14/05/2017 Sunday Politics London

Download Subtitles




Andrew Neil and Tim Donovan are joined by shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey, housing minister Brandon Lewis and American political pollster Frank Luntz.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 14/05/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



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


Theresa May unveils plans to build many more affordable homes


in England, but with no price tag, timetable or building targets -


Labour takes aim at the City with what it calls a Robin Hood Tax


to fund public services, but will traders just


Don't look at the polls - Jeremy Corbyn, at least,


insists he can win this election - so which way will


We'll hear from a focus group in Leeds.


We look at the Green electoral offer and here, what the parties are


saying about tackling the air pollution problem in London.


And with me, our own scientifically selected focus group


of political pundits - they're not so much


undecided as clueless - Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott


They'll be tweeting throughout the programme.


So, we've got two new policies this morning.


Labour say they will introduce a financial transaction tax


if they win the general election and what they're calling


"the biggest crackdown on tax avoidance in the country's history".


The Conservatives say they'll work with local authorities in England


to build council houses with the right to buy.


Theresa May says the policy "will help thousands of people


get on the first rung of the housing ladder".


Steve, what do you make of them? I have been conditioned after doing


tax and spend debates in pre-election periods for many


decades to treat policy is not as literal but as arguments. In other


words if you look back to 2015 the Tory plan to wipe out the deficit


was never going to happen and yet it framed and large event. In that


sense the Robin Hood tax is a sensible move for Labour to make at


this point because it is part of a narrative of reconfiguring taxation


to be fair. Treating it as an argument rather than something that


would happen in day one of Labour government is sensible. In terms of


building houses Theresa May said right from the beginning when she


was in Number Ten that there is a housing deficit in this country


rather than the economic deficit George Osborne was focusing on, and


this is an example of trying to get house-building going. It seems


entirely sensible, not sure how it works with right to buy but again as


framing of a 90 minute it makes sense. I disagree with Steve on one


front which is how sensible Theresa May's policy is on the housing


announcement. I think more broadly these two announcements have


something in common which is that over the next 24 hours both will


probably unravel in different ways. Ye of little faith! The Mayor of


London has already said he doesn't agree with this, and when people see


the actual impact of what looks like a populist tax will very potentially


affect people's pensions, it might become a lot less popular. On the


Tory housing plans, I think it is difficult to imagine how they are


going to implement this huge, what looks like a huge land and property


grab. Through compulsory purchase orders, which are not a simple


instrument. They say they will change the law but really the idea


of paying people below the market value for their assets is not


something I can see sitting easily with Tory backbenchers or the Tories


in the House of Lords. Tom. Both would appear superficially to be


appealing to traditional left and traditional right bases. What is


more Tory than right to buy, then councils sell on these houses, and


Labour slapping a massive tax on the city. The Tories' plan, I would say


look a bit deeper and all of the Tory narrative from the last six


years which hasn't worked well is talking about the private sector


increasing supply in the market. Now Mrs May is talking about the role


for the state after all so this is the shift creeping in. On the Labour


transaction tax, one of the most interesting things I heard in days


was from Paul Mason, former BBC correspondent, now a cog in Easter


extreme. On Newsnight he said don't worry about whether the Labour


manifesto will add up, I'm promising it will, the bigger Tory attack line


should be what on earth will be the macroeconomic effect of taking so


much tax out of the system. Very well, we shall see. At least we have


some policies to talk about. Now, on Tuesday Labour


will launch its manifesto. But we've already got a pretty good


idea of what's in it - that's because most of its contents


were leaked to the media Labour has a variety of spending


pledges including an extra ?6 billion a year for the NHS,


an additional ?8 billion for social care over the lifetime


of the next parliament, as well as a ?250 billion


in infrastructure over The party will support the renewal


of the Trident submarine system, although any Prime Minister should


be extremely cautious about its use, and the party


will hold a strategic defence and security review immediately


after the election. In terms of immigration,


Labour will seek "reasonable management of migration",


but it will not make "false Elsewhere, university tuition


fees will be abolished, and the public sector pay cap,


which limits pay rises for public sector workers


to 1%, will be scrapped. The party also aims to renationalise


the railways, the Royal Mail and the National Grid,


as well as creating at least one A senior Labour backbencher


described it to the Sunday Politics as a manifesto for a leadership


who don't "give a toss about the wider public",


and several other Labour candidates told us they thought it


had been deliberately leaked by the leadership,


with one suggesting the leak was intended to "bounce


the National Executive" And we're joined now from Salford


by the Shadow Business Secretary, Welcome to the programme. The draft


manifesto proposed to renationalise the number of industry. You will


wait for the franchises to run out rather than buy them out at the


moment so can you confirm the railways will not be wholly


nationalised until 2030, after three Labour governments, and Jeremy


Corbyn will be 80? I'm not going to comment on leaks, you will just have


to be patient and wait to see what is in our manifesto. But you have


already announced you will nationalise the railways, so tell me


about it. We have discussed taking the franchises into public ownership


as they expire, however the detail will be set out in the manifesto so


I'm not prepared to go into detail until that policy is formally laid


out on Tuesday. That doesn't sound very hopeful but let's carry on. You


will also nationalise the National Grid, it has a market capitalisation


of ?40 billion, why do you want to nationalise that? Again, I'm not


going to speculate on leaks, you will just have to be patient. But


you said you will nationalise the National Grid so tell's Y. The leaks


have suggested but you will just have to wait and see what the final


manifesto states on that one. So is it a waste of time me asking you how


you will pay for something that costs 40 billion? Be patient, just


couple of days to go, but what I would say is there is growing


pressure from the public to reform the utilities sector. The


Competition and Markets Authority stated in 2015 that bill payers were


paying over till debt -- ?2 billion in excess of what they should be


paying so there is a clear need for reform. The bills we get are from


the energy companies, you are not going to nationalise them, you are


going to nationalise the distribution company and I wondered


what is the case for nationalising the distribution company? As I said,


our full plans will be set out on Tuesday. In relation to the big six


energy companies, we know in recent years they have been overcharging


customers... There's no point in answering questions I am not asking.


I am asking what is the case for nationalising the National Grid?


There is a case for reforming the energy sector as a whole and that


looks at the activities of the big six companies and it will look at


other aspects too. You will have to be patient and wait until Tuesday.


What about the Royal Mail? Again, you will have to wait until Tuesday.


Why can't you just be honest with the British voter? We know you are


going to do this and you have a duty to explain. I'm not even arguing


whether it is right or wrong. The Royal Mail was sold off and we know


it was sold under value and British taxpayers have a reason to feel


aggrieved about that. There is a long-term strategy that would ensure


the Royal Mail was classified as a key piece of infrastructure but the


details of that will be set out in our manifesto because we want to


ensure businesses and households ensure the best quality of service


when it comes to their postal providers. You plan to borrow an


extra 25 billion per year, John McDonnell has already announced


this, on public investment, on top of the around 50 billion already


being planned for investment. You will borrow it all so that means, if


you can confirm, that many years after the crash by 2021, Labour


government would still be borrowing 75 billion a year. Is that correct?


We have set out ?250 billion of capital investment, and ?250 billion


for a national investment bank. Our financial and fiscal rules dictate


we will leave the Government in a state of less debt than we found it


at the start of the parliament so we won't increase the national debt at


the end of our Parliamentary term. How can you do that if by 2021 you


will still be borrowing around 75 billion a year, which is more than


we borrow at the moment? The 500 billion figure is set out over a


period of ten years, it's a figure that has been suggested by Peter


Helm from Oxford University as a figure that is necessary to bring us


in line with other industrial competitors. Similar figures have


been suggested by groups such as the CBI. By the way I have not included


all 500 billion, just the 250 billion on public spending, not the


extra money. You talk about the fiscal rules. The draft manifesto


said you will leave debt as a proportion of trend GDP law at the


end of each parliament, you have just said a version of that. What is


trend GDP? In clear terms we will ensure the debt we acquire will be


reduced by the end of the parliament. We won't leave the


Government finances in a worse state than we found them. OK, but what is


trend GDP? Our rule is we will ensure public sector net debt is


less than we found it when we came to power in Government on June the


8th. But that is not what your draft manifesto says. I'm not going to


comment on leaks, you are just going to have to wait until Tuesday to


look at the fine detail and perhaps we will have another chat then. You


have published your plans for corporation tax and you will


increase it by a third and your predictions assumed that will get an


extra 20 billion a year by the end of the parliament. But that assumes


the companies don't change their behaviour, that they move money


around, they leave the country or they generate smaller profits. Is


that realistic? You are right to make that point and you will see


when we set out our policies and costings in the manifesto that we


haven't spent all of the tax take. We have allowed for different


differentials and potential changes in market activity because that


would be approved and direction to take. But corporation tax is allowed


to be cut in France and the United States, it's only 12.5% in Dublin.


Many companies based in Britain are already wondering whether they


should relocate because of Brexit, if you increase this tax by a third


couldn't that clinch it for a number of them? No, we will still be one of


the lowest corporation tax rate in the G7. Let's look at what's


important for business. Cutting corporation tax in itself doesn't


improve productivity, or business investment and there's no suggestion


cutting corporation tax in recent years has achieved that. Businesses


need an investment in tools in things they need to thrive and


prosper, they also need to reduce the burden at the lower end of the


tax scale, before we get to the Prophet stage. One key example is


business rates. We have made the proposal to government to in --


exclude machinery so businesses can invest and grow operations in the


future but the Government refused. Corporation tax has been cut since


2010. When it was 28% it brought in ?43 billion a year. Now it is down


to 20%, it brought in ?55 billion a year. By cutting it in the last


year, it brought in 21% more, so what is the problem? It might have


brought in more money, but has it increased business investment in the


long term. It is not just about cutting corporation tax, but it is


on the ability of businesses to thrive and prosper. Business


investment in the UK is below are industrial competitors. Wages are


stagnating which doesn't indicate businesses are not doing well. Let


me get it right, you are arguing if we increase business tax by a third,


that will increase investment? I am not saying that. You just did. Know


I didn't, I said reducing business tax isn't enough, you have to invest


in the things businesses need to thrive and prosper. You have also


got to lessen the burden on business. You have announced a


financial transaction tax. Your own labour Mayor of London said he has


vowed to fight it. He said I do not want a unilateral tax on business in


our city, so why are you proceeding with it? This isn't a new


initiative, there is a growing global pressure to make sure we have


fairness in the financial sector. Ordinary British people are paying


for our banking crisis they didn't cause. Another important point,


stamp duty reserve tax was brought in in the 1600 and there have been


little reforms. The sector has changed and we have do provide


changes to the system for that change. High-frequency trading where


we have a state of affairs where a lot of shares are traded on


computers within milliseconds. We need a tax system that keeps up with


that. What happens if they move the computers to another country? Emily


Thornaby said this morning, other countries had already introduced a


financial transaction tax, what other countries have done that?


There are ten countries looking at introducing a transaction tax. Which


ones have done it so far? They will be later announcing a final package,


going through the finer detail at the moment. But the European


Commission tried to get this done in 2011 and it still hasn't happened in


any of these countries. But you are going to go ahead unilaterally and


risk these businesses, which generate a lot of money, moving to


other jurisdictions. There is not a significant risk of that happening.


The stamp duty reserve tax is levied at either where the person or


company is domiciled or where the instrument is issued rather than


worth the transaction takes place. This tax in itself is not enough to


make people leave this country in terms of financial services because


there is more to keep these businesses here in terms of the


investment we are making, the economy that Labour will build, in


terms of productivity improvement we will see. Thank you very much,


Rebecca Long-Bailey. And listening to that was the Home


Office Minister, Brandon Lewis. Over the years, you have got


corporation tax by 20%, it is lower than international standards, so why


are so many global companies who make money out of Great Britain,


still not paying 20%? It is one of the problems with the point Labour


were making and Rebecca could not answer, these companies can move


around the world. One of the important things is having a low tax


economy but these businesses, it encourages them to come at a rate


they are prepared to pay. People may say they are right, if they were


paying 19, 20% incorporation tax. But they are not. Google runs a


multi-million pound corporation and did not pay anywhere near 20%. There


are companies that are trading internationally and that is why we


have to get this work done with our partners around the world. Has there


been an improvement? It is more than they were paying before. Whether it


is Google or any other company, alongside them being here, apart


from the tax they pay, it is the people they employ. The deal was, if


you cut the business tax, the corporation tax on profits, we would


get more companies coming here and more companies paying their tax. It


seems it doesn't matter how low, a number of companies just pay a


derisory amount and you haven't been able to change that. As you


outlined, the income taken from the changing corporation tax has gone


up. That is from established British companies, not from these


international companies. It is because more companies are coming


here and paying tax. That is a good thing. There is always more to do


and that is why we want to crack down. In the last few weeks in the


Finnish Parliament, Labour refused to put to another ?8.7 billion of


tax take we could have got by cracking down further. You claim to


have made great progress on cracking down on people and companies to pay


the tax they should. But the tax gap is the difference between what HMRC


takes in and what it should take in. It has barely moved in five years,


so where is the progress? He have brought in 150 billion more where we


have cracked down on those tax schemes. The gap is still the same


as it was five years ago. It's gone from 6.8, 26.5. It has gone down.


The Prime Minister and the Chancellor said they want to


continue work on to get more money on these companies while still


having a competitive rate to encourage these companies. While big


business and the wealthy continue to prosper, the Office for Budget


Responsibility tell us those on average earnings in this country


will be earning less in real terms by 2021 than they did in 2008. How


can that be fair? I don't see it that way. I haven't seen the figures


you have got. What I can say to you, Andrew, we have made sure the


minimum wage has gone up, the actual income tax people pay has gone down.


So in their pocket, real terms, people have more money. You are the


self-styled party of work. We keep emphasising work. Under your


government you can work for 13 years and still not earn any more at the


end of it, and you did at the start. Where is the reward for effort in


that? I have not seen those figures. There are 2.8 million more people,


more jobs in economy than there was. 1000 jobs every day and people are


working and developing through their careers. This is what I thought was


odd in what Rebecca was saying, investing in people is what the


apprenticeship levy is about, companies are investing their works


force to take more opportunities that there. We are talking about


fairness, politicians talk about hard-working people and we know the


average earnings are no higher than they were in 2008. We know the pay


and bonuses of senior executives have continued to grow and the


Institute for Fiscal Studies has shown 3 million of the poorest


households will lose an average of ?2500 a year in the next Parliament,


benefits frozen, further sanctions kick in. 3 million of the poorest


losing 2500. Under the Tories, one law for the rich and another for the


poor. It is quite wrong. First of all, we have got to be fair to the


taxpayer who is funding the welfare and benefit system. Which is why the


welfare was right. Get more people in work and then it is important to


get more people upscaling. As that allowance rises, people have more of


the money they earn in their pocket to be able to use in the economy.


People will be worse off. 2500, among the poorest already. They will


have more money in their pocket as we increase the allowance before


people pay tax. We have seen millions of people coming out of tax


altogether. The reason I ask these questions, you and the Prime


Minister go on and on about the just about managing classes. I am talking


about the just about managing and below that. It is all talk, you


haven't done anything for them. We have made sure they have an


increasing minimum wage, it has gone up more under us than any other


previous government. Their wages will be still lower in real terms.


Let me come on to this plan for housing. We have announced a new


plan to increase affordable housing, social housing, some council housing


and social housing built by the associations. How much money is


behind this? It is part of the 1.4 billion announced in the Autumn


Statement. How many homes will you get for 1.4 billion? That depends on


the negotiations with local authorities. It is local


authorities, who know the area best. I will not put a number on that. 1.4


billion, if you price the house at 100,000, which is very low,


particularly for the South, back at you 14,000 new homes. That is it.


What we have seen before, how the local government can leveraged to


build thousands more homes. That is what we want to see across the


country. It is not just about the money, for a lot of local


authorities it is about the expertise and knowledge on how to do


this. That is why support from the housing communities minister will


help. What is the timescale, how many more affordable homes will be


built? I will not put a number on it. You announced it today, so you


cannot tell me how many more or what the target is? It is a matter of


working with the local authorities who know what their local needs are,


what land they have got available. What we saw through the local


elections with the Metro mayors, they want to deliver in their areas,


whether it is the West of England, the north-east, Liverpool,


Manchester and we want to work with them. You have said variations of


this for the past seven years and I want some credibility. When you


cannot tell us how much money, what the target and timescale is, and


this government, under which affordable house building has fallen


to a 24 year low. 1.2 million families are on waiting lists for


social housing to rent. That is your record. Why should we believe a word


you say? This is different to what we have been doing over the last two


years. We want to develop and have a strong and stable economy that can


sustain that 1.4 billion homes. This is important. In 2010, we inherited


the lowest level of house building, 75,000 new homes. That is about


189,000 over the last four years. That is a big step forward after the


crash, getting people back into the industry. More first-time buyers


onto the market. Final question, in 2010, 2011, your first year in


government, there were 60,000 affordable homes built. May not be


enough, but last day it was 30 2000. So why should we trust anything you


say about this? On housing, we have delivered. We have delivered more


social housing. Double what Labour did in 13 years, in just five years.


This is what this policy is about, working with local authorities to


deliver more homes to people in their local areas. Thank you.


Now, they have a deficit of between 15 and 20% in the polls,


but Jeremy Corbyn and those around him insist Labour can win.


If the polls are right they've got three and half weeks to change


voters' minds and persuade those fabled undecided voters


We enlisted the polling organisation YouGov to help us find out how


the performance of party leaders will affect behaviour


Leeds, a city of three quarters of a million people,


eight Parliamentary seats and home to our very own focus group.


Our panel was recruited from a variety of backgrounds


and the majority say they haven't decided who to vote for yet.


Watching behind the glass, two experts on different sides


Giles Cunningham, who headed up political press at Downing Street


under David Cameron and Aaron Bastani, Corbin supporter,


under David Cameron and Aaron Bastani, Corbyn supporter,


I think Theresa May sees herself as a pound shop Thatcher.


Milliband's policies but when it came


about who you want, if you wake up on maybe a 2015,


We found in a couple of focus groups, people saying


we'd be quite relieved, even though some of those same


people have been saying we quite like the Labour policies.


I think the fact that Corbyn's going so hard on his values,


this is a really progressive manifesto, they live


But I think that's a new challenge, that wasn't there in 2015.


Is there anyone here that you don't recognise?


After a little warm up, the first exercise, recognising


I think it's nice to have a strong woman in politics, I do.


But I've got to say, when she comes on the news,


I kind of do think, here we go again.


Tell me about Tim Farron, what are your impressions of Tim Farron?


It isn't going to do anything, it isn't going to change anything.


You'll be surprised to hear it's actually the Greens.


Strong and stable leadership in the national interest.


Yes, Team May, it's the British equivalent of make


What do we think about this one for the many and not the few?


It's not quite as bad as strong and stable,


but it will probably get on our nerves after a while.


We must seize that chance today and every day until June the 8th.


But that's not quite my question, my question is,


if you are Prime Minister, we will leave, come hell or high


water, whatever is on the table at the end of the negotiations?


If we win the election, we'll get a good deal with Europe.


Assertive and in control and he felt comfortable


But the second one, I thought he was very hesitant.


I thought he was kind of, hovering around, skirting around


and that's the second time I've seen a similar


interview with the question being asked regarding Brexit.


I don't think I'd have any confidence with him


You think you are going up against some quite strong people,


how are you going to stand up for us?


When you are in negotiations, you need to be tough.


And actually is right to be tough sometimes,


particularly when you are doing something for the country.


There's a reason for talking about strong and stable leadership.


It's about the future of the country, it's


It's just that people kind of listen to that kind of thing and think


Both on The One Show and in the news.


She attracts the public better than what Corbyn does.


She didn't answer the question in a more articular way than Corbyn


Imagine that Theresa May is an animal.


So, in your minds, what animal is coming to mind


I've done a Pekinese because I think she's all bark and no bite.


Alpaca because she's superior looking and woolly


I don't think his policies are for the modern, real world.


A mouse because they are weak and they can be easily bullied,


but also they can catch you by surprise if you're


What do you take away from what you saw then,


and what message would you send back to the Tories now?


I think what came over is people see Theresa May as a strong politician,


not everyone likes her, but you don't need to be


liked to be elected, because ultimately it's about who do


you trust with your future and your security.


I think what I also take out of that focus group,


was it was a group of floating voters, there was no huge appetite


for the Lib Dems and there was no huge appetite for Ukip.


So my messaged back to CCHQ would be stick to the plan.


I thought the response to the manifesto was excellent.


It's clear that people aren't particularly keen on Theresa May,


There are some associations with her about strength and stability,


which is exactly what the Tory party want of course, but they are not


positive and nobody thinks that she has a vision


So, what I'd say the Jeremy Corbyn, what I'd say to the Labour Party is,


they need to really emphasise the manifesto in


Jeremy Corbyn himself has to perform out of his skin and I think


he has to reemphasise those characteristics which may be have


come to the fore may be over the last 12 months,


resilience, strength and the fact that he's come this far,


why not take that final step and go into ten Downing Street?


We're joined now by the American political consultant


For the sake of this discussion, assume the polls at the moment are


broadly right, is there any hope for Mr Corbyn in the undecided voters?


Know, and this is a very serious collection with serious consequences


to who wins. Nobody cares whether you can draw and what animal they


represent, they want to know where they stand, and I felt that was


frivolous. I come to Britain to watch elections because I learned


from here. Your elections are more substantial, more serious, more


policy and less about personality and that peace was only about


personality. That's partly because Mrs May has decided to make this a


presidential election. You can see on the posters it is all Team May. I


agree with that, and in her language she says not everyone benefits from


a Conservative government, I don't see how using anything Republicans


have used in the past. In fact her campaign is more of a centrist


Democrats but it is a smart strategy because it pushes Corbyn further to


the left. Of course you said Hillary Clinton have won. On election night


the polling was so bad in America, the exit polls that were done, the


BBC told America she had won. No, I was anchoring the programme that


night, I ignored your tweet. The BBC had the same numbers. Yes, but we


did not say she had won, I can assure you of that. Because of


people like you we thought she had but we didn't broadcast it. That was


a smart approach. My point is other than teasing you, maybe there is


hope for Jeremy Corbyn. I think you will have one of the lowest turnout


in modern history and I think Labour will fall to one of the lowest


percentages, not percentage of number of seats they have had, and


this will be a matter of soul-searching for both political


parties. What you do with a sizeable majority, and she has a


responsibility to tell the British people exactly what happens as she


moves forward. He and Labour will have to take a look at whether they


still represent a significant slice of the British population. Do you


see a realignment in British politics taking place? I see a


crumbling of the left and yet there is still a significant percentage of


the British population that once someone who is centre-left. And they


like a lot of Mr Corbyn's policies. I'm listening to Michael foot. I


went to school here in the 1980s and I feel like I'm watching the Labour


Party of 35 years ago, in a population that wants to focus on


the future, not the past. Thank you. It's just gone 11.35,


you're watching the Sunday Politics. 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. Hello and welcome to the London part


of the show. Joining me for the duration -


David Lammy, Labour candidate for Tottenham, and Mark Field


Conservative candidate for the I want to start with you David


and the Labour Manifesto. Let's talk about tax because the


parts of the Labour manifesto we have seen so far is date they are


planning to increase taxes on those who earn over ?30,000 per year, do


you support that? Absolutely, average wages in London are around


35,000, depending on where you are in the city. When I think of care


workers, the vast majority need public services we can count on and


that means for the small percentage at the top they should pay a bit


more. But why not more than that? John McDonnell says it is a modest


increase, but why not be more radical? We have also said there


should be changes to corporation tax, which were slashed dramatically


by George Osborne, and I think inheritance tax, which was also


slashed by the Government, so it's not just the income tax threshold we


are looking at, but quite properly, if you see the social care crisis we


have got, if you are worried about A queues, we need at the top to


pay more and that's why it's popular. 58% on pest and saying they


were for it. And Labour has been clear, if you want to go for a low


tax party you must vote for the Labour party, not the Conservative


Party. Let's see what is in the manifesto. I don't think you should


prejudge it. Londoners do not feel undertaxed. Which Londoners? Many


Londoners. I expect the Londoners I represent are slightly different...


In Ealing and Acton, Brentford and Chiswick, areas such as Westminster


North, 80,000 is not a lot of money. It is a very expensive city in which


to live, their cost of living is high, but anyone on ?55,000 per year


will think Hang on, I'm two promotions away from being regarded


as super rich. Do you think anyone who burns over ?80,000 are


super-rich? I can afford to pay a bit more and I am over ?80,000 and


so is Mark. The vast majority of Londoners are nowhere near that and


that is on two incomes in their homes. We have been feeling the


squeeze since 2008 when wages have not gone up in this city. Are you


supporting the wrong people in this election if you are going to


criticise a policy like this? If you look at it in the round across the


country, 95% of people won't pay higher taxes under Labour, that's


pretty good. That's the way they are putting it at the moment. People are


aspiring to earn more. I think the biggest story I hear particularly


about income tax is that many people who are burning in the higher rates


of tax feel a massive disincentive to working harder. Are you killing


aspirations? The choice is between taxation or austerity, and the


Tories have gone for slashing and burning as always. Our local


authority not even properly able to clean the streets and the rubbish


bins. Look at the housing we haven't built. All that we absolutely need


to see a tax threshold increase. Let's talk about the style of the


campaign, Labour were criticised in parts of the press because of the


last week but what about the Tory campaign, is it too presidential?


Theresa May has made it all about her, not about the party. Not at


all, it's about the team behind her. She has made it clear, and clearly


there is a disparity, and we want to say to the public at large there is


a choice. Only two people can be Prime Minister come the 9th of June.


It cannot be Nicola Sturgeon or Tim Farron, and it's right to boil it


down to a choice. It has been because I presidential campaign but


Theresa May has strong views and she needs not just a mandate to get


Brexit through but more importantly there has been too much short-term


is in politics as a whole. The idea that we want to say we want a


domestic agenda... Has it been extended beyond just Theresa May, in


our experiences in trying to get Tory representatives to put people


up... Yes, you are here but we have also experienced people who said


they will come on, then it has been scuppered by Conservative Central


office which plays into the idea of questions being briefed from


journalists to Theresa May before she is asked questions. To be fair


all elections are thermally controlled events. You are always


looking to try to find divisions and it applies to the Labour Party as


well as our party, rather than have a broad debate. As London MPs David


and I probably agree on more things that might meet the eye but there


are certain issues where we wouldn't be entirely at one with our party


necessarily, on whole range of issues such as migration. We are


living in a global city, we recognise the importance of


financial services, and therefore if we come on the programme is the last


thing we want to hear is, you are divided from what your party


leadership are saying. In the first in our series of films


looking at what the parties have to offer London,


Andrew Cryan has been out and about with the Green


party in North London. The fullest environmental parties


blossomed in the 1970s. Are we really going to have


twice as many cars? But today they've evolved


into something different, and the Green Party is fighting this


election on a whole range of policies, many of which bear


a striking similarity When I heard their manifesto


being leaked and discussed on Radio 4 yesterday morning, I thought


it was our manifesto that had been leaked for a moment,


and then I realised some of the policies weren't quite


as radical as ours. The Green Party manifesto


is due out in a few days, but the policies they have released,


well many are exactly the same as Labour's, including votes for 16


year olds and a promise to end both university tuition fees


and NHS privatisation. Both parties say they want to scrap


the Government's immigration target, introduce rent controls,


and build a very similar number Well, the Greens, I think,


have the real challenge, electorally, that the Labour Party


in its current and with its current leadership


is probably quite attractive to many Green voters,


so those voters who in ex-Labour voters who had gone


to the Greens will now But there is one big policy


the Greens are hoping They want a second


referendum on EU membership. People should vote Green for a party


that will give people a say on the terms of any EU exit deal


that is negotiated by whoever is Prime Minister after


the general election. But the reality of this election


is that the Green Party's number one priority is to protect their soul


MP, Caroline Lucas, in Brighton Pavilion,


and maybe if they are lucky pick up At the weekends, many Green


activists from London are not campaigning in the capital


but jumping on a train On the Green Party website,


none of the seats they are giving priority to are in London,


and in fact, in some of the key races in the capital,


the Greens aren't putting Now, this is one of


the tightest constituencies in all of the country,


Ealing Central and Acton. The Labour Party won it last


time by just 274 votes. Now, on the 8th of June,


the Green Party have decided not to stand a candidate,


saying people should lend their votes to Labour


and keep the Tories out. Stephen Clarke has helped


negotiate deals between those There are now five seats in London


where the Greens have I think the Green Party have clearly


operated more in the spirit of the alliance than the other


parties and I think this has got They passed a resolution


at their recent conference which said it was for local parties


to decide whether, in the interests of pushing the Green agenda


and pushing electoral change, if they chose to stand


aside they could. Traditionally the Greens have tended


to rely on younger voters, but where they are standing


candidates in London, they will be fighting hard for votes


from people of all ages. The question is whether


in their hearts they are I am joined by Sian Berry


from the London Assembly, The Tories have called the


selection, voters out there know they shouldn't do just what the


Tories say. Lots of people are wondering how we can prevent this. 1


million voted in the last election for the Green party but we still


only came out with one MP. The system is broken and we have to be


working with voters to change the system so millions of people across


the country in marginals and in areas where the Greens are not


strong, where it is Labour against Tory save seeds, we have to do


something about that. That is always the battle cry from you and the


Liberal Democrats in terms of the voting system, but even so, the


figures are going in the wrong direction for you, where as you were


building last time round? The thing we have done in this election is


putting people in the direction of stopping the Tories getting a huge


majority. That has to be reflected in maybe a dip in the National


polls. But in areas like Islington North where Caroline is campaigning,


people want a second referendum on Brexit... In other areas, it is not


unique. How big an issue is Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party because


that manifesto, as your colleagues, it could have been the Green party


manifesto. If you are going to go for a left of centre Progressive


Alliance, you will vote for the Labour Party. The only party you can


count on who will look after the environments, and Labour has a mixed


up policy on Brexit. Talking about cutting freedom of movement and not


being in the single market is what the Greens in Parliament will fight


for. We have promised everyone in the country a final say on the deal


that will come from the EU. Almost nobody under the age of 21 by the


time we exit the EU, will have had a say on that. That is a distinctive


offer, but you are hailing the Alliance as something that has been


adopted broadly. They have not taken up your cry on this issue, whether


it would have worked or not, we will never know. You are not contesting


five London seats. It is not being reciprocated in any formal way, why


bother gives the Liberal Democrats and Labour the free run? There were


more than six seats across London where this thing was considered. It


is a shame Labour didn't join in at a national level and stand aside in


the Isle of Wight. But in other places where we are doing it, these


are tiny majorities, where it does make sense for the progressive vote


to come behind the Labour candidate and I am proud of the Greens who


have done that. Is it a missed opportunity, white isn't Labour


working with the Greens because you could've maximised your seats? I am


worried about any potential for a lack of opposition for a


Conservative government so I am more open to working with the Greens than


others in my party. I have worked well with Caroline Lucas in our


opposition to Brexit, we share an all-party group. Having said that, I


am pleased to see the Greens stand down in places like Ealing, where I


do think you have strong MPs, you want that support. Therefore, there


is a continued discussion on where we can work together. Have you


talked to the Greens locally? Yes, we have talked to the Greens in the


London Borough of Haringey. But you wouldn't be in favour of that? The


election was called very quickly. This is a special election, enormous


things at stake. Apart from your offer on Brexit, what is it you


don't like about the Labour manifesto? There is definitely a


role for the Greens on the London assembly, challenging the mayor on


some of his broken promises on estates and renting. On tax, rail


nationalisation, when it comes to the salaries for the public sector,


anything you disagree with? We are in our 2015 manifesto and we are


flattered to see them taken up by the Labour Party. We are a distinct


party and we have a distinct offer in the selection, which is the final


combination on Brexit, and you won't find another party doing that. In


terms of the environment, could we say the Conservative Party is


environment light? I would not say it is light. Where the Green party


had difficulty making breakthrough, which is tribute to their


involvement in politics over the years, both the Conservative Party


and the Labour Party have taken on certain policies. Which one?


Immolation, one of the regrets, the whole business in the High Court


before the election was called, that will be a priority if we are


re-elected, we will get something on clean air. In general terms, do you


think the Conservative Party could do more and has gone backwards? No,


there is a huge amount on renewables, solar and wind energy.


In the last ten years there has been a change in the tax treatment in


relation to this. In many ways, a tribute to the impact the Green


party has had as a movement. I have spent the last five years fighting


the Conservative's road-building plans. We don't have a green


government. Everything they do is tiny and token. We need the Greens


in Parliament arguing for comprehensive things like a


sustainable transport policy and clean air act. Let's move on to that


issue. Let's move on to an issue


of particular interest to the Green party and one which campaigners say


should be a major concern for all political parties -


air quality in the capital. Our environment correspondent


Tom Edwards reports on what the parties are proposing


to tackle the problem, which affects many living in London


and might well influence A community in Kennington


demanding action on bad air. My name is Aoife, I am


seven years old... They want all parties


to sign their Clean Air pledge. I want to try and clean up


the pollution in the air so when I get older I won't have


lung disease or problems I feel that the bad air I will be


breathing in will make me ill. 45,000 vehicles a day use this


road, poor air quality Will it affect how you


vote in the election? There needs to be


a Clean Air agenda. We can't continue like


this, this is a killer. We are pretending it's not


there because you can't see it, ARCHIVE: If it weren't


for the smoke-laden fog outside, The last big political


intervention on air quality ARCHIVE: Here is the main source


of atmospheric pollution. The Clean Air Act banned coal


after the great smog, There are calls for new legislation


to tackle fumes from traffic. About 50% of nitrogen dioxide


is due to road traffic. The mayor says he can deal


with about half of that with his ultralow emission zone


where the polluter pays, but he'll need help from whoever


is elected here to deal Children here at the Royal Brompton


see the impact of London's high levels of pollution,


especially nitrogen dioxide. Experts say it slows lung growth


and poor air is shortening the lives These doctors want


action and this week, took their message to Downing


Street. It is about changing the fleet,


removing the vehicle fleet, removing the vehicles that are most


polluting, particularly the older diesel vehicles,


but making sure the newer vehicles As soon as I asked Sophie Walker,


who is my party leader, In Kennington, the Women's


Equality Party, the Greens, the Liberal Democrats and Labour


all pledge to clean up pollution. We really do want to see a diesel


scrappage scheme because we think getting diesel cars off our roads


is the most important thing we can do to improve the air quality,


particularly in London, particularly in places


like Kennington. What we will be setting


out in our manifesto are a national framework,


a national framework which doesn't just give local


authorities the responsibility, but actually make sure they are then


backed up with the competence We have to have a Clean Air Act


that is fit for the 21st century, that can deal with these poisonous,


tiny, tiny little particles that get deep into our lungs


and into our bloodstreams. The Conservatives didn't attend,


they would charge diesel drivers The real public health


issues are in areas, our main cities where there


are particular problems. That's where we should be


focusing our efforts. We don't want to see a national


programme of penalising motorists. Clean air campaigners say London


is now in the grip of a health emergency and say all parties should


make tackling it a priority. David Lambie, how would you get


diesel cars off the road. We have got to move to a scrappage scheme,


move away from diesel. The evidence has moved on. We understand a


particular problem with pollutants and particles in the lungs. Children


are dying in this city and I suspect in other major cities across the


country. That is why it is a national scheme. In a sense, the


running the mayor has done in London with the High Commission zones and


his toxicity charge have to become national and that is why we need a


new clean air act. As we got rid of smog in the past, we need to deal


with this and it needs a national framework. Do you agree that,


charging diesel drivers as a last resort, will not get diesel cars off


the road. Simon Burkett, my friend... Environmental science is


in a state of flux, because 15 years ago the government at the time was


saying go down the diesel route. We need a diesel scrappage scheme but


we need to recognise those who were in scent of eyes to go down the


diesel route and should be getting some compensation. You are


penalising drivers, and many of them would have bought diesel cars


thinking it was the right thing to do?


Yes, and the car-makers should pay. They should be the ones paying, we


shouldn't give them a bonus for a scrappage scheme. Diesel damaging


people's lungs was well established at the time. What is the choice,


children dying or looking at the car manufacturers, many who spun against


the evidence at the time, and saying, yes, actually, if we are


putting a framework together they have to take more of a burden than


the taxpayer so we can move forward and create an environment we can all


live in. I'm saying let back car manufacturers, let's not move away


from diesel -- that is what the Tories are saying. It is a very


emotive subject and we have run out of time.


On Thursday nominations closed in the 650 parliamentary


seats across the country, so now we know exactly who's


We've been analysing the parties' candidates to find out


what they might tell us about the make-up of the House


Well, we know Theresa May is committed to delivering Brexit and


analysis of Conservative candidates has shown that


in their top 100 target seats, 37 candidates supported leave


during last year's referendum campaign


and 20 supported remain; 43 have not made public


In the last parliament, the vast majority of Labour MPs


were hostile to Jeremy Corbyn so how supportive are Labour


Well, of 50 of Labour's top 100 target seats


17 candidates have expressed support for Mr Corbyn.


20 candidates supported Owen Smith in last year's leadership contest


or have expressed anti-Corbyn sentiment, and


If they won those, the Labour benches would be


marginally more sympathetic to Mr Corbyn than they are now.


What do the figures tell us about where the other


Well, the Lib Dems have decided not to stand against the Greens


in Brighton Pavilion, and are fielding 629


candidates this year - that's two fewer than 2015.


The number of Ukip candidates has fallen dramatically.


They are standing in 247 fewer constituencies than 2015,


throwing their support behind solidly pro-Brexit Tories


in some areas such as Lewes and Norfolk North.


The Greens are fielding 103 fewer candidates


than at the last election, standing down to help


other progressive candidates in some places.


The most liking statistic is the demise in Ukip candidates, is this


their swansong? And I think so. It is remarkable how few Ukip


candidates are standing. It is hard to see they will suddenly revive in


the next couple of years. I think this is probably the end. Frank


Luntz mentioned the fragmentation of the left was a feature of this


election, but also there is the consolidation of the right, and if


you take the things together that could explain why the polls are


where they are. Absolutely, that's precisely what happened at the start


of the 1980s, the right was incredibly united and that's when we


started talking about majorities of over 100 or so. No matter what the


size of Theresa May's majority, it will be the total collapse of Ukip,


but not just because we are now leaving the EU and that was their


only reason for being, but a whole lot of people voted for Ukip because


they felt the Tories were no longer listening. Theresa May has given the


impression that she is listening, and that is the biggest possible


thing that could happen to the Tory vote. Fragmentation of the left,


consolidation of the right? It's one of the lessons that is never learnt,


it happened in the 1980s, it doesn't take much for the whole thing to


fracture so now you have on the centre-left the SNP, the Labour


Party, the Greens, the Liberal Democrats all competing for the same


votes and when you have, fleetingly perhaps, large numbers coalescing on


the right in one party, there is only going to be one outcome. It


happens regularly. It doesn't mean the Tories haven't got their own


fragility. Two years ago, David Cameron and George Osborne the


dominant figures, neither are in Parliament now which is a symptom of


the fragility this election is disguising. Mrs May's position in a


way reminds me of Mrs Thatcher in the 1980s, I won't be outflanked on


the right, Nicolas Sarkozy in France, I won't be outflanked on the


right, so the National Front didn't get through either timed he ran to


the second round on like this time, and now Mrs May on Brexit won't be


outflanked Iver and as a result has seen off right flank. And also she


is looking to the left as well with some of the state interventions.


What was interesting about the analysis you showed a few minutes


ago was the number of Tory candidates who have apparently not


declared which way they voted in the referendum, and you would have


thought if this election was all about Brexit, as some would claim,


that would become an unsustainable position, and actually more it's


about leadership. But the point that I'm now hearing from a number of


Labour candidates that they are seeing Tory leaflets that don't even


have the Tory candidate's name on them, it is just about Theresa May.


I am glad they are keeping to the law because by law they have to put


it on. It has been harder for some of the smaller parties too because


of the speed of the election being called. We have the manifesto is


coming out this week. I think Labour Forshaw on Tuesday, we are not yet


sure when the Tories will bring bears out. I suggest one thing, it


will at least for people like me bring an end to the question you


will have to wait for the manifesto. And Rebecca Long baby will never


have that excuse again, isn't it wonderful! She is not the only one.


When you are trying to take the north and Midlands from Labour, I


would go to one or the other. For me, I can barely hold back my


excitement over the Tory manifesto. This will be, I think, the most


important day for the British government for the next five years.


That wasn't irony there? You actually meant that? I'm not even


being cynical at all on Sunday Politics! This is a huge day and


it's because I think we will see... I don't think Mrs May will play it


safe and I don't think we will get the broadbrush stuff that she might


be advised to do. I think she will lay out precisely what you want to


do over the next five years and take some big risks. Then finally after a


year of this guessing and theorising, we will finally work out


what Mrs May is all about. She will say she doesn't want the next


parliament to be all about Brexit, though she knows that's the next


important thing she has to deliver in some way, so she gets a mandate


for that if the polls are right but she


does have very different ideas from Mr Cameron about how to run a


country. She will I assume one to mandate for what these different


ideas are. Otherwise there is no point in holding an early election.


You will get a majority, but if you get a mandate to carry on


implementing the Cameron and Osborne manifesto it would be utterly


pointless. I agree, it is the pivotal event of the election and it


will be interesting to see the degree to which she expands on the


line which interests me about its time to look at the good that


government can do. Because in a way this moves the debate on in UK


politics from, from 97 the Blair Brown governments were insecure


about arguing about the role of government. Cameron Osborne


government similarly so, so here you have a Labour Party talking about


the role of government and the state, and Tory leader apparently


doing so was well. I think that will be really interesting to see whether


it is fleshed out in any significant way. And it is not a natural Tory


message. Harold Macmillan talked about the role of the state, Ted


Heath Mark two was pretty big on the state, the industrial policy and so


on, and even if it is not thought to be that Tory, does she get away with


it because she deliver such a big victory if that's what she does


deliver? Just inject a little note of scepticism, I wonder how much of


this is authentically Theresa May. I was interested to and talk to


someone who used to sit in cabinet meetings during which Theresa May


never expressed an opinion on anything outside the Home Office


briefs. Other ministers were roving all over their colleagues' briefs.


So where are the ideas coming from? I think we can point to Nick


Timothy. One of her closest advisers in Downing Street. It will be


interesting to see how that evolves. On Thursday I think we will all be


talking about something called Urdington Toryism. Urdington is the


suburb of Birmingham where Nick Timothy comes from, who is very much


Theresa May's policy brain and leading inspiration. Urdington


Toryism is about connecting the party with traditional working class


voters, and their belief to do that is not just taking away government


out of their lives but showing them that government can actually help


their lives. It can be a force for good to rebuild the trust. A lot of


what Mrs May talks about is all... It is talk and then a lot of it


suddenly goes by the wayside. What happened to worker directors on the


boards. It is designed to appeal to that constituency and then nothing


happens. She had an excuse before in the sense that it wasn't in the 2015


manifesto and she had a small majority so therefore she arguably


had to water down some of the stuff for example in her Tory conference


speech, which had a lot of this active government material in it. If


she puts it in the manifesto, it is a sign she plans to do it and will


have no excuse if she then gets nervous afterwards because it will


be in there. If it wasn't for Brexit, this great overwhelming


issue, I think this election will be seen as quite a significant


development in terms of an argument around the role of government,


much-needed. But Brexit unfortunately overshadows it all. As


much as we like our arguments over the role of government we will hear


strong and stable, stable and strong ad nauseam, aren't we? Absolutely,


and we heard the same old lines from the Labour Party as well so they are


all at it. It will be a fascinating week, stop talking it down! Thanks


to our panel. The Daily Politics will be


back on BBC Two at noon I'll be back here at the same time


on BBC One next Sunday. Remember - if it's Sunday,


it's the Sunday Politics. When it came to my TV habits,


I'd watch anything... But now I can sign in online


and get more of what I love. I'm kept up to date


with the shows I love and I get suggestions


on subjects I'll like. A new personalised BBC


is on its way. To tailor the benefits to you,


sign in and introduce yourself.


Andrew Neil and Tim Donovan are joined by shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and Home Office minister Brandon Lewis to discuss the party manifestos for the forthcoming general election. Plus American political pollster Frank Luntz, and a chat with undecided voters in Leeds. Journalists Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards review the papers.