:00:36. > :00:40.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:41. > :00:43.Theresa May has named the date - she says she'll trigger Article 50
:00:44. > :00:48.That will fire the starting gun on our departure
:00:49. > :00:51.from the EU and begin two years of intense negotiation.
:00:52. > :00:55.Here's what else is coming in today's programme...
:00:56. > :00:58.Labour's Deputy Leader Tom Watson accuses left-wing supporters
:00:59. > :01:05.of Jeremy Corbyn of plotting to seize control of the party.
:01:06. > :01:07.Mr Watson says the grassroots Momentum group is in cahoots
:01:08. > :01:15.George Osborne insists he can still be an MP and edit
:01:16. > :01:25.But the Ethics watchdog says rules on MPs' second
:01:26. > :01:28.Should people with learning disabilities be allowed to work
:01:29. > :01:32.The businesswoman and campaigner Rosa Monckton says the rules
:01:33. > :01:35.are an obstacle to some, rather than a protection.
:01:36. > :01:39.And are the Cornish at risk of ethnic oppression?
:01:40. > :01:41.The Council of Europe, which upholds human rights,
:01:42. > :01:51.says the Government needs to do more for Cornish people.
:01:52. > :01:53.All that in the next hour, and with us for the whole
:01:54. > :01:56.of the programme today, two giants of the Westminster
:01:57. > :01:57.scene - former Cabinet minister Eric Pickles,
:01:58. > :01:59.and the former Labour minister Caroline Flint.
:02:00. > :02:17.Some breaking news in the last hour - the Government has announced
:02:18. > :02:19.that it will trigger Article 50 on Wednesday 29th March.
:02:20. > :02:21.Let's talk to our political correspondent Vicki Young.
:02:22. > :02:26.So what is going to happen? It seems a long time since the
:02:27. > :02:29.referendum in June but Theresa May always said she wanted to trigger
:02:30. > :02:32.article 50 by the end of March and she will do that. After Prime
:02:33. > :02:36.Minister's Questions next week she will make a statement to the House
:02:37. > :02:40.of Commons and then formally send a letter to Donald Tusk, the president
:02:41. > :02:44.of the European Council. That is what happens, of course many other
:02:45. > :02:48.questions then about the negotiations themselves. It means
:02:49. > :02:52.there is a two-year clock ticking before the UK leads the European
:02:53. > :03:12.Union, and in that time both sides will try
:03:13. > :03:16.to get a deal. What it involves, of course, is open to some speculation,
:03:17. > :03:18.but I think at this point Theresa May getting her way, fulfilling the
:03:19. > :03:21.timetable she said she would, despite some bumps along the way,
:03:22. > :03:23.the Supreme Court of course made the Government bring dinner bill, it
:03:24. > :03:26.went through Parliament, changes were made by the laws, but in the
:03:27. > :03:28.end she will get her way and trigger Article 50 by next Wednesday.
:03:29. > :03:31.You mentioned the letter she will send to the European Union, take us
:03:32. > :03:33.through a bit of a process that will happen on the European Union site?
:03:34. > :03:35.We have had some words dropped saying the commission is ready to
:03:36. > :03:38.begin the Brexit negotiations, because both sides want to say they
:03:39. > :03:40.are in control. Absolutely, until now Theresa May
:03:41. > :03:44.has been in charge of the timetable but as soon as she sends a letter,
:03:45. > :03:48.in many ways attention turns to Brussels. Donald Tusk has said they
:03:49. > :03:54.may be ready to give some response to the letter within 48 hours or so,
:03:55. > :03:59.it will be the European Union Council who gives the negotiating
:04:00. > :04:02.mandate to the commission to set forward their priorities, so we will
:04:03. > :04:05.get to know more about the priorities on both sides. Both sides
:04:06. > :04:11.have talked about things like the right of UK citizens -- EU citizens
:04:12. > :04:15.in the UK, Brits living abroad, but there are things they do not agree
:04:16. > :04:20.on, the so-called divorce bill, for example, will Theresa May be handed
:04:21. > :04:24.a huge bill, saying this is what the UK owes and unless you agree to pay
:04:25. > :04:29.it we will not have talks at all? Will they discuss the extricating of
:04:30. > :04:32.the relationship alongside the future relationship, the trade deal,
:04:33. > :04:38.for example? All these questions unanswered but the 27 other European
:04:39. > :04:41.countries will have a summit in the next few weeks then negotiations can
:04:42. > :04:45.start, although people pointing to things like the French and German
:04:46. > :04:49.elections which may delay it, but the timetable is not that long. Two
:04:50. > :04:54.years sounds like a long time but the person in charge of negotiations
:04:55. > :04:58.for the EU has already said he thinks the re-met needs to be made
:04:59. > :05:02.by October 2000 and 18. Eric Pickles, this is a big moment
:05:03. > :05:08.whether you were in favour of it or not. Your reaction to the fact that
:05:09. > :05:12.a date has now been set? It is a massive moment, I'm pleased we are
:05:13. > :05:16.getting on with it, it is right that they act was unamended, but if we
:05:17. > :05:20.know anything about our friends in the European Union it is a five to
:05:21. > :05:24.midnight organisation so I'm not as confident that everything will be
:05:25. > :05:33.sorted out so quickly. Do you agree that it could be one of those
:05:34. > :05:36.marathon, last days of the negotiation timetable in two years'
:05:37. > :05:39.time, it will be a marathon talks between all sides before a deal is
:05:40. > :05:42.done? My view is that over the next two years there will have to be a
:05:43. > :05:44.lot of work done and that the excitement starts in some respects,
:05:45. > :05:47.the detail, but I think at the end of the two years we are only likely
:05:48. > :05:51.to have the headlines. I think after those two years, there will be maybe
:05:52. > :05:57.five, six years of transitioning into every area of policy, which is
:05:58. > :06:00.why even Theresa May before now has mentioned a transition period. I
:06:01. > :06:06.think you are right, there will be a lot left until five to midnight but
:06:07. > :06:10.don't think it will be over in two years' time, they will be discussion
:06:11. > :06:13.for years to come. In terms of a reflection on the Labour side,
:06:14. > :06:16.should there have been more opposition? I feel the Labour
:06:17. > :06:20.position is the right one, it happens to be the one that I
:06:21. > :06:24.believe, but we have to accept the result of the referendum. At the
:06:25. > :06:27.same time I believe our position was right during the discussion of the
:06:28. > :06:31.bill to raise concerns about the fact that EU nationals working here,
:06:32. > :06:35.paying their taxes, do not know what will happen to them, and I think now
:06:36. > :06:38.that we have got a date next week for the letter to be sent, I hope
:06:39. > :06:43.Theresa May will stand by her word, which is to give that particular
:06:44. > :06:53.area of policy priority. Do you agree
:06:54. > :06:57.that we are unlikely to get beyond what Caroline calls the headline,
:06:58. > :06:59.the divorce settlement, and in terms of having a free-trade deal there
:07:00. > :07:02.will have to be interim proposals so that there is no cliff edge? I think
:07:03. > :07:04.all the things your reporter talked about, the eventual bill, the
:07:05. > :07:07.working out of a trade agreement, the working out about the new
:07:08. > :07:11.relationship, if it will be meaningful, has to take place
:07:12. > :07:14.roughly at the same time because all three are interrelated. But I do
:07:15. > :07:18.think it is going to be very complex and I do think it is going to take
:07:19. > :07:24.an awful lot of time, but I do think that we might not see people fully
:07:25. > :07:28.engaged in this on the continent within the European Union until well
:07:29. > :07:31.into the autumn of this year. We will leave it there, but that is the
:07:32. > :07:37.date that will fire the starting gun on the two years of negotiations of
:07:38. > :07:40.Britain leaving the EU, that is March the 29th, that is next
:07:41. > :07:42.Wednesday, a week on Wednesday is when Theresa May, the Prime
:07:43. > :07:45.Minister, will trigger Article 50. Labour's deputy leader, Tom Watson,
:07:46. > :07:47.says left-wing supporters of Jeremy Corbyn are involved
:07:48. > :07:49.in a plot which could destroy Mr Watson was reacting to claims
:07:50. > :07:55.that the grassroots Momentum group is planning a takeover in a secret
:07:56. > :07:59.deal with the boss of the Unite Yesterday's Observer newspaper
:08:00. > :08:04.published a recording of the chair of Momentum,
:08:05. > :08:08.Jon Lansman, in which he claimed that Unite would affiliate
:08:09. > :08:11.to Momentum if Len McCluskey Let's have a listen
:08:12. > :08:41.to that recording. Tom Watson has been touring
:08:42. > :08:46.the studios this morning. He says the intentions
:08:47. > :08:51.of Momentum are clear. I think Jon Lansman's secret plan
:08:52. > :08:53.threatens the very electoral existence of the Labour Party,
:08:54. > :08:56.which is why I'm speaking out, We're facing an early general
:08:57. > :09:00.election, and yet you've got a very powerful faction leader saying
:09:01. > :09:02.we need to take control That's not going to get us
:09:03. > :09:06.anywhere on the doorsteps, We're joined now by Momentum
:09:07. > :09:19.activist Rachel Godfrey-Wood. You have heard Tom Watson's words,
:09:20. > :09:26.that there is a secret plot to take over the Labour Party. What did you
:09:27. > :09:29.say as a member of Momentum? I find this pretty disappointing, all
:09:30. > :09:33.Momentum has done since we came into existence is to encourage new Labour
:09:34. > :09:37.members to be as active as possible in the party and build up a party
:09:38. > :09:40.capable of providing a general alternative in this country, and it
:09:41. > :09:48.is disappointing when you get figures from the established Labour
:09:49. > :09:53.hierarchy basically talking about this total nonstory. You say it is a
:09:54. > :09:57.total nonstory but Tom Watson is claiming, and deep you listen to Jon
:09:58. > :10:02.Lansman of Momentum, he says Unite, a big union, will affiliate to
:10:03. > :10:06.Momentum and fully participate in Momentum as for the Communication
:10:07. > :10:10.Workers Union. Is that not going to happen? I have no knowledge
:10:11. > :10:13.whatsoever of any discussions, obviously we are a left-wing
:10:14. > :10:17.organisation, we want to work with trade unions because we are one of
:10:18. > :10:22.the most fundamentally unequal countries in the world... So you
:10:23. > :10:27.cannot rule it out? I think it is the wrong focus, trade unions are
:10:28. > :10:30.being under attack, we have the most repressive trade union laws in the
:10:31. > :10:35.country, people in those trade unions want to work with Momentum
:10:36. > :10:42.and to me that makes total sense and think it is disingenuous to portray
:10:43. > :10:49.that is there is something out of line about it. You say it would be
:10:50. > :10:52.logical for a union like Unite to affiliate its upward Momentum, this
:10:53. > :10:56.grassroots organisation within Labour. But why would Unite and the
:10:57. > :10:59.Communication Workers Union want to divert their political funds away
:11:00. > :11:03.from the Labour Party's organising for local and general election
:11:04. > :11:10.campaigns towards Momentum, which we know is aiming to fight within the
:11:11. > :11:14.Labour Party? Obviously it is up to trade unions within Unite to take
:11:15. > :11:18.these types of decisions, but I suspect there will be people who
:11:19. > :11:20.understand there is a relationship between defending the industrial
:11:21. > :11:23.interests of those workers and also a political struggle which means
:11:24. > :11:27.having a Labour Party which can genuinely fight for workers' rights,
:11:28. > :11:30.and unfortunately that is not what has existed in the past,
:11:31. > :11:36.particularly when people like Tom Watson had an awful lot of influence
:11:37. > :11:42.in the party. What have you got to be worried about? Isn't this just
:11:43. > :11:46.the case of a union affiliated itself to a grassroots movement in
:11:47. > :11:51.Labour that wants to fight on behalf of the workers? Can I just say Tom
:11:52. > :11:56.was elected at the same time as Jeremy Corbyn, so if Tom is an
:11:57. > :12:01.establishment figure then so is Jeremy. I think Jeremy and others
:12:02. > :12:05.will be concerned from what they have heard on the tape because what
:12:06. > :12:09.is being said by Jon Lansman goes totally against what he promised
:12:10. > :12:13.would happen within Momentum. It was promised that anybody who was not a
:12:14. > :12:19.Labour Party member would not be part of Momentum, and what is quite
:12:20. > :12:23.clear from that tape is Jon is saying, we are not going to get with
:12:24. > :12:26.people from Trotsky and other fringe parties in the country, and that
:12:27. > :12:32.goes against everything he promised Jeromy and others, and I have to say
:12:33. > :12:38.what he be reassured Len McCluskey about. The worrying thing is to have
:12:39. > :12:41.a movement like Momentum which has Labour Party members in it but also
:12:42. > :12:44.a ragbag of other people from different parties and different
:12:45. > :12:48.priorities and what our priority is, which is trying to win a general
:12:49. > :12:52.election, which again Jon Lansman I understand that is getting in the
:12:53. > :12:57.way of their planning, planning to do what? Basically to take over the
:12:58. > :13:02.Labour Party. This is the statement from Unite. They say, they make
:13:03. > :13:05.clear it is exclusively for our executive Council to determine which
:13:06. > :13:10.organisations we affiliate to, there are no plans for Unite to affiliate
:13:11. > :13:14.to Momentum and, for the record, the general secretary Len McCluskey have
:13:15. > :13:20.never met Jon Lansman. Is this a nonstory by Tom Watson? It is a
:13:21. > :13:24.capable Jon Lansman has said at a meeting and for me the most worrying
:13:25. > :13:27.aspect is that Jon Lansman and others in Momentum promised to
:13:28. > :13:31.change the organisation to be one in which only Labour Party members
:13:32. > :13:35.could be part. Rachel has heard the tape, Jon Lansman goes against
:13:36. > :13:39.everything he promised and that must be absolutely disappointing for Jon
:13:40. > :13:42.and the Jeromy and others who have supported Momentum. I am
:13:43. > :13:48.disappointed along with them. What do you say to claims? Momentum's
:13:49. > :13:52.rules are totally clear, non-Labour members will not have membership
:13:53. > :13:57.rights, they cannot vote in elections, they cannot hold key
:13:58. > :14:00.positions. People in local Momentum groups can campaign and take part in
:14:01. > :14:04.broad campaigns in which you might have people in other parties, that
:14:05. > :14:09.is up to them. But you heard the tape, he is saying, I'm not going to
:14:10. > :14:11.kick anybody out, we have a plan, the general election is getting in
:14:12. > :14:19.the way of our planning. That doesn't sound, to me, like
:14:20. > :14:22.someone who has first and foremost caught the interest of not just the
:14:23. > :14:25.Labour Party but the people we seek to represent. What is the plan Jon
:14:26. > :14:29.Lansman is talking about? I don't know, I don't think this is
:14:30. > :14:32.fundamentally about plots or plans, this is about a organisation that
:14:33. > :14:36.wants to bring people into politics, get them engaged, because that is
:14:37. > :14:40.the only way the Labour Party will re-establish itself as a genuine
:14:41. > :14:44.power. Also in the tape Jon Lansman said the group should take control
:14:45. > :14:50.of regional Labour Parties and change selection rules for MPs and
:14:51. > :14:56.councillors. The party, as it stands, is fundamentally
:14:57. > :14:59.unbalanced... So that is the plan? On the National executive council
:15:00. > :15:03.you have 30 odd people and only six are democratically elected by the
:15:04. > :15:07.members, that is not particularly democratic so I think it is
:15:08. > :15:11.understandable but a lot of Labour members and Momentum members want to
:15:12. > :15:15.rebalance that, that is totally legitimate part of Labour Party
:15:16. > :15:18.politics. Isn't that what other groups do? John McDonnell was asked
:15:19. > :15:23.about this, the Shadow Chancellor, and he said that's what Progress
:15:24. > :15:27.does, what other Labour influencing groups do, they try change the
:15:28. > :15:31.direction of the party, isn't that what Momentum is doing? There is
:15:32. > :15:35.nothing wrong with different groups, we have lots of groups linked around
:15:36. > :15:40.environmental policy, health policy, to try to influence the party, but
:15:41. > :15:44.this is a very different nature, Progress you can only be a Labour
:15:45. > :15:49.Party member, we do not have parallel branches in our communities
:15:50. > :15:52.of Progress. What we have in Doncaster and elsewhere are Momentum
:15:53. > :15:56.groups and whether these people are members or not, and it is
:15:57. > :16:00.questionable now the Jon Lansman tape has been heard, there is entry
:16:01. > :16:03.is through Momentum into our party to influence from far left
:16:04. > :16:06.Trotskyist groups who could not get elected on their own platforms but
:16:07. > :16:09.are seeking to come to the Labour Party and this goes against
:16:10. > :16:13.everything that was promised to the leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy
:16:14. > :16:17.Corbyn. Do you deny that has been entry is into the Labour Party or
:16:18. > :16:22.attempt to control regional parties and change the candidates that are
:16:23. > :16:34.standing? The problem is organisations like Progress which
:16:35. > :16:36.have opened it up to the kind of big scale business which has no
:16:37. > :16:38.interest... That is ridiculous, Rachel. No interest in what the
:16:39. > :16:40.Labour Party have historically stood for. Are you wanting to change the
:16:41. > :16:45.leadership rules at conference? Would you like to see a change where
:16:46. > :16:47.it is, instead of 15% of the Parliamentary Labour Party, people
:16:48. > :16:51.like Caroline Flint can nominate people who go on the ballot, it
:16:52. > :16:56.would be 5%, thereby people perhaps on the right wing side of the Labour
:16:57. > :17:00.Party would have a left-wing candidate guaranteed on the ballot?
:17:01. > :17:04.We live in one of the most unequal countries in the world, in Momentum
:17:05. > :17:07.we would like to have leadership campaigns where the candidates can
:17:08. > :17:10.challenge those inequalities and I don't see why members of the
:17:11. > :17:15.Parliamentary Labour Party like Caroline should have
:17:16. > :17:23.Why should you have the right? We are a mainstream political party, we
:17:24. > :17:28.are not a Trotskyist party. I think it is important that members of
:17:29. > :17:32.Parliament have a say because at the end of the day it will be the person
:17:33. > :17:37.they will follow who will lead them in the chamber. To reduce it down to
:17:38. > :17:40.5% is quite ridiculous. What will you do about it? Tom Watson said
:17:41. > :17:44.it's a battle for the future existence of the party and he's
:17:45. > :17:48.sitting in a Shadow Cabinet meeting now to discuss it with John
:17:49. > :17:54.McDonnell. What would you be able to do? I think both John McDonnell and
:17:55. > :17:57.Jeremy Corbyn should be worried and concerned by what has been said by
:17:58. > :18:02.Jon Lansman reportedly over the weekend. I joined the Labour Party
:18:03. > :18:07.in 1979. I've been through the Labour Party through thick and thin.
:18:08. > :18:12.Its first and foremost my priority to win a general election. That's
:18:13. > :18:16.what we need to focus on. You mentioned a general election and at
:18:17. > :18:20.the weekend we spoke to Andrew Gwynne, the Labour coordinator. He
:18:21. > :18:22.said he would welcome a snap general election.
:18:23. > :18:25.If the government was to issue a motion in the Commons
:18:26. > :18:27.for an early election, the Labour Party would vote
:18:28. > :18:30.Well, it would be very difficult not to, Andrew.
:18:31. > :18:32.Because if the government wants to dissolve Parliament,
:18:33. > :18:34.wants a general election, we don't want the Tories
:18:35. > :18:38.We want to be in government, we want to have that
:18:39. > :18:43.opportunity to put that case to the British people.
:18:44. > :18:48.Is Labour ready for a snap general election if one were to be called?
:18:49. > :18:52.We should be ready for an election. We are getting ready for local
:18:53. > :18:56.council elections in May. For Theresa May, she may find herself in
:18:57. > :19:00.a difficult position because she might make the same mistake as
:19:01. > :19:06.Gordon Brown. Gordon Brown was still in gang dallying over an election
:19:07. > :19:12.and when it came to it, she lost. Like Gordon Brown, and I say this
:19:13. > :19:16.with respect, Theresa May does not have a mandate. We have seen
:19:17. > :19:20.policies on grammar schools, changes to policies on tax not in the Tory
:19:21. > :19:26.manifesto. She has Brexit to deal with. Theresa May should seek a
:19:27. > :19:30.mandate. It would make it much easier for her if she thinks she can
:19:31. > :19:35.gain seats at an election. I think she has a mandate from the people
:19:36. > :19:42.from the referendum. I think once Article 50 is triggered, I think the
:19:43. > :19:46.possibility of a general election disappears for at least two years.
:19:47. > :19:50.There can't be a snap general election because of the fixed
:19:51. > :19:54.Parliament act. Even if the Labour Party agreed to it, it would take
:19:55. > :19:58.some time. It wouldn't come if they voted in favour. I don't think at
:19:59. > :20:02.the moment they would want to be able to stop it. I think there are
:20:03. > :20:08.further reasons. I think Theresa May is driven by duty. She sees her
:20:09. > :20:14.primary duty to get a smooth transition out of the EU. If it
:20:15. > :20:17.comes, I'm very glad the Labour Party is ready for it, but I don't
:20:18. > :20:19.think there will be many of them left. I think everyone is ready for
:20:20. > :20:27.it. on Standards in Public Life has said
:20:28. > :20:31.he will look again at whether rules on MPs having second jobs need to be
:20:32. > :20:35.changed in light of Mr Osborne's new role at the London
:20:36. > :20:36.Evening Standard. MPs are allowed to have second jobs,
:20:37. > :20:41.but the Commons Code of Conduct states that they must not act
:20:42. > :20:43.as a "paid advocate". They do have to declare any payment
:20:44. > :20:46.for employment outside Parliament in the Register of Members'
:20:47. > :20:47.Financial Interests. The rules also state that Cabinet
:20:48. > :20:50.members must wait three months before they can accept any kind
:20:51. > :20:53.of paid employment, and they should not lobby existing ministers
:20:54. > :20:55.on behalf of any organisation that has employed them for two years
:20:56. > :21:01.after leaving office. The Parliamentary Commissioner
:21:02. > :21:03.for Standards - currently Kathryn Hudson -
:21:04. > :21:05.is tasked with looking The commissioner then reports any
:21:06. > :21:10.breaches of the Code of Conduct to the Committee on Standards -
:21:11. > :21:12.currently chaired by Labour's Kevin Barron -
:21:13. > :21:15.which then decides on a course of action to take against an MP,
:21:16. > :21:18.including recommending suspension from the Commons,
:21:19. > :21:25.if this is necessary. But it is up to the Committee
:21:26. > :21:29.on Standards in Public Life to advise the Prime Minister
:21:30. > :21:31.on ethical standards, and the chair of that committee,
:21:32. > :21:34.Lord Bew, told a Sunday paper this weekend that they would have
:21:35. > :21:38.to "look again at our rules" in light of George Osborne's
:21:39. > :21:54.appointment as editor Eric Pickles, Mr Osborne now has six
:21:55. > :21:57.jobs. Not just two, but six. Can he really effectively represent his
:21:58. > :22:03.constituents? I think that's a matter for him and it's a matter for
:22:04. > :22:09.his employers and his electorate. What do you think? I was as
:22:10. > :22:13.open-mouthed and gobsmacked as the rest of the country with the
:22:14. > :22:27.announcement. But if anyone can make it work, I suspect George can do so.
:22:28. > :22:33.He's a young guy. LAUGHTER I can't look you in the face! I
:22:34. > :22:40.can't see a reason why he can't do it whatever his age, six jobs! We
:22:41. > :22:46.know he's accepted this job as the editor of the Evening Standard. He
:22:47. > :22:52.has accepted a post as the adviser for US asset management Blackrock
:22:53. > :22:56.for ?650,000 per year. He also earns money on speeches and conferences.
:22:57. > :23:01.He is also a fellow at the Washington -based McCain Institute
:23:02. > :23:05.think tank, as well as being an MP. However young and energetic, is it
:23:06. > :23:08.possible to do all of those effectively and represent your
:23:09. > :23:11.constituents? Both politics and running a newspaper are pretty
:23:12. > :23:17.cut-throat. If he it will be apparent. I'm interested that there
:23:18. > :23:22.will be an enquiry. There are hundreds of MPs lining up to become
:23:23. > :23:28.editors of newspapers. I think this is actually a pretty unexceptional
:23:29. > :23:32.thing and I think the committee has had this on the stocks for a long
:23:33. > :23:37.time, they are looking for an excuse and this is the perfect excuse to do
:23:38. > :23:40.it. Has he broken any rules? I don't think he has broken any, but he's
:23:41. > :23:44.not working within the spirit of the rules. It's like when we discuss
:23:45. > :23:50.tax, people working in the spirit of it, and they get away with it. I
:23:51. > :23:54.don't think he can do the job. Which job will suffer? I think being an MP
:23:55. > :23:59.will suffer. I have come down this morning on the train from Doncaster.
:24:00. > :24:03.I was in the office for 10am. The idea that you are only working when
:24:04. > :24:08.Parliament is sitting and you turn up for a debate is not the case. I
:24:09. > :24:11.think he has done a huge disservice by his actions, actually. It's not
:24:12. > :24:18.like he needs the money. He's loaded, as we all know. I think he's
:24:19. > :24:22.done a huge disservice... Do you think it will affect other MPs with
:24:23. > :24:26.second jobs? I think it is a huge disservice to the perception of MPs
:24:27. > :24:30.and what we do with our time. I think he's back in British politics.
:24:31. > :24:36.He has been an important voice in the Conservative Party for 15 years.
:24:37. > :24:39.It's a different thing. If it's all about him and positioning himself in
:24:40. > :24:44.the politics of the future, whatever that might be, future leader of the
:24:45. > :24:49.Conservative Party, or future candidate for Mayor of London, I'm
:24:50. > :24:52.not concerned. Is it a conflict of interest in that case? How can you
:24:53. > :24:57.edit a newspaper like the London Evening Standard and be a politician
:24:58. > :25:02.at the same time cost and blue at that Sarah Samson didn't see it as a
:25:03. > :25:08.part-time job. Let's hope he gets the same amount. There is a world of
:25:09. > :25:12.difference between editing this programme and editing a newspaper.
:25:13. > :25:17.Public broadcasters have to remain impartial. One thing about the
:25:18. > :25:21.British press is that it's a very partial organisation. It has views.
:25:22. > :25:27.So it doesn't matter he's not independent because he will be
:25:28. > :25:29.lobbying for the Conservative Party through the newspaper. Don't get
:25:30. > :25:36.bitter about it! I still have hope for you. Is it true? I suspect he
:25:37. > :25:40.will run a successful paper and there is a tradition of journalists
:25:41. > :25:44.becoming politicians and politicians becoming journalists. I'm not
:25:45. > :25:47.advocating, I'm not saying it's a wonderful thing, but I'm saying I
:25:48. > :25:51.don't think it's as important or significant as perhaps you are
:25:52. > :25:55.making it out to be. Eric Pickles talks about bitterness. Caroline
:25:56. > :25:58.Flint, is that your issue, if he was to edit a paper that was more
:25:59. > :26:06.favourable to the Labour Party, you wouldn't have as big a problem? That
:26:07. > :26:08.hasn't crossed my mind at all. I read Evening Standard when I'm in
:26:09. > :26:11.London and I actually think it's pretty fair in terms of where it
:26:12. > :26:17.dishes at plaudits and the brickbats. But what is terrible is,
:26:18. > :26:20.it's like being an MP is not the most important job in George
:26:21. > :26:23.Osborne's life. That's a disservice to other MPs and it's just not right
:26:24. > :26:30.he should operate in this way. I think you should stand-down. Like
:26:31. > :26:34.Tony Blair, like David Cameron, when they decided to step away from their
:26:35. > :26:37.jobs, they left Parliament. You think he should leave Parliament, do
:26:38. > :26:43.you think he will leave Parliament in the end? They will be so much for
:26:44. > :26:48.Rory around this. Will it undermine public trust in MPs? Plenty of
:26:49. > :26:51.Conservative MPs feel that. Ultimately we will have to see
:26:52. > :26:58.whether he can do these two very exacting jobs. That's up to his
:26:59. > :27:05.electorate. What his electorate will have is a very powerful person as
:27:06. > :27:08.their member of Parliament. I'm not advocating him remaining in
:27:09. > :27:12.Parliament and I'm not advocating him going. I just think
:27:13. > :27:16.circumstances will determine this ultimately. In terms of the conflict
:27:17. > :27:20.of interest, he's running a paper with business pages, they will be
:27:21. > :27:24.dealing with companies. He will still be an adviser to asset
:27:25. > :27:29.management firm Blackrock, that will lead to serious questions on whether
:27:30. > :27:32.he can do that and be an MP. I think that the more important of the two
:27:33. > :27:40.questions, if you'll forgive for saying so. That could be easily
:27:41. > :27:43.dealt with if he laid down proper, what we call Chinese walls, so the
:27:44. > :27:49.business editor had complete autonomy over those matters. Would
:27:50. > :27:53.you trust that enough to inoculate and protect? The consequences of
:27:54. > :27:57.breaching that would be beyond imaginable. But there is no
:27:58. > :28:00.transparency or accountability. Who will decide about whether he is
:28:01. > :28:04.doing his job as an MP more than he does his job as the editor? The
:28:05. > :28:10.truth is that the constituents do not have any say as far as I know in
:28:11. > :28:13.terms of recalling. He was Chancellor of the ex-Jet, I imagine
:28:14. > :28:20.that's more daunting than being the editor of the Evening Standard. --
:28:21. > :28:21.Chancellor of the Exchequer. I don't believe constituents suffered as a
:28:22. > :28:24.result. Up to 15 new Bills, on top
:28:25. > :28:27.of the Great Repeal Bill, That's according to a new report
:28:28. > :28:30.from the think tank The report also warns that
:28:31. > :28:34.Parliament is unlikely to have much time for legislating anything
:28:35. > :28:38.non-Brexit related, and may have to find alternative ways
:28:39. > :28:41.of achieving policy aims. We are joined now by Jill Rutter,
:28:42. > :28:52.who co-authored the Institute Welcome to the daily politics. Do
:28:53. > :28:59.you think Parliament will struggle with the bills it as to push
:29:00. > :29:04.through? This is a huge, big additional workload for Parliament.
:29:05. > :29:08.The great repeal bill itself is in many ways the least interesting of
:29:09. > :29:12.the pieces of legislation, but it's a massive task. David Davis himself
:29:13. > :29:15.said potentially thousands of pages of secondary legislation coming
:29:16. > :29:20.through. We have major new bills that will need to be put in place.
:29:21. > :29:24.The new migration and customs regimes and a new agricultural
:29:25. > :29:29.policy. MPs will want to get stuck into those. None of these were
:29:30. > :29:35.planned when the Conservatives ran for government in 2015. What will
:29:36. > :29:40.that do to non-Brexit legislation? We estimate, the figures we have
:29:41. > :29:43.heard say there will be 10-15 of Brexit bills of varying sizes and
:29:44. > :29:52.the great repeal bill. When you take that into account and you have these
:29:53. > :29:55.sessions, 5-8 bills in each of those sessions and loads of secondary
:29:56. > :29:59.legislation, normally in Queen's speech you get 20 bills being
:30:00. > :30:02.introduced. You could say up to around half of your conventional
:30:03. > :30:09.legislative programme might to be displaced. You want secondary
:30:10. > :30:14.legislation might be used to amend primary legislation. What we call
:30:15. > :30:16.Henry VIII clauses. This would mean less parliamentary scrutiny, so will
:30:17. > :30:22.we see more rebellion against the government as a result?
:30:23. > :30:27.We have seen the Government try to take him with yet eight hours before
:30:28. > :30:31.and Parliament revolted against that. Parliament needs to be clear
:30:32. > :30:35.that all it is trying to achieve in the great repeal bill is putting
:30:36. > :30:39.existing European law into UK law, it should resisted the temptation to
:30:40. > :30:44.make lots and lots of changes. There is lots of times that after Brexit.
:30:45. > :30:47.Where it needs to change things, it needs to do that through primary
:30:48. > :30:54.legislation and it needs to give Parliament the to make decisions in
:30:55. > :30:56.advance, draft legislation if feasible, proper impact assessments
:30:57. > :30:58.Parliament can understand what it is being asked to do. Thank you very
:30:59. > :30:58.much. We're joined now by the Ukip
:30:59. > :31:06.MP Douglas Carswell. You have no doubt seen the report's
:31:07. > :31:09.conclusions and listened to the interview, but the Government will
:31:10. > :31:13.have a fairly complex, time-consuming few years ahead of
:31:14. > :31:18.it, navigating Brexit. Are you surprised? Self-government takes
:31:19. > :31:22.energy and effort and if anyone in white Minster -- Whitehall
:31:23. > :31:25.Westminster the it is too much effort they should not be in the
:31:26. > :31:29.business of making public policy. The institute has done a good job of
:31:30. > :31:33.outlining some of the things we need to consider and I think the basic
:31:34. > :31:36.principle, which I hope we can get cross-party consensus on, is that no
:31:37. > :31:41.one should really make changes to public policy, and this Great Repeal
:31:42. > :31:46.Bill should become a great transfer bill. If people want to make changes
:31:47. > :31:50.to public policy, I would love to see higher environmental standards,
:31:51. > :31:55.but that in Europe 2017 general election manifesto, get a mandate
:31:56. > :32:01.from people, don't do it on the sly. Do you think that would work? It be
:32:02. > :32:05.take that blueprint, do the Great Repeal Bill, bring things into law,
:32:06. > :32:13.then spend more time bringing in legislation to perfect agriculture
:32:14. > :32:15.etc? Because it is called Great Repeal Bill it sounds like we are
:32:16. > :32:21.starting with a blank piece of paper! Because many of the laws we
:32:22. > :32:24.have we put forward to the EU, it will be about asserting that we want
:32:25. > :32:27.others and there is time down the road for any political party to put
:32:28. > :32:34.forward their own changes in the future, and Theresa May in her 12
:32:35. > :32:37.objectives said she wanted to keep things like employment protection,
:32:38. > :32:41.and she also said an handset, but that mean she can accept what we
:32:42. > :32:45.already have in terms of the issues around employment rights. Do you
:32:46. > :32:50.accept there will be bills and areas of legislation that cannot just be
:32:51. > :32:55.adopted, to use Caroline's term? Let me just give an example, the
:32:56. > :32:59.Institute of Government has said different systems need to be set up,
:33:00. > :33:02.so if we have an immigration system, one that we have not had before
:33:03. > :33:05.because we were guided by EU principles, then we will need
:33:06. > :33:09.primary legislation and that will take time. There are 15 of those
:33:10. > :33:15.bills, will that be done in two years? As I said, self-government
:33:16. > :33:20.takes time and effort. I'm asking if it will be done in those two years.
:33:21. > :33:22.I think it will, the Institute for Government have highlighted
:33:23. > :33:35.important things but they tend to reflect the priorities but I think
:33:36. > :33:40.they over exaggerate the complexities. Let's take their point
:33:41. > :33:46.of view, is the Government preparing for the legislation? I'm sure it is,
:33:47. > :33:50.forgive me for slightly correcting, Henry VIII powers are not about
:33:51. > :33:54.secondary legislation, it is when the Secretary of State is granted
:33:55. > :34:00.powers to do them without reference to Parliament. Secondary legislation
:34:01. > :34:03.takes place all the time in Parliament, morning, afternoon and
:34:04. > :34:08.evening, and sometimes it is a devil of a job to get people to serve
:34:09. > :34:11.though so it has to be done in a reasonable way, and we are going to
:34:12. > :34:15.need to make some slight changes, it will have to take place there. But
:34:16. > :34:19.there were revolts from the Government try to use those sort of
:34:20. > :34:24.clauses to change legislation and it had to be dropped. Would you be
:34:25. > :34:28.happy, Douglas... Henry VIII clauses are not normal but secondary
:34:29. > :34:30.legislation is. Are you happy for less Parliamentary scrutiny over
:34:31. > :34:35.what could be important pieces legislation? In terms of
:34:36. > :34:38.transferring the status quo, transferring it from EU to UK status
:34:39. > :34:43.quo, I don't see the need for a great deal of debate before the next
:34:44. > :34:47.general election. There are three stages by which an idea like Brexit
:34:48. > :34:51.is accepted by the status quo. Number one, where the Institute of
:34:52. > :34:54.Government was six months ago, it is eight it is unthinkable. Number two
:34:55. > :34:58.is to get to where they are now, which is to say it is impractical.
:34:59. > :35:02.Stage three is for them to say it was their idea all along. The
:35:03. > :35:06.Institute for Government and others are making the journey toward
:35:07. > :35:08.accepting this radical idea. Do you think it will offer more
:35:09. > :35:27.opportunities for rebellion and consent if this is the way
:35:28. > :35:30.the Government has to push through legislation? There will be areas
:35:31. > :35:33.where it will be the consensus because we are just adopting into
:35:34. > :35:35.our Bill Watt with EU law. What they will identify are the points of
:35:36. > :35:38.contention and no doubt on that there is likely to be different
:35:39. > :35:40.views, not just across the chamber but maybe within Conservative
:35:41. > :35:42.benches as well. It will be a hard slog. And it will be done in the two
:35:43. > :35:44.years? Oh, yes. We don't know, sitting here, but if there is that
:35:45. > :35:46.amount of pressure being put on Parliament, we haven't even talked
:35:47. > :35:50.about domestic legislation aside from Brexit, could it delay the
:35:51. > :35:53.whole process of leaving the EU? Let's be frank, over the last couple
:35:54. > :35:57.of years Parliament hasn't introduced much in the way of
:35:58. > :36:02.flagship legislation, the tail end of a Cameron coalition, I think MPs
:36:03. > :36:10.could cope with a bit more work. Often MPs have been passing the
:36:11. > :36:14.clarity legislation to look busy. You think Parliament has been lazy
:36:15. > :36:20.in terms of what it has had to do? The last couple of years has been
:36:21. > :36:25.clarity and I think this is the big change, it will involve bringing all
:36:26. > :36:30.legislation that, so we are going to be busy, we're going to be busy all
:36:31. > :36:34.the time. But what about domestic legislation? Aside from Brexit, will
:36:35. > :36:42.there be any time or room for any of that? This is domestic legislation.
:36:43. > :36:46.I mean aside from Brexit. First and foremost it will be the priority and
:36:47. > :36:50.in the last parliament we had one line whips, not discussing primary
:36:51. > :36:54.legislation and that was lazy Government. On domestic policy the
:36:55. > :36:56.problem we have got at the moment is domestic policy is being made up,
:36:57. > :37:01.like grammar schools, like the stuff on tax the other week, and that is
:37:02. > :37:06.not a problem Brexit, that is a problem... I must let Eric answer
:37:07. > :37:12.that, that policy is being made up. I don't accept that, but I do think
:37:13. > :37:16.there is a case for Parliament to sit for five days a week for the
:37:17. > :37:21.next few years to get this thing through, if necessary. What do you
:37:22. > :37:25.think about that? Fundamentally, the grown-ups are back in charge, for
:37:26. > :37:28.the first time in 20, 30 years, grown-ups are running the Government
:37:29. > :37:31.and it can be done, it is a big ask but with grown-ups in charge we are
:37:32. > :37:38.getting there. When are you going back into the Conservative Party?! I
:37:39. > :37:42.give condiments to ministers when they are necessary, it is my job.
:37:43. > :37:50.What about sitting five days a week? Fantastic. What about you, Caroline?
:37:51. > :37:53.Some others do not live in London, some of us live with our
:37:54. > :37:57.constituents. The days when we are in London, too much of it is one
:37:58. > :38:01.line Whip days, too much of it is not sorting out Government business
:38:02. > :38:05.and we should make sure this area of policy gets the time it deserves and
:38:06. > :38:08.we could do that if we looked at... How will George Osborne Poke those
:38:09. > :38:15.other jobs if he has to sit five days a week? He will cope. Is that
:38:16. > :38:19.your answer? That is my answer. Now let's take a look
:38:20. > :38:21.at what else is happening The Foreign Secretary is off
:38:22. > :38:25.on his travels again this afternoon. It's back to the land
:38:26. > :38:28.of his birth for Boris, who has a series of meetings
:38:29. > :38:30.with the Trump administration. Tomorrow, the Scottish Parliament
:38:31. > :38:32.starts a two-day debate on having On Wednesday, it's the Theresa
:38:33. > :38:45.versus Jezza show - and you can catch PMQs live
:38:46. > :38:47.on the Daily Politics. Wednesday also sees the end
:38:48. > :38:50.of consultation on the Government's controversial proposals
:38:51. > :38:51.on new national funding Jeremy Corbyn makes a speech
:38:52. > :38:54.to the Federation of Small Business And on Saturday, EU leaders meet
:38:55. > :38:58.to mark the 60th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome,
:38:59. > :39:00.which marked the start We're joined now by Laura Hughes of
:39:01. > :39:13.the Daily Telegraph and George Eaton Welcome to both of you. George, what
:39:14. > :39:17.is happening in the Labour Party with Tom Watson saying there is a
:39:18. > :39:21.battle for the future of Labour, that Jeremy Corbyn didn't know about
:39:22. > :39:26.this battle within Momentum, saying they need to rebalance the Labour
:39:27. > :39:31.Party? Labour currently, as it often has in recent times, resembles a
:39:32. > :39:35.fight club more than a political party and what the current battle is
:39:36. > :39:41.really about is who gets control of the party after Jeremy Corbyn is
:39:42. > :39:45.gone. All sides are preparing for another leadership contest and the
:39:46. > :39:49.key issue of dispute is the so-called McDonnell Amendment, that
:39:50. > :39:55.would cut the number of nominations you need to get on the ballot from
:39:56. > :39:58.15% of MPs to 5%. What Jeremy Corbyn's supporters fear is that
:39:59. > :40:03.after him they will not be able to get a left-wing success on the
:40:04. > :40:07.ballot and it is precisely that that Jeremy Corbyn's opponents, Tom
:40:08. > :40:19.Watson among them, want to prevent. How does this play out, if it is a
:40:20. > :40:21.battle for succession, who comes after Jeremy Corbyn at whatever
:40:22. > :40:23.point? We have the Unite leadership election going on at the moment
:40:24. > :40:25.between Len McCluskey and Gerard Coyne, what happens next? The
:40:26. > :40:28.interesting thing in mentioning the succession is that John McDonnell
:40:29. > :40:34.has come out today, pretty extraordinary, and attacked John
:40:35. > :40:36.Watson -- Tom Watson in his own Shadow Cabinet and said he is
:40:37. > :40:43.interfering in Unite's leadership contest. I think what Tom Watson is
:40:44. > :40:47.doing and what other Labour MPs are doing is they want to inform Labour
:40:48. > :40:51.members, this is what it will mean, if you change the rules on selection
:40:52. > :40:56.for the leadership, you will end up with somebody else like John
:40:57. > :40:59.McDonnell, someone else in Jeremy Corbyn's close circle, and that is
:41:00. > :41:03.not what they want, so that is probably what this is all about.
:41:04. > :41:06.George, let's talk about another front that Theresa May is fighting
:41:07. > :41:11.on, she has announced she will trigger article 50 to trigger Brexit
:41:12. > :41:16.a week on Wednesday, the 29th, but Nicola Sturgeon has also released
:41:17. > :41:20.the text on a motion on a second independence referendum to be
:41:21. > :41:25.debated on and decided tomorrow, on Wednesday. How does that play out?
:41:26. > :41:32.There is going to be a vote in the Scottish parliament and it will pass
:41:33. > :41:35.the SNP with a majority if you include the Independents in the
:41:36. > :41:41.Scottish parliament. Nicola Sturgeon will use this to bolster the case,
:41:42. > :41:46.she has already been mocking Theresa May saying that she has a mandate, I
:41:47. > :41:50.don't think Nicola Sturgeon was taken by surprise when Theresa May
:41:51. > :41:55.refused to grant her a second referendum bites spring 2019, I
:41:56. > :41:58.think her calculation is that the anger that this will cause among
:41:59. > :42:06.Scots will ultimately help the cause of independence when that second row
:42:07. > :42:09.-- that a second referendum happens. As George said, Nicola Sturgeon
:42:10. > :42:14.probably wasn't surprised that Theresa May rejected the timing of
:42:15. > :42:18.autumn 2080 or early 2019 but she has repeated it in imagine, though
:42:19. > :42:22.she said it would be most appropriately between those two
:42:23. > :42:26.dates. Does it indicate any flexibility on the SNP side? Maybe,
:42:27. > :42:30.over the weekend there were murmurs that Nicola would be more flexible
:42:31. > :42:36.but it is interesting they have used that word again in this motion that
:42:37. > :42:38.has gone out today. I don't know how flexible, she has to appear like she
:42:39. > :42:42.is taking a strong stance because over the next two days where we have
:42:43. > :42:45.this debate in Scotland the Unionists will make a case that
:42:46. > :42:49.Nicola Sturgeon doesn't really have a plan for what would happen if
:42:50. > :42:54.Scotland did become independent. What currency would they use? How
:42:55. > :42:57.would they get rid of the ?15 billion deficit? Questions like that
:42:58. > :43:03.still have not been answered so she has to stick them on something and
:43:04. > :43:06.perhaps it will be the key date. Law reviews and Georgie Dibaba thank
:43:07. > :43:11.you both very much. Before we leave the week ahead, this idea of a Green
:43:12. > :43:15.paper on capping energy prices, is this deja vu for you and Ed
:43:16. > :43:19.Miliband? It does feel a bit like that Groundhog Day moment and we had
:43:20. > :43:22.a debate in Parliament last week in which Jessye Norman was not
:43:23. > :43:26.unfriendly to what some of us have been saying for some time which is
:43:27. > :43:29.that we need to do something about this market because people on
:43:30. > :43:33.standard variable tariffs are paying over the odds, and finally actually
:43:34. > :43:37.in the speech Theresa May made at the weekend, she acknowledged the
:43:38. > :43:40.energy market isn't working so I'm keeping my fingers crossed that we
:43:41. > :43:46.will get progress. Tell our viewers this is slightly different to you
:43:47. > :43:50.and Ed Miliband proposed a few years which was a cap, the difference that
:43:51. > :43:55.in the worst and best deals? Relative gap is what John Penrose is
:43:56. > :44:00.suggesting, I don't agree with that, I think basically what we should
:44:01. > :44:03.have is a protective great that the regulator provides for those people
:44:04. > :44:08.on the standard variable tariffs and what it would mean is if their bills
:44:09. > :44:11.-- is that their bills cannot go above a certain level and it would
:44:12. > :44:15.be regulated because since about 2012 they have spent more than 8
:44:16. > :44:19.billion more than they needed to. Do you agree something needs to be
:44:20. > :44:22.done? We have seen huge hikes in energy prices in the last few
:44:23. > :44:29.months. There have been spectacular hikes and I think some consumers
:44:30. > :44:33.feel they have been taken for risk, so we will see what this Green paper
:44:34. > :44:37.says and it it pragmatically means we have to adopt some of this then
:44:38. > :44:41.so be it. You would be broadly in favour of looking at the idea of
:44:42. > :44:45.capping prices? I want to see what it looks like, we have seen a shift
:44:46. > :44:49.in energy prices but nothing that would reflect the shift in prices
:44:50. > :44:54.consumers have paid, so I want to see that... So you think the market
:44:55. > :44:58.is broken in the late Caroline things? That is what Theresa said at
:44:59. > :45:01.the weekend. Markets sometimes can be skewed.
:45:02. > :45:04.Now, from April the minimum wage will rise to ?7.50 an hour.
:45:05. > :45:07.That's as part of the government's plan to take it to more
:45:08. > :45:12.But is it harming at least one group more than it helps?
:45:13. > :45:14.The businesswoman and campaigner Rosa Monckton thinks
:45:15. > :45:17.that the minimum wage is preventing employers from hiring more people
:45:18. > :45:19.with learning disabilities, because their output simply can't
:45:20. > :45:39.Is it just for the money, or to have a role in society,
:45:40. > :45:52.Almost 1.5 million people in the UK have a learning disability,
:45:53. > :45:56.but of those, just under 6% are in work.
:45:57. > :45:58.My daughter Domenica has Down's syndrome.
:45:59. > :46:04.Last year I started a charity for people with learning
:46:05. > :46:10.This is the training cafe where our young people can
:46:11. > :46:17.hone their practical and social skills before trying
:46:18. > :46:21.Something that makes it increasingly difficult to get people
:46:22. > :46:23.with learning disabilities into work is the sharp rise in
:46:24. > :46:26.the minimum wage, soon to go up to ?7.50 an hour.
:46:27. > :46:28.Most people think this is only a good thing.
:46:29. > :46:31.But if it costs more for a company to hire someone
:46:32. > :46:34.than the value of their output, then that person will
:46:35. > :46:39.For those people, the minimum wage doesn't raise their
:46:40. > :46:45.Yet it's considered profoundly controversial to even raise
:46:46. > :46:48.the subject of a therapeutic exemption of the minimum wage for
:46:49. > :46:57.Policymakers seem to live in an abstract world,
:46:58. > :47:01.more concerned with the rhetoric of human rights and equality,
:47:02. > :47:04.rather than what might benefit real human beings.
:47:05. > :47:07.People with a learning disability may still live at home.
:47:08. > :47:10.Often they have no understanding of money.
:47:11. > :47:13.They want to work so they can have a fulfilled and purposeful
:47:14. > :47:16.life, and make friends rather than be alone in front
:47:17. > :47:24.For those people, we need to focus less on their right to a minimum
:47:25. > :47:27.wage, and more on their right to the dignity of a paid job.
:47:28. > :47:38.Do you accept that this is a very difficult issue for politicians to
:47:39. > :47:42.grapple with when they talk about disabled people and what they are
:47:43. > :47:46.worth in terms of work? I don't understand why it should be. Because
:47:47. > :47:51.the mistake that's being made is that people are being judged by the
:47:52. > :47:56.financial worth. This is not about that. It's not about money. It's
:47:57. > :48:00.about what you're worth is as a human being, and it's about the
:48:01. > :48:04.dignity of going to work, the psychological and social benefits of
:48:05. > :48:08.being included. Caroline Flint, do you accept that for people with
:48:09. > :48:12.learning disabilities the minimum wage rules have become in some way
:48:13. > :48:17.an obstacle and is not a protection in terms of them being offered and
:48:18. > :48:20.getting jobs. I don't personally have evidence of that. I think
:48:21. > :48:24.probably before the minimum wage rules came in it wasn't any easier
:48:25. > :48:29.for these young people to find work either. When it comes to disability,
:48:30. > :48:34.physical or mental or learning disabilities, there are such a range
:48:35. > :48:38.of different people that are part of those groups. I understand part of
:48:39. > :48:42.what you are saying, but to say there should be a different level
:48:43. > :48:46.for the minimum wage is probably not the right way forward. There has to
:48:47. > :48:52.be something else. When I was a minister at the WP, often employers
:48:53. > :48:57.were just excluding people because they weren't sure how to work with
:48:58. > :49:00.people, it wasn't to do with pay. -- at the DWP. That requires the
:49:01. > :49:05.government and others to be more involved in getting that right. The
:49:06. > :49:08.employers I have seen over the years who employ people with various
:49:09. > :49:12.disabilities say to me, we wonder why we didn't do it before because
:49:13. > :49:16.it's been great for our company and workforce. The problem is that when
:49:17. > :49:20.ministers and politicians look at the laws, if they were to set
:49:21. > :49:26.different standards all levels, wouldn't it devalue the work of all
:49:27. > :49:29.disabled workers potentially, because as Caroline Flint said,
:49:30. > :49:36.there is a great degree of variation. No. We are talking
:49:37. > :49:40.specifically about people with learning disabilities. I can't
:49:41. > :49:46.emphasise that distinction enough. There already exists within the
:49:47. > :49:51.national minimum wage a therapeutic exemption for peace workers, who are
:49:52. > :49:55.unusually slow in their output. I would suggest to politicians that
:49:56. > :49:58.you look at people in the support group of employment support
:49:59. > :50:03.allowance. I think there are about half a million people there. Many of
:50:04. > :50:07.them might not be able to work anyway. But introduce assessments,
:50:08. > :50:12.introduced as a pilot the therapeutic or minimum wage for that
:50:13. > :50:16.particular cohort. Could you see that happening? We remember Lord
:50:17. > :50:20.Freud saying something similar a couple of years ago. He was a
:50:21. > :50:24.minister at the time. He ended up in a lot of trouble. I understand why
:50:25. > :50:31.politicians are reluctant to look into this. It's important about that
:50:32. > :50:34.idea of worth. You have to recognise that the person with learning
:50:35. > :50:41.disabilities and the employer both need support. You need to offer
:50:42. > :50:46.support to the employer as well as the employees. The point being made
:50:47. > :50:52.is that these are perfectly good, perfectly able employees who can get
:50:53. > :51:00.the satisfaction of work, and enhance the environment for other
:51:01. > :51:04.co-workers. You referred to Lord Freud, who at the time said, when he
:51:05. > :51:09.was discussing this very issue, there is a small, there is a group,
:51:10. > :51:14.and I know exactly who you mean, when you say they are not worth the
:51:15. > :51:18.full wage. It might have been clumsy speech, but were you offended by it?
:51:19. > :51:29.Certainly Labour politicians were and many organisations who felt they
:51:30. > :51:33.were offending people and what they're worth was. You're making the
:51:34. > :51:37.mistake of talking about the financial worth. You need to speak
:51:38. > :51:41.to parents who have adult children with learning disabilities sitting
:51:42. > :51:47.at home and not able to go to work because their economic output isn't
:51:48. > :51:53.worth the minimum wage. I have had the most appalling trolling online
:51:54. > :51:57.since I wrote this article in the Spectator. Unbelievable. But I am
:51:58. > :52:02.sustained by all the e-mails I have received from parents, from siblings
:52:03. > :52:07.saying, please hold your head up above the parapet. We need our young
:52:08. > :52:12.people to get into work. 1.4 million people in the UK have a learning
:52:13. > :52:16.disability, and 1.3 million of them are unemployed. Surely any steps
:52:17. > :52:21.similar to what Rosa Monckton is suggesting, would go some way to
:52:22. > :52:25.encouraging employers to take on more people with a learning
:52:26. > :52:28.disability. The statistics are appalling. I would say that they
:52:29. > :52:32.were probably just as appalling before we had the minimum wage as we
:52:33. > :52:38.do today. Part of the question for me, it is about worth, in terms of
:52:39. > :52:42.individuals themselves feeling like they are contributing and engaging
:52:43. > :52:46.with others. We have seen a huge amount of services that supported
:52:47. > :52:49.young people with learning disabilities and older people, and
:52:50. > :52:53.you mentioned this in your article, they have been shut down and they
:52:54. > :52:57.don't have places to go any more. It requires a wider look. To be honest,
:52:58. > :53:01.going for the minimum wage, I don't think first and foremost it's the
:53:02. > :53:06.biggest problem, but there is certainly something that needs to be
:53:07. > :53:09.addressed, because lots of these young people will be living longer
:53:10. > :53:14.than they did a few decades ago. That's something we need to face as
:53:15. > :53:20.a society for these young people. Eric Pickles suggested more support
:53:21. > :53:24.for employers to encourage people to take on more people with learning
:53:25. > :53:28.disabilities. Mencap, who don't agree with your stance, say it's
:53:29. > :53:32.important for companies to take on more roles for people with learning
:53:33. > :53:35.disabilities. It's one way of looking at it, but businesses are
:53:36. > :53:39.not charities. They need an incentive to take young people with
:53:40. > :53:42.learning disabilities into the workplace. Eric Pickles, if there
:53:43. > :53:47.was a situation where you could talk about different standards and levels
:53:48. > :53:52.of pay, do you think there would be any political weight behind an idea
:53:53. > :53:59.like that? I hesitate to disagree with Rosa, but in the present
:54:00. > :54:04.climate if a government tried to do that, it would be howled out before
:54:05. > :54:07.any good could come of it. I recognise what Caroline says. I
:54:08. > :54:11.would be very much in favour of fundamentally looking at ways in
:54:12. > :54:16.which can get more people with learning difficulties into
:54:17. > :54:19.employment. I think offering support to the employer, offering support to
:54:20. > :54:25.the employee at the same time, a route. But in the modern world it
:54:26. > :54:33.would simply be hounded out, as Lord Freud was hounded out. But it
:54:34. > :54:37.shouldn't be. I know that. Everybody wants to feel like they belong
:54:38. > :54:41.somewhere. All these young people who have been brought up, in
:54:42. > :54:45.mainstream schools, they have been brought up to believe they are part
:54:46. > :54:50.of society and suddenly they are not any more. Maybe there's another way,
:54:51. > :54:54.what is it to incentivise employers? Personally I would say, don't reduce
:54:55. > :54:57.the minimum wage. There are other ways. Employers get all sorts of
:54:58. > :55:01.other things with tax credits here and there and other bits of support.
:55:02. > :55:10.For many things that I don't think are worthwhile, but this could be
:55:11. > :55:16.something different. That's what we do our centre. We have people in
:55:17. > :55:19.employee are supportive positions and we hope they will be offered
:55:20. > :55:23.full-time and part-time jobs at the end of it. One of our candidates
:55:24. > :55:27.last week was offered 12 hours per week at the minimum wage because
:55:28. > :55:32.she's worth it, with support. Another was not. They looked at it
:55:33. > :55:37.very scientifically and said, this person can do 70% of the job. As a
:55:38. > :55:42.company we cannot justify paying the national minimum wage. For the sake
:55:43. > :55:45.of clarity, I accept that, but I was talking about somebody working
:55:46. > :55:49.alongside them in the work itself. But there are people, there is the
:55:50. > :55:52.access to work funding from the government to pay for somebody for a
:55:53. > :55:58.year to be with that person. A lifelong learning disability is
:55:59. > :56:02.exactly that, when that person pulls away, what will happen then?
:56:03. > :56:08.Rosamund Pike, thank you for coming in. -- Rosa Monckton, thank you for
:56:09. > :56:09.coming in. Are the Cornish at risk
:56:10. > :56:11.of ethnic oppression? The Council of Europe -
:56:12. > :56:13.not to be confused with the European Council -
:56:14. > :56:15.have condemned the Government The Cornish were formally
:56:16. > :56:19.designated a minority in 2014, but the Council says the Government
:56:20. > :56:21.has failed to maintain Let's talk now to the leader
:56:22. > :56:39.of Mebyon Kernow, But what say you, Eric Pickles, have
:56:40. > :56:43.you been neglecting your duty and obligation to the people of
:56:44. > :56:49.Cornwall? I'm the guilty man, I gave money to the Cornish language when I
:56:50. > :56:53.was secretary of state. I gave it in order the Liberal Democrats wouldn't
:56:54. > :56:59.block I think half ?1 billion of savings. So it was a bribe?
:57:00. > :57:07.Absolutely! I can't fool you for your honesty. I think it was half a
:57:08. > :57:13.billion in worth. But what about the government helping Cornish people.
:57:14. > :57:17.The government 's help should be to the people of Cornwall, the industry
:57:18. > :57:21.and education in Cornwall. I'm not entirely sure. I would like the idea
:57:22. > :57:28.that Cornish would continue in some form or another, but after all, most
:57:29. > :57:31.of that went into people learning the language, which I'm sure is very
:57:32. > :57:37.beautiful. Do you think it's right, even though Eric Pickles says he
:57:38. > :57:40.only did it so the Liberal Democrats would do not do something the
:57:41. > :57:44.Conservative Party did or didn't want, that the Cornish up entreated
:57:45. > :57:48.the way they should have been. It's not a bad thing to recognise the
:57:49. > :57:52.diversity we have in the United Kingdom. The culture and languages
:57:53. > :58:04.of our great country fine. That's what I said in my press release.
:58:05. > :58:07.What I do find in all of this, I think they are calling for an
:58:08. > :58:12.independence for Cornwall. I don't go down that route. I think
:58:13. > :58:16.something at the general election that this party, who got less than
:58:17. > :58:19.2% of the vote, just four councillors in the whole of Cornwall
:58:20. > :58:23.from this party, I think we could reduce things to such a level that
:58:24. > :58:26.it gets a bit ridiculous. But culture and language and making sure
:58:27. > :58:30.that isn't lost and supporting it in different ways is a good thing. But
:58:31. > :58:33.there's no point if you are not going to do anything about it. You
:58:34. > :58:38.might put the money in but you haven't backed it up. Somebody said,
:58:39. > :58:43.what kind of idiot funded this in the first place, and I said, that
:58:44. > :58:47.would be me! You have just reinforced that on the programme. We
:58:48. > :58:52.don't often get yes ounces from politicians. But thank you for that.
:58:53. > :58:54.That's all for today. Thanks to our guests.
:58:55. > :58:56.The one o'clock news is starting over on BBC One now.
:58:57. > :58:59.I'll be here at noon tomorrow with all the big political stories
:59:00. > :59:01.of the day - do join me then. Bye-bye.