23/01/2018 Daily Politics

Henry Bolton says he won't stand

down, promising to fight

on and "drain the party swamp".

We put one of his supporters up

against one of his critics.

And we speak to the controversial

left-wing activist Jackie Walker,

who says her suspension

from the Labour party

is a witchhunt.

She's calling on the party's

newly constituted ruling

body to let her back in.

All of that in the next hour -

and with us for the whole

of the programme today

is the Conservative

MP George Freeman -

a former minister and,

until November, the chair of

the Prime Minister's policy board.

Welcome back to the programme.

First today, the BBC understands

that Boris Johnson is using today's

meeting of the cabinet to push

for an extra £100 million a week

for the NHS in England after Brexit.

Here is the Foreign Secretary

arriving for that

meeting this morning.

He was unusually tight-lipped

when challenged by reporters

in Downing Street.

Our political correspondent

Norman Smith is in Downing Street.

Do you want to be the Chancellor,

Foreign Secretary, or perhaps Health

Secretary?

Secretary?

That £350 million on the

side of the bus of the Leave

campaign! Is this about Boris

Johnson trying to save his

reputation, Norman Smith?

I think a

part of it is Boris Johnson seeking

vindication, justification, for that

hugely contentious claim during the

referendum campaign about the extra

£350 million of. Although you will

be saying, hang on, he is now

promising only 100 million,

nevertheless that is roughly the net

figure once you subtract from a £350

million all the cash we get back

from the EU. My understanding is

that Johnson is deal the £350

million offer to become government

policy Jeff Heath thinks it can

inject a bit more positive energy to

the rather dour Brexit process. More

than that, I'm told that he visited

his local Oxbridge hospital, along

with the Health Secretary, Jeremy

Hunt, not so long ago and was very

concerned about what he saw in terms

of the pressures on staff and the

state of morale. And he thinks there

is now a pressing case to get extra

funds for the NHS. But you have to

say, it is all very odd. Sometimes

we get Cabinet ministers briefing

what they've said in a cabinet

meeting, we don't really get cabinet

ministers

briefing what they're going to say,

and on a subject area which is

nothing to do with their particular

area, Boris Johnson being the

Foreign Secretary, not the Health

Secretary. And that prompted this

rather tart puts down from the

Chancellor as he arrived in Brussels

this morning.

Mr Johnson is the

Foreign Secretary. Mr Johnson is the

Foreign Secretary.

I gave the Health

Secretary an extra six William

pounds in the budget. More details

will be in the spending review, when

that takes place.

And the timing of

this could scarcely be more awkward

for Theresa May, because it chimes

with a whole load of backbenchers

sniping that has been directed at

Mrs May for her lack of radicalism,

lack of big ideas, lack of really

new thinking and, I suppose, Boris

Johnson will argue, here's a big

idea, an extra £100 million for the

NHS every week. It fuels the

narrative that Mrs May is far too

cautious.

George Freeman, do you

support Boris Johnson's call for

£100 million extra per week to be

spent on the NHS?

I think we all

want more money to be spent on the

NHS, and Philip Hammond is right,

that is why we put a lot more in

just a few weeks ago. The real

challenge is, can we make Brexit a

moment where we increase our rate of

growth so that business generates

more money for the public sector,

and secondly, the integration with

care. I think the Prime Minister has

signalled a real commitment on this

issue to make sure that we really

build care and health together.

But

she has not actually moved the funds

to the health department, so its

cosmetic?

It is only one week in at

yes, we need to see some really big

thinking about the NHS in the 21st

century. That is the real challenge.

So, you support Boris Johnson making

this public school - should he have

done it through the newspapers when

he is the Foreign Secretary, not the

Health Secretary?

I was quite

surprised to read it in the papers.

It is really important that the

Cabinet works behind closed doors,

it is the highest council in the

land. It is really important that

the public have faith that the

Cabinet is able to do its job behind

closed doors, not in the newspapers.

Everyone is deal to make sure that

their issues are being heard. But I

think it is important that Cabinet

collective responsibility holds.

Has

he overstepped the mark?

I was quite

surprised to read in advance of the

meeting what was going to be said.

So he has breached Cabinet

collective responsibility?

No.

Cabinet collective responsibility is

about sticking to policy decisions

that have been made. But the point

is, I think it is really important

that people can see that Cabinet is

working behind closed doors.

Because

if everybody did that in the Cabinet

it would be mayhem, if everybody

spoke right across their briefs.

What should Theresa May do to rein

in Boris Johnson but big yearning it

is quite difficult to rein in Boris

Johnson because he is Boris Johnson,

here's something of a loose cannon,

that is his whole political

character. I think what the Prime

Minister has to do is to show that

she and her team are absolutely

serious about integration with care.

Yes, more money but also old

thinking about the NHS in the 21st

century.

I have called for some

really long-term, cross-party

thinking. Jeremy Hunt has done a

brilliant job taking politics out of

the NHS. I think we should go

further and

further and signal a commitment to

make it a National Health Service,

not a hearty health service.

So, was

the Prime Minister wrong to dismiss

this cross-party commission on the

NHS, then?

It is not that she has

dismissed it out of hand.

She said

thanks, no thanks, really.

Well, it

is a discussion which is ongoing.

There are many people who are

strongly supporting it. A royal

commission would take a decade or

more. I think a lot of us feel that

if you take someone like, say,

Norman Lamb, Conservatives like

myself, people on the Labour benches

who agree about much of this, we can

take out a lot of the politics and

then identify the big question is

where we have to have a big debate,

and I think that will do as a

service.

Do you understand the

frustration of people like Sarah

Wollaston, who is calling for

Theresa May to be bolder, and

others, saying that she needs to be

bolder on this issue?

I said similar

things. The challenge is that she

leads a government which is almost

totally preoccupied, inevitably,

with Brexit. The challenge is to

find the bandwidth and the capacity

to do the big thinking. That's why I

have called for her to set up a

commission, like Churchill did in

the war, beyond Brexit, how to make

this a moment of inspiring national

renewal to to make the imagination

of people who largely did not vote

for it.

Do you accept the idea that

Labour has won on the issue of the

NHS and as a result the Tories

should just focus on other issues?

I

absolutely don't. I think Jeremy

Hunt has done an amazing job taking

the Labour Party's claim to be the

only hearty of the NHS out.

Everybody knows it needs more

funding and better integration with

care. The challenge is, are we going

to be bold in really owning a vision

of the NHS in the 21st century? More

local, more integrative, letting

local leaders run it. We have to be

bold.

Now it's time for our daily quiz.

The question for today is?

Which former politician

was photographed at Disneyland Paris

while his wife was attending

meetings in the French capital?

Was it...

a) David Cameron?

B) Ed Balls?

C) Nick Clegg?

Or d) Barack Obama?

At the end of the show, George

will give us the correct answer.

Now, what do the business

lobby group the CBI,

the Labour frontbench,

pro-Remain Tory backbenchers

and reportedly some cabinet

ministers all have in common?

They think we should

at least consider staying

in the EU's customs union,

or, as some people prefer,

in A customs union with the EU.

Let's take a look...

All 28 EU member states are formally

members of the custom union.

And the EU also has custom union

agreements with other

countries, like Turkey,

Andorra and San Marino.

The customs union means that no

tariffs or duties are charged

on goods being traded

inside the union.

And members of the customs union

are required to place the same

tariffs on goods coming

into the bloc from

outside countries.

And the EU also negotiates trade

deals on behalf of all members.

Countries inside the customs

union are not allowed

to strike their own bilateral trade

deals with other countries.

At her Florence speech in September,

Theresa May said...

But last month, the Chancellor,

Philip Hammond, wrote that Britain

woud "seek a new customs

arrangement" with the EU.

It's unclear how similar such

an arrangement would

be to the status quo.

Meanwhile, Labour's Shadow Brexit

Secretary, Keir Starmer,

says that the UK entering

into "a customs union" with the EU

should be an option on the table

in the negotiations.

And yesterday, the lobby

group the Confederation

of British Industry said that

staying in a customs union

with the EU is "part of a practical,

real-world answer" to the problems

thrown up by Brexit.

But the Foreign Secretary,

Boris Johnson, wasn't

impressed by that suggestion.

He tweeted...

I'm joined now by the Conservative

MP Jacob Rees-Mogg,

who was recently elected as chairman

of the influential European

Research Group, made up

of Brexit-backing Conservative MPs.

Welcome to The Daily Politics. Just

before I come to you, Jacob

Rees-Mogg, George Freeman, should

the government now listen to the

CBI's calls to stay inside a customs

union after we leave the EU?

I think

the key is that we have a business

friendly Brexit. Most of my

constituents when they voted for

Brexit wanted as out of the

political union at actively trading

as a part of what they were sold in

the 1970s.

So, remaining in the

customs union?

The problem with the

customs union is that it prevents us

ultimately from signing trade deals.

In the short-term industry in this

country would like to remain in as

predictable than the arrangement in

terms of trading in Europe as they

can. If Liam Fox came back and said,

I've got a huge trade deal ready to

sign with Africa with America, then

I think the balance of proper

dinners teak wood swing and people

would say, let's go for it.

But in

the absence of that, do you think at

the moment all things being equal

that Britain should heed those calls

and remain in a customs union with

the EU?

Some of those calls I think

are designed to stop us implementing

Brexit at all, and I don't agree

with that.

But should Britain remain

in a customs union?

I would like us

to negotiate a heap trade agreement

with the European Union in which we

have that free customs union, so

that the Northern Ireland border

works, so that we can sell our

goods. I think the only point of

difference with Jacob is that he is

a sovereignty hawk would prefer us

to be out at the end of March next

year even if we don't have a customs

agreement. I would like us to have a

customs agreement, and if we didn't,

paying the price of another year or

two while we negotiate those trade

deals for me would be a small price

to pay. But we agree ultimately that

we want to be able to do those local

trade deals, and that means coming

out of the current customs union.

But at the moment if the price is to

stay in the customs union until in

the future trade deals are struck,

or could be struck, you would be

happy for that and you support that?

The keyword is THE customs union. A

customs union, yes. But I think we

negotiate a customs agreement which

means we can sell across the

European market. That is what my

constituents voted for.

That is

pretty well what is currently the

arrangement of staying in the

customs union, that actually all of

the regulations would remain the

same and the status quo would

continue - do you agree with George

Freeman on that?

CBI and received

many millions of pounds in the

European Union between nine and 15,

not the independent body, it is

backing inefficiency, a lack of

competitiveness and wants to remain

in the European Union. Campaign for

the euro, the change rate mechanism

and against Brexit, it is not

representing small business all the

consumer, it is the consumer wants

to help and I want to get out of the

customs union as soon as possible.

Specific example: 11.8% tariff on

clothing coming into this country

from outside the EU, but where is

11.4%. That hits and humid in the UK

to very little benefit of UK

manufacturers because we do not make

many textiles or shoes anymore.

Counterexample, aerospace industry,

we are a major player.

There is no

tariffs on that.

There are other

industries, life sciences, 60

billion, I don't want to in have two

arrange individual deals. I agree

with Jacob here, we need to access

the market.

Michel Barnier, and

president Emmanuel Macron have both

said we can have a free-trade deal

with the European based on Canada,

that is...

Would you agree with

that, would you accept that, Canada,

the Canada deal, on goods?

the Canada deal, on goods?

Enhanced

Canada...

That is on the table, does

not need for us to stay in the

customs union, and this is where I

do disagree, we will not be able to

get the other trade deals because

the other countries will not think

it is worthwhile doing deals with an

EU satellite.

I understand that, our

only difference, is avoiding the

cliff edge, I want the businesses

that I know are raising the money

that will pay for the NHS to have

confidence that there is no cliff

edge in 15 months' time. I'm not

surprised they want to know. For me,

continual membership of a customs

union while we get the trade

agreements in base is a price worth

paying.

I want because people to

have cheaper food, clothing and

footwear the day that we leave the

EU, it will affect the standard of

living for the poorest in our

society the most erratically, the

customs union is about protecting

inefficient European businesses,

inefficient European businesses, not

for anything else.

There is a

discussion about Britain remaining

in a customs union, something

similar to what we have now, because

the evidence has not been produced

by Whitehall that new bilateral

trade deals will outweigh the lost

trade from the EU.

I think the trade

seal issue is a bit of a red

herring, the biggest individual

national trading partner is the

United States with whom we have no

trade deal. Our biggest earner, net

earner, is financial services. By

and large, they do not have trade

deals, are not subject to the trade

deals you get with manufactured

goods. What we want is to open up

the market to lower prices and make

the UK more competitive and

efficient and use that as a lever.

Would you see it as a betrayal if

Britain remains in the customs union

or in a customs union?

If we stay in

the customs union, we have not left

the European Union, it would be a

failure on behalf of the government

if that happened.

And on, he just

said, actually, the main reason to

come out of the customs union is to

be able to do trade deals. That is a

red herring.

You cannot do them

unless you are out.

They are much

overstated, they are a useful thing

to have, but the biggest single

training can ease the United States,

with whom we have no formal trade

deal. Arrangements but not a deal.

How is it you know better than the

CBI, about what is best for the

British economy?

The CBI has a

history of getting things wrong.

And

you don't...?

Take it as a

commentator, it got the art am

wrong, the euro wrong, it backed

remain and it is funded by the

European Union. -- it got the RM

wrong. Though it is representing is

not the consumer, I am arguing for

my constituents, I want them to have

lower prices and better quality,

that can be brought in from outside

the European Union. The CBI is a

spokesman for vested interest.

Do

you agree? Do you think it is a

spokesman for vested interest and

the government should not listen to

them?

Jacob is right in that it is

the corporate end of the ladder,

representing bigger companies, but

he's wrong...

Not just me, a lot of

people agree with me.

Does he know

better? He's wrong to dismiss this

soap casually, I am reconciled to

"Brexit", it has to be pro-business,

I want us to be not just

pro-business as a government but

more businesslike, on the board of

Great Britain plc I would say, I

understand the customs union

prevents us from doing a trade deal,

have we got anything lined up?

If

not, I would say, right now, that is

a step too far. If we can get the

trade deals then I see the argument.

You are not convinced that you will

be able to get the trade deals or

that it might replace...

He just

said trade deals are a distraction.

We will come onto that, because I

thought...

I thought that was the

whole point of Liam Fox's job.

You

spoke with people at the time, you

were chairman of the policy ball

before Christmas, in cabinet,

ministers, Tory MPs, is this being

actively considered, Britain

remaining in the customs union

arrangement with the EU?

I don't

think at that level of detail, most

colleagues, and most constituents,

reconciled to Brexit, want us to

make a success of it, wanted to be

pro-business, on the doorsteps they

said, we voted to join a Common

Market, not a political union, we

have come out of the political

union, and stayed in a trading brock

-- trading block.

Is there the

possibility the government will

consider it?

We make the go shaded,

we may get a full trade deal with

Europe, full movement of goods and

ability.

This is not about the

customs union, they may be listening

to some pro-remain Tory

backbenchers, like Ed Vaizey, at the

weekend he said, free-trade deals

will make as the out of Brexit

unscathed, that is the birds, he

said, they take years and years,

they and the domestic audiences.

They don't always take years and

years, the US and Australia did one

in ten or 11 months, it has been

very powerful. Trade deals, a

distraction, this is important goal

on the real benefit we get is from

lifting tariffs on goods that come

into the country, nontariff

barriers. That makes the UK more

competitive, makes good for

consumers cheaper. Unilateral free

trade has worked in every country

that has tried it historically.

Trade deals are an ad benefit, if

you open up your market, and go to

people and say, we have opened up

the market, do you want to open up

yours, that helps trade even

further. The benefits you get by

reducing your input costs and the

costs of consumption for voters

across the country is very

economically powerful.

Why, then,

has Liam Fox being put in this

position to seek out and scope

free-trade deals which has been sold

to the British public as a core part

of the "Brexit" operation, part of

being ace swashbuckling free-trade

negotiation, it is striking out on

our own.

Singapore is completely

open but does trade deals on top

because it wants to be as

encouraging to people to be as open

as it is. It is in the interests of

the world to have as much free-trade

as possible and if we can be a

catalyst, that is very exciting, if

deals can lead to that, that will be

of benefit. The key benefit is

lifting tariffs and making goods in

this country cheaper, both

manufactured inputs for industry but

also, making goods cheaper for

consumers.

The big challenges

transition, we are geared towards a

European market, we cannot do that

overnight, at the end of March next

year, we need some transition.

And for more reporting

and analysis of Brexit,

check out the BBC News website,

that's bbc.co.uk/brexit.

Has the Prime Minister been too

cautious in setting out her big

vision for government?

Earlier we heard that

Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has

demanded more money for the NHS,

and he's not only

one voicing concern.

Let's have a look at some

of the calls to action coming

from the backbenches.

Last Friday, former business

minister Nick Boles tweeted

that there was a "timidity and lack

of ambition about Mrs May's

Government, which means it

constantly disappoints".

Ed Vaizey, the former culture

minister, joined in the criticism,

calling for "big, bold and radical

ideas" to attract votes,

warning against what he called

a "safety first approach"

when he appeared

on Peston On Sunday.

Speaking on The Westminster Hour

on Sunday night,

former Tory Party chairman

Grant Shapps said:

Veteran Tory MP Nicholas Soames

tweeted yesterday morning:

He added the hashtag,

#wheres the bold and brave

so far its dull dull dull

What do you say that it is dull

the

mechanics are a little bit dull,

and...

He is talking about all the

other things.

He is talking about

the overall government message, the

challenge we face, that the PM

faces, for the next 15 months, the

government will be largely

preoccupied with negotiating this

very important deal. How then do we

set out the bold ideas to make

Brexit a moment of national renewal

that it needs to be to succeed, not

least to capture the imagination of

the young who did not vote for it?

That is why I have called for a

commission outside the government,

like Clement Attlee and Winston

Churchill appointed beverage at the

end of the war, to look at bold

ideas.

You were chairman of the

policy board until November, what

are the ideas?

A lot of us have big

ideas, I will give you a view.

What

are you taking on, the flagship

policy, apart from Brexit?

The first

is NHS and care, big commitment to

that commitment that has been done

for decades.

How? Jeremy Hunt is...

You have already conceded that will

not include money, it sticks with

the CLT and he has it as a title,

how has he going to get to grips

with it? -- DCLG. I have not said

that at all, it is the beginning of

a bold process of commitment to real

integration. What is it in practical

terms, what is the government

pledging to do.

Well, firstly tackle

the problem that has bedevilled it

for decades, social care has been

funded through local government and

underfunded, and health has been

solely the preserve of NHS England

and the Department of Health.

Labour

says it will spend money now, the

Conservative government says it will

do it by 2021.

We put in 6 billion

in the autumn, we put in more money

every year, we put in 6 billion in

the Autumn Statement, but the

challenge is what is the NHS looked

like, designed in 1947, not fit for

purpose in the 21st-century. I have

worked in the NHS and I have been

the health Minister, it is how we

support it with digital technology

to give them power over their own

health, go from being a provider

organisation to an empowering

organisation.

Isi Gabsa the

leadership of the party to do this?

Both, -- is it down to the

leadership or the party?

I think the

party needs a role in shaping abroad

big agenda beyond the mechanics so

that people can be inspired, quite

difficult to do that in a government

where every department is looking

through its new relationship with

Europe.

Has she indicated she will

do that, give it to the party to

shape the ideas?

We will have do

wait and see, I have not heard that,

that is part of what Nicholas Soames

and Ed Vaizey are signalling.

Is

that because she lacks the

leadership and vision to do it

herself?

I think it is more because,

she takes her duties as Prime

Minister of a country negotiating

"Brexit" very seriously, and I think

she and the team do not see the need

to have a more inspiring vision.

They believe that competence,

administration, delivering Brexit,

will be enough, that is where we

disagree, a whole lot of voters out

there take that for granted, they

want to see why the Conservatives

should carry on and govern, do we

have the vision.

How frustrating is

it to work in that environment, when

Ewart share of the policy board?

It

is politics under Theresa May. It

has been true of all leaders,

Parliament is full of ideas, and

backbenchers driven with ideas to

make the world a better place and

the Prime Minister must pick a team.

The frustration is, under David

Cameron's leadership, under the last

ten and 15 years, and Theresa May,

as party chairman, the party has

modernised and come to term with

modern Britain, it has led in

showing it has a vision. The danger

of Brexit if we don't tackle it is

that it may look to a generation

under 40 like backward step, we have

to make sure we have a vision for

making Brexit a moment of looking

forward, with Europe.

Is it time to

abandon austerity altogether?

I have

called for a new approach, first

seven years of belt tightening, from

the top, in London, I think, morale

and confidence in public services is

now quite low. I think we have do

single that we have a bold vision

for public services, support public

services, that is why I have called

for and the Chancellor is enacting a

leadership Academy and a new set of

funding, those heroes who have

turned around schools and hospitals.

You have admitted morale is low in

the public services and the

Conservatives have been in

government since 2010, should they

accept responsibility?

Morale is a

difficulty post crash. It was a big

crash and people were saying this

will take ten or 20 years to pay off

these debts. No surprise that seven

years in, people are weary, and I

think the challenge for us, on big

ideas is, do we have a vision of

public services in the 21st-century,

more locally rooted, more locally

led, ending command and control from

Whitehall and giving incentives back

to places to tackle health in their

localities? To run a more integrated

model of public services, that is a

big idea.

Among 18 to 29-year-old,

the vote shares slumped, with one

pollster finding only 8% of them

voted Conservative, 69% voted

Labour, you yourself have said that

the crisis is intergenerational,

have you lost the youth vote for

ever?

Not for ever, but it is

serious, there is a massive question

over this administration and this

government and this Conservative

Party, that is why have spoken with

the urgency I have, there is a whole

generation, under 40, actually,

under 45, who have picked up a lot

of personal debt through the crash

and the crisis, come into a new

chair workplace of huge job

insecurity, cannot afford to buy

houses, and they worry that Brexit

may be the final insult, turning our

back on the world they are excited

by, unless we set out a vision for

how we make Brexit the opposite, a

moment of inspiring renewal, where

we embrace global opportunity and

gives them a chance to go from

wherever they are in Britain into

the world, then I fear we may well

lose their generation.

Give me free

policies that will get young people

voting for the Tories.

My ideas,

and...

Have the government take an

on-board?

Not yet, but number one,

every school or college leave and

not going into a job or higher

education, work experience on the

front line of international do, so

they get out around the world and

see emerging markets. Number two, a

lifelong learning digital skills

passport, so that everyone in this

country recognises that we have two

keep reskilling all the time. And

number three, give all mayors the

ability to raise it local

infrastructure bonds. Asset backed

by local economies, three big ideas

that would drive out working for

every.

Let's see if they get

accepted and taken on by the

government.

If you like a fizzy drink, you'll

soon be paying more to enjoy it,

because the sugar tax comes

into force in April this year.

The government will be taxing

producers and importers of sweet

drinks to help cut obesity,

especially in children.

But how should we spend

the money that's raised?

And will it really do anything

to change our habits?

Here's Emma Vardy.

In the 2016 budget, the former

Chancellor George Osborne introduced

plans for attacks on sugary soft

drinks to get those of us with a

sweet tooth to cut back on these and

make healthier choices.

make healthier choices. The tax

applies to drinks containing more

than five grams of sugar per 100

millilitres. It means you will see

the price of some drinks on the

shelf go up by around 20p. It has

been welcome by health

professionals, but for those in the

industry it has left a rather so, a

taste.

We have always felt that the

softs drinks industry levy was an

inappropriate way to address an

issue which stems frankly from

overall diet and levels of exercise,

so picking on one particular product

and one particular tax of this sort

is the wrong way to address the

challenge that we all face, and

admittedly there is a serious

challenge in relation to childhood

obesity.

So, what are we going to do

with all these extra taxes raised

from sweet drink lovers hammered the

MP Frank Field has a private

members' bill with cross-party

support calling for the money raised

to go to school holiday breakfast

clubs.

When George Osborne finally

gave in to having a sugar tax, he

had resisted on the basis that it

was regressive, in other words

poorer people would pay more. Now,

if you use some of this revenue to

feed poorer children and have fun in

the holiday and maintain their

educational improvements recorded

during term time, it seems to us a

really good way by which the

government could make sure that the

sugar tax was not regressive but

progressive.

Drink manufacturers are

adapting to the new tax in different

ways. Coca-Cola said it will cut the

size of its bottles while also

putting up the price. Other

manufacturers like Ribena have been

taking on the tricky challenge of

reducing sugar in their products

while trying to maintain a flavour

that will satisfy customers.

Our

consumers have told us they want

this sugary product...

That is

probably harder than it sounds.

Considerably! The Treasury had

originally estimated the tax would

raise more than £500 million a year.

But now it is thought it bring in

much less. The forecast revenue has

diminished substantially. Originally

this was going to raise more than

£500 million. They are now saying

that it is going to raise £275

million. And we still think that is

an overestimate. But I simply say

again, this is not the best way to

tackle obesity.

It is expected that

the true impact on the businesses

that make these ducts will not

become clear for some time. Experts

believe it will take even longer to

really see whether it delivers the

health benefits the government is

hoping for.

We're joined now by Kawther Hashem -

a nutritionist and spokeswoman

for the campaign group

Action on Sugar.

Look into the programme. Tax is

aimed specifically at high sugar

fizzy drinks, excluding things like

milkshakes and other fruit juices,

so doesn't go far enough in your

mind?

I think it does in terms of

trying to get the manufacturers to

reduce levels of sugar. It is kind

of different to what other countries

have done. It is basically trying to

encourage the companies to

reformulate their products.

Many of

your colleagues, George, will say

that this tax is bad for consumers

and bad for the economy - are they

wrong?

I think they are. I called

for the sugar tax, another big idea!

Was it taken non-public when did you

first suggest it?

2014. But I think

the truth is, two things. We don't

want to punish people for having

drinks. We have got to incentivise

the industry so that these things

taste the same but they don't make

UOB said that is perfectly doable. I

would

would like

exercise, it is about schools... Not

to me it isn't. It is about an

enlightened state taking its

responsibility is to its citizens

are seriously, and particularly the

most vulnerable. Childhood obesity

is a really big problem, it is a

time bomb in our society along with

diabetes and dementia. The two are

linked, and diet is really

important. It will bankrupt the NHS

if we don't tackle it on behalf of

our most vulnerable young citizens.

But it is a huge problem, we know

that, we have politicians like

George Freeman telling us. So why

does a tax on just fizzy drinks go

far enough, it is not go to solve

the problem of childhood obesity?

It

is part of a solution. There are

many other things that government

should look at doing, for example,

the promotions on this type of

products, which is constantly

happening all the time. We can

incentivise the industry to reduce

the levels of sugar but then there

are other products which are heavily

promoted, on discount all the time,

advertising during family TV time,

we need to look at these other

areas.

Would you be happy for that?

Yeah, and I think we need to look at

much more sport in schools. I don't

mean the tyranny of the few of us

who were not very athletic civil

everybody doing exercise built into

the school day. I would like our

planning system to build exercise

into the community. We are still

building housing estates designed

for three cars. Building exercise

into the fabric of our society.

What

about the evidence that the tax will

actually work in terms of changing

habits and reducing obesity?

For the

countries who have already had an

increase in tax and in price, it has

had an impact in reducing levels of

drink Spearing consumed.

Where?

Mexico, for example, and

particularly in the socially

deprived areas, because they ended

up having less of those. And they

kind of incentivised those consumers

to go for the lowest sugar options,

water and the others.

But was the

evidence conclusive in Mexico? I

understand that after a year or so

the levels at it to go up again in

terms of consumption of fizzy

drinks?

No, I think the first stage

of evidence suggests there is a 12%

reduction in intake.

Coca-Cola have

decreased their sizes of bottles and

increased their pricing?

So, this is

one of the reasons, one of the ways

that those companies are going to

try and retrieve the cost of the

levy, by increasing prices.

Initially, when this lovely was

going to come into play, it was

actually not necessarily going to be

price hikes. And it is not

necessarily a negative thing that

sugary drink Speaker more expensive,

because they are having a huge cost

on society.

The Treasury downgraded

their forecast of the money that

would be raised from more than £500

million to £380 million, you think

that is good news, but it is less

money to be spent on for instance

promoting sport?

It tells you the

industry is adapting very fast. One

worry is the government taxing

things and getting keen on the

revenue. I did not want the

government dependent on a sugar tax.

Even if it is going to promote more

sport in schools, which is what you

said should be part of the holistic

approach?

It is part of the next.

But I think the fact that revenues

from the sugar tax are dropping is a

sign that the industry is very

quickly adapting. The British drink

industry is highly adaptable, it is

one of the jewels in our crown. Lets

use the text to incentivise sugar

substitution but also recognise that

it is only one to.

Where would you

like the government to use the

revenues raised?

It could be used on

the NHS, on school sports. The aim

of it is not necessarily revenue

raising, it is to incentivise the

industry to reduce levels of sugar.

The emphasis has been on drinks, on

fizzy drinks, but confectionery

accounts for quite a substantial

amount of young people consuming

sugar. If you wanted to solve the

obesity crisis, would you, George,

be in support of extending the tax

to sweets and chocolates?

I would

want to look at the evidence. I

think potentially. But it is

absolutely crucial that we're not

denying people a bar of chocolate.

People like chocolate. It is part of

human nature.

But you want to

deprive them of fizzy drinks?

No, I

want them to buy something which is

not putting pounds on them.

Something which is a pleasure. We

mustn't become puritans taking

pleasure out of life. But if we took

the calories out so that you get the

pleasure without the fat and the

obesity, that's surely a good thing.

Well, when you find a solution to

that, do let me know, because I am

partial to a bar of chocolate!

The Ukip leader Henry Bolton has

said he will not stand down,

despite facing a wave of party

resignations in protest

at his leadership.

On Sunday, Ukip's National Executive

Committee declared that it had lost

confidence in Mr Bolton

after allegations

about his private life.

But Mr Bolton has hit back

saying he in turn has lost

confidence in the NEC.

Here he is speaking

to reporters yesterday.

I shall respect the next steps in

the constitutional process, and will

therefore not be resigning as party

leader. I shall repeat, I will not

be resigning as party leader.

Instep, during the next four weeks,

I shall be calling for the

coordination and mobilisation of all

Leave campaigns to ensure that the

government delivers full

independence from the European Union

in all areas of government at the

administration. And I shall be

calling for the party itself to

mobilise in order to support that

effort. This is the most pressing

matter facing our nation. And I am

determined not to allow the NEC to

distract the party away from

participating forcefully in the

independence debate.

Henry Boldon

giving that press statement

yesterday.

David Allen is Ukip's

spokesman on electoral reform

and is a supporter of Henry Bolton.

Peter Whittle is the former

deputy leader of Ukip,

and has called for Mr Bolton

to stand down.

What was your reaction when you

heard he was going to fight on?

Depressed, actually. Because the

fact is that basically one man's

vanity is basically spooling this

thing out over and over, the party

is being made to look ridiculous. If

in fact he had been supported by the

NEC, we would not be hearing about

all of this stuff about electoral

reform in the party and the NEC. It

is a massive distraction to get away

from what is the real problem, and

that is that Henry Bolton should go.

I've just come from actually talking

somebody back from leaving the

party. This is what one is dealing

with everyday now.

David Allen,

you're a supporter of Henry Bolton,

the party is imploding, more than 15

people have stood down, surely he

has to go?

Certainly there is a bit

of a herd mentality about it. I tend

to think they're following the wrong

scent of. The reason why I am

supporting Henry Bolton is exactly

the same reason that I supported him

in the leadership campaign. I stood

in the leadership campaign, as

repeater, and I stood down to

support Henry Bolton because

firstly, his agenda for reforming

the party was something that I

strongly believe in. And secondly I

thought he would win. Now, you have

to recognise that for a long time

there has been a huge disconnect

between the leadership of the party

and the mothership at the

grassroots.

Peter Whittle, even

Nigel Farage says that the party is

run by a bunch of amateurs, and that

it is hardly surprising that there

has been this massive fallout?

Because Nigel has got a thing about

the NEC, fair enough. He is entitled

to that. The point is, Henry has

been in since September. He stood on

reform and all the rest of it -

nothing has happened. There has been

no communication, there has been no

reform, virtually no media presence,

until we get this kind of media

presence, which of course makes us a

laughing stock. It is simply

unsustainable.

Before this all blew

up, what great political direction

was Henry Bolton taking the party in

the 11 of the things that Henry

Bolton wants to do is to introduce

an inclusivity agenda so that we

would involve membership in policy

making. Because there's been a huge

gap between the leadership and the

membership in the party. Peter says

that's not happening - it is,

because I have already put my group

together and we had our first

meeting last Friday. Have already

drafted a manifesto commitment for

Ukip in the area of electoral

reform. Are the things which are

changing our work to repair the IT

system. We have an e-mail system,

for example, which arbitrarily

leaves out a third of the members

every time we send an e-mail. Are

these things going to save Ukip?

The

fact is at the moment, we are going

through an amazingly important time

with Brexit. It is an open goal for

us. It's all very well going on

about e-mail systems and the rest of

it, which basically will mean

nothing to anyone outside. We should

be making the argument, we have been

absolutely absent for the past four

months, and as I say again, the

first time people actually hear of

our new leader is because he has

just left his wife and kids just

before Christmas to go off with some

woman who has basically texted

things which are almost beyond

racist.

What do you think about

that? That is what has caused this

latest row - has Henry Boldon cut

off all relations with the person

responsible for these tweets?

I am

not privy to that, you will have to

ask Henry. My understanding is that

she has resigned from the party,

which is right. Also that Henry was

unaware of these tweets, which were

made before they met. Be fair if it

were marital breakdown is always to

stressing. It is often acrimonious.

And if you enter a new relationship,

your first conversation is not going

to be, hello, darling, two years ago

I think I sent a tweet which might

be offensive. So, Henry didn't know

about that. Henry Bolton hasn't done

anything wrong. But what he has been

doing is travelling the country

speaking to members, introducing

reform produced as prettily needed.

Why is his private life of so much

concerned?

It is not a question of

morality. I think that the racism,

yes, is important, actually. This

party, particularly, and I have been

on this show talking about it,

fights these kind of accusations all

the time, we're always trying to

show people that we are not racist

and then along comes something like

this. And since it has happened it

has been the sheer ineptitude with

which Henry Bolton has gone on the

media, seemingly wanting to dig a

bigger hole for himself every single

day. What worries me is that this

party is a great party which has

moved political mountains. I do not

like to see it being made to look

silly and at the moment it is being.

Do you think it is in the death

throes? But is it? At the moment

things are looking grave, I what

does not help at all, is that we

have to go through something through

an AGM.

A huge amount of money, all

the rest of it, at the very time we

should be fighting what is happening

with this government and the inept

handling of Brexit.

Extraordinary

general meeting happening, Willis

before the members to decide? Can

you win it?

This is interesting,

because of a quirk in the

constitution, what the NEC has done

is the equivalent of pistols at

dawn! It is either Henry Bolton

those, or, the NEC goes.

With that

be the end of the party? Executive

collapses?

Know, the NEC is a

consistent obstacle to reform the

party for as long as I have been in

it, we talk about Nigel, but then

there is Diane James, then there is

Paul Nuttall, all these battles with

the NIC -- NEC, we are on the fourth

leader, third leadership contest,

and apparently Peter wants a fourth

leadership contest...

I do not.

We

might as well pencil in the fifth,

for next year.

No, no. What if he

stands down, there will be another

leadership contest. The last thing

we need, yes, we need an interim

leader, I have said for a long time,

get us through the May elections,

should be talking about the May

elections, talking that Brexit,

instead of talking that tinkering

around with an e-mail system and the

rest of it. If Henry Bolton had a

shred of personal pride, he would

have gone after the NEC...

Isn't

this the case, that this is a vanity

project, the face of everything

collapsing around him, in terms of

all his team designing, all this

publicity, bad publicity, getting

there, pretty well, 15 or so, that

he should do the decent thing and

go?

One of the things that a

political party leader needs is

resilience. Now, in Ukip, you

probably need resilience doubled.

Henry Bolton certainly has that.

What is happening now, is we have

just under 4000 people are letting

him as leader, only 3.5 months ago,

that cannot be overturned. By 13

people. It will go to a next

ordinary general meeting and what is

that Henry Bolton will win this, the

NEC will resign, a new NEC will be

put in place, we can then move

forward to change the constitution

and the structure.

Will you accept

the result, if Henry Bolton is

elected if the EGM supports the

leadership, will you accept it?

Yes,

but it will not happen, I don't know

what world you are living in that

every single day is getting

resignations, whole branches are

going, over the past four months,

people do not even know what Henry

even thinks about certain political

issues, they have no idea where the

party is going. They are quite right

to be frustrated and they are faced

with all of this.

I have a feeling

it will continue for a few days and

weeks at least. Thank you for coming

in.

Now, Labour's ruling body,

the National Executive committee

or NEC,

meets today.

Not normally a major

news event I grant you.

But it's the first meeting

of the NEC since the election

of three new members,

most notably the Momentum

founder Jon Lansman.

So what does it all mean?

Our correspondent

Iain Watson

is outside Labour HQ.

What is being discussed?

Various

things that are on the agenda, what

is not being discussed, this

demonstration behind me, people

against expulsion from the Labour

Party, we can talk about that in a

moment. What is on the agenda,

Labour officials are stressing,

mainstream political issues like the

state of the NHS, the collapse of

Carillion, other issues on the

agenda as well, report back from the

first phase of Labour's democracy

review. It is a long-term review

looking into how the party organises

at a level, reports from the Labour

Party conference. Some speculation

about it being used as a vehicle to

deselect sitting Labour MPs. That is

not officially part of the remit.

Any discussion that takes place

would be outside of the official

democracy review. That may well

change to magically. What the Labour

Party does in terms of organising at

grassroots level in due course. --

that may well change dramatically.

Also, talk about whether there can

be transgender candidates on all

women short lists, this is being

discussed in subcommittees, it is

controversial because some people in

the party believe men should not be

allowed to self define as women and

get onto all women short lists, and

in their view should have two

produce gender recognition

certificate. Others say that is

dissemination and we expect a

statement from the Labour ruling

body later on this afternoon. The

first sign that the political

balance has shifted to the left,

cannot think of any more evidence

from the official agenda.

Tell us

about this campaign, Labour against

the witchhunt which has been

launched.

The campaign which has

been launched a few months ago, they

are lobbying the NEC to try to stop

the expulsions of people they say

are being thrown out of the party

for having effectively left-wing

views. People to the left of Labour

in the past, then wanted to come

into the Labour Party, generally

would say to support Jeremy Corbyn

and are now being chucked out

because of views they have expressed

in the past. Under mental do this is

the question of anti-Zionism against

anti-Semitism, the items they make

is that the issues have been

conflated and some people accused of

anti-Semitism in order to get them

expelled from the Labour Party. I

will be speaking with one of them

very soon, it is coming up at the

national constitution committee.

They will be deciding whether there

will be any expulsions.

will be any expulsions.

Lobbying

today's NEC meeting to demand an end

to what they call a witchhunt

against the pro-Corbyn left in the

Labour Party, the group is called

Labour Against the Witchhunt. Jackie

Walker is among them - she was

suspended by the party in September

2016 following allegations of

anti-semitism. She joins me now. One

of the things that resulted in your

current suspension of your Labour

Party membership, he said, I still

haven't heard a definition of

anti-Semitism that I can work with.

The Labour Party has adopted the

International Holocaust Rembrandts

Alliance definition of

anti-Semitism, do you accept that as

a definition you can work with?

It

is not clear what it has accepted.

-- remembrance Alliance. It has

accepted a headline definition, we

have been told. Anti-Semitism as a

certain perception of jurors people

that could be seen as hatred against

US people.

Of course we would accept

that but not the following

definitions which as far as we are

concerned linked to much criticism

of Israel, with racism, with

anti-Semitism.

-- Jewish. Rhetorical

and physical ... The accept what has

been said by this body?

As far as

I'm concerned, and I'm saying this

as an anti-racist train of some

years, as somebody who has been on

the barricades against fascists, I

like to stick to the nice simple

definition of anti-Semitism, used

hatred against you

hatred against you is -- hatred

against Jewish people because they

are Jewish. We are going into cloudy

waters. We have had counsel opinion

which says that those following

definitions will not hold up in

court.

Shouldn't parties be able to

set their own definitions and rules,

they may be a broad church, as the

Labour Party always says, but they

have the right to suspend people who

do not sign up to broad principles

and aims, including you. Absolutely.

That is what they have done, so what

is the problem?

They have the right

to do that but of course, what I'm

saying is they have not accepted the

full definition...

That is what the

Labour Party has said, they have

accepted that as the definition, if

you don't sign up to that, do you

accept...

I do not access that what

you are saying is correct. As a

member of Jewish voice for Labour

and other jewel Jewish Labour

organisations. We have been told

something very different.

That maybe

something you need to take up the

Labour Party.

The reason having this

conversation, under the leadership

of Jeremy Corbyn, we have seen a

rise of a nasty, violent, outrageous

language on social media,

campaigning in the last election

against conservatives and others,

anti-Semitic language, racist

language, Clive Lewis Sein gets down

on your needs at the conference...

Don't use that word...

-- Clive

Lewis saying.

A once great party...

I think what you have said is

outrageous... Coming from a party

who has a Foreign Secretary who has

made racist statements about the

former President of the United

States, Barack Obama, and called

people of African descent picking

anys with water well and

smiles -- "pickannines with

watermelon smiles".

That is not

racist. We are seeing the research

and is of nasty, vitriolic politics.

Women who were targeted because they

are women, horrible things written

on houses and windows.

Do you know

what has been said about me?

Answer

the claims that have been made, they

are not just me by George, they are

games made by elements within

momentum and within the hard left,

do you accept that it exists?

What I

accept exists at the moment is a

very dangerous atmosphere and

culture on social media, if I could

tell you how many threats and abuse

I have had, including from people

who claim to be Tory members, and

these have been threats to have me

hanged, to have me burned alive, to

have me rape...

If they are Tory

members, they should be dealt with,

but they are not.

Will you send them

to him?

I will, this is happening to

women and black women. Diane Abbott,

if you remember, has had more abuse

than anybody...

And we know, and we

have talked about that but talking

about your suspension, you have

called this a witchhunt, all of this

has happened while Jeremy Corbyn has

been leader.

Exactly.

The momentum

steering committee removed you as

vice-chair, calling your behaviour

irresponsible and remarks offensive,

cannot be a politically motivated

witchhunt, these are the people you

support.

Can I say one thing about

this, I must be careful what I

say...

Will you answer the question?

My case is just about to go through

a hearing, I am not allowed to

answer particularly on headbutt...

You are calling a witchhunt. It is

not coincidence that it happened as

Jeremy Corbyn became a leader of the

Labour Party, because, of course, he

is the only national figure that has

risen to that prominence it has been

a supporter of the Palestinians.

Of

his

the Labour Party is not one set

dictated peace of organisation.

--

his brother.

We have run out of time. The answer

to the quiz, who was photographed at

Disneyland Paris while his wife was

having meetings in the French

capital.

"Yes," Cameron confirms

in a message to Politico.

He was wearing a flat cap, not easy

to recognise him.

"It rained a lot so I bought a hat!

I haven't joined the Peaky Blinders,

or become Bob Crow,

just trying to stay warm and dry."