29/11/2017 Daily Politics

Morning folks - welcome

to the Daily Politics.

Ahead of the latest deadline

in the Brexit negotiations,

there are new signs that the

two sides are close to agreement,

or have even agreed, on

how much money we'll pay the EU

to meet our post-Brexit obligations.

Does this have the makings

of a breakthrough in Brussels?

With talk of the divorce costin

40 billion euros or more,

Nigel Farage claims Christmas has

come early for the EU.

He joins us live.

Theresa May won't be at Prime

Minister's Questions to talk about

it, her deputy Damian Green is

standing in from noon - despite

being under investigation over

allegations of sexual impropriety.

And forget Brexit, we'll be talking

about the other big issue facing

the nation - the biggest -

should we get a day off to mark

the wedding of Harry and Meghan?

All that in the next 90 minutes.

And with me for all of it, two

politicians who know their Article

50 from their Acquis Communautaire,

as they say in the EU - they're

both former MEPs who hopped off

what the papers used to call

the Brussels gravy train

and arrived here in Westminster.

Just in time too.

It's the Brexit Minister and

Conservative peer, Martin Callanan,

and for Labour the Shadow Treasury

Minister, Anneliese Dodds.

First, today, Westminster is agog

with speculation this morning that

Britain and the EU have pretty much

agreed how much the UK should pay

the EU to meet ongoing

post-Brexit obligations,

thereby allowing the Brexit talks

to move on to a future trade

arrangement in the new year.

The actual sum is still a bit vague,

with some reports saying it's

as high as 60 billion euros -

or is that pounds - or as low

as 45 billion euros or pounds.

Some newspapers this morning are

unclear either way.

Safe to say, it will be at least

double the £20 billion Mrs May

offered in her Florence speech.

Here's Lizzie with the details.

Let's start by talking about

our annual contribution to the EU.

Last year, that was £9.4 billion

or £181 million per week.

Theresa May has long said "the days

of Britain making vast contributions

to the EU every year will end".

But the British government has

said in future it may want to make

smaller annual payments to

participate in EU agencies

such as EURATOM.

Aside from our annual

contributions, though,

before Brexit the EU wants to settle

the UK's so-called divorce bill.

What's included in the bill is

contested but there'll be the UK's

share of outstanding commitments

from previous EU budgets, pensions

for EU officials, and what the

EU calls contingent liabilities.

In her Florence speech in September,

Theresa May promised no country

would lose out from Brexit

in the current EU budget round

that runs from 2014-2020.

That was interpreted as meaning the

UK would pay up to 20 billion euros

- but she also said the UK would

"honour commitments" it had made

during our membership.

And today, it's been reported that

at last week's meeting

of the inner Brexit cabinet,

ministers agreed to boost the UK's

offer in order to help

move talks on to trade.

The financial framework that's

said to have been agreed could lead

to an eventual bill

between 40 and 50 billion euros.

But on this most sensitive

of subjects, Downing Street

and Brussels are still playing down

the idea of a final settlement

having been agreed with just

under three weeks to go

until the crucial meeting

of the European Council.

Andrew.

Thanks Lizzie.

In a minute we'll speak to Nigel

Farage in Brussels. Let's go to

Martin Callan nan, the Government

minister on breaks the in the

Lord's?

If this sum of 40 billion plus,

what's it for?

At the moment, no

sum's been agreed.

When the sum is,

what's it for?

To settle outstanding

liabilities. Commitments the EU

incurred during our membership which

lasts for years, sometimes decades.

There was a detailed argument to be

had, we've purchase Rioficials in

Brussels negotiatingsing thissings

going through the commitment line by

line, what is a legal commitment.

Whether we are responsible for it it

or our share of it. There he is the

money we've to get back from our

share of capital in the EIB. It is a

detailed negotiation. Nothing has

yet been agreed.

40 billion plus is

a lot of money? Bigger than our

defence budget?

That's not all in

one lump. It is spread out over

decades.

What's a big chunk of this

40 billion? It is the people's money

who are watching this programme.

Give them an idea of where it's

going?

A lot is to aid for the

former central and Eastern European

countries, decommissioning nuclear

power stations, structural issues

etc, things which have been agreed,

the spending of which doesn't take

place in any one year.

We're giving

aid to Eastern Europe even though

we've an age budget separate?

That

is for poorer countries. There's a

negotiation going on at the

moment...

You've said that three

times already. We understand that.

The point is, nothing's been agreed

yet. We want to move forward

together to make sure any agreement

in December, we'll know in the next

few weeks, will take us forward to

the important stage which is the

next stage of trade talks.

This is

separate from the amount of money

that we continue to pay every year

until the end of the current budget

process which is 2019?

Yes.

We

continue the pay the money we pay

about £10 billion.

It is a cap of

yearly...

Does it cover the

transition period?

That is the

transition period.

No, I'm talking

about the current budget process

ends 2019, the same year we are

coming out.

It ends in 2020.

There

is a transition period the

Government wants to negotiate as

well. Does this sum of money we're

talking about cover the transition

period?

That's still to be

negotiated. That's what we want to

get on to talk about. I think it is

expected we'll meet our budget

liabilities during the transition

period. That was in the first phase

of the Florence speech.

The 40

billion or whatever it is that's

being talked about is in addition to

continuing to pay our budget

obligations and to paying the budget

during a transition period?

If that

is what is agreed in the talks that

we haven't had yet. We want to talk

about transition periods. It is very

important we get on to talk about

that early next year.

The transition

period is not covered by the sums of

money talked about today?

The Prime

Minister said we'd meet our on

lickations during the transition

period. If the agreement is we would

carry on under current terms.

It is

important we get this right. We

carry on paying our membership fee

up until we leave. We then have a

transition period of perhaps a

couple of years and then we pay our

ongoing obligations. The point I'm

trying to establish, it's 40 billion

or whatever plus the transition

period obligations?

Part of our

ongoing long-term commitments will,

of course, transpire during the

period of our remaining membership.

And our transition period. That will

be covered under the yearly payments

agreed as part of the ongoing normal

EU budget process. It is a very

complicated system.

It is. We'll

have to pay another 20 billion in

membership fees until it expires,

net, 10 billion or so a year.

That

is agreed for the transition period.

We've the transition period?

If that

is whats agreed. Some of the

commitments take place during the

remainder of our budget period. If

you're building a bridge or

something and you pay a certain

amount per year over the next ten

years, clearly some of that will

fall within our remaining membership

period and transition period.

Let's

go to Nigel Farage. It looks like

it's £40 billion or euros plus over

a number of years. Isn't that a

price worth paying to meet our

obligations and get to the end game

you've always wanted which is out of

the EU? Well, I guess he didn't

hear. That Nigel Farage, can you

hear me? It's Andrew Neil here in

London. Nigel farrage? Clearly not.

We often go live to Beijing but not

to Brussels. Clearly the problem.

How much would Labour be prepared to

pay?

The whole point of this debate

is the question you posed. What is

this for? What we should have agreed

with the EU is what the principles

are for generating this sum. We

don't know what it's for. When we're

bandying around these amounts...

They have agreed what the

obligations are. That's why there's

such a range of money being put on

it. They have agreed our ongoing

obligations. Would you be prepared

to pay a sum of at least £40

billion?

We

We don't have

information about what this is for.

They haven't told the public or

Parliament. How can we make an

assessment about whether this is

right or

not. If it transpires or

ongoing obligations the total over

ten or 20 years, 40 billion or so,

would you be prepared to pay that?

We can't major a judgment until we

know what's in those commitments.

That's the problem with this whole

debate. We wanted the Government to

negotiate openly with the commission

about which commitments they would

want to fund. Around EURATOM the

Government said they didn't want to

be part of that. We want to know

what we should be spending on.

Do

you think we should meet our ongoing

commitments to regional developments

in Eastern Europe?

We want to be

responsible country.

So you would do

that?

We don't know what the other.

Do you think we should help meet our

pension onliations to the EU? We

don't know what terms we are looking

at.

To be fair, we can talk about

raw figures until the cows come

home. Until we know...

You can't

give us any idea of figures?

The

Government isn't tell us the basis.

You know some of the obligations.

You can't give us an idea of what

you would regard as acceptable?

We

don't know what we're paying for. If

we had that in front of us. We don't

know what the parameters of the

pensions is. We want to look at the

detail. It is taxpayers' money. We

want to scrutinise it properly. We

don't have the methodology being

used for this. We said that from the

very start.

You've been consistent

in not giving us any idea of what it

will cost. Can you hear me now?

Yes,

I can.

My question to you was, it

looks like we're talking about 40

billion plus in pounds or euros. It

will be over a long period of time.

It will meet some of our ongoing

obligations each after we leave.

Isn't that a sum worth paying to

reach the end game you've always

wanted, which is to get out?

The

first thing to say is we voted to

leave. We want a clean break, not a

relationship that can go for

decades, certainly in the case of

pensions. Secondly, even if we've

been offered tariff-free access to

the single market in return which at

this stage we haven't. Each if we

had been offered that, it is not

worth nearly £50 billion. No deal is

better than a bad deal. This is a

very bad deal indeed.

How do you

know that. Most businesses are

terrified of the idea of no deal. Of

crashing out. They would rather have

a deal?

Look, there are lots of

different voices of business. Yes, I

understand the big Corp rats always

defend the European Union structure.

I'm reminded they were the people

who thought joining the euro was a

good idea.

They provide most of our

exports. They are worried if we

crash out, this will harm their

ability to export. That's

legitimate, is it not?

Do you know

something, with no deal and with

tariffs being put on British

manufacturers, the movement of

sterling against the euro, every

month, is bigger than the percentage

we pay in tariffs. Just look at the

amount of business America does.

China does with the EU on World

Trade Organisation rules. The other

big thing here is we keep obsessing

about our trade relationship with

Europe. Look, 85% of the global

economy is outside the euro zone.

Another reason for a clean quick

break is to start opening ourselves

up to other trade deals.

45% of our

exports go to the EU. How much of

America's exports go to the EU?

These are smaller amounts. These are

growing #345shing9s. It is still

$300 billion worth. Every single

year. The American's sell into the

European single market without

having a trade deal of every kind.

It is about $1 in 10 rather than $1

in 2. It is much more important to

us?

You can look at the other way

around. 80% of the entire British

economy is not involved in overseas

trade of any kind at all. Yet, if we

sign up to a transition deal we'll

be bound by the rules of the single

market. There are lots of advantages

to breaking out of this.

Finally,

what's happened? None of your Tory

eurosceptic friends are saying

anything about this. They seem

content to go along with it. Why is

that?

They have their big chance. In

a few minutes, it is Prime

Minister's Questions, I hope

somebody on the back benches say we

did not vote to pay more money to

the EU. We vetted to stop paying

money. -- we vote the to stop

paying. We

We have heard from some

Eurosceptics like Iain Duncan Smith.

I'm not one to put people off

watching PMQs. No doubt our viewers

will follow your rallying cry. The

Prime Minister said we were coming

to the end of making vast

contributions to the ow. When?

It is

difficult for me to comment in

detail, when we have an agreement,

at the moment officials are there

negotiating line by line on the

details of the period and when we

have number, a final agreement we

can talk about the detail then. It

depend on what your definition is.

It is not the detail it is the

principle.

We pay roughly 10 billion

a year, 20 billion gross into the EU

budget.

When does the vast it is

likely to be front loaded, so when

do the vast contributions come to an

end?

It depend what your definition

is?

At least ten billion a year.

It

is impossible to say until we have

Andre Ayew dream on the exact

amount.

You keep referring to the

Florence speech, when we asked about

that you can't tell us.

Depends what

the definition of vast is S we will

be paying less than current

contribution.

When the Prime

Minister said vast, what did she

mean?

It means we will agree a deal

which will provide certainty into

the long-term and our payments will

taper off to eventually zero.

That is the first time I have heard

vast described like that, but never

mind.

So you don't want to put any figure

on it at all, you want to talk about

what would be right. Can I clarify

other parts of Labour's position. It

is it the position we should remain

in customs union.

On the first bit

of the question we do want clarity

about what this sum is composed and

that is what we are not getting

unfortunately from Government. Round

the customs union, so we have said

clearly we want all options to be

open to the Government, we think

they have wrongly, they have wrongly

said they don't want to stay in a

customs union, they don't want to

stay in the single market.

If you

had the option of staying would you

take it?

If that was the best thing

for the British economy, along with

the other elms of any negotiation we

would be open to looking at it. We

have remained open minded, it is to

be fair, what we have had from the

Government is months and months of

failing to deal with what are basic

issues...

February or March, I am

trying to ask you what the position

is, do you still want to be members

of the singlet market?

If we were in

a position where we could a good

deal with tariff free access, where

we could keep a frictionless trading

arrange. . We would try to get it.

Do you want to be a member of the

single market?

We can't assess that

at the moment, because to be fair,

to be fair... Hang on a minute. We

are not all over the place, let us

be clear about where we are, we have

been talking about the exit bill,

the Government still hasn't sorted

out arrangement for EU citizens.

I

am trying to quiz Labour. It is only

fair both sides should be quizzed.

Diane Abbott has called for a

referendum, on whatever deal is in

the end done, do you agree with

that?

Think there needs to be more

democracy. A simple question, do you

agree? At the moment it would be

difficult to envisage how that would

fit in with the he dual.

So that is

a no.

We have to have a meaningful

alternative.

Would you argue with

that or not?

Think until we know how

it would work I can't argue for it,

I wouldn't know what the other

options would be, what the

alternative would be if people voted

no.

This issue, briefly, if there

are no great trade talks, if trade

talks don't prodouse a good deal, is

this money off the table?

Nothing is

agreed until everything is a agreed.

So it is. That was a shrug for

people not watching the screen.

Nothing is agreed until everything

is agreed is a basic principle of

negotiations we will stick by that.

As close as I can expect to an

answer from anyone this morning.

As close as I can expect to

an answer from anyone this morning.

News that Prince Harry

and Meghan Markle are engaged -

well, it's the first I've heard

of it but if you say so -

has led to calls for the government

to give the nation a day off.

Downing Street says there's no

precedent for an extra public

holiday, and the Prime Minister said

last night that she thought simply

seeing two young people in love

would sufficiently please

the nation.

The Conservative MP Andrew Rosindell

joins us now from College Green.

You think there should be a bank

holiday, why?

Well, I think we do

this better than any other country,

our Royal Family is a great advert

for Britain. To miss this

opportunity, of having a great

national celebration, I think would

be a great shame. We had a bank

holiday when William and Kate were

married, of course when Charles and

Diana and of course when Princess

Anne was parried so there is a

precedence, let us have a great

celebration next year and make it

something that the whole country can

unite behind.

But the Prime

Minister, your Prime Minister says

that just seeing them in love is

enough. Not enough for you?

Of

course it is. It is fantastic, it is

great new, brightened even's week.

Let us make it a huge national

celebration. There a lot...

Why?

Harry is sixth in line to the

throne. He is about to become

seventh. He is marrying an American,

a talented American star let, why is

that...

No country does this better

than Britain. Princess Anne and

Prince Charles had bank holidays for

their wed, there are only two

children of Prince Charles, so,

there is a precedent for this. I

think that the British public would

rise to the occasion its shows the

rest of the world what Britain is,

which a constitutional monarchy

where the country queue nighted

above party politics. It is a great

opportunity for Britain. Let us take

it, make it a national celebration,

let everybody get involved and make

it something very special.

But win

son is going to be packed. It will

be packed anywhere whether it is a

public holiday north. It costs 2.3

billion to have a public holiday,

where is the national celebration in

that? I think you need to look at it

from a different angle. It is it is

great for the economy, it is great

for tourism. I won't be great for

the economy it it costs 2.3 billion.

I don't think it does. You are not

looking at the overall gain for the

country in having a huge national

celebration of the that kind.

Whenever we have had a jubilee it

has been fantastic for the country.

Let us seize the opportunity. Let us

celebrate a Royal Wedding but let

the country take part in it.

All

right. Thank you for that.

What do you think?

Labour said we

wanted to have four more bank

holiday, we feel it is important to

bring people together round national

celebration, as I understand there

is a process though that needs to be

gone through to consider any

applications, but I think that is

something that should be looked at.

We need to have more moment of

national celebration.

What about

you? You can speak individually?

These matters of state are way above

my pay grade. I am sure the Prime

Minister will want to look at it.

There hasn't always been a bank

holiday for a Royal Wedding. People

will celebrate in their own way, I

am not sure we need a day's holiday

to celebrate it.

am not sure we need a day's

holiday to celebrate it.

The news that Harry and Meghan

will marry next May could be a shot

in the arm for several important

British industries.

Shops selling DVD copies of

the legal drama Suits, for instance.

And the British pottery industry,

which is gearing up for a new range

of commemorative crockery.

So much so that new Defence

Secretary Gavin Williamson

is probably regretting giving up

running his own pottery

firm in Staffordshire.

There he is.

He looks much happier doing that

than running the Ministry

of Defence, doesn't he.

Well, the Daily Politics has never

seen a bandwagon it didn't

want to climb aboard,

so for this week only

we've commissioned this.

There's Harry, Meghan, and I'm

on there too for some reason.

And joyful monarchists and sulking

republicans alike can win one -

all you have to do to be

in with a chance is tell us

when this happened -

and a warning, this film

contains flashing images.

# Stop right now

# Thank you very much

# I need somebody

with the human touch

# Hey you...

For the first time in his life he's

got to face questions for the abuses

of human rights that he committed.

A bill will be introduced to remove

the right of hereditary peers to sit

and vote in the House of Lords.

# Never ever have I ever felt so low

# When you gonna take me out

of this black hole...

# So come on, let me entertain you

# Let me entertain you.

It's not a day for sound bites.

I feel the hand of history

upon our shoulders.

# We are gonna be

# Forever, you and me

# I'm a Barbie girl...

Come on!

# Life in plastic, it's fantastic.

It's sold.

# Imagination, life is your creation

# Come on Barbie, let's go party

# I'm a Barbie girl,

in a Barbie world. #

You get really quality music on this

show. To be in with a chance of

winning send your answer to our

special quiz e-mail. Entries must

arrive by 12.30 today. You can see

the full terms and conditions for

Guess the Year on the website.

Guess the Year on the website.

Not long to go until midday -

there's Big Ben, and that means not

long until Prime Minister's

Questions.

As the Prime Minister

is in the Middle East,

her number two, Damian Green,

will be at the despatch box,

despite being investigated over

allegations of sexual impropriety,

which he denies.

Laura Kuenssber is here as always.

Emily Thornberry will appear for

Labour, that is how it works. . She

will. She has also done this before,

so neither are strangers to the

despatch box, but it will have a

very different tone, and of course a

different political import, because

of course, they are not trading

blows in the same way, because they

don't have the same status. There is

another awkwardness about Damian

Green the First Secretary of State

doing this today, because of course,

he as you suggested under

investigation after allegations of

him making inappropriate advances to

a young journalist and an allegation

of pawn being found on his computer

some years ago. To decide he hasn't

done it would have been telling from

Downing Street but still for him to

do it when the results of that

investigation are still unknown, it

is a bit of an awkward... He has

been out of the public eye since the

allegations broke.

He hasn't been

hiding away, he was next to the

Prime Minister at last week's Prime

Minister's Questions if I recall

correctly. During the budget he was

round. He mid a tread to the DUP

conference in Belfast as well. Over

the weekend, which is a key

political event for the Tories now,

so he hasn't been hiding away,

whether we can read anything into

that about whether Number Ten thinks

that he is going to be cleared,

frankly who knows? For them to hide

him away would suggest they knew

exactly what was going to happen.

PMQs takes place today when

Westminster, the media in

Westminster would seem pretty sure

that although the sum of money is

still within a range, that some kind

of agreement is going to be done for

the December EU summit on our

divorce bill?

I am sure that is what

I understand, and as the sequence of

events here is quite important to

understand, so, last Monday, the UK

cabinet Brexit committee gave

Theresa May the green light to go to

Brussels with a hypothetically much

more generous offer thought to be

around the 40 billion euroish mark.

The Cabinet gave her that

permission, Olly ribbons her top EU

official, her sherpa took that offer

to Brussels at the back end of last

week, that suggestion was given a

broad welcome in Brussels, yes, that

is something we can work with, and a

broad range and a broad framework of

a bill of somewhere between 40 and

50 billion euros has in theory been

signed off. Now there is a lot of

hard haggling to come. No question

about that, nobody will go anywhere

near it officially, but one of the

important things politically is the

mood among Brexiteers mainly,

including those round the Cabinet

table has changed in recent months

so we have not seen and I don't

think we will see really a huge up

surge of sort of euro kept sticks

saying this is not acceptable. The

public view of course may be

different, but in terms of the

Brexit bill being a complete

political nightmare for Theresa May,

there has been a change in mood in

the last couple of months and I

don't think we will see it have huge

immediate consequences for her,

there is an urgent question on

justice issues straight after Prime

Minister's Questions today.

Who will take that?

Liz Truss. I

will expect she will say no

agreement until anything is a

agreed. I won't get into figures but

she might let something slip.

There has been an astonishing level

of discipline after last week's

Brexit cabinet committee. Whatever

they agreed in there it held. It

really really head.

The significance

is that it opens the door, there are

still a little matter of the

Northern Ireland...

That is not

settled either. Absolutely.

If that

can be, you think of the money is

done, other things will fall into

place. If that happens, we move on

then to discuss the future

relationship between the EU and the

UK.

As one minister described, it a

divorcing couple fighting over who

gets the vinyl collection and pot

plants then on to the long-term

custody of the children. It is an

over used met foretalking about

divorce and the future. That is it

in terms of understanding what it

is. I wouldn't be too confident that

there is definitely going to be

agreement at this summit. The money

being broadly settled is a vital

part to unlocking this decision of

whether they move on or not. But, it

does not mean we're definitely going

to move on. Ireland is still an

enormous issue. There are stumbling

blocks over the European Court of

Justice. To child benefit. That was

an issue in renotionaways.

Let's see

what happens in PMQS

I have been asked to reply on behalf

of my Right Honourable friend the

Prime Minister who is abroad in the

Middle East furtherering our

interests in a region that is

fundamental to national security and

prosperity. We wish Prince Harry and

making an market happiness in their

future. Today is the 150 #9th

anniversary of the RAF. The whole

house will want to express our great

today to their service to this

country.

The First Secretary's

congratulations to Prince Harry on

his engagement. Thanks to the

outstanding efforts by the Labour

council in North East Lincolnshire,

the Government has included the

Greater Grimsby project in its

industrial strategy document. But we

need more than a by line in a glossy

magazine to make its potential a

reality. Can the First Secretary

said when the Government will put

its money where its mouth is so we

can get going.

Beneath this, I can

welcome the fact the honourable lady

is welcoming the industrial

strategy. As she should do. It will

be good for Grimsby. It will be good

for many communities around this

country. Particularly those who may

feel in the past, they have been

left behind. I'm happy to assure her

that the industrial strategy will

come with Monet thatched as she will

have heard in my Right Honourable

Friend the Chancellor's budget.

Making a success of the South Tees

mayoral development corporation is

vital for Teesside. He was die

lighted toing with Welcome the Prime

Minister to my constituency this

summer. Will he join me in

recognising the scale of opportunity

the MDC makes and redefine Teesside

to the world. And the new money

awarded in the budget is only the

start of the process on delivering

its huge potential to change?

I can

see my honourable friend is getting

the hang of questions already. I'm

happy to assure him that we are

committed to working with him and

indeed, the Tees valley mayor, Ben

Houcham who's doing so much to

develop the area. We want to support

him and the South Tees develop

corporation. As he says, the

Chancellor announce £123 million of

new funding in the budget. We

recognise the significant economic

opportunities in that area.

Let me

join the Secretary of State in

congratulating the RAF on its

anniversary and congratulating

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle on

their engagement. That's one

American couple we'll be delighted

to see holding hands. I'm sure

Prince Harry, the patron of Rugby

Football League will be joining all

of us in supporting the England team

in the World Cup Final on Saturday.

I will be waving my St George's

flag. On a much sadder note, I'm

sure the whole House will join me in

sending our thoughts to all those

killed and injured in Friday's

horrific attack on the mosque in

north Sinai. It is a bitter reminder

that the vast majority of the

victims of Jihadi terror are

Muslims. Before I get on with my

questions, can I ask First Secretary

a point of principle. Is he happy to

be held to the same standards in

Government as he has to others in

opposition?

Yes, I am. All ministers

should respect and debate the

ministerial code and I absolutely

think that that's a very important

part of confidence in public life.

Can I also echo her thoughts about

the terrible events in Sinai and,

also say that she may find it

difficult to wave the St George's

flag but I will be doing so for the

English rugby league team... As a

Welsh rugby fan, I may find it even

more difficult than her. But I will

be doing so as well.

The First

Secretary looked rather perturbed at

my line of questioning. He doesn't

need to worry. I really am not going

there. I merely wondered if he

remembered the question he asked at

Prime Minister's Questions almost 17

years ago when John Prescott stood

in forefootball and whether he could

answer the same question today. So,

what's the question? The question

was this. What percentage of new

nurses recruited in the past 12

months are now working full-time?

I

can't remember! LAUGHTER I can't

remember asking the question then.

I'd love to know what the then

Deputy Prime Minister answered. What

I'm happy to assure the right

honourable lady, is that we have

more nurses, more midwives, more

doctors... Working in the Health

Service now. The Health Service is

performing more operations now

certainly than it was 17 years ago.

And, in particular, in the budget

last week, my right hop rabbling

friend the Chancellor was able to

announce more than £6 billion extra

on health spending which will make

the Health Service even stronger in

the future than it is now.

I thank

him for that response. Since he

failed to answer my original

question oo ail dough it for him.

According to the Government's latest

figures. More than 40% of newly

recruited nurses are leaving

full-time employment within their

first year. It is not just the new

recruits that are quitting, the

overall number of NHS nurses and

health visitors is down by 1,500

this year. And the numbers are now

lower than when this Government came

into office. So, why does the First

Secretary think so many nurses are

leaving?

There are, as I say, more

operations being done, more nurses,

more doctors, more midwives. The

Health Service is expanding. We have

got 14,900 more doctors, 1500 more

medical school places each year and

we've 10,000 more nurses on our

wards and we've announced an

increase of more than 5,000 extra

nurse training places every year. We

are, of course, we have said in

addition, the Chancellor said in his

budget, that we would commit to make

sure that the nurse's pay increase,

the action for change, agenda for

change staffing covered would not

comout of other health spending. So,

nurses can be reassured that this

Government will continue to support

them both in pay and in terms of

numbers and that is why our health

service in England is getting

better. If she wants to look at a

health service where things are

getting worse... She can look to the

Labour Government in Wales. And she

doesn't need to take it from me, she

can take it from the public. Because

public satisfaction with the NHS in

Wales is lower than it is in

England. That's the effect of Labour

Government on health care.

I hate to

brake it to him, there are more

nurses in the NHS than those working

in emergency and acute wards.

Including, district nurses. They've

halved under the Tories. Guess who

picks up the slack in nurses are not

there? Nurses in acute care. Why are

so many nurses leaving the vocation

they love? According to the RCN, the

top four reasons are excess

workload, staff shortages, low pay

and worries about patient care.

According to the Government's own

figures, the number of nurses

quitting because of worries about

their finances or their health has

doubled since the Tories first froze

their pay. Let's get on to the

question that was asked by John

Prescott 17 years ago, he said,

nurses at his local hospital were

warning "staff shortages are putting

patients' lives at risk" so can he

tell me, what are those same nurses

telling the First Secretary today?

What I can tell you is that since 17

years ago, it is interesting that 17

years ago there were still

significant numbers of Labour

Government ahead with all these

pressures exposed to us, since 17

years ago, there are significantly

more nurses in post. I didn't quite

understand her point about wards.

She seemed to go on and off the

wards. But we know we've 10,000

morse nurses on our wards where

people want to see them. Also, if

she's interested in nurse's pay, of

course, I hope she'll find it in

herself to welcome the tax cuts that

were announced in the budget, the

increase in the personal allowances,

that will help nurses just as they

will help workers across both the

public and private sector. This is

good news for nurses. It was a

budget in the just good for the

Health Service but specifically good

for the nurses profession. I hope

she can bring herself to welcome

that.

Well, I notice he didn't want

to talk about patient care at his

local hospital. Could the reason be

that his local A&E according to the

board's most recent minutes "have

severe staff shortages in medical

and nursing care, which means

patient safety is being put at risk.

The only option to tackle those

shortages is to cancel out patient

clinics" it gets worse. And it gets

worse. At a public meeting tomorrow,

there is going to be a public

meeting tomorrow to consider closing

his local A&E for good. In other

words, all of things the First

Secretary has been denying what are

you doing to our NHS? It is

happening on your own doorstep.

Isn't it about time the First

Secretary got a grip?

THE SPEAKER:

THE SPEAKER:

I'm entirely innocent

in this matter. First Secretary.

The

right honourable lady's grasps at

the facts is shaky. The meeting

tomorrow in my constituency is about

the strategic transformation plan. I

am happy to assure her that I am

entirely in favour of option one of

that strategic transformation plan

which suggests not just leaving A&E

services in the hospital in my

constituency but expanding

specialist services there. I would

strongly suggest she doesn't think

she knows more about what's going on

in my constituency than I do.

I

suspect that neither the nation or

his own constituents will have taken

any reassurances from that answer.

But really, we have an NHS in the

grip of a choppic funding and

staffing crisis. GPs are quitting in

record numbers. Junior doctors are

running A&Es without supervision.

Our nurses are at breaking point at

before the winter crisis is coming.

So, let me finally ask the First

Secretary, what does it say about

the Government's priorities that

last week's budget could only find

£350 million to help the

cash-strapped stretched to the limit

NHS cope with the winter fuel

crisis?

Only £350 million to cope with the

winter crisis, and was able to find

11 times that amount, to spend on a

no deal Brexit. Isn't that the very

definition of a government fiddling

away while the rest of the country

burns?

The Right Honourable lady is

determined to talk the NHS down. It

is a Conservative Government which

is increasing funding, on the NHS,

so it remains the best Health

Service in the world, as the

independent Commonwealth fund has

repeated, for the second year in a

row. It is this party which promised

and delivered more money for the NHS

in 2010, 2015, and in last week's

budget where my Right Honourable

friend the Chancellor promised 6.3

billion extra for the NHS. More

patients treated, more operations

carried are out by more doctors and

nurse, when she says at the end,

that the Government is wasting £3

billion on preparing for Brexit, we

know that, we now know that the

Labour Party doesn't think it is

worth preparing for Brexit, they do,

though, they do, though, think it is

worth preparing for a run on the

pound. That is all you need to know

about Labour.

This week, one of Labour's last two

remaining councillors in Boston

crossed the floor to join the

Conservatives. And he said he didn't

want to see this country go back to

1973. Will the first secretary join

me in welcoming this new member to

the Conservative Party, and will he

agree with me, that an open

optimistic Britain deserved better

than reheated Marxism and Labour's

bankrupt economy.

I am very happy to

agree with my honourable friend and

indeed, with the wisdom of the

Labour councillor who has joined the

Conservative Party, quite right that

what we see from the party opposite,

is they would lose control of public

finances, hike taxes to their

highest ever peacetime level and

cause business, the new... I would

point out to the local councillor he

may have moved in anticipation

because I understand that moderate

councillors are being deselected by

the hard left. Thank you Mr Speaker

I can join the first secretary in

congratulating Prince Harry on his

engagement. Can I welcome the

moderator of the church of Scotland.

Can the First Secretary of State

tell the House how much money the UK

Government has received for arms

sales from Saudi Arabia since the

war with Yemen began. I don't have

the figure to hand, I do urge the

honourable gentleman, to recognise

the fact first of all, that our

defence industry is an extremely

important creator of jobs and

prosperity, in Scotland as well as

in other parts of the country and

that we have, because I am obviously

aware of the very terrible situation

in Yemen at the emno, but this

country has one of the most rigorous

and robust defence sales regimes in

the world, it was recognised in a

court case last July, and we are

absolutely determined to continue

the most rigorous robust system in

place because that is the right

thing to do, both for prosperity and

to ensure we keep a proper control

on arms.

That is a long time to be able no to

not answer the question. The UK

Government has received 4.billion,

from arms to Saudi Arabia since the

war in Yemen he garntion which has

created a humanitarian crisis. Yemen

is now on the brink of famine.

Unicef said 150,000 children will

die by the end of the year. Doesn't

the first secretary agree the best

thing the Prime Minister can do with

her meetings today is follow the

example of the Netherlands and

suspend licenses for arms sales to

Saudi Arabia.

I should correct

something the right honourable said

that the Government received money.

It will be the companies that

receive the money and therefore,

their worker, so, he can take that

position if he wan, I I know the

Labour Party's position is that as

well. But that would entail

significant job loss, what is very

important is is not only that we

have the robust regime which I

talked about, but that absolutely we

continue the humanitarian efforts

that we make, to try and alleviate

the terrible conditions in Yemen, we

are the fourth largest humanitarian

donor to Yemen, and the second

largest to the UN appeal. I would

also remind him that the involvement

of the Saudis in this conflict came

at a request of the legitimate

Government of Yemen and has United

Nations Security Council backing,

that is why we support it. This is a

conflict supported by the UN

Security Council, and I would hope

that the right honourable gentleman

will have some respect for the

Security Council.

Thank you Mr Speaker. This

Government's ambition to build more

homes is welcome, especially among

those struggling to get on the

housing ladder. Taub on the dene is

playing its part. With its garden

town status we must have houses that

are good places to live. Mr Speaker,

maybe even where we have showers

where people don't use microbeads in

the shower. But we must have the

right roads on these development,

would he agree the housing

infrastructure fund is key to

unlocking funds for vital roads like

the spine road through Taunton,

My

honourable friend is absolutely

right. I know what a stout champion

she is of the people of Taunton

Deane, she is quite right about the

housing infrastructure's fund as

well, we need more homes but

absolutely, we need the

infrastructure to back them up, that

is why the Chancellor doubled the

housing infrastructure fund in the

budget.

Thank you Mr Speaker. As the First

Secretary of State will know being

my Nair noon in Kent. As a result of

underfunding the County Council is

running out of cash and is cutting

the funding to buses by 70%. Four

hospital buses, 14 school buses and

over 100 other routes are to be cut.

Thousands of pensioner, especially

those in rural areas are to be

trapped at hope. Does the right

honourable member for Ashford

support such cuts.

I do not

recognise the characterisation of

Kent County Council's position,

which my constituency neighbour has

expressed. All Local Authorities as

all parts of the public sector have

to live within their means because

we have to continue paying down the

deficit that was run up by the

previous Labour Government. Kent

County Council is a very good County

Council which does many good things

for the people in Kent and will

continue to do so.

Is

Would my right honourable friend

agree that for decades the itch itch

member states in the European Union

have made large contributions to the

budget of the EU, because the

macroeconomic benefits of belonging

to the large free trade areas of the

single market make it a bargain to

pay that share of the cost. Should

we not therefore welcome the rumours

we have today, in the press, of a

possible imminent settlement of the

method of calculating future

contributions so it may enable us to

get on the serious negotiations

about how we retain the maximum

future access to all those benefits

of that free trade?

Well, my right honourable friend has

been round long enough to not know

not believe everything he readses in

the newspapers and it would be wrong

for me to go into figures now, he is

absolutely right that what we are

about, and what my right honourable

friend the Secretary of State for

Exiting the European Union is about

is making sure we get the best

possible deal at this stage so we

can move on to the trade talks and

Britain, as a country that meets its

international obligations of course

we, will, as it exits the European

Union, meet the obligations and have

all the rights we have in that

process, so we can maintain a deep

and special partnership with the

other 27 members of the European

Union, as we move forward in

friendship and cooperation after we

have left. Fear of publicity, some

of the reasons why very many women

are reluctant to report rape,

assault and sexual harassment. Does

he agree with me, that Government,

particle need to lead by example.

Will he, on behalf of Government

apologise to the victims who

Parliament and Government have been

letting down? I All of the political

parties, need to improve complaints

procedures and other aspects of the

culture of politics, to make sure

that young men or young women who

are interested in politics do not in

any way feel deed from playing an

active role in it. There is a place

for everyone in this House on all

sides and in all parties and indeed

the House authorities of making sure

this is the best possible working

environment for young people to come

into.

Mr Speaker, many mothers in

this chamber know how hard

childbirth can be, but we would

never use that knowledge in a veiled

threat against a journalist when

being questioned in the way the

honourable member for Hampstead and

Kilburn did when questioned by a

Channel 4 journalist recently. As I

assume the first secretary is not

pregnant would he complete the work

that the journalist tried and ask

the honourable member for Hampstead

to use her influence with her aunt

who is the Prime Minister of

Bangladesh whose regime is

responsible for the kidnap of... And

ask for his release.

I am sure

honourable lady

Order I am sure she

notified the honourable lady of an

intention to refer to her in this

question. She didn't? Well, that was

disorderly.

Sorry. Order, order. Order.

Nevertheless, the question has been

asked, nevertheless, perfectly

proper for the first secretary,

briefly, to reply.

You and the House

should be aware, I can only speak on

behalf of the Government, and I can

assure my honourable friend that

Bangladesh remains an important

human rights priority area for the

Foreign Office, and that we continue

to raise allegations of enforced

disappear at all levels of the

Government of Bangladesh I think I

should stop there.

Mr Speaker, at the present rate of

progress, it will take the three

officials at the first secretary's

old department more than 70 years to

investigate the claims of round

four-and-a-half thousand waspy women

deprived of their state pension. I

know this Government is slow but

isn't that adding insult to injury?

The honourable gentleman will be

aware that the Government committed

a sum of more than 1 billion £ to

make sure that no-one's pension

would be delayed more than 18 months

from the original period and he

also, I am sure, as a reasonable man

recognises that with increasing

longevity it is inevitable that the

pension age will rise. That is what

this Government is doing, and by

next year, pension inequality will

have been removed. We will hit 65

for both sexes, in next year, and

that means that we will then have an

equal pensions system. James Gray.

The Royal Air Force is unique having

been established by an act of

parablement which received Royal

Assent 100 years ago today. Will he

find time to Joan me and members of

both Houses and staff throughout the

Palace in celebrating the service

the RAF have given over the last 100

years in a unique parade this

evening at 7.30?

I have already

mentioned the sentry today and my

honourable friend is right not just

to bring it up again, we cannot pay

high enough tribute to the men and

women of the RAF for a century of

service that will go on for a long

time, into the future as well, and I

am glad he has managed to get an

advert in for the parade at

Portcullis House.

Thank you. The United Kingdom has

lost its seat on the international

Court of Justice. EU agencies are

pulling out of London, and there

will be no more European capitals of

culture in the United Kingdom. Is

the sun setting on empire 2.0 before

it has even begun?

I think the

honourable gentleman has, is not, it

is not surprising that EU

institutions are not going to be in

a state that is not a member of the

EU, that can't come as a surprise.

On the capitals of culture, I rather

agree, I think it is very

disappointing that after they had

let British cities asking, I know

some in Scotland, asking to apply to

be part of the process, the

Commission decided that they

couldn't. We are iner George

Entwistle gent talks with the

Commission about that and in

particular, we are making sure that

all those cities who applied can

continue with their cultural

development because cultural

development has been shown to be an

extremely good basis for the

regeneration of cities and towns

across the United Kingdom.

This Saturday, I will be announcing

the winners of Mayanual local shop

Kempeities as part of small business

Saturday. Will my Right Honourable

Friend wish all retailers the best

of luck and also wish those winners

congratulations?

I'm very happy to

share my honourable friend's

congratulations for her retailers. I

like I suspect many members will be

celebrating small business Saturday

this weekend. It has become an

extremely important part of the

calendar. Supporting small business

is at the heart of this Government's

economic strategy. We should all

take every opportunity to celebrate

the hugely important work they do in

innovation, entrepreneurship and in

serving the people.

Today we see

shocking new figures that child

knife deaths are nearing a 40-year

high. Five months ago, the Prime

Minister in this place promised

action. But she has failed to

deliver. Nothing in the budget on

policing and nothing meaningful to

tackle the causes as well as the

crime. It's clear we need

intervention now and not just from

the Home Office. Funding youth

workers in major trauma centres is

proven to get young people out of

the psych violence it would cost £6

million a year to fund. Will the

First Secretary in his role

establish a cross-Government

programme of action to come good on

the Prime Minister's promise?

I'm

sure the honourable lady is aware

the stance on knife crime this

Government is taking is tougher than

ever. We've made punishment against

repeat offenders stronger. We've

banned cautions for the most serious

offences. There is now a very clear

message, if you carry knives in

public you are more likely than ever

to go to price on. Price on. The

latest figures show 42% of adult

offenders were given an immediate

custodial sentence, the highest rate

in nearly a decade. I hope she can

be reassured this Government's being

tougher on knife crime than any

previous Government.

Does the First

Secretary agree with me we don't

need to break into the computer or

iPad to work out the half a trillion

he wants to borrow will attract £7.5

billion of interest payments over a

year.

The one difficult

THE SPEAKER:

This relates to no

Government policy the gentleman is

responsible or rather the Shadow

Chancellor for which he isn't.

Mr

Speaker, Sharon Jones is a

constituent who had a malignant

brain tumour removed 20 years ago.

This left her with excruciating

headaches and severe pain in her

neck and shoulders. Sharon has been

in receipt of ESA and the Department

for Work and Pensions accepts that

Sharon is not fit for work. Yet, she

has now been placed in the work

related activity group and her

benefit has been reduced. Will the

First Secretary justify this to

Sharon?

Obviously there will be

clearly be individual issues in this

case which I can't be aware of. I'm

sure my Right Honourable Friend the

Secretary of State for Work and

Pensions will be very happy to look

at this individual case to see if

something needs to be done for

Sharon.

I very much welcome the

announcement of a border lands

growth deal. This is positive news

for the border aya. But can the

First Secretary assure me this

initiative will receive sufficient

resource to ensure its success?

I

share my honourable friend's

enthusiasm for the borderlands

growth initiative. I've seen the

many benefits of city deals and

growth deals around all parts-of-UK

since I became First Secretary. I

think the borderlands growth innish

five is particularly important

because it will show the mutual

prosperity between his part of the

north of England and the southern

part of Scotland. All I can say is

since my Right Honourable Friend the

Secretary of State for Scotland is

actually a constituency MP in the

southern part of the Scotland, I

know this deal will get particularly

strict attention inside the Cabinet.

Does the First Secretary agree with

the Lord speaker's committee that

the House of Lords should be reduced

to 600 and the term should be

limited to 15 years? Does he not

feel the slightest sense of

embarrassment that the crisis of

credibility of the undemocratic

upper chamber's become so acute its

members are themselves begging for

reform whilst the elect the

Government refuses to act?

I think

when the honourable gentleman speaks

on behalf of all members of the

House of Lords in terms of begging

for reform, he may not necessarily

absolutely be representing the

entire range of views in another

place. But I'm happy to assure him

the Government's looking very

carefully at the proposal and we

will respond in due course.

Can my

Right Honourable Friend and

neighbour say what action the

Government's proposing to take guest

Russian-backed agenciesies spreading

fakes news? They have been doing it

in our political Tam wanes but

disinformation may be spread about

important issues about vaccines and

the flu jab.

My honourable friend is

right to raise this. Cybersecurity

is an extremely important issue.

Fake news and the dissemination of

potentially dangerous information is

one part of that. The National Cyber

Security Centre is looking very hard

at this. It takes a number of

measures to combat it. Some of

which, obviously, have to remain

private. I can assure him it is very

high on the agenda of the national

cybersecurity service which is

underover a year old. It is doing

good work in making sure the area of

cybersecurity is doing much better

than a used to.

An 11-year-old

primary school pupil approached me

to say he, his mother and two

brothers live in a one bedroom flat.

Can he find me a council flat like I

grew up in. It is very unlikely he

will ever have one. Can I ask

simply, given the measures announce

in the last week's housing budget

will not solve the scale of the

problem which sees over 100,000

children living in temporary

accommodation. What is he going to

do to make sure that boy, his family

and others living in temporary

accommodation gets the decent home

they need that they can call their

own?

I agree this is a serious

problem. And that's one of the

reasons why housing was at the

centre of my Right Honourable

Friend, the Chancellor's budget. I

hear from the opposition front bench

that is asking what we're doing

about it. I'll tell her. Last year,

we delivered more homes than we've

seen in all but one of the last 30

years. 217,000, taking us to 1.1

million since 2010. Over the next

five years, we'll invest £44 billion

in home building boosting the

funding for council, social and

low-cost housing to over £9 billion.

We are building more social housing

than the Labour Government did in

its 13 years in office. We'll build

even more in the future. This is a

Government that's addressing his

constituent's problems. Previous

Labour Governments failed to do so.

At the recent extremely successful

Cheltenham and Literature Festival

Hilary clin tan came and talked

about the importance of ensuring the

Russians cant inter veer with

British or American elections.

Should we be building an offensive

cyber capability so our opponents

know we have the will and where with

all to strike back?

My honourable

friend is right as you would expect

from the member of Parliament who

represents GCHQ. He is absolutely

right about the offensive capacity

that we may well need in the cyber

area and I'm happy to assure him and

the House we are indeed developing

that.

I would like to ask the

minister if, without Mensing the new

state pension, apprenticeships or

stating the false hood that the

Scottish Government can somehow fix

the problem and begin the Prime

Minister is a WASPI woman herself,

how he can justify a rise of 413% in

the number of women over the age of

60 in receipt of ESA because of this

Government's refusal to give them

their pensions?

As I applied to a

previous question on this subject, I

hope she would recognise the

principle that is right, that we

need, as we live longer, to move up

the pension age. And she knows as

well as I do, that actually, the

Scottish Government does have the

capacity to top up welfare payments.

They like to sit here and deny this.

In Holyrood, they know they could do

this. As ever with the SNP, they

should stop simply moaning in this

chamber. They should go back to

their own Government in Scotland and

say if they want to do something,

they should do it. Get on with the

day job of running Scotland.

I very

# Welcome the Government's modern

industrial strategy that was

launched this week. Does my Right

Honourable Friend agree that it's

really going to be important as this

country moves forward. We seek a

global Britain in in creating more

and better quality jobs? The point

about the industrial strategy, which

is a hugely important moment, is to

create not just a stronger economy,

but a fairer economy for decades to

come. That's why it's looking

forward to 2030. It is a long-term

attempt to make sure that we have

not just a global outward looking

economy but a modern economy where

we can capitalise on our huge

research strengths and our huge

intellectual strength to make sure

we actually benefit commercially

from that for decades to come.

That's the route for rising

prosperity.

This Sunday, the 3rd

December, is the year when

international day of persons with a

disability. So far, in Government

has refused to carry out a

cumulative impact assessment of its

social security policies of people

living with a disability. Will the

First Secretary now mark this day by

doing the right thing for disabled

people and carry out a full,

cumulative impact assessment?

I'm

sure the honourable lady, who has

great expertise in this field will

know that this Government is

spending £90 billion on disability

benefits. But, more to the point, we

are being more successful than ever

before in giving disabled people a

degree of independence. Hundreds of

thousands more disabled people are

in work than have ever been before.

We have a plan to have an extra

million in work over the next ten

years. That is an extremely

important and practical way to

improve the lives of hundreds of

thousands of disabled people. That's

what this Government is doing.

That's what we'll continue to do.

Given the President of Iran said

they will not be the first country

to breach the joint plan of action,

can the First Secretary assure

US-British diplomats are working

hard in Washington DC to persuade

our American friends it is in the

interests of the West and Iran to

uphold the JCPOA as a prelude to

solving other regional problems?

My

honourable friend is right. We think

the JCPOA is a very important part

of attempting to improve conditions,

not just between Iran and its

neighbours but across the wider

Middle East and we will continue to

argue that case in all parts of the

world.

I too join in offering

congratulations to Prince Harry and

Meghan Markle on their engagements.

One of the issues Prince Harry

highlightnd and campaigned on is the

issue of mental health. The invest

for livecam pain in Northern Ireland

is doing a fantastic job and

highlighting the need for extra

resources on that issue ewe. We join

in that campaign and have secured

extra resources. At a time when

issues like that, mental health,

education and all 9 rest need tor

prioritised in Northern Ireland by a

locally devolved Government working

on these issues and representing the

people of Northern Ireland, does the

First Secretary of State agree it is

a gross dereliction of

responsibility for Sinn Fein to

announce this week they are not

going to engage in further

discussions on the restoration of

devolution? If that's the case, we

now need to move quickly to restore

accountability and ministers to the

Northern Ireland Office to get on

with the people's business of

responsible Government in Northern

Ireland?

The right honourable

gentleman will know that my Right

Honourable Friend the Northern

Ireland Secretary is working as hard

as possible to restore democratic

control to restore the Northern

Ireland Executive. We all want to

see proper he devolved Government

restored in Northern Ireland. I

think that will be by far the best

thing for the people of Northern

Ireland and this Government will

continue to work tirelessly to that

end.

THE SPEAKER:

Order.

Is called Britain first. Many people

regard Britain first as a fascist

organisation. Certainly on the far,

far right. These tweets purport to

show Muslims committing crime.

President Trump retweeted three

posts by a Jada Fransom when he woke

up this morning Washington time. The

post includes unverified videos of

Muslims destroy a statue of Virgin

Mary. Muslims beat up boy on

crutches. You get the sense of the

kind of things. She's the Deputy

Leader of Britain first. She's

facing four charges, current Le out

of bail facing four charges of

causing religiously argue vated

harassment as part of a Kent Police

investigation into the distribution

of leaflets and posting of online

videos during a trial at Canterbury

Crown Court in May. She's due to

appear in court in Northern Ireland

charged with using threatening and

abusive language. In a speech she

made in Belfast in August. Mr Trump

has 43.6 million Twitter followers

who have now by him been sent these

videos from Britain first.

What's your reaction to that?

You're

giving us the latest new. Britain

first is an appalling organisation.

I only hope he's made a mistake in

retweeting some of this stuff. Very

hard to comment without knowing the

background of this contention.

Mr

Trump is due to visit this country

in 2018? What does this do to that

visit?

Let's establish the full

facts. At the end of the day...

I've

given you the full facts.

He is

still the President of the United

States. If he choses to visit the

country, he should be accorded the

full respect of his office which is

an important office. The US is a

valuable ally. Nobody will defend

that if the facts are as you set it

out.

This country spent six years

fighting the Nazis. Do we really

want to welcome to our shores a man

who retweets fascist anti-Muslim

propaganda?

Well, I think we need to

ascertain the full circumstances. I

said I totally agree with you,

Britain first is an appalling

organisation. No-one would want to

defend any of their actions or

tweets. The information in the video

is probably false anyway. Yeah,

nobody wants to defend what they do

and what they stand for. I agree

with you, we celebrated Remembrance

Day recently. We have a proud

history of fighting Nazis and

fascism in this country. We should

stand by that.

I think I'm right in

saying, you may remember better, the

man who murdered Jo Cox, who struck

her down in cold blood, wasn't he

shouting Britain First?

I think he

was. I don't want to say it for

sure. But it is ringing bells. This

is very concerning to hear. I think

unfortunately this horrible racist

material does circulate on the

internet. It is extremely worrying

to hear that response from Donald

Trump. I must say, I felt, I don't

know if others agree with this, his

response to London attacks and the

way he dealt with the London Mayor,

a British elected politician, was

absolutely appalling. We need to see

strenuous comments now coming from

the highest level in British

Government. We cannot have another

head of state closely involved with

someone who is apparently, it seems,

you've said now, supporting criminal

material. That is potentially what

this is. I hope the British

Government will make clear

representations. Just ignoring it is

not good enough if what you said is

the case.

What is your view on Mr