:00:37. > :00:41.Afternoon, folks. Welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:42. > :00:45.The Liberal Democrats release their manifesto today,
:00:46. > :00:48.focusing on a pledge to give people a final say on the Brexit deal
:00:49. > :00:53.in a referendum and a raft of policies for young people.
:00:54. > :00:56.Theresa May and Philip Hammond went on the attack this morning,
:00:57. > :00:59.claiming there's a vast black hole in Labour's manifesto plans.
:01:00. > :01:04.But Labour insist they're fully costed.
:01:05. > :01:08.Unite leader Len McCluskey insists he is "now full of optimism"
:01:09. > :01:10.about Labour's general election hopes despite saying in an interview
:01:11. > :01:14.yesterday he could not see the party winning.
:01:15. > :01:18.And the Moodbox and I find ourselves in Dumfries in south west Scotland,
:01:19. > :01:20.where we're asking whether Scottish independence is a crucial
:01:21. > :01:30.issue for voters here at the coming election.
:01:31. > :01:33.So all that in the next hour and with us for the duration
:01:34. > :01:35.Conservative peer Michael Forsyth, who served in John Major's Cabinet
:01:36. > :01:41.First today, manifestos are a bit like buses -
:01:42. > :01:44.you wait for ages and then they all come along at once.
:01:45. > :01:47.Labour were first out of the blocks with their manifesto yesterday,
:01:48. > :01:55.called "For the Many, Not the Few", today it's the turn
:01:56. > :02:00.of the Liberal Democrats and tomorrow, it's the Tories.
:02:01. > :02:03.The Lib Dems published their manifesto in the last few minutes.
:02:04. > :02:05.It is called "Change Britain's Future", and they say
:02:06. > :02:08.it's aimed at giving young people a "brighter future".
:02:09. > :02:14.Yes, the flagship policy in the Liberal Democrat manifesto
:02:15. > :02:18.is their pledge to have a referendum on the terms of the Brexit deal
:02:19. > :02:26.The Lib Dems want to give the British people the chance
:02:27. > :02:29.to reject what they say is the "extreme and divisive Brexit"
:02:30. > :02:34.Aside from Brexit, the Lib Dems are offering to spend more
:02:35. > :02:39.In particular, they would give the NHS and social care an extra
:02:40. > :02:44.They would get that ?6 billion by raising all rates
:02:45. > :02:50.And all of that extra money from income tax would be ring-fenced
:02:51. > :02:58.On education, they would give just under ?7 billion to schools
:02:59. > :03:01.and colleges over the course of the next parliament.
:03:02. > :03:06.That would pay for things like protecting per pupil funding
:03:07. > :03:09.in real terms and tripling the early years pupil premium.
:03:10. > :03:10.That's extra money given to nurseries educating three
:03:11. > :03:21.and four-year-olds from disadvantaged backgrounds.
:03:22. > :03:23.The Lib Dems would also build new rent-to-own homes
:03:24. > :03:26.people taking part in the scheme would be able to gradually buy their
:03:27. > :03:31.They would reverse some of the welfare cuts.
:03:32. > :03:33.For example, they would restore housing benefit
:03:34. > :03:38.They would end the current cap on public sector pay.
:03:39. > :03:41.And the Lib Dems would create a new young person's bus pass
:03:42. > :03:43.which would give 16 to 21-year-olds in England a two-thirds
:03:44. > :03:50.Let's look at Ed Davey setting out the party's Brexit policy this
:03:51. > :03:56.morning. We think people are very upset
:03:57. > :03:58.about Brexit here in London. Many of them voted to Remain
:03:59. > :04:02.and we want to say when the Brexit deal has been done in three or four
:04:03. > :04:05.years time, then people should have the right to vote on that deal
:04:06. > :04:08.and say whether they like it and if they don't like it,
:04:09. > :04:11.they can vote to remain I think people are worried
:04:12. > :04:16.that the Theresa May-Nigel Farage coupling, where they're backing
:04:17. > :04:18.an extreme form of Brexit, is very damaging to people's futures
:04:19. > :04:20.particularly young people's I think people do want
:04:21. > :04:24.a chance to vote again. Dick Newby, the leader
:04:25. > :04:27.of the Lib Dems in the House of Lords and chair of
:04:28. > :04:38.the Manifesto Working Let me just clarify. Your party has
:04:39. > :04:43.ruled out joining any kind of coalition after this election? Yes.
:04:44. > :04:47.So you wouldn't be in any kind of Government? No, we would not, no.
:04:48. > :04:50.We're in the sail position as the Labour Party. We know who the
:04:51. > :04:53.Government is going to be after the next election and we're going more
:04:54. > :04:56.honest. Who is going to be the Government? The Conservative
:04:57. > :04:59.Government. If you're not going to join any coalition, what's the point
:05:00. > :05:06.of going through the policies with you? Well, I think people want to
:05:07. > :05:09.know when they're voting for us what kind of country they're living in.
:05:10. > :05:14.But you're not going into Government, what's the point? People
:05:15. > :05:17.vote for people who share their values and views about how the
:05:18. > :05:21.country should go going forward and that's why you have a manifesto.
:05:22. > :05:25.Yes, but if the values as you're claiming are going to be the values
:05:26. > :05:29.of a May Government, I assume you're going to win by a landslide and you
:05:30. > :05:34.would not get involved in a coalition that could stop that from
:05:35. > :05:40.happening then I say, your policies, what you stand for is irrelevant?
:05:41. > :05:46.No, they're not. The details are irrelevant? From the day Parliament
:05:47. > :05:49.gets back, we're going to be debating the Government's policies
:05:50. > :05:53.and we're going to be voting on them and the manifesto gives a guide to
:05:54. > :05:56.people about how we're going to behave and what we're going to be
:05:57. > :06:01.doing in the next Parliament. One of the policies you have is to have a
:06:02. > :06:05.second referendum, a referendum on the deal if and when a deal for
:06:06. > :06:12.Brexit is done? Yes, that's right right. . Who said a referendum was
:06:13. > :06:14.disrespectful to the voters and counter productive and who said if
:06:15. > :06:19.you're having two referendums you might as well have three? Well...
:06:20. > :06:25.Who said that? It doesn't matter who said it. Vince Cable said it. Yes.
:06:26. > :06:30.Of the Lib Dems who is on your frontbench team. Disrespectful? What
:06:31. > :06:33.we're saying is that people voted for a departure. They have no idea
:06:34. > :06:37.last year what they were going to get. So we say at the end of the
:06:38. > :06:42.process, there are only two lots of people who can decide - what we do
:06:43. > :06:48.about Brexit. Either, MPs, or the people. If MPs, if it was left to
:06:49. > :06:50.MPs before the last referendum, they would have been, they were
:06:51. > :06:54.completely out-of-touch with the people. So we think a process
:06:55. > :06:58.started by the people should be completed by the people.
:06:59. > :07:03.But if the European Union knows that there is going to be a referendum on
:07:04. > :07:08.the outcome of the negotiations, that gives them a huge incentive to
:07:09. > :07:11.give us the worst possible deal? No, I think you're pinning too much
:07:12. > :07:16.faith on the powers of persuasion of the Lib Dems there. People in
:07:17. > :07:24.Europe... I never made that mistake before? I didn't think you had, but
:07:25. > :07:27.I think that people in Europe are negotiating on the basis of getting
:07:28. > :07:31.a deal which they think is in the long-term interests of the EU on the
:07:32. > :07:35.basis that we will leave. That's the only way they can do it, but it
:07:36. > :07:40.doesn't mean that that rules out us having a final say on it. If I'm
:07:41. > :07:44.negotiating for Brussels, and you're negotiating for Britain, and I know
:07:45. > :07:47.that you have to put whatever you agree to the British people, I'm
:07:48. > :07:50.going to try and give you a punishment beat soing that the
:07:51. > :07:54.British will think we didn't real identities it was going to be as bad
:07:55. > :07:59.as this, we're going to need visas to go there, we can't work anymore,
:08:00. > :08:04.oh, let's vote against it. I'm not going to give you a Free Trade
:08:05. > :08:08.Agreement and not going to give you tariff reason free trade, am I? But
:08:09. > :08:12.why does that work for the British people and not Parliamentarians?
:08:13. > :08:14.Somebody decides, Andrew, it isn't just the Prime Minister, you have
:08:15. > :08:18.one body of people deciding in Parliament or a larger body of
:08:19. > :08:22.people, the condition deciding, they're going to react in the same
:08:23. > :08:24.sort of way to the attitude and the deal that comes out of Brussels
:08:25. > :08:28.surely. When would the referendum be? Well, the Prime Minister says
:08:29. > :08:32.she can complete the negotiations within the time frame. So you would
:08:33. > :08:39.have it when she come back with a deal. Would there be enough time?
:08:40. > :08:44.Well, she says there is. She has not been that explicit at when it can be
:08:45. > :08:49.done? I think your contention if the country was to vote against the deal
:08:50. > :08:52.we would stay in the EU? That would be the proposition. Who in Brussels
:08:53. > :08:59.led you to believe that would be the case? Well, I think it's pretty
:09:00. > :09:03.clear from all the lawyers, from someone like Lord Kerr who wrote
:09:04. > :09:08.Article 50 that it is revocable, you can stop the process if you want to
:09:09. > :09:14.do. Have you had any indication from Brussels that that is the case?
:09:15. > :09:18.That's how they view it or have the European Court of Justice view it
:09:19. > :09:24.that way? Senior officials in the EU have said that the article is
:09:25. > :09:28.revocable. Who are they? Former advisors to the commission. Former
:09:29. > :09:31.members of the European Court of Justice. Who are they? Well, I
:09:32. > :09:36.haven't got a list of their names, but there is a long list of names
:09:37. > :09:40.and John Kerr who wrote it. He is just an observer now. Yeah, but he
:09:41. > :09:43.knew what was in people's minds when it was written because he had the
:09:44. > :09:50.pen. I suggest he didn't because when he wrote it, he never thought
:09:51. > :09:53.it would happen. He wrote it as entirely academic exercise? Well, he
:09:54. > :09:55.is not a flippant sort of chap. I wouldn't say that. He just didn't
:09:56. > :09:59.think it would happenment you didn't think it would happen. Well, nobody
:10:00. > :10:03.thought it was going to happen, did they? No, some people did. A lot of
:10:04. > :10:10.people didn'tment one of them was Nick Clegg. I want to run you this
:10:11. > :10:16.clip of what he said. This is before the country gave its verdict on
:10:17. > :10:19.Brexit and he was speaking at the Oxford Union, he was debating with
:10:20. > :10:23.Nigel Farage, it was in December 2015, before we got to the
:10:24. > :10:28.referendum. Sure. But what would happen if we had one. This is Mr
:10:29. > :12:36.Clegg. There will be some voices and I hope it won't be Nigel or Sir
:12:37. > :12:40.People and not all voting on Brexit in this general election for that
:12:41. > :12:45.they are voting whether they think Jeremy Corbyn is said to be Prime
:12:46. > :12:51.Minister. Your whole appeal in this campaign has been on Brexit. That is
:12:52. > :12:55.your distinguishing thing. That's the one thing that does distinguish
:12:56. > :13:02.you. Yes, that's what we're fighting. It is what makes you a
:13:03. > :13:07.Japanese soldier in the jungle. It over, you lost, it's gone the come
:13:08. > :13:13.on out, put your hands up, we will look after you. Somebody decides,
:13:14. > :13:17.Andrew, the MP for them is that MPs or the people? We think it will be
:13:18. > :13:21.the people. People were decided twice, in the referendum and in this
:13:22. > :13:25.election. No, because we don't know the deal. We know what the Prime
:13:26. > :13:31.Minister wants, which is a large measure of having the Government,
:13:32. > :13:35.but we don't know what is going to get. Many things are definitely not
:13:36. > :13:39.going to happen so who knows where we're going to be in the process.
:13:40. > :13:44.Your election strategy has been based on the 48% who voted remain.
:13:45. > :13:47.You want to pick as many of them but the latest polls suggest you miss
:13:48. > :13:51.read the mood of the British people and it no longer exists, this 48%
:13:52. > :14:03.force of the country now seems divided into 45% of hard levers, not
:14:04. > :14:07.as much as the 52 who voted, and 23% are voting to remain but they accept
:14:08. > :14:12.the outcome and have come out of the jungle, put their hands up and said,
:14:13. > :14:16.we know it's over. And only 22% are hard remainders and you are
:14:17. > :14:21.struggling even to get them. The strategy is flawed.
:14:22. > :14:27.No, we fight elections on what we believe. We're also fighting as Jo
:14:28. > :14:32.was explaining how do you fund the NHS on a sustainable basis? How do
:14:33. > :14:36.you stop schools having cuts per pupil of in some cases of over 10%?
:14:37. > :14:40.All these things that we're talking about on the doorstep. Some people
:14:41. > :14:43.have Brexit at the top of their minds, a lot of people don't
:14:44. > :14:49.frankly. A lot of people are more interested in whether they can get
:14:50. > :14:54.to hospital quickly so we're setting out how you would deal with those
:14:55. > :14:58.problems as well. Your manifesto would be a guide as to how you will
:14:59. > :15:02.vote in Parliament, under the next Government? It is, absolutely. All
:15:03. > :15:06.right. What would be a good result for you? Oh, a good result would be
:15:07. > :15:10.a significant increase in votes and seats. What would significant be?
:15:11. > :15:14.Well, significant means substantial. What does substantial mean? Well, it
:15:15. > :15:16.is roughly the same as significant! LAUGHTER
:15:17. > :15:21.I put a number on either of them, what would you think? Only a fool
:15:22. > :15:28.would that. What's it like in the jungle? I'm enjoying it. Leave him
:15:29. > :15:33.alone. Remember my former leader, Lord Ashdown was a jungle warrior.
:15:34. > :15:34.He was indeed. Don't go down that line!
:15:35. > :15:45.Thank you. Let me pick up on the last point of
:15:46. > :15:48.Andrew made about domestic policies, the NHS. The Lib Dems have come
:15:49. > :15:52.forward with a bold policy of raising all rates of income tax by
:15:53. > :16:00.1%, and that money will go into funding the NHS. No, not at all. As
:16:01. > :16:04.the headlines say today, living standards are under pressure and the
:16:05. > :16:08.idea you can help them by putting a penny on income tax at all levels is
:16:09. > :16:13.foolish and the lesson we have learned from the reductions in tax
:16:14. > :16:17.made for example when we cut the top rate of tax, its revenues go up so
:16:18. > :16:20.if you're going to put up tax, in the longer term you're going to get
:16:21. > :16:25.less revenue and that's not a sensible policy and you will also
:16:26. > :16:29.reduce people's living standards. You're expecting no tax rises in the
:16:30. > :16:35.Conservative manifesto of any sort? I would be surprised if there's any
:16:36. > :16:40.income tax rises. You would like to see the lock David Cameron put on,
:16:41. > :16:43.not raising income tax? No, I'm against making gimmicks and foolish
:16:44. > :16:46.promises in manifestos because they come back to bite you. You say
:16:47. > :16:50.because of the squeeze on living standards you wouldn't want to seek
:16:51. > :16:55.increases in living tax but actually, if you look at spending on
:16:56. > :16:58.health, the ISS, which actually, once you take into the age of the
:16:59. > :17:05.population, the amount of money we're spending on health per person
:17:06. > :17:08.will be lower in 2019-21 it was in 2009-10. People may not want to pay
:17:09. > :17:11.more income tax but I don't think they also want their standards of
:17:12. > :17:15.health care to be going down either. Know, and the way we get more
:17:16. > :17:20.spending on the health service is by increasing the tax base, not by
:17:21. > :17:23.increasing the rates, and we do that by getting growth in the economy,
:17:24. > :17:29.investing in the economy and perceiving the kind of policies...
:17:30. > :17:32.We've had growth in the economy, admittedly lower than expected in
:17:33. > :17:36.the last quarter, but we've had growth in the economy and the IDF as
:17:37. > :17:44.state spending per person on health will be low in 2019-20 than 2009.
:17:45. > :17:47.The spending commitments made by the present Government are considerably
:17:48. > :17:51.in excess of those that were promised by the Labour Party when
:17:52. > :17:53.they stood in the last general election. I'm asking about the
:17:54. > :17:56.comparison between what the Conservatives that they were going
:17:57. > :18:00.to do and what the Lib Dems are offering to do in terms of boosting
:18:01. > :18:06.health spending. If you look at education, the schools budget now we
:18:07. > :18:12.know was facing real terms cuts of ?3 billion or 8% by 2019-20, and you
:18:13. > :18:15.have to take into account the rise in pupil numbers. In the
:18:16. > :18:19.Conservative manifesto you pledged as the number of pupils increased,
:18:20. > :18:22.so will the aunt of money in schools, a real terms increase in
:18:23. > :18:25.schools budgets in the next Parliament for that you've broken
:18:26. > :18:28.that pledge for the blue could be honest like the Lib Dems who say
:18:29. > :18:34.they will put more money into schools by raising income tax. We
:18:35. > :18:38.have put more money into schools. The criticism would be the
:18:39. > :18:41.expenditure per head has not increased. But the total
:18:42. > :18:49.expenditure... A real terms increase, even if pupil numbers go
:18:50. > :18:52.up, and that, you're not going to do by 2019-20. We have increased the
:18:53. > :19:02.schools budget. But not in real terms. You are on the wrong argument
:19:03. > :19:05.in my opinion. Hang on, second, it's a political argument and the
:19:06. > :19:09.political argument is you shouldn't measure success in education by the
:19:10. > :19:14.amount you're spending. If you look at what has happened for example in
:19:15. > :19:17.England, where education is in school 's performance has soared
:19:18. > :19:20.ahead of Scotland, where they spent 20% more, there is no direct
:19:21. > :19:25.relationship between the performance of schools and the amount you spend.
:19:26. > :19:28.But it was a promise he made on the 2015 manifesto and, in terms of
:19:29. > :19:32.rising pupil numbers, real terms, they will be cuts in pupil spending.
:19:33. > :19:36.You may claim there is no relationship between spending and
:19:37. > :19:39.outcomes, and that's perfectly credible, but it's about pledges
:19:40. > :19:45.which are made in manifestos. Well, that's why I hope our manifesto will
:19:46. > :19:48.be short on firm commitments and sat out the broad approach which we will
:19:49. > :19:53.take towards running the economy and that includes living within our
:19:54. > :19:55.means. Listening to talking about health and education spending, you
:19:56. > :20:00.would think we were not actually living beyond our means of more than
:20:01. > :20:06.?50 billion a year. And our national debt has grown to, if Labour had
:20:07. > :20:09.their way, it would be ?2 trillion. Although the Tories have been
:20:10. > :20:14.underpowered and the coalition and in their own. And we have been
:20:15. > :20:19.criticised for not spending enough. We believe that there. Thank you.
:20:20. > :20:25.-- we believe that there. -- we will leave that there.
:20:26. > :20:30.The question for today is which book series did Theresa May
:20:31. > :20:32.reveal she was a fan of on the campaign trail yesterday?
:20:33. > :20:40.At the end of the show Michael will give us the correct answer.
:20:41. > :20:49.So, the day after Labour's manifesto and perhaps not surprisingly,
:20:50. > :20:51.the Conservatives have spent the morning on the attack.
:20:52. > :20:54.Speaking in London at a joint news conference with the Chancellor,
:20:55. > :20:56.Philip Hammond, Theresa May has dismissed Labour's election
:20:57. > :21:06.manifesto as a "fantasy wish list of easy promises".
:21:07. > :21:08.While Jeremy Corbyn and Labour retreat into an ideological comfort
:21:09. > :21:10.zone, ducking the difficult challenges which lie ahead,
:21:11. > :21:17.I won't shy away from facing the challenges of our time.
:21:18. > :21:20.Rather I will set out how we will tackle them
:21:21. > :21:25.head-on because that is what leadership is about.
:21:26. > :21:29.One of Jeremy Corbyn's key allies, Unite leader Len McCluskey,
:21:30. > :21:32.insists he is "now full of optimism" about Labour's general election
:21:33. > :21:35.hopes despite saying in an interview yesterday he could not see
:21:36. > :21:40.The union boss told Politico magazine a Labour victory would be
:21:41. > :21:43."extraordinary" and suggested winning just 200 seats would be
:21:44. > :21:49.But this morning, he did a massive U-turn after an "incredible"
:21:50. > :21:55.The response has been like something we've never seen before,
:21:56. > :22:01.If I was having that interview today I wouldn't be making those comments.
:22:02. > :22:04.I think also the Labour campaign has been brilliant.
:22:05. > :22:09.Jeremy Corbyn has come across as a real man
:22:10. > :22:24.Len McCluskey. What a difference 24 hours makes. We used to say a week
:22:25. > :22:25.is a long time and now it's 24 hours.
:22:26. > :22:28.To discuss all this is Barry Gardiner, the Shadow Secretary
:22:29. > :22:34.Welcome back to the programme. You say the current spending plans you
:22:35. > :22:38.have will be balanced by increases in tax. But is there any limit on
:22:39. > :22:45.the amount you would borrow for public investment? Yes, there is a
:22:46. > :22:48.limit on what we would borrow for public investment because we have
:22:49. > :22:55.set out clearly that we would put in place a transformation programme,
:22:56. > :23:01.which is going to borrow 25 billion a year for a 10-year period. That's
:23:02. > :23:08.what we have set out. So the borrowing that we are taking into
:23:09. > :23:12.account is in that capital programme. But you would borrow more
:23:13. > :23:16.than 25 million because he would inherit as the rest of the decade
:23:17. > :23:20.went on, existing capital spending, about 50 billion a year by the end
:23:21. > :23:25.of the decade. You would add 25 billion a year onto that. There's
:23:26. > :23:29.also the national investment bank to consider and the cost of
:23:30. > :23:34.nationalisation as well, so you would be borrowing at least 75
:23:35. > :23:42.billion by the end of the decade and maybe more than 100 billion or more.
:23:43. > :23:46.I think if you look at the tax which has come this morning from the
:23:47. > :23:48.Conservatives, what they have done is they have actually put into
:23:49. > :23:53.capital many things which are actually revenue spending. I'm not
:23:54. > :23:58.using the Conservative figures. I don't know which figures you are
:23:59. > :24:03.using. The figures from the OBR and the red book. You are going to try
:24:04. > :24:08.and balance the current budget and borrow to invest. So you will
:24:09. > :24:12.inherit about 50 billion a year and added 25 billion to that and there
:24:13. > :24:16.are other things which could fall under cap ex which you would borrow
:24:17. > :24:20.to finance as well. So what I'm saying is, by the end of the decade,
:24:21. > :24:23.you could be borrowing almost twice as much as we are borrowing at the
:24:24. > :24:29.moment on these figures. What is wrong with that analysis? Let me say
:24:30. > :24:33.what borders that analysis and constrains it because of course what
:24:34. > :24:39.we have said is, by the end of the Parliament, we would have the debt
:24:40. > :24:46.reduced from where it stands today. Now, that therefore puts a
:24:47. > :24:54.constraint on what we would do. Define reduce. Very easy. The debt
:24:55. > :25:00.in 2010 was ?979 billion, immediately after the financial
:25:01. > :25:05.crisis. Today it is 1700 and ?31 billion. It has gone up by ?750
:25:06. > :25:08.billion under the Conservatives. We have said at the end of the
:25:09. > :25:16.parliament it will be lower than it is today. Using what metric? It's
:25:17. > :25:21.not going to be lower in absolute terms. You are going to add to the
:25:22. > :25:25.debt every year. What we are doing is we're going to certainly reduce
:25:26. > :25:30.the trend rate of growth of the debt by the end of that. No, watch
:25:31. > :25:37.manifesto says that you're going to reduce debt as a percentage of trend
:25:38. > :25:45.GDP, that's what it says. What is trend GDP? The GDP is a measure of
:25:46. > :25:52.product... I know why GDP is so what is trend GDP? It is how GDP is
:25:53. > :25:55.growing declining in the economy. Said he would not measured against
:25:56. > :26:01.the GDP for a year but on your estimate of what you think the trend
:26:02. > :26:04.is going forward? My understanding of the figures that the Treasury
:26:05. > :26:11.team have produced is that we would be measuring it in the same way as
:26:12. > :26:17.the Government has set out. But as a trend, so you can be quite flexible
:26:18. > :26:21.but the trend? The GDP is the GDP but we can all have different views
:26:22. > :26:26.on the trend, and you could have the ability to take the highest trend
:26:27. > :26:30.and say, as a percentage of GDP, debt has gone down. There is a
:26:31. > :26:33.simple answer to this, though, and that is that the Office for Budget
:26:34. > :26:38.Responsibility should be able to look at both the Labour Party
:26:39. > :26:41.manifesto's promises and our spending commitments as we have
:26:42. > :26:46.requested the Government to doom and to have the Conservative manifesto
:26:47. > :26:54.vetted in exactly the same way. If we do that, then we have an
:26:55. > :26:59.independent body that can look at both manifestos and say, which one
:27:00. > :27:06.actually stacks up? I understand that. We have given the clearest
:27:07. > :27:09.indication of where all our spending commitments are coming from and how
:27:10. > :27:16.they are going to be funded and that is in the document we have. I'm
:27:17. > :27:20.talking about the Capital One, because that's big and vague. Can I
:27:21. > :27:25.pick you up on one thing you mentioned. I think it was mistaken.
:27:26. > :27:29.Where you talked about the nationalisation programme. That's
:27:30. > :27:35.what I wanted to ask you so let me ask you this, will the money for
:27:36. > :27:42.nationalisation, the cost of nationalisation, come out of the 25
:27:43. > :27:48.billion a year of what to call the National transformation fund? I
:27:49. > :27:51.think there's a mistake in which the way the nationalisation programme is
:27:52. > :27:56.going to work. Example, if you look at the way in which the proposals
:27:57. > :28:02.are put forward for the National Grid, it's not too by the National
:28:03. > :28:09.Grid as such, what it does is it alters licensing conditions. Now,
:28:10. > :28:15.under the 89 electricity acts, and the 2006 utilities act, the way in
:28:16. > :28:21.which the licensing is set up at the moment means that the capital assets
:28:22. > :28:27.and the licence to operate for the district network operations are
:28:28. > :28:31.combined and there's no end to that licensing process. What we are
:28:32. > :28:34.proposing is to introduce a termination to those licenses so you
:28:35. > :28:40.would actually separate the capital and the licensing. So you are not
:28:41. > :28:48.going to nationalise the National Grid? It may happen at the end of
:28:49. > :28:54.the process. The grid itself, the assets, could be purchased, but it's
:28:55. > :29:00.rather like saying, the analogy of the railways. It's like saying you
:29:01. > :29:03.have the network, the Railtrack itself, and you have a licence to
:29:04. > :29:09.operate on its. At the moment, they are combined. If I can just make a
:29:10. > :29:16.financial point... Will the network be state owned? At the moment, the
:29:17. > :29:20.value that National Grid has as a company, it comes from the
:29:21. > :29:23.integration of the licence and the capital assets. If you separate
:29:24. > :29:31.them, it radically affects the value. Wilner State take over the
:29:32. > :29:37.grade? It would still only assets. If you look at the way the National
:29:38. > :29:41.Grid talks about its own future, it's very much on a regional grid
:29:42. > :29:48.basis, looking at the district and regional network operators as being
:29:49. > :29:55.able to... I'm lost. Is the National Grid going to be state owned or not?
:29:56. > :30:05.There will be far greater public accountability... It's not the same.
:30:06. > :30:11.So you're going to toughen up the regulations? This option for us to
:30:12. > :30:20.do that. The change to the licence is exactly in the manifesto. Let me
:30:21. > :30:25.show you. So you're going to put a new regulation in, not going to
:30:26. > :30:29.actually buy the assets? No, I haven't said we won't buy the
:30:30. > :30:34.assets, but I have said there is an option to do that but the valuations
:30:35. > :30:37.would be substantially different. There would still be a tonne of
:30:38. > :30:43.money. Its body got a market capital of 40 billion. And a big chunk of
:30:44. > :30:48.that... What I'm trying to establish is, regardless of this, when it
:30:49. > :30:53.comes to the nationalisation is you are proposing, does the cost, and
:30:54. > :30:59.there will be some cost, you cut nationalise everything, does it come
:31:00. > :31:04.from the 250 billion over ten years or a separate cost?
:31:05. > :31:10.I think certainly some of it would come from the ?25 billion a year.
:31:11. > :31:14.You're not sure? I can't give you the exact figures per year, no, I
:31:15. > :31:19.can't. But money that you have said will be a national transformation
:31:20. > :31:23.which is to build new assets, build new roads, new railwayses, new
:31:24. > :31:28.hospitals, new schools, things which we create assets, some of that could
:31:29. > :31:34.be used simply to buy existing assets? If it were, then what it
:31:35. > :31:38.would be doing is it would be reducing the amount that bill payers
:31:39. > :31:41.at the moment are paying to subsidise the profits that the
:31:42. > :31:46.companies take out. The element of their bills that is going into
:31:47. > :31:50.shareholders pockets rather than coming back into the public purse.
:31:51. > :31:53.So in fact, money would then be generated, revenue would be
:31:54. > :32:00.generated in a different way. So I think one has to take account of the
:32:01. > :32:04.fact that if that capital were used to procure those assets, it would
:32:05. > :32:08.also generate more revenue for the public purse because that revenue
:32:09. > :32:12.would not be... It wouldn't generate it for the public purse, you're
:32:13. > :32:16.promising to cut water rates and cut electricity rates. There wouldn't be
:32:17. > :32:20.money for the public purse, it would go on the cuts? If people are not
:32:21. > :32:24.spending money on water water littles or energy bills, they are
:32:25. > :32:29.spending, most people in the economy will be spend it in other ways and
:32:30. > :32:32.therefore, no, but it does as you will understand generate further
:32:33. > :32:40.revenues for the public purse. Because they're creating tax and
:32:41. > :32:43.wealth in other ways. Michael Forsyth, ma carry, an Australian
:32:44. > :32:49.bank, it owned Thames Water for ten years, during that ten years it paid
:32:50. > :32:55.itself or paid its shareholders ?1.6 billion in dividends, ?1.6 billion,
:32:56. > :33:00.it wracked up ?10.6 billion in debt, it had a ?360 million pension
:33:01. > :33:05.deficit and it paid no corporation tax. There is surely a case for
:33:06. > :33:08.doing something about that? Well, there maybe a case for the
:33:09. > :33:13.regulators and for doing something about that, but there is no case for
:33:14. > :33:17.spending scarce capital resources on buying assets which are not a
:33:18. > :33:21.priority or shouldn't be a priority for any Government. I mean, I'm just
:33:22. > :33:24.listening to what, I don't really understand what is being said about
:33:25. > :33:29.the National Grid, but I mean it sounds to me as if what is being
:33:30. > :33:33.said they want to find a way of making sure that the shareholders
:33:34. > :33:36.don't get proper value. As the shareholders are the pension funds
:33:37. > :33:41.and people's pensions that doesn't make any sense at all. All right,
:33:42. > :33:44.we'll unpick this further in the days to come.
:33:45. > :33:47.Let's get a round-up of all the other election campaign news.
:33:48. > :34:00.I am indeed. Jo, yes another beautiful day here in Westminster.
:34:01. > :34:03.But we've had our eye on what the candidates have been up to around
:34:04. > :34:08.the country and there is a few treats for you. So, Diane Abbott has
:34:09. > :34:13.been taking on a tough crowd at the Police Federation. The Green Party
:34:14. > :34:18.have an offer especially for women, but starting off this round-up for
:34:19. > :34:24.any retro gaming fans out there, well, someone has created a Super
:34:25. > :34:27.Mario-style campaign game. Take a look.
:34:28. > :34:29.Let's play Super Tory Party versus The Coalition of Chaos.
:34:30. > :34:38.Select your player and level - easy, hard or Brexit.
:34:39. > :34:41.So back in the real world on the campaign trail today,
:34:42. > :34:44.the Green Party is promising free sanitary products for those
:34:45. > :34:49.The party has pledged to end period poverty by providing free tampons
:34:50. > :34:55.The Conservatives will scrap the Severn Bridge tolls if they win
:34:56. > :34:57.the general election, predicting it would bring
:34:58. > :35:06.Are you a whingeing liberal elitist snowflake?
:35:07. > :35:08.This Labour voter in Brighton was proud to be so.
:35:09. > :35:13.The Conservative's Ruth Davidson got her bake on in Dumfries.
:35:14. > :35:20.Let me try that again. Good afternoon.
:35:21. > :35:22.The Police Federation were lacking a little enthusiasm
:35:23. > :35:24.as they were addressed by Diane Abbott.
:35:25. > :35:27.She faced a backlash over her opposition
:35:28. > :35:34.And someone with way too much time on their hands made this.
:35:35. > :35:54.# Strong and stable, strong and stable, strong
:35:55. > :36:04.and stable, strong and stable, strong and stable #.
:36:05. > :36:10.I'm not sure I imagined Theresa May ever dancing like that, but on a
:36:11. > :36:13.Friday night, who knows? That's your lot. I'm back tomorrow.
:36:14. > :36:16.Figures out this morning show the UK unemployment
:36:17. > :36:20.rate has fallen to 4.6%, its lowest in 42 years.
:36:21. > :36:23.To discuss this and the manifestos are two seasoned political
:36:24. > :36:25.journalists, the Mirror's Kevin Maguire and Caroline Wheeler
:36:26. > :36:36.Kevin Maguire, you've written that the Labour manifesto has lots of
:36:37. > :36:41.smart ideas. Which ones were you attracted to? I think the ones that
:36:42. > :36:48.the country, people are attracted to like ?10 Living Wage, more money in
:36:49. > :36:51.the NHS, free school meals for primary pupils, rail
:36:52. > :36:55.renationalisation, those policies are popular, but as you also know, I
:36:56. > :37:00.believe unless Jeremy Corbyn becomes popular Labour will be in trouble.
:37:01. > :37:04.If you're not sure about the messenger, you won't buy your
:37:05. > :37:08.message. I know Len McCluskey, I know he has done a U-turn. He said
:37:09. > :37:12.just 24 hours that he couldn't see Labour winning. He said he thought
:37:13. > :37:16.it would be difficult. Was that sensible even 24 hours ago? Well, I
:37:17. > :37:21.think it sounded the way a lot of people are and it was a rare moment
:37:22. > :37:25.of honesty. Somebody breaking free from a script where everybody seems
:37:26. > :37:28.to have to pretend they're going to win. You look at the opinion polls,
:37:29. > :37:32.you talk to Labour MPs defending seats, you speak to Labour
:37:33. > :37:37.candidates who, if they haven't got a seat, don't really expect to get a
:37:38. > :37:43.seat. So Len McCluskey really was telling a truth. The other argument,
:37:44. > :37:47.of course, is whether, if Labour went down from 229 seats to 200
:37:48. > :37:51.whether that would be a reasonable result and that's about who defines
:37:52. > :37:55.what a defeat is, how heavy it is and then owns what happens after
:37:56. > :37:59.that. Well, that, of course, will be crucial as as far as the Labour
:38:00. > :38:03.Party is concerned. Caroline Wheeler, how easy would it be stand
:38:04. > :38:06.on the manifesto for the Labour candidates who have been hostile to
:38:07. > :38:09.Jeremy Corbyn? Well, that's the interesting thing really, we have
:38:10. > :38:12.seen lots of copy written about it in our newspapers, but we're not
:38:13. > :38:16.hearing very much from those MPs that are going to be standing on
:38:17. > :38:21.that ticket at all. Len McCluskey is the only person that's come out and
:38:22. > :38:24.endorsed it which I think speaks volumes. I think at the moment the
:38:25. > :38:28.notion is they want to keep their head down and not say too much about
:38:29. > :38:32.it. There has been discussion that they're not mentioning Jeremy
:38:33. > :38:36.Corbyn, some are suggesting he might be removed fairly soon after the
:38:37. > :38:39.general election and inn a sort of last-ditch bid to persuade voters
:38:40. > :38:43.that they might be voting for something different which paints a
:38:44. > :38:47.kind of picture of sort of disarray really for the party and doesn't
:38:48. > :38:51.bode well really post the general election. Kevin Maguire, we have
:38:52. > :38:57.interviewed one of the frontbench spokes people for the Labour Party
:38:58. > :39:00.about the plans for nationalising industries and nationalising the
:39:01. > :39:03.National Grid and he seemed to imply that it wouldn't be a
:39:04. > :39:08.straightforward take over into state ownership, that there would be some
:39:09. > :39:13.sort of reregulation. Are we clear exactly what Labour is proposing and
:39:14. > :39:17.costings for their planned nationalisation? Not entirely
:39:18. > :39:21.because I looked at those figures for what they proposed to raise in
:39:22. > :39:26.taxes and what they proposed to spend and I think they came to ?48.6
:39:27. > :39:32.billion in a wonderful beautiful symmetry in those two tables and I
:39:33. > :39:36.didn't see any figures for spending on renationalisation, but the
:39:37. > :39:38.argument from Labour is public control, public accountability,
:39:39. > :39:43.public ownership can take many forms. For instance on the railways,
:39:44. > :39:48.as franchises come up for renewal they would be taken back so that
:39:49. > :39:52.wouldn't cost anything, but some are long and it would take a long time
:39:53. > :39:55.for that to happen. Water they seem to want to buy something. On the
:39:56. > :39:59.National Grid we thought they wanted it take ownership of it, it sounds
:40:00. > :40:03.like not now. The regional energy companies they would set-up would be
:40:04. > :40:07.alternatives so they wouldn't be taking the big six which most of us
:40:08. > :40:10.buy our electricity from at the moment. There is a range of answers,
:40:11. > :40:17.but it sounds confusing because it is. Right. Thank you for that, for
:40:18. > :40:21.clearing it up. Caroline Wheeler, unemployment is at its lowest level
:40:22. > :40:28.since 1975, but real wages are being squeezed due to rising inflation now
:40:29. > :40:31.at its four year high of 2. # %, how does that affect the story the
:40:32. > :40:36.Government wants to tell ahead of the election? They want to tell a
:40:37. > :40:39.story of the finances looking like they are in good hands particularly
:40:40. > :40:42.under the Conservative Party as we head towards Brexit and we're almost
:40:43. > :40:46.two years away from that. The problem they are going to have is
:40:47. > :40:51.about, the age old story which is pounds and pence in your pocket and
:40:52. > :40:55.that's where the notion of tax comes in. We heard the Labour Party's
:40:56. > :40:59.plans on tax, to protect 95% of people from tax rises, but that does
:41:00. > :41:02.impact on those that earn over ?80,000. Tomorrow will be the time
:41:03. > :41:07.of the Conservative Party to tell us what they are intend to do and of
:41:08. > :41:11.course, if they are going to abandon David Cameron's tax lock pledge then
:41:12. > :41:14.that is going to mean that the real prospect of raising taxes, which is
:41:15. > :41:17.going to hit people in the pockets, which if they're feeling the squeeze
:41:18. > :41:21.maybe something that they will consider when they go into the
:41:22. > :41:25.polling booth. Well, with the squeezes as perhaps the backdrop
:41:26. > :41:29.today, Kevin Maguire, on the Liberal Democrats manifesto, will voters be
:41:30. > :41:33.persuaded by a penny on income tax to pay for more money going into
:41:34. > :41:36.health and schools? I suspect not. I have been somewhat surprised by the
:41:37. > :41:41.lack of impact of the Liberal Democrats in this election. They bet
:41:42. > :41:45.most of the ranch on it being a Brexit election which it hasn't
:41:46. > :41:49.really felt that way. I don't think looking at that manifesto it's going
:41:50. > :41:52.to be the game changer they want and it's very difficult to see them
:41:53. > :41:55.winning all the seats they were talking about earlier on and I think
:41:56. > :41:59.in some areas they will be struggling to hold what they've got.
:42:00. > :42:07.Thank you both very much. Enjoy the campaign!
:42:08. > :42:12.Just referring back to our interview with Barry Gardiner, this is what
:42:13. > :42:16.the Labour manifesto says. It says, "Regain control of energy supply
:42:17. > :42:23.networks through the opposition of licence conditions." I think that's
:42:24. > :42:27.what Mr Gardiner was talking about and says transition to a publicly
:42:28. > :42:32.owned decentralised energy system. So, it would seem that in the end
:42:33. > :42:38.the idea is still whether it is anymore the National Grid or lots of
:42:39. > :42:42.regional grids, it would be, it would nevertheless be publicly
:42:43. > :42:46.owned. Doesn't that mean we'll make regulation so tough that the value
:42:47. > :42:50.of the shares will fall and we'll buy them on the cheap. I have no
:42:51. > :42:54.idea really what it means. I will have to do some more homework.
:42:55. > :42:56.Throughout the campaign we're taking the Daily Politics Moodbox around
:42:57. > :42:58.the country to test the mood of the public.
:42:59. > :43:14.Hello, Andrew. Let me start by quoting a local. We two paddled in
:43:15. > :43:17.this strael. The Moodbox and I didn't, it's chilly. Dumfries was
:43:18. > :43:21.the home of Robbie Burns in the final years of his life and it is
:43:22. > :43:24.where the SNP cleaned up at the last general election. Relegating Labour
:43:25. > :43:30.into third. It's now the Tories who have got it in their sights. It's
:43:31. > :43:32.also a place that rather convincingly voted no in the
:43:33. > :43:35.Scottish independence referendum so we have been asking voters whether
:43:36. > :43:38.they think that issue of Scottish independence will be a crucial issue
:43:39. > :43:39.to them in the coming general election.
:43:40. > :43:41.Yes, or no? MUSIC: I Get Around
:43:42. > :43:43.by The Beach Boys. # Round round get around,
:43:44. > :43:45.I get around # Yeah, get around round round I get
:43:46. > :43:47.around, ooh-ooh #. Certain things, school, education,
:43:48. > :44:01.NHS, things like that. I'm a staunch campaigner
:44:02. > :44:08.for the union so definitely I'll be voting Conservative to remain
:44:09. > :44:12.as part of that. Because I'm voting independence,
:44:13. > :44:16.I've always voted yes and if the election included
:44:17. > :44:21.a question for yes or no about independence,
:44:22. > :44:25.I would vote that way. No, it's not about
:44:26. > :44:27.independence for me. It's about who would be best
:44:28. > :44:33.running this country. I'm a believer in Scottish
:44:34. > :44:35.independence all my life, I'm not going to vote for anything
:44:36. > :44:38.else but SNP. The issue of independence
:44:39. > :44:41.will influence the way you vote? I don't think anyone
:44:42. > :44:47.in Scotland should either. # And we've never missed yet
:44:48. > :44:54.with the girls we meet # None of the guys go steady cos it
:44:55. > :44:57.wouldn't be right # To leave their best girl home now on Saturday
:44:58. > :45:01.night # I get around, get around round
:45:02. > :45:04.round I get around #. Nicola Sturgeon is just
:45:05. > :45:27.hellbent on independence. So you want to vote to make sure
:45:28. > :45:29.she can't have that? What's most important issue
:45:30. > :45:34.at this election for you? In this election for me
:45:35. > :45:37.it would be Brexit. So Scottish independence, is it
:45:38. > :45:40.the burning issue at this election? Well, I think this might be
:45:41. > :45:46.a first in Moodbox history. A verified dead heat between those
:45:47. > :45:51.who think that Scottish independence is the most crucial issue for them
:45:52. > :45:54.at this election Thank you, Dumfries Galloway,
:45:55. > :46:03.and thank you, Robbie Burns. Joining us now from Aberdeen
:46:04. > :46:08.is Callum McCaig from the SNP. And Michael Forsyth,
:46:09. > :46:18.the former Scotland Secretary, Welcome to the Daily Politics. Is
:46:19. > :46:22.their selection for you primarily about a second independence
:46:23. > :46:25.referendum, yes or no? I think this election is about who is the best
:46:26. > :46:30.people to represent Scotland in Westminster and we have the choice,
:46:31. > :46:33.the battle ground has been drawn between the Tories and SNP and it's
:46:34. > :46:37.a battle I am confident about. I have been speaking to many voters
:46:38. > :46:41.and I ask people what is important to them and to some people
:46:42. > :46:46.independence is important but the vast majority, it's not, it's about
:46:47. > :46:51.who's the best place in Westminster question of why suddenly a change of
:46:52. > :46:55.heart? It's no longer a priority in an election campaign. I think we've
:46:56. > :47:00.done that service are quite irony in terms of the Tories fought both the
:47:01. > :47:04.last Scottish Parliament elections, the council elections and saying no
:47:05. > :47:08.to it. I'm of the belief the Scottish Parliament should be the
:47:09. > :47:14.place to decide whether Scotland has another independence referendum. It
:47:15. > :47:16.is decided. It is the clear vote on a Scottish Parliament that there
:47:17. > :47:21.should be another referendum once the terms of Brexit are known.
:47:22. > :47:24.Nobody is running away from independent but there are other
:47:25. > :47:28.issues around what type of Brexit we are going to have, what the state
:47:29. > :47:35.pension is going to be and people in Scotland are not daft. It's just
:47:36. > :47:40.interesting that the SNP in all the years I've interviewed them are
:47:41. > :47:46.reluctant to talk about independence now. I wonder if you are playing
:47:47. > :47:51.down the issue in this election because the issue of independence,
:47:52. > :47:55.the UK has voted to leave the EU, has not shifted the balance towards
:47:56. > :48:02.Scottish independence in the way you had hoped for? No, I disagree. But
:48:03. > :48:06.it hasn't shifted, has it? The SNP has said the only way Scotland will
:48:07. > :48:10.become an independent country is if people vote for it in a referendum.
:48:11. > :48:15.That's how we decide. That referendum has been voted for by the
:48:16. > :48:18.Scottish Parliament and therefore it should happen. That's democracy for
:48:19. > :48:22.them when we're talking about other issues in an election and we are not
:48:23. > :48:25.an independent country yet, so the issues are about how we are governed
:48:26. > :48:30.whilst we are part of the UK, it's important, so we are not a one trick
:48:31. > :48:33.pony. We believe independence is the correct future for Scotland but
:48:34. > :48:39.whilst we are not independent, we have to shape the way the UK is to
:48:40. > :48:44.the benefit of Scotland. If other parties don't want to do that, they
:48:45. > :48:48.have to accept that. Do you accept the dial has not moved towards
:48:49. > :48:52.independence since the Brexit about? There's been a significant change in
:48:53. > :48:56.how these things happen. People who voted yes, who would now vote no.
:48:57. > :49:02.But has the dial shifted dramatically? Not really but with
:49:03. > :49:06.not a campaign on independence and referendum campaign is where we
:49:07. > :49:12.would shift that. If we started in 2012 when it was announced, it went
:49:13. > :49:16.from 30% up to 45%. In this election, not just speaking to yes
:49:17. > :49:22.voters but everyone. I'm not going to write off anybody because how
:49:23. > :49:24.they voted in 2014 or 2015. I'm confident we can gauge with people
:49:25. > :49:28.on the issues of this general election. When it comes to the
:49:29. > :49:34.referendum we will engage on the issues of referendum. Just finally,
:49:35. > :49:37.on Brexit, you obviously against it, and your request for Scotland to
:49:38. > :49:43.stay in the single market have been written off by the Government as
:49:44. > :49:48.unworkable. So how will the SNP actually be able to achieve giving
:49:49. > :49:53.Scotland a place at the top table during Brexit negotiations? I think
:49:54. > :49:59.that battle has not entirely been lost. We have an election that could
:50:00. > :50:03.shape what happens I'm not going to take advantage how people vote in
:50:04. > :50:08.the UK. I would assume the Government will stay as it is, that
:50:09. > :50:11.would be unfair in terms of the electoral process. Let's try to
:50:12. > :50:14.shape the attitudes in Scotland and elsewhere through the debate which
:50:15. > :50:18.suggests" operation with our friends and neighbours in Europe is a good
:50:19. > :50:22.thing. Not just for Scotland but for the UK as a whole. Let's get the
:50:23. > :50:27.softest Brexit and make sure Scottish industries are given
:50:28. > :50:33.priority. Island gas in Aberdeen is very important to the local economy.
:50:34. > :50:39.It was a low priority in terms of the Tories are Brexit talks but I
:50:40. > :50:45.would like to be high priority. It would cost 500 million quid to the
:50:46. > :50:48.industry. Michael, looking at recent polling, I electoral calculus, it
:50:49. > :50:53.indicates the Tories could take ten seats from the SNP coming from a
:50:54. > :50:58.very low base as you know. But this would be an improvement. Is there
:50:59. > :51:01.evidence to show Scottish voters are suddenly become Conservative again?
:51:02. > :51:05.Isn't it really just about Brexit and therefore it could be short-term
:51:06. > :51:12.lived if this surge turns out to be true? I think what has happened is a
:51:13. > :51:17.lot of tactical voting in Scotland, four party system. When we lost our
:51:18. > :51:22.seeds in 1997, we had 17.5% of the vote and the Liberals got ten seats.
:51:23. > :51:27.People vote tactically for the a lot of Tories have voted in the
:51:28. > :51:31.north-east tactically for the SNP to stop Labour. It is now completely
:51:32. > :51:36.clear there's not going to be a Labour Government and people are
:51:37. > :51:39.very, very upset by the SNP's campaign to refuse to accept the
:51:40. > :51:45.result of a Scottish referendum and to imply that those people who voted
:51:46. > :51:48.Brexit are somehow in favour of independence. You're picking up
:51:49. > :51:52.those votes but has not been a wholesale conversion to a
:51:53. > :51:58.Conservative loss. You've just been to Dumfries Galloway. On the local
:51:59. > :52:04.election results, we would have won that seat. If you look at the local
:52:05. > :52:08.election results where I live, the SNP council long-standing has been
:52:09. > :52:11.replaced by a Tory one. There is a swing because people resent the fact
:52:12. > :52:14.that they are being told we have to have another referendum and one of
:52:15. > :52:19.the ironies of this election campaign is the two parties, the SNP
:52:20. > :52:22.and liberals, who want more referendums, are the ones who don't
:52:23. > :52:27.accept the results of. Let's look at some of the issues. You don't want
:52:28. > :52:31.to be a one trick pony in the SNP so let's look at education. Scottish
:52:32. > :52:36.Government statistics. They are pretty damning after a decade of SNP
:52:37. > :52:39.rule, fewer than half of 13 and 14-year-olds in Scotland are able to
:52:40. > :52:44.write properly. With a proportion of those functionally illiterate more
:52:45. > :52:50.than doubling for the battered dreadful legacy. I think you can
:52:51. > :52:56.pick statistics. Some are not good. You have not picked the ones which
:52:57. > :53:01.say... Which ones say numerous the and literacy have improved under the
:53:02. > :53:04.SNP? You can pick some would say things are not great and some things
:53:05. > :53:11.which are improving and you have picked some statistics and you have
:53:12. > :53:18.denied that. People are passing higher exams in record numbers, we
:53:19. > :53:22.have the lowest youth unemployment in the UK, so there are some things
:53:23. > :53:26.that need to be improved, nobody is denying that, but to suggest that
:53:27. > :53:30.somehow the education system is failing an entire generation of
:53:31. > :53:34.people in Scotland is incorrect. Just tell me on literacy and
:53:35. > :53:37.numerous E, can you give me some positive numbers? To be clear, I'm
:53:38. > :53:41.not denying those figures but I'm suggesting, if you look at certain
:53:42. > :53:44.figures in isolation, and ignore other figures would suggest things
:53:45. > :53:49.are not quite as bad as the picture you like to paint, then things, when
:53:50. > :53:53.you look them in the round are not as bad. Does the SNP accept there
:53:54. > :53:56.are issues which need to be addressed with education? Yes, and
:53:57. > :54:02.that's why we are increasing money going into schools to close the gap
:54:03. > :54:05.and yes, we are aware of these issues and addressing them. That's
:54:06. > :54:08.not just look at certain things in isolation without accepting the
:54:09. > :54:12.bigger picture which is not as dark as the picture you are painting.
:54:13. > :54:17.Thank you very much for joining us. The Washington post is reporting
:54:18. > :54:22.President Putin is ready to hand over records of President Trump's
:54:23. > :54:27.talks with the Russian Foreign Minister to US lawmakers if the
:54:28. > :54:35.White House approves. And they will show he did not hand over any secret
:54:36. > :54:39.intelligence, says the Kremlin. Curiouser and curiouser. Shutting
:54:40. > :54:41.down the story well, isn't it? No way this story will shut down.
:54:42. > :54:44.Now, in the run up to the general election we've been taking a look
:54:45. > :54:47.at some of the smaller parties hoping to win seats.
:54:48. > :54:49.Today it's the turn of the Alliance for Green Socialism
:54:50. > :54:51.and they are putting up three candidates.
:54:52. > :54:54.The Alliance for Green Socialism was founded in 2003.
:54:55. > :54:57.It wants to get rid of capitalism in favour of the environment.
:54:58. > :55:00.It doesn't have a Twitter account and, as one of the smallest parties,
:55:01. > :55:04.Its policies include putting a stop to global warming
:55:05. > :55:10.with investment in renewable energy and sustainable infrastructure.
:55:11. > :55:14.It wants to abandon what it calls endless economic growth.
:55:15. > :55:17.And it seeks public ownership of utilities, big business
:55:18. > :55:31.The Alliance for Green Socialism also wants to abolish the monarchy
:55:32. > :55:33.and put an elected presidency in its place.
:55:34. > :55:35.And the leader Mike Davies joins me now.
:55:36. > :55:41.Welcome to the programme. Thanks for the invite. You have three
:55:42. > :55:48.candidates. What are you hoping to achieve? We want to make our
:55:49. > :55:53.policies and our views clear to as many people as possible. And since
:55:54. > :55:58.those policies are not being put forward by any of the larger
:55:59. > :56:02.parties, we are putting forward. What's the difference between the
:56:03. > :56:06.Alliance for Green Socialism and the Green party? In the British
:56:07. > :56:17.political spectrum, the Green party is to the left. That's a very
:56:18. > :56:21.dubious statement. Really? The Green party, firstly, doesn't understand
:56:22. > :56:25.the relationship between capitalism and environmental problems like
:56:26. > :56:32.global warming. The Green party's attitude, and I'm quoting Caroline
:56:33. > :56:35.Lucas, an archetypal supposedly left Green party member, she will sort
:56:36. > :56:41.out the environment and then think about capitalism. They don't realise
:56:42. > :56:45.you can't sort out the environment without thinking about capitalism at
:56:46. > :56:54.the same time. You sound, if I may say so, a bit like the People's
:56:55. > :56:59.Judaean front. You did use that analogy two years ago. Isn't that
:57:00. > :57:01.the reason why you never make that much progress, because you're so
:57:02. > :57:07.bitty differentiating yourself from each other, but on a number of
:57:08. > :57:12.things you are on a broad agreement, so what you achieve more by being
:57:13. > :57:17.together? Are you talking about the Labour Party or the Green party?
:57:18. > :57:21.Both, actually. If you look at the Labour Party, basically it has no
:57:22. > :57:26.interest in the environment. If you listen to Jeremy Corbyn speech, he
:57:27. > :57:31.won't say a word about the environment. If you look at the
:57:32. > :57:36.Labour Party manifesto, nothing in Jeremy's forward about the
:57:37. > :57:39.environment. It has got 12 headings, none of which concern the
:57:40. > :57:44.environment for the PS, if you dig down deep to word number 573 you
:57:45. > :57:47.will find a dozen words on it, but basically they don't care and the
:57:48. > :57:53.Green party, as I say, they don't appreciate that you cannot solve the
:57:54. > :57:56.environmental problems, particularly global warming, when you've got an
:57:57. > :58:01.economic system which pursues endless growth and immediate profit.
:58:02. > :58:06.All right. How well do you think are going to do? I think we will come
:58:07. > :58:11.close to form an excrement. LAUGHTER
:58:12. > :58:14.On that realistic note... I want the first interview. Done.
:58:15. > :58:17.There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.
:58:18. > :58:21.The question was which book series did Theresa May reveal she was a fan
:58:22. > :58:29.So, Michael, what's the correct answer?
:58:30. > :58:31.Harry to is the correct answer. Thank you very much.
:58:32. > :58:35.TEACHER: And I know you like reading those books.
:58:36. > :58:47.She has read all of them. She's thinking, is there a trap?
:58:48. > :58:50.The One O'Clock News is starting over on BBC One now.
:58:51. > :58:53.I'll be here at noon tomorrow with all the big