20/11/2017 Daily Politics


20/11/2017

Jo Coburn is joined by Conservative MP Nick Boles and Labour MP Jess Phillips to discuss Wednesday's Budget, the Brexit divorce bill and housing policy.


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 20/11/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

Hello and welcome to

the Daily Politics.

0:00:370:00:41

The Chancellor says they're

going to "unblock the logjam"

0:00:410:00:44

in the Brexit negotiations,

but will the Prime Minister's Brexit

0:00:440:00:46

Cabinet agree on what to offer

the EU and will it be accepted?

0:00:460:00:51

A million new homes

will be built by 2020 -

0:00:510:00:53

that's the promise that will be

in this week's Budget,

0:00:530:00:56

but will it be kept?

0:00:560:00:59

Jeremy Corbyn went from zero to hero

- Labour MPs who wanted him gone

0:00:590:01:03

react to June's shock election

result in a new BBC documentary -

0:01:030:01:07

but is he performing well enough now

against a government that's

0:01:070:01:10

on the ropes?

0:01:100:01:15

And from the frying pan

and into the jungle!

0:01:150:01:17

Should Labour's outgoing leader

in Scotland be taking time off

0:01:170:01:20

as an MSP to do reality TV?

0:01:200:01:26

All that in the next hour

and with us for the whole

0:01:280:01:33

of the programme today are two MPs

who have eschewed the lure

0:01:330:01:39

of the jungle for the

Daily Politics studio.

0:01:390:01:41

But don't worry, because we'll be

putting you through our own

0:01:410:01:44

trials and tribulations.

0:01:440:01:45

With us, former minister

Nick Boles and Jess Phillips.

0:01:450:01:47

She chairs the women's

Parliamentary Labour Party.

0:01:470:01:56

First today, Theresa May will

convene a meeting of her new Brexit

0:01:560:01:59

"inner Cabinet" in Downing Street

to talk tactics ahead of next

0:01:590:02:02

month's crucial summit

of the European Council.

0:02:020:02:04

The smaller group includes senior

ministers who supported both Leave

0:02:040:02:06

and Remain in the referendum.

0:02:060:02:07

They're expected to discuss raising

the divorce bill the UK is willing

0:02:070:02:10

to pay to the EU to help

move talks on.

0:02:100:02:17

The UK has already promised roughly

£20 billion with suggestions

0:02:170:02:19

the Government might be willing

to double that figure.

0:02:190:02:23

Yesterday Philip Hammond told

the Andrew Marr Show plans

0:02:230:02:25

were afoot to "unblock that logjam".

0:02:250:02:30

And said the UK was "on the brink

of making some serious progress

0:02:300:02:33

in our negotiations with the EU".

0:02:330:02:35

Today's Times reports that

Theresa May is expected to meet

0:02:350:02:40

European Council President Donald

Tusk on Friday to discuss the Bill,

0:02:400:02:45

but with coalition talks collapsing

in Germany and uncertainty over

0:02:450:02:48

Angela Merkel's position

as Chancellor, could there be

0:02:480:02:53

ramifications for the negotiations

of the EU's leading player

0:02:530:02:55

being politically paralysed?

0:02:550:02:57

Well, the EU's chief Brexit

negotiator Michael Barnier has been

0:02:570:03:00

speaking today in Brussels.

0:03:000:03:03

He had some choice words for those

who think the UK should play

0:03:030:03:06

hardball and be prepared

to walk away.

0:03:060:03:09

We have a shared history and this

history started long

0:03:090:03:13

before the last 44 years.

0:03:130:03:21

That is why that no deal

is not our scenario even though

0:03:210:03:25

we will be ready for it.

0:03:250:03:30

I regret that this no deal option

comes up so often in the UK public

0:03:300:03:39

debate and it is though

we want to ignore the current

0:03:390:03:44

benefits of European Union

membership can say that no deal

0:03:440:03:47

would be a positive result.

0:03:470:03:49

We're joined now by our Brussels

reporter, Adam Fleming.

0:03:490:03:55

What else did he say, Adam?

So, Jo,

you will notice Michel Barnier was

0:03:550:04:00

speaking in English there. This is

the most English I have heard him

0:04:000:04:04

use in a speech. Normally he speaks

in French and when there is a barb

0:04:040:04:09

he wants to deliver to the UK he

does that in English so we get it!

0:04:090:04:12

He had a lot of barbs to deliver and

I have written down the bits where

0:04:120:04:18

he took aim at David Davis. I will

work through them. David Davis has

0:04:180:04:21

said oh the problem with Northern

Ireland following the rules of the

0:04:210:04:25

single market or the customs union

after Brexit means that then

0:04:250:04:29

threatens the single market that

effectively exists between Northern

0:04:290:04:31

Ireland and the rest of the United

Kingdom. Michel Barnier said people

0:04:310:04:35

that said that were talking nonsense

because Northern Ireland already had

0:04:350:04:38

separate rules from the rest of the

UK on things like agriculture and

0:04:380:04:42

plant health and things. Then he

talked about Brexiteers that make

0:04:420:04:48

contradictory statements like saying

we will be freed from the shackle of

0:04:480:04:51

Brussels, but then at the same time,

saying but we will have a really,

0:04:510:04:54

really close relationship with the

single market anyway. And then he

0:04:540:04:58

said, "Oh, people have been talking

about UK financial services still

0:04:580:05:01

having access to the single market

and being able to use their

0:05:010:05:05

passport." That's the technical

thing that means a financial

0:05:050:05:09

services company registered in one

EU country can sell its services in

0:05:090:05:13

another. Michel Barnier said that

will disappear with Brexit. UK First

0:05:130:05:18

Minister's will not be able to rely

on that passport. Those are things

0:05:180:05:22

that David Davis have been saying

and I think Team Barnier wanted to

0:05:220:05:26

respond to the Brexit secretary's

speech in Berlin that he gave at the

0:05:260:05:30

end of last week.

Is this

interpreted as Michel Barnier

0:05:300:05:35

playing hard ball here?

What struck

me about the speech really was that

0:05:350:05:39

this is the most I have heard Michel

Barnier talk about the future trade

0:05:390:05:43

deal, the future relationship

between the UK and the EU and what

0:05:430:05:46

shape it will take. This is much

less of the Michel Barnier playing

0:05:460:05:49

hard ball on the Irish border, the

money and the citizens rights, the

0:05:490:05:52

stuff that we are used to hearing

him talk about. This was more about

0:05:520:05:56

phase two of the Brexit

negotiations. He is starting to get

0:05:560:06:00

his head into that phase because it

could start as soon as the next

0:06:000:06:03

summit of EU leaders in December.

And so he was making all the big

0:06:030:06:08

philosophical points about the UK

has to answer the question, does it

0:06:080:06:11

want to stay pretty close to the EU

rules and the EU model that it

0:06:110:06:16

participates in now? Or does it want

to diverge from those and have its

0:06:160:06:20

own rules and regulations? He made

the point that the more divergence

0:06:200:06:23

there is from the EU norms, then

perhaps the harder it will be to get

0:06:230:06:27

that trade deal or that future

partnership through all the national

0:06:270:06:32

parliaments it would have to go

through in the rest of the EU 27

0:06:320:06:34

countries. So there was that big

point. And then, when he did the

0:06:340:06:41

stick approach of saying financial

services you have got to worry about

0:06:410:06:45

that, he then said, "But, if all the

issues can be solved, and we can

0:06:450:06:50

reach agreement, the EU and the UK

then the EU would be prepared to

0:06:500:06:54

offer its most sophisticated Free

Trade Agreement approach to the UK."

0:06:540:06:57

So basically saying there could be a

very deep and special partnership,

0:06:570:07:00

but it will come with very deep and

special conditions.

All right, Adam

0:07:000:07:04

Fleming thank you very much in

Brussels.

0:07:040:07:07

And we're joined now by the leading

Conservative Eurosceptic, Bill Cash.

0:07:070:07:11

Welcome to the Daily Politics. Do

you have faith in the new inner

0:07:110:07:14

Cabinet of Theresa May's or do you

think it is a move to try and

0:07:140:07:17

convince you and some of your Leave

supporting colleagues to accept a

0:07:170:07:21

higher divorce bill?

No, I think it

is reasonable. I think it is a good

0:07:210:07:24

idea. Somebody the other day I think

it was Frank Field suggested there

0:07:240:07:29

ought to be something along these

lines. To have an inner Cabinet of

0:07:290:07:32

that kind is a good idea thanks, of

course, they refer back to the

0:07:320:07:36

Cabinet as a whole which is

essential to say the least.

If they

0:07:360:07:41

agree a higher divorce bill and what

is being talked about is 40 billion

0:07:410:07:44

euros, would you accept that?

We

have to look at the methodology. The

0:07:440:07:48

reality is that we are as a

Constitutional Affairs Committee of

0:07:480:07:52

the House of Lords said under no

strict legal obligation to pay, but

0:07:520:07:57

there are definitely certain aspects

for example between now and the date

0:07:570:08:00

when we leave which is 29th March

2019. Quite clearly, obligations

0:08:000:08:07

which we will continue until that

point in time.

So, you would be

0:08:070:08:11

prepared if the obligations and

liabilities are set out to pay up to

0:08:110:08:14

40 billion euros?

What I really

think and I said this already and I

0:08:140:08:19

wrote to the Prime Minister about

this. I think that both sides should

0:08:190:08:24

set out by mutual consent their

methodology so people can form a

0:08:240:08:27

judgment about it. We don't want to

be in a position where we are

0:08:270:08:32

completely unreasonable, but I do

think that actually, the European

0:08:320:08:37

Union is in a war of attrition until

apparently this morning which sounds

0:08:370:08:41

to me as if we are moving in the

right direction at last and I do

0:08:410:08:45

think that actually, for example,

ex-EU officials who are British

0:08:450:08:50

might be treated perhaps in the same

way as former colonial civil

0:08:500:08:55

servants.

Michel Barnier talking on

a philosophical level about the sort

0:08:550:09:00

of trade deal if he is also moving

towards phase two, if you like, of

0:09:000:09:04

the trade talks, the things that he

is explaining and outlining, they

0:09:040:09:09

would be worth paying 40 billion

euros for?

That's not what I'm

0:09:090:09:12

saying. We have got to decide on the

amount by a proper methodology and

0:09:120:09:15

then you can answer that question,

but not now.

But if it unlock the

0:09:150:09:20

negotiation and if you got

everything else that you wanted, it

0:09:200:09:23

would be worth paying once you have

gone through the methodology?

Well,

0:09:230:09:26

I think if as a result of the

methodology it's clear that there

0:09:260:09:30

are legal obligations which both

sides accept and I think that's

0:09:300:09:35

where the negotiations need to to be

cleared up.

Your colleague says if

0:09:350:09:39

you give 40 to 50 billion euros to

the EU the public in his words, who

0:09:390:09:43

voted by a majority to leave will go

bananas and spare. Isn't he right?

0:09:430:09:49

Well, he maybe, depending on whether

the methodology is something that

0:09:490:09:53

convinces people there is a basis

for it and you ought to remember

0:09:530:09:56

perhaps, I don't say you personally,

but people ought to remember that in

0:09:560:10:00

the past for example, after the war,

we had an arrangement whereby and it

0:10:000:10:06

is called the London death agreement

where we remitted a significant

0:10:060:10:09

amount of the German debt and

actually, since we have been in

0:10:090:10:15

1972, we've made a net contribution

of well over £100 billion.

But is

0:10:150:10:20

this what the public were expecting?

This is what your colleagues said we

0:10:200:10:25

wouldn't have to pay and we didn't

have legal obligations?

That's what

0:10:250:10:30

the House of Lords constitutional

committee said as well. If there is

0:10:300:10:33

a proper methodology which

demonstrates the fact that there is

0:10:330:10:36

an obligation of something...

You

will have been proved wrong?

No, I

0:10:360:10:40

will have simply have said that's

what the Constitutional Affairs

0:10:400:10:43

Committee of the House of Lords said

and there is a case for making some

0:10:430:10:47

payment on the proper methodology.

Right, we're hearing reports that

0:10:470:10:50

the British Government, Nick Boles,

may co a lease around the 40 billion

0:10:500:10:55

euro figure. That's four years of

our net contribution and another

0:10:550:10:59

four years of paying into the EU.

That isn't what people were promised

0:10:590:11:02

or they thought would happen. It is

not what the Government prepared

0:11:020:11:05

them for?

Well, government has been

clear that it would settle the

0:11:050:11:09

accounts. The 20 billion that's

already been promised is as it were

0:11:090:11:13

a new matter because that is because

we are intending to have this tran

0:11:130:11:18

that lasts two years on current

membership terms. What we are now

0:11:180:11:22

talking about is the settling of the

accounts and of course, it's the

0:11:220:11:25

case that the EU has made various

commitments for the future while we

0:11:250:11:30

were a member and it is not

unreasonable to expect us to pay for

0:11:300:11:35

our share of those commitments

because they were made in good faith

0:11:350:11:37

when we were a member.

So we're

going to double what Theresa May

0:11:370:11:42

promised in the Florence speech?

No,

but they are two sums. One is a

0:11:420:11:46

payment for two more years within

the EU structures on current terms

0:11:460:11:50

and then now, what we are talking

about is, what the settling of the

0:11:500:11:54

accounts mean and Bill is right,

that ultimately, it's about the

0:11:540:11:56

methodology. If the methodology is

reasonable, then I think everybody

0:11:560:12:00

can live with it because it's a

one-off final payment. If it is huge

0:12:000:12:08

people will be angry and the

Government does not intend to agree

0:12:080:12:11

to anything like that.

How much

would be?

I'm not the guy

0:12:110:12:16

negotiating and nor do I have the

detail.

Do you agree that people

0:12:160:12:21

will go bananas and Nigel Evans said

we shouldn't be throwing ransom

0:12:210:12:26

money at the EU because we haven't

got anything concrete in return?

No,

0:12:260:12:29

it is important that there is this

principle that nothing is agreed

0:12:290:12:33

until everything is agreed. So we

can say this is the methodology that

0:12:330:12:37

we would accept for the calculation

for that amount if we get a

0:12:370:12:40

reasonable free trade deal, but

ultimately, we will only actually be

0:12:400:12:44

on the hook once that free trade

deal has been offered and agreed by

0:12:440:12:48

all of the 27 members of the EU. In

that circumstance, I think the

0:12:480:12:52

British people would accept that it

was worth it for the new

0:12:520:12:55

relationship. If the new

relationship isn't that great, they

0:12:550:12:57

will probably say no.

How much would

be too much for you, Jess Philips?

I

0:12:570:13:04

think that the divorce bill is an

amount of money that I wish we

0:13:040:13:09

weren't having to pay full stop

because obviously I would have

0:13:090:13:11

preferred if we stayed in the

European Union. But the idea that

0:13:110:13:15

people are going to take to the

streets and be really, really cross

0:13:150:13:18

if we have to settle our accounts to

get a good deal is just simply not

0:13:180:13:24

how I experience the world and

experience conversations tefr day

0:13:240:13:28

with my constituents every day about

the European Union.

Bill Cash,

0:13:280:13:32

Robert says that I cannot believe

the public would accept a huge

0:13:320:13:35

amount when we need money for

schools, hospitals and housing and

0:13:350:13:38

many other things so I think it will

be difficult if that's going to be

0:13:380:13:41

that sum amount of money?

Well, I'm

not entirely sure that Robert is the

0:13:410:13:48

sole arbiter of these questions. I

will say that however there is a lot

0:13:480:13:51

of pressure on public services and

it is our belief that when we leave

0:13:510:13:57

the European Union with a completely

new kind of deal, with the rest of

0:13:570:14:00

the world, with our surplus by the

way Jo having just shown our surplus

0:14:000:14:05

with the rest of the world went up

£10 billion last year alone and our

0:14:050:14:10

deficit with the 27 member states

also went up by about £10 billion so

0:14:100:14:15

we are on a reasonably good

trajectory.

When will the British

0:14:150:14:25

Government be able to spend that?

Not for another four years.

What is

0:14:250:14:29

happening they are in the process of

negotiation which if you were to

0:14:290:14:33

include a transitional period takes

you into the four year period

0:14:330:14:35

anyway.

In the transition period, of

course, we will be subject to the

0:14:350:14:39

European Court of Justice, we will

be paying in every year sums

0:14:390:14:42

comparable to those we pay now. We

won't be able to sign free trade

0:14:420:14:46

deals. We will be in the EU until

2021?

The question of the extent to

0:14:460:14:52

which we will be in the European

Court of Justice is really quite a

0:14:520:14:57

critical question and as a matter of

fact I think that although there

0:14:570:15:00

have been a lot of contradictions

about that, that's part of the

0:15:000:15:04

negotiations and actually at this

moment in time I don't think it is a

0:15:040:15:08

given that we will be in the

European Court of Justice as it is

0:15:080:15:12

at the moment.

Are you prepared to

give way on the European Court of

0:15:120:15:22

Justice as as being under the

jurisdiction of that?

I am very

0:15:220:15:30

unhappy about us being under the

European Court of Justice for very

0:15:300:15:34

good reasons. The European Court of

Justice, as I said in the House of

0:15:340:15:37

Commons the other day, asserts

constitutional supremacy.

But is it

0:15:370:15:44

a red line for you on this?

It

certainly is on the basis that they

0:15:440:15:50

can't assert constitutional

supremacy over ours and effectively

0:15:500:15:53

require a situation in which our act

of Parliament after Brexit would be

0:15:530:15:57

strapped down.

How many of your

colleagues agree with you on that?

0:15:570:16:02

We will see because we are going to

have a debate on this, but as far as

0:16:020:16:06

I'm concerned it is a matter

principle. I think the bill actually

0:16:060:16:13

says that the European Court of

Justice will not have effect as a

0:16:130:16:20

European court after exit day.

Nick

Boles, would you mind if the UK is

0:16:200:16:26

under ECJ jurisdiction only way till

2021?

Know, so long as it is limited

0:16:260:16:31

by that time period and I think that

Michael Gove and Boris Johnson have

0:16:310:16:34

also made clear that they can live

with that because as I think one of

0:16:340:16:39

them said, let's keep our eyes on

the prize. What matters is what is

0:16:390:16:44

the agreement that we can reach for

after the conclusion of the

0:16:440:16:48

transition. Keeping abutting pretty

much as it is now for two years.

0:16:480:16:53

Ultimately, it will pass quickly.

Around two years.

As long as it was

0:16:530:17:01

before the next election, I think

that will be acceptable.

Did you

0:17:010:17:04

wanted to be longer than three

years?

I think the critical thing is

0:17:040:17:07

that the transition needs to be

complete before the next general

0:17:070:17:11

election.

So you would be happy to

see it until 2022?

There are still

0:17:110:17:18

amendments being posed in the House

of Lords on the European Court which

0:17:180:17:22

would be of grave concern.

Let me

talk to you about the tone of the

0:17:220:17:25

debate that has gone on recently

because there are people who feel

0:17:250:17:28

that it has got out of control and

you are partly responsible, Bill

0:17:280:17:33

Cash, because you have accused some

of your colleagues of collaboration

0:17:330:17:37

with Labour. Is that the right tone

that should be adopted in this big

0:17:370:17:41

constitutional decision between

levers and Remainers?

First of all,

0:17:410:17:46

if you actually read my article in

the Times very carefully, I said if

0:17:460:17:51

they were.

It is the word

collaboration.

It means working

0:17:510:17:55

within a framework and with other

people.

It has negative connotations

0:17:550:18:00

which I'm sure you used specifically

for that purpose, but it has got so

0:18:000:18:04

bad that your colleagues over the

weekend has had umpteen death

0:18:040:18:09

threats and she blames that or says

it is a direct result of the Daily

0:18:090:18:15

Telegraph's muting the front page.

Is that feeding a tone of debate

0:18:150:18:19

that has now become sinister?

I

deplore anything along these lines,

0:18:190:18:23

but I will also say that we have a

debate going on that is incredibly

0:18:230:18:28

important and it is essential that

we don't end up in a situation

0:18:280:18:32

where, for example, there were to be

votes, and I am not saying there

0:18:320:18:37

will be.

But if there were, would

they be collaborators?

If they were

0:18:370:18:45

to completely undermine the whole of

the Brexit process and the

0:18:450:18:47

referendum, then that would be a

very, as I said in my article, that

0:18:470:18:51

would raise serious questions about

what was being done. But it is a

0:18:510:18:54

matter of analysis. We haven't got

to that point. As a matter of fact,

0:18:540:19:00

we have actually been getting our

ills through at the moment.

Has the

0:19:000:19:03

tone been wrong, though?

Dominik

said yesterday that it was important

0:19:030:19:09

and I actually had lunch with him

only a couple of days ago. We had a

0:19:090:19:13

very amicable discussion about all

of this. As a matter of fact, I

0:19:130:19:17

think it is important to stick to

the analysis because it is so

0:19:170:19:21

important to actually deliver Brexit

according to what the people decided

0:19:210:19:25

in the referendum, but at the same

time it would be quite impossible

0:19:250:19:29

for us simply to state whatever

amendments are put down our own

0:19:290:19:34

right. We are discussing these very

sensibly and with a very good

0:19:340:19:39

atmosphere in the House of Commons

itself, and I think that I deeply

0:19:390:19:44

deplored the death threat to

business. I think that is absolutely

0:19:440:19:47

appalling. But I do most

emphatically say that having voted

0:19:470:19:51

for Article 50 and for the

referendum act itself and also for

0:19:510:19:54

the second reading of the repeal

bill, there are natural constraints

0:19:540:19:58

in the manner in which people

proceed.

Thank you very much. Thank

0:19:580:20:03

you for coming in.

0:20:030:20:04

Now it's time for our daily quiz.

0:20:040:20:06

The question for today

is what item of clothing,

0:20:060:20:08

traditionally worn by a man

will soon be worn by a woman

0:20:080:20:11

in the palace of Westminster?

0:20:110:20:12

Was it A, a tie?

0:20:120:20:14

B, tights?

0:20:140:20:15

C, kilt?

0:20:150:20:16

Or D, braces?

0:20:160:20:18

At the end of the show Jess and Nick

will give us the correct answer.

0:20:180:20:23

So, it's the Budget on Wednesday.

0:20:230:20:26

I know you're all on tenterhooks,

but don't worry, you don't have

0:20:260:20:29

to wait until then for some

of its contents to be revealed.

0:20:290:20:32

Yesterday the Chancellor

was on the Andrew Marr Show

0:20:320:20:36

in an appearance that's become

as much part of tradition as

0:20:360:20:38

the parliamentary occasion itself.

0:20:380:20:39

Amidst the post-election clamour

for something to be done on housing,

0:20:390:20:43

Philip Hammond promised a million

new homes by 2020.

0:20:430:20:47

You might be forgiven for thinking

you have heard these

0:20:470:20:50

sort of pledges before.

0:20:500:20:52

Our guest of the day, Nick Boles,

has some of his own ideas

0:20:520:20:55

about tackling the housing crisis.

0:20:550:20:57

Here's his soapbox.

0:20:570:21:06

MUSIC PLAYS

0:21:070:21:17

The Prime Minister has

made it her personal

0:21:170:21:19

mission to build more

homes, more quickly.

0:21:190:21:22

Wednesday's Budget

will be a key moment.

0:21:220:21:25

The Chancellor has to announce

new measures to deliver more homes,

0:21:250:21:29

more homes for sale,

more affordable homes,

0:21:290:21:30

more council homes.

0:21:300:21:33

Here are some things he should do.

0:21:330:21:43

First, he should launch

a new Grenfell housing commission

0:21:470:21:49

to build 50,000 affordable homes

across the country and issue

0:21:490:21:53

a new Grenfell housing bond to raise

£50 billion to pay for them.

0:21:530:22:03

The

0:22:040:22:05

That would give us

genuinely affordable homes

0:22:050:22:06

in places like this,

0:22:060:22:10

Elephant Park in South London.

0:22:100:22:11

What better way, what better

memorial, to the people

0:22:110:22:15

who lost their lives in the dreadful

Grenfell Tower fire?

0:22:150:22:17

Second, he should reform the land

market to cap the profits that

0:22:170:22:23

wealthy landowners can make and give

councils the power to buy land

0:22:230:22:26

for housing at a reasonable price

so they can spend the money

0:22:260:22:29

they save on vital

local infrastructure.

0:22:290:22:34

Third, he should tell people

who already own their own home

0:22:340:22:37

in an urban or suburban area

that they can stick one

0:22:370:22:41

or two stories on the top

without going through a full

0:22:410:22:43

planning application,

but they ought to stick

0:22:430:22:45

to the local design.

0:22:450:22:55

Finally, he should tell the big

house builders to stop

0:22:570:23:00

dragging their feet and build out

those sites where they've

0:23:000:23:08

got planning permission,

and if they don't build the homes

0:23:080:23:10

on time, he should make

them offer the plots

0:23:100:23:12

to other builders who will.

0:23:120:23:14

It's going to take years to bring

sanity back into our housing market,

0:23:140:23:17

so we've got no time to lose.

0:23:170:23:18

Let's start now.

0:23:180:23:19

And Nick Boles is still here.

0:23:190:23:26

with Jess Phillips. Just picking up

in the last few points you made in

0:23:260:23:29

that film, should broadly in your

mind developers with planning

0:23:290:23:31

permission use it or lose it?

Yes, I

think that is absolutely right and

0:23:310:23:36

the question is how you get them to

do that. How do you put that into

0:23:360:23:40

effect in a way that also respect

the fact that they have made a big

0:23:400:23:44

investment in securing the planning

permission in the first place. It is

0:23:440:23:47

a very long accommodated and

expensive process. So my idea is

0:23:470:23:50

that they should be forced to sell

on the plots that they are not

0:23:500:23:55

building out on schedule to any

other builder who wants to build out

0:23:550:23:58

that plot, and that would quickly

reveal whether the excuse that they

0:23:580:24:03

often make, which is that some are

no longer viable and the value has

0:24:030:24:07

gone down, whether that was real or

in fact actually they were just

0:24:070:24:10

trying to eke out the suppliers

slowly as possible to keep prices

0:24:100:24:15

up.

Right, but the Government

already pledged in 2015 and 2017

0:24:150:24:19

that went million homes would be

built by 2020. You have missed the

0:24:190:24:23

target and are still missing it. How

you meet that additional number of

0:24:230:24:28

homes?

We have had a good figure.

A

better figure.

Let's recognise that

0:24:280:24:35

progress has been made through the

planning reforms and other reforms

0:24:350:24:38

that have happened. But I actually

agree with you. I think it is not

0:24:380:24:43

enough to will the end without

willing the means. You have got to

0:24:430:24:46

take some quite radical action, and

at the moment I haven't heard

0:24:460:24:49

anything from either the Chancellor

or anyone else that suggests to me

0:24:490:24:54

that we are going to do the things

that I know will be required, the

0:24:540:24:57

sort of things I was talking about

in the film. They are really quite

0:24:570:25:00

difficult and big steps to take, but

if we don't do things like that then

0:25:000:25:03

we will not take that figure.

Are

you confident the Chancellor will do

0:25:030:25:07

any of those radical things?

Well, I

am optimistic.

On the basis of?

0:25:070:25:13

Well, he made very plain that this

is the Prime Minister's number one

0:25:130:25:17

priority and his number one priority

for the budget and he recognises

0:25:170:25:20

issues with major house-builders not

building out on time and so I am

0:25:200:25:24

optimistic that they understand the

scale of the response required, but

0:25:240:25:27

I do think that they need to

understand that they will be judged

0:25:270:25:31

not just on the target, not just on

the aspiration, they will be judged

0:25:310:25:35

on the specific detail of the plans

that we are going to put into place

0:25:350:25:39

to actually make this market work.

Do you think it is in off, Jess

0:25:390:25:43

Phillips, to talk about Private

developers building homes? Is what

0:25:430:25:46

is needed if the Chancellor is going

to live up to what he said and

0:25:460:25:50

Theresa May also to go for a mass

state operation in terms of building

0:25:500:25:55

homes?

I think there needs to be

both. I think that unless we talk

0:25:550:25:58

about proper social housing, the

single biggest thing that comes into

0:25:580:26:02

my casework and through the doors of

my office every week is people who

0:26:020:26:06

are inappropriately housed in social

housing or who cannot get into

0:26:060:26:09

housing through social housing. In

Birmingham, there are thousands of

0:26:090:26:14

people living in an appropriate

temporary accommodation. There has

0:26:140:26:17

to be social building by the state.

What do you say to that? Should it

0:26:170:26:22

be led by state intervention in

order to do the things you have just

0:26:220:26:26

admitted? They have not been done

and if they are not it will not

0:26:260:26:29

happen.

I am going to disappoint you

because I completely agree with you.

0:26:290:26:33

My proposal for the Grenville

housing commission is to produce

0:26:330:26:37

50,000 social or affordable homes.

Homes that are owned by housing

0:26:370:26:41

associations, community land trusts,

and indeed councils.

What is

0:26:410:26:44

affordable?

There are is a range.

You want people to be getting onto

0:26:440:26:50

the housing ladder, but some of

them, quite a lot of them, need to

0:26:500:26:55

be good old-fashioned council homes.

At those sorts of rents, social rent

0:26:550:26:58

as they are called. We need to have

the full makes out there and it is

0:26:580:27:01

not enough to say that any one piece

is going to solve the problem. We

0:27:010:27:05

need all of the pieces to together.

But what the percentage are you

0:27:050:27:10

talking about? Because when people

talk about affordable housing, no

0:27:100:27:13

one knows what they mean and most of

the time it is not affordable.

It is

0:27:130:27:17

affordable and the sense that

someone can afford to move into it

0:27:170:27:20

but it is not affordable to people

who work in, say, the NHS. And it

0:27:200:27:25

should be.

How many?

I am not going

to go into detail but I do think it

0:27:250:27:32

is very important that councils

review their role, there are natural

0:27:320:27:38

role of commissioning and building

council homes. They will all be

0:27:380:27:42

subject in my view ultimately to

write to buy and I think that should

0:27:420:27:45

continue, but there needs to be a

steady supply of council homes to

0:27:450:27:48

ensure that our constituents who

can't afford something that is now

0:27:480:27:55

classified as affordable, that there

is a solution for them.

But you have

0:27:550:27:59

said the aid of dexterity is over

and that many governments run at a

0:27:590:28:02

deficit of around 2.6%. The risk

ruining the economy by not fixing

0:28:020:28:07

the roof while the sun is shining?

I

think it is a very important

0:28:070:28:11

problem, this. It has all sorts of

social and economic impacts. If

0:28:110:28:16

people can't get housing, they

become very frightened to take

0:28:160:28:19

risks. They become very frightened

to move to a new job and to set up a

0:28:190:28:30

new business. And so I think, yes,

we absolutely need to fix this

0:28:300:28:32

problem.

By adding to the deficit?

But to build homes that are either

0:28:320:28:35

with money for sale or generate a

rental income, so it is not like we

0:28:350:28:39

are just throwing money away.

Is

this a priority for Labour? Should

0:28:390:28:44

it be a priority for Labour in the

way that it is in rhetorical terms

0:28:440:28:50

for the Conservatives, because

Labour has a big promise in terms of

0:28:500:28:54

spending and renationalisation and a

long list that it wants to put money

0:28:540:28:57

into. Should this be the top of the

priority list?

If it were down to

0:28:570:29:01

me, it would be the absolute top of

the priority list, and to be fair I

0:29:010:29:05

think that for a lot of people in

the Labour Party it is the same.

0:29:050:29:08

Housing is the beginning, middle,

and end of the welfare of the people

0:29:080:29:12

who live in our country and when it

is precarious, all of the things

0:29:120:29:16

that Nick has said about the ability

to take risks and be entrepreneurial

0:29:160:29:20

are all true and it is also bad for

the health of our nation. And it is

0:29:200:29:24

causing huge problems. So to me, I

don't know whether it has been in

0:29:240:29:29

the past, but it seems like the

silver bullet, the panacea to try to

0:29:290:29:33

improve things would be to build

more houses and for people like me

0:29:330:29:37

and Nick who probably all our

houses, so to recognise that that

0:29:370:29:41

wealth is not something that we are

old, it is something that is built

0:29:410:29:45

on the backs of other people not

being able to afford a house.

And

0:29:450:29:50

would you support loosening planning

in the way that Nick advocates?

He

0:29:500:29:57

will get a lot of complaints about

his bad planning from neighbours,

0:29:570:30:00

but I do think that people being

able to build extra bits onto their

0:30:000:30:03

house and councils being able to

redevelop properties where families

0:30:030:30:07

grow and families are naturally

bigger in certain parts of my

0:30:070:30:10

constituency, but I am weary that I

don't want people throwing up

0:30:100:30:15

monstrosities. I also don't think

that it should be necessarily in

0:30:150:30:17

keeping with the area because I

think actually architecturally we

0:30:170:30:20

need to develop and trying to always

keeping the same, I think sometimes

0:30:200:30:24

mixed with the boring houses.

0:30:240:30:30

Should councils be allowed to borrow

to build?

Yes, with limits, but I

0:30:300:30:34

have to say it is one of the

treasury orthodoxes that drives me

0:30:340:30:39

and I think most MPs completely

round the bend, you know, somehow

0:30:390:30:43

the Government is allowed to borrow

almost to do anything, but they

0:30:430:30:46

won't allow responsible councils who

want to build council homes that

0:30:460:30:51

would solve a local need, that would

reduce the housing benefit bill that

0:30:510:30:55

goes straight back to the Treasury

and it's for reasons that I think

0:30:550:31:01

are entirely speechless.

Do you

think Philip Hammond is going to be

0:31:010:31:04

radical enough in your mind? Is he

radical enough to be the Chancellor

0:31:040:31:08

that's needed at the moment?

He has

very tough job and he has to keep a

0:31:080:31:11

lot of things in balance and I'm

sure I won't get everything I want,

0:31:110:31:16

but I listened to his interview

yesterday and I was encouraged that

0:31:160:31:20

he has identified this as his number

one priority. I'm optimistic.

Were

0:31:200:31:26

you encouraged by his comments there

are no unemployed people?

The way

0:31:260:31:30

the media handled that, of course,

it was clumsy and he should not have

0:31:300:31:35

said it. But what he was responding

to was the suggestion that when

0:31:350:31:40

there is a new technology that jobs

change and lots of people will be

0:31:400:31:43

made unemployed. He was saying when

shorthand typists weren't needed

0:31:430:31:47

anymore, there wasn't a sudden rush

of unemployed shorthand typists.

He

0:31:470:31:52

said we have created three million

jobs is what he said afterwards. It

0:31:520:31:56

sounded as if he had forgotten the

1.4 million unemployed. You say it

0:31:560:32:00

was clumsy. What say you?

I think

that, it probably was clumsy, but it

0:32:000:32:05

does unfortunately add to a layer

of, people who live where I live who

0:32:050:32:09

just think that the Conservatives

don't get their problems. I'm

0:32:090:32:15

unemployed, I have got

unemploymented people in my family,

0:32:150:32:19

it is sort of like hi we are over

here. Whilst I appreciate what he

0:32:190:32:24

was talking about was ought

owemation it does make people feel

0:32:240:32:30

their needs are forgotten and they

are not being heard.

Right. Is that

0:32:300:32:33

how he comes across, Philip Hammond?

No, I think we all make mistakes. I

0:32:330:32:39

have made my fair share and when you

are in a television studio and you

0:32:390:32:43

are under pressure you can sometimes

not think about things and think

0:32:430:32:48

about the broader implications of

them. We have the highest employment

0:32:480:32:52

rate in recorded history in this

country, but we have got further to

0:32:520:32:56

go and more people to try and get

help back into work and that's the

0:32:560:33:00

priority of this government.

Thank

you both of you.

0:33:000:33:04

So all that Budget fun to come

as the Withdrawal Bill continues

0:33:050:33:08

to be debated in the Commons

and Theresa May makes a new Brexit

0:33:080:33:11

divorce bill offer to the EU.

0:33:110:33:12

It's going to be a busy week

for Emily Ashton of Buzzfeed

0:33:120:33:15

and Chris Hope of the Telegaph

who are both on College Green.

0:33:150:33:19

Welcome to both of you. Emily, first

of all, how tight a spot is the

0:33:190:33:23

Chancellor in in terms of the

expectations that have been raised,

0:33:230:33:27

they are high. He is going to save

the Conservative Party fortunes and

0:33:270:33:31

of course, deal with all the

requests for money?

Yes, he is in a

0:33:310:33:34

bit of a tight spot, isn't he with

the Budget this week and Brexit in

0:33:340:33:38

general. He is a pro Remain minister

and he is under pressure from the

0:33:380:33:47

pro Brexiteers. He needs to find

something that appeals to real

0:33:470:33:50

people. You were talking about the

gaffe he made yesterday. The problem

0:33:500:33:52

is that he can sometimes come across

as a robot! Alongside the Maybot and

0:33:520:34:01

you need somebody that understands

real people. You remember the speech

0:34:010:34:07

from Theresa May on the steps of

Downing Street talking about helping

0:34:070:34:11

the just about managing. And more of

the housing, the Universal Credit,

0:34:110:34:16

the nurses pay, that's what we

really need to hear from him this

0:34:160:34:19

Wednesday.

Nick Boles has said he's

optimistic that he will, Philip

0:34:190:34:24

Hammond, rise to the challenge. Are

you as optimistic about what he will

0:34:240:34:29

do? Will it really be tinkering

around the edges on some of the big

0:34:290:34:33

issues or are you expecting

something radical?

I think it will

0:34:330:34:37

be tinkering around the edges for

Philip Hammond. This week it will be

0:34:370:34:42

less Brexit remainers and more

Hammond and everyone else. It seems

0:34:420:34:47

most people can't bear the bloke and

are hoping he might get sacked

0:34:470:34:50

before Christmas. He is not really a

human being and he can't do human.

0:34:500:34:55

Gordon Brown said that's part of the

problem of modern politics is

0:34:550:34:59

emoating and relating. It is the

Maybot and the robot as Chancellor.

0:34:590:35:03

It is tricky. There has to be some

idea, we are not sure what it is, we

0:35:030:35:10

want to see stamp duty reform, that

probably won't happen and some areas

0:35:100:35:14

where he can make tax cuts and it

will be a disappointing Budget.

0:35:140:35:18

Let's move on to Brexit because

there is the meeting of the Brexit

0:35:180:35:22

inner Cabinet later today. We heard

Michel Barnier the EU's chief

0:35:220:35:26

negotiator seeming to talk a little

bit more about life beyond the

0:35:260:35:29

divorce bill. Do we think there is

going to be a strong signal that the

0:35:290:35:34

40 billion euros is going to be

offered by the UK Government?

Yes,

0:35:340:35:37

that's right. We have got the Brexit

War Cabinet, War Cabinet, a

0:35:370:35:47

convoluted subcommittee that's

meeting this afternoon. We are

0:35:470:35:49

expecting some deal between the ten

Cabinet Ministers on that committee

0:35:490:35:52

for a Bill that Britain will pay to

the EU in the region of 40 billion

0:35:520:35:59

or 50 billion which is more than

they have said in the past and will

0:35:590:36:02

upset a lot of MPs who say that's

not what the public voted for

0:36:020:36:05

actually. They don't want to spend

this money to the aye. Isn't that

0:36:050:36:08

the point of Brexit? The point is

they want to move on to the next

0:36:080:36:11

phase of talks. And that is a way

town lock the next phase. So, this

0:36:110:36:15

really is a question of look, do you

want to move on or not? We need to

0:36:150:36:19

pay the bill.

How broad is the anger

going to be Chris Hope because Bill

0:36:190:36:23

Cash was saying if the methodology

is right and that's what we have to

0:36:230:36:29

pay, then we will have to pay it,

but Nigel Evans saying it will be

0:36:290:36:34

scandalous?

The difference between

what we have to pay which Bill Cash

0:36:340:36:41

and the punishment beating we are

taking from leaving Europe and the

0:36:410:36:44

European Union and that's the

problem for a lot of Brexiteers, we

0:36:440:36:49

have no idea what we are getting for

the money, we are paying this huge

0:36:490:36:52

bill and we have no idea what we are

getting in return. It looks slightly

0:36:520:36:58

crazy.

0:36:580:37:00

Now, there's compulsory

viewing for any politicos

0:37:000:37:01

on BBC Two at 9pm tonight.

0:37:010:37:03

Filmmaker David Modell has followed

Labour MPs through the election

0:37:030:37:06

campaign when many had expected

Jeremy Corbyn to crash and burn.

0:37:060:37:09

Instead he went from zero

to hero, of course.

0:37:090:37:12

Here are Labour MPs Lucy Powell,

Ruth Cadbury and Stephen Kinnock,

0:37:120:37:15

who only months earlier had been

calling for Mr Corbyn to resign,

0:37:150:37:18

taking in June's shock result.

0:37:180:37:24

Largest party.

0:37:240:37:25

Oh my god.

0:37:250:37:26

Oh my god.

0:37:260:37:29

That's unbelievable.

0:37:290:37:32

A 30 seats gain.

0:37:320:37:34

Amazing.

0:37:340:37:35

Oh my god.

0:37:350:37:41

What they are saying the

Conservatives are the largest party.

0:37:410:37:43

Note they don't have an overall

majority at this stage.

0:37:430:37:46

314 for the Conservatives.

That's down 17.

0:37:460:37:51

We are looking at a hung

parliament then.

0:37:510:37:55

A hung parliament.

0:37:550:37:56

A hung parliament.

0:37:560:38:02

I'm not sure what Stephen's

face is revealing here,

0:38:020:38:07

but perhaps he's realising

the Corbyn-free tomorrow

0:38:070:38:09

he is thinking about might

never actually come.

0:38:090:38:13

Well, they were very revealing those

reactions. Jess Phillips, some of

0:38:130:38:18

your colleagues didn't know quite

what to do or say at that point of

0:38:180:38:22

the announcement. Did you?

I was

driving at the time and I was with a

0:38:220:38:27

colleague of mine and we had been

campaigning all day. I was shocked.

0:38:270:38:30

I nearly drove off the road.

Really?

I was really shocked, yeah.

And...

0:38:300:38:35

It just wasn't what we were

expecting. I think that I had

0:38:350:38:38

thought it was going to be a lot

better than it had been predicted

0:38:380:38:41

weeks and weeks out by the time we

were within the sort of last two,

0:38:410:38:45

three weeks of the election campaign

because you can just feel it when

0:38:450:38:48

you're there. We spoke to 21,000

people in six weeks. So you get a

0:38:480:38:53

feeling for it. But you don't know

whether it is the same where you are

0:38:530:38:56

as everywhere else, you are in a

bunker during that period really.

0:38:560:39:00

How would you interpret Stephen kin

OK there, was he thinking this is a

0:39:000:39:05

bad result, Labour under Jeremy

Corbyn winning an extra 30 seats?

I

0:39:050:39:09

wouldn't like to try and guess what

was on Stephen's mind at the time! I

0:39:090:39:14

think with the documentaries one has

to be careful of editing and over

0:39:140:39:19

speaking to try and project on to

people.

Shouldn't they have been

0:39:190:39:22

celebrating 30 extra seats for

Labour?

Yeah, absolutely, but it

0:39:220:39:27

goes to a studio if people like us

are sat there, they are probably

0:39:270:39:31

going no one trusts the exit polls

so it is difficult to know actually

0:39:310:39:35

how that's going to stack up in

reality.

But he almost looked

0:39:350:39:39

disappointed?

Yeah, I should imagine

if we were watching tonight, more

0:39:390:39:43

will be revealed.

Right.

It's a very

good documentary maker.

Well, we

0:39:430:39:48

will all be watching it. You

admitted you were wrong after the

0:39:480:39:52

election for questioning Jeremy

Corbyn's electability. Is he

0:39:520:39:55

unassailable?

I don't think anybody

is unassailable. Out for milk at

0:39:550:40:03

moment and there is a new world

order when you get back! I think

0:40:030:40:06

that anybody who thinks they are

unassailable should have a word with

0:40:060:40:10

themselves, but he is in a stronger

position.

Right, is he, should he be

0:40:100:40:14

doing better than he is at the

moment? Theresa May is not having a

0:40:140:40:20

good autumn by anyone's standards.

She has lost two Cabinet Ministers

0:40:200:40:23

in the last month, Brexit

negotiations are currently in

0:40:230:40:26

deadlock, they are flailing over

core policies like Universal Credit

0:40:260:40:32

and Labour and the Tories are neck

and neck and occasionally they are a

0:40:320:40:35

few points ahead? T-does seem if

electorates only reacted to poor

0:40:350:40:42

performances the Labour Party should

be streaming ahead in the polls. So

0:40:420:40:45

why aren't they?

I think there is

all sorts of reasons. I think that

0:40:450:40:49

people at the moment, everything is

so consumed with Brexit that lots of

0:40:490:40:53

people, we don't know what people's

domestic agendas are anymore. The

0:40:530:40:59

vision that helps people really,

really understand where you might

0:40:590:41:04

want to put your, which we don't

know when there is going to be

0:41:040:41:09

another vote, it seems to have been

sucked away by Brexit, bun of the

0:41:090:41:13

problems is that both political

parties increased their vote share

0:41:130:41:17

in the last election and it is very

difficult for them to find the

0:41:170:41:21

natural places to be stealing it

from. So we seem to be in a deadlock

0:41:210:41:24

in the poll.

There are plenty of

people who feel that Brexit is not

0:41:240:41:29

going well. If that's the image of

people, why isn't Jeremy Corbyn 20

0:41:290:41:35

points ahead in the poll?

I have no

idea why. But maybe people are not

0:41:350:41:40

convinced. The people who did vote

for him were obviously convinced and

0:41:400:41:44

we need to convince natural Tory

voters to vote Labour and that is

0:41:440:41:49

much bigger step.

Is there still a problem over the

0:41:490:41:52

economy and trust on the economy

because despite everything that is

0:41:520:41:56

going on for the Government, a

recent poll showed the Prime

0:41:560:41:59

Minister and the Chancellor remain

about eight points ahead of Jeremy

0:41:590:42:02

Corbyn and John McDonnell?

I think

that almost certainly is an issue

0:42:020:42:06

and being sensible and safe

especially in a time when we don't

0:42:060:42:10

know what's going to happen with

Brexit. People want to feel that the

0:42:100:42:14

economy is going to be in safe hands

and they have got, they have never

0:42:140:42:17

had an opportunity to prove it

because there were always

0:42:170:42:23

backbenchers who weren't involved

when the Labour Party was in

0:42:230:42:25

government so they have got a long

way to prove that people can trust

0:42:250:42:29

them with their money and that's

totally understandable.

The election

0:42:290:42:35

result for you, Nick Boles, were you

shocked?

Yes, I had a weird

0:42:350:42:39

experience because I was finishing

treatment for cancer so I hadn't

0:42:390:42:42

been able to campaign at all in my

constituency and was sort of lying

0:42:420:42:46

flat on the sofa watching it unfold

and thinking what on earth have they

0:42:460:42:49

done and worried, of course, for my

own seat as it happens, my majority

0:42:490:42:54

went up, but I think the important

thing was that that election was

0:42:540:43:00

crucially an election about Brexit

and there is a lot of research

0:43:000:43:03

that's been done which suggests that

most of the people who switched

0:43:030:43:06

their vote, one way or another, were

voting about Brexit. So, there were

0:43:060:43:10

a huge number of people who voted

Labour for the first time because

0:43:100:43:15

they wanted the softest Brexit

possible. And there were others, of

0:43:150:43:19

course, Ukip voters for instance who

voted Conservative for the first

0:43:190:43:23

time because they wanted a rather

harder Brexit. I don't think the

0:43:230:43:26

next election is going to be about

Brexit. It will be about the future

0:43:260:43:30

so I'm not sure whether it will tell

us very much the polling position

0:43:300:43:34

today about the next election.

I

mean, we have just discussed Theresa

0:43:340:43:38

May is not having an easy time. You

could say it has been a catastrophic

0:43:380:43:43

autumn for him and the disappointing

election result. Should she fight

0:43:430:43:46

the next election?

As she said she

will carry on being leader as long

0:43:460:43:52

as the Parliamentary party want her

to be leader. I think the natural

0:43:520:43:55

thing is for her to deliver Brexit

and for then for her and for the

0:43:550:44:00

party to have a think about whether

that's a natural time to hand over

0:44:000:44:06

to somebody fresher and younger and

newer or whether she is in a sense

0:44:060:44:10

so rebuilt her credibility and her

authority that actually she can

0:44:100:44:15

fight the next election, but I don't

think anybody should be thinking

0:44:150:44:18

about this or giving consideration

to one decision or another until

0:44:180:44:22

Brexit is complete. That's her

mission is to deliver Brexit and

0:44:220:44:26

it's a pretty big mission and a

difficult one and I think let's

0:44:260:44:29

stick with that.

You think if it

were deemed to be a success she

0:44:290:44:33

could stay on until the next

election?

It is not impossible.

0:44:330:44:40

The documentary is on BBC Two at 9pm

tonight.

0:44:400:44:44

Now, the accusations of sexual

harassment at Westminster may be

0:44:440:44:47

off the front pages,

but with inquiries on-going

0:44:470:44:48

and the establishment of a cross

party body to handle claims

0:44:480:44:51

of impropriety, still to be

agreed on, the story

0:44:510:44:53

is unlikely to go away.

0:44:530:44:54

Here is Theresa May earlier this

month, attempting to get

0:44:540:44:57

on the front foot in her handling

of the story.

0:44:570:45:01

Sadly over recent days

we have seen a number

0:45:010:45:03

of allegations about figures

from across the political parties

0:45:030:45:07

and it's important that those

are investigated impartially

0:45:070:45:10

and some have rightly been

referred to the police.

0:45:100:45:14

I think if this hasn't happened

to you, it's difficult to appreciate

0:45:140:45:18

the impact that being a victim

of this sort of behaviour can have.

0:45:180:45:21

It simply has a lasting impact

on people and we need to do more

0:45:210:45:25

to stop these abuses of power

and I'm pleased that having convened

0:45:250:45:28

this meeting of party leaders today.

0:45:280:45:31

And joining us now is

Joanna Williams, the author

0:45:310:45:34

of Women Versus Feminism:

Why We All Need Liberating

0:45:340:45:36

from the Gender Wars.

0:45:360:45:39

Jess Phillips who as Chair of the

Women's Parliamentary Labour Party,

0:45:390:45:41

has handled some of the complaints

in the party.

0:45:410:45:46

Welcome to the studio. Do you think

this has been well handled and

0:45:460:45:50

handled in the correct way?

No, I

don't. I think there are a number of

0:45:500:45:54

problems with it has been handled so

far, perhaps more significantly the

0:45:540:46:00

tragic suicide of the Welsh Labour

MP Carl Sargeant. So I think we have

0:46:000:46:08

the trappings of a witchhunt, which

is bad for men but also terrible for

0:46:080:46:12

women, this idea that we are going

to lump together everything from

0:46:120:46:18

rape accusations, serious sexual

assault allegations to touching of

0:46:180:46:21

knees or text messages, all been

conflated together, I think it

0:46:210:46:27

trivialises some of the serious

crimes that have had an impact on

0:46:270:46:32

women's lies and creates a witchhunt

atmosphere.

What do you have decided

0:46:320:46:37

that?

I don't know who is lumping

things together other than those who

0:46:370:46:40

want to call it a witchhunt. I don't

think it is a witchhunt, I think

0:46:400:46:44

that like any place of work,

Parliament has delivered by the same

0:46:440:46:47

roles and people should feel safe

and comfortable and power and

0:46:470:46:52

patronage that exists in Parliament

should never ever be able to be used

0:46:520:46:56

to exploit whether that is sexual

harassment or people's sexual urges,

0:46:560:47:01

because it is to be fundamentally

about the power imbalance that

0:47:010:47:04

exists in there and it is by no

means only women. I have dealt with

0:47:040:47:08

complaints by men as well.

Do you

accept that?

No, I think it is very

0:47:080:47:13

disingenuous to say that we don't

know who is lumping these things

0:47:130:47:16

together because we have had

spreadsheets going around

0:47:160:47:17

Parliament, compiled through text

messages groups that have then

0:47:170:47:22

formed the front page of news

stories that have focused on

0:47:220:47:26

everything from touching of knees to

serious accusations of rape, I think

0:47:260:47:29

these things are clearly being

lumped together and the argument is

0:47:290:47:33

that all of these things are on a

continuum. Well, by that logic every

0:47:330:47:37

aspect of human interaction from

saying hello to summon, talking to

0:47:370:47:40

someone, to rape and murder are all

on a continuum. But the argument

0:47:400:47:45

that women are completely powerless.

Sexual harassment does happen but

0:47:450:47:51

the idea that women can't turn

around and ask not for that to

0:47:510:47:55

happen or through a cup of coffee

over them walk away. These are women

0:47:550:47:58

in Parliament we are talking about.

I think despite the ridiculous and

0:47:580:48:02

insulting to women. Right. Why can't

women do that?

They absolutely can

0:48:020:48:06

but I suppose the difference is that

I recognise that not all women are

0:48:060:48:11

exactly the same and some women may

feel completely able to and all

0:48:110:48:16

power to their elbows. I would like

to eat it if somebody touched me.

0:48:160:48:20

However, there are lots and lots of

young people and I know because I

0:48:200:48:24

work in Parliament, there are lots

of young women and men who are dear

0:48:240:48:29

to try and get on in life and feel

that they have two be quiet about

0:48:290:48:35

certain things. This isn't just a

problem in Parliament.

I see this

0:48:350:48:41

absolutely everywhere. This is a

very patronising idea that some

0:48:410:48:43

women are capable of dealing with

sexual harassment but other women

0:48:430:48:46

are not.

What about the case if it

is a young woman who's going for a

0:48:460:48:49

job in hand houses of parliament and

the person who is interviewing her

0:48:490:48:55

sends her sexual text messages. Is

she in a position to tell that man

0:48:550:48:58

easily to literally go away?

Actually, today, yes. The fact is

0:48:580:49:04

there are young women in the country

who are at risk of sexual harassment

0:49:040:49:09

and let's talk about the young girls

in Rochdale, in Oxford, in

0:49:090:49:14

Newcastle, and when Sarah chavvy...

I thought we weren't going to lump

0:49:140:49:17

them all together.

When these girls

are talked about, they do not make

0:49:170:49:29

the front page.

I hear about all of

these cases. I set up services for

0:49:290:49:36

child victims of sexual exploitation

all across the Midlands and it is

0:49:360:49:40

absolutely phenomenal but you are

now lumping those things in

0:49:400:49:44

together, exactly as you have

claimed not to be doing, which I

0:49:440:49:48

find to be completely disingenuous.

Anyone who is going to stand there

0:49:480:49:52

and say that I don't care about

child sexual excitation but I do

0:49:520:49:56

care about knee touching is, I am

afraid to say, lying.

Are all of

0:49:560:50:01

these things a matter of importance?

You recently wrote that any woman

0:50:010:50:05

who publicly accusing someone of

sexual harassment without details

0:50:050:50:07

are evidence is not only believed

about celebrating? Can you give me

0:50:070:50:11

examples where they have not had

details or evidence?

Well, these are

0:50:110:50:15

not tested in court of law. That is

the point. Anybody can turn round

0:50:150:50:20

and say that someone touched my knee

ten years ago and if you have a

0:50:200:50:25

serious accusation of rape or sexual

assault, it needs to go to a court

0:50:250:50:29

of law. You have somebody who has

tragically committed suicide without

0:50:290:50:33

even knowing what the allegations

were against him. How can that be

0:50:330:50:36

right in 2017 that somebody is fired

from their job without even knowing

0:50:360:50:42

what they stand accused of?

Should

people be told in full what it is

0:50:420:50:46

they are accused of. Some people

might say that they know what they

0:50:460:50:50

are being accused of even if it

hasn't been publicly explained. But

0:50:500:50:53

if we look at the ongoing

investigations, including the

0:50:530:50:57

cabinet Minister, Damian Green,

Charlie Elphick also said they don't

0:50:570:51:00

know the full nature of their

allegations. Is that the correct way

0:51:000:51:03

to deal with that?

Well, I am not an

expert in this and I wonder that it

0:51:030:51:08

may be in certain cases where an

alleged event is so serious that it

0:51:080:51:14

has been referred to the police. It

may be that the police then say that

0:51:140:51:18

no further information can be

supplied to the alleged perpetrator.

0:51:180:51:24

But it certainly in the ideal world

as an employer, you would hope that

0:51:240:51:29

the accusations were shared in full,

but as I say, it may be that the

0:51:290:51:32

police actually prevent that. We

have to respect the police, that

0:51:320:51:34

they do need to be able to do their

jobs properly.

Isn't there a

0:51:340:51:39

difference between what is known as

locker room talk because of Donald

0:51:390:51:43

Trump and sexual banter and serious

sexual harassment and that there is

0:51:430:51:46

a risk of minimising what most

people would think is the more

0:51:460:51:49

serious accusation from, as you say,

the day to day power play?

I think

0:51:490:51:55

the people who are aiming to

minimise both things are the people

0:51:550:51:58

who are essentially trying to lump

those two things together. Now, I

0:51:580:52:02

don't think that being upset that

young women feel that they cannot

0:52:020:52:06

speak up where they are employed-

many of them leave their jobs

0:52:060:52:10

because they just don't know what to

do with it. It is, to be honest,

0:52:100:52:15

about power. Sexual violence is not

about sexual urges. Sexual

0:52:150:52:18

harassment is not about sexual

urges. It is about having power over

0:52:180:52:22

somebody and it exists in difficult

power -- different power

0:52:220:52:27

relationships. As you is an expert,

if there is going to be a police

0:52:270:52:32

investigation, which I don't know.

There isn't an Charlie Elphick's

0:52:320:52:35

case. At the party were to speak to

him, they could then be called to

0:52:350:52:38

give evidence.

On the subject of

power, we need to remember that

0:52:380:52:42

these are adult women that we are

talking about. We're not talking

0:52:420:52:47

about children. And where is the

power line when one person loses his

0:52:470:52:50

job and another person gets a

Guardian column or the front story?

0:52:500:52:56

But if they have been found to be

caught in wrongdoing, shouldn't they

0:52:560:53:04

lose their job?

But this is them

losing a job on the basis of an

0:53:040:53:07

accusation without having been found

guilty of anything.

Just very

0:53:070:53:11

briefly, the people who have been

accused and suspended from Labour,

0:53:110:53:14

the investigations have gone quiet.

You have any idea about when we will

0:53:140:53:17

hear if they have been resolved?

I

think that the investigation is

0:53:170:53:22

trying to be... It is all being

redesigned. Every political party is

0:53:220:53:26

redesigning it. It shouldn't be too

long, and they are trying to do it

0:53:260:53:30

in a timely manner.

0:53:300:53:30

Now, she stood down as Labour's

leader in Scotland for a quieter

0:53:300:53:34

life, so what better way to achieve

that than becoming

0:53:340:53:36

a reality TV star?

0:53:360:53:37

Her party's new leader,

Richard Leonard, is now

0:53:370:53:39

considering whether Kezia Dugdale

should be disciplined

0:53:390:53:40

for deserting her post

as an MSP at Holyrood to head

0:53:400:53:43

for the Australian jungle.

0:53:430:53:47

She hasn't yet made an appearance on

I'm A Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here!,

0:53:470:53:51

but she's not the only

politician on the programme.

0:53:510:53:53

Boris' dad, Stanley Johnson,

made his debut on the first

0:53:530:53:55

episode last night.

0:53:550:54:00

I'm Stanley Johnson. I am an author,

a former politician, an

0:54:000:54:04

environmental campaigner. People

probably also recognise me as being

0:54:040:54:07

the father of Boris Johnson, the

politician. Wow! Hey, hey, look at

0:54:070:54:13

this! Look at this. I think I'm

going to have some champagne. Oh, my

0:54:130:54:22

lord. What have we here?

Wow.

Are

you a film star?

No, I am the wife

0:54:220:54:32

of an England player.

Is he going to

be out for the Ashes?

Oh, no. He

0:54:320:54:39

plays football, not cricket.

Are you

a footballer?

No, I am an actor.

How

0:54:390:54:47

wonderful!

I just finished with

Hollyoaks.

I know about Hollyoaks.

0:54:470:54:55

It actually comes just when you

watch the Channel 4 News.

0:54:550:54:58

And here to give some advice to this

year's political jungle-dwellers

0:54:580:55:00

is I'm a celebrity survivor,

Christine Hamilton.

0:55:000:55:04

What are your top tips?

Be yourself.

You can't be anything else. Anybody

0:55:040:55:09

who has put themselves in there now,

they know what is coming. I was on

0:55:090:55:12

the very first one so I literally

had no idea. It was 15 years ago.

0:55:120:55:18

Gosh!

Allah, I know. Now they all

know exactly what is coming. -- Ooh,

0:55:180:55:33

I know! Now they all know exactly

what is coming.

Now they don't know

0:55:330:55:39

who eat other arm. I love Stanley's

excuse for not watching because it

0:55:390:55:42

clashes with the news.

I think

Stanley will do very well. I know

0:55:420:55:47

him and I think he will... I think

people like him.

What about Kezia

0:55:470:55:52

Dugdale?

I do think she should be

there. She has a job, for heaven 's

0:55:520:55:57

sake. I think it is wrong. We have

had another MP being in and she was

0:55:570:56:04

criticised and she was out pretty

quickly. They don't like

0:56:040:56:06

politicians. The one who did best

was Edwina Currie. Kezia said in

0:56:060:56:16

2016 that she wanted to ban all

second jobs for members of the

0:56:160:56:19

Scottish parliament and she wanted

to have a new kind of politics.

0:56:190:56:24

Well, what do you think? Do you

think she should be sanctioned?

I

0:56:240:56:28

don't know is the answer to this

question. I genuinely don't. I

0:56:280:56:32

didn't know she was going on it

until yesterday.

Nor did Jeremy

0:56:320:56:37

Corbyn. Or Richard Leonard.

What I

am really wary of is that there are

0:56:370:56:44

foot lines in the Labour Party at

the moment and I hope that this does

0:56:440:56:47

not become one of them because it is

nonsense. I wouldn't do it. You

0:56:470:56:52

wouldn't do it. For all sorts of

reasons.

Is it because it would be a

0:56:520:56:57

conflict of interest?

For all sorts

of reasons.

I think we can show the

0:56:570:57:06

tweet.

0:57:060:57:15

So isn't it a bit of the critical?

Also, I suppose, because of some of

0:57:160:57:21

the fractions in the Labour Party,

the same thing could be said for a

0:57:210:57:25

Kezia Dugdale that this is giving an

excuse to people who might want to

0:57:250:57:29

take that excuse. But it is

hypocritical. There's no two ways

0:57:290:57:32

about that.

That seems to be...

Nobody seems to know what is

0:57:320:57:38

happening to the money. First of

all, she said she would give some of

0:57:380:57:43

it to a charity. She did have a

pledge on a registered member's

0:57:430:57:47

interests that she would donate all

of our money that she raised from

0:57:470:57:50

other work to a charity. That is

gone. She is being paid tens and

0:57:500:57:55

tens and tens of thousands.

Everybody negotiates. It is vastly

0:57:550:57:59

more... I think I can say this. I

was offered £10,000. And I asked

0:57:590:58:05

them to make it a bit better. They

made it up to 12 and then they put

0:58:050:58:10

everyone else's up as well.

You

tempted?

I frankly would pay not to

0:58:100:58:19

have to watch it. Have you ever

watched it? No.

0:58:190:58:25

There's just time before we go

to find out the answer to our quiz.

0:58:250:58:28

The question was what

item of clothing -

0:58:280:58:30

traditionally worn by a man -

will soon be worn by a woman

0:58:300:58:33

in the palace of Westminster?

0:58:330:58:34

Was it:

0:58:340:58:35

A, a tie?

0:58:350:58:36

B, tights?

0:58:360:58:37

C, waistcoat?

0:58:370:58:38

Or D, braces?

0:58:380:58:40

So, Jess and Nick, what's

the correct answer?

0:58:400:58:43

Tights.

And that is because? Sarah

Clark is going to become the first

0:58:430:58:54

Black rod and so she will be wearing

those sites.

I was really pleased.

0:58:540:59:01

Good, well, there is a change for

you.

0:59:010:59:02

That's all for today.

0:59:020:59:03

Thanks to our guests.

0:59:030:59:05

The one o'clock news is starting

over on BBC One now.

0:59:050:59:07

I'll be here at noon

tomorrow with all the big

0:59:070:59:10

political stories of the day.

0:59:100:59:11

Do join me then.

0:59:110:59:12

Bye-bye.

0:59:120:59:16

Jo Coburn is joined by Conservative MP Nick Boles and Labour MP Jess Phillips to discuss Wednesday's Budget, the Brexit divorce bill and housing policy.

There is also an interview with former I'm a Celebrity contestant Christine Hamilton about politicians appearing on the jungle TV show.


Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS