12/03/2017

:00:34. > :00:39.It's Sunday morning and this is the Sunday Politics.

:00:40. > :00:44.David Davis tells MPs to leave the Brexit bill untouched,

:00:45. > :00:46.ahead of a week which could see Britain begin the process

:00:47. > :00:51.We'll talk to a Tory rebel and Ukip's Nigel Farage.

:00:52. > :00:54.Phillip Hammond's first budget hit the rocks thanks to a tax rise

:00:55. > :01:02.But how should we tax those who work for themselves?

:01:03. > :01:04.And remember Donald Trump's claim that Barack Obama had ordered

:01:05. > :01:15.We'll talk to the former Tory MP who set the whole story rolling.

:01:16. > :01:17.In London this week, a rise in anti-Semitic

:01:18. > :01:20.Universities urged to take a tougher approach.

:01:21. > :01:32.And joining me for all of that, three self-employed journalists

:01:33. > :01:36.who definitely don't deserve a tax break.

:01:37. > :01:37.It's Steve Richards, Julia Hartley-Brewer

:01:38. > :01:41.They'll be tweeting throughout the programme with all the carefree

:01:42. > :01:49.abandon of Katie Hopkins before a libel trial.

:01:50. > :01:52.BBC lawyers have suddenly got nervous!

:01:53. > :01:55.So first today, the government is gearing up to trigger Article 50,

:01:56. > :01:57.perhaps in the next 48 hours, and start negotiating Britain's

:01:58. > :02:00.Much has been written about the prospect of the Commons

:02:01. > :02:03.getting a "meaningful vote" on the deal Britain negotiates.

:02:04. > :02:05.Brexit Secretary David Davis was on the Andrew Marr programme

:02:06. > :02:07.earlier this morning and he was asked what happens

:02:08. > :02:18.Well, that is what is called the most favoured nation status deal

:02:19. > :02:23.There we go out, as it were, on WTO rules.

:02:24. > :02:26.That is why of course we do the contingency planning, to make

:02:27. > :02:33.The British people decided on June the 23rd last year

:02:34. > :02:38.My job, and the job of the government, is to make

:02:39. > :02:48.the terms on which that happens as beneficial as possible.

:02:49. > :02:56.There we have it, clearly, either Parliament votes for the deal when

:02:57. > :02:59.it is done or it out on World Trade Organisation rules. That's what the

:03:00. > :03:01.government means by a meaningful vote.

:03:02. > :03:08.I think we get over obsessed about whether there will be a legal right

:03:09. > :03:12.for Parliament to have a vote. If there is no deal or a bad deal, I

:03:13. > :03:15.think it would be politically impossible for the government to

:03:16. > :03:18.reject Parliament's desire for a vote because the atmosphere of

:03:19. > :03:21.politics will be completely different by then. I take David

:03:22. > :03:26.Davies seriously. Within Whitehall he has acquired a reputation as

:03:27. > :03:30.being the most conscientious and details sadly... And well briefed.

:03:31. > :03:33.Absolutely and well travelled in terms of European capitals of the

:03:34. > :03:37.three Brexit ministers. It is quite telling he said what he did and it

:03:38. > :03:41.is quite telling that within cabinet, two weeks ago he was

:03:42. > :03:45.floating the idea of no deal at all. Being if not the central estimate

:03:46. > :03:49.than a completely plausible eventuality. It is interesting. I

:03:50. > :03:54.would suggest the prospect of no deal is moving up the agenda. It is

:03:55. > :04:00.still less likely than more likely to happen. But it's no longer a kind

:04:01. > :04:03.of long tail way out there in the distance. Planning for no deal is

:04:04. > :04:05.the same as having contents insurance or travel insurance, plan

:04:06. > :04:10.for the worse case scenarios are prepared it happens. Even the worst

:04:11. > :04:14.case scenario, it's not that bad. Think of the Jeep 20, apart from the

:04:15. > :04:19.EU, four members of the G20 economies are successful members of

:04:20. > :04:22.the EU. The rest aren't and don't have trade deals but somehow these

:04:23. > :04:27.countries are prospering. They are growing at a higher rate. You are

:04:28. > :04:31.not frightened? Not remotely. We are obsessed with what we get from the

:04:32. > :04:34.EU and the key thing we get from leaving the EU is not the deal but

:04:35. > :04:38.the other deals we can finally make with other trading partners. They

:04:39. > :04:41.have higher growth than virtually every other EU country apart from

:04:42. > :04:45.Germany. It is sensible as a negotiating position for the

:04:46. > :04:49.government to say if there is no deal, we will accept there is no

:04:50. > :04:54.deal. We're not frightened of no deal. It was clear from what David

:04:55. > :04:57.Davies was saying that there will be a vote in parliament at the end of

:04:58. > :05:02.the process but there won't be a third option to send the government

:05:03. > :05:06.back to try to get a better deal. It is either the deal or we leave

:05:07. > :05:10.without a deal. In reality, that third option will be there. We don't

:05:11. > :05:15.know yet whether there will be a majority for the deal if they get

:05:16. > :05:21.one. What we do know now is that there isn't a majority in the

:05:22. > :05:25.Commons for no deal. Labour MPs are absolutely clear that no deal is

:05:26. > :05:29.worth then a bad deal. I've heard enough Tory MPs say the same thing.

:05:30. > :05:38.But they wouldn't get no deal through. When it comes to this vote,

:05:39. > :05:41.if whatever deal is rejected, there will then be, one way or another,

:05:42. > :05:45.the third option raised of go back again. But who gets to decide what

:05:46. > :05:49.is a bad deal? The British people will have a different idea than the

:05:50. > :05:56.two thirds of the Remain supporting MPs in the Commons. In terms of the

:05:57. > :06:00.vote, the Commons. Surely, if the Commons, which is what matters here,

:06:01. > :06:06.if the Commons were to vote against the deal as negotiated by the

:06:07. > :06:10.government, surely that would trigger a general election? If the

:06:11. > :06:13.government had recommended the deal, surely the government would then, if

:06:14. > :06:19.it still felt strongly about the deal, if the other 27 had said,

:06:20. > :06:23.we're not negotiating, extending it, it would in effect become a second

:06:24. > :06:26.referendum on the deal. In effect it would be a no-confidence vote in the

:06:27. > :06:30.government. You've got to assume that unless something massively

:06:31. > :06:33.changes in the opposition before then, the government would feel

:06:34. > :06:38.fairly confident about a general election on those terms. Unless the

:06:39. > :06:42.deal is hideously bad and obviously basso every vote in the country...

:06:43. > :06:46.The prior minister said if it is that bad she would have rather no

:06:47. > :06:51.deal. So that eventuality arrives. -- the Prime Minister has said. Not

:06:52. > :06:56.a second referendum general election in two years' time. Don't put any

:06:57. > :06:59.holidays for! LAUGHTER -- don't look any.

:07:00. > :07:01.So the Brexit bill looks likely to clear Parliament this week.

:07:02. > :07:05.That depends on the number of Conservative MPs who are prepared

:07:06. > :07:07.to vote against their government on two key issues.

:07:08. > :07:11.Theresa May could be in negotiations with our European

:07:12. > :07:13.partners within days, but there may be some

:07:14. > :07:15.wheeler-dealings she has to do with her own MPs, too.

:07:16. > :07:20.Cast your mind back to the beginning of month.

:07:21. > :07:22.The bill to trigger Article 50 passed comfortably

:07:23. > :07:30.But three Conservatives voted for Labour's amendments to ensure

:07:31. > :07:34.the rights of EU citizens already in the UK.

:07:35. > :07:37.Seven Tory MPs voted to force the government to give Parliament

:07:38. > :07:42.a say on the deal struck with the EU before it's finalised.

:07:43. > :07:46.But remember those numbers, they're important.

:07:47. > :07:50.On the issue of a meaningful vote on a deal, I'm told there might have

:07:51. > :07:53.been more rebels had it not been for this assurance from

:07:54. > :07:58.I can confirm that the government will bring forward a motion

:07:59. > :08:00.on the final agreement to be approved by both Houses

:08:01. > :08:05.And we expect, and intend, that this will happen before

:08:06. > :08:12.the European Parliament debates and votes on the final agreement.

:08:13. > :08:17.When the government was criticised for reeling back

:08:18. > :08:21.from when and what it would offer a vote on.

:08:22. > :08:23.The bill then moved into the Lords, where peers passed it

:08:24. > :08:31.And the second, that Parliament be given a meaningful vote on the terms

:08:32. > :08:34.of the deal or indeed a vote in the event of there

:08:35. > :08:38.The so-called Brexit bill will return to Commons

:08:39. > :08:42.Ministers insist that both amendments would weaken

:08:43. > :08:45.the government's negotiating hand and are seeking to overturn them.

:08:46. > :08:51.But, as ever, politics is a numbers game.

:08:52. > :08:53.Theresa May has a working majority of 17.

:08:54. > :08:57.On Brexit, though, it's probably higher.

:08:58. > :08:59.At least six Labour MPs generally vote with

:09:00. > :09:03.Plus, eight DUP MPs, two from the Ulster Unionist party

:09:04. > :09:09.If all Conservatives vote with the government as well,

:09:10. > :09:15.Therefore, 26 Conservative rebels are needed for the government to be

:09:16. > :09:22.So, are there rough waters ahead for Theresa May?

:09:23. > :09:25.What numbers are we looking at, in terms of a potential rebellion?

:09:26. > :09:28.I think we're looking at a large number of people who are interested

:09:29. > :09:31.This building is a really important building.

:09:32. > :09:32.It's symbolic of a huge amount of history.

:09:33. > :09:36.And for it not to be involved in this momentous time would,

:09:37. > :09:43.But he says a clear verbal statement from the government on a meaningful

:09:44. > :09:49.vote on any deal would be enough to get most Tory MPs onside.

:09:50. > :09:51.It was already said about David Jones.

:09:52. > :09:53.It's slightly unravelled a little bit during

:09:54. > :09:58.I think this is an opportunity to really get that clarity

:09:59. > :10:01.through so that we can all vote for Article 50 and get

:10:02. > :10:05.We've have spoken to several Tory MPs who say they are minded to vote

:10:06. > :10:09.One said the situation was sad and depressing.

:10:10. > :10:12.The other said that the whips must be worried because they don't

:10:13. > :10:19.A minister told me Downing Street was looking again at the possibility

:10:20. > :10:23.of offering a vote in the event of no deal being reached.

:10:24. > :10:25.But that its position was unlikely to change.

:10:26. > :10:28.And, anyway, government sources have told the Sunday Politics they're not

:10:29. > :10:35.That those Tory MPs who didn't back either amendment the first time

:10:36. > :10:38.round would look silly if they did, this time.

:10:39. > :10:42.It would have to be a pretty hefty lot of people changing their minds

:10:43. > :10:45.about things that have already been discussed in quite a lot of detail,

:10:46. > :10:49.last time it was in the Commons, for things to be reversed this time.

:10:50. > :10:52.There's no doubt that a number of Tory MPs are very concerned.

:10:53. > :10:54.Labour are pessimistic about the chances of enough Tory

:10:55. > :10:58.rebels backing either of the amendments in the Commons.

:10:59. > :11:00.The important thing, I think, is to focus on the fact

:11:01. > :11:03.that this is the last chance to have a say on this.

:11:04. > :11:07.If they're going to vote with us, Monday is the time to do it.

:11:08. > :11:09.Assuming the bill does pass the Commons unamended,

:11:10. > :11:12.it will go back to the Lord's on Monday night where Labour peers

:11:13. > :11:16.have already indicated they won't block it again.

:11:17. > :11:19.It means that the Brexit bill would become law and Theresa May

:11:20. > :11:23.would be free to trigger Article 50 within days.

:11:24. > :11:25.Her own deadline was the end of this month.

:11:26. > :11:31.But one minister told me there were advantages to doing it early.

:11:32. > :11:34.We're joined now from Nottingham by the Conservative MP Anna Soubry.

:11:35. > :11:36.She's previously voted against the government on the question

:11:37. > :11:43.of whether Parliament should have a final say over the EU deal.

:11:44. > :11:49.Anna Soubry, I think it was clear this morning from David Davies that

:11:50. > :11:52.what he means by meaningful vote is not what you mean by a meaningful

:11:53. > :11:57.vote. He thinks the choice for Parliament would be to either vote

:11:58. > :12:01.for the deal and if Parliament doesn't, we leave on World Trade

:12:02. > :12:07.Organisation rules, on a bare-bones structure. In the end, will he

:12:08. > :12:11.accept that in the Commons tomorrow? No, because my problem and I don't

:12:12. > :12:15.think it is a problem, but my problem, the government's problem is

:12:16. > :12:19.that what I want is then to answer this question. What happens in the

:12:20. > :12:24.event of their not being any deal? David Davies made it very clear that

:12:25. > :12:28.in the event of there being no deal, Parliament would have no say. It

:12:29. > :12:32.means through your elected representatives, the people of this

:12:33. > :12:37.country would have no say on what happens if the government doesn't

:12:38. > :12:39.get a deal. I think the request that Parliament should have a say on

:12:40. > :12:44.Parliamentary sovereignty, is perfectly reasonable. That is what I

:12:45. > :12:51.want David to say. If he says that, I won't be rebelling. If he does...

:12:52. > :12:55.They have refused to say that. Sorry. If he continues to say what

:12:56. > :13:01.he said the BBC this morning, which means that the vote will be either

:13:02. > :13:08.to accept the as negotiated or to leave on WTO rules, will you rebel

:13:09. > :13:12.on that question but no, no, sorry, if there's a deal, Parliament will

:13:13. > :13:15.have a say. So that's fine. And we will see what the deal is and we

:13:16. > :13:19.will look at the options two years down the road. When who knows

:13:20. > :13:23.what'll happen in our economy and world economy. That is one matter

:13:24. > :13:27.which I am content on. The Prime Minister, a woman of her word has

:13:28. > :13:33.said that in the event of a deal, Parliament will vote on any deal. I

:13:34. > :13:37.don't difficulty. To clarify, I will come onto that. These are important

:13:38. > :13:40.matters. I want to clarify, not argue with you. You are content that

:13:41. > :13:44.if there is a deal, we will come under no deal in a second, but if

:13:45. > :13:51.there is a deal, you are content with the choice of being able to

:13:52. > :13:53.vote for that deal or leaving on WTO terms? No, you're speculating as to

:13:54. > :13:59.what might happen in two years' time. What the options might be.

:14:00. > :14:02.Personally I find it inconceivable that the government will come back

:14:03. > :14:06.with a rubbish deal. They will either come back with a good deal,

:14:07. > :14:10.which I won't have a problem with or they will come back with no deal. To

:14:11. > :14:15.speculate about coming back with a deal, there is a variety of options.

:14:16. > :14:18.I understand that that is what the Lord amendments are about. They are

:14:19. > :14:26.about a vote at the end of the process. Do forgive me, the Lords

:14:27. > :14:28.amendment is not the same that I've voted for in Parliament. What we

:14:29. > :14:31.call the Chris Leslie amendment, which was talking about whatever the

:14:32. > :14:34.agreement is, whatever happens at the end of the negotiations,

:14:35. > :14:38.Parliament will have a vote. Parliament will have a say. The

:14:39. > :14:43.Lords amendment is a bit more technical. It is the principle of no

:14:44. > :14:47.deal that is agitating us. Let's clarify on this. They are

:14:48. > :14:51.complicated matters. What do you want the government to say? What do

:14:52. > :14:56.you want David Davis to say tomorrow on what should the Parliamentary

:14:57. > :15:00.process should be if there is no deal? Quite. I want a commitment

:15:01. > :15:04.from him that in the event of no deal, it will come into Parliament

:15:05. > :15:11.and Parliament will determine what happens next. It could be that in

:15:12. > :15:15.the event of no deal, the best thing is for us to jump off the cliff into

:15:16. > :15:18.WTO tariff is. I find it unlikely but that might be the reality. There

:15:19. > :15:23.might be other alternatives. Most importantly, including saying to the

:15:24. > :15:25.government, go back, carry on. The question that everybody has to ask

:15:26. > :15:36.is, why won't the government give My fear is what this is about is

:15:37. > :15:41.asked deliberately, not the Prime Minister, but others deliberately

:15:42. > :15:47.ensuring we have no deal and no deal pretty soon and in that event, we

:15:48. > :15:51.jumped off the cliff onto WTO tariffs and nobody in this country

:15:52. > :15:57.and the people of this country do not have a say. My constituents did

:15:58. > :16:01.not vote for hard Brexit. You do not want the government to

:16:02. > :16:07.have the ability if there is no deal to automatically fall back on the

:16:08. > :16:12.WTO rules? Quite. It is as simple as that. We are now speculating about

:16:13. > :16:18.what will happen in two years. I want to find out what happens

:16:19. > :16:23.tomorrow. What will you do if you don't get that assurance? I will

:16:24. > :16:27.either abstain, or I will vote to keep this amendment within the Bill.

:16:28. > :16:32.I will either vote against my government, which I do not do

:16:33. > :16:35.likely, I have never voted against my government until the Chris Leslie

:16:36. > :16:39.clause when the Bill was going through, or I will abstain, which

:16:40. > :16:43.has pretty much the same effect because it comes into the Commons

:16:44. > :16:49.with both amendments so you have positively to vote to take the map.

:16:50. > :16:55.Can you give us an idea of how many like-minded conservative colleagues

:16:56. > :17:00.there are. I genuinely do not know. You must talk to each other. I do

:17:01. > :17:07.not talk to every member of my party. You know people who are

:17:08. > :17:11.like-minded. I do. I am not doing numbers games. I know you want that

:17:12. > :17:17.but I genuinely do not know the figure. I think this is an

:17:18. > :17:23.uncomfortable truth. People have to understand what has happened in our

:17:24. > :17:27.country, two particular newspapers, creating an atmosphere and setting

:17:28. > :17:30.an agenda and I think many people are rather concerned, some

:17:31. > :17:36.frightened, to put their head over the parapet. There are many millions

:17:37. > :17:41.of people who feel totally excluded from this process. Many of them

:17:42. > :17:44.voted to remain. And they have lost their voice. We have covered the

:17:45. > :17:46.ground I wanted to. We're joined now by the Ukip MEP

:17:47. > :17:58.and former leader Nigel Farage. Article 50 triggered, we are leaving

:17:59. > :18:02.the EU, the single market and the customs union. What is left you to

:18:03. > :18:06.complain about? All of that will happen and hopefully we will get the

:18:07. > :18:10.triggered this week which is good news. What worries me a little I'm

:18:11. > :18:15.not sure the government recognises how strong their handers. At the

:18:16. > :18:18.summit in Brussels, the word in the corridors is that we are prepared to

:18:19. > :18:23.give away fishing waters as a bargaining chip and the worry is

:18:24. > :18:27.what deal we get. Are we leaving, yes I am pleased about that. You are

:18:28. > :18:32.under relevant voice in the deal because the deal will be voted on in

:18:33. > :18:37.Parliament and you have one MP. You are missing the point, the real vote

:18:38. > :18:41.in parliament is not in London but Strasbourg. This is perhaps the

:18:42. > :18:45.biggest obstacle the British Government faces. Not what happens

:18:46. > :18:50.in the Commons that the end of the two years, the European Parliament

:18:51. > :18:55.could veto the deal. What that means is people need to adopt a different

:18:56. > :18:57.approach. We do not need to be lobbying in the corridors of

:18:58. > :19:03.Brussels to get a good deal, we need is a country to be out there talking

:19:04. > :19:07.to the German car workers and Belgian chocolate makers, putting as

:19:08. > :19:11.much pressure as we can on politicians from across Europe to

:19:12. > :19:16.come to a sensible arrangement. It is in their interests more than

:19:17. > :19:23.ours. In what way is the vision of Brexit set out by David Davis any

:19:24. > :19:26.different from your own? I am delighted there are people now

:19:27. > :19:34.adopting the position I argued for many years. Good. But now... Like

:19:35. > :19:40.Douglas Carswell, he said he found David Davis' performers this morning

:19:41. > :19:45.reassuring. It is. And just as when Theresa May was Home Secretary every

:19:46. > :19:48.performance she gave was hugely reassuring. She was seen to be a

:19:49. > :19:55.heroine after her conference speeches and then did not deliver. I

:19:56. > :20:01.am concerned that even before we start we are making concessions. You

:20:02. > :20:05.described in the EU's divorce bill demands, 60 billion euros is floated

:20:06. > :20:11.around. You said it is laughable and I understand that. Do you maintain

:20:12. > :20:19.that we will not have to pay a penny to leave? It is nine months since we

:20:20. > :20:25.voted exit and assuming the trigger of Article 50, we would have paid 30

:20:26. > :20:29.billion in since we had a vote. We are still members. But honestly, I

:20:30. > :20:33.do not think there is an appetite for us to pay a massive divorce

:20:34. > :20:41.Bill. There are assets also. Not a penny? There will be some ongoing

:20:42. > :20:47.commitments, but the numbers talked about our 50, ?60 billion, they are

:20:48. > :20:52.frankly laughable. I am trying to find out if you are prepared to

:20:53. > :20:57.accept some kind of exit cost, it may be nowhere near 60 billion. We

:20:58. > :21:00.have to do a net agreement, the government briefed about our share

:21:01. > :21:06.of the European Union investment bank. Would you accept a

:21:07. > :21:11.transitional arrangement, deal, five, ten billion, as part of the

:21:12. > :21:16.divorce settlement? We are painted net ?30 million every single day at

:21:17. > :21:21.the moment, ?10 billion plus every year. That is just our contribution.

:21:22. > :21:28.We are going to make a massive saving on this. What do you make of

:21:29. > :21:33.what Anna Soubry said, that if there is no deal, and it is being talked

:21:34. > :21:37.about more. Maybe the government managing expectations. There is an

:21:38. > :21:42.expectation we will have a deal, but if there is no deal, that the

:21:43. > :21:47.government cannot just go to WTO rules, but it has to have a vote in

:21:48. > :21:50.parliament? By the time we get to that there will be a general

:21:51. > :21:56.election coming down the tracks and I suspect that if at the end of the

:21:57. > :22:00.two-year process there is no deal and by the way, no deal is a lot

:22:01. > :22:05.better for the nation than where we currently are, because we freed of

:22:06. > :22:08.regulations and able to make our own deals in the world. I think what

:22:09. > :22:15.would happen, and if Parliament said it did not back, at the end of the

:22:16. > :22:22.negotiation a general election would happen quickly. According to reports

:22:23. > :22:27.this morning, one of your most senior aides has passed a dossier to

:22:28. > :22:31.police claiming Tories committed electoral fraud in Thanet South, the

:22:32. > :22:37.seat contested in the election. What evidence to you have? I read that in

:22:38. > :22:40.the newspapers as you have. I am not going to comment on it. Will you not

:22:41. > :22:47.aware of the contents of the dossier? I am not aware of the

:22:48. > :22:53.dossier. He was your election strategists. I am dubious as to

:22:54. > :22:58.whether this dossier exists at all. Perhaps the newspapers have got this

:22:59. > :23:06.wrong. Concerns about the downloading of data the took place

:23:07. > :23:13.in that constituency, there are. Allegedly, he has refuted it, was it

:23:14. > :23:18.done by your MP to give information to the Tories, do you have evidence

:23:19. > :23:25.about? We have evidence Mr Carswell downloaded information, we have no

:23:26. > :23:29.evidence what he did with it. It is not just your aide who has been

:23:30. > :23:35.making allegations against the Conservatives in Thanet South and

:23:36. > :23:42.other seats, if the evidence was to be substantial, and if it was to

:23:43. > :23:46.result in another by-election being called an Thanet South had to be

:23:47. > :23:51.fought again, would you be the Ukip candidate? I probably would. You

:23:52. > :23:57.probably would? Yes. Just probably? Just probably. It would be your

:23:58. > :24:01.eighth attempt. Winning seats in parliament under first past the post

:24:02. > :24:04.is not the only way to change politics in Britain and I would like

:24:05. > :24:10.to think I proved that. Let's go back to Anna Soubry. The implication

:24:11. > :24:14.of what we were saying on the panel at the start of the show and what

:24:15. > :24:19.Nigel Farage was saying there would be that if at the end of the process

:24:20. > :24:23.whatever the vote, if the government were to lose it, it would provoke a

:24:24. > :24:28.general election properly. I think that would be right. Let's get real.

:24:29. > :24:32.The government is not going to come to Parliament with anything other

:24:33. > :24:40.than something it believes is a good deal and if it rejected it, would be

:24:41. > :24:44.unlikely, there would be a de facto vote of no confidence and it would

:24:45. > :24:49.be within the fixed term Parliaments act and that be it. The problem is,

:24:50. > :24:55.more likely, because of the story put up about the 50 billion, 60

:24:56. > :24:58.billion and you look at the way things are flagged up that both the

:24:59. > :25:03.Prime Minister and Boris Johnson saying, we should be asking them for

:25:04. > :25:08.money back, I think the big fear and the fear I have is we will be

:25:09. > :25:13.crashing out in six months. You think we could leave as quickly as

:25:14. > :25:19.six months. Explain that. I think they will stoke up the demand from

:25:20. > :25:23.the EU for 50, 60 billion back and my real concern is that within six

:25:24. > :25:28.months, where we're not making much progress, maybe nine months, and

:25:29. > :25:32.people are getting increasingly fed up with the EU because they are told

:25:33. > :25:36.it wants unreasonable demands, and then the crash. I think what is

:25:37. > :25:41.happening is the government is putting in place scaffolding at the

:25:42. > :25:46.bottom of the cliff to break our fall when we come to fall off that

:25:47. > :25:51.cliff and I think many in government are preparing not for a two-year

:25:52. > :25:57.process, but six, to nine months, off the cliff, out we go. That is my

:25:58. > :26:01.fear. That is interesting. I have not heard that express before by

:26:02. > :26:08.someone in your position. I suspect you have made Nigel Farage's date.

:26:09. > :26:14.It is a lovely thought. I would say to Anna Soubry she is out of date

:26:15. > :26:17.with this. 40 years ago there was a good argument for joining the common

:26:18. > :26:22.market because tariffs around the world was so high. That has changed

:26:23. > :26:26.with the World Trade Organisation. We are leaving the EU and rejoining

:26:27. > :26:35.a great big world and it is exciting. She was giving an

:26:36. > :26:36.interesting perspective on what could happen in nine months rather

:26:37. > :26:41.than two years. I thank you both. It was Philip Hammond's first

:26:42. > :26:43.budget on Wednesday - billed as a steady-as-she-goes

:26:44. > :26:49.affair, but turned out to cause uproar after the Chancellor appeared

:26:50. > :26:51.to contradict a Tory manifesto commitment with an increase

:26:52. > :26:53.in national insurance contributions. The aim was to address what some see

:26:54. > :27:02.as an imbalance in the tax system, where employees pay

:27:03. > :27:04.more National Insurance The controversy centres

:27:05. > :27:07.on increasing the so-called class 4 rate for the self-employed who make

:27:08. > :27:10.a profit of more than ?8,060 a year. It will go up in stages

:27:11. > :27:17.from 9% to 11% in 2019. The changes mean that over one

:27:18. > :27:21.and a half million will pay on average ?240 a year

:27:22. > :27:25.more in contributions. Some Conservative MPs were unhappy,

:27:26. > :27:31.with even the Wales Minister saying: "I will apologise to every

:27:32. > :27:34.voter in Wales that read the Conservative manifesto

:27:35. > :27:35.in the 2015 election." The Sun labelled Philip

:27:36. > :27:41.Hammond "spite van man". The Daily Mail called the budget

:27:42. > :27:43."no laughing matter". By Thursday, Theresa May

:27:44. > :27:46.said the government One of the first things I did

:27:47. > :27:52.as Prime Minister was to commission Matthew Taylor to review the rights

:27:53. > :27:56.and protections that were available to self-employed workers

:27:57. > :27:59.and whether they should be enhanced. People will be able to look

:28:00. > :28:01.at the government paper when we produce it, showing

:28:02. > :28:04.all our changes, and take And, of course, the Chancellor will

:28:05. > :28:09.be speaking, as will his ministers, to MPs, businesspeople and others

:28:10. > :28:13.to listen to the concerns. Well, the man you heard mentioned

:28:14. > :28:15.there, Matthew Taylor, has the job of producing

:28:16. > :28:29.a report into the future Welcome. The Chancellor has decided

:28:30. > :28:34.the self-employed should pay almost the same in National Insurance, not

:28:35. > :28:38.the same but almost, as the employed will stop what is left of your

:28:39. > :28:42.commission? The commission has a broader frame of reference and we

:28:43. > :28:48.are interested in the quality of work in the economy at the heart of

:28:49. > :28:53.what I hope will be proposing is a set of shifts that will improve the

:28:54. > :28:57.quality of that work so we have an economy where all work is fair and

:28:58. > :29:00.decent and all jobs give people scope for development and

:29:01. > :29:09.fulfilment. The issue of taxes a small part. You will cover that? We

:29:10. > :29:11.will, because the tax system and employment regulation system drive

:29:12. > :29:18.particular behaviours in our labour market. You approve I think of the

:29:19. > :29:23.general direction of this policy of raising National Insurance on the

:29:24. > :29:28.self-employed. Taxing them in return perhaps for more state benefits. Why

:29:29. > :29:32.are so many others on the left against it from Tim Farron to John

:29:33. > :29:37.McDonnell? Tax rises are unpopular and it is the role of the opposition

:29:38. > :29:41.parties to make capital from unpopular tax rises. I think as tax

:29:42. > :29:45.rises go this is broadly progressive. There are self-employed

:29:46. > :29:50.people on low incomes and they will be better off. It is economic league

:29:51. > :29:53.rational because the reason for the difference in National Insurance --

:29:54. > :29:58.economically. It was to do with state entitlements. The government

:29:59. > :30:03.is consulting about paid parental leave. A series of governments have

:30:04. > :30:08.not been good about thinking about medium sustainability of the tax

:30:09. > :30:12.base. Self-employment is growing. But it is eroding the tax base. It

:30:13. > :30:19.is important to address those issues. A number of think tanks have

:30:20. > :30:24.said this is a progressive move. Yet, a number of left-wing

:30:25. > :30:30.politicians have been against it. And a number of Tories have said

:30:31. > :30:33.this is a progressive move and not a Tory government move, the balance of

:30:34. > :30:38.you will pay more tax, but you will get more state benefits is not a

:30:39. > :30:42.Tory approach to things. That a Tory approach will be you will pay less

:30:43. > :30:45.tax but entitled to fewer benefits as well.

:30:46. > :30:55.I preferred in and policies to politics -- I prefer policies. When

:30:56. > :30:59.people look at the policy and when they look the fact that there is no

:31:00. > :31:01.real historical basis for that big national insurance differential,

:31:02. > :31:06.they see it is a sensible policy. I don't have to deal with the

:31:07. > :31:09.politics. There has been a huge growth in self-employment from the

:31:10. > :31:10.turn of the millennium. It's been strongest amongst older workers,

:31:11. > :31:19.women part-timers. Do you have any idea, do you have

:31:20. > :31:23.the data in your commission that could tell us how many are taking

:31:24. > :31:28.self-employment because they like the flexibility and they like the

:31:29. > :31:32.tax advantages that come with it, too, or they are being forced into

:31:33. > :31:37.it by employers who don't want the extra costs of employment? Do we

:31:38. > :31:43.know the difference? We do, broadly. Most surveys on self-employment and

:31:44. > :31:46.flexible forms of employment suggest about two thirds to three quarters

:31:47. > :31:50.enjoy it, they like the flexibility, they like the autonomy and about a

:31:51. > :31:55.third to one quarter are less happy. That tends to be because they would

:31:56. > :31:57.like to have a full-time permanent job. It is not necessary that they

:31:58. > :32:02.don't enjoy what they are doing, they would like to do other things.

:32:03. > :32:06.And some of the protections that come with it? Yes. There are some

:32:07. > :32:09.people who are forced into southern employees by high-risk but also some

:32:10. > :32:14.people feel like they can't get a proper job as it were. --

:32:15. > :32:20.self-employment by people who hire them. It is on the narrow matter of

:32:21. > :32:24.tax revenues but if you are employed on ?32,000 the state will take over

:32:25. > :32:28.?6,000 in national insurance contributions, that is quite chunky.

:32:29. > :32:32.If you are self-employed it is ?2300. But the big difference

:32:33. > :32:39.between those figures isn't what the employee is paying, it's the

:32:40. > :32:43.employer's contributions up to almost 14%, and cupped for as much

:32:44. > :32:52.as you are paid. What do you do about employers' contributions for

:32:53. > :32:56.the self employed? -- it is uncapped for as much. What I recommend is

:32:57. > :33:00.that we should probably move from taxing employment to taxing labour.

:33:01. > :33:04.We should probably have a more level playing field so it doesn't really

:33:05. > :33:08.matter... Explained that I thought it was the same thing. If you are a

:33:09. > :33:12.self-employed gardener, you are a different tax regime to a gardener

:33:13. > :33:20.who works for a gardening firm. On the individual side and on the firm

:33:21. > :33:24.side. As we see new business models, so-called gig working, partly with

:33:25. > :33:29.technology, we need a more level playing field saying that we're

:33:30. > :33:33.taxing people's work, not the form in which they deliver that. That is

:33:34. > :33:35.part of the reason we have seen the growth of particular business

:33:36. > :33:41.models. They are innovative and creative and partly driven by the

:33:42. > :33:45.fact that if you can describe yourself as self-employed there are

:33:46. > :33:47.tax advantages. Coming out in June? Will you come back and talk to us?

:33:48. > :33:49.Yes. We say goodbye to viewers

:33:50. > :33:54.in Scotland, who leave us now Coming up here in 20 minutes,

:33:55. > :33:58.we'll be talking to the former Tory MP who was the root

:33:59. > :34:05.of Donald Trump's allegation that he had been put

:34:06. > :34:07.under surveillance by First though, the Sunday

:34:08. > :34:14.Politics where you are. Is anti-Semitism on the rise among

:34:15. > :34:20.students and academics? We're looking at what's

:34:21. > :34:22.happening on campus and asking whether universities

:34:23. > :34:29.are taking a tough enough approach. Here with me throughout:

:34:30. > :34:31.Mark Field, Conservative MP for the Cities of

:34:32. > :34:33.London and Westminster. And Meg Hillier, Labour MP

:34:34. > :34:35.for Hackney South and Shoreditch, and the chair of the Public Accounts

:34:36. > :34:38.Committee. Which we always say is very

:34:39. > :34:40.influential, so we are very pleased A quick word to kick

:34:41. > :34:45.off on the Budget. Your view on the row

:34:46. > :34:48.over the self-employed. There was a row and clearly

:34:49. > :34:58.we will look at this again. I personally felt that

:34:59. > :35:00.the benefits of this, step towards a signification

:35:01. > :35:03.of the tax process. One of the things I hope

:35:04. > :35:06.Philip Hammond will put into place in the November budget

:35:07. > :35:08.and indeed in budgets in future years is to try and get

:35:09. > :35:13.a far simpler tax system. As Meg will confirm,

:35:14. > :35:15.at this point at least, a more complicated tax system opens

:35:16. > :35:18.the door to tax avoidance and we need to try to make sure we get

:35:19. > :35:21.as much tax as possible. Lots of people in London

:35:22. > :35:23.in this position. You will appreciate

:35:24. > :35:26.that in your position. What's not to like,

:35:27. > :35:29.in the long-term? To break a manifesto promise and not

:35:30. > :35:34.realise it was coming was I represent a lot of

:35:35. > :35:37.self-employed people To come out of the blue like

:35:38. > :35:43.that is not really the way to do it. No, you can't just say

:35:44. > :35:46.we will do one thing and say It's much more

:35:47. > :35:50.complicated than that. If you're going to talk about

:35:51. > :35:53.simplification of tax, that's a In fairness, it's

:35:54. > :35:55.a slight grey area. To say it was a manifesto

:35:56. > :35:58.promise breach, there was a grey area about it

:35:59. > :36:00.but I accept it wasn't handled quite as skilfully

:36:01. > :36:02.as it might have been. I think we will get it

:36:03. > :36:05.right in a month's time. The promise was to make this a very

:36:06. > :36:08.brief talking point and we've Let's look in more detail

:36:09. > :36:12.at what was on offer for the capital Across Britain, local

:36:13. > :36:15.areas will take control of their own economic destiny

:36:16. > :36:18.and we will support them to do so. I can inform the House that I have

:36:19. > :36:21.reached a deal with the Mayor At last, the announcement in this

:36:22. > :36:26.week's budget of the much anticipated devolution

:36:27. > :36:28.deal for London. That includes plans to pilot

:36:29. > :36:31.a new model to fund the capital's infrastructure, to co-commission

:36:32. > :36:33.criminal justice services with the government,

:36:34. > :36:35.health care powers to be announced later this month and the retention

:36:36. > :36:43.of all business rates by London. There's a commitment to piloting,

:36:44. > :36:46.to trying out further steps towards what will be a full move

:36:47. > :36:49.to London holding all its business And at that time, one would hope

:36:50. > :36:57.London's local government would have greater freedom

:36:58. > :37:00.in the use of resources and be less dependent on government grants

:37:01. > :37:05.from that point onwards. According to research

:37:06. > :37:07.by the Institution of Siscal Studies, that's not

:37:08. > :37:08.necessarily what we'll be The valuation rate of London

:37:09. > :37:21.businesses paying about ?800 million But London councils don't

:37:22. > :37:24.get to keep that money. It is being redistributed

:37:25. > :37:27.to the rest of the country to those councils and other parts

:37:28. > :37:30.of the country where business rates Those business rates

:37:31. > :37:32.have been particularly The Chancellor have announced

:37:33. > :37:36.a ?72.5 million for London businesses that will

:37:37. > :37:38.be hit the hardest. The Chancellor appeared to listen

:37:39. > :37:40.a bit, but his announcement My worry is small businesses

:37:41. > :37:45.in London who work their socks Nowadays, London contributes 30%

:37:46. > :37:49.of the country's tax revenue. Up from 25%, ten years

:37:50. > :37:51.ago, according to the With the rest of the country

:37:52. > :37:57.more and more dependent on money from the capital,

:37:58. > :38:00.how do you square that with greater Follow where the money goes,

:38:01. > :38:15.is the important thing. I must confess, probably like Meg,

:38:16. > :38:23.I listened two or three times, to exactly what was

:38:24. > :38:25.said, when I looked... There was only one line

:38:26. > :38:27.in the actual speech. When you look at this

:38:28. > :38:29.memorandum of understanding, But it's not been billed

:38:30. > :38:33.as the final answer or the And presumably it is

:38:34. > :38:36.new business rates beyond 2019, it's not necessarily

:38:37. > :38:38.just the existing pile. That is happening nationally

:38:39. > :38:41.and everywhere anyway. It is although London is a very

:38:42. > :38:46.successful commercial capital. There are two slight

:38:47. > :38:48.points I would make. One, I have a slight concern

:38:49. > :38:53.on things like transport structure, One, I have a slight

:38:54. > :38:55.concern on things like there isn't a great relationship

:38:56. > :38:59.between the secretary of state and They will have to bang their heads

:39:00. > :39:03.together to make it work for London. We can't have too much

:39:04. > :39:06.of the positioning that's been On both sides.

:39:07. > :39:08.Fault on both sides? There's been positioning

:39:09. > :39:11.going on on both sides but I won't put the blame one way or the other,

:39:12. > :39:15.but they need to have a positive This isn't going to work,

:39:16. > :39:19.I won't be caught down that But that is an obstacle, anyway?

:39:20. > :39:23.I think it is an obstacle. The fact that nothing was said

:39:24. > :39:26.about Crossrail 2 makes me think that this is the first area

:39:27. > :39:29.where I think we're going to have But probably, I think central

:39:30. > :39:32.government are going to say to London, right,

:39:33. > :39:35.you had Crossrail 1, you've had the Olympics, there is a demand for much

:39:36. > :39:38.of the rest of the UK that if you're going to have Crossrail 2, it's

:39:39. > :39:42.going to have to be brought out of going to have Crossrail 2, it's

:39:43. > :39:45.going to have to be bought out of Almost completely self-financed

:39:46. > :39:48.probably, isn't it? To be fair, that is doable

:39:49. > :39:50.given the potentially very large increase in rateable

:39:51. > :39:52.value that will take place But that probably is the sign,

:39:53. > :39:57.having had a bit of seedcorn money for Crossrail 2,

:39:58. > :39:59.ultimately it will be a London Again, very little detail

:40:00. > :40:08.but the suggestion in that memo potentially developers buying land

:40:09. > :40:11.or having land quite near a potential route of Crossrail

:40:12. > :40:14.2 would be paying on the increase To be honest, that is a model that

:40:15. > :40:19.we've talked about with the Jubilee line extension, everything else,

:40:20. > :40:21.saying you have this windfall And I think probably we now need

:40:22. > :40:28.to look for the 2020s at 2030s to try and capture some of that

:40:29. > :40:32.value to make sure that these Like Mark, I'm concerned

:40:33. > :40:36.about whether the money We look at devolution

:40:37. > :40:39.on my committee quite a lot and we are concerned about how

:40:40. > :40:42.we will be able to follow whether the tax pound from central

:40:43. > :40:45.government going down to London Trying to establish,

:40:46. > :40:49.what did you think was the promise, A couple of key things,

:40:50. > :40:56.like taking some control of some of the issues around

:40:57. > :41:00.criminal justice, which could be a really good win and

:41:01. > :41:01.further education. It's only really good if the money

:41:02. > :41:04.actually follows it. One thing we haven't

:41:05. > :41:05.already bottomed out, but I don't think

:41:06. > :41:08.is likely to happen, but I'm hopeful, I'm still pushing

:41:09. > :41:11.for, is some of the central government-owned assets

:41:12. > :41:12.that belong to London. Mike NHS PropCo, the property

:41:13. > :41:15.company that owns a lot of NHS assets like St Leonards in my

:41:16. > :41:18.constituency, they got taken into Whitehall rather than

:41:19. > :41:20.being local resources. And I've said to the mayor,

:41:21. > :41:23.we need to try to get these Hopefully, in negotiations

:41:24. > :41:26.he will be pushing for that, because that's a real value asset

:41:27. > :41:29.for housing and basically on London's books, perhaps

:41:30. > :41:31.you can borrow against. But you know some of the arguments

:41:32. > :41:34.about wanting to make some progress in retaining,

:41:35. > :41:36.having the right to raise taxes Whether its stamp duty,

:41:37. > :41:39.looking at council tax again No, and the business rates

:41:40. > :41:43.is a very hot potato. In my constituency and across

:41:44. > :41:46.London, we are seeing huge hikes, But it's very difficult for local

:41:47. > :41:49.government and the mayor, you can't just stop that now,

:41:50. > :41:52.because that's built And that's one of the challenges.

:41:53. > :41:55.How we will face that. I think we might see some innovative

:41:56. > :41:58.solutions from London and other devolved areas on business rates

:41:59. > :42:01.as time goes on, but not enough Isn't the key thing,

:42:02. > :42:04.and it is your patch, Mark Field, isn't the key area,

:42:05. > :42:07.areas like Westminster and Camden generate a huge

:42:08. > :42:09.amount of business rates. Of course, they redistribute under

:42:10. > :42:13.a formula, a model, now. On the understanding

:42:14. > :42:18.of what the mayor and the borrowers On the understanding

:42:19. > :42:20.of what the mayor and the boroughs are looking for is when all business

:42:21. > :42:23.rates are devolved and councils raise their own and keep them

:42:24. > :42:27.and City Hall does as well, that City Hall are going to be able

:42:28. > :42:30.to insist that the money raised by Camden and Westminster doesn't go

:42:31. > :42:32.out of London. That it stays within London, is that

:42:33. > :42:36.doable and would you support that? I do accept there are benefits of

:42:37. > :42:40.central London. It is a fantastic global

:42:41. > :42:42.tourist attraction as well. The idea that the Borough

:42:43. > :42:45.of Westminster or the City of London should retain all of its money,

:42:46. > :42:47.that's never been But just to distribute to other

:42:48. > :42:53.parts of London but not subsidise Although, again, I think

:42:54. > :42:58.we're looking at pretty Listen, I can see it

:42:59. > :43:02.from the Treasury's point of view. They look upon London

:43:03. > :43:04.as being an exceptional place. As I say, this is going to be

:43:05. > :43:07.a work in progress. Clearly, I think it's welcome

:43:08. > :43:09.that we had a devolutionary I think the detail will

:43:10. > :43:14.be have to be worked And we will have to have you both

:43:15. > :43:22.back to resume this conversation. Reports of anti-Semitic incidents

:43:23. > :43:25.at universities have doubled over the last year according

:43:26. > :43:28.to the Community Security Trust, A number of concerns were raised

:43:29. > :43:32.just recently after a week of anti-Israeli student

:43:33. > :43:33.activism on campuses. It's proving a difficult area

:43:34. > :43:35.for universities to manage. When does a healthy campus debate

:43:36. > :43:44.turn into something more serious? At University College London,

:43:45. > :43:46.they're wrestling with this issue as the contentious

:43:47. > :43:49.Israel Apartheid Week draws to a close here and at dozens

:43:50. > :43:54.of other academic institutions. We expect them to have robust

:43:55. > :43:57.policies and procedures in place to comply with the law,

:43:58. > :44:00.to investigate and swiftly address hate crime, including any

:44:01. > :44:01.anti-Semitic incidents Back in October, things got

:44:02. > :44:08.really out of hand, here. The university's Friends of Israel

:44:09. > :44:11.group organised a talk from a former Israeli soldier but didn't follow

:44:12. > :44:13.the correct procedures. The university rejected their

:44:14. > :44:15.application, but changed their mind at the last minute on appeal causing

:44:16. > :44:18.Palestinian supporters to accuse the university of double standards

:44:19. > :44:24.and to organise a protest. But there were no arrests and no

:44:25. > :44:32.reports of serious violence. However, UCL's official report

:44:33. > :44:57.into the event found that: I can make it very clear that in my

:44:58. > :45:04.society and the pro-Palestinian activism that I'm involved in,

:45:05. > :45:06.I've never, not even once, seen anything that is anti-Semitic

:45:07. > :45:08.or anything that is, However, if there was anything said,

:45:09. > :45:16.many of us would immediately It is not something that we tolerate

:45:17. > :45:19.in our movement because it Yahya believes that he and his

:45:20. > :45:27.society on the right Fiercely critical of Israel,

:45:28. > :45:33.but crucially not anti-Semitic. But these are some of the things

:45:34. > :45:35.he's tweeted in the past, admittedly, some of the them

:45:36. > :45:38.he was only 16. Calls on Israel to give

:45:39. > :45:42.up its Nazism and Zionists He didn't want to talk about them

:45:43. > :45:48.on camera, but insists And it really must be stopped,

:45:49. > :46:02.otherwise we will be releasing into the future a generation

:46:03. > :46:04.of students who have been infected by this,

:46:05. > :46:07.who will carry on believing that hate speech is

:46:08. > :46:08.acceptable in society. It is really urgent

:46:09. > :46:16.that something be done. Anti-Semitism has been

:46:17. > :46:19.in the spotlight amid a reported 30% year-on-year increase in incidents

:46:20. > :46:21.nationally and a doubling of incidents involving

:46:22. > :46:22.students or academics. This woman says she and her

:46:23. > :46:24.friend were targeted Two guys came to us and they tried

:46:25. > :46:29.to do something to my friend's phone so I stepped in,

:46:30. > :46:34.in the middle between them. The same guy, he went around me,

:46:35. > :46:37.he took my Israel flag from my bag. And he, just, like, took it

:46:38. > :46:42.out and my friend said, "How dare you take

:46:43. > :46:52.something from her bag?" They started to walk

:46:53. > :46:57.against each other and then Both SOAS and the Metropolitan

:46:58. > :47:00.Police say they're What's clear is that the problem

:47:01. > :47:03.with anti-Semitism What's less clear is

:47:04. > :47:05.what the authorities can Joining us now is Baroness Amos,

:47:06. > :47:17.director of the School of Oriental and African Studies,

:47:18. > :47:19.and Professor Geraint Rees, Dean of Life Sciences

:47:20. > :47:21.at University College London. Professor Rees, you wrote

:47:22. > :47:26.the report we saw a copy I think it makes recommendations

:47:27. > :47:30.potentially for disciplinary action It makes a number of recommendations

:47:31. > :47:43.and I am delighted the University has accepted all of those

:47:44. > :47:45.and is moving forward You mentioned that my investigation

:47:46. > :47:48.found there was evidence to suggest that students may have committed

:47:49. > :47:51.an offence against the code of conduct and so disciplinary

:47:52. > :47:53.processes are under way to determine whether or not that's correct

:47:54. > :47:56.and what action will be taken. But I think importantly

:47:57. > :47:58.there are other areas we also looked at, where we looked

:47:59. > :48:01.at strengthening our code of practice on freedom of speech,

:48:02. > :48:03.at reviewing our security protocols, and also, importantly,

:48:04. > :48:05.thinking about how proactively we can bring communities together

:48:06. > :48:08.through the appointment of an interfaith champion

:48:09. > :48:12.in the senior management and an interfaith forum

:48:13. > :48:16.to address these issues. Complex circumstances, obviously,

:48:17. > :48:18.because there are issues about whether the meeting should

:48:19. > :48:20.have taken place to begin with and how there had been

:48:21. > :48:23.an appeal and it finally happened, When you say what might have

:48:24. > :48:29.breached the code of conduct. Over anti-Semitism explicitly,

:48:30. > :48:33.or issues of disorder, Our students code of conduct talks

:48:34. > :48:39.about how to for example protect freedom of speech,

:48:40. > :48:42.which we are committed to, but in an atmosphere of tolerance

:48:43. > :48:44.and trust and mutual respect it, and so there are some areas

:48:45. > :48:47.in which behaviours of some of the students appeared

:48:48. > :48:49.to have breached those. Are you saying that they may

:48:50. > :49:03.have been anti-Semitic Our students code of conduct talks

:49:04. > :49:06.about how to for example but in an atmosphere of tolerance

:49:07. > :49:09.and trust and mutual respect it, and so there are some areas

:49:10. > :49:11.in which behaviours of some of the students appeared

:49:12. > :49:13.to have breached those. Are you saying that they may

:49:14. > :49:16.have been anti-Semitic Well, the anti-Semitism comments

:49:17. > :49:19.in the report referred to chance and in fact,

:49:20. > :49:22.as the report makes clear, or the investigation makes

:49:23. > :49:24.clear, some of the issues I was about to talk about that led

:49:25. > :49:27.to the students being referred for this are to do

:49:28. > :49:29.with the interfering A specific example is some

:49:30. > :49:32.of the students tried to, or succeeded, in entering the room

:49:33. > :49:35.where the Speaker was and trying That would clearly be a breach

:49:36. > :49:40.of our code of practice on freedom of speech and merits consideration

:49:41. > :49:41.for disciplinary action. We can see the difficulties

:49:42. > :49:44.from the incident again. What happens in terms of the mood

:49:45. > :49:47.on campus after something like this? Is it very limited, do many

:49:48. > :49:49.people know about it? Is the pressure on you and

:49:50. > :49:52.the University to take action? The mood on campus clearly response

:49:53. > :49:54.to an incident like that. Police were called and attended

:49:55. > :49:58.and a large number of individuals on and off campus

:49:59. > :50:00.made representations afterwards. That does not of course directly

:50:01. > :50:03.influence our need to take action, because we always need

:50:04. > :50:05.to be vigilant. You must never be

:50:06. > :50:07.complacent in these areas. And so the investigation took place

:50:08. > :50:10.in a very structured way that saw evidence and input from a large

:50:11. > :50:12.number of people, both The female student we saw

:50:13. > :50:16.towards the end of that piece What's happening there?

:50:17. > :50:22.We are investigating that incident. Of course, for me, the first

:50:23. > :50:26.priority always is the duty of care We have students from over 130

:50:27. > :50:38.countries across the world, and protecting that diversity

:50:39. > :50:41.and ensuring inclusivity and building a culture of respect

:50:42. > :50:44.and tolerance is absolutely at the heart of who we are

:50:45. > :50:48.and what we're about. At the same time,

:50:49. > :50:51.we are a university. We promote dialogue,

:50:52. > :50:56.there is robust discussion. We are a university that

:50:57. > :50:58.specialises in Asia, So there are lots of political

:50:59. > :51:05.dimensions that frame some And how difficult is it

:51:06. > :51:13.to police that boundary? We don't want to get

:51:14. > :51:15.into definitions too much about anti-Semitism,

:51:16. > :51:19.but that is an issue that is very difficult for you, is it?

:51:20. > :51:22.Well, we have a very clear policy. It is called Respect at Soas,

:51:23. > :51:24.which takes as its starting point the Equality Act,

:51:25. > :51:30.which, within that Equality Act, sets out a number of what are called

:51:31. > :51:33.protected characteristics, And our Respect at Soas policy

:51:34. > :51:38.talks about the fact that harassment is something

:51:39. > :51:45.that we take very seriously. You know that some people

:51:46. > :51:47.are concerned that you are not adopting whatever this international

:51:48. > :51:49.definition... You know, that the government,

:51:50. > :51:52.Joe Johnson, the universities minister, is saying -

:51:53. > :52:09.rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism

:52:10. > :52:11.are directed towards individuals and or their

:52:12. > :52:13.property or towards Jewish Is that where you have a problem,

:52:14. > :52:17.that some people will say No, no, we don't think

:52:18. > :52:21.that our responsibility as a university is to define

:52:22. > :52:23.anti-Semitism or indeed to define Islamophobia,

:52:24. > :52:25.or any other of the issues that are so widely discussed

:52:26. > :52:27.in our society. We see our responsibility

:52:28. > :52:32.as ensuring that we are remote We see our responsibility

:52:33. > :52:34.as ensuring that we promote I consulted with our centre

:52:35. > :52:41.for Jewish studies on this, who basically said that

:52:42. > :52:43.this definition is a And thus you don't want

:52:44. > :52:47.to particularly get involved... There are some who lecture

:52:48. > :52:50.in anti-Semitism who think Some of those students who may have

:52:51. > :52:57.said to our reporter, maybe felt that Soas wasn't doing

:52:58. > :52:59.quite enough yet, or perhaps... I know you cannot talk

:53:00. > :53:01.about that specific incident, but it is one of two

:53:02. > :53:04.or three you've had. It is important for me

:53:05. > :53:10.and it is important that the whole Soas community that everyone feels

:53:11. > :53:12.comfortable at Soas. One of the things I have

:53:13. > :53:19.agreed with the Union of Jewish Students but also

:53:20. > :53:23.with our Soas Jewish Society is that we will review our procedures,

:53:24. > :53:27.but also do a lot more signposting, so that people who feel

:53:28. > :53:30.that there is a concern, that they know where to go.

:53:31. > :53:33.Thank you. Observations briefly from both

:53:34. > :53:36.of you, what do you think? It is important to have

:53:37. > :53:39.robust discussion. If we can't do that on our campuses,

:53:40. > :53:42.there is a real problem. But it is difficult,

:53:43. > :53:45.where there is hate speech or intimidation, there needs

:53:46. > :53:48.to be some action. I don't envy the academics

:53:49. > :53:51.who are having to make the decision about exactly where that

:53:52. > :53:54.line is drawn. But I think we need to have a place

:53:55. > :53:58.for discussion and I think the worst thing is when you go into a meeting

:53:59. > :54:01.and you feel uncomfortable, and you That really is, I think,

:54:02. > :54:04.one of the main... Do you accept, do you think more

:54:05. > :54:07.is happening, or is it just There is and should be

:54:08. > :54:14.an absolute right to free speech and I'm afraid,

:54:15. > :54:16.I think, too many of our universities, there is a little bit

:54:17. > :54:21.too much political correctness and essentially they have a very

:54:22. > :54:23.partisan, a left-wing partisan view, particularly on the right

:54:24. > :54:25.of Israel to exist. Therefore they are a little

:54:26. > :54:27.bit more easy-going about anti-Semitism than they would

:54:28. > :54:29.be about anti-homophobic... I will allow you two

:54:30. > :54:33.a very brief response. Soas is a university

:54:34. > :54:39.that has had the first We have robust debate on these

:54:40. > :54:47.issues all the time and it's very Of course it makes people

:54:48. > :54:53.feel uncomfortable. But we are not going

:54:54. > :54:56.to allow racism, What we have to do is make sure

:54:57. > :55:07.we have the policies in place that Professor Rees, a final thought

:55:08. > :55:11.from your point of view. You were at the front

:55:12. > :55:14.line and looked at that Our commitment to freedom of speech

:55:15. > :55:18.applies to all of our We have the Jewish neighbourhood

:55:19. > :55:26.watch, they tell me that incidents are on the increase

:55:27. > :55:28.and they are quite distressing. An 11-year-old boy with his skull

:55:29. > :55:31.cap removed in the street. And we have got to

:55:32. > :55:33.stand up against that. We can't see what happened post,

:55:34. > :55:38.for example, the referendum. In that period, immediately

:55:39. > :55:41.after the referendum, a lot of my students,

:55:42. > :55:43.not just my Jewish students, my Muslim students and others,

:55:44. > :55:47.were all extremely concerned about what was happening,

:55:48. > :55:50.not on the Soas campus, Rather than interrupt this,

:55:51. > :55:57.we are not going to do our normal Carry this on, though,

:55:58. > :56:01.she has rejected your accusation. My biggest concern is that

:56:02. > :56:04.I think if rent a mob turns up in big numbers,

:56:05. > :56:09.there is a great fear, understandably, I am not saying

:56:10. > :56:12.it is an easy situation universities They will say better

:56:13. > :56:15.that we cancel this speaker, I think that again shows a level

:56:16. > :56:24.in which there is intimidation that can go on and I feel

:56:25. > :56:26.there are certain groups, some on the left of British politics,

:56:27. > :56:30.who are able to utilise the muscle and ensure there isn't

:56:31. > :56:33.an absolute commitment from too many of our universities to free

:56:34. > :56:36.speech at all costs. It would be really helpful

:56:37. > :56:42.if you made that case to government. Because one of the constraints that

:56:43. > :56:47.universities are under in relation to the Prevent legislation is a huge

:56:48. > :56:50.pressure to cancel events. Because they might

:56:51. > :56:55.become problematic. I'm afraid we are

:56:56. > :56:59.running out of time. Apologies to those of you who loved

:57:00. > :57:02.that feature, 60 Seconds. To all of you, thanks

:57:03. > :57:05.very much indeed. Now the government plans for new

:57:06. > :57:20.grammar schools. The Education Secretary

:57:21. > :57:22.Justine Greening was speaking to a conference

:57:23. > :57:24.of headteachers on Friday. They're normally a pretty polite

:57:25. > :57:26.bunch, but they didn't Broadcasters weren't

:57:27. > :57:33.allowed into the speech, but this was captured

:57:34. > :57:37.on a camera phone. And we have to recognise actually

:57:38. > :57:40.for grammars, in terms of disadvantaged children,

:57:41. > :57:44.that they have, they really do help them close

:57:45. > :57:47.the attainment gap. And at the same time

:57:48. > :57:49.we should recognise that ..That parents also want choice

:57:50. > :57:56.for their children and that those schools are often

:57:57. > :58:10.very oversubscribed. I suppose it is a rite of passage

:58:11. > :58:15.for and education secretaries to have this at a head teachers

:58:16. > :58:19.conference book the head are usually more polite. Isn't part of the

:58:20. > :58:25.problem, whether one is for or against the expansion of grammar

:58:26. > :58:29.schools, the government plans are complicated, you cannot sum them up

:58:30. > :58:34.in a sentence. The proof of that is they can still get away with denying

:58:35. > :58:36.they are expanding grammar schools. They will find an alternative

:58:37. > :58:41.formulation because it is not as simple as a brute creation of what

:58:42. > :58:46.we used to know is grammar schools with the absolute cut-off of the 11

:58:47. > :58:50.plus. I am surprised how easy they found it politically. We saw the

:58:51. > :58:55.clip of Justine Greening being jeered a little bit but in the grand

:58:56. > :58:58.scheme, compared to another government trying this idea a decade

:58:59. > :59:03.ago they have got away with it easily and I think what is happening

:59:04. > :59:07.is a perverse consequence of Brexit and the media attention on Brexit,

:59:08. > :59:12.the government of the day can just about get away with slightly more

:59:13. > :59:16.contentious domestic policies on the correct assumption we will be too

:59:17. > :59:20.busy investing our attention in Article 50 and two years of

:59:21. > :59:26.negotiations, WTO terms at everything we have been discussing.

:59:27. > :59:29.I wonder if after grammar schools there will be examples of

:59:30. > :59:34.contentious domestic policies Theresa May can slide in stock

:59:35. > :59:41.because Brexit sucks the life out, takes the attention away. You are a

:59:42. > :59:48.supporter. Broadly. Are you happy with the government approach? They

:59:49. > :59:52.need to have more gumption and stop being apologetic. It is a bazaar

:59:53. > :59:58.area of public policy where we judge the policy on grammar schools based

:59:59. > :00:01.on what it does for children whose parents are unemployed, living on

:00:02. > :00:07.sink estates in Liverpool. It is absurd, we don't judge any other

:00:08. > :00:10.policy like that. It is simple, not contentious, people who are not

:00:11. > :00:15.sure, ask them if they would apply to send their child there, six out

:00:16. > :00:20.of ten said they would. Parents want good schools for their children, we

:00:21. > :00:24.should have appropriate education and they should be straightforward,

:00:25. > :00:27.this is about the future of the economy and we need bright children

:00:28. > :00:33.to get education at the highest level, education for academically

:00:34. > :00:37.bright children. It is supposed to be a signature policy of the Theresa

:00:38. > :00:41.May administration that marks a government different from David

:00:42. > :00:43.Cameron's government who did not go down this road. The signature is

:00:44. > :00:52.pretty blurred, it is hard to read. It is. She is trying to address

:00:53. > :00:56.concerns about those who fail to get into these selective schools and

:00:57. > :01:00.tried to targeted in poorer areas and the rest of it. She will

:01:01. > :01:04.probably come across so many obstacles. It is not clear what form

:01:05. > :01:07.it will take in the end. It is really an example of a signature

:01:08. > :01:10.policy not fully thought through. I think it was one of her first

:01:11. > :01:15.announcements. It was. It surprised everybody. Surprised at the speed

:01:16. > :01:20.and pace at which they were planning to go. Ever since, there have been

:01:21. > :01:25.qualifications and hesitations en route with good cause, in my view. I

:01:26. > :01:29.disagree with Juliet that this is... We all want good schools but if you

:01:30. > :01:33.don't get in there and you end up in a less good school. They already do

:01:34. > :01:37.that. We have selection based on the income of parents getting into a

:01:38. > :01:42.good catchment area, based on the faith of the parents. That becomes

:01:43. > :01:45.very attainable! I might been too shot run christenings for these. --

:01:46. > :01:47.I have been. Now, you may remember this time last

:01:48. > :01:50.week we were talking about the extraordinary claims by US

:01:51. > :01:52.President Donald Trump, on Twitter of course,

:01:53. > :01:54.that Barack Obama had ordered And there was me thinking

:01:55. > :01:57.that wiretaps went out Is it legal for a sitting

:01:58. > :02:02.President to do so, he asked, concluding it was a "new low",

:02:03. > :02:11.and later comparing it to Watergate. Since then, the White House has been

:02:12. > :02:15.pressed to provide evidence for this It hasn't, but it seems it may have

:02:16. > :02:21.initially come from a report on a US website by the former Conservative

:02:22. > :02:23.MP Louise Mensch. She wrote that the FBI had been

:02:24. > :02:27.granted a warrant to intercept communications between Trump's

:02:28. > :02:34.campaign and Russia. Well, Louise Mensch joins

:02:35. > :02:46.us now from New York. Louise, you claimed in early

:02:47. > :02:50.November that the FBI had secured a court warrants to monitor

:02:51. > :02:55.communications between trump Tower in New York at two Russian banks.

:02:56. > :02:57.It's now four months later. Isn't it the case that nobody has proved the

:02:58. > :03:07.existence of this warrant? First of all, forgive me Andrew, one

:03:08. > :03:10.takes 1's life in one's hand when it is you but I have to correct your

:03:11. > :03:14.characterisation of my reporting. It is very important. I did not report

:03:15. > :03:19.that the FBI had a warrant to intercept anything or that Trump

:03:20. > :03:23.tower was any part of it. What I reported was that the FBI obtained a

:03:24. > :03:27.warrant is targeted on all communications between two Russian

:03:28. > :03:34.banks and were, therefore, allowed to examine US persons in the context

:03:35. > :03:37.of their investigation. What the Americans call legally incidental

:03:38. > :03:43.collection. I certainly didn't report that the warrant was able to

:03:44. > :03:48.intercept or that it had location basis, for example Trump tower. I

:03:49. > :03:52.just didn't report that. The reason that matters so much is that I now

:03:53. > :03:57.believe based on the President's reaction, there may well be a

:03:58. > :04:01.wiretap act Trump Tower. If so, Donald Trump has just tweeted out

:04:02. > :04:05.evidence in an ongoing criminal case that neither I nor anybody else

:04:06. > :04:08.reported. He is right about Watergate because he will have

:04:09. > :04:13.committed obstruction of justice directly from his Twitter account.

:04:14. > :04:19.Let me come back as thank you for clarifying. Let me come back to the

:04:20. > :04:23.question. -- and thank you. We have not yet got proof that this warrant

:04:24. > :04:27.exists, do we? No and we are most unlikely to get it because it would

:04:28. > :04:32.be a heinous crime for Donald Trump to reveal its existence. In America

:04:33. > :04:36.they call it a Glomar response. I can neither confirm nor deny. That

:04:37. > :04:40.is what all American officials will have to say legally. If you are

:04:41. > :04:43.looking for proof, you won't get it until and unless a court cases

:04:44. > :04:49.brought. But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The BBC validated

:04:50. > :04:54.this two months after me in their reporting by the journalist Paul

:04:55. > :04:57.Wood. The Guardian, they also separately from their own sources

:04:58. > :05:01.validated the existence of the warrant. If you are in America, you

:05:02. > :05:05.would know that CNN and others are reporting that the investigation in

:05:06. > :05:09.ongoing. Let me come onto the wider point. You believe the Trump

:05:10. > :05:13.campaign including the president were complicit with the Russians

:05:14. > :05:16.during the 2016 election campaign to such an extent that Mr Trump should

:05:17. > :05:22.be impeached. What evidence did you have?

:05:23. > :05:28.That is an enormous amount of evidence. You could start with him

:05:29. > :05:30.saying, hey, Russia, if you are listening, please release all the

:05:31. > :05:35.Hillary Clinton's e-mails. That's not evidence. I think it rather is,

:05:36. > :05:39.actually. Especially if you look at some of the evidence that exists on

:05:40. > :05:43.Twitter and elsewhere of people talking directly to his social media

:05:44. > :05:48.manager, Dan should be no and telling him to do that before it

:05:49. > :05:52.happened. There is a bit out there. The BBC itself reported that in

:05:53. > :05:56.April of last year, a six agency task force, not just the FBI, but

:05:57. > :06:00.the Treasury Department, was looking at this. I believe there is an

:06:01. > :06:03.enormous amount of evidence. And then there is the steel dossier

:06:04. > :06:11.which was included in an official report of the US intelligence

:06:12. > :06:14.committee. You've also ... Just to be clear, we don't have hard

:06:15. > :06:19.evidence yet whether this warrant exists. It may or may not. There is

:06:20. > :06:22.doubt about... There are claims about whether there is evidence

:06:23. > :06:27.about Mr Trump and the Russians. That is another matter. You claimed

:06:28. > :06:34.that President Putin had Andrew Breitbart murdered to pave the way

:06:35. > :06:38.for Steve Bannon to play a key role in the Trump administration. I

:06:39. > :06:43.haven't. You said that Steve Bannon is behind bomb threats to Jewish

:06:44. > :06:48.community centres. Aren't you in danger of just peddling wild

:06:49. > :06:51.conspiracy theories? No. Festival, I haven't. No matter how many times

:06:52. > :06:56.people say this, it's not going to be true -- first of all. I said in

:06:57. > :06:59.twitter I believe that to be the case about the murder of Andrew

:07:00. > :07:06.Breitbart. You believe President Putin murdered him. I didn't! You

:07:07. > :07:10.said I reported it, but I believed it. You put it on twitter that you

:07:11. > :07:16.believed it but you don't have a shred of evidence. I do. Indeed, I

:07:17. > :07:19.know made assertions. What is the evidence that Mr Putin murdered

:07:20. > :07:25.Andrew Breitbart? I said I believe it. You may believe there are

:07:26. > :07:29.fairies at the bottom of your garden, it doesn't make it true. I

:07:30. > :07:38.may indeed. And if I say so, that's my belief. If I say I am reporting,

:07:39. > :07:45.as I did with the Fisa warrant exists, I have a basis in fact. They

:07:46. > :07:50.believe is just a belief. I know you are relatively new to journalism.

:07:51. > :07:54.Let me get the rules right. Andrew, jealousy is not your colour... If it

:07:55. > :07:58.is twitter, we don't believe it but if it is on your website, we should

:07:59. > :08:04.believe it? If I report something and I say this happened, then I am

:08:05. > :08:08.making an assertion. If I describe a belief, I am describing a belief.

:08:09. > :08:13.Subtlety may be a little difficult for you... No, no. If you want to be

:08:14. > :08:20.a journalist, beliefs have to be backed up with evidence. Really? Do

:08:21. > :08:23.you have a faith? It's not a matter of faith, maybe in your case, that

:08:24. > :08:29.President Putin murdered Andrew Breitbart. A belief and a report at

:08:30. > :08:34.two different things and no matter how often you say that they are the

:08:35. > :08:37.same, they will never be the same. You've said in today's Sunday Times

:08:38. > :08:47.here in London that you've turned into" a temporary superpower" where

:08:48. > :08:50.you "See things really clearly". Have you become delusional? No. I am

:08:51. > :08:57.describing a biological basis for ADHD, which I have. As any of your

:08:58. > :09:00.viewers who are doctors will know. It provides people with

:09:01. > :09:03.unfortunately a lot of scattered focus, they are very messy and

:09:04. > :09:07.absent-minded but when they are interested in things and they have

:09:08. > :09:11.ADHD they can have a condition which is hyper focus. You concentrate very

:09:12. > :09:17.hard on a given subject and you can see patterns and connections. That

:09:18. > :09:22.is biological. Thank you for explaining that. And for getting up

:09:23. > :09:26.early in New York. The first time ever I have interviewed a temporary

:09:27. > :09:30.superpower. Thank you. You are so lucky! You are so lucky! I don't

:09:31. > :09:34.think it's going to happen again. Please don't ask us to comment on

:09:35. > :09:39.that interview! I will not ask you, viewers will make up their own

:09:40. > :09:40.minds. Let's come back to be more mundane world of Article 50. Stop

:09:41. > :09:48.the killing! Will it get through at the

:09:49. > :09:51.government wanted it? Without the Lords amendment falling by the way

:09:52. > :09:56.that? I am sure the Lord will not try to ping-pong this back and

:09:57. > :10:00.forth. So we are at the end of this particular legislative phase. The

:10:01. > :10:03.fact that all three Brexit Cabinet ministers, number ten often don't

:10:04. > :10:07.like one of them going out on a broadcast interview on a Sunday,

:10:08. > :10:09.they've all been out and about. That suggests to me they are working on

:10:10. > :10:15.the assumption it will be triggered this week. This week. The

:10:16. > :10:19.negotiations will begin or at least the process begins. The negotiation

:10:20. > :10:23.process may be difficult, given all of the European elections. The Dutch

:10:24. > :10:28.this week. And then the French and maybe the Italians and certainly the

:10:29. > :10:32.Germans by the end of September, which is less predictable than it

:10:33. > :10:37.was. Given all that, what did you make of Anna Soubry's claim, Viacom

:10:38. > :10:41.on her part, that we may just end up crashing out in six months question

:10:42. > :10:47.-- fear on her part. It was not just that that we made that deliberately

:10:48. > :10:50.organising. I want us to get on with the deals.

:10:51. > :10:57.Everyone knows a good deal is the best option. Who knows what is going

:10:58. > :11:00.to be on the table when we finally go out? Fascinatingly, the demand

:11:01. > :11:06.for some money back, given the amount of money... Net gains and net

:11:07. > :11:13.costs in terms of us leaving for the EU. It is all to play for. That will

:11:14. > :11:17.be a possible early grounds for a confrontation between the UK and the

:11:18. > :11:23.EU. My understanding is that they expect to do a deal on reciprocal

:11:24. > :11:26.rights of EU nationals, EU nationals here, UK citizens there, quite

:11:27. > :11:30.quickly. They want to clear that up and that will be done. Then they

:11:31. > :11:33.will hit this problem that the EU will be saying you've got to agree

:11:34. > :11:38.the divorce Bill first before we talk about the free trade bill.

:11:39. > :11:42.David Davis saying quite clearly, no, they go together because of the

:11:43. > :11:47.size of the bill. It will be determined, in our part, by how good

:11:48. > :11:51.the access will be. The mutual recognition of EU residents' rights

:11:52. > :11:55.is no trouble. A huge amount of fuss is attracted to that subject but it

:11:56. > :11:59.is the easiest thing to deal with, as is free movement for tourists.

:12:00. > :12:02.Money is what will make it incredibly acrimonious. Incredibly

:12:03. > :12:06.quickly. I imagine the dominant story in the summer will be all

:12:07. > :12:09.about that. This was Anna Soubry's implication, members of the

:12:10. > :12:12.governors could strongly argue, things are so poisonous and so

:12:13. > :12:16.unpleasant at the moment, the dealers are advancing -- members of

:12:17. > :12:22.the government. Why not call it a day and go out on WTO terms while

:12:23. > :12:26.public opinion is still in that direction in that Eurosceptic

:12:27. > :12:29.direction? No buyers' remorse about last year's referendum. The longer

:12:30. > :12:33.they leave it, view more opportunity there is for some kind of public

:12:34. > :12:37.resistance and change of mind to take place. The longer believe it,

:12:38. > :12:41.the more people who voted for Brexit and people who voted Remain and

:12:42. > :12:45.think we didn't get world War three will start being quite angry with

:12:46. > :12:49.the EU for not agreeing a deal. In terms of the rights of EU nationals

:12:50. > :12:54.he and Brits abroad, by all accounts, 26 of the 27 have agreed

:12:55. > :12:58.individually. Angela Merkel is the only person who has held that up.

:12:59. > :13:03.That will be dealt with in a matter of days. The chances of a deal being

:13:04. > :13:08.done is likely but in ten seconds... It would not be a bad bet to protect

:13:09. > :13:12.your on something not happening, you might get pretty good odds? The odds

:13:13. > :13:18.are going up that a deal doesn't happen. But, as I said earlier, the

:13:19. > :13:22.House of Commons will not endorse no deal. We are either in an early

:13:23. > :13:27.election or she has to go back again. Either way, you will need us!

:13:28. > :13:30.We will be back at noon tomorrow on BBC Two ahead of what looks like

:13:31. > :13:32.being a big week in politics. We will be back here same time, same

:13:33. > :13:35.place. Remember, if it's Sunday,

:13:36. > :14:39.it's the Sunday Politics. They're calling it an

:14:40. > :14:46.entertainment extravaganza audience fun and frolics

:14:47. > :14:51.and outrageous shenanigans. And I don't even know what

:14:52. > :14:55.those HONK words mean.