0:00:38 > 0:00:41Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
0:00:41 > 0:00:43The Cabinet are meeting to discuss what Britain's relationship
0:00:43 > 0:00:47with the EU should look like after Brexit.
0:00:47 > 0:00:50It looks like it's all smiles for now but are there big battles
0:00:50 > 0:00:53ahead for the Prime Minister?
0:00:53 > 0:00:55Are social media companies doing enough to combat abusive
0:00:55 > 0:00:57comments posted online?
0:00:57 > 0:01:01We'll be joined by the chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee.
0:01:01 > 0:01:04The House of Lords debates cutting itself down to size.
0:01:04 > 0:01:11So will the ermine-clad turkeys vote for Christmas?
0:01:11 > 0:01:16If you want some last-minute Christmas ideas for the political
0:01:16 > 0:01:20geek in your family, we're Parliament's favourite bookworm on
0:01:20 > 0:01:29hand with his festive holiday reading list. All that in the next
0:01:29 > 0:01:36hour. With us is Matthew Parris. He was a Conservative MP once upon a
0:01:36 > 0:01:38time. Welcome to the Daily Politics.
0:01:38 > 0:01:40The Justice Secretary, David Lidington, says he wants
0:01:40 > 0:01:43to see a "more diverse" judiciary but has ruled out targets
0:01:43 > 0:01:46for appointing more black and minority ethnic judges.
0:01:46 > 0:01:51Mr Lidington has been responding formally to a review carried
0:01:51 > 0:01:54out by Labour MP David Lammy in to the way in which Black,
0:01:54 > 0:01:56Asian and minority ethnic people are treated in
0:01:56 > 0:01:57the criminal justice system.
0:01:57 > 0:02:00Among the 35 recommendations is a proposal calling
0:02:00 > 0:02:03for a national target to ensure there was a properly
0:02:03 > 0:02:07"representative" judiciary and magistracy.
0:02:07 > 0:02:14But Mr Lidington says targets aren't the answer.
0:02:14 > 0:02:18I think that is the wrong way to go about it. The judges today we are
0:02:18 > 0:02:24recruiting people who joined the legal profession 20 is a guess you
0:02:24 > 0:02:28need people with a lot of experience before they start to become a judge.
0:02:28 > 0:02:34I think a target is self-defeating. And it brings in to question the
0:02:34 > 0:02:37independence of judges which is a very important principle. The top
0:02:37 > 0:02:42judges are committed to a more diverse judiciary. We need to
0:02:42 > 0:02:46identify and encourage and mental brightening and women from black and
0:02:46 > 0:02:49Asian communities, who are lawyers and say, do you want to become a
0:02:49 > 0:02:53judge one day? This is how you go about it.Has the government ducks
0:02:53 > 0:02:57what would have been a radical proposal?Yes, I think they have.
0:02:57 > 0:03:02It's all very well saying it'll be 20 is until someone is a judge but
0:03:02 > 0:03:06we could start now. What goes in at one end of the pipeline will come
0:03:06 > 0:03:10out the other end and I don't see a particular reason why we are going
0:03:10 > 0:03:14to have target of any kind the law, the judiciary should be exempt from
0:03:14 > 0:03:19it.The figures are quite startling and the review concluded there was
0:03:19 > 0:03:23bias within the judicial system and one way of changing that would be to
0:03:23 > 0:03:27make it more representative of the people they are serving.I'm sure
0:03:27 > 0:03:32that's right and I'm sure the bias is unconscious. I'm sure nobody is
0:03:32 > 0:03:38consciously biased and nobody is writing rules to stop the
0:03:38 > 0:03:40diversification of the judicially. It is unconscious. Where you have
0:03:40 > 0:03:47unconscious buyers, you need to meet quotas and targets to reverse it.
0:03:47 > 0:03:53How long do you think it will take to eliminate that buys in the system
0:03:53 > 0:03:58and therefore reduce the figures that seemed to see far more people
0:03:58 > 0:04:01from minority backgrounds facing a magistrate?People need to see black
0:04:01 > 0:04:06faces on the bench, actually on the magistrates bench that has happened
0:04:06 > 0:04:12to some degree but further up, the Whigs, you don't see black faces
0:04:12 > 0:04:20often in judges wakes. If you did, if people did, it would be an
0:04:20 > 0:04:23inspiration to younger men and women from ethnic communities saying,
0:04:23 > 0:04:29people like you and me are judges. How else can you think the
0:04:29 > 0:04:33government can tackle this underrepresentation and also bias
0:04:33 > 0:04:38within the system, conscious or otherwise? David Lidington says we
0:04:38 > 0:04:41will reform if we cannot explain buyers.I don't think it means
0:04:41 > 0:04:46anything but I think he is just dodging and fudging as he is obliged
0:04:46 > 0:04:51to do. It's hard to know how you do it. The government doesn't choose
0:04:51 > 0:04:57judges and we don't want politicians choosing judges but I think there
0:04:57 > 0:05:00are always, behind-the-scenes, ways, committees of whose names we've
0:05:00 > 0:05:04never of Hurd, meetings wouldn't know about that our
0:05:04 > 0:05:08behind-the-scenes in which you can slowly encourage change. It would be
0:05:08 > 0:05:12slow but we should start.All right, let's leave it there. Some other
0:05:12 > 0:05:13breaking news today.
0:05:13 > 0:05:16The Electoral Commission has today fined the Liberal Democrats £18,000
0:05:16 > 0:05:17for breaching campaign finance rules
0:05:17 > 0:05:18during the EU referendum.
0:05:18 > 0:05:21Almost all of that fine comes from the Lib Dems having failed
0:05:21 > 0:05:24to provide acceptable invoices or receipts.
0:05:24 > 0:05:26The Electoral Commission said the rules were clear
0:05:26 > 0:05:28and it was "disappointing" the Lib Dems didn't
0:05:28 > 0:05:34follow them correctly.
0:05:34 > 0:05:37We asked the Liberal Democrats for an interview but no one was
0:05:37 > 0:05:37available.
0:05:37 > 0:05:40The party says mistakes in this case were a result of human error
0:05:40 > 0:05:43and and that steps were being taken to ensure that they weren't
0:05:43 > 0:05:46repeated in future.
0:05:46 > 0:05:48Now it's time for our daily quiz.
0:05:48 > 0:05:51Jeremy Corbyn has given an interview to Grazia magazine in which he said
0:05:51 > 0:05:57he believes he will "probably" be Prime Minister within the next year.
0:05:57 > 0:05:59The question for today is what was else did we learn?
0:05:59 > 0:06:02Was it a) that he's going to be eating stuffed marrow
0:06:02 > 0:06:03for Christmas dinner?
0:06:03 > 0:06:06b) that he's allergic to dogs.
0:06:06 > 0:06:09c) that he's "an accidental fashion icon"
0:06:09 > 0:06:14because of his dedication to normcore clothing?
0:06:14 > 0:06:16Or d) that he'd secretly like to be a stand-up comedian?
0:06:16 > 0:06:19At the end of the show Matthew will give us the correct answer.
0:06:19 > 0:06:22Theresa May has been holding a meeting of her full
0:06:22 > 0:06:25Cabinet this morning.
0:06:25 > 0:06:27Yesterday was a trimmed down version.
0:06:27 > 0:06:30Top of the agenda is the UK's future relationship with the EU,
0:06:30 > 0:06:33the first time the Cabinet has given the issue formal consideration.
0:06:33 > 0:06:36Yesterday, we reported on some of the major dividing lines among
0:06:36 > 0:06:38the Prime Minister key ministers, we'll talk about that
0:06:38 > 0:06:39a little more in a moment.
0:06:39 > 0:06:42But first let's take a look at how the Brexit negotiations
0:06:42 > 0:06:46are likely to proceed.
0:06:46 > 0:06:48Theresa May says her government will "aim high" in the next
0:06:48 > 0:06:50stage of EU negotiations.
0:06:50 > 0:06:55She wants a "bespoke and ambitious" trade deal with the EU after Brexit.
0:06:55 > 0:06:59But the EU's chief negotiator Michel Barnier has been playing down
0:06:59 > 0:07:02the idea of a bespoke deal.
0:07:02 > 0:07:04In an interview published today, he said that Britain
0:07:04 > 0:07:08will not get a special deal for the City of London.
0:07:08 > 0:07:10He said:
0:07:16 > 0:07:18Which is at odds with Brexit Secretary David Davis' plans
0:07:18 > 0:07:23for a "Canada plus plus plus" trade deal, or, in plain speak,
0:07:23 > 0:07:27a tariff-free area between the UK and the EU which explicitly
0:07:27 > 0:07:30includes financial services.
0:07:30 > 0:07:33At the same time, newspaper reports suggest Michael Gove will use
0:07:33 > 0:07:37today's meeting to argue for Britain to pull out of the EU's
0:07:37 > 0:07:40Working Time Directive.
0:07:40 > 0:07:44The Directive restricts the working week to 48 hours,
0:07:44 > 0:07:46and Gove and others think scrapping it would allow British workers
0:07:46 > 0:07:50to top up their pay.
0:07:50 > 0:07:51But other Cabinet members believe scrapping the Directive
0:07:51 > 0:07:56would weaken employment rights.
0:07:56 > 0:07:58Let's talk to our correspondent Ben Wright who's in Downing Street
0:07:58 > 0:08:04where the Cabinet has been meeting this morning.
0:08:04 > 0:08:08So, have you had your it to the door to hear whether they are all singing
0:08:08 > 0:08:15from the same hymn sheet, as I think Boris Johnson once said?, I imagine
0:08:15 > 0:08:18the message coming out of various rabid ministers via their special
0:08:18 > 0:08:22advisers will be one of unity around the table. In fact, this morning,
0:08:22 > 0:08:28Philip Hammond tweeted, and he doesn't tweet very much, saying he
0:08:28 > 0:08:33disagreed with the report in the Telegraph suggesting there are big
0:08:33 > 0:08:36disagreements in the subcommittee yesterday and that he was in a
0:08:36 > 0:08:40lonely minority arguing for close alignment with the EU after Brexit,
0:08:40 > 0:08:44so he stresses there is harmony. That is exactly the message they
0:08:44 > 0:08:49will want to send out from Number Ten today. The Cabinet broke up 20
0:08:49 > 0:08:54minutes ago, so they have gone back to their departments. The issue of
0:08:54 > 0:08:58the working Time directive would not be on the agenda today. And was keen
0:08:58 > 0:09:02to stress the government plans to maintain and enhance workers' rights
0:09:02 > 0:09:07after we've left the EU. I think what to do's meeting was all about
0:09:07 > 0:09:10was discussing the broad principles of the sort of trading arrangement
0:09:10 > 0:09:15the UK hopes to get with the EU after Brexit. I don't think they got
0:09:15 > 0:09:19into specifics, pretty broad brush, and I imagine the Prime Minister was
0:09:19 > 0:09:25telling her cabinet they should aim high and they can get the best of
0:09:25 > 0:09:30both worlds.Does that mean that after the recess, both sides, one
0:09:30 > 0:09:37that wants closer alliance and one that wants divergences, will be
0:09:37 > 0:09:42plotting how to secure that Brexit in time for January?They will
0:09:42 > 0:09:48because the window is tight. We know that the EU want to nail down the
0:09:48 > 0:09:52terms of the transition agreement early in the New Year and I think
0:09:52 > 0:09:55they will come forward with their negotiating guidelines for
0:09:55 > 0:09:58discussing the second phase and their idea for how the trading
0:09:58 > 0:10:03relationship should work with the UK after Brexit. They want those
0:10:03 > 0:10:07guidelines in place by March and we expect the Prime Minister to make a
0:10:07 > 0:10:11big speech early in the New Year along the lines of her Florence
0:10:11 > 0:10:17speech, setting out the sort of aims and priorities she wants from that
0:10:17 > 0:10:20huge trade relationship. In the next five or six weeks, this is going to
0:10:20 > 0:10:24be argued intensively on the question needs to be settled so the
0:10:24 > 0:10:29harmony wheeze will hear about will be tested once they get into the
0:10:29 > 0:10:32detail of how they envisage this relationship working in the future.
0:10:32 > 0:10:36I think what is going to become abundantly clear early on is that
0:10:36 > 0:10:40the number of red lines the government have already spelt out,
0:10:40 > 0:10:50leaving the single market, no big money for the EU limits the kind of
0:10:50 > 0:10:57deal the UK can get. And the consistent message from the EU is
0:10:57 > 0:11:04that the UK just cannot view the single market as some sort of buffet
0:11:04 > 0:11:08to grace from, picking the best bits. This comes with very clear
0:11:08 > 0:11:13obligations and costs, and if the UK wants to move away from that, it
0:11:13 > 0:11:16will lose a significant amount of access and I think that is where the
0:11:16 > 0:11:21discussion in the cabinet is going to be.Thank you very much. Brexit
0:11:21 > 0:11:26has seen a boon for one tribe, the political think tank.
0:11:26 > 0:11:28Joining me now are two of their number, Victoria Hewson
0:11:28 > 0:11:35from the Legatum Institute and Tom Kibasi from IPPR.
0:11:35 > 0:11:38Welcome to both of you. Starting with you, Victoria, do you agree
0:11:38 > 0:11:48with Ben that having read lines, so many of them politically, that will
0:11:48 > 0:11:54limit the real?It sets out some parameters. Once the policy was
0:11:54 > 0:11:59formulated that we would be leaving the customs union and the single
0:11:59 > 0:12:03market and also leaving the direct jurisdiction of the European Court
0:12:03 > 0:12:10of Justice, then that guides you in a certain direction of working
0:12:10 > 0:12:13towards a free trade agreement albeit a very deep and comprehensive
0:12:13 > 0:12:19free trade agreement that should realistically be able to go much
0:12:19 > 0:12:23further than any free trade agreement before simply because we
0:12:23 > 0:12:26start from such a position of openness towards each other's
0:12:26 > 0:12:31markets.Or does mean there's red lines will turn pink racing?We saw
0:12:31 > 0:12:37the government was prepared to compromise on its redline so having
0:12:37 > 0:12:41told the EU they could go whistle about the divorce Bill, having
0:12:41 > 0:12:44resisted the role of the European Court in the protection of citizens
0:12:44 > 0:12:48rights, the government caved on every single one of its red lines.
0:12:48 > 0:12:52There is no reason to think they wouldn't cave on their red lines in
0:12:52 > 0:12:56this next phase of negotiations.But you want full divergences from the
0:12:56 > 0:13:00EU, you are happy to some extent with what has been set up publicly
0:13:00 > 0:13:06by Theresa May. What would that look like, for our viewers?I think full
0:13:06 > 0:13:10divergences probably not the right way to describe it. I think having
0:13:10 > 0:13:16the right to diverged from EU legislation is extremely important
0:13:16 > 0:13:25but when we talk about divergences, we don't mean... A full reform and
0:13:25 > 0:13:31repeal. Or even reforming and repealing everything over a time. It
0:13:31 > 0:13:34will be a pathway towards doing things differently and reforming
0:13:34 > 0:13:38things where the government of the day thinks that a particular reform
0:13:38 > 0:13:47or change is the best way for the British economy.And you're talking
0:13:47 > 0:13:51about the body of regulation?Yes, it will be coming to force in the UK
0:13:51 > 0:13:55and it is a pathway of gradually reforming to make the economy more
0:13:55 > 0:14:00competitive and to improve various things in the context of
0:14:00 > 0:14:04international trade as well.And you'd like to see something called
0:14:04 > 0:14:08the shared market, what is it?It is a fresh proposal for a new model to
0:14:08 > 0:14:12govern our relationship with the EU and based on aligning ourselves in
0:14:12 > 0:14:16terms of regulation but allowing for the possibility of divergences time.
0:14:16 > 0:14:22I don't think we want to diverged. It is a very odd position. It is
0:14:22 > 0:14:25both anti-business and anti-worker. It is a strange position to have so
0:14:25 > 0:14:30we propose we should be aligned because that is in our interests,
0:14:30 > 0:14:34the interests of businesses and workers.Why do you see it is
0:14:34 > 0:14:38anti-business and anti-worker?It is one of those things that sounds
0:14:38 > 0:14:44persuasive but what most businesses will tell you that what they want is
0:14:44 > 0:14:49a simpler life, they want fewer regulations, not more. Soap proposal
0:14:49 > 0:14:53for regulatory divergences a proposal to create even more
0:14:53 > 0:15:03regulation for business.Is that how you envisage it?Not at all. Most
0:15:03 > 0:15:08businesses in this country only trade domestically in the UK market.
0:15:08 > 0:15:11Any business exports will always meet the regulatory requirements of
0:15:11 > 0:15:19its export market. And, so, the opportunities for improving
0:15:19 > 0:15:23competitiveness in our own economy and also introducing more
0:15:23 > 0:15:26competition by way of third-party trade deals is where the real games
0:15:26 > 0:15:31are to be found.Think about it from perspective of a business operating
0:15:31 > 0:15:35in the UK, dealing with one set of regulations at home, another set of
0:15:35 > 0:15:40regulations to trade into the single market, this makes no sense at all,
0:15:40 > 0:15:46it is bizarre.Bizarre, says Tim, obviously, tom-tom I should say,
0:15:46 > 0:15:56food is not agree with your vision. -- Tomba, I should say. -- Tom. What
0:15:56 > 0:16:01is the risk to employees, then you may fear that your regulation may
0:16:01 > 0:16:07roll back on gains that have been made.It is not on my list of areas,
0:16:07 > 0:16:11where I would like to see divergences occur at all, but
0:16:11 > 0:16:16ultimately, that will be a question for the government of the day, and
0:16:16 > 0:16:21any government which seeks to make changes will be judged at the ballot
0:16:21 > 0:16:27box.If we cannot have as good a deal as some people would see it, as
0:16:27 > 0:16:32Tom sees it, you would also like to replicate that kind of relationship,
0:16:32 > 0:16:36what is wrong with full diverging? Why not go for a full cutting point
0:16:36 > 0:16:42with the EU? Well, I think, between what Tom and what Victoria says, you
0:16:42 > 0:16:47see the grounds for possible agreement, and that is, you may call
0:16:47 > 0:16:51it the divergences of parallels. LAUGHTER
0:16:51 > 0:16:55Not another term(!) LAUGHTER The agreement is that we stay as we
0:16:55 > 0:17:00are for the moment, we stay a aligned, but we retain the right to
0:17:00 > 0:17:04diverges we want to, my guess is we would not want to, in the end it
0:17:04 > 0:17:09would not make sense, 40% of trade is with the EU, but there you have
0:17:09 > 0:17:13the sort of fudge that I could see sticking, if I can stick to one
0:17:13 > 0:17:18metaphor(!)is that the fudge you see?To an extent that is correct,
0:17:18 > 0:17:23we would only diverged, just because you can, does not mean that you have
0:17:23 > 0:17:26two, and you would automatically embark on a programme, bonfire of
0:17:26 > 0:17:32red tape, the hyperbole that is often used, in this debate. It will
0:17:32 > 0:17:36simply be where there is a good reason to change something, the UK
0:17:36 > 0:17:40Government will be able to do so, and it will do that by balancing the
0:17:40 > 0:17:46downside risks of any frictions that will then result in trade with the
0:17:46 > 0:17:49EU, against trade with the rest of the world, against the domestic
0:17:49 > 0:17:56market. So many areas that are ripe for reform, the Treasury, for
0:17:56 > 0:18:00example, produced an 80 page report last year about areas in financial
0:18:00 > 0:18:05services regulation where they could make improvements and improve
0:18:05 > 0:18:09competitiveness, to make it more proportionate, and less costly and
0:18:09 > 0:18:11bring it up to date with technological developments.Is that
0:18:11 > 0:18:16achievable when Michel Barnier says we will not get a bespoke trade
0:18:16 > 0:18:22deal, which allows us to pick the bits we would like and discard the
0:18:22 > 0:18:26rest, particularly around financial services?His comments on financial
0:18:26 > 0:18:30services, as I understand them, from the papers this morning, that they
0:18:30 > 0:18:35are never OK with any free trade deal, is not true, they are included
0:18:35 > 0:18:40in all...They were not in Canada. They were, there is a whole
0:18:40 > 0:18:45chapter... What it does not do is give mutual recognition of your home
0:18:45 > 0:18:49state, you would still have two apply for a licence. But, a starting
0:18:49 > 0:18:54point with Canada, we are much further advanced, so there was
0:18:54 > 0:19:00certainly a lot of scope.Is that just a starting negotiating position
0:19:00 > 0:19:03from Michel Barnier, and the EU will move when it comes to securing a
0:19:03 > 0:19:07trade deal, because they need us, as so many politicians claim, as much
0:19:07 > 0:19:12as we need them, if not more.So, 78% of Europe's capital markets are
0:19:12 > 0:19:16based in London, it is really important for the whole of the
0:19:16 > 0:19:20single market, but we should look carefully at what Michel Barnier has
0:19:20 > 0:19:24said, he has not said there can be no bespoke arrangement, one he has
0:19:24 > 0:19:28said is there can be no cherry picking, that means, you cannot have
0:19:28 > 0:19:30the benefits without the obligations, that should be obvious
0:19:30 > 0:19:34to all of us. What they are saying is, there is more room for
0:19:34 > 0:19:38compromise but the compromise cannot be one-sided, cannot be that we want
0:19:38 > 0:19:42all the benefits and will not take any of the burdens, have your cake
0:19:42 > 0:19:46and eat it, that is not a tenable position for either side.Which
0:19:46 > 0:19:50burdens would you be prepared to accept, in order to get the full
0:19:50 > 0:19:55combo offensive deal that you think would be good for Britain?As an
0:19:55 > 0:19:59example, if we are to benefit from regulatory development of the
0:19:59 > 0:20:03European Union, we should make a contribution towards that, we need
0:20:03 > 0:20:07to continue some form of financial contribution, that is a reasonable
0:20:07 > 0:20:10situation, we cannot so we want all the benefits of institutions and
0:20:10 > 0:20:14frameworks and rules but we are simply not prepared to pay the fare
0:20:14 > 0:20:19share.You would accept paying into an EU budget beyond the Clemente
0:20:19 > 0:20:23Sinn on transition period, we are going to be paying into a certain
0:20:23 > 0:20:28extent, but paying substantially more in order to have the benefits?
0:20:28 > 0:20:31Let's see what a fair contribution is, it is not one of those things
0:20:31 > 0:20:34you can put a number on but you have to commit something if you want to
0:20:34 > 0:20:38benefit.Freedom of movement, one of the other key pillars of the single
0:20:38 > 0:20:45market...?I find the rhetoric around the indivisibility of the
0:20:45 > 0:20:48four freedoms slightly ridiculous, it is not the holy trinity... The EU
0:20:48 > 0:20:51may say it is but they have compromised on freedom of movement
0:20:51 > 0:20:55in the past, contra Mize in with Lichtenstein, in terms of the number
0:20:55 > 0:20:59of people going in, they have compromised on Switzerland, certain
0:20:59 > 0:21:02sections, there is high and deployment, they get preferential
0:21:02 > 0:21:09job applications... And the deep and , offensive free trade agreement
0:21:09 > 0:21:14with Ukraine. -- compromised with Liechtenstein. They have contra Mize
0:21:14 > 0:21:20in the past.The new sense of optimism that Theresa May has, do
0:21:20 > 0:21:27you share?No, she has found another cul-de-sac to go up. She has
0:21:27 > 0:21:31agreement on phase one, by saying that we will stay in the single
0:21:31 > 0:21:35market, and the customs union, until we can think of a way of not having
0:21:35 > 0:21:40a hard border in Northern Ireland... But she is keeping afloat, in
0:21:40 > 0:21:43politics, keeping afloat is often the first thing you have to do.In
0:21:43 > 0:21:49terms of what will fly, with those who voted leave, do you think there
0:21:49 > 0:21:53will be an acceptance around continuing to pay into EU budget, if
0:21:53 > 0:21:59there was a good enough deal in the end of it?I think that would be
0:21:59 > 0:22:04fine, as Sam has suggested, if you wish to continue to participate in a
0:22:04 > 0:22:07particular programme it is perfectly reasonable to pay a cost towards
0:22:07 > 0:22:14that. There will be several agencies where, actually, it will be of
0:22:14 > 0:22:19reciprocal benefit because the UK has contributed greatly to financial
0:22:19 > 0:22:24services regulatory bodies, where it will be very useful for the EU as
0:22:24 > 0:22:27well to continue having access to our resources.We have a few moments
0:22:27 > 0:22:35to discuss this, thank you very much.
0:22:35 > 0:22:37And for more reporting and analysis of Brexit,
0:22:37 > 0:22:46check out the BBC News website, that's bbc.co.uk/brexit.
0:22:53 > 0:22:55Now, it used to be a truth universally acknowledged that
0:22:55 > 0:22:58you could only win elections in Britain from the centre ground.
0:22:58 > 0:23:00But was the recent General Election a return to the traditional battles
0:23:00 > 0:23:02between left and right?
0:23:02 > 0:23:04Let's just a look at the pitches from both Theresa May
0:23:04 > 0:23:06and Jeremy Corbyn back in June.
0:23:06 > 0:23:09And I believe we can and must take this opportunity to build a great
0:23:09 > 0:23:10meritocracy here in Britain.
0:23:10 > 0:23:12Now, let me be clear about what that means.
0:23:12 > 0:23:14It means making Britain a country where everyone,
0:23:14 > 0:23:16of whatever background, has the chance to go as far
0:23:16 > 0:23:19as their talent and their hard work will take them.
0:23:19 > 0:23:21A country that asks not where you have come
0:23:21 > 0:23:23from but where you are going to.
0:23:23 > 0:23:25It means making Britain a country that works not
0:23:25 > 0:23:33for the privileged few, but for everyone.
0:23:33 > 0:23:35Labour's mission over the next five years is to change all of that.
0:23:35 > 0:23:37Our manifesto sets out how.
0:23:37 > 0:23:41With a programme that is radical and responsible.
0:23:41 > 0:23:47A programme that will reverse our national priorities
0:23:47 > 0:23:49and put the interests of the many first.
0:23:49 > 0:23:53We will change our country while managing within our means.
0:23:53 > 0:23:55And we will lead us through Brexit
0:23:55 > 0:24:04while putting the preservation of jobs first.
0:24:04 > 0:24:06Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May launching their respective
0:24:06 > 0:24:09manifestos earlier this year.
0:24:09 > 0:24:11But does the traditional left-right divide explain what's happening
0:24:11 > 0:24:12in British politics right now?
0:24:12 > 0:24:14Or is there something else going on?
0:24:14 > 0:24:16To explain we're joined by our favourite psephologist
0:24:16 > 0:24:26Professor John Curtice from Glasgow.
0:24:27 > 0:24:31Is it no longer about left and right in politics?It is still about left
0:24:31 > 0:24:35and right but the crucial thing is, in the wake of the election, it is
0:24:35 > 0:24:40no longer just about left and right, because the truth is, despite the
0:24:40 > 0:24:42creative ambiguity in which both parties engage the election campaign
0:24:42 > 0:24:47and frankly have continued to engage thereafter on the question of
0:24:47 > 0:24:52Brexit, voters themselves seem to have decided that Brexit still
0:24:52 > 0:24:57matters and also that they reflected their reviews of Brexit in the way
0:24:57 > 0:24:59in which they voted. The Conservative Party quite clearly
0:24:59 > 0:25:05lost ground, among those who voted remain, who want a soft Brexit, who
0:25:05 > 0:25:09are not concerned about immigration. They gained ground among levers and
0:25:09 > 0:25:13those who wanted a hard Brexit. Labour gain some ground among
0:25:13 > 0:25:18levers, among hard Brexit years, but they gained much more from Remainers
0:25:18 > 0:25:21and soft Brexit and those not concerned about immigration. --
0:25:21 > 0:25:26Leavers. Attitudes towards Brexit is not a left right issue, going back
0:25:26 > 0:25:31to what happened in the election, in the referendum, in June, 2016,
0:25:31 > 0:25:35whether or not you are left-wing or right-wing, made virtually no
0:25:35 > 0:25:40difference at all to your chances of voting remain or leave. Rather, that
0:25:40 > 0:25:45referendum, with immigration the central issue, was where one instead
0:25:45 > 0:25:50the crucial division was between social liberals and social
0:25:50 > 0:25:53conservatives, broadly speaking, those people on one hand who are
0:25:53 > 0:25:58happy with a relatively diverse society where we have multiple
0:25:58 > 0:26:01languages and multiple religions and people do not necessarily all agree
0:26:01 > 0:26:05on the social mores to which we should adhere. In contrast, social
0:26:05 > 0:26:10conservatives think we need a much more cohesive society and much less
0:26:10 > 0:26:14comfortable about these things. If you are a social conservative, you
0:26:14 > 0:26:21voted leave in the referendum, a social liberal voted for remain.
0:26:21 > 0:26:24Because people were reflecting views about Brexit in whether they were
0:26:24 > 0:26:26swinging to or from the Conservatives and whether or not
0:26:26 > 0:26:30they were likely to go to labour, therefore, that distinction between
0:26:30 > 0:26:35social conservatives and social liberals became much more marked
0:26:35 > 0:26:42whether or not people voted Labour or Conservative in June, left and
0:26:42 > 0:26:46right did not matter so much as it had historically. The movement is
0:26:46 > 0:26:51rarely explained by whether you are a social liberal or socially
0:26:51 > 0:26:55conservative, not whether you are left-wing or right-wing.Matthew,
0:26:55 > 0:26:58for you, the whole EU referendum was extremely important, would you say
0:26:58 > 0:27:04that was more important than your traditional left right politics?
0:27:04 > 0:27:06Yes, I have gone slightly mad(!) LAUGHTER
0:27:06 > 0:27:11...Over Brexit, a lot of people have, I dream about it and think
0:27:11 > 0:27:15about it all the time, I have found myself feeling I could much more
0:27:15 > 0:27:19easily be friends with someone in the Labour Party that was against
0:27:19 > 0:27:22Brexit than with somebody in the Conservative Party that was in
0:27:22 > 0:27:27favour of it.Have you thought about voting Labour?I have thought about
0:27:27 > 0:27:31it, but not with Jeremy Corbyn as leader, that brings us back to the
0:27:31 > 0:27:35topic you introduced at the beginning, I think Labour have with
0:27:35 > 0:27:41great success mind the possibilities of attracting support from the
0:27:41 > 0:27:45extreme, from the left, and the Tories have with great success, mind
0:27:45 > 0:27:48the support they thought they could get from the right.But they both
0:27:48 > 0:27:52dominated the results are they must also have been taking from in
0:27:52 > 0:27:56between...Yes, and in order for one to gain a distinctive advantage over
0:27:56 > 0:28:00the other, it must be to the centre they look for the new support. --
0:28:00 > 0:28:05decisive advantage.Do you think that this is a bubble, that this is
0:28:05 > 0:28:09a temporary state of affairs, in terms of the way people are voting
0:28:09 > 0:28:14in their allegiances, to social liberals and social conservatives,
0:28:14 > 0:28:21or do you think that this is going to be sustained, that it is going to
0:28:21 > 0:28:25endure.We will probably be talking about "Brexit" this time next year
0:28:25 > 0:28:29and the year after that. The stimulus seems to have brought it
0:28:29 > 0:28:33about, the EU referendum, as long as we are arguing about Brexit we will
0:28:33 > 0:28:38see this distinction between social liberals and social conservatives,
0:28:38 > 0:28:41and frankly it creates difficulties for both political parties. Matthew
0:28:41 > 0:28:47is not alone, bearing in mind, the Conservative Party now has a very
0:28:47 > 0:28:52strong, very pro-leave electorate, whose views of running the economy
0:28:52 > 0:28:55is primarily protectionist, and very much at odds with what you might
0:28:55 > 0:28:59regard as traditional centre-right Conservative voter who runs a
0:28:59 > 0:29:03business. As you can now see, there are views about how the economy
0:29:03 > 0:29:07should be run are very much at odds with those of the Conservative
0:29:07 > 0:29:11Party. Meanwhile, the Labour Party has a tension, in winning over
0:29:11 > 0:29:17remain voters, it has won over young graduates, and it has won that
0:29:17 > 0:29:20community much more successfully than working-class voters but it is
0:29:20 > 0:29:23working class voters who the Labour Party feel they should be
0:29:23 > 0:29:28representing. Both parties have elections as a result of this
0:29:28 > 0:29:33process which is at odds of traditional conceptions of where
0:29:33 > 0:29:36their core support lies.Will the parties change their offer to bridge
0:29:36 > 0:29:45the divide? Within their own political tribe? Or, will they just
0:29:45 > 0:29:47stick to the vaguely traditional offer that both these parties make
0:29:47 > 0:29:51to those sets of people in the hope that once we get through the Brexit
0:29:51 > 0:29:54negotiations, normal business will resume?
0:30:01 > 0:30:08It is going to be difficult for the parties because we are reaching the
0:30:08 > 0:30:14point in the Brexit negotiations where the hard choices will have to
0:30:14 > 0:30:19be made and where what Brexit actually does mean becomes more
0:30:19 > 0:30:23apparent. For example, if in the end the Conservative government actually
0:30:23 > 0:30:26does and secure annex it from freedom of movement or something
0:30:26 > 0:30:32that looks like it, it will be in trouble because that is what it is
0:30:32 > 0:30:37electret expects. Meanwhile if the Labour Party ends up looking too
0:30:37 > 0:30:44hard on Brexit, it will put up risk that young voters will not vote for
0:30:44 > 0:30:51it. These next few months will be important because Brexit is likely
0:30:51 > 0:30:56to be the central issue, it will be difficult for the parties to
0:30:56 > 0:31:00triangulate over these various divides. They are going to have to
0:31:00 > 0:31:03take a position.
0:31:03 > 0:31:05And now for a special Christmas treat, here is some proper
0:31:05 > 0:31:06Parliamentary navel-gazing.
0:31:06 > 0:31:09Because this morning the House of Lords has been debating the...
0:31:09 > 0:31:10Er...
0:31:10 > 0:31:11House of Lords.
0:31:11 > 0:31:12Yes, you heard that correctly.
0:31:12 > 0:31:15Specifically the Lords have been debating a proposal to reduce
0:31:15 > 0:31:17the size of the so-called upper chamber to a mere 600 peers.
0:31:17 > 0:31:18Let's have a listen.
0:31:18 > 0:31:24The committee have been encouraged by the response of noble Lords and,
0:31:24 > 0:31:27indeed, to those outside the house as well. For their part the
0:31:27 > 0:31:29government have made clear they are interested in finding out whether
0:31:29 > 0:31:32the committee's inclusions command widespread support in the house. And
0:31:32 > 0:31:37I hope in today's debate, as which we can see involves almost 100 noble
0:31:37 > 0:31:40Lords, this will serve that purpose and demonstrate the proposals have
0:31:40 > 0:31:41strong backing.
0:31:41 > 0:31:45I'm joined now by Baroness Taylor - she was on the Committee which has
0:31:45 > 0:31:47produced the report calling for a reduction in the size
0:31:47 > 0:31:49of the House of Lords.
0:31:49 > 0:31:55Welcome to the Daily Politics. Reducing it by a quarter, 15 year
0:31:55 > 0:31:59terms, minimum 15% crossbenchers. Why?There's a great deal of
0:31:59 > 0:32:02pressure and criticism of the House of Lords because it is so large. A
0:32:02 > 0:32:06lot of people don't appreciate the work the Lords does. They see us in
0:32:06 > 0:32:13the chamber, the picture you've got there in everybody in their ermine.
0:32:13 > 0:32:18You look so lovely in it.They don't realise the work goes on. Heck of a
0:32:18 > 0:32:22lot of really good work goes on in the House of but it is large. Prime
0:32:22 > 0:32:28ministers have used the House of Lords to give rewards to friends and
0:32:28 > 0:32:31colleagues, and if we carry on like this there will be no end to the
0:32:31 > 0:32:35size of the House of Lords are what we're trying to do is not only
0:32:35 > 0:32:39reduce the size of the House of Lords now that actually make sure
0:32:39 > 0:32:43there is a sustainable reduction and that is why we are suggesting a cap
0:32:43 > 0:32:47of 600.The proposals are being debated. How will you progress
0:32:47 > 0:32:54forwards on this?The idea that it is long-term, we should aim at 600,
0:32:54 > 0:32:59we should say that from now on any new pier should survey capped time
0:32:59 > 0:33:05of 15 years. And that will allow existing members to retire and for
0:33:05 > 0:33:09every two that retired, only one person can be appointed. So, that
0:33:09 > 0:33:16will allow existing members to serve out their term. They were promised
0:33:16 > 0:33:19life peerages and they can keep them but new members can only served for
0:33:19 > 0:33:2515 years. And we are also seeing the Monica News their power to create
0:33:25 > 0:33:29non-sitting peers so if you want to recognise some tea for public
0:33:29 > 0:33:32service, you can give them a peerage but not a seat in the House of
0:33:32 > 0:33:37Lords.Is this radical enough or incremental?All peers should be
0:33:37 > 0:33:44non-sitting. What is my lord, my lady, and ermine got to do with the
0:33:44 > 0:33:48House of Lords legislative job? They shouldn't be called Lords. We just
0:33:48 > 0:33:58need 300 people who really know their subject, who were once -- were
0:33:58 > 0:34:03not once great doctors or engineers but who are great right now. You'd
0:34:03 > 0:34:09need a body not in control of the Prime Minister. Somebody said one
0:34:09 > 0:34:13queue or for admiring the House of Lords is to watch it.You'd be
0:34:13 > 0:34:17surprised how many people do watch the House of Lords.But do they
0:34:17 > 0:34:21admire it when they watch at?We get letters and e-mails saying we watch
0:34:21 > 0:34:27this debate, what about this, what about that. It is good quality
0:34:27 > 0:34:33debate.It may be but you can still retain good quality debate with 200,
0:34:33 > 0:34:38300 peers.We did originally when we had the report from the Labour
0:34:38 > 0:34:42Party, we suggested 450 on the basis of numbers necessary to fill the
0:34:42 > 0:34:46committees and we're not saying 600 and that is it forever, that is what
0:34:46 > 0:34:51we are suggesting and the house onto a smaller number. Baroness Boothroyd
0:34:51 > 0:34:54said a significantly smaller number, she wants to be hundred 50, as you
0:34:54 > 0:34:59would. What we are trying to establish as the direction of
0:34:59 > 0:35:04travel. We're not going to be changed by legislation.Because you
0:35:04 > 0:35:10will not get it through?Partly because of that but also because any
0:35:10 > 0:35:15legislation that gives the House of Lords a legitimate democratic
0:35:15 > 0:35:18mandate will challenge the house of commons more and the last thing we
0:35:18 > 0:35:22want is to elected chambers at loggerheads with each other.Do you
0:35:22 > 0:35:26agree with that?I do. We should have a grand revising committee and
0:35:26 > 0:35:30it should be an honour to serve on the committee and you shouldn't
0:35:30 > 0:35:34serve more than five years, you should be chosen according to
0:35:34 > 0:35:38qualifications rather than according to who you were once acquainted with
0:35:38 > 0:35:43in politics or elsewhere and you shouldn't have all the trappings,
0:35:43 > 0:35:50toss it all out, all the old codgers.I think they speak very
0:35:50 > 0:35:55highly of you, to!I think he is auditioning for a position.I'm too
0:35:55 > 0:35:59old!Do you think the public would support of getting rid of the
0:35:59 > 0:36:03trappings and having it as a professional body that scrutinises,
0:36:03 > 0:36:09so no cafes, no bars, no ermine? Most workplaces have tea rooms.But
0:36:09 > 0:36:13you know what I mean. I've no problems getting rid of the ermine.
0:36:13 > 0:36:18I've got no problem with the title but what we are trying to focus on
0:36:18 > 0:36:22is what is the role of the House of Lords?It is to be the second
0:36:22 > 0:36:28chamber, the second chamber, to hold the government to account, and we
0:36:28 > 0:36:32want to do it any more focused way and if will reduce the numbers, we
0:36:32 > 0:36:36well have more respect for the house and people understand its role and
0:36:36 > 0:36:40see the actual value added it gives to the country.What about the
0:36:40 > 0:36:46political aspect of it? In terms of how they are appointed to this grand
0:36:46 > 0:36:50committee that you have thought about, would they still be political
0:36:50 > 0:36:55appointees? Would it represent the House of Commons?I'd say not. I
0:36:55 > 0:36:59don't include need more than one legislature, one elected legislature
0:36:59 > 0:37:03and what you'd be looking for in a grand revising committee would be
0:37:03 > 0:37:06expertise. I'd have thought your political inclinations should have
0:37:06 > 0:37:10very little to do with it.Do you agree with that?I think you do need
0:37:10 > 0:37:16expertise and we have a good deal of expertise and we need tactical
0:37:16 > 0:37:23proposals.There are too many of youth.There are, and we sing let's
0:37:23 > 0:37:27reduce it and make it more manageable, see it is more focused
0:37:27 > 0:37:32and get more public respect too many of you are people who once did
0:37:32 > 0:37:37something.There are too many oness, that is what we need to get rid of.
0:37:37 > 0:37:45As someone who is still there, some of us get revised. You've got to
0:37:45 > 0:37:48have government ministers in the House of Lords.Do you have to have
0:37:48 > 0:37:53as many of them? To have to have as many people who did once have a job
0:37:53 > 0:37:57in government as an adviser or working for a party?It is a
0:37:57 > 0:38:02question of balance and what we've said in this report is that the
0:38:02 > 0:38:06crossbenchers should be 20% and I think we recognise the rule of
0:38:06 > 0:38:10crossbenchers and we appreciate their role but you do need the
0:38:10 > 0:38:14reality that comes from political experience as well.One of the
0:38:14 > 0:38:17controversial elements of the report as it makes no recommendations to
0:38:17 > 0:38:21change the status is in election of the hereditary peers or 26 bishops.
0:38:21 > 0:38:28Why not? I'm committed to supporting any legislation that gets rid of the
0:38:28 > 0:38:31hereditary by-elections and I'd like to see the situation with the
0:38:31 > 0:38:38bishops change. It is rather strange that we have one group of religious
0:38:38 > 0:38:45people that and not Catholics and dues and Hindus and Muslims but that
0:38:45 > 0:38:51when change without legislation. The bishops say they will accept the
0:38:51 > 0:38:55spirit of the report and they will cooperate in any way if the house
0:38:55 > 0:38:58wants to go in this direction so there is scope for change and who
0:38:58 > 0:39:03falls a got a private members bill which actually would end the
0:39:03 > 0:39:08hereditary by-elections which the hereditary people are not against.
0:39:08 > 0:39:11The Countess of Maher said if you have a hereditary by-election,
0:39:11 > 0:39:16you're making it all male because there are no women coming up through
0:39:16 > 0:39:19that route. There is the build-up of support for getting rid of the
0:39:19 > 0:39:23hereditary by-elections but this committee couldn't look at
0:39:23 > 0:39:25legislative changes because the government said they wouldn't
0:39:25 > 0:39:38support any at this stage.Thank you very much for coming in.
0:39:40 > 0:39:42Now, yesterday the Speaker of the House of Commons,
0:39:42 > 0:39:44John Bercow praised Mp's for being "dedicated, hardworking,
0:39:44 > 0:39:45committed public servants".
0:39:45 > 0:39:48They were debating harassment in public life following last weeks
0:39:48 > 0:39:50report from the Committee on Standards in Public Life.
0:39:50 > 0:39:53Much of the abuse MPs receive is on social media platforms
0:39:53 > 0:39:55and the Home Secretary Amber Rudd said the government will look
0:39:55 > 0:39:58at proposals to create new legislation to protect people.
0:39:58 > 0:39:59Here's a flavour of yesterday's debate.
0:39:59 > 0:40:00Everybody should be treated with tolerance,
0:40:00 > 0:40:01decency, and respect.
0:40:01 > 0:40:04Which party and MP stands for how they choose to vote, campaign,
0:40:04 > 0:40:07or present themselves should not be met with vitriolic and disgusting
0:40:07 > 0:40:11messages, suggesting that they should be hung in public
0:40:11 > 0:40:14or get what's coming to them, or perhaps, most unacceptable
0:40:14 > 0:40:19of all, that their unborn child should die.
0:40:19 > 0:40:21The report makes recommendations for government, for political
0:40:21 > 0:40:25parties, social media companies, the media, law enforcement
0:40:25 > 0:40:29and everyone in public life.
0:40:29 > 0:40:35This reflects the fact that tackling abuse is a joint responsibility.
0:40:35 > 0:40:37We will consider the recommendations in detail and we will respond
0:40:37 > 0:40:40to them in due course.
0:40:40 > 0:40:45When politicians get death threats as a result of how
0:40:45 > 0:40:48they vote in this house, that is not the primary
0:40:48 > 0:40:52responsibility of social media companies.
0:40:52 > 0:40:56If anyone is responsible, it is the headline writers
0:40:56 > 0:41:00who accuse judges of being enemies of the people, and elected
0:41:00 > 0:41:06members of parliament as mutineers and saboteurs
0:41:06 > 0:41:12when all they are doing is exercising their civil right
0:41:12 > 0:41:15to cast their vote in this House of Commons.
0:41:15 > 0:41:23In voting as you think fit, on any political issue, you,
0:41:23 > 0:41:31as members of Parliament, are never mutineers...
0:41:31 > 0:41:34You are never traitors...
0:41:34 > 0:41:37You are never malcontents.
0:41:37 > 0:41:41You are never enemies of the people.
0:41:41 > 0:41:47You are dedicated, hard-working, committed public servants doing
0:41:47 > 0:41:52what you believe to be right.
0:41:52 > 0:41:55I'm joined now by the Chair of the Home Affairs Select
0:41:55 > 0:41:56Committee, Yvette Cooper.
0:41:56 > 0:41:58She's had representatives from Facebook, Google and Twitter
0:41:58 > 0:42:05before her committee this morning.
0:42:05 > 0:42:09Welcome to the programme. You've spoken to representatives from those
0:42:09 > 0:42:15companies and you asked them about taking down abusive tweets, and to
0:42:15 > 0:42:20Google about offensive videos. Are you satisfied with the actions?No.
0:42:20 > 0:42:24I think they have done more competitive last time we took
0:42:24 > 0:42:27evidence from them back in February. They have appointed more staff, they
0:42:27 > 0:42:31are starting to increase their standards and to search for things
0:42:31 > 0:42:36so that is progress. However we have had too many examples of things we
0:42:36 > 0:42:41had raised with them before which they clearly recognised, which were
0:42:41 > 0:42:44either illegal or breached community standards, where action wasn't taken
0:42:44 > 0:42:52fast enough or at all and that included anti-Semitic tweets. It
0:42:52 > 0:43:01included far right, national action, video. I had to go to YouTube, to
0:43:01 > 0:43:05the top, to make sure it was taken down.What is their explanation for
0:43:05 > 0:43:10not doing it?We are working on it, they say, we are doing better than
0:43:10 > 0:43:20we were before. And they are than -- they have huge reach and power and
0:43:20 > 0:43:24wealth and resources which is why we are going to keep pressing them to
0:43:24 > 0:43:27do more because in the end public safety is at risk here.Put
0:43:27 > 0:43:32suspended accounts related to Britain first. Do you think that is
0:43:32 > 0:43:35because they were going to come before your committee that they got
0:43:35 > 0:43:45around to it?Obviously, you depend on... You shouldn't rely on
0:43:45 > 0:43:47Parliamentary hearings for organisations like Twitter or
0:43:47 > 0:43:52Facebook or YouTube to do the right thing. They should do it on the end
0:43:52 > 0:43:55without a deadline of a parliamentary hearing. It is welcome
0:43:55 > 0:43:59they've taken action. We questioned Facebook why they haven't taken some
0:43:59 > 0:44:06action and on the way in which we need to look at the off-line and
0:44:06 > 0:44:09online activities, if what they are doing is breaching standards.I
0:44:09 > 0:44:13listened into some of the hearing this morning and get the impression
0:44:13 > 0:44:16they are trying to introduce new technology to deal with it because
0:44:16 > 0:44:21new Twitter accounts have already appeared representing characters in
0:44:21 > 0:44:24Britian First said in a way are you ever going to get these companies to
0:44:24 > 0:44:29do what he wants them to do in terms of banning these accounts
0:44:29 > 0:44:35altogether? New ones will always appear.There is always a question
0:44:35 > 0:44:39about the pace of technology. I think it is clear they can do more.
0:44:39 > 0:44:43We found too many examples of where they simply will not moving fast
0:44:43 > 0:44:47enough and also where if it was the Home Affairs Select Committee
0:44:47 > 0:44:51reporting things to them, in the end they did respond but, actually, if
0:44:51 > 0:44:55it was people just responding, pressing the button and clicking,
0:44:55 > 0:44:59often Alternaria complains were not addressed enough. And was another
0:44:59 > 0:45:05which concerns me is some of the way in which the technology is promoting
0:45:05 > 0:45:10extremism. If you go on one far right racist site, actually they
0:45:10 > 0:45:14will recommend more. There is effectively a process of bringing
0:45:14 > 0:45:17that can take place through technology and if it is taking place
0:45:17 > 0:45:21for the far right extremism we were challenging, the fear is it is also
0:45:21 > 0:45:25taking place on some of the Muslim extremism as well.This was
0:45:25 > 0:45:30inevitable of the printing press. As long as somebody can spread around
0:45:30 > 0:45:35what they think about some deals, whether they do it by word-of-mouth
0:45:35 > 0:45:40or pamphlet, whether they do it in letters... All my life in politics
0:45:40 > 0:45:43and the media, I have received horrible letters from people,
0:45:43 > 0:45:47calling me the most appalling things.Has it got worse?None of
0:45:47 > 0:45:52the letters were filed, I'd open, laugh and throw them away. If people
0:45:52 > 0:45:57are busily on social media, I don't read it. You can't stop people doing
0:45:57 > 0:46:01these things except by a system of censorship and you'd have to have
0:46:01 > 0:46:06hundreds of thousands of sensors on Google and Twitter the rest actually
0:46:06 > 0:46:10pre-approving everything before it was put up.Is registration the
0:46:10 > 0:46:15answer?I don't think this is about preapproval at all, I think that
0:46:15 > 0:46:19there is a difference between promoting free speech and making
0:46:19 > 0:46:23death threats.-- legislation.We have a criminal line that needs to
0:46:23 > 0:46:28be drawn.If it is against the law, of course.And line against motoring
0:46:28 > 0:46:34extremism, and things that become terrorism. National action, it is a
0:46:34 > 0:46:37banned organisation, because of its danger and the government assessment
0:46:37 > 0:46:41of the terror threat...What about legislation to enforce these
0:46:41 > 0:46:44companies to do it.We will be looking at that, the select
0:46:44 > 0:46:48committee will be looking at that, what other measures are needed, we
0:46:48 > 0:46:51recommended there should be fines against social media companies
0:46:51 > 0:46:55simply not removing a legal dangerous content fast enough, and
0:46:55 > 0:47:02not responding, but we also want to look more widely at other
0:47:02 > 0:47:06legislative proposals, something must be done.You would support sums
0:47:06 > 0:47:09legislation making them be seen as publishers, not platforms, then they
0:47:09 > 0:47:14would be liable?We have asked them for more evidence, committees have
0:47:14 > 0:47:17made the proposal, we have not looked at that yet and we want to do
0:47:17 > 0:47:21so. In the end, this is about promoting democracy and free speech,
0:47:21 > 0:47:26it is about making sure that nobody's voices are drowned out by
0:47:26 > 0:47:29racism or by extremism, and about making sure that all voices can be
0:47:29 > 0:47:35heard. Social media is the new forum. For discussions. It is really
0:47:35 > 0:47:38important everyone should feel part of that and you do not get some
0:47:38 > 0:47:44people drowned out by extremism... Nobody is drowned out by extremism
0:47:44 > 0:47:48but... Illegal, I agree with you, if it is illegal, people should be
0:47:48 > 0:47:53stopped, but I am suspicious of your word dangerous, I have known so many
0:47:53 > 0:47:58politicians with so many different ideas of what might be dangerous. If
0:47:58 > 0:48:02it appeared in print. The law is the law, the law... The law should be
0:48:02 > 0:48:06adhered to, but I think I wide range of opinion, including offensive
0:48:06 > 0:48:11opinion, including violent opinion, so long as it does not incite
0:48:11 > 0:48:16breaking the law, I really don't think that once you start trying to
0:48:16 > 0:48:19distinguish between what is free speech that people are allowed and
0:48:19 > 0:48:24what is free speech people are not allowed, it is a slippery slope.We
0:48:24 > 0:48:29have laws about incitement.And of course you need a very robust
0:48:29 > 0:48:31debate, you need people challenge, people will be offended, there needs
0:48:31 > 0:48:35to be those robust debate, especially when it comes to holding
0:48:35 > 0:48:39politicians to account.Is it putting off politicians entering
0:48:39 > 0:48:43public life, that was the point made by the committee on standards in
0:48:43 > 0:48:46public life, that social media was the most significant factor driving
0:48:46 > 0:48:50abuse and harassment during the general election and it reached a
0:48:50 > 0:48:54tipping point and would put people off entering politics. Blue nobody
0:48:54 > 0:48:58who does not want to be abused sometimes in unfair term should
0:48:58 > 0:49:02enter public life. Because you always will be.People should not
0:49:02 > 0:49:05face death threats, they should not find there is a threat that their
0:49:05 > 0:49:08children and their staff start to become fearful. That is the kind of
0:49:08 > 0:49:13thing we have seen, the targeted harassment and bullying, that kind
0:49:13 > 0:49:17of threat, which can mean people do not speak out. It is our job to
0:49:17 > 0:49:21speak out in a democracy and we want more people speaking out, we should
0:49:21 > 0:49:26be able to do this in a way that does not involve the kind of poison
0:49:26 > 0:49:30that can end up undermining democracy. We have to stand up for
0:49:30 > 0:49:35democracy and not let it be undermined.Diane Abbott brought up
0:49:35 > 0:49:38the issue of headlines calling people new to nears and traitors, do
0:49:38 > 0:49:45they have a responsibility to regard and look at those headlines. --
0:49:45 > 0:49:51mutineers.They do not, of course, I think the Daily Mail is stupid to
0:49:51 > 0:49:55talk about enemies of the people! The Daily Telegraph is stupid to
0:49:55 > 0:49:59talk about mutineers but a newspaper has every right to characterise
0:49:59 > 0:50:03those people whose political opinions it disagrees with in any
0:50:03 > 0:50:07way they like that is not illegal. Do you think they have a responsibly
0:50:07 > 0:50:11to?With rights come responsibilities, nobody is talking
0:50:11 > 0:50:18about legislation... There is a responsible at on those
0:50:18 > 0:50:21organisations to recognise if that then leads to death threats, if it
0:50:21 > 0:50:24leads to consequences. They have a responsibility to take very
0:50:24 > 0:50:28seriously and most editors do, they do take very seriously the
0:50:28 > 0:50:36consequences...Mutineer... That cannot be calculated to consider to
0:50:36 > 0:50:40be led to a death threat. Photographs, targeted photographs.
0:50:40 > 0:50:45We know what they were trying to do, which is to undermine debate on a
0:50:45 > 0:50:49really important issue that needs to be widely debated.All right.They
0:50:49 > 0:50:54should take responsibility for that. Thank you for coming in.
0:50:54 > 0:50:57There's concern over government proposals to change the way that
0:50:57 > 0:50:58women's domestic violence refuges are funded.
0:50:58 > 0:51:01In future it could mean the accommodation is no longer paid
0:51:01 > 0:51:02for mainly from housing benefit.
0:51:02 > 0:51:04Instead, refuges would be funded from ring-fenced
0:51:04 > 0:51:05grants given to councils
0:51:05 > 0:51:07but these grants would also have to cover
0:51:07 > 0:51:08a number of different housing demands.
0:51:08 > 0:51:11Charities warn it could mean refuges will have to close their doors
0:51:11 > 0:51:16to some vulnerable women.
0:51:16 > 0:51:18Here's Emma Vardy.
0:51:20 > 0:51:24Women's refuges provide safety and time to adjust for women who leave
0:51:24 > 0:51:30abusive partners. But under new proposals, the government plans to
0:51:30 > 0:51:33remove refuges and other forms of short-term supported housing from
0:51:33 > 0:51:39the welfare system.The nationalised welfare system detected some of the
0:51:39 > 0:51:45refuge funding from any local authority cuts. This will not. The
0:51:45 > 0:51:48government will say, we are passing the exact same amount of money
0:51:48 > 0:51:53down... But it will back fill what councils were spending.Instead, the
0:51:53 > 0:51:56government is looking at giving grants to councils, which will be
0:51:56 > 0:52:01used to pay for all sorts of short-term housing. As well as
0:52:01 > 0:52:05refuges, it will cover accommodation for other individuals, too, such as
0:52:05 > 0:52:08ex-offenders and those with drug addictions. The problem, some fear,
0:52:08 > 0:52:14is that because many women in refuges come from outside a local
0:52:14 > 0:52:16authority's area, councils may direct more money to other
0:52:16 > 0:52:20vulnerable groups, such as people who are homeless or those who are
0:52:20 > 0:52:25elderly.Where these contracts are decided one-year in advance, what it
0:52:25 > 0:52:29means, by November, if a local authority has run out of money, and
0:52:29 > 0:52:33100 more women turn up around Christmas who need beds, what will
0:52:33 > 0:52:37happen in those circumstances?The government is consulting on
0:52:37 > 0:52:42proposals. One Conservative MP who has expressed concerns told us he is
0:52:42 > 0:52:45urging the government to consider other options.One of the things
0:52:45 > 0:52:49that I want to make sure, the government keep their focus on
0:52:49 > 0:52:53change, but understand that two thirds of women actually seek refuge
0:52:53 > 0:52:57outside of their local area, for obvious reasons, they are running
0:52:57 > 0:53:01away from something, they want safe haven. But also, the local
0:53:01 > 0:53:03authorities, whereas they may be best placed to understand the need
0:53:03 > 0:53:10and demand, they may not be best placed to deliver that, that support
0:53:10 > 0:53:14that is needed, because refuges are not just a bed for a night, they are
0:53:14 > 0:53:17specialists services.The government told us the number of spaces
0:53:17 > 0:53:22available in refuges has increased by more than 300 since 2010. And it
0:53:22 > 0:53:26says that it will make sure that no victim of domestic abuse is turned
0:53:26 > 0:53:31away from the support they need. £40 million of funding has been
0:53:31 > 0:53:35committed until 2020, but charities say that unless the money is
0:53:35 > 0:53:40properly directed to the refuges where it is needed, then a postcode
0:53:40 > 0:53:44lottery for victims could mean the difference between life and death.
0:53:50 > 0:53:53Now, how are you all getting on with the dreaded
0:53:53 > 0:53:54Christmas shopping?
0:53:54 > 0:53:58Well, if you're in need of a few more stocking filler ideas
0:53:58 > 0:53:59Westminster's resident bookworm,
0:53:59 > 0:54:00Conservative MP Keith Simpson, has compiled his annual
0:54:00 > 0:54:05Christmas reading list.
0:54:05 > 0:54:08Someone's got to do it!
0:54:08 > 0:54:10For those of you who enjoy a bit of political history,
0:54:10 > 0:54:12there's been a couple of books
0:54:12 > 0:54:14on Churchill published in recent months, and Keith's favourite
0:54:14 > 0:54:16is six Minutes in May: How Churchill Unexpectedly Became
0:54:16 > 0:54:17Prime Minister, by Nicholas Shakespeare.
0:54:17 > 0:54:19Another acclaimed title is
0:54:19 > 0:54:20Fall Out: A Year of Political Mayhem,
0:54:20 > 0:54:23by Tim Shipman, his follow-up to last year's All Out War.
0:54:23 > 0:54:25This offering from the Sunday Times journalist tells the inside story
0:54:25 > 0:54:28of Theresa May's 2017 struggles, from the election to her attempts
0:54:28 > 0:54:32to secure a Brexit deal.
0:54:32 > 0:54:34ITV Political Editor Robert Peston's take on the extraordinary
0:54:34 > 0:54:37events of the last 18 months,
0:54:37 > 0:54:44WTF, I hope I don't have to spell
0:54:44 > 0:54:45out what that stands for(!),
0:54:45 > 0:54:46asks how we got here,
0:54:46 > 0:54:49and perhaps more importantly, how we move forward to sort it all out.
0:54:49 > 0:54:51Former Cabinet Minister Oliver Letwin's Hearts and Minds explains
0:54:51 > 0:54:54how the central ideas and policies of the modern Conservative
0:54:54 > 0:54:55party came into being,
0:54:55 > 0:54:56while also charting his own journey
0:54:56 > 0:54:58from childhood to Margaret Thatcher's policy unit,
0:54:58 > 0:55:00into the very centre of government.
0:55:00 > 0:55:03And Auntie's War is an account of the crucial part the BBC played
0:55:03 > 0:55:04in informing the nation
0:55:04 > 0:55:06what was happening during the Second World War,
0:55:06 > 0:55:10by our very own Radio 4 presenter Edward Stourton.
0:55:10 > 0:55:16I promise we're not naval-gazing, this is Keith's list!
0:55:16 > 0:55:21And Keith's with us now.
0:55:21 > 0:55:25I see that you have got this one in front of you... You have Auntie's
0:55:25 > 0:55:29War in front of you.I had to bring my copy in, you did not have it!
0:55:29 > 0:55:32LAUGHTER Typical.I was discussing it with
0:55:32 > 0:55:36somebody before coming on. Very nice man indeed, you have the official
0:55:36 > 0:55:42history of the BBC, and what he does is, he brings alive the development
0:55:42 > 0:55:48of beans the tuition but also the amazing talented people, both the
0:55:48 > 0:55:53regulars and others. I think the BBC we know and like, or do not like,
0:55:53 > 0:55:58today, is largely based on that, and he writes well. It is the kind of
0:55:58 > 0:56:03thing I can imagine, after Boxing Day, exhausted, you want to read a
0:56:03 > 0:56:09book.This would be it.It is very good, Auntie's War.A rich selection
0:56:09 > 0:56:13of books, Christmas, into the New Year, I suppose that that arduous
0:56:13 > 0:56:19events over the last 18 months have fuelled these books.Yes, the book
0:56:19 > 0:56:23by Tim Shipman, fallout, that is the shipsecond volume, I'm frightened
0:56:23 > 0:56:26that he is going to have the right a third volume, probably called
0:56:26 > 0:56:32something like All Out, that covers the election of Theresa May, the
0:56:32 > 0:56:35awful general election, and the events after that, and it is based
0:56:35 > 0:56:41almost entirely on dozens of interviews that he has done. I spoke
0:56:41 > 0:56:45yesterday, to a very close colleague of Theresa May.She said, it is not
0:56:45 > 0:56:49what he has put in, it is what he has left out! I have got to tell
0:56:49 > 0:56:58you, it does make The Thick of It look mild in comparison, if I was
0:56:58 > 0:57:01the joint chiefs of staff, Tim and Fiona, I would not want to be
0:57:01 > 0:57:07watching that... I would not want to be reading it...Does not take my
0:57:07 > 0:57:10fancy, also very unpleasant, that sort of stuff, I think some of them
0:57:10 > 0:57:14have watched the thick of it and think that is how you have do talk
0:57:14 > 0:57:18these days, it is not edifying. -- The Thick of It. An awful lot of
0:57:18 > 0:57:24navel-gazing near, my book would be David Coulthard, and is to educate
0:57:24 > 0:57:29and, in Zimbabwe, during the short coalition period. He rescued
0:57:29 > 0:57:33Zimbabwe's education system, rescued closed schools and teachers were not
0:57:33 > 0:57:39being paid, there were three assassination attempts by the
0:57:39 > 0:57:43governing party on him. He survived all free. That is politics, that is
0:57:43 > 0:57:47what politics is really all about. Not all this stuff about who said
0:57:47 > 0:57:53what to do.On a note of that, Churchill. Jack Gill is always the
0:57:53 > 0:57:57centre... The subject... Of some book. Matthew has nicely brought it
0:57:57 > 0:58:05in. -- Churchill.A couple of books, Nicola Shakespeare, his six minutes
0:58:05 > 0:58:12is about the time, in the thousand, and, to vote, and it is about the
0:58:12 > 0:58:18famous debate, the adjournment debate, in which Chamberlain loses,
0:58:18 > 0:58:22need is not, knee has a majority of 80, but down from a majority of 250.
0:58:22 > 0:58:28And he brings alive Churchill. -- Nicholas Shakespeare. And then you
0:58:28 > 0:58:34have the darkest hour...And there is a film of that.I have seen it...
0:58:34 > 0:58:39It is brilliant! I'm quite looking forward to it.
0:58:39 > 0:58:42There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.
0:58:42 > 0:58:45The question was Jeremy Corbyn has given an interview to Grazia
0:58:45 > 0:58:47magazine in which he said he believes he will "probably" be
0:58:47 > 0:58:49Prime Minister within the next year.
0:58:49 > 0:58:51But what was else did we learn?
0:58:51 > 0:58:54Was it that he's going to be eating stuffed marrow for Christmas dinner,
0:58:54 > 0:58:55that he's allergic to dogs,
0:58:55 > 0:58:56that he's "an accidental fashion icon",
0:58:56 > 0:58:59or that he'd secretly like to be a stand-up comedian.
0:58:59 > 0:59:00So Matthew what's the correct answer?
0:59:00 > 0:59:05I know that he does not like cats, it is quite likely he is allergic to
0:59:05 > 0:59:10dogs.No, fashion icon! Just like all of us here(!) LAUGHTER
0:59:10 > 0:59:14There is Jeremy Corbyn, thank you very much to all of you. Thank you
0:59:14 > 0:59:19for bringing in the box. We will make sure reread some of them. --