28/05/2017 Sunday Politics South West


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 28/05/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Good morning and welcome to the Sunday Politics.


New CCTV images are released showing suicide bomber, Salman Abedi,


on the night he attacked Manchester Arena, killing 22 people.


Are the politicians and the security services doing


Theresa May says Britain needs to be "stronger and more resolute"


in confronting extremist views, as she outlines plans


for a new Commission to counter extremism.


We'll be talking to the Security Minister.


Jeremy Corbyn says a Labour government would recruit 1,000


more staff at security and intelligence agencies.


In the South West - the Conservative council leader


who says Mrs May should stick to her manifesto on social care


and not put a limit what we're asked to pay for it.


supporters. In London, we look at what the Conservatives are offering


the capital, having voted Remain. To help guide me through this


morning, I'm joined by Steve Richards, Julia


Hartley-Brewer and Tim Marshall. They'll be sharing their thoughts


on Twitter and you can join So, with a week and a half to go,


the election campaign And some recent polls


suggest the race is just We'll be taking a closer look


at that in just a moment but, first, here are some of the key events over


the next 10 days or so: Tonight at 6pm will see the third


of the party leader interviews. This time it's the SNP's


Nicola Sturgeon facing questions While many across the UK will be


enjoying tomorrow's bank holiday, there will be no break


in campaigning for And in the evening it will be


the turn of Ukip's Paul Nuttall On Tuesday the SNP


publish their manifesto - the last of the major parties to do


so - after last week's Then on Wednesday, the BBC's


Election Debate will see representatives from the seven main


parties debate in front On Thursday, Lib Dem leader Tim


Farron will have his interview... Before Friday's Question Time


special with Theresa May They won't debate each other,


but will take questions consecutively from members


of the audience. The final week of campaigning


is a short one, with politicians cramming in three days


of door-knocking before voters go We'll have an exit poll once


voting has ended at 10pm, with the result expected early


in the morning of June 9th. Well, it's Sunday, and that always


means a spate of new opinion And they make for fascinating,


if a tad confusing, reading. There are five new opinion


polls today, which have the Conservative lead


over Labour anywhere from six points to 14 points.


So, what's going on? Professor John Curtice


is the expert we always turn to at times like this,


and he joins me from Glasgow. Take us through these polls. They


seem to be all over the place? They may seem to be but there is a very


consistent key message. Four of these five polls, if you compare


them with what they were saying before the Conservative manifesto


launch on the 18th, four say the Conservatives are down by two


points. Four of them say the Labour vote is up by two points. A clear


consistent message. The Conservative lead has narrowed. Why does this


matter? It matters because we are now in a position where the leads


are such that the Conservatives can no longer be sure of getting the


landslide majority they want. Some posters suggesting they may be in


trouble and it is going to get rather close. Others suggested is


further apart. There are two major sources of... The Poles agree that


young voters will vote Labour if they vote. Older voters will vote


for the Conservatives. How many of those younger voters will turn out


to vote? The second thing is whether the evidence in the opinion polls


that the Conservatives are advancing more in the North of England and the


Midlands is realised that the ballot box? If it is not realised, the


Tories chances of getting a landslide look remote. If it is,


they could still well indeed get a majority more than 80%. The


Conservatives have lost some ground depending on which opinion poll you


look at. What about the Labour Party? It is gaining ground. It has


been gaining ground ever since week one. They started on 26, they now


average 35. There were a lot of people out there at the beginning of


the campaign who were saying, I usually vote Labour but the truth is


I'm not sure about Jeremy Corbyn. They seem to have decided the Labour


manifesto wasn't so bad. They have looked at Theresa May and have said,


we will stick with Labour. Labour have managed to draw back into the


fold some of their traditional voters who were disenchanted,


together with, crucially, some of those younger voters who have never


voted before, who have always been a particular target for Jeremy Corbyn.


What is your reaction to previous opinion polls and elections weather


has been a feeling that some of the Labour support has been overstated?


This be a worry this time? That is one of the uncertainties that faces


the opinion polls and the rest of us. We had a conference on Friday at


which it was carefully explained that pollsters have been trying to


correct the errors that resulted in an overestimation of Labour support


a couple of years ago, particularly among younger voters. You shouldn't


assume the opinion polls will be wrong this time because they were


wrong the last time. We want in truth know whether or not the polls


have got it right. Even if they are wrong in terms of the level, they


are not wrong in terms of the trend. The trends have been dramatic so


far. A big rise in Tory support early on at the expense of Ukip. And


subsequently, a remarkable rise in Labour support, albeit from a low


initial baseline. This election has already seen quite a lot of


movement. We shouldn't rule out the possibility there will be yet more


in the ten days to come. That is his analysis. Let's talk to


the panel. Julia, how concerned should Conservative headquarters be


at this particular point at what looks like an apparent surge by


Labour? Depends if you want a massive landslide majority or might


not. I assume the Tory party do. Whether anybody thinks that is a


good idea is a different matter. Undoubtedly the manifesto league was


a total disaster. Social care policy and the U-turn. Lots of stuff in the


Labour manifesto was very appealing. The tactic from Sir Lynton Crosby


was clear. It is all about Theresa May. Don't even mention the


candidate or the party. The Labour Party, the candidates are on the


moderate side are saying, don't mention Jeremy Corbyn. This has been


a battle between two big people. The more we have seen of Theresa May,


she has gone down. The more we have seen of Jeremy Corbyn, he has gone


up. If you make it about strong and stable leadership and then you do


something like a massive unprecedented U-turn on a key policy


like social care, the knock is even greater. Do you think that is the


reason for the change in the opinion polls or is Labour gaining some


momentum? I think it is part of the reason. You can understand why the


focus was on her at the beginning because her personal ratings were


stratospheric. What is interesting is all successful leaders basically


cast a spell over voters in the media. None of them are titans. All


of them are flawed. It is a question of when the spell is broken. This is


a first for a leader's spell to be broken during an election campaign.


That was a moment of high significance. The fact the Labour


Party campaign is more robust than many thought it would be is the


other factor. I think it is the combination of the two, that the


trend, as Professor John Curtis said, the trend has been this


narrow. There has not been much campaigning. Local campaigning


resumed on Thursday, national campaigning on Friday. Do you think,


Tim Marshall, that the opinion polls are reflecting what happened in


Manchester and people's thoughts about which party will keep them


safe? No, I think that will come next week. I think it is too soon


for that. It was quite understandable from the V -- the


very beginning for Lynton Crosby to frame the campaign in terms of


Theresa May and Brexit. The electorate can have its own view.


You always have to go back to Clinton's it's the economy stupid


for most of the electorate. It is framed in your electricity bill. It


is framed in your jobs. Both manifestos have got more holes in


them than Swiss cheese. It comes down to which manifesto you believe.


The Labour manifesto makes more promises about things you care about


like your electricity bill. Interesting, but in the end despite


while we thought would be a Brexit election, it has been a lot about


public services. It always comes down to bread-and-butter issues. I


don't think we have quite seen how the terrorist you has played out. We


had the Westminster attack only a couple of months ago. That was


already factored in in terms of who you trust and who you don't trust.


The IRA stuff from Jeremy Corbyn is already factored in. People actually


care about how ordinary government policies affect their lives. Thank


you very much. The election campaign was,


of course, put on hold following the terrorist


attack in Manchester But now that campaigning has


resumed, it's hardly surprising that security


is now a primary concern. The Labour Party has announced it


would recruit 1,000 more Jeremy Corbyn, speaking on ITV at


short while ago, says previous cuts have undermined security.


It seems that the cuts in police numbers have led to some very


dangerous situation is emerging. It is also a question of a community


response as well. So that where, an imam, for example, lets the police


he is concerned about a muddy, I would hope they would act. And I


would hope we have -- and I would hope they would have the resources


to act as well. Joining me now from Leeds


is the Shadow Justice Good morning. You have announced a


thousand more Security and Intelligence agency staff. That is


in line with what the government has already announced and the Shadow


Home Secretary, Diane Abbott, has said you would not be spending any


more money. It doesn't amount to much, does it? That is just one of


the parts of our pledge card on the safer communities. There is also


10,000 extra police, because the Conservatives cut the police by


20,000. That 10,000 extra police would mean in -- and extra police


officer in each neighbourhood. There are 3000 extra put -- prison


officers. Prison staff has been cut by 6000. That is a third. It is not


helping keep communities safer. We are pledging 3000 extra


firefighters. Also, a thousand extra security staff and 500 extra border


guards. There have been 13 areas identified where our borders are not


as secure as they should be. That is the list of numbers you have given.


If we concentrate on the security services, because it was Jeremy


Corbyn he said there will be more police on the streets under Labour.


If the security sources need more resources they should get them. Why


aren't you giving them more? We are committing to a thousand more


police. The Godinet is doing that as well. You are not committing


anything more. The government has not delivered on that promise. We


will deliver on that promise is -- promise. What Jeremy has made very


clear is that you can't do security on the cheap. Austerity has to stop


at the police station door, and at the hospital door. But we will be


giving the resources required to keep our communities safer. So you


will give them the resources and more powers? Well, the police need


to be empowered. But when you listen to what the Police Federation are


saying, they have been speaking out for a long time about the danger


caused by police cuts. And I'm talking not only about terrorism,


not only about acts of extreme violence, but anything from


anti-social behaviour to burglary. Use it more powers. What sort of


powers are you thinking of giving the security services? We need to


listen to them. That is not a power. We need to listen to the


intelligence community and the security service, to the army and


the police, about what they think and how they think our communities


could be made safe. One thing is clear. Cutting the number of police


by 20,000 makes our community is less safe, not more safe. You said


you will listen to the security services. Can voters be reassured


and guaranteed that Jeremy Corbyn will listen to the security services


and the police in terms of more powers if that is what they want?


Until now he has spent his whole political career voting against


measures designed to tackle home-grown and international


terrorism. Jeremy Corbyn's speech on safer communities earlier this week


made clear he is listening to the security services. So he would grant


those new powers. He voted against the terrorism Act in 2000, into


thousands and six. In 2011. And in 2014, the data retention and


investigatory Powers act. Which new powers will he be happy to enact?


Just to say, Jeremy Corbyn along with Theresa May, David Davis and


many Conservative MPs, voted against legislation where they thought it


would be ill-advised, ineffective or actually counter-productive. It is a


very complex situation. What we don't want to do is introduce


hastily prepared laws with one eye to the newspaper headlines, which


can act as recruiting sergeants for terrorism. And actually, when I said


earlier that Jeremy Corbyn made clear in his speech this week that


he has been listening to the security services, what he said


about the international situation has also been said by the former


head of MI5, Stella Rimington, and her predecessor. As well as


president of back -- President Barack Obama.


You say he will give the police and security services the resources and


powers they need. If we look back at some of the legislation Jeremy


Corbyn and others voted against in 2000, it gave the Secretary of State


the -- new powers... Does Jeremy Corbyn still think that is a bad


idea? Jeremy Corbyn along with Theresa May, David Davis and


others... I know you want to bracket it with Conservatives but I'm


interested in what Jeremy Corbyn will do when he says we are going to


be smarter about fighting terrorism. If he's not prepared to vote in


favour of those sorts of measures, or trying to impose restrictions on


suspects, I'm trying to find out what he will do. It is a complex


situation. With this legislation the devil is often in the detail. If it


was a simple and stopping terrorism by voting a piece of legislation


through Parliament, it would have been stopped a long time ago. Sadly


there are no easy answers, and that is recognised by Barack Obama,


Stella Rimington, the head of the MI5, by David Davis and other


Conservative MPs. What is clear, as Jeremy made clear in his speech this


week, is the way things are being done currently is not working. We


have got to be tough on terrorism and the unforgivable acts of murder,


but also tough on the causes of terrorism as well. The sad truth is


there are no easy answers. If there were, the problem would have been


solved a long time ago. If you more security and terrorism officers but


your leader is still uncomfortable with giving them the powers they


need to do their jobs because it is complicated legislation, they will


want to know how you are going to do it. At another stop the War rally in


2014, Jeremy Corbyn said the murder of a charity worker was jingoism. At


the beginning of that speech he mentioned the importance of the


one-minute silence for the memory of Alan Henning who was murdered. What


he has also made clear is responsibility for acts of terrorism


and murder lies with the murder, and something that's really disappointed


me is that the Prime Minister said the other day that in Jeremy


Corbyn's speech on this on Monday, he said... Whether she agrees with


him on his politics, she knows he didn't say that in his speech, but


what troubles me is you have got a Prime Minister who must have sat


down with her advisers earlier that day and said, well I do know he


didn't say that but if we say he did we might win some votes. I think


that is shameful and it shows Theresa May cannot be trusted. These


issues should transcend party politics. We need to pull together


on this issue. Thank you very much. Well, the Conservatives have


promised a new statutory commission The party says it will identify


extremism, including the "non-violent" kind,


and help communities stand up to it. Also this morning,


the Security Minister, Ben Wallace, has attacked internet giants


for failing to tackle terror online, and accused them


of being ruthless money-makers. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.


Those comments you have made about social media companies failing in


their responsibility to take down extremist material, what will you do


to compel them? I think we will look at the range of options. The Germans


have proposed a fine, we are not sure whether that will work, but


there are range of pressures we can put onto some of these companies.


Some have complied. In the article in the Sunday Telegraph today I did


say it is not all of them. They are not immune to pressure. We can do


internationally, and the Prime Minister urged at the G7 and


international response. I think there are a range of issues. We


could change the law. You mentioned the G7, and rhetoric and warm words


are fine to an extent but it is action people want. If you have made


these impassioned remarks in the newspapers about them failing to do


the job, people want to know what powers do you have now to say to


social media companies take down this material? We have an act that


was recently passed. In this area we have just finished consulting on one


of the areas we could use but we cannot pre-empt the consultation. We


have right now officials from my department over in the United States


with American officials working with CSPs because what we see is that


they do respond to pressure. The best example is we think they have


the technology and the capability to change the algorithms they use that


maximise profit over safety. But you are relying on these companies


devoting more resources to this line of work that you would like to see


them do. Have you got any evidence they will do that? They said, only a


few weeks ago before the election was called the Home Secretary hosted


a Round Table with them. We have evidence they are trying to improve


it. A few are refusing to or being difficult, and that's why the Prime


Minister was right to step up not only the language she was using but


to say we are not going to allow this to progress any more. People


will be worried about who will make the judgment about what is


unacceptable and what should be taken down. Let me show you this,


which was shared widely across social media. If you read that quote


you could argue it is at the same end if you like. The man in the


picture is a terrorist hate preacher, the jihadist who was


killed in Yemen by the Americans. Is this the sort of thing you would be


demanding social media companies take down? You have to look at the


context it was deployed in. I could show you some of the 270,000 pieces


we have had removed since 2010 from internet sites that have been


extreme. The big issue is not often the individual image, it is the way


these companies set up the algorithms to link you. If you were


watching that on Facebook delivered to you, perhaps you would like to


look at this, because that's how they set it up. If you go onto


YouTube, you can get let down the path from looking at Manchester... I


understand your example, but from a practical level are you expecting


media companies to take down that sort of posts if it appeared? Yes...


You are? Who will make the decisions about what will radicalise young


people that could lead someone down the path to let off a bomb? If I


invite your viewers to look at the work the Guardian have done on


Facebook guidance, to say for example it is OK to produce videos


or broadcast videos of seven-year-olds being bullied as


long as it wasn't accompanied by captions, I don't think you need to


be an expert to say that is not acceptable. Something more worrying


for you as a journalist and me as a politician, another set of guidance


that says... I think this is quite menacing... That certain people


don't deserve our protection. That includes journalists and politicians


and people who are controversial. So I think there is more work to be


done but at the end of the day it is the pathway this stuff leads to. It


is more about examining how much progress you can make. The


Government says there are up to 23,000 potential terrorist attackers


in this country, 3000 of those posing a serious threat being


monitored. That is pretty disturbing, these are big numbers.


Yes, and the tragedy of Manchester shows this is not about failure, it


is about the scale of the challenge we face and that is why it is


important that alongside people is powers. Should you double the size


of MI5 for example? We have increased year-on-year in real terms


not only the money but the numbers of people in MI5. It is now 2000 we


have committed to increased to... Before the attack. Before our


manifesto we had recruited, we have increased the whole of government


spending on counterterrorism from ?11.7 billion in 2015 up to 15.7


billion. Would you expand the number of people in MI5? I have asked them


on a regular basis if they have the resource if they are happy with it,


and the answer comes back time and time again, yes we are. You have


quite extensive powers at your disposal, the question is if you are


using them. Measures were introduced in 2012 to replace control orders,


but they have rarely been used. Only seven are currently in operation.


Why? Because there are a whole... It is just one tool in the tool box.


Other powers we use, we take away people's passports if we think they


are about to travel. How many? I cannot comment, it is a sensitive


issue. Plenty of people are finding their passport has been removed and


at the same time we strip people of citizenship to make sure they don't


come back. On top of that, because of the investment made in GCHQ, MI5


and counterterrorism, we have more powers and more ability to monitor


them. But are you using them enough? Only seven TPIMs are in operation.


You won't give me any of the other measures at your disposal, but if


they are only in single figures, that doesn't seem to compare with


the numbers who are being monitored. Also, we have to strike a balance


between... We have to satisfy the court so we have to make sure there


is enough evidence to restrict people's freedoms. TPIMs do all


sorts of good things to keep people safe. It sends people away from


where they live, it tags them... I tell you why they are better. The


control orders were on track to be struck down by the courts because


one of the things we have to satisfy is the courts but we also have to


satisfy, we have to make sure we get the balance between the community is


right and the measures we take. If we alienate our communities, we


won't get the intelligence that allows us to catch it. There is no


point in having more police and intelligence services if you don't


give them the powers to do the job. Jeremy Corbyn were licensed James


Bond to do precisely nothing. And -- thank you.


The revelation that the Manchester suicide bomber, 22-year-old


Salman Abedi, was born in this country has raised fresh concerns


about the effectiveness of the UK's counter-extremism policy.


In a moment we'll be talking to two people who've spent their careers


investigating radicalisation in the UK.


Douglas Murray, of the Henry Jackson Society,


and Sara Khan, author of The Battle for British Islam and CEO


of the counter-extremism organisation Inspire.


We asked both for a personal take on how to confront the problem


of Islamist extremism. First up, here's Douglas Murray.


Even after all these dead, all this mourning and defiance,


We remain stuck in the John Lennon response to terrorism -


Our politicians still refuse to accurately identify


the sources of the problem, and polite society


This country gave asylum to the Libyan parents of Salman Abedi.


Their son repaid that generosity by killing 22 British people,


one for each year of life this country had given him.


We need to think far more deeply about all this.


Eastern Europe doesn't have an Islamic terrorism problem


France has the worst problem because it has the most Islam.


Are we ever going to draw any lessons from this?


For the time being, the game is to be as inoffensive as possible.


The rot isn't just within the Muslim communities.


Consider all those retired British officials and others who shill,


and are in the pay of the Saudis and other foreign states,


even while they pump the extreme versions of Islam into our country.


It is high time we became serious too.


Islamist extremism is flourishing in our country.


We're failing to defeat it, so what can we do about it?


Whenever I say we must counter those Muslim organisations


who are promoting hatred, discrimination, and sometimes even


violence, I'm often either ignored by some politicians out


of a misplaced fear of cultural sensitivity, or I find myself


experiencing abuse by some of my fellow Muslims.


These groups and their sympathisers tour Muslim communities,


hold events, and have hundreds of thousands of followers


Yet there is little counter challenge to their toxic


anti-Western narrative, which includes opposition


I've seen politicians and charities partner


with and support some of these voices and groups.


Many anti-racist groups will challenge those on the far


right but not Muslim hate preachers, in the erroneous belief that to do


But it's Islamophobic not to challenge them because it implies


Following the attack on Monday, it cannot be business as usual.


We must counter those who seek to divide us.


Sarah Karen Allen Douglas Murray join me know. You wrote a book,


strange death of Europe. What did you mean in your film when you said,


let's get serious? Several things. Let me give you one example. The


young man who carried out this atrocious attack was a student at


Salford University for two years. He was on a campus which is, from its


leadership to its student leadership, opposes all aspects of


the government's only counter extremism programme. They boast they


are boycotting it. They always did this. The university he was at was


against the only counter extremism policy this state has. This is just


one example of a much bigger problem. What are you suggesting?


Shut down the University? Force them to change their policies? I think in


the case of Salford, which discourages students from reporting


Islamic extremism... When you discover you have produced a suicide


bomber in Manchester, you should be held responsible. What do you say to


that? I think it is quite clear from I am experienced there have been


politicians who have undermined Prevent, community organisations,


Islamist groups who have been at the forefront of undermining and


countering Prevent, but also wider counter extremism measures. Islamist


-- Islamist extremes and has flourished in this country. If


Summer Rae had given us a crystal ball ten years ago and said, look


forward and you will see hundreds of people leave this country to join


Isis, we will have hundreds of people convicted of Islamist


offences, I think we would have been quite shocked that things have got


worse as opposed to getting better. Douglas Murray, the essence of your


argument when you made the comparison between the numbers of


Muslims in other countries is that we have too much Islam in Britain?


The aunt Tilly Muslim Brotherhood give is that the answer to


absolutely everything is Islam. Less Islam is a good thing. Let me


finish. The Islamic world is in the middle of a very serious problem. It


has been going on since the beginning. I think it is not worth


continuing to risk our own security simply in order to be politically


correct. I would disagree with Douglas on that. Nobody is going to


deny that since the end of the 20th century there has been a rise in


Islamist extreme terror organisations. Yes, there is a


crisis within contemporary Islam, but there is a class. There are


competing claims about what the faith stands for. While we are


seeing Islamist terror organisations, leading theologians


are saying that the concept of a caliphate is outdated. Muslims


should be adopting a human rights culture. I entirely agree with that.


There are obviously people trying to counter that. I would urge us to


take the long view. In the history of Islam there have been many


reformers. Most of the time they have ended a up being the ones on


the brunt of the violence. I deeply resent what you and others do in


this country. I want you to win. But they are a Billy good minority. A


poll last year found that two thirds of British Muslims found they would


not report a family member they found to be involved in extremism to


the police. You are proposing more Draconian measures. I wish they


could win. We should do everything we can to support people like that.


What we should recognise the scale of the problem is beyond our current


understanding. You counter radicalisation on a university


campus or online? Discussion we had with Ben Wallace about the material


that is out there. If we pursue in a hard-line way perhaps the sort of


thing Douglas Murray is suggesting, gone is freedom of speech, gone is


freedom of debate and discussion? The best way to counter extremism is


through the prism of human rights. We cannot abandon our human rights


to fight extremism. Where I think we are going wrong, where there is a


gap, is the lack of counter work to challenge Islamist ideals. How many


people are going to say we need to counter that strict narrative? That


is where we are not doing enough work. What about the human rights


point, that you cannot take away people's human rights? I'm not


suggesting that. I'm suggesting we do things that ensure that 22 people


don't get blown up on an average Monday again, OK? Dissent to be


opposed to people want to blow up our daughters is not opposing human


rights. If you're taking government money and you are an institution


like Salford University you should be held responsible for not


cooperating with standard security measures. You can challenge


extremism without abandoning human rights. We have got to actually


counter the Islamist narrative. We're not doing enough. This is not


about closing down free speech. This is encouraging it. This is the most


effective way of countering the Islamist narrative. Why isn't it


doing better? A number of reasons. One is there is a denial taking


place. A lot of apologetics. Part of it is the way we talk about Muslims


in this country. We use the term Muslim community as if they are


homogenous. There is a positive trend but there is a negative trend


among British Muslims. We need to counter those promoting the idea


that Muslims are part of a collective identity. I agree. It is


also the case there is massive push back because a lot of Muslims are


defending the faith in this country. We think we can push them down a


better path but they are defending absolutely everything. We need to


get real about that. Thank you very much.


It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.


We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now


Hello, I'm Lucie Fisher. minutes, the Week Ahead.


Coming up on the Sunday Politics here in the South West...


As Boris comes back to Cornwall, the Brexit questions


And for the next 20 minutes, I'm joined by the Ukip candidate


for Truro and Falmouth, Duncan Odgers, and Labour candidate


Sue Dann, who's standing in Plymouth Moor View.


Let's start with Jeremy Corbyn's speech making a link


between Britain's military action abroad and the risk


The Labour leader's comments prompted a strong response


from local Tory candidate and former army officer Johnny Mercer.


I just do not accept that doing nothing is always the answer.


I think Jeremy Corbyn's speech today, it belies


These terrorists, they use that narrative after they have done


something, you know, things like the World Trade Center,


It's just making things up to get elected, and the fact that this guy


could be Prime Minister in two weeks is just extraordinary.


Strong words. Do you stand by your leader's comments? I do, because


when you listen to what Jeremy Corbyn said, he said that our


foreign policy is part of a narrative, so when we go into other


countries like Iraq or Afghanistan or what is happening in Syria or


Libya, there is a void, a space the terrorists are getting into, and


what we need to do is make sure that the close that, and we have to do


that in many ways. So he is not saying you should do nothing? Now,


he is not saying that, he absolutely he is not saying that, he absolutely


acknowledges we have a foreign policy where we have to support can


do things which support other countries in their fight against


terror. Meanwhile at the Ukip manifesto


launch a question on the topic from the BBC's Laura Kuennsberg drew


outbursts from the cloud including south west Ukip


MEP William Dartmouth. It sounds like you're near as dammit


blaming the Prime Minister for this attack and the circumstances that


led to it. This kind of heckling pleasing to


the hands of opposing parties, it sets you up as roadie. That is the


wrong word, I think it proves with Ukip, the passionate politics we


believe in. See you think it is acceptable? I think it was a little


rude to interrupt, but I believe the passions can overcome people on a


subject. SWAT about this question Laura was suggesting, that Paul


Nuttall was effectively blaming Theresa May for the attack, and they


consequence leading up to it? I do not think he was blaming her, that


is a slant on the question, he was talking about the policies on


various governments that have not protected people effectively.


One of the South West's Conservative council leaders has criticised his


party's apparent U-turn on whether to limit what we're each


Theresa May now says she'd consult on a cap.


But the leader of Teignbridge District Council says


the Conservative manifesto suggestion of allowing the state


to take everything but our last ?100,000 would be a fair way


to spread the cost of care between generations.


At St Andrews House care home in Ashburton, much talk


about Mrs May's position on social care.


I think she is hard, Theresa May, you know...


Well, I think you've got to know a lot about politics


I mean, a lot of people talk as if they understand it,


He is also a Conservative councillor.


But it's not just his residents who don't understand how much


a Conservative government would charge them for their care.


I mean, there is an argument to say that a cap is a better thing.


Or do we go for ?100,000 in the reverse, really?


So you either keep your 100,000 or it is capped at 100,000.


This week, Theresa May said there could be a cap


There would be a consultation, she said.


And that consultation will include an absolute limit


on the amount people have to pay for their care costs.


But no mention of a cap in the Conservative manifesto,


which said we would be charged up to our last ?100,000.


Secretary of State, can we just ask you very quickly


When did Theresa May change her mind?


The way that modern care homes are trying to support people living


Jeremy Christophers supported the manifesto policy


and was disappointed when his leader appeared to water it down.


If it were me, I would probably have stuck to it and come up


with reasoned arguments and evidence as to why this works better


for people than the previous scheme which only delivered ?23,000


This delivers ?100,000, but for whatever reason it is not


a comfortable conversation with the public at this time.


But it will have to be held sometime.


The Lib Dems are promising a dedicated care tax and a


Labour is offering a national care service with an extra 8 billion


for social care over the next five years.


Ukip pledges an extra 2 billion for social care.


The residents here hope the debate about how much they have to pay


And to discuss this we're joined by the Conservative Candidate


Welcome. It is confusing people this issue. Can you clean it up, will


there be a cap on what people have too pay on social care if the Tories


wind? That is going to be a consultation on a cap. What is


important to remember is the policy is about preserving ?100,000 of


people's assets rather than 23,000 at the moment. And making sure that


is an easier decision about whether to move into residential care or


not. That will not know necessarily lead to the necessity of selling a


home. Do you think there should be a cap? We need to look at it and I


think it should be a progressive system. I think it should be capped


and I think it will be, but it depends on how we want to do that.


We have to make sure there is bitterness between the generations,


but also fairness for those who have scrimped and saved and put all their


money into a House throughout their lives. How can you have a Papin the


?100,000 limit? It isn't the same thing. ?100,000 is the preservation


of assets. A cap is an entirely separate thing. SWAT is the


Conservative Party's policy on this? To have a consultation to look at


all the aspects of it, to see you how to make it as progressive as we


can, as they are as we can make it. Has that cleared it up for you? Not


really. This is a U-turn and policy, this is a crisis created by the


Conservatives over the last few years. ?4.6 billion has been taken


out of the social care budget, and this has been dropped in on two


local councils who have not been able to fund social care properly.


Celebrities pledging to spend a billion extra on social care over


the next five years. How do you pay for that? And an extra billion into


the first year as well. But being able to find it is a different


thing. We have been clear in how we have costed the manifesto, the


day-to-day funding of things we have to do have been costed by increased


taxes elsewhere. We have to pay for the national social care service


that looks after our elderly as we get older. And it cost to it.


Duncan, Ukip pledging to spend 2 billion extra on social care. Is


that enough? Labour said 2 billion, when you match it up with funding,


will make a great deal to social care. We have already listen to the


Conservatives who say that consultation means once we are


elected we will do what we like anyway. But she has tried to be more


honest than put up some ideas upfront. Green butterfat honesty on


a complete U-turn to save bolts? -- but is that honesty? She is


absolutely clear that we have to address this issue, the sort of


money we have been hearing about is not going to be enough from the


Labour point of view. That will just pay for raising the minimum wage.


Aside from that, if the Tories election campaign turning into a


shambles? A newspaper said... Should you have gone off message? Theresa


May is the only person who can be trusted to pursue a good and


constructive Brexit process. Was at a mistake, then, to talk about fox


hunting and social care issues? Social care issues underfunding


depend on as having a strong economy, and we will only get there


if we have Theresa May at the negotiating table. Is that something


you're hearing, that Brexit is the key issue? No, in Plymouth the key


issue is things that affects peoples lives. I talk more about the NHS,


funding for schools, more about making sure that people do not have


to go to food banks and they are getting paid a proper living wage,


which the Labour Party will deliver on, I talk about winter fuel


allowance, why we're not looking after pensions. Those are the issues


that are really affecting lives on the doorstep. On the U-turn, we need


to have a strong and stable leader, and it seems that whenever Theresa


May is put under any pressure about a policy that is going to be


difficult to deliver, she changes her mind. Is this the strong


negotiating skills we will need for the Brexit table? Is this not a


strong and stable leader? I know Theresa May well, and she is a


careful and deliberate politician. She will absolutely fight for us in


the negotiations. Thank you very much for joining us.


The Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson was electioneering


It was the first time he'd been to the county since his visit


in the Brexit battlebus, and the people of St Ives were keen


to ask him what money Cornwall can hope for after we leave.


By 2020, Cornwall will have received more than ?1.3 billion


Beneficiaries have included the Eden Project, a new university


for the county, and the roll-out of superfast broadband.


One of the next big projects is the dualling of one of the last


long stretches of single carriageway on Cornwall's Main


After last year's Brexit vote, the government moved reasonably


quickly to guarantee this latest tranche of funding until 2020.


What we're doing here is guaranteeing that projects that


have already been signed or that are going to be signed


over the coming months, even if the payment of those funds


runs on beyond the time we leave the EU, will be guaranteed


by the British Government to the recipients.


Beyond 2020, if Cornwall was still in the EU,


it would almost certainly qualify for another large chunk of cash.


When the Prime Minister visited Cornwall earlier


in the election campaign, I asked her if the Conservatives


would replace that with the UK Government money.


It is not just about the issue of funding, it is about our modern


It's about ensuring we are promoting and encouraging the growth


of the economy across the whole of the United Kingdom,


This week Foreign Secretary and Brexit pin-up Boris Johnson


You don't want to leave the European Union.


You're doing everything you possibly can to screw it up.


Do you really think Theresa May, who does U-turn after U-turn,


who has actually done one again today, is going to do


Mr Johnson was at least happy to talk to the BBC,


but not necessarily to clarify the funding issue.


Half the money that comes back under our control is currently


already spent in the UK, that will continue to be spent.


There will be another ?10 billion coming back,


that will be additional cash that we can spend on priorities such


as the NHS and Cornwall and all sorts of things.


All being well, the EU funded work to dual the A30 from Carl


and crossed to Chadlington will begin in 2019 - 2020.


Precisely the time at which the road ahead for similar projects


And to discuss this we're joined by the Lib Dem candidate


in Truro and Falmouth, Rob Nolan.


Welcome to the programme. How much of a problem is it for the Lib Dems


that Cornwall voted to leave, yet you're asking for a second


referendum? Brexit has the potential to be an economic disaster for


Cornwall. We receive million pounds a year -- ?100 million a year from


the EU to fund the University, universities, to get us into an


exciting IT economy. Do you think if there was a second referendum,


Cornwall may vote differently? Well we need to know what the deal is. We


need to know we will keep the funding beyond 2020, and what the


deal is. There are rumours that Mrs May might be prepared to give away


fishing rights for banking fishing rights for banking


concessions. Our fishermen voted to get rid of their water. They will be


feeling betrayed everything she gives it away to help bankers in


London. Duncan, Brexit could be a disaster for Cornwall and its


fishermen. It could be, which is why Ukip are holding them to account.


Theresa May has only promised goal to 12 miles, and she has not said


she will take the full 200 miles back. -- has only promised to go to


12 miles. What will happen after 2020, when there is no more European


funding? As far as Ukip is concerned, the money that went to


Europe and was given back to us that we did not have a choice to choose,


the money will be available to put back into Cornwall, which is down to


the elected representatives in London to ensure that happened. Does


that sound right to you? We do not hold a lot of faith in our elected


representatives in London. We need the funding and have been told we


will come back to you until you what we have negotiated. We want a second


referendum on the deal. I do not trust Theresa May to settle this. I


do not trust parliament, who seem to do not trust parliament, who seem to


falling into line. We need the falling into line. We need the


good deal, paid enough, they will good deal, paid enough, they will


vote to continue. Ukip is the best party to scrutinise that? I do not


trust Ukip at all. So why did you approach Ukip to stand as a


candidate in 2015? I did not, that is all I. What would Labour do for


Cornwall for parts who currently receive a European funding? We need


to have a vision of what a strong Brexit means, we need to make sure


we protect jobs, that we have prosperity, that our businesses in


to have strong economy and they can to have strong economy and they can


invest into companies now. But can you guarantee money passed 2020? Is


Cornwall going to lose out? I do not have a magic wand. I look at the


money going into Cornwall from Europe and it is a big sum of money.


So we need to know from the government what is going to happen,


and I totally agree with you about the funding coming out of Cornwall


and other areas and how it is going to be replaced, and we have not got


that vision, but what we need to that vision, but what we need to


know is how the government will keep the jobs, prosperity and the economy


growing in the south-west because it is dependent on funding. The


government talks about a value for money test. Has the money that came


in from Europe been wasted? We have the highest number of start-up


businesses in the UK, businesses coming along. I went to the Cornish


business there, and they described the area as a potential silicon


valley. There is real potential to grow the economy down there. We need


that money, and when the government says there are going to test it,


really the mean cuts. That is all they ever do to Cornwall, they take


away 25 million out of schools, underfund our NHS, and value for


money means cuts. But Cornwall voted to leave. Did they bite the hand


that feeds you? The issue here is we do not have an MEP. We do not have a


Cornish MEP that could have been explaining the benefits of being in


the EU. We have a healthy scepticism of central government, and Russell


seems a long way away. Is it a hard sale to get those who voted to leave


to agree to a second referendum? I think they would be happy to get a


second chance on the deal? Bid -- a second chance at the deal. We have


voted to get out, let us get out. We never voted for the second


referendum. We need to discuss the deal, get discussing it. In Falmouth


are worrying about their funding being cut. -- a school in Falmouth.


of general election candidates on the BBC website.


We also have an election special here on BBC One on Tuesday night.


Now our regular round-up of the political week in 60 seconds.


Cornwall Council elects Lib Dem Adam Painter


as its new leader in partnership with the independence.


Cornwall stands to lose more than any other area through Brexit,


so it is really important that we stand together.


Armed police will patrol the streets of the Southwest for first time.


It's a response to the Manchester attack.


It is normal patrolling, but it is now overtly


But I would ask the public to be reassured and not put off by it.


Unpaid council tax has lost councils in the south-west more


than ?150 million over the last five years.


Why don't they pay if they are working?


Councils are having real problems and they are having to put council


tax up to much higher levels than they used to.


And the region's Headteachers are sending out thousands of letters


calling on parents to challenge election candidates


It just encourages you to go and ask the right questions


Let us look at the issue of school funding. Our headteachers right to


politicise this issue? Do you think they were right to send out


thousands of letters to ask parents to get in touch with the election


candidate and ask questions on the doorstep? Yes, I do. The last Labour


government made education the core of its manifesto, and put a lot of


money into schools. I am a local school governor, and we had to make


redundancies at the beginning of the year because of school funding


crisis. And so yes, it is political, but it is our children's future. We


should be able to stand up and say why we're cutting money from


schools, and we would not do that. Duncan, does that sound like Ukip's


idea? Investment in schools is important. How can you cut


immigration if you're not educating your own people to provide the


skills we need for the future? We're cutting food for primary school


children, which helps their education. 6.9 p for breakfast is


not enough. We have to invest in the children because they are the


future, and skills is what we need. We have run out of ten. -- run out


of re-elected. Is the only choice for


strong and stable leadership. Now, after the Manchester attack,


will the final week of election campaigning different in tone from


what came before? My panel are here. Tim Marshall, it will be very front


of Centre for the next few days. Is that a good thing for the election


if it is going to be framed to who do you feel more safe with? It is


inevitable but I think it will only be part of the election. As I said


before the opt out, for many voters this is also about economics,


unemployment. It is not all about Brexit, nor is it only about


security. What it will do, I hope, is get the tone of the debate right.


Although I have already seen the tone being lowered. I wasn't


impressed with Mr Corbyn's speech last week blaming it on a foreign


policy, which is a wafer thin analysis of what is going on.


Inappropriate timing too soon? No, I think the argument is utter


nonsense. I don't want to attack just one side. The Conservative


party, I've forgotten which minister has already said that we would be


safer under a Tory Prime Minister, it has got nothing to do with Labour


or Tory government, the next Islamic attack. It is to do with jihadist


ideology, not party policies. You raise an important issue about tone.


It also points to a broader argument, one we were having


earlier, has politics been two courses with this issue of


extremism? Has the conversation about it tiptoed around some of the


sensitive issues? And by the media. You highlight the problem of this


being part of the election campaign by saying, has politics been too


cautious? Who do you mean by politics? And in an election


campaign there is a duty to be a divide, and adamant about values,


policies etc. Security is an issue that transcends those political


divides. So I think it is deeply unhealthy. It is nobody's fault a


tragedy occurred. But if you ask me does it help or enhance an election


debate? Emphatically not. A tragic event brings politics, as you call


it, together. Security is an issue that is complex and doesn't divide


neatly. Elections are political battles, by definition. So I think


the coming together of this, a tragedy occurred anyway, but it is


an unfortunate context. Do you agree or do you think this is a time to


talk about these issues? Is it a time to review the level of


argument? This is a political debate. I personally think the


politicians should have been out and about on Wednesday. There is no


wrong time to get it right. We mustn't let the terrorists affect


our way of life. But they have when we disrupt the election campaign. It


may be party political. But for a lot of voters, including me, I want


to hear from party leaders. What do you plan to do about this? Right


now, I've not heard anything that suggests any of these parties have


got to grips with the real problem, which is that we are not actually


tackling the problem in our midst. Douglas Murray touched on it


earlier. We have not even come to grips with the scale of the problem.


Does Labour have a grip -- Power Point in terms of terrorist


legislation? It is complicated. And not all of it has worked or is used


enough by government? It is another example where this doesn't work in


an election debate because David Davis has opposed a lot of this


terrorism legislation. He is now heading Brexit. There is a civil


liberties argument which I personally have doubts about. Again,


it brings people together from the major parties. And Corbyn didn't


actually say it was the cause of terrorism, British foreign policy,


but it helped to facilitate terrorism, which is a different


argument. Again, that would be supported by some Tories as well.


That is why it is difficult in an election campaign for this issue to


dominate. The front page of the Sunday Times talks about a campaign


relaunch, which may not, grow as a great surprise following the social


care fiasco. Do we know what that will entail? It sounds like Boris


Johnson will play a role. The whole point is it was all about Theresa


May and it turns out that is not quite good enough. The more we have


seen of Theresa May, the less impressive she has looked. Certainly


the Andrew Neil interview just repeating the same thing again and


again. Voters don't like that. They like people who are honest and


actually engage with them. When we see beat interviews in the next few


days, I think it will be interesting to see if she changes tack and tries


to engage with what people are asking. If it is back to leadership


and Brexit, and the economy, will that be more comfortable ground? I


think so. I understand framing it in terms of Brexit. But she has got to


broaden it out. I think that is why she is broadening it out. I don't


think the tragic events will absolutely dominate. That would be a


small victory for terrorism. This is a country of 65 million people with


an awful lot of issues. We have 65 million votes, well, 65 million


people with opinions in two weeks. It is quite a long campaign. There


is still time to go. What do you think Labour will be focusing on


from now on? I would imagine they will look very closely at where they


are well ahead in the opinion polls and focus on that relentlessly.


Public services, NHS etc. And try to get it off as soon as possible from


security and fees is used which, on one level at least, appear to be a


gift to the Conservatives. I assume that is what they are going to do.


But this is a very unpredictable campaign where nothing has gone


according to plan. Let's look ahead. On Wednesday evening we have got an


election debate. It is in Cambridge. Leaders of some of the parties.


Amber Rudd will be representing the Conservatives. We don't know yet who


will represent Labour. Today we have had Amber Road and Diane Abbott


against each other on Andrew Marr. Let's have a look. I think there is


something to be said for a Home Secretary who has actually worked in


the Home Office. I work in the home office for nearly three years as a


graduate trainee. This government has always felt that urgency. That


is why we have been putting in additional money. It is significant


that the commission for extremism in the manifesto was put in before


Manchester. We need to do more. You voted against prescribing those


groups. Because there were groups on that list I deemed to be dissidents


rather than terrorist organisations. We are making good progress with the


companies who put in place encryption. We will continue to


build on that. It was 34 years ago. I had a rather splendid Afro at the


time. I don't have the same hairstyle. And I don't have the same


views. It is 34 years on. The hairstyle has gone. Some of the


views have gone. So you no longer, you regret what you said about the


IRA? The hairstyle has gone, the views have gone. I would say to


Diane Abbott that I have changed my hairstyle are few times in 34 years


but I have not changed my view of how we keep the British public safe.


Let's get away from hairstyle sides talk about the prospect of the two


of them taking part in the election debate. Would you like to see that?


On one level I would like to see it and another the level I would like


to see an intelligent debate. I'm glad I never had an Afro or


supported the IRA. Whenever Diane Abbott steps out in a TV studio or a


radio studio, Labour haemorrhage votes. She cannot say things like my


regret supporting this or that legislation. She is an absolute


disaster. If Labour put her up, they are beyond mad. Who do you think


Labour should put up? By the way, I did have an Afro! I based my whole


log on Kevin Keegan and it was good. That is the wrong question. I will


explain why. The Labour campaign, it seems to me there were only five or


six people put up. That is the fault of others who refused to take part.


It also shows the degree to which the current leadership can only rely


on five or six people. I would imagine we are talking about a pool


of five or six people. As for my judgment as to who the best public


performer is in that pool, it would be by some margin John McDonnell,


who is a very good interviewee and performer. I think he is a very good


performer. It would come back to the economy at some point, presumably.


But then it comes back to the IRA. I don't think the debate will be very


illuminating. I think if Amber Rudd is there, Diane Abbott should be


there. I think the leaders should be debating. Some people say it is


froth. I think the leader -- the electorate gets a sense of the


leaders. On haircuts, I would like to thank both of them are talking


about the haircuts. I am looking forward to tomorrow's papers and the


theme that will run through the week. Let's not finish on the hair.


Thank you very much for being our guests. That is it for today. Thank


the panel for Jonny May. Andrew Neil will be back next weekend. And I


will be back on BBC Two on Tuesday. That is at midday with more daily


politics. In the meantime, have a very lovely bank holiday. From all


of us here, bye-bye. As voters prepare to go to the polls


to choose who represents them the SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon joins


me for the Andrew Neil Interviews. One minute to get the


food on the plate. ..team them up with


a Michelin starred chef, putting their reputation


on the line. ..which team will have the


recipe for success? One minute to get the


food on the plate.


Download Subtitles