20/04/2017 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 20/04/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



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?


Download Subtitles