24/01/2017 Newsnight


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 24/01/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Back in November, when the court said Parliament should


get a vote on Brexit, there was rejoicing on one side,


Today, the Supreme Court upheld that verdict,


but it wasn't really clear who'd won or lost.


This judgment does not change the fact that the UK


will leave the European Union, and it's our job to deliver


on the instruction the people of the UK have given us.


Never has so much attention been given to a Supreme Court case


of such enormous constitutional significance, but which may end up


We'll hear from Alex Salmond, on the path Scotland will now take.


And Labour's Emily Thornberry on the party's challenge of trying


to appeal to both sides of the Brexit debate.


Also tonight, should primary school children wear hijabs?


We must not normalise it, instead of supporting that practice we should


question it because what you are doing is sexualising that child.


Donald Trump invites the cameras into the Oval Office.


What's he got to say about the environment?


We can't be in an environmental process for 15 years if a bridge is


going to be falling down, or if a highway is crumbling.


So we're expediting environmental reviews and


If you thought the arguments over Brexit would end


after the referendum, sorry, it's not over


and the Supreme Court has invited the arguments to continue -


in the Commons, and perhaps more crucially now,


Then there's Scotland, the court didn't give the government


there any power over Brexit, but the SNP are not going to accept


Now it's not clear who will actually have the muscle to actually


block or delay Brexit, and the bookies still think Article


50 will probably be triggered before the end of March.


But there is a chance it will get messy.


Our policy editor Chris Cook is good at making sense of a mess -


here's how he thinks things might pan out.


To invoke article 50, Downing Street will not


need to consult the devolved governments, but will need to pass a


In broad terms, Article 50 provides that a


country wishing to leave the EU must give a notice in accordance with its


Right now, that doesn't look like a serious


The first stage then in the Article 50


process is taking a bill into the House of Commons.


Now, the fundamental facts about the lower


house of parliament is there is a Conservative majority.


So yes, the SNP and the Liberal Democrats might cause


trouble for the government, but fundamentally they will not succeed.


The only that people are really looking or hoping for from the lower


House are really quite narrowly procedural.


Here for example, is the Labour position.


Labour accepts and respects the referendum result and


But we will be seeking to allay amendments to ensure a proper


scrutiny and accountability throughout the process.


That starts, Mr Speaker, with a white paper or


The government hopes that the bill will be through the


Commons by February the 9th when it rises for its next recess.


Then it is off to the House of Lords which


is where it is likely to have a tougher time.


Remember, the government does not have a majority


But any problems there are likely to take the form of


unhelpful amendments and perhaps a bit of delay.


On big items, the House of Lords is often restrained by the fact that


there was a commitment in a manifesto and by convention the


House of Lords does not oppose manifesto commitments.


But this time, while there was a commitment


to a referendum, there are certainly was not a commitment to take the UK


So some members at least will see that as


giving them licence to challenge the government.


But ultimately the House of Lords probably will not


want to be seen to be frustrating the will


expressed in the referendum result last year.


Now the government says that Parliament will get another


opportunity to vote on the deal that it gets


from Europe at the end of the process.


But whether that is an opportunity for Parliament to really


scrutinise what is going on and suggest changes, depends on


precisely when the government comes back for that vote.


The draft deal has to come back before it has


been signed because Parliament can look at it and I dare say, that is


fine, or it is mostly fine but this is not,


you can get something different or better on this.


It is important it comes at that stage, rather than


parliament being asked, take it or leave it, at the 11th hour.


I do not think that would be acceptable.


Given our rulers have not been much been constrained,


question today is, why they took this case


Well, the Scottish government does not have and has not sought


Thanks to the Supreme Court, we now know there is no requirement


for a vote in the devolved parliaments or assemblies.


But, the Scottish parliament is going to have a vote anyway.


Earlier I spoke to Alex Salmond, former First Minister,


Today he has said Downing Street must treat the devolved


administrations as equal partners in the Brexit process, quote,


I asked where did Theresa May make such a promise.


What she and the Tory party have said is that Scotland is an equal


Actually, the phrase, not from Theresa May,


but from her predecessor was Scotland should lead


the United Kingdom, not leave the United Kingdom.


But the phrase equal partnership has been used by the Conservative Party,


that Scotland is an equal partner within the United Kingdom.


If you're an equal partner within the United Kingdom,


then your views on something as substantial and far reaching


as Brexit deserve to be taken on account on an equal basis.


It was one person, one vote in Scotland as it was everywhere


A Scottish person was equal to everywhere else.


But Scotland is a country, not a county, and the Scottish


nation voted decisively to stay within the European Union.


But of course, it was Theresa May who said explicitly,


the week after she became Prime Minister, when she went


to visit Nicola Sturgeon in Scotland, she said she wanted


an agreed position across the United Kingdom.


You can't have an agreed position, unless you're prepared to consult


She is consulting, but I don't think it was understood that the Scottish


administration would have equal say on an issue of customs union,


immigration policy, foreign policy, international treaties


as the government of the United Kingdom,


in which the people of Scotland have a large shaping part,


because they vote in UK general elections, obviously.


The vote in favour of staying in the European Union was 62%.


The vote in favour of the United Kingdom was 55%.


Far more people in Scotland by majority and percentage wanted


to stay within Europe as wanted to stay with


As you will remember in 2014, one of the cardinal arguments


of the No campaign, there were people arguing


against independence, was that we would stay in Europe


if we voted against Scottish independence.


It looks absurd, but that was one of the key arguments


More to the point, of course, Nicola Sturgeon,


the Scottish First Minister, stood on a manifesto commitment last


year and was re-elected on the basis that if Scotland was dragged out


of Europe against the will of the Scottish people,


then the Scottish Parliament would have the right to call


That brings me to what is the big question for the SNP today.


The big question for the SNP, why don't you just call a referendum?


You are not going to learn anything between now and Brexit.


We know what the British Government's policy on Brexit is,


it has been stated by Theresa May as clearly as anything.


We know that Scotland is not going to remain


in the single market, as the Scottish Government hopes,


we know that Britain is not even going to try and stay


What else do you need to trigger a referendum?


Well let's go through the Parliamentary process as far


The UK Government are still to respond officially


to the Scottish Government's compromise proposal that


if England is determined to leave the single market,


Scotland could stay in the single market.


There are working examples elsewhere in Europe where this is the case.


Why shouldn't that be considered as a reasonable proposal?


If at the end of the day Theresa May is not interested in staying


in the single market, she is not interested in respecting


the wishes of the people of Scotland to stay within the single market,


maintain jobs and investment, then of course if she flings down


the gauntlet, I fully expect Nicola Sturgeon to pick it up.


Well then we do expect a referendum, because she is not going to give


you different status within the single market.


There are all sorts of practical challenges and difficulties.


There is a working example in Europe at the moment for a country


which has a monetary and customs union with another country


and one is in the single market and one isn't.


That is Lichtenstein and Switzerland.


If you intend to implement control of labour at the workplace


for a green card system as Theresa May does,


there is no impediment to Scotland being within the single market


It of course has complexities, but anything about Brexit has


complexities and this is a practical proposition.


Why shouldn't the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom pay attention


to the wishes of the Scottish people, the Scottish Parliament


I am I suppose curious as to why you're offering


this rather complicated, and it would be complicated,


settlement when there is a much more simple one facing you,


which is to call a referendum and just let the Scottish people decide.


What is it that the Scottish people....


Is it because the polls are against you?


Right, OK, let's take these points in turn.


There is nothing as complicated as the Brexit process,


There is already going to be we know special deals


There is already going to be we know special deals for Northern Ireland,


for Gibraltar, perhaps even for the City of London,


for the car industry in Sunderland, and if there can be a special deal


for the car industry in Sunderland, then I think there might


be a special deal for the nation of Scotland.


If the Prime Minister does not want to accede to any of these


reasonable compromise proposals from Nicola Sturgeon, then


as Nicola Sturgeon has rightly said, an independence referendum


And it will take place within the next two years.


As for support for it, there have been 16 polls


since the Brexit vote in the United Kingdom.


15 of these polls have shown support at a higher level than the 45%


I have seen a poll that 62% of Scottish people don't want


The question was wanted a referendum in 2017.


I would vote against a referendum this year, as indeed


Nicola Sturgeon's proposition in these circumstances


with a compromise proposal rejected is to have a referendum


within the negotiating period of two years.


Would you accept that if there is another referendum, that is it.


You cannot win on the best-of-3 at that stage.


If it is two-nil, it is over and this time really


it is over for 30, 50 years, it cannot come back


If the Prime Minister decides to ignore the substantial demand


in the UK as a whole to stay in the single market place,


if she then decides to ignore the wishes of Scotland


to maintain our 1000 year connection and history with Europe


as a European nation, in that context, if there


is a referendum within the next two years, then the Yes side will win.


For some reason, it is Labour that is perhaps struggling


with the consequences of this Supreme Court verdict more


If Parliament is to vote, then Labour has to make up its mind


as to exactly what it's position is - and yet it has given a good


impression of being in a muddle - keen to support Brexit


as that was the result of the referendum, but also having


lots of Remain supporters it can't ignore.


It's kind of stuck between Ukip in some blue collar neighbourhoods,


and the Lib Dems in university towns.


Nick Watt has been looking at where the parties stand.


For the best part of three decades Europe has cast a shadow over the


Conservative Party. Now at the very moment many Tories have been


expecting a split of historic proportions, it is the Labour Party


that is wrestling with this most troublesome of issues. The bulk of


the Conservative Party accepts Theresa May's timetable for


triggering Article 50 and her Brexit blueprint. As for the Labour Party


they are struggling to fashion a coherent response. Many Labour MPs


are trying to work out how to adapt their pro-EU views while


representing constituencies that recorded high Leave votes in the


referendum. I campaigned passionately for remain and I'd


lived and worked in Brussels for years and I am marriage to someone


from Denmark and I am pro-European with my heart and head but I am also


a Democrat. The referendum has overridden the way I would look at


the European question and now we have to accept the reality of where


we are, and pushed the government to secure the best possible deal for


the British people. It was but half a generation ago that Labour's


support for the EU was an electoral asset. Now the referendum has


changed everything, presenting Labour with a daunting challenge.


Labour will never appeal to people fervently pro-European and die-hard


Brexiteer is. It hurts to try to change the terms of the conversation


and reach out to people who did not feel strongly in either direction,


which means not talking about Brexit any more. While the conversation is


about Brexit vapour is in a weak position. He believes it is


providing rich pickings for other parties. Since the general election,


it is estimated Labour has lost the highest number of votes to the Lib


Dems. 400,000. It has also lost votes to the Conservatives and


200,000 to Ukip. The Labour Party in complete disarray. They do not know


what they think. You talk to Labour MPs on the issue and you get


different answers. The Labour Party should be getting behind voting to


trigger Article 50 but I have spoken to some today who say they will


still try to frustrate the process. One unlikely voiced sympathisers


with Labour. I am sympathetic to Jeremy Corbyn because I think he is


finding problems that any Labour leader would find and they are not


specific to him. He is a symptom, not decors, of the division with the


London voters thinking one thing and broadly be more than voters thinking


another. Jacob Rees-Mogg believes his party has an opportunity


unprecedented in the modern era. The Conservative Party is probably more


united on Europe than it has been since the days of Anthony Eden. Mrs


May is in the position of having less opposition than almost any


Conservative leader probably in history. That she has a united


party, there is no internal position. Stephen Kinnock believes


all may not be lost his party. The government has a mandate to take the


UK out of the EU. They do not have a mandate to turn us into some sort of


European version of the Cayman Islands. Brexit is not an excuse for


making a bonfire of workers' rights and of environmental rights, of


slashing the minimum wage, slashing corporation tax, deconstruction of


the welfare state this country is built on. This government does not


have a mandate to do that and our job is to draw those battle lines.


In the space of a fuel years, the UK has experienced two landmark


referendums and it has been Labour that has faced acute challenges in


the aftermath. The party will be hoping that the shadow cast by


Brexit will lift, although ironically, it may take a definitive


rake with the EU to allow Labour to return to a more natural terrain.


Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry joins us.


I know what the Lib Dems think of the EU and I know where Theresa May


stands. I would find it hard to say where labour stands at the moment.


Just in a couple of sentences, what is your policy. Do you really know


where the lead Dems stand, they only have a group of blind and the last


time they had to vote on Article 50 half of them voted one way and the


other half another. -- Lib Dems. In a couple of sentences what is the


Labour position on what happens now, not on the process but on what we


want and where we want to be. The British people have spoken, we have


our instructions, we have got to make sure we get the best possible


deal. We believe that begins with the economy. No one voted to be


poorer or to lose their job. And on that point you are no different to


Theresa May because she believes we want as much market access as


possible, we want investment. She is not willing to pay the price for


that market access, by giving up control of our borders. Are you


saying you would have less control of the border is then Theresa May is


advocating? I think there are differences in terms of emphasis but


I think the speech she made, she was trying to ride two wars is at once


going in different directions. It is our job as the opposition and we are


only the opposition, we have got to hold her to account, there are parts


of her speech we like, we like the idea of a tariff free access to the


single market. We like they're not being a build-up of red tape, that


is the kind of thing we like to hear and yes we will support her on that.


We want to make sure negotiations go that way. But when she talks about


some kind of weird new customs union entirely built for the UK or says if


we do not get the deal then we're going to become a completely


different country, break the economic model. This is what she


said. She said she wanted to break the economic model, attract in. That


was the back-up plan. She can only threaten if she means it and she


means if she does not get her own way she will try to attract business


here by lowering corporation tax and by making it more attractive. That


means less money for... I know what your critique of her youth. What I


want to know is if there an alternative vision to Brexit to the


one that says we get control back of the borders, we leave the single


market and customs union and fight for as much access as we can get


after that. That sounds as if that is what your position is. You're not


talking about free movement. What we're saying is that our first


principle, what is most important is that we look after the economy. For


any government what is most important is safety and security of


citizens and second is the economy. But all economists will tell you


free movement is the price you pay to get the best market access and


that is good for the economy. If we are not going to be in the single


market and we have to have a custom made deal for the UK, then there


will need to be negotiations and we have made it clear we will not die


in a ditch for freedom of movement. There needs to be give-and-take this


but the priority is to make sure no one loses their job and we look


after the economy. Because people who are just keeping their heads


above water will be those who are most affected if the economy goes


backwards. This is entirely consistent with Labour values. But


the trade-off between market access, and control of the borders, I'm not


100% clear where you are on that. Suppose you have knocked on my door


is a member of the public and I say, tell me what your policy is on


Europe. In a punter friendly style. I have just told you. So priority on


the economy. What about immigration question what our policy is that we


will not die in a ditch for freedom of movement. That argue for or


against. For free movement or against it? We're not against


immigration, we have always been in favour of their rules and managed


migration and that continues to be the Labour policy. So in favour of


free movement but not going to die in a ditch for it. So you would keep


it and get good market access? We're not going to be doing the


negotiations and our job as opposition is to make sure the


government does not lose sight of the overwhelming importance of jobs


and living standards. And the economy. We do not need them, we do


not trust them to go off on their own and negotiate on our behalf in


Europe without us keeping an eye on them. And so today we said the


Article 50 if it is going to be triggered, we will not get in the


way but try to amend the legislation in order to ensure that they keep


coming back, that would keep an eye on it and if necessary they will be


hand-to-hand combat on this. We need to make sure we get the best deal


for the country and she cannot say that she acts on behalf of the whole


country without negotiating with Parliament and Westminster


parliament, listening to the views of the British people. We represent


important parts of the and people said Labour is in such difficulties,


but will represent the country. The fact is, ... They represent more of


it because they got more votes. But the mixture of use with the Labour


Party reflects that of the public. The way in which we're thinking


about this with more depth I think that the Tories is a good thing and


we can contribute and help but they need to listen. One of the things,


the lines has been you will not let the government turn the UK into an


offshore Cayman Islands. Will that be an amendment to the Article 50


Bill? Let us first see what the bill is. It might be a couple of line.


Maybe, maybe not. You could put in an amendment saying the UK must not


become a tax haven or aim to... But there's no point anyway because a


future government could change its mind on that. There will be a number


of things. The first thing is the plan may be a piece of paper with


plan written on the top but it is a speech she did not make an


Parliament and therefore was not answerable to questions. So we want


a white paper, a clear plan so we can help them to account. She is


promising everything to everyone, let's have it written down and told


her to it. Then the broad principles, what are they, when you


are negotiating we want to be able to set lines in the sand. And then


most importantly, the accountability so as you go along, you must keep


reporting back. We should hold you to account and the final vote should


not be at the 11th hour when basically it is take it or leave it.


All processed stuff. If there's not much difference between you and...


There's a lot of difference between our approach and that of the Tories.


Do you accept, one of the difficulties is the country, the


great schism is Remain or Brexit. And the opposition, accepting the


Brexit result, it puts you in a difficult position because in a


sense you are not on either side of the great fissure in politics. In


the end you cannot have political parties to go for one half of the


other which is what the other parties are doing. The fact that we


are trying to bring the country together under the principle that we


need to look after the economy and get the best deal on behalf of the


whole country, is something we can unify the country around. We're not


going to chase 40%, or the extreme part of 52%, we will do our utmost


to ensure we stand up for the whole country and shall be listened to. We


will make sure that we are. A four-year-old Muslim girl


is at the centre of a row She was reportedly


told she couldn't wear a hijab - a headscarf -


by her Catholic primary school. The school was accused


by one councillor of In contrast, some Muslims have


pointed out pre-pubescent girls are not mandated to wear


the headscarf at all. But it's another case in the great


national discussion about the right boundary between tolerance


and non-conformity. Should a four-year-


old be wearing a hijab Katie Razzall has been to Birmingham


to find out what's been going on. It's a regular morning for these


seven and eight-year-olds at Birmingham's Anderton Park


primary school. In this classroom today five


of the girls were dressed in hijabs, the traditional head covering


sometimes worn by Muslim women. Here, headscarves are allowed


as long as they're purple or white. With some pupils in every year


opting to wear them, the headteacher is relaxed


about their choices. I think sometimes some of these


cultural practices like very young girls wearing a headscarf,


is just because that has always been done and maybe the families have


never questioned it. And often here girls may come


in in a headscarf at nine o'clock in the morning and then they're hot


or they have got PE and they just take it off and it is off


for the rest of the day. But another Birmingham School,


Catholic Saint Clare's, is under fire from a local Labour


councillor who weighed in after parents reportedly


complained to him that the school had banned their four-year-old


from wearing a hijab. This school has a strict


uniform policy. Amongst the prohibitions,


no dyed hair, no beads or coloured It is clearly outlined


on their website, so they may have been surprised to find themselves


at the centre of a row over a hijab. The row appeared on social media


when a man complained his four-year-old niece got detention


from school because she The local councillor, Waseem Zaffar,


replied saying he had already met the headteacher to discuss


the matter, clearly outlining to her


that this policy contravenes He continued he was insisting this


matter is addressed ASAP Neither the school nor Mr Zaffar,


who is Birmingham Council's cabinet member for equality,


would talk to Newsnight about the issue, which has


been widely reported But at the school gates this


afternoon, the only parent who would go on camera did not


support Saint Clare's approach. It is the 21st century and we should


be tolerant towards other religions and cultures,


actually, as well. We are Christians and Catholics


but never mind about the scarves, it The Equalities Act makes


no mention of uniform, but caselaw precedents do suggest


if a pupil cannot attend a school unless they remove an item


necessary for their faith, that is discriminatory


and potentially illegal. That is not what is


happening here, though. According to some Muslim activists


who argue even if you do believe girls should wear headscarves,


that only kicks in at puberty. They haven't done anything wrong,


they're not breaching any I would not want to start endorsing


and supporting the idea of girls wearing the headscarf


in primary schools. We must not normalise it and instead


of supporting that practice I think we should actually question it


because actually, what you are doing So is this about curtailing


religious freedoms, or cultural practices,


that some might see as misogynistic? A government commission review


on social integration recently found that some women are being held back


by regressive practices, justified in the name


of culture or religion. Newsnight has previously reported


on claims that some Muslim men within the Labour Party have been


accused of misogyny. Today, one female Muslim


councillor told us, this hijab When a Labour councillor


says that, it shocks me. But it did not surprise me,


I hear all sorts of things behind closed doors,


which are not good enough. And as a Labour councillor


that is on a Cabinet, a strong Labour authority,


where we know there has been issues before, there has been


Trojan Horse scandals, you have done


investigations yourself. Where it feels like the party is not


taking these things seriously, we need to have zero tolerance


on this kind of behaviour. Birmingham Council told Newsnight


school governing bodies decide on uniform but that it is working


with Saint Clare's to make sure its policy is in line


with legal requirements as well as talking to all schools


in the area to ensure The posts on Facebook


by the councillor who sparked this row have apparently


now been removed. Mark Urban, our diplomatic editor


has been in the US but is here now. A change of tack on


the Keystone Pipeline. You had better explain. It is a


pipeline running from Canadian oil fields, or is meant to, into the


American system, stopped by President Obama in 2015 and Donald


Trump this morning made an executive order to try to get it going and the


Dakota Access pipeline under construction stopped by lawsuits.


The aim is to announce big and bold, we put American jobs, American steel


to build these pipelines, America's energy needs ahead of tree hugging


people and we will drive a bulldozer through them. That is the aim and at


the same time infuriating environmentalists and Native


American groups. Basically trying to push a bulldozer through. There is


announcement of infrastructure projects in the coming weeks.


Foreign policy, more your beat. I am afraid we have been waiting in vain


with rumours that among the first orders will move the US embassy in


Israel to Jerusalem which did not happen and a cautious tone from the


embattled press secretary implying no decision had been made. Other


things we expected potentially on the Iran nuclear deal, Chinese


currency manipulation, so-called, they haven't happened. It is


fascinating. There is a desire to make the running with these big


domestic job creation type projects that are key to his agenda and his


base. They said today the administration, look, Congress has


been so slow to approve foreign policy choices we are behind. You


may see them coming together next week with a meeting with the


President of Mexico, where the trade agenda I think will come to the


fore. Let's finish by reflecting


on the story of the day - the Supreme Court verdict


and the path to Brexit, which is I am joined by author and journalist


Sonia Pernell and the sun's political journalist. And the


Guardian, 's Owen Jones. We have been speaking about the problems of


labour. Do you get depressed that the left right schism has been blown


apart by the Brexit Remain schism. And Jeremy Corbyn, to bring the left


populism to the people is not being heard? Depressed about politics, me?


Nothing to be depressed about! Clearly we have a divided country,


polarised on an issue that modern with -- that will dominate a long


time. Jacob Rees-Mogg alludes to this, the unique problem Labour has


is in its electoral coalition it has people who live in London,


Manchester, Birmingham, Liverpool, who feel traumatised in the


aftermath of the referendum and they want it to go away. You have Labour


voters in Doncaster, Burnley, who feel they have their country back


and it is difficult to reconcile the different perspectives. Brexit is


not just about the EU. If anything the EU is long down the list in


terms of what the referendum conjured up with immigration,


multiculturalism, social issues, I suppose. You get groups of people


with different outlooks on life. When you want a Labour opposition to


have a clear take on the people on the top, vested interests, to talk


about tax Justice, investment, cuts. Does it make you worried that the


coalition that is the Labour Party is past its sell-by date because the


two groups do not agree with each other on the big issues of the day?


It does need to adapt. All over Europe social democracy is in


crisis. It does not matter if the leaders of these parties on the left


or right. In Germany, the Labour sister party, their leader supports


third way style policy. He would probably be envious of Labour's


terrible polling in this country. There are few countries where it is


doing well. You get across Europe be centre-left and a rising radical


left who argue with each other but that is often displace Durie from


both wings that their lack of a clear route and vision to power and


a clear strategy and all sections, if you believe in a different


Britain, different Europe, in those other countries, there is a big ask


about how you build a coalition and that coalition has changed. It is


not the industrial working class, more people going to university. Let


me put it to the others. Are you selling your shares in Labour? I


would but what we have is a complete vacuum of leadership and they have


to decide where they are, and be brave and decide what they are going


to do and stick to it and fight for it and vote accordingly in


Parliament. The Supreme Court said it is up to politicians to take it


forward. It is now up to Parliament to make a decision. MPs are not


delegates, they are representatives, not legally bound to vote, they


should vote with their conscious. The leadership of the party should


allow them to do so. Tom, do you have advice for Labour? Very happy


to offer advice. Sonia is right. They will be in a terrible mess for


as long as they try, as Owen pointed out, to straddle this giant fissure.


If they give up one side they will lose half their market. We have seen


it before. The Scottish referendum, by almost no fault of their own,


they have been split by two giant referendums. What Labour need to


realise is the existential threat. It is not a problem that will


resolve in a few months, with a few cheeky votes in parliament. There is


a poll for the Stoke by-election by the John Bell sponsored Labour


outfit. The first on that by-election which has the leader of


Ukip ten points ahead already. If you want a list of candidates in the


by-election, go to the BBC website. A ten point lead for Paul Nuttall.


Labour on 25%. 80% of his supporters come from Labour voters. Is this the


fissure that divides the nation. I wonder out there there are people


who don't much care about it? There was another poll saying more people


were concerned about what is happening in the NHS than with


Brexit. These issues get conflated. Again, go back to leadership. You


need a leader of the Labour Party, whichever party will replace it, to


take the position and stick at it and say it will be better for the


NHS and employment. We don't have that. We have no opposition. Where


have all the Tory Remain people gone? Why are they acquiescing? I


think they are biding their time. Their numbers are strong. There are


those brave enough to give David Davis a hard time as they did in the


Commons. The likes of George Osborne, a lot of people remain


silent. They know it is the wrong time to wave their flags. Theresa


May has momentum behind her. It will get a lot more difficult for her. At


the moment it feels she is making the running. This is the early


skirmishes of what will be giant warfare. Do you agree? What Theresa


May has done has made Brexit is like a cult. If you don't belong to it,


you are shunned, you do not get on TV, do not get asked to parties and


you are excluded. A lot of people are afraid to stick their heads


above the parapet. Are you optimistic for a post Brexit


Britain? Are you down on it? At the moment, the odds are it is a deal


that prioritises jobs, the economy, not looking great. Turning Britain


into a giant tax haven that would mean cutting public services would


chill everyone. In British politics, if it is about our relationship to


the European Union, rather than say, like we have gone through the


longest fall in living standards is the 19th century, that squeeze will


come back. The housing crisis, the lack of secure jobs, which is why


many communities voted to leave, because they felt they had lost


control of their communities. Education, the NHS. Labour needs and


this is its task ahead, while keeping the electoral coalition


together, to have a coherent alternative on those issues and try


to shift the debate so we are not just talking about the EU for the


next 50 years at this rate. There are other things that need to be


addressed. Thanks. That is all we have time for. Amelie will be here


tomorrow. Good night.


Download Subtitles