20/04/2017 Daily Politics

Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.

Jeremy Corbyn kicks off Labour's election campaign,

promising to take on what he calls the "cosy cartel" of "wealth

extractors" and saying he refuses to "doff his cap" to "powerful

The Green Party also launch their election

Their co-leader, Caroline Lucas, joins me live.

Parliament enters what's called the 'wash-up',

with just a few days left to run, what legislation will get rushed

And Paul Nuttall's got just six weeks to prove

himself as Ukip leader, according to Nigel Farage.

We'll assess the party's prospects now that Brexit is under way.

And with us for the whole of the programme today,

the deputy chair of Ukip, Suzanne Evans.

Nigel Farage, was asked if he was going to stand

I've got to weigh up, how do I best help

Do I do it by standing for the House of Commons, or do I do it

by staying as leader of a group in the European Parliament, where

ultimately, there's going to be a veto over the Brexit deal?

I will decide over the next two days.

I'm being pushed and pulled in different directions.

I'm really, genuinely, at this moment in time,

There we go - he is yet to make up his mind. Would you urge him to run?

Yes, he should run again in South Thanet, Wade tried before. The

Conservatives seem to behave -- seemed to behave rather badly in

that election, according to reports. This is the issue of election

misspending in 2015. Absolutely, so did the Conservatives have an unfair

advantage? Nigel Farage missed it marginally, so let's have another

go. If he did, and I know he always follows your advice, hangs on your

every word, if he does run, it's a constituency where he ran before. As

you say, there were problems with it and he may think he has a choice

this time. It is close to London and the national media, so Nigel Farage

becomes the face of Ukip in this election, not Paul Nuttall. I don't

think so. We are deciding on candidate selection, what are our

target seats, and we have done some work already. I think that South

Thanet has to be one of those seats. We want someone reputable to run

that. Should Paul Nuttall have another go at Stoke, where he lost?

He is thinking about where best this time. He was talking before about

standing in Andy Burnham's seat. Maybe Paul will feel that that is a

better fit for him. Stoke was an unusual situation, wasn't it? Wets

what about you? I won't be standing anywhere because -- what about you?

I won't be standing anywhere. Why not? It will be head down from

Monday and I would have time to do anything else. And it will be

shorter this time? The manifesto was one of the shorter ones. We had some

pretty pictures in it, too! Know we know you are writing the manifesto.

The question for today is: Which leader's child has been

pictured playing football in an Arsenal shirt?

I am told that is something to do with association football.

c) France's Francois Hollande, or d) Poland's Beata Szydlo?

At the end of the show, Suzanne will hopefully give us

Do you have any idea? I think I know even less about football than you

do. That would put you into the negative category.

So, Jeremy Corbyn kicked off Labour's election campaign this

morning with a clear message: Don't write off Labour just yet.

He told supporters in Westminster that while the mainstream media had

written off the party's chances in the general election,

he doesn't "play by the rules", and that he expected to pull off

a dramatic turn-around in the party's fortunes.

He took aim at big businesses, too, warning the likes of Southern Rail

and Sir Philip Green that they should be 'afraid'

Here's a little of what he had to say.

Labour is the party that will put the interests of the majority first,

while the Tories only really care about those who already have so

That is why we - yes, we - will prove the establishment experts

wrong and change the direction of this election, because the British

people know that they are the true wealth creators, held back by a

system rigged for the wealth extractors.

Theresa May will insist that this is an election about

She will try to downplay the issues that affect people's lives

every day and instead turn the election into an ego trip

about her own failing leadership, and the

machinations of the coming negotiations in Brussels.

It is only Labour that will focus on what kind

of country we want to have after Brexit.

In the coming weeks, Labour will lay out our policies to unlock

opportunities for every single person in this country.

We will focus on giving people real control

over their own lives, and make sure that everyone reaps a just reward

That was the Labour leader this morning.

Mr Corbyn said that there is a rigged system, rigged to favour the

wealth extractors. Who are they? In relation to the world of work, from

which I came - it cannot be right that the percentage of profit going

on wages has fallen dramatically but the percentage of profit going on

top earners has increased dramatically. Boardroom excess. That

is a global phenomenon on. I am in favour of rewarding success and I

have worked with some good chief executives in my time, but it cannot

be right. And understandably, working people resent that and want

a fair share. I understand the argument. He talked about

individuals and corporations as wealth extractors. Give me an

example of one. Philip Green, for example. Is an individual. To bring

alive what he is saying, you need to refer to a real example. I have met

with BHS workers who work, some of them, 20 and 30 years and lost their

jobs... Philip Green is an individual. Mr Corbyn said Philip

Green should be worried by a Labour Government - why? Bad employers,

wealth extractors, who treat working people shamefully, yes, they should

be. What will you do to him? We will spell out in our manifesto the

issues that will be central for us. You will mention him in the

manifesto? We are determined to ensure that the voice of working

people is properly heard... I understand, but why should Philip

Green be worried? What do you have in store for him and the boss of

Sports Direct? Wait and see what is in the manifesto. Do you know? Yes,

we are sending an unambiguous message, which is that we want good

employers to sexy, but we don't want ad employers to continue. All will

be revealed. Let's look at some of Britain's big companies to find out

how many wealth extractors there are around. Tesco? That is a company

that has done very well. The relationship between Tesco and its

workforce and their trade union is quite good. Is it a wealth

extractor? It has sometimes not paid enough to the people it employs. So

it is? Would ie equate Tesco with Sir Philip Green? Not for one

moment. But you can't change the economy the way you want on the

basis of Philip Green, no matter what it is that you have in store.

British Telecom? It sometimes leaves something to be desired. Is it a

wealth extractor? You are not getting the point, that our

criticism and our concern on behalf of working people is, those who

extract wealth wrongly and at the expense of working people, and who

do not treat their workforce fairly or pay them a decent living wage. I

understand the argument. I'm trying to find out who you have in mind.

I've given a couple of examples already. British Gas? In my

experience in the world of work, I charge a group that brought together

public and private employers. We used to have good contractors

complaining about being undercut by bad ones, so we stand for any

economy of fair treatment, and also fair competition. You have said

that. I am trying to find out who is in the cross hairs, because there is

a lot hanging on this, and it would be good to know who you think is

part of a rigged system that is a cosy cartel. Let me ask again - is

Bill Gates a wealth extractor? He is a man who has made a fortune, but he

is one of the most outstanding men in the world... Is he a wealth

extractor or not? His wealth has been spent well, not just on his

employees... Is he not a wealth extractor? Also, the outstanding

work he has done as a great philanthropist. I know all about

Bill Gates. You're not getting the point... The point is, you are not

answering the question. Let me try again, because Mr Corbyn has divided

the system into wealth creators and wealth extractors. Is Bill Gates a

wealth extractor? You are not getting the point. I am not getting

the answer. We are in favour of the creation of wealth. So is Bill Gates

a wealth creator or extractor? Which one? What we want is any economy

where you no longer get the roads undercutting the reputable. British

Aerospace? It is a dam good company and I have worked with them over the

years. Marks Spencer? I can see what you are trying to do, but you

are missing the point. Let me give you this example: I remember, why

not name it? The company ISS, one of the biggest contract is in the

world. They said, we want to be good, we want to be better, but our

problem is, we operate in a competitive environment where we are

undercut by the rogues, so what we want to do, therefore, is to

transform the nature of the economy so that good companies create wealth

and succeed, so that workers benefit as a consequence. You have said that

five times, so, other than Philip Green, in your view, who else is a

world extractor? -- wealth extractor? We will say more in our

manifesto. So you can say anything other than a high-profile

businessman, a Buccaneer? Those who behave badly should be named and

shamed. Let me try one more time - who else is a wealth extractor? You

just have to wait forearm in a faster. Will you name them? We want

to send the clearest possible message about the kind of economy we

should become a -- economy we should be, what type of country we should

be. Let me try something else. Do you agree with the Shadow Chancellor

that anyone earning over ?70,000 a year is rich? They are not poor, are

they? The average wage is ?27,000 a year. To earn ?70,000 a year is to

live comfortably. Comfortably - MPs are over 70,000. Are you rich? I was

brought up in poverty. We were all brought up in different

circumstances. Are you rich? I get a very good wage. But are you rich? I

don't feel that I am, no. Why has the Shadow Chancellor said that

being rich means earning about 70,000? He is making a point about

what type of economy we should have. Instead of doing what should be

done, which is a fair deal for the great majority of Britain, you have

got a Government that has been systematically, particularly at the

top, handing out tax breaks to the rich, the corporation tax, the top

rate of tax, all of the things that have made those with a lot of money

yet more wealthy, but the great majority of ordinary people have

lost out, not least because we have had the longest squeeze in real

wages in a generation. ?70,000 a year is a good salary. It may not

necessarily make you rich or make you feel that you are rich,

particularly if you live in London and the Saudis, thank you no costs

are very high. If you owned ?90,000, or ?100,000, at the moment, your

marginal rate of tax is 40%. These people could expect to pay a higher

marginal rate? We will put in our manifesto our

intentions in relation to tax. Our focus is not on low and middle

earners, our focus is that firstly you should pay your tax, secondly if

you can afford much more then you should pay more. You will have to

wait for our manifesto. But also firstly what we will do is to end

the scandal of tax giveaways to the wealthy because that's exactly what

this Government has been doing. Let me try one more time, if you are

earning 70,000 per year, which you could be the head of the big English

department in a comprehensive, it could be a relatively senior

policeman, it could be a doctor, it could be a very senior nurse with a

lot of responsibility, on that you should expect to pay a higher rate

of tax? No, and our tax plans... So for these people the marginal rate

is not going up? Our tax plans will be spelt out in the manifesto. Our

focus... I know what your focus is, the people watching would like to

know. They would like to know if they will pay more tax. They would

quite like you to give me the opportunity to answer the question.

The focus will be on tackling those who avoid paying their tax, the top

rate earners who can and should pay more... Does not include people on

70,000? Ending the giveaways. You are not answering my question, we

will have to wait for the manifesto. Neil Kinnock says it is now more

unlikely than ever that there will be a Labour government in his

lifetime, do you agree? I am absolutely determined that we do not

return to the dark days of the 1980s where we end up with 18 years of

Conservative Winter. I fought with Neil... So do you disagree? I am

absolutely determined. I am asking if you disagree. The British people

need a Labour government and therefore we have got to be

single-mindedly focused on rebuilding support, gaining power

and changing the country for the better. A Labour Britain is always

better than a Conservative written. The answer just doesn't bear

resemblance to the question I asked. Jeremy Corbyn said this morning that

the city, he didn't use the words but he said they, the city crashed

the economy. Why after ten years of the Labour government did the Labour

government allowed the city to crush the economy? I think there was a

global problem where governments across the globe did not

sufficiently regulate the finance sector. Straight answer to a

straight question. Including the Labour government here. Labour took

steps, opposed by the Tories every step of the way. But you accept that

Labour presided over events that crashed the economy? We took steps

to try and change that. The Tories opposed those steps, there was then

the crash, and the appalling thing about what's happened subsequently

is it is working people who paid the price. Which is a point Jeremy

Corbyn made strongly. Thank you, I hope to see you and be more

successful after the manifesto. Look forward to it. Douglas Carswell has

decided not to run in this election, remember he defected from the Tories

to Ukip, he won his seat, then left Ukip and became an independent in

strong Ukip territory, but he's not running again. What is your

reaction? I think Jack Dromey could look at some of the work Douglas

Carswell has done on how you really tackle elites and what you really

do... I understand but I was simply asking for your reaction. I am very

surprised, I always thought Douglas was someone who... I think he did

enjoy his job, he was a great advocate for people of Clacton. Let

me give you another surprise, he's backing the Conservative candidate.

We don't know who the Ukip candidate is yet so I suspect that is a little

premature. It never rains but it pours for Ukip at the moment. It's

an interesting time to be in politics and in Ukip as well, but it

always is. We will have plenty of time to get... We are done. I will

see you post manifesto, looking forward to it. Me too!

Theresa May hasn't been out and about this morning.

She's been in Downing Street for a series of meetings.

But last night, the Prime Minister was in Bolton.

She tried out some of the campaign lines we will be hearing a lot of in

the next few weeks. It's a choice between strong and

stable leadership under the Conservatives or weak and unstable

coalition of chaos led by Jeremy Corbyn. And that is very clear. The

other parties are lining up to prop up Jeremy Corbyn. We have seen it

with the Liberal Democrats and we see it with the Scottish

Nationalists. Theresa May there, she was speaking in Bolton, part of the

north of Lancashire, where the Conservatives are hoping to pick up

a few seats, particularly if they think the Ukip threat was not what

it was. In the old days it was Bolton east, Bolton West, in these

days it is swing seats. These are changed days.

We're joined now by David Cameron's former deputy chief of staff,

the Conservative MP Oliver Dowden, and by Alistair Carmichael,

the Liberal Democrats' Home Affairs spokesperson.

And the only Lib Dem in -- MP in Scotland. For the moment! What do

you make of Jeremy Corbyn's attempts to stand up to the wealth

extractors? It is interesting stuff but it's quite remarkable that in an

election framed around Brexit armour which that is clearly the defining

issue at least at the moment, Jeremy Corbyn has very little to say about

it. My instinct is that I think it was probably quite a good move on

his part to shift, because on Brexit he has a pretty weak story to tell.

He was absent without leave during the referendum campaign and his

so-called leadership under Article 50 has been pitiful. It is not

necessary, simply because the Prime Minister calls the election, it

isn't necessary for the Leader of the Opposition to go on with that.

Jeremy Corbyn said this morning that the crash, caused by the financial

system and by the institutions of the financial system, caused huge

hardship for people who weren't responsible for the crash. People

are suffering to some extent on that, whereas the people who caused

it seem by and large to get away scot-free. Surely that's a

legitimate point. Of course it is, but there is a danger for any

political party that wants to talk about something other than the

debate that is at the centre... He wants to talk about the standards of

living for British people, what could be more important? Although

Jeremy Corbyn was talking about an interesting analysis of the past,

what will have an impact on the living standards of working people

in this country in the here and now and in the future, and it will be

Theresa May's determination to pursue a hard Brexit, taking us out

of the single market and Customs union. Ed Miliband talked about

predators in his first speech, I think he was leader of Labour at the

party conference, Theresa May has stopped about tax dodgers,

international companies and directors not paying their fair

share or doing things wrong way, she divided people into that as well,

Jeremy Corbyn is just doing the same, there's nothing unusual about

it. It is perfectly legitimate to raise this issue but I've always

thought the way to help working people is cut their taxes, and we

have done that by ?1000 per year, and at the same time the wealthier

are paying more than ever. We were the ones to do that first of all,

can we remember that? We found the money to do it! Let me put this to

you, it's an example I think of what they were talking about, in the

financial year for Google ending June 2016 we have a turnover in

Britain of $8 billion, how much corporation tax to be paid? Google

are paying more now than they used to, I don't know the exact figure. I

will tell you, they paid 25 million on turnover of 8 billion. That

cannot be right, can it? No, I completely agree. George Osborne

introduced reforms of the rules to deal with the so-called double Irish

question. The main problem we have is large multinational companies are

moving money around the world, taking tax in other countries... We

know what they are doing, we are trying to work out why you haven't

stopped them. Six years of Conservative government and they are

still paying a marginal rate of tax. A company that has made ?8 billion

out of this country in one year pays 25 million in tax. That's why people

are angry, is it not? Yes, but we are tapping the double Irish

question, we have raised billions from tax avoidance, just in this

last Budget we announced a further ?800 million from tax avoidance, we

are closing down loopholes, going after tax evaders with higher fines,

we are more aggressively taxing them, and if you go back to what

Theresa May said on the steps of Downing Street that's something she

wants to address further. You are writing the Ukip manifesto, what are

you going to say about these things? About inequality? About some of

these companies who seem to pay very small amounts of corporation tax.

Absolutely, and we had in our 2015 manifesto ways to cut down on tax

avoidance, which the Tories picked up and run with. We believe

fundamentally taxpayers should be allowed to keep as much of their own

money in their own pockets as possible so we are looking to

smaller government is well and I think it's one of the things that's

interesting, that Theresa May's government is a party of big

government, talking about more politics and not less, and we oppose

that as well. Must uncontrolled immigration has driven down wages,

by controlling immigration you get a natural rise in wages. There's

another dimension to this, and it is the truth of the matter that you

will only tackle tax evasion by cooperating with other people and

other parts of the world. The EU was one of the most significant trading

blocs within that globalised economy. I think words have to be

carefully used. You are not accusing Google of evasion? That was the word

you used. Sorry, avoidance, and thank you for giving me the

opportunity to put that correct, but corporate tax avoidance, closing

down the loopholes can only be done by working with other countries and

the EU is an important... If the thrust of your politics is being

driven by an inward looking and isolationist policy, then in fact

that becomes more and more... You are spinning everything. Challenge

you on the EU, we have made tremendous progress through the G7

at looking at tax avoidance, I don't think the EU has that big a role to

play on tax avoidance. It helps to facilitate it, companies can place

their headquarters in countries with the lowest tax regimes, we would

stop that. What would the Lib Dems do about inequality? We would tackle

it by allowing working people to keep more money... But a lot of that

has been done already. There are still a lot more to do and you use

the machinery of government to give people the tools to pull themselves

up. We invest in education, in the pupil premium, which puts extra

money directly into children who come from the poorer families. That

way you enable them to make the most of the talents they have got and to

pull themselves out of poverty. Are you up for Progressive Alliance? If

there are progressives around with whom you can make alliance then I am

up with it. Jeremy Corbyn? I don't think so because any Alliance has

got to be a coherent one and no alliance with Jeremy Corbyn will be

coherent. As for the nationalists they are neither progressive nor

particularly keen on making alliances with other people.

Mischief from them but not from you? Heaven forfend!

So what, I hear you cry, about all the bills that

are going through Parliament at the moment?

What about the Small and Medium Sized Co-operative

Development Bill, or the Short and Holiday-Let Accommodation

(Notification of Local Authorities) Bill?

Well, let me tell you all about the wash-up period.

The wash-up is the period immediately before an election,

when the Government works out which bills

it can rush through, and which it has to

drop, before Parliament dissolves at the start of May.

Turning bills into law is normally a long, drawn-out process that

can take months, but during the wash-up, the Government

speeds up the process by watering bills down to take the controversial

bits out and thrashes out compromises with the opposition

parties so the bills can get through.

Anything left over has to wait until a new government is formed.

Let's talk now to our reporter Emma Vardy.

Emma, what is getting through and what is not? Hundreds of bills are

going through Parliament at the moment, some of them covering

mainstream issues like prisons and transport, and others that deal with

things like Habitat regulations. There are six major ones that are

going back and forth between the Houses. The higher education and

research bill is one of the big ones, and this will only get onto

the stack Briton statute but if their concession. May is already

having -- get onto the statute book if there are concessions. The

Digital economy Bill deals with ticket touting and the level of the

BBC licence fee and that is another one at ping-pong stage that can get

through if there are concessions. The other bills that haven't reached

ping-pong yet - the criminal finances Bill is a major one,

dealing with corruption and terrorism financing, which goes to

the Lords next week and can get through the parties agree. For

others, it looks like the end of the road. The prisons and courts Bill

and local Government Finance bill are two which looked like they will

bite the dust and will have to be restarted in the next Parliament.

The Tories believe they will win this election and win big, otherwise

they would not have called it. There may be right or wrong, but that is

what they think, so why do they need to rush this through if they are

confident they will come back? Some things are time critical, like

getting permission for university fees to rise in time for September,

but also important is that if bills are fully formed, if they have to go

through the process of being restarted in the next Parliament,

they will also be fighting for space with Brexit legislation.

Negotiations will go one largely behind the scenes, over four days

next week, and there will be pressure for the Government to get

things through. Also, the opposition don't want to be seen to be standing

in the way of useful legislation because of a point of detail, so we

have this wash-up period next week, and we will watch and see what

happens. Thank you very much about. The wash-up period part of the way

British politicians do things. We're joined now by Catherine Haddon

from the Institute of Government. Welcome to the programme. Is this a

period where there is cooperation between the parties to get this

done? That can be, but the big division is between the Commons and

Lords, because the House of Lords is where the opposition really sets,

because there is a majority in the Commons. It is more about being

between the chambers. It is not about differences of view and things

like that, there is a lot of important scrutiny and amendments go

on in these kinds of stages. Governments, when they put

legislation through, will put amendments on things because they

realise they don't quite work. The danger of doing it too quickly is

that you end up with a bad bill, which you want to avoid. The

opposition has more power than normal, and so too will the Lords.

In 1983, we were awaiting the BT privatisation bill and Labour

refused to put it through in the rush before the 1983 election, so it

had to wait. Margaret Thatcher's return brought the bill back. There

is an opportunity with their higher education and research funding bill,

where we may see opposition from the Lords, because there has been

criticism of it. There were stories in the press this morning that

Theresa May, who has argued against taking student numbers out of the

migrant figures, may now concede that to get the bill through. And

there are a lot of interesting questions, not just how much

legislation will be on the box for the next Parliament and whether or

not they want to carry bills through, but also, what does Theresa

May want to change? Many of these bills have their origins in the last

Conservative manifesto, so this could be your opportunity to change

policy on some issues, should she be returned with the majority she

hopes. That is one of the reason she is giving for the election, that if

she puts a number of things into the manifesto, then under the Salisbury

role, I think, the Lords can delay and argue, but they cannot stop

something on which a Government has been elected. Although some, the Lib

Dems, don't recognise that. They rejected as that? In 2005. I don't

know whether Tim Farron will respect it. It is a long-standing tradition

about things that are renowned manifesto. They are not necessarily

specified in a manifesto with detail, so there is scope

opposition, to the but it means that key areas that have been put through

as manifesto policies, the Lords are not supposed to recommend and

ultimately stop them, but they can change them significantly if they

argue the case. I guess we will wait for the Tory manifesto, but we don't

know yet if Mrs May has got any major legislative programme in mind

in addition to Brexit, or whether Brexit is going to suck up all the

oxygen. A lot of her speech was about domestic policy, and there

were a number of areas where we have seen progress, but that will now

have to stall. We were expecting more consultations, more from the

Government on industrial strategy, social mobility, and of course,

there was going to be a White Paper on grammar schools in June. These

could change. Then there are other things that might change as well. We

saw with the budget, the Finance Bill is one of the things that

currently needs to be sorted out and go through wash-up. Because that is

tax and revenue, so they have to do that. Yes, and they will probably

reduce it to the bare minimum. They may want to have a new budget under

the next Government because they may want to reintroduce the thorny issue

of national insurance. The Treasury have this big hole they want to

fill, so the manifesto could change the legislation a lot. Parliament

goes down, I think, at midnight on the 2nd of May. Yes, dissolution. It

has been announced this morning that it will be, yes, at the end of the

2nd of May, so that will also be the last time that MPs and their staff

get to access computer... And they are not MPs any more. No, just

candidates, so they won't have access to resources. Civil servants

have written to MPs today to say that the normal process for

enquiries will be happening. As far as they are concerned, the purdah

has already started. The election will be on the 8th of June, and then

a couple of weeks later, whoever wins has formed a Government and

there is the Queen's speech. We were expecting that anyway in May. There

is not as much legislation going on because of that. You might have to

account for the fact that she may have a reshuffle. She has a

reshuffle, she might want to change departments round, so that will also

affect smaller legislation going through as well, because different

ministers may have different priorities in mind. Fascinating. A

very much. -- thank you very much. Our guest of the day

is Suzanne Evans of Ukip. Now, at every election, we are used

to hearing that her party is on the verge of a parliamentary

breakthrough - it's The party has seen some success,

currently holding five seats in the Welsh Assembly,

but Ukip has also faced an array of problems,

mostly self-inflicted. After last year's referendum, MEP

Diane James was elected as leader, but she stood down after only 18

days, saying she didn't Eventually, she resigned

from the party altogether. Cue another leadership race

and another resignation. This time, frontrunner Steven Woolfe

left the party after he was knocked out during an altercation

with a fellow Ukip MEP. MEP Paul Nuttal was eventually

elected as Ukip supremo but was then caught out about achievements

on his CV and had to apologise after falsely claiming to have lost

friends at the Hillsborough disaster, all of which helped

scupper his campaign He was described as weak

by the party's millionaire donor, Arron Banks, before Banks

was subsequently elbowed out during He vowed to set up Ukip 2.0

and destroy the party. And the trouble kept

coming - their only MP, resigned from the party to sit

as an independent, though many And this month, former

Tory Mark Reckless, who is now a Welsh Assembly member,

resigned from Ukip to sit as an independent and vote

with the Conservative group What a mess! Thank you for reminding

me of all that. I would have completely forgotten if it wasn't

for you! It is a never-ending nightmare. It has not been our

moment of glory, let's be honest, but I think we are in a situation

where Article 50 has been triggered and there is no doubt that getting

out of the EU was Ukip's reason for being, our primary goal. Inevitably,

there will be reflection and reconsideration, when it looks like

someone else has picked up the ball and run away with it. I would say to

people that we're not yet. People who are saying that Ukip is finished

and our job is done, I would say no. Until the fat lady sings on Brexit,

if you like, we are still in and have to get out. There is still this

debate about hard or soft Brexit. I would say there is just Brexit.

People like you and other UK people always tell me in these interviews

that your job is to hold the Government's fee to the fire over

Brexit. It is. When you have seen that litany of woes I have gone

through, you have done more to set yourself a light. In some senses, I

can only agree, and we have shot ourselves in the foot in some

senses. That doesn't mean that we don't have a job to do and we must

carry on. Mrs May is going to go to the country, and she will repeat her

Brexit strategy and the broad outlines of what she aims to achieve

in the negotiations, and if she wins, she will have a mandate to

carry that out, whether you liked all the details or not. She has the

mandate, if she wins, to do it. Even your role of holding their feet to

the fire seems to have been scuppered by this election. I

disagree. If Theresa May comes back with a massive Tory majority, my

concern is that when you have huge majorities, without serious

opposition, a dictator meant Halladay comes in, and I think there

is a touch of that in Mrs May. We hear she will not take part in the

TV debates. It is like, I will do what I like. She is a dictator? No.

You said a touch of a dictator. Like Tony Blair in 1997, massive

majority, Tory Party depleted, decisions made without any

opposition which scuppered and left a terrible legacy of the people for

successive generations. I am not terribly keen on majority

governments for precisely that reason. For the sake of argument,

let's accept, briefly, the elected dictatorship might argue, if you are

to have any role in putting some constraints on this self-described

elected dictatorship, you would need more than one or two MPs, otherwise

she would be irrelevant. If you are not in parliament, you

cannot hold the Government to account. One of the things we will

be looking out in our 2017 manifesto is the policies, the Tory handbook

as some people are calling it, that the Conservative Party has gone

with. So you are even more irrelevant if they have nicked your

policies. Even your non-EU policies are being pinched by them. I would

say that makes us very relevant. Why vote for the monkey if you can have

the organ grinder. Because you don't know if the organ grinder will play

the tune they said they would play. Theresa May will have the mandate to

do so if she wins and in the sense it doesn't matter what you say any

more because if the Government wins with a big majority, if there is a

small win all sorts of things will happen, but she then has a mandate

and what you think is surely irrelevant. Let's see what the Tory

manifesto says. Theresa May failed to control immigration when she was

Home Secretary, never came anywhere near the tens of thousands, just

went up and up. She says she wants to release us from the European

Courts of Justice, does that mean we will pull out of the European arrest

warrant? I'd like to see the details. The failure of the

Government to hit its immigration figures has been apparent for six

years, the issue of the European arrest warrant has been around for

at least six more years as well. And yet you have made all of these

points and you still have no MPs. Let's wait and see. We are always

waiting and seeing, and nothing happens. When you get an they leave,

defect or decide not to stand again. Maybe Douglas was clearly thinking

about that anyway, I would suggest, but just because we don't have any

MPs it won't stop us from trying. I understand that and parties all over

the world have to try. Paul Nuttall talked about rebranding the party,

what does that mean? I don't know. A lot of people talk about

rebranding... The content of the manifesto should surely reflect the

rebranding. I think he was talking about the logo, that sort of thing.

Getting rid of the union flag? Well, the pound sign. I like the yellow,

not the purple. Ukip began as something of a threat to the Tories

in the south and I think that was one of the reasons Mr Cameron moved

to a referendum. It then started to think we could be even more of a

threat to Labour in the north, without ceasing to be a threat in

the south. But when you look at the South now and you look at Mrs May's

position and the fact the country did vote for Brexit and she's taking

a line that you by and large approve of... That one issue, yes.

Disaffected voters are just as likely to go back to Tories in the

south and you are not really getting the votes in the north. I remember

the first ever interview I did for daily politics, I said, I think our

future lies in the Labour heartlands. I think we need to focus

on both, and Ukip's manifesto will once again look to be both, it will

be that common sense a party that appeals to both those on the left

and right because it is common sense because its policies will benefit

everyone in the country. You said there was a touch of the dictator

about Mrs May but you were the one last November that wanted judges to

be sacked. No, I have been misquoted on this. I was talking about the

fact our judiciary is pretty much completely unaccountable and I think

there should be more scrutiny when it comes to judicial appointments

for instance. We were talking about the elites and they replicate

themselves and there is nowhere that is more evident than in the

judiciary. This so sacking judges won't be in the manifesto? I can

guarantee that! You heard it here first.

It's not just Labour who are kick-starting

The Green Party - of England and Wales, we should say -

are launching their campaign this afternoon in Bristol.

We're joined from there by the party's co-leader, Caroline Lucas.

There she is with that iconic bridge behind her. You must have heard or

seen bits of what Jeremy Corbyn was saying this morning. Was there

anything you disagreed with? I have been on a train for most of the

morning with plenty of delays so if you wouldn't mind refreshing my

memory about what he did say... He talked about wealth extractors and

cosy cartels, of people making the rules up to help themselves, he

talked about, well Mr McDonnell talked about erasing taxes... I

wondered if you disagreed with any of it? The general thrust? Certainly

I agree we should be moving to a much fairer society, in Britain we

have most of the -- one of the most unequal societies in the whole of

Europe so we want to make sure people on higher incomes will be

paying more but the Green Party not only has that analysis and shared

concern about inequality and a real commitment to addressing inequality,

but also we have that consistent position when it comes to Brexit. We

want to avoid the hardest type of Brexit, which Mrs May is pursuing,

for which we say she has no mandate. Thirdly, we want to put climate and

environmental protection back at the top of the agenda. It's amazing how

short people's memories are, last year was the hottest year on record

and people seem to have forgotten that now so we will be talking about

the importance of investing in green jobs. In Bristol we are currently in

second place and our candidate was an MEP, a very experienced

politician, and last time round we had an increased to 27% almost

unprecedented so we have a really good chance of winning our first MP

here in Bristol West. You reached out to Labour and the Lib Dems with

talk of a Progressive Alliance but they have both rejected your offer,

are you disappointed by that? I am deeply disappointed and people up

and down the country are disappointed because it is yet more

of the same type of politics, putting their own interests above

those of the country. We faced a defining general election, which

will make key decisions about the kind of country we will be. A quick

look at the polls suggest the kind of policies Mrs May is pursuing will

ensure she comes back with a majority of up to 100, I don't think

that represents what people want in this country. It's the result of a

skewed electoral system. We don't know the result yet! Right now this

Government is governing on the basis of less than 24% of the eligible

vote, so we need to reach out to other parties to see if we can avoid

the most extreme Tory policies. You set an interesting precedent in the

Richmond by-election, famously won by the Lib Dems, because you stood

down and that's will have contributed to the Lib Dem victory

there. You have got to concentrate your resources in the areas which

you are now in Bristol, will you be looking at seats where even though

they have rejected your progressive alliance, will you be looking at

seats where if you don't stand there and other progressive party will

have a chance? You won't see people standing down across the country,

but what I think is exciting is the fact that up and down the country

there is such a desire to try to beat this scandalously undemocratic

electoral system and work together to that end. So many times you have

parties from the centre and centre left fighting each other and what

happens time and again is the Tories say all through the middle. Surely

now when there is so much at stake when it comes to public services and

Brexit, surely now those other parties should be putting aside

tribal politics. I understand the logic. There are five Conservative

seats which the Lib Dems would have won if Green voters had backed them

in the 2015 election but it has to be a two Way Street. Are you having

any discussions with Tim Farron or Liberal Democrats about that sort of

thing? There are discussions going on at all levels. Can I draw your

attention to the Isle of Wight, another of our target seats which is

currently held by Conservative, Ukip in second place, but the Greens are

inferred. We have a fantastic candidate on the Isle of Wight who

is really admired and respected, she has a good chance. There is a real

groundswell of people who want to change this. Is there a real

possibility that in some of the seats with the Lib Dems, where the

Lib Dems could win, if you weren't there, is that a discussion we

should be looking out for in the next couple of weeks? Is it really a

runner? I think so because there is such a ground of popular opinion for

it. My e-mail inbox is overflowing with people begging for parties to

get together and have grown-up politics. You have organisations

like Compass, people active in this space saying how do we have a

politics which delivers what the majority of people in this country

want. The undemocratic electoral system, which gives power to the

Government on 24% of the electoral vote, that is stymieing what the

majority of people want which is decent public services, investment

in jobs and the environment. Except when they had a chance to vote for a

change of electoral system, they didn't change it. But if you have a

choice to change it to something not much better... That is your view. If

with discussions with Labour or the Lib Dems, if it is possible to

identify five seats where you step back they could do better and maybe

win or five seats where if they step back you would do better, you are up

for that? Completely up for that and stepping back can take many forms,

it can be as simple as where you decide to put resources, right

through to one could even perhaps imagine an open primary, an open

democratic decision about who is best placed to fight an extreme

Tory. But the key thing to say is this is locally driven and has to

come from what the local constituents want. Those discussions

are being had right now. Caroline Lucas, thank you for joining us with

such a beautiful backdrop, it's been a pleasure. Come and join us! If

only I had the time. Do you agree? We believe in a system of

proportional representation that does make votes matter and makes

votes fair. All right, we have to leave it there, as this era of good

feelings break-out. There's just time before we go

to find out the answer to our quiz. The question was: Which leader's

child has been pictured playing So, Suzanne, what's

the correct answer? Thanks to Suzanne Evans

and all my guests. I'll be back this evening

at 11:45 on BBC One, where you'll be joining me again,

Suzanne, along with Miranda Green, As a reality TV star, Donald Trump

may have been ignorable. But he is now unignorable,

he comes to us 24/7. But what will

his presidency mean for the world?