0:00:38 > 0:00:41Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
0:00:41 > 0:00:45All sides claim victory in the aftermath of last
0:00:45 > 0:00:48night's Cabinet away day, and praise is heaped on Theresa May
0:00:48 > 0:00:51- but could there be trouble ahead for the Prime Minister
0:00:51 > 0:00:54as the so-called Mutineers rock the boat again?
0:00:54 > 0:00:56Another bus with a big number on it.
0:00:56 > 0:00:59This time, it's Remainers on board.
0:00:59 > 0:01:02Can they really persuade the British people to change
0:01:02 > 0:01:04their mind about Brexit?
0:01:04 > 0:01:07Gay people can get married in England, Wales and Scotland -
0:01:07 > 0:01:09but not in Northern Ireland.
0:01:09 > 0:01:12With the Stormont Assembly suspended should the UK parliament
0:01:12 > 0:01:15legislate to legalise it?
0:01:15 > 0:01:17And Lib Dem leader Vince Cable chooses Roy Jenkins
0:01:17 > 0:01:20as his political hero.
0:01:22 > 0:01:25I think he would be a very, very sad, heartbroken man if he saw
0:01:25 > 0:01:28what had happened today.
0:01:34 > 0:01:37All that in the next hour, and with me for the duration,
0:01:37 > 0:01:39the Guardian's Heather Stewart and the Telegraph's Tim Stanley.
0:01:39 > 0:01:42Welcome to the programme.
0:01:42 > 0:01:46So, Theresa May's Brexit cabinet enjoyed a lavish dinner last night
0:01:46 > 0:01:50of cream of sweetcorn soup with a ham hock croquette
0:01:50 > 0:01:54followed by Guinness short rib of Dexter Beef with onions
0:01:54 > 0:01:59and parsnip mash, but now the Chequers party is over
0:01:59 > 0:02:00and the clean-up has begun.
0:02:00 > 0:02:03We've been told the Prime Minister "played a blinder" and that
0:02:03 > 0:02:04there was an outbreak of unity...for now.
0:02:04 > 0:02:07But just what has been agreed?
0:02:07 > 0:02:10Some have briefed that "divergence has won",
0:02:10 > 0:02:13meaning Britain won't be tied to EU regulations but instead try to trade
0:02:13 > 0:02:19with Europe using a system of mutually agreed rules.
0:02:19 > 0:02:23Others have said there was an increasing realisation
0:02:23 > 0:02:26that there needed to be a pragmatic Brexit with an acknowledgement
0:02:26 > 0:02:28that the UK should stick closely to Brussels in some areas.
0:02:28 > 0:02:30So what now?
0:02:30 > 0:02:33Theresa May will have to get her whole cabinet to sign off
0:02:33 > 0:02:36on the deal next Tuesday before the Prime Minister makes her keynote
0:02:36 > 0:02:42speech outlining the government's position next Friday.
0:02:42 > 0:02:45The fun really starts when they put the proposals to the EU.
0:02:45 > 0:02:50Michel Barnier has always warned that any deal must be "less
0:02:50 > 0:02:51favourable" than the current arrangement and that
0:02:51 > 0:02:54the government's plans would not be compatible with the EU's principles.
0:02:54 > 0:02:57There are a few coming late to the party, Tory backbench MP
0:02:57 > 0:02:59Anna Soubry has put down a new amendment to the government's
0:02:59 > 0:03:07trade bill calling for a customs union with the EU once we leave.
0:03:09 > 0:03:12This could potentially be very dangerous for Mrs May as it
0:03:12 > 0:03:14could get support from Labour who are also poised to commit
0:03:14 > 0:03:17themselves to membership of "a customs union" with a speech
0:03:17 > 0:03:18from Jeremy Corbyn expected on Monday.
0:03:18 > 0:03:21Let's have a listen to what Michael Gove and Amber Rudd had
0:03:21 > 0:03:27to say about last night's meeting.
0:03:28 > 0:03:31A very positive meeting and we got behind the Prime Minister and agreed
0:03:31 > 0:03:35the basis for her speech for next weekend and are looking forward to
0:03:35 > 0:03:38it going ahead.The Prime Minister will be making a speech shortly but
0:03:38 > 0:03:41there was a very good atmosphere and we agreed on a way forward.
0:03:41 > 0:03:47And we're joined now from Central Lobby by Dominic Grieve.
0:03:47 > 0:03:51Dominic, your colleague, Anna Sue Brie, put down a new amendment to
0:03:51 > 0:03:57the trade bill calling for a customs arrangement with the EU once we
0:03:57 > 0:04:01leave -- Soubry. Theresa May said you would be leaving the customs
0:04:01 > 0:04:07union with the EU so why have you signed up for it?The Prime Minister
0:04:07 > 0:04:10is right that we will leave the customs union on the EU because the
0:04:10 > 0:04:15on -- one is dependent on the other. The question arises is what is in
0:04:15 > 0:04:18the national interest for the future to avoid tariffs and inspection
0:04:18 > 0:04:24regimes and enable free trade and allow an open border between
0:04:24 > 0:04:28ourselves and the EU and the North and South of Northern Ireland. These
0:04:28 > 0:04:33are important considerations. My view has been that the national
0:04:33 > 0:04:37interest lies in maintaining those. If that means being in a form of
0:04:37 > 0:04:41customs union and I don't think that is something we ought to rule out.
0:04:41 > 0:04:45Of course, the prime Minister indicated she would like to try and
0:04:45 > 0:04:49achieve this ability to have a free flow of trade of goods by some other
0:04:49 > 0:04:55means and I don't object to Latin anyway, -- object to that in any
0:04:55 > 0:04:59way, but I do have strong views about eliminating the possibility of
0:04:59 > 0:05:03a customs union because, at the end of the day, the likely benefit to
0:05:03 > 0:05:07the United Kingdom was third-party agreements with other countries,
0:05:07 > 0:05:11which would be much less than a disadvantage of using -- losing the
0:05:11 > 0:05:16free flow of trade which I think will have an adverse impact on our
0:05:16 > 0:05:20GDP.You differ with the Prime Minister as to how this future
0:05:20 > 0:05:25relationship can be achieved. What difference will the tabled amendment
0:05:25 > 0:05:30actually make?Just be correct. I don't differ with her about how it
0:05:30 > 0:05:33might be achieved. If she can achieve it by the means she is
0:05:33 > 0:05:36seeking, all well and good but we should not rule out the possibility
0:05:36 > 0:05:39of a customs union, and in order to make sure that issue remains on the
0:05:39 > 0:05:45that is why the amendment has been tabled and it will mean when we come
0:05:45 > 0:05:48to the report stage of the bill it can be given proper consideration in
0:05:48 > 0:05:52the light of whether the negotiations have got some point at
0:05:52 > 0:05:56that stage.Do you accept following what has been reported from those
0:05:56 > 0:06:03who attended them Chequers meeting, the eight-hour meeting, that it was
0:06:03 > 0:06:06relatively harmonious and by supporting this amendment you are
0:06:06 > 0:06:10making life difficult for your Prime Minister?That I think is a
0:06:10 > 0:06:16misunderstanding of the tabling of amendments. As parliamentarians we
0:06:16 > 0:06:19can table amendments during the passage of a bill to make sure
0:06:19 > 0:06:22issues are considered that we think are of importance. What decision is
0:06:22 > 0:06:26taken about the amendment must be dependent on what stage and the
0:06:26 > 0:06:29information we have asked the progress of negotiations when it
0:06:29 > 0:06:33comes back. The point is, you should not exclude the possibility of
0:06:33 > 0:06:39remaining a customs union. And that is what we have got to make sure,
0:06:39 > 0:06:44that we keep that issue available for us.But you want to have Labour
0:06:44 > 0:06:48MPs support the amendment and, in fact, you want the Labour leadership
0:06:48 > 0:06:52to MPs to back the amendment about remaining in the customs union which
0:06:52 > 0:06:57could result in defeat for your government.I have absolutely no
0:06:57 > 0:07:01idea whether the Labour leadership, which actually is led by someone who
0:07:01 > 0:07:05broadly speaking has supported Brexit, will wish to support the
0:07:05 > 0:07:09amendment. I have little doubt the amendment will command support
0:07:09 > 0:07:13across the house and it might command support across a broad
0:07:13 > 0:07:17swathe of the Conservative party in parliament. But at the moment we
0:07:17 > 0:07:21haven't come to that point. At the moment the amendment has been tabled
0:07:21 > 0:07:25and I think it is essential we could keep the issue available and could
0:07:25 > 0:07:28consider it.I have looked to the people who signed up to the
0:07:28 > 0:07:32amendment and there are a large number of Labour MPs and, if you
0:07:32 > 0:07:36listen to anything coming out the Labour leadership's mounds in the
0:07:36 > 0:07:41last few weeks, it looks as though they are to confirming the position
0:07:41 > 0:07:44which is like yours, keeping the issue of a customs union on the
0:07:44 > 0:07:49table. So if the government was defeated, what would happen then?If
0:07:49 > 0:07:52the government was defeated eventually I would assume the
0:07:52 > 0:07:56government would be required to seek to negotiate keeping us in the
0:07:56 > 0:08:01customs union, if that can be obtained from our EU partners.
0:08:01 > 0:08:10Excuse me. Those are things that one has to keep in mind, of course. But
0:08:10 > 0:08:13I don't think it would be the end of the government at all. There's no
0:08:13 > 0:08:18reason why it should be.If you clear your throat for a moment,
0:08:18 > 0:08:21Heather Stewart, let's ask about Labour, because Jeremy Corbyn will
0:08:21 > 0:08:26make this speech on Monday. Do you think it will be the point at which
0:08:26 > 0:08:32Jeremy Corbyn says we will back the idea of Britain remaining in a
0:08:32 > 0:08:35customs union with the European Union.There has certainly been a
0:08:35 > 0:08:41shift in Labour policy and I coordinated one as we saw different
0:08:41 > 0:08:45members from wings of the party, Owen Smith, Emily Thornberry and
0:08:45 > 0:08:49others saying the policy was evolving. John McDonnell had
0:08:49 > 0:08:55interesting words as well. It's always dangerous to predict what
0:08:55 > 0:08:59Jeremy Corbyn will say in his speeches. I remember a speech in the
0:08:59 > 0:09:03referendum campaign which did not turn out as expected. But there has
0:09:03 > 0:09:08clearly been a shift and busily the Labour leadership is extremely keen
0:09:08 > 0:09:11on inflicting defeat in the House of Commons to the government if it can.
0:09:11 > 0:09:15So how dangerous is it for Theresa May? Dominic grieve says it will
0:09:15 > 0:09:20mean we just have to keep the idea of a customs union on the table but
0:09:20 > 0:09:24it will mean more than that for Theresa May?Listening then he
0:09:24 > 0:09:29seemed to leave the door open of a Canada plus model free-trade model
0:09:29 > 0:09:32which delivers the benefits of a customs union without being in one
0:09:32 > 0:09:35and I'm sure he will want to respond to that and I don't want to put
0:09:35 > 0:09:39words in his mouth but I see that as the compromise that might happen. We
0:09:39 > 0:09:43essentially have three separate positions. That of the government,
0:09:43 > 0:09:46which hasn't really changed, where they say they want divergences where
0:09:46 > 0:09:51they will copy what the EU does but not be in the EU. You have the Tory
0:09:51 > 0:09:54rebel and Labour position which hasn't really changed of saying we
0:09:54 > 0:09:59should be in a customs union. One position that might have changed is
0:09:59 > 0:10:03that some members of the EU 27 are in favour of a Canada plus plus plus
0:10:03 > 0:10:07style deal and don't want to see things dragged out by the
0:10:07 > 0:10:12negotiators of the commission. So in many ways things have not changed
0:10:12 > 0:10:16but I don't see this disagreement between the rebels on the government
0:10:16 > 0:10:19is completely shutting the door on some sort of agreement.What would
0:10:19 > 0:10:23happen if the government was defeated on the amendment?It would
0:10:23 > 0:10:27be very embarrassing and undermine the government's efforts are
0:10:27 > 0:10:31providing a unified front and might embolden those in the Cabinet such
0:10:31 > 0:10:35as Philip Hammond who take a more remain point of view which I suspect
0:10:35 > 0:10:40is what on the rebels minds. But I expect they are reasonable and some
0:10:40 > 0:10:46accommodation can be made.But you to inflict an embarrassing defeat on
0:10:46 > 0:10:49your own government?I never want to defeat my own government and I
0:10:49 > 0:10:55always seek to try and avoid doing that and after all, I don't have are
0:10:55 > 0:10:59serial rebel reputation even though I voted once against the government
0:10:59 > 0:11:02on a national issue.You said it was in the national interest to keep it
0:11:02 > 0:11:06on the table so will you put your principles ahead of the party?We
0:11:06 > 0:11:10are in danger of running ahead of ourselves on this. I've explained
0:11:10 > 0:11:14what it is that the amendment is designed to achieve and the point
0:11:14 > 0:11:19was very well made that it might be that some sort of Canada plus plus
0:11:19 > 0:11:24plus arrangement can be arrived at but I am interested in the reality
0:11:24 > 0:11:28of free trade without tariffs and inspection regimes. That is what I
0:11:28 > 0:11:31want to see and I'm perfectly prepared to consider different
0:11:31 > 0:11:34options but I'm not prepared to exclude options in order to achieve
0:11:34 > 0:11:39that.What do you say to Jacob Rees Mogg who said remaining in a customs
0:11:39 > 0:11:46union with the EU means we would be common to internal tariff meaning
0:11:46 > 0:11:49higher prices for clothing and footwear and it would be more
0:11:49 > 0:11:52expensive for the British public? Does the amendment risk lowering the
0:11:52 > 0:11:56standard of living for people in this country?I completely disagree
0:11:56 > 0:12:00with Jacob's analysis. The evidence is overwhelming that if we come out
0:12:00 > 0:12:04of a customs union we have no satisfactory arrangements and have a
0:12:04 > 0:12:07tariff and inspection regime meaning the cost of living will rise and it
0:12:07 > 0:12:11is the poorest and most vulnerable who will suffer the most.Tim
0:12:11 > 0:12:17Stanley, what you say to that?You could argue that the Brexiteers are
0:12:17 > 0:12:21breeding trouble for the government by saying that stopping the
0:12:21 > 0:12:25migration of people during the transition. Everyone is bargaining
0:12:25 > 0:12:30now. That is all I can really say. It's up to the Prime Minister to
0:12:30 > 0:12:33navigate this. One reason she appears so tight-lipped and
0:12:33 > 0:12:36difficult to read is because she is juggling so many balls. You could
0:12:36 > 0:12:39argue it's her fault because she did not get the majority she wanted to
0:12:39 > 0:12:43make it possible that this week I feel more sympathetic because we are
0:12:43 > 0:12:46starting to see the demands of other people in the parliament and she has
0:12:46 > 0:12:52to keep them all happy whilst also maintaining a clear path for the
0:12:52 > 0:12:55government.Dominic Grieve, thank you.
0:12:55 > 0:12:59Now the leaders of the other 27 EU countries are gathering
0:12:59 > 0:13:02today to amongst other things firm up their position on Brexit.
0:13:02 > 0:13:05Our Brussels reporter, Adam Fleming is there.
0:13:05 > 0:13:10Add, tell me what they are discussing.The way I've been
0:13:10 > 0:13:14putting it this morning is that Brexit is not the theme tune for the
0:13:14 > 0:13:19summit but it is the background music so they will talk about the
0:13:19 > 0:13:23future composition of the European Parliament after 2019 because there
0:13:23 > 0:13:27will no longer be 73 British MEPs and they will talk about the
0:13:27 > 0:13:31successor to the process by which Jean-Claude Juncker was made prime
0:13:31 > 0:13:37minister of the EU Commission and his term of office is up there. Then
0:13:37 > 0:13:43they have the really thorny issue of the MSF left, the multi-financial
0:13:43 > 0:13:49framework, which is the seven-year budget cycle which starts in 2021
0:13:49 > 0:13:54and will have a Brexit sized hole in it of potentially 15 billion euros
0:13:54 > 0:13:58per year. Lots of difficult conversations between net
0:13:58 > 0:14:01contributors who pay in and don't necessarily want to paying more, and
0:14:01 > 0:14:05their recipients who don't necessarily want to receive less,
0:14:05 > 0:14:09while there is increasing demands on the budget when it comes to security
0:14:09 > 0:14:13and migration. That discussion will go on for months and months. In
0:14:13 > 0:14:18terms Brexit, the only bit formerly on the agenda today is Donald Tusk
0:14:18 > 0:14:22will update the 27 leaders on the process he will go through to write
0:14:22 > 0:14:26their next set of guidelines for the next phase of talks about trade and
0:14:26 > 0:14:30the future relationship, which the 27 will sign off in this building
0:14:30 > 0:14:36when they next meet on the 23rd of March.The EU seems to have rejected
0:14:36 > 0:14:41a key British proposal for the future relationship after Brexit,
0:14:41 > 0:14:45the so-called baskets where you can have a variance in relation post
0:14:45 > 0:14:48Brexit. This is according to documents published by the European
0:14:48 > 0:14:54commission. In your opinion, are the EU 27 still singing from the same
0:14:54 > 0:15:00hymn sheet? Is there any sign of divergences?
0:15:00 > 0:15:06Yeah, that's the word they all use all the time.Very fashionable.That
0:15:06 > 0:15:10document yesterday which emerged was a presentation that was given by the
0:15:10 > 0:15:13European Commission Brexit negotiators to diplomats from the
0:15:13 > 0:15:1727, a couple of weeks ago, which talked about these three Baskett
0:15:17 > 0:15:21approach the Prime Minister has as a basis for the discussion about the
0:15:21 > 0:15:24future relationship and they said it was incompatible with the European
0:15:24 > 0:15:28Council's guidelines for Brexit and they pointed out that it meant that
0:15:28 > 0:15:32the UK was cherry picking, taking what bits of the single market it
0:15:32 > 0:15:36liked which threatened the integrity of the single market, it threatened
0:15:36 > 0:15:39the autonomy of the EU's decision-making because it would
0:15:39 > 0:15:42mean the UK on the outside would be too involved on decision is
0:15:42 > 0:15:46happening on the inside, there would have to be a role for the European
0:15:46 > 0:15:50Court of Justice in the UK were still going to rely on concepts in
0:15:50 > 0:15:53EU law, and also said what about Norway, because they are in the
0:15:53 > 0:15:57European economic Eire, might get annoyed by the UK getting the sort
0:15:57 > 0:16:01of deal? They were very firm. That's against the guidelines drawn up by
0:16:01 > 0:16:09the 27 in April last year. But I'm detecting subtle little hints where
0:16:09 > 0:16:12things are changing force of this is going to sound incredibly geeky so
0:16:12 > 0:16:15bear with me. The Swedish board of trade, which is the trade agency
0:16:15 > 0:16:19which advises the Swedish Government, has just written 260
0:16:19 > 0:16:24pages of Brexit reports about the economy, it's all in Swedish but
0:16:24 > 0:16:28they've released a four page summary in English which says a one size
0:16:28 > 0:16:32fits all model for the UK and Sweden is not appropriate for the Swedish
0:16:32 > 0:16:35economy and they say for some sectors of the Swedish economy it
0:16:35 > 0:16:40would be best of the UK remained in EU. For some sectors of the Swedish
0:16:40 > 0:16:43economy it would be better if there was a deep and special trade
0:16:43 > 0:16:47relationship like the one the EU has with Ukraine, but some part of the
0:16:47 > 0:16:50switch economy it would be like Switzerland where they have loads of
0:16:50 > 0:16:55bilateral deals in different sectors and they say a plane free trade
0:16:55 > 0:16:58agreement like the EU has with Canada and Japan, would not
0:16:58 > 0:17:03eliminate barriers to trade effectively and would not be good
0:17:03 > 0:17:06enough. To my ears, does that mean they are criticising Michel
0:17:06 > 0:17:13Barnier's Canada is the best you are going to get approach or criticising
0:17:13 > 0:17:17the UK's guidelines saying we have to delete some of those red lines in
0:17:17 > 0:17:21those areas or is it both or neither and is that what we're going to be
0:17:21 > 0:17:26looking at, more clues about what member states think about this
0:17:26 > 0:17:28future relationship?Adam, thank goodness there was that translation
0:17:28 > 0:17:32from the Swedish board of trade because it would have left you in a
0:17:32 > 0:17:32pickle.
0:17:32 > 0:17:34We're joined now from Rome by the Italian
0:17:34 > 0:17:36MEP Roberto Gualtieri, who is on the European Parliament's
0:17:36 > 0:17:40Brexit steering group.
0:17:40 > 0:17:43Welcome to the programme. I don't know how much of the last discussion
0:17:43 > 0:17:47you just heard, but we are already hearing that Brussels is rejecting
0:17:47 > 0:17:53Theresa May's approach of managed divergences also why?Actually this
0:17:53 > 0:18:00is not true. We are respectfully waiting for understanding of what
0:18:00 > 0:18:04exactly is the UK proposal. We understand there will be a speech
0:18:04 > 0:18:09from the Prime Minister next week. And then we will define our
0:18:09 > 0:18:14guidelines. We have only said that we want a relationship with the
0:18:14 > 0:18:18United Kingdom which is as close as possible, but, of course, any kind
0:18:18 > 0:18:24of relationship has its own balance and rights of obligation, single
0:18:24 > 0:18:27market has other rules, custom union, other rules, and if there are
0:18:27 > 0:18:32red lines which prevent those solutions, then we enter into a
0:18:32 > 0:18:35category of a free-trade agreement which of course have to be
0:18:35 > 0:18:38negotiated.You say you don't know what Britain once and therefore
0:18:38 > 0:18:43nothing has been rejected, but that's not the case, is it, Roberto,
0:18:43 > 0:18:46because the Prime Minister has put forward a proposal of three baskets
0:18:46 > 0:18:50where you would have some mutual recognition in some areas, some
0:18:50 > 0:18:54close alignment and some divergences and we know now from the commission
0:18:54 > 0:18:58that they rejected that, so I say again, why has that been rejected
0:18:58 > 0:19:03out of hand?Honestly, I don't understand what we're talking about.
0:19:03 > 0:19:08We have not received a formal position. We haven't heard the
0:19:08 > 0:19:14speech. Nothing hinting of these baskets, which is not a totally
0:19:14 > 0:19:18clear concept. We know in a free-trade agreement, if the UK is
0:19:18 > 0:19:22not in the customs union, if it's not in a single market, of course we
0:19:22 > 0:19:29cannot have a totally free market, we have to have an agreement and the
0:19:29 > 0:19:32level of market access will depend on a number of factors. We can have
0:19:32 > 0:19:38a very good level of market taxes for goods and services, the more
0:19:38 > 0:19:43difficult, of course, as the Swedish document just quoted saying, in a
0:19:43 > 0:19:48free-trade agreement, if it's impossible, if you want frictionless
0:19:48 > 0:19:53trade, you need to stay in the single market. These other basics.
0:19:53 > 0:19:58Of course we have to enter into negotiations and we need a clear
0:19:58 > 0:20:02position from the UK and of course we will our guidelines to Parliament
0:20:02 > 0:20:08in March.You do accept there's a number of countries in fact that do
0:20:08 > 0:20:13have special deals with the European Union, it's not strictly a case of
0:20:13 > 0:20:17remaining in the single market to get that frictionless trade or
0:20:17 > 0:20:23remaining in the customs union, so there is the complete alignment with
0:20:23 > 0:20:27regulations. For example, Turkey, it isn't bound by freedom of movement
0:20:27 > 0:20:31and has a customs union with the EU but only on goods and not services.
0:20:31 > 0:20:35That's a bespoke deal so why can't Britain have a bespoke deal?This is
0:20:35 > 0:20:43exactly a good example. Turkey is a member of a different union, which
0:20:43 > 0:20:48has advantages, in terms of tariff. Of course Turkey is bound to have
0:20:48 > 0:20:55the same tariff outside so this means there's some equalisation of
0:20:55 > 0:21:01the policy. With less friction in the trade of goods, of course, there
0:21:01 > 0:21:05are still some checks to be done because they are not in the single
0:21:05 > 0:21:11market.Yes but button plaited broadly with the approach of three
0:21:11 > 0:21:15baskets? Norway also has a special deal, it's part of the single
0:21:15 > 0:21:19market, but not the customs union. It a separate rules. For industries
0:21:19 > 0:21:25like farm produce and fish. Britain could have a similar approach,
0:21:25 > 0:21:30mixing perhaps the two?That's exactly the reason why we need to
0:21:30 > 0:21:35wait for what would be the proposal because something similar to Turkey
0:21:35 > 0:21:42is different from a free-trade agreement because it implies some
0:21:42 > 0:21:47limitation in the external tariff which Canada does not have. So far
0:21:47 > 0:21:53we have heard that the UK was excluding this option. If they move
0:21:53 > 0:21:55in this direction it would be a positive thing of course, but it has
0:21:55 > 0:22:01not been said.Yes, but we keep hearing from the EU, Michel Barnier,
0:22:01 > 0:22:05Britain won't be allowed to cherry pick but examples of Norway, Turkey
0:22:05 > 0:22:11and Switzerland, their bilateral agreements with the EU to some
0:22:11 > 0:22:15extent that is cherry picking. This has been rejected out of hand for
0:22:15 > 0:22:26Britain. Why?I insist I agree with your description of how we reject,
0:22:26 > 0:22:31but it's not true.That they have rejected it.We have some
0:22:31 > 0:22:36obligations with the UK if they choose to be banned by a customs
0:22:36 > 0:22:41union, and it's a positive fact we not rejecting it all. Switzerland is
0:22:41 > 0:22:45a bit different, but I would like to remind you, Switzerland has the
0:22:45 > 0:22:52freedom of movement. I understand the UK does not want this.Is the EU
0:22:52 > 0:23:0127 still unified?Absolutely. We have been unified and we will be
0:23:01 > 0:23:07united because we have a very reasonable position. We want a
0:23:07 > 0:23:10relationship as close as possible with the United Kingdom. Of course
0:23:10 > 0:23:15each kind of relationship has balances, rights and obligations
0:23:15 > 0:23:21under accept this principle, so we are open to engaging in a decision
0:23:21 > 0:23:27as far as the UK, we have a clear proposal, and we will discuss it. It
0:23:27 > 0:23:33would also be very useful of course to move forward the discussion on
0:23:33 > 0:23:36transition because that an element of uncertainty. We are close, not
0:23:36 > 0:23:42yet there, but I hope a number of problems will be positively solved
0:23:42 > 0:23:47and a very reasonable proposal of the union with some limitation of
0:23:47 > 0:23:51course, would be the basis of an agreement so we can move into the
0:23:51 > 0:23:55last phase which is crucial of course.Roberto, stay with us why
0:23:55 > 0:24:01bring in my other guest to the discussion. What do you make of what
0:24:01 > 0:24:04Roberto is saying? Despite some other language that has come from
0:24:04 > 0:24:07the European Union, about not wanting Britain to cherry pick, does
0:24:07 > 0:24:12he have a point it is still not clear exactly what Britain is after?
0:24:12 > 0:24:16That is very true but it's all so from what he said, not entirely
0:24:16 > 0:24:19clear, what Europe will eventually agree to. I'm loving the discussion
0:24:19 > 0:24:23this morning because we're seeing some light at the end of the tunnel.
0:24:23 > 0:24:25At the beginning of the negotiation process everything tended to feel
0:24:25 > 0:24:29like it was on the side of the EU because they were trying to get as
0:24:29 > 0:24:36much money out of us, that was their focus and they got it. With is gone,
0:24:36 > 0:24:38they are down 9 billion, but now we're moving on, while the
0:24:38 > 0:24:42commission may well be saying one thing, Michel Barnier could be
0:24:42 > 0:24:46saying it's not possible, you can't cherry pick, which technically
0:24:46 > 0:24:50speaking is true from the EU's point of view, it's interesting to hear
0:24:50 > 0:24:53the individual representatives of different countries are thinking,
0:24:53 > 0:24:58hang on, we sell to Britain's markets, why can't we do a deal
0:24:58 > 0:25:02because it's in everyone's benefit? What do you think about the idea of
0:25:02 > 0:25:06Britain's managed divergences which I'm sure can mean something to
0:25:06 > 0:25:10everyone, in terms of sort of semantics and linguistic gymnastics,
0:25:10 > 0:25:15do you think Britain will find much more difficult when is presented to
0:25:15 > 0:25:19the EU?I do, and I think it's a better way of dealing with the
0:25:19 > 0:25:22divergences within the Cabinet itself, rather than thinking about
0:25:22 > 0:25:25the negotiations although it seems to me they're there was a chink of
0:25:25 > 0:25:29light in the sense of when you raised Turkey the answer was, yes,
0:25:29 > 0:25:34we have a customs union in particular areas so that does seem
0:25:34 > 0:25:38up the idea of different arrangements in different sectors,
0:25:38 > 0:25:40which Theresa May many months ago used to say repeatedly the customs
0:25:40 > 0:25:46union is not a binary question to which the commission used to say
0:25:46 > 0:25:50absolutely yes, it is. Perhaps it is a bit more complex than that and
0:25:50 > 0:25:54that is why David Davis and his ministers are shuttling around like
0:25:54 > 0:25:57mad visiting several European capitals every week because they
0:25:57 > 0:26:02very much hope to open up ultimate of a chink between Brussels and the
0:26:02 > 0:26:08EU 27.On the implementation period, Roberto mentioned, do you think it
0:26:08 > 0:26:11is now becoming clear Theresa May will have to give away on her
0:26:11 > 0:26:15proposal to change the rights for EU citizens coming during the two-year
0:26:15 > 0:26:23period?It is implicit in the transition deal, it doesn't feel it
0:26:23 > 0:26:26has been nailed down a. And the Times of course was reporting today
0:26:26 > 0:26:29that exactly what would happen. I think what Britain wants to maintain
0:26:29 > 0:26:34at this stage is as much Flex it is possible because it has got to get
0:26:34 > 0:26:39its House in order but also doesn't want to put a time negotiations when
0:26:39 > 0:26:42it comes to negotiating a future traders have regardless of what the
0:26:42 > 0:26:47Government may publicly say about rights, Ireland, any of this stuff,
0:26:47 > 0:26:51my suspicion is the transition will be a movable feast.Thank you very
0:26:51 > 0:26:54much for joining us today.
0:26:54 > 0:26:56Now it's time for our daily quiz.
0:26:56 > 0:26:58Earlier this week, David Davis was at pains to tell people
0:26:58 > 0:27:06post-Brexit Britain wouldn't be a "Mad Max-style dystopian fantasy".
0:27:06 > 0:27:07Disappointing a view!
0:27:07 > 0:27:08Disappointing a view!
0:27:08 > 0:27:10Well, yesterday, his cabinet colleague Andrea
0:27:10 > 0:27:11Leadsom backed him up,
0:27:11 > 0:27:13and said life outside the EU would be much more
0:27:13 > 0:27:14like another film.
0:27:14 > 0:27:15But which one?
0:27:15 > 0:27:17Was it a) 28 Days Later?
0:27:17 > 0:27:18b) Love Actually?
0:27:18 > 0:27:19c) Four Weddings and a Funeral?
0:27:19 > 0:27:21or d) The Wicker Man?
0:27:21 > 0:27:22The mind boggles!
0:27:22 > 0:27:23The mind boggles!
0:27:23 > 0:27:26At the end of the show, Tim and Heather will give
0:27:26 > 0:27:27us the correct answer.
0:27:27 > 0:27:28Slightly surreal question.
0:27:28 > 0:27:29Slightly surreal question.
0:27:29 > 0:27:32Now, remember that Leave Campaign bus which carried the claim
0:27:32 > 0:27:33that we send £350 million a week to the EU?
0:27:33 > 0:27:37Money which could be spent on the NHS?
0:27:37 > 0:27:40Well, Remainers now have their own bus touring the country with a big
0:27:40 > 0:27:43number on the side of it.
0:27:43 > 0:27:51It's in Liverpool today and onboard is campaigner Phil Richmond.
0:27:51 > 0:28:00Haven't we had enough of buses with big figures on the side of them?I
0:28:00 > 0:28:03don't know. I mean, we had a bus which said 350 William pounds was
0:28:03 > 0:28:09going to be saved by leaving the EU, and then the government's own
0:28:09 > 0:28:13figures showed in fact we are going to be 2000 million pounds a week
0:28:13 > 0:28:17poorer and we understand why they try to give it under wraps and why
0:28:17 > 0:28:22MPs are only allowed to go and look at these numbers in a special room
0:28:22 > 0:28:27with an invigilator if they leave their mobile phones at the door.
0:28:27 > 0:28:30Behind you we have three Jacob Rees Moggs behind you which could be
0:28:30 > 0:28:35worrying from your point of view. They are obviously not very keen on
0:28:35 > 0:28:38your bus but we will leave them there in the background. Just to
0:28:38 > 0:28:45remind viewers of his position. Isn't this all a bit late, two years
0:28:45 > 0:28:48too late in fact? Shouldn't you have done this during the referendum
0:28:48 > 0:28:55campaign?No, absolutely not. It couldn't be a better time. We have
0:28:55 > 0:29:01had a phoney war for 18 months and finally the Government is having to
0:29:01 > 0:29:04admit there are hard trade-offs in Brexit and it's going to come at a
0:29:04 > 0:29:11price. And it's not going to make is better off, we are going to be
0:29:11 > 0:29:14poorer, and we know how much poorer we are going to be. We are at a
0:29:14 > 0:29:18point when people are asking is it worth it? We now concede what the
0:29:18 > 0:29:21price of Brexit is going to be and what our campaign is doing is saying
0:29:21 > 0:29:26is it worth it? And more and more people are asking is it worth it?
0:29:26 > 0:29:30Why and how have you calculate that figure on the bus which is being
0:29:30 > 0:29:38scored slightly by the trio of Jacob Rees Moggs?OK, it's a pity you
0:29:38 > 0:29:45can't see the figure, because it's very simple. If you have 5% loss of
0:29:45 > 0:29:51GDP growth, and you have a current GDP of macro-2,000,000,000,000, 5%
0:29:51 > 0:29:58of that is 100 billion, and that is 2000 million. It's as simple as
0:29:58 > 0:30:05that. There's no calculations needed.Aren't you reigniting
0:30:05 > 0:30:10project fear?
0:30:10 > 0:30:18project fear?No. Project fear is about frightening people with things
0:30:18 > 0:30:22that might happen. This is simply telling people what the Government's
0:30:22 > 0:30:26thinking is. This is what the best experts the Government has are
0:30:26 > 0:30:32telling them is going to happen with Brexit.
0:30:33 > 0:30:38Apart from the three behind you, how have is the turnout been to see the
0:30:38 > 0:30:43bus?The turnout is well and we've been well-received everywhere. You
0:30:43 > 0:30:47can't see, they are on the other side of the bus. But because of the
0:30:47 > 0:30:52noise of those I'm finding hard to hear you.Thanks for joining us and
0:30:52 > 0:30:55maybe you should have a conversation with the three guys behind you
0:30:55 > 0:31:00wearing the Jacob Rees Mogg masks. As soon as I am of their I am going
0:31:00 > 0:31:05to ask them do you really think it is worth it? But thanks for having
0:31:05 > 0:31:06me on.
0:31:06 > 0:31:09Well, earlier this week a pro-Brexit group of economists came up
0:31:09 > 0:31:11with their own assessement of the economic impact
0:31:11 > 0:31:12of leaving the EU.
0:31:12 > 0:31:13Julian Jessop contributed to that report.
0:31:13 > 0:31:20Vicky Pryce is a former government economist.
0:31:20 > 0:31:27We were all glued to the Jacob Rees Mogg people in the last film. Your
0:31:27 > 0:31:32model assumes mass elimination of tariffs. As any government minister
0:31:32 > 0:31:35or political party indicated they would unilaterally eliminate
0:31:35 > 0:31:39tariffs?Not as such but that's a reasonable approximation of where
0:31:39 > 0:31:42the government wants to end up, a situation where we have a
0:31:42 > 0:31:45comprehensive free-trade deal with the rest of the European Union
0:31:45 > 0:31:49covering both goods and services and significantly lower trade barriers
0:31:49 > 0:31:53with the rest of the world. It's true the government is not hoping to
0:31:53 > 0:31:58completely eliminate the barriers and to make those assumptions we
0:31:58 > 0:32:00have another assumption where we only make roughly half of them and
0:32:00 > 0:32:03that still delivers a positive number but whichever way you look at
0:32:03 > 0:32:09it you end up in positive numbers rather than negatives. But you don't
0:32:09 > 0:32:13think anyone has put the scenario forward?Has any other country
0:32:13 > 0:32:17indicated they would be interested in removing tariffs and nontariff
0:32:17 > 0:32:21barriers to the extent you'd like to see?We have the model what the
0:32:21 > 0:32:24government is aiming to achieve. You can have a separate argument about
0:32:24 > 0:32:28whether this scenario is likely to be accepted by the rest of the
0:32:28 > 0:32:33European Union or world, but the problem with the Treasury analysis
0:32:33 > 0:32:36is that it models three scenarios, none of which are government policy
0:32:36 > 0:32:40and particular the one that features on the bus is the one thing that the
0:32:40 > 0:32:44government has ruled out. So there has to be a range of scenarios
0:32:44 > 0:32:47rather than prejudging before the negotiations have started?What do
0:32:47 > 0:32:52you say to that?It interesting they've come up with a positive
0:32:52 > 0:32:58figure in the medium to long term. What is the medium to long term?
0:32:58 > 0:33:032030, that is the period you are looking at. But it could take longer
0:33:03 > 0:33:07for any positives to come through. The interesting thing is they are
0:33:07 > 0:33:11not saying much about the short-term, which is likely to be
0:33:11 > 0:33:21disruptive for those who put it together.
0:33:21 > 0:33:26together. That will be difficult. Any trade agreement we have with
0:33:26 > 0:33:30anyone else is unlikely to cover services and quite a lot of
0:33:30 > 0:33:32countries that would like to talk to us about this, like India, would
0:33:32 > 0:33:36like and return to be to be able to come and work here and that is
0:33:36 > 0:33:40something the UK is not going to allow.Do you sign up broadly to the
0:33:40 > 0:33:47Treasury analysis that they used to say that growth would grow less
0:33:47 > 0:33:53quickly in the future?What I have signed up to is that if we move with
0:33:53 > 0:33:57restraint to our major trading partner because 45% of our services
0:33:57 > 0:34:02of business to them, if you make that less frictionless and you
0:34:02 > 0:34:06reduce the ability to sell to those countries the way we did before it
0:34:06 > 0:34:11will increase costs and reduce growth, and that in itself is a good
0:34:11 > 0:34:16starting point. Anything you do to reduce the impact you may have,
0:34:16 > 0:34:20anything that allows you to stay as close as you are to where you are at
0:34:20 > 0:34:24present will, of course mean, you are not doing as badly as you did
0:34:24 > 0:34:28otherwise.Do you agree you are talking about the medium to long
0:34:28 > 0:34:32term, and if we are talking about 15 years of slower growth or a smaller
0:34:32 > 0:34:35economy that that is something that is going to impact negatively on the
0:34:35 > 0:34:39British public?As far as the short-term the Treasury made a
0:34:39 > 0:34:43report two years ago that suggested a vote to leave would prompt an
0:34:43 > 0:34:48immediate recession so prompt -- predicting on short-term is pretty
0:34:48 > 0:34:55good.What is it the short-term this time?It depends on a couple of
0:34:55 > 0:34:58things, such as transitional arrangements and what sort of
0:34:58 > 0:35:01adjustment mechanisms are put in place. To protect agriculture, if we
0:35:01 > 0:35:08remove those subsidies or manufacturing sectors. And looking
0:35:08 > 0:35:15at the longer term we can expect a big positive.What about the cost to
0:35:15 > 0:35:21consumers Brexit, there has always been the two different positions
0:35:21 > 0:35:24with Jacob Rees Mogg saying if we do not have a clean or pragmatic
0:35:24 > 0:35:31Brexit, the cost of -- for consumers will go up.One of the benefits of
0:35:31 > 0:35:34being in this huge regional free-trade area is that prices are
0:35:34 > 0:35:41kept low and now we have inflation reappearing because of overall we
0:35:41 > 0:35:47had a period of low inflation we have no tariffs and trade barriers
0:35:47 > 0:35:52are practically nonexistent which means there are no costs to industry
0:35:52 > 0:35:58and the benefit is that it is forced firms to take advantage of economies
0:35:58 > 0:36:01of scale to take advantage of the fact that you can move things easily
0:36:01 > 0:36:06from one country to another and take advantage of the open skies and
0:36:06 > 0:36:09airline costs coming down. The consumer has been the main
0:36:09 > 0:36:14beneficiary of being there. On the other side, and that was the point
0:36:14 > 0:36:16you are making...The common external tariff has meant in the
0:36:16 > 0:36:22mind of Jacob Rees Mogg that closing and some food is more expensive.It
0:36:22 > 0:36:25is absolutely true there are tariffs against various countries for those
0:36:25 > 0:36:29products that keep some price is high but that is compensated by the
0:36:29 > 0:36:34low prices we pay for other things and there is no expectation we will
0:36:34 > 0:36:39be reducing those tariffs to zero or considerably good as that would
0:36:39 > 0:36:43eliminate our agriculture sector and eliminate the manufacturing sector,
0:36:43 > 0:36:47so the consumer would suffer because of lower growth and higher
0:36:47 > 0:36:50unemployment.Do you accept the compensation outweighs the model
0:36:50 > 0:36:53that has been outlined by Jacob Rees Mogg or do you agree with him
0:36:53 > 0:36:59completely?On this matter I am with Jacob. The key point is that the
0:36:59 > 0:37:02things being modelled are in the hands of the government so when you
0:37:02 > 0:37:07get a big negative it's because you assume in the absence of a deal the
0:37:07 > 0:37:10British government would impose tariffs on imports from the European
0:37:10 > 0:37:15Union. In practice it could maintain a level playing field under the
0:37:15 > 0:37:17rules of the World Trade Organisation by lowering tariffs on
0:37:17 > 0:37:22trade, which would be a clear policy -- positive. The winners outweigh
0:37:22 > 0:37:26the losers and it's possible to compensate the losers and be better
0:37:26 > 0:37:30off.Let's have a look at the idea of compensation. If we go back to
0:37:30 > 0:37:33the Treasury analysis, for a free-trade deal with America to make
0:37:33 > 0:37:38up for lost trade with the EU, those civil service estimates and
0:37:38 > 0:37:42economists will not just be wrong, they will have to be wrong by a
0:37:42 > 0:37:48factor of 40. For the estimated 0.2% growth from the US trade deal to
0:37:48 > 0:37:53make up for the lost 8% in trade from the EU.Do you accept that?
0:37:53 > 0:37:57Both those numbers fail the common-sense test. Exports to the EU
0:37:57 > 0:38:03are only 12% of GDP and somehow the hit would be 8% even with a small
0:38:03 > 0:38:08increase...But we are talking about wrong by a factor of 40. Due
0:38:08 > 0:38:14accepted to large measure to be wrong by?If you look at the past
0:38:14 > 0:38:17record of forecasting by the Treasury, it's possible to get that
0:38:17 > 0:38:22wrong.Treasury forecasting has not got a good track record and it is
0:38:22 > 0:38:25true that economic Armageddon was predicted in the immediate aftermath
0:38:25 > 0:38:30of that referendum vote and it has not been realised.Firstly, Treasury
0:38:30 > 0:38:34forecasting are exactly not been bad. Many times they've been
0:38:34 > 0:38:37considerably better than the independent forecasters and we have
0:38:37 > 0:38:43not left the EU yet, Brexit has not happened and there was a huge
0:38:43 > 0:38:46increase of liquidity into the system by the Bank of England and
0:38:46 > 0:38:51low interest rates and special help for loans and enterprises for
0:38:51 > 0:38:54consumers. They've all benefited from that and that is white there is
0:38:54 > 0:38:59the fall in the pound. What is going on right now is where is the rest of
0:38:59 > 0:39:04the world is growing fast, we are lowing -- growing at the lowest rate
0:39:04 > 0:39:10of the G-7.You claim that border costs would be zero. Is there any
0:39:10 > 0:39:15border in the cost -- in the world where the costs zero except the
0:39:15 > 0:39:19borders between the countries of single market?That is a modelling
0:39:19 > 0:39:25assumption.Belied the Treasury one. It is an assumption. It is more
0:39:25 > 0:39:29reasonable than the Treasury assumption because over time border
0:39:29 > 0:39:31costs are falling through technological progress and its
0:39:31 > 0:39:35increasingly easy to move goods across borders without having to
0:39:35 > 0:39:40face large costs and we see that not just in the UK, but worldwide. In
0:39:40 > 0:39:45contrast the Treasury forecast a big increase in border costs and a
0:39:45 > 0:39:49knock-on on the amount of trade we do. As it happens, if you add a
0:39:49 > 0:39:53small back into the modelling for border costs you would still produce
0:39:53 > 0:39:59higher costs, but I think our analysis is more accurate than the
0:39:59 > 0:40:03Treasury's.In terms of the effect on voters, the economy was not the
0:40:03 > 0:40:09main issue for many people who voted to leave. These discussions,,
0:40:09 > 0:40:12important as they are, will they have an impact, including the amount
0:40:12 > 0:40:17of money being printed on this bus saying it will cost 2000 million,
0:40:17 > 0:40:20actually affect what people think?I doubt they will in the short-term.
0:40:20 > 0:40:24The problem with the arguments made by the Treasury at the time of the
0:40:24 > 0:40:27referendum campaign was that people did not believe the numbers. I sat
0:40:27 > 0:40:34in on a focus group, £4300 a year to be worse off than they did not
0:40:34 > 0:40:39believe it and did not understand how it related to their real life.
0:40:39 > 0:40:43Unlike 350 million going to the NHS. That seems simpler because we know
0:40:43 > 0:40:48we make a direct financial contribution. I think people will be
0:40:48 > 0:40:52sceptical about the economist forecast and the fact we didn't drop
0:40:52 > 0:40:55into recession of the voted to leave will emphasise the general voter
0:40:55 > 0:41:01suspicions about whether they can trust the numbers, which seems to be
0:41:01 > 0:41:04spuriously precise always.One of the problems is that neither side,
0:41:04 > 0:41:08certainly on the extremes, seems to be keen to give away in any sense to
0:41:08 > 0:41:14the other argument. Is there really a view that there will be no
0:41:14 > 0:41:19economic downside to Brexit?I've not encountered anyone, privately or
0:41:19 > 0:41:24publicly, who has said that, in the short term. The Brexit argument, the
0:41:24 > 0:41:27pro-Brexit argument is the first of all the forecasts have been called
0:41:27 > 0:41:32into question by the lack of severity of the impact of the result
0:41:32 > 0:41:35because we thought it would be much worse than it has been and Britain
0:41:35 > 0:41:40has fared fairly well. The second argument is that if you leave the EU
0:41:40 > 0:41:45and positively embrace global trade, and this leave you to sit on the
0:41:45 > 0:41:48margins of Europe and begged to be allowed back in, that won't do much
0:41:48 > 0:41:52for growth but if you positively leave and trade more with East Asia,
0:41:52 > 0:41:57America, that is actually going to create a growth which can make up
0:41:57 > 0:42:00for the loss with Europe. The other thing mentioned is technological
0:42:00 > 0:42:04change and why it is difficult to make medium and long-term forecast
0:42:04 > 0:42:09is you cannot predict things like the Internet or artificial
0:42:09 > 0:42:12intelligence which will dramatically change the kinds of markets we
0:42:12 > 0:42:15operate in in ten or 20 years.We have to end it there, but thank you
0:42:15 > 0:42:17very much.
0:42:17 > 0:42:19Now, deep divisions in the Labour Party.
0:42:19 > 0:42:21A national debate about Britain's place in Europe.
0:42:21 > 0:42:22Sounds familiar?
0:42:22 > 0:42:25Well, they are the same issues that shaped the political career of a big
0:42:25 > 0:42:27figure of a previous political era, Roy Jenkins.
0:42:27 > 0:42:29And he's the man Liberal Democrat Leader, Vince Cable,
0:42:29 > 0:42:31has chosen as his political Hero.
0:42:31 > 0:42:39Here's Elizabeth Glinka.
0:42:42 > 0:42:46Vince Cable, who is your political hero?
0:42:46 > 0:42:49Well I've chosen Roy Jenkins, who was one of the great figures
0:42:49 > 0:42:55in the Liberal and Social Democratic tradition in British politics.
0:42:55 > 0:42:56A great reforming Home Secretary.
0:42:56 > 0:43:04A much-admired Chancellor, a great European.
0:43:05 > 0:43:07And somebody whose values and life, in many ways, I have followed.
0:43:07 > 0:43:10Roy Jenkins was born in 1920 in the mining
0:43:10 > 0:43:12valleys of South Wales.
0:43:12 > 0:43:15A grammar school boy who went on to Oxford,
0:43:15 > 0:43:21he was immersed in politics from an early age, following in his
0:43:21 > 0:43:24father's footsteps and becoming a Labour MP in 1948.
0:43:24 > 0:43:27He was a hugely reforming Home Secretary of the 1960s
0:43:27 > 0:43:30at a point when you were a young man, a student, just
0:43:30 > 0:43:31beginning your working life.
0:43:31 > 0:43:32What did that mean to you?
0:43:32 > 0:43:35This was the era of Mary Whitehouse who had this attempt to restore
0:43:35 > 0:43:38old-fashioned values.
0:43:38 > 0:43:41It was the dirtiest programme that I have seen for a very long time.
0:43:41 > 0:43:46There was this enormous mood, particularly amongst young people,
0:43:46 > 0:43:48to sweep away all the rather old-fashioned values that seemed
0:43:48 > 0:43:54to exist at that time.
0:43:54 > 0:43:57There was censorship on books and the theatre,
0:43:57 > 0:44:00divorce laws, abortion laws, rules governing homosexuality.
0:44:00 > 0:44:03They all seemed rooted in a bygone era.
0:44:03 > 0:44:06And he, more than anybody else, lifted the barriers.
0:44:06 > 0:44:09It changed the face of the country.
0:44:09 > 0:44:12It modernised it in a way that we would now regard
0:44:12 > 0:44:16as perfectly normal today.
0:44:16 > 0:44:18Always of the centre, his experiences as an intelligence
0:44:18 > 0:44:23officer during World War II made him a passionate European.
0:44:23 > 0:44:26He would defy his party and campaign for membership in 1975.
0:44:26 > 0:44:28Leaving UK politics to become president of the European
0:44:28 > 0:44:31Commission two years later.
0:44:32 > 0:44:35People of his generation were people who'd fought in the war,
0:44:35 > 0:44:41who saw the rebuilding of Europe as something that was a political
0:44:41 > 0:44:45objective to end conflict in Europe, I think he would be a very,
0:44:45 > 0:44:49very sad, heartbroken man if he saw what had happened today.
0:44:49 > 0:44:52One of the things that comes across when you're reading
0:44:52 > 0:44:56about him, looking at his speeches, is sort of how urbane he was.
0:44:56 > 0:44:59Is that something that appealed to you?
0:44:59 > 0:45:03Well, no, our lifestyle is a little bit different.
0:45:03 > 0:45:06I'm a little bit more puritanical, more frugal.
0:45:06 > 0:45:10He liked the big long lunch, which became rather celebrated,
0:45:10 > 0:45:13a great lover of high-class wines.
0:45:13 > 0:45:16I've never really got into that.
0:45:16 > 0:45:18He didn't come across as particularly tribal.
0:45:18 > 0:45:21And I think perhaps that is the way people might
0:45:21 > 0:45:23think about you as well.
0:45:23 > 0:45:26Yes, and I did respect that in him.
0:45:26 > 0:45:30He had good relationships right across the spectrum.
0:45:30 > 0:45:33I think those were the days when MPs used to write each other private
0:45:33 > 0:45:37letters of congratulation and condolence and there was a kind
0:45:37 > 0:45:40of civilised environment.
0:45:40 > 0:45:43But returning from Europe, those relationships could not
0:45:43 > 0:45:45prevent the growing alienation he felt as the Labour Party
0:45:45 > 0:45:47swung to the left.
0:45:47 > 0:45:50In 1981, he and others from the right of the party,
0:45:50 > 0:45:54known as the Gang of four, would leave to set up the SDP.
0:45:54 > 0:45:59We offer, not only a new party, although it is that,
0:45:59 > 0:46:02but a new approach to politics.
0:46:02 > 0:46:05A certain Vince Cable was amongst the converts.
0:46:05 > 0:46:07I'm just coming around the area meeting everybody.
0:46:07 > 0:46:09They would later merge with the Liberals.
0:46:09 > 0:46:14What was most difficult I think for him and also for any of us
0:46:14 > 0:46:17was the break with many of the other so-called moderates
0:46:17 > 0:46:20in the Labour Party.
0:46:20 > 0:46:22One of his closest associates was Anthony Crossland,
0:46:22 > 0:46:25who had actually been his lover when they were at
0:46:25 > 0:46:29university together.
0:46:29 > 0:46:31And Roy Hattersley and people of that kind.
0:46:31 > 0:46:34He's still reviled by some people in the Labour Party
0:46:34 > 0:46:37for splitting away with the SDP.
0:46:37 > 0:46:40Did he make mistakes?
0:46:40 > 0:46:42Well, historians will argue for many, many years as to
0:46:42 > 0:46:47whether the breakaway was justified.
0:46:47 > 0:46:51I think actually the Labour Party modernisation which started under
0:46:51 > 0:46:56Neil Kinnock, through John Smith to Tony Blair, probably wouldn't
0:46:56 > 0:47:01have happened if it hadn't been for the SDP breakaway and I think
0:47:01 > 0:47:05British politics is much the better for having had the Lib Dems,
0:47:05 > 0:47:08of which he was one of the parents.
0:47:08 > 0:47:11Of course you would say that.
0:47:11 > 0:47:14In fact, in his later years, sitting as a life peer,
0:47:14 > 0:47:18he would advise Tony Blair as the new Labour project took form.
0:47:18 > 0:47:21As Chancellor of Oxford he would continue to write
0:47:21 > 0:47:22the acclaimed biographies which he produced
0:47:22 > 0:47:25throughout his life.
0:47:25 > 0:47:27Married to wife Jennifer for nearly 58 years,
0:47:27 > 0:47:32he died in 2003 at the age of 82.
0:47:32 > 0:47:36If you were going to pay tribute to Roy Jenkins, what would you say?
0:47:36 > 0:47:39I think he was one of the great statesman
0:47:39 > 0:47:42of the post-war era in Britain.
0:47:42 > 0:47:44You can read his legacy in his books.
0:47:44 > 0:47:47I think he fell short of what he ultimately wanted to achieve.
0:47:47 > 0:47:49He never became Prime Minister.
0:47:49 > 0:47:53His vision of the SDP Liberal Alliance never lead
0:47:53 > 0:47:55to Government as he'd hoped.
0:47:55 > 0:48:03But he was a genuinely great figure in post-war British politics.
0:48:07 > 0:48:09Vince Cable talking about his political hero, Roy Jenkins there.
0:48:09 > 0:48:12And you can see the other films in our Political Hero
0:48:12 > 0:48:18series on our website.
0:48:18 > 0:48:23Do you agree he was one of the great statesmen of British politics even
0:48:23 > 0:48:28though he didn't become Prime Minister?Yes, she was and is
0:48:28 > 0:48:31amended for those social reforms he helped to champion. It's fascinating
0:48:31 > 0:48:36to look at that and think about someone really agonising about
0:48:36 > 0:48:41whether they should remain in their party, but their party before their
0:48:41 > 0:48:45country, which they could see to be deeply important, and I think there
0:48:45 > 0:48:50are MPs in both parties actually who fear that they may have to make that
0:48:50 > 0:48:54decision at some point over the next couple of years. Perhaps we can all
0:48:54 > 0:48:57muddle through it but it's fascinating to remember what goes
0:48:57 > 0:49:03around comes around.In that sense, it is amazing to look back at the
0:49:03 > 0:49:05error of Roy Jenkins on the fact Europe was at the heart of
0:49:05 > 0:49:10everything that he believed in. That's what led him to break away
0:49:10 > 0:49:16and help set up the SDP. Lessons learned for today?In that case,
0:49:16 > 0:49:22they won but then society was rather different, more deferential and when
0:49:22 > 0:49:26the establishment backed staying in the EEC, which was the issue, the
0:49:26 > 0:49:31public listened. People said reddish liberalism died in the 1920s but it
0:49:31 > 0:49:35didn't, and Roy Jenkins is probably the most significant Labour Liberal
0:49:35 > 0:49:40of the 20th century and his reforms in the 60s changed society. In the
0:49:40 > 0:49:441980s the experiment with the SDP didn't quite transform politics but
0:49:44 > 0:49:50many Labour Party people would say cut Margaret Thatcher in power. Here
0:49:50 > 0:49:57is proof that where there is why, there was a way.How cruel.
0:49:57 > 0:49:59Same-sex marriage has been a legal reality in England,
0:49:59 > 0:50:01Wales and Scotland since 2014.
0:50:01 > 0:50:04And gay marriage is already a right in the Isle of Man and is legal
0:50:04 > 0:50:07or being legalised in Channel Islands.
0:50:07 > 0:50:10But there is one part of the UK where you still cannot marry
0:50:10 > 0:50:14a same-sex partner - Northern Ireland.
0:50:14 > 0:50:16It also means that couples who wed in Great Britain will not
0:50:16 > 0:50:20have their marriage recognised in Northern Ireland.
0:50:20 > 0:50:22Any legislation to enable same-sex marriage is a matter
0:50:22 > 0:50:24for the Assembly at Stormont where the Democratic Unionist
0:50:24 > 0:50:29Party have blocked it.
0:50:29 > 0:50:31But with the collapse of talks to get the devolved
0:50:31 > 0:50:33administration up and running, there are now calls
0:50:33 > 0:50:38for Westminster to legislate.
0:50:38 > 0:50:41In a written reply to the Labour MP, Conor McGinn, Northern Ireland
0:50:41 > 0:50:43Secretary Karen Bradley said the issue, "Should be addressed
0:50:43 > 0:50:46in the NI Assembly, but the power of the Westminster Parliament
0:50:46 > 0:50:47to legislate remains unaffected.
0:50:47 > 0:50:49If this issue were to be raised in Westminster,
0:50:49 > 0:50:52the Government's policy is to allow a free vote on matters of conscience
0:50:52 > 0:50:55such as equal marriage."
0:50:55 > 0:50:58And her shadow, Labour's Owen Smith stated -
0:50:58 > 0:51:00"In the absence of a Stormont Bill, would she consider legislating
0:51:00 > 0:51:02similarly to extend equal marriage rights to Northern Ireland?
0:51:02 > 0:51:05We believe that she should, and we will support
0:51:05 > 0:51:12her if she does so."
0:51:13 > 0:51:19Conor McGinn is in our self and newsroom and joins us now. You've
0:51:19 > 0:51:21had confirmation from the Northern Ireland Secretary that Westminster
0:51:21 > 0:51:25could legislate and the Tories wouldn't win the vote. Tell their
0:51:25 > 0:51:29MPs what to do, but that doesn't mean same-sex marriage Northern
0:51:29 > 0:51:33Ireland will happen any time soon, does it?And taking forward a bill
0:51:33 > 0:51:37at the end of March which can decisively test the mood of the
0:51:37 > 0:51:42House of Commons if anyone objects to extending equal marriage Northern
0:51:42 > 0:51:46Ireland, they can oppose it and put it to a vote. I'm very confident we
0:51:46 > 0:51:49would win any vote and it's then for the Government to legislate but let
0:51:49 > 0:51:52me be very clear, my preference would be for a fully functioning
0:51:52 > 0:51:55power-sharing executive and assembly to do this but people can't wait for
0:51:55 > 0:51:59their basic rights any longer than that's why I've taken the decision,
0:51:59 > 0:52:03along with my colleagues in the Labour Party and others, to put this
0:52:03 > 0:52:09to Westminster.What do you think about that? If there isn't a
0:52:09 > 0:52:10power-sharing devolved administration functioning people
0:52:10 > 0:52:13shouldn't be forced to wait to find out if they can practice same-sex
0:52:13 > 0:52:19marriage?There is a contradiction in argument for that but of course
0:52:19 > 0:52:23in the assembly there is something called a petition of concern, a
0:52:23 > 0:52:30device created to ensure one idea, even if supported by the majority of
0:52:30 > 0:52:34the assembly can't be imposed upon another community. Last time was a
0:52:34 > 0:52:39vote on same-sex marriage the assembly voted to introduce it but
0:52:39 > 0:52:44because of this petition concern, because it wasn't a supermajority,
0:52:44 > 0:52:47it couldn't be imposed and if you look the breakdown of the voting,
0:52:47 > 0:52:52essentially the Unionist community, the elected representatives, are
0:52:52 > 0:52:57opposed to this. So imagine what it could do to the Northern Ireland
0:52:57 > 0:53:01settlement if in Westminster someone impose a something which is of
0:53:01 > 0:53:05enormous sectarian controversy upon Northern Ireland.Conor McGinn, you
0:53:05 > 0:53:11are shaking your head.That is not about people being Unionist, being
0:53:11 > 0:53:14gay, married, but people being equal. If my constituents at the
0:53:14 > 0:53:19same sex and love their partner can get married in Saint Helens, if they
0:53:19 > 0:53:22can in Cardiff and Edinburgh and Dublin, they should be able to do so
0:53:22 > 0:53:28in Belfast as well.That there are other issues to consider.One could
0:53:28 > 0:53:31say the teaching of the Irish line which in Northern Ireland is an
0:53:31 > 0:53:35equality issue and why shouldn't it be taught in state schools but you
0:53:35 > 0:53:38wouldn't want Westminster imposing that. It's very obvious that would
0:53:38 > 0:53:41undermine the settlement in Northern Ireland. Why therefore do it with
0:53:41 > 0:53:46same-sex marriage? The whole thing was stitched together in order to
0:53:46 > 0:53:50prevent exactly this kind of thing and I fear that there bill, I
0:53:50 > 0:53:55understand that attention behind it, it could be a provocative act --
0:53:55 > 0:53:59intention.I think there's a majority for equal marriage in the
0:53:59 > 0:54:02Northern Ireland assembly. Every opinion poll taken has shown the
0:54:02 > 0:54:04public is in favour of equal marriage and I think this is the
0:54:04 > 0:54:08right thing to do. The people of Northern Ireland should not be
0:54:08 > 0:54:12discriminated against. It's 50 years on from the Northern Ireland Civil
0:54:12 > 0:54:15Rights Association taking to the streets to demand equal rights and
0:54:15 > 0:54:19we talked about Roy Jenkins earlier in this programme, it's 50th on from
0:54:19 > 0:54:23homosexuality being to come alive, if not all right for people in
0:54:23 > 0:54:26Northern Ireland, gay people, to be discriminate against.What do you
0:54:26 > 0:54:30say about the concern raised by Tim Stanley it could antagonise
0:54:30 > 0:54:35sectarian relations if the polls suggested the Unionist community
0:54:35 > 0:54:41wasn't as in favour of same-sex marriage in Northern Ireland and it
0:54:41 > 0:54:44would be imposed upon them from Westminster?I don't think that's
0:54:44 > 0:54:48wholly accurate but the DUP can't have it both ways. They've called
0:54:48 > 0:54:53for direct rule, they want Northern Ireland to remain part of the United
0:54:53 > 0:54:55Kingdom for that they believe Westminster has an important role to
0:54:55 > 0:54:59play and so they therefore can't fully complain if Westminster acts
0:54:59 > 0:55:02decisively on this issue of equal marriage and they have the
0:55:02 > 0:55:07opportunity to oppose it when my bill comes forward at the end of
0:55:07 > 0:55:09March. Political House of Commons and at the House of Commons decided
0:55:09 > 0:55:12in favour like the Northern Ireland assembly has already decided, the
0:55:12 > 0:55:16Government has a duty to act and they should bring forward
0:55:16 > 0:55:20legislation.Right, forgave me for being cynical, Conor McGinn, but
0:55:20 > 0:55:27this is not just about the principle about politics.
0:55:27 > 0:55:31about politics. The Prime Minister is dependent on the DUP for her
0:55:31 > 0:55:37Parliamentary majority and that party is opposed to same-sex
0:55:37 > 0:55:40marriage, so obviously this could make it very difficult for the
0:55:40 > 0:55:44relationship between the Government and the DUP.That's a matter for
0:55:44 > 0:55:49Theresa May. The concern is that whether it in terms of negotiations
0:55:49 > 0:55:53at Stormont around the overall settlement in future of Northern
0:55:53 > 0:55:56Ireland and re-establishing the institutions or equal marriage, she
0:55:56 > 0:56:02and her Government are compromised either relationship with the DUP and
0:56:02 > 0:56:04their reliance on them. But the Secretary of State for Northern
0:56:04 > 0:56:07Ireland has made clear that will be a free vote and I'm very confident
0:56:07 > 0:56:10there will be an overwhelming majority in the House of Commons
0:56:10 > 0:56:14that support equal marriage, so in that sense, it's up to every MP to
0:56:14 > 0:56:17make his or her own mind up about whether to support this or not.What
0:56:17 > 0:56:21is your opinion on the idea that being imposed on Northern Ireland
0:56:21 > 0:56:24because there's not a devolved December that the moment?It
0:56:24 > 0:56:30underlines the fact that a year-long suspension in the assembly is
0:56:30 > 0:56:33incredibly problematic in the way the Government has failed to get a
0:56:33 > 0:56:40grip on it. It's alarming. Although I share some of his concerns about
0:56:40 > 0:56:43unravelling a very delicate mess, I do think it's an anomaly and it's
0:56:43 > 0:56:47about rights and about people mag boss lives and we saw one the
0:56:47 > 0:56:52legislation changed in the rest of the UK, what a huge difference it
0:56:52 > 0:56:55made to couples had been living together for many years and could
0:56:55 > 0:56:58formalise their relationships and we're talking about people's
0:56:58 > 0:57:04ablation ships and lives who could formalise their relationships --
0:57:04 > 0:57:09relationships and lives. It's a right issue.How problematic would
0:57:09 > 0:57:12be for Theresa May in her relationship with the DUP?It's
0:57:12 > 0:57:19embarrassing, isn't it? She relies on their votes in the Commons, and
0:57:19 > 0:57:23some of the Liberals in her own party, Ruth Davidson made a fuss
0:57:23 > 0:57:28when the deal was struck about the fact this is a party who has some
0:57:28 > 0:57:34rather old-fashioned views, let's say, as we would see it, so it would
0:57:34 > 0:57:38be embarrassing for Theresa May and she is already in a position where
0:57:38 > 0:57:44it's hard for her to appear as neutral broker in those talks in
0:57:44 > 0:57:50Northern Ireland, even with issues like this blowing up.Conor McGinn,
0:57:50 > 0:57:51thank you very much.
0:57:51 > 0:57:54And we did ask to speak to a minister from the Northern
0:57:54 > 0:57:56Ireland Office but no one was available.
0:57:56 > 0:57:57The Democratic Unionist Party also turned down our
0:57:57 > 0:57:58request for an interview.
0:57:58 > 0:58:00Oh well, we are Billy no mates.
0:58:00 > 0:58:03There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.
0:58:03 > 0:58:06The question was which film did Andrea Leadsom say post-Brexit
0:58:06 > 0:58:08Britain would be more like than Mad Max?
0:58:08 > 0:58:09Was it: A) 28 Days Later?
0:58:09 > 0:58:10B) Love Actually?
0:58:10 > 0:58:11C) Four Weddings and a Funeral?
0:58:11 > 0:58:13Or D) The Wicker Man?
0:58:13 > 0:58:15So, Tim and Heather, what's the correct answer?
0:58:15 > 0:58:16And the answer was Love Actually.
0:58:16 > 0:58:19I have to say it's a film which makes me feeling credibly nauseous.
0:58:19 > 0:58:23It is the correct answer. We won't show it now because we run out of
0:58:23 > 0:58:27time.
0:58:27 > 0:58:28That's all for today.
0:58:28 > 0:58:30Thanks to my guests.
0:58:30 > 0:58:37Bye bye.