22/06/2017 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 22/06/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Afternoon, folks. Welcome to the Daily Politics.


Theresa May has told MPs that tests on tower blocks have found that more


buildings are covered with combustible cladding,


thought to be a factor in the blaze at Grenfell Tower in London.


The Queen's Speech was dominated by new laws to open the way


for Brexit, but will they survive months or even years


of parliamentary warfare in the Commons and the Lords?


The Liberal Democrats have a few more MPs but they are still


Is Vince Cable the man to help them win?


And as thousands get ready to head to Glastonbury this weekend, they'll


need to watch out for sunburn, rain and the risk of bumping


We'll bring you our political guide to festival season.


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


of the programme today, two peers who've put their ermine


back into the cupboard until the next Queen's Speech,


which could be in a couple of weeks, at the rate we're going!


It's Labour's leader in the Lords Angela Smith


and the former Conservative cabinet minister Michael Forsyth.


First let's turn to last week's tragedy at Grenfell Tower in London.


This morning the chief executive of the local authority,


Kensington and Chelsea Council has resigned, he said at the insistence


of the Local Government Secretary Sajid Javid.


Also this morning, the Prime Minister Theresa May has


been telling MPs what the government knows about the causes of the fire,


and said tests on other high-rise flats have discovered some


are covered in "combustible" cladding.


The government has arranged to test cladding in all


Mr Speaker, shortly before I came to the chamber,


I was informed that a number of these tests have come


The relevant local authorities and local Fire Services have been


informed and as I speak, they are taking all possible steps


to ensure buildings are safe and to inform affected residents.


Immediately after this statement, the Department for Communities


and Local Government will contact any MPs whose constituents


So a significant announcement from the Prime Minister,


and No 10 has since confirmed that three samples of cladding from tower


blocks in England alone have been found to be combustible.


We're expecting to hear more from the Local Government Secretary


later today, but now let's go to our correspondent Jim Reed.


What have we learned? As you say, we are expecting a kind of common


statement by Sajid Javid. -- some kind of Commons statement. He might


give us an idea about the number of flats in apartment in bold. In the


last quarter of an hour, the Guardian newspaper has reported it


could be up to 600 blocks across the country which could have this


cladding attached which is linked to the blaze at Grenfell Tower.


Yesterday evening, we heard from people, from residents of an estate


in North London, Tolson, that they were concerned about the cladding on


their block and we went down there, they were receiving e-mails from the


local housing association saying they thought it almost certainly was


the same kind of cladding as was an Grenfell Tower and the interesting


thing from where we went, and we have pictures to show you, I think,


is that this was a new block under new estate, built two or three years


ago, and the central block is 22 stories high. There are real


questions, if new build blocks are using this material which over the


weekend, the government said was banned, there are real questions


about the regulations involved. If professional multinational companies


have been using this apparently with building regulation guidance when


they should not have been. Do we have any indication what the


government intends to do about this, if we now know... I must say, it


does not really come as a surprise, why would Grenfell Tower be a one


off? We now know there are multiple tower blocks across England and the


government is only talking about England at the moment, Wales,


Scotland and Northern Ireland are separate. Now we know this, do we


have any idea what the government intends to do about it? It was


unclear from Theresa May's statement today, whether the government still


think this material breached building regulations. That could be


really important when we go forward into a potential public enquiry and


looking at criminality. Over the weekend, the Chancellor said they


thought this stuff was banned and over the weekend, people in the


firing history have been split down the middle on this, half of them


saying it was clearly bad and they should not have been using it and


the other half saying it is more nuanced. There are real questions


now and still questions for Theresa May about the material and the


building regulations that might have allowed it to be used because we


know for sure it was banned above a certain height in other countries,


in the US and certainly in Germany. So is it banned here or not? That is


one question Theresa May did not answer in the House of Commons


today. People will wonder at such a simple matter is this, in a sense,


that it is a matter that regulations have not covered, that politicians


at the local and national level have not covered. You don't need to be an


expert to know that you don't surround the building with


combustible material. Clearly but one thing we need to be careful


here, because people watching this will be rightly concerned about what


is on the outside of their building, the one we went to in Tottenham last


night is a very different building from Grenfell Tower, very modern, so


it has all the safety and security features like sprinklers, safe


rooms, Fireman's lift, that kind of thing, and people there won't things


that could make everything OK so if it should not be on the outside, it


should not be there but there's a big difference between some of the


new build blocks with their built in safety features and somewhere like


Grenfell Tower, where the cladding has been attached to an older style


building. We will leave it there. Clearly a long way to go but thank


you for bringing us up to date. We are waiting for further


announcements. Michael Forsyth, Theresa May said


the response to the appalling fire at Grenfell Tower was a failure of


the state, both at local and national level. Do you agree?


I do and I'm surprised the chief Executive has taken so long to


resign because the council clearly failed. Whether or not they failed


in terms of building regulations, anyone who saw that I could see the


effect of the cladding and the way the fire drifted up the building at


a very fast pace. The important thing now I think is to focus on


what buildings are affected, and to provide the means and resources to


local authorities to put it right because this news will have families


all over the country being worried about their safety and the first


duty of a government is to protect the safety of its people. If it was


a failure at the local level, the chief executive of the local council


has now resigned. That may not be enough for many people but it is a


start. But the Prime Minister said it was also a failure at the


national level so who should resign at the national level? You know,


when an aeroplane crashes, we don't actually seek to a tribute blame.


What we seek to do is try to find out what happened and if you get in


the blame game, it makes it much more difficult. Your government has


just forced the head of Kensington Council to resign. I'm not sure if


it was the government or not. He said it was Sajid Javid who said he


had to resign. I don't think he should need Sajid Javid to tell him


he had to resign because the way they handled the affairs after the


fire was thoroughly inadequate. I understand that but that is the


local level but if it is also acknowledged there was a failure at


the national level, you should be held accountable there? I don't know


and that is why we need a public inquiry, like we did after Piper


Alpha, which is a comparable disaster, where people look at what


went wrong and where we have recommendations which can be


implemented throughout the country. But in the short term, we have to


reassure people about their safety and this news is going to add to the


anxiety which people in blocks across the country will feel. Is


this not a failure of the whole political class? At the national and


local level, that we have allowed buildings like this, we now learn a


good number, to have been clouded in combustible material? Yeah, I think


it's outrageous and anyone hearing that, they could be 600 buildings


across the country? As I heard that figure, I took a sharp intake of


breath, I was shocked by it and not only do you have to reassure people


that they are safe, you can only do it if you undertake the work


necessary and do the work to make them safe but your question about


accountability I think is the key one in this. Michael is right, you


have to find out what went wrong, it is not about blame but at the end of


the day, there is an issue about responsibility and accountability


and the chief executive resigned. Who was in charge of the building?


The council outsourced it to a private company, who were not taking


on board the concerns of residents. That was the policy of the Tony


Blair Labour government. Actually, it predated it and Michael was one


of the pioneers of this but that does not avoid accountability.


Someone has to take responsibility. Know, the 1999 Environment Report by


select committee says we do not believe it should take a serious


fire in which many are killed before all reasonable steps are taken


towards minimising the risks. That was 1999. We then had what, 11 years


of Labour government and then another seven years of Conservative


government but actually, it did take a serious fire before we started to


find out what is going on. Andrew, things have changed a number of


times since then. I think the key thing here is and I would be


interested to know was worthy building with Galicians adhered to


and wanting the Prime Minister could not answer today and I could not


understand why, was this building, and anyone that was referred to, was


it built within the regulations or is it outside the regulations and


someone did not check properly? That is the key answer, is this legal or


illegal and if the Prime Minister can't answer that question, I don't


know who can. The public inquiry... People will be positive that it


could be legal to surround the building... Absolutely. If Grenfell


Tower had been left in its rather ugly state, it was very much a 1970s


concrete tower block, it would have looked ugly but it would not have


gone up in flames the way did, it was surrounding it with this stuff


which turned it into a fire that spread so quickly. If other


buildings are surrounded like this, what should be done? They should be,


the cladding may very well need to be replaced and the local


authorities may need to have help from central government to do that.


I think we should focus on what needs to be done. That is the first


point. Yes, and as to who was responsible or the regulations, that


is a matter for the public inquiry but the immediate thing should be to


put right the risks that are affected by those people. But also,


if the law is inadequate, it needs to be changed pronto, now. We don't


know that yet. If people are living in buildings that run the risk of


what happened at Grenfell Tower, we don't know for sure because we are


still trying to get all the details but if it seems that more of this


combustible material has been used in tower blocks up and down the


land, what should be done? It has got to be removed, there is no


alternative. Should people be moved out of the buildings until it is


removed? That may well be the option but we have to find out if it is


that material or not first. My understanding is there are panels


that look similar, some combustible and some aren't and the checking


process has to come first. Surely this would be logged in every town


Hall, surely planning permission, building regulations, the files must


exist in the town hall? You shouldn't have to go to the towers


to see them. All of this must be on record. I'm sure every local


authority will be doing that now and what we have to avoid is it becoming


a sort of party political issue. Everyone wants to see this put right


and the people who've been affected by this terrible fire... They cannot


wait on the inquiry, they need to move now, lives are at risk. Indeed.


As if the police did not have enough on their hands, there was this


attempted day of rage Westminster yesterday. Seemingly encouraged by


the Shadow Chancellor. He says the government "Has forfeited the right


to govern". Do you agree? On a number of things, I agree with that


but not connected with this. I think it is an inadequate government and a


weakened government. Has it forfeited the right to govern? As


time goes on, the House of Commons will make that decision. I know why


people are angry. John McDonnell has made the decision already, says it


has forfeited the right to govern, do you agree? I think this


government is an incompetent government and I want to see it


replaced as soon as possible. As it forfeited the right to govern, one


more time? Saying no implies that somehow I think they've got a right


to government, I think it is inadequate and incompetent and that


is as much as I could say. You would not repeat what the Shadow


Chancellor say? He can speak for himself, he does not lead me to do


it for him. Indeed, we do and they will be even more angry when they


find out that there are many more buildings in a similar situation to


the one in Notting Hill. But do you think these days of rage really


help, given that even some of the residents, some of the victims asked


the demonstrators not to proceed? Is this a rather unseemly underbelly of


Corbyn is, the demonstrations? It's not about that, we had


demonstrations and marches forever but they don't change much at the


end of the day. John McDonnell thinks they do. Makabu the challenge


for politicians of all parties and political classes to show you can


effect change by political decisions and that is what the politicians


have to prove and step up to the plate. On Grenfell Tower Brexit and


all these issues, otherwise people take the law into their own hands


and that is the last thing we want to see. Do we know yet, are we sure


that Theresa May has a grip of this? I think she has. What is the sign?


SHE announced in inquiry, it was in the Queen's speech, she has


intervened and taken immediate action and I don't think it helps


for people to trash the Prime Minister when she needs to focus on


getting things put right. At the time of national emergency, it is


not trashing the prime ministers to ask if she's got a grip, that is the


minimum we expect of a Prime Minister in these circumstances. --


if the Prime Minister's to ask if she has got a grip. What is the


evidence? She has set up the enquiry, said that she will bring


forward legislation as an advocate for people who are affected by


tragedies of this kind. She has indicated... But it is the case,


Michael, if you are a resident or a local person here, your abiding


thought on this is everyone has been too slow to respond. For the Prime


Minister to show she has got a grip, she has to write much more quickly


because of the stories from residents of the aftermath of the


are disgraceful. These are people who have lost their lives, lost


friends and family. But we have a system of local government in this


country. And it failed them. There has to be a significantly better


response in the future. Let's leave that because there is more


information to come and we will return to it.


The question for today is about Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson,


still regularly tipped as a future Tory leader.


His reputation hasn't exactly been enhanced by a BBC radio


interview he gave yesterday, when he struggled to answer


It led the interviewer to compare their conversation


to a well-known comic double act - but which one was it?


At the end of the show, our very own comic double act,


Angela and Michael, will give us the correct answer.


The Prime Minister has just arrived in Brussels


thoughts on the issue of rights for EU migrants in the UK


and British citizens living in Europe.


To find out more, let's speak to the BBC's new, fresh-faced


Welcome, nice to see you. Tell me, what is Mrs May hoping to achieve


and what is going to happen today? The summit when it starts in about


two macros will be business as usual for the EU, discussing things like


internal and external security, and having a working dinner to talk


about international affairs and Donald Trump climate change. At the


end, Theresa May will say a couple of words to update her fellow EU


leaders in what is the impact of the decisive general election in the UK


in the Brexit process. She is also expected to say some words about her


so-called generous offer about the rates for EU citizens living in the


UK after Brexit. Still shrouded in mystery about that. Then Mrs May


will be politely asked to leave the room and the remaining leaders will


get an update on the first stage of negotiations for the chief


negotiator in the EU side Michel Barnier and do their own Brexit


business, deciding on the criteria for relocating two EU agencies based


in London which have to move after Brexit. I understand they are


arguing about where they should go so they are not entirely united. Is


she not going to be entirely overshadowed, polite as they may


well be, by the presence of the new President of France, President


Emmanuel Macron? Yes, that is the arrival everybody's will waiting


for, the freshfaced boy wonder Emmanuel Macron, the new President


of France. And when you talk to the people around this city, who are


usually quite cynical, you mention the name Macron and a smile crosses


their lips and they talked openly about him being the new hope for


Europe and the proof people can still be rallied to the European


project. His big pitch before he came here was a new process by which


the EU could ban certain foreign investments and sensitive economic


areas in the EU. It looks like that will be downgraded and will remain


in the hands of the member states and the EU will not have new powers.


Theresa May has already been pushed to the side in the sense that EU


officials and leaders do not want Brexit to contaminate the


proceedings at the summit today and tomorrow, they want to talk about


these big issues like climate change, security and the economy,


which is why the Brexit section has been left until after dinner, quite


late tonight. I understand from one diplomatic source, the Brexit


discussion might last less than half an hour. So you will have a


late-night, Adam! It, thank you. Adam Fleming in Brussels.


Yesterday, the Queen came to Parliament to set out the 27


Bills the government intends to pass in what the Prime Minister


hopes will be a two-year session of Parliament.


In other words, there will be no cladding next year. -- no Queen's


Speech. But all the signs are it's


going to be one of the most turbulent parliaments


in generations, as the Conservatives try to get their legislation


through without a Commons majority. Of course, it's not the first time


we've had a minority government. # We are amazed, but not


amused by all the things Some might say this was a dark time,


with power cuts, the three-day week, industrial unrest and two elections


within eight months. The first was in February,


and after a close result, a minority Labour government took


office under Harold Wilson. But after a difficult few months,


with Parliamentary defeats and dissent from his own


backbenchers, Mr Wilson decided As you know, Her Majesty the Queen


has agreed to my request that Parliament should be dissolved


on Friday, and the general election will be held


on Thursday, 10th October. He was rewarded with a majority


of just three seats. But within two years,


there was a return to minority government, because of a by-election


defeat and defections. Harold Wilson resigned


and Jim Callaghan took over He was forced to make


a series of unofficial deals with minority parties


like the Ulster There was also the Lib-Lab pact


in 1977, an agreement where Liberals supported the government in return


for policy consultation. But this was short-lived, as a year


later, the Liberals called it a day. As the parliamentary


arithmetic got tighter, the whips brought in sick


and injured MPs for crucial votes. But despite their efforts,


when the Conservative leader Margaret Thatcher tabled a motion


of no-confidence against a backdrop of the Winter of Discontent


the government lost by one vote, ushering in 18 years


of Conservative rule. So minority governments from the


past. Brexit dominated the Queen's Speech,


with eight bills relating Let's look in a bit more detail


at what the Government is proposing and the challenges Mrs May might


face in getting her The main piece of Brexit


legislation is the Repeal Bill, which gets rid of the 1972


European Communities Act and gives MPs the ability to convert or amend


all EU law into UK law. The government says


the Immigration Bill will enable the Government to end the free


movement of EU nationals into the UK, but still allows


the country to attract "the brightest and the best"


people to work here. There are also bills relating


to Customs and Trade, which allows the UK to have a stand-alone customs


regime and flexibility to accommodate future trade


agreements with the EU and others MPs vote next week


on the Queen's Speech, but without a majority,


the Conservatives are relying on a deal with Northern Ireland's


Democratic Unionist Party - but no deal is currently in place,


despite the election Once clear of the Commons,


the legislation will also have to navigate the House of Lords,


where the Tories also Peers have suggested that


because Theresa May does not have a majority in the Commons,


they would not have to respect the 'Salisbury Convention',


where Lords do not oppose legislation that is in


a government's manifesto. Labour's Baroness Smith has said


the unelected chamber would respect We will find out what that means in


a minute. And finally, the SNP could also


cause the Government problems. Theresa May has suggested


that the Scottish Parliament might need to approve parts of the Brexit


legislation, with the SNP saying they want control over farming


and fisheries policy. So those are some of the hurdles


facing the Government. No doubt there will be more down the


We'll come to the Lords in a moment, but first, let's talk


We're joined now by Labour's John Mann, who campaigned for Brexit.


Welcome to the programme. You were a prominent Labour Leave support. What


you say to your party colleagues in the Lords who might be thinking of


frustrating Brexit? We stood in a very clear election manifesto on the


major issues and so that mandate is there and anyone who fears from it


in the Lords, there will be a sub theme that will emerge, which will


be Lords reform. I would expect at some stage the Commons will want to


debate and deliberate and do something in that. So I would not


be, if I was in the House of Lords, wanting to try and overturn the


Labour manifesto. Obviously, the Conservative manifesto. And the


referendum that took place. So let me spell this out, if the Lords do


not behave, in your terms, you would threaten them with abolition? I


would get rid of them anyway. Would you get a majority in today's


Commons? Is the Government strong enough to do that? I think the


likelihood of Lords reform is very high, if this Parliament lasts long


enough for legislation to start taking place. Just one of the little


sideshows. And the idea that unelected Lords could overturn


decisions of the Commons that were in line with a Labour manifesto and


the referendum, that the majority of the country voted on, would be


anathema to most people, so it is going to need some finesse and skill


in the Lords for them to play their role appropriately and effectively.


And if they do, they will certainly have considerable influence, but if


they overstepped the mark, I think that will come back very quickly in


what authority they are overturning. What you say to that? I have been


the Lords leader of the Labour Party for years and have lost count of how


many times people say, if the Lords wreck this, we will abolish them. It


is a misunderstanding of how the House of Lords operates. How are you


going to operate in the Brexit bills? In the way that we always


have and will do. The Salisbury Convention that you mentioned and


Michael may agree, betrays a real misunderstanding. 1945, the Labour


government, massive majority. It is important! You do not understand it.


I do understand it, I know very well about the Salisbury Convention and


it came in with the 1945 Labour government and the Lords do not


challenge that Labour government. I am not trying to find out what


happened in 1945. It is relevant! I know that, I want to know what you


will do when these Brexit bills come to the Lords. You fight it up so I


thought you would want to raise the issue. I think this thing about the


Salisbury Convention and what happens is as if the fight is


between the House of Lords and the Executive. The Government have the


challenge not just through Brexit but through the House of Commons...


But you are not in charge of the Commons, you are in charge of Labour


in the Lords. I am asking you because you will not answer the


question! Let me ask for a third time. I am trying really hard to


answer your question! Will you answer the primacy of the Commons on


this legislation will you attempt to amend it? I have made it very clear


we observe the premises of the Commons, but if the Prime Minister


does not get exactly what she wants out of the House of Commons, the


Government cannot try and use the House of Lords or abuse the House of


Lords to do what the Government wants, we have to look at the


primacy of the Commons and not the Executive. But whatever comes to


Lords will have been passed by the Commons, either primacy of the


Commons. Yes. So shall you are obliged to observe that? All


legislation comes from the Commons, we look at the detail of that and do


things in the normal way we always have done which has never caused any


excitement. Where John and others have got this totally wrong is the


issue about what the Government can do in the House of Commons, and I


think the biggest challenge for this Government stop Gregory Havret Prime


Minister that could not put half a manifesto in the Queen's Speech. --


for this Government. And we have a Prime Minister. You reassured by


this? I understand what goes on in the Commons, a sit in the Commons


and I am very clear what the manifesto is regarding immigration


in the EU which hardly received any commentary on the election. A


position I am far more comfortable with is immigration from Jeremy


Corbyn's manifesto than we had from Gordon Brown, Tony Blair and Ed


Miliband. And from what the Labour position is. The issue that emerges


is if we have freelancing Lords who are in essence break the Labour whip


by going against the Labour manifesto. Along with a grossly


overrepresented number of Liberals. You said every time somebody does


something the House of Lords you do not agree with, abolish the House of


Lords, that is not grown-up politics. It is a revising chamber,


it looks up legislation and make suggestions to the House of Commons,


but it is always the House of Commons that has the final say and


nobody I know in the House of Lords is challenging that.


That's not what I said, I said in the context of having so many people


in the House of Lords who are out of touch with the majority of the


British population of the EU referendum, there is a likelihood I


think at some stage that House of Lords reform will emerge, if this


parliament last long enough for that kind of legislation. Hold on, John


Mann, we are going to let you go now because you kindly came in at the


last minute and we are grateful for you for coming in and giving your


point of view, John Mann, Labour MP, Michael Coulson, it is a


well-established convention at the House of Lords does not challenge


the manifesto policies of a government with a majority. Does


that apply to a hung parliament where it does not have a majority?


You're not going to like my answer because I think your question is


irrelevant. What Angela is saying is right, the House of Lords will look


at the legislation from the House of Commons and often, that legislation


has not even be properly scrutinised in the House of Commons, and they


will discuss it and they may suggested amendments but the idea


that House of Lords is going to obstruct a bill which gives us the


ability to operate an immigration policy, for example, when we are


committed to leaving the European Union by March 2019, we need to have


these policies in place. I've no doubt people will suggest amendments


but at the end of the day, the Commons will have the final say.


That is what Angela said yesterday. Nobody reported the debate yesterday


from the Lords but it was a very civilised discussion and the lords


are not going to obstruct things but they are going to help make sure we


get things right which is what the Prime Minister urged us to do. So


let me make clear, Labour's policy in the Lords, it may wish to amend,


improve as it sees the bill in its way but it will do nothing to


obstruct the Brexit process? We have said that, you did this interview


with me about a year ago and I gave you the same answer. I've been very


clear. I can point out that a few things have happened in the past


year, in fact, a few things have happened in the past month so it is


relevant again. We have always been clear, it's not for the House of


Lords to block Brexit and we've never tried to. We've made sensible


suggestions to the government like on the position of EU nationals


which would help our nationals abroad and the government has


refused to accept that. I think that House of Lords got it right and


maybe the Prime Minister is wishing she took our advice. But the final


decision is with the House of Commons. We have taken the decision.


What about the membership of the single market? Will Labour peers


attempt to block after leaving membership of the single market? I


think the possession of Labour peers is going to be that we would like to


have terms and conditions to the single market as close as what we


have got now while negotiations are going on. That is government and


Labour policy in the Commons. No, because Theresa May said you wanted


to come out of the single market completely. We think it is a good


starting point... Let's get to that, the policy of the Labour manifesto


and the Conservative manifesto was to end membership of the single


market, still to attempt to have as good a free trade deal as they can


get but no longer do have membership. Is that a policy that


will be upheld in the Lords? I don't see that changing in the Lords but


that does not mean we think the single market is a bad thing and I


think we would like to get as close to the terms and conditions, as


Michael Heseltine and David Davis have said, get as close to that as


possible. Being a member of the EU means you are not a member of the


single market, that is a matter of fact, but we don't want to throw the


baby out with the bath water. There's nothing unclear about it.


Let me be clear, do you support us leaving membership of the single


market? It is a matter of fact that when we leave the EU, you have left


the single market. What I think about it is irrelevant. Norway is a


member of the single market but not a member of the EU. But it is a


membership -- member of the EEA which gives it membership of the


single market, which may be a transitional thing but membership of


the single market will go when we leave the EU but we want to try to


retain the benefits of the single market in terms of tariff free


trade, for example, which is really important to British industry.


Throwing the baby out with the bath water leaving the EU is not


responsible. What about leaving the EU? That is something changing


across the EU and one of the interesting thing about immigration


is so many businesses and universities are now saying we want


a sensible immigration policy. So a continuance of free movement? There


must be some forms of free movement, not the same as it is now because we


are leaving the EU but the position of the government of an immigration


cap has not worked. It sounds like you are up for a lot of amendments


that would quite substantially change what the government is trying


to do. I think we will see the amendment in the House of Commons on


this, actually. The point I was trying to make earlier, that you did


not want to listen to, the point is, the amendments will happen in the


Commons and we will have to examine what the Commons sends us, not the


government's initial intentions. I know that but then you get a chance


to amend in ways that you see fit to do. What I have been trying to


establish if you are going to make substantive changes to the Brexit


legislation, so it fundamentally changes the nature and the form and


the manner in which we are leaving? You seem to be under its average and


that the House of Lords changes legislation, if we make changes, we


suggest it to the government and they go back to the Commons, which


is the point I keep making, the House of Commons has primacy here so


we may well suggest a number of amendments to the House of Commons


but it will be for them to accept or reject. But going forward, you could


delay the timetable? This is another question you put to me before and I


will answer in the same way again, you don't have extended ping-pong,


we might ask the Commons to think again and if they choose not to, we


might occasionally asked them to think a second time but I can't


because any occasion in the House of Lords when it has gone beyond that


while I have been there. Why are you so confident the government's Brexit


legislation will be largely unscathed in the Lords? Because we


are legally committed to leaving the EU in March 2019, we need to put in


place policies on immigration, fishing and a range of other things


and the detail is important and the Commons will look at it and the


Lords is full of people who have got considerable expertise as it is


right they should be involved in the way the Prime Minister has


suggested. But I am pretty confident that the House of Lords is not going


to be used to obstruct the process and Angela in has beat yesterday


made that very clear and there is no appetite in the House of Lords... Is


he right to be confident? He is but I keep coming back to the point the


House of Lords has never obstructed government legislation, we make


suggestions but if the Prime Minister is going to be concerned, I


would be concerned about the Commons. She might not have the


majority for some of the things herself. She's not got a majority in


her own party for some other things she has suggested, it is not just


Brexit, it is other bills as well which is why the detail will be


important, the House of Lords has expertise... The Labour manifesto


campaigned on ending membership of the single market and the Labour


manifesto recognised that free movement would have to end so isn't


there a majority in the Commons, with Labour and Conservative, for


these things? In the Labour manifesto, we accepted by leaving


the European Union, it ends our membership of the single market.


That does not mean we think the terms and conditions on which our


businesses trade across Europe are bad and we should do the best to get


as close to those as possible and not hamper our businesses and the


economy. The Prime Minister says she wants that but unless she brings


policies forward, she will find it difficult to get the business for


the Commons. I don't think it will be as clear-cut as some making out,


it can be very public they did. Finally, Michael, let me ask you


about Scotland, the convention in which the Scottish Parliament has


two, on matters that are devolved, the Scottish Parliament basically


has to give consent to the Westminster Parliament, is... No.


Some people say, and until the Supreme Court ruled this was not a


legally binding matter, what is the situation on this? It is called a


convention because it is a convention. Actually, we had a big


debate on this when the government I think foolishly put it into the


Scotland Bill but the clause said that they would not normally


legislate in respect of devolved matters without a legislative


consent motion. There is no requirement to do so. The SNP have


been trying to make out it is a veto and they are in the absurd position


of saying they should have a veto on the government being able to take


back powers from the European Union whilst at the same time arguing that


they want to remain in the European Union and those powers to remain in


Brussels. It is absurd. But on the narrower constitutional point, you


don't believe... No. That the Scottish Parliament has a veto on


these Westminster issues? The European select committee, which


gave evidence to and we discussed this in depth, my view is that there


no veto and this is UK legislation and therefore, it does not apply and


it is yet again the nationalists trying to make trouble and


difficulty. Well, we asked the SNP to come on the programme today but


they said no one was available. What a surprise!


Now, the Liberal Democrats may have outperformed pretty low expectations


at the general election, but they still only have 12 MPs


But their share of the vote went down a bit. Some people have


questioned the party's decision to campaign wholeheartedly against


Brexit. Here's Tim Farron, announcing his


resignation last week. This is a historic time in British


politics. What happens next, in the next months and years, will shape


our country for generations. My successor will inherit a party that


is needed now more than ever before. Our future as an open, tolerant and


united country is at stake. The cause of British liberalism has


never been needed more. People who will fight for a Britain that is


confident, generous and compassionate are needed more than


ever before. That is the challenge our party and my successor faces,


and the opportunity I am certain they will rise to with my help.


Mr Farron has now left the building and the race


So far, it's not exactly a crowded field.


The only MP to have said they want the job is Vince Cable,


Welcome back. Have not seen you for ages. Well I've been writing novels.


Why are you doing this? I think it's important. I've come back, I did not


expect to be here six weeks ago but I'm back at a crucial time for the


country. And for the party. I think I have got a combination of


experience, energy and enthusiasm. I think I could do the job well. I'm


going for it. You said that "The political winds are moving in the


Lib Dems' favour". Where are they coming from? What I mean by that is


that I think there is a big gap opening up in what you good possibly


call the centre of British politics. The Conservatives are in serious


trouble, the 30 year war over Europe is reigniting in a serious way. The


Labour Party did extremely well in the election, no getting away from


that but I think the hard-core economic policies they have got,


which are really not credible, I think open a space for a party which


is economically literate, pro-business and has got experience


of government. But that was the analysis of many Lib Dems when the


election was called, that you have a Conservative Party in real trouble


over Brexit, whatever, even more trouble than Theresa May thought, as


it turned out, the Labour Party has moved to the left, now with the hour


for the Lib Dems. You had your chance and in fact, you actually did


worse in terms share of the vote, in total votes, land 2015 which was one


of your worst in modern times? As you accepted at the beginning, did


better in terms of MPs, we got more diversity but the vote share was


down and the challenge is to get it but as you know, British politics is


now moving very fast. It is highly uncertain. I'm pretty positive that


if we can occupy that enormous ground in the middle of politics, we


have got to Mendis opportunity. Was it a mistake for your party to call


-- a tremendous opportunity. Was it a mistake for your party to go for a


second referendum on the EU? I don't think it was a mistake but it did


not cut through in the way we are tired and I think that was because a


lot of people thought it was a way of running the old referendum


because we thought it was wrong. It sounds as though you would jump


that? No because the role of the second referendum is quite


different, in two years' time, there will be a fundamentally different


situation. You would have a second referendum? I would in two years'


time. Let me just explain... You don't sound very enthusiastic about


it. Orange Mackreth I am and when I made my leadership statement, it is


up there at the front. It is a different question because we are


faced with whether we want to accept the result of the negotiation or


not. There may be other options on the table. It is a different


question and a different set of issues and given the existing


referendum has launched this process, we would need another one


to close it off. That was not Tim Farron's policy. It was but... You


called it is respect for and counter-productive. I didn't, had we


had a second referendum to second-guess the previous one, that


would have been disrespect but we accepted the result. What we are now


arguing is that at the end of the negotiating process, the British


public should have the right to approve what has come out of it. It


could be a disastrous outcome. But although you have been in


retirement, we have not stopped keeping track of you, in Brighton on


the 19th of September, 2016, you said that to hold another vote on


the Brexit deal secured by Theresa May was disrespectful to voters and


politically counter-productive. Well, what I was talking about at


that time... I don't think I used the word deal in that context but if


I did, I did not put it correctly. You were referring to the deal which


raises the question of the problems. I do remember the interview. No, you


don't, you were speaking at a fringe event, not an interview. OK, at a


fringe event, let me be clear, I have said throughout we should not


have a second referendum to invalidate the last vote but we are


dealing with a fundamentally different question when the


negotiations have been completed. Do we accept the results? Supposing for


example, the negotiations are a complete disaster and we have no


deal, crashing out... It is not impossible. It could happen although


large numbers of the Cabinet appear to be warning against it, we could


get a bad deal so how do we terminate the process? In an ideal


world it should be parliament but given this process has been set in


train by a referendum, we would need another one to validate it. That is


the context in which I have been speaking and I fully support the


idea of having a referendum in those circumstances.


You also as tree questions about a referendum on the deal. What happens


if you win, is that binding, do you have a third referendum? What is the


answer to your own questions? How we will round this process up, the


country is very divided. Whatever happens, this thing is going to go


on and on and the worse the outcome, the more we need to have the public


on our side. So should we make it the best of three? I am not in


favour of having a lot of referendums! Seriously, we are going


to have... Well, you wore the one that's it, do we have a third?


Potentially, we have an enormous mess at the end of this negotiation.


You can say that again! We have to find a way out of it and how do we


find a way out of it? Have you done a deal with Jo Swinson, from


Scotland? I have not done a deal with any MP. People have said you


will make a deal to do -- to be the leader for a couple of years and


then stand aside for her. That is not true, I will run as leader and


will run the course of the Parliament if I need to. If this


Parliament does run for five years and that is a big if, if it does,


you would be almost 80 by the next election. Yes, I would be quite a


what younger than Gladstone when he 40 macro the general election. So


you could see an 80-year-old taking the party into an election campaign?


This is nothing to do with physically, it is how you feel. I


have plenty of energy. So we could have a party of the young and the


youth having an eight-year-old, that would be interesting. That is


conceivable, five years is a long way away in the political scene, it


is almost geological. We have to get through the issue of a potential


early election, the Brexit negotiations. But I am definitely


opt for it. I can see that. You are not just a politician, you have


always been a commentator on politics and you follow it very


carefully, and the economy. We have talked many times on these issues.


How long do you think the Government will survive, is it possible? I


think it could survive quite a long time, not least because I do not


think the public have an appetite for an election. We have had three


votes in two years and in each case the country has become more divided.


Four in Scotland in three years. So I do not think there is any appetite


among serious people to have another look election. But we have to


perform the role of opposition and we will be constructive and that is


the role we will perform. Do you know who you will be facing? I think


Ed Davey, a good colleague of mine. We will wait and see. And when will


we get the result? In September. Before the party conference. Before


it? You should add a bit of excitement to the conference and


hold it back, we always need excitement at a Lib Dem conference!


That is for our powers that be to decide, it will comply with whatever


it is. I shall watch from afar. Vince Cable.


Now, if you're one of the 130,000 or so people heading


to Glastonbury Festival this weekend, you might be


looking forward to leaving politics behind you.


If so, bad luck, because it looks like some


Jeremy Corbyn, who likes to say he's got youth on his side,


will be introducing the American rap duo Run the Jewels.


But if there are any other MPs about to get on the train


to Somerset, worrying about what to pack and how to behave


- then worry no more, because here's Ellie,


with our political guide to attending a festival.


Glastonbury and getting ready for it may not be as easy as it looks.


Tents, like controversial policies, can be difficult to pitch. So


politicians, this is a little help from your friends at the Daily


Politics. In our guide to festivals. Get a friend to show you the ropes.


I am surrounded by new Bis dashing nudists now! Hi, Richard. Before he


was an MP or the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson was invited to


Glastonbury with an unlikely friend. Singer and songwriter and left-wing


activist Billy Bragg, he loved it, once he worked out how to pronounce


it. What you say, Glastonbury? It is not the hunting and shooting and


fishing brigade. If you are a politician, you probably never


switch off. Say yes to taking part in little programmes while you are


there but find a public -- a quiet spot. We will leave it there, thank


you. Enjoy yourself, but remember a silent disco does not mean other


people will not hear you. Silent disco! Webber's Deputy Leader Tom


Watson posted various images of himself in social media having a


great time, but white trousers? Make sure you know how you're getting


home, Tom Watson did not look like he did and it is 122 miles back to


Westminster. And if you are late back, do not tell people you are


going. Clive Lewis, who is going again year, last time missed his


debate in Parliament as Shadow Defence Secretary because he was not


back in time. We welcome the new Shadow Defence Secretary. I think he


has gone AWOL in his first parade! And here are some final thoughts for


our festival frenzy to politicians. The weather can be unpredictable,


there could be storms, with lots of different cams, you might get lost,


and there will be people walking around who you may suspect are high,


but you are used to that in Westminster! There you go, the


definitive guide. With Mr MacRae were to an John MacDonald about to


make... -- with Mr Corbyn and John McDonnell


both due to make appearances at the festival, you could be


forgiven for thinking that only people with left-wing political


views are allowed in. I'm reliably informed that isn't one


of the entry requirements, and to prove it, we've even managed


to find a Conservative activist I assume you are not going to that


wearing that? No, probably not. No, because she would stick out like a


sore thumb and they would assume you were a Tory! When he addresses his


adoring fans in The Pyramid stage, what will you be doing? Hopefully


something else, listening to music or watching a film with family and


friends, whatever. Can you watch a film at Glastonbury? Yes, they have


a theatre stage. What is the point of that? It is about getting


together and having a fun time with people whose company you enjoy. Have


you been before? Yes, I have been twice before. Have you got a fancy


tent? Not quite, I go with family who Glastonbury veterans so they


sought me out, not too bad. You the only Conservative who will be there?


Not sure! That is refreshingly honest! You mean there might be one


of the? Perhaps! Yes, I do not expect you would catch many people


admitting they were Conservative there because very left-wing! You


have no choice now, they are watching you on telly, you have a


big neon sign! Why do you think 18 to 24-year-olds and even and


34-year-olds voted substantially for Mr Corbyn and very few for the


Conservatives? I think it is Jeremy Corbyn's cornucopia of goodies he


offered in this manifesto. Things like rent control and free tuition


fees, these things typically very attractive to young people who


perhaps do not have as much money as people further down the line. I


think that is probably true and explains why Labour got 62% of the


youth vote and your party got 27%. Why should young people believe in


capitalism when they have no capital? I think it is because


capitalism really come at the end of the day, has been proven time and


time again to be the most benign system there is. You are not


convincing the young people. No, neither is Theresa May. That is what


I am talking about! And her form of capitalism is a kind of


protectionism and it is not reflective of the world and free


markets. Her failure to win the intellectual battle over her


policies and failing to explain why her policies would help young people


is a big part of why she was the youth vote. You going to take your


life in your hands and attempt canvassing at Glastonbury? Goodness,


no! I did not even canvassed during the general election. Maybe that is


why so few young people if you cannot even be bothered to campus.


No, I did a protest vote at this general election and I voted for


Liberal Democrats because I live in a Conservative safe seat and was


disillusioned with the way the Conservative Party was. So even in a


safe seat, they cannot count on your support? How long will you go for? I


will go down this afternoon and I will leave on Sunday night. Good


luck and I hope the weather holds up! I have been told it will break


up. Fancy going? No, I am not nearly as cool as everybody else at


Glastonbury! I don't think they will be very call this weekend! Would you


care to double the numbers and make it two Tories? I think I might stick


out like more of a sore thumb! That I would not wear a tie, no. But


that's tie, and might be tempted. You notice!


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


The question was about Boris Johnson getting in a muddle on the radio,


and which comic double act was the interview compared to?


So, Angela and Michael, what's the correct answer?


It sounded like the two runners. What does this Queen's Speech do to


make sure the criminal justice system stops treating black people


more harshly than white? There are measures, I believe in the Bill in


the courts which I think is supposed to address some of those issues and


one thing in particular that we are looking at is... Measures to, hang


on a second... That what all sorts of measures that we want is to take,


to ensure that we do not discriminate against everybody. Does


that sound like the next Prime Minister of the United Kingdom?


Probably not. It sounded a bit like Diane Abbott. It was on the Diane


Abbott scale. It is a lesson to everybody that if you have got your


notes, do not start flicking through paper and know your stuff before you


go on. That is what we have begun to expect from Boris, he will laugh it


off as a joke and it is not he is our Secretary. He should have


learned by now, if you are talking in the Queen's Speech, you should


know what is in it. I think interviewers are becoming


increasingly cruel to politicians. Well, it passes the time! It is not


cruel to ask a question about... The Prime Minister talked about a


burning injustice, it is not a cruel question to talk about what deals


with that. When they do not get it right, to play it over and over


again is quite cruel. He made a virtue of being shambolic and it is


not fun when you Foreign Secretary. We will leave it there. That is all


for today. The One o'clock news is starting


over on BBC One now. I will be back tonight


with Alan Johnson, Michael Portillo, Michelle Dewbury, Richard Madeley


and Melanie Phillips The critically-acclaimed


series is back. then we have to treat only patients


with very early stages of


Download Subtitles