07/07/2017 Daily Politics

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?