:00:39. > :00:46.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:47. > :00:52.Questions over the Conservatives general election campaign spending
:00:53. > :00:54.have snowballed this morning, as the party is fined a record
:00:55. > :00:58.Meanwhile, 12 police forces investigating local Tory campaigns
:00:59. > :01:13.Chancellor Phillip Hammond is forced to drop a tax rise
:01:14. > :01:26., so where could the Government be forced to back down next?
:01:27. > :01:28.With reports of student unions banning certain newspapers,
:01:29. > :01:30.words like "man-kind" and even "sombreros", is free speech
:01:31. > :01:35.really under threat at British universities?
:01:36. > :01:42.And style, understatement, refinement - all things
:01:43. > :01:51.you won't find in this limousine made for Donald Trump and about to
:01:52. > :02:04.All that in the next hour and with us for the whole
:02:05. > :02:07.of the programme today, someone I can assure you didn't
:02:08. > :02:09.arrive here by limousine - not least because he'd quickly write
:02:10. > :02:11.an article about the BBC wasting money - it's
:02:12. > :02:16.Let's begin today with the news that the Conservatives have been
:02:17. > :02:18.fined a record ?70,000 by the electoral commission.
:02:19. > :02:21.This is one of a series of investigations into how the party
:02:22. > :02:23.spent money at the 2015 general election and a number
:02:24. > :02:26.It follows a long-running investigation into claims the Tories
:02:27. > :02:30.may have broken electoral law by Channel 4 News, which in turn led
:02:31. > :02:34.Well, don't worry, because JoCo is here with the details.
:02:35. > :02:37.Political parties have to keep a record of all their spending
:02:38. > :02:39.during election campaigns to make sure they comply with
:02:40. > :02:42.The Electoral Commission, the independent watchdog
:02:43. > :02:44.which oversees election expenses has fined the Conservatives a record
:02:45. > :02:51.?70,000 for breaking election expense rules.
:02:52. > :02:53.The Commission says there were "numerous failures"
:02:54. > :02:55.in reporting the spending on three by-elections in 2014
:02:56. > :03:08.These included missing payments of at least ?104,000 and ?118,000
:03:09. > :03:14.that was either not reported or incorrectly reported.
:03:15. > :03:18.A portion of that amount was recorded as national party
:03:19. > :03:21.spending when it should have been written down as local
:03:22. > :03:23.candidate spending, which has much smaller limits.
:03:24. > :03:28.What's more Conservatries did not include the required invoices
:03:29. > :03:32.or receipts for 81 payments to the value of nearly ?53,000.
:03:33. > :03:34.The Conservatives have accepted the fine and said they made
:03:35. > :03:43.Separately, a dozen police forces have sent files
:03:44. > :03:48.to the Crown Prosecution Service to decide whether charges
:03:49. > :03:50.should be brought over how the Conservatives spent money
:03:51. > :03:54.The Tories aren't the only party to feel the force
:03:55. > :03:58.of the Electoral Commission, last year both Labour and the Lib
:03:59. > :04:01.Dems were fined ?20,000 each for undeclared election expenses.
:04:02. > :04:03.I spoke to Claire Bassett the chief executive
:04:04. > :04:08.of the Electoral Commission earlier and I begain by asking
:04:09. > :04:10.of the Electoral Commission earlier and I began by asking
:04:11. > :04:12.her what she thought of the Conservatives claim
:04:13. > :04:16.that they made an administrative error.
:04:17. > :04:18.What we have found is a number of failings right across three
:04:19. > :04:20.by-elections in 2014 and the UK Parliamentary general election
:04:21. > :04:23.in 2015 that covered a number of aspects of the work.
:04:24. > :04:26.We think these are unprecedented, the level we have seen,
:04:27. > :04:28.and for that reason, we have imposed a ?70,000 fine
:04:29. > :04:32.which is the highest we have ever imposed.
:04:33. > :04:35.Would you have imposed more if you had had the scope to do so?
:04:36. > :04:42.That ?70,000 actually represents five different separate fines
:04:43. > :04:48.which have been added up, and certainly, at least one of those
:04:49. > :04:51.we would have liked to have been higher than the maximum ?20,000
:04:52. > :04:56.We think that level is just too low and that, in fact,
:04:57. > :05:01.this could be seen as a cost of doing business for some parties,
:05:02. > :05:04.particularly if you are spending millions of pounds at a general
:05:05. > :05:08.We would like to see Parliament increase that,
:05:09. > :05:09.certainly, so it is in line with other regulators.
:05:10. > :05:11.Just to ask again about the administrative error
:05:12. > :05:13.line, or justification, from the Conservatives -
:05:14. > :05:15.do you think that is justified in terms of this explanation?
:05:16. > :05:17.Well, what we have found, we examined the national party
:05:18. > :05:20.spending return for the by-elections and for the general election
:05:21. > :05:22.and what we found was numerous instances where campaign spending
:05:23. > :05:27.was either inaccurately reported, missing, or not apportioned
:05:28. > :05:32.properly and what that says is that there was a system failure
:05:33. > :05:35.in how they were recording that spending and how those
:05:36. > :05:44.So it is a significant failure and what it meant
:05:45. > :05:46.is that we were actually unable to establish accurate
:05:47. > :05:48.levels of what was spent in some areas, for example.
:05:49. > :05:50.The whole controversy has centred around what actually
:05:51. > :05:54.counts as local spending, local campaign spending
:05:55. > :05:56.for a specific candidate in a specific constituency,
:05:57. > :05:58.and national spending from the central office of a party
:05:59. > :06:02.As far as you are concerned, what is the main difference?
:06:03. > :06:06.What we have looked at is only the national spending,
:06:07. > :06:10.Candidate spending returns are under a different regime
:06:11. > :06:18.and that is what the police and the CPS are looking at.
:06:19. > :06:23.But in terms of what we looked at, money spent on campaigning -
:06:24. > :06:25.was it spent on the big national campaigns that were about getting
:06:26. > :06:28.that party elected or were they about supporting an individual
:06:29. > :06:30.candidate in a specific constituency to get elected?
:06:31. > :06:32.I think that is the best way of summarising the difference.
:06:33. > :06:34.How co-operative were the Conservatives?
:06:35. > :06:36.Well, there have been some delays in completing the investigation
:06:37. > :06:40.and those are largely down to difficulties we have had
:06:41. > :06:42.obtaining information to carry out this investigation
:06:43. > :06:44.and unfortunately, at one point, we did have to seek
:06:45. > :06:49.Labour and the Liberal Democrats were also fined ?20,000 each.
:06:50. > :06:51.The Conservatives have been fined significantly more.
:06:52. > :06:58.Does that mean that the Conservatives were a lot worse?
:06:59. > :07:02.It means the scale and nature was more serious.
:07:03. > :07:04.The Conservatives' was also across the three by-elections
:07:05. > :07:06.which wasn't the case in the other two.
:07:07. > :07:10.But that fine also reflects the difficulty we had
:07:11. > :07:12.in completing the investigation, the challenges brought
:07:13. > :07:18.In the other two instances, both the parties very quickly
:07:19. > :07:20.put their hands up and co-operated fully with the investigations,
:07:21. > :07:24.which unfortunately was not the case here.
:07:25. > :07:27.And we did ask to speak to the Conservatives and Labour
:07:28. > :07:30.on this issue this morning, but neither want to
:07:31. > :07:37.Maybe they are busy doing something else.
:07:38. > :07:41.But let's talk now to our assistant political editor, Norman Smith.
:07:42. > :07:44.He's outside the Conservative Party's HQ,
:07:45. > :07:45.central office as it used to be known, in Westminster.
:07:46. > :07:54.Norman, so a record fine from the Commission and now all eyes on the
:07:55. > :07:58.Crown Prosecution Service. Because that will establish as to whether
:07:59. > :08:05.this breach of the election rules was deliberate. It was a tactic by
:08:06. > :08:09.the Conservative Party, in effect to give them an advantage in key
:08:10. > :08:14.marginal seats by enabling their candidates to spend more. Now, the
:08:15. > :08:16.electoral Commission are saying this is not something they investigate,
:08:17. > :08:22.this is beyond their jurisdiction. They simply do not know what the
:08:23. > :08:24.intent was, whether it was honest administrative error, as
:08:25. > :08:30.Conservative officials here insist, or whether there was a deliberate
:08:31. > :08:35.intent to give Tory candidates a key advantage in those critical wards.
:08:36. > :08:40.But, I mean there is no getting away, I think, from the severity and
:08:41. > :08:43.almost anger, you sense from the Electoral Commission at the way the
:08:44. > :08:48.Conservative Party responded to this investigation, the fact they had to
:08:49. > :08:51.get a court order to obtain the key documents. And there is also one
:08:52. > :08:59.telling paragraph towards the end of the report where they say they fear
:09:00. > :09:03.there was "a realistic prospect that Conservative candidates did indeed
:09:04. > :09:07.have an advantage." Now that is clearly, I suppose the smoking gun.
:09:08. > :09:12.Whether this at the end of the day was simply poor book keeping or
:09:13. > :09:16.something else was going on. Norman that's Tory headquarters behind you
:09:17. > :09:21.there in our shot. How worried are they in that building? ? Well, I
:09:22. > :09:25.think they have to be worried. I mean these are very, very serious
:09:26. > :09:31.suggestions and they are just allegations, let's be honest. I mean
:09:32. > :09:35.their response so far, it seems to me, to be rather desperately
:09:36. > :09:40.suggesting that really this as big news as we seem to think it is, this
:09:41. > :09:45.was down to some administrative mistakes. They suggest the amount of
:09:46. > :09:50.money involved is comparatively small compared to their overall
:09:51. > :09:55.election spend. 0.6%. They say they have never been fined for this sort
:09:56. > :10:00.of thing before. They are also crit of the electoral -- critical of the
:10:01. > :10:03.Electoral Commission, taking a swipe at them, suggesting they need to
:10:04. > :10:08.review the way they go about their work. But clearly we need to wait
:10:09. > :10:13.until the police conclude their inquiries to get more details as to
:10:14. > :10:18.whether this was deliberate and whether there was intent behind the
:10:19. > :10:24.abuse of rules. Busy say. Rod Liddell how serious is it for the
:10:25. > :10:31.Tories? Very serious. The laughable thing is Labour hasn't making as
:10:32. > :10:38.much hay as it as they should be. You could, at the least, if the
:10:39. > :10:44.smoking gun is found, as Norman say, demand a rerun of the by elections,
:10:45. > :10:49.even though the general election superceded, in the Will the defence
:10:50. > :10:52.of dome crasscy. The reality is the spend per constituent... It is quite
:10:53. > :10:55.small It is quite small, it could have a significant difference.
:10:56. > :11:00.Labour may not be making as much of it as you think they should because
:11:01. > :11:06.they got fined. It was ?20,000. The Tories have ?7 o 0,000 and it is a
:11:07. > :11:13.record -- ?70,000 Yes but we have been looking into the Tory with more
:11:14. > :11:22.alack right and vigorous. And of course, Ukip. I think they got down
:11:23. > :11:25.and Labour. Ukip are being investigated but we haven't heard
:11:26. > :11:29.from the Electoral Commission from them. But Labour and the be Lib Dems
:11:30. > :11:34.are caught up in an investigation too. The reason they are keeping
:11:35. > :11:37.quite quiet. The obvious thing to ask for is a rerun of the
:11:38. > :11:41.by-elections, in terms of democracy, what is the last thing that Jeremy
:11:42. > :11:43.Corbyn wants now? Probably and more late Thursday nights for us More
:11:44. > :11:48.late Thursday nights for you. Those are the words
:11:49. > :11:51.of Chancellor Philip Hammond in this morning's Sun,
:11:52. > :11:53.as he explains the Government's decision to perform a U-turn
:11:54. > :11:56.on its planned rise in National Insurance only a week
:11:57. > :11:58.after he announced it at the Budget. The toxic mixture of being seen
:11:59. > :12:01.to break a manifesto commitment, opposition from Tory MPs,
:12:02. > :12:04.the newspapers, and crucially, to the plan and Mr Hammond had to go
:12:05. > :12:08.the despatch box yesterday to eat a fairly big
:12:09. > :12:20.serving of humble pie. It is very important,
:12:21. > :12:22.both to me and to my right honourable friend,
:12:23. > :12:24.the Prime Minister, that we comply not just with the letter but also
:12:25. > :12:27.the spirit of the commitments Therefore, as I set out in my letter
:12:28. > :12:35.this morning to the chairman of the select committee,
:12:36. > :12:37.my right honourable friend, the member for Chichester,
:12:38. > :12:45.I have decided not to proceed with the class four NICs measures
:12:46. > :12:48.set out in the Budget. There will be no increases
:12:49. > :12:50.in National Insurance contribution The genuinely self-employed
:12:51. > :12:53.carry real financial risk I know that a Conservative
:12:54. > :13:02.government really wants a tax system that will support risk takers
:13:03. > :13:04.and growth creators. Will the Chancellor commit to work
:13:05. > :13:07.with colleagues over the coming months who believe it is time
:13:08. > :13:10.to take a holistic and simplifying view of personal taxation
:13:11. > :13:11.for the self-employed which will support
:13:12. > :13:13.wholeheartedly those who build Might the Chancellor consider
:13:14. > :13:20.to make up the loss in revenue to bear down on those employers
:13:21. > :13:22.who force their employees into self-employment
:13:23. > :13:26.against their wish, destabilise their lives
:13:27. > :13:30.and thereby get out of paying National Insurance contributions,
:13:31. > :13:33.as all good employers do pay? As a slavish supporter
:13:34. > :13:40.of the Government, I am in some difficulty because my article
:13:41. > :13:44.robustly supporting the Chancellor's early policy
:13:45. > :13:46.in the Forest Journal is already Having been persuaded
:13:47. > :13:58.of the correctness of the course he is now following,
:13:59. > :14:00.I merely needed an opportunity Joining us now is the former
:14:01. > :14:17.Minister for Government A Welcome back to the programme. Now
:14:18. > :14:21.you were involved in drawing up the Tory manifesto for 2015. It stated
:14:22. > :14:25.four times there would be no rise in national insurance contributions.
:14:26. > :14:30.Did you forget to send a copy to Philip Hammond? I'm not responsible
:14:31. > :14:33.for sending copies of manifesto for anybody. I suspect what was
:14:34. > :14:37.happening was the Treasury was focussing on the legislation that
:14:38. > :14:41.then happened and that legislation specifically tied down income tax
:14:42. > :14:44.and the ordinary national insurance you and I play as employees but
:14:45. > :14:49.didn't tie down the self-employed such. I suspect they focussed on
:14:50. > :14:53.that. You know civil servants keep an eye on the manifesto as W they
:14:54. > :14:57.read through it and gut it before parties come into power and yet we
:14:58. > :15:02.learn that Mr Hammond wasn't even sure that this was a Conservative
:15:03. > :15:04.manifesto pledge until he heard the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg say it in
:15:05. > :15:15.this very studio. That's remarkable. It is not as remarkable as it would
:15:16. > :15:20.be if it had not been translated into law... One particular type of
:15:21. > :15:25.National Insurance was put into law, the manifesto did not discriminate.
:15:26. > :15:29.You are right it did not but the lauded. When the law was going
:15:30. > :15:36.through, the Labour Party said we were doing it to fulfil the
:15:37. > :15:40.manifesto commitment. It was what it was mainly aimed at. The manifesto
:15:41. > :15:46.was not consistent ultimately with what Philip Hammond did. As a matter
:15:47. > :15:50.of history, we will all recall, what was going on was there was a big
:15:51. > :15:56.hoo-ha about raising income tax and the suggestion that the ordinary
:15:57. > :16:07.National Insurance would be raised. Nobody thought it actually referred
:16:08. > :16:12.to the class two, three, four NICS. We were meant to work that out? A
:16:13. > :16:16.senior adviser to Mr Cameron said it was an idea you thought up on the
:16:17. > :16:19.hoof at the last minute, and emptied it in the election grid and you
:16:20. > :16:26.said, make a promise not to raise income tax, National Insurance, VAT.
:16:27. > :16:29.Long history, a question of whether Ed Miliband would raise taxes, the
:16:30. > :16:43.suggestion he would raise National Insurance instead. Would the Tories
:16:44. > :16:46.raise it as well? In retrospect, it would have been better if it had
:16:47. > :16:47.been more carefully phrased so in that, rather than just... So that it
:16:48. > :16:49.could have exempted what Philip Hammond is trying to do. Fact is
:16:50. > :16:56.fact. As we are now, it is right that we come back to this issue in
:16:57. > :17:02.the next Parliament after a review. Fiasco, shambles? No, no. Three
:17:03. > :17:07.weeks from now, you will not remember what it was about. I can
:17:08. > :17:13.assure you I will! Be in no bad about that! You will be on to the
:17:14. > :17:17.next big thing. There are some big things and this is quite a small
:17:18. > :17:22.thing. The big-ticket item is the question of whether the Budget needs
:17:23. > :17:29.to be fiscally neutral. Philip decided rightly it should be. It
:17:30. > :17:34.will now have to be done in a different way. We might forget it or
:17:35. > :17:37.put it to the back of our minds if you do a U-turn on something else,
:17:38. > :17:42.now you have shown you are an easy target for backbench treasure. What
:17:43. > :17:46.is the next? New schools funding, grammar schools? Probate charges
:17:47. > :17:53.which are going to shoot through the roof? I am charmed you think I am
:17:54. > :18:01.the representative of Her Majesty's government. I was dismissed a year
:18:02. > :18:05.ago. You going to defend them even though you will probably come back
:18:06. > :18:10.and say they were right to change in four weeks? I am happy to defend
:18:11. > :18:13.rational policy-making. I think the change Philip Hammond made was
:18:14. > :18:17.rational even though it contradicted the manifesto. I know it is
:18:18. > :18:21.extremely difficult to judge all of these things. There will be changes
:18:22. > :18:25.of course. The big issue is whether in general the Government is taking
:18:26. > :18:29.us in the right direction and it is. It has poisoned the well between ten
:18:30. > :18:33.and 11. Mr Hammond's acolytes off the record briefed that the people
:18:34. > :18:39.around the Prime Minister are economically illiterate. The
:18:40. > :18:43.consequence is these people who have never been known not to bear a
:18:44. > :18:49.grudge, they go for Mr Hammond and force him into having to back down.
:18:50. > :18:54.It is not yet at the Tony Blair- George Brown shade of things but it
:18:55. > :18:58.is not great. Compared to what happened for many years... That was
:18:59. > :19:04.not good for the country. This is not good for the country. I do not
:19:05. > :19:08.actually think there is a breakdown at all. I do not know the intimate
:19:09. > :19:13.detail but my impression is that actually both Philip and Theresa
:19:14. > :19:20.will find a good way of operating. Tony Blair and George Brown managed
:19:21. > :19:24.to run a government without operating. If you were Jean-Claude
:19:25. > :19:28.Juncker or any of the other negotiators, you would look and say,
:19:29. > :19:32.this government is a pushover, give them pressure and they capitulate.
:19:33. > :19:35.It hardly suggest that when you get to something that really matters
:19:36. > :19:41.like the Brexit negotiations that you will be able to stand up. If
:19:42. > :19:46.that is a mistake that EU negotiators make it will be a very
:19:47. > :19:49.serious mistake because Theresa May is no pushover. Challenged by the
:19:50. > :19:53.House of Lords on a much bigger issue, she robustly stood up for the
:19:54. > :19:57.position she was taking and the House of Lords backed down. If you
:19:58. > :20:03.are asking the question, will Theresa May stick up for her
:20:04. > :20:08.position on the EU Brexit? She will and very powerfully. I have
:20:09. > :20:12.negotiated with her for 16 years and I almost always lost. Explain to me,
:20:13. > :20:18.you said to me that this policy, the one announced in the budget, was
:20:19. > :20:21.rational. But it was counted out in the manifesto and the rational
:20:22. > :20:26.policy which was introduced last week is now no more. By definition,
:20:27. > :20:31.that makes your government is rational. No. It means there was a
:20:32. > :20:35.rational policy which it was not possible to pursue because the
:20:36. > :20:40.manifesto was badly worded. It was a mistake. The moral case, if that is
:20:41. > :20:44.as you are saying, it would have been to say, we were did the
:20:45. > :20:53.manifesto wrongly, the policy stays. Between us, I would have preferred
:20:54. > :20:56.it to be said. You backing the U-turn or sticking with the
:20:57. > :21:02.pre-U-turn policy? The pre-U-turn policy was good. It will have to
:21:03. > :21:05.come back in a different form. Sticking to the exact words of the
:21:06. > :21:12.manifesto is an important issue because at the next time we issue a
:21:13. > :21:19.manifesto, people need to know it is what we will do. I want to move on
:21:20. > :21:25.to election expenses, your party has been fined a record ?70,000, you
:21:26. > :21:30.failed to declare ?276,000 of expenses. Can nobody count in Tory
:21:31. > :21:33.Central office? As you observed earlier, all three political parties
:21:34. > :21:41.were found to have accounting systems which were not... Not like
:21:42. > :21:45.you both. The inaccuracies were in the three by-elections as well, it
:21:46. > :21:50.is a larger fine. All parties should obviously have accounting systems
:21:51. > :21:54.which are perfect. The Electoral Commission said the scale was
:21:55. > :21:57.completely different for the Conservatives, the scale and scope
:21:58. > :22:01.of the issues concerning the Conservative Party election
:22:02. > :22:04.expenses. And they could not get anything out of you. They were not
:22:05. > :22:10.trained to get anything out of me! The parties should always cooperate
:22:11. > :22:14.with the authorities -- they were not trying to get anything out of
:22:15. > :22:18.me. The Electoral Commission said your party was guilty of
:22:19. > :22:22.unreasonable and uncooperative conduct. At one stage, to get
:22:23. > :22:28.central office to release information, they had to go for a
:22:29. > :22:32.court order. There is law here and what parties are obliged to do is
:22:33. > :22:35.break the law and part of that is to have accounting systems that work,
:22:36. > :22:40.we should have that, it is an embarrassment... Given that the
:22:41. > :22:49.accounting systems were pretty dodgy... Not Baggio, wrong. -- not
:22:50. > :22:59.dodgy. I will not accept that they were dodgy. It suggest someone was
:23:00. > :23:03.intentionally... We do not know. We both know, we all know, that the
:23:04. > :23:10.prosecuting authorities, the police, are properly looking at it. Why
:23:11. > :23:16.didn't you call operate? I suspect the accounting systems were just
:23:17. > :23:20.wrong. It was clear you had made mistakes, intentionally or not, that
:23:21. > :23:25.is a matter for down the road. Why didn't you call operate? I think the
:23:26. > :23:29.party did have to cooperate will stop unreasonable and uncooperative
:23:30. > :23:35.conduct. You delayed the investigation for months. When you
:23:36. > :23:40.say, I did not delay anything... The party delayed the investigation for
:23:41. > :23:44.months. I suspect there are many different accounts of exactly what
:23:45. > :23:48.went on. The important point is, we should not have been in this
:23:49. > :23:56.position. If the accounts had been perfect, this would not happen.
:23:57. > :24:02.Whose fault is it? They have been reported to the police. As has the
:24:03. > :24:06.opposite number in the Lib Dems. It is the correct thing to do. The
:24:07. > :24:13.accounting systems were wrong. The fact is, 70,000 is a slap on the
:24:14. > :24:20.wrist. You need to have a blue ball and get some Tory hedge funds
:24:21. > :24:27.supporter, have little Jemima and Hamish some work express for a --
:24:28. > :24:32.work express for a couple of days. You are making it into a major
:24:33. > :24:35.political thing. The real disincentive for parties which will
:24:36. > :24:38.force them to keep proper accounts is the fact you have terrible
:24:39. > :24:48.problems in the media and with the public if you don't. The real thing
:24:49. > :24:53.is that 12 police forces are reporting your party to the CPS. I
:24:54. > :24:59.suspect they will clear the party of any wrongdoing in that sense. 12
:25:00. > :25:07.police forces are wrong? All 12? We do not know what they said. You must
:25:08. > :25:12.not prejudge these things. You are... We don't know what the
:25:13. > :25:16.outcome is. I suspect it will be to clear them. I am saying it is wrong
:25:17. > :25:21.not to have proper accounting systems. What actually keeps the
:25:22. > :25:27.parties honest in that respect and make sure they do do their job
:25:28. > :25:32.properly is the amount of exposure that goes on if you don't. That is
:25:33. > :25:35.more important than a fine. Shouldn't we go and run the
:25:36. > :25:41.by-elections again? You can do what you like! Sorry to be the moral
:25:42. > :25:45.arbiter on this programme, wouldn't that be the moral thing to do? It
:25:46. > :25:53.would be silly for someone to do that. They need to see what happens
:25:54. > :25:58.with the prosecuting authorities. Having a moral arbiter is a pretty
:25:59. > :26:02.new thing to have in politics! Oliver Letwin, thank you very much.
:26:03. > :26:04.Now, let's talk a little further about that Government U-turn
:26:05. > :26:06.on the rises in National Insurance contributions.
:26:07. > :26:08.It was announced shortly before PMQs yesterday, which didn't give
:26:09. > :26:11.Labour's Jeremy Corbyn long to work out how to exploit the climb-down.
:26:12. > :26:14.But it also caused problems for some on the Conservative side,
:26:15. > :26:16.including the International Development Minister, Rory Stewart,
:26:17. > :26:19.who had been defending the tax rise in this very studio just before
:26:20. > :26:28.It is important to understand that the majority of self-employed
:26:29. > :26:35.people will not be worse off as a result of this measure.
:26:36. > :26:38.The pension benefits have gone up over time and the reason for the
:26:39. > :26:41.discrepancy is gone. It is important to understand
:26:42. > :26:44.that the majority of self-employed people will not be worse off
:26:45. > :26:47.as a result of this measure. So, if you're on, for example,
:26:48. > :26:49.?17,000 a year, like the majority of my constituents, you would be
:26:50. > :26:53.?309 better off in terms of your tax It sounds to me as though
:26:54. > :26:57.the Government has made a difficult decision,
:26:58. > :26:59.which I think is the right decision, which is that we have to keep
:27:00. > :27:02.to the spirit of the manifesto. Amazing how quickly the U-turn is
:27:03. > :27:09.can change people's mines! We're joined now by Tom Newton-Dunn
:27:10. > :27:20.from the Sun and by Kate McCann It was a big screeching U-turn. It
:27:21. > :27:23.was. Record-breaking. We have never had the main tax policy of a budget
:27:24. > :27:30.collapse within seven days. Six days. That is true. The credibility
:27:31. > :27:35.of the Chancellor? It has not helped him a huge amount. I would say he is
:27:36. > :27:42.damaged but this is far from terminal. Rumours of Philip
:27:43. > :27:45.Hammond's demise and sacking in the summer are grossly exaggerated. The
:27:46. > :27:50.truth is the PM and the Chancellor are an old married couple and like a
:27:51. > :27:56.lot of old married couples, there is not a lot of love left but they will
:27:57. > :28:00.go on together. Speak for yourself! The last Tory manifesto was before
:28:01. > :28:03.his time, he said, before the time of the current leadership, it does
:28:04. > :28:08.not really wash, does it? It does not. I do not think Oliver Letwin's
:28:09. > :28:15.comments will wash either, him saying we were only talking about
:28:16. > :28:19.class one NICS. We have all had to learn the differences! It is
:28:20. > :28:23.disingenuous to make that argument. It gets to the heart of the problem
:28:24. > :28:30.which is that you should not put things like this in the manifesto
:28:31. > :28:38.because National Insurance is of -- is a massive revenue raiser. Massive
:28:39. > :28:40.learning curve, what have we learnt about this government? What does it
:28:41. > :28:46.say about Theresa May and Philip Hammond? We have learned they are
:28:47. > :28:51.seriously capable of major screw ups. We will get to the bottom of
:28:52. > :28:56.this eventually. I am told there is a great story at the time of the
:28:57. > :29:03.making of the decision. The original tax rise or the U-turn? The original
:29:04. > :29:06.tax rise. Philip Hammond is an excessive physical disciplinarian,
:29:07. > :29:10.he has to make the budgets balanced and find ways of paying for things
:29:11. > :29:14.that will not come out or borrowing so he won the original battle to pay
:29:15. > :29:17.for the 2 billion of social care and Oliver Letwin could have tried to
:29:18. > :29:26.explain how on earth he left Philip Hammond with the hospital pass of 1
:29:27. > :29:28.million ring fences. He won the original battle and it went terribly
:29:29. > :29:33.wrong and Number 10 say they predicted it in advance, hence why
:29:34. > :29:39.then forced a pretty rapid U-turn. We know from that that decisions are
:29:40. > :29:43.made in Number 10 far too quickly and informed and there is another
:29:44. > :29:48.element, putting all of this into the wider perspective, the Tory MPs
:29:49. > :29:52.are talking about this today, the sheer workload on top of the
:29:53. > :29:57.Chancellor and the PM, Brexit, Donald Trump, the fiscal problem,
:29:58. > :30:00.how to pay for social care and the NHS, and the Scottish referendum.
:30:01. > :30:05.You think these mistakes will become more frequent as a result? Four
:30:06. > :30:09.crises pretty tough to deal with and it is almost inevitable the wheels
:30:10. > :30:14.will come off on one of them. We talked briefly before with Oliver
:30:15. > :30:21.Letwin about if they folded under pressure over this issue, in
:30:22. > :30:25.physical terms, ?2 billion, what will be the next thing they will
:30:26. > :30:28.fault over? Problems with the schools funding already. The
:30:29. > :30:32.government whips are worried about the bus services Bill which sounds
:30:33. > :30:37.boring but lots of backbench MPs are upset about that, cutting bus
:30:38. > :30:42.services in local constituencies. The wider problem is exactly what
:30:43. > :30:45.you say, what it means for party discipline. Tory MPs have
:30:46. > :30:49.effectively become the official opposition. Jeremy Corbyn is not
:30:50. > :30:53.holding Theresa May to account. We saw that yesterday. The U-turn was
:30:54. > :30:55.forced by the Tory backbenches. It is not anything to do with the
:30:56. > :31:05.Labour Party. In terms of Tory backbenchers, we
:31:06. > :31:09.demonstrated with Rory Stewart, he had to about-turn on air and Dominic
:31:10. > :31:14.Raab was defending the policy after the Budget, how upset will they be,
:31:15. > :31:17.in terms of having defended a policy that then makes them look stupid
:31:18. > :31:21.when it is dropped? Very upset. There is the policy mess and the
:31:22. > :31:26.communications handling of it. To have a mid-rapging Government
:31:27. > :31:31.minister, live on television and not telling him, no-one bothering to
:31:32. > :31:36.ring up and say - don't go too strong on this, we are about to pull
:31:37. > :31:40.the rug from under your feet. Although a letter was sent. Why does
:31:41. > :31:45.number ten not know we have a minister live on air defending this.
:31:46. > :31:49.It wreaks of a shambles. Let's talk about Labour, Jeremy Corbyn had to
:31:50. > :31:53.respond. He had about 20 minutes or so when this became apparent that
:31:54. > :31:56.the Chancellor was going to drop these tax rises on national
:31:57. > :31:59.insurance contributions and it seems he did not handle it W what impact
:32:00. > :32:03.does that have on Labour and the Government? The impactd on the
:32:04. > :32:08.Government is to cheer them up immensely. There is, as Kate says,
:32:09. > :32:12.there is no official Opposition effectively. No attempt to hold
:32:13. > :32:18.Theresa May to K he simply cannot do it. All he can do is wish everybody
:32:19. > :32:23.a happy St Patrick's Day. An, enanity. So, off Labour Party where
:32:24. > :32:27.the majority of the Labour MPs do not like him and are clubbed
:32:28. > :32:32.together because the alternative could be worse than Corbyn and an
:32:33. > :32:36.electorate which also does not like him and mistrusts him even more than
:32:37. > :32:40.it mistrusted Ed Miliband. It is absolutely disastrous. And I can't
:32:41. > :32:45.see any way out of it at all in the short term. You know, this is going
:32:46. > :32:51.to go on for two years. Thank you both very much.
:32:52. > :32:58.We are getting reports of a shooting in the French down of Grasse in the
:32:59. > :33:03.Cote d'Azur. We don't have any details yet. Implications is that it
:33:04. > :33:06.is a terrorist incident but we don't yet know.
:33:07. > :33:08.Are universities restricting free speech?
:33:09. > :33:10.The practice of "no-platforming", where individuals are banned
:33:11. > :33:12.from speaking on campus, aren't new, but there have been reports that
:33:13. > :33:15.an increasing number of people and activities are being restricted
:33:16. > :33:17.over questions of sexuality, race and gender.
:33:18. > :33:29.Jenny Kumah's been back to university to find out more.
:33:30. > :33:32.University - a place for debating, challenging ideas and analysing
:33:33. > :33:43.But campuses also strive to be places where all students feel safe
:33:44. > :33:47.and able to get involved without judgment and intimidation.
:33:48. > :33:49.It seems these two ideas are causing conflict on campus.
:33:50. > :33:54.There is growing concern that some student unions are becoming
:33:55. > :33:56.increasingly restrictive as they try to balance
:33:57. > :33:59.allowing free speech with protecting different groups.
:34:00. > :34:02.There have been a number of high-profile incidents recently,
:34:03. > :34:10.like one union banning Mexican hats from a freshers' fare
:34:11. > :34:14.for being racist, and some unions have banned cross dressing for fun.
:34:15. > :34:17.Here at Queen Mary University of London, the Free-Speech Society
:34:18. > :34:20.isn't happy that a vote has resulted in a ban on the Sun,
:34:21. > :34:24.the Daily Mail and the Daily Express being sold at union-run shops here.
:34:25. > :34:27.Why shouldn't students be able to purchase them on campus
:34:28. > :34:30.and discuss the ideas and challenge them if they don't like them
:34:31. > :34:37.We should have that debate and have those discussions,
:34:38. > :34:39.but banning them or banning the sale of them doesn't help
:34:40. > :34:47.The student union told me there is no one available
:34:48. > :34:50.to give an interview today, but they have just e-mailed me
:34:51. > :34:52.a statement and they say this is a commercial boycott
:34:53. > :34:54.and the union should not tolerate hateful
:34:55. > :34:56.discourse in its venues, including in the
:34:57. > :35:00.But questions have also been raised about student unions
:35:01. > :35:05.Six groups are not allowed a platform on campuses
:35:06. > :35:15.But recent decisions to exclude some high-profile
:35:16. > :35:25.Feminist writer Julie Bindel was barred from speaking
:35:26. > :35:29.They said her views on trans people would incite hatred.
:35:30. > :35:32.And a National Union of Student representative refused to share
:35:33. > :35:34.a platform with gay rights activist Peter Tatchell, accusing him
:35:35. > :35:39.Your party's long history of anti-Semitism, homophobia and
:35:40. > :35:46.When you have got a massive platform in the media and elsewhere
:35:47. > :35:48.suggesting that your freedom of speech has been curtailed
:35:49. > :35:50.by you not being invited to a student union event,
:35:51. > :35:53.Students are exercising their freedom of speech
:35:54. > :35:59.by calling out and disagreeing with certain views.
:36:00. > :36:05.But last October, police were called to the University College London
:36:06. > :36:07.when things got heated as pro-Palestinian supporters
:36:08. > :36:09.protested about a former Israeli soldier's talk.
:36:10. > :36:13.A university report found individuals planned to stop
:36:14. > :36:17.the event and created an intimidating atmosphere.
:36:18. > :36:20.This week, Baroness Deech called on the Government to write
:36:21. > :36:24.to university authorities to urge them to make sure that
:36:25. > :36:33.their self-governing, democratically-elected student
:36:34. > :36:44.Universities need to act promptly when the law is broken and deal
:36:45. > :36:46.with the offending students quickly, otherwise the students will go down,
:36:47. > :36:49.it will be the end of term, and the situation will not
:36:50. > :36:52.Baroness Deech says she is considering putting
:36:53. > :36:54.forward an amendment to the Higher Education Bill
:36:55. > :36:56.to strengthen free speech at universities, but the Government
:36:57. > :36:58.insists there are already sufficient laws in place.
:36:59. > :37:03.Before we move on. More reports of what is happening in France. Several
:37:04. > :37:06.people seem to be injured in a shooting incident at a French
:37:07. > :37:13.school. A gunman son understood to have opened fire at a high school in
:37:14. > :37:16.Grasse, about 30 minutes north of Cannes on the Cote d'Azur. The
:37:17. > :37:20.headteacher is said to be among those wounded. So we are getting a
:37:21. > :37:25.little bit more of a picture there, but still a lot yet to come through.
:37:26. > :37:29.Going back to the story we did the film on now. We are joined by author
:37:30. > :37:37.and journalist Kate Welsh. Welcome to the programme. A recent free
:37:38. > :37:42.speech survey by Spike said 94% of UK universities have censored free
:37:43. > :37:50.speech in the past year, some have no platform, people like Germaine
:37:51. > :37:53.Greer, Roger sth Scruton and a human rights' activist called Miriam
:37:54. > :37:57.Namasi. Are you happy? I don't believe it is censorship. I think
:37:58. > :38:00.freedom of speech is the right to accept the consequences of that
:38:01. > :38:03.speech. That means if certain institutions don't want to promote
:38:04. > :38:07.or give you a platform to say these things, then you have to accept
:38:08. > :38:13.that. Really? Yes, I do. That's not curtailing freedom of speech? No, I
:38:14. > :38:17.don't think it is. But people... People like Germaine Greer. But you
:38:18. > :38:21.have taken away the freedom of these people to speak at the university?
:38:22. > :38:24.They can speak wherever they like. But it freedom of speech is not
:38:25. > :38:27.freedom to be invited wherever you want. What is the point of a
:38:28. > :38:31.university if you don't allow a variety of views to be expressed? A
:38:32. > :38:36.variety of views, that's absolutely fine. Clearly not if you are
:38:37. > :38:43.Germaine Greer. I think - students are being asked to pay increasingly
:38:44. > :38:49.higher fees. I think that if they object to people like Germaine
:38:50. > :38:52.Greer, Julie Bindel and others being given, frequently pretty hefty
:38:53. > :38:56.speaking frees and a plot form at their universities. Julie Bildel
:38:57. > :39:01.does not take fees for that and she has worked for 30 years raising
:39:02. > :39:05.awareness of violence against women and done so, you know, thanklessly
:39:06. > :39:09.and for her to be bored from universities, simply because she has
:39:10. > :39:13.a different view to you or so. People in that university about
:39:14. > :39:17.transgender issues is a disgrace, as it is with Peter Tatchell. Hold on,
:39:18. > :39:24.hold on. Let Kate Welsh come back. Just to save money. It is ludicrous.
:39:25. > :39:29.I think Julie Bindel has done some fantastic things for women's issues,
:39:30. > :39:31.I will not decry that. I believe she has frequently incited hatred
:39:32. > :39:36.against transgender people. She hasn't. She has defended them. I
:39:37. > :39:41.have heard her do it. She has done it to me of I have spoken to her
:39:42. > :39:47.about it. She has supported trapped gender people. She look test notion,
:39:48. > :39:53.a scientific fact that someone who has transitioned from a man to a
:39:54. > :39:57.woman is still, technically, essentially, a man. The issue is not
:39:58. > :40:02.right or wrong, the issue is shouldn't you be able to hear the
:40:03. > :40:07.views on both sides of the argument. The Lincoln university, the student
:40:08. > :40:11.union t banned the university Conservative Association from social
:40:12. > :40:15.media because the Association had point odd out that the university
:40:16. > :40:20.had a low ranking what enit came to free speech. This is getting
:40:21. > :40:23.ridiculous I don't think that is on the same par as criticising who is
:40:24. > :40:28.being invited to speak at universities or to say that a
:40:29. > :40:32.democratically elected student union, preferring not to sell papers
:40:33. > :40:38.like the Daily Mail. Why would you do it at all? Why are you scared
:40:39. > :40:42.of... ? I'm in the remotely scared. Isn't a university exactly the place
:40:43. > :40:49.where there should be this cross fertilisation of ideas of political
:40:50. > :40:51.opinions, a breadth of ininformed opinion, of contentious opinion, of
:40:52. > :40:55.things which you might find difficult to accept and things which
:40:56. > :40:59.I might find difficult to accept. That's what should happen at
:41:00. > :41:02.university. Surely that's point? But freedom of speech and freedom of
:41:03. > :41:05.expression for minority groups has traditionally been oppressed or made
:41:06. > :41:09.difficult to access by people who criticise their ability to exist,
:41:10. > :41:14.like Julie Bindel with transpeople. She doesn't criticise that. We havep
:41:15. > :41:20.been around that. The principle at issue is here is not the rights or
:41:21. > :41:24.wrongs of any of the issue, it is that a of university, if you are
:41:25. > :41:28.lucky enough to get to one, is one of the view times in your life when
:41:29. > :41:34.you can go along and hear every view under the sun, but, in fact, what is
:41:35. > :41:37.happening now, is that the views are being channelled into a very narrow
:41:38. > :41:41.tunnel and if you are outside of that with your views, you don't get
:41:42. > :41:47.in? I think it is a very exciting time to be a student right now. I
:41:48. > :41:50.graduated ten years ago, we didn't - the progressive movement that's
:41:51. > :41:55.flowering now was reallip only in bud then but I think students are
:41:56. > :41:58.turning around and saying no to bigotry and hate speech. Well they
:41:59. > :42:02.can go to meetingsings and say that. It is a main or the doing that. It
:42:03. > :42:07.is the minority in the student unions doing that. I speak to
:42:08. > :42:10.someone with a kid at university. He said all this rubbish, this idiocy,
:42:11. > :42:15.this politically correct nonsense has no purchase whatsoever amongst
:42:16. > :42:18.the wider student body. It has a purchase only amongst the perenlely
:42:19. > :42:25.active amongst the political groups within there. . Who are generally
:42:26. > :42:30.from oppressed groups. Universities have been a safe place for straight,
:42:31. > :42:33.white men. We are seeing now an increase, a levelling of the playing
:42:34. > :42:38.field for other voices to be heard. You are stopping other people's
:42:39. > :42:41.voices being heard. That will mean removing the platform from one
:42:42. > :42:49.person and giving it to someone else. Well, a women removing it from
:42:50. > :42:55.a gay woman. City University in London, a who runs a well-known
:42:56. > :43:01.journalism course, voted to ban the Daily Mail and The Daily Express.
:43:02. > :43:04.Running a journalism course, fabulous The Daily Mail and
:43:05. > :43:09.journalism don't go hand in hand. That is your view. That doesn't give
:43:10. > :43:13.you a vote for banning them They are saying that in this specific campus,
:43:14. > :43:20.they are not banning it anywhere else. Where people are studying
:43:21. > :43:25.journalism. If you don't like the Daily Mail, I can understand that,
:43:26. > :43:30.but... It is commercial boycotting. There was theed a am Smith institute
:43:31. > :43:34.support recently which suggested, I think that 85% of university
:43:35. > :43:38.lecturers tended to the left, were liberals, tended to the left. Sure
:43:39. > :43:42.but that's always been the case. That's regularly the case, pretty
:43:43. > :43:47.much. Back in the '60s they did this comparison it was something like
:43:48. > :43:53.60%, still a majority but nothing like the hegonomy within those
:43:54. > :43:56.universities now, is all from this sort of left, liberal, censorious,
:43:57. > :44:03.intolerant and there are tearian. Well that's your view as well. Sthoo
:44:04. > :44:06.yes, I have just said it. Yes, in terms of viewpoint, it isn't
:44:07. > :44:09.generally accepted by everyone that that is the view at universities.
:44:10. > :44:14.Well left-wing view is. Thank you very much. We'll move on.
:44:15. > :44:18.Now, it's been another interesting week for Ukip,
:44:19. > :44:21.after they were forced to deny on Tuesday that they had suspended
:44:22. > :44:22.former donor and founder of the Leave.EU campaign,
:44:23. > :44:26.Mr Banks had previously donated ?1 million to the party,
:44:27. > :44:29.but in recent months, he had been very critical of the new Ukip
:44:30. > :44:32.leadership and of the party's only Westminster MP.
:44:33. > :44:35.On Tuesday morning, Mr Banks tweeted that his Ukip
:44:36. > :44:43.He claimed this was because he had accused the current Ukip leadership
:44:44. > :44:46.of not being able to "knock the skin off a rice pudding".
:44:47. > :44:57.And also confirmed he would be setting up his own "movement" -
:44:58. > :44:59.calling it Ukip 2.0 the force awakens - on Twitter.
:45:00. > :45:01.A Ukip party spokesman instead said that Mr Banks
:45:02. > :45:03.had not been suspended but that his membership lapsed
:45:04. > :45:06.in January and he "chose not to renew, despite reminders".
:45:07. > :45:08.Ukip's only MP, Douglas Carswell, who isn't exactly best
:45:09. > :45:11.friends with Mr Banks, made the slightly barbed response,
:45:12. > :45:14."It's always very sad when one of Ukip's 40,000 members leaves
:45:15. > :45:15.the party for whatever reason," he said.
:45:16. > :45:20.And we are joined now by the Ukip MEP, Bill Etheridge.
:45:21. > :45:30.Welcome to the programme. Is the party trying to silence Arron Banks?
:45:31. > :45:36.Ukip does not silence anyone, we are often in the headlines for debating
:45:37. > :45:43.things voraciously between us. You could not silence Arron Banks if you
:45:44. > :45:49.wanted to. Has he been suspended? His membership lapse. There is no
:45:50. > :45:53.hard feelings for the leadership towards Arron Banks and I would hope
:45:54. > :46:00.the other way round either. Even though he has been critical of the
:46:01. > :46:04.currently. Paul Nuttall? Arron Banks does not say things in a politically
:46:05. > :46:10.correct way. He did a fantastic job in the referendum. I wish him well.
:46:11. > :46:14.Relations cannot be that cordial or he would not be setting up a new
:46:15. > :46:18.movement, he would be staying with Ukip. He has been speaking about a
:46:19. > :46:23.new movement for some time. It will not be competing with Ukip, as I
:46:24. > :46:27.understand it. It will be called the patriotic alliance and we have heard
:46:28. > :46:30.today from Mr Banks's spokesman that it will be launched the day after
:46:31. > :46:37.the May elections. Good luck to him. Democracy. You said relations are
:46:38. > :46:41.still cordial and there are no hard feelings, that does not smack of
:46:42. > :46:44.cordial relations if you go and set up a rival party. You can have a
:46:45. > :46:50.difference of opinion. He can do whatever he wants. He is a very
:46:51. > :46:56.political guy and that is great. Do you support him in his venture?
:46:57. > :47:01.Would you consider joining? No, I am Ukip until the end and I am going to
:47:02. > :47:08.be a part of it until the end. If it is called Ukip 2.0, the force of w
:47:09. > :47:16.is, Star Wars and allergies, doesn't it feel as if Ukip is at war with
:47:17. > :47:22.itself or not with itself, with another party? -- the force awakens.
:47:23. > :47:26.He did a cross-party organisation and his aim was very similar to ours
:47:27. > :47:30.and he has been a great help, a donor and many other things and I am
:47:31. > :47:34.very grateful. Are you welcoming this new party adding to the colour
:47:35. > :47:41.of democracy? No, it sounds ludicrous. The title of it and the
:47:42. > :47:54.way it has been presented. The thing which Ukip is often prone to,
:47:55. > :47:58.occasional bursts of amour propre. There is a huge deficit in this
:47:59. > :48:02.country, a vast number of people are not prepared to vote for Jeremy
:48:03. > :48:08.Corbyn's Labour Party and they are not prepared to vote for what has
:48:09. > :48:13.become a shambles of Ukip, what we saw at Stoke and Copland. There are
:48:14. > :48:19.all of the votes out there looking for a conduit. Ukip is effectively
:48:20. > :48:24.dissolving. That is how it seems to me. I am not going to sit here next
:48:25. > :48:30.to you of all people and say, we did a great job in Stoke. It was
:48:31. > :48:34.disastrous. However, it does not mean we cannot improve and learn
:48:35. > :48:39.from it. There is a whole range of things we can do. This country needs
:48:40. > :48:44.a party that is more about lower taxation, smaller state, less
:48:45. > :48:48.politically correct. I do not think that appeals to many of the Labour
:48:49. > :48:53.voters in the north. Moving on election spending, as you know,
:48:54. > :48:57.files have been sent to prosecutors and the Tory party has been fined
:48:58. > :49:03.?70,000 by the Electoral Commission for issues to do with the election
:49:04. > :49:06.expenses. In theory, as Rod Liddle raised earlier, there could be a
:49:07. > :49:11.by-election. Why haven't you asked for one in South Thanet? We are
:49:12. > :49:15.waiting to see how things develop. I would love to see one and I think we
:49:16. > :49:20.would come up very strong. You could have challenged it at the time? The
:49:21. > :49:24.party is watching and seeing how it develops. If there is not unity, we
:49:25. > :49:28.will go at it, all guns blazing, and we would have a very strong
:49:29. > :49:33.candidate. You would support Nigel Farage Rennie again? Great
:49:34. > :49:38.politician. Did you listen to his interview with Marine Le Pen? I have
:49:39. > :49:43.not listened to it yet. It will be good, I am sure. When I spoke to him
:49:44. > :49:46.about Marine Le Pen a while ago, he distanced himself from the French
:49:47. > :49:52.presidential candidate, she was not that then. He said, we do not want
:49:53. > :49:56.anything to do with her. Why is he cosying up to her now? There are
:49:57. > :50:01.fundamental differences in policy between Ukip and the National Front.
:50:02. > :50:06.Many of them. It was right not to go into a grouping. For Nigel to speak
:50:07. > :50:10.to another patriotic leader in Europe, have discussions, that is
:50:11. > :50:17.perfectly legitimate. Now they are friends? Nigel is friendly with lots
:50:18. > :50:24.of people, it does not mean they are on the same page politically. There
:50:25. > :50:32.is an arguing for saying Theresa May should speak to her as well. An
:50:33. > :50:39.intruder burst into the high school in southern France and open fire.
:50:40. > :50:45.The town hall in Grasse saying it is not a terrorism incident, it
:50:46. > :50:50.involved students. The BBC News Channel will keep you abreast of
:50:51. > :50:54.developments during the day. Theresa May has just been speaking about the
:50:55. > :50:58.second independence referendum for Scotland which has been proposed by
:50:59. > :51:07.the Scottish Nationalists. She has said, now is not the time. Just now
:51:08. > :51:10.we should be putting all our energies into making sure we get the
:51:11. > :51:14.right deal for the UK and Scotland in our negotiations with the EU.
:51:15. > :51:19.That is my job as Prime Minister. Right now, we should be working
:51:20. > :51:22.together and not pulling apart, we should be working together to get
:51:23. > :51:28.the right deal for Scotland and the UK. That is my job as Prime
:51:29. > :51:35.Minister. For that reason, I say to the SNP, now is not the time.
:51:36. > :51:37.Argument developing as to when the next referendum for Scottish
:51:38. > :51:40.independence should be. The Prime Minister saying not one Brexit
:51:41. > :51:49.negotiations going on. -- not while. Now, if you're a fan of cars
:51:50. > :51:52.with plenty of leather, gold, wood-panelling and high-tech gadgets
:51:53. > :51:54.- it sounds a bit like Jo-Co's Austin Allegro -
:51:55. > :51:57.then you could be in for a treat this weekend because a limousine
:51:58. > :52:00.that was made for one Donald J Trump Introducing the ultimate
:52:01. > :52:08.Trump-mobile. In 1988, this luxury limo was
:52:09. > :52:13.designed exclusively by Cadillac to carry The Donald around
:52:14. > :52:22.his business empire. But for the last ten years,
:52:23. > :52:31.it's been in this mechanic's yard in the little less
:52:32. > :52:33.glamorous Gloucester. It's now owned by Craig Ayres
:52:34. > :52:36.who says he saved it from the He knew I was interested
:52:37. > :52:42.in Cadillacs and limos I knew it was something different,
:52:43. > :52:48.I bought it there and then and drove Rumour has it Trump made
:52:49. > :52:51.a deal with Cadillac to This was a prototype but the plans
:52:52. > :53:02.were abandoned and Trump just kept It's different to drive
:53:03. > :53:04.than anything else. You don't drive a Cadillac,
:53:05. > :53:06.you pilot one. It had a lot of features
:53:07. > :53:09.on there well ahead of its Everybody looks at it,
:53:10. > :53:13.a lot of people like it. When this car was built,
:53:14. > :53:15.no expense was spared. It was designed to cater
:53:16. > :53:19.for Trump's every mood. Its rosewood interiors housed
:53:20. > :53:21.a once state-of-the-art TV, VCR and even
:53:22. > :53:26.afax machine. The roof was heightened
:53:27. > :53:29.for extra space, and the personalised branding left nothing
:53:30. > :53:31.to the imagination as to who might Howdy, young lady,
:53:32. > :53:48.what do you want to know? What was it like being
:53:49. > :53:51.owned by Donald Trump? It was pretty hair-raising,
:53:52. > :53:53.let me tell you. There's a lot of beautiful women
:53:54. > :53:59.that's ridden in me, I tell you. I hope I can find another
:54:00. > :54:04.owner to love me. The car is up for auction on Sunday,
:54:05. > :54:12.so, soon, someone else can Joining us now is the design critic
:54:13. > :54:35.and author, Stephen Bayley. This limousine, the auction estimate
:54:36. > :54:41.is between 10- ?12,000. I believe everything we buy tells stories
:54:42. > :54:48.about us. It probably betrays us. You can see this in Trompe's
:54:49. > :54:52.properties. Churchill once said about, we shape our buildings and
:54:53. > :54:57.our buildings shaped us. Here we have a man who wants to live on a
:54:58. > :55:05.golf course. Someone once described golf as the last refinement of the
:55:06. > :55:08.suburban mind. Here you have a man, the leader of the free world,
:55:09. > :55:12.dedicated himself to it. There are other paradigms where a president
:55:13. > :55:25.might live, Frank Lloyd Wright, on the Prairie, the could have chosen a
:55:26. > :55:32.heart. -- hut. The first television interview he did after he won the
:55:33. > :55:40.election, he was sitting on the Louis XVI Simon King golden throne.
:55:41. > :55:45.-- Sun King. How will you liberate the dispossessed of Kentucky?
:55:46. > :55:48.Someone once said there was a marvellous line about the woman who
:55:49. > :55:55.did all of Henry Frick's collecting for him, he introduced new American
:55:56. > :56:00.money to old French furniture. There has always been that sort of thing
:56:01. > :56:08.in American taste, you project status, the Cadillac, gold helps,
:56:09. > :56:13.French references help. The Cadillac, the stretch limo, there
:56:14. > :56:16.was a time, in the 80s and 90s, that was not an unusual sight in New
:56:17. > :56:24.York. The thing unique in having that. It was a commodity stuff for
:56:25. > :56:30.midtown Manhattan. It has rather changed now. You do not see the
:56:31. > :56:37.stretch limos so much now, even in New York. Were they ever considered
:56:38. > :56:47.good taste? No, I do not think so. I would be prepared to bid for the car
:56:48. > :56:54.except it is not quite bling enough. I want it to offend people. The
:56:55. > :56:59.problem is, these cars may work on the avenues and streets of New York,
:57:00. > :57:10.they do not work on the Ben Delaney is of the Home Counties. -- bendy
:57:11. > :57:15.lanes. It is a projection of tasteful stop he has a lot of taste
:57:16. > :57:22.and it is always bad. It is 70s, is it? What about Donald Trump's taste?
:57:23. > :57:29.I am told an MOT comes with it for a couple of months. If the tax comes
:57:30. > :57:36.as well, I am in! You have your own flag on the door! I think it is a
:57:37. > :57:44.rather beautiful car and I do not like cars very much. Is it
:57:45. > :57:50.snobbery...? Yes, of course it is. He seems to be assessed with gilded
:57:51. > :57:55.stuff. There is the strange thing in Trump Tower, I was speaking about
:57:56. > :58:02.his preference... Trump Tower, the interior, the lobby is designed to
:58:03. > :58:07.be waterfalls and gold and escalators, reflective surfaces
:58:08. > :58:11.often used by people insecure in their tastes in order to project,
:58:12. > :58:14.his apartment, I have not been invited but I have seen pictures,
:58:15. > :58:20.that was designed by one of the people who worked on his casinos.
:58:21. > :58:26.The president, golf and casinos, his parameters for interior design.
:58:27. > :58:32.Heaven for him! In most parts of America, that will impress them.
:58:33. > :58:35.The one o'clock news is starting over on BBC One now.
:58:36. > :58:38.I'll be back here tonight on BBC One after Question Time for This Week,
:58:39. > :58:40.with Michael Portillo, Liz Kendall, Agnes Poirier,
:58:41. > :58:43.historian Kate Williams and Andrew Rawnsley.
:58:44. > :58:46.I'll also be back at noon tomorrow with all the big political
:58:47. > :59:03.The psychiatrist was a figment of his imagination.
:59:04. > :59:10.You never live in the moment any more.
:59:11. > :59:18.Can we find her before he does something?
:59:19. > :59:22.If anything were to happen to her, Charlie...