30/01/2017 Daily Politics

Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.

Donald Trump's new policy of banning refugees and suspending the entry

of foreign nationals from seven countries has caused

We'll look at what the changes mean, and how political

Should Mr Trump's state visit to the UK to be

but Downing Street says it's going ahead and the President

With the Brexit bill about to come out of the starting

blocks in the Commons, we'll be sizing up the hurdles

in the way of Britain's departure from the EU.

And, as Desert Island Discs turns 75, we'll be looking back at some

of the most famous political castaways who've shared

their memories, along with their favourite records.

And with us for the whole of the programme today,

two MPs who've been castaway in the studio here with me

for the next hour - you've no hope of being rescued,

It's the Conservative Mims Davies and Labour's Dan Jarvis.

First today, let's talk about the clampdown

on immigration announced by US President Donald Trump

that's been causing controversy around the world.

On Friday, Mr Trump signed an executive order halting the US

refugee programme for 120 days, indefinitely banning all Syrian

refugees and suspending the entry of all nationals from seven

Moves to implement the measure triggered anger

The British Government's response has also come under fire,

with opponents claiming the Prime Minister was

The Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, is due to make

a statement on the President's new policy later today,

and the planned state visit by Mr Trump scheduled for later this

A petition on Parliament's website asking for the visit to be cancelled

to avoid causing embarrassment to the Queen has passed

one million signatures, making it among the most popular

since the service started, and Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has

called for the event to be postponed.

Among all of this there's been a certain amount of confusion

about the real impact of Mr Trump's executive order.

So who exactly is affected, and for how long will

Friday's executive order introduced a 90-day suspension on visas

for all nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries -

Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.

Initially, dual nationals appeared to be subject to the ban.

Over the weekend British Olympian Sir Mo Farah,

who was born in Somalia, and the British-Iraqi Conservative

MP Nadhim Zahawi spoke of their fear of being unable to travel to the US.

Last night, after Boris Johnson sought clarification from US

officials, the Foreign Office confirmed UK citizens with dual

nationality would only be subject to extra checks

if they were travelling to the US from one of

White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus said US

green-card holders - legal residents -

would not be affected, although agencies say people

returning from overseas will be assessed on a case-by-case basis

before being allowed back into the US.

Friday's executive order also brought in a 120-day suspension

of the US refugee programme, with an indefinite ban

Finally, the order introduces a cap of 50,000 refugees

to be accepted in 2017, against a limit of 110,000 set

We'll be joined by the Ukip MEP Patrick O'Flynn,

For now, isn't he just enacting something he said he would do during

the campaign? I think there will burn a fallout, the select committee

would have found this unpalatable, and I certainly think we should be

doing everything we can to make sure that our national scan travel and

that ultimately we are making sure that America knows what it is doing.

It is going to affect things globally and what the Prime Minister

and Foreign Office are doing behind the scenes is as important is what

happens in front of the camera as well. We have got questions and a

statement in the house today and I am pleased with the clarifications

we had yesterday evening. Why didn't the Prime Minister Theresa May

answer the question directly in the way you have just done at the press

conference when she had the opportunity to condemn this

executive order? Everyone is in a difficult place here. When you are

on foreign soil it is probably hard for the Prime Minister today, excuse

me, can I just have a word? That is when we use our softer powers behind

the scenes. I think it is a very good visit by the Prime Minister

overwrought... It has been overshadowed by this, committee was

asked pointedly three times, it was not a question of saying, can I have

a word about immigration policy, Stewart asked directly about members

of the press, did she support or want to criticise the executive

order that I have just outlined by President Trump and she did not

answer the question. Eventually, when she did, rightly or wrongly,

she said it was a matter in terms of immigration for the president and

not for her. As a former Foreign Secretary, she has been on the other

side of this argument, it is a tricky place to be. You said it is a

dangerous thing and can have terrible unforeseen, already is

having terrible consequences. It absolutely good, this is 90 days, it

is related, I have heard that it is a Muslim ban, it is about the

country's America has decided... Is that right or wrong? We could all

pick other countries that we feel could be included if this measure

was appropriate anyway. Which countries would you be including if

you were extending the list? I would not be extended it or signing up to

it, and Mo Farah summed up a lot of what my constituents have been

saying, and I will be prepared to say that in the House of Commons

later today. In a way, Dan Jarvis, wasn't Theresa May write the first

anthology cannot affect the immigration policies of the

president of the United States? She might

not be to affect them but it does not mean she cannot take of you. I

suspect Number Ten is probably privately sleeping. They're right

and number of items discussed that were useful, around Nato, some of

the comments Donald Trump made regarding torture, and all of that

has been overshadowed by this announcement, which I think lacks

logic and decency. People have to make difficult judgments about the

extent to which they feel able to speak out against things they

disagree with, we have a special relationship with America, it is

important to maintain that, but I think, given the strength of feeling

that exists, it would be the right thing for the Prime Minister to be

clear about the fact that she does not agree with this, that she

condemns this and does not think it is the way to proceed and I hope we

will see that, in the next day or two. Do you agree with Jeremy Corbyn

that the state visit by Donald Trump to be postponed or cancelled until

the ban is lifted? I personally would feel uncomfortable with

President Trump coming here under state visit. I do think we have to

make difficult judgments with regard to foreign policy, we need to

maintain our special relationship with the United States... Would you

cancel it or not, if you had the power to do so? I'm not sure I would

have arranged it in the first place because this is very early days for

President Trump, I would have waited to see how had gone first. That is

Jeremy Corbyn right to ask for it to be cancelled or postponed? It is

right but I think it needs to be done in the most diplomatic way

possible. We are joined now by Patrick O'Flynn in our Stoke studio.

Would you like to see a similar Visa ban bought it in here in the UK? I

think every country is in charge of its own immigration policy, is the

first thing to say, so while what Donald Trump has Voges arbitrary and

is temporarily, I take the view that a lot of people are rightly very

worried about the Islamist threat and would on the site of Draconian

is rather than laxity like Mrs Merkel... So you do see it as

Draconian? I think Crispin Blunt said yesterday it seems to be the

hallmark of an immature administration, not particularly

fully thought through, perhaps a bit arbitrary, but it is a 90 day

breathing space and we will see what the Administration comes up with...

But my question was, would you like to see a similar ban here? Again,

I'm not sure it is a ban, it is not a comprehensive ban... It is a Visa

suspension, would you like to see that here? Not a blanket suspension,

but I do think it is very important that, with our migration policy, we

not only look at people's aptitude and what they can bring to British

society in terms of their skills, but also their attitude, do they

accept call British principles such as gender equality, freedom of

expression, parochialism in our society. Right, but the White House

has denied it, but don't these measures, in your mind, in terms of

the executive order, amount to a ban on Muslim immigration in all but

name? Certainly the countries listed are predominantly Muslim population

countries, and it has to be said Donald Trump, in his campaign, did

talk about the Islamist threat to American society as well as the West

in general, and pretty much signposted this type of very tough

action. So you see it as anti-Muslim? I don't see it as

anti-Muslim. I hope the intention is to help protect a free Western

country against the threat of radical Islamist militant terrorism

and all the rest of it. I think, the way the liberal left over year has

overreacted and the hysteria, to me, shows a chasm between ordinary

common-sense people and the things that they worry about, including the

Islamist threat to all Western countries including the United

Kingdom... So you would support a ban? To keep the country safe? You

said you don't think it is anti-Muslim but you accept that it

is about seven countries on a list which are predominantly Muslim

countries and Donald Trump said he was calling for a total shutdown of

Muslims entering the United States, so how could it be anything but

anti-Muslim? I criticised Donald Trump for the way he conducted his

campaign, some of the over the top things he said. In terms of the

United Kingdom policy, I think ministers will be informed by

security briefings and expert assessments, but all I'm saying is I

think rigorous vetting is appropriate, and we criticised

Donald Trump but the mess Angela Merkel has plunged most of the

European continental mainland into by a very lax policy. Are you part

of a liberal metropolitan elite bubble of hysteria by condemning

what Donald Trump has done? I think anyone would struggle to fit to be

in that -- to fit me in that particular category. If we are going

to talk about common sense, that people like Mo Farah and others are

not going to be able to travel back to the place where they are living

to be reunited with their family, it seems the execution of his policy,

whether you agree with it or not, has been very poorly done, it has

not been thought through and all of the relevant government department

in the United States have not been consulted, so I hope real lessons

will be learned by the American Administration as to how this has

been done. And what about the protests? Patrick O'Flynn says there

has been left-wing hysteria, is that how you see it? No, there is genuine

concern with the fact that well over 1 million people have already signed

a petition, many of my constituents have been in touch to express their

concerns. This is people standing up for what they believe in, it is a

perfectly healthy thing. When it comes to logic, no fatal attacks on

US soil have been committed by nationals from those seven countries

on the blacklist, so is this about terrorism and keeping America safe,

wife or instance is Saudi Arabia not on the list? Most of the 9/11

conspirators came from Saudi Arabia. If I can keep some logic in reply,

just because recent attacks on American soil have been carried out

by American citizens doesn't mean there is no international Islamist

threat, as indeed we experience in many other countries. No one has

told me who the guest in the studio is... It is Dan Jarvis and Mims

Davies. Well, I would not accuse him of necessarily being part of a

metropolitan liberal elite, but I do find it amusing when he says that

the President's state visit, who has been invited, should be postponed in

the most diplomatic way. I think that is a tall order. While people

who are signing up to the petition think it sends a strong symbol or at

least an indication to Donald Trump about strength of feeling here. But

let's stick to the policy substance, let's talk about the vetting of

refugees, extreme vetting. Nigel Barrage, former leader of Ukip, said

that he would like to see that apply to the UK. What

You will have to ask Nigel what he means. Would you back it? It depends

what it means by extreme vetting, I think we need to be less led by the

intelligence, immigration services, the people getting the intelligence

from our friends and neighbours, as well. So certainly, look, we're

living in a very dangerous era, where I believe the threat from

Islamist terror is one of the biggest threats to our way of life.

We are living in a high migration climate. The British Dutch system

has been completely out of control. It seems to me perfectly reasonable

to be thinking about new protections for law-abiding citizens. You talk

about the threat from Islamic terrorists, but none of the recent

attacks, over quite a number of years, have been Front National is

from those countries. The policy and executive order was unclear, which

meant thousands were left stranded, many American citizens all those who

held dual nationality. There will be and have already been court cases

being brought against Donald Trump as to whether it was legal in the

first place. So there is no indication at this moment in time it

will make America safer than it currently is, is there? Ice Inc I

acknowledged earlier it's in the hallmark of an immature

administration. -- I think I acknowledged earlier. A bit half

baked in its implementation. If you look at some other countries where

terror attacks have happened, they have been carried out from people

coming from some of the countries listed reporting to be refugees.

Particularly in Europe, in Germany and France, for instance.

In the case of the extreme vetting as you talks about, it takes between

18-24 months for refugees to be vetted under the US system of

immigration. How much more extreme could it be?

Well, I don't know what they spend two years doing, but it doesn't

necessarily have to be a longer time frame. All I'm saying is if there

are more checks that can be made, it seems perfectly reasonable to me

that they should be made. In general the point I would like to make is

there is no inalienable right for a citizen of one country to go on

travel all live in another country. We have sovereign nation states and

I'm very glad since EU referendum in Britain is on the road to becoming

one of those countries again and will be able to set up own

immigration controls. Do you see the dangers of hugging the president a

bit too close in terms of Theresa May's visit? You are judged on the

company you keep? I think the Prime Minister was

rightly the first person to go and speak to president Tromp, in

relation to the special relationship. Moving on to the

visit, I've had people writing to me, the committee will look at that

tomorrow and rightly because people are concerned. A ban for the ban I

am really comfortable with and I think it leaves us in a difficult

position long. I'd be rather working on that relationship, as we saw the

Prime Minister doing. This is overshadowing that and for me that

is a problem. Before we move on, the German Chancellor had an open door

policy toward Syrian refugees. Do you think that policy worked on was

the right one? I'm not sure it was the

right or if it worked. If the intention of this policy, this

announcement, is making the United States safer, I'm not sure it has

achieved that goal. All the serious people who understand the complex

nature of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism would say if you're trying

to make the country safer by restricting access from people in

the countries that have been identified, you have picked the

wrong countries. There are some obvious omissions in that list which

I think undermines it. Thank you. The question for today

is all about Donald Trump's visit According to the Sunday Times,

the White House is concerned about the possibility of an awkward

moment when the president meets a) Because of the prince's

view on GM foods? b) Because of his view

on climate change? c) Because they disagree over

modern architecture? d) Because Mr Trump has

a phobia of royalty? At the end of the show Dan and Mims

will give us the correct answer. The Prime Minister is in Cardiff

this morning, to meet with the First Ministers of Scotland

and Wales, and the first and only Theresa May says she wants

to continue "constructive discussions" with the leaders

of the devolved governments in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland

about Britain's future relationship However, she's made it clear

she is in the driving seat, and the Scottish and Welsh

governments say they have not seen any signs that Mrs May

is taking their proposals seriously. Our chief political correspondent

Vicki Young is in Cardiff. What have you found out from the

meeting so far? It is interesting because Theresa May said the Nicola

Sturgeon, when she became Prime Minister, she wanted the devolved

nations to be fully involved in discussions in the run-up to Brexit.

The clock is ticking now, with Article 50 due to be probably

triggered by the end of March. Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland

all want to have their say. Really now it's about what type of Brexit

Theresa May wants. I think I'm making that speech when she said she

thought the UK would leave the single market, that has really riled

particularly the SNP. It is not what they want, they say it is not what

their people want and they don't think the UK Government is in any

way listening. They think they are coming to these meetings but it's

not having any impact. Just before this meeting Nicola Sturgeon said

time is running out for the Prime Minister to heed the voice of

Scotland. So today there is a paper on the table about how Scotland

feels it could stay in the single market, even if the UK were to

leave. How that might work, no one is particularly sure. I think there

are people in the Commons as well, we have heard from Labour MPs and

the SNP, they feel the same, that Theresa May is dictating what they

would call a hard Tory Brexit and they don't feel they are having any

input. Thank you. Now let's stick with Brexit,

as MPs will tomorrow start debating the Bill which will trigger

Britain's departure from the EU. Most commentators are predicting

that it will pass its early Commons stages without too much problem,

but there are still plenty of other potential obstacles to come before

we reach the Brexit finishing line. Mark Lobel has been

to the Lee Valley Athletics Centre In the run-up to triggering Article

50 and keeping our EU negotiations on track,

what hurdles lie ahead The EU divorce bill will be debated

in the Commons this week, with several Parliamentary

hurdles to overcome. The first second reading

will be a vote on the main principles of the bill,

which will most likely be followed by a vote

on the Government's preferred timetable of triggering Article 50

by the end of March, which could also limit the time

available for the next hurdle, amendments put forward by MPs deemed

appropriate by the Deputy Speaker. This really interesting thing

about these votes is that the vast majority of MPs are going to end up

voting for something with which they passionately

disagree, and with which they feel will have disastrous

consequences for the country. That's why tensions are so high

within the parties, and why you have this quite remarkable situation

of Labour whips potentially not But I think when people

talk about this in terms of whether Parliament

is going to block it or not, What matters, however,

is how long it takes to go through and whether it's amended

on its way through. It's the amendments that

I think are crucial here. The Liberal Democrats

said they will only vote for the bill if a referendum

on the deal is promised. I think one of the amendments

that probably won't have much chance of passing,

because I don't think there's much appetite within Parliament for it,

is the idea of a second referendum. I think it's some of the other

amendments, on things like reporting to Parliament or the role of EU

nationals already living in this country, those strike me

as potentially more difficult There's no control over

their timetable and no amendment can be ruled out of order,

so anything could happen, but large delays would be a risky

move from an unelected chamber. Once Article 50 is triggered

and those Parliamentary hurdles Leading them on behalf of EU heads

of state and government will be the former French minister

Michel Barnier, who wants a draft It will then be put to a vote

in the European Parliament, where just over half its members

will need to support The agreement also needs to clear

the European Council, with support from 72% of the 27

member states, representing at least 65% of the total

population of those countries. Once that's all done,

it's back to Westminster. Theresa May has said there will be

a final vote in Parliament, Another hurdle could

spring up along the way. If MPs thought the deal was running

into trouble they could call a no-confidence vote

in the Government. Ten hurdles over 110 metres,

except some politicians argue Revoking Article 50, thus reversing

the decision to leave. That's right, pretend we never shot

the firing gun in the first place. It's not clear that

that is something that Westminster can do on its own and it

would require the agreement of the other EU nation states,

but there's no doubt that some MPs To leave the EU, the UK has to clear

at least ten hurdles. Now begins that journey,

which is set to dominate So it is a marathon and not a

sprint, to carry on that analogy. To Nicola Sturgeon things Theresa May

isn't listening to her, taking seriously what the Scottish and

Welsh governments are proposing an Brexit and she's right. This is a

typical Nicola Sturgeon line of I'm not getting what I want on this. We

have had a decision by the of the bright British people to leave the

European Union. I think for UK plc, the jobs, security, for what we need

to be doing as a government, we need to get on with this. I'm really

pleased with the timetable. Theresa May is not listening, that's true,

isn't it? The Prime Minister is there today and listening. And

ignoring. Unless it is the argument she wants to hear she says not

listening, potentially on both sides. What is the point of Theresa

May think she will have this meeting -- these meetings because she would

take into account the views of those devolved governments if she's not

listening? I'm sure there is something that can be taken back

this. I think peeling back the layers, Scotland is getting what

they want will be difficult. Wales is a different issue. They voted to

go and I think you are going to see... The Labour administration

wants to stay in the single market. I think people are going to end up

being realistic about, actually, do we want to be navel-gazing on this

get on with things? There are companies, global companies, British

companies making decisions based on what they need to keep people in

jobs, which pays mortgages and keeps people in homes. You say you think

there will be something that will be given to the devolved

administrations, that these meetings are not a waste of time. Can you

give me an example, however small, of where Theresa May has moved in

the direction of what the Scottish and Welsh Government would like? I

think if the Prime Minister thinks all we think it's not right to

concede, because it's going to mess up the rest of the deal, then I

don't think we should do that either. I don't think anyone should

be held to ransom. She's not going to concede anything? Listen and find

out what's practical, but ultimately if it's about a Saughton Nicola

Sturgeon I don't think anyone in the UK... What about the idea of staying

in the single market? To be fair, that is not Labour's policy either.

If you wearing charge Nicola Sturgeon wouldn't get that either?

It's pin maker that won't happen. Labour to secure the best policy

deal. This has been a challenging time for us as a party. Many of us

campaigned to stay within the European Union but we have decided,

rightly in my view, given this is such a big strategical political

decision for the country, its right to come together on a cohesive view.

Is it right for Jeremy Corbyn to party manage MPs? Wouldn't it have

been better to have a free vote on the Labour side? I don't think it

would have been better to have a free vote. This is such an important

issue for the future of our country and the Labour Party to say we were

not able to bring people together... That you can't, it's clear you

can't. There are about 100 Labour MPs and some in the Shadow Cabinet

and some of them are supposed to be party whips you impose party

discipline. It is not a consensus at all. We will see if it is a

consensus or not, in terms of the number of people who vote with us or

not. You think it will be less? I think there are a number of good

colleagues who have difficult decisions to make. From the point of

view of our party, given this is such a big issue for the country, I

don't think it would have been the right thing to have a free vote. I

think it's the right thing for Jeremy to say this is our view and

he expects his members of Parliament, particularly those on

the front bench, to support that view. If you're trying to enforce,

as you say, a party line, to have a formed view, was it the right

strategy for the deputy leader Tom Watson to say Shadow Cabinet members

to resign can get their jobs back in a couple of months? Just because you

stand down from the front bench over a particular issue, even if it is an

important one might Brexit, doesn't mean you couldn't go back and serve

at some point. If you're trying to persuade people to come on-board and

present a united within Labour rather than a divided one, surely

the sanctions have to be at least relatively strong?

I'm not sure that would be helpful in the current climate where people

have to make difficult judgment about whether to represent the views

of their constituents or what they believe to be the right thing to do,

we all wrestle with those decisions. Brexit is the defining issue of our

generation... If you are a Labour MP and you had a strong Ukip vote and a

strong Remain boat, it is a difficult position for anyone. What

the Labour Party is trying to do is laudable. It is the Liberal Democrat

position, hardly turning up at the debates, chuntering on the sidelines

about wanting to change things, wanting to make the best of it... It

is a unified message in terms of what they are saying? Many

colleagues in all parties will find this difficult. I find it very easy

but for other colleagues this is a difficult balance. There are

by-elections as a result. Is this going to be the case in every

decision that the Labour Party have to make? You say this is the

defining issue, there are many coming down the line, is this how

the Labour Party will act with 100 or so MPs defied the whip? It is for

the leader to decide but it is right in this case on this issue that we

reach a formed view and colleagues are strongly encouraged to support

it, I think that is the right decision. Let's see what the next

few days brings. It is difficult for some colleagues but we have to come

together with a view on how to proceed. One of the amendments

Labour will put forward is guaranteeing the right of EU

nationals already living here. There has been an ongoing row about

whether they are being used as bargaining chips. Did you think you

could support that amendment? For me it is one of the issues as a

constituency MP that I see problems with this, I have people that live

and work abroad, for example in my area in the marine industry a lot to

work... Were due back the amendment? I don't think we need an amendment,

I think it needs to be part of the negotiating process. We are not

going to forget about this, it is an important issue, but at the moment

it is one of a number of matters... Do you think it should still be part

of negotiations rather than guaranteed ahead of negotiations?

There is no reason why it cannot be both of those things, negotiation

and as part of an amendment. The purpose of putting it forward is to

provide the opportunities for MPs to express their concerns about it and

I think there was a benefit in doing that. Are there any other amendments

of substance? We will see, but I think it is important they are seen

in a constructive way. There is abuse among some colleagues on the

other side of the house that these amendments slow down the triggering

of article 50, I don't see it that way, I think it is about adding

value to the process. Now, Unite is the biggest

union in the country, with 1.4 million members,

and we often end up talking about it on this programme because,

as well as being a powerful voice for its members,

it's also given millions to Labour and has an influential role

in the running of the party. The current general secretary

is Len McCluskey, he's been in the job since 2011 and has been

a key supporter of Jeremy Corbyn. Well he's up for re-election, but

he's not going to go unchallenged. Here's one of those hoping to win,

Unite regional secretary for the West Midlands Gerard Coyne,

launching his campaign. I think the time is right for some

change, and I think the time It's not about the leadership

that we've had thus far, although I do think that Unite has

become too much of a political commentator, and not actually

focusing on the concerns, the direct concerns

of our membership. Because I do know that for you,

actually, the difficulties you face in the world of work have got more

and more intense. You said you want to get away from

the political game playing in Westminster, what did you mean by

that? I think it is very clear, I want to focus on the job that is

critical for our members in the Times ahead, making sure they are

protected, that they are supported in the workplace and their terms and

conditions are improved, rather than focusing on Westminster politics.

But you are happy to campaign on broader political issues, for

example before Theresa May's Lancaster house speech you called

for her to take a firm stance on freedom of movement, why is that

important for your members? The next two years will be arguably the most

difficult for our members since the Second World War, the implication of

Brexit, we have to face up to it now and prepare our membership for those

challenges that will be very in terms of adjusting to the world post

Brexit. What does that mean in terms of freedom of movement, what would

you like to see? We have to make sure we are investing in skills in

the UK because employers for a long time have taken skills down off the

shelf when they have faced deficit in their workforce rather than

investing in the long-term unemployed or people in their

existing workforce. There is an media to focus on critical issues,

including investment as well. But you have not answered the question

about freedom of movement do you support the target

set by Theresa May, by the Government, in bringing net

migration down to tens of thousands? The reality is we have to face up to

what the British public voted for in the referendum and they have said

clearly that migration is an issue. If that means as a result of the

process we are going through that we will no longer be in the single

market, then we have to p repare for your view on transport strikes?

There have been a number of strikes across industries but let's take the

example of the strikes on the southern rail network, would you

condemn or support them? I am a trade union leader, I support those

strikes, I believe in the right of people to take industrial action, it

is a fundamental right and I would support them. And you would continue

to do so even if, as the management claims, they have answered some of

the concerns raised by the trade unions what about your view on

transport strikes? There have been a number of strikes across industries

but let's take the example of the strikes on the southern rail

network, would you condemn or support them? I am a trade union

leader, I support those strikes, I believe in the right of people to

take industrial action, it is a fundamental right and I would

support them. And you would continue to do so even if, as the management

claims, they have answered some of the concerns raised by the trade

unions? It is interesting in that example, the management has been

described as. In my view, workers don't take strike think long and

hard about because it means losing pay. The reality of trying to solve

a dispute, unfortunately strike action really is a last resort, so

to be in this, it is a decision they have to think long and hard about

because it means losing pay. The reality of trying to solve the

dispute, unfortunately strike action really is the last resort, so to be

in proposed nuclear power plant in Cumbria in terms of the action they

have taken, it is clear the responsibility rests with the

management. What about nuclear power, what did you think when you

saw Jeremy Corbyn last week unable to give support to a proposed

nuclear power plant in Cumbria. What did you think about Jeremy Corbyn's

response, when he was unable to give his backing? I'm clear, I I

absolutely support our membership in the energy sector, we need a

balanced energy respond including nuclear. I think some of the issues

we have been talking about around Hinkley Point, one of the critical

issues there is the skills infrastructure to support the

development. What did you think about Jeremy Corbyn's response, when

he was unable to give his backing? I'm clear, the vision... So his

position concerns you? What concerns me feel the work they are members

need to feel the work they are doing is that is the most important thing

for me, not the position of the leader of the Labour Party. Except

there is a close connection between the union and the Labour Party. In

this case, why is it that your campaign is being seen as a proxy

war between the centrist Labour Party and Jeremy Corbyn's side. I

don't that is the most important thing for me, not the position of

the leader of the Labour Party. Except there is a close connection

between the union and the Labour Party. In this case, why is it that

your campaign is being seen as a proxy war between the centrist

Labour Party and Jeremy Corbyn's side. I don't believe sure that we

are fit for the. But why do you think it is being seen that way? You

would probably be better asking that question to Len McCluskey in terms

of the political arena that Unite has operated. I want to move away

from that, I am more West Midlands than Westminster and I want our

members to get the service they deserve and make sure that we are

fit for the 21st you see it as a proxy war between two side in the

Labour Party? I don't, I see it as a do you see it as a proxy war between

two side in the Labour Party? I don't, I see it as the union at a

difficult time. Why is Momentum, the grass roots group that has grown up

supporting Jeremy Corbyn, putting so much effort into supporting Len

McCluskey? I don't know, you would have to ask them, but none of the

should underestimate the importance of the job of leading a trade union

like Unite. It is a tough time for Labour and people need to make a

choice about who they think is the best person to lead Unite in the

future. I think it is an important relationship between the Labour

Party and the trade union movement, I am proud of that link, I think it

has served us well over many years. There have been a few ups and downs

over the years but I think the trade union movement in provide an

incredibly important voice, and it might not be as close as it has been

but it is an important relationships are members of Unite should be

mindful of that in any decision they make. There is a close relationship,

you cannot get away from Westminster in that sense, the Labour Party,

outlined by Dan Jarvis, has a close relationship with Unite. I don't

doubt for one minute that working people and Unite members do better

under a Labour Government, but this is about the leadership. I am not a

puppet Master for the leader of the Labour Party, I want to get on with

the priority of focusing on our members in what will be a turbulent

time ahead. And the way to do that is by some sort of relationship and

support in the Labour Party. Unite. We affiliated to the Labour Party if

you win the election, you would still have delegates,

representatives of the National Executive Committee? Of course. So

the links are still there, rightly or wrongly, you cannot get away from

that. You cannot get away from it but the focus, what I want to do as

leader of the biggest trade union in Britain, is making sure every day

that one I focus on that it is not about parliamentary politics, it is

about what is better for my members and better for working people. In

the end, you are not going to win, looking at the figures, 15% of

members voted last time, total, and two

thirds of those voted for Len McCluskey. One in ten voted for Len

McCluskey, so I do believe I can win. The reality is this is wide

open as an election, there is a clear message about the focus I will

bring to the job and the difference I will provide so yes, I do believe

I can win. How would you get on with Jeremy Corbyn? He is the leader of

the Labour Party, simple as that. But how would you build relations

with Jeremy Corbyn? My job is not to be focused on the leader of the

Labour Party, that is exactly why I am standing. My job is to be focused

on the 4 million members that pay my wages. Gerard Coyne, good luck.

Well, it's set to be a busy week here in Westminster.

Let's take a look at what's coming up in the next few days.

Tomorrow, as we've been hearing, MPs begin two days of debate

on the European Union Notification of Withdrawal Bill, which will allow

the Prime Minister to trigger Article 50 and begin the process

The debates could last late into the night,

and you can expect them to be heated.

Sticking with Brexit, on Wednesday Ivan Rogers

You may remember he resigned as the UK's man in Brussels

earlier this month and took a swipe at the Government as he went.

On Thursday the Bank of England will publish

its quarterly inflation report, setting out predictions

The bank's governor Mark Carney has already indicated that he's

likely to revise up this year's growth forecast.

On Friday EU leaders meet in Malta to discuss life after Brexit,

it's not clear yet if Theresa May will be going too.

And private members' bills being considered by MPs will include

Dan Jarvis's attempt to set a new target for the reduction

We're joined now by two journalists who like nothing more than a late

night Commons sitting and a row about a foreign visit -

it's Jason Groves of the Daily Mail, and Holly Watt of the Guardian.

Jason, first of all, is Donald Trump's state visit going to go

ahead. Yes, I think that is pretty clear. Number Ten have said today it

will be a gesture to populism to scrap it. Of course critics think

the visit in the first place was a gesture to a populist, but they are

pretty clear that this visit is important and that it rather

transcends the current row. When it does go ahead I think we should be

set for some pretty extraordinary protests, the like of which we

really haven't seen for very many years. There is lots to talk about

whether this is embarrassing for the Queen, I'm not convinced by that, I

think she has put up with some pretty difficult people in the past,

Emperor Hirohito, I think she and Philip can cope. She is pretty

resilient! Holly, how does Downing Street get a grip on this story in

terms of the petition, for example, which will continue no doubt to go

up and up? It has been a complicated bidets, a week used to be a long

time in politics, now it is 48 hours, faced with new realities all

over the place. Theresa May had her trip to Washington, DC which seemed

to go off quite smoothly apart from some strange handholding, then they

went to Turkey and by the time they had arrived it was all strange and

-- all change and they were scrambling to catch up. I see the

two of you are not holding hands, that is something! You are clearly

on level ground! Let's look at Brexit and the week ahead, we just

looked at some of the hurdles in terms of legislation and the pathway

through Parliament, how do you see it?

There will be lots of debates and votes in parliament tomorrow about

how long they have to debate it, if there should be a White Paper and

when they report back. I think on Wednesday evening the vast majority

will vote for Article 50, because I think to do so would be so

anti-democratic that most of them can't stomach doing it. There will

be a rebellion, certainly by the SNP, they won't vote for it, the Lib

Dems won't vote for and I think you'll see 50 or 60 Labour MPs not

vote for it, which is a problem for the Labour Party. But I think the

legislation itself will get through. Looking at the Labour Party, does it

matter there is this divide in the Labour ranks, Holly? People have

resigned already and six or seven who are not clear if they will vote

along with Jeremy Corbyn's three line whip. Then you have Tom Watson

saying quietly that in the old days if you resigned from the Shadow

Cabinet, that was a very, very long time in the wilderness. Now it's

more like a rugby sin bin ten minutes on the sidelines thinking

about what you've done. Not so quiet now, everyone seems to know about

it. Back in the shadow could have -- cabinet in a couple of months. In

the next few days if Article 50 is triggered, what happens in the

Lords? I think it will take a bit longer to get it through the Lords.

Something like 80% of peers are opposed to Brexit. I think leaders

of the main groups have been pretty clear that... Turkeys voting for

Christmas if they voted against. Unelected politicians overturning

the democratic will as expressed in the referendum is not really a

runner. I suspect it will get through there as well but it will

take a lot longer, and there will be more debates to come. Thank you

both. Now, we mentioned Dan's

private members bill coming to the Commons this week,

it's seeking to enshrine in law Does putting a pledge into law

achieve anything? I hope that it would, clearly. In 2010 this was

agreed on a cross-party basis. The then leader of the Conservative

Party, David Cameron, thought it would be a good thing to do. Given

that we have 4 million children currently growing up in poverty and

the Institute for Fiscal Studies say that number will increase by 50%,

actually it would be a very powerful show of unity if across the House of

Commons we could agree to work together to say we need to reduce

those numbers, we will do something about it. I think having a target

focuses the mind of the decision-makers in government. Does

it? Labour drops the figure to drop child poverty by specific date in

its manifesto. In the end it doesn't bring you any closer to the goal you

have set out by just saying there is a target? I don't agree with that.

Government sets lots of targets. The immigration target they continually

failed to meet? Across governments there are lots of specific targets.

I think in life, if you want to achieve something, it's useful to

set a target so you can measure your progress against it. If you are not

prepared to set a target, I'm afraid what I conclude from that if you are

not seriously committed to reduce the number of children growing up in

poverty. Is another point, if you don't say, you are not making a

priority, if you don't pledge it, you're not putting your money where

your mouth is. The ISS says there will be a 50% increase by 2020. That

is a massive failure by the government. This government and

under David Cameron from 2010 the commitment was to tackle the

problems causing the poverty issue. I have a 10%, by one measure, in my

constituency and I can think of particular states and areas where

people's life chances are clearly not the life chances we would hope

for them to be having. So you have failed. By that measure, the old

target based on the percentage of households with below average

income, you are going to have seen an increase of 50%, according to the

Institute for Fiscal Studies. This depends on the measurement you are

looking at. Going back to life chances are making a difference, I

agree with Dan. Let's set a target, but we have been making changes.

Universal credit is coming in, people premium, the national living

wage, we are taking more people out of tax than ever. The trainee and

apprenticeships we are offering and 2 million more people in jobs, we

need to set aspirations. Is that enough? The previous Labour

government lifted 1 million children out of poverty. Theresa May said she

would fight injustices, I think it is an injustice so many children are

growing up in poverty in this Friday we have an opportunity to do

something about it and I hope we do. Now, it may shock you to learn

that there are some BBC programmes even better known than the Daily

Politics. And if you were listening

to the radio yesterday, you might have heard one of them,

as Desert Island Discs marked its 75th anniversary

with an interview with David The format has hardly

changed since 1942 - a bit like this programme,

then - and over the decades some of the biggest names in politics

have been 'cast away', and perhaps revealed more

than they bargained for. We've chosen some of the highlights,

let's have a listen. There is some flash photography in

this film. Mrs Thatcher, how

important to you is music? It's what I go to when I want

to take refuge in something completely different,

when I really want to get away from worries and go from the very

logical life that I've lived and I've always been trained

to live, really to a different I couldn't identify

with the Conservatives, who I'd fought all my life,

but I couldn't really increasingly identify with the Labour Party,

and I think one of the early seeds of the SDP, one which has been very

little noticed in the press, was the strong support that those

of us who later formed the SDP had The people who have sacrificed

their view in order to get to the top, have very often

really left no footprints I really think I have chosen quite

consciously to give people confidence in themselves and not

confidence in me. You were calling for the immediate

reduction in numbers of immigrants coming into Britain

and for the repatriation of those, That was official policy of

the Conservative Party at the time. Then why were you sacked

by Ted Heath for saying it? Because he didn't like the fact

that it had been heard. It almost brings tears to my eyes,

with the pride I have in doing that job, and the faith that people have

in me, and therefore I don't want stardom,

I just want to be known as a jolly good Speaker,

and a nice girl, and somebody who has been very fair

and just all round. The true emotional attachment

to the Labour Party is not to cling onto something long past its sell-by

date, it is actually to say, "Well, what is this party

about, what do we feel? Well, why did I join

the Labour Party? I thought, when I was preparing this

list, that I'd actually quite like something to perhaps jig up

and down to or dance to a bit on this desert island,

and my husband Philip and I are sort of the Abba generation,

so it is a piece of Abba, We're joined now by the Telegraph's

radio critic, Gillian Reynolds. Welcome to the daily politics. Why

do politicians love doing it so much? It gives them that moment

where they can turn into real people. Does it turn them into real

people? They try very hard. It depends if they have chosen their

own things or an adviser has chosen for them. Do you think, for

instance, Mrs Thatcher will really chose those songs? She says in the

great book about Desert Island discs, I couldn't do with comedy --

do without comedy... That's the thing, when you've listened to all

these politicians, you give those examples, is it not always credible

that these people could have picked those particular tracks? I love to

think of David Cameron dancing tomorrow see and the Smiths. That's

the thing, is it done by committee? There were rumours certain prime

ministers or leaders of parties about the committee they're saying

we have to have an even spread of classical, pop, is that...? The

little giveaways are delicious. When Tony Blair chose his favourite

object it was a guitar lent to him and one of his favourite records was

Johnson's singing crossroad blues. I love to think of that, the devil 's

music, he was singing about being buried at the crossroads. It's a

thrilling concept. Politicians love it, because for that brief moment

they are in the same league as David Attenborough, and great lords, great

thinkers of our time. I think it is a wonderful piece of entertainment.

No wonder it survived. I was going to say, that is why it has endured.

Simple, adaptable, fits all sizes, what more can I say? Would you be

sitting never discs if you were going on Desert Islands, thinking

about the tracks that work best for you? I think it is a national

treasure, if I were I wouldn't approach it in that way I think I

would just make a short list of those musical moments that bring

back memories. Do you believe him, do you think that's what would

happen? I think he'd be got at. Would you be got at? Not for a

moment, a true pop girl and the theme of Black beauty. I could do it

in about ten minutes. What is your one luxury? My children! You can't

have people. I'm sorry, it's basic, moisturiser. A lot of people, Joan

Collins took moisturiser. I love Joan Collins. I don't think you are

as old as Joan Collins! Dan Jarvis, what would your one book be? Would

you be like Enoch Powell and choose the old Testament in Hebrew and

Greek? You really do know this off by heart! I didn't realise you

couldn't take a person. Perhaps a bit hard to take your kids, I

thought maybe I should take Donald Trump, because sometimes you have to

take one for the team! LAUGHTER Spend the rest of your life with

Donald Trump. I have a couple of records. The thing that brings back

so many memories for me is sitting with my kids, listening to In The

Night Garden. A wonderful, emotive soundtrack. I would definitely take

that. That's the one thing my husband used to turn up as soon as

my children went to sleep. Is it important politicians show they have

a hinterland outside of politics when they do this? I think it's nice

for people to see another side, as well as the angry barking must. Not

that we've had any of that today, you've been wonderful! More 's the

pity. I know you worked very hard for that. A favourite? My favourite?

Well, I don't really have a favourite, but I do think if I was

singing along on a log and ended up on a desert island, whose record is

I bear listening to? Mo Mowlam's were pretty good. They are not in

the book but she ended up with the Jackson five and Blame It On The

Boogie. I Didn't Listen Yesterday Because I Was At Church Yesterday

Praying For The Future Of The World. I Will Catch The Repeat On Friday.

Thank you for coming on and sharing that even if they went your personal

records. There's just time before we go

to find out the answer to our quiz. The question is why is Donald Trump

reported to be worrying about meeting Prince Charles

during his state visit? c) His views on architecture,

or d) Because Mr Trump

has a fear of princes? So, Dan and Mims, what's

the correct answer? Frankly, I think all of them could

be. They could but I need one. I'm thinking climate change. Climate

change, what about you? Hazard climate change. That is correct.

That's all for today, thanks to our guests.

The one o'clock news is starting over on BBC One now.

I'll be here at noon tomorrow, with all the big political

To be in the Lords, you have to be punctual...

Sometimes you really do literally have to slam the door