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

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS