Chris Grayling - Leader of the House of Commons HARDtalk

Welcome to The HARDtalk, I'm Stephen Sackur.

Any hopes that Britain's decision on whether to stay in or leave

the EU would be calm, dispassionate and respectful have

In the run up to the referendum on 23 June, the two camps

are kicking lumps out of each other, and the fight is at its bloodiest

inside the governing Conservative Party.

My guest today is Chris Grayling, the Leader

of the House of Commons and a senior figure in the campaign to leave

Will this political war ultimately weaken Britain and Europe?

thank you. The British public has had weeks of this referendum

campaign, and there are days more to go. Do you think the nature of the

campaign is serving the British public well? I think there will

always be some lively moments, but I think people like being given a real

choice. This is a four-month campaign at which both sides have

got ample opportunity to explain issues, get messages out. People

will have to form their own judgement. There are strong views on

both sides of the debate, ultimately it is a decision that will rest with

the public. One of the most respected committees in the place,

the House of Commons, described the debate as being full of lurid claims

which are impoverishing the debate. I am not sure I necessarily by that

argument. There have been some fairly robust arguments on both

sides, such as the complaint of the money that is sent to the EU. That

is a National office of statistics figures. People will probably be

very interested in that, let me stop you. You claim that it cost Britain

?350 million a week, membership of the European Union. That is frankly

just plain wrong. It is not, the official figure is 9.9% of the

national office of statistics... We only get about half of it back. So,

you have just given the game way, you get it back. The figure that you

present on the Leave campaign battle bus as how much it costs Britain

every week to be in the EU is nonsense because you get more than

half of the moneyback. We do get a rebate, which is continuous

negotiation, and the second is... You are getting a rebate every year,

so however you get an account for it, there is money going out

amounting to about 18 billion of which the... Our overall

contribution is over ?300 billion a week. What we get back is not under

our control. We get about a quarter back through the rebate. That is

under constant pressure from other EU members who want to get rid of

it. What we have set throughout the campaign, that our gross on

tradition. Our net contribution is about ?10 billion a year. As someone

who has run government departments in top spending reviews, that would

be a great addition to things like spending on our health service. I am

taking a wild guess that this was a distortion would not persuade you to

change your mind on the figures. I guessed that and clearly I am right.

I just wonder whether you mind that, for example, some of the most

respected figures in the land, such as the chair of the UK statistics

authority, said that he is deeply disappointed that you continue to

use that figure. Do you not care about that? What he said was that

you need to play it in context, which I have done. But you have

frequently used it without any context whatsoever. We have said

throughout that that is our gross contribution. The money we do go

back, we don't have control over. That is money that is decided for us

as to how it is spent. Our rebate is under constant pressure from other

member states. There is no guarantee that it will still be there in five

years at White Oda new respect Sir John Major, perhaps a doyen of the

Conservative party. He described the use of statistics and economic

arguments as strategic political lying as an art form, it is great

political fraud. I completely disagree. Using official statistics

from the office of National statistics is hardly a national

fraud. Other claims that have been made in the last few days by your

side, Boris Johnson said that Britain is going to be on the hook

for billions more from the EU because he says we will ultimately

be forced to be a part of future bailouts. We will have to fork out

billions. He also says there is a black hole in the European budget

which we will have to meet. It is just plain wrong, isn't it? You and

I know that the David Cameron deal with Europe is that those of us not

in the eurozone will not be required to take in future eurozone bailouts.

It is only a couple of years since a political agreement was reached

between our government and other member states that said we would

have to contribute to the last bailout. But that was immediately

torn up subsequently. There is not yet a legal basis for our exclusion

from any future bailouts. We have had to pay out billions... The

entire debate is nonsensical. If you say that any agreements that have

been signed me nothing... About three years ago, there was a

political agreement about a gay lot of which written was not part, but

then suddenly we turned out to be part of it. That is one of the

challenges. On this question of truth telling and deceit or not, a

final poster that really sticks in my mind is that Turkey is joining

the EU. Turkey is a candidate member. It is. -- Turkey is a

candidate member. We have a document setting out the current process of

integrating Turkey into a number of EU processes as part of what it

described as the process of bringing Turkey towards membership. That is a

very long sentence and has nothing to do with the statement, Turkey is

joining the EU. It is a candidate member and European commissioners

are working towards Turkey joining. I don't know what the date is yet,

but it is absolutely clear that it is going to occur. A plan was agreed

only two months ago that to stop migrants crossing the AT, Turkey

was going to become a member of the EU. According to my statement, you

have no idea of whether Turkey will ever be a member of the EU. I am

simply taking at face value what the European Commission said. They may

be telling us a non- truce, but as far as I can see, Turkey is a

candidate member and the EU is taking steps to move them towards a

membership. Tell me if this is unfair, but you focus on Turkey

because that is part of the main plank of your message delivery right

now, which is about immigration? You seem to believe that you have a

winning platform as long as you keep the debate in Britain on the

question of immigration. You have suggested that Turkey is going to be

an EU member in the 18 million Turks will have the freedom and write to

come and live and work in the UK. Of course, that notion is so full of

holes I don't know where to begin. But your cat has been peddling it

for the last few months gradually we have a group of countries that are

lined up to become members of the EU, they include study, Turkey,

Macedonia and Turkey. In the case of Turkey, the commission explicitly

agreed to accelerate the process of moving them towards the EU. Even if

there is a restriction put in place to limit free movement of workers

for a period, as was the case in the past, if you are self-employed, you

can move straightaway. Very years that were in Romania and bog area

joined, anyone working in the UK long before the official

restrictions were lifted, south of the people could live in the EU from

wherever they wanted from day one. How many Turks in this hypothetical

land of yours we Turkey is a member of the EU, which of course it isn't,

how many Turkish people do you think would come to the UK? I don't know,

but what I do know from experience, in 2005 we admitted eight Eastern

European countries. Five years later, we admitted Romania and Gary

West European free movement. We saw very large numbers of people, in

seven figures, come to the UK. That number is rising. There is no reason

to believe that as more countries join, that that process won't

continue. Net immigration to the UK was a third of a million, 333,000.

Roughly half came from inside the EU and the rest came from outside. Your

colleague Michael Gove has committed that if the Leaf campaign wins,

within just a few years, that number will be down to tens of thousands.

How are you going to do that? We have just passed and immigration

act, they have put restrictions of movement from outside the EU. Within

the EU, we have said there are a number of changes that we think need

to happen. We are campaigning, we are not a government, but we have

talked about a couple of things. The first is that people should only

come to the UK to work if they have got a job. The second is that we

should introduce a system similar to the Australian points -based system

that allows us to recruit skills when we need them and not...

Australia has a much higher proportion of migrants in their

population than we do with their points -based system. How are you

going to deliver this reduction when the CBI have said they want to see

the movement of workers continue and they have said that the EU have

consistently helped the UK to fill their skills shortage closer work it

is about having control. At the moment, we can't control the flow of

migration within Europe. When SEBI is telling you that immigration must

continue because of the skills shortage, whether you talk about

control will not, people will still have to come in. There are promises

of reducing the numbers to tens of thousands, that does not stand up. I

think it does. You want to strangle British business? I want people to

have a choice. If we continue our levels at the moment, in overall

terms, a city the size of Newcastle or Oxford every year, that will

change our country. We will see more congested roads, more congested

schools. We will see pressures on our health service. We will see

pressures on the housing market. We will see significant additional

development of green spaces around our country. If that is to happen,

it is my view that the people of this country should have their

choice. At the moment, there is no choice. Looking at other countries,

some of those who have said we should stay with the EU, such as the

US. The US, if they were going to have a similar issue, they would

have to be having an SD card and people emigrate to America. Why

should we have no control about the numbers of people who want to live

and work it? I don't want to be a close the nation and its want to be

able to manage that process. What about the tone of your

argument? Sir John Major said it is overall squalid. I don't agree. You

drive down the motorway and see that ridiculous poster you put up? That

wasn't put up by us. It is fraudulent. It has nothing to do

with us. It was Vote Leave. It was your campaign. It is perfectly

possible for someone to mock up a poster. It isn't just posters. It is

the tone. It is important to say, it isn't from us. This is important. We

have talked about immigration as pressure on health, housing,

schools, and the younger generation. Many are voting to remain, the

younger people... Many younger people want to remain. If they want

to get on the housing ladder, in what world will that become easier

if we continue to have a city the size of Newcastle in immigrants

coming to England every year. Do you think young people really related to

Boris Johnson when he talked about efforts through history to recreate

the empire of the Romans? He said Napoleon, Hitler, various other

people tried it out, it ends tragically, and the EU is an attempt

to do this by different method. Hitler? That association works? He

was making a point. He is a politician like you. He is

associating the EU with Hitler. He is also an accomplished historian

and was making a historian's point. But he is speaking as a practical

politician. He thinks linking the EU and Hitler is good politics he is an

accomplished historian. He isn't, actually, professional, as a

historian, he is a politician. He has written many books. You can

choose to answer or not. Is it sensible to reach out to young

people in this country today, many that travel around Europe, to link

the EU and Hitler? What or is was doing was making a historical

argument in poor taste. -- Boris. It is an interesting point, the polls

suggest there is a clear division. The older generation, it seems, by

and large, according to the polls, are with you, and the younger

generation wants to remain in Europe. Why do you think that is? I

don't know why people choose to vote the way they do... Why is your

message not reaching out to young people? Interestingly, we have

outing to see movement in the polls. I think that message is getting the

younger generation. -- are starting to. When I talk to students and

schools during the course of this campaign the message I give is think

about the implications of the roles we have today for your future in the

United Kingdom, especially about housing and the nature of the

country in which they live. It will change, inevitably, and my point is

not about that change being right or wrong, but about them having a safe.

If we look forward, under current rules in the UK, we will see our

country changed. I think the people who live here, old and you, should

have a say. I would like to finish on the way this debate is being seen

from outside. One of the key elements of the debate for your side

is the conviction you seem to have that whatever the European states

Sadie right now, other members, about things being different if

written vote for Brexit... -- say. There will be a tough negotiation

with the UK if you leave, you seem to say it is absurd to suggest the

EU would put up trade barriers in a fit. You don't close a shop to your

best customer, says Michael Gove. Do you not actually listen to what the

rest of Europe is seen? Angela Merkel, Francois Hollande? --

saying. You have to look at it the other way around. People are talking

about advantageous terms. But it is also about the access of the rest of

the EU to the UK market. If we leave the European Union we will represent

17% of EU exports. We are crucial markets to French farmers and German

automatic car makers. In what world do we think that their governments

are going to jeopardise the 5 million jobs that depend upon UK

consumers? Let me try and address that. The world in which that would

be the case is a world in which the EU has greater leverage than the UK.

To quote an independent economist, the truth is the EU needs us a great

deal less than we need them. The worst case scenario is that its

economy would be 0.2% smaller after Brexit. Not the case with us. The

leverage is with them. I don't buy that. This is an independent

economist. This is the French election year. The most vociferous

lobby group in France are the farmers. If we don't carry on

trading with the EU, the price of French agricultural projects in the

UK will rise up to 40%. -- products. They will go bust, the French

farmers. What sane politician in their election you possibly say to

the farmers who will take to the streets in the drop of a hat, we

will cripple your business in the most important market. It is a heck

of a gamble you are taking, that senior politicians across Europe are

crying wolf. Just to quote the Economy Minister from France,

Britain will be completely killed in the global trade negotiations if it

votes for Brexit. You think this language is a smokescreen? I

listened very careful to Emmanuel's interview. He asked about power

states developments in the UK. He said it is important it goes ahead.

The Northern Powerhouse, I mean. There is a lot of physical rhetoric

in this... People trust politicians internationally any more? -- to

people. President Obama said it is quite clear that it is in the UK and

the EU and the US's addressed for Britain to stay in the EU. --

interest. Even China says though. Everyone looking in says, Britain,

think carefully. You don't trust any of them? President Obama said it was

in the US's interest... No, he said both. Look, the key point is we are

looking out for the future. The debate is important is because over

the next ten years, according to Angela Merkel, Francois Hollande,

there is going to be a move. The EU in ten years time will look like big

block called the United States of the eurozone or whatever and tacked

onto it will be two countries, the UK and Denmark. The only two

countries not bound by treaty to be part of that. How much they will we

have in what goes on? How much will we be able to look after our

national interest? All those countries saying we should stay,

they aren't asking themselves the question what we in the same

position putting ourselves into that situation, where we are unable to

look after our national interest... We would be voted out every time.

Referring to the question on whether you trust the words of people like

President Obama internationally... I was in Washington. I talked to

American politicians. The views they are much more nuanced than just

President Obama. He happens to be the president. Let's talk about

trust in one different way. You can't, it seems, trust your own boss

any more, David Cameron. You don't trust him. I do trust in. He is and

will continue to be a very good Prime Minister. -- him. But your

colleagues, Michael Gove and Boris Johnson, they wrote saying he

deceived the British public concerning Brexit. Do you believe he

is to see for? How can you go on working for him if you believe that?

-- deceitful. But he is a good Prime Minister. But he believe he is

telling lies. I have every confidence in David Cameron as Prime

Minister. Even if you think right now he is deceiving the British

people? This will always be a lively debate. There are strong sentiments

on both sides of the argument. But I make it be that it is in Britain's

interest that regardless of the outcome, David Cameron is the best

man to lead this country for the next New Year's. Chris Grayling,

thank you very much for being on HARDtalk. -- few years. Thank you.

It was a pleasure. THEME SONG PLAYS. Yesterday we saw some sunshine

across many parts of the UK.