24/01/2017

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:34. > :00:39.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.

:00:40. > :00:47.Today, by a majority of eight to three, the Supreme Court rules that

:00:48. > :00:50.the Government cannot trigger Article 50 without an Act of

:00:51. > :01:02.A government defeat in the Supreme Court as the judges

:01:03. > :01:04.confirm that only parliament can approve the triggering of Article

:01:05. > :01:07.50 which begins the process of our withdrawal from the EU -

:01:08. > :01:09.but they rule that there's no role for the devolved

:01:10. > :01:12.The Government accepts the Supreme Court's judgement.

:01:13. > :01:15.MPs and peers will get a vote - but what will the legislation look

:01:16. > :01:18.like and what obstacles might Labour and other opposition

:01:19. > :01:21.Strikes have paralysed the Southern Rail network

:01:22. > :01:23.for months, preventing hundreds of thousands of commuters

:01:24. > :01:26.Should unions and workers be allowed to inflict such disruption

:01:27. > :01:34.And we're leaving the EU - so when will the bonfire

:01:35. > :01:36.of regulations that are supposed to cost the British economy

:01:37. > :01:48.All that in the next hour, and with us for almost the whole

:01:49. > :01:51.of the programme today is the former Culture Secretary and Leave

:01:52. > :02:00.So - the Government has failed to get its way in the Supreme Court,

:02:01. > :02:03.and MPs and peers will get a vote before Article 50 is triggered,

:02:04. > :02:09.which begins the process of Britain's exit from the EU.

:02:10. > :02:11.The judges ruled by a majority of eight to three

:02:12. > :02:14.that the Government cannot begin the process for the UK's exit

:02:15. > :02:18.from the European Union without the authorisation of Parliament.

:02:19. > :02:20.Lord Neuberger, president of the Supreme Court,

:02:21. > :02:23.said a further Act of Parliament was required as the EU

:02:24. > :02:25.Referendum Act did not specify what would happen after the vote.

:02:26. > :02:31.Another issue the 11 justices had to consider

:02:32. > :02:34.was whether the devolved assemblies also need to be consulted.

:02:35. > :02:37.But they ruled that ministers did not need the consent

:02:38. > :02:39.of the legislatures in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland

:02:40. > :02:49.The Government is now expected to swiftly publish legislation

:02:50. > :02:50.asking Parliament to invoke Article 50.

:02:51. > :02:53.Any bill is expected to be very short in order to leave as little

:02:54. > :03:03.Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn has said the party

:03:04. > :03:05.will not frustrate the invoking of Article 50, but is demanding

:03:06. > :03:08.that the Government is accountable to Parliament throughout the Brexit

:03:09. > :03:17.negotiations - with a "meaningful vote" at the end.

:03:18. > :03:19.Alex Salmond, the Scottish National Party's

:03:20. > :03:21.International Affairs spokesperson, has said the SNP will table 50

:03:22. > :03:28."serious and substantive" amendments, including a call

:03:29. > :03:32.for the Government to publish a White Paper before

:03:33. > :03:35.But how big a problem will this pose to

:03:36. > :03:38.The Prime Minister had pledged to trigger Article 50

:03:39. > :03:44.But MPs did overwhelmingly back a motion before

:03:45. > :03:46.Christmas supporting the Government's Brexit timetable -

:03:47. > :03:49.suggesting there may be a clear majority in the House of Commons

:03:50. > :03:53.Here's how the President of the Supreme Court, Lord Neuberger,

:03:54. > :04:05.The referendum is of great political significance.

:04:06. > :04:07.But the Act of Parliament which established it did not say

:04:08. > :04:15.So any change in the law to give effect to the referendum must be

:04:16. > :04:17.made in the only way permitted, by the UK constitution.

:04:18. > :04:25.To proceed otherwise would be a breach of settled

:04:26. > :04:27.constitutional principles, stretching back many centuries.

:04:28. > :04:29.On the devolution issues, the court unanimously rules that UK

:04:30. > :04:31.ministers are not legally compelled to consultant the devolved

:04:32. > :04:37.legislatures before triggering Article 50.

:04:38. > :04:40.The devolution statutes were enacted on the assumption that the UK

:04:41. > :04:43.would be a member of the EU, but they do not require it.

:04:44. > :04:56.Relations with the EU, are a matter for the UK Government.

:04:57. > :04:59.The Attorney General, Jeremy Wright, had this reaction to the judgement.

:05:00. > :05:02.It's a case that it was wholly appropriate for the highest court

:05:03. > :05:05.Of course the Government is disappointed with the outcome.

:05:06. > :05:08.But we have the good fortune to live in a country where everyone,

:05:09. > :05:09.every individual, every organisation, everyone government,

:05:10. > :05:14.So the Government will comply with the judgment of the court,

:05:15. > :05:28.and do all that is necessary to implement it.

:05:29. > :05:31.Gina Miller is the business woman who brought the case

:05:32. > :05:37.Here's how she reacted to the judgement.

:05:38. > :05:40.In Britain, we are lucky, we are fortunate to have the ability

:05:41. > :05:42.to voice legitimate concerns and views as part

:05:43. > :05:54.I have therefore been shocked by the levels of personal abuse that

:05:55. > :05:57.I have received from many quarters, over the last seven months,

:05:58. > :05:59.for simply bringing and asking a legitimate question.

:06:00. > :06:11.Let's talk to our political editor, Laura Kuenssberg.

:06:12. > :06:18.Laura, the Government respects the judgment, even though it lost, and

:06:19. > :06:21.lawyers have described the ruling a as victory for democracy, what does

:06:22. > :06:26.Theresa May do now? The first thing as one Government minister said was

:06:27. > :06:29.to say phew, that might sound strange given the Government have

:06:30. > :06:32.lost this case, they certainly have, and let us not forget they did not

:06:33. > :06:37.want to be in this position. No question about that. However, they

:06:38. > :06:44.had two clear fears about what the court might say this morning, one

:06:45. > :06:47.they would give the devolved administrations a formal role and

:06:48. > :06:51.say they had to have an official say over this process, the judges held

:06:52. > :06:57.back from doing that, so that is one small victory for the Government.

:06:58. > :07:00.Part two, the court did not say what kind of legislation, what kind of

:07:01. > :07:04.act the Government would have to come forward with. And that was

:07:05. > :07:09.another small victory for the Government, so phew on those two

:07:10. > :07:13.accounts, the judges did not tell them they had to consultant the

:07:14. > :07:17.other authorities and they did not spell out the kind of legislation

:07:18. > :07:21.they had to put forward. Therefore, they can push ahead with what might

:07:22. > :07:25.even only be a bill of two lines, that we might see as soon as

:07:26. > :07:29.tomorrow, and I expect that the Government might try to tie this all

:07:30. > :07:31.up within the next fortnight as far as Westminster is concerned. In

:07:32. > :07:38.order to stick to the timetable of the end of March, but does that mean

:07:39. > :07:44.then, that MPs will not be able to put down amendments? We have heard

:07:45. > :07:48.from the SNP they will try and put down 50 substantive amendments. Yes

:07:49. > :07:52.and there will be huge efforts from those on the Remain side to try to.

:07:53. > :07:56.A mend this bill, no question about that. Some of them will be debated

:07:57. > :07:59.and there are real questions too, for the Government, if somebody

:08:00. > :08:02.manages to get an amendment down, about whether or not we should stay

:08:03. > :08:07.in the single market, if they manage to get an amendment down about a

:08:08. > :08:13.vote at the end of the process that would be binding. That could start

:08:14. > :08:19.be sticky. There is a pretty widespread expectation now that the

:08:20. > :08:25.amendments might be troublesome. It could be bumpy, particularly when

:08:26. > :08:28.this hits the House of Lords, but there isn't widespread expectation

:08:29. > :08:33.this will go through and with the two big headaches not having been

:08:34. > :08:35.realised by stream court, the Government strange as it sounds they

:08:36. > :08:43.have been defeated but they are relieved. This. Amendment that

:08:44. > :08:49.Labour has talked about. A meaningful vote, that would be a

:08:50. > :08:53.veto? It would, so there is going to be a real game of cat-and-mouse in

:08:54. > :08:58.terms of which amendments a are selected by the Deputy Speaker

:08:59. > :09:01.rather the than John Bercow who will select the amendments that go

:09:02. > :09:06.forward. Even the selection will be a political act. But this is going

:09:07. > :09:11.to be difficult, for anybody, Jeremy Corbyn or any one else trying to put

:09:12. > :09:18.down amendments here, because where the government has a lot of people

:09:19. > :09:22.would thinked its cards wisely, Theresa May got out last week ahead

:09:23. > :09:26.of the Supreme Court verdict today and set out with clarity for the

:09:27. > :09:29.first time, what her plan is. She has tried to pitch that very much as

:09:30. > :09:34.this is what she believes people voted for and therefore, nobody can

:09:35. > :09:37.try to disturb or disrupt that, so people who are trying to put forward

:09:38. > :09:41.amendments will be doing so up against that context, and I think

:09:42. > :09:45.when you talk to MPs of all political parties right now, there

:09:46. > :09:48.is an acceptance that whatever they try to do, whether it is Jeremy

:09:49. > :09:54.Corbyn's amendment or anything else, the time for being able to slam the

:09:55. > :09:59.brakes on this is probably past. At least it seems that way for now, in

:10:00. > :10:02.six or nine month whence once we are in negotiations this could feel a

:10:03. > :10:12.very very different picture. Thank you.

:10:13. > :10:17.Welcome both o you. Fist your reaction, are you disappointed by

:10:18. > :10:22.the ruling? No, I think it was widely expected that this would be

:10:23. > :10:26.the ruling, it is a ruling that the constitutional lawyers and the

:10:27. > :10:30.academics will crawl over and it very important for basic issues line

:10:31. > :10:35.the use of a Royal Prerogative, but in termles of Brexit, I don't think

:10:36. > :10:38.it will make much difference now and as Laura rightly said, the fact that

:10:39. > :10:43.Parliament can reach a quick decision and move on was the

:10:44. > :10:48.important outcome. So do you also agree with Laura's assessment that a

:10:49. > :10:51.very short bill will be presented to Parliament, rather than a

:10:52. > :10:56.substantive piece of legislation? Yes, I mean, what the Supreme Court

:10:57. > :10:59.has said is that Parliament needs to authorise the Government to trigger

:11:00. > :11:02.Article 50. That is a couple of loins of legislation. I would expect

:11:03. > :11:09.that bill to be published very quickly and for it to go through

:11:10. > :11:13.Parliament quick. We expected the first part of the ruling and no

:11:14. > :11:16.doubt you are disappointed by what the Supreme Court President said

:11:17. > :11:20.that relations with the EU are a matter for the UK Government, he was

:11:21. > :11:23.very clear, so do you accept now that the devolved assemblies leek

:11:24. > :11:28.the Scottish Parliament will not have a veto? Well, one thing that

:11:29. > :11:31.the judgment did say today was that it is a political decision. It is up

:11:32. > :11:36.to Theresa May about whether or not the Scottish Parliament has a say,

:11:37. > :11:38.now the UK Parliament has never legislated on an issue that is the

:11:39. > :11:44.responsibility of the Scottish Parliament in the EU impacts on

:11:45. > :11:48.fishing, farming energy. But it's a matter of Foreign Affairs. They have

:11:49. > :11:52.never done so. Where there is a political decision,ing if it's a

:11:53. > :11:57.political decision, is that union of equals, is it a respect agenda in

:11:58. > :12:01.terms of devolution and will that settlement be respected. When will

:12:02. > :12:07.you hold a independence referendum on the fact the Government isn't

:12:08. > :12:11.going to legally be bound to ask for your say, in this decision, when

:12:12. > :12:14.will you hold the referendum? We haven't triggered Article 50 yet.

:12:15. > :12:18.Let us see what the minister has to say about what happens next. One

:12:19. > :12:25.thing that has been hugely disappointing to is is the Scottish

:12:26. > :12:29.Government put forward a compromise. We put forward compromise, that was

:12:30. > :12:33.flatly rejected, and that was really disappointing that the UK Government

:12:34. > :12:37.is not prepared to meet the Scottish Government and the other devolved

:12:38. > :12:40.administrations half way. Once Article 50 is triggered and it looks

:12:41. > :12:43.like that will happen by the end of March which is what Theresa May

:12:44. > :12:46.would like to see, we know that the UK will be coming out of the single

:12:47. > :12:49.market, is that when you will tell us when the independence referendum

:12:50. > :12:55.will be? That is obviously something the Scottish Parliament will have to

:12:56. > :13:00.debate. The the referendum comes highly likely, this is as a direct

:13:01. > :13:03.result of the UK Government refusing to compromise, refusing to give any

:13:04. > :13:08.ground. We did not vote to leave the insystem market. We were promised

:13:09. > :13:12.that Scotland would get powers over immigration by vote leave, we are

:13:13. > :13:17.not getting that, we have had a series of broken promises by the UK

:13:18. > :13:21.Government and this puts Scotland and its relationship of equals into

:13:22. > :13:26.a very difficult place. Right. Steven has a point. Even Theresa May

:13:27. > :13:31.said the devolved assemblies were going to be fully engaged. Of course

:13:32. > :13:39.they will be. They don't if they don't have that say. They will take

:13:40. > :13:41.part in the debates in Parliament. They have initiated debates in

:13:42. > :13:46.Parliament. At the end of the day, the Scottish Government is not an

:13:47. > :13:49.equal of Westminster Government, certain matters are devolved to the

:13:50. > :13:52.Scottish Government, one of those is not the matters concerning the

:13:53. > :13:55.European Union, this is a decision for the Westminster Parliament.

:13:56. > :14:00.Right. You do accept that which is what I said to you initially, that

:14:01. > :14:05.when it comes to matters of the EU, when it comes to Foreign Affairs

:14:06. > :14:09.these are not devolved issues. But things like fishing and farming are.

:14:10. > :14:13.Energy is a devolved issue. Will you have a say on that through the

:14:14. > :14:15.committee? These are Members of Parliament. John's forgetting that

:14:16. > :14:20.members of Parliament are not members of the Government, we are

:14:21. > :14:23.members of the Westminster Parliament us juz as Conservative

:14:24. > :14:27.MSPs are members of the Scottish Parliament. Democracy does not begin

:14:28. > :14:31.and end at Westminster, and this is something the Conservative Party has

:14:32. > :14:34.not really kept pace with, and thus is disastrous electoral showing in

:14:35. > :14:39.Scotland. And you could pay the price for that, as the ballot box,

:14:40. > :14:43.in future elections but in terms of being fully engaged, how do you see

:14:44. > :14:46.the devolved assemblies being fully engaged, other than sitting on a

:14:47. > :14:55.committee or two in Brexit? I'm sure the government will listen

:14:56. > :15:00.to the views of the devolved governments. If they make sensible

:15:01. > :15:06.suggestions, I'm sure they will be taken into account. When you say it

:15:07. > :15:09.was promised, what was the wording given to you by Michael Gove in

:15:10. > :15:15.terms of a promise that immigration would be devolved? He thought it

:15:16. > :15:19.would be sensible for Scotland to have control over immigration

:15:20. > :15:24.because we have particular needs. Freedom of movement is something

:15:25. > :15:28.jobs rely on. I will read you what he said. He said, if in the course

:15:29. > :15:32.of the negotiations the Scottish Parliament wants to play a role in

:15:33. > :15:37.deciding how a Visa system could work, then that is something we

:15:38. > :15:45.would look into. That's not quite the same as saying they would

:15:46. > :15:51.devolve immigration. I raised this in the chamber. When I asked Michael

:15:52. > :16:00.Gove if it would mean devolving immigration, he nodded. It was an

:16:01. > :16:04.act of negligence that the UK government has carried on. If they

:16:05. > :16:11.can keep this simple promise, what hope Howie for the rest of these

:16:12. > :16:19.areas? -- can't. You behaved in a negligent manner. You make promises

:16:20. > :16:22.you couldn't keep. The vote Leave campaign was not the government.

:16:23. > :16:28.What Michael Gove said sounds very sensible to me. But sadly, in my

:16:29. > :16:34.view, Michael Gove is not a member of the government now, nor am I. It

:16:35. > :16:40.means it is a matter for the government to decide. Steven Cousins

:16:41. > :16:44.HAAS to go. Thank you. Jenny Chapman, Jeremy Corbyn has said this

:16:45. > :16:49.morning Labour will not frustrate the process of invoking article 50.

:16:50. > :16:54.But he has said he will seek to amend the Bill and ensure there is a

:16:55. > :16:59.meaningful vote. What is that? The reason it is meaningful is that it

:17:00. > :17:04.needs to come before the deal is signed. There will be two votes. I

:17:05. > :17:10.don't think people got their heads around it. The votes we are talking

:17:11. > :17:13.about today is around the Article 50 agreement, the withdrawal agreement

:17:14. > :17:18.from the EU, which will deal with things like pensions and

:17:19. > :17:22.contributions, all of those sorts of issues. Also in that agreement is

:17:23. > :17:26.likely to be a transitional deal, which we will be on. That will

:17:27. > :17:31.inform our relationship as we leave so there is no cliff edge. What is

:17:32. > :17:36.not in that withdrawal agreement is the free-trade deal, or whatever our

:17:37. > :17:41.future agreement is going to be with the EU. That is another bowled

:17:42. > :17:48.Parliament needs to have. Theresa May needs to give parliament a votes

:17:49. > :17:54.on any trade deal she goes into in the future. Would you go along with

:17:55. > :18:03.that? Parliament obviously needs a votes. That is very clear. The

:18:04. > :18:06.problem is that once Article 50 is triggered, then we are set on a path

:18:07. > :18:15.which will lead to Britain leaving. That is irrevocable. That is being

:18:16. > :18:22.argued about at the moment. That is what Article 50 says. If we chuck

:18:23. > :18:27.out the deal and say Parliament decides it doesn't like the deal,

:18:28. > :18:33.then we leave anyway. We just don't have a deal. This is where the

:18:34. > :18:37.argument lies. If there is a vote and Parliament does vote it down. We

:18:38. > :18:41.don't like the deal, we don't think we are getting enough in terms of

:18:42. > :18:47.what we wanted with regard to free-trade, do we stay in the EU at

:18:48. > :18:54.that point, or do we go on to World Trade Organisation rules? One is the

:18:55. > :19:00.transitional deal we could have. That takes away this, you either

:19:01. > :19:03.take this deal or not. That was a stupid thing for the Prime Minister

:19:04. > :19:06.to have said because it will not be the case. You can actually extend

:19:07. > :19:14.the negotiating period should you need to. That has to get the

:19:15. > :19:18.agreement of the other 27 states. The debate is taking place as if

:19:19. > :19:26.that is not possible. It is possible. You agree it is a risk? Of

:19:27. > :19:31.course. He could not get agreement, we would be on a cliff edge. Indeed.

:19:32. > :19:38.I don't think it would be in the interest of the other 27 states. Why

:19:39. > :19:42.shouldn't there be a deal to say that actually, just go back and

:19:43. > :19:48.negotiate further in the interests of the UK? Parliament has the

:19:49. > :19:56.ability to vote at any stage of the process. But at the end of the day

:19:57. > :19:59.this is in negotiation the government has to conduct. I think

:20:00. > :20:04.the Prime Minister is right to warn against any attempt to bind the

:20:05. > :20:09.hands of the negotiating team. We don't want to set conditions on the

:20:10. > :20:11.government. Europe will know that and will harden their stance

:20:12. > :20:17.immediately if they know that the government has to achieve something.

:20:18. > :20:22.Right. These are the arguments that have been set out before. We show

:20:23. > :20:27.our hand completely, we won't get the deal that we want. You accept

:20:28. > :20:31.that? Absolutely. You will not see an amendment from the Labour Party

:20:32. > :20:38.which says we want to see your negotiating tactics. We will be

:20:39. > :20:42.making probably five very reasonable amendments that I hope the House

:20:43. > :20:48.will adopt. We want to see a plan. We have had a speech. Do you want to

:20:49. > :20:52.see a White Paper? That would be great. If it is less than a White

:20:53. > :20:59.Paper but still fulfils the function of a plan, we would settle for that.

:21:00. > :21:03.We want certainty around EU citizens, certain principles around

:21:04. > :21:07.maximising free-trade, the Customs Union, that the Prime Minister

:21:08. > :21:11.outlined herself in her speech. We want parliamentary oversight and a

:21:12. > :21:15.vote before the end. Most of those things the Prime Minister has

:21:16. > :21:20.already said she accepts. I do not see why the government would want to

:21:21. > :21:25.obstruct our amendments. You have been clearer about what Labour pots

:21:26. > :21:31.position would be in terms of Article 50. Are you convinced by

:21:32. > :21:36.your labour colleagues? You will not get every Labour MP to vote in

:21:37. > :21:42.favour of triggering Article 50. Will there be a width? That is way

:21:43. > :21:46.above my pay grade! There is the small matter of the party

:21:47. > :21:50.leadership, the shadow Cabinet, the Chief whip. If you are quite firm as

:21:51. > :21:55.part of the Brexit team on issues like freedom of movement, invoking

:21:56. > :22:01.Article 50, should there be party management to whip Labour MPs? It is

:22:02. > :22:07.not up to me. Whatever we do, whether it is a three line whip, it

:22:08. > :22:12.is academic and away. There are MPs I know who, whatever working

:22:13. > :22:18.arrangements you put in place, are not going to vote Article 50. One of

:22:19. > :22:23.them was on the programme yesterday. You are split on this issue as we

:22:24. > :22:30.used to say the Conservatives are. We are not, really. It's different.

:22:31. > :22:35.It is nothing like what you have seen over decades in the Tory party.

:22:36. > :22:38.The referendum has put Labour MPs in positions where they are on

:22:39. > :22:41.different sides of this argument. But we respect one another pots 's

:22:42. > :22:54.edition on this. We are very understanding. --'s position. We saw

:22:55. > :23:00.IDS and Ken Clarke going at it hammer and tongs this morning on TV.

:23:01. > :23:09.I was a Maastricht rebel, so I remember! When it comes to the vote,

:23:10. > :23:12.I think what you will see is with probably the single exception of Ken

:23:13. > :23:17.Clarke, all Conservative MPs will vote to trigger Article 50. The

:23:18. > :23:18.Labour Party will probably go in three different directions. Thank

:23:19. > :23:20.you. Donald Trump's had a busy few days,

:23:21. > :23:25.and so far it's going well for him. His proposed Secretary of State has

:23:26. > :23:28.been given the green light by the Senate, and he's formally

:23:29. > :23:30.withdrawn from the Trans-Pacific But not everything is

:23:31. > :23:33.going according to plan. So our question for today

:23:34. > :23:37.is, what's gone wrong? At the end of the show John

:23:38. > :24:08.will give us the correct answer. Over the last year or so, strikes

:24:09. > :24:11.on Southern Trains have wreaked havoc on rail travellers

:24:12. > :24:13.in the south east of England. The row over who should operate

:24:14. > :24:16.the doors on new trains has re-opened the debate

:24:17. > :24:18.about whether our strike laws need toughening, and today,

:24:19. > :24:20.Conservative backbencher Chris Philp is introducing a bill to the Commons

:24:21. > :24:23.to address the issue - and he joins us from

:24:24. > :24:32.Parliament's Central Lobby. What does your bill asked for? It

:24:33. > :24:36.asks for proportionality. It says the rights of the public to get to

:24:37. > :24:39.work or get home to see their loved ones, should be balanced with the

:24:40. > :24:45.right to strike. People do need to be able to get to work. A High Court

:24:46. > :24:51.judge should adjudicate were strike action is taking place or is

:24:52. > :24:54.proposed, to say that action must be reasonable and proportionate when

:24:55. > :25:01.weighed against the impact on the public, against the issue of the

:25:02. > :25:05.drivers. The action on Southern Railway has not been reasonable and

:25:06. > :25:09.proportionate. There have been 40 days when 300,000 people have been

:25:10. > :25:14.unable to get to work. The dispute centres on who opens or closes the

:25:15. > :25:18.doors. Driver operated stores run perfectly safely on 1.5 million

:25:19. > :25:25.trains in the last five years. The regulator says they are saved. They

:25:26. > :25:33.run safely on London Underground. It is -- the strike is running people's

:25:34. > :25:35.lives. The strike stayed past the required threshold. What

:25:36. > :25:44.justification have you got to make it even harder? Taking the RMT

:25:45. > :25:48.dispute with Southern as an example, something like 75% did vote for

:25:49. > :25:52.strike action. You have 300,000 people simply complaining about who

:25:53. > :25:58.opens or closes the door, preventing 300,000 people from getting to work

:25:59. > :26:02.on 40 days. It is not reasonable or proportionate. I'm not saying strike

:26:03. > :26:05.should be banned. I'm simply saying we should balance the right to

:26:06. > :26:08.strike with the right of people to get to work and recognise those

:26:09. > :26:13.rights as well as recognising the work of -- the rights of strike. Is

:26:14. > :26:18.the government supporting new? I'm not here to support -- to speak for

:26:19. > :26:21.the government. Begun and will speak for themselves. It is not currently

:26:22. > :26:26.government policy. They are thinking about it. The more the unions behave

:26:27. > :26:30.unreasonably, the more likely this kind of legislation becomes. We

:26:31. > :26:39.can't sit back and watch constituents' lives being ruined by

:26:40. > :26:43.this kind of action. If they behave unreasonably, it makes a case for

:26:44. > :26:48.legislation stronger. Watson of turnout are you expecting from your

:26:49. > :26:54.colleagues? After failing to predict the Brexit referendum and Donald

:26:55. > :26:59.Trump's election, not in the prediction business. It does have a

:27:00. > :27:02.lot of backbench support. Over 50 Conservative MPs signed a letter a

:27:03. > :27:05.couple of weeks ago to the daily Telegraph, and there is widespread

:27:06. > :27:11.support in parliament and more importantly in the country.

:27:12. > :27:15.Yesterday a Paul was published saying 64% of Londoners supported

:27:16. > :27:18.this. We're joined now by Mick Lynch

:27:19. > :27:28.of the RMT union. Let's go back to that opinion poll

:27:29. > :27:33.in yesterday's Evening Standard. 65% of Londoners want curbs on strikes

:27:34. > :27:40.by train or tube drivers. It would be good if you lose the vote? 61% of

:27:41. > :27:46.the country on a nationwide poll support the right of trained staff,

:27:47. > :27:51.emergencies services start, doctors, Fire Brigade 's etc, to maintain

:27:52. > :27:55.their right to strike. He is saying, if you strike on the way we like and

:27:56. > :28:00.it's very ineffective, I will tolerate your right to strike. This

:28:01. > :28:02.is a suppression of human rights. Long-standing human rights that

:28:03. > :28:07.trade unions and working class people have had. People have rights.

:28:08. > :28:11.It is balanced by, if you like, in an unfair whereby the current raft

:28:12. > :28:15.of legislation which has just gone through Parliament. It is not even

:28:16. > :28:19.fully enforced yet. We have a raft of balancing laws that will restrict

:28:20. > :28:24.the right to strike coming in on March the 1st. They have been on a

:28:25. > :28:30.process of voting in parliament. This is more about Chris Phipps's

:28:31. > :28:35.ambition. He is getting a profile out of it. He has not done enough to

:28:36. > :28:38.bring about a resolution and put pressure on Chris Kelly -- Chris

:28:39. > :28:42.Grayling and Southern to bring a resolution. He is politicising the

:28:43. > :28:46.dispute through his own ends and for the Tory party's agenda, which is

:28:47. > :28:50.whenever the trade unions dared to put their heads above the parapet,

:28:51. > :28:57.they want to make what we do illegal and crush resistance. He is not

:28:58. > :29:04.wanting to make it illegal? All but. Yes, I support the bill. I will vote

:29:05. > :29:06.for it if there is a vote today. How would you deem a strike to be

:29:07. > :29:11.unreasonable on an essential service? Chris has set out that the

:29:12. > :29:19.critically essential services should have additional requirements

:29:20. > :29:22.before... What would there be? Primarily transport, rail, perhaps

:29:23. > :29:27.the tubes. Things huge number of people depend on. Chris is speaking

:29:28. > :29:30.up for his own constituents and travellers on Southern rail who have

:29:31. > :29:34.been put through misery Day misery Day after day. Do you blame the

:29:35. > :29:42.company? The company is certainly open to criticism. Shouldn't some of

:29:43. > :29:45.the pressure be going on to the company? I know Chris Grayling is

:29:46. > :29:53.talking to the company and the union. He has done nothing. He has

:29:54. > :29:59.said his door is open. This is about strike action and whether there are

:30:00. > :30:00.some services were there needs to be protection for the consumers. Chris

:30:01. > :30:13.has come up with some suggestions. What you mean, paying conditions

:30:14. > :30:18.that people have built up, you find that to be too much and you are

:30:19. > :30:22.going to challenge it and get one of your friends to the judiciary to

:30:23. > :30:26.make that strike illegal. At the moment they haven't done well with

:30:27. > :30:30.their friends in the judiciary. There are people that are willing to

:30:31. > :30:36.put the trade unions down. No-one wants to give us the freedom enjoyed

:30:37. > :30:41.in other countries, we have the most repressive laws in the western

:30:42. > :30:46.world. They are mirrors what is in place in other countries. Other

:30:47. > :30:57.restrictive practises. Other countries... People are more tree to

:30:58. > :31:01.take action. Australia, developed western economy, they recognise on

:31:02. > :31:05.critical services you need protection. The DFT has put people

:31:06. > :31:10.through misery, there is no need for this dispute in the first place, the

:31:11. > :31:14.DFT has sponsored this dispute from the beginning to get rid of guards

:31:15. > :31:17.on the trains it a political dispute in the sense your party and

:31:18. > :31:21.Government is running I Do you accept both sides have politicised

:31:22. > :31:25.it. You have on the one side, I have before quoted to you the RMT

:31:26. > :31:28.President, you said it was quoted out of context but it was broadly

:31:29. > :31:34.about taking down a Tory Government when it came to resisting strike

:31:35. > :31:36.action and you blamed the Tory Government, for ideologically

:31:37. > :31:40.opposing these strikes and not doing enough about the company, so

:31:41. > :31:44.politics has dogged this strike on both sides. All strikes have a

:31:45. > :31:51.political element. There is going to be something in there that is a

:31:52. > :31:55.broader agenda. The Tory party and the DFT want to dehumanise the

:31:56. > :31:58.railway. They will change the franchises, so that the companies

:31:59. > :32:03.can make no profit and their ambition is to get rid of guards on

:32:04. > :32:10.all trains in the UK. Is that that your ambition? We made clear this is

:32:11. > :32:14.a dispute between the operating company, it is the case that across

:32:15. > :32:17.the rest of the country there are large numbers of trains that are

:32:18. > :32:21.driver only operated without any difficulty whatsoever. I suppose

:32:22. > :32:24.what I could say in terms of the legislation itself, this trade union

:32:25. > :32:30.legislation was brought in relatively recently, if you are

:32:31. > :32:35.supportive of toughening up or going further with that legislation you

:32:36. > :32:38.got it wrong the first time round. Chris is introducing a private

:32:39. > :32:42.member bill. He is putting suggestions on the table, I think

:32:43. > :32:44.they are interesting one, I think they are worth looking at,

:32:45. > :32:49.particularly given the experience we have had in the last few weeks. Will

:32:50. > :32:53.the Government move on it? That is a matter for the Government. Should

:32:54. > :32:56.they? I would hope they would. You are revisiting a piece of

:32:57. > :33:01.legislation you have only just brought in. I think what is driving

:33:02. > :33:07.Chris fillip and a lot of other people is the fact 300,000 people

:33:08. > :33:12.are being put through hell, over a arcane dispute between two trade

:33:13. > :33:21.unions about who opens the doors. It is not arcane. We are passionate

:33:22. > :33:27.about defending the standards of safety on the railway. You choose

:33:28. > :33:29.not to believe that, but the guard has other roles besides opening and

:33:30. > :33:33.closing door, that is what the dispute is about. Whenever we put

:33:34. > :33:39.forward reasonable industrial accuse sun that is effective you seek to

:33:40. > :33:43.make it illegal. The Tory party has never reported legislation that will

:33:44. > :33:46.assist trade unions, this is another chapter in oppressing our rights and

:33:47. > :33:50.another in suppressing people's freedom and the ability to resist

:33:51. > :33:54.what this Government is doing and what the employers are doing. The

:33:55. > :33:58.Government says it is about balancing rights between the people

:33:59. > :34:04.who use the services and people like you who work in the service, but

:34:05. > :34:09.could this strike action actually backfire for the unions, if it

:34:10. > :34:15.results in the Government backing even tougher leg lacing you sigh as

:34:16. > :34:19.anti-union. So you come out with your hands up. We are not prepared

:34:20. > :34:23.to do that. What can you do? We have the right to industrial action and

:34:24. > :34:27.we will continue to do so. We try do that within the law as we do with

:34:28. > :34:32.everything else. Regulation about tax and returns and the rest of it.

:34:33. > :34:36.We will continue to act within the law until the Tories make that

:34:37. > :34:39.impossible. Wouldn't it be better to try and have a reconciliation,

:34:40. > :34:42.rather than talking about tougher legislation that is is only going to

:34:43. > :34:46.escalate this row because we have heard, they will continue the union,

:34:47. > :34:49.which is within their right further strike action. One of the

:34:50. > :34:52.suggestions in the bill is on essential services, where there is

:34:53. > :34:54.an industrial dispute there should be a requirement to go to

:34:55. > :34:59.arbitration, that is one possibility. Another is it should go

:35:00. > :35:03.before perhaps a judge, not a friendly one, as we had seen today

:35:04. > :35:06.but an independent judge who can rule as to whether or not the action

:35:07. > :35:10.taken is proportionate. These are suggestions at this stage. This is

:35:11. > :35:13.not going to become law, they are sensible and worth looking at. Thank

:35:14. > :35:16.Now, Donald Trump promised yesterday to "cut business regulation

:35:17. > :35:19.Could the UK government do the same here?

:35:20. > :35:21.That's the hope of many of those who campaigned

:35:22. > :35:25.They say red tape associated with our membership of the EU

:35:26. > :35:27.is costing the UK economy billions of pounds every year.

:35:28. > :35:43.One of the burning issues of the referendum campaign.

:35:44. > :35:47.It is absurd that we are told you cannot sell bananas in bunches

:35:48. > :35:56.If we take back control, we will lift the burden.

:35:57. > :36:01.?600 million a week lifted off the backs of British industry.

:36:02. > :36:05.Bananas claimed about wonky fruit aside, saving all that money

:36:06. > :36:09.by getting rid of red tape is surely a persuasive argument.

:36:10. > :36:13.In 2014, the think-tank Open Europe costed the impact of the 100 most

:36:14. > :36:17.expensive EU regulations on the British economy

:36:18. > :36:21.Take environmental legislation, such as the UK Renewable Energy Strategy.

:36:22. > :36:24.Costing a yearly ?4.7 billion, it's one of the hottest

:36:25. > :36:35.Or employment legislation, such as the Working Time Directive.

:36:36. > :36:37.That was said to cost business ?4.2 billion a year.

:36:38. > :36:39.There is an annual price tag of ?2.1 billion

:36:40. > :36:44.for the Temporary Agency Workers Directive.

:36:45. > :36:46.Lots and lots of regulations that are very much to do

:36:47. > :36:49.with bureaucracy, rather than real benefit, and that bureaucracy

:36:50. > :36:52.cost businesses money, especially when it's applied

:36:53. > :36:59.The British Chambers, for example, stopped measuring it in 2010

:37:00. > :37:02.because nobody was listening, and by that point they'd already

:37:03. > :37:07.estimated that European regulations cost ?80 billion a year.

:37:08. > :37:11.Big numbers, but the Government holds its hands up and says it likes

:37:12. > :37:13.many of these regulations, and any way it realises it

:37:14. > :37:15.could get its fingers burned by removing them.

:37:16. > :37:18.Under my leadership, not only will the Government protect

:37:19. > :37:20.the rights of workers set out in European legislation,

:37:21. > :37:25.Because under this Conservative Government,

:37:26. > :37:28.we will make sure legal protection for workers keeps pace

:37:29. > :37:36.The think-tank Open Europe reckon there is an annual ?13 billion

:37:37. > :37:38.saving to be had from deregulation, but that would come

:37:39. > :37:41.from amending EU rules, rather than dumping them completely.

:37:42. > :37:49.The Government's plan is to take EU regulation

:37:50. > :37:52.on to the UK statute book, and the first instance is to keep

:37:53. > :37:54.that regulation the same, in terms of negotiation with the EU,

:37:55. > :37:58.but clearly the Government is giving itself the tools to look

:37:59. > :38:00.at regulations in the future, because it will be something that

:38:01. > :38:03.I certainly think that as the relationship

:38:04. > :38:08.develops, as we are outside of the European Union,

:38:09. > :38:10.it is inevitable in some areas regulation is going to diverge

:38:11. > :38:14.different attitudes to certain issues, and as the EU takes

:38:15. > :38:16.different attitudes we might no longer sign up to.

:38:17. > :38:18.Those hoping for a bonfire of EU regulations the day

:38:19. > :38:20.after Brexit might want to dampen their expectations.

:38:21. > :38:22.Changing the rules or getting rid of them completely,

:38:23. > :38:33.even if you wanted to, could well be a slow burn.

:38:34. > :38:40.You enjoyed that John. I suppose you would think one of the great add van

:38:41. > :38:42.Tam of Brexit is we will be able to establish vast swathes of

:38:43. > :38:46.regulation, which would you like to get rid of first? I think there is a

:38:47. > :38:52.lot to choose from, what we have said to British business is you tell

:38:53. > :38:55.us which are the most burden some, the most unnecessary, pieces of

:38:56. > :38:59.regulation and we will look at whether they can be repealed. This

:39:00. > :39:03.is going to take time. It is not part of the Brexit negotiations, but

:39:04. > :39:06.because what we will do is introduce a bill that transfers all European

:39:07. > :39:09.regulations into British law and then we will have the opportunity to

:39:10. > :39:12.go through and decide which are appropriate and which are not.

:39:13. > :39:19.Right. But what are the regulations that you would like to get rid of?

:39:20. > :39:23.Boris Johnson said we can get rid of the pointless rules, what did he

:39:24. > :39:27.have in mind? I think you have had a list put up on the screen of some.

:39:28. > :39:31.Things like the Working Time Directive, not to remove entirely.

:39:32. > :39:35.Part of the problem with European regulation is they agreed in

:39:36. > :39:40.Brussels, as a single regulation across the whole of #y50u6r7. What

:39:41. > :39:44.we will be able do is design it so it meets our needs, it might be that

:39:45. > :39:47.certain sectors should be exempted for instance from Working Time

:39:48. > :39:52.Directive, but we have the time to look at these things and craft them,

:39:53. > :39:57.so they don't impose unnecessary costs and burdens. You would like to

:39:58. > :40:02.restrict something like the Working Time Directive which is a cost of

:40:03. > :40:06.4.2 billion. That season a area where we can say to the various

:40:07. > :40:09.sectors for maybe the farming sector or the NHS or others who have

:40:10. > :40:12.complained about the impact of Working Time Directive, you tell us

:40:13. > :40:15.what is necessary, and which is unnecessary, and just adding to our

:40:16. > :40:18.costs and then the British Government can draw up the

:40:19. > :40:22.regulation, specifically designed for the needs of that particular

:40:23. > :40:26.sector. That puts you at odds with the Prime Minister, because Theresa

:40:27. > :40:29.May wants to enhance exactly that type of employment protection and

:40:30. > :40:33.legislation, a fairer Britain she says is a country that protects an

:40:34. > :40:38.enhances the rights people have at work, so she doesn't want to do

:40:39. > :40:42.that. We don't want to sweep away all Rourkers -- workers' rights. You

:40:43. > :40:48.have said business tells you we want to get some of the regulations and

:40:49. > :40:51.rules that will know doubt, some will include employment protection,

:40:52. > :40:57.the ones Theresa May says she wants to keep. They would say we would

:40:58. > :41:02.like you to get rid of it. I can remember from my time in Government

:41:03. > :41:07.there were measures which the Government oppose which we argued

:41:08. > :41:10.against and loss in a vote, so we were still required to implement.

:41:11. > :41:14.There are plenty of examples like that where we have side this is not

:41:15. > :41:18.necessary. It is going to add to costs now we will have the ability

:41:19. > :41:23.to get rid. Are you disappointed by what Theresa May said? No,some She

:41:24. > :41:26.goes on to say that is why in order to have this fair ir-Britain, that

:41:27. > :41:29.is why as we translate, which with you said the body of European law

:41:30. > :41:33.into domestic regulation for we willen shoe shoe that workers'

:41:34. > :41:38.rights are fully protected and maintained. She doesn't want to get

:41:39. > :41:42.rid of any of it That is no what she is saying. He is saying workers'

:41:43. > :41:46.rights are fully protected and maintained. Under my leadership, not

:41:47. > :41:50.only will the Government protect the rights of workers, set out in

:41:51. > :41:53.European legislation, like the temporary agency workers directive

:41:54. > :41:58.and the working time directive, we will build on them. She wants to

:41:59. > :42:01.increase it. One of the things about being outside the European Union is

:42:02. > :42:06.we can reduce regulation in areas where we think it is unnecessary, if

:42:07. > :42:10.there are air areas we would like to do more we have the chance to do so.

:42:11. > :42:15.That will increase the talk. About this tall from you and Boris Johnson

:42:16. > :42:19.and you and your leave colleagues we are going to wipe away billions, not

:42:20. > :42:24.according to Theresa May, or what you have said is you might build.

:42:25. > :42:28.There are one or two areas where we wanted to go further and the

:42:29. > :42:31.European Union held us back. Animal welfare and legislation, we were

:42:32. > :42:36.stopped from bringing in certain protections, but in the vast

:42:37. > :42:40.majority of cases, Europe has added more and more regulation. Where? I

:42:41. > :42:43.am trying to get to the bottom of it. If you have accepted that

:42:44. > :42:47.Theresa May wants to not only keep workers' rights legislation, but

:42:48. > :42:52.build on them, environmental legislation, such as the UK

:42:53. > :42:55.renewable energy strategy comes in at 4.7 billion. Environmental

:42:56. > :43:00.protections would you get rid of those to save money? We will draw

:43:01. > :43:02.them up so they are appropriate for this country, there will be some

:43:03. > :43:06.elements of European regulation which are sensible and which we will

:43:07. > :43:11.say we have no intention of repealing those, but where there are

:43:12. > :43:14.examples where we believe that they are unnecessary and costly, we can

:43:15. > :43:19.get rid of them. Have you got any examples? Are we going to get to the

:43:20. > :43:24.bottom of the list... As we talked about one or two, like Working Time

:43:25. > :43:27.Directive, which we wouldn't necessarily get rid of. Theresa May

:43:28. > :43:31.doesn't want to get rid of it. She hasn't said that, she said she will

:43:32. > :43:36.protect workers right. Where there is a strong case, we will keep those

:43:37. > :43:39.thing, when I was Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport we had

:43:40. > :43:43.European regulation coming through, which we strongly opposed, and yes

:43:44. > :43:48.we were forced to implement. We can look at it again and some we may

:43:49. > :43:53.keep and other parts we have the freedom to repeal. Boris Johnson

:43:54. > :43:58.said we can, when we take back control we can save ?600 million a

:43:59. > :44:04.week, will be lifted off the backs of British industry, do you agree

:44:05. > :44:08.with that? John Longworth you had earlier, he ran the British Chambers

:44:09. > :44:12.of Commerce who used to keep the running total of the cost of

:44:13. > :44:15.regulation, I don't think you can put a specific figure on it. Boris

:44:16. > :44:19.Johnson did. There is a vast amount of regulation which adds to cost,

:44:20. > :44:23.makes us less competitive and destroys jobs. You haven't been able

:44:24. > :44:26.to give me a specific example We have been talking about specific

:44:27. > :44:33.example, I have given you several. I think that it is for business to

:44:34. > :44:39.tell us, those areas of regulation they found to be most costly and for

:44:40. > :44:42.which there is little justification. As we come to debate the great

:44:43. > :44:45.repeal bill, that will be consequence.

:44:46. > :44:48.Now, Theresa May refused to say on Sunday whether she was aware that

:44:49. > :44:51.a Trident missile had veered off course towards Florida in a test

:44:52. > :44:56.Yesterday it was revealed that the Prime Minister was made

:44:57. > :44:59.aware of the incident when she took office in July, and the Defence

:45:00. > :45:02.Secretary, Michael Fallon, was summoned to the House of Commons

:45:03. > :45:13.As the matters we are about to discuss are of the utmost

:45:14. > :45:17.confidentiality and may give succour to Her Majesty's enemies,

:45:18. > :45:23.I beg to move - I beg to move that the House sit in private.

:45:24. > :45:27.Under Standing Order Number 163, I am obliged to this this question

:45:28. > :45:35.The question is that the House do sit in private.

:45:36. > :45:37.As many as are of that opinion say aye.

:45:38. > :45:52.We do not comment on the detail of submarine operations.

:45:53. > :45:56.I can, however, assure the House that during any test firing

:45:57. > :46:01.the safety of the crew and public is paramount, and is

:46:02. > :46:07.I can assure the House that the capability and effectiveness

:46:08. > :46:13.of the United Kingdom's independent nuclear deterrent is not in doubt.

:46:14. > :46:16.The Government has absolute confidence in our deterrent,

:46:17. > :46:20.and in the Royal Navy crews who protect us and our Nato allies,

:46:21. > :46:30.Can I ask the Secretary of State a simple question.

:46:31. > :46:33.Why was this information deliberately kept from Parliament

:46:34. > :46:36.Who made the decision to keep this incident quiet?

:46:37. > :46:40.Was it his department or was it Number Ten?

:46:41. > :46:43.And while respecting the limits of what he can disclose,

:46:44. > :46:45.can he at least set out what investigation his

:46:46. > :46:48.department has carried out into what happened in June?

:46:49. > :46:52.And what assurances he can give that there will be no future cover

:46:53. > :46:59.Mr Speaker, at the heart of this issue is a worrying lack

:47:00. > :47:01.of transparency and a Prime Minister who's chosen to cover

:47:02. > :47:04.up a serious incident, rather than coming clean

:47:05. > :47:13.This House, and more importantly the British public, deserves better.

:47:14. > :47:17.While accepting that the nuclear deterrent needs to be

:47:18. > :47:21.shrouded in secrecy, it also needs to deter,

:47:22. > :47:24.and once stories get out there, that a missile may have failed,

:47:25. > :47:26.isn't it better to be quite frank about it,

:47:27. > :47:34.especially if it has no strategic significance, as in this case

:47:35. > :47:53.John Whittingdale, has this been handled well by Number 10? I think

:47:54. > :47:58.it is faintly absurd to have a 40 minute session of MPs asking

:47:59. > :48:04.questions and having the Secretary of State refused to answer them,

:48:05. > :48:07.basically. But he is quite right. Matters of nuclear deterrent are

:48:08. > :48:11.concerned with security and we never comment on these. There have been

:48:12. > :48:18.successful tests publicised in the past. Press releases have been sent

:48:19. > :48:21.out. And the Prime Minister was briefed a rout -- about this test

:48:22. > :48:29.misfiring. Should they have come clean when they were asked? What the

:48:30. > :48:35.Secretary of State has told us, the submarine is now back doing its job

:48:36. > :48:40.and we have come out the other side. Eukaryote test to see if there are

:48:41. > :48:47.problems and then correct them. -- eukaryote test. I don't think you

:48:48. > :48:52.can put out a press release to tell everybody that Britain's nuclear

:48:53. > :49:00.deterrent has a problem. Because it undermines deterrence Ubud Julian

:49:01. > :49:06.Lewis says there have been umpteen other tests that have been

:49:07. > :49:11.successful. Should Number 10 have come clean? I don't think it would

:49:12. > :49:17.have affected the vote on Trident. You don't talk publicly on matters

:49:18. > :49:21.affecting public security. When it was all over the press, should a

:49:22. > :49:26.Theresa May have answered differently on the Andrew Marshall?

:49:27. > :49:31.If the Prime Minister had just said, I regret the fact that this was on

:49:32. > :49:35.the front page of the Sunday Times, but I'm still not prepared to talk

:49:36. > :49:38.about matters of national security, which is essentially what the

:49:39. > :49:43.Secretary of State then said later, that would have been fine. Is that

:49:44. > :49:48.what you have -- would have advised her to do? A long time ago I used to

:49:49. > :49:53.advise the Prime Minister before interviews and that is probably what

:49:54. > :49:56.I would have said. To some extent the Prime Minister could have

:49:57. > :50:01.stopped the debate on this in its tracks on Sunday by saying something

:50:02. > :50:06.more definitive, couldn't she? She clearly was on willing to answer the

:50:07. > :50:08.question. She might have been more explicit in just saying, I'm not

:50:09. > :50:11.going to answer that question. Our guest of the day,

:50:12. > :50:13.John Whittingdale, has to rush off now, but before he goes,

:50:14. > :50:16.let's find out the What hasn't gone

:50:17. > :50:45.well for Donald Trump John Whittingdale, what do you think

:50:46. > :50:49.is the right answer? The one I suspect he would probably be most

:50:50. > :50:55.sore about is Arnold Schwarzenegger. It's probably not the right answer!

:50:56. > :51:00.It is not. His new Washington, DC Hotel is losing money. I don't

:51:01. > :51:04.suppose people will shed any tears because he has got a few Bob. Thank

:51:05. > :51:06.you for being on the programme. Thank you.

:51:07. > :51:08.Back to our main story - the Supreme Court's judgement

:51:09. > :51:10.on whether Article 50 can be triggered.

:51:11. > :51:12.In the last hour, the Brexit Secretary, David Davis,

:51:13. > :51:18.I can announce today that we will shortly introduce legislation

:51:19. > :51:22.allowing the government to move ahead with invoking article 50,

:51:23. > :51:29.which starts the formal process of withdrawing from the European Union.

:51:30. > :51:33.We received the lengthy judgment a few hours ago and government lawyers

:51:34. > :51:38.are assessing it carefully. But this would be a straightforward bill.

:51:39. > :51:42.It's not about whether or not the UK should leave the European Union.

:51:43. > :51:47.That decision has already been made by the people of the United Kingdom.

:51:48. > :51:51.We will work with colleagues in both houses to ensure this bill is passed

:51:52. > :51:56.in good time and we will invoke article 50 by the end of March this

:51:57. > :52:00.year, as the Prime Minister has set out. We will introduce legislation

:52:01. > :52:06.to give the government legal power to trickle Article 50 and begin the

:52:07. > :52:11.formal process of withdrawal. It will be separate to the great repeal

:52:12. > :52:14.Bill to repeal the European Communities Act 1972, introduced

:52:15. > :52:19.later this year. This will be the most straightforward bill possible

:52:20. > :52:21.to effect the decision of the people and respect the decision of the

:52:22. > :52:25.Supreme Court. That was David Davis. We're joined now by the leader

:52:26. > :52:27.of the Liberal Democrats in the Lords, Lord Newby,

:52:28. > :52:36.and the former Ukip Welcome to both of you. Dick Newby,

:52:37. > :52:40.you are the leader of the Liberal Democrats in the House of Lords,

:52:41. > :52:43.which has a large contingent of more than 100 unelected peers. Are you

:52:44. > :52:48.going to block Article 50? We will try to amend the Bill. We will be

:52:49. > :52:53.trying to insert in the Bill a provision that the people should

:52:54. > :53:01.have the final say on the outcome of the Brexit negotiations. Do you want

:53:02. > :53:06.a second referendum? We want a first referendum. With the first

:53:07. > :53:11.referendum people voted for a raft of incompatible things. We want to

:53:12. > :53:15.give them the chance to vote on what will be a very specific negotiated

:53:16. > :53:18.outcome. I think it is quite likely we will oppose it. It will be

:53:19. > :53:23.perfectly available for people to vote in favour of Brexit at that

:53:24. > :53:27.point if they agree with the terms. Do you not feel uncomfortable that

:53:28. > :53:30.you would be leading 100 or so unelected peers in frustrating the

:53:31. > :53:35.well of more than 17 million voters in the referendum who called for the

:53:36. > :53:40.EU to live? We're not frustrating the will of the people. Giving

:53:41. > :53:44.people a vote is not frustrating the will of the people. It's

:53:45. > :53:49.implementing the will of the people or allowing them to implement their

:53:50. > :53:52.own will. Said that the fair enough? The House of Lords is there to

:53:53. > :53:57.scrutinise legislation and amendments will be laid down in good

:53:58. > :54:00.faith. It is there to scrutinise legislation but the government

:54:01. > :54:04.couldn't have been clearer when it spent ?9 million on that pamphlet it

:54:05. > :54:08.shoved through every letterbox in the land, in which it said clearly

:54:09. > :54:13.that you, the people, will decide this. It didn't actually put it into

:54:14. > :54:17.the legislation, technically, but there is no doubt about it that that

:54:18. > :54:22.is what was intended, that is what the British people thought they were

:54:23. > :54:30.doing when they voted for Brexit. I would be very surprised if, led by

:54:31. > :54:33.the Liberal Democrats in the House of Lords, the House of Lords did

:54:34. > :54:41.anything to frustrate that process. I think it would be madness. And,

:54:42. > :54:46.you know, they will be erecting the guillotine in Parliament Square

:54:47. > :54:50.pretty soon. That sounds pretty painful? We tried to amend the House

:54:51. > :54:57.of Lords so we were popularly elected. The Labour Party and the

:54:58. > :55:01.Tories wouldn't agree. According to Malcolm Pearson, it would be

:55:02. > :55:05.madness? We don't believe it would be madness. Giving people a vote

:55:06. > :55:10.could never be madness. We still believe the House of Lords as a role

:55:11. > :55:15.to play but it should be elected. The Supreme Court has upheld that.

:55:16. > :55:20.The government lost its case in the Supreme Court. They have said it is

:55:21. > :55:27.up are parliament to trigger the process of leaving the EU. Do you

:55:28. > :55:34.think those judges are enemies of the people, as described by the

:55:35. > :55:37.Daily Mail? No. I understand they said that Parliament had to be

:55:38. > :55:42.consulted about the triggering of Article 50, which is rather

:55:43. > :55:47.different. They said it had to be an act of Parliament. Yes. I gather

:55:48. > :55:51.that is going to be done soon. That's fine. There can be an act of

:55:52. > :55:55.Parliament to trigger Article 50 and the process will take place. The

:55:56. > :56:05.Prime Minister has said the result of the negotiations will be put

:56:06. > :56:08.again to Parliament. So again, it comes back to Parliament. But you

:56:09. > :56:11.must remember, the House of Lords is a very Europhile place. It's stuffed

:56:12. > :56:15.full of former EU Commissioner 's and assorted mischief who have

:56:16. > :56:18.actually brought this country into the bog with the European Union

:56:19. > :56:23.where we are. So the House of Lords will be very grudging about this.

:56:24. > :56:27.What do you think about the second referendum idea, or the first

:56:28. > :56:31.referendum idea as Dick Newby says? I don't think people will want it.

:56:32. > :56:37.It is pretty clear we will be able to do a very good deal with the EU.

:56:38. > :56:40.If you look at jobs, they have got 3 million more jobs selling things to

:56:41. > :56:47.us than we have to them. We held every card in the pack. On mutual

:56:48. > :56:50.residence, they have got 3 million people living here, we have 1.2

:56:51. > :56:58.million living there. Why is this going to be so difficult? It's not.

:56:59. > :57:03.It is in our interests to give us a painless exit from this ill-fated

:57:04. > :57:08.venture. We don't know what the negotiations are going to be. But

:57:09. > :57:12.divorce negotiations tend not to be happy, jolly events. Unless

:57:13. > :57:15.everybody would like to get something positive out of it?

:57:16. > :57:20.Everybody would like to get something out of it. Frankfurt would

:57:21. > :57:25.like to get City jobs, so would Paris, so would Dublin. Berlin would

:57:26. > :57:28.like to get our high-tech jobs. The negotiations will bear those jobs

:57:29. > :57:35.are very much in mind. Suzanne Evans, Ukip's Deputy chair, says

:57:36. > :57:41.judges should be subjected to some sort of democratic control. Do you

:57:42. > :57:46.agree? No, I don't think I do. It is very important for the separation of

:57:47. > :57:50.powers that Parliament and the executive and the judiciary, and

:57:51. > :57:55.indeed the church, remain... So you think today was a good day in terms

:57:56. > :58:00.of democracy? Think of is proper that it should happen. I regret the

:58:01. > :58:03.decision of the majority of the judges. But one wouldn't be

:58:04. > :58:09.surprised about that because on the whole are judges are pretty

:58:10. > :58:15.politically correct. You think they are Europhiles? I didn't say that!

:58:16. > :58:22.Are the Lib Dems moving away from the centre of the -- politics? Only

:58:23. > :58:31.a quarter of the support your call for a second referendum? I think

:58:32. > :58:34.that we saw erichment, and we are seeing weekly in by-elections, that

:58:35. > :58:37.many people support exactly what we are standing for. We look forward to

:58:38. > :58:38.this being chewed over in Parliament.

:58:39. > :58:40.That's all for today. Thanks to our guests.

:58:41. > :58:43.The One O'Clock News is starting over on BBC One now.

:58:44. > :58:47.I'll be back at 11:30 tomorrow with Andrew, for live coverage

:58:48. > :58:54.Do join us then. Bye bye.