Jo Coburn is joined by Conservative MP Rishi Sunak and Labour MP Lucy Powell. They discuss claims of sexual harassment in Westminster and look ahead to the Budget in November.
Browse content similar to 30/10/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Hello and welcome to
the Daily Politics.
Allegations of sexual harassment
continue to swirl around Westminster
and now the Prime Minister has
intervened - calling
for new grievance procedures
to tackle inappropriate behaviour.
To spend or not to spend.
As Chancellor Phllip Hammond comes
under increasing pressure
to increase funding to public
services, we'll look at a new report
arguing that if he does,
he'll no longer be able to balance
Gordon Brown this morning admitted
he struggled to communicate
with voters during his time
in office, so should our senior
politicians try a spot
of leadership coaching?
And in an age where so many people
are addicted to their mobiles,
we'll speak to one former MP
who thinks it's making us far too
impatient and unrealistic.
I often had to explain the limits
of an MP's ability to otherwise
quite reasonable people,
demanding that I, personally,
immediately sought out Donald Trump.
-- sort out.
All that in the next hour.
And with us for the whole
of the programme today two MPs
who could probably also
tell you a thing or two
about demanding constituents,
Labour's Lucy Powell and Rishi Sunak
from the Conservatives.
Welcome to the show.
First of all, today is the first
working day that the Spanish region
of Catalonia comes under direct rule
from the Spanish Government.
Rallies for Spanish unity were held
in the Catalan capital Barcelona
yesterday and Spain's chief
prosecutor is preparing to file
criminal charges against the Catalan
leader Carles Puigdemont.
New elections are planned
for December which the Spanish
government say Mr Puigdemont
could take part in,
provided he wasn't in jail.
When you look at the situation of
how it has unfolded, in order to
de-escalate tensions, could the EU
have done more?
I think the EU could
have done more. The Spanish
government could have done more and
the Catalan administration could
have done more. It is a failure of
diplomacy and leadership across all
parts. It is not irreversible and
irreconcilable but it is now at a
huge crisis point. I think
absolutely more could be done and
better buys could be given from the
EU as well.
Do you think they were
once scared of intervening in the
constitutional prices in Spain? The
chief prosecutor is preparing
criminal charges against any person
acting in the independence
referendum? Do you think Spanish
leaders should be jailed for that?
Spain has a free press, a free
judiciary and a working political
system. Mistakes have been made the
how things have been handled. At
this point the right thing is to let
the democratic processes in Spain
run. There are fresh elections
coming up and all sides will
participate. Ultimately we all
believe in democracy and the process
working out if the right people
stand for the elections and everyone
votes in numbers. The process can
have a stable outcome.
difficult to in the long term you
make the situation, then it has been
over the last few months. It is
likely to be its head again with
fresh elections coming along.
Willmore devolved power be the
answer? It would be the answer. We
have demands over many decades for
greater devolution to parts of the
UK anti-countries in the UK. We had
to meet those demands. We could not
have just said to the Scots in the
70s, 80s and 90s, we will put you
all in jail for demanding these
things. That is not how... The
people have a right to
self-determination in some regard.
That has to be done within the
confined of the legality of the
country and it is not our country.
If you look at the Scottish Welsh or
Northern Irish examples, talking
about is the first point. Coming to
a compromise about devolving some
powers, more powers, to meet some of
that appetite whilst sustaining
integrity of the nation state. There
is a pathway forward if people are
prepared to grasp the leadership
Brokers will no doubt remain
on Catalonia while events unfold. --
focus will no doubt remain.
Now it's time for our daily quiz.
The question for today is,
Labour MP Barry Sheerman caused
controversy over the weekend
by saying which group of people
voted Remain in the EU referendum:
a) Better educated...
or d) Traitors?
At the end of the show,
Lucy and Rishi will give us
the correct answer.
The newspapers are yet again full
of rumours of sexual harassment
taking place in Parliament, and now
the Prime Minister has got involved.
Theresa May has written
to Commons Speaker John Bercow
calling for new procedures
to support parliamentary staff,
saying that the current
regime "lacks teeth."
In the letter, the Prime Minister
said that she wants to see
procedures and an independent
The former chairman of the committee
on standards in public life,
Sir Alistair Graham,
welcomed SOME of the proposals,
but warned against
adding that he was "less
sure" about mediation.
It comes as the political website
Guido Fawkes and the Times both
claimed to have seen a "spreadsheet"
of redacted names, said to be
circulated by junior aides,
that accuses a number of tory
Separately, there have been rumours
about a small number of Labour Mps.
The Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said
he was ready to back the PM
and establish "robust
and effective" new rules.
Over the weekend, a Cabinet Office
investigation was ordered
into whether Conservative MP
and international trade minister
Mark Garnier breached ministerial
rules after alledged inappropriate
behaviour towards his
Well, it's been announced
that Andrea Leadsom,
the Leader of the Commons,
will make a statement
later this afternoon.
We can get the latest from our
Polical correspondent Vicki Young.
I understand you have just come back
from the briefing, the Number 10
spokesman, to lobby political
journalists like yourself of what
His point was the Prime
Minister takes its very seriously
and the Prime Minister would be
sitting beside Andrea Leadsom when
she makes that statement later today
put up some are accusing the Prime
Minister being too reactive rather
than proactive. She has ordered this
Cabinet Office enquiry into mark
Garnier. Some are saying, can't she
decide for herself that she thinks
it was inappropriate behaviour or
not? Should she take action and fire
him from his job? The spokesman
said, he did not want to get into
every discussion there has ever been
over party whips and people in
charge of discipline. The rumour is
they have little black books with
misdemeanours of MPs they can use
against them to try to get them to
follow the party line. The spokesman
said it would not get into those
conversations but did deny one of
the suggestions in newspapers at the
weekend there was a dossier
containing this information that the
Prime Minister had seen. He said
there was no dossier and the Prime
Minister cannot have seen it. He did
say she was deeply concerned about
recent reports on any unwanted
sexual behaviour in any work place
is unacceptable. The Prime Minister
make sure the reputation of
Parliament is not damaged but made
the point that has to be done on a
Is there a
feeling there have been some parts
of the media that have overreacted?
There has not been a big enough
distinction over genuine and serious
claims of sexual harassment or
sexual assault and rape allegations
and what is called a culture of
sexist behaviour within Parliament.
That is always the issue needs
cases. This has happened before were
MPs have got into trouble. Some have
ended up in court and were found not
guilty of certain accusations. There
was always the issue of the strange
relationship, if you like, there is
any way between an office which has
the MP at the head of the office.
They are the line manager, the
employer, a researcher, potentially
of younger members of the community.
The idea that power is put into all
of this and they can be taken
advantage of. If you are a
researcher, something has happened
to you, who do you go to with that
complaint? It is still that we have
been talking about for very many
years when it comes to Westminster.
That has not been resolved is where
the Prime Minister is writing to the
Speaker of the House of Commons to
work out if there is a way of this
being done and maybe having a third
party. Should it be left up to the
parties themselves to deal with it?
The problem is that politics comes
into play it may not be in the best
interests of the party leader to
have a scandal of that nature. After
all these years of this kind of
talk, it is still what they are
wrestling with. How do you do with
it and how can people speak out? As
we have seen with other cases in
Hollywood and the rest of it, once
people feel they can speak out about
it, you might get to the truce.
you experienced sexual harassment in
Westminster or politics? Yell Anot
as an MP. The power inequality is
what is always at the root cause of
abuse, harassment or sexual
Not as an MP. That is
all was on a spectrum. As an MP I
feel I chi am more in a position of
power and that is harder for people
to exploit me in that way for the
other young researcher and working
in politics in my 20s, I was subject
to bullying and inappropriate
behaviour and I thought I had
nowhere to go with that at that
time. I knew it would not be my
interests to go anywhere with it.
You don't want to have that mark on
your career. I think that is the
issue here. It is something, a
culture, which exists across many of
the top professions, probably in the
BBC, the media, politics, etc. We
are lawmakers and had to go further
than other institutions in making
sure that kind of behaviour is
eradicated and has somewhere to go.
How big is the problem? Is the storm
around these claims of sexual
harassment reflecting what is going
on in the corridors of power?
rampant? I don't know if the answer.
The truth is, to not know is part of
the problem. Certainly we saw the
scandal within the Liberal Democrat
Party with women coming forward a
year or so ago. Women who were
trying to become MPs, get on in the
Liberal Democrat Party all came out.
There have been scandals. If I hear
of anything myself, directly, any
direct allegations that I would act
on them and take those forward. I
don't. But I think the power
inequalities, the way in which our
offices are setup and Parliament and
so forth, within the Labour Party
there is a bigger issue at the
moment as well which is connected,
which is about the systematic
bullying and abuse at all levels of
the Labour Party. We are probably
not alone in that.
Have you gone to
the party itself to complain about
this? Has it been dealt with?
raise that regularly. We raise it in
the Parliamentary Labour Party and
others. I would like to see the
Labour Party taking a more serious
stance on that as well. It's only a
month ago that a female leading
political correspondent required a
bodyguard coming to our conference.
I don't think enough said about that
at the time. We need to show strong
leadership, even when it means
taking on our own side.
Whittingdale, one of your
colleagues, has said something is to
be done but we are talking about a
minority of incidents.
Is he right?
I agree with almost everything that
Lucy has said. There is a problem
and we do need to tackle and figure
out the best way to do it for our
party and the other parties as well.
In terms of how big a problem it is,
I cannot honestly tell you. I have
only been in Parliament for two
years my understanding is the
situation is a lot better now than
it was in the past. As I read these
stories like everybody else, clearly
there is still a problem we need to
fix in making sure that people feel
comfortable they can bring
allegations to light. That will be
part of the process of knowing how
big the problem is that lets take
Mark Garnier who told his secretary
to buy sex toys for him and used a
demeaning phrase when addressing
He says this was taken out of
context and it was not sexual
harassment. Is it acceptable
It is not language I
would use personally thought we
don't want to get into the business
of trial by television. It is right
that is being investigated.
he be suspended while the
investigation is going on?
disputed the facts and be
interpretation from the get go for
that when the facts are known, the
Prime Minister must make a decision
Presumably you would not
use the language that you do not
think it is acceptable. Is it enough
to have an investigation as to
whether he has breached the
I do not have
infinite detail of it. They are able
to look at a range of behaviour. The
Prime Minister is trying to lead to
the front on this issue and making
sure she gets to the bottom of that
case and any other cases.
been reports that four Labour MPs
have been accused of harassing
women. I have heard the Shadow
Minister telling the BBC she
reported a Labour colleague who
tried to kiss her when she was a
campaigner. This does cut across all
parties, doesn't it?
don't think there is a moral high
ground that applies. I would say
that swift action is necessary by
suspending people will stop I was
one of the first people to fall for
-- call for Jarrod O'Mara to be
suspended. The allegations were so
serious. The primers to should be
doing the same with her own
ministers. It is not an issue for
the Cabinet Office, it is whether
she personally as comfortable having
someone admitting that behaviour
took place. I'm not here to make a
party political point about it,
certainly not. We have to try to
make these things about politics
because it is not convenient for
political leaders or they are in a
weak position or it is one of their
allies or friends. They are not
going to be as strong about it as
they should be.
married to Nick Clegg, said Labour
must have known about Jared O'Mara's
comments because she and Nick Clegg
knew about him. Is it credible for
Labour to say they did not know
about his past?
They should have
done. There has been a failure in
the betting process if they did not.
Used to be chief of staff for Ed
Miliband. We went through many
disciplinary issues were about MPs
or trying to select candidates for
by-elections. In our era, ten, would
not have got through the vetting
process. I don't know what happened
in this case. -- Jared would not
have got through. That is why it is
right he should have been suspended.
It cannot be because someone is your
political ally and you are softer on
that or he is a minister and you
don't want the fuss. You must take a
strong stance. Culture change
requires strong leadership and that
applies to Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa
May. One ever-changing culture is
nebulous. It is difficult.
It is commonly known that the whips
have reports on many MPs that they
have information, that is stored
about MPs, that they can use against
them, rightly or wrongly in the
event of tight votes, difficult
particularly now in a minority
Government, are you awhich of that
sort of information?
No I am not
aware of that. That is the law of
the Whips office and there is this
black book in a safe, it is not
something I have come across but it
is important to distinguish between,
of course will is gossip about who
might be dating who, but what we are
talking about here is more important
than that. I am very confident that
if people are aware of serious
allegations of sexual harassment,
those will and should be brought to
How? At the moment,
Hopefully, we are in this hoed
situation as MPs which people don't
realise we employ our members of
staff ourselves, what we need is a
more form. Institutional process.
What would you like?
Like a big
company, any big company would have
an independent HR department so
there is someone people can go to
who is not their direct report who
as Lucy said there is a power
imbalance there, they need to go
someone else, to raise their
complaint, and then there should be
a formal process to see that threw.
It isn't just enough to call for a
mediation service, you would like a
more robust system set up, in a way
is Theresa May acting with enough
seriousness, to this problem?
think she has shown very serious
purpose there. She has written
straightaway. We will have a
statement from the leader of the
House and it is important we work
together. I think she is right to
say we should try and tackle this
problem across Parliament, so we
need to come up jointly round the
table with a solution we think is
robust and make sure Parliament is
what we want it to be, which is a
safe and welcoming place, especially
for young people.
Should she have
taken more direct action herself
about Mark Garnier and Stephen
Mark is facing a serious
allegation and she is institutions a
process which hasn't been done
before so put in place the process
you are talking about, so I think,
obviously it is the early stages of
a journey we need to go on. I agree
with Lucy, it is about cultural
change at the end of the day. We
have a responsibility to make the,
contribute to changing the culture
this Parliament so it is this...
it can't just be left to the
No, where I would agree is
we need a third party independent
place people should be able to go
to, with anonymity as well, to raise
concerns that might be smaller or
lower level, and decide whether they
want to take them forward. The word
I object to that Theresa May has
used in her proposals is mediation.
I don't think this is a question of
mediation, it is not we have a
dispute with our bossings and that
needs some mediation this is about
sending clear signals about
inappropriate behaviour, behaviour
that may become much more serious in
terms of where it extends to, and so
mediation is the wrong word for
that, but third party independent
anonymous, they are some of the
elements I think can help take this
The Chancellor, Philip Hammond,
is between a rock and a hard place
over his upcoming budget according
the Institute for Fiscal Studies.
In a new report out this morning
they point out that whilst
he is under pressure to increase
public spending, to do
so would damage his commitment
to balance the books and get rid
of the deficit.
Mr Hammond is even facing demands
from his own Cabinet
colleagues, have a listen
to the Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt
on the Andrew Marr Show yesterday.
This Government is absolutely
committed to making our NHS the
safest, best health care system.
We recognise there is
a lot of work to do.
We've just been talking
about mental health.
There are lots of
other areas as well.
I will be making a very
robust case for the
NHS to get the resources that it
needs, as I'm sure other Cabinet
ministers will for
We can speak to Carl Emmerson,
who's from the IFS.
You are saying today that Philip
Hammond is facing a tricky hand, in
next month's budget. What do you
It looks like the outlook for
growth over the next few years for
productivity, which is the key
driver of growth is going to be
downgraded. In March it was assumed
we would go about 1.6 a year,
unfortunately recent history
suggests that is perhaps too
optimistic, we have only been
managing 0. 4% a year. That is bad
news because lower productive group
means lower wages and that means
people will be paying less in tax so
we expect a lot more red ink in the
budget number, so more borrowing
over the next few years than what he
was planning eight months ago.
you put a figure on that, how much
of a hole is it going to make, this
We don't mow
how big of a downgrade they will do.
The OBR is suggesting it is going to
be significant. Where they to
downgrade half way what they assumed
back in March and what the average
we are seen over the last seven
years has been, the deficit in 2021,
2022 would be 20 billion higher, so
on course to be borrowing about 36
billion rather than about 16
billion, so it would make a
significant difference, and then the
challenge for the Chancellor is,
your plans look like you will end up
borrowing more and people are
wanting tax cut, increasing in
benefit spending and people want
more spending on public services,
how do you square that circle? You
have all these competing demands
mapped for extra cash and the public
finances aring worse.
It is looking
difficult but sounds like it is
particularly difficult to balance in
this particular case, do you think
he is going to have to drop his
target of wiping out the deficit by
He has various option, you
could imagine a situation where a
Chancellor chose now to increase
taxes significantly, that is what
often happens just after general
election, but that choice looks
difficult particularly given that
the Conservatives don't have a
Parliamentary majority so he may not
have that option to hand. It seems
unlikely he want to do more benefit
cuts or more public service cuts on
top of those very plans. It is
unlikely he will say it is an end to
austerity and we are stop cutting at
all. The most likely scenario is
small giveaways targeted at
particular group, that will add to
borrowing and that would bring into
question whether the Government is
serious about eliminating the
deficit and maybe we don't want to
commit to having a balanced budge
fret the mid 2020s on ward. It looks
harder to get there perhaps we
should be honest and they we are not
going to do that, we would rather
have hiring spending or lower taxes.
Would you broadly support dropping
the target of working out the
deficit by 2025? Is that no longer
the first priority for a
wouldn't support that, and I think
it is right that the Chancellor is
adopting the balanced approach. It
is right we live within our mean, he
has been flexible in how he has done
that so that star get has been
pushed out, but the record is very
good. Growth in the UK since 2010
has been one of the highest among
all developed country, employment is
at a record high and we have taken
difficult decisions on bringing down
the deficit, it is down by two
thirds, 100 billion less when we
came into Government. That is
extraordinary. At the same time,
there is record amount of investment
going into public services. Health
and education, defence, they are all
receiving record amounts, that is a
tricky job but one we are managing
It looks as if your Government
is go to do the opposite when it
comes to trying to get rid of the
deficit. They have committed to 10
billion for new help to buy loans. 2
billion for new council home, 1.2
for tuition fee, 2 billion for the
national insurance, U-turn and one
billion to the DUP. So they are
splashing money round every where
and it has to be paid for. If you
don't want it to be paid for by
abandoning that target of getting
rid of the deficit you are obviously
in favour of hiring taxes.
do you pay nor that?
There is head
room in the numbers. As we heard
from calm Emerson, they still think
he is on target to meet his fiscal
Except the low productivity
could cost up to 20 billion. Is
us see what happens, that is the a
forecast into the future. His target
he will probably still meet because
he put head room in the budget, that
is what sensible planning is about.
As we look forward growth is
absolutely key, we have been lucky
to enjoy relative to other countries
very strong growth. As a result,
that growth will falter, that is the
prediction from the IFS and probably
from the OBR unless something is
done about it. I say to you again,
going forward would you rather
borrow more or see taxes going up We
will see the fruits of that
investment, investment is relatively
high levels, reforms to technical
education, there is a record amount
of new company creation, those are
the things that will raise product
#2i6ty, they have only just started
There has been no
evidence up to now.
don't happen overnight. Over the
coming years we will start to see
the fruits of that as we have seen
in primary and secondary.
back the idea that
There is a few
different issue, it is clearly the
case that the slash and burn
austerity approach of the Government
has not worked by its own measure
because they said originally the
deficit would be eliminated by 2020,
now we are talking about it not even
being elimiteded by 2025. They have
failed markedly to invest in closing
that productive gap and that issue
about productive, which has been
around for years.
So would you back
the idea of abandoning that are tea
We have said we have a fully
costed manifesto commitment, so,
there is about how you cut the cake
as well and decisions you make, but
we have a fully costed manifesto set
of commitments that, we show where
we will raise the taxes from in
terms of corporation tax, making
different decision about inheritance
tax and capital gain tabs, these
huge tax cuts for the richest which
have happened under the
Conservatives and switching that
Except as you know,
the IFS don't think the sums add up.
They have said clearly and they said
it in the election it was a black
hole of at least nine billion in
your tax and spending plans and that
was specifically on public service,
what do you say? Response?
not anything like as big as a figure
the IFS have said about the
Government's black hole and they are
If you are not in
Government it is all right to be
fairly fast and loose with the
Not at all. We have a fully
costed audited set of manifesto
commitments but I think it is is
really important to understand why
we are in the situation we are now
in. The Government have failed to
invest properly in skills, skills
budgets have been slashed and burned
under this Government, we are seeing
schools budgets being cut.
has, well, go on, you respond?
IFS were clear at the time of the
election, they said Labour should
not pretend, those are the words
they use, should not pretend all
this money can be magiced up from a
small minority of rich people. It
means higher fax rises for the vast
What was the percentage
Labour said, they would tax how many
people at the top?
The IFS said
they should not pretend they can
raise all this money...
only a small part of it.
it is hard on one hand to criticise
the Government for not getting the
deficit down fast enough, not
cutting enough, at the same time
objecting to every difficult
decision the Government has made, to
try and get us to Li within our
mean, you can't have it both way,
when you look at health and
education spend, they are autorecord
We are talking about a lot
more people being dealt with and a
growing elderly population.
look at it as a share of GDP, we
spend at least the EU and OECD
average... If not more than that.
Why does Jeremy Hunt feel he needs
He is batting for his
Should there be a focus
on higher spending in public service
snoops what there should be a focus
on is output, what we care about is
how many people we are treating, how
many children are good our
outstanding schools we should be
debating that. You said the
austerity of the Government has
failed, clearly, you said, but why
is Labour only pledging to reverse
£4 billion worst of welfare cuts and
not the full 12 billion.
like to see a greater focus in terms
of how we can help those that are
transitioning on to Universal
Credit, the low paid and just about
managing, I have given others yes, I
for example I think the tax free
childcare scheme that is Government
has brought in which is going to
almost entirely better off people.
That should be going to the just
about managing families to help with
their costs, so I think there is,
there is more that can be done there
and it is about how you slice the
cake, it is about some of the
political decisions you make within
the envelope you have, but there is,
you know, we are getting to the
point, I think after seven years of
austerity, where we need to have a
bigger conversation with the public,
about why austerity in itself is a
failed policies, because you have
not been able to invest in people
properly, so yes we do have more
people in work, but they are in low
paid job, they are not in secure
jobs that is because we haven't been
upskilling people, we haven't been
investing in the regions in other
parts of the country.
There is a cost. Is it really
The 48 billion is fully
costed and clearly set out,
independently audited. Even the IFF,
many people say with such low
interest rates we should have spent
the last four years borrowing to
invest for big projects in
transport, and skills, to raise
Let me finally
put to you, there is a choice, if
you are a six-week wait for
Universal Credit payments. Would you
rather see that time shortened to a
month to stop people becoming
destitute? To do that, reverse the
plans for corporation tax?
said about Labour's plans to raise
corporation tax back up, it would
depress economic activity, lower
wages and make sure there are fewer
How do help people on
At the moment they
can access 50% of the payments they
are Jews on the same day if needs be
more people could beware of that
service. -- Bayard
-- they are due. You must remember
that we spend £90 billion on working
age welfare. That is pretty much the
same as we spend on the NHS and is
twice what is spent on schools. It
is a large bill that is not wrong to
ask how the money is spent and make
sure it is spent carefully.
is anything to go by, it will be
another busy week in politics.
Let's take a look at the week ahead.
Tomorrow, Health Secretary Jeremy
Hunt will be in front
of Parliament's Health
And the Government will
reveal details of its new
housing benefit policy.
On Wednesday, Theresa May will take
Prime Minister's Questions
in the House of Commons.
On Thursday, it's the turn
of Brexit ministers to answer
questions in Parliament.
And on Friday, Labour Leader
Jeremy Corbyn will appear
on the Channel 4 TV show Gogglebox -
in a special edition to raise money
for cancer research.
We're joined now by Lucy Fisher,
senior political correspondent
at The Times, and the Guardian's
joint political editor,
Welcome to both of you. Lucy Fisher,
first of all, is the media storm
orang claims of sexual harassment
and inappropriate behaviour
proportionate to the number of cases
According to the
dossier, it showed 36 Tory MPs are
so far involved in these claims
which so far are unverified. The
claims also stretch up as high as
the Cabinet. Former Cabinet
ministers and senior MPs. I think it
is very serious indeed. I do not
think there is a suggestion this is
an overblown scandal.
Do think it
could end up with ministers being
That is not impossible. Some
people were surprised that yesterday
Mark Garnier, who admitted going on
to buy sex toys with his assistant.
I do not know if we can say that on
lunchtime television. You have said
it now. Using an unfortunate phrase
towards her, he said it was all fun.
I don't think it is a tall clear
that we will not see resignations as
time goes on.
-- at all clear. There
have been criticisms of Theresa May
not taking firm enough action. What
do you think she needs to do to get
to grips with the situation?
thought her letter to John Burke are
calling for new Parliamentary
procedures does not go far enough.
-- Berkow. Questions in the Sunday
papers suggested sleaze briefings
were fed into Number 10. She needs
to become aware of what she knew
about allegations of harassment and
rape behaviour by MPs. A senior
Conservative has tabled a motion
today. Andrea Leadsom will be in
front of MPs talking on the next
steps. Certainly the PM needs to act
fast. Her spokesman would not
confirm she has confidence from her
Cabinet. We could see some sackings
in the offing pretty imminently.
wonder with Andrea Leadsom standing
up, Theresa May will be with her in
the House of Commons. The wonder
whether it will encourage victims to
come forward in the way you saw with
the Weinstein case. Let's move on to
the budget, or fiscal and economic
policy. The Government is to drop
plans to cap housing benefit for
people living in social rented
accommodation. Another U-turn.
this becoming a trend? It certainly
seems that way. An interesting fact,
ten announced by the PM last week
during Prime Minister's Questions
came on the back of Labour tabling
an opposition Day debate. Even
though the Prime Minister said we
will not get involved and vote in
the non-binding Labour led debate,
she still felt prompted with the
U-turn. Jeremy Corbyn certainly is
feeling confident with Labour
planning to press on for more
changes in policy of the Universal
Credit certainly in the run-up to
Some of this can be seen
in the light these are the policies
of George Osborne being reversed
here. Actually some of the chickens
are coming home to roost.
Absolutely. George Osborne announced
£12 billion of welfare cuts. He has
since gone. The legacy remains. MPs
are finding constituents coming to
them and telling them dreadful
stories about Universal Credit and
these are the cuts coming through.
On Universal Credit, finally, what
do you think will happen? Do you
think there will be a further
announcement about shortening the
That is the mood
music. There have been text messages
sent to Tory MPs suggesting the
initial delay in first payment for
people moving on to benefit system
of six weeks could be reduced to
Thank you both very
The Government may be facing
defeat in the Lords.
Labour peers, with the support
of Liberal Democrats
and some cross benchers,
are supporting an amendment
to the Data Protection Bill that
would incorporate part of the EU
Charter of Fundamental Rights.
That covers data protection into the
The Government however
argue that the amendment,
which concerns the right to privacy
and personal data, risks
the unintended consequence
of abolishing exemptions that allow
journalists to protect
We can get more on this
from Labour's Lord Stevenson who's
leading the amendment
and the Conservative
MP Matt Warman.
Welcome to both of you. Wilf
Stevenson, you have put down this
amendment calling for article eight
of the EU rights to be inserted into
It is an important part of
law. We think this should be
continued and see no reason for it
to be taken out.
What is the
problem? Just be keeping the status
quo. Sima krych it would that the
bill as it stands keeps the status
It would be that the bill as
it stands keeps the status quo. It
is about potentially not been
complied with data protection
regulations across the EU which has
huge economic consequences are now
some more serious economic
consequences potentially around
removing the protections that
journalists and other financial
institutions currently enjoy under
data protection regulations. It is
very important we get this right.
Are you against it in principle? If
it is the status quo, surely we were
exposed to both unintended
has all the right measures in place
to make sure we are compliant with
European regulations and that
journalists, for instance, enjoy the
protections they need, the financial
institutions enjoy the protections
they need as well. This is about
making sure that we don't, as I
think a well intentioned amendment
might risk doing it puts us in a
position where we are not comply
getting the best data protection
regulations for the most important
part of our economy over the coming
I can't quite see the
difference between what you have
signed up to nine whether that is
leading up to terrorist financing
and money laundering. Do think there
is a danger that could increase with
your amendment question we do not
want that to happen.
We are trying
to reach out to the Government. This
is day one of seven days in
committee. We are saying to the
Government, let's try to get this
right for the benefit of all
concerned. The risks are really- if
we get this wrong all sorts of
businesses trading with Europe might
not be able to do so. Even worse
European countries might not be able
to trade with us. There is a lot at
Do you think you will defeat
the Government on this?
necessary. We are both very close
together. What we have just heard is
very close to where we want to get
to. You want to get it right.
do you think Labour is up to? If you
are working together, as you both
say, is there really a case, as I
understand it, that they are trying
to make Brexit more difficult form
Mr 's? Is that true? -- for
ministers. Al Arights can exist in
all sorts of territory.
Are you stoking something
that does not exist in trying to
make mischief over Brexit?
an issue where we are genuinely
listening to amendments that have
been proposed. There will be read
tabled an amendment which will
soften the language. This is an
argument over our future
relationship with the European Union
were all sides understand the
importance and understand why we had
to get this right foot if I am
honest will get there because
everyone is on the same side.
you going to allow Labour to go
forward with including this bit of
the Charter and keeping it within
the data protection Bill?
fundamentally shift where the focus
is. What it would do is introduce a
whole new set of language, a whole
new set of unintended consequences
as you said in your introduction.
Just explain the unintended
consequences. How would journalists
no longer be able to protect their
sources or anti-dumping agencies
could not check drugs cheats? How
would it happen with this amendment?
What we had in the original
amendment was a blanket set of
rights to enshrine the right to
princely into people, whatever they
were doing. As you have just heard,
there is the knowledge that went too
far. This amendment seeks to try and
protect people who currently enjoy
legitimate protections without
providing a blanket rule for people
whether they are criminal or not. We
need to get this right. There is
genuine willingness to try to find a
sensible middle ground that
preserves the protections that
people have at the moment but that
also makes sure we have world
leading data protection regulations
and compliant data protection
regulations with our most important
trading partners in Europe.
sounds like a big appeal. Maybe the
two of you can work it out and
report back on what happens in
Parliament. Thank you.
It's pretty obvious that mobile
phones have taken over our lives
in the last few years but have
they made us more demanding
of our politicians.
Charlotte Leslie, who used to be
a Conserative MP in Bristol believes
the instant gratification we get
from social media is making us ask
far too much of our MPs.
Here's her soapbox.
My mobile phone.
It helps me do so much
more, I tell myself.
But have you ever caught
the technology in your pocket
beginning to change you?
When I find myself demanding
instant answers to problems
in my own life right now,
I begin to wonder whether technology
is eating our brains.
I was selected as a candidate
to fight Bristol North West in 2006.
Back then, Twitter was
barely out of its egg.
E-mails were frequent,
but so were letters.
By 2015, everything had changed.
Not only did Twitter
dominate our attention span,
I noticed people changing too.
We've become less tolerant
of waiting and less clear
about the difference
between what we want
and what is actually possible.
I often had to explain
the limits of an MP's ability.
to otherwise quite reasonable
people demanding that I,
sort out Donald Trump
or global extremism.
If our technology has turned us
into instant gratification,
virtual reality addicts,
it's going to get much harder
for politicians to satisfy this ever
more demanding public.
If digital really is reprogramming
us, to prefer the instant over
the long-term and feel-good idealism
over gritty pragmatism,
does this fundamentally
favour the political left?
So, is virtual reality
the greatest enemy of the right?
If so, the gradient of technology
that Conservatives will have
to climb if they are to own
the politics of the future may be
much steeper than just
getting good on Instagram.
And Charlotte joins us now.
Is it really fair to say that you
think in your mind social media has
benefitted the left more than the
I'm not sure, but I do ask
myself that, the reason I am
Conservative and not Labour is not
because I think that what Labour
wants is necessarily wrong, it is
because I don't think it works in
reality. And so I asked myself, if
you have two types of people in the
world and you probably need both,
who look at the world as they want
it to be and act on that, and then
other people who tend to look at the
world as it is and act on that,
disease virtual reality fave the
people who would like the world as
they would like it to be, that is
the difference I have with my Labour
Or is it the Conservatives
haven't been very good at using
That is a different
debate. Look at the 2015 and
discourse was that Conservatives
were far ahead.
What do you say to that in response
to the left?
I think we are seeing a
rise in populism on both sides of
the political spectrum, and I think
we are entering a period in politics
where people want simple answers, to
what are complex questions.
Yes, I think
they is a difficult time for
politics, for those of us who think
you have to, do have to make
difficult decisions that things are
a long-term trend, and so I think,
Charlotte has, but I don't think it
is the left right thing, I think
this is about the edges of politics
versus maybe in the middle.
a relatively new MP, how demanding
is it in terms of social media
request, peopleable to contact you
directly on a daily basis.
Charlotte and Lucy I represent a
rural constituency so broadband and
me of session Nat is not...
helps you, the fact you have patchy
cover. I look forward to the day
when all of my constituencies can
find me on Facebook and have a
signal. As a new MP it has been
prechty much a positive experience
for me because it enables me to
connect with different people as you
try to establish yourself. Do you
use all the social media?
How do you survive
without using twister?
I am here to
tell the tale. That is probably why
I have had a positive more
experience, most people's
experience, it can be abusive,
Facebook is more engaging with video
content and things like that.
think it is about different
dedemocracy, I represent one of the
largest populations in the country,
it is one of the most deprived. One
thing I say is I want you to be more
demanding because the people who
need me the most in my constituency
aren't demanding and the people who
need me the least are most
demanding. I think there is an
It is important to
be demanding in the right way.
Something politics has done is to
say we can give you everything now,
and so in a sense we can't be
surprised when people say I want
this now and want unreasonable
things and get disappointed and
upset when it isn't given.
expectation is important but if you
look at someone like Donald Trump
who is a great user as we know of
twitter and hasn't yet been able to
give all of, meet the promises he's
made yet his supporters still like
him, it is as much the sort of
messenger as well as the message and
how it is communicated.
I think it
will be interesting to give Donald
Trump time, because we are a short
way into Trumpism in America, I
think we have a fundamental
mismatch. I notice myself expecting
things more quickly, it isn't me
saying that lot is change, it is me
saying what is this doing to my
expectations and how real and how
realistic is my demand on what is a
tangible physical world.
But it can
get a lot more done as you said and
it does give you a direct line,
Gordon Brown thinks personality
politics is the issue, when it comes
to social media, not necessarily the
message, do you think he is right?
It is no surprise, if you have lots
of different ways for people to
speak to constituents that
personality will matter a lot more.
Have you preprogrammed yourself, the
onset of having a smartphone and the
social media, has it changed you?
Probably changed all, you have to
try and switch it off. Otherwise I
would be a terrible mum as a
terrible politician, which I
probably am both that. Is a
different question, the other trend
I think I would agree w alongside
this sort of simple answers to
complex problems which Donald Trump
epip miced is this trend for
personal back story, personal kind
of story ribs about politicians
which I think is the way everyone is
Do you think it is a good
I don't think it is a
particularly good thing, people will
come a cropper. If you make it all
about your own personal brand, and
then for some reason you don't live
up to that brand, you know, that is,
because we are not all perfect
people, we are not people that have
got a great, it is all about our
back story. We are all ordinary
Some are less ordinary than
Some are a bit posh, posher
than me, but most people are
ordinary people trying to do a good
thing. It should be about what we
are trying to do, not necessarily,
you know, our personality or back
All right. Leave it there.
Now, what makes a great
Is it confidence, or compassion,
or a penchant for handshakes?
Well, according to Liz Truss,
the answer could, in some part, lie
in leadership coaching.
At a speech to the Social Market
Foundation, the Chief Secretary
to the Treasury called
for a departure from the idea
of leadership as an innate quality.
She said that cabinet ministers
should follow the lead of business
chiefs and admit the need for
coaching, and avoid the dichotomy
that someone is "either
Winston Churchill or David Brent."
Today, former Prime Minister Gordon
Brown has given his view on why
he failed to resonate
with the public saying:
"The modern version of 'connecting'
seems to increasingly include
a public display of emotion,
with the latter - authentic or not -
seen as evidence of a sincerity
required for political success"
"in a far more touchy-feely era,
our leaders speak of public issues
in intensely personal ways
and assume they can win votes simply
by telling their electors
that they 'feel their pain'.
For me, being conspicuously
demonstrative is uncomfortable"
Joining us now is leadership
coach from the Alexander
Partnership, Jill Pett.
Welcome to the programme. Hind sight
is a wonderful thing and people can
be more candid when they are no
longer in office. What makes a
successful political leader in your
I think it is a broad
question, I think that we at the
Alexander partnership chub 2 are
concerned with leaders find their
authentic voice and being authentic
and present in the moment and
understanding really what your
purpose is is critical, and I think
that Liz Truss is right. Think we
have moved away from personality,
politics and I think people are
looking for credibility and real
belief in what they are talking
If it is about authenticity
and you are not naturally someone
who has a lot of empathy or can't
demonstrate emotion and you are
running a country, then doesn't that
hinder your ability to succeed.
I think there are ways in which you
can work round that, what we are
engaged with, is helping people
become the best versions of
themselves. So everyone has
different degree of empathy, I don't
think that is is a prerequisite for
success in politics.
What do you
think is key in terms of being a
I think Liz is
right. There is room for coaching
and improvement. Some things you
can't teach, like temperament and
judgment, authorityty, coaching
probably can't help you with that.
In the nuts and bowls of how you do
your job, we are all people, we have
things we are better and good at and
getting help seems sensible. Some of
the most successful COEs have
And lots of it.
I am not good at this or that, I
need to improve how I communicate.
Is that why you have been considered
a potential future leader on testify
Conservative Party. Because you have
recognised what is needed to become
a good leader.
I will be different.
There is no package, everyone wants
to be the best version of
themselves, getting hem seems the
right thing to do. Lewis Hamilton
has won a fourth World Championship,
if you look a his career he talks
about these are the things I have
changed and got better at. Jimmy
Anderson is going off to which Ashes
Series, his game has evolved. People
are trying to improve themselves.
don't think there is any doubt, it
is a given, in business, that any
modern progressive CEO would have a
good leadership coach by their side,
with them over a period of time.
That is a given. It is obvious to
say that that needs to transfer into
politics. I mean, you know, the
agenda for minister, and people in
high office is so complex. So, you
need all the help you can get.
every Prime Minister should have
You would say that,
how have we managed up to now?
good question. Are we managing? I
think it is very much on the rise in
Europe, and the States and I think
anyone in high office would have a
leadersome hip coach, and I think
really we need to set our people up
to succeed, otherwise we are not
going to get our brightest and best
Thank you. There is
just time before we go to find out
the answer to our quiz.
The question was - Labour MP
Barry Sheerman caused controversy
over the weekend by saying
which group of people voted Remain
in the EU referendum.
So, Lucy and Rishi,
what's the correct answer?
Hip coach, and I think really we
need to set our people up to
succeed, otherwise we are not going
to get our brightest and best into
politics. Thank you. There is just
time before we go to find out the
answer to our quiz.
Know what he said.
What was it?
Was that wise?
That's all for today.
Thanks to our guests.
I'll be here at noon tomorrow
with all the big political stories
of the day - do join me then.
Jo Coburn is joined by Conservative MP Rishi Sunak and Labour MP Lucy Powell. They discuss claims of sexual harassment in Westminster and look ahead to the Budget in November. The programme also includes a short film by Charlotte Leslie MP on whether smartphones and social media have made the public too demanding of politicians.