:00:41. > :00:45.It's Sunday morning, this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:46. > :00:47.The police believe the Westminster attacker Khalid Masood acted alone,
:00:48. > :00:49.but do the security services have the resources and
:00:50. > :00:53.We'll ask the leader of the House of Commons.
:00:54. > :00:56.As Theresa May prepares to trigger Brexit, details of
:00:57. > :01:02.Will a so-called Henry VIII clause give the Government too much power
:01:03. > :01:06.Ukip's only MP, Douglas Carswell, quits the party saying it's "job
:01:07. > :01:08.done" - we'll speak to him and the party's
:01:09. > :01:16.In London, a capital in recovery, but after this week's
:01:17. > :01:19.attack in Westminster, have the police resources to the job
:01:20. > :01:31.And with me - as always - the best and the brightest political
:01:32. > :01:33.panel in the business - Toby Young, Polly Toynbee
:01:34. > :01:39.and Janan Ganesh, who'll be tweeting throughout the programme.
:01:40. > :01:41.First, it was the most deadly terrorist attack
:01:42. > :01:45.The attacker was shot dead trying to storm Parliament,
:01:46. > :01:47.but not before he'd murdered four people and injured 50 -
:01:48. > :01:51.one of those is still in a critical condition in hospital.
:01:52. > :01:53.His target was the very heart of our democracy,
:01:54. > :01:56.the Palace of Westminster, and he came within metres
:01:57. > :01:59.of the Prime Minister and senior Cabinet ministers.
:02:00. > :02:03.Without the quick actions of the Defence Secretary's
:02:04. > :02:05.close protection detail, fortuitously in the vicinity
:02:06. > :02:13.at the time, the outcome could have been even worse.
:02:14. > :02:21.Janan Ganesh it is four days now, getting on. What thoughts should we
:02:22. > :02:25.be having this weekend? First of all, Theresa May's Parliamentary
:02:26. > :02:28.response was exemplary. In many ways, the moment she arrived as
:02:29. > :02:33.prime minister and her six years as Home Secretary showed a positive
:02:34. > :02:36.way. No other serving politician is as steeped in counterterror and
:02:37. > :02:40.national security experience as she is and I think it showed. As to
:02:41. > :02:44.whether politics is going now, it looks like the Government will put
:02:45. > :02:51.more pressure on companies like Google and Facebook to monitor
:02:52. > :02:54.sensor radical content that flows through their channels, and I wonder
:02:55. > :02:59.whether beyond that the Government, not just our Government but around
:03:00. > :03:03.the world, will start to open this question of, during a terror attack,
:03:04. > :03:07.as it is unfolding, should there be restrictions on what can appear on
:03:08. > :03:11.social media? I was on Twitter at the time last week, during the
:03:12. > :03:17.attack, and people were posting things which may have been useful to
:03:18. > :03:20.the perpetrators, not on that occasion but future occasions.
:03:21. > :03:25.Should there be restrictions on what and how much people can post while
:03:26. > :03:30.an attack is unfolding? I think we have learned that this is like the
:03:31. > :03:33.weather, it is going to happen, it is going to happen all over the
:03:34. > :03:38.world and in every country and we deal with it well, we deal with it
:03:39. > :03:43.stoically, perhaps we are more used to it than some. We had the IRA for
:03:44. > :03:47.years, we know how to make personal risk assessments, how to know the
:03:48. > :03:52.chances of being in the wrong place at the wrong time are infinitesimal,
:03:53. > :03:57.so people in London didn't say, I'm not going to go to the centre of
:03:58. > :04:01.London today, everything carried on just the same. Because we know that
:04:02. > :04:07.the odds of it, being unlucky, are very small. Life is dangerous, this
:04:08. > :04:13.is another very small risk and it is the danger of being alive. I think
:04:14. > :04:17.from an Isis Islamist propaganda point of view, it showed just what a
:04:18. > :04:22.poor target London and the House of Commons is, and it is hard to
:04:23. > :04:25.imagine the emergency services and local people, international
:04:26. > :04:32.visitors, reacting much better than they did. And the fact that our
:04:33. > :04:36.Muslim mayor was able to make an appearance so quickly afterwards
:04:37. > :04:40.shows, I think, that we are not city riddled with anti-Islamic prejudice.
:04:41. > :04:44.It couldn't really have been a better advertisement for the values
:04:45. > :04:47.that is attacking. OK, thank you for that.
:04:48. > :04:50.So, four days after the attack, what more do we know
:04:51. > :04:53.The police have made 11 arrests, but only one remains
:04:54. > :04:58.Here's Adam with the latest on the investigation.
:04:59. > :05:03.According to a police timeline, that's how long it took
:05:04. > :05:05.Khalid Masood to drive through a crowd on Westminster
:05:06. > :05:12.to crash his car into Parliament's perimeter...
:05:13. > :05:16.to fatally stab PC Keith Palmer, before being shot by a bodyguard
:05:17. > :05:27.The public are leaving tributes to the dead at Westminster.
:05:28. > :05:32.The family of PC Palmer released a statement saying:
:05:33. > :05:34."We would like to express our gratitude to the people
:05:35. > :05:37.who were with Keith in his last moments and who were
:05:38. > :05:40.There was nothing more you could have done,
:05:41. > :05:43.you did your best and we are just grateful he was not alone."
:05:44. > :05:46.Investigators say Masood's motive may have gone to the grave with him.
:05:47. > :05:49.Officers think he acted alone, despite reports he spent a WhatsApp
:05:50. > :05:56.The Home Secretary now has such encrypted messaging
:05:57. > :06:02.There should be no place for terrorists to hide.
:06:03. > :06:04.We need to make sure that organisations like WhatsApp,
:06:05. > :06:07.and there are plenty of others like that, don't provide a secret
:06:08. > :06:10.place for terrorists to communicate with each other.
:06:11. > :06:14.It used to be that people would steam open envelopes or just
:06:15. > :06:23.listen in on phones when they wanted to find out what people were doing,
:06:24. > :06:25.legally, through warrantry, but in this situation
:06:26. > :06:27.we need to make sure that our intelligence services
:06:28. > :06:29.have the ability to get into situations like encrypted
:06:30. > :06:33.She will ask the tech industry to suggest solutions
:06:34. > :06:35.at a meeting this week, although she didn't rule out
:06:36. > :06:39.But for those caught up in the attack, perhaps it will be
:06:40. > :06:47...not the policy implications that will echo the loudest.
:06:48. > :06:50.We're joined now from the Hague by the Director of Europol,
:06:51. > :06:55.the European Police Agency, Rob Wainwright.
:06:56. > :07:03.What role has Europol played in the aftermath of Wednesday's attacks? I
:07:04. > :07:06.can tell you we are actively supporting the investigation,
:07:07. > :07:10.because it is a live case I cannot of course go into the details, but
:07:11. > :07:14.to give you some context, Andrew, this is one of about 80
:07:15. > :07:18.counterterrorist cases we have been supporting across Europe this year,
:07:19. > :07:22.using a platform to shed thousands of intelligence messages between the
:07:23. > :07:26.very large counterterrorist community in Europe, and also
:07:27. > :07:30.tracking flows of terrorist finance, illegal firearms, and monitoring
:07:31. > :07:38.this terrible propaganda online as well. All of that is being made
:07:39. > :07:40.available now to the Metropolitan Police in London for this case. Do
:07:41. > :07:45.we know if there is any European link to those who may have inspired
:07:46. > :07:49.or directed Khalid Massoud? That is an active part of the inquiry being
:07:50. > :07:52.led by Metropolitan Police and it is not for me to comment or speculate
:07:53. > :07:58.on that. There are links of course in terms of the profile of the
:07:59. > :08:02.attacker and the way in which he launched these terrible events in
:08:03. > :08:06.Westminster, and those that we've seen, for example, in the Berlin
:08:07. > :08:11.Christmas market last year and the attack in Nice in the summer of last
:08:12. > :08:16.year, clear similarities between the fact that the attackers involved
:08:17. > :08:22.have criminal background, somewhat dislocated from society, each of
:08:23. > :08:26.them using a hired or stolen vehicle to deliberately aim at pedestrians
:08:27. > :08:30.in a crowded place and using a secondary weapon, whether it is a
:08:31. > :08:33.gun or a knife. So we are seeing a trend, I think, of the kind of
:08:34. > :08:37.attacks across Europe in the last couple of years and some of that at
:08:38. > :08:41.least was played out unfortunately in Westminster this week as well.
:08:42. > :08:45.Mass and was known to the emergency services, so were many of those
:08:46. > :08:49.involved in the Brussels, Paris and Berlin attacks, so something is
:08:50. > :08:54.going wrong here, we are not completely across this, are we?
:08:55. > :08:59.Actually most attacks are being stopped. This was I think at least
:09:00. > :09:04.the 14th terrorist plot or attempted attack in Britain since 2013 and the
:09:05. > :09:09.only one that has got through, and that fits a picture of what we see
:09:10. > :09:14.in France last year, 17 attempted attacks that were stopped, for
:09:15. > :09:19.example. Unfortunately some of them get through. But people on the
:09:20. > :09:22.security services' Radar getting through, in Westminster, Brussels,
:09:23. > :09:28.Paris and Berlin. There is clearly something we are not doing that
:09:29. > :09:33.could stop that. Again, if you look at what happened in Berlin and at
:09:34. > :09:37.least the first indications from what police are saying in London,
:09:38. > :09:42.these are people that haven't really appeared on Baha'i target list of
:09:43. > :09:46.the authorities, they are on the edge at best of radicalised
:09:47. > :09:51.community -- on the high target list. When you are dealing with a
:09:52. > :09:55.dispersed community of thousands of radicalised, Senate radicalised
:09:56. > :09:59.individuals, it is very difficult to monitor them 24/7, very difficult
:10:00. > :10:04.when these people, almost out of the blue and carry out the attacks that
:10:05. > :10:08.they did. I think you have to find a sense of perspective here around the
:10:09. > :10:11.work and the pressures of the work and the difficult target choices
:10:12. > :10:16.that police and security authorities have to make around Europe. The Home
:10:17. > :10:21.Secretary here in London said this morning it is time to tackle apps
:10:22. > :10:25.like WhatsApp, which we believe Massoud was using, because they
:10:26. > :10:28.encrypt from end to end and it is difficult for the security services
:10:29. > :10:35.to know what is happening there. What do you say, are you up for
:10:36. > :10:39.that? Across the hundreds of cases we have supported in recent years
:10:40. > :10:43.there is no doubt that encryption, encrypted communications are
:10:44. > :10:47.becoming more and more prominent in the way terrorists communicate, more
:10:48. > :10:50.and more of a problem, therefore, a real challenge for investigators,
:10:51. > :10:54.and that the heart of this is a stark inconsistency between the
:10:55. > :10:58.ability of the police to lawfully intercept telephone calls, but not
:10:59. > :11:03.when those messages are exchanged via a social media messaging board,
:11:04. > :11:07.for example, and that is an inconsistency in society and we have
:11:08. > :11:10.to find a solution through appropriate legislation perhaps of
:11:11. > :11:13.these technologies and law enforcement agencies working in a
:11:14. > :11:21.more constructive way. So you back that? I agree that there is
:11:22. > :11:26.certainly a problem, absolutely. We know there was a problem, I'm trying
:11:27. > :11:34.to find out if you agree with the Home Secretary's solution? I agree
:11:35. > :11:37.certainly with her calls for changes to be made. What the legislative
:11:38. > :11:41.solution for that is of course for her and other lawmakers to decide
:11:42. > :11:47.but from my point of view, yes, I would agree something has to be done
:11:48. > :11:49.to make sure we can apply more consistent interception of
:11:50. > :11:54.communication in all parts of the way in which terrorists invade our
:11:55. > :11:56.lives. Rob Wainwright of Europol, thank you very much.
:11:57. > :11:59.Here with me in the studio now is the Leader of the House
:12:00. > :12:06.What did last week's attack tell us about the security of the Palace of
:12:07. > :12:09.Westminster? It told us that we are looked after by some very
:12:10. > :12:18.courageous, very professional police officers. There is clearly going to
:12:19. > :12:23.be a lessons learned with you, as you would expect after any incident
:12:24. > :12:26.of this kind. That will look very carefully at what worked well but
:12:27. > :12:33.also whether there are changes that need to be made, that is already
:12:34. > :12:39.under way. And that is being run by professionals, by the police and
:12:40. > :12:47.security director at Parliament... Palace authorities, we will get
:12:48. > :12:50.reports from the professionals, particularly our own Parliamentary
:12:51. > :12:53.security director, and just as security matters in parliament are
:12:54. > :12:57.kept under constant review, if there are changes that need to be made as
:12:58. > :13:02.a result, then they will need to be made. Let's look at some of the
:13:03. > :13:06.issues it has thrown up, as we get some distance from these appalling
:13:07. > :13:09.events when our first reaction was always the people who lose their
:13:10. > :13:15.lives and suffer, and then we start to become a bit more analytical. Is
:13:16. > :13:18.it true that the authorities removed armed guards from Cowbridge gate,
:13:19. > :13:24.where the attacker made his entry, because they looked to threatening
:13:25. > :13:29.for tourists? -- carriage gate. No, the idea that a protest from MPs led
:13:30. > :13:36.to operational changes simply not the case. What happened in the last
:13:37. > :13:40.couple of years is that the security arrangements in new Palace Yard have
:13:41. > :13:44.actually been strengthened, but I don't think your view was would
:13:45. > :13:48.expect me to go into a detailed commentary upon operational security
:13:49. > :13:54.matters. Why were the armed guards removed? There are armed guards at
:13:55. > :13:59.all times in the Palace of Westminster, it is a matter for the
:14:00. > :14:04.security authorities and in particular for the police and direct
:14:05. > :14:10.command of those officers to decide how they are best deployed. Is it
:14:11. > :14:14.because, as some from Scotland Yard sources have reported to the papers
:14:15. > :14:18.this morning, was it done because of staffing shortages? I'm in no
:14:19. > :14:21.position to comment on the details of the operation but my
:14:22. > :14:27.understanding is that the number of people available is what the police
:14:28. > :14:31.and the security authorities working together have decided to deploy and
:14:32. > :14:36.that they think was commensurate with the threat that we faced. Is it
:14:37. > :14:42.not of concern that as the incident unfolded the gates were left
:14:43. > :14:46.unguarded by armed and unarmed, they were just unguarded, so much so
:14:47. > :14:53.that, as it was going on, a career with a parcel on a moped at was able
:14:54. > :14:59.to drive through? -- up career. I think we will need to examine that
:15:00. > :15:03.case as part of looking into any lessons learned, but what I don't
:15:04. > :15:05.yet know, because the police are still interviewing everybody
:15:06. > :15:11.involved, witnesses and police officers involved, was exactly who
:15:12. > :15:17.was standing where in the vicinity of the murder at a particular time.
:15:18. > :15:21.We have seen pictures, the gates were unguarded as people were
:15:22. > :15:27.concentrating on what was happening to the police man and to the
:15:28. > :15:31.attacker, but the delivery man was able to come through the gates with
:15:32. > :15:36.a parcel?! You have seen a particular camera angle, I think it
:15:37. > :15:40.is important before we rush to judgment, and we shouldn't be
:15:41. > :15:44.pointing fingers, we need... We are trying to get to the bottom of it.
:15:45. > :15:48.To get to the bottom of it means we have to look at what all the
:15:49. > :15:53.witnesses and all the police officers involved say about what
:15:54. > :15:56.happened, and then there needs to be a decision taken about what if any
:15:57. > :16:00.changes need to be made in light of that.
:16:01. > :16:09.We know the attacker was stopped in his tracks by the Defence
:16:10. > :16:13.Secretary's bodyguard, where was the armed roving unit that had replaced
:16:14. > :16:18.the armed guard at the gate? I cannot comment on operation details
:16:19. > :16:22.but my understanding is there were other armed officers who would have
:16:23. > :16:27.been able to prevent the attacker from getting to the chamber, as has
:16:28. > :16:33.been alleged it would be possible for him to do. Were you aware that a
:16:34. > :16:37.so-called table top simulation, carried out by Scotland Yard and the
:16:38. > :16:47.Parliamentary authorities, ended with four terrorists in this
:16:48. > :16:51.simulation able to storm parliament and killed dozens of MPs? No, that
:16:52. > :17:00.is the first time that has been mentioned to me. You are the leader
:17:01. > :17:06.of the house. These matters are dealt with by security professionals
:17:07. > :17:11.who are involved, they are advised by a security committee, chaired by
:17:12. > :17:15.the Deputy Speaker, but we do not debate operational details in
:17:16. > :17:20.public. I'm not asking for a debate, I raise this because it's been
:17:21. > :17:23.reported because it's quite clear that after this simulation, it
:17:24. > :17:30.raised serious questions about the security of the palace. Actions
:17:31. > :17:37.should have followed. What I've said to you is that these matters are
:17:38. > :17:41.kept under constant review and that there are always changes made both
:17:42. > :17:47.in the deployment of individual officers and security guards of the
:17:48. > :17:51.palace staff and other plans to strengthen the hard security of the
:17:52. > :17:58.perimeter. If you look back at Hansard December last year, they was
:17:59. > :18:02.a plan already been brought forward to strengthen the security at
:18:03. > :18:15.carriage Gates, looking at questions of access. Will there be armed
:18:16. > :18:20.guards now? You need to look not just at armed guards, you need to
:18:21. > :18:23.look at the entirety of the security engagements including fencing.
:18:24. > :18:27.There's lots about the security we don't need to know and shouldn't
:18:28. > :18:31.know, but whether or not there are armed guards is something we will
:18:32. > :18:38.find out quite soon and I'm asking you if you think there should be. If
:18:39. > :18:41.you think the judgment is by our security experts that there need to
:18:42. > :18:47.be more armed guards in certain places, then they will be deployed
:18:48. > :18:51.accordingly, but I think before we rush to make conclusions about
:18:52. > :18:55.lessons to be learned from Wednesday's appalling attack, it is
:18:56. > :18:59.important the police are allowed to get on with completing the interview
:19:00. > :19:04.of witnesses and their own officers, and then that there is considered
:19:05. > :19:09.view taken about what changes might need to be made and then they will
:19:10. > :19:14.be implemented. Let me come onto the triggering of Article 50 that begins
:19:15. > :19:19.our negotiations to exit the European Union. It will happen on
:19:20. > :19:23.Wednesday. John Claude Juncker told Germany's most popular newspaper
:19:24. > :19:28.that he wants to make an example of the UK to make everyone realise it's
:19:29. > :19:35.not worth leaving the EU. What do you make of that? I think all sorts
:19:36. > :19:40.of things are said in advance of negotiations beginning. Clearly the
:19:41. > :19:45.commission will want to ensure the EU 27 holds together. As the Prime
:19:46. > :19:51.Minister has said, that is a British national interest as well. She has
:19:52. > :19:55.been very clear... What do you make of President Juncker's remark? It
:19:56. > :20:03.doesn't surprise me ahead of negotiations but I think if rational
:20:04. > :20:07.mutual interest is to the fore that it's perfectly possible for an
:20:08. > :20:13.agreement to be negotiated between the UK and our 27 friends and allies
:20:14. > :20:16.that addresses all of the issues from trade to security, police
:20:17. > :20:22.cooperation, foreign policy co-operation, works for all
:20:23. > :20:26.countries. The EU wants to agree a substantial divorce bill before it
:20:27. > :20:33.will even discuss any future UK EU relations, what do you make of that?
:20:34. > :20:38.Article 50 says the terms of exit need to be negotiated in the context
:20:39. > :20:42.of the kind of future relationship that's going to exist between the
:20:43. > :20:47.departing country and the remaining member states. It seems it is simply
:20:48. > :20:52.not possible to separate those two. Clearly there will need to be a
:20:53. > :20:55.discussion about joint assets and join liabilities but I think if we
:20:56. > :21:00.all keep to the fore the fact we will continue to be neighbours, we
:21:01. > :21:02.will continue to be essential allies and trading partners, then it is
:21:03. > :21:19.possible to come to a deal that works for all size. The
:21:20. > :21:22.question is do you agree the divorce bill first and then look at the
:21:23. > :21:24.subsequent relations we will have or do you do them both in parallel?
:21:25. > :21:30.Article 50 itself says they have to run together. Do you think they have
:21:31. > :21:35.to be done together or sequentially? I think it is impossible to separate
:21:36. > :21:39.the two but we will get into negotiations very soon and then once
:21:40. > :21:45.David Davis is sitting down with Michel Barnier and others and the
:21:46. > :21:50.national governments become involved too, then I hope we can make steady
:21:51. > :21:54.progress. An early deal about each other's citizens would be a good
:21:55. > :22:02.piece of low hanging fruit. Is the Government willing to pay a
:22:03. > :22:07.substantial divorce bill? The Prime Minister has said we don't rule out
:22:08. > :22:12.some kind of continuing payments, for example there may be EU
:22:13. > :22:19.programmes in the future in which we want to continue to participate. 50
:22:20. > :22:24.billion? We don't envisage long-term payments of vast sums of money. So
:22:25. > :22:30.50 billion isn't even the Government ballpark? You are tempting me to get
:22:31. > :22:35.into the detail of negotiation, that is something that will be starting
:22:36. > :22:42.very soon and let's leave it to the negotiations. During the referendum
:22:43. > :22:47.there was no talk from the Leave side about any question of
:22:48. > :22:50.separation bill, now the talk is of 50 billion and I'm trying to find
:22:51. > :23:01.out if the British government thinks that of amount is on your radar. The
:23:02. > :23:07.Government is addressing the situation in which we now are, which
:23:08. > :23:11.is that we have a democratic obligation to implement the decision
:23:12. > :23:15.of the people in the referendum last year, and that we need to do that in
:23:16. > :23:20.a way that maximises the opportunity, the future prosperity
:23:21. > :23:24.and security of everybody in the UK. Let me try one more thing on the
:23:25. > :23:29.Great Repeal Bill, the white Paper will be published I think on
:23:30. > :23:34.Thursday, is that right? We haven't announced an exact date but you will
:23:35. > :23:39.see the white Paper very soon. Let's say it is Thursday, it will enshrine
:23:40. > :23:44.thousands of EU laws into UK law, it will use what's called Henry VIII
:23:45. > :23:50.powers, who of course was a dictator. Is this an attempt to
:23:51. > :23:57.avoid proper Parliamentary scrutiny? No, we are repealing the Communities
:23:58. > :24:02.Act 1972, then put existing EU legal obligations on the UK statutory
:24:03. > :24:08.footing, so business know where they stand. Then, because a lot of those
:24:09. > :24:16.EU regulations will for example refer to the commission or another
:24:17. > :24:20.regulator, you need to substitute a UK authority in place so we need to
:24:21. > :24:31.have a power under secondary legislation to tweak the European
:24:32. > :24:37.regulators so it is coherent. This is weather Henry VIII powers come
:24:38. > :24:41.in. It is secondary legislation and the scope, the definition of those
:24:42. > :24:44.powers and when they can be used in what circumstances is something the
:24:45. > :24:50.parliament will have to approve in voting through the bill itself. And
:24:51. > :24:55.if it is as innocuous as you say, will you accept the proposal of the
:24:56. > :24:59.Lords for an enhanced scrutiny process on the secondary
:25:00. > :25:03.legislation? Neither the relevant committee of the House of Lords, the
:25:04. > :25:09.constitution committee, nor anyone else has seen the text of the bill
:25:10. > :25:12.and I think when it comes out, I hope that those members of the House
:25:13. > :25:18.of Lords will find that reassuring, but as I say the definition of those
:25:19. > :25:24.powers are something the parliament itself will take the final decision.
:25:25. > :25:25.David Lidington, thank you for being with us.
:25:26. > :25:28.So, Ukip has lost its only MP - Douglas Carswell.
:25:29. > :25:30.He defected to Ukip from the Conservative Party
:25:31. > :25:31.almost three years ago, but yesterday announced
:25:32. > :25:33.that he was quitting to sit as an independent.
:25:34. > :25:35.His surprise defection came in August 2014 saying,
:25:36. > :25:38."Only Ukip can shake up that cosy little clique called Westminster".
:25:39. > :25:42.But his bromance with Nigel Farage turned sour when Mr Carswell
:25:43. > :25:44.criticised the so-called "shock and awful" strategy as
:25:45. > :25:49.Then, during the EU referendum campaign last year, Nigel Farage
:25:50. > :25:52.was part of the unofficial Leave.EU campaign, whereas Douglas Carswell
:25:53. > :25:58.opted to support the official Vote Leave campaign.
:25:59. > :26:00.Just last month, former Ukip leader Nigel Farage
:26:01. > :26:02.accused Douglas Carswell of thwarting his chances
:26:03. > :26:04.of being awarded a knighthood, writing that,
:26:05. > :26:12.Announcing his resignation on his website yesterday,
:26:13. > :26:14.Mr Carswell said, "I desperately wanted us to leave the EU.
:26:15. > :26:17.Now we can be certain that that is going to happen, I have
:26:18. > :26:20.decided that I will be leaving Ukip."
:26:21. > :26:22.When Mr Carswell left the Conservative Party in 2014
:26:23. > :26:25.he resigned as an MP, triggering a by-election.
:26:26. > :26:28."I must seek permission from my boss," he said referring
:26:29. > :26:37.This time, though, Mr Carswell has said there will be no by-election.
:26:38. > :26:43.We're joined now from Salford by Ukip leader, Paul Nuttall.
:26:44. > :26:53.Welcome back to the programme. Are you happy to see the back of your
:26:54. > :26:59.only MP? Well, do you know, I'm always sad when people leave Ukip at
:27:00. > :27:04.a grass roots level or Parliamentary level, but I'm sad but I'm not
:27:05. > :27:08.surprised by this. There has been adrift by Douglas and Ukip over the
:27:09. > :27:12.past couple of years, his relationship with Nigel Farage
:27:13. > :27:16.certainly hasn't helped, and it is a hangover from the former regime
:27:17. > :27:20.which I inherited. I try to bring the party together, I thought I had
:27:21. > :27:24.done that for a few months but it seems now as if I was only papering
:27:25. > :27:31.over the cracks. Douglas has gone and I think we will move on and be a
:27:32. > :27:34.more unified party as a result. Did Douglas Carswell jump because he
:27:35. > :27:38.expected to be pushed out your national executive committee
:27:39. > :27:41.tomorrow? He came before the National executive committee to
:27:42. > :27:45.answer questions regarding issues that have come to the fore over the
:27:46. > :27:52.last couple of months. There was the knighthood issue, the issue
:27:53. > :27:57.surrounding the Thanet election and his comments in a book which came
:27:58. > :28:01.out regarding Brexit. So was he under suspicion? He was coming to
:28:02. > :28:09.answer these questions and they would have been difficult. So he did
:28:10. > :28:13.jump in your view? No, I'm not saying he would have been pushed out
:28:14. > :28:21.of the party but he would have faced difficult questions. What is clear
:28:22. > :28:26.is that a fissure had developed and I'm not surprised by him leaving the
:28:27. > :28:31.party. You have also lost Diane James, Stephen Wolf, Arron Banks,
:28:32. > :28:36.you failed to win the Stoke by election, Mr Carswell is now a
:28:37. > :28:44.pundit on US television, Ukip now stands for the UK irrelevance party,
:28:45. > :29:00.doesn't it? Paul's hard us yesterday on 12%, membership continues to
:29:01. > :29:04.rise. -- the polls had us on 12%. 4 million people voted for Ukip. Over
:29:05. > :29:08.the summer exciting things will be happening in the party, we will
:29:09. > :29:12.rewrite the constitution, restructure the party, it will have
:29:13. > :29:17.a new feel to it and we will be launching pretty much the post
:29:18. > :29:22.Brexit Ukip. Arron Banks, who used to pay quite a lot of your bills, he
:29:23. > :29:26.said the current leadership, that would be you, couldn't knock the
:29:27. > :29:31.skin off a rice pudding, another way of saying you are relevant, isn't
:29:32. > :29:37.it? I don't think that's fair. I've only been in the job since November
:29:38. > :29:40.the 28th, we have taken steps to restructure the party already, the
:29:41. > :29:44.party is on a sound financial footing, we won't have a problem
:29:45. > :29:50.money wise going forward. It is a party which can really unified, look
:29:51. > :29:54.forward to the post Brexit Iraq, tomorrow we are launching our Brexit
:29:55. > :30:01.test for the Prime Minister. If it wasn't for Ukip there wouldn't have
:30:02. > :30:04.been a referendum and we wouldn't have Brexit. Every time you say you
:30:05. > :30:11.will unified, someone else leaves. Is Arron Banks still a member? No,
:30:12. > :30:15.not at this moment in time. He has been a generous donor in the past,
:30:16. > :30:21.he's done a great job of ensuring we get Brexit and I'm thankful for that
:30:22. > :30:24.but he isn't a member. He has just submitted an invoice of ?2000 for
:30:25. > :30:34.the use of call centres, will you pay that? No. That should be
:30:35. > :30:40.interesting to watch. In the aftermath of the Westminster
:30:41. > :30:43.attack, Nigel Farage told Fox News that it vindicates Donald Trump's
:30:44. > :30:49.extreme vetting of migrants. Since the attacker was born in Kent, like
:30:50. > :30:53.Nigel Farage, can you explain the relevance of the remark? I
:30:54. > :30:57.personally haven't supported Donald Trump's position on this, but what I
:30:58. > :31:02.will say, this is what Nigel has said as well, we have a problem
:31:03. > :31:07.within the Muslim community, it is a small number of people who hate the
:31:08. > :31:10.way we live... Can you explain the relevance of Mr Farage's remark? Mr
:31:11. > :31:27.Farage also made the point about multiculturalism being the
:31:28. > :31:29.problem as well and he is correct on that because we cannot have separate
:31:30. > :31:31.communities living separate lives and never integrating. How would
:31:32. > :31:34.extreme vetting of migrants help you track down a man who was born in
:31:35. > :31:37.Kent? In this case it wouldn't. Maybe in other cases it would. But,
:31:38. > :31:40.as I say, I'm not a supporter of Donald Trump's position on extreme
:31:41. > :31:44.vetting, never have been, so I'm the wrong person to ask the question
:31:45. > :31:48.too, Andrew. That has probably become clear in my efforts to get
:31:49. > :31:52.you to answer it. Let me as too, should there be a by-election in
:31:53. > :31:56.Clacton now? Douglas has called by-elections in the past when he has
:31:57. > :32:03.left a political party, I know certain people in Ukip are keen to
:32:04. > :32:05.go down this line, Douglas is always keen on recall and if 20% of people
:32:06. > :32:09.in his constituency want a by-election then maybe we should
:32:10. > :32:15.have won. Ukip will be opening nominations for Clacton very soon.
:32:16. > :32:22.Hold on with us, Mr Nuttall, I have Douglas Carswell here in the studio.
:32:23. > :32:29.Why not call a by-election? I'm not switching parties. You are, you are
:32:30. > :32:32.becoming independent. There is a difference, I've not submitted
:32:33. > :32:37.myself to the whip up a new party, if I was, I would be obliged to
:32:38. > :32:41.trigger a by-election. If every time an MP in the House of Commons
:32:42. > :32:45.resigned the whip or lost the whip, far from actually strengthening the
:32:46. > :32:49.democracy against the party bosses, that would give those who ran
:32:50. > :32:55.parties and enormous power, so I'm being absolutely consistent here,
:32:56. > :32:58.I'm not joining a party. It is a change of status and Nigel Farage
:32:59. > :33:07.has just said he will write to every constituent in Clacton and he wants
:33:08. > :33:11.to try and get 20% of constituents to older by-election. We are going
:33:12. > :33:15.to testing, he says, write to every house in Clacton, find out if his
:33:16. > :33:19.constituents want a by-election, if 20% do we will find out if Mr
:33:20. > :33:26.Carswell is honourable. I'm sure they will be delighted to hear from
:33:27. > :33:28.Nigel. There have been several by-elections when Nigel has had the
:33:29. > :33:34.opportunity to contact the electorate we did -- which did not
:33:35. > :33:38.always go to plan. If you got 20%, would you? Yesterday I sent an
:33:39. > :33:44.e-mail to 20,000 constituents, I have had a lot of responses back,
:33:45. > :33:51.overwhelmingly supported. Recently you said you were 100% Ukip, now you
:33:52. > :33:56.are 0%. What happened? I saw Theresa May triggering article 50, we won,
:33:57. > :34:00.Andrew. You knew a few months ago she was going to do that. On June
:34:01. > :34:04.the 24th I had serious thought about making the move but I wanted to be
:34:05. > :34:09.absolutely certain that Article 50 would be triggered and I think it is
:34:10. > :34:12.right. This is why ultimately Ukip exists, to get us out of the
:34:13. > :34:16.European Union. We should be cheerful instead of attacking one
:34:17. > :34:21.another, this is our moment, we made it happen. Did you try to sideline
:34:22. > :34:26.the former Ukip leader during the referendum campaign? Not at all, I
:34:27. > :34:31.have been open about this, the idea I have been involved in subterfuge.
:34:32. > :34:36.You try to sideline him openly rather than by subterfuge? I made
:34:37. > :34:39.the point we needed to be open, broad and progressive to win. I made
:34:40. > :34:43.it clear in my acceptance speech in Clacton and when I said that Vote
:34:44. > :34:47.Leave should get designation that the only way Euroscepticism would
:34:48. > :34:53.win was by being more than just angry natives. What do you make of
:34:54. > :35:01.that? I am over the moon that we have achieved Brexit, unlike Douglas
:35:02. > :35:03.I rarely have that much confidence in Theresa May because history
:35:04. > :35:07.proves that she is good at talking the talk but in walking the walk
:35:08. > :35:11.often fails, and I'm disappointed because I wanted Douglas to be part
:35:12. > :35:15.of the post Brexit Ukip where we move forward with a raft of domestic
:35:16. > :35:20.policies and go on to take seat at Westminster. Do you think you try to
:35:21. > :35:24.sideline Mr Farage during the referendum campaign? Vote Leave
:35:25. > :35:30.certainly didn't want Nigel Farage front of house, we know that. They
:35:31. > :35:36.freely admit that, they admitted it on media over the past year. Nigel
:35:37. > :35:40.still was front of house because he is Nigel Farage and if it wasn't for
:35:41. > :35:43.Nigel, as I said earlier, we wouldn't have at the referendum and
:35:44. > :35:49.we wouldn't have achieved Brexit because Nigel Farage appeals, like
:35:50. > :35:53.Ukip to a certain section of the population. If our primary motive is
:35:54. > :35:57.to get us out of the European Union, why are we having this row, why
:35:58. > :36:01.can't we just celebrate what is happening on Wednesday? We can, but
:36:02. > :36:05.you are far more confident that Theresa May will deliver on this
:36:06. > :36:09.than I am. Ukip may have been a single issue pressure group ten
:36:10. > :36:13.years ago, it wasn't a single issue pressure group that you joined in
:36:14. > :36:17.2014, it wasn't a single issue pressure group that you stood for in
:36:18. > :36:22.2015 at the general election, and I'm disappointed that you have left
:36:23. > :36:25.us when we are moving onto an exciting era. What specifically
:36:26. > :36:30.gives you a lack of confidence in Mrs May's ability deliver? Her
:36:31. > :36:35.record as Home Secretary, she said she would deal with radical Islam,
:36:36. > :36:39.nothing happened, she said she would get immigration down to the tens of
:36:40. > :36:42.thousands, last year in her last year as Home Secretary as city the
:36:43. > :36:46.size of Newcastle came to this country, that is not tens of
:36:47. > :36:50.thousands. I think we need to take yes for an answer eventually. The
:36:51. > :36:54.problem with some Eurosceptics is they never accept they have won the
:36:55. > :36:58.argument. We have one, Theresa May is going to do what we have wanted
:36:59. > :37:02.her to do, let's be happy, let's celebrate that. But let's wait until
:37:03. > :37:07.she starts bartering things away, until she betrays our fishermen,
:37:08. > :37:10.just as other Conservative prime ministers have done in the past.
:37:11. > :37:15.Let's wait until we end up still paying some sort of membership fee
:37:16. > :37:18.into the European Union or a large divorce bill. That is not what
:37:19. > :37:27.people voted for on June the 23rd and if you want to align yourself
:37:28. > :37:31.with that, you are clearly not a Ukipper in my opinion. So for Ukip
:37:32. > :37:36.to have relevance, it has to go wrong? I'm confident politics will
:37:37. > :37:40.come back to our terms but -- our turf but there will be a post Brexit
:37:41. > :37:43.Ukip that will stand for veterans, book slashing the foreign aid bill
:37:44. > :37:49.and becoming the party of law and order. Finally, to you, Douglas
:37:50. > :37:54.Carswell, you say you have confidence in Mrs May to deliver in
:37:55. > :37:59.the way that Paul Nuttall doesn't. You backed her, you were
:38:00. > :38:03.Conservative, you believe that Brexit will be delivered under a
:38:04. > :38:08.Conservative Government. Why would you not bite the 2020 election as a
:38:09. > :38:12.Conservative? I feel comfortable being independent. If you join a
:38:13. > :38:15.party you have to agree to a bunch of stuff I would not want to agree
:38:16. > :38:23.with. I am comfortable being independent. So you will go into
:38:24. > :38:27.2020 as an independent? If you look at the raising of funds, what Vote
:38:28. > :38:31.Leave did as a pop-up party... We only have five seconds, will you
:38:32. > :38:36.fight as an independent in the next general election? Let's wait and
:38:37. > :38:43.see. Very well! Thank you both very much.
:38:44. > :38:45.It's almost 11.40am, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:38:46. > :38:48.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now
:38:49. > :38:51.Coming up here in 20 minutes, The Week Ahead...
:38:52. > :38:55.First, though, the Sunday Politics where you are.
:38:56. > :39:03.As you'd expect, we're picking up on the implications of the terror
:39:04. > :39:05.attack at Westminster and, given where it happened, it's more
:39:06. > :39:08.poignant than usual having as our main guests two MPs -
:39:09. > :39:10.Sarah Olney, not long arrived at parliament after being elected
:39:11. > :39:12.Liberal Democrat MP for Richmond Park.
:39:13. > :39:15.And Theresa Villiers, Conservative MP for Chipping Barnet
:39:16. > :39:17.and former Northern Ireland Secretary.
:39:18. > :39:19.Both of you, of course, elected representatives
:39:20. > :39:31.In the debate that followed, quite striking, you raised the issue about
:39:32. > :39:36.arming police, Theresa, and giving arms to those not trained to use
:39:37. > :39:39.them. What were you thinking there? I was saying it is important to
:39:40. > :39:46.reflect on whether there are lessons to be learned about our security,
:39:47. > :39:50.and I was sort of, I think we need to give some thought to whether all
:39:51. > :39:54.officers who are protecting sites known to be of interest to
:39:55. > :39:58.terrorists arms for their own protection. Obviously they would
:39:59. > :40:01.need to be trained to use them properly. They would have to have
:40:02. > :40:07.the basic training, but you are in effect saying every firearms officer
:40:08. > :40:11.or just those at key sites? In looking at this I think we need to
:40:12. > :40:15.focus on key sites, and certainly not advocating widespread arming of
:40:16. > :40:20.police officers. Another alternative for officers in Parliament is
:40:21. > :40:24.whether more of them should have Tasers, that might have been useful
:40:25. > :40:28.for the two officers at the gate in this incident. I wouldn't say at
:40:29. > :40:34.this stage we should rush to conclusions that the lessons learned
:40:35. > :40:38.are clear, but I think we need to reflect on options like arming
:40:39. > :40:42.police officers who are not armed already in Parliament. Sarah Olney,
:40:43. > :40:48.if you can remember, an observation before what happened this week, did
:40:49. > :40:54.you have any sense or thought about the fact there were unarmed officers
:40:55. > :40:57.on that one entrance? I think Theresa is right, it is early to say
:40:58. > :41:02.what the lessons to be learned from this incident are. I would say most
:41:03. > :41:04.of the times I have used that gate generally the officers armed and
:41:05. > :41:09.that is pretty much in line with what I would expect, so it is quite
:41:10. > :41:12.surprising that this particular officer was not armed on this
:41:13. > :41:17.occasion, maybe that is something that needs to be looked at. But
:41:18. > :41:21.speaking personally, I'm not in favour generally of greater arming
:41:22. > :41:25.of the police. I see armed officers sometimes on the streets or at the
:41:26. > :41:30.station and I don't find that reassuring, I find it unnerved me to
:41:31. > :41:35.see too many firearms on the streets as part of routine patrols. Have you
:41:36. > :41:42.felt completely safe in the houses since you have arrived? You have
:41:43. > :41:44.arrived there and thought, this looks highly protected? It has never
:41:45. > :41:49.been a matter of concern for me at any time before, and I cannot speak
:41:50. > :41:52.highly enough of the way police reacted on Wednesday, they were
:41:53. > :41:56.absolutely fantastic, the care they took with us. Theresa, you bring in
:41:57. > :42:00.extra knowledge of this because you will have gone through all sorts of
:42:01. > :42:04.stuff in your position as Northern Ireland Secretary, but have you ever
:42:05. > :42:08.had doubts about the security of the Palace of Westminster? I have always
:42:09. > :42:11.felt very safe in the Palace of Westminster just as I feel safe in
:42:12. > :42:21.London as a whole. It is important for people to recognise that whilst
:42:22. > :42:24.this has been a horrific tragedy, thankfully these attacks are very,
:42:25. > :42:26.very red. The likelihood of someone falling victim to a terrorist attack
:42:27. > :42:29.is very small. Do you have that sense that the nature of it, it is a
:42:30. > :42:35.difficult truth, but can you guard against what happens without
:42:36. > :42:38.stopping people driving anywhere?! I'm afraid it is impossible to
:42:39. > :42:41.prevent every single terrorist attack. We have some of the best
:42:42. > :42:46.police and intelligence services in the world and on a daily basis they
:42:47. > :42:49.are preventing terrorists from carrying out their violent plans.
:42:50. > :42:51.But it is simply not possible to prevent them all, particularly the
:42:52. > :42:58.low Tech attacks of this sort. Earlier this week, before
:42:59. > :43:00.what happened, the mayor had just published his official plans
:43:01. > :43:02.for policing in the capital. Counter-terrorism specifically among
:43:03. > :43:07.the issues, of course. But wider concerns are revealed
:43:08. > :43:09.about the impact of financial cuts, This was a week in which
:43:10. > :43:17.the Metropolitan Police's efforts to keep Londoners safe was put
:43:18. > :43:20.to the test, one officer dying in the line of duty
:43:21. > :43:25.in the attack on Westminster. Since August 2014, the capital had
:43:26. > :43:28.been on the second-highest alert possible, and experts who believed
:43:29. > :43:31.a terror attack on London to be inevitable were proven
:43:32. > :43:35.right on Wednesday. The reality is, having
:43:36. > :43:38.looked at this in detail only a few months ago,
:43:39. > :43:44.this was something that clearly we had to expect in some form,
:43:45. > :43:48.and I'm pleased that it looks as though all the emergency
:43:49. > :43:51.and contingency arrangements seem This all raises questions
:43:52. > :43:58.about London's counterterrorism policies, which were highlighted
:43:59. > :44:00.this week in City Hall's Crime It states that, "Counterterrorism
:44:01. > :44:06.policing begins with community policing," and there will now be
:44:07. > :44:09.an extra police constable in each ward, up from only one PC and one
:44:10. > :44:12.Community Support Officer A further 600 armed officers
:44:13. > :44:20.are being recruited, and some of them were visible
:44:21. > :44:26.at the scene this week. An online hate crime hub is being
:44:27. > :44:37.set up to combat radicalisation, And allowed the police to
:44:38. > :44:41.investigate the use of the Internet to abuse and harass people. The
:44:42. > :44:46.mayor supports the use of intelligence said stop and search.
:44:47. > :44:49.But the plan expresses the concern that if you are black
:44:50. > :44:52.and minority ethnic in London, you are 2.5 times more likely to be
:44:53. > :44:53.stopped and searched than white people.
:44:54. > :44:56.The report also cites the greater pressure on the Met's budget.
:44:57. > :44:59.It's had to make ?600 million of savings since 2010,
:45:00. > :45:03.with an additional ?400 million to be cut over the next four years.
:45:04. > :45:07.With the Met Police in charge of fighting terrorism nationally,
:45:08. > :45:10.will the Government reconsider its plans to reduce funding
:45:11. > :45:13.for London under its new funding formula?
:45:14. > :45:16.As the plan stated only two days before the attack,
:45:17. > :45:18."Should the worst happen and an attack happen,
:45:19. > :45:21.it is essential that the Metropolitan Police Service has
:45:22. > :45:29.the resources it needs to respond rapidly and protect the city."
:45:30. > :45:35.Joining us Sophie Linden, Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime.
:45:36. > :45:43.Working very closely with the mayor of course. Has the Met got
:45:44. > :45:48.sufficient resources to deal with terrorism? I just want to pause and
:45:49. > :45:53.remember the victims of the horrific attack on Wednesday, not just those
:45:54. > :45:57.who died such as PC Keith Palmer but those who are really seriously the
:45:58. > :46:01.injured and have life changing injuries, but also to pay tribute to
:46:02. > :46:06.the police and emergency services because they stepped up, their
:46:07. > :46:11.response was robust and really should be admired. We have the best
:46:12. > :46:15.policing service in the world. In terms of resources, I think it is
:46:16. > :46:18.too early, I don't want to get into that at this stage in terms of
:46:19. > :46:24.counterterrorism. The police acted in a way they should have done. When
:46:25. > :46:27.the Mayor went to Cobra chaired by the Prime Minister on the Wednesday
:46:28. > :46:33.of the attack, they were given assurances that he had the resources
:46:34. > :46:36.he needed. The acting Assistant Commissioner told Cobra and the
:46:37. > :46:43.Prime Minister there were sufficient resources, you agree with that then?
:46:44. > :46:46.The man in charge of counterterrorism for the country
:46:47. > :47:03.reassured the Prime Minister that he have the resources he needed in --
:47:04. > :47:06.to deal with an attack. In terms of counterterrorism, as he said, he has
:47:07. > :47:15.the resources he needs to respond to the attack. So are there enough
:47:16. > :47:19.armed officers? It is too early. We have to learn the lessons of
:47:20. > :47:23.Wednesday and look back. There is an ongoing investigation into what
:47:24. > :47:26.happened, and making sure they know the known associates of the
:47:27. > :47:33.attacker, but in terms of making sure we learn the lessons, we need
:47:34. > :47:36.to wait and see. The mayor has already announced we will be
:47:37. > :47:41.increasing the number of firearms officers on the street. Then this
:47:42. > :47:47.key thing about putting another police officer back into every ward,
:47:48. > :47:51.the 630 wards in the capital, so there will be now two police
:47:52. > :48:00.officers and one support worker, is that enough? Our commitment and the
:48:01. > :48:07.mayor's commitment is to make sure every ward in London has two police
:48:08. > :48:10.officers and one PC SO, and where there is higher crime or higher
:48:11. > :48:19.vulnerability, there will be ability of the borough commander to put
:48:20. > :48:22.extra PCs into that ward. You have that resource? We wouldn't make the
:48:23. > :48:29.commitment unless we could deliver it. As we look at it, Londoners
:48:30. > :48:35.sufficiently well funded, we can hear this from your own mouth, to
:48:36. > :48:39.deal with policing challenges at the moment? The reason I ask is because
:48:40. > :48:45.the mayor often likes to give the opposite impression. In terms of the
:48:46. > :48:49.counterterrorism act, I don't wish to get into the funding issue. In
:48:50. > :48:55.terms of counterterrorism and responding to the attack, he had
:48:56. > :48:58.deficient resources. In terms of the Metropolitan Police going forward
:48:59. > :49:04.and the funding, we have said we are concerned about that. I wonder, is
:49:05. > :49:09.it meeting the propriety of the time that a Mayor or the Deputy mayor
:49:10. > :49:14.don't go on the attack politically about funding because we have just
:49:15. > :49:19.seen the capital... London is still, it is only a few days since the
:49:20. > :49:23.horrific terrorist attack at the heart of our democracy on
:49:24. > :49:29.Parliament, and really innocent victims, tourists in London. I don't
:49:30. > :49:32.wish to get into the debate about funding for counterterrorism but in
:49:33. > :49:38.terms of longer term strategic funding we need to make sure London
:49:39. > :49:48.has the funding it needs. Have the police got enough resources, ie
:49:49. > :49:52.feeling confident? It is not for me to say? If someone chose to target
:49:53. > :50:02.the area, you have the eyes and ears in place? I have a good relationship
:50:03. > :50:07.with the local borough commander. Richmond has specific issues that
:50:08. > :50:11.concern us but it is not a high crime area, not somewhere with big
:50:12. > :50:17.problems with gangs and drugs. I'm confident in our local bullies. And
:50:18. > :50:21.you are not getting complaints from people that they haven't got enough
:50:22. > :50:27.resources? I'm not hearing that from them directly. Counterterrorism is
:50:28. > :50:31.the highest priority for the Government which is why the last
:50:32. > :50:36.Spending Review devoted extra resources, I think about 500
:50:37. > :50:40.million. Also there has been a big uplift in the capacity of the
:50:41. > :50:45.intelligence services. I think in the security review there was a
:50:46. > :50:51.commitment to recruiting 1900 more people. On the counterterrorist
:50:52. > :50:55.side, you feel content? If I took you back to your constituency and
:50:56. > :51:00.the community policing element, restoring, do you regret the loss of
:51:01. > :51:06.some of these local community police officers under the last mayor, Boris
:51:07. > :51:09.Johnson? Of course we still have our neighbourhood teams and they are
:51:10. > :51:17.essential. Smaller now, half the size. There have been changes over
:51:18. > :51:20.the years. It is vital we retain those neighbourhood teams, it's also
:51:21. > :51:25.worth recalling that spending on police across the country has been
:51:26. > :51:29.protected in real terms over the course of the Spending Review. I
:51:30. > :51:36.think the Mayor doesn't devote sufficient resources to the suburbs,
:51:37. > :51:39.I would like to shift some officers to outer London to reflect the
:51:40. > :51:42.population but it is vitally important to recognise spending on
:51:43. > :51:48.the police has been protected in real terms at a time of severe
:51:49. > :51:52.pressure on public finances. It is being protected, but perhaps you are
:51:53. > :51:57.hearing we should be dedicating more money to the suburbs? In terms of
:51:58. > :52:01.the protection of counterterrorism, as I have said, there are the
:52:02. > :52:07.resources there to respond to attacks. In terms of the other
:52:08. > :52:10.ornaments, we have seen previously some de munition in the local
:52:11. > :52:18.neighbourhood policing that we are putting back. In terms of suburbs,
:52:19. > :52:22.and to London, the resources are demand led. It isn't a political
:52:23. > :52:27.decision in terms of where the money goes, it is around where the demand
:52:28. > :52:31.is, where there is vulnerability and if you look London is changing and
:52:32. > :52:36.some of that demand is shifting out to outer London and some of the
:52:37. > :52:38.resources should follow that. Thank you for coming in.
:52:39. > :52:40.Shisha bars have been proliferating in the capital in recent
:52:41. > :52:42.years, and some councils are getting increasingly concerned.
:52:43. > :52:44.Should they be subject to stricter licensing conditions?
:52:45. > :52:49.Brent Council is calling on the Government for more powers
:52:50. > :52:55.to close down the worst venues, as Dan Freedman reports.
:52:56. > :53:00.It's one of London's fastest growing night-time activities,
:53:01. > :53:06.but shisha bars, where people can smoke flavoured
:53:07. > :53:09.tobacco through a water-cooled pipe, are not regulated in the same way
:53:10. > :53:13.And authorities say there is a growing minority that
:53:14. > :53:23.We've had murders, attempted murders, GBHs,
:53:24. > :53:26.violent disorder affrays, all linked to these venues.
:53:27. > :53:31.Many of them are lawless, they are unregulated,
:53:32. > :53:34.and that's why we are trying to get them closed down.
:53:35. > :53:37.They make lots of money, we have no idea where that money goes.
:53:38. > :53:39.We also have evidence these venues are linked to drug
:53:40. > :53:45.A lot of these venues are death traps.
:53:46. > :53:49.Here in Brent, in a pattern that's repeated right across London,
:53:50. > :53:52.there's been an explosion in the number of shisha bars opening
:53:53. > :53:57.The council says there is now around 50 altogether and that at least four
:53:58. > :54:01.fifths of them are in some way breaking the law.
:54:02. > :54:08.These are four separate incidents of violent disorder associated
:54:09. > :54:16.It's now temporarily closed, but the council say their powers
:54:17. > :54:19.are limited to three-month closures and fines of up to ?2,500.
:54:20. > :54:22.They say what they need is the ability to close problem
:54:23. > :54:28.Well, if you imagine a pub or somewhere that was selling
:54:29. > :54:31.alcohol or food late at night that had some really bad associated
:54:32. > :54:33.anti-social behaviour problems, we would have the power
:54:34. > :54:37.We would have the power to not issue a licence to a premises
:54:38. > :54:39.where there was persistent bad behaviour, so to speak.
:54:40. > :54:46.The longest that we can close somebody for is
:54:47. > :54:51.ourselves essentially in a game of cat and mouse with the owners.
:54:52. > :54:54.I think there are a small number of premises where there is really
:54:55. > :54:57.serious breaches happening, but you know, up to a quarter
:54:58. > :54:59.of them really are areas that we would consider closing,
:55:00. > :55:02.and so it's really about the problem being more intense in some of them.
:55:03. > :55:04.Nevertheless, the degree of noncompliance across them
:55:05. > :55:07.generally is a massive concern to me and we need a licensing regime
:55:08. > :55:13.In terms of the most serious ones, we will be working with police
:55:14. > :55:16.and it's really important that we have the powers to deal with this
:55:17. > :55:21.If there is actual evidence of crime, there are laws in Britain
:55:22. > :55:23.to prosecute the criminals and they should be pursued
:55:24. > :55:25.in the right fashion, but the idea that the venue
:55:26. > :55:27.generates crime is really problematic and we have
:55:28. > :55:31.However, crime isn't the only concern.
:55:32. > :55:38.In neighbouring Barnet, they've run a poster campaign
:55:39. > :55:42.to highlight the fact that shisha smoking is just as bad, if not
:55:43. > :55:44.worse for your health, than smoking cigarettes.
:55:45. > :55:46.Back in Brent and one of the borough's best-run venues
:55:47. > :55:48.said he wouldn't be averse to tighter regulation.
:55:49. > :55:50.It all comes down to management of the place,
:55:51. > :56:03.Do you want to manage it in a way where you make money quick?
:56:04. > :56:06.Don't focus much on quality, then that's the way to go.
:56:07. > :56:08.Obviously with that, you expect the crimes
:56:09. > :56:10.to go up, you expect bad publicity for yourself.
:56:11. > :56:15.The Home Office say police and local councils have an extensive range
:56:16. > :56:18.of powers available to deal with premises that are causing
:56:19. > :56:21.But many believe that, unless something changes, this hot
:56:22. > :56:42.Theresa Villiers, I think you have been part of a campaign to prevent
:56:43. > :56:46.one particular opening? I think it is important for people to
:56:47. > :56:54.understand that shisha bars, this is very bad for their health, just as
:56:55. > :57:00.bad... It is a health thing, purely? My understanding is the focus is on
:57:01. > :57:07.encouraging people not to do this because of the health concerns that
:57:08. > :57:15.are on a par with smoking. And from what you know, do you think there
:57:16. > :57:17.are sufficient powers then? They are feeling there is a disconnect with
:57:18. > :57:23.their licensing powers over establishments like this, even less
:57:24. > :57:27.power than they have for pubs or licensed premises like those. It
:57:28. > :57:31.sounds like a serious problem so I'm sure the Home Office will reflect
:57:32. > :57:35.somewhat whatever representations they get but there seem to be a lot
:57:36. > :57:41.of options in terms of anti-social behaviour orders and these kind of
:57:42. > :57:46.things. I'm not sure the solution is yet more offences and laws. It seems
:57:47. > :57:50.to me enforcement and some of the power was already available might be
:57:51. > :57:53.the best option. Liberal Democrats are concerned about individual
:57:54. > :57:56.freedoms and we have heard policing isn't a problem in south-west
:57:57. > :58:05.London, I don't think shisha bars are. We have one or two. Are there
:58:06. > :58:11.any concerns about lack of licensing powers around them? Luck I haven't
:58:12. > :58:15.heard that from my own constituency that it's causing a problem but to
:58:16. > :58:19.me I think I would be troubled by the idea that we wanted to target
:58:20. > :58:23.one type of business and prevent people running a business which, as
:58:24. > :58:29.long as it is well run it doesn't cause a nuisance to other people, I
:58:30. > :58:35.don't see why they should be subject to additional licensing. I dislike
:58:36. > :58:45.cultural thing here? It could be perceived like that. -- and a slight
:58:46. > :58:49.cultural thing. Let me bring you into that debate because if there is
:58:50. > :58:54.a danger with interfering with something, it could be seen as
:58:55. > :58:58.targeting and cause a backlash, couldn't it? It is important to
:58:59. > :59:01.focus on premises which are problem for their neighbours but the
:59:02. > :59:05.authorities must take an objective approach and I don't think it would
:59:06. > :59:11.be right to target one type of premises. They should only really
:59:12. > :59:12.take action where rules are being broken and crime is being committed.
:59:13. > :59:13.OK. Now for the rest of the political
:59:14. > :59:20.news in 60 seconds. London's Sharia Council has signed
:59:21. > :59:23.up to a new code of conduct. All rulings will be recorded
:59:24. > :59:26.in English, the primacy of English civil law is to be reinforced,
:59:27. > :59:28.and better religious training for scholars will be put in place
:59:29. > :59:31.to prevent harmful cultural practices that force women to return
:59:32. > :59:38.to abusive relationships. The ultralow emissions zone
:59:39. > :59:39.which the Mayor plans to introduce by 2019 will affect
:59:40. > :59:46.London's emergency services. There are more than 800 police,
:59:47. > :59:51.fire and ambulance vehicles who will breach the ultra low
:59:52. > :59:53.emissions zone rules. The fire brigade fears
:59:54. > :59:56.the zone will cost it NHS chiefs have spent ?70 million
:59:57. > :00:00.on consultants hired to draw up plans aimed at plugging the hole
:00:01. > :00:03.in the health service budget. Bosses reviewing services at five
:00:04. > :00:05.sites in south-west London spent over ?4 million
:00:06. > :00:09.on management consultants. A report from The King's Fund,
:00:10. > :00:12.a think tank, last year said that some managers felt under pressure
:00:13. > :00:34.from NHS England to use consultants. Police cars, ambulances, fire
:00:35. > :00:40.Rangers, should they be exempt all have to pay if they are breaking the
:00:41. > :00:42.pollution restrictions? I think they should be exempt, we should be
:00:43. > :00:46.looking as far as possible when we look at replacing the fleet to be
:00:47. > :00:49.replacing them with lower emission alternatives. Should they be exempt
:00:50. > :00:53.or forced to pay, because that would maybe encourage them to make the
:00:54. > :00:57.changes necessary? They should be encouraged to make the changes to
:00:58. > :01:03.the bleat as soon as it is affordable, but I think we do need
:01:04. > :01:08.to be pragmatic on this, to inflict a very big new charge on emergency
:01:09. > :01:12.services might be difficult. What about this wider plan to extend it
:01:13. > :01:19.right up to the north and south circular, would it hit too many
:01:20. > :01:26.people too soon? It is important it is properly consulted on because if
:01:27. > :01:33.businesses are impacted by cost then we need to care. Action is needed to
:01:34. > :01:42.clean up our air but we do need to recognise that we should not be in
:01:43. > :01:45.15 businesses with these burdens. I can see you nodding in agreement but
:01:46. > :01:47.we don't have any more time! Thank you both for coming in, Andrew, back
:01:48. > :01:53.to you. So yesterday the European Union
:01:54. > :02:11.celebrated its 60th birthday at a party in Rome, the city
:02:12. > :02:13.where the founding document Leaders of 27 EU countries
:02:14. > :02:17.were there to mark the occasion - overshadowing it, though,
:02:18. > :02:19.the continued terrorist threat, And on Wednesday Theresa May,
:02:20. > :02:22.who wasn't in Rome yesterday, will trigger Article 50,
:02:23. > :02:24.formally starting The President of the European
:02:25. > :02:27.Council, Donald Tusk, made an appeal for unity
:02:28. > :02:33.at the gathering. Today in Rome, we are renewing
:02:34. > :02:38.the unique alliance of free nations that was initiated 60 years ago
:02:39. > :02:46.by our great predecessors. At that time, they did not
:02:47. > :02:49.discuss multiple speeds, they did not devise exits,
:02:50. > :02:53.but despite all the tragic circumstances of the recent history
:02:54. > :03:13.they placed all their faith Mr Tusk, he is Polish, the man that
:03:14. > :03:17.has the Council of ministers, and on that council where every member of
:03:18. > :03:22.the EU sits he is an important figure in what is now about to
:03:23. > :03:28.happen. We have got to negotiate our divorce terms, we've got to agree a
:03:29. > :03:31.new free trade deal, new crime-fighting arrangements, we've
:03:32. > :03:37.got to repatriate 50 international trade agreements, and all of that
:03:38. > :03:43.has to be ratified within two years, by 27 other countries. Can that
:03:44. > :03:47.really happen?! I don't think it is inconceivable because it is in the
:03:48. > :03:50.interests of those 27 EU member states to try and negotiate a deal
:03:51. > :03:55.that we can all live with, because that would be preferable to Britain
:03:56. > :03:59.crashing out within two years. But I think this is why Labour's position
:04:00. > :04:04.is becoming increasingly incoherent. Keir Starmer has briefed today that
:04:05. > :04:07.he will be making a speech tomorrow setting out six conditions which he
:04:08. > :04:09.wants the deal to meet, otherwise Labour won't vote for it, but if
:04:10. > :04:30.Labour doesn't vote for it that doesn't mean we will be able to
:04:31. > :04:32.negotiate an extension, that would be incredibly difficult and require
:04:33. > :04:35.the consent of each of the 27 member states, so if Labour votes against
:04:36. > :04:38.it we will just crash out, it is effectively Labour saying no deal is
:04:39. > :04:40.better than a poor deal, which is not supposed to be their position.
:04:41. > :04:43.Labour's position may be incoherent but I was not asking about their
:04:44. > :04:45.position, I was asking about the Government's position. The man
:04:46. > :04:47.heading the Badila said he wants it ready by October next year so that
:04:48. > :04:50.it can go through the ratification process, people looking at this
:04:51. > :04:55.would think it is Mission: Impossible. It seems impossible to
:04:56. > :05:01.me to be done in that time. The fact that it is 27 countries, the whole
:05:02. > :05:05.of the European Parliament as well, there will be too many people
:05:06. > :05:10.throbbing spanners in the works and quite rightly. We have embarked on
:05:11. > :05:14.something that is truly terrible and disastrous, and the imagery we can
:05:15. > :05:19.have of those 27 countries celebrating together 60 years of the
:05:20. > :05:22.most extraordinary successful movement for peace, for shared
:05:23. > :05:29.European values, and others not there... We were not there at the
:05:30. > :05:36.start either, and we are not there now! And we have been bad partners
:05:37. > :05:40.while we were inside, but now that we are leaving... They did not look
:05:41. > :05:45.like it was a birthday party to me! I think it was, there was a sense of
:05:46. > :05:50.renewal, Europe exists as a place envied in the world for its values,
:05:51. > :05:54.for its peacefulness, that is why people flocked to its borders, that
:05:55. > :06:01.is why they come here. Can you look at the agenda that faces the UK
:06:02. > :06:05.Government and EU 27, is it not possible, in fact even likely, that
:06:06. > :06:12.as the process comes to an end they will have to agree on a number of
:06:13. > :06:17.areas of transitional arrangements? I think they will and they will have
:06:18. > :06:20.to agree that soon, I would not be surprised if sometime soon there is
:06:21. > :06:24.an understanding is not a formal decision that this is a process that
:06:25. > :06:28.will extend over something closer to buy or seven than two years. On
:06:29. > :06:31.Wednesday article 50 will be filed and there will be lots of excitement
:06:32. > :06:36.and hubbub but nothing concrete can happen for a while. Elections in
:06:37. > :06:40.France in May, elections in Germany which could really result in a
:06:41. > :06:51.change of Government... That is the big change, Mrs Merkel might not be
:06:52. > :06:55.there by October. And who foresaw that a few months ago? So you might
:06:56. > :06:57.be into 28 Dean before you are into the substantive discussions about
:06:58. > :06:59.how much market access or regulatory observance. I cannot see it being
:07:00. > :07:03.completed in two years. I could see, if negotiations are not too
:07:04. > :07:07.acrimonious, that transitional agreement taking place. Let's look
:07:08. > :07:11.at the timetable again. The council doesn't meet until the end of April,
:07:12. > :07:14.it meets in the middle of the French elections, the first round will have
:07:15. > :07:18.taken place, they will need a second round so not much can happen.
:07:19. > :07:24.President Hollande will be representing France, then the new
:07:25. > :07:29.French government, if it is Marine le Pen all bets are off, but even if
:07:30. > :07:33.it is Mr Mac run, he does not have a party, he will not have a majority,
:07:34. > :07:38.the French will take a long while to sort out themselves. Then it is
:07:39. > :07:42.summer, we are off to the Cote d'Azur, particularly the Bolivian
:07:43. > :07:47.elite, then we come back from that and the Germans are in an election,
:07:48. > :07:51.it may be very messy, Mrs Merkel no longer a shoo-in, it could be Mr
:07:52. > :08:04.Schultz, he may have to try to form a difficult green red coalition,
:08:05. > :08:07.that would take a while. Before you know it, it is Guy Fawkes' Day and
:08:08. > :08:10.no substance has taken place, yet we are then less than a year before
:08:11. > :08:12.this has to be decided. It is a big task and I'm sure Jana is right that
:08:13. > :08:15.there will be transitional arrangements and not everything will
:08:16. > :08:19.be concluded in that two year timetable, but in some respects what
:08:20. > :08:24.you have described helps those of us on the Eurosceptic site because it
:08:25. > :08:27.means they cannot really be a meaningful parliamentary vote on the
:08:28. > :08:31.terms of the deal because nothing is going to be agreed quickly enough
:08:32. > :08:35.for them to be able to go back and agree something else if Parliament
:08:36. > :08:38.rejects it, so when the Government eventually have something ready to
:08:39. > :08:44.bring before Parliament it will be a take it or leave it boat. How
:08:45. > :08:47.extraordinary that people who have campaigned. Indeed give us our
:08:48. > :08:50.country back and say, isn't it wonderful, we won't have a
:08:51. > :08:55.meaningful boat for our parliamentarians of the most
:08:56. > :08:59.important... We don't know what the negotiation, the package is, day by
:09:00. > :09:02.day we see more and more complicated areas nobody ever thought about,
:09:03. > :09:09.nobody mentioned during the campaign, all of which has to be
:09:10. > :09:13.resolved and the European Council and the negotiators say nothing is
:09:14. > :09:19.agreed until everything is agreed. You lead us into a catastrophe.
:09:20. > :09:22.There will be plenty of opportunity for Parliament to have its say
:09:23. > :09:26.following the introduction of the Great Repeal Bill, it is not as if
:09:27. > :09:31.there will be no Parliamentary time devoted. The final package is what
:09:32. > :09:36.counts. We have two years to blog about this!
:09:37. > :09:46.There was a big Proview -- pro-EU march yesterday... I was there!
:09:47. > :09:50.Polly Toynbee was there, down to Parliament Square, lots of people
:09:51. > :09:54.there marching in favour of the European Union. We can see the EU
:09:55. > :10:01.flags there on flags, lots of national flags as well, the British
:10:02. > :10:09.one. Polly, is it the aim of people like you still to stop Brexit, or to
:10:10. > :10:15.soften Brexit? I think the aim is for the best you can possibly do to
:10:16. > :10:18.limit the damage. Of course, if it happens that once people have had a
:10:19. > :10:22.chance to see how much they were lied to during the campaign and how
:10:23. > :10:26.dreadful the deal is likely to be, if it happens that enough people in
:10:27. > :10:32.the population have changed their minds, then maybe... There is no
:10:33. > :10:35.sign up yet. But we have not even begun, people have not begun to
:10:36. > :10:40.confront what it is going to mean. Wait and see. I think it is just
:10:41. > :10:45.being as close as we can. Is that credible, do you think, to stop it
:10:46. > :10:49.or to ameliorate it in terms of the Remainers? I think it is far more
:10:50. > :10:54.credible to try and stop it but even then the scope is limited. It is
:10:55. > :10:55.fairly apparent Theresa May's interpretation of the referendum is
:10:56. > :11:17.the country wants an end to free movement, there is probably no way
:11:18. > :11:19.of doing that inside the single market. She also wants external
:11:20. > :11:22.trade deals, no way of doing that outside the customs unit, said the
:11:23. > :11:24.only night you can depend if you are pro-European is, let's not leave
:11:25. > :11:26.without any trade pact, at least let's meet Canada and have a
:11:27. > :11:29.formalised trade agreement. The idea of ace -- of a very soft exit is
:11:30. > :11:32.gone now because the public really did want an end to free movement and
:11:33. > :11:34.the Government really does want external trade deals. It depends
:11:35. > :11:42.what changes in Europe. I think the momentum behind the Remoaning
:11:43. > :11:47.movement will move away. One of the banners I saw being held up
:11:48. > :11:50.yesterday by a young boy on the news was, don't put my daddy on a boat.
:11:51. > :11:55.It gets a lot of its moral force from the uncertainty surrounding the
:11:56. > :12:00.fate of EU nationals here and our resident in the remainder of the EU
:12:01. > :12:03.and I think David Lidington is right that it will be concluded quite
:12:04. > :12:08.quickly once negotiations start and that will take a lot of the heat and
:12:09. > :12:12.momentum out of the remaining movement. Why didn't Theresa May
:12:13. > :12:17.allow that amendment that said, we will do that, as an act of
:12:18. > :12:21.generosity, we will say, of course those European citizens here are
:12:22. > :12:25.welcome to stay? It would have been such a good opening move in the
:12:26. > :12:31.negotiations, instead of which she blocked it. It does not augur well.
:12:32. > :12:34.I have interviewed many Tories about this and put that point to them but
:12:35. > :12:42.they often say the Prime minister's job is to look after UK citizen in
:12:43. > :12:47.the EU... Bargaining chips, I think you have to be generous and you have
:12:48. > :12:49.to wish you people in Spain and everywhere else where there are
:12:50. > :12:53.British citizens would have responded. The British Government
:12:54. > :12:56.did try and raise that with their EU counterparts and were told, we
:12:57. > :13:00.cannot begin to talk about that until article 50 has been triggered.
:13:01. > :13:04.Next week we will be able to talk about it. How generous it would have
:13:05. > :13:09.been, we would have started on a better note. Didn't happen, we will
:13:10. > :13:13.see what happens next with EU citizens. That is it for today, the
:13:14. > :13:15.Daily Politics will be back tomorrow at midday and every day next week on
:13:16. > :13:18.BBC Two as always. And there's also a Question Time
:13:19. > :13:20.special live tomorrow night from Birmingham -
:13:21. > :13:22.with guests including the Brexit Secretary David Davis,
:13:23. > :13:24.Labour's Keir Starmer, former Ukip leader Nigel Farage
:13:25. > :13:26.and the SNP's Alex Salmond - I'll be back next week
:13:27. > :13:32.at 11am here on BBC One. Until then, remember -
:13:33. > :13:35.if it's Sunday, it's MUSIC: The Elements
:13:36. > :14:42.by Tom Lehrer # There's Attenborough, micro.bit,
:14:43. > :14:45.The Bottom Line and In Our Time # And Terrific Scientific
:14:46. > :14:48.and Ten Pieces and All In The Mind # And BBC Food, Alphablocks,
:14:49. > :14:50.Forces of Nature With Brian Cox # A Midsummer Night's Dream
:14:51. > :14:54.and Springwatch. # Every element of wonder -
:14:55. > :15:02.available across the BBC. indecent behaviour.
:15:03. > :15:04.Evelyn Waugh's classic novel.