:00:28. > :00:32.It's Sunday Morning, and this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:33. > :00:35.Labour attacks Conservative plans for social care and to means-test
:00:36. > :00:38.So can Jeremy Corbyn eat into the Tory lead
:00:39. > :00:44.Theresa May says her party's manifesto is all about fairness.
:00:45. > :00:48.We'll be speaking to a Conservative cabinet minister about the plans.
:00:49. > :00:51.The polls have always shown healthy leads for the Conservatives.
:00:52. > :00:54.But, now we've seen the manifestos, is Labour narrowing the gap?
:00:55. > :00:57.Had your fill of professional politicians?
:00:58. > :00:59.Maybe plump for a pub landlord instead?
:01:00. > :01:12.Today, we're looking beyond the mainstream.
:01:13. > :01:15.And with me - as always - the best and the brightest political
:01:16. > :01:17.panel in the business: Sam Coates, Isabel Oakeshott
:01:18. > :01:19.and Steve Richards - they'll be tweeting throughout
:01:20. > :01:22.the programme, and you can get involved by using
:01:23. > :01:30.Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn says pensioners will be up to ?330 a year
:01:31. > :01:42.worse off under plans outlined in the Conservative manifesto.
:01:43. > :01:48.The Work Pensions Secretary Damian Green has said his party will not
:01:49. > :01:52.rethink their plans to fund social care in England. Under the plans in
:01:53. > :01:58.the Conservative manifesto, nobody with assets of less than ?100,000,
:01:59. > :02:03.would have to pay for care. Labour has attacked the proposal, and John
:02:04. > :02:06.McDonnell, Labour's Shadow Chancellor, said this morning that
:02:07. > :02:10.there needs to be more cross-party consensus.
:02:11. > :02:12.That's why we supported Dilnot, but we also supported
:02:13. > :02:15.Because we've got to have something sustainable over generations,
:02:16. > :02:17.so that's why we've said to the Conservative Party,
:02:18. > :02:20.Let's go back to that cross-party approach that actually
:02:21. > :02:24.I just feel we've all been let down by what's come
:02:25. > :02:35.Sam, is Labour beginning to get their argument across? What we had
:02:36. > :02:39.last week was bluntly what felt like not very Lynton Crosby approved
:02:40. > :02:43.Conservative manifesto. What I mean by that is that it looks like there
:02:44. > :02:47.are things that will cause political difficulties for the party over this
:02:48. > :02:52.campaign. I've been talking to MPs and ministers who acknowledge that
:02:53. > :02:58.the social care plan is coming up on the doorstep. It has cut through
:02:59. > :03:01.very quickly, and it is worrying and deterring some voters. Not just
:03:02. > :03:13.pensioners, that people who are looking to inherit in the future.
:03:14. > :03:15.They are all asking how much they could lose that they wouldn't have
:03:16. > :03:18.lost before. A difficult question for the party to answer, given that
:03:19. > :03:23.they don't want to give too much away now. Was this a mistake, or a
:03:24. > :03:30.sign of the Conservatives' confidence? It has the hallmarks of
:03:31. > :03:34.something that has been cobbled together in a very unnaturally short
:03:35. > :03:39.time frame for putting a manifesto together. We have had mixed messages
:03:40. > :03:43.from the Tory MPs who have been out on the airwaves this morning as to
:03:44. > :03:48.whether they will consult on it whether it is just a starting point.
:03:49. > :03:54.That said, there is still three weeks to go, and most of the Tory
:03:55. > :03:58.party this morning feel this is a little light turbulence rather than
:03:59. > :04:02.anything that leaves the destination of victory in doubt. It it flips the
:04:03. > :04:06.normal politics. The Tories are going to make people who have a
:04:07. > :04:13.reasonable amount of assets pay for their social care. What is wrong
:04:14. > :04:16.with that? First, total credit for them for not pretending that all
:04:17. > :04:20.this can be done by magic, which is what normally happens in an
:04:21. > :04:25.election. The party will say, we will review this for the 95th time
:04:26. > :04:30.in the following Parliament, so they have no mandate to do anything and
:04:31. > :04:34.so do not do anything. It is courageous to do it. It is
:04:35. > :04:39.electorally risky, for the reasons that you suggest, that they pass the
:04:40. > :04:46.target their own natural supporter. And there is a sense that this is
:04:47. > :04:51.rushed through, in the frenzy to get it done in time. I think the ending
:04:52. > :04:56.of the pooling of risk and putting the entire burden on in inverted
:04:57. > :05:05.commas the victim, because you cannot insure Fritz, is against the
:05:06. > :05:08.spirit of a lot of the rest of the manifesto, and will give them huge
:05:09. > :05:17.problems if they try to implement it in the next Parliament. Let's have a
:05:18. > :05:22.look at the polls. Nearly five weeks ago, on Tuesday the 18th of April,
:05:23. > :05:27.Theresa May called the election. At that point, this was the median
:05:28. > :05:32.average of the recent polls. The Conservatives had an 18 point lead
:05:33. > :05:41.over Labour on 25%. Ukip and the Liberal Democrats were both on 18%.
:05:42. > :05:46.A draft of Labour's manifesto was leaked to the press. In the
:05:47. > :05:49.intervening weeks, support for the Conservatives and Labour had
:05:50. > :05:54.increased, that it had decreased for the Lib Dems and Ukip. Last Tuesday
:05:55. > :06:00.came the launch of the official Labour manifesto. By that time,
:06:01. > :06:06.Labour support had gone up by another 2%. The Lib Dems and Ukip
:06:07. > :06:10.had slipped back slightly. Later in the week came the manifestos from
:06:11. > :06:15.the Lib Dems and the Conservatives. This morning, for more polls. This
:06:16. > :06:23.is how the parties currently stand on average. Labour are now on 34%,
:06:24. > :06:27.up 4% since the launch of their manifesto. The Conservatives are
:06:28. > :06:33.down two points since last Tuesday. Ukip and the Lib Dems are both
:06:34. > :06:39.unchanged on 8% and 5%. You can find this poll tracker on the BBC
:06:40. > :06:44.website, see how it was calculated, and see the results of national
:06:45. > :06:47.polls over the last two years. So Isabel, is this the Tories' wobbly
:06:48. > :06:52.weekend or the start of the narrowing? This is still an
:06:53. > :06:59.extremely healthy lead for the Tories. At the start of this
:07:00. > :07:04.campaign, most commentators expected to things to happen. First, the Lib
:07:05. > :07:10.Dems would have a significant surge. That hasn't happened. Second, Labour
:07:11. > :07:14.would crash and plummet. Instead they are in the health of the low
:07:15. > :07:21.30s. I wonder if that tells you something about the tribal nature of
:07:22. > :07:25.the Labour vote, and the continuing problems with the Tory brand. I
:07:26. > :07:31.would say that a lot of Tory MPs wouldn't be too unhappy if Labour's
:07:32. > :07:37.result isn't quite as bad as has been anticipated. They don't want
:07:38. > :07:44.Corbyn to go anywhere. If the latest polls were to be the result on June
:07:45. > :07:49.the 8th, Mr Corbyn may not be in a rush to go anywhere. I still think
:07:50. > :07:54.it depends on the number of seats. If there is a landslide win, I
:07:55. > :07:59.think, one way or another, he will not stay. If it is much narrower, he
:08:00. > :08:05.has grounds for arguing he has done better than anticipated. The polls
:08:06. > :08:10.are very interesting. People compare this with 83. In 83, the Tory lead
:08:11. > :08:23.widened consistently throughout the campaign. There was the SDP -
:08:24. > :08:25.Liberal Alliance doing well in the polls. Here, the Lib Dems don't seem
:08:26. > :08:28.to be doing that. So the parallels with 83 don't really stack up. But
:08:29. > :08:31.let's see what happens. Still early days for the a lot of people are
:08:32. > :08:36.saying this is the result of the social care policy. We don't really
:08:37. > :08:39.know that. How do you beat them? In the last week or so, there's been
:08:40. > :08:45.the decision by some to hold their nose and vote Labour, who haven't
:08:46. > :08:49.done so before. Probably the biggest thing in this election is how the
:08:50. > :08:56.Right has reunited behind Theresa May. That figure for Ukip is
:08:57. > :09:01.incredibly small. She has brought those Ukip voters behind her, and
:09:02. > :09:06.that could be the decisive factor in many seats, rather than the Labour
:09:07. > :09:11.share of the boat picking up a bit or down a bit, depending on how
:09:12. > :09:14.turbulent the Tory manifesto makes it. Thank you for that.
:09:15. > :09:17.We've finally got our hands on the manifestos of the two main
:09:18. > :09:19.parties and, for once, voters can hardly complain that
:09:20. > :09:23.So, just how big is the choice on offer to the public?
:09:24. > :09:25.Since the Liberal Democrats and SNP have ruled out
:09:26. > :09:27.coalitions after June 8th, Adam Fleming compares the Labour
:09:28. > :09:30.Welcome to the BBC's election centre.
:09:31. > :09:34.Four minutes from now, when Big Ben strikes 10.00,
:09:35. > :09:38.we can legally reveal the contents of this, our exit poll.
:09:39. > :09:40.18 days to go, and the BBC's election night studio
:09:41. > :09:50.This is where David Dimbleby will sit, although there is no chair yet.
:09:51. > :09:53.The parties' policies are now the finished product.
:09:54. > :09:56.In Bradford, Jeremy Corbyn vowed a bigger state,
:09:57. > :09:59.the end of austerity, no more tuition fees.
:10:00. > :10:07.The Tory campaign, by contrast, is built on one word - fear.
:10:08. > :10:15.Down the road in Halifax, Theresa May kept a promise to get
:10:16. > :10:18.immigration down to the tens of thousands, and talked
:10:19. > :10:21.of leadership and tough choices in uncertain times.
:10:22. > :10:27.Strengthen my hand as I fight for Britain, and stand with me
:10:28. > :10:33.And, with confidence in ourselves and a unity
:10:34. > :10:41.of purpose in our country, let us go forward together.
:10:42. > :10:44.Let's look at the Labour and Conservative
:10:45. > :10:50.On tax, Labour would introduce a 50p rate for top earners.
:10:51. > :11:14.The Conservatives ditched their triple lock, giving them
:11:15. > :11:16.freedom to put up income tax and national insurance,
:11:17. > :11:18.although they want to keep the overall tax burden the same.
:11:19. > :11:20.Labour offered a major overhaul of the country's wiring,
:11:21. > :11:22.with a pledge to renationalise infrastructure, like power,
:11:23. > :11:25.The Conservatives said that would cost a fortune,
:11:26. > :11:28.but provided few details for the cost of their policies.
:11:29. > :11:30.Labour have simply become a shambles, and, as yesterday's
:11:31. > :11:32.manifesto showed, their numbers simply do not add up.
:11:33. > :11:34.What have they got planned for health and social care?
:11:35. > :11:38.The Conservatives offered more cash for the NHS,
:11:39. > :11:42.reaching an extra ?8 billion a year by the end of the parliament.
:11:43. > :11:46.Labour promised an extra ?30 billion over the course of the same period,
:11:47. > :11:52.plus free hospital parking and more pay for staff.
:11:53. > :11:59.The Conservatives would increase the value of assets you could
:12:00. > :12:02.protect from the cost of social care to ?100,000, but your home would be
:12:03. > :12:04.added to the assessment of your wealth,
:12:05. > :12:08.There was a focus on one group of voters in particular
:12:09. > :12:13.Labour would keep the triple lock, which guarantees that pensions go up
:12:14. > :12:19.The Tories would keep the increase in line
:12:20. > :12:22.with inflation or earnings, a double lock.
:12:23. > :12:25.The Conservatives would end of winter fuel payments
:12:26. > :12:28.for the richest, although we don't know exactly who that would be,
:12:29. > :12:37.This is a savage attack on vulnerable pensioners,
:12:38. > :12:41.particularly those who are just about managing.
:12:42. > :12:45.It is disgraceful, and we are calling upon the Conservative Party
:12:46. > :12:51.When it comes to leaving the European Union, Labour say
:12:52. > :12:54.they'd sweep away the government's negotiating strategy,
:12:55. > :12:57.secure a better deal and straightaway guaranteed the rights
:12:58. > :13:03.The Tories say a big majority would remove political uncertainty
:13:04. > :13:15.Jeremy Vine's due here in two and a half weeks.
:13:16. > :13:21.I'm joined now by David Gauke, who is Chief Secretary to the Treasury.
:13:22. > :13:28.Welcome back to the programme. The Tories once promised a cap on social
:13:29. > :13:36.care costs. Why have you abandoned that? We've looked at it, and there
:13:37. > :13:41.are couple of proposals with the Dilnot proposal. Much of the benefit
:13:42. > :13:45.would go to those inheriting larger estates. The second point was it was
:13:46. > :13:51.hoped that a cap would stimulate the larger insurance products that would
:13:52. > :13:56.fill the gap, but there is no sign that those products are emerging.
:13:57. > :14:01.Without a cap, you will not get one. We have come forward with a new
:14:02. > :14:05.proposal which we think is fairer, provide more money for social care,
:14:06. > :14:10.which is very important and is one of the big issues we face as a
:14:11. > :14:15.country. It is right that we face those big issues. Social care is
:14:16. > :14:23.one, getting a good Brexit deal is another. This demonstrates that
:14:24. > :14:25.Theresa May has an ambition to lead a government that addresses those
:14:26. > :14:31.big long-term issues. Looking at social care. If you have assets,
:14:32. > :14:35.including your home, of over ?100,000, you have to pay for all
:14:36. > :14:40.your social care costs. Is that fair? It is right that for the
:14:41. > :14:45.services that are provided to you, that that is paid out of your
:14:46. > :14:49.assets, subject to two really important qualifications. First, you
:14:50. > :14:56.shouldn't have your entire estate wiped out. At the moment, if you are
:14:57. > :15:02.in residential care, it can be wiped out ?223,000. If you are in
:15:03. > :15:08.domiciliary care, it can be out to ?23,000, plus you're domiciliary.
:15:09. > :15:13.Nobody should be forced to sell their house in their lifetime if
:15:14. > :15:15.they or their spouse needs long-term care. Again, we have protected that
:15:16. > :15:25.in the proposals we set out. But the state will basically take a
:15:26. > :15:30.chunk of your house when you die and they sell. In an essence it is a
:15:31. > :15:33.stealth inheritance tax on everything above ?100,000. But we
:15:34. > :15:37.have those two important protections. I am including that. It
:15:38. > :15:42.is a stealth inheritance tax. We have to face up to the fact that
:15:43. > :15:46.there are significant costs that we face as a country in terms of health
:15:47. > :15:51.and social careful. Traditionally, politicians don't address those
:15:52. > :15:56.issues, particularly during election campaigns. I think it is too Theresa
:15:57. > :16:00.May's credit that we are being straightforward with the British
:16:01. > :16:03.people and saying that we face this long-term challenge. Our manifesto
:16:04. > :16:07.was about the big challenges that we face, one of which was
:16:08. > :16:11.intergenerational fairness and one of which was delivering a strong
:16:12. > :16:17.economy and making sure that we can do that. But in the end, someone is
:16:18. > :16:21.going to have to pay for this. It is going to have to be a balance
:16:22. > :16:24.between the general taxpayer and those receiving the services. We
:16:25. > :16:27.think we have struck the right balance with this proposal. But it
:16:28. > :16:32.is entirely on the individual. People watching this programme, if
:16:33. > :16:39.they have a fair amount of assets, not massive, including the home,
:16:40. > :16:43.they will need to pay for everything themselves until their assets are
:16:44. > :16:48.reduced to ?100,000. It is not a balance, you're putting everything
:16:49. > :16:54.on the original two individual. At the moment, for those in residential
:16:55. > :16:58.care, they have to pay everything until 20 3000. -- everything on the
:16:59. > :17:02.individual. But now they will face more. Those in individual care are
:17:03. > :17:06.seeing their protection going up by four times as much, so that is
:17:07. > :17:10.eliminating unfairness. Why should those in residential care be in a
:17:11. > :17:15.worse position than those receiving domiciliary care? But as I say, that
:17:16. > :17:19.money has to come from somewhere and we are sitting at a proper plan for
:17:20. > :17:22.it. While also made the point that we are more likely to be able to
:17:23. > :17:26.have a properly functioning social care market if we have a strong
:17:27. > :17:30.economy, and to have a strong economy we need to deliver a good
:17:31. > :17:34.deal on Brexit and I think Theresa May is capable of doing that. You
:17:35. > :17:39.have said that before. But if you have a heart attack in old age, the
:17:40. > :17:43.NHS will take care of you. If you have dementia, you now have to pay
:17:44. > :17:47.for the care of yourself. Is that they are? It is already the case
:17:48. > :17:51.that if you have long-term care costs come up as I say, if you are
:17:52. > :17:57.in residential care you pay for all of it until the last ?23,000, but if
:17:58. > :18:01.you are in domiciliary care, excluding your housing assets, but
:18:02. > :18:07.all of your other assets get used up until you are down to ?23,000 a
:18:08. > :18:14.year. And I think it is right at this point that a party that aspires
:18:15. > :18:17.to run this country for the long-term, to address the long-term
:18:18. > :18:22.challenges we have is a country, for us to be clear that we need to
:18:23. > :18:28.deliver this. Because if it is not paid for it this way, if it goes and
:18:29. > :18:32.falls on the general taxpayer, the people who feel hard pressed by the
:18:33. > :18:36.amount of income tax and VAT they pay, frankly we have to say to them,
:18:37. > :18:40.those taxes will go up if we do not address it. But they might go up
:18:41. > :18:46.anyway. The average house price in your part of the country is just shy
:18:47. > :18:50.of ?430,000, so if you told your own constituents that they might have to
:18:51. > :18:56.spend ?300,000 of their assets on social care before the state steps
:18:57. > :19:01.in to help...? As I said earlier, nobody will be forced to pay during
:19:02. > :19:06.their lifetime. Nobody will be forced to sell their houses. We are
:19:07. > :19:11.providing that protection because of the third premium. Which makes it a
:19:12. > :19:16.kind of death tax, doesn't it? Which is what you use to rail against.
:19:17. > :19:21.What it is people paying for the services they have paid out of their
:19:22. > :19:24.assets. But with that very important protection that nobody is going to
:19:25. > :19:30.be wiped out in the way that has happened up until now, down to the
:19:31. > :19:34.last three years. But when Labour propose this, George Osborne called
:19:35. > :19:38.it a death tax and you are now proposing a stealth death tax
:19:39. > :19:44.inheritance tax. Labour's proposals were very different. It is the same
:19:45. > :19:51.effect. Labour's were hitting everyone with an inheritance tax. We
:19:52. > :19:53.are saying that there are -- that there is a state contribution but
:19:54. > :20:00.the public receiving the services will have to pay for it out of
:20:01. > :20:03.assets, which have grown substantially. And which they might
:20:04. > :20:08.now lose to social care. But I would say that people in Hertfordshire pay
:20:09. > :20:13.a lot in income tracks, national insurance and VAT, and this is my
:20:14. > :20:17.bet is going to have to come from somewhere. Well, they are now going
:20:18. > :20:22.to pay a lot of tax and pay for social care. Turning to immigration,
:20:23. > :20:26.you promised to get net migration down to 100,020 ten. You failed. You
:20:27. > :20:31.promised again in 2015 and you are feeling again. Why should voters
:20:32. > :20:35.trust you a third time? It is very clear that only the Conservative
:20:36. > :20:40.Party has an ambition to control immigration and to bring it down. An
:20:41. > :20:44.ambition you have failed to deliver. There are, of course, factors that
:20:45. > :20:48.come into play. For example a couple of years ago we were going through a
:20:49. > :20:51.period when the UK was creating huge numbers of jobs but none of our
:20:52. > :20:55.European neighbours were doing anything like it. Not surprisingly,
:20:56. > :21:02.that feeds through into the immigration numbers that we see. But
:21:03. > :21:07.it is right that we have that ambition because I do not believe it
:21:08. > :21:11.is sustainable to have hundreds of thousands net migration, you're
:21:12. > :21:15.after year after year, and only Theresa May of the Conservative
:21:16. > :21:19.Party is willing to address that. It has gone from being a target to an
:21:20. > :21:23.ambition, and I am pretty sure in a couple of years it will become an
:21:24. > :21:28.untimed aspiration. Is net migration now higher or lower than when you
:21:29. > :21:34.came to power in 2010? I think it is higher at the moment. Let's look at
:21:35. > :21:38.the figures. And there they are. You are right, it is higher, so after
:21:39. > :21:46.six years in power, promising to get it down to 100,000, it is higher. So
:21:47. > :21:49.if that is an ambition and you have not succeeded. We have to accept
:21:50. > :21:54.that there are a number of factors. It continues to be the case that the
:21:55. > :21:58.UK economy is growing and creating a lot of jobs, which is undoubtedly
:21:59. > :22:02.drawing people. But you made the promise on the basis that would not
:22:03. > :22:04.happen? We are certainly outperforming other countries in a
:22:05. > :22:10.way that we could not have predicted in 2010. That is one of the factors.
:22:11. > :22:13.But if you look at a lot of the steps that we have taken over the
:22:14. > :22:19.course of the last seven years, dealing with bogus students, for
:22:20. > :22:22.example, tightening up a lot of the rules. You can say all that but it
:22:23. > :22:26.has made no difference to the headline figure. Clearly it would
:22:27. > :22:31.have gone up by much more and we not taken the steps. But as I say, we
:22:32. > :22:36.cannot for ever, it seems to me, have net migration numbers in the
:22:37. > :22:41.hundreds of thousands. If we get that good Brexit deal, one of the
:22:42. > :22:46.things we can do is tighten up in terms of access here. You say that
:22:47. > :22:50.but you have always had control of non-EU migration. You cannot blame
:22:51. > :22:53.the EU for that. You control immigration from outside the EU.
:22:54. > :23:00.Have you ever managed to get even that below 100,000? Well, no doubt
:23:01. > :23:05.you will present the numbers now. You haven't. You have got down a bit
:23:06. > :23:10.from 2010, I will give you that, but even non-EU migration is still a lot
:23:11. > :23:14.more than 100000 and that is the thing you control. It is 164,000 on
:23:15. > :23:18.the latest figures. There is no point in saying to the voters that
:23:19. > :23:21.when we get control of the EU migration you will get it down when
:23:22. > :23:27.the bit you have control over, you have failed to get that down into
:23:28. > :23:31.the tens of thousands. The general trend has gone up. Non-EU migration
:23:32. > :23:37.we have brought down over the last few years. Not by much, not by
:23:38. > :23:42.anywhere near your 100,000 target. But we clearly have more tools
:23:43. > :23:47.available to us, following Brexit. At this rate it will be around 2030
:23:48. > :23:50.before you get non-EU migration down to 100,000. We clearly have more
:23:51. > :23:54.tools available to us and I return to the point I made. In the last six
:23:55. > :23:58.or seven years, particularly the last four or five, we have seen the
:23:59. > :24:02.UK jobs market growing substantially. It is extraordinary
:24:03. > :24:05.how many more jobs we have. So you'll only promised the migration
:24:06. > :24:09.target because you did not think you were going to run the economy well?
:24:10. > :24:13.That is what you are telling me. I don't think anyone expected us to
:24:14. > :24:17.create quite a number of jobs that we have done over the last six or
:24:18. > :24:20.seven years. At the time when other European countries have not been.
:24:21. > :24:26.George Osborne says your target is economically illiterate. I disagree
:24:27. > :24:33.with George on that. He is my old boss but I disagree with him on that
:24:34. > :24:36.point. And the reason I say that is looking at the economics and the
:24:37. > :24:41.wider social impact, I don't think it is sustainable for us to have
:24:42. > :24:45.hundreds of thousands, year after year after year. Let me ask you one
:24:46. > :24:49.other thing because you are the chief secretary. Your promising that
:24:50. > :24:54.spending on health will be ?8 billion higher in five use time than
:24:55. > :24:56.it is now. How do you pay for that? From a strong economy, two years ago
:24:57. > :25:02.we had a similar conversation because at that point we said that
:25:03. > :25:07.we would increase spending by ?8 billion. And we are more than on
:25:08. > :25:11.track to deliver it, because it is a priority area for us. Where will the
:25:12. > :25:15.money come from? It will be a priority area for us. We will find
:25:16. > :25:21.the money. So you have not been able to show us a revenue line where this
:25:22. > :25:25.?8 billion will come from. We have a record of making promises to spend
:25:26. > :25:29.more on the NHS and delivering. One thing I would say is that the only
:25:30. > :25:35.way you can spend more money on the NHS is if you have a strong economy,
:25:36. > :25:38.and the biggest risk... But that is true of anything. I am trying to
:25:39. > :25:43.find out where the ?8 billion come from, where will it come from? Know
:25:44. > :25:46.you were saying that perhaps you might increase taxes, ticking off
:25:47. > :25:53.the lock, so people are right to be suspicious. But you will not tell us
:25:54. > :25:57.where the ?8 billion will come from. Andrew, a strong economy is key to
:25:58. > :26:01.delivering more NHS money. That does not tell us where the money is
:26:02. > :26:05.coming from. The biggest risk to a strong economy would be a bad
:26:06. > :26:09.Brexit, which Jeremy Corbyn would deliver. And we have a record of
:26:10. > :26:13.putting more money into the NHS. I think that past performance we can
:26:14. > :26:15.take forward. Thank you for joining us.
:26:16. > :26:17.So, the Conservatives have been taking a bit of flak
:26:18. > :26:21.But Conservative big guns have been out and about this morning taking
:26:22. > :26:25.Here's Boris Johnson on ITV's Peston programme earlier today:
:26:26. > :26:29.What we're trying to do is to address what I think
:26:30. > :26:32.everybody, all serious demographers acknowledge will be the massive
:26:33. > :26:36.problem of the cost of social care long-term.
:26:37. > :26:39.This is a responsible, grown-up, conservative approach,
:26:40. > :26:42.trying to deal with a long-term problem in a way that is equitable,
:26:43. > :26:45.allows people to pass on a very substantial sum,
:26:46. > :26:47.still, to their kids, and takes away the fear
:26:48. > :26:53.Joining me now from Liverpool is Labour's Shadow Chief Secretary
:26:54. > :27:05.Petered out, welcome to the programme. Let's start with social
:27:06. > :27:09.care. The Tories are saying that if you have ?100,000 or more in assets,
:27:10. > :27:14.you should pay for your own social care. What is wrong with that? Well,
:27:15. > :27:19.I think the issue at the end of the day is the question of fairness. Is
:27:20. > :27:23.it fair? And what we're trying to do is to get to a situation where we
:27:24. > :27:29.have, for example, the Dilnot report, which identified that you
:27:30. > :27:32.actually have cap on your spending on social care. We are trying to get
:27:33. > :27:38.to a position where it is a reasonable and fair approach to
:27:39. > :27:42.expenditure. But you will know that a lot of people, particularly in the
:27:43. > :27:47.south of country, London and the south-east, and the adjacent areas
:27:48. > :27:50.around it, they have benefited from huge house price inflation. They
:27:51. > :27:55.have seen their homes go up in value, if and when they sell, they
:27:56. > :28:01.are not taxed on that increase. Why should these people not pay for
:28:02. > :28:05.their own social care if they have the assets to do so? They will be
:28:06. > :28:09.paying for some of their social care but you cannot take social care and
:28:10. > :28:12.health care separately. It has to be an integrated approach. So for
:28:13. > :28:16.example if you do have dementia, you're more likely to be in an
:28:17. > :28:21.elderly person's home for longer and you most probably have been in care
:28:22. > :28:25.for a longer period of time. On the other hand, you might have, if you
:28:26. > :28:28.have had a stroke, there may be continuing care needs paid for by
:28:29. > :28:32.the NHS. So at the end of the date it is trying to get a reasonable
:28:33. > :28:40.balance and just to pluck a figure of ?100,000 out of thin air is not
:28:41. > :28:46.sensible. You will have heard me say about David Gold that the house
:28:47. > :28:50.prices in his area, about 450,000 or so, not quite that, and that people
:28:51. > :28:55.may have to spend quite a lot of that on social care to get down to
:28:56. > :28:59.?100,000. But in your area, the average house price is only
:29:00. > :29:05.?149,000, so your people would not have to pay anything like as much
:29:06. > :29:11.before they hit the ?100,000 minimum. I hesitate to say that but
:29:12. > :29:14.is that not almost a socialist approach to social care that if you
:29:15. > :29:19.are in the affluent Home Counties with a big asset, you pay more, and
:29:20. > :29:22.if you are in an area that is not so affluent and your house is not worth
:29:23. > :29:27.very much, you pay a lot less. What is wrong with that principle? I
:29:28. > :29:31.think the problem I am trying to get to is this issue about equity across
:29:32. > :29:37.the piece. At the end of the day, what we want is a system whereby it
:29:38. > :29:41.is capped at a particular level, and the Dilnot report, after much
:29:42. > :29:45.examination, said we should have a cap on care costs at ?72,000. The
:29:46. > :29:49.Conservatives decided to ditch that and come up with another policy
:29:50. > :29:53.which by all accounts seems to be even more Draconian. At the end of
:29:54. > :30:02.the day it is trying to get social care and an NHS care in a much more
:30:03. > :30:05.fluid way. We had offered the Conservatives to have a bipartisan
:30:06. > :30:10.approach to this. David just said that this is a long term. You do not
:30:11. > :30:15.pick a figure out of thin air and use that as a long-term strategy.
:30:16. > :30:21.The Conservatives are now saying they will increase health spending
:30:22. > :30:26.over the next five years in real terms. You will increase health
:30:27. > :30:31.spending. In what way is your approach to health spending better
:30:32. > :30:38.than the Tories' now? We are contributing an extra 7.2 billion to
:30:39. > :30:42.the NHS and social care over the next few years. But you just don't
:30:43. > :30:47.put money into the NHS or social care. It has to be an integrated
:30:48. > :30:52.approach to social and health care. What we've got is just more of the
:30:53. > :30:57.same. What we don't want to do is just say, we ring-fenced an out for
:30:58. > :31:05.here or there. What you have to do is try to get that... Let me ask you
:31:06. > :31:10.again. In terms of the amount of resource that is going to be devoted
:31:11. > :31:16.in the next five years, and resource does matter for the NHS, in what way
:31:17. > :31:20.are your plans different now from the Conservative plans? The key is
:31:21. > :31:25.how you use that resource. By just putting money in, you've got to say,
:31:26. > :31:32.if we are going to put that money on, how do we use it? As somebody
:31:33. > :31:36.who has worked in social care for 40 years, you have to have a different
:31:37. > :31:41.approach to how you use that money. The money we are putting in, 7.7,
:31:42. > :31:46.may be similar in cash terms to what the Tories claim they are putting
:31:47. > :32:00.in, but it's not how much you put in per se, it is how you use it. You
:32:01. > :32:02.are going to get rid of car parking charges in hospital, and you are
:32:03. > :32:05.going to increase pay by taking the cap on pay off. So it doesn't
:32:06. > :32:07.necessarily follow that the money, under your way of doing it, will
:32:08. > :32:11.follow the front line. What you need in the NHS is a system that is
:32:12. > :32:19.capable of dealing with the patience you have. What we have now is on at
:32:20. > :32:28.five Asian of the NHS. Staff leaving, not being paid properly. So
:32:29. > :32:32.pay and the NHS go hand in hand. Let's move onto another area of
:32:33. > :32:38.policy where there is some confusion. Who speaks for the Labour
:32:39. > :32:44.Party on nuclear weapons? Is it Emily Thornbury, or Nia Griffith,
:32:45. > :32:49.defence spokesperson? The Labour manifesto. It is clear. We are
:32:50. > :33:00.committed to the nuclear deterrent, and that is the definitive... Is it?
:33:01. > :33:03.Emily Thornbury said that Trident could be scrapped in the defence
:33:04. > :33:09.review you would have immediately after taking power. On LBC on Friday
:33:10. > :33:15.night. She didn't, actually. I listened to that. What she actually
:33:16. > :33:19.said is, as part of a Labour government coming in, a new
:33:20. > :33:24.government, there is always a defence review. But not the concept
:33:25. > :33:31.of Trident in its substance. She said there would be a review in
:33:32. > :33:34.terms of, and this is in our manifesto. When you reduce
:33:35. > :33:41.something, you review how it is operated. The review could scrap
:33:42. > :33:45.Trident. It won't scrap Trident. The review is in the context of how you
:33:46. > :33:51.protect it from cyber attacks. This will issue was seized upon that she
:33:52. > :33:57.was saying that we would have another review of Trident or Labour
:33:58. > :34:03.would ditch it. That is nonsense. You will have seen some reports that
:34:04. > :34:07.MI5 opened a file on Jeremy Corbyn in the early 90s because of his
:34:08. > :34:16.links to Irish republicanism. This has caused some people, his links to
:34:17. > :34:22.the IRA and Sinn Fein, it has caused some concern. Could you just listen
:34:23. > :34:30.to this clip and react. Do you condemn what the IRA did? I condemn
:34:31. > :34:34.all bombing. But do you condemn what the IRA did? I condemn what was done
:34:35. > :34:39.with the British Army as well as both sides as well. What happened in
:34:40. > :34:45.Derry in 1972 was pretty devastating as well. Do you distinguish between
:34:46. > :34:52.state forces, what the British Army did and the IRA? Well, in a sense,
:34:53. > :34:57.the treatment of IRA prisoners which made them into virtual political
:34:58. > :35:01.prisoners suggested that the British government and the state saw some
:35:02. > :35:09.kind of almost equivalent in it. My point is that the whole violence if
:35:10. > :35:15.you was terrible, was appalling, and came out of a process that had been
:35:16. > :35:20.allowed to fester in Northern Ireland for a very long time. That
:35:21. > :35:24.was from about two years ago. Can you explain why the Leader of the
:35:25. > :35:29.Labour Party, Her Majesty 's opposition, the man who would be our
:35:30. > :35:35.next Prime Minister, finds it so hard to condemn IRA arming? I think
:35:36. > :35:38.it has to be within the context that Jeremy Corbyn for many years trying
:35:39. > :35:48.to move the peace protest... Process along. So why wouldn't you condemn
:35:49. > :35:55.IRA bombing? Again, that was an issue, a traumatic event in Irish -
:35:56. > :36:01.British relations that went on for 30 years. It is a complicated
:36:02. > :36:06.matter. Bombing is not that complicated. If you are a man of
:36:07. > :36:10.peace, surely you would condemn the bomb and the bullet? Let me say
:36:11. > :36:16.this, I condemn the bomb and the bullet. Why can't your leader? You
:36:17. > :36:21.would have to ask Jeremy Corbyn, but that is in the context of what he
:36:22. > :36:22.was trying to do over a 25 year period to move the priest process
:36:23. > :36:26.along. Thank you for joining us. It's just gone 11.35,
:36:27. > :36:28.you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers
:36:29. > :36:37.in Scotland and Wales. Had your fill of
:36:38. > :36:43.professional politicians? Why not plump for a pub
:36:44. > :36:57.landlord instead? I'm up against the machine
:36:58. > :36:59.obviously, so I haven't got the numbers of feet on the ground and
:37:00. > :37:01.finances. Well, they might fancy a pint,
:37:02. > :37:04.but my guests will have to wait Lucy Powell is the Labour candidate
:37:05. > :37:07.for Manchester Central, Graham Brady is standing
:37:08. > :37:11.for the conservatives And Tina Rothery is the Green
:37:12. > :37:15.Party's candidate in Fylde. Graham, is the champagne
:37:16. > :37:25.back in the fridge? Well, you should never have
:37:26. > :37:31.champagne before an election has been mine and I think it's a timely
:37:32. > :37:39.reminder. We got some serious choices as a nation. Lucy, how has
:37:40. > :37:45.your manifesto gone down and when you have been out campaigning.
:37:46. > :37:49.Samovar populism -- policies have been very popular on the doorstep.
:37:50. > :37:58.We're seeing the real meat of the campaign now, there are some very
:37:59. > :38:04.taking any big decisions and the taking any big decisions and the
:38:05. > :38:10.Tories an decisions are being met with a lot of concern. Watching me
:38:11. > :38:13.expect from your manifesto next meeting? The left right manifestos
:38:14. > :38:19.have been quite starkly laid out have been quite starkly laid out
:38:20. > :38:26.from both the left and the right. We can hold our position as we normally
:38:27. > :38:33.do on holding parties to account on the environment issue. Because if we
:38:34. > :38:37.have an unhealthy population and air and water quality is at risk, then
:38:38. > :38:43.much more is at stake. It impacts the NHS, the ability to make their
:38:44. > :38:48.way in life, jobs, and security. And of course our position across the
:38:49. > :38:51.world an environmental impacts. Looking forward to hearing more
:38:52. > :38:52.about that, but first the parties have put their policies on the
:38:53. > :38:54.table. The menu includes re-nationalising
:38:55. > :38:56.railways, paying for home-care costs, and possibly even backing
:38:57. > :38:58.out of Brexit. But which one's
:38:59. > :39:00.tempting most voters? King Faisal of Iraq
:39:01. > :39:04.on a tour of a cotton It's the town's industrial heritage
:39:05. > :39:09.that helped set it up But with two visits in a month,
:39:10. > :39:17.Conservative Theresa May hopes to enjoy her own coronation
:39:18. > :39:20.by picking up votes She claims her party represents
:39:21. > :39:25.ordinary working people, and at a computer session
:39:26. > :39:29.for job-seekers at Breightmet That's despite him being out
:39:30. > :39:36.of work for eight years. To take the level of unemployment
:39:37. > :39:40.down to what she has taken it down This town-centre market is in
:39:41. > :39:46.the Bolton North East constituency, They have a majority
:39:47. > :39:51.of around 4,500, Just up the road, in Bolton West,
:39:52. > :39:57.the roles are reversed. Labour needs to hold on here and win
:39:58. > :40:01.that back if it's got any hope So, what do people here think
:40:02. > :40:07.about what's on the menu The Conservatives are promising
:40:08. > :40:12.more money for the NHS, funded by a new means test
:40:13. > :40:15.on winter fuel payments. They're also asking people
:40:16. > :40:19.with assets of more than ?100,000 They, again, say they'll cut net
:40:20. > :40:25.migration below 100,000. I think she says what she means
:40:26. > :40:28.and I hate to say it, but she's probably a bit
:40:29. > :40:32.like Mrs Thatcher, but a lot nicer. ?7.50 as minimum wage and, you know,
:40:33. > :40:36.prices of things have So, for me, I don't think
:40:37. > :40:45.that should continue. Labour say that they'd
:40:46. > :40:51.renationalise the railways, They'd reintroduce the 50p rate
:40:52. > :40:55.of tax on the highest earners and provide more free childcare,
:40:56. > :40:58.while scrapping tuition fees. I do think that the Labour Party
:40:59. > :41:01.manifesto is a bit odd. They don't think that's
:41:02. > :41:06.going be a winner, really. It's certainly caught a lot
:41:07. > :41:11.of people eyes that I know of, and these are, I wouldn't
:41:12. > :41:13.say dyed-in-the-wool I don't believe that they are
:41:14. > :41:24.capable of actually getting a good deal for us in
:41:25. > :41:26.Brexit, so I don't know Up the road in Burnley,
:41:27. > :41:30.there's another battle for votes. Here, it's the Lib Dems
:41:31. > :41:32.who are chasing Labour. I think the Lib Dems
:41:33. > :41:35.are offering the best package We're offering training
:41:36. > :41:38.and skills for young people, we're offering money for education,
:41:39. > :41:40.and the biggest thing, we're offering money,
:41:41. > :41:41.certainly increasing spending, So, the battle for hearts
:41:42. > :41:45.and minds goes on. It could be in places like Bolton
:41:46. > :41:59.and Burnley that this Graham, we will start to be
:42:00. > :42:03.Conservative manifesto. It's been perceived by many including the
:42:04. > :42:07.Times and e-mail on Sunday as an attack on the wealthy and
:42:08. > :42:15.pensioners. How is it going down in some of the wealthiest parts of the
:42:16. > :42:20.North West. Goal I been out on the street talking to people about these
:42:21. > :42:24.things and certainly there are concerns about these things that
:42:25. > :42:27.people recognise it as an attempt to deal with a looming crisis in social
:42:28. > :42:34.care. People know something has to be done, we can't carry on refusing
:42:35. > :42:40.to tackle the problem. Can use CYP bowl think it is an inheritance tax
:42:41. > :42:44.in it different way? Of course I can see how people would be unhappy with
:42:45. > :42:48.it about how you raise that money people would be unhappy. We have
:42:49. > :42:52.defined a way that is fairer. This increases the amount of money that
:42:53. > :42:55.people can keep and know they can protect, and it also means that
:42:56. > :43:00.people who are more affluent will be making some contribution to their
:43:01. > :43:07.own care. Of course I can understand why people have reservations. Is
:43:08. > :43:14.that fair that there is a greater redistribution of wealth? But the
:43:15. > :43:23.surprising about the Tory proposal was a cap on the cat -- cost of care
:43:24. > :43:26.is a fair method. So given that the kids to reduce activity should be
:43:27. > :43:31.saying that the people shouldn't be paying more than ?75,000 towards the
:43:32. > :43:38.cost of their care, it means that those who have the longest term
:43:39. > :43:45.needs, those with dementia for example, why is this not a fair way?
:43:46. > :43:49.Firstly because people who need care at home are coming into this
:43:50. > :43:54.arrangement, so that is going to bring a lot of people into it, but
:43:55. > :43:59.think it is a particularly unfair for those who require long-term care
:44:00. > :44:02.over a long period through no fault of their own because they get a
:44:03. > :44:05.health issue like dementia, which means that they might see all of
:44:06. > :44:12.their assets going apart from the last 100,000. When you look at some
:44:13. > :44:16.of the people who live in your constituency who don't have assets
:44:17. > :44:21.of ?100,000, they need contributions from those who can afford it then
:44:22. > :44:24.they? That's why we've got to look at this issue and the fairest way of
:44:25. > :44:28.dealing with it, but I think that the cap on the cost of care is a
:44:29. > :44:33.much fairer way of looking at it and I think that many people in my
:44:34. > :44:36.constituency who have spent a long time trying to buy their own home,
:44:37. > :44:49.and may have a home that is only worth 100- to ?120,000 or a formal
:44:50. > :44:56.council property I now faced with a lot of questions with this proposal.
:44:57. > :45:02.Nobody would have to sell their home to get care because it would happen
:45:03. > :45:05.after they have died. Let speak to Tim Farron.
:45:06. > :45:07.The Lib Dem leader and MP for Westmorland and Lonsdale,
:45:08. > :45:09.Tim Farron, was campaigning in their target seat
:45:10. > :45:13.of Hazel Grove on Friday, fresh from the ITV leaders' debate.
:45:14. > :45:16.If your husband has dementia and has to go into a nursing home,
:45:17. > :45:19.your family home will have to be cashed in to pay for it.
:45:20. > :45:23.If you have dementia or if one of your loved ones has dementia,
:45:24. > :45:26.We must fight against the dementia tax.
:45:27. > :45:28.The Liberal Democrats are absolutely determined to keep
:45:29. > :45:39.Tina, we don't know the details of your manifesto but do you find this
:45:40. > :45:44.acceptable and to look at some of the State and put that back into
:45:45. > :45:51.social care system customer what we feel about the contribution that
:45:52. > :45:57.Howard elderly have contributed to the system over their lives. What
:45:58. > :46:02.was their contribution and why is it that they are expected to pay for
:46:03. > :46:12.something that they have contributed to their lives. We would guarantee
:46:13. > :46:16.that you can keep ?100,000 of assets, so a lot of people will have
:46:17. > :46:22.greater security, they will be able to keep more their assets to pass
:46:23. > :46:26.onto children. Based on this attack and pensioners with deservedly has
:46:27. > :46:30.think people realise this is a think people realise this is a
:46:31. > :46:34.proper contest in this election, there is a choice, you can is a
:46:35. > :46:45.Jeremy Corbyn as by Minister. People have be aware that we shouldn't...
:46:46. > :46:52.Conservatives are saying that gets seats may be lost, if you look at
:46:53. > :46:57.saying to reason they may be looming saying to reason they may be looming
:46:58. > :47:06.-- Theresa May may be linked with the left. But I think this does
:47:07. > :47:12.prove that we have to fight for every seat and every vote. When you
:47:13. > :47:17.see policies like this that are apparently redistribution of wealth,
:47:18. > :47:29.the fuel allowance being means tested? I've there is a debate to be
:47:30. > :47:32.had about but the Conservatives are so many questions unanswered, people
:47:33. > :47:36.are unsure if they were following to the net out of the net. Many
:47:37. > :47:40.pensioners, yes of course, you could look at some of the wealthiest
:47:41. > :47:43.pensioners, but where do you draw that line. I think the Conservatives
:47:44. > :47:49.have not said what they will draw that line, and many people are
:47:50. > :47:52.feeling that they will caught. If we come down on the side of the number
:47:53. > :47:57.of will benefit, because it's actually easier -- on the side of
:47:58. > :48:04.universal benefits because it's actually easier... There are
:48:05. > :48:09.people... There are people heading to the polls at the time of their
:48:10. > :48:13.life when they are concerned? People are concerned that the baby more
:48:14. > :48:20.money into hammer the National Health Service, will be be able to
:48:21. > :48:24.find social care will be defined our schools,... People want to know
:48:25. > :48:30.where they stand on June eight? People wanting -- need-to-know that
:48:31. > :48:41.they can rely on the Conservatives to fund the national health service.
:48:42. > :48:44.The policy is that everybody in primary school will have a free
:48:45. > :48:48.breakfast and I think that is a very good thing to do and probably more
:48:49. > :48:49.important for children to start the day do you dispute that that will
:48:50. > :48:56.have a big impact on families having have a big impact on families having
:48:57. > :48:59.their lunch is taken away? I think this is a small number of people
:49:00. > :49:02.having a new entitlement extended a couple years ago, I think it was a
:49:03. > :49:07.questionable thing to do then. It makes much more sense to get more
:49:08. > :49:16.children starting school brightly. The headlines this week... The
:49:17. > :49:22.breakfast club, open to everybody would be a good thing, but again,
:49:23. > :49:26.really difficult things to tackle. The squeeze that has been threatened
:49:27. > :49:30.on school funding, we are able to deal with that and promised another
:49:31. > :49:32.4 billion for school funding over the next Parliament that isn't to be
:49:33. > :49:35.a good contribution guaranteeing a good contribution guaranteeing
:49:36. > :49:40.that no school will lose funding. that no school will lose funding.
:49:41. > :49:43.Tina, your manifesto is not out yet, but we will come to you but we do
:49:44. > :49:46.know that they believed renationalisation of public services
:49:47. > :49:53.in that. Something that Lucy 's party shares. Do you think it makes
:49:54. > :49:55.the party look outdated? I think the Green party has stood its ground
:49:56. > :49:58.since it started. I think people are just beginning to catch up that so
:49:59. > :50:00.many of our policies have now been many of our policies have now been
:50:01. > :50:04.adopted by the Labour Party. When adopted by the Labour Party. When
:50:05. > :50:07.you just said that we need to fund you just said that we need to fund
:50:08. > :50:12.social care so that people can reassured that that will happen
:50:13. > :50:17.under the Conservative manifesto, the government has always been at
:50:18. > :50:23.the ability to find social care adequately, but it's how we spun and
:50:24. > :50:33.that money -- spend that money. We should be re-tubing to the blues --
:50:34. > :50:40.British copies. Where's the British bailout, as the bailout for the
:50:41. > :50:44.people? Are does that make it look like a step back in time,
:50:45. > :50:52.renationalisation? I like that manifesto, but I did want to vote
:50:53. > :50:54.Labour? Let's take the issue of renationalisation. On some
:50:55. > :51:03.utilities, there is a clear argument. At water, there is no
:51:04. > :51:08.competition there is no Reed monopolies operating around regions.
:51:09. > :51:15.We've seen water charges go up. I get a lot of messages about people
:51:16. > :51:19.losing their water charges -- who have seen their water charges rise.
:51:20. > :51:26.On rail nationalisation would we are talking about is as the contract,
:51:27. > :51:29.putting them... Gordon in that piece said that he was unemployed and were
:51:30. > :51:35.still saying that he trusts this government more in terms of getting
:51:36. > :51:38.him a job? We put forward a manifesto that is about the many not
:51:39. > :51:44.the few, it is about investing in people, public services. Investing
:51:45. > :51:49.in communities, making sure that some of our communities here in the
:51:50. > :51:53.North West are connected to the jobs through better transport, buses,
:51:54. > :51:58.trains. That they've got the local services that they need to get the
:51:59. > :52:01.skills, massive investment in education and skills, which, I
:52:02. > :52:05.think, will help to move our economy forward and make sure people aren't
:52:06. > :52:07.left behind OK, maybe the mainstream parties have left you a little bit
:52:08. > :52:10.cold. Well, actually there
:52:11. > :52:12.are fewer of them than there were two years ago -
:52:13. > :52:14.668 to be precise. That's the drop in the number
:52:15. > :52:17.of candidates across the country. But Stuart Pollitt's been to meet
:52:18. > :52:20.some of the more free thinkers ANNOUNCER: 29,300...
:52:21. > :52:23.Remember Martin Bell The most famous and successful
:52:24. > :52:29.independent in our region when he took the Tatton seat
:52:30. > :52:34.from the Tories in 1997. What you have accomplished
:52:35. > :52:37.here has been, to me, 20 years on and this time
:52:38. > :52:42.there are independents standing on issues as diverse as family
:52:43. > :52:48.values and football. One of them is
:52:49. > :52:50.Blackburn fan, Duncan. He's fed up with how Rovers' owners
:52:51. > :52:53.are running the club. Basically, a single issue -
:52:54. > :52:56.ultimately, to put a football club into safe hands and to really
:52:57. > :53:00.address some of the problems that we're seeing source
:53:01. > :53:05.in football at the moment. It is a bit of a drastic step,
:53:06. > :53:08.something I've never really Do you feel you have any
:53:09. > :53:11.chance, realistically? I just don't agree with
:53:12. > :53:16.being taken for granted. Pub owner Terry's hoping to swap
:53:17. > :53:18.serving regulars for serving his What I want to do, really,
:53:19. > :53:22.is I want to bring local What I want to do, really,
:53:23. > :53:27.is I want to bring local Choosing the safest Labour
:53:28. > :53:30.seat in the country I'm up against the machine,
:53:31. > :53:37.obviously, so I haven't got the numbers of feet on the ground
:53:38. > :53:40.and leaflets and finance. The numbers of independents
:53:41. > :53:44.and smaller parties has fallen from two years ago
:53:45. > :53:48.when it was nearly 4,000 Some parties, like the English
:53:49. > :53:53.Democrats and the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition,
:53:54. > :53:55.aren't fielding any But there are others
:53:56. > :54:00.who are trying to defy the odds. One of them is Steve Radford
:54:01. > :54:07.from the Liberal party. It's fielding two candidates
:54:08. > :54:10.in the north west. I think the whole idea
:54:11. > :54:13.that the spectrum of politics is either black or white,
:54:14. > :54:16.right or left, is sheer nonsense. There's many issues that need
:54:17. > :54:18.exposing, there's many issues that need raising,
:54:19. > :54:21.and we hope to add to the political debate and give people
:54:22. > :54:25.a real, positive choice. The problem for smaller parties
:54:26. > :54:28.in the UK is the electoral system. It's really very difficult
:54:29. > :54:32.for independents as well. I mean, independents used to be very
:54:33. > :54:35.common in our system until the 20th century,
:54:36. > :54:38.and in living memory, there have only really been three
:54:39. > :54:41.or four independents who've That means the likes of Duncan,
:54:42. > :54:59.Terry and Steve have an uphill Tina, you're from a smaller party,
:55:00. > :55:03.the three big ones that people perceive as being the main ones.
:55:04. > :55:07.Have you seen an increase in people taking an interest in politics
:55:08. > :55:09.outside of those parties? I think it been hugely inspirational this time
:55:10. > :55:15.around. Whatever you think about tactical voting, the mere fact that
:55:16. > :55:18.people are striving for a change from the bottom up when we find that
:55:19. > :55:22.our electoral system is so ill-equipped for the age we live in
:55:23. > :55:26.and the type of representation that we want, we have two parties
:55:27. > :55:30.opposite who have had every opportunity over the decades to fix
:55:31. > :55:35.every problems there are now claiming that they will fix. Why are
:55:36. > :55:39.they fix? We have gone through this time and again, election after
:55:40. > :55:45.election. We get to the same things and the same manifesto promises that
:55:46. > :55:48.never live up to. People party loyalty is being challenged much
:55:49. > :55:54.more I isn't it? Is that a good thing? Well, what we are seeing, if
:55:55. > :55:57.the polls are to be believed, and Emma was a bit wary about that, is
:55:58. > :56:02.actually people are coming back to the two main political parties in
:56:03. > :56:05.this election. It was only two or three years ago that everyone was
:56:06. > :56:15.saying that it was the end of the two party politics system. I think
:56:16. > :56:19.polling of the highest ratio between Tories and label for many years.
:56:20. > :56:21.I was in Lancaster and Fleetwood this week,
:56:22. > :56:24.with a majority over the Conservatives of just 3%.
:56:25. > :56:27.The Greens have had a smattering of councillors up there in recent
:56:28. > :56:29.years and there was talk of the party standing
:56:30. > :56:33.Here's what some left-leaning voters told me, starting
:56:34. > :56:50.It pushes the Labour Party to adopt policies that are a deeper form of
:56:51. > :56:54.socialism. This is a marginal constituency so if we vote Green, we
:56:55. > :57:00.will hand the seat of the Tories as we did a few years ago. I haven't
:57:01. > :57:08.decided, I'm still wrestling. White macro Billy the I just feel really
:57:09. > :57:17.sad that I have to make that decision. Do I vote with my heart
:57:18. > :57:22.over the dreams? Do you think that the Greens should keep forfeiting
:57:23. > :57:29.candidates to keep the Tories out? The fact that we have a system that
:57:30. > :57:37.causes this is a problem. It means it's a two horse race and the two
:57:38. > :57:41.horse races black in the race don't want to change that. We need other
:57:42. > :57:45.voices, other shades of the community and more diversity. This
:57:46. > :57:49.is what is being hindered. We hear it in the population when we are out
:57:50. > :57:55.campaigning. People are being told that a vote for a green is not going
:57:56. > :58:00.to get you want. Tina says at first person posters out of date
:58:01. > :58:07.especially now? People emphatically rejected what was on offer. I think
:58:08. > :58:13.people should vote their and their head and. Do you think it is feared
:58:14. > :58:18.that the Green party have decided to stand down in certain places such as
:58:19. > :58:22.Chester and don't feel that their back is being scratched by the
:58:23. > :58:25.Labour Party? Well we are a national parties are we going to stand
:58:26. > :58:37.everywhere and we were very recently in government and the station to be
:58:38. > :58:39.in government again. I do support more proportional representation and
:58:40. > :58:50.as Graham said we had a referendum that was overwhelmingly rejected.
:58:51. > :58:55.The referendum we had was not on the type of updating and we wanted, we
:58:56. > :59:02.need to have more public debate. That referendum was not justified.
:59:03. > :59:07.One of the best things about our political system is the constituency
:59:08. > :59:10.link. My constituents, who live in a meeting every weekend and every
:59:11. > :59:14.evening, really value the fact that I am their representative than it is
:59:15. > :59:23.my job to go into the community and speak to them... That's it from us.
:59:24. > :59:33.My thanks to Lucy Powell, Tina Rothery anti-Graham Brady. Next week
:59:34. > :59:33.-- and to Graham Brady. Next week will be
:59:34. > :59:40.our policy. Thank you very much, Tom Brake. Andrew, back to you.
:59:41. > :59:42.So, two and half weeks to go till polling day,
:59:43. > :59:45.let's take stock of the campaign so far and look ahead
:59:46. > :59:54.Sam, Isabel and Steve are with me again.
:59:55. > :00:01.Sam, Mrs May had made a great thing about the just about managing. Not
:00:02. > :00:08.the poorest of the poor, but not really affluent people, who are
:00:09. > :00:12.maybe OK but it's a bit of a struggle. What is in the manifesto
:00:13. > :00:16.for them? There is something about the high profile items in the
:00:17. > :00:21.manifesto. She said she wants to help those just above the poorest
:00:22. > :00:26.level. But if you look at things like the winter fuel allowance,
:00:27. > :00:30.which is going to be given only to the poorest. If you look at free
:00:31. > :00:34.school meals for infants, those for the poorest are going to be kept,
:00:35. > :00:42.but the rest will go. The social care plan, those who are renting or
:00:43. > :00:47.in properties worth up to ?90,000, they are going to be treated, but
:00:48. > :00:53.those in properties worth above that, 250,000, for example, will
:00:54. > :01:00.have to pay. Which leads to the question - what is being done for
:01:01. > :01:03.the just about managings? There is something, the personal allowance
:01:04. > :01:08.that David Cameron promised in 2015, that they are not making a big deal
:01:09. > :01:14.of that, because they cannot say by how much. So you are looking in tax
:01:15. > :01:22.rises on the just about managings. Where will the tax rises come from.
:01:23. > :01:29.We do not know, that there is the 40 million pounds gap for the Tories to
:01:30. > :01:34.reach what they are pledging in their manifesto. We do not know how
:01:35. > :01:40.that is going to be made up, more tax, or more borrowing? So that is
:01:41. > :01:44.why the questions of the implications of removing the tax
:01:45. > :01:48.lock are so potentially difficult for Tory MPs. The Labour manifesto
:01:49. > :01:51.gives figures for the cost of certain policies and where the
:01:52. > :01:57.revenue will come from. You can argue about the figures, but at
:01:58. > :02:01.least we have the figures. The Tory manifesto is opaque on these
:02:02. > :02:05.matters. That applies to both the manifestos. Looking at the Labour
:02:06. > :02:09.manifesto on the way here this morning, when you look at the
:02:10. > :02:13.section on care for the elderly, they simply say, there are various
:02:14. > :02:19.ways in which the money for this can be raised. They are specific on
:02:20. > :02:24.other things. They are, and we heard John McDonnell this morning being
:02:25. > :02:32.very on that, and saying there is not a single ? in Tory manifesto. I
:02:33. > :02:38.have only got to page 66. It is quite broad brush and they are very
:02:39. > :02:43.open to challenge. For example, on the detail of a number of their
:02:44. > :02:47.flagship things. There is no detail on their immigration policy. They
:02:48. > :02:52.reiterate the ambition, but not how they are going to do that, without a
:02:53. > :02:59.massive increase in resource for Borders officials. We are at a time
:03:00. > :03:06.where average wages are lagging behind prices. And in work benefits
:03:07. > :03:11.remain frozen. I would have thought that the just-about-managings are
:03:12. > :03:14.people who are in work but they need some in work benefits to make life
:03:15. > :03:22.tolerable and be able to pay bills. Doesn't she has to do more for them?
:03:23. > :03:29.Maybe, but this whole manifesto was her inner circle saying, right, this
:03:30. > :03:36.is our chance to express our... It partly reads like a sort of
:03:37. > :03:40.philosophical essay at times. About the challenges, individualism
:03:41. > :03:46.against collectivism. Some of it reads quite well and is quite
:03:47. > :03:50.interesting, but in terms of its detail, Labour would never get away
:03:51. > :03:54.with it. They wouldn't be allowed to be so vague about where taxes are
:03:55. > :03:59.going to rise. We know there are going to be tax rises after the
:04:00. > :04:07.election, but we don't know where they will be. 100%, there will be
:04:08. > :04:12.tax rises. We know that they wanted a tax rise in the last budget, but
:04:13. > :04:16.they couldn't get it through because of the 2015 manifesto. Labour do
:04:17. > :04:22.offer a lot more detail. People could disagree with it, but there is
:04:23. > :04:28.a lot more detail. More to get your teeth into. About capital gains tax
:04:29. > :04:33.and the rises for better owners and so on. The SNP manifesto comes out
:04:34. > :04:39.this week, and the Greens and Sinn Fein. We think Ukip as well. There
:04:40. > :04:46.are more manifestos to come. The Lib Dems have already brought theirs
:04:47. > :04:50.out. Isn't the Liberal Democrat campaign in trouble? It doesn't seem
:04:51. > :04:55.to be doing particular the well in the polls, or at the local elections
:04:56. > :05:00.a few weeks ago. The Liberal Democrats are trying to fish in
:05:01. > :05:05.quite a small pool for votes. They are looking to get votes from those
:05:06. > :05:10.remainers who want to reverse the result, in effect. Tim Farron is
:05:11. > :05:17.promising a second referendum on the deal at the end of the negotiation
:05:18. > :05:23.process. And that is a hard sell. So those voting for remain on June 23
:05:24. > :05:29.are not low hanging fruit by any means? Polls suggesting that half of
:05:30. > :05:34.those want to reverse the result, so that is a feeling of about 20% on
:05:35. > :05:37.the Lib Dems, and they are getting slightly less than half at the
:05:38. > :05:43.moment, but there are not a huge amount of votes for them to get on
:05:44. > :05:52.that strategy. It doesn't feel like Tim Farron and the Lib Dems have
:05:53. > :05:56.promised enough. They are making a very serious case on cannabis use in
:05:57. > :06:00.a nightclub, but the optics of what they are discussing doesn't make
:06:01. > :06:04.them look like an anchor in a future coalition government that they would
:06:05. > :06:08.need to be. I wonder if we are seeing the re-emergence of the
:06:09. > :06:13.2-party system? And it is not the same two parties. In Scotland, the
:06:14. > :06:17.dynamics of this election seemed to be the Nationalists against the
:06:18. > :06:31.Conservatives. In England, if you look at what has happened to be Ukip
:06:32. > :06:35.vote, and what Sam was saying about the Lib Dems are struggling a bit to
:06:36. > :06:37.get some traction, it is overwhelmingly Labour and the
:06:38. > :06:39.Conservatives. A different 2-party system from Scotland, but a 2-party
:06:40. > :06:43.system. There are a number of different election is going on in
:06:44. > :06:48.parallel. In Scotland it is about whether you are unionist or not.
:06:49. > :06:53.Here, we have the collapse of the Ukip vote, which looks as though it
:06:54. > :06:57.is being redistributed in the Tories' favour. This is a unique
:06:58. > :07:04.election, and will not necessarily set the trend for elections to come.
:07:05. > :07:08.In the Tory manifesto, I spotted the fact that the fixed term Parliament
:07:09. > :07:16.act is going to be scrapped. That got almost no coverage! It turned
:07:17. > :07:20.out to be academic anyway, that it tells you something about how
:07:21. > :07:25.Theresa May is feeling, and she wants the control to call an
:07:26. > :07:28.election whenever it suits her. Re-emergence of the 2-party system,
:07:29. > :07:38.for this election or beyond? For this election, yes, but it shows the
:07:39. > :07:41.sort of robust strength of parties and their fragility. In other words,
:07:42. > :07:46.the Lib Dems haven't really recovered from the losses in the
:07:47. > :07:51.last general election, and are therefore not really seen as a
:07:52. > :07:56.robust vehicle to deliver Remain. If they were, they might be doing
:07:57. > :08:01.better. The Labour Party hasn't recovered in Scotland, and yet, if
:08:02. > :08:05.you look at the basic divide in England and Scotland and you see two
:08:06. > :08:11.parties battling it out, it is very, very hard for the smaller parties to
:08:12. > :08:17.break through and last. Many appear briefly on the political stage and
:08:18. > :08:22.then disappear again. The election had the ostensible goal of Brexit,
:08:23. > :08:27.but we haven't heard much about it in the campaign. Perhaps the Tories
:08:28. > :08:31.want to get back onto that. David Davis sounding quite tough this
:08:32. > :08:36.morning, the Brexit minister, saying there is no chance we will talk
:08:37. > :08:40.about 100 billion. And we have to have power in the negotiations on
:08:41. > :08:45.the free trade deal or what ever it is. I think they are keen to get the
:08:46. > :08:50.subject of the manifesto at this point, because it has not started
:08:51. > :08:54.too well. There is an irony that Theresa May ostensibly called the
:08:55. > :08:59.election because she needed a stronger hand in the Brexit
:09:00. > :09:02.negotiations, and there was an opportunity for the Lib Dems, with
:09:03. > :09:07.their unique offer of being the party that is absolutely against the
:09:08. > :09:13.outcome of the referendum, and offering another chance. There
:09:14. > :09:17.hasn't been much airtime on that particular pledge, because instead,
:09:18. > :09:23.this election has segued into being all about leadership. Theresa May's
:09:24. > :09:28.leadership, and looking again at the Tory manifesto, I was struck that
:09:29. > :09:35.she was saying that this is my plan for the future, not ABBA plan. Even
:09:36. > :09:41.when talking about social care, he manages to work in a bit about
:09:42. > :09:45.Theresa May and Brexit. And Boris Johnson this morning, an interview
:09:46. > :09:50.he gave on another political programme this morning, it was
:09:51. > :09:55.extraordinarily sycophantic for him. Isn't Theresa May wonderful. There
:09:56. > :10:01.is a man trying to secure his job in the Foreign Office! Will he succeed?
:10:02. > :10:08.I think she will leave him. Better in the tent than out. What did you
:10:09. > :10:14.make of David Davis' remarks? He was basically saying, we will walk away
:10:15. > :10:22.from the negotiating table if the Europeans slam a bill for 100
:10:23. > :10:27.billion euros. The point is that the Europeans will not slam a bill for
:10:28. > :10:32.100 billion euros on the negotiating table. That is the gross figure.
:10:33. > :10:36.There are all sorts of things that need to be taken into account. I
:10:37. > :10:43.imagine they will ask for something around the 50 or ?60 billion mark.
:10:44. > :10:47.It looks that they are trying to make it look like a concession when
:10:48. > :10:52.they do make their demands in order to soften the ground for what is
:10:53. > :10:56.going to happen just two weeks after general election day. He makes a
:10:57. > :11:01.reasonable point about having parallel talks. What they want to do
:11:02. > :11:06.straightaway is deal with the bill, Northern Ireland and citizens
:11:07. > :11:08.rights. All of those things are very complicated and interlinked issues,
:11:09. > :11:13.which cannot be dealt with in isolation. I wouldn't be surprised
:11:14. > :11:17.if we ended up with parallel talks, just to work out where we are going
:11:18. > :11:24.with Northern Ireland and the border. Steve, you can't work out
:11:25. > :11:29.what the Northern Ireland border will be, and EU citizens' writes
:11:30. > :11:33.here, until you work out what our relationship with the EU in the
:11:34. > :11:38.future will be. Indeed. The British government is under pressure to deal
:11:39. > :11:43.quickly with the border issue in Ireland, but feel they can't do so
:11:44. > :11:47.because when you have a tariff free arrangement outcome, or an
:11:48. > :11:50.arrangement that is much more protectionist, and that will
:11:51. > :11:54.determine partly the nature of the border. You cannot have a quick
:11:55. > :11:57.agreement on that front without knowing the rest of the deal. I
:11:58. > :12:02.think the negotiation will be complex. I am certain they want a
:12:03. > :12:08.deal rather than none, because this is no deal thing is part of the
:12:09. > :12:12.negotiation at this early stage. Sounding tough in the general
:12:13. > :12:16.election campaign also works electorally. But after the election,
:12:17. > :12:23.it will be a tough negotiation, beginning with this cost of Brexit.
:12:24. > :12:26.My understanding is that the government feels it's got to make
:12:27. > :12:33.the Europeans think they will not do a deal in order to get a deal. They
:12:34. > :12:38.don't want no deal. Absolutely not. And I'm sure it plays into the
:12:39. > :12:42.election. I'm sure the rhetoric will change when the election is over.
:12:43. > :12:45.That's all for today, thank you to all my guests.
:12:46. > :12:47.The Daily Politics will be back on BBC Two at 12.00
:12:48. > :12:51.And tomorrow evening I will be starting my series of interviews
:12:52. > :12:54.with the party leaders - first up is the Prime
:12:55. > :12:56.Minister, Theresa May, that's at 7pm on BBC One.
:12:57. > :12:59.And I'll be back here at the same time on BBC One next Sunday.
:13:00. > :13:04.Remember - if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.