02/07/2017 Sunday Politics London

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

Her position may be safe for the time-being.

But what about Theresa May's policies?

As ministers drops hints about easing the public sector pay

cap, is the Conservative Party undergoing a rebrand?

Jeremy Corbyn takes to the streets to call for an end to austerity.

But with his party's divisions on Brexit thrust into the open

is his post-election honeymoon coming to an end?

And, with Brexit talks under way, we know there's plenty at stake

for Britain, as it negotiates a new relationship.

But what's at stake for the remaining EU countries?

We speak to a leading European politician.

In London - we'll have the latest on the crisis engulfing one

of the Tories' flagship borough, Kensington and Chelsea,

over its handling of the Grenfell tower disaster.

And, on the eve of Wimbledon, I'm joined by the three top seats

of political commentary, Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott

They'll be serving up aces throughout the programme.

Is the Government going to change its policy on public sector pay?

The Conservative manifesto stated that the 1% cap on annual pay rises

for public sector workers would remain in place

until 2020, saving up to ?5 billion a year by then.

Earlier this week there were rumblings that the policy

would be reviewed, before the Treasury weighed in to suggest

The new Environment Secretary, Michael Gove, was asked about it

on the Andrew Marr show earlier today.

I was Education Secretary and I know the schoolteachers pay review body

Not a poodle but they work underneath the overall strategy

set by the Chancellor, set by the government.

They take account of that, but they also take account

of other questions as well, including the number of people

who are entering the profession, whether we need to have an increase

in pay in order to ensure we get the best people in the profession.

These pay review bodies have been set up in order to ensure we can

have authoritative advice on what is required in order

to ensure the public services on which we rely are effectively

staffed and the people within them are effectively supported.

I think we should respect the integrity of that process.

I'm not an individual, I am a member of the government,

Michael Gove. Two U-turns in one day, maybe going for the hat-trick

this week. It sounds they are thinking of ways of loosening up the

pay freeze but Mr Hammond doesn't want it to come out until the autumn

budget. That is absolutely right. My understanding is the deal is already

done. We've reported this week that 20 quite senior Tory MPs went to see

the new chief of staff on Wednesday, to make it very clear indeed they

would be voting for a budget that allowed the public sector pay freeze

to continue. Fine, we're going to do this, we're going to give fresh

advice to the pay review bodies that there remit has been expanded but we

cannot do it today because it's a victory for comrades Jeremy Corbyn

if we do. There we see, in a sense, the weakness of ten Downing St. They

can't direct this policy themselves. They are overruled by Mr Hammond

from Mr 11, and it only takes about 20 Tory MPs to say, hey, this is

what we want and at the very least the government has to listen to them

very seriously. They have to listen to the man they have to act, because

that is the fragility of the new House of Commons. We saw it last

week on another issue. If you have 20 people saying hey has got to rise

in the public sector, beyond the cap, pay will rise in the public

sector beyond the cap, because they won't be up to get it through the

House of Commons. I think there are other issues involved beyond the

numerical situation in the Commons. Lots of MPs came back after that

election, including Gavin Barrell who is in number ten, who lost his

seat, saying teachers and others were saying we can't carry on with

the pay restraint up until 2020. I think it is going to happen for a

combination of reasons. What happens to deficit reduction? The deficit is

going to rise this year. There were a few Tory MPs but not many who feel

it is wrong for the party to capitulate, having made such a point

of principle about posterity, that it looks very, very week just to be

caving in. I think Steve is right. This isn't just about the maths and

the -- in the House of Commons, Tory MPs are frightened in a way I have

never known them frightened before, at the momentum behind Jeremy Corbyn

at the moment. There is a real feeling about the Tory brand being

really in a very, very difficult place at the moment, where Tories

look nasty, there isn't nearly enough sympathy and it feels

politically impossible to stick with the pay limits as they are. That may

be one reason that will keep Tory MPs in line, because the last thing

they want at the moment is an election. When they say the country

doesn't need on another election it means the Tory party doesn't mean

another election, isn't that right? That's right and I think the view is

settled. Notwithstanding frenzied speculation in Sunday newspapers,

the daily newspapers are a lot more responsible! LAUGHTER

But every Tory MP says to Reza until the end of Brexit, we don't want to

open Pandora's box. -- Theresa May until the end of Brexit. The problem

still remains, she does have a lot less authority, which is why you get

bigwigs left, right and Centre for Michael Gove to Damian Green and

Justine Greening rattling that instant more money. You have to keep

the balance by leaving by consensus and a general for all, which we are

in danger of looking like this morning. OK, we will see.

So it's not exactly what you might call "strong and stable",

but after a turbulent couple of weeks, it appears

the Prime Minister has brought less instability,

The Government's legislative programme is in place and Brexit

So has Theresa May done enough to steady the ship

It's been an action-packed story of suspense, drama and intrigue.

The latest instalment, hotly anticipated.

"I got us into this mess", she told her MPs after the election,

This week, Theresa May tried to do just that.

To get the Democratic Unionist Party's ten MPs to back

the minority government, the PM pledged ?1 billion

Opposition parties branded it a bung and as the week went on,

some have their own MPs who are less than enthusiastic.

Mr Speaker, I can barely put into words my anger at the deal

But having signed that piece of paper, the Tories now had a tight

working majority of 13 to pass key Commons votes.

It was, at the very least, breathing space.

So, a deep breath and, midweek, and Labour proposal that the cap

on public sector pay rises should be lifted.

Some Tory MPs, including ministers, agreed, in principle.

Labour's challenge failed, but the Government had

We will listen to what people in this house have said before

The public sector pay cap, by the way, was designed

to save ?5 billion for the public purse by 2020.

But the policy looks like it could be on its last legs.

Thursday was the big moment, the Queen's Speech, which passed,

Tory support for a Labour amendment led to a government pledge to front

abortions in England for women from Northern Ireland.

The ayes have it, the ayes have it, unlock.

The last-minute compromises in this Queen's Speech suggests

the Prime Minister is acutely aware of the arithmetic in Parliament.

She will have to listen more to her own MPs and they know that.

One former Cabinet minister told me every time seven of us get together,

And yet, after this week, the Prime Minister may not be such

I think the ship is certainly steadier.

I think there is a degree of what I call a rolling probation

for the Prime Minister at the moment.

And I think the Prime Minister's performances in the chamber,

Prime Minister's Questions, we had the first one back this

week, where she reasserted a deal of her authority.

And I think there is a great deal of relief and respect for that.

Others say the party should reflect on more

It doesn't matter if we have Alexander the great or the Ark

Angel Gabriel as leader, unless we have fundamental reform.

At the moment, often we have these policies but it's like a whole load

of clothes pegs without a washing line, bringing them together.

So we need to explain what we are about.

The Conservative Party is there to help working

The Conservative Party is there because we are the party

of the ladder of opportunity to get people up that ladder.

We have a moral purpose, too, just as the Labour Party do.

Several MPs told me the debate within the party is still when,

Anybody who says it will definitely be Theresa May as the leader

of the Conservative Party going into the next general election

It might be, I have to say at the moment it's

But conversely, there is absolutely no appetite whatsoever,

thre are no manoeuvres going on, no operations going on to instigate

a leadership challenge to have a new leader

of the Conservative Party in the immediate future.

One theory is that Theresa May stays on as PM to negotiate

To be something of a scapegoat for what will be,

at best controversial, at worst, deeply unpopular.

And then, to move aside to make way for a less tarnished leader, who can

take the Conservatives into the next general election.

It's the immediate future Theresa May will be focused on.

This week, a G20 meeting in Hamburg with other world leader chums.

Back home, she can't take her friends for granted

and told her own MPs, she'd serve as long

Joining me now is the Minister for International Trade Greg Hands.

Welcome to the programme. Good morning, Andrew. Do you agree with

your old Treasury boss, George Osborne, who said easing up on

austerity would risk the mistakes of the past which led Britain to the

point where there was no money left? There is no change in government

policy. We must live within our means. That is the right thing to

do. We have reduced the deficit by three quarters since 2010. That is

work that is still ongoing. It's very important that we keep budget

discipline, because it's impossible to pay for our public services

without having a growing economy, the taxes coming into pay for all

the services people want and expect. How can you continue to cut the

deficit, it's actually rising this year compared to last year, how do

you continue to cut the deficit? ?1 billion to find for the DUP, you

have to find the money you could in debt because you couldn't change

national insurance, and if you loosen up on the public sector pay

freeze, you have to find money for that as well, how do you do both?

It's important to have a prudent policy, a prudent fiscal budget

policy. The Chancellor will be laying out his budget in the

autumn... How do you square the circle and me all these demands?

Your own ministers are talking about them and yet continue with deficit

reduction? It's very important to consider what we have done on public

sector pay. Actually by having that cap in place we have saved around

200,000 public sector jobs. We have done a lot for the lower paid public

sector workers by raising the personal allowance... I'm not asking

about that, I'm asking how do you meet the demand for extra public

spending and continue with deficit reduction? I think over the last

seven years the government has had a very good record on this, Andrew. In

terms of being able to reduce the deficit... While still putting in

place increases in public funding. For example, in the Conservative

manifesto we pledged 4 billion extra on schools and 8 billion extra on

health. We can do the two together, but it does require that budget

discipline overall, making sure that something is to get out of control.

You were a number two in the Treasury during George Osborne's

tenure. You protected pensioners with triple lock, free bus passes,

the Winter fuel allowance but trebled tuition fees on young folk

made it impossible for many of them to get a foot on the property

ladder. Is it any wonder young people to vote for you? I think

that's an important question for us and an important question as we look

at the election. That's why I asked the question, what is the answer? We

have to improve our offer and young people and provide more housing. I

think we need to look at more money into schools, improving our schools

as we go forward and making sure that cities like mine in London are

made more liveable and more cost-effective for young people. Why

haven't you done that in the past seven years? Instead you have

secured the pensioners and you have knocked young folk may have turned

against you. Why should young people believe in capitalism if they have

no chance of accruing any capital? I think what we have done over the

last seven years has actually been to build more homes. We just need to

build the more quickly. Your record of building homes is even worse than

the last Labour government and you know that. 62% of 18-24 -year-olds

voted Labour. 62%. 56 of 25-35 -year-olds. You didn't build enough

houses for these people. That is one of the reasons why we are addressing

that. Why haven't you addressed it? 1.5 million new homes over the

course of this Parliament and what we have done that with things like

starter homes, shared ownership, it's much more flexible forms of

tenure to make sure homes are more attractive to younger people,

particularly younger people starting off in life. Ministers have bent

telling me this for seven years and you never do it. -- been telling me.

That is what the programme is designed to do. We have been

building more homes. We need to accelerate that. We'll phone need an

open conversation about how we improve elsewhere for young people

in schools and universities and so on that. OK, Brexit. You are the

International Trade Minister. Will the UK leave the customs union in

March 2019, and if it doesn't make its own trade deals? Our position on

exit and the customs union is unchanged. What is it? To leave the

single market and Customs union. But other components of free trade

agreement with the European Union and customs arrangements, so we have

frictionless free trade with the European Union. Will that happen by

March 2019? That is the negotiation that has just started. I am not

putting an end state on that. What I'm saying is the objective in this

is to make sure that we frictionless trade with the EU and come to a

future customs arrangements to buy it's not clear we will be able to

start making our own trade deals after March 2019? Once we leave the

European Union, yes, I am clear we will be able to make our own trade

deals. March 2019? When we leave the single union and the customs union

we come to an arrangement with the European Union. We will be able to

make free trade deals but at the moment we can't because we are in

the EU. Will you be able to make them if there is a transition

period? That remains to be seen. You might not. We have only just started

the negotiation. You had a year to think about it. To think about a

transition period and when it might start and then... What we are clear

about is there should be no cliff edge for businesses in the UK and

the European Union and to make sure the trade continues as frictionless

as possible. We don't yet know if we will be able to make our free trade

deals during the transitional period? It could be postponed until

2021 or 22? We don't yet know if we're going to have a transition

period, to be fair. The objection in all of this is to have frictionless

free trade with the European Union and come to a customs arrangement.

That is the objective. You are minister for London so let's

turn to the Grenfell Tower disaster. Kensington and Chelsea Council is in

chaos. The leader resigned on Friday and the chief executive has gone as

well. That is what I mean, it is in chaos. We're waiting for a new

leader for the council because it is important for local democracy to

have its say. It is quite a big thing for government to to go in and

put a Council on special measures. It is in a state, you have lost the

chief executive, you've lost the council leader, it is lacking in

experience and surely if there is ever a time to send in the

Commissioners to get a grip of this crisis, it is now? We are waiting

for a new leader. There is an interim chief executive coming over

from Lewisham Council. Clearly, there will be lessons to be learned

and that is a matter for the public enquiry. There will be an election

within the Conservative group on the council. There are very capable

councillors in Kensington and Chelsea. We haven't seen much sign

of that, did you have any involvement in the resignation of

the council leader? I spoke to him, like all council leaders do. I spoke

to him, I spoke to the previous leader and the leader of might of

the council. It is natural that MPs speak to their council leaders on an

ongoing basis. We know the Council opted for cheaper cladding because

they want good costs. So that cheese pairing is inevitable in town halls

when central government, has yours has done, cut their budget by 40%? I

don't accept the premise to that because a lot of financing has been

devolved back to local government. But you have cut local government

financing by 40%. There is 200 billion available over the rest of

this Parliament to the local councils and we believe that is

fair. Kensington and Chelsea Council spent ?8.6 million on this

refurbishment. It is not necessarily a shortage of funds. Indeed, they

have 274 million in reserves and they put people at risk to save

?300,000. If that is not a case of putting in the Commissioners, what

is? That is a matter for the ongoing enquiry and the lessons to be

learned from that and how it happened is a matter for the

different enquiries, including the public enquiries. Thank you.

Theresa May's stated aim in calling the election last month was to get

a stronger hand in the Brexit negotiations - in the end, the

But it's worth remembering that there's a lot at stake for both

After all, the UK is a major net contributor to the EU budget

and a big trading partner for the 27 countries remaining in the EU.

When Mr Davis and Mr Barnier kicked off the talk a couple of weeks ago,

the tone was businesslike and broadly constructive.

The two men agreed that the first age of the negotiation

The rights of EU citizens living here and British

The financial settlement that the UK will pay the EU,

On citizens rights, the EU published their proposals three weeks ago,

and the UK Government came forward with their plan last Monday.

The UK offer, however, was greeted with scepticism.

The Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said...

But elsewhere, some EU figures have begun to worry about the financial

implications of Brexit for the remaining 27 countries.

Gunther Oettinger, the EU's budget Commissioner, said this week that

Brexit would leave a hole in the EU's finances of at least

That's because the UK is a net contributor to the budget.

The UK also runs a large trade deficit with the EU.

Last year we bought ?312 billion worth of goods

That is 71 billion more than we sold to the

So the introduction of trade tariffs would be costly for both sides.

The Brexit negotiations will continue every month.

Mr Davis and Mr Barnier will have their next face-to-face

meeting in Brussels on Monday the 17th of July.

Joining me now from Rome is Roberto Gualtieri.

He's a Socialist MEP, and part of the European

Welcome to the programme. The British government has published a

detailed plan to protect the rights of EU citizens living in the UK. The

EU response was highly critical, will that be the EU's response to

everything Britain proposes? First, we welcome the intention to protect

EU citizens. But, our reading of the plan is that it falls short of its

own ambitions, so there are a number of issues to be clarified. I think

also to be corrected. For instance, while our proposal is based on a new

low, this is based on a UK low and there are no guarantees that might

be changed in the future. Then there is the famous issue of enforcement,

which is based on UK courts. And third, there are a number of rights

which seem to be missing. For instance, a family member will have

to make his own request for settled status and we consider that an

conceivable there might be two different answers. My own child, for

instance. You are right, there are things to discuss. This wasn't a

take it or leave it offer by the British government, it was the

beginning of a negotiation. But Michel Barnier said it lacked

clarity and vision. Someone else said it was worrisome and the Dutch

Prime Minister said there were thousands of questions left

unanswered. These are not helpful responses? It is not an issue of

tones, it is an issue of the start of the negotiation, indeed. We are

commentating the paper, identifying what is good, and the rights

similar, there are a number of loopholes and there are some more

from the issues relating to the legal status... It just sounds very

constructive. Instead of saying, this is a good start, but there is

much more to do. But you just sound negative. No, I don't think so. My

first sentence was, I welcome the intention to protect the rights of

EU citizens. That is a very constructive sentence. Then one has

to be consistent and to find a mechanism which fully guarantees the

right and the negotiation, and they are exactly for this purpose.

Brussels is now worrying about how to fill the huge financial hole that

Britain's departure will create in EU revenues. There is a number of

ideas being floated at the moment, introduce an EU VAT supplement or

take an axe to the common agricultural policy which is about

40% of the budget. Does that appeal to you? There are two different

problems. The first is to define the settlement, which has to be an

integral part of the withdrawal agreement. We are not looking for

fines, we are looking for only commitment to be paid. Then there is

the issue for the future, were of course the union will have to

reassess and redefine and improve its mechanism in its own resources

so it can have an efficient finances in the future. So what do you want,

and EU VAT or cutting money to Italy? I think the union deserves a

better system of resources. This is for the future and we are working on

that. Do you agree with the bustle's commission every member of the EU

should adopt the euro by 2025? Yes, of course it is possible. Like it

was for the United Kingdom, for Denmark, but in principle, the

members of the union members of the union. So we think it would be good

to a allowed the euro. There is the political will of the country to be

taken into account but I think the euro has proven to be a successful

currency, protecting citizens. I expect the membership will be

broadened in the future. Why is it's GDP below what it was 15 years ago

and the industrial output is below them what it was in 1984 so the euro

hasn't been successful to you. You now run a massive deficit with

Germany, where is the success? It should not be confused, the currency

with the economic crisis we had. The also mistake in the conductor of the

economic policy. We are changing austerity politics for more growth

policies. Your country hasn't grown since you join the euro. The

economic policy is another thing, so we need to change the economic

policy. The common currencies is a strong protection for all of us.

Your country hasn't grown since you joined the euro. I don't think your

assessment is correct. Yes it is. By the way now, Italy is growing and

that is good. Europe is growing. In 2017 it is growing more than the US

and the UK. Do you accept if Britain had stayed in and been forced to

join the euro in 2025, there is no public opinion support for joining

the euro here? This is a joke. Whenever they say, if the UK had

stayed in the union, the UK would be forced to join the euro. This is not

true. That is what the Brussels delegation said. The Brussels

commission said it thinks everybody in the EU should adopt the euro by

2025. As I said, no. If you want to make a political statement, you are

free to do so. But the fact is, the member of the delegation to the euro

are supposed to join. Members who have decided to stay out of the

euro, are free to stay out of the euro whilst they are in the EU. That

is perfectly possible. Thank you for speaking to us from Rome today.

Jeremy Corbyn has had a bit of a spring in his step

since the election, after doing much better than pretty much

Indeed, despite the party's internal splits, Labour

But earlier this week, Labour's divisions on Brexit

were thrust into the open as 50 Labour MPs defied the party line

to vote in favour of a backbench amendment calling for the UK

to remain members of the EU single market and customs union.

One of those rebels was Labour MP Stella Creasy who had this to say

What a lot of us are saying is we want, in these negotiations,

To have a government that has forced through a hard Brexit,

especially in the light of the general election result,

with the public very clearly rejecting Theresa May's approach,

And across the house, again, there are MPs saying,

We don't know what is possible to achieve, but what we do know

is if you walk in the room and you throw away something

like single market membership, which 650,000 jobs in London alone

are part of that, it's irresponsible.

I'm joined now by the Shadow Justice Secretary Richard Burgon.

Welcome to the programme. Thank you. On Thursday 49 MPs, almost a fifth

of the Parliamentary party, rebelled against the leadership over Brexit,

including three shadow ministers, were subsequently sacked by Jeremy

Corbyn. Labour is now more divided on Brexit than the Tories? I don't

think so. I think the amendment was regrettable and premature, and I

agree with the Labour deputy leader Tom Watson, when he said he was

disappointed about that. Actually, the difference in the Labour Party,

the difference of nuance on the single market between those who

definitely want to be a member of the single market, including some

people who backed that amendment, and those who want tariff free

access to the single market. The reality is, not just on Brexit, but

a whole host of issue, it's the Conservative government that is

completely divided and that odds with itself. If it is just nuance

and you are not divided, Mark our card. The Chancellor said single

access market mentorship is not on the table, the Brexit secretary said

it should be and another shadow ministers speaks about seeking

reformed membership of the European market and the customs union. Which

one is Labour policy? Brexit is a settled issue, in that Labour

accents Britain is leaving the European Union but we believe

Britain has to have a relationship with the institutions. Which one is

Labour policy of these three statements? Labour believes that we

should be having a job 's first Brexit. A Brexit that puts the

economy first. As our manifesto says, Britain's leaving the European

Union, for example that also means the freedom of movement of labour,

and the UK's part of that, will end when Britain leads the EU. Do you

want freedom of movement to end? What we do want to end is the

practice of unscrupulous employers, only recruiting workers from abroad

and also an scrupulous employers trying to use the free you movement

of labour to breakdown -- drag down terms and conditions. You can do

that if we are in or out of the single market. Do you want freedom

of movement to end? It is inevitable the freedom of movement will end. Do

you want it to do is a question that that is the difference. Your

manifesto said what you just said, I asked you if you want it to end?

What Labour wants is Brexit that puts jobs on the economy that is.

What Labour doesn't want is to put immigration and fall 's immigration

targets as the Conservatives did on the table. What is the answer? It's

quite simple, the free movement of labour will end in terms of when the

UK leads the European Union. Labour's priority is not any other

issue than jobs on the economy being put first and that is really

important. Putting jobs on the economy does, should we leave or

stay in the customs union? I think we need to leave all the options

open on that. We need to negotiate without putting options off the

table. You can't negotiate unless you know what your aim is, is it to

leave or stay in the customs union? British manufacturers gain a lot,

and their workers, in jobs, in terms of the current arrangement with a

customs union. What we want is an equivalent benefit. We want the

benefits of being in the customs union, even if when we leave the

European Union we can't be in the customs union. These are the kind of

demands that Theresa May should be making, and her ability to do so,

I'm afraid, has been severely weakened by the fact you can't even

command a majority now after she asked for a majority to do so. You

have criticised the government for saying no deal is better than a bad

deal, which I understand. But does that mean Labour's position is that

any deal is better than no Deal? Any deal better than no Deal? No, no. It

would be strange to say any deal is better than no Deal. We want a good

deal for Britain. But if you can't get that? We are confident a Labour

government could get that, we want a job 's first Brexit that puts jobs

first and puts living standards first and doesn't use, as the

Conservative government has tried to do, Brexit as a smoke screen to try

and create some kind of low regulated tax haven... You could be

in government for very shortly and the in these negotiations. If the EU

does not budge on demanding 1 billion euros divorce Bill, would

you just sack that for the sake of any deal or say no? -- suck it up?

Labour won't be sucking up to anyone, the EU or anyone else. A

Labour government would negotiate hard for Britain. What if they

wouldn't budge? On the demand for 100 billion euros? What would you

do? These are hypothetical scenarios, and these negotiations

are nuanced and compensated. Labour would campaign, in opposition, hold

the government to account for and in government deliver jobs first

Brexit, that puts the economy does. The kind of post-Brexit Britain we

want to see is one in which there is investment in industry, assistance

from the government in industry and are more equal society with high

wage jobs. Ian Wright Fricke, your new party says Labour is currently

too broad a church. Do you agree with him? I think the Labour Party

has always been a broad church. He says too broad? It has always been a

broad church, socialists and trade unionists and long may it be so. You

don't agree? The Labour Party is a broad church and it should be. Do

you support lowering the threshold of MPs needed, that you need to get

to stand for the Labour leadership? It is going to be debated at your

autumn conference? This question isn't seen as dead about the

leadership election many people predicted would occur after the

general election won't be occurring. Do you support? Tom Watson says

Jeremy Corbyn is secure for many years. I do believe all parties,

including the Labour Party, need to be made more democratic. We have a

membership of well over half a million and I would like the members

to have more say in our party's policies and in the way the party is

run. Jeremy Corbyn spoke at a left-wing rally in London yesterday.

Among the crowd there were placards calling Theresa May a murderer,

pictures of Mrs May's head on communist flags and Trotskyite

banners. Are these the kind of people Mr Corbyn should be

associating himself with, if he is a Prime Minister in waiting? The

reality is when you speak at an outdoor meeting, you have no control

who turns up or who is walking past. You have no control over the kind of

banners people make. I understand the hundred and 50,000 members of

the public at that event. No, there won't, 15,000. I spoke the night

before the general election, in an event in Leeds city centre. For all

I know, there could have been all sorts of people walking past,

watching. The key thing is to judge Jeremy by his words, Judge Labour by

our words on what we've done. We do believe in a new kind of politics.

Also politics committed to changing our society for the better. OK,

Richard Burgen, thank you for joining us today. It is coming up to

11:40pm. -- 11:40am. We say goodbye to viewers

in Scotland, who leave us now for

Sunday Politics Scotland. Coming up here in 20

minutes, the Week Ahead... First though, the Sunday

Politics where you are. Coming up later - a local

authority in turmoil. We'll have the latest

on the crisis engulfing one of the Tories' flagship boroughs,

Kensington and Chelsea, over its handling of

the Grenfell Tower disaster. I'll be discussing that

with a Kensington councillor - former deputy leader

of the authority - as well as our MP guests

for the morning Clive Efford, Labour member for Eltham

and the Conservative member It is worth picking up on comments

to Andrew from Greg Hands, he said he won't be sending in a hit squad

of Commissioners. It's quite a big thing to put a council on special

measures, what do you say to that? I say they have to restore confidence

of the local community, particularly those directly affected by the fire.

They have clearly failed to do that. What we have is an administration in

Kensington and Chelsea that have shown that they have an inability to

be able to connect. Something has to be done. I support the idea of

picking people from other local government bodies to go in there and

provide an oversight of what's going on in Kensington and Chelsea, to try

and restore that confidence. What could we lose from doing it? Why

not? By all means send in people who can help an expert who can help sort

the situation now, because it's a devastating set of circumstances.

But to go into an elected council and shut it down and sending

unelected commissioners, I don't think that will help anybody. That's

more of a political gesture and I don't think the government should

consider doing that. However, clearly Kensington and Chelsea have

a lot to answer for and need to get a grip of the situation quickly.

More on that in a moment, but let's turn now to knife crime.

After years of going down, it's going up again in London.

This week the Mayor, Sadiq Khan, launched a new strategy

His Conservative opponents said it was too little and too late.

Just to my left here is a children's play area, now a crime scene.

He was murdered here on the Monks Hill Estate.

Ten Londoners were murdered with knives last month,

part of an escalation that's seen knife crime go up 11%

Behind each statistic, a personal tragedy.

Dwayne Jones ran a boxing club in Brixton, helping young

people off the streets, until his life was cut short.

I literally saw Dwayne 45 minutes before it happened.

I just popped to the shop and said, "I'll be back soon, son".

I got back with the shopping and only for two youths to say

Went to the scene, and saw my son on the floor having open surgery.

It's caused me, I'd now say I have a disability, which I have.

It's not one that you can see on the outside,

I'm going through trauma, shock, grief, hair loss.

Today, Dwayne's mother Lorraine runs the gym he started.

Part of their work is taking on young people referred

by the police and giving them structure and discipline.

Ant was sent here after he was found carrying a knife at school.

The police eventually dropped the case against him

Knife crime is so common in London, Ant says, that between 60-70%

of boys will have carried a blade to a school like his at some point.

Young people, some of them are scared for their lives bacause

You could be a good person but something

It was here at this gym in the week where the Mayor launched his

It promises to give any school which wants one a metal detector,

to increase stop and search, to name and shame retailers selling

to minors, to improve coordination between organisations and spend

an extra ?625,000 tackling the problem - taking

Sadiq Khan says he wants to stop knife crime in London.

Of course, that's a very laudable thing.

But is it really what this strategy is going to do?

For it to work, the Mayor is calling on the Government to reverse

?22 million worth of cuts that have been made to youth

Them cutting down the funding regarding the youth projects,

So now you've cut their hope in half, you've cut

their dreams in half, you've cut their

When we were growing up there was a number of youth centres

that were available to us and that kept us off the estate.

We were inside the youth centres, we had community leaders

that we could speak to, that had previously gone down

But Conservatives have accused the Mayor of playing politics.

If Sadiq Khan is really that concerned about youth services,

they say, it's well within his powers to find the money himself.

When you talk about stopping knife crime, it's a great news sound bite,

we all want to stop knife crime, it's very important to Londoners,

but when you only give ?600,000 to it, in the context of a budget

And questions too about the Mayor's record on stop and search.

When he was running for office he said he'd do everything

in his power to reduce it, but now he's Mayor it's going up.

There are issues around stop and search.

It has to be accountable, it has to be transparent,

and it's also very important that those officers

who are undertaking stop and search, do so in an intelligent way

and are confident to use the powers that they have.

What we've found with talking to young people is their real issue

with stop and search is how it's carried out.

And while the Mayor says his plan is an ambitious one,

it hasn't stopped his critics from saying it's too

Joining us now is Patrick Green, from the Ben Kinsella Trust.

It is early intervention, what is missing? Something we haven't done

enough on. Talking to young people at the start. Stopping young people

from offending in the first place. We work with 10,000 people over the

last five years and when we ask them why they carry a knife, 99 times out

of 100 they say protection. One group of young people safe they will

carry a knife because they are fearful of being victimised, they

have been victimised before and they feel threatened. They are young

people, when you work with them, they don't want to carry a knife so

in terms of early intervention you can work with them and help them

find other ways. For the second group, our young people who are

offending. They have drifted into offending and are carrying knives to

protect themselves against other gang members. The work with them is

much more intensive. But social health approach, looking at the

issues around young people is important. If you do that, you drive

down knife crime figures. What about diversion? The first instance is the

challenge, we have too many young people offending, knife crime is up

24%. Hospital admissions is up 13% with knife crime. We have a lot of

work to do in terms of diversion but we have to stop young people

offending in the first place. Enforcement, do we need to get

tougher? After all the early intervention and the diversion

activities, if you continue to offend, enforcement has to be right

and proper. We have to ensure the law is used appropriately. Does

there need to be more stop and search otherwise this figure will be

out of control? Stop and search is interesting, if you carry a knife

you should do so in the knowledge there is a high likelihood of you

getting caught. Using police stop and search powers is to ensure that

happens. We certainly need to ensure stop and search continues. It is

only one part of Mike crime. It will not sought knife crime out by

itself, but we need intelligence led stop and search. Police are now

wearing video monitors. That should make a big difference in terms of

their interaction with young people. Le a lot to get our teeth into,

Andrew Russell, do you think police are going in and targeting in

people? No, the police need to do more, but we need to give them the

confidence and power to do their job. In my constituency, we are

seeing a spike in knife crime. Local people are worried, but they want

the police to go out and do their job and not be held back by any

constraints. Stop and search is the right way forward, you have to do it

sensitively and it should be intelligence led. But the police

need to take this more seriously. There has been an uplift in knife

crime and it is unacceptable. Burkini needs to be more stop and

search and sometimes the police will get it wrong but they will annoy

people who aren't carrying things? This is not just about the police,

there is a series of levels. What do you say about stop and search to

begin with? It needs to be intelligence led. There was a lot of

consideration around stop and search after the MacPherson enquiry. When I

spoke to my local police, they said using the forms they had to fill in,

which this government scrapped, developed a lot of intelligence at a

local level. The cuts to safer neighbourhood policing where police

officers got to know their local communities, got to know what was

going on, could pick up intelligence and those instances where gang

members were preying on young people in the community. Do you agree with

that? I am not an MP, but we want more policing, more re-sources for

policing. The Mayor of London and the government have a duty to make

sure people are protected. Do you think we will get them now, because

of the precarious nature of the government at the moment?

Governments have to balance the books. Whoever is in power, even if

Jeremy was Prime Minister, he couldn't promise spending the

country cannot afford. We have to live within our means, but make sure

sufficient funding is available for essential things. In London, we can

go no further in terms of cutting back on the police. Can I take you

up on this, local councils may have had to cut budgets severely and

youth services to an extent, it would be unusual, but the mayor

could put up his precept to put money back into the services if he

so wished with council tax? That would be a matter for him. What do

suggest, you are a close ally? I am, he will have a lot of priority so I

cannot sit here and say which priorities he should give that money

to if he chooses to put the precept up. But he is calling for more

investment in youth services. We went through this before in the

1980s, I was working with young people at that time. When we see

cuts of this kind, the austerity cuts we have seen, one of the first

things that get squeezed is the non-statutory services that is the

youth service. We are paying a price for that. We need those responsible

adults within the community who can intervene and provide guidance young

people. Final word? The answer is sustainability. We have run knife

crime initiatives before, central government have done it on a lease

two occasions. We have driven knife crime down and the ball gets

dropped. Other things come along and we distracted. I don't want to come

back here in a few years' time and be saying the same thing. Thank you

for coming in. Tenants in blocks next to Grenfell

tower won't have to pay rent until at least the end of the year,

it's been announced. They've been without hot

water since the fire. The move by Kensington

and Chelsea Council looked like a first step in trying

to restore credibility among its residents,

after another difficult week. Councillors clashed with the press

over a closed meeting, the leader and his deputy resigned,

and the talk turned to a taskforce Tanjil Rashid takes

us through events. Is this the first good decision you

have made... On Friday, the leader of Kensington

Chelsea Council made his exit from politics over his response

to the Grenfell Tower tragedy. Pressure had been mounting

on Councillor Paget-Brown ever since protesters stormed the town

hall in anger, at what they And his decision to cut short

Friday's Cabinet meeting, the first since the fire two weeks

ago, earned him a rebuke I have therefore decided to step

down as leader of the council, They will appoint a new deputy

leader and Cabinet. But that's not what the

Mayor Sadiq Khan wants. There is support on the ground

for a completely new There were problems of gas pipe

installation, stairwells that will not accessible and there were

hundreds, literally hundreds of fire doors missing. The estimate by

Camden Council said they need at least 1000 fire doors. In this

atmosphere of intense scrutiny across London, it falls on Mr Javid

whether or not to put councillors in Kensington and Chelsea. He said he

will be keeping a close eye on the situation.

Joining us now, former Mayoral adviser to Boris Johnson,

a former deputy leader of Kensington council, and still a Conservative

What would you have done differently in terms of the aftermath if you had

been the leader? I am not claiming I would have done things better or

differently. The important point to start with in any discussion, the

council did let people down. There were heroic actions on behalf of

individual council officers, but the overall organisation let people

down. The Prime Minister said it was a failure of the state at every

level. What was wrong? There is going to be an enquiry. The council

was overwhelmed by the scale and didn't recognise sufficiently early

it was being overwhelmed. What you think the reason for that is? It is

a lack of people on the ground, we have had your reliance on voluntary

services to help most of these people, is that austerity, cuts or

not caring that much about this part of the community, compared with the

majority of fairly well-to-do people in Kensington and Chelsea? I don't

think that is fair and if you look at the quantity of donations, food

and money that has come in, much of it from people throughout the whole

of Kensington and Chelsea. There is a sense of solidarity. What went

wrong at the time, is not something for me to pre-empt but the

organisation was faced with a challenge, the scale of which it

didn't immediately recognise. We have to acknowledge that and then

ask where we go from there and that is the issue we need to think about.

I can take your point on that, but you felt Nicholas Paget Brown should

go. You won't just saying that because of the handling of the

meeting with the press last week, but had the handling of everything

been adequate up until then? What motivated me finally to say

something, because he clearly did not want to go of his own volition.

The team running the aid and support effort which represents the

emergency civil response team, responsibility for that is to be

handed over back to the council in the course of the next week or so,

according to his statement. I simply didn't think it was credible you

could go to the people of North Kensington and said the people

responsible for your support and aid are the people who let you down.

There had to be a change at the top for the council to stop being

defensive and start owning the errors it made. Where do you go from

there? The call for commissioners to be appointed? This is not an

outrageous or unreasonable thing to say, but it is coming very much from

the top and senior figures in the Labour Party. I don't hear any calls

for that from local Labour councillors, who represent this area

and who I think haven't sufficiently been brought into... You have

already said, responsibility is going to be coming back to the

council quite soon, that was the intention under Nicholas Paget

Brown. It wasn't something that gave you confidence, what is wrong with

the council having support and other people coming in and working

alongside? They will not be taking over, they will be working

alongside. As Andrew said earlier, it is right, the council does

welcome support. Above all this, the government is not walking away from

this, there is still a task force on the government is looking carefully

at it. There are lots of agencies, the DVLA, Home Office, passport

people. I am not suggesting these people are walking off the job, we

need that help. But the call for commissioners is actually a call in

effect, for the abolition of the council as a political entity. In

the same way that when Tower Hamlets fell into the hands of people who

were... Are the calls for this politically motivated? I am not

going to say that. It is not coming from local people. Local people want

to have their voices heard. It is not necessarily the council. They

are not saying imposed people on us from outside. They are not saying

that? They are absolutely saying they have no confidence in their

local authority. They have said they want something done about that. But

what they said about the mayor's call, which was a reasonable thing

in the circumstances, was for them, the local people to be consulted

about who come in and took over in the interim. They have absolutely no

confidence in the current administration. Daniel, you call for

the leader of the council to stand down, what is your plan? Who

replaces him? Who is the person you have confidence in who can restore

confidence of Kensington and Chelsea residents. Quickly. There is going

to be... You have no name? There will be an election process in the

next few days. The council, like all local authorities, the council has

the urn and deliver trust. You are not entitled to trust. The council

has to be given, in my view, as an institution for years to become, has

to be given the chance to do that. One of the worries I have about

appointing government commissioners to run this, you deny and delay the

opportunity for that reconciliation between the council and the people

who have been badly affected. I think that chance should be given,

but it has to be earned. If it isn't, then something will have to

happen like that. This could have happened in any council, it could

have been in Greenwich or Haver ring. Because this is years of

mismanagement, complacency, not particularly by Kensington and

Chelsea but lots of councils have got to look at their safety. It

could happen anywhere because of years of complacency and the lack of

investment in local government? In local government but also national

government of all parties. Let's stop naming and shaming people and

pointing a finger in the political way, let's look at long-term

solutions to ensure these things don't happen again. That is what

people want us to do to make sure we don't have this horrific situation

again. I don't want to turn this into a political argument. I want to

talk about how we solve this for the future and make sure people are

saved in whichever borough they live. This was a huge tragedy and it

would have overwhelmed the resources of any local authority. It is

important local authorities show their ability to work with other

local authorities. The next day, after the Grenfell fire, local

authorities were ringing Kensington and Chelsea, offering their

assistance. They didn't respond. When the Prime Minister said there

was a failure of the state at all levels, that is probably one of the

things she was thinking about. That will come out further in in enquiry.

Do you not accept and think that what is reflected was a pre-existing

failure to reach out to this community? There was no sense of

resilience, no relationship which enabled this authority and

leadership to cope? Actually, I think the council probably would

have made the same errors of judgment if the fire had taken place

in a tower block in any part of the borough, because the scale of the

disaster actually overwhelmed the council and they did not think it

through correctly. That was an error, there were failings. I am not

here to say everything went well. But I don't think it was related to

the fact it was this tower, as opposed to another tower. Andrew,

back to you. So, is the Conservative Party

undergoing a re-brand? Can Jeremy Corbyn unite

the Labour party? And has Michael Gove reinvented

the political interview? Let's start with this conservative

speeches. Damian Green, other people talking about the need to do some

hard thinking about tuition fees, home ownership, a pitch for the

young and many other things. That's normally the kind of speech as

politicians give when you lose an election? It's ironic, it sort of

feels like they have lost the election. I keep having to remind

people that Tories got nearly 60 seats more than Labour got. This

feels like the beginning of a repositioning, you are right. I

wouldn't have said they are embarking on a rebrand but they need

to. What was remarkable about the David Cameron years, particularly at

the beginning of David Cameron's leadership of the party, was despite

all the efforts he made to modernise the Conservative Party with the

pitch on environment and big society and all of that stuff, is when you

actually continued to poll people about what they thought of the

Tories, they still thought the Tories represented the wealthy and

were for the wealthy. It was only camera and that made the difference,

and that hasn't gone away. I don't understand how they do this. To do

blue sky thinking, to have a real rethink of what you stand for, is

normally what you do in opposition. It's tougher to do when you are in

power. I can see you could do it if you were a hundred seat majority and

not much to worry about, but when you're living hand to mouth in a

hung parliament, I don't see how these politicians have the bandwidth

to survive and do this blue sky thinking. And they won't have. They

will become exhausted very quickly, and by that I mean physically

exhausted. As a minority Labour government of 1974-79 became

exhausted quickly. Also, to think about this rethinking and rebranding

means a coordinated approach, it's not. You will have individual

ministers reflecting on what went wrong and what they need to do to

put it right. Although they technically won more seats, they are

a lot more marginal seats now than before. Why they don't want and

another election. I think it will be, as I say, they haven't got a

strong leader in place at the moment, it will be frantic and

uncoordinated when they get the space to do it. And very reactive.

Yes. Reactive events from the other parties, like Stella Creasy, and

their own party. They have a leader who is not just weak and survival is

the name of the game for her at the moment, she is not noted for policy

development or policy rethink at all. She is, actually. Really? So

sorry to burst this bubble. Look at the Tory party manifesto. I'm not

saying I backed it or not, but the Tory party manifesto in the

election, it was incredibly radical. They had an entire chapter called

international generational failures. Arguing or solving or trying to

solve a huge amount of problems they might have. That wasn't her, it

wasn't actually her. Is the bubble still intact? It does, there is a

lot of radical thinking going on. The problem they've got, they

absolutely disastrously failed to sell it. The wrong person in charge

to sell it, she doesn't look like much of a radical. They failed to

make the point when they were given the chance in front of the

electorate. They need to find a better way to communicate. Reports

this morning on developing their own social media offensive. It has only

been around for about seven years! Social media. Meanwhile, Labour, all

the Labour people I speak to on the Corbin Bryant jet, they think now

they just need to stick to the script. -- on the Jeremy Corbyn

project. If the election was before the end of the year, they'd pretty

much fight on the manifesto they just fought on? They would virtually

publish the same manifesto if it was this year. They don't need to do

more thinking? I think they do, because they didn't win either. The

context of the next election will be different when it comes. There's no

doubt, for now, they feel a sense of small letter M momentum and

justifiably so after the election result. There are dangers of

complacency and hubris, because they didn't win, but if there was an

election in the autumn, they were published as a manifesto with some

confidence. Is there any sense the honeymoon overfed Jeremy Corbyn? We

saw the discipline problem he had midweek with those MPs who backed

the Chuka Umunna amendment. In times gone by he had to live with it? It

would be a great mistake to think there's a real sense of unity in the

Parliamentary party, the problems that continued. It depends if you

are one of the Labour MPs who in by Jeremy Corbyn because you thought he

was unelectable, and those have gone a little quiet, or you didn't like

him because you fundamentally disagreed with his policy

principles. Those people are still not reconciled to his programme and

agenda. This is more than Mr Corbyn I would suggest. The people who run

the Labour Party are from the left. They are not going to consolidate...

Whether Mr Corbyn falls under the proverbial bus, why make a

difference, they will consolidate their grip, and we will see that at

the party conference, and even without Mr Corbyn, this is now a

party which is clearly of the left. They are in control. Absolutely, you

heard it from Richard Burgon, talking about the need to give

members more democratic control, therefore not the MPs, who are still

moderate or Blairite, whatever you want to call it. There will be an

almighty tussle. Jeremy Corbyn had given this very unexpected

semi-victory, didn't win that election but did better than he

thought, he could either be thoroughly consensual and get people

like Yvette Cooper and Chuka Umunna back on the front bench and move

towards, away from the hard left of the centre. All he could press on

determine with the hard left vision and that is precisely what he's

doing. That means undoubtably another war. You didn't win but

you've done really well, much better than 80% of your own party said you

would do. Indeed, they were all carping and getting ready for you to

fail, so they could move in on you. Why would you not to do but you know

you still have a problem with the Parliamentary party but you'd

consolidate your control of the conference, the National executive

committee, the grassroots, where you are in control? I understand what he

did with the Shadow Cabinet. To that extent, Tesak prominent members of

the Shadow Cabinet who have stood with him up until that election, to

bring these figures in who hadn't been with him, would have been an

act of betrayal, which is not his style. I can understand. There just

wasn't the space to bring them in. Whether later on he needs to be

pragmatic, as well as this conviction, Messiah figure, is a

different question. I think there will be times when he will need to

be. In the end, you can't run divided parties. A leader, one of

the responsibilities of leadership, is to try as much as possible to

bring people together. As well as just crushing them. I guess my point

is, this is not a party that suddenly reverts to where it was

after all when Mr Corbyn goes. This is a different Labour Party. That's

the point I'm making. It is a different Labour Party and in some

ways therein lies the opportunity for the Conservatives. There is very

clear blue water there. What the Conservatives have totally failed to

do is present themselves as a party that offers anything other than

misery. A party that offers opportunity, aspiration and isn't

just about making everything harder. The Daily Mail got it right when

they said Theresa May has a gloom bucket. We're running out of time

but I want to show you something here which may change the art of the

Sunday political interview. Take a look at this.

Are you absolutely clear that our environmental and food

standards will not be loosened in any way, as a result of leaving

the EU and doing free trade deals with other

Up until the end of this Parliament, farmers have been guaranteed that

You have suggested that very, very wealthy farmers,

who get huge amounts of money from the EU at the moment,

like Sir James Dyson and others, will get less money under

Were you very, very surprised to be brought back?

Michael Gove, thank you very much indeed.

Well, this could change the art of the interview. Yes! Thanks a lot.

Different politicians can do different things. Michael Gove is a

big character, has a lot of licensed to say yes when he doesn't

necessarily mean yes and we allow him to get away with it. Theresa May

trying to pull that trick, not so much. It would be nice in my

expensive she said yes or no to a question I asked! It would certainly

make these programmes a lot shorter. LAUGHTER

Nothing new about this. I listen to Michael Fallon tell the Armed Forces

this week there was plenty of money in their budgets, it doesn't make it

any more true. I am all in favour of those short interviews because there

would be more room for the panel! You could have three minute

political interviews and then half an hour of the panel afterwards. We

promise not to do yes or no answers. They don't have to stop at yes or

no, but I quite like when someone says yes or no and then explained

why it is yes or no. So many politicians of all parties answer

the question without getting to the yes or no bit. You just get a river

of fudge. Tom makes a good point. Michael Gove is newly confident,

he's just been reappointed to the Cabinet which he himself said he

didn't expect. Therefore for the time being he is unsackable. They

are all unsackable, they can all do this now! It does give you a bit

more space for that yes or no direction, you know, which could

land others, as Tom suggested, in trouble. He is in a strong place. I

have feeling it won't reinvent the Sunday interview! That said this

weekend, Wimbledon starts tomorrow so Joe will be back at 11 o'clock. I

will be back at the same time next Sunday.

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

MAN: What makes you two make different from each other?

but I don't, like, love it as much as Lucy.

Oh, Arthur lives down the hill and I live down the hill.

Good at counting and I'm good at hiding.

SI KING: Let me guess, you're seeing a garden, aren't you?

DAVE MYERS: Well, we're seeing a kitchen!

With culinary inspiration from the great outdoors...

..we'll be cooking up some top nosh live in the open air.