0:00:38 > 0:00:41Hello, and welcome to the Daily Politics.
0:00:41 > 0:00:43Justine Greening quits the Cabinet rather than being
0:00:43 > 0:00:45forced to do another job.
0:00:45 > 0:00:48And she wasn't the only Secretary of State to put their foot down.
0:00:48 > 0:00:52What does the reshuffle say about Theresa May's authority?
0:00:52 > 0:00:55Theresa May's new top team meet for the first time.
0:00:55 > 0:00:57Today, she's reshuffling the junior ranks of her Government.
0:00:57 > 0:01:00We'll have the latest.
0:01:00 > 0:01:02How to lose a job and alienate people.
0:01:02 > 0:01:04Last month, Toby Young was was handed a role
0:01:04 > 0:01:05overseeing universities.
0:01:05 > 0:01:08This morning, he resigned after a furore over controversial
0:01:08 > 0:01:12tweets and newspaper articles.
0:01:12 > 0:01:16Should he have been given the job in the first place?
0:01:16 > 0:01:19And - he's been meeting and greeting, and, of course,
0:01:19 > 0:01:21tweeting world leaders as President of the United States
0:01:21 > 0:01:23for almost a year now.
0:01:23 > 0:01:29So, what should the world make of Donald Trump?
0:01:32 > 0:01:35All that in the next hour.
0:01:35 > 0:01:37And with us for the whole of the programme today
0:01:37 > 0:01:38is Mark Malloch Brown.
0:01:38 > 0:01:41He's a member of the House of Lords and a former GOAT -
0:01:41 > 0:01:43he was a minister in Gordon Brown's Government
0:01:43 > 0:01:48Of All The Talents, and a United Nations Deputy Secretary General.
0:01:49 > 0:01:50We love using that phrase!
0:01:50 > 0:01:52He now leads Best for Britain - an organisation
0:01:52 > 0:01:54which aims to co-ordinate pro-Remain groups to oppose
0:01:54 > 0:01:55the Government's Brexit strategy.
0:01:55 > 0:01:56Welcome to the programme.
0:01:56 > 0:01:59First today, let's take a look at how the papers reacted
0:01:59 > 0:02:01to the Cabinet reshuffle - and it won't make happy
0:02:01 > 0:02:02reading in Downing Street.
0:02:02 > 0:02:06The Times leads on the resignation of Justine Greening,
0:02:06 > 0:02:08calling the reshuffle "shambolic", and saying it laid bare
0:02:08 > 0:02:13"Theresa May's lack of authority".
0:02:13 > 0:02:16The Guardian also highlights Ms Greening's departure,
0:02:16 > 0:02:19and says the Prime Minister has been accused of "giving in to the boys"
0:02:19 > 0:02:21after Jeremy Hunt refused to move from Health Secretary
0:02:21 > 0:02:25to the business department.
0:02:25 > 0:02:27Mr Hunt's refusal also leads The Mail.
0:02:27 > 0:02:31The paper says Theresa May's reshuffle plans were "torpedoed",
0:02:31 > 0:02:34including her desire to remove former leadership rival
0:02:34 > 0:02:37Andrea Leadsom from the Cabinet.
0:02:38 > 0:02:40And the Daily Telegraph recalls Harold Macmillan's "Night
0:02:40 > 0:02:43of the Long Knives" by describing this reshuffle as a "false start":
0:02:43 > 0:02:46"The night of the blunt stiletto".
0:02:47 > 0:02:53We're joined now by our Political Editor, Laura Kuenssberg.
0:02:53 > 0:02:57It was never billed as being a completely dramatic reshuffle, but
0:02:57 > 0:03:02actually the papers have concluded it was a damp squib. Do you agree?I
0:03:02 > 0:03:06think it was bungled in some aspects. It was never meant to be
0:03:06 > 0:03:10big and dramatic but there was quite a lot of drama, the drum was
0:03:10 > 0:03:14unintentional, because ministers, as they sometimes do in reshuffle some
0:03:14 > 0:03:18even when prime ministers are at the peak of their powers, ministers did
0:03:18 > 0:03:21not like what they were being offered. If Downing Street does not
0:03:21 > 0:03:25do their homework and test the waters with ministers, would they be
0:03:25 > 0:03:31willing to move or not, this is what happens - they end up sitting around
0:03:31 > 0:03:34the Cabinet table this morning with Theresa May looking at colleagues
0:03:34 > 0:03:39that she didn't want to be in those seats. It has also made a lot of
0:03:39 > 0:03:43serving people in the Government, not just oriented is, quite
0:03:43 > 0:03:47disgruntled, particularly at how Justine Greening was treated. She is
0:03:47 > 0:03:50very determined and robust. Somebody told me yesterday originally when
0:03:50 > 0:03:55she was offered the job of being Secretary of State for the
0:03:55 > 0:03:57Department for International Development under David Cameron, she
0:03:57 > 0:04:01was so cross that she staged a sit in in number ten before eventually
0:04:01 > 0:04:06accepting the job! She knows her own mind and she is very determined.
0:04:06 > 0:04:09Lots of Tory MPs are asking this morning, why was Jeremy Hunt allowed
0:04:09 > 0:04:18to argue for his job and say in post?She did for hours, apparently?
0:04:18 > 0:04:22He went in in the night and emerged in the dark! Justine Greening was
0:04:22 > 0:04:25not allowed to do the same. She could become somebody rather useful
0:04:25 > 0:04:32to somebody like Mark Malloch Brown today. She is a prominent Remainer,
0:04:32 > 0:04:36she has won a London marginal seat, not many of them in the Tory Party
0:04:36 > 0:04:40these days. That could be storing up trouble for the future, she is very
0:04:40 > 0:04:45important.Before we go on to the other moves and what it says about
0:04:45 > 0:04:49Theresa May's authority, Justine Greening, will she join the ranks of
0:04:49 > 0:04:52what have been described, some people find rather offensively,
0:04:52 > 0:04:56mutineers on the backbenches?She will be careful about what you does
0:04:56 > 0:05:01next. She
0:05:03 > 0:05:05next. She says she cares about social mobility most, that is why
0:05:05 > 0:05:08she wants to stay in that job.She was the first comprehensively
0:05:08 > 0:05:09educated Education Secretary.She only launched her social mobility
0:05:09 > 0:05:13strategy less than a month ago, the ink is hardly dry on this very big
0:05:13 > 0:05:16piece of work that was meant to work in tandem with Theresa May's stated
0:05:16 > 0:05:23goal of making the country work for everyone. So she cares very deeply
0:05:23 > 0:05:26about that. And from conversations with those who understand her
0:05:26 > 0:05:32thinking, she wants to make that her focus. That said, she is a buddy who
0:05:32 > 0:05:36cares very much about our future relationship with the European
0:05:36 > 0:05:41Union. It may well be that some of her former colleagues manage to
0:05:41 > 0:05:48entice her to be on the backbenches with those group of awkward
0:05:48 > 0:05:55Remainers.What about Theresa May's authority? Reshuffles can
0:05:55 > 0:05:59historically be very difficult and people who don't always move. What
0:05:59 > 0:06:02does this say about a Government which is read by doing and starting
0:06:02 > 0:06:06the New Year on a fresh footing, and she hasn't been able to do the
0:06:06 > 0:06:11things that she wanted?She had the authority to make her move, and that
0:06:11 > 0:06:14wasn't the case last year, she wasn't even strong enough to have a
0:06:14 > 0:06:17go at all of this. What they discovered yesterday is that she
0:06:17 > 0:06:23wasn't strong enough to be able to deliver what she wanted. Suggestions
0:06:23 > 0:06:28that she may did not come to pass. Today, however, it is important,
0:06:28 > 0:06:31maybe not so much to the public perception, because frankly there
0:06:31 > 0:06:35will be a lot of people walking up and down Downing Street who even
0:06:35 > 0:06:40devoted Daily Politics viewers may never even have heard of! But for
0:06:40 > 0:06:44the Tory Party and the succession and renewal of the Next Generation,
0:06:44 > 0:06:48today is very important in terms of bringing other people forward. We
0:06:48 > 0:06:52know already that Dominic Raab has moved the housing.We have just seen
0:06:52 > 0:06:55Alok Sharma going through the front door. There is Dominic Raab. He has
0:06:55 > 0:07:01been given the housing brief.He may be rather disappointed not to be in
0:07:01 > 0:07:04the Cabinet, some people who know him well are suggesting. Jo Johnson
0:07:04 > 0:07:09is also going into number ten, the current science and Higher Education
0:07:09 > 0:07:12Minister.We don't quite know what is happening with him.Today we will
0:07:12 > 0:07:19see a lot of new intake, or newish intake MPs coming into Government.
0:07:19 > 0:07:24Some of them from the 2015 intake. Ten new names were suggested to me,
0:07:24 > 0:07:28I'm not going to read them all out. Some people who Daily Politics
0:07:28 > 0:07:34viewers will have seen, MPs like only Dowden, Suella Fernandes, a
0:07:34 > 0:07:40prominent Euro sceptic, Jo Churchill, one of the Suffolk MPs.
0:07:40 > 0:07:44Muzarabani, a prominent Brexiteer. We will see by the end of the day if
0:07:44 > 0:07:48Theresa May has been able to achieve the second aim of her reshuffle,
0:07:48 > 0:07:53which was putting forward a new team further down the ranks. But just to
0:07:53 > 0:07:57close, a quiz question, he said in 2008, by the end of my first
0:07:57 > 0:08:04Parliament, I want all -- a third of my ministers to be female. Theresa
0:08:04 > 0:08:08May and her allies are saying the same thing. Bringing people from the
0:08:08 > 0:08:12lower ranks is one thing, but whether that changes the top table
0:08:12 > 0:08:14in years to come, we will see.Thank you.
0:08:14 > 0:08:16Now, what were the big moves in yesterday's reshuffle?
0:08:16 > 0:08:18Education Secretary Justine Greening was the surprise departure last
0:08:18 > 0:08:21night when she opted to leave the Cabinet rather than be moved
0:08:21 > 0:08:22to a different department.
0:08:22 > 0:08:25She will be replaced by Damian Hinds.
0:08:25 > 0:08:27David Lidington moves in to replace Damian Green
0:08:27 > 0:08:29as Cabinet Office Minister, after Mr Green was forced
0:08:29 > 0:08:32to resign before Christmas.
0:08:32 > 0:08:35He will not, however, take over the title
0:08:35 > 0:08:37of First Secretary of State - a position which was the Prime
0:08:37 > 0:08:40Minister's de facto deputy.
0:08:40 > 0:08:42Mr Lidington will be replaced as Justice Secretary by David Gauke,
0:08:42 > 0:08:50who in turn vacates the Work and Pensions Department
0:08:52 > 0:08:55in favour of Esther McVey, who returned to the Commons in last
0:08:55 > 0:08:56year's general election.
0:08:56 > 0:08:58Patrick McLoughlin handed over the mantle of Conservative Party
0:08:58 > 0:08:59Chairman to Brandon Lewis.
0:08:59 > 0:09:01And Northern Ireland Secretary James Brokenshire stood down
0:09:01 > 0:09:03citing health reasons, and will be replaced
0:09:03 > 0:09:07by Culture Secretary Karen Bradley.
0:09:07 > 0:09:09Matthew Hancock gets his first Cabinet post by taking
0:09:09 > 0:09:12over her department.
0:09:12 > 0:09:14Jeremy Hunt refused to move from the Department of Health,
0:09:14 > 0:09:18and adds extra responsibility for social care to his brief.
0:09:18 > 0:09:20And Communities Secretary Sajid Javid also adds
0:09:20 > 0:09:23housing to his title.
0:09:23 > 0:09:25The remaining Cabinet line-up remains unchanged,
0:09:25 > 0:09:28with Amber Rudd staying at the Home Office, Boris Johnson
0:09:28 > 0:09:36as Foreign Secretary, and Philip Hammond as Chancellor.
0:09:38 > 0:09:40And we're joined now by the new Deputy Chairman
0:09:40 > 0:09:43of the Conservative Party, James Cleverley.
0:09:43 > 0:09:46Welcome to the Daily Politics, congratulations on your appointment.
0:09:46 > 0:09:52This reshuffle was supposed to underlying Theresa May's authority,
0:09:52 > 0:09:56but in fact it has undermined it. How has her authority been
0:09:56 > 0:10:00strengthened?This reshuffle was about bringing new talent into
0:10:00 > 0:10:04Government, we have seen that, we have seen promotions in the Cabinet.
0:10:04 > 0:10:10To whom? Who is the new talent who has come into the Cabinet?Well, you
0:10:10 > 0:10:16know... We have a number of new women that have come around the
0:10:16 > 0:10:19Cabinet table, who are attending Cabinet for the first time. Claire
0:10:19 > 0:10:25is coming through in the Cabinet. We are also seeing, as Laura was
0:10:25 > 0:10:29saying, we have also seen in some of the less high-profile roles,
0:10:29 > 0:10:33particularly here at the vice chairmanship of the party, which we
0:10:33 > 0:10:38were discussing yesterday, a lot of new people coming through. We are
0:10:38 > 0:10:42going to see new faces coming into Government.At the lower levels, the
0:10:42 > 0:10:46ministerial ranks below Cabinet. But at Cabinet, there hasn't been the
0:10:46 > 0:10:50complete change that we were promised. Not at the top three
0:10:50 > 0:10:54conditions. Because Theresa May couldn't move people like Jeremy
0:10:54 > 0:10:56Hunt and she couldn't persuade Justine Greening to take the
0:10:56 > 0:10:59position at work and pensions. How would you judge Theresa May's
0:10:59 > 0:11:03authority this morning?You are saying about what was promised. I
0:11:03 > 0:11:06don't know who might have been promising things to you, but the
0:11:06 > 0:11:11decisions about reshuffles are taken at number ten, and they are kept
0:11:11 > 0:11:15private at number ten until the announcement is made. There's been a
0:11:15 > 0:11:18huge amount of speculation, there always is when reshuffles come
0:11:18 > 0:11:23along. It may well be that you feel that the changes haven't met your
0:11:23 > 0:11:26expectations.They were the changes that we expected because they came
0:11:26 > 0:11:30from people around the Prime Minister. I mean, do you think the
0:11:30 > 0:11:33media has been mishandled in this instance?I think there have been a
0:11:33 > 0:11:40lot of people in the media, and this always happens, a lot of people in
0:11:40 > 0:11:42the media speculate about who might be getting promoted, who might be
0:11:42 > 0:11:47moving. And it's always the case, I remember a number of reshuffles when
0:11:47 > 0:11:50people said, that's not what we excited, as if somehow it is the
0:11:50 > 0:11:53fault of Government. What we have around the Cabinet table, we have a
0:11:53 > 0:11:59really good mix of experience. We've got a really, really strong team.
0:11:59 > 0:12:02And also what we are seeing now is people being brought up into
0:12:02 > 0:12:07Government. And I'm Rulli positive about these changes.The former
0:12:07 > 0:12:09Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith said Downing Street should
0:12:09 > 0:12:12have managed the media more carefully in the run-up to this
0:12:12 > 0:12:18reshuffle. Do you agree with him? No, I think it's impossible to
0:12:18 > 0:12:22constantly chase the speculation. If you try and back down every single
0:12:22 > 0:12:25piece of speculation you wouldn't have time to get any real work done.
0:12:25 > 0:12:28Chris Grayling, it was tweeted out by the Conservative headquarters
0:12:28 > 0:12:32that he was going to be the chairman and that was obviously completely
0:12:32 > 0:12:37wrong.Is actually proves my point. The BBC, if I remember rightly,
0:12:37 > 0:12:44confirmed for definite that Chris Grayling was going to be... The
0:12:44 > 0:12:47Conservative by the German, somebody took what they believe to be an
0:12:47 > 0:12:50authoritative source who got it wrong -- the Conservative Party
0:12:50 > 0:12:53chairman.Didn't they think of calling number ten to find it out
0:12:53 > 0:12:56was it look that is the point of chasing speculation, there is lots
0:12:56 > 0:13:00of speculationwe are never going to chase every bit of gossip and
0:13:00 > 0:13:04speculation and it would be wrong to do so.Whose fault is it that the
0:13:04 > 0:13:07headlines are so awful for Theresa May and the Government this morning?
0:13:07 > 0:13:11I don't think we should be too worried about the headlines. Today
0:13:11 > 0:13:15and yesterday were about reshuffle. And that always causes lots of froth
0:13:15 > 0:13:20and drama in the media. What really is important is the delivery of
0:13:20 > 0:13:24Government. Today's headlines are what they. Tomorrow and onwards we
0:13:24 > 0:13:31will be getting the really important stuff, which is about what we are
0:13:31 > 0:13:34doing and delivering in Government. Let's talk about Deliveroo. If this
0:13:34 > 0:13:37was going to be a reboot, if you have said this is a new Cabinet,
0:13:37 > 0:13:40although the faces haven't really changed that much -- let's talk
0:13:40 > 0:13:45about the reshuffle. What kind of policy can you expect from the new
0:13:45 > 0:13:48Cabinet?What we are doing is delivering on the agenda that the
0:13:48 > 0:13:55Prime Minister is set out when she stood on the steps of Downing
0:13:55 > 0:14:00Street.There is no change of policy is?It is never about no change, the
0:14:00 > 0:14:04fundamental for loss of the about what the Prime Minister and the
0:14:04 > 0:14:08ministerial team is doing government remains the same, about delivering
0:14:08 > 0:14:10opportunities of the fundamental for loss of view. It's about helping
0:14:10 > 0:14:15people get on the housing ladder, grabbing the employment, keeping the
0:14:15 > 0:14:19economy on track, delivering a good Brexit. These things in job because
0:14:19 > 0:14:22they are the fundamentals, the foundation stones upon which the
0:14:22 > 0:14:25detail is built, they will remain the same. Some of the details will
0:14:25 > 0:14:28change, that always happens. But the fundamental things remain the same
0:14:28 > 0:14:33no matter what.Reshuffles are always built up in the BDO, in
0:14:33 > 0:14:36Westminster, and in the bubble, to some extent, this is an event for
0:14:36 > 0:14:42us. Do you think this has been badly handled?There has been a pattern
0:14:42 > 0:14:46with Theresa May, people get out there and overpromise and then her
0:14:46 > 0:14:52"Gypsy and what's delivered time after time -- and her own
0:14:52 > 0:14:57cautiousness chips in. James, congratulations on your new role.
0:14:57 > 0:15:00Fundamentally, this is a reshuffle where the boys kept their jobs and
0:15:00 > 0:15:06probably the greatest representative of diversity in real performance
0:15:06 > 0:15:10terms around the Cabinet table, Justine Greening, lost hers.How
0:15:10 > 0:15:16much of a loss is Justine Greening to the Cabinet?
0:15:16 > 0:15:20It is never good news when you lose a good minister from Government.
0:15:20 > 0:15:25Justin had her own reasons, I haven't been able to talk to her...
0:15:25 > 0:15:29She didn't want the work and pensions brief, do you think it was
0:15:29 > 0:15:32a loss and should Theresa May have tried harder to keep her?As I say,
0:15:32 > 0:15:36I wasn't privy to the conversations. It is a shame, I think she is a
0:15:36 > 0:15:40fantastic MP and I don't know the reasons why she was not able to stay
0:15:40 > 0:15:45in Government.Was she doing a good job, in your mind, as Education
0:15:45 > 0:15:52Secretary?The problem with recent -- reshuffles us that there is
0:15:52 > 0:15:57always more talent than there are seats.But what she doing a good
0:15:57 > 0:16:03job?Yes, I think so. The question is, is there somebody that might do
0:16:03 > 0:16:06a better job, might she be better deployed doing a different job? It
0:16:06 > 0:16:11is not about if it was a good job, I think she was doing a good job.
0:16:11 > 0:16:14There are a myriad of complicated moving parts in a reshuffle and they
0:16:14 > 0:16:19all into play.How do you think it looks when there have been promises
0:16:19 > 0:16:24made by Theresa May about wanted to have a Government that better
0:16:24 > 0:16:31reflects society at large, when you lose somebody like Justine Greening,
0:16:31 > 0:16:35comprehensive re-educated, a campaigner in terms of gay rights,
0:16:35 > 0:16:38leaving the Government in that way, and in terms of the number of women
0:16:38 > 0:16:44there has been no net increase in women in Cabinet posts?As I say,
0:16:44 > 0:16:49the changes to the cabinet, I think, are taking us in the right
0:16:49 > 0:16:55direction.There are no more women in full Cabinet posts?We have ten
0:16:55 > 0:16:58women attending cabinet. There has got to be a degree of stability in
0:16:58 > 0:17:02the Cabinet. We are in Government. This is not one of the Labour
0:17:02 > 0:17:05Party's Mickey Mouse Shadow Cabinet reshuffles. These are people running
0:17:05 > 0:17:09departments, where you have to have a degree of stability. But we do
0:17:09 > 0:17:15have a fantastic mix of people. We have Esther McVey now, who has come
0:17:15 > 0:17:23into Cabinet.You don't think she represents an increase in diversity,
0:17:23 > 0:17:27I think you would be wrong.Do think she will become passionate in her
0:17:27 > 0:17:32role?I think she will be. From what I know of her, and I don't know here
0:17:32 > 0:17:35as well as some colleagues that served with her previously, she is
0:17:35 > 0:17:39absolutely passionate about delivering the things we are all
0:17:39 > 0:17:43passionate about, lifting people out of hardship, giving people
0:17:43 > 0:17:45opportunities...She was very criticised by the disability lobby
0:17:45 > 0:17:52for her work in that role in the last Government?She was very
0:17:52 > 0:17:57aggressively and nastily targeted by people like John McDonnell, who used
0:17:57 > 0:18:03very appalling and violent, misogynistic language against her. I
0:18:03 > 0:18:09think that unfortunately fuelled a bit of a hue and cry.The criticism
0:18:09 > 0:18:12from disability rights campaigners preceded the comments made by John
0:18:12 > 0:18:15McDonnell.I know when she previously worked in the Department
0:18:15 > 0:18:18for Work and Pensions she was absolutely passionate about using
0:18:18 > 0:18:22her role in that department to help people get on in life. I think she
0:18:22 > 0:18:27will be absolutely fantastic in that role.Let's move on to the party
0:18:27 > 0:18:30itself. This is the role you are going to be given. Do you think this
0:18:30 > 0:18:35reshuffle was more about developing the party, about the next election,
0:18:35 > 0:18:39than it was about government policy, and hence the ranks have been
0:18:39 > 0:18:44swelled by the likes of you and your colleagues at the party level?I
0:18:44 > 0:18:49think there is always a balance between the work of Government and
0:18:49 > 0:18:54how the mechanics, the party machine works. They both need to work. A
0:18:54 > 0:18:59good party machine helps government deliver, and a government delivering
0:18:59 > 0:19:02helps us with elections.Has the party machine been failing because
0:19:02 > 0:19:05of what happened in the last election?The party machine
0:19:05 > 0:19:11delivered the highest vote in a generation.How many members has the
0:19:11 > 0:19:16party got?I genuinely don't know at the moment.Why don't you know? Why
0:19:16 > 0:19:20is it so difficult to get numbers of Conservative Party members from
0:19:20 > 0:19:27anybody in the Conservative Party? Because we are, in the party, our
0:19:27 > 0:19:33philosophy is that we believe in autonomy, and party membership is
0:19:33 > 0:19:38owned that the constituency level. It is not that easy to compile
0:19:38 > 0:19:41up-to-date and accurate figures. The more important point is that the
0:19:41 > 0:19:45party machine is a good machine and it did well at the last general
0:19:45 > 0:19:49election. The Labour Party did very well, and sometimes the success that
0:19:49 > 0:19:52we achieved is slightly overshadowed and hidden. But it is about building
0:19:52 > 0:19:56on that success and making sure that we are absolutely ready to go into
0:19:56 > 0:20:02the local elections in the spring of this year, and other elections, and,
0:20:02 > 0:20:06ultimately, the general election. John Strafford, at the Campaign For
0:20:06 > 0:20:10Conservative Democracy said that membership could be as low as
0:20:10 > 0:20:1670,000. Below 100,000 would make the Conservative Party the fourth
0:20:16 > 0:20:20largest party, behind the Liberal Democrats, the SNP and certainly
0:20:20 > 0:20:24behind Labour. Can you win an election on that number of members?
0:20:24 > 0:20:27I now work at Central office and I don't have the figures at my
0:20:27 > 0:20:32fingertips.Would you be worried by that? He is a man on the ground,
0:20:32 > 0:20:36working at grassroots level for years.John cannot know what the
0:20:36 > 0:20:41figures are. He may be speculating, it could be an educated guess. The
0:20:41 > 0:20:47point I am making is, whatever the membership is, whatever the
0:20:47 > 0:20:50functions at Central office have been, at the last general election
0:20:50 > 0:20:55we delivered the largest vote share and the largest number of votes in a
0:20:55 > 0:20:59generation. I am not saying it is perfect, of course it isn't, and
0:20:59 > 0:21:02there are things to do, but it is a good organisation and working well.
0:21:02 > 0:21:08Our job is to make it work better. Will you publish the figures? Grant
0:21:08 > 0:21:12Shapps said they should be published when you have them?I am the deputy
0:21:12 > 0:21:17party chairman, that would need to be signed off by my boss.Do you
0:21:17 > 0:21:21think they should be made public? There are reasons to and fro.
0:21:21 > 0:21:26Members are not the only thing. We have a huge number of supporters and
0:21:26 > 0:21:30activists who, for whatever reason, are not party members, they don't
0:21:30 > 0:21:34want to sign up. I don't think we should disregard their contribution
0:21:34 > 0:21:37because they don't put their signature on a form.Mark Malloch
0:21:37 > 0:21:40Brown, we focused on Justine Greening and talked about the
0:21:40 > 0:21:46diversity and perhaps how Theresa May's government has not reached the
0:21:46 > 0:21:50aspiration of what she wanted. Esther McVey is a new cabinet
0:21:50 > 0:21:52minister, a woman in the Department for Work and Pensions, do you
0:21:52 > 0:21:57welcome that?She knows a bit about unemployment, having lost her seat!
0:21:57 > 0:22:01Yes, of course. I don't know her at all, but it is great to have her
0:22:01 > 0:22:06there. The fundamental point that you have just pressed James Wan,
0:22:06 > 0:22:12this is a party which is shrinking, it is smaller than a lot of NGOs,
0:22:12 > 0:22:19NGOs looking at the historic houses and animal rights, a modern social
0:22:19 > 0:22:22media movement has 1.7 million members. This is a shrinking party
0:22:22 > 0:22:27that increasingly is out of touch, I would argue, with the changing
0:22:27 > 0:22:33politics.But terms of vote share, like the Labour Party, but slightly
0:22:33 > 0:22:38bigger, because they did win the election, albeit losing a majority,
0:22:38 > 0:22:4142%?The two main parties have a bigger share of the vote than they
0:22:41 > 0:22:46had in a generation, which I think is a last hurrah as party politics
0:22:46 > 0:22:49begins to fundamentally realign around the newer agendas around
0:22:49 > 0:22:53there.In terms of messaging from the party, are you pleased that Toby
0:22:53 > 0:22:58Young has resigned?I think it was increasingly clear that was the
0:22:58 > 0:23:03right choice. I think there were many very credible reasons for him
0:23:03 > 0:23:08to be appointed in the first place, he had some fantastic work with free
0:23:08 > 0:23:14schools. But he has put out intentionally controversial ideas
0:23:14 > 0:23:17into the public to stimulate debate. That is what he was paid to do at
0:23:17 > 0:23:20the time. Clearly, that overshadowed the good work he did more recently
0:23:20 > 0:23:26on education.But there are reams of tweets and articles that have now
0:23:26 > 0:23:29been published. Should he have been appointed on the basis of somebody
0:23:29 > 0:23:38that talked about education, saying the Government would have to repeal
0:23:38 > 0:23:42the equality act because any exam not accessible to a troglodyte with
0:23:42 > 0:23:48a mental age of six would be judged to be elated. -- elitist. Should
0:23:48 > 0:23:53anybody like that have been appointed?Toby's job at the time he
0:23:53 > 0:23:57wrote that was to stimulate debate and argument and be provocative.
0:23:57 > 0:24:03That is what he was meant to do. In this instance, it was to rely more
0:24:03 > 0:24:08heavily on the education experience he developed with free schools. On
0:24:08 > 0:24:14balance, it was clear that one overshadowed the other.Thank you.
0:24:14 > 0:24:16Now, last month, he was appointed to a Government quango
0:24:16 > 0:24:17overseeing universities.
0:24:17 > 0:24:20Today, Toby Young has resigned from that role after a furore over
0:24:20 > 0:24:22tweets and newspaper articles that disparaged women, the disabled
0:24:22 > 0:24:24and the working class.
0:24:24 > 0:24:27Defenders point to Toby Young's record as an educationalist
0:24:27 > 0:24:30and founder of the West London Free School, though many MPs
0:24:30 > 0:24:31were unimpressed when his appointment was discussed
0:24:31 > 0:24:36in the Commons yesterday afternoon.
0:24:36 > 0:24:39I am flabbergasted and it is beyond me how the minister can stand
0:24:39 > 0:24:44up and support this appointment.
0:24:44 > 0:24:46As the Prime Minister said yesterday, Mr Young,
0:24:46 > 0:24:49since these comments and tweets, has been doing exceedingly good work
0:24:49 > 0:24:56in our education system.
0:24:56 > 0:24:59And it is for that reason that he is well placed to make
0:24:59 > 0:25:02a valuable contribution to the work of the board of the office
0:25:02 > 0:25:05for students, where he will continue to do much more to support
0:25:05 > 0:25:08the disadvantaged than some many of his armchair critics.
0:25:08 > 0:25:14On this one, I think things have gone badly wrong.
0:25:14 > 0:25:18I'm not talking about the things that he has done on Twitter.
0:25:18 > 0:25:21What I am more concerned about are some quite dark articles,
0:25:21 > 0:25:23where he talks about the disabled, where he talks about
0:25:23 > 0:25:27the working class, much more significantly in 2015.
0:25:27 > 0:25:29And I have the article here, on what he calls
0:25:29 > 0:25:33"progressive eugenics".
0:25:33 > 0:25:39Now, I find this incredibly dark and very dangerous stuff.
0:25:39 > 0:25:42I feel that Mr Young's comments do cross a line and they are indicative
0:25:42 > 0:25:44of an underlying character.
0:25:44 > 0:25:46Clearly, there is a case for the board revisiting
0:25:46 > 0:25:51and asking him to step down.
0:25:51 > 0:25:53And we're joined by Labour's Dawn Butler,
0:25:53 > 0:25:57who raised the urgent question.
0:25:57 > 0:26:00And Freddie Gray, Deputy Editor of The Spectator, where Toby Young
0:26:00 > 0:26:04shared his resignation this morning.
0:26:04 > 0:26:09Welcome to both of you. So, are you pleased he has resigned?I am
0:26:09 > 0:26:12pleased he has resigned, it was the right thing to do. It should have
0:26:12 > 0:26:17been done earlier. I don't think he should have resigned, I think the
0:26:17 > 0:26:19Prime Minister should have been stronger and said it was an
0:26:19 > 0:26:23inappropriate appointment and he should step down.What do you say to
0:26:23 > 0:26:27that? Looking at the articles, which have been in the public domain,
0:26:27 > 0:26:32along with thousands and thousands of tweets that Toby Young deleted
0:26:32 > 0:26:35rather hurriedly over the last week or so, was it a mistake to have
0:26:35 > 0:26:40appointed him in the first place?I don't actually know if it was a
0:26:40 > 0:26:44mistake to have appointed him, what I do think it is is sad. It has
0:26:44 > 0:26:47obviously been proved to be a mistake in that he has now had to
0:26:47 > 0:26:52stand down. The point about it is that it is sad, in that Toby has
0:26:52 > 0:26:56changed as a person, he has talked a lot about those changes, and he has
0:26:56 > 0:27:01been bang to rights for things he said in the past, which he said was
0:27:01 > 0:27:05foolish, and which he said now are plain wrong.They are not in the
0:27:05 > 0:27:13distant past. Some of them were said in 2015. I mean, this article on
0:27:13 > 0:27:15progressive eugenics, it was referred to there by Robert Halford,
0:27:15 > 0:27:19he proposed that poorer people should be helped to choose which
0:27:19 > 0:27:22embryos were allowed to develop based on intelligence. Do you think
0:27:22 > 0:27:26he has changed that much?I disagree with him very strongly there, and I
0:27:26 > 0:27:31remember doing so at the time. I do think that his opinions are complex,
0:27:31 > 0:27:35and he is a convex person. In terms of being qualified for this job,
0:27:35 > 0:27:39we're not talking about him being minister for health, we are talking
0:27:39 > 0:27:44about him being 1/15 of a quango that, up until recently, nobody had
0:27:44 > 0:27:49heard of. I don't think that anybody should be deemed unqualified,
0:27:49 > 0:27:53because he is qualified, and he has set up successful free schools.Dawn
0:27:53 > 0:27:57Butler, do you think people can change? You sat in the studio with
0:27:57 > 0:28:01me when we were talking about Jarrod O'Mara, who you said was on a
0:28:01 > 0:28:04journey and was changing, from some of the things he had written in the
0:28:04 > 0:28:08past. Do you think people can fundamentally change or that
0:28:08 > 0:28:13everything Toby has said and written in the past marks him out for this
0:28:13 > 0:28:22sort of job?The difference between Jarrod and Toby was that Jarrod was
0:28:22 > 0:28:27published, and Toby was promoted. The Government promoted Toby to
0:28:27 > 0:28:31this, a paid, public appointment. We need to establish if due process was
0:28:31 > 0:28:34taken place, whether there was due diligence in the process. We also
0:28:34 > 0:28:38need to establish whether he was suitable. It has come to light that
0:28:38 > 0:28:43evidently he was not suitable. And whether he was promoted on merit, or
0:28:43 > 0:28:47the fact that he was mates with a certain group of people.Let's talk
0:28:47 > 0:28:50about suitability. Freddie claims that Toby Young was suitable because
0:28:50 > 0:28:56of his background in education recently. A founder member of a free
0:28:56 > 0:29:01school, and it was in that capacity that he was going to take up this
0:29:01 > 0:29:06role, on the regulatory body. Do you think he was qualified for that job?
0:29:06 > 0:29:10There are over 800 free schools in the UK, so there are a plethora of
0:29:10 > 0:29:16people that were qualified. There is also...Was he qualified?Well, he
0:29:16 > 0:29:21wasn't suitable. Suitability, there are the Nolan principles and the
0:29:21 > 0:29:24seven principles of holding public office. He has failed in all of
0:29:24 > 0:29:28those principles. So, he wasn't suitable for the position to be
0:29:28 > 0:29:31appointed in the first place. It shows a serious lack of judgment by
0:29:31 > 0:29:35the Prime Minister, by Boris Johnson, by Joe Johnson, defending
0:29:35 > 0:29:39him in the house yesterday.That is the point, you cannot separate what
0:29:39 > 0:29:42he may do professionally in terms of education and the man himself on the
0:29:42 > 0:29:47basis of what he said?
0:29:47 > 0:29:51Yes, but I would emphasise again that this is a minor role on a
0:29:51 > 0:29:54quango, if we went through every single Government quango and
0:29:54 > 0:29:58analysed what each of them had said and done on social media, you would
0:29:58 > 0:30:02find yourself throwing out a lot of people based on their character.To
0:30:02 > 0:30:08delete 40,000 tweets is an enormous number of tweets to delete. Just 13
0:30:08 > 0:30:13months ago, somebody put a sexual harassment document on his desk and
0:30:13 > 0:30:18underlined sections of it in red. That shows you the type of mind and
0:30:18 > 0:30:23character that he is all stop and I am not saying...You are not
0:30:23 > 0:30:29objecting to Toby because of his tweets, you are objecting to him
0:30:29 > 0:30:38because he is a Conservative who is on a quango.Is that true? Is it
0:30:38 > 0:30:43because he is a Tory
0:30:43 > 0:30:45on a quango.Is that true? Is it because he is a Tory, in right-wing
0:30:45 > 0:30:49Conservative?That's absolutely ridiculous. I am sat on a committee
0:30:49 > 0:30:53in Parliament to change the culture of Parliament in regards to sexual
0:30:53 > 0:30:57harassment, I am on that committee just two months, after two months I
0:30:57 > 0:31:00can't stand up and speak out against somebody with such views then I'm
0:31:00 > 0:31:04not doing a good job. I'm not saying that people can't go on a journey
0:31:04 > 0:31:10and change they can.You don't seem to grant him the right to have a
0:31:10 > 0:31:15journey.He defended what he said, saying exactly what you have just
0:31:15 > 0:31:20said.He said that he had said childish things and they were wrong.
0:31:20 > 0:31:24It is more than childish, isn't it? These are deeply offensive. He has
0:31:24 > 0:31:30justified it by saying that he was a journalist provocateur. Well,
0:31:30 > 0:31:34certainly, and it's not just Labour politicians who have criticised him.
0:31:34 > 0:31:37Robert Halfon, Sarah Wollaston, others within the Conservative
0:31:37 > 0:31:41Party. Does that not diminish your argument that this is somehow a
0:31:41 > 0:31:47Labour war?I think there has been a witchhunt, you know? There has been
0:31:47 > 0:31:51a attempt to produce Toby in the court of public opinion, and it has
0:31:51 > 0:31:57worked.He is in his 50s, it's a bit late to grow up! I think his habits
0:31:57 > 0:32:01are probably pretty formed! I do have some sympathy around the fact,
0:32:01 > 0:32:05being an ex-journalist myself, journalism is about being
0:32:05 > 0:32:08provocative, if we were all held to account for everything we had said
0:32:08 > 0:32:12as a journalist, we wouldn't get anywhere. The Spectator has quite a
0:32:12 > 0:32:16staple of people who have said extremely, including Boris Johnson
0:32:16 > 0:32:20at earlier stages, and die as a reader have often enjoyed them.
0:32:20 > 0:32:25Should
0:32:25 > 0:32:28Should they be banned from holding the sort of jobs?Public standards
0:32:28 > 0:32:30have moved at the same time as people in social media have become
0:32:30 > 0:32:34more extreme to capture attention. Toby Young is properly a victim of
0:32:34 > 0:32:39raising standards of what we expect of people at a time that to keep his
0:32:39 > 0:32:44audiences and readership he if anything has had to become more
0:32:44 > 0:32:48extreme and what he has said.It is not enough to apologise and distance
0:32:48 > 0:32:52yourself from what you as a journalist might have said and done"
0:32:52 > 0:32:57he should have had the self-awareness to say, go great I'm
0:32:57 > 0:33:01the kind of provocative journalist who better stick to my trade, I'm
0:33:01 > 0:33:05going tohave a difficult time of it if I have to move into public life.
0:33:05 > 0:33:07Thank you.
0:33:07 > 0:33:09It's approaching a year since his inauguration,
0:33:09 > 0:33:11and those who suggested that Presidential office would change
0:33:11 > 0:33:14the reality TV star and billionaire have been proven wrong.
0:33:14 > 0:33:16The account of a chaotic and dysfunctional White House
0:33:16 > 0:33:18in the book Fire and Fury, published last week,
0:33:18 > 0:33:20provided yet more evidence that Donald Trump in no conventional US
0:33:20 > 0:33:23President.
0:33:23 > 0:33:26And, as the rest of the world has discovered over the last 12 months,
0:33:26 > 0:33:28he's not a man who does diplomacy.
0:33:28 > 0:33:33Here's Elizabeth Glinka.
0:33:34 > 0:33:41It's going to be on the America first. America first -- only
0:33:41 > 0:33:47America.Right from the beginning, Donald Trump's approach to
0:33:47 > 0:33:51international relations has been somewhat unorthodox. A diplomatic
0:33:51 > 0:33:55insurgent, he pulled out of international deals on trade and
0:33:55 > 0:33:59climate change, denounced the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, and broke
0:33:59 > 0:34:03decades of policy by declaring Jerusalem the capital of Israel.He
0:34:03 > 0:34:07absolutely was certain in his language that he wanted to put
0:34:07 > 0:34:12America's interests first on the global stage. This meant
0:34:12 > 0:34:16renegotiating multilateral relationships, and really focusing
0:34:16 > 0:34:19instead on bilateral partnerships. He also wanted to renegotiate
0:34:19 > 0:34:25America's relationship with Russia. He thought he could for a much
0:34:25 > 0:34:29stronger bond with President Putin. A relationship that continues to
0:34:29 > 0:34:33cause headaches, as at the official investigation into collusion between
0:34:33 > 0:34:39the trunk campaign and the Kremlin intensifies. There was one subject
0:34:39 > 0:34:44that he continued to return to again and again.We cannot continue to
0:34:44 > 0:34:50allow China... They have taken our money, they have taken our jobs...
0:34:50 > 0:34:54China is a currency manipulator.Yet so far that open hostility appears
0:34:54 > 0:34:59to have been forgotten.China welcomed President Trump and they
0:34:59 > 0:35:04gave him a fantastic ceremony. He left feeling like he had a very
0:35:04 > 0:35:08strong personal relationship with President Xi Jinping. Of course, the
0:35:08 > 0:35:14broader context of the nuclear issue in North Korea has meant that, for
0:35:14 > 0:35:18Trump, that has taken precedence. Whilst long-term allies are fearful
0:35:18 > 0:35:21of an escalation on the Korean potency luck at the American
0:35:21 > 0:35:25President of the social media to exchange in schools with King John
0:35:25 > 0:35:31on. His putter spats are not reserved for his foes -- with Kim
0:35:31 > 0:35:34Jong-un. He retweeted a far right groups.Increasingly over time we
0:35:34 > 0:35:38have seen tweets used to shout back at the rest of the world. Leaders
0:35:38 > 0:35:42around the world are trying to decide what to do with this. Of
0:35:42 > 0:35:45course, those people who are working with him in the White House are also
0:35:45 > 0:35:50faced with very difficult questions about whether or not to disregard
0:35:50 > 0:35:57the tweets or whether or not to try and design strategies to continue to
0:35:57 > 0:36:00implement these into policies, we are seeing a range of different
0:36:00 > 0:36:04responses to Twitter.After a busy 12 months, it seems the world is
0:36:04 > 0:36:07still a little perplexed by the man who calls himself a very stable
0:36:07 > 0:36:09genius.
0:36:09 > 0:36:10We're joined now by the former Vice-President
0:36:10 > 0:36:16of Republicans Overseas, Jan Halper Hayes.
0:36:16 > 0:36:22Welcome back to the Daily Politics. In your mind, what are Donald
0:36:22 > 0:36:26Trump's signal foreign policy achievements so far?He has achieved
0:36:26 > 0:36:33things with Isis, Nato actually has increased its spending by about $12
0:36:33 > 0:36:39billion.What are his achievements with Isis?That they have driven
0:36:39 > 0:36:44them out of certain areas of Syria and Iraq. And they have been able to
0:36:44 > 0:36:48release some of those who were captured.Even though Donald Trump
0:36:48 > 0:36:52said he wouldn't actually intervene in Syria before he became president.
0:36:52 > 0:36:58Well, I think Donald Trump said a lot of things. And, the fact is,
0:36:58 > 0:37:02what people don't understand about him is that he really operates from
0:37:02 > 0:37:07a jewel perspective. He understands that he is taking a position, but at
0:37:07 > 0:37:11the same time, he realises that America does have a responsibility
0:37:11 > 0:37:15to the rest of the world.Do you agree with that? Do you think there
0:37:15 > 0:37:20is a strategy behind Donald Trump's tweeting? Because effectively, he is
0:37:20 > 0:37:24running his own foreign policy from Puerto?I'm not sure there is eight
0:37:24 > 0:37:28that you, but it is an instinct and there is a powerful one. I say to
0:37:28 > 0:37:32somebody who is perhaps not quite as critical as his foreign policy as
0:37:32 > 0:37:36you might imagine, because I felt American foreign policy had become
0:37:36 > 0:37:41rather complacent, it was managing long-term problems like Syria and
0:37:41 > 0:37:44Afghanistan, which never seemed to get solved.You would have liked to
0:37:44 > 0:37:48have seen more intervention and you think Donald Trump is the man to do
0:37:48 > 0:37:52it?No, not listen Sir Lee, I don't think intervention is the solution
0:37:52 > 0:37:57to all problems, by any means. I felt a disruptive approach, a
0:37:57 > 0:38:01challenge to a lot of America's relationships, is valid. However,
0:38:01 > 0:38:06the fact that they are all bundled together behind this America first
0:38:06 > 0:38:11label and it is so transactional and so bilateral, it is having a really
0:38:11 > 0:38:15devastating consequence. And it is rippling out globally around trade,
0:38:15 > 0:38:23security, you name it, is human rights, democracy. It is proving so
0:38:23 > 0:38:26far a very disappointing although predictably so presidency, I think.
0:38:26 > 0:38:34May I add about his tweeting, it is strategic, exceedingly strategic.
0:38:34 > 0:38:39Which tweets are strategic?There are four Prat agrees. One is to
0:38:39 > 0:38:44deflect what is going on. -- categories. Two is to send out trial
0:38:44 > 0:38:50balloons to test how people feel. To divert from uncomfortable things, or
0:38:50 > 0:38:55to do pre-emptive framing of things. Where would you put Mexico and
0:38:55 > 0:38:59Mexico building that will? Because he tweeted about that early on, what
0:38:59 > 0:39:03was that in terms of your categories?That was pre-emptive
0:39:03 > 0:39:09framing. And under the trial balloon to get a sense of what, how well it
0:39:09 > 0:39:14would be received.The nuclear button, the most recent and
0:39:14 > 0:39:17potentially the most explosive, to coin a phrase. How would you
0:39:17 > 0:39:20characterise that?Well, I thought it was very interesting that he came
0:39:20 > 0:39:28up with a name for him, Rocket Man. But the thing about North Korea, and
0:39:28 > 0:39:32Trump is very much aware of this, that he's almost like the gift that
0:39:32 > 0:39:36keeps on giving to North Korea, like the gift that keeps on giving the
0:39:36 > 0:39:43journalist.Seeing that his button is bigger...North Korea needs to
0:39:43 > 0:39:47have and I American slant to it. That has been something over the
0:39:47 > 0:39:51years that has been very important for their survival -- and
0:39:51 > 0:39:55anti-American slant. From the Korean War, they did not feel it was their
0:39:55 > 0:40:00fault. His grandfather, Kim Il-sung, was the one that first started that
0:40:00 > 0:40:03attitude towards anti-American is. Since the 60s, there have been
0:40:03 > 0:40:11cartoons.Nikki Haley, ambassador to the UN, has defended Donald Trump's
0:40:11 > 0:40:15nuclear button, mine is bigger than yours, too Kim Jong-un, saying it
0:40:15 > 0:40:21was required to keep the North Korean leader on his toes.It has
0:40:21 > 0:40:27got a frat room for eternity to it, guys standing naked in front of the
0:40:27 > 0:40:32show and saying, mine is bigger than yours!That's a lovely image for us
0:40:32 > 0:40:35at lunchtime!It simply feeds into exactly what you were saying, it
0:40:35 > 0:40:42feeds into this America is the enemy of North Korea, which keeps its weak
0:40:42 > 0:40:48regime strong and in power. In fact, for years, what has been begging to
0:40:48 > 0:40:52be done in the Korean peninsula is really to put China in front on this
0:40:52 > 0:40:58one. It should be their problem, not the US's problem. In fact, instead,
0:40:58 > 0:41:05we keep on, rather than diminishing Kim, we enhance him, by this sort of
0:41:05 > 0:41:11nuclear button language and rocket man language. He is running an
0:41:11 > 0:41:14economy 100th the size of South Korea. He has got some slightly
0:41:14 > 0:41:20dodgy weaponry. We should turn this problem over to China, which is the
0:41:20 > 0:41:25neighbour that. For most if he tries to use those weapons.Do you think
0:41:25 > 0:41:28there has been a moderating effect on Donald Trump around because of
0:41:28 > 0:41:32the advisers around him? People always used to talk about the system
0:41:32 > 0:41:36in America, the checks and balances. Do you think that is in anyway
0:41:36 > 0:41:40softening Donald Trump, apart from the tweets he does from his bedroom?
0:41:40 > 0:41:44I think in terms of his verbal presentation, you are unlikely to
0:41:44 > 0:41:51see anything softening. In of his decision-making, general matters,
0:41:51 > 0:41:53Kelly McMasters, he respects them enormously. And he very much listens
0:41:53 > 0:41:59to them.Isn't that the case that the world is tuning out of the
0:41:59 > 0:42:02tweets to some extent, and the process of foreign policy is being
0:42:02 > 0:42:06done by the advisers around him? Well, it is a strange moment when we
0:42:06 > 0:42:10are forced to take comfort that there are bunch of generals around
0:42:10 > 0:42:14him! The American system traditionally had civilian control
0:42:14 > 0:42:18of the generals, this time we have generals' control over civilians and
0:42:18 > 0:42:22we are all relieved and happy. I think it is right that there are
0:42:22 > 0:42:26international has been some tuning out. I'm struck when I go to
0:42:26 > 0:42:29international conferences, the ones who remain deeply alarmed by Trump
0:42:29 > 0:42:35tend to be the Americans, who just can't believe what comes next.
0:42:35 > 0:42:38Whereas I think internationally, there has been a little bit of view,
0:42:38 > 0:42:41this guy, strange fellow, but ultimately a weak president because
0:42:41 > 0:42:46he can't drive what he wants through Congress. And I think actually
0:42:46 > 0:42:49that's a very dangerously benign view to take of it, because a
0:42:49 > 0:42:55president can make war. Can make huge trouble around and
0:42:55 > 0:42:58international security issue in a way that he cannot do domestic
0:42:58 > 0:43:04league.But he also really values being unpredictable. And in fact,
0:43:04 > 0:43:11North Korea reached out to the Heritage foundation, the Bruce
0:43:11 > 0:43:16Klinger, who is their North Korean expert, to ask him to come over and
0:43:16 > 0:43:20explained Rob, which he declined. But is it wise to repeatedly
0:43:20 > 0:43:24intervene and actually insult your allies? I mean, even Britain,
0:43:24 > 0:43:28criticising the Mayor of London and the Curragh policy here, is that
0:43:28 > 0:43:32sensible diplomacy?No, it's not sensible diplomacy, it is Donald
0:43:32 > 0:43:36Trump's behaviour and there are aspects of him that are definitely
0:43:36 > 0:43:40not perfect and unacceptable to a lot of people, including myself. But
0:43:40 > 0:43:49it is part of him,
0:43:49 > 0:43:51it is part of him, and you really have the June some of it out.
0:43:51 > 0:43:53Except, is it damaging the global reputation? Has it damaged the
0:43:53 > 0:43:55global reputation already of the United States?I'm actually for mind
0:43:55 > 0:43:58that our reputation has been damaged for much longer than Trump came into
0:43:58 > 0:44:02the Presidency.Look, I would echo that in the sense that I think, you
0:44:02 > 0:44:07know, Obama and from, two sides of the same coin, how do you manage
0:44:07 > 0:44:11relative American weakness. America is by far the strongest country in
0:44:11 > 0:44:15the world still, but relative weakness, inability to project its
0:44:15 > 0:44:18power for example in Asia or in the Middle East as effectively as it
0:44:18 > 0:44:24could the past. Obamacare did it by a rather quiet and, passive,
0:44:24 > 0:44:28multilateralism that didn't really deliver results. Trump has done it
0:44:28 > 0:44:31with bluster and gesture, and absolutely correctly,
0:44:31 > 0:44:35unpredictability. I would argue the returns on his strategy are probably
0:44:35 > 0:44:40even less than they were no Obama's. Thank you for coming in.
0:44:40 > 0:44:41Now, New Year, new Brexit Bill.
0:44:41 > 0:44:44The Trade Bill gets its second reading in the Commons today.
0:44:44 > 0:44:45That's the first proper opportunity MPs have
0:44:45 > 0:44:48to scrutinise the legislation, which is exactly what our
0:44:48 > 0:44:53Parliamentary Correspondent, Mark D'Arcy, has been doing.
0:44:53 > 0:44:57Thank you for fulfilling that important duty. Tell us about it?
0:44:57 > 0:45:01It's a tough job, but somebody has to do it! The trade bill is quite a
0:45:01 > 0:45:04small measure in terms of the number of clauses, but it is a measure that
0:45:04 > 0:45:07gives ministers are a lot of power to implement trade deals that
0:45:07 > 0:45:13haven't been negotiated yet. This is the same problem that the an awful
0:45:13 > 0:45:16lot of Brexit legislation, that you have to have a large kit of tools
0:45:16 > 0:45:19available to you, because the structure you are building hasn't
0:45:19 > 0:45:23even got past the concept stage yet, let alone the design stage. So
0:45:23 > 0:45:27they've got very wide powers they are going to give to ministers to
0:45:27 > 0:45:30enact trade treaties. Trade treaties can be very big deals indeed. There
0:45:30 > 0:45:36is a thing called the Government Procurement Agreement, which is $1.3
0:45:36 > 0:45:47trillion of business
0:45:47 > 0:45:49across the planet. The UK will now need individual membership of that,
0:45:49 > 0:45:52and it is quite an important thing for any number of British jobs. That
0:45:52 > 0:45:55is just one of dozens of examples out there of treaties that we have
0:45:55 > 0:45:58to make or join as members of that are coming down the path. The other
0:45:58 > 0:46:00issue with this bill is that Parliament is a little bit
0:46:00 > 0:46:02uncomfortable about how little traction it has when those treaties
0:46:02 > 0:46:06come up. Remember, with a loss of trade treaties, there are particular
0:46:06 > 0:46:10issues that grab people's attention. It might be hormone produced beef,
0:46:10 > 0:46:14genetically modified soya beans or chlorine washed chicken, but when
0:46:14 > 0:46:17there was a thing called the Transatlantic Trade and Investment
0:46:17 > 0:46:23Partnership, TTIP, people became extremely worried about that because
0:46:23 > 0:46:26there was a thought out there that it might impinge on the National
0:46:26 > 0:46:29Health Service and effectively privatise the NHS. Some people
0:46:29 > 0:46:32dismissed that as a scare story, but it was a worry that was definitely
0:46:32 > 0:46:34up there.Thank you very much.
0:46:34 > 0:46:37Well, my guest of the day, Mark Malloch Brown, has some
0:46:37 > 0:46:39experience of global trade - with previous roles at the UN
0:46:39 > 0:46:41and as a Foreign Minister.
0:46:41 > 0:46:42As does Digby Jones, former Trade Minister
0:46:42 > 0:46:44and a previous Head of the CBI.
0:46:44 > 0:46:48He joins us now from Birmingham.
0:46:48 > 0:46:54I think the two of you were in government together, with Gordon
0:46:54 > 0:46:59Brown. Welcome back to the Daily Politics. Mark Mike Brown, David
0:46:59 > 0:47:03Davies says he is aiming for a Canada plus plus plus, Canada have
0:47:03 > 0:47:07done a trade deal with the EU. Would that be a good outcome in your mind?
0:47:07 > 0:47:11It might well be, if one could guess at what he means. This is the same
0:47:11 > 0:47:17guy that has also, you know, there has been talk today that he might
0:47:17 > 0:47:23get a minister in charge of a no Brexit scenario for the country. The
0:47:23 > 0:47:29challenges in trade, the world is full of pluralistic or multilateral
0:47:29 > 0:47:36trade agreements and we are, in a sense, old Britain, threatening to
0:47:36 > 0:47:40set out to sea and reconstruct that set of relationships for ourselves
0:47:40 > 0:47:46pretty much from scratch, having left the safe harbour of Europe. The
0:47:46 > 0:47:51whole direction of international trade policy at the is moment
0:47:51 > 0:47:58towards the America First of Trump, trade is going to be on my terms to
0:47:58 > 0:48:01lower American trade deficits. It is simply not a very good environment
0:48:01 > 0:48:06to be trying to reinvent your trade policy in, particularly when you
0:48:06 > 0:48:11have that safe, effective harbour where we do 43% of our trade at the
0:48:11 > 0:48:16moment with Europe.Digby Jones, what do you say to that?Greetings
0:48:16 > 0:48:25from Birmingham. You have two GOATS for the price of one. I am not as
0:48:25 > 0:48:29pessimistic as Mark. I am very keen on ensuring that we remain very good
0:48:29 > 0:48:36friends with Europe. I don't like the
0:48:36 > 0:48:40the the idea that it will be enemies and not friends, when it is in the
0:48:40 > 0:48:46interests of an unemployed live in Greece today, a single mother in
0:48:46 > 0:48:50Madrid today, 12% of France unemployed today, it is in their
0:48:50 > 0:48:58interests that they get a good quality trade agreement, covering
0:48:58 > 0:49:01services and financial services, with this enormous trading partner
0:49:01 > 0:49:04called Britain. I wish those that are still sulking about the result
0:49:04 > 0:49:14came on board to get a good result. I want the Cleggs, and the Blairs,
0:49:14 > 0:49:17Mark, as well, in his suit, a seriously good talent, I want them
0:49:17 > 0:49:22to be behind the United Kingdom to get the deal done. I don't call this
0:49:22 > 0:49:25Canada plus plus plus, I think it has the chance of being unique just
0:49:25 > 0:49:28because we are so big. It is a fabulous time to be doing deals in
0:49:28 > 0:49:35Asia, and I have to say, with great respect to Mr Barnier and his
0:49:35 > 0:49:40people, and I'm going to see Michel Barnier tomorrow...You as well,
0:49:40 > 0:49:43following Nigel Farage?Not following him in policy or thought,
0:49:43 > 0:49:47I am following him in time. I am going to say to him, I want to hitch
0:49:47 > 0:49:53their wagon to Asia's century, and I am not going to denigrate Europe. I
0:49:53 > 0:49:57am going to say that I don't agree with the safe harbour idea. Europe
0:49:57 > 0:50:01is in relative decline. Asia is not. I would like to be doing deals with
0:50:01 > 0:50:07Asia.Do you accept that? Are you sulking? Are you sitting there with
0:50:07 > 0:50:12others on the Labour and Tory side that are just lacking the optimism
0:50:12 > 0:50:15and the gung ho spirit of people like Digby Jones for the trade deals
0:50:15 > 0:50:23that are out there?Well, if I was ever feeling down, Digby was the man
0:50:23 > 0:50:27I went to. He is gloriously optimistic about everything, God
0:50:27 > 0:50:32bless him, and terribly talented. So I take what he says very, very
0:50:32 > 0:50:36seriously. For me, it is not Europe or Asia, and I don't think it is for
0:50:36 > 0:50:40Digby, you can get both. I also think you can get both. But how you
0:50:40 > 0:50:44get both for me is different, you start by holding on to Europe and at
0:50:44 > 0:50:48age.But you can't get free trade deals with other countries if we are
0:50:48 > 0:50:54still part of the single market?All of the Asians I talked you do not
0:50:54 > 0:50:59like the idea of special trade stuff governing the relationship with the
0:50:59 > 0:51:03UK and Europe, because they look at Europe as a single export market, of
0:51:03 > 0:51:06which the UK is part. They don't want to send cars and electronics
0:51:06 > 0:51:10here that are different to the ones they have to ship to Europe. The
0:51:10 > 0:51:14complexity of that kind adds costs to our imports, as well as what we
0:51:14 > 0:51:20export.Realistically, you say you want to remain friends with Europe
0:51:20 > 0:51:24and with the EU, but do you accept that any trade deal with the EU,
0:51:24 > 0:51:27which may be a good one, particularly if it includes
0:51:27 > 0:51:30services, which is a big issue for Britain, it will not be as good as
0:51:30 > 0:51:35the one we have got now?I think in tariff terms it will be the same as
0:51:35 > 0:51:42now.In trade terms?Yes, but in tariff terms, an inhibitor to trade,
0:51:42 > 0:51:48frankly, every deal Mark and I ever did as trade, you were starting with
0:51:48 > 0:51:53tariffs of 10%, 12%, 8%, and trying to get them down. I've never known a
0:51:53 > 0:51:58trade negotiation on Earth start at zero and try to get it up. I'm not
0:51:58 > 0:52:01at all concerned. I think it will be exactly the same in tariffs. Where I
0:52:01 > 0:52:06am concerned and where we have work to do is what I called nontariff
0:52:06 > 0:52:10barriers to trade. The bureaucracy, the regulation. Mark is right in
0:52:10 > 0:52:14saying that we have to adapt, we are not going to like this as a country
0:52:14 > 0:52:17but we have to do it, we have to adapt to a lot of the regulation
0:52:17 > 0:52:20that Europe do to enable goods to be sold there. Because of that, we will
0:52:20 > 0:52:24do it for the rest of the world because no producer in Britain, no
0:52:24 > 0:52:28manufacturer or service provider is going to have two lines, one for
0:52:28 > 0:52:32non-Europe, and one for Europe. Mark is absolutely right. You can work
0:52:32 > 0:52:35through that by being Michel Barnier's friend, saying, you're not
0:52:35 > 0:52:39going to have a problem with me on this, I want to get it done quickly
0:52:39 > 0:52:42to give business certainty. What is very important right now is that we
0:52:42 > 0:52:53don't have the situation where, he has to understand that we can walk
0:52:53 > 0:52:57away but we're not going to.You want a situation where you could
0:52:57 > 0:53:03walk away and not pay the divorce bill?Definitely.Is there an
0:53:03 > 0:53:07opportunity? The 27 are not united completely when it comes to trade.
0:53:07 > 0:53:14They all have different priorities at the moment. It may be
0:53:16 > 0:53:18at the moment. It may be that Britain can secure trade deal like
0:53:18 > 0:53:21Canada's, because we start with being joined together, unlike
0:53:21 > 0:53:24Canada. Do you accept that might be straightforward and it is just
0:53:24 > 0:53:32services that are the issue?I think services are a special issue, so
0:53:32 > 0:53:39much of the architecture of Europe that we blame on Brussels, the lead
0:53:39 > 0:53:46partner with our trade ministers. We have had a real hand in shaping
0:53:46 > 0:53:50trade policy. However many pluses you add to the Canada formula, we
0:53:50 > 0:54:00become a taker, not a rule maker. We can expect that trade policy will
0:54:00 > 0:54:02shift to something more reflective of Franco German priorities than
0:54:02 > 0:54:09ours. We will steadily be on the losing end of a changing European
0:54:09 > 0:54:13trade policy which we will not be able to influence.As well as being
0:54:13 > 0:54:17a rule taker, rather than a rule giver, part of the argument of the
0:54:17 > 0:54:21debate being held now, in terms of the negotiations and how closely we
0:54:21 > 0:54:25align ourselves with the EU, what about trade diminishing with
0:54:25 > 0:54:31distance? When people like you say, look, there are all of these
0:54:31 > 0:54:35opportunities out there in Asia and Australia, isn't it true that it is
0:54:35 > 0:54:39more difficult to trade in the way that we do with close, literally,
0:54:39 > 0:54:43geographical partners, than those further afield in terms of volume?
0:54:43 > 0:54:52No. In a world before digitalisation, before Robitaille is
0:54:52 > 0:54:56-- robots, I would have said yes. The world has changed. Brussels has
0:54:56 > 0:55:03not kept up. They saw success in manufactured goods, when the world
0:55:03 > 0:55:06is aching for what Britain does really well. We can achieve so much
0:55:06 > 0:55:11of that with technology. Where you are right is that people are going
0:55:11 > 0:55:16to have to get on the plane, rather than Eurostar, and nobody does trade
0:55:16 > 0:55:19better than when they are sitting over a table and you're doing
0:55:19 > 0:55:22face-to-face. You are right there is that. But frankly, we are talking
0:55:22 > 0:55:27about a few hours every time. It is a different world. When you think of
0:55:27 > 0:55:32someone
0:55:32 > 0:55:36someone like the UAE, the third biggest home of our exports, not
0:55:36 > 0:55:43Germany, not France, what can they do? They get value-added services.
0:55:43 > 0:55:48That is the future.Mark Malcolm Brown, is the truth that the
0:55:48 > 0:55:52organisation you are representing wants to reverse Brexit?Absolutely,
0:55:52 > 0:55:57I am ashamed to say it, even with Digby at the end of the line.How do
0:55:57 > 0:56:02you do it?It's very clear, like with anything to do with democracy,
0:56:02 > 0:56:08you are allowed to change mind. That is why we have new elections. I
0:56:08 > 0:56:11think people are changing their minds.The polls don't indicate
0:56:11 > 0:56:15that.It depends which one you read. But I agree that they haven't
0:56:15 > 0:56:20changed it as dramatically as I would like to see. It is moving
0:56:20 > 0:56:23because there is a deterioration in the economic situation and people
0:56:23 > 0:56:28are beginning to understand that they were seriously mis-sold in the
0:56:28 > 0:56:36original referendum. The guys who fought for Stronger In didn't fight
0:56:36 > 0:56:40as strongly as they should. We are such an ambivalent country when it
0:56:40 > 0:56:44comes to Europe, we find it hard to admit that we actually rather like
0:56:44 > 0:56:49our European neighbours, that seems to be a political suicide note.
0:56:49 > 0:56:54There is no obvious mechanism in order to stop?There is a meaningful
0:56:54 > 0:56:57vote in October, a defeat of the government on that vote would lead
0:56:57 > 0:57:01to a second referendum or election, or some way of having a second
0:57:01 > 0:57:07chance.You have literally got ten seconds?Just beware, the word
0:57:07 > 0:57:10tyrant. We chopped off the King's head because he was telling
0:57:10 > 0:57:12Parliament what to do. You don't want to give the parliament into the
0:57:12 > 0:57:17position of acting as the tyrant to the people. The people asked for
0:57:17 > 0:57:20something. I think what they really asked for, deep down, but they
0:57:20 > 0:57:24didn't want to be told what to do by Berlin and Brussels. Be careful what
0:57:24 > 0:57:28you might wish for, because if you got it, I have to say that I think
0:57:28 > 0:57:34parliament would be in an incurably difficult position.Let's quickly
0:57:34 > 0:57:37get back to the reshuffle and find out who has been in and out of
0:57:37 > 0:57:41Number 10. Norman Smith is in Downing Street. I hope you went home
0:57:41 > 0:57:47last night and haven't been there all night?It has been like
0:57:47 > 0:57:51Piccadilly Circus, coming and going. What have we had so far? We have had
0:57:51 > 0:57:57the reshuffle of the deckchairs of some of the middle ranking male
0:57:57 > 0:58:02ministers. We have seen, for example, Dominic Raab has moved from
0:58:02 > 0:58:08justice to housing, Alok Sharma made way for him at housing and went to
0:58:08 > 0:58:10employment. Joe Johnson, the Universities Minister, yesterday
0:58:10 > 0:58:16defending Toby Young, has been shuffled over to transport. Greg
0:58:16 > 0:58:19Hands stays at International Trade. Some of the older men have been
0:58:19 > 0:58:23parcelled off. These are male ministers of a certain vintage,
0:58:23 > 0:58:29shall we say in their 50s. John Hayes, Philip Dunne, Robert
0:58:29 > 0:58:35Goodwill, Mark Dhani, they will be dispatched from government. -- Mark
0:58:35 > 0:58:41Garnier. We have had Harriet Baldwin, Margot James, some women
0:58:41 > 0:58:44are inside Downing Street and I expect they are likely to be pushed
0:58:44 > 0:58:49up the ministerial ladder.Thank you for bringing us to the end of the
0:58:49 > 0:58:53programme. All quiet behind you at the moment at Number 10. Thank you
0:58:53 > 0:58:56for being our guest of the day, Mark Malcom Brown. The one o'clock News
0:58:56 > 0:59:01is starting on BBC One. Andrew will be here tomorrow for the first Prime
0:59:01 > 0:59:06Minister's Questions. Goodbye.