04/09/2017 Daily Politics

Hello, and welcome to the Daily Politics,

our first programme back after the summer break, and guess

With Brexit talks over the summer, little progress between the two

The government faces a key test of its authority this week when MPs

debate draft legislation on withdrawing from the EU.

The PM, who's in Japan at the moment, says she's

going to hang on in there and fight the next election.

There's even talk of a reshuffle to bring potential Tory

We'll be talking to new Tory darling, Jacob Rees-Mogg.

We'll take a look back over Donald Trump's eventful summer.

It's been a tough time for the President and it could get

tougher following claims by North Korea that it's tested

And as the nation returns to the grindstone, we'll be asking

what could make your commute to work more bearable.

Well, one travel expert gives us his opinion.

How can we make rail passengers happy? I say it's time to put up

train fares! All that in the next hour,

and with us for the whole of the programme today,

two of Westminster's finest, fresh-faced and invigorated

following their summer break. Labour's Angela Eagle and

the Conservative MP, David Jones. Angela's been writing a book

all summer and David tells us he's been visiting a lot

of agricultural shows. And if that doesn't fill your heart

with warmth, the Duchess of Cambridge has announced she's

expecting her third child. So, have you been walking in any

mountings recently? Wales is very mountainous, I've done little else.

I have done an awful lot of visiting agricultural shows which is what I

mostly do in August. And the high point of your summer? My summer

personally, it was going for to date Italy to visit a battlefield where

my father fought in the Second World War. An emotional event for you.

What about you, where you are following in the footsteps of Jeremy

Corbyn and traipsing around marginal constituencies? No, I have been

actually in deep in reading, and thought, about right-wing Tory

economic policy. What fun for the summer! So that I can debunk it so I

can do that in a book, I can't say a lot more at the moment, it out next

year. So how you getting on with it? It's coming together. Sounds like

quite a heavy Reid. I'm going to try and put some jokes in. Did you see

Jeremy Corbyn perform at the Edinburgh fringe? I wasn't in the

audience but I think it's important to have presence at all cultural

event and Jeremy does that. What about this feeling of Groundhog Day,

talking more about Brexit. And that is going to be what really dominates

the next few weeks of this short session that we have in autumn. We

have got the withdrawal bill coming through and that's going to be

interesting, and I am sure that we are looking forward to seeing the

way it develops. Are you looking forward to it, is it like Groundhog

Day? Parliament is a particular place, you get a bit of extra

scaffolding but not much else has changed. The Brexit bill will be a

crucial part of the two weeks and we are going to have to make sure that

are built that at the moment is not fit for purpose is considerably

improved or we will not be going through the lobbies in support. Food

for thought. What about the position papers, have you read all of them? I

read most of them. You must have slept well. I am a swot. I read most

of them. Which was your favourite? Adore the one on judicial

Corporation was a classic of its kind. They reminded me of a series

of fantasy books, they didn't have a lot to do with reality. It's about

time the government start coming up with some actual detail about what

they need... We will come to all of this, good to see party politics is

alive and kicking in the first two minutes of the show!

Last week the Prime Minister announced, to the suprise of many

I think it's fair to say, that she wasn't a quitter

and would lead the Tories into the next election.

Well, let's talk now to Jacob Rees-Mogg, who emerged

as the unexpected favourite over the summer to take her place.

Are you on the news as? Of course I'm not, and you give me the

splendid backdrop, photo shopped in. You are already in Downing Street! I

haven't become your special Downing Street correspondent, but that would

be a wonderful job to have. You have to be impartial and balanced. Unlike

many people at the BBC, we will let that go! You are standing in front

of number ten, how does it feel? It feels as fake as it is, I'm actually

in a studio a few yards away from you. Are you and -- ambitious for a

ministerial job? I am ambitious only to return to North Somerset and

contribute to the development of ideas in the Conservative Party. I

very much look forward to Angela's book because she is one of the most

thoughtful members of the opposition and it will be very useful for

conservatives to see how non-conservatives attack our views

and positions, to see if we can remake the case back again. I think

this battle of ideas it is so exciting, and it's what our system

does so well. Wouldn't you be better placed to challenge what Angela is

going to say in her book, and you have got over reader waiting. That

is one, it is a start! You would be better doing it from a ministerial

post, wouldn't you? We would have a lot more freedom to discuss issues

from the backbenches because I'm not bound by collective responsibility.

I do not have constraint upon me on what I'm allowed to say. And that's

an easier position to be in and discussion board issues rather than

ministers, -- and discuss broader issues. Are you surprised to find

yourself as a frontrunner for a leadership which isn't yet vacant?

I'm as astonished as you are. It's all jolly August stuff and now we're

in September I imagine it will calm down. Where you disappointed by

Theresa May's declaration that she's going to stay on and fight the next

election? No, Isaac it's the right thing to say. Leaders need to give a

clear guide to their intention to carry on. I understood why David

Cameron said that he was going to go when he did, before the 2015

election, but once leaders say that, their authority seat away and

authority in politics is crucial for the ability to get things done. From

some of the directions from backbenches, not you necessarily, I

think there was incredulity that there was a declaration, she said

she would leave it to the party to decide, but she would carry on. All

leaders are servants of their party in some way and they cannot carry on

if the party doesn't want them to use that will remain true. I would

be very suspicious of anonymous briefings that tends to be by people

who have other motives, all teary at its for saying things. Let's have

people come out -- have all teary motives for saying things. Let's

have people come out publicly. They were not all anonymous, some people

were prepared to say publicly that they were surprised that she had

declared such a thing having lost the Tory majority. Those comments

were very politely and diffidently put, I do not think anyone said it

was in possible or unreasonable. If you were asked to step up to the

ministerial plate, there was talk of a reshuffle but that was quashed by

Number ten, you would serve? When Mrs May was asked directly, she

giggled, so I think my chances of a summons were limited. Boris Johnson

became Foreign Secretary and some people thought that would be

interesting. He is a great man and an inspirational representative of

us a road. What would you do if you were offered a ministerial position?

Imagine a little bit like that backdrop behind you, it is fake,

you're not really in down the street, but just imagine there was a

ministerial post, what would you like? This isn't going to happen,

I'm very happy serving the people of North East Somerset, that's my role

and that's what I enjoy doing. To start putting oneself forward is a

great mistake. Heaven knows, next you'll be offering me the papacy.

Yes, we've got time for that! Thank you very much, you can leave the

studio now. Thank you The question

The question for today is what did Brexit Secretary David Davis refer

The future prime ministers, a charming bustard, soft and current

cuddly, or Lazarus? Now, while our guests have been off

sipping sangria and catching up on all those novels published

since the 23rd June last year, the process

of Brexit continues apace. It hasn't been much of a holiday

for David Davis and Michel Barnier, nor for the hundreds of civil

servants on each side engaged in trying to extricate the UK

from the EU before March 2019. So what's been happening

over the break? There have been two rounds

of talks between the UK These have been dominated

by discussions on citizens' rights, the Irish border and the financial

settlement between the EU and UK. Over the summer, the UK

released 11 position papers on Brexit, to go

with the EU's nine. Future customs arrangements

were covered, as well as citizens' But at a tense press

conference last week, European Commission negotiator

Michel Barnier said "no decisive While Brexit Secretary David Davis

urged the EU to be "more imaginative The big sticking point is over

the size of the UK's divorce bill, the financial settlement

the UK will pay the EU. The UK side believe the EU's sums

don't add up but the EU has accused the UK of refusing

to honour its obligations. This weekend Michel Barnier has said

part of his job is to educate the UK about the price of leaving

the single market. This matters, because talks can't

progress onto phase 2, the future relationship

between the UK and EU, before sufficient progress

on the matters of separation, including the divorce

bill, have been agreed. Meanwhile, Labour announced a shift

in its Brexit position this summer to staying inside the single

market and customs union This could mean keeping free

movement of people and other EU rules beyond March 2019,

when the UK will leave the EU. On Thursday the government

faces its first big Brexit-related test of the new parlimentary session

with the second reading That was almost as long as the whole

negotiation! Where 13 months on from the referendum vote, over six months

after Article 50, what concrete achievements can you list? There has

been progress, there has been a series of talks. The big issue as

you rightly said in your introduction is the question of

money, no doubt. It's now up to the EU how they calculate their demands.

They need to tell us. We have seen a number of demands from 60 billion to

100 billion, and none have been computed. We will talk about the

precise money at the moment but you haven't answered the question on

what concrete achievements you can point to. There have been some

achievements, last week there was agreement as to the issue of health

care for expats living in the EU and the U UK. That isn't really a major

issue. Not in terms of the divorce Bill, EU citizens leaving -- living

here and UK citizens abroad. We have to understand that the EU has struck

its position and made it clear that it wants agreement on the issues

that you outlined in your introduction. And for so long as

they actually maintain that position, there will be no progress

which is why David Davies quite rightly said the other day that we

need to see some more flexibility and imagination on the part of the

EU, because if, for example, they insist on resolving the Irish

question before resolving the issue of trading arrangements, we will

never get anywhere. He published these papers which didn't really say

anything in terms of what he wanted to achieve, it was very much about

aspiration, I read a number of them. There isn't much progress on the

issue of the Irish border and on citizens rights and the clock is

ticking towards March 2019 and you blame the commission for being

intransigent, but you know what Michel Barnier's mandate was from

the other 27 member states so why you complaining? I'm complaining

about the fact that he is quite clearly constrained by the mandate

you have been given. But you agreed to it, he agreed to settling the

divorce Bill first before moving to talk about a trade deal. Until such

time that we can agree a future relationship, we won't get anywhere.

So why did David Davies signed up to doing it, he was wrong? I have not

been in the Brexit Department for a while. What I would say is this,

until such time as the EU recognise that there's got to be agreement as

to the future relationship, which is actually prescribed in Article 50

itself, we will not make progress and it's as much in their interests

to get that progress as ours. So you want the government to state that it

wants to change how these negotiations are handled, that

you're not going to settle the divorce Bill? No, what I want is the

EU to recognise that Article 50 prescribed that the future

relationship is something that has to be considered now and this is

something that they're failing to do.

What is wrong with the EU saying you need to meet your obligations that

you signed up to when the UK said it would honour its financial

commitment in the seven-year multiannual framework? There's

nothing wrong with fulfilling our obligations, the question is what

they are. Are they those - should we pay for the seven years to 2020?

Well, we clearly do have about only Gration to make some payment and I

think everybody agrees that. I think the important thing is that the EU

shouldn't be coming up with firs they've clearly plucked out of the

air like 100 billion euro. It's a negotiation isn't it? But rather

saying how they've calculated their demands. Over the weekend we saw the

figure of 50 billion mooted as the amount of the so-called divorce

bill. If that figure was spread over a transitional period, would you

accept it for frictionless tariff free trade with the EU? No. I don't

think we should be paying to trade. I don't think you pay a trading

partner to trade with you. We need to have a proper calculation of the

way that the EU have come up with this sum and then say yes, let's

talk about it. At the moment, they are not doing it. Labour's changed

its position, Angela Eagle, when it comes to the EU and the

negotiations. Jeremy Corbyn sacked three MPs for voting for an

amendment. Now Labour is saying it wants to stay in the single market

and customs union during the transitional period so should they

get their jobs back? Firstly it's for Jeremy to make his own Shadow

Cabinet up but I think the key thing that hasn't changed is that we've

always said jobs and the economy have to come first and what Keir

Starmer's been saying just recently over summer is that at least for the

transition period, we need to stay in the customs union and the single

market. That is a change in position though from the manifesto? Let me

give you an example of why. Just up the road from my constituency, there

is the Ellesmere Port automotive plant. When I visited them, they do

70%-odd of their trade with Europe. The supply chain is completely mixed

up across Europe. They told me that coming out of the customs union

would cost an extra 125 million a year just for that plant. But you

are not honouring the result of the referendum. Of course we are. No you

are not. Hang on. That put all of that trade and all of the jobs that

my constituents do at risk. The people who voted to leave the EU...

It's not what Labour said. Can I remind you what they said. Hang on,

Angela Eagle. In the manifesto, it states very clearly that Labour will

end freedom of movement, one of the four pillars of the single market.

In order to end free movement, it means you leave the single market.

If March 2019 is the date the UK leaves under Labour, we won't leave,

we'll still be in the single markets and customs union and we'll still

have the European Court of Justice making laws that the UK will have to

buy and -- will have to abide by and nothing will have changed. We said

we'd put jobs and the economy first for a very good reason. As the All

Party Group that published its report on customs ahead of the

Government a couple of weeks ago demonstrated, leaving the customs

union and the single market potentially puts the cost of ?25

billion a year. Into the far future... What do you say to the 49%

who voted to leave in Wallasey? What I'm going to say to them and what I

said to them and have always said to them is, we are trying to get the

best deal. We need a Government that wants to engage and get a good deal.

What we've got is a sort of Government led by a zombie Prime

Minister who is in the middle of being dealt with by people who want

to succeed her who can't make progress in Europe. It's 13-14

months after the referendum, we've made no progress. The clock is

ticking. Time is running out. They've got a point haven't they?

They haven't because the time when they should have been making the

objections was when the notification of Bill went through. That went

through completely unamended. Now we have the Labour Party in an utterly

incoherent position. No we are not. Their position is career -- clear

but it's changed. Tom Watson is saying we need to remain in the

customs union and the single market. Could you see a situation where you

would support the UK staying in the single market in perpetuity? I

wouldn't personally object to that. That is not our frontbench position.

But let me say this, it's really important that this is a negotiate

#14u7b and that we get the best possible deal -- negotiation. You

don't do that by striking vein glorious posers like the Government

has. The clock is ticking down. My constituents' prosperity is at stake

here. Jobs, future prospects - it's really important the Government gets

this right. This is about an issue of trust. One out of ten. That is

the view of my two guests. So that's the view of two MPs

but what do you make of the government's

negotiating efforts so far? Ellie and the moodbox came out

of summer hibernation to find out. One of only five boroughs of London

who voted to leave in last It was also home for more

than 50 years to Ted Heath, a Tory who arguably got us

into all this EU stuff So, the perfect place

to ask the question, do you have confidence

in the government's handling I just think they don't really

know what they're doing. When we voted for Brexit,

we voted for a clean break, now it's all a little bit

here and a little bit there and sooner or later we're

still going to be tied I'm going to have to be confident

and say yes, because in the end, Do you have confidence in

the government to negotiate Brexit? All we can do is say,

hope for the best. Boris Johnson just sums it up,

he's an idiot abroad, and if that's our face,

of what we're planning to do, They can negotiate a deal,

whether it will be a good I don't think that the

Europeans actually want us Um...I'm going to be positive,

yes. Sir, good deal on Brexit, Do you trust the government

to deliver a decent deal on breakfast, I mean,

Brexit? So no love lost in Brussels

whether divorce negotiations are well underway and it would seem

good people of Bexley It was a close run thing but it

seems there isn't a great deal of confidence in the government's

negotiations so far. You can understand why people don't

have trust in the Government, some people. Theresa May said she'd cut

net migration to the tens of thousands, she didn't. She said

there would be no snap election, then she called one and she lost the

Tory majority. Why would she inspire confidence? I would say, by the way,

that moodbox showed possibly a fairly even split which reflected

the referendum outcome so I think possibly people were continuing the

sentiment. And the answer to my question? I think that what we have

seen so far is a positive approach to the Brexit issue. But I'm talking

about trust in Theresa May. Why would she inspire confidence,

bearing in mind what's happened? Because I believe that her approach

has been proven to be entirely correct. We had a proper period

analysing the British economy which was the right thing to do. We then

published a White Paper, we then had the notification of the withdrawal

Bill. But that's process, anyone could have done that. But the

process is absolutely essential. Are you pleased she said she will stay

on for the full five years and stay there until the next general

election? As Jacob Rees-Mogg said, we need to seed our leader lead. She

is saying she intends to be there to take us through Brexit. I understand

that. Do you think she will. I do. Do you support her? Of course I do.

It's essential that we take this country out of the European Union on

the best possible terms and she's the right person to do it. There is

a war goingen in the Conservative Party at the moment about who the

next leader is going to be and it's clear that Theresa May isn't going

to lead them into the next... Why is it clear Because they know... Who

would be the next one then? Who knows. They had a clear... That's a

problem... She would have been gone already. George Osborne has

described Theresa May's premiership as a second rate horror show. He's

described her as a dead woman walking. Do you believe Jeremy

Corbyn will endure into the next election or lead you into the next

election? You are running the country at a crucial time for our

future history. You are the the alternative Government. Do you think

Jeremy Corbyn will lead you there. I am sure he will. Would you like to

see him do that? He did a good job in the election and if he wants to

lead us into the next one, he will. Was it a difficult thing to persuade

him... It's worrying about losing to Labour that's knocking the Prime

Minister off her Perch. Well, on that basis, this idea that MPs need

to back Brexit or get Jeremy Corbyn, what is the problem with amending a

piece of legislation, the withdrawal Bill, how is it you get Jeremy

Corbyn if you back an amendment? Because now is not the time to do

it. The time for amendments... You don't get Jeremy Corbyn do you

from... No, no, no, the time for amendments was the notification of

the withdrawal Bill. We crossed the rule bill within parent I'm sorry.

So Anna Soubry, is she a traitor? She'll have to consider where her

loyalty lies. Or? Thing is what she needs to do. I think... We are going

to come back to you. Ministers need the power to change law on Labour

law without referring to Parliament. That's not true. We are going to

discuss this later in the week when it comes back to Parliament on

Thursday. Have you spoken to Tory backbenchers to support you by the

way on that Plenty of that going on. How many? I'm not going to discuss

that. That might be the problem. But it's happening is it? Are you

worried about that? We have a few that will be supported too.

Earlier I spoke to the Polish MEP Danuta Hubner, and I started

by asking her why the UK should agree to any figure for a financial

settlement before the start of discussions about the future

You know very well we are not talking about figures yet.

All we are talking and all we need to progress and to have

agreement on is the methodology of calculating the bill.

Here we see that the position of the UK is practically just stuck,

there's no progress, there is a completely different

diverging view on the approach to the financial bill

There is no agreement on the legal basis.

This is something which, of course, the EU side cannot accept,

that's why, unless we are also seeing a more constructive approach

on the UK side, we can make progress on this.

We are not talking yet about figures, we are just talking

about the legally binding commitments.

There is a dispute about whether they are legally

binding but certainly, David Davis, the Brexit

secretary, has said there are moral obligations.

Do you think the UK should pay anything above what it's previously

signed up to in the 2014-2020 multilateral financial framework?

You know, it's quite actually amazing because we hear also

from all those who benefit from the programmes and projects

which are confined to the EU budget to which every

We hear the last position of the UK that the UK should not pay

a penny beyond the exit from the European Union,

then you start thinking there is no understanding at all of how

the European Union functions and what the budget

So that is amazing for a country that's spent with us

That's why we have here this disparity

Negotiation of course can bring different results,

but we have also made it clear from the very beginning

that we need this sequencing, that there is a logic

because the Article 50 says that we have to know the future

aspiration of the UK to agree on the transition period.

So we want to know the future position but we have to reach

a certain level of advancement of the negotiations that would allow

us to do that in line with the mandate we have.

Do you think it helps though that when Michel Barnier...

There is one more thing we need to remember.

Sorry, do you think it helps when Michel Barnier uses language

like, we need to teach the UK what it means to leave

the single market and we need to educate the UK.

Do you think that's language that helps bring two sides together?

I think on both sides during the negotiations,

there is this risk of the language and we probably here can find a lot

of examples of the British language and etc specially of some British

politicians who is, the language, using the language

which is unacceptable, I think even the British reality.

So sometimes we go far with our long wadge because we want to also make

the other side understand and what Michel Barnier is trying

to say is that the single market is, if I can use your approach,

single market is single market and single market

if you are a member of it, there are commitments and the single

This is the most important achievement of European integration,

we cannot dismantle it for the sake of those negotiations.

We are all very strong when it comes to a single market.

Let's have a look though at what is being put forward by the EU.

There is a sense in the UK that the EU may be prepared to bear

some economic pain to make a political point.

The UK is Poland's second biggest export market

Are you happy to risk that relationship, that

economic relationship, in order to make your political

You know, there are different stages and aspects of the negotiations

and there's a very clear withdrawal from the European Union and then

there is this single market and customs union which we hear

from the British side is just really a misunderstanding of what leaving

the single market or leaving the customs union means.

So we all would like to have the UK within the single market

and within the customs union but that, of course,

what would be the difference between belonging or being a member

and to benefitting from everything that the single market oftens,

so we are in this process of clearly trying to understand

what is the final aspiration of the Brits to stay,

Will it be happy smiles all round at the end of this?

You know, everything is good what ends good and I can assure

you that here on the EU side and on the European Parliament side,

on the Council side and Commission side, I think we are all very

seriously committed to have a good deal and to have a good

If there is a good end to something which is I think something

that we don't see as a good solution, also for the long-term

future of the UK, but it's up to the UK citizens to decide.

They decided, they will have it and we'll spare no effort to make

it all well organised, to ensure orderly Brexit,

but we cannot do it ourselves, we need a good cooperation,

taking into account the time factor with the British Government.

Let's hear from Fleet Street's finest.

Tom Newton Dunn from the Sun and Kate McCann from the Telegraph.

Listening to some of that, would you make of it? Is a breakthrough likely

between these two sides? I think over the weekend, the breakthrough

with unlikely with Barnier and David Davis escalating the war of rhetoric

to President at levels this morning have maybe -- to unprecedented

levels. This morning, we have just had the spokesman for the Prime

Minister saying that they want to intensify negotiations, David Davis

wants to move from this one week a month, slightly staid and cumbersome

process, to rolling week on week until they find a way through the

deadlock. No one wants to leave the room until a solution is found.

Lucky them! Do you think the timelines for Brexit are now

interested the? Even if they do intensify the number of times they

need to talk about it. Is it in jeopardy? I think most people think

so, you can see the tension between Barnier and David Davis, in fact

Barnier said, I am not angry now, and when I am, you will know about

it. The report overnight on Politico about intensifying gauche issues,

the government realise they need to step up, we are going to have

position papers coming on trade and other issues this week. I think the

government say they are being met with brick walls every step of the

way. There were people over some are saying the position papers were

there to show that something was being done in the absence of any

real concrete progress. If the EU don't change their mind, or give

Michel Barnier a more generous hand in the negotiations so he doesn't

have too sick to this rigid sequencing, where is the

breakthrough going to come? It's not just the sequencing which delays

everything hugely, one week talks, three weeks and then we go back to

27 different capitals and explain what they discussed, and then that

is the problems with negotiating with the EU. The Greeks had it, the

Japanese, Americans, you're talking to 27 different countries and it's

time-consuming. I don't think we'll see any progress at all in real

substance until we get to the EU Council in October, after the German

elections when the 27 have a chance to get into a room for the first

time and say, maybe we need to change this framework. Another

breakthrough moment this morning was Nick Clegg, not known for his

Euroscepticism, the arch Europhile in the country, admitting that

perhaps the EU's position was a little bit rigid and it needed to be

looked at. Michel Barnier being boxed in? You can see the 27 moving

but not yet. Well, don't go away, Tom and Kate,

because we don't just It's going to be a busy autumn term,

so lets see what's in store Tomorrow, MPs return to Parliament

after the summer recess, but their sitting will be

short-lived as they then break again in two weeks

for the Party Conference Season. Labour will meet in Brighton

from 24th September, where they are expected to debate

the so-called McDonnell amendment, to lower the number of MP

nominations a candidate would need Next up the Conservatives

meet in Manchester, where Theresa May reportedly plans

to apologise to the party faithful In amongst that, German

voters will decide whether Chancellor Angela Merkel

will remain in post when they go to the polls on 24th September,

a result that could impact the direction of Theresa May's

Brexit negotiations. And November will see our

Chancellor, Philip Hammond, give his second Budget for the year

as he switches the timings Let's look ahead to the conferences.

How would you assess Jeremy Corbyn's position going into that conference?

I think he's in quite a good position. I think there is this

McDonnell a moment discussion which has had this been taken out of the

tail of it, there is no talk about replacing him, no talk about a

successor, no talk about rebellion. I think what Labour has to be

careful on in this comfort is Brexit, their single market position

is all over the place, they have a number of MPs who have strong views

about the single market, you have seen Tom Watson saying one thing and

Keir Starmer saying something else, they need to get this together. When

you bring these people together to talk about Brexit in one place, it's

only going to generate more headlines about labour being split

and not having a inherent argument. Anybody who had Barry Gardner this

morning try to make the odd given that the public knew what they voted

for, he knows that impossible to argue. The leadership is not being

to be an issue. What about Theresa May, is her position strengthened

after the summer? She survived. Until last week I think it was, she

didn't good job bedding in and getting a good news grid and -- she

did a decent job bedding in, and she showed a bit of humility and showed

she had learned and she would change her star and governing. Then she

went to Japan and effectively said, I want another decade in number ten.

We were pretty surprised, those on the trip couldn't believe she meant

to say it. I think she actually misspoke. It has revealed the

fragility she still has with the respect of Tory MPs, they are

prepared to forgive have that quickly. I think she had taken a

couple of steps back with this unfortunate phraseology last week.

Although some would say, what else would she say which was asked, will

you go on and on? Because of the problems that previous prime

ministers have had when they have named a departure date. What she

could have done is made a token gesture, I think she went a little

bit too far, she didn't mean to say, I will fight the next election, she

probably meant to say, I am not a quitter and I will not give up but

he didn't and that led to questions about leading us into another

election. That is not where she meant the discussion to go. It's

talk about the economy briefly, could that be the fly in the team

and for government? If wages do not keep pace with prices, the value of

the pound has fallen, growth is slower than had been thought, how

big an issue is that going to be as an issue for conferences? A huge

issue going forward over the next year or two years. It won't come to

fruition quite yet, there is reporting in some newspapers this

morning that he's going to lift the public sector pay cap which would be

a very big deal indeed. -- that she is going to lift the pay cap. So the

pay freeze will go, it will cost ?4 billion yesterday Chancellor will

have to pay for that in the Budget but those are ways of showing that

she feels the pain of austerity and to keep people ticking over and

content with her government while the economy and growth begins to

lesson. Taking that on board, if that is the case, lifting the public

sector pay cap, what will that do to austerity and Philip Hammond when he

goes forth with his next budget? It's difficult to know because there

have already been reports that Philip Hammond and Theresa May and

others in the government, and particularly the Cabinet, have not

agreed on how far austerity should continue. I think Tom is right, the

budget later this year will be an opportunity and the Prime Minister

will want to use it to show that she understands that people are

struggling in the country, so we will likely see things like housing

policy change or something on stamp duty. These are areas where they are

popular with the country you have to balance them with how they're going

to be paid for and we are yet to see an answer for that question. Thank

you very much for marking our cards. Now, here's a question

for you to ponder on the 6:15 Are peak rail fares

simply too cheap? Here's the Independent's Travel

Editor, Simon Calder, on why he thinks some rail fares

should rise above and beyond Waterloo Station, Europe's

biggest transport terminal. It's an essential part

of the nation's infrastructure. But a lot of the commuters I talked

to here are deeply upset So how can we make rail

passengers happier? I say it's time to

put up train fares! In there, they've extended

the platforms to take longer trains. And increasing capacity should ease

overcrowding for a while at least. The reason trains are too crowded

is because fares are too low. So we need to increase the cost

of season tickets to the most popular trains while at the same

time cutting prices to tempt travellers

onto less popular services. Each year, the Department

for Transport prescribes what train operators can charge for about half

the tickets they sell. The government has the tricky task

of balancing the interests of people who pay for the railways,

most of whom are not regular train users,

with the long-suffering passengers. The solution is to allow

market forces to prevail. If I insist on arriving

at a Central London terminus between eight and nine

in the morning, for example, I should have to pay

for a premium season ticket, while those who are more

flexible get a better deal. This government, like its

predecessors, regards that idea Make do and mend remains

the order of the day. But the common complaint that fares

are too high and trains are too If commuters really were paying

too much, there'd be Getting up early for

a cheaper train might be Yet, by hiking up prices at peak

times for trains, everyone would For politicians as well

as rail passengers, Simon Calder joins us now from our

Salford studio. You may not win the popularity prize for this soap box

but passenger who is already will no doubt pay thousands for peak travel

tickets will be aghast at your suggestion. How could they afford

further increases? Some of them will be able to. If you

can't, you are going to have to accept that you are going to be

arriving, for example, in Central London or in Manchester or Leeds or

Glasgow, maybe uncomfortably early, maybe at 7. 45, rather than 8. 45.

But, unfortunately, since we in this country have decided we don't really

like the idea of extending what the marvellous Victorians did for us in

terms of the railways, it's a very good way to manage capacity. It's

much better than saying OK everybody buy season tickets at very good

subsidised prices, off you all go and you can all stand up all the way

from Guildford to London which is not pleasant for everybody. I don't

feel people necessarily think they've got a bargain when buying

the season tickets. If you look at comparisons in other countries, it

may be the case, I don't know. People are forced to arrive at work,

school or whatever it is at the time that is given to them? Well, maybe

we need to talk more deeply about having some more flexibility built

into businesses which would tolerate that. But people are also making a

lifestyle choice to live in leafy Essex or Surrey or wherever and

commute in from there. They could live in the outer suburbs of London,

they could probably still afford somewhere, they wouldn't have such

nice a lifestyle so they're making choices. It comes back to the fact

that many people don't travel regularly by train and they're

subsidising those of us lucky enough to travel frequently by train.

Angela Eagle, are you convinced? Not at all. There's ban 32% increase in

regulated fares since 2010 that people pay. There's been a ?3.5

billion profit that the train operators have made and I just think

that we need to get to a situation where we don't from this privatised

rail system which has worked out a system of milking commuters for the

maximum profit. What we need to do is have something that's actually

properly coordinated by the Government so that we have a fairer

way of doing things. I have to say, he's talked about trains and that's

fair enough, but actually, most people require buses to get to and

from work and we ought to think about that. It's far more people

using the bus services which again, a deregulated thing outside of

London. Let's stick to the trains. Prices have gone up and are still

going up. Really, can you expect people to bear higher fares when

quite often the service is not up to scratch? Well, I think that is a

problem that's bedevilled serial governments. That may be so, but...

I think Simon's idea's got the huge defect that most employers expect

their employees to get into work at a particular time because that's the

way that their particular sector of the economy works. But would people

be prepared to pay more at peak times if the trains were punctual,

if you had a seat on almost every journey you went into work for.

Would that be worth pay ago premium for at peak times then it could be

cheaper at other times? I think actual think prices are pretty high

as they are and the railway operating companies have got a

responsibility to bear. This is something that the Government is

aderision. Are you going to get anywhere with this Simon listening

to our guests? Sorry to quote not a very popular person, Jean-Claude

Juncker, politicians know what to do, they just don't know how to get

elected afterwards and honestly, you have to accept that there is a

capacity squeeze going into London that price is going to be a pretty

good way of regulating it, so yes, let's have a debate about

renalisation, swreked had one any time between 1997 and 2010 Angela

Eagle when Labour was in power but you didn't. That's a debate worth

having, the basic problem is too many of us want to go to our big

cities in the rush hour at peak time. It's a zero sum game. Give

some people more expensive fare bus use that to let people effectively

sit around at London Victoria or wherever having a coffee while

waiting for the train and having got up early to get there earlier too.

Now, hands up who follows the President of the

Well, if you do, you'll know he's had a busy summer,

Just as well he doesn't believe in vacations.

Very disappointed with the Attorney General

The President certainly felt that Anthony's comments

were inappropriate for a person in that position.

I want to congratulate you on having done a fantastic job, General,

and we look forward to, if it's possible, an even better

Trump's promise to repeal and replace Obamacare crashed

and burned on the floor of the Senate.

Have you seen any Russians in West Virginia or Ohio or Pennsylvania?

Hate has come to the streets of this southern American city.

This egregious display of hatred, bigotry and

The President's everyone is to blame response,

and silence until now, met a firestorm of criticism.

Racism is evil, and those who cause violence in its name

Including the KKK, neo-Nazis, and white supremacists.

It's epic what happened, but you know what, it

happened in Texas and Texas can handle anything.

I'm joined now by Kate Andrews from the Institute of Economic Affairs

and by Molly Kiniry who works at the Legatum Institute.

She's also a spokesperson for Republicans Overseas.

Kate, how would you sum up his summer? Hectic. Some of his

responses have been erratic, out of his control and he ticked all the

right boxes doing what he was supposed to do. Other controversies

of his making when he went off script to respond to

Charlottesville, mentioning at that point that there was violence on

both sides which was shocking and inappropriate. So some of it has

been his own making. He's been busy firing people. We have all known him

to do so since his days of the Apprentice. At quite a pace in the

recent months. What was the low point? Charlottesville. That did not

enhance America's image abroad, how Americans are viewed abroad or how

the Republican Party is viewed as a whole. Obviously, these are views

which we all whole heart think condemn. White nationalism is not a

mainstream view in the American body of politics. These were a few

hundred disaffected young men mostly. But wasn't he reliant for

his win as President? I think that Donald Trump perceives that. My

analysis would be different. I don't think this is a sufficiently large

portion of the election rat that it swung the tide for him. He's had to

do with some turbulent personnel changes. They happened so quickly, I

couldn't keep up with them. He made some bad choices didn't he for Team

Trump? He did. The a problem with Charlottesville is that one of his

main chiefs of staff, he was familiar and sympathetic to the

white nationalists. We saw him leave immediately after Charlottesville

and that was the right choice. We have had a large turnover in the

communications department. I think his best pick so far has been

General John Kelly. You do? Yes. He seems to be doing what he can to

whip the President into shape. There have been fewer PR disasters since

he's been brought on board. Certainly conditioned handle all of

them but he's been a good choice. Before I ask my guests about their

views overseas. Are Republicans worried that poor support is

slipping away now? No. The poll numbers haven't been indicating that

at all. President Trump seems to have a floor of 35-40% of people who

simply aren't going anywhere, at least for the time being. Right.

Isn't that the point - whatever happens and whatever he says and

does, his core support is still pretty rock solid, Angela? That

seems to be the case in American terms. I don't think he's doing a

lot more the image of America abroad and, I have to say, waking up and

finding out what is going on in North Korea and looking at the very

mixed messages that the President has actually sent to Kim Jong Un in

an escalating, very worrying situation, it doesn't make me sleep

any easier at night. How worried are you about that? I would agree

entirely with Angela. We are at the most crucial moment so far of the

Trump presidency and I think what's happening in North Korea is a real

test for him. At the moment, I have to say, what he's doing doesn't

appear to be that coherent and I think that the world is waiting for

a lead from America. How worried are Americans? How worried are you, are

we on the brink of some sort of Amageddon? I don't think we are and

that is why I am concerned that Trump is now setting his own version

of a red line. Remember Obama's red line in Syria and when Assad used

the chemical weapons, he didn't fulfil his word and his own red

line. I think Trump's really at danger of doing that. He's

threatening cutting off trade with China and threatening he's going to

bring down fire in North Korea. I don't think we are going to have a

nuclear war with Korea, but if we don't, he's set his own red line.

That's the problem. He's said it will be met with fire and fury and

he's set the red line. Yet what are the military options? They are

frankly somewhat limited as Steve Bannon said in his last interview

before he left the White House. They've not seen any math which

doesn't show several million people in Seoul dying if that were to

happen. Setting a red line is a new step but it's not like any of the

previous steps have worked. North Korea's development of these weapons

has been going on at exponential haste for the last few years so a

new strategy is needed. Right. But beyond diplomacy which obviously has

been tested and sanctioned, what else is there? Well, Donald Trump

has suggested cutting off economic activity Which would harm China? Yes

but also countries like Germany and Russia. And also the US. Yes, it

would. If we two back then to what Republicans are thinking, oaf the

summer Carl Bernstein, the Watergate journalist said there was now worry

and concern at high levels in the Republican Party about whether

Donald Trump is really fit to continue as President. Is that

actually got -- has that actually got traction? I think that's

tremendously unhelpful rhetoric. He was elected, not by majority, but

through the system that we have which is the electoral college. He

was elected democratically. I think we all have to hope that Mr Trump

grows into the role and does well as President Obama said in his note

which he left for Mr Trump on his first day in office, that we have to

hope he does well because how the President does is a good indication

of how the country is doing. What did you think about that when you

saw the Dwight about Republicans beginning to think this is enough? I

think the Republicans have always thought Donald Trump would be

enough. They never wanted him to be the nominee but because so many

refused to drop out of the race he ended up being that and we picked up

the pieces. Now just time for the answer of the quiz:

What is the correct answer? Soft and cuddly. Charming. Yes, yes it was.

Let's have a look. A charming person. We won't find out what you

really think of him. Thank you to all of my guests and particularly to

my guests of the day. The BBC News is starting at 1 on BBC One. See you

tomorrow. Bye. Owen Quine - he's a very famous

and good novelist. He's gone off before,

only this time it's been ten days. I'm an investigator.

His wife's very worried for him. Owen has written a very thinly

disguised slandering