Browse content similar to 26/03/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
It's Sunday morning, this is the Sunday Politics.
The police believe the Westminster attacker Khalid Masood acted alone,
but do the security services have the resources and
We'll ask the leader of the House of Commons.
As Theresa May prepares to trigger Brexit, details of
Will a so-called Henry VIII clause give the Government too much power
Ukip's only MP, Douglas Carswell, quits the party saying it's "job
In the South West: and the party's
A senior Tory claims we needa special tax to pay for the NHS.
And should the Government bring in tighter controls
And with me - as always - the best and the brightest political
panel in the business - Toby Young, Polly Toynbee
and Janan Ganesh, who'll be tweeting throughout the programme.
First, it was the most deadly terrorist attack
The attacker was shot dead trying to storm Parliament,
but not before he'd murdered four people and injured 50 -
one of those is still in a critical condition in hospital.
His target was the very heart of our democracy,
the Palace of Westminster, and he came within metres
of the Prime Minister and senior Cabinet ministers.
Without the quick actions of the Defence Secretary's
close protection detail, fortuitously in the vicinity
at the time, the outcome could have been even worse.
Janan Ganesh it is four days now, getting on. What thoughts should we
be having this weekend? First of all, Theresa May's Parliamentary
response was exemplary. In many ways, the moment she arrived as
prime minister and her six years as Home Secretary showed a positive
way. No other serving politician is as steeped in counterterror and
national security experience as she is and I think it showed. As to
whether politics is going now, it looks like the Government will put
more pressure on companies like Google and Facebook to monitor
sensor radical content that flows through their channels, and I wonder
whether beyond that the Government, not just our Government but around
the world, will start to open this question of, during a terror attack,
as it is unfolding, should there be restrictions on what can appear on
social media? I was on Twitter at the time last week, during the
attack, and people were posting things which may have been useful to
the perpetrators, not on that occasion but future occasions.
Should there be restrictions on what and how much people can post while
an attack is unfolding? I think we have learned that this is like the
weather, it is going to happen, it is going to happen all over the
world and in every country and we deal with it well, we deal with it
stoically, perhaps we are more used to it than some. We had the IRA for
years, we know how to make personal risk assessments, how to know the
chances of being in the wrong place at the wrong time are infinitesimal,
so people in London didn't say, I'm not going to go to the centre of
London today, everything carried on just the same. Because we know that
the odds of it, being unlucky, are very small. Life is dangerous, this
is another very small risk and it is the danger of being alive. I think
from an Isis Islamist propaganda point of view, it showed just what a
poor target London and the House of Commons is, and it is hard to
imagine the emergency services and local people, international
visitors, reacting much better than they did. And the fact that our
Muslim mayor was able to make an appearance so quickly afterwards
shows, I think, that we are not city riddled with anti-Islamic prejudice.
It couldn't really have been a better advertisement for the values
that is attacking. OK, thank you for that.
So, four days after the attack, what more do we know
The police have made 11 arrests, but only one remains
Here's Adam with the latest on the investigation.
According to a police timeline, that's how long it took
Khalid Masood to drive through a crowd on Westminster
to crash his car into Parliament's perimeter...
to fatally stab PC Keith Palmer, before being shot by a bodyguard
The public are leaving tributes to the dead at Westminster.
The family of PC Palmer released a statement saying:
"We would like to express our gratitude to the people
who were with Keith in his last moments and who were
There was nothing more you could have done,
you did your best and we are just grateful he was not alone."
Investigators say Masood's motive may have gone to the grave with him.
Officers think he acted alone, despite reports he spent a WhatsApp
The Home Secretary now has such encrypted messaging
There should be no place for terrorists to hide.
We need to make sure that organisations like WhatsApp,
and there are plenty of others like that, don't provide a secret
place for terrorists to communicate with each other.
It used to be that people would steam open envelopes or just
listen in on phones when they wanted to find out what people were doing,
legally, through warrantry, but in this situation
we need to make sure that our intelligence services
have the ability to get into situations like encrypted
She will ask the tech industry to suggest solutions
at a meeting this week, although she didn't rule out
But for those caught up in the attack, perhaps it will be
..not the policy implications that will echo the loudest.
We're joined now from the Hague by the Director of Europol,
the European Police Agency, Rob Wainwright.
What role has Europol played in the aftermath of Wednesday's attacks? I
can tell you we are actively supporting the investigation,
because it is a live case I cannot of course go into the details, but
to give you some context, Andrew, this is one of about 80
counterterrorist cases we have been supporting across Europe this year,
using a platform to shed thousands of intelligence messages between the
very large counterterrorist community in Europe, and also
tracking flows of terrorist finance, illegal firearms, and monitoring
this terrible propaganda online as well. All of that is being made
available now to the Metropolitan Police in London for this case. Do
we know if there is any European link to those who may have inspired
or directed Khalid Massoud? That is an active part of the inquiry being
led by Metropolitan Police and it is not for me to comment or speculate
on that. There are links of course in terms of the profile of the
attacker and the way in which he launched these terrible events in
Westminster, and those that we've seen, for example, in the Berlin
Christmas market last year and the attack in Nice in the summer of last
year, clear similarities between the fact that the attackers involved
have criminal background, somewhat dislocated from society, each of
them using a hired or stolen vehicle to deliberately aim at pedestrians
in a crowded place and using a secondary weapon, whether it is a
gun or a knife. So we are seeing a trend, I think, of the kind of
attacks across Europe in the last couple of years and some of that at
least was played out unfortunately in Westminster this week as well.
Mass and was known to the emergency services, so were many of those
involved in the Brussels, Paris and Berlin attacks, so something is
going wrong here, we are not completely across this, are we?
Actually most attacks are being stopped. This was I think at least
the 14th terrorist plot or attempted attack in Britain since 2013 and the
only one that has got through, and that fits a picture of what we see
in France last year, 17 attempted attacks that were stopped, for
example. Unfortunately some of them get through. But people on the
security services' Radar getting through, in Westminster, Brussels,
Paris and Berlin. There is clearly something we are not doing that
could stop that. Again, if you look at what happened in Berlin and at
least the first indications from what police are saying in London,
these are people that haven't really appeared on Baha'i target list of
the authorities, they are on the edge at best of radicalised
community -- on the high target list. When you are dealing with a
dispersed community of thousands of radicalised, Senate radicalised
individuals, it is very difficult to monitor them 24/7, very difficult
when these people, almost out of the blue and carry out the attacks that
they did. I think you have to find a sense of perspective here around the
work and the pressures of the work and the difficult target choices
that police and security authorities have to make around Europe. The Home
Secretary here in London said this morning it is time to tackle apps
like WhatsApp, which we believe Massoud was using, because they
encrypt from end to end and it is difficult for the security services
to know what is happening there. What do you say, are you up for
that? Across the hundreds of cases we have supported in recent years
there is no doubt that encryption, encrypted communications are
becoming more and more prominent in the way terrorists communicate, more
and more of a problem, therefore, a real challenge for investigators,
and that the heart of this is a stark inconsistency between the
ability of the police to lawfully intercept telephone calls, but not
when those messages are exchanged via a social media messaging board,
for example, and that is an inconsistency in society and we have
to find a solution through appropriate legislation perhaps of
these technologies and law enforcement agencies working in a
more constructive way. So you back that? I agree that there is
certainly a problem, absolutely. We know there was a problem, I'm trying
to find out if you agree with the Home Secretary's solution? I agree
certainly with her calls for changes to be made. What the legislative
solution for that is of course for her and other lawmakers to decide
but from my point of view, yes, I would agree something has to be done
to make sure we can apply more consistent interception of
communication in all parts of the way in which terrorists invade our
lives. Rob Wainwright of Europol, thank you very much.
Here with me in the studio now is the Leader of the House
What did last week's attack tell us about the security of the Palace of
Westminster? It told us that we are looked after by some very
courageous, very professional police officers. There is clearly going to
be a lessons learned with you, as you would expect after any incident
of this kind. That will look very carefully at what worked well but
also whether there are changes that need to be made, that is already
under way. And that is being run by professionals, by the police and
security director at Parliament... Palace authorities, we will get
reports from the professionals, particularly our own Parliamentary
security director, and just as security matters in parliament are
kept under constant review, if there are changes that need to be made as
a result, then they will need to be made. Let's look at some of the
issues it has thrown up, as we get some distance from these appalling
events when our first reaction was always the people who lose their
lives and suffer, and then we start to become a bit more analytical. Is
it true that the authorities removed armed guards from Cowbridge gate,
where the attacker made his entry, because they looked to threatening
for tourists? -- carriage gate. No, the idea that a protest from MPs led
to operational changes simply not the case. What happened in the last
couple of years is that the security arrangements in new Palace Yard have
actually been strengthened, but I don't think your view was would
expect me to go into a detailed commentary upon operational security
matters. Why were the armed guards removed? There are armed guards at
all times in the Palace of Westminster, it is a matter for the
security authorities and in particular for the police and direct
command of those officers to decide how they are best deployed. Is it
because, as some from Scotland Yard sources have reported to the papers
this morning, was it done because of staffing shortages? I'm in no
position to comment on the details of the operation but my
understanding is that the number of people available is what the police
and the security authorities working together have decided to deploy and
that they think was commensurate with the threat that we faced. Is it
not of concern that as the incident unfolded the gates were left
unguarded by armed and unarmed, they were just unguarded, so much so
that, as it was going on, a career with a parcel on a moped at was able
to drive through? -- up career. I think we will need to examine that
case as part of looking into any lessons learned, but what I don't
yet know, because the police are still interviewing everybody
involved, witnesses and police officers involved, was exactly who
was standing where in the vicinity of the murder at a particular time.
We have seen pictures, the gates were unguarded as people were
concentrating on what was happening to the police man and to the
attacker, but the delivery man was able to come through the gates with
a parcel?! You have seen a particular camera angle, I think it
is important before we rush to judgment, and we shouldn't be
pointing fingers, we need... We are trying to get to the bottom of it.
To get to the bottom of it means we have to look at what all the
witnesses and all the police officers involved say about what
happened, and then there needs to be a decision taken about what if any
changes need to be made in light of that.
We know the attacker was stopped in his tracks by the Defence
Secretary's bodyguard, where was the armed roving unit that had replaced
the armed guard at the gate? I cannot comment on operation details
but my understanding is there were other armed officers who would have
been able to prevent the attacker from getting to the chamber, as has
been alleged it would be possible for him to do. Were you aware that a
so-called table top simulation, carried out by Scotland Yard and the
Parliamentary authorities, ended with four terrorists in this
simulation able to storm parliament and killed dozens of MPs? No, that
is the first time that has been mentioned to me. You are the leader
of the house. These matters are dealt with by security professionals
who are involved, they are advised by a security committee, chaired by
the Deputy Speaker, but we do not debate operational details in
public. I'm not asking for a debate, I raise this because it's been
reported because it's quite clear that after this simulation, it
raised serious questions about the security of the palace. Actions
should have followed. What I've said to you is that these matters are
kept under constant review and that there are always changes made both
in the deployment of individual officers and security guards of the
palace staff and other plans to strengthen the hard security of the
perimeter. If you look back at Hansard December last year, they was
a plan already been brought forward to strengthen the security at
carriage Gates, looking at questions of access. Will there be armed
guards now? You need to look not just at armed guards, you need to
look at the entirety of the security engagements including fencing.
There's lots about the security we don't need to know and shouldn't
know, but whether or not there are armed guards is something we will
find out quite soon and I'm asking you if you think there should be. If
you think the judgment is by our security experts that there need to
be more armed guards in certain places, then they will be deployed
accordingly, but I think before we rush to make conclusions about
lessons to be learned from Wednesday's appalling attack, it is
important the police are allowed to get on with completing the interview
of witnesses and their own officers, and then that there is considered
view taken about what changes might need to be made and then they will
be implemented. Let me come onto the triggering of Article 50 that begins
our negotiations to exit the European Union. It will happen on
Wednesday. John Claude Juncker told Germany's most popular newspaper
that he wants to make an example of the UK to make everyone realise it's
not worth leaving the EU. What do you make of that? I think all sorts
of things are said in advance of negotiations beginning. Clearly the
commission will want to ensure the EU 27 holds together. As the Prime
Minister has said, that is a British national interest as well. She has
been very clear... What do you make of President Juncker's remark? It
doesn't surprise me ahead of negotiations but I think if rational
mutual interest is to the fore that it's perfectly possible for an
agreement to be negotiated between the UK and our 27 friends and allies
that addresses all of the issues from trade to security, police
cooperation, foreign policy co-operation, works for all
countries. The EU wants to agree a substantial divorce bill before it
will even discuss any future UK EU relations, what do you make of that?
Article 50 says the terms of exit need to be negotiated in the context
of the kind of future relationship that's going to exist between the
departing country and the remaining member states. It seems it is simply
not possible to separate those two. Clearly there will need to be a
discussion about joint assets and join liabilities but I think if we
all keep to the fore the fact we will continue to be neighbours, we
will continue to be essential allies and trading partners, then it is
possible to come to a deal that works for all size. The
question is do you agree the divorce bill first and then look at the
subsequent relations we will have or do you do them both in parallel?
Article 50 itself says they have to run together. Do you think they have
to be done together or sequentially? I think it is impossible to separate
the two but we will get into negotiations very soon and then once
David Davis is sitting down with Michel Barnier and others and the
national governments become involved too, then I hope we can make steady
progress. An early deal about each other's citizens would be a good
piece of low hanging fruit. Is the Government willing to pay a
substantial divorce bill? The Prime Minister has said we don't rule out
some kind of continuing payments, for example there may be EU
programmes in the future in which we want to continue to participate. 50
billion? We don't envisage long-term payments of vast sums of money. So
50 billion isn't even the Government ballpark? You are tempting me to get
into the detail of negotiation, that is something that will be starting
very soon and let's leave it to the negotiations. During the referendum
there was no talk from the Leave side about any question of
separation bill, now the talk is of 50 billion and I'm trying to find
out if the British government thinks that of amount is on your radar. The
Government is addressing the situation in which we now are, which
is that we have a democratic obligation to implement the decision
of the people in the referendum last year, and that we need to do that in
a way that maximises the opportunity, the future prosperity
and security of everybody in the UK. Let me try one more thing on the
Great Repeal Bill, the white Paper will be published I think on
Thursday, is that right? We haven't announced an exact date but you will
see the white Paper very soon. Let's say it is Thursday, it will enshrine
thousands of EU laws into UK law, it will use what's called Henry VIII
powers, who of course was a dictator. Is this an attempt to
avoid proper Parliamentary scrutiny? No, we are repealing the Communities
Act 1972, then put existing EU legal obligations on the UK statutory
footing, so business know where they stand. Then, because a lot of those
EU regulations will for example refer to the commission or another
regulator, you need to substitute a UK authority in place so we need to
have a power under secondary legislation to tweak the European
regulators so it is coherent. This is weather Henry VIII powers come
in. It is secondary legislation and the scope, the definition of those
powers and when they can be used in what circumstances is something the
parliament will have to approve in voting through the bill itself. And
if it is as innocuous as you say, will you accept the proposal of the
Lords for an enhanced scrutiny process on the secondary
legislation? Neither the relevant committee of the House of Lords, the
constitution committee, nor anyone else has seen the text of the bill
and I think when it comes out, I hope that those members of the House
of Lords will find that reassuring, but as I say the definition of those
powers are something the parliament itself will take the final decision.
David Lidington, thank you for being with us.
So, Ukip has lost its only MP - Douglas Carswell.
He defected to Ukip from the Conservative Party
almost three years ago, but yesterday announced
that he was quitting to sit as an independent.
His surprise defection came in August 2014 saying,
"Only Ukip can shake up that cosy little clique called Westminster".
But his bromance with Nigel Farage turned sour when Mr Carswell
criticised the so-called "shock and awful" strategy as
Then, during the EU referendum campaign last year, Nigel Farage
was part of the unofficial Leave.EU campaign, whereas Douglas Carswell
opted to support the official Vote Leave campaign.
Just last month, former Ukip leader Nigel Farage
accused Douglas Carswell of thwarting his chances
of being awarded a knighthood, writing that,
Announcing his resignation on his website yesterday,
Mr Carswell said, "I desperately wanted us to leave the EU.
Now we can be certain that that is going to happen, I have
decided that I will be leaving Ukip."
When Mr Carswell left the Conservative Party in 2014
he resigned as an MP, triggering a by-election.
"I must seek permission from my boss," he said referring
This time, though, Mr Carswell has said there will be no by-election.
We're joined now from Salford by Ukip leader, Paul Nuttall.
Welcome back to the programme. Are you happy to see the back of your
only MP? Well, do you know, I'm always sad when people leave Ukip at
a grass roots level or Parliamentary level, but I'm sad but I'm not
surprised by this. There has been adrift by Douglas and Ukip over the
past couple of years, his relationship with Nigel Farage
certainly hasn't helped, and it is a hangover from the former regime
which I inherited. I try to bring the party together, I thought I had
done that for a few months but it seems now as if I was only papering
over the cracks. Douglas has gone and I think we will move on and be a
more unified party as a result. Did Douglas Carswell jump because he
expected to be pushed out your national executive committee
tomorrow? He came before the National executive committee to
answer questions regarding issues that have come to the fore over the
last couple of months. There was the knighthood issue, the issue
surrounding the Thanet election and his comments in a book which came
out regarding Brexit. So was he under suspicion? He was coming to
answer these questions and they would have been difficult. So he did
jump in your view? No, I'm not saying he would have been pushed out
of the party but he would have faced difficult questions. What is clear
is that a fissure had developed and I'm not surprised by him leaving the
party. You have also lost Diane James, Stephen Wolf, Arron Banks,
you failed to win the Stoke by election, Mr Carswell is now a
pundit on US television, Ukip now stands for the UK irrelevance party,
doesn't it? Paul's hard us yesterday on 12%, membership continues to
rise. -- the polls had us on 12%. 4 million people voted for Ukip. Over
the summer exciting things will be happening in the party, we will
rewrite the constitution, restructure the party, it will have
a new feel to it and we will be launching pretty much the post
Brexit Ukip. Arron Banks, who used to pay quite a lot of your bills, he
said the current leadership, that would be you, couldn't knock the
skin off a rice pudding, another way of saying you are relevant, isn't
it? I don't think that's fair. I've only been in the job since November
the 28th, we have taken steps to restructure the party already, the
party is on a sound financial footing, we won't have a problem
money wise going forward. It is a party which can really unified, look
forward to the post Brexit Iraq, tomorrow we are launching our Brexit
test for the Prime Minister. If it wasn't for Ukip there wouldn't have
been a referendum and we wouldn't have Brexit. Every time you say you
will unified, someone else leaves. Is Arron Banks still a member? No,
not at this moment in time. He has been a generous donor in the past,
he's done a great job of ensuring we get Brexit and I'm thankful for that
but he isn't a member. He has just submitted an invoice of ?2000 for
the use of call centres, will you pay that? No. That should be
interesting to watch. In the aftermath of the Westminster
attack, Nigel Farage told Fox News that it vindicates Donald Trump's
extreme vetting of migrants. Since the attacker was born in Kent, like
Nigel Farage, can you explain the relevance of the remark? I
personally haven't supported Donald Trump's position on this, but what I
will say, this is what Nigel has said as well, we have a problem
within the Muslim community, it is a small number of people who hate the
way we live... Can you explain the relevance of Mr Farage's remark? Mr
Farage also made the point about multiculturalism being the
problem as well and he is correct on that because we cannot have separate
communities living separate lives and never integrating. How would
extreme vetting of migrants help you track down a man who was born in
Kent? In this case it wouldn't. Maybe in other cases it would. But,
as I say, I'm not a supporter of Donald Trump's position on extreme
vetting, never have been, so I'm the wrong person to ask the question
too, Andrew. That has probably become clear in my efforts to get
you to answer it. Let me as too, should there be a by-election in
Clacton now? Douglas has called by-elections in the past when he has
left a political party, I know certain people in Ukip are keen to
go down this line, Douglas is always keen on recall and if 20% of people
in his constituency want a by-election then maybe we should
have won. Ukip will be opening nominations for Clacton very soon.
Hold on with us, Mr Nuttall, I have Douglas Carswell here in the studio.
Why not call a by-election? I'm not switching parties. You are, you are
becoming independent. There is a difference, I've not submitted
myself to the whip up a new party, if I was, I would be obliged to
trigger a by-election. If every time an MP in the House of Commons
resigned the whip or lost the whip, far from actually strengthening the
democracy against the party bosses, that would give those who ran
parties and enormous power, so I'm being absolutely consistent here,
I'm not joining a party. It is a change of status and Nigel Farage
has just said he will write to every constituent in Clacton and he wants
to try and get 20% of constituents to older by-election. We are going
to testing, he says, write to every house in Clacton, find out if his
constituents want a by-election, if 20% do we will find out if Mr
Carswell is honourable. I'm sure they will be delighted to hear from
Nigel. There have been several by-elections when Nigel has had the
opportunity to contact the electorate we did -- which did not
always go to plan. If you got 20%, would you? Yesterday I sent an
e-mail to 20,000 constituents, I have had a lot of responses back,
overwhelmingly supported. Recently you said you were 100% Ukip, now you
are 0%. What happened? I saw Theresa May triggering article 50, we won,
Andrew. You knew a few months ago she was going to do that. On June
the 24th I had serious thought about making the move but I wanted to be
absolutely certain that Article 50 would be triggered and I think it is
right. This is why ultimately Ukip exists, to get us out of the
European Union. We should be cheerful instead of attacking one
another, this is our moment, we made it happen. Did you try to sideline
the former Ukip leader during the referendum campaign? Not at all, I
have been open about this, the idea I have been involved in subterfuge.
You try to sideline him openly rather than by subterfuge? I made
the point we needed to be open, broad and progressive to win. I made
it clear in my acceptance speech in Clacton and when I said that Vote
Leave should get designation that the only way Euroscepticism would
win was by being more than just angry natives. What do you make of
that? I am over the moon that we have achieved Brexit, unlike Douglas
I rarely have that much confidence in Theresa May because history
proves that she is good at talking the talk but in walking the walk
often fails, and I'm disappointed because I wanted Douglas to be part
of the post Brexit Ukip where we move forward with a raft of domestic
policies and go on to take seat at Westminster. Do you think you try to
sideline Mr Farage during the referendum campaign? Vote Leave
certainly didn't want Nigel Farage front of house, we know that. They
freely admit that, they admitted it on media over the past year. Nigel
still was front of house because he is Nigel Farage and if it wasn't for
Nigel, as I said earlier, we wouldn't have at the referendum and
we wouldn't have achieved Brexit because Nigel Farage appeals, like
Ukip to a certain section of the population. If our primary motive is
to get us out of the European Union, why are we having this row, why
can't we just celebrate what is happening on Wednesday? We can, but
you are far more confident that Theresa May will deliver on this
than I am. Ukip may have been a single issue pressure group ten
years ago, it wasn't a single issue pressure group that you joined in
2014, it wasn't a single issue pressure group that you stood for in
2015 at the general election, and I'm disappointed that you have left
us when we are moving onto an exciting era. What specifically
gives you a lack of confidence in Mrs May's ability deliver? Her
record as Home Secretary, she said she would deal with radical Islam,
nothing happened, she said she would get immigration down to the tens of
thousands, last year in her last year as Home Secretary as city the
size of Newcastle came to this country, that is not tens of
thousands. I think we need to take yes for an answer eventually. The
problem with some Eurosceptics is they never accept they have won the
argument. We have one, Theresa May is going to do what we have wanted
her to do, let's be happy, let's celebrate that. But let's wait until
she starts bartering things away, until she betrays our fishermen,
just as other Conservative prime ministers have done in the past.
Let's wait until we end up still paying some sort of membership fee
into the European Union or a large divorce bill. That is not what
people voted for on June the 23rd and if you want to align yourself
with that, you are clearly not a Ukipper in my opinion. So for Ukip
to have relevance, it has to go wrong? I'm confident politics will
come back to our terms but -- our turf but there will be a post Brexit
Ukip that will stand for veterans, book slashing the foreign aid bill
and becoming the party of law and order. Finally, to you, Douglas
Carswell, you say you have confidence in Mrs May to deliver in
the way that Paul Nuttall doesn't. You backed her, you were
Conservative, you believe that Brexit will be delivered under a
Conservative Government. Why would you not bite the 2020 election as a
Conservative? I feel comfortable being independent. If you join a
party you have to agree to a bunch of stuff I would not want to agree
with. I am comfortable being independent. So you will go into
2020 as an independent? If you look at the raising of funds, what Vote
Leave did as a pop-up party... We only have five seconds, will you
fight as an independent in the next general election? Let's wait and
see. Very well! Thank you both very much.
Hello, I'm Martyn Oates, coming up on the Sunday Politics
Is it time for a special tax to pay for the NHS?
I think there's much more support for these kinds of taxes if people
So I do actually think a hypothecated tax is a good idea.
And for the next 20 minutes, I'm joined by the Exeter MP
Ben Bradshaw and by Neil Parish, the MP for Tiverton and Honiton.
Last week's terrorist attack on Westminster has left many people
wondering what more can be done to improve security.
Did Khalid Masood's actions make you think British police officers
I think we were all there on Wednesday.
Some thoughts on lessons to be learned?
I mean, Ben, you think there's an argument for more
I think we pride ourselves on having a police force that's
But there'll be people who know a lot more
and I'm sure they will be reviewing the Commons security as we speak,
whether more can be done to make that very vulnerable entrance point
a little more robust, and the question as to
whether you should leave police officers out there unarmed,
but I don't really feel qualified to say that.
But it's not in the British tradition, is it, for all of our
police officers - particularly those who spend time having themselves
photographed with tourists - to have great machine guns.
There was an interesting debate the day afterwards,
with the Prime Minister and others, arguing that, in a technical
sense, the assailant didn't actually breach the Parliamentary security.
But, obviously, if you look at the footage, and you were there,
clearly, that body was a long way into the Parliamentary estate?
First of all, I very much agree with Ben,
that we shouldn't arm all of our police, because I think
it's lovely they can stay there and talk with tourists
But we've also got to protect those police.
Normally, there is a policeman with a machine gun just back
Now, how the assailant got in quite as far as he did, I don't know.
I suspect the division bell went, at the gates opened, and,
of course, all the ministers are coming back in to vote.
And I suspect it was just by chance that he had that
That's why, I suspect, we may have to look at not perhaps
doing quite so much, we can do more at the outer gates,
and then perhaps make sure we have a system where you come
into a locked gate system and into the second part.
I think the main thing is that our heart goes out to the police,
they lost one of their own, and he was a really, really great
Ben comes in on bicycle, so do I into Parliament -
I don't cycle around my constituency, because it's
But we need to make sure we protect our police,
but we have armed police there, ready to take down an assailant.
But somehow or other, those police that are right
out with the public, they're great ambassadors,
but they've got to be protected more than they are at the moment.
Would the NHS be better off if it was funded
Sarah Wollaston, the chair of the Health Select Committee,
thinks so and told this programme it was time to consider ring fencing
National Insurance to pay for the apparently endlessly rising
More patients than at any time in NHS history.
Worried relatives, medical staff under pressure and a political row
about whether NHS funding is keeping up with demand.
I'm going to go and see what I can do to shift beds and create space.
Fresh from one winter crunch point, the Government already appears
Experience has shown that on-site GP triage in A departments can
have a significant and positive impact on A waiting times.
I'm therefore making a further ?100 million of capital available
immediately for new triage projects at English hospitals
Something similar already happens in Plymouth.
There are a number of potential benefits.
The main benefit would be that patients should see the right
practitioner first time, and not have to go through
a complicated series of seeing different people before they finally
see the doctor or nurse that can best meet their needs.
But there are already fears about whether there will be enough
GPs to make this work across England by next winter.
And one Conservative MP, who also happens to be chair
of the Health Select Committee, says it's time the NHS was directly
I think there's much more support for these kinds of taxes if people
So I do think, actually, that a hypothecated tax is a good idea,
and I would like to see National Insurance repurposed
as a health and social care insurance, and for that
That is a huge change when it comes to public finances.
Interestingly, National Insurance raises more
For others, though, the situation is less
about the rules of tax-and-spend, but about being straight
If we're being honest with people, if we're being honest
with the public, an up to 2p increase in tax
would be necessary in order to save the NHS.
That isn't Lib Dem policy yet, but it is a measure of just how
seriously some are taking the health of the NHS.
Neil, have you got any sympathy with your Conservative colleague's
view there that there should be some ring-fenced tax?
She says that should be National Insurance.
I think it's an interesting idea to ring fence a tax.
Whether National Insurance is the right one, in the end
I think it probably would have to be income tax.
You think people might be persuaded...?
I think they might be, because what has happened,
and naturally it's bound to be a political football,
health, by its very nature, we all need health care
and the amount we spend on it is a political issue -
but I think, because more money is pouring in,
and success governments will have to pour more money in,
perhaps it is actually time to look at this.
But if you start, health has a tax, defence has a tax,
What we do accept is that we will have to review how much
we spend on the health service, because we're all getting older,
That's the Lib Dem's contention, that you need to be honest.
It's not an easy one to deal with, because people like the service.
They don't necessarily want to pay the tax,
But let's have this debate, because I think it's clear that
all of us want the health service to succeed.
And it's case of not only managing the health service,
And we're putting more money in, but the cost of pensions
and the cost of everything is going up.
Ben, you look at the Labour party's website today,
on the front page, save the NHS, save it from the Tories,
But how are you going to do this, how would you provide this funding?
It's great that Neil and Sarah and other Conservative MPs
Not just for the NHS, but for social care.
When we left office, we had NHS funding up
It's now gone back down again, and we're seeing
As Neil says, we have a growing, elderly population,
We have to have a long-term, sustainable solution.
I'm not sure that hypothecation is necessarily the answer,
partly for the reasons Neil's already given,
but if there was a recession, for example, does that
mean the money's then going to go down for the NHS?
But you do need to do something, and I think you need
to look at everything, whether it's is combination
of income, National Insurance tax, more sin taxes - like the sugar tax
that the Health Committee recommended that has now been
adopted by the Government, already been very successful
Well, you can think of a number of things, can't you -
fat, sugars, salt, things that are bad for you.
I think the public would accept that perhaps more than income tax,
And I don't think we should rule out the idea that we had
when we were in Government for social care, of some kind
Because if you invest in public health -
which I think is the other mistake this Government's made,
it's cut funding for public health - so, illness prevention,
then you actually reduce long-term demand on the NHS.
So our obesity report, which is coming out this weekend,
which is very critical of the Government inaction,
says that if you spend a bit more on tackling obesity,
you save a lot more for the NHS in the long run.
I don't want to get too aggressive with Ben, but don't forget,
we did have a huge deficit, over ?50,000 million
It's all very well to spend the money, but we've got to spend
So I think there will have to be some link.
If we were linking this tax with the health spending,
it's got to be linked somehow to the economy as well
OK, alongside the financial strain on the NHS, there's a huge
problem with staffing, both the Lib Dems and
the British Medical Association are warning that Brexit
Here's Dr Jeeves Wijesuriya, who is chairman of the junior doctor's
We've done a recent survey of EU doctors that are working
here in the UK, and the implications of Brexit are absolutely huge.
Four in ten EU-trained doctors feel that they will have to leave
the health service and will leave working in this country
because of the possible implications of Brexit.
He was making the point that there is a staffing crisis at the moment.
And he says this is only going to get potentially much worse if this
situation with EU nationals isn't sorted?
I have made this point are ready, in fact I raised it with the Health
Secretary in the Commons, and the solution to this is to reassure sent
to EU nationals are currently work in the health service or social care
that they will be able to save. Again, very just satisfactory answer
from the Health Secretary. They need to make this a priority once
negotiations start. I think Ben is right, but whether
Government's also right is that we can't agree to that until we have a
reciprocal arrangement with what's hanging with our guys across Europe.
Otherwise we shall run out of staff. Not just in health service, it's
across the whole industry. Wanted to ask you about that,
because last week the Immigration Minister was suggesting that in
terms of agricultural work, we could be up skilling native workers to do
that. Is the Government likely to be banging the drum in a big way in
terms of health staff? Saying we can train our own doctors and that will
solve the problem? We can try, and we can do more to
solve the problem. When it comes to doctors and nurses, we have a pool
we can get native workers into. When it comes to picking vegetables or
whatever, there isn't an massive amount of people that really want
those particularly jobs are available for those particular jobs.
Meat processing, factories, you name it. There's a big in my constituency
where 70% of the workers are Eastern European. What we are saying and the
moment is that there is enough Labour, but we've got to work very
quickly. And as far as the health service is concerned, I think we
have more of a chance to get more home-grown labour in there. But it's
not easy, and the Government's got to be ready to move quickly.
What happens if these people have already gone back?
The Immigration Minister was saying to us last week that the figures
don't show that. Some of the figures are up as far as September, and some
as far as December. I think we're got to look through this next period
and make sure that people are still coming. Barbarians and remaining is
into becoming reasonably freely here. -- Bulgarians and Romanians
seem to becoming reasonably freely here. Others not so much.
Is this more moaning scaremongering, some people would say?
No. There are fewer applications, staff shortages across the health
sector. Even the president of the commission said we should settle
this now, it's amoral issue. If you -- it's a moral issue. If you look
at the pension liability and other at the pension liability and other
issues going forward, this will not be easy. It has the potential to be
a complete disaster. a complete disaster.
But had to make sure it works, But had to make sure it works,
because we are Brexiting, and it has to work.
Some local MP's are calling for the Government to review
the DVLA's practice of selling drivers details
The issue was debated in the House of Commons following claims some
private companies are intimidating and hounding drivers to pay fines.
The DVLA only supplies details to companies
which are accredited by a trade body, but Torbay MP
Kevin Foster says the standards are not high enough.
Barry, Hazel and Jonathan - three Torbay residents
who took their battle over a parking fine to their MP.
I've been issued with a ?100 fine for overstaying in the Marina
I know that's not the case, because I have a ticket to prove that.
I was sent a fine for missing off, apparently, the first digit
I didn't put my whole registration number in.
The fine was eventually reduced to 30.
All three wrote at the local MP, Kevin Foster, to complain.
And this week, the Tory called on the Government
I think the suspicion is the cowboy clampers have become the cowboy
And whilst they may wish to leave their spur marks on
car parks across the country, I hope the Minister will be clear
of what action will be taken to make sure they have to ride off
Now, Kevin Foster has received more complaints about this car park,
and Crossways in Paignton, then any other in his patch.
Now that I've parked, I am entering into a legal agreement
with the company which runs this car park.
Now that I've parked, I am entering into a legal agreement
with the company which runs this car park.
I have to abide by their terms and conditions.
If I don't abide by these terms and conditions -
staying late for example - DVLA will send my registered
details to the company which runs this car park,
and then the company will issue me a fine.
That's all very well if the car park's being run properly.
But some MPs say they know of cases around
the country where drivers are being penalised unfairly.
People are duped into false charges and harassed
by firms who manage, somehow, to get hold
of their personal information, whether through the DVLA, or,
as mentioned earlier, through other sources.
But a trade body which oversees private operators says the DVLA
will only pass on details to companies which have
We've had a great number of members who halve applied
Unfortunately, anyone who isn't willing to work within the confines
of our code of practice or engage to the high standards
that we require, doesn't get past the first stage.
Premier Park, which runs this car park, says it's happy
to meet with Mr Foster to discuss any issues.
But only time will tell us if the Government
will change its regulations in the sector.
Ben, because you're a famous cyclist, do you have any sympathy
with these motorists? I've had examples of over officious
car parking agencies chasing constituents. There's balance to be
struck care. You had a guy on the film there from the organisations
that represents car parks that says we won't accept some of these
operators into our operation. I think that's the route to go down.
But people shouldn't be able to get away with breaking the law are
taking up a parking space owners could use when they haven't paid for
it. There's balance to be made. Is the balance correct?
Not quite, they come in and I as quickly as they can, they don't get
as much leeway, not as much as public car parks would. I think they
need to be restricted in their ambitions, echoes they're very much,
the quicker they get you, the more they can charge you. They're
enormous charges people are having to pay, ridiculous fines.
At the trade body enough though? Probably not, and probably not
perhaps making enough noise about it. I also think perhaps, sometimes,
where are the revenues going from these vast charges? Mummers Day of
it's another issue, because in the end looks as if they're penalised
hugely with massive fines, I think they've got a fair gripe.
Time now for our regular round-up of the political week in 60 seconds.
A public meeting was told about last-ditch efforts
to save the only care home on the Isles of Scilly.
If the home closes, elderly people face a move to the mainland.
It's splitting my family, it is making them out of reach.
When they need me, they need me, and I won't be there.
Devon County Council's Tory leader is launching a petition to get
school funding debated again in the Commons.
Tory backbenchers are far from happy with the way
the Government's handling this increasingly toxic issue.
It would be a very poor reflection on us if standards went down
simply because we're not able to supply children with the teachers
they need and with the support staff they need and with
And that's something that I, as a Conservative MP,
There's been more concern about mobile phone coverage
One MP is saying the lack of connectivity is leaving
And there's plenty of anger from consumers too.
Neil, I think you are the MP saying you think constituents
are being left in the dark ages because of mobile phone coverage?
Because we were having a debate, or I was going to have a debate
when we were locked in the chamber because of the terrorist attack,
but it is a case of making sure they share properly, the companies.
And some are getting broadband, the most rural areas, will be
I think partly it's because the companies
And I know the Government doesn't want to go there,
but roaming, so that you go from one company to the other.
Because in some areas in the countryside, Orange or O2
or the other networks will work better in certain areas.
I used to travel across the continent, I could change
countries and get another roaming and the phone never went.
But drive into the Blackdown Hills, and your signal goes entirely.
Not that Ben does that on his bicycle very often.
The school funding issue, of course, very dominant this week again.
And, frankly, a lot of stony-faced Conservative MPs
as the Prime Minister was defending what the Government's doing.
I did warn ministers a couple of years ago when they said
they said they wanted to change the formula -
which we all support - at the same time cutting
funding to schools overall, as they are, by 7%.
It's the very worst time to fiddle around with the formula,
because you create more losers than you do winners,
Because nobody's really happy with the thing, are they?
The main thing is that we invested more in schools across the piece,
so all schools were getting more money...
We did have more money, because we were running,
until the financial crash, we had the long this period
of sustained growth, noninflationary growth,
Yeah, but not because of the overspending, Neil,
because of the global financial crash.
The schools weren't complaining, the schools were getting better,
attainment was getting better, and investment was going in.
We've now seen the biggest cut since the 1950s in our schools,
and this lot are doing nothing about it.
Neil, are you as cross as many of your colleagues?
Pretty well, because I think it's a case of more money and some
The trouble is partly one of the problems is the Government's
been to prescriptive or the county and how we spend it
So it's combination assembly that is, because we make sure
at the next generation is better educated than we were and so on.
Is the Government going to get out of this hole, do you think?
I would have thought that if we upped the temperature,
we would get something out of the Government.
It doesn't have a very big majority, and think perhaps
can see you nodding in agreement but we don't have any more time! Thank
you both for coming in, Andrew, back to you.
So yesterday the European Union celebrated its 60th birthday
at a party in Rome, the city where the founding document
Leaders of 27 EU countries were there to mark the occasion -
overshadowing it, though, the continued terrorist threat,
And on Wednesday Theresa May, who wasn't in Rome yesterday,
will trigger Article 50, formally starting
The President of the European Council, Donald Tusk,
made an appeal for unity at the gathering.
Today in Rome, we are renewing the unique alliance of free nations
that was initiated 60 years ago by our great predecessors.
At that time, they did not discuss multiple speeds,
they did not devise exits, but despite all the tragic
circumstances of the recent history they placed all their faith
Mr Tusk, he is Polish, the man that has the Council of ministers, and on
that council where every member of the EU sits he is an important
figure in what is now about to happen. We have got to negotiate our
divorce terms, we've got to agree a new free trade deal, new
crime-fighting arrangements, we've got to repatriate 50 international
trade agreements, and all of that has to be ratified within two years,
by 27 other countries. Can that really happen?! I don't think it is
inconceivable because it is in the interests of those 27 EU member
states to try and negotiate a deal that we can all live with, because
that would be preferable to Britain crashing out within two years. But I
think this is why Labour's position is becoming increasingly incoherent.
Keir Starmer has briefed today that he will be making a speech tomorrow
setting out six conditions which he wants the deal to meet, otherwise
Labour won't vote for it, but if Labour doesn't vote for it that
doesn't mean we will be able to negotiate an extension, that would
be incredibly difficult and require the consent of each of the 27 member
states, so if Labour votes against it we will just crash out, it is
effectively Labour saying no deal is better than a poor deal, which is
not supposed to be their position. Labour's position may be incoherent
but I was not asking about their position, I was asking about the
Government's position. The man heading the Badila said he wants it
ready by October next year so that it can go through the ratification
process, people looking at this would think it is Mission:
Impossible. It seems impossible to me to be done in that time. The fact
that it is 27 countries, the whole of the European Parliament as well,
there will be too many people throbbing spanners in the works and
quite rightly. We have embarked on something that is truly terrible and
disastrous, and the imagery we can have of those 27 countries
celebrating together 60 years of the most extraordinary successful
movement for peace, for shared European values, and others not
there... We were not there at the start either, and we are not there
now! And we have been bad partners while we were inside, but now that
we are leaving... They did not look like it was a birthday party to me!
I think it was, there was a sense of renewal, Europe exists as a place
envied in the world for its values, for its peacefulness, that is why
people flocked to its borders, that is why they come here. Can you look
at the agenda that faces the UK Government and EU 27, is it not
possible, in fact even likely, that as the process comes to an end they
will have to agree on a number of areas of transitional arrangements?
I think they will and they will have to agree that soon, I would not be
surprised if sometime soon there is an understanding is not a formal
decision that this is a process that will extend over something closer to
buy or seven than two years. On Wednesday article 50 will be filed
and there will be lots of excitement and hubbub but nothing concrete can
happen for a while. Elections in France in May, elections in Germany
which could really result in a change of Government... That is the
big change, Mrs Merkel might not be there by October. And who foresaw
that a few months ago? So you might be into 28 Dean before you are into
the substantive discussions about how much market access or regulatory
observance. I cannot see it being completed in two years. I could see,
if negotiations are not too acrimonious, that transitional
agreement taking place. Let's look at the timetable again. The council
doesn't meet until the end of April, it meets in the middle of the French
elections, the first round will have taken place, they will need a second
round so not much can happen. President Hollande will be
representing France, then the new French government, if it is Marine
le Pen all bets are off, but even if it is Mr Mac run, he does not have a
party, he will not have a majority, the French will take a long while to
sort out themselves. Then it is summer, we are off to the Cote
d'Azur, particularly the Bolivian elite, then we come back from that
and the Germans are in an election, it may be very messy, Mrs Merkel no
longer a shoo-in, it could be Mr Schultz, he may have to try to form
a difficult green red coalition, that would take a while. Before you
know it, it is Guy Fawkes' Day and no substance has taken place, yet we
are then less than a year before this has to be decided. It is a big
task and I'm sure Jana is right that there will be transitional
arrangements and not everything will be concluded in that two year
timetable, but in some respects what you have described helps those of us
on the Eurosceptic site because it means they cannot really be a
meaningful parliamentary vote on the terms of the deal because nothing is
going to be agreed quickly enough for them to be able to go back and
agree something else if Parliament rejects it, so when the Government
eventually have something ready to bring before Parliament it will be a
take it or leave it boat. How extraordinary that people who have
campaigned. Indeed give us our country back and say, isn't it
wonderful, we won't have a meaningful boat for our
parliamentarians of the most important... We don't know what the
negotiation, the package is, day by day we see more and more complicated
areas nobody ever thought about, nobody mentioned during the
campaign, all of which has to be resolved and the European Council
and the negotiators say nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.
You lead us into a catastrophe. There will be plenty of opportunity
for Parliament to have its say following the introduction of the
Great Repeal Bill, it is not as if there will be no Parliamentary time
devoted. The final package is what counts. We have two years to blog
about this! There was a big Proview -- pro-EU
march yesterday... I was there! Polly Toynbee was there, down to
Parliament Square, lots of people there marching in favour of the
European Union. We can see the EU flags there on flags, lots of
national flags as well, the British one. Polly, is it the aim of people
like you still to stop Brexit, or to soften Brexit? I think the aim is
for the best you can possibly do to limit the damage. Of course, if it
happens that once people have had a chance to see how much they were
lied to during the campaign and how dreadful the deal is likely to be,
if it happens that enough people in the population have changed their
minds, then maybe... There is no sign up yet. But we have not even
begun, people have not begun to confront what it is going to mean.
Wait and see. I think it is just being as close as we can. Is that
credible, do you think, to stop it or to ameliorate it in terms of the
Remainers? I think it is far more credible to try and stop it but even
then the scope is limited. It is fairly apparent Theresa May's
interpretation of the referendum is the country wants an end to free
movement, there is probably no way of doing that inside the single
market. She also wants external trade deals, no way of doing that
outside the customs unit, said the only night you can depend if you are
pro-European is, let's not leave without any trade pact, at least
let's meet Canada and have a formalised trade agreement. The idea
of ace -- of a very soft exit is gone now because the public really
did want an end to free movement and the Government really does want
external trade deals. It depends what changes in Europe. I think the
momentum behind the Remoaning movement will move away. One of the
banners I saw being held up yesterday by a young boy on the news
was, don't put my daddy on a boat. It gets a lot of its moral force
from the uncertainty surrounding the fate of EU nationals here and our
resident in the remainder of the EU and I think David Lidington is right
that it will be concluded quite quickly once negotiations start and
that will take a lot of the heat and momentum out of the remaining
movement. Why didn't Theresa May allow that amendment that said, we
will do that, as an act of generosity, we will say, of course
those European citizens here are welcome to stay? It would have been
such a good opening move in the negotiations, instead of which she
blocked it. It does not augur well. I have interviewed many Tories about
this and put that point to them but they often say the Prime minister's
job is to look after UK citizen in the EU... Bargaining chips, I think
you have to be generous and you have to wish you people in Spain and
everywhere else where there are British citizens would have
responded. The British Government did try and raise that with their EU
counterparts and were told, we cannot begin to talk about that
until article 50 has been triggered. Next week we will be able to talk
about it. How generous it would have been, we would have started on a
better note. Didn't happen, we will see what happens next with EU
citizens. That is it for today, the Daily Politics will be back tomorrow
at midday and every day next week on BBC Two as always.
And there's also a Question Time special live tomorrow
night from Birmingham - with guests including
the Brexit Secretary David Davis, Labour's Keir Starmer,
former Ukip leader Nigel Farage and the SNP's Alex Salmond -
I'll be back next week at 11am here on BBC One.
Until then, remember - if it's Sunday, it's
Andrew Neil and Lucie Fisher discuss the Westminster attack with Commons leader David Lidington and head of Europol Rob Wainwright. Plus Ukip leader Paul Nuttall talks about Douglas Carswell about quitting the party. Panellists include Janan Ganesh from the Financial Times, Polly Toynbee from The Guardian and Toby Young from The Spectator.