0:00:37 > 0:00:41Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
0:00:41 > 0:00:44The Chancellor says they're going to "unblock the logjam"
0:00:44 > 0:00:46in the Brexit negotiations, but will the Prime Minister's Brexit
0:00:46 > 0:00:51Cabinet agree on what to offer the EU and will it be accepted?
0:00:51 > 0:00:53A million new homes will be built by 2020 -
0:00:53 > 0:00:56that's the promise that will be in this week's Budget,
0:00:56 > 0:00:59but will it be kept?
0:00:59 > 0:01:03Jeremy Corbyn went from zero to hero - Labour MPs who wanted him gone
0:01:03 > 0:01:07react to June's shock election result in a new BBC documentary -
0:01:07 > 0:01:10but is he performing well enough now against a government that's
0:01:10 > 0:01:15on the ropes?
0:01:15 > 0:01:17And from the frying pan and into the jungle!
0:01:17 > 0:01:20Should Labour's outgoing leader in Scotland be taking time off
0:01:20 > 0:01:26as an MSP to do reality TV?
0:01:28 > 0:01:33All that in the next hour and with us for the whole
0:01:33 > 0:01:39of the programme today are two MPs who have eschewed the lure
0:01:39 > 0:01:41of the jungle for the Daily Politics studio.
0:01:41 > 0:01:44But don't worry, because we'll be putting you through our own
0:01:44 > 0:01:45trials and tribulations.
0:01:45 > 0:01:47With us, former minister Nick Boles and Jess Phillips.
0:01:47 > 0:01:56She chairs the women's Parliamentary Labour Party.
0:01:56 > 0:01:59First today, Theresa May will convene a meeting of her new Brexit
0:01:59 > 0:02:02"inner Cabinet" in Downing Street to talk tactics ahead of next
0:02:02 > 0:02:04month's crucial summit of the European Council.
0:02:04 > 0:02:06The smaller group includes senior ministers who supported both Leave
0:02:06 > 0:02:07and Remain in the referendum.
0:02:07 > 0:02:10They're expected to discuss raising the divorce bill the UK is willing
0:02:10 > 0:02:17to pay to the EU to help move talks on.
0:02:17 > 0:02:19The UK has already promised roughly £20 billion with suggestions
0:02:19 > 0:02:23the Government might be willing to double that figure.
0:02:23 > 0:02:25Yesterday Philip Hammond told the Andrew Marr Show plans
0:02:25 > 0:02:30were afoot to "unblock that logjam".
0:02:30 > 0:02:33And said the UK was "on the brink of making some serious progress
0:02:33 > 0:02:35in our negotiations with the EU".
0:02:35 > 0:02:40Today's Times reports that Theresa May is expected to meet
0:02:40 > 0:02:45European Council President Donald Tusk on Friday to discuss the Bill,
0:02:45 > 0:02:48but with coalition talks collapsing in Germany and uncertainty over
0:02:48 > 0:02:53Angela Merkel's position as Chancellor, could there be
0:02:53 > 0:02:55ramifications for the negotiations of the EU's leading player
0:02:55 > 0:02:57being politically paralysed?
0:02:57 > 0:03:00Well, the EU's chief Brexit negotiator Michael Barnier has been
0:03:00 > 0:03:03speaking today in Brussels.
0:03:03 > 0:03:06He had some choice words for those who think the UK should play
0:03:06 > 0:03:09hardball and be prepared to walk away.
0:03:09 > 0:03:13We have a shared history and this history started long
0:03:13 > 0:03:21before the last 44 years.
0:03:21 > 0:03:25That is why that no deal is not our scenario even though
0:03:25 > 0:03:30we will be ready for it.
0:03:30 > 0:03:39I regret that this no deal option comes up so often in the UK public
0:03:39 > 0:03:44debate and it is though we want to ignore the current
0:03:44 > 0:03:47benefits of European Union membership can say that no deal
0:03:47 > 0:03:49would be a positive result.
0:03:49 > 0:03:55We're joined now by our Brussels reporter, Adam Fleming.
0:03:55 > 0:04:00What else did he say, Adam?So, Jo, you will notice Michel Barnier was
0:04:00 > 0:04:04speaking in English there. This is the most English I have heard him
0:04:04 > 0:04:09use in a speech. Normally he speaks in French and when there is a barb
0:04:09 > 0:04:12he wants to deliver to the UK he does that in English so we get it!
0:04:12 > 0:04:18He had a lot of barbs to deliver and I have written down the bits where
0:04:18 > 0:04:21he took aim at David Davis. I will work through them. David Davis has
0:04:21 > 0:04:25said oh the problem with Northern Ireland following the rules of the
0:04:25 > 0:04:29single market or the customs union after Brexit means that then
0:04:29 > 0:04:31threatens the single market that effectively exists between Northern
0:04:31 > 0:04:35Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom. Michel Barnier said people
0:04:35 > 0:04:38that said that were talking nonsense because Northern Ireland already had
0:04:38 > 0:04:42separate rules from the rest of the UK on things like agriculture and
0:04:42 > 0:04:48plant health and things. Then he talked about Brexiteers that make
0:04:48 > 0:04:51contradictory statements like saying we will be freed from the shackle of
0:04:51 > 0:04:54Brussels, but then at the same time, saying but we will have a really,
0:04:54 > 0:04:58really close relationship with the single market anyway. And then he
0:04:58 > 0:05:01said, "Oh, people have been talking about UK financial services still
0:05:01 > 0:05:05having access to the single market and being able to use their
0:05:05 > 0:05:09passport." That's the technical thing that means a financial
0:05:09 > 0:05:13services company registered in one EU country can sell its services in
0:05:13 > 0:05:18another. Michel Barnier said that will disappear with Brexit. UK First
0:05:18 > 0:05:22Minister's will not be able to rely on that passport. Those are things
0:05:22 > 0:05:26that David Davis have been saying and I think Team Barnier wanted to
0:05:26 > 0:05:30respond to the Brexit secretary's speech in Berlin that he gave at the
0:05:30 > 0:05:35end of last week.Is this interpreted as Michel Barnier
0:05:35 > 0:05:39playing hard ball here?What struck me about the speech really was that
0:05:39 > 0:05:43this is the most I have heard Michel Barnier talk about the future trade
0:05:43 > 0:05:46deal, the future relationship between the UK and the EU and what
0:05:46 > 0:05:49shape it will take. This is much less of the Michel Barnier playing
0:05:49 > 0:05:52hard ball on the Irish border, the money and the citizens rights, the
0:05:52 > 0:05:56stuff that we are used to hearing him talk about. This was more about
0:05:56 > 0:06:00phase two of the Brexit negotiations. He is starting to get
0:06:00 > 0:06:03his head into that phase because it could start as soon as the next
0:06:03 > 0:06:08summit of EU leaders in December. And so he was making all the big
0:06:08 > 0:06:11philosophical points about the UK has to answer the question, does it
0:06:11 > 0:06:16want to stay pretty close to the EU rules and the EU model that it
0:06:16 > 0:06:20participates in now? Or does it want to diverge from those and have its
0:06:20 > 0:06:23own rules and regulations? He made the point that the more divergence
0:06:23 > 0:06:27there is from the EU norms, then perhaps the harder it will be to get
0:06:27 > 0:06:32that trade deal or that future partnership through all the national
0:06:32 > 0:06:34parliaments it would have to go through in the rest of the EU 27
0:06:34 > 0:06:41countries. So there was that big point. And then, when he did the
0:06:41 > 0:06:45stick approach of saying financial services you have got to worry about
0:06:45 > 0:06:50that, he then said, "But, if all the issues can be solved, and we can
0:06:50 > 0:06:54reach agreement, the EU and the UK then the EU would be prepared to
0:06:54 > 0:06:57offer its most sophisticated Free Trade Agreement approach to the UK."
0:06:57 > 0:07:00So basically saying there could be a very deep and special partnership,
0:07:00 > 0:07:04but it will come with very deep and special conditions.All right, Adam
0:07:04 > 0:07:07Fleming thank you very much in Brussels.
0:07:07 > 0:07:11And we're joined now by the leading Conservative Eurosceptic, Bill Cash.
0:07:11 > 0:07:14Welcome to the Daily Politics. Do you have faith in the new inner
0:07:14 > 0:07:17Cabinet of Theresa May's or do you think it is a move to try and
0:07:17 > 0:07:21convince you and some of your Leave supporting colleagues to accept a
0:07:21 > 0:07:24higher divorce bill?No, I think it is reasonable. I think it is a good
0:07:24 > 0:07:29idea. Somebody the other day I think it was Frank Field suggested there
0:07:29 > 0:07:32ought to be something along these lines. To have an inner Cabinet of
0:07:32 > 0:07:36that kind is a good idea thanks, of course, they refer back to the
0:07:36 > 0:07:41Cabinet as a whole which is essential to say the least.If they
0:07:41 > 0:07:44agree a higher divorce bill and what is being talked about is 40 billion
0:07:44 > 0:07:48euros, would you accept that?We have to look at the methodology. The
0:07:48 > 0:07:52reality is that we are as a Constitutional Affairs Committee of
0:07:52 > 0:07:57the House of Lords said under no strict legal obligation to pay, but
0:07:57 > 0:08:00there are definitely certain aspects for example between now and the date
0:08:00 > 0:08:07when we leave which is 29th March 2019. Quite clearly, obligations
0:08:07 > 0:08:11which we will continue until that point in time.So, you would be
0:08:11 > 0:08:14prepared if the obligations and liabilities are set out to pay up to
0:08:14 > 0:08:1940 billion euros?What I really think and I said this already and I
0:08:19 > 0:08:24wrote to the Prime Minister about this. I think that both sides should
0:08:24 > 0:08:27set out by mutual consent their methodology so people can form a
0:08:27 > 0:08:32judgment about it. We don't want to be in a position where we are
0:08:32 > 0:08:37completely unreasonable, but I do think that actually, the European
0:08:37 > 0:08:41Union is in a war of attrition until apparently this morning which sounds
0:08:41 > 0:08:45to me as if we are moving in the right direction at last and I do
0:08:45 > 0:08:50think that actually, for example, ex-EU officials who are British
0:08:50 > 0:08:55might be treated perhaps in the same way as former colonial civil
0:08:55 > 0:09:00servants.Michel Barnier talking on a philosophical level about the sort
0:09:00 > 0:09:04of trade deal if he is also moving towards phase two, if you like, of
0:09:04 > 0:09:09the trade talks, the things that he is explaining and outlining, they
0:09:09 > 0:09:12would be worth paying 40 billion euros for?That's not what I'm
0:09:12 > 0:09:15saying. We have got to decide on the amount by a proper methodology and
0:09:15 > 0:09:20then you can answer that question, but not now.But if it unlock the
0:09:20 > 0:09:23negotiation and if you got everything else that you wanted, it
0:09:23 > 0:09:26would be worth paying once you have gone through the methodology?Well,
0:09:26 > 0:09:30I think if as a result of the methodology it's clear that there
0:09:30 > 0:09:35are legal obligations which both sides accept and I think that's
0:09:35 > 0:09:39where the negotiations need to to be cleared up.Your colleague says if
0:09:39 > 0:09:43you give 40 to 50 billion euros to the EU the public in his words, who
0:09:43 > 0:09:49voted by a majority to leave will go bananas and spare. Isn't he right?
0:09:49 > 0:09:53Well, he maybe, depending on whether the methodology is something that
0:09:53 > 0:09:56convinces people there is a basis for it and you ought to remember
0:09:56 > 0:10:00perhaps, I don't say you personally, but people ought to remember that in
0:10:00 > 0:10:06the past for example, after the war, we had an arrangement whereby and it
0:10:06 > 0:10:09is called the London death agreement where we remitted a significant
0:10:09 > 0:10:15amount of the German debt and actually, since we have been in
0:10:15 > 0:10:201972, we've made a net contribution of well over £100 billion.But is
0:10:20 > 0:10:25this what the public were expecting? This is what your colleagues said we
0:10:25 > 0:10:30wouldn't have to pay and we didn't have legal obligations?That's what
0:10:30 > 0:10:33the House of Lords constitutional committee said as well. If there is
0:10:33 > 0:10:36a proper methodology which demonstrates the fact that there is
0:10:36 > 0:10:40an obligation of something...You will have been proved wrong?No, I
0:10:40 > 0:10:43will have simply have said that's what the Constitutional Affairs
0:10:43 > 0:10:47Committee of the House of Lords said and there is a case for making some
0:10:47 > 0:10:50payment on the proper methodology. Right, we're hearing reports that
0:10:50 > 0:10:55the British Government, Nick Boles, may co a lease around the 40 billion
0:10:55 > 0:10:59euro figure. That's four years of our net contribution and another
0:10:59 > 0:11:02four years of paying into the EU. That isn't what people were promised
0:11:02 > 0:11:05or they thought would happen. It is not what the Government prepared
0:11:05 > 0:11:09them for?Well, government has been clear that it would settle the
0:11:09 > 0:11:13accounts. The 20 billion that's already been promised is as it were
0:11:13 > 0:11:18a new matter because that is because we are intending to have this tran
0:11:18 > 0:11:22that lasts two years on current membership terms. What we are now
0:11:22 > 0:11:25talking about is the settling of the accounts and of course, it's the
0:11:25 > 0:11:30case that the EU has made various commitments for the future while we
0:11:30 > 0:11:35were a member and it is not unreasonable to expect us to pay for
0:11:35 > 0:11:37our share of those commitments because they were made in good faith
0:11:37 > 0:11:42when we were a member.So we're going to double what Theresa May
0:11:42 > 0:11:46promised in the Florence speech?No, but they are two sums. One is a
0:11:46 > 0:11:50payment for two more years within the EU structures on current terms
0:11:50 > 0:11:54and then now, what we are talking about is, what the settling of the
0:11:54 > 0:11:56accounts mean and Bill is right, that ultimately, it's about the
0:11:56 > 0:12:00methodology. If the methodology is reasonable, then I think everybody
0:12:00 > 0:12:08can live with it because it's a one-off final payment. If it is huge
0:12:08 > 0:12:11people will be angry and the Government does not intend to agree
0:12:11 > 0:12:16to anything like that.How much would be?I'm not the guy
0:12:16 > 0:12:21negotiating and nor do I have the detail.Do you agree that people
0:12:21 > 0:12:26will go bananas and Nigel Evans said we shouldn't be throwing ransom
0:12:26 > 0:12:29money at the EU because we haven't got anything concrete in return?No,
0:12:29 > 0:12:33it is important that there is this principle that nothing is agreed
0:12:33 > 0:12:37until everything is agreed. So we can say this is the methodology that
0:12:37 > 0:12:40we would accept for the calculation for that amount if we get a
0:12:40 > 0:12:44reasonable free trade deal, but ultimately, we will only actually be
0:12:44 > 0:12:48on the hook once that free trade deal has been offered and agreed by
0:12:48 > 0:12:52all of the 27 members of the EU. In that circumstance, I think the
0:12:52 > 0:12:55British people would accept that it was worth it for the new
0:12:55 > 0:12:57relationship. If the new relationship isn't that great, they
0:12:57 > 0:13:04will probably say no.How much would be too much for you, Jess Philips?I
0:13:04 > 0:13:09think that the divorce bill is an amount of money that I wish we
0:13:09 > 0:13:11weren't having to pay full stop because obviously I would have
0:13:11 > 0:13:15preferred if we stayed in the European Union. But the idea that
0:13:15 > 0:13:18people are going to take to the streets and be really, really cross
0:13:18 > 0:13:24if we have to settle our accounts to get a good deal is just simply not
0:13:24 > 0:13:28how I experience the world and experience conversations tefr day
0:13:28 > 0:13:32with my constituents every day about the European Union.Bill Cash,
0:13:32 > 0:13:35Robert says that I cannot believe the public would accept a huge
0:13:35 > 0:13:38amount when we need money for schools, hospitals and housing and
0:13:38 > 0:13:41many other things so I think it will be difficult if that's going to be
0:13:41 > 0:13:48that sum amount of money?Well, I'm not entirely sure that Robert is the
0:13:48 > 0:13:51sole arbiter of these questions. I will say that however there is a lot
0:13:51 > 0:13:57of pressure on public services and it is our belief that when we leave
0:13:57 > 0:14:00the European Union with a completely new kind of deal, with the rest of
0:14:00 > 0:14:05the world, with our surplus by the way Jo having just shown our surplus
0:14:05 > 0:14:10with the rest of the world went up £10 billion last year alone and our
0:14:10 > 0:14:15deficit with the 27 member states also went up by about £10 billion so
0:14:15 > 0:14:25we are on a reasonably good trajectory.When will the British
0:14:25 > 0:14:29Government be able to spend that? Not for another four years.What is
0:14:29 > 0:14:33happening they are in the process of negotiation which if you were to
0:14:33 > 0:14:35include a transitional period takes you into the four year period
0:14:35 > 0:14:39anyway.In the transition period, of course, we will be subject to the
0:14:39 > 0:14:42European Court of Justice, we will be paying in every year sums
0:14:42 > 0:14:46comparable to those we pay now. We won't be able to sign free trade
0:14:46 > 0:14:52deals. We will be in the EU until 2021?The question of the extent to
0:14:52 > 0:14:57which we will be in the European Court of Justice is really quite a
0:14:57 > 0:15:00critical question and as a matter of fact I think that although there
0:15:00 > 0:15:04have been a lot of contradictions about that, that's part of the
0:15:04 > 0:15:08negotiations and actually at this moment in time I don't think it is a
0:15:08 > 0:15:12given that we will be in the European Court of Justice as it is
0:15:12 > 0:15:22at the moment.Are you prepared to give way on the European Court of
0:15:22 > 0:15:30Justice as as being under the jurisdiction of that?I am very
0:15:30 > 0:15:34unhappy about us being under the European Court of Justice for very
0:15:34 > 0:15:37good reasons. The European Court of Justice, as I said in the House of
0:15:37 > 0:15:44Commons the other day, asserts constitutional supremacy.But is it
0:15:44 > 0:15:50a red line for you on this?It certainly is on the basis that they
0:15:50 > 0:15:53can't assert constitutional supremacy over ours and effectively
0:15:53 > 0:15:57require a situation in which our act of Parliament after Brexit would be
0:15:57 > 0:16:02strapped down.How many of your colleagues agree with you on that?
0:16:02 > 0:16:06We will see because we are going to have a debate on this, but as far as
0:16:06 > 0:16:13I'm concerned it is a matter principle. I think the bill actually
0:16:13 > 0:16:20says that the European Court of Justice will not have effect as a
0:16:20 > 0:16:26European court after exit day.Nick Boles, would you mind if the UK is
0:16:26 > 0:16:31under ECJ jurisdiction only way till 2021?Know, so long as it is limited
0:16:31 > 0:16:34by that time period and I think that Michael Gove and Boris Johnson have
0:16:34 > 0:16:39also made clear that they can live with that because as I think one of
0:16:39 > 0:16:44them said, let's keep our eyes on the prize. What matters is what is
0:16:44 > 0:16:48the agreement that we can reach for after the conclusion of the
0:16:48 > 0:16:53transition. Keeping abutting pretty much as it is now for two years.
0:16:53 > 0:17:01Ultimately, it will pass quickly. Around two years.As long as it was
0:17:01 > 0:17:04before the next election, I think that will be acceptable.Did you
0:17:04 > 0:17:07wanted to be longer than three years?I think the critical thing is
0:17:07 > 0:17:11that the transition needs to be complete before the next general
0:17:11 > 0:17:18election.So you would be happy to see it until 2022?There are still
0:17:18 > 0:17:22amendments being posed in the House of Lords on the European Court which
0:17:22 > 0:17:25would be of grave concern.Let me talk to you about the tone of the
0:17:25 > 0:17:28debate that has gone on recently because there are people who feel
0:17:28 > 0:17:33that it has got out of control and you are partly responsible, Bill
0:17:33 > 0:17:37Cash, because you have accused some of your colleagues of collaboration
0:17:37 > 0:17:41with Labour. Is that the right tone that should be adopted in this big
0:17:41 > 0:17:46constitutional decision between levers and Remainers?First of all,
0:17:46 > 0:17:51if you actually read my article in the Times very carefully, I said if
0:17:51 > 0:17:55they were.It is the word collaboration.It means working
0:17:55 > 0:18:00within a framework and with other people.It has negative connotations
0:18:00 > 0:18:04which I'm sure you used specifically for that purpose, but it has got so
0:18:04 > 0:18:09bad that your colleagues over the weekend has had umpteen death
0:18:09 > 0:18:15threats and she blames that or says it is a direct result of the Daily
0:18:15 > 0:18:19Telegraph's muting the front page. Is that feeding a tone of debate
0:18:19 > 0:18:23that has now become sinister?I deplore anything along these lines,
0:18:23 > 0:18:28but I will also say that we have a debate going on that is incredibly
0:18:28 > 0:18:32important and it is essential that we don't end up in a situation
0:18:32 > 0:18:37where, for example, there were to be votes, and I am not saying there
0:18:37 > 0:18:45will be.But if there were, would they be collaborators?If they were
0:18:45 > 0:18:47to completely undermine the whole of the Brexit process and the
0:18:47 > 0:18:51referendum, then that would be a very, as I said in my article, that
0:18:51 > 0:18:54would raise serious questions about what was being done. But it is a
0:18:54 > 0:19:00matter of analysis. We haven't got to that point. As a matter of fact,
0:19:00 > 0:19:03we have actually been getting our ills through at the moment.Has the
0:19:03 > 0:19:09tone been wrong, though?Dominik said yesterday that it was important
0:19:09 > 0:19:13and I actually had lunch with him only a couple of days ago. We had a
0:19:13 > 0:19:17very amicable discussion about all of this. As a matter of fact, I
0:19:17 > 0:19:21think it is important to stick to the analysis because it is so
0:19:21 > 0:19:25important to actually deliver Brexit according to what the people decided
0:19:25 > 0:19:29in the referendum, but at the same time it would be quite impossible
0:19:29 > 0:19:34for us simply to state whatever amendments are put down our own
0:19:34 > 0:19:39right. We are discussing these very sensibly and with a very good
0:19:39 > 0:19:44atmosphere in the House of Commons itself, and I think that I deeply
0:19:44 > 0:19:47deplored the death threat to business. I think that is absolutely
0:19:47 > 0:19:51appalling. But I do most emphatically say that having voted
0:19:51 > 0:19:54for Article 50 and for the referendum act itself and also for
0:19:54 > 0:19:58the second reading of the repeal bill, there are natural constraints
0:19:58 > 0:20:03in the manner in which people proceed.Thank you very much. Thank
0:20:03 > 0:20:04you for coming in.
0:20:04 > 0:20:06Now it's time for our daily quiz.
0:20:06 > 0:20:08The question for today is what item of clothing,
0:20:08 > 0:20:11traditionally worn by a man will soon be worn by a woman
0:20:11 > 0:20:12in the palace of Westminster?
0:20:12 > 0:20:14Was it A, a tie?
0:20:14 > 0:20:15B, tights?
0:20:15 > 0:20:16C, kilt?
0:20:16 > 0:20:18Or D, braces?
0:20:18 > 0:20:23At the end of the show Jess and Nick will give us the correct answer.
0:20:23 > 0:20:26So, it's the Budget on Wednesday.
0:20:26 > 0:20:29I know you're all on tenterhooks, but don't worry, you don't have
0:20:29 > 0:20:32to wait until then for some of its contents to be revealed.
0:20:32 > 0:20:36Yesterday the Chancellor was on the Andrew Marr Show
0:20:36 > 0:20:38in an appearance that's become as much part of tradition as
0:20:38 > 0:20:39the parliamentary occasion itself.
0:20:39 > 0:20:43Amidst the post-election clamour for something to be done on housing,
0:20:43 > 0:20:47Philip Hammond promised a million new homes by 2020.
0:20:47 > 0:20:50You might be forgiven for thinking you have heard these
0:20:50 > 0:20:52sort of pledges before.
0:20:52 > 0:20:55Our guest of the day, Nick Boles, has some of his own ideas
0:20:55 > 0:20:57about tackling the housing crisis.
0:20:57 > 0:21:06Here's his soapbox.
0:21:07 > 0:21:17MUSIC PLAYS
0:21:17 > 0:21:19The Prime Minister has made it her personal
0:21:19 > 0:21:22mission to build more homes, more quickly.
0:21:22 > 0:21:25Wednesday's Budget will be a key moment.
0:21:25 > 0:21:29The Chancellor has to announce new measures to deliver more homes,
0:21:29 > 0:21:30more homes for sale, more affordable homes,
0:21:30 > 0:21:33more council homes.
0:21:33 > 0:21:43Here are some things he should do.
0:21:47 > 0:21:49First, he should launch a new Grenfell housing commission
0:21:49 > 0:21:53to build 50,000 affordable homes across the country and issue
0:21:53 > 0:22:03a new Grenfell housing bond to raise £50 billion to pay for them.
0:22:04 > 0:22:05The
0:22:05 > 0:22:06That would give us genuinely affordable homes
0:22:06 > 0:22:10in places like this,
0:22:10 > 0:22:11Elephant Park in South London.
0:22:11 > 0:22:15What better way, what better memorial, to the people
0:22:15 > 0:22:17who lost their lives in the dreadful Grenfell Tower fire?
0:22:17 > 0:22:23Second, he should reform the land market to cap the profits that
0:22:23 > 0:22:26wealthy landowners can make and give councils the power to buy land
0:22:26 > 0:22:29for housing at a reasonable price so they can spend the money
0:22:29 > 0:22:34they save on vital local infrastructure.
0:22:34 > 0:22:37Third, he should tell people who already own their own home
0:22:37 > 0:22:41in an urban or suburban area that they can stick one
0:22:41 > 0:22:43or two stories on the top without going through a full
0:22:43 > 0:22:45planning application, but they ought to stick
0:22:45 > 0:22:55to the local design.
0:22:57 > 0:23:00Finally, he should tell the big house builders to stop
0:23:00 > 0:23:08dragging their feet and build out those sites where they've
0:23:08 > 0:23:10got planning permission, and if they don't build the homes
0:23:10 > 0:23:12on time, he should make them offer the plots
0:23:12 > 0:23:14to other builders who will.
0:23:14 > 0:23:17It's going to take years to bring sanity back into our housing market,
0:23:17 > 0:23:18so we've got no time to lose.
0:23:18 > 0:23:19Let's start now.
0:23:19 > 0:23:26And Nick Boles is still here.
0:23:26 > 0:23:29with Jess Phillips. Just picking up in the last few points you made in
0:23:29 > 0:23:31that film, should broadly in your mind developers with planning
0:23:31 > 0:23:36permission use it or lose it?Yes, I think that is absolutely right and
0:23:36 > 0:23:40the question is how you get them to do that. How do you put that into
0:23:40 > 0:23:44effect in a way that also respect the fact that they have made a big
0:23:44 > 0:23:47investment in securing the planning permission in the first place. It is
0:23:47 > 0:23:50a very long accommodated and expensive process. So my idea is
0:23:50 > 0:23:55that they should be forced to sell on the plots that they are not
0:23:55 > 0:23:58building out on schedule to any other builder who wants to build out
0:23:58 > 0:24:03that plot, and that would quickly reveal whether the excuse that they
0:24:03 > 0:24:07often make, which is that some are no longer viable and the value has
0:24:07 > 0:24:10gone down, whether that was real or in fact actually they were just
0:24:10 > 0:24:15trying to eke out the suppliers slowly as possible to keep prices
0:24:15 > 0:24:19up.Right, but the Government already pledged in 2015 and 2017
0:24:19 > 0:24:23that went million homes would be built by 2020. You have missed the
0:24:23 > 0:24:28target and are still missing it. How you meet that additional number of
0:24:28 > 0:24:35homes?We have had a good figure.A better figure.Let's recognise that
0:24:35 > 0:24:38progress has been made through the planning reforms and other reforms
0:24:38 > 0:24:43that have happened. But I actually agree with you. I think it is not
0:24:43 > 0:24:46enough to will the end without willing the means. You have got to
0:24:46 > 0:24:49take some quite radical action, and at the moment I haven't heard
0:24:49 > 0:24:54anything from either the Chancellor or anyone else that suggests to me
0:24:54 > 0:24:57that we are going to do the things that I know will be required, the
0:24:57 > 0:25:00sort of things I was talking about in the film. They are really quite
0:25:00 > 0:25:03difficult and big steps to take, but if we don't do things like that then
0:25:03 > 0:25:07we will not take that figure.Are you confident the Chancellor will do
0:25:07 > 0:25:13any of those radical things?Well, I am optimistic.On the basis of?
0:25:13 > 0:25:17Well, he made very plain that this is the Prime Minister's number one
0:25:17 > 0:25:20priority and his number one priority for the budget and he recognises
0:25:20 > 0:25:24issues with major house-builders not building out on time and so I am
0:25:24 > 0:25:27optimistic that they understand the scale of the response required, but
0:25:27 > 0:25:31I do think that they need to understand that they will be judged
0:25:31 > 0:25:35not just on the target, not just on the aspiration, they will be judged
0:25:35 > 0:25:39on the specific detail of the plans that we are going to put into place
0:25:39 > 0:25:43to actually make this market work. Do you think it is in off, Jess
0:25:43 > 0:25:46Phillips, to talk about Private developers building homes? Is what
0:25:46 > 0:25:50is needed if the Chancellor is going to live up to what he said and
0:25:50 > 0:25:55Theresa May also to go for a mass state operation in terms of building
0:25:55 > 0:25:58homes?I think there needs to be both. I think that unless we talk
0:25:58 > 0:26:02about proper social housing, the single biggest thing that comes into
0:26:02 > 0:26:06my casework and through the doors of my office every week is people who
0:26:06 > 0:26:09are inappropriately housed in social housing or who cannot get into
0:26:09 > 0:26:14housing through social housing. In Birmingham, there are thousands of
0:26:14 > 0:26:17people living in an appropriate temporary accommodation. There has
0:26:17 > 0:26:22to be social building by the state. What do you say to that? Should it
0:26:22 > 0:26:26be led by state intervention in order to do the things you have just
0:26:26 > 0:26:29admitted? They have not been done and if they are not it will not
0:26:29 > 0:26:33happen.I am going to disappoint you because I completely agree with you.
0:26:33 > 0:26:37My proposal for the Grenville housing commission is to produce
0:26:37 > 0:26:4150,000 social or affordable homes. Homes that are owned by housing
0:26:41 > 0:26:44associations, community land trusts, and indeed councils.What is
0:26:44 > 0:26:50affordable?There are is a range. You want people to be getting onto
0:26:50 > 0:26:55the housing ladder, but some of them, quite a lot of them, need to
0:26:55 > 0:26:58be good old-fashioned council homes. At those sorts of rents, social rent
0:26:58 > 0:27:01as they are called. We need to have the full makes out there and it is
0:27:01 > 0:27:05not enough to say that any one piece is going to solve the problem. We
0:27:05 > 0:27:10need all of the pieces to together. But what the percentage are you
0:27:10 > 0:27:13talking about? Because when people talk about affordable housing, no
0:27:13 > 0:27:17one knows what they mean and most of the time it is not affordable.It is
0:27:17 > 0:27:20affordable and the sense that someone can afford to move into it
0:27:20 > 0:27:25but it is not affordable to people who work in, say, the NHS. And it
0:27:25 > 0:27:32should be.How many?I am not going to go into detail but I do think it
0:27:32 > 0:27:38is very important that councils review their role, there are natural
0:27:38 > 0:27:42role of commissioning and building council homes. They will all be
0:27:42 > 0:27:45subject in my view ultimately to write to buy and I think that should
0:27:45 > 0:27:48continue, but there needs to be a steady supply of council homes to
0:27:48 > 0:27:55ensure that our constituents who can't afford something that is now
0:27:55 > 0:27:59classified as affordable, that there is a solution for them.But you have
0:27:59 > 0:28:02said the aid of dexterity is over and that many governments run at a
0:28:02 > 0:28:07deficit of around 2.6%. The risk ruining the economy by not fixing
0:28:07 > 0:28:11the roof while the sun is shining?I think it is a very important
0:28:11 > 0:28:16problem, this. It has all sorts of social and economic impacts. If
0:28:16 > 0:28:19people can't get housing, they become very frightened to take
0:28:19 > 0:28:30risks. They become very frightened to move to a new job and to set up a
0:28:30 > 0:28:32new business. And so I think, yes, we absolutely need to fix this
0:28:32 > 0:28:35problem.By adding to the deficit? But to build homes that are either
0:28:35 > 0:28:39with money for sale or generate a rental income, so it is not like we
0:28:39 > 0:28:44are just throwing money away.Is this a priority for Labour? Should
0:28:44 > 0:28:50it be a priority for Labour in the way that it is in rhetorical terms
0:28:50 > 0:28:54for the Conservatives, because Labour has a big promise in terms of
0:28:54 > 0:28:57spending and renationalisation and a long list that it wants to put money
0:28:57 > 0:29:01into. Should this be the top of the priority list?If it were down to
0:29:01 > 0:29:05me, it would be the absolute top of the priority list, and to be fair I
0:29:05 > 0:29:08think that for a lot of people in the Labour Party it is the same.
0:29:08 > 0:29:12Housing is the beginning, middle, and end of the welfare of the people
0:29:12 > 0:29:16who live in our country and when it is precarious, all of the things
0:29:16 > 0:29:20that Nick has said about the ability to take risks and be entrepreneurial
0:29:20 > 0:29:24are all true and it is also bad for the health of our nation. And it is
0:29:24 > 0:29:29causing huge problems. So to me, I don't know whether it has been in
0:29:29 > 0:29:33the past, but it seems like the silver bullet, the panacea to try to
0:29:33 > 0:29:37improve things would be to build more houses and for people like me
0:29:37 > 0:29:41and Nick who probably all our houses, so to recognise that that
0:29:41 > 0:29:45wealth is not something that we are old, it is something that is built
0:29:45 > 0:29:50on the backs of other people not being able to afford a house.And
0:29:50 > 0:29:57would you support loosening planning in the way that Nick advocates?He
0:29:57 > 0:30:00will get a lot of complaints about his bad planning from neighbours,
0:30:00 > 0:30:03but I do think that people being able to build extra bits onto their
0:30:03 > 0:30:07house and councils being able to redevelop properties where families
0:30:07 > 0:30:10grow and families are naturally bigger in certain parts of my
0:30:10 > 0:30:15constituency, but I am weary that I don't want people throwing up
0:30:15 > 0:30:17monstrosities. I also don't think that it should be necessarily in
0:30:17 > 0:30:20keeping with the area because I think actually architecturally we
0:30:20 > 0:30:24need to develop and trying to always keeping the same, I think sometimes
0:30:24 > 0:30:30mixed with the boring houses.
0:30:30 > 0:30:34Should councils be allowed to borrow to build?Yes, with limits, but I
0:30:34 > 0:30:39have to say it is one of the treasury orthodoxes that drives me
0:30:39 > 0:30:43and I think most MPs completely round the bend, you know, somehow
0:30:43 > 0:30:46the Government is allowed to borrow almost to do anything, but they
0:30:46 > 0:30:51won't allow responsible councils who want to build council homes that
0:30:51 > 0:30:55would solve a local need, that would reduce the housing benefit bill that
0:30:55 > 0:31:01goes straight back to the Treasury and it's for reasons that I think
0:31:01 > 0:31:04are entirely speechless.Do you think Philip Hammond is going to be
0:31:04 > 0:31:08radical enough in your mind? Is he radical enough to be the Chancellor
0:31:08 > 0:31:11that's needed at the moment?He has very tough job and he has to keep a
0:31:11 > 0:31:16lot of things in balance and I'm sure I won't get everything I want,
0:31:16 > 0:31:20but I listened to his interview yesterday and I was encouraged that
0:31:20 > 0:31:26he has identified this as his number one priority. I'm optimistic.Were
0:31:26 > 0:31:30you encouraged by his comments there are no unemployed people?The way
0:31:30 > 0:31:35the media handled that, of course, it was clumsy and he should not have
0:31:35 > 0:31:40said it. But what he was responding to was the suggestion that when
0:31:40 > 0:31:43there is a new technology that jobs change and lots of people will be
0:31:43 > 0:31:47made unemployed. He was saying when shorthand typists weren't needed
0:31:47 > 0:31:52anymore, there wasn't a sudden rush of unemployed shorthand typists.He
0:31:52 > 0:31:56said we have created three million jobs is what he said afterwards. It
0:31:56 > 0:32:00sounded as if he had forgotten the 1.4 million unemployed. You say it
0:32:00 > 0:32:05was clumsy. What say you?I think that, it probably was clumsy, but it
0:32:05 > 0:32:09does unfortunately add to a layer of, people who live where I live who
0:32:09 > 0:32:15just think that the Conservatives don't get their problems. I'm
0:32:15 > 0:32:19unemployed, I have got unemploymented people in my family,
0:32:19 > 0:32:24it is sort of like hi we are over here. Whilst I appreciate what he
0:32:24 > 0:32:30was talking about was ought owemation it does make people feel
0:32:30 > 0:32:33their needs are forgotten and they are not being heard.Right. Is that
0:32:33 > 0:32:39how he comes across, Philip Hammond? No, I think we all make mistakes. I
0:32:39 > 0:32:43have made my fair share and when you are in a television studio and you
0:32:43 > 0:32:48are under pressure you can sometimes not think about things and think
0:32:48 > 0:32:52about the broader implications of them. We have the highest employment
0:32:52 > 0:32:56rate in recorded history in this country, but we have got further to
0:32:56 > 0:33:00go and more people to try and get help back into work and that's the
0:33:00 > 0:33:04priority of this government.Thank you both of you.
0:33:05 > 0:33:08So all that Budget fun to come as the Withdrawal Bill continues
0:33:08 > 0:33:11to be debated in the Commons and Theresa May makes a new Brexit
0:33:11 > 0:33:12divorce bill offer to the EU.
0:33:12 > 0:33:15It's going to be a busy week for Emily Ashton of Buzzfeed
0:33:15 > 0:33:19and Chris Hope of the Telegaph who are both on College Green.
0:33:19 > 0:33:23Welcome to both of you. Emily, first of all, how tight a spot is the
0:33:23 > 0:33:27Chancellor in in terms of the expectations that have been raised,
0:33:27 > 0:33:31they are high. He is going to save the Conservative Party fortunes and
0:33:31 > 0:33:34of course, deal with all the requests for money?Yes, he is in a
0:33:34 > 0:33:38bit of a tight spot, isn't he with the Budget this week and Brexit in
0:33:38 > 0:33:47general. He is a pro Remain minister and he is under pressure from the
0:33:47 > 0:33:50pro Brexiteers. He needs to find something that appeals to real
0:33:50 > 0:33:52people. You were talking about the gaffe he made yesterday. The problem
0:33:52 > 0:34:01is that he can sometimes come across as a robot! Alongside the Maybot and
0:34:01 > 0:34:07you need somebody that understands real people. You remember the speech
0:34:07 > 0:34:11from Theresa May on the steps of Downing Street talking about helping
0:34:11 > 0:34:16the just about managing. And more of the housing, the Universal Credit,
0:34:16 > 0:34:19the nurses pay, that's what we really need to hear from him this
0:34:19 > 0:34:24Wednesday.Nick Boles has said he's optimistic that he will, Philip
0:34:24 > 0:34:29Hammond, rise to the challenge. Are you as optimistic about what he will
0:34:29 > 0:34:33do? Will it really be tinkering around the edges on some of the big
0:34:33 > 0:34:37issues or are you expecting something radical?I think it will
0:34:37 > 0:34:42be tinkering around the edges for Philip Hammond. This week it will be
0:34:42 > 0:34:47less Brexit remainers and more Hammond and everyone else. It seems
0:34:47 > 0:34:50most people can't bear the bloke and are hoping he might get sacked
0:34:50 > 0:34:55before Christmas. He is not really a human being and he can't do human.
0:34:55 > 0:34:59Gordon Brown said that's part of the problem of modern politics is
0:34:59 > 0:35:03emoating and relating. It is the Maybot and the robot as Chancellor.
0:35:03 > 0:35:10It is tricky. There has to be some idea, we are not sure what it is, we
0:35:10 > 0:35:14want to see stamp duty reform, that probably won't happen and some areas
0:35:14 > 0:35:18where he can make tax cuts and it will be a disappointing Budget.
0:35:18 > 0:35:22Let's move on to Brexit because there is the meeting of the Brexit
0:35:22 > 0:35:26inner Cabinet later today. We heard Michel Barnier the EU's chief
0:35:26 > 0:35:29negotiator seeming to talk a little bit more about life beyond the
0:35:29 > 0:35:34divorce bill. Do we think there is going to be a strong signal that the
0:35:34 > 0:35:3740 billion euros is going to be offered by the UK Government?Yes,
0:35:37 > 0:35:47that's right. We have got the Brexit War Cabinet, War Cabinet, a
0:35:47 > 0:35:49convoluted subcommittee that's meeting this afternoon. We are
0:35:49 > 0:35:52expecting some deal between the ten Cabinet Ministers on that committee
0:35:52 > 0:35:59for a Bill that Britain will pay to the EU in the region of 40 billion
0:35:59 > 0:36:02or 50 billion which is more than they have said in the past and will
0:36:02 > 0:36:05upset a lot of MPs who say that's not what the public voted for
0:36:05 > 0:36:08actually. They don't want to spend this money to the aye. Isn't that
0:36:08 > 0:36:11the point of Brexit? The point is they want to move on to the next
0:36:11 > 0:36:15phase of talks. And that is a way town lock the next phase. So, this
0:36:15 > 0:36:19really is a question of look, do you want to move on or not? We need to
0:36:19 > 0:36:23pay the bill.How broad is the anger going to be Chris Hope because Bill
0:36:23 > 0:36:29Cash was saying if the methodology is right and that's what we have to
0:36:29 > 0:36:34pay, then we will have to pay it, but Nigel Evans saying it will be
0:36:34 > 0:36:41scandalous?The difference between what we have to pay which Bill Cash
0:36:41 > 0:36:44and the punishment beating we are taking from leaving Europe and the
0:36:44 > 0:36:49European Union and that's the problem for a lot of Brexiteers, we
0:36:49 > 0:36:52have no idea what we are getting for the money, we are paying this huge
0:36:52 > 0:36:58bill and we have no idea what we are getting in return. It looks slightly
0:36:58 > 0:37:00crazy.
0:37:00 > 0:37:01Now, there's compulsory viewing for any politicos
0:37:01 > 0:37:03on BBC Two at 9pm tonight.
0:37:03 > 0:37:06Filmmaker David Modell has followed Labour MPs through the election
0:37:06 > 0:37:09campaign when many had expected Jeremy Corbyn to crash and burn.
0:37:09 > 0:37:12Instead he went from zero to hero, of course.
0:37:12 > 0:37:15Here are Labour MPs Lucy Powell, Ruth Cadbury and Stephen Kinnock,
0:37:15 > 0:37:18who only months earlier had been calling for Mr Corbyn to resign,
0:37:18 > 0:37:24taking in June's shock result.
0:37:24 > 0:37:25Largest party.
0:37:25 > 0:37:26Oh my god.
0:37:26 > 0:37:29Oh my god.
0:37:29 > 0:37:32That's unbelievable.
0:37:32 > 0:37:34A 30 seats gain.
0:37:34 > 0:37:35Amazing.
0:37:35 > 0:37:41Oh my god.
0:37:41 > 0:37:43What they are saying the Conservatives are the largest party.
0:37:43 > 0:37:46Note they don't have an overall majority at this stage.
0:37:46 > 0:37:51314 for the Conservatives. That's down 17.
0:37:51 > 0:37:55We are looking at a hung parliament then.
0:37:55 > 0:37:56A hung parliament.
0:37:56 > 0:38:02A hung parliament.
0:38:02 > 0:38:07I'm not sure what Stephen's face is revealing here,
0:38:07 > 0:38:09but perhaps he's realising the Corbyn-free tomorrow
0:38:09 > 0:38:13he is thinking about might never actually come.
0:38:13 > 0:38:18Well, they were very revealing those reactions. Jess Phillips, some of
0:38:18 > 0:38:22your colleagues didn't know quite what to do or say at that point of
0:38:22 > 0:38:27the announcement. Did you?I was driving at the time and I was with a
0:38:27 > 0:38:30colleague of mine and we had been campaigning all day. I was shocked.
0:38:30 > 0:38:35I nearly drove off the road.Really? I was really shocked, yeah.And...
0:38:35 > 0:38:38It just wasn't what we were expecting. I think that I had
0:38:38 > 0:38:41thought it was going to be a lot better than it had been predicted
0:38:41 > 0:38:45weeks and weeks out by the time we were within the sort of last two,
0:38:45 > 0:38:48three weeks of the election campaign because you can just feel it when
0:38:48 > 0:38:53you're there. We spoke to 21,000 people in six weeks. So you get a
0:38:53 > 0:38:56feeling for it. But you don't know whether it is the same where you are
0:38:56 > 0:39:00as everywhere else, you are in a bunker during that period really.
0:39:00 > 0:39:05How would you interpret Stephen kin OK there, was he thinking this is a
0:39:05 > 0:39:09bad result, Labour under Jeremy Corbyn winning an extra 30 seats?I
0:39:09 > 0:39:14wouldn't like to try and guess what was on Stephen's mind at the time! I
0:39:14 > 0:39:19think with the documentaries one has to be careful of editing and over
0:39:19 > 0:39:22speaking to try and project on to people.Shouldn't they have been
0:39:22 > 0:39:27celebrating 30 extra seats for Labour?Yeah, absolutely, but it
0:39:27 > 0:39:31goes to a studio if people like us are sat there, they are probably
0:39:31 > 0:39:35going no one trusts the exit polls so it is difficult to know actually
0:39:35 > 0:39:39how that's going to stack up in reality.But he almost looked
0:39:39 > 0:39:43disappointed?Yeah, I should imagine if we were watching tonight, more
0:39:43 > 0:39:48will be revealed.Right.It's a very good documentary maker.Well, we
0:39:48 > 0:39:52will all be watching it. You admitted you were wrong after the
0:39:52 > 0:39:55election for questioning Jeremy Corbyn's electability. Is he
0:39:55 > 0:40:03unassailable?I don't think anybody is unassailable. Out for milk at
0:40:03 > 0:40:06moment and there is a new world order when you get back! I think
0:40:06 > 0:40:10that anybody who thinks they are unassailable should have a word with
0:40:10 > 0:40:14themselves, but he is in a stronger position.Right, is he, should he be
0:40:14 > 0:40:20doing better than he is at the moment? Theresa May is not having a
0:40:20 > 0:40:23good autumn by anyone's standards. She has lost two Cabinet Ministers
0:40:23 > 0:40:26in the last month, Brexit negotiations are currently in
0:40:26 > 0:40:32deadlock, they are flailing over core policies like Universal Credit
0:40:32 > 0:40:35and Labour and the Tories are neck and neck and occasionally they are a
0:40:35 > 0:40:42few points ahead? T-does seem if electorates only reacted to poor
0:40:42 > 0:40:45performances the Labour Party should be streaming ahead in the polls. So
0:40:45 > 0:40:49why aren't they?I think there is all sorts of reasons. I think that
0:40:49 > 0:40:53people at the moment, everything is so consumed with Brexit that lots of
0:40:53 > 0:40:59people, we don't know what people's domestic agendas are anymore. The
0:40:59 > 0:41:04vision that helps people really, really understand where you might
0:41:04 > 0:41:09want to put your, which we don't know when there is going to be
0:41:09 > 0:41:13another vote, it seems to have been sucked away by Brexit, bun of the
0:41:13 > 0:41:17problems is that both political parties increased their vote share
0:41:17 > 0:41:21in the last election and it is very difficult for them to find the
0:41:21 > 0:41:24natural places to be stealing it from. So we seem to be in a deadlock
0:41:24 > 0:41:29in the poll.There are plenty of people who feel that Brexit is not
0:41:29 > 0:41:35going well. If that's the image of people, why isn't Jeremy Corbyn 20
0:41:35 > 0:41:40points ahead in the poll?I have no idea why. But maybe people are not
0:41:40 > 0:41:44convinced. The people who did vote for him were obviously convinced and
0:41:44 > 0:41:49we need to convince natural Tory voters to vote Labour and that is
0:41:49 > 0:41:52much bigger step. Is there still a problem over the
0:41:52 > 0:41:56economy and trust on the economy because despite everything that is
0:41:56 > 0:41:59going on for the Government, a recent poll showed the Prime
0:41:59 > 0:42:02Minister and the Chancellor remain about eight points ahead of Jeremy
0:42:02 > 0:42:06Corbyn and John McDonnell?I think that almost certainly is an issue
0:42:06 > 0:42:10and being sensible and safe especially in a time when we don't
0:42:10 > 0:42:14know what's going to happen with Brexit. People want to feel that the
0:42:14 > 0:42:17economy is going to be in safe hands and they have got, they have never
0:42:17 > 0:42:23had an opportunity to prove it because there were always
0:42:23 > 0:42:25backbenchers who weren't involved when the Labour Party was in
0:42:25 > 0:42:29government so they have got a long way to prove that people can trust
0:42:29 > 0:42:35them with their money and that's totally understandable.The election
0:42:35 > 0:42:39result for you, Nick Boles, were you shocked?Yes, I had a weird
0:42:39 > 0:42:42experience because I was finishing treatment for cancer so I hadn't
0:42:42 > 0:42:46been able to campaign at all in my constituency and was sort of lying
0:42:46 > 0:42:49flat on the sofa watching it unfold and thinking what on earth have they
0:42:49 > 0:42:54done and worried, of course, for my own seat as it happens, my majority
0:42:54 > 0:43:00went up, but I think the important thing was that that election was
0:43:00 > 0:43:03crucially an election about Brexit and there is a lot of research
0:43:03 > 0:43:06that's been done which suggests that most of the people who switched
0:43:06 > 0:43:10their vote, one way or another, were voting about Brexit. So, there were
0:43:10 > 0:43:15a huge number of people who voted Labour for the first time because
0:43:15 > 0:43:19they wanted the softest Brexit possible. And there were others, of
0:43:19 > 0:43:23course, Ukip voters for instance who voted Conservative for the first
0:43:23 > 0:43:26time because they wanted a rather harder Brexit. I don't think the
0:43:26 > 0:43:30next election is going to be about Brexit. It will be about the future
0:43:30 > 0:43:34so I'm not sure whether it will tell us very much the polling position
0:43:34 > 0:43:38today about the next election.I mean, we have just discussed Theresa
0:43:38 > 0:43:43May is not having an easy time. You could say it has been a catastrophic
0:43:43 > 0:43:46autumn for him and the disappointing election result. Should she fight
0:43:46 > 0:43:52the next election?As she said she will carry on being leader as long
0:43:52 > 0:43:55as the Parliamentary party want her to be leader. I think the natural
0:43:55 > 0:44:00thing is for her to deliver Brexit and for then for her and for the
0:44:00 > 0:44:06party to have a think about whether that's a natural time to hand over
0:44:06 > 0:44:10to somebody fresher and younger and newer or whether she is in a sense
0:44:10 > 0:44:15so rebuilt her credibility and her authority that actually she can
0:44:15 > 0:44:18fight the next election, but I don't think anybody should be thinking
0:44:18 > 0:44:22about this or giving consideration to one decision or another until
0:44:22 > 0:44:26Brexit is complete. That's her mission is to deliver Brexit and
0:44:26 > 0:44:29it's a pretty big mission and a difficult one and I think let's
0:44:29 > 0:44:33stick with that.You think if it were deemed to be a success she
0:44:33 > 0:44:40could stay on until the next election?It is not impossible.
0:44:40 > 0:44:44The documentary is on BBC Two at 9pm tonight.
0:44:44 > 0:44:47Now, the accusations of sexual harassment at Westminster may be
0:44:47 > 0:44:48off the front pages, but with inquiries on-going
0:44:48 > 0:44:51and the establishment of a cross party body to handle claims
0:44:51 > 0:44:53of impropriety, still to be agreed on, the story
0:44:53 > 0:44:54is unlikely to go away.
0:44:54 > 0:44:57Here is Theresa May earlier this month, attempting to get
0:44:57 > 0:45:01on the front foot in her handling of the story.
0:45:01 > 0:45:03Sadly over recent days we have seen a number
0:45:03 > 0:45:07of allegations about figures from across the political parties
0:45:07 > 0:45:10and it's important that those are investigated impartially
0:45:10 > 0:45:14and some have rightly been referred to the police.
0:45:14 > 0:45:18I think if this hasn't happened to you, it's difficult to appreciate
0:45:18 > 0:45:21the impact that being a victim of this sort of behaviour can have.
0:45:21 > 0:45:25It simply has a lasting impact on people and we need to do more
0:45:25 > 0:45:28to stop these abuses of power and I'm pleased that having convened
0:45:28 > 0:45:31this meeting of party leaders today.
0:45:31 > 0:45:34And joining us now is Joanna Williams, the author
0:45:34 > 0:45:36of Women Versus Feminism: Why We All Need Liberating
0:45:36 > 0:45:39from the Gender Wars.
0:45:39 > 0:45:41Jess Phillips who as Chair of the Women's Parliamentary Labour Party,
0:45:41 > 0:45:46has handled some of the complaints in the party.
0:45:46 > 0:45:50Welcome to the studio. Do you think this has been well handled and
0:45:50 > 0:45:54handled in the correct way?No, I don't. I think there are a number of
0:45:54 > 0:46:00problems with it has been handled so far, perhaps more significantly the
0:46:00 > 0:46:08tragic suicide of the Welsh Labour MP Carl Sargeant. So I think we have
0:46:08 > 0:46:12the trappings of a witchhunt, which is bad for men but also terrible for
0:46:12 > 0:46:18women, this idea that we are going to lump together everything from
0:46:18 > 0:46:21rape accusations, serious sexual assault allegations to touching of
0:46:21 > 0:46:27knees or text messages, all been conflated together, I think it
0:46:27 > 0:46:32trivialises some of the serious crimes that have had an impact on
0:46:32 > 0:46:37women's lies and creates a witchhunt atmosphere.What do you have decided
0:46:37 > 0:46:40that?I don't know who is lumping things together other than those who
0:46:40 > 0:46:44want to call it a witchhunt. I don't think it is a witchhunt, I think
0:46:44 > 0:46:47that like any place of work, Parliament has delivered by the same
0:46:47 > 0:46:52roles and people should feel safe and comfortable and power and
0:46:52 > 0:46:56patronage that exists in Parliament should never ever be able to be used
0:46:56 > 0:47:01to exploit whether that is sexual harassment or people's sexual urges,
0:47:01 > 0:47:04because it is to be fundamentally about the power imbalance that
0:47:04 > 0:47:08exists in there and it is by no means only women. I have dealt with
0:47:08 > 0:47:13complaints by men as well.Do you accept that?No, I think it is very
0:47:13 > 0:47:16disingenuous to say that we don't know who is lumping these things
0:47:16 > 0:47:17together because we have had spreadsheets going around
0:47:17 > 0:47:22Parliament, compiled through text messages groups that have then
0:47:22 > 0:47:26formed the front page of news stories that have focused on
0:47:26 > 0:47:29everything from touching of knees to serious accusations of rape, I think
0:47:29 > 0:47:33these things are clearly being lumped together and the argument is
0:47:33 > 0:47:37that all of these things are on a continuum. Well, by that logic every
0:47:37 > 0:47:40aspect of human interaction from saying hello to summon, talking to
0:47:40 > 0:47:45someone, to rape and murder are all on a continuum. But the argument
0:47:45 > 0:47:51that women are completely powerless. Sexual harassment does happen but
0:47:51 > 0:47:55the idea that women can't turn around and ask not for that to
0:47:55 > 0:47:58happen or through a cup of coffee over them walk away. These are women
0:47:58 > 0:48:02in Parliament we are talking about. I think despite the ridiculous and
0:48:02 > 0:48:06insulting to women. Right. Why can't women do that?They absolutely can
0:48:06 > 0:48:11but I suppose the difference is that I recognise that not all women are
0:48:11 > 0:48:16exactly the same and some women may feel completely able to and all
0:48:16 > 0:48:20power to their elbows. I would like to eat it if somebody touched me.
0:48:20 > 0:48:24However, there are lots and lots of young people and I know because I
0:48:24 > 0:48:29work in Parliament, there are lots of young women and men who are dear
0:48:29 > 0:48:35to try and get on in life and feel that they have two be quiet about
0:48:35 > 0:48:41certain things. This isn't just a problem in Parliament.I see this
0:48:41 > 0:48:43absolutely everywhere. This is a very patronising idea that some
0:48:43 > 0:48:46women are capable of dealing with sexual harassment but other women
0:48:46 > 0:48:49are not.What about the case if it is a young woman who's going for a
0:48:49 > 0:48:55job in hand houses of parliament and the person who is interviewing her
0:48:55 > 0:48:58sends her sexual text messages. Is she in a position to tell that man
0:48:58 > 0:49:04easily to literally go away? Actually, today, yes. The fact is
0:49:04 > 0:49:09there are young women in the country who are at risk of sexual harassment
0:49:09 > 0:49:14and let's talk about the young girls in Rochdale, in Oxford, in
0:49:14 > 0:49:17Newcastle, and when Sarah chavvy... I thought we weren't going to lump
0:49:17 > 0:49:29them all together.When these girls are talked about, they do not make
0:49:29 > 0:49:36the front page.I hear about all of these cases. I set up services for
0:49:36 > 0:49:40child victims of sexual exploitation all across the Midlands and it is
0:49:40 > 0:49:44absolutely phenomenal but you are now lumping those things in
0:49:44 > 0:49:48together, exactly as you have claimed not to be doing, which I
0:49:48 > 0:49:52find to be completely disingenuous. Anyone who is going to stand there
0:49:52 > 0:49:56and say that I don't care about child sexual excitation but I do
0:49:56 > 0:50:01care about knee touching is, I am afraid to say, lying.Are all of
0:50:01 > 0:50:05these things a matter of importance? You recently wrote that any woman
0:50:05 > 0:50:07who publicly accusing someone of sexual harassment without details
0:50:07 > 0:50:11are evidence is not only believed about celebrating? Can you give me
0:50:11 > 0:50:15examples where they have not had details or evidence?Well, these are
0:50:15 > 0:50:20not tested in court of law. That is the point. Anybody can turn round
0:50:20 > 0:50:25and say that someone touched my knee ten years ago and if you have a
0:50:25 > 0:50:29serious accusation of rape or sexual assault, it needs to go to a court
0:50:29 > 0:50:33of law. You have somebody who has tragically committed suicide without
0:50:33 > 0:50:36even knowing what the allegations were against him. How can that be
0:50:36 > 0:50:42right in 2017 that somebody is fired from their job without even knowing
0:50:42 > 0:50:46what they stand accused of?Should people be told in full what it is
0:50:46 > 0:50:50they are accused of. Some people might say that they know what they
0:50:50 > 0:50:53are being accused of even if it hasn't been publicly explained. But
0:50:53 > 0:50:57if we look at the ongoing investigations, including the
0:50:57 > 0:51:00cabinet Minister, Damian Green, Charlie Elphick also said they don't
0:51:00 > 0:51:03know the full nature of their allegations. Is that the correct way
0:51:03 > 0:51:08to deal with that?Well, I am not an expert in this and I wonder that it
0:51:08 > 0:51:14may be in certain cases where an alleged event is so serious that it
0:51:14 > 0:51:18has been referred to the police. It may be that the police then say that
0:51:18 > 0:51:24no further information can be supplied to the alleged perpetrator.
0:51:24 > 0:51:29But it certainly in the ideal world as an employer, you would hope that
0:51:29 > 0:51:32the accusations were shared in full, but as I say, it may be that the
0:51:32 > 0:51:34police actually prevent that. We have to respect the police, that
0:51:34 > 0:51:39they do need to be able to do their jobs properly.Isn't there a
0:51:39 > 0:51:43difference between what is known as locker room talk because of Donald
0:51:43 > 0:51:46Trump and sexual banter and serious sexual harassment and that there is
0:51:46 > 0:51:49a risk of minimising what most people would think is the more
0:51:49 > 0:51:55serious accusation from, as you say, the day to day power play?I think
0:51:55 > 0:51:58the people who are aiming to minimise both things are the people
0:51:58 > 0:52:02who are essentially trying to lump those two things together. Now, I
0:52:02 > 0:52:06don't think that being upset that young women feel that they cannot
0:52:06 > 0:52:10speak up where they are employed- many of them leave their jobs
0:52:10 > 0:52:15because they just don't know what to do with it. It is, to be honest,
0:52:15 > 0:52:18about power. Sexual violence is not about sexual urges. Sexual
0:52:18 > 0:52:22harassment is not about sexual urges. It is about having power over
0:52:22 > 0:52:27somebody and it exists in difficult power -- different power
0:52:27 > 0:52:32relationships. As you is an expert, if there is going to be a police
0:52:32 > 0:52:35investigation, which I don't know. There isn't an Charlie Elphick's
0:52:35 > 0:52:38case. At the party were to speak to him, they could then be called to
0:52:38 > 0:52:42give evidence.On the subject of power, we need to remember that
0:52:42 > 0:52:47these are adult women that we are talking about. We're not talking
0:52:47 > 0:52:50about children. And where is the power line when one person loses his
0:52:50 > 0:52:56job and another person gets a Guardian column or the front story?
0:52:56 > 0:53:04But if they have been found to be caught in wrongdoing, shouldn't they
0:53:04 > 0:53:07lose their job?But this is them losing a job on the basis of an
0:53:07 > 0:53:11accusation without having been found guilty of anything.Just very
0:53:11 > 0:53:14briefly, the people who have been accused and suspended from Labour,
0:53:14 > 0:53:17the investigations have gone quiet. You have any idea about when we will
0:53:17 > 0:53:22hear if they have been resolved?I think that the investigation is
0:53:22 > 0:53:26trying to be... It is all being redesigned. Every political party is
0:53:26 > 0:53:30redesigning it. It shouldn't be too long, and they are trying to do it
0:53:30 > 0:53:30in a timely manner.
0:53:30 > 0:53:34Now, she stood down as Labour's leader in Scotland for a quieter
0:53:34 > 0:53:36life, so what better way to achieve that than becoming
0:53:36 > 0:53:37a reality TV star?
0:53:37 > 0:53:39Her party's new leader, Richard Leonard, is now
0:53:39 > 0:53:40considering whether Kezia Dugdale should be disciplined
0:53:40 > 0:53:43for deserting her post as an MSP at Holyrood to head
0:53:43 > 0:53:47for the Australian jungle.
0:53:47 > 0:53:51She hasn't yet made an appearance on I'm A Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here!,
0:53:51 > 0:53:53but she's not the only politician on the programme.
0:53:53 > 0:53:55Boris' dad, Stanley Johnson, made his debut on the first
0:53:55 > 0:54:00episode last night.
0:54:00 > 0:54:04I'm Stanley Johnson. I am an author, a former politician, an
0:54:04 > 0:54:07environmental campaigner. People probably also recognise me as being
0:54:07 > 0:54:13the father of Boris Johnson, the politician. Wow! Hey, hey, look at
0:54:13 > 0:54:22this! Look at this. I think I'm going to have some champagne. Oh, my
0:54:22 > 0:54:32lord. What have we here?Wow.Are you a film star?No, I am the wife
0:54:32 > 0:54:39of an England player.Is he going to be out for the Ashes?Oh, no. He
0:54:39 > 0:54:47plays football, not cricket.Are you a footballer?No, I am an actor.How
0:54:47 > 0:54:55wonderful!I just finished with Hollyoaks.I know about Hollyoaks.
0:54:55 > 0:54:58It actually comes just when you watch the Channel 4 News.
0:54:58 > 0:55:00And here to give some advice to this year's political jungle-dwellers
0:55:00 > 0:55:04is I'm a celebrity survivor, Christine Hamilton.
0:55:04 > 0:55:09What are your top tips?Be yourself. You can't be anything else. Anybody
0:55:09 > 0:55:12who has put themselves in there now, they know what is coming. I was on
0:55:12 > 0:55:18the very first one so I literally had no idea. It was 15 years ago.
0:55:18 > 0:55:33Gosh!Allah, I know. Now they all know exactly what is coming. -- Ooh,
0:55:33 > 0:55:39I know! Now they all know exactly what is coming.Now they don't know
0:55:39 > 0:55:42who eat other arm. I love Stanley's excuse for not watching because it
0:55:42 > 0:55:47clashes with the news.I think Stanley will do very well. I know
0:55:47 > 0:55:52him and I think he will... I think people like him.What about Kezia
0:55:52 > 0:55:57Dugdale?I do think she should be there. She has a job, for heaven 's
0:55:57 > 0:56:04sake. I think it is wrong. We have had another MP being in and she was
0:56:04 > 0:56:06criticised and she was out pretty quickly. They don't like
0:56:06 > 0:56:16politicians. The one who did best was Edwina Currie. Kezia said in
0:56:16 > 0:56:192016 that she wanted to ban all second jobs for members of the
0:56:19 > 0:56:24Scottish parliament and she wanted to have a new kind of politics.
0:56:24 > 0:56:28Well, what do you think? Do you think she should be sanctioned?I
0:56:28 > 0:56:32don't know is the answer to this question. I genuinely don't. I
0:56:32 > 0:56:37didn't know she was going on it until yesterday.Nor did Jeremy
0:56:37 > 0:56:44Corbyn. Or Richard Leonard.What I am really wary of is that there are
0:56:44 > 0:56:47foot lines in the Labour Party at the moment and I hope that this does
0:56:47 > 0:56:52not become one of them because it is nonsense. I wouldn't do it. You
0:56:52 > 0:56:57wouldn't do it. For all sorts of reasons.Is it because it would be a
0:56:57 > 0:57:06conflict of interest?For all sorts of reasons.I think we can show the
0:57:06 > 0:57:15tweet.
0:57:16 > 0:57:21So isn't it a bit of the critical? Also, I suppose, because of some of
0:57:21 > 0:57:25the fractions in the Labour Party, the same thing could be said for a
0:57:25 > 0:57:29Kezia Dugdale that this is giving an excuse to people who might want to
0:57:29 > 0:57:32take that excuse. But it is hypocritical. There's no two ways
0:57:32 > 0:57:38about that.That seems to be... Nobody seems to know what is
0:57:38 > 0:57:43happening to the money. First of all, she said she would give some of
0:57:43 > 0:57:47it to a charity. She did have a pledge on a registered member's
0:57:47 > 0:57:50interests that she would donate all of our money that she raised from
0:57:50 > 0:57:55other work to a charity. That is gone. She is being paid tens and
0:57:55 > 0:57:59tens and tens of thousands. Everybody negotiates. It is vastly
0:57:59 > 0:58:05more... I think I can say this. I was offered £10,000. And I asked
0:58:05 > 0:58:10them to make it a bit better. They made it up to 12 and then they put
0:58:10 > 0:58:19everyone else's up as well.You tempted?I frankly would pay not to
0:58:19 > 0:58:25have to watch it. Have you ever watched it? No.
0:58:25 > 0:58:28There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.
0:58:28 > 0:58:30The question was what item of clothing -
0:58:30 > 0:58:33traditionally worn by a man - will soon be worn by a woman
0:58:33 > 0:58:34in the palace of Westminster?
0:58:34 > 0:58:35Was it:
0:58:35 > 0:58:36A, a tie?
0:58:36 > 0:58:37B, tights?
0:58:37 > 0:58:38C, waistcoat?
0:58:38 > 0:58:40Or D, braces?
0:58:40 > 0:58:43So, Jess and Nick, what's the correct answer?
0:58:43 > 0:58:54Tights.And that is because? Sarah Clark is going to become the first
0:58:54 > 0:59:01Black rod and so she will be wearing those sites.I was really pleased.
0:59:01 > 0:59:02Good, well, there is a change for you.
0:59:02 > 0:59:03That's all for today.
0:59:03 > 0:59:05Thanks to our guests.
0:59:05 > 0:59:07The one o'clock news is starting over on BBC One now.
0:59:07 > 0:59:10I'll be here at noon tomorrow with all the big
0:59:10 > 0:59:11political stories of the day.
0:59:11 > 0:59:12Do join me then.
0:59:12 > 0:59:16Bye-bye.