21/03/2018 Daily Politics

Morning, folks.

Welcome to The Daily Politics.

The magic money tree has been

shaken, as the government is poised

to announce a significant pay rise

for a million NHS staff

in England.

We'll be speaking to

the Chief Secretary

to the Treasury, Liz Truss, about

where the money is coming from.

There's something very fishy

on the River Thames.

Politicians throw fish

from a trawler outside Parliament

saying fisherman have been

betrayed by the Brexit

transition deal.

It is compromising with people's

livelihoods. The idea you cannot

make an omelette without breaking

eggs until you are potentially

dealing with people's livelihoods

and putting them out of business.

And there's plenty for Theresa May

and Jeremy Corbyn to discuss

at Prime Minister's Questions today.

We'll be live for all

the action at noon.

All that in the next

hour and a half.

And with me are the Chief Secretary

to the Treasury, Liz Truss,

and Shadow Treasury Minister,

Anneliese Dodds.

Welcome back to the programme.

First, I can't imagine Theresa May

will be over the moon

about Donald Trump's decision

to ring Vladimir Putin personally

about his election victory.

The Washington Post reports

that the President ignored

a briefing note that said in capital

letters "DO NOT CONGRATULATE"

and he also chose not to heed

talking points from aides

instructing him to condemn

the poisoning of a former

Russian spy in Britain

with a powerful nerve agent.

He didn't raise that either, but he

did congratulate. Not the best

support from our major ally, is it?

We have had fantastic support from

all of our allies including the US,

France, Germany in making it clear

that this was a state-sponsored

attack on British soil that has

followed the Prime minister's strong

leadership on the issue.

But there

is no appetite for further

collective ear -- action?

I don't

think that is the case. We are

seeing increasing concern about

Russian activities. Not across the

whole of British politics and there

is a concern about the Leader of the

Opposition.

But Mr Trump has called

to congratulate him, and so has

Angela Merkel and Jean-Claude

Juncker has written to

congratulating, so where is the

evidence that either America or the

European Union is up for more

sanctions?

The joint statement that

was put out by all of those people

was extremely strong.

It made no

mention of sanctions.

I personally

wouldn't congratulate Vladimir Putin

with what he has done and the

policies he is pursuing our

disgraceful, but it's up to those

individuals, President Trump,

Jean-Claude Juncker, what they

decide to do.

No, that is collective

action. I'll try again. Can you

provide is with a scintilla of

evidence that either the US or the

EU is up for more collective action?

The joint statement...

It didn't

mention collective action.

But it

was very clear that the attack was

carried out.

That is what I'm

asking. It didn't mention collective

action. Jeremy Corbyn, he once asked

to send the of this nerve agent to

Moscow. What would be the point of

that?

He said there should be

cooperation.

No, he said there

should be a Sample of the nerve

agent sent three times tomorrow --

to Moscow. Why?

That is part of the

international prohibition for

chemical weapons.

No, it's not. It's

descended to the OP CW, the

organisation for the Prohibition of

chemical weapons and they are

getting at. That is the process.

What would be the point of sending

it to Russia?

What I believe he said

is that it is important to stick to

the rules and conventions.

No, I'm

sorry. He said several times we

should send it to Moscow. You are

denying the question. He said we

should send it to Moscow. What would

be the point back?

I was trying to

respond. If it is usually the

convention that countries which are

being investigated have the ability

to look at those kinds of

substances, then that should be

followed, and what he has said

consistently and surely no one can

disagree, is that we have do follow

international conventions.

And we

are doing that.

To be fair, Jeremy

was criticised the saying we should

be doing that in the house, which

was not right. We have to keep the

moral high ground on this.

Right,

let me come back to this. We are

using the organisation and they are

getting the nerve agent and they

will examine it. That was always on

the cards. But the policy of your

leader is that we serve, send this

nerve agent to Moscow. This is

something the Russians hid from us

and did not tell us they were

developing. When they were rumbled

that they had, they said they had

got rid of it all and it had all

been destroyed under OPCW rules. Are

you expecting them if we send them a

sample to say, yes, that was ours,

we had it all along?

That is mad.

Jeremy has been absolutely clear all

along. The Russian state, he has

agreed with Theresa May.

You are not

answering the question.

I tried to.

If the convention is that is the

process that is followed, he is

right to say he is following it.

The

convention is to send it to the

OPCW. You really think that the

Russians would admit that this was

their nerve agent?

I'm sure they

won't.

So why send it?

I used to

work in the Western Balkans and I

know how they operate, and they

don't follow international law, but

this country always should and that

is where we have the moral high

ground and we should not surrender

that. I don't think Theresa May has,

I think she has followed the right

procedures and Jeremy is right to

say we should keep doing that

because that is the soft parallel,

is our commitment to the rules.

I

still don't understand what good is

certain -- sending the agent to

Moscow would do.

Despite the Chancellor saying

last week that austerity

was still the watchword

for government finances it seems

nearly all NHS staff in England,

apart from doctors, could be in line

for a bumper pay rise.

The BBC has learnt that over

one million health service

workers could expect

an increase of more than 6%

over three years.

It's expected the deal will be

formally agreed later today

with the lowest earners getting

the most - some could

see their pay packet rise by £4,000.

Of course this won't come cheap,

it's believed the cost

to the taxpayer could

be around £4 billion.

Things have clearly changed,

have a listen to the Prime Minister

being grilled by a nurse

during the 2017 election.

My wage slips from 2009 reflect

exactly what I'm earning today.

So how can that be fair in light

of the job that we actually do?

And I recognise the job that you do

but we have had to take...

Why hasn't it changed

before now then?

We have had to take some hard

choices across the public sector

in relation to public

sector pay restraint.

We did that because of the decisions

we had to take to bring public

spending under control because it

wasn't under control under

the last Labour Government.

And I'm being honest

with you in terms of saying

that we will put more money

into the NHS, but there isn't

a magic money tree that we can shake

that suddenly provides

for everything that people want.

But it turns out there is a magic

money tree.

That is not true.

Where

has the money come from?

It's

because we had careful stewardship

of the economy...

Where was the

money and where did it come from?

It

was in the budget, and the

Chancellor was clear that if there

were productivity improvements in

the NHS because of the special

circumstances that the NHS faces, we

would be able to look at pay rises.

Let's look at this in detail. In the

budget, in November, health spending

was increased for this financial

year by £3 billion, just shy of 3

billion. Does that include the pay

rise?

No, the pay rises in addition

to that.

So it wasn't decided in

December.

We put the money aside on

the Chancellor was very clear that

additional money would be made

available if we could do a deal with

the unions that would include

productivity improvements. That is

very important because we want to

see better outcomes for patients

while we also want to see NHS staff

properly rewarded, so he was very

clear that any money that was part

of the deal would be additional, and

he said that in the budget.

To

clarify, the 3 billion increase

planned for this financial year, and

the 2 billion increase for the next

financial year does not include the

pay rise?

That is correct.

So I ask

again, where will this money come

from?

We have put money aside. From

where? From part of the overall

budget, factored into the plans to

deal with the pay rise.

Where is

that? I have the departmental

resources budgets here?

It is not in

the NHS budget.

This is the NHS

budget, it's the resource planning

for all departments, so where did

you put this aside?

The money is not

in the Department of Health budget.

This is all of the budgets.

There

would be extra money forthcoming

from the Treasury if we were able to

do a deal to reform the way that the

pay works within the NHS. At the

moment their automatic pay and it's

a complicated system that doesn't

work for nurses or other NHS staff,

and it doesn't work on the employers

either, so we want to reform that.

We are on the way to getting that

really positive reform so we can

make sure people are paid well.

Are

the pay rises conditional... Are

they

they conditional on productivity

improvements?

They are part of an

overall deal which includes

productivity improvement.

But are

they conditional? If they are not

improved, do the play -- does the

pay rise not happen?

All of this

will be outlined later today, but

essentially changes in the

contractual terms are part of the

deal and that will help improve

productivity, so that is the way it

works.

But if you don't get it, do

the pay rises still take place? I

used to be an industrial

correspondent and have lived through

more productivity agreements than

you have had a hot breakfasts and

I've never seen one that actually

worked and paid for itself, so I ask

again, if this costs £4 billion, and

you don't get 4 billion savings, do

the pay rises happen?

The pay rises

will happen.

Regardless? In line

with the deal, if it is signed off.

It is the reform of those increments

that is the thing we are agreeing.

Let me try one more time. Are these

pay rises of 6.6% over three years,

are they conditional on these

improvements happening, or do they

happen anyway?

They are part of a

deal on increment reform, so they

are agreed at the same time. There

isn't some subsequent year when we

will claw money back. It isn't -- it

is an exchange or contractual

changes that benefit people working

in the NHS and the employers and the

patients, so that is the deal.

This

has shot your fox, hasn't it? Even

the unions seem happy.

We are

pleased the government is listening.

In terms of whether the deal will be

good for nurses, I've had a number

saying they don't feel that cutting

some of their annual leave will be

helpful.

That is not going to

happen. There is no cut in annual

leave.

That is great and I will look

at the deal closely when it comes in

front of as later today. What

frustrates me is that we've had a

long period when government is not

made the change and the Labour Party

has said for months that we can pay

for this by reversing some of those

tax cuts that the government decided

to impose for the best of people and

profitable corporations. We spelt it

out a long time ago how we could

paper this and in the meantime they

have lost so many experienced staff

in the NHS who are fed up with their

pay...

Would you want a bigger pay

rise or is 6.6% fair enough?

We have

said it's got to keep track with

inflation and that means, is that 6%

doesn't keep track with inflation

you have a problem further down the

line.

But do you want more or are

you happy with the rov broad

approach?

We hope that that approach

has been informed by discussions

between them and the pay review

bodies, and if that is what the pay

review bodies are suggesting is

necessary for retention and

recruitment, it seems sensible. It's

disappointing it's taken so long to

get here.

Of course, the health

service will store the under huge

pressure and these rises I have

spoken about, even if they don't

include pay are still historically

low in spending, lower than Mrs

Thatcher in the 80s, way lower than

John Major in the 90s and much lower

than Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

There is still talk there must be

more money not just for pay, but the

care services themselves. Would you

offer an extra penny on national

insurance?

No. We are not looking at

that proposal that has been floated

in the papers, and what we are doing

is talking about how we can get

better value for money, and we have

a spending review next year where we

will look across government spending

as a whole.

It would not be the overall strategy

of the Government to look at extra

taxes to find extra money for the

NHS?

Obviously I can't say what's

going to happen in future.

You are

ruling out national insurance?

What

I can say is we are spending above

the European average on health, we

are getting...

Are we? When did that

happen?

We are getting better value

for money. We have been doing that

for some years.

Actually, I don't

think on OECD figures we have at

all.

If you include health and

social care, we are.

Across-the-board.

That's because

they cant social care different in

other ways. On health itself, we

spent less than Germany, less than

France, Sweden, Norway, Holland,

Belgium, would you like me to go on?

The Nuffield trust recently did a

report which said we are spending in

line on our health service and

social care...

That is wrong, I will

tell you.

Andrew, we recognise...

There are issues in the health

service.

Do you rule out tax rises

to make about a gap and bring us up

to the European total?

I'm not

talking about the future budget. We

can't do that. What I'm saying is we

are spending in line with other

European countries.

I'm questioning

that quite seriously. Would you be

up for what Gordon Brown did a while

back, another penny on national

insurance?

We want the same

progrowth which is progressive to

this, so we set out at the last

election, we stick by those plans we

should be reversing some of the tax

cuts for the best off people and for

profitable corporations. In our

manifesto we said we have got 48.6

billion spending commitments, 48.6

billion tax cuts, largely, we would

have reversed so we were quite

explicit about that.

That is not all

for the NHS?

No comets for a whole

range of social services including

social care, and for the worst

winter crisis, in my memory,...

The

problem is if you concentrate your

tax rises on the very highest paid,

people already account for by far

the biggest chunk of income tax, you

can't be sure you would get that

many.

We have seen the rates of

income tax, the best earners, going

down under this Government and lots

of other changes too.

The top 1% of

income tax payers account for almost

30% of income tax.

Yes, but you know

that part of the reason why they had

that huge share is because their

incomes are so high now.

But my

point is you can't be sure, unlike a

penny on national insurance which is

a slam dunk 5 billion it raises, you

can't be sure if you start to raise

taxes on people who are mobile and

internationally employable, you will

get the money.

You can't be sure.

What I would ask is when we had

those levels previously, I'm not

talking 30 years ago, but under the

previous Labour Government, when we

didn't have those cuts to the top

rate, did you see huge droves of

people saying I'm getting squeezed

out and moving to other countries?

No, they accepted this was the tax

system.

We had then a deficit which

we had to sort out.

OK, we have to

move on. We are now seeing the

lowest... Hold on, you said you

would keep taxes low but you as

Chief Secretary will no as a

percentage of GDP taxes are already

at their highest for 40 years.

We

have reduced taxes. Not as a

percentage... That is where we are

getting the money. That's why the

economy is doing better.

We need to

move on.

Now this morning, a publicity stunt

was arranged on a trawler

on the River Thames which involved

flinging fish overboard.

Elizabeth Glinka went along to this

most bizarre of protests.

It is 8:30am, and absolutely

gorgeous day in London. That is the

River Thames. We are waiting for a

fishing trawler. Yes. A fishing

trawler.

The boat in question, comes from

with stubble on a voyage to

Westminster to symbolically dump

fish in protest at the UK's Brexit

transition deal which this week

learned would keep the British Fleet

bound to European fishing quotas for

another 21 months after we leave the

EU. And who should be fined?

People

are promised we would take back

control in 2019, and that has now

been delayed and that could

potentially be disastrous for the

fishing communities but of course

the biggest losers on the day we

joined the EU, back in 1973, and it

ought to have been the first

beneficiaries from our departure.

You know this is part of a

transition deal and you also know

that the Prime Minister made it very

clear they would have to compromise.

There's compromising the People's

livelihoods and the argument you

can't make an omelette without

breaking eggs is all very well until

you are doing the People's

livelihoods and potentially putting

them out of business.

The stunt was

organised to gain maximum attention

ahead of today's Prime Minister's

Questions was supposed to start with

a riverside media conference. So

that is the boat and it has arrived

at embankment, but it turns out it's

not allowed to stop, so they are

doing a sale by and then they will

carry up to Westminster and stop at

Parliament. Best laid plans. A

little further up the river they

were finally able to pull in and we

are told a certain Nigel Farage got

on board in time for some

high-profile fish dumping. Right in

front of the Palace of Westminster.

That was it, they made it to the

Houses of Parliament. Nigel Farage

got on the boat, they threw some

fresh off the boat and now they are

failing off. Up the river.

failing off. Up the river.

There we

go. Fun on the Thames this morning.

They were trying to make an

important point. We don't now leave

the common fisheries policy until

2021. That is what we have agreed.

The EU man did it and we agreed it.

What did we get in return?

We are

keeping the British catch. At the

same levels as what it is, so we are

not allowing the European Union to

reduce our catch during that period.

We stay within the policy.

We are

staying within the overall quota

regime during that period.

So what

did we get in return?

We got a good

transition deal overall. We got the

catch protected which is incredibly

important for British fishing

communities. We've also got the

ability to negotiate a good deal

once we leave the EU. I recognise

people are disappointed. No doubt

about that. The big prize here is

getting the long-term deal force up

where they write to concede this?

It

highlights the fact there's not been

a clear direction from the

Government not just on the

transition deal but on the future as

well. I'm originally a long time ago

my family where fishing people and

we need to have a long-term

stability to buy the boats and all

this kind of things. They've just

found out what the transition

situation is going to be.

It's

basically the status quo. Where they

write to agree that? After January

the 1st 2021, assuming the process

continues, we become known as an

independent coastal state. Where

they write, though, to agree to the

status quo up until that happening?

The problem is people don't know

what it's for and what the future

will be after that so yes we need to

talk about what the transition

period is going to be like, but

people don't know. We will put up

with it for this period but what

will it be like in the future?

You

raise an important point. I suspect

Liz Truss, this is why a lot of

fisherfolk are angry that it's not

so much the status quo continues and

they don't get out of the common

fisheries policy. They've never

liked it since we joined the Common

Market. It's not so much we are in

it until the end of 2020. They don't

trust you to do a proper fisheries

policy once we leave. They think,

looking at your Government, when it

comes to giving concessions to fund

managers to trade in Europe, they

will do that before they will stand

up for fishermen.

They have a

champion in Michael Gove. I'm sure

we will make sure that the fishing

communities do get what they have

been promised, which is taking back

control of the waters, being able to

control our own fishing industry

which we have not been able to do.

So we will have nothing to do with

the common fisheries policy gesture

Mark after January the 1st 2021?

We

are leaving the common fisheries

policy fault we will be an

independent coastal state. We will

be doing bilateral negotiations with

all the different parties including

the EU.

So we will negotiate?

Quotas?

Yes and we always have done.

Fishing waters are issues where you

have negotiations and we have done

that.

That's why the fishing

communities are worried I would

suggest.

It's not been clear

throughout this period even who is

leading on this for the Government.

Michael Gove the Environment

Secretary but it's not clear in

terms of Brexit negotiations who is

leading on this? I think there's

been a huge amount of confusion. He

is responsible for this. Has he been

arguing about this in Brussels? I

have not seen it.

The answer is,

yes, he has.

If the EU says, right,

we are going to give the City of

London more access than we have

planned to European financial

services, but in return we want to

keep broadly the same fishing quotas

as currently exist under the Common

fisheries policy, what will the

Government do?

We are leaving the

common fisheries policy. We want to

implement our own fishing policy. It

is a massively complex issue.

There's myriad parts of this.

You

see my point.

But we cannot sell

fishing communities down the river.

We won't do it.

That's why they are

worried and were on the River Thames

today, worried that if the choice

comes between the Government looking

after the City of London, which is

financially far more important to

the economy than fishing, but

fishing is still an important part

of what makes this an island race,

and they are worried as I say, the

fund manager will get precedence

over the fishermen.

One of the clear

messages from the referendum is that

we cannot neglect parts of the

country that feel cutout of

decisions and feel left behind and

we will not do that. We need to make

sure that we treat our fishing

industry, which is actually very

important economically, with the

respect it deserves and we are

committed to doing that by the way,

just to respond quickly, all of

these discussions are taking place

across Government all the time and

Michael Gove is very closely

involved in those negotiations.

Briefly.

On this, those directly

involved, they don't know what's

going on, they are not being

communicated with.

Which is why they

were on the Thames this morning.

Check out the website for more on

this. Let's see where we are. I have

forgotten what the areas. I have now

found it. -- year is.

Now, a commitment to free markets

has rather gone out of fashion

in British politics of late.

But our guest of the day, Liz Truss,

is doing her utmost to put free

markets back in vogue.

On Monday night she attended

the launch of a new group designed

to promote Tory free-market thinking

to younger voters.

It's called Freer.

Must have taken them

a while to come up with that.

At the event Liz declared

that her party needed to be "Tories

with attitude" and that Labour

are "a bunch of humourless,

po-faced, hat-wearing socialists".

I'll take my hat off.

We photo

shopped the hacked out.

Anyway, we're down with the kids

here at the Daily Politics,

so we've got some advice for Liz

on how to engage the young.

What you need to do

is offer them free stuff,

rather than blathering

on about free markets.

The kids want free stuff.

But this isn't

a something-for-nothing society.

If you want one, you have

to enter our Guess

The Year competition.

Just tell us when this happened.

MUSIC: Children Of The

Revolution by T-Rex.

The final stages of the burning

of the British Embassy

did see the arrival

of the Government Dublin

Fire Brigade at last.

Earlier their efforts to reach

the flames had been prevented

by the huge crowd gathered

in Merrion Square.

MUSIC: Starman by David Bowie.

# There's a star man

# Waiting in the sky. #

It's unquestionably the most

fabulous exhibition ever mounted

at the British Museum.

The value of the gold

alone would more than pay

for a Treasury of western art.

MUSIC: Lean On Me by Bill Withers.

# Just call on me, brother,

when you need a hand

# We all need

somebody to lean on. #

How do you feel?

Fine, great to be home.

MUSIC: You're So Vain

by Carly Simon.

# You're so vain

# You probably

think this song is about you

# You're so vain

# You're so vain, I bet you think

this song is about you

# Don't you, don't you?

# You had me several years ago

# When I was still quite naive. #

To be in with a chance of winning

a Daily Politics mug,

send your answer to our special quiz

email address -

that's [email protected].

Entries must arrive by 12.30 today,

and you can see the full terms

and conditions for Guess

The Year on our website.

I find it helps me to get to sleep

at night!

I find it helps me to

get to sleep at night!

That's bbc.co.uk/dailypolitics.

It's coming up to midday here.

Big Ben is there behind the

scaffolding just peeking through.

Prime Minister's Questions coming up

in a few minutes. Laura Kuenssberg

is here. Unsure what the Leader of

the Opposition will talk about

today. He's got many things to

choose from.

choose from. We know he raised the

issue of NHS pay. And wearing

government

There's an urgent question after

PMQs today and it's possible that

someone raise this whole brew around

Cambridge analytic. This huge story

relating to Facebook which has been

dominating across the Atlantic and

also a big part of the discussions

at Westminster this week.

So Jeremy

Hunt, the Secretary of State for

Health, it is post-PMQ 's Govan to

make a statement on the health

proposal settlement deal?

He will

answer an urgent question from the

Shadow Health Secretary John

Ashworth and also during PMQs the

unions and NHS employers will be

unveiling the specific details of

the deal. So what we have been

reporting this morning is over a

three-year period it will be worth

more than £4 billion but when we get

a written statement from the

Government, of course we will look

very carefully at the details.

Let's

go to the Commons.

Series to ten, Merseyside Police

have lost 1084 police officers.

Crime went up by 18 and a half

percent and there were 21 firearm

discharge is, one of which resulted

in a fatality. Across the forces,

there were 94 firearm discharges

with four fatalities. Local MPs have

met Home Office ministers, but no

extra resources have been provided.

Will the Prime Minister arrange for

the Home Secretary arrange with

local MPs to discuss the additional

support with this serious problem.

Can I say to the honourable

gentleman that in the safety

partnership with Merseyside Police,

crime statistics in the constituency

have fallen since 2010, but can I

say to the Right Honourable

gentleman that he obviously mentions

incidents that are of real concern.

And I'm sure the police are giving

their attention to those incidents.

What we are doing is ensuring that

overall, antique points at my right

honourable friend to ensure that

overall in the next year, not only

are we protecting police budgets we

could see 450 million extra pounds

being available to the forces across

the country.

the country.

Can I associate myself

with the prime Mr's earlier

comments. Britain's ability to trade

with the world has been curtailed by

the EU for over 40 years -- Prime

Minister. We have now won the

ability to sign our own trade

agreements around the world. And as

the Prime Minister agree with me

that this is Britain's greatest

opportunity in Brexit and ensures we

can embrace the globe as a truly

proud international country once

again.

My honourable friend raises a

very important point. And it is

something I agree with him when this

is an important opportunity for the

UK posts Brexit.

UK posts Brexit. And we need to

forge our own way by signing trade

deals with old friends and new

allies alike.

allies alike. And has he knows we

can bring into force new trade

arrangements around the rest of the

world a clue truly global Britain.

-- for a truly global Britain.

I to

join the primer listing

commemorating the attacks that took

place in Westminster a year ago and

I will be some of the events

tomorrow. We should all remember

this as an attack on democracy

within our society -- join the Prime

Minister. I also join in sending

condolences to the family of the Red

Arrows engineer who sadly died

yesterday and we wish the pilot well

in his recovery. Mr Speaker, I had

the pleasure of meeting Andria who

won the global teacher award and we

should congratulate and the school

in Brent for the great work she does

there. Mr Speaker, today is the

Kurdish New Year, so can we wish all

Kurdish people around the world a

happy day, and particularly for

those suffering so much in the

conflict in Syria, a hope of peace

in the year to come. Mr Speaker,

does the Prime Minister believe that

the collapse of Northamptonshire

Council is the result of

Conservative incompetence at a local

level or conservative incompetence

at an national level.

Can

I first joined the honourable

gentleman in those

gentleman in those celebrating

Kurdish people around the world are

happy day. There has been a report

into Northamptonshire County

Council, but let's look at what we

see across the board in counsels. --

in local councils. If you look at

what is happening in councils up and

down this country there is one

message for everybody, and that is

the Conservative councils cost you

less.

Mr Speaker, my question was

actually quite specific to

Northamptonshire. And the Tory

leader of the council said we had

been warning the government since

2013/14 that we could not cope with

the level of cuts we were facing.

Three years ago Mr Speaker, that

Council, Brent, it was pioneering an

easy council model. It then

proceeded to outsource 96% of its

council staff and transferred them

to News service providers run by

private companies paying dividends.

Now that counsel has gone bust. So

does the Prime Minister really

believe that the slash and burn

model for local government is really

a good one?

a good one?

Can I say to the right

honourable gentleman it would be

helpful if he first accurately

reflected the independent statutory

inspection which concluded last week

where the report was clear that

Northamptonshire's failure was not a

case of underfunding. So his

case of underfunding. So his claims,

indeed Northamptonshire's core

spending power is set to rise by

£14.5 million. I say to the right

honourable gentleman the attack that

he is making that this is all about

the amount of money that government

is providing is not correct. What we

are ensuring is that councils are

able to provide good service is up

and down the country that is what we

see with councils, Conservative

councils, up and down the country

costing people less than Labour.

costing people less than Labour.

The

problem is that Northamptonshire has

gone bust and it is caused by the

Conservative government and counsel.

And it is a model used by Barnett

counsel, until recently run by the

Conservatives, where capita holds

councils with an estimated value of

£500 million.

£500 million. Government cuts mean

councils across England face a 5.2

million funding gap by 2020, so does

the government believe it was right

to prioritise tax cuts for the

super-rich and big business.

super-rich and big business.

The

house is becoming overexcited. I say

that the Prime Minister's answer

must be heard, and the right

honourable gentleman must also be

heard, and it will be, however long

it takes. Mr Snell you are behaving

in a most undignified manner.

There

seems to be a lot of concern among

Conservative members about my

suggestion that the government had

prioritised.

prioritised. And put it as something

more than funding for social care

for bin collection or street

cleaning.

Can I say to the right

honourable gentleman he talks about

bin collection, but people in

Birmingham living under a Labour

council saw thousands of tonnes of

waste on the street because they

were failing to collect the bins.

And we all know he talks about

payments, but we all know he talks

about tax, and the top 1% of

taxpayers are paying the highest

burden of tax than they ever paid

under Labour. And we all know what

Labour would mean for council

taxpayers, because just this week,

the Shadow Communities Secretary.

Could it be that he does not want

people to know he is supporting? He

has supported a plan to stop local

taxpayers to have the right to stop

tax hikes. He supported a plan. To

have a land value tax, tax on your

home and garden, and wants to

introduce a new hotel tax and we all

know what would happen under Labour,

more taxes on ordinary working

people and they would pay the price.

Mr Speaker, the shadow Secretary for

local government supports councils

and thinks they should be properly

funded and doesn't think they should

be a vehicle for privatisation. Mr

Speaker, the leader of Surrey County

Council, who just happens to be a

conservative says, we are facing the

most difficult financial crisis in

our history and he did not mince his

words. He went on to say that the

government cannot stand idly by

while Rome burns. Council funding

has been cut by half since 2010.

Households in England now face

council tax rises of £1 billion. The

Tory leader of the local government

Association says councils will have

to continue to cut back services or

stop some altogether due to

government cuts. So, as people open

their council tax bills, isn't it

clear what the Conservative

messages? Pay more to get less.

The average council tax for bands

deep property is £100 less and

Conservative than Labour. He says

his Shadow Local Government

Secretary is supporting councils

foresaw I wonder if he is supporting

these councils, Haringey, whether

Labour leader was forced out?

Brighton, where the Labour leader

was forced out? Cornwall, where the

Labour group leader was forced out?

What are these people done? They

have supported building more homes,

providing good local services, and

tackling anti-Semitism in the Labour

Party. So the message is clear. If

you believe in good local services,

if you want to see more homes built,

and if you want to tackle

anti-Semitism, there is no place for

you in the Labour Party.

Jeremy

Corbyn.

Mr

Corbyn.

Mr Speaker, Labour councils

build houses. Conservative councils

privatise.

privatise.

Order. Order. There is a

very raucous atmosphere. I will say

it again. Backbench members should

seek to imitate the Zen like calm of

the father of the House, an example

to us all. Jeremy Corbyn.

We all

admire Zen, Mr Speaker. Pay more for

less is what the Conservative

message is. In Leicestershire, the

County Council is pushing through

£50 million worth of cuts. And

cancel increases of 6%. -- council

tax increases. They blamed

chronically low Government funding.

That is the message, pay more to get

less. It's not just households. The

average small shop will see their

rates bill increase by £3600. Empty

shops suck the life out of the high

streets and local communities. So

why is the Prime Minister presiding

over a Government that is tearing

the heart out of our local high

streets?

First of all, we have

provided extra support for small

businesses in relation to business

rates. Secondly, it talks about

Labour councils building homes but

actually we have built more homes

under this Government run under 13

years of a Labour Government. And he

talks about local level councils.

Yesterday two Labour councillors

from Ashfield joined the

Conservatives. What did one of them

say? They said both locally and

nationally, the Labour Party has

been taken over by the hard left.

They are more interested in fighting

internal ideological battles than

standing up for the priorities of

working men and women. Conservatives

will always welcome people who care

about their local area at and we

will always stand up for people in

their local area.

Jeremy Corbyn. Mr

Speaker, half a million businesses

will see their rates rise this year,

some by 500%. Even Mary Porters, who

led the Government's says the

high-tech campaign, said it was

simply a PR campaign which looked

like we are doing something and

hoped it might kick-start something,

but it didn't.

but it didn't. This Conservative

Government has slashed public

services. They cut funding and

expect councils to build up the

pieces. The result of this is

children's centres are closing,

schools are struggling, fewer police

on the streets, older people and

left without care and dignity. And

refugees turning women away. --

refuges. It's unsustainable. And

doesn't that tell you everything you

need to know? Doesn't that tell you

everything you need to know about

this Government, that it demands

households and businesses to pay

more to get less?

This Government is

spending more on our schools and our

NHS than ever before. We are able to

do that because of a balanced

approach we take to the good economy

and because of the strong economy we

see under the Conservatives. But I

notice the right Honourable

gentleman in his six questions is

not mentioned today's unemployment

figures. Employment is at a joint

record high. Unemployment has not

been lower since 1975. Economic

inactivity is at a record low. That

is a strong jobs market. Utilising

benefits for a market, Labour

members of Parliament?

members of Parliament?

Thank you, Mr

Speaker. I can only assume that the

Leader of the Opposition has not

read the report but Northamptonshire

County Council. Worldwide, I want to

focus on a different issue today.

Worldwide, every minute millions of

throwaway paper copy cups go to

landfill in order to solve it we

need industry consumers and

Government to work together. In that

spirit, a company in my constituency

have developed a fully recyclable

alternative cap that can be easily

recycled, unlike the current option.

Will my right honourable friend join

me in welcoming that innovation and

perhaps I might be able to give one

to her if she's around afterwards?

LAUGHTER

Well... I'm very happy... I'm very

happy to say to my honourable friend

that if you would like to come along

and see me afterwards...

LAUGHTER

He has raised an important point

and, as he knows, we are committed

to wanting to leave our environment

in a better state than we found it

and I would like to congratulate the

innovation. This is an important

example of working with industry to

ensure that we are dealing with this

issue of plastic waste. We are clear

in our environment plan we want to

do and that's a very good example of

that.

Thank you. Can I also talk

about the remarks about the

terrorist atrocity in Westminster a

year ago, our thoughts are with

those who gave their lives and of

course the work of the emergency

services. I want to associate myself

with the remarks. Does the Prime

Minister agree that subverting the

democratic political process in any

country is totally unacceptable?

Well, we certainly believe in

ensuring that democratic processes

are able to continue, people seek

free and fair elections and I think

that everybody in this House would

accept.

Can I thank the Prime

Minister for that answer? The parent

company of Cambridge analytic is to

check laboratories, run by a

chairman of Oxford Conservative

Association, and its founding

chairman was a former Conservative

MP. A director appears to have been

donated over £700,000 to the Tory

party. A former Conservative Party

treasurer is a shareholder. We know

about the links to the Conservative

Party and they go on and on. Will

the Prime Minister confirmed to the

House her governments connections to

the company?

Can I say, the right

honourable gentleman has been

talking about two companies, the

parent company and he also referred

to Cambridge analytic, and I can say

as far as I'm aware the Government

has no current contracts with

Cambridge analytic or the other

group. What we have seen in

Cambridge analytic are the

allegations clearly very concerning,

and it absolutely right that they

should be properly investigated. It

is right that the information

Commissioner is doing exactly that.

People need to have confidence in

how their personal data is being

used. And I would expect Facebook,

Cambridge analytic and all

organisations involved to comply

fully with the investigation taking

place. I'm pleased to say of course

the bill we are bringing forward on

data protection will strengthen

legislation on this and give the ICO

the information Commissioner office

tougher powers to ensure

organisations comply and I hope it

will be supported from everybody

across this House.

We have a lot of

backbenchers questions to get

through. Gordon Anderson.

Some

London boroughs are renting houses

in Kent including Sittingbourne for

use as temporary accommodation for

homeless families. My local

authorities are then expected to

provide those families with the

support they need. This is putting a

strain on Kent's schools, hospitals

and social services who receive no

extra funding to provide that

support. Would my right honourable

friend agree with me that the London

Mayor and London boroughs should

provide more homes in the capital so

London families can be looked after

by them instead of placing the

burden on hard-pressed council

taxpayers in Kent?

Can I say to my

honourable friend that he is right

to speak up on behalf of his

constituents on this issue for some

London authorities must secure

temporary accommodation within their

own borough as far as is reasonably

practical. But we've also change the

laws so the council must take into

account the impact a change in

location would have on a household.

He's absolutely right, we do want to

see the London Mayor and boroughs

being able to build more homes. The

London Mayor has had money provided

to him to build affordable homes.

It's a pity he has not been building

as many as we would like to see.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. School cuts

in Portsmouth under this Government

will reach 3.3 by 2019 and

classrooms will be starved of

resources they need including

textbooks and basic stationary. At

the same time, 40,000 children in

the south-east rely on food banks.

If the Prime Minister was a teacher,

who had been under a pay cut for

eight years, what would she buy a

struggling child in one of my city's

classrooms, a textbook or a square

meal?

Can I say to the honourable

gentleman, he raises the issue of

school funding. As I said earlier,

actually, the amount of money we are

spending on schools is greater than

it has ever been before. What

matters is the quality of education

provided in schools for Sabato is

why I'm sorry he didn't welcome the

fact that we now see over 20,000

children at a good school in his

area, 9000 more than in 2010.

We

should all recognise and welcome the

employment figures announced today.

I'm sure we all welcome that, but

given the latest report that there

are an acceptably high levels of

youth unemployment among ethnic

communities in Britain, will my

right honourable friend explained to

the House what the new 19 limp and

fund will do to help young people

into work?

He raises are very

important point. We know these

figures because of the racial

disparity ordered which I

commissioned when I became Prime

Minister, it shows there's been

progress, but we do need to do more

because 16-24 -year-old in ethnic

groups are likely to be twice

unemployed than their white peers.

And £90 million I have announced

will help to tackle those

inequalities in youth unemployment

and it is an initiative which will

be run by the big lottery fund, and

it will identify the barriers to

employment for those young people

and help them to overcome those

barriers. I think that is incredibly

important and I was very pleased to

visit Birmingham, which is doing

excellent work in this area.

Thank

you, Mr Speaker. The war in Syria

has now entered its eighth year. In

recent weeks, over 1000 people have

been killed in eastern provinces and

hundreds of Kurds lie dead and

200,000 civilians are fleeing for

their lives. Even the hospital has

been attacked. What will the

Government do to help ring urgent

humanitarian relief to those in such

despair?

Can I say that we take the

situation in eastern provinces in

Syria very seriously indeed and it

is an issue which has been raised at

the United Nations Security Council.

The Foreign Secretary has raised

this issue with others as well. We

need to ensure that we are very

clear about what needs to happen to

ensure people could be protected,

humanitarian aid could get in and

for those whom it was necessary, for

them, because of their condition, to

be given a safe passage to do so and

we will continue to press this case.

We recently interviewed a panel of

university vice chancellors on the

education select committee who

failed to recognise their salaries

are outrageous, being twice that of

the Prime Minister, and mainly

funded by the taxpayer and student

debt. Given that these outrageous

salaries are paid in the poorest

performing universities, were the

Prime Minister confirmed this will

be looked at in the post education

review

I think she has raised a point

others are concerned about as well.

Universities are autonomous from

governments and with up to them how

they set their pay levels but they

should recognise students and

taxpayers are continued into the

higher education system and expect

value for money. The office of

students which has been set up will

be acting to ensure greater

transparency in relating to senior

staff pay full stop and requiring a

justification for total enumeration

package awarded to the providers

most senior staff so we will start

to see a light beam shone very

clearly on the issue.

Last week, the agriculture and

fisheries secretary, and Ruth

Davidson said that the Prime

Minister has been clear, Britain

will leave the CFP as of March 20

19. Now the UK is staying in the

fisheries policy but with no say on

quotas. The worst deal imaginable.

What changed between last week and

this week?

Can I say to the

honourable gentleman that we will be

working with the fishing industry,

both fishermen and fish processors,

that we do see a bright future for

the freshening industry -- fishing

industry. We will take back control

of the waters and make sure we do

not see British fishermen unfairly

denied access to other waters and we

want to rebuild our fishing

industry. That is a Conservative

Party that is committed to coming

out of the Common fisheries policy.

His party wants to stay in the

Common fisheries policy.

Common fisheries policy.

Mr Speaker,

char well is really proud to be

building three houses a day, and

construction traffic is playing

havoc with our road surfaces. Will

the Prime Minister meet with me to

discuss what more national

government can do to help with

inevitable growing pains

can either say to my honourable

friend to congratulate Charwell for

the homes they are building.

I

recognise that this brings with it

other challenges and at budget we

more than doubled the housing

infrastructure fund with another

£2.7 billion, and earlier today my

right honourable friend, the Housing

Secretary announced a further 44

areas for infrastructure projects

with the potential to deliver

400,000 more homes, so I recognise

the important role infrastructure

plays.

The Prime Minister was right to

prevent members of the Royal family

and government ministers from

attending the football World Cup in

Russia. But what is being done to

safeguard everyday football fans in

what was in my view is already a

dangerous place to watch football.

Even before the incident in

Salisbury. What advice will be given

to travelling English supporters,

many of whom have already bought

their tickets? And if she confident

that adequate cooperation between

our police and the Russian police

will protect English fans?

I

recognise the important issue the

honourable gentleman has raised

because we want British football

fans to be able to be safe when they

are enjoying watching the England

team. And we are currently working

with the police and they are looking

closely at what arrangements will be

in place to support the England

football fans who travelled to

Russia and the Foreign Office will

be carefully monitoring the

situation to make sure advice is

available to football fans so they

are aware of the circumstances that

will be in Russia and what support

will be available.

My right

honourable friend will be aware that

I mentioned Jackie Woodcock, a

terminally ill constituents of mine

who set up the dying to work

campaign. Santander, her mortgage

brokers have been incredibly helpful

in freezing her payments and will

take it from her estate when she

dies, but now they have gone even

further and are not increasing the

interest payments either. So would

my right honourable friend agree

that other banks should follow the

cover -- caring and compassionate

example set by Santander and

encourage them to look after

terminally ill people in the same

way?

Can I say to my honourable

friend that she has raised an issue

about which she cares deeply, and

I'm certainly happy to join her in

congratulating Santander and the

support they have provided to Jackie

Woodcock. Obviously she has raised a

wider issue and it is important for

employers to be aware of and to

fulfil their legal obligations

towards their employees, including

the terminally ill employees, and

I'm sure others will look at the

excellent example Santander has set.

The Sunday Times said this week that

affordable housing and easy access

to London in Bedford has made it one

of the best places to live in the

UK. But Bedford constituents are

worried about and concerned about

the school funding cuts and services

cuts, the impending closure of the

only walk-in centre, the big

increase in homelessness and the

loss of peak-time rail services to

London. My question to the Prime

Minister is, why is the government

ruining the prospects of our great

town?

I can say to the honourable

gentleman that the prospects of his

great town are being improved by the

fact we see thousands more children

in good and outstanding schools in

Bedford and we have in the local

authority than we have gone before

and when we came into power and it's

being improved, and then more

funding in Bedford, but it's also a

government that is ensuring we have

a strong economy providing jobs for

people in his constituency.

people in his constituency.

Thank

you, Mr Speaker. Financial services

are of critical importance both to

thousands of my constituents in

Hitchin and Harpenden and also to

the country as a whole. Will the

Prime Minister take this opportunity

to update the house on progress made

on ensuring that our future trade

deal with the European Union

includes an agreement on financial

services?

services?

Can I say to my honourable

friend that I'm well aware of the

importance of financial services

both for the United Kingdom and

constituents in his constituency and

elsewhere but also the important

role the City of London plays in

terms of the financial sector for

the whole of the European Union.

This is a matter in which we are in

discussion with the European Union

about and there is a recognition of

the significant role the City of

London plays and the importance of

ensuring that we may access to

finance across the European Union.

Mental health issues affect one in

ten children who on average have to

see their GP three times borate --

before referral with many waiting

for up to 18 months for treatment.

At a time when national funding in

the area is being constantly cut,

including a 5% reduction in funding

to Lewisham, is this not another

example of the government saying one

thing but doing another with our

NHS?

May I say, that the government

is putting more funding into mental

health provision and have already

made available an additional £1.4

billion to improve children and

young people's mental health

services. And we have committed that

70,000 more people will have access

to mental health care. I will say

this to the honourable lady that she

rightly raises mental health issues,

particular she is raised if young

people, but across the board we need

to give more attention to mental

health. We are putting more money

into it and we want to see parity of

esteem between mental and physical

health in the National Health

Service. It is something the Labour

Party in 13 years of government have

failed to do.

failed to do.

The EU agreement

published this week has left

fishermen from Amble and the

north-east anxious. Why we will gain

control in the fermentation period,

which is great news, there is real

concern in case EU colleagues try to

take advantage of us losing our

voice in the CFP bike changing quota

rules during the implementation

period, so will the Prime Minister

consider asking deference to prepare

a financial mitigation plan to

protect the fleet should we need to

do so?

do so?

There needs to be the

certainty to operate on the same

basis until we reach a new

partnership we are renegotiating. As

I said earlier, the new partnership

means we want to take back control

of the waters and ensure British

fishermen are not unfairly denied

access to other waters and ensure

that we cannot -- we can rebuild the

fishing industry, which I think is

important. What has been agreed is

the stability key not being changed,

so the quotas that British fishermen

will operate under will not be

changed. I know that deaf are

looking actively at how we can

ensure that we are not only

maintaining the fishing industry but

that and rebuild it -- I know that

Defra are looking actively.

This

week every party in Westminster took

part in an international summit to

challenge violence against women in

politics. Online abuse dominated

discussions. Last year her

government considered a statutory

practice for social media

corporations for the abuse of

content they publish. Will the Prime

Minister say if she remains content

with a toothless, voluntary code, or

will she give it a digital guard dog

that both barks and bites?

Can I say

to the honourable lady that she

raises an important point. On all of

these issues we have taken the view

that we sit down with the industry

and work with them to see what they

are willing to do on a voluntary

basis but they know if that doesn't

actually work we will look at

legislation. The abuse that was

undertaken, she referred to the

abuse and political campaigning. I'm

afraid that is a sorry state of

affairs we have reached in this

country and we want to see the free

and fair election and people having

the confidence to be to go out and

put their views forward without

feeling they will be abused.

feeling they will be abused.

The

clinically led future fit programme

for Shropshire seeks to improve and

modernise hospital services across

Shropshire and we have been waiting

for a decision on this issue for

many years. Could the Prime Minister

use her good offices to ensure that

this vital scheme is supported in

the coming weeks so we can secure

the vital investment for Shropshire

NHS?

My honourable friend is right

to speak up for Shropshire in the

way he has done and he will be

pleased to see that the Right

Honourable friend the Secretary of

State for Health and social care

purred to his comments and we will

contact him about this issue.

Mr

Speaker, the review made a big

difference in improving services for

children with communication needs.

Communication is the key life skill

for children to learn and thrive,

yet a decade on, the latest report

shows much more needs to be done. So

will the Prime Minister commit to a

cross government strategy that puts

this issue at the heart of policy

and gives all our children the best

possible start in life?

My

honourable gentleman has raised an

important issue and the Department

for Education will be considering

the report carefully because we do

not want to see any child held back

from achieving their potential which

includes ensuring those children

with speech, language and

communication needs are given the

support that they need and that

there has been particular training

for teachers to support children who

require additional help to

communicate. But we will introduce

the education health and care plans

to make sure children with

additional needs receive the right

support to succeed in school in the

future but we will look carefully at

the report and respond in due

course.

Unlike the SNP, I do not

want to see Britain rejoin the

disastrous Common fisheries policy.

But I do have some concerns about

the fisheries aspects of the

transitional agreement which has

been provisionally agreed with the

European union. Before she travels

to the European Council, can the

Prime Minister assure the house and

fishing communities around the UK

that we will absolutely and

unequivocally take back full control

of our waters from 2021?

As I said

earlier, the point about the

fermentation period is that it is

the period during which people are

allowed to move to make the changes

that the new economic partnerships

we have and it will ensure that

businesses, fishermen included,

don't face to changes on the cliff

edge in the way that they are

operating. By definition because it

is maintaining the status quo so

people don't have to make those

extra changes, it is, I recognise

not the same and won't be the same

as the end state when we have a

future economic partnership and have

that new relationship. As I said

earlier one of the elements we will

be looking for in reassuring the

visiting industry is to ensure that

we do take back control of our

waters.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can I

associate with myself with the Prime

Minister, the Leader of the

Opposition and the leader of the SNP

by offering condolences to the

family of the RAF engineer who was

killed tragically in my constituency

yesterday. The RAF has been part of

my constituency for over 75 years

and they are a tight-knit group of

aircraft men and support staff on

the ground. And whilst they are

grieving, will the primaries to join

with me in paying tribute to the

Royal Air Force and whilst they

commemorate their century of

dedicated service to our country.

I

am very happy to join the honourable

gentleman in saying what a great job

the Royal Air Force does for us, and

he sees it at first hand in its

connection with his constituency,

but we should recognise the valour

of all of those serving in our Armed

Forces, and particularly in this

100th year of the Royal Air Force,

those who serve in the Royal Air

Force, and we thank them for it.

May I welcome the government's

decision to create a medical school

at Canterbury in East Kent but to

clean my honourable friend the

Member for Faversham who has been

indefatigable in the fight for this.

Does not underline the importance of

training more doctors and nurses to

ensure our health services in the

region is well staffed and well

looked after?

My honourable friend

is right. I'm pleased to welcome the

new medical school in Canterbury and

the four other schools set up around

those parts of the country and he's

also right this is about ensuring we

are training a workforce for the

National Health Service and we have

raised significantly the number of

training places, the biggest the NHS

has ever seen.

Thank you. Given that

mesh can shrink in a woman's body,

will she supported

will she supported proposals to

this?

This is a very important issue

and this has caused concern to

women. And I will look in detail at

it. I'm happy to write to her about

it but I recognise the concern is

about this particular issue and I

will write about what the NHS will

be doing on it.

Thank you. Will she

congratulate the remarkable start of

Prince Alexander Hospital in Harlow

to ensure they are out of special

measures today? Will she support our

campaign for a new hospital to

ensure the staff is fit for the 21st

century?

Can I congratulate the

local hospital in Harlow he is

referring to four coming out of

special measures? That's very

important and I know will give added

confidence to his constituents. He

tempts me to support a new hospital

in his area and I'm sure as he will

know the Secretary of State has

heard his request in relation to

that. What we do know is we are

putting more money into the NHS to

ensure we get the best possible

services provided to people through

the National Health Service.

Just

before we...

Earlier this morning, the major

unions were on board for that. No

doubt more will be revealed in the

next couple of hours. Mr Corbyn went

on local governments, specifically

on Northampton, the Council there,

which has gone bust, and had to be

wound up. A Conservative councillor.

He said was that caused by Tory

incompetence at local level or

national level? The rest of the PMQs

we're all about local Government,

about spending, quality of services,

and of course the reason for that is

that the local elections are now

looming. On May the 3rd. Campaigns

are getting under way. A highly

political robust exchange between

the two frontbenchers on this. The

leader of the SNP in Parliament in

Westminster went on Conservative

connections with the parent company

of Cambridge analytical, something

we could be hearing more about as

the week goes on. Still with me is

Liz Truss.

Liz Truss. Also Laura Kuenssberg.

Local elections and their

campaigning has begun. They were

both prepared to be very political

and Theresa May dug further than she

ever has before in terms of trying

to push back to Jeremy Corbyn some

of the unhappiness and strife there

has been in local Labour councils

around the country. And the tensions

between council leaders who have

been here for a long time and knew

whether Labour supporters were. She

was making a full frontal political

attack. Jeremy Corbyn started off

with a real good question about it

at local Tories or national Tories

who are incompetent which is led to

a council collapsing? I think by the

end of the session, there'd been a

role reversal and Jeremy Corbyn

started strongly, the prime

ministers seemed to be on the back

foot but by the end it felt to me as

if it was the other way.

Yes, Jeremy

Corbyn at the beginning was strong

but it petered out a bit and the

Prime Minister generalised things

bye bye going into attack on Corbyn

is over positions in the Labour

Party, and what she regards as

moderate Labour politicians

resigning and so wonderful. It

became much more a party political

battle.

There's no question that

these issues around council

pressures will be a huge feature of

the council elections. No question

about that. Elections in lots of

different part of the country and

London too. The context to all of

that, both parties are in

expectation management phases, the