Amol Rajan is joined by Helen Lewis and Tim Montgomerie to discuss the government's handling of the Brexit negotiations with Hilary Benn and Jacob Rees Mogg.
Browse content similar to 01/12/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Hello and welcome to
the Daily Politics.
Parliament's Brexit Committee says
it can't see a solution
to the negotiation sticking point
of how the Irish border
will work after Brexit.
We'll talk to its chair Hilary Benn.
Do you know your passporting
from your equivalence?
We'll look at the options
for Britain's banking
industry after Brexit.
Whatever happened to
the boundary review?
MPs have already voted to decrease
the number of constituency
seats from 650 to 600,
but a new bill seeks
to up the numbers again.
We'll work out what's going on.
And it's December 1st
and it's beginning to look
a lot like Christmas.
So, what should you get
the political geek
in your life this year?
We'll have the Daily Politics
All that in the next hour
and with us for the duration
Tim Montgomerie, Conservative writer
and founder of the website
UnHerd and Helen Lewis,
Deputy Editor of the New Statesman.
Thank you for coming in.
Thank you for coming in.
Now, in a video posted on Twitter
last night Jeremy Corbyn
launched a fresh assault
on Britain's bankers.
When bankers say the Labour Party
is a threat, they're
right, Mr Corbyn said.
Let's take a look.
Nurses, teachers, shop workers,
builders, well, just about everyone,
is finding it harder to get
by while Morgan Stanley's CEO paid
himself £21.5 million last year.
And UK banks paid £15
billion in bonuses.
Labour is a growing movement
with well over half a million
members and a government in waiting
that will work for the many.
So when they say we are
a threat they are right.
We are a threat to a damaging
and failed system that
is rigged for the few.
Helen, we all know that Jeremy
Corbyn is a socialist and does not
need to persuade his supporters he
is enemy of the banking sector,
would it not be better for him to
reach out to the financial
They have been doing
that. But first Labour has no big
donors any more. They used to have
Sainsbury's and people like that and
they see themselves as a grassroots
membership organisation funded by
A vast number.
are not in hog with big business to
that sense. Also the Tory party has
thrown away some of its advantage
with big business by supporting
Brexit. People in the business
community see it as a threat and a
big disruption they would rather not
happen. The Tories always seemed to
have that idea that they were sound
and stable with continuity and
labour are reflected that. That has
been eroded by Brexit.
This was a
video that Jeremy Corbyn put out on
Twitter last night and he has been
very effective to use social media
to circumvent journalists. But he is
also cover star, on the front cover
of GQ magazine. Are we beginning to
see the emergence of a coherent,
perhaps convincing, media strategy?
Using social media to motivate
people and there he is on the GQ
an effective strategy?
It has been a
phenomenon over the last few years,
one I did not predict, how much
Jeremy Corbyn's personality has
underpinned Labour's success. They
have a very radical agenda. If John
McDonnell had been the leader and
the front man for that, he is a much
more aggressive character, I think
it would have frightened people. But
the guy who makes jam and has an
allotment and who does not seem to
get angry very much is almost the
perfect front person for what is a
radical agenda. The Conservatives
need to get the focus much more on
the policy issues and the dangers of
Labour's economic policies and away
from the personality. It is
interesting how much labour is now
going for a strategy that looks more
Blairite than Momentum.
control they exercise. The editor of
GQ said he had never seen an
operation quite like the media
operation around Jeremy Corbyn. He
will be chuffed with that?
so, but they are also very defensive
of him. His supporters as well feel
very defensive about him. He was
written off completely by the
mainstream media and now they feel
they have to protect him. This is
where the accusations of cult
personality come from because they
feel personally he has come under
intense attack. But Tim is right in
the sense they have built a brand
that is the brand he has got and the
Tory attack that this man is
dangerous, he will take you back to
the 1970s and you think drain covers
and jam and you can put them
together, it did not work at the
I am struggling to
put that together in my head as
Now it is time for our daily quiz.
Jeremy Corbyn is on the cover
of this month's GQ magazine,
but what make was the suit
he was wearing for the photo shoot?
B) Pre-mani, otherwise
known as Primark.
C) Dolce and Gabbana.
D) Marks & Spencer.
Do you know the answer?
say so now.
Do not say so now.
At the end of the show
Tim and Helen will give
us the correct answer.
So as it's the first day of December
we thought we'd take a look
at our Brexit advent calender to see
what festive treats will be in store
for us in the coming days.
There's a lot going on.
This morning the Exiting the EU
Committee publishes a report arguing
they can't see how the problem
of the Irish border can be solved,
something that perhaps European
Council President Donald Tusk
and the Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar
will talk about when they meet
later today in Dublin.
Next Monday Theresa May will meet EU
where they will discuss
the Prime Minister's revised offer
on the divorce bill,
and then on Wednesday
the European Council
and the European Commission
will then meet behind closed doors
to discuss Mrs May's proposal.
Also on the 6th, Brexit Secretary
David Davis will be in front
of the Exiting the EU committee
to face a grilling over his redacted
The moment of truth will come
a week later when all EU
leaders meet in Brussels
for the European Council summit.
The meeting lasts for two days
and the Prime Minister will be
hoping that on the second day
they will announce that enough has
been agreed over money,
the Irish border and EU citizens'
rights so that they can
move on to the second
phase of the negotiations
and start talking trade.
Well, new Irish Deputy
Prime Minister and also
Irish Foreign Minister Simon Coveney
was asked about the Brexit
negotiations this morning.
What the British government has been
asking of the Irish government is
just - trust us, we will solve these
issues with a broad, bold trade
agreement, so that may
not be possible...
Can I play you a clip?
Can I play you a clip...
Sorry to disrupt you...
To finish the point, John...
Yes, carry on?
Sorry, I mean we cannot be
asked here to leap into
Well, Parliament's Brexit committee
has a report out today on how
the negotiations have been going.
It says the Committee can't see how
it will be possible to resolve
the issue of having no border
between Northern Ireland
and the Republic with
the government's policy of leaving
the single market and customs union.
The Chair of that committee,
Labour's Hilary Benn,
is in Central Lobby.
Thank you very much, good afternoon.
You say in your report that the
proposals for the border are not
tested. Is that not the whole point,
we are in uncharted territory and we
will not know how to solve it?
certainly are in uncharted territory
because of the referendum result.
But the decision to leave the
customs union and the single market
is not an inevitable conference
consequence, it is a choice the
government made. On the one hand the
government has rejected that there
should be no border, institutional
arrangements and no infrastructure
and we support that and the Irish
government and everybody supports
that. But we do not see how you can
reconcile that with the other
decision the government has made
about leaving the customs union and
the single market. Therefore we have
called on the government to set out
in more detail how it proposes to
square that circle. What it
published in the summer I'm talking
about technology and a new customs
partnership, was itself in the
government's own words and tested.
Clearly it has thus far not been
sufficient to provide reassurance to
the Irish government.
What do you
propose? What are your solid
proposals for how to take this very
complicated position with the two
sides seem very far apart? What do
The Select Committee
has not proposed a solution, we have
identified the continuing nature of
the problem. What would you suggest?
The Select Committee has not reached
a view on that. Personally as a
Labour politician I would stay in
the customs union, but that is not a
solution the customs union has
reached, the Select Committee has
reached. The Select Committee has
also said today we want to see the
negotiations moved on to phase two
because that may help to provide
part of the answer to this question,
depending on our future trading
relationship, and we what the
government to set out clearly,
assuming the European Council gives
the go-ahead, what seeking a deep
and special partnership actually
means. Michel Barnier will be asking
them what they want. Parliament
needs to know what the government's
There were lots of well
sourced reporters earlier in the
week that the mood in Dublin is a
lot of progress has been made on
this issue. Doesn't your Select
Committee report 48 hours late,
behind the curve?
We produced our
report on the basis of information
available to us at the time we
finalised it. But if progress has
been made, I am certain the Select
Committee would welcome that because
we also say we want to move on to
phase two of the negotiations. Some
things will move quite quickly,
particularly when you have a
deadline coming up. But this is
clearly a fundamental problem which
the government has recognised and
the Irish government has recognised
that and what the Irish government
has been saying in recent weeks have
indicated they were not at that
point satisfied a solution could be
found. I hope one can be that gets
us through to phase two, but we will
not see the final answer on the
border until the negotiations are
Has the intervention of
Leo Varadkar, the Irish Taoiseach,
helped progress this argument?
Critics of his say he is
intransigent and has presented a
problem. As he prevented you with a
The Irish government is
looking after Ireland's interests
and everybody wants to solve this
problem, but it is a problem that
has been put on the Republic of
Ireland by the referendum result and
by the government's decision to
leave the customs union and the
single market. That is why there is
a difficulty. Ireland is
particularly affected by Brexit and
therefore it is appropriate that the
Taoiseach should say we need to look
after the interests of our country
and in the end we have to reach an
agreement not just between the UK
and Ireland because Ireland is part
of the 27 and the issue about the
border is when we leave the European
Union, this will be the external
border of the 27 member states as it
is in all of the other countries.
That is why trying to find a
solution, given the context, given
the Good Friday Agreement and the
fact there are 200 crossings with no
border posts or checking at the
moment, a practical benefit of the
Good Friday Agreement, it is
important we hang onto that, but we
have to find a practical way forward
and that is why we have called on
the government to set out in more
detail how it will solve it. What it
has offered so far has not persuaded
the Irish government or the Select
Committee that you could square the
Jacob Rees Mogg reported that
today's report Select Committee is
split between those who voted to
remain and those who voted to leave.
It is a bit of a remain tinge.
done for coming up with that! The
vast majority of the report was
agreed by consensus. We work very
hard in the committees, I am sure
Jacob will attest to that, to try
and reach consensus. You look at the
back of the report and you can see
which sections were voted on and
each member of the committee as an
individual decides how they will
cast their vote. We have a job of
work to do as a committee to hold
the government to account, to
scrutinise the process of Brexit. In
the past we have said there should
be a vote for MPs and the government
eventually agreed with that. We call
for a conditional arrangement and
the government is seeking those. We
asked for a white paper on the
negotiating objectives and that was
given. We are seeking to have an
influence on the process and we are
working together as members despite
the different views we held during
the referendum last year.
very much indeed.
Thank you very much indeed.
Joining us now is the Conservative
MP and member of the Brexit Select
Committee, Jacob Rees Mogg.
You are an optimist, what is your
Can I agree with the last
point that Hilary Benn was saying,
he is a really good and patient
chairman and there are areas of
agreement and we do our best to
agree, but the highlight of the
report is inevitably the issues
where we do not agree which is
divided straight down the lines of
how you divided and voted in the
referendum. Select Committee report
are powerful when they are
unanimous, when they are not
unanimous, it is straight party
What is your solution?
solution was set out very clearly by
John Thomson who appeared in front
of the Brexit Select Committee and
he said he could implement the
government's policy on not having
any border, it was manageable, and
if the border was imposed, that was
a matter for the Irish government
and the European Union. There was no
need for any border in terms of UK
Government policy and it is up to
the Republic of Ireland and the
European Union to decide if they
want to impose one.
Do you have confidence the proposed
checks for technical solutions, a
lot of people say that there is no
need, there could be a frictionless
border, are you confident that they
will actually work? There are
feelings in Dublin they could be a
gift to insurgents?
I think most of
it is very straightforward, you can
do customs declarations in the same
way you do a VAT declaration. The
transition becomes a tax point
rather than a checkpoint. People pay
their VAT by sending in a quarterly
return and there is an exemption of
£85,000 for VAT when you do not have
to do this. The government suggested
the exemption for customs should be
£250,000 and then it's a question of
whether people pay their taxes or
not. That solution is very
straightforward. At nontariff
barriers, some things take place on
an all Ireland basis already. So,
animal hygiene is on an Au Ireland
basis already. There's no need to
break it up. The technological
solutions are there -- or Ireland.
We do not want to put tariffs on
anybody, free trade is the
opportunity of Brexit and we should
not be looking to collect vast
The DUP are
kingmakers of this Parliament. Was
it productive for them to say, to
threaten, that they would remove
their confidence in supply
I think the issue that
they correctly raised was we cannot
have a situation when Northern
Ireland is taken away from the
United Kingdom. Northern Ireland is
as much a part of the UK as Somerset
and that is the position of
conservatives and unionists.
damaging to the government and its
wider agenda that the confidence and
supply agreement we have could
potentially be undermined by the
This party is the main party of
government, the unionist bid is
essential. There is no majority
within the Conservative Party, let
alone in the DUP, to break up the
United Kingdom, to meet the
requirements of the Prime Minister
of Ireland. I think what the DUP
said is pretty standard conservative
Tim, based on what we have
seen so far on Brexit negotiations
progressing, as Britain got up to
the job of finding a solution for
this vexing issue?
negotiations are very hard, what
they have revealed more than
anything else is how fragile and
insecure and organisation the EU is.
A competent institution would not be
so difficult in these negotiations.
It is so worried about losing other
members it is having to be so
difficult with the UK. And the Irish
border issue. It is much easier to
solve this issue if trade talks are
happening concurrently with other
issues. Because the EU is so
obsessed with the money issue,
because the budget position of the
EU is so weak, we are in difficult
positions where the Irish government
is playing politics. Sinn Fein tries
to run a harder line on this issue
and the Prime Minister of Ireland
feels they have to play the game
too. It's a principal game we have
to take from this. I think this can
be solved. There is every
possibility that towards the end of
negotiations, one country, remember
how the EU Canada agreement was
almost held to ransom? There a poll
Maka cup possibility one country can
do that again. We had to prepare for
no deal -- there is a possibility
one country can do that again.
are flanked by optimists on all
sides, it sounds straightforward, do
you share their optimism?
the idea of the deal if you want to
stay outside of the customs union.
The simple solution is to stay in
the customs union, I do not believe
that leave voters in the country
believe they voted on the basis that
they wanted to unlock the wonderful
potential of trade deals.
economic growth is outside of the
And the trading
block is right next to us, Australia
is quite far away. But the point is
I think it is one of those
situations where people in Britain
would think, why are we having this
enormous row about something that is
an obsession for the Tory party and
that nobody cares about?
has been levelled at you repeatedly
over the last few years. Is the
obsession of a particular wing of
the Tory party impeding the finding
of an easy and pragmatic solution?
The customs union is a protectionist
The customs union is a protectionist
racket, and it puts up the prices of
food, clothing and footwear. These
hit the poorest in our country the
most because the largest portion of
their spending goes on food,
clothing and footwear, compared to
the richer in society.
poorest people in the world, Africa.
It discriminates against imports
from some of the poorest countries
in the world. It impoverishes the
poorest. To get out the customs
union will be an advantage for
Brexit and will be good for the
people in this country but also help
poor countries elsewhere in the
world. The customs union is a
disgrace and a blot on the
reputation of the EU. And it has got
I think this is a
munificent and charitable
-- I do not think this is in the
mind of most leave voters. You will
hear a lot about respecting the
referendum but we need to hear more
about what drove the referendum. I
think it was economics and
immigration, not free trade.
our own tariffs, this is really
important. In the WTO, you register
your tariffs with the WTO. We could
put zero on food, zero on clothing
and Sarah and footwear. I tell you
what, we will get you guys together
to talk about it -- zero on
Damian Green has been in
use a former college at detective
told the BBC today that he was
shocked by the amount of pornography
viewed on the computer from his
office many years ago. Damian Green
denies the allegations, Evening
Standard say that friends of David
Davis say he may resign over this
issue. Can I ask, what explains the
timing of this investigation into
I think the real
scandal here goes back to what
happened when Damian Green's office
was searched, a political enquiry by
the police. It was outrageous and
unconstitutional that an opposition
member of Parliament had his offices
raided that information stolen from
the convenience of the then
That may be the real
But right now...
Patients, I am coming to your
It is a scandal from some
years ago. What explains the timing
of it now? Many people say that
Damian Green has been targeted
because of his closeness to a Prime
Minister that is currently weak.
point of origin is really important
because as a general principle of
law, evidence from illegal searches
is not permissible.
The police behaved disgracefully,
they raided an opposition minister's
offices and the House of Commons.
It's a real scandal and now police,
or ex-police, using information
obtained improperly to damage a
politician. What we should be asking
about is the politicisation of the
police force under the last Labour
government, not about Damian Green.
It's a police force under this
government revealing confidential
These are retired
police officers, so it is not.
Davis Dave -- and David Davies, if
he leaves, is it a credible threat
that he should resign?
Why should he
But if he did... I'm not
asking if he showed that if he did,
would it damage the government?
heard no rumours about him
resigning, he said very important
member of this government and has
great support across the country. I
could not see any reason for him to
It's on the front of the
Evening Standard... Not for the
first time in a few months, it will
be interesting reading!
very odd views, and likes freezer
Jacob Rees-Mogg, thank you
very much for coming in.
Now, MPs will today debate an issue
which affects all of them -
You could be forgiven for thinking
the matter had been settled.
Parliament voted in 2011 to reduce
the number of MPs and equalise
the electorates to about 74,000
people per constituency.
The new system should have been used
for the 2015 general election
but the coalition
government couldn't agree.
Today a private member's Bill
sponsored by the Labour backbencher
Afzal Khan seeks to reverse
the government's plans to reduce
the size of the House
from 650 MPs to 600.
Instead the bill would aim to
equalise the size of constituencies
based on population.
Emma is in central lobby for us.
That's right, under the current
government plans, it could lead to a
real scramble for seats, if the
number of MPs is reduced by 50. But
I'm here with a man who says, don't
do that. Keep the number of MPs the
same they change the constituencies
so they have roughly the same number
of voters. Labour's Afzal Khan has
the second reading of his Private
members bill in the Commons today
and Mark Harper also joins me, the
minister in charge of the coalition
when these original government plans
were written up. Let me ask the
original intention of the government
plans was to save money. We cut the
number of MPs here, and I'm the
country will still take over, why
not just do that?
My feeling is that
currently the government does not
have a majority. There are people
from all sorts of parties, including
their own sites, unhappy with the
change. The government say they want
to save money but what they are
actually trying to do is reduce MPs
in Parliament but keep their own
executive power at the same level
with the number of voters that they
have. In reality, there are 260
unelected peers in the House of
Lords. That costs 136 million. Are
they going with this? It doesn't add
up. I'm tried to build consensus
where we can bring all the different
parties together so we can have
And Mike Harper,
that this damage democracy? Why
isn't this a sensible suggestion?
The root cause of why we brought
forward these proposals in the first
place and the present law to reduce
the number of MPs is simple. We want
constituencies to be broadly equal
size, plus or so constituents are
equally represented across the
country. We thought it was sensible
in the wake of the expenses scandal
to reduce the number of MPs, the
House of Commons is one of the
largest parliaments. The cost of the
House of Lords has come down, I was
a minister who wanted to bring
forward proposals to elect the other
place but they never went through.
We have a boundary commission that
is going to report next October, and
Parliament will be able to vote on
specific proposals. The problem with
this bill, we kick it into the long
grass again. It's the second or
third time the Labour Party has
tried to push this into the future
because they don't want to equalise
the sizes of those constituencies in
practice. It is an important
principle that voters, wherever they
are in the country, are equally
represented in parliament.
the original plans would benefit
Is this about
Labour trying to protect it?
not true, the bottom line is, we
have people from across, including
the Conservative Party, it isn't
simply about the Labour Party, I
think it's much fairer. There's the
idea, of course, we are against that
but the point is there's a real life
outside that by having this
variation which is 7.5%, it allows
us to adapt and keep communities
together. Do not forget that we are
here to serve the community and if
we break it up, that's the people
who lose out and we want to protect
Do people outside this house
really care? Even about what a
constituency is or how big it is,
making sure that the people do the
job? Does it matter to voters
whether we reduce or keep the same
It's important that voters
outside feel equally represented.
Some constituencies only have 40,000
in -- 40,000 voters.
Why not change
You need to keep them
broadly equal in size, and Afzal 's
bill this morning widens things out
a bit. But we also thought it was
right to reduce numbers of
Parliament. We thought it was
sensible, and it was one of the most
popular policies that the coalition
brought forward and if the answer to
the question you are asking is,
let's have more members of
Parliament, I do not think it is the
How much money would
£66 million over
Parliament, you can argue it is not
the largest sum in the wild but it
isn't a trivial sum of money. It can
then be spent on public services.
Your plans wouldn't do that?
would make sure we maintain the
balance. We need to make sure that
the member of Parliament is here --
members of Parliament here can hold
them to account, you can try and
reduce MPs to a smaller number and
this is where the relationship
breaks down. This is why they do not
have it. It isn't just the Labour
Party but all parties are saying it
is not right and MPs onside to say
this. What I am saying is sensible.
It does have support. We can still
go ahead. We are quite happy with
it. When the review went against us,
we did not block it. We took it
through. I do not think it is fair
to say that we do not want it
reviewed. We do. We want to maintain
Where you will see what
happens with your plans in the House
of Commons today. Thank you to both
of you. The current government
proposals to reduce numbers of MPs
could take effect if this goes ahead
by the next election in 2022 unless
Labour plans derailed this...
you very much indeed.
The impetus behind boundary changes
was partly to do with costs to
Parliament. It arose after the
expenses scandal, MPs were despised
even more than perhaps they are now.
Is the urgency behind this issue,
has it gone?
I think there are
bigger issues at the moment. £66
million is a lot of money but
compared to the sums that the
government had to deal with, it is
relatively small. I'm very
sympathetic to the Labour argument,
in some respects, that the real
Robin is the House of Lords. Outside
of the people's Republic of China,
is the biggest legislative body in
the world. Costs are beginning to be
controlled but it is unelected Lords
and people turning up and not
working particularly hard, many do
but many don't, but that is the real
affront to the
Isn't the issue with boundary
And when MPs potentially
lose their seats, they will resist
any changes that could put them out
of a job?
At the moment when the DUP
came in, the boundary changes were
dead as a dodo because the DUP would
be affected by it. The boundary
changes only create obvious losers.
Structurally Labour has got a small
advantage and the idea of a
reduction would not be one that
finds favour with Labour. Who is
left to vote for it? There is a
problem. It is mad in 2017 were to
have hereditary peers and people who
can clock in once every couple of
months and treated as a gentleman's
club. Lots of peers worked very hard
and their influence is useful and we
could just have them and not the
This bill will not get
It speaks about the big
problem which is there really very
little domestic legislation because
people are desperately trying to
hang bits and pieces where they can
and get through private members
bills because Brexit has crowded
It is a shame
because after Grenfell in particular
there was something of a chat about
a big impact on housing. There was a
possibility for Labour and the
Tories to get together on building
Council houses. The Communities
Secretary was open to that
possibility, Sajiv Javid. My concern
about Theresa May is she is not a
bold thinker and she has not been
able to see opportunities out of a
tragedy like Grenfell to say let's
fix something so these people did
not die in vain.
On the issue of
making Parliament feel more
accountable, why is there not more
of a momentum behind reforming the
House of Lords? Clearly it stirs
passions on both sides of the House
and people on both sides of the
divide say there is a problem, but
people are not talking about the
House of Lords.
Weirdly housing is
another very good example of this,
something that creates a lot of
specific users, but a disparate
group of winners and that is very
hard to deal with in politics. If
you build more houses, lots of
people would have their back garden
overlooked by a tower block and
there would not like that, but the
people who would win from that
currently do not have a vote through
the planning system. Actual physical
human beings would be rejected out
of the laws, but the improvement of
democracy is harder to quantify.
Maybe the improvement of democracy
is what we talk about but nobody
Now, Chief EU Brexit negotiator
Michel Barnier says British banks
will lose their coveted "passporting
rights" when Britain leaves the EU.
These passports allow banks to serve
clients across the EU
without the need for licences
in individual countries.
So, should we be concerned
that powerful banks may
move their headquarters outside
Or is this all a fuss over nothing?
Emma Vardy has been looking
at the options for Britain's
industry after Brexit.
It's a massive money spinner
for the UK, the banking industry
and the City of London has long been
the envy of other countries,
and it's underpinned by passporting.
It's been particularly important
in wholesale and commercial banking,
in allowing a bank to be registered
in one country in the EU
but to provide its services
to corporates, in particular,
and financial institutions
in another country in the EU
without having to set up permanently
and be locally regulated
in that other country.
The loss of passporting has been
a serious concern for the city.
More than 5000 British firms rely
on these rights to bring in some
£9 billion of revenue every year.
And the taxes generated here,
say bankers, help to pay
for our public services.
Any damage to the sector
could have a serious effect
on the overall British economy.
But some believe that there
are incentives for the UK and the EU
to find a post Brexit solution that
works for both sides.
European firms will continue
to want to access the services that
London provides and I think,
from a political point of view,
that the EU will actually
want to have some form of influence
and dialogue with the UK about how
those services are regulated
because they will be systemically
important to their economies,
despite the fact we will
be outside of the EU.
Speaking to the Treasury Select
Committee last month,
the Chancellor Philip Hammond said
that after we lose the UK's
passporting rights, some form
of what is called enhanced
equivalence will be sought instead.
Most people in the sector accept
that passporting will not be
the future route but some form
of enhanced equivalence
within a framework that recognises
international standards and that
gives businesses appropriate levels
of certainty is going
to be the way forward.
This word "Equivalence" is what some
are hoping will save the day.
The idea that if the UK
continues to adopt the same
standards as the EU,
than the European regulator may
continue to allow UK-based financial
firms to keep operating the way
that they do now.
The problem is, at the moment
there is no certainty
as to what the EU may agree to.
Some companies are already
hedging their bets.
There's no question that the large
wholesale banks in London
are making their contingency plans.
If they don't know what is going
to happen in March 2019,
they will be forced to start
relocating their operations
into continental Europe.
Many have already taken premises,
and are in the process of beginning
to transfer people and hire locally,
that will begin in January 2018
in order to be certain to be up
and running by March 2019.
Until then, when talks
do move on to trade,
the city will be watching closely...
Emma Vardy reporting.
Well to discuss banking after Brexit
we're joined by the head
of Bloomberg Economics,
Thank you for coming in. Is it fair
to say that the response to Brexit
so far from the banking sector has
not been as apocalyptic as some doom
There are quite a lot
of the big leaders of the banks and
the big American banks who have
based themselves in London. I have
had conversations with them over the
course of this year where the
initial numbers they had for how
many people would end leaving, are
dialling down in terms of the
initial phase. But firstly they are
not waiting to find out about the
transition or fingers crossed for
the negotiations. They are still
making their plans now, particularly
for the disaster scenario where you
do not have a clear path out and a
transition. They are doing things
now, they are moving people now,
they are not waiting for the
negotiations. On the initial day
after Brexit, assuming it is not a
real cliff edge situation, that
there is a deal, I think you might
find that we will still find London
is the dominant financial centre of
Europe for quite some time. Whether
that is the case in ten or 20 years
when regulations have changed and
when banks have adapted, I am not so
sure. The initial day one change may
not be so dramatic.
Is that not what
businesses do anyway? The negative
impact of the UK's vote to leave the
EU is materially less. It looks to
have stabilised activity. That may
be sufficient for the GDP to avoid a
talking about the economy and not
necessarily the financial system.
There are fundamental changes for
the financial systems, especially
legal organisation to continue to
operate. The short-term impact of
the referendum was not what
economists thought. But if you look
at the growth rate now and how it
has slowed, it has had a significant
And how seriously do people in
the financial sector take the
possibility of a no deal?
The bag of
England flagged up early this week
in a report and there is this legal
certainty question. Apart from where
people are based there are about $26
trillion worth about outstanding
derivative contracts and half of
which are due to run on past 2019.
If we do not know what regulations
will be there to enforce those
contracts, you could find financial
institutions in impossible
situations. Things like that are
more of a short-term concern than
the long-term future.
As a Brexit
supporter you must acknowledge that
there will be huge upsets in the
financial sector and it is bad news
for the Chancellor of the extract.
Businesses dislike uncertainty and
this is the moment where uncertainty
is at the peak because trade talks
have not even begun. Overall there
are so many positive signs. You have
Deutsche Bank reconfirming that
London will be the principal place
where they do business. London has
so many advantages in terms of its
cultural richness, its
infrastructure, as well as the
conglomeration of financial,
accountancy and legal practices. And
the language. It is not as if there
is an obvious alternative Paris,
Frankfurt, Amsterdam? The services
and institutions are so spread
across the continent no one can
watch London. London is the only
place Europe has versus Shanghai,
Hong Kong or New York. It will take
something of an earthquake. We
should not be complacent and we need
to ensure our tax and regulatory
systems keep London competitive. But
as the Bank of England Governor has
warned, not an enthusiast for
Brexit, he has warned Europe don't
damage your's only real chance of
having a global, financial centre.
Tim is right, there is an ecosystem
in London that has not been
replicated anywhere else. You could
argue potentially New York, but
nowhere else in the world has
combined all of these industries
together. It is like this ecosystem
or coral reef where everything is
feeding on each other. But we could
gradually over time lose that and it
will not be replicated in any other
single city. It will all go to
different parts of Europe like
Frankfurt, Paris, Dublin, Amsterdam.
It could disappear, business could
not happen because Europe does not
have a place that ticks all the
boxes in a way that London does.
That is the worry. We will lose
something for ever and quite a lot
of business will not happen that
would have happened.
What do you
think the public will make of this
idea? Emma's film was about par
sporting rights and exemptions for
people who are quite wealthy. Will
the public be sympathetic to that on
pragmatic grounds? We need to soften
the transition. But will they say
why should there be different rules
for different folks?
That is what
Jeremy Corbyn talked about at the
top of the hour. There is a feeling
the mood has changed and there is
less indulgence. You can see a lot
of our politics through the lens of
post-crash politics and there is
still residual anger. Who are the
politicians making the case to
people that are strong, resilient
financial sector is in the interest
of people who do not feel they have
seen any of the proceeds of that in
the last ten or 15 years?
politicians are championing the
financial sector at the moment?
There are none. I would say Philip
Hammond is the closest you have had
to a proponent and a defender of the
city. People are trying to keep
quite a lot of staff here, people
want to stay here, except those who
have been offered tax breaks to go
back to Italy and France. But if we
have a Labour government which is
explicit in raising taxes on the
financial sector, it is a bit
How hard are you finding to
win the argument that the short-term
pain in Brexit will be worth it
because of a game in the medium and
long-term? Is that getting for you
There was an interesting
poll that asked voters what they
thought the long-term outlook was.
They thought it would be OK.
I think Britain is in a good
position in the long run and voters,
more than people in Westminster that
we inhabit, they do not obsessed
about the twists and turns of these
negotiations and ultimately they
think that slogan, taking control
and being in control, is funny.
people thinking about the global
economy and world finance, we had
years where people had nothing but
bad things to say about the
Eurozone, the included. It's
terribly lethargic, not been able to
adjust to problems, but this year,
the growth forecasts have been
revised up... We also have the
possibility of a stronger Franco
German partnership which could
produce some reform. It seems ironic
that we seem to be falling away from
Europe as we are seeing positive
We opened the show with
Jeremy Corbyn's video last night
about Morgan Stanley, where he had a
tirade against the financial sector.
In the city, what do they think is
the bigger threat, Jeremy Corbyn or
It's a difficult position,
he knew that there would be such
unpalatable options for people in
the city to choose from? In the last
election, most people, certain the
last election but one, many people
in the city would have taken Labour
as the least worst option but with
this kind of rhetoric and it is
playing well, were then maybe, that
could change? By and which is a
bigger threat to the city, Corbyn or
Corbyn! We like a range of views on
Thank you for coming in.
Bonjour et bienvenue
a la Daily Politics.
I knew I would get the accent
No need to adjust your sets -
that's how Daily Politics may be
introduced in the future
if President Macron has his way.
On a trip to Burkina Faso in Africa,
the French President called
for French to become
the world's first language.
Mr Macron said French had
a "radiance" and "attractiveness"
to it and should be
more widely used.
Here's a few famous British faces
showing how to do it.
FRENCH NATIONAL ANTHEM PLAYS.
Francias o Anglais je croix parce
que j'ai appris l'allemamd.
Il ya maintenant cinquent ans qua la
celebration du centenaire y j'ai
appris les canadiens de continuer
l'exemple de valor, d'egalite,
de liberte y d'inclusion.
Entante camille et allies.
Merci beaucoup toute
le monde, merci.
Well to discuss President Macron's
ambitions we're joined from Paris
by the journalist Agnes Poirier.
Thank you very much indeed for being
with us. Is there nothing that
Emmanuel Macron thinks he cannot do?
Is there any chance of this proposal
actually becoming a reality?
hear the sarcasm all the way from
Paris! I sort of share that British
irony. But, President Macron's
optimism knows no limits. It is also
based, I must say, on projections by
demographers. It is in the first
time that I've heard this. 2050,
because of the birth rate in Franco
Africa, is very high, the numbers of
Francophone speakers will be higher
than the number of Anglophone
speakers. Well, I'm not sure we will
still be around to discuss that
then, but if you read or hear a
speech in Africa, it wasn't just
gung ho that France and the French
language, rather, would rule the
waves soon but it was quite
inclusive. Talking about how the
French language does not belong to
or in France but it also belongs to
Africa. And a very young Africa.
It's true, the same with the English
language that French literature,
wealth and richness, it comes
actually, I would say it personally,
more from territories outside of
France because it makes a language
richer. Now, is it desirable that
French regain status? I'm not sure.
Your point on demography, tomography
is very important as we look forward
to the rest of the 21st century but
if it was about demography,
shouldn't we all be learning
Mandarin or Hindi or Urdu? Isn't
that the way the world is expanding
rather than through Francophone
Personally I think you
should learn as many languages as
you can. Talking about Mandarin,
there are languages that are spoken
by a lot of people like Mandarin but
it is within their borders. The
thing is, like Spanish, Arabic,
English and Portuguese, French is
spoken outside of its borders. So,
making it an international language.
It is the fifth most spoken language
in the world and great writers felt
comfortable writing in French is in
their own language like Tolstoy or
Anthony Burgess, actually. He was a
polyglot. I think the future belongs
to polyglots, not people who look
inwardly but for people and
countries who look outwardly and, if
I could say a word on Brexit, and I
know it is not going to please Tim,
but if Brexit is implemented and if
Trump is here to stay, it will have
an impact on Anglophone coach. --
culture. It has already had an
impact. Speaking to young Europeans,
they are fine. The US, Britain, the
Anglophone culture, it's less
desirable than it was before and it
is very sad. It saddens me
That's a hell of a
charge to put at the feet of the
Brexiteers! How would you respond?
By voting to leave the EU, you made
English less fashionable and less
cool and English is on the rise?
We talked about the bumpy patch that
Brexit is going through, that isn't
a bad point, but also that President
Macron's ambitions no no limits,
neither does his humility. Perhaps
you should focus on reforming
Francis labour laws, and do the
basic things first before changing
how the world speaks. Look at France
24, their news channel. They have a
French language service and an
English service language. The BBC
And Arabic as well.
couldn't possibly speak for the BBC.
I think English is pretty safe,
there is a lot of speculation about
We had to move on. Thank you
for joining us from Paris. Much
Now, it's been a busy
week at Westminster.
As loyal viewers of the Daily
Politics, we know you'll be
completely up to date
on all the political goings
on, but just in case -
here's Ellie with a round-up
of the week in 60 seconds.
This week we saw the UK agree to pay
a divorce bill which could be worth
up to 50 billion euros.
The government handover to MPs it's
redacted analysis of what Brexit
will mean for the economy,
and Michel Barnier, the EU's chief
negotiator, irritates some
Brexiteers by suggesting that by
voting to leave, Britain had chosen
not to stand shoulder to shoulder
with Europe following
the terror attacks.
Elsewhere, the government
announced its long-awaited
which focused on, among other
things, the development
of artificial intelligence
and clean energy, which was entirely
overshadowed by the announcement of
the biggest royal
wedding of the century
since the last one,
spoilsport PM said no, we won't be
getting a bank holiday for it...
Meanwhile, Theresa May
has been in Iraq -
the first British Prime
Minister to visit since 2008.
# It's beginning to look
a lot like Christmas...
# Even in Westminster...#
a lot like Christmas...
Where they've already put
up their Christmas tree.
So, the Parliamentary Christmas tree
has arrived and today is of course
the first of December,
and that means we can officially
start talking about Christmas!
Here on the Daily Politics
we like to give you a helping hand,
so have come up with a few ideas
for presents to give
to the politico in your life.
Tim, Helen, what do we think of
this? This is a Jeremy Corbyn 2008
I have flicked through my
copy, there are many useful things,
including cut out and keep Jeremy
Corbyn masks! To surprise your loved
Tim, I thought this would
suit you... It is austere, and full
of financial information... A lot of
economic things... You know how much
it costs? £15? £25? £35 if you want
a budget. Do you want that?
the things on the table... I want
that one. Is it signed?
It is a rare
and signed one!
Rare and signed! --
and un-signed. Can I have that one?
Thank you very much. I'm not going
to wear that...
I hope I'm not going
to upset Helen with my idea. She is
from the new statesman and I think
we have two fantastic political
weeklies. But the world is about
technology at the moment. What is
happening with Facebook, and Google.
That is where the action is. I would
give politicians a subscription to
the new scientist and Wired. That is
where the action is. What is
happening over there in Westminster?
Silicon valley and the laboratories
and the bedrooms of the whiz kids,
that's what we need to focus on.
Any kind of magazine is good,
to get people reading!
websites are quite good.
I do quite
like the Internet...
We have gifts
for you! This is for you, Helen.
It's all worth it!
Can we opened
them now? I haven't got anything for
you, I feel guilty!
You are on TV so
therefore you should be impressed!
will practice my happy and surprised
Aah... I can
put this on our tree... I've just
put up my true.
I have votes for
women. Next year it is the 100th
anniversary of the representation of
the People Act. I'm genuinely
Yes, very nice. I quite
like the Jeremy Corbyn annual as
All right, happy Christmas!
It's something you always wanted. I
really think that red is your
Manchester United red, but
There's update you on
the David Davis story about... I
mentioned it earlier. Basically,
David Davis has warned Downing
Street not to sack his Cabinet
colleague Damian Green as a result
of the wrongful attempt by former
officers to do him down. That is
what sources close to whom have told
the BBC. He says he feels he has a
dog in the fight because Damian
Green was his subordinate on the
team at the time. He threw a
protective cloak around his
colleague on a point of principle. I
suspect that story will develop
through the course of the day.
There's just time before we go
to find out the answer to our quiz.
The question was about Jeremy Corbyn
appearance on the cover of this
month's GQ magazine.
What make was the suit
he was wearing for the photo shoot?
b) Pri-mani, otherwise
known as Primark.
c) Dolce and Gabbana,
or d) Marks and Spencer?
So, Tim and Helen -
what's the correct answer?
I have my Marks & Spencer suit
We cannot have these
I Marks and Spencers.
Did you know that? I did, that their
Tropi didn't walking on was wearing
an incredibly expensive suit.
does that GQ cover say?
airbrushing is brilliant and
everybody should have done!
think he confirmed that he was
Either that or he has
a great moisturiser!
They are better
than the pictures in this annual...
Should the Labour leader be getting
I don't think they were
worrying in 1984...
Guys, I hope you
enjoy your Christmas presents. Happy
Christmas from the BBC.
That's all for today.
Thanks to Tim Montgomerie
and Helen Lewis.
The one o'clock news is starting
over on BBC One now.
Sarah Smith will be back
on Sunday on BBC One at 11
with the Sunday Politics.
And Jo will be back here
on BBC Two on Monday at midday
Amol Rajan is joined by journalists Helen Lewis and Tim Montgomerie to discuss the government's handling of the Brexit negotiations with Brexit Committee chair Hilary Benn and Conservative backbencher Jacob Rees Mogg. Plus a look at Christmas presents available for political fanatics.