:00:38. > :00:46.Senior Labour MP, Tristram Hunt, announces
:00:47. > :00:50.he's leaving politics to head up the V museum in London.
:00:51. > :00:52.He insists he's not trying to rock the Labour boat
:00:53. > :00:58.but his decision triggers a tricky by-election for Jeremy Corbyn.
:00:59. > :01:01.We report on the power struggle going on within Momentum -
:01:02. > :01:07.the grassroots organisation set up to support Mr Corbyn's leadership.
:01:08. > :01:13.Just one week before he takes office, what do we know
:01:14. > :01:15.about Donald Trump's plans for the presidency?
:01:16. > :01:18.And you might know what hard Brexit is
:01:19. > :01:20.but what about grey Brexit, clean Brexit and red,
:01:21. > :01:35.We've got the Daily Politics guide to Brexit terminology.
:01:36. > :02:02.All that in the next hour and with us for the duration
:02:03. > :02:04.Guardian columnist, Gaby Hinsliff and Isabel Oakeshott, political
:02:05. > :02:08.So, earlier this morning the senior Labour politician Tristram
:02:09. > :02:09.Hunt confirmed he will stand down as a Member of Parliament to become
:02:10. > :02:11.the director of the Victoria and Albert Museum in London.
:02:12. > :02:12.In a letter to his local party, Mr Hunt says the job was too
:02:13. > :02:14.good to turn down and that he has "no desire to rock
:02:15. > :02:15.the boat" and that "anyone who interprets my decision to leave
:02:16. > :02:25.Let's talk to our political correspondent, Carole Walker.
:02:26. > :02:31.He says he is not rocking the boat and we shouldn't interpret it that
:02:32. > :02:39.way but that's what many people will do. There is no doubt that tris Tam
:02:40. > :02:43.hunted's departure is a big loss to the Labour Party. People on all
:02:44. > :02:47.sides of the party know that. 'S charismatic, well-known figure and
:02:48. > :02:51.his departure follow that of Jamie Reid, another Labour MP who is also
:02:52. > :02:55.standing down. Triering a by-election in Copeland. Labour will
:02:56. > :02:59.have to face a tricky by-election in Stoke. As you mention there, tris
:03:00. > :03:04.Tam hunt in his resignation letter says he doesn't want to rock the
:03:05. > :03:09.boat and talked about how his new role in the V will enable him to
:03:10. > :03:14.combine his passion for education, his train public engagement but he
:03:15. > :03:18.talks, too, about his frustration of 23409 being able to tackle
:03:19. > :03:23.inequality and poverty particulars will you now Labour is out of power
:03:24. > :03:26.and he has been hugely critical in the past of Jeremy Corbyn's
:03:27. > :03:31.leadership. He was opposition spokesman on education and stood
:03:32. > :03:37.down when Corbyn cosh became leader. -- Corbyn cosh became leader. After
:03:38. > :03:40.the referendum in the summer, he wrote scathing criticism on Jeremy
:03:41. > :03:44.Corbyn's role during the referendum campaign and said that Labour voters
:03:45. > :03:49.need a different Labour Leader. He called on the Labour Party to act,
:03:50. > :03:52.this was, of course before Jeremy Corbyn fought and successfully
:03:53. > :03:56.stayed on as Labour Leader. I think the concern from many of those who
:03:57. > :04:00.used to be in the mainstream of the Labour Party, who now feel that they
:04:01. > :04:05.are out in the cold under Jeremy Corbyn, will see this as a further
:04:06. > :04:10.sign of how disillusioned many who represent that wing of the party
:04:11. > :04:16.have become and I think it'll reinforce the concerns that the
:04:17. > :04:20.Labour Party is shifting, in Jeremy Corbyn' direction, and that many
:04:21. > :04:23.those whose views are different to the Labour Leader, now see their
:04:24. > :04:29.futures outside Parliament. All right, thank you very much for that.
:04:30. > :04:35.At least it is windy, but it is good to seat sun is out. It was snowing
:04:36. > :04:41.when I came in. Gaby, not entirely unexpected? No but still a shock. He
:04:42. > :04:45.has decided to stop banging his head against a brick wall. The Labour
:04:46. > :04:48.Party is not going in his preferred direction, Corbyn cosh is not going
:04:49. > :04:53.anywhere, so leaves MPs with a choice - do you sit around and be a
:04:54. > :04:57.prophet of doom for the next ten years or decide there are other ways
:04:58. > :05:04.to serve the public. It is only 18 months since a general election and
:05:05. > :05:08.there use to be a convention you don't b bail out in the middle of a
:05:09. > :05:12.Parliament. Some will see it as dereliction of duty. But a problem
:05:13. > :05:16.already a tricky by-election in Copeland in the North west, where
:05:17. > :05:20.the Labour majority is small. Now another by-election in Stoke in the
:05:21. > :05:24.Midlands much his majority is a little bit bigger there, but Ukip
:05:25. > :05:27.and the Conservatives were strong seconds, and it was baying
:05:28. > :05:31.eurosceptic constituency in the referendum. I don't think any
:05:32. > :05:39.additional by-election is welcome by Jeremy Corbyn at the moment.
:05:40. > :05:43.Certainly, Tristram hunt's departure is a damning excitement on the
:05:44. > :05:49.leadership. It is not going to be the last. What is happening is that
:05:50. > :05:52.recruitment agencies are actually swirling, like vultures, over the
:05:53. > :05:56.most talented members of the moderate wing of the Parliamently
:05:57. > :06:02.Labour Party. And they are getting a lot of very tempting approaches. And
:06:03. > :06:05.I think that there will be other high-profile departures because for
:06:06. > :06:08.many Labour MPs, who are frustrated with the direction that Jeremy
:06:09. > :06:12.Corbyn has taken, there are other ways they feel they could more
:06:13. > :06:21.effectively do a job to serve the public. Well, Paul Flynn, a Labour
:06:22. > :06:25.MP tweeted, "Thinker, Tristram schaunt stumbled into the alien
:06:26. > :06:33.world of politics, blinked, baffled, he retreats back into his natural
:06:34. > :06:36.habitat of academia." Mr Flynn then deleted that tweet, for reasons that
:06:37. > :06:41.some may find obvious, others woented.
:06:42. > :06:47.-- others won't. The point, I'm not sure he was make, but point that
:06:48. > :06:53.comes out of this is that someone like Tristram Hunt had a hinterland
:06:54. > :07:00.beyond politics. He was a distinguished academic, written many
:07:01. > :07:04.books. And Jamie Reid had habiter land, I think he has gone into Seoul
:07:05. > :07:08.afield. If we want to look at the Labour MPs in the moderate wing of
:07:09. > :07:12.the Labour Party, who could have other jobs to go to? I would look at
:07:13. > :07:16.people who have track records in other fields, talents they can use,
:07:17. > :07:22.most MPs came from something. It is interesting to me that both of those
:07:23. > :07:27.two have small children. I think if you have a family that you are away
:07:28. > :07:30.from during the week, there is a question of - what am I really doing
:07:31. > :07:34.this for? Could I be, frankly, having a nicer life all around and
:07:35. > :07:49.not banging my head against a brick wall. I think there are a lot of MPs
:07:50. > :07:53.who feel the same as Hunt, intensely frustrated, the word he used in his
:07:54. > :07:56.letters but don't have job offers at the door. I guess the truth that
:07:57. > :08:00.Paul Flynn was trying to get at and maybe why he deleted the tweet, that
:08:01. > :08:04.Mr Corbyn and people around him, may be glad to see the back of him? Yes,
:08:05. > :08:07.I'm sure they are, they will, in their small-minded world see this as
:08:08. > :08:10.some kind of little victory but at the end of the day none of it looks,
:08:11. > :08:18.good, does it? We shall see. Politicians always like to be
:08:19. > :08:22.at the cutting edge and we learn today that one party leader
:08:23. > :08:24.is planning to give an address b) French Presidential
:08:25. > :08:34.candidate Jean-Luc Melenchon? At the end of the show Gaby and
:08:35. > :08:46.Isabel will give us the correct Now, after a tempestuous press
:08:47. > :08:51.conference and lurid claims of compromising material
:08:52. > :08:53.in the hands of the Russians, President-elect Trump is putting
:08:54. > :08:56.the finishing touches to his plan Next Friday Mr Trump
:08:57. > :09:05.will become Mr President, at the traditional inauguration
:09:06. > :09:07.ceremony on the steps So what do we know about how
:09:08. > :09:13.Donald Trump plans to govern as President and what impact
:09:14. > :09:16.will his nominations Donald Trump's choice
:09:17. > :09:20.for Secretary of State - the American equivalent
:09:21. > :09:27.of the Foreign Secretary - is Rex Tillerson, the former chief
:09:28. > :09:30.of Exxon Mobil who is said to have had a close relationship
:09:31. > :09:34.with Vladimir Putin. He has done a lot of business in
:09:35. > :09:38.Russia Tillerson raised eyebrows yesterday
:09:39. > :09:41.by saying the US would have to send "a clear signal" that China should
:09:42. > :09:44.be barred from accessing islands it has built in disputed territory
:09:45. > :09:48.in the South China Sea. James Mattis, Mr Trump's choice
:09:49. > :09:53.for Secretary of Defense, is known for taking a hard-line
:09:54. > :09:58.position on Iran and yesterday said the US needs to "forge a strategy
:09:59. > :10:03.to checkmate Iran's goal But critical rhetoric of Nato
:10:04. > :10:10.was scaled back yesterday, with General Mattis saying he wants
:10:11. > :10:13.to see the US maintaining the "strongest possible
:10:14. > :10:20.relationship" with America's "most Donald Trump has chosen several
:10:21. > :10:29.climate change sceptics to join his top team,
:10:30. > :10:32.including Rick Perry as Energy Secretary,
:10:33. > :10:34.who described climate change I guess that doesn't make him a
:10:35. > :10:41.sceptic, but a denier. And what about the President-elect's
:10:42. > :10:43.key election pledge - to build a wall on the border with
:10:44. > :10:47.Mexico? In his press conference on
:10:48. > :10:49.Wednesday, Mr Trump confirmed work on the wall would start soon
:10:50. > :10:52.after his inauguration, with the central American state
:10:53. > :10:54.reimbursing the costs later. Donald Trump also used his press
:10:55. > :10:57.conference to welcome his If Putin likes Donald Trump,
:10:58. > :11:06.guess what, folks, that's called Now, I don't know that
:11:07. > :11:12.I'm going to get along with Vladimir Putin,
:11:13. > :11:14.I hope I do. And if I don't, do you honestly
:11:15. > :11:21.believe that Hillary would be Does anybody in this room
:11:22. > :11:24.really believe that? We're joined now by Sir
:11:25. > :11:38.Give us all a break. Christopher Meyer, our former
:11:39. > :11:42.ambassador to the United States. Welcome back.
:11:43. > :11:46.I guess a lot of people will think - what is the point of continued
:11:47. > :11:51.Russian-American hostility, aggression, return of the kold war,
:11:52. > :11:55.why not have a -- return of the Cold War. Why not have a goal -
:11:56. > :12:01.rebuilding a relationship with the Kremlin? I think it is a very good
:12:02. > :12:04.goal. In and of itself there is nothing objectionable to rebuilding
:12:05. > :12:07.the relationship which has deteriorated seriously and actually
:12:08. > :12:14.is some kind of threat to world peace. I think the problem we've had
:12:15. > :12:18.with Trump's remarks about Russia, they tended to be linked with
:12:19. > :12:24.extreme scepticism with the use of Nato. You put those #20g9 and it
:12:25. > :12:28.becomes, I think, dangerous to the British national interest and to
:12:29. > :12:35.members of NATOs' interests. If, however he is going to take the
:12:36. > :12:43.Mattis line... And he is pro-NATO And as a military man that would be
:12:44. > :12:47.typical, he is in favour, he will drop the scepticism about Nato but
:12:48. > :12:51.still say - I'm going to work Bert with the Russians that President
:12:52. > :12:54.Obama did, I see no objection. Mr Trump takes over when there is
:12:55. > :13:00.criticism over the Obama foreign policy. Mr Obama has shown little
:13:01. > :13:04.interest in Europe. He has done several U-turns in the Middle East,
:13:05. > :13:07.indeed many say he has created a vacuum which the Kremlin have
:13:08. > :13:13.filled, without resolving any of the issues there and it was all meant to
:13:14. > :13:19.be, as part of the American pivot to the Pacific, and he hasn't really
:13:20. > :13:24.done that, either, as we see the growing naval power of China and
:13:25. > :13:28.these islands. So, he's not inheriting a form of policy, I would
:13:29. > :13:33.suggest, that has been a great success? I actually - I'm a bit of a
:13:34. > :13:40.dissident on this. I actually think will the passage of time people will
:13:41. > :13:43.look back on Obama's policy and say - it wasn't so stupid at all. He
:13:44. > :13:47.made mistakes, talking about a red line with the Syrian regime's use of
:13:48. > :13:50.chemical weapons, that was a mistake, he looked like he was
:13:51. > :13:55.wheeling back on something he himself has said but in the Middle
:13:56. > :13:58.East overall I don't find anything particularly objection objectionable
:13:59. > :14:03.about Russia a regional power in that area, taking more of the
:14:04. > :14:08.responsibility for outside intervention in the Syrian civil
:14:09. > :14:12.war. I think the United States and the United Kingdom, for that matter,
:14:13. > :14:16.other Nato Allies, have nothing to gain by getting deeply involved in
:14:17. > :14:21.what is going on in Syria. Except that on the one hand the Americans,
:14:22. > :14:24.you take that view, but if the American position was that Assad has
:14:25. > :14:28.to go but you create the circumstances where Mr Putin comes
:14:29. > :14:33.in as Assad's biggest backer, you are facing both ways at once There
:14:34. > :14:37.are contradictions. Let us not deny T I think this is the weakest area
:14:38. > :14:44.of Obama's foreign policy. And the UK is worse, actually on this very
:14:45. > :14:48.point that you just made. Something in a sense, I feel that all this
:14:49. > :14:52.Russian stuff is a bit like - look, there is a squirrel, let's talk
:14:53. > :14:59.about Russia, talk about Putin, talk about his different attitudes. It
:15:00. > :15:01.seems to me that everybody I have learn interested Trump's transition
:15:02. > :15:03.team and listen to his Secretary of State, that the real hardline he is
:15:04. > :15:12.going to take is against China. If I was the President in China I
:15:13. > :15:17.would be really worried because there has historically been a kind
:15:18. > :15:20.of triangular game over decades, China, Russia, United States, we saw
:15:21. > :15:24.that in the days of the Soviet Union. If I was a member of the
:15:25. > :15:30.foreign policy planning staff of the Chinese Foreign Minister I would be
:15:31. > :15:35.saying oh-oh, it looks like there could be a US-Russia axis which is
:15:36. > :15:40.going to develop, it might not, but it could develop and it's going to
:15:41. > :15:50.have one feature in common, and that will be a hostility towards China. I
:15:51. > :15:56.think the kind of Russian-Chinese raproachment vaguely seen is a
:15:57. > :16:01.fragile thing. Trump has spoken about building a 350 warship
:16:02. > :16:06.imperial Navy. That Navy is overwhelmingly, Wye suggest, for
:16:07. > :16:12.deployment in the Pacific. To counteract a rise of Chinese Naval
:16:13. > :16:16.power. If you square off the Russians, which is essentially about
:16:17. > :16:21.troop deployment, any standoff with Russia is about boots on the ground.
:16:22. > :16:25.Any standoff with China is ships in the sea, not boots on the ground. So
:16:26. > :16:29.there is a kind of sense in his part that let's square that off because I
:16:30. > :16:37.need the money to build this imperial Navy. Well, when I was in
:16:38. > :16:41.Washington people were talking about a 450-ship Navy which would be
:16:42. > :16:46.necessary to keep, 350 sounds relatively modest. But I agree with
:16:47. > :16:49.you that if you are a Naval strategist what you are worried
:16:50. > :16:57.about is development of the Chinese Navy, although if you are in Beijing
:16:58. > :17:03.you are saying we haven't had a blue waters Navy historically. Please may
:17:04. > :17:08.we have secondhand Russian aircraft carriers so we can... Only one. Only
:17:09. > :17:14.one, you are right. There may be another after that trip through the
:17:15. > :17:23.channel. If I was looking at my crystal ball which is particularly
:17:24. > :17:28.misty at the moment, I would say if there is a raproachment it will be
:17:29. > :17:36.fragile. Let us say it solidifies out of that triangle China becomes
:17:37. > :17:41.the loser. Do you detect any changing focus in terms of foreign
:17:42. > :17:46.policy from what Trump was saying on the campaign trail or even in the
:17:47. > :17:53.early days post the election and to what he is thinking of for a Trump
:17:54. > :17:56.administration? I think that Russia still seems to be the main theme,
:17:57. > :18:00.that there is so much noise about. I think this whole issue about what's
:18:01. > :18:04.going on in the south China seas which is getting a lot less
:18:05. > :18:08.attention in the global media, it's something I am beginning to look at
:18:09. > :18:13.at the early stages of a book on defence at the moment, it's
:18:14. > :18:18.absolutely fascinating and people don't really realise how aggressive
:18:19. > :18:20.China is getting in its strategic positioning, essentially almost kind
:18:21. > :18:25.of creating air strips built on little rocks that are nr the middle
:18:26. > :18:28.of nowhere, building up positioning which is an incredibly aggressive
:18:29. > :18:32.way of behaving. It's not getting a lot of attention at the moment but I
:18:33. > :18:37.am sure that is something that is going on in Trump's mind. The other
:18:38. > :18:44.thing we didn't really talk about, the wider context of this is what's
:18:45. > :18:48.going to go on in the Baltic states and clearly if the relationship
:18:49. > :18:52.between America and Russia is going to get any warmer that is crucial,
:18:53. > :18:57.what are Putin's intentions there? I am told that there is almost no
:18:58. > :19:01.doubt he will attempt to introduce tariffs against the Chinese. He may
:19:02. > :19:05.not get it through Congress but he is going to try? China isn't just
:19:06. > :19:13.key to his foreign policy, it's key to his domestic policy. What does
:19:14. > :19:17.Trump stand for? It's bring back jobs, make America great again, stop
:19:18. > :19:22.the country being flooded with cheap Chinese imports. That is the single
:19:23. > :19:24.most important thing in a way about - that's the single most important
:19:25. > :19:28.thing about his relationship with China, it's a trading relationship
:19:29. > :19:35.and whether he is prepared to launch really a trade war with China. Let
:19:36. > :19:40.me go back to the squirrel. This business of the dossier and the rest
:19:41. > :19:45.of it. What do you make of the involvement in this of MI6, not just
:19:46. > :19:51.their ex-agent but giving permission for this agent to speak to the FBI,
:19:52. > :19:55.even though he was no longer with MI6 and the involvement of a former
:19:56. > :19:59.British ambassador, as well, what do make of it? At one level it's
:20:00. > :20:07.absolutely delicious. This is wonderful stuff. Great story.
:20:08. > :20:11.Another level it feeds Russian paranoia about the wicked British.
:20:12. > :20:14.Since the days of the revolution they've been paranoid about British
:20:15. > :20:19.intelligence. They have overrated us a lot which has been useful to us, I
:20:20. > :20:24.have to say, so they will say that Chris Steel, who I have never met by
:20:25. > :20:34.the way... Donald Trump has called him a failed spy by the way. It
:20:35. > :20:41.shows that possibly we have got the worst of all the world's in this
:20:42. > :20:48.because... Upset the Russians and Donald Trump, as well. So, the idea
:20:49. > :20:51.that Tony Blair once had of straddling the Atlantic didn't quite
:20:52. > :20:56.mean this in mutual insults to the Russians on one hand and the
:20:57. > :21:04.Americans on the other. I don't know what to make of this. I am told he
:21:05. > :21:07.was a good MI6 operative. He seemed to have become obsessive as he was
:21:08. > :21:12.paid to compile this report and he seemed desperate to get the report
:21:13. > :21:16.out in some shape or form. This was a private operation, originally
:21:17. > :21:21.bankrolled by Republican billionaire who wanted to stop Trump becoming
:21:22. > :21:27.the nominee for his party. Then taken over by rich Democrats to try
:21:28. > :21:34.to stop him becoming President of the United States. This was paid for
:21:35. > :21:38.propaganda-information. Paid for is the key phrase here, because I think
:21:39. > :21:41.when you move out of a Government bureaucracy and you start going into
:21:42. > :21:46.the wider world and trying to make money running a consultancy of the
:21:47. > :21:51.kind he ran, then you are very keen if you offer your product to become
:21:52. > :21:58.known because it increases your own, you hope, reputation. So I guess his
:21:59. > :22:03.keenness to see this reach a wider audience was very much driven by
:22:04. > :22:06.perfectly normal commercial motivation because he was
:22:07. > :22:10.co-partners, being... Being paid. His company in London had been hired
:22:11. > :22:18.by an American company which in turn had been hired by first of all as I
:22:19. > :22:23.say the Republican billionaire and then the rich Democrat fat cats.
:22:24. > :22:29.Contracts will now come powering in, I assume he thought, he is running
:22:30. > :22:35.for his life! If he was such a smart MI6 operative would he not have
:22:36. > :22:44.worked that out? He had worked with - been connected with what is the
:22:45. > :22:48.one with the polonium poisoning. You would have thought if his
:22:49. > :22:53.fingerprints were over this dossier, that life would not continue as
:22:54. > :22:58.nrmal. Some would say in the Foreign Office and I can not speak for the
:22:59. > :23:03.foufs, some would say if you spend too long in MI6 you could slightly
:23:04. > :23:10.bonkers. Your former colleague, Andrew Wood say he helped bring
:23:11. > :23:14.attention to the dossier compiled by Chris Steel, by bringing attention
:23:15. > :23:18.to Senator John McCain, indeed I am told John McCain sent somebody over
:23:19. > :23:23.and was told you look for someone holding a copy of the Financial
:23:24. > :23:25.Times. Clearly they didn't meet in the Stock Exchange because that
:23:26. > :23:34.wouldn't really set you apart. Would you have done that? I don't think
:23:35. > :23:37.so. But I think this happened at some international security
:23:38. > :23:42.conference, in Canada? Correct. Who knows. It could be Andrew Wood
:23:43. > :23:49.saying to John McCain, hey, have you seen this funny report? It could be
:23:50. > :23:55.just like that. Were you subject to KGB stings when you were in Moscow,
:23:56. > :24:00.honeypot traps? I was, I am pleased to say I thought of the Queen and
:24:01. > :24:06.resisted all. No pictures. They tried three games, one was a gay
:24:07. > :24:14.assault if I can put it in those terms. The other two were
:24:15. > :24:23.heterosexual. I resisted all of them in the name of my country. They
:24:24. > :24:27.didn't resist your red socks? I didn't wear them! Thank you.
:24:28. > :24:30.What's the best way to sort out a classic political power struggle?
:24:31. > :24:36.Could it be eating cupcakes and thinking about butterflies?
:24:37. > :24:40.That, apparently, was the response of a senior figure in Momentum
:24:41. > :24:45.to a sudden plan to revamp the pro-Jeremy Corbyn campaign
:24:46. > :25:06.group's entire constitution, minutes before he was pushed out.
:25:07. > :25:08.Without so much as even a nibble of a cupcake.
:25:09. > :25:10.In what's being described as a "coup d'email",
:25:11. > :25:12.Momentum founder Jon Lansman has taken back control of
:25:13. > :25:14.the organisation which he hopes will one day affiliate
:25:15. > :25:34.Look at this Momentum members having so much fun.
:25:35. > :25:38.They are a Christian youth group in America.
:25:39. > :25:41.My choice is I stand on the rock of Jesus.
:25:42. > :25:43.I choose to be the only one for the only one.
:25:44. > :25:46.But for the organisation of the same name, in praise of Jeremy Corbyn,
:25:47. > :25:52.Jill Mountford, an Alliance For Workers' Liberties Supporter,
:25:53. > :25:58.was one of the most senior people in Momentum until three days ago.
:25:59. > :26:03.She has told the Daily Politics that a sudden shake-up this week
:26:04. > :26:06.was a coup d' e-mail to take over the organisation, with no
:26:07. > :26:08.discussion, no debate and she complained that people
:26:09. > :26:10.are being taught some appalling lessons in how you build
:26:11. > :26:21.As far as coups go and the Labour movement has had a few
:26:22. > :26:23.attempts recently, this one appears to be
:26:24. > :26:26.Here is what happened, on Tuesday night at 7.39,
:26:27. > :26:29.with no prior warning, this e-mail was sent to Momentum's
:26:30. > :26:32.Attached was a proposed new constitution, ripping up
:26:33. > :26:35.the current rules and structures, that had handed control to a few
:26:36. > :26:40.hard-left delegates last month in what some then called a coup.
:26:41. > :26:42.Within minutes of this countercoup, approval came from several members
:26:43. > :26:49.So by 8.54, just 75 minutes later, they had a majority.
:26:50. > :26:52.Just before it was time for a hot cup of cocoa and bedtime,
:26:53. > :26:55.Momentum's existing democratic structure has been dissolved.
:26:56. > :27:02.So a victory for both the man who sent the original e-mail,
:27:03. > :27:08.Momentum's founder, John Landman, who crucially maintains control
:27:09. > :27:10.of a database of members' details and his allies.
:27:11. > :27:13.I don't think we need to be talking about coups and countercoups
:27:14. > :27:21.and it is all getting a bit Game of Thrones, this is just
:27:22. > :27:24.the Labour Party where we are trying to organise for Jeremy Corbyn's
:27:25. > :27:28.Christine Shawcroft, a left-winger, seen as a moderate in the current
:27:29. > :27:40.spat was also on the scooped momentum steering committee
:27:41. > :27:43.Jeremy Corbyn put under consultation and we based
:27:44. > :27:45.the new arrangements on the results of the consultation.
:27:46. > :27:47.You basically flushed out the Trotskyists, didn't you?
:27:48. > :27:51.But the new constitution says all members of Momentum must join
:27:52. > :27:54.the Labour Party by the summer, a move endorsed yesterday
:27:55. > :28:01.I want all Momentum members to become members
:28:02. > :28:04.of the party and I want the party membership to continue to grow.
:28:05. > :28:07.So, some members of Momentum who have been expelled
:28:08. > :28:09.from the Labour Party, like Jill Mountford, could soon find
:28:10. > :28:12.In addition, so-called moderate MPs, like Hillary
:28:13. > :28:15.Benn, who staged a failed coup against Jeremy Corbyn last summer,
:28:16. > :28:18.could suffer from Momentum's growing influence.
:28:19. > :28:21.Jeremy Corbyn was asked yesterday if he would step in to
:28:22. > :28:23.defend his former Shadow Cabinet colleague, if local party activists
:28:24. > :28:29.I do not, as a leader, dictate or interfere in
:28:30. > :28:37.I want justice, I want democracy, I want fairness, I
:28:38. > :28:39.The victors of yesterday's coup d'e-mail also
:28:40. > :28:41.want Momentum to affiliate with Labour.
:28:42. > :28:44.Just ask the Communist Party who were
:28:45. > :28:51.refused entry, when they tried over half a century ago.
:28:52. > :28:54.Let the happy times roll on for these Momentum members in America
:28:55. > :28:57.but there's not much of a festive atmosphere right now, amongst Jeremy
:28:58. > :29:06.With me now is the Momentum member Paul Hilder, who was also
:29:07. > :29:11.a co-founder of the online crowd-funding platform
:29:12. > :29:13.Crowdpac and Luke Akehurst, Secretary of the centrist Labour
:29:14. > :29:28.Some are saying that this move by the Momentum chairman to impose this
:29:29. > :29:34.new constitution is like a coup, is it a coup? Absolutely not. I think
:29:35. > :29:37.that what's happened here is long overdue, actually, but they've laid
:29:38. > :29:41.stronger democratic foundations for the movement. It's happened through
:29:42. > :29:47.a democratic consultation which they had over 40% turnout in, which was
:29:48. > :29:52.more than a movement like one got in Spain in similar consultations and
:29:53. > :29:57.that consultation, that vote, found an overwhelming majority of Momentum
:29:58. > :30:02.members believing in a par days paintery model of democracy rather
:30:03. > :30:07.than the old-fashioned model of committees and so forth which some
:30:08. > :30:16.people are more attached to. What do you make of Jill Mountford doing
:30:17. > :30:21.about it's a disregard of struck sturs? The membership has
:30:22. > :30:28.demonstrated that they don't believe in the model of democracy which Jill
:30:29. > :30:33.is advocating. They believe in a more participating approach. The new
:30:34. > :30:38.constitution is fascinating, it has an election for potentially every
:30:39. > :30:41.post on that new co-ordinating group, if there is contestation of
:30:42. > :30:45.elections and this extraordinary group, 15 members selected by lot
:30:46. > :30:59.randomly from the movement as a whole who also play a role in
:31:00. > :31:03.decision-making. Sqa Isn't this what centrist figures
:31:04. > :31:09.like Tom Watson have been wanting, making with sure they clean up their
:31:10. > :31:14.act and make sure they are an aphysicalaited o and that's what
:31:15. > :31:18.they are doing? The moderate wing of the Labour Party, believes it is
:31:19. > :31:22.appropriate whether it is a faction or any of the centrist factions to
:31:23. > :31:27.be formally affiliated to the Labour Party. That's my fear, it's kind of
:31:28. > :31:34.institutionalisation of the factionalism. It's quite ridiculous
:31:35. > :31:37.that we are sat here on national TV debating the internal structures of
:31:38. > :31:43.a faction within the Labour Party. It just shouldn't be that parties
:31:44. > :31:50.within a party like that... But isn't Labour First a faction? Well,
:31:51. > :31:55.we don't have all this rigmarole of kind of branches and votes and
:31:56. > :31:59.meetings and structures that mirror the Labour Party's structure. We are
:32:00. > :32:02.a network of people... But you are a faction. People could call you a
:32:03. > :32:07.faction. We are a network of people that agree with each other. You
:32:08. > :32:12.could call that a faction. Sthant what Momentum is, except for the
:32:13. > :32:16.hard left ones? A group of people that broadly agree with each other.
:32:17. > :32:19.I have no problem with the existence of networks of people within the
:32:20. > :32:22.Labour Party that agree with each other but when that becomes
:32:23. > :32:26.fundamental to the internal dynamic of the party, that everyone feels
:32:27. > :32:30.you are either for or against Momentum and you are either in
:32:31. > :32:33.Momentum or outside, that's very you think haeltedy and a lot of Labour
:32:34. > :32:38.Party members don't want to be badged up like that. What would you
:32:39. > :32:42.say? I agree with the morns of a broad church and much more open
:32:43. > :32:47.exchange and debate. I think that what is going on here in Momentum,
:32:48. > :32:52.though, is really about them trying to lean into a positive engagement
:32:53. > :32:55.with the Labour Party. One of the risks of what Jill Mountford and
:32:56. > :32:58.other people, the direction in which they were leading things, some
:32:59. > :33:02.people were warning - this is going to lead at some point to Momentum
:33:03. > :33:06.splitting off and becoming a separate party. Full engagement
:33:07. > :33:09.here, with the Labour Party, which I think at one level I have seen
:33:10. > :33:15.people on the right of the Labour Party welcoming. OK. Gaby, what do
:33:16. > :33:20.you make of it? It worries me slightly that the Labour Party has
:33:21. > :33:26.so little to say, that we are down to discussioning whether the You
:33:27. > :33:31.dayian people's, people's front of Judaea is in control of Momentum. It
:33:32. > :33:36.is an inward looking debate. I don't think people care. It is probably a
:33:37. > :33:40.good thing if they've kicked out the Trots, but it is a long way from
:33:41. > :33:44.many people who joined Momentum think it was. It was if you have
:33:45. > :33:49.never been interested in politics before, you can come into this big
:33:50. > :33:56.party and ended up about a low about logistics. Have you, Gabby's phrase,
:33:57. > :33:59.kicked out the Trots. I'm not in any desuggestion-making role in this
:34:00. > :34:03.movement. I wasn't asking you about the decision. I don't believe that
:34:04. > :34:08.anybody has been kicked out at this point in time. There is a rule that
:34:09. > :34:09.you won't be able to be a member, except under exceptingal
:34:10. > :34:12.circumstances, through appeal, if you have been expelled from the
:34:13. > :34:16.Labour Party and everybody is being encouraged to join the Labour Party
:34:17. > :34:19.but the other thing about Moment up, you have a broader supporter base of
:34:20. > :34:25.200,000 people. I think Gabby is right to say - you know, there are
:34:26. > :34:29.more important things going on in the xun trithan the internal
:34:30. > :34:36.constitutional arrangements of different political movements. --
:34:37. > :34:49.going on in the country. But I think what they have done is broadly
:34:50. > :34:52.constructive and opened up the possibility for it to live up to the
:34:53. > :34:54.promise it articulated on in the beginning. Well, moderate Labour MPs
:34:55. > :34:59.would say thil straits with the hard left, put five of them in a room and
:35:00. > :35:02.you get at least six rows. A bit like Ukip? Well, very like Ukip, I'm
:35:03. > :35:05.sure would them you would get ten rows with six in the room. I think
:35:06. > :35:07.Gabby is right - there is an interesting question about that this
:35:08. > :35:10.says to the young, enthusiastic people who signed up to Momentum and
:35:11. > :35:13.thought they were getting engaged in some exciting new form of politics
:35:14. > :35:18.and just find it is all consuming itself, the party is eating itself.
:35:19. > :35:25.This is the ultimate example. Look, Akehurst, if you have to be a member
:35:26. > :35:28.of the Labour Party, now to be a member of Momentum, shouldn't they
:35:29. > :35:33.be allowed to affiliate to the Labour Party? No affiliation isn't
:35:34. > :35:38.for faction s or groups of a particular viewpoint. It is for
:35:39. > :35:44.trade unions or for socialist societies I w like the Fabian
:35:45. > :35:47.Society think-thank that or Labour Students or Christian Socialists, it
:35:48. > :35:54.is for groups that are open to anyone, left or right of the party.
:35:55. > :36:04.It's completely inappropriate to have formal recognition in the
:36:05. > :36:06.structures for groups. It would open them up to reselection of MPs and
:36:07. > :36:10.give them delegates to local parties. The party here is
:36:11. > :36:16.institutionalisation of factionalism and of division, when actually the
:36:17. > :36:21.Labour Party needs to unite, and not have these divisions around what
:36:22. > :36:25.labels people attach to themselves. What is your reaction to Tristram
:36:26. > :36:30.Hunt's regular Is nation? -- resignation? Well he has decided to
:36:31. > :36:35.do other things, fair enough. I think toeps up an extraordinarily
:36:36. > :36:40.interesting by-election, a big challenge for Labour -- it opens up.
:36:41. > :36:42.A big challenge, given how that constituency in Stoke is and a
:36:43. > :36:46.challenge and an opportunity for Momentum and the Labour Party to see
:36:47. > :36:51.what it can do in a constituency like that. I don't think anyone
:36:52. > :36:53.would predict the outcome. And finally, Luke, your reaction to Mr
:36:54. > :36:59.Hunt's resignation? I'm disappointed. I think we need
:37:00. > :37:04.fighters rather than quitters. Both people who'll stay and fight to
:37:05. > :37:06.bring the Labour Party back to electability in a moderate
:37:07. > :37:09.standpoint and people who will fight against the Tories. He has made his
:37:10. > :37:16.choice but it is not one I'm very impressed by. We'll leave it there.
:37:17. > :37:21.I didn't get into John Landsman resigning as director of skament
:37:22. > :37:27.moiment scam campaign service, and being replaced by his ally,
:37:28. > :37:31.Christine Shawcroft who sits on the national committee I wouldn't go
:37:32. > :37:35.there. As the weekend approaches, I'm not. Thank you for joining us.
:37:36. > :37:38.At the start of the new year, how are the political parties faring?
:37:39. > :37:40.If you believe the opinion polls, the Conservatives have a commanding
:37:41. > :37:43.lead over Labour across the UK, and the SNP are maintaining
:37:44. > :37:52.But another measure of party support is actual votes in ballot boxes
:37:53. > :37:54.and every Thursday local council by-elections are held
:37:55. > :37:58.which can give an indication of the parties' fortunes.
:37:59. > :38:02.The last time we looked at what was happening in ward
:38:03. > :38:05.by-elections was back in October, so let's take a look
:38:06. > :38:15.Since the local elections in May last year, there have been 190 local
:38:16. > :38:16.council by-elections, held across England,
:38:17. > :38:20.In total, around 70 seats have changed hands.
:38:21. > :38:23.So how have the main parties been doing?
:38:24. > :38:25.Since October, the last time we looked at what was happening
:38:26. > :38:31.in ward by-elections, the Conservatives have lost another
:38:32. > :38:33.seat, making a net loss of 15 seats since May.
:38:34. > :38:39.And there's more bad news for Labour.
:38:40. > :38:42.They're down another 4 seats, and have lost 12 seats in total.
:38:43. > :38:45.Ukip have lost another councillor, and 3 seats in all.
:38:46. > :38:47.But with the Lib Dems it's a different story.
:38:48. > :38:52.Since October, they've increased their gains
:38:53. > :38:56.Elsewhere, the SNP have lost two seats and Plaid Cmyru
:38:57. > :39:05.And to discuss all that we're joined now by the academic Tony Travers
:39:06. > :39:11.from the Department of Government at the London School of Economics.
:39:12. > :39:17.First of all, tony, the principle - are local Government by-elections a
:39:18. > :39:22.guide to how the parties are fairing? They are not a bad guide.
:39:23. > :39:27.Like by-elections, you have to be a bit cautious with individual ones.
:39:28. > :39:30.But certainly if you look at the aggregated local election results,
:39:31. > :39:36.particularly on all-out days which we get in May each year and look at
:39:37. > :39:39.the way the parties perform in those and you adjust them to represent
:39:40. > :39:43.what local elections are taking place in a particular year, they
:39:44. > :39:47.give you a very clear sense of whether or not an opposition party
:39:48. > :39:51.is likely to win at the next general election. So they are, in many ways,
:39:52. > :39:58.a better guide now, in some ways, than opinion polls. Well, the be Lib
:39:59. > :40:03.Dems have gained 26 seats. Obviously following a period when they were
:40:04. > :40:07.pretty much wiped out in #35r789ly terms, not wiped out but decimated
:40:08. > :40:12.in parliamentary terms. -- in parliamentary terms. Does it amount
:40:13. > :40:19.to a fightback? It certainly is. You catalogue the significant shift to
:40:20. > :40:23.the Liberal Democrats in the local by-elections there is a pattern over
:40:24. > :40:28.time. Yesterday there were two more, one in Sunderland and one in Hemel
:40:29. > :40:32.Hempstead, where in both cases there were significant swings, in
:40:33. > :40:37.Sunderland... 42%. To the Lib Dems. Actually, Sunderland. So this tells
:40:38. > :40:41.us that there is something going on out there, I'm in the exactly sure
:40:42. > :40:44.what it is, but something is going on. Well, Sunderland is interesting,
:40:45. > :40:48.because Sunderland was one of the pivotal moments on the right of the
:40:49. > :40:54.referendum and we knew it was going to vote for Brexit but it voted by
:40:55. > :41:00.more than we thought and yet there is a 42% swing to the Lib Dems that
:41:01. > :41:04.want to undo Brexit. How does that happen? Well, it probably isn't all
:41:05. > :41:08.about Brexit, is it? A number of things are going on. A lot of
:41:09. > :41:12.Liberal Democrats will be recognised, as happened in the
:41:13. > :41:18.Richmond parliamentary by-election, as putting forward a pro-Remain or
:41:19. > :41:22.anti-Brexit view, but I think in other election, they have a lot of
:41:23. > :41:25.things going on here. The response to the Labour Party's internal
:41:26. > :41:29.troubles and at the same time, you know, remember the Conservatives
:41:30. > :41:33.have now, one way or another been in power for seven years and a sort of
:41:34. > :41:38.mid--term anti-Government view probably tangled up in this as well.
:41:39. > :41:41.People are not going to Ukip it would appear in places like
:41:42. > :41:46.Sunderland, they are actually going to the Liberal Democrats, it is an
:41:47. > :41:52.interesting phenomenon and it may have an effect on the by-elections.
:41:53. > :41:56.I don't know if that will happen in Copeland or Stoke on Trent but it
:41:57. > :42:00.could affect the result. Well, the Liberal Democrats took control of
:42:01. > :42:03.the Three Rivers District Council by winning a seat from the
:42:04. > :42:07.Conservatives last night as well. And yet when we look at the two
:42:08. > :42:10.by-elections coming up for Westminster, cleaned in the
:42:11. > :42:13.north-west and Stoke-on-Trent, central in the Midlands, Labour
:42:14. > :42:18.seems to be on the back foot there. You would expect a Government to
:42:19. > :42:22.lose by-elections midterm, you know this is what happens and Labour,
:42:23. > :42:25.obviously is in a mess nationally, so that's not - but what is
:42:26. > :42:29.interesting, the Liberal Democrats seem to be picking up all over the
:42:30. > :42:33.place, they are picking up Labour voters who can't vote for Corbyn,
:42:34. > :42:40.obvious, they are picking up Tory voters who were Remainers or
:42:41. > :42:43.dismayed by Theresa Mays inner who ways and less, the usual coalition
:42:44. > :42:47.of Liberal Democrats, because they can't figure out where else to put
:42:48. > :42:51.their vote. They become a grab bag for all sorts of things. That will
:42:52. > :42:55.not work in Copeland which will be much more of a conventional fight
:42:56. > :42:58.and it'll not work in Stoke where it will be Labour verses Ukip but from
:42:59. > :43:01.talking to people t seems people are more confident about holding Stoke
:43:02. > :43:08.than they are about holding Copeland. The majority is bigger.
:43:09. > :43:12.But Stoke is a very Brexity place. And Ukip was a strong second. They
:43:13. > :43:17.were nip and tuck with the Conservatives for second place. But
:43:18. > :43:23.you would normally expect in a seat like Copeland, held by Labour, and
:43:24. > :43:27.at times the as Tony says, the governing party has been in power
:43:28. > :43:30.for seven years but opposition parties hold on to their seats so
:43:31. > :43:34.the loss of Copeland would be huge if it happened. It certainly would
:43:35. > :43:38.be, it is difficult to read much into the statistics we looked at at
:43:39. > :43:42.the beginning of this section on who has gained what so far, because if
:43:43. > :43:46.you are look agent those as a guide as to what might happen in 2020, it
:43:47. > :43:50.is reunreliable. At the moment we are in this incredibly unusual
:43:51. > :43:55.interim period before we presumably leave the EU, so people feel as they
:43:56. > :43:59.perhaps did in Richmond, that voting for the Lib Dems might influence in
:44:00. > :44:03.some way the ways we come out. By the time we get to 2020, we will be
:44:04. > :44:07.in entirely different territory. I'm not sure any of these cases really
:44:08. > :44:11.are much of a good guide. The Labour Party would be thrown into crisis if
:44:12. > :44:17.the Conservatives were to win Copeland. And Ukip -- this is a
:44:18. > :44:23.bigger stretch, both are a bit of a stretch but this is a bigger one -
:44:24. > :44:29.if Ukip was to win Stoke? I think that's right. It is very difficult
:44:30. > :44:35.for the Labour Party if they start losing by-elections in the midterm
:44:36. > :44:43.of a Conservative Government. With crisis in the NHS and... All those
:44:44. > :44:48.things playing. We are running up to a full sweep at local elections.
:44:49. > :44:51.Councils in England and Wales holding local elections in May. That
:44:52. > :44:55.will give us a national sense of how well the Liberal Democrats are
:44:56. > :45:01.doing. I do think that - and I take the point we are a long way away
:45:02. > :45:04.from a general election, but truth is unless an opposition party is
:45:05. > :45:06.doing really in local elections through the period of a Parliament,
:45:07. > :45:10.it is very, very unlikely they are going to win the next general
:45:11. > :45:13.election. That's what the locals do tell us, they sell us more about the
:45:14. > :45:16.opposition than the Government in some ways. We'll keep an eye on them
:45:17. > :45:20.and monitor the results. Thank you for your help in this regard.
:45:21. > :45:23.You'll have heard the terms 'hard brexit' and 'soft brexit'.
:45:24. > :45:26.But what about 'grey brexit', and 'clean brexit'?
:45:27. > :45:28.If the terminology used in the brexit debate has been
:45:29. > :45:30.giving you a headache, we've got just the thing
:45:31. > :45:37.Here's Adam Fleming's guide to the language of Brexit.
:45:38. > :45:39.The language of Brexit can be baffling and some words
:45:40. > :45:44.Let's try and shed some light anyway.
:45:45. > :45:51.Proponents of leaving feel this is used in a pejorative way
:45:52. > :45:57.by former Remain campaigners to describe the worst possible
:45:58. > :45:59.outcome of the Brexit negotiations, ie, where trade and travel
:46:00. > :46:02.are difficult and there's little or no co-operation on justice,
:46:03. > :46:11.Leavers much prefer the phrase clean Brexit.
:46:12. > :46:13.Clean Brexit is defined by the campaign group Change Britain
:46:14. > :46:16.as removing the UK from all parts of the EU that prevent us
:46:17. > :46:22.signing our own global trade deals and writing our own regulations
:46:23. > :46:25.and with everyone knowing what's going to happen when.
:46:26. > :46:28.It's the opposite of dirty Brexit which presumably means no one
:46:29. > :46:30.knowing exactly what's going to happen when.
:46:31. > :46:39.The clearest version of this is the UK staying
:46:40. > :46:43.in the single market, designed to allow goods and services
:46:44. > :46:46.to travel around the EU with as few barriers as possible,
:46:47. > :46:49.although you have to stick to the rules of the single market,
:46:50. > :46:52.possibly including the free movement of people.
:46:53. > :46:56.In fact, Michael Gove has christened it fake Brexit.
:46:57. > :47:08.It actually stands for pay as you go Brexit, the idea that we take
:47:09. > :47:11.programmes and elements of the EU we still quite like and pay
:47:12. > :47:16.For example, the Brexit Secretary, David Davis, hasn't ruled out
:47:17. > :47:19.the idea of paying money for access to the single market.
:47:20. > :47:30.This is a scenario designed to bridge between two extremes.
:47:31. > :47:33.They are, black or disorderly Brexit, which is is us leaving
:47:34. > :47:37.without any kind of exit deal in a fairly chaotic fashion,
:47:38. > :47:40.and white Brexit, which I think means leaving but inheriting
:47:41. > :47:45.Grey Brexit is a sort of Goldilocks mixture of the two.
:47:46. > :47:47.What do you think about that, Prime Minister?
:47:48. > :47:50.Actually, we want a red, white and blue Brexit,
:47:51. > :47:52.that is the right Brexit for the United Kingdom.
:47:53. > :47:56.Coined on a battleship in the Gulf, red, white and blue Brexit
:47:57. > :48:00.was Theresa May's attempt to paint the process in her own terms,
:48:01. > :48:03.patriotic, optimistic, uniquely British.
:48:04. > :48:06.Now obviously the BBC doesn't have a view
:48:07. > :48:09.about which phrase is the right one because they're all judgments.
:48:10. > :48:12.But hopefully you feel a bit more switched on about what people
:48:13. > :48:21.And we've prepared a cut-out-and-keep guide
:48:22. > :48:34.If you'd like to get your hands on it, check out our Facebook page
:48:35. > :48:48.A viewer pointed out we coined a new phrase this morning, Brexitee.
:48:49. > :48:53.During the campaign itself I don't remember anybody talking about hard
:48:54. > :49:03.Brexit or soft Brexit, it was Brexit or not Brexit. Brexit in terms of a
:49:04. > :49:06.hard Brexit, though, was coined by the Remainers who had lost after
:49:07. > :49:11.June and it's been a very clever phrase for them. I agree with that,
:49:12. > :49:17.I think it was a hostile rebranding exercise. It was an attempt to use
:49:18. > :49:23.the language of Brexit to try to clutch victory from the jaws of
:49:24. > :49:27.defeat, to try to frighten people into thinking that hard Brexit was
:49:28. > :49:31.something they hadn't voted for. In fact, soft Brexit I think for most
:49:32. > :49:36.people that backed Brexit is a kind of synthetic Brexit, it's not a real
:49:37. > :49:40.Brexit. For me all this terminology, but particularly the two simple
:49:41. > :49:44.phrases we started out with, hard Brexit and soft Brexit, is a
:49:45. > :49:47.nonsense. Brexit is Brexit, as Theresa May has said, it means
:49:48. > :49:51.Brexit. . I think her red, white and blue thing, although it got a laugh
:49:52. > :49:56.from the particular way we presented it there, is a Goodway of putting
:49:57. > :50:00.it. What she means is the Brexit that people voted for, one that's in
:50:01. > :50:06.the best interests of Britain. Most of the people who ran the vote Leave
:50:07. > :50:10.campaign, as Adam said, they seemed to think that what is called a soft
:50:11. > :50:17.Brexit is really not a Brexit at all. The trouble with this whole
:50:18. > :50:22.debate is when Brexit means Brexit, everyone knows what they means, they
:50:23. > :50:26.don't. There is about 14 different ways you compute it. For the
:50:27. > :50:30.campaign it was imperative not to talk about that, because you can get
:50:31. > :50:33.a majority for just Leave. The minute you start breaking it down
:50:34. > :50:38.into what that means because everyone has different ideas about
:50:39. > :50:41.what they meant by Leave, some immigration is important, trade has
:50:42. > :50:45.different meaning for different people, it's better to forget about
:50:46. > :50:48.that and get the maximum number of people under the Leave umbrella.
:50:49. > :50:51.Once it's happening you have to be specific about what kind of Brexit
:50:52. > :50:55.and that's the reason Theresa May takes refuge in let's have a red,
:50:56. > :50:59.white and blue Brexit which means kind of nothing, because the minute
:51:00. > :51:03.she is specific someone will be unhappy, half the Tory Party will be
:51:04. > :51:07.furious because it's not their version. Half who voted Leave will
:51:08. > :51:11.say that's not what I meant. It's to keep it kind of vague for as long as
:51:12. > :51:15.possible while sounding like you are saying something. The Leave side
:51:16. > :51:26.didn't like the invention of hard Brexit but they then hit back
:51:27. > :51:33.because we have now had words like Remoaner. In the first few weeks
:51:34. > :51:37.after Brexit and probably the few months after the referendum result
:51:38. > :51:41.Brexiteers and supporting MPs were very nervous about this kind of
:51:42. > :51:45.language. I sense that people are more relaxed about that now. Leave
:51:46. > :51:49.supporters now feel they're a little bit less anxious about this
:51:50. > :51:54.terminology and where it way lead us because there is more confidence
:51:55. > :51:57.that Theresa May, who was a Remainer, will actually deliver the
:51:58. > :52:04.kind of Brexit, vague as it may be, that most people who voted for Leave
:52:05. > :52:10.had in mind. You mentioned that Theresa May has kept it vague, Gaby,
:52:11. > :52:15.because the moment she stops doing that someone will be upset. This
:52:16. > :52:19.speech is now on Tuesday. There surely has to be some substance in
:52:20. > :52:23.this speech now? From what we understand she's going to be clear
:52:24. > :52:26.about things we sort of knew, which is her priorities are reduce
:52:27. > :52:30.immigration, get out of the European Court of justice, but do that in a
:52:31. > :52:34.way that preserves as good trade relations as possible. But it's less
:52:35. > :52:37.now about what her negotiating objectives are, what you want to
:52:38. > :52:44.know is how is she going to get there? We understand she wants the
:52:45. > :52:46.least damaging deal, fine, who doesn't? How do you think you are
:52:47. > :52:50.going to get that exactly? I don't think we will hear a great deal
:52:51. > :52:53.about that on Tuesday. She's been specific at some points, weirdly
:52:54. > :52:58.specific. She said at one point we will have the right to label our own
:52:59. > :53:02.food which tells you something very specific about what she wants. Then
:53:03. > :53:09.she backs away from it... What does label your own food mean? God knows!
:53:10. > :53:17.It implies for a start, that we are not going to be told to put on food
:53:18. > :53:21.labels by Brussels which implies outside the single market, probably
:53:22. > :53:25.outside the WTO rules. That's weirdly specific. Then there is a
:53:26. > :53:28.hurried retreat away from that. You thought you knew where you were, oh,
:53:29. > :53:33.hang on, you don't again. Because of the vacuum the Government's created
:53:34. > :53:37.as a tries to work out what Brexit actually means, she said Brexit
:53:38. > :53:43.means Brexit, but hadn't yet worked out what that means, others have
:53:44. > :53:48.filled the vacuum. If she does not do something to fill this vacuum in
:53:49. > :53:52.this speech next week there will be despair on both sides. The people
:53:53. > :53:56.who wanted to stay will despair but people who wanted to leave will
:53:57. > :54:00.despair, as well. She doesn't have to stumble on for that much longer
:54:01. > :54:05.before she triggers Article 50. So why bother with a speech at all?
:54:06. > :54:10.Well, she's doing the speech because she's under so much pressure from
:54:11. > :54:13.all sides and I think it will be a kind of bizarre exercise in
:54:14. > :54:16.stringing out for as long as possible saying as little as
:54:17. > :54:21.possible with possibly one top line to satisfy the broadcasters and the
:54:22. > :54:24.media. I have always thought that if you haven't really - if you bill a
:54:25. > :54:27.big speech, you better have something to say otherwise it's
:54:28. > :54:31.better not to give it. Other people will say the trouble is we are close
:54:32. > :54:34.enough now to the triggering of Article 50 negotiation, before long
:54:35. > :54:36.we will get stuff leaking out of 27 other member states capitals about
:54:37. > :54:39.what they think the British position is and their position would be in
:54:40. > :54:42.response. This is their last chance to sort of have control of the
:54:43. > :54:46.narrative a bit before it slips away. I agree, there is only so many
:54:47. > :54:48.speeches you can give where there is a big build-up and then it's like,
:54:49. > :54:51.is that it? Exactly. Time now for our high-speed round-up
:54:52. > :54:54.of the week in politics Theresa May launched her vision
:54:55. > :55:03.of what she calls the shared society promising extra money for local
:55:04. > :55:08.mental health services. For too long, mental illness has
:55:09. > :55:11.been something of a hidden Jeremy Corbyn attempted
:55:12. > :55:14.to reboot his leadership, announcing Labour were no longer
:55:15. > :55:17.wedded to freedom of movement, before flip-flopping and saying
:55:18. > :55:19.he could support free Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt
:55:20. > :55:26.came under pressure over He says the NHS is getting more cash
:55:27. > :55:33.than it asked for but the boss It would be stretching it to say
:55:34. > :55:37.that the NHS has got more Strikes disrupted travel around
:55:38. > :55:43.Britain with workers from London Underground,
:55:44. > :55:45.British Airways and And, outgoing US President Barack
:55:46. > :55:54.Obama delivered an emotional final speech in Chicago,
:55:55. > :55:56.while President-elect Trump held a conference attacking fake news
:55:57. > :56:20.and dirty dossiers. Someone added true Brexit and fake
:56:21. > :56:24.Brexit to the lexicon. Gaby, we have talked about Theresa May's brings
:56:25. > :56:30.problems and the need to, not give away her negotiating strategy, but
:56:31. > :56:34.to fill out her vision of a post-Brexit Britain. She has two
:56:35. > :56:36.immediate problems, though, the rash of strikes, particularly in London
:56:37. > :56:43.and the south-east, affecting transport at a time when the weather
:56:44. > :56:48.is miserable, and this simmering and probably growing crisis in the NHS.
:56:49. > :56:53.I would suggest that it's not clear on either front if MrsMay has a clue
:56:54. > :56:57.what to do. I think the tensions particularly on the NHS, which is
:56:58. > :57:00.moving from simmering to boiling point now, the tensions between
:57:01. > :57:04.Number 10 and Simon Stevens, head of NHS England, are very clear now.
:57:05. > :57:08.Simon Stevens is not someone I would go to war with unless I knew what I
:57:09. > :57:11.was doing. The idea that you are fighting with your most important
:57:12. > :57:14.senior civil servant in terms of delivering at the same time as the
:57:15. > :57:19.papers are full of awful stories about people dying on trolleys in
:57:20. > :57:24.corridors and Little Children spending hours in A waiting to be
:57:25. > :57:26.seen, I think there needs to be a sense of something from the
:57:27. > :57:30.Government other than just insisting the NHS has money and it's going to
:57:31. > :57:35.be fine, because it's Patently not fine. Strikes causing disruption and
:57:36. > :57:39.we don't really know what the Government's response or attitude or
:57:40. > :57:45.- we know the attitude, not the response. A growing crisis in the
:57:46. > :57:50.NHS. Yet, MrsMay's 14 points ahead in the polls. If there was a real
:57:51. > :57:53.opposition in this country she would not be 14 points ahead at all.
:57:54. > :57:57.Indeed I would suggest she would be behind now. Absolutely. It tells you
:57:58. > :58:01.everything you need to know about the state of the Labour Party and
:58:02. > :58:05.whether they are capable of being an effective opposition at the moment.
:58:06. > :58:09.I think Gaby is right on the NHS, it's not a problem that's going to
:58:10. > :58:12.go away but the problems are so fundamental they're not something
:58:13. > :58:18.that she can correct at the same time as tackling getting Britain out
:58:19. > :58:19.of the EU. Let's come to the quiz. I think our guests will struggle on
:58:20. > :58:22.this! The question was which party leader
:58:23. > :58:25.is planning to address his b) French Presidential
:58:26. > :58:29.candidate Jean-Luc Melenchon. Or d) outgoing European Parliament
:58:30. > :58:42.President Martin Schulz. You don't know, do you? I am saying
:58:43. > :58:46.it's a trick question and Tim Farron is a hologram. The Jean-Luc
:58:47. > :58:50.Melenchon. Thanks to Gaby, Isabel
:58:51. > :58:53.and all my guests. I'll be back on Sunday
:58:54. > :58:56.with the Sunday Politics when I'll be talking to Lib Dem leader
:58:57. > :58:59.Tim Farron and press regulation