02/04/2017 Sunday Politics London

It's Sunday Morning and this is the Sunday Politics.

The Government has insisted that Gibraltar will not be bargained

But the territory's chief minister says the EU's proposal

After a momentous week, Britain's journey out

Can the Prime Minister satisfy her critics at home

We speak to the former Conservative leader, Michael Howard.

And we have the lowdown on next month's local elections -

what exactly is up for grabs, who's going up and who's going down?

In London, little sign of people changing their minds. MPs from

opposing sides give the view from there constituencies.

And with me, as always, the best and the brightest political

panel in the business - Steve Richards, Isabel Oakeshott

and Tom Newton Dunn who'll be tweeting throughout the programme.

For the people of Gibraltar, Clause 22 of the EU's draft negotiating

guidelines came as something of a shock.

The guidelines propose that the Government in Spain be

given a veto over any future trade deal as it applies to

The UK Government has reacted strongly, saying Gibraltar

will not be bargained away in the Brexit talks.

Here's the Defence Secretary, Michael Fallon, speaking

We are going to look after Gibraltar.

Gibraltar's going to be protected all the way, all the way,

because the sovereignty of Gibraltar cannot be changed without

the agreement of the people of Gibraltar and they have made it

very clear they do not want to live under Spanish rule

and it is interesting, I think, in the draft guidelines from the EU

that Spain is not saying that the whole thing is subject

Michael Fallon earlier. Steve, is this a Spanish power grab or much

ado about nothing? It could be both. Clearly what is happening about this

negotiation and will happen again and again is that at different

points individual countries can start playing bargaining cards. They

will say, if you want a deal, you have to deliver this, UK. Spain is

doing it early. It might turn out to be nothing at all. It is an early

example of how to delete recruit after Article 50 is triggered, the

dynamic -- how after Article 50 is triggered, the dynamic changes. At

certain points, any country can veto it. It gives them much more power

than we have clocked so far. Donald Tusk, the head of the European

Council, he went out of his way to say Britain mustn't deal by

laterally, with individual countries, it has to deal with the

EU as a block. Was it mischiefmaking to add this bit in about Spain?

Those two things do not tally. I think on our part, when I say we, I

mean the Foreign Office and Number 10, we dropped the ball. By

excluding Gibraltar from the letter of Article 50, they gave an

opportunity to the Spanish to steal the narrative. Why this is

important, presentation, things looked like they were going quite

well for Theresa May when she handed over the letter, for a few hours,

and suddenly, you have this incredible symbolism of Gibraltar.

For Brexiteers, the idea that there could be some kind of diminishment

or failure in relation to Gibraltar, it would be a very symbolic

illustration of things not going entirely to plan. Forget the detail,

it does not look great. Gibraltar got mentions in the white paper.

They did not get a mention in the Article 50 notification. Do you

think the British Government did not see this coming? To be honest, I do

not think it would make a bit of difference. Theresa May could have

an entire chapter in her letter to Donald Tusk and the Spanish and the

EU would have still tried this on. For me, it was as much a point of

symbolism than it was for any power grab. It was a good point to make.

You need to know, Britain, you are not in our club, we will not have

your interests at heart. Officials after the press conference, they

went on to talk about it saying it is a territorial dispute. It is not!

Gibraltar is British. It is very much a shot across the bow is.

Whether it comes to pass, it is still yet to be seen. I feel we will

be chasing hares like this for the next few years. There will be many

other examples. They are greatly empowered by the whole process.

Britain has not really got... It has got to wait and hear what their

interpretation of Brexit is. They will negotiate, we will negotiate

accordingly. I have some sympathy about the letter, the Article 50

letter. They agonised over it, so much to get right in terms of

balance and tone. It would have been absurd to start mentioning Skegness

and everything else. Why not! Skegness, what did they do? It is a

real example of how the dynamic now changes. The Spanish royals are

going to come here in a couple of months, that could be interesting.

It will be good feelings breaking up, I am sure. -- breaking out.

So, after a historic week, the UK is now very much

But will it be a smooth journey to the exit door?

Or can we expect a bit of turbulence?

Are you taking back control, Prime Minister?

Big days in politics usually involve people shouting

and the Prime Minister getting in a car.

It is only a few hundred metres from Downing Street to Parliament.

But the short journey is the start of a much longer one

and we do not know exactly where we will all end up.

This is a historic moment from which there can

Moments earlier, this Dear John, sorry, Dear Don letter,

was delivered by Britain's ambassador in Brussels to the EU

He seemed genuinely upset to have been jilted.

Back in Westminster, hacks from around the world

were trying to work out what it all meant for the

So, here it is, a copy of the six-page letter

The letter reaffirms the PM's proposal to have talks on the exit

deal and a future trade deal at the same time.

It also mentioned the word "security" 11 times and stated

a failure to reach agreement would mean cooperation

in the fight against crime and terrorism would be weakened.

Later, our very own Andrew got to ask her what would happen

if Britain left the European policing agency, Europol.

We would not be able to access information in the same way

as we would as a member, so it is important, I think,

we are able to negotiate a continuing relationship that

enables us to work together in the way that we have.

That night, the Brexiteers were happy.

We did not have a Mad Hatter, but now we do.

Down the street, even the Remainers, having a Mad Hatters' tea party,

I am not sure that is actually Boris, though.

The next morning, the papers suggested Theresa May would use

security as a bargaining tool and threaten to withdraw the UK's

cooperation in this area if no deal was struck.

Downing Street denied it, as did the Brexit Secretary.

We can both cope, but we will both be worse off.

That seems to be a statement of fact, it is not a threat,

David Davis had other business that morning,

introducing the Great Repeal Bill, outling his plans to transfer

all EU law into British law to change later,

It is not without its critics but the Brexit Secretary said,

among other benefits, it would make trade talks easier

As we exit the EU and seek a new deep and special partnership

with the European Union, we are doing so from a position

where we have the same standards and rules.

It will also ensure we deliver on our promise to end the supremacy

of European Union law in the UK as we exit.

There was, though, a small issue with the name.

The Government hit an early hurdle with the Great Repeal Bill.

Parliamentary draughtsmen said they were not allowed

Great(!) so it is just the Repeal Bill.

So far, it had been a tale of two cities.

By Friday, there was another, Valletta in Malta, where EU leaders

were having a meeting and President Tusk, yes, him again,

set out draft guidelines for the EU Brexit strategy.

Once, and only once, we have achieved sufficient progress

on the withdrawal can we discuss the framework for our

Starting parallel talks on all issues at the same time,

as suggested by some in the UK, will not happen.

The EU 27 does not and will not pursue a punitive approach.

Brexit in itself is already punitive enough.

The pressure on Theresa May to get the Brexit process going has now

gone and the stage is being set elsewhere for the showdown

But face-to-face discussions are not likely to happen

Before May or early June. No one is celebrating just yet.

We're joined now from Kent by the former Conservative

The EU says it will not talk about a future relationship with the UK

until there has been sufficient progress on agreeing the divorce

bill. Should the UK agree to this phased approach? Well, I think you

can make too much about the sequence and timing of the negotiations. I

assume that it will be a case of nothing is agreed until everything

is agreed and so any agreements that might be reached on things talked

about early on will be very provisional, so I think you can make

a big deal about the timing and the sequence when I do not think it

really matters as much as all that. Don't people have a right in this

country to be surprised of the talk of a massive multi-billion pound

divorce settlement? I do not remember either side making much of

this in the referendum, do you? No. A select committee of the House of

Lords recently reported and said that there was no legal basis for

any exit fee. We will have to see how the negotiations go. I think

some of the figures cited so far are wildly out of kilter and wildly

unrealistic. We will have to see what happens in the negotiations. As

one of your panel commented earlier, there will be lots of hares to

pursue over the next couple of years and we should not get too excited

about any of them. Would you accept that we make... It may not be

anything like the figures Brussels is kicking around of 50, 60 billion

euros, do you think we will have to make a one-off settlement? If we get

everything else we want, if we get a really good trade deal and access

for the City of London and so on, speaking for myself, I would be

prepared to make a modest payment. But it all depends on the deal we

get. What would modest be? Oh, I cannot give you a figure. We are

right at the start of the negotiations. I do not think that

would be agreed until near the end. The EU says that if there is a

transition period of several years after the negotiations, and there is

more talk of that, the UK must remain subject to the free movement

of peoples and the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, would

that be acceptable to you? It depends on the nature of the

transitional agreement. We are getting well ahead of ourselves

here. You cannot, I think, for any judgment as to whether there should

be a transitional stage until you know what the final deal is. If

there is to be a final deal. And then you know how long it might take

to implement that deal. That is something I think that it is really

rather futile to talk about at this stage. It may become relevant,

depending on the nature of the deal, and that is the proper time to talk

about it and decide what the answer to the questions you pose might be.

Except the EU has laid this out in its negotiation mandate and it is

reasonable to ask people like yourself, should we accept that? It

is reasonable for me to say, they will raise all sorts of things in

their negotiating mandate and we do not need to form a view of all of

them at this stage. Let me try another one. The EU says if they do

agree what you have called a comprehensive free trade deal, we

would have to accept EU constraints on state aid and taxes like VAT and

corporation tax. Would you accept that? Again, I am not sure quite

what they have in mind on that. We will be an independent country when

we leave and we will make our own decisions about those matters. Not

according to know that -- to the negotiating mandate. As I have said,

they can put all sorts of things in the negotiating guidelines, it does

not mean we have to agree with them. No doubt that is something we can

discuss in the context of a free trade agreement. If we get a free

trade agreement, that is very important for them as well as for

us, and we can talk about some of the things you have just mentioned.

Can you please leave a 20 without having repatriated full control of

migration, taxis and the law? I think we will have repatriated all

three of those things by the time of the next general election. How high

would you rate the chances of no deal, and does that prospect worry

you? I think the chances are we will get the deal, and I think the

chances are we will get a good deal, because that is in the interests of

both sides of this negotiation. But it is not the end of the world if we

do not get a deal. Most trade in the world is carried out under World

Trade Organisation rules. We would be perfectly OK if we traded with

the European Union, as with everybody else, under World Trade

Organisation rules. It is better to get the deal, and I think we will

get the deal, because it is in the interests of both. Let me ask you

about Gibraltar. You have campaigned in Gibraltar when the sovereignty

issue came up under the Tony Blair government. The EU says that Spain

should have a veto on whether any free-trade deal should apply to the

Rock. How should the British government replied to that? As it

has responded, by making it absolutely clear that we will stand

by Gibraltar. 35 years ago this week, Andrew, another woman Prime

Minister Centre task force is halfway across the world to protect

another small group of British people against another

Spanish-speaking country. I am absolutely clear that our current

woman Prime Minister will show the same resolve in relation to

Gibraltar as her predecessor did. This is not about Spain invading

Gibraltar, it is not even about sovereignty, it is about Spain

having a veto over whether any free-trade deal that the UK makes

with the EU should also apply to Gibraltar. On that issue, how should

the British government respond? The British government should show

resolve. It is not in the interests of Spain, really, to interfere with

free trade to Gibraltar. 10,000 people who live in Spain working

Gibraltar. That is a very important Spanish interest, so I am very

confident that in the end, we will be able to look after all the

interests of Gibraltar, including free trade. Michael Howard, thank

you for joining us from Kent this morning.

Although sometimes it seems like everyone has forgotten,

there are things happening other than Brexit.

In less than five weeks' time, there will be a round of important

domestic elections and there's a lot up for grabs.

Local elections take place on the 4th of May in England,

In England, there are elections in 34 councils, with 2,370

The majority are county councils, usually areas of strength

Large cities where Labour usually fares better are not

Six regions of England will also hold elections for newly created

combined authority mayors, and there will be contests

for directly elected mayors, with voters in Manchester,

Liverpool and the West Midlands among those going to the polls.

In Scotland, every seat in all 32 councils are being contested,

many of them affected by boundary changes.

Since these seats were last contested, Labour lost all but one

Meanwhile, every seat in each of Wales' 22 councils

All but one was last elected in 2012 in what was a very

strong year for Labour, though independent

candidates currently hold a quarter of council seats.

According to the latest calculations by Plymouth

University Election Centre, the Tories are predicted

to increase their tally by 50 seats, despite being in government,

But the dramatic story in England looks to be with the other parties,

with the Lib-Dems possibly winning 100 seats, while Ukip

could be seeing a fall, predicted to lose 100 seats.

Though the proportional system usually makes big changes

less likely in Scotland, the SNP is predicted to increase

both the number of seats they hold, and the number

In Wales, Labour is defending a high water mark in support.

Last year's Welsh Assembly elections suggest the only way is down,

with all the parties making modest gains at Labour's expense.

Joining me now is the BBC's very own elections guru,

Professor John Curtice of the University of Strathclyde.

Good to see you again. Let's start with England. How bad are the

selection is going to be for Labour? Labourer not defending a great deal

because this is for the most part rural England. The only control

three of the council they are defending and they are only

defending around 500 seats, I nearly a quarter are in one county, Durham.

Labour's position in the opinion polls is weakened over the last 12

months and if you compare the position in the opinion polls now

with where they were in the spring of 2013 when these seats in England

were last fought, we are talking about a 12 point swing from Labour

to conservative. The estimate of 50 losses may be somewhat optimistic

for Labour. Of the three council areas they control, two of them,

Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire, could be lost, leaving labourer with

virtually a duck as far as council control is concerned in these

elections in England. In England, what would a Liberal Democrat

reserve urgently great? That is the big question. We have had this

picture since the EU referendum of the Liberal Democrats doing

extraordinarily well in some local by-elections, gaining seats that

they had not even fought before, and in other areas, doing no more than

treading water. We are expecting a Liberal Democrat skin because the

lost the lot -- the lost lots of ground when they were in coalition

with the Conservatives. It is uncertain. A patchy performance may

well be to their advantage. If they do well in some places and gain

seats, and elsewhere do not do terribly well and do not waste

votes, they may end up doing relatively well in seats, even if

the overall gaining votes is likely to be modest. The elections for

mayors, they are taking place in the Labour will that be a hefty

consolation prize for the Labour Party? It ought to be, on Teesside,

Merseyside, Greater Manchester. We are looking at one content very

closely, that is the contest for the mayor of the West Midlands. If you

look at what happened in the general election in 2015, labourer work nine

points ahead of the Conservatives in the West Midlands. If you look at

the swing since the general election, if you add that swing to

where we were two years ago, the West Midlands now looks like a draw.

Labour have to worry about a headline grabbing loss, and the West

Midlands contest. If they were to lose, that wooden crate -- that

would increase the pressure for their own Jeremy Corbyn to convince

people that they can turn his party's fortunes around, and in

truth at the moment, they are pretty dire. The West Midlands has

Birmingham as its heart. Chock-a-block with marginal seats.

It always has been. I always remember election night and marginal

seats in the West Midlands. Scotland, the SNP is assaulting

Labour's last remaining power base. The biggest prizes Glasgow. Will it

take it, the SNP? Whether the SNP will gain control of Glasgow is

uncertain. If you look at what is happening in local government

by-elections let alone the opinion polls, in 2012, when these seats

were last fought, Labour did relatively well, only one percentage

point behind the SNP who were rather disappointed with the result

compared to other elections. No sign of that happening this time alone --

this time around. Polls put the SNP ahead. By-elections have found the

SNP advancing and Labour dropping by double digits. Labour are going to

lose everything they currently control in Scotland, the SNP will

become the dominant party, the question is how well they do. In

Scotland there is a Conservative revival going on. The Conservatives

did well in recent local government by-elections. At the moment, Labour

are expected to come third north of the border in the local elections,

repeating the third they suffered in the Holyrood elections last year. In

Wales, Labour is expecting to lose control of a number of councils.

They are the main party in 12 of 22 local authorities. How bad could it

be? We're expecting Labour to lose ground. In the opinion polls when

these seats were last fought, labourer in the high 40s. Now they

are not much above 30%. Cardiff could well join Glasgow was no

longer being a Labour stronghold. Look out for Newport. Some of the

South Wales councils that Labour control, Labour is

probably too but occasionally, Plaid Cymru surprises in this area. They

managed to win the Rhondda seat in the assembly elections. Jeremy

Corbyn has said he wants to be judged on proper elections, council

elections as opposed to opinion polls, but even if he does as badly

as John has been suggesting, does it affect his leadership? I think it

does on two counts. It will affect his own confidence. Anyone who is a

human being will be affected by this. He might go into his office

and be told by John McDonnell and others, stand firm, it is all right,

but it will affect his confidence and inevitably it contributes to a

sense that this is moving to some kind of denoument, at some point. In

other words, while I understand the argument that he has won twice in a

leadership contest, well, within 12 months, I wonder whether this can

carry on in a fixed term parliament, up until 2020, if it were to do so.

On two France, it will have some impact. I am not seeing it will lead

to his immediate departure, it will mark, but if these things are as

devastating as John suggests, it will have an impact. Tom, I'll be

looking at a Lib Dem fightback? That is the $64,000 question. It would

seem that we should be. One massive reason we're not having a general

election a time soon, apart from the fact that Theresa May does not

believe in these things, she believes in pressing on, it is

because Tory MPs in the South West who took the Lib Dem seats, they

were telling Number 10 they were worried they were going to lose

their seats back to the Lib Dems. The Lib Dems never went away and

local government. They have got other campaigners and activists. It

looks credible that they will be the success story of the whole thing.

Ukip leader, Paul Nuttall, he says this will be the most difficult

local elections his party will face before 2020. A bit of management of

expectations. It is unlikely to be a good time for Ukip. They are right

to manage expectations. The results will be horrible for Ukip. I agree

with Tom about the Lib Dem threat to the Tories. Talking to

some senior figures within the Tory party earlier this week, I was

picking up that they are worried about 30-40 general election seeds

being vulnerable to the Lib Dems because of the Labour collapse. I

would normally agree with Steve about the resilience of politicians,

the capability of withstanding repeated blows, but Jeremy Corbyn is

not in the normal category. I think he is, in the sense that although he

get solace from winning leadership contest, anyone who leads a party

into the kind of, it is not going to be that vivid, because they are not

defending the key seats. If they were to win Birmingham, say, and get

slaughtered by the SNP in Scotland, it will undermine what is already a

fairly ambiguous sense of self-confidence. We need to leave it

there. Thank you, John Curtice. Well, with those elections

on the horizon, is Labour where it Former leader Ed Miliband

was on the Andrew Marr Show earlier and he explained

the challenge Labour faces It is easier for other parties,

if you are the Greens or the Liberal Democrats you're essentially

fishing in the 48% pool. If you are Ukip, you are

fishing in the 52% pool. Labour is trying to do

something much harder, which is to try and speak

for the whole country, and by the way, that is another part

of Our attack on Theresa May,

part of it is she's Ignoring the verdict

going into this, saying, let's overturn it, looks

like ignoring the 52%. By the way, there is more

that unites Remainers and Leavers than might first appear,

because they share common concerns about the way

the country is run. Joining me now is the Shadow Health

Secretary, Jon Ashworth. Welcome to the programme. Alastair

Campbell told me on the BBC on Thursday that he is fighting to

reverse the referendum result. Ed Miliband says that Remain needs to

accept the result, come to terms with it. Who is right? We have to

accept the referendum result. I campaigned passionately to remain in

the European Union. The city I represent, Leicester, voted narrowly

to remain in the European Union. Sadly the country did not. We cannot

overturn that and be like kinky nude, trying to demand the tide go

back out. We have to accept this democratic process. We all voted to

have a referendum when the relevant legislation came to Parliament. How

bad will the local elections before Labour? Let us see where we get to

on election night when I am sure I will be invited on to one of these

types of programmes... The election date, the following day. But it does

look like you will lose seats across the board in England, Scotland and

Wales. What did you make of what Steve Richards said about the impact

on Jeremy Corbyn's leadership? We have to win seats, we cannot fall

back on the scales suggested. No, your package was right, it tends to

be Tory areas, but generally, we have to be winning in

Nottinghamshire, Lancashire, those types of places because they contain

a lot of the marginal constituencies that decide general elections. The

important places in the elections are towns like Beeston, towns you

have not heard of, but they are marginal towns in marginal swing

constituencies. We have to do well in them. We will see where we are on

election night but my pretty is to campaign hard in these areas over

the next few weeks. Even people who voted Labour in 2015, they prefer

Theresa May to Mr Corbyn as Prime Minister, a recent poll said. Isn't

that extraordinary? I have not seen that. I will look it up. It was you

Government. -- YouGov. It is important we win the trust of

people. You are not winning the trust of people who voted for you in

2015. We have to hold onto people who voted for us in 2015 and we have

to persuade people who voted for other parties to come to us. One of

the criticisms I have of the debate that goes on in the wider Labour

Party, do not misunderstand me, I am not making a criticism about an

individual, but the debate you see online suggests that if you want to

get people who voted Conservative to switch to Labour it is somehow a

betrayal of our principles, it was not. Justin Trudeau said

Conservative voters are our neighbours, our relatives. We have

to persuade people to switch from voting Conservative to voting Labour

as well as increasing our vote among nonvoters and Greens. It seems like

you have a mountain to climb and the mountain is Everest. Another poll, I

am not sure if you have seen this, in London, the Bastian of Labour,

the Bastian of Remain, Mr Corbyn is less popular than even Ukip's Paul

Nuttall. That is beyond extraordinary! I do not know about

that. The most recent set of elections in London was the mayoral

election where the Labour candidate city: won handsomely. He took the

seat of a conservative. We took that of a conservative. It was a year

ago. We did well then. You had an anti-Jeremy Corbyn candidate. I

think he nominated Jeremy Corbyn, from memory. We have not got

elections in London but our elections are in the county areas

and the various mayoral elections... What about the West Midlands? In any

normal year, mid-term, as the opposition, Labour should win the

West Midlands. John Curtis says it is nip and tuck. It has always been

a swing region but we want to do well, of course. We want to turn out

a strong Labour vote in Dudley, Northampton, those sorts of places.

They are key constituencies in the general election. Does Labour look

like a government in waiting to you? What I would say is contrast where

we are to what the conservative garment is doing. I asked you about

Labour, you do not get to tell me about the Conservatives. Does it

look like a government in waiting to you? Today we are exposing the

Conservatives... Reminding people the Conservatives are breaking the

pledge on waiting times of 18 weeks so lots of elderly people waiting

longer in pain for hip replacements and cataract replacements. Yesterday

the Housing spokesperson John Healey was exposing the shortcomings in the

Help to Buy scheme. The education spokesperson has been campaigning

hard against the cuts to schools. Tom Watson has been campaigning hard

against some of the changes the Government want to introduce in

culture. The Shadow Cabinet are working hard to hold the

Government's feet to the fire. Does it look like a government in

waiting? Yes. It took you three times! There is a social care

crisis, schools funding issue, a huge issue for lots of areas, the

NHS has just got through the winter and is abandoning many of its

targets. You are 18 points behind in the polls. We have to work harder.

What can you do? The opinion polls are challenging but we are a great

Social Democratic Party of government. On Twitter today, lots

of Labour activists celebrating that the national minimum wage has been

in place for something like 16 years because we were in government. Look

of the sweeping progressive changes this country has benefited from, the

NHS, sure start centres, an assault on child poverty, the Labour Party

got itself in contention for government. I entirely accept the

polls do not make thrilling reading for Labour politicians on Sunday

morning, but it means people like me have to work harder because we are

part of something bigger than an individual, we are in the business

of changing things for the British people and if we do not do that, if

we do not focus on that, we are letting people down. Is Labour

preparing for an early election question Billy burqa? Reports in the

press of a war chest as macro for an early election? The general election

coordinator called for a general election when Theresa May became

Prime Minister. We are investing in staff and the organisational

capability we need. By the way, the Labour Party staff do brilliant

work. A bit of nonsense on Twitter having a go at them. They do

tremendous work. Whenever the election comes, they will be ready.

Jon Ashworth, thank you. We say goodbye to viewers

in Scotland who leave us now Coming up here in 20

minutes, the Week Ahead. First though, the Sunday

Politics where you are. To dissect the potential impact

of Brexit on the capital, For remain, Neil Coyle, Labour MP

for Bermondsey and Old Southwark. And Andrew Rossendale,

Conservative MP for Romford What we are going to do first off

is hear from Neil and Andrew, They have been reflecting on the

future for their constituents, each reporting from their own patch

on Wednesday, the day Welcome to Romford and to

Margaret Thatcher House. This was the heart of our campaign

last June as Romford and Havering voted 70% to leave

the European Union. There is a feeling of contentment

that we are back in the driving seat and that is why people around

here voted to leave. It was actually, I think,

more about sovereignty. We don't like what being

being told what to do. With ourselves and the Tories

and Ukip, we all work together in Havering to make this possible

and we did all work together. Members of six political parties

here in this borough worked together to achieve that great victory,

and so, this week, it is a fantastic celebration, not only

for what we achieved here in Havering but for the great

decision of the British people to take back control of our country

and to leave the European Union. It's a wonderful day to celebrate

a wonderful occasion. So, this week we celebrate

the triggering of Article 50, the beginning of the restoration

of our freedom as a nation, the rights of the British people

to make their own decisions As a Labour MP, I am sickened to see

people celebrating uncertainty caused by Theresa May's

actions this week. Bermondsey and Old Southwark,

many businesses have been in touch with me to outline their concerns

about leaving the European Union. I think the biggest issue

is the uncertainty of it. We seem to be going into

this whole new arena. The traders that talk to me say,

what is going to happen next? What is going to be

the restrictions on what we can do? We are here at Brindisa

at Borough Market. Brindisa is a Spanish food

specialist, contributing to the vibrant, creative food

and drinks sector we have, But a sector that is very worried

about the falling pound. Further devaluation

of the pound would obviously I think we will have

to look at other costs that might come into play,

such as legislation. The impact goes far,

far beyond just businesses. Universities losing access

to EU research funding British students could pay

more because of leaving The health and social care sector

in crisis but reliant The Government need to get real

and stop being dishonest Neil, are you going to be able

to find any kind of peace It is happening, but as I said

in the piece, the Government is not being honest with people

about the costs and consequences of what is happening and the dangers

and risks ahead of not having a deal in place in two years and to see

the UK Government using security as a bargaining chip in these

negotiations is frankly sickening. The idea that we would not support

another French or German government, whoever it might be,

to avoid a terrorist We will come onto the security

a little bit later. The wider point, not

being honest, what do you say? I don't know where Neil

is getting this from. The Prime Minister has made it very

clear that we are going to get the best possible agreement

with our friends, our That means trade, corporation

and it means security. Most countries in the world have

sensible bilateral arrangements. We are just as capable of having

a sensible arrangement with Europe What we are not going to be part

of and what the British people voted clearly against is to be

in a political union, It does not mean we cannot

still work with our friends on the continent and have

sensible bilateral cooperation. Celebration there, but what thought

do you give to the majority, the very big majority,

in your capital city, I think again we have

to look to the future. The British people

voted to leave the EU. Most of us who respect democracy

voted overwhelmingly in Parliament to invoke Article 50 and give

the Prime Minister the ability to get on with the job and get

the best possible arrangements The important thing now is surely

to rally around and ensure there is a confident

negotiating position The idea that this is a vote

against a political union when you have seen businesses

who are saying, they don't know of exporting will be,

they don't know what the costs They have seen a drop in the pound

already damaging their business, damaging their ability to invest

in further jobs. People are losing their jobs

right now as a result of what is going on and to see

people celebrating is... You make it sound as if

the economy has bombed. In my constituency, I can tell

you there are businesses who haven't The financial sector

is moving jobs out of London. The biscuit factory

in Wigan closed, blaming... The idea that the economy has gone

on as before is simply not true. As you enjoy your Italian

prosecco, was it? As you enjoy your prosecco,

what thought will you give Will you not be looking

for the signs or will you be in denial if businesses in your area

start going belly up? I want sovereignty restored

to the British people. Of course, any political change,

anything like this, you can have a Jeremy Corbyn government,

there would be a big drop in the pound then,

anything like that can Once we have adjusted, there may be

ups and downs, bumps in the road. Yes, the pound has fallen,

but I think that was necessary Long-term, it is in our interests

to take back control Hang on a second, let's move on,

that word, take back control, What should happen to immigration

levels in the capital? On his way back from Paris this

week, this is what the mayor, You say you want it,

we have been getting 30,000 odd Europeans in every year over

the last ten years, do you want to see that

figure go up or go down? I want to make sure we can meet

the needs of London. That means, obviously,

skilling up Londoners to have the skills for the jobs

we create in construction or tech or financial services,

but also recognising that one of the reasons why we are

the greatest city in the world Those industries are all saying

they want more people, so you happy for that number to go

up above 30,000 a year I will give you one simple

example in construction. We have, roughly speaking, 300,000

construction workers in London. Of those half, between 10

and 20% are going to Even if we were to skill

up our youngsters to have these jobs in construction we cannot

fill these vacancies. So you are happy for the immigration

level in London to go We have got to have a flexible

immigration system that recognises London's needs,

not just in construction, but in tech, in culture,

in finance and other Do you understand that people

will have less confidence in whether you're going to provide

a decent deal if you will not say whether you want more

or less immigration? No, they won't, because they voted

to stay in the EU, because they recognise

the contribution talent We have got one million Londoners,

for example, they are Londoners who are EU citizens,

contributing hugely to our economy. Andrew, you said something

about it in the film, but people, if you are honest,

voted a lot on immigration Well, I think that the idea that

Britain cannot control its immigration policy,

yes, they did not like that idea. They wanted to see an immigration

policy which is sensible, beneficial to Britain, welcomes

people that are here to work, but not one which gives preferential

treatment to European citizens while Commonwealth citizens

are prevented from coming in. Those constituents are economically

illiterate if you listen This country has always

had immigration. But we have given up control of how

we manage that immigration We are bringing back control

of immigration policy and borders. That is what the

British people want. You would have a system

where you treated EU residents You need a fair system where

everyone is treated on their merit, not on their nationality,

but what they can It should be a fair

and equal system. Leaving all the skills shortages

in areas such as construction to cleaning hospitals,

where you do not have the staff. We have always needed that

kind of immigration. It means if you are coming into work

in the United Kingdom, you have to go through the same

process, so an Austrian has to go through the same

process as an Australian. The Mayor of London seems to have

that difficulty saying he would not mind it going up if that happened,

if the economy expanded The idea that we need some kind

of artificial number is nonsense. What Sadiq is saying,

and the poll showed that the vast majority of Londoners

back his agenda for London and the support he has

offered to business, and if we need people

to come in to take on jobs that are available, why

would we want to stop that? Why would we want to stop people

coming, paying and contributing? The idea that we are taking back

control somehow is utter nonsense. The government has the right

to remove people from EU countries who have been here for three months

if they are not working and unable 300,000 EU citizens have come over

here over in the last Are you happy for that annual

figure, or over the next ten years, Are you happy, if we need it

for immigration, to go up? My concern with the number

is the pressure on public services. When people talk about immigration

in the context of the referendum, we need to factor in the fact it

became a proxy, because the Conservatives and the Lib Dems

before squeezed public services, That pressure on services

is what concerns people. If you get investment in public

services, would you then say If it is linked to taking on jobs

and contributing to our economy, why would we not want

to welcome that? Among the areas where the mayor

expressed particular concern during his three days in Europe

was security co-operation. That is our man in Brussels,

formally notifying the EU of Britain's decision to leave,

but who else was in town this week? The Mayor of London on his European

tour, cut short after last He was meeting with the Mayors

of Paris and Brussels, both cities also targeted in recent

years by terrorists. We are together, we will face

together the crazy situation that happened in Brussels last year,

and in London this year. Sadiq Khan emphasised

the EU's contribution It has made us safer

through cross-border policing, European arrest warrants,

intelligence sharing These may now be up

for renegotiation but after meeting with the EU's Security Commissioner,

Mr Khan stressed the It is in nobody's interests for us

to have less good links with our European partners

after Brexit, in relation Brexiters disagree that leaving

the EU could make us less safe. Our intelligence gathering

abilities, a lot of our security expertise, we are doing that

on a bilateral basis, most of that. We are doing it with other

European partners, but not In her letter to the EU,

the Prime Minister mentioned security 11 times, calling

for a special partnership that takes in both economic

and security cooperation. Something she stressed

to MPs this week. With Europe's security more fragile

today than at any time since the end of the Cold War,

weakening our cooperation and failing to stand up for European

values would be a costly mistake. Some are saying that

sounds like a threat. We're joined by Professor

Malcolm Chalmers from Before we get onto that,

whether or not it sounded like a threat, in a nutshell,

has being part of the EU enhanced There's both the more

technical level, police and intelligence cooperation,

an element of which is governed by EU wide agreements,

much of which is not. We will have to look at how

that is continued after Brexit. There is also the broader

foreign and security policy arrangements,

for example, agreeing EU sanctions against Russia,

Iran or whoever it might be. That is a mechanism

which we will have to redevelop in some other form once we leave

the European Union. Can you participate fully,

can you do a good job of countering terrorism and providing security

when you're outside The United States and

the European Union have many legally binding agreements in a number

of areas, not least on data sharing which is absolutely critical

in terms of intelligence. Once we are outside

the European Union, we will have to develop something of that sort

in order to replicate the benefits that the United States

or other major powers have. Nick Clegg, the former

Deputy Prime Minister, said this week that you would be

losing access to Schengen systems, data information systems,

absolutely crucial, he said. Is that absolutely crucial,

does that imperil our ability As the Prime Minister made clear

in the Article 50 letter, in the absence of any agreement

on security cooperation after Brexit, there would be real

risks, so it is very important for our security and the security

of our neighbours that we reach such such an agreement before we withdraw

from existing agreements. Do you think it sounded

like a threat, what she said today, the coupling together of that

with the trade deal? I was struck by how important

security was in our letter and how relatively unimportant

it was in the reply In the European reply,

the main emphasis was Security and counterterrorism

was mentioned, but in the Article 50 letter from the UK,

as your report suggests, There was considerable reference

to the increased dangers Security was almost put

on a par with economics. I do not think a direct threat

was made, but implicit in it was that nothing is agreed

until everything is agreed. We always deal in simplicities,

I am afraid, on this programme. If you had to answer whether this

made things more difficult, When we talk about whether or not

it was a threat, would we suffer, or would the EU suffer more from us

taking away our information, our Terrorism, organised crime,

cybercrime are all international phenomena which we have to tackle

through international cooperation, most of all with our neighbours,

but also globally. It does not make any sense

to make a calculation as to whether you increase

the probability of a terror attack in Paris more than the probability

of a terrorist attack in London. It is a shared concern

which we have to tackle together. Neil, you said at the beginning

of the programme you thought this is what we shouldn't be

using as a bargaining chip. What she's doing is just

stating a reality. If you want to treat the UK

properly and seriously, you will provide them

with a sensible trade deal, otherwise things like security

will suffer, it is inevitable? We have heard the government talk

about British people living in other EU countries and EU citizens living

here as bargaining chips, now we are seeing the government

trying to lever in that implicit threat of security being,

you know, the trade deal being contingent on what we share

in terms of security. It is an utterly despicable

gesture by the government. Actually if you look

at what the United Kingdom contributes to the security

and defence of Europe, it is more than any other country,

and that is going to continue. We are a responsible nation,

we want to work with our allies and partners within the EU,

via Nato, but as Gisela Stuart said Most countries have bilateral

agreements on these things. It is irresponsible to throw this

into the mix and say we might not cooperate on security if we do not

get the trade deal. What about the wider issue

of whether we will be any less We should recognise

that the security services in this country do an incredible job

of tackling domestic home grown terror of the kind we sadly saw

in London last week. But the idea that we would not

want to share and prevent attacks That is not what the Prime Minister

is saying, she is highlighting the importance of getting bilateral

security agreements in place, she is emphasising

the importance of this. The EU is almost taking it

for granted, and I do not I think we need to work together

with our European friends to make sure that all people of Europe

are safe and secure. You're saying they should not take

for granted that we share intelligence on threats to them,

or they are sharing threats with us. If we are to defeat terrorists,

prevent attacks, we must work Malcolm, a final word,

the European arrest warrant, which we have heard a lot about,

we come out of that Can we get exactly the same

arrangement afterwards? It is possible to get

the same arrangement. The point is that all of these

are about the rule of law, legally binding agreements

which strike the right balance between the rights of the individual

and the responsibility of state. The current advice given

by the European Court of Justice? Cyber security is another example

where the European Union regulations play a central role in how

we guide our firms You can have new legal arrangements,

but it is not simply a case of ad hoc bilateral

cooperation after Brexit. You have to have laws in place

to govern that relationship. Now for the rest of the political

news in 60 Seconds. The firm which operates

the Hong Kong metro has been awarded the franchise to run

South West Trains for seven years. The Department For Transport said

the new operators would oversee a ?1.2 billion investment to improve

journeys for millions A six-year cost-cutting partnership

between Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea

and Hammersmith and Fulham boroughs, to share some

services, has collapsed. Westminster and Kensington

and Chelsea authorities accuse Hammersmith and Fulham of appearing

to make alternative in-house plans without any formal engagement

with the other two local authority About 200 couriers are threatening

legal action against the takeaway They are claiming that they are

employees and entitled Deliveroo claims that delivery

riders are self-employed contractors and are not entitled

to basic employment rights. On this Brexit focused programme,

Neil Coyle, what now needs to happen over the next two years,

what are you watching for? My starting point is I would prefer

us not to be leaving the European Union,

but what the government needs to do is stop deceiving and committing

this fraud on British people, and outline the dangers

and costs that we face, so, British students pay more to go

to universities because universities do not have European funding

or international student numbers. Which hospitals do you want

to close, which social care services do you want to stop serving people

because they cannot recruit? What farms do you want

to stop operating? What are you going to say to the car

manufacturers who face What do you say to businesses

who want to recruit? What do you say to hotels

who are reliant on EU nationals? In about 35 seconds,

you have got hospitals, Frankly, we have a great future

ahead of our great United Kingdom. As long as people like Neil

and others stop the Remoaning, accept the will of the British

people, let's trade globally, make our own laws, work

with our friends and neighbours, let's support businesses and give

them the opportunity to be If we go on and on about being

unhappy about leaving, To both of you, thanks very

much indeed for doing So, what will be the effect

of new tax and benefit changes Will the Government's grand

trade tour reap benefits? And are the Lib Dems really

going to replace Labour, To answer that last question,

I'm joined by from Salford by the Lib Dem MP, Alistair

Carmichael. Michael Fallon sirs the Lib Dems

will replace Labour. How long will it take? We will have to wait and

see. Anyone who thinks you can predict the future is engaged in a

dodgy game. I have been campaigning with the Liberal Democrats in

Manchester... You must not mention... You know the by-election

rules. It is only an illustration. Across false ways of the country,

the Liberal Democrats are back in business -- across whole swathes of

the country. Part of the reason why we are getting a good response is

because the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn has taken such a

self-destructive path. Even if you do pretty well in the local

elections, it you have to make up lost ground from the time you did

very well in previous times, you used to have 4700 councillors. It

will take you a long while to get back to that. You will get no

argument from me that we have a mountain to climb. What I'm telling

you is, and if this is not just in this round of elections, it is in

the other by-elections in places like Richmond, and in by-elections

write the length and breadth of the country since last June, the Liberal

Democrats are taking seats from the Labour Party under Conservative

Party, and not just in Brexit phobic areas. Not just in Remain areas. But

in places like Sunderland as well which voted very heavily for Brexit.

In fact, that vote was in large part as well a protest against the way in

which the Labour Party really has taken these areas for granted over

the years. That is why the ground is fertile for us. In the local

elections which is what we are discussing today, why would anybody

vote for the Liberal Democrats if they believed in Brexit? Mr Farren

has said he wants to reverse works. If you are Brexit supporter and you

are considering how to cast your vote, first of all, I think you will

be looking at the quality of representation you can get for your

local area and you are right, we have a lot of ground to recoup from

previous elections, we lost 124 seats, communities have now had a

few years to reflect on the quality of service they have been able to

get and they have missed the very effective liberal Democrat

councillors they have had. This is not just about whether you are a

believer or remainer, ultimately, that is an issue we are going to

have to settle and we will settle it not in the way the Government is

having by dictating the terms of the debate, but by bringing the whole

country together. I think that is something you can only do if, as we

have suggested, you give the people the opportunity to have a say on the

deal when Theresa May eventually produces it. The only way you could

really replace Labour in the foreseeable future would be if a big

chunk of the centre and right of the Labour Party came over and join due

in some kind of new social democratic alliance. -- joined you.

There is no sign that will happen? I do not see whether common purpose is

anymore holding the Labour Party together. That is for people in the

Labour Party to make their own decisions. Use what happened to the

Labour Party in Scotland. -- you saw. Politics moved on and left them

behind and they were decimated as a consequence of that. So was your

party. It is possible the same thing could happen to the Labour Party and

the rest of the UK. Politics is moving on and they are coming up

with 1970s solutions to problems in 2017. Alistair Carmichael, thanks

for joining us. Let us have a look at some of the tax and benefit

changes coming up this week. The tax changes first of all. The personal

allowance is going to rise to ?11,500, the level at which you

start to pay tax. The higher rate threshold, where you start to play

at 40%, that will rise from currently ?43,400, rising up to 40

5000. -- pay. Benefit changes, freeze on working age benefits,

removal of the family element of tax credits and universal credit, that

is a technical change but quite an impact. The child element of tax

credit is going to be limited to two children on any new claims. The

Resolution Foundation has crunched the numbers and they discovered that

when you take the tax and benefit changes together, 80% go to better

off households and the poorest third or worse. What help -- what happened

to help the just about managing? The Resolution Foundation exists to find

the worst possible statistics... It is not clear the figures are wrong?

They are fairly recent figures and I have not seen analysis by other

organisations. The Adam Smith Institute will probably have some

question marks over it. Nobody should be surprised a Tory

government is trying to make the state smaller... And the poor

poorer. The system is propped up by better off people and so it will be

those people who will be slightly less heavily taxed as you make the

state smaller. Theresa May will have to stop just talking about the just

about managing. And some of her other language and the role of the

government and the state when she sounded quite positive... She

sounded like a big government conservative not small government.

In every set piece occasion, she says, it is time to look at the good

the government can do. That is not what you heard from Mrs Thatcher.

Tony Blair and Gordon Brown would not have dared to say it either even

if they believed it. It raises a much bigger question which is, as

well as whether this is a set of progressive measures, the Resolution

Foundation constantly argued when George Osborne announced his budget

measures as progressive when they were regressive when they checked

out the figures, but also how this government was going to meet the

demand for public services when it has ruled out virtually any tax

rises that you would normally do now, including National Insurance.

There are a whole range of nightmare issues on Philip Hammond's in-tray

in relation to tax. The Resolution Foundation figures do not include

the rise in the minimum wage which has just gone under way. They do not

include the tax free childcare from the end of April, the extra 15 hours

of free childcare from September. Even when you include these, it does

not look like it would offset the losses of the poorest households.

Doesn't that have to be a problem for Theresa May? It really is a

problem especially when her narrative and indeed entire purpose

in government is for that just about managing. What Mrs May still has

which is exactly a problem they have at the budget and the Autumn

Statement is that they are still saddled with George Osborne's

massive ring fences on tax cuts and spending. They have to go through

with the tax cut for the middle classes by pushing up the higher

rate threshold which is absolutely going to do nothing for the just

about managing. When they try to mitigate that, for example, in the

Autumn Statement, Philip Hammond was told to come up with more money to

ease the cuts in tax credits, came up with 350 million, an absolute...

It is billions and billions involved. Marginal adjustment. A

huge problem with the actual tax and benefit changes going on with what

Mrs May as saying. The only way to fix it is coming up with more money

to alleviate that. Where will you find it? Philip Hammond tried in the

Budget with the National Insurance rises but it lasted six and a half

days. I was told that it was one of the reasons why the Chancellor

looked kindly on the idea of an early election because he wanted to

get rid of what he regards as an albatross around his neck, the Tory

manifesto 2015, no increase in income tax, no increase in VAT, no

increase in National Insurance, fuel duty was not cut when fuel prices

were falling so it is hardly going to rise now when they are rising

again. This is why, I suggest, they end up in these incredibly

complicated what we used to call stealth taxes as ways of trying to

raise money and invariably a blow up in your face. Stealth taxes never

end up being stealthy. It is part of the narrative that budget begins to

fall apart within hours. You have to have sympathy, as Tom says, with

Philip Hammond. No wonder he would like to be liberated. The early

election will not happen. The best argument I have heard for an early

election. The tax and spend about at the last election was a disaster

partly because the Conservatives feared they would lose. Maybe they

could be a bit more candid about the need to put up some taxes to pay for

public services and it is very interesting what you picked up on

Philip Hammond because he is trapped. So constrained about... You

can also reopen the Ring fencing and spending and the obvious place to go

is the triple lock, OAP spending. Another case for an election. He

cannot undo the promise to that demographic. We will not get to 2020

without something breaking. The Prime Minister, the trade secretary

and Mr Hammond, they are off to India, the Far East, talking up

trade with these countries, I do not know if any of you are going? Sadly

not. Will it produce dividends? The prime Minster is going somewhere

too. No, it will not, the honest answer. No one will do a trade deal

with us because we cannot do one because we are still in the EU and

they need to know what our terms will be with the EU first before

they can work out how they want to trade with us. This is vital

preparatory work. Ministers always go somewhere in recess, it is what

they do. We will not see anything in a hurry, we will not see anything

for two years. They have to do it. Whatever side of the joint you are

on, Brexit, remain, we need to get out there. -- the argument. We

should have been doing this the day after the referendum result. It is

now several months down the line and they need to step it up, not the

opposite. You can make some informal talks, I guess. You can say, Britain

is open for business. There is a symbolism to it. What a lot of

energy sucked up into this. Parliament is not sitting so they

might as well start talking. We have run out of energy and time. That is

it for today. We are off for the Easter recess, back in two weeks'

time. If it is Sunday, it is the Sunday Politics. Unless it is that

used to recess! -- Easter recess. Marine Le Pen has her eyes

on the French presidency. As she tries to distance herself

from her party's controversial past, we follow the money and ask,

"Who's funding her campaign?" I think I've died and gone to

heaven. Saluti. Chin-chin. So, can anybody speak Italian?

No. Non parlo italiano.