25/01/2018 Daily Politics


25/01/2018

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 25/01/2018. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

Hello and welcome to

The Daily Politics.

0:00:370:00:41

Bed occupancy rates at almost 95% -

11,000 ambulances were delayed

0:00:410:00:44

by over 30 minutes -

those are the latest perfomance

0:00:440:00:47

statistics from NHS England.

0:00:470:00:49

Can the health service survive many

more winters like this?

0:00:490:00:57

Crime recorded by the police

in England and Wales is up -

0:00:570:01:02

as are violent crime,

knife crime and sex offences.

0:01:020:01:04

But the official crime survey

suggests crime continues to fall -

0:01:040:01:07

so, which figures are right?

0:01:070:01:08

Families Minister Nadhim Zahawi said

he left the party early

0:01:080:01:11

and the exclusive Presidents Club

won't be holding any more events

0:01:110:01:14

after revelations of sexual

harassment at their charity function

0:01:140:01:16

- but do women need more

protection against exploitation?

0:01:160:01:23

The government appoint a Muslim

woman to head up a new Commission

0:01:230:01:25

for Countering Extremism -

but why are some senior

0:01:250:01:28

figures in Muslim community

opposing her appointment?

0:01:280:01:30

I'll be talking to former

Conservative Cabinet minister

0:01:300:01:33

Sayeeda Warsi, who's

called her a "mouthpiece"

0:01:330:01:35

for ministers.

0:01:350:01:39

All that in the next hour,

and as Donald Trump,

0:01:390:01:47

Theresa May and the world's rich

and famous converge on a ski

0:01:470:01:50

resort in the Swiss Alps,

we've managed to keep one member

0:01:500:01:56

of the global elite captive

here in Wesminster.

0:01:560:01:58

It's the Mail on Sunday

columinst Peter Hitchens.

0:01:580:02:01

I've never been in the global elite,

thank heavens!

0:02:010:02:06

Welcome to the programme.

0:02:060:02:07

And let's go straight to Davos,

where Theresa May is due to address

0:02:070:02:10

the World Economic Forum this

afternoon.

0:02:100:02:12

Our business editor,

Simon Jack, is there.

0:02:120:02:13

Simon what - is she going to say?

0:02:130:02:15

Well, she's going to start by making

some remarks on technology. She is

0:02:150:02:20

going to call on people to bring

more pressure on tech companies to

0:02:200:02:27

do more to remove extremist content

from the internet and to make it a

0:02:270:02:31

safer place and ideally to develop

artificial intelligence which means

0:02:310:02:36

that this content will automatically

come down, artificial intelligence

0:02:360:02:38

which will recognise messages. And

she will say that Britain wants to

0:02:380:02:41

be a big part of the AI development.

The eagle has landed, Donald Trump

0:02:410:02:52

is here, he arrived helicopter about

an hour rego. I think people will be

0:02:520:02:57

looking for one thing. - just how

special is our special relationship?

0:02:570:03:05

After they were holding hands at the

White House about a year ago,

0:03:050:03:08

relations have soured a little bit

and they've publicly clashed on

0:03:080:03:11

Twitter over Donald Trump's tweeting

some far right material from

0:03:110:03:19

Britain. Then there was the UK visit

- is he coming or isn't he? Is it

0:03:190:03:24

because he didn't like Barack

Obama's deal or is it because he

0:03:240:03:27

didn't think he would get a very

warm welcome? And the other thing,

0:03:270:03:31

and I can't overemphasise this

enough, is that whilst we've been

0:03:310:03:37

here, the darling of the economic

forum has become Emmanuel Macron,

0:03:370:03:39

and the reports are that Donald

Trump is going to offer Macron a

0:03:390:03:44

visit before he offers Theresa May

the same thing. And so when it comes

0:03:440:03:47

to the question, who do I call in

Europe? Is it the UK? At the moment,

0:03:470:03:50

that's not clear. Resume oblique,

even though you don't get to pick

0:03:500:03:59

your own topic in Davos, there must

be a lot of chat about Brexit?

Yeah,

0:03:590:04:06

she's going to be asked about the

negotiations and how they are going.

0:04:060:04:08

Philip Hammond was just on the main

stage and said they thought they had

0:04:080:04:11

made some pretty good progress and

they are hoping to get some kind of

0:04:110:04:14

transition deal framework wrapped up

by March which if true would give

0:04:140:04:17

businesses up to three years. And

the other thing is, once we are out

0:04:170:04:24

after 2019, what happens then? Is

Britain free to pursue its own trade

0:04:240:04:28

deals? The big rise for some would

be a trade deal with the US. The

0:04:280:04:32

Prime Minister was speaking to the

BBC this morning and she said, we're

0:04:320:04:35

up for it, they're up for it. But

some of Donald Trump's senior

0:04:350:04:43

ministers including the Treasury

Secretary and the economic Secretary

0:04:430:04:46

have made some positive noises that

there is an appetite to do that. So,

0:04:460:04:49

both sides are willing. As you will

know there's quite a lot of

0:04:490:04:55

questions about whether they are

able to do that within the confines

0:04:550:04:58

of Article 50. David Davis is

absolutely convinced that he has got

0:04:580:05:01

freedom after March 2019 to

negotiate with whoever it likes,

0:05:010:05:07

with the idea that you sign on the

dotted line when the transition

0:05:070:05:10

period is over. She will want to

accentuate those positive noises,

0:05:100:05:12

and we will be looking for the body

language between the Prime Minister

0:05:120:05:15

and the President of the United

States.

Peter Hitchens, with us

0:05:150:05:20

today, for the duration - Theresa

May in Davos not exactly

0:05:200:05:26

centrestage, Simon Jack was telling

us - it feels as though this is part

0:05:260:05:30

of the continuing narrative of the

problems for Theresa May?

What is

0:05:300:05:33

she doing there anyway? Davos was

described to me as finding the worst

0:05:330:05:38

restaurant d'you know and going to

it and listening to a man talking

0:05:380:05:43

about bitcoin in a Peter Ustinov

voice. What is she doing there,

0:05:430:05:48

when...?

Representing Britain

presumably, if Donald Trump and

0:05:480:05:51

Emmanuel Macron...

0:05:510:05:56

Emmanuel Macron...

To whom? Theresa

May cannot go on a state visit to

0:05:570:05:59

the United States by the way because

she is not head of state. The Queen

0:05:590:06:02

would do that. Whereas President

Macron can. As for the special

0:06:020:06:07

relationship, I thought everybody

now knew that the special

0:06:070:06:09

relationship was a joke and a myth

and it does not exist and if she's

0:06:090:06:12

looking for it in Davos, she will

not find it there, either.

If she is

0:06:120:06:17

going to meet a Donald Trump, and

that has been hurriedly arranged,

0:06:170:06:20

for them in Davos, does she have to

try and restore better relations?

I

0:06:200:06:24

don't know what you can do. The man

is such a completely loose cannon

0:06:240:06:28

that it's impossible to know what he

would do next and what he would make

0:06:280:06:32

of any meeting at all and whether it

would benefit her not. In whose eyes

0:06:320:06:38

does somebody's outstanding improved

by meeting Donald Trump? I cannot be

0:06:380:06:44

alone in thinking that. It is a

baffling thing for politicians who

0:06:440:06:49

fail at home, they try to prance

around on the international stage

0:06:490:06:51

looking more important than they

are. And it doesn't seem to me to be

0:06:510:06:55

a wise thing to do, it seems to me

yet another, how shall I put this,

0:06:550:07:04

possible putsch against her are

being planned.

Former Prime Minister

0:07:040:07:07

David Cameron is also in Davos and

he has been overheard by the

0:07:070:07:11

television cameras talking about

Brexit...

0:07:110:07:21

A mistake not a disaster, is what

David Cameron described Brexit as

0:07:340:07:38

jest of course you were on the other

side of the EU referendum, but are

0:07:380:07:41

you surprised to hear him say that?

No. He did not really understand

0:07:410:07:46

what he was doing. And also he would

say that, wouldn't he? Before the

0:07:460:07:51

vote he would have said it was a

disaster. Now that it has happened,

0:07:510:07:56

he is quite rightly viewed by many

people as responsible for it and he

0:07:560:07:59

has to say it's a mistake. A mistake

not made by him, of course, but by

0:07:590:08:06

the British people for voting to

leave in the referendum which he

0:08:060:08:08

himself called! You voted to

leave... I didn't vote, I took no

0:08:080:08:12

part in the referendum, I hate

referendums.

But you wanted Britain

0:08:120:08:17

to be in the EU?

I want Britain to

be independent but not in this way.

0:08:170:08:20

What do you make of how the

negotiations are going?

I was a

0:08:200:08:26

industry correspondent for many

years and it would be foolish to

0:08:260:08:29

imagine that negotiations will not

end at the last minute if they will

0:08:290:08:33

reach a conclusion, when the last

minute comes. The only question is,

0:08:330:08:38

what form the compromises take.

And

you would like Britain to stay close

0:08:380:08:41

to the single market and the

economic area?

I think the Norway

0:08:410:08:45

option is the best one for us and I

think it would satisfy several

0:08:450:08:49

things. First of all it would avoid

the terrible consequences of

0:08:490:08:53

becoming a third country if we left,

which would be very, very difficult.

0:08:530:08:57

These aren't terrorists, these are

huge bureaucracies on the frontiers

0:08:570:09:00

which we would face if we became a

third country trading with the

0:09:000:09:04

European Union. And also, because of

the little-known but important

0:09:040:09:08

Lichtenstein option it would give us

the chance to control our borders as

0:09:080:09:11

well.

This is what Brexiteers Mike

Jacob Rees-Mogg describe as being a

0:09:110:09:16

vassal state, not defining the rules

but having to accept them?

He can

0:09:160:09:21

say that if he likes. But the

problem is this. 40 years of being

0:09:210:09:27

in the European Union, much of

Britain's muscle has atrophied, and

0:09:270:09:32

we really aren't in a very strong

position to march out into total

0:09:320:09:37

independence at the moment. And if

we tried to do so I think we might

0:09:370:09:41

stumble. It's perfectly sensible for

a politician who is making a name by

0:09:410:09:48

being a billeted on this issue to

speak like this. But the trouble is

0:09:480:09:51

there will have to be a compromise.

Those of us who take the future of

0:09:510:09:54

the country seriously, or even try

to do so, must wonder what sort of

0:09:540:09:57

compromises that could be, which

would suit both sides. This was not

0:09:570:10:01

a huge, overwhelming vote to leave,

it was a narrow one, and therefore

0:10:010:10:05

we have to accept there will be a

compromise.

0:10:050:10:12

Now it's time for our daily quiz.

0:10:120:10:14

According to reports in the press,

Donald Trump told Theresa May

0:10:140:10:17

she could be like a world

famous politician.

0:10:170:10:19

So, our

0:10:190:10:20

question is - which one?

0:10:200:10:21

Was it a) Winston Churchill?

0:10:210:10:22

b) Margaret Thatcher?

0:10:220:10:23

C) Ronald Reagan?

0:10:230:10:25

Or d) Neville Chamberlain?

0:10:250:10:26

At the end of the show, Peter

will give us the correct answer.

0:10:260:10:29

This morning, NHS England

released the latest figures

0:10:290:10:31

on the organisation's performance.

0:10:310:10:32

In the week ending 21st January,

pressure on the service continued -

0:10:320:10:35

with 11,000 ambulance delays

of over 30 minutes -

0:10:350:10:37

and bed occupancy levels of 94.8%.

0:10:370:10:41

These figures are a very slight

improvement in comparison

0:10:410:10:43

to the previous set of weekly

figures when there was a bed

0:10:430:10:48

occupancy level of 94.90% of beds,

and 12,600 last ambulance delays

0:10:480:10:50

of over 30 minutes.

0:10:500:10:53

Labour have seized upon the issue.

0:10:530:10:55

Tonight, they will hold an NHS rally

outside the Houses of Parliament -

0:10:550:11:01

in support of "the heroes

that work there".

0:11:010:11:03

And yesterday at PMQs,

Jeremy Corbyn attacked

0:11:030:11:07

the PM about NHS funding, calling

the extra £2.8 billion pledged

0:11:070:11:10

in last autumn's

Budget "thin gruel".

0:11:100:11:13

Theresa May said the NHS had been

"better prepared" than ever before

0:11:130:11:16

for winter pressures,

and the Government was ensuring

0:11:160:11:18

that the NHS receives more funding.

0:11:180:11:22

But she faces trouble on her own

benches over the issue too -

0:11:220:11:25

Boris Johnson reportedly called

for extra NHS funding

0:11:250:11:27

at this week's Cabinet,

and backbenchers Jacob Rees Mogg,

0:11:270:11:30

Mark Pritchard and Nick Boles

have all said the health

0:11:300:11:32

service needs more money.

0:11:320:11:35

And frustration was vented by some

Tory MPs on Twitter -

0:11:350:11:37

including Johnny Mercer

and Sarah Wollaston -

0:11:370:11:40

after the PM deflected an invitation

by 90 MPs across the parties to set

0:11:400:11:45

up a cross-party group to enhance

sustainability in the NHS.

0:11:450:11:49

Joining us now is Carol Jagger,

who works at the Institute

0:11:490:11:52

of Ageing in Newcastle.

0:11:520:11:54

She has warned that we might be

underestimating the future increases

0:11:540:11:56

in demand on the NHS.

0:11:560:12:02

Thank you very much for joining us

on the programme. You've done

0:12:020:12:07

research which shows that as we're

living longer, with more complicated

0:12:070:12:11

conditions, our health care is going

to get more complicated as well?

0:12:110:12:14

Yes, I have. And if I can just say a

little bit about what we did... Al

0:12:140:12:20

model takes people aged 35 and over,

and with lifestyle factors, obesity,

0:12:200:12:28

smoking and physical inactivity, and

other factors, it simulates how

0:12:280:12:34

they're doing to age in terms of

accruing diseases. And yes, we found

0:12:340:12:39

that most of the increase will be in

what we term complex

0:12:390:12:47

multi-morbidity, four or more

diseases.

And that is more context

0:12:470:12:52

to manage and it's going to cost

considerably more money?

Yes, it is.

0:12:520:12:55

But I think also it's about

organisation, too. It all boils down

0:12:550:13:04

to money but it is really, we will

need better training for health

0:13:040:13:09

professionals and longer

consultation times for GPs as well.

0:13:090:13:13

So, we talk a lot about funding for

the NHS, whether it's adequate or

0:13:130:13:17

not, and your warning us that we're

going to look at substantial

0:13:170:13:21

increases in the future - can the

NHS really ever have enough money?

I

0:13:210:13:27

think it has to be a longer term

plan double we've got at the moment.

0:13:270:13:32

It isn't something that we can just

shore up for a couple of years.

0:13:320:13:38

Basically our research is showing

that this is going to continue for

0:13:380:13:40

the next 25 and 30 years, and it

isn't going to get better. And

0:13:400:13:44

actually more worryingly, we also

found that people, younger people,

0:13:440:13:50

who are ageing into the older

population, are coming in with more

0:13:500:13:54

disease as well.

Thank you very much

for explaining that, Carol Jagger.

0:13:540:13:59

With me in the studio is Labour's

Shadow Health Secretary Jonathan

0:13:590:14:06

Ashworth and Tory MP Andrew

Murrison, who served in the Navy as

0:14:060:14:09

a medic for 20 years. Andrew, it is

clear that there is rising concern

0:14:090:14:16

amongst voters about the NHS, 40%

saying they think it is the most

0:14:160:14:18

important issue facing the

government - is the government

0:14:180:14:21

handling it well?

You're right, by

far and away it's the biggest issue

0:14:210:14:26

in my constituency mailbag at the

moment. I think the garment has

0:14:260:14:30

approached winter pressures, which

we have had for the past 30 years,

0:14:300:14:34

quite well this year. We've had

advanced planning, more money going

0:14:340:14:38

in, and it has been handled I think

quite well.

That is a very

0:14:380:14:42

short-term issue for the winter, but

chief executive of NHS England says

0:14:420:14:47

he needs £4 billion more and he's

not getting it?

Yes, well I think

0:14:470:14:51

you should let pitch and a number of

my colleagues are saying the same,

0:14:510:14:55

notably Boris Johnson, obviously. I

have been arguing for more money for

0:14:550:14:59

the NHS for a very long time. But I

think Carol Jagger is absolutely

0:14:590:15:04

right, it's not just about the sum

total of money going into the NHS,

0:15:040:15:07

which lags well behind other

countries in Western Europe I have

0:15:070:15:10

to say, but it's also about how we

structure the NHS and what we do

0:15:100:15:13

within it, we must consider it on

preventative health as well.

0:15:130:15:22

preventative health as well.

The

money is a part of it though and

0:15:230:15:25

your manifesto pledge they would be

an increase in spending for every

0:15:250:15:28

year of this Parliament but the

National Audit Office says once

0:15:280:15:34

adjusted for age, money will fall

this year rather than increase.

0:15:340:15:41

There is more money being spent and

more activity than ever before.

And

0:15:410:15:45

there is more need than ever before.

Yes, there is, and Carol's comments

0:15:450:15:50

are worrying because we are and in

the 70th of our NHS, there needs to

0:15:500:16:00

be a root and branch above party

consultation on where we go from

0:16:000:16:03

here.

Jonathan, you didn't sign the

letter calling for a cross-party

0:16:030:16:10

commission on the NHS because --,

did you. Is this because you think

0:16:100:16:18

the NHS are already doing a good job

I don't need to be in a cross-party?

0:16:180:16:26

No, that is not it and I know that

what my colleague saying about

0:16:260:16:31

demanding more money is actually the

case. But this is about choices to

0:16:310:16:37

make and I am sceptical that the

government would make the decisions

0:16:370:16:39

to give the NHS the funding it

really needs. Historically, and we

0:16:390:16:44

are at the 70th anniversary,

historically, the NHS for 62 years

0:16:440:16:49

to 4% uplift year by year. For the

last eight years, it's gone through

0:16:490:16:54

a tight financial squeeze of a 1%

uplift, giving us the crisis we have

0:16:540:16:59

seen on our TV screens, BBC news...

But the NHS wouldn't be getting that

0:16:590:17:06

1% -- that 4% uplift you were to

have won the election? You were

0:17:060:17:13

promising about 2%.

We were

promising five billion and I would

0:17:130:17:18

have been considerably more than the

Conservatives. But we do need a

0:17:180:17:24

long-term plan for the National

Health Service.

Isn't that why you

0:17:240:17:28

need to take the politics out of it

and have some kind of cross-party

0:17:280:17:31

commission that looks at the beach

beyond the lifetime of this

0:17:310:17:34

government had restructuring the

NHS?

I think the problem is the last

0:17:340:17:38

royal commission we had was under

Harold Wilson's government had no

0:17:380:17:42

one thing is it really came up with

a long-term plan for the NHS when

0:17:420:17:47

they did it in the 70s.

That doesn't

mean it couldn't be done better now.

0:17:470:17:52

One of the proposals we have, you

know we have the Office for Budget

0:17:520:17:59

Responsibility, is generally

respected, people accept its

0:17:590:18:01

analysis, we believe we need

something like that by health care

0:18:010:18:03

to recommend to government and give

independent reports on the funding

0:18:030:18:09

needs of the NHS, the staffing needs

of the NHS, to allow government to

0:18:090:18:12

put in that long-term planning which

we do agree is needed. I just don't

0:18:120:18:16

think the Royal commission would

give us answers on time.

Does there

0:18:160:18:19

need to be 's party cooperation in

looking at the beach of the NHS?

I

0:18:190:18:25

really think there does need to be

and the public expects there to be.

0:18:250:18:31

The report Jonathan is referring to

has largely been implemented over

0:18:310:18:36

the years and it's not right to say

because Royal commissions of the

0:18:360:18:39

past had taken a long time and been

expensive, they need to be in the

0:18:390:18:42

picture. We need to be sure this is

within a very tight timeline. Within

0:18:420:18:48

two years, a report which is

authoritative, which is what a royal

0:18:480:18:52

commission lens. It is certainly not

partisan. The public wants that,

0:18:520:18:55

they want politicians to come

together and agree something that is

0:18:550:19:00

closest we get to a national

religion in this country. If there

0:19:000:19:04

is one thing that unites the parties

in Westminster, it is the National

0:19:040:19:09

Health Service. I promise you this,

at the next general election, it

0:19:090:19:13

will be at the forefront of people's

minds.

Peter Hitchens, cross-party

0:19:130:19:19

co-operation on the future of the

NHS. It is -- is it the only way

0:19:190:19:25

forward?

Yes, I think we are all

tired of Labour saying they are the

0:19:250:19:30

only ones

0:19:300:19:35

only ones able to save the NHS. The

Conservatives are not trying to

0:19:370:19:41

destroy it even if that is what the

media says. The whole approach

0:19:410:19:45

becomes needlessly adversarial

because they make the relationship

0:19:450:19:48

bad. We had 18 years of

marketisation and 13 years of

0:19:480:19:56

splurge. The truth is that we could

spend the entire GDP on the NHS and

0:19:560:20:03

it still doesn't work. A Royal

commission could look at the huge

0:20:030:20:07

need for preventative health. The

hospital near where I live, you

0:20:070:20:11

approach it three two concentric

rings. One is of people smoking and

0:20:110:20:19

the next is a car park. These are

two contributors to ill-health. The

0:20:190:20:28

lack of exercise, with terrible

provision for public transport

0:20:280:20:33

meaning people drive. The second is

lifestyle choices which make people

0:20:330:20:36

ill. Somehow or other, I would

personally suggest tax incentives to

0:20:360:20:41

keep people healthy and fit, somehow

or other you have to do something

0:20:410:20:44

about that. Then there is the final

thing, which is that for the past 50

0:20:440:20:48

years now, all governments have been

attacking the family and trying to

0:20:480:20:53

substitute with it for the state.

The care of the old which used to be

0:20:530:20:58

done by families is now invariably

loaded onto the health service at

0:20:580:21:00

the end of peoples lives and that is

a great deal the reason we have

0:21:000:21:03

problems every winter. There needs

to be some recognition that the

0:21:030:21:09

destruction of the family, the De

Kooning particularly of women

0:21:090:21:13

particularly into paid work has been

actually a mistake and we can't

0:21:130:21:18

substitute it either by the health

service, the welfare system or

0:21:180:21:22

social services.

Some radical ideas

there from Peter.

Someone has got to

0:21:220:21:27

have them.

Is this something that

government ever consider, ideas as

0:21:270:21:33

radical as this?

Golly, I thought

Jonathan was going to go first. I

0:21:330:21:40

like radical and blue sky thinking.

Some of the points made I would

0:21:400:21:43

agree with and sympathise with but

look, I am a politician and I'm a

0:21:430:21:48

practical person and want something

done within a reasonable time frame.

0:21:480:21:53

I very much welcome Jeremy Hunt's

10-year time frame, far more

0:21:530:21:58

realistic than the five-year one we

have been dealing with up to this

0:21:580:22:00

point. We have to work with society

and what people want and expect in

0:22:000:22:06

the 21st century. Lifestyle,

absolutely important. Smoking has

0:22:060:22:10

gone down quite significantly in

recent years. The great driver of

0:22:100:22:13

health inequalities is gradually

being addressed. But there are other

0:22:130:22:20

health-related lifestyle issues and

I think particularly obesity, so it

0:22:200:22:25

would be a mistake in any review

simply to look at how to patch

0:22:250:22:29

people up when they become sick. We

also need to look at why they become

0:22:290:22:33

sick and how government can do

things that aren't going to make

0:22:330:22:36

matters worse, because we need to

remember government interventions

0:22:360:22:39

have a habit of making things worse

rather than better.

Labour argue a

0:22:390:22:44

great deal about the funding for the

NHS and we could pick through the

0:22:440:22:47

numbers and show that actually even

the Labour Party wasn't promising

0:22:470:22:51

the annual 4% uplift that the NHS

traditionally gets but this goes

0:22:510:22:55

beyond money, doesn't it? Is it not

a mistake to be constantly

0:22:550:22:58

criticising the government for the

funding they are giving the NHS

0:22:580:23:06

funding they are giving the NHS and

not looking at some of the

0:23:070:23:08

underlying structural issues?

Absolutely, there are loads of

0:23:080:23:10

fundamental issues which need to be

attacked. Funding is a fundamental

0:23:100:23:12

issue, as indeed is staffing at the

social care system. The two are

0:23:120:23:17

interlinked because as we have heard

there are lots of elderly people

0:23:170:23:20

trapped in hospitals. I would say

driving a lot of that is the £6

0:23:200:23:26

billion worth of cuts, not the

beginning of women into the world of

0:23:260:23:31

work as Peter described it. I

actually think women working is a

0:23:310:23:36

good thing and more women should be

encouraged into the world of work.

I

0:23:360:23:41

didn't say anything about equal

pay...

I think the problem around

0:23:410:23:48

social care and lack of care for our

elderly is not to do with women

0:23:480:23:52

being in work. Why don't some of the

men is that home to look after them?

0:23:520:23:57

Fine by me if you can persuade them

to do it.

0:23:570:24:06

to do it. I am only opposed to the

huge pressure on women to go out to

0:24:060:24:10

paid work when in many cases they

would rather be at home raising

0:24:100:24:16

their children...

This is a

significantly contentious debate but

0:24:160:24:19

at the debate for another day, I'm

afraid. We will have to leave it

0:24:190:24:23

there.

0:24:230:24:27

The Home Office has appointed

a Muslim human rights campaigner,

0:24:270:24:29

Sara Khan, to lead a new commission

to counter extremism.

0:24:290:24:32

Labour say the appointment fails

to acknowledge that most

0:24:320:24:35

Muslims have no confidence

in the government's

0:24:350:24:36

Prevent strategy.

0:24:360:24:37

Adding to the criticism is former

Faith and Communities

0:24:370:24:39

minister Baroness Warsi.

0:24:390:24:40

I spoke to her earlier

from our Leeds studio and began

0:24:400:24:43

by asking her why she thought

Sara Khan wasn't qualified

0:24:430:24:45

for the role.

0:24:450:24:46

I'm sure Sara is a perfectly nice

human being but this is a very

0:24:460:25:01

important role, one which will

determine the kind of country that

0:25:010:25:05

our children will grow up in. For

that role, there are certain

0:25:050:25:08

characteristics which are essential

for the person leading in that role

0:25:080:25:11

and one of those is that this person

has to be independent, somebody who

0:25:110:25:16

can robustly challenged communities

and robustly challenged government.

0:25:160:25:20

Why do you think Sarah Khan would

not be independent?

I think there is

0:25:200:25:26

a whole plethora of reasons about

how Sara came about, the campaigns

0:25:260:25:31

she has run, the book she wrote, who

was it written by? How much of this

0:25:310:25:35

has been done at the bequest and

behest of the Home Office? And

0:25:350:25:41

agencies attached to the Home

Office. It is important to me that

0:25:410:25:45

whoever comes into this comes in in

a position of strength. This person

0:25:450:25:51

will to challenge communities, take

on some of the cup issues. This

0:25:510:25:54

person has to be deeply respected

and connected to the communities in

0:25:540:25:59

which he operates.

Surely your

criticism of her two day then is

0:25:590:26:03

undermining that and will make her

job harder?

I made my views clear

0:26:030:26:08

about this appointment months ago, I

wrote about it and put an extract of

0:26:080:26:13

that out yesterday. I have been

talking about the importance of this

0:26:130:26:16

role and how important it is that we

appoint the right person. Remember,

0:26:160:26:22

Sarah, this person is going to have

to do have some really tough

0:26:220:26:27

conversations from a position of

strength where someone may not be

0:26:270:26:33

agreeing with that person but they

will have to have a discussion. This

0:26:330:26:37

person will have to engage broadly

and deeply with all communities and

0:26:370:26:41

sadly Sara has been an advocate of

the government's policy of

0:26:410:26:45

disengagement which has meant more

and more people, individuals and

0:26:450:26:50

activists, have been considered

beyond the pale and have been

0:26:500:26:53

disengaged. For these and another --

a number of other reasons, it is

0:26:530:26:57

that the government have the

opportunity to make a very good

0:26:570:27:00

appointment, and there were some

very good candidates in the final

0:27:000:27:04

run to this role, and they chose not

to do so.

Are you disappointed it

0:27:040:27:13

wasn't you, is that partly why you

feel like this?

I can only be

0:27:130:27:18

disappointed if I had applied and I

didn't apply because I did not feel

0:27:180:27:21

I have the time for it. But there

were good people in the running,

0:27:210:27:29

including a prosecutor who took on

the greening gangs and to contact

0:27:290:27:33

issues that questioned and prayed

communities. That is the type of

0:27:330:27:39

person we needed in this role.

Someone independent, brave,

0:27:390:27:45

experienced, somebody with great

gravitas in this area. Sadly, that

0:27:450:27:48

is not the route the government

chose to take.

You have also been

0:27:480:27:54

very critical of the government's

anti-terrorism policy, prevent. You

0:27:540:27:58

have said it is toxic and should be

paused. You still feel that way?

My

0:27:580:28:03

view is that we need something in

our countries -- counterterrorism

0:28:030:28:08

policy that does people upstream

underway to terrorism. But what is

0:28:080:28:13

clear and this is not just my view

but the view of counterterrorism

0:28:130:28:20

services, police, academics, across

the political divide, when many

0:28:200:28:27

people look at this and say it is

time for an independent review of

0:28:270:28:31

prevent. It's a view that I hold and

that many practitioners who practice

0:28:310:28:36

capital letter

0:28:360:28:44

capital letter prevent need a

review.

0:28:440:28:51

review.

One of the people you

mentioned actually supports Sara

0:28:510:28:55

Khan's appointment and says he does

not see how she can't be independent

0:28:550:28:59

because she criticised the

government.

I can only go by my own

0:28:590:29:03

experience and I have known of Sara

and her sister who is an official at

0:29:030:29:09

the Home Office for nearly 15 years.

I have seen their journey over time,

0:29:090:29:17

they're changing views about Islam,

how they manifest it, wearing the

0:29:170:29:23

huge up, not wearing a jab, this is

something I have been involved in

0:29:230:29:28

over the years and knowing what I

know, having worked inside and

0:29:280:29:32

outside of government, I am

disappointed by this appointment

0:29:320:29:36

because I think it will hinder not

help our appointment.

You criticised

0:29:360:29:41

this appointment of another Toby

Young moment on twitter. Does that

0:29:410:29:46

mean that you think Sara Khan can't

contain -- can't continue in this

0:29:460:29:50

appointment is not in the past,

appointments have been made and when

0:29:500:29:55

it becomes clear the appointment was

not the right appointment, the

0:29:550:29:58

government has reconsidered and I

sincerely hope the government will

0:29:580:30:01

reconsider this appointment.

Only

this morning, I have been speaking

0:30:010:30:05

to people who engage in prevent work

at the grassroots level and two

0:30:050:30:09

people have said to me that this

appointment will actually make their

0:30:090:30:13

life and their job more difficult.

These are people who are engaged in

0:30:130:30:19

the government's own prevent work. I

spoke to a civil servant this

0:30:190:30:24

morning who said the advice was that

this appointment would make things

0:30:240:30:27

more difficult in the fight against

extremism.

We will have to leave it

0:30:270:30:31

there. Thank you, Baroness Warsi.

0:30:310:30:36

We are joined now in the studio by

Dame Louise Casey. Thank you for

0:30:360:30:43

coming in. Is Sara Khan the right

person for this job?

Yes, and to be

0:30:430:30:48

fair, whoever was appointed, no

matter who they were, would face a

0:30:480:30:52

barrage of criticism, and probably

in many areas of the country, people

0:30:520:30:56

going thank not someone is in the,

who is we are cracking on. I think

0:30:560:30:59

some of this is incredibly

unedifying. If only powerful Muslim

0:30:590:31:05

women and not Muslim women would

come together and get behind the

0:31:050:31:09

extremism commission and behind Sara

Khan's appointment, that would be a

0:31:090:31:12

much better way forward. The woman

hasn't even started yet, and when

0:31:120:31:17

Baroness Warsi was appointed, she

herself took some criticism from the

0:31:170:31:22

same sort of cohort at that time. I

wish she was onside and supporting

0:31:220:31:27

and making this work, because

whoever is in the job...

Her

0:31:270:31:31

argument is that Sara Khan is not

able to be independent enough of

0:31:310:31:34

government, because she's been so

close to the Home Office in the

0:31:340:31:37

past?

I find that extraordinary,

really. Sara Khan, she is her own

0:31:370:31:42

woman and she will say exactly what

she thinks needs to be done. She's

0:31:420:31:46

fearless, feel is around politics

and frankly around some of the stuff

0:31:460:31:49

she has had to put up with.

We did

try and get her on today but you

0:31:490:31:55

wasn't available.

I am a poor

substitute, but the fact of the

0:31:550:31:59

matter is that it's just not right

on the day that a long process will

0:31:590:32:04

have been gone through, this will

have had ministerial support, I

0:32:040:32:07

would imagine it is an appointment

made very much by the Home

0:32:070:32:10

Secretary. We need to get behind,

leave aside all this personality

0:32:100:32:14

stuff. It's not where we need to be.

There is a job that needs to be

0:32:140:32:19

done, Sara Khan has got the job, I

think she will do it really well, we

0:32:190:32:23

should be supporting her.

I'm sorry,

I just can't really support the idea

0:32:230:32:27

that there should be a moment

official tasked with dealing with

0:32:270:32:32

extremism. The word extremism is no

business of the government to define

0:32:320:32:38

any opinion and whether it be

extremist or not and trying to stamp

0:32:380:32:43

it out. If people commit crime then

they should be prosecuted and

0:32:430:32:47

punished for it if convicted. But

the whole idea of a government

0:32:470:32:52

having opinions on people's opinions

is repulsive to me and I am amazed

0:32:520:32:55

that we can sit here discussing it

in a country which has until

0:32:550:32:59

recently been reasonably free. It is

simply not the job of the state to

0:32:590:33:03

interfere in what people think. What

they do is another matter.

0:33:030:33:06

Incitement to violence is another

matter. But if we accept this, then

0:33:060:33:10

then it is not at all unforeseeable

that is not a very long time I could

0:33:100:33:15

be classified as an extremist,

subject to government investigation

0:33:150:33:19

and supervision and who knows what

else. I really am amazed that the

0:33:190:33:23

way in which people give up the

liberties which it took centuries in

0:33:230:33:26

this country to obtain.

Let's let

Louise Casey address that - is this

0:33:260:33:31

a commission looking at what people

think or what they do?

I am not a

0:33:310:33:35

government official.

No, you're not

but we're discussing the appointment

0:33:350:33:39

of.

And Sara Khan today has not been

a government official. I think it

0:33:390:33:46

would be crazy to think that we

don't have a problem in this country

0:33:460:33:51

of the extreme far right getting

more extreme, getting more members.

0:33:510:33:55

It would be crazy to think that we

don't have people in this country

0:33:550:33:58

that right now as we sit here think

that the young girls that died in

0:33:580:34:03

the Manchester Arena bombing attack

had it coming to them. That

0:34:030:34:08

actually, in the name of something,

that actually that was an acceptable

0:34:080:34:11

way and people think that...

Hang

on, I don't know what you mean by

0:34:110:34:15

acceptable.

In all other areas of

crime, we prevent pitch but we don't

0:34:150:34:22

have laws about what people think in

this country. It is not laws about

0:34:220:34:25

what people think, it's about a...

What do you mean by acceptable,

0:34:250:34:28

then?

What I mean is there are young

people who are growing up and start

0:34:280:34:34

talking in classrooms and with their

friends about things that we would

0:34:340:34:37

find very, very close to what is

criminal, and if that was around...

0:34:370:34:41

We are in at the moment some kind of

constant for Rory over the

0:34:410:34:45

boundaries between what is

acceptable conduct for me in

0:34:450:34:50

published life and in private life

and where they cover those

0:34:500:34:53

boundaries of. I do not see anybody

questioning that debate.

You might

0:34:530:34:56

be but... I question any menace to

freedom of speech and thought,

0:34:560:35:01

because these things are very

important and they are very easily

0:35:010:35:04

lost. And they are usually very

easily lost on a strong emotional

0:35:040:35:08

tide such as the one which you've

just been expressing, of these

0:35:080:35:13

people discussing opinions. I think

a lot of people's opinions are

0:35:130:35:16

disgusting, but they then must be

challenge in a debate. It is not the

0:35:160:35:20

role of the state to prosecute

people for what they think. Anything

0:35:200:35:25

short of incitement to. Although we

do not have a first amendment in

0:35:250:35:28

this country I think we should

practice as far as possible the

0:35:280:35:31

rules which follow from that. Which

is, you can say what you like short

0:35:310:35:37

of shouting fire in a crowded

theatre falsely. And I think we

0:35:370:35:41

should stick with that. I'm amazed

at the way in which, particularly on

0:35:410:35:44

the pretext of fighting terrorism,

which actually the government is not

0:35:440:35:47

very good at, actually, we introduce

laws and procedures which are

0:35:470:35:54

actually based on the idea that

there are somethings we are not

0:35:540:35:58

allowed to think.

We understand what

you think about that, Peter. Louise

0:35:580:36:03

you were also in the antisocial

behaviour tsar and we have got new

0:36:030:36:08

crime statistics out today which

show that violent crime and other

0:36:080:36:13

offences as recorded by the police

have risen sharply. Robberies up by

0:36:130:36:16

20 29%...

0:36:160:36:22

Overall crimes recorded

by police in 44 forces

0:36:220:36:24

across England and

Wales rose by 14%,

0:36:240:36:26

while violent crime

increased by 20%.

0:36:260:36:27

Robberies surged by

nearly a third - 29%.

0:36:270:36:29

In the same time period,

knife crime was up by 21%.

0:36:290:36:32

And sex crimes also

increased by 23%.

0:36:320:36:33

This must be of concern to you?

Yes.

Since 2014 in particular, we have

0:36:330:36:36

seen increases and those statistics

are robust John White is not about

0:36:360:36:41

extra reporting or awareness. It is

very clear that on that particular

0:36:410:36:45

criminal offence, that actually that

is going in the wrong direction. And

0:36:450:36:49

my own view, and Peter will probably

disagree with this as well, is that

0:36:490:36:53

I actually think it is time for us

to step back and think, what is

0:36:530:36:57

happening and we know that this is

largely an urban problem, it is a

0:36:570:37:01

specific problem in London. If we

asked the police which wards, they

0:37:010:37:05

would be able to tell us which

wards. I think the solution does not

0:37:050:37:09

lie in constant policing and

enforcement of. We do need

0:37:090:37:12

enforcement and policing, one of the

things I'm worried about is the

0:37:120:37:15

reduction of police officers and

resources, particularly in the

0:37:150:37:17

magical authors and police --

particularly in the Metropolitan

0:37:170:37:23

Police but nevertheless we ought to

know what is happening in those

0:37:230:37:27

families and in their lives, why

some of them are dropping out of

0:37:270:37:30

school, why some of them think

carrying a knife is in their

0:37:300:37:33

interest, why we are allowing

predatory, nasty gangs to take hold

0:37:330:37:36

in some of these wards and not

having a bigger response than we

0:37:360:37:40

have at the moment. There needs to

be a line in the sand, and I don't

0:37:400:37:43

see one.

It has been said that knife

crime is going to be a top issue but

0:37:430:37:48

actually some more imaginative ideas

like the violence reduction unit

0:37:480:37:52

which operates in Glasgow, where

knife crime has been falling

0:37:520:37:55

substantially - why are they not

being adopted?

Apart from the fact I

0:37:550:37:59

think that the Metropolitan Police

are actually very concerned about

0:37:590:38:02

resources in policing at the moment.

I think the other thing is that we

0:38:020:38:05

need to find, what started in

Scotland, and I saw your piece on

0:38:050:38:10

Sunday, and I was aware of that

work, but we need to find a

0:38:100:38:14

different approach. And one of those

different approaches is actually

0:38:140:38:17

going into the families where we

know that this is a problem and

0:38:170:38:20

trying to work out how we can stop

siblings and others growing up in

0:38:200:38:24

those families making the same

mistakes. And I think that is not a

0:38:240:38:27

policing issue, it is where things

like family intervention, which I

0:38:270:38:32

did Andrew Labour, troubled

families, which I

0:38:320:38:40

families, which I did under the

Conservatives, needs to be at the

0:38:410:38:41

forefront. You need a different

approach to these things, and it IS

0:38:410:38:44

interference, in terms of family

life, because at the moment we have

0:38:440:38:46

too many deaths.

Is that too much a

state interference in family life?

0:38:460:38:49

No, the state is entitled to

interfere where there is exactly the

0:38:490:38:53

point. But it would seem to me to be

a hugely unexamined aspect of these

0:38:530:39:00

crimes, and that is the increasing

almost epidemic use of mind altering

0:39:000:39:06

drugs in certain parts of society,

which the state does nothing

0:39:060:39:09

whatsoever to prevent. The

possession of drugs is virtually

0:39:090:39:13

unprosecuted in this country now

that the process which has been

0:39:130:39:16

going on for 40 years which has

excellent rated in recent years,

0:39:160:39:22

effectively letting people off. I

have to just mention as well, going

0:39:220:39:26

back to the other subject, you

almost always find mind altering

0:39:260:39:29

drugs present in the lives of people

who are involved in terrorist

0:39:290:39:35

outrages, whether that would be

marijuana or some Chris should

0:39:350:39:39

drugs, or steroids, they are almost

invariably present. I have been

0:39:390:39:43

studying this very carefully for

some years and they're there. These

0:39:430:39:48

are a subset of violent crime which

is unusually closely studied. But

0:39:480:39:52

the refusal of the authorities to

attempt to deal with the possession

0:39:520:39:58

and use of mind altering drugs lies

behind an awful lot of this.

I don't

0:39:580:40:01

agree with that. I think that is

part of the problem with how this

0:40:010:40:10

becomes a left-to-right, polarised

debate. We know where the level of

0:40:100:40:13

knife crime is very high. Win over

wards in London in particular,

0:40:130:40:18

probably Greater Manchester and

Liverpool as well. We know that

0:40:180:40:22

there are nasty, predatory gangs

that are at the top end of crime and

0:40:220:40:24

they sweep people into it, quite

often young people have not got

0:40:240:40:30

brilliant results in school, quite a

lot of them are excluded, they're

0:40:300:40:33

not in school, and underneath all of

this, it involves a much more

0:40:330:40:39

difficult conversation with

ourselves about how we help those

0:40:390:40:42

communities, and it -- in a

significantly different way to how

0:40:420:40:47

we do it at the moment. We need to

stop this, particularly on knife

0:40:470:40:52

crime, somebody on the left saying

it is an outrage and then somebody

0:40:520:40:56

on the right... We need to find a

pragmatic way forward. We have too

0:40:560:41:01

many deaths of young men in

particular on our streets in London.

0:41:010:41:03

Why won't you consider the drugs

issue? You mentioned children in

0:41:030:41:08

school dropping out and... Ask any

teacher and you will find that in so

0:41:080:41:16

many cases, particularly where

they're bright, the point at which

0:41:160:41:19

they drop out is the point at which

they've started using drugs. The

0:41:190:41:23

areas that you've named, are these

areas that are free of drugs, that

0:41:230:41:27

have no cannabis farms in them? They

are overflowing with drugs, why are

0:41:270:41:33

you not making the connection?

It is

one of the issues that is at play.

0:41:330:41:37

One of the other jobs I've been

responsible for is homelessness,

0:41:370:41:41

where again drugs is a prevalent

part of what happens to people who

0:41:410:41:44

are on the streets as is the use of

alcohol. I'm not suggesting it is

0:41:440:41:48

not an issue, of course, but that is

not going to get the knife crime

0:41:480:41:53

statistics and the lives of young

people made safer in London and

0:41:530:41:56

nationally if we just take one

issue. We have to look at it in the

0:41:560:42:00

round. And finally, the more people

that keep dissing Prevent, the more

0:42:000:42:05

people lose confidence in it, and so

the public, who are not part of...

0:42:050:42:13

The counter-terrorism strategy, the

more that people keep undermining

0:42:130:42:16

it, the more difficult it is for the

police officers and civilians to do

0:42:160:42:20

something about.

That sounds like an

argument against free discussion.

I

0:42:200:42:23

completely disagree.

Prevent is a

huge topic which we will need to

0:42:230:42:28

discuss at another time.

0:42:280:42:31

A director at the Department

for Education has resigned.

0:42:310:42:35

The Families Minister

was summoned to Downing Street

0:42:350:42:37

to explain HIS presence at a charity

event run by the Presidents Club

0:42:370:42:40

at the Dorchester Hotel

in London last week -

0:42:400:42:42

where hostesses were reported

to have been sexually harassed .

0:42:420:42:44

where hostesses were reported

to have been sexually harassed.

0:42:440:42:46

Nadhim Zahawi said he left the event

shortly after 9.30 when he said

0:42:460:42:50

he "felt uncomfortable",

but said he did not see any

0:42:500:42:52

of the "horrific" events reported.

0:42:520:42:53

He also tweeted that he would never

attend a men-only function again.

0:42:530:42:56

The government were asked to respond

to an urgent question on the story

0:42:560:42:59

What the Department for Education

needs to do, and in fact

0:43:020:43:07

all departments, all public bodies

in fact, needs to do is to make sure

0:43:070:43:10

that this sort of behaviour

isn't going on anywhere.

0:43:100:43:12

It has to not be tolerated.

0:43:120:43:15

It's not just about forcing people

to do the right thing.

0:43:150:43:19

It's actually about

changing attitudes.

0:43:190:43:25

I noticed that the organisation

wishes to put it

0:43:250:43:27

on to the individual

0:43:270:43:28

members where actually what happened

was that women were bought as bait

0:43:280:43:36

for men who are rich men not a mile

from where we stand,

0:43:370:43:39

as if that is an

acceptable behaviour.

0:43:390:43:41

It is totally unacceptable.

0:43:410:43:42

It is appalling that that

continues and I support

0:43:420:43:44

the minister and her response.

0:43:440:43:48

We all have our duty to do to make

sure that those dinners

0:43:480:43:51

don't ever happen again.

0:43:510:43:52

They chose to treat the hostesses

in this way, to make them parade

0:43:520:43:55

across the stage in front of men,

to make them wear black

0:43:550:43:58

skimpy outfits and specify

the colour of their underwear.

0:43:580:44:01

They chose to ask them

to drink before the event.

0:44:010:44:07

Does she agree all of the organisers

including the Presidents Club

0:44:070:44:10

and all of the private companies

involved in organising this should

0:44:100:44:12

be investigated for breach

of the law and breach

0:44:120:44:14

of the charity rules?

0:44:140:44:16

Cross-party is absolutely

the word and maybe that

0:44:160:44:19

work starts from today.

0:44:190:44:22

Some men, especially

rich and powerful men,

0:44:220:44:24

feel entitled to women.

0:44:240:44:32

They view their bodies

as playthings and they thinnk

0:44:320:44:34

that lecherous pawing

0:44:340:44:35

and groping of women

is acceptable behaviour.

0:44:350:44:37

That a charity is prepared

to facilitate that behaviour

0:44:370:44:39

as long as wealthy men

are opening their cheque-books

0:44:390:44:41

beggars belief.

0:44:410:44:43

May I suggest to the minister

that this is more than a collective

0:44:430:44:50

misjudgment, that this

is a deliberate sticking up of two

0:44:510:44:53

fingers to those that they perceive

as being the PC culture.

0:44:530:45:00

So, pretty clear what MPs thought up

the Presidents Club event. Peter

0:45:000:45:07

Hitchens, our US outraged?

I am not

surprised but I am a puritan and

0:45:070:45:11

perhaps a prude and I find events of

this kind as repulsive as anybody

0:45:110:45:17

and more repulsive than some. What I

am interested to see it but having

0:45:170:45:23

long opposed the permissive society

of which this is an aspect, I am at

0:45:230:45:27

last having allies among the left

wing feminists who have seemed

0:45:270:45:35

critical of this in the past. This

is a factor of it.

It seems that

0:45:350:45:42

something has changed because this

may not have made the headlines it

0:45:420:45:45

did yesterday that had happened a

year ago.

It is interesting to see

0:45:450:45:50

the Financial Times entering scooped

journalism. But no, it wouldn't have

0:45:500:45:53

done.

This follows on from Harvey

Weinstein and all of this. Does it

0:45:530:46:00

mark a major shift in which we will

get critical of all sorts of things

0:46:000:46:05

that have been going on, maybe even

to the discomfort of you?

I don't

0:46:050:46:09

know. It is possible. It is also

possible that it could be another

0:46:090:46:14

occasion for people to stand up in

public and say how good they are. I

0:46:140:46:18

was at the cinema at the weekend and

I had to sit through a pre-film film

0:46:180:46:26

watcher with all sorts of great and

good person saying they were against

0:46:260:46:30

something like this. Sure, they can

say that, but the problem -- the

0:46:300:46:36

question is, do they really oppose

the changes in our society which

0:46:360:46:39

have taken place over the last 40 or

50 years which lead to this? We used

0:46:390:46:44

to have a situation where there was

lifelong marriage

0:46:440:46:55

lifelong marriage and the

respectable chastity. These are

0:46:550:46:59

supposedly respectable people

behaving in a very disrespectful way

0:46:590:47:02

in an expensive London hotel.

Theresa May has said that she

0:47:020:47:06

thought that kind of objectification

of women in this case had been left

0:47:060:47:10

behind. She talks about it and it

obviously hasn't because we have lap

0:47:100:47:15

dancing clubs all over the place,

the Chippendales performing, it's

0:47:150:47:18

not just women.

The people who own

them used to give money to the

0:47:180:47:23

Conservative Party.

I don't know if

they still do. Will we see a shift

0:47:230:47:27

away from a gentrification? -- a

shift away from objectification?

I'm

0:47:270:47:36

not sure. It would have to be an

enormous shift. What is it that the

0:47:360:47:45

and I have to call them this

politically correct critics in this

0:47:450:47:49

case, what is it that we need in law

to prevent this happening again?

0:47:490:47:56

Now, defence spending has

been in the news again

0:47:560:47:59

after Sir Nick Carter,

head of the army, warned

0:47:590:48:01

earlier this week that Britain's

military risked falling behind that

0:48:010:48:04

of its potential enemies

without additional investment.

0:48:040:48:05

His comments come amid widespread

speculation about possible cuts

0:48:050:48:08

to personnel and equipment and calls

to increase defence spending to 3%

0:48:080:48:10

of GDP from some MPs.

0:48:100:48:12

But what about Trident -

out nuclear missile deterrent -

0:48:120:48:14

which will soon need replacing?

0:48:140:48:15

Would the money spent

on a replacement be

0:48:150:48:17

better spent elsewhere?

0:48:170:48:21

Here's my guest of the day,

Peter Hitchens, on his soapbox.

0:48:210:48:27

Britain's defence policy

is like a man who spends so much

0:48:350:48:38

on insuring himself against alien

abduction that he can't afford

0:48:380:48:41

cover for fire and theft.

0:48:410:48:44

Army chiefs have been warning this

week that our conventional defences

0:48:440:48:48

are frighteningly short

of equipment, men and money.

0:48:480:48:52

But what they won't say in public

is that a major reason

0:48:520:48:55

for the squeeze is the vast expense

of building four new Trident

0:48:550:49:00

submarines, leviathans,

hugely bigger than this 1960s relic,

0:49:000:49:04

HMS Ocelot, veteran of countless

top secret missions

0:49:040:49:12

against the Soviet Union.

0:49:130:49:16

Unlike Ocelot here, the new Trident

boats are museum pieces before

0:49:160:49:19

they've even been laid down.

0:49:190:49:20

Like her, they're Cold War

weapons but built 30 years

0:49:200:49:23

after the Cold War ended.

0:49:230:49:27

Elaborate, complex and huge,

they were designed to deter

0:49:270:49:33

the enormous Soviet armies

in East Germany, which

0:49:330:49:35

long ago melted away.

0:49:350:49:37

And they're a superpower weapon,

decades after we cease

0:49:370:49:40

to be any such thing.

0:49:400:49:41

If we were a superpower,

we could make our own missiles

0:49:410:49:44

rather than lease them from the USA,

as we more or less do.

0:49:440:49:51

Israel, a country with many

irreconcilable enemies and under far

0:49:520:49:56

more risk of attack than we are,

doesn't have anything

0:49:560:49:59

like so elaborate or costly.

0:49:590:50:02

So, why should we?

0:50:020:50:04

The choice isn't between

Trident and nothing.

0:50:040:50:12

The new submarines will come

in at somewhere between £31

0:50:190:50:22

billion over 35 years -

the government estimate -

0:50:220:50:28

or £175 million, if you DON'T

believe the government estimates,

0:50:280:50:31

as I tend not to do.

0:50:310:50:36

You can't help thinking that some

of this money will come out of funds

0:50:360:50:40

that could otherwise be spent

on usable, conventional weapons.

0:50:400:50:48

The Tories, and Labour Blairites,

think Trident is a very useful

0:50:480:50:53

weapon with which to attack Jeremy

Corbyn.

0:50:530:50:57

But everyone in government knows

that many in the military privately

0:50:570:51:05

think it a vainglorious

waste of money.

0:51:050:51:07

Field Marshal Lord Bramall,

too old to care what politicians say

0:51:070:51:10

or do, openly says what many

in the military can only think -

0:51:100:51:13

that we should get rid of it.

0:51:130:51:17

Nobody can call Lord Bramall

a pacifist or a defeatist.

0:51:170:51:19

He's living proof that

there's a good, hard,

0:51:190:51:24

patriotic argument for disposing

of this usable monstrosity, before

0:51:240:51:32

-- unusable monstrosity, before

it destroys our real defence system.

0:51:380:51:45

And we are joined in the studio now

by the chair of the Defence Select

0:51:450:51:50

Committee and of course Peter

Hitchens is still here. Thank you

0:51:500:51:52

very much for coming in, Julian

Lewis. What did you make of Peter

0:51:520:51:56

Hitchens argument there that

basically the money being spent on

0:51:560:51:59

Trident would be much better spent

on conventional weapons and building

0:51:590:52:04

up the army.

Unfortunately, we are

nowhere near of spending enough on

0:52:040:52:10

defence irrespective of the

contribution that Trident's

0:52:100:52:12

expenditure of 31 £241 billion spent

over a considerable number of years

0:52:120:52:19

would make any difference to. I

always say to anyone using this

0:52:190:52:25

argument, if you think that we would

scoop up the money that otherwise

0:52:250:52:29

would be spent on our ultimate

insurance policy against nuclear

0:52:290:52:32

aggression, namely the Trident, if

even call that would go back into

0:52:320:52:41

defence, you are being unrealistic.

We have a commitment to spend 2% of

0:52:410:52:45

GDP on defence as part of our Nato

membership, so surely the money for

0:52:450:52:50

Trident would have to go back in?

The 2% commitment gets right to the

0:52:500:52:55

heart of the issue. The 2%

commitment is nowhere near enough.

0:52:550:52:59

In the ten long years of the Blair

government, I was shadow defence

0:52:590:53:04

Minister for the Conservatives and I

spent a lot of time arguing that

0:53:040:53:07

they weren't spending enough when

they were spending 2.5% of GDP. Even

0:53:070:53:14

when, Peter's point and it's a good

point, that the Cold War came to an

0:53:140:53:18

end at the end of the 1980s, then we

were

0:53:180:53:28

were spending 4.5% on defence. Even

after we took the peace dividend

0:53:280:53:32

cuts, in 1995 to 1996 we were

spending 3%. This would be a drop in

0:53:320:53:41

the ocean and we would be losing our

ultimate insurance policy.

Peter.

A

0:53:410:53:47

lot of things are a drop in the

ocean, if you like. The army is

0:53:470:53:52

suffering from a serious recruitment

crisis and I think one of the issues

0:53:520:53:55

that if they have closed out what's

up their recruitment officers. The

0:53:550:53:58

cost is tiny and it is trivial in

itself, but the Army now is smaller

0:53:580:54:09

than France was allowed after being

defeated after Germany. The Navy is

0:54:090:54:17

in a terrible crisis because of many

things, not just the overspending on

0:54:170:54:21

aircraft carriers that we can't use

and the fact that all these ships

0:54:210:54:25

don't work and can't move. It also

doesn't have enough people and it

0:54:250:54:28

has been losing over the years many

experienced NCO type people of the

0:54:280:54:34

type we can't replace and these are

not expensive things, but the drain

0:54:340:54:37

of money into Trident is one of the

main reasons why these things are

0:54:370:54:41

happening and will continue to

happen for 30 years to come. The

0:54:410:54:45

question is, do we need this thing?

Also, I think it's part of national

0:54:450:54:50

growing up. We really do need to

understand that we are an important

0:54:500:54:54

country but we're not a superpower

and we should start behaving as one.

0:54:540:55:00

We have the chance to pull out

before renewing it at fast expense

0:55:000:55:04

and that would be a very useful

moment of recognition of what we

0:55:040:55:08

really need to be. What do we really

need an army for? What do we need an

0:55:080:55:13

army for? What do we need a before?

What shape should they have? But

0:55:130:55:18

that needs a moment of profound

reflection. The fact the Cold War is

0:55:180:55:24

over would be a good starting point

for that discussion. I am sure we

0:55:240:55:28

could spend more, but within what we

do spend, transferring the money we

0:55:280:55:32

spend on this to conventional force

would make more sense.

Can I just

0:55:320:55:41

say, we were not a superpower at any

point during the Cold War and we

0:55:410:55:45

spent on average 5% of GDP on

defence.

But Peter's point is not

0:55:450:55:53

about spending. It's about nuclear

weapons as a status symbol.

I hope I

0:55:530:55:58

have established that our defence

spending is so woefully low that

0:55:580:56:01

until we get to the point where we

have the Defence Secretary, and we

0:56:010:56:05

might just have one now, who is

prepared to say that we need to be

0:56:050:56:09

spending more in the order of 3% of

GDP, this sort of argument will make

0:56:090:56:13

no realistic difference. And you

know what, Michael Fallon who

0:56:130:56:18

defended the government blind

through all his years of -- as

0:56:180:56:22

Secretary of State for Defence now

have an article saying, do you know

0:56:220:56:26

what, we need to be spending at

least 2.5% of GDP? I think we are

0:56:260:56:31

winning that argument, Peter, let's

not divert onto Trident for the

0:56:310:56:35

money point of view. The argument

for Trident is simple. It is not to

0:56:350:56:40

deter the major armies of the Soviet

Union during the Cold War. Trident

0:56:400:56:44

is to ensure that no country can

ever be misled into thinking that it

0:56:440:56:48

could blackmail us into surrender by

the threat of using nuclear weapons

0:56:480:56:53

against us

0:56:530:56:59

against us which we would have no

means of retaliating for. Even one

0:56:590:57:01

Trident submarine is able to inflict

such damage in retaliation, not only

0:57:010:57:04

is it unacceptable, it is

unavoidable. It is not a panacea, it

0:57:040:57:10

does not meet...

I disagree with

you.

I will continue if I can. It

0:57:100:57:19

does not deter every form of

military threat but what it does do

0:57:190:57:22

is deter military attack which you

would not be capable of defending

0:57:220:57:30

against without it.

As you well

know, British nuclear weapons were

0:57:300:57:36

initially

0:57:360:57:41

initially developed after discussion

with the Americans, due to a

0:57:410:57:49

situation where they were made very

angry. The building was specifically

0:57:490:57:55

to demonstrate that we were still

important. Then this deal was

0:57:550:58:01

dependent on the Americans for our

missiles. Then it became an issue of

0:58:010:58:05

whether we could describe -- destroy

Moscow. The initiation of these were

0:58:050:58:11

so we could continue to destroy

Moscow. These submarines...

We won't

0:58:110:58:20

have to leave it there. Thank you

very much for coming in, Julian

0:58:200:58:24

Lewis.

0:58:240:58:25

There's just time before we go

to find out the answer to our quiz.

0:58:250:58:28

The question was which world famous

politician did Donald Trump say

0:58:280:58:31

Theresa May could be like?

0:58:310:58:32

Was it:

0:58:320:58:33

A) Winston Churchill

0:58:330:58:34

B) Margaret Thatcher

0:58:340:58:35

C) Ronald Reagan

0:58:350:58:36

or D) Neville Chamberlain?

0:58:360:58:37

So Peter, what's the correct answer?

0:58:370:58:39

I don't know, but when they are

being rude to other politicians,

0:58:390:58:43

they normally say Neville

Chamberlain. But probably Winston

0:58:430:58:47

Churchill.

Apparently it was Winston

Churchill. He had just watched a

0:58:470:58:54

film and apparently said Theresa May

have the potential to be just like

0:58:540:58:57

him.

0:58:570:58:58

That's all for today.

0:58:580:58:59

Thanks to our guests.

0:58:590:59:01

The one o'clock news is starting

over on BBC One now.

0:59:010:59:03

Bye bye.

0:59:030:59:05

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS