26/03/2017 Sunday Politics South West


Similar Content

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


Download Subtitles