28/11/2017 Daily Politics


28/11/2017

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 28/11/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

Hello, and welcome

to the Daily Politics.

0:00:380:00:43

The Government is warned it could be

in contempt of Parliament unless it

0:00:430:00:50

hands over full details

of its assessment of the potential

0:00:500:00:52

impact of Brexit on the economy.

0:00:520:00:53

We'll have the latest.

0:00:530:00:54

Is Momentum carrying out a hard-left

purge of Labour's centrists?

0:00:540:00:57

Or is the organisation putting

some much-needed lead

0:00:570:00:59

in the party pencil?

0:00:590:01:02

We discuss with one of Momentum's

most high-profile supporters.

0:01:020:01:07

On his first outing in the Commons,

the new Defence Secretary is warned

0:01:070:01:10

by his own MPs that he faces

a "substantial rebellion"

0:01:100:01:12

if there are more cuts

to the Armed Forces.

0:01:120:01:15

We'll be speaking to the chairman

of the Defence Select Committee.

0:01:150:01:18

And.

0:01:180:01:19

Who are the key people

behind the scenes?

0:01:190:01:21

We have the latest in our

Westminster Village series.

0:01:210:01:29

All that in the next hour.

0:01:300:01:33

And with us for the whole

of the programme today

0:01:330:01:37

is the Guardian

columnist Owen Jones.

0:01:370:01:38

Welcome to the show.

0:01:380:01:40

Now, this morning, the Bank

of England Governor

0:01:400:01:42

Mark Carney has said Britain's

biggest banks could cope

0:01:420:01:45

if the country leaves the EU

in a "disorderly" way.

0:01:450:01:50

For the first time since

the financial crisis,

0:01:500:01:54

all of the UK's biggest lenders have

passed the bank's stress tests.

0:01:540:02:01

Here is Mark Carney speaking

earlier this morning.

0:02:010:02:06

Despite the severity of the test,

for the first time since the Bank

0:02:060:02:11

began stress testing in 2014,

no bank needs to strengthen

0:02:110:02:14

its capital position as a result.

0:02:140:02:15

Informed by the stress test

and our own risk analysis,

0:02:150:02:17

the FPC also judges that the banking

system can continue to support

0:02:170:02:20

the real economy, even

in the unlikely event

0:02:200:02:22

of a disorderly Brexit.

0:02:220:02:32

The balance sheets of British banks

are strong enough, are you

0:02:330:02:37

reassured?

It shows how low the bar has been

0:02:370:02:42

set. We're not talking about

imminent financial Armageddon. We

0:02:420:02:47

have seen the weakest growth in

Britain of any major G-7 country,

0:02:470:02:51

the longest squeeze in wages since

perhaps the 18th century, and a

0:02:510:02:57

prospect of a no deal Brexit which

means everything from dairy and meat

0:02:570:03:03

product prices surging, aeroplanes

being grounded, the economy grinding

0:03:030:03:08

to a halt.

Aren't they the worst case scenarios

0:03:080:03:12

you prepare for?

They are not a risk I would like to

0:03:120:03:15

take.

It is not as bad as you won't be

0:03:150:03:21

shot in the head but you may be

hospitalised.

0:03:210:03:23

What we are talking about because

the Tories have bungled Brexit

0:03:230:03:30

negotiations are they are going very

badly, we have a chronically weak

0:03:300:03:37

Government, we have the longest

squeeze in wages for 200 years. Weak

0:03:370:03:43

economic growth and the prospect of

a disastrous no deal Brexit which

0:03:430:03:47

will cause huge hardship.

People might say you are doing

0:03:470:03:52

project fear in the way that remain

as said ahead of the referendum. In

0:03:520:03:57

terms of warnings, Morgan Stanley

says Jeremy Corbyn becoming Prime

0:03:570:04:03

Minister would cause more damage to

UK business than Brexit.

0:04:030:04:08

I would be more worried if they

started lauding Jeremy Corbyn. This

0:04:080:04:14

financial elite plunged the world

into economic disaster, they got

0:04:140:04:18

saved by the state, one of the many

lavish benefits claimants. They

0:04:180:04:26

caused huge economic ruin which many

were forced to pay for. The truth of

0:04:260:04:32

why the Labour Party is doing so

well is because of the damage

0:04:320:04:38

inflicted on our economy by the

financial sector.

0:04:380:04:42

So why a 20 points ahead if they are

doing so well?

0:04:420:04:46

Older people haven't been won over

because the Labour Party have a 20

0:04:460:04:51

point lead the people over those

under 65. We have to do more for

0:04:510:04:58

those who haven't suffered the great

squeeze in wages. Issues like social

0:04:580:05:03

care, pensions.

On the economy they are not trusted

0:05:030:05:08

still.

They have closed the gap. You said

0:05:080:05:12

you would expect them to be further

ahead, even the Shadow Chancellor

0:05:120:05:19

has said there could be a run on the

pound and a flight of capital from

0:05:190:05:26

the UK, thinking there is a worst

case scenario if Labour come to

0:05:260:05:31

Government.

You would see a sharp decline...

0:05:310:05:37

He thinks there would be a

further...

0:05:370:05:40

You have to prepare for all

eventualities.

0:05:400:05:43

That is what Mark Carney is doing.

I said we wouldn't have if a natural

0:05:430:05:50

apocalypse doesn't mean in a deal

Brexit wouldn't be ruinous.

0:05:500:05:57

If you look at the Tories's economic

record where they said they would

0:05:570:06:01

wipe out the deficit by 2015.

2031. They have added more debt than

0:06:010:06:11

any Labour Government put together.

A terrible decline in wages.

0:06:110:06:15

That is why an alternative, saying,

let us have a genuine living wage,

0:06:150:06:22

ask those at the top to pay more to

invest in our crippled public

0:06:220:06:27

services, bring our utilities back

under the ownership of the people,

0:06:270:06:33

that has resonated with millions of

people.

0:06:330:06:37

What Usain about... About the record

levels -- what do you say to mark --

0:06:370:06:50

what do you say about the record

levels of unemployment?

0:06:500:06:56

What we have seen in this country is

most people in poverty are in work.

0:06:560:07:02

They get up every day to earn their

poverty which is bad for the

0:07:020:07:07

economy, they don't spend, bad for

the taxpayer because wages have to

0:07:070:07:11

be topped up. Instead, as we are

arguing, you need an interventionist

0:07:110:07:19

policy to support industries like

renewable energy and high-tech to

0:07:190:07:21

create skilled, properly paid jobs

which are sustainable.

0:07:210:07:29

Should Labour reverse all the cuts

by the Government rather than 4

0:07:290:07:35

billion?

I would like to see them go further.

0:07:350:07:40

I would like Labour to go further in

lots of ways, a more radical

0:07:400:07:44

programme including reversing every

single cut.

0:07:440:07:48

Labour has accused the Government

of treating Parliament with contempt

0:07:480:07:51

unless it hands over full details

of its assessment of the potential

0:07:510:07:54

impact of Brexit on the economy.

0:07:540:07:55

The Government sent over

its documents to the Brexit

0:07:550:07:58

Committee last night

but with crucial details edited out.

0:07:580:08:02

The Brexit Secretary David Davis

said the papers had been redacted

0:08:020:08:04

because there was no guarantee

they would be kept secret.

0:08:040:08:07

Well, the Brexit Committee has been

meeting this morning to discuss how

0:08:070:08:10

to respond to the Government.

0:08:100:08:12

Norman Smith joins us now

from Portcullis House

0:08:120:08:14

where the meeting has

been taking place.

0:08:140:08:21

Bring us up to date? The committee

has decided to summon David Davis to

0:08:210:08:26

appear before them, I suspect, on

Monday, and have written to him

0:08:260:08:34

saying it is not acceptable he has

flouted the will of the Commons by

0:08:340:08:40

not handing over all the

documentation, challenging his view

0:08:400:08:43

he has been given no assurances how

the committee would respond. Jacob

0:08:430:08:49

Rees Mogg tabled an amendment to the

letter to include the possibility Mr

0:08:490:08:54

Davies might be in breach of

parliamentary Prevc which would open

0:08:540:08:58

him up to being in contempt of

Parliament -- privilege.

0:08:580:09:05

What happens next?

The select committee today has

0:09:050:09:12

decided to ask David Davis to appear

before us. I have written to him to

0:09:120:09:18

say, because the Government in its

better to me yesterday said it had

0:09:180:09:22

withheld certain information, I

don't think that is consistent with

0:09:220:09:28

the resolution Nijhuis past, and I

have said the committee will need to

0:09:280:09:36

consider whether this is potentially

a breach of privilege. We are asking

0:09:360:09:41

him to appear as a matter of urgency

to ask him about the process by

0:09:410:09:46

which the Government decided to

respond to the resolution which led

0:09:460:09:50

to an edited version of the

material, and so we can ask him the

0:09:500:09:57

question of the arch lever files of

material given, is there anything

0:09:570:10:01

which in your view might undermine

the negotiations because the

0:10:010:10:06

committee will take the decision

about what to publish.

0:10:060:10:09

The Government is clear the

documents you have seen do not

0:10:090:10:15

exist, they are not there. They say

the committee has not given him

0:10:150:10:20

assurances over how you will treat

this information.

0:10:200:10:26

The second of those suggestions is

incorrect. I made it very clear to

0:10:260:10:30

the Secretary of State how the

committee would deal with this. The

0:10:300:10:33

members will look at the material

released, they can't take copies

0:10:330:10:37

away. I gave assurances how it would

be handled. I said we would ask the

0:10:370:10:43

Government are there things in here

you think our commercial in

0:10:430:10:46

confidence or very sensitive, and

the committee takes its

0:10:460:10:53

responsibilities seriously.

Ultimately I made it clear to him,

0:10:530:10:57

Parliament instructed the material

be released to us, it is the job of

0:10:570:11:00

the committee to decide what is

published having considered what

0:11:000:11:05

ministers think. For the material

released, one reason why we are

0:11:050:11:09

calling him is, is there anything

you have concerns given you told us

0:11:090:11:14

you have included a lot of stuff you

were concerned about.

0:11:140:11:19

What happens if David Davis says, I

am sorry, I will not hand over the

0:11:190:11:25

additional documentation I am wary

of giving over.

0:11:250:11:29

The committee will have to consider

whatever answers he gives, and

0:11:290:11:33

decide how to take it further.

I am not prejudging what the

0:11:330:11:41

committee might decide. The question

has been raised whether potentially

0:11:410:11:46

this is a breach of privilege. The

committee has taken no stance at

0:11:460:11:54

all. Ultimately it will be for the

committee to decide what happens

0:11:540:11:57

next.

This might look like a tussle over

0:11:570:12:04

paperwork but it is more profound, a

tussle over who is going to run the

0:12:040:12:09

Brexit process. Ministers or can

Parliament grab hold of it? So much

0:12:090:12:16

of the whole tussle has been about

this from the first day.

0:12:160:12:22

I'm joined now by the Conservative

MP John Whittingdale who sits

0:12:220:12:25

on the Brexit Committee,

and was in the meeting this morning.

0:12:250:12:27

And by the Labour MP Paul Blomfield

who is a Shadow Brexit minister.

0:12:270:12:34

Welcome to you. John Whittingdale,

David Davis is in breach of

0:12:340:12:41

Parliament. There was a vote,

Parliament decided to seek the

0:12:410:12:45

papers in full and he failed to

deliver.

0:12:450:12:49

Parliament had also said the

Government should not release the

0:12:490:12:53

material which could jeopardise our

negotiations, and the important

0:12:530:12:59

thing is we get the best possible

deal for this country, it is the

0:12:590:13:03

biggest issue facing us and I would

not want the Government to release

0:13:030:13:07

anything which could put that at

risk.

0:13:070:13:10

Is he in breach of Parliament by

failing to supply the papers in

0:13:100:13:14

full? We will come onto what could

be adapted. Has he failed to do what

0:13:140:13:21

was demanded of him?

In my view, no, Parliament has said

0:13:210:13:26

we should not release documents...

What would you say to Hilary Benn?

0:13:260:13:32

The committee was not unanimous. I

support summoning David Davis, he

0:13:320:13:39

needs to answer questions about

whether there is information in the

0:13:390:13:43

documents we have been given, which

are sensitive and we should not even

0:13:430:13:48

release those.

If he has released those, why not

0:13:480:13:53

everything?

In his letter, he says he hasn't

0:13:530:13:56

supplied all the information because

he has withheld some that could put

0:13:560:14:01

at risk our negotiations. And said

even within the documents he has

0:14:010:14:06

given there is some sensitive

material he would prefer not to be

0:14:060:14:09

made public.

Has the committee overstepped its

0:14:090:14:15

mark?

All Hilary Benn has done is said the

0:14:150:14:18

committee may wish to consider. That

is not overstepping the mark. It is

0:14:180:14:23

reasonable to say that. The question

is whether we conclude there has

0:14:230:14:29

been any breach of privilege, my

view is that there has not.

0:14:290:14:33

We are in the middle of one of the

most important sets of negotiations,

0:14:330:14:37

why should the Government be forced

to give away sensitive information

0:14:370:14:43

that would not be in the national

interest and might undermine

0:14:430:14:46

negotiations?

I wound up the debate for the

0:14:460:14:53

Liberal Party on the 1st of November

and made it clear we do not want to

0:14:530:14:57

seek commercially sensitive

information released or the

0:14:570:15:03

negotiations compromised. But we do

want to see the 58 impact

0:15:030:15:07

assessments released to the Select

Committee.

0:15:070:15:11

If they are not adapted, how can

they include the 60 -- sensitive

0:15:110:15:20

information?

We want them to be released to the

0:15:200:15:26

committee who can decide what

publications can be made more

0:15:260:15:28

widely.

0:15:280:15:28

Es Do you trust the members of

Select Committees, bearing the mind

0:15:360:15:40

David Davis' letter was leaked and

ended up in a newspaper?

I don't

0:15:400:15:47

think it is good if we start from

the premise we can't trust Select

0:15:470:15:52

Committees, which work across a

range of issues and areas. Our

0:15:520:15:58

accountability begins to break down

if Government are marginalising

0:15:580:16:00

Select Committees in this way.

Well,

obviously a point, John

0:16:000:16:04

Whittingdale. Do you not trust your

fellow parliamentarians, either we

0:16:040:16:08

have a system that works and you can

deal with sews sensitive

0:16:080:16:12

information, otherwise you are going

to see information that we can all

0:16:120:16:15

see in the public domain.

? In this

case you have a Select Committee of

0:16:150:16:19

20 members, and the information is

also beingp given to the Lords'

0:16:190:16:23

Select Committee and being given do

the devolved administration. This

0:16:230:16:26

information is going to a lot of

people.

Do you trust your fellow

0:16:260:16:29

parliamentarians?

I have chaired a

Select Committee in ten years,

0:16:290:16:32

during that time we had to have leak

inquiries because information was

0:16:320:16:35

leaked. I am afraid there are

precedents for this happening and on

0:16:350:16:39

a committee of this size, when one

has to say that perhaps not every

0:16:390:16:43

member is as committed to obtaining

a good deal as I am and my

0:16:430:16:47

colleagues, in those instances, I

can see why the Secretary of State

0:16:470:16:49

is reluctant.

What do you say to

that, Paul, Blomfeld?

I think it is

0:16:490:16:57

an important principle here, you

alluded to it at the outset. At

0:16:570:17:00

every point during this process

Government has tried to marginalise

0:17:000:17:04

Parliament. Parliament is central in

what are the most important

0:17:040:17:07

negotiations facing this country. I

made it clear, at the end of the

0:17:070:17:10

debate, if the Government didn't

wish to release, as the Commons

0:17:100:17:15

wanted the to, those papers,

unredacted, they should have voted

0:17:150:17:18

against that motion or amended it.

They chose not to and the motion was

0:17:180:17:21

very clear - that the papers should

be released in full to the Select

0:17:210:17:24

Committee.

You haven't answered the

question about the problems of leaks

0:17:240:17:28

and leaks of sensitive information

that could damage Britain's position

0:17:280:17:31

in these negotiations. We know that

leaks happen all the time. So why

0:17:310:17:36

would we risk it with these

negotiations?

Well, I have to say

0:17:360:17:40

some of the most damaging leaks that

have come out of the negotiations

0:17:400:17:46

are from the Cabinet with Government

ministers briefing against each

0:17:460:17:48

other which caused enormous damage

to the process and confidence in

0:17:480:17:52

where this Government is taking us.

I think we have to work on the

0:17:520:17:55

principle that our Select Committees

are to be trusted and to fulfil

0:17:550:17:59

their responsibilities properly.

Once Government starts saying we are

0:17:590:18:01

not going to give them this

information, because we have to

0:18:010:18:04

worry about it or not going to give

them that information, the system of

0:18:040:18:09

parliamentary accountability breaks

down.

Right but even the EU

0:18:090:18:13

themselves have said they wouldn't

give away potentially sensitive

0:18:130:18:16

information. On their fact street

they say, "A certain level of

0:18:160:18:22

confidentiality is necessary to

protect EU interests and to deep

0:18:220:18:26

chances for a satisfactory outcome

high." Are they wrong?

No they are

0:18:260:18:30

right. What we have said and we made

it clear, I made this point in the

0:18:300:18:35

Commons, when we were concluding the

debate, we do not want to seat

0:18:350:18:39

public release of information which

is confidential or compromising the

0:18:390:18:43

negotiating position but we want to

see that full information made

0:18:430:18:45

available to the Select Committee

responsible in the House of Commons.

0:18:450:18:48

Right. I mean, David Davis is making

this up as he goes alock, isn't he?

0:18:480:18:53

-- along. There weren't any

assessment impact papers in the

0:18:530:18:58

first place and Parliament in the

end called his bluff?

Well, I

0:18:580:19:03

haven't yet seen the documents we

have been given. There are 850

0:19:030:19:06

pages, I only got them last night.

We only have one copy. Until I have

0:19:060:19:09

had a chance to look the a therges I

don't know quite what they will

0:19:090:19:12

consist of. -- to look at them. We

won't know what the material that

0:19:120:19:19

has been withheld is, so we don't

know if they are complete or not. It

0:19:190:19:24

is a political game. You are saying

its a short-term political game but

0:19:240:19:28

the Brexit secretary, David Davis

said to a committee of MPs in

0:19:280:19:31

December last year, "We have carried

out o or are the midst of carrying

0:19:310:19:38

out 57 sector analysis which have

amplcations that 85% of the economy

0:19:380:19:41

and some of those are still to be

concluded." Yet, when course the

0:19:410:19:46

vote was lost, nobody could seem to

put their hands on these, in

0:19:460:19:50

detailed papers written about

different sectors of the economy

0:19:500:19:53

Well, as I understand it, this is an

ongoing process, they are documents

0:19:530:19:57

that are continually having new

information added to them, the has

0:19:570:20:01

now said that they will give us the

documents at the time the vote was

0:20:010:20:10

carried but they continue to go on

evolving.

That's the point they

0:20:100:20:16

don't exist in the form you have

outlined That case there is (

a

0:20:160:20:19

serious question about trusting

Government. David Davis told the

0:20:190:20:22

break it Select Committee in

December, as youlight, that that

0:20:220:20:25

work was being done, and then he

provided in October the Lords'

0:20:250:20:31

committee with a list of 58, he had

added one to the 57 in December,

0:20:310:20:37

sectorial impact assessments he said

had been undertaken. If they have

0:20:370:20:40

knot been undertaken we are in

serious territory.

Well, if you

0:20:400:20:43

don't know they existed in the fist

place, what are you criticising

0:20:430:20:46

here? You have not actually seen the

contents of the documents so far,

0:20:460:20:51

you don't even know if they existed

in the fist place so, what is this

0:20:510:20:55

all about?

Well, I take the

Secretary of State's word at face

0:20:550:21:00

value. He said this work was being

undertaken and he reported on the 58

0:21:000:21:05

reviews that had taken place. I'm

not doubting that. All we want to do

0:21:050:21:08

is see them.

Right, but you haven't

seen them and yet you are

0:21:080:21:13

criticising the process, criticising

the content of papers that you

0:21:130:21:16

haven't yet seen.

Well the Secretary

of State said that the Government

0:21:160:21:22

had undertaken 58 sectorial impact

assessments. The House of Commons

0:21:220:21:25

voted that they should be released

in full to the Brexit Select

0:21:250:21:28

Committee, that's what we are

concerned about. Either that work

0:21:280:21:31

hasn't been undertaken, which is

very serious for the country if they

0:21:310:21:34

have not taken the economic impact

assessments on the negotiations that

0:21:340:21:38

they are deeply involved in, which

will affect everybody's jump in

0:21:380:21:41

livelihoods or they have and they

are not releasing them in full.

0:21:410:21:44

Either way, this is serious

territory.

Right. The question is

0:21:440:21:49

one of transparency John

Whittingdale and the Tory MP, Jacob

0:21:490:21:53

Rees-Mogg is supporting Labour and

Paul Blomfeld in this, because he

0:21:530:21:56

says that they have to be published

these papers, in full to the Brexit

0:21:560:22:00

Select Committee. The motion does

not allow for redaction and a happy

0:22:000:22:04

chat across the Despatch Box between

the shadow spokesman and ministers

0:22:040:22:09

and it doesn't reduce the right of

this House to seat papers. He is

0:22:090:22:13

correct -- see the papers

I know

that is his view. I don't entirely

0:22:130:22:17

agree with him. In this instance, I

think there is a bigger issue at

0:22:170:22:22

stake. Getting the right deal for

this country is imperative.

0:22:220:22:27

Transparency can be pushed to the

side

If it involves releasing

0:22:270:22:31

information that could potentially

undermine the negotiation, yes.

0:22:310:22:33

Right. What is your view, Owen z

they exist and is there a question

0:22:330:22:42

of redaction?

A question of honesty,

David Davis seemed to imply or

0:22:420:22:52

suggest, that they were there in

detail. The wider point about

0:22:520:22:55

transparency is this - we were told

by the leaders of the Leave campaign

0:22:550:22:59

that this ex-Brit was about

restoring parliamentary sovereignty,

0:22:590:23:02

and yet they undermine parliamentary

scrutiny of this proriver single

0:23:020:23:06

step of the way. The other point,

John Whittingdale talked about a

0:23:060:23:09

good deal. I wouldn't trust this

Government to wash my windows never

0:23:090:23:13

mind...

How do you get a good deal

if you give awane reveal...

The

0:23:130:23:18

question is, do we have

parliamentary sovereignty, where

0:23:180:23:21

there is proper parliamentary

oversight on a cross-party basis or

0:23:210:23:24

do we entrust the future of our

country to Liam Fox, Boris Johnson

0:23:240:23:30

and David Davis, where we had a

Leave campaign that promised all

0:23:300:23:34

sorts of things, getting a deal

would be a walk in the park, the

0:23:340:23:37

boreder in Ireland wouldn't be a

problem, it is and we would get £350

0:23:370:23:43

million extra a beak for the NHS.

That got lost in the post. Now if we

0:23:430:23:47

don't trust them over and over

again, why should we allow them to

0:23:470:23:54

have complete oversight without MPs

on the cross of had party basis

0:23:540:24:00

restoring...

We have lost John

Whittingdale. He had to go back to

0:24:000:24:06

the Houses of Parliament for an

urgent question on this subject. We

0:24:060:24:09

will bring that to you, when we get

it:

0:24:090:24:13

Now it's time for our daily quiz.

0:24:130:24:14

An SNP MP called Douglas Chapman has

managed to secure a Parliamentary

0:24:140:24:17

debate suggesting that the UK should

appoint a new ambassador.

0:24:170:24:20

But to where?

0:24:200:24:21

Is it a) The Arctic?

0:24:210:24:22

b) The Antarctic?

0:24:220:24:23

c) Catalonia?

0:24:230:24:24

Or d) Mars?

0:24:240:24:25

At the end of the show,

Owen will hopefully give

0:24:250:24:28

us the correct answer.

0:24:280:24:34

Now, unless you've been hiding away

for the last couple of years,

0:24:340:24:37

you've no doubt heard

about Momentum, the campaign group

0:24:370:24:39

set up to support Jeremy Corbyn.

0:24:390:24:46

Owen here is a high-profile

supporter, and is involved in some

0:24:460:24:48

of Momentum's campaigning.

0:24:480:24:50

Yesterday, we reported on Momentum's

new political objectives document,

0:24:500:24:53

which it is asking prospective

parliamentary candidates to sign.

0:24:530:24:59

It got a few in the

party a bit irked.

0:24:590:25:01

One Labour MP

tweeted that Momentum

0:25:010:25:03

was like a "Stalinist cult".

0:25:030:25:04

So, is that true?

0:25:040:25:05

Or is the criticism overblown?

0:25:050:25:07

Today's Times reports that some

Labour councillors around

0:25:070:25:09

the country are being deselected

or pressured to stand down

0:25:090:25:13

in favour of candidates more

sympathetic to Momentum's aims.

0:25:130:25:16

The in-fighting is particularly

intense in Haringey,

0:25:160:25:18

in north London.

0:25:180:25:21

One of the councillors

there, Tim Gallagher,

0:25:210:25:29

says there is an "aggressive purge"

happening in the local party.

0:25:290:25:32

He added that the atmosphere

is "inflamed with division,

0:25:320:25:34

distrust and what at times

feels like hatred".

0:25:340:25:36

Meanwhile, the founder and chair

of Momentum Jon Lansman

0:25:360:25:46

is running for a place on the ruling

body of the Labour Party,

0:25:470:25:50

the National Executive Committee.

0:25:500:25:51

At Labour's recent conference,

Momentum successfully pushed

0:25:510:25:53

for a change to Labour's leadership

election rules, which means that,

0:25:530:25:56

in future, candidates running

to lead the party will only need

0:25:560:25:58

the support of 10%, rather

than 15%, of Labour MPs.

0:25:580:26:01

But Jon Lansman said that the change

to the rules "doesn't

0:26:010:26:03

go far enough".

0:26:030:26:04

He also wants to see further changes

in the Labour Party, in particular,

0:26:040:26:07

"giving members more

influence over policymaking".

0:26:070:26:12

Momentum says it has

31,000 paying members

0:26:120:26:19

and a further 200,000 supporters.

0:26:190:26:23

Many think that the organisation

played a key role in helping

0:26:230:26:26

Jeremy Corbyn and Labour to gain

seats at the election back in June.

0:26:260:26:29

With us now is Richard Angell,

director of Progress,

0:26:290:26:38

a centre-left pressure group.

0:26:380:26:43

Are you concerned with the

situation, particularly in har ingay

0:26:430:26:48

Utterly ludicrous. Momentum played

an historic role in the election. I

0:26:480:26:57

hope Richard would agree.

.

Come to

the har ingay

It is about what

0:26:570:27:06

member Labour put forward to

represent the party adds councillor,

0:27:060:27:09

you have seen a handful of examples

in har ingay. And I should point out

0:27:090:27:14

what a thriving party it is. In

Hornsey and Wood Green do you how

0:27:140:27:20

many members of the Labour Party, it

is 1 in 14, a thriving Democratic

0:27:200:27:25

Party. The problem s har ingay is

the Labour council there is

0:27:250:27:32

proposing a mass sell-off of council

housing and public land including

0:27:320:27:38

both MPs, including David Lammy, no

Corbynite. And poe o opposed by

0:27:380:27:44

consit City Council r os and some of

those, when they support come up

0:27:440:27:52

from election, there has been a

handsful where members themselves

0:27:520:27:56

democratically decided they would

like to replace them with swuvenlt

0:27:560:27:59

they might be disappointed with

losing elections, they always are,

0:27:590:28:02

but it is democracy.

Is it democracy

in action or a purge?

It is a the pa

0:28:020:28:08

earn taking place. The first woman

leader of Leeds council has been

0:28:080:28:12

triggered in her local party, a city

with two women MPs for Labour in its

0:28:120:28:16

whole history. You have it in

Manchester, where the former Mr Gay

0:28:160:28:20

UK has been deselected. You have a

young, black lesbian woman in

0:28:200:28:24

Southwark where it is taking place.

There is a pattern across the

0:28:240:28:27

country, Owen, this is now going to

come to our Labour MPs potentially

0:28:270:28:31

down the road. The Tory opponents

don't have to deal with this, they

0:28:310:28:35

are having to deal with different

challenge, in Haringey, it isn't

0:28:350:28:41

true, you have fallen for George

Osborne's trap. He wanted to impose

0:28:410:28:46

big swinging cuts on local

government so, Labour people would

0:28:460:28:49

take it out on Labour councillors

rather than a Tory Treasury. That's

0:28:490:28:53

why Momentum, not its membership,

hover working really hard, but the

0:28:530:28:57

Momentum leadership is taking it out

on Labour councillors for decisions

0:28:570:29:01

made by George Osborne. Why are you

falling for their trap?

Firstly in

0:29:010:29:05

terms of falling for traps, it is

disappointed if you are talking

0:29:050:29:09

about factions, for your faction to

go to the Murdoch press and try and

0:29:090:29:13

-- that's what happened in the Times

this morning.

It happens in the

0:29:130:29:18

public domain

To portray democratic

selections by members as a purge. It

0:29:180:29:25

is not, it is democracy in ction a.

Your own, honoury President, Stephen

0:29:250:29:30

Twigg, who I happen to like very

much by the way he himself won his

0:29:300:29:34

seat by deselecting...

Yes he did.

He deselected.

He had no role in

0:29:340:29:39

that deselection.

Yes, he znchts

your faction that's what they did.

0:29:390:29:43

-- he Z

That's not true

Let me

finish In terms of Richard's record

0:29:430:29:53

on diversity it is excellent.

Why

are they deselecting people already

0:29:530:29:57

in position, it is not so much about

the diversity issue, it is about

0:29:570:30:00

trying to get rid of people

representing Labour already?

0:30:000:30:07

Grassroots members of the Labour

Party in handful of incidences, they

0:30:070:30:11

have made themselves a democratic

choice, look, if you get selected as

0:30:110:30:15

a candidate for the Labour Party in

any position, it is a huge honour,

0:30:150:30:17

but it doesn't mean you have it for

life, whatever you do. Members have

0:30:170:30:21

the right to judge you on your

record and values, if they

0:30:210:30:26

themselves democratically decide

they would prefer somebody else in

0:30:260:30:29

their place, that is their role. The

need to portray that as undemocratic

0:30:290:30:35

manoeuvring when Labour now, I have

to say before 2015n many places,

0:30:350:30:41

local Labours were husks with very

little activity, with council r os

0:30:410:30:44

selected with very few members,

Labour now is one of the biggest

0:30:440:30:48

parties in the Concern world, is a

thriving dome Western World is a

0:30:480:30:52

thriving Democratic Party.

We will

come on to how they've manage to

0:30:520:30:57

swell the numbers but back to haring

game. You adduced Owen Jones of --

0:30:570:31:04

you accused Owen Jones of falling

for George Osborne's trap but do you

0:31:040:31:10

accept in Haringey there was a great

strength of feeling against what the

0:31:100:31:13

council was proposing?

0:31:130:31:20

This is what George Osborne wanted.

This is not just Haringey.

Let him

0:31:200:31:27

finish.

This is what the Tories wanted. In

0:31:270:31:33

Haringey, what is wrong with local

members saying, we don't agree with

0:31:330:31:41

our representatives backing council

proposals to make swingeing cuts,

0:31:410:31:44

whoever you want to blame, that is

democracy.

0:31:440:31:49

They have no choice. They can't run

a legal -- a deficit budget.

0:31:490:31:57

When they put a motion to the

Council on anti-Semitism, there were

0:31:570:32:03

people who work in the chamber

hounding those people and

0:32:030:32:07

threatening them with deselection if

they voted to tackle anti-Semitism.

0:32:070:32:12

Jon Lansman is Jewish.

Does that mean there is no tone of

0:32:120:32:19

hatred as said by this young Labour

councillor. Gallagher says he

0:32:190:32:24

doesn't want to stand again because

the atmosphere is poisonous,

0:32:240:32:29

inflamed by distrust and what feels

like hatred.

0:32:290:32:33

We are seeing candidates who are

very disappointed their brand of

0:32:330:32:37

politics is no longer in the ascent,

there is a mass democratic party

0:32:370:32:45

full of optimism.

And full of hatred he says.

0:32:450:32:48

That is not true. I saw Richard

Angell where your fellow -- your

0:32:480:33:00

fellow travellers were leaving

abuse.

0:33:000:33:06

The vast majority of people as you

would accept who have joined the

0:33:060:33:15

liver party are decent, honest,

optimistic.

0:33:150:33:17

I did not say that.

The people I campaign with, they

0:33:170:33:24

were brilliant. I enjoyed getting on

with them, we disagreed, we talked.

0:33:240:33:31

There is something in the leadership

actively supporting this. We have a

0:33:310:33:37

loyalty test, any revisions to the

manifesto... Momentum does not

0:33:370:33:44

practice what it peaches, it does

not have internal democracy, it

0:33:440:33:49

decided who the candidate in Corby

is without a ballot.

0:33:490:33:56

On the loyalty test, we had a

discussion, Richard brought this up,

0:33:560:34:06

do you think you would have passed

it at all stages in recent history?

0:34:060:34:10

In spring this year after using the

Copeland election, you called for

0:34:100:34:16

Jeremy Corbyn to resign. You would

not have met at contract.

0:34:160:34:23

Yes, after voting for him, I was

publicly disillusioned. Why am I

0:34:230:34:30

working so closely with the Mentor?

Momentum is a very broad church of

0:34:300:34:41

members united by wanting to have a

radical socialist Government to

0:34:410:34:45

build a socialist society.

The loyalty test, the Mentor

0:34:450:34:54

supports candidates in internal

elections.

0:34:540:35:04

Progress...

What we are proud of...

0:35:040:35:08

Progress is a tiny group in

comparison. Momentum have thriving

0:35:080:35:14

democratic local groups which

democratically selects their own

0:35:140:35:18

board.

Why are you so much smaller in terms

0:35:180:35:23

of numbers?

Compared to Momentum. You have to

0:35:230:35:30

accept they have been hugely

successful in terms of getting new

0:35:300:35:35

members, injecting enthusiasm. Your

branch of the party is running

0:35:350:35:38

scared.

We are recognising our politics is

0:35:380:35:44

at a low ebb and we had to renew

ourselves because, clearly, people

0:35:440:35:50

think our ideas have run their

course, people can't move on from

0:35:500:35:53

the last Labour Party.

I am allowed to believe what I

0:35:530:36:00

believe and renew my politics.

We are a growing organisation. Let

0:36:000:36:06

me make this comparison. What

Progress does in selection is

0:36:060:36:13

provide training for people so they

know the process, Labour makes it

0:36:130:36:17

cloaked in secrecy. We don't donate

money to campaigns, we don't get

0:36:170:36:25

together to say you have two

pre-select a candidate. We support

0:36:250:36:29

as many as we can.

Do you want everybody to be saying

0:36:290:36:40

exactly the same thing on exactly

the same issues so there is no

0:36:400:36:44

deviation? Is it discipline to get

your man into number ten?

0:36:440:36:50

In the general election, I

campaigns, including four MPs who

0:36:500:36:55

have different politics from myself.

Should they be deselected? No, that

0:36:550:37:02

is not the case. In terms of the

loyalty test, the Mentor is

0:37:020:37:09

supporting certain candidates, as

other organisations do, asking them

0:37:090:37:15

to sign up to their values. There is

nothing wrong.

0:37:150:37:21

The former head of compliance...

I remember being active when Tony

0:37:210:37:28

Blair was leader and the atmosphere

them towards people of my politics

0:37:280:37:32

was often bitterly hostile. We were

blamed for destroying the Labour

0:37:320:37:38

Party, and the reality is now the

Labour Party is far more open and

0:37:380:37:45

democratic than it has been for a

generation. It will mean elements of

0:37:450:37:50

the old order who believe in what

many people now believe is a failed

0:37:500:37:55

orthodoxy, they will find that other

people who join will maybe replace

0:37:550:37:58

them.

That is part of democracy. The

0:37:580:38:04

Labour Party did far better than

many expected even within the Labour

0:38:040:38:10

Party itself. Do you accept the

values and policies being espoused

0:38:100:38:16

by Jeremy Corbyn struck a chord?

It did. But also in that manifesto

0:38:160:38:22

it aligned economic security and

national security, the best of

0:38:220:38:28

Jeremy Corbyn and Tom Watson, but in

the days after the election, he said

0:38:280:38:32

they would still get rid of Trident.

He didn't do that.

0:38:320:38:40

Very briefly, in the end, Labour

were still two points behind, 20

0:38:400:38:50

years ago Tony Blair came in 12

points ahead. In order to win do you

0:38:500:38:55

not have is to be in that position

of Tony Blair and a more centrist

0:38:550:38:59

Labour Party to win an election?

Those who support those politics on

0:38:590:39:05

the continent are doing far worse

for Labour's sister parties. Labour

0:39:050:39:14

got 40%, New Labour at its peak got

44.

0:39:140:39:18

Labour started on 24, within six

weeks ended up on 40. In the next

0:39:180:39:24

election if we going with 42%, what

many Tory MPs fear is the only way

0:39:240:39:33

is up. Because of the Mentor Labour

did far better.

0:39:330:39:41

If only that were true.

0:39:410:39:47

Some say behind the door of Number

10 Downing Street lie

0:39:470:39:50

the real power brokers -

those who advise the Prime Minister

0:39:500:39:52

on issues such as strategy,

communications or policy.

0:39:520:39:54

Emma Vardy has been having a look

at who's in, and who's out.

0:39:540:40:03

After the general election,

Theresa May faced something

0:40:030:40:05

of an exodus of staff.

0:40:050:40:12

Some who were blamed

for the disastrous result

0:40:120:40:14

were shown the door.

0:40:140:40:15

New faces came in.

0:40:150:40:16

Others rewarded for their

loyalty were promoted.

0:40:160:40:18

She reshaped her inner circle

and braced for the challenges ahead.

0:40:180:40:28

Here were the two main casualties

of the post-election clear-out.

0:40:280:40:32

Former joint Chief

of Staff Fiona Hill,

0:40:320:40:34

and Nick Timothy, decided to walk.

0:40:340:40:35

This man occupies the most

powerful non-ministerial

0:40:350:40:37

position in Government.

0:40:370:40:38

Gavin Barwell got the job

after losing his Croydon seat.

0:40:380:40:43

He is now the Downing Street Chief

of Staff, a highly influential role

0:40:430:40:46

at the heart of Government.

0:40:460:40:48

This is now the most senior

female in Mrs May's team,

0:40:480:40:54

Deputy Chief of Staff Joanna Penn,

known as Jo-Jo, who worked closely

0:40:540:40:57

with Theresa May in the Home Office.

0:40:570:40:59

Another member of staff

who followed Mrs May

0:40:590:41:01

from the Home Office is Alex Dawson,

now the political director

0:41:010:41:05

of Number Ten, someone who has risen

in prominence since that election.

0:41:050:41:11

It's just so tiresome when you're

trying to run the country and this

0:41:110:41:14

lot is popping up with questions.

0:41:140:41:17

So behind every Prime Minister

there is hard-headed press team.

0:41:170:41:22

It's a round-the-clock

job, you know.

0:41:220:41:23

Here's someone whose

name you might remember

0:41:230:41:25

from the credits of this programme.

0:41:250:41:27

Robbie Gibb left his job

as the boss of the BBC's live

0:41:270:41:30

political output to become

Theresa May's Director

0:41:300:41:32

of Communications.

0:41:320:41:39

Another former BBC

journalist, Tom Swabrick,

0:41:390:41:41

deals with the broadcast media

while Paul Harrison is the current

0:41:410:41:44

Press Secretary.

0:41:440:41:45

And what about those

set-piece media appearances

0:41:450:41:47

which show the public the human side

of the Prime Minister's personality?

0:41:470:41:50

Overseeing those is Liz Sanderson,

a former feature writer

0:41:500:41:53

for the Mail On Sunday.

0:41:530:41:57

Prime Ministers' careers are often

later remembered for some

0:41:570:41:59

of their key speeches.

0:41:590:42:01

And that's where the

wordsmiths come in.

0:42:010:42:04

Help a PM to nail that podium

moment and you might

0:42:040:42:07

just go down in history.

0:42:070:42:09

Although this speech might go down

for all the wrong reasons,

0:42:090:42:14

with Philip Hammond being the chief

provider of cough sweets,

0:42:140:42:19

Keelan Carr is Theresa May's

new speech writer.

0:42:190:42:22

And here

is another journalist

0:42:220:42:23

turned political aide.

0:42:230:42:24

The former Political Editor

of the Daily Mail, James Slack,

0:42:240:42:27

is the Prime Minister's official

spokesperson - he has the daily

0:42:270:42:30

job of briefing lobby

journalists at Parliament.

0:42:300:42:35

Working behind this door, well,

there aren't many jobs like it,

0:42:350:42:37

but you never quite know how long

it will last.

0:42:370:42:47

We're joined now by someone

who mixes with the movers

0:42:470:42:49

and shakers on a daily basis,

the political editor

0:42:490:42:52

of The Sun, Tom Newton Dunn.

0:42:520:42:55

Welcome back. Changes in personnel

after the election, how has Downing

0:42:550:43:02

Street changed?

Considerably, a 180 degrees U-turn.

0:43:020:43:09

There are some new names, Robbie

give.

0:43:090:43:14

I remember him.

I understand his

staff still get Molly King text

0:43:140:43:22

messages despite the fact he has

still moved on. -- rollicking. The

0:43:220:43:36

two figures missing are Nick Timothy

and Fiona Hill who drove the

0:43:360:43:41

operation, and some say had a fair

hand in driving the Prime Minister,

0:43:410:43:47

very adversarial people. Without

that, number ten is a lot more

0:43:470:43:53

adversarial, less adversarial.

Has it weakened the Prime Minister?

0:43:530:43:58

After the election we talked about

the possibility of those advisers

0:43:580:44:03

having to load which they did, and

it would be like losing a leg or an

0:44:030:44:08

arm.

Has that been the case? Sort of. An

0:44:080:44:12

interesting dynamic. Number ten now

has no majority and still have no

0:44:120:44:18

money. Now they don't have much of a

mandate.

0:44:180:44:22

The entire job of this number ten is

to build alliances in cabinet and

0:44:220:44:29

Parliament, to be consensual and

build bridges and a group effort

0:44:290:44:33

which is the opposite of before when

it was about driving through

0:44:330:44:43

policies. Today, number ten is

delivering on the mandate it has

0:44:430:44:47

which is getting policy and

governing without any majority.

0:44:470:44:54

Does it make any difference who is

behind the throne in terms of

0:44:540:45:00

advisers, or is it still very much

led by the Prime Minister, and her

0:45:000:45:05

closest advisers who are elected?

This is a directional lists -- a

0:45:050:45:14

Government without direction.

And the personnel Quetta but we have

0:45:140:45:18

gathered you are not a supporter of

this Government. Does it make a

0:45:180:45:22

difference?

0:45:220:45:22

#9d

It does, Nick Timothy, cut a

figure. He is widely ridiculed often

0:45:280:45:33

as the architect of a disastrous

manifesto. But what that manifesto

0:45:330:45:38

accepted was the free market

consensus had collapsed T spoke how

0:45:380:45:42

the state needed to take a far more

actedive role and how things had

0:45:420:45:50

failed. I think he was an

interesting figure in that sense, he

0:45:500:45:53

understood that. The problem with

the Tories at the moment is they are

0:45:530:45:56

flitting between either the position

of saying let's double dog on free

0:45:560:46:00

market dog marks we have not sold it

properly, or to say the system isn't

0:46:000:46:03

working. -- dogma. And that was the

camp he was in.

Do you accept that,

0:46:030:46:09

this has been more about state

intervention, un-Tory, but you have

0:46:090:46:12

said yourself...

The rhetoric, not

the policy.

The rhetoric, then, in

0:46:120:46:16

that case. If somebody like Nick

Timothy who has gone, was seen as

0:46:160:46:20

the brain, if you like, behind the

policy, do you need a person like

0:46:200:46:24

that to actually

Absolutely. I think

Owen - I think some of the policies

0:46:240:46:30

were recently interventionist. Ed

Miliband's policy, price freeze,

0:46:300:46:35

kicking corporate governments around

boardrooms and more shareholders

0:46:350:46:38

having greater rights, workers on

the board, etc, all of that was very

0:46:380:46:43

un-Tory and certainly very

unlibertarian Tory and you needed a

0:46:430:46:47

character like Nick Timothy who

fervently believed in it to drive it

0:46:470:46:54

through, quite dogmaticically and

swatting opposition aside.

Do you

0:46:540:46:57

need that sort of force behind

politics,er is eial, everybody says

0:46:570:47:01

it is about the 24-hour media. Is it

important to have that narrative

0:47:010:47:04

going through in a main or the

Government?

You need a vision and

0:47:040:47:07

this Government doesn't have a clear

vision whatsoever. The problem now

0:47:070:47:10

with the Government is it is about

day-to-day survival rather than a

0:47:100:47:13

long of had term clear project for

the country which meets its

0:47:130:47:17

challenges, obviously it went

horribly wrong for the Tories in

0:47:170:47:20

that snap election but you did have

someone like Nick Timothy who z I

0:47:200:47:25

mean it was disastrous in terms of

the dementia tax and election

0:47:250:47:30

falling to pieces but in the overall

society we have lived in, yes it has

0:47:300:47:35

been stripped away completely and it

is about how Theresa May survives,

0:47:350:47:38

will she make it to the end of the

day.

They shaping events the current

0:47:380:47:42

team now, and if it is a broader

circle, they have managed to keep

0:47:420:47:45

Theresa May in power at times when

people have said it'll all fall

0:47:450:47:49

over?

And that is the number one

goal of number ten at the moment,

0:47:490:47:53

keep Theresa May in power and

somehow get Brexit through without

0:47:530:47:57

the Tory Party imploding, I think

events also shame personle. The

0:47:570:48:03

single most important person,

Tuilagily the most important person

0:48:030:48:07

apart from Mrs May, is Mr May, when

history books are written, the role

0:48:070:48:12

and effect and guidance he gave to

the Prime Minister will be huge. We

0:48:120:48:14

see very little of him. But

certainly her most important

0:48:140:48:17

advisor. After that it is Gavin

Barwell the Chief of Staff and Gavin

0:48:170:48:22

was chosen very much because he was

nice guy Gavin. Tory MPs like him.

0:48:220:48:27

He doesn't have an enemy in the

House of Commons, you need that to

0:48:270:48:30

build bridges and keep the PM where

she is, try hard it get a minuscule

0:48:300:48:36

policy, through like a stamp duty

cut on first time buyers but really,

0:48:360:48:39

the game is survival.

Thank you.

0:48:390:48:42

The new Defence Secretary,

Gavin Williamson, has been warned

0:48:420:48:44

that he faces a "substantial

rebellion" if the Government allows

0:48:440:48:46

any more cuts to the Armed Forces.

0:48:460:48:49

Mr Williamson was facing questions

for the first time in his new role

0:48:490:48:54

in the House of Commons yesterday

and he was left in little doubt

0:48:540:48:57

about the widespread anger

among his colleagues over further

0:48:570:48:59

possible defence savings.

0:48:590:49:00

Let's look at some highlights:

0:49:000:49:01

What we have in terms of our

national security and capability

0:49:040:49:09

review is the opportunity to step

back, look at the threats and

0:49:090:49:15

challenges that this country faces,

whether it is from cyber, whether it

0:49:150:49:20

is more conventional threats,

and make sure we have the right

0:49:200:49:29

resources in place so that we can

deliver for our Armed Forces.

0:49:290:49:32

It was surreal last week to hear

the Permanent Private Secretary

0:49:320:49:34

say that the man in charge had made

no formal pre-Budget request

0:49:340:49:37

to the Chancellor for more money.

0:49:370:49:39

It is one thing to ask and not

get, Mr Speaker, but

0:49:390:49:42

another not even to bother asking.

0:49:420:49:45

Above all, will he speak

to his right honourable friend

0:49:450:49:47

the Chief Whip to remind him

0:49:470:49:49

if he does not do so he will face

a very substantial rebellion.

0:49:490:49:53

It might seem illogical

to have a defence

0:49:530:49:55

capability review that could

decrease our capabilities at a time

0:49:550:49:57

when we need to do everything we can

0:49:570:49:59

to increase the fighting power

of our Armed Forces.

0:49:590:50:03

I think my honourable

friend makes a very

0:50:030:50:05

valuable point in terms of making

sure we have the right

0:50:050:50:07

capability for all our Armed Forces.

0:50:070:50:12

I am taking the opportunity to look

at all the work that has been done,

0:50:120:50:18

and making my own judgment of

the best way to go forward on this.

0:50:180:50:22

Joining me from Central Lobby

in Parliament is the Chairman

0:50:220:50:24

of the Defence Select Committee,

Julian Lewis.

0:50:240:50:30

How do you think the new Defence

Secretary did?

I think he got off to

0:50:300:50:34

a good start. He showed himself to

be open minded about the central

0:50:340:50:39

issue - which is: Are we spending

enough on defence. He knows the

0:50:390:50:43

answer to, that not nearly enough.

Is he going to do anything about it?

0:50:430:50:49

We had Jonny Mercer here yesterday

saying he is not prepared to see

0:50:490:50:55

another degredation in this

country's budget for the military.

0:50:550:50:58

So say all of us. The problem is we

are now spending barely the Nato

0:50:580:51:04

minimum of 2% GDP on defence. The

last time we faced the scenario of

0:51:040:51:10

an acertive Russia, coupled with a

terrorist threat, the 1980s. Do you

0:51:100:51:15

know what we were spending then? Not

2%, 3%, generally 5% of GDP on

0:51:150:51:22

defence, a similar sum to what we

were spending on education and

0:51:220:51:24

health.

Why aren't you advocating 5%

of GDP being spent on defence, you

0:51:240:51:31

are only asking for 3?

I think a 50%

uplift in the defence budget would

0:51:310:51:35

be a pretty good start. The reality

is now we are spending nearly four

0:51:350:51:39

times on health what we spend on

defence and two-and-a-half times

0:51:390:51:44

what we spend on education what we

spend on defence and six times on

0:51:440:51:47

welfare what we spend on defence and

what's more for every £3 we spend on

0:51:470:51:52

defence, we have to spend £1 on

international aid. So defence has

0:51:520:51:56

fallen too far down our scale of

national priorities.

So, are you one

0:51:560:51:59

of the 30 MPs who are prepared to

hold the Government's feet it the

0:51:590:52:03

fire on the defence as Johnny Mercer

said yesterday?

Signed his letter at

0:52:030:52:09

the first asking Avon been pressing

now, until I'm blue in the face, as

0:52:090:52:14

well as in the ideology, that we

need to get defence up the spending

0:52:140:52:19

order of priority.

But how far are

you prepared...

3% is a start.

How

0:52:190:52:24

far are you prepared to go. Holding

the Government's feet to the fire is

0:52:240:52:27

one thing and as you say you have

been talking about this until you

0:52:270:52:31

are blue in the case, how can you

ensure that those cuts don't go

0:52:310:52:36

ahead?

Well, I think it remains to

be seen whether the cuts would be

0:52:360:52:42

put in a situation in the Commons

that would have to result in a vote,

0:52:420:52:48

but I cannot see people who think as

I do, and as Jonny does and as James

0:52:480:52:57

Grey and Leo Doherty, who I think

you showed in hour cuts, can't see

0:52:570:53:01

us voting for ku.s the main thing,

it took the previous Secretary of

0:53:010:53:05

State, right up until the last few

weeks in office, before he started

0:53:050:53:09

to talk in terms of 2% was a base

and not aing target or a egg Crookes

0:53:090:53:13

whereas the -- not a ceiling,

whereas the new Defence Secretary

0:53:130:53:18

stated in his first outing that this

was his stance. And so, he's got to

0:53:180:53:21

build on that. He may not be a

defence expert, but he is a pretty

0:53:210:53:28

good infighter and an infighter is

what we need to get the defence

0:53:280:53:31

budget back to whering it ought to

be.

I suppose you see this, do you,

0:53:310:53:36

as a point of maximum leverage?

Because your colleagues and you are

0:53:360:53:38

speaking out now? I know you have

consistently, over the last few

0:53:380:53:44

years, the Spending Review has been

delayed until January or February,

0:53:440:53:47

the Budget was last week, you know

the Government has a fragile Commons

0:53:470:53:50

'majority. Do you think you will get

your way?

Well, we have been trying

0:53:500:53:53

to get this case across for a very

long time, as you say. The previous

0:53:530:53:58

Defence Secretary said that the

review was being held, because of an

0:53:580:54:04

intensification of the threat. Now,

if you have an intensifying threat,

0:54:040:54:08

that means you have got to spend

more money on de-Phelps, not make

0:54:080:54:12

defence cuts. So it's not a question

of trying to blackmail the

0:54:120:54:17

Government when its back is in a

corner...

But it might work

It's a

0:54:170:54:23

question of persistently carrying on

with the campaign, in the hope that

0:54:230:54:26

we will, at last, begin to make

serious progress.

All right, thank

0:54:260:54:29

you.

0:54:290:54:30

Let's return now to our main

story, the row about

0:54:300:54:32

the Government's Brexit reports -

edited versions of which have

0:54:320:54:35

been given to the Brexit

Select Committee.

0:54:350:54:37

Labour has managed to secure

an urgent question on the issue

0:54:370:54:39

which ministers have been responding

to in the last few minutes.

0:54:390:54:44

Let's take a look:

0:54:440:54:48

Mr Speaker this is not a game. This

is the most important set of

0:54:480:54:51

decision this is country has taken

for decades. They need to be

0:54:510:54:54

subjected to proper scrutiny. In my

experience, the biggest mistakes are

0:54:540:54:59

made when decisions are not

scrutinised. Can I remind the

0:54:590:55:03

minister and the Secretary of State

that until this House passed the

0:55:030:55:07

motion on 1st November, ministers

routinely claimed that these

0:55:070:55:10

analysis were extensive and there

are at thattive. -- and

0:55:100:55:17

authoritative. They say they have

put them together. In September they

0:55:170:55:22

answered a free dom of information

question.

We were clear that the

0:55:220:55:29

documents did not exist in the form

requested. We've collated

0:55:290:55:33

information in the way that doesn't

include some sensitive material but

0:55:330:55:36

the documents which he freely admits

he hasn't seen, do not contain

0:55:360:55:39

redactions. It is noticeable that

the original suggestion of

0:55:390:55:43

redactions in the debate on 1st

November, came from him. And came

0:55:430:55:49

from him speaking for the front

bench of the Opposition. He said in

0:55:490:55:51

the debate he had accepted all along

with the Government should not put

0:55:510:55:55

into the public domain any

information that woop undermine our

0:55:550:55:58

negotiating position and that he

accepts that there is a level of

0:55:580:56:02

detail and confidential issues and

tactics that should not be

0:56:020:56:04

discussed.

0:56:040:56:14

Robin Walker and Kier sfarmer there.

0:56:160:56:19

-- Kier Starmer.

0:56:190:56:21

There's just time before we go

to find out the answer to our quiz -

0:56:210:56:24

Douglas Chapman, the SNP MP

for Dunfermline & West Fife has

0:56:240:56:27

suggested that we should

have an ambassador to where?

0:56:270:56:28

We'll ask Douglas because we have

him down the line. We can talk about

0:56:330:56:36

it. But do you know what the answer

is, Owen?

I'll go for a wild card,

0:56:360:56:41

is it Mars?

No, funnily enough. That

got a laugh out of Douglas Chapman.

0:56:410:56:46

Can you give us the correct answer?

It is on the actic.

Why do you want

0:56:460:56:53

an ambassador to the Arctic?

To

create a greater focus around Arctic

0:56:530:56:57

issues. I think we had our

contoastic conference in Edinburgh

0:56:570:57:03

this time last week talking about

how we can collaborate more with the

0:57:030:57:07

Arctic nations to secure issues

around the environment and energy

0:57:070:57:12

and you know there are economic

opportunities there, that we need to

0:57:120:57:14

manage and steward in a way that

protects the environment. So there

0:57:140:57:19

is lots of different reasons, and as

you have discussed with Julian

0:57:190:57:23

Lewis, on issues around defence and

security, so there is a whole range

0:57:230:57:26

of issues we think, having an Arctic

ambassador would make sure there was

0:57:260:57:31

a complete focus on the area and

making sure that our relationships

0:57:310:57:35

with Arctic countries are spot on.

And where would this embassy be?

0:57:350:57:40

Well, I think it's more a post for

an individual.

What about you?

Well,

0:57:400:57:45

thanks very much for the offer of a

job...

Not in my gift actually,

0:57:450:57:51

anyway...

I have an important job

being an MP. But nevertheless, there

0:57:510:57:56

is eminently qualified people out

there who can fulfil this role and

0:57:560:57:59

while we do have ambassadors for the

UK in the likes of Norway and

0:57:590:58:03

Iceland and so on, somebody who is

focussed on Arctic issues, would be

0:58:030:58:07

a great bonus and would give us a

level of credibility amongst other

0:58:070:58:12

Arctic nations to make sure they

knew we were serious about taking

0:58:120:58:16

the Arctic seriously.

So when is

this debate?

Tomorrow, 11.00. I'm

0:58:160:58:19

hoping we will hear from the

minister, and while I'm not

0:58:190:58:24

expecting him to give a big thumbs

up and a big yes to this, I hope it

0:58:240:58:29

puts the idea in his head and that

we can make some progress over the

0:58:290:58:32

next few years.

Right, Douglas

Chapman, thank you very much. Do you

0:58:320:58:35

like the idea?

It is a bit nippy, as

it is. I have cold ears in on the

0:58:350:58:41

way.

You need the correct clothes.

That's what they say. Douglas

0:58:410:58:45

Chapman thank you very much and

thanks to all of my guests today in

0:58:450:58:48

the warm studio, particularly to you

Owen Jones for being guest of the

0:58:480:58:51

day.

0:58:510:59:01

Jo Coburn is joined by the author and commentator Owen Jones to review the government's decision to handover part of their Brexit analysis documents and whether the full papers will be released. Plus they take a look at the Momentum group and how it is shaping the Labour party, as well examine the key players behind the scenes in Number 10 in the Westminster Village series.


Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS