31/10/2016

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:37. > :00:38.Hello, and welcome to the Daily Politics.

:00:39. > :00:41.The Government comes under fire over its funding

:00:42. > :00:45.for the NHS in England, as MPs say the Prime Minister's

:00:46. > :00:51.claim that it's getting a ?10 billion boost is "false".

:00:52. > :00:53.The race to replace Nigel Farage heats up as nominations

:00:54. > :01:00.One candidate pulls out at the last minute and accuses the top

:01:01. > :01:03.of the party of treating the contest "like a coronation".

:01:04. > :01:09.Work and Pensions Secretary Damian Green promises personalised support

:01:10. > :01:11.to help more people move from benefits into work.

:01:12. > :01:15.We'll look at the Government's plans for welfare reform.

:01:16. > :01:19.And we've exclusive behind-the-scenes access

:01:20. > :01:21.to the House of Commons voting lobby, where old traditions

:01:22. > :01:30.are being updated with digital technology.

:01:31. > :01:35.All that in the next hour, and with us for the whole

:01:36. > :01:37.of the programme today, the Minister for Disabled People,

:01:38. > :01:46.And, soon, the Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, Debbie Abrahams.

:01:47. > :01:48.Let's start with the warning today from the Conservative chair

:01:49. > :01:51.of the Health Select Committee that the NHS in England

:01:52. > :01:54.is under enormous pressure and needs more more money.

:01:55. > :01:57.Sarah Wollaston also says that Government claims that the NHS

:01:58. > :02:00.in England is due to receive an extra ?10 billion

:02:01. > :02:07.It gives a false impression that the NHS is awash with cash,

:02:08. > :02:10.and in fact if you look at the way that figure is reached,

:02:11. > :02:13.it's by adding another year to the Spending Review and also

:02:14. > :02:17.by changing pots of money from one part of the health budget

:02:18. > :02:21.to another, so for example taking money out of public health

:02:22. > :02:27.And so it can give an impression that more is given when in fact

:02:28. > :02:33.the real figure is very considerably lower.

:02:34. > :02:41.Sarah Wallerstein there. The real figure, she says, is 4.5 billion, so

:02:42. > :02:45.less than half. Is she right, or the Government? I have a great deal of

:02:46. > :02:49.respect for Sarah and she has said good things about the need to get

:02:50. > :02:54.more money into prevention and primary care, but I think she is

:02:55. > :02:59.wrong on the numbers. We have funded the NHS' own plan, they asked us, we

:03:00. > :03:03.asked them how much they needed, they said in Italy 8 billion, that

:03:04. > :03:09.rose to ten and we have given them that money. But hang on, the money

:03:10. > :03:13.is going to NHS in England, which is, albeit important, one part of

:03:14. > :03:18.the NHS. What Sarah Wollaston was saying is that other parts of the

:03:19. > :03:22.NHS, such as social care, is losing money, money taken from the budget

:03:23. > :03:27.to boost another part, so the NHS as a whole is not getting a ?10 billion

:03:28. > :03:32.boost. Two points, first of all we have funded the NHS' own plan, the

:03:33. > :03:40.second thing is, with regard to the other services such as social care

:03:41. > :03:46.that local Government funds, local Government reserves have doubled

:03:47. > :03:50.since 2010, there are 22.5 billion currently sat in local Government

:03:51. > :03:53.reserve accounts. Every local Government person on this programme

:03:54. > :03:56.has said they have been cut to the bone and social care has been

:03:57. > :04:01.starved over a longer period of time then just boosting reserves

:04:02. > :04:04.recently. Don't get me wrong, there are challenges there but money is

:04:05. > :04:07.going into those areas, 5.3 billion in the better care fund and we have

:04:08. > :04:24.enabled local governments to raise its own money,

:04:25. > :04:26.we have relaxed the rules around how much council tax can be raised

:04:27. > :04:29.locally, provided it is spent on social care. But money is not the

:04:30. > :04:32.only issue here, the way we are going to get all the money that is

:04:33. > :04:34.available in the system to work best is if we enable people at local

:04:35. > :04:37.level to put that money into prevention and early services. Not

:04:38. > :04:39.piling it on to acute care. I take that point, but she is making a

:04:40. > :04:45.serious accusation that the Government has misled the public,

:04:46. > :04:53.have they? Know. So she is wrong? Absolutely. She says you only arrive

:04:54. > :04:57.at the budget of ?10 billion in terms of a boost over five years by

:04:58. > :05:01.shifting money from public health budget and health education and

:05:02. > :05:07.training, and also including an extra year in the calculation, so

:05:08. > :05:12.2015-2015 rather than just the term of this Parliament. That is

:05:13. > :05:17.misleading, it is slight of hand? Know, this is funding the NHS' own

:05:18. > :05:19.plan. There are other issues she raises about particular pressures

:05:20. > :05:25.that health care faces, inflation and so forth on drug costs and

:05:26. > :05:29.things like that, but this is about as supplying the money the NHS said

:05:30. > :05:32.it needed. We were the only political party to make that

:05:33. > :05:40.commitment at the general election and since then... That has been

:05:41. > :05:42.contested, saying it is aimed misinterpretation by the

:05:43. > :05:46.Conservative Government. East so you are saying money has not shifted

:05:47. > :05:51.from any other budget and including the extra year is not misleading? I

:05:52. > :05:56.do not follow what Sarah says when she says we are claiming that the

:05:57. > :06:02.system is awash with cash. We have never claimed that, we note that

:06:03. > :06:07.every year there are increasing pressures, an older population being

:06:08. > :06:09.just one of them, so we know that there are serious challenges out

:06:10. > :06:14.there but we have made this a priority, we have said to the NHS,

:06:15. > :06:19.give us your plan, tell us what you need and we will meet that. In

:06:20. > :06:22.addition to that, we have enabled local Government, on top of the

:06:23. > :06:27.better care fund, which is going into social care, we have enabled it

:06:28. > :06:31.to raise its own money. Well, she said she will have conversations

:06:32. > :06:33.with Philip Hammond, the Treasury, about this, so that should be

:06:34. > :06:35.interesting. Thank you. It's Halloween, so what ghostly

:06:36. > :06:41.presence is supposed to be Is it a) Winston

:06:42. > :06:43.Churchill's cigar smoke? B) The apparition of Ed Balls' mad

:06:44. > :06:48.professor on Strictly? C) The wails of former

:06:49. > :06:52.Prime Minister Viscount Goderich, known as 'the blubberer' for his

:06:53. > :07:00.tendency to cry while in office. Or, d) the feline ghost of former

:07:01. > :07:11.chief mouser Humphrey the cat. At the end of the show Penny

:07:12. > :07:14.and Debbie, who has now arrived, Welfare reform was one

:07:15. > :07:19.of the centrepieces of David Cameron's programme

:07:20. > :07:21.when the Conservatives first came Today the Government has announced

:07:22. > :07:33.new plans to help more disabled people into employment,

:07:34. > :07:35.which they say will provide a more "targeted and personalised" way

:07:36. > :07:38.to help more people find jobs. But with pressure on Ministers

:07:39. > :07:41.to make work pay and reduce welfare Damian Green said earlier this month

:07:42. > :07:49.that his vision was 'a welfare state fit for the world of work

:07:50. > :07:53.in the 21st century'. So what issues are on the Work

:07:54. > :07:56.and Pensions Secretary's desk? Work capability assessments,

:07:57. > :08:00.the scheme that assesses claimants of disability benefits,

:08:01. > :08:04.are set for an overhaul as part Statutory sick pay and GP fit notes

:08:05. > :08:11.are also to be reviewed as part of an effort to help disabled people

:08:12. > :08:15.back into work. But the Government still faces

:08:16. > :08:17.criticism for failures by Concentrix, a private company

:08:18. > :08:20.contracted to tackle benefit fraud that has been accused of incorrectly

:08:21. > :08:24.withdrawing tax credits The flagship universal credit scheme

:08:25. > :08:31.is up and running but is not forecast to be fully

:08:32. > :08:36.delivered until 2022 - 11 years after it

:08:37. > :08:43.was first announced. The Conservative MP Heidi Allen has

:08:44. > :08:47.called for cuts to work incentives in the scheme made

:08:48. > :08:50.by George Osborne to be reversed. And there is increased scrutiny

:08:51. > :08:52.over the triple lock - the Government's pledge

:08:53. > :08:56.that the state pension will always rise by wages, prices or 2.5%,

:08:57. > :09:00.whichever is higher. Former Work and Pensions Secretary

:09:01. > :09:02.Iain Duncan Smith told the Sunday Politics yesterday

:09:03. > :09:05.that it was time to scrap the pledge and spend

:09:06. > :09:09.the money elsewhere. Well, the Work and Pensions

:09:10. > :09:12.Secretary, Damian Green, was talking earlier this morning

:09:13. > :09:15.about those new plans to help more Well, the system isn't working well

:09:16. > :09:23.enough for large numbers of people. We've got huge numbers of people,

:09:24. > :09:25.unprecedentedly high numbers of people, in work,

:09:26. > :09:28.about 80%, but just under 50% And what I want to do is to tap

:09:29. > :09:36.into the huge amount of talent there is there,

:09:37. > :09:40.and also most of those people do want to work, and so the system

:09:41. > :09:43.needs to change so that We aspire to be a Government that

:09:44. > :09:49.works for everyone and that includes all those people who want to work

:09:50. > :09:52.but now can't, and that requires changes not just in Jobcentre Plus,

:09:53. > :09:57.the things I'm directly responsible for, but also in the health service

:09:58. > :10:11.and in the attitude of employers. Damian Green there. The Government

:10:12. > :10:14.is reviewing the work capability assessment, by giving that are you

:10:15. > :10:21.admitting it is not currently fit for purpose? I think it could be

:10:22. > :10:24.improved dramatically both in terms of the process, currently we don't

:10:25. > :10:27.make good use of all of the bits of information different parts of

:10:28. > :10:32.Government has, we require people to feel into many forms and give the

:10:33. > :10:35.State information, the same information, over and again, so

:10:36. > :10:39.there is a lot that can still be done with the process. We have

:10:40. > :10:43.obviously made some announcements on changing that, for example not

:10:44. > :10:49.requiring people with degenerative conditions to go through retests,

:10:50. > :10:52.but we think there are further more fundamental reforms that are

:10:53. > :10:56.required, particularly splitting out the finance from any conditionality

:10:57. > :11:02.that we place on an individual. Why has it taken so long? I am conscious

:11:03. > :11:05.that I have been in the Department for 18 weeks and my in tray looks

:11:06. > :11:11.very different to the one Iain Duncan Smith had to tackle when he

:11:12. > :11:14.took over the department, so I think we are building on the reforms that

:11:15. > :11:19.he has done. But it is a slow process. I think there were some

:11:20. > :11:25.other things that were very pressing that he wanted to tackle. But we are

:11:26. > :11:28.now in a position because of work done and other reforms that the work

:11:29. > :11:35.capability assessment has undergone to take this fundamental look and I

:11:36. > :11:38.think it is long overdue, but very important that we start the

:11:39. > :11:42.consultation. And something that perhaps should have been done by

:11:43. > :11:47.Iain Duncan Smith, having got as far as he did with the reforms? We are

:11:48. > :11:51.continuing a programme of work that he set out. The reason this is so

:11:52. > :11:56.important is that currently you have people with a health condition, or

:11:57. > :11:59.who have a disability, who are parked with no support, so

:12:00. > :12:06.ironically those that need the most help don't get it because we have

:12:07. > :12:11.money attached to the conditions that we place on someone. That needs

:12:12. > :12:14.to be reformed. We will talk about some of the incentives for people

:12:15. > :12:18.with chronic illnesses or long-term conditions in a moment, but do you

:12:19. > :12:22.welcome the fact that this review is happening, even if you think it is

:12:23. > :12:26.long overdue, is it the right review? As you have just said,

:12:27. > :12:31.actions speak louder than words. We have known for a number of years

:12:32. > :12:34.that the work capability assessment is not working, it dehumanises

:12:35. > :12:38.people, there is a piece of research at last year that shows it

:12:39. > :12:43.exacerbates mental health conditions, increasing suicides.

:12:44. > :12:47.There are all sorts of issues associated with not just the work

:12:48. > :12:51.capability assessment but other aspects of it. Do you accept that

:12:52. > :12:54.assessment that that is what it has done to people either disabled and

:12:55. > :12:57.claiming benefit or other people with long-term conditions who have

:12:58. > :13:01.to go through that work assessment, that it has caused them to become

:13:02. > :13:07.more ill or in some places commit suicide? I think that leaving aside

:13:08. > :13:12.the fundamental reforms we want to do to the policy, the delivery of

:13:13. > :13:19.that policy is absolutely critical. I think even if you don't have

:13:20. > :13:23.anxiety or depression or anything that could be exacerbated by such a

:13:24. > :13:29.process, if you are having to go through an enormous amount of

:13:30. > :13:33.bureaucracy and an unnecessary number of assessments, that is not

:13:34. > :13:38.going to do anyone any good at all, so I think it is the process as well

:13:39. > :13:42.as what we are trying to get out of that. So you admit it has not helped

:13:43. > :13:47.in many people's cases in terms of trying to deal with what are

:13:48. > :13:49.probably difficult things? The Government's statement include

:13:50. > :13:54.references to helping people with long-term conditions but we have

:13:55. > :13:57.heard to date on the BBC that people with long-term conditions such as

:13:58. > :14:02.rheumatoid arthritis or Parkinson's, there is a of threat or incentive

:14:03. > :14:06.hanging over those people that they are going to be reassessed despite

:14:07. > :14:09.the fact that they have long-term conditions which would make it

:14:10. > :14:13.difficult to go back to work, do you accept that? Part of the reason we

:14:14. > :14:17.are doing the paper jointly with health is because we realise it is

:14:18. > :14:22.not just employment support interventions that need to be

:14:23. > :14:28.improved, it is also about people who need access to pain management,

:14:29. > :14:33.physiotherapy, a whole raft of interventions, mental health support

:14:34. > :14:38.being a particularly poignant one. That is why we are producing this

:14:39. > :14:42.paper today, because we know that, to date, the systems have not worked

:14:43. > :14:47.to assist those people. But let me be very clear that those people who

:14:48. > :14:53.are not able to work will not be required to work. That will come as

:14:54. > :14:57.some comfort to people, of course the definition of who is not able to

:14:58. > :15:02.work will still be up for interpretation. Can I just put to

:15:03. > :15:05.you first of all, you said yesterday the Government's approach was

:15:06. > :15:08.ideological grip on with the sole purpose of targeting the most

:15:09. > :15:12.vulnerable in society, what is your evidence for that? First of all let

:15:13. > :15:18.me comment on what Penny has just said. We are in the context of an

:15:19. > :15:29.NHS financial crisis. Not just a social care

:15:30. > :15:33.crisis, we are talking about support for disabled people, some basic

:15:34. > :15:36.support about helping them get out of bed in the morning. Where on

:15:37. > :15:38.earth is that going to come from? This is completely pie in the sky,

:15:39. > :15:40.we have employment support cuts for disabled people by more than a

:15:41. > :15:45.third. Again, how is this about helping get disabled people into

:15:46. > :15:48.work? It is all very well, as I said, they are fine words but

:15:49. > :15:52.actions speak louder. So you will wait to see what the actions are,

:15:53. > :15:56.but come back to the question, ideological driven with the purpose

:15:57. > :15:59.of targeting the most vulnerable in society, do you stand by that

:16:00. > :16:03.claimed that that is what the Government is doing? If we look at

:16:04. > :16:09.what has happened over the last few years, nearly ?30 billion of cuts to

:16:10. > :16:17.7 million people, another 1500 per year for people on EFA WRAG, these

:16:18. > :16:20.are the most vulnerable people in society and we should not target

:16:21. > :16:25.them. There is no evidence in terms of the approach the Government is

:16:26. > :16:31.taking, this is about getting people off loaded, purely and simply. So

:16:32. > :16:36.you are targeting the most vulnerable because the cuts show

:16:37. > :16:42.that? I think that is very wrong and there is... You are right, it is

:16:43. > :16:46.wrong! There is a mood to portray not just Government but also those

:16:47. > :16:51.people providing those services in our job centres as people that don't

:16:52. > :16:55.care, and this issue should be an issue... People have come to me and

:16:56. > :17:00.said people are being targeted. Don't talk over each other, finish

:17:01. > :17:04.your sentence. I had a constituent who worked in a job centre for 20

:17:05. > :17:10.years and came to me and said claimants are being targeted, there

:17:11. > :17:11.are targets about getting people off-loaded, sanctions through the

:17:12. > :17:23.work capability assessment. If you have targets driven by

:17:24. > :17:26.profit, surely you will get a situation where people are treated

:17:27. > :17:36.as if they are in a sausage factory? It used to be the case that

:17:37. > :17:40.Jobcentre staff was rewarded depending on how they were

:17:41. > :17:46.performing. This was not a good way to monitor things. What we should be

:17:47. > :17:49.measuring and what the thrust of the green paper is and the changes we

:17:50. > :17:54.have made over the last 18 weeks is measuring individuals' distance

:17:55. > :18:01.travelled. There will be some people whose goals are to get back into

:18:02. > :18:04.full-time work. There will be some whose goal is meaningful activity,

:18:05. > :18:08.and some will not be able to do any of that. We have to look at what

:18:09. > :18:11.support that individual needs. By companies that the government has

:18:12. > :18:16.employed to do these jobs have not had a good track record in dealing

:18:17. > :18:25.with people on a human basis so far, if you believe all the stories. And

:18:26. > :18:29.on that, Concentrix, the company contacted by the government to

:18:30. > :18:31.tackle tax credit fraud which was accused of incorrectly withdrawing

:18:32. > :18:36.benefits from hundreds of families, do you accept that ministers bear

:18:37. > :18:41.responsibility for this by incentivising payment by results?

:18:42. > :18:48.Well, the issues we have with tax credits are serious. And they are

:18:49. > :18:54.unacceptable. I have had them in my own constituency. But we need to

:18:55. > :18:57.ensure that whether it is in a contract, whether we performance

:18:58. > :19:01.manage our staff, the right incentives are there. But those were

:19:02. > :19:07.the wrong incentives. If you incentivised by payment by results,

:19:08. > :19:10.you are going to get the sort of very sad stories that we hear is as

:19:11. > :19:17.a result of going through the system. In the case of the tax

:19:18. > :19:25.credits the problem is some of the IT systems they have been using. We

:19:26. > :19:32.had a case the other day of someone who was accused of living in a shop,

:19:33. > :19:39.because they were living above a shop. Does the government over those

:19:40. > :19:43.people an apology? Absolutely. We have to accept that the policy is

:19:44. > :19:48.one thing and even if we have the perfect policy, we have to ensure

:19:49. > :19:59.that it is delivered in an excellent way. With regard to the Department

:20:00. > :20:04.for Work and Pensions, our staff are subject matter experts with these

:20:05. > :20:14.issues. They are not medical professionals. That is nonsense. We

:20:15. > :20:18.have expert disability advisers. You have one specialist disability

:20:19. > :20:24.adviser for every 600 people. How can you say you are committed? That

:20:25. > :20:28.is why we are bringing out another 300. On the basis that Penny

:20:29. > :20:31.Mordaunt says ministers should apologise for the tax credit

:20:32. > :20:35.debacle, which meant hundreds of families had their tax credits

:20:36. > :20:43.stopped, do you welcome that apology? I do. The statement of last

:20:44. > :20:49.week was a very measured one. And now, when we look at what will be in

:20:50. > :20:52.the contracts in future for work capability assessments, do you

:20:53. > :20:55.accept Penny Mordaunt's word that it would be different and that it will

:20:56. > :21:00.not be incentivising payment by results? Performance management is

:21:01. > :21:04.key. Governments of all colours have not been good around contracting,

:21:05. > :21:10.both in terms of the design and in terms of performance managing it. We

:21:11. > :21:14.all need to get better. But I would like to know what we are going to do

:21:15. > :21:20.about access to work. With 1.3 million disabled people who want to

:21:21. > :21:27.work and only 35,000 able to get access to work to help them get back

:21:28. > :21:32.to work, the figures don't match. I am interested in the specifics

:21:33. > :21:36.around that. What about the comment Iain Duncan Smith made at the

:21:37. > :21:42.weekend. More than half of the work and pensions budget goes on

:21:43. > :21:47.benefits. He suggested it might be time to do away with the triple

:21:48. > :21:50.lock. Do you agree? I don't. As a chairman of the all party group on

:21:51. > :21:58.ageing, I would point out that the older you are, your cost of living

:21:59. > :22:01.goes up. Is it affordable? I think it is and I think it is important

:22:02. > :22:09.that we protect those benefits for pensioners. Do you agree?

:22:10. > :22:13.Absolutely. What about the welfare cap on how much the government

:22:14. > :22:17.spends overall on social security benefits? It is popular but it has

:22:18. > :22:22.been breached every year since it has been brought in. Is there any

:22:23. > :22:28.point continuing with it? It is important that we have welfare

:22:29. > :22:39.spending under control. But we also need to ensure that the reach of our

:22:40. > :22:43.programmes is as they need to be. Our green paper has not been

:22:44. > :22:46.published yet, both but there will be a focus on that. We have to

:22:47. > :22:52.ensure that not only the reach, but the quality of these programmes is

:22:53. > :22:58.there. The cuts that George Osborne introduced to work incentives,

:22:59. > :23:02.should they be reversed as Heidi Allen said? There are no plans to do

:23:03. > :23:07.that. What I would take to Heidi and others who are concerned about that

:23:08. > :23:14.is to look at the whole package for those individuals in terms of the

:23:15. > :23:18.living wage and their personal tax contributions. According to the

:23:19. > :23:22.Resolution Foundation, a single parent with a child under four

:23:23. > :23:26.working full-time on the minimum wage would receive ?3600 less. How

:23:27. > :23:31.does that help the families who are just managing, the very people

:23:32. > :23:34.Theresa May says she wants to help? I met that organisation last week

:23:35. > :23:37.and I would say that you have to look of a package of support we are

:23:38. > :23:42.giving people in the round, which includes those other things. This is

:23:43. > :23:46.outrageous. Universal credit was meant to be introduced to make work

:23:47. > :23:52.pay and we supported it on that basis. On average, 2.5 million

:23:53. > :23:55.families will be over ?2000 a year worse off. We now have a situation

:23:56. > :23:59.where there are more families who are in work living in poverty than

:24:00. > :24:04.there are workless families. This is a travesty and it has happened under

:24:05. > :24:07.this government's what. Two thirds of the 4 million children living in

:24:08. > :24:10.poverty are from working families. We must reverse these cuts if we are

:24:11. > :24:17.to have a meaningful impact. After the false start

:24:18. > :24:19.earlier this autumn, when Diane James lasted just 18 days

:24:20. > :24:22.in the job, Ukip's search Our political correspondent

:24:23. > :24:37.Alex Forsyth is keeping a close eye It seems that the nominees are

:24:38. > :24:39.dropping like fliess yeah. When this contest was announced, which was

:24:40. > :24:43.itself a surprise after Diane James did just 18 days in the job, there

:24:44. > :24:48.was a flurry of people who thought they would throw their hat in the

:24:49. > :24:51.ring for the next Ukip leader role. But as of today, when nominations

:24:52. > :24:55.have closed, we know of only four left in the running. This morning,

:24:56. > :24:59.the latest candidate to dropout was Raheem Kassam. He is a former aide

:25:00. > :25:03.to Nigel Farage, one of the first to declare that he would stand for the

:25:04. > :25:07.leadership this time. He only did his formal launch on Friday, a

:25:08. > :25:12.couple of days ago. Over the weekend in the papers, a he got a lot of

:25:13. > :25:17.coverage, so it came as a surprise when he decided to withdraw this

:25:18. > :25:21.morning. He said in his statement that he thought the path to victory

:25:22. > :25:24.was too narrow. Read into that that he thinks senior figures in the

:25:25. > :25:27.party are getting behind Paul Nuttall and so there was little

:25:28. > :25:31.chance of him winning. He also cited some anger at the media, saying

:25:32. > :25:36.journalists have turned up at his parents' home, and also fundraising.

:25:37. > :25:39.It was thought that the multimillionaire backer Arron Banks

:25:40. > :25:42.was behind Raheem Kassam, but he said in a statement this morning

:25:43. > :25:46.that they only had enough money to run a digital campaign based on

:25:47. > :25:50.Westminster. He didn't think that would be effective, so that was part

:25:51. > :25:53.of the reason he pulled out. I have spoken to Mr Kassam and he said he

:25:54. > :25:57.did still have the support of Arron Banks, but he did not want to take a

:25:58. > :26:01.lot of donations to come second, so he stood down. We will get the final

:26:02. > :26:07.list of candidates this afternoon and the hustings start tomorrow. Did

:26:08. > :26:10.he also imply that the system had been rigged? He said he had asked

:26:11. > :26:14.questions over the weekend over the integrity of the process, and he was

:26:15. > :26:19.not convinced by it. He does not go so far as to say the process has

:26:20. > :26:21.been rigged, but he implies that the weight of the party machine is

:26:22. > :26:27.getting behind Paul Nuttall, who some see as the frontrunner and the

:26:28. > :26:30.one potential unity candidate who can lead Ukip out of the mess they

:26:31. > :26:34.have been in for the past year. So I think Raheem Kassam's implication is

:26:35. > :26:37.that he didn't think he could win against the weight of the party

:26:38. > :26:45.machine and the senior figures who want Paul Nuttall to succeed. That

:26:46. > :26:49.is another reason he decided to pull out. So we are left with four names

:26:50. > :26:55.in the frame, but no final confirmation from Ukip yet as to the

:26:56. > :26:56.short list. The new leader is expected to be announced by the end

:26:57. > :26:57.of the month. We've been joined by one

:26:58. > :26:59.of the four remaining candidates to be Ukip leader,

:27:00. > :27:11.Peter Whittle, who is a member You must be pleased that Raheem

:27:12. > :27:14.Kassam has withdrawn. I am not particularly pleased, because I have

:27:15. > :27:22.known him for a long time and he is an exceptionally talented guy and a

:27:23. > :27:28.very individual guy. And what the leadership contests are showing this

:27:29. > :27:34.time is that this is the contest we should have been having all along.

:27:35. > :27:38.There are people of real merit. I would want as many people as

:27:39. > :27:45.possible to be on show. He is backing you, so you must be pleased.

:27:46. > :27:51.It is kind of him to back me. If you look at the people standing now,

:27:52. > :27:56.they are extremely talented people. That is what people have to know

:27:57. > :27:59.about our party. Do you have a chance of winning against Paul

:28:00. > :28:04.Nuttall and Suzanne Evans? Well, you don't enter these things with a

:28:05. > :28:10.counsel of despair. You have to resist questions like that. The fact

:28:11. > :28:15.is, I love this party. I have been in it for four years. I have been

:28:16. > :28:20.culture spokesman for three. This year, we had a real breakthrough and

:28:21. > :28:25.got two assembly members on to the London Assembly. People said we

:28:26. > :28:29.would never do that in London. But the party has gone through a series

:28:30. > :28:34.of convulsions, losing a leader after 18 days, which is careless to

:28:35. > :28:41.say the least. But Mr Kassam said he would be the Farage-ist candidate.

:28:42. > :28:45.Is that the mantle you are now going to assume? I have always been a

:28:46. > :28:52.supporter of Nigel. There is no revisionism going on there. Nigel is

:28:53. > :28:58.a towering figure. Isn't that why the party is having the problems it

:28:59. > :29:03.is, because he has gone? It was always going to be tough picking a

:29:04. > :29:07.new leader, because he is the most influential politician we have had

:29:08. > :29:18.in two generations. And no one will go back on his legacy. But we are

:29:19. > :29:25.now in a position where we can go onto a brilliant act two. Whatever

:29:26. > :29:29.that might be. It is very simple. Our first goal was the referendum.

:29:30. > :29:33.Our next goal will be to replace Labour as the real opposition in

:29:34. > :29:39.this country. What do you say to that, Debbie Abrahams? I would

:29:40. > :29:44.prefer to know more about your policies. Other than leaving Europe,

:29:45. > :29:55.I am not clear on what Ukip stands for, particularly on the NHS, which

:29:56. > :29:59.Paul Nuttall has slated. No. The fact is with Ukip, everyone knows

:30:00. > :30:03.what we stand for, which is unusual in politics these days. Then it is

:30:04. > :30:07.interesting that there are divisions within your party. Mr Kassam says he

:30:08. > :30:13.is worried about the integrity of the process and the leadership

:30:14. > :30:20.contest. Has he got a point? That is not a picture I recognise. It has

:30:21. > :30:26.all been done very fairly and professionally. So he is wrong about

:30:27. > :30:33.that? It is not a picture I recognise. The whole progress of the

:30:34. > :30:37.leadership campaign has been very smooth this time, because we know

:30:38. > :30:40.what is at stake and we want this party to be a success because there

:30:41. > :30:46.are people, particularly in the Midlands and the north... It is not

:30:47. > :30:49.just a question of being opportunist, but we have a duty to

:30:50. > :30:53.speak for those people. That is why I want us to be the official

:30:54. > :30:59.opposition in years to come. 2020 is the big star for that.

:31:00. > :31:06.You could say now the referendum has happened, there is no need for Ukip

:31:07. > :31:13.whatsoever and Labour could start to claw back some of the support they

:31:14. > :31:15.lost to Ukip. No chance of this. In terms of putting forward your

:31:16. > :31:20.individual vision for the party, do you think Ukip is ready to become

:31:21. > :31:25.the first UK wide political party with a gay leader? Of course, I was

:31:26. > :31:28.the only gay candidate in the mayoral race, for example. Not bad

:31:29. > :31:39.going for a supposedly homophobic party! My fellow Assembly Member is

:31:40. > :31:44.a black eye, we are the most diverse group on the London assembly! And

:31:45. > :31:48.this is despite claims of homophobia, have you experienced

:31:49. > :31:54.that? None at all. All of these things are very, very old charges,

:31:55. > :31:58.really. The fact is, what we have now in Britain are people who are

:31:59. > :32:02.not spoken for, they do not trust the Tories and they are quite right

:32:03. > :32:16.not to trust the Tories, and in fact I think there is no chance, whatever

:32:17. > :32:19.this speech is that Theresa May makes, that they will go over to the

:32:20. > :32:21.Tories, and Labour now look down on them and treat them with contempt.

:32:22. > :32:23.Although there have been defections from Ukip to the Tories since the

:32:24. > :32:26.referendum, as you know. Including Steven Woolfe and certainly thought

:32:27. > :32:30.about it, I know he's not now running in the contest. Are you

:32:31. > :32:34.going to stay to the very end of this competition? We are all in it

:32:35. > :32:41.to win it. So you will not be dropping out? I think the question

:32:42. > :32:44.is, people will see, looking at our hustings, which are happening

:32:45. > :32:47.tomorrow in London and then in Wales, two more next week, they will

:32:48. > :32:49.feed the breadth of vision and talent that there is in this party.

:32:50. > :32:52.Peter Whittle, thank you. How should the UK control

:32:53. > :32:59.immigration once we've left the EU? The official Vote Leave campaign

:33:00. > :33:01.argued for an Australian-style points-based system -

:33:02. > :33:03.but that's been ruled Others have suggested a new regime

:33:04. > :33:06.of work permits. My next guest has produced his own

:33:07. > :33:09.plan, which could include continuing freedom of movement for some

:33:10. > :33:13.categories of worker. Here's Sunder Katwala,

:33:14. > :33:15.director of the non-partisan think Sometimes, you sit down

:33:16. > :33:35.in a restaurant, starving hungry, but they've got nothing that

:33:36. > :33:39.sounds very appetising. When it comes to Brexit, the fixed

:33:40. > :33:45.menu seems very narrow indeed. Most of us would like a good trade

:33:46. > :33:48.deal with Europe for British business, but that always comes

:33:49. > :33:51.served with a liberal helping of free movement, which isn't

:33:52. > :33:53.to everyone's taste. And it seems the only alternative

:33:54. > :33:55.is thin gruel, the hardest, The first rule is, don't

:33:56. > :34:07.be rude to the waiter. But you also need an idea

:34:08. > :34:12.of what you want the kitchen If we can't reach a deal

:34:13. > :34:17.by the time the Article 50 clock runs out in 2019,

:34:18. > :34:20.that will count as a The logical outcome for immigration

:34:21. > :34:25.is that we would then apply the same rules for Europeans

:34:26. > :34:29.as we do for outside the EU. But we could make Europe a much more

:34:30. > :34:35.attractive offer than that, one that gives us the control over

:34:36. > :34:39.immigration that the public want, but is appealing enough to the EU

:34:40. > :34:42.that we can still get A new system could still offer

:34:43. > :34:53.preferential treatment Above a certain skill

:34:54. > :34:57.level, we could keep free People don't want fewer engineers

:34:58. > :35:08.or scientists to come. We also need some low-skilled

:35:09. > :35:10.migration too, to pick fruit But here, the public do

:35:11. > :35:14.want to control the scale So let's have quotas for low-skilled

:35:15. > :35:19.work based on what our economy needs, and offer those places

:35:20. > :35:22.to Europeans first as part Britain would get control over

:35:23. > :35:26.the pace of migration, but it's also an attractive offer

:35:27. > :35:31.to the EU and its workers too, certainly more so than if we don't

:35:32. > :35:36.get any deal at all. And if Europe says "non",

:35:37. > :35:38.we can always try another restaurant and offer a similar

:35:39. > :35:41.trade and migration deal with North American,

:35:42. > :35:43.Australian, Indian But we all know that Europe's got

:35:44. > :35:49.great food, so let's see what the Brussels

:35:50. > :36:07.chefs say first. Penny, Cuba on the Vote Leave side

:36:08. > :36:11.in the referendum campaign. We are going to continue to need skilled

:36:12. > :36:15.and unskilled Labour in the British economy after we finally leave the

:36:16. > :36:21.EU so, in your mind, what a quota for unskilled workers make sense?

:36:22. > :36:25.I'm not going to, as I said earlier, showed the Government's hand in

:36:26. > :36:29.terms of what it is going to be negotiating gone, but what I do

:36:30. > :36:34.think is important is that we get back full control. It was one of the

:36:35. > :36:39.key issues in the referendum campaign, and they tweaked something

:36:40. > :36:43.that quite a lot of politicians didn't figure out which was that

:36:44. > :36:48.unless you can control immigration you cannot govern properly or

:36:49. > :36:53.planned services. Control is one thing, control on immigration, to be

:36:54. > :36:57.able to choose the number and the sorts of migrant workers you would

:36:58. > :37:01.like he is not the same as just bringing down the numbers

:37:02. > :37:05.dramatically, the two are not mutually exclusive, so would you at

:37:06. > :37:09.least consider the idea of a quota for a number of unskilled workers to

:37:10. > :37:21.do some of the jobs that British workers have not come up until now,

:37:22. > :37:24.wanted to do? I think a range of issues will be looked at, the only

:37:25. > :37:26.thing that has been ruled out if the points system approach that

:37:27. > :37:28.Australia have taken. But this is a key issue in terms of the

:37:29. > :37:33.negotiations, and the Government isn't going to reveal its hand. That

:37:34. > :37:37.really was the nub of the referendum result, the message that came

:37:38. > :37:41.through loud and clear was, we want to do something about immigration. I

:37:42. > :37:44.think what we know is the public have lost confidence in how the

:37:45. > :37:47.Government has been handling immigration in this country in the

:37:48. > :37:50.last ten or 15 years, there were not the right preparations for the scale

:37:51. > :37:54.of immigration we have had and we have that promises to cut levels

:37:55. > :37:55.that have not been possible so people want especially some control

:37:56. > :38:11.over the scale and pace of unskilled immigration while at the

:38:12. > :38:13.same time they are positive about the contribution immigration can

:38:14. > :38:16.make to this country if it is better managed and controlled. You talk

:38:17. > :38:19.about quotas, how big would that be for unskilled workers? Our proposal

:38:20. > :38:22.is that we would have skilled free movement at levels people were happy

:38:23. > :38:29.about and would decide on an annual basis, something like the budget,

:38:30. > :38:32.talk to the health service, employers, people worried about the

:38:33. > :38:37.impact on communities, the Home Secretary comes to the house, set

:38:38. > :38:39.the quota and we agree what it is. Under the system Europeans would

:38:40. > :38:44.have access to the low skilled work before other people did if we made

:38:45. > :38:47.the deal with Europe. But it would be just another arbitrary number in

:38:48. > :38:50.the way the Government has set in the last Parliament and this

:38:51. > :38:55.Parliament and number to bring down net migration to tens of thousands,

:38:56. > :38:58.which it has consistently failed to do? Something went wrong with that

:38:59. > :39:02.target, which was not possible to meet, which was that the number came

:39:03. > :39:11.first as a sound bite and people scrambled around for policies to

:39:12. > :39:14.meet it and there were none to meet it while we were in the EU. If we

:39:15. > :39:16.have a process on, what other pressures on migration that create

:39:17. > :39:19.reductions, what are the needs for migration, how do we get the

:39:20. > :39:22.balance, you can set the number according to the feeling on the

:39:23. > :39:26.ground in economic sectors, in local areas, about how to match the

:39:27. > :39:32.pressures and gains of immigration, set the number with worked out

:39:33. > :39:37.policy. What about Labour's policy? Am I right in thinking there is not

:39:38. > :39:42.a policy in terms of setting any numbers on net migration or

:39:43. > :39:46.immigration? What we want to do is have a national conversation about

:39:47. > :39:51.immigration and what that means. We have had a national conversation! We

:39:52. > :39:54.had a general election in 2015 and then a referendum debate. The

:39:55. > :39:58.general election covered a host of things and the only question as I

:39:59. > :40:05.understand in the referendum was, do you want to be in Europe or out?

:40:06. > :40:08.There was a really complex result in terms of our understanding of the

:40:09. > :40:12.result and we need to have a more detailed understanding of what that

:40:13. > :40:16.means. As has been pointed out already, our care service, one in

:40:17. > :40:21.five care workers come from overseas, also our NHS staff, we

:40:22. > :40:25.would collapse without those skilled workers but also the less skilled.

:40:26. > :40:30.So you don't want to control the numbers in any way? I said we need

:40:31. > :40:34.to have a national conversation. But that does not answer the question,

:40:35. > :40:44.do you or don't you want to control the numbers? What we want, we need

:40:45. > :40:50.to recognise what migration does and how it supports and enables our

:40:51. > :40:53.economy, so we know there is an net benefit... People rejected that if

:40:54. > :41:00.you interpret the referendum result in that way? What was the question?

:41:01. > :41:04.They said they wanted control... No, they didn't, they said they wanted

:41:05. > :41:08.to be out of Europe and it is complex to understand why they

:41:09. > :41:11.wanted to leave, even in areas where there is no migration, people voted

:41:12. > :41:15.to leave. There are parts of the country where there were very low

:41:16. > :41:18.levels of immigration and they still voted to leave. I think there were

:41:19. > :41:22.many reasons why people voted to leave, for some it was about

:41:23. > :41:26.sovereignty, all sorts of other issues, but I think we are kidding

:41:27. > :41:32.ourselves if we don't accept that immigration was a major part. Excuse

:41:33. > :41:35.me for bringing this back to the Green paper today, there is an

:41:36. > :41:38.element of the Green paper that looks at this, one thing I am

:41:39. > :41:45.conscious of his opportunities to work overseas that disabled people

:41:46. > :41:50.have, even work experience, quite often they are not able to take them

:41:51. > :41:55.up because our support is not flexible enough to do that, so there

:41:56. > :41:58.is a lot we can do in this space for our own citizens. Do you think

:41:59. > :42:02.voters that were concerned with immigration are wrong? No, I

:42:03. > :42:08.understand, area such as Lincolnshire where there has been a

:42:09. > :42:11.real influx of migrants to support our agricultural industry, pressures

:42:12. > :42:16.have been put on local services. At the same time, those local services

:42:17. > :42:20.have been cut by this Government. Do you think British workers will get

:42:21. > :42:24.out into the field and help the seasonal fruit picking instead? I

:42:25. > :42:28.think we need to look at what, different areas need different

:42:29. > :42:34.things, so for example the Government cut the migrant fund and

:42:35. > :42:36.that needs to be reintroduced, we also need to make sure employment

:42:37. > :42:44.agencies don't undercut when they recruit from abroad, undercutting

:42:45. > :42:48.local Labour. There is evidence in terms of how successfully we can

:42:49. > :42:52.integrate communities into different areas, and that hasn't happened

:42:53. > :42:56.either. Some of the Labour MPs in the North have a very different view

:42:57. > :43:00.on immigration and they do think that something should be done about

:43:01. > :43:02.the numbers, even Keir Starmer in Shadow Cabinet said something has to

:43:03. > :43:09.be done about immigration. Is he wrong? No, he's not, he said

:43:10. > :43:14.something has to be done about immigration... He meant bringing

:43:15. > :43:18.down the numbers. It is about how we make sure the economy is supported

:43:19. > :43:21.by migration but also make sure communities are not put under

:43:22. > :43:25.pressure and there are ways that we can do that which has not happened

:43:26. > :43:28.unfortunately in the last few years. How confident are you that both

:43:29. > :43:31.parties but particularly the Government will take on all consider

:43:32. > :43:36.the sort of scheme you have put forward? I think there is potential

:43:37. > :43:41.pragmatic consensus here, both sides have said something important about

:43:42. > :43:44.control on the pace and scale of immigration, openness to the

:43:45. > :43:48.immigration that allows us to get a good deal, so we think a good deal

:43:49. > :43:52.could converge around this proposal. We have heard a lot about red lines

:43:53. > :43:56.on deals people don't want, if we are going to have a sharper debate

:43:57. > :43:59.we have got to hear ideas about practical proposals that we could

:44:00. > :44:11.put on the table and that would be attractive to a consensus in Britain

:44:12. > :44:14.and that I think is a better deal for Europe than we will get it we

:44:15. > :44:16.have a failure on both sides and no deal at all. Are you working closely

:44:17. > :44:18.with ministers? We will speak to ministers on all sides, there are

:44:19. > :44:22.pragmatic voices will remain that will have to come up with a real

:44:23. > :44:27.policy that works for the 52% and the 48%. When do you think the Prime

:44:28. > :44:31.Minister will be able to deliver on her pledge for net migration in the

:44:32. > :44:38.tens of thousands? Ultimately I think that will happen after we

:44:39. > :44:42.leave the EU. So in 2019? We will have to see what system is put in

:44:43. > :44:46.place and precisely what I think needs to happen is the focus on what

:44:47. > :44:50.the economy needs, what skills we need, how many people we need, and

:44:51. > :44:55.that will determine the numbers, that it will... But it will be after

:44:56. > :44:58.the EU that we will get back for control? Thank you.

:44:59. > :45:01.Now let's have a look at what else is coming up this week.

:45:02. > :45:03.The Shadow Brexit Secretary Keir Starmer is hoping to ask

:45:04. > :45:05.an urgent question in the Commons this afternoon about

:45:06. > :45:09.The Japanese car giant announced last Thursday that they would build

:45:10. > :45:11.two new models at their Sunderland factory after receiving "assurances"

:45:12. > :45:15.Labour MP Keith Vaz could have his entry onto the Justice Committee

:45:16. > :45:23.The Conservative MP Andrew Bridgen will try and trigger a Commons vote

:45:24. > :45:27.Keith Vaz resigned as chairman of the Home Affairs Committee last

:45:28. > :45:29.month after newspaper allegations that he had paid

:45:30. > :45:35.On Wednesday, Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn will face

:45:36. > :45:39.As always, we'll broadcast the session in full here

:45:40. > :45:44.Later that day, around 70 Labour MPs will launch a centre-left group

:45:45. > :45:53.The MPs behind it say their aim is to help the party produce

:45:54. > :45:57.On Thursday, the Bank of England Governor Mark Carney

:45:58. > :45:58.will deliver the quarterly inflation report.

:45:59. > :46:02.That's the Bank's verdict on how the British economy is performing.

:46:03. > :46:06.It's thought that Mark Carney could use the opportunity to end

:46:07. > :46:08.speculation about whether he will continue in the job

:46:09. > :46:15.Joining me from outside on College Green are the deputy

:46:16. > :46:17.political editor Jason Groves and Martha Gill, who writes

:46:18. > :46:31.Jason Groves, what do you think Mark Carney will do? I think he will

:46:32. > :46:36.stay. He is telling friends he wants to stay and although we understand

:46:37. > :46:40.that he has personal reasons for possibly wanting to return to

:46:41. > :46:44.Canada, he is in a job that pays him a lot of money and he says he wants

:46:45. > :46:50.to see Brexit through. In many ways, he is a lucky man to be able to make

:46:51. > :46:54.his own decision. There are quite a few in government who would be happy

:46:55. > :46:57.to see the back of him. But at this moment, there is a feeling that it

:46:58. > :47:02.might spook the markets for him to go. I think he will stay. Martha,

:47:03. > :47:07.how much fuss will there be from the Tory MPs who have felt Mark Carney

:47:08. > :47:12.overstepped the mark in the EU referendum? Will they make a fuss if

:47:13. > :47:16.he stays? Probably, but if he goes, they will make even more fuss. They

:47:17. > :47:24.will use it as an opportunity to jump on these accusations that he

:47:25. > :47:28.torched the economy down and made incorrect calls before Brexit. If he

:47:29. > :47:34.went, it would certainly cause uncertainty in the markets, adding

:47:35. > :47:40.to the stress caused by Brexit. Let's talk about Nissan and those

:47:41. > :47:43.assurances. A letter was enough to persuade Nissan to continue

:47:44. > :47:48.investing in the north-east. What was promised, do you think? We got a

:47:49. > :47:51.good outline of what was promised from Greg Clark yesterday. There

:47:52. > :47:53.were three areas where the government offered the kind of

:47:54. > :47:58.grants you might expect a government to offer any big business,

:47:59. > :48:05.investing, training and research. Then there was this extra area where

:48:06. > :48:09.the real political debate is now, in that he has offered them an

:48:10. > :48:11.assurance that they can continue trading without tariffs and without

:48:12. > :48:17.bureaucratic impediments. Nobody quite knows what that means. We

:48:18. > :48:20.don't know who is applies to. Interestingly, the letter doesn't

:48:21. > :48:24.say what happens if the government can't deliver that. At the moment,

:48:25. > :48:27.they can't guarantee it. Negotiations with Brussels haven't

:48:28. > :48:33.even started, and we are already making promises about the outcome.

:48:34. > :48:37.Presumably, if that cannot be upheld, the idea of no tariffs being

:48:38. > :48:43.put on car-makers like Nissan, there would have to be compensation which

:48:44. > :48:46.would be taxpayer funded. That is the key question. That is what I

:48:47. > :48:54.suspect Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, will be grilling

:48:55. > :48:58.Greg Clark on today. I suspect he will also be interested in whether

:48:59. > :49:05.there are sector by sector deals, because Greg Clark was only talking

:49:06. > :49:07.about the car industry yesterday. It would be extraordinary for the

:49:08. > :49:13.government to monitor deals sector by sector. I suspect Keir Starmer

:49:14. > :49:16.will want to find out whether all of Britain's other key industries will

:49:17. > :49:20.get the same kind of deals that the car industry seems to be getting. We

:49:21. > :49:24.will be listening to Business Secretary Greg Clark when he talks

:49:25. > :49:29.about these things. Let's move onto Keith Vaz, the Labour MP currently

:49:30. > :49:33.under investigation. This issue has been raised by Andrew Bridge, the

:49:34. > :49:36.Conservative MP, because Keith Vaz wants to take his place on the

:49:37. > :49:42.Justice committee. Is he going to get anywhere with his opposition?

:49:43. > :49:45.Well, Andrew tells me he has secured a vote in the Commons tonight. We

:49:46. > :49:52.will have to see what the numbers are. It is an unusual situation. For

:49:53. > :49:56.a lot of members of the public, they will be surprised that a man in

:49:57. > :49:58.Keith Vaz's position is going for a seat on the Justice committee at

:49:59. > :50:02.this time when he has all this hanging over him. He has had to step

:50:03. > :50:05.down from the home affairs committee. I suspect if he had been

:50:06. > :50:09.on the Justice committee, he would have had to step back from that. It

:50:10. > :50:13.is extraordinary that he is going for this. My gut feeling is that he

:50:14. > :50:22.will get on. But we will have to wait and see. Martha Gill, what do

:50:23. > :50:27.you think will happen? I agree. These things tend to go through

:50:28. > :50:31.smoothly. It would be unusual for it to be blocked at this stage, but it

:50:32. > :50:37.is also unusual for somebody involved in ongoing investigations

:50:38. > :50:39.like Keith Vaz to get onto such a prestigious select committee. We

:50:40. > :50:44.will see. Thank you both very much. As we've just been discussing,

:50:45. > :50:47.Labour have secured what's known as an "urgent question" in the House

:50:48. > :50:49.of Commons this afternoon to discuss the detail

:50:50. > :50:52.of assurances given to Nissan by the Business Secretary Greg

:50:53. > :50:54.Clark, which led to the car manufacturer committing to continue

:50:55. > :50:56.production of its cars It's of no interest for there

:50:57. > :51:03.to be tariff barriers to the Continent and vice versa,

:51:04. > :51:07.so I said that our objective would be to ensure that we have

:51:08. > :51:11.continued access to the markets without tariffs and without

:51:12. > :51:13.bureaucratic impediments. And that is how we will approach

:51:14. > :51:32.those negotiations. Should he just publish the letter? I

:51:33. > :51:37.don't think so, but he has been open about the discussions he has had

:51:38. > :51:42.with Nissan and I am sure he will say more in the meeting later today.

:51:43. > :51:51.This is quite normal, and it would be weird if a business didn't use

:51:52. > :51:58.Brexit as a way of furthering its own aims. Unsuccessfully in the case

:51:59. > :52:07.of Nissan. Other car-makers will be saying, are we going to get the same

:52:08. > :52:12.deal? We want to reassure any company that is periodically

:52:13. > :52:18.reviewing staying in the UK or relocating that it is best investing

:52:19. > :52:23.here. Of course, but what has been dangled in front of Nissan to make

:52:24. > :52:26.them stay? Reports have said they were considering leaving, so what

:52:27. > :52:32.did the government promise and will the taxpayer have to pay? This is

:52:33. > :52:41.really about ensuring that business has confidence in this government.

:52:42. > :52:46.Is this a good idea, to do sector by sector deals, where you could have

:52:47. > :52:51.free trade agreements for the car industry, for example, to ensure

:52:52. > :52:57.that companies like Nissan stay put? We want to see the detail of that.

:52:58. > :53:04.But is it a good idea? I am not sure, because I have not seen the

:53:05. > :53:08.detail. By publishing the letter, we get an opportunity to analyse

:53:09. > :53:12.whether it was a good idea or not. Well, he has said quite a lot. He

:53:13. > :53:20.said there would not be tariffs placed on goods. Is that an

:53:21. > :53:25.assurance enough for you? There was an interview last night from the

:53:26. > :53:29.boss of Nissan which was implying something slightly different. Let's

:53:30. > :53:33.take Greg Clark at his word that there would not be any tariffs that

:53:34. > :53:40.would be put on car manufacturers when exporting. Would that be a good

:53:41. > :53:45.deal? Obviously, we want to make sure that companies in the UK can

:53:46. > :53:53.trade as freely as possible with Europe. But we need to see the

:53:54. > :53:57.detail. If Nissan are now getting a sweetener through the taxpayer, why

:53:58. > :54:04.couldn't we provide it to another business? This sweetener might be

:54:05. > :54:10.that in the end, if we can't keep that assurance of error free trade,

:54:11. > :54:15.we will compensate you. Would that be all right for the government said

:54:16. > :54:21.taxpayers will fund compensation if we cannot keep our promise of tariff

:54:22. > :54:26.free trade? Greg Clark has been quite straightforward in his

:54:27. > :54:32.interview yesterday. We don't know about that. Well, he did say there

:54:33. > :54:40.was not money dangled in order to secure them remaining in the UK. As

:54:41. > :54:46.you would expect from someone who supported the Leave camp, I think

:54:47. > :54:49.common sense will prevail. I think businesses in Europe will want to

:54:50. > :54:54.trade with us as we do with them. And some of the obstacles that are

:54:55. > :54:56.being floated will not come to pass. Let's see what happens.

:54:57. > :54:59.So, ever wanted to keep track of how your MP has been

:55:00. > :55:03.Whether they toe the party line, or are a serial rebel?

:55:04. > :55:04.It's all information that's recorded, but now, thanks

:55:05. > :55:07.to a new app launched by Parliament called Commons Vote,

:55:08. > :55:09.you can get hold of it almost immediately

:55:10. > :55:14.Ellie has been looking at how it all works.

:55:15. > :55:17.It's what happens when the Speaker needs MPs

:55:18. > :55:25.And this bell rings to let everyone know.

:55:26. > :55:30.If I wanted to vote against whatever was being proposed, I would get up

:55:31. > :55:36.out of the chamber and head to the no lobby, which is that way.

:55:37. > :55:42.If I wanted to vote in favour, I'd go that way to the ayes.

:55:43. > :55:45.Once a vote or division is called, MPs have eight minutes

:55:46. > :55:49.to get from the chamber or wherever they are.

:55:50. > :55:52.Then I would get to the desks here and work out which queue

:55:53. > :56:06.But things recently have changed, so what's different?

:56:07. > :56:08.Until earlier this year, members' names were recorded

:56:09. > :56:10.on pen and paper and when they came through,

:56:11. > :56:13.a clerk recorded their name with a marker pen.

:56:14. > :56:16.Now we've changed to a system of recording names by tablet device,

:56:17. > :56:19.we have the data in a digital format.

:56:20. > :56:22.So it's quite a traditional process, with a modern twist.

:56:23. > :56:25.Everything else has stayed the same as for many decades.

:56:26. > :56:27.Members still walk through the lobbies,

:56:28. > :56:30.but the way we record votes has changed.

:56:31. > :56:33.And that's useful for the clever technical people, who've come up

:56:34. > :56:47.So we have a nice copy of Hansard, how it was traditionally recorded.

:56:48. > :56:53.We've got a list of all the votes and we can scroll through them,

:56:54. > :56:55.have a look at what has gone on in the past.

:56:56. > :56:58.And we can see that there were 195 ayes and 280 noes.

:56:59. > :57:01.If you choose the noes, you can get a list of all those

:57:02. > :57:06.We can also look at all the members, so you can scroll through

:57:07. > :57:08.or search for their name, and we can choose a member.

:57:09. > :57:11.If we choose Luciana Berger, we can see how she has voted

:57:12. > :57:14.in every division, and you get the count of the division as well,

:57:15. > :57:17.so you can quickly see what side she was on.

:57:18. > :57:19.Everything that goes on in parliament will continue

:57:20. > :57:23.It just means you can get the information on the move.

:57:24. > :57:35.I can see how that will help us journalists. Will you get more

:57:36. > :57:39.hassle from your constituency and voters if they think you haven't

:57:40. > :57:43.voted the way you should? I think anything that helps voters to know

:57:44. > :57:47.what is going on and about the process is a good thing. It would

:57:48. > :57:52.just mean they get it a little quicker than they have in the past.

:57:53. > :57:57.Is this part of the attempt at modernisation processes in the

:57:58. > :58:00.Commons? About time. I think it will be great. Constituents want to know

:58:01. > :58:05.the information. I can get it quicker. I like the idea of them

:58:06. > :58:08.wandering around with their apps. There's just time before we go

:58:09. > :58:12.to find out the answer to our quiz. B) Ed Balls' mad

:58:13. > :58:20.professor on Strictly? C) The wails of former

:58:21. > :58:23.Prime Minister Viscount Goderich - known as the "Blubberer"

:58:24. > :58:25.for his tendency to cry while in office, or d) The feline

:58:26. > :58:28.ghost of former chief mouser, So Debbie and Penny,

:58:29. > :58:37.what's the correct answer? I am going to go for the cigar

:58:38. > :58:42.smoker. I will go for the cigar smoke as well. You are both right,

:58:43. > :58:45.although I think we may have shown the picture too early! It is the

:58:46. > :58:46.cigar smoke, not Ed Balls. Thanks, Penny, Debbie

:58:47. > :58:51.and all my guests. The One O'Clock News is starting

:58:52. > :58:54.over on BBC One now. I'll be here at noon tomorrow

:58:55. > :59:06.with all the big political to commemorate the Africans

:59:07. > :59:09.who were here.