19/12/2017 Daily Politics


19/12/2017

Jo Coburn is joined by journalist Matthew Parris for the latest news from Westminster, including an interview with Home Affairs committee chair Yvette Cooper about hate crime.


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 19/12/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

Hello and welcome to

the Daily Politics.

0:00:380:00:41

The Cabinet are meeting to discuss

what Britain's relationship

0:00:410:00:43

with the EU should look

like after Brexit.

0:00:430:00:47

It looks like it's all smiles

for now but are there big battles

0:00:470:00:50

ahead for the Prime Minister?

0:00:500:00:53

Are social media companies doing

enough to combat abusive

0:00:530:00:55

comments posted online?

0:00:550:00:57

We'll be joined by the chair of

the Home Affairs Select Committee.

0:00:570:01:01

The House of Lords debates cutting

itself down to size.

0:01:010:01:04

So will the ermine-clad

turkeys vote for Christmas?

0:01:040:01:11

If you want some last-minute

Christmas ideas for the political

0:01:110:01:16

geek in your family, we're

Parliament's favourite bookworm on

0:01:160:01:20

hand with his festive holiday

reading list. All that in the next

0:01:200:01:29

hour. With us is Matthew Parris. He

was a Conservative MP once upon a

0:01:290:01:36

time. Welcome to the Daily Politics.

0:01:360:01:38

The Justice Secretary,

David Lidington, says he wants

0:01:380:01:40

to see a "more diverse" judiciary

but has ruled out targets

0:01:400:01:43

for appointing more black

and minority ethnic judges.

0:01:430:01:46

Mr Lidington has been responding

formally to a review carried

0:01:460:01:51

out by Labour MP David Lammy

in to the way in which Black,

0:01:510:01:54

Asian and minority ethnic

people are treated in

0:01:540:01:56

the criminal justice system.

0:01:560:01:57

Among the 35 recommendations

is a proposal calling

0:01:570:02:00

for a national target to ensure

there was a properly

0:02:000:02:03

"representative"

judiciary and magistracy.

0:02:030:02:07

But Mr Lidington says

targets aren't the answer.

0:02:070:02:14

I think that is the wrong way to go

about it. The judges today we are

0:02:140:02:18

recruiting people who joined the

legal profession 20 is a guess you

0:02:180:02:24

need people with a lot of experience

before they start to become a judge.

0:02:240:02:28

I think a target is self-defeating.

And it brings in to question the

0:02:280:02:34

independence of judges which is a

very important principle. The top

0:02:340:02:37

judges are committed to a more

diverse judiciary. We need to

0:02:370:02:42

identify and encourage and mental

brightening and women from black and

0:02:420:02:46

Asian communities, who are lawyers

and say, do you want to become a

0:02:460:02:49

judge one day? This is how you go

about it.

Has the government ducks

0:02:490:02:53

what would have been a radical

proposal?

Yes, I think they have.

0:02:530:02:57

It's all very well saying it'll be

20 is until someone is a judge but

0:02:570:03:02

we could start now. What goes in at

one end of the pipeline will come

0:03:020:03:06

out the other end and I don't see a

particular reason why we are going

0:03:060:03:10

to have target of any kind the law,

the judiciary should be exempt from

0:03:100:03:14

it.

The figures are quite startling

and the review concluded there was

0:03:140:03:19

bias within the judicial system and

one way of changing that would be to

0:03:190:03:23

make it more representative of the

people they are serving.

I'm sure

0:03:230:03:27

that's right and I'm sure the bias

is unconscious. I'm sure nobody is

0:03:270:03:32

consciously biased and nobody is

writing rules to stop the

0:03:320:03:38

diversification of the judicially.

It is unconscious. Where you have

0:03:380:03:40

unconscious buyers, you need to meet

quotas and targets to reverse it.

0:03:400:03:47

How long do you think it will take

to eliminate that buys in the system

0:03:470:03:53

and therefore reduce the figures

that seemed to see far more people

0:03:530:03:58

from minority backgrounds facing a

magistrate?

People need to see black

0:03:580:04:01

faces on the bench, actually on the

magistrates bench that has happened

0:04:010:04:06

to some degree but further up, the

Whigs, you don't see black faces

0:04:060:04:12

often in judges wakes. If you did,

if people did, it would be an

0:04:120:04:20

inspiration to younger men and women

from ethnic communities saying,

0:04:200:04:23

people like you and me are judges.

How else can you think the

0:04:230:04:29

government can tackle this

underrepresentation and also bias

0:04:290:04:33

within the system, conscious or

otherwise? David Lidington says we

0:04:330:04:38

will reform if we cannot explain

buyers.

I don't think it means

0:04:380:04:41

anything but I think he is just

dodging and fudging as he is obliged

0:04:410:04:46

to do. It's hard to know how you do

it. The government doesn't choose

0:04:460:04:51

judges and we don't want politicians

choosing judges but I think there

0:04:510:04:57

are always, behind-the-scenes, ways,

committees of whose names we've

0:04:570:05:00

never of Hurd, meetings wouldn't

know about that our

0:05:000:05:04

behind-the-scenes in which you can

slowly encourage change. It would be

0:05:040:05:08

slow but we should start.

All right,

let's leave it there. Some other

0:05:080:05:12

breaking news today.

0:05:120:05:13

The Electoral Commission has today

fined the Liberal Democrats £18,000

0:05:130:05:16

for breaching

campaign finance rules

0:05:160:05:17

during the EU referendum.

0:05:170:05:18

Almost all of that fine comes

from the Lib Dems having failed

0:05:180:05:21

to provide acceptable

invoices or receipts.

0:05:210:05:24

The Electoral Commission said

the rules were clear

0:05:240:05:26

and it was "disappointing"

the Lib Dems didn't

0:05:260:05:28

follow them correctly.

0:05:280:05:34

We asked the Liberal Democrats for

an interview but no one was

0:05:340:05:37

available.

0:05:370:05:37

The party says mistakes in this case

were a result of human error

0:05:370:05:40

and and that steps were being taken

to ensure that they weren't

0:05:400:05:43

repeated in future.

0:05:430:05:46

Now it's time for our daily quiz.

0:05:460:05:48

Jeremy Corbyn has given an interview

to Grazia magazine in which he said

0:05:480:05:51

he believes he will "probably" be

Prime Minister within the next year.

0:05:510:05:57

The question for today

is what was else did we learn?

0:05:570:05:59

Was it a) that he's going to be

eating stuffed marrow

0:05:590:06:02

for Christmas dinner?

0:06:020:06:03

b) that he's allergic to dogs.

0:06:030:06:06

c) that he's "an accidental

fashion icon"

0:06:060:06:09

because of his dedication

to normcore clothing?

0:06:090:06:14

Or d) that he'd secretly like to be

a stand-up comedian?

0:06:140:06:16

At the end of the show Matthew

will give us the correct answer.

0:06:160:06:19

Theresa May has been holding

a meeting of her full

0:06:190:06:22

Cabinet this morning.

0:06:220:06:25

Yesterday was a trimmed down

version.

0:06:250:06:27

Top of the agenda is the UK's future

relationship with the EU,

0:06:270:06:30

the first time the Cabinet has given

the issue formal consideration.

0:06:300:06:33

Yesterday, we reported on some

of the major dividing lines among

0:06:330:06:36

the Prime Minister key ministers,

we'll talk about that

0:06:360:06:38

a little more in a moment.

0:06:380:06:39

But first let's take a look at how

the Brexit negotiations

0:06:390:06:42

are likely to proceed.

0:06:420:06:46

Theresa May says her government

will "aim high" in the next

0:06:460:06:48

stage of EU negotiations.

0:06:480:06:50

She wants a "bespoke and ambitious"

trade deal with the EU after Brexit.

0:06:500:06:55

But the EU's chief negotiator

Michel Barnier has been playing down

0:06:550:06:59

the idea of a bespoke deal.

0:06:590:07:02

In an interview published today,

he said that Britain

0:07:020:07:04

will not get a special deal

for the City of London.

0:07:040:07:08

He said:

0:07:080:07:10

Which is at odds with

Brexit Secretary David Davis' plans

0:07:160:07:18

for a "Canada plus plus plus" trade

deal, or, in plain speak,

0:07:180:07:23

a tariff-free area between the UK

and the EU which explicitly

0:07:230:07:27

includes financial services.

0:07:270:07:30

At the same time, newspaper reports

suggest Michael Gove will use

0:07:300:07:33

today's meeting to argue for Britain

to pull out of the EU's

0:07:330:07:37

Working Time Directive.

0:07:370:07:40

The Directive restricts

the working week to 48 hours,

0:07:400:07:44

and Gove and others think scrapping

it would allow British workers

0:07:440:07:46

to top up their pay.

0:07:460:07:50

But other Cabinet members believe

scrapping the Directive

0:07:500:07:51

would weaken employment rights.

0:07:510:07:56

Let's talk to our correspondent

Ben Wright who's in Downing Street

0:07:560:07:58

where the Cabinet has been

meeting this morning.

0:07:580:08:04

So, have you had your it to the door

to hear whether they are all singing

0:08:040:08:08

from the same hymn sheet, as I think

Boris Johnson once said?

, I imagine

0:08:080:08:15

the message coming out of various

rabid ministers via their special

0:08:150:08:18

advisers will be one of unity around

the table. In fact, this morning,

0:08:180:08:22

Philip Hammond tweeted, and he

doesn't tweet very much, saying he

0:08:220:08:28

disagreed with the report in the

Telegraph suggesting there are big

0:08:280:08:33

disagreements in the subcommittee

yesterday and that he was in a

0:08:330:08:36

lonely minority arguing for close

alignment with the EU after Brexit,

0:08:360:08:40

so he stresses there is harmony.

That is exactly the message they

0:08:400:08:44

will want to send out from Number

Ten today. The Cabinet broke up 20

0:08:440:08:49

minutes ago, so they have gone back

to their departments. The issue of

0:08:490:08:54

the working Time directive would not

be on the agenda today. And was keen

0:08:540:08:58

to stress the government plans to

maintain and enhance workers' rights

0:08:580:09:02

after we've left the EU. I think

what to do's meeting was all about

0:09:020:09:07

was discussing the broad principles

of the sort of trading arrangement

0:09:070:09:10

the UK hopes to get with the EU

after Brexit. I don't think they got

0:09:100:09:15

into specifics, pretty broad brush,

and I imagine the Prime Minister was

0:09:150:09:19

telling her cabinet they should aim

high and they can get the best of

0:09:190:09:25

both worlds.

Does that mean that

after the recess, both sides, one

0:09:250:09:30

that wants closer alliance and one

that wants divergences, will be

0:09:300:09:37

plotting how to secure that Brexit

in time for January?

They will

0:09:370:09:42

because the window is tight. We know

that the EU want to nail down the

0:09:420:09:48

terms of the transition agreement

early in the New Year and I think

0:09:480:09:52

they will come forward with their

negotiating guidelines for

0:09:520:09:55

discussing the second phase and

their idea for how the trading

0:09:550:09:58

relationship should work with the UK

after Brexit. They want those

0:09:580:10:03

guidelines in place by March and we

expect the Prime Minister to make a

0:10:030:10:07

big speech early in the New Year

along the lines of her Florence

0:10:070:10:11

speech, setting out the sort of aims

and priorities she wants from that

0:10:110:10:17

huge trade relationship. In the next

five or six weeks, this is going to

0:10:170:10:20

be argued intensively on the

question needs to be settled so the

0:10:200:10:24

harmony wheeze will hear about will

be tested once they get into the

0:10:240:10:29

detail of how they envisage this

relationship working in the future.

0:10:290:10:32

I think what is going to become

abundantly clear early on is that

0:10:320:10:36

the number of red lines the

government have already spelt out,

0:10:360:10:40

leaving the single market, no big

money for the EU limits the kind of

0:10:400:10:50

deal the UK can get. And the

consistent message from the EU is

0:10:500:10:57

that the UK just cannot view the

single market as some sort of buffet

0:10:570:11:04

to grace from, picking the best

bits. This comes with very clear

0:11:040:11:08

obligations and costs, and if the UK

wants to move away from that, it

0:11:080:11:13

will lose a significant amount of

access and I think that is where the

0:11:130:11:16

discussion in the cabinet is going

to be.

Thank you very much. Brexit

0:11:160:11:21

has seen a boon for one tribe, the

political think tank.

0:11:210:11:26

Joining me now are two

of their number, Victoria Hewson

0:11:260:11:28

from the Legatum Institute

and Tom Kibasi from IPPR.

0:11:280:11:35

Welcome to both of you. Starting

with you, Victoria, do you agree

0:11:350:11:38

with Ben that having read lines, so

many of them politically, that will

0:11:380:11:48

limit the real?

It sets out some

parameters. Once the policy was

0:11:480:11:54

formulated that we would be leaving

the customs union and the single

0:11:540:11:59

market and also leaving the direct

jurisdiction of the European Court

0:11:590:12:03

of Justice, then that guides you in

a certain direction of working

0:12:030:12:10

towards a free trade agreement

albeit a very deep and comprehensive

0:12:100:12:13

free trade agreement that should

realistically be able to go much

0:12:130:12:19

further than any free trade

agreement before simply because we

0:12:190:12:23

start from such a position of

openness towards each other's

0:12:230:12:26

markets.

Or does mean there's red

lines will turn pink racing?

We saw

0:12:260:12:31

the government was prepared to

compromise on its redline so having

0:12:310:12:37

told the EU they could go whistle

about the divorce Bill, having

0:12:370:12:41

resisted the role of the European

Court in the protection of citizens

0:12:410:12:44

rights, the government caved on

every single one of its red lines.

0:12:440:12:48

There is no reason to think they

wouldn't cave on their red lines in

0:12:480:12:52

this next phase of negotiations.

But

you want full divergences from the

0:12:520:12:56

EU, you are happy to some extent

with what has been set up publicly

0:12:560:13:00

by Theresa May. What would that look

like, for our viewers?

I think full

0:13:000:13:06

divergences probably not the right

way to describe it. I think having

0:13:060:13:10

the right to diverged from EU

legislation is extremely important

0:13:100:13:16

but when we talk about divergences,

we don't mean... A full reform and

0:13:160:13:25

repeal. Or even reforming and

repealing everything over a time. It

0:13:250:13:31

will be a pathway towards doing

things differently and reforming

0:13:310:13:34

things where the government of the

day thinks that a particular reform

0:13:340:13:38

or change is the best way for the

British economy.

And you're talking

0:13:380:13:47

about the body of regulation?

Yes,

it will be coming to force in the UK

0:13:470:13:51

and it is a pathway of gradually

reforming to make the economy more

0:13:510:13:55

competitive and to improve various

things in the context of

0:13:550:14:00

international trade as well.

And

you'd like to see something called

0:14:000:14:04

the shared market, what is it?

It is

a fresh proposal for a new model to

0:14:040:14:08

govern our relationship with the EU

and based on aligning ourselves in

0:14:080:14:12

terms of regulation but allowing for

the possibility of divergences time.

0:14:120:14:16

I don't think we want to diverged.

It is a very odd position. It is

0:14:160:14:22

both anti-business and anti-worker.

It is a strange position to have so

0:14:220:14:25

we propose we should be aligned

because that is in our interests,

0:14:250:14:30

the interests of businesses and

workers.

Why do you see it is

0:14:300:14:34

anti-business and anti-worker?

It is

one of those things that sounds

0:14:340:14:38

persuasive but what most businesses

will tell you that what they want is

0:14:380:14:44

a simpler life, they want fewer

regulations, not more. Soap proposal

0:14:440:14:49

for regulatory divergences a

proposal to create even more

0:14:490:14:53

regulation for business.

Is that how

you envisage it?

Not at all. Most

0:14:530:15:03

businesses in this country only

trade domestically in the UK market.

0:15:030:15:08

Any business exports will always

meet the regulatory requirements of

0:15:080:15:11

its export market. And, so, the

opportunities for improving

0:15:110:15:19

competitiveness in our own economy

and also introducing more

0:15:190:15:23

competition by way of third-party

trade deals is where the real games

0:15:230:15:26

are to be found.

Think about it from

perspective of a business operating

0:15:260:15:31

in the UK, dealing with one set of

regulations at home, another set of

0:15:310:15:35

regulations to trade into the single

market, this makes no sense at all,

0:15:350:15:40

it is bizarre.

Bizarre, says Tim,

obviously, tom-tom I should say,

0:15:400:15:46

food is not agree with your vision.

-- Tomba, I should say. -- Tom. What

0:15:460:15:56

is the risk to employees, then you

may fear that your regulation may

0:15:560:16:01

roll back on gains that have been

made.

It is not on my list of areas,

0:16:010:16:07

where I would like to see

divergences occur at all, but

0:16:070:16:11

ultimately, that will be a question

for the government of the day, and

0:16:110:16:16

any government which seeks to make

changes will be judged at the ballot

0:16:160:16:21

box.

If we cannot have as good a

deal as some people would see it, as

0:16:210:16:27

Tom sees it, you would also like to

replicate that kind of relationship,

0:16:270:16:32

what is wrong with full diverging?

Why not go for a full cutting point

0:16:320:16:36

with the EU? Well, I think, between

what Tom and what Victoria says, you

0:16:360:16:42

see the grounds for possible

agreement, and that is, you may call

0:16:420:16:47

it the divergences of parallels.

LAUGHTER

0:16:470:16:51

Not another term(!) LAUGHTER

The agreement is that we stay as we

0:16:510:16:55

are for the moment, we stay a

aligned, but we retain the right to

0:16:550:17:00

diverges we want to, my guess is we

would not want to, in the end it

0:17:000:17:04

would not make sense, 40% of trade

is with the EU, but there you have

0:17:040:17:09

the sort of fudge that I could see

sticking, if I can stick to one

0:17:090:17:13

metaphor(!)

is that the fudge you

see?

To an extent that is correct,

0:17:130:17:18

we would only diverged, just because

you can, does not mean that you have

0:17:180:17:23

two, and you would automatically

embark on a programme, bonfire of

0:17:230:17:26

red tape, the hyperbole that is

often used, in this debate. It will

0:17:260:17:32

simply be where there is a good

reason to change something, the UK

0:17:320:17:36

Government will be able to do so,

and it will do that by balancing the

0:17:360:17:40

downside risks of any frictions that

will then result in trade with the

0:17:400:17:46

EU, against trade with the rest of

the world, against the domestic

0:17:460:17:49

market. So many areas that are ripe

for reform, the Treasury, for

0:17:490:17:56

example, produced an 80 page report

last year about areas in financial

0:17:560:18:00

services regulation where they could

make improvements and improve

0:18:000:18:05

competitiveness, to make it more

proportionate, and less costly and

0:18:050:18:09

bring it up to date with

technological developments.

Is that

0:18:090:18:11

achievable when Michel Barnier says

we will not get a bespoke trade

0:18:110:18:16

deal, which allows us to pick the

bits we would like and discard the

0:18:160:18:22

rest, particularly around financial

services?

His comments on financial

0:18:220:18:26

services, as I understand them, from

the papers this morning, that they

0:18:260:18:30

are never OK with any free trade

deal, is not true, they are included

0:18:300:18:35

in all...

They were not in Canada.

They were, there is a whole

0:18:350:18:40

chapter... What it does not do is

give mutual recognition of your home

0:18:400:18:45

state, you would still have two

apply for a licence. But, a starting

0:18:450:18:49

point with Canada, we are much

further advanced, so there was

0:18:490:18:54

certainly a lot of scope.

Is that

just a starting negotiating position

0:18:540:19:00

from Michel Barnier, and the EU will

move when it comes to securing a

0:19:000:19:03

trade deal, because they need us, as

so many politicians claim, as much

0:19:030:19:07

as we need them, if not more.

So,

78% of Europe's capital markets are

0:19:070:19:12

based in London, it is really

important for the whole of the

0:19:120:19:16

single market, but we should look

carefully at what Michel Barnier has

0:19:160:19:20

said, he has not said there can be

no bespoke arrangement, one he has

0:19:200:19:24

said is there can be no cherry

picking, that means, you cannot have

0:19:240:19:28

the benefits without the

obligations, that should be obvious

0:19:280:19:30

to all of us. What they are saying

is, there is more room for

0:19:300:19:34

compromise but the compromise cannot

be one-sided, cannot be that we want

0:19:340:19:38

all the benefits and will not take

any of the burdens, have your cake

0:19:380:19:42

and eat it, that is not a tenable

position for either side.

Which

0:19:420:19:46

burdens would you be prepared to

accept, in order to get the full

0:19:460:19:50

combo offensive deal that you think

would be good for Britain?

As an

0:19:500:19:55

example, if we are to benefit from

regulatory development of the

0:19:550:19:59

European Union, we should make a

contribution towards that, we need

0:19:590:20:03

to continue some form of financial

contribution, that is a reasonable

0:20:030:20:07

situation, we cannot so we want all

the benefits of institutions and

0:20:070:20:10

frameworks and rules but we are

simply not prepared to pay the fare

0:20:100:20:14

share.

You would accept paying into

an EU budget beyond the Clemente

0:20:140:20:19

Sinn on transition period, we are

going to be paying into a certain

0:20:190:20:23

extent, but paying substantially

more in order to have the benefits?

0:20:230:20:28

Let's see what a fair contribution

is, it is not one of those things

0:20:280:20:31

you can put a number on but you have

to commit something if you want to

0:20:310:20:34

benefit.

Freedom of movement, one of

the other key pillars of the single

0:20:340:20:38

market...?

I find the rhetoric

around the indivisibility of the

0:20:380:20:45

four freedoms slightly ridiculous,

it is not the holy trinity... The EU

0:20:450:20:48

may say it is but they have

compromised on freedom of movement

0:20:480:20:51

in the past, contra Mize in with

Lichtenstein, in terms of the number

0:20:510:20:55

of people going in, they have

compromised on Switzerland, certain

0:20:550:20:59

sections, there is high and

deployment, they get preferential

0:20:590:21:02

job applications... And the deep and

, offensive free trade agreement

0:21:020:21:09

with Ukraine. -- compromised with

Liechtenstein. They have contra Mize

0:21:090:21:14

in the past.

The new sense of

optimism that Theresa May has, do

0:21:140:21:20

you share?

No, she has found another

cul-de-sac to go up. She has

0:21:200:21:27

agreement on phase one, by saying

that we will stay in the single

0:21:270:21:31

market, and the customs union, until

we can think of a way of not having

0:21:310:21:35

a hard border in Northern Ireland...

But she is keeping afloat, in

0:21:350:21:40

politics, keeping afloat is often

the first thing you have to do.

In

0:21:400:21:43

terms of what will fly, with those

who voted leave, do you think there

0:21:430:21:49

will be an acceptance around

continuing to pay into EU budget, if

0:21:490:21:53

there was a good enough deal in the

end of it?

I think that would be

0:21:530:21:59

fine, as Sam has suggested, if you

wish to continue to participate in a

0:21:590:22:04

particular programme it is perfectly

reasonable to pay a cost towards

0:22:040:22:07

that. There will be several agencies

where, actually, it will be of

0:22:070:22:14

reciprocal benefit because the UK

has contributed greatly to financial

0:22:140:22:19

services regulatory bodies, where it

will be very useful for the EU as

0:22:190:22:24

well to continue having access to

our resources.

We have a few moments

0:22:240:22:27

to discuss this, thank you very

much.

0:22:270:22:35

And for more reporting

and analysis of Brexit,

0:22:350:22:37

check out the BBC News website,

that's bbc.co.uk/brexit.

0:22:370:22:46

Now, it used to be a truth

universally acknowledged that

0:22:530:22:55

you could only win elections

in Britain from the centre ground.

0:22:550:22:58

But was the recent General Election

a return to the traditional battles

0:22:580:23:00

between left and right?

0:23:000:23:02

Let's just a look at the pitches

from both Theresa May

0:23:020:23:04

and Jeremy Corbyn back in June.

0:23:040:23:06

And I believe we can and must take

this opportunity to build a great

0:23:060:23:09

meritocracy here in Britain.

0:23:090:23:10

Now, let me be clear

about what that means.

0:23:100:23:12

It means making Britain

a country where everyone,

0:23:120:23:14

of whatever background,

has the chance to go as far

0:23:140:23:16

as their talent and their hard

work will take them.

0:23:160:23:19

A country that asks not

where you have come

0:23:190:23:21

from but where you are going to.

0:23:210:23:23

It means making Britain

a country that works not

0:23:230:23:25

for the privileged few,

but for everyone.

0:23:250:23:33

Labour's mission over the next five

years is to change all of that.

0:23:330:23:35

Our manifesto sets out how.

0:23:350:23:37

With a programme that is

radical and responsible.

0:23:370:23:41

A programme that will reverse our

national priorities

0:23:410:23:47

and put the interests

of the many first.

0:23:470:23:49

We will change our country

while managing within our means.

0:23:490:23:53

And we will lead us

through Brexit

0:23:530:23:55

while putting

the preservation of jobs first.

0:23:550:24:04

Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May

launching their respective

0:24:040:24:06

manifestos earlier this year.

0:24:060:24:09

But does the traditional left-right

divide explain what's happening

0:24:090:24:11

in British politics right now?

0:24:110:24:12

Or is there something else going on?

0:24:120:24:14

To explain we're joined

by our favourite psephologist

0:24:140:24:16

Professor John Curtice from Glasgow.

0:24:160:24:26

Is it no longer about left and right

in politics?

It is still about left

0:24:270:24:31

and right but the crucial thing is,

in the wake of the election, it is

0:24:310:24:35

no longer just about left and right,

because the truth is, despite the

0:24:350:24:40

creative ambiguity in which both

parties engage the election campaign

0:24:400:24:42

and frankly have continued to engage

thereafter on the question of

0:24:420:24:47

Brexit, voters themselves seem to

have decided that Brexit still

0:24:470:24:52

matters and also that they reflected

their reviews of Brexit in the way

0:24:520:24:57

in which they voted. The

Conservative Party quite clearly

0:24:570:24:59

lost ground, among those who voted

remain, who want a soft Brexit, who

0:24:590:25:05

are not concerned about immigration.

They gained ground among levers and

0:25:050:25:09

those who wanted a hard Brexit.

Labour gain some ground among

0:25:090:25:13

levers, among hard Brexit years, but

they gained much more from Remainers

0:25:130:25:18

and soft Brexit and those not

concerned about immigration. --

0:25:180:25:21

Leavers. Attitudes towards Brexit is

not a left right issue, going back

0:25:210:25:26

to what happened in the election, in

the referendum, in June, 2016,

0:25:260:25:31

whether or not you are left-wing or

right-wing, made virtually no

0:25:310:25:35

difference at all to your chances of

voting remain or leave. Rather, that

0:25:350:25:40

referendum, with immigration the

central issue, was where one instead

0:25:400:25:45

the crucial division was between

social liberals and social

0:25:450:25:50

conservatives, broadly speaking,

those people on one hand who are

0:25:500:25:53

happy with a relatively diverse

society where we have multiple

0:25:530:25:58

languages and multiple religions and

people do not necessarily all agree

0:25:580:26:01

on the social mores to which we

should adhere. In contrast, social

0:26:010:26:05

conservatives think we need a much

more cohesive society and much less

0:26:050:26:10

comfortable about these things. If

you are a social conservative, you

0:26:100:26:14

voted leave in the referendum, a

social liberal voted for remain.

0:26:140:26:21

Because people were reflecting views

about Brexit in whether they were

0:26:210:26:24

swinging to or from the

Conservatives and whether or not

0:26:240:26:26

they were likely to go to labour,

therefore, that distinction between

0:26:260:26:30

social conservatives and social

liberals became much more marked

0:26:300:26:35

whether or not people voted Labour

or Conservative in June, left and

0:26:350:26:42

right did not matter so much as it

had historically. The movement is

0:26:420:26:46

rarely explained by whether you are

a social liberal or socially

0:26:460:26:51

conservative, not whether you are

left-wing or right-wing.

Matthew,

0:26:510:26:55

for you, the whole EU referendum was

extremely important, would you say

0:26:550:26:58

that was more important than your

traditional left right politics?

0:26:580:27:04

Yes, I have gone slightly mad(!)

LAUGHTER

0:27:040:27:06

...

Over Brexit, a lot of people

have, I dream about it and think

0:27:060:27:11

about it all the time, I have found

myself feeling I could much more

0:27:110:27:15

easily be friends with someone in

the Labour Party that was against

0:27:150:27:19

Brexit than with somebody in the

Conservative Party that was in

0:27:190:27:22

favour of it.

Have you thought about

voting Labour?

I have thought about

0:27:220:27:27

it, but not with Jeremy Corbyn as

leader, that brings us back to the

0:27:270:27:31

topic you introduced at the

beginning, I think Labour have with

0:27:310:27:35

great success mind the possibilities

of attracting support from the

0:27:350:27:41

extreme, from the left, and the

Tories have with great success, mind

0:27:410:27:45

the support they thought they could

get from the right.

But they both

0:27:450:27:48

dominated the results are they must

also have been taking from in

0:27:480:27:52

between...

Yes, and in order for one

to gain a distinctive advantage over

0:27:520:27:56

the other, it must be to the centre

they look for the new support. --

0:27:560:28:00

decisive advantage.

Do you think

that this is a bubble, that this is

0:28:000:28:05

a temporary state of affairs, in

terms of the way people are voting

0:28:050:28:09

in their allegiances, to social

liberals and social conservatives,

0:28:090:28:14

or do you think that this is going

to be sustained, that it is going to

0:28:140:28:21

endure.

We will probably be talking

about "Brexit" this time next year

0:28:210:28:25

and the year after that. The

stimulus seems to have brought it

0:28:250:28:29

about, the EU referendum, as long as

we are arguing about Brexit we will

0:28:290:28:33

see this distinction between social

liberals and social conservatives,

0:28:330:28:38

and frankly it creates difficulties

for both political parties. Matthew

0:28:380:28:41

is not alone, bearing in mind, the

Conservative Party now has a very

0:28:410:28:47

strong, very pro-leave electorate,

whose views of running the economy

0:28:470:28:52

is primarily protectionist, and very

much at odds with what you might

0:28:520:28:55

regard as traditional centre-right

Conservative voter who runs a

0:28:550:28:59

business. As you can now see, there

are views about how the economy

0:28:590:29:03

should be run are very much at odds

with those of the Conservative

0:29:030:29:07

Party. Meanwhile, the Labour Party

has a tension, in winning over

0:29:070:29:11

remain voters, it has won over young

graduates, and it has won that

0:29:110:29:17

community much more successfully

than working-class voters but it is

0:29:170:29:20

working class voters who the Labour

Party feel they should be

0:29:200:29:23

representing. Both parties have

elections as a result of this

0:29:230:29:28

process which is at odds of

traditional conceptions of where

0:29:280:29:33

their core support lies.

Will the

parties change their offer to bridge

0:29:330:29:36

the divide? Within their own

political tribe? Or, will they just

0:29:360:29:45

stick to the vaguely traditional

offer that both these parties make

0:29:450:29:47

to those sets of people in the hope

that once we get through the Brexit

0:29:470:29:51

negotiations, normal business will

resume?

0:29:510:29:54

It is going to be difficult for the

parties because we are reaching the

0:30:010:30:08

point in the Brexit negotiations

where the hard choices will have to

0:30:080:30:14

be made and where what Brexit

actually does mean becomes more

0:30:140:30:19

apparent. For example, if in the end

the Conservative government actually

0:30:190:30:23

does and secure annex it from

freedom of movement or something

0:30:230:30:26

that looks like it, it will be in

trouble because that is what it is

0:30:260:30:32

electret expects. Meanwhile if the

Labour Party ends up looking too

0:30:320:30:37

hard on Brexit, it will put up risk

that young voters will not vote for

0:30:370:30:44

it. These next few months will be

important because Brexit is likely

0:30:440:30:51

to be the central issue, it will be

difficult for the parties to

0:30:510:30:56

triangulate over these various

divides. They are going to have to

0:30:560:31:00

take a position.

0:31:000:31:03

And now for a special Christmas

treat, here is some proper

0:31:030:31:05

Parliamentary navel-gazing.

0:31:050:31:06

Because this morning the House

of Lords has been debating the...

0:31:060:31:09

Er...

0:31:090:31:10

House of Lords.

0:31:100:31:11

Yes, you heard that correctly.

0:31:110:31:12

Specifically the Lords have been

debating a proposal to reduce

0:31:120:31:15

the size of the so-called upper

chamber to a mere 600 peers.

0:31:150:31:17

Let's have a listen.

0:31:170:31:18

The committee have been encouraged

by the response of noble Lords and,

0:31:180:31:24

indeed, to those outside the house

as well. For their part the

0:31:240:31:27

government have made clear they are

interested in finding out whether

0:31:270:31:29

the committee's inclusions command

widespread support in the house. And

0:31:290:31:32

I hope in today's debate, as which

we can see involves almost 100 noble

0:31:320:31:37

Lords, this will serve that purpose

and demonstrate the proposals have

0:31:370:31:40

strong backing.

0:31:400:31:41

I'm joined now by Baroness Taylor -

she was on the Committee which has

0:31:410:31:45

produced the report calling

for a reduction in the size

0:31:450:31:47

of the House of Lords.

0:31:470:31:49

Welcome to the Daily Politics.

Reducing it by a quarter, 15 year

0:31:490:31:55

terms, minimum 15% crossbenchers.

Why?

There's a great deal of

0:31:550:31:59

pressure and criticism of the House

of Lords because it is so large. A

0:31:590:32:02

lot of people don't appreciate the

work the Lords does. They see us in

0:32:020:32:06

the chamber, the picture you've got

there in everybody in their ermine.

0:32:060:32:13

You look so lovely in it.

They don't

realise the work goes on. Heck of a

0:32:130:32:18

lot of really good work goes on in

the House of but it is large. Prime

0:32:180:32:22

ministers have used the House of

Lords to give rewards to friends and

0:32:220:32:28

colleagues, and if we carry on like

this there will be no end to the

0:32:280:32:31

size of the House of Lords are what

we're trying to do is not only

0:32:310:32:35

reduce the size of the House of

Lords now that actually make sure

0:32:350:32:39

there is a sustainable reduction and

that is why we are suggesting a cap

0:32:390:32:43

of 600.

The proposals are being

debated. How will you progress

0:32:430:32:47

forwards on this?

The idea that it

is long-term, we should aim at 600,

0:32:470:32:54

we should say that from now on any

new pier should survey capped time

0:32:540:32:59

of 15 years. And that will allow

existing members to retire and for

0:32:590:33:05

every two that retired, only one

person can be appointed. So, that

0:33:050:33:09

will allow existing members to serve

out their term. They were promised

0:33:090:33:16

life peerages and they can keep them

but new members can only served for

0:33:160:33:19

15 years. And we are also seeing the

Monica News their power to create

0:33:190:33:25

non-sitting peers so if you want to

recognise some tea for public

0:33:250:33:29

service, you can give them a peerage

but not a seat in the House of

0:33:290:33:32

Lords.

Is this radical enough or

incremental?

All peers should be

0:33:320:33:37

non-sitting. What is my lord, my

lady, and ermine got to do with the

0:33:370:33:44

House of Lords legislative job? They

shouldn't be called Lords. We just

0:33:440:33:48

need 300 people who really know

their subject, who were once -- were

0:33:480:33:58

not once great doctors or engineers

but who are great right now. You'd

0:33:580:34:03

need a body not in control of the

Prime Minister. Somebody said one

0:34:030:34:09

queue or for admiring the House of

Lords is to watch it.

You'd be

0:34:090:34:13

surprised how many people do watch

the House of Lords.

But do they

0:34:130:34:17

admire it when they watch at?

We get

letters and e-mails saying we watch

0:34:170:34:21

this debate, what about this, what

about that. It is good quality

0:34:210:34:27

debate.

It may be but you can still

retain good quality debate with 200,

0:34:270:34:33

300 peers.

We did originally when we

had the report from the Labour

0:34:330:34:38

Party, we suggested 450 on the basis

of numbers necessary to fill the

0:34:380:34:42

committees and we're not saying 600

and that is it forever, that is what

0:34:420:34:46

we are suggesting and the house onto

a smaller number. Baroness Boothroyd

0:34:460:34:51

said a significantly smaller number,

she wants to be hundred 50, as you

0:34:510:34:54

would. What we are trying to

establish as the direction of

0:34:540:34:59

travel. We're not going to be

changed by legislation.

Because you

0:34:590:35:04

will not get it through?

Partly

because of that but also because any

0:35:040:35:10

legislation that gives the House of

Lords a legitimate democratic

0:35:100:35:15

mandate will challenge the house of

commons more and the last thing we

0:35:150:35:18

want is to elected chambers at

loggerheads with each other.

Do you

0:35:180:35:22

agree with that?

I do. We should

have a grand revising committee and

0:35:220:35:26

it should be an honour to serve on

the committee and you shouldn't

0:35:260:35:30

serve more than five years, you

should be chosen according to

0:35:300:35:34

qualifications rather than according

to who you were once acquainted with

0:35:340:35:38

in politics or elsewhere and you

shouldn't have all the trappings,

0:35:380:35:43

toss it all out, all the old

codgers.

I think they speak very

0:35:430:35:50

highly of you, to!

I think he is

auditioning for a position.

I'm too

0:35:500:35:55

old!

Do you think the public would

support of getting rid of the

0:35:550:35:59

trappings and having it as a

professional body that scrutinises,

0:35:590:36:03

so no cafes, no bars, no ermine?

Most workplaces have tea rooms.

But

0:36:030:36:09

you know what I mean. I've no

problems getting rid of the ermine.

0:36:090:36:13

I've got no problem with the title

but what we are trying to focus on

0:36:130:36:18

is what is the role of the House of

Lords?

It is to be the second

0:36:180:36:22

chamber, the second chamber, to hold

the government to account, and we

0:36:220:36:28

want to do it any more focused way

and if will reduce the numbers, we

0:36:280:36:32

well have more respect for the house

and people understand its role and

0:36:320:36:36

see the actual value added it gives

to the country.

What about the

0:36:360:36:40

political aspect of it? In terms of

how they are appointed to this grand

0:36:400:36:46

committee that you have thought

about, would they still be political

0:36:460:36:50

appointees? Would it represent the

House of Commons?

I'd say not. I

0:36:500:36:55

don't include need more than one

legislature, one elected legislature

0:36:550:36:59

and what you'd be looking for in a

grand revising committee would be

0:36:590:37:03

expertise. I'd have thought your

political inclinations should have

0:37:030:37:06

very little to do with it.

Do you

agree with that?

I think you do need

0:37:060:37:10

expertise and we have a good deal of

expertise and we need tactical

0:37:100:37:16

proposals.

There are too many of

youth.

There are, and we sing let's

0:37:160:37:23

reduce it and make it more

manageable, see it is more focused

0:37:230:37:27

and get more public respect too many

of you are people who once did

0:37:270:37:32

something.

There are too many oness,

that is what we need to get rid of.

0:37:320:37:37

As someone who is still there, some

of us get revised. You've got to

0:37:370:37:45

have government ministers in the

House of Lords.

Do you have to have

0:37:450:37:48

as many of them? To have to have as

many people who did once have a job

0:37:480:37:53

in government as an adviser or

working for a party?

It is a

0:37:530:37:57

question of balance and what we've

said in this report is that the

0:37:570:38:02

crossbenchers should be 20% and I

think we recognise the rule of

0:38:020:38:06

crossbenchers and we appreciate

their role but you do need the

0:38:060:38:10

reality that comes from political

experience as well.

One of the

0:38:100:38:14

controversial elements of the report

as it makes no recommendations to

0:38:140:38:17

change the status is in election of

the hereditary peers or 26 bishops.

0:38:170:38:21

Why not? I'm committed to supporting

any legislation that gets rid of the

0:38:210:38:28

hereditary by-elections and I'd like

to see the situation with the

0:38:280:38:31

bishops change. It is rather strange

that we have one group of religious

0:38:310:38:38

people that and not Catholics and

dues and Hindus and Muslims but that

0:38:380:38:45

when change without legislation. The

bishops say they will accept the

0:38:450:38:51

spirit of the report and they will

cooperate in any way if the house

0:38:510:38:55

wants to go in this direction so

there is scope for change and who

0:38:550:38:58

falls a got a private members bill

which actually would end the

0:38:580:39:03

hereditary by-elections which the

hereditary people are not against.

0:39:030:39:08

The Countess of Maher said if you

have a hereditary by-election,

0:39:080:39:11

you're making it all male because

there are no women coming up through

0:39:110:39:16

that route. There is the build-up of

support for getting rid of the

0:39:160:39:19

hereditary by-elections but this

committee couldn't look at

0:39:190:39:23

legislative changes because the

government said they wouldn't

0:39:230:39:25

support any at this stage.

Thank you

very much for coming in.

0:39:250:39:38

Now, yesterday the Speaker

of the House of Commons,

0:39:400:39:42

John Bercow praised Mp's

for being "dedicated, hardworking,

0:39:420:39:44

committed public servants".

0:39:440:39:45

They were debating harassment

in public life following last weeks

0:39:450:39:48

report from the Committee

on Standards in Public Life.

0:39:480:39:50

Much of the abuse MPs receive

is on social media platforms

0:39:500:39:53

and the Home Secretary Amber Rudd

said the government will look

0:39:530:39:55

at proposals to create

new legislation to protect people.

0:39:550:39:58

Here's a flavour of

yesterday's debate.

0:39:580:39:59

Everybody should be

treated with tolerance,

0:39:590:40:00

decency, and respect.

0:40:000:40:01

Which party and MP stands for how

they choose to vote, campaign,

0:40:010:40:04

or present themselves should not be

met with vitriolic and disgusting

0:40:040:40:07

messages, suggesting

that they should be hung in public

0:40:070:40:11

or get what's coming to them,

or perhaps, most unacceptable

0:40:110:40:14

of all, that their unborn

child should die.

0:40:140:40:19

The report makes recommendations

for government, for political

0:40:190:40:21

parties, social media companies,

the media, law enforcement

0:40:210:40:25

and everyone in public life.

0:40:250:40:29

This reflects the fact that tackling

abuse is a joint responsibility.

0:40:290:40:35

We will consider the recommendations

in detail and we will respond

0:40:350:40:37

to them in due course.

0:40:370:40:40

When politicians get death

threats as a result of how

0:40:400:40:45

they vote in this house,

that is not the primary

0:40:450:40:48

responsibility of social

media companies.

0:40:480:40:52

If anyone is responsible,

it is the headline writers

0:40:520:40:56

who accuse judges of being enemies

of the people, and elected

0:40:560:41:00

members of parliament

as mutineers and saboteurs

0:41:000:41:06

when all they are doing

is exercising their civil right

0:41:060:41:12

to cast their vote in

this House of Commons.

0:41:120:41:15

In voting as you think fit,

on any political issue, you,

0:41:150:41:23

as members of Parliament,

are never mutineers...

0:41:230:41:31

You are never traitors...

0:41:310:41:34

You are never malcontents.

0:41:340:41:37

You are never enemies of the people.

0:41:370:41:41

You are dedicated, hard-working,

committed public servants doing

0:41:410:41:47

what you believe to be right.

0:41:470:41:52

I'm joined now by the Chair

of the Home Affairs Select

0:41:520:41:55

Committee, Yvette Cooper.

0:41:550:41:56

She's had representatives

from Facebook, Google and Twitter

0:41:560:41:58

before her committee this morning.

0:41:580:42:05

Welcome to the programme. You've

spoken to representatives from those

0:42:050:42:09

companies and you asked them about

taking down abusive tweets, and to

0:42:090:42:15

Google about offensive videos. Are

you satisfied with the actions?

No.

0:42:150:42:20

I think they have done more

competitive last time we took

0:42:200:42:24

evidence from them back in February.

They have appointed more staff, they

0:42:240:42:27

are starting to increase their

standards and to search for things

0:42:270:42:31

so that is progress. However we have

had too many examples of things we

0:42:310:42:36

had raised with them before which

they clearly recognised, which were

0:42:360:42:41

either illegal or breached community

standards, where action wasn't taken

0:42:410:42:44

fast enough or at all and that

included anti-Semitic tweets. It

0:42:440:42:52

included far right, national action,

video. I had to go to YouTube, to

0:42:520:43:01

the top, to make sure it was taken

down.

What is their explanation for

0:43:010:43:05

not doing it?

We are working on it,

they say, we are doing better than

0:43:050:43:10

we were before. And they are than --

they have huge reach and power and

0:43:100:43:20

wealth and resources which is why we

are going to keep pressing them to

0:43:200:43:24

do more because in the end public

safety is at risk here.

Put

0:43:240:43:27

suspended accounts related to

Britain first. Do you think that is

0:43:270:43:32

because they were going to come

before your committee that they got

0:43:320:43:35

around to it?

Obviously, you depend

on... You shouldn't rely on

0:43:350:43:45

Parliamentary hearings for

organisations like Twitter or

0:43:450:43:47

Facebook or YouTube to do the right

thing. They should do it on the end

0:43:470:43:52

without a deadline of a

parliamentary hearing. It is welcome

0:43:520:43:55

they've taken action. We questioned

Facebook why they haven't taken some

0:43:550:43:59

action and on the way in which we

need to look at the off-line and

0:43:590:44:06

online activities, if what they are

doing is breaching standards.

I

0:44:060:44:09

listened into some of the hearing

this morning and get the impression

0:44:090:44:13

they are trying to introduce new

technology to deal with it because

0:44:130:44:16

new Twitter accounts have already

appeared representing characters in

0:44:160:44:21

Britian First said in a way are you

ever going to get these companies to

0:44:210:44:24

do what he wants them to do in terms

of banning these accounts

0:44:240:44:29

altogether? New ones will always

appear.

There is always a question

0:44:290:44:35

about the pace of technology. I

think it is clear they can do more.

0:44:350:44:39

We found too many examples of where

they simply will not moving fast

0:44:390:44:43

enough and also where if it was the

Home Affairs Select Committee

0:44:430:44:47

reporting things to them, in the end

they did respond but, actually, if

0:44:470:44:51

it was people just responding,

pressing the button and clicking,

0:44:510:44:55

often Alternaria complains were not

addressed enough. And was another

0:44:550:44:59

which concerns me is some of the way

in which the technology is promoting

0:44:590:45:05

extremism. If you go on one far

right racist site, actually they

0:45:050:45:10

will recommend more. There is

effectively a process of bringing

0:45:100:45:14

that can take place through

technology and if it is taking place

0:45:140:45:17

for the far right extremism we were

challenging, the fear is it is also

0:45:170:45:21

taking place on some of the Muslim

extremism as well.

This was

0:45:210:45:25

inevitable of the printing press. As

long as somebody can spread around

0:45:250:45:30

what they think about some deals,

whether they do it by word-of-mouth

0:45:300:45:35

or pamphlet, whether they do it in

letters... All my life in politics

0:45:350:45:40

and the media, I have received

horrible letters from people,

0:45:400:45:43

calling me the most appalling

things.

Has it got worse?

None of

0:45:430:45:47

the letters were filed, I'd open,

laugh and throw them away. If people

0:45:470:45:52

are busily on social media, I don't

read it. You can't stop people doing

0:45:520:45:57

these things except by a system of

censorship and you'd have to have

0:45:570:46:01

hundreds of thousands of sensors on

Google and Twitter the rest actually

0:46:010:46:06

pre-approving everything before it

was put up.

Is registration the

0:46:060:46:10

answer?

I don't think this is about

preapproval at all, I think that

0:46:100:46:15

there is a difference between

promoting free speech and making

0:46:150:46:19

death threats.

-- legislation.

We

have a criminal line that needs to

0:46:190:46:23

be drawn.

If it is against the law,

of course.

And line against motoring

0:46:230:46:28

extremism, and things that become

terrorism. National action, it is a

0:46:280:46:34

banned organisation, because of its

danger and the government assessment

0:46:340:46:37

of the terror threat...

What about

legislation to enforce these

0:46:370:46:41

companies to do it.

We will be

looking at that, the select

0:46:410:46:44

committee will be looking at that,

what other measures are needed, we

0:46:440:46:48

recommended there should be fines

against social media companies

0:46:480:46:51

simply not removing a legal

dangerous content fast enough, and

0:46:510:46:55

not responding, but we also want to

look more widely at other

0:46:550:47:02

legislative proposals, something

must be done.

You would support sums

0:47:020:47:06

legislation making them be seen as

publishers, not platforms, then they

0:47:060:47:09

would be liable?

We have asked them

for more evidence, committees have

0:47:090:47:14

made the proposal, we have not

looked at that yet and we want to do

0:47:140:47:17

so. In the end, this is about

promoting democracy and free speech,

0:47:170:47:21

it is about making sure that

nobody's voices are drowned out by

0:47:210:47:26

racism or by extremism, and about

making sure that all voices can be

0:47:260:47:29

heard. Social media is the new

forum. For discussions. It is really

0:47:290:47:35

important everyone should feel part

of that and you do not get some

0:47:350:47:38

people drowned out by extremism...

Nobody is drowned out by extremism

0:47:380:47:44

but... Illegal, I agree with you, if

it is illegal, people should be

0:47:440:47:48

stopped, but I am suspicious of your

word dangerous, I have known so many

0:47:480:47:53

politicians with so many different

ideas of what might be dangerous. If

0:47:530:47:58

it appeared in print. The law is the

law, the law... The law should be

0:47:580:48:02

adhered to, but I think I wide range

of opinion, including offensive

0:48:020:48:06

opinion, including violent opinion,

so long as it does not incite

0:48:060:48:11

breaking the law, I really don't

think that once you start trying to

0:48:110:48:16

distinguish between what is free

speech that people are allowed and

0:48:160:48:19

what is free speech people are not

allowed, it is a slippery slope.

We

0:48:190:48:24

have laws about incitement.

And of

course you need a very robust

0:48:240:48:29

debate, you need people challenge,

people will be offended, there needs

0:48:290:48:31

to be those robust debate,

especially when it comes to holding

0:48:310:48:35

politicians to account.

Is it

putting off politicians entering

0:48:350:48:39

public life, that was the point made

by the committee on standards in

0:48:390:48:43

public life, that social media was

the most significant factor driving

0:48:430:48:46

abuse and harassment during the

general election and it reached a

0:48:460:48:50

tipping point and would put people

off entering politics. Blue nobody

0:48:500:48:54

who does not want to be abused

sometimes in unfair term should

0:48:540:48:58

enter public life. Because you

always will be.

People should not

0:48:580:49:02

face death threats, they should not

find there is a threat that their

0:49:020:49:05

children and their staff start to

become fearful. That is the kind of

0:49:050:49:08

thing we have seen, the targeted

harassment and bullying, that kind

0:49:080:49:13

of threat, which can mean people do

not speak out. It is our job to

0:49:130:49:17

speak out in a democracy and we want

more people speaking out, we should

0:49:170:49:21

be able to do this in a way that

does not involve the kind of poison

0:49:210:49:26

that can end up undermining

democracy. We have to stand up for

0:49:260:49:30

democracy and not let it be

undermined.

Diane Abbott brought up

0:49:300:49:35

the issue of headlines calling

people new to nears and traitors, do

0:49:350:49:38

they have a responsibility to regard

and look at those headlines. --

0:49:380:49:45

mutineers.

They do not, of course, I

think the Daily Mail is stupid to

0:49:450:49:51

talk about enemies of the people!

The Daily Telegraph is stupid to

0:49:510:49:55

talk about mutineers but a newspaper

has every right to characterise

0:49:550:49:59

those people whose political

opinions it disagrees with in any

0:49:590:50:03

way they like that is not illegal.

Do you think they have a responsibly

0:50:030:50:07

to?

With rights come

responsibilities, nobody is talking

0:50:070:50:11

about legislation... There is a

responsible at on those

0:50:110:50:18

organisations to recognise if that

then leads to death threats, if it

0:50:180:50:21

leads to consequences. They have a

responsibility to take very

0:50:210:50:24

seriously and most editors do, they

do take very seriously the

0:50:240:50:28

consequences...

Mutineer... That

cannot be calculated to consider to

0:50:280:50:36

be led to a death threat.

Photographs, targeted photographs.

0:50:360:50:40

We know what they were trying to do,

which is to undermine debate on a

0:50:400:50:45

really important issue that needs to

be widely debated.

All right.

They

0:50:450:50:49

should take responsibility for that.

Thank you for coming in.

0:50:490:50:54

There's concern over government

proposals to change the way that

0:50:540:50:57

women's domestic violence

refuges are funded.

0:50:570:50:58

In future it could mean

the accommodation is no longer paid

0:50:580:51:01

for mainly from housing benefit.

0:51:010:51:02

Instead, refuges would be

funded from ring-fenced

0:51:020:51:04

grants given to councils

0:51:040:51:05

but these grants would also

have to cover

0:51:050:51:07

a number of different

housing demands.

0:51:070:51:08

Charities warn it could mean refuges

will have to close their doors

0:51:080:51:11

to some vulnerable women.

0:51:110:51:16

Here's Emma Vardy.

0:51:160:51:18

Women's refuges provide safety and

time to adjust for women who leave

0:51:200:51:24

abusive partners. But under new

proposals, the government plans to

0:51:240:51:30

remove refuges and other forms of

short-term supported housing from

0:51:300:51:33

the welfare system.

The nationalised

welfare system detected some of the

0:51:330:51:39

refuge funding from any local

authority cuts. This will not. The

0:51:390:51:45

government will say, we are passing

the exact same amount of money

0:51:450:51:48

down... But it will back fill what

councils were spending.

Instead, the

0:51:480:51:53

government is looking at giving

grants to councils, which will be

0:51:530:51:56

used to pay for all sorts of

short-term housing. As well as

0:51:560:52:01

refuges, it will cover accommodation

for other individuals, too, such as

0:52:010:52:05

ex-offenders and those with drug

addictions. The problem, some fear,

0:52:050:52:08

is that because many women in

refuges come from outside a local

0:52:080:52:14

authority's area, councils may

direct more money to other

0:52:140:52:16

vulnerable groups, such as people

who are homeless or those who are

0:52:160:52:20

elderly.

Where these contracts are

decided one-year in advance, what it

0:52:200:52:25

means, by November, if a local

authority has run out of money, and

0:52:250:52:29

100 more women turn up around

Christmas who need beds, what will

0:52:290:52:33

happen in those circumstances?

The

government is consulting on

0:52:330:52:37

proposals. One Conservative MP who

has expressed concerns told us he is

0:52:370:52:42

urging the government to consider

other options.

One of the things

0:52:420:52:45

that I want to make sure, the

government keep their focus on

0:52:450:52:49

change, but understand that two

thirds of women actually seek refuge

0:52:490:52:53

outside of their local area, for

obvious reasons, they are running

0:52:530:52:57

away from something, they want safe

haven. But also, the local

0:52:570:53:01

authorities, whereas they may be

best placed to understand the need

0:53:010:53:03

and demand, they may not be best

placed to deliver that, that support

0:53:030:53:10

that is needed, because refuges are

not just a bed for a night, they are

0:53:100:53:14

specialists services.

The government

told us the number of spaces

0:53:140:53:17

available in refuges has increased

by more than 300 since 2010. And it

0:53:170:53:22

says that it will make sure that no

victim of domestic abuse is turned

0:53:220:53:26

away from the support they need. £40

million of funding has been

0:53:260:53:31

committed until 2020, but charities

say that unless the money is

0:53:310:53:35

properly directed to the refuges

where it is needed, then a postcode

0:53:350:53:40

lottery for victims could mean the

difference between life and death.

0:53:400:53:44

Now, how are you all getting

on with the dreaded

0:53:500:53:53

Christmas shopping?

0:53:530:53:54

Well, if you're in need of a few

more stocking filler ideas

0:53:540:53:58

Westminster's resident bookworm,

0:53:580:53:59

Conservative MP Keith Simpson,

has compiled his annual

0:53:590:54:00

Christmas reading list.

0:54:000:54:05

Someone's got to do it!

0:54:050:54:08

For those of you who enjoy a bit

of political history,

0:54:080:54:10

there's been a couple of books

0:54:100:54:12

on Churchill published in recent

months, and Keith's favourite

0:54:120:54:14

is six Minutes in May:

How Churchill Unexpectedly Became

0:54:140:54:16

Prime Minister, by

Nicholas Shakespeare.

0:54:160:54:17

Another acclaimed title

is

0:54:170:54:19

Fall Out: A Year

of Political Mayhem,

0:54:190:54:20

by Tim Shipman, his follow-up

to last year's All Out War.

0:54:200:54:23

This offering from the Sunday Times

journalist tells the inside story

0:54:230:54:25

of Theresa May's 2017 struggles,

from the election to her attempts

0:54:250:54:28

to secure a Brexit deal.

0:54:280:54:32

ITV Political Editor Robert Peston's

take on the extraordinary

0:54:320:54:34

events of the last 18 months,

0:54:340:54:37

WTF, I hope I don't have to spell

0:54:370:54:44

out what that stands for(!),

0:54:440:54:45

asks how we got here,

0:54:450:54:46

and perhaps more importantly, how

we move forward to sort it all out.

0:54:460:54:49

Former Cabinet Minister Oliver

Letwin's Hearts and Minds explains

0:54:490:54:51

how the central ideas and policies

of the modern Conservative

0:54:510:54:54

party came into being,

0:54:540:54:55

while also charting his own journey

0:54:550:54:56

from childhood to Margaret

Thatcher's policy unit,

0:54:560:54:58

into the very centre of government.

0:54:580:55:00

And Auntie's War is an account

of the crucial part the BBC played

0:55:000:55:03

in informing the nation

0:55:030:55:04

what was happening during

the Second World War,

0:55:040:55:06

by our very own Radio 4 presenter

Edward Stourton.

0:55:060:55:10

I promise we're not naval-gazing,

this is Keith's list!

0:55:100:55:16

And Keith's with us now.

0:55:160:55:21

I see that you have got this one in

front of you... You have Auntie's

0:55:210:55:25

War in front of you.

I had to bring

my copy in, you did not have it!

0:55:250:55:29

LAUGHTER

Typical.

I was discussing it with

0:55:290:55:32

somebody before coming on. Very nice

man indeed, you have the official

0:55:320:55:36

history of the BBC, and what he does

is, he brings alive the development

0:55:360:55:42

of beans the tuition but also the

amazing talented people, both the

0:55:420:55:48

regulars and others. I think the BBC

we know and like, or do not like,

0:55:480:55:53

today, is largely based on that, and

he writes well. It is the kind of

0:55:530:55:58

thing I can imagine, after Boxing

Day, exhausted, you want to read a

0:55:580:56:03

book.

This would be it.

It is very

good, Auntie's War.

A rich selection

0:56:030:56:09

of books, Christmas, into the New

Year, I suppose that that arduous

0:56:090:56:13

events over the last 18 months have

fuelled these books.

Yes, the book

0:56:130:56:19

by Tim Shipman, fallout, that is the

ship

second volume, I'm frightened

0:56:190:56:23

that he is going to have the right a

third volume, probably called

0:56:230:56:26

something like All Out, that covers

the election of Theresa May, the

0:56:260:56:32

awful general election, and the

events after that, and it is based

0:56:320:56:35

almost entirely on dozens of

interviews that he has done. I spoke

0:56:350:56:41

yesterday, to a very close colleague

of Theresa May.

She said, it is not

0:56:410:56:45

what he has put in, it is what he

has left out! I have got to tell

0:56:450:56:49

you, it does make The Thick of It

look mild in comparison, if I was

0:56:490:56:58

the joint chiefs of staff, Tim and

Fiona, I would not want to be

0:56:580:57:01

watching that... I would not want to

be reading it...

Does not take my

0:57:010:57:07

fancy, also very unpleasant, that

sort of stuff, I think some of them

0:57:070:57:10

have watched the thick of it and

think that is how you have do talk

0:57:100:57:14

these days, it is not edifying. --

The Thick of It. An awful lot of

0:57:140:57:18

navel-gazing near, my book would be

David Coulthard, and is to educate

0:57:180:57:24

and, in Zimbabwe, during the short

coalition period. He rescued

0:57:240:57:29

Zimbabwe's education system, rescued

closed schools and teachers were not

0:57:290:57:33

being paid, there were three

assassination attempts by the

0:57:330:57:39

governing party on him. He survived

all free. That is politics, that is

0:57:390:57:43

what politics is really all about.

Not all this stuff about who said

0:57:430:57:47

what to do.

On a note of that,

Churchill. Jack Gill is always the

0:57:470:57:53

centre... The subject... Of some

book. Matthew has nicely brought it

0:57:530:57:57

in. -- Churchill.

A couple of books,

Nicola Shakespeare, his six minutes

0:57:570:58:05

is about the time, in the thousand,

and, to vote, and it is about the

0:58:050:58:12

famous debate, the adjournment

debate, in which Chamberlain loses,

0:58:120:58:18

need is not, knee has a majority of

80, but down from a majority of 250.

0:58:180:58:22

And he brings alive Churchill. --

Nicholas Shakespeare. And then you

0:58:220:58:28

have the darkest hour...

And there

is a film of that.

I have seen it...

0:58:280:58:34

It is brilliant! I'm quite looking

forward to it.

0:58:340:58:39

There's just time before we go

to find out the answer to our quiz.

0:58:390:58:42

The question was Jeremy Corbyn has

given an interview to Grazia

0:58:420:58:45

magazine in which he said

he believes he will "probably" be

0:58:450:58:47

Prime Minister within the next year.

0:58:470:58:49

But what was else did we learn?

0:58:490:58:51

Was it that he's going to be eating

stuffed marrow for Christmas dinner,

0:58:510:58:54

that he's allergic to dogs,

0:58:540:58:55

that he's "an accidental fashion

icon",

0:58:550:58:56

or that he'd secretly like to be

a stand-up comedian.

0:58:560:58:59

So Matthew what's

the correct answer?

0:58:590:59:00

I know that he does not like cats,

it is quite likely he is allergic to

0:59:000:59:05

dogs.

No, fashion icon! Just like

all of us here(!) LAUGHTER

0:59:050:59:10

There is Jeremy Corbyn, thank you

very much to all of you. Thank you

0:59:100:59:14

for bringing in the box. We will

make sure reread some of them. --

0:59:140:59:19

Jo Coburn is joined by Times columnist Matthew Parris for the latest news from Westminster, including an interview with Home Affairs committee chair Yvette Cooper about hate crime. Also, reducing the size of the House of Lords, Brexit, and Conservative MP Keith Simpson discusses his popular Christmas reading list.


Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS