12/06/2017 Daily Politics

Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.

Theresa May prepares to meet Conservative MPs.

She says she'll serve a full term as Prime Minister,

Labour say they are ready to form a Government,

but with a Conservative working majority of 13, is there really any

The Brexit Secretary says we're still leaving the single market,

but does the general election mean there will have to be changes

And frozen in time - we'll look back at the general

All that in the next hour, and with us for the whole

of the programme today, an MP who's on so often he's

becoming the Shadow Minister for the Daily Politics,

And his predecessor in that role, but we haven't seen on the programme

for some time, former Conservative Party

Theresa May held her first Cabinet meeting this morning.

Later, she faces her backbench MPs at a meeting

It looks like there's no immediate plan to oust her.

So, how will this minority Government go about governing?

When the dust settled after election night,

the Conservatives ended up with 318 seats and Labour with 262.

All other parties combined took 70 seats, 10 of which were won

by the DUP, who've been courted by the Conservatives for a so-called

When one subtracts Sinn Fein MPs, who don't take their seats,

and the Speaker and Deputy Speakers, who traditionally don't vote,

the effective working majority for a Conservative Government that

Over the weekend Theresa May set about reshuffling her Cabinet.

Damian Green was elevated from Work and Pensions Secretary

to First Secretary of State - a move that's seen him

touted as effectively Theresa May's new deputy.

He was replaced as the man in charge of welfare policy by long-time

It was a return to the top table for one-time leadership

contender Michael Gove, who takes on the

While his fellow Leave campaigner Andrea Leadsom moved

across to become the new Leader of the House of Commons.

Liz Truss, who many had thought had something of a torrid time

at the Justice Department, becomes the new Chief

And was replaced as Justice Secretary and Lord Chancellor

So, as Theresa May prepares to face down her party

at the 1922 Committee tonight, all attention among her reorganised

staff will be on crafting a Queen's Speech for next Monday.

MPs will vote on its contents on 27th June.

That will count as the new minority Government's

Grant Shapps, what went wrong? Well, the manifesto, clearly, that was a

big issue on the doorstep. Specifically the social care policy?

Specifically, I think you can do a certain number of unpopular things

and people will say, OK, we understand you are taking tough

decisions, so maybe that was the pension triple-lock moving to a

double-lock. I don't think you can do everything, and what this

manifesto tried to do in the of responsibility fiscally, solving

long-term problems, was try to do everything and I think that was a

mistake. Was it arrogant? I think it was borne out of now departed from

Downing Street to some advisers who were not best at taking advice and

certainly didn't ask people who really would know about things like

long-term care sufficiently advanced with ministers for example not being

involved. But Theresa my is the one who hired the advisers and took

their advice, it cannot all be laid at their door? In the end of good

leader has to take responsibility for what happened and I very much

hope that when Theresa May comes to the 1922 this evening, she will come

and speak to Conservative MPs, that she doesn't do what seems to happen

on the doorstep on Friday... She did not take any responsibility.

Colleagues lost their jobs, but actually this expectation of this

election was allowed to get completely out of control, and when

that happens you end up in a mess. So I think what she will do later is

perhaps just show the progression of the fact that people have lost their

Parliamentary jobs for a general election which was not strictly

required and I hope take some questions from colleagues. But I

agree with you in the introduction, I don't think there is any great

feeling that we want an urgent leadership election, getting right

back into that, because, to coin a phrase, genuinely what the country

actually requires is some stability, so I think that leadership election

is not the first thing that should be on the cards. Were you surprised

she did not show much contrition on the doorstep on Friday. Yes. What

would you have liked to have heard from her? What she then said an hour

or two later, her colleagues have lost their seats, majorities had

been cut, and clearly in human terms this election did not go to plan,

the plan was to have a bigger majority and strengthen her upper

hand at Brexit negotiations, which is fine, but it is not what ended up

happening so you expect any speech about it to at least acknowledge the

fact it hasn't gone our way. But, as I say, I think she has then done a

series of the right things, I think she was right to move quickly to put

the Cabinet back in place, she dealt with the Downing Street advisers,

she is seeing the 1922 this evening. She was pressured to do that? By

circumstances, of course, but we are where we are with it, and you ask

whether I think there will be a leadership election and I think, no,

if the 1922 goes well for her deceiving. Should there be a

leadership contest if it does not go well? You would require, just on a

technical note, 48 MPs, 15%, 48 MPs to sign a letter will stop at an

emotional and personal level, you have outlined, she did not show

contrition on Friday. She went to the country because she wanted to

get a stronger mandate, a bigger mandate, she made the whole campaign

about her in a presidential style, promoted herself as strong and

stable and asked for a stronger mandate for Brexit, and it backfired

catastrophically for her personally. She lost a majority, Tories have

lost seats, as you said, you have gone backwards and she was dubbed a

Maybot in terms of her personal style. Does she not need to take

more responsibility? Not to acknowledge that was a mistake on

Friday, and I hope that has been recognised. The thing about Theresa

May, she is quite good at being Prime Minister, what she is not good

at Apple is the campaigning and that is what this election showed up, and

what was crazy, and I thought this all along, being party chairman I

thought about this long and hard, to allow expectations to run to the

point where there was May-mania and we would get hundreds of seats was

crazy insane. For the purpose of balance, the same think is happening

now, Jeremy Corbyn has lost a selection, he has far fewer MPs than

we do, only four more than their disastrous 2010, and now we have

Corbyn-mania. To stick to the main point, how these things get out of

control, we now have a Corbyn-mania which is every bit as mad as having

the May-mania beforehand. Politics does not have to be done in this

pibroch atmosphere. Do you think she will fight another election as

leader of the Conservative Party? At this point, I don't know. I suspect

that she won't. Do you think she will last the year? Will she, should

she make it to the Conservative Party conference? I think it would

be great if she now gets the Government in place, which she

started to do yesterday, and starts the negotiations, and then she can

herself make any decision about the future. I think it should be that

way round and I think the mood of the party is to allow for that time

and space to do that, and, as I say, what happens this evening in the

1922 will be vital to that because she, I think, will need to give the

sense that she has not always given in the past that she gets it. We can

see pictures of Boris Johnson, Foreign Secretary, confirmed back in

post, he has denied he is interested in the leadership, he is out

running, you might say he is limbering up. Look at that, amazing.

I will look at it for a brief moment, limbering up for a

leadership election, getting himself in shape for the top job? He says

not and I think that is probably true for the time being. Do you

believe him? I think if he was going to do it he would have already done

it. I think what we are moving towards here, my best assessment of

the situation, is she now has a bit of time and space to get things back

on something of an even keel, and with a working majority of 30 it is

perfectly possible to do this and actually the big issue, we always

like to state the Conservative Party is the party that puts the nation's

interest first, and before Barry scoffs that that you can look at the

Scottish referendum where at the time it was not in our best

interests to have Scotland leaving the UK but we still wanted to do

that and in the same spirit right now the most important thing is to

have the Brexit negotiations actually begin and that is why we

require that everything just comes down for the moment. Barry Gardiner

has been listening patiently! Why, though, has more party been so happy

about losing the election? I have not been happy about losing the

election, I don't think many people in my party have been happy...

Jeremy Corbyn looked delighted in the interview yesterday, he thought

he had won! What I think we have two be reasonably aware of is that we

have turned what the broadsheets were saying was going to be 120 to

150 sheet majority to the Conservatives into a reduced number

of seats to the Conservatives where they are now forming a minority

administration in conjunction with the DUP. More successful than even

you could have imagined but you still boss? Given where we were, we

have achieved an historic was urgent and I am pleased about that, but I'm

conscious there are many people out there in the country who were hoping

for the policies that we put in our manifesto to be delivered, and that

we have not done that is no solace to them. Let's talk about the

policies, Grant Shapps, which policies will be dropped from the

manifesto, because you did not win a mandate for it? Who knows? I cannot

answer that. I will tell you one straight off the bat, absolute

insanity to start to talk about changing fox-hunting laws, what on

earth was that about?! It was the moment where I thought there had

been a mistake made, perhaps an off-the-cuff comment and then I bet

the manifesto and discovered not only were we planning to allow a

free vote but it would be a Government bill in Government time.

It stands absolutely no chance of being passed and thank goodness.

What about the expansion of grammar schools? Things like grammar

schools, the future of education, social care, triple-lock, all of

those things I think will be in the mix with the discussions that will

now have to take place. Do you think they should be dropped, in a sense

that Winter Fuel Payments being cut to a certain number of pensioners,

we were never told who it was going to affect, social policy now with

its cap as well as its floor, are you saying that shouldn't happen?

Things like the social care policy literally went down like a lead

balloon, nobody was interested in hearing the explanation which, when

you dig into the policy, raising the four from 23 to ?100,000 and it

would help some people but no one was interested in getting into that

detail. What it did was send a signal that we somehow were not

interested in the aspirations of people who work hard and save all

their life and want to be able to keep some of that money. People

confused it with being about inheritance tax,

which it is not, so I think that policy needs to be shelved. So the

accusations that Labour had a magic monetary when it came to their

manifesto, it will be the Tories who will now go back on a lot of their

manifesto commitments and won't commit to bringing down the deficit

as in previous manifestos, and they will be spending money and giving

out freebies? I don't think that should and needs to be the case.

Doesn't it? But so many people voted for the Labour Party for a lot of

those policies, I'm not saying for a magic monetary, I'm saying for

spending more on public services. It is also possible a lot of people

voted Labour to show that they wanted, as people voted Brexit

thinking it would never happen, probably voted that way as well,

but on social care, for example, I'm not saying there are endless amounts

of money, we spent years with The Economist Andrew Dilnot working out

what to do one care, it is perfectly good, costed policy. And you didn't

do it! How are you going to get your programme of legislation across?

Bite do we keep hearing Jeremy Corbyn will have an alternative

programme? I don't want to intervene in the cosy chat you have been

happening for the past quarter of an hour... It has not been cosy, I have

been taking him through what happened between the election. If I

can comment on that, it seems to me the real question people need

answered immediately is, what is the Queen's Speech? She went to the

country on a manifesto, most of the key policies of which she cannot

deliver because she is now finding them to be toxic, so what is

actually going to be in the Queen's Speech? Nothing. It is vacuous. What

I am saying to you is, how are you going to get your policies into any

sort of form the public the Ben Foden? You lost the election, none

of your manifesto policies are going to come into reality. We are not in

Government, absolutely. So why does Jeremy Corbyn say you will offer an

alternative programme for Government? There is no prospect of

you being able to do that. What the official opposition has to do in

Parliament is to put forward reasoned and reasonable alternatives

and to make the case so that people can see and ultimately, in a

parliament where actually things are so febrile and on a knife edge,

where there is a real chance of the Government losing the vote, then

actually to be putting forward the reasonable alternatives and trying

to build a consensus around that. What is your reasoned proposal on

social care that is different to the Government's we actually were in

favour of the do not report, we had bipartisan agreement about it until

the Conservatives ripped that up, but more than that we said, for

example, we would increase carers allowance by 17%, that is something

which again was deeply popular. We would restore the ?4.6 billion of

cuts the Conservatives made over the past three years. There is a lot of

difference there. Do you think those are the sorts of

things that should be part of the Queen's speech? Had cross-party

agreement on the Andrew deal not proposals. I disagree on going back

to the world that got us back into the financial crass and we have been

trying to recover ever since. You cannot keep... Grant Shapps... We're

not going to go back now in 2017 back to what happened in the

financial crash. Labour have not been in power since 2010, the

Conservatives have under a majority government. From 979 billion... You

cannot reduce debt until you reduce and eliminate the deficit. And you

haven't done. You did say he would eliminated by 2015. The policies you

are proposing beyond the care thing which we agree about will take us

back into the deficit. Can I ask about the DUP and confidence and

supply arrangement. Are you comfortable with that? I don't want

to be in coalition. I am very uncomfortable with many of the

social views as well, things I will literally never ever support.

However, the party is entitled to vote for our economic programme and

I hope an agreement can be made, confidence and supply agreement, can

be made to do that. Are you worried that actually the Government has

lost the capacity to hold the ring in the re-establishment of the

Assembly in Northern Ireland? Because now they are seen to be in

bed with one side, one party in that arrangement, and they can therefore

no longer in an impartial way deal with both sides. Let him answer that

straight question. I think transparency is important here and

we need to know what has been offered to the DUP in order to gain

the support, and the Government is not saying that. The deal as I

understand is not done yet, so when it is done I agree it should be

transparent. To answer your question, I do think that given the

DUP want to get the power-sharing going again, I don't think this will

be an impediment. As I say, if they want to agree with our economic

programme, and if in return they want for example the long-term care

we were just talking about, sheltered from the manifesto, fine,

let them vote with our programme. Were you uncomfortable when Gordon

Brown was having talks with the DUP in 2010? I have always said that if

we are the largest single party, we should govern as a minority

government. I believe it's the only honest way of doing things. Which

the Tories are going to try to do here. They are doing a deal. No,

it's a confidence and supply. Let's move on.

Now, this morning it was the Brexit Secretary David Davis

who was charged with getting the Government's message across.

With negotiations due to start next week, he was asked

whether the election would change their

The thing to understand is that the fundamental central aim

of trying to get a free trade agreement, a customs agreement,

and a continuing agreement on security and other matters

is still in the interests of both sides, so that

And that's what we driving for, and, frankly, that's

David Davis, Grant Shapps, do you accept Theresa May has no mandate

now for what she said in that Lancaster house speech in terms of

Brexit? No, firstly on Brexit I was a remainder. I like to think

middle-of-the-road on this in as much as I would agree the country

has voted to leave and we must now leave. And leave the single market?

The implication is it is very hard to leave in any other way and fulfil

the country has asked us to do but I've never been hardline about it.

What does that mean, hard line? I have always felt having a manifesto

objective of reducing immigration to an arbitrary figure of less than

100,000 is to say that this fact is more important than our economy, and

I think that is the wrong way round to have this. So you agree with Ruth

Davidson, the leader of the Tories in Scotland, and had a very good

night in her terms because she increased the number of seats in

Scotland for the Conservatives? She says she wants to put the economy

ahead of the issue of immigration, but what does that mean in terms of

changing fundamentally the shape of Brexit? So yes, I do entirely agree

with that. What it means is this. If you are talking about the single

market, it is clear we cannot be in the single market because that

requires completely free movement of people but we already accept in this

country some people to come and go and there may be a deal around

having some sort of visa system that enables people to work here, which

provides sufficient movement for work and jobs only of course. Which

might in your terms be a softer approach to Brexit rather than the

hard lines of this only being about a particular figure. You were saying

earlier about hardline or hard Brexit. So let's be specific about

what we mean, you are still in agreement about leaving the single

market? And still an agreement with what the party put in its manifesto

on the customs union? So it's about tone? I think that is what the

country itself agreed... And you are in total agreement with that too,

Barry? Many Conservatives previously go along with a hard Brexit have now

said it is the economy and jobs that must govern the ultimate deal we

have with Europe. His Labour still committed to leaving the single

market? Yes, because it is clear the single market is the internal market

of the European Union, if we leave the European Union, then relieve the

internal market and with that we cannot have a deal where there is

single market or internal market that is without the four freedoms.

What did you mean when you said, we need those benefits and when they

are achieved through reformed membership of the single market,

it's actually secondary to achieving the benefit. So for you you want to

see a reformed membership of the single market? No, you have quoted

me accurately but what I said was we wanted the benefits of the single

market, which is exactly what Grant says he wants. We have been

absolutely clear on this. We want those benefits, and actually the

issue of how we get them is secondary... But that is not the

same as reformed membership because you have said you still want

membership of the single market, you just want to reform it. No, it said

unless you can get a reform deal so that the whole way the internal

market is structured as reformed... So you think you could stay in the

single market and have a deal on immigration? The Government has

ruled that out, we have said it is highly unlikely because of the

reasons we have just talked about in terms of the four freedoms, the EU

have made it clear they will not give membership of the internal

market unless it is accompanied by the four freedoms. What we are

saying is, if they were to offer that would we turn it down? So if

they were to offer that, but reform the four freedoms you talked about,

you would accept that? Then we have changed the basis of what EU

membership constitutes. I think it is highly unlikely. I was simply

being exact about where we were. But nothing has changed fundamentally.

The two parties are exactly the same in terms of wanting to... Hang on,

let me say what it is first. You are the same on the issue of coming out

of the single market and coming out of the customs union? They would

actually go to World Trade Organisation rules and David Davis

on your programme made it quite clear he thinks that is something we

should keep as a threat. This is something we think is ridiculous.

It's not that that is no deal, there are outcomes here... I think I can

clear this up actually. On the surface it sounds like we are saying

the same thing about the single market and customs union but I think

the approach you are suggesting where there is no backdrop, if we

cannot get at least something reasonable we have negotiated, our

backstop is to say no to a deal. If you don't say no to a deal, you tell

people in our fans they can push you around. Now because of this election

and what happened, and her call for a stronger mandate has been rejected

by the people, the EU will now think they can probably push the UK

around. To finish my previous point, this is what happened when David

Cameron went to the EU to renegotiate, you made it clear there

was nothing that would happen if they didn't give him anything, they

didn't give him anything because they knew he had already shown his

hand. It is like playing a very poor hand and you are proposing we do

that as a country. Do you think it is a weak negotiating hand to save

no deal is better than a bad deal? My point is simply this, that

Article 50 being triggered, there's two years to conclude and

negotiation before you were rejected onto WTO terms. World Trade

Organisation. So the idea that somehow there is a cardio play...

Let him answer. The idea that there is a card to be played here which is

that we will walk away is nonsense. That is already built into the rules

of these negotiations, and therefore the point here is which is the

better outcome for the British people? Is it better to say that

actually we will just not conclude and negotiation within that period

and we will then go onto WTO rules which means we have all the tariff

barriers, all the nontariff barriers, all the problems for our

companies and businesses and exporters, or do we say that we must

conclude a deal within that time, hopefully with transitional

arrangements. We are going to have to finish it there but I want to say

the Prime Minister's official spokesman has refused to confirm the

date of the Queen's speech, the legislative programme that would be

presented. It's going to be delayed for a few days, what does that say

to you? I haven't heard that news. It has just been announced. If

that's because they cannot agree on what to go in the Queen's speech?

Let's move on. The general election in Scotland

told a rather different story The Conservatives actually gained

12 seats, the Scottish Conservative leader -

Ruth Davidson - being seen as the party's knight in shining

armour and yesterday. Miss Davidson, never shy

of the cameras, staged a photo opportunity with the successful

candidates that she's Labour were also successful,

gaining six seats in Scotland, All of this at the expense

of the SNP who, if you can Well, joining me now

is the SNP's Stephen Gethins. Welcome to the programme. It was a

bad night for you. We managed to win the majority of the seats in which

we stored. We did lose seats and we lost some fine parliamentarians and

that was obviously disappointing but we still managed to win the election

in Scotland. But you went backwards and Ruth Davidson coined the phrase

peeking out, do you agree with her? Lost some good colleagues, excellent

parliamentarians and that was obviously disappointing. I'm

disappointed to have lost Mike Weir, Alex Salmond, Angus Robertson, who

have provided tremendous asset to the constituency and been strong

voices for Scotland. Indyref2 is dead, isn't it? That is something

the Scottish Parliament has voted on so I will leave it with the Scottish

parliament. In your mind, plans for the second Scottish referendum,

which you campaigned on, that has gone, you haven't got the mandate

for it now? Something I found astonishing during the general

election campaign was we spent a lot of time with the Tories and others

wanting to talk about this rather than the records. The Tories had a

poor record on where we are in Europe. They did well in Scotland

for someone with a poor record. They still lost the election in Scotland

but they made progress... There are more Tories in Scotland than pandas

now, aren't there? We have to get more pandas! You didn't want to talk

about it because you knew the people of Scotland didn't want it. We also

need to talk about the Westminster issues. Like your record on

education. We want to talk about issues like

where you will get the funding from, there is a direct impact on

education in Scotland. There were interesting remarks about the

movement we will have to see, and critically something will have to

happen down here, Westminster will have to change its culture and those

of us at Westminster are going to have to talk to each other, find

agreement where we can, and try to work together not least on Europe.

Let's talk about Europe, Nicola Sturgeon called for a Brexit pause.

Isn't the truth that you just want to stop it? Not at all, I think if

you look back you will see the only Government to provided anything of

substance around watch it happen next on Europe was the compromise

the Scottish Government released across the UK, a pan UK compromise,

if that was rejected there was a Scottish element as well. It was

rejected by the Government at the time. Freedom of movement, EU

nationals who have made this country that home should be allowed to stay,

universities getting some kind of certainty, all these issues that are

now open for discussion and that is why we are asking for a pause. You

want to reopen the debate about the single market? I think we should be

members of the single market. Asking for a pause the discussion. Given

Theresa May has just taken six critical weeks out of the

negotiation period, I think a few days to reflect on the general

election, access the results, which the story still have to do, and have

a discussion about what happens next... What gives the SNP the right

to dictate what should happen now in terms of Brexit? You lost seats. I

think you are falling back on the old Westminster habit of thinking

1-party dictate. These are policy suggestions we are open to

discussing with other political parties. These two have agreed,

ostensibly, on Brexit in terms of single market membership, they want

out. I would be surprised if the Labour Party will let the Tories off

the hook so easily. You think Labour might be on your side for the single

market? There are a large number of areas where we can find common

ground with colleagues in the Labour Party, freedom of the bid, the

single market, issues that have a direct impact on jobs and the

economy and issues for young people. Ironically you could work with Ruth

Davidson, CHI also wants to perhaps have an open discussion, she says,

on Brexit and some of the areas around it, you could join with her.

If I can find common ground on issues I think will benefit my

constituents on these issues and of course I will work together with

members of other political parties. In this parliament we will all have

to get used to talking to one another, listening to one another as

well. Gone are the days when the Tories can get a third of

the vote and command a majority, those days have clearly gone now and

in Hollywood it is something that has happened for years, Westminster

will have to get behind it. How long do you want the talks to pause for?

I think a few days while we have some time, let's see how long it

takes because we have to reflect on the election result, the Tory hard

Brexit is finished and we need to listen to people from other

political parties, get the devolved administrations involved, which has

not happened previously. Should the devolved administrations be

involved? Ruth Davidson obviously wants to have more involvement and

has some basis for fixing a muscle. What about bringing in the SNP and

Labour in a more cross-party committee other than a select

Committee which already exists on Brexit, to talk about it? It is a

good idea to have a consensus in politics and I'm fascinated to hear

it from the SNP. I used to stand just next Angus Robertson, and the

banter backwards and forwards, he was the most tribal of politicians I

ever used to come across. Unbelievable. And actually, as a

group, I don't think there were more tribal group of MPs than the SNP.

So, can you work... In the last Parliament, if you go back and look

at the motions, my amendments on the European issue, I was able to get

support from Labour, even some Tories, David Davis even backed my

call for the referendum date to be changed. That was due to the

approach of other colleagues in the house more than anything else. Where

is the common ground between you? One of the key aspect where there is

real disagreement on Brexit is over regulation and deregulation.

Conservatives want a deregulated economy. In order to be able to

continue to have the access of which Grant speaks but which his party has

difficulty to negotiate because of their view on regulation, we

actually need to have equivalents with the EU. Will you vote down the

Great Repeal Bill? We have already said we will vote down the Great

Repeal Bill because we want our rights and protections built,

exactly that area of regulation, they want to do away with the

regulations that are actually providing us with protection for our

clean air, environmental, birds and habitats directive, something that

the new Secretary of State, something for the new Secretary of

State for environment... Who is Michael Gove, a great friend of

yours. He has said he is against it. If you all talk over each other, no

one can hear. The Great Repeal Bill thanks to take all of the

legislation and put it into British law wholesale and in particular

protect workers' rights and environmental. We have two ended

there because we have to let Stephen Gethin 's goat. You won by two

votes? Yes, they all count, that is the thing to take away, they all

count in every constituency. Who will replace Angus Robertson in

Westminster? That is something we have to discuss over the next few

days, and also we need to take some time to relax and family and the

public as well! Yesterday, Jeremy Corbyn said he is

ready to fight another election this year. Theresa May said on the other

hand she wants to fight of all time. So is there any public appetite

for an early election? We thought we'd test that idea

with the only scientific method known to man -

the Daily Politics moodbox. We have only just recovered from the

last one, and now we are asking whether we are going to do it again.

The question for commuters, should there be another early election, yes

or no? Why is that? We're exhausted! I've got loads of energy! I'm going

to say yes. No, we have to get on and do stuff. Works, be productive.

Yes, there should. Why? Because it is too unstable at the moment. Who

is up for another early election? There has to be, nothing has been

decided yet and we have doubts agreement across the political

divide that we have. How soon? Within six months. We need a proper

Government to negotiate on our behalf. You are up for another one?

No, but I think we need one! I think now we will get a better opinion,

people will see what other people have said, that we are fed up with

it and need some more stability. No, we are fed up with elections. Fed up

with it all? Yes! Made her mind up the first time, doesn't want to do

it again. Sick of elections! Will you vote in hours? Oh, God. Oh, God,

yes or no? It is disruptive, we should decide who is representing us

before we go into those negotiations. Commuters, it seems,

are up for it, because the yeses are pulling ahead. Yes or no? Doesn't

vote, doesn't vote in elections... Yes or no? You have to give the ball

back! Trying to steal our balls! He is up for it again. I am up for it

again. She just voted in the wrong box! I am going to have to do this

to balance it out. We've just been moved on! We're not wanted here.

What's the point in doing something again when it was a disaster in the

first place? She is the walking dead. No one wants to vote for her,

no one is interested and I think it is back to the polls. There are lots

of people who will want to express the feelings and I think another

election would be a good way to do that. Would it turn out any

different? I think it would. Voter fatigue? Not here. They want to go

back to the ballot box. Barry, does it fill you with joy

that there are people out there who would like to see a second election?

I think, having just come off seven weeks of campaigning, I am weary and

I don't fancy going straight back into it! Jeremy Corbyn does! But

what I think is significant there is that Chaplin said, I don't want one

but I think we need one. And actually what the country needs and

what business needs is clarity and certainty, and at the moment what

they have got is total instability. Why? Because we have a minority

Government that doesn't know from day to day even whether it is going

to put its own manifesto into the Queen's Speech, far less whether it

is going to be able to deliver on any of the promises. And it has been

delayed, the Queen's Speech, for a few days so we don't know when it

will be. Grant, is she a dead man walking as George Osborne, former

Chancellor, said yesterday, and therefore there has to be an

election, just because you don't have a better idea at the moment? I

watched that interview at the moment and you have to bear in mind that

George was fired by Theresa so he certainly has some calls and

passion, and I don't think that is necessarily the case. The reason I

say that is, if this supply and confidence agreement gets going, the

majority of 13 is actually not dissimilar to where we were in the

last Parliament and actually the one we have just had for... But she has

lost personal authority? We are able to get on and do the business of

Government. Undeniably, it would be crazy to sit here and say, no, there

is no loss of... It has only been four days and I hear what you are

saying about timing and the Queen's Speech, it has only been three days

since we had the results so I think allowing a little bit of time, we

may find we have a more stable Government than anyone expects.

We might all be photographers now - there were certainly plenty

of selfies on the campaign trail - but sometimes there's no substitute

And the master of political photography is Stefan Rousseau.

If you see a picture of a politician in the papers, it's probably his.

Here's a selection of his images from the election campaign.

And the Press Association's Stefan Rousseau joins us now.

It has been a memorable campaign, some people may not have enjoyed it

as much as others, but what are your memories of the campaign? My

memories are it has been a very controlled campaign, so soon after

2015, it felt quite flat, there was not any great highlights. I don't

remember anyone pictured jumping out at me like there was in 2015, 2010,

you can go through all the campaigns and think of one picture but there

is nothing for this one. None of the parties were really ready, they

weren't prepared. That is the measure of a snap election, I

suppose! Let's look at some of the photographs you have chosen, there

is the first one, a picture from the first day of campaigning. This is

Northumberland, the start of the campaign proper, the Conservative

campaign bus in rural Northumberland but it was a sign of things to come

because this is what we got, the Prime Minister on a platform with a

very tight group of people around her, and this is what we saw, we

went to so many places over a month and it was the same thing. Whether

you think that is good or bad, it is not for me to judge, but from a

photographer's point of view it is difficult to make it look

different... And come alive. Let's look at the style in contrast of the

Labour campaign, one picture from it, there is Jeremy Corbyn. A? This

is Oxford East, the candidate and her family, but he was quite good at

that, very natural, very good with children, and he seemed to enjoy and

relish it, this was right at the beginning of the campaign and I

think people saw this and thought, this is his strength, and they did

more of this as the campaign went on. He is known, being a natural

campaigner, you says himself he has campaigned almost permanently for 30

years or so and actually this picture that you have picked out,

the third one from the night of the party debate in Cambridge, which was

a week or so before the election, that told a different story which

was quite revealing. Indeed, if you look, Corbyn is leading everyone

out, he's people would have loved this picture because he looks like

he is in charge. Possibly the most senior politician, Amber Rudd,

tucked in the doorway at the back and he is leading them out into the

debate, Cambridge, I think, the BBC debate. Quite a strong picture for

him. Natural as well because they didn't know I was there, I think had

they known there would have been advisers are advising them not to

walk that way, security guards, but they didn't know I was around the

corner. It was an interesting line-up because they would not have

thought about it but you captured them on the way at... He was going

out first, not knowing there were any any cameras there. Symbolic that

Amber Rudd, the minister, is at the back, and in between we have the

other party leaders, Caroline Lucas on the Greens, Leanne Wood for Plaid

Cymru and Tim Farron for the Liberal Democrats. And the final one you

picked out from the weekend is when Theresa May returned to Number Ten

Downing Street having been to see the Queen. What did this say to you?

I did this same picture ten months ago when she walked through the door

for the first time and the mood was remarkably the same, I was quite

surprised. When they walk in traditionally the Prime Minister

gets clapped in by the staff so I was there to record that, this great

moment when the door first opened and she walks across the threshold

and you get all the staff clapping on the way down. The mood was very

similar, I wondered how it would be because it was not the victory she

wanted but if you put the two pictures together from last year and

this year you would not believe there was 12 months apart. And this

was after, as Grant Shapps said, earlier she had not shown enough in

terms of taking account from what happened on election night, there

had been reports she had been crying overnight, which David Davis said he

hadn't seen, but you could imagine that, in a way, when the results

came in? I have heard everyone asked if she cried a lot but we have to

accept none of us were there. But you can imagine how difficult it

was. Fighting elections is quite an emotional business, you think about

your own lives and your family and everyone you know, but if you are

doing it as Prime Minister then of course the emotions must be much

stronger because you have got a lot It had all been up all night the

previous day so emotions run much stronger after that and goodness

knows what was going through her mind. Walking through the door

having not really achieved what she thought she was going to achieve.

Stefan Rousseau, thank you very much.

Let's get back into the here and now and speak to two people who use

the notebook and pen rather than the camera to

Jack Blanchard of the Mirror and Sam Coates of the Times.

Your reflections of today, she's going to have to address her own

MPs, what's that going to be like for her, Sam Coates? Undoubtedly

quite sticky but there is one driving force underneath everything

that's going on at the moment. Over the weekend the Tory MPs took a look

at Theresa May and decided about Prime Minister is better than no

Prime Minister. They decide they didn't want a leadership contest

because it might destabilise a Prime Minister hanging by a thread even

more and lead to a general election. Why don't they want a general

election? Because they are worried Labour might do even better,

propelling Jeremy Corbyn into Downing Street. So however sticky it

is, and it will be sticky, they are basically setting I suspect a low

bar for Theresa May this afternoon and they will complained but they

want to make sure she functions as a Prime Minister for now while they

work out what to do with that manifesto that was so palpably

unpopular. But there are challenges to functioning, to use your word.

The DUP said there hadn't been a deal over the weekend, it was

corrected by Michael Fallon today. We were expecting the Queen's speech

on a date and now that has been delayed so are we already seeing

difficulties here to hold it together? You bet. We have a Prime

Minister who spent seven weeks warning the nation about a coalition

of chaos that would happen if Jeremy Corbyn was voted into power and two

days after the election she is at the helm of a coalition of chaos.

She has been unable to strike a deal with the DUP so far,

the Queen's speech has been delayed, we don't know if the Brexit talks

will start on time. The Government is floundering around and all the

things she was scaremongering before the election have come to pass but

with her at the helm. How long do you think she will survive, Sam

Coates? I think it will be months not weeks. She has effectively got

two coalitions in her own party that she has to manage. She has the DUP

and those talks are ongoing, but she also has the Scottish Tories under

Ruth Davidson. It looks pretty tricky. I don't think necessarily

the delay of the Queen's speech is a sign there is a crisis but she needs

to get a deal with both sides that keeps everybody happy and in the end

I think the thing that will trip her up as legislation and what happens

in the House of Commons. Let's talk about Labour, Jack. Jeremy Corbyn is

feeling jubilant even though Labour lost the election and there is a

sense there may be discussions on Brexit. John McDonnell was clear

about coming out of the single market but do you think there are

potential problems for that line within Labour? I think there could

be but they are trying to keep it as vague as possible because the moment

they try to pin it down to firm with the same divisions will open up in

Labour as well. Jeremy Corbyn is riding sky-high at the moment,

nobody thought he would pull off this election... And nobody will

challenge him. Exactly. But I do think the is nuanced with regards to

access to the single market, what does that mean, the terms are quite

vague and I think Labour will be able to forge it for now. Both of

you, does it matter who the papers back any more in elections? We offer

strong and stable coverage of everybody. Well done! I'm not sure

that phrase will be used in future elections. It's not very often the

Mirror chalks up what it can call a win and we will take this one! I

will leave on a high then for both of you. Thank you.

So, all the pollsters got the general election result

There was one polling company, called Survation, that predicted

Their chief executive, Damian Lyons-Lowe, came

on the programme on the eve of polling day last week, and,

well, got a predictably sceptical reception.

One point would mean a hung parliament and the Tories

It would mean, using our most recent Scotland figures

from the Sunday Post, plugging those into a Scotland

predictor and plugging the... doing a simple national swing

and a few tweaks, nothing too special, it would mean

there would be a no overall majority situation with at least

a requirement for support from the DUP and perhaps

That's a yes, it's a hung parliament?

I was giving you my workings, so, yes, a hung parliament.

I was beginning to lose the will to live!

I'm a massive outlier here, I'm going to be the most

wrong or the most right, so I think showing my working...

As they say in Glasgow, is your jacket hanging

Is this Survation poll an outlier or in the mainstream?

It's an outlier and, in a word, no, I don't think so.

Things turned out Damian's, not Deborah's way, and so we've

brought them both back together this afternoon.

We are good like that on the Daily Politics. You should eat it, like

Paddy Ashdown had to eat his hat. Why did you get its own right and

others got it wrong? Because we have a consistent method that is

delivered a consistent results, and in short everybody else apart from

us had changed the turnout models to assume that voters would behave in a

certain way, and it have the effects of suppressing increases in Labour

support and the support from the young, and suppressing the reverse.

So effectively the fully weighted raw numbers were correct, we all had

the correct average Conservative and Labour numbers. However, after that

weeks they had done to correct the problems after the 2015 election, it

have the effect of Dublin the Conservative lead over Labour --

doubling. You can eat your humble pie now if you like but in terms of

a knee jerk reaction do you think there was overcompensation from

getting it wrong in 2015? It is so interesting, it is all about how the

data was weighted, but you look at its constituency by constituency, it

looks like it might be to do with a broader... Under 30s rather than

under 24s, and there might be an education thing as well. So the

constituencies where there were more graduates for example had a higher

turnout and favoured Labour. But was it simply a case of many more young

people turning out to vote or is that too simplistic? There were

seats like Canterbury for example, which has been Conservative for as

long as I remember and it went Labour. Was that down to lots of

young people, and when I say young I mean under 35. There are

constituency by constituency examples. Let's take Cardiff

Central, where you have got something like 34% of the population

are 18-24. In that case you will have an extreme example of 18-24

getting that percentage correct. But the problem is they don't turnout.

Sorry to interrupt but they did turn out in the EU referendum, 60% of

them turned out 18-24s, and both that group and 30-35 groups had

shown net new registrations up since the comparable period in the 2015

general election, so this is a broad... And one more point is that

our method also factors in the likelihood to vote of older people.

There were lots of policies that were unattractive for older people

and it may have affected the turnout. We were all discussing the

winter fuel payments, the social care policy that would now include

your house, that must have had an impact. When we get the detail from

the exit poll we will know for sure but my hunch is that older people

also sat on the hands of it. That seems to make sense, which would

obviously be damaging for the Conservatives. But broadly, the

Tories have a problem with young voters. That last point was

absolutely right, door after door of older voters saying I'm not going to

vote. And on the young? Yes, this particular generation have forgotten

that Labour introduced tuition fees. These things change every election.

When have you done really well amongst the 18-25s? We have done

very well in Scotland in the past and now come back in Scotland, and

for example in 2015 people told me as party chairman we cannot win with

ethnic minorities and we did a lot better if not win with that group.

Labour canvassing got it wrong a lot of the time. Speaking off the record

to Labour candidates at the time, they weren't sensing Labour would do

as well as they did in terms of the share of the vote so what went

wrong? It is actually what went right. We were doing the work but

this was a short campaign. You cannot get round your entire

electorate, and in a short campaign you focus on the people who

previously have canvassed for you and the to a certain extent you are

trying to shore up the vote you think will be yours. We are out of

programme time, we literally have ten seconds. Inquiry, yes or no?

Yes. I think it is so obviously doesn't need an inquiry. Thank you

to you for being my guests today. I will be back tomorrow with more.

Goodbye. For the first time, the Science

Museum is opening its doors so you can vote for

Britain's greatest invention.