04/09/2017 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 04/09/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



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


Download Subtitles