12/05/2017

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:37. > :00:41.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.

:00:42. > :00:47.Jeremy Corbyn declares he's not a pacifist as he pledges a robust,

:00:48. > :00:48.independent foreign policy and "no hand-holding" with US

:00:49. > :00:54.President Trump lays into the former director of the FBI,

:00:55. > :00:57.saying he's a showboat and a grandstander, as he attempts

:00:58. > :01:00.to close down the row over his sacking of James Comey.

:01:01. > :01:02.The opinion polls failed to predict David Cameron's general

:01:03. > :01:11.So can we trust the polls this time around?

:01:12. > :01:13.And how will Brexit Britain fare in tomorrow's Eurovision

:01:14. > :01:26.And with us for the whole of the programme today, the Guardian

:01:27. > :01:29.And Christian May, editor of City AM.

:01:30. > :01:33.Let's kick off with the news overnight from Washington -

:01:34. > :01:38.that Donald Trump has described the former director of the FBI

:01:39. > :01:40.whom he fired earlier this week as a "showboat"

:01:41. > :01:48.In an interview with NBC News, President Trump also said

:01:49. > :01:52.-- talked about his reasons for firing James Comey.

:01:53. > :01:55.But regardless of recommendation I was going to fire Comey, knowing

:01:56. > :01:59.And, in fact, when I decided to just do

:02:00. > :02:02.it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing

:02:03. > :02:05.with Trump and Russia is a made up story, it is

:02:06. > :02:10.an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election.

:02:11. > :02:18.He is a showboat, he is a grandstander. The FBI has been in

:02:19. > :02:23.turmoil. Everybody knows that. I know I am not under investigation,

:02:24. > :02:29.me, personally. I am not talking about campaigns or anything else. I

:02:30. > :02:34.am not under investigation. Polly Toynbee, your first impressions of

:02:35. > :02:39.that interview? You always think you cannot be more shocked by Trump and

:02:40. > :02:43.then you are and what he has done is utterly astounding. He has sacked

:02:44. > :02:50.everybody involved in investigating the Russian links with his campaign.

:02:51. > :02:55.This sacking is utterly disgraceful and extraordinary. He has given

:02:56. > :03:01.different reasons why. In the first place, it was the investigation into

:03:02. > :03:07.Hillary Clinton and now he said it is this Trump, Russia thing. What

:03:08. > :03:13.worries you about the interview? Polly said, he has changed the story

:03:14. > :03:21.for the reasons of sacking James Comey. He has admitted that he had

:03:22. > :03:26.dinner and conversations with James Comey where he asked the FBI

:03:27. > :03:30.director was he under investigation, which is certainly unethical, if not

:03:31. > :03:35.illegal. There are fresh questions about conversations he had with

:03:36. > :03:40.James Comey but it is too early to say what lies at the root of this is

:03:41. > :03:43.a conspiracy or incompetence. It is difficult to tell with Trump which

:03:44. > :03:49.of those factors is the great motivator. It could be he is erratic

:03:50. > :03:55.and unpredictable. If he fired the head of the FBI because he felt he

:03:56. > :03:59.was getting too close to him, it is extraordinary to assume it would put

:04:00. > :04:05.the issue away. That is the question, it will not end the row.

:04:06. > :04:08.How does he get himself, extricate himself from this situation? It

:04:09. > :04:15.depends whether the investigation continues and what it turns up with.

:04:16. > :04:25.I was in Washington reporting, my earlier jobs, at the time of

:04:26. > :04:29.Watergate when Archibald Cox was sacked by Nixon and it feels like

:04:30. > :04:35.that, the act of someone desperate and desperately investigation should

:04:36. > :04:40.not continue. If he has nothing to hide, let it continue. Although it

:04:41. > :04:43.fits with the pattern of being unpredictable, of being erratic, of

:04:44. > :04:49.changing his mind, and of course he still denies he has any direct

:04:50. > :04:57.dealings, properties in Russia. We'll bat continued to hold, that

:04:58. > :05:02.line? And Washington, is it really from this? Will they come after

:05:03. > :05:07.Trump over this? I think a lot of people are. His critics, of which

:05:08. > :05:15.there are many, are determined to draw the Watergate comparison. It

:05:16. > :05:22.was fun to note the president Nixon library saying Nixon never fired the

:05:23. > :05:28.head of the FBI. This will run and run. Whether there will be fresh

:05:29. > :05:31.earrings, legal action taken against the president or those around him

:05:32. > :05:39.depends. Trump obviously feels he is insulated. He must feel that. He has

:05:40. > :05:42.that confidence. Whether it is misplaced... Whether you put it down

:05:43. > :05:48.to his personality or whether he thinks there is nothing here, it is

:05:49. > :05:52.politically motivated. I think he is insulated by his support base and

:05:53. > :05:56.they will believe anything he says, he says fake news and a ground swell

:05:57. > :06:01.of people who voted for him will back him, whatever he says, even if

:06:02. > :06:04.he says one thing one day and be opposite the next. Extraordinary.

:06:05. > :06:11.That is true of popular support, but it might not hold in Washington.

:06:12. > :06:13.What he calls the swamp. The question for today

:06:14. > :06:36.is how much is the general At the end of the show we will see

:06:37. > :06:39.if Polly and Christian can work out the numbers and perhaps we will do a

:06:40. > :06:40.whip round and see if they will donate.

:06:41. > :06:42.Jeremy Corbyn has been giving a speech setting out his views

:06:43. > :06:46.The Labour leader is a former chairman of the Stop The War

:06:47. > :06:49.But today, he's been explaining the circumstances

:06:50. > :06:53.in which he would countenance military action.

:06:54. > :06:58.In his speech, Jeremy Corbyn declared, "I am not a pacifist."

:06:59. > :07:01.He argued that military force can be justified if it's used

:07:02. > :07:03.as a genuine last resort and in compliance

:07:04. > :07:10.He also took aim at the foreign policy of recent years.

:07:11. > :07:15.He said the war on terror has failed.

:07:16. > :07:18.And he said that the "bomb first, talk later" approach to security

:07:19. > :07:27.Jeremy Corbyn turned his guns on both Theresa May and Donald Trump.

:07:28. > :07:32.He said there will be no more hand-holding with Donald Trump

:07:33. > :07:36.And the UK will pursue an independent foreign policy.

:07:37. > :07:40.But the Conservatives have responded to Mr Corbyn's speech,

:07:41. > :07:42.saying that the Labour leader has "spent a lifetime trying

:07:43. > :07:55.Jeremy Corbyn has been giving his speech at the Chatham House think

:07:56. > :08:00.tank. The War on terror has been driven, which has driven these

:08:01. > :08:04.interventions has not succeeded. It has not increased security at home,

:08:05. > :08:10.in fact many would say just the opposite. It has caused

:08:11. > :08:13.destabilisation and devastation abroad and last September, the House

:08:14. > :08:19.of Commons foreign affairs Select Committee published a report on the

:08:20. > :08:27.Libyan war, which David Cameron promoted. They concluded the

:08:28. > :08:30.intervention led to political and economic collapse, humanitarian and

:08:31. > :08:35.migrant crises and fuelled the rise of Isis in Africa and the Middle

:08:36. > :08:41.East. Jeremy Corbyn. We have been joined from Leeds.

:08:42. > :08:44.for Peace and Disarmament, Fabian Hamilton.

:08:45. > :08:52.Jeremy Corbyn said he would do everything necessary to protect this

:08:53. > :08:55.country. What does that mean? It means not leaving the country

:08:56. > :09:00.defenceless and ensuring the Armed Forces are properly supplied and

:09:01. > :09:04.armed bandit mean spending the 2% we are committed to through Nato on the

:09:05. > :09:10.armed services and events. Defence of this country is safe with the

:09:11. > :09:14.Labour Party and always has been and always will be. What about a strike

:09:15. > :09:19.against the leader of so-called Islamic State? Jeremy Corbyn was

:09:20. > :09:23.asked if he would authorise such a strike if the British security

:09:24. > :09:26.forces got that intelligence and he did not answer the question. Would

:09:27. > :09:31.that be necessary to protect the country in your mind? It is a

:09:32. > :09:36.theoretical situation and it is hard to say unless you are faced with

:09:37. > :09:42.intelligence and facts. It is all very well asking if you would do

:09:43. > :09:46.this in the circumstances but nobody knows the circumstances and it is

:09:47. > :09:50.impossible to answer. If he is saying a Labour government would do

:09:51. > :09:54.everything to protect the UK in Britain, is a member of Isis in

:09:55. > :09:58.Syria was planning a terrorist act on the streets of this country,

:09:59. > :10:02.would Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn authorise a strike on that

:10:03. > :10:08.individual? It is not that unrealistic. I cannot answer that

:10:09. > :10:19.question. Why not? Because I do not know the circumstances or

:10:20. > :10:22.intelligence but I cannot see why Jeremy Corbyn would react in any

:10:23. > :10:24.other way to any other Prime Minister Labour or Conservative

:10:25. > :10:26.given the threat. He would do what David Cameron did in that situation?

:10:27. > :10:30.Could you repeat the question? A Prime Minister Corbyn would do the

:10:31. > :10:34.same as David Cameron did when he reported the drone strike that

:10:35. > :10:39.killed high-level people in Isis. Why are we talking about these

:10:40. > :10:44.theoretical issues? We have no idea what the circumstances may be, what

:10:45. > :10:48.the intelligence would show, what the military advice would be given

:10:49. > :10:53.to the Prime Minister of the day. Jeremy Corbyn along with every

:10:54. > :10:58.member of the Labour Party and MP holds the defence of this country as

:10:59. > :11:02.a highest possible priority and we will do everything to defend the

:11:03. > :11:06.people of Great Britain. People want to be able to trust a future Labour

:11:07. > :11:11.government that they would do the sorts of things people would

:11:12. > :11:15.consider necessary to protect this country. Jeremy Corbyn criticised

:11:16. > :11:21.what he called unilateral military action which he said has become

:11:22. > :11:25.almost routine. Explain, does that mean a future Labour government

:11:26. > :11:30.would always need for UN backing for any military action? It depends on

:11:31. > :11:35.the circumstances. We are a member of Nato and know the Nato treaty

:11:36. > :11:39.means an attack on one is an attack on all and I would not have thought

:11:40. > :11:43.if one member was attacked and the treaty was invoked we would

:11:44. > :11:48.necessarily go to the UN, it depends on the circumstances. The defence of

:11:49. > :11:54.the country is a priority for any party who wants to hold power and

:11:55. > :11:59.any government elected to power. If you criticise unilateral action, the

:12:00. > :12:03.logic of the argument says Britain would not be prepared to take

:12:04. > :12:10.military action, even if the UK was under threat in the unilateral way,

:12:11. > :12:14.and by leaving that not clear, does that give someone like Vladimir

:12:15. > :12:20.Putin a veto on the UK's foreign policy? Russia is a permanent member

:12:21. > :12:24.of the UN Security Council, it does not respect our veto in Syria for

:12:25. > :12:31.example, are you saying we should always respect there is? We should

:12:32. > :12:36.not embark on the kind of approach in the past, that Jeremy quite

:12:37. > :12:40.rightly says means dropping the bombs first and asking questions

:12:41. > :12:44.later. Innocent people have been killed as a result of some of these

:12:45. > :12:47.strikes and conflicts and that is something we want to avoid. If we

:12:48. > :12:55.can see a conflict coming we need to do everything through international

:12:56. > :12:58.forums including the UN and Nato to de-escalate the situation and stop

:12:59. > :13:02.the conflict happening in the first place. Do you think talking and

:13:03. > :13:07.using the vehicle of the UN has de-escalated the Syrian crisis? It

:13:08. > :13:12.hasn't, but the UN has an important role there and the problem with

:13:13. > :13:16.Syria, the crisis is so complicated it is almost impossible to pick it

:13:17. > :13:21.apart but the only solution will be through the United Nations. I cannot

:13:22. > :13:27.see any other solution unless Turkey, Iran, Russia find a

:13:28. > :13:33.conclusion between Syria and the Isis factions and other warlords.

:13:34. > :13:39.You can only see the UN as a viable channel, as you say, to direct

:13:40. > :13:42.foreign policy or military intervention, but what about

:13:43. > :13:48.humanitarian intervention? You remember Tony Blair intervened to

:13:49. > :13:51.stop Slobodan Milosevic to attacking civilians in Kosovo without the

:13:52. > :13:57.backing of the UN. With Jeremy Corbyn do it for humanitarian

:13:58. > :14:00.reasons I smirk I think this country has a good record in humanitarian

:14:01. > :14:05.interventions and provided parliament is consulted and approved

:14:06. > :14:09.it, I see no reason why we should not take those interventions on if

:14:10. > :14:13.it is for humanitarian purposes to save lives. We are good at doing

:14:14. > :14:18.this had we have shown an example to other countries. Is Jeremy Corbyn

:14:19. > :14:22.saying today what he personally thinks, or is he saying what he

:14:23. > :14:25.feels he needs to save from a collective point of view for the

:14:26. > :14:34.Labour Party? He seems to have changed his mind on Nato and defence

:14:35. > :14:38.spending. Join every campaign, fight all the cuts except those in the

:14:39. > :14:44.Armed Forces where we want to see a fume or cuts taking place and no

:14:45. > :14:49.more nuclear weapons. Nato was founded to promote a Cold War with

:14:50. > :14:53.the Soviet Union. That resulted in the formation of the Warsaw Pact.

:14:54. > :14:59.Come the end of the Cold War in 1990, that should have been the time

:15:00. > :15:05.for Nato to shut up shop, give up, go home and go away.

:15:06. > :15:14.So, does Jeremy Corbyn still think that Nato should shut up and go

:15:15. > :15:18.away? He wasn't the leader of the Labour Party when he said that. He

:15:19. > :15:23.is now the leader of a large party that makes its decisions

:15:24. > :15:27.collectively. So has he changed his mind, or does he still hold that

:15:28. > :15:30.view but he has either been forced or converted himself to thinking

:15:31. > :15:34.that that is not the right policy to represent the Labour Party. He may

:15:35. > :15:40.well have changed his mind, he may well still hold the same views. You

:15:41. > :15:43.don't know? Of course I don't know, but what is very clear is that when

:15:44. > :15:46.you are the leader of a political party, you have to go along with the

:15:47. > :15:51.democratic decision and the collective view, and the collective

:15:52. > :15:54.view is that we support Nato and we support remaining a member of Nato,

:15:55. > :16:04.and that is what Jeremy Ayre is promoting. I have my own particular

:16:05. > :16:06.views about disarmament and nuclear weapons, but we accept the

:16:07. > :16:12.democratic decision and we will carry it out. But there are some

:16:13. > :16:17.decisions that only a Prime Minister can make, and if you are putting

:16:18. > :16:19.yourself forward to be a Prime Minister, your personal views are

:16:20. > :16:23.important because it goes to the heart of your personal credibility

:16:24. > :16:28.when you are standing in front of voters. 2014, three years ago,

:16:29. > :16:31.Corbyn saying very passionately that Nato should shut up shop, and saying

:16:32. > :16:36.that the only cuts that he would support would be cut to the Armed

:16:37. > :16:42.Forces, a direct contradiction of what you are saying in your

:16:43. > :16:46.manifesto. Are we really saying that when somebody says something three

:16:47. > :16:52.years ago, they are not entitled to change their mind given how very

:16:53. > :17:01.huge change Jeremy bowl smack role is now -- Jeremy's role is now... So

:17:02. > :17:06.in the last three years he has had a radical change of heart having held

:17:07. > :17:10.those views all his life? Of course he has, because he never had the

:17:11. > :17:13.prospect of being the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, and now that

:17:14. > :17:17.prospect is within view so you have to change your mind and take a much

:17:18. > :17:23.broader view of what your role now is. But you did say you one sure

:17:24. > :17:26.whether he had changed is my door was doing it the democratic will of

:17:27. > :17:30.the Labour Party. Will people believe what you are saying? Will

:17:31. > :17:34.people trust that if he became prime Estep he would hold to those

:17:35. > :17:39.policies in the manifesto, or would he under a copper hence it Strategic

:17:40. > :17:44.Defence Review try and go back to the policies that he actually

:17:45. > :17:47.believes? Jeremy Irons a Democrat like all of us, and he will go along

:17:48. > :17:54.with the democratic view of the Labour Party. There are decisions

:17:55. > :17:59.made in the seclusion of 10 Downing Street, but they are made with a

:18:00. > :18:03.whole lot of advisers, advice about the common good, the defence of the

:18:04. > :18:07.realm, the important issues that a Prime Minister must deal with, and

:18:08. > :18:12.it seems to me that you are trying to personalise this into the persona

:18:13. > :18:22.of Jeremy Corbyn. But he wants to be Prime Minister, that is fair. But

:18:23. > :18:25.you have to see that his views will be different than when he was a

:18:26. > :18:28.backbencher was speaking for himself and his constituents alone, and that

:18:29. > :18:34.is a different point of view tour party leader aspiring to be the

:18:35. > :18:38.leader of this country. Your reaction on that, that goes to the

:18:39. > :18:44.very heart of the matter. Can people trust Jeremy Corbyn and what he is

:18:45. > :18:47.saying today as Labour leader and a future Prime Minister in this

:18:48. > :18:50.election campaign, or will they refer to the views that he has held

:18:51. > :18:56.over the last 30 years or so in parliament? It is a difficult line

:18:57. > :18:59.to hold, that line between what he has been saying passionately for 30

:19:00. > :19:04.years on the position he has now been forced to adopt as he leads a

:19:05. > :19:09.political party. The public will rightly look at 30 years of speeches

:19:10. > :19:12.and 30 years, decades of dubious association with people who have

:19:13. > :19:16.made this country harm, one only has to think about his quite vocal

:19:17. > :19:20.support for the bombs and the bullets of the IRA, a time when he

:19:21. > :19:24.clearly felt that the military action or armed action was justified

:19:25. > :19:27.in that conflict, so he can make a speech today at the head of a

:19:28. > :19:31.general election in which he seeks to reassure people that he does wish

:19:32. > :19:34.to protect the country, but if you have spent 30 years positioning

:19:35. > :19:36.yourself on the other side of that argument, people will rightly

:19:37. > :19:42.question your sincerity. Do you think this is a difficult area for

:19:43. > :19:47.Jeremy Corbyn to appear authentic? He has always said, I stand by the

:19:48. > :19:51.principles I have always held. It is difficult, but what he said today

:19:52. > :19:55.would actually be very popular if it weren't him say it. Almost

:19:56. > :19:58.everything he has said, people would agree with. They don't want to be

:19:59. > :20:01.close to Trump, they don't want any more involvement with the Middle

:20:02. > :20:06.East, they do regard it as having been a disaster, they don't see

:20:07. > :20:11.solutions in Syria or any reason why us adding a few bombs is going to

:20:12. > :20:14.solve that intractable problem. Unfortunately because of his back

:20:15. > :20:21.story and the clips you have shown, people weren't trusted coming from

:20:22. > :20:25.him. Like a labour's manifesto, nothing in there that would be

:20:26. > :20:28.unpopular. Before we go onto the front pages of the papers, do we

:20:29. > :20:35.know anything more about Theresa May's foreign policy? As Polly

:20:36. > :20:40.Toynbee said, cuddling up, as people see it, to Trump, will not be a

:20:41. > :20:45.popular image with British voters. In my view the special relationship

:20:46. > :20:48.is special because it endures no matter who is in office on either

:20:49. > :20:51.side of the Atlantic, so I don't think she was wrong to go to

:20:52. > :20:57.Washington. She might regret the fact that Trump grabbed her hand,

:20:58. > :21:01.but I imagine there were Tory cheers were Jeremy Corbyn says he will talk

:21:02. > :21:04.about defence policy in the election campaign... Former military leaders

:21:05. > :21:12.have criticised Theresa May for saying that this 2% of GDP de being

:21:13. > :21:16.spent on our defences is accounting deceit. There is a roe going on that

:21:17. > :21:21.is more important. We all know what Jeremy Corbyn thinks about defence,

:21:22. > :21:35.it is the one thing that everybody knows. But there is a big argument

:21:36. > :21:36.going on, the military of defence -- the Ministry of Defence is

:21:37. > :21:41.overspending dramatically, and they want a new strategic review. He says

:21:42. > :21:44.he doesn't want one because he knows it will uncover the extent to which

:21:45. > :21:48.they are in bad trouble, that is the more important story.

:21:49. > :21:52.Let's see how some of today's papers covered Labour's manifesto launch.

:21:53. > :21:54.Christian's newspaper City AM says "Never mind the '70s,

:21:55. > :21:57.Corbyn will take us back to the 1940s", referring

:21:58. > :21:59.to the level of state intervention promised in the manifesto.

:22:00. > :22:02.Polly's paper, the Guardian, has a picture of Jeremy Corbyn

:22:03. > :22:05.on the front page and calls it a radical manifesto,

:22:06. > :22:07.which the Labour leader says will transform lives.

:22:08. > :22:15.The Times claims the manifesto has promoted an internal wcivil

:22:16. > :22:21.And it also has a picture of our colleague Giles Wooltorton,

:22:22. > :22:24.the BBC cameraman whose foot was run over by Mr Corbyn's car yesterday.

:22:25. > :22:28.And The Sun also has a picture of Giles on its front page, alongside

:22:29. > :22:30.a picture of Unite boss Len McCluskey taking

:22:31. > :22:32.The headline is "crash, bang, wallies", claiming

:22:33. > :22:37.that the manifesto launch is a "shambles".

:22:38. > :22:45.In a way, Labour has a point about members or parts of the press who

:22:46. > :22:49.have just got it in for him no matter what he says. Most of the

:22:50. > :22:52.printed press in this country is sceptical if not hostile to some of

:22:53. > :23:00.the positions he has advocated. But they would be whatever he said. 85%

:23:01. > :23:03.of the press is always against Labour. The reference to the 1940s

:23:04. > :23:07.was from Paul Johnson of the ISS, and nobody can accuse him of being

:23:08. > :23:12.always against Labour, that is one of the most impartial institutions

:23:13. > :23:15.in the country. His argument was that the policies outlined in the

:23:16. > :23:19.manifesto are so radical they would transform the role of the state in

:23:20. > :23:23.so many areas of people's lives, and lead to such extraordinary levels of

:23:24. > :23:26.state spending, they really ought to be questioned. Nothing in the

:23:27. > :23:30.manifesto would be unpopular, you said, there are things that would be

:23:31. > :23:35.unpopular, but you are right, time and again whether an nationalising

:23:36. > :23:39.rail, zero hours contracts, banning fox hunting, these things poll well

:23:40. > :23:44.with the public, yet it is Mr Corbyn himself and the wider team around

:23:45. > :23:50.him that will prevent these policies... It is a popular

:23:51. > :23:54.manifesto, when people comparing with the 1983 longest suicide note

:23:55. > :23:58.in history... It didn't do the many good then! There were important

:23:59. > :24:03.things in it that are there now like unilateral disarmament, pulling out

:24:04. > :24:07.of Nato, pulling out of Europe, there is nothing in this manifesto I

:24:08. > :24:11.think that anybody somewhat to the left of centre couldn't agree with

:24:12. > :24:16.warmly. What about the costings, though? Isn't that going to be the

:24:17. > :24:21.day of reckoning in terms of the amount of money on social care,

:24:22. > :24:25.abolishing tuition fees, these sound like very popular but very expensive

:24:26. > :24:30.policies. What we need to see is how they are going to be costed, and

:24:31. > :24:34.what the priorities are. Are these longer-term things? Are they really

:24:35. > :24:39.going to abolish all tuition fees even for the richest families? Will

:24:40. > :24:43.there be gradations? Who knows? It is really important that those are

:24:44. > :24:48.watertight. And they won't be, because he is talking about spending

:24:49. > :24:54.taxes, the same tax rise on multiple different projects. We heard from

:24:55. > :24:57.the former Lib Dem pension Minister Steve Webb who said the commitment

:24:58. > :25:02.to cancel the rising of the state pension age would cost 300 billion

:25:03. > :25:08.over 20 years. But that is a bit of a chisel, over 20 years. Corbyn will

:25:09. > :25:12.have to try to be in power for 20 years if he wants to fully

:25:13. > :25:15.nationalise the rail. People say he will seize it back, but they fall

:25:16. > :25:19.back in mostly in about 15 years, and they will fall back in without

:25:20. > :25:23.any cost, because you are not snatching it back. The 1983

:25:24. > :25:27.manifesto was all about grabbing back huge industries with no

:25:28. > :25:32.compensation. There is quite a bit of that in the manifesto. We all

:25:33. > :25:38.know the Conservatives are wanting to cap prices as well in terms of

:25:39. > :25:41.energy companies. But the only bit of costing apart from the

:25:42. > :25:46.re-spending as critics would say of corporation tax increases is this

:25:47. > :25:53.idea of taxing those who earn over ?80,000 a bit more. Why so modest

:25:54. > :25:56.from John McDonnell? He said it would only be a modest amount, that

:25:57. > :26:02.doesn't sound like it would be enough to meet those costs. Maybe

:26:03. > :26:06.there is a 50p tax for hire people. You could go up to 60p for the

:26:07. > :26:16.people earning a million. You could, but you raise less money. Let save

:26:17. > :26:16.this is the next week where we will have the manifesto is, finally.

:26:17. > :26:19.Deal. The opinion polls are forecasting

:26:20. > :26:22.a comfortable Conservative victory But after the surprise

:26:23. > :26:24.result of 2015, Brexit and President Trump's win,

:26:25. > :26:27.can we trust polling companies to give us an accurate

:26:28. > :26:29.prediction of the result? Jenny Kumah's been looking at how

:26:30. > :26:31.the pollsters are trying The Conservatives

:26:32. > :26:39.are the largest party. It was the day that David Cameron

:26:40. > :26:42.won, and you could argue They weren't able to get to people

:26:43. > :26:55.who, if they did persist, they did pursue them,

:26:56. > :26:59.difficult to get, but they They didn't get them,

:27:00. > :27:02.so they got the more Labour. After the surprise result

:27:03. > :27:05.of the 2015 general election, pollsters took a good,

:27:06. > :27:08.hard look at the way they did and brought in changes

:27:09. > :27:10.to improve accuracy. Despite this, many still failed

:27:11. > :27:14.to forecast Brexit. So are they right about

:27:15. > :27:19.next month's election? And just how sure can we be

:27:20. > :27:22.that the polls' favourite will be moving into Number 10

:27:23. > :27:25.on June the 9th? YouGov's online polls put Labour

:27:26. > :27:27.and the Conservatives To improve their accuracy,

:27:28. > :27:38.they've recruited more people to their survey panels who aren't

:27:39. > :27:41.interested in politics and are less likely to vote,

:27:42. > :27:43.so that their samples Despite this, they mainly forecast

:27:44. > :27:49.a Remain result in 2016. What actually happened in the EU

:27:50. > :27:52.referendum was there was a higher turnout than people expected,

:27:53. > :27:54.and some social groups who don't normally vote so often actually

:27:55. > :27:57.did come out and vote, How confident are you that your

:27:58. > :28:01.forecasts for the 2017 Even if you look at polls

:28:02. > :28:10.when we got it really wrong, so 1992, the famous error,

:28:11. > :28:13.2015 when things were very wrong. The poll only got it wrong

:28:14. > :28:15.by about seven points. If the Conservatives have got

:28:16. > :28:21.a lead of about 19 points, then if you were just as wrong

:28:22. > :28:24.as that, that would still leave In the polling industry, you're only

:28:25. > :28:28.as good as your last game. ComRes's polls were

:28:29. > :28:32.the least wrong in 2015. They then brought in new techniques

:28:33. > :28:35.to better reflect turnout. But their final EU referendum poll

:28:36. > :28:45.showed an 8-point lead for Remain. For the 2017 election,

:28:46. > :28:49.if voters behave the way they did in the 2015 general election,

:28:50. > :28:52.then our turnout modelling should The big question in my mind

:28:53. > :28:59.is the impact of the 2016 referendum, and whether for some

:29:00. > :29:04.voters that meant that for the first time they voted

:29:05. > :29:13.and they are getting a taste for it. I think more likely, we've got

:29:14. > :29:15.a slightly different problem, which is that some people may feel

:29:16. > :29:18.that the result is a foregone conclusion, and they'll sit

:29:19. > :29:21.on their hands, sit at home and do So do the public trust

:29:22. > :29:24.the forecasters? I thought I'd do my

:29:25. > :29:26.own opinion poll. A couple of them of late have

:29:27. > :29:33.been a little way off. I think the people that partake

:29:34. > :29:36.and vote or that they screen aren't a true representation

:29:37. > :29:39.of the population. It's a safe bet to say that it's

:29:40. > :29:42.definitely going to go one way, and the opinion polls will be proven

:29:43. > :29:46.right this time, but I think we'll still be surprised

:29:47. > :29:51.at how right it is. We'll know for sure

:29:52. > :29:53.whether pollsters have done better And we've been joined

:29:54. > :30:02.by Will Jennings, professor of politics at Southampton

:30:03. > :30:13.University. Welcome. You were part of the

:30:14. > :30:19.polling inquiry. What is your sense of why the pollsters got it wrong,

:30:20. > :30:24.particularly in 2015? In 2015 after the election there was speculation

:30:25. > :30:28.around whether it was to do with shy Tories with people not willing to

:30:29. > :30:33.say they would vote Conservative, or lazy labour and Labour voters did

:30:34. > :30:36.not turn out that the enquiry concluded there was slight evidence

:30:37. > :30:42.for a late swing at the polls towards the Conservatives in the

:30:43. > :30:45.final day or two, what caused it was unrepresentative samples and

:30:46. > :30:49.pollsters were not getting enough people who had low political

:30:50. > :30:52.engagement. They were over representing highly politically

:30:53. > :30:57.engaged people and also under representing slightly older voters.

:30:58. > :31:01.Are you worried it could happen again this time? When you said

:31:02. > :31:07.certain groups were overrepresented it was felt support for Labour was

:31:08. > :31:11.overrepresented. Could Labour support be lower or higher than the

:31:12. > :31:16.polls currently estimate? There is an historical pattern of the polls

:31:17. > :31:20.over the past 20 years of them tending to overstate Labour support

:31:21. > :31:25.and it is difficult to know this election because there has been huge

:31:26. > :31:29.mythological change across the industry with pollsters making

:31:30. > :31:32.different changes. Some tinkered with turnout probabilities and how

:31:33. > :31:36.likely people are to vote and many look to the quality of their panels

:31:37. > :31:40.and it is difficult to know whether the historical pattern of Labour

:31:41. > :31:47.support being overstated but we should not assume it will be and we

:31:48. > :31:53.cannot assume the patterns of 2015, 2016 in the referendum, will

:31:54. > :31:56.necessarily hold in 2017. Do we need to see companies spending more money

:31:57. > :32:01.on the fieldwork and surveys they carry out in order to ensure they

:32:02. > :32:08.are getting the representation? Pollsters are doing it incredibly

:32:09. > :32:11.difficult job in an economically constrained situation. Newspapers

:32:12. > :32:16.and broadcasters do not pay a lot of money for the polls and recruiting

:32:17. > :32:20.high-quality panels to represent the population is expensive. I think

:32:21. > :32:25.they are within the financial constraints they are operating doing

:32:26. > :32:29.the best they can and trying to innovate methodology. The real

:32:30. > :32:32.challenge of polling is you deal with a moving target between

:32:33. > :32:40.elections and only get one test to see if your methodological changes

:32:41. > :32:45.of work. What about TV debates, manifesto launches, what difference

:32:46. > :32:49.do they make two changes in polling? There is debate academically about

:32:50. > :32:54.how much campaigns matter. The evidence we have from looking at a

:32:55. > :32:57.large number of elections in the UK and cross nationally, the polls tend

:32:58. > :33:02.to converge on the final result steadily. As you approach election

:33:03. > :33:06.day the polls tell you more about the result. We should not expect to

:33:07. > :33:11.see large swings in public opinion in either direction as we head

:33:12. > :33:16.towards Junior eight. Thank you very much. Christian May, do you trust

:33:17. > :33:20.the polls? A lot was made of getting it wrong in 2015, but there have

:33:21. > :33:25.been other polls since and the pollsters have been more accurate.

:33:26. > :33:32.What he said was you need a high-quality panel to represent the

:33:33. > :33:36.nation. We need a fume or are you to make it representative! Do you think

:33:37. > :33:42.they are worth trusting? Yes as an indication. There are many different

:33:43. > :33:47.things you can poll on and when you look at values and issues you get a

:33:48. > :33:52.stark difference if the public thinks 70-30 on a topic it can be a

:33:53. > :33:58.good indication but if it is a straight, yes, no race, you might

:33:59. > :34:05.have 3-4% margin of error but the current polling with a 20% lead for

:34:06. > :34:08.the Conservatives, a 3% margin will not change things. I think the

:34:09. > :34:15.pollsters would have to pack up shop and go away and do something else if

:34:16. > :34:21.they were wrong this time. 15, 20% point lead. If that were wildly

:34:22. > :34:25.wrong, the game would be up. What is interesting is what people are

:34:26. > :34:31.polled on. People like policies and Labour policies. When they are told

:34:32. > :34:35.which party, which leader represents which policies, they change their

:34:36. > :34:40.mind, which I am afraid shows leadership matters more than

:34:41. > :34:45.everything else had wipes out almost everything. It was ever fuss. I

:34:46. > :34:48.think it has become more so and every election gets more

:34:49. > :34:50.presidential. Let's get a round-up of the election campaign news.

:34:51. > :35:03.Thank you for letting me come inside and sit in the office. You have

:35:04. > :35:07.found a chair! It is warm, not raining, I am undercover and it is

:35:08. > :35:11.Friday and things are not as manic in the campaign as the past few days

:35:12. > :35:15.but there has been plenty of news in the past 24 hours, including the

:35:16. > :35:16.return of old faces. This is what has been happening.

:35:17. > :35:18.He thought he'd said goodbye to the cringey photo-op,

:35:19. > :35:21.but former PM David Cameron was back on the campaign trail

:35:22. > :35:28.It's so important, not only that the Conservatives win and win

:35:29. > :35:32.well, so Theresa can negotiate that Brexit deal, so she can stand up

:35:33. > :35:35.to people that want an extreme Brexit either here or in Brussels.

:35:36. > :35:41.Tony Blair has been talking Brexit in Ireland.

:35:42. > :35:43.The game no one wants to play is back.

:35:44. > :35:49.Check out this party election broadcast from the Greens,

:35:50. > :35:56.Although they know carefully crafted pastiches are my thing, right?

:35:57. > :36:00.Father's Day isn't enough for the Lib Dems.

:36:01. > :36:03.They want a whole Father's Month, with a pledge to introduce more

:36:04. > :36:06.Out filming for the BBC Politics Facebook page

:36:07. > :36:10.with some cardboard cutouts, I stumbled into film

:36:11. > :36:13.director Guy Ritchie, who seemed a bit confused.

:36:14. > :36:15.Guy, Guy, who are you going to vote for in

:36:16. > :36:29.Surely he'd recognise BoJo, who made a rare foray

:36:30. > :36:32.Go on, say some funny long words, go on.

:36:33. > :36:47.Guy Ritchie, do not worry, you will be able to see Theresa May in action

:36:48. > :36:50.this afternoon, because she is in the North of England during a speech

:36:51. > :36:55.about patriotism. While everybody is declaring whether or not they are a

:36:56. > :36:59.pacifist, Ukip leader Paul Nuttall said he is not that he would only

:37:00. > :37:03.send soldiers overseas if it was truly in the British national

:37:04. > :37:08.interest. The biggest news, David Dimbleby is sitting just over there.

:37:09. > :37:16.I spotted him earlier. He wants your chair, you will have to move, Adam.

:37:17. > :37:17.Elsewhere, the SNP have accused the Conservatives of poisoning the well

:37:18. > :37:21.of Brexit negotiations. By not yet guaranteeing

:37:22. > :37:24.the continued rights of EU citizens living in the UK -

:37:25. > :37:26.something the SNP have branded We're joined now from Dundee

:37:27. > :37:35.by the SNP's Europe Welcome back to the Daily Politics.

:37:36. > :37:39.Theresa May has said resolving the rights of EU citizens in the UK is a

:37:40. > :37:46.priority in negotiations and she wants to deal with it first. That is

:37:47. > :37:51.hardly poisoning the well? The issue of EU citizens is something she

:37:52. > :37:55.could resolve now. I was at the University of Saint Andrews with the

:37:56. > :38:00.First Minister, one of many institutions where EU citizens make

:38:01. > :38:03.a contribution financially and making communities a better place in

:38:04. > :38:08.which to live and work. The government could have solved this

:38:09. > :38:12.problem a long time ago. As could the EU. It is something up to the UK

:38:13. > :38:19.Government. They could say if you live here and have made your home

:38:20. > :38:26.here, stay. In terms of poisoning the well, we see Theresa May...

:38:27. > :38:30.After this election, there is a big job for parliamentarians which is to

:38:31. > :38:35.scrutinise the work of the government over what kind of

:38:36. > :38:42.relationship we have with Europe, on the environment, EU citizens. We

:38:43. > :38:44.have Theresa May trying to criticise and hurl abuse at European partners

:38:45. > :38:52.that she will have to negotiate with. This is a negotiation as you

:38:53. > :38:56.have said, and what could be utterly contemptible about first offering to

:38:57. > :39:00.deal with this issue before the formal negotiations started, which

:39:01. > :39:06.was rejected by the EU. The government made an attempt to deal

:39:07. > :39:11.with resolving the issue of the fate of EU citizens. Secondly, they have

:39:12. > :39:17.to look at British citizens in EU countries. It is a two-way street.

:39:18. > :39:22.If you take the issue of EU citizens who live here, we should be honoured

:39:23. > :39:26.they have made Scotland and elsewhere in the UK their home. If

:39:27. > :39:30.you look at the massive financial contribution alone, and it is more

:39:31. > :39:35.than that, we would be financially worse off without these EU citizens.

:39:36. > :39:40.Theresa May has not said she does not want them to stay. You are

:39:41. > :39:45.implying she wants them to go. It is good for the UK to keep EU citizens,

:39:46. > :39:51.who contribute so much. In the universities where I live, in our

:39:52. > :39:55.tourist sector. In the food and drinks sector. They make a huge

:39:56. > :40:00.contribution. The government can sort this out now. Given the way

:40:01. > :40:06.Theresa May and Ruth Davidson have been sitting, the abuse they have

:40:07. > :40:10.hurled at the people we need to negotiate with, this could be a

:40:11. > :40:15.little bit of goodwill. They could have solved this problem months ago.

:40:16. > :40:20.Yet they have let uncertainty go on almost a year and that is not

:40:21. > :40:24.acceptable. I am sure that is unsettling for EU citizens living

:40:25. > :40:29.here, but what about the 1.1 million British expats in the EU? Are you

:40:30. > :40:37.not then leaving them out in the cold? The most substantial piece of

:40:38. > :40:40.work done in terms of our future relationship with Europe was done by

:40:41. > :40:46.the Scottish Government just before Christmas whereby it looked as a

:40:47. > :40:52.compromise are looking at the single market, having freedom of movement.

:40:53. > :40:58.I want to concentrate on the EU citizens and a reciprocal deal for

:40:59. > :41:02.the British expats. You asked about that issue as well and that would

:41:03. > :41:06.have solved that problem. We are not alone in thinking freedom of

:41:07. > :41:11.movement is good because it benefits UK citizens living elsewhere in

:41:12. > :41:16.Europe, as well as EU citizens here. That compromise document would have

:41:17. > :41:22.solved the problem. That document has not been used and if we are

:41:23. > :41:27.looking at your proposal to give a unilateral offer to the EU by saying

:41:28. > :41:30.we will guarantee the rights of residency and right to work of all

:41:31. > :41:36.EU citizens that are here, what happens to the 1.1 million British

:41:37. > :41:40.expats? Are you prepared for them to have a less good deal if that is

:41:41. > :41:43.what came back from the EU? We're not saying that which is why we put

:41:44. > :41:48.forward the compromise document which would secure their rights as

:41:49. > :41:52.well. The SNP is the only party who have put together a document that

:41:53. > :41:56.would secure the rights of EU citizens and UK citizens. We have

:41:57. > :42:00.had nothing from the UK Government, an interesting point in this

:42:01. > :42:05.election campaign, where you see detail from the Scottish Government

:42:06. > :42:09.had SNP and bluff and bluster from the Tories in terms of their dealing

:42:10. > :42:13.with Europe. With the referendum campaign to solve a Tory civil war

:42:14. > :42:16.and now we have a general election campaign to stave off another Tory

:42:17. > :42:21.civil war and take advantage of the Labour Party Civil War. We should

:42:22. > :42:25.get to grips with the substantial problems we have got as a result of

:42:26. > :42:28.having to deal with the relationship with Europe and Theresa May's

:42:29. > :42:34.language and using people as bargaining chips is making things

:42:35. > :42:38.work. Nicola Sturgeon has ruled out increasing the top rate of tax with

:42:39. > :42:41.the civil service analysis to the Scottish Government suggesting a

:42:42. > :42:46.risk of ?30 million in lost revenues by the wealthy upping and leaving.

:42:47. > :42:57.Wide you want to increase the top rate to 50p now? This is the same

:42:58. > :43:02.situation as in the past two SNP manifesto is. You want a national

:43:03. > :43:07.50p. Let's be clear with the viewers. The past two manifestos, I

:43:08. > :43:11.think you are picking up on the Finance Minister's remarks reported

:43:12. > :43:15.today. We have been clear we don't want to see Scotland to do that on

:43:16. > :43:18.its own while we are still part of the union and do not have many

:43:19. > :43:23.financial powers, we would like to see it across the UK. It is a

:43:24. > :43:27.Westminster election and we have been clear where we can we will work

:43:28. > :43:31.with other parties for progressive politics as we did in the last

:43:32. > :43:35.Parliament and this is one area where we could work with other

:43:36. > :43:38.parties in the UK Parliament. Does the Scottish Government have the

:43:39. > :43:44.power to raise income tax? If it does so, you are doing so just in

:43:45. > :43:48.Scotland and not elsewhere. You just said in your last answer you have...

:43:49. > :43:52.That is why the Council of economic advisers and remember the first

:43:53. > :43:56.registered took the innovative step of having a council of economic

:43:57. > :44:01.advisers is something she refers to on this. On the point of Westminster

:44:02. > :44:06.and these elections it is something we can work with other parties on

:44:07. > :44:11.issues across the UK, while we are part of the UK, big decisions are

:44:12. > :44:15.made about people in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK and we have a

:44:16. > :44:17.responsibility to work in a constructive manner at Westminster.

:44:18. > :44:22.If you continue talking at great length we cannot put the questions.

:44:23. > :44:25.On the tax rate, you imply the Scottish Government does not have

:44:26. > :44:29.much in the way of power but you have powers to raise income tax and

:44:30. > :44:31.could have done so. You said you had very few powers, the words you use

:44:32. > :44:49.but it was such a long time ago! In terms of raising the level of

:44:50. > :44:53.income tax, you can do that. But why do it now when it is not looked at

:44:54. > :45:02.in terms of being done across the rest of the UK? We are wanting to

:45:03. > :45:07.see a reduction in austerity, because if you look at the cuts to

:45:08. > :45:11.the Scottish Government, they are coming from Westminster, and if we

:45:12. > :45:17.have that austerity, that is less money to spend on education, health,

:45:18. > :45:26.crucial public services. Westminster has a huge role, it is essential we

:45:27. > :45:33.have a strong team of SNP MPs in Westminster, and that is why we can

:45:34. > :45:38.be the official opposition. Is this about a second independence

:45:39. > :45:42.referendum? Why is it not on your SNP campaign leaflets? The Scottish

:45:43. > :45:49.Parliament... This is the start of the campaign, and we are still in

:45:50. > :45:53.favour... You have always known what your lines are an independence. I

:45:54. > :45:59.don't figure that is a great secret. So why isn't it in your campaign

:46:00. > :46:03.leaflet? The Scottish Parliament has voted in favour of independence.

:46:04. > :46:04.What we want to see is Westminster respective decisions made at the

:46:05. > :46:09.Scottish Parliament. Because you don't think you will get as big a

:46:10. > :46:15.mandate this time around? The Tories have got us into this mess on just

:46:16. > :46:18.36% of the vote, and the SNP has 95% of the seats in Scotland, so if

:46:19. > :46:23.those are the two different margins you are comparing this by, I'm not

:46:24. > :46:29.sure that is fair, but we are in this mess based on 36% of people in

:46:30. > :46:32.the UK voted Conservative. I fight against the Conservatives in North

:46:33. > :46:34.East Fife, and we know we have to work hard over the next few weeks.

:46:35. > :46:38.Stephen, thank you very much. Let's take a look now at another

:46:39. > :46:41.of the smaller parties campaign in the general election -

:46:42. > :46:43.the Socialist Party of Great Britain, which is fielding

:46:44. > :46:46.just three candidates. The Socialist Party of Great Britain

:46:47. > :46:48.was founded in 1904 with the aim It's a leaderless organisation,

:46:49. > :46:52.with more than 20,000 It takes inspiration from Marx,

:46:53. > :47:00.but rejects Leninism and Trotskyism. It wants an immediate move

:47:01. > :47:03.to a socialist system with a system As such, they don't believe in other

:47:04. > :47:18.political parties or government. But presumably you are not the

:47:19. > :47:22.leader? Certainly not! Because you don't have a leader? How does that

:47:23. > :47:27.work in practice? We have democracy instead. So how do you make a

:47:28. > :47:31.decision? What we do is in our party every year we have an annual

:47:32. > :47:34.conference, and the conference is attended by delegates from all over

:47:35. > :47:39.the country, issues are discussed, then they go back to their branches

:47:40. > :47:43.and we vote on the issues. When I say democracy I mean we have a

:47:44. > :47:47.system in our party where all relevant information to the party

:47:48. > :47:53.freely available to every member. Every member has the same access to

:47:54. > :47:57.the democratic process. But if you oppose all governments, which I the

:47:58. > :48:02.case, are you standing in a general election? Because we are Democrats.

:48:03. > :48:10.But what is the point? If you don't believe in the political system, why

:48:11. > :48:15.are you standing is in it? We use it to put forward our propositions. To

:48:16. > :48:18.what end? To change people's minds, to explain the system they live

:48:19. > :48:22.under and put forward a better system of living. How can you do

:48:23. > :48:27.that by only putting forward three candidates? By coming on television,

:48:28. > :48:31.hopefully there are millions of people out there. There are millions

:48:32. > :48:35.watching this programme, absolutely! But if you are only fielding three

:48:36. > :48:38.candidates, it is not a very big offer you are making in terms of

:48:39. > :48:44.trying to convert people. You mustn't underestimate people. I'm

:48:45. > :48:48.not underestimating people, I am slightly questioning your ability to

:48:49. > :48:51.appeal to a broad audience. We are a very small party with limited

:48:52. > :48:55.resources. If we had unlimited resources, we would contest every

:48:56. > :49:01.seat where we could delegate a member to do so. But the point of

:49:02. > :49:05.coming on television like this is to put forward our case against

:49:06. > :49:08.capitalism and socialism. If we look at Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party, why

:49:09. > :49:13.don't you just support him of the Labour Party? It isn't a socialist

:49:14. > :49:18.party, it is a capitalist party and it always has been. We are a

:49:19. > :49:22.principled party. You have just had a chap on the Labour Party talking

:49:23. > :49:28.about defence. The Labour Party's principles change with the political

:49:29. > :49:31.whim. The Communist Party said they were happy with Jeremy Corbyn and

:49:32. > :49:35.the Labour Party manifesto. You are different to them, what what are the

:49:36. > :49:44.differences between you, and the other socialist party, what marks

:49:45. > :49:48.you out? What we want, what we stand for is socialism. But is that common

:49:49. > :49:52.ownership and democratic control of the means of producing wealth,

:49:53. > :49:57.carried out in the interest of the whole community. What they stand for

:49:58. > :50:04.estate capitalism who believe in the state, whereas we do not. We believe

:50:05. > :50:08.that for society to run correctly, it has to be run democratically, and

:50:09. > :50:15.that means that the responsibility has to be shared, otherwise it is an

:50:16. > :50:17.immature system. This is part of the political debate, but does this

:50:18. > :50:23.party have anything to add in terms of the general election? Probably

:50:24. > :50:29.quite useful for Jeremy Corbyn to have somebody to the left of him!

:50:30. > :50:34.Have you found your members looking towards the Labour Party? The Labour

:50:35. > :50:40.Party has brought in lots of people, have any of your members move

:50:41. > :50:43.towards them? I think we had one member a couple of years ago join,

:50:44. > :50:50.but our membership is fairly small but fairly stable, because we have a

:50:51. > :50:55.unique way of viewing society, and a unique proposition to put forward as

:50:56. > :51:01.far as the future goes. What about the nationalisation of the railways?

:51:02. > :51:03.What is your view on that? It's not common ownership, it state

:51:04. > :51:10.ownership. So what would you do? What we would do? The point is, we

:51:11. > :51:14.do not propose to run capitalism. But running the role is, how they

:51:15. > :51:23.run? On the basis of common ownership. They would be a resource

:51:24. > :51:30.that the whole of society would produce and run for itself. Your

:51:31. > :51:39.party also calls for a wage list, moneyless society, I was trying to

:51:40. > :51:43.think of a comparison. Kibbutz in Israel used to run in a similar way.

:51:44. > :51:47.What is your view of some of these policies? Danny Mac be interested to

:51:48. > :51:52.know that the chief economics at the Bank of England has also talked

:51:53. > :51:56.about a cashless society, but he was talking about moving away from hard

:51:57. > :52:02.cash to something purely digital. I think society stripped of the

:52:03. > :52:05.freedom and liberty that having money and personal choice gives them

:52:06. > :52:13.would be miserable. Is it a burden? I think lack of it is more of a

:52:14. > :52:16.burden. All wealth in society are socially produced, and so it should

:52:17. > :52:20.be socially administered. We live in a society that is based on

:52:21. > :52:25.employment, so you have employers and employed. There is a French

:52:26. > :52:32.word, it means to use, to take advantage of. We want a society

:52:33. > :52:36.where we give freely of our social creativity and take freely from

:52:37. > :52:42.social production. Then no longer do we have to sell ourselves for a

:52:43. > :52:45.price, we will be free, and we will live a life without price. Any

:52:46. > :52:52.examples of that going on at the moment? Human beings have to sell

:52:53. > :52:55.themselves on the labour market, the sordid process of selling ourselves

:52:56. > :53:00.on the labour market, somebody will use us for their ends. Can you give

:53:01. > :53:09.me an example of where that could work successfully and does work?

:53:10. > :53:14.Venezuelan? That is cheap. This is much more like Christianity in its

:53:15. > :53:18.purest form. Consider the lilies of the field. It is that kind of

:53:19. > :53:25.utopianism. It has a place. Don't all talk at once. Final word to

:53:26. > :53:32.Danny. It is not utopian. What allows capitalism to function is the

:53:33. > :53:36.egregious case of mistaken identity. We all share the same ancestors, we

:53:37. > :53:41.are all members of the same family, that is our common identity. With a

:53:42. > :53:49.common identity, it is impossible to exploit orca worse in anyway, and

:53:50. > :53:50.capitalism runs on mistaken identity. Danny Lafferty, we have to

:53:51. > :53:53.finish there. We may be saying adios,

:53:54. > :53:55.adieu and auf wiedersehen to the European Union,

:53:56. > :53:58.but as the Prime Minister assured us earlier this week, it

:53:59. > :54:00.will still be wilkommen, bienvenue and welcome

:54:01. > :54:02.for the Brits when it comes to the Eurovision Song Contest

:54:03. > :54:04.in Kiev tomorrow. But will our erstwhile European

:54:05. > :54:06.partners deliver a Brexit Macro I have always wanted to say

:54:07. > :54:13.that! Let's remind ourselves

:54:14. > :54:14.what this bit of European # Knowing my fate

:54:15. > :54:23.is to be with you...# # Rise like a Phoenix

:54:24. > :54:50.out of the ashes # Spin my head and

:54:51. > :55:04.# Power to the boys that played rock and roll

:55:05. > :55:13.# And soon you will find that there comes a time

:55:14. > :55:31.We've been joined by Chris West, author of Eurovision!A History of

:55:32. > :55:41.You must have a lot of fun doing this? I love it. I have seen every

:55:42. > :55:48.Eurovision is on but has ever been some. Is that right? Except for two

:55:49. > :55:51.years where they have lost all the tapes, the first one, 56, and in

:55:52. > :55:57.1964, they lost the tape, and someone wants find a box with

:55:58. > :56:03.Eurovision 1964 on it, opened its... And it was empty. Crime of the

:56:04. > :56:07.century! What impact do you think Brexit will have on our role? I

:56:08. > :56:11.don't know, and it is interesting. Eurovision is a signalling mechanism

:56:12. > :56:16.whereby other countries will pass judgment on another country, so if

:56:17. > :56:22.you look at 2003, Iraq, we came last. It wasn't a great song or

:56:23. > :56:27.performance, but I think out there, people were saying they didn't

:56:28. > :56:30.approve of that. What will we get this year? We don't know. It might

:56:31. > :56:38.be that Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal... Will they take their

:56:39. > :56:54.revenge? If they are having a horrible time, they might vote for

:56:55. > :57:00.us so we might get the douze point, then? Politics is a big deal in this

:57:01. > :57:09.Eurovision Song contest. I have to say my heart slightly sank when I

:57:10. > :57:12.saw the countries voting for each other rather than the songs. That

:57:13. > :57:18.changed when they change the judging system. You should watch! Do you

:57:19. > :57:23.watch it? My grandchildren love it, it is brain much a kid thing. What

:57:24. > :57:26.is good to remember and what is good about your book is it was started at

:57:27. > :57:30.the same time at the beginning of the whole European idea, and it came

:57:31. > :57:39.from that sort of idealism. And it is kind of bonkers and crazy now we

:57:40. > :57:46.have Egypt and... Europe has grown! And Australia, which is wonderful!

:57:47. > :57:50.So we are taking it broadly! But Polly does make an interesting point

:57:51. > :57:56.about what it was there for in the beginning, and that is the point.

:57:57. > :58:05.Yes, the founder was a great friend of the founding of the EU, so it

:58:06. > :58:07.does come from the same root. Theresa May pulled a terrible face

:58:08. > :58:14.because she plainly thinks we will be punished, and we certainly

:58:15. > :58:16.deserve to be. Maybe we will get some Euro-sceptic solidarity from

:58:17. > :58:22.the countries that I Euro-sceptic, maybe a sympathy vote. I have never

:58:23. > :58:26.watched it, but we might go into the top five! It is never too late. I am

:58:27. > :58:29.going to quickly finish it there, thank you very much for coming in.

:58:30. > :58:32.There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.

:58:33. > :58:40.So Polly, Christian, what's the correct answer?

:58:41. > :58:47.Is it just the amount the parties spend the whole general election? As

:58:48. > :58:55.long as the returns are signed off properly I think 140. Let's find out

:58:56. > :59:00.if mark, my political collie, is there and can give is the answer.

:59:01. > :59:03.What is the answer? After some number crunching, we found out that

:59:04. > :59:09.the Government expects the UK general election to cost the

:59:10. > :59:13.taxpayer ?143 million, that is ?101 million spent on printing the postal

:59:14. > :59:16.vote, ballot papers, the tens of thousands of polling stations being

:59:17. > :59:21.manned and counting millions of votes, and ?42 million on election

:59:22. > :59:24.mailings, distributions for the candidates, and that is according to

:59:25. > :59:29.the Cabinet Office and Northern Ireland Office. Thank you very much

:59:30. > :59:31.for crunching the numbers, well done, Polly.

:59:32. > :59:34.Thanks to Polly, Christian and all my guests.

:59:35. > :59:39.The one o'clock news is starting over on BBC One now.