Labour's Frank Field and Nicky Morgan from the Conservatives join Jo Coburn throughout the programme. They look at the EU Withdrawal Bill and immigration after Brexit.
Browse content similar to 13/11/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Hello and welcome to
the Daily Politics.
The husband of a woman jailed
in Iran calls on the Government
to be clear that his wife
was on holiday when
she was detained.
Why did Michael Gove
say that he didn't know
what she was doing there?
Too hard, too soft, just right.
All the old arguments re-surface
as the EU Withdrawal Bill
returns to the Commons.
As they continue to argue in
Brussels, can agreement be reached
here about the best way forward?
Theresa May thought strong
and stable would be a winning
formula in the general election -
but is it politicians
with authenticity that
have the midas touch?
And we'll hear from
the architectural historian who's
gone behind the scenes of Big Bens'
multi million pound makeover.
All that in the next hour
and with us for the whole
of the programme today a Labour MP
who's been around Westminster almost
as long as Big Ben and has never had
a makeover; Frank Field who chairs
the Work and Pensions
Also here, the equally authentic
although slightly less long-standing
Conservative MP and chair
of the Treasury select
committee, Nicky Morgan.
Welcome to both of you.
First this morning, the husband
of the British-Iranian woman,
has said the government "hasn't done
all it could have done" to secure
the release of his wife.
She was arrested during a visit
to Iran in April 2016, accused
of trying to overthrow the regime.
She says she was simply
on holiday visiting relatives.
Last week the Foreign Secretary,
Boris Johnson, was accused
of worsening Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe's
plight by saying
that she was teaching
journalists in the country -
a claim that's been seized
upon by some in Iran.
Yesterday, Boris Johnson's Cabinet
Colleague, Michael Gove,
appeared to add to the uncertainty
about what Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe
was doing there.
I don't know. One of the things I
want to stress is that...
Is that there is no reason why
Nad anyone Zaghari-Ratcliffe should
be in prison in Iran so far as I
know. No evidence has been produced
suggesting she should be detained.
It appears here to be harming the
human rights of someone whose plight
necessarily moves us all.
that you don't know who she was
doing. Her husband is clear she was
on holiday with her child.
case I take exactly her husband's
assurance in that regard.
Responding to Michael Gove's
comments, Nazanin's husband,
Richard Ratcliffe, has written
to Foreign Office office to "remind
all Cabinet Ministers
that the Government position
is that the UK Government has
no doubt that Nazanin
was in Iran on holiday".
Mr Ratcliffe spoke to
the BBC this morning.
I wrote yesterday in fact after we
saw and I didn't catch it live the
comments, but obviously my cousins
did and they got very upset and
watched it through. Don't get me
wrong, he said some good things
about Iran. He said Nazanin is on
holiday and is innocent, it
shouldn't be for Cabinet Ministers
to be fudging it. I wrote to the
Foreign Office on an e-mail setting
out that the Government's position
was clear in Parliament that the UK
Government has no doubt that she was
there on holiday and if they could
please make sure all the Cabinet
Ministers are are aware of it.
Johnson was asked about it this
Let me say on Iran and
consular cases, they are all very
sensitive and the key thing to
understand is that we are working
very, very hard and intensively and
impartially on all those cases.
Thank you very much. See you later,
Nicky Morgan, his
comments about the fact that Nazanin
was teaching journalists in Iran may
have worsened her situation. Your
colleague Anna Soubry has called for
him to be sacked. Do you agree with
I think he should be
considering his position, yes. If I
thought sacking was going to make a
difference... I mean the important
point is the safety and security of
Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe. I cannot
begin to imagine what went through
Boris Johnson and I'm afraid to say
Michael Gove's minds. We all know,
particularly after a week of
coverage that she was in the country
visiting her parents with her young
daughter, that's it, end of story.
Michael was right to say there was
no justification whatsoever for the
Iranian authorities to hold her.
irresponsible is it then of Boris
Johnson if it's true that he had
just not read the briefs
If that is true, and that is a big
if, I don't know, but that is
inexcusable. I've been a Secretary
of State but not a Foreign Secretary
where somebody's security is at risk
like in this case but frankly there
are times when being a Secretary of
State is not glamorous, involves
reading boxes of paper every week
and every night, that is the job you
are asked to do on behalf of your
country. If he doesn't want to do
it, somebody else should be given
Listening to him in
Brussels saying the case needs to be
handled sensitively and impartially,
what does he mean?
I have no idea. I
just don't understand why he... I
don't know what advice he is getting
that says this morning would have
been a... This morning would have
been a perfect opportunity to say, I
heard the comments of her husband,
I'm very soyry, I got it wrong and
the situation is clear, we are doing
all we can as a Government to put
pressure on the Iranian authorities
and will use everything we've got
disposal to get her out of prison.
Is he the right man to deal with
The conduct he's shown,
the way he's answered the original
question and continued it would
make, I would have thought, any
Prime Minister think, do I have the
right person as Foreign Secretary
because, sadly this is only one of a
number of cases where there are
British nationals detained around
the world but obviously Iran is a
particularly difficult area of the
world to deal with.
Ratcliffe told the BBC today that he
didn't want Boris Johnson to be
sacked because he could do more good
by actually now trying to get his
wife released. Many Labour
politicians have called for him to
be sacked, Jeremy Corbyn, Tulip
Sadiq and Sadiq Khan, Keir Starmer
however told the programme that why
he should have been fired a while
ago, we should reflect on what
Richard is saying this morning. Do
you think it would be better for him
to stay to see this through?
Keir start Searle right on that. For
-- Keir Starmer is right on that.
For Boris Johnson to say this case
needs to be handled delicately seems
almost a contradiction in terms the
given his character. The role he has
played is appalling with Michael
Gove. The idea that you can, as
Foreign Secretary, without learning
your brief, do this, and then for
other Cabinet Ministers to put their
foot in your big mouth. Why didn't
Michael Gove say, this is not my
department, that the Government's
line is quite clear, I have nothing
to say on Boris Johnson's comments
this person is innocent, she was
there on holiday, but we all know
this is an evil regime that will use
her and use this maybe to increase
her sentence. I think that is
shameful and both of them, both
Michael Gove and Boris Johnson
should hang their heads in shame for
the role they've played in this.
Richard Ratcliffe has said he thinks
he should stay. They've spoken and
they feel it's perhaps his best
chance to get his wife released. But
why do you think - I know you are
not in the mind of Michael Gove -
what would be the motivation for
saying he didn't know what she was
doing there, bearing in mind there's
been so much publicity around it and
the Government's clarified the
position that she was there on
holiday. Do they know something we
Well, look, possibly and I
didn't see the clip live yesterday
morning so I don't know whether
there was something before. But as I
said, I don't know what was going
through the minds of Michael and
Boris when they said what they said.
I think it's right to listen, of
course, to Nazanin's husband up
close, he's suffering the agonies of
his wife and daughter not being
here, it must be dominating every
single second of his life. If that's
what he thinks OK, but I would say
that people sl to be very mindful of
everything they say in a case like
Michael Gove in that interview
yesterday was backing up Boris
Johnson's position, saying it was
very much the Iranian authorities'
fault that this happened.
Of course it is.
about Michael Gove protecting his
I don't think
it's about that. Undoubtedly when
you are on any kind of sofa and in
the Cabinet, you are there to stand
up and to defend your Cabinet
colleagues on the basis of
collective responsibility and
supporting each other but I think
Frank has provided a perfect script
that Michael could have used and
perhaps he'll ask you next time
Frank for advice before he goes on
the Marr programme.
What is so
worrying about this, isn't it, is
that if he was going into defend his
colleague, God help what is going to
happen when Boris Johnson's enemies
set on him. It's opened the whole
issue again which was beginning to
die down, if it could die down, but
I agree with what's been the theme
of this. I mean, the real culprit is
Iran, an evil regime. We ought to
bear that in mind. But we don't go
around making it easy for them to be
nasty to British citizens.
For goodness sake.
Now it's time for our daily
quiz and it seems there
is no aspect of our lives
that is unaffected by Brexit.
According to reports in the press
this morning Michel Barnier
is warning that there could be
a rather awkward travel ban
if the negotiations collapse.
So what are they threatening to stop
crossing the border.
On Friday the European Commission's
Chief Negotiator Michel Barnier said
the UK had to provide "vital"
clarification on the total sum it's
prepared to pay to the EU.
He said the British need to be clear
in the next fortnight,
before the December EU Council
summit where leaders of the EU27
will judge whether or not it's time
to begin trade negotiations.
But as we approach this crucial
point in the negotiations,
what other outstanding Brexit issues
are occupying the Prime
Minister here at home?
This week the EU Withdrawal Bill
is back in Parliament -
with a controversial amendment
attached setting the
exact date of Brexit.
If it succeeds, 11pm on the 29th
March 2019 will be fixed in law
as the time the UK leaves the EU -
regardless of the state
It's unclear if many
Conservatives will vote
against that amendment -
but one who will, Anna Soubry, has
called it "a very foolish mistake".
Closer to the Cabinet table
it's not clear things
are easier for Theresa May -
she's had a letter from Michael Gove
and Boris Johnson.
That's reported to say some
government departments are focusing
on Brexit preparations...
And it apparently features a demand
that a transition deal be
a maximum of two years.
Labour have been piling
on the pressure too -
Shadow Brexit Secretary Keir Starmer
has been outlining the party's
own transition amendments.
They're calling for a guaranteed
role for the European Court
of Justice during any transitional
But the action isn't
all on the green benches -
today Brexit Committee chair
Hilary Benn will meet David Davis.
To discuss the release of Brexit
impact assessments into 58 different
sectors of the UK economy.
And Theresa May's hosting business
leaders from across the EU
in Number 10 Downing Street -
they want a transition deal that
preserves the status quo.
Well we can talk now about that
to our Business Editor, Simon Jack,
who is in Downing Street.
Welcome, Simon. Is Theresa May
going to be hearing anything from or
saying anything to these groups that
hasn't been said before?
Well, this will be the first time
that she'll speak directly to these
business groups, if you like, the
European equivalent of the CBI. She
invited them in to get their take on
how best to proceed to minimise any
damage. Basically the message is,
there is mutual self-interest here,
if there are problems at Dover, for
example, there'll be problems at
Calais and which need to work
together to minimise the problems.
The businesses want to stress the
urgency of the situation today, the
head of business Europe wrote
recently to Donald Tusk saying she
was concerned at the slow progress.
They want a transition deal, just
like their counterparts here, they
want a transitional deal arranged so
everyone will have an idea of what
it will look like by the time we
come to the December talks. Number
Ten say this is unfair, transitional
deal with the ECJ still in charge is
also stated Government policy and
when it comes to the slow pace of
progress, It Takes Two to tango or
not in this case. This is the
negotiation. That is holding them
up. The other by-product Number Ten
will be hoping for is that the
business group also go back home to
their own politicians and say, there
could be some grave damage to our
businesses as well. One German
business group said it could cost
the German automotive sector £200
billion. They need the progress and
the transitional deal agreed so they
can deal wit in December.
Interesting the point you made about
two to tan goal or not in this case
-- tango. Is there any evidence they
are pressurising their own national
governments or have done so up until
now, as well as come here to the UK
to pressurise Theresa May?
interesting view as that, I was
talking to a big German car
manufacturer recently, Theresa May
says when you go back to Angela
Merkel and tell her your concerns,
they say Angela Merkel says I have
not got the bandwidth for this at
the moment, I am trying to form a
government, speak to Brussels, not
Berlin. It seems that back channel
of isms is talking through
politicians is working particularly
Nicky Morgan, Anna Soubry,
this amendment fixing the Brexit
date is three foolish, will you be
voting against it?
I haven't decided
why we are putting this date on the
face of the bill. It seems to me a
poor negotiating tactic. And you
know, the bill is not about Brexit
per se, it's about the process,
that's what government ministers
have always explain to us, it's
about process, getting the law,
rather than Brexit whether it
happens are not. It's happening, we
have had the vote, we have to your
Article 50 process, it's about how
Parliament scrutinises the law.
is there a need to fix the date?
have four amendments, my first
tomorrow was fixing the date. Why?
It seems absurd that you would go
through this process and not have a
date when this transition would be
finished but if I could finish this,
I think the government has very big
criticisms now about the drive of
the government... Whether in fact I
mean, I've asked the government for
a Brexit Cabinet which is in
constant session to drive these
negotiations, to be doing all this
work behind the lines in Europe,
above as Mrs, what it is likely to
cost you and so on, one closes to
set the date, a second clause is to
move the legislation, regulation
over, the third is that Parliament
decides how we review that and the
fourth is a safe haven and I believe
just as tomorrow they are accepting
my first clause, when they get to
the hand-to-hand fighting in the
Lords, there is no way, no
guillotine, cut off process... They
will actually jettison most of the
spill and we will be left with a
four clause bill about getting us
out on time with the very clear
legislation in here, how we review
They are worried you are going
to thwart this bill unless it is in
They were worried that the
Article 50 bill wasn't going to go
through, the second reading of the
spill, ministers and those who think
Brexit is a great idea need to stop
worrying about trying to justify and
trying to hold onto the result of
the referendum, the result is there,
it's happened, this country is
leading the EU and I'm afraid to say
the Prime Minister's tone deaf, tin
eared article on Friday was
guaranteed to continue to deepen
divisions in the Conservative Party
rather than trying to heal them
which is what you should be doing. I
have won agreement with Frank on
this, the drive that is needed to
get this stuff done and all the
other things that government needs
to be doing.
Right. Why are you in a
quandary as to whether to vote
I still don't
understand, this bill has been
explained to us by ministers, David
Davis, who says Bill, you people
should have no problems with this...
What's wrong with putting an end
date on it?
That's more about
Brexit, and it happening or not
happening, I except it's happening,
we have Article 50 which is a clear
two-year process, at the end of
March 2019 we will not be members of
the EU, this is by Parliament and
the rights of Parliament. Those who
know about negotiating strategies
say it's a bad idea to put a hard
date in at the end on the face of
the bill, that's not what this bill
is designed to do.
Those who know
about negotiations and in charge of
what's going on. That's a bigger,
broader issue. Whole thing is
meandering over the place, there is
no central drive and the key fact
is, that when we withdraw, if there
is no agreement, there is no money
coming in so the empty bowls from
Poland and all the rest will be
coming up saying, where is our money
to the Germans and the Germans will
say there is no money, there's going
to be a mega- crisis. At this stage,
because they need our money, the
boot will go on to the other foot
and we need to stress that, how will
start to come do us, the nearer we
get to the final parts of the
There nothing to worry
about and are you happy with the
idea of no deal?
I think we should
have a proper, thought out no deal
stands, that might have to happen,
anybody going into negotiations
would have that as part of the
armoury. What worries me is, I get
no sense this is the biggest issue
facing the government.
To do this...
Really, it's the only thing they're
doing, it's part of the problem.
Cabinet is in constant session like
Churchill's War Cabinet.
people in the Cabinet who agree with
Nicky Morgan, recalcitrant
remainders who make this difficult?
There is a lot of people who want
these negotiations to fail but they
won't actually say so. And there are
one or two people, like Ken Clark,
who are quite honest but most people
who want the process to fail, so we
revoke the decision to come out, are
appearing to be, as I say, Wolves in
sheep clothing, saying we must make
this a better this, we must make
this a better that. The aim of many
people in Parliament still is to
thwart the process, so we don't
Let us talk about the
letter from Boris Johnson and
Michael Gove, wasn't appropriate to
send a letter direct Theresa May and
saying there are part of the
government but I've making
insufficient progress and there is
insufficient energy and then it
appeared in the papers? Is that the
right way to govern?
things. Firstly ministers to write
to the Prime Minister on a private
basis, I did it to David Cameron and
I'm sure others did about them is we
particularly cared about and want to
see the government agenda. She did
have leaked? No. Should they be
directing the Prime Minister? No,
she is the Prime Minister, but they
can say this is my view. The point
about insufficient energy, I think
there is insufficient energy, the
budget coming up, that is a time for
government to show energy in other
areas. The way people vote in the
referendum will not necessarily be
addressed I Brexit, things like
economic growth, wage increase, the
government has got to show energy on
all those things.
energy was about preparation for
I have to say, there is
massive amounts of energy being
expended on Brexit, plenty of the
departments, papers circulated,
insufficient energy, the debate on
the impact assessment you talked
about at the beginning of this
piece, we were told there were 58
impact assessments, we are told they
are not there. Do you think they
exist? There are bits and pieces of
paper but I am not sure they could
be pulled together to make an impact
Do you think there
really was... I think there is more
chance that those papers exist than
the chairman of the Tory backbench
committee has 40 names to dethrone
Mr macro which I think, I doubt
whether he's got many names at all.
But it's interesting that was a
demand for 58 political assessments
or the impact assessments on 58
sectors were asked to be produced
and then they could be produced. Is
that because they don't exist in
this order form we presume?
that's exactly right.
The form they
should exist... If we take the need
for housing, the big uplift we want
in the budget. We need to link that
to say there will be a labour supply
coming in to meet that. Until we
have home-grown our own supply.
Apple then cut immigration, that
will then give us serious welfare
We will talk about these
things in a moment.
departments we need, we don't need
apartments trotting out the old
thing from their silos saying what
You don't think
there's a need for the impact
assessments at all? Let's talk about
labour, you the government lacks
drive to push these negotiations
forward, using labour would do a
better job with their view on Brexit
and the negotiations when Keir
Starmer said leaving the EU without
a deal would cause constitutional
Britain's don't have
the sort of disturbances, she said.
What is Keir Starmer doing? What I
am saying, the Prime Minister should
now go Top Gear, we should actually
have a Brexit Cabinet as we had a
War Cabinet, the Prime Minister
should offer up places to the
opposition leaders to become part of
that, to bind them in, that would
begin to tell us who is making
gestures and who is serious about
getting the very, very best move for
You agree with Sue
James Dyson who was a lead vote and
talked about Brexit, give or on the
same site when it comes to this big
decision, he said the only way to
make a success Brexit was to make it
easier to hire and fire people and
abolish corporation tax?
agree? I don't agree. I thought his
other comments about that we should
prepare for a no deal were much
more, less partial than what one
might expect from a businessman.
Normally he rises above what might
be good for his business by taking a
national interest and I don't, it
might be jolly good for his firm and
the brilliance of it but it's
certainly not good news for...
he also said Britain should walk
away now from negotiations, is he
I think we should consider if
this farce goes on, to say there is
no money coming, you are in real
They need the money, Nicky
Morgan, don't they? There is a black
hole in the budget, that would focus
There are commitments we make
to the EU which we need to honour.
If we don't all of them, they don't
seriously start negotiating...
even the 20 billion euros Theresa
May has set...
They can string so
long, once they get the money there
will be no interest in any way in
coming to an agreement.
political... We will let Nicky
Morgan respond. Out there in the
country there are real people with
real jobs reliant on whether its
funding from the EU, people coming
from abroad to work, it's all very
well for people like James Dyson,
this is a secret agenda for a number
of people, it's not for the British
people want, it's not an answer to
the issues. I suspect it is obvious
what some of my colleagues would
like and I thought John Major made a
brilliant speech a few months ago
saying this is not what the billion
people want. We asked James Dyson to
appear before the Treasury Select
Committee, he was not available as
Wednesday but could appear on the
Andrew Marr Show. We very much hope
you will come back in the New Year.
You can make your
suggestions. I have plenty of work
on Sundays, thank you.
Seven days a
"Take back control of our borders"
that was the oft repeated mantra
of Brexit campaigners.
The assumption being that taking
back control would mean reducing
the numbers coming into the UK.
But should post-Brexit immigration
actually be increased?
City AM's Rachel Cunliffe thinks so.
Here's her soapbox.
Taking back control of our borders
doesn't have to mean reducing
immigration. Now that Brexit is
happening, there is an assumption
that migration numbers will
inevitably be slashed. This would be
a mistake. We don't need the number
of foreign workers to follow in
order to to honour the will of the
people who voted for Brexit, the
psychology of immigration in the
sense of anxiety and discomfort
borders feel about it isn't really
linked to levels at all. During the
EU referendum Australia's points
-based immigration system was
heralded by league heavyweights such
as Boris Johnson, Michael Gove Andy
Burnham Nigel Farage. But Australia
has three times the net migration
per capita Britain doors. In the
2016 survey just 34% of Australians
thought immigration should be
reduced. In contrast, 77% of Brits
thought immigration was too high in
a survey conduct did for the
referendum. Clearly there is a
disconnect the migration levels and
the cultural anxiety surrounding it.
But we can end free movement, take
back control and still welcome the
people we need. We should increase
numbers, especially from non-EU
countries like the US, India and
China. We should lower their wage
threshold on hiring foreign workers,
nurses and care workers for a start
and make sure all businesses have
the skills they need. This isn't a
betrayal of the Brexit vote. It's
honouring it by building immigration
system specifically for the UK. So
let's take back control of
immigration and increase it!
Rachel Cunliffe is here with us now.
Welcome. You say in the film before
the referendum 70% of Brits thought
the level of immigration was too
high, want an awful lot of lead
voters feel betrayed Britain
increases immigration post Brexit?
think that's what the assumption is
but look at the studies done since
the referendum, you see the anxiety
around migration numbers decreases
significantly when you point to
specific jobs, for example, 22% of
British people think that reducing
immigration should come at the
expense of the economy, for example.
86% of British people would like the
number of highly skilled migrants to
either stay the same or increase
when you start to break it down,
this general discomfort that people
have around migration doesn't
actually applies when you are
talking about specific skills we
Frank Field? I accept
that. The key reason why Donald
Trump's vote has remained is that
people did not believe he would
build a wall but he would be on a
journey to control immigration. I
think some did believe... I don't
think so, I think they thought this
man would try and do something that
other politicians had failed and
what I don't sense from the
government, they have any feel about
how they are going to implement that
promise, even if it's over the
longer term. Will people feel
betrayed? I don't think so if we
spell out the moment, we are now in
business to handle the economy. We
are looking at care workers,
building workers, we will have in
place training skills so that people
can opt for them and become part of
that labour force, only when we've
got a skills supply home grown, so
to speak. Can we start bringing down
the actual totals.
So you want to see the totals coming
We know they've got up because
the total inadequacy of our labour
force here which is either that they
won't take jobs which other people
coming in will take or they don't
have the skills. This is what I was
trying to say earlier, Jo, that
Brexit and immigration policies and
a welfare reform policy goes
together. We have to have the jobs
available to put restrictions on
people's benefits to then also be
able to prom toys bring down
immigration in the long run.
accept that, that immigration would
come down and should come down in
the long-term once we have trained
enough people in Britain to do the
jobs that are currently done by
That is a hugely
hypothetical question, you are
talking about years or decades. When
you have a high volume of migration,
particularly from innovative
countries, entrepreneurial, they
want to start businesses, those
kinds of people create opportunities
and create new jobs and skills.
the mass of people that are coming
in, they are coming in to do
semi-skilled jobs. Of course we want
those people, we want the dynamism
in our economy but the idea takes
ages to actually become a brickie
you can be trained to do the job in
13 week and can be on site. In your
second year you can be earning £150
For whatever reason, that is
It's because of the
Hang on. You say
it's not happening at the moment and
it would take years to actually do.
Do you want immigration to come
Thereth I want there to be the
right immigration and the right
numbers for our economy. I was never
entirely convinced by this, we have
got to get it below a certain number
because that misses all the nuances.
People understand about the need for
high skilled immigration but also
low skilled. We have remarkably
almost full employment in this
country, NHS, social care,
construction industry, if we are
going to have a housing package in a
budget, all need people from abroad.
The most important thing that
happened over the summer was Amber
Rudd, the Home Secretary, asking the
mightration Advisory Council to do a
proper in-depth analysis of who we
will need to come here, which
sectors are in need of migration
most and which ones we can perhaps
train people up on over time.
will be one of those assessments we
haven't said yet. David Davis when
he met Michel Barnier said more
people to come if need be on
immigration won't be pulling up draw
bridge bigger pool to fish from. I
come back to the initial point that
there was a feeling that there were
people who voted in the referendum
to leave because they did want to
see numbers broadly coming down?
sure that's absolutely right, based
on conversations I've had in my
constituency, there are people who
undoubt think did that. That's
partly the politicians' failure not
to have had a debate about
immigration. The previous Labour
them. I think most people want to
know who is coming here, why and how
long they are coming for and also
when they are going to go home if
that is the right thing.
about an economy...
What are we
doing about training to create full
employment for British workers.
to you accept Labour did make a
mistake in terms of immigration?
was the first person to criticise to
say we should never have gone into
the deal with the accession
countries without having
restrictions on them. I mean,
there's no question about where I
hope to appear. The toughest person
on the Labour side about
immigration. But the idea that
anybody believes that we should have
a draw bridge policy to pull it up,
people need to trust the politicians
on the direction of travel and the
You get it.
it by having the policies I've been
talking about today which is
actually that you do not have a draw
bridge but you do have plans in the
longer term for more British people
to have better opportunities to take
the jobs that are being done.
that case when it comes to the
immigration system that is going to
be devised in the post-Brexit world,
should EU citizens have preferential
treatment after Brexit to non-EUs?
That depends on the negotiations and
the overall deal that is struck. The
it's something we should be aware
of. Undoubtedly unfortunately, some
of the leave campaigners promised a
non-EU community that actually
they'll be able to bring in many
more people because EU immigration
would be stopped. Again that is
going to be unpicked, they have to
be honest about the debate and the
You are a journalist at
City AM. Britain has broadly
benefitted. Some would say your
sector's grown at the detriment to
the rest of the UK.
benefitted from migration more than
perhaps other sectors have done. I
don't really hold this idea that
other people have been disadvantaged
by myingration. We are not just
talking about City workers here, we
are talking about technology,
engineering, low-skilled workers. I
don't like that term because a lot
of low-skilled or unskilled jobs
require a level of skill and clearly
those aren't necessarily skills that
we have in this country but I just
want to say that I particularly
agree with Nicky, showing that we
are in control, people just wanting
to know who, are the people, where
are they coming from and what are
they coming here for? 71% of
migrants come here either to work or
to study. They are net contributors
to the economy on the other hand
message hasn't come across.
So MPs reuturn to Westminster
after a short break
at the end of last week -
what's in their in-trays?
A Budget Bill for Northern Ireland,
which will allow the government
in Westminster to set spending plans
in the continuing absence
of the Stormont Assembly,
will be rushed through
the Commons this afternoon.
This evening the PM will deliver
a speech at the Lord
Mayor's Banquet in London.
Brexit battles return to the Commons
tomorrow as the first
two days of the committee stage
scrutiny of the EU
Withdrawal Bill begin.
will see the penultimate PMQs before
the Budget in a week's time.
The House of Commons will hold
a backbench debate on the roll-out
of Universal Credit on Thursday,
introduced by Frank Field.
The vote for the next leader
of Scottish Labour will
take place on Friday.
We're joined now by Rowena
Mason of the Guardian
and Steve Hawkes of the Sun.
Welcome to both of you. Rowena,
first of all, what do you make of
Michael Gove's comments regarding
Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe yesterday?
It's an ill judged remark from a
minister about Mrs
Zaghari-Ratcliffe, earning him a
rebuke this morning. Michael Gove
said he didn't know what she was
doing in Iran and that's added fuel
to the flames of Boris Johnson
saying that she'd only been out
there training journalists when her
family maintains she was there on
holiday. Number Ten today have said
that the Government's position, the
agreed position is that she was out
there on holiday. So Michael Gove
there, departing from what was the
Do we think Steve that Boris Johnson
is going to still be under pressure
to resign after repeated calls for
him to be sacked by both Labour and
some in the Conservative Party?
don't think he's going to be under
pressure to resign as much this
week. The pressure on him now is
huge to bring Nazanin back. They
were describing the sheer hell they
are going through, there is the fact
that Nazanin is being tested for
breast cancer. It was interesting to
hear Nicky a moment ago. Richard
Ratcliffe is clear, we don't need
any more stability. We need Nazanin
back and we need Boris to deliver on
that. There is a small chance for
Boris to do something to actually
salvage his reputation. That picture
of Boris coming back with Nazanin on
a plane could save him.
the relationship between Michael
Gove and Boris Johnson? The two seem
to have made up obviously having
fallen out spectacularly during the
last leadership contest. They've
obviously been holding secret
monthly meetings. How dangerous is
this for the Prime Minister?
remarkable reckon sailiation really
but they have a mutual interest,
trying to push Theresa May towards a
very clean and decisive Brexit --
reconciliation. Some would call it a
very hard Brexit. It's dangerous for
the Prime Minister, that is two
senior Cabinet Ministers who were
successful in the vote leave
campaign and ultimately backed by
the public in that referendum, seem
to be throwing their weight around
sending this letter, making demands
to her and so she's in an
ex-Froomely difficult position
because on the other side the
Brexiteers are pulling her in the
other direction -- extremely
Eight short of
the number required to triring a
contest but how dangerous is this
for the Prime Minister?
The MPs are
ready to sign, that is a long way
from signing something. There is no
doubt that Theresa May is in an
awful lot of trouble and has to come
back to show leadership and
authority. The Government might we
can the fact that this is -- welcome
the fact that this is a Brexit
debate because it allows people to
get on the front foot. 471
amendments is incredible. She has to
show some authority and get the
budget out of the way. That is the
other thing looming. Try to get the
reshuffle and the next generation,
the new breed up. There is an
important thing happening today.
Amber Rudd is at the Centre for
Policies event talking about the
Tory party. What she says is going
to be very interesting.
Withdrawal Bill, we have discussed
it with Frank Field and Nicky
Morgan, Nicky Morgan said the
article was tone deaf and will do
nothing to heal the divisions within
the Conservative Party. What is your
I think that high lites
how much difficulty Theresa May is
going to have getting the Bill
through unless he makes concessions
to Nicky Morgan and her colleagues
on the softer Brexit wing. Labour
think there are 13 amendments where
the Prime Minister is in danger of
losing unless she makes concessions,
on things like curbing Henry 58
powers. I think the rebels and the
rest of us are waiting to hear
whether the Government will back
down on some of these things in
order to get us through the House of
Do you think they will back
down in order to get it through?
think they will. It's interesting,
Nicky's comments, sounds like she
wants a job on the Evening
I'll ask her in a
Or whether she's going to go
for George's job. There will be some
concessions, we are hearing
rumblings that David Davis will say
something important this afternoon
when he introduces the Bill in
Parliament. . I can't see how the
Government can fail to back down on
the Henry VIII powers. There will be
some concessions I'm sure.
So we're just nine days
until the budget -
and last minute lobbying
is in full swing.
How handy that we have the Treasury
Select Committee chair
here and the chair of the committee
scrutinising one of the big
spending departments -
work and pensions.
We are delighted that you are both
here. Frank Field, recent figures
suggest long waits in A&E have
increased by 557% in seven years,
obviously more people too. The NHS
boss says Brexit funding promises
must be honoured. To you support
more money for the NHS?
I have long
supported it and #24iing of a new
way of funding the health and social
care we need, we should do it on a
New Bay six of national insurance.
-- finding a new way of funding. A
lot of people don't think national
insurance is a tax but a
contribution. In return we need to
give people a bigger say, but to
make sure that the money from the
new scheme actually goes to the
But should the
Government follow through, Frank
Field, on that vote leave pledge of
giving £350 million to the NHS?
should follow through by, at some
stage, monies which we spend will be
returned to this country.
I was never part of
making those extraordinary things.
You signed up to the
leave requests for...
No. If you
check the record, my contribution
was very limited about getting
Labour voters out because I saw that
as the key to success.
But you would
like money to go to the NHS.
needs to be on a basis that we'd
only keep coming back with the
begging cap, that if we move to
something like a National Health
Service, insurance care, a scheme
based on national insurance reformed
progressive, I think the Government
would get a cheer from people,
rather than a fear.
Well, will they
get a cheer Nicky Morgan from this,
talking of public investment, one of
George Osborne's close allies says
they should end austerity. He says
voters won't buy it at another
election. Do you agree?
I think we will have to change the
economic narrative and whether the
Chancellor does it at this budget,
it ties in with the post Brexit
Britain, how we are going to boost
wages, challenge productivity or the
like of productivity that we have
seen. Of course it's very easy to
say let's take our foot off the
brake, put more money into the NHS
but we have to have a balance. There
are people working hard to pay their
taxes, are we collecting the right
taxes, I think Frank is right at
looking at social care.
Philip Hamilton -- Hammond signal an
end to social care austerity?
that living within our means,
balancing the books, however
undoubtedly the Chancellor has
already signalled things like public
sector pay is something he is aware
of, of course this debate about
Universal Credit, there will be
changes I think are coming but I
think the whole thing about the way
the economy, he was right in 2010,
we took some pretty tough decisions
to balance the books, it has moved
on, I think that's part of the isn't
people voted as they did in June
2016, they looked and thought we are
aware missing out, our bosses are
not giving us the money we would
like to have, we are not seen money
going into essential public
services. This is the opportunity
for government to press the reset
It is about resetting the
narrative and spending more, would
you support scrapping the deficit
whether in fact the target date gets
moved, that is a matter for the
Chancellor in terms of looking at
the balance sheet but I think it's
the right thing to aim for, we are
not... The interest payments have
been more than the whole of the
schools budget, that's not
sustainable, it cannot be right for
us as a country to continue to
borrow this morning, we've got to
continue to keep a lid on spending,
but also look at the other thing is
big investment driving economic
growth, that's the way to get things
going. Spending on housing you would
effect of Universal Credit? Looking
at how it's done, I'm not aware of
all the numbers but of course
particularly this six-week wait
period which has been a big concern
to MPs and every body else.
fees again, more money spent?
to say I am a supporter of the
tuition fee policy, I think it's
right to raise the threshold and I
think we need to move on and look at
Briefly on universal
but credit, Frank, are you calling
for more funding for getting rid of
In the longer term we want
reforms that will start on Thursday
when a cross-party motion based on
the select committee report calling
for this time limit from 6-4 weeks,
we will actually make the views of
the House of Commons felt and their
lobbyists are resolved if I was in
charge of the budget, the key think
the Chancellor has got to do, never
mind about all this technicality is
most of us can't understand. The key
thing, they have got to sound a note
of hope, there is actually
opportunities coming, particularly
on housing and particularly
protecting lower paid workers who
are not being done right to
So Theresa May thought is was all
about Strength and Stability -
but was this year's general election
really all about that slippery
political concept - authenticity.
The argument goes that Jeremy Corbyn
had it in spades - and she didn't.
The same contest had already been
played out on the other side
of the Atlantic of course.
Here, a Georgetown linguistics
professor looks at how
Hillary Clinton struggled to win
the trust of American voters:
Let's go back to when Hillary
Clinton first appeared in the public
stage, 92, the wife of the former
governor of Arkansas, now running
for President. She was about as
unaffected as a person could be, she
had simple, plain brown hair, she
held it back with a headband, she
wasn't so concerned with her
appearance. She was ridiculed, a
woman who is not concerned with her
appearance he wears a simple
headband would be unacceptable in
public life. So she did for people
seemed to want, she had her style,
added reached blonde, then she was
criticised for being manipulative,
she was trying to manipulate her
image and here, already, you see
this suspicion of she is not
authentic. Well think was authentic
they did not like that either and I
think that's emblematic of what she
faced going forward.
A clip there from a documentary
on political authenticity that airs
on Radio Four at 8.30 tonight.
It's presented by the political
scientist Professor Rosie Campbell,
who joins us now...
What makes a politician authentic?
An extremely good question.
glad I asked it. Trying to work it
out, you describe it as a slippery
concept, seems to be a mixture of
things, sometimes we think of
authenticity as consistency,
sticking with policies over a long
period but it gets mixed up with
being related book or sounding like
a normal person.
And that is my
problem, when people say
authenticity, is it about conviction
politics and principles? Jeremy
Corbyn would say he has stuck to
principles, Jacob Rees Mogg might
say he is upended because he has to
to political principles. Is it that
more in your mind than it is about
the late ability, about how someone
looks and response and that sort of
I think at its core are
perhaps that is what we are looking
for, people have lost trust and
faith in politicians to some extent
reticular Lee after the expenses
scandal and they are looking for
some kind of integrity and I think
that sticking to your principles
over time as part of that. I'm not
sure I totally agree with you over
Jeremy Corbyn, has he softened
slightly on Europe and nuclear
disarmament? There are other things
he does that seem to signal to
people he is an authentic politician
that is perhaps not so much about
You think Jeremy
Corbyn has stuck to his principles
but in reality that has not been the
case, he has smartened up his
appearance, he wears the suit, he is
losing some of his authenticity in
order to be at Westminster?
think he's losing any of that
authenticity, his position on Europe
as James, Germany and I would be in
the same lobby, we are not in the
same lobby now, someone has changed.
It may be difficult in academic
circles to decide who is genuine and
who is authentic, it does not appear
the voters have much difficulty in
actually deciding that and I think
the study or to begin with voters.
You are doing... LAUGHTER leprosy
Voters seem to have, if you
as Conservative voters who is the
most honest and trustworthy many
more of them will say Mr macro than
Labour voters and if you look at the
number of Conservative voters who
think that Jeremy Corbyn is an
authentic guy will find that guy is
-- number is much smaller, voters
are no better than we academics at
There is a positive bias but
the judgement comes through quite
clearly that they can spot
But even if they can
spot authenticity isn't politics
about compromise? Isn't it about
backroom and being pragmatic. Banks
it could be the most explosive
current example of all bad.
Brexit. I feel quite concerned
about, if we don't allow politicians
to change their mind in a considered
and reflected way over a period of
time in politics won't actually,
democracy won't function. I don't
think it necessarily means
politicians should change their mind
on the same day...
Or twice a day?
Can you faith fake authenticity?
am not sure you can, I think the
voters have an antenna for it, which
are duly younger voters who
described Jeremy Corbyn as appendix.
A fascinating programme I did back
at party Conference, they said that,
I think authenticity is in the year
of the beholder, they know someone
is authentic not without being able
to put their finger on it. I would
propose it's about able setting out
what they believe in and saying it
as they think it is and I think the
trouble actually with a lot of
coverage of modern politics
particularly as a minister, it's a
nightmare coming on a Daily Politics
scummy you have a government line,
you might have use of your own, a
clever interviewer will say I know
how to get it out of them and you
spend yourself and your time getting
into linguistic contortions.
what people seem to think is a bad
thing about politics. Let's show you
and viewers this tweet about Donald
Trump, saying it how it is is what
he is seemingly famous for but...
That's authentic, is a popular? I
think that's the problem with the ID
of authenticity, it's slippery. On
Trump has changed his mind about
policy a great wheel. But being able
to seem relatable and to connect
with people, that's actually one way
that we pick up one intensity I
think sometimes we voters to get it
wrong, despite what you say, Frank.
The other point, you can't run as
Nicky was saying, the House of
Commons depends on people faithfully
voting for or against government,
that's how you for them to account,
you can't have 650 authentic
That may be true. Rosi,
Now - its chimes were briefly heard
again over the weekend to mark
Big Ben is undergoing
a multi-million pound renovation
programme and Channel Four have
access to the work.
In a moment we'll be joined
by the historian, Dr Anna Keay,
who presents the programme.
One of my favourite bits in any big
conservation project is when the
roof comes off, it's like the
skeleton of a foil, an amazing
thing, you feel it you never
normally get to see. It's going to
be a once in a 100 and your
opportunity to see the bare bones of
The top of the tower is
going to be stripped down into its
original frame. Its giant hands over
four metres long, removed. The four
phases, each one large enough to
drive a double-decker bus through,
will be taken apart. And 2567 cast
an roof tiles and other parts
restored. One of the world's
best-known buildings is about to
And Anna Keay who's the director
of Landmark Trust joins me now.
Why does this work have to be done?
Because this is a great want list
building, 150 odd years old and if
we care about it we wanted to still
be there in time and we need to look
after, it's standing there in the
elements, acid rain, wind, any thing
that any building has two content
with and it has eroded over time.
The top section is cast-iron, we
know what happens to metal, trusts
and if you go and stand behind the
clock faces you can pick the ire of.
Really? And it needs a lot of TLC.
That TLC, how difficult is it to
find people who have skills to
restore this iconic building?
a big issue across all historic
buildings in this country, we see it
in my work, it's all very well
saying you want to do this stuff,
unless you can find a stonemason who
knows how to deal with a bit of
exploded limestone from 1850, it's
all talk. It's a big task and it is
a tall order on this building
because it's so big, it's not just a
small number of people come all you
need a kind of an army to deal with
You need a whole team at it
for the duration? Yes. The cost of
the work has doubled is that good
value for money, Nicky Morgan?
course not but the work has to be
done, it's a major landmark, you see
all the tourists, people come to
look at it, I have constituents who
bring international visitors and
they say I want to come and look of
this amazing thing. Of course you
have to keep a look on the costs but
are we weighing up the massive
earner that is economically from
people coming to look at big den,
the Houses of Parliament and other
started an inquiry on the total
renovation which will cost £4
billion, will continue?
We will look at it but we are
waiting at the moment and over the
next steps are going to be from the
government. The House of Commons
authorities are taking a time to
consider for we are going. Have you
missed the chiming? It wasn't there,
I didn't know something you do but
if you're very close to it, and you
are on the phone, it's a nightmare.
Sorry but we will have to end it
There's just time before we go
to find out the answer to our quiz.
The question was according
to Michel Barnier what could be
stopped from crossing the border
if the Brexit negotiations fail ...
a) Wine b) Pets c) Eurocrats
or d) Cheese.
So what's the correct answer?
It is Eurocrats. I thought it was
all of them.
That's all for today.
Thanks to our guests.
The One O'Clock News is starting
over on BBC One now.
I'll be here at noon tomorrow
with all the big political stories
of the day...
do join me then.
Labour's Frank Field and Nicky Morgan from the Conservatives join Jo Coburn throughout the programme. They look at the EU Withdrawal Bill and immigration after Brexit, and discuss how important authenticity is in politics.