20/06/2017 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 20/06/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.


The Chancellor Philip Hammond says Britain is 'weary' of austerity


and promises he will pursue stronger economic growth to pay


David Davis promises he'll deliver a Brexit deal "like no other


in history" after his first formal meeting with the EU's chief


Ahead of the state opening of parliament tomorrow,


Theresa May continues to negotiate a deal with the DUP to get her plans


We'll take a look at what's likely to make the cut


It's Ed Miliband, I'm sitting in for Jeremy Vine.


And Ed Miliband moonlights as a DJ on Radio 2 -


we'll review the former leader of the Labour Party's


We are joined by a radio critic and fellow broadcaster Nigel Farage.


and with us for the whole of the programme today


the businessman and former minister in Gordon Brown's


So, this morning the Chancellor, Philip Hammond, has been


giving his assessment of the economic picture


Mr Hammond made it clear he wants to put the economy at the heart


of the Brexit negotiations but he also talked of the need


for his government to convince the public that they should trust


the Conservatives with the nation's finances ...


Stronger growth is the only sustainable way to deliver


better public services, higher real wages and


I thought we'd won that argument, but I learned in the general


But we must make anew the case for a market economy


And we need to explain again how stronger growth must be delivered


Do you agree with Philip Hammond that the Tories failed to make a


case for a rising economy, hence the support for the Labour Party.


Absolutely right, I was amazed at the appalling campaign, how they


didn't start saying, we can't be trusted with the economy, they


cannot and it's the old classic way of campaigning and they ignored it


completely. -- we can. If you don't have businesses investing in its


people and its kit we -- you will not achieve productivity


enhancement, you will not compete in the world, you will not make money


and if you don't make money you don't pay tax, if you don't pay taxi


don't have a public sector. People are fed up with austerity,


campaigning on what many people felt was league outlook for more


austerity was wrong. If that were end you have people saying I'm going


to keep this group down and make life difficult for you and on the


other hand you have Marxists with their mates in the cookie jar at


saying you can't have everything, prizes every day... But isn't that


what the Conservatives are going to do now? This is not a zero-sum game


of austerity or no austerity, you can have a well-managed economy


without giving everything away when you haven't got it, Robert, go bust,


call in the IMF. There is a happy medium, I thought Philip Hammond was


spot-on. He said we have to have growth -- growth, you said you need


tax receipts, Odrick services to a good quality standard of the


prospects for growth don't look strong. The CBI prediction thinks


the British economy will slow in the coming years, they say it's because


of political uncertainty because of the result of the election, partly


because of Brexit and they said the economy going to 1.6% in 2018 will


be rather subdued. I think they are wrong and by the way, I used to be a


trade journal of the CBI so it's not personal to them but a lot of these


forecasts turn out to be wrong. What I do think and they haven't added,


business doesn't like uncertainty, and we've got two years of


uncertainty coming down the line. I think more about Brexit, while this


is happening it's not going to be easy. But... So for the economy has


confounded all the critics, not just Brexit but in terms, two years ago


and this year, it's doing better and one thing we must do, must do, is


keep the door open with the welcome mat to international investment


coming in, running businesses here, generating welfare and paying tax,


therefore you need low taxes and you need government help to build your


infrastructure, that's how you get it done. Including things like


housing and transport but one of the problems... And education. But one


of the problems for the voting public is rising inflation, wages


remaining low because real incomes are being cut and that's a


problem... It's not a consequence. But wages haven't gone up... For


jihad is a feeling that the economy is going here and I am not going


with it, let's look an alternative but the challenge will be to hammer


down on inflation, that's for certain. You can afford wage


increases if you match with productivity, productivity comes


from better skills, better investment in kid, those two things


will lead due to having better real wage rises and it will also curb


inflation. The question for today is,


what present did Michel Barnier - the EU's Chief Brexit negotiator -


give to David Davis, at the start of the Brexit


negotiations yesterday? b) A pair of binoculars


themed hot air balloon c) A vinyl


copy of the EU anthem, Ode to Joy At the end of the show


Digby will hopefully give So right on schedule David Davis


formally opened negotiations Following a lunch with his opposite


number, Michel Barnier, the two men gave a press


conference in Brussels. They both said the talks had got off


to a constructive start... I've been encouraged by the


constructive approach that both sides have taken. We've laid a solid


foundation for future discussions with an ambitious but eminently


achievable timetable. And it's clear from the opening that both of us


want to achieve the best possible outcome and the strongest support


partnership. One that works for the UK and for the youth. Our objective


is to agree on the main principles on the key challenges for the UK's


withdrawal as soon as possible. This includes citizens rights, the single


financial settlement and the question of orders, in particular in


Ireland. This morning Michel Barnier


travelled to Luxembourg for a meeting of the EU's


General Affairs Council to brief Europe Ministers


on the start of the brexit We can talk now to our


Europe Reporter, Adam Fleming ... You are there in the sunshine.


Michel Barnier telling all the member states what he and David


Davis talked about, what happens next? Greetings from an absolute the


scorching Luxembourg, who knew it could get some hot? Michel Barnier


will meet Europe ministers from the other 27 EU countries in about an


hour's time to update them on what happened yesterday, the talks with


David Davis. The ministers will have a discussion in the margins of this


meeting about the process for relocating two of the EU agencies


that look after banking and pharmaceuticals based in London.


What will happen to them after Brexit, a big competition from other


countries to host them. On the issue of citizens rights Iwobi movement


soon on that whole thing about what happens to EU nationals living in


the UK and UK nationals living on the continent, there's going to be


an EU summit of leaders on Thursday in Brussels, Theresa May will update


her counterparts and the UK's proposals on that issue and in the


UK on Monday document will be published with much more detail


about the UK's pitch on that particular subject. Going forward


for the Brexit talks as a whole, we got the terms of reference


yesterday, there will be a week of talks every month until October.


There will be a mixture of plenary sessions which is where well said


Michel Barnier on one side of the table, David Davis on the other like


we saw yesterday in Brussels and there will be a series of smaller


negotiating groups dedicated to three main topics, citizens rights,


the issue of how much money the UK should pay to leave the EU and


thumping euphemistically called other withdrawal issues. Then the


big issue of what happens to the border between Northern Ireland and


Ireland, will be the subject of something called a continuing


dialogue which will be done by the Sherpas, David Davis and Michel


Barnier's deputies will discuss that and we heard that might take right


up until the end of the Brexit process to sort out. It will be a


long, hot and busy summer for you and the other EU countries but will


we get updates from all those meetings, will there be regular


press conferences, will we know the content of those meetings and what's


decided? That's actually very interesting, Michel Barnier's people


says he wants to do press conferences throughout this process


of the thing we saw yesterday with him and David Davis, talking about


what they had done, that's going to be a regular feature. Part of the


terms of reference yesterday, released, about transparency and the


line there is that both sides will be as transparent as default, they


are keen to get as much paperwork and facts and figures and


negotiating positions out there as possible, however there is a caveat


in the terms of reference, each side can specify that wants documents to


be held back from public consumption or to be passed around by everyone


else. I think that's a sort of note leaking clause then of course the EU


requires lots of meetings with people different countries are


updated like what's happening today. My big hope for today is that I will


be able to corners of Europe ministers on their way out of here


and they will give me some gossip about what happened yesterday. Adam,


happy hunting. Bebe Jones, the meeting was presented yesterday by


Michel Barnier as a win for them with David Davis, the Brexit


negotiator for the UK linking first in terms of the phase negotiations


to the talks. Do I care? I negotiated 20 years as a corporate


lawyer, don't go and waste ammunition on stuff that doesn't


matter, if you want to talk about divorce costs first trade


afterwards, by all means, avid, I don't care. What I really hope she


does on Thursday as I hope she makes a big announcement in public that


says if you are in EU citizen, you are in work in Britain you are not


only safe but welcome. It looks as if that might happen. I don't want


anything in return in other words, a unilateral... That change the EU and


puts them into a position that says how about you. I'm far more


interested in ensuring we stop and ensure that this is seen to be no's


interests because we mattered to them and they matter to us.


You'd think just after a general election you could look


at the winning party's manifesto and that would be a good guide


to what's going to be in the Queen's Speech.


However with no majority in the Commons, the deal


with the DUP yet to be agreed and some of Theresa May's


own backbenchers in a rebellious mood it's harder to predict.


Brexit is of course likely to be the central theme,


and I predict we'll see a Great Repeal Bill,


which will turn all EU laws currently have affecting us


which will turn all EU laws currently affecting


During the election campaign Theresa May promised legislation


to tackle terrorism, that could mean a change in human


rights laws so that tougher restrictions could be


Trailed this morning are plans for a series of transport


infrastructure bills, including allowing the extension


of the HS2 rail line as well as more charging points for electric cars.


Plans to put a cap on household energy bills could also appear,


especially as it may well be supported by Labour MPs.


We could also see a new housing bill that will free up land


for more houses to be built, and I expect proposed legislation


However now the visions become less clear, the Conservatives


did have a number of controversial proposals including dropping


the pensions triple lock and making people to fund their social


care with their homes, with a lack of support there's


a strong chance these won't make it into the speech.


Finally the Conservatives were keen


but with no overall majority, and many dissenting backbenchers,


that could disappear in a puff of smoke.


We can talk now to our deputy political


editor John Pienaar, who's in Downing Street ...


John, this agreement to deal with the DUP in order to give Theresa May


and the Conservatives a working majority, is it going to happen?


stop I think it is a matter of when, not if, both sides wanted to happen.


The Prime Minister does not talk about strength any more for obvious


reasons, she talks about stability and certainty. There are no


certainty that all left in British politics at the moment, but a deal


with the Democratic Unionists, signed and sealed, so the DUP say in


advance that they will back the Government on those make or break


votes, that would at least give Theresa May's Lovemark more


stability than otherwise. I think we will see that unveiled within the


next few days. There some uncomfortable choreography. On we


go. With the Government still living a precarious situation and Theresa


May's situation still more precarious. Could she have called


the bluff of the DUP? She did not need any formal arrangement ordeal


and as commentators have said it is unlikely that the DUP would support


Labour, so why has she bothered to spend so much time on this? I don't


think there was any real likelihood of the Democratic Unionist Party


being put in a position where they could then be Government's arms


behind their back. Hostility to Jeremy Corbyn is well and real. The


Government would not have had the DUP lined up against them in the


Queen's Speech, but to have a formal deal in the eyes of those behind me


gives you that extra bit of stability. The talks leading up to a


deal, when unveiled, will give the Government something of a heads up


of what they can and cannot do as they marched through the coming


parliamentary session. The DUP will not want them to carry on with their


plans to water down the guarantee to pensioners or change universal


rights to benefits for those getting the winter allowance just at the


moment. There are other things. We will have those clearly mapped out,


they might have suspected them. They will carry on but it does not mean


life will be secure from now on, certainly not Theresa May's, because


it is not. We know there will be a Lib Dem


leadership contest, he was standing? Said Vince Cable has thrown his hat


into the ring. Vince Cable, the great sage of the Liberal Democrat


party, joined the battle. Norman Lammers ready and waiting, Ed Davey,


a former Cabinet minister like Vince Cable and Norman Lamb. Now that Jo


Swinson has said that she is not doing it, the way is clear for Ed


Davey, I expected to say he is in. Maybe some more horses will also


join the race. Thank you, John Pienaar.


We've been joined by Labour's shadow trade secretary


Barry Gardiner, and by the former Conservative Chief


Do my prediction is that right? Not too far away. I don't know, as far


as I can see the speech will be dominated to some extent by Brexit,


the conversation you just had with Digby, the bill is necessary to


deliver us leaving the EU and some very important domestic matters. You


mention transport infrastructure, that is really important to make


sure the economy fires on all cylinders. And also issues like


updating mental health legislation to make sure that the country works


for everybody, those are really important things that will bring the


country together. Do you accept broadly, as your colleague David


Davis has said, that because of the election result your Queen's Speech


will be pruned somewhat? We need to listen, the Prime Minister was very


clear, the result is not what we would have wanted, in a democratic


country you need to listen to the election result and the Prime


Minister will reflect on our manifesto commitments and what we


should put in the Queen's Speech. We have had a big decision last year on


leaving the European Union, we have had a general election and I think


the public wants us to deal with a hand we have, the Government should


get on with governing in the national interest, that is what the


Prime Minister is doing. Barry Gardiner, will you let them go than


with the Queen's Speech that we made some suggestions? The interesting


thing about Mark referred to in how Brexit will dominate things in the


future is if you listen to what Philip Hammond said this morning,


the Mansion House speech, he has swallowed entirely the Labour


playbook. And our Labour manifesto came out loud and clear. It was fair


and managed migration, it was about a jobs first Brexit, it was about no


deal being a very, very bad deal for the UK. The nationalisation of


water, electricity and railways?! You are a wonderful commentator but


you are on the sidelines. Are we talking about Brexit? About Brexit,


absolutely. He has even said today that he would look at remaining in


the customs union. I take your point that you are saying that he has, in


your mind, taken on board some of the recommendations you made, but


she said that freedom of movement should end in terms of Brexit, you


said that in you're manifesto? We said that when you leave the


European Union you leave the internal market, meaning that all


four freedoms end. That is the same as the Government? That is just the


mechanics. That is what Labour has said, that is what the Conservatives


say. We would put in plays fair and manage... Sure... The result is the


same. On the customs union the Labour manifesto says the UK will be


the customs union and not remain in it, has that change? We said we


would focus on the outcomes and the structures are secondary. What we


want are the benefits without all the additional bureaucratic burdens


at the Borders, all the benefits of that, we said that whether that is


done in a new bilateral relationship with the European Union, a bespoke


deal, or whether it is done through some modifications... Have you


swallowed the entire Labour manifesto, as Barry Gardner puts it,


regarding Brexit? I read Philip Hammond's speech that he delivered


this morning, it is completely consistent with the Prime Minister's


Lancaster house speech. If you go through her 12 negotiations, it is


what we said. We want a special partnership with the EU, we want a


free trade deal, we want frictionless borders, that has been


the position from the beginning, particularly making sure we have a


frictionless border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern


Ireland. That is very important for both countries and the peace


process. It is one of the great virtues that that would


facilitate... There are plenty of other ways of dealing with it and we


are clear that you have to leave the single market when you leave the EU


otherwise you are bound by freedom of movement, the court and playing


in huge contributions. I think if you stayed in the single market the


public would not think you have left the EU. It is getting a good deal...


The Chancellor made the case for a new form of customs agreement with


the current border arrangement which presumably means agreeing to some


form of the EU oversight for some years following Britain's exit from


the union? The Prime Minister was clear in Lancaster Harwich speech


that she wanted to see a phased implementation Brexit, which is exec


another chance is that this morning -- in the Lancaster house speech. We


want a smooth exit, we want to make sure we get a good deal for British


business to consider being successful. Digby Jones, do you not


think there has been a change, at least in tone and in terms of trying


to reach out to the EU partners? Philip Hammond has said the economy


must be at the centre, ahead of immigration concerns? Is he right?


As I listen to these gentlemen I was thinking that the average person


watching would say this is precisely why we hate


politicians. Labour said this, Tories want this... Why don't you


think, this is in the national interest that you bury your party


differences, you had your scrap at the general election and the nation


once the deal to be done. There is so much common ground between you, I


actually don't care if Philip Hammond spoke out if your playbook.


It is irrelevant whether you are delighted. It is irrelevant whether


he did not. What is important is that the bulk of the country are


looking for you guys to show a bit of maturity and blessed tribalism.


Let slip that the arithmetic, you have to get a Queen's Speech through


-- let's look at the arithmetic. You know what this is about, if we are


looking ahead to important votes like the Great Repeal Bill, and I


will ask Barry on the Labour position on that, will you reach out


to pro-Brexit Labour MPs to come on board, not you personally, but the


Tories, in order to get through this important legislation without a


majority? Responding to Digby, in answer to your first question I said


that the whole point about Theresa May forming a Government was to go


than in the national interest, implementing the Brexit decision and


the result of the election. The interpretation of that decision has


been reopened because she did not get a decisive victory. So my


question about the party arithmetic... We put the Queen's


Speech forward. On the Great Repeal Bill, essentially taking existing EU


legislation, putting it in British legislation so that when we leave


the EU business the public know what the deal is, we will not be changing


policy, we will copy across what we have. I don't think there is a


massive difference between us and Labour. Arguing about what we change


that too is for subsequent political debate, copying across to protect


workers' rights, protect the environment, I don't think there


would be a massive difference and we would expect to get their support.


Labour will support the Government in the Queen's Speech? What we said


about the repeal Bill is that we entirely accept that on day one the


Government has repeatedly said it, on day one the rights and


protections currently existing in EU law will be transposed into UK law.


The difference is that they will be transposed into UK law and they will


not have the protection of primary UK law. Would you support it? We


will promote your reservations, but in order for these things to pass,


will Labour support it or not? There is a better way of doing it, that is


what we will put forward. We do not think it is right to have those


protections at the whim of a Secretary of State who through


secondary legislation could abolish... You will seek to amend


it? We will seek to do what they say they are doing, to take them with


the same strength as they have in Europe and the same force, because


of the umbrella of protection in Europe provides, into UK law and


ensure they are embedded their... This is a potential problem. Barry


Gardiner is part of the opposition, that is what oppositions do, they


oppose things that they say are still in the national interest. We


oppose them in the national interest because we believe... They say the


national interest, you may say they are not being responsible, but it


leaves you with a problem? It will be an interesting test for Labour


whether they meant what they said about respecting the result of the


reprimand on implementing Brexit. If every time we bring forward


legislation we are simply putting the rules in legislation and we will


be setting out why we are doing that to give business a clear steer when


we read so everyone knows the rules, if Labour opposes those sort of


things then the public will conclude they are not in favour of delivering


Brexit at all. You will be painted as an irresponsible opposition?


There are rights and protections currently existing in Europe which


we know for a fact senior government ministers have opposed. We are


talking about the clean-air act, for example. The clean air directive


which repeatedly this Government has failed to act upon in the interests


of this country. We are talking about the habitats directive which


Government ministers... The new Secretary of State for the


environment has previously gone on the record as saying that he is


against it. These are precisely the very important environmental and


social protections... Barry, you arrogantly say that people like me


sit on the sidelines. We, the business community, pay your wages.


We create the wealth that pays the tax that build schools and


hospitals. We don't sit on the sidelines, my friend. Do they not


have a right to oppose...? ALL TALK AT ONCE Barry, wait a


moment. The question was would you get the


Great Repeal Bill through so business can say we are starting? I


don't want a conversation about whether you approve of the Habitat


directive for the so-and-so directive, it was a simple question,


can business think we are on our way? If all I get is a political


answer it is not quite what we on the sidelines want to hear. The


first response is that neither Digby or I have been actually businessmen


for about 20 years. As we speak I chair six companies, I think that


qualifies me. Let's not compete, answer the question. The whole point


about what Digby says is he is very happy to see certain protections


that exist in European legislation done away with and the whole


argument that Mark is putting forward is that on day one all these


rights and protections will be the same, what we do thereafter is a


matter for them, but it is not. It is a slippery slope and without the


solid protections of being in primary legislation, all the social


protections, the Labour protections will be deregulated away, that is


the signal... Let Mark reply. Can you guarantee that these protections


will be saved? We and the Prime Minister have been very clear both


in the Lancaster house speech at the manifesto that as far as workers'


rights, environmental protection, all of that legislation is being


copied from European legislation into UK legislation so that when we


leave, all of those things... Let him finish. For future debates,


clearly we can all debate about what should employment law and


environmental law look like, but when we beat everything will be the


same so that business has the certainty to plan and continue to be


successful. I think Barry is not being straight with people when he


suggests that somehow we will change all these things.


If you are saying you are sticking broadly to the commitments that you


make, why is Theresa May still locked in talks with the DUP, it's


pretty clear they would not support the Labour Party and of labour were


going to form a government in terms of numbers come off she continuing


with the DUP, why doesn't she just called their bluff and said support


the Queen's speech. I am not involved in the discussions, I am a


backbencher but my guess is she is trying to go through, work out what


we can deliver, maximise what we can deliver from the manifesto and have


that conversation with the DUP. They broadly share our views on things


like defence and security and things like that, they've been clear about


the overall position but we want to make sure we can maximise what we


can deliver. Taking a Digby's point on the national interest. Barry, I


am going to have to leave it there, you have both had a good crack at


this, Barry, yes you have! Tomorrow will be the Queen's


64th Queen's Speech. But it might look at bit different


to normal as our Ellie For the second time since he came to


the throne, His Majesty The King... The sovereign leads Buckingham


Palace, escorted by the household cab, that's just under 120 horses,


just the same for well under a century, since 1852, before they'd


even invented the Daily Politics. The king or for the best part of the


last seven decades, the Queen arrives at Parliament in order to


deliver his or her speech, the list written by ministers of the law is


the government hopes to get approved by parliament over the coming


session. But this time things will be a little different. This year


they are scaling things back, the Queen will turn up your two


sovereigns gate in a posh car rather than her gold carriage, there won't


be a horse inside. The dress code is different too. The Queen won't be in


her ceremonial garb, it will be day dress rather than robes, that also


means she won't mean any page boys to help her with all that material.


She won for her crime either but don't worry, it was ill be there,


having arrived in its own car and placed on a table next to her. And


the peers watching will still wear their ermine, perfectly for the 34


degrees forecast for tomorrow. Last time there was a scaled back Queen's


Speech was in 1974 following Ted Heath's snap election. Buckingham


Palace, the government and parliamentary parties agreed to do


the same this year because there wasn't enough time to rehearse with


the horses hangs to trooping the colour last weekend. So the goings


on in Parliament may be less flashy than normal, a temporary studios


belonging to the broadcasters certainly are not, this year's


Queen's Speech may be less of the pomp of the circumstances mean it


will be as closely scrutinised as ever.


We've been joined by the royal historian Kate Williams.


Are you disappointed it's not going to be the full regalia? We have seen


this before, we soared in 1974 after Edward Heath called a snap election.


I'm more disappointed we are not having a Queen's Speech next year,


because the principle is it's going to be dressed down this year because


of trooping the colour, the Crown is going in a car, not on the Queen's


head, but the Palace says we will have a dressed down setup and next


year we are back to the full regalia but that's not going to happen.


Because we have to Magarira your session based on Brexit but critics


might say it is because they are worried they might get through


another Queen's Speech. We gave you the broad outline, will it be


totally different? It will be totally different, we won't see the


horse and carriage, we won't see what we expect to see the tourists


lined up to see, she will be in a car, dressed down, no page boys and


the Crown will be carried in as opposed to being actually worn. In


1974 we had the cap of maintenance and the sword and Crown weren't even


carried in, at least we get the crown even though it's not on her


head. There are other traditions that will carry on this time, an MP


is always taken hostage if you like in the Palace, explain the


background. The MP is taken hostage in the Palace, usually one of the


backbenchers and this is because the monarch is not allowed to enter


Parliament, dating back to the time of Charles and at the monarch was to


stay was to cause chaos then that MP is a hostage. They are hostage to


fortune, sitting in Buckingham Palace, watching the television over


there. Amazing that tradition continues. And the great tradition,


searching the Palace of Westminster for the gunpowder plot bombs, I


mean, the tradition that we have dates back to Edward VII, he was the


one who bought in to all the pomp and ceremony, Queen Dettori opened


Parliament, less so after Prince Albert died but the pomp and


ceremony and circumstance was brought in by Edward VII, it's quite


an old tradition. Yes, it is. One of the other things that struck me,


debate about when it was going to happen, and the date hadn't been


clarified that was an argument put forward that's because it takes a


long time for the Inc to dry on the goatskin parchment? But it's not


actually goatskin. It's not made of gold, it's a special parchment, a


vegan parchment made specially to last 500 years, I don't know how


they can guarantee that, I don't know how we can test that or take it


back if it didn't but this is a special parchment made of paper that


is called goatskin. It's supposed to last 500 years so? That's correct,


I've been where they have the rules, it lasts just as well as those ones


from the 17th century. Are you going to miss it? Not really, I am quite a


pomp and ceremony sort of person but sitting in 34 degrees of heat in


this massive cloak, I have to say, if we are going to do it for obvious


reasons, let's do it all, let's have a day when none of this happens, I


get that, although I quite like the pomp and circumstance, I quite enjoy


it. You would like some fashion, summer and winter uniform? For two


or three reasons you mention, we are dressing down, that stressed I'm


completely this time but then... Shorts and T-shirts? Trainers? Why


not? Put your shades on. It's a bit half baked, hip but not there, I


would do the whole thing for good reasons or not. Personally I would


carry on as Edward VII intended but if not, the Crown is not there, yet


it is, it's coming in a car. You can imagine some newspaper carrying some


satire about the crime's day, I got picked up in a car, I sat next to


Her Majesty. And it will be very hot. It is, you saw guards men


fainting at trooping the colour, Her Majesty is the strongest of all is


all but she's still is in her 90s. But I do think it's rather a shame,


increasingly we are seeing her handing more of her duties and this


is a key duty for her, it is vital, she is head of state and it is vital


duty but still, as we start to move towards thinking that we may begin


to see some of her final state openings because she may get the job


to Prince Charles eventually, it is rather a shame that we are seeing


rather fewer but there have been times before then they dressed down.


Queen Victoria complained in 1880 some of the ladies were not dressed


correctly and children were allowed in. God forbid, never worked with


children and animals. That's because we are getting old, Kate Williams,


thank you. Now, following the terror attack


on a mosque in London yesterday, we spoke to Miqdaad Versi


from the Muslim Council of Britain. While Mr Versi praised


the response to the attack, he was critical of anti-Muslim


sentiment which, he said, could lead to this kind


of violent Islamophobia. We've talked very much about hate


speakers being unacceptable, And now we know that the BBC


and many others will not have Anjem Choudary and others on the TV,


despite having had them in the past. What about the same


people on the right? What about the people


like Douglas Murray, who just last week came on the show


and said less Islam That kind of attitude


within even the BBC, within a show like this,


giving a platform to people like that to spread their


hate is unacceptable. Well, nobody from the Henry Jackson


Society was with us for that discussion yesterday,


but we are joined now by Tom Wilson, who is a Fellow


at the Henry Jackson Society Centre for the Response to


Radicalisation and Terrorism. Welcome to the Daily Politics, you


heard the comments made, what was your comments to what was said? I


think it's an accept the ball that people like Douglas Murray and those


of us in the Henry Jackson Society who had been focused on countering


extremism and extremist ideology, of defending liberal values and Chrissy


should be equated with extremists like Anjem Choudary. It undermines


the attire effort to undermine extremism. Except Douglas Murray


said Les Islam in general is obviously a good thing, he was


drawing parallels a few weeks ago on Sunday Politics when I interviewed


him between the number of Muslims in the country and the rate of


terrorist attacks. Is that not hate speech? No, I think as you know from


that programme he was talking about extremists and radicals, he said how


much he acts the Liberals, the moderates... He said they are in a


minority and he didn't think they would succeed and therefore he


didn't think more Islam was a good thing which in some people's minds


sounds like some set of closing process. Not at all, at the Henry


Jackson Society we've been quite clear about combating a whole range


of extremism on the far right as well as among Islamist and that's


why we support the government's prevent programme focusing on


tackling far right but the goal is Asian as well as within the Islamic


community as well. Do you accept that Douglas Murray's comments about


having less Islam is inflammatory? I don't think it was inflammatory


because I think what he was saying, if we look at this country work we


have a large Muslim community and a wide spectrum of different police,


on the far end, the most extreme ends there are problematic views and


we would want a lot less of that kind of Islam, I think that's what


Douglas has always focused his career on, seeking to combat.


Except, B Jones, let me read you the quality made in the original


interview, he said Eastern Europe doesn't have an Islamic terrorism


problem because it doesn't have much Islam. France has the worst problem


because it has the most Islam. Now he doesn't say it's all to do with


extremism, he is talking about Islam, are we ever he says going to


draw any lessons from this, apparently not? Douglas Murray, is


he right? I am not saying he intentionally or didn't


intentionally forget, what this country needs less fundamental


Islam. If he was talking about it generically I think he's completely


wrong because you can't... You don't want less or more of Judaism, less


or more Catholicism, less or more of any... Buddhism or Hindu... What it


is, I think the Islamic community house two sort itself out better to


deal with its own problem of fundamentalism and statistically, if


you have a large Muslim community, almost statistically by definition


you will have more extremism simply because there will be a percentage


of the population, of the community but it's not a function, it's a


statement of fact, if you have more of a certain type you will have more


of the extreme of that certain type but I don't think it's on to say


that a nation needs more or less of a belief. What it was need is less


of a damaging... End of it which is fundamentalism and as you say, that


could be the far right as much as it could be Islam. Do you agree? I


think what was specifically so problematic about these comments was


the equation with Anjem Choudary, who is a hate preacher, who supports


Islamic State Anderson prison, comparing somebody like that to


Douglas who tries to counter extremism is it that macro


concerning, the Muslim Council of Britain haphazard that Racal has had


its problems in the past, and they are trying to defame and silence


those who are trying to combat the problem. Do you think right-wing


extremism is dealt with equally to Islamic fundamentalism? Certainly in


the government's counter extremism strategy it is, they seek to combat


that two ideologies but the National conversation hasn't focused as much


as it could do on the far right as it needs to, particularly as we've


seen a rise in hate crimes against Muslims as well as recently with


this attack on Jo Cox, it's a serious problem. It's a problem


which critics might argue and maybe the Muslim Council of Britain would


say the government has taken its eye off the ball because of the focus


rightly on Islamic extremism and fundamentalism. You think the Henry


Jackson Society has played a role in that perhaps focusing too much on


one side of extremism and not the other? We've produced research on


countering the far right on campus and we've been supportive of the


government strategy prevent which focuses on far right referrals as


well as Islamist ones and we say it's correct to do both of those. Do


you think America -- in your mind they are treated both equally in the


pub in mind? No, I was thinking this this morning, there are many


reasons, one is more global than the other, I think it's fur to say, one


has a bigger infrastructure than the other and one is more in the public


mind because there have been more incidents of terrorism caused more


by one than the other and that's factual. The terrorism response


tends to be guided to one because statistically there is more of it


but I don't think the public mind sees it in the same way and I


thought this morning, I forget his name, the guy in Norway... And are


spearing braided. That had nothing to do... That had to do with far


right extremism and socialism, and that was evil and disgusting and had


nothing to do with Islam and he murdered 60... War, I think,


actually. But was just so utterly disgraceful and was nothing to do


with Islam. So we have got to understand there is this and the


more you have won the more you have the other and I think our society


needs to understand that more and I think France probably has the same


problem, for all the obvious political reasons. I keep very much


for coming in from the Henry Jackson Society. We are getting the ports


that the deal, the agreement with the DUP, this would be ahead of the


Queen's Speech tomorrow is beginning to take for Maurice almost agreed


and will bring you confirmation of that as and when it happens.


Ed Miliband's career took a surprising turn yesterday -


the former Labour leader made his debut as a radio


presenter, standing in for Jeremy Vine on Radio 2.


Next week the former Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith will take


Let's hear how Ed Miliband got on yesterday afternoon.


It's Ed Miliband, I'm sitting in for Jeremy Vine.


A year after the referendum, today is the day Brexit


Are you someone who is optimistic about the outcome and says people


We've got some comments from our listeners.


Liam e-mails with a particularly personal one for me.


I met you in the Mallard in Cusworth..."


- I can recommend it - "..the other week while you


I'm a Labour voter but voted Leave on the back of all


Alistair from Isla Island in Scotland joins,


I think that's just Isla, actually, in Scotland.


Mr Vine's made the odd mistake as well, so don't worry.


Because this is so important, Ed, that my mum is not


a prejudiced person, and that's why I find Brexit


and talking to my mum about Brexit so difficult.


Andy, we are incredibly grateful to you both


for sharing your story and your emotion.


And we've been joined by the Telegraph's radio


critic Gillian Reynolds, and the presenter of


The Nigel Farage Show on LBC - he may also be familiar to some


of you from his former career in politics...


Or maybe not so former, but we will ask that later! Is somebody


experienced as a radio presenter, how did he get on? Not bad.


Politicians should be good at this in one way because we are used to


dealing with arguments, we are used to one side of an argument, a


counterargument, whenever you do an interview with devious like you you


think, what will be that argument be? The problem a lot of politicians


have is that they are so scripted. They stand up, read from an autocue,


it is all a bit... Politics these days is a bit wooden. To make the


transition from being a party leader to present you have to lose that and


listen up. You did not think he was natural


enough? It was his birthday. I will not be unkind... You can be, there


are no rules. Let judge him on Friday. I have been doing it for six


months, I am very inexperienced, but I feel I give it best when I am very


laid back and relaxed and it is almost like you are chatting to a


friend at home. Radio presenting has to be conversational? They are very


different shows, Mr Farage's shows are the one-man band, constantly


talking, the Jeremy Vine show is very structured and largely run by


the editor, he will be on his years saying go to the music, or whatever,


he has to play records, take the calls, run to time. It is very


tightly structured with a very experienced editor, it is quite


different. What did you think? He was not bad at all, I think he


exceeded expectations. He was better than I thought he would be in terms


of the sounds of it. He ran a tremendous risk, because like yours,


Mr Farage, he has a voice that impressionists love! Is that a bad


thing? Is it the real thing?! You did not think it was him? I think


introducing records is quite hard, having done it myself along with the


current affairs programme. I was hopeless at doing the music. Of


course there are the records, when you are a BBC presenter you are not


allowed to have an opinion. Now, what I do with LBC, I am allowed an


opinion. And off, rules I can say pretty much what I want but I had to


invite the other side of it. -- under off rules. It makes a big


difference if you are free to speak your mind, especially with the type


of show you are doing. I do not think I would last very long on the


BBC. I am not sure you will ever find out! Is it a good idea for


former and current politicians to do this? Ed Miliband is yesterday,


politically, so he has the freedom... And Iain Duncan Smith is


tomorrow?! You ought to be a politician! Nigel, your politics


career is over so it gives you bigger freedom. I am not sure


Edwards taking a risk because he is yesterday... He has nothing to use.


-- nothing to lose. But Nigel, you made a good point that politics


these days, it is so scripted, you must do this and bad. That is why


Macron, Trump, Farage, Corbyn appeal. You and Corbyn could not be


further apart but you appeal to the public because you are not the


traditional scripted politician. Ed Miliband was. Are the listeners


being well served by Nigel and Ed? Yes, I think so, except Nigel, I am


sure he will not mind me saying, is a bit of a one trick pony here


because he has one issue and he goes on and on about it. Everyone tells


me I have the best job in the world and then I point out to them but I


have to listen to you at least once a week. And then they quail. Because


when people bring up and say you were wrong about this and that you


say that was very interesting, next call. Are you cutting people off who


do not agree with you?! There are other presenters on that show who


demean people who have an alternative opinion. The only time I


would cut somebody off... You are mercilessly polite. I am. What about


this former political career, is it definitely former? Lord Jones has


written me off, that is the end of it! Don't get out of it that way,


would you stand for leader? Will you get back into politics? I am leading


a group in the European Parliament, I am still in politics. That is


where the re-negotiations of the British Steel will take place. I am


in a very good position to oversee it. Will you stand for Ukip leader


again? I have not decided. It is not ruled out. There is a fabulous wine


cellar at brussels, we should make a part of the renegotiation, you said?


Could you advise? One final piece of advice, the British public who voted


Ukip actually voted away to make sure this deal was done, and I think


you have a moral as well as possibly representational obligation to those


who voted Ukip to ensure that we come out holding the feet to the


fire, you would be very good. Far fewer people voted for Ukip... I was


trying to take it away from party politics. You are seen as Brexit.


Which is why I will see this thing through 42-macro years in the


European Parliament. As far as Ukip is concerned, I am still thinking.


Tellers when you have made up mind, thank you both.


So, in the run up to this month's general election the opinion polls


were divided on what would be the likely outcome, but most


were predicting an outright win for the Conservatives and suggesting


a significant Parliamentary majority for Theresa May.


That, as we now know, wasn't correct.


The polling company Ipsos MORI has been looking at how different groups


of voters actually voted when faced with a ballot box.


While Labour targeted young people in this campaign,


the stark contrast between young and old was the biggest


since the 1970s, with the swing to Labour coming from those under


the age of 44, whereas the swing to the Conservatives


Perhaps less expected was the class divisions,


with more middle class voters favouring Labour and working


class voters moving towards the Conservatives.


Theresa May's party also had a large lead amongst those with no


education qualifications, while graduates favoured Labour.


But Labour took the lead amongst those who voted Remain in last


year's Brexit referendum, with a majority of Leave voters


From the other parties, the Lib Dems vote share remained steady,


although only half of their voters had also backed them


in 2015, compared to Labour and the Conservatives who held


on to nine out of ten of their voters from the last election.


And we've been joined by Gideon Skinner from Ipsos MORI.


You still predicted a win for the Conservatives. Did you get your


calculations wrong on the number of young people who turned out to vote?


We think that was one of the things that made this underestimate Labour,


we got most of the other parties pretty much correct but we


underestimated Labour is one of the things we think we may have made a


mistake is that we adjusted for turnout, in previous elections we


had always seen young people were much less likely to turn out, but


latest data suggests they did and that was an increase. It was not


just the 18 to 24, it was the under 35s? Yes, the eye-catching rise is


among 18 to 24, Labour always does better among the very youngest.


There was a swing to Labour among the 25 to 34 age group and the 34 to


44. I mentioned the class divide, did that stick out? Certainly. We


have produced these estimates since 1979 and have never seen Labour get


as high a score among middle classes as in 2017, never seen the


Conservatives get as high score amongst the working classes as we


have seen these estimates. Both parties increased their bowled


share, it was not just one side or the other, but they did well among


the class they are perhaps traditionally not associated with.


It was interpreted by some as a protest election and revenge of the


Remainers, did you see it like that? There is a difference by Remain and


Leave vote, Remain war more likely to vote Labour and Leave


Conservative. And graduates more -- were more likely to vote Labour and


people without qualification is more likely to vote Conservative.


Although Brexit was one of the most important issues it was not the only


one, we saw concerns about NHS rise to one of the highest we have seen,


concern about education being the third most important, it was not


just Brexit. What about a shift in voter


alignment? There was a move, middle-class voters going to Labour,


working-class in some parts of the country to the Conservatives. Has


that been a permanent shift, do you think? Has there been a realignment


in support? There has been a long-term pattern of class being


less of a predictable and in the 70s or 80s, that has changed over the


years. Tony Blair did very well among the middle classes. It is not


new but it seems to accelerate and when you say middle class and


working class they are -- there are very different groups, the


metropolitan elites and the older Conservative groups. Doesn't that


make it more difficult to predict? You can't say middle class and


working class, it is rural, metropolitan and all sorts of other


factors? One of the big problems unions have had in the private


sector is that lots of the battles have been won and the idea of the


TUC, Labour, it is not what it was because you get so much more


aspirational behaviour. I have welcomed and relished the day that I


can look at you, I was asked so many times in various things that I do,


call it. I said I do not go with a landslide but I will go with 58. And


that is because people like you said it would be a 20 or 22% lead. If you


said it was 5% or 6% I would not have done that. Why did you get it


so badly wrong? I am afraid we will have to leave it, saved by the Bell.


There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.


The question was what present did Michel Barnier -


the EU's Chief Brexit negotiator - give to David Davis


at the start of the Brexit negotiations yesterday?


A, a ride in an EU-themed hot air balloon?


C, a vinyl copy of the EU anthem, Ode to Joy?


It is B or deed, I will go with the wooden hiking stick. You would be


right, well done. Maybe he was trying to say take a hide in the


most polite way! Thanks to all our guests,


especially Digby Jones. The one o'clock news is starting


over on BBC One now. We won't be here tomorrow as it's


the State Opening of Parliament - you can watch all the coverage live


on BBC One from 10:30am. MUSIC: Power


by Kanye West


Download Subtitles