28/05/2017 Sunday Politics East Midlands

Good morning and welcome to the Sunday Politics.

New CCTV images are released showing suicide bomber, Salman Abedi,

on the night he attacked Manchester Arena, killing 22 people.

Are the politicians and the security services doing

Theresa May says Britain needs to be "stronger and more resolute"

in confronting extremist views, as she outlines plans

for a new Commission to counter extremism.

We'll be talking to the Security Minister.

Jeremy Corbyn says a Labour government would recruit 1,000

more staff at security and intelligence agencies.

In the East Midlands, what will the Manchester bombing

And are disabled people being ignored by politicians?

what the Conservatives are offering the capital, having voted Remain.

To help guide me through this morning, I'm joined by

Steve Richards, Julia Hartley-Brewer and Tim Marshall.

They'll be sharing their thoughts on Twitter and you can join

So, with a week and a half to go, the election campaign

And some recent polls suggest the race is just

We'll be taking a closer look at that in just a moment but, first,

here are some of the key events over the next 10 days or so:

Tonight at 6pm will see the third of the party leader interviews.

This time it's the SNP's Nicola Sturgeon facing questions

While many across the UK will be enjoying tomorrow's bank holiday,

there will be no break in campaigning for

And in the evening it will be the turn of Ukip's Paul Nuttall

On Tuesday the SNP publish their manifesto -

the last of the major parties to do so - after last week's

Then on Wednesday, the BBC's Election Debate will see

representatives from the seven main parties debate in front

On Thursday, Lib Dem leader Tim Farron will have his interview...

Before Friday's Question Time special with Theresa May

They won't debate each other, but will take questions

consecutively from members of the audience.

The final week of campaigning is a short one, with politicians

cramming in three days of door-knocking before voters go

We'll have an exit poll once voting has ended at 10pm,

with the result expected early in the morning of June 9th.

Well, it's Sunday, and that always means a spate of new opinion

And they make for fascinating, if a tad confusing, reading.

There are five new opinion polls today, which have

the Conservative lead over Labour anywhere from six

points to 14 points. So, what's going on?

Professor John Curtice is the expert we always turn

to at times like this, and he joins me from Glasgow.

Take us through these polls. They seem to be all over the place? They

may seem to be but there is a very consistent key message. Four of

these five polls, if you compare them with what they were saying

before the Conservative manifesto launch on the 18th, four say the

Conservatives are down by two points. Four of them say the Labour

vote is up by two points. A clear consistent message. The Conservative

lead has narrowed. Why does this matter? It matters because we are

now in a position where the leads are such that the Conservatives can

no longer be sure of getting the landslide majority they want. Some

posters suggesting they may be in trouble and it is going to get

rather close. Others suggested is further apart. There are two major

sources of... The Poles agree that young voters will vote Labour if

they vote. Older voters will vote for the Conservatives. How many of

those younger voters will turn out to vote? The second thing is whether

the evidence in the opinion polls that the Conservatives are advancing

more in the North of England and the Midlands is realised that the ballot

box? If it is not realised, the Tories chances of getting a

landslide look remote. If it is, they could still well indeed get a

majority more than 80%. The Conservatives have lost some ground

depending on which opinion poll you look at. What about the Labour

Party? It is gaining ground. It has been gaining ground ever since week

one. They started on 26, they now average 35. There were a lot of

people out there at the beginning of the campaign who were saying, I

usually vote Labour but the truth is I'm not sure about Jeremy Corbyn.

They seem to have decided the Labour manifesto wasn't so bad. They have

looked at Theresa May and have said, we will stick with Labour. Labour

have managed to draw back into the fold some of their traditional

voters who were disenchanted, together with, crucially, some of

those younger voters who have never voted before, who have always been a

particular target for Jeremy Corbyn. What is your reaction to previous

opinion polls and elections weather has been a feeling that some of the

Labour support has been overstated? This be a worry this time? That is

one of the uncertainties that faces the opinion polls and the rest of

us. We had a conference on Friday at which it was carefully explained

that pollsters have been trying to correct the errors that resulted in

an overestimation of Labour support a couple of years ago, particularly

among younger voters. You shouldn't assume the opinion polls will be

wrong this time because they were wrong the last time. We want in

truth know whether or not the polls have got it right. Even if they are

wrong in terms of the level, they are not wrong in terms of the trend.

The trends have been dramatic so far. A big rise in Tory support

early on at the expense of Ukip. And subsequently, a remarkable rise in

Labour support, albeit from a low initial baseline. This election has

already seen quite a lot of movement. We shouldn't rule out the

possibility there will be yet more in the ten days to come.

That is his analysis. Let's talk to the panel. Julia, how concerned

should Conservative headquarters be at this particular point at what

looks like an apparent surge by Labour? Depends if you want a

massive landslide majority or might not. I assume the Tory party do.

Whether anybody thinks that is a good idea is a different matter.

Undoubtedly the manifesto league was a total disaster. Social care policy

and the U-turn. Lots of stuff in the Labour manifesto was very appealing.

The tactic from Sir Lynton Crosby was clear. It is all about Theresa

May. Don't even mention the candidate or the party. The Labour

Party, the candidates are on the moderate side are saying, don't

mention Jeremy Corbyn. This has been a battle between two big people. The

more we have seen of Theresa May, she has gone down. The more we have

seen of Jeremy Corbyn, he has gone up. If you make it about strong and

stable leadership and then you do something like a massive

unprecedented U-turn on a key policy like social care, the knock is even

greater. Do you think that is the reason for the change in the opinion

polls or is Labour gaining some momentum? I think it is part of the

reason. You can understand why the focus was on her at the beginning

because her personal ratings were stratospheric. What is interesting

is all successful leaders basically cast a spell over voters in the

media. None of them are titans. All of them are flawed. It is a question

of when the spell is broken. This is a first for a leader's spell to be

broken during an election campaign. That was a moment of high

significance. The fact the Labour Party campaign is more robust than

many thought it would be is the other factor. I think it is the

combination of the two, that the trend, as Professor John Curtis

said, the trend has been this narrow. There has not been much

campaigning. Local campaigning resumed on Thursday, national

campaigning on Friday. Do you think, Tim Marshall, that the opinion polls

are reflecting what happened in Manchester and people's thoughts

about which party will keep them safe? No, I think that will come

next week. I think it is too soon for that. It was quite

understandable from the V -- the very beginning for Lynton Crosby to

frame the campaign in terms of Theresa May and Brexit. The

electorate can have its own view. You always have to go back to

Clinton's it's the economy stupid for most of the electorate. It is

framed in your electricity bill. It is framed in your jobs. Both

manifestos have got more holes in them than Swiss cheese. It comes

down to which manifesto you believe. The Labour manifesto makes more

promises about things you care about like your electricity bill.

Interesting, but in the end despite while we thought would be a Brexit

election, it has been a lot about public services. It always comes

down to bread-and-butter issues. I don't think we have quite seen how

the terrorist you has played out. We had the Westminster attack only a

couple of months ago. That was already factored in in terms of who

you trust and who you don't trust. The IRA stuff from Jeremy Corbyn is

already factored in. People actually care about how ordinary government

policies affect their lives. Thank you very much.

The election campaign was, of course, put on hold

following the terrorist attack in Manchester

But now that campaigning has resumed, it's hardly

surprising that security is now a primary concern.

The Labour Party has announced it would recruit 1,000 more

Jeremy Corbyn, speaking on ITV at short while ago, says previous cuts

have undermined security. It seems that the cuts in police

numbers have led to some very dangerous situation is emerging. It

is also a question of a community response as well. So that where, an

imam, for example, lets the police he is concerned about a muddy, I

would hope they would act. And I would hope we have -- and I would

hope they would have the resources to act as well.

Joining me now from Leeds is the Shadow Justice

Good morning. You have announced a thousand more Security and

Intelligence agency staff. That is in line with what the government has

already announced and the Shadow Home Secretary, Diane Abbott, has

said you would not be spending any more money. It doesn't amount to

much, does it? That is just one of the parts of our pledge card on the

safer communities. There is also 10,000 extra police, because the

Conservatives cut the police by 20,000. That 10,000 extra police

would mean in -- and extra police officer in each neighbourhood. There

are 3000 extra put -- prison officers. Prison staff has been cut

by 6000. That is a third. It is not helping keep communities safer. We

are pledging 3000 extra firefighters. Also, a thousand extra

security staff and 500 extra border guards. There have been 13 areas

identified where our borders are not as secure as they should be. That is

the list of numbers you have given. If we concentrate on the security

services, because it was Jeremy Corbyn he said there will be more

police on the streets under Labour. If the security sources need more

resources they should get them. Why aren't you giving them more? We are

committing to a thousand more police. The Godinet is doing that as

well. You are not committing anything more. The government has

not delivered on that promise. We will deliver on that promise is --

promise. What Jeremy has made very clear is that you can't do security

on the cheap. Austerity has to stop at the police station door, and at

the hospital door. But we will be giving the resources required to

keep our communities safer. So you will give them the resources and

more powers? Well, the police need to be empowered. But when you listen

to what the Police Federation are saying, they have been speaking out

for a long time about the danger caused by police cuts. And I'm

talking not only about terrorism, not only about acts of extreme

violence, but anything from anti-social behaviour to burglary.

Use it more powers. What sort of powers are you thinking of giving

the security services? We need to listen to them. That is not a power.

We need to listen to the intelligence community and the

security service, to the army and the police, about what they think

and how they think our communities could be made safe. One thing is

clear. Cutting the number of police by 20,000 makes our community is

less safe, not more safe. You said you will listen to the security

services. Can voters be reassured and guaranteed that Jeremy Corbyn

will listen to the security services and the police in terms of more

powers if that is what they want? Until now he has spent his whole

political career voting against measures designed to tackle

home-grown and international terrorism. Jeremy Corbyn's speech on

safer communities earlier this week made clear he is listening to the

security services. So he would grant those new powers. He voted against

the terrorism Act in 2000, into thousands and six. In 2011. And in

2014, the data retention and investigatory Powers act. Which new

powers will he be happy to enact? Just to say, Jeremy Corbyn along

with Theresa May, David Davis and many Conservative MPs, voted against

legislation where they thought it would be ill-advised, ineffective or

actually counter-productive. It is a very complex situation. What we

don't want to do is introduce hastily prepared laws with one eye

to the newspaper headlines, which can act as recruiting sergeants for

terrorism. And actually, when I said earlier that Jeremy Corbyn made

clear in his speech this week that he has been listening to the

security services, what he said about the international situation

has also been said by the former head of MI5, Stella Rimington, and

her predecessor. As well as president of back -- President

Barack Obama. You say he will give the police and

security services the resources and powers they need. If we look back at

some of the legislation Jeremy Corbyn and others voted against in

2000, it gave the Secretary of State the -- new powers... Does Jeremy

Corbyn still think that is a bad idea? Jeremy Corbyn along with

Theresa May, David Davis and others... I know you want to bracket

it with Conservatives but I'm interested in what Jeremy Corbyn

will do when he says we are going to be smarter about fighting terrorism.

If he's not prepared to vote in favour of those sorts of measures,

or trying to impose restrictions on suspects, I'm trying to find out

what he will do. It is a complex situation. With this legislation the

devil is often in the detail. If it was a simple and stopping terrorism

by voting a piece of legislation through Parliament, it would have

been stopped a long time ago. Sadly there are no easy answers, and that

is recognised by Barack Obama, Stella Rimington, the head of the

MI5, by David Davis and other Conservative MPs. What is clear, as

Jeremy made clear in his speech this week, is the way things are being

done currently is not working. We have got to be tough on terrorism

and the unforgivable acts of murder, but also tough on the causes of

terrorism as well. The sad truth is there are no easy answers. If there

were, the problem would have been solved a long time ago. If you more

security and terrorism officers but your leader is still uncomfortable

with giving them the powers they need to do their jobs because it is

complicated legislation, they will want to know how you are going to do

it. At another stop the War rally in 2014, Jeremy Corbyn said the murder

of a charity worker was jingoism. At the beginning of that speech he

mentioned the importance of the one-minute silence for the memory of

Alan Henning who was murdered. What he has also made clear is

responsibility for acts of terrorism and murder lies with the murder, and

something that's really disappointed me is that the Prime Minister said

the other day that in Jeremy Corbyn's speech on this on Monday,

he said... Whether she agrees with him on his politics, she knows he

didn't say that in his speech, but what troubles me is you have got a

Prime Minister who must have sat down with her advisers earlier that

day and said, well I do know he didn't say that but if we say he did

we might win some votes. I think that is shameful and it shows

Theresa May cannot be trusted. These issues should transcend party

politics. We need to pull together on this issue. Thank you very much.

Well, the Conservatives have promised a new statutory commission

The party says it will identify extremism, including

the "non-violent" kind, and help communities stand up to it.

Also this morning, the Security Minister, Ben Wallace,

has attacked internet giants for failing to tackle terror

online, and accused them of being ruthless money-makers.

Welcome to the Sunday Politics. Those comments you have made about

social media companies failing in their responsibility to take down

extremist material, what will you do to compel them? I think we will look

at the range of options. The Germans have proposed a fine, we are not

sure whether that will work, but there are range of pressures we can

put onto some of these companies. Some have complied. In the article

in the Sunday Telegraph today I did say it is not all of them. They are

not immune to pressure. We can do internationally, and the Prime

Minister urged at the G7 and international response. I think

there are a range of issues. We could change the law. You mentioned

the G7, and rhetoric and warm words are fine to an extent but it is

action people want. If you have made these impassioned remarks in the

newspapers about them failing to do the job, people want to know what

powers do you have now to say to social media companies take down

this material? We have an act that was recently passed. In this area we

have just finished consulting on one of the areas we could use but we

cannot pre-empt the consultation. We have right now officials from my

department over in the United States with American officials working with

CSPs because what we see is that they do respond to pressure. The

best example is we think they have the technology and the capability to

change the algorithms they use that maximise profit over safety. But you

are relying on these companies devoting more resources to this line

of work that you would like to see them do. Have you got any evidence

they will do that? They said, only a few weeks ago before the election

was called the Home Secretary hosted a Round Table with them. We have

evidence they are trying to improve it. A few are refusing to or being

difficult, and that's why the Prime Minister was right to step up not

only the language she was using but to say we are not going to allow

this to progress any more. People will be worried about who will make

the judgment about what is unacceptable and what should be

taken down. Let me show you this, which was shared widely across

social media. If you read that quote you could argue it is at the same

end if you like. The man in the picture is a terrorist hate

preacher, the jihadist who was killed in Yemen by the Americans. Is

this the sort of thing you would be demanding social media companies

take down? You have to look at the context it was deployed in. I could

show you some of the 270,000 pieces we have had removed since 2010 from

internet sites that have been extreme. The big issue is not often

the individual image, it is the way these companies set up the

algorithms to link you. If you were watching that on Facebook delivered

to you, perhaps you would like to look at this, because that's how

they set it up. If you go onto YouTube, you can get let down the

path from looking at Manchester... I understand your example, but from a

practical level are you expecting media companies to take down that

sort of posts if it appeared? Yes... You are? Who will make the decisions

about what will radicalise young people that could lead someone down

the path to let off a bomb? If I invite your viewers to look at the

work the Guardian have done on Facebook guidance, to say for

example it is OK to produce videos or broadcast videos of

seven-year-olds being bullied as long as it wasn't accompanied by

captions, I don't think you need to be an expert to say that is not

acceptable. Something more worrying for you as a journalist and me as a

politician, another set of guidance that says... I think this is quite

menacing... That certain people don't deserve our protection. That

includes journalists and politicians and people who are controversial. So

I think there is more work to be done but at the end of the day it is

the pathway this stuff leads to. It is more about examining how much

progress you can make. The Government says there are up to

23,000 potential terrorist attackers in this country, 3000 of those

posing a serious threat being monitored. That is pretty

disturbing, these are big numbers. Yes, and the tragedy of Manchester

shows this is not about failure, it is about the scale of the challenge

we face and that is why it is important that alongside people is

powers. Should you double the size of MI5 for example? We have

increased year-on-year in real terms not only the money but the numbers

of people in MI5. It is now 2000 we have committed to increased to...

Before the attack. Before our manifesto we had recruited, we have

increased the whole of government spending on counterterrorism from

?11.7 billion in 2015 up to 15.7 billion. Would you expand the number

of people in MI5? I have asked them on a regular basis if they have the

resource if they are happy with it, and the answer comes back time and

time again, yes we are. You have quite extensive powers at your

disposal, the question is if you are using them. Measures were introduced

in 2012 to replace control orders, but they have rarely been used. Only

seven are currently in operation. Why? Because there are a whole... It

is just one tool in the tool box. Other powers we use, we take away

people's passports if we think they are about to travel. How many? I

cannot comment, it is a sensitive issue. Plenty of people are finding

their passport has been removed and at the same time we strip people of

citizenship to make sure they don't come back. On top of that, because

of the investment made in GCHQ, MI5 and counterterrorism, we have more

powers and more ability to monitor them. But are you using them enough?

Only seven TPIMs are in operation. You won't give me any of the other

measures at your disposal, but if they are only in single figures,

that doesn't seem to compare with the numbers who are being monitored.

Also, we have to strike a balance between... We have to satisfy the

court so we have to make sure there is enough evidence to restrict

people's freedoms. TPIMs do all sorts of good things to keep people

safe. It sends people away from where they live, it tags them... I

tell you why they are better. The control orders were on track to be

struck down by the courts because one of the things we have to satisfy

is the courts but we also have to satisfy, we have to make sure we get

the balance between the community is right and the measures we take. If

we alienate our communities, we won't get the intelligence that

allows us to catch it. There is no point in having more police and

intelligence services if you don't give them the powers to do the job.

Jeremy Corbyn were licensed James Bond to do precisely nothing. And --

thank you. The revelation that the Manchester

suicide bomber, 22-year-old Salman Abedi, was born in this

country has raised fresh concerns about the effectiveness of the UK's

counter-extremism policy. In a moment we'll be talking to two

people who've spent their careers investigating

radicalisation in the UK. Douglas Murray,

of the Henry Jackson Society, and Sara Khan, author of The Battle

for British Islam and CEO of the counter-extremism

organisation Inspire. We asked both for a personal take

on how to confront the problem of Islamist extremism.

First up, here's Douglas Murray. Even after all these dead,

all this mourning and defiance, We remain stuck in the John Lennon

response to terrorism - Our politicians still refuse

to accurately identify the sources of the problem,

and polite society This country gave asylum to

the Libyan parents of Salman Abedi. Their son repaid that generosity

by killing 22 British people, one for each year of life this

country had given him. We need to think far more

deeply about all this. Eastern Europe doesn't

have an Islamic terrorism problem France has the worst problem

because it has the most Islam. Are we ever going to draw

any lessons from this? For the time being, the game

is to be as inoffensive as possible. The rot isn't just within

the Muslim communities. Consider all those retired British

officials and others who shill, and are in the pay of the Saudis

and other foreign states, even while they pump the extreme

versions of Islam into our country. It is high time we

became serious too. Islamist extremism is

flourishing in our country. We're failing to defeat it,

so what can we do about it? Whenever I say we must counter those

Muslim organisations who are promoting hatred,

discrimination, and sometimes even violence, I'm often either ignored

by some politicians out of a misplaced fear of cultural

sensitivity, or I find myself experiencing abuse by some

of my fellow Muslims. These groups and their sympathisers

tour Muslim communities, hold events, and have hundreds

of thousands of followers Yet there is little counter

challenge to their toxic anti-Western narrative,

which includes opposition I've seen politicians

and charities partner with and support some of these

voices and groups. Many anti-racist groups

will challenge those on the far right but not Muslim hate preachers,

in the erroneous belief that to do But it's Islamophobic not

to challenge them because it implies Following the attack on Monday,

it cannot be business as usual. We must counter those

who seek to divide us. Sarah Karen Allen Douglas Murray

join me know. You wrote a book, strange death of Europe. What did

you mean in your film when you said, let's get serious? Several things.

Let me give you one example. The young man who carried out this

atrocious attack was a student at Salford University for two years. He

was on a campus which is, from its leadership to its student

leadership, opposes all aspects of the government's only counter

extremism programme. They boast they are boycotting it. They always did

this. The university he was at was against the only counter extremism

policy this state has. This is just one example of a much bigger

problem. What are you suggesting? Shut down the University? Force them

to change their policies? I think in the case of Salford, which

discourages students from reporting Islamic extremism... When you

discover you have produced a suicide bomber in Manchester, you should be

held responsible. What do you say to that? I think it is quite clear from

I am experienced there have been politicians who have undermined

Prevent, community organisations, Islamist groups who have been at the

forefront of undermining and countering Prevent, but also wider

counter extremism measures. Islamist -- Islamist extremes and has

flourished in this country. If Summer Rae had given us a crystal

ball ten years ago and said, look forward and you will see hundreds of

people leave this country to join Isis, we will have hundreds of

people convicted of Islamist offences, I think we would have been

quite shocked that things have got worse as opposed to getting better.

Douglas Murray, the essence of your argument when you made the

comparison between the numbers of Muslims in other countries is that

we have too much Islam in Britain? The aunt Tilly Muslim Brotherhood

give is that the answer to absolutely everything is Islam. Less

Islam is a good thing. Let me finish. The Islamic world is in the

middle of a very serious problem. It has been going on since the

beginning. I think it is not worth continuing to risk our own security

simply in order to be politically correct. I would disagree with

Douglas on that. Nobody is going to deny that since the end of the 20th

century there has been a rise in Islamist extreme terror

organisations. Yes, there is a crisis within contemporary Islam,

but there is a class. There are competing claims about what the

faith stands for. While we are seeing Islamist terror

organisations, leading theologians are saying that the concept of a

caliphate is outdated. Muslims should be adopting a human rights

culture. I entirely agree with that. There are obviously people trying to

counter that. I would urge us to take the long view. In the history

of Islam there have been many reformers. Most of the time they

have ended a up being the ones on the brunt of the violence. I deeply

resent what you and others do in this country. I want you to win. But

they are a Billy good minority. A poll last year found that two thirds

of British Muslims found they would not report a family member they

found to be involved in extremism to the police. You are proposing more

Draconian measures. I wish they could win. We should do everything

we can to support people like that. What we should recognise the scale

of the problem is beyond our current understanding. You counter

radicalisation on a university campus or online? Discussion we had

with Ben Wallace about the material that is out there. If we pursue in a

hard-line way perhaps the sort of thing Douglas Murray is suggesting,

gone is freedom of speech, gone is freedom of debate and discussion?

The best way to counter extremism is through the prism of human rights.

We cannot abandon our human rights to fight extremism. Where I think we

are going wrong, where there is a gap, is the lack of counter work to

challenge Islamist ideals. How many people are going to say we need to

counter that strict narrative? That is where we are not doing enough

work. What about the human rights point, that you cannot take away

people's human rights? I'm not suggesting that. I'm suggesting we

do things that ensure that 22 people don't get blown up on an average

Monday again, OK? Dissent to be opposed to people want to blow up

our daughters is not opposing human rights. If you're taking government

money and you are an institution like Salford University you should

be held responsible for not cooperating with standard security

measures. You can challenge extremism without abandoning human

rights. We have got to actually counter the Islamist narrative.

We're not doing enough. This is not about closing down free speech. This

is encouraging it. This is the most effective way of countering the

Islamist narrative. Why isn't it doing better? A number of reasons.

One is there is a denial taking place. A lot of apologetics. Part of

it is the way we talk about Muslims in this country. We use the term

Muslim community as if they are homogenous. There is a positive

trend but there is a negative trend among British Muslims. We need to

counter those promoting the idea that Muslims are part of a

collective identity. I agree. It is also the case there is massive push

back because a lot of Muslims are defending the faith in this country.

We think we can push them down a better path but they are defending

absolutely everything. We need to get real about that. Thank you very

much. It's just gone 11.35,

you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers

in Scotland, who leave us now Coming up here in 20

minutes, the Week Ahead. In the East Midlands,

campaigning is underway again here, but what does the Manchester

bombing mean for security The important thing is to get

on top of the Manchester incident, to make arrests,

to keep people safe. But part of keeping people safe

is having that debate And the campaigners who say disabled

people have taken the biggest hit from austerity cuts and are

being ignored by politicians. Labour and the Conservatives talk

about targeting the older vote and trying to mobilise young people

but there has been no attempt My guests this week -

Sir Edward Garnier was the Conservative MP for Harborough

for 25 years before standing down at this

election and Rory Palmer is the Labour Deputy

City Mayor of Leicester. There

are reports in this morning's papers that the Tories

are considering relaunching It's been a bit of a disaster

so far hasn't it? I'm not sure I would agree with

that. The election is let any other, polls narrow during the course of

that and people historically have tended to vote for the party which

they believe is a leading the best and produces the best prime

ministers and I think you will find, I don't want to be complacent,

that's Theresa May is the Prime Minister on Friday morning June the

9th. What do you these are the day-to-day stuff of election

campaigns, people get overwrought and overexcited and distracted but

this election unfortunately has been overshadowed and will remain

overshadowed by the terrible events in Manchester last Monday. But it's

going to be the big shadow over the selection of the brightness that we

find despite his dark clouds is that the pleural democracy with open

systems of accountability will come systems of accountability will come

through and that is what the psychopaths who engineered the awful

events on Monday night. Rory Palmer, Labour's been

picking up in the polls, How are you going

to turn that round? The polls are narrowing, we see that

in the media on the back of the Conservative manifesto launch, I'm

not sure in modern politics we've ever seen the manifesto for a

governing party unravel so quickly. The response on the doorstep for

Labour has certainly been improving in my experience, I been canvassing

in all parts of the East Midlands are clearly there is a big challenge

and we will continue to work hard for every vote but as Edward says

there is a dark cloud over this election campaign even though they

are and running after the appropriate pause following the

atrocity in Manchester, I think the usual tit-for-tat politics doesn't

feel the same at the moment. And nor should it.

Well, campaigning has resumed, but the Manchester bombing has cast

What does it mean here in the East Midlands?

Already questions are being asked about resources

And one MEP says it's time to consider rounding up suspected

Here's our Political Editor, Tony Roe.

An election campaign stalled by terror.

Politics put aside, replaced by unity and defiance.

It's not unprecedented of course - war meant

no general election between 1935 and '45.

Ballot boxes being put back into cold storage

More recently in 2001, the general election was delayed by foot

And last year during the EU referendum, the murder of Jo Cox

put the campaign on hold for 48 hours.

Do these interruptions to the democratic process have any effect

on the outcome when politics resumes?

Immediately Jeremy Corbyn decided to stick

Whilst it might appeal to his own voters to

talk about ending foreign intervention, the type of person who

is inclined towards Theresa May will be worried about Corbyn from a

11 o'clock on Thursday, silence for Manchester in Leicester.

After that minute, the noise of politics was

MEP Roger Helmer wanted to talk about security, too.

He says it's time to think the unthinkable -

internment for 3,000 terror suspects.

There are networks of these people and when we know who

they are, we can't say, oh, well, we can't take them to court because

I have just suggested that internment is a

Terror and security, law and order, it's become

an election issue as cuts to police numbers -

What is happening now, there are more officers on the

streets and because there aren't enough, they are being supported by

4,000 members of the Armed Forces so it shows there is an issue.

The Government has now decided that a large task

Leadership is under the spotlight in any crisis -

the Falklands War turned around Margaret Thatcher's fortunes and she

swept back to power after being desperately low in the polls.

NEWSREEL: Mr Churchill flew back and what was to

be almost his last day as Prime Minister.

On the other hand, Churchill was kicked out of

office after leading the nation to victory in World War II.

History teaches us politics in a democracy

The country is ready for a new policy to face new

We're joined in the studio by Paul Holmes from the Liberal Democrats,

who was the party's MP for Chesterfield between 2001

and 2010 and is now their party chairman there.

Internment is an absolute disaster. We tried that in Northern Ireland or

40 odd years ago and it was a recruiting Sergeant for the IRA. It

moved nationalist people and to the terrorist organisation. It would do

the same here. Americans interned at the Japanese during World War II and

apologise afterwards because lots of Japanese went on to serve in the

World War II. It is self-defeating. We have instrument already in war to

deal with suspects of this nature, and there are enough laws and I say

this with this report of the independent reviewer of terrorist

legislation who this morning wrote that we have enough laws, to simply

the application of them and we need to deal with. Of course we need to

follow the evidence, we need to make sure that those who are properly

suspected of criminal activity and these are psychopathic... Quite high

under using those fools? A number of people have been

subjected to measures and hundreds of people have been convicted of

terrorist offences and they will continue to be convicted when the

evidence is there but the whole point about dealing with these

people is that they want to destroy our values, they hate us and we must

not descend into the level of conduct that they wish to impose

upon us. They are the enemy both physically and emotionally and

psychologically and you must deal with them through supporting our

values, underpinning the rule of law and making sure we do not descend

into the sort of filthy behaviour that they would like us to take up.

Isn't it the answer? We have a very strong legal framework in place to

deal with those suspected of planning and sticking foreign

terrorists and I think one of the critical points as we make sure

those who are charged with applying that legal framework, the police and

security services are fully resourced to do the vitally

important and difficult and complex job that they have that they can do

that job. I think there is more to be done, we need to expect more from

the internet companies, social media platforms. It is too easy for

vulnerable people to stumble upon and find extremist material on the

internet interest material of all kinds. We need to find a solution to

that urgently to stop whoever is in Government after the 8th of June has

to put that at the top of their to-do list. Hope is what has

happened in Manchester affected the mood in Leicester? Most

multicultural cities? The mood in Leicester is one of outrage and

defiance and real sympathy and upset for the people of Manchester and

other great multicultural diversity. We cannot even Joe the day after the

attack for an event led by young people over different faiths, we had

powerful and eloquent defiant messages speaking to the values that

Edward has mentioned which we must never step away from and that is

critical going forward. We have to find a way through this as a country

which doesn't compromise on those defining values of our society and

community. But which takes head on in robust and rigorous ways those

who want to drive hate and division and amenities, we must never give in

to that. If internment is into the answers which we have all agreed it

isn't, what is? If it was a simple answer you could legislate against

terrorism and it would have been done years ago. There are no simple

answers and the course that governments have been pursuing a new

routes we have to go down and we learned a lot from trying to deal

with the IRA with knee jerk measures which did not work and you have to

engage with dignity. The current preventive measures that Labour

introduced at being criticised but it is not a matter of scrapping

prevent, it is a matter of improving it. Even a very simple measure of

like switching the name from prevent to engage, you have to engage with

the Muslim community because you need them to be passing on the

information. The Conservative manifesto includes plans for a

commissioner for countering extremism which the party says will

help those community 's, prevent hasn't been a success, I don't agree

with you. Prevent has been a success and the work, but plus the work of

the security services is actually for example it's 2013 stopped eating

plots. That could have been eating times 22 other people being blown to

bits. There were others commission work? The commissioners agreed to be

a mixture of police, security but also people from the ordinary

communities throughout the country advising and coming forward. It is

good to be something like a statutory body which will be there

to provide advice to Government to learn the lessons. It'll provide a

place can go to to get better ideas of how to produce practical

solutions. The Prime Minister hasn't said how it will work but she has

said it will have a clearer remit. Lots of promises being made in the

late of Manchester, Jeremy Corbyn promising an extra 10,000 police

officers and more security staff if your party wins. It's surely more

than police numbers we need to increase and improve? Making sure we

have a great number of police on our streets is really important from

reassuring the public, it is really important to be built back

neighbourhood policing which was ages Springwatch success under

Labour Government anti-trust law committee said that is critical to

this whole issue. We have police and crime commission is saying about

enough police, experts from the intelligence committee saying there

aren't enough resources, the first responsibility of any Government is

to resource you police and security apparatus. Police said if the will

of police who wouldn't need the Army? That is an easy thing to say.

The Army act to provide reassurance and to allow police officers who are

doing other things to be done with them. Counterterrorism is not just a

question of police officers in uniform becoming the streets of

Leicester or Nottingham Chesterfield. It is a very complex

intelligence led in system, the security services have had their

budget increased to very nearly ?16 billion. We have an 1800 additional

security officers. It is highly sophisticated, completed but really

dedicated work and it is not easy to just say let's have another

policeman on the beat. By Kerry much indeed. -- thank you very much.

Well, the cuts haven't just hit our emergency services.

One campaigner in the East Midlands says disabled people have been hit

worse than any other part of society.

Frances Ryan, who writes an austerity column

for the Guardian, says people with disabilities are being ignored

by politicians, but they could prove a powerful voice in the election.

In recent years, British politics has been widely

But what is striking is that there is one group more

than any other who have been impacted by Government cuts

Theresa May talks openly about how severely disabled people

will still be protected but in reality severely disabled

people in poverty have been impacted by cuts 19 times harder

By 2018, disabled people will have lost collectively

So anything from the bedroom tax to fit for work tax

to the abolishment of disability living allowance which pays

This is only part of a bigger picture of inequality

There are currently 1 million disabled people

So that means anything from help to go to the toilet

or have a wash, let alone go to work or be part of the community.

The disability employment gap is still double that of non-disabled

people but for wheelchair users who are having to use

a kitchen and a bucket in order to wash themselves,

because there is no accessible bathroom, or injure themselves

as try to get up the stairs, there has been barely

Labour and the Conservatives talk about targeting the older vote

and trying to mobilise young people but there has been no attempt

It's not hard to see why some disabled people feel shut out

of the political process, considering at the last election,

one in four polling stations were literally inaccessible

Political parties would do well to start thinking differently.

There is a small army of 13 million disabled people in the UK and 89%

of those eligible to vote intend to at the upcoming election.

Campaigns such as Crip The Vote UK do great work in bringing attention

to issues that affect disabled people and mobilising the disabled

votes but ultimately it is the job of politicians to engage

the demographic who are too long ignored.

It's a disgrace that so many polling stations

were inaccessible for disabled people to cast their vote -

is that just another sign as Frances says of them being ignored ?

Clearly if people can't get to the polling station that is a disgrace

and that is what the local authorities to run the politicians

ought to be dealing with will stop can understand that as a practical

point but it is not just polling stations, is getting into theatres

and hospitals and the place of work and shops and the things to which

every citizen should be entitled. I don't want to blanket all disabled

people that they must identify themselves by their disability. I

want them all to have the same access to public services, to work

and entertainment and leisure at every other citizen has and so there

may be 13 million people with a disability but they are young, old,

employed, unemployed students. And if you're there are being ignored by

all the parties? It is a moral all the parties? It is a moral

outrage that over half the people living in property in this country

are disabled, some of your a disabled person. But situation will

get worse because of many of the welfare benefit cuts that the

policy agenda which is very clear policy agenda which is very clear

about the concerns of disabled people and will end these awful

continual personal dependency payments and work stability

assessments of disabled people are defined to be incredibly difficult

and dignified and distressing. I chair the disability partnership

board and I have heard many of these concerns first-hand. Disabled people

are frightened about what is happening and what could happen in

the future... They feel they are being hit harder by these cuts than

any other section of society? It was the Conservative Party that brought

in the disability discrimination act and since then we have been doing

arrest in opposition to encourage the Lennon labour Government

subsequently the coalition Government to bring forward

targeted, tabled this book financing for disabled people but I repeat,

disabled people do not want to be defined by their disability. They

want access to the things that more able-bodied... Everybody in this

country is having to share the burden of dealing with the economic

mess that we inherited. Some would say the most vulnerable feel that

worst? That is the whole point of this system of by you and as an

individual conceded benefits which best suit arrives and make our lives

most independent. We have to think about how to balance the books and

all this? I'm not sure it is right, that we have a situation today for

disabled people are taking really hits to their personal finances and

income because of benefit cuts could it be the bedroom tax or

introduction of other benefits changes but not the nearest get tax

cuts. That is fundamentally not fair. There will do things

differently. In the run up to the election

we're hearing from all the candidates in some

of the region's election hotspots. And they don't come much hotter

than the battle for Ashfield Usually a Labour stronghold,

it's now regarded as a three way marginal, and hotly contested too

by the Liberal Democrats, the Green Here's the doorstep pitch

from all the candidates. A vote for me on the 8th of June

will protect our beautiful green spaces, oppose fracking,

and fund our public Nationally we shall scrap student

debt and oppose age-related wages. I am standing with Theresa May who

will get the best deal for Brexit. A vote for Jeremy Corbyn's

candidate will get chaos. I am the local candidate born

and bred in Ashfield. I am a miner's son and a retired

senior police officer. I understand the area's issues

and I will fight to get The reason why you should vote

for me as Liberal Democrats in Ashfield is that we have got

a fully costed funding That is a penny on income tax,

the reversal of the corporation tax, this will give 14 million extra

for NHS in Ashfield. This is not a general election,

this is a second referendum. Mrs May has asked for a greater

mandate in Parliament and she doesn't need one,

she has already got it. If you are one of the 17.4 million

people who voted to leave, I want to bring Ashfield more

up-to-date, I want to bring more I want to see the crime figures

bringing further down, we want to get rid of the police

and crime commissioner and put the money that is spent on those

people to bobbies on the beat I'm always struck by the number

of people who tell me you have helped my mum and my sister

or neighbour and that's what I'm in politics for,

to serve the people of Ashfield I can continue doing that or you can

get a Tory MP who will do what ever Theresa May wants -

police cuts, tax cuts for the rich. I'll never do that, I'll

always be on your side. That's it for now, just time to let

you know that there's a special East Midlands Today debate

on the General Election Geeta Pendse will be in the chair

as a studio audience grills politicians from all the main

parties on issues that matter most That's on BBC One at 10.45

on Tuesday evening. Time now to thank my guests,

Edward Garnier and Rory Palmer re-elected. Is the only choice for

strong and stable leadership. Now, after the Manchester attack,

will the final week of election campaigning different in tone from

what came before? My panel are here. Tim Marshall, it will be very front

of Centre for the next few days. Is that a good thing for the election

if it is going to be framed to who do you feel more safe with? It is

inevitable but I think it will only be part of the election. As I said

before the opt out, for many voters this is also about economics,

unemployment. It is not all about Brexit, nor is it only about

security. What it will do, I hope, is get the tone of the debate right.

Although I have already seen the tone being lowered. I wasn't

impressed with Mr Corbyn's speech last week blaming it on a foreign

policy, which is a wafer thin analysis of what is going on.

Inappropriate timing too soon? No, I think the argument is utter

nonsense. I don't want to attack just one side. The Conservative

party, I've forgotten which minister has already said that we would be

safer under a Tory Prime Minister, it has got nothing to do with Labour

or Tory government, the next Islamic attack. It is to do with jihadist

ideology, not party policies. You raise an important issue about tone.

It also points to a broader argument, one we were having

earlier, has politics been two courses with this issue of

extremism? Has the conversation about it tiptoed around some of the

sensitive issues? And by the media. You highlight the problem of this

being part of the election campaign by saying, has politics been too

cautious? Who do you mean by politics? And in an election

campaign there is a duty to be a divide, and adamant about values,

policies etc. Security is an issue that transcends those political

divides. So I think it is deeply unhealthy. It is nobody's fault a

tragedy occurred. But if you ask me does it help or enhance an election

debate? Emphatically not. A tragic event brings politics, as you call

it, together. Security is an issue that is complex and doesn't divide

neatly. Elections are political battles, by definition. So I think

the coming together of this, a tragedy occurred anyway, but it is

an unfortunate context. Do you agree or do you think this is a time to

talk about these issues? Is it a time to review the level of

argument? This is a political debate. I personally think the

politicians should have been out and about on Wednesday. There is no

wrong time to get it right. We mustn't let the terrorists affect

our way of life. But they have when we disrupt the election campaign. It

may be party political. But for a lot of voters, including me, I want

to hear from party leaders. What do you plan to do about this? Right

now, I've not heard anything that suggests any of these parties have

got to grips with the real problem, which is that we are not actually

tackling the problem in our midst. Douglas Murray touched on it

earlier. We have not even come to grips with the scale of the problem.

Does Labour have a grip -- Power Point in terms of terrorist

legislation? It is complicated. And not all of it has worked or is used

enough by government? It is another example where this doesn't work in

an election debate because David Davis has opposed a lot of this

terrorism legislation. He is now heading Brexit. There is a civil

liberties argument which I personally have doubts about. Again,

it brings people together from the major parties. And Corbyn didn't

actually say it was the cause of terrorism, British foreign policy,

but it helped to facilitate terrorism, which is a different

argument. Again, that would be supported by some Tories as well.

That is why it is difficult in an election campaign for this issue to

dominate. The front page of the Sunday Times talks about a campaign

relaunch, which may not, grow as a great surprise following the social

care fiasco. Do we know what that will entail? It sounds like Boris

Johnson will play a role. The whole point is it was all about Theresa

May and it turns out that is not quite good enough. The more we have

seen of Theresa May, the less impressive she has looked. Certainly

the Andrew Neil interview just repeating the same thing again and

again. Voters don't like that. They like people who are honest and

actually engage with them. When we see beat interviews in the next few

days, I think it will be interesting to see if she changes tack and tries

to engage with what people are asking. If it is back to leadership

and Brexit, and the economy, will that be more comfortable ground? I

think so. I understand framing it in terms of Brexit. But she has got to

broaden it out. I think that is why she is broadening it out. I don't

think the tragic events will absolutely dominate. That would be a

small victory for terrorism. This is a country of 65 million people with

an awful lot of issues. We have 65 million votes, well, 65 million

people with opinions in two weeks. It is quite a long campaign. There

is still time to go. What do you think Labour will be focusing on

from now on? I would imagine they will look very closely at where they

are well ahead in the opinion polls and focus on that relentlessly.

Public services, NHS etc. And try to get it off as soon as possible from

security and fees is used which, on one level at least, appear to be a

gift to the Conservatives. I assume that is what they are going to do.

But this is a very unpredictable campaign where nothing has gone

according to plan. Let's look ahead. On Wednesday evening we have got an

election debate. It is in Cambridge. Leaders of some of the parties.

Amber Rudd will be representing the Conservatives. We don't know yet who

will represent Labour. Today we have had Amber Road and Diane Abbott

against each other on Andrew Marr. Let's have a look. I think there is

something to be said for a Home Secretary who has actually worked in

the Home Office. I work in the home office for nearly three years as a

graduate trainee. This government has always felt that urgency. That

is why we have been putting in additional money. It is significant

that the commission for extremism in the manifesto was put in before

Manchester. We need to do more. You voted against prescribing those

groups. Because there were groups on that list I deemed to be dissidents

rather than terrorist organisations. We are making good progress with the

companies who put in place encryption. We will continue to

build on that. It was 34 years ago. I had a rather splendid Afro at the

time. I don't have the same hairstyle. And I don't have the same

views. It is 34 years on. The hairstyle has gone. Some of the

views have gone. So you no longer, you regret what you said about the

IRA? The hairstyle has gone, the views have gone. I would say to

Diane Abbott that I have changed my hairstyle are few times in 34 years

but I have not changed my view of how we keep the British public safe.

Let's get away from hairstyle sides talk about the prospect of the two

of them taking part in the election debate. Would you like to see that?

On one level I would like to see it and another the level I would like

to see an intelligent debate. I'm glad I never had an Afro or

supported the IRA. Whenever Diane Abbott steps out in a TV studio or a

radio studio, Labour haemorrhage votes. She cannot say things like my

regret supporting this or that legislation. She is an absolute

disaster. If Labour put her up, they are beyond mad. Who do you think

Labour should put up? By the way, I did have an Afro! I based my whole

log on Kevin Keegan and it was good. That is the wrong question. I will

explain why. The Labour campaign, it seems to me there were only five or

six people put up. That is the fault of others who refused to take part.

It also shows the degree to which the current leadership can only rely

on five or six people. I would imagine we are talking about a pool

of five or six people. As for my judgment as to who the best public

performer is in that pool, it would be by some margin John McDonnell,

who is a very good interviewee and performer. I think he is a very good

performer. It would come back to the economy at some point, presumably.

But then it comes back to the IRA. I don't think the debate will be very

illuminating. I think if Amber Rudd is there, Diane Abbott should be

there. I think the leaders should be debating. Some people say it is

froth. I think the leader -- the electorate gets a sense of the

leaders. On haircuts, I would like to thank both of them are talking

about the haircuts. I am looking forward to tomorrow's papers and the

theme that will run through the week. Let's not finish on the hair.

Thank you very much for being our guests. That is it for today. Thank

the panel for Jonny May. Andrew Neil will be back next weekend. And I

will be back on BBC Two on Tuesday. That is at midday with more daily

politics. In the meantime, have a very lovely bank holiday. From all

of us here, bye-bye. As voters prepare to go to the polls

to choose who represents them the SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon joins

me for the Andrew Neil Interviews. One minute to get the

food on the plate. ..team them up with

a Michelin starred chef, putting their reputation

on the line.