07/07/2017 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 07/07/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.


Theresa May travels to Hamburg for the G20 summit where she'll


press for agreement on neutralising the threat of global terrorism.


We'll get the latest from the meeting of world leaders.


The Brexit Secretary David Davis meets business leaders as the CBI


calls for the UK to remain in the single market


until a new trade deal with the EU is agreed.


The House of Lords is lit up to celebrate the 50th anniversary


of the partial-decriminalisation of homosexuality


And, as Jeremy Corbyn's poll ratings climb, is the Labour leader planning


And with me for the duration is the political journalist


So Theresa May is in Hamburg for the meeting of world


It's the first time Donald Trump has met


the Russian President Vladimir Putin and the agenda will focus on trade,


Speaking to the BBC this morning, Theresa May said she was hoping


to push the international community to clamp down further


What I am doing here at the G20 is raising the need for us


to work collectively, internationally, to deal


with terrorist financing, not just large sum of money


financing terrorism, but also to find ways of working


with the financial services, with banks and others, to identify


the smaller-scale transactions that can sometimes lead


Let's get the latest from Hamburg and talk


to our deputy political editor, John Pienaar.


So that's her campaign on if you like to get agreement on trying to


fight back on terrorism globally. What else is she talking about? That


the message of the morning, get companies to do more practically and


politically to do with the sourcing of finance for terrorism. You


wouldn't expect a huge row about the principle that. Are expected to


appear in the final communique. She will be meeting Donald Trump and the


Chinese leader. Those will be interesting fascinating meetings,


especially with Donald Trump because Theresa May is one of many leaders


here who want Donald Trump to rethink on all sorts of things,


notably the climate change agreement in Paris and she was speaking to me


early on and said she hoped he would change his mind and come back on


board with the Paris climate change deal. She is taking on these


challenges. It's worth pointing out that as the list of global


challenges grow, climate change, North Korea, disagreements about


trade, it's a problem for Theresa May that the influence of the UK


could be said to be shrinking in the aftermath of Brexit and the election


where his authority has diminished and she's not got another power as


she had before the boat. How much impact can she and the UK really


have in this particular forum, bearing in mind the result of the


election? Well, she's here, presenting and promoting the idea of


a global Britain, as she puts it, reaching out to the world but


there's no denying there was an issue there. Her former Cabinet


colleague William Hague was saying there's a problem with losing


influence as a result of Brexit, but she says she's going to not be


intimidated, she will be bold, and that in itself is a recognition that


she has a challenge on her hands. Thank you very much. This is really


about the meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. What do


you expect? What's interesting about due 20s is it about alliance


building and diplomacy, and it's not the language Donald Trump


specialises in, let's be honest, but when it comes to Vladimir Putin in


particular, back home, he's got a problem with the perception that his


campaign was too close to the Kremlin and people around him are


too close to it, so he has got a tricky task today to show he


standing up to Russia but also trying in some ways to deliver on


what he said in his campaign for the presidency which is left reset


relations. This is about cooperation, and collaboration,


multilateralism, and Donald Trump is much more about winners and losers


and individual nations. Is this going to be seen to some extent,


particularly in the light of him pulling the USA out of the Paris


climate change, is the retiring the USA from global politics in that


sense? That's the problem, his problem is like Theresa May's. Has


Britain lost its clout because of Brexit? Hast Donald Trump by virtue


of being who he is and trying to reach French on things like


globalisation, has he taken the USA's influence off the table? They


are still a hugely strong economic nation so it's got a lot of clout,


but the big problem is on things like Iraq and, climate change, it


looks like the USA is being gently persuaded to come on board with


anybody else but whether or not Donald Trump agrees to it is the big


question. OK, let's leave it there. The question for today is what does


the French government want to ban? At the end of the show we'll


see if Paul can give The cream of British


business is being courted by the Government later today,


to try to get them board The Government is keen to show that


Britain is open for business. Earlier this week, Liam Fox,


the International Trade Secretary, said the UK remains "extremely


attractive to foreign investors" a year on from the European Union


referendum, and announced there was a record level of foreign


investment last year. The Liberal Democrats,


however, point out that despite this the number


of new jobs created by foreign


investment fell by 9%. Later today, the Brexit Secretary


David Davis will meet senior business leaders including the heads


of the Confederation Of British Industry


and manufacturers organisation EEF at his county residence


in Chevening, to try They've also created an EU


Exit Business Advisory Group that will meet every fortnight,


where business leaders Some are certainly


doing that already. Yesterday, the CBI Director


General Carolyn Fairburn called for Britain to remain


in the single market and customs union until a trade agreement


had been concluded. However, the EU isn't


making life easy. Michel Barnier, the EU's chief


negotiator, warned yesterday that frictionless trade, where goods can


move between Britain and the EU without too many checks and red


tape, is "not possible". We've been joined by


the Conservative MP Kit Malthouse, and by James McGrory,


who runs Open Britain which is campaigning for the UK


to stay in the single market. Welcome to both of you. The CBI has


called for us to stay in the single market and the customs union Intel


deal has been done. Do you agree? I don't, there needs to be some kind


of implementation phase that we reach when negotiations are done but


saying now that we will stay in both before there's a free trade


agreement just means the EU has an incentive not to agree a free-trade


agreement because they get us within the structure but without any


control over the rules so no, I'm not sure it's good. The CBI


represent large businesses generally. It doesn't surprise me


they would want to cling onto this kind of system which are suited for


so long. Small businesses would have a different view. Is that how you


regard the CBI, they are clinging to a corporate racket? Yes, it's


generally accepted a bit of accompanist racket. They favour


business is not as a forward facing, not as globally facing, and they


like the protectionist approach of the EU so doesn't surprise me they


want to hang onto it but I agree this notion that should be some kind


of cliff edge, sudden transition, might not be entirely helpful and


having a transition phase might not be a bad thing. It's no surprise the


CBI saying this but from a negotiating position you wouldn't


want to state here and now as a Government that that would be


opposition throughout a transitional phase because then you've played all


your cards? I think it falls into the same category as no deal is


better than a bad deal mantra. There are negotiations, compromises on


both sides, but this posturing which is only going to leave as being


worse off, seems pointless. Surely the best thing is to get a deal good


for business and in response to this corporate racket at the CBI, I


fundamentally disagree with that. It's also backed by the Trade Union


Congress today, employers and employees, as a sensible way


forward. I don't think the Government are being upfront with


people about the trade-offs that will happen if we leave the single


market and Customs union. We'll come to that in a moment. You say it's


all posturing but by declaring so early on if you like, it's sending


out a message, isn't it, to the EU, and also for many people who want to


see Brexit happen sooner rather than later, there was a possibility we'll


never leave? We are doing the opposite. We are saying whatever


happens in these negotiations, no matter how they go, and I have found


a single person who thinks it will be done by March 2019 in its


entirety, we are imposing our own red line saying we will definitely


go to the single market, the customs union, controlling immigration...


You can see why your position which is absolutely stated in Clare, it


will lead people to believe, a bit like the song, Hotel California, you


never leave. You can leave the EU would been the single market. Norway


are not in the EU but are in the single market. The Government


promised people frictionless trade, deal with the exact same benefits


but I'm saying is not possible unless you stay in. It's not just


James McGrory saying this but so does Michel Barnier and he should


know as the chief negotiator for the EU. Is it realistic to say we will


have completed a free-trade agreement with the EU by March 2019?


Yes, I think it's realistic because we are starting from a completely


different position than most people are who are negotiating free-trade


agreements so, the moment, there are no barriers. In most free-trade


agreement to have dubbed long negotiations about the barriers


which exist which you then remove but in this negotiation, it's about


the barriers the EU want to put up and that means that things should be


a lot easier and quicker, not least also don't forget, because it's


very, very much in their financial interest to have a free-trade


agreement with us, they sell more to us than we do to them and that's why


I think we should be concentrating a lot more on the rest of the world


but nevertheless, it would be in their rational interests to want a


free-trade agreement. You have to rely on the fact that despite the


loss of the negotiations are unelected, the elected leaders of


the EU will want a free-trade agreement because it's in their best


interests. The wealth believes we could do an agreement by March 2019


apart from the Government and Brexiteers? The opponents don't. I


mean, if we're talking about businesses, groups of people and


organisations in favour of Britain leaving the EU, the wealth believes


we can realistically do it in that time frame? I can't pick somebody


out for you but if you look at the work of the Licata instituted, they


assembled as there is a trade negotiations from across the world


and the universally said it was possible for the UK to do it. Michel


Barnier is going to say that frictionless trade is not possible


and that his negotiating position. We shouldn't fall for the line from


the European Union, Britain will negotiate from its own standpoint.


Of course, I will be the first to put my hand up and say I was wrong


if we do get a free-trade agreement which has frictionless trade and the


exact same benefits we get from single market membership and customs


union membership. You would say that because you don't want it and you


want is to stay in the single market and for many people that would mean


we haven't left the EU. Yes, you would stand in opposition say is not


possible because we want to try to persuade people away. The onus


should be on the people who say is possible to prove it. You can prove


what's possible with a single market, we have seen the trading


benefits and you can quantify them. Just going around saying we can have


the same benefit isn't the same as actually tangibly proving it. I


don't think business agrees with it or anyone other than a hard group of


Brexiteers does. Our business is valuable to the EU when you look at


the trade deficit figures. They need us just as much, to some extent,


than we need them. I'm not saying a deal isn't possible, I think it is


possible, but is it possible by actually October 20 18th which is


when we need to do it? And is it as good a deal as we have got now? I


don't think so. Let's talk about the frictionless trade. You say about


putting up tariffs rather than removing them but if tariffs did


become imposed on certain goods, are you saying we would not be in a


position where things would be held at the ports where, at the moment of


course, we are part of a customs union and single market, goods


travel freely and people but goods travel freely across the borders,


cross the Channel, and we know hearing a bus yesterday, they could


be held at the ports, we don't know the infrastructure to deal with


that. That could cause chaos. I don't think that's true. We had the


guy at the Inland Revenue dealing with all of this stuff in front of


the Treasury committee before the election and he completely refuted


that. We said will be need more space at Dover to store stuff? He


said absolutely not because most of it is a electronically done, in


advance, 95% of stuff goes through frictionless Lee, even from outside


the EU, it passes through and he thinks the system could cope with a


pretty well as they do with trade from outside the EU. Sony didn't


seem to think it would be a problem identity White would be.


How much pressure is there on David Davis and Liam Fox who is trying to


put in place this free trade deal although he can't do them while we


are negotiating, to try to say to people like James McGrory that the


trade-off will be an advantage? This is about how pragmatic you can


be in delivering Brexit which is the main task of the David Davis.


What you have seen here is a variation on whether it is practical


or impractical. David Davis is more aromatic than


people would expect which is why he is popular amongst Tory members and


business. He is try to work through the problem.


Someone described it as 3D chess. You need the brain the size of a


planet. It is a problem-solving issue.


The most important thing for the Tory Government is delivering,


making sure those people who voted get what they voted for.


When we talk about a cliff edge, and if there were a situation where


button did come out on WTO rules, the EU has two operate by those


rules, they cannot maliciously take action that would harm Britain.


What is the problem? I agree with me Barnier who was honest enough to say


it is the worst of a lose - lose situation. This is no deal is better


than a bad deal rancher... It is the equivalent of either you do this or


I will shoot myself in the head and you in the foot.


Is that the worst situation? Of course not. The huge amount of


our trade is done on WTO rules. Our second biggest market is the USA.


You are not going to take a penal deal over no deal. We need to be


clear. There is a lot of rhetoric from Michel Barnier, some from our


side. Cabinet Minister is reported to say


Liam Fox is struggling to find a way of balancing losses.


Negotiating sides are trying to find the moving parts in positions. The


deal won't become clear for another year.


It will have to become clear in a year.


These things get done at the end. That is true. At the moment they are


sounding each other out. We can fume which makes good TV, the truth is we


won't know the real position for another few months.


Thank you very much. The Palace Of Westminster


is to undergo something of a makeover this weekend when it


will be lit up in rainbow The annual festival is already


underway, with the biggest parade set to make its way


through the capital on Saturday. The decision to light up Parliament


marks 50 years since the part-decriminalisation


of homosexuality in since the presentation


of the Wolfenden Report in 1957, where the Government


said homosexuality The House Of Lords has


been behind the move. The Lord Speaker Norman


Fowler joins me now. Welcome back to the Daily Politics.


Why are you lighting up the House Of Lords like this?


I hope it is a symbol of those people who are still in this country


being discriminated against, and certainly I hope a symbol outside


this country to all those countries where homosexuality is illegal,


people are prosecuted, and other countries like Russia where they


simply pushed to the bottom. It is to say here at Westminster we not


only take this seriously, we act and support you.


Have you been slow off the mark? Same-sex marriage was passed in 2013


yet the LGBT flag only flew from portcullis last year. Has not been


done to raise awareness, commemorate the fights are gay rights in


Parliament? Never enough has been done but we


have been making dramatic progress. You mentioned equal marriage. That


was a very, very substantial move forward. What was interesting about


that is, we expected the House Of Commons to approve it but, in


percentage terms, the House Of Lords voted more than the House Of


Commons. Does this showed the House Of Lords


is more enlightened? More than people expected, there is


a myth the House Of Lords is full of Tory backwoods men. But, actually,


it proved last year it has a lot of younger members forward-thinking


members. Fowler deserves credit, when he was a Cabinet Minister in


the 1980s he ran the campaign on AIDS and way back then politicians


were treating this seriously even at a time when Margaret Thatcher was


talking about section 28 and gay people felt persecuted.


There were lots of worthwhile campaigns and organisations would


like to promote the work they are doing. Is there a danger you are


under pressure to symbolically commemorate all sorts of things or


does this stand out on its own? In a sense, this is a question of


human rights. Here, people are being discriminated against. We are


talking about stigma and giving people equal rights. That does


perhaps mark it out from other campaigns. There is no reason we


can't do other campaigns but I don't think, we don't want to have


campaigns of this kind every week. It is notable this is the first time


we have had a campaign like that on the front of the House Of Lords.


Mentioning B DUP and arrangements with the Government, what does it


say about the UK Parliament at a time when there is this deal between


the Government and a Northern Irish party which is against same-sex


marriage legislation? As you know I am totally independent


in all these things. Except I did press strongly for equal marriage.


It is a free vote issue. It won't come as any surprise to the DUP that


I don't agree for one moment with their position. There we are. There


are still people in this country, it is the whole point of what we are


doing, leave aside equal marriage, who are antagonistic to gay people.


We have to seek to convert them to the fact that gay people have equal


rights to everyone else. Thank you for coming in.


There's just time for our run-down of the political week,


On Monday, James Brokenshire said a deal at Stormont was achievable.


Kensington and Chelsea Council announced a new leader by the


Government sent in a task force. The year after his enquire into the


Aragua, Sir John Chilcot said Tony Blair was not straight with the


nation about his decisions in the run-up to the conflict.


President Trump and present Putin are meeting in Hamburg. There were


angry scenes outside with the so-called welcome to help Arch


attended by 20,000. The former head of BBC Westminster


Robbie Gibb has flipped jobs to become the new director of


communications for Theresa May. You could say out of the frying pan and


into the fire. Nicholas Soames posted a picture of


himself stabbing, which makes him really call, apparently. -- dabbing.


We have a week and a half until recess, some say that is what


Theresa May has it to do, make it to recess. Is her position is safe in


the short term? Safe until July 20 shall we say.


Mid-ranking Tory ministers are thinking, she is doing so much


damage to our brand, Labour are leading in the polls, Shikhar remain


for the foreseeable future. They are talking about before or after


conference. David Davis has been important in


the Brexit negotiations but he famously said, when he was appointed


to cabinet, this is my last job in Government, in politics. Did he mean


my last job in politics is delivering Brexit in which case he


could be Prime Minister? People suspect it was the fact he has this


one national mission. If so, it seems quite implausible, a Prime


Minister who was not a Brexiteer, Tory MP is -- Tory MPs believe they


need an out and out Brexiteer. There is a feeling Tory MPs are


united by the fact they want to keep the Tories in Government and not


lead to a situation where Jeremy Corbyn leading the Labour Party


could take over. That is the most terrifying thing


from this opinion poll. Backbenchers saying there is no way we can have a


general election. Not until after Brexit. And the British public


wouldn't really want a general election right now. As Brenda in


Bristol made it clear to all of us. That is priced in. But who will


emerge as David Davis's main rival. There aren't that many potential


people in the field. Amber Rudd has been talked about,


and there are some bright eyed young contenders.


Jeremy Corbyn has consolidated his grip on the Labour Party.


How are they going to do that? Is there a threat to some Labour MPs to


fall into line or risk being deselected?


We have had mixed messages. Ian Lavery the chair made clear to us he


wanted to look again at the reflection rules for Labour MPs.


Nobody had talked about it. Somehow members would force sitting


MPs to be reselected. That is being reviewed.


Jeremy himself is allowing his lieutenants to ride both forces, on


the one hand, hardliners like Chris Williamson, and Ian Lavery has


changed his vision saying we are a genuine broad church. We don't need


to change reselection rules very much.


The report some Labour MPs are being asked to apologise over criticism


for Jeremy Corbyn, it is hard to see how you marry both sides.


It is difficult. A lot of MPs who were critical of


Jeremy Corbyn are coming under pressure from their members.


I detect a sense of pragmatism. We talked about it with the Tory Party,


the same for the Labour Party, MPs saying we don't need another row.


The question is, first the next Labour conference, will this be


raised? There's just time before we go


to find out the answer to our quiz. What does the French


Government want to ban? The answer is the sale


of cars using an internal combustion engine, which will be


outlawed from 2040 in France. Thanks to Paul Waugh


and all my guests. Andrew will be back


on Sunday on BBC One at 11, And I'll be back here


on BBC Two on Monday, but I don't, like,


love it as much as Lucy. MAN: What makes you two make


different from each other?


Download Subtitles