31/01/2018 Daily Politics

Morning, folks, welcome

to the Daily Politics.

I'm not a quitter, declares

Theresa May 35,000 feet

in the air en route to China.

She says the government just needs

to make more of its achievements.

Will that really satisfy

her myriad Tory critics

despairing of her leadership?

Just 14 months until

Britain leaves the EU.

Maybe under 12 months

if a deal is to be done.

-- nine months.

So is there any hope either Labour

or Tory parties will let us know

soon what the UK's future

relationship with the EU should be?

Labour's leader in the London

Borough of Haringey stands down

accusing her critics of "sexism,

bullying and undemocratic

behaviour".

Did allies of Jeremy

Corbyn force her out?

And it's Prime Minister's Questions,

without the Prime Minister.

We'll bring you Lidington

versus Thornberry live at midday.

All that in the next 90 minutes

of public service broadcasting

at its very finest and it may be

the B team in the Commons today,

but it's the A team here

in the Daily Politics studio.

OK, A minus, or B plus!

Foreign Office Minister Mark

Field and Shadow Brexit

Minister, Jenny Chapman.

I'm glad you're not in China!

So Theresa May's on her much

anticipated trip to China

with a 50-strong trade

delegation in tow including BP

and Jaguar Land Rover,

as well as small firms

and universities including

Manchester and Liverpool.

She's holding talks

with Chinese President Xi Jinping,

they will talk about trade

and investment, but the PM

says she will also raise

the issue of human rights.

I'm sure the Chinese will look

forward to that!

Mrs May told reporters travelling

with her to China that

"I'm not a quitter."

but that the Conservatives "need

to ensure that we do speak

about the achievements

that we've seen".

Here's what she had to say

at a press conference earlier today.

Yes, we do need to do more,

and we do need to ensure

that we are talking

about what we have already achieved

to those young people who worry

about whether they'll

get their own home, to those

parents who are concerned

about the education their children

will be getting, to people

who are worried about the jobs

for the future for their children,

and that's what we will be

doing and I'm committed

to delivering on that.

Let's talk to our political editor,

Laura Kuenssberg who is in Beijing.

Exactly what achievements should you

be talking about, Mark Fielding?

We

have got the lowest unemployed for

40 years, the highest number of

people ever in employment, despite

all of the clear uncertainty in the

Brexit negotiations, we have now got

a real growth, better growth than

anticipated in the economy.

But

lower than might have been expected.

I don't think that's the case at

all...

Lover growth than almost

anyone in the G-7.

We were heading

into a massive recession, that was

what we were told in advance. It was

the government, --.

It was the

government, the Treasury who said

that.

And independent body. But we

are paying down the deficit more

quickly than we thought.

So why

aren't you talking more about it?

I

wish we were. There I say it, the

one and only question that your

correspondent asked Theresa May in

Beijing was to do with the tittle

tattle and triviality of British

parliament, rather than the strong

relationship of China, why she is

there and bringing not just

professional and financial services

but people from education, it

renders the important business in

the future, we have 150,000 Chinese

students in the UK. This is the good

news story globally and in the UK.

When she entered Downing Street, on

the steps, she talked about tackling

the burning injustices in Britain.

What burning injustice have you

extend grid? -- extinguished?

What

she says, the sense of that

vision... What have you done? It is

difficult without having a majority

to drive legislation. She also said

this was an issue for not just a

short-term parliament, these are

issues that we have to face for

decades ahead. In relation to what

we are trying to do to make work

pay, all the controversy about

Universal Credit, making work pay is

an important part.

In what way has

the Commons stopped you crowds back

from extinction burning injustice?

This is a long-term programme, the

notion that this would happen in a

matter of months...

So nothing has

happened yet?

A lot is going on

behind the scenes, I speak to a lot

of my colleagues in ministries and

they have exciting plans and I hope

we will be able to bring other

political parties with us to get

legislation through.

You talk about

the press concentrating on what you

described article title, this is a

serious question of the leadership

of your party, by your party, an

ex-Tory minister says policy making

with the speed of a tortoise. Tory

grandees Nicholas Soames, this

government is dull, dull, dull.

Another Cabinet minister says, we

are run by vision this mediocrity.

That is your own site.

Andrew, you

will remember in the dim and distant

past that I had my differences with

the leadership, so I can understand

colleagues being frustrated if they

are known part of the team. Need to

look beyond -- if they are no longer

part of the team. We need to look

beyond the tittle tattle of

politics. We have a difficult

process to get through Brexit which

needs to happen, and the resilience

and sense of duty which Theresa May

shows, my constituents writes to me

and they do not say, we want a

leadership election, they admire her

resilience and sense of duty.

Let's

come onto the labour problems with

the leader leadership. Claire Kober

is the leader of the Haringey

Council, she is going to resign,

local elections in May. She had

talked about being the victim from

within the own party of sexism,

bullying, undemocratic behaviour and

outright personal attacks. Why is

there sexism, bullying, undemocratic

behaviour and outright personal

attacks into a's Labour Party?

First

of all I want to say that I'm very

sad to see Claire Kober go in the

way that she has. And her statement

and the things that she said since

submitting her resignation letter

are very, very serious.

These are

serious allegations. So does there

need to be a formal party

investigation?

I believe there does,

there ought to be an investigation

and we ought to get to the bottom of

this and that is quite apart from

the controversy around the housing

project about which I know

insufficiently to comment about. I

think on the issue of her

resignation and the circumstances

around it, if there has been the

behaviour that she alleges,...

She

wouldn't make it up, but she? She is

the most prominent Labour woman, I

think in the current climate, the

fact that she is a woman subject to

all this makes it more, poignant

because we have a number of women in

other fields being subjected to this

from Hollywood to other areas of

public life. She's the most dominant

Labour woman in local government and

she's effectively being handed out

by people in her own party.

So it

needs to be investigated. I don't

know what the nature of the bullying

or any harassment may have been, if

you can draw a parallel in things

that have happened in other areas of

work, I believe there ought to be

robust physical debate and challenge

in the Labour Party.

No one is

arguing with that.

There is a

dissension between that and what she

is alleging.

There should be a quick

investigation. Who should do it?

Which part of the Labour Party?

The

NEC.

But the NEC is in the hands of

people she has been on the wrong end

of.

They are responsible for making

sure that this kind of behaviour

does not take part anywhere in the

party.

Would you think that the NEC

could do a proper investigation in

this position? 21 Labour councillors

have either been deselected or are

standing down in May when the next

elections take place. And they have

been replaced, essentially, by

Momentum coup, seemingly with the

backing of the NEC.

There is a big

difference between challenge,

deselection, the proper democratic

processes of the Labour Party being

used to alter a choice of candidate

which happens, that is not and an

usual thing to take place, maybe an

usual to this extent. But I maybe it

is unusual to this extent. There is

a difference between that and what

she has alleged.

Do you think Claire

Kober would be satisfied with an

investigation led by today's NEC?

That's for her to say. If it's not

to be the NEC, it would you say

should do it?

She has criticised for

this process, the NEC, for this

process going on. The NEC had

intervened in what her council has

been doing, she has criticised that.

Surely it's hardly an impartial body

to investigate what has been

happening there in terms of sexism,

bullying and personal attacks.

Whatever the make-up of the NEC,

those people serving the party in

that capacity needs to step up and

take responsibility and conduct a

thorough, impartial investigation.

If they cannot do that, the rest of

the Labour Party will see that in a

very dim light, no matter which side

of the odd that they place

themselves on.

Final question, --

which side of the argument that they

place themselves on. Has any of the

Labour Shadow Cabinet criticised

this behaviour?

Andrew Gwynne is

going into try and mediate.

He

hasn't criticised the behaviour.

I

don't think that having anybody of

prominence, casting their opinion

about this at this stage, is

especially helpful. I hope that

Claire, and I think she is and I am

sure she is, is getting support from

colleagues in local government and I

think the right thing for prominent

people in the Labour Party to do now

is to say yes, there needs to be an

investigation to support that, make

sure it's done thoroughly.

I think

she has been very fair, it's worth

pointing out that this whole thing

began essentially because the Labour

council wanted to work with a

private body to get 6000 more homes

very urgently required for local

people. Eventually ideology for

Momentum has trumped the interest of

local people.

I think you are

overstocking...

Whether that is true

or not.

That is not the issue.

Nothing justifies her issue. We all

have robust debate but we do not go

down this road. We have to move on.

Now, Labour are going to force

a binding vote in the Commons today,

calling on the government to publish

the assessments of the economic

impact of Brexit that

were leaked yesterday.

The vote would force the government

to release the papers

to the Brexit Select Committee.

And the leak has prompted more

soul-searching about Brexit on both

sides of the House -

here's Elizabeth Glinka to explain.

Civil servants have been beavering

away, and the leaked analysis

suggests that under three different

models of a future relationship,

the UK's GDP in 15 years' time

would be between two and 8% lower

than if Brexit never happened.

But Brexit Minister Steve Baker said

the assessments didn't consider

the implications of the bespoke deal

the government wants with the EU.

And he said that regardless,

government forecasts were "always

wrong, and wrong for good reasons".

Labour has led calls

for publication but the criticism

was echoed by some Tories,

including Justice

Minister Phillip Lee.

Who said "we can't just

dismiss this and move on",

adding that if the figures

were anywhere near right,

there'd be a "serious question"

to be asked about the government's

current Brexit policy.

While former Brexit Minister Lord

Bridges criticised the government

for having no answers

to "basic, critical questions".

And saying he feared

all we will get by October

when both sides want a draft

deal to be done is more

"meaningless waffle".

But it's not only Theresa May

who is getting it from her own side.

The Labour leadership has also been

castigated in recent days

for alleged fence-sitting on Brexit.

With MPs from the Labour Campaign

for the Single Market arguing

that the party had so far "failed

to reach a common and

coherent position".

Andrew, back to you.

Mark Field, these forecasts that

were leaked, do we take them

seriously?

They are draft forecasts

and they only had forecast

fibrillation to an off-the-shelf

model as opposed to the bespoke

model...

There were three different

models.

They are all off-the-shelf

options that we have got him play.

Given the range, from two to 8%

drop, imagine six points the other

way, that makes growth of four

point.

So we shouldn't take them

seriously?

It's not about that...

With the point if we don't take --

what is the point if we don't take

them seriously?

I get a lot of

opinions coming my way because I am

a minister, some of them will be

draft forecasts and you use your own

judgment. Of course you take

seriously everything that comes

through.

So should they be published

when they are finalised draft so

that we can use our judgment quite

like we have a debate in the house

today and we of course will.

And we

of course will...

Will government

oppose this?

We are going to

abstain, we will be in the debate

but it will get through. It will be

published and the big caveat is that

these are draft they do not take

account of the desired outcome, the

bespoke deal.

Will you publish the

draft or publish when the draft is

finished?

It makes sense to try and

get as much of the draft published

as early avoid as possible. The

difficulty with this...

It's MS?

It

will look a mess because it will not

look as

look as though it's a government

document that official.

But we don't

know what the government is trying

to achieve. That's part of the

problem. George Bridges, former

Brexit minister, he said, there is

no bridge to a clear destination,

just a gangplank into thin air. And

that your own sign.

I'm sorry he

feels that way because I think the

Florence speech made it clear that

we are a large country within the

EU, the notion therefore of having a

deal that is the same as Norway over

the operation of 5 million, that

recover the population of 5 million

or Switzerland, or Iceland, is a

nonstarter. We want a specific book

deal.

So what should that consist

of? -- bespoke deal.

There are whole

range of services, financial

services, close to my own heart, the

importance of London as a whole

sold...

So what does the government

want in financial services, what

should we want as a country?

Of his

open to negotiation.

I know that.

But in any negotiation you make your

demand, you put your position so

what is it?

I will not announce it

on this programme because it is a

fluid situation. We speak to people

in the city and they are used to the

idea of having almighty sessions

before a deal gets done. We will

have debate and discussion on this

matter right through until March 20

19. I don't think we should be

fearful of that. That is the way

which negotiations are done.

The on Soomin Lee important areas,

you cannot tell us what the

Government's end goal is. -- on so

many important areas. Not

necessarily the negotiations for

what you're striving for.

If you

start telling everyone what the end

goal was, you would give away

your...

You have to tell the other

side or you can't negotiate it

A

huge amount of negotiation has gone

on. If I were sitting moments ago,

you would say it was all calamitous

and everything was going to collapse

and just before Christmas we submit

got through stage one, there was a

sense of making progress on the

important areas that needed to get

decided before stage two began.

Labour's pushing this economic

assessment to be published. Why do

you put so much store on forecasts

from people whose previous forecasts

were so far out?

We think of the

Government has commissioned this

work but it must be putting some

store by. We expected to be of a

reasonable quality, especially given

that initially we were told it was

in excruciating detail, then we were

told it didn't exist, then something

was published which was at best

superficial. Now we find there is

something, thanks to Buzzfeed, and

we want to know what it is.

That is

the site that leaked it. Do you put

much store... These are the people,

the Treasury. They said that

unemployment would rise - progress

was their forecast- if we voted to

leave, between 0.5 million and

820,000. That was the range. And it

would be a quick rise. The 01 5

million would probably happen before

Christmas of 2016 to adopt what

actually happened?

We want these

papers...

What actually happened?

We

all know what happened to.

Just tell

us for those who don't. An

employment continued to fall.

If you

take that argument, you would never

bother looking at any forecast or

evidence. We want to be able to

interrogate and challenge the

forecasts and if we think the data

used is incorrect or insufficient or

been overinterpreted, we will be

able to debate that but at the

moment all we have is a partial leak

and the Brexit ministers are saying,

"Well, this is a partial league,

doesn't really matter, isn't

important," and in the very same

breath are using...

Let's come onto

Labour's permit the whoa position.

The Government has been criticised

not being clear. You were asked on

ITV about Labour's position and what

once side user, "I do think people

are capable of getting their heads

around this. What we are saying is

that we want the benefits of the

single market but that we are uneasy

about accepting all of the laughter.

We want the benefits of the single

market and our constituents and said

very clearly in voting to leave that

there are aspects of membership they

are not content with, that's why

it's a negotiation" it business you

clarifying Labour's position. Would

you like another go?

No, I think

that do the job very well. What we

are saying is that we want the

benefits of the single market and

the is that we want the benefits of

the single market and the customs

union, but to ignore the fact that

there was a clear message from many

people about free movement of labour

would be just to stick hands over

our ears and pretend...

Is it your

position that we should stay as

members of the single market?

Well,

without getting too legalistic about

it, we are going to need a new

treaty, so you can't just stay as

members of the single market because

we are members by virtue of our

membership of the EU, which ends up

the end of March next year, so we

need a new treaty.

Sure that new

treaty include membership of the

single market?

Won't include

membership of the single market

because it will be a new treaty and

we won't be members of the same way

that we are now. How closely we dock

the single market, for a better way

of putting it, needs to be

negotiated. There are some aspects

of membership that I don't think the

country is content with and that we

would want to negotiate around.

Powers that different from the

Government's position?

Because the

Government has taken membership of

the single market and the customs

union of the table and the Labour

Party hasn't.

So you might still be

members of the single market?

We

have said we will accept a

transitional period on the same

terms have now it that is very

different to what the Government

same, although I will say it is very

hard to square the circle of the end

of the phase one negotiations and

the very serious, solemn commitments

that were made there, and the

Florens speech, which says that

we're not going to be part of these

institutions. How can we have it

both ways?

I still don't have any

idea whether Labour thinks we should

stay members not after the

transition period. On the transition

period, will we stay members of the

single market during the transition

period?

I don't noted that is

something we are going to be

debating.

Government is about to

begin negotiations. Don't you need

to have your position determined?

You're quite right, beginning

negotiations, not ending.

You can't

begin negotiations if you don't know

what you're going to us.

I think it

is clear that what will command the

majority of the public is something

that is compatible with the about to

leave the EU and that means we

cannot remain members of the single

market or the customs...

During the

transition?

Afterwards. Obviously, I

think the public out there want to

see as many of the benefits and

advantages...

You are both saying

that but at least Labour has been, I

think, still very unclear on the end

stage but clearer than you are on

the transition because you would

stay in the single market for the

transition as members and you do

stay in the customs union. Will we

stay in the customs union for the

transition?

I think there will have

to be some issue around Ireland.

After we joined the EEC in 1973 of

the height of the troubles, Ireland

and the UK came together and the

interconnection between our two

countries remains as strong as ever

but then needs to be some, dare I

say, fudged deal in relation to

Ireland's.

I'm very pleased to hear

you say that.

The Cabinet

subcommittee that was meant to

discuss this on Monday, the papers

were withdrawn still we still don't

know. One final thing. Will free

movement as we currently have it

continue for the transition period?

I don't know. I suspect...

You don't

know? You are in the Foreign Office.

It is part of a negotiation.

I've

done negotiations, I don't know if

you have. So how it works is, one

side says, "This is what we would

like," and the other side says,

"This is what we would like," and

then you negotiate to try to bring

the two sides together. But if you

don't tell us, "This is what we

would like," how do you negotiate?

There was no settled position and it

will be part parcel of the

negotiations.

A referendum was in

June you triggered Article 50, up

for a year ago, you've done phase

one of the negotiations, based two

is about to start and you still

cannot tell us your position on some

of the most fundamental issues?

There was no settled position on the

transition period, at which point

free movement as we have it will

then. It will end at some point

between 2019 and the end of the

transition period.

We will have to

end this conversation now. Probably

a relief! 4-ball reporting and

analysis Brexit, check out the BBC

News website... -- for more

reporting.

Now, you're having the builders in -

but should you put up with the dust

and rubble to keep and eye

on them or move out and let

them get on with it?

Do you just move down the road

or would a few years in the country

widen your horizons?

What about those elderly relatives

in the House of Lords -

should they stay put?

Then there are all the interior

finishes to decide on -

should it be marble or granite

in the bathrooms?

Decisions, decisions.

Perhaps, when they vote

on plans for the restoration

and refurbishment of the Palace

of Westminster this afternoon,

MPs should just put the whole thing

off until 2022, at least,

and settle down to a nice

cup of builder's tea in the classic,

un-refurbished Daily Politics mug.

All you need to do is tell

us when this happened.

MUSIC: Crazy In Love by Beyonce

The quiet man is here to stay

and he's turning up the volume.

CHEERING AND APPLAUSE

MUSIC: Sound Of The Underground

by Girls Aloud

We've never, ever marched before.

I've never been on a march before.

# When the girls get down

to the sound of the radio #.

# I don't know what it is that

makes me feel like this

# I don't know who you are

# But you must be some

kind of superstar #.

May the peace of God,

our Father, be upon this House

and upon this country.

# Father, Father, Father,

help us

# Need some

guidance from above

# Cos people got me,

got me questioning

# Where is the love?

# Where is the love?

# Where is the love?

# Where is the love #.

# I think I'd better leave right now

# Before I fall any deeper

# I think I'd better leave right now

# I'm feeling weaker and weaker

# Somebody better show me out

# Before I fall any deeper

# I think I'd better leave

right now

# Yes, I will

# I think I'd better

leave right now #.

To be in with a chance of winning

a Daily Politics mug,

send your answer to our special

quiz e-mail address -

that's [email protected]

Entries must arrive by 12.30 today,

and you can see the full terms

and conditions for Guess

The Year on our website -

that's bbc.co.uk/dailypolitics

It's coming up to midday here -

just take a look at Big Ben -

and that can mean only one thing.

Yes, Prime Minister's

Questions is on its way.

It is without the Prime Minister

because she is in China. She could

have done it by Skype, I suppose!

Probably the Wi-Fi is not strong

enough in the House of Commons. Our

deputy political editor jumpy and I

see it. Laura Kuenssberg is with the

Prime Minister. We will see what

comes about PMQs. This vote on

restoring parliament and there was a

decision as to whether it closes

down and they all move on for quite

a long period, or do they try to do

it while they are still in, which

will probably be even more

expensive. Either way, a

multi-million pound project.

And it

decision as to whether you can

quickly on spending millions of

pounds on doing at the Palace of

Westminster or you say, let's Paul

Davison principle and then come back

and talk about it later on.

and talk about it later on. The

government seems to be curiously

reluctant to commit to billions of

pounds in a hurry to this building.

Practically, it would be difficult

to make such a movement but we are

all aware that politicians and the

Palace of Westminster is not the

highest regard with a lot people now

and so talking about spending

billions on anything like a hurry

will not go down well in this time

of well, some disregard for politics

and politicians.

It is the most

famous parliamentary building in the

world, it is a UNESCO World Heritage

site. For those who don't think we

need to refurbish it, what would

they have us do? Just let it crumble

to dust on the banks of the Thames?

What would that say of this country?

There was no plan to leave it alone

and just let it rotten to dust on

the side of the River Thames. There

was an idea to keep the rolling

repairs going on, which been going

on for so long. You walk around the

Palace of Westminster and get into

the sellers and attics and you can

really see the state of the place. A

lot of work really needs to be done

and you can carry on doing that but

it is a hugely iconic building, one

of the most famous not just

Parliamentary buildings but

buildings on the planet. It is a

source applied to the country. I'm

at risk of sounding like an advocate

of getting on and doing the job

done. Bovo Blade Runner is pretty

much exactly that. Let's bite the

bullet and get on with it. It may

not be passed but even if that is

the case, we will carry on talking

and watching.

Is it a free vote or

is it a government vote?

It is a

free vote, so Andrea Leadsom, the

Leader of the House of Commons, is

putting down this, saying, should we

captured up on web or do this big,

big job, which as you carry on

talking? Chris Bryant and some big

Labour MPs are saying, enough

faffing about, let's just commit now

to what we should do.

What would you

do?

I would commit to get with it. I

don't fancy decamping. I think we

should commit to doing it and we

will work around it it up it will be

a bit of a building site.

I

understand it is that imperative

that John rightly points out of

spending millions of pounds but it

is iconic building.

Not being a

builder myself, I would take the

advice that we are being given that

we all need to clear out of it, do

the work is clearly and sadly as

possible.

And then you can't go back

in.

Nobody agrees with me that we

ought to move Parliament to the

north-east of England that have a

bit of out the glory.

Nobody agrees

with that. Wires that?

I can't

imagine. We seem to be stuck in

London.

Well, it is the capital.

Given that, I am having to reconcile

myself to moving out and then

hopefully being elected again and

going back in.

There is a building

that has been empty for a while,

quite a new building, the Department

of Health on Whitehall.

There are

one or two possibilities very near

to where we are sitting now.

Building over by the Supreme Court

has been discussed, then there was

was talk of going to Birmingham, and

if there, why not Darlington, why

not Chesterfield? There will be lots

of voices calling for all sorts of

movement and that argument is going

to carry on.

What is the cost? I've

seen a figure, 6 billion.

Roughly 6

billion is the figure, if there is

such a thing is roughly 6 billion. I

remember when 6 billion was a lot of

money but it is being discussed. The

repairs on the Victoria Tower, the

real cost was double the estimate.

We will go straight over to the

Commons for David Lidington and

Emily Thornberry.

A number of Carillion employ use and

former in please live in my

constituency and indeed, the company

has a training centre in Gateshead

-- Carillion employees. Will the

government act now to correct a

similar future corporate theft where

private directors have siphoned off

what should have been millions of

pounds in pension contributions to

pay bogus dividend and unearned

corporate bonuses to themselves?

What action does the government

propose to take?

First of all, Mr

Speaker, I completely understand the

anxiety that must be affecting the

apprentices and their families in

the honourable gentleman's

constituency. He probably heard me

say Jerry last week's debates that

the construction industry training

board had taken responsibility for

finding alternative employers to

enable all those in apprentices who

were with Carillion to continue and

complete their qualifications. They

are making good progress in that

work but I shall certainly insure

that the particular concern he has

concerned about Gateshead is brought

to their attention. On the broader

question, the House will understand

that it will be wrong for me to

pre-empt findings by an independent

inquiry by the official receiver but

we have already made clear that we

will be publishing proposals later

this year to stop directors being

able to siphon off pension funds in

any way that he described.

Mr

Speaker, my right honourable friend

will be aware that the country faces

significant cyber threats from other

countries and from non-state actors.

He will also be aware that we are

protected from those by our security

and intelligence services including

the men and women at GCHQ in my own

county of Gloucestershire. When the

government publishes the results of

the security review, will he confirm

that we will continue as we have

since 2010 two invest in those

capabilities to keep our country

safe?

Mr Speaker, my right

honourable friend is absolutely

correct and I'm happy to give him

that assurance on behalf of the

government. The sad truth is, in

this country, we face a growing

threat of cyber attacks from States,

serious crime gangs and hacking

groups. We do have a robust strategy

to protect services such as our

democratic process is underpinned by

2 billion in government investment.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Let me start

by welcoming the minister back to

his role but diving from the Prime

Minister. Last time he did so in

December 2016, his party was 17

points ahead in the polls, and he

told the House that the Labour Party

was, I quote, quarrelling like the

film mutiny on the Bounty, reshot by

the team who made carry on. Well,

what a difference a year makes!

Oh,

how the tables have turned!

how the tables have turned!

But I'm

not going to intrude further on the

government's private grief because I

genuinely hope that we can reach

consensus across this house today on

a very important issue. Next Tuesday

will beat the centenary of women

gaining the right to vote in

Britain, followed later in 1918 by a

second right, to stand for

Parliament. I'm sure the minister

will agree that we have a long way

to go in regard to the second right.

After all, I am the only Emily

elected since 1918, and he is one of

155 Davids. And the women behind me

on these benches represent one

quarter of all the women elected in

the last 100 years but it is still

not good enough. So does the

Minister think, will the Minister

tell us how he can best increase

female representation in this house?

Mr Speaker, can I first of all thank

the right honourable lady for her

worlds of welcome and clearly my

previous remarks struck a chord with

her to have been treasured in the

way that they clearly have. It's a

delight to me to see the right

honourable lady still in her place

when no fewer than 97 members of her

front bench have either been sacked

or resigned since we took office.

JEERING.

You know, I play credit to her

sticking power though she must

sometimes whisper to myself, surely

I'm a celebrity, please get me out

of here!

The point that she raised is a

serious one. And I think that all

political parties represented here,

she's right to seek to make this

conceptual, wants to encourage more

women candidates to come forward. I

am played that my party, since I was

first elected to 25 years ago, has

made very considerable progress but

I also accept that there is more to

be done. I hope that she for her

part will accept that we have now

had two women leaders and by

minister so they have a bit of

catching up to do.

I've got to say,

Mr Speaker, that if the party

opposite is so proud of having a

female leader, why are so many of

them trying to get rid of her? And

why has she had to run away to China

to get away from them? But I thank

him for that answer and I totally

agree with your sentiment. But let

me ask him also about the first

right that I mentioned. I write that

million to Mecca of women received

100 years ago this week, the basic

right to vote. It was originally

restricted to women with property

over the age of 30, then 90 years

ago was extended to all women over

21, then 50 years ago, to all men

and women over the age of 18. So can

I ask the minister of simple

question? How many more years to be

have to wait until the vote is

extended to everyone over 16?

extended to everyone over 16?

Mr

Speaker, the age of 18 rather than

16 is widely recognised as the age

at which one becomes an adult and

that is when full citizenship rights

are attained. There's only a handful

of countries in the world that have

a nationwide voting age below 18 and

we believed that the age of

majority, 18, should continue to be

the age at which people become

eligible to vote.

The honourable

gentleman makes international

comparisons but I have to say to the

Minister that it was this country

and a Labour government that led the

way in Europe and India speaking

world in reducing the -- and the

English speaking world and reducing

the age of vote to 18 and where we

lead others followed, and it will be

the same here. Let me move on to the

second question I would like to ask

the honourable gentleman. I have

listened carefully to his answer but

I didn't hear any logical

explanation for the different rights

that we give 16-year-olds in this

country. At 16, we are free from

parental control, we can leave home

and start a family, get married,

start work, pay taxes, join the

forces, so can the minister give us

a logical explanation why a

16-year-old should not have the

right to vote?

right to vote?

Mr Speaker, I am, I

have to say, slightly baffled by the

honourable lady's comments when

compared with what her party did in

office. Because it was the last

Labour government that raised the

legal age for buying cigarettes to

18, raised the age of selling knives

to 18, raised the age to buy

fireworks to 18, and raised the age

for using a sunbed to 18.

LAUGHTER

I think that if she wants a lesson

in inconsistency, she might want to

examine the mirror.

Mr Speaker, he mentions a range of

restrictions that we have until the

age of 18 but those are for the most

part to do with public health,

public sector data and the

prevention of crime. They are not

the same as the basic right to vote

on issues that affect your life.

What a heart considered old enough

-- once you are considered old

enough to make other decisions on

your life such as leaving school,

leaving home, getting married. Let

me give the Minister of specific

example.

Order, I'm sure it will not

have escaped public notice and it is

rather a sad irony, that when a

woman is addressing the House, quite

a lot of noisy boorish and in one

case rather stupid individuals are

trying to shout the Right Honourable

lady down. Cut it out.

Thank you

very much, Mr Speaker. I wanted to

give the Minister of specific

example to illustrate what I'm

talking about. According to the

government's own figures, the number

of 16 and 17-year-olds receiving

carer's allows for looking after

disabled relatives at home has risen

by more than 50% in four years. --

carer's allowance. Over 2016 and

17-year-olds last year gave up their

youth and -- 2000, 1617 -year-olds

last year gave up their youth and

education to look after relatives.

How can it be fair to expectancies

take on the responsibility because

of failures of the state and deny

them the say on how that state is

run?

Mr Speaker, the logic of the

honourable lady's arguments is that

she wishes to lower the age of

majority from 18 to 16. She listed a

number of areas in which she

supported the age at which activity

should be allowed at 18 on grounds

that only then could people be

expected to have sufficient maturity

and responsibility to have those

rights. My argument to her is that

the age of majority should be set

matching both rights and

responsibilities. And I think that

it is perfectly reasonable to say

that from the age of 18, we entrust

young men and women to exercise

those rights and responsible if he's

in full. On Havard Nordtveit -- on

her final point, it is right that

sensible local authorities have

particular care for the role of

young carers, and in my experience,

local authorities, whichever party

runs them, makes every effort to do

that.

I'm genuinely surprised at the

Minister's response because after

all, this is what he said two years

ago speaking to the youth

Parliament. And let me quote him.

When the voice and the vote of young

people is absent, decisions are made

that affect young people's lives

that they have not always chosen. So

not for the first time in these

exchanges, I've got to say, Mr

Speaker, I agree with the Minister.

All of us on this side agree with

the Minister. So why does he no

longer agree with himself?

Well, if

she had been with me at the youth

Parliament which was indeed a

memorable and enjoyable occasion,

she would have discovered that a

significant number of the young men

and women there were actually over

voting age. But I fully support the

role that the youth Parliament does,

the role that their members do

throughout the country, the role

that organisations like school

councils do, in getting young people

used to the idea of exercising

democratic responsibility. That

seems to me and excellent training

for the full adult responsibility is

that they will inherit when they are

18, and I hope and encourage more

young people to go out and vote.

He says he was only talking about

18-year-olds but you were there. He

was talking to 370 under 18s. But

what these discussions have revealed

is that there is no logical

principled objection to votes at 16.

That is why the Welsh and Scottish

Government support it, that is why

every single political party in this

House supports it, except, of

course, the Conservative Party and

the DUP. Once again, joined in

opposition to change. They're not

the Coalition of chaos, Mr Speaker,

they are the Coalition of cavemen.

But does the Minister... And does

the Minister not realise the

lesson...

Order! Order! One member

who thinks he knows what he is

talking about is gesticulating at me

and the answer is, it is a matter of

taste, not of order, and it

shouldn't escape somebody of great

intelligence.

I was talking about

cavemen and what I wanted to say was

this... Why doesn't the Minister

realise the lesson that we women

taught his predecessors 100 years

ago - when changes it cannot be

resisted for ever, and this is a

change time has come.

change time has come.

Mr Speaker, I

think my advice to the right

honourable lady is to wean herself

off the habit of watching old

versions of the Flintstones on the

relevant cartoon channel. I just

think that we ought to salute the

fact that not just the parliament

but many schools and other youth

organisations throughout the country

are working hard to get young people

use to the idea that as they grow

up, they should take an interest in

current affairs and then when they

reach the relevant age exercise the

full rights and responsibilities of

an adult by participating in

elections and in political

campaigning. But the situation we

have here, Mr Speaker, with the

national voting age at 18, is one

that is followed by 26 out of 27

other members of the European Union,

by the United States, Canada, New

Zealand and Australia. Unless she is

going to denounce all of those

countries as somehow inadequate to

her own particular standards, then

quite honestly, Mr Speaker, I wish

she ought to grow up and try and

treat the subject with a greater

degree of seriousness.

Thank you, Mr

Speaker. The government's attacks

has made what the UK one of the most

competitive basis to do business so

does my right arable friend agree

that raising tax would damage the UK

economy, as we have seen in

Scotland, where growth has fallen

behind the rest of the UK?

Mr

Speaker, I'm very happy to agree

with my rubble friend. We did

devolve promise has new powers to

Hollywood and it is obviously for

the Scottish Government to determine

how to use them. It is a matter of

great regret that they have chosen

to use those powers to break their

promises and penalised aspiration in

Scotland's. In our own budget, we

increased the Scottish Government's

spending power by £2 billion, so the

SNP have no excuse for hiking the

taxes of hard-working people,

including public servants, and

penalising businesses. The leader of

the Scottish Nationalists in

Westminster used to champion wealth

creation and free enterprise. I hope

he will ask the First Minister of

Scotland to think again.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can I welcome

the Minister to his place. If

reports are true, he may be

auditioning for a new role and I

wonder if he is sending out a

heart-warming letter. And if you are

single market is essential to the

Government's agenda for trade and

competitiveness. Since Buzzfeed

published the analysis, does the

Minister recognise that the single

market is essential for jobs and

prosperity? Mr Speaker, when we

leave the EU next March, we will, as

a matter of legality, leave the

single market and the EU customs

union. The Prime Minister and the

entire Government have set out in

both the Lancaster House and

Florence speeches, also making it

clear that we are seeking a new

partnership with our neighbours in

the European Union that ensures that

we continue to have frictionless

trade, which is the interest of not

just our people but the people of

every one of the 27 EU countries.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I must say I

am surprised at the Minister because

it is not a question... Or we are

going to be an transitional deal and

will still be in the single market.

This is a Government in crisis and

an international embarrassment. The

Chancellor, the Scottish Secretary,

the Scottish Conservatives, the Home

Secretary have all supported

membership of the single market.

Despite this, the Government is

still prepared to make everyone

poorer. Where is the leadership?

poorer. Where is the leadership?

Mr

Speaker, the leadership which the

right honourable gentleman wants was

set out very clearly both that

Lancaster House and then again in

Florence, and by right on oral

friend the Prime Minister will be

making further speeches on these

issues in the weeks and months to

come. But can I just say to the

honourable gentleman that the most

important single market to the

people of Scotland is the single

market of the United Kingdom, which

is worth nearly £50 billion every

year to the Scottish economy, four

times more than trade with the

European Union. It is our deep and

special partnership with the EU in

the future that will help deliver

prosperity to Scotland, not the

separatist policies pursued by the

Scottish National Party.

I know my

right honourable friend shares my

passion for ensuring that all

children get opportunity to succeed,

regardless of who they are or where

they come from. Can he confirm what

progress the Government has made in

reducing the attainment gap between

less well off second risk pupils and

their peers, and that positive

impact of when the next preschool

applications will open?

He is

absolutely right and the

Government's clear ambition and

purpose is to ensure that our school

system works for every child in

every community in this country. Our

reforms have already raised school

standards. We are seeing now nearly

2 million more children attending

good and outstanding schools and the

attainment gap between disadvantaged

pupils on their peers has shrunk by

10% at GCSE and 10.5% at key stage

two since 2011. I know education

ministers will be happy to talk to

my honourable friend about their

plans further to improve standards

in schools.

Mr Speaker, last Sunday

in my constituency, 17-year-old was

stabbed with life changing results.

The knife crime across our country

is not being driven by my nose and

young people but driven by

gangsters, organised criminals and

dirty money. -- driven by miners.

Cocaine alone is driven £12 million

in this country, so I asked the

Minister, why are we cutting our

Border Force, why are we cutting our

police and why has London been

offered only in their violence

reduction strategy a community fund

of more 5p. You could not buy a

house for not .5 million in London.

--

Can I first say that I, like

every other member of this House,

would have nothing but the most

heartfelt sympathy for the victim

himself and for his family and

friends at the most appalling

experience that they have endured

and are still living through. The

honourable gentleman is right to say

that there are complex causes to

what we are seeing in terms of knife

crime. There is no doubt, I agree

with him, that organised crime is

contributing to this, and organised

crime is exploiting young people who

they try to groom to attract into

criminal gangs and the Government is

to publish later this year a violent

crime strategy that will be not just

to look at the criminal justice

system but how we work effectively

with all other agencies to ensure

that young people are diverted away

from that sort of activity in the

first place. But it is also true

that we have... If you carry a

knife, you can expect to end up in

jail. We have toughened and

sentences and we have protected,

despite what he said, police

budgets. A quarter of all police are

in London.

Demand full school places

in the London Borough of Bromley are

forecast to grow by some 20 present

over coming years but repeatedly

proposals for much-needed schools

have been delayed in no small

measure because of concerns at the

way the educational schools funding

agency has handled the planning

application process. On behalf of

the Prime Minister, will my right

honourable friend agreed to meet me

to discuss the very real concerns

that local parents have out of the

competency of the agency?

Can I say

either I or my right horrible friend

the Education Secretary will be

happy to talk to him. The purpose of

the education and Skills Funding

Agency formed at the start of this

financial year was to provide a more

joined up approach to funding,

covering schools, colleges and other

providers. I do note that Bromley

has increased both primary and

secondary school capacity by more

than 6300 places since 2010 and the

ESF a is delivering nine schools in

Bromley but there is more work to be

done and ministers will gladly talk

to my honourable friend about that.

Recent research shows that

international students are worth a

staggering £20 billion to the UK

economy. That research was

commissioned by Nick Hillman, who

was the Conservative Party candidate

in green ridge in 2010 and a former

adviser to Lord Willets, yet the

policies of the Prime Minister have

stopped that steady increase of a

number of international students

commit our country. Does he agree

with me this is a touch careless of

the Prime Minister to have

squandered the billions of pounds

that could have been available to

our schools and hospitals?

Mr

Speaker, what the facts actually say

is that we are the second most

popular destination in the world for

students, and university sponsored

these applications are up by nearly

one fifth since 2010 so I would

argue that contrary to what he

alleges, we are doing a good job in

attracting international students.

South Dorset is the most beautiful

constituency in the whole of the

United Kingdom.

No, it is not!

So

improving the infrastructure is

difficult, to create jobs and

prosperity. What we can do is

improve our rail links on the

Salisbury line and Yeovil Junction

to get faster trains to Weymouth.

Will my right honourable friend

reassure my constituents and me that

the Government is behind this scheme

to do exactly what the Government

wants, to create more wealth and

prosperity in South Dorset?

Mr

Speaker, as my honourable friend

will know, the Chancellor last year

set aside a very considerable sum of

money, more than £20 billion, to

finance infrastructure improvements,

rail, road and broadband, in order

to generate growth around the

country and to facilitate housing

development. I know my honourable

friend's constituency is one that

has seen considerable housing

development in recent years. I will

ensure that transport ministers talk

to him about the particular concerns

he has expressed.

On the 25th of

January 1985, the Conservative

government promised there would be

no nuclear waste dumped in

Billingham on a mine. Will be

confirmed that that promise still

stands?

He will have to forgive me

if I say that my memory for

statements that were given in 1985

is a little bit rusty. It was seven

years before even I was first

elected to this House. I will look

into the point that he has raised

and I will write to him to set up

the position.

To secure our future

prosperity and to meet the

employment challenge posed by

artificial intelligence, this

country has an urgent need to

improve its digital skills base.

Will my right honourable friend

therefore congratulate the open

University in my constituency for

securing a leading role in the

Government's new Institute of

coding?

Can I first of all join my

honourable friend in congratulating

the open University for securing

that lead role in the Institute of

coding. I think the Institute is

going to be a very important new

initiative to get universities to

work together closely with

businesses to develop specialist

coding skills, and the Government is

investing £84 million to deliver a

comprehends a programme to improve

the teaching of the computer

curriculum. We look forward to

working closely with the University

and the Institute.

After ten years of this country, my

constituent missed out on the right

to indefinite leave bite into two

days when she went away from the

country and broke a leg making it

unable for her to come back. She has

to wait ten years to apply again

which means that she will be unable

to adopt a child which might be the

only way she could have family in

this country. Can we have a meeting

to discuss this in Justice when she

returns?

returns?

I don't know more about the

detail about the case went the

honourable gentleman has just

described in the House, but like

many members, I have immigration

casework my constituency so I'm

familiar with the type of problem

that he has described. If you would

like to write to me after these

exchanges, setting out the details,

I will discuss that with my right

honourable friend the Home Secretary

and the relevant minister will meet

him.

Last week, I visited RNAs

called Rose as part of the Armed

Forces polymer tree scheme and was

delighted to see an outreach

programme to promote skills to the

local community in STEM. Does he

agree that these initiatives to

inspire the skills of the Armed

Forces and the country will need to

succeed in the future and their

approach at cold the area should be

defended?

He raises an important

point, I did know about the

important role that STEM plays in

the life of Cornwall but he has

highlighted the

highlighted the work of Culdrose in

the science and mathematics skills

that we will need in the growing

economy highlighted in the

government strategy and what he has

described as happening at Culdrose

will go towards that.

It is an

extraordinary fact that this year,

last year, every for over a decade,

one London Borough, the London

Borough of Islington, has received

more arts Council funding than the

entirety combined of the Midlands

and Northern X coalfield

communities. Who is going to be

brave enough to reverse this is

equity so that my constituents,

especially young constituents, can

have fair and equitable access to

arts funding?

Well, I'm not sure

whether that was meant as an attack

directed on the Right Honourable

member for Islington North or

Islington South. But what I can say,

to the honourable judgment, is this,

obviously if there is a particular

bid that he feels was unfairly

treated, he is welcome to take that

up with the new arts minister who I

know will want to examine that case

carefully. But in general terms,

more than half of the arts funding

in England is awarded to arts

activities outside Greater London.

Mr Speaker, holiday homes in

Cornwall are a mixed blessing. They

provide important support our local

economy but they also take up

vitally needed housing stock and

push up prices beyond the reach of

many local people. In addition, many

of them avoid paying council tax by

switching to business use and

enjoying the benefits of small

business rate relief. Does my right

on role boyfriend agree with me that

this

-- does my right honourable friend

agree with me that this situation is

unsustainable and he will find a way

to post this loophole?

He raises a

valid point, it is clearly right

that holiday owners should pay the

correct tax. The individual

decisions on council tax and

business tax rates on the properties

rests with the department which is

independent of ministers, but if a

property is available for rent for

140 days or more year it is subject

for business rates, and if he does

not meet this test, council tax is

due. If an individual provides false

information to seek business rate

relief, that person is liable to

summary conviction or a fine or

both.

Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister

wants to bring forward legislation

to tackle domestic violence and

abuse. But her government is

currently taxing the same survivors

for using the child maintenance

service. For survivors of domestic

abuse, using the collect and pay

service is not a matter of choice,

it is a matter of safety. Will he

urged the Prime Minister to commit

to using this bill to scrap the tax

for survivor Primakov domestic

abuse?

-- survivors of domestic

abuse? There is a government

consultation imminent and I would

urge her to make representations to

that.

that.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Following last year's terrorist

attack in Manchester, the government

has committed £24 million to the

city. The effect being felt across

the area and in my constituency,

will the government give an

assurance that they will continue to

support Manchester?

We will

certainly continue to support

Manchester, right across government.

Through the various agencies and

spending programmes that government

has a available. And I think that

the Manchester area demonstrated

last year its resilience and strong

sense of community identity and

purpose, and I think that will serve

it well economically and socially in

the years ahead.

The whole house

will warmly welcome the fantastic

news which has saved thousands of

news at bombardier in Northern

Ireland. And we should pay tribute

to the management of Bombardier in

Northern Ireland and Canada, the

workforce and unions who worked well

together, the honourable members on

this bench and the government who

went in very strongly to support the

company. Can I I urge the Chancellor

of the Duchy of Lancaster to get

behind improving manufacturer

of the Duchy of Lancaster to get

behind improving manufacturing in

Northern Ireland? , gently urge the

government, which I know always

listens very carefully, to get on

with it?

Can I first of all thank

the right honourable gentleman for

his word and although it is a few

years ago since I had the

opportunity to visit Bombardier in

Belfast, Ireland how important that

enterprise is for the provision of

high-quality -- I remember how

important it is for the provision of

high-quality work in the area. The

government worked closely with

leaders and politicians, in Northern

Ireland, the Prime Minister rate --

rate this with President Trump and

Justin Trudeau in Canada and we have

been very active, we are pleased by

the outcome. You can rest assured

the government will remain a strong

supporter of business in Northern

Ireland but I would perhaps add that

the sooner we can get back to

devolved government in Northern

Ireland, the easier it will be to

ensure the practical benefits

flowing back to Northern Ireland.

flowing back to Northern Ireland.

A

vibrant high Street is critical in

traditional market towns like

Knaresborough in my constituency

where there has been a market since

1310. In this age of Internet

shopping, will my right honourable

friend confirmed the government

support for traditional markets and

policies that will boost our high

streets?

Mr Speaker, my honourable

friend is right to speak up on

behalf of his constituents, I know

he is a tireless campaigner for

Harrogate and Knaresborough. And

markets like the one in

Knaresborough are part of the local

fabric and tradition of towns right

across this country. The government

wants to help those markets and town

centres to prosper in what is at the

same time a rapidly changing retail

environment, and I'm sure the right

honourable friend the community

Secretary will write to him with

further details.

Lincoln's walk-in

centre will close in a few weeks

despite the fact that there is

inconsistent and inconsistent

service provision in place to

mitigate the closure. Will the

Minister pass on to the Prime

Minister my request to meet meet to

discuss review of that closure?

If

she would like to set out a bit more

detail, than she has had the time to

do today, I will ensure that a

minister sees her about this.

Thank

you, Mr Speaker. Next Wednesday, we

will be assessing and voting on the

local government finance settlement.

A group of us from the shire

counties are very concerned that

there is not enough money for rural

counties like ours when adult social

care costs are spiralling out of

control, in my own county we have a

black hole the £10 million. What

message should I take back to the

leader of my counsel?

That is

thicker, I think one -- Mr Speaker,

I think one message to send to my

honourable friend is the government

has made an extra £2 billion in

funding available to local

authorities, particularly for social

care. And local authorities are

obviously deciding at this moment

whether they use the more flexible

powers that they have in respect of

social care. I know my honourable

friend met my right noble friend,

the community secretary a few days

ago, and I would encourage him to

continue to talk to the community

secretary and other ministers in

that department about the particular

circumstances in Shropshire.

The

current edition of the Economist

magazine carries an article which

says that the hostile takeover bid

for GKN by Melrose, quote, costs

down not only on the survival of

GKN, Britain's third largest and

independent aerospace defence firm,

but the rest of the industry as

well. The honourable gentleman knows

that when national security issues

are involved, ministers have the

power to intervene to protect the

public interest. Will they do so in

this case?

As I understand it, the

bid for GKN is being examined by the

relevant independent authorities,

clearly this is something that the

appropriate ministers in defence and

business departments will be

monitoring closely. It would be

wrong of me to spec in more detail

about this case for now.

--

speculate in more detail. My

constituency of Chelmsford is a very

popular place to live. And this

week, we've had very good news that

there are more first-time buyers

getting on the housing ladder than

any time in the past decade. Can my

right honourable friend update us on

the progress the government is

making to help people to buy a

house?

Mr Speaker, I'm pleased to be

able to say that the number of

first-time buyers is now at the

highest level for about ten years.

And that is a tribute to the various

initiatives that both the community

secretary and the Chancellor of the

Exchequer have put in place to

introduce us time buyers, things

like the cut in stamp duty -- Raqqa

first-time buyers, things like the

cut in stamp duty which will benefit

95% of first-time buyers. We need to

improve housing supply and

constituencies like hers and mine

are showing the way to the rest of

the country about the need to build

houses to meet the legitimate

demands and expectations of young

people who are working incredibly

hard and want to get a foot on the

housing ladder.

To order.

Prime Minister's Questions comes to

women without the prior minister,

who is in China. We watched David

Livingstone and Emily Thornberry for

Labour, the Shadow Foreign

Secretary. Emily Thornberry

surprised us all by going on...

First aborted at about the centenary

of women's votes, then about

increased female representation. --

first she talked about the

Centenary... Shoot talked about why

the Government was against cutting

the voting age from 18 to 16 for

Westminster elections. It is more in

some of the devolved government in

Scotland and Wales but she wants, as

is Labour policy, to cut the voting

age to 16 but Mr Lidington was

having nothing of it. He said there

were a lot of rights you didn't get

on to you 18, including the right,

which I didn't know, to rent a

sunbed.

sunbed. Ms Thornbury snapped back

saying there were young carers who

have had to love after relatives. We

didn't see that coming and it was

different. Whether or go any further

is another matter. We will talk

about it with our panel. We have...

Foreign Office Minister Mark Field,

and Shadow Brexit

Minister Jenny Chapman.

And our deputy political editor

John Pienaar is also here.

It was an unusual thing to go on.

Not unimportant but unusual, since

it is not on the agenda at the

moment so it probably won't make any

of the newscasts later in the day

and tonight but you talked about how

this was playing to social movement

and this would do well for Labour.

I'm sure it will, with Theresa May

away and Jeremy Corbyn having a

break or working in his office, as

the case may be, we saw Emily

Thornberry making the most of the

dimmed spotlight by going to target

audience and this stuff is, as we

speak, being and put together to be

put out online, it isn't already, I

suspect it is. When it comes to the

audience, a young audience is a

large part of the audience for that

and we know that Labour is very keen

to reach a younger audiences. There

was a statistical dispute about how

far younger voters move the market

the last election. But we do know it

is thought to be a more fertile act

of political territory for the

Labour Party than other parties. So