:00:38. > :00:42.Boris Johnson hits the election campaign
:00:43. > :00:47.is not just a "mutton-headed mugwump",
:00:48. > :00:49.but has the Foreign Secretary undermined his own credibility
:00:50. > :00:53.Tensions are high on the Korean peninsula
:00:54. > :00:56.but the US says it wants to bring the North Korean leader
:00:57. > :01:02.we'll ask one of Donald Trump's advisors what that means.
:01:03. > :01:04.Zac's back but other prospective candidates are sacked -
:01:05. > :01:11.with the Daily Politics Desk of Election News.
:01:12. > :01:15.And parliament shuts up shop today in a quintessentially British way -
:01:16. > :01:48.Obviously, all this coverage of the French elections is catching on!
:01:49. > :01:51.All that in the next hour and with us for the duration today,
:01:52. > :01:53.someone who's well used to hearing Norman French
:01:54. > :01:55.as a member of the House of Lords -
:01:56. > :01:59.So, for the first time since Theresa May called the election,
:02:00. > :02:01.Boris Johnson has been deployed this morning.
:02:02. > :02:04.the Foreign Secretary launched a personal attack on Jeremy Corbyn,
:02:05. > :02:06.referring to him as a "mutton-headed old mugwump".
:02:07. > :02:08.A "mugwump", by the way, is apparently a person
:02:09. > :02:16.who remains aloof or independent from party politics.
:02:17. > :02:24.It comes from the 1886 American presidential campaign, where
:02:25. > :02:28.Republicans left their candidate and put the support behind Grover
:02:29. > :02:33.Cleveland, who won, the first Democratic candidate to win since
:02:34. > :02:37.the end of the civil war. They became known as mugwump. What that
:02:38. > :02:38.has to do with Mr Corbyn, I have no idea.
:02:39. > :02:40.Having suggested that Britain's security would not be safe
:02:41. > :02:42.in Mr Corbyn's hands, Mr Johnson was asked to clarify
:02:43. > :02:45.the Government's own position on supporting US action in Syria.
:02:46. > :02:48.I think it would be very difficult if the United States has a proposal
:02:49. > :02:51.to have some sort of action in response to a chemical weapons
:02:52. > :02:54.attack and if they come to us and ask for our support,
:02:55. > :02:56.whether it's with submarine-based cruise missiles in the Med
:02:57. > :03:01.or whatever it happens to be, as was the case back in 2013,
:03:02. > :03:04.John, in my view, and I know this is also the view
:03:05. > :03:06.of the Prime Minister, it would be very difficult
:03:07. > :03:20.What do you make of that? Well, we would have to know what we were
:03:21. > :03:24.saying yes to. Syria has been going on since 2011. We have had a
:03:25. > :03:28.chemical attack before in 2013. We have had a policy where we have
:03:29. > :03:33.consistently said Assad must go, but he's still there. In 2017, we need
:03:34. > :03:38.to be careful because the US hasn't made it clear what the strike was
:03:39. > :03:42.about and what next. What the endgame was. Exactly. Targeted
:03:43. > :03:45.strikes are important, because it could be part of a strategy to get
:03:46. > :03:50.Assad to the negotiation table, but the fact that we haven't heard since
:03:51. > :03:54.that strike what the US are trying to achieve, they haven't been saying
:03:55. > :03:58.Assad must go in the way have in recent times. The relationship
:03:59. > :04:02.between them and Russia, of course, impacts on what happens in Syria. So
:04:03. > :04:08.we can't just say yes, we have to ask why. He also seemed to muddy the
:04:09. > :04:11.waters a bit in that if such a decision was required, he said it
:04:12. > :04:18.would be up to the Prime Minister to decide, whereas recent practice has
:04:19. > :04:24.been to go to Parliament on these matters. What do you think? It is
:04:25. > :04:31.not entirely clear what the convention this. The Prime Minister
:04:32. > :04:34.does have absolute right to commit our troops without going to
:04:35. > :04:37.Parliament. And sometimes the element of surprise is necessary.
:04:38. > :04:40.Because of what has happened in recent times, before we commit our
:04:41. > :04:45.troops, I think prime ministers do come back to the House and I presume
:04:46. > :04:47.Theresa May would follow that. Is there a distinction between going to
:04:48. > :04:54.the Commons and committing troops, as opposed to firing cruise missiles
:04:55. > :04:57.from submarines in the Met? I suppose our young men and women are
:04:58. > :05:01.not at risk in the same way if we were to put troops on the ground,
:05:02. > :05:06.but I still go back to this question - what are we trying to achieve as
:05:07. > :05:08.an international community, and what would Britain bring to that
:05:09. > :05:14.coalition which makes it necessary to be involved? Those are questions
:05:15. > :05:21.that need to go before Parliament. Is Jeremy Corbyn a mutton headed old
:05:22. > :05:25.mugwump? This is just Boris being Boris. Jeremy Corbyn is an
:05:26. > :05:32.ineffective leader of the Labour Party, which means he can never be
:05:33. > :05:34.an effective Prime Minister. Without sounding ultra-confident, Jeremy
:05:35. > :05:39.Corbyn is not going to be Prime Minister. I don't think we need to
:05:40. > :05:42.resort to personal attacks on him. It is obvious that he can't run a
:05:43. > :05:47.political party and would not be able to run the country. Using the
:05:48. > :05:52.phrase mutton headed old mugwump, which, other than the alliteration,
:05:53. > :06:00.I'm not sure what the purpose of that phrase is... I had to look it
:06:01. > :06:05.up. Is it personal? It was something I felt comfortable with as party
:06:06. > :06:07.chairman. I don't think we need to resort to personal attacks,
:06:08. > :06:10.certainly not in the current general election, where we are so far ahead
:06:11. > :06:13.in the polls. It is clear from everything coming back but the
:06:14. > :06:17.question is not whether Theresa May will be Prime Minister, it is what
:06:18. > :06:23.the size of her majority will be. We should get on with telling the
:06:24. > :06:29.country the mandate that we want, how we are going to govern, the
:06:30. > :06:34.policies that are important to us, publish our manifesto. Jeremy can
:06:35. > :06:38.damage himself by himself. How big a part should Mr Johnson played in the
:06:39. > :06:43.campaign? Is he an asset to your party or a loose cannon? It depends
:06:44. > :06:47.on the kind of campaign we want to run. He certainly gets a lot of
:06:48. > :06:53.attention and a lot of people like him. He has huge face and name
:06:54. > :06:55.recognition and certainly provide entertainment and light-heartedness
:06:56. > :06:59.to some campaigns. But I think Theresa wants to run this as a
:07:00. > :07:03.serious campaign, and it is a serious time. The reason the
:07:04. > :07:07.election has been called us because we are going into serious
:07:08. > :07:11.negotiations. And he is the Foreign Secretary. But Boris is always
:07:12. > :07:16.Boris, whether as Foreign Secretary or Mayor of London. He is a great
:07:17. > :07:21.guy, I just don't think that this election requires us to have any
:07:22. > :07:25.personal attacks on anybody. At least it brought mugwump back into
:07:26. > :07:31.the political lexicon. It hasn't been used for a long time. And we
:07:32. > :07:33.all missed it. I missed it, actually! But that is just me.
:07:34. > :07:36.Now, another morning and another party leader is out
:07:37. > :07:38.on the campaign trail - this morning, Jeremy Corbyn took
:07:39. > :07:44.Very little actual concrete policy - they tell us we'll have to wait
:07:45. > :07:47.for the manifesto on May 15th for the actual detail.
:07:48. > :07:48.But this morning as they visited voters,
:07:49. > :07:50.Jeremy Corbyn reiterated his pledge to build 100,000 affordable
:07:51. > :07:54.council and housing association homes
:07:55. > :08:00.They have also claimed that Labour-led councils build more homes
:08:01. > :08:04.This is what Jeremy Corbyn had to say.
:08:05. > :08:07.A Labour Government won't stand by and watch
:08:08. > :08:13.We will build a million homes over the period of a Parliament,
:08:14. > :08:17.half of which will be council and housing association for rent
:08:18. > :08:29.We want our young people growing up with security, so they can
:08:30. > :08:37.achieve more in school, in college and go on to university.
:08:38. > :08:39.We can speak now to Labour's Jack Dromey,
:08:40. > :08:55.So just an aspiration here, no policy? It is a firm commitment to
:08:56. > :09:02.build a million homes a year. Not a million a year. I beg your pardon, a
:09:03. > :09:06.million over a five-year period. And half of those homes would be built
:09:07. > :09:11.by councils and housing associations to rent and to buy. It is a welcome
:09:12. > :09:17.commitment because we are engulfed by the biggest housing crisis in a
:09:18. > :09:20.generation. No government has done enough, to be frank, but our record
:09:21. > :09:24.was so much better. We built 2 million new homes, a million more
:09:25. > :09:29.homeowners now. Home ownership is now falling for the first time since
:09:30. > :09:35.the 1920s. We brought up to standard the 1.8 million council and social
:09:36. > :09:41.homes. We slashed homelessness. And when we had the financial crisis in
:09:42. > :09:44.2008, I worked with John Healey when he was the housing minister and I
:09:45. > :09:50.was typically general secretary of my union. We worked together to put
:09:51. > :09:56.a programme together, the kick-start programme, which sold 120,000 homes
:09:57. > :10:02.built, workers kept in the building jobs and avoided the collapse of the
:10:03. > :10:08.construction industry. Why should we believe a firm commitment to you all
:10:09. > :10:11.from you to build 200,000 new homes a year when you never succeeded in
:10:12. > :10:18.doing that in the 13 years you were in power? Because that is what the
:10:19. > :10:22.country now demands. But you didn't do it before. In the way I have
:10:23. > :10:28.described, we have a good track record. You never built 200,000 new
:10:29. > :10:33.homes a year. I made it clear that no government has ever done enough.
:10:34. > :10:35.The question is who has got the determination to build affordable
:10:36. > :10:41.homes to rent and to buy that the country wants. The idea that you
:10:42. > :10:44.have a generation now growing up, often into their 40s, having to stay
:10:45. > :10:48.at home with mum and dad or in costly, insecure rented private
:10:49. > :10:52.sector accommodation is plain wrong. It would be one of our top
:10:53. > :10:56.priorities. Not just the homes that people want, but the jobs it
:10:57. > :11:00.creates. If you have good homes, that helps improve people's health,
:11:01. > :11:06.because damp and overcrowded homes damage health. It is an utter
:11:07. > :11:09.determination to tackle the housing crisis. But the only way we can
:11:10. > :11:14.judge that determination is to look at your past record. We have no
:11:15. > :11:24.details of the policy of how you are going to do this. You are talking
:11:25. > :11:28.about 100,000 new council housing houses as part of the mix. In the 13
:11:29. > :11:40.years you were in power, how many council houses did you build? Not
:11:41. > :11:44.enough. How many? You built 7870. That was in 13 years. But you expect
:11:45. > :11:50.us to believe you will build 100,000 a year now? But we inherited from a
:11:51. > :11:55.Conservative government when we came to power in 1997 social housing
:11:56. > :12:04.stock in this country that was a scandal. Damp homes, badly heated
:12:05. > :12:08.homes. We made a decision that with those already in those homes, we had
:12:09. > :12:13.to bring them up to standard. It has transformed the lives of millions.
:12:14. > :12:19.Did we build enough new social homes? No, we didn't. But if you
:12:20. > :12:24.look at what is happening now, if you live in an area where you have a
:12:25. > :12:28.Labour council, you see 50% more homes being built by that Labour
:12:29. > :12:33.council. Here I am in Birmingham, where we are getting close to 3000
:12:34. > :12:38.homes a year. A third of those are being built by Birmingham City
:12:39. > :12:40.Council. A leading Labour member of the London Assembly says Labour
:12:41. > :12:46.should apologise for its record on council housing in government. I
:12:47. > :12:51.have made it clear. No government has ever done enough. He is saying
:12:52. > :13:00.you should apologise. He said more council homes were built in the last
:13:01. > :13:06.year of Thatcher's government than were built in 13 years of a Labour
:13:07. > :13:09.government. But the Thatcher government and John Major government
:13:10. > :13:16.than left us with the mess of the best part of 2 million social homes,
:13:17. > :13:20.most of them in disrepair. We acted to put that right. That was our
:13:21. > :13:25.priority. Should there be more council homes built? Yes, without
:13:26. > :13:29.doubt. But look at the record of what Labour councils do compared to
:13:30. > :13:36.Conservative councils. We build homes, they don't build anywhere
:13:37. > :13:43.near far enough or fast enough. How will you pay for 100,000 new social
:13:44. > :13:45.homes a year? Both by way of direct investment, but also intelligent
:13:46. > :13:50.arrangements. As shadow housing minister, I worked with the housing
:13:51. > :13:57.associations. I have seen it in my own constituency of the Abbey Fields
:13:58. > :14:02.estate is working with housing associations but also Birmingham
:14:03. > :14:08.City Council. We have mixed housing. But where will the money come from?
:14:09. > :14:12.The mixed housing is different and buy. On a basic level, you have an
:14:13. > :14:16.estate where you have people from different backgrounds living
:14:17. > :14:20.together. Some people buy, and that helps you build homes for social
:14:21. > :14:24.web. It is a combination of investment and that kind of
:14:25. > :14:28.intelligent mixed community building that generates the money necessary.
:14:29. > :14:32.Here in Birmingham, we now have something called the Bromley bond,
:14:33. > :14:38.where you have private sector companies who are wanting to invest
:14:39. > :14:42.in a new social housing come in mixed tenure estates in the way I
:14:43. > :14:47.have described. We also have a Chinese company which is going to
:14:48. > :14:53.invest ?2 billion in housing in Birmingham. So if you have the will,
:14:54. > :15:00.there is a way. Have you costed 100,000 new social houses? Yes. And
:15:01. > :15:04.you will see that in our manifesto. You can't tell me today? I have
:15:05. > :15:08.given you a strong steer about how we do it. It is a combination of
:15:09. > :15:13.direct investment, and this government has been cutting back on
:15:14. > :15:16.investment in social housing. Councils of all political
:15:17. > :15:20.persuasions have been complaining bitterly about what the Government
:15:21. > :15:24.is doing. So it is a combination of investment in social housing with
:15:25. > :15:30.the kind of intelligent approach which levers in investment from the
:15:31. > :15:34.private sector in building mixed community areas. Family, Mr Corbyn
:15:35. > :15:40.campaign for the Labour leadership on rent controls. Were those feature
:15:41. > :15:45.in the Labour manifesto? We are certainly going to act on a chronic
:15:46. > :15:49.problem of insecurity in the private rented sector, often poor
:15:50. > :15:55.accommodation in the private sector and soaring and unpredictable rents.
:15:56. > :16:01.Will there be rent controls? That will be at the heart of our
:16:02. > :16:05.manifesto. You will see what we say. One more time, will there be rent
:16:06. > :16:11.controls? Mr Corbyn is in favour of them. Will they feature in the
:16:12. > :16:15.manifesto? Wait and see. We will transform the private rented sector
:16:16. > :16:20.in the best interests of private tenants, good landlords, of which
:16:21. > :16:26.there are many in this country, but also tackling bad landlords. More
:16:27. > :16:34.secure, higher quality private rented sector.
:16:35. > :16:38.Depufrp We will leave it there. You are not answering my question, all
:16:39. > :16:44.I'm getting is rhetoric You are getting answers. The one thing I am
:16:45. > :16:49.not getting. Never mind always a pleasure to discuss these matters
:16:50. > :16:56.with you. Housing is a problem. A big problem. This Conservative
:16:57. > :17:00.Government has been in power now for six, into its seventh year and you
:17:01. > :17:04.are still way short of 200,000 new homes a year. We are. I think the
:17:05. > :17:09.last figures were 190,000. We think that the figures should be... Not as
:17:10. > :17:18.high as that I think that was the UK overall. Less in England. 2015-16 I
:17:19. > :17:24.think it was 2700,000. You will have to correct me on the area. We said
:17:25. > :17:28.we have to build 225,000 to 275,000 houses, new additions a year. Not
:17:29. > :17:32.just building new houses but conversions as well. Where I agree
:17:33. > :17:37.with Jack is that successive governments, we are talking back to
:17:38. > :17:40.the Thatcher years as to when council housing was being bi.
:17:41. > :17:45.Successive governments have failed to keep up with demand and the needs
:17:46. > :17:49.of Britain. Starts in England around 142,000 in the past two years I was
:17:50. > :17:54.looking at some figures this mornings the latest figures I had
:17:55. > :17:57.for 2015-16 were 190,000, I was comparing them to the last Labour
:17:58. > :18:02.figures we had. I think you will find it is for the UK as a whole.
:18:03. > :18:04.Right. I think Labour figures were 130,000.
:18:05. > :18:06.Now, it's a truism in politics that one campaigns in poetry
:18:07. > :18:10.Your view of Donald Trump's campaign rhetoric
:18:11. > :18:12.may have you doubting the timeless quality of that remark,
:18:13. > :18:15.so as we reach the hundredth day of Mr Trump's Presidency,
:18:16. > :18:17.perhaps he ought to chew over another maxim,
:18:18. > :18:20.one put forward by a British Prime Minister:
:18:21. > :18:22.that "events, dear boy, events" are the things most likely
:18:23. > :18:27.And like so many occupants of the Oval Office before him,
:18:28. > :18:29.Mr Trump's been buffeted by cold political winds from
:18:30. > :18:36.Tensions have risen in north-east Asia amid concerns over new nuclear
:18:37. > :18:39.weapons tests conducted by North Korea.
:18:40. > :18:42.Washington, Beijing and Seoul believe that North Korea could very
:18:43. > :18:48.soon have nuclear weapons with inter-continental capability,
:18:49. > :19:09.meaning they could be used to target cities
:19:10. > :19:17.North Korea says it'll "never stop" testing nuclear weapons so long
:19:18. > :19:19.as the US continues alleged "acts of aggression",
:19:20. > :19:21.while US Vice-President Mike Pence promised his country would meet
:19:22. > :19:24.with an "overwhelming" military response.
:19:25. > :19:27.Donald Trump invited all 100 American senators
:19:28. > :19:29.to a White House briefing to discuss the situation.
:19:30. > :19:30.But the rhetoric from Washington appears to have been dialled down,
:19:31. > :19:33.with the US military's commander in the Pacific theatre saying
:19:34. > :19:34.they wanted to bring Kim Jong-Un
:19:35. > :19:36."to his senses, not to his knees".
:19:37. > :19:38.And we're joined now to discuss this by Sebastian Gorka.
:19:39. > :19:38.He's a deputy assistant and strategist in the White House.
:19:39. > :19:46.Welcome to the programme. # Thank you. Bring the Korean dictator to
:19:47. > :19:50.his senses, not his knees. What would it mean in policy terms? Well
:19:51. > :19:53.this up thing about this administration, we do not tend to
:19:54. > :19:57.give away the play book in advance. But if you look at events over the
:19:58. > :20:00.past three weeks it is clear we have sent a message to several nations
:20:01. > :20:06.that have client states that they have to draw their own internal red
:20:07. > :20:10.lines for what kind of behaviour they will countenance from those
:20:11. > :20:13.client states, whether it is Russia with Syria or whether it is China
:20:14. > :20:18.with North Korea. North Korea will not be solved in by lateral
:20:19. > :20:24.discussions. It's not a normal nation, so right now, I think the
:20:25. > :20:32.summit, the results of that summit, especially the turn around the
:20:33. > :20:37.Korean coal shipment, tells you things are going in the right
:20:38. > :20:44.direction. What do you expect core China to do? North Korea relies on
:20:45. > :20:49.China. China has leverage. Zo they can exercise that. What is the game
:20:50. > :20:53.here? What do you want China to do? The game is a very simple one. North
:20:54. > :20:59.Korea has to stop taking action that is are destabilising to the region
:21:00. > :21:03.and stop behaving in a way that in material breach of the numerous
:21:04. > :21:06.international requirements with regards to weapons of mass
:21:07. > :21:10.destruction programmes and ballistic missiles. What indications do you
:21:11. > :21:13.have that China is prepared to use its leverage in that direction? The
:21:14. > :21:18.most obvious is what happened with the coal shipment but beyond that we
:21:19. > :21:21.are thot going to force our hand or Beijing's hand. This is very
:21:22. > :21:27.delicate stuff. Remember, it is a nation that is more Stalinist than
:21:28. > :21:34.Joseph Stalin's USS R was and as such, it is not your normal actors
:21:35. > :21:40.let's put it like that. The British secretary said today, military
:21:41. > :21:45.actions are "not the way forward" and risk "huge and hideous
:21:46. > :21:49.reprisals" what do you say? I say that what the President has
:21:50. > :21:56.demonstrated in the past 14 weeks is that state craft is never the only
:21:57. > :21:59.function. There is not only one way of solving things, diplomacy without
:22:00. > :22:04.the option of force is just words and pieces of paper, a state craft
:22:05. > :22:07.requires the application of all the tools of state craft, all the
:22:08. > :22:11.instruments of power at the right time. That is why we sent a very
:22:12. > :22:15.clear message. It's not about leading from behind. It is not just
:22:16. > :22:21.about meetings in Geneva or vee ennia. It is about the -- Vienna, it
:22:22. > :22:24.is about the toppings, should it be required to use other tools as well.
:22:25. > :22:28.-- it is about the option. What is the message? That America is
:22:29. > :22:35.back, there are red lines and we will execute. What is the red line?
:22:36. > :22:39.Well, in recent weeks it's the use of weapons against innocent women
:22:40. > :22:42.and children. But in North Korea what is the red line? Again, we
:22:43. > :22:46.don't give our play book away. You have said you have made it very
:22:47. > :22:50.clear but it is not... We have made it clear at a political level but we
:22:51. > :22:53.will not talk about the tactical or operational theatre triggers, that's
:22:54. > :23:01.what the Obama administration did with Mosul and what the Clinton
:23:02. > :23:05.administration did with the Balkans. If you broadcast all of your
:23:06. > :23:11.potential triggers those will be used against you. One Republican
:23:12. > :23:16.senator after the briefing said it lacked "Straight answers on the
:23:17. > :23:20.policy of North Korea and its testing of ICBM?" I would disagree.
:23:21. > :23:24.But you weren't there? This is making a discussion, a comment about
:23:25. > :23:34.an unclassified meeting, then, I would disagree. But what is the
:23:35. > :23:39.policy on ICBMs? The North Koreans continue to test missiles to give
:23:40. > :23:44.them an ICBM capability and with that they are able to miniaturise
:23:45. > :23:49.the nuclear weapons so they could nuclearise an ICBM, if they continue
:23:50. > :23:52.down that road f Chinese pressure either doesn't happen, or doesn't
:23:53. > :23:56.deter them, what is the American reaction? Again, we do not show our
:23:57. > :24:03.cards to the players at the poker table. But, the vice-president was
:24:04. > :24:08.very clear in his tour of Asia last week, the capacity to inflict
:24:09. > :24:12.physical damage on our Allies or partners or our nation will not be
:24:13. > :24:17.countenanced. How we will get to that point, whether it will be
:24:18. > :24:22.through multilateral diplomacy, behind the scenes, second track,
:24:23. > :24:25.third track negotiations, the use of force in some demonstrable fashion
:24:26. > :24:29.to send a message are options on the table but we will not declare what
:24:30. > :24:34.those options will be at a certain time. Do you accept, though, that if
:24:35. > :24:46.there was a military response to undermine or destroy North Korea's
:24:47. > :24:52.ICBM capabilities, that the price would be a rain of fire on the South
:24:53. > :24:59.Korean capital? Everybody knows the geography and the distance. About 70
:25:00. > :25:07.miles And the North Koreans have massive artillery to hit a modern,
:25:08. > :25:10.big population, Westernised city Nevertheless, there are numerous
:25:11. > :25:15.other tools that can be used. I'm not going to comment, I'm in the
:25:16. > :25:23.going to confirm or deny but there have been stories about why that
:25:24. > :25:33.recent test failed. It didn't fail because a bomb was dropped on the
:25:34. > :25:39.missile pad. Cyber warfare Is one theory I'm in the going to comment
:25:40. > :25:44.on. I'm not going to confirm or deny it. Then there were missiles
:25:45. > :25:49.launched on the Syrian airfield after the attacks, you can see that
:25:50. > :25:52.in terms of a punishment act of what had been done by the Assad regime
:25:53. > :25:56.but what is the strategy behind it? What is the strategy? Yes Very
:25:57. > :26:02.similar to what we are doing in North Korea. Assad's regime has
:26:03. > :26:08.significant sponsors, one of them is Russia and we sent a message that
:26:09. > :26:13.you may want to reconsider just how far your sponsorship goes when you
:26:14. > :26:16.have a client that is prepared to use chemical weapons against its own
:26:17. > :26:24.citizens. That is a strategic response. And as you saw with
:26:25. > :26:28.regards to Secretary Tillerson's cancelled meeting with Vladimir
:26:29. > :26:33.Putin and what led to that meeting, the desired effect of that use of
:26:34. > :26:36.force were arrived at. Hang on, what has been different about Russian
:26:37. > :26:42.actions in Syrian since the attack? It is not actions in Syria, it is
:26:43. > :26:45.clearly their reassessment of just how deep and how far that
:26:46. > :26:50.relationship will go and their openness to talk to our Cabinet
:26:51. > :26:54.members on these issues. But I don't know what's changed on the ground
:26:55. > :27:01.since that attack. I mean within 24 hours the Syrian Air Force was
:27:02. > :27:05.taking off from that very airfield and hitting civilian areas, which
:27:06. > :27:13.were deemed to be rebels. So what changed? By the way, why the 59
:27:14. > :27:19.cruise missiles, why did they do so little damage? What were those
:27:20. > :27:27.aircraft? They were prefueled. They didn't have the capacity to fuel
:27:28. > :27:32.them. It was smoke a irmirrors, in almost every interview I give, I
:27:33. > :27:36.have to remind people this is week 14, not month 14. Patients is a
:27:37. > :27:39.virtue. What do you make of what you have heard? It goes to the questions
:27:40. > :27:43.I was asking at the beginning - what is the strategy and what we are kind
:27:44. > :27:47.of hearing, well there is a strength we're not going to tell anybody what
:27:48. > :27:50.it is, we'll not deny or confirm the strategy. As international partners
:27:51. > :27:54.of somebody who sat in the Foreign Office for two-and-a-half years, if
:27:55. > :27:57.we are going to commit to supporting strategies, well, we need to know
:27:58. > :28:01.what is going on, and I think even in relation to Syria, it was obvious
:28:02. > :28:06.that we didn't know what was going on until it had happened In World
:28:07. > :28:09.War Two, what did we do with regard to the Third Reich? Did we advertise
:28:10. > :28:14.our strategies? In fact we did the opposite. We convinced Hitler we
:28:15. > :28:18.were coming over Calais, not in fact coming over on the beaches of
:28:19. > :28:22.Normandy, that's strategic action. Well that was a tactic, what we did
:28:23. > :28:26.in temples strategy, was leave nobody in any doubt that we were
:28:27. > :28:31.going for the total destruction of Nazi Germany. That was the strategy
:28:32. > :28:37.and nobody was in any doubt... But how you achieve it. A tactic not a
:28:38. > :28:40.strategy. Don't mix terms. The discussion between Allies was clear
:28:41. > :28:45.on what the strategy was. Ultimately there is no doubt in anybody's mind
:28:46. > :28:48.that Assad has committed the most vile murders and acts in his own
:28:49. > :28:53.country. He is still there. But he is still there. We have been saying
:28:54. > :28:58.since 2011, Assad must G I'm not sure what the US policy is now on
:28:59. > :29:03.whether he must or must not G that hasn't been clarified We don't can
:29:04. > :29:07.have what the Obama administration had, an article of faith that he
:29:08. > :29:11.must G we are going to deal with the people that support him because it
:29:12. > :29:15.has to be. The bottom line is the killing has to sto. You asked about
:29:16. > :29:19.the difference between strategies and objectives, our objective is the
:29:20. > :29:25.killing has to stop. What the permutation is for that, who is in
:29:26. > :29:28.power, that lab political -- that will be a political power, a
:29:29. > :29:31.political process. Now, it's a snap general election,
:29:32. > :29:33.so the parties have had to work at breakneck speed
:29:34. > :29:35.to select candidates. But don't worry - our Ellie's been
:29:36. > :29:38.keeping up with it all and has all the details of those
:29:39. > :29:40.and more besides with the Daily Politics
:29:41. > :29:47.Desk of Election News. Yes and here it is, welcome, with a
:29:48. > :29:51.hastily erected sign, we have a chair and a computer. So what more
:29:52. > :29:55.could you want? Today we have been getting more details of who is going
:29:56. > :30:00.to fight this election and it is a blast from the Tory past. Esther
:30:01. > :30:01.McVey, remember her, she has been selected to fight George Osborne's
:30:02. > :30:14.seat. He is delighted Tweeting: Down shout, Zac is back, he resigned
:30:15. > :30:17.his Tory seat last year in protest to Heathrow expansion and promptly
:30:18. > :30:19.lost his seat to the Liberal Democrats. Well once again he is now
:30:20. > :30:22.the Tory candidate. It's a practical decision -
:30:23. > :30:24.who is most likely And on that basis,
:30:25. > :30:27.people have made the I think it's the right decision,
:30:28. > :30:45.I wouldn't have put my hat The Ukip leader is in the headlines
:30:46. > :30:48.for comparing Ukip to Gandhi. It is a bit like the Gandhi thing, he
:30:49. > :30:52.said. First they laugh at you, then they attack you and then you win. We
:30:53. > :30:55.don't know if he is planning to stand in the coming election.
:30:56. > :30:57.Elsewhere, Tim Farron and the Lib Dems have been on the campaign trail
:30:58. > :31:12.in Cambridge this morning. Not sure what he was talking about,
:31:13. > :31:16.maybe a new Lib Dem Slocombe. Elsewhere, we have been hearing from
:31:17. > :31:23.Jeremy Corbyn. He has been in Harlow, keen not to turn his back on
:31:24. > :31:27.people there. He has been funding up to the electorate in a campaign
:31:28. > :31:31.stump speech. Labour may be cheered by some diverse and high profile
:31:32. > :31:36.support from the snooker community today. Ronnie O'Sullivan yesterday
:31:37. > :31:38.tweeted his support for Jeremy Corbyn, before going on to get
:31:39. > :31:44.knocked out of the World Championships. And here is one for
:31:45. > :31:50.you. I know you are into grime, a maker of hip-hop, garage and jungle.
:31:51. > :31:56.Jeremy Corbyn, or Jay Z, has the backing of the crime artist JME, and
:31:57. > :32:05.I think I can use my high-tech studio to do this. Yes, we had
:32:06. > :32:10.better get out of that before the swearing. One last piece of news is
:32:11. > :32:13.that we have heard that there will be a State Opening of Parliament on
:32:14. > :32:20.the 19th of June, with a Queen's Speech for whoever wins. Thank you
:32:21. > :32:22.for playing one of my more recent recordings.
:32:23. > :32:25.Now, the Government has a strategy to stop people becoming terrorists
:32:26. > :32:28.It's received enormous scrutiny over recent years,
:32:29. > :32:31.and is now in the middle of yet another revamp.
:32:32. > :32:33.In a moment, we'll hear from our guest of the day
:32:34. > :32:36.Baroness Warsi on this, but first, Emma Vardy looks back
:32:37. > :32:38.at the development of Prevent in city that found itself
:32:39. > :32:45.In 2013, six young Muslim men from Portsmouth travelled
:32:46. > :32:59.Initially, some believed this to be for humanitarian work,
:33:00. > :33:07.as a sinister extremist organisation.
:33:08. > :33:09.The realisation that six friends from Portsmouth had gone to join
:33:10. > :33:14.them was a huge shock for the local community.
:33:15. > :33:17.A police team from Special Branch began carrying out
:33:18. > :33:24.Officers built new relationships with leaders at the city's mosques
:33:25. > :33:28.They urged people, especially mothers, to speak up
:33:29. > :33:32.if they felt their children may be being radicalised.
:33:33. > :33:34.We really need families, schoolteachers, nurses and doctors
:33:35. > :33:37.to tell us about their concerns long before someone goes on to become
:33:38. > :33:42.a jihadi bride or commits a criminal act.
:33:43. > :33:46.The city also had increasing problems with right-wing extremism.
:33:47. > :33:51.The English Defence League targeted Portsmouth's largest mosque.
:33:52. > :33:54.We've noticed that a lot of people that go to Syria actually
:33:55. > :33:58.What sort of stereotypical views do we think of
:33:59. > :34:03.Prevent officers in Portsmouth brought the fight against
:34:04. > :34:05.radicalisation into the classroom, beginning a new programme
:34:06. > :34:11.The goal is for students to understand
:34:12. > :34:16.We want to get our message across that as far as possible,
:34:17. > :34:19.we don't want to criminalise anybody.
:34:20. > :34:21.They engaged with thousands of young people, discouraging travel
:34:22. > :34:25.to Syria, but also discouraging radicalisation
:34:26. > :34:31.It was one of the first cities in the UK where Prevent
:34:32. > :34:33.was being used extensively to discourage radicalisation
:34:34. > :34:39.The Prevent statutory duty prompted a significant step forward
:34:40. > :34:41.in the delivery of Prevent work across all public
:34:42. > :34:46.Now social workers, health care staff and teachers had a duty
:34:47. > :34:53.Hundreds of front line staff in Portsmouth received
:34:54. > :35:00.It prompted criticism that ordinary workers were being asked to spy
:35:01. > :35:03.on people in their care, something repeatedly
:35:04. > :35:05.refuted by those who work with the Prevent strategy.
:35:06. > :35:07.Responsibility for Prevent was transferred from the police
:35:08. > :35:13.The main part of our role is education to keep people safe.
:35:14. > :35:17.We talk about British values, challenging extremism
:35:18. > :35:21.through promoting democracy, freedom of speech.
:35:22. > :35:24.Today if someone raises concerns about someone who may be
:35:25. > :35:29.Portsmouth City Council's Prevent team
:35:30. > :35:33.will carry out intervention work if they believe it is needed.
:35:34. > :35:35.The process is usually kept highly confidential,
:35:36. > :35:39.but Prevent teams are keen to stress that they see their work primarily
:35:40. > :35:45.The long term solution has to be in the counter-extremism strategy
:35:46. > :35:48.where civil societies come together and take on this ideological
:35:49. > :35:54.that we have been challenging homophobia, racism and fascism.
:35:55. > :35:56.That has to be the future and that is something
:35:57. > :36:01.No one else from Portsmouth has since been known
:36:02. > :36:03.to have travelled to Syria, but authorities believe
:36:04. > :36:10.their counter-extremism work must continue.
:36:11. > :36:13.Now, our guest of the day, Sayeeda Warsi,
:36:14. > :36:15.is a long-standing critic of the Prevent programme and has
:36:16. > :36:17.just written a book, The Enemy Within,
:36:18. > :36:31.What is the evidence that Prevent has lost the confidence of the
:36:32. > :36:34.Muslim community? Firstly, I have not been a long-standing critic of
:36:35. > :36:38.the Prevent tragedy. I called a brave, dynamic and cutting edge when
:36:39. > :36:44.it started in 2003 and when it was first published. The concern I have
:36:45. > :36:47.is that over the years, you have to look at the way it is written as a
:36:48. > :36:57.strategy. The iterations of it have changed. What started as a genuine
:36:58. > :37:03.battle of ideas led by the community and prevention of people getting
:37:04. > :37:06.into terrorism has ended up being a policy which has had concerns raised
:37:07. > :37:13.from across the board. People like rights watch, Helena Kennedy,
:37:14. > :37:16.Michael Mansfield, QC, the George Soros foundation, even David
:37:17. > :37:22.Anderson, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, has said
:37:23. > :37:26.it is time to independently reviewed Prevent. But it has been reviewed a
:37:27. > :37:31.lot. What is the evidence that it has lost the confidence of the
:37:32. > :37:35.Muslim community? Like I said, there is a platter of reports in which
:37:36. > :37:39.members of the Muslim community have given evidence. I can give you my
:37:40. > :37:41.own evidence of people who are consistently bringing me up, parents
:37:42. > :37:46.and teachers who are concerned about the level of training, the training
:37:47. > :37:53.material, the people who are trained to train others, the number of
:37:54. > :37:57.referrals, the opaqueness of all of this. Those of us who want Prevent
:37:58. > :38:00.to work are saying it is time for an independent review. The fact that
:38:01. > :38:03.the Government is digging its heels in, not prepared to have an
:38:04. > :38:09.independent review, not putting into the public domain so much of what
:38:10. > :38:12.could be contentious material and the opaqueness of the whole
:38:13. > :38:20.strategy, I think is raising deep concerns. The president of the
:38:21. > :38:23.national association of Muslim police said two years ago that
:38:24. > :38:26.Prevent has moved on a lot. There were teething problems, but it is
:38:27. > :38:30.moving in the right direction. Prevent has made a difference. We
:38:31. > :38:35.have made a lot of progress. For every quote from someone who thinks
:38:36. > :38:40.dock there are two sides to this. There are those who want to get rid
:38:41. > :38:44.of Prevent. Others say it is working. The reality is somewhere in
:38:45. > :38:53.the middle. Some bits of it have worked, others haven't. If I took
:38:54. > :38:56.this as a very personal thing, it is up kind of thing where if I had
:38:57. > :39:00.concerns about my children, I should be open to feel I could take them
:39:01. > :39:03.there and it would not impact on them at their lives and we would get
:39:04. > :39:08.genuine support. It is not that kind of place. It is not a space that
:39:09. > :39:13.parents feel they can refer their children, and it should be. But some
:39:14. > :39:16.are suspicious that Prevent is being undermined by a deliberate strategy
:39:17. > :39:20.by reactionary forces in the Muslim community. I agree. There is
:39:21. > :39:25.definitely a lobby out there which wants to do nothing but trash
:39:26. > :39:32.Prevent. But the other side of the argument is that some believe that
:39:33. > :39:39.if Prevent is such a great policy dock the Government has consistently
:39:40. > :39:42.said it is a good policy. But it has openly said it doesn't apply in
:39:43. > :39:46.Northern Ireland. There was a question in Parliament Ma Long ago
:39:47. > :39:51.when a member of pollen said yes, but we were told that Prevent
:39:52. > :39:55.doesn't apply to counterterrorism, it applies to Muslim communities.
:39:56. > :39:59.But they have other programmes in Northern Ireland, as you know,
:40:00. > :40:04.because similar issues have been a problem in Northern Ireland for
:40:05. > :40:08.decades. And Prevent is seen as the golden standard. We are exported to
:40:09. > :40:13.other parts of the world. Because there are these questions, the fact
:40:14. > :40:17.that there is this debate, I am saying, let's have an independent
:40:18. > :40:21.review of this. Let's have somebody like David Anderson, a well
:40:22. > :40:24.respected lawyer, review all of this, somebody with expertise. And
:40:25. > :40:28.let's have everybody who has concerns give evidence and hopefully
:40:29. > :40:32.emerge from this with a stronger programme which a lot of us can
:40:33. > :40:36.support. You write in your book that there is a disproportionate focus on
:40:37. > :40:44.Islamist related terrorism. Why would there not be? Identical said
:40:45. > :40:49.that. Have you read the book? I have just seen a summary. Well, I say in
:40:50. > :40:56.the book that there is a policy at the moment which has a definition of
:40:57. > :41:00.Islamist extremism which in my view and according to many other experts
:41:01. > :41:06.is fundamentally flawed. But we don't have a definition of any other
:41:07. > :41:11.form of extremism or terrorism. And if you look at the figures, you see
:41:12. > :41:16.that these arguments, unfortunately, are far too complex to be dealt with
:41:17. > :41:22.in a 32nd sound bite. It is why I wrote a book about it. But what is
:41:23. > :41:28.not complex is that the overwhelming terror threat to us is Islamist.
:41:29. > :41:33.That is a fact. So that is what we should be focusing on. We should be,
:41:34. > :41:39.but if you look at the definition of Islamist extremism as it stands, we
:41:40. > :41:45.are looking for the tell-tale signs of what makes a terrorist. The
:41:46. > :41:48.tell-tale signs are anything from 15 to about 30. This is borne out by
:41:49. > :41:52.the evidence of people who have studied the lives and profiles of
:41:53. > :41:57.people who have been involved in terrorist attacks. And yet despite
:41:58. > :42:01.these 15 to 30 tell-tale signs, government policy focuses on one.
:42:02. > :42:08.That should worry us all, that we have a counterterrorism strategy
:42:09. > :42:12.which follows a definition which doesn't encompass all the tell-tale
:42:13. > :42:16.signs of what makes a terrorist. Do you think it was wrong for the
:42:17. > :42:24.Government to want people to ascribe to British values? What I say about
:42:25. > :42:29.British values is that it is a list which is reductive. We should be
:42:30. > :42:35.talking about British ideals. What should Britain be in 2017? When we
:42:36. > :42:40.talk about British values, and I unpick this again in the book, we
:42:41. > :42:46.cite the values that we break in policy-making. I give example after
:42:47. > :42:52.example of where we say "These are our values", but in policy-making,
:42:53. > :42:58.we fail to follow those values. We need a much more honest debate about
:42:59. > :43:02.what Britain wants to be in 2017. When we have had that debate and we
:43:03. > :43:06.have a set of British ideals to which we can all sign up, that
:43:07. > :43:14.includes government. If we say we believe in X, we should be doing X.
:43:15. > :43:18.But is there not a continuing problem with the growing isolation
:43:19. > :43:24.of some Muslim communities, parts of our cities, especially in the north,
:43:25. > :43:28.which are now overwhelmingly Muslim and inward to interact purely within
:43:29. > :43:35.themselves and are not integrated with the rest of society? One of the
:43:36. > :43:38.things I explore is the diversity amongst British Muslim Awards. I
:43:39. > :43:43.talk about how from ethnicity to theology to class to profession, to
:43:44. > :43:48.the way in which they live and where they live, as Muslim communities, we
:43:49. > :43:52.are so diverse. One of the things I argue for it to make sure that we
:43:53. > :44:04.talk about Britain's Muslim communities, we don't see them as a
:44:05. > :44:07.monolithic block. That is true. The Muslim community is more diverse
:44:08. > :44:15.than the French community, which is overwhelmingly from north Africa.
:44:16. > :44:19.But there are clearly problems of a lack of integration, and it is
:44:20. > :44:25.getting worse. Some Muslim communities are increasingly
:44:26. > :44:30.isolated from the rest of us. I talk about some Muslim communities which
:44:31. > :44:34.believe in a separatist isolation. We have those amongst all
:44:35. > :44:40.communities. We have a Orthodox Jewish community which lives in a
:44:41. > :44:45.separatist way. But one of the things I go back to in this book is
:44:46. > :44:52.that I have a frank conversation with Britain's Muslim communities. I
:44:53. > :44:56.said to them, we are not terrorists. There are 3 million of us. If we
:44:57. > :45:01.were, we would have killed everybody. But how are we fit for
:45:02. > :45:08.purpose in Britain in 2017? And I challenge them to raise their game
:45:09. > :45:10.to make sure we are part of a bigger community. We should always bear in
:45:11. > :45:13.mind that integration is a middle-class pastime. You and I
:45:14. > :45:16.don't have a problem with integration because we presumably
:45:17. > :45:20.live in nice houses and send our kids to nice schools and probably go
:45:21. > :45:22.to the same nice resorts on holidays. But if you're at the
:45:23. > :45:26.bottom of the pile, it doesn't matter what colour or religion you
:45:27. > :45:32.are, then unfortunately, integration is not the top of your priority
:45:33. > :45:35.list, it is survival. We have to be careful to draw a distinction
:45:36. > :45:38.between those communities that are deliberately choosing to live
:45:39. > :45:42.separate lives, and those that live separate lives because they have no
:45:43. > :45:43.choice. Because of economic circumstances. Your book is called
:45:44. > :45:47.The Enemy Within. Now, despite the best attempts
:45:48. > :45:50.of the Lib Dem leader Tim Farron to focus attention back
:45:51. > :45:52.on to the UK's relationship with the EU, he's had a bruising
:45:53. > :45:56.couple of days which have seen him face scrutiny over his views on gay
:45:57. > :45:59.sex and sack a would-be MP over At PMQs, Theresa May blasted
:46:00. > :46:07.the decision to allow David Ward to stand in his old constituency
:46:08. > :46:15.of Bradford East when asked about it by ex-Bradford
:46:16. > :46:17.councillor Sir Eric Pickles. The Prime Minister has shown
:46:18. > :46:20.considerable leadership in adopting the IHRA
:46:21. > :46:23.definition of anti-Semitism. Does she believe it's
:46:24. > :46:26.the duty of all party leaders within this House,
:46:27. > :46:30.not just to pay lip service to it, And does she share my
:46:31. > :46:49.disgust that a former Affairs Select Committee
:46:50. > :46:51.for his anti-Semitic utterances, is now the official
:46:52. > :46:53.candidate in Bradford East? People will be, I think,
:46:54. > :47:05.rightly, disappointed to see the Liberal Democrats readopt
:47:06. > :47:07.a candidate with a questionable It is important that all parties
:47:08. > :47:11.maintain the strongest possible censure on all forms of intolerance
:47:12. > :47:13.and send that message Just hours after that broadside,
:47:14. > :47:18.Mr Farron reversed the decision to let David Ward stand
:47:19. > :47:28.for the party on June 8th, At one stage he said it was nothing
:47:29. > :47:32.to do with him and he didn't want to interview but a few hours later he
:47:33. > :47:35.described him as "unfit to represent the party."
:47:36. > :47:40.that he was "stunned and somewhat ashamed of my own party".
:47:41. > :47:46.You know, how do you stop the House of Commons raising issues of Israel?
:47:47. > :47:51.Well, what you do is you make sure that supporters of the Palestinians
:47:52. > :47:54.don't get into the House of Commons and ask awkward questions
:47:55. > :48:03.and this is the strategy and it works, doesn't it?
:48:04. > :48:05.To discuss this, we're joined by James Sorene,
:48:06. > :48:08.who used to work for Nick Clegg and is now the CEO of
:48:09. > :48:13.the Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre.
:48:14. > :48:19.David Ward said his sacking is designed to stop supporters of
:48:20. > :48:23.Palestinians being elected, is he right nonsense. People in this
:48:24. > :48:26.country have a rigorous debate about foreign policy issues, there are
:48:27. > :48:30.lots of debates about Israel and the Palestinians and how to solve that
:48:31. > :48:33.conflict. It is a smoke screen that is thrown up by people like David
:48:34. > :48:38.Ward it make it seem like he is being silenced. If he wanted to
:48:39. > :48:41.engage in a sensible debate about Israel and the Palestinians would've
:48:42. > :48:46.been welcome to do so but what I did do was engage in a very dark side of
:48:47. > :48:50.that kind of discussion which quickly trips into anti-Semitism. We
:48:51. > :48:55.have mentioned the new definition of anti-Semitism talked about the
:48:56. > :48:59.house, he pretty much ticked every box of the guidance notes of what
:49:00. > :49:04.that definition is. So Mr Farron in your view was right to sack him? I
:49:05. > :49:09.believe he was right. So what, in terms of the definition of
:49:10. > :49:15.anti-Semitism, what is it that Mr Ward has said that was anti-Semitic
:49:16. > :49:18.as opposed to being very strongly, perhaps virulently, anti-Israel? If
:49:19. > :49:23.you look at the tweets he has written and the blogs, also that he
:49:24. > :49:28.has written, he has various themes as caped of dangerous fantasy about
:49:29. > :49:39.Israel no longer existing, or Israel not existing any more. He supported
:49:40. > :49:43.Nsa Shah with a comment of Israelis being transferred to America and he
:49:44. > :49:49.talked about things that is in the definition, that should be avoided.
:49:50. > :49:58.He said if he lived in the Gaza strip he would fire rockets too. For
:49:59. > :50:03.a British parliamentarian, it is stupid to say but is it anti
:50:04. > :50:09.Semitic? I wouldn't think that was particularly anti-Semitic. He talks
:50:10. > :50:19.about the apartheid state of Israel. To call it an apartheid state is a
:50:20. > :50:23.long-standing Meme for anti-Israel but is it anti-itic as oi posed to
:50:24. > :50:27.virulently anti-Israel. That particular comment may or may not
:50:28. > :50:31.be. It depends on the context and what he is doing but if you look at
:50:32. > :50:35.the to tality of his beliefs and what he said there are clear things
:50:36. > :50:38.which are basically anti semitism, they are not having a sensible
:50:39. > :50:42.debate about Israel and the Palestinians. My entire career is
:50:43. > :50:46.based on sensible discussions about Israel and the Palestinians, what he
:50:47. > :50:50.is doing is not that. What Tim Farron right to sack David Ward? He
:50:51. > :50:56.was. I looked at some of the detailed stuff he said and what
:50:57. > :51:01.David does is, he consistently confuses his very clear opposition
:51:02. > :51:06.to the Israeli government... Which... Which I do all the time.
:51:07. > :51:09.The current Israeli administration, I think lots of people within
:51:10. > :51:15.Britain's Jewish communities would have concerns about the current
:51:16. > :51:19.Israeli administration and he confuses that and a couple of
:51:20. > :51:23.comments are about what he feels Jews are doing to Palestinians.
:51:24. > :51:27.Interested you said, that I was looking through so. Things he said,
:51:28. > :51:32.not all by any means a lot of what he said was, it seems to me, you are
:51:33. > :51:36.clearly a real enemy of Israel but that may, that is not always the
:51:37. > :51:44.same as being anti-Semitic but then I saw ones where he said "the Jews",
:51:45. > :51:47.not Israel, he said "The Jews are inflicting atrocities on
:51:48. > :51:55.Palestinians." I authority that may have been the, the use of "Jews." It
:51:56. > :51:58.is an absolutely classic meme as you said of anti-Semite, that they will
:51:59. > :52:02.talk about the Holocaust and talk about Israelis being like Nazis. It
:52:03. > :52:05.is a classic, it is the most offensive thing you could possibly
:52:06. > :52:09.do and you can talk about Israel, you can talk about all sort of
:52:10. > :52:13.Middle East issues, you don't need to use Nazi imagery to make your
:52:14. > :52:18.point and is clearly designed to be offensive, you are back in the Ken
:52:19. > :52:22.Livingstone interview, by defending someone by talking about Hitler. It
:52:23. > :52:26.is transparent and clear. It is like a dog whistle an air raid siren for
:52:27. > :52:31.the followers, they know what is being talked about and they jump in
:52:32. > :52:35.on it. James is right. I talk about these issues all the time. I say -
:52:36. > :52:39.why would you even reach for the Holocaust or Hitler? How can they be
:52:40. > :52:48.answers to what is happening in the Middle East. Interestingly, what
:52:49. > :52:52.was, when Nas Shah said what she did and apologised. She said it was a
:52:53. > :52:57.stupid car too, I shouldn't have put it out. And anyone coming out and
:52:58. > :53:00.supporting a cartoon for which the original MP apologised for was a
:53:01. > :53:04.daft thing to do. You said the British volunteer who is fight for
:53:05. > :53:08.the Israeli Army should be treated as foreign fighters and prosecuted
:53:09. > :53:12.on their return? No, what I have said if you are British and you want
:53:13. > :53:16.it fight, you will fight for an army and fight for Britain only. It is a
:53:17. > :53:19.very clear view I have. And that is whether you are British Pakistani,
:53:20. > :53:23.British Indian, British Israeli, British whatever you may happen to
:53:24. > :53:27.be. I think the law in this area is unclear. Should they be prosecuted,
:53:28. > :53:31.so if you join the US Army or French for legion, if you come back you
:53:32. > :53:35.should be prosecuted? This is the issue, at the moment the law is
:53:36. > :53:38.unclear about who you join and which bit you join and how you are
:53:39. > :53:43.prosecuted to how you come back. I think to clear it all up and to make
:53:44. > :53:46.clear where you stand, if you are British, and you want to fight, you
:53:47. > :53:50.fight for the British Armed Forces and you fight for no-one else. OK,
:53:51. > :53:52.we'll leave it there. We asked David Ward to come on the programme but
:53:53. > :53:56.declined. Parliament is shutting
:53:57. > :53:57.up shop today. MPs and peers will not return
:53:58. > :54:00.to their respective debating chambers until after the general
:54:01. > :54:02.election on June 8th. But it will not be doing
:54:03. > :54:04.so without ceremony. It's called prorogation and BBC
:54:05. > :54:09.Parliament's Daniel Brittain went behind the scenes of the ceremony
:54:10. > :54:11.in 2015 to explain The time of year when Parliament
:54:12. > :54:22.is put into a deep sleep This time, though, there'll
:54:23. > :54:25.be no fairy godmother Instead, with one stroke
:54:26. > :54:34.of her wand, the wicked witch will dissolve them all next week
:54:35. > :54:37.and the MPs will be sent into outer darkness,
:54:38. > :54:40.or the election, as it's called. If you are looking for the heart
:54:41. > :54:43.of the British constitution, then I think it's here
:54:44. > :54:47.because sooner or later you're going to find yourself
:54:48. > :54:49.in this hidden away coridor It leads to the Crown Office
:54:50. > :54:55.and I think they keep it deliberately hidden away and it's
:54:56. > :54:58.here that the final seal is put Within this office,
:54:59. > :55:05.on instructions from the business managers of the House,
:55:06. > :55:16.I will prepare this Royal Commission, it deals firstly
:55:17. > :55:18.with the appointment of the Royal Commissioners
:55:19. > :55:20.and will also give the commissioners or any three of them full power
:55:21. > :55:24.and authority in our name to proroge This document will then go
:55:25. > :55:29.to the Queen, she will sign the document at the top
:55:30. > :55:32.at a Privy Council meeting which It'll then be returned
:55:33. > :55:37.to me and will be dated, sealed with the great seal
:55:38. > :55:39.of the realm. So it is literally signed,
:55:40. > :55:41.sealed and delivered. Paperwork in place,
:55:42. > :55:51.the show can begin. The peers are gathered
:55:52. > :55:54.in the Chamber of the House of Lords and they despatch Black Rod off
:55:55. > :55:57.to the Commons, collect the Commons, they bring them down here,
:55:58. > :55:59.rabble from the Commons, they go into the Chamber
:56:00. > :56:02.of the House of Lords and they meet Part of the ceremony of prorogation
:56:03. > :56:18.is the giving of Royal Assent to those bills that await Royal
:56:19. > :56:21.Assent and the Clerk of the Crown announces the title of each bill
:56:22. > :56:24.and then I look at the Commons and use the words of Royal Assent
:56:25. > :56:27.on behalf of the Queen. And that, of course,
:56:28. > :56:30.is done in Norman French. That is to say - the Queen
:56:31. > :56:37.wishes it and we go There are actually two variations
:56:38. > :56:48.on that formula, one of which I shall be
:56:49. > :56:50.using on this occasion. The longest is for what's called
:56:51. > :56:53.supply bills which are effectively La Reyne remercie ses bons
:56:54. > :56:57.sujets, accepte leur In other words, the Queen
:56:58. > :57:03.thanks her good subjects, accepts their benevolence
:57:04. > :57:05.and thus, wishes it so. Is it any different to ordinary
:57:06. > :57:11.French, Norman French? I'm afraid I know no Norman French
:57:12. > :57:14.other than the words that I thought you all went
:57:15. > :57:18.around chatting in Norman At Her Majesty's command this
:57:19. > :57:24.Royal Variety Performance is due As some would say -
:57:25. > :57:36.La Reyne, le veult. And we're joined now
:57:37. > :57:38.from Central Lobby by our Parliamentary Correspondent,
:57:39. > :57:41.Sean Curran. We were going to conduct this
:57:42. > :57:46.interview in Norman French but have run out of time N this wash-up
:57:47. > :57:55.period, what has got through and what hasn't? . -- in this wash-up
:57:56. > :57:59.period? What has the Government dropped because of time? The
:58:00. > :58:05.northern Bill was rushed through. The Finance Bill, enacting Philip
:58:06. > :58:09.Hammond's Budget and in the last couple of hours, a private member's
:58:10. > :58:15.bill on the registration of Farriers looks like it'll make it on to the
:58:16. > :58:18.statute Bill. The biggest casualty the Prison and Court Bill which will
:58:19. > :58:20.overhaul the prison system in England and Wales. That is shelved
:58:21. > :58:24.for now. Obviously if the Conservatives get back in, that
:58:25. > :58:29.could be resurrected in the Queen's Speech. Parliamentary business lend
:58:30. > :58:32.in a few hours' time. Parliament will be dissolved at one minute past
:58:33. > :58:37.midnight on Wednesday. At that point there are no more MPs, all the
:58:38. > :58:43.people who normally work here are ordinary citizens with no special
:58:44. > :58:44.privileges. They will continue to get paid until polling day. That's
:58:45. > :58:48.good to know. Thank you very much. The One O'Clock News is starting
:58:49. > :58:54.over on BBC One now. I will be joined by Michael
:58:55. > :58:56.Portillo, Alan Johnson, Giles Fraser, Helen Lewis,
:58:57. > :58:58.John Nicolson, Sian Berry and Dustin Lance Black
:58:59. > :59:02.on This Week from 11.45.