25/09/2016 Sunday Politics London

Welcome to Liverpool where the Labour Party has decided

who its next leader should be - he's the same one they had before.

So is it onwards and upwards for Jeremy Corbyn's Labour?

Morning folks and welcome to the Sunday Politics.

I am therefore, conference, delighted to declare Jeremy Corbyn

elected as leader of the Labour Party.

Jeremy Corbyn says he wants to "wipe the slate clean".

But can Labour MPs serve under a man they said they had no confidence in?

We look at where the next battles are likely to be fought and speak

to one peer who's quitting the party in protest.

Jeremy has no leadership qualities, whatsoever.

His little group like him and they think he is the Messiah

but he will never become the leader -

He's been "getting down" at party conferences for more than 50 years -

we'll ask John Prescott if he's optimistic about the next 50 years.

David Cameron felt "let down" by Theresa May

because of her lukewarm support for Remain during the

Was she a secret brexiteer or just manoeuvring for the top job?

In the capital, how is this rivalry shaping up?

London's Mayor warns pointedly that you can only change lives

And we tried to oust them from the programme -

but they're back by popular demand - so with me - the best

and the brightest political panel in the business Steve Richards,

Rachel Shabi and Tom Newton-Dunn, who'll be tweeting

David Cameron became intensely frustrated

at Theresa May's unwillingness to declare her intentions

in the run-up to the EU referendum campaign.

That's according to a new book by Mr Cameron's former spin doctor.

The book by Craig Oliver is called Unleashing Demons:

The Inside Story Of Brexit, and is being serialised in Mail

The book talks about Mrs May's "submarine strategy

Mr Oliver also writes that, "Her sphinx-like approach

At one point a leading Remain campaigner asks: "Are we sure May's

Oliver also makes claims around Boris Johnson's

He claims Mr Johnson texted Mr Cameron after

saying Brexit would be "crushed like a toad beneath the harrow".

And claims the new Foreign Secretary had a last-minute wobble over

backing a vote to Leave the EU, sending a text which read

There we go. We know the feeling! This is a Prime Minister of which we

know very little. What does this tell us about her? What it tells us

is that Craig Oliver David Cameron don't like her very much, that's the

only thing we can be 100% sure of, quite frankly. We knew she was a

submarine throughout the campaign and I remember discussing it during

the campaign on your programme. What we are debating is the motive, why

does she stay hidden? Speaking to Downing Street people this morning,

they are furious. They say Craig Oliver would be better writing

fiction than fact. They are disputing a lot of what Craig Oliver

says but of course he was there. It comes down to what you think of

Theresa May. Why was she so quiet? Why would she not come up behind

Cameron? Was it a political thing because she wanted to be a PM or did

she not believe what he was saying? What we know is she was always a

reluctant Remainer and some people thought she was a secret Brexiteer.

What with don't know is she was playing the part of a submarine. Was

she quietly plotting for the leadership? That is the bit that is

unclear. Yes, I mean, I think to a certain extent a lot of these things

we did already know, you are right. But we didn't know the extent to

which... I mean, this is a party which claims to love Britain and yet

seems to make decisions on the basis of pure political gain. And once we

see the machinations of that and the insights to that that seem to be

exposed today in this book, the fact Theresa May was asked 13 times, the

fact Boris Johnson... 13 times to? To step up and support Cameron. I

missed that, 13 times she was asked? In fact, Boris Johnson less than a

minute before making decisions sent a text to David Cameron saying he

would come out in favour of Remain, shows how arbitrary, random and

politically driven these decisions were. I think we should be asking

them these questions every day. It is unforgivable they took the

country to such a massive and catastrophic decision on the basis

of such naked political gain. That has never happened in politics

before! Perish the thought! I thought that because Mrs May played

the part of reluctant Remainer she would annoy both sides, that the

Leave campaign would be angry with her because she didn't jump to them

and Remain side would be angry because she did nothing effective

during the campaign and that would count her out from getting the

leadership. How did I get that wrong? It certainly didn't have that

effect. I think we can roughly work out what happened. A senior official

at the Home Office who worked with Theresa May for a long time told me

earlier this year, long before the referendum, and when people had

declared, that he was 100% sure she would back Remain. He was a great

admirer of hers and he said that was her view and that she would do that.

So I think she was a Remainer. But as you say, she had doubts. She made

Corbyn look evangelical on the issue. There is nothing

contradictory about being in the end for Remain but harbouring leadership

ambitions. They did try to get her to do more, I know they did. But the

Remain campaign was also ambiguous about the issue of immigration and

the group Dunne the degree to which they wanted to go with it, they

wanted to go on the economy. I don't think they pressed her the heart of

the dominant force in the campaign because they wanted it to be more

about the economy than immigration. So reluctant Remainer, low profile

for all kinds of reasons, one of which was the Remain campaign didn't

want immigration to overwhelm the economy. It did in the end. They

calculated that wrong. The Remain campaign got that wrong, not Theresa

May. Have we known less about any Prime Minister in modern times than

Theresa May? It's funny because we think we know her. I've interviewed

her, you have interviewed her, we have seen her around the scene for

20 years but we don't know precisely... We will get a load more

about this at Tory conference. Is that coming up? Have got to go there

too? One day we will leave Liverpool. People will see that as

an opportunity to explain a bit more about her. River Lea, because we

need to move on. We'll have a habit of overestimated and overanalysing

Theresa May -- briefly. She could be a simple straightforward person who

likes to tell the truth, ever thought about that? Never. It is

tough to get to the top with people knowing who you are. Why would we

want to leave Liverpool? Look over there, it is lovely. It was the

result everyone expected. After almost three months

of campaigning Labour have the same leader they had before -

so can the slate really be wiped clean - as Jeremy Corbyn has urged -

or will splits and divisions Adam Fleming has been watching

events here in Liverpool unfolding. But it's been about our Labour

family facing the future. He was the head of the family last

week and he'll be the head So Labour has elected its new leader

and is the old leader, So Labour has elected its new leader

and it's the old leader, Jeremy Corbyn, winning this contest

and winning by a slightly larger In his second victory speech in just

over a year Jeremy Corbyn said Labour would fight the Government's

plans to extend grammar I'm calling on Labour Party members

all over the country to join us in a national campaign for inclusive

education for all next Saturday. The Tories' plans for grammar school

segregation of our children expose their divisive and damaging

agenda for our country. But the big message

to his party was this. We have much more in common

than that which divides us. As far as I'm concerned let's wipe

that slate clean from today and get on with the work we've got to do

as a party together. Jezza escaped the cameras to go

and celebrate with his allies. Where is the Jeremy

Corbyn victory party There will be a number of victory

parties, but the most important thing now is just

bringing people together. So what Jeremy will be doing

is going around all the different individual party receptions,

the different regions and giving the same unity message,

and he will be drinking, or having cups of tea,

with everybody, all sides. As luck would have it we found

a persistent Corbyn critic who had just been invited

in for a friendly chat. I'm actually just going

to see Jeremy Corbyn now. Oh, are you?

Have a one-to-one chat? He asked me to see me

so I'm going to see him. Can we come with you?

Alas, I don't think he'll allow it. And we did, staking out

their meeting at the leader's hotel. She didn't sound

entirely convinced. It was fine.

What happened? He wanted to talk to me because I'm

the chair of the women's PLP. It's the right thing to do that

Jeremy wanted to see people like me who have our own mandates

within the PLP. I think that's

the right thing to do. It's whether you listen and then

change your actions that matters. Others were less polite on Twitter,

posting pictures of their chopped He is hostile to America,

he is hostile to business and he's And I'm the reverse on all those

issues as well. This is a position,

as Leader of The Opposition, where effectively you are in

position to become the next You cannot become the Prime Minister

of this country unless you appeal to the great population,

and in particular middle England. And I think Jeremy has no

leadership qualities whatsoever. Back at conference,

they were setting up for a meeting Corbyn fans and Corbyn sceptics

are deadlocked over reforms to the party, especially

plans to revive elections The criticism doesn't matter

here at the festival running alongside conference,

organised by the pro-Corbyn They are just over the moon

that they have managed to get their hero elected,

not just once but twice. And we're joined now

by the former Shadow Health Welcome back to the Sunday Politics.

Tell me, what will go down in history as the most botched coup of

2016? Will it be the uprising against President Erdogan in Turkey,

or your efforts to unseat Mr Corbyn in the UK?

You've started from completely the wrong premise, Andrew, to be honest.

As much as you might read in the papers about a finely orchestrated

plot and coo, what I know is I resigned at the end of June because

I had concerns about Jeremy's capacity to lead the Labour Party. I

was worried that in a very complicated situation that we find

ourselves in after the results of the referendum he didn't have the

capacity to develop the answers that the party needs. So there was a

concerted effort to get rid of him. I resigned at the end of June. A

number of my colleagues shared the sense of despair and there was

clearly a vote of no-confidence in the Parliamentary Labour Party. At

the point at which that happened and that the point at which Jeremy said

he wasn't going to resign, they had to be a leadership contest. Why did

there have to be? What was the point of it? You have left him stronger

than ever. What we have done this is have a

really important debate about the future of the Labour Party. It was

important for members of parliament who with Jeremy day in and day out

and who have had growing concerns over the last year to say we've got

to change as a party. The next 12 months need to be better than the

last 12 months. We need to appeal to the country. We need Jeremy to

understand that if we are going to be a credible and effective

opposition, and a government in waiting, then he actually needs to

get his act together. So does he understand that now? I hope so but

only time will tell. It may all be for nothing. You'll have to ask him

the next time he comes on your show. You were the ones who sparked this

process. Do you now have any doubt that he will lead Labour into the

2020 election? Well, a week is a long time in politics, Andrew. Who

knows when the next General Election will be? I said 2020, that is when

it is scheduled to be but there could be a surprise but Labour would

have to vote for that in the Commons. Let's assume it is 2020 and

it is the full term. Are you in any doubt that Mr Corbyn will lead your

party into that election? Watch Jeremy has got to do is prove he can

unite the party and that he can craft a message that appeals to the

country. I don't think anyone wants to continue the leadership contest

of this summer. But what people like me are determined to do is to

continue fighting for a Labour Party that speaks to and for the whole of

the country, and one which is capable of winning the next General

Election. So you do have some doubts? That is not what I said. We

need to focus our efforts... I know what you said about your focus but

it is a simple question, do you have doubts that he can win the next

General Election? Jeremy needs to prove that he is a competent and

capable Leader of the Opposition. You have said that, of course,

everybody who is Leader of the Opposition must prove they are

competent. It would seem from your inability to give a straight answer

that you do have doubts that he will win, indeed you even seem to have

doubts that he will lead your party into the next election. I have been

honest and it would be quite strange for me having been so explicit over

the summer to come onto your programme and say that overnight the

concerns that I had expressed had evaporated. Clearly Jeremy is to be

congratulated on winning for a second time and he won a clear

victory. But because people have voted for him in the numbers that

they have doesn't mean that somebody like me automatically changes my

mind. There are a number of things that he could do to move the party

forward. Give me the most important one. I think he needs to commit

unequivocally to a majority of the Shadow Cabinet being elected by the

Parliamentary Labour Party. MPs need a new top team to coalesce around.

Jeremy has talked about extending an olive branches. Is talked about

wiping the slate clean. The time for words is over. -- he has talked. The

time for that is over. He needs to say one thing that would show his

willingness to compromise. A minority of the Shadow Cabinet

should be elected by the Parliamentary Labour Party? --

majority. That is the first one. There are other ideas about how the

cabinet should be selected. Do you believe he will do that? He's been

playing for time in the NEC. What would be useful is in the 24 hours

following his election is for him to show that he has learned from the

last 12 months and an elected Shadow Cabinet would be one way of doing

that. I also think... Can I just ask, why would he do that? His

support, his constituency, if I could put it that way, is the

membership in the country. Particularly the new members, who

gave him 85% of their votes. He knows the PLP cannot stand him. So

why would he hand the power to choose his Shadow Cabinet to that

part of the Labour Party which likes him least?

I think you are characterising the Parliamentary Labour Party

incorrectly, Andrew. Jeremy needs to build a team in Parliament in order

to fulfil the basic functions of a parliamentary opposition. The basic

duties parliamentary opposition cannot be carried out if you don't

have a team. Clearly people were concerned about the direction of

travel over the past year. We've been concerned about dreadful

results in local elections, we've been concerned about the inability

to go out and really make the case strongly for us staying in the EU.

If Jeremy wants to be a strong and effective opposition, she needs --

he needs to be Parliament... All of us need to behave with maturity and

humility going forward. I think there's some options here that he

could be exploring. All right. If he doesn't follow your advice and if he

sticks with the leader largely appointing the Shadow Cabinet, many

would say if it was good enough for Ed Miliband to do that it should be

good enough for Jeremy Corbyn to do that, if he continues along that

route, should centrist MPs like yourself serve in that Shadow

Cabinet? I won't be serving in that Shadow Cabinet. I have been explicit

in my view this summer, as I've already said to you, they haven't

changed overnight simply because Jeremy Paris been elected. Can you

just explain, given... I'm not sure what else he has to do. He's won two

leadership elections by massive majorities, the second one even

bigger than the first. He is clearly the choice of the party in the

country. Why would you not join his Shadow Cabinet? Because as I said in

the last couple of months, and I'm sorry to say this, but my

experiences during that time were that it was dysfunctional and I

think behaviours do have to change in order for the Parliamentary

Labour Party and the Shadow Cabinet to be a really effective opposition.

I think I can best serve the Labour Party and my constituents from the

backbenches. If we know how this works... If I were to return to the

front bench, in a couple of weeks' time you would be saying to me,

Heidi Alexander, you said all of those things over the summer, have

you now changed your mind? I don't think that's good for anyone. Would

you advise like-minded MPs to do the same, not to join Mr Corbyn's Shadow

Cabinet? I think every member of Parliament will ultimately take

their own decisions. Would you advise them or just leave them to

their own devices? I think if Jeremy commits to having the majority of

the Shadow Cabinet elected by the Parliamentary Labour Party, then for

some people that might be the right thing to do for them. You backed

Owen Smith in this election campaign. If there were a general

fear among MPs like yourself that Labour is drifting to father left to

be electable for the country as a whole, why if that was the case did

Owen Smith not attack a single domestic policy of Jeremy Corbyn's?

I think what Owen did throughout the campaign was actually moved beyond

the slogans. That's the problem we've had in the last year. Jeremy

Thompson about investing ?500 billion in a capital investment

programme but has absolutely no idea where that's coming from. -- Jeremy

Thompson bout that. -- Jeremy talks about that. Owen

Smith is honest and says we would have to borrow. That's what Jeremy

Corbyn says! Actually, it's quite different to what Jeremy Corbyn and'

John McDonald have been saying. If the fear was drifting to the left

and making the party unelectable... It was mainly about, we're just as

left wing as Mr Corbyn but we are more unelectable! You didn't have

any major policy differences with the leader! I think we did,

actually. We spoke about the EU referendum and our commitment and

our belief that the British people should have a say on the final

Brexit deal, either in a second referendum or at the general

election. There were differences around areas of defence policy as

well. Domestic policy was my original question. I understand the

difference on defence. It's clear that the party membership has

changed. Revolution may be too strong a word, but there is a clear

difference between the new members who have come in and those who were

party members at the election last year and in May of 2015. What would

be wrong for these new members to say we would like Labour MPs who

more reflect our values, our positions, our policy is that we

want to see implemented. What would be wrong with that? I think the

Labour Party is quite divided at the moment and we should be honest about

that. This is a searing revelation you're giving me this morning (!)

Parties change, your party has been reinvigorated with a lot of young,

new people coming in. What would be wrong with them saying actually, I

would like to have an MP represent me who is more in tune with what

I've signed up for? I'm not sure it's really about that, to be

honest. My own experience in my constituency, someone who is a

hard-working member of Parliament, I've spoken to a lot of those new

members who value the work that I do in my constituency but some of whom

have taken the decision clearly to vote for Jeremy still. We should

remember that since Jeremy Maclin lost the election, 80,000 people

joined between then and the freeze date of the 12th of January, so

there are 80,000 people who had by and large joint because of Jeremy

Vine who had not yet had the opportunity to vote for him. I

understand that. Are you in trouble yourself? I hope I'm not but I know

there are people who are agitating against it. What do you think when

you see Diane Abbott doing that job? I think Diane Abbott has one of the

biggest and most responsible jobs in Parliament. I think that she needs a

team around her to actually do that job effectively. The only way she

will get that team is if Jeremy agrees, I think, to Shadow Cabinet

elections. That is a point that has come through loud and clear. Heidi

Alexander, thank you. So, Labour MPs who prompted this

leadership contest have lost the argument and failed to persuade

Labour Party members and supporters But can centrist Labour MPs use

the party machinery to take The National Executive Committee

is the Labour Party's ruling body. Win control of the NEC and you win

control of the beating Since Jeremy Corbyn

first became leader, there has been a fine balance

on the NEC between his loyalists In anticipation of his re-election,

the deputy leader Tom Watson has recently been squaring up

to Mr Corbyn in the latest The committee has 33 members

representing local parties, unions, Going into the party's conference,

the NEC looks to have tipped slightly in the leader's favour,

with 18 Corbyn-leaning members Although one or two of these

could tilt either way The pro-Corbyn block has been

boosted by two new members. Rhea Wolfson and Claudia Webbe,

who will replace two However, the NEC recently agreed

a rule change that could allow Scottish Labour

leader Kezia Dugdale and Welsh First Minister Carwyn

Jones, both hostile to Mr Corbyn, Tom Watson is also leading the move

to restore elections to the Shadow Cabinet,

a plan overwhelmingly The Shadow Cabinet currently picks

three of its own to sit on the NEC, currently two of the three,

Jon Trickett and Rebecca The other, Jonathan Ashworth,

is a Corbyn sceptic. If Labour MPs were allowed to elect

people to the Shadow Cabinet it could result in more centrists

on the NEC. Meanwhile, Mr Corbyn is promoting

the idea of giving ordinary party members and trade unions more

say on the committee. Control of the NEC could allow

Jeremy Corbyn and his allies to change the rules for future

leadership elections, which would make it almost

impossible for MPs and MEPs to stop another left-wing candidate making

a future bid for the leadership. And the move perhaps most feared

by MPs, a mandatory reselection We're joined now by Rhea Wolfson -

a Jeremy Corbyn supporter who was recently elected to the NEC

and takes up her seat at the end of the week -

and by Luke Akehurst who supported Owen Smith

in the leadership election. It is very finely balanced. The

figures I would have would be 16 members that clearly support Corbyn

and maybe 17 that don't. Do you agree with that? Yes, I think it is

very finely balanced. With the recent elections, with Jeremy Corbyn

supporters winning all those seeds, if not tipping the balance. What

about this decision to appoint Scottish and Welsh representatives

to the NEC? I understand as it stands at the moment that they would

be appointed by the leaders of the Scottish and Welsh Labour parties.

In other words, appointed by Labour sceptics. Will that switch the

balance more against Mr Corbyn? On its own merits it's a good thing

because it is an obvious gap that there hasn't been Scottish and Welsh

representation, but if you look at the front is in those two countries,

it probably wouldn't be hugely helpful to him. What would you think

of that? I agree it probably would change the balance of power. I'm

really disappointed with how this has come about and I think it's

incredibly important to have elected Scottish and Welsh representative.

So you think that if we do have Scottish and Welsh representatives,

they should be elected by the membership in Scotland and Wales?

Absolutely. It's not an interim think is not as if we're moving

towards having better representation, it's actually taking

an incredibly important issue of the table. During the Commons review,

the moderate wing of the party actually put forward proposals that

would have guaranteed members on the NEC LX did buy one member one vote

from each nation and region of the UK and we didn't manage to get that

through and in fact the left of the party opposed it at the time. Or is

it going to happen, the Scottish and Welsh wraps being appointed? I

understand there may be attempt to overturn it this week on the

conference floor. I think that's probably one of the more interesting

things that will happen this week, it will probably go to a vote on

conference floor. I'm probably reasonably confident at least on the

side of the constituency delegates that moderates did well in those.

Three members of the Shadow Cabinet get to go on to the NEC and that

could change the balance of power as well. Are you in favour of elections

for the Shadow Cabinet, and if so, by whom? In principle... Again, I

don't want to take this conversation out of context and don't think you

can. This is all about political Moon over in again. My concern is

this is to undermine Corbyn. I'm not a fan of people saying they won't

serve unless elected. I am accountable to members. How would

you like to see the Shadow Cabinet chosen, then? I would be willing to

listen to the practicalities about the accommodation of having it

entirely elected by members. All elected?

But not by the PLP? That could be compromise. There was one third, one

third, one third. I would consider that, an electoral college. The PLP

could choose the Shadow Cabinet, as has been suggested. Will Corbyn

agree to that? It depends if Jeremy is serious about what he says about

party unity and olive branches. I want to at least see functional

unity where the Labour Party gets on with its job of holding the Tories

to account and attacking the weak government. In order to do that you

need people to come back who resigned this summer. There will not

come back unless they have an independent mandate from the PLP. A

few might but to get everyone re-engaged there has got to be some

kind of concession who were unhappy with Jeremy Bosman leadership, it is

political reality. Mr Corbyn has won two leadership elections in a row.

If MPs who were disillusioned with him continue to snap, in the words

of Len McCluskey, the Unite leader, do they risk the selection and

should they? I don't like talking about the selection process is like

that, it makes it seem like people are trying to seize power. That's a

decision for local parties. The conversation we should be having,

and why this conversation has come about because of mandatory

deselection, it's because people are unhappy, there is a rift between the

PLP and party members and that must be resolved, and it can be in other

ways apart from mandatory deselection. I think those other

ways should be the priority. Aren't we in a process where the

Parliamentary Labour Party now has to change to reflect the membership

of the new Labour Party? At the moment there is a disconnect between

the kind of people who have signed up to join Labour and the sort of

people who represent Labour in the PLP. Is it not inevitable that some

of these will be changed in the months and years ahead? Or the other

way it could happen is that the composition of the membership could

change to reflect Labour voters more. At the moment we have a

membership that his weight to the left even of the people who already

vote Labour. Demographically it is dominated by graduates and well off

people from the south of England so it doesn't represent the Labour

heartlands. So are you going to start a centrist Momentum? There was

an initial amount of work on recruitment, one of the mistakes in

the leadership election was not have a lot in the phase that you could

reach out to the country and persuade loads of people to come

back. The moderate wing of the party will not win until we learn how to

recruit a mass membership in the same way Jeremy Corbyn has done.

It's going to be an interesting time at the NEC. It will be interesting!

It's just gone 11.37am, you're watching the Sunday Politics.

We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now

Coming up here in 20 minutes, I'll be talking to former

Deputy Prime minister and conference stalwart,

First, the Sunday Politics where you are.

Jeremy Corbyn's strengthened mandate among a membership

And catching our eye in particular is the Sunday Times, which has

the headline that London's Mayor, Sadiq Khan, thinks "a Corbyn purge

That is what the headline says. This is about the threat of deselection

to MPs and so on. What about that relationship

between Corbyn and Khan? A little later, we'll

be wondering aloud whether Mr Khan may one

day, or even now, have It looks like that particular

tendency could be catching, But there was an exception -

one of our guests today, Ken Livingstone,

London's first Mayor, who didn't have his eye on the top

job, to our knowledge. Neither, as far as we know,

does Theresa Villiers, but we'll find that out later,

now that she is no Ken Livingstone, let's start on

Labour, of course. Heidi Alexander has just told Andrew that Jeremy

Corbyn, his leadership etc, he really needs to get his act

together. Do you agree? No. The simple fact is we have had a year of

Labour MPs underlining Jeremy and making personal attacks. You look

back at the days when we had Tony Blair -- undermining Jeremy. We

criticised policies, we didn't say this man is not fit to govern. That

has been damaging to the Labour Party. They've got to accept it,

they will not get rid of Jeremy. We should focus on persuading people

that Jeremy's economic strategy could actually work. Massive

investment, modernising our infrastructure, cracking down on

Google and Starbucks so they pay their fair share of tax so we can

put more money into education and health without taxing ordinary

people. What happens now? Does he offer that olive branch to those

MPs, former Shadow Cabinet members who have left? He did a year ago.

Should he do it now? He will, he will be on the phone to them. Some

have already said they will not come back and join but I think we just

have to move on from that. 35 years ago when the SDP split happened the

people leading that were giant figures, everyone in Britain knew

who they were. These people criticising Jeremy, most people

haven't got a clue who they are. What do you feel about inviting

people back? Would you like Heidi Alexander, who is still critical,

invited back? I think Jeremy will. Do you think he should? I think he

will and he should. If they stay in that it on the backbenches that is

up to them, we will get on with campaigning and reaching out to the

public not worrying too much about a few embittered old Blairites. How do

you feel about this? He seems to be offering warm words this morning,

Jeremy Corbyn, to Andrew Marr, reassuring those MPs who were

worried about the threat of deselection? How do you feel about

these MPs who campaigned against him automatically being reselected? I've

always been in favour of reselection. When I was Labour MP

for Brent East the right-wingers would put up a candidate against me

and I didn't object to that. If you look at America, everyone from the

President down to small-time mayor are up for reselection in every

election, it's about democracy. Jeremy has made it quite clear he

will not bring back automatic reselection because that would mean

further schisms in the party. So you wouldn't want to see it? I

personally would but if you look back, we introduced it in about 1980

and carried on until Blair got in at only about five MPs wherever

deselected. Do you have any optimism that the kind of civil war, or

whatever it is, is going to ease? I think it will because there will be

a large block of MPs in Labour who oppose Jeremy, who now recognise

they have got Jeremy up to the next General Election and they will get

behind him because they would rather see a Labour government and another

five years of the Tories. The vast bulk will come on board but there

will be some sitting around whining on the backbenches. What is your

advice? How is Jeremy Corbyn going to win those kind of seats that

ensures he forms a government? You cannot look me in the eye and say he

is in that position now? Do you agree? We have the economic strategy

that could work. Every time Labour lost a General Election is because

people didn't think our economic policy was credible. Jeremy's is.

It's the policy that many on the left have been arguing for four

years. Massive investment. We are so run down as a country. Look at the

state of our roads, our broadband is positively antique compare to what

you've got in places like China and Hong Kong. Theresa, we cannot let

you be a spectator any longer. The ideal time in chipping Barnett and

across London and everywhere else to go for a snap election. Well, I

don't think we should rush into a snap election, but I do think the

Labour Party is in a disastrous state. They are massively divided.

They are chaotic and incompetent. And just to hear Jeremy Corbyn on

the BBC this morning talking about, oh well, the previous Labour

government didn't spend too much, he just doesn't get the fact that you

have to live within your means to run a healthy economy. You have to

have helped the public finances to allow businesses to grow to deliver

the economic stability we need for jobs. And if we can't do that then

the NHS will suffer, our transport will suffer. The people who suffer

most when people like Jeremy Corbyn get in charge of the public finances

and messed them up, the people who suffer most are the most

disadvantaged in our society. That you haven't added yet, we should

never be complacent. We are absolutely not complacent because we

know there are important things we need to change in this country, we

need to make our transport system better. We need to ensure that it's

a country that works for everyone, that everyone shares in the benefits

of economic growth. But the reality is that it would be reckless and

disastrous for this country if Labour became the next government.

It would be chaos. Dying to come back on that, Ken, but you can pick

up on it in the next section, if you like!

Londoners have got very used to stories of tensions between City

Remember the warmth between Mr Livingstone and Mr Brown?

A few months into his mayoralty - and with his very big

personal mandate - is Sadiq Khan an asset

The story of Labour's Civil War has twists and turns worthy

In a dramatic series finale, house Corbyn saw of its rivals

In a dramatic series finale, house Corbyn saw off its rivals

So what now for the man across the water in City Hall, Sadiq Khan?

Arguably the most powerful Labour politician in the country.

Once upon a time cover two were happy to pose

Last year, Sadiq Khan even nominated Jeremy Corbyn for the leadership.

But since then, there have been disagreements over everything

from singing the national anthem to whether to campaign with

Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said it discredited

And come this summer, Sadiq Khan support a change

Owen Smith is the right leader for our party and why I think he's

the best chance we've got to win the next election.

It is smart of Sadiq to be this counterpoint to Corbyn,

to say that "Corbyn can do his thing and get people into his rallies,

but what I'm interested in is government, power,

changing laws and making life better for people."

All things that critics of the Labour leader

That he is too focused on ideological purity,

But since that wasn't the view of party members,

His first move was to congratulate Corbyn on his victory.

Here is Hammersmith MP Andy Slaughter, a friend

I think he will bring the Labour Party down-to-earth

and say it's hard work winning elections and it is even harder

And he's done the first spectacularly and he's done a good

job so far in his first 100 days setting out his programme,

and he's got some solid achievements there, particularly

And he's saying, this is what I'm doing, you should all

But Corbyn supporters say that what Labour should actually be doing

The Labour Party has twice said that they would like

I think for some sections of the party, I think it's really

time to internalise that reality and figure out how to work

within it, but what we're seeing instead is this tendency to sort

of cast around and look for other potential leaders, who would perhaps

be better to lead the party, rather than to focus on the actual

elected leader and how they might unite around him.

A clue about how things are going to go could well come

from the Labour conference this week and how the man uses his speech.

from the Labour conference this week and how the Mayor uses his speech.

Speculation is already one running high.

I don't think Sadiq is going to cause too much mischief.

I would be surprised if he mentions Corbyn more than a few times,

But I think above all what he will do is use that as a message,

sorry, as a platform, to present himself as a rival future leader.

I think Sadiq is basically going to use the next nine years,

between now and 2025, to present himself as an alternative

leader for Labour who could actually become Prime Minister and take back

control of that place over there, the House of Commons.

Before getting too carried away with the idea of two warring clans,

it's worth remembering that Sadiq Khan has never said he wants

The idea of a clash between two rival powers could turn out to be

more of a fantasy story than a reality.

We could of course be jumping the gun a little. But what harm in that?

What do you say about the election result going back to May? Was down

to Sadiq Khan's unique gifts, or down to Jeremy Corbyn and Jeremy

Corbyn's Labour that he won? Both coming together. Which was more

important? I think it was the fact that amongst Londoners it was a

rejection of an unpleasant Tory campaign smearing Sadiq Khan as a

terrorist sympathiser. People were not going to do that, Londoners are

not stupid, they knew that Muslims and terrorists are not synonymous

and it was an unpleasant campaign. Jeremy threw everything behind

getting him elected. If you look at the result, he was only 1% less than

when I won in 2000, the best result we had anywhere in the country.

He didn't campaign with Jeremy Corbyn much during the campaign. We

see things like Corbyn purge could destroy the country and, you have to

win elections before you achieve anything. I think Sadiq Khan should

not be undermining Jeremy Hunt that way. He's nowhere near as bad as

some of the MPs in terms of what he's saying. If you look at the

problems I had with Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, I was expelled from

the Labour Party and Lord Browne didn't speak to me until he became

Prime Minister. I think if we saw a Labour government, Sadiq Khan and

Jeremy would get on fine with a major programme of investment,

building new council houses on things like that, and Jeremy knows

that. But do you think it is undermining Jeremy? It is a bit, but

Jeremy Paris been re-elected, everyone including Sadiq have to put

that behind them and we have to focus on explaining to people how we

can do better, grow the economy. Germany export five times what we do

to China. They have never allowed their banks to dictate the economy.

They have modernised... We have allowed hours to die out. Frankly I

wouldn't have got involved when I was Mayor of London in internal

party conflicts like that because you've got to work with whoever wins

and you don't want to do anything to damage your relationship with them.

He called for your suspension over those remarks at the time, which we

don't have to rehearse. He was probably misled. If you look at the

home affairs select it says in the statement... If I had said that, I

would have apologise, but I didn't say that. The fact that he chose

that opportunity to say you should be suspended straightaway and you

were someone who had backed him to be mayor? What was interesting, the

people backing Jeremy Campbell 90% of them were voting for Sadiq and

vice versa. They were both seen as good candidates with an alternative

to the Blair years and I think Sadiq should put that behind them now and

work with Jeremy. If we can elect a Labour government, Sadiq will get

billions of pounds for investment in London. The discussion we have is

all about the labour mayoral figure, but how disappointed are you with

that result? I was obviously hugely disappointed that Zac Goldsmith did

not win the election, I think he would have been a great mayor, but

the government will try to work constructively with Sadiq on matters

important to all Londoners. Ken Livingstone mentions the negative

nature of the campaign, widely perceived? The questions were asked

and Sadiq has answered them in terms of being elected and we need to move

on from that and work constructively together. It was a bit more than

that. The vast majority of the campaign was about issues of concern

to Londoners, how much they pay in council tax, the transport system,

policing. There was discussion at the end about people with whom Sadiq

had shared a platform but that was elected and he won, so we move on.

You say you want to see a constructive relationship between

the government and the mayor, but at the same time, you want to make

things difficult for him because he is a Labour mayor? We will certainly

hold him to account. This idea of a big difference between him and

Jeremy Corbyn is overplayed, frankly. What they have in common is

that they both want to carry on borrowing forever and they want to

raise taxes. I believe Labour in power in this country would be

severely damaging to jobs and economic stability. They are

different but what unites them is the not balancing the books. The

simple fact is that John McDonnell, every budget he produced was

balanced and there was not a penny of borrowing for revenue. Every

government, they have all borrowed. The simple fact is, with the

exception of two years under Nigella Lawson, Tory governments have

borrowed 2% to 3% of GDP to balance their budget. Before we start

heading into that macroeconomic, let's move on a bit.

We've entered a fresh phase in Ukip's life

with Nigel Farage stepping down and a new leader,

another MEP, Diane James, taking hold of the reins.

She describes those in favour of staying

60% of Londoners voted to remain, everyone acknowledges that figure.

My use of the term Remainiacs was to refer to the absolutely small

core that just want to completely ignore the outcome of

Should the 1 million Londoners, people working here but who come

from other EU member states, have anything to fear from Ukip

Right the way through the referendum campaign, Ukip made the point,

we were not looking at mass expulsion, from either

the United Kingdom back to Europe or expecting our member state

counterparts in Europe to reciprocate and expel people.

That is not what grown-up countries do.

So there is no risk, no threat at all from Ukip.

If anything, there is a risk and a threat coming from this

current government, that is yet to come off the fence

and actually straightforwardly set out that individuals

from European Union states who are here lawfully

and legally are here to stay and can enjoy being a member

and contribute to the fabric of United Kingdom's society.

A new face, a new town. New danger? I think Ukip are sort of struggling

to find a role for themselves. They are more divided than the Labour

Party but more importantly a lot of their supporters are rejoining the

Conservatives, because we gave the country the choice of whether to be

in the EU and now we've voted to leave, that significantly undermines

the point of Ukip. Do they still represent a danger to Labour in

particular in northern areas? Wanting to get back the east of

London, Kent and so on? There are a lot of traditional working class

areas where people felt a Labour government... In Scotland they voted

SNP, in the north they voted for Ukip. We have to show these people

that we can get homes for them to rent or buy and we can give good

education for their children. Theresa May asked a dozen times may

be to come out and stand up and be more part of supporting David

Cameron. A secret Brexiteer, do you think? Was she on your side,

privately, maybe? There were times when I did wonder! Her speech in the

referendum campaign expressed real concerns about the possibility of

Turkey joining the EU and it also said that the sky is not going to

fall in if we leave. There were certain pointers in it which I think

were a lot more pragmatic and down-to-earth than what some of the

other Remainers were saying. I think she was genuinely listening to both

sides. Do you think she had an idea that she would be challenging for

the leadership and all that? I think despite all the acres of newsprint

to the contrary, this was a defining issue for us in all parts of the

political spectrum. We had to decide, did we want to be an

independent self-governing country again? What about her and her

position? She was not out there fighting tooth and nail with George

Osborne and David Cameron and so on. She took a side and made a decision.

She's always been strongly in favour of the security co-operation that

comes with being in the EU, I think. Budgie also recognised that there

were credible arguments on both sides and I think that was

represented in how she approached the referendum campaign.

Now the rest of the week's political news in 60 seconds.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan has asked the MP for Barking,

Margaret Hodge, to chair a review of the Garden Bridge project.

Ms Hodge will examine whether value for money has been achieved

from the taxpayer's ?60 million contribution to the bridge.

The mayor has said no more taxpayer money should be spent on the bridge.

A compulsory purchase order to make residents of a London

council estate sell their flats, ahead of a regeneration

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Sajid Javid,

told Southwark Council it had not done enough to protect Aylesbury

estate residents, arguing that the residents would not be able

to stay on the estate or live nearby.

Sadiq Khan has called for London to get New York-style powers over

taxes and public services, following his five-day

tour of North America, urging the Government to devolve

more responsibility to City Hall over areas including transport,

Going ahead with the Garden Bridge, it is not to latest grab this? I

have to say, I'm not an enthusiast for the garden bridge. If it's going

to happen, I don't think there should be more public money poured

into it. It was always an idea as something promoted as something that

would be built and funded by the private sector. It has to be that,

doesn't it? I know there is a certain amount of money committed to

it already and I'm reluctant to see that, to be honest, but I don't want

to see any more spent on it. Labour were saying we want to build this

garden bridge, all the money would be raised by the private sector,

they didn't ask me for a penny. Now they're talking about ?60 million

going into it. If you've got that sort of money, that are much more

important areas to build a bridge, like parts of East London where

there aren't any bridges. I would say, if you want to build it, that's

fine, but don't come to me or TEFL or that money because it can be

better spent elsewhere. It looks like she's a bit cold on northern

devolution and all that stuff? I think if we devolve in London, we

should devolve to the borough 's. They are closest to local

communities. Sometimes devolution in London seems to involve a withdrawal

of powers from the borough is to the mayor. Absolutely dissolve

everything. We are the most centralised of all the Western

democracies. I was explaining to a Russian politician about the system

and he said it is worse than under Stalin!

Welcome back - and we're joined now by John Prescott, who's been coming

to Labour Conferences for more than 50 years.

And our political panel, Tom Newton-Dunn, Rachel Shabi

John Prescott, welcome back to the Sunday Politics and a Labour

conference. In a much changed Liverpool! I can't believe it. That

looks amazing. Has the Labour Party ever been at a low ahead in the past

50 is? It's an interesting question. I hear everyone going back 50 years

but we've always had fierce battles in the Labour Party, whether it was

nuclear or the left or the right, we used to fight over the Treasurer's

vote! There have always been those strong battles. It has become more

personal now, it is more abuse than argument and we've got to move away

from that. Do you share the fears of your old colleague Neil Kinnock,

that there might not be another Labour government in his lifetime?

Who was that? Neil Kinnock, former leader of the Labour Party? When I

heard him saying there will never be another Labour government in his

lifetime... Basically, Neil, you did lose to elections and Michael foot

lost that election. We lost with Ed Miliband... There is no doubt he's

got great experience of that but he is wrong! I thought we would get to

the answer! Is the Labour Party at a very low ebb? It is, but I think

you're absolutely right, it is a great myth that in the past there

weren't huge, passionate internal debates. Under Wilson's leadership,

there were problems all over the place but he won for elections out

of five, he always used to say. It has become much more personal now

with the social media thing going on in that kind of raises it to a

different temperature. If it was accepted they could argue

over policy, as was in the past and as will be the case with the

Conservatives over Brexit, then there might be a way of working

around this. As things stand at the moment it is a completely

nightmarish, circuitous debate where the MPs slack him off and his

supporters slack them off and it gets nowhere. The danger for Labour

is earlier in the programme we talked about elections to the NEC

and who will hold the balance of power there and the battles coming

of the argument over how to choose the Shadow Cabinet, Labour can't

afford another year of talking about itself. No, that is right, and the

public isn't remotely interested in these very tedious internal

machinations. Look, Jeremy Corbyn has proved himself twice. There can

be no clearer message that the party really needs to put this behind them

and focus on unifying. I think the other great myth, we're talking

about the myths of history and time and the centre-right. The myth is

that they have all the answers. They clearly don't. They haven't been

able to persuade their own selectors of their own eligibility and they

haven't been able to persuade the general public that a right words

shifting Labour Party is preferable and desirable. So maybe it's time

for them to think, you know what, Jeremy Corbyn has won two leadership

elections, he has caused the party to be swelled, its ranks swelled and

it's the largest party in Europe and people are galvanised, motivated and

energised in a way they haven't been for so long. People have been

apathetic about politics for so long. May be that wing of the party

has something to learn from Corbyn rather than the other way around. I

couldn't get Heidi Alexander to answer this. Is there any doubt that

Jeremy Corbyn leads Labour into the 2020 election? I think there is a

small doubt. He could still be toppled. Who would topple him? The

unions. This massive force in Labour politics, centre-left politics,

which no one has come close to talking about in the last few days,

we have a huge election coming up the after next for the Unite union.

Len McCluskey is running again. If he stands down, they have already

lost the GMB and Unison are not fond of him, if he does go it is curtains

for him. It is about fundamental change taking place. Everyone of us

has got to think differently, including me. They have all got to

say for the party have said this with their new members, we have a

different way of doing things and we want some of the old policies

rehearsed and put forward again. The changes, whether in the PLP, the

trade unions or elsewhere, things have changed, it's a big change

coming to the Labour Party and thank God. I remember arguing with Tony

Blair whether we should call it new Labour or old Labour and he wanted

to call it new Labour and I said why don't we call it Labour. There is a

change in policy, they want fundamental change, they are

entitled to have it, he has won two elections, why do we think of the

revolutionary thought, he is our leader until the next election, get

on for the ride and fight the Tories instead of fighting ourselves. There

is one really good answer to that, that is all well and good but you

are 26% in the polls, an all-time historic low that is where Corbyn is

taking them. All too often we talk about the polls. Terrible

inconvenience! Let us go along this road, see how we can do it, the PLP,

let's just for the argument is about the election of the Shadow Cabinet.

The PLP voted against Shadow Cabinet is only two or three years ago and

now it wants them back. Quite right, I support them, I've been party to

them. For god sake, can get on with fighting the Tories, back the

leadership for the moment? I have to say to Jeremy, talking about splits

in part is, we have already wondering, Momentum crazy things,

argue the case for change. Electoral College instead of one man, one

vote. I've always fought for one man one vote. That would be going

backwards, would it not? It would strengthen the PLP. We have to look

at all of these fears and do a proper conference as I advocate, but

think about it first. We have ?3 members at Miliband came through and

whacked that through special conference. We need to think about

how we've done things in the past, trade unions, members of Parliament,

PLP members, they want change, they are entitled democratically to see

if we will listen to them at implement it democratically. Jeremy

must show leadership. What does showing leadership mean? There are

two things. The election of a Shadow Cabinet if you want to do that.

Elected by whom? That could be the PLP to begin with. We can't wait

until the conference comes along, 11th of October. These things are

constitutional. In the coming elections he is the leader, he could

put in people he feels he has to have their in the Shadow Cabinet,

because it's all about power distribution, and give the PLP the

right to put some people in and then look at the issues of whether other

members should be involved. That's the long-term. At the moment a team

ready for fighting Theresa May, she will be worse than Thatcher. We are

here in the great traditional Labour city, the heartland of traditional

Labour support. Does anybody in Liverpool care how the Shadow

Cabinet is selected? I doubt meet people just outside this building

are talking about that. They will be because they are journalists! I

don't even think they will be! In a way we are contradicting ourselves

because we are saying we should not spend time talking about it and we

are all talking about it. The so-called rebels misjudged this

completely in terms of timing, when they all resigned on the Sunday

after the referendum, they didn't ask, do we have a candidate? What

happens if Jeremy Corbyn doesn't go as a result of this and have they

got themes that can unite the rest of the membership, or a new

membership could to? We keep talking about the voters. Let's not talk

about the Shadow Cabinet because that is an insider conversation.

About the voters, we don't know whether Jeremy Corbyn is electable

or not. We don't know how he would fare with a united team behind him

with over 500,000 members canvassing, campaigning, talking

about his policies. We don't know if for this time, in a time when we are

dealing with massive inequalities, when we're dealing with rampant...

Just, food banks, child poverty and things that should not happen in one

of the wealthiest countries in the world. We don't know whether what

the Labour Party proposes under Jeremy Corbyn will resonate. We will

have a chance to find out. One of the things that is interesting is

that clearly the membership of the party has changed dramatically, even

in the past 12 months. Will the Parliamentary party change as a

result of that? There has been talk of the and reselection. This is what

Mr Corbyn had to say this morning. The relationship

between an MP and their It's not necessarily

all the policy tick It's also the relationships,

the community, the effectiveness of representation

and all those issues. Let's have a democratic discussion

and I think the vast majority of MPs will have

no problem whatsoever. Is it's not inevitable, given that

you've talked about it yourself, this huge change taking place in the

Labour Party membership, that the Parliamentary party will have to

change to reflect that? To some extent the PLP is the creation of

the previous membership, not the new membership. That is right. Some

people were opposing him within weeks when he was elected and

pulling out of the cabinet and I don't think they will change. They

might want to stay on the backbenches, they don't want to

divide the party so they will fight for the party from the backbenches.

The greater majority of those in the PLP they didn't want to go on this

road of no confidence, that was one when they were kidded into believing

that if they had a begin of no confidence he would pick of the

revolver and shoot himself. It never was going to happen. So let's say,

keep your view, if you don't want to get involved, fine, but now you are

required to take account, looking at the policy issues between us rather

than fighting ourselves. He has got to show leadership. He is the man in

charge of it. That's why the election of the Capanagh has become

more important inside the PLP. It's a struggle, isn't it? The PLP

produced a whole package of things with electoral reform. Let's get on

with that, put it on the side, get a team ready for October the 11th to

fight the Tories are using our energy and fighting the Tories and I

think the majority of MPs are on board for that. Will Rachel get to

see her united Labour Party behind Mr Corbyn going into another

election? No. This is it. We have to look at the facts on the table, the

Labour Party, the PLP and the people in the country, those people who

voted for Owen Smith, they are so far apart ideologically, the hard

left and there is the Blairite right and those two will never unite and

it's all very well John saying so and I admire your optimism but you

and I know it will not happen. It has got to for our people. The party

and our country wants it. If your press get onside instead of being so

vicious about Corbyn, not just your paper, but most of them have had a

kind of hostility that has not been seen before. It has taken ten

minutes but eventually we got there. Perhaps we will wait and see. The

ideological gap is as big as the 80s, partly because on both sides

there is a complete lack of clarity about what they believe in and where

they want to go. The early 80s, Roy Jenkins knew exactly what there were

four and so did Tony Benn. There is that clarity of vision now. It is

all blurred and muddled so there is a problem and an opportunity there.

Second, I think the crunch point in this Parliament for Jeremy Corbyn,

not now obviously, but if and when the Tories have a crisis over Brexit

and if at that point Labour are 25, 20 6% in the polls he will have a

crisis. Let me interrupt you because the really big political event

yesterday wasn't what was happening here in Liverpool, it happened on

BBC One on your TV screens. It was Ed Balls in Strictly. Let's see how

that went. Dancing the waltz,

Ed Balls and Katya Jones. There we go, glitter balls on

strictly. I bet you wish you had been there. I turned it down some

time ago. So did I! What was the woman who did it? Edwina. BBC

journalists, the public like people like that and supported in many ways

but they fall out because they can't dance. That is a drawback. They love

them for not dancing, they love the fact they are trying. But they

didn't win. I love dancing myself, but frankly you've got to have some

movement. There has got to be a flow in the body and the feel of the

music. I think you've got it there! You want to do it, I can tell!

Doesn't he? He wants to do it. That is not dancing, it's about the

movement of the body, the music and the spirit. You should be a judge on

the programme. I give it eight! Today talking about Jeremy Corbyn,

they love this, it humanises it. You can see a petition to get him on. I

can see it happening. We may have to speak to compliance about it!

Anyway, it has become a part of the Constitution that you and I have to

meet at a Labour conference, so it's good to see you. Two comedians

together. One day we might get a proper job!

I'll be back next week at the Conservative Party

Conference in Birmingham with more Sunday Politics.

And I'll be back tomorrow with the Daily Politics at 11am

over on BBC Two with more from the Labour Conference

We will bring you what is happening in the Labour conference and the

Shadow Chancellor's speech too. Remember, if it's Sunday,

it's the Sunday Politics.