05/06/2016 Sunday Politics London

Just over a fortnight to go, and the referendum debate is getting

serious, with Boris Johnson and John Major the latest senior

We'll be discussing all the week's big developments,

We've hit the road with both campaigns, and we've got two big

I'll be joined by Labour's John Prescott,

And, if you haven't decided how to vote yet,

One MP who's only now finally reached a decision will reveal live

on air if he's backing leave or remain.

In the capital, it's the UK's financial powerhouse -

how will that EU decision affect the City of London?

And, in a week in which one poll showed the public are three times

more likely to trust the word of a random stranger

And, in a week in which one poll showed the public are three times

I'm joined by a political panel with the full authority

It's Sam Coates, Isabel Oakeshott, and Janan Ganesh.

We'll try and find some random strangers to replace

them next week, and see if you notice the difference!

So, in case you weren't sure just how high the stakes were in this

referendum campaign, you only have to look at this

morning's papers, and listen to former Prime Minister John Major

taking aim at his fellow Tories in the Leave campaign.

The current Prime Minister David Cameron tried to get his party

to avoid so-called blue-on-blue attacks, in the hope of keeping

It seems like John Major didn't get the message,

as he accused the Leave campaign of squalid deceit,

and called Boris Johnson a court jester.

Here he is, talking to Andrew Marr earlier.

This is going to affect people, their livelihoods, their future

for a very long time to come, and if they are given honest,

straightforward facts and they decide to leave,

then that is the decision the British people take.

But if they decide to leave on the basis of inaccurate

information, inaccurate information known to be inaccurate,

Now, I may be wrong, but that is how I see their campaign.

And this is so important, for once, I'm not prepared to give the benefit

of the doubt to other people, I'm going to say

And I think this is a deceitful campaign, and in terms

of what they are saying about immigration, a really

They are misleading people to an extraordinary extent.

So, that was former Prime Minister John Major, but,

when Boris Johnson took to the same sofa, he studiously declined

to return fire when asked if those words were part of an attempt

by the Remain campaign to "take him out".

Whether it is or not, this morning I think that...

I'm rather with John McDonnell this morning...

He says that there's too much of this sort of blue-on-blue action,

and what he wants to hear is the arguments,

Boris failing to take the bait. As I said, John major hadn't got the

memo from down the street, that was a joke.

The fact was John Major was sent into the show by Downing Street to

beat up on Boris. Is that an example, a testament to have rattled

they are? My own evidence is they are very

rattled, they got extremely twitchy about something I tweeted on Friday

night where I suggested a prominent Remain person was appearing on sky.

This shows the level of nerves in Downing Street. The kind of language

being exchanged between senior figures in the party raises very

serious questions about how the party comes together.

We had Michael Gove this morning saying he thinks the party can come

together on June the 24th. Of course they can, but I doubt it will be on

June the 24th. It is quite remarkable for a

Conservative Downing Street to get a former Conservative prime ministers

to come onto the BBC, the main Sunday morning news show, Andrew

Maher, and to beat up on the man who is currently favourite to be the

Tory leader. That is almost unprecedented.

John Major put his credibility on the line with phrases like squalid,

depressing. He was going for Boris Johnson.

There is a clear, strategic imperative behind what John Major

was saying, he is trying to reduce Boris Johnson's credibility,

currently the most popular and trusted figure in the EU debate

They are worried and trying to harm that.

So, they are going for the man. The Big Questions this morning for

Downing Street, and it is right to point fingers at Downing Street for

pushing this kind of intervention, stiffening John Major's spines when

it turned out Boris was going to be on the programme I think he had a

bubble. That is my understanding. The danger

is that Downing Street are encouraging this, to send this

debate into a Tory blue-on-blue battle.

The effect may well be to deter Labour voters.

The people who want Britain to stay inside you need to do two things, to

make sure Tory voters vote for Remain, and turn out the Remain vote

against Labour and SNB voters. The question is whether having all

the headlines dominated by this blue-on-blue fight -- SNP.

It means people shrug and give up. It is more than just blue-on-blue.

From what John Major said this morning, it seems Downing Street is

prepared to trash the Tory brand, their own brand, in desperation to

win on June the 23rd. John Major describing one of the

likely people to be the ex-Tory leader -- next Tory leader as a

court jester. Saying, if you put Michael Gove

Boris Johnson comic Iain Duncan Smith in charge of the NHS, is like

giving your pet hamster to a buy them. A second Tory poster. How can

you not conclude they are so desperate about June the 23rd they

are prepared to trash their own party's brand.

Short of using the B word when he thought the Microsoft when talking

to Michael Brunson, it was very vociferous.

It is true Boris Johnson did not retaliate in the interview. John

Major and number ten would argue that retaliation was made very

early, over the past few weeks, the Prime Minister's integrity on some

questions had been brought into doubt by people in his own party.

Without defending number ten's instructions to John Major if they

exist, they feel aggrieved because of attacks during the campaign.

Looking at the footage of John Major, I detect sincere emotion on

his part, rather than being a mouthpiece.

I did argue that he didn't mean what he said.

As Sam was saying, he didn't want to come on.

This is such an important development, it tells us about the

remain camped. Now, staying with the EU referendum,

today we're going to try Two well-informed campaigners,

the Conservative MEP Dan Hannan and the Labour MP Emma Reynolds

will be interrogating each other I'll mostly just be sitting

back to watch. A short while ago in our green room,

they tossed a coin to see Emma is the winner, or loser,

depending on your point of view so they'll be the first

to be cross-examined. They took a break in campaigning

to make their pitch I'm Daniel Hannan, Conservative

Member of the European Parliament, and I'm inviting you to fire me

on the 23rd of June. First, because leaving

is the modern choice. The European Union

is a relic of the 1950s, when regional blocs

looked like the future, but that world has been overtaken

by technological change. Second, because it's

the cheaper choice. Instead of handing Brussels

?20 billion a year gross, 10 billion net, we'll have our money

to spend on our priorities. We will take back the sublime right

to hire and fire our own lawmakers. In a necessarily uncertain world,

we will have taken back control to mitigate any risks ourselves

instead of passing power to people who may not

have our interests at heart. And fifth, because it's

the confident choice. We are a merchant,

maritime, global nation, the fifth largest economy

on the planet, one of five permanent seat-holders

on the UN Security Council. We have the world's most

widely studied language, before we are able to run our own

affairs in our own interests? Trading and cooperating with friends

and allies on every continent, including Europe,

but living under our own laws. So, here are Dan Hannan

and Emma Reynolds. And, just to explain the rules,

you've just five You can only ask questions,

or only give answers. Nine out of ten economists and a

string of organisations say leaving the EU would damage the economy

make families worse off, cause a recession, could you name an

independent economic force -- economic forecaster who has said the

opposite? Five former chancellors are

campaigning to leave, plenty of economists, ...

Gerard Lyons has said, although in favour of leaving, if we were to

vote to leave, the two years, it would cause great uncertainty and

depress the economy. He hasn't said that. He said that in

a report. He hasn't. You will have to do

better than that. He is strongly of the view leaving means walking away

from a declining trade bloc and being able to leap up... And the

uncertainty? All these international bodies. .

Hang on. The IMF, these are people who shared the outlook,

international bureaucrats, they share the lifestyle, the tax-free

lifestyle, they shared the basic outlook. Through euros, because that

is the kind of circles they live in. The Institute for Fiscal Studies is

widely respected, they have said by leaving we could blow a black hole

of up to ?40 billion in our public finances, meaning less money for

public services. They were feeding in the same basic

data they got from these IMF, OECD organisations.

They are independent. If I didn t think we would be better off as a

whole, I would not be inviting viewers to make me redundant. The

reason I am confident I will have a job in the private sector doing

something more productive than regulating everyone else is we

shouldn't be linked to the world is Oates only collapsing trade bloc.

There are huge opportunity -- the world's. We are the only one that

hasn't grown. Another question, you have described

the NHS as the biggest 60 year mistake, why can the public trust

the Leave campaign when they don't want the NHS to be in public hands?

I said the mistake was having a nationalised system rather than a

pluralist one as they have in almost every other industrialised country.

The referendum is an instruction to the Government to get us out.

It does not mean you are electing the boat Leave campaign, but giving

a mandate to get us out on terms and in a timescale said to our allies

across the control -- the channel but in our interests.

We are really looking at a decision to leave and asking people not to

trust any other politician but the British electorate.

The weight of economic evidence is on the remain camped, you would

admit that at least. Can you name a country that has

access to the single market but does not accept free movement?

The EU side free trade agreements with Colombia...

You said access to the single market, every country in Europe has

access to the single market. There is a free trade area from

non-EU Iceland... Why therefore does Ireland and

Norway faced agricultural tariffs of over 13%?

Ireland and Norway? Icelands and Norway.

Yes, they have wisely chosen to stay out of the Common Agricultural

Policy. Their farmers are strongly in favour of staying out of the CIP.

If we did the same thing, instead of being doubly penalised as a net food

importer with efficient farms, paying more in, getting less out, we

can have a British farming policy tailored to suit our needs.

In Northern Ireland, you suggested the border would remain open between

the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. How can you therefore

guarantee that if you want to stop free movement, that European

migrants would not come through that border? You are leaving the back

door open. Illegal migrants could come through that border today but

do not. They could come through legally. We have an agreement which

includes the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands, which are not in

the, it long predates the EU. The point is it is possible now, don't

take anyone's word for it, we have a common travel area with EU and

non-EU states, no-one in Dublin or Westminster is suggesting that is a

problem. We have only three seconds to go, tough and time in the

interests of fairness! It is the dunnock Emma to be cross-examined,

let's look at her pitch to undecided voters.

We are stronger, safer and better off in Europe.

Families benefit from lower prices, more jobs,

Businesses benefit from a European single market

Workers benefit from employment protection.

We trade more with the EU than any other country.

from companies like Jaguar Land Rover here in the West Midlands

And by staying in the EU, we will attract even more investment

and create more jobs for the next generation.

In the 21st century, the challenges that our country face

no longer stop at the White Cliffs of Dover.

Cross-border crime and terrorism, climate change -

by working with our European partners,

we can meet these challenges successfully.

predicts that damage will be done to our economy if we leave.

And the Bank of England Governor, Mark Carney,

It would create a black hole in our public finances,

meaning less money for our public services, like schools and the NHS.

for more jobs, prosperity and security.

As before, Dan, you now have five minutes

to put your questions. Off you go.

Thank you. As you know, the EU is not a settled dispensation, it is

undergoing the Euro crisis, the Schengen crisis, migration problems,

and it is evolving - what are the greatest risks of Remain? Well, you

would keep your job! You seem to want to lose your job. I don't think

that there are great risks of as remaining, because we have the best

of both worlds. We are not in the eurozone, we have the pound as our

currency, like eight other member states retain their currency, but we

have unfettered access to the single market, and no other country... What

can you tell us about budget contributions in ten or 15 years'

time? I know what our budget contributions are today, not what is

on the side of your bus. How many migrants might be resettled here?

More came from outside of the EU than inside. Can you tell us how

many bailouts we might be dragged into? Zero. So if we vote to stay

in, even though we had a written guarantee in 2014 that which would

not be dragged into a bailout, you trust them this time? You say that

but you are a MEP. I am asking the questions. I think the ministers go

to the Council of Ministers meetings, 97% of the votes won, we

are not run by Eurocrats. You cannot answer any of the questions about

how it might look if we stay in so there are risks both ways. Is it

safer to take back control to mitigate risks ourselves, or save a

passing control to people who may not have our interests at heart I

do not know why you mistrust our European partners to such a great

extent, because the challenges we face in the 21st century, climate

change, cross-border crime, terrorism, those are challenges we

share with our partners. Let me ask another question, in our country we

have an example of a very high-minded, radical tradition that

has been very good at dispersing power from oligarchs to the general

population. As an heiress to the suffragettes and the chartists, do

you feel comfortable backing an elitist, anti-democratic project

where supreme power is wielded by people immune to the ballot box

where we pay more to wealthy French farmers than poor African farmers,

and where we have inflicted joblessness and misery on tens of

millions of people around the Mediterranean while Eurocrats like

around in private jets? Does that seem comfortable as a person on the

centre-left? I feel comfortable because I feel the EU has been a

force for good in terms of employment protection, in a way a

Conservative governments never has, comfortable because we elect our

MEPs, and we elect a government that sends ministers to Brussels to have

the final say on European regulations, and I feel comfortable

as a British MP that over the vast majority of policy areas, whether

health, housing, education, policing, we have confidence in

those areas. So Lord Rose, the leader of the remainder campaign

says Vote Leave for higher wages, Paddy Ashdown says we will get

cheaper food, don't you think there are benefits to the majority of low

and medium income people from having that boosting household income? On

the contrary. So they are wrong I think they are wrong, people in my

constituency, low and middle incomes, they will suffer the most

if manufacturing is eliminated, according to the Brexit Economist,

the Bank of England governor has predicted a recession, and it will

be people I reserve present who will be worse after macro, not people

earning high income jobs. -- worse off. What is the strongest argument

for voting Leave? I don't think there is one. None at all? This is

one of the things that puzzles a lot of people trying to make up their

mind. You do not think there are any benefits of staying in the EU. It is

not my job to tell you them, but I can see them! People make an issue

out of being so broad-minded and reasonable, but they struggle to see

the other point of view at all. They cannot put themselves in the shoes

of the people that the EU is not benefiting, which is the vast

majority. There is a lot of scaremongering on your side about

what might happen, because if we stay in, we will pretty much have

the status quo, access to a market where we trade more than with the

rest of the world, 44% of our exports go to the rest of the EU.

Our trade unions represent four million people who think we should

stay. I would rather this on to them than you. Do you think the European

Union is a growing, successful scheme that people would join today

if we were not already a member Yes no? Yes. We ended there, I thank you

both for that. So, this week both sides of this

referendum have really The big set-piece TV

grillings have begun. Senior Conservatives have been

knocking lumps out of each other. And the Labour machine seems finally

to have creaked into life. We'll be talking about

all of that today. But, first, our Adam's been

on the buses to see where this

campaign is heading. There's livestock,

there's Boris Johnson, and there's a man

with a stuffed animal. Well, I suppose I could have

accidentally bought the cow This was the week the referendum

started to feel a bit more like a general election

campaign, and not just because of

the photo op. Vote Leave unveiled

a spending commitment, cutting the VAT on domestic fuel,

and a whole new immigration system - And here Boris told farmers

that their subsidies would be safe, even if the UK left the EU -

not everyone was convinced. There's no authority, no power,

he's just a person that's walked in here

and said what he's got to say. You could say it, I could

say it, I can promise. First of all,

where are your wellies? Are you getting a bit

of grief from the farmers? No, there's a lot of

support, a lot of support, and a lot of people

coming up to me and saying, "We are with you,

we want to come out." Some people, obviously, need

reassurance about the subsidies He left - without offering me

a lift, so I caught the train, to Birmingham,

and the Labour in campaign. But this week Jeremy Corbyn

made a big speech after it emerged many Labour supporters didn't know

the party was in favour of the EU. Do you think that was

a great speech from JC? Jeremy's journey, if you like,

which mirrors the journeys that many have made on this,

he was a Eurosceptic in '75, and I think he's more powerful

for that. Our journey took us to a building

site to see investment from abroad that the Remain campaign claim

is linked to our EU membership. Of course, with foreign

money comes foreigners. How are you going to vote?

No, come out. Why's that? Because of all the immigrants

and things like that. Too many of them now

coming into this country. Well, inevitably,

I've ended up in one of these This week, the Remain campaign

got some high visibility backing from foreign leaders -

in Spain, the Netherlands, the former Foreign Secretary

David Miliband. Some people might say

that you live in America now, you are one of these high-profile

foreigners coming over and lecturing us on what to do,

what do you say to that? I'm a British voter,

and I'm able to speak with passion about my own country,

this is my home country, and although it's not where I live

and work at the moment, I still feel that there is

a real obligation to speak not just to the economic issues

and the security issues, but also the foreign-policy

issues, frankly. to ride on Britain Stronger

in Europe's luxury coach, or hop onto Nigel Farage's

double-decker. You wait ages for a referendum

battle bus to come along, So, you heard Alan Johnson there

defending Jeremy Corbyn's latest intervention in the referendum

campaign, despite critics claiming that Labour hasn't exactly been

full-throated in its campaign Well, the former Deputy Prime

Minister and veteran Labour campaigner John Prescott

seems to agree. He says in his newspaper column

today that his party's message

hasn't been getting through. John Prescott, good morning to you.

Good morning. You say in your column that the Conservatives have hijacked

the campaign, why has Labour allowed that to happen? It is a good point,

I suggested in the paper that it seems almost to have been the

strategy, blue on blue destroying the Tory party, hopefully, we will

have to wait and see! We saw that in the broadcasts this morning, but

where is Labour? It seems as if we are just enjoying the fight between

them, but that is not putting our position. Labour maybe in the

European Union, I support being in it, but we're not putting the

arguments, and so when you see on a bus there, for example, on Boris's

bus, ?350 million a week to put into the health service, this is from a

government that reduced from 9% of GDP the average in Europe to 7% and

when they go on with a Labour politician in this way, Gisela, the

Tories get the publicity, and they are in the background. We are not

putting down the record of the Tories, they cannot do it because

they are in a joint agreement on a bus about Europe. Let me just get

another question in, as a result of everything you say, are you worried

that you are failing to galvanise the Labour vote, do get it out to

vote for Remain on the 23rd? Absolutely! Labour people want to

hear Labour people talking about this government's record, whether

they are four in or out, they carried out a record that is

basically destroying our health service, housing was halved in

billions, and now they say they will bring it. Michael Gove says all

these terrible bankers, why didn't the vote with Labour to stop the

bonuses for them? He didn't, he doesn't, they are hypocritical, we

must show that Labour has strong values, we believe in social

justice. When you have heard Tories talking about being social justice?!

Look Labour, at Labour. Maybe Labour voters are confused, when you look

at Jeremy Corbyn's pro EU speech, he spent as much time attacking the

Tories and EU policies. Good on Jeremy! By Sea said the bad things

predicted by Vote Leave work addicted by those who say we should

remain, that all the scare stories were just myth-making and prophecies

of doom. Is it any surprise that Labour voters are confused? Yes but

I do not think we should talk too much about what we should do, Jeremy

is not a passionate man, he does not scream and shout like me, does he?!

But to that extent, our people want to see, and this is what has

happened to politics, people speak and do believe what they are saying!

On both sides, Cameron's side, Boris Johnson, they are saying things that

they did not do in government, which Labour oppose, and they are against

social justice. We want a Labour Europe, different to them, not, we

all believe in Europe, let's travel on the same bus! No wonder people

are confused, get a strong Labour voice, and glad Jeremy said what he

said, but point out what these beggars did in government!

What about the confusion, even Damian McBride caught on Twitter

offering policy tips to the Brexit campaign.

Labour voters seem to be confused. I don't say that the Europe they

want is the one I want. I took part in the last referendum. Despite the

Tories not giving us a referendum and taking us in 1975 into the

common market. I do believe, I was against a political Europe. In fact,

I turned down a job with Jim Callaghan to be commissioner. On

that ground, I thought that is where they were heading.

I can't say it has stopped. What we argued then was for a wider Europe

so we didn't move along the federal Europe case. That is still an

argument to be fought for, I feel strongly, Labour does. I'm not sure

the Tories pursued it. Sadiq Khan, tested Jarrell, Harriet

Harman, they have appeared with Tories, including the Prime

Minister. You refused, but last night you were appearing on Russia

Today, a Putin propaganda channel, with Ken Livingstone, he has been

suspended from your party, have you thought this through?

Of course. I don't go in joint party operations, I never have. I didn't

when I fought the Labour in 197 . I am the same. I am not saying they

can't or shouldn't. We are saying the Labour vote is crucial and there

is confusion as to the Labour position.

Standing alongside Tory politicians, the survey has recently shown most

of the speeches that come out of that are Tory spokesmen. 48% Tory,

8% Labour. Why are we confused? Like in Scotland, if you appear alongside

them bring on Europe, you better start telling people what you

disagree about. Jeremy is trying to do that. I

wouldn't do it, it adds to the confusion. If you can't get the

Labour vote out in big numbers, are you worried you could lose this

referendum? Yes. I want every Labour person in

to vote. I fought on the last one thinking we would win on the

referendum, and we lost, mainly it was particularly women, they get

concerned about the long-term, their children, security, I think that is

what defeated as in 1975. Seriously, I think it will go the other way. We

need to be talking about the big powers. It is not Britain on its

own, it is global powers, America, India, China, who will decide the

issue about crime, immigration, security. We will be a little island

shouting out, don't you recognise we are a big power. But we will have no

say in a global decision. Jeremy Corbyn has hinted he might

bring Ed Miliband into the Shadow Cabinet. What about you, are you

available? I have done my bit for the Labour

Party, except shouting on the side as I do. That is his decision. I

want to see a united party. One of the things is people are confused

because of these changes. Where does Labour stand? Start talking about it

and be clearer on immigration. We have been cowards, the whole

political establishment has avoided the argument. That is a global

solution. There will be more migration coming from African

countries which have no water or food because of climate change. This

is not a temporary problem but a global problem and needs a global

solution and not a little country on the side shouting and staying out of

it. Thank you.

Now, even if plenty folks are still undecided,

you might think most Mps will have made their mind up as to how they'll

It's only two-and-a-half weeks to go, after all.

But, according to our research, there at still 26 undecided Tory

Well, we're going to reduce that number by one today,

as the Conservative MP Johnny Mercer is here to reveal for the first time

What is your decision? The first thing to say is, like a lot of

people, being out on the doors of Plymouth, we are disappointed by the

level of debate. Even today.

What is your decision? It is important to get this across.

But tell me, leave or remain? Two Government ministers saying the

Government is not telling the truth about the economy which has upset

people. In terms of this referendum, it is

clear we should remain, not a single economic expert has come out and

said this will do things for our economy, our jobs.

If you look at what this garment has delivered in places like Plymouth

around jobs, the single biggest factor in improving people's life

chances, it has done good things. It is the economic case.

And a security case. Why do the people of Plymouth seem not

convinced quite a recent polls say they were largely for Leave.

A poll I have been running has come out and said that.

When this debate started, I said this was an issue, not the issue. It

has become clear. I did not think we would vote to leave the EU. This is

a vote of singular importance to this country. People have begun to

forget we need to get on with Government on June 24.

That may be the case. But do you think you can win on the economic

arguments? With the economic arguments, there are single clear

points. On the economy, the people who

always feel the worst affected, it is always the most vulnerable.

Always those who file like a desperate struggle. My area of

Plymouth is still categorised by the EU as a deprived area in parts. They

cannot take that shock. It is OK for others to say we can go to this

nirvana. The truth is the same people are affected.

Why do 74% in your constituency say...

That is a very small poll. But it is indicative of the mood,

74%. People will feel more passionate

about leaving because for some people this is a single issue. They

have been looking for a reason to come out and leave the EU. I think

the vast majority do not want to leave. You are looking at where we

are now it is not perfect. We are on this trajectory. Do we throw it away

for a nirvana no one can quite lay their hands on. Could the most

vulnerable in the UK who rely on a job, on the NHS, public service

funding, could they withstand that shock? I can look them in the eye

and say, I went this based on something that sounded like a great

idea but I could not go for it. It has loads of problems.

Why take so long? Thinking about Europe is not something I got into

politics today about. I have spoken to a lot of people. It

would be naive to suggest there are reasons why people want to leave. On

balance, it is a clear case. Society is judged by how it looks after its

vulnerable. We have to remain part of the EU to continue to do that. It

isn't perfect. Thank you for coming on and telling

us how you will vote on June 23 We say goodbye to viewers

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

the Week Ahead, when we'll be talking about the referendum

and the TV debates with the veteran Conservative backbencher David

Davis. First, though, the Sunday

Politics where you are. And with me for the duration

Stephen Timms, Labour MP for East Ham, and Matthew Offord,

Conservative MP for Hendon. Could we just start with quick first

thoughts on the EU referendum Matthew, what's at stake

for your constituents? What's at stake is the future

of the United Kingdom, I want to come out of Europe,

I believe that we can flourish, we don't need the European Union,

and some of the measures and directives are stifling our economy,

so I'd like to see us come out Are your constituents

asking you that question, how will it affect us locally,

and what do you say to them? Well, they are asking me questions,

how will it affect locally. Things like, for example,

air quality, that's certainly an issue that Defra

and the Government are working on. So we don't need Europe to tell us

about environmental conditions, because actually we've got quite

a good track record. I saw something recently that said

we only have good bathing water around our coastline

because of the EU. It's something that the Government

has always been working upon, and that will not change overnight

if we decide to leave the EU. Stephen, what's at stake

for your constituents? It's the jobs, for my constituents,

that are at stake. Thousands of people living

in my borough in Newham, commuting into the City every day,

working in financial services. If we were to leave the EU,

it would be a big threat I talk every Saturday on my street

stall in East Ham High I would say there is a fairly even

split at the moment between those in favour of staying in,

and those who want to come out. Certainly, the question of jobs

weighs heavily on people's minds. What about local

investment in your area? There is a big project,

the Asian Business Port, The plan is, it is a Chinese

developer wants to provide European headquarters space for Chinese banks

and others who want to address 30,000 jobs, a big difference to us

in East London. The reality I think is,

if by the time those companies choose whether to move in, we are no

longer in the European market, That is the scale of the threat

we face to jobs in London Let us continue on that idea,

to critics, is where the great recession started,

but the bonuses never stop. To its fans, it is the

lifeblood of the capital. Where does the city

stand on leaving the EU? What would life look

like if that happened? Finance, London's biggest,

most lucrative, Lots of people watching aren't

going to be overly concerned with the future of a load

of bankers, lawyers, hedge fund But there is no question having

financial services in London is one reason why our capital

is the richest part of the UK one of the very

richest in the world. That construction site is giving

jobs to electricians and There are deliveries to be made

taxis to ride, shops and more. Many at the top of the City

say leaving the EU is the lobbying group

for financial services big firms and say there

is 84% of those who run

major international 95% of them say it is

mission-critical to have access Only 4% said the UK

should leave the EU. Lloyd's of London is the global hub

of specialist insurance. Billions of pounds change

hands here every year. They say being part of the EU is one

of the reasons for their success. The one thing that

nearly all City firms that want to stay in

the EU have in common is they are concerned

about That they have the right

to sell their products across the EU in the same way

that they would here in Britain We rely on the passporting

right the EU provides us into the EU where we can treat

the EU's 27 member states Secondly, very importantly,

we trade with the benefit of the bilateral agreements the EU have

with other third party countries. It is not just Lloyd's

who are worried, banks like HSBC say

they would move staff aboard. Others have donated

to the Remain campaign. One estimate doing the rounds from

PricewaterhouseCoopers is 100,0 0 financial services jobs could be

lost by the end of the decade. Does all of this amount

to what the Leave There are powerful forces conspiring

to make people afraid of leaving EU, when the truth is, they say

that things will be absolutely fine. One man who thinks Project Fear

is in full effect is Mark Littlewood,

Director General of the Institute America sells its financial

services and insurance to the EU in roughly speaking

about the same proportion The USA has managed that

without joining the single currency and without

considering becoming a member of the If the USA can achieve that

on the upside, I don't see any According to some of

those who want to leave, when freed from the shackles

of EU regulation, that much better

suits our interests. The French have a veto

over all legislation David Cameron went

to Europe to try to negotiate a similar veto

for financial services, and they told him he couldn't

possibly have one. With financial services

picking up such a large part of the economy,

the impact of this referendum for a single sector could

have huge implcations not just for the Square Mile

but the whole of the country. Joining us now,

Ruth Lea supports Leave, and Mark Boleat, leader of the

London City Corporation, economist, Why, and what do you think the worst

scenario is of leaving? Why is what John Nelson

from Lloyd's explained. It is access to the entire

European Union market It is not possible

from outside the EU. For many businesses,

it is not relevant. For a lot, it is,

particularly the larger ones. It would be a threat to jobs

if we were not in the EU. The worst case is if Britain

was outside the EU with no access to the single market other

than would be available If we could negotiate

continued access, with a say in the rules,

that would not be acceptable but the least worst outcome

if we chose to leave. The prospects for the City

are very great whether we are in or out

of the EU. If we didn't leave,

we could negotiate a good agreement to have continued access

to the European market. The chairman of UBS,

former president He said Britain should get

a very favourable agreement. When it comes to passporting, I have

little doubt the British Government would sit down with the other

members of the EU and agree some regulatory system

which is a quasi-passport which would continue trade

very much as it is today. How is it that all the major

financial institutions in the City are saying they want to stay?

We have been here before. I remember how many times

I was told because I was anti-Europe because of economic reasons,

if we didn't join the euros, One of the reasons the British

and European split negotiate an agreement if it is

in their interests, and of the banks and financial institutions,

including the EU banks, 75 of them are here in London

because London is the unique They need the talent pool

here, the global reach. If there were not an agreement,

they would suffer, that is not Mark, everyone keeps

on citing the euro. I am told I am one of these people,

which I certainly wasn't. it certainly didn't include

the City of London Corporation. We are talking about whether

Britain stays in the EU or not. If we can get the arrangement

described, two of his points, Any equivalence wouldn't

be negotiated, The EU says this is what you have

to do, Britain would have to do it. There would be uncertainty

until we achieve that. If Britain votes to leave

on the 23rd of June, the assumption would be that we

would not be in the single market with access to it

until someone can demonstrate that would not be the case.

That would take a period of time. About this equivalence,

there's something called MiFID II. That will have

equivalence provisions. I don't want to get technical.

I am lost already. We would be leaving the EU

2020 at the earliest. This system of equivalence

I was talking about will already be in place.

Why leave the EU? Not because of economic reasons

but democratic reasons. PwC say there could be

a loss of 100,000 jobs? I don't believe

any of those figures. I always think economic

forecasters are there That goes for George Osborne's

?4300 hit on households et cetera. As an impartial economist

looking down. I always knock my profession,

you know that. To the point, if you believe

that trade will continue then I don't see any reason why

there should be a loss of jobs. The other thing, where

are the growth markets going to be? It is in the non-EU which is where

the growth in future will come from. 100,000 jobs was an estimate from

PwC, is yours at the corporation higher or lower or in that ballpark?

Do you have fears for jobs? There have been different studies

on the impact. I wouldn't say they are the same

but they are broadly similar. the exact impact would depend

on the terms negotiated. At the very least, there would be

a period of years of uncertainty before we would know

what the arrangements were. The equivalence regimes,

when they are negotiated territory by territory, come in years

after the single market arrangement. on the assumption

it might turn out all right. Let us bring in

our elected representatives. Matthew, you will have seen

and known and fully understood the value of the City, not just

to the capital but the country. Would you want to take the risk

You say there is a risk. Firstly, Ruth is right,

this isn't just about big business but about us choosing our own

democracy and deciding for ourselves what we want to do

and how we want to have The second point is, Ruth also made,

the amount that we trade with financial to Europe

has reduced by over 70% The amount with America

is about the same. We shouldn't just be looking

towards Europe but elsewhere. Particularly with some

the emerging economies. So we would not need

to be part of the EU. In fact, we would be better

if we weren't, You take another view?

There is a huge risk to jobs here. Ruth makes the point it will take

three years for the arrangements It is that uncertainty in itself

which is such a huge risk to jobs. Who will invest in financial

services in the UK if they don't know what the basis

for their future trading with Europe is going to be?

We won't know. Will we need visas

to visit France and Germany? Will they need to apply to visit us?

We won't know. People won't invest,

and we will lose jobs. The vice chairman of

the Chinese Development Bank says he wants to invest here

simply because the UK with a centre of time zones

between America and Asia. We have a pool of people,

solicitors and other professions, able to work with the markets

and a good legal framework. If they don't know for a few years

the basis for their ability to trade from the UK

into Europe, they won't invest. threaten us with the EU

imposing more regulations? Well, one of the things that

disappoints me about what this government has done about Europe

is the reduction in the number of British civil servants

working in Brussels. This government hasn't engaged

sufficiently with the mechanisms of the Commission,

the Parliament, and the Council We will need, after the referendum,

assuming we vote, as I hope we do, to stay in, we'll need to engagement

more vigorously with those debates that are happening in order

that we can deal with risks like that one,

which would threaten us, if changes were made that

were damaging to our interests. But of course,

if we come out of the EU, we won't any longer have the ability

to shape those rules at all. The likelihood is that we will have

to play by the rules still, so we will be

in a far worse position Don't you sometimes secretly

and quietly think how brilliant or exciting

it could be untrammelled by any sense of danger

of EU regulation? Well, I agree entirely

with what Stephen said about the need to be better engaged,

but we are going to be publishing some research tomorrow showing that,

actually, we have done rather well in the negotiations on the various

financial services initiatives. Often they start off as something

that is not favourable to Britain, but we do a really good job,

the civil servants do it, even with limited resources,

and we get a good outcome. FTT is really interesting,

because we are not party to it. If it ever happens, and actually

it is not going to happen in any way like the way it has

been envisaged, we would be subject to it

whether we're inside the EU or out, because it would be supranational,

as our own stamp duty is. The fact is, by being in the EU

even though we wouldn't be party to it, we

can influence that debate. And also, our own government has

made it clear there would be no relaxation of financial regulation

in the event of Britain not And did David Cameron negotiate

quite a good deal in terms of preserving

the City's position? I don't think so, because basically

they can just turn it down. Could I just pick up

from Stephen's comment? He talks about uncertainty, I take

your point, as I have already said, in 2018 you have equivalence,

the equivalence provisions, and all you need for

a British Government then is to say, And when it comes to visas,

again, in the negotiations, I would trust and expect

the British Government to say Because, quite honestly,

they would say that, they because know full well

they don't want this sort of story of uncertainty to go on.

Wrap it up for us. It can't, because the reason

for coming out of Europe, To deal with immigration,

we would have to have some sort of visa system,

and that would apply to us as well as to those people,

so if I want to visit Brussels, That will put businesses

in an impossible position, The British Government at the time

would surely say what they envisage by way of visas, and I think

they would give a very generous deal on that...

We don't know. You can say you don't know now,

but do you know in 2018 or 2017 The Government would

have already said... A final word to Matthew,

do you except and are you saying and how long do think there might

be turbulent times As I've said, I don't think

there would be turbulent times. We have also experienced that kind

of uncertainty before, the time that we withdrew

from the ERM. Not only did our interest rates

reduce, our exports increased,

and our economy boomed. I see it happening the same again.

Time marches on. I would love to talk about

this all afternoon(!) Yeah, I can detect that!

But you can't, thanks very much Now, for the rest of

the news in 60 seconds. London boroughs are not

enforcing affordable housing The pan-London yearly

target for new units although councils

set their own levels. Only 8,500 such units were built

in developments with affordability Westminster Council has said

it is facing significant financial challenges and may axe

its fixed CCTV cameras in September to save ?1.7 million

in upgrade costs. The authority claims

there is only limited evidence that fixed CCTV cameras prevent

crime and disorder. Labour Mayor of London Sadiq Khan

joined Prime Minister David Cameron this week to launch

a Remain battle bus. Mr Cameron had previously criticised

Mr Khan's poor judgment However, on Monday,

they said they would work together and shared a joke about their

fathers' very different careers Stephen, was Sadiq Khan right

to share a platform, as some people joked,

with that extremist David Cameron? I think he was, it's clearly

a huge issue for London, whether or not we stay

in the European Union, for the reasons we've

just been talking about. I think Sadiq, who's made

a fantastic start as Mayor of London, which I really applaud,

I think he's absolutely right to stand up for

the interests of London and make the case

for staying in the EU. Quite a few people in your party

perhaps right at the top, the deputy leader, does not

appear to share your view. I think Sadiq is right

to take every opportunity to make the case for London,

that is what he is doing. What did you think when you saw

the Mayor of London there Well, the day after the election,

an ambassador who I shall not name said it was permissible to use

any method, any technique, But after the election,

you have to accept the result, and I think that is

absolutely right. I don't see Sadiq Khan

as a Labour Member of Parliament, that he is no longer,

or a Labour mayor - I see him as Mayor of London,

so he was right to do so. Right, and you support as such,

as a London MP, unless he does something

radically awful to you locally? And what about this decision

by Westminster Council? I think they are the wealthiest

authority but certainly bang here in the middle of the capital,

with all the tourists and so on they are planning to look

like they are going to scrap their CCTV system.

I find it greatly worrying. When I was a councillor in Barnet,

we introduced CCTV in a regular roll-out programme, and not only did

it help prevent fairly horrific crimes like rape and possibly

there was a murder. And it worries me that

in the capital city, London, that we no longer have not

only a deterrent against crime, but also a great tool

in the fight against terrorism. I mean, Westminster is saying

it literally only get involved I think it has a wider importance,

I agree with Matthew about this I have just had a public meeting

with resident in my constituency, who talked about rubbish

fly-tipping, and a lot of people want to see more cameras

so that those who dumped rubbish, dumped mattresses, dump boxes

of rubbish on the pavement, So I'm surprised

Westminster is doing this. They say it is very reactive

and not really a deterrent, do you not accept that?

I think it can be. Of course, it has to be used

smartly, and when people do things that are bad,

they need to be caught I think they'd find

CCTV pretty effective. Just this last matter,

figures out this week under freedom of information which showed

that the struggle that London authorities have heating their own

targets for affordable homes, I don't know what their target is,

but we certainly have a robust building programme, probably

the biggest in London. And so we are playing

our part within Barnet. But it comes down to the issue,

once again, of immigration, more people wanting to come

to the capital, whether from inside this country or from abroad,

so we need to vote Briefly, 20 seconds left,

people were saying they looked at the figures, no-one got anywhere

near 50% affordability, that is what Sadiq Khan

says is possible. It is, it's a big task that

Sadiq has set, he's right there a massive crisis

facing the of London. We shall see what he does.

Thanks very much indeed. David Davis will talk to is about

the snoopers' charter, but that interview with John Major on the

Andrew Marr Show, earlier we showed you in talking about the deceit of

the Leave campaign, this is in talking about Boris Johnson's

prospect of leading the party. If they continued to divide the

Conservative Party, as they are doing at the present time, and if

Boris has the laudable ambition because it is laudable to become

Prime Minister, he will find, if he achieves that, that he will not have

the loyalty of the party he divided. Iain Duncan Smith was serially

disloyal in the 1990s. When he became leader, he was surprised that

no-one was loyal to him. Boris should learn from that.

What was the purpose of his interview this morning?

I guess number ten asked him to do it, and being a loyal supporter of a

Tory party, he would do that. I guess he was trying to reduce the

credibility of the Leave campaign's claim. Some irony when you consider

the most incredible claim has been from George Osborne, the Treasury,

in terms of his forecasts, and even what John Major said, I was his last

defender in the Commons, the numbers bandying around.

He said for example this controversial ?350 million was one

third of that. That is half the net contribution. He said industries

would face 10% levies. The car industry would, but most of

the others would be up to 5%. He was not being very

straightforward with the numbers. Were you surprised how personal the

attacks on Boris well. We know he has long hated Iain

Duncan Smith. Understandable. But saying in the

hands of Michael Gove, Boris Johnson, IDS, the NHS would be like

a hamster in a room with a pattern. He was trashing the Tory brand.

A harsh attack. I don't think it was very wise.

One of the problems both sides of this campaign have had is it is too

personalised. The public don't like it. After the

23rd, we had to pull the party together.

With that sort of attack, it is a bad idea.

Sam. Let me put it this way. Whatever the result, things for the

Tories will never be the same again for the rest of this Parliament

It will be very hard. Clearly with a working majority of about 18, hard

to get contentious the station through, the biggest area of danger

for David Cameron. He will be a zombie Prime Minister, he can't get

it through the Commons, and the Lords is a different matter where

legislation will get stuck. You saw the kinds of things in the

Queen's Speech. With the exception of the data Bill, I can't see any of

the bills will be that radical when they get passed into law. So I think

there will be a successful coup after June the 23rd, that seems

unlikely. Even if it is a vote to Leave.

That could change things. I think David Cameron would go within his

own time. In the case of a remain vote, there are up to 20 MPs who

bitterly disliked David Cameron I don't think that number has

dramatically increased solely as a result of the referendum campaign.

There is a safety valve, the leadership election which will

happen possibly sooner than you think.

There may not be an immediate coup even if the vote is to Remain.

The keyword or words, zombie parliaments, there are anything

between 20-50 MPs deeply disillusioned with the Prime

Minister. They have a taste for revolt. The

Government majority is derisory This Government could now find it

very difficult to get anything major through this potential zombie

parliament. That is absolutely true. On the

matter of a coup, there are a number of mischief makers within the Tory

ranks who don't mind if a coup succeeds or fails, they feel the

Labour opposition is so weak, they have the luxury of doing this.

I think the numbers are lower than you think. I would say 20, not more

than that. That is enough, given the Government

majority. These are the ones that hate the

regime as it were. You have another group. The problem

is not if there is a Brexit victory, but if there is a very narrow Remain

victory. A lot of those wanting Brexit will

feel they have been cheated. The ?9 million spent on the

leaflets, all of that, they will be difficult to manage.

This is a Government that has found it hard to get its budget through.

Almost unprecedented, it lost most of the major parts of the budget

unveiled in March. Would it not be even more difficult if it is a vote

to Remain, but small, to get its business through except the

noncontroversial. To say it is difficult for the

future is a description of the past ten months, they had two H a great

answer their planned pensions reform amongst other things.

The potential American trade deal. Most recently, and prior to the

referendum. Things will become difficult

afterwards. David Cameron will end up leading my kind of Government, it

won't do very much. The basic strategic stuff. What the founders

in America intended. The one bit of optimism for the Tories, it picks up

on David's point, I wouldn't underestimate how many Tory MPs want

is referendum done with, that includes absolutely committed

leaders who don't think much of David Cameron.

Interviewing Johnny Mercer, he wants it over, you can tell from his

demeanour. And he wouldn't look at me but there

may be another reason! We don't need to go that!

Let me ask you. Given the kind of Government our panel are talking

about, it is already difficult for the Government to get things done.

Even more difficult after the referendum I would suggest if it is

Remain by a small majority. Does that give you hope for your

continued opposition to the investigatory Powers act for the

police and intelligence services? Taking up on the American view, look

what happened with tax credits. There were about 40 people opposing

it, only two voting against it. It went to the House of Lords, got

knocked back. The Government knew there was a looming rebellion.

That will be the message of the future.

A lot of that pressure play. The investigative powers act, large

parts of it will be flayed by the House of Lords, the Government will

concede. That is the way it will happen.

Whether it is the approval mechanisms or the data gathered or

who has access, those will be challenged.

All those things will now be more at risk at least after the referendum.

Maybe why they are brushing it through in the next few days.

I would suggest looking at the campaign, two and a half weeks to

go, in the week up to the Whitsun bank holiday, Remain one that, and

overwhelming economic amount of stuff coming out.

In the weeks since leading up to this weekend, Leave have probably

done better. The interviews on Sky.

Still all to play for. Leave goes into this week probably with a

spring in its step. I think that is right. One of the

mistakes of the Remain campaign was at two different points, to feel

like they were heading for victory. Once in the aftermath of the visit

by President Barack Obama. They thought it was a big moment that

would produce a push. A couple of weeks ago, they sensed

that polls were going their way in private conversations they thought

they had got it in the bag. That created hubris and a problem.

They did not see coming the Australian style points system

attacked by Vote Leave last weekend, setting out plans. They thought it

would be a policy freak referendum campaign. That pulled the debate

back into the Leave side. Is Leave thinking it can win?

Privately, I think they are beginning to think they have a 0-50

chance, maybe more. Previously, privately, a lot would admit they

felt pessimistic. I definitely sense a shift. If you

look at what happened in Scotland, it was around this time use saw

polls saw an advantage -- seeing an advantage for independence.

Still three weeks to go, nobody is counting their chickens.

I am reliably informed Leave is ahead but that is embargoed so I

didn't mention it. But they still don't think they are

losing? How big a victory do they need in

order to put the question to bed and preserve the Prime Minister.

At least 55-45? That would do it. The fact they

deployed John Major shows they are worried.

John Major was the nuclear weapons. Lose or win, yes or no?

Brexit, a small margin. You heard it here first. Just to

mention, as well as the debate we have been discussing, I will be

interviewing leading figures from both sides of

Starting tomorrow at 7.30 on BBC One, with Shadow Foreign

Followed on Wednesday by Chancellor George Osborne.

And then it's the turn of Leave campaigners Nigel Farage

I hope you can join me, it should be fun.

And, of course, we're back here next week as usual at 11 o'clock

Remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.