27/05/2016 Newsnight


Tory divisions over Europe; an extra British warship for Libya; Charles Moore on Brexit; would background checks for government jobs help social mobility? Kirsty Wark presents.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 27/05/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



The one thing which is absolutely dependable, is that anything Boris


says, you can find him saying the opposite only


The Conservatives are at each other's throats


In an exclusive interview Chris Patten doesn't hold back.


I'll be asking Jacob Rees-Mogg who called Michael Heseltine


a frightful old humbug, if the rancour runs too deep


The Prime Minister has announced that we are upping our engagement


with Libya, sending a warship to the territory, and personnel


The way it has been dealt with in Iraq and Syria has shown to be


reasonably successful. And I think taking that model and transposing it


to Libya, has to be a good thing. What kinds of backgrounds do these


city idiots come from? The government wants a background


checklist for job interviews to stop An economist and expert


on social mobility backs it. A public school educated solicitor


thinks it's a terrible idea. The closer to the date


of the referendum we get, the more difficult it is to see how


the Conservative party is going to bind itself together again,


the more visceral the language, the thicker the mud


that's being slung. If the issue of the EU


is at the heart of their political credo, how can Cabinet mnisters


so opposed to each other sit around And then there's Boris,


not in the Cabinet, but a big beast roaring at David Cameron -


just yesterday - about the scandal of the government's failure


to curb immigration. The former Tory Chairman Chris


Patten, and current Chancellor of Oxford University -


a big beast himself - has given an exclusive interview


to Newsnight's David Grossman in which his criticism


of Boris Johnston in in which his criticism


of Boris Johnson in Does it make you proud that the main


protagonists on either I'm proud of two of them,


I'm not sure about the other two! Particularly since their regard


for the truth seems They seem to economise on the verite


to a certain extent. Let's talk about how


the campaign is going, in your view, through


some of those people. I was looking back at some


of the archive and there was a wonderful shot of you coming


down the stairs of Central Office in about 1992, I think it was,


and following you is a young man wearing red braces,


who is recognisable What do you think about his


contribution to all of this? For a start, we wouldn't be having


a referendum were it not for him. Well, I think we wouldn't be having


a referendum were it not for the way that this psychodrama has engulfed


the Conservative Party ever since the ERM debacle,


and I suppose ever since Margaret I think she was got rid


of because of the poll tax, rather than Europe,


but that's another matter. I think David Cameron


is incomparably the best qualified I'm not known to be terribly servile


in my attitude to people, but I think he's clever,


he's got good judgment, and if anyone can put this wreckage


back together again after - I hope - we have voted in favour


of staying in the European Union, I just hope we don't go


through all this again. Yeah, I worry that for a lot


of the Brexiteers, in a sort of spittle-flecked way,


this is a never-end-um, What do you make of Boris Johnson's


contribution? Jean-Claude Juncker has said


he's making stuff up. Yes, of course he is,


but he always has. One thing which is absolutely


dependable is that anything Boris says, you can find him saying


the opposite only So I don't take his intellectual


contribution to this campaign, although he is


a perfectly clever man. I think one of the things he resents


is that he didn't get as good But Boris just makes it


up as he goes along. And you come across people


like that. There is a sense in which you can't


call Boris a liar. I think he's one of those people


in life who simply doesn't really understand the difference


between fact and fiction. And if he can make a good joke


by saying something, or if he can write a newspaper


article by referring to Hitler and the European Union, he does it,


and he doesn't think about it. But he will be saying the opposite


in a few months' time. You know what Boris Johnson


would say if he was sat here? He would say, Chris Patten,


he was somebody who advocated We would be in a much bigger mess


if he had had his way. Why should we listen to him


on this matter? Actually, what I was really


in favour of, and I don't want to get into complicated


details, was a common currency, I put my hand up, everybody


occasionally makes a mistake, Though it's worth making


this additional point, that I think if we had joined


the euro, it might have avoided some of the mistakes that have


been made since. As a former chairman


of the Conservative Party, how does David Cameron bring


the party back together again? I think it would be very


difficult for him. Are people like Mr Gove


and Mr Johnson, Mr Duncan Smith - once the quiet man of British


politics, happy days! Are they all going to require


Mr Cameron to go cap in hand around Europe for the next few years trying


to negotiate new trade deals and new agreements with the


European Union? If we vote to stay in,


which I hope we do, he will have to balance managing the party


with making sure that people I'm sure he will know now,


to borrow a phrase of Ken Clarke's, or a metaphor of Ken Clarke's,


that there are some people on the right, you give them a bun


today and they come back I think some people have to be made


aware of the fact that we only have But he will have to try to bring


the party together. It will be easier, if,


as I said earlier, it will be easier if people accept the result,


and accept that we don't go I'm joined now from Bristol


by the pro-leave campaigner and Conservative MP,


Jacob Rees-Mogg. Somebody Chris Patten called a


spittle flecked Brexiteer. Good evening to you. Chris Patten


called it the Conservative psychodrama. I wonder if you think a


lot of the anger and division is synthetic or very deeply felt and


difficult to reconcile? Well, Lord Patten is a very great family


friend, a good friend of my father's and was very generous to me when I


was younger. He's a man of endless good humour and I think his anger is


almost certainly synthetic he's far too similar -- civilised a man to


believe a lot of what he said to you in that interview. Does he, like


Boris Johnson, not understand truth from fiction? I wouldn't say that,


he's a political pugilist and he recognises that Boris is twice as


trusted as the Prime Minister on the European issue so he's trying to


bash down Boris to support the prime and Esther's position. From a


pro-Remain point of view, it's a rational thing to do. -- Prime


Minister. You have called into question the veracity of what Chris


Patten said, yet he is very heartfelt in what he is saying about


the manner in which this debate is being conducted. Lord Patten has


always been a political showman. He is very good at the theatrical part


of politics. He has made an intervention in accord with that.


He's also a passionate pro-European and always has been. What he's doing


isn't unreasonable. I see why the remaining party want to damage Boris


Johnson because he's hugely popular and trusted across the country and


has been putting the Leave I didn't across very well. Let's talk about


Boris Johnson. -- the Leave argument across. He makes it up as he goes


along, says Chris Patten. You could take that to be something relatively


funny, like you can't have a handoff bananas in the European Union, it's


only got three fingers. You could also talk about him in voting the


memory of Hitler when it comes to a European superstate. -- invoking.


Are these things helpful to this debate? I think almost everything


Boris has said is factually accurate. When he appeared before


the Treasury Select Committee he was singularly accurate and well briefed


and the things he was asked about turned out to be correct. In


comparison with other people who have tried to create a superstate,


you can go back to Charlemagne. What Boris said was factually true. Will


you take something more to do with the economy? The committee's report


today was unanimous, it was unanimous in saying that the Leave


campaign's idea that the European Union sucks up ?350 million of


British money per day was wrong and highly misleading. Those are the


kind of figures Boris Johnson is putting about. It was a unanimous


report. Did you go along with that report? Did you have your finger is


on toes crossed? I don't want to be pedantic, but nobody said ?350


million per day. A week, I'm sorry. That was inflammatory language!


You're getting more inflammatory than the Brexiters! Not a precedent


for the BBC! That figure is the grace figure which excludes the


rebate. It's a bad figure, I have always said that, and I go along


with the report. More importantly it said the Chancellor's thoughts to


the Treasury report did not reflect the report. For the Chancellor of


the X to get to say some thing not strictly true is much more worrying.


-- of the exchequer to say something. Whichever way this vote


goes, can the DNA of the cabinet remain the same, all will be


Believers have to remain -- have to leave the Cabinet? -- will be


Levers. I'm campaigning to leave because I believe in British


democracy. If British people vote to remain, I must accept that and shut


up. If on the other hand they vote to leave, the remain side have to do


take it as well. It goes to the heart of great divisions in the


Cabinet. Four weeks out from the referendum, the language, and I have


to say you yourself through a quick stone at Michael Heseltine, the


language of the campaign over the next few weeks will not become


milder. Definitely not. But Michael Heseltine is big enough to cope with


being called an old humbug. I doubt it will have disrupted his sleep for


a second. In politics people make their arguments forcefully and


passionately and throw the odd insult about. Afterwards we all


settle down. Look at the Prime Minister and Nick Clegg in Downing


Street garden they formed the coalition. I wonder if you agree


with Chris Patten, that it's inconceivable that if vote Leave


wins and we are out of the European Union, is it inconceivable to you


that David Cameron would remain as leader, especially if he had to go


cap in hand to make trade deals and so forth? Do you think if Britain


votes to leave, David Cameron would leave number ten? I actively want


the Prime Minister to stay in those circumstances, because the first


thing we would have to do is improve our relationship with our European


friends and neighbours and he has bent a lot of time talking to them


and is in the best position to get the ball rolling. He will need tough


negotiators beneath him, but I'm a great supporter of the Prime


Minister in everything other than Europe. If we vote to leave, he will


have to get on with getting us out and I will give him the support to


do that. David Cameron made an announcement


today at the end of the G7 summit in Japan which signals an upping


of the Uk's engagement with Libya. The Royal Navy is preparing


to deploy another warship to the Mediterranean to help


tackle people smuggling Britain will also send a training


team to the North African state. The Prime minister said


it was in Britain's interests to support the new national unity


government, to help it grow, to help it have the ability to


control the country, but he refused to comment on reports that British


special forces are already engaged in fighting so-called


Islamic State in Libya. Last month, when reflecting


on his presidency, President Obama said that his worst mistake


was failing to plan for the day after the uprising in Libya,


and also made a rare criticism of David Cameron for becoming


"distracted" after the intervention. Here's our diplomatic


editor Mark Urban. A powerful warship like a type 45


destroyer, seen here practising its drills,


offers the chance to ramp up operations against


the Islamic State group. It could also be used to cordon


to British and Libyan vessels trying to intercept weapons


and people smugglers. All these options were opened up


by the Prime Minister's Britain should be helping,


we are already part And we want that to move to the next


stage of working with a Libyan government to stop boats leaving


in the first place and, over time, As we have seen in the eastern


Mediterranean, that's what works. But many a plan for relaunching


Libya and its security forces Last month, Foreign Secretary Philip


Hammond visited Tripoli and inspected the fledgling navy


that Britain hopes to build up, so it can police


migration and smuggling. But, we have been told,


the Libyans didn't sign off on his proposals,


and until Libyan and legal requirements are satisfied,


a new international naval mission Anyone in the military who operates


in a foreign country needs to have a legal status


of forces, a legal agreement. That starts with the United Nations


resolution. From that perspective,


any military commander going out to Libya would want to have


reassurances from the government So a comprehensive approach


to tackling scenes like this, where a grossly overloaded people


smuggler's boat capsized this week, remains elusive, while the British


government would like Libyan coastguards to be able to stop this


and take migrants back A threat to the whole project


remains from Islamic militants An effort against them sparked


accusations of mission creep. The complexity of the situation


in Libya plays into a whole bunch of other questions about the kind


of assistance that should be available to the new government


of national accord, and the incredibly delicate


political situation in Libya where there is now a real potential


of Libya going back to civil war The Libyan affiliates


of Islamic State now hold much of the coastline,


with one pocket centred on Sirte Britain's role in the struggle


against them includes intelligence gathering by HMS Enterprise,


a survey vessel, and a secret spy planes flying from


Akrotiri in Cyprus. Special forces, the Royal Marines


SPS, have long been active on the coast, and were this week


reported to be operating As for sending more,


the Royal Fleet auxiliary in the region could support more


special forces or training missions. And a frigate or destroyer


destroyer also soon be sent. For the time being though


much of the British Islamic State is one


of the greatest threats not just to Britain,


but to the world. And the way that it has been dealt


with in Iraq and Syria has shown And I think taking that model


and transposing it to Libya For the past five years,


the Royal Navy and British special forces have been in and out of Libya


and it has rarely been simple. Now there is the prospect


of a more ambitious mission, and everyone from operational


commanders to MOD lawyers will be These are some of the questions that


have been drawn up by Cabinet Office Minister Matt Hancock,


for people applying for jobs to try to stop discrimination


against the poor. Because rather than social mobility,


the UK suffers from social The questions will be drawn up


as a national standard, applied to civil servant job


applicants, and the government Perhaps the test could be applied


to would be Cabinet Ministers. Half the Cabinet were privately


educated, despite the fact only 7% Joining me to discuss this


is solicitor AbiJit Pandya, and from the think tank,


Class, the economist Faiza Shaheen. Good evening. In fact, the EU


referendum campaign probably demonstrates this problem quite


acutely. The four leaders of the campaign all went to Oxford. Three


out of the four are privately educated. Surely that is an


indication something has to change? I don't agree there is a problem. If


you look at the facts, last year 517,000 people were privately


educated out of a total of 8.2 million in this country. That saved


the Department of education ?3.5 billion. That is ?3.5 billion which


would go to poorer children, children whose parents cannot afford


private education. To suggest private education somehow undermines


opportunities in terms of the level of education poorer children get, is


deceiving. These potential measures, whether or not the applicant was


eligible for free school meals, the qualifications of their parents,


professions, income or wealth, isn't the danger that what you do is you


penalised the child for a decision made by the parents? No, is


happening is we have 50% of the Cabinet who went to private school,


we have 40% of the BAFTA winners went to private school, we have a


situation in law and journalism were if we had that situation in


football, we would not have David Beckham Morra Wayne Rooney today.


The reasons that we have to think about these measures is because the


situation so bad. There is no perfect solution. Does it feel like


a blunt instrument? No. There are some better measures than others.


For some young people from certain backgrounds, getting to the doorway


you can even write that application has been much harder. It is not


about positive discrimination, it is about levelling the playing field.


Do you accept it is harder for children from state schools who


perhaps do not have the support and all of the other things that go with


the private education, the feeling of certainty, the feeling of


confidence, the feeling that you can do something and nothing is barred


to you that macro that that is not open to a lot of children and that


is a bad inequality? I do not concede the point it is an


inequality. No, I don't. If you have got there on merit because your


parents have actually facilitated that, that is merit. It is not merit


his money. That is the -- your view of merit. Tony Hibbert your


situation. Your parents came to this country before you were born. They


thought sending you to private school would give you a better


chance in life? That is right. That is not the same as persecuting


people for not going to private education. When you say inequality,


that is a broad term with significantly nebulous meanings.


Let's college life chances. There are plenty of people who are


successful. It is how you measure success. The argument you are


putting forward is a particular type of job and Society, a select one,


and the vast majority of people do not become Cabinet ministers, is


being infiltrated by people from a select background. That is not the


grounds to change all opportunities across the board. It is across the


board. Even in acting and creative sectors now. This is very costly. It


is not just costly in terms of the influencers and the types of


policies and decisions that are made by people that do not experience


what most people in society do... I want to know if I am employing


someone that they are motivated, by knowing they have gone to a state


school and worked really hard, that is levelling the playing field.


Right now they are discriminated against. What happens when you have


a blind aptitude test? Is that in itself an indicator? Some of these


blind aptitude tests have their own vices. They can be better. Take for


instance the Oxford interviews. That bias is towards a certain type of


confidence that you will have if you went to private school. Your parents


decided to send you to a private school because they thought it was


better for you than a state education? That was their specific


view. Other parents may think differently. Other parents may want


to spend their money taking their children to water ski rather than


send them to private school. That is a decision for people. Not for the


state. Do you agree that often the companies that do best have a very


diverse group of people on the board, who bring different


experiences and different attitudes? Why would you need to change the


rules if that is already happening? My point at the start was that half


a million people in this country save ?3.5 billion for people who


cannot afford... It is important. If you want the resources for people


who can't afford it, the best way to do that is get more people in


private education. We cannot have people living segregated lives like


that. When you have private school and private health care, they are


less willing to put back in. That is why we see tax avoidance. It is a


misleading number. Thank you. Each week during the EU referendum


campaign, we want to offer you an oasis away from the facts,


fibs, flannel and fears being lobbed We bring you the thoughts


of influential determinedly not attached to one camp or the other,


but who who have thought deeply Tonight it's the former editor


of the Daily Telegraph and the official biographer


of Margaret Thatcher, Charles Moore. I've always thought it


mattered that we should have And that the people you vote


for govern you, and that when you are fed up with voting


for them, you vote them out. In the EU, there is no such thing


as the Leader of the Opposition. There is permanent government


by a governing class As the day approaches


I feel more strongly, partly because I have a sense


that the voters are being bullied. I mean, if we want the proof


that there is a sort of global elite telling us what to do,


we've been given it Every famous person in every other


country in the world has been telling us how to vote,


and every great big organisation which does well out of the system


is telling us how to vote. And the whole point about this


is it's us, not great big organisations and people


who run other countries. When people say that


they're thinking of - they can't decide but they're


are thinking they might vote Remain, I tend to raise the point of,


would you feel remorse? One of the things you should do


when a big decision comes is to maximise the power


of your decision. If you vote Remain, you will sink


without trace between the waves of Obama and Jean-Claude Juncker


and Hillary Clinton and the IMF and the World Bank


and the rest of them. They will be vindicated


in their fundamental complacency about the running


of the Western world. And your decision will


have been forgotten. I see some of the commentary


and they keep saying to the Leave campaign,


"What are you going to do That is not the Leave


campaign's job. They're not going to


be the government. So there's a lot of uncertainties,


not uncertainties that I think fundamentally about the future


of this country, which I think is secure outside the EU,


but about literally It worries me a bit but it does not


worry me nearly enough No Such Thing as the News


is on next, followed by Artsnight, in which Charlotte Church celebrates


the joy of the human voice and meets singers who are trying


to do things differently. But before we go, earlier,


Barack Obama became the first US president to visit Hiroshima


since his predecessor, Harry Truman, ordered the nuclear attack


on the city that ended Mr Obama used his speech,


perhaps audaciously, to draw some Good night.


The world was forever changed here. But today, the children of this city


will go through their day in peace. What a precious thing that is. It is


worth protecting. And then extending to every child. That is the future


we can choose. A future in which Hiroshima and Nagasaki are known as


the dawn of atomic warfare, but as the start of our own moral


awakening. Hello. Some fine weather this


weekend but there will be a sprinkling of thunderstorms. Some