28/11/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 28/11/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.


The new leader of the UK Independence Party with 9622 votes,


62.6% of the vote, Paul Nuttall. Paul Nuttall has been elected


the new leader of Ukip. After a tumultuous few months,


can he bring the fractious Theresa May has admitted that Brexit


keeps her awake at night. Could another attempt to get


the courts to scupper her plans, be about to contribute


to her insomnia? Could forcing firms to reveal


the gap between the highest and lowest paid employees be


the answer to corporate # I didn't sell out


I didn't give in And political songs slug it out


to become Christmas number one. But which Jeremy Corbyn-inspired


single will make it? And with us for the whole


of the programme today is the Conservative MP and former


Work and Pensions Secretary, And the Labour MP and former


Shadow Cabinet Minister, Lisa Nandy. First, is a new legal


challenge about to be launched that will put obstacles


in the way of Theresa Lawyers are arguing that June's vote


may have mandated our withdrawal from the European Union,


but not a lesser-known organisation Theresa May has admitted that


decisions over Brexit and this is just latest nightmare


to disturb her sleep. Mark Carney, the Governor


of the Bank of England, continues to haunt the Prime


Minister after calling for a transitional period of two


years to delay Britain's departure 80 Conservative MPs will today


demand both EU residents in the UK and UK residents in the EU has given


reciprocal rights following Brexit, saying people are not bargaining


chips. Three of her more regular tormentors, Anna Soubry, Nick Clegg


and Chuka Umunna joined forces this morning, saying British industry


would be harmed by sector by sector free trade agreement instead of


staying in the single market. And Theresa May has


a fresh nightmare today with British Influence-backed lawyer


Jolyon Maugham arguing that leaving the EU will not automatically mean


leaving the European Economic Area - threatening to take the government


back to court if it tries But will she be given any comfort


today by her Polish counterpart, Beata Szydlo, who is meeting


Theresa May at Downing Street. She says Poland will be


a constructive partner to the UK and calls for a good compromise


with the EU for Britain. Brexit may well be disturbing


Jeremy Corbyn's sleep too. Yesterday, Shadow Foreign Secretary


Emily Thornberry refused to rule out a second referendum on whatever


Brexit deal emerged - a position apparently at odds


with her Shadow Cabinet colleagues. And this morning Labour backbencher


Dan Jarvis has said that any perceived failure to accept


the voters' verdict on Brexit and immigration would act


as a toxic mix for Labour. We're joined now by the former


Northern Ireland Secretary and Leave campaigner,


Theresa Villiers. Welcome. The referendum ballot paper


asked people whether to stay in the EU, not the EEA. These lawyers have


a right to say you have no mandate to take as out of the EEA and by


definition the single market? And we are only in the EEA because we are a


member of the EU, article two C of the EEA agreement makes it clear. I


think the court proceedings will be dismissed because once we leave the


EU we automatically ceased to be members of the EEA. You can be a


member of the European free trade area without being a member of the


EU, so don't the lawyers have a right to say if you want to


underline that departure from the EEA, you would have to do it through


Parliament? I believe this court case is another way to try to


overturn the result and to muddy the waters, to delay things. Even in the


worst-case scenario they turned out to be right and got it to the


Supreme Court, the worst-case scenario would be Parliament would


have to vote, in which case Parliament should get on and vote


because that is the way to respect the result. Is it just an to prolong


what they see as agony? Legal action has been launched by an organisation


I had not heard of called British Influence, which sounds as if it


should be vaguely pro-British but it is an organisation that promotes the


European Union. They are trying to basically find a legal route to slow


down or block Brexit. I do not think it changes the big picture, we are


coming out and if we have to do a separate instrument through


Parliament to technically get us out of the EEA, so be it. You would not


support is staying in the economic area because you know the argument


then would-be it would perhaps allow us to stay in the single market and


give us access many would like to keep? I do not think staying in the


EEA is consistent with what people voted for on the 23rd of June, which


was to leave the EU, for a return of sovereignty and for British law to


be superior to the law of the EU. Do you agree? Part of the difficulty is


apart from the fact we know Britain voted by a majority to leave the


European Union, we don't know what people were actually voting for or


what it looks like and one reason the mess has ended up again in the


courts is because we have not had clarity from the government about


the shape of the Brexit deal. The way we should resolve this is have


the debate in Parliament and with the public. We have accepted we are


leaving, and five months after the vote, it beggars belief we have not


made progress towards what that is. It will be held up as Lisa Nandy


says, it will be potentially held up in the courts and the government has


lost one case and it is going to the Supreme Court. Are you filled with


confidence the government would win a second case on this argument about


coming out of the European economic area? I am confident and it is clear


the government would win the case. The important thing is to make


progress on the negotiations and that will start once Article 50 is


tabled. If the government has to introduce separate legislation in


the way you conceded, in your case the worst-case scenario, they would


have to repeal article 120 seven. Would MPs feel bound to vote the


same way as with Article 50, all would they think twice? It makes for


a more varied debate and there would be a diverse range of opinions


expressed in Pollio. People need to listen to constituents and what they


felt people voted for. I was on the Remains side, campaigning against


this, but I have recognise what people were fundamentally voting


for, and the phrase take back control, the most powerful phrase


anyone spoke in the campaign, that is about sovereignty and about


saying British laws will be made in Parliament and will not be


counteracted by the European Court of Justice, it is about showing


voters immigration policy is made within our shores, not in Brussels.


If people want those things it is not consistent with staying in the


EEA. If we remain in the EEA, do you agree the UK cannot take back


control? I disagree with what Stephen Crabb said about taking back


control. That became, it somehow captured the mood of people in


constituencies like mine, but it was for the constituents I spoke to


during the campaign about wanting to see real power over things that


matter, whether recent quality work, time to spend with your family,


being able to make decisions about local services. Part of the trouble


is we had the referendum without real thought given by the government


as to what comes next and suddenly we are in a studio in London trying


to define what people meant all over the country, and we should have had


that debate from the beginning. We will come back to that shortly,


particularly the idea if we stayed in the EEA we would have to pay


contributions to budgets and would have to have freedom of movement.


Now, Ukip has a new leader - its second new leader


Congratulations on your victory, pulled muscle. Why do you think


members backed you over your rivals? Because I have not just talked the


talk, I have walked the walk, been in the party 12 years and I am the


most experienced candidate, having been chairman and head of policy,


deputy leader six years and the party realises it has to come


together and unify and stay on the pitch and hold the government's feet


to the fire on Brexit and that is why I have the biggest mandate in


the history of the party. Was it a fair contest? One of your fellow


candidates, John Rees-Evans, said on this programme the election process


has been compromised and alleged party officials may have misused


databases to promote their favoured candidate, what do you say to him?


That is not something I witness. The last leadership election, there were


100 complaints and this election, apparently ten. It is minuscule. I


think the election has been good-humoured and fair and precisely


what Ukip has needed. The last thing Ukip would have needed is an


election that involved in fighting and whatnot. We had a good-humoured


contest and now we can move on. The party was so busy involved in months


of chaotic infighting, how are you going to deal with that? I have


never been part of any faction in the party, I generally get along


with everyone. What happens the other month, in Strasbourg, when we


had the altercation between two MEPs was probably the best thing that


happened because everybody woke up, smelt the coffee and understood it


was an existential crisis and it was my duty to step in, stand in this


election, win it and bring the party together. One way you can bring the


party together after difficult months is by the people you put on


your team. You have your pointed? I have appointed Peter Whittle, the


London Assembly member as deputy. I have appointed subject to approval


Paul Oakden, party chairman, who has steered the ship brilliantly over


the summer during these difficult months and I have appointed Patrick


O'Flynn as senior political adviser and within the next 72 hours there


will be appointments of party officers and spokespeople. I will


hit the ground running. I know the party inside out and it will not be


a problem. Not the most diverse group of people you have mentioned


there, but what about Suzanne Evans, who also ran through leadership, why


did you not give her something? If you hold your horses and wait, there


will be an announcement regarding Suzanne Evans tomorrow. As I said at


the hustings I will build a team of all talents and Suzanne Evans has a


lot of talent. What is her job, tell us? I am not going to tell you. Why


not? There is not much diversity in the group you have announced, would


you agree? Come on, that is splitting hairs. I have appointed


three people. Four. My team will be announced in the next 72 hours. This


party will move forward. We have had problems over the last couple of


months and now we will restructure the party and get ready for the


battle ahead at Sleaford and by-elections hopefully next year as


well. You were described as a reluctant leader and I think you


thought about it before you went to the job. And it was suggested you


lacks the steel necessary to sort out the difficulties that the party


has experienced. What changed your mind and have you got the steel? The


steel issue, the easy thing for me would be to step aside and drum the


other faction out of the party, which would be the wrong thing to


do. The Coward's thing to do. I showed steel because I said I would


bring this thing back together and move it forward and turn it into a


real movement of working people that will go into labour constituencies


and hopefully in many areas replace the Labour Party. As for me wanting


to do it, one reason I did it was because it is my duty. I watched


over the summer the party I laugh and have helped build, begin to fall


to bits. It is my duty to step in, steadied the ship and take it


forward to bigger and better things. Let's pick up on some of the things


you mention. On Brexit, how will you put pressure on the Government to


deliver what you would like to see in terms of leaving the EU? Elect


aurally. -- in terms of elections. The only way you change things in


British politics is by being an electoral threat. We saw that in


2013. The only reason Mr Cameron offered the referendum was because


Ukip was growing in size, growing in the polls and becoming an electoral


threat. That is how we will hold the Government's feet to the fire over


Brexit. How will you bring Labour voters over to Ukip? Very easy.


Jeremy Corbyn seems to be doing a very good job of that himself. We're


now going to begin to speak the language of ordinary working people.


We will move into the areas that the Labour Party have neglected.


Working-class communities across the kingdom can have nothing in common


with Jeremy Corbyn and the others. This north London, Islington set. We


will focus on the issues that really matter to working-class people on


the doorstep - immigration, crime, defence, foreign aid, ensuring


British people are put to the top of the queue. We will go out there to


campaign and you will see a big rise in the Ukip voting Labour areas


under my leadership. If you expect to increase the vote, what would


success looked like in terms of seats at the next general election?


We would be looking for an improvement on the last one, which


would not be difficult. We are looking at least to get into double


figures. We're going to target sensibly, not have that scatter-gun


approach we had in past. It is clear, the areas where we are now


winning councils, drilling down in local communities and making a


difference already. Use a double figures in the 2020 general election


for Ukip. I would hope so, Jo. But you are putting me on the spot. I


was only elected five minutes ago. But you haven't just stepped on


leather Ukip stage, have you? You are not a new be in that sense.


There was an accusation that the party misspent funds during the


election campaign, and one of your own member said it would be no


surprise if that had happened. What do you think? In our defence, we had


two compliance officers who said everything was fine. We have done


nothing different from any of the other pan-European parties, and we


expect to be vindicated. In the end, this looks to me as if this is


nothing but revenge for Brexit by the European Parliament. It could


end up in the European court of justice and I absolutely 100%


believe that we will be found innocent. You say you will bring the


party together, but one of your big problems is that you have lost a lot


of people, people defecting to the Tories, or becoming independent. It


was hinted last week that Douglas Carswell could rejoin the Tory Party


before the next election. Stephen -- Stephen Wolf, Diane James, these are


people who came from the Tory Party. I just saw Douglas on the stairs. He


won't be a problem. I am always sad when people leave the party, at any


level. I hope that one day they may think about coming back under a new


leadership. We have had a very difficult summer. It was as if Ukip


won the referendum, stopped fighting the European Union, looked around


and decided what else it could fight and decided to fight each other.


That is over now, finished. We will look forward and not backward. Under


my leadership, with a united Ukip, I would not want to be Labour and


Conservative MPs, because if you are Ray Remainer, we're coming after


you. -- if you are a Remainer. Nigel Farage will be a roaming voice for


the party. I think you will find Nigel Farage will be a prominent


voice for the party, on the airwaves and on TV shows like this. I'm sure


he will be if he has anything to do with it. In terms of other


elections, the French presidential election, would you back Marine Le


Pen for that job? This leader of Ukip will not involve himself in any


foreign elections. No view at all on it? This Ukip leader will not


involve himself in any foreign elections, simple as that. I will be


focusing on getting the party ready for 2020 in this country. Do you


think it was a mistake for Nigel Farage to back Donald Trump? He has


struck gold, hasn't he? He has been proven absolutely right. So you were


wrong to criticise it? Yes will stop well, I didn't agree with some of


the things Donald Trump was saying during the campaign. I thought in


many ways he had the right messages but was the wrong candidate. Now he


has won, it is clear he is an Anglophile and will put Britain at


the front of the queue when it comes to a trade deal. And this is the guy


who backed Brexit. The special relationship is going to be safer


with the Trump Administration. Paul Nuttall, thank you very much. Lisa


Nandy, Ukip speaking the language of ordinary working people. There is no


real affinity in areas like yours with Jeremy Corbyn and the North


London elite, as he calls them. The challenge for Paul is whether he can


change the party. He said they want to learn to start speaking the


language of ordinary people in the North of England, and although lots


of people in constituencies like mine agreed with Ukip about wanting


to leave the EU, they had precisely the opposite vision about what comes


next. Even on immigration? Dan Jarvis has said today that those


Labour MPs who do not accept the verdict of the referendum, as he saw


it, a lot of it about immigration, will lose their seats. Yes, I think


people want to see the impact of immigration dealt with, particularly


where we were talking about attracting people into this country


to be able to work in areas like the NHS, which has done a lot of good


for our services. Young people were saying, we would love to work in the


NHS, so why are you not investing in us too? People would like to see


more money for the NHS as well. Is it just about impact or is it about


fewer people, the numbers? It is about who comes, where they work and


what impact that has. It depends, for example, if you are Ray


tradesperson working in London where you are competing with migrant


workers prepared to live in damp, dirty, overcrowded housing so that


you can cut your costs and you seen your wages going down, I think that


is about having a minimum level of skills and qualifications in order


to drive wages up. If you are a young person in a town like Wigan,


where you have just lost your nursing bursary and you are being


told to thank your lucky stars that we can attract people into work in


the NHS, then it is about ringing back the nursing bursary and that


pathway for you. That means you won't reduce the numbers. In the


end, people would want a straight answer on that. As well as the


impact, would you reduce the numbers? It is not about an


arbitrary cap, because that would damage public services. The problem


Paul has got is that his party was fighting a campaign saying they


would put more money into public services after the referendum, and


what we have heard is that there will be more cuts to services as a


result of leaving the EU. The net migration figures haven't come down


to the tens of thousands over the last Parliament and still in this


Parliament, so there is no point in having a cap will stop we set a


target which we have not met. Which you could not meet the first time,


and you are still far off. Nobody predicted the employment boom we


have seen in the last four or five years. As a result, there are parts


of the country where there is effectively full employment,


business is saying, we need more workers because there is not the


availability of young workers. I am open-minded about the immigration


issue. For many people, when they voted for Britain to leave the EU,


they wanted to see that immigration policy was coming back to the UK for


full control. We need to have an honest debate about immigration in


the future. The population structure is changing, we are becoming an


older society. The truth is, we probably need more immigrants in the


future, not less, to do all those jobs that the young talent pool


isn't available to do. In a word, we need immigration - do you agree with


Stephen? Because of our manifesto commitment, I support attempts to


bring the numbers down below 100,000. Everyone acknowledges that


will be difficult. Do you think it can be achieved? It is, I think. It


will take a while, and it is not achievable until we take back


control over immigration and bring free movement to an end. You would


be prepared to bring the numbers down to the tens of thousands even


if it affected public services and looking after an ageing population


in the way Stephen Crabb outlined? And think it is possible to reduce


it without damaging services. It is important for us to attempt to


fulfil the commitment we made in our manifesto. It will take a long time


and it won't be easy but we should not give up on it as an aspiration.


Do you think you can do both? It is difficult to achieve. Foreign


students, it is ridiculous to count those in our figures. It is a good


thing for people to come and study in our universities. They bring in


cash from overseas and should not be counted. I think this is cheap


politics because you are trying to pretend to people that you can fix


some very real problems in their lives by having an arbiter 's target


-- by having an arbitrary target around numbers. It will lead a much


smaller working age population trying to pay for the welfare state


that supports the very old and the very young. Not only are you going


into that with no plan about how to mitigate the damage to public


services, but you're not saying anything about investing in young


people in towns like mine so that they can compete in the system we


have. We want to invest in young people to give them the skills they


need to get these jobs. Why are you not doing it? We have to respond to


public concern about unsustainable levels of migration. I am not saying


that we should bring it down to zero. Of course, migration should


continue and it can help our economy, but it needs to be a


sustainable levels if we are to respond to the result of the


referendum and the public concern that there is. Our job as


politicians is to solve some of the real problems this country has. You


are arguing, essentially, that all you want to do is respond to


something you have heard rather than to lead the country forward. No, I


am saying I was elected on a manifesto that made a commitment to


bring down net migration. We will have to leave it there, except just


briefly to ask, Emily Thornbury suggested that the Labour policy was


that Labour will not frustrate the will of the people as a result of


the referendum and will not try to blog article 50 being triggered?


Yesterday I said I did not think there was a strong appetite in the


country for a second referendum, certainly not from my constituents.


From Labour MPs? Most feel that we had the referendum, made the


argument and lost, so now our job is to get on with it. Why is Emily


Thornbury not being clear about the Labour line? She did what a lot of


politicians do, she answered the question she wanted to rather than


the point that was being made. Our job five months after the vote is to


make sure that we have some say in what Britain looks like after Brexit


rather than rehashing old arguments. Thank you.


Now it's time for our daily quiz, which today is all about Francois


Fillon, the Thatcher-admiring, car-loving, French Republican


presidential candidate, who is married to a Brit.


But what is Monsieur Fillon's nickname?


At the end of the show, Stephen and Lisa will give us


I didn't know what it was I love. -- what it was either.


It's the band you've always wanted to see.


You get online as soon as the tickets are released -


Have genuine fans really snapped up the tickets that quickly,


or are ticket touts buying them in bulk so they can sell them


on at much higher prices on ticket reselling websites?


That's what many genuine fans suspect and now there's a campaign


Josh Franceschi of the band You Me At Six went back to one


of his favourite venues, Alexandra Palace in North London,


And I should warn you that there is some flash


Rock 'n' roll is about breaking boundaries, about enjoying yourself,


but if there's one thing threatening the new music industry


I don't just mean the people standing outside the venue.


That's illegal without a street trading


I'm talking about online ticket touts, individuals or


businesses who scalp masses of tickets, often


using a specialised botnet software so they can


When a gig is announced, fans head to primary


ticket websites, often to be told it's sold out,


It's the touts who bought them, forcing fans


to pay hiked up prices on secondary websites.


These secondary websites masquerade as fan-to-fan


marketplaces, but as we highlighted at the Culture, Media and Sport


select committee, they are all dependent on hard-core ticket touts.


One of Stub Hub's major clients was recently outed as a man


from Quebec who is still scalping and reselling


Enough is enough - genuine fans are being priced


Music lovers are consumers too, and consumers have rights.


In New York, legislation is in place.


Those profiteering should face prison or a fine.


This goes beyond consumer protection.


A number of music businesses have come together


to fight back with a new campaign called the Fan Fair Alliance.


This is an industry that's already suffering


from a lack of money coming into it in other ways.


If we want the live community to thrive, we need this to


And we're also joined by the Conservative MP Nigel Adams,


Ticket resale sites provided important service if you miss out


first time around? They serve a purpose but I think it is about


there being a cut-off point as to how far prices can be inflated. Some


websites offer resale mechanisms but that is at face value and there are


websites a little bit more, what we would say at the fairer end of the


scale. Websites charging 20 times the resale price. Give me an


example? Tickets can go for? Way into their thousands. There was a


study with Phil Collins and I believe it got to ?4000 for two


tickets. Were they sold out in 15 seconds or something? How can that


be? I think we have all tried to get tickets, I have tried with a couple


of iPads and failed recently to do it. Should there be technology to


stop people buying in bulk? A lot of the primary ticket companies have


technology to try to stop it happening but it is a technological


arms race and the touts are very good at it. They have these bots


that hoover up hundreds and thousands of tickets and within


seconds they are for resale on other websites at inflated prices. Will


legislation do what you want it to do if it is about a technological


arms race? I believe it will. Josh has been fantastically supportive.


He took it upon himself to sell tickets director fans across the


counter in a shop. There is a problem. It is not a silver bullet


to ban the bots and make it an offence, but they do it in certain


states in America where you can now go to prison. I want to make it an


imprisonable offence as well but there are other things we need to do


as well. Do you support that? Yes. For people to go to jail, for there


to be a prison sentence, do you think it will work as a deterrent? I


think it will work as a deterrent. It is not about me trying to lock


people up, it is trying to get the situation changed for fans of live


music because daily I interact with the fine base, whether face-to-face


or through social media -- fan base. Many are priced out of the equation


and that is my fundamental issue with it. A ticket resale company


mentioned in the film said they support legislation to stop bots


misuse. They say they have consistently supported legislation


and gave evidence to a committee in the Senate on the subject. They go


on to say legislation alone cannot solve it so what else needs to be


done? I think we need to be looking at how tickets are released and in


some cases you have artists and managers who might be complicit.


Touting has been going on since the Romans have put on shows in the


Colosseum but we will not entirely move this away but we need to take


action. Having this as an offence is a step in the right direction. Is it


a good idea? Yes, it sounds exactly right. It is striking a balance,


because nobody wants to stop the process of selling on a ticket you


might not need and even getting a little bit of a margin. It is making


sure people cannot profiteer and in terms of hoovering up tickets,


surely that is a crime. Is it a pressing issue for you? Yes, along


with the work Nigel has done, my colleague Sharon Hodgson has


campaigned on this and that is because for our constituents it


matters. It is not just the fan experience, but it also strangles an


industry that is important for Britain and brings pleasure to a lot


of people and these people are parasites and need to be dealt with,


so well done. Have you tried to get tickets? I have been unsuccessful. I


got my Britney tickets but had to use three phones. I got through in


20 minutes. I can confirm she was brilliant. It was worthwhile? I lost


out on Kate Bush. Should ministers get behind this? Absolutely. The


Culture Secretary takes it seriously and is having meetings today


regarding law enforcement of this and I meet her on Wednesday at the


Department with industry representatives. We have an


opportunity. We will debate it a day in the report stage of the digital


economy Bill. It is a cross-party supported issue. The only people


presumably not in favour are the stand Flashmans of this world. You


are confident this will make a difference? I am and I think more


artists should speak up for their fans on this issue. It does not take


much to put your name on something and it is worth putting your name


on. We are confident it will be passed.


Now, the big question this week is, which British politicians will be


boarding a plane to Havana to attend Fidel Castro's funeral?


Jeremy Corbyn - probably, Boris Johnson - maybe.


But what's in store for those of us marooned on a North Atlantic rather


Today, Theresa May hosts the Polish Prime Minister


at Downing Street in the latest bilateral meeting with EU leaders


before formal Brexit negotiations start next year.


They'll also discuss the deployment of British troops


On Tuesday, the government will publish a Green Paper


on corporate governance that will include proposals to make


companies publish information on the the ratio between their


On Wednesday, Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn will meet


And Thursday is the by-election in Richmond Park in south-west


London, which was triggered by the resignation of Zac Goldsmith


following the government's decision to back a third runway a Heathrow.


We're joined now by the joint political editor of the Guardian,


Heather Stewart, and Jim Waterson of Buzzfeed.


Welcome. Nick Clegg has said the Richmond by-election result if the


Lib Dems win could mark a turning point in the government's direction


on Brexit, do you agree? Zac Goldsmith triggered the by-election,


resigning over Heathrow but no candidate is standing who would back


the third runway so it has become about Brexit and an opportunity for


the Liberal Democrats to prove they can turn people'sanguish about what


is going into an electoral fight back for them but it remains to be


seen whether they can do so but they have thrown the kitchen sink at it.


I do not know how many invitations to go down... Every single day. We


will see. If they won, would it marked a seismic change? It would


increase their number of MPs by one. The only way is up for them because


they are in a terrible position but there is optimism if you talk to


them. They say you have to be a bit mad to be Lib Dem at the moment but


it is fun. We are starting to break in suburban Lib Dem Tory seats. And


some of the Labour suburban seats. They are going for suburban seats


where previously Lib Dems could think of getting MPs. Richmond, they


have a very good chance. On Brexit will it change the terms? I'm not


sure it will put the pressure on Theresa May at the moment is to give


us more detail and information. She is saying no running commentary. But


a lot of politicians are giving us a running commentary from the other


side of the channel but if the Lib Dems perform strongly it would put a


certain amount of pressure on Theresa May and tell us more about


how she will handle this and perhaps to retain a closer relationship but


she has her backbenchers shouting saying, let's do it now. One of the


other issues she made prominent when she became leader and Prime Minister


was corporate governance. Workers on boards. As she abandoned her


promises? She said she would like to see workers on boards of companies.


Has it gone? We will have to see what is in the consultation but


potentially we are less likely to see one of your mates elevated to


board level and sitting around having coffee with the chairman


discussing the future of the company. The bit that is interesting


is whether they will introduce public pay ratios so you will see


how much you earn compared to the boss, or how much the average pay in


the organisation is, which Vince Cable proposed in the coalition but


dropped when he was told Goldman Sachs would look more equal than at


Waitrose or John Lewis. Why do you think she seems to be backing away


from some of these issues. It is a short period in which to perform a


U-turn but I think she is anxious about business reaction. There was a


big business backlash after her conference speech when she appeared


to signal a more interventionist approach, with Ed Miliband type


policies. Businesses are anxious anyway because of Brexit and


uncertainties so there is some nervousness but it is rapid to have


proposed these things and be rowing back already. What about Fidel


Castro? Who will go? Should Jeremy Corbyn go? He wants to. Jeremy


Corbyn probably never dream team would be considered for an invite to


Fidel Castro's funeral and now he has this opportunity and he is told


he is not necessarily allowed to take it because it might make it


look bad for his party. I feel sorry for this guy. His chance to get over


their and get stuck in. Now he has MPs telling him it would be wildly


inappropriate. What does Lisa Nandy say? Should he go? I would not go


out of respect for people who have died or suffered under Castro but we


owe it to them and the rest of the world to take a proper assessment of


Castro's legacy. How was it this guy who has been criticised rightly by


human rights organisations for the brutality of his regime also came to


be held as a hero by Nelson Mandela? To understand that you have to


understand the role the US has played against Cuban people and


their interests. What I have seen in the last few days is so many people


trying to take the complexity out of politics and it is tempting to do


but ultimately a destructive thing to do. Many people suffered and lost


their lives while Fidel Castro was in power and it is more complicated


than it looks. There is a David and Goliath tale in terms of how Cuba


managed to hold America to ransom. You should the British Government


send? I am sure the Foreign Office have protocols. They will be reading


them. The correct rank of minister to go. Not Boris, please. It


probably will not be Boris. It is right we should send somebody but we


should do it being absolutely clear that this is a man who represented


an ideology that cause destruction not just in Cuba but around the


world, he imprisoned thousands, murdered his own citizens, no need


to shed a tear for him. Let's pick up on one of those


stories with our guests here in the studio -


the proposals to force companies to publish information


about the difference between the highest


and lowest paid employees. It's been one of the themes


of Theresa May's premiership. Here's what she said on the subject


at the launch of her leadership bid The FTSE, for example,


is trading at about the same level it was 18 years ago,


and it's nearly 10% below its Yet, in the same period,


executive pay has more than trebled, and there is an irrational,


unhealthy and growing gap between what these companies


pay their workers and what So, as part of the changes


I want to make to corporate governance, I want to make


shareholder votes on corporate pay I want to see more transparency,


including the full disclosure of bonus targets and the publication


of pay multiple data - that is, the ratio between CEOs' pay


and the Theresa May said it, it's the


difference between the earnings of the chief executive and the average


employee when it came to forcing companies to publish pay ratios, not


the lowest and the highs, necessarily. Do you support that,


Stephen Crabb? I like the idea, not because I think it will achieve a


huge amount on its own. It represents an approach we are taking


to the corporate world, saying, look, in the 21st century we need a


more responsible capitalism in our society, we want business is doing


the right thing. By using the pay ratio as a lever for shining a light


on wider business practices, that is really important. As we just heard,


and no doubt some of the companies would argue this, it can create


misleading comparisons if in the end you distort to some extent what the


pay ratio is between the highest and the average employee. Who would that


benefit? Sure, there will be imperfections. It is not a perfect


tool, but the very fact that you are encouraging businesses to do it


means that they will have to have that conversation at board level,


have that discussion in the company, and that is a healthy thing. Do you


think it is a good idea? Theresa May talked about average pay is being


compared to the highest pay, which cuts out what is happening at the


bottom of the scale. The reason it is important is not just because


there are huge gaps in wealth in the country but because businesses that


try to take all their employees with them, reinvest in local communities


and make sure they put pounds in the pockets of the people who spend


them, these are the businesses that tend to do well and help build the


economy. It is about a long-term business approach, not a quick,


short term gain approach, which has been damaging before. It is


important that she gets the detail right. What about the point that if


you cannot take businesses with you and you alienate them, and a lot of


people argue she is moving away from her original rhetoric, is the tone.


Businesses did not like it. There are businesses the other day, such


as Lidl the other day saying they would pay the living wage. There are


companies that want to invest in the workforce and put something back


into the community, and those are the ones that Prime Minister should


be supporting. Company should publish the pay of its top earner


compared to its average employee and if it can be justified by


performance, they would have nothing to fear. Who said that? Ed Miliband?


Yes. How about this - employees should be on remuneration


committees. Same guy? The Labour manifesto. So the Conservative Party


has shamelessly stolen labour ideas, ideas which you criticised the


separately when they were suggested. It is about responding to what


voters are saying. We did not spend the month in the referendum campaign


talking just about Europe. We talked about jobs, people's working lives


and other things they felt discontent about. This is one of the


things we have taken from that. Theresa May talked about this during


the leadership campaign, but so did other people back in July. It is


healthy. Except that Theresa May is now backing away from some of those


ideas she was aping from Labour. We will wait and see in the Green


paper. It should be the start of a wide-ranging discussion. Ed Miliband


is having some fun with his tweets. What is your response? Ed is having


a bit of fun there. Let's look at what is in the Green paper tomorrow.


Lisa is right - the vast majority of businesses in the country are run by


decent people looking to great value for the company and for the wider


economy. We want to share the spotlight on the things that need


improved. Like putting workers on the board? That sounded like a


gimmick, to be honest. I am interested in how we can strengthen


workers' voices within the company. I am impressed in some companies by


how good relations are between the bosses and the unions. It's a


gimmick? It is patronising to say you want to give workers a voice but


shut them out of the boardroom. This is about restoring power to workers


over the things that affect their lives will stop workers in


companies, as most decent business leaders will tell you, are the


greatest asset that any company has. They are the people who drive the


company and build the wealth that is then reinvested in the company and


which lines the pockets of shareholders too. Are there other


ways of giving employees a voice other than putting them on the


board? There are lots of ways. The co-op model, where the company is


actually owned by the workforce and decisions are made cooperatively


between those workers and the management. Trade unions are another


way that you give workers a strong voice. There are lots of things that


can be done. The problem with what Theresa May is doing is that she is


willing the ends but will not countenance the means. These were


considered anti-business when Labour suggested them but they are sensible


and reasonable when the Conservatives do? You have a more


sensible discussion with business when you have Conservatives in


office generally. I will give you the last word. Is that true? This is


such an outdated point of view. This is a party formed by and for working


people. We have strong relationships up and down the country. We believe


it there. Now, if you were watching


the programme a couple of weeks ago you will have heard the song that's


surely to a shoo-in you will have heard the song that's


surely to be a shoo-in No, not James Corden or a re-release


of Leonard Cohen's Halleluiah, I speak, of course, of the "JC


for PM" track written and performed But we can now reveal exclusively


on this programme that Yes, the team behind the satirical


play "Corbyn: The Musical" are releasing one of the tracks just


in time for Christmas. # I didn't sell out


I didn't give in # Don't believe in borders


Austerity is mean # I'll veto a state funeral


For Her Majesty the Queen # The protesters are in charge


We've occupied the state # I'm a governmental


virgin # I didn't sell out


I didn't give in We may be revealing too much on this


programme. The writer of that song and the creator of Corbyn: The


Musical commie Bobby Friedman, --, Bobby Friedman, joins us now. Why


are you releasing it as a Christmas single? It is for charity, which is


a good thing at Christmas, but also, we saw the other song that was on


the show a few weeks ago, and we thought we should give people a


choice. This song is entitled You Needed A Hero, You Got Corbyn, which


you could take either way. It could be in the sense that you needed a


hero and you did in fact get one. It is extraordinary that one politician


can generate two Christmas singles. That is the thing about Jeremy


Corbyn. I would say that we have as much of a chance of getting to


number one for Christmas as Jeremy Corbyn does of getting to number


ten, but you never know what can happen with Jeremy Corbyn, because


people are fascinated by him even if they don't necessarily want to vote


for him. Will you be buying the song? And what do you think of the


analysis? It's dreadful. Come on! You should have asked people to


guest star in it, and then I would have bought it. Would he have taken


part? I think so. Do you think there was more of an appetite in the


country for a pro-Jeremy Corbyn Christmas song or an anti-Jeremy


Corbyn Christmas song? I think it is a British tradition of satirising


our politicians rather than an anti-song, trying to pop the balloon


of pompous politicians. Go onto iTunes, where it is available now,


and satirise and Pope politicians in the ribs rather than holding them up


in a hagiographic way. Is there not enough satire around, Stephen?


There's plenty. I thought it was a reasonable song, but not that


Christmassy. There is one other song coming out for the Jo Cox


Foundation. Don't be put off by the fact that politicians are singing on


the song, there are real musicians as well, and it will raise money for


good causes. How many politicians on that? Quite a few, they were in the


choir. They have been slightly muted in favour of people who can actually


sing. I can't sing. Not a note? I think I can, but that's usually


after seven pints of lager. I'm sure that can be arranged!


There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.


The question was: What is Francois Fillon's nickname?


Is it a) Monsieur Thatcher, b) Monsieur Rosbif, c)


Monsieur Va-Va Voom, or d) Monsieur Pee-Pee?


This has foxed the two of you. Have a guess. It might be too obvious.


Miss your -- miss Apparently, he often disappears


to the loo when things get Let's look at the more serious angle


on the French presidential elections. The Socialists will be


nowhere in this - why? What we have seen across Europe, and in the


United States, recently is a similar phenomenon, where you have the far


right offering cheap and easy solutions, to turn the clock back to


the 1970s and saying they can put everything back to how it was, then


on the other hand, you've got the sort of radical left saying, we can


do everything, we can sort this out. In the middle, you have the


centre-left in all of those countries that has been squeezed by


those two. Things Critics might say they have failed. The centre-left


has failed to inspire people in recent years. Briefly, are you a fan


of Francois Fillon? I think France needs a shake-up and he is the guy


to do it. Think it very much, and thank you to both of you for being


our guess. The one o'clock news is starting


over on BBC One now. I'll be here at noon tomorrow


with all the big political stories MUSIC: Silly Games


by Janet Kay Mum, we're supposed to be


making our own, like tape. I used to do a joke about waiting


for Lenny Henry to die so I could get on TV.


LAUGHTER I hate that joke. What is that


joke? "There can be only one."


Download Subtitles