:00:08. > :00:13.But wasn't it supposed to be immigration?
:00:14. > :00:16.Does a shift in course for the Leave campaign suggest the wind
:00:17. > :00:34.And what they called their counter attack on the economy.
:00:35. > :00:36.The economy was supposed to be their Achilles heel
:00:37. > :00:39.but the latest round of campaigning suggests some Leavers believe it
:00:40. > :00:42.And we've learned that even if the Leavers do prevail,
:00:43. > :00:44.Whitehall mandarins are considering plans that
:00:45. > :00:47.would kick any curbs on immigration into the long grass We'll ask this
:00:48. > :00:49.minister if post-Brexit Britain will bear much resemblance
:00:50. > :00:53.Also tonight: I believe the Republican nominee should never get
:00:54. > :00:54.near the White House. Hillary Clinton edges ever closer to
:00:55. > :00:56.history. neither an unemployment benefit nor
:00:57. > :01:08.a Dire Straits song? When it's part of a universal
:01:09. > :01:10.basic income, of course. And apparently it's
:01:11. > :01:20.on the agenda for Labour. It's internecine, intra-party
:01:21. > :01:24.and increasingly international. But if there's one thing
:01:25. > :01:27.upon which most participants in the Referendum campaigns can
:01:28. > :01:30.agree, it is that you can't There might be a new one
:01:31. > :01:35.popping up every day but, in the shadow of last year's epic
:01:36. > :01:37.failure to predict anything close they are to be taken with a cellar
:01:38. > :01:46.full of salt. And yet there is a sense abroad that
:01:47. > :01:48.Leave campaigners today turned their attention back
:01:49. > :01:50.to the economy, arguably their weakest card,
:01:51. > :01:52.because they feel they've more or less sewn up immigration,
:01:53. > :01:54.inarguably their strongest. And while this may not be
:01:55. > :01:56.prompting conniptions on the Remain side just yet,
:01:57. > :02:01.it seems to be causing concern. Newsnight's Political Editor Nick
:02:02. > :02:03.Watt joins me now to run a rule over all
:02:04. > :02:19.things Referendum. Just how much concern? The mood in
:02:20. > :02:27.Remain is nervous. I was speaking to a senior figure. He said it is time
:02:28. > :02:39.to quote Sir Alex Ferguson, it is squeaky bum time. He said that the
:02:40. > :02:44.Remain side had had a good run. But this morning there was a poll that
:02:45. > :02:51.said Leave one redhead had were driving immigration as a concern
:02:52. > :02:58.among voters. -- were ahead and worse. One minister said, while we
:02:59. > :03:03.not hearing from the PM talking about his great deal on Europe where
:03:04. > :03:07.he imposed a four year ban on EU migrants claiming in work benefits.
:03:08. > :03:11.Another minister said, the PM must talk about immigration but he can't
:03:12. > :03:16.because it would mean talking about his proposal target to bring net
:03:17. > :03:20.migration and out of the tens of thousands and this minister said
:03:21. > :03:27.that, of course, is unworkable. Will we see a shift in tone or tactic?
:03:28. > :03:32.The message is clear from the Central command of the Remain camp,
:03:33. > :03:40.they say the economy is their trump card and they will stick with that.
:03:41. > :03:45.It will only make Brexit more angry. The issue on which you can swing
:03:46. > :03:48.voters is the economy. That is why in increasingly buoyant and
:03:49. > :03:52.confident vote leave campaign were not just talking about the economy,
:03:53. > :03:56.they were delivering what one source described to me as a counterpunch.
:03:57. > :03:59.Let's come in and make the case that staying in the EE was the greater
:04:00. > :04:05.risk on the economy, talking about how the UK might be liable for
:04:06. > :04:09.future Eurozone bailouts. -- EU. Disputed by the PM. But vote leave
:04:10. > :04:14.say it will not be plain sailing. More issues to come ahead. There
:04:15. > :04:19.will be a mansion house speech from David Cameron as a statement from
:04:20. > :04:26.Christine Lagarde, head of the IMF. Thanks. Andrea Leadsom, part of the
:04:27. > :04:29.vote leave campaign, joins me now. The day the referendum was
:04:30. > :04:35.announced, the day Boris Johnson gave a mighty boost to your site by
:04:36. > :04:40.announcing he would support it, and the day the polls seem to be turning
:04:41. > :04:46.in your favour, the pound fell on all three occasions, do you know
:04:47. > :04:51.why? -- your side. It has dipped, that's true. It is a floating
:04:52. > :04:56.currency. It goes up and down every day. If you look at whether Pounders
:04:57. > :05:03.versus the Duro, it is roughly about where it was when the PM came back
:05:04. > :05:08.with his renegotiation. -- pound is versus the euro. Every time it drops
:05:09. > :05:13.a cent against the euro or the dollar, everybody goes on about
:05:14. > :05:19.it... That wasn't my question. It is not every time the pound drops that
:05:20. > :05:29.they are claiming every link -- a link. There must be a unifying theme
:05:30. > :05:32.is to buy the markets respond so pessimistically. Every time the sun
:05:33. > :05:38.shines on the leave campaign the pound drops. By a small amount.
:05:39. > :05:42.There is a saying in the city, by on the rumour, sell on the fact. It
:05:43. > :05:47.means it is a bit of jargon which means, what happens is volatility in
:05:48. > :05:53.advance of a big event, where traders position themselves to try
:05:54. > :05:56.and make money. That is their job. When the event happens, they hope to
:05:57. > :06:03.take their profits and to carry on with the new reality. That is why it
:06:04. > :06:06.was so disturbing that the governor of the Bank of England should make
:06:07. > :06:11.an intervention in this debate and start claiming unprovable
:06:12. > :06:17.assertions. Because his job is, in fact, financial stability. The
:06:18. > :06:22.talking down of the economy by people on the Remain side is
:06:23. > :06:27.increasing volatility. You will find on June the 23rd, if we vote to
:06:28. > :06:32.leave, those things will settle down. You mentioned the city and the
:06:33. > :06:39.euro. Your former employer in the city has focused on the euro and
:06:40. > :06:43.warned that sterling may reach parity with the euro from its
:06:44. > :06:51.current level of 1.25 if it is a vote to leave. That is your former
:06:52. > :06:54.employer. Economic forecasting is an honourable profession, but it is
:06:55. > :07:00.only as good as the assumptions you put into it. We have seen a raft of
:07:01. > :07:04.economic assumptions, including from the Treasury, that effectively say
:07:05. > :07:06.that if we leave we wait the geisha at any trade other than a basic
:07:07. > :07:23.free-trade -- that effectively say that if we
:07:24. > :07:31.leave we will only negotiate trade, other than a basic free-trade
:07:32. > :07:33.agreement... You mentioned Treasury forecasts being unreliable, whether
:07:34. > :07:39.unreliable when you were in the Treasury? No. Economic forecasting
:07:40. > :07:44.is an honourable profession. But it is only as good as the assumptions
:07:45. > :07:47.you put in. To answer that question, the person I worked with there for
:07:48. > :07:52.many years, one of the great investors in the UK, who invest
:07:53. > :07:58.daily in day out in our pensions and so on, his company says, actually,
:07:59. > :08:03.there will not be a huge impact from Brexit. People like Roger Bootle.
:08:04. > :08:07.Highly regarded in the city. Saying there may be some short-term
:08:08. > :08:13.volatility but long-term it will be better off. It is only as good as
:08:14. > :08:16.the assumptions you put into it. It is difficult to find somebody to
:08:17. > :08:21.trust. The voters are finding it difficult to find people to trust.
:08:22. > :08:27.That isn't the issue. I am a vote and it is the issue. It isn't. You
:08:28. > :08:34.cannot predict what you are going to have for dinner next week. -- voter.
:08:35. > :08:39.I accept the middle ground. Can we find somebody, like Martin Lewis,
:08:40. > :08:44.the journalist, from the money saving expert website. Here's a man
:08:45. > :08:48.most trusted by the British public to provide guidance on this issue
:08:49. > :08:56.and he did today. He described himself as a risk averse, which is
:08:57. > :09:02.why he is in of Remain. People who prefer to gamble are in favour of
:09:03. > :09:09.Leave, for example, he said. Can we trust him? This isn't an issue of
:09:10. > :09:14.trust. The issue is it is not possible to see with a crystal ball
:09:15. > :09:21.into the future. Economic forecasting relies on assumptions
:09:22. > :09:25.going into the model. Martin Lewis is saying he is risk averse. His
:09:26. > :09:31.assessment, his personal opinion, is that it is riskier to leave that
:09:32. > :09:36.remain. My assessment after 25-year is in finance is that it is far
:09:37. > :09:41.riskier to stay. Leaving means we can negotiate trade with the world,
:09:42. > :09:47.the 80% of the world not in the EU. And then to stay in the EU risks our
:09:48. > :09:52.economy being incredibly damaged by the stagnation of the European
:09:53. > :09:57.economies. And by the fact our budgetary contributions are under
:09:58. > :10:05.control of the EU, not under control of the UK. Can we trust the man who
:10:06. > :10:16.has been roundly told by the IMF he has used the figures wrong? Michael
:10:17. > :10:20.Gove, of course. -- wrongly. It is not possible to predict with
:10:21. > :10:26.precision every prediction relies on your assumptions. If you assume
:10:27. > :10:29.negative inputs, you will get negative outputs. It isn't a matter
:10:30. > :10:33.of trust, it is a matter of those are the facts. Many thanks.
:10:34. > :10:35.Given that they pretty much run the gamut from apocalyptic nightmare
:10:36. > :10:38.to a land of milk and honey, you could be forgiven for thinking
:10:39. > :10:42.that all predictions of what the UK might look like in the event
:10:43. > :10:44.of a vote to leave had been exhaustively explored.
:10:45. > :10:50.There is a new option gathering momentum in Whitehall that would see
:10:51. > :10:53.civil servants working furiously to hold on to as much commercial
:10:54. > :10:58.union as possible in the event of a political schism.
:10:59. > :11:00.It's even got a neologism of its own: Flexit.
:11:01. > :11:12.Whichever way we vote in this referendum, Britain will go
:11:13. > :11:16.The destinations on offer are not too clear.
:11:17. > :11:18.Especially as campaigners fighting on each side cannot promise
:11:19. > :11:35.Newsnight has learned that civil servants are seriously
:11:36. > :11:38.considering a route to Brexit which is not the same
:11:39. > :11:41.The question on the referendum ballot sheet is extremely simple,
:11:42. > :11:43.should we remain members of the European Union,
:11:44. > :11:48.But on both sides there are uncertainties.
:11:49. > :11:55.For Remain, we don't know how the future political and economic
:11:56. > :11:57.circumstances of the EU will change it.
:11:58. > :11:59.For Leave, the principal set of unknowns are about our future
:12:00. > :12:01.trading relationships with our big partners.
:12:02. > :12:07.Particularly the European Union itself.
:12:08. > :12:09.The official Vote Leave campaign wants us at some
:12:10. > :12:16.They argue that would let us trade more with faster growing parts
:12:17. > :12:20.of the world, cut EU red tape, and cut net immigration.
:12:21. > :12:24.If Britain does vote to go it alone and leave the European Union,
:12:25. > :12:30.an important principle to consider is this, the more Britain
:12:31. > :12:36.uses its new liberties to vary its rules from those
:12:37. > :12:39.uses its new liberties to vary its rules from those applying
:12:40. > :12:41.from across the European Union, be they about veterinary care,
:12:42. > :12:44.or immigration, the more likely it is that Britain will find
:12:45. > :12:51.itself facing barriers to trade in with the EU.
:12:52. > :12:53.Be they tariffs, or be it simple administrative tariffs,
:12:54. > :12:56.Vote Leave's principal argument is that any losses we might suffer
:12:57. > :12:59.on access to the EU's internal market will be more than made up
:13:00. > :13:02.for by trading elsewhere in the world, and by the loss
:13:03. > :13:08.To its fans, the appeal of Vote Leave's plan,
:13:09. > :13:11.which envisages a lot of difference from now, is precisely that it
:13:12. > :13:36.It is important to remember that even if Vote Leave win
:13:37. > :13:38.on the 23rd of June, Vote Leave won't be
:13:39. > :13:42.And they won't be deciding what our future relationship
:13:43. > :13:45.with the EU will be, that will be up to the officials,
:13:46. > :13:49.I have been speaking to a lot of civil servants who are likely
:13:50. > :13:52.to be involved in any renegotiation with our relationship with Europe
:13:53. > :13:56.And one thing is quite striking, their vision for what Britain's life
:13:57. > :13:59.will be like outside the EU is quite different to the one being put
:14:00. > :14:03.A number of very similar plans are being considered in Whitehall
:14:04. > :14:05.on the potential road ahead from a Brexit vote.
:14:06. > :14:07.These route maps by pro-Brexit thinkers are known by names
:14:08. > :14:10.like Flexit, Europe 2.0, or, in Roland Smith's case,
:14:11. > :14:13.How would you go about leaving the EU?
:14:14. > :14:15.We have to, initially, protect the economics.
:14:16. > :14:24.That means getting into an EEA position rather
:14:25. > :14:28.That means retaining lots of EU rules and regulations?
:14:29. > :14:30.At that point it means retaining a lot of stuff to do
:14:31. > :14:34.So yes, we do jettison a lot of other things to do
:14:35. > :14:37.with political union, and we jettison some big policies
:14:38. > :14:39.like the common agricultural policy and common fisheries policy.
:14:40. > :14:54.Lots of civil servants like a Norway style European Economic Area
:14:55. > :14:57.membership as the first leg of any Brexit journey to minimise
:14:58. > :15:00.We could then disentangle further at a slower speed
:15:01. > :15:03.Some even think this strategy could prove a model
:15:04. > :15:07.You would have a Europe which is a small, incredibly
:15:08. > :15:09.integrated space where you have one single currency.
:15:10. > :15:11.Where those countries really pull sovereignty and in effect become
:15:12. > :15:20.And you have everyone else in Europe who is part of a free-trade space
:15:21. > :15:22.in close partnership with Eurozone Europe,
:15:23. > :15:24.but it's not done as intensely, regulated, and is sort
:15:25. > :15:33.It would allow those who want maximum integration to have it.
:15:34. > :15:36.It would allow everyone else to do it at their own pace.
:15:37. > :15:43.But these schemes have a big political weak spot.
:15:44. > :15:46.Why is it you think Vote Leave haven't gone for your road map?
:15:47. > :15:48.I think perhaps because they have chosen immigration
:15:49. > :15:51.Immigration is a big issue in this country.
:15:52. > :15:54.As we all know. As I accept, as well.
:15:55. > :15:57.My issue with it is that the economy is a bigger issue, and that keeps
:15:58. > :16:00.coming up in polls time after time, and therefore, for me,
:16:01. > :16:03.that is what we actually need to focus on in the first instance.
:16:04. > :16:06.The Remain campaign has plenty of criticism of this model, as well.
:16:07. > :16:08.The Leave campaign have said if we leave the EU,
:16:09. > :16:11.they want us to leave the single market, leave the EU entirely,
:16:12. > :16:22.If we were to follow the Norwegian EEA model,
:16:23. > :16:29.that wouldn't have a mandate,
:16:30. > :16:31.and it wouldn't achieve the things the Leave campaign say
:16:32. > :16:35.We wouldn't be able to stop free movement of people.
:16:36. > :16:39.We would still have to accept most EU rules with no say over
:16:40. > :16:42.And we would still have to pay into the EU budget.
:16:43. > :16:45.So it is far worse than the deal we have now.
:16:46. > :16:47.Today, BBC News revealed that lots of Pro-Remain MPs
:16:48. > :16:50.They will have Whitehall allies, too.
:16:51. > :16:52.But if Vote Leave win this campaign
:16:53. > :16:54.ministers may feel they will have to cut immigration,
:16:55. > :16:57.especially as the Prime Minister might well soon be from Vote Leave.
:16:58. > :16:59.This is what happens when you post simple referendum questions
:17:00. > :17:15.STUDIO: Still with me is Energy Minister Andrea Leadsom,
:17:16. > :17:17.and joining her is former head of the World Trade
:17:18. > :17:26.The European project feel slightly threatened by the prospect of Brexit
:17:27. > :17:29.but that report notwithstanding, in the event of a vote to leave, the
:17:30. > :17:42.union will bend over backwards to keep Britain as close to the centre
:17:43. > :17:46.of business as possible, surely? That is speculation and the reality
:17:47. > :17:53.is quite different, the reason the UK joined the European Union 40
:17:54. > :17:59.years ago was free trade. If the UK leaves, it leaves the union, and it
:18:00. > :18:12.leaves this free trade zone and the single market. It will import more,
:18:13. > :18:17.because of the zero tariff which the Brexit campaign says will occur
:18:18. > :18:22.after having left, so less exports, because of tariffs in the European
:18:23. > :18:28.Union, 50% of UK export, plus the 50 other countries with which the EU
:18:29. > :18:34.has preferential trade agreements. More imports, less exports, less
:18:35. > :18:43.production, less jobs. That is the equation. That is also speculation,
:18:44. > :18:49.of course. I have been in trade negotiations for 20 years, they are
:18:50. > :18:57.not about love, they are about hard numbers, they are about clout, they
:18:58. > :19:00.are about bargaining capacity. Standing alone, the UK loses the
:19:01. > :19:05.bargaining capacity that it has with other countries because it belonged
:19:06. > :19:11.to the European Union and because the European Union is 500 million
:19:12. > :19:18.consumers. That is the reason the US, Canada and Mexico have a
:19:19. > :19:23.free-trade agreement. Trade is a world of elephants. 500 million.
:19:24. > :19:28.China, India, more than 1 billion! That is what trade is about, that is
:19:29. > :19:35.what trade negotiations are about. Look at the UK, outside in the cold?
:19:36. > :19:39.More imports, less exports. That is roughly what I call shooting oneself
:19:40. > :19:44.in the foot! We will not be an elephant anymore, I'm not sure what
:19:45. > :19:47.we will be but it will not be anywhere near as big. The EU has
:19:48. > :19:53.Nick Dougherty negotiated free-trade agreements with economies of the
:19:54. > :19:57.size of about 7 trillion US dollars, that is the EU elephant,
:19:58. > :20:00.Switzerland, population of less than 30 million, has negotiated
:20:01. > :20:07.free-trade around the world with the economic size of about 27 trillion.
:20:08. > :20:12.-- the EU has negotiated free-trade agreements. The fleetness of it is
:20:13. > :20:15.vital, the EU's own numbers themselves showed that because of
:20:16. > :20:19.their failure to negotiate free-trade agreements with some of
:20:20. > :20:22.the biggest economies in the world, the UK's jobs have been impacted
:20:23. > :20:28.negatively to the tune of nearly 300,000 jobs. Had we negotiated
:20:29. > :20:32.free-trade with big economies, that could have been what the UK
:20:33. > :20:38.achieved. If we leave the EU, we will be able to negotiate those
:20:39. > :20:44.free-trade agreements on our own. I'm sorry to say but free trade is
:20:45. > :20:53.about negotiations. What will you negotiate? What will you offer to
:20:54. > :20:56.the people you negotiate with? Your policy is zero tariff on the UK
:20:57. > :21:02.market. What will you offer to the others? If they have free access to
:21:03. > :21:08.your market, they will not give you anything, if they have free access,
:21:09. > :21:11.it does not make sense. What is a trade negotiation, it is a deal, I
:21:12. > :21:15.give you something, you give me something. If you have given me free
:21:16. > :21:23.access to the market, which is what is being said, then there is not any
:21:24. > :21:28.more reason to have a deal! The campaign is not saying that the UK
:21:29. > :21:33.will have zero tariffs. Of course it is, I have read very carefully what
:21:34. > :21:39.you're colleague Patrick Milford has said, and he said, zero tariffs.
:21:40. > :21:45.He's not speaking for the vote Leave campaign, he has his individual
:21:46. > :21:55.views... I'm sorry to say, then, you are going to close the economy?
:21:56. > :21:58.Let's hear from her. We will undergo shed free-trade, you will be aware
:21:59. > :22:03.that the average time taken is 28 months, on average, as I have said,
:22:04. > :22:08.the likes of Switzerland and Iceland and Singapore, they have negotiated
:22:09. > :22:13.free-trade agreements with all of the world's biggest economies. The
:22:14. > :22:16.UK will plan to do the same. They have negotiated an agreement because
:22:17. > :22:21.they have a protected economy, which they have open. I know Switzerland,
:22:22. > :22:26.and Switzerland is a very protected economy. These countries have a
:22:27. > :22:32.protected economy, and what they do in a negotiation, they love the
:22:33. > :22:36.protection for the price of market access everywhere. That is why
:22:37. > :22:43.Switzerland negotiated a free-trade agreement with China, except... And
:22:44. > :22:48.the European Union has not. Except in that case, the deal is fairly
:22:49. > :22:53.unbalanced because China is a huge market and Switzerland is a small
:22:54. > :22:57.market. The UK is the world's biggest economy. Unbalanced trade
:22:58. > :23:02.deal, if that is what you want...? It is not a good reason, you may
:23:03. > :23:07.have other reasons, and I am not entering into that because this is
:23:08. > :23:11.my area of expertise. I sense this conversation has barely begun, but
:23:12. > :23:15.unfortunately, for the purpose of this evening, at least, it must come
:23:16. > :23:19.to an end. Thank you very much for joining us.
:23:20. > :23:21.Hilary Clinton is tonight within touching distance
:23:22. > :23:23.of becoming the first female Presidential nominee
:23:24. > :23:25.Barring a surprise of Biblical proportions,
:23:26. > :23:27.tomorrow's primaries in five US states
:23:28. > :23:30.will see her secure enough support to see off Senator Bernie Sanders,
:23:31. > :23:31.her remaining rival for the Democratic Party's candidacy.
:23:32. > :23:34.But it has been an angry and occasionally vicious battle,
:23:35. > :23:37.except, I suppose, by the standards of the Republican Party this year,
:23:38. > :23:41.that she will need to heal some serious wounds in her own party
:23:42. > :23:55.Newsnight's Diplomatic Editor Mark Urban reports.
:23:56. > :24:01.VOICEOVER: Running for president is not for shrinking violets, shake
:24:02. > :24:06.that many hands, down another drinks, should enough hoops, you may
:24:07. > :24:11.soon not know when it is time to quit. That at least is how many
:24:12. > :24:16.Democrats feel about Bernie Sanders, the last primaries are looming, all
:24:17. > :24:23.of the polling insists it will be a trump Clinton battle. Over the last
:24:24. > :24:28.month, where the maths has not been there for him anymore, and he has
:24:29. > :24:31.stayed in the race, there has been an increasing impatience from the
:24:32. > :24:36.supporters of Hillary Clinton for him to get out but it is appropriate
:24:37. > :24:42.for him to stay in until tomorrow. There are primaries in six states
:24:43. > :24:49.tomorrow, California alone has 546 delegates up for grabs. Hillary
:24:50. > :24:54.Clinton is just 23 short of getting the 2383 delegates that she needs to
:24:55. > :24:59.secure the nomination. It is almost impossible for Bernie Sanders to win
:25:00. > :25:04.now, but he may have shown his party a path to a different type of
:25:05. > :25:08.politics. What the party establishment is learning from this
:25:09. > :25:11.experience in 2016 is that the party is going through a transition, the
:25:12. > :25:18.real energy in the Democratic party here is in the progressive wing, and
:25:19. > :25:21.it foreshadows a lot of fights to come within the Democratic party as
:25:22. > :25:26.it evolves into something considerably more progressive than
:25:27. > :25:32.it is right now. Everyone now expects this election to be Clinton
:25:33. > :25:35.against Trump, and his supporters have been stepping up attacks at
:25:36. > :25:41.that way on public distrust of the Clinton plan. I never told anybody
:25:42. > :25:49.it is a lie... These allegations are full. She, too, is turning her
:25:50. > :25:57.campaign towards the main event. -- these allegations are false. In the
:25:58. > :26:01.last few weeks he has criticised places allies, has praised
:26:02. > :26:07.dictators, like in North Korea, has advocated pulling out of Nato, our
:26:08. > :26:12.strongest military alliance...! Has said, in very cavalier ways, and he
:26:13. > :26:15.doesn't really mind if other countries get nuclear weapons,
:26:16. > :26:20.including Saudi Arabia. As for that apparently unstoppable Trump
:26:21. > :26:26.bandwagon... The Clinton campaign now seems confident that a little
:26:27. > :26:32.humour and light character assassination will work just fine.
:26:33. > :26:36.There is a way to talk about his statements, there is a way to paint
:26:37. > :26:41.a picture, if you will, for the general electorate, the voters who
:26:42. > :26:45.will vote in the fall, about what a Donald Trump presidency might look
:26:46. > :26:49.like. Her strategy between now and election day is to make that
:26:50. > :26:55.unacceptable to a large percentage of people who will vote in the fall.
:26:56. > :26:59.The success of the Sanders and Trump campaigns ought to have taught
:27:00. > :27:06.Hillary Clinton's people that the rejection of politics as usual is
:27:07. > :27:09.now deep in America, Donald Trump has emerged largely unscathed for
:27:10. > :27:15.months of negative campaigning. Enormous concern on the Democratic
:27:16. > :27:20.side, there is a Teflon aspect to Donald Trump's candidacy, how do you
:27:21. > :27:24.run against a candidate like that? Unfamiliar to rain, no candidate has
:27:25. > :27:27.ever run against a candidate like Donald Trump, with the bombast and
:27:28. > :27:30.the ability to chew through new cycle after new cycle, it is
:27:31. > :27:34.something the Democrats are sitting in conference rooms and about what
:27:35. > :27:40.will stick, nothing has stuck so far. With voting immanent in
:27:41. > :27:45.California and five other states, Hillary Clinton must now convince
:27:46. > :27:53.her party and the wider country that she really can be the unifier.
:27:54. > :27:55.STUDIO: Joining me now is Democratic strategist and Bernie Sanders
:27:56. > :27:58.And Democratic pollster and Hillary Clinton
:27:59. > :28:09.Harlan, will your man bow out gracefully, if the numbers stack up
:28:10. > :28:13.as expected? I don't expect that at all, he has very clearly
:28:14. > :28:17.communicated that he has the money and resources and backing to stay
:28:18. > :28:20.through up until the convention, regardless of the results, he has a
:28:21. > :28:26.very good chance, he has the most momentum going into tomorrow, he
:28:27. > :28:30.will stay through the convention. Unity be damp? Well, I think he is
:28:31. > :28:34.putting the middle class, the American worker, before party
:28:35. > :28:42.politics, a lot of people respect him for that, myself included. -- be
:28:43. > :28:46.damned. Do you think that Bernie Sanders is motivating Democratic
:28:47. > :28:51.supporters or damaging the position of your candidate? Bernie Sanders
:28:52. > :28:56.has played a very important role in the campaign so far, articulated in
:28:57. > :29:01.economic agenda that is very powerful, spoken to the need for
:29:02. > :29:05.change, mobilise voters, and I see no reason why he cannot continue to
:29:06. > :29:11.the convention doing the same thing. What I hope is that we are united in
:29:12. > :29:14.turning focus on Donald Trump, and I think Bernie Sanders this weekend
:29:15. > :29:19.gave a very powerful speech, talking about Donald Trump, nothing could be
:29:20. > :29:27.more of an anathema to Bernie Sanders, then a billionaire who has
:29:28. > :29:30.profited at the expense of ordinary people who will not unionise his
:29:31. > :29:36.workers, who has brought in immigrant workforce, because he can
:29:37. > :29:39.pay them less, who has cheated people out of their college
:29:40. > :29:44.educations and is a racist and a misogynist to boot!... I would say
:29:45. > :29:48.that is very unifying the Democrats, I hope Hillary Clinton and Bernie
:29:49. > :29:52.Sanders speaks eloquently do that. Numbers suggest a significant number
:29:53. > :29:54.of Bernie Sanders supporters are more likely to support Trump than
:29:55. > :30:10.Hillary ...? I think those numbers are deceptive.
:30:11. > :30:15.As Bernie Sanders speaks to Donald Trump and draws the contrast, I
:30:16. > :30:18.don't think that's true. I think it is a momentary expression of
:30:19. > :30:26.frustration. The Bernie Sanders voters have no thing in common with
:30:27. > :30:31.Donald Trump. No issue positions in common with Donald Trump. Do you
:30:32. > :30:37.recognise that description? Absolutely not. There is commonality
:30:38. > :30:42.between a candidate like Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. Both
:30:43. > :30:45.antiestablishment candidates. Both taking issue with trade. Hillary
:30:46. > :30:51.Clinton is on the wrong side of trade. Her husband was the architect
:30:52. > :30:56.of this. She negotiated the GP in the State Department. Between the
:30:57. > :31:05.two, it will lead to lots of jobs being taken overseas. -- negotiated
:31:06. > :31:08.the TTP. They are doing cold, hard calculations, saying I don't really
:31:09. > :31:12.like Donald Trump but Hillary Clinton is on the wrong side of
:31:13. > :31:18.trade. She has supported every war since Vietnam. She voted for every
:31:19. > :31:21.invasion of Iraq. She is on the wrong side. She is a
:31:22. > :31:28.multimillionaire in her own right. These dispersions that she is...
:31:29. > :31:32.That Donald Trump is hard to relate to because he is extraordinarily
:31:33. > :31:37.wealthy, I think they also stick to Hillary Clinton. You are a
:31:38. > :31:44.democratic strategist, who would you vote for? Clinton versus Trump, who
:31:45. > :31:49.would you vote for? Right now I am taking a hard look at Trump. I can't
:31:50. > :31:54.believe I'm saying it. I think Hillary Clinton has a 30 year track
:31:55. > :31:59.record of lies, deceit, and fraud. I don't trust her. The e-mail thing
:32:00. > :32:03.was the straw that broke the camel 's back for me. She put her on
:32:04. > :32:07.political expediency ahead of national security. She destroyed
:32:08. > :32:11.evidence as part of the investigation. I have real issues
:32:12. > :32:15.with her, I don't trust her. This is the real deal, not opinion polls,
:32:16. > :32:22.this is a Democratic strategist who is thinking about voting for Trump,
:32:23. > :32:28.this is a problem. He has a problem. But I don't imagine you will vote
:32:29. > :32:38.for someone who called a Mexican judge, my black voter. And the way
:32:39. > :32:42.he has treated women. Who wants to expand nuclear weapons. I can
:32:43. > :32:48.appreciate you are frustrated, but I cannot imagine that any Democrat
:32:49. > :32:54.would vote for Donald Trump. And the data shows it is less than seven to
:32:55. > :33:01.9% of voters. I think our bigger issue is turnout. That percentage is
:33:02. > :33:06.quite meaningful, particularly where it happens. You know better than
:33:07. > :33:11.anyone. Probably one of the top pollsters in the Democratic party.
:33:12. > :33:15.In certain states, amongst certain constituencies, that swing vote
:33:16. > :33:19.could be very meaningful. I am sure Bernie Sanders will endorse Hillary
:33:20. > :33:22.Clinton. And I am positive he will do everything he can in his power
:33:23. > :33:26.because of what he stands for and what he believes in and the kind of
:33:27. > :33:31.person he has worked his whole life to be. To reassure people that
:33:32. > :33:37.Hillary Clinton is the better vote over Donald Trump. We saw the same
:33:38. > :33:40.fight in 2008. There was all of this discussion about would Hillary
:33:41. > :33:46.supporters really vote for Barack Obama, Hillary voted for him and all
:33:47. > :33:47.of her supporters did, as well. Many thanks.
:33:48. > :33:49.He has a catchy slogan, "new economics",
:33:50. > :33:51.but shadow chancellor John McDonnel has thus far
:33:52. > :33:54.failed to offer much by way of policies to fit the description.
:33:55. > :33:57.It's particularly interesting, then, that he chose tonight to attend
:33:58. > :33:59.the Westminster launch of a report proposing the abolition
:34:00. > :34:02.of means-tested benefits in favour of a flat rate payment for everyone,
:34:03. > :34:07.the so-called "universal basic income."
:34:08. > :34:09.It is, he said earlier, an idea that Labour will be looking
:34:10. > :34:20.Joining me now to work out what it might look like is.
:34:21. > :34:31.Andy Stern's book is getting attention in the US and beyond. And
:34:32. > :34:36.the cheaper to call commentate at the Independent also joins me. --
:34:37. > :34:42.and chief political commentator as the independent also joins me.
:34:43. > :34:52.If you believe a lot of reputable research by Oxford University,
:34:53. > :34:56.McKinsey, Deloitte, the world economic, or most recent, the noble
:34:57. > :35:01.laureate who said that a storm of destruction to the job market is on
:35:02. > :35:03.the way because of the acceleration of technology, we would be really
:35:04. > :35:10.foolish not to prepare for that storm. -- Nobel laureate. We need to
:35:11. > :35:15.prepare for the disruptions of the job market. Because people will not
:35:16. > :35:22.be paid to do a job, the solution is to pay them not to do a job? We are
:35:23. > :35:26.talking about setting a floor for people. We are not saying people
:35:27. > :35:30.won't work or earning come, but we are saying that the ability to earn
:35:31. > :35:34.a full-time job like I was able to do in my lifetime is going to be
:35:35. > :35:40.become more difficult. Technology isn't just affecting blue-collar
:35:41. > :35:44.workers, it is in other industries and other areas of finance. We have
:35:45. > :35:49.to understand that we would arrive at a time when there is not enough
:35:50. > :35:52.work for people to do that. We want economic stability in our economy.
:35:53. > :35:56.We don't want all of these means tested programmes. We want to give
:35:57. > :36:02.people a floor so they have some security. An attractive proposition
:36:03. > :36:11.at first glance. It is a lovely idea. Imagine there is no heaven.
:36:12. > :36:16.Everybody who has ever looked at it has thought, wouldn't it be nice if.
:36:17. > :36:23.Problem is, you cannot actually make it work. It involves spending so
:36:24. > :36:29.much money on people who wouldn't otherwise need it. You would have to
:36:30. > :36:34.put tax rate up to... One model I have seen offers a basic income of
:36:35. > :36:39.8000 per year but it involves putting up the basic rate of tax up
:36:40. > :36:43.to 48p in the pound. I don't think it is politically possible. That
:36:44. > :36:48.scheme doesn't even deal with housing benefit or council tax
:36:49. > :36:56.credit. It is too complicated. It is going to cost too much, B-2 -- it be
:36:57. > :37:01.complicated, but you are selling lots of books. We have something
:37:02. > :37:06.very simple in our country, it is called Social Security. It is
:37:07. > :37:14.universal. It is paid for by contributions from individuals. $1.7
:37:15. > :37:18.trillion. The current system is worth about 8 billion. Our country
:37:19. > :37:23.doesn't have VAT. There are lots of things we can in this country. A lot
:37:24. > :37:27.of the money that is paid to wealthier people would be clawed
:37:28. > :37:31.back by the tax system. We have to first decide, is this a good idea,
:37:32. > :37:38.and I think it is one. Then we have to think about how to pay for it.
:37:39. > :37:44.Charles Murray, a conservative, and Andy Stern both agree on the
:37:45. > :37:50.concept. We are three Nobel laureates agreeing on the concept.
:37:51. > :37:57.We should do the maths, I think it would work. Why did Swiss voters
:37:58. > :38:01.reject it yesterday? It is premature in Switzerland. The poll around it
:38:02. > :38:06.said 70% of Swiss voters say in the next 25 years they think it is
:38:07. > :38:09.inevitable. Switzerland is a successful country, doesn't have
:38:10. > :38:13.much property, technology isn't really affecting it, but I think
:38:14. > :38:18.they did an enormous contribution. They have sparked a global debate.
:38:19. > :38:23.It is now in the UK, Justin Trudeau, according to the US, the UN,
:38:24. > :38:27.everybody is talking about it. Maybe there is a better way to end
:38:28. > :38:31.poverty, provide benefits, so we can deal with the upcoming change and
:38:32. > :38:35.destruction in the job market. That's the crucial point, the
:38:36. > :38:42.upcoming change, do you know they're rather robots who can do journalism?
:38:43. > :38:47.We will all be out of a job. -- there are even robots. It is as old
:38:48. > :38:51.and idea as the basic income. The idea that technology will put
:38:52. > :38:55.everybody out of work, and change the nature of work. Let's wait and
:38:56. > :39:01.see what actually happens. The problem with the basic income is
:39:02. > :39:08.that you cannot... Driverless trucks, soon, which is a big part of
:39:09. > :39:13.the American economy. The British economy has continued to create jobs
:39:14. > :39:17.at an unprecedented rate, too. The job market will change. It won't
:39:18. > :39:23.mean people won't have any work to do. That is the old utopian idea of
:39:24. > :39:26.Thomas Moore, he proposed this and proposed that people wouldn't have
:39:27. > :39:33.to do more than a couple of hours work each day. Cannot see any
:39:34. > :39:37.mileage in it at all? I think it is a lovely idea. Andy says do the
:39:38. > :39:42.maths, anybody who has finds it doesn't work. So let's concentrate
:39:43. > :39:44.on making the welfare system we have worked better rather than some
:39:45. > :39:49.utopian scheme which involves tearing it all up and starting
:39:50. > :39:51.again. Many thanks to you berries. That is all we have time for