12/06/2017 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 12/06/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



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.


Download Subtitles