21/05/2017 Sunday Politics London


21/05/2017

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 21/05/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

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

:00:29.:00:32.

Labour attacks Conservative plans for social care and to means-test

:00:33.:00:35.

So can Jeremy Corbyn eat into the Tory lead

:00:36.:00:38.

Theresa May says her party's manifesto is all about fairness.

:00:39.:00:44.

We'll be speaking to a Conservative cabinet minister about the plans.

:00:45.:00:48.

The polls have always shown healthy leads for the Conservatives.

:00:49.:00:51.

But, now we've seen the manifestos, is Labour narrowing the gap?

:00:52.:00:56.

at the opposite ends of the Brexit spectrum.

:00:57.:00:59.

We're looking at the policies and chances of the Liberal Democrats

:01:00.:01:02.

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

:01:03.:01:16.

panel in the business: Sam Coates, Isabel Oakeshott

:01:17.:01:17.

and Steve Richards - they'll be tweeting throughout

:01:18.:01:19.

the programme, and you can get involved by using

:01:20.:01:22.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn says pensioners will be up to ?330 a year

:01:23.:01:30.

worse off under plans outlined in the Conservative manifesto.

:01:31.:01:42.

The Work Pensions Secretary Damian Green has said his party will not

:01:43.:01:48.

rethink their plans to fund social care in England. Under the plans in

:01:49.:01:52.

the Conservative manifesto, nobody with assets of less than ?100,000,

:01:53.:01:59.

would have to pay for care. Labour has attacked the proposal, and John

:02:00.:02:03.

McDonnell, Labour's Shadow Chancellor, said this morning that

:02:04.:02:06.

there needs to be more cross-party consensus.

:02:07.:02:10.

That's why we supported Dilnot, but we also supported

:02:11.:02:12.

Because we've got to have something sustainable over generations,

:02:13.:02:15.

so that's why we've said to the Conservative Party,

:02:16.:02:18.

Let's go back to that cross-party approach that actually

:02:19.:02:21.

I just feel we've all been let down by what's come

:02:22.:02:24.

Sam, is Labour beginning to get their argument across? What we had

:02:25.:02:35.

last week was bluntly what felt like not very Lynton Crosby approved

:02:36.:02:39.

Conservative manifesto. What I mean by that is that it looks like there

:02:40.:02:43.

are things that will cause political difficulties for the party over this

:02:44.:02:48.

campaign. I've been talking to MPs and ministers who acknowledge that

:02:49.:02:52.

the social care plan is coming up on the doorstep. It has cut through

:02:53.:02:58.

very quickly, and it is worrying and deterring some voters. Not just

:02:59.:03:01.

pensioners, that people who are looking to inherit in the future.

:03:02.:03:13.

They are all asking how much they could lose that they wouldn't have

:03:14.:03:15.

lost before. A difficult question for the party to answer, given that

:03:16.:03:18.

they don't want to give too much away now. Was this a mistake, or a

:03:19.:03:23.

sign of the Conservatives' confidence? It has the hallmarks of

:03:24.:03:31.

something that has been cobbled together in a very unnaturally short

:03:32.:03:34.

time frame for putting a manifesto together. We have had mixed messages

:03:35.:03:39.

from the Tory MPs who have been out on the airwaves this morning as to

:03:40.:03:43.

whether they will consult on it whether it is just a starting point.

:03:44.:03:48.

That said, there is still three weeks to go, and most of the Tory

:03:49.:03:54.

party this morning feel this is a little light turbulence rather than

:03:55.:03:58.

anything that leaves the destination of victory in doubt. It it flips the

:03:59.:04:02.

normal politics. The Tories are going to make people who have a

:04:03.:04:06.

reasonable amount of assets pay for their social care. What is wrong

:04:07.:04:13.

with that? First, total credit for them for not pretending that all

:04:14.:04:16.

this can be done by magic, which is what normally happens in an

:04:17.:04:20.

election. The party will say, we will review this for the 95th time

:04:21.:04:25.

in the following Parliament, so they have no mandate to do anything and

:04:26.:04:30.

so do not do anything. It is courageous to do it. It is

:04:31.:04:34.

electorally risky, for the reasons that you suggest, that they pass the

:04:35.:04:39.

target their own natural supporter. And there is a sense that this is

:04:40.:04:46.

rushed through, in the frenzy to get it done in time. I think the ending

:04:47.:04:51.

of the pooling of risk and putting the entire burden on in inverted

:04:52.:04:56.

commas the victim, because you cannot insure Fritz, is against the

:04:57.:05:05.

spirit of a lot of the rest of the manifesto, and will give them huge

:05:06.:05:08.

problems if they try to implement it in the next Parliament. Let's have a

:05:09.:05:17.

look at the polls. Nearly five weeks ago, on Tuesday the 18th of April,

:05:18.:05:22.

Theresa May called the election. At that point, this was the median

:05:23.:05:27.

average of the recent polls. The Conservatives had an 18 point lead

:05:28.:05:32.

over Labour on 25%. Ukip and the Liberal Democrats were both on 18%.

:05:33.:05:41.

A draft of Labour's manifesto was leaked to the press. In the

:05:42.:05:46.

intervening weeks, support for the Conservatives and Labour had

:05:47.:05:49.

increased, that it had decreased for the Lib Dems and Ukip. Last Tuesday

:05:50.:05:55.

came the launch of the official Labour manifesto. By that time,

:05:56.:06:00.

Labour support had gone up by another 2%. The Lib Dems and Ukip

:06:01.:06:06.

had slipped back slightly. Later in the week came the manifestos from

:06:07.:06:10.

the Lib Dems and the Conservatives. This morning, for more polls. This

:06:11.:06:15.

is how the parties currently stand on average. Labour are now on 34%,

:06:16.:06:23.

up 4% since the launch of their manifesto. The Conservatives are

:06:24.:06:27.

down two points since last Tuesday. Ukip and the Lib Dems are both

:06:28.:06:33.

unchanged on 8% and 5%. You can find this poll tracker on the BBC

:06:34.:06:39.

website, see how it was calculated, and see the results of national

:06:40.:06:44.

polls over the last two years. So Isabel, is this the Tories' wobbly

:06:45.:06:47.

weekend or the start of the narrowing? This is still an

:06:48.:06:52.

extremely healthy lead for the Tories. At the start of this

:06:53.:06:59.

campaign, most commentators expected to things to happen. First, the Lib

:07:00.:07:04.

Dems would have a significant surge. That hasn't happened. Second, Labour

:07:05.:07:10.

would crash and plummet. Instead they are in the health of the low

:07:11.:07:14.

30s. I wonder if that tells you something about the tribal nature of

:07:15.:07:21.

the Labour vote, and the continuing problems with the Tory brand. I

:07:22.:07:26.

would say that a lot of Tory MPs wouldn't be too unhappy if Labour's

:07:27.:07:31.

result isn't quite as bad as has been anticipated. They don't want

:07:32.:07:37.

Corbyn to go anywhere. If the latest polls were to be the result on June

:07:38.:07:44.

the 8th, Mr Corbyn may not be in a rush to go anywhere. I still think

:07:45.:07:49.

it depends on the number of seats. If there is a landslide win, I

:07:50.:07:54.

think, one way or another, he will not stay. If it is much narrower, he

:07:55.:07:59.

has grounds for arguing he has done better than anticipated. The polls

:08:00.:08:05.

are very interesting. People compare this with 83. In 83, the Tory lead

:08:06.:08:10.

widened consistently throughout the campaign. There was the SDP -

:08:11.:08:23.

Liberal Alliance doing well in the polls. Here, the Lib Dems don't seem

:08:24.:08:25.

to be doing that. So the parallels with 83 don't really stack up. But

:08:26.:08:28.

let's see what happens. Still early days for the a lot of people are

:08:29.:08:31.

saying this is the result of the social care policy. We don't really

:08:32.:08:36.

know that. How do you beat them? In the last week or so, there's been

:08:37.:08:39.

the decision by some to hold their nose and vote Labour, who haven't

:08:40.:08:45.

done so before. Probably the biggest thing in this election is how the

:08:46.:08:49.

Right has reunited behind Theresa May. That figure for Ukip is

:08:50.:08:56.

incredibly small. She has brought those Ukip voters behind her, and

:08:57.:09:02.

that could be the decisive factor in many seats, rather than the Labour

:09:03.:09:06.

share of the boat picking up a bit or down a bit, depending on how

:09:07.:09:11.

turbulent the Tory manifesto makes it. Thank you for that.

:09:12.:09:14.

We've finally got our hands on the manifestos of the two main

:09:15.:09:17.

parties and, for once, voters can hardly complain that

:09:18.:09:19.

So, just how big is the choice on offer to the public?

:09:20.:09:23.

Since the Liberal Democrats and SNP have ruled out

:09:24.:09:25.

coalitions after June 8th, Adam Fleming compares the Labour

:09:26.:09:27.

Welcome to the BBC's election centre.

:09:28.:09:30.

Four minutes from now, when Big Ben strikes 10.00,

:09:31.:09:34.

we can legally reveal the contents of this, our exit poll.

:09:35.:09:38.

18 days to go, and the BBC's election night studio

:09:39.:09:40.

This is where David Dimbleby will sit, although there is no chair yet.

:09:41.:09:50.

The parties' policies are now the finished product.

:09:51.:09:53.

In Bradford, Jeremy Corbyn vowed a bigger state,

:09:54.:09:56.

the end of austerity, no more tuition fees.

:09:57.:09:59.

The Tory campaign, by contrast, is built on one word - fear.

:10:00.:10:07.

Down the road in Halifax, Theresa May kept a promise to get

:10:08.:10:15.

immigration down to the tens of thousands, and talked

:10:16.:10:18.

of leadership and tough choices in uncertain times.

:10:19.:10:21.

Strengthen my hand as I fight for Britain, and stand with me

:10:22.:10:27.

And, with confidence in ourselves and a unity

:10:28.:10:33.

of purpose in our country, let us go forward together.

:10:34.:10:41.

Let's look at the Labour and Conservative

:10:42.:10:44.

On tax, Labour would introduce a 50p rate for top earners.

:10:45.:10:50.

The Conservatives ditched their triple lock, giving them

:10:51.:11:14.

freedom to put up income tax and national insurance,

:11:15.:11:16.

although they want to keep the overall tax burden the same.

:11:17.:11:18.

Labour offered a major overhaul of the country's wiring,

:11:19.:11:21.

with a pledge to renationalise infrastructure, like power,

:11:22.:11:23.

The Conservatives said that would cost a fortune,

:11:24.:11:26.

but provided few details for the cost of their policies.

:11:27.:11:28.

Labour have simply become a shambles, and, as yesterday's

:11:29.:11:30.

manifesto showed, their numbers simply do not add up.

:11:31.:11:32.

What have they got planned for health and social care?

:11:33.:11:35.

The Conservatives offered more cash for the NHS,

:11:36.:11:39.

reaching an extra ?8 billion a year by the end of the parliament.

:11:40.:11:42.

Labour promised an extra ?30 billion over the course of the same period,

:11:43.:11:46.

plus free hospital parking and more pay for staff.

:11:47.:11:52.

The Conservatives would increase the value of assets you could

:11:53.:11:59.

protect from the cost of social care to ?100,000, but your home would be

:12:00.:12:02.

added to the assessment of your wealth,

:12:03.:12:04.

There was a focus on one group of voters in particular

:12:05.:12:08.

Labour would keep the triple lock, which guarantees that pensions go up

:12:09.:12:13.

The Tories would keep the increase in line

:12:14.:12:19.

with inflation or earnings, a double lock.

:12:20.:12:23.

The Conservatives would end of winter fuel payments

:12:24.:12:25.

for the richest, although we don't know exactly who that would be,

:12:26.:12:29.

This is a savage attack on vulnerable pensioners,

:12:30.:12:37.

particularly those who are just about managing.

:12:38.:12:41.

It is disgraceful, and we are calling upon the Conservative Party

:12:42.:12:45.

When it comes to leaving the European Union, Labour say

:12:46.:12:51.

they'd sweep away the government's negotiating strategy,

:12:52.:12:55.

secure a better deal and straightaway guaranteed the rights

:12:56.:12:57.

The Tories say a big majority would remove political uncertainty

:12:58.:13:03.

Jeremy Vine's due here in two and a half weeks.

:13:04.:13:15.

I'm joined now by David Gauke, who is Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

:13:16.:13:21.

Welcome back to the programme. The Tories once promised a cap on social

:13:22.:13:28.

care costs. Why have you abandoned that? We've looked at it, and there

:13:29.:13:36.

are couple of proposals with the Dilnot proposal. Much of the benefit

:13:37.:13:41.

would go to those inheriting larger estates. The second point was it was

:13:42.:13:45.

hoped that a cap would stimulate the larger insurance products that would

:13:46.:13:51.

fill the gap, but there is no sign that those products are emerging.

:13:52.:13:56.

Without a cap, you will not get one. We have come forward with a new

:13:57.:14:01.

proposal which we think is fairer, provide more money for social care,

:14:02.:14:05.

which is very important and is one of the big issues we face as a

:14:06.:14:10.

country. It is right that we face those big issues. Social care is

:14:11.:14:15.

one, getting a good Brexit deal is another. This demonstrates that

:14:16.:14:23.

Theresa May has an ambition to lead a government that addresses those

:14:24.:14:25.

big long-term issues. Looking at social care. If you have assets,

:14:26.:14:31.

including your home, of over ?100,000, you have to pay for all

:14:32.:14:35.

your social care costs. Is that fair? It is right that for the

:14:36.:14:40.

services that are provided to you, that that is paid out of your

:14:41.:14:46.

assets, subject to two really important qualifications. First, you

:14:47.:14:49.

shouldn't have your entire estate wiped out. At the moment, if you are

:14:50.:14:57.

in residential care, it can be wiped out ?223,000. If you are in

:14:58.:15:02.

domiciliary care, it can be out to ?23,000, plus you're domiciliary.

:15:03.:15:09.

Nobody should be forced to sell their house in their lifetime if

:15:10.:15:13.

they or their spouse needs long-term care. Again, we have protected that

:15:14.:15:15.

in the proposals we set out. But the state will basically take a

:15:16.:15:25.

chunk of your house when you die and they sell. In an essence it is a

:15:26.:15:30.

stealth inheritance tax on everything above ?100,000. But we

:15:31.:15:33.

have those two important protections. I am including that. It

:15:34.:15:37.

is a stealth inheritance tax. We have to face up to the fact that

:15:38.:15:42.

there are significant costs that we face as a country in terms of health

:15:43.:15:46.

and social careful. Traditionally, politicians don't address those

:15:47.:15:51.

issues, particularly during election campaigns. I think it is too Theresa

:15:52.:15:56.

May's credit that we are being straightforward with the British

:15:57.:16:00.

people and saying that we face this long-term challenge. Our manifesto

:16:01.:16:03.

was about the big challenges that we face, one of which was

:16:04.:16:07.

intergenerational fairness and one of which was delivering a strong

:16:08.:16:11.

economy and making sure that we can do that. But in the end, someone is

:16:12.:16:17.

going to have to pay for this. It is going to have to be a balance

:16:18.:16:21.

between the general taxpayer and those receiving the services. We

:16:22.:16:24.

think we have struck the right balance with this proposal. But it

:16:25.:16:27.

is entirely on the individual. People watching this programme, if

:16:28.:16:32.

they have a fair amount of assets, not massive, including the home,

:16:33.:16:39.

they will need to pay for everything themselves until their assets are

:16:40.:16:43.

reduced to ?100,000. It is not a balance, you're putting everything

:16:44.:16:48.

on the original two individual. At the moment, for those in residential

:16:49.:16:54.

care, they have to pay everything until 20 3000. -- everything on the

:16:55.:16:58.

individual. But now they will face more. Those in individual care are

:16:59.:17:02.

seeing their protection going up by four times as much, so that is

:17:03.:17:06.

eliminating unfairness. Why should those in residential care be in a

:17:07.:17:10.

worse position than those receiving domiciliary care? But as I say, that

:17:11.:17:16.

money has to come from somewhere and we are sitting at a proper plan for

:17:17.:17:19.

it. While also made the point that we are more likely to be able to

:17:20.:17:23.

have a properly functioning social care market if we have a strong

:17:24.:17:27.

economy, and to have a strong economy we need to deliver a good

:17:28.:17:30.

deal on Brexit and I think Theresa May is capable of doing that. You

:17:31.:17:35.

have said that before. But if you have a heart attack in old age, the

:17:36.:17:39.

NHS will take care of you. If you have dementia, you now have to pay

:17:40.:17:43.

for the care of yourself. Is that they are? It is already the case

:17:44.:17:47.

that if you have long-term care costs come up as I say, if you are

:17:48.:17:51.

in residential care you pay for all of it until the last ?23,000, but if

:17:52.:17:57.

you are in domiciliary care, excluding your housing assets, but

:17:58.:18:01.

all of your other assets get used up until you are down to ?23,000 a

:18:02.:18:07.

year. And I think it is right at this point that a party that aspires

:18:08.:18:14.

to run this country for the long-term, to address the long-term

:18:15.:18:17.

challenges we have is a country, for us to be clear that we need to

:18:18.:18:22.

deliver this. Because if it is not paid for it this way, if it goes and

:18:23.:18:28.

falls on the general taxpayer, the people who feel hard pressed by the

:18:29.:18:32.

amount of income tax and VAT they pay, frankly we have to say to them,

:18:33.:18:36.

those taxes will go up if we do not address it. But they might go up

:18:37.:18:40.

anyway. The average house price in your part of the country is just shy

:18:41.:18:47.

of ?430,000, so if you told your own constituents that they might have to

:18:48.:18:51.

spend ?300,000 of their assets on social care before the state steps

:18:52.:18:56.

in to help...? As I said earlier, nobody will be forced to pay during

:18:57.:19:01.

their lifetime. Nobody will be forced to sell their houses. We are

:19:02.:19:07.

providing that protection because of the third premium. Which makes it a

:19:08.:19:11.

kind of death tax, doesn't it? Which is what you use to rail against.

:19:12.:19:17.

What it is people paying for the services they have paid out of their

:19:18.:19:21.

assets. But with that very important protection that nobody is going to

:19:22.:19:25.

be wiped out in the way that has happened up until now, down to the

:19:26.:19:30.

last three years. But when Labour propose this, George Osborne called

:19:31.:19:34.

it a death tax and you are now proposing a stealth death tax

:19:35.:19:38.

inheritance tax. Labour's proposals were very different. It is the same

:19:39.:19:44.

effect. Labour's were hitting everyone with an inheritance tax. We

:19:45.:19:51.

are saying that there are -- that there is a state contribution but

:19:52.:19:54.

the public receiving the services will have to pay for it out of

:19:55.:20:00.

assets, which have grown substantially. And which they might

:20:01.:20:04.

now lose to social care. But I would say that people in Hertfordshire pay

:20:05.:20:08.

a lot in income tracks, national insurance and VAT, and this is my

:20:09.:20:13.

bet is going to have to come from somewhere. Well, they are now going

:20:14.:20:17.

to pay a lot of tax and pay for social care. Turning to immigration,

:20:18.:20:22.

you promised to get net migration down to 100,020 ten. You failed. You

:20:23.:20:26.

promised again in 2015 and you are feeling again. Why should voters

:20:27.:20:31.

trust you a third time? It is very clear that only the Conservative

:20:32.:20:35.

Party has an ambition to control immigration and to bring it down. An

:20:36.:20:41.

ambition you have failed to deliver. There are, of course, factors that

:20:42.:20:44.

come into play. For example a couple of years ago we were going through a

:20:45.:20:48.

period when the UK was creating huge numbers of jobs but none of our

:20:49.:20:51.

European neighbours were doing anything like it. Not surprisingly,

:20:52.:20:55.

that feeds through into the immigration numbers that we see. But

:20:56.:21:02.

it is right that we have that ambition because I do not believe it

:21:03.:21:07.

is sustainable to have hundreds of thousands net migration, you're

:21:08.:21:11.

after year after year, and only Theresa May of the Conservative

:21:12.:21:15.

Party is willing to address that. It has gone from being a target to an

:21:16.:21:19.

ambition, and I am pretty sure in a couple of years it will become an

:21:20.:21:23.

untimed aspiration. Is net migration now higher or lower than when you

:21:24.:21:28.

came to power in 2010? I think it is higher at the moment. Let's look at

:21:29.:21:34.

the figures. And there they are. You are right, it is higher, so after

:21:35.:21:39.

six years in power, promising to get it down to 100,000, it is higher. So

:21:40.:21:46.

if that is an ambition and you have not succeeded. We have to accept

:21:47.:21:50.

that there are a number of factors. It continues to be the case that the

:21:51.:21:55.

UK economy is growing and creating a lot of jobs, which is undoubtedly

:21:56.:21:58.

drawing people. But you made the promise on the basis that would not

:21:59.:22:02.

happen? We are certainly outperforming other countries in a

:22:03.:22:05.

way that we could not have predicted in 2010. That is one of the factors.

:22:06.:22:10.

But if you look at a lot of the steps that we have taken over the

:22:11.:22:13.

course of the last seven years, dealing with bogus students, for

:22:14.:22:19.

example, tightening up a lot of the rules. You can say all that but it

:22:20.:22:22.

has made no difference to the headline figure. Clearly it would

:22:23.:22:26.

have gone up by much more and we not taken the steps. But as I say, we

:22:27.:22:31.

cannot for ever, it seems to me, have net migration numbers in the

:22:32.:22:37.

hundreds of thousands. If we get that good Brexit deal, one of the

:22:38.:22:41.

things we can do is tighten up in terms of access here. You say that

:22:42.:22:46.

but you have always had control of non-EU migration. You cannot blame

:22:47.:22:50.

the EU for that. You control immigration from outside the EU.

:22:51.:22:53.

Have you ever managed to get even that below 100,000? Well, no doubt

:22:54.:23:00.

you will present the numbers now. You haven't. You have got down a bit

:23:01.:23:05.

from 2010, I will give you that, but even non-EU migration is still a lot

:23:06.:23:10.

more than 100000 and that is the thing you control. It is 164,000 on

:23:11.:23:15.

the latest figures. There is no point in saying to the voters that

:23:16.:23:18.

when we get control of the EU migration you will get it down when

:23:19.:23:21.

the bit you have control over, you have failed to get that down into

:23:22.:23:27.

the tens of thousands. The general trend has gone up. Non-EU migration

:23:28.:23:31.

we have brought down over the last few years. Not by much, not by

:23:32.:23:37.

anywhere near your 100,000 target. But we clearly have more tools

:23:38.:23:42.

available to us, following Brexit. At this rate it will be around 2030

:23:43.:23:47.

before you get non-EU migration down to 100,000. We clearly have more

:23:48.:23:50.

tools available to us and I return to the point I made. In the last six

:23:51.:23:54.

or seven years, particularly the last four or five, we have seen the

:23:55.:23:58.

UK jobs market growing substantially. It is extraordinary

:23:59.:24:02.

how many more jobs we have. So you'll only promised the migration

:24:03.:24:05.

target because you did not think you were going to run the economy well?

:24:06.:24:09.

That is what you are telling me. I don't think anyone expected us to

:24:10.:24:13.

create quite a number of jobs that we have done over the last six or

:24:14.:24:17.

seven years. At the time when other European countries have not been.

:24:18.:24:20.

George Osborne says your target is economically illiterate. I disagree

:24:21.:24:26.

with George on that. He is my old boss but I disagree with him on that

:24:27.:24:33.

point. And the reason I say that is looking at the economics and the

:24:34.:24:36.

wider social impact, I don't think it is sustainable for us to have

:24:37.:24:42.

hundreds of thousands, year after year after year. Let me ask you one

:24:43.:24:45.

other thing because you are the chief secretary. Your promising that

:24:46.:24:49.

spending on health will be ?8 billion higher in five use time than

:24:50.:24:54.

it is now. How do you pay for that? From a strong economy, two years ago

:24:55.:24:56.

we had a similar conversation because at that point we said that

:24:57.:25:02.

we would increase spending by ?8 billion. And we are more than on

:25:03.:25:07.

track to deliver it, because it is a priority area for us. Where will the

:25:08.:25:11.

money come from? It will be a priority area for us. We will find

:25:12.:25:16.

the money. So you have not been able to show us a revenue line where this

:25:17.:25:21.

?8 billion will come from. We have a record of making promises to spend

:25:22.:25:25.

more on the NHS and delivering. One thing I would say is that the only

:25:26.:25:30.

way you can spend more money on the NHS is if you have a strong economy,

:25:31.:25:35.

and the biggest risk... But that is true of anything. I am trying to

:25:36.:25:38.

find out where the ?8 billion come from, where will it come from? Know

:25:39.:25:43.

you were saying that perhaps you might increase taxes, ticking off

:25:44.:25:46.

the lock, so people are right to be suspicious. But you will not tell us

:25:47.:25:53.

where the ?8 billion will come from. Andrew, a strong economy is key to

:25:54.:25:57.

delivering more NHS money. That does not tell us where the money is

:25:58.:26:01.

coming from. The biggest risk to a strong economy would be a bad

:26:02.:26:05.

Brexit, which Jeremy Corbyn would deliver. And we have a record of

:26:06.:26:09.

putting more money into the NHS. I think that past performance we can

:26:10.:26:13.

take forward. Thank you for joining us.

:26:14.:26:15.

So, the Conservatives have been taking a bit of flak

:26:16.:26:17.

But Conservative big guns have been out and about this morning taking

:26:18.:26:21.

Here's Boris Johnson on ITV's Peston programme earlier today:

:26:22.:26:25.

What we're trying to do is to address what I think

:26:26.:26:29.

everybody, all serious demographers acknowledge will be the massive

:26:30.:26:32.

problem of the cost of social care long-term.

:26:33.:26:36.

This is a responsible, grown-up, conservative approach,

:26:37.:26:39.

trying to deal with a long-term problem in a way that is equitable,

:26:40.:26:42.

allows people to pass on a very substantial sum,

:26:43.:26:45.

still, to their kids, and takes away the fear

:26:46.:26:47.

Joining me now from Liverpool is Labour's Shadow Chief Secretary

:26:48.:26:53.

Petered out, welcome to the programme. Let's start with social

:26:54.:27:05.

care. The Tories are saying that if you have ?100,000 or more in assets,

:27:06.:27:09.

you should pay for your own social care. What is wrong with that? Well,

:27:10.:27:14.

I think the issue at the end of the day is the question of fairness. Is

:27:15.:27:19.

it fair? And what we're trying to do is to get to a situation where we

:27:20.:27:23.

have, for example, the Dilnot report, which identified that you

:27:24.:27:29.

actually have cap on your spending on social care. We are trying to get

:27:30.:27:32.

to a position where it is a reasonable and fair approach to

:27:33.:27:38.

expenditure. But you will know that a lot of people, particularly in the

:27:39.:27:42.

south of country, London and the south-east, and the adjacent areas

:27:43.:27:47.

around it, they have benefited from huge house price inflation. They

:27:48.:27:50.

have seen their homes go up in value, if and when they sell, they

:27:51.:27:55.

are not taxed on that increase. Why should these people not pay for

:27:56.:28:01.

their own social care if they have the assets to do so? They will be

:28:02.:28:05.

paying for some of their social care but you cannot take social care and

:28:06.:28:10.

health care separately. It has to be an integrated approach. So for

:28:11.:28:12.

example if you do have dementia, you're more likely to be in an

:28:13.:28:17.

elderly person's home for longer and you most probably have been in care

:28:18.:28:21.

for a longer period of time. On the other hand, you might have, if you

:28:22.:28:25.

have had a stroke, there may be continuing care needs paid for by

:28:26.:28:28.

the NHS. So at the end of the date it is trying to get a reasonable

:28:29.:28:32.

balance and just to pluck a figure of ?100,000 out of thin air is not

:28:33.:28:41.

sensible. You will have heard me say about David Gold that the house

:28:42.:28:46.

prices in his area, about 450,000 or so, not quite that, and that people

:28:47.:28:50.

may have to spend quite a lot of that on social care to get down to

:28:51.:28:55.

?100,000. But in your area, the average house price is only

:28:56.:28:59.

?149,000, so your people would not have to pay anything like as much

:29:00.:29:05.

before they hit the ?100,000 minimum. I hesitate to say that but

:29:06.:29:11.

is that not almost a socialist approach to social care that if you

:29:12.:29:14.

are in the affluent Home Counties with a big asset, you pay more, and

:29:15.:29:19.

if you are in an area that is not so affluent and your house is not worth

:29:20.:29:22.

very much, you pay a lot less. What is wrong with that principle? I

:29:23.:29:27.

think the problem I am trying to get to is this issue about equity across

:29:28.:29:31.

the piece. At the end of the day, what we want is a system whereby it

:29:32.:29:37.

is capped at a particular level, and the Dilnot report, after much

:29:38.:29:41.

examination, said we should have a cap on care costs at ?72,000. The

:29:42.:29:45.

Conservatives decided to ditch that and come up with another policy

:29:46.:29:49.

which by all accounts seems to be even more Draconian. At the end of

:29:50.:29:53.

the day it is trying to get social care and an NHS care in a much more

:29:54.:30:02.

fluid way. We had offered the Conservatives to have a bipartisan

:30:03.:30:05.

approach to this. David just said that this is a long term. You do not

:30:06.:30:10.

pick a figure out of thin air and use that as a long-term strategy.

:30:11.:30:16.

The Conservatives are now saying they will increase health spending

:30:17.:30:21.

over the next five years in real terms. You will increase health

:30:22.:30:26.

spending. In what way is your approach to health spending better

:30:27.:30:32.

than the Tories' now? We are contributing an extra 7.2 billion to

:30:33.:30:38.

the NHS and social care over the next few years. But you just don't

:30:39.:30:42.

put money into the NHS or social care. It has to be an integrated

:30:43.:30:47.

approach to social and health care. What we've got is just more of the

:30:48.:30:52.

same. What we don't want to do is just say, we ring-fenced an out for

:30:53.:30:57.

here or there. What you have to do is try to get that... Let me ask you

:30:58.:31:06.

again. In terms of the amount of resource that is going to be devoted

:31:07.:31:10.

in the next five years, and resource does matter for the NHS, in what way

:31:11.:31:16.

are your plans different now from the Conservative plans? The key is

:31:17.:31:20.

how you use that resource. By just putting money in, you've got to say,

:31:21.:31:26.

if we are going to put that money on, how do we use it? As somebody

:31:27.:31:32.

who has worked in social care for 40 years, you have to have a different

:31:33.:31:36.

approach to how you use that money. The money we are putting in, 7.7,

:31:37.:31:41.

may be similar in cash terms to what the Tories claim they are putting

:31:42.:31:46.

in, but it's not how much you put in per se, it is how you use it. You

:31:47.:32:00.

are going to get rid of car parking charges in hospital, and you are

:32:01.:32:02.

going to increase pay by taking the cap on pay off. So it doesn't

:32:03.:32:05.

necessarily follow that the money, under your way of doing it, will

:32:06.:32:08.

follow the front line. What you need in the NHS is a system that is

:32:09.:32:11.

capable of dealing with the patience you have. What we have now is on at

:32:12.:32:19.

five Asian of the NHS. Staff leaving, not being paid properly. So

:32:20.:32:29.

pay and the NHS go hand in hand. Let's move onto another area of

:32:30.:32:32.

policy where there is some confusion. Who speaks for the Labour

:32:33.:32:38.

Party on nuclear weapons? Is it Emily Thornbury, or Nia Griffith,

:32:39.:32:45.

defence spokesperson? The Labour manifesto. It is clear. We are

:32:46.:32:49.

committed to the nuclear deterrent, and that is the definitive... Is it?

:32:50.:33:00.

Emily Thornbury said that Trident could be scrapped in the defence

:33:01.:33:04.

review you would have immediately after taking power. On LBC on Friday

:33:05.:33:09.

night. She didn't, actually. I listened to that. What she actually

:33:10.:33:15.

said is, as part of a Labour government coming in, a new

:33:16.:33:19.

government, there is always a defence review. But not the concept

:33:20.:33:24.

of Trident in its substance. She said there would be a review in

:33:25.:33:31.

terms of, and this is in our manifesto. When you reduce

:33:32.:33:35.

something, you review how it is operated. The review could scrap

:33:36.:33:41.

Trident. It won't scrap Trident. The review is in the context of how you

:33:42.:33:45.

protect it from cyber attacks. This will issue was seized upon that she

:33:46.:33:51.

was saying that we would have another review of Trident or Labour

:33:52.:33:57.

would ditch it. That is nonsense. You will have seen some reports that

:33:58.:34:04.

MI5 opened a file on Jeremy Corbyn in the early 90s because of his

:34:05.:34:08.

links to Irish republicanism. This has caused some people, his links to

:34:09.:34:16.

the IRA and Sinn Fein, it has caused some concern. Could you just listen

:34:17.:34:23.

to this clip and react. Do you condemn what the IRA did? I condemn

:34:24.:34:30.

all bombing. But do you condemn what the IRA did? I condemn what was done

:34:31.:34:34.

with the British Army as well as both sides as well. What happened in

:34:35.:34:39.

Derry in 1972 was pretty devastating as well. Do you distinguish between

:34:40.:34:45.

state forces, what the British Army did and the IRA? Well, in a sense,

:34:46.:34:52.

the treatment of IRA prisoners which made them into virtual political

:34:53.:34:57.

prisoners suggested that the British government and the state saw some

:34:58.:35:01.

kind of almost equivalent in it. My point is that the whole violence if

:35:02.:35:09.

you was terrible, was appalling, and came out of a process that had been

:35:10.:35:15.

allowed to fester in Northern Ireland for a very long time. That

:35:16.:35:20.

was from about two years ago. Can you explain why the Leader of the

:35:21.:35:25.

Labour Party, Her Majesty 's opposition, the man who would be our

:35:26.:35:29.

next Prime Minister, finds it so hard to condemn IRA arming? I think

:35:30.:35:35.

it has to be within the context that Jeremy Corbyn for many years trying

:35:36.:35:39.

to move the peace protest... Process along. So why wouldn't you condemn

:35:40.:35:48.

IRA bombing? Again, that was an issue, a traumatic event in Irish -

:35:49.:35:55.

British relations that went on for 30 years. It is a complicated

:35:56.:36:01.

matter. Bombing is not that complicated. If you are a man of

:36:02.:36:06.

peace, surely you would condemn the bomb and the bullet? Let me say

:36:07.:36:10.

this, I condemn the bomb and the bullet. Why can't your leader? You

:36:11.:36:16.

would have to ask Jeremy Corbyn, but that is in the context of what he

:36:17.:36:21.

was trying to do over a 25 year period to move the priest process

:36:22.:36:22.

along. Thank you for joining us. It's just gone 11.35,

:36:23.:36:26.

you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers

:36:27.:36:28.

in Scotland and Wales. Coming up here in 20

:36:29.:36:30.

minutes, the Week Ahead. First, though,

:36:31.:36:32.

the Sunday Politics where you are. A double-header here

:36:33.:36:43.

in the capital today. We're looking at Ukip

:36:44.:36:47.

and the Liberal Democrats - third and fourth in London

:36:48.:36:56.

in the general elections Its prime goal

:36:57.:36:58.

achieved, what future? Ukip just doesn't do low drama -

:36:59.:37:01.

whether it's referendum campaigns... Ukip's Steven Woolfe will be kept

:37:02.:37:11.

in hospital for another two days, following what Nigel Farage called

:37:12.:37:19.

"an altercation" with fellow After just 18 days in charge,

:37:20.:37:22.

it's been reported tonight that the Ukip leader,

:37:23.:37:28.

Diane James, is set to stand down. Ukip's election story

:37:29.:37:32.

is also a fascinating one. At the 2015 general election,

:37:33.:37:37.

they got the third highest number of votes in London, up from

:37:38.:37:39.

60,000 in 2010 to nearly 300,000 It still wasn't enough to win

:37:40.:37:45.

them a seat in London, but after disastrous council

:37:46.:37:50.

election at the last local elections outside of London,

:37:51.:37:53.

the party's not standing It is a strategic decision,

:37:54.:37:56.

that actually, we want to ensure I think all parties were caught

:37:57.:38:03.

a little bit on the hop with this snap election,

:38:04.:38:08.

so what we are doing is concentrating in those areas

:38:09.:38:10.

where there is either a strong Remain candidate,

:38:11.:38:14.

or we know we have very good The party manifesto is due out this

:38:15.:38:17.

week, but so far their high-profile policy announcements include pledges

:38:18.:38:22.

to ban the burqa and sharia courts, establish a one in, one

:38:23.:38:27.

out immigration policy, a ?10 billion a year cut

:38:28.:38:31.

in the foreign aid budget, and to prevent all residential

:38:32.:38:34.

development on the green belt. There are a number of issues that

:38:35.:38:38.

motivated people to vote to leave, and probably one

:38:39.:38:41.

of those was immigration. We have a very strong

:38:42.:38:44.

and robust immigration policy, which we think will appeal

:38:45.:38:46.

to people, because it is about tackling those numbers

:38:47.:38:49.

of people coming here. But if London voters can't pick

:38:50.:38:53.

Ukip in certain seats, All the evidence from polling

:38:54.:38:55.

suggests that the Ukip vote is transferring insignificant chunks

:38:56.:39:01.

from its previous vote for Ukip is transferring in significant

:39:02.:39:08.

chunks from its previous vote for Ukip to the Conservatives,

:39:09.:39:11.

and that begs all sorts of questions in constituencies where,

:39:12.:39:14.

if you add a sizeable chunk of the Ukip vote to the previous

:39:15.:39:17.

Conservative vote, could that overhaul a Labour

:39:18.:39:19.

or other candidate? Taking a seat like Ealing Central

:39:20.:39:22.

and Acton, a key Labour marginal with a majority just shy of 300,

:39:23.:39:25.

and which Ukip are not contesting. If those voters turn

:39:26.:39:29.

to the Conservatives, And that's exactly what's happening

:39:30.:39:31.

in this Ukip heartland This time, I shall vote

:39:32.:39:36.

Conservative, because I think it's essential that we get a strong

:39:37.:39:43.

mandate to get a good Brexit. Since Farage has gone,

:39:44.:39:49.

and it seems like they've had a lot of trouble within the party,

:39:50.:39:56.

I don't think they are Really, if you want to go

:39:57.:39:59.

with the Brexit, really, you've got However, there are some who believe

:40:00.:40:03.

party still has a role to play. There's only one to be voting for -

:40:04.:40:08.

and I have to speak Because I think they are the only

:40:09.:40:11.

ones who's going to force these Because we are losing our

:40:12.:40:16.

identity in this country. People who's bred and born here,

:40:17.:40:21.

they can't get a house. But having campaigned

:40:22.:40:23.

so hard to leave the EU, this time it's the voters that leave

:40:24.:40:29.

Ukip who could prove equally I'm joined by London Assembly

:40:30.:40:32.

member Peter Whittle, Welcome to you. Three weeks back I

:40:33.:40:56.

asked you how many candidates would stand, and you said you were pretty

:40:57.:41:02.

well covered. I think we took from that nearly all, most. A third you

:41:03.:41:06.

haven't been able to find candidates. It's not a question of

:41:07.:41:11.

that. We said to branches that they could decide what they wanted to do

:41:12.:41:17.

in this election, and they took us at our word. I would have liked to

:41:18.:41:21.

have seen more in London, but we have 48 out of the seats in London.

:41:22.:41:26.

These are very unusual circumstances for this election. Not just in

:41:27.:41:32.

London but across the country. People we saw in the film are

:41:33.:41:36.

lending their vote to Conservatives, I would say. You left it to

:41:37.:41:41.

constituency level, because that is what you do. And in many places,

:41:42.:41:46.

suitable people didn't come forward. That shows you the state of the

:41:47.:41:51.

party in London right now. They are able to choose, and in a number of

:41:52.:41:55.

cases, suitable people didn't come forward. No. In many cases, they

:41:56.:42:03.

wanted to not challenge someone who was a Brexiteer. That was the whole

:42:04.:42:07.

point. That has been the case across the country. We are still standing

:42:08.:42:12.

in the vast majority of seats across the country. People say we are not

:42:13.:42:18.

strong in London. We have two AMs in the London assembly. We didn't have

:42:19.:42:25.

any for a while. Now we are back. People might say you've had a period

:42:26.:42:28.

of strength but it is deserting you rapidly. People say about us, a lot

:42:29.:42:38.

of people want us to go. We are not going anywhere. We are here to stay.

:42:39.:42:45.

We are very strong in certain parts, especially to the east of London,

:42:46.:42:50.

places like Dagenham. We heard there from the good people of Hornchurch.

:42:51.:42:55.

In a number of your associations, people have decided it is not good

:42:56.:43:02.

to challenge a Conservative Brexiteer, who are better able to

:43:03.:43:06.

deal with the process under Theresa May. Thank you for what you have

:43:07.:43:13.

done, but it's over. People do put country before party. The fact is

:43:14.:43:17.

that those voters will come back when they see what happens with

:43:18.:43:22.

Theresa May, which is that there will be softening and backsliding.

:43:23.:43:24.

You are absolutely convinced about that. Totally. For one good reason -

:43:25.:43:33.

when the Prime Minister was Home Secretary, she talked very tough on

:43:34.:43:39.

things like migration. She then presided over the biggest hike in

:43:40.:43:43.

migration we've seen in our history. Why should we trust what Theresa May

:43:44.:43:48.

is going to do with this? The bigger the majority she gets, the softer

:43:49.:43:52.

she will get. Then you will see people coming back to us. We have

:43:53.:43:57.

our manifesto coming out on Wednesday. All of the ideas we have

:43:58.:44:02.

been putting forward, whether it is our migration agenda, cutting

:44:03.:44:06.

foreign aid or getting migration down, all of these issues will be in

:44:07.:44:10.

the mainstream in the gives to come. One thing we do know is that one in

:44:11.:44:16.

one out on immigration. Straightaway? It will be over five

:44:17.:44:24.

years. Don't you want to stop low skilled and unskilled coming in

:44:25.:44:28.

straightaway? Yes. There should be a moratorium on that. That has

:44:29.:44:34.

oppressed wages, no question. It has led to people here not being trained

:44:35.:44:38.

for the jobs they should be able to do. Also, there is unemployment in

:44:39.:44:45.

London. There is unemployment amongst young people. This is not

:44:46.:44:47.

being addressed. When it comes to unskilled or low

:44:48.:45:08.

skilled jobs, there is a glut in the market. Basically, people here

:45:09.:45:12.

cannot get jobs, that is for sure. What is happening is that people are

:45:13.:45:15.

brought in and then paid appalling wages, whether it is in coffee shops

:45:16.:45:20.

or whatever. You know the evidence is not for that. The evidence is

:45:21.:45:25.

that if there is a slight negative, 1% over eight years on low skilled

:45:26.:45:30.

and unskilled. And you know for the workforce as a whole, it is actually

:45:31.:45:37.

slightly higher. The evidence has come from none other than the

:45:38.:45:40.

governor of the Bank of England, who has said that there has been

:45:41.:45:43.

suppression of wages across London. The main point about this is that

:45:44.:45:47.

there is great public concern about the level of migration, as we saw

:45:48.:45:51.

this week with the Tories. They put it as virtually a footnote in the

:45:52.:45:55.

back of their manifesto. But we're talking about London and you must

:45:56.:45:58.

accept that there is not that concerned. There are absolutely is.

:45:59.:46:04.

What concerns do you have at all? About, for instance the loss of ?5

:46:05.:46:09.

billion, the net contribution to the economy of those East European

:46:10.:46:12.

workers that have come in since 2004. I dispute these figures, first

:46:13.:46:17.

of all, but the other point is this. It is not just about the needs of

:46:18.:46:22.

big business or about money as a whole. It is about housing, it is

:46:23.:46:27.

about hospital places, it is about education places. We have got the

:46:28.:46:30.

biggest crisis in housing in the whole country. But if they are net

:46:31.:46:36.

contributors, contributing to the exchequer, they are helping to

:46:37.:46:39.

provide the receipts improving those conditions. But they are not

:46:40.:46:45.

improving. Or are you blaming them for underinvestment elsewhere? It is

:46:46.:46:47.

absolute common sense that people can see for themselves, if you have

:46:48.:46:52.

huge numbers of people coming into the country, coming into London,

:46:53.:46:56.

London's population is growing by 1 million a decade. That will have an

:46:57.:47:00.

affect on housing, education, social services, on hospitals. 60,000

:47:01.:47:06.

workers a year coming in, 100,000 with dependents, what would you like

:47:07.:47:11.

to see the figure at, what is a realistic figure for London? That is

:47:12.:47:15.

the wonderful thing about having a points based system. And you have to

:47:16.:47:19.

think through because you will know what different sectors need. Have

:47:20.:47:23.

you an idea? We want to cut migration by half and no other party

:47:24.:47:27.

is saying that at the moment. They are accepting a situation where

:47:28.:47:31.

300,000 people leave so you end up with 300,000 left. We want to get it

:47:32.:47:35.

down to zero net, which would effectively be cutting it by half.

:47:36.:47:40.

And you think that in five years the level of Bob Skilling and investment

:47:41.:47:44.

in further education, the workforce would just emerge to clean our

:47:45.:47:48.

hospitals, to run cafes and work in hotels? This is a counsel of

:47:49.:47:52.

despair. You're basically saying that you are happy to have a Ponzi

:47:53.:47:55.

scheme were you just keep on topping up and topping up and topping up.

:47:56.:47:59.

Those people have to be housed and look after, they have to have

:48:00.:48:03.

medical services, they have to be educated. The fact is that this

:48:04.:48:08.

situation simply cannot go on. We are the only party addressing it.

:48:09.:48:12.

Peter, we will see more details on your policies on Wednesday. Thank

:48:13.:48:13.

you very much indeed. Back in 2015, the Lib Dems

:48:14.:48:15.

collapsed, in London as elsewhere. The extent of any revival

:48:16.:48:18.

would appear to depend still want electoral revenge

:48:19.:48:27.

for a Leave decision. Well, at 20 minutes to five we can

:48:28.:48:31.

now say the decision taken in 1975 by this country to join

:48:32.:48:41.

the Common Market has been reversed. And with that the Liberal Democrats

:48:42.:48:48.

spied an opportunity. They would try to make themselves

:48:49.:48:50.

the voice of the 48%. Going into this election,

:48:51.:48:54.

the party are making a second Our argument is that it shouldn't be

:48:55.:49:00.

a Tory Prime Minister, a Tory cabinet or Tory MPs who sign

:49:01.:49:06.

Britain's contract for the next few In theory, that should

:49:07.:49:10.

work well in London. After all, we cast more votes

:49:11.:49:16.

for Remain than anywhere else in England, but are things

:49:17.:49:18.

really that simple? Just because you voted to stay

:49:19.:49:23.

in the EU, does that mean you want the Lib Dems' solution -

:49:24.:49:27.

a second referendum? Last year she fought and won

:49:28.:49:30.

a landmark court case against the government,

:49:31.:49:36.

forcing them to vote in parliament This election, she is running

:49:37.:49:38.

a tactical voting campaign to help pro-Remain MPs but even she doesn't

:49:39.:49:42.

want to make the public go If you believe in democracy,

:49:43.:49:45.

we have to move on. I personally am not

:49:46.:49:52.

in favour of a second referendum because I think referenda

:49:53.:49:59.

and plebiscite is difficult. I believe in our system

:50:00.:50:02.

of representative democracy, therefore it is about having strong

:50:03.:50:04.

political candidates in parliament to hold

:50:05.:50:06.

government to account, rather than trying to

:50:07.:50:07.

reverse the process. But of course the Lib Dems are

:50:08.:50:09.

standing on more than just Brexit. They also oppose a third runway

:50:10.:50:12.

at Heathrow, want a ban on the sale of diesel vehicles by 2025

:50:13.:50:16.

and want to put London's suburban railways under

:50:17.:50:18.

Transport for London control. On housing, they want to introduce

:50:19.:50:20.

a rent to own scheme that will help people buy a home and take action

:50:21.:50:23.

on foreign buyers, making sure that all new houses

:50:24.:50:26.

are marketed in the UK first. And they've also pledged

:50:27.:50:28.

?60 million to spend The Lib Dems clearly needed to come

:50:29.:50:30.

up with something by way of a manifesto that would really

:50:31.:50:41.

capture the imagination. They've got two MPs in London

:50:42.:50:43.

at the moment, only nine across the country as a whole,

:50:44.:50:46.

and they really needs to get airtime to get back

:50:47.:50:49.

into the public imagination. And this manifesto

:50:50.:50:55.

really hasn't captured Opinion polls are showing

:50:56.:50:57.

the Lib Dems only a point or so ahead of what they got

:50:58.:51:05.

at the last general election and that result saw them almost

:51:06.:51:14.

wiped out in parliament. Broadly in this election,

:51:15.:51:16.

the Lib Dems have got two The first is keep hold of the two

:51:17.:51:19.

MPs they've currently got and after that they want to try

:51:20.:51:23.

and re-elect some of the party's most famous faces who got kicked out

:51:24.:51:26.

in the last general election, people like Vince Cable,

:51:27.:51:28.

Ed Davey and Simon Hughes. But for a party that struggled

:51:29.:51:33.

in recent elections, that will take a reversal

:51:34.:51:35.

in fortunes and has that much really Imagine a future where people are

:51:36.:51:46.

decent to each other, or we take the challenge of climate change

:51:47.:51:48.

seriously. But even the Lib Dems admits

:51:49.:51:51.

they have no realistic chance A good result would be picking up

:51:52.:51:54.

a few seats, but even that Tom Brake joins me now to discuss

:51:55.:51:58.

his party's offer to London. Welcome. Isn't the truth that a lot

:51:59.:52:09.

of people, as we have acknowledged in the introduction, remain in the

:52:10.:52:14.

capital, but the decision has now been made and they actually just

:52:15.:52:17.

want people, and the government to get on with it. We accept the

:52:18.:52:24.

outcome of the vote. And the country did vote for Brexit. We have a

:52:25.:52:27.

difference of opinion with the Prime Minister over what the best approach

:52:28.:52:31.

to Brexit is going to be an Brexit, of course, as a particular impact on

:52:32.:52:36.

London. It is probably more dependent on us being part of the

:52:37.:52:39.

single market than virtually anywhere else. But isn't it a

:52:40.:52:43.

problem that straight from the word go we had Tim Farron, much of the

:52:44.:52:50.

time he spent in London emphasising a second referendum. But the pure

:52:51.:52:53.

choice, if you want to keep on opposing it, is to come to the

:52:54.:52:57.

Liberal Democrats. Is that where Londoners really are? Do they want

:52:58.:53:01.

that? I don't think it is about opposing it, I think it is about

:53:02.:53:04.

giving people the opportunity, once a Prime Minister has completed the

:53:05.:53:08.

deal, to have their say, because what we do not know a present is

:53:09.:53:13.

whether that deal might require the UK to pay 50 billion euros. If that

:53:14.:53:20.

is the case, I would have thought there was a substantial proportion

:53:21.:53:22.

of people who would be interested in having a view on this. You will know

:53:23.:53:26.

from your own seat the impact of what Ukip might do, not sending in

:53:27.:53:31.

some seats. 7000 Ukip votes in your seat and Ukip were not standing.

:53:32.:53:36.

They claim it is a deliberate strategy and that is something that

:53:37.:53:40.

will potentially cost you dearly, if, as we think we are seeing, they

:53:41.:53:45.

are going over to the Tories. As far as we can tell, that is not

:53:46.:53:48.

happening uniformly, but we are pushing in a London context some

:53:49.:53:53.

proposals which we hope will appeal to Londoners. We oppose Crossrail

:53:54.:54:04.

two, and we are opposing -- we support Crossrail two and we are

:54:05.:54:12.

opposing a third runway. You are specifying local issues, and we know

:54:13.:54:15.

the rules about your constituency, but be honest with me, are those

:54:16.:54:18.

Ukip voters going back to the Conservatives, next door, where you

:54:19.:54:24.

did very well last time as well? I am sure that some of them well. But

:54:25.:54:28.

if we are campaigning on a platform that is not just about Brexit, in

:54:29.:54:33.

London all Liberal Democrat candidates, and we have candidates

:54:34.:54:37.

in all the seats, are also campaigning on things like the NHS,

:54:38.:54:41.

and there will be many former Ukip voters concerned about the state of

:54:42.:54:45.

the NHS. There will also be many Ukip voters worried about the state

:54:46.:54:49.

of funding in London's schools where we have something positive to say in

:54:50.:54:51.

terms of how we would increase funding. You mention you are

:54:52.:54:58.

standing in the seats. Is there an issue now there as well? We have

:54:59.:55:01.

seen the greens withdraw from some seats to help Liberal Democrat

:55:02.:55:05.

candidates in south-west London. What are you putting into this

:55:06.:55:09.

progressive alliance? Would you not have been sensible to stood aside --

:55:10.:55:13.

to have stood aside in some of these seats? It is a local party decision

:55:14.:55:18.

and some of the local parties in Caroline Lucas's seats decided not

:55:19.:55:22.

to put up a candidate. Why not something like healing and central

:55:23.:55:29.

action, if Ukip had stepped aside their comedy made it easier for the

:55:30.:55:32.

Conservatives and the greens have set aside help Labour. Why would Lib

:55:33.:55:39.

Dems not step aside there? I guess the same question could be asked

:55:40.:55:42.

about Liberal Democrat seat in London where the Labour Party and

:55:43.:55:46.

the greens had not stepped down. You currently have to MPs and you are no

:55:47.:55:50.

longer a big player. The party is still a party, probably not that

:55:51.:55:54.

this general election but in the future general elections aspired to

:55:55.:55:58.

be a party of government. You could see that anywhere -- you could say

:55:59.:56:03.

that at any time. One local party, as with Caroline Lucas's seats, they

:56:04.:56:08.

thought it was right to stand down and that was what we saw. Are you

:56:09.:56:13.

saying that given it does not look, based on the polls, with a normal

:56:14.:56:16.

caveats, that the Liberal Democrats will be making huge progress in this

:56:17.:56:19.

election, they do think there should be serious thinking about

:56:20.:56:22.

realignment and the Lib Dems should think about where it goes and what

:56:23.:56:27.

it does next? The idea of a progressive alliance, if the idea is

:56:28.:56:30.

that the Lib Dems would come to some arrangement with Jeremy Corbyn's

:56:31.:56:34.

Labour Party, the problem is we do not support a lot of what he

:56:35.:56:37.

advocates. He has contributed almost as much to the debacle that is

:56:38.:56:44.

Brexit as a conservative state. I think a conservative alliance with

:56:45.:56:48.

someone who is not conservative is not something we would support. Is

:56:49.:56:51.

there any electoral advantage any more in opposing Heathrow? I mean

:56:52.:56:57.

Labour are not and the Conservatives have made their decision. What can

:56:58.:57:02.

you do know? We will continue to campaign on it. The residents, and

:57:03.:57:05.

there are very many millions of them who live under the flight path, who

:57:06.:57:09.

will be affected by a third runway at they will not want, in my view,

:57:10.:57:13.

politicians to simply throw their hands up in the air and say it is

:57:14.:57:17.

too difficult and it is agreed so let's forget about it. We will

:57:18.:57:20.

continue to campaign against it. London and the south-east are

:57:21.:57:24.

already overheated in terms of that type of development and there are

:57:25.:57:27.

other parts of the country where there is support for airport

:57:28.:57:31.

expansion, which is not the case in places like Heathrow. So you are

:57:32.:57:35.

sticking to that policy. There are enough. On immigration, we spent a

:57:36.:57:40.

lot of the chat on Peter Whittle on this but Liberal Democrats are

:57:41.:57:43.

saying you will make a more positive case for this. Sadiq Khan, the

:57:44.:57:47.

Labour mayor makes a strong case and Jeremy Corbyn makes a pretty strong

:57:48.:57:51.

case for the economic advantages. What do you mean? What would you

:57:52.:57:56.

like to see numerically happen to migration? I don't think you can set

:57:57.:57:59.

a figure because it depends on the strength of the UK economy. I think

:58:00.:58:04.

we want to reassure people that immigration is the immigration that

:58:05.:58:09.

the UK requires and that the people coming to the UK will not buck the

:58:10.:58:12.

system in some way. What is disappointing is that the present

:58:13.:58:15.

government has not use the powers that already exist to ensure that if

:58:16.:58:20.

an EU citizen is not actively seeking work, they can actually be

:58:21.:58:24.

returned to their country of origin. There are powers that already exist.

:58:25.:58:29.

But at the economy needed it and we wanted the economy to keep on going,

:58:30.:58:32.

you would be happy to see migration go up? If that is what the economy

:58:33.:58:38.

needed. If that is what is required, then I think that is something that

:58:39.:58:41.

should be appropriate. It is worth noting that although in the health

:58:42.:58:47.

service we are starting to see immigration from EU countries going

:58:48.:58:52.

down, all that is happening as a result is that immigration, people

:58:53.:58:56.

coming to work in the NHS are coming from instead India and the

:58:57.:59:00.

Philippines. So a reduction in one might simply leads to an expansion

:59:01.:59:04.

in another area. You had a signature policy about people being able to

:59:05.:59:08.

rent and then try to buy their property eventually to attract the

:59:09.:59:12.

young, but the young are still remembering your policy of getting

:59:13.:59:16.

rid of tuition fees. Why not reverse that? I think that is a policy that

:59:17.:59:20.

is not affordable. We have said we will bring back the maintenance

:59:21.:59:24.

grants that allowed disadvantaged students to get to university,

:59:25.:59:27.

something the Conservatives are cancelled. And rent to own is still

:59:28.:59:33.

our policy. Thank you very much, Tom Brake. Andrew, back to you.

:59:34.:59:40.

So, two and half weeks to go till polling day,

:59:41.:59:43.

let's take stock of the campaign so far and look ahead

:59:44.:59:45.

Sam, Isabel and Steve are with me again.

:59:46.:59:54.

Sam, Mrs May had made a great thing about the just about managing. Not

:59:55.:00:02.

the poorest of the poor, but not really affluent people, who are

:00:03.:00:08.

maybe OK but it's a bit of a struggle. What is in the manifesto

:00:09.:00:12.

for them? There is something about the high profile items in the

:00:13.:00:16.

manifesto. She said she wants to help those just above the poorest

:00:17.:00:21.

level. But if you look at things like the winter fuel allowance,

:00:22.:00:26.

which is going to be given only to the poorest. If you look at free

:00:27.:00:30.

school meals for infants, those for the poorest are going to be kept,

:00:31.:00:35.

but the rest will go. The social care plan, those who are renting or

:00:36.:00:42.

in properties worth up to ?90,000, they are going to be treated, but

:00:43.:00:47.

those in properties worth above that, 250,000, for example, will

:00:48.:00:53.

have to pay. Which leads to the question - what is being done for

:00:54.:01:00.

the just about managings? There is something, the personal allowance

:01:01.:01:03.

that David Cameron promised in 2015, that they are not making a big deal

:01:04.:01:08.

of that, because they cannot say by how much. So you are looking in tax

:01:09.:01:14.

rises on the just about managings. Where will the tax rises come from.

:01:15.:01:22.

We do not know, that there is the 40 million pounds gap for the Tories to

:01:23.:01:29.

reach what they are pledging in their manifesto. We do not know how

:01:30.:01:34.

that is going to be made up, more tax, or more borrowing? So that is

:01:35.:01:40.

why the questions of the implications of removing the tax

:01:41.:01:44.

lock are so potentially difficult for Tory MPs. The Labour manifesto

:01:45.:01:48.

gives figures for the cost of certain policies and where the

:01:49.:01:51.

revenue will come from. You can argue about the figures, but at

:01:52.:01:57.

least we have the figures. The Tory manifesto is opaque on these

:01:58.:02:01.

matters. That applies to both the manifestos. Looking at the Labour

:02:02.:02:05.

manifesto on the way here this morning, when you look at the

:02:06.:02:09.

section on care for the elderly, they simply say, there are various

:02:10.:02:13.

ways in which the money for this can be raised. They are specific on

:02:14.:02:19.

other things. They are, and we heard John McDonnell this morning being

:02:20.:02:24.

very on that, and saying there is not a single ? in Tory manifesto. I

:02:25.:02:33.

have only got to page 66. It is quite broad brush and they are very

:02:34.:02:38.

open to challenge. For example, on the detail of a number of their

:02:39.:02:43.

flagship things. There is no detail on their immigration policy. They

:02:44.:02:48.

reiterate the ambition, but not how they are going to do that, without a

:02:49.:02:52.

massive increase in resource for Borders officials. We are at a time

:02:53.:02:59.

where average wages are lagging behind prices. And in work benefits

:03:00.:03:06.

remain frozen. I would have thought that the just-about-managings are

:03:07.:03:11.

people who are in work but they need some in work benefits to make life

:03:12.:03:14.

tolerable and be able to pay bills. Doesn't she has to do more for them?

:03:15.:03:23.

Maybe, but this whole manifesto was her inner circle saying, right, this

:03:24.:03:29.

is our chance to express our... It partly reads like a sort of

:03:30.:03:36.

philosophical essay at times. About the challenges, individualism

:03:37.:03:40.

against collectivism. Some of it reads quite well and is quite

:03:41.:03:46.

interesting, but in terms of its detail, Labour would never get away

:03:47.:03:50.

with it. They wouldn't be allowed to be so vague about where taxes are

:03:51.:03:54.

going to rise. We know there are going to be tax rises after the

:03:55.:03:59.

election, but we don't know where they will be. 100%, there will be

:04:00.:04:07.

tax rises. We know that they wanted a tax rise in the last budget, but

:04:08.:04:12.

they couldn't get it through because of the 2015 manifesto. Labour do

:04:13.:04:16.

offer a lot more detail. People could disagree with it, but there is

:04:17.:04:22.

a lot more detail. More to get your teeth into. About capital gains tax

:04:23.:04:28.

and the rises for better owners and so on. The SNP manifesto comes out

:04:29.:04:33.

this week, and the Greens and Sinn Fein. We think Ukip as well. There

:04:34.:04:39.

are more manifestos to come. The Lib Dems have already brought theirs

:04:40.:04:46.

out. Isn't the Liberal Democrat campaign in trouble? It doesn't seem

:04:47.:04:50.

to be doing particular the well in the polls, or at the local elections

:04:51.:04:55.

a few weeks ago. The Liberal Democrats are trying to fish in

:04:56.:05:00.

quite a small pool for votes. They are looking to get votes from those

:05:01.:05:05.

remainers who want to reverse the result, in effect. Tim Farron is

:05:06.:05:10.

promising a second referendum on the deal at the end of the negotiation

:05:11.:05:18.

process. And that is a hard sell. So those voting for remain on June 23

:05:19.:05:23.

are not low hanging fruit by any means? Polls suggesting that half of

:05:24.:05:29.

those want to reverse the result, so that is a feeling of about 20% on

:05:30.:05:34.

the Lib Dems, and they are getting slightly less than half at the

:05:35.:05:37.

moment, but there are not a huge amount of votes for them to get on

:05:38.:05:43.

that strategy. It doesn't feel like Tim Farron and the Lib Dems have

:05:44.:05:52.

promised enough. They are making a very serious case on cannabis use in

:05:53.:05:57.

a nightclub, but the optics of what they are discussing doesn't make

:05:58.:06:00.

them look like an anchor in a future coalition government that they would

:06:01.:06:04.

need to be. I wonder if we are seeing the re-emergence of the

:06:05.:06:08.

2-party system? And it is not the same two parties. In Scotland, the

:06:09.:06:13.

dynamics of this election seemed to be the Nationalists against the

:06:14.:06:17.

Conservatives. In England, if you look at what has happened to be Ukip

:06:18.:06:31.

vote, and what Sam was saying about the Lib Dems are struggling a bit to

:06:32.:06:35.

get some traction, it is overwhelmingly Labour and the

:06:36.:06:37.

Conservatives. A different 2-party system from Scotland, but a 2-party

:06:38.:06:39.

system. There are a number of different election is going on in

:06:40.:06:43.

parallel. In Scotland it is about whether you are unionist or not.

:06:44.:06:48.

Here, we have the collapse of the Ukip vote, which looks as though it

:06:49.:06:53.

is being redistributed in the Tories' favour. This is a unique

:06:54.:06:57.

election, and will not necessarily set the trend for elections to come.

:06:58.:07:04.

In the Tory manifesto, I spotted the fact that the fixed term Parliament

:07:05.:07:08.

act is going to be scrapped. That got almost no coverage! It turned

:07:09.:07:16.

out to be academic anyway, that it tells you something about how

:07:17.:07:20.

Theresa May is feeling, and she wants the control to call an

:07:21.:07:25.

election whenever it suits her. Re-emergence of the 2-party system,

:07:26.:07:29.

for this election or beyond? For this election, yes, but it shows the

:07:30.:07:38.

sort of robust strength of parties and their fragility. In other words,

:07:39.:07:42.

the Lib Dems haven't really recovered from the losses in the

:07:43.:07:46.

last general election, and are therefore not really seen as a

:07:47.:07:51.

robust vehicle to deliver Remain. If they were, they might be doing

:07:52.:07:56.

better. The Labour Party hasn't recovered in Scotland, and yet, if

:07:57.:08:01.

you look at the basic divide in England and Scotland and you see two

:08:02.:08:06.

parties battling it out, it is very, very hard for the smaller parties to

:08:07.:08:11.

break through and last. Many appear briefly on the political stage and

:08:12.:08:17.

then disappear again. The election had the ostensible goal of Brexit,

:08:18.:08:22.

but we haven't heard much about it in the campaign. Perhaps the Tories

:08:23.:08:27.

want to get back onto that. David Davis sounding quite tough this

:08:28.:08:31.

morning, the Brexit minister, saying there is no chance we will talk

:08:32.:08:37.

about 100 billion. And we have to have power in the negotiations on

:08:38.:08:40.

the free trade deal or what ever it is. I think they are keen to get the

:08:41.:08:45.

subject of the manifesto at this point, because it has not started

:08:46.:08:50.

too well. There is an irony that Theresa May ostensibly called the

:08:51.:08:55.

election because she needed a stronger hand in the Brexit

:08:56.:08:59.

negotiations, and there was an opportunity for the Lib Dems, with

:09:00.:09:02.

their unique offer of being the party that is absolutely against the

:09:03.:09:07.

outcome of the referendum, and offering another chance. There

:09:08.:09:13.

hasn't been much airtime on that particular pledge, because instead,

:09:14.:09:17.

this election has segued into being all about leadership. Theresa May's

:09:18.:09:23.

leadership, and looking again at the Tory manifesto, I was struck that

:09:24.:09:29.

she was saying that this is my plan for the future, not ABBA plan. Even

:09:30.:09:35.

when talking about social care, he manages to work in a bit about

:09:36.:09:42.

Theresa May and Brexit. And Boris Johnson this morning, an interview

:09:43.:09:46.

he gave on another political programme this morning, it was

:09:47.:09:50.

extraordinarily sycophantic for him. Isn't Theresa May wonderful. There

:09:51.:09:55.

is a man trying to secure his job in the Foreign Office! Will he succeed?

:09:56.:10:01.

I think she will leave him. Better in the tent than out. What did you

:10:02.:10:08.

make of David Davis' remarks? He was basically saying, we will walk away

:10:09.:10:14.

from the negotiating table if the Europeans slam a bill for 100

:10:15.:10:22.

billion euros. The point is that the Europeans will not slam a bill for

:10:23.:10:27.

100 billion euros on the negotiating table. That is the gross figure.

:10:28.:10:32.

There are all sorts of things that need to be taken into account. I

:10:33.:10:37.

imagine they will ask for something around the 50 or ?60 billion mark.

:10:38.:10:43.

It looks that they are trying to make it look like a concession when

:10:44.:10:48.

they do make their demands in order to soften the ground for what is

:10:49.:10:52.

going to happen just two weeks after general election day. He makes a

:10:53.:10:56.

reasonable point about having parallel talks. What they want to do

:10:57.:11:01.

straightaway is deal with the bill, Northern Ireland and citizens

:11:02.:11:06.

rights. All of those things are very complicated and interlinked issues,

:11:07.:11:08.

which cannot be dealt with in isolation. I wouldn't be surprised

:11:09.:11:13.

if we ended up with parallel talks, just to work out where we are going

:11:14.:11:17.

with Northern Ireland and the border. Steve, you can't work out

:11:18.:11:24.

what the Northern Ireland border will be, and EU citizens' writes

:11:25.:11:29.

here, until you work out what our relationship with the EU in the

:11:30.:11:33.

future will be. Indeed. The British government is under pressure to deal

:11:34.:11:38.

quickly with the border issue in Ireland, but feel they can't do so

:11:39.:11:43.

because when you have a tariff free arrangement outcome, or an

:11:44.:11:47.

arrangement that is much more protectionist, and that will

:11:48.:11:50.

determine partly the nature of the border. You cannot have a quick

:11:51.:11:54.

agreement on that front without knowing the rest of the deal. I

:11:55.:11:57.

think the negotiation will be complex. I am certain they want a

:11:58.:12:02.

deal rather than none, because this is no deal thing is part of the

:12:03.:12:08.

negotiation at this early stage. Sounding tough in the general

:12:09.:12:12.

election campaign also works electorally. But after the election,

:12:13.:12:16.

it will be a tough negotiation, beginning with this cost of Brexit.

:12:17.:12:23.

My understanding is that the government feels it's got to make

:12:24.:12:26.

the Europeans think they will not do a deal in order to get a deal. They

:12:27.:12:34.

don't want no deal. Absolutely not. And I'm sure it plays into the

:12:35.:12:38.

election. I'm sure the rhetoric will change when the election is over.

:12:39.:12:43.

That's all for today, thank you to all my guests.

:12:44.:12:45.

The Daily Politics will be back on BBC Two at 12.00

:12:46.:12:47.

And tomorrow evening I will be starting my series of interviews

:12:48.:12:51.

with the party leaders - first up is the Prime

:12:52.:12:54.

Minister, Theresa May, that's at 7pm on BBC One.

:12:55.:12:56.

And I'll be back here at the same time on BBC One next Sunday.

:12:57.:12:59.

Remember - if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.

:13:00.:13:04.

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS