12/12/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 12/12/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



This is BBC News - and these are the top stories


Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.


A cross-party group calls on the government to guarantee that


EU citizens living in the UK can stay after Brexit.


Leading Leave campaigner Gisela Stuart tells us why.


Theresa May is under pressure to sanction a rise in council tax


in England to boost spending on social care for the elderly.


Is the food served in prisons causing riots?


We'll hear from the campaigner who wants a nutritious overhaul


And we go behind-the-scenes in parliament to discover


the history of Hansard, the official publication


which captures every word spoken in the Commons and the Lords.


And with us for the whole of the programme today, the former


Conservative culture minister Ed Vaizey,


But first, let's take a look at a couple


of political warnings issued yesterday on the Sunday Politics.


First up, Ken Livingstone, who was asked by Andrew


By what time do you start to get worried if the polls haven't


Oh, I mean, I think they will turn around...


But generally when do you start to get worried if they haven't?


If in a year's time it was still as bad as this,


I don't think it will be because Jeremy and his team


are going to focus on the economy and that's what wins every election.


Remember, Bill Clinton - "It's the economy, stupid."


Ken Clarke also appeared on the Sunday Politics yesterday.


Here he is being asked about Theresa May's future,


should she decide to pursue what he calls a "hard Brexit".


You seem to be quoted in the Mail on Sunday this morning as saying


that if the Prime Minister's sides too much with the hard Brexit


It is because I think only a minority of the House of Commons


think it's all frightfully simple and you can just leave.


She will be in a minority if she started adopting the views


of John Redwood or Iain Duncan Smith.


It's quite clear that a majority of the House of Commons does not


agree with that and actually it would be pretty catastrophic


We turn up and face 27 other nation states and the biggest free


market in the world, and tell them we are


Ed Vaizey, is Ken Clarke ride, Theresa May could be brought down if


she sides with Eurosceptic head-bangers in her party? No, it's


not right, first of all, I don't think she will be brought down.


She's in an unassailable position, very popular with MPs and incredibly


popular in the country, not just with voters. My question is, if she


sides with Eurosceptic MPs. If she goes for a hard Brexit? I don't


think she will but I can dodge the question this way. I don't think she


will go from hard Brexit. That's my next question. You don't think she


will take the UK out of the single market? You are asking me, almost


inviting me to dodge the question. It quite clear, coming out of a


customs union is not a hard Brexit for the you can't leave the EU


without leaving those two elements because you need to control


immigration and have your own free trade treaties. What do you think is


a hard Brexit then? These terms are unhelpful for supper hard Brexit


would be by and large an ideological exit from the European Union which


didn't take into account of the important factors such as the one


they going to discuss later about the right of EU nationals living in


the UK, so I would like to see... If you want me to move closer perhaps


to Ken's position, I would urge the Prime Minister to change some of the


rhetoric falls I'd like to see her reaching out to the remain as


because there's nothing wrong having voted remain, believing the backdrop


in the European Union and raising your concerns about what the future


holds. On that issue of tone and reaching out, let's talk about


trouser gate. In a sartorial failure to reach out across the divide from


the Education Secretary, for her ?995 pair of brown leather trousers,


bitter chocolate they were described as in one of the papers. Nicky


Morgan was then banned from the meeting due to attend at number ten.


Do you think that was the right response? I was surprised to see


that appear in the newspapers. I don't know if they were crumbs from


the Russian intelligence service at the moment which is hacking... These


were texts Chief of staff. Fiona Hill, I don't


want to get into the row between them. Was it appropriate for those


texts to be sent so Nicky Morgan was banned? People send text messages to


each other all the time. People in number ten, senior figures


particularly, do it with an element of authority and adapted them to


make a judgment on whether people should not be included in meetings.


It's a very unfortunate dispute. I wish it had not happened. I admire


Nicky Morgan for standing up for what she believes in but, in this


case, it's a dangerous way to go. Fiona Hill speaks for the Prime


Minister when she issued a text saying don't bring Nicky Morgan to


number ten again, is that the right thing? I don't know whether the


Prime Minister was going to be at the meeting. She has a lot of huge


things to deal with. Do you think she has actioned it? I don't know, I


doubt it very much. Fiona Hill, chief of staff, she's entitled to


make a position clear about who should be at an internal meeting in


number ten and unfortunately it's gone into this position where we are


playing effectively with personal politics and moving away from the


issues which are incredibly important and need to be discussed


for the let's talk to Jess Phillips about Jeremy Corbyn. Not trousers.


We've had enough of trousers and handbags. The party has sunk to 25%


of the support in a survey three days ago. Its worst showing since


1983. It lost the Richmond by-election. Ken Livingstone said


yesterday, if it's as bad as this in a year's time we would be worried.


Are you worried now? Do you agree with him? I agree with the


substantive point that if we are in this position in a year's time,


yeah, it's going to have to look at what we're going to do about that.


I'm worried already. We need a good run in the election. It's not that


far-away. I think that the Labour Party needs a good shake after the


two by-elections. We shouldn't read too much into by-elections which are


won or lost by the favourite party in the area because they are the


usual things, but, yeah, we need to be worrying. What would you do? The


Labour Party needs to have a much clearer position on certain things


and we need to act together. That's the truthful top is Brexit, having a


clear position on that because on the doorstep anecdotally the message


seemed to be that people didn't know what Labour position actually was


regarding Brexit? Both of those by-elections, it became a further


referendum on Brexit with a 1-1 draw in both cases. In those particular


elections, I think in a general election, post-Article 50, hard


Brexit, whatever happens, the Brexit message won't necessarily be the


only thing you have to be clear on but the Labour Party is in a


difficult position where we have MPs in very heavily remain areas and


very heavy lead areas. Would you give it a year or do you think


something needs to be done sooner? I think you need to give it here


because I'm sick of the Labour Party talking about itself I'm interested


in talking to people behind the doors. Diane Abbott said the poll


gap with the Tories would be closed by next year. Do you believe that,


17 points? If you have asked me where we would be in world politics


18 months ago, I wouldn't about a clue. It difficult for me to say


what will happen in a year's time. At the moment, we seem on a similar


trajectory for quite some time and we need a kick up the bum to sort it


out. All right. On point, we will move on the.


Now it's time for our daily quiz, which is all about the fraught issue


I'm sure my two guests of all body sent to their hundreds. -- already


sent their hundreds. And the question for today is,


which of these cards is not At the end of the show,


we'll see if Ed and Jess can give Now, over the coming days


on the Daily Politics we're going to be taking a look


at the issues faced by key government departments


in the run-up to Brexit. For today's Brexit Tracker,


we're looking at the challenges faced by Home Secretary Amber Rudd,


whose brief covers the contentious issues of immigration


and border control. So what exactly is in


her Brexit in-tray? Politicians and their civil servants


in the Home Office have plenty to wrestle with as we move


into a post-Brexit world - and not just the potentially


implementing new restrictions on EU immigration, though that will be


taking up plenty of their time. They have to weigh up


whether to try to remain part of the European Arrest Warrant


scheme, which returns Theresa May supported it


when Home Secretary but civil servants will now be exploring


whether bilateral deals can be as effective or, indeed,


whether it's necessary at all. A decision on Europol


is coming even quicker, with Britain needing to decide


in the coming months if it wants to sign up to new rules expanding


the European law enforcement agency's powers to fight terrorism


or opt out and potentially lose access to databases


of European criminals. The department will also be


grappling with what to do about the Northern Ireland border,


whether the UK can continue in the common travel area,


which allows free movement between the mainland and Ireland,


or whether a hard border will be required to prevent EU nationals


gaining unregistered The EU will introduce tighter data


protection measures in 2018, despite the UK arguing


against it during negotiations. The Home Office takes responsibility


for data protection. Will it need to seek equivalence


with EU standards to continue access to the digital single market,


or will it now take the opportunity to seek a looser set


of regulations outside? One area where work is progressing


apace is on changing our passports. A campaign to remove the words


"European Union" and return to the blue colour of old received


a filip after minister Robert Goodwill announced


the Government was now considering potential changes


to the UK passport in September. These are just some of the issues


Home Secretary Amber Rudd and her team have on their plates


as the Government moves ever closer to triggering Article 50 and firing


the starting gun on our exit And to discuss all of that we've


been joined by the Labour MP Gisela Stuart, who led


the Vote Leave referendum campaign. She's now working with


the cross-party thinktank British Future, which today


delivered a letter to Downing Street demanding the Government guarantee


the right to remain in the UK to EU Welcome to Daily Politics. You said


you want the government to grant 1.8 million EU citizens right to remain


in the UK before Article 50 was triggered and you want the


government do that with no guarantee that European member states will


reciprocate and protect the rights of UK nationals living elsewhere in


the EU. Is that a smart negotiating strategy? 2.8 million EU citizens


live in the UK and 1.8 of those already have acquired the rights


necessary to have permanently to remain but we are suggesting that


for the remaining ones, including those who have a customs made permit


to leave to remain which is fast tracked, capped in terms of cost of


first passport and a date for qualifying for that is when you


trigger Article 50. Is it smart negotiating? On negotiations, your


facts, the facts are the legal rights which EU citizens got which a


lot of UK citizens have already got in France and Spain have to be


respected. You also set the tone of the negotiations and I think it's


important from my point of view that Theresa May goes in there and says


we're outward looking, welcoming country, and we make the first move


and expect from you to make the same thing. You expect some sort of


reciprocal arrangement and response but is it a risk worth taking


because it is a risk, isn't it, that they don't reciprocate like the


like? Given, from what I understand, the intervention Angela Merkel, a


lot of EU member states have already started to argue for that, but they


are hoping that this council meeting at the weekend and reach an


agreement, so it's a bit like the British future report which brought


together levers and remain as from all but the parties and the trade


unions and insert it directors. I think we can actually make that


consensus but someone has to start and when it comes to people I think


it should be as. You obviously see it as a bridge in that sense to


perhaps set the tone for opening negotiations but why don't we just


wait until Article 50 is triggered? It's not long now until formal


negotiations start and perhaps the tone should be more businesslike?


In the run-up to the triggering, I want the Home Office to streamline


some of its mechanisms, actually be ready for that. Do you agree? I


would rather we went to this position. I represent a constituency


that has a lot of scientific research. I can't emphasise enough


the amount of insecurity that has been engendered by the Leave vote.


Having said that, I understand the Prime Minister but opposition, which


is to say, you can't make a concession without a concession from


the other side and I think if we followed diesel's policy, tempted


though I am, we've already seen the increase that has happened in the


last few months. -- Gisela Stuart's policy. You are effectively saying,


if you come over now, you can get permission to stay in the UK. I


think an eye for an eye made the whole world blind and somebody needs


to step up to the plate. We're not talking about numbers, we are


talking about the boys and my son's class and his mum and dad and what


it means to them. We cannot use people as bargaining chips and from


what I've heard, when the Polish by Melissa came here and from what I've


heard of other European leaders, where lots of their people live


here, they are desperate to hear this from the UK. -- Polish Prime


Minister. The longer we treat people as a bargaining chip, the more shame


is brought our country. Let's move on to the Home Office in trade. The


European arrest warrant featured strongly in the campaign. Police


chiefs say it speed up extraditions but it does mean foreign countries


can extradite British citizens. Is that difficult to square with taking


back control? We need to negotiate a strong extradition protocol, as we


have with the United States and Canada. Is about strong? People have


criticised the one that's been done with the United States. The European


arrest warrant had its problems because it allowed for people being


extradited from the United Kingdom for crimes which were not crimes in


the UK. That wasn't very happy state. How many people are we


talking about? I think one is too much. The principle of the entire


Home Office in trade... They have to have some principles on which they


approach this and I think the first principle has to be, just because it


has the word Europe and it does not mean it is bound to the ECJ and the


jurisdiction of that court and that is how you peel things. That's what


needs to be looked at because we're not going to be under the


jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice so anything that flows


from that, we won't be part of. In 2014 Theresa May said that if we


opted out of the arrest warrant, British criminals will be able to


hop on the Eurostar or fly to Spain sake of the knowledge we wouldn't be


able to get them back or prosecute them. So isn't it dangerous to play


politics with the sort of things? That depends on what you put in its


place, just as you wouldn't say that any criminal can hop on an aeroplane


and go to United States and we can't extradite them... You come to


different agreements which are perfectly possible and the


independent commission said it is perfectly possible to do that.


Things change but that does not mean that they get worse. They may not


get worse but I think it is about the loss, perhaps, of information of


intelligence is what the critics would say, people like Ed Vaizey. If


you look Europol, last month the UK opted to remain a member on a


temporary basis at least until we leave. The Government was warned it


could lose vital intelligence unless it did so. So should we remain a


member once we be the EU? Europol is under a duty to reach an agreement


with the whole number of countries which are not currently part of the


EU and when it comes to intelligence sharing, we are a massive net


contributor to that intelligence in the European intelligence sphere.


They would really damage themselves to cut us out because we are giving


more to them than we get back. But I thought that was the whole point of


Leave, you wanted to leave these things and take back control. You


didn't necessarily want to be part of these agencies, I take your point


about the name, and now you are saying you do. These agencies aren't


based on the European Union. They are European wide and you take back


control by taking back your laws and making the decision... Europol is


the EU's law enforcement agency. You can opt in and a lot of other people


opt in. But the vote to leave was to leave and it was to leave, in your


mind, the single market and things like the customs union and in other


people's mines, it would be to leave all the agencies that are associated


and represent the EU, otherwise why did we believe? You are associating


the decision to leave with drawing up the drawbridge and saying we will


no longer take part in any of these. These are the things where we choose


and there is no automaticity and no universal jurisdiction for the court


of justice. That is what Leave and. Does that mean the same to you or


does it mean we are going to opt back into many of the things we were


a member of when we were in the EU? I assume we will opt back in. That's


not necessarily a criticism of the Brexit position because underlying


the Brexit position is what Gisela is saying, which is that it is a


choice for the UK but choice goes both ways and we have to rely on our


European partners. Certainly, I remember Theresa May, when she was


Home Secretary during this campaign, putting security front and centre as


part of our membership of the EU so I would want to see things like the


European arrest warrant, which makes it much easier for us to get


criminals back to the UK for trial and, obviously, Europol, where


clearly the intelligence sharing is absolutely vital, being very much on


the table with us looking for reasons to stay. But it is


accountable to the European Parliament, as well as national


parliaments, Europol, so if we maintain those close ties, won't we


be subject to European laws? That would be the nature of how you opted


to those negotiations and a lot of the intelligence sharing, whether it


is defence cooperation, have almost been bilateral. They have not been


on a European wide basis. Let's talk about... Gisela Stuart


mentioned that we have, to some extent, the upper hand when it comes


to intelligence, partly because the main intelligence relationships with


countries outside the EU. So, actually, if we maintain those


relationships, the EU will still want to have that sort of contact


with us. Are we in a more advantageous position? Time will


tell, whether we are in a more advantageous position. I don't think


that Theresa May especially, as our Prime Minister, who has been groomed


by her experience at the Home Office, is going to agree to


anything that would put the UK in a more risky position, is the truth. I


think she's terrible on other things. On safety, I think that's


pretty much bread and butter. I think it would be incredibly


shocking if other European countries came and said, "Sorry, we don't care


about you being as safe, those bilateral agreements that we all had


before, sorry, we're going to, because you are leaving Europe, you


can't have the information that might save people in your country".


I think that's unlikely. Let's talk about one other issue, slightly


different, but still in the Home Office in trade, which is the colour


of the passports. It wasn't a joke! Do you think they should go back to


the old colour? I have a real problem because my first passport


was green and after that it became whatever it is now. The Government


can decide whatever colour it wishes. I think what really bothers


people is to make sure that whatever passport they have now is valid


until it expires and they don't incur any extra costs. Is this a


burning issue for you? The minister said the Government is considering


potential changes. Why do people keep saying it was blue? In my


memory, it was black. I never have about possible because I was too


young and I was on my parents' passport and when I had one was


either a Brown card to go on a school trip or a red passport.


Nobody has ever raised it with me on the doorstep. The day someone says,


"This red passport has made me feel like I just don't belong here any


more," is the day that I will campaign for a new colour passport.


Until that day comes, I shall not give a toss what colour our


passports are. That's very parliamentary speaker on the Daily


Politics! What about you? Do you give a monkey's about the colour? I


quite like the passport at the moment. What should please the


Brexiteers is that clearly what will happen is that the words European


Union, which have been on the front of our passport, will disappear and


that should be enough for them. Maybe they'll send out special


maroon stickers because I've just renewed my passport and it is valid


for ten years and I will need a little sticker to blank out the


European Union. I'm not paying for another one! You could have a


special sticker made for you! Gisela Stuart, you don't need a passport to


come onto the programme. Yet! That might be down to you, of course!


Let's take a look at what the next few days have in store in the


political week ahead. Chancellor Philip Hammond


will be giving evidence to the Treasury Select Committee


this afternoon, with reports that ministers are considering allowing


councils to increase council tax The Prime Minister will also


announce today that the UK will become one of the first


countries to adopt an internationally recognised


definition of anti-Semitism in order Half a million rail


passengers face disruption on Tuesday, on the first of three


days of strike action The dispute is over the role


of conductors on trains. Also on Tuesday, Labour's


Shadow Brexit Secretary, Keir Starmer, will be giving


a speech on his party's priorities His opposite number


David Davis will also be speaking on Wednesday,


as he makes his first appearance On Thursday, Defence Secretary


Michael Fallon will host a summit with the US


Defence Secretary Ash Carter and representatives from 15 other


countries focused on countering And in Holyrood,


the Scottish Government will also present their draft


Budget for 2017-18. are the Guardian's Holly Watt,


and Jason Groves of the Daily Mail. Welcome to both of you. Holly, on


social care, it's been in the news quite a lot recently, the chief


executive of Care England has described the system is a house of


cards that could topple at any moment. Widen the Chancellor cover


it in his Autumn Statement, in your view? I think social care is one of


those issues that affect absolutely everyone. Everyone knows people who


are going into care homes, will have to go into care homes, have family


members in care homes. This is one of those things that need to be


handled on a cross-party basis but there's been quite a long period of


people scoring political points backwards and forwards. Before the


2010 election, Andrew Lansley, Norman Lamb and Andy Burnham try to


sit down and think of how to resolve care homes on the problems within


but that got shipwrecked with a Conservative Party election brochure


and since then, there has been a long, ongoing attempt to resolve it,


culminating in the Autumn Statement and it not being mentioned. How much


pressure is the Government under to deal with this now? I think they're


under a lot of pressure and you can see why because an answer to your


question about why it didn't appear in the Autumn Statement, I think the


reason is that some people in Number Ten thought, we are not going to put


up council tax, we are just not going to do it. I think the fact


that they are now contemplating it shows you the kind of pressure


they're under, not just from the health sector, where there is a


serious backlog building up in the NHS, also from local authorities,


but from Tory MPs. Tory MPs are lobbying the Chancellor and Mrs May


about this because they are seeing what is happening in their own


communities and I think that's why, reluctantly, they are going to


sanction some kind of, probably temporary, increasing council tax to


keep the system on its feet while they look at longer-term reforms. It


may be that we hear something later this week. Apparently. If we return


to the issue of Brexit, Holly, according to the House of Lords EU


committee, it is Brexit week. It feels like it's been Brexit week


ever since June 23 but we are going to be hearing from David Davis at


the Brexit select committee on Thursday. Will we hear anything new?


Hopefully! Lots of people are asking... Kier Starmer Astra


detailed analysis of how Brexiters going to happen last week and a lot


of people are hoping David Davis is going to say more. Clearly, the


Prime Minister has said that they can't put too much out there because


that would damage their ability to negotiate with the EU but they are


hoping that we will hear more. There are a series of reports coming out


of the House of Lords this week, and that is six big parliamentary


reports so it is clear there is so much detail that needs to be


resolved. The arguments go on, Jason, about a hard and soft Brexit


and Labour's position has been unclear, according to some of the


Labour Party itself. The shadow Brexit secretary Kier Starmer is


going to be making a speech tomorrow on Labour's priorities for the


negotiations. Do you think they've got a clear enough position? Could


you tell us? I don't think anyone could tell you. Hopefully, Kier


Starmer will clear things up a bit tomorrow. The problem is, every time


he does, somebody else, usually John McDonell, pops up and says something


contrary. Kier Starmer will say it is a disaster to leave the single


market and Brexiters all been handled very badly and then the


Shadow Chancellor will say, actually, it's a fantastic


opportunity. Jeremy Corbyn will talk about the bits of the EU that aren't


popular, such as free movement and immigration, and will not really be


too fussed about the single market. I hope we do get some clarity from


Labour because it is hurting them. Attested in Richmond and is probably


hurt them in Sleaford, whether just Rowden in fourth place. -- it hurt


them in Richmond. I don't want to go back to the trouser story per se but


if we read into the reaction from Fiona Hill, Theresa May's chief of


staff, in terms of the texts she sent on the public spat that has


emerged, what do you think it actually says about Theresa May's


Number Ten operation? Lots of people have raised questions


about the management of the Prime Minister's office and these abrupt


text messages which emerged this weekend. It makes it clear they got


a brusque way of managing. We saw that last week with Boris Johnson


and the issues over his comments on Yemen. They have a very harsh way of


managing things at times not causing people to be quite angry. All right,


thank you both very much. Let's return to social care. Ed Vaizey,


it's lost almost a tenth of its budget since 2010, more than 5000


care beds had been lost in the past 18 months. More people are growing


old that the care they need and by 2020 more than a million other


people will be over the age of 75. Is the system on the verge of


collapse? I would not go that far but it clearly needs to be


addressed. My County Council, when we had 2% added to the preset,


founded welcome and I know social care has enabled us to live longer,


good thing. We are introducing a national living wage, good thing,


but putting pressure on costs. It is doubling. Local budgets have reduced


significantly. Who's fault is that? The last Labour government. Of


course, yeah! I'm inclined to comment on what the situation is at


the moment and if you are saying, yes, it's partly to do with a


reduction of local authority budgets, clearly the fact were


having a debate about allowing councils to increase it is a


recognition that council budgets are... But it clearly not enough


also why wasn't something done about it in the Autumn Statement? I'm not


a member of the government. Should he have addressed it? Something


needs to be addressed, clearly, so let's see what comes up in terms of


giving councils of flexibility they need. Labour also feel it a bit much


to dump it on council tax. It's ridiculous to do that especially if


you come from a large authority like Birmingham. Where would you get the


money from them? The government should increase the grounds they


give to them. Cancels like mine, are different to the ones Ed get his


resources from full that they can't raise the same amount of money from


council tax. It relies heavily on government grants already full


support and show will get a week for care homes for the elderly people


whereas in Birmingham it is 400. That is completely unsustainable.


There is a need for the government to recognise that, when we invest in


infrastructure, all the money they gave away in the Autumn Statement,


sometimes infrastructure is people and there is a massive


infrastructure which needs to be built up in social care. Would you


be prepared to put up general taxation? Yes, I think we have got


to look at this and people every week, as an MP, you get letters


saying, I don't want to sell my house to look after my mum, I don't


want to sell her house. People got to recognise this is going to cost.


People need to pay for it however the government invested billions in


infrastructure in shovel ready projects in the Autumn Statement


also why on earth that may invest in the infrastructure like child care,


social care? Just to make it clear, you would be prepared to back a call


for increasing income tax, central taxation, to fund social care? Yes.


That's clear. The government has allowed the precept to increase and


pulled budgets were cancelled and health authorities can pull their


budgets. I want to take issue with Jeff depicting my County Council as


sitting on a pile of cash. But there are richer and poorer cancels. We


get less money for education and Birmingham. You accept the point


Jess makes that if you laid to the council tax, in more deprived


communities, they struggle to make the same amount of money as a richer


cancels. I'm not saying you're sitting on a pilot cash but which of


them Jess's. I would not accept that. Would you like me to send you


the figures? You have different pressures in Birmingham than we have


in Oxfordshire. The largest numbers of burnable children. Let her talk.


Have you got figures to show that his council is better off than


yours? I did a report on every single Council and the country


asking what their pay rates were for nursing home care, social care, and


the disparity between... In Tory councils, twice as much money in


Birmingham, Wolverhampton, Walsall, Solihull, which is next door


bordering my constituency gets about ?100 more. My old people deserve


just as much as your old people. At the moment, the way the government


is creating, it's going to create a worst postcode lottery. It's based


on formulas which have been around for a very long time. Let's change


it. Rural councils face higher costs in terms of transport and education


are lobbying for more money. They compare itself to Birmingham and


they will show figures where they are losing out to authorities like


Birmingham so you can blame... We are talking about social careful


stop there is a fundamental agreement more money needs to be


going through. Should go through the precept? If you are paying far


higher percentage of income in cancer fact that if you are wealthy.


The just about managing class, the group of people Theresa May really


wants... A lot of people can't afford to pay their council tax


because this government has raised the threshold significantly for


people in terms of income tax so people on... So why don't you make


it income tax rather than council tax? It would be more progressive.


There was a cap suggested on the amount an individual should have to


spend on their social care. And to do a lot to the big report a few


years ago and it was shelved. -- Andrew Dill not. The Treasury came


back with ?72,000 in the end. It has not happened for them it was due to


happen around now. Should there be a cab and what should it be? People


don't want to be in a position where they are going into care having to


effectively sell their house. People quite rightly regard that as an


asset they've built up. I certainly think the government should consider


a cap. 35,000? 75,000? It's something which needs to have a


discussion. I'm not going to sell this programme what I'm going to fly


off the top of my head. Ten years ago, we've opposed a system of


social insurers where people could take out insurance to cover their


care costs and that is another element. Do you think there will be


agreement, a decision, an announcement? As a backbencher, I


get my news from the newspapers, not from any special briefing. But


clearly, there is a move not to solve this problem, because it needs


a much wider debate. Entrenched the problem. Funding is definitely on


the agenda. It's the official edited transcript


of what goes on in Parliament. It's published daily and details


the momentous occasions and the quieter moments


in the Commons, so you don't The goings-on in Parliament


are watched closely. Comments and counterclaims


pored over, especially Of course, there are times


when there are fewer But even in those quiet times,


there are two sets of eyes and ears taking down,


witnessing everything They sit here above


the Speaker's chair. They are the reporters of Hansard,


and they've been here for centuries, with different staff over


the years, of course. Two reporters at any given


time are in these seats. It's difficult to get in and out of,


but you have the best And you're craning your neck


searching the benches for anything that people would say that you need


to put into the record. A purely verbatim report wouldn't be


a useful thing as a written record, so we translate the spoken


to the written, so that the record The reporters watch back video


of the debate they made notes on and then type it up,


editing as they go. The deadlines are very tight


so if I'm doing a five-minute turn, which is a chunk of debate


that we report, I have 45 minutes to get that done


and onto the sub-editor's desk. I'll then have a few minutes


before I have to go back Hansard has been the official record


of Parliament since 1909. But for hundreds of years before


that, there were competing journals So it's interesting standing


here seeing this huge row of books. If we look at the years they cover,


we can see here they start And we have to walk quite a long way


before we then get to the Battle of Waterloo and even further before


we get to the First World War and it's only by this point


when I've walked really quite a long way that we get to the 1940s


in the Second World War. way that we get to the 1940s


and the Second World War. These days, most of our customers


access Hansard in digital form. In those days, the print


run was quite big. When I joined Hansard 20 years ago,


there were still many thousands And also, all these lovely bound


volumes were sent out to all the libraries in the country


as a way of distributing them. These days we produce several


hundred daily copies which members still like to use in the chamber


and very, very few of A lot of work in recent years has


been aimed at making our digital House of Commons business


is available to read on the Hansard And you can search for your


own MP, for example. And that's quicker, of course,


than sitting through hours I'm only asking you this because I


went to Mac and first last time forth if anything you've said that


you've regretted or had changed? I've had the same thing changed on


two different occasions for the because I'm from Birmingham and when


I say the word number, if I talk about my mum, being a mum in the


House of Commons, they always write it M U M and we spell it mum. It a


noisy when they sanitise my regional accent so I check because it was


maiden speech. I said, I would never say mum, I say mum. I got them to


change it. You can have things changed. You can reprint it?


Potentially. She's a troublemaker with Hansard. What about you?


Anything you've helped Hansard didn't record? The joke is always


that you can make any kind of announcement you like in the House


of Commons if you wanted kept secret. Is that true? Anything I


found this programme I will be trolled from Italy end of the day on


Twitter about how awful I been. If I made a debate in Parliament, where I


messed up, and was useless, no one would say anything. Has that


happened a lot? Whenever I speak in there, it ends up in the paper. I'm


incredibly dull in Parliament, that's true.


LAUGHTER I didn't want to save. Hansard is


recording this. Everybody else on Twitter is, so you can rest assured


it will be there. Is the standard of food served up


in prisons contributing to problems That's the view of Lucy Vincent,


a writer and campaigner who says meals in prisons are often


substandard and need When I first started researching


food in UK prisons I didn't And, although it's a far cry


from Dickensian porridge, it turns out prison food is more


similar to school dinners before Jamie Oliver brought


about change 11 years ago. Think excess carbohydrates


and a severe lack of What I wasn't prepared to discover


was the significant impact low quality food is having


on the inmates of our At a time of national chaos


in the UK prison system, we are feeding some of society's


most vulnerable and mentally unstable individuals food that's


having a much more severe impact on their well-being


than we might realise. A recent report by HM Inspectorate


of Prisons has revealed significant failings in prison food


across the board and record Only 29% of prisoner survey


respondents described the food Food being served below temperature,


lack of communal dining due to staff shortages and low nutritional


quality all crop up continuously. Last year, an inmate at HMP


Northumberland staged a protest on a high railing after receiving


a cold meal. A decade ago, the country saw


the effect better nutrition, less additives and more fresh food


had on schoolchildren. Pupils got on better,


behaved well and, as a result, Why can't we do the same


in our country's prisons? The report also noted a lack


of opportunities for prisoners to cook for themselves or to learn


catering skills in prison kitchens. These activities could aid


rehabilitation and improve their Decent nutrition has the power


to positively impact everything from self-esteem to health,


learning and development. When you are dealing


with individuals who are likely to have struggled with these issues


more than most, I believe this becomes a matter


of much greater importance. Lucy Vincent is here,


and we've also been joined by the Conservative


MP Stewart Jackson. Lucy, some people would say we spent


enough on prisoners. Each prisoner Place costs around ?3000 a year. Do


we need to spend more? At this stage, what I'm asking for is not


more money, necessarily. You can eat and cook well with not much money


and at the moment, prison spending per head per day is around ?2 and I


do think that you can eat well with that kind of money. I think what


Jamie Oliver did in schools, he had around 37p, I know it was ten years


ago, per head per day, and he proved that. It was difficult but he did


it. What do you say, Stewart Jackson? I'm slightly sympathetic


but I do think there are bigger priorities in prison. One of them is


violence, the other is the proliferation of drugs, mental


health problems, family breakdown and literacy and numeracy and


general education. These are all important issues which I would


suggest or a higher priority than issues around nutrition. Lee


Stevenson says that if you take the examples of schools and the food


that kids were eating, fewer additives meant better behaviour. --


Lucy Vincent says. Let's get into perspective that this hasn't been a


major issue by international comparisons, the quality of


nutrition, the quality of food served in our prisons. Either


visited some of the toughest prisons in the world. I was in San Miguel


prison in Santiago in Chile when 81 people were killed in a riot. It was


Dickensian. By comparison, the UK has a very good prison standard. You


have chosen the extreme, one might say! If we keep to the idea of


trying to improve, if that's what Lucy is suggesting, the quality of


food will improve the experience for prisoners in jail... The thing is,


Lucy, would it have that much of an impact? Would you get your inmates


eating that nice plate of fruit and vegetables? A major say, I don't


like it. From the prisoners and ex-prisoners I've spoken to, one of


the main things they crave inside things like salads, and one woman I


spoke to, when she came out of prison, she went straight to


Morrisons, bought a salad and chicken breast and dated on the


train that because she hadn't had it for three years. Do you consider


having good food and decent food privilege or a necessity? Obviously,


it's a necessity but we have to strike the balance between what


people expect in a prison, which is not cordon bladder, high-end


cuisine, basically, because taxpayers are paying for


incarcerating people. To get a custodial sentence these days, you


have to have committed quite a serious crime. What do you say to


that? I'm not pitching three course Michelin star meals. I'm talking


about fresh, healthy, simple, cheap food that they'll enjoy eating more


than they're eating at the moment but mainly to improve their


behaviour. Part of the report that I based my research on, they did a


study in prisons and they gave exactly the same food for a month


but they gave them some nutritional supplements, so things like vitamin


see that they may not have been getting from fresh fruit, and they


noticed a significant increase in better behaviour, lack of violence


and prisons were calmer and I think that is really interesting and that


was just nutritional supplements. They were still eating all the


carbs. I agree with that and I think that's a great project. What we need


to do is have more social investment bonds like in Doncaster and


Peterborough, where you tackle recidivism and you actually give a


fiscal incentive to keep people from coming back into prison. Nutrition


can be part of that project, funded by the third sector and government.


Labour did it and we did it and we need to roll that out a bit more but


what I am saying is that probably the priority, when resources are


very tight, our drugs and violence within prisons. But this isn't about


costing any more money. That's Lucy's point. It doesn't cost any


more to present the sort of food that people might want to eat, the


sort of food that might calm people down, that might lead to a reduction


in violence or drug smuggling or the desire to commit more crime within


prison. We've got to trust prison governors as well. I think Stuart is


being remarkably emollient on this show. I suspect he had crushed


avocado on wholemeal bread for breakfast! Tofu! Are you not giving


us a true reflection of your views, Stewart Jackson? I do support Lucy's


point. I boarded a wider context it clearly, when you debate anything


like this, you have a binary debate, soft on crime and prisoners, to the


redemption debate. When Michael Gove was just a secretary, he had the


support of the papers because he had the credibility of being a


centre-right politician, saying, we got to get out of this mentality of


just locking people up and throwing away the key because they are going


to come back into society. That's your mentality, isn't it? The more


skills they have an game when they are in prison, the more likely they


will be integrated into society and the less it will cost us on the


better it will be for them. I agree with all that. I do think, though,


that we've got to trust prison governors and not throw the key


away. I do believe, though, that you've actually got to understand


that people believe that people are in prison, taxpayers, for a reason.


And that's the point. You go to prison, you've committed a crime, in


many cases are very serious crime, you lose personal freedoms and


choice and that means you don't get great food either. One person I


respect to who had served a short sentence summed it up really well.


She said, you go to prison to get your freedom taken away from you.


You do not go to prison to be starved or have your health


compromise. Is that happening? From the research I've come across, there


has been a significant decrease in food quality in prisons over the


years and it is having a much bigger impact than we realise. We do not


want to see people starved or feeling they are being starved order


prized? Let's move onto anecdote -- from anecdote... I don't think Her


Majesty is in prisons has found that degree of nutritional problems in


prison. You've got to see it in a wider context of teaching people to


read and write, giving them self worth, letting them work and earn


money. Just briefly, Jess Phillips, one of the issues Stewart Jackson


wrote about was the smuggling of drugs, drones being used of fruit


and veg going to stop that? Of course not on their own, but I've


worked in prisons for many years, I ran a female offenderss' service and


contrary to what has been said, lots of people are in there completely


nonserious things, such as their children not going to school and


women on short sentences. They're all sorts of health and locations


for those people that definitely need to be considered, about whether


prisoners the right place for those sentences to go ahead but also,


these people need to be looked after within the same degree that we would


also expect them to be punished. Thank you both very much. It's


nearly lunchtime! Now, what to put on top


of your Christmas tree is not normally a decision


that involves politics. But if you think an angel or a Star


of David is a bit passe, and you're also a fan


of Jeremy Corbyn, then you might A crochet satirist -


that's crochet, by the way, not knitting - has made


an alternative Christmas tree topper in the form


of the Labour leader. It's said to be the perfect ornament


for the "festive atheist socialist". But it's been selling


so well that the artist - who, as you might have guessed,


is a supporter of Jeremy Corbyn - says she won't now be


able to process any more Here's the US


President-elect Donald Trump. But he's a "voodoo pincushion",


which is a bit less festive. There's also the former leader


of Ukip, Nigel Farage. This one is, of course,


David Cameron. And the former Education


Secretary Michael Gove. The former Work and Pensions


Secretary Iain Duncan Smith. Now, the artist, Kat Stiff,


actually met Jeremy Corbyn And she managed to give him


a crochet doll of himself - it looks like he was happy


to receive it. She's here with us now. What gave


you the idea? Which idea? Of crocheting politicians, even the


ones you like. I woke up one morning and put on the radio and Michael


Gove had said something about the last straw was when he was trying to


reduce the summer holidays, and the level of frustration I felt was not


very healthy and I thought, how can I deal with this? I was crocheting


dolls of Poirot on various things so I thought I would crochet a pin


Gove's face and then I posted on social media and a lot of people...


It got a good response. We have noticed that you have crocheted nice


dolls of left-wing politicians, those who support, and pin cushions


of the right wing once. If someone wanted an order the other way round,


would you do it? Ultimately, someone could buy the Jeremy Corbyn and they


could stick pins in it if they want to. That is very true. Does it take


you a long time to make each one? About three or four hours. They're


beautiful! What's along the front? We've got Nigel Farage but he is not


a pincushion. I'd have him as my pincushion! Can you tell us who the


others are? Michael Gove and David Cameron. You want Michael Gove?


Remember when Peter Mandelson... Hello, Michael. Are you enjoying the


backbenchers? I thought your programme with Fern Britton


yesterday was very good. Have you rehearsed this? About Ron Jeremy


Corbyn, which is your favourite? Er... Jeremy Corbyn is the only nice


one I make! Do you make any women? Not yet but I'm going to do Theresa


May after Christmas. Valid point! Jess Phillips, one of the most


prominent Labour backbenchers who could possibly find. What is the


difference between crochet and knitting? Crochet is one hook and is


a series of knots, whereas knitting is two needles and I don't know how


to knit at all. They are completely different. When did you start


crocheting? About four years ago. It's amazing! Would that be at the


top of your Christmas tree? I would love to buy this but you probably


don't sell to Tories. Michael Gove ordered one! I didn't know what to


do. They ordered it on your website? What was the editor? They gave me


their address, which I thought was bowled! Don't give that out on the


show! It was in the Metro or something and I got an order from


Michael Gove. I thought, is this real? And it was! But you are busy


now until the New Year, so you would have to get your orders in now for


next year. There is one there but it is not for you. Is that a display


copy? Thank you for bringing them in. Listen, you!


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


which of these cards is not from a political leader?


What is the correct answer? I know the ones on my left. The Dove and


Downing Street are Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn. I'm going for the


squirrel. That is actually from Danny Alexander, the Liberal


Democrat former Chief Secretary to the Treasury, and it was a Christmas


card because it was a rude, but was made by Harriet Harman. We will have


a quick look at Christmas cards. They will go across the screen at


the end. These are some of the cards that Theresa May has received and is


going to send out. They were done by schoolchildren for her especially.


She picked three different designs and the dove of peace was Jeremy


Corbyn's card. That's it. Thank you very much. That was the Lib Dems.


Tim Farron!


Download Subtitles