:00:52. > :00:52.Afternoon folks, welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:53. > :00:55.With just a week of campaigning to go, Jeremy Corbyn goes
:00:56. > :00:57.on the NHS, and Theresa May talks Brexit.
:00:58. > :00:59.Will the parties prosper from pushing what they believe
:01:00. > :01:03.Trident is described as Britain's "nuclear deterrent",
:01:04. > :01:06.but would it deter if the person charged with ordering its deployment
:01:07. > :01:10.They are supposed to be the loonies in this election -
:01:11. > :01:12.we'll ask the Monster Raving Loony party if they're looking
:01:13. > :01:19.And forget your education, social class or where you're from,
:01:20. > :01:22.could how muscle-bound you are affect the way you vote?
:01:23. > :01:25.All that in the next hour, and with us for the duration today,
:01:26. > :01:27.Britain's constitutional historian - Peter Hennessey -
:01:28. > :01:45.All that in the next hour, and with us for the duration today,
:01:46. > :01:47.Britain's constitutional historian - Peter Hennessey -
:01:48. > :01:50.First this morning, let's get the latest on the campaign
:01:51. > :01:52.from a couple of bleary-eyed journalists, who are
:01:53. > :01:54.no-doubt counting down the hours until polling day.
:01:55. > :01:57.Sam Coates of the Times and Kate McCann of the Telegraph.
:01:58. > :02:06.Kate, you ran a story about Labour's immigration policy, was just a
:02:07. > :02:10.position paper or will it in from Labour policy if they win the
:02:11. > :02:13.election? It is interesting this morning that Jeremy Corbyn was asked
:02:14. > :02:20.about this immigration policy paper that was penned by his home affairs
:02:21. > :02:25.policy adviser. He said it was a discussion paper, one of many, but
:02:26. > :02:27.didn't deny that it could be part of Labour's policy on immigration
:02:28. > :02:42.because of course in the manifesto they don't actually set out what it
:02:43. > :02:45.would look like. We have seen no detail. I think it will form part of
:02:46. > :02:56.their detail thinking, whether we will see it publicly before polling
:02:57. > :03:01.day is another matter. It is an analysis of polling that has been
:03:02. > :03:12.done. It shows that Mrs May could lose seats. Lots of others have been
:03:13. > :03:22.a bit sniffy about it. What you could have done is let magic
:03:23. > :03:26.together with a lot of demographic data to find out what is going on in
:03:27. > :03:30.each constituency and have come up with this suggestion that their
:03:31. > :03:34.central scenario, with a wide margin of error, suggests that Theresa May
:03:35. > :03:39.will fall about 16 seats short of a majority. That is massively outside
:03:40. > :03:44.the consensus of a study one opinion, it is not where other
:03:45. > :03:50.pollsters think necessarily this is. I am quite struck by the level of
:03:51. > :03:54.shouting on social media and elsewhere that simply don't like the
:03:55. > :03:59.result it implies. There are a range of forecasts from different people,
:04:00. > :04:06.we will find out next Thursday who is right. Do you believe it? Polling
:04:07. > :04:09.isn't really a matter of faith, think it is a very credible attempt
:04:10. > :04:15.to work out what is going on using different methodologies for everyone
:04:16. > :04:20.else. Do you believe it, Kate? I would not want to comment on the
:04:21. > :04:26.rules, I would use the traditional politician's answer. You are a
:04:27. > :04:29.journalist! It doesn't necessarily feel right, if you go around the
:04:30. > :04:33.country and talked a lot of people, as you have done online programme,
:04:34. > :04:37.it doesn't necessarily feel in my gut that it is where this is
:04:38. > :04:44.heading. We have the big debate in the image tonight. Sam, there was
:04:45. > :04:48.talk that Mr Corbyn could turn up, or are they just playing with us,
:04:49. > :04:51.just teasing us? He was definitely doing that at the press conference
:04:52. > :04:55.this morning, trying to get to Theresa May to come along. If you
:04:56. > :05:00.just watch that you would think that maybe, maybe Jeremy Corbyn might
:05:01. > :05:03.surprise us all and cannot after saying he wouldn't. I can see a big
:05:04. > :05:08.strategic downside in doing that, which is that it would elevate the
:05:09. > :05:11.importance of that event. It is quite helpful for the Labour Party
:05:12. > :05:15.that has benefited enormously from the 2-party screws, the fact that
:05:16. > :05:18.all of the votes from the lesser parties apart from the SNP in
:05:19. > :05:23.Scotland have been falling into the Labour Party on the right. So I
:05:24. > :05:26.don't think it would be tactically that wise but if you listen to
:05:27. > :05:32.Jeremy Corbyn this morning, we could be up for a surprise. Kate, it is a
:05:33. > :05:35.week to go, the campaigning. Next Wednesday because there was no
:05:36. > :05:41.campaigning on polling day itself, Thursday the 8th of June. Some up
:05:42. > :05:44.for us, where are we in this campaign? Well, in some centres we
:05:45. > :05:49.have had a renewed vigour in the campaign. Yesterday saw Theresa May
:05:50. > :05:53.affectively try and relaunch the Conservative campaign. It doesn't
:05:54. > :05:58.just said Theresa May any more, it says the rules of May and the
:05:59. > :06:01.Conservatives. This is very much the second part, after the terrible
:06:02. > :06:05.attack in Manchester, things stopped and slow down. Again we have seen
:06:06. > :06:08.Jeremy Corbyn come out today and focus on public services, the NHS
:06:09. > :06:13.and schools, and that is how the parties will spend the final week.
:06:14. > :06:16.Theresa May talking about Brexit, why it is important she is Prime
:06:17. > :06:20.Minister, Jeremy Corbyn talking about money, how he will put more
:06:21. > :06:24.money into public services, trying to go back to the centre to appeal
:06:25. > :06:27.to lots of traditional Labour voters, to shore up those votes and
:06:28. > :06:31.when anyone left who is floating around and not yet decided. Of
:06:32. > :06:34.course the Roi Du Mee will want to focus on why she should be Prime
:06:35. > :06:37.Minister Anwar Jeremy Corbyn should not be, and I think we will see him
:06:38. > :06:43.try and admit out and talk a lot more about policy in the final week.
:06:44. > :06:48.Who will win? The Theresa May will be Prime Minister next Thursday.
:06:49. > :06:52.With an increased majority? I don't know, we will have to wait and see
:06:53. > :06:56.but I think what is definitely true is that she called the selection
:06:57. > :07:00.perhaps hoping for a landslide, they once in a generation chance for a
:07:01. > :07:03.realignment. If that doesn't materialise and the don't get 100
:07:04. > :07:07.plus seats next Thursday, she will come back to Westminster quite
:07:08. > :07:11.potentially with an increased majority but perhaps weaker than she
:07:12. > :07:15.thought because she has shown not to be perfect, not to be impregnable.
:07:16. > :07:19.Her and her team make mistakes. That will be one big takeaway from this
:07:20. > :07:23.campaign that is likely to enjoy whatever the result, unless she does
:07:24. > :07:27.terrifically well, far outpacing some other polls we have seen this
:07:28. > :07:32.morning. That brings us to the end of the Sam and Kate show. I am sure
:07:33. > :07:33.it will run and run, if not in Westminster than at the end of the
:07:34. > :07:42.Blackpool pier. What do you make of this election
:07:43. > :07:46.campaign, Peter Hennessey? There are no iron laws in British politics but
:07:47. > :07:50.there is a nonferrous metal wall, that the issues flow where they
:07:51. > :07:54.flow, you cannot expect a general election, even if the number-1
:07:55. > :08:03.protagonist who has called it wants there to be a driving issue that
:08:04. > :08:10.they want. As Ted Heath band. -- found out. It was wrong to think, if
:08:11. > :08:13.people did, I certainly didn't, that it would be a single issue question,
:08:14. > :08:18.and also it was overshadowed by the tragedy of last week. But general
:08:19. > :08:22.elections by their very nature are promiscuous things, they flow where
:08:23. > :08:26.they flow, and the human drama, and how can one put it? The human
:08:27. > :08:30.geography is as much a factor in these things, or seems to be, in the
:08:31. > :08:34.way the campaign goes and the tone and pitch of it as the cartography
:08:35. > :08:38.of those opinion polls. I am very sceptical about the one in the
:08:39. > :08:44.Times, by the way. I think the poll of polls is a great guide that is a
:08:45. > :08:45.10% lead for the Tories. Yes. It is certainly an unusual campaign, we
:08:46. > :08:50.can agree. So Labour has returned to what it
:08:51. > :08:53.considers its stongest suits - Here's what Jeremy Corbyn had
:08:54. > :08:56.to say a little earlier. The future of our National Health
:08:57. > :08:59.Service and our schools The state that the Conservatives
:09:00. > :09:03.have left our NHS and our children's schools in is anything
:09:04. > :09:06.but strong and stable. Over the last seven years,
:09:07. > :09:08.they've starved public services who rely on those resources,
:09:09. > :09:10.because at every turn the Conservatives have chosen tax
:09:11. > :09:13.giveaways for the few over public Patients are suffering ever longer
:09:14. > :09:21.waits in overcrowded wards, those who need care have been
:09:22. > :09:23.left without it. A, maternity units,
:09:24. > :09:25.and whole hospital units We're joined from Newcastle now
:09:26. > :09:45.by the Shadow Health Welcome to the programme. Why is
:09:46. > :09:50.Labour promising to spend now only a little more on the NHS than the
:09:51. > :09:54.Tories? Well, frankly, Andrew, the choice at this election for the
:09:55. > :09:59.British people is stark, between further reinvestment by Labour once
:10:00. > :10:05.again into our public services, especially schools and hospitals, or
:10:06. > :10:13.more chaos and cuts under Calamity May. So I think there is a choice of
:10:14. > :10:16.the British people. If it is so stark, why are you promising to
:10:17. > :10:22.spend on the NHS only a little more than the Tories? We have promised
:10:23. > :10:28.investment of 37 billion over the course of the next Parliament by
:10:29. > :10:33.2022. And that would be a huge further investment in the NHS. Oh
:10:34. > :10:40.gosh, my earpiece is coming out. Sorry about that, you are doing well
:10:41. > :10:46.with it. I will hold it. It is over 2% extra investment of GDP. Compared
:10:47. > :10:51.with where we will be in 2022 if the Conservatives win, which as you have
:10:52. > :10:56.heard from Jeremy this morning, it is the waiting list would go up to
:10:57. > :11:00.5.5 million people, and there would be an extra 1.5 million pensioners
:11:01. > :11:06.in need of urgent social care. Except that when you look at the IFF
:11:07. > :11:09.study of your two spending plans, the Conservative plan and the Labour
:11:10. > :11:17.pan as outlined in your manifestos, by about 2021, 22, the difference in
:11:18. > :11:22.the total spend is only a couple of billion. The ISS points out that
:11:23. > :11:29.historically UK health spending has grown by an average of 4% per year
:11:30. > :11:32.in real terms. 4%, which is twice, I think, the rate you are promising to
:11:33. > :11:35.do it, as you would be the first to claim, there was a lot of ground to
:11:36. > :11:41.catch up as well but you are not catching up. Historically the NHS
:11:42. > :11:45.has always been safer in Labour hands than it ever has been in
:11:46. > :11:49.Conservative hands. After seven years stewardship of the NHS, the
:11:50. > :11:52.British people are beginning to see once again, in case they had
:11:53. > :11:59.forgotten, or for those too young to remember, that the NHS is now in
:12:00. > :12:03.calamity under May's chaotic leadership. At the risk of sounding
:12:04. > :12:08.like a broken gramophone record, if we still have those these days, I
:12:09. > :12:13.ask you again: if all that is true, why is your extra spending so
:12:14. > :12:16.modest? I don't think it is modest. You are always telling us that we
:12:17. > :12:23.are always trying to spend the way beyond our means. I think ?37
:12:24. > :12:27.billion extra... But you have added all that up, that is the old trick
:12:28. > :12:33.politicians do, you have added it up over five years. It is not 37
:12:34. > :12:37.billion more by 21-22, you have added up each increase each year.
:12:38. > :12:42.But the proof of the pudding will be what happens to the NHS. We have
:12:43. > :12:48.promised we will reduce waiting lists by over a by 20 22. We will
:12:49. > :12:53.put 8 billion into social care we will see vast improvements. Social
:12:54. > :12:57.care imagery needs ?1 billion of investment and the Tories have not
:12:58. > :13:01.promised that urgent investment straightaway. We will do that
:13:02. > :13:06.immediately women take office. But if, and I understand why you would
:13:07. > :13:12.want to make the NHS is such a priority, I think that is clear why
:13:13. > :13:16.you would want to do that, why then is your single biggest spending
:13:17. > :13:22.commitment the abolition of University tuition fees, which will
:13:23. > :13:29.cost 11 billion a year? You are not planning per year to spend anything
:13:30. > :13:34.like that on the NHS, why not? It is such a huge policy, that was such a
:13:35. > :13:38.fundamental betrayal of a whole generation of young people, two of
:13:39. > :13:43.whom are mine. I have a 21-year-old just doing her final maths exam on
:13:44. > :13:47.Friday, and a 23-year-old who are sitting on for the grand's worth of
:13:48. > :13:56.debt. We have got to stop that. It was a huge -- it was a huge betrayal
:13:57. > :14:01.of a whole generation. We need to scrap the tuition fees. But why make
:14:02. > :14:06.that more important, since it is essentially a subsidy to the
:14:07. > :14:09.middle-class, tuition fees, the abolition of them, it will
:14:10. > :14:13.overwhelmingly benefit middle-class and other middle-class families if
:14:14. > :14:20.you abolish them. And yet you found a lot more money for that than you
:14:21. > :14:22.found for schools or for the NHS, or even four in work benefits, which
:14:23. > :14:27.above all would help the working poor? But there is no guarantee that
:14:28. > :14:31.all of that money was going to get paid back. These were loans that
:14:32. > :14:35.wouldn't get written off, that were paid back when people move into work
:14:36. > :14:41.about ?21,000, but they would be only paid back if people and above
:14:42. > :14:44.that. There were huge amounts guaranteed to be written off. All we
:14:45. > :14:47.are saying is we will do that now, we will not pretend that this money
:14:48. > :14:52.is all going to come back into the Exchequer. We are going to remake
:14:53. > :14:58.the commitment to the young people of this country that they can have
:14:59. > :15:02.higher education and the state will pay. Well, everyone pays, they pay
:15:03. > :15:06.when they get their job and make it back to society. And we are going to
:15:07. > :15:11.do loads for schools as well, Andrew, you know we are. ?4 billion
:15:12. > :15:16.we are going to hugely invest in schools. Versus 11 billion for
:15:17. > :15:20.tuition fees, I guess that is my point, you are devoting more to
:15:21. > :15:23.that. However, I have asked you that. Let me move on. There was a
:15:24. > :15:29.leaked document this morning about migration made by one of Mr Corbyn's
:15:30. > :15:33.policy advisers, written by him, I should say, suggesting Labour would
:15:34. > :15:39.allow the unskilled migrants to continue to work, to come here into
:15:40. > :15:42.the UK after Brexit. Is that your understanding? No. I read about this
:15:43. > :15:48.morning for the first time. It is not in our manifesto. I understand
:15:49. > :15:51.it is some discussion paper but it hasn't been for discussion with the
:15:52. > :15:59.Labour MPs signed not quite sure who it is out for discussion with.
:16:00. > :16:04.So you would not continue to allow skilled migrants to come into the
:16:05. > :16:10.country from the rest of the EU after Brexit? No, I've done public
:16:11. > :16:15.consultation since the Brexit vote, as you know I am a Sunderland MP and
:16:16. > :16:18.62% of my constituents voted to leave and I have held public
:16:19. > :16:23.consultations and made a clear commitment to them that free
:16:24. > :16:27.movement will end when we leave the EU, and that will be a fair
:16:28. > :16:31.migration policy based on the needs of the economy, a points-based type
:16:32. > :16:34.system, if you like, that's my commitment I've made, that's what
:16:35. > :16:39.I'm aware that is in the manifesto and what I will be pushing for. That
:16:40. > :16:43.is clear and from your point of view and what you think, so I thanked you
:16:44. > :16:51.for that. I want to come onto the interview Mr Corbyn gave yesterday
:16:52. > :16:55.to Women's Hour on Radio 4. The presenter was Emma Barnett and she
:16:56. > :17:01.interviewed Mr Corbyn and she then got abused on Twitter. Partly
:17:02. > :17:05.because she is Jewish. Let me just read some of these things that were
:17:06. > :17:12.said. This is from somebody who calls him or herself Labour Insider.
:17:13. > :17:15.Allegations have surfaced that @emmabarnett is a zionist.
:17:16. > :17:18.And a user calling himself Steven McNamara, who later
:17:19. > :17:22.deleted his Twitter account, said:
:17:23. > :17:24."He should have known especially when a Zionist shill
:17:25. > :17:28.like you who hates him is conducting the interview".
:17:29. > :17:36.And, "We know where Zionist Torygrapher writer Emma Barnett
:17:37. > :17:39.is coming from, and she hates Corbyn."
:17:40. > :17:50.I assume that's because she writes now and again for the Telegraph, we
:17:51. > :17:55.know where she is coming from and she hates Corbyn. I guess the
:17:56. > :17:59.question I would put is - in years gone by you would get this kind of
:18:00. > :18:06.anti-Semitic abuse coming from the hard right in British politics. Why
:18:07. > :18:11.do we now get it coming from the extremes of Labour? I've got
:18:12. > :18:15.absolute zero tolerance for anti-Semitism or any racism from
:18:16. > :18:21.where ever it comes in society. You will not be surprised I will say
:18:22. > :18:26.that, my maiden name was Cohen, my maiden name was Cohen, although I
:18:27. > :18:30.was not brought up Jewish I am half Jewish and I have absolutely no
:18:31. > :18:35.tolerance for anyone who would say such things. It's totally abhorrent,
:18:36. > :18:38.totally against any decent value in this country and I just haven't got
:18:39. > :18:42.the time of day for people who enter into that sort of dialogue. It was a
:18:43. > :18:48.bit embarrassing since it all came out on the day Labour launched its
:18:49. > :18:52.race and faith manifesto, wasn't it? Yes, rather unfortunate. I think
:18:53. > :18:56.those people that enter into those sort of comments are no friend of
:18:57. > :19:00.Labour, they are not any friend of any civilised society to be frank.
:19:01. > :19:05.Sharon Hodgson, thank you for joining us. The city looks beautiful
:19:06. > :19:09.behind you. I'm not sure it is a photograph or the real pain also I
:19:10. > :19:18.think it's a photograph. It is sunny today. So the picture is accurate.
:19:19. > :19:21.Thank you. This kind of anti-Semitic abuse is surprising. Historically
:19:22. > :19:24.you would think was from the far right and now seems in the far left
:19:25. > :19:27.as well. It is appalling, and I'm sure only a
:19:28. > :19:32.small number of people. It is venomous. I sometimes wonder if it
:19:33. > :19:34.wasn't looking in the past before the electronic revolution they
:19:35. > :19:40.couldn't express it and now they can in an instant. They don't resist the
:19:41. > :19:46.temptation. It is dreadful, it is poisonous. Sharon and other
:19:47. > :19:48.mainstream politicians including Mr Corbyn have disowned it.
:19:49. > :19:50.Since Jeremy Corbyn became Labour leader in 2015,
:19:51. > :19:53.the party's policy on nuclear weapons has been thrown into doubt
:19:54. > :19:56.in a way not seen since Labour abandoned unilateralism in 1989.
:19:57. > :20:01.Jeremy Corbyn's opposition to Britain's atomic arsenal
:20:02. > :20:09.He is a long-standing member of the Campaign
:20:10. > :20:12.for Nuclear Disarmament, CND, and indeed served
:20:13. > :20:15.as the organisation's Vice President until last year.
:20:16. > :20:17.But the Labour Party's policy is quite clear -
:20:18. > :20:19.the manifesto states "Labour supports the renewal
:20:20. > :20:27.However, in a BBC interview in 2015, the Labour leader himself said that
:20:28. > :20:30."It is immoral to have or use nuclear weapons, I've made that
:20:31. > :20:36.Asked whether he would use Trident, Jeremy Corbyn said "no".
:20:37. > :20:39.And last July the Labour leader voted against his own party's policy
:20:40. > :20:49.of renewing Trident in a key Parliamentary vote.
:20:50. > :20:51.Only last month Jeremy Corbyn told The Andrew Marr Show that
:20:52. > :20:53."there would be no first use of it."
:20:54. > :20:59.We're joined now by the Conservative,
:21:00. > :21:02.Julian Lewis, who was chairman of the Defence Select Committee,
:21:03. > :21:04.the Shadow Minister for Peace and Disarmament, Fabian Hamilton,
:21:05. > :21:07.Peter Hennessey who is an expert on Britain's Nuclear
:21:08. > :21:18.Fabian Hamilton, it would be fair to say the party's policy on renewing
:21:19. > :21:25.Trident is not the policy that Mr Corbyn would want. Is that fair?
:21:26. > :21:29.That's very fair and not the policy I would want but it is the policy
:21:30. > :21:34.parliament agreed and it is the policy of the Labour Party so we
:21:35. > :21:37.have to accept that. But given that above all it is the Prime Minister
:21:38. > :21:43.who is in charge of Britain's nuclear deterrent, and quite often
:21:44. > :21:47.it's use if it ever came to that would not be a Capanagh matter, the
:21:48. > :21:52.buck really stops with the Prime Minister -- Cabinet matter. Is it a
:21:53. > :21:57.credible deterrent if the man in charge said he would use it? I don't
:21:58. > :22:00.think it is a credible deterrent in any case whatever the circumstances
:22:01. > :22:04.but that's my personal view. The fact is we are rebuilding the
:22:05. > :22:07.dreadnought class submarines, parliament agreed that, the Labour
:22:08. > :22:12.Party policy is to support that and that is what is going ahead. I would
:22:13. > :22:15.hope no Prime Minister, Labour, conservative, or anybody else, would
:22:16. > :22:18.ever dream of using these appalling weapons because they destroy every
:22:19. > :22:25.living creature on earth. What happened to the days where political
:22:26. > :22:29.parties took such clear decisions on such matters of vital national
:22:30. > :22:36.interest and individuals didn't agree with it so they resigned? What
:22:37. > :22:40.happened to that? As you know, Andrew, this is a policy that has
:22:41. > :22:47.been with us, and it has been controversial in the Labour Party,
:22:48. > :22:51.since 1979, I would suggest. And probably before that too. We have
:22:52. > :22:56.had many debates and discussions over it. If Jeremy Corbyn wasn't
:22:57. > :23:00.willing to accept the party's policy, or if I wasn't willing to
:23:01. > :23:03.accept it we would clearly have to resign but we are willing to accept
:23:04. > :23:09.it. Even though you believe it's immoral? I believe they are
:23:10. > :23:13.appalling, immoral weapons. Why would you support something you
:23:14. > :23:16.believe to be immoral? Like Jeremy Corbyn I am a Democrat and I believe
:23:17. > :23:21.if the majority agrees something we should abide by the majority.
:23:22. > :23:29.Doesn't morality trumpet democracy? It doesn't stop us having our own
:23:30. > :23:33.particular views -- Trump democracy? If you get elected again on June the
:23:34. > :23:38.8th and it comes before Parliament under a Labour government would you
:23:39. > :23:42.vote for it? The point is it would become dumber come before Parliament
:23:43. > :23:46.again because the decision has been made. If it did would you vote for
:23:47. > :23:51.it? I can't say unless I know what the motion is and what we are being
:23:52. > :23:55.asked to vote on. This house reaffirms the intention to renew
:23:56. > :23:59.Trident. You're setting this up as a way of trying to discredit me and
:24:00. > :24:05.obviously my party. I'm just trying to find out if you were elected on a
:24:06. > :24:10.manifesto in favour of it and if it came before the House of Commons if
:24:11. > :24:13.you'd won would you vote for it? I disapprove of these weapons but the
:24:14. > :24:17.fact is we've got them, we have voted to continue to have them and
:24:18. > :24:21.that his party policy and untold party policy changes then we will
:24:22. > :24:25.continue to support this in the House. I made a conscientious
:24:26. > :24:28.objection, as I think 50 or 60 other MPs did at the time, that we
:24:29. > :24:37.shouldn't have these dreadful weapons. The crucial issue is this,
:24:38. > :24:39.that's why I'm doing the job we are doing, we should negotiate the
:24:40. > :24:41.reduction internationally in the number of warheads every nuclear
:24:42. > :24:44.mission has. That's the best way to get rid of these weapons. You are
:24:45. > :24:50.the Shadow Minister for disarmament and he wanted negotiate down the
:24:51. > :24:54.number of nuclear weapons. What other nuclear power in the world
:24:55. > :24:58.agrees with you? I don't know until we start the negotiations but the
:24:59. > :25:03.United Nations is currently discussing the ban treaty, the
:25:04. > :25:05.treaty like the Treaty on landmines, chemical and biological weapons.
:25:06. > :25:09.Let's stick to the nukes at the moment. Which other nuclear power is
:25:10. > :25:16.cutting its nuclear arsenal or actually expanding and modernising
:25:17. > :25:20.it? Who else believes in it? Who are you going to negotiate with's let me
:25:21. > :25:24.answer the question. All of the powers that have already signed the
:25:25. > :25:28.Non-Proliferation Treaty, the NPT, concluded and agreed in 1970, have
:25:29. > :25:32.agreed that the nuclear powers as part of that treaty obligation to
:25:33. > :25:36.reduce the number of warheads they have. Russia has reduced the number
:25:37. > :25:42.of warheads, the US has reduced the number of warheads and the UK has
:25:43. > :25:48.too. Both Russia and America are modernising their nuclear facilities
:25:49. > :25:53.to make them more effective, they don't need as many. India has
:25:54. > :25:57.responded as well, which is upgrading its nuclear weapons. North
:25:58. > :26:02.Korea, I don't even have to tell you about that. Who else is going to
:26:03. > :26:06.come to the table with you and get a serious reduction in nuclear weapons
:26:07. > :26:11.as part of your disarmament? Who? That remains to be seen when the
:26:12. > :26:15.treaty is concluded that 163 non-nuclear armed nations in the
:26:16. > :26:18.world are negotiating this treaty at the United Nations. Can you name one
:26:19. > :26:22.country that wants to be involved with you in nuclear disarmament that
:26:23. > :26:25.is a nuclear power? Not at the moment, of course I can't, but we
:26:26. > :26:29.changed the atmosphere and environment in the world to make
:26:30. > :26:32.these weapons unacceptable, as we did with landmines, and with
:26:33. > :26:36.chemical and biological weapons. We make them illegal and to use them is
:26:37. > :26:43.a war crime but it never was before and thanks to the UN it is now. It
:26:44. > :26:46.is a process that takes many years and we have to start that process or
:26:47. > :26:48.the world is going to destroy itself. Julian Lewis, what is wrong
:26:49. > :26:53.with a moral opposition to nuclear weapons? Welcome people take one of
:26:54. > :26:59.two views about the best way to keep peace in the nuclear age. One is
:27:00. > :27:03.that the build-up mutual trust and you get rid of mutual fear and
:27:04. > :27:06.suspicion, and you do that by disarming yourself and showing your
:27:07. > :27:09.potential enemies they have nothing to fear from you and that is the
:27:10. > :27:14.peace through disarmament approach you have just heard and Jeremy has
:27:15. > :27:17.debated this many times. The other view is diametrically opposed to
:27:18. > :27:21.that and says the best way to keep the peace is to show any potential
:27:22. > :27:26.aggressor that if they attack you with nuclear weapons there would be
:27:27. > :27:31.not only unacceptable but also unavoidable retaliation. I
:27:32. > :27:35.understand that but it wasn't what I asked you. What is wrong with a
:27:36. > :27:39.moral opposition to nuclear weapons? Nothing but what one should have is
:27:40. > :27:43.a moral opposition to nuclear war. Now, if you believe, and hence the
:27:44. > :27:47.relevance, I'm afraid, of the answer, if you believe the best way
:27:48. > :27:52.to prevent nuclear war is to disarm then it is morally right for you to
:27:53. > :27:55.press, as you have just heard Fabian do, for nuclear disarmament. If like
:27:56. > :27:59.me you believe the best way to prevent nuclear war is to show that
:28:00. > :28:03.if someone attacks you with nuclear weapons they will get an
:28:04. > :28:06.unacceptable and unavoidable nuclear response then the moral position to
:28:07. > :28:11.take is to keep the nuclear weapons, and I'm delighted to say that in
:28:12. > :28:15.poll after poll for 30 years or more two thirds of the British people
:28:16. > :28:21.agree with my point of view and only a quarter agree with Fabian's point
:28:22. > :28:25.of view. They may agree with you with that on a majority but it's not
:28:26. > :28:29.an extremist position to be against nuclear weapons. It doesn't put you
:28:30. > :28:32.beyond the pale, Michael Portillo, former Defence Secretary, said
:28:33. > :28:37.Trident was a waste of money, particularly since we have a minute
:28:38. > :28:41.army at the microscopic Navy. Crispin Blunt, the last chair of the
:28:42. > :28:43.Foreign Affairs Committee, Tori Grandy, went through the lobbies
:28:44. > :28:52.with Mr Corbyn last year against Trident. It is not just, if I can
:28:53. > :28:56.put Mr Corbyn and the CND, who have opposition to the renewal of
:28:57. > :29:00.Trident. If you had asked me to name any two conservative politicians who
:29:01. > :29:03.take this point of view I would have said Michael Portillo and Crispin
:29:04. > :29:06.Blunt. Crispin Blunt was the only person to take this point of view
:29:07. > :29:12.and his view, which I respect, he is an old friend, he is an ex-chairman
:29:13. > :29:21.and I am an ex-chairman, there is no defence committee have the movement,
:29:22. > :29:25.of a that people who take the view, there are a few generals, I can name
:29:26. > :29:28.them before you do if you like, you can come up with good quotes to say
:29:29. > :29:33.we don't need nuclear weapons. I have seen what you've done to the
:29:34. > :29:36.Army. Why do they say that? They say that because they are worried about
:29:37. > :29:42.cuts to conventional forces. But if you believe that there should be
:29:43. > :29:47.stronger conventional forces, that is no excuse for leaving your
:29:48. > :29:52.country defenceless against nuclear blackmail, which no amount of
:29:53. > :29:58.conventional weaponry can counter. You can have the strongest
:29:59. > :30:02.conventional forces in the world. We would still be part of Nato. I will
:30:03. > :30:05.come to that in a moment. You could be the strongest conventional power
:30:06. > :30:08.in the world but if your adversary has even a few mass destruction
:30:09. > :30:15.weapons there is nothing you can do to resist him. Yes, we would be part
:30:16. > :30:17.of Nato and as part of Nato are nuclear weapons, they are assigned
:30:18. > :30:23.to the general defence, but the problem about this is that by having
:30:24. > :30:32.our own nuclear weapons we are able to ensure that if any aggressor work
:30:33. > :30:34.to miscalculate and believe that perhaps, for example, because
:30:35. > :30:38.nuclear weapons hadn't been used in the event of a conventional invasion
:30:39. > :30:42.of the continent then the Americans might not use them on behalf of
:30:43. > :30:49.Britain standing alone, by Britain having her own nuclear deterrent
:30:50. > :30:54.nobody can never be any doubt that in nuclear attack in this country
:30:55. > :30:57.would lead to unacceptable and unavoidable nuclear response, unless
:30:58. > :31:03.Jeremy Corbyn is the Prime Minister, because he has announced in advance
:31:04. > :31:08.that he would not retaliate. Nuclear weapons are in use every day. There
:31:09. > :31:13.use derives from their deterrent effect in preventing nuclear war and
:31:14. > :31:16.Jeremy undermines that position. Let me bring in Peter Hennessey. What
:31:17. > :31:25.you make of the state of the debate on Trident? That could be a vote in
:31:26. > :31:30.the next Parliament on the new warheads, because we need a new one.
:31:31. > :31:35.We build the submarines, the Americans provide the missiles but
:31:36. > :31:43.we provide the warheads. Designed in Berks. The existing warheads are
:31:44. > :31:46.still viable as far as I know, one doesn't know about these things
:31:47. > :31:52.unless one is a real insider, but they are getting old. It will take
:31:53. > :31:57.17 years to produce the new warhead, according to the Cabinet Office's
:31:58. > :32:01.estimate. And also the extending of the Vanguard submarines programme,
:32:02. > :32:07.which Julian's committee has looked at. We will need to look at it
:32:08. > :32:11.again, keeping those boats going until the late 20s, early 30s, is
:32:12. > :32:15.way beyond their planned life and that will take an enormous amount of
:32:16. > :32:19.effort. The Vanguard are the existing ones, but I thought were
:32:20. > :32:23.building new ones to replace them. But you need to replace them one by
:32:24. > :32:27.one sequentially, and they have been shoved up to the late 20s, early
:32:28. > :32:31.30s, way beyond their anticipated life and keeping them going will be
:32:32. > :32:41.remarkable. It is a great feat to have kept continuous at war
:32:42. > :32:49.deterrence since 1969. I got married that day. You have managed to keep
:32:50. > :33:00.continuously married while Trident for Polaris was continuously... Do
:33:01. > :33:05.you call it operation relentless? Since the point of the deterrent is
:33:06. > :33:07.that it is a deterrent and most people, almost everybody hopes we
:33:08. > :33:16.would never be in a position where we would even have two consider it,
:33:17. > :33:20.but in terms of firing it, what is the point of a deterrent if the man
:33:21. > :33:24.who would be Prime Minister is already saying he wouldn't use it
:33:25. > :33:29.anyway? Surely it loses all deterrent power if he says I will
:33:30. > :33:32.not use it even if we have got it? Guidance on the point of the
:33:33. > :33:37.deterrent myself but let me follow Julian's logic, and I have huge
:33:38. > :33:41.respect for the work he did as chair of the select committee in the last
:33:42. > :33:44.Parliament, and he and I are good friends. But the logic of what he
:33:45. > :33:48.says is that every large nation in the world should have its own
:33:49. > :33:51.independent nuclear deterrent if what he says is true but I don't buy
:33:52. > :33:55.that argument. We have heard of the American say over and over again
:33:56. > :34:00.about their right to bear arms but it is not guns that kill people, it
:34:01. > :34:03.is people that kill people. That is the same logic, it is not about
:34:04. > :34:07.nuclear weapons, it is about nuclear war. You can't have one without the
:34:08. > :34:14.other. If you didn't have nuclear weapons you wouldn't have nuclear
:34:15. > :34:22.war. Yes, because the Americans did. Had we got to the 1945 scenario, and
:34:23. > :34:26.if the Japanese had been in a position to retaliate, would
:34:27. > :34:30.Hiroshima and Nagasaki have been attacked, and the answer is no. We
:34:31. > :34:34.will never know that of course, thank goodness. And we won't be able
:34:35. > :34:38.to continue this because we have run out of time but I thank you Fabian
:34:39. > :34:40.Hambuchen in Leeds and Julian Lewis here in London, thank you both.
:34:41. > :34:43.Here on the Daily Politics, we see our role as very much helping
:34:44. > :34:46.you through the scary forest that is the general
:34:47. > :34:49.But as well as listening out for political prospects
:34:50. > :34:51.going bump in the dark, and uncosted policies hiding up
:34:52. > :34:54.trees, we're keeping a look out for the smaller parties lurking
:34:55. > :34:57.Today, we're shining our torches at the Official Monster
:34:58. > :35:03.Formed in 1982 by Screaming Lord Sutch and current leader,
:35:04. > :35:08.Howling Laud Hope, they urge people to "Vote For Insanity".
:35:09. > :35:11.They want to make all MPs wear the slogans of any
:35:12. > :35:13.companies they work for, just like Formula One drivers
:35:14. > :35:16.and snooker players, and introduce a 30-day cooling off
:35:17. > :35:19.period for General Elections, so you can get your vote back
:35:20. > :35:23.They have fiscal plans too, such as introducing a 99p
:35:24. > :35:26.coin to save on change, and complicating the UK tax
:35:27. > :35:28.system, so it will be too hard for corporations
:35:29. > :35:37.They also promise musicians free transport on trams and buses,
:35:38. > :35:40.as a thank you for bringing joy into people's lives.
:35:41. > :35:47.And Loony party leader Howling Laud Hope is with us now.
:35:48. > :36:03.Welcome back on the Daily Politics. Hello. You say you're 2017 ten, is
:36:04. > :36:14.it's often the centre or not quite right? Al dente. Soft in the middle.
:36:15. > :36:18.You must be proud in any way that it is not fully costed? To be quite
:36:19. > :36:21.honest with you, the Monster Raving Loony Party has very a good idea of
:36:22. > :36:26.what should happen in Brexit. If and when we come out, we then declare
:36:27. > :36:31.ourselves the offshore tax haven, we are the biggest island Europe has
:36:32. > :36:35.got. Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man become our satellite islands.
:36:36. > :36:39.We tell the members of Europe to together and sling their hook in the
:36:40. > :36:43.nearest fish pond. We would then in Europe without Europe ruling us.
:36:44. > :36:51.Only the loony party would think about this. Does Zurich still have
:36:52. > :36:56.gnomes? I think so. It was Harold Wilson who talk about that. That may
:36:57. > :36:59.well be adopted, the Chancellor has talked about a different economic
:37:00. > :37:08.model if we would not to get a deal on Brexit. I see that Ukip has
:37:09. > :37:13.anticipated your -- adopted your immigration policy of one income of
:37:14. > :37:17.one out. You are ahead of your time. Over the years we have got many
:37:18. > :37:22.things through Parliament, as you well-known. Theresa May is talking
:37:23. > :37:28.about a coalition of chaos, but that is right up your street. Of course
:37:29. > :37:32.it is. Any of the other party sounding you out, seeing if you are
:37:33. > :37:38.up for this? Nigel Farage has said we ought to form a coalition between
:37:39. > :37:48.us, and I have always said yes, Nigel, Ukip, we sleep. Very well.
:37:49. > :37:56.Other ideas pinched by parties, 204I drinking, Petzschner passports. --
:37:57. > :38:01.24 out drinking, passports for pets. Jeremy Corbyn has been talking about
:38:02. > :38:06.a bank holiday on St George's Day, we advocated that years ago. If you
:38:07. > :38:10.want tomorrow's policies, vote for us today. So, if you want
:38:11. > :38:14.yesterday's policies, but for us today, on the eighth, I mean. You
:38:15. > :38:21.have never had a candidate retained their deposit. Never ever. But if
:38:22. > :38:25.you did, you would have to consider your position. You couldn't survive
:38:26. > :38:30.as leader. If anyone retains their deposit, they are getting too many
:38:31. > :38:37.votes and not being loony enough. And you are the UK's longest serving
:38:38. > :38:41.political leader too. 17 years, dead right, a good record. If you show
:38:42. > :38:46.some success of being the electrical or coming up with policies that
:38:47. > :38:51.other parties are pinching, I would suggest your position is in trouble.
:38:52. > :38:55.We have always said the Monster Raving Loony Party is the
:38:56. > :38:59.Parliamentary think tank. They pinch our ideas over time. Nothing we can
:39:00. > :39:03.do about it. Who is doing the thinking in our part -- in your
:39:04. > :39:09.party? Me, and all the other members. If you go to the website,
:39:10. > :39:13.you can send in your own policies, and at our party conference in
:39:14. > :39:17.Blackpool, we see which ones are good and which ones we will use.
:39:18. > :39:22.Anybody's policies we can use. Have you dropped what was your solution
:39:23. > :39:27.to global warming, the Tete the air conditioning units on the outside of
:39:28. > :39:33.buildings. Now, that is central. We haven't got that at all, glad you
:39:34. > :39:36.are numbered. What do you make of this constitutional proposal, that
:39:37. > :39:40.there will be a 30 day cooling off period after you vote, so you can
:39:41. > :39:44.decide to take your vote back? You reduce the voting age to five years
:39:45. > :39:52.old, because that is how MPs behave in PMQs, and relocate Parliament to
:39:53. > :39:57.Wormwood Scrubs to save on the commute. Quite hard to find a
:39:58. > :40:00.consensus on that. It has been a great honour meeting you. I think
:40:01. > :40:04.there should be a father of the polls, and I think it would be due,
:40:05. > :40:08.25 elections in a row. It is glorious, you are part of the
:40:09. > :40:13.continuity of the realm. You never thought you would hear that, from a
:40:14. > :40:17.constitutional expert. Thank you for being with us. Thank you very much.
:40:18. > :40:19.Now - with a round-up of the craziness elsewhere
:40:20. > :40:22.in the election campaign - here's Emma.
:40:23. > :40:26.You don't need to be the Monster Raving Loony Party to provide us
:40:27. > :40:30.with a bit of madness on the campaign trail. We regularly see the
:40:31. > :40:36.main parties are quite capable of doing that themselves too. I have a
:40:37. > :40:39.question for you. Two appearances matter? For us into the world, we
:40:40. > :40:43.just throw on any old thing in the morning but what about the
:40:44. > :40:47.politicians? We are hearing that one party leader might be smartening up
:40:48. > :40:54.his act. With that and more, here's the campaign round-up. As The one
:40:55. > :40:57.Show became the Corbyn show last night, a revelation emerged about
:40:58. > :41:01.the Labour leader's academic achievements. You went to a private
:41:02. > :41:09.prep school and a grammar school. It can't be true but it -- they tell
:41:10. > :41:14.you left with Cuiaba Es. I have the certificate at home. Matt McClure
:41:15. > :41:19.and remember the withering comments Jeremy Corbyn once received on his
:41:20. > :41:24.sense of style? Put on a proper suit, do up your tie and sing the
:41:25. > :41:27.national anthem! Rumour has it that Jeremy Corbyn's spin doctors have
:41:28. > :41:32.given him an election makeover, insisting he wears dark blue suits
:41:33. > :41:36.to make him look more prime ministerial. Meanwhile, Theresa May
:41:37. > :41:41.has said in a speech that if the user may became Prime Minister... He
:41:42. > :41:45.will find himself alone and naked in the negotiating chamber of the
:41:46. > :41:51.European Union. Leaving us with a mental image we can't raise.
:41:52. > :41:59.Jonathan Bartley received his stats results. He scored 67 out of 70, but
:42:00. > :42:03.instead of going to the top of the class, he called for the primary
:42:04. > :42:11.school tests to be abolished. As if by magic, it is going to appear,
:42:12. > :42:14.look at that. Meanwhile, breakfast means scrapping free school lunches.
:42:15. > :42:18.Nick Clegg has attacked the Theresa May's decision to do away with free
:42:19. > :42:27.school meals, unveiling a new poster for the Lib Dems in Kennington. I
:42:28. > :42:29.have looked in every single camera now. We managed to get your better
:42:30. > :42:31.side. Emma reporting. Now, in the run-up to election day,
:42:32. > :42:34.we've been talking to each of the five largest parties
:42:35. > :42:36.in Northern Ireland. Last week, we spoke to Alliance,
:42:37. > :42:38.and today we're joined by Robin Swann, newly elected leader
:42:39. > :42:51.of the Ulster Unionist Party. Mr Swann, your party campaigned for
:42:52. > :42:56.the main but you are now fully signed up to Brexit. You think
:42:57. > :42:59.either of the levers of the Remainers are impressed with your
:43:00. > :43:03.position? We have taken the same position as the Prime Minister,
:43:04. > :43:06.Theresa May at this moment in time. As a Democratic party we have
:43:07. > :43:12.accepted the rule of the United Kingdom. Our MPs when elected will
:43:13. > :43:14.be working for the best deal for the UK post Brexit and during the
:43:15. > :43:18.negotiations, because we clearly believe that the best thing for the
:43:19. > :43:24.UK will be beneficial for Northern Ireland. Is there any difference now
:43:25. > :43:30.between you and the DUP on Brexit? In regards to Brexit, yes, the
:43:31. > :43:34.difference between us, one of their elected people said at one stage
:43:35. > :43:38.Brexit was beneficial at any cost, where our differential comes is that
:43:39. > :43:40.we wanted to see a realistic agreement out of Brexit, especially
:43:41. > :43:45.for Northern Ireland, because we are the only part of the United Kingdom
:43:46. > :43:48.that has a land border with another EU member state. And we are fully
:43:49. > :43:53.aware of the challenges and opportunities that will bring. And
:43:54. > :43:56.during the referendum campaign, parties on the Remain side, like
:43:57. > :44:03.your own party, though I don't think you yourself, but your own party
:44:04. > :44:06.pointed out that if we leave the European Union it creates special
:44:07. > :44:09.problems for Northern Ireland, doesn't it? It does but it also
:44:10. > :44:14.create opportunities as well, and I think that is where we have to focus
:44:15. > :44:18.on, now that we are leading the EU and Article 50 has been triggered.
:44:19. > :44:23.The challenge specifically to Northern Ireland in regard to the
:44:24. > :44:26.land borders, as I said earlier, there is a disingenuous argument
:44:27. > :44:29.made here in Northern Ireland about a hard border between ourselves and
:44:30. > :44:33.the Republic of Ireland but it has been made clear by the UK
:44:34. > :44:37.Government, by the Irish government, by our own executive and by the
:44:38. > :44:41.European Union that neither or none of the four organisations want to
:44:42. > :44:44.see a hard border. So that is something we're working for at this
:44:45. > :44:48.minute in time. And we are reflective that when the EU needs to
:44:49. > :44:50.be creative when it comes to solutions and problems they have
:44:51. > :44:56.been in the past and that is something we think will be possible
:44:57. > :44:59.and something we work towards. It is true that nearly everybody in
:45:00. > :45:05.London, Belfast and Dublin so they don't want to see a hard border, but
:45:06. > :45:09.nobody is quite sure how to do that. Can you envisage a settlement in
:45:10. > :45:15.which nothing changes on the border? That of course is something we would
:45:16. > :45:18.like to see. We have the benefit of the border as we see it at this
:45:19. > :45:22.minute in time, and also that benefits of the Common travel area,
:45:23. > :45:27.which has been in place for a long time. As a member of the British
:45:28. > :45:30.Irish Parliamentary Association, I sat with elected representatives
:45:31. > :45:34.from across the UK and the Republic of Ireland, looking at how visas
:45:35. > :45:40.could work, how transition is good work, and to ensure that we maintain
:45:41. > :45:44.the open movement of people on this island and across the GB. One of the
:45:45. > :45:47.things we are very clear from a party point of view is that we do
:45:48. > :45:53.want to see a hard border positioned down the Irish sea with customs and
:45:54. > :45:59.checkpoints and passport controls at Stranraer or in Heathrow.
:46:00. > :46:05.There are some seats where the DUP looks favourite, or has a better
:46:06. > :46:11.chance of winning where you are not going to run. There is a seat the
:46:12. > :46:15.DUP will not run, I think to help your cause. But in those seats where
:46:16. > :46:22.there is an Ulster Unionist candidate and a DUP candidate why
:46:23. > :46:25.should they choose you over the DUP? There's fundamental differences
:46:26. > :46:31.between the two parties and we have made that clear and we do make that
:46:32. > :46:34.clear. The unionism that we demonstrate is actually a positive
:46:35. > :46:37.unionism and a confident unionism and something I brought forward
:46:38. > :46:45.within my leadership within the past six weeks. One of the newest leaders
:46:46. > :46:48.in this campaign. Ourselves and the DUP stand as two different parties
:46:49. > :46:51.on different manifestos and it is our approach to some of the
:46:52. > :46:55.fundamentals we have seen specifically around policy in
:46:56. > :47:00.regards to legacy, we are opposed to the creation of an historical
:47:01. > :47:04.investigations unit, we see that as the creation of a secondary police
:47:05. > :47:08.force in Northern Ireland. We are also supportive and try and bring
:47:09. > :47:11.forward in the assembly a number of times a manufacturing strategy
:47:12. > :47:15.specifically for Northern Ireland which the DUP stood down on. One of
:47:16. > :47:19.the main fundamental differences is how our party approaches matters of
:47:20. > :47:23.conscience issues. We need to leave it there but thank you for joining
:47:24. > :47:24.us from Belfast, from the Ulster Unionist Party.
:47:25. > :47:26.Now - Ellie's taking the Daily Politics Balls around
:47:27. > :47:33.Today she's in Cambridge - which is playing host tonight
:47:34. > :47:35.to the greatest debate the university city's ever seen.
:47:36. > :47:37.And in exam season Ellie hasn't had a moment
:47:38. > :47:39.to fritter away, right, Ellie?
:47:40. > :47:54.Sorry, Andrew! I was just doing a little bit of research. Did you know
:47:55. > :47:57.Cambridge has been sending a representative to Parliament ever
:47:58. > :48:01.since the 13th century. More recently it has become a Labour Lib
:48:02. > :48:06.Dem marginal, Labour defending a majority of just 599. But we're not
:48:07. > :48:09.here to talk about that today, over the last few weeks we've been out
:48:10. > :48:12.with the mood box, the coloured balls, tackling the big issues of
:48:13. > :48:16.the campaign and today there is a big issue facing the nation. Not
:48:17. > :48:20.just Cambridge. The question tonight is, the live debate which will
:48:21. > :48:26.include Jeremy Corbyn, which makes it all the more exciting to watch.
:48:27. > :48:30.But it's on at the same time as Britain's Got Talent. What will
:48:31. > :48:32.people watch? We asked people in Cambridge who are not necessarily
:48:33. > :48:39.representative of the whole nation. Here is what they said.
:48:40. > :48:45.So, what would you rather watch, Britain's Got Talent or a programme
:48:46. > :48:52.about the election? The election. Really? Why? It is funny to see
:48:53. > :48:58.people are how about you, Madam? There is no talent in politics in
:48:59. > :49:01.this country any more, it's gone. Britain's Got Talent or the Election
:49:02. > :49:08.Debate, which would you rather watch? Election Debate I think. Is
:49:09. > :49:12.it the final? The final is on June the 8th. Definitely Election Debate,
:49:13. > :49:17.although I'd love to see Simon Cowell moderate it. I'm not a fan of
:49:18. > :49:18.Britain's Got Talent but certainly not of politics so I'd go for
:49:19. > :49:35.Britain's Got Talent. The Election Debate has the edge
:49:36. > :49:40.over Britain's Got Talent. You do get to vote in Britain's Got Talent
:49:41. > :49:48.as well. Do you? OK. You've never watched it have you? No. What will
:49:49. > :49:52.you be watching? I will watch the Election Debate but on catch up
:49:53. > :49:56.because I will be in the office but I will watch the Election Debate
:49:57. > :50:12.afterwards. The Election Debate has God on its side? Definitely, yes.
:50:13. > :50:17.Given there is so little political talent in this country Britain's Got
:50:18. > :50:23.Talent is the better choice. Who is watching what? Election Debate for
:50:24. > :50:30.me. Britain's Got Talent. Election Debate. Britain's Got Talent. This
:50:31. > :50:38.family is split down the middle. The debate. Why? It is more exciting.
:50:39. > :50:43.Going to get some popcorn in? I've got exams, but why not? Let's take a
:50:44. > :50:51.break. Are you just saying what you think I want to hear? Probably! OK,
:50:52. > :50:56.no, Election Debate, definitely. The lines have now closed and the votes
:50:57. > :51:06.have been counted. And I can reveal that tonight's winner is...
:51:07. > :51:13.The Election Debate programme. It's on at 7:20pm. Thank you very much,
:51:14. > :51:17.Cambridge. -- 7:30pm. We look forward to seeing the
:51:18. > :51:18.viewing figures. We need to check if the people of Cambridge were lying
:51:19. > :51:20.to us, perish the thought! Joining us from the set
:51:21. > :51:22.of the BBC Election Debate tonight is Mishal Hussein,
:51:23. > :51:28.who is chairing the debate. I understand the big news is Jeremy
:51:29. > :51:31.Corbyn is now going to be part of the debate. Yes, we just heard that
:51:32. > :51:35.in the last few minutes so it means we do have another party leader
:51:36. > :51:39.joining the line-up of seven tonight. This is actually the first
:51:40. > :51:43.time we can show any wonder set here on The Daily Politics and we have
:51:44. > :51:47.the podiums set up for all of the seven politicians. There has been a
:51:48. > :51:51.lot of... Essentially most of tonight has been decided by the
:51:52. > :51:54.drawing of lots, the position each of those politicians takes on the
:51:55. > :51:58.stage also the order in which they make their opening statements and
:51:59. > :52:01.the order in which they make their closing statements. It is of course
:52:02. > :52:06.great news Jeremy Corbyn will be with us here tonight. That is
:52:07. > :52:10.alongside the leader of the Liberal Democrats, Tim Farron, the deputy
:52:11. > :52:15.leader of the SNP Angus Robertson, Paul Nuttall for Ukip, Caroline
:52:16. > :52:17.Lucas for the Greens, Angus Robertson for the SNP, and Amber
:52:18. > :52:22.Rudd for the Conservatives. It should be lively. It certainly will
:52:23. > :52:26.be. What is the format? How will you proceed?
:52:27. > :52:30.The format is that the composition of the audience here in Cambridge is
:52:31. > :52:36.totally out of the BBC's Hans. They have been independently chosen by an
:52:37. > :52:39.outside company, a polling company, and have been carefully chosen as
:52:40. > :52:42.you would expect to reflect the country as a whole so they vote for
:52:43. > :52:47.different parties. Some are undecided voters, altogether they
:52:48. > :52:50.are coming in from different parts of the country, and also importantly
:52:51. > :52:54.we have made a decision that they should be split along the lines of
:52:55. > :52:57.last year's EU referendum campaign, so half of those sitting in the
:52:58. > :53:02.audience tonight voted to leave and half voted to remain. Those who were
:53:03. > :53:05.coming along were given the opportunity to submit their
:53:06. > :53:08.questions and we have chosen a selection that represent a range of
:53:09. > :53:12.issues that are being talked about in this election campaign. I'm
:53:13. > :53:17.assuming I generally need to stress that the seven politicians don't get
:53:18. > :53:21.to see them in advance but for the avoidance of doubt they do not get
:53:22. > :53:24.to see them in advance. The composition of those questions has
:53:25. > :53:30.just been in the hands of a small group of people. Mishal Hussein,
:53:31. > :53:34.good luck tonight, live, BBC One, 7:30pm from Cambridge, I'm sure it
:53:35. > :53:38.will be good fun and informative as well and Mr Corbyn will be their
:53:39. > :53:42.too. What do you make of the decision by Mr Corbyn to turn up
:53:43. > :53:49.which only leaves Theresa May of the leading parties not there. It is
:53:50. > :53:55.good politics, people have been surprised how he has conducted his
:53:56. > :53:58.campaign. This shows confidence on his part. That's the first
:53:59. > :54:05.canvassing at white fryer. That was terrific. Nicola Sturgeon will not
:54:06. > :54:07.be there, Angus Robertson will be there of the Parliamentary
:54:08. > :54:09.delegation, not Nicola Sturgeon. Now, how do you like
:54:10. > :54:11.your politicians? A new study from Brunel University
:54:12. > :54:17.has shown that the more heavily built and attractive a man,
:54:18. > :54:19.the less generous We'll be speaking to the author
:54:20. > :54:25.of the report in a moment, but first here's a quick rundown
:54:26. > :54:28.of some of today's manliest men in politics -
:54:29. > :54:30.none of whom, of course, Well, we're joined now by the lead
:54:31. > :55:30.author of the research, Welcome to the programme. Am I right
:55:31. > :55:33.in saying that the report concludes in general there is a tendency the
:55:34. > :55:41.better looking that person the less generous they will be. It is about
:55:42. > :55:43.upper body size, muscularity and the correlation is the preference for
:55:44. > :55:48.equality, bigger and more muscular men were less in favour of equality,
:55:49. > :55:51.political and economic equality. Does it work in reverse? The less
:55:52. > :55:57.muscular you are the more generous you are? More egalitarian, more in
:55:58. > :56:00.favour of economic redistribution, more in favour of social equality
:56:01. > :56:05.between groups in society. Why do you think that is? That is a good
:56:06. > :56:09.question. We think it is partly that guys who find themselves in these
:56:10. > :56:14.big muscular bodies calibrate their sociopolitical attitudes to match
:56:15. > :56:18.their formidable itty and we form these environments where the outcome
:56:19. > :56:21.of social competitions for status and resources were determined by
:56:22. > :56:26.your fighting ability, physical strength, so we think it is partly
:56:27. > :56:30.this throwback to our evolutionary heritage. But there also seems to be
:56:31. > :56:33.more competitive individuals, the guys spent more time working out in
:56:34. > :56:40.the gym and also have these anti-egalitarian political attitudes
:56:41. > :56:45.as well. Democratic politicians, I know authoritarian ones like to
:56:46. > :56:49.appear as strongmen, mainly men, is that true of Democratic leaders as
:56:50. > :56:53.well? Is it important to be seen to be strong? There is a lot of studies
:56:54. > :56:57.on preferences for leaders and when people exhibit most strongly
:56:58. > :57:00.preferences for mostly masculine, aggressive type readers who appear
:57:01. > :57:07.formidable and appear strong. It is always in the context of
:57:08. > :57:11.international conflict. Those preferences are especially strong in
:57:12. > :57:14.the context of war, for example. A point that we want to make in the
:57:15. > :57:19.study is it is not necessarily a rational basis at all on which to
:57:20. > :57:23.base your attitudes. Social inequality has really negative
:57:24. > :57:27.outcomes for society. If it gets too extreme, lots of social dysfunction
:57:28. > :57:30.is asserted with too much inequality. We are trying to
:57:31. > :57:33.eliminate the hidden sources of people's attitudes in sums of their
:57:34. > :57:36.preferences for equality and say they are not necessarily rational
:57:37. > :57:40.and people don't know where they are coming from. It's not the best basis
:57:41. > :57:44.for policy decisions to base it on your own physical form and ability.
:57:45. > :57:48.Our politics isn't particularly chock-a-block with alpha males, is
:57:49. > :57:53.it? In British politics? Not necessarily. There is more of a
:57:54. > :57:56.history, maybe because of the class structure of British society,
:57:57. > :58:00.politicians are supposed to be kind of genteel and not express a lot of
:58:01. > :58:03.aggressiveness. It is different in America, people like Arnold
:58:04. > :58:06.Schwarzenegger can be governor of California. In Britain it seems like
:58:07. > :58:11.there is a preference for very strong women leaders, it more
:58:12. > :58:17.acceptable, going back to Elizabeth I and Margaret Thatcher. Theresa May
:58:18. > :58:22.says Elizabeth I is her hero. Yes. I think there is almost more of
:58:23. > :58:27.tolerance with women leaders in society. What happened to the new
:58:28. > :58:30.man? I wondered, it is fascinating, it reminds me of the great writer
:58:31. > :58:33.and novelist Michael Defraine of the distinction between herbivores and
:58:34. > :58:42.carnivores but can be both. Jeremy Corbyn has herbivorous ways and
:58:43. > :58:47.carnivorous views. He throws your taxonomy of the Labour Party. It is
:58:48. > :58:49.an interesting thesis. And on that we have to end it. Thank you for
:58:50. > :58:50.joining us. That's all for today -
:58:51. > :58:52.thanks to our guests. The One o'Clock News is starting
:58:53. > :59:00.over on BBC One now. The BBC Election Debate tonight on
:59:01. > :59:03.BBC One at 7:30pm and Jo will be here