25/01/2018 Daily Politics


25/01/2018

Sarah Smith is joined by Peter Hitchens to discuss Theresa May's visit to Davos and the continuing fallout from the Presidents Club event.


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

Sarah Smith is joined by Mail on Sunday columnist Peter Hitchens. They discuss Theresa May's visit to Davos and the continuing fallout from the Presidents Club event. Labour's Jon Ashworth and Andrew Murrison from the Conservatives discuss the future of the NHS, and Baroness Warsi talks about Sarah Khan's appointment as head of the Commission for Countering Extremism.


Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS