08/02/2018 Daily Politics

Our I'm afraid they may be

disappointed for some time to come.

The sense that we get with these

meetings is that they have not been

a forum for making decisions but for

expressing opinions. I am large,

everybody has set out what their

views are but there has not been an

attempt to draw the feds together

and say we will discount that all go

with that. It has been an occasion

for Mrs May to take on where the

balance of opinion lies with key

Cabinet ministers which means the

time frame for getting clarity would

seem to me to be disappearing

several weeks hence. Which, of

course, leaves nerves jangling

because we move ever closer to that

crunch March EU summit when we have

to have some sort of clarity about

what it is we are seeking. You say

this has been an opportunity for

Cabinet ministers to air their own

views about what they see as the

relationship with the EU once we

leave. Is there going to be a

compromise having gathered that

information to try and find a way

through and bridge these two sides,

one who wants to say closely aligned

with the EU and another which wants

a clean break.

That is almost going

to be inevitable because of the

fundamental divide within the

Cabinet over the issue of trade.

Some ministers like Philip Hammond

believe the name of the game is

staying close to the EU to minimise

damage to the economy and others

like Boris Johnson who believe the

golden opportunity is to cut loose

and strike free trade deals.

Fundamental difference about whether

national interest lies. The way you

bridge that, keep everyone on board

is frankly by some rather elastic

language, I would point, for

example, to the big soup of

compromise reached over the Northern

Ireland border.

Ireland border. Everybody has talked

about regulatory and alignment. I

think creative language will have to

be used. But that hits the buffers

when the EU say, that's fine but

what does it mean. If you are not

able to say precisely what you want,

the danger is the EU negotiator

simply sees that the -- seize the

initiative and say hypothetically

here is a free-trade deal. You see

the process to the EU. When

widespread allegations of sexual

harassment and bullying are merged

at Westminster in autumn, the fact

that that it should happen at the

seat of democracy should be a source

of shame for is all, said the Prime

Minister.

The leaders of the main

political parties agreed to set up a

working group to address those

concerns. The new proposals were

agreed yesterday and were set up

this morning. A new grievance

procedure, after hearing from over

250 people who have experienced

sexual harassment at Westminster in

the past year. The committee,

chaired by Andrea Leadsom said that

harassment had been a feature of the

lives of many people working in

Parliament. The grievance procedure

would provide practical and

emotional support to complainers

regardless of whether they report

the matter to the police or not.

They will be a trained sexual

violence adviser who will lead the

process that could result in a

written apology or workplace

training for the perpetrator. Based

on the balance of probabilities,

action will be taken based on the

work of the parliamentary committee

for standards. Confidentiality of

all those involved will be protected

throughout. MPs who are found to

have harassed staff could face

suspension or recall. The proposals

will be debated by MPs later this

month. Angela, just listening to

that, do you think there is enough

that's new that is going to toughen

up the procedure for MPs and staff

and also the culture?

It's a good

start but it won't be the end of it.

I worked as a researcher in

Parliament. Working in Parliament

for most people including me has

been a positive experience. It makes

it worse when you have these

complaints from people of sexual

harassment or bullying. This is why

the reporters so essential to take

action.

The numbers are quite

alarming. You say it is a great

place to work and for the majority

it is but one in five have

experienced or witnessed harassment

or inappropriate sexual behaviour.

That shocks me. I think it's

appalling. If you talk to women in

other workplaces you hear the same

story but I would has to be better

and set an example. I think there is

something that we could move more

quickly on, the adviser that is

available to report things too. That

is new and as quickly as possible,

it's something in the Labour Party

we've been pushing for and I are

pleased it's in there.

The unions

say to completely change the culture

of bullying and harassment there has

to be formal union recognition.

Do

you agree with them? I do. I

encourage anyone who works in

Parliament to be a member of their

trade union. It's a safe space for

those dealing with such issues.

There should be formal recognition

and any member of staff working in

any place of work should benefit

from trade union membership.

Should

that have been a priority for the

Labour members working on these

recommendations?

They are trying to

get agreement across the board. I

think it's been quite a challenging

exercise for everybody involved.

Understanding this scale of the

problem. We tend to talk about

sexual harassment and I think

bullying and intimidation in the

workplace is equally unpleasant. It

may not be so severe in places but

if you are facing bullying day in,

day out and are uncomfortable for

any reason in the workplace, then

something has to be done and action

needs to be taken.

What about the

sanctions? It looks as though there

will be the power, which already

existed in some ways, in terms of

MPs recall, that will come after

investigation and the ability to

sack peers.

Fears can be expelled

for different reasons.

Including

this.

I'm slightly uncomfortable

about recall for MPs. Thereafter

recommendations about recall is. I'm

not sure on where in the scale it

should be introduced. I'd like to

see the power of the constituents on

this one. There is a way forward on

it but I'm not 100% certain in my

mind what that is yet.

Would you be

unhappy if that much power was

vested in to the Parliamentary

Commissioner for standards?

It has

to be wider than the Parliamentary

commission. If we put it in the

hands of one person, it would rather

be uncomfortable for me. There's a

lot of discussion going on and they

haven't reached agreement yet. The

work the committee has put in has

been extraordinary, the time, energy

and effort has been excellent and I

congratulate them for what they've

done so far.

We will return to this

later in the programme. The Prime

Minister is getting 20 of advice

from within her party on what

position to take on Brexit. She's

not the only one. Jeremy Corbyn is

also pressed by his party to come

out in favour of a much closer

relationship with the EU after

Brexit. Have a look.

The leadership

is waiting to see if public opinion

moves in a particular direction. I'm

saying, I would argue, in the end,

you've got to lead and make the

argument for your values.

I don't

want to be a rebel. I want our party

to seize this opportunity to

demonstrate that in contrast of

these wretched government, we can

live up to our national

responsibilities and our

internationalist heritage.

Both government and parties are

finding it hard to move forward so a

referendum on a new question about

the future relationship may become

unavoidable.

The question is whether

or not Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell

and the Shadow Cabinet will lead us

to a position where we can defeat

the government. Call me

old-fashioned, it is in the interest

of opposition to beat the government

on votes.

We're joined now by Alastair

Campbell, he's former director

of communications to Tony Blair,

he's editor at large

of the New European,

and he's found time to write

a new novel about football

and terrorism in the 1970s.

And of course Angela Smith

is still here, I don't know if she's

working on any novels.

A subject for another time!

Cathartic it may be.

I am living in

a novel at the moment.

You're not

alone. The same subject kept

cropping up there in those various

clips from Labour politicians. Lead.

Why don't your own MPs and peers

think the parties doing enough to

lead on Brexit?

I think we are doing

enough to lead on Brexit.

They are

not convinced.

Let's see what

happens in the House of Lords and

the House of Commons. We haven't got

the arithmetic and the House of

Commons. You look at the Article 50

amendment, they were able to

persuade their own people to vote

down our amendment. There are key

issues coming up that will come back

to the House of Commons that are key

Labour Party policies on dealing

with this, things like the

transition period, Henry VIII

powers. When we talk about bringing

back control to the UK, what we see

is bringing back control to

government ministers. There are

issues like that, and the Charter of

fundamental rights, those kinds of

issues we have shown great

leadership on.

Do you share the

frustration of MPs who feel that the

leadership is not being clear about

what it wants in terms of exit Mac

and an end relationship with the EU

and it needs to come off the fence?

I don't think it is the frustration

of MPs, out in the country there is

massive frustration, and I agree

with Angela, I've followed a lot of

the Lords debate, and hopefully that

Lords will change this process but I

think in the Commons, the fact

yesterday Jeremy Corbyn yet again

cannot bring himself to challenge

them on this single most important

issue facing the country, the fact

that millions and millions of people

are genuinely concerned that with

opposition and government handling

it differently but saying this is

happening, people are feeling

frustrated. Parliament isn't

reflecting the debate in the

country's.

What you say to that that

Jeremy Corbyn doesn't bring up the

issue of Brexit in the Commons?

He

does bring it up.

PMQs?

One of the

great tragedies of Brexit is the

other issues the government should

be dealing with like the housing

issue and the health service.

Even

when he does that, the reason why

the government is failing on things

like health and housing and crime

and these things is because they are

totally consumed on sorting out

their own problems on Brexit and

Jeremy Corbyn doesn't challenge

Theresa May on it.

It is perfectly

evident and the Labour Party as a

whole and Jeremy and Keir Starmer

have put pressure on the government

to say what your policy is.

What

about Labour's policy?

We have

cabinet had a meeting to decide what

their policy is on Brexit. Theresa

May wants to go around the table and

hear their policy on Brexit.

I don't

think I've ever known a government

quite as shambolic as this one.

Every day I will turn on the news,

the Cabinet is meeting to decide the

strategy on Brexit. They've been

saying it since June 2016 and Labour

should be ripping them apart.

Let's

talk about that because a YouGov

poll which I've probably seen says

that if Labour was to come off the

fence on Brexit, it will lose

support. I know it is a poor but it

is quite interesting.

Because it is

difficult.

You could say Labour are

playing a strategic binder because

by being opaque and by focusing on

the government, they've actually

managed to hold the support they've

got.

I'll admit at the last election

I thought we'd get punished for

appearing to be a bit leave and a

bit remain. It didn't happen. But

this is happening. And I think

leadership ultimately is facing the

country up to the biggest issues and

there is a real danger the

government strategy appears to be we

have to get outcome what may,

whatever the cost. Labour's strategy

is we will do that as well but in a

better way.

That is unfair because

we've been clear. I campaign for

remain, our policy was remain. Since

the referendum what we have said is

the benefits of the single market

and the customs union, they are in

the EU. When we leave, we are not

saying we won't negotiate, we have

to negotiate what our position is if

we leave. That is where the failure

of government lies. Then negotiating

strategy from the beginning has been

to rule out the very things the

public didn't have a say on.

So

you're saying you want to be clearer

about remaining in the single market

and Customs union.

During the

transition phase, when these things

are being negotiated...

That is

transition.

It is. What the

government cannot do is rule it out

and not look at the evidence to say

this is dangerous. They are taking

the economy to a cliff edge and the

government has to take

responsibility. If we were in

government, we would have those

negotiations on a completely

different bases.

Alistair Campbell

has said in the last few weeks

Brexit will happen and it will be a

disaster. Do you accept you are a

part of what Alistair Alistair

Campbell has said?

If we were in the

negotiations, it would be different,

we would start from a different

point.

One of the reasons I think

people talk about public opinion

shifting...

It isn't, is it, the

Paul Sturrock show that.

If you have

the government and most of the media

saying done deal, can't revisit it,

that debate doesn't reopen. Jeremy

Corbyn could be leading this but he

doesn't want to.

The government

doesn't want to give information.

Let's talk about Labour.

The point

is valid. Public opinion is not

getting information. Whenever the

government does an analysis of the

economy they tried to hide the

information and it has to be dragged

kicking and screaming. What is clear

nobody wants the kind of extremist

Brexit Jabez Rees Mogg and others

are advocating.

Throughout this

interview, with all due respect,

you've criticised the process, and

the government for the way they are

handling the negotiations. Alistair

Campbell and others are talking

about a statement of intent, about

what you want, about what the party

is trying to achieve. There hasn't

been much of that, has there, for

Labour?

What the state is meant of

intent is that they want is we will

remain in the EU. That isn't the

state of intent. The Labour Party

has accepted the referendum but we

are saying we would do it

differently.

Do you accept that,

that is to position the Labour Party

will not take up?

I accept the

difficulty of the politics.

So you

really believe they will say we will

remain in the EU at some point?

The

politics are difficult and I hope

that as this goes on, we reach an

understanding that if we decide the

costs are too high, the coast is too

great, the risk to Britain's

standing in the world is too great,

the threat to the peace process in

Northern Ireland is real, they have

to follow through the logic. That

means the public should be

entitled...

As a former strategist,

you wouldn't be saying that at this

point, because you admitted facing

both ways has helped.

I'll tell you

why I would because the country is

desperate for leadership. They are

not getting it from the government.

The government is a total, complete

shambles. Amber Rudd did a very

revealing interview at the weekend

where she said we are looking for

something all of us can live with.

She meant the ministers. They've

lost sight of the public and I think

if Labour came out and lead, we've

looked at this, every which way,

this is going to damage. Look at the

stuff yesterday. In the north-east,

West Midlands, Northern Ireland and

Scotland, that is what they want.

Would that be a more honourable

position to take, never mind the

representative view of Labour,

because at the moment all you are

doing is coming in behind the

government on saying we are doing

this badly, you're doing this wrong,

but you haven't got a suggestion.

We

are saying how we would do

differently and that is important.

To achieve what?

If there is going

to be Brexit in this country, and

that is where we are, and we have

accepted the result, we don't

believe the way that it is doing. It

doesn't have a policy on trade.

We

shouldn't leave until been away

where we are going.

Where is Labour

going?

We needed transition phase.

Don't laugh. I'm not laughing at the

transition phase, it is about

delaying the point at which Labour

is clear what they want to do.

We

have been clear. In negotiations we

would never rule out being in the

customs union or the single market.

And, yet, whenever there's been a

vote in parliament, it seems to be

the whip is to say don't vote for

it.

It hasn't. These are matters for

negotiation, and we want to keep

certain things like the Northern

Ireland border. That is interesting.

It is not resolved. They can't

resolve it and how they will

resolved.

Was it wrong for the

Labour Party to whip their MPs to

stop them voting against some of the

Brexit deals that have gone through

so far?

The Brexit deal, we haven't

seen it.

We have had Article 50. The

withdrawal bill. And Labour MPs were

told not to vote against these

things.

There's not to do with the

deal. Article 50 was to start the

process which was recognising the

referendum. The withdrawal bill is

nothing to do with leaving the EU.

What it is a technical bill, about

bringing all the protections

contributed to back into UK domestic

law.

The meaningful vote, Alistair,

what would you like to see Labour

MPs do? RU minded, if you were in

the position now advising Jeremy

Corbyn, vote against the deal

whatever its content?

No, you have

to judge it. Keir Starmer some while

ago set out the tests again which

you should judge it. And I cannot

see I've laboured to that how they

can support the deal which is...

That in effect is saying vote down

the deal, and what would happen?

I

am in an easier position than Angela

because I'm not part of the inner

circle and I can say what I think. I

think this is going to be a disaster

and I think there is a danger we are

helping the government facilitate

this disaster. Because they are not

being held to account, I think, in

the way they should be, particularly

in the Commons where Theresa May

seems to go to PMQs week after week,

she will get health, education...

That seems like praise of the House

of Lords, Alistair!

Alistair

Campbell is saying you are not

holding the government to account in

the way that you should or could be.

I think we are stop with they should

be run ragged at the moment.

They

are. The polls don't indicate you

are going ahead of them.

But what

should we do about the country?

If

you look, they are forced provide

information and publish information

they've tried to keep secret showing

how damaging Brexit, as they wanted,

will be.

So we should say we don't

want it. We need to go out and say

to the people who voted leave, we

know why you're angry, that is what

we will address but we went do it

with this hard Brexit.

And is to

Campbell, thank you.

The front page of this

morning's Daily Telegraph has

caused a bit of a stir,

thanks to its front page (GFX

which says the investor

George Soros, known as 'the man

who broke the Bank of England',

is 'backing a secret

plot to thwart Brexit'.

The report, which carries the byline

of Theresa May's former

adviser Nick Timothy,

is about the plan by one

remain-supporting campaign group

to try and bring about a second

referendum to keep

Britain in the EU.

Well, the former Ukip MEP

Steven Woolfe has claimed that

what he calls "ultra-remainers"

are now speaking with a single

voice and wants leave

campaigners to do the same.

He joins me now from Strasbourg.

I don't quite understand what you

are worried about, unless you are

running scared from a running

campaign, then perhaps it is doing

the same as the leave campaign

before the referendum.

No, what I

was concerned about is that the

Remainers or the ultra-Remainers, as

you have heard they don't want to

listen to voters. What they've done

since that referendum is being

incredibly well organised, they've

managed to get their people in

places to be able to articulate

their view that this will be a

disaster, that leaving the EU will

cause immense problems in the

future. And also they are incredibly

well funded. As you can see from

today's newspapers, what you have is

a UK-based organisation, accepting a

large donation from a non-UK banking

billionaire. To be frank, that

reminds me a little bit of the

Rodolfo plot in 1571 where we had a

Florentine banker trying to help a

team assassinate Elizabeth the

first. This isn't the first time

that we've had...

Billionaires

bankrolling political campaigns is

hardly new, is it? This isn't

anything secret, they are hiding in

plain sight. The complaints you're

making you could say the leave

campaign was a pretty aggressive,

legitimate campaign that wanted to

leave the EU and the government has

said the country will leave the EU.

You are part of a campaign that

wanted the government to rule out

the possibility of staying in the

single market. They've said it will

happen and the same with the customs

union so where are these

ultra-Remainers taking the lead?

I think what you hear when I go up

and down the country as I still do

and attend meetings and speak to

ordinary people, they are incredibly

fed up by the negativity that seems

to be on the media particularly, not

just shows like this, in all

different

different ways, that seems to say

that the leave vote is a

particularly bad scenario. They

don't feel they have had their voice

of a I've argued that we should have

had a low regulation Singapore style

of economy moving forward that

includes all the key points that we

wanted, control of our borders,

having our money back and trying to

distribute that in the right places,

making sure that the European Court

of Justice is no longer in control

and democracy for our people and not

from outside.

Have you got support

from everyone and all of these

groups you have brought together?

I've certainly been talking to them

and you saw with my actions taking

Lord B Jones and John Longworth from

leave means leave and from Labour

leave. We've been pulling these

groups together. You'll see some

action on these front in the next

few weeks.

Do you need Nigel Farage

two, and leave this -- lead this

newsgroup?

No, absolutely not. Nigel

has taken a very different route. He

still articulates leaving the

European Union and is a strong voice

but he's someone who's more

interested in being in the media as

a personality. What we need to look

at now is those people have

experience in dealing with the

economy of Britain, those needed to

create laws across a whole spectrum

of policy issues, those are the

people with experience that you have

got. In UK politics and in the

Conservative Party, you have the DRG

with Jacob Rees-Mogg and others like

that.

Would you Jacob Rees-Mogg to

lead this new group? You seem

infused by his leadership of the

European research group.

I think

he's doing a sterling job with the

DRG and all the other Conservative

MPs backing Brexit to the hilt. They

would obviously be part of this.

Over the next 4-6 weeks where we've

got a mission critical timing ahead

of others because of what I see in

the European Parliament in relation

to the vote and the way that the

commission is pulling together a

whole series of papers that we need

to challenge that and put forward

some very positive messages. I know,

for example, that one group is run

bringing a really strong message of

how Britain would be successful in a

big way if we adopt a certain set of

criteria.

Arron

criteria.

Arron Banks is encouraging

former Ukip members to flood back

into the Conservative Party to

change the course of history again.

Do you agree with Arron Banks?

I

think through the people he speaks

to in his group, the decision that

there is no political party

challenging the Labour Party or

those in the ultra-Remainer groups.

Should they be brought back into the

Conservative Party?

I think they

have to take their own decision. If

they are Labour supporters they can

back John Mills and the Labour lead

group. If they are like myself

conservatives who believe in a

different vision for Europe they can

fight the Conservative fight. This

is a national group of the future

and we need people from different

political front to attack the

ultra-Remainers.

Are you a

ultra-Remainers?

That was an

extraordinary interview. Please

leave campaign won the referendum

and now they seemed to be in a panic

and I suspect it is because people

are rejecting the extremist Brexit

that we have heard articulated and a

lack of confidence in the government

who deliver any form of Brexit at

all. I don't blame him for trying

but he is on a lost cause with a

hard Brexit.

What do you think?

There we go again with the language

of extremist exit. This isn't

helpful. It is the sort of language

that we heard when they said the old

are destroying the lives of young

people or are racist, it's a

disgrace. Is. We have an economy

that will move forward successfully

in the future.

And Samir question if

you will. If the economy is going to

do so well through exit, why is all

the evidence showing the opposite?

I've never been called an extremist

in my life, I find that quite

amusing.

Stephen?

During the

referendum campaign we had the sort

of economic reports suggesting from

even then the Chancellor that we

would lose 400,000 jobs and have an

emergency budget and this is the

same type of argument on economic

's. We have seen more people in

work.

We haven't left yet.

We seeded

in manufacturing and different

sectors. We haven't left and you

can't have your cake and eat it and

say that the economy is growing not

slowing.

We are going to have to end

it there. I can't remember how many

times people have said have your

cake and eat it. One day, we will.

And for more reporting

and analysis of Brexit,

check out the BBC News website,

that's bbc.co.uk/Brexit

Now, the German Chancellor

Angela Merkel looks close to finally

securing a new coalition government.

Germany had been stuck in political

limbo since September's inconclusive

general election saw the mainstream

parties lose support

to the far-right AfD -

they had tapped into anger over

Angela Merkel's refugee policy.

But after a failed attempt

to forge an alliance

with two smaller parties,

Mrs Merkel was forced to woo

back the reluctant SPD,

her junior partner for two

of her three terms.

We're joined now by our Berlin

Correspondent, Damien McGuinness.

Is it a done deal?

Not yet. It was

confirmed yesterday that there is a

proposed deal between those two

partners, the centre-left and

centre-right. Their party leaders

might want this but the centre-left

SPD have pledged to give their

members vote. That is 460,000 people

across Germany. It will be a postal

ballot. It won't be until the

beginning of March that we know

whether the members have accepted

it. It's possible that they might

reject it. It is looking pretty

50-50. Many SPD members and

centre-left voters feel they were

scarred badly by the last coalition

with the Conservatives under Angela

Merkel. That is why they would

rather go into opposition and

refined themselves. It is going to

be a nerve-racking few weeks for

German politics and Angela Merkel.

If this gets rejected in March, we

could be looking at starting all

over again. It's been almost five

months since the elections and it

could mean fresh elections which

would mean no government until

autumn. If they vote yes, we would

have a government in place by

Easter.

It looks as though there is

going to be a coalition government

confirmed until March at the

earliest. Looking at the

negotiations, what sort of price is

Angela Merkel paying to bring the

SPD, the Labour Party, into

coalition government?

This vote with

their members is hanging over her

head. That's why she had to give

away some pretty big ministries

including labour, the finance

ministry, which is unusual, she

would have wanted to hang onto that

ordinarily. These are tricky

powerful and key members and she has

been criticised by business leaders

and some grassroots supporters. On

many policies, she has given away

but if we look at the list overall

it is a lot of compromises. No big

grand vision. It could help Germans

in their daily lives, building more

homes, better infrastructure,

sorting out health care, more money

for these things. These are aspects

of the German economy, domestic

issues that have been issues over

the last few months and the

government has been called upon to

do more on them.

The government has

been diminished somewhat by this

wrangling and Angela Merkel has

emboldened her main opposition

party, the AfD.

You would think she

has been weakened but her ratings

are still quite high. Everyone

around her has been weakened even

more, certainly the leader of the

centre-left SPD party, Martin

shorts. His ratings have fallen to

the ground. Angela Merkel is popular

among mainstream Germans but she is

unpopular with a large minority who

disagree with her refugee policy.

What happens depends on this vote

with the social Democrats. That

would mean going back to scratch and

effectively no permanent government

for a year in Germany. That would be

seen as her fault because it would

have meant she had two goals at

forming a coalition and failed. It

would be hard to imagine she would

not be weakened by that. If this

government is pulled together there

is no reason to feel that she

couldn't lead that government. There

is a lot of movement behind the

scenes about who might replace her

because many people assume she

wouldn't run for another term. If

this government does happen, the

next four years would really see the

centre-left getting back its

identity and the centre-right

planning the post-Merkel era. It

would be and era of jostling and a

lot more argumentative than we have

seen in the past.

It's a little over 20 years

since the Royal Yacht,

Britannia, was decommissioned.

Designed to be a symbol

of national pride and flagship

for the Royal Family,

it was the 83rd Royal Yacht,

but was taken out of service

on grounds of cost and is now

a visitor attraction in Edinburgh.

But one group of Conservative MPs

wants to build a new Britannia,

and they want to set up

a national lottery to pay for it.

Here's the MP Craig Mackinley

with his soapbox.

I name this ship Tanya. --

Britannia.

As Britain leaves the European

Union, Britain will now need to

project itself on the world stage to

show it is back in business and for

that reason I believe now is the

time to commission a new Royal yacht

Britannia. Another at Unity to

showcase Britain and show of the

best of our history and shipbuilding

skills into the future. The Royal

yacht Britannia was decommissioned

in 1997. This was a spiteful mistake

by the Labour government. During 40

years of service she conducted 968

official visit and clocked up over 1

million Miles Agassi. In her last

deployment to the Far East,

commercial trade deals of almost £3

billion were signed on board. A new

Royal yacht would project Britain's

unique soft power and influence

around the globe. She would be at

the disposal of the government and

the Royal family to host

international events. To be

achievable we need to find the money

to build her and that is an

estimated £120 million. I am mindful

of the pressure on public finances

and I don't think taxpayers should

foot the bill. I'm proposing a new

national lottery to pay the costs.

The Royal yacht is now a familiar

sight to millions of Australian

people...

We will also need to

investigate comp entry sources of

funding from business leaders who

are supportive of the project.

Leading naval architects are willing

to volunteer their services for

free, similarly compote

manufacturers have told the team

they would like to be part of the

project in the new Royal yacht for

free. Britain remains the third

largest maritime power in the world

and we have unique connection and

history with the sea. The country

deserves a new floating Royal Palace

to project the best of British

business and show our humanitarian

work across the globe.

And Craig McKinley joins us now.

You say part of the money that it

would cost to the yacht would be

funded by national lottery, how

would that work?

I understand people

would be reluctant the public

finances to be used for this but

£120 million represents 1.5 hours of

national government expenditure but

I understand the sensitivities of it

so I think people could play a part

in this by there being a new

stand-alone national lottery. Also

with the Project board I want to put

together, be tapping up the best of

British businesses to have their

products in the yacht and showcase

accordingly.

So, sponsorship deals?

How much do you think you'd be able

to generate from that?

Early days

yet but there are straws in the wind

that potentially the engines could

be provided for free by certain UK

businesses. Naval architects have

been keen to do the spec for free. I

want to pull together a number of

strands to get this project on site.

I fully understand government

departments have been reluctant to

the spa because of the strain on

public finances and I understand

their sensibilities.

That's one

thing, as you say, but a financial

priority but is it a priority at

all? When you think and look at the

debate and discussions around

Brexit. Is this really the time to

be talking about commissioning a new

royal.

-- new Royal Yacht Squadron

it is exactly the time. We have

heard it again and again, we will be

out of the customs union and the

single market, Britain will be free

on the world stage to actually

showcase itself and get new trade

deals so the very small and narrow

cost of this will be paid back in

literally a heartbeat.

It has been a

persuasive argument to have a sort

of open Britain for business,

global, outward facing. Would this

help that sort of campaign on a

post-brexit-mac world?

I thought

that is what our embassies which the

government has been closing were

supposed to be doing. I wonder, if

you said to the public, we will have

a new national. Rick, you choose

what you want it to go towards.

Would they say a Royal Yacht

Squadron I'm not sure they would and

I'd also like to know can the

government supply the Navy personnel

and ships and boats that accompany a

Royal you're at when it goes

anywhere? One of the reasons it was

decommissioned in the first place,

and I haven't heard the Royal Family

complained their work has been

hampered by not having a Royal

you're, is because of the ongoing

cost. It was over 270 Navy personnel

with the running of the Royal yacht

so if you want to ask the public is

this what your priority is, go ahead

but I'm not sure it would be a Royal

yacht.

The PM was in China last week

on a Voyager aircraft and we

achieved £9 billion worth of trade

deals. The last outing of the Royal

yacht before it was decommissioned,

£3 billion worth of trade deal

signed on one trip.

We got more

without the Royal yacht.

Yes, but I

think there is more, this projection

Britain is a maritime nation, it is

a big shipbuilding nation. I

understand the ongoing annual

revenue cost of running this.

And

the Navy personnel.

Indeed, but it

could be a humanitarian offering, a

training ship. It would be a

different asset than it was in the

past but it would be a key

diplomatic tool to project Britain.

I think the post-Brexit world is

exactly the time for one.

Thank you.

While we've been on air, the Commons

leader Andrea Letson has been giving

a statement to MPs on the new rules

around sexual harassment and

bullying at Westminster, let's have

a listen.

We have proposed a set of policies

that will fundamentally change the

working culture in Parliament. Mr

Speaker, I'd like to turn now to

these proposals. They are as

follows. Firstly, Parliament will

agree a shared behaviour code. This

will apply to everyone on the

estate, or in gauged in

Parliamentary business, regardless

of location, and will underpin the

new policy. It will be consulted on

and will make clear the behaviour

expectations of everyone in the

Parliamentary community. The new

complaints and grievance procedure

will be independent from political

parties. Thirdly, it was

acknowledged sexual harassment and

sexual violence are different from

other forms of inappropriate

behaviour.

Joining me now is the

political reporter Lucy Fisher. Do

you welcome the announcement and the

recommendations from Andrea Letson?

Yes, I do and many people across

Westminster will be glad it has been

professionalised. Really, there

should be this in place anyway.

What

about the issue of anonymity, that

if a complaint is made against an

MP, for example, the MP will remain

anonymous until such time it is

resolved or if it is a serious

allegation?

In principle, I think it

is a good idea, allowing people the

chance to try to prove their

innocence and fight their corner

until any finding is made. The

Brault he is going to be more

difficult to police, if the accuser

wants to speak to the press or speak

out, I don't see how you're going to

be able to stop people but by laying

it down in the rules that they want

to keep things under wraps, that

might encourage people to kind of

keep their counsel until the finding

is made. MPs will be happy with that

because there has been some concern

in Westminster this new procedure

could be used to make fixations

claims against MPs by disgruntled

employees or rivals.

I'm going to

get a comment from Angela.

One of

the key reasons for it is an MP

might only have one member of staff

in the Palace of Westminster so by

identifying PMP, you're close to

identifying the member of staff

making the complaint. You want to

ensure if you identify the

complainant, that makes them more

reluctant to come forward so there

has been a lot of discussion about

how best to do this but you don't

want to shame the complainant for

coming forward for fear they may be

identified.

Do you think enough is

being done here to settle this issue

or at least moved to a place where

it will be settled and people will

feel protected at work and they have

somebody January independent talk

about any complaints?

I think so and

I think we can see from the fact it

has taken three months of wrangling

since the scandal first it

Westminster in November for them to

come to this agreement, the

Conservatives, labour, cross-party,

the staff associations, trade

unions, everyone is broadly happy

with the new procedures. It is

independent, there will be a new

sexual violence adviser in

Parliament and I think it seems

quite robust, this new system.

Lucy

Fisher, thank you.

The official language

used in Parliament is,

of course, English -

although you might also hear

a smattering of Norman French

in the House of Lords when bills

are given Royal Assent.

So yesterday was something

of a landmark, after Welsh

was spoken for the first time

during a Parliamentary debate.

Here's the Secretary of State

for Wales, Alun Cairns,

speaking at a meeting

of the Welsh Grand Committee.

And Alun Cairns joins

us now - croeso!

Is that correctly pronounced?

Spot

on. I've been most nervous about it

for the whole programme.

What is so

special about the Welsh language?

It

is part of one of the languages of

the United Kingdom, it is the pay

Parliament, demonstrating although

it is a ancient language, we have a

modern approach to reflect cultures

and traditions of the UK. The issue

came up last year, it was made to

the leader of the house. He sought

by advice and we agreed this would

be a good thing to do.

How did it

happen, how did it come about the

rule change meaning you can now

speak Welsh in the committee rooms

in Parliament?

First of all, it is

in the Welsh grand committee which

is made out of MPs, all Welsh MPs,

plus additional guest, the junior

minister in the Wales office, a

fluent Welsh speaker that happens to

represent a Yorkshire constituency,

and there is simultaneous

translation so we will look to the

European Parliament or the Welsh

assembly and see simultaneous

translation works effectively and

this was our way of using the same

technology.

Would you like to see

I've spoken in Parliament more

broadly?

I think yesterday was a

significant step, the first step, so

let's see the sort of use it had.

Many MPs used it, many MPs are

learning Welsh. If there is an

enthusiasm for it, it is a

conversation to have but let's see

how widely it is used because, of

course, there are consequences and

procedures in Parliament.

And costs.

The translation services, is this

the sort of thing you'd like to have

the taxpayers spend money on?

The

Prime Minister said when she stood

on the doors of Downing Street when

she was first appointed Prime

Minister by the Queen the precious

union. If we are going to represent

every part of the union, we need to

represent the languages of the

United Kingdom and this is a

positive step in order to

demonstrate the relevance of the UK

Parliament in every corner of the

country.

Can everyone on the grand

Welsh committee speak Welsh?

More

dead than I thought which is

interesting because there are lots

of MPs who might be a pitch I about

it but yesterday they had a bit of

confidence and they started using

it. It underlines Welsh is a

language of the UK.

Do you welcome

this?

It is welcomed by the Welsh

MPs and it is a matter for the Welsh

MPs but there's also always been the

proposal and you're allowed to give

evidence in another language or

British sign language in the

committee if it is easier for you to

get your message across. People are

called to give evidence to a

committee and you want to do them to

do so in a way they can make

themselves understood best so there

is that facility. A degree for

British sign language, we are very

inclusive.

It sometimes races and

issue for hand signals.

Paul Flynn,

a Welsh MP, was called to order by

the Speaker because the speaker

thought he was speaking Welsh

language but he was actually

speaking old English.

No one could

understand anyway!

Which

demonstrates that have been protest

by many MPs to see this change. And

we're happy to make the change.

Any

other languages that should be

permitted?

Let's look at each case

its merits. Welsh I think is an

official language of the UK or one

of the languages of the UK and on

that basis we reflect that.

All

right, thank you for coming in. Say

something else to us in Welsh.

SPEAKS WELSH. Lovely, I'll translate

that later.

Time now to find out

the answer to our quiz.

The question was

which TV show does Theresa May

want to appear in?

Strictly Come Dancing,

Great British Bake Off,

Blue Peter or Songs of Praise

So Angela what's the correct answer?

Let's have a look...

I've been worrying about this. If it

was me, I'd go for Striclty, and I

hope she has, but I suspect not.

You're right! Let's have a look.

She

would rather be on Bake Off or

strictly?

What a choice. Very

difficult in different ways. I enjoy

watching Strictly. I'm not sure I'd

do very well at either. Strictly has

some nice costumes.

So, do you think

Strictly?

Possibly, yes.

Can you

dance?

No. This might be an

impediment to being on Strictly.

No,

I think it is a requirement for

politicians to be on Strictly but

you can't dance.

But we can't all be

Ed Balls.

And he really did prove

you can do well even if you can't

dance. Are you surprised she went

for Strictly?

I think it's great.

Would you like to go on the

programme yourself? No, I'd go for

Coronation Street but then Strictly.

But you have thought about it? Just

tell viewers, Nicky Lilley talking

Theresa May on CBBC said catch up

with that if you can.

That's all for today.

Thanks to our guests.

We will be back tomorrow. Goodbye.