:00:39. > :00:42.It's Sunday morning and this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:43. > :00:45.With Cabinet divisions over Brexit, spending and leadership spilling
:00:46. > :00:48.onto the front pages, we'll be talking to international
:00:49. > :00:50.trade secretary Liam Fox about Britain's future
:00:51. > :00:58.Jeremy Corbyn's been to Brussels to set out
:00:59. > :01:01.Labour's vision for Brexit - but with the party suffering its own
:01:02. > :01:03.divisions on Europe, are they being entirely clear
:01:04. > :01:07.And as Ukip searches for another leader, will taking an even more
:01:08. > :01:09.hard-line stance on Islam make the party relevant again,
:01:10. > :01:17.If Ukip goes down the route of being a party that is anti
:01:18. > :01:26.the religion of Islam, frankly it's finished.
:01:27. > :01:28.In London - once a year you can visit your local council
:01:29. > :01:45.So what happened when armchair auditors in Lambeth did just that?
:01:46. > :01:48.Yes, all of that to come, and I'm joined for all of it
:01:49. > :01:50.by three journalists whose every word is as closely followed
:01:51. > :01:54.And much like the Liberal Democrat leadership contest, they've
:01:55. > :01:59.won their place on the panel because no-one else wanted the job.
:02:00. > :02:09.It's Steve Richards, Isabel Oakeshott and Tom Newton Dunn.
:02:10. > :02:11.First today, for a supposedly private gathering, the meeting
:02:12. > :02:14.of the Cabinet on Tuesday has generated rather a lot of headlines,
:02:15. > :02:16.most of them featuring Chancellor Philip Hammond.
:02:17. > :02:20.Yesterday there were disputed claims in the Sun over what he may or may
:02:21. > :02:24.not have said about women driving trains, and today the Sunday Times
:02:25. > :02:28.says colleagues picked him up for describing public sector workers
:02:29. > :02:31.as overpaid, although some dispute that version of events.
:02:32. > :02:33.Well, Mr Hammond was on the Andrew Marr Show this morning,
:02:34. > :02:36.and he took the unusual step of suggesting that the source
:02:37. > :02:42.of the stories may be people unhappy at his position over Brexit.
:02:43. > :02:45.If you want my opinion, some of the noise is generated by people
:02:46. > :02:48.who are not happy with the agenda that I have,
:02:49. > :02:57.tried to advance of ensuring that we achieve a Brexit
:02:58. > :03:01.which is focused on protecting our economy, protecting
:03:02. > :03:04.our jobs, and making sure we can have continued rising living
:03:05. > :03:17.So what do you make of that, Isabel? The Chancellor thinks he's being
:03:18. > :03:21.undermined by Cabinet colleagues who don't trust him on Brexit. That's
:03:22. > :03:28.quite remarkable to say that in public. I also think it's completely
:03:29. > :03:35.true. That's the least controversial part of it! The briefing is his
:03:36. > :03:37.position on Brexit and also frustration on his position over
:03:38. > :03:42.public sector pay then it is over any kind of leadership manoeuvrings.
:03:43. > :03:49.We saw on the Andrew Marr Show that he was doubling down on the issue of
:03:50. > :03:52.public sector pay rises. He didn't categorically deny using the words
:03:53. > :03:59.of overpaid, in fact he reiterated the fact he sees them as whether
:04:00. > :04:02.they are overpaid or not so I believe he did use that phrase but
:04:03. > :04:08.clearly he's got the tone wrong and I don't think he's done himself any
:04:09. > :04:15.favours. He's a pretty wealthy man himself, multimillionaire. He must
:04:16. > :04:21.have some kind of political deafness if he thinks it's OK for someone in
:04:22. > :04:26.his position to say, in a number of cases, lowly paid public sector
:04:27. > :04:30.workers are overpaid? I think he is politically deaf, and not
:04:31. > :04:42.emotionally intelligent. He has a great head for figures but very poor
:04:43. > :04:55.at expressing himself. It was a crass remark over women train
:04:56. > :04:59.drivers. He may be in the right place on some arguments, he's just
:05:00. > :05:04.extremely poor at expressing and that's what gives his opponents the
:05:05. > :05:10.chance to rip his head off. He should have worked out by now that
:05:11. > :05:13.it is clear whatever... Because of the dim munition of Mrs May's
:05:14. > :05:18.authority that whatever you see in the Cabinet now is likely to become
:05:19. > :05:22.public in some shape or form. I think this is the profound lesson of
:05:23. > :05:28.the story, that Cabinet discussion is almost impossible now, and
:05:29. > :05:32.Hammond will go away this summer thinking I can't engage in a proper
:05:33. > :05:36.debate in Cabinet because they will leak it. It sounds as if they were
:05:37. > :05:40.having quite a grown-up conversation about public sector pay with a
:05:41. > :05:44.spending department ministers putting the case for breaking the
:05:45. > :05:48.cup and Hammond saying from the Treasury perspective this is what's
:05:49. > :05:54.happening. Which is what normally happens in Cabinet. He would hope
:05:55. > :05:58.so, not any more. He won't be able to speak his mind in Cabinet because
:05:59. > :06:02.he knows it will be leaked and that is another sign of fragility of this
:06:03. > :06:06.Government, when you cannot have a grown-up discussion about public
:06:07. > :06:09.sector pay even in Cabinet, and that means Cabinet discussion which is
:06:10. > :06:16.urgently needed on Brexit and the rest of it cannot happen in an open
:06:17. > :06:20.way because leaking is happening. Mrs May is not exactly top of the
:06:21. > :06:25.Pops with her own party at the moment but doesn't help her in the
:06:26. > :06:30.fact that her Chancellor is even less top of the Pops? The key thing
:06:31. > :06:34.is that backbenchers don't want a leadership contest at the moment.
:06:35. > :06:38.There are a number of Cabinet ministers or more senior figures who
:06:39. > :06:42.have been around longer who may feel this is their last chance of the
:06:43. > :06:48.leadership and they are urgently wanting it happen now. Backbenchers
:06:49. > :06:54.don't want it, I don't think it will happen. Will it happen? I don't
:06:55. > :07:02.think it will. There are egos clashing in the Cabinet and also
:07:03. > :07:05.many who just want things to stay the way they are, so they will. We
:07:06. > :07:06.will talk more about this leadership matter later in the programme, but
:07:07. > :07:08.let's move on. This week the government passed
:07:09. > :07:09.another Brexit milestone when in introduced the Repeal Bill
:07:10. > :07:11.to the Commons. It will incorporate all EU law
:07:12. > :07:14.into the UK's domestic And although a vote on the Bill
:07:15. > :07:18.isn't due until the autumn, the government still has plenty
:07:19. > :07:20.on its plate when it Brexit secretary David Davis
:07:21. > :07:23.and the EU's negotiator Michel Barnier will sit down
:07:24. > :07:25.for another helping of Brexit negotiations in Brussels
:07:26. > :07:27.this week. Progress now needs to be made
:07:28. > :07:31.on some big questions. They include: the rights of EU
:07:32. > :07:33.citizens living here, How to maintain an open border
:07:34. > :07:40.between Northern Ireland And the size of the financial
:07:41. > :07:45.settlement or so-called divorce bill Previous estimates have included a
:07:46. > :07:52.figure of The British government has put no
:07:53. > :07:58.figure on it, simply saying it This week, Foreign Secretary
:07:59. > :08:04.Boris Johnson said the EU could "go whistle" if it was
:08:05. > :08:06.expecting an extortionate fee Brussels wants this set
:08:07. > :08:19.of negotiations focusing on the principles of separation
:08:20. > :08:22.to be done by the end of the year. They can then turn to the main
:08:23. > :08:25.event, the future trading relationship between the UK
:08:26. > :08:27.and the EU. While the UK remains a member
:08:28. > :08:30.of the EU customs union, it cannot But it can hold advanced discussions
:08:31. > :08:34.with other countries. This week, Australian Prime Minister
:08:35. > :08:36.Malcolm Turnbull said his country was very keen for a deal
:08:37. > :08:41.as quickly as possible. And at the G20 summit, Donald Trump
:08:42. > :08:45.said he wanted to sign a very powerful UK-US trade
:08:46. > :08:50.deal very quickly. But as trade deals normally
:08:51. > :08:53.take years to negotiate, it is unclear when the first ones
:08:54. > :08:56.will be ready for post-Brexit So there will be plenty
:08:57. > :09:01.for both sides to digest, as negotiations continue
:09:02. > :09:09.over the summer. I'm joined
:09:10. > :09:19.by the International Trade Your brief is to agree new free
:09:20. > :09:24.trade deals but you cannot sign any until Brexit is done, can you even
:09:25. > :09:30.begin proper negotiations this side of Brexit or is that illegal too? We
:09:31. > :09:37.cannot negotiate and conclude a trade agreement but we can scope
:09:38. > :09:41.them out. We can get our preparatory work done. We have got ten working
:09:42. > :09:46.groups established across the world with countries from Korea to the
:09:47. > :09:50.United States to Australia. I know scoping the out is fine, you can
:09:51. > :09:55.talk about trade but you cannot begin formal trade negotiations
:09:56. > :09:59.until after Brexit. No, but we have trade working agreements. Free trade
:10:00. > :10:05.agreements are not the only thing that are in the mix as it were, they
:10:06. > :10:09.are what people think about but we also have mutual recognition
:10:10. > :10:14.agreements where we can reduce some of the barriers to trade, the
:10:15. > :10:18.technical barriers, in that process. We have a number of other things
:10:19. > :10:23.going on. We have got to get our trading schedules in Switzerland and
:10:24. > :10:28.Geneva and the World Trade Organisation organised. We then have
:10:29. > :10:32.40 EU free trade agreements and we have to get them ready because if we
:10:33. > :10:37.were not to negotiate those and be ready on the first day of Brexit,
:10:38. > :10:41.there would be huge market disruption. Although you can clearly
:10:42. > :10:47.do a lot of technical work and you can talk till the cows come home,
:10:48. > :10:54.there will be no free trade deals on the shelf ready to sign come March
:10:55. > :11:02.2019 when we are leaving the EU, that's correct isn't it? Technically
:11:03. > :11:07.there will be new ones... There will be no free trade deals ready to say
:11:08. > :11:11.right, we are out, here is a deal I have baked earlier. Not right away
:11:12. > :11:15.because we are not permitted to do that as part of our membership of
:11:16. > :11:19.the European Union and one of the things I want to get is greater
:11:20. > :11:23.freedom to be able to negotiate on behalf of the UK. That's not
:11:24. > :11:30.possible when you are inside the customs union. There's much talk of
:11:31. > :11:33.a transition after 2019. You told Bloomberg you didn't mind a few
:11:34. > :11:40.months, the Chancellor this morning said it would be a couple of years.
:11:41. > :11:42.What is it? The key thing is why would you have a transitional
:11:43. > :11:48.arrangements, how long would it be and what would the conditions be.
:11:49. > :11:53.For me first we have to leave the European Union in March 2019 so
:11:54. > :12:00.there can be no case of extending EU membership. At that point as a third
:12:01. > :12:03.country we can have a transition agreement which keeps as little
:12:04. > :12:08.disruption as possible but it has to have an end date. You said a few
:12:09. > :12:12.months, the Chancellor said a few years, why the difference? As the
:12:13. > :12:17.Chancellor said, it is more a technical argument, because for
:12:18. > :12:21.example how do we get new border equipment in place, how do we get
:12:22. > :12:26.the arrangements for immigration put in place, but for me, you know, I've
:12:27. > :12:32.waited a long time and campaigned long time to leave the European
:12:33. > :12:36.Union. As long as we leave in March 2019 I'm happy, as long as we have a
:12:37. > :12:39.time-limited transitional period to make it work for business. The
:12:40. > :12:45.Chancellor doesn't deny the transition could take up four years.
:12:46. > :12:51.The Brexit Secretary David Davis says it could be a maximum of three
:12:52. > :12:54.years, you are talking months. Shouldn't you sort this out around
:12:55. > :13:02.the Cabinet table instead of all three of you sending mixed messages?
:13:03. > :13:06.We are dependent on for example what HMRC Tal us, how investment is
:13:07. > :13:10.going. It's also a question of negotiating with our European
:13:11. > :13:16.partners. We know what's involved, why are you sending out these mixed
:13:17. > :13:20.messages? I don't have a problem with the transition period as long
:13:21. > :13:25.as it is time-limited. It is not just the time, it is the conditions.
:13:26. > :13:30.I want in the transitional period to be able to negotiate agreements at
:13:31. > :13:34.that point. We cannot have a putting off over the freedom to negotiate
:13:35. > :13:41.trade agreements. At the moment is it clear you would be able to sign
:13:42. > :13:49.any free trade deals during a transition period? No, that's to be
:13:50. > :13:54.negotiated. So if Mr Hammond or Mr Davies is right, up to three or four
:13:55. > :14:00.years, it could be 2021 before you get to sign a free trade deal. We
:14:01. > :14:05.don't now how long any would take to negotiate. They don't happen
:14:06. > :14:10.overnight. Would you even be able to negotiate during a transition
:14:11. > :14:14.period? I would hope so, that is one of the conditions we might set. It
:14:15. > :14:17.is certainly something I would want to see because otherwise it makes it
:14:18. > :14:22.much more difficult to take advantage of the opportunities that
:14:23. > :14:26.Brexit itself would produce. Your ink will run dry before you get to
:14:27. > :14:33.sign one of these agreements. We have a huge amount to do and it's
:14:34. > :14:37.not just at the free trade agreement level. We have for example what we
:14:38. > :14:41.get at the World Trade Organisation because the real game for the UK is
:14:42. > :14:49.to get a global liberalisation in the services sector -- the real
:14:50. > :14:55.gain. And I want to come onto that in a minute but before do, are you
:14:56. > :14:59.group of the Cabinet ministers that seems to regularly be briefing
:15:00. > :15:05.against Philip Hammond? No, I deplore leaks from the Cabinet, I
:15:06. > :15:12.think my colleagues should be quiet, stick to their duties, and I expect
:15:13. > :15:18.discipline to be effective. The only people smiling that this will be
:15:19. > :15:26.people in Berlin and Paris. Why are people doing it? The need to have
:15:27. > :15:31.less prosecco. They don't trust Philip Hammond, do they? I don't
:15:32. > :15:35.think that is true. I read in the press we have very different views,
:15:36. > :15:39.in fact our views are very similar on things like transition. I don't
:15:40. > :15:46.know where it is coming from but I think it should stop.
:15:47. > :15:52.But it is happening? It is happening and I think it undermines the
:15:53. > :15:56.position of the government. We do not need an interim leader or an
:15:57. > :16:03.alternative leader. We have a very good competent leader in Theresa
:16:04. > :16:07.May. But he thinks it is being done by fellow Brexiteers? I do not know
:16:08. > :16:13.who is doing it and they should stop. Let's come back to the tariff
:16:14. > :16:17.free trade. There is much talk about that. The Chancellor says much of
:16:18. > :16:21.our trade with the world is in services and free trade deals won't
:16:22. > :16:27.make any particular difference. Do you agree with him? They can make a
:16:28. > :16:32.difference. It has been estimated with the OECD that free trade deals
:16:33. > :16:39.with the United States could add ?42 billion to our bilateral trade by
:16:40. > :16:43.2030. There is a game to be made. In an economy like the UK which is 80%
:16:44. > :16:48.services, what we would benefit from is a range of global liberalisation.
:16:49. > :16:52.One example is data. We have an economy where we talk about freedom
:16:53. > :16:56.of movement of goods and services, but you also have to have the
:16:57. > :17:02.freedom of movement of data. One thing I would like the UK to lead on
:17:03. > :17:08.is to look to a global agreement on that. But the talks have come to an
:17:09. > :17:14.end. There is no great global movement. That is not true. We have
:17:15. > :17:18.just had a multilateral agreement, the trade facilitation was signed
:17:19. > :17:22.this year which seeks to diminish friction at customs around the world
:17:23. > :17:27.and will add 70 billion to the economy. But it leaves plenty of
:17:28. > :17:30.nontariff barriers in place. The moment you start to talk about these
:17:31. > :17:35.complicated rules and regulations that hinder services, it does not
:17:36. > :17:41.make free trade deals impossible, it makes them much more on placated and
:17:42. > :17:47.prolonged to do. Correct? You need to look at what is happening in the
:17:48. > :17:53.global economy. According to the OECD, in 2012, the G7 and G20
:17:54. > :17:57.countries were operating about 300 nontariff barriers. By the end of
:17:58. > :18:02.2015, they were operating nearly three times that number. The silting
:18:03. > :18:06.up of growth and global trade is being done by the global economy. We
:18:07. > :18:11.need to be looking at how we can remove some of those barriers,
:18:12. > :18:15.because otherwise our prosperity becomes limited. Is it still your
:18:16. > :18:21.view that no deal would be better than a bad deal? Anyone who goes
:18:22. > :18:26.into that negotiation without that is foolish. We will not accept any
:18:27. > :18:30.deal they will give us. That is the problem David Cameron had before the
:18:31. > :18:35.referendum. I think our partners believed we would accept a bad deal
:18:36. > :18:41.rather than none. But Philip Hammond has given the game away. He said no
:18:42. > :18:46.deal would be a very, very bad outcome. The Europeans know that we
:18:47. > :18:50.have realised no deal would be a very bad outcome. Is he right? I
:18:51. > :18:56.think you can argue on what the outcome would be. It is very
:18:57. > :18:59.important as a negotiating tool, and the Prime Minister is 100% right.
:19:00. > :19:03.Those we are negotiating with, need to believe that we would walk away
:19:04. > :19:08.rather than accept a bad deal. But if you're going to walk away you did
:19:09. > :19:23.not say the consequences would be very, very bad. You do not agree
:19:24. > :19:28.with the key is what is our negotiating position? You simply do
:19:29. > :19:32.not hand it away. So he is wrong? He says very, very bad. We have to
:19:33. > :19:35.accept we have a right to walk away and those we are negotiating with
:19:36. > :19:39.have to understand that. No businessman would go into a deal and
:19:40. > :19:44.say whatever the outcome, we will accept it. And no business would go
:19:45. > :19:49.into a major negotiation with six different voices but your government
:19:50. > :19:56.is. David Davis speaks for the government not the Sunday
:19:57. > :19:59.newspapers. Not Philip Hammond. Philip Hammond was very clear this
:20:00. > :20:08.morning on the issue of transition. We are leaving the single the --
:20:09. > :20:13.market, we are leaving the customs union. Let me just quote to some
:20:14. > :20:19.other issues. It would be good to get some clarity. Is there a
:20:20. > :20:22.contingency plan for no deal? Yes, government departments are all
:20:23. > :20:27.working for their contingency plans for what would happen if we got to
:20:28. > :20:32.the end of negotiation with no deal. Why did the Foreign Secretary say
:20:33. > :20:36.there was no plan for no deal. There are contingency plans across
:20:37. > :20:42.Whitehall. Is he wrong or out of the loop? As dead no. There are
:20:43. > :20:46.contingency plans and my department and other departments have
:20:47. > :20:51.specifically been tasked... He said it this week. Well, that is not
:20:52. > :20:57.correct. We would be foolish not to have such contingency plans. I
:20:58. > :21:01.understand the argument, you need to bring the Foreign Secretary in. He
:21:02. > :21:06.is only the Foreign Secretary that you would need to bring him in, I
:21:07. > :21:13.would have thought. You want is full deal with the EU as possible. Would
:21:14. > :21:22.you be prepared to pay for that kind of open access? It depends what you
:21:23. > :21:26.mean by pay. We have to start with where we are with the European Union
:21:27. > :21:32.at the moment. We already have a tariff free arrangement. I know what
:21:33. > :21:37.we already have. The only reason why we would not continue with that is
:21:38. > :21:43.if the politicians on the other side of the channel wanted to put
:21:44. > :21:49.politics before economics. What they said they want an annual fee? If
:21:50. > :21:52.they are talking about Britain continuing to pay for those
:21:53. > :21:57.international arrangements... I am not talking about that and I think
:21:58. > :22:01.you know I am not. If we get a full access trade deal, that they say you
:22:02. > :22:07.have to pay an annual fee for this full access, should we pay it? I
:22:08. > :22:10.would not want to make a public position while our negotiations are
:22:11. > :22:15.coming on but I think you would find it difficult to square with WTO law.
:22:16. > :22:21.Has there ever been a free trade deal where you pay the other side
:22:22. > :22:26.for access? Not that I am aware of. Nor me. It would be unprecedented.
:22:27. > :22:30.Are you ruling it out? I am not going to say anything. I see say we
:22:31. > :22:32.should not have a number of different cabinet voices ahead of
:22:33. > :22:56.our negotiations so I will not do that. We will have a
:22:57. > :22:59.negotiation. We will try and get as free deal as possible. Let me tell
:23:00. > :23:02.you why it is important. I know why it is important. I have another
:23:03. > :23:04.question. You said the EU has trade deals with a number of other
:23:05. > :23:07.countries at the moment of which we are part of, South Korea and Canada
:23:08. > :23:10.are two examples. Will they continue to trade with us on the existing
:23:11. > :23:12.basis, or will we have to do new deals or change these deals after
:23:13. > :23:17.Brexit? We are negotiating with his third countries so we have something
:23:18. > :23:23.so that deals are translated into UK law so there is no disruption to
:23:24. > :23:28.trade. It is not clear. It is break clear. The Canada deal has not yet
:23:29. > :23:33.been ratified by the European Union. So we do not know if we can carry on
:23:34. > :23:39.trading with those countries which the EU has a free trade deal with on
:23:40. > :23:45.the same basis. We have not spoken to a single country and we have
:23:46. > :23:50.working groups with Switzerland and career which make up 82% by value.
:23:51. > :23:55.Not a single one of those has indicated they did not want to carry
:23:56. > :24:00.out this transitional adoption. In the case of Canada, in the case of
:24:01. > :24:05.Singapore, where that agreement has not yet been reached by the EU, we
:24:06. > :24:11.will have to think then about a Plan B and how we go into a bilateral
:24:12. > :24:18.agreement. The EU now regards as may as a lame duck leader. It is true in
:24:19. > :24:23.Brussels, Berlin and Paris -- the EU now regards Mrs May as a lame duck
:24:24. > :24:27.leader. There is a hung parliament. Labour will not save your bacon on
:24:28. > :24:34.Brexit. They want a quick election and they will vote to bring that
:24:35. > :24:40.about. This election result has severely undermined Britain's
:24:41. > :24:43.negotiating position. If you are looking at European governments,
:24:44. > :24:48.they are looking at dealing with minority governments all the time.
:24:49. > :24:51.They are dealing with coalitions formal and informal. The key is we
:24:52. > :24:55.have something stronger than that. We have the will of the British
:24:56. > :24:59.people behind us clearly expressed in the referendum that we are going
:25:00. > :25:04.to leave the European Union, whatever Tony Blair or anyone else
:25:05. > :25:07.says. We will leave in March 20 19. Now the job of the government is to
:25:08. > :25:11.get the best deal and that is best done by my colleagues getting on
:25:12. > :25:15.with their departmental work, not involving themselves in things they
:25:16. > :25:19.do not need to be involved in, giving our backbenchers the
:25:20. > :25:24.reassurance that we have a united Cabinet. Liam Fox, thank you.
:25:25. > :25:26.Jeremy Corbyn went to Brussels this week to meet with the EU's
:25:27. > :25:28.chief Brexit negotiator, Michael Barnier.
:25:29. > :25:30.We're told Mr Corbyn wanted to set out Labour's
:25:31. > :25:33.But on some of the big questions - like Britain's relationship
:25:34. > :25:36.with the single market and the customs union -
:25:37. > :25:39.Here's Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell speaking earlier.
:25:40. > :25:41.I believe we have to try and maintain the benefits
:25:42. > :25:43.of the customs union, and that's one of the issues
:25:44. > :25:47.Does it mean staying inside or leaving?
:25:48. > :25:50.Keep all the options open, keep all the options...
:25:51. > :25:52.Under Labour we could stay inside the customs union?
:25:53. > :25:55.We are concentrating on the objectives rather
:25:56. > :25:57.than the structures and that seems to have a resonance
:25:58. > :26:01.I'm joined now by the Shadow Business Secretary
:26:02. > :26:05.Rebecca Long-Bailey, she's in our Salford studio.
:26:06. > :26:11.Good morning to you. Good morning. If there is a snap general election
:26:12. > :26:16.it could well be Labour negotiating Brexit, so let's try and get some
:26:17. > :26:20.answers to some fundamental questions. Is Labour in favour of
:26:21. > :26:24.Britain remaining a member of the single market? What we have said it
:26:25. > :26:29.want to retain the benefits of the single market and the customs union.
:26:30. > :26:32.We have to be flexible in our approach, we appreciate that. The
:26:33. > :26:34.end goal is maintaining the current benefits we have because we are
:26:35. > :26:55.standing on the edge of a cliff, quite frankly, on
:26:56. > :26:58.that matter. But you would concentrate on remaining a member of
:26:59. > :27:00.the single market? The machinery we use to maintain those benefits is
:27:01. > :27:03.open to negotiation. We have got to respect the result of the referendum
:27:04. > :27:06.and the will of the people, in terms of having greater control over our
:27:07. > :27:08.laws and the border. If we could negotiate staying in the single
:27:09. > :27:10.market would be fantastic but whether it is likely have to be
:27:11. > :27:13.seen. We are looking at all the options on the table and getting
:27:14. > :27:19.access to the single market is one of those. Everybody wants access, I
:27:20. > :27:23.am talking about membership. It is still not clear whether you would
:27:24. > :27:26.negotiate to remain as a member of the single market, with all the
:27:27. > :27:32.consequences of free movement and the European Court that would follow
:27:33. > :27:36.from that. What is your position? We want to retain the current benefits
:27:37. > :27:40.we have is a member of the single market, but we appreciate there will
:27:41. > :27:44.be free movement and we will lose control over our laws. That was one
:27:45. > :27:49.of the key positions that were set out in the referendum and people
:27:50. > :27:53.were extremely concerned about that. That has to be negotiated. If we
:27:54. > :27:58.could negotiate membership of the single market while dealing with the
:27:59. > :28:04.other issues, that would be great. I think that would be unlikely. We
:28:05. > :28:10.have to look at a more flexible approach while not being a member.
:28:11. > :28:15.Is Labour in favour of remaining a member of the customs union? Again,
:28:16. > :28:21.the position is similar. We want to retain the benefits we have in the
:28:22. > :28:25.customs union. We want to have our cake and eat it, as do most parties
:28:26. > :28:29.in Westminster. So you and Boris Johnson or on the same wavelength?
:28:30. > :28:37.We need to be flexible, not cut our nose off despite our face. I am
:28:38. > :28:44.asking for your position. Would you be clear to be prepared to sacrifice
:28:45. > :28:50.not being able to do free trade deals, as the price for remaining in
:28:51. > :28:54.the customs union? We have to be extremely flexible. We should be
:28:55. > :29:01.able to carry out and negotiate our free trade deals. You cannot do that
:29:02. > :29:06.in the customs union? So are you in or out? That is why it is a point
:29:07. > :29:09.for negotiation, Andrew. We want to retain the benefits of the customs
:29:10. > :29:15.union will negotiating trade deals as we see fit. That will form part
:29:16. > :29:20.of the negotiations themselves. We cannot cut our nose despite our face
:29:21. > :29:23.without coming out of the customs union without any transitional
:29:24. > :29:27.arrangements whatsoever and send businesses over the cliff. Since you
:29:28. > :29:30.do want to keep your cake and eat it. You want to stay in the single
:29:31. > :29:40.market but not have the obligations that go with it, stay the single
:29:41. > :29:45.union but not do -- stay in the single market but do your own trade
:29:46. > :29:53.deals. The opposition is untenable. That is the point of the
:29:54. > :29:58.negotiations... To be untenable? Not to be untenable. We have
:29:59. > :30:01.negotiations. The machinery we have whether it is through outside
:30:02. > :30:04.agreements or whether it is about a negotiated form of an amended
:30:05. > :30:10.settlement, that is a moot point frankly. We need to make sure we
:30:11. > :30:15.have the same benefits. John McDonnell, the Shadow Chancellor,
:30:16. > :30:18.says people would interpret remaining in the single market is
:30:19. > :30:23.not respecting the referendum but you say it is an option to keep
:30:24. > :30:26.open, who is right? I think he is right in what he said. It is
:30:27. > :30:30.automatically assumed that once you leave the EU you leave the single
:30:31. > :30:34.market and that is generally the case. I would be surprised that we
:30:35. > :30:38.would be able to negotiate any of the concessions that we want to make
:30:39. > :30:42.as remaining part of the single market as a member. I am not saying
:30:43. > :30:46.it is completely off the table because stranger things have
:30:47. > :30:51.happened, but what we need to focus on is less on the machinery and more
:30:52. > :30:53.on the outcome. We need to make sure we retain the benefits and we
:30:54. > :31:00.negotiate some form of agreement to deal with that.
:31:01. > :31:06.But why would you keep an option open that would not respect the
:31:07. > :31:12.result of the referendum? People assume that once you leave the EU
:31:13. > :31:16.you leave the single market. That could be negotiated, but it's
:31:17. > :31:20.extremely unlikely. I wouldn't rule anything out at this stage because
:31:21. > :31:25.stranger things have happened and this process so far has been
:31:26. > :31:29.extremely chaotic. But you would have to decide your negotiating
:31:30. > :31:36.position. Saying we don't rule anything out is not a negotiating
:31:37. > :31:39.position. We are clear on our negotiating position, we want to
:31:40. > :31:45.retain the benefits we currently have as part of the customs union
:31:46. > :31:50.and the single market, whether that is inside or outside is a moot
:31:51. > :31:59.point. Rex it means Brexit, we are clear on that. -- Brexit means
:32:00. > :32:03.Brexit. How can it, if you want to stay inside the single market and
:32:04. > :32:08.Customs union, and you said access would entail accepting some element
:32:09. > :32:13.of free movement. That's what you said but your manifesto was
:32:14. > :32:19.categorical - free movement would end after Brexit, which is currently
:32:20. > :32:24.Labour policy? The manifesto was clear free movement would end. The
:32:25. > :32:28.point I was making at the time is there are some areas which are
:32:29. > :32:36.extremely complex, for example the free movement of scientists. There
:32:37. > :32:40.is an extreme state of concern regarding that, so the Government
:32:41. > :32:45.has to look at things like that. There might have to be concession is
:32:46. > :32:48.made in certain areas like that in order to get an associative
:32:49. > :32:52.membership for example but the clear position overall is that free
:32:53. > :32:56.movement would end and we are in favour of reasonable and managed
:32:57. > :33:00.migration. We are also not in favour of the current undercutting of wages
:33:01. > :33:04.for example through the Swedish denigration and we want to see that
:33:05. > :33:09.end immediately because we don't think it is right company cancels
:33:10. > :33:15.labour overseas and undercut British employees. Let me finish on another
:33:16. > :33:19.topic. John McDonnell again, the Shadow Chancellor, said this morning
:33:20. > :33:27.the victims of Grenfell Tower were victims of social murder. What is
:33:28. > :33:33.social murder? I haven't spoken to John about that but what happened in
:33:34. > :33:40.Grenfell was absolutely horrific. But were they victims of social
:33:41. > :33:46.murder? I haven't spoken to John to understand the term but in my
:33:47. > :33:50.constituency we have a large number of tower blocks that have the same
:33:51. > :33:54.cladding on and people are living in fear. Following the Lakanal House
:33:55. > :33:59.fire, the coroner made recommendations the Government
:34:00. > :34:06.should be installing sprinklers in all housing over 30 metres high and
:34:07. > :34:11.they haven't done that. I call on than to do that immediately whilst
:34:12. > :34:15.also making sure the funding is available to carry out necessary
:34:16. > :34:26.remedial works. One other issue has come light... My question is
:34:27. > :34:31.important... When John McDonnell says that the people in Grenfell
:34:32. > :34:35.Tower were murdered, murdered by political decisions, is he right? I
:34:36. > :34:45.go back to the point I made earlier. I haven't discussed it with John...
:34:46. > :34:53.Two weeks ago. The Government should have acted on recommendations. Were
:34:54. > :34:59.they murdered? They should have acted on recommendations to retrofit
:35:00. > :35:03.sprinklers and they didn't. There was incompetence is no question,
:35:04. > :35:08.dereliction of duty, some terrible decisions made that resulted in that
:35:09. > :35:14.appalling event that we saw but does that amount to murder? It is a
:35:15. > :35:19.simple question. You could look at it case of manslaughter but the fact
:35:20. > :35:23.is people lost their lives through a failure to conduct adequately a duty
:35:24. > :35:28.of care. People would assume that is murder if you like, if it was taken
:35:29. > :35:34.through the courts, and could be classified as corporate
:35:35. > :35:40.manslaughter. It's not murder? We are going round in circles here. The
:35:41. > :35:43.point is the Government should have acted on recommendations to retrofit
:35:44. > :35:46.sprinklers years ago and should have looked at amending building
:35:47. > :35:52.regulations instead of kicking the issue into the long grass time and
:35:53. > :35:57.time again. People where I live are living in extreme fear, and we want
:35:58. > :36:01.the Government to take action immediately. Rebecca Long-Bailey
:36:02. > :36:03.from Salford, thank you for joining us.
:36:04. > :36:06.You may not have noticed but Ukip - the party that once promised
:36:07. > :36:08.and arguably delivered a political earthquake - is having
:36:09. > :36:12.The last leader, Paul Nuttall, stood down after the party saw its vote
:36:13. > :36:17.is one anti-Islam candidate threatening to split what's
:36:18. > :36:35.Forget the warm prosecco, if there is any plotting going on in Ukip
:36:36. > :36:42.about who should be in charge, it would be going on over a pint. And
:36:43. > :36:47.there is plotting. This programme understands Ukip's ruling body could
:36:48. > :36:53.ban one of the candidates from standing, and that is not going to
:36:54. > :36:57.go down terribly well. Anne Marie Waters, a former Labour activist,
:36:58. > :37:01.wants to be the next leader. She believes Ukip needs to talk more
:37:02. > :37:05.about Islam, a religion she has called evil. She says there is
:37:06. > :37:10.growing support for her views including among the hundreds of new
:37:11. > :37:16.members who have joined Ukip in recent weeks. Are you anti-Islam? I
:37:17. > :37:22.don't like the religion, no, and a lot of people get confused on Islam
:37:23. > :37:27.and all Muslims. The religion, the Scriptures and how it is practised
:37:28. > :37:30.in most of the world I find quite frankly abhorrent. There are
:37:31. > :37:37.millions of people in this country who think as I do. They don't
:37:38. > :37:42.want... And the real extreme right could rise if people are not allowed
:37:43. > :37:46.to talk about this. Nigel Farage has already said he doesn't want to be
:37:47. > :37:52.the leader again, but he still has a clear view of what Ukip 's macro
:37:53. > :38:01.future should and should not hold. Ukip goes down the route of being a
:38:02. > :38:04.party that is anti the religion of Islam, frankly it's finished. I
:38:05. > :38:08.don't think there is any public appetite for that but it is timing
:38:09. > :38:12.and the party would be finished. If there are some within Ukip who say
:38:13. > :38:14.the party had already moved to the right at the last election with its
:38:15. > :38:21.integration agenda. Banning
:38:22. > :38:23.the burka and physically checking children for female
:38:24. > :38:24.genital mutilation. If we don't really do something
:38:25. > :38:27.about FGM now, we never will. Anne Marie Waters wants to go
:38:28. > :38:29.further but also suspects The party chairman says
:38:30. > :38:35.there will be due process according to Ukip's constitution,
:38:36. > :38:51.including the screening process
:38:52. > :38:52.for its leadership candidates conducted
:38:53. > :38:53.by an external vetting company. But like the old boss,
:38:54. > :38:56.he doesn't think Ukip should become What we're going through now
:38:57. > :39:00.is a process where people can I'm talking about the process
:39:01. > :39:04.we have, which I think is robust enough to protect the party,
:39:05. > :39:07.its history, and protect its future. We have always been
:39:08. > :39:09.about being for something, we are not against something,
:39:10. > :39:11.and hopefully that will come through in this leadership election
:39:12. > :39:14.so I'm excited about it. I'm not focusing on one
:39:15. > :39:15.particular candidate. But it has got senior
:39:16. > :39:17.party figures worried. Several MEPs have told me
:39:18. > :39:20.the majority of their colleagues in Brussels would walk away
:39:21. > :39:22.if Anne Marie Waters Another Ukip senior source
:39:23. > :39:25.said there would be mass The deadline for leadership
:39:26. > :39:29.nominations is the 28th of July. So far, around seven people have
:39:30. > :39:31.said they intend to stand. Of course the bigger the field,
:39:32. > :39:34.the fewer the votes required to win. One senior MEP told me it would be
:39:35. > :39:37.the most rancorous contest the party had ever had,
:39:38. > :39:40.amongst the least stellar cast. The man who led Ukip at its most
:39:41. > :39:43.successful says direction is one thing but the party must also become
:39:44. > :39:45.more professional on their current
:39:46. > :39:53.trajectory, then they will on their current
:39:54. > :39:56.trajectory, then they will And as I say, if Ukip withers
:39:57. > :40:00.and Brexit is not delivered, something else will replace it
:40:01. > :40:03.so I'm saying to what is still my party, unless you change radically,
:40:04. > :40:05.get your act together, Whatever the direction
:40:06. > :40:15.the new leader takes Ukip, there are already plenty who think
:40:16. > :40:26.the party is over. We say goodbye to viewers
:40:27. > :40:36.in Scotland who leave us now Coming up here in 20 minutes,
:40:37. > :40:41.we'll be talking about what's next First though, the Sunday
:40:42. > :40:54.Politics where you are. Hello and welcome, ladies
:40:55. > :40:56.and gentlemen, to the London I'm joined for the duration
:40:57. > :41:00.by Chris Philp, Conservative MP for Croydon South and by Neil Coyle,
:41:01. > :41:03.Labour MP for Bermondsey did you know that once a year
:41:04. > :41:14.you can go into your local council We caught up with some armchair
:41:15. > :41:19.auditors who did just that that in Lambeth and found out
:41:20. > :41:21.what they discovered. I want to start by getting
:41:22. > :41:24.your take on the latest developments in the fallout
:41:25. > :41:28.from the Grenfell Tower fire. Earlier this morning Andrew Marr
:41:29. > :41:35.spoke to John McDonnell about his use of the phrase social murder to
:41:36. > :41:40.describe what happened at the Tower, would you say that term is fair to
:41:41. > :41:44.describe what happened? There are families still in shock about what
:41:45. > :41:52.happened. There were clearly falls in the materials were used so those
:41:53. > :41:55.people who must and will be held responsible for what happened and we
:41:56. > :41:59.must look at the building regulations and find a way to make
:42:00. > :42:04.sure this can never happen again. Isn't that kind of evocative
:42:05. > :42:09.language helpful? If it results in the Government taking action it has
:42:10. > :42:13.so far failed to do in retrofitting of sprinklers in tower blocks like
:42:14. > :42:17.Southwark, there are multiple tall buildings where people are more
:42:18. > :42:20.nervous now and would like to see their homes made safer and would
:42:21. > :42:25.like the Government to commit to doing that so it's shining a light
:42:26. > :42:30.on an important issue. Do you know which think of the left popularised
:42:31. > :42:34.the term social murder? Friedrich Engels. Do you think the fact
:42:35. > :42:38.Rebecca Long-Bailey and John McDonnell are using that kind of
:42:39. > :42:46.language suggests they occupy a wing of the party that uses the rhetoric
:42:47. > :42:49.you are not comfortable with? They are using that language because they
:42:50. > :42:52.wish to focus on the family 's who lost loved ones, and they are
:42:53. > :42:56.representing thousands of families across the country who are more
:42:57. > :42:59.nervous about their homes. They don't see sufficient action from the
:43:00. > :43:03.Government, they are worried building regulations are being
:43:04. > :43:08.abused or ignored for years and they are worried about their homes.
:43:09. > :43:13.Chris, do you think that's the right kind of language to be using? No, if
:43:14. > :43:17.we want to look after the victims of this fire and make sure it never
:43:18. > :43:21.happens again, because quite clearly it should never have happened in
:43:22. > :43:26.21st-century Britain, we must make sure it never happens again. The way
:43:27. > :43:29.we do that is not by using inflammatory words like social
:43:30. > :43:34.murder, we do that by having a full and proper investigation and wait
:43:35. > :43:39.and see what happens after that. There is a police investigation
:43:40. > :43:44.going on sale if anyone is guilty of manslaughter or murder, we will find
:43:45. > :43:49.out in due course. There will be an early interim report so lessons can
:43:50. > :43:57.happen quickly rather than after a year or two. That's the way this
:43:58. > :44:01.should happen, not by scoring some cheap political points so I call on
:44:02. > :44:06.everyone to get behind the inquiries and make sure whatever they find we
:44:07. > :44:10.take action. If there is any criminal liability like manslaughter
:44:11. > :44:16.or murder, the police will find out and organisations will be held
:44:17. > :44:20.responsible. But that wait and see point isn't good enough for people
:44:21. > :44:26.who are desperate to feel more secure in their homes. If you are
:44:27. > :44:30.living on the 22nd floor and you are nervous the Government is not
:44:31. > :44:35.retrofitting sprinklers, that issue can be resolved aside from the
:44:36. > :44:40.investigation, the longer inquiry into Grenfell Tower. And not saying
:44:41. > :44:43.do nothing, and within days of that terrible fire the establishment
:44:44. > :44:49.started testing hundreds of samples and in some cases evacuations took
:44:50. > :44:53.place as a result so of course we need instant action and I accept
:44:54. > :45:02.that. So when will the Government provide the funding for retrofit
:45:03. > :45:05.sprinklers? Where Fire Services said retrofit sprinklers were required
:45:06. > :45:10.and if the authorities didn't have money to do it, the Government
:45:11. > :45:14.committed to helping out. The Government has said if the council
:45:15. > :45:19.cannot afford to do essential work the Government will step in and
:45:20. > :45:26.help. The question for you is whether, clearly you want action to
:45:27. > :45:29.be taken, but is this kind of rhetoric actually useful in
:45:30. > :45:34.addressing the underlying problems or does it get in the way? Lots of
:45:35. > :45:37.people say we need a measured response and calling this horrific
:45:38. > :45:41.tragedy a social murder doesn't help.
:45:42. > :45:47.I'll be honest it is not language I would use but if it gets people
:45:48. > :45:52.security to carry on living in their homes, that is the most important
:45:53. > :45:56.part of this. The idea that there will be this fair assessment of
:45:57. > :46:01.council resources to retrofit by a government which has cut council
:46:02. > :46:06.budgets by 40%, it worries me. We need that money up front and not
:46:07. > :46:12.some sort of fake assessment. This 40% cut figure is not a real figure.
:46:13. > :46:19.I can see you two will get on, this is fantastic at max we will come
:46:20. > :46:21.back to Grenfell again in the show. Thank you for now.
:46:22. > :46:24.The capital is now seeing more than one acid attack every day,
:46:25. > :46:25.causing life-changing injuries to its victims.
:46:26. > :46:28.The increase in attacks has led to its rise up the political agenda,
:46:29. > :46:30.and on Monday MPs will debate what can be done
:46:31. > :46:35.There are some flashing images in Raphael Sheridan's report.
:46:36. > :46:39.On Thursday, Londoners were shocked by a spate of acid attacks,
:46:40. > :46:45.Two teenage males have since been arrested.
:46:46. > :46:47.It's a rising phenomenon in the capital.
:46:48. > :46:51.There were over 450 victims last year according to Met figures,
:46:52. > :46:53.double the number in 2015, and it's especially
:46:54. > :47:00.Once almost solely associated with so-called honour violence,
:47:01. > :47:03.it's becoming increasingly widespread as criminal gangs
:47:04. > :47:06.are thought to be switching from knives to acid.
:47:07. > :47:09.It's easier to buy and not a crime to carry.
:47:10. > :47:14.East Ham MP Stephen Timms is clear about what he wants to see happen.
:47:15. > :47:17.I'd like the Minister to confirm on Monday that the possession
:47:18. > :47:21.of acid will be an offence in the future in exactly the same
:47:22. > :47:25.way that possession of a knife is an offence today.
:47:26. > :47:29.I'd like the law to be changed so that sulphuric acid will only be
:47:30. > :47:36.He will be leading a debate about this in Parliament tomorrow
:47:37. > :47:38.in light of today's comments from the Home Secretary,
:47:39. > :47:42.who's warned future attackers they face life behind bars.
:47:43. > :47:45.Many Londoners will no doubt be anxious to see what MPs can do
:47:46. > :47:54.I'm joined by Rabina Khan, an independent councillor
:47:55. > :48:00.on Tower Hamlets council who has written on the subject.
:48:01. > :48:09.Thank you for coming in. Why are these acid attacks so sharply
:48:10. > :48:13.rising? I think we need to put some context to this. Acid attacks have
:48:14. > :48:18.been prevalent in this country and they happen across the world as
:48:19. > :48:21.well. They disproportionately affect women. Researchers showed in the
:48:22. > :48:25.last ten years hospital ad missions have doubled because of acid
:48:26. > :48:29.attacks. While we're having this debate and a quarter legislation,
:48:30. > :48:34.why so late in the day? These are the questions which need to be
:48:35. > :48:39.asked. But they have massively increased. Whether you go by
:48:40. > :48:46.financial years or not, in 2016 there were 398 against 317 before.
:48:47. > :48:52.In 2017 there were 452 attacks. They are rising sharply. Are they rising
:48:53. > :48:55.or is there better resources for people reporting as well? They're
:48:56. > :48:59.definitely has been a spike in the increase but I want to talk about
:49:00. > :49:03.the underreporting. The under reporting about many victims who
:49:04. > :49:07.feel they may face reprise all. I am dealing with a case of a woman and
:49:08. > :49:12.her son in Tower Hamlets who faced an acid attack back in November 20
:49:13. > :49:24.16. They do not want to come to the media
:49:25. > :49:27.because they are afraid of reprisals. We need support for
:49:28. > :49:29.victims to have the ability to report. There is a narrative in the
:49:30. > :49:32.media that this is prevalent in parts of the South Asian community
:49:33. > :49:33.and it is associated with an retribution, that women are attacked
:49:34. > :49:36.because they have behaved dishonourably. For people who find
:49:37. > :49:41.that thinking disgusting and don't understand it, what would be the
:49:42. > :49:46.thinking behind those parts of communities? In Bangladesh there are
:49:47. > :49:50.over 3500 acid attacks which have taken place. It happens in India and
:49:51. > :49:54.Afghanistan and this country. This has been in Britain for a long time.
:49:55. > :49:59.The fact we are now having this debate, the fact we are trying to
:50:00. > :50:04.change legislation, acid attacks are prevalent in certain communities and
:50:05. > :50:08.there is an agenda behind it. It is a terrorism agenda, trying to
:50:09. > :50:13.control a woman in that way. But the new context to acid attacks is the
:50:14. > :50:17.dimensions and debate around it have changed. We have gang members who
:50:18. > :50:22.think it is easier to carry a weapon of choice which is acid. It is
:50:23. > :50:26.easier to carry the acid than a knife, because it is an offensive
:50:27. > :50:38.crime if you carry a knife. It is easier to disguise acid because you
:50:39. > :50:43.can carry it around a bottle. Just picking up on what Rabina Khan has
:50:44. > :50:47.said, why has it taken until now for the debate to be held about the shop
:50:48. > :50:51.rising attacks? As you said, it has doubled recently. Injuring someone
:50:52. > :50:56.with acid is already a criminal offence. You can get up to a life
:50:57. > :51:00.sentence for carrying acid already and carrying it with intent has a
:51:01. > :51:04.sentence of up to four years under the current law. But I must agree
:51:05. > :51:09.with what Stephen Timms said. Effectively, acid is being used as a
:51:10. > :51:20.weapon like a knife and in my view, it should be treated as an
:51:21. > :51:23.equivalent. Merely carrying the worst kinds of acid like sulphuric
:51:24. > :51:26.acid and hydrochloric acid, I think there is a case of simply carrying
:51:27. > :51:29.that in public and offence in itself as it is with a knife already. It is
:51:30. > :51:34.a criminal intent to carry acid with intent but you do not need a license
:51:35. > :51:37.to buy it. Should you need a licence? I think for the most
:51:38. > :51:42.powerful kinds of acid there is a strong case for doing that and we
:51:43. > :51:45.will debate it in Parliament tomorrow. You cannot say you need
:51:46. > :51:53.hydrochloric or sulphuric acid around the home. Clearly, it is
:51:54. > :51:58.industrial or chemical. Will you be in Parliament tomorrow? Gas, and
:51:59. > :52:04.what concerns me is whether the law has changed and whether the police
:52:05. > :52:08.have the resources to do it. This tie was gifted to me by the mother
:52:09. > :52:13.of a 15-year-old murdered in a knife attack. We see 80% of knife crimes
:52:14. > :52:18.go an prosecuted. If we have the same position with acid attacks and
:52:19. > :52:23.80% of criminals going unpunished, we are not solving anything. Does it
:52:24. > :52:28.strike you as bizarre that we can have guidelines for knife attacks
:52:29. > :52:32.but we do not have any more for knife attacks, while as Rabina Khan
:52:33. > :52:37.has been arguing, it has been rising sharply for many years. Needs to
:52:38. > :52:42.move up the agenda. The other link here is the gangs are using it. The
:52:43. > :52:46.recent spate in north London was around my bed crime. People stealing
:52:47. > :52:52.mopeds by using acid on the mopeds driver and then using their mopeds
:52:53. > :52:56.to commit other crimes, in particular mobile phone thefts. The
:52:57. > :53:01.police say they do not have the means to tackle this. There are 2500
:53:02. > :53:05.mopeds thefts of mobile phones in the last month. Police do not have
:53:06. > :53:13.the resources to tackle that and they say they should not chase some
:53:14. > :53:19.mopeds drivers because of their safety. Is there a case that if
:53:20. > :53:25.licences are required for the carrying of acid, that people will
:53:26. > :53:33.end up buying it online instead?... We need to have the regulations and
:53:34. > :53:39.monitor who is purchasing it. It is very EEC for young people to access
:53:40. > :53:44.or certain members of our communities to access sulphuric
:53:45. > :53:48.acid. My problem is while we are having the debate about changing the
:53:49. > :53:52.legislation we are not talking about supporting the victims here. How
:53:53. > :53:59.would you like to do that? The intent about using acid, it is not
:54:00. > :54:05.about trying to kill, it is about to inflict humiliation. Permanent human
:54:06. > :54:10.relation. When acid is used, it melts the face and not the skin. The
:54:11. > :54:15.damage that is caused is very long-term. Katie Piper, whose face
:54:16. > :54:23.was rebuilt, the doctor has commented that the acid attacks are
:54:24. > :54:29.used to inflict painful sense of humiliation on the self, the
:54:30. > :54:34.identity, so the psychological and emotional support needs to be in
:54:35. > :54:38.place for victims. Some victims have had to endure 20 operations just to
:54:39. > :54:42.be able to breathe and come out in society. Has the Home Secretary
:54:43. > :54:49.Amber Rudd got it right when she said we need to look at life
:54:50. > :54:54.sentences? She needs to go further. The Home Office do not collect data
:54:55. > :54:57.on acid. The police need to be supportive and the support
:54:58. > :55:04.organisations who support victims of acid attacks also need to be
:55:05. > :55:08.supported. A final word on that? This is a terribly important issue.
:55:09. > :55:14.It ruins people's lives, it is deeply disturbing that it is on the
:55:15. > :55:19.rise and we do need to take action to halt it. Thank you for coming in.
:55:20. > :55:21.Depending on who you want to believe, councils are either
:55:22. > :55:23.cesspits of profligacy and waste or the cash-strapped victims
:55:24. > :55:27.But thanks to new powers, you, the public can now do something
:55:28. > :55:32.Since 2015, town halls have had to open up their accounts to the public
:55:33. > :55:34.for 30 days ever year, but in Lambeth one groups' attempts
:55:35. > :55:36.to use the powers is proving highly controversial.
:55:37. > :55:40.We went and spoke to that resident and said, can
:55:41. > :55:46.Meet the armchair auditors, Lambeth citizens armed
:55:47. > :55:49.with a spreadsheet and determined to shake things up at the Town Hall.
:55:50. > :55:52.It really started as a result that I lived next door to this estate
:55:53. > :55:54.and there was talk about it potentially being demolished because
:55:55. > :56:03.I read about this piece of legislation via a book called
:56:04. > :56:05.the Silent Estate by Heather Brooke which allows people
:56:06. > :56:08.to audit their accounts, and decided to give it a go really.
:56:09. > :56:11.So Simon decided to rally the troops.
:56:12. > :56:14.People like Tom here who live on the estate.
:56:15. > :56:16.We notified Lambeth of the issues and they still
:56:17. > :56:22.The result was a document they called the Lambeth People's Audit,
:56:23. > :56:24.which they allege has uncovered financial mismanagement
:56:25. > :56:30.Much of their work focuses on housing and repairs.
:56:31. > :56:34.So just now the People's Audit wants to show us around the estate,
:56:35. > :56:36.show some of the issues that there have been with repairs,
:56:37. > :56:39.with drainpipes, where there has been a fire risk,
:56:40. > :56:43.Unfortunately though, someone from Lambeth Council stopped
:56:44. > :56:48.They said the estate regeneration is so sensitive that
:56:49. > :56:53.television cameras are not allowed to film at all.
:56:54. > :56:56.So instead, here are some photos that they took earlier.
:56:57. > :57:00.One main claim in the People's Audit was the council took ?1 million
:57:01. > :57:04.from the pot of money the council ring-fenced for council housing,
:57:05. > :57:06.and rather than investing it in repairs, they spent it on doing
:57:07. > :57:11.The council say that, in their words, is fake news.
:57:12. > :57:16.The money is paying the town hall staff who work on housing.
:57:17. > :57:19.If you had a housing office on an estate,
:57:20. > :57:22.you would expect that to be paid for from the HRA because it's part
:57:23. > :57:26.If you put those people in another building they're
:57:27. > :57:28.sharing with other people, obviously, the costs are going
:57:29. > :57:32.You'd still expect that to be paid from the HRA.
:57:33. > :57:35.In fact, the council say the Lambeth People's Audit is not
:57:36. > :57:42.It's being presented as something else, which is really a shame
:57:43. > :57:45.because I do think the legislation, which lets people go in,
:57:46. > :57:48.look at a council's accounts, see exactly how the council
:57:49. > :57:51.is spending their money, is a really good thing.
:57:52. > :57:54.But in this instance, I'm afraid it has been hijacked
:57:55. > :57:56.by professional politicians who until very recently,
:57:57. > :58:03.I think there are questions to be asked about why they have
:58:04. > :58:09.So we put Lambeth Council's words to the People's Audit.
:58:10. > :58:12.The People's Audit is a collection of senior politicians
:58:13. > :58:16.from the Liberal Democrats and the Greens.
:58:17. > :58:21.I've never been a member of a political party in my life.
:58:22. > :58:26.Don't particularly have an intention of joining one.
:58:27. > :58:29.Some of the members are actively involved in politics
:58:30. > :58:34.This is George Turner, a former Lib Dem parliamentary
:58:35. > :58:37.There are people involved who are from the Green Party,
:58:38. > :58:40.people involved who are not a member of any party at all,
:58:41. > :58:43.and I think there might even be a few Labour Party members.
:58:44. > :58:46.I don't know what the party affiliation of people
:58:47. > :58:50.involved in the group are, because it's not a concern to us.
:58:51. > :58:52.Chris Holt has worked for the Greens.
:58:53. > :58:56.It's all very well for Lambeth Labour to attack the people
:58:57. > :59:01.We just want them to answer the questions.
:59:02. > :59:03.It doesn't matter who's asking them, just answer the questions
:59:04. > :59:05.and hopefully, we can all be satisfied.
:59:06. > :59:08.But to avoid misunderstanding, does there need to be more
:59:09. > :59:10.transparency on the half of the new armchair auditors,
:59:11. > :59:24.It's really important though that we know who's
:59:25. > :59:27.doing this sort of work, that they are as transparent
:59:28. > :59:30.as they are demanding of the local authority, and that there are clear
:59:31. > :59:32.parameters of how they present their information, so people can
:59:33. > :59:36.Under the new rules, every council has to open up
:59:37. > :59:39.Most London local authorities do it in the summer.
:59:40. > :59:42.So if you fancy joining the ranks of the armchair auditors,
:59:43. > :00:01.you are an MP may bring Lambeth. Would you welcome this action? I do
:00:02. > :00:08.think there are areas where transparency needs to be greater.
:00:09. > :00:12.For example, leaseholder charges for major works programmes is something
:00:13. > :00:18.which continually comes up for concerns, along with planning law
:00:19. > :00:23.and how the people are involved. Is the principle of opening up your
:00:24. > :00:27.accounts to citizens for 30 days a good one, because you believe in
:00:28. > :00:31.transparency, or a potentially dangerous one, because it will end
:00:32. > :00:37.up being captured by political organisations?
:00:38. > :00:46.There shouldn't be any problem opening up accounts, whether that's
:00:47. > :00:50.by an alternative political party. I think in one but it is unfortunate
:00:51. > :00:56.that appears to be opponents of the council leading part of the audit.
:00:57. > :01:04.That is contested, it is worth saying... If we just looked at this
:01:05. > :01:08.through what needs to be in the public domain, routinely, not just
:01:09. > :01:15.for 30 days in the summer but routinely made available. What's the
:01:16. > :01:24.point of this legislation if there is controversy over it and nothing
:01:25. > :01:29.really happens? The council says we don't accept your conclusions and
:01:30. > :01:33.that's that. I think it's a brilliant initiative. Openness and
:01:34. > :01:38.transparency is the beating heart of our democracy. The people in Lambeth
:01:39. > :01:43.appear to be independent, but with a few political activist as well. I
:01:44. > :01:47.will be encouraging people in Croydon to start doing the same
:01:48. > :01:50.things now. Clearly the National Audit Office has overall
:01:51. > :01:55.responsibility for local government audit so if the National Audit
:01:56. > :02:00.Office sees anything in this report, they should follow it up. The
:02:01. > :02:04.biggest element of accountability comes in May next year with the
:02:05. > :02:08.local council elections and if people decide their council has done
:02:09. > :02:13.a bad job, paying for repairs that were never done, paying twice as
:02:14. > :02:17.much as they should have done for repairs, spending money on the town
:02:18. > :02:20.hall instead of tenants, they have an opportunity to kick out the
:02:21. > :02:25.council next May and that's the ultimate sanction we have in a
:02:26. > :02:34.democracy, the ballot box. It is very easy to get into administrative
:02:35. > :02:38.bashing, but I think councils are having to be much more focused on
:02:39. > :02:43.how they spend money, much more innovative in their partnership
:02:44. > :02:49.working. But actually fundamentally councils don't have the resources to
:02:50. > :02:54.deliver the services. You said the budgets have been cut by 40% and
:02:55. > :02:58.that's not correct because the business retention has replaced
:02:59. > :03:02.that, leaving them broadly speaking flat. Councils should not be
:03:03. > :03:06.complaining about funding when they are paying for repairs that have
:03:07. > :03:12.never been carried out. Was it a good idea to scrap the audit
:03:13. > :03:24.commission in 2011 and make councils like number audited by... I think it
:03:25. > :03:31.has been damaged in how it can do its job. I don't agree, we have the
:03:32. > :03:35.National Audit Office overseeing it, it is wasteful duplication and I'm
:03:36. > :03:36.glad we streamlined it. You are fantastic double act. Thank you for
:03:37. > :03:37.coming in. My thanks to my guests
:03:38. > :03:41.Neil Coyle and to Chris Philp, This is the last Sunday Politics
:03:42. > :03:53.before Parliament breaks up for the summer recess, and most MPs could
:03:54. > :03:56.definitely do with some time away from the political hothouse at
:03:57. > :03:58.Westminster. But when they come back
:03:59. > :04:00.in September, both the Conservatives and Labour face some big questions
:04:01. > :04:03.over how to win an overall majority We'll talk about that in a moment,
:04:04. > :04:09.but first let's have a look at what's been happening to Theresa May
:04:10. > :04:26.and Jeremy Corbyn since polling day And what we are saying is the
:04:27. > :04:27.Conservatives are the largest party. Note they don't have an overall
:04:28. > :04:44.majority at this stage. She who dares doesn't always win.
:04:45. > :04:48.Now let's get to work. The party that has lost in this election is
:04:49. > :04:53.the Conservative Party. The arguments they put forward in this
:04:54. > :05:01.election have lost. I think we need a change. That's not quite true,
:05:02. > :05:08.Labour is a party that lost. The Government failed and her coming
:05:09. > :05:13.over here to try to speak to... Who? Who do you want to speak to you had
:05:14. > :05:23.your chance. Now everyone will go angry and crazy.
:05:24. > :05:50.I think the public will want us to get the broadest possible consensus
:05:51. > :05:54.in looking at those issues. If the Prime Minister would like it, I am
:05:55. > :06:01.happy to furnish her with a copy of our election manifesto.
:06:02. > :06:04.You are now playing for Arsenal! The comments we were getting back that
:06:05. > :06:10.were passed on to me were that we were going to get a better results
:06:11. > :06:23.than we did. Devastated enough to shed a tear? Yes, a little tear at
:06:24. > :06:28.that moment, yes. Let's start with Mrs May. Another
:06:29. > :06:35.day, another leadership rumour, challenge. She is tired, she wants
:06:36. > :06:42.to fight on, she doesn't. Is this corrosive to her leadership? Hugely
:06:43. > :06:47.corrosive. My estimation of what's really going on in the party, and
:06:48. > :06:53.Tory MPs in Westminster, is the vast majority and by that I mean probably
:06:54. > :06:58.around 300 don't want a contest. They want her to stay and finish
:06:59. > :07:04.Brexit, see it through, because of the incredible Pandora's box that
:07:05. > :07:11.would open. Who's putting these incredible column inches in the
:07:12. > :07:17.papers? They are giant egos, they have been at this for several years
:07:18. > :07:24.if not decades and they are keen to manoeuvre themselves into the
:07:25. > :07:28.position to be the leader. In their own interests? Because most Tories I
:07:29. > :07:32.speak to think the risk of another leadership election is horrendous
:07:33. > :07:36.for them because they fear it could lead to a general election and they
:07:37. > :07:40.will lose. The ones you are talking about, they put their own
:07:41. > :07:46.self-interest above the interest of their party. Without a doubt. They
:07:47. > :07:49.are funny bunch, we know them very well, but they are simply incapable
:07:50. > :07:54.of putting their own interests underneath those of the country. The
:07:55. > :07:59.problem for Mrs May is this won't stop. They are going to carry on
:08:00. > :08:03.doing this I think unless she says something about her own leadership
:08:04. > :08:08.and conference is the time to do it. She needs to spell out a timetable
:08:09. > :08:16.for herself, when she will stay and go. She almost did that, didn't she,
:08:17. > :08:20.in her interview with you. She came very close. I agree with almost
:08:21. > :08:26.everything Thomas said, but those on the backbenches who don't want a
:08:27. > :08:32.leadership contest, it's not purely for the good of the country, there
:08:33. > :08:36.is self-interest there too and that is because they are eyeing up the
:08:37. > :08:42.top job and they need a few years to build up a following. My view is
:08:43. > :08:45.people like Boris Johnson 's and Amber Rudd for their own reasons
:08:46. > :08:53.think they stand a better chance once Brexit is done. At the moment
:08:54. > :09:04.Mr Johnson too toxic for the Remainers, Amber Rudd too toxic for
:09:05. > :09:08.the Leavers. Last time Mrs May went walking in the hills, in Wales, she
:09:09. > :09:12.came back and called an election. She's about to go walking in the
:09:13. > :09:17.Swiss mountains I understand in the weeks ahead for a break. Is there
:09:18. > :09:22.any chance she comes back and says I'm not going on with this? No
:09:23. > :09:26.because although I think being a human being she will be deeply
:09:27. > :09:30.traumatised by what's happened, and it will probably hit her more
:09:31. > :09:34.intensely when she moves away for a few days from the cocoon drama of
:09:35. > :09:38.the whole situation, you just have to keep going and she will be
:09:39. > :09:44.walking and thinking what have I done? But she is clearly trying to
:09:45. > :09:49.hold on and she's built up a new Number Ten. Almost an entire new
:09:50. > :09:53.personnel in there. She's brought Damian Green in as a deputy so
:09:54. > :09:59.there's no sign she plans to go in the short-term but leadership is
:10:00. > :10:02.partly about a spell on us and her ministers. The fact that her
:10:03. > :10:06.ministers, even in her interview when she was being robust in two
:10:07. > :10:10.years, they know that she won't fight part of the next election
:10:11. > :10:16.which means part of the spell has gone. When Tony Blair gave a date
:10:17. > :10:22.for his departure, you could feel the power losing away from him. The
:10:23. > :10:28.fact that assumption is there means this feverish speculation will carry
:10:29. > :10:33.on until she goes. Let me come on to Mr Corbyn who would seem to be in a
:10:34. > :10:38.much better position after the election. What does he now do
:10:39. > :10:41.though? Because if you cannot provoke an election quite quickly,
:10:42. > :10:47.you never know how long your day in the sun will be. But he does have a
:10:48. > :10:51.mission or he and the people around him, they want to take control of
:10:52. > :10:58.those parts of the Labour Party they don't already take control, and they
:10:59. > :11:00.will probably do it. Absolutely, so Jeremy Corbyn has established he's a
:11:01. > :11:07.very good campaigner. Everybody now agrees on that. Look at the clip, he
:11:08. > :11:12.now dresses in a white shirt and a dark suit, and he actually looks I
:11:13. > :11:19.won't say Prime Minister Arial but like he could possibly lead the
:11:20. > :11:24.whole country. -- prime ministerial. But the whole thing is built on
:11:25. > :11:28.protests, there isn't a fully established policy set up where he
:11:29. > :11:32.is ready to take over the Government if this election comes. The
:11:33. > :11:37.challenge for him is to turn the huge generation of support he's got
:11:38. > :11:42.over protest into the ability to govern. You heard from Rebecca
:11:43. > :11:48.Long-Bailey on Brexit alone, the party now admitting their policy is
:11:49. > :11:52.cake and eat it, that is not electorally satisfying. Final word
:11:53. > :11:58.from Isabel. The fact is Mr Corbyn has been a transformative figure for
:11:59. > :12:04.the Labour Party. If and when he goes, it's not going back to normal.
:12:05. > :12:10.It is transformative for the Labour Party and the country. I disagree
:12:11. > :12:13.with Tom, they put forward a more detailed programme than the
:12:14. > :12:18.Conservatives at the election and be costed it to some extent. I think to
:12:19. > :12:23.be facing two weighs on Brexit is the only place for a Leader of the
:12:24. > :12:28.Opposition to beat and he has been smart on that. Tony Blair when he
:12:29. > :12:37.was a leader faced to microwaves on single currency, outside of
:12:38. > :12:43.Parliament he seemed be more robust, but he's played it very smart. All I
:12:44. > :12:48.would say is for Brexiteers we want more Tony Blair saying it won't
:12:49. > :12:54.happen. You think he's such a toxic figure that whatever side he
:12:55. > :13:02.supports damages that side? Absolutely, yes. As a leader of an
:13:03. > :13:05.opposition party you cannot advance things. All right, we will have to
:13:06. > :13:08.leave it there. Enjoy your summer. That's all for today, and that's
:13:09. > :13:11.all from us until September. Remember if it's Sunday,
:13:12. > :13:13.it's the Sunday Politics - unless it's parliament's summer
:13:14. > :13:20.recess. But for me it is thank you and
:13:21. > :13:56.goodbye. When I think of the world
:13:57. > :13:56.we inhabit, everyone will think, When I think of the world
:13:57. > :14:01.we inhabit, everyone will think, Yeah. And it wasn't,
:14:02. > :14:05.it was done by hand over days and weeks
:14:06. > :14:08.and months and years. It was always
:14:09. > :14:13.a very, very deep love affair between this incredible,
:14:14. > :14:16.wonderful, glorious music and that's why we merged
:14:17. > :14:26.with the Liberals. ordinary people can make
:14:27. > :14:30.a big difference.