:00:42. > :00:45.It's Sunday morning, this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:46. > :00:48.The police believe the Westminster attacker Khalid Masood acted alone,
:00:49. > :00:50.but do the security services have the resources and
:00:51. > :00:53.We'll ask the leader of the House of Commons.
:00:54. > :00:57.As Theresa May prepares to trigger Brexit, details of
:00:58. > :01:03.Will a so-called Henry VIII clause give the Government too much power
:01:04. > :01:06.Ukip's only MP, Douglas Carswell, quits the party saying it's "job
:01:07. > :01:13.In the South... and the party's
:01:14. > :01:15.The regeneration that's coming to a town near you,
:01:16. > :01:19.but is it all a bit similar-looking, with too many high-end shopping
:01:20. > :01:31.And with me - as always - the best and the brightest political
:01:32. > :01:34.panel in the business - Toby Young, Polly Toynbee
:01:35. > :01:40.and Janan Ganesh, who'll be tweeting throughout the programme.
:01:41. > :01:42.First, it was the most deadly terrorist attack
:01:43. > :01:46.The attacker was shot dead trying to storm Parliament,
:01:47. > :01:48.but not before he'd murdered four people and injured 50 -
:01:49. > :01:52.one of those is still in a critical condition in hospital.
:01:53. > :01:54.His target was the very heart of our democracy,
:01:55. > :01:57.the Palace of Westminster, and he came within metres
:01:58. > :02:00.of the Prime Minister and senior Cabinet ministers.
:02:01. > :02:04.Without the quick actions of the Defence Secretary's
:02:05. > :02:05.close protection detail, fortuitously in the vicinity
:02:06. > :02:14.at the time, the outcome could have been even worse.
:02:15. > :02:22.Janan Ganesh it is four days now, getting on. What thoughts should we
:02:23. > :02:26.be having this weekend? First of all, Theresa May's Parliamentary
:02:27. > :02:29.response was exemplary. In many ways, the moment she arrived as
:02:30. > :02:34.prime minister and her six years as Home Secretary showed a positive
:02:35. > :02:36.way. No other serving politician is as steeped in counterterror and
:02:37. > :02:41.national security experience as she is and I think it showed. As to
:02:42. > :02:45.whether politics is going now, it looks like the Government will put
:02:46. > :02:51.more pressure on companies like Google and Facebook to monitor
:02:52. > :02:54.sensor radical content that flows through their channels, and I wonder
:02:55. > :02:59.whether beyond that the Government, not just our Government but around
:03:00. > :03:04.the world, will start to open this question of, during a terror attack,
:03:05. > :03:08.as it is unfolding, should there be restrictions on what can appear on
:03:09. > :03:11.social media? I was on Twitter at the time last week, during the
:03:12. > :03:18.attack, and people were posting things which may have been useful to
:03:19. > :03:20.the perpetrators, not on that occasion but future occasions.
:03:21. > :03:26.Should there be restrictions on what and how much people can post while
:03:27. > :03:30.an attack is unfolding? I think we have learned that this is like the
:03:31. > :03:33.weather, it is going to happen, it is going to happen all over the
:03:34. > :03:39.world and in every country and we deal with it well, we deal with it
:03:40. > :03:44.stoically, perhaps we are more used to it than some. We had the IRA for
:03:45. > :03:47.years, we know how to make personal risk assessments, how to know the
:03:48. > :03:53.chances of being in the wrong place at the wrong time are infinitesimal,
:03:54. > :03:57.so people in London didn't say, I'm not going to go to the centre of
:03:58. > :04:02.London today, everything carried on just the same. Because we know that
:04:03. > :04:08.the odds of it, being unlucky, are very small. Life is dangerous, this
:04:09. > :04:14.is another very small risk and it is the danger of being alive. I think
:04:15. > :04:18.from an Isis Islamist propaganda point of view, it showed just what a
:04:19. > :04:23.poor target London and the House of Commons is, and it is hard to
:04:24. > :04:26.imagine the emergency services and local people, international
:04:27. > :04:33.visitors, reacting much better than they did. And the fact that our
:04:34. > :04:37.Muslim mayor was able to make an appearance so quickly afterwards
:04:38. > :04:41.shows, I think, that we are not city riddled with anti-Islamic prejudice.
:04:42. > :04:45.It couldn't really have been a better advertisement for the values
:04:46. > :04:48.that is attacking. OK, thank you for that.
:04:49. > :04:50.So, four days after the attack, what more do we know
:04:51. > :04:54.The police have made 11 arrests, but only one remains
:04:55. > :04:59.Here's Adam with the latest on the investigation.
:05:00. > :05:04.According to a police timeline, that's how long it took
:05:05. > :05:06.Khalid Masood to drive through a crowd on Westminster
:05:07. > :05:13.to crash his car into Parliament's perimeter...
:05:14. > :05:16.to fatally stab PC Keith Palmer, before being shot by a bodyguard
:05:17. > :05:27.The public are leaving tributes to the dead at Westminster.
:05:28. > :05:32.The family of PC Palmer released a statement saying:
:05:33. > :05:35."We would like to express our gratitude to the people
:05:36. > :05:37.who were with Keith in his last moments and who were
:05:38. > :05:40.There was nothing more you could have done,
:05:41. > :05:43.you did your best and we are just grateful he was not alone."
:05:44. > :05:47.Investigators say Masood's motive may have gone to the grave with him.
:05:48. > :05:50.Officers think he acted alone, despite reports he spent a WhatsApp
:05:51. > :05:57.The Home Secretary now has such encrypted messaging
:05:58. > :06:02.There should be no place for terrorists to hide.
:06:03. > :06:05.We need to make sure that organisations like WhatsApp,
:06:06. > :06:08.and there are plenty of others like that, don't provide a secret
:06:09. > :06:11.place for terrorists to communicate with each other.
:06:12. > :06:15.It used to be that people would steam open envelopes or just
:06:16. > :06:24.listen in on phones when they wanted to find out what people were doing,
:06:25. > :06:26.legally, through warrantry, but in this situation
:06:27. > :06:28.we need to make sure that our intelligence services
:06:29. > :06:30.have the ability to get into situations like encrypted
:06:31. > :06:33.She will ask the tech industry to suggest solutions
:06:34. > :06:36.at a meeting this week, although she didn't rule out
:06:37. > :06:40.But for those caught up in the attack, perhaps it will be
:06:41. > :06:48...not the policy implications that will echo the loudest.
:06:49. > :06:50.We're joined now from the Hague by the Director of Europol,
:06:51. > :06:56.the European Police Agency, Rob Wainwright.
:06:57. > :07:04.What role has Europol played in the aftermath of Wednesday's attacks? I
:07:05. > :07:07.can tell you we are actively supporting the investigation,
:07:08. > :07:11.because it is a live case I cannot of course go into the details, but
:07:12. > :07:15.to give you some context, Andrew, this is one of about 80
:07:16. > :07:19.counterterrorist cases we have been supporting across Europe this year,
:07:20. > :07:23.using a platform to shed thousands of intelligence messages between the
:07:24. > :07:27.very large counterterrorist community in Europe, and also
:07:28. > :07:30.tracking flows of terrorist finance, illegal firearms, and monitoring
:07:31. > :07:39.this terrible propaganda online as well. All of that is being made
:07:40. > :07:41.available now to the Metropolitan Police in London for this case. Do
:07:42. > :07:46.we know if there is any European link to those who may have inspired
:07:47. > :07:49.or directed Khalid Massoud? That is an active part of the inquiry being
:07:50. > :07:53.led by Metropolitan Police and it is not for me to comment or speculate
:07:54. > :07:59.on that. There are links of course in terms of the profile of the
:08:00. > :08:03.attacker and the way in which he launched these terrible events in
:08:04. > :08:06.Westminster, and those that we've seen, for example, in the Berlin
:08:07. > :08:12.Christmas market last year and the attack in Nice in the summer of last
:08:13. > :08:17.year, clear similarities between the fact that the attackers involved
:08:18. > :08:23.have criminal background, somewhat dislocated from society, each of
:08:24. > :08:27.them using a hired or stolen vehicle to deliberately aim at pedestrians
:08:28. > :08:31.in a crowded place and using a secondary weapon, whether it is a
:08:32. > :08:34.gun or a knife. So we are seeing a trend, I think, of the kind of
:08:35. > :08:37.attacks across Europe in the last couple of years and some of that at
:08:38. > :08:42.least was played out unfortunately in Westminster this week as well.
:08:43. > :08:46.Mass and was known to the emergency services, so were many of those
:08:47. > :08:50.involved in the Brussels, Paris and Berlin attacks, so something is
:08:51. > :08:55.going wrong here, we are not completely across this, are we?
:08:56. > :09:00.Actually most attacks are being stopped. This was I think at least
:09:01. > :09:05.the 14th terrorist plot or attempted attack in Britain since 2013 and the
:09:06. > :09:10.only one that has got through, and that fits a picture of what we see
:09:11. > :09:15.in France last year, 17 attempted attacks that were stopped, for
:09:16. > :09:20.example. Unfortunately some of them get through. But people on the
:09:21. > :09:23.security services' Radar getting through, in Westminster, Brussels,
:09:24. > :09:29.Paris and Berlin. There is clearly something we are not doing that
:09:30. > :09:34.could stop that. Again, if you look at what happened in Berlin and at
:09:35. > :09:38.least the first indications from what police are saying in London,
:09:39. > :09:43.these are people that haven't really appeared on Baha'i target list of
:09:44. > :09:47.the authorities, they are on the edge at best of radicalised
:09:48. > :09:52.community -- on the high target list. When you are dealing with a
:09:53. > :09:56.dispersed community of thousands of radicalised, Senate radicalised
:09:57. > :10:00.individuals, it is very difficult to monitor them 24/7, very difficult
:10:01. > :10:04.when these people, almost out of the blue and carry out the attacks that
:10:05. > :10:09.they did. I think you have to find a sense of perspective here around the
:10:10. > :10:12.work and the pressures of the work and the difficult target choices
:10:13. > :10:17.that police and security authorities have to make around Europe. The Home
:10:18. > :10:22.Secretary here in London said this morning it is time to tackle apps
:10:23. > :10:26.like WhatsApp, which we believe Massoud was using, because they
:10:27. > :10:29.encrypt from end to end and it is difficult for the security services
:10:30. > :10:35.to know what is happening there. What do you say, are you up for
:10:36. > :10:40.that? Across the hundreds of cases we have supported in recent years
:10:41. > :10:44.there is no doubt that encryption, encrypted communications are
:10:45. > :10:48.becoming more and more prominent in the way terrorists communicate, more
:10:49. > :10:51.and more of a problem, therefore, a real challenge for investigators,
:10:52. > :10:55.and that the heart of this is a stark inconsistency between the
:10:56. > :10:59.ability of the police to lawfully intercept telephone calls, but not
:11:00. > :11:04.when those messages are exchanged via a social media messaging board,
:11:05. > :11:08.for example, and that is an inconsistency in society and we have
:11:09. > :11:11.to find a solution through appropriate legislation perhaps of
:11:12. > :11:14.these technologies and law enforcement agencies working in a
:11:15. > :11:21.more constructive way. So you back that? I agree that there is
:11:22. > :11:27.certainly a problem, absolutely. We know there was a problem, I'm trying
:11:28. > :11:34.to find out if you agree with the Home Secretary's solution? I agree
:11:35. > :11:38.certainly with her calls for changes to be made. What the legislative
:11:39. > :11:42.solution for that is of course for her and other lawmakers to decide
:11:43. > :11:47.but from my point of view, yes, I would agree something has to be done
:11:48. > :11:49.to make sure we can apply more consistent interception of
:11:50. > :11:54.communication in all parts of the way in which terrorists invade our
:11:55. > :11:56.lives. Rob Wainwright of Europol, thank you very much.
:11:57. > :11:59.Here with me in the studio now is the Leader of the House
:12:00. > :12:07.What did last week's attack tell us about the security of the Palace of
:12:08. > :12:10.Westminster? It told us that we are looked after by some very
:12:11. > :12:18.courageous, very professional police officers. There is clearly going to
:12:19. > :12:24.be a lessons learned with you, as you would expect after any incident
:12:25. > :12:27.of this kind. That will look very carefully at what worked well but
:12:28. > :12:33.also whether there are changes that need to be made, that is already
:12:34. > :12:39.under way. And that is being run by professionals, by the police and
:12:40. > :12:48.security director at Parliament... Palace authorities, we will get
:12:49. > :12:51.reports from the professionals, particularly our own Parliamentary
:12:52. > :12:54.security director, and just as security matters in parliament are
:12:55. > :12:58.kept under constant review, if there are changes that need to be made as
:12:59. > :13:02.a result, then they will need to be made. Let's look at some of the
:13:03. > :13:07.issues it has thrown up, as we get some distance from these appalling
:13:08. > :13:10.events when our first reaction was always the people who lose their
:13:11. > :13:16.lives and suffer, and then we start to become a bit more analytical. Is
:13:17. > :13:19.it true that the authorities removed armed guards from Cowbridge gate,
:13:20. > :13:25.where the attacker made his entry, because they looked to threatening
:13:26. > :13:30.for tourists? -- carriage gate. No, the idea that a protest from MPs led
:13:31. > :13:37.to operational changes simply not the case. What happened in the last
:13:38. > :13:40.couple of years is that the security arrangements in new Palace Yard have
:13:41. > :13:45.actually been strengthened, but I don't think your view was would
:13:46. > :13:49.expect me to go into a detailed commentary upon operational security
:13:50. > :13:54.matters. Why were the armed guards removed? There are armed guards at
:13:55. > :13:59.all times in the Palace of Westminster, it is a matter for the
:14:00. > :14:04.security authorities and in particular for the police and direct
:14:05. > :14:10.command of those officers to decide how they are best deployed. Is it
:14:11. > :14:15.because, as some from Scotland Yard sources have reported to the papers
:14:16. > :14:19.this morning, was it done because of staffing shortages? I'm in no
:14:20. > :14:22.position to comment on the details of the operation but my
:14:23. > :14:27.understanding is that the number of people available is what the police
:14:28. > :14:31.and the security authorities working together have decided to deploy and
:14:32. > :14:37.that they think was commensurate with the threat that we faced. Is it
:14:38. > :14:43.not of concern that as the incident unfolded the gates were left
:14:44. > :14:47.unguarded by armed and unarmed, they were just unguarded, so much so
:14:48. > :14:54.that, as it was going on, a career with a parcel on a moped at was able
:14:55. > :14:59.to drive through? -- up career. I think we will need to examine that
:15:00. > :15:04.case as part of looking into any lessons learned, but what I don't
:15:05. > :15:06.yet know, because the police are still interviewing everybody
:15:07. > :15:12.involved, witnesses and police officers involved, was exactly who
:15:13. > :15:18.was standing where in the vicinity of the murder at a particular time.
:15:19. > :15:21.We have seen pictures, the gates were unguarded as people were
:15:22. > :15:27.concentrating on what was happening to the police man and to the
:15:28. > :15:32.attacker, but the delivery man was able to come through the gates with
:15:33. > :15:36.a parcel?! You have seen a particular camera angle, I think it
:15:37. > :15:41.is important before we rush to judgment, and we shouldn't be
:15:42. > :15:45.pointing fingers, we need... We are trying to get to the bottom of it.
:15:46. > :15:49.To get to the bottom of it means we have to look at what all the
:15:50. > :15:53.witnesses and all the police officers involved say about what
:15:54. > :15:57.happened, and then there needs to be a decision taken about what if any
:15:58. > :16:01.changes need to be made in light of that.
:16:02. > :16:09.We know the attacker was stopped in his tracks by the Defence
:16:10. > :16:14.Secretary's bodyguard, where was the armed roving unit that had replaced
:16:15. > :16:19.the armed guard at the gate? I cannot comment on operation details
:16:20. > :16:22.but my understanding is there were other armed officers who would have
:16:23. > :16:28.been able to prevent the attacker from getting to the chamber, as has
:16:29. > :16:33.been alleged it would be possible for him to do. Were you aware that a
:16:34. > :16:38.so-called table top simulation, carried out by Scotland Yard and the
:16:39. > :16:47.Parliamentary authorities, ended with four terrorists in this
:16:48. > :16:52.simulation able to storm parliament and killed dozens of MPs? No, that
:16:53. > :17:00.is the first time that has been mentioned to me. You are the leader
:17:01. > :17:06.of the house. These matters are dealt with by security professionals
:17:07. > :17:11.who are involved, they are advised by a security committee, chaired by
:17:12. > :17:16.the Deputy Speaker, but we do not debate operational details in
:17:17. > :17:21.public. I'm not asking for a debate, I raise this because it's been
:17:22. > :17:24.reported because it's quite clear that after this simulation, it
:17:25. > :17:31.raised serious questions about the security of the palace. Actions
:17:32. > :17:38.should have followed. What I've said to you is that these matters are
:17:39. > :17:42.kept under constant review and that there are always changes made both
:17:43. > :17:47.in the deployment of individual officers and security guards of the
:17:48. > :17:52.palace staff and other plans to strengthen the hard security of the
:17:53. > :17:58.perimeter. If you look back at Hansard December last year, they was
:17:59. > :18:03.a plan already been brought forward to strengthen the security at
:18:04. > :18:15.carriage Gates, looking at questions of access. Will there be armed
:18:16. > :18:20.guards now? You need to look not just at armed guards, you need to
:18:21. > :18:24.look at the entirety of the security engagements including fencing.
:18:25. > :18:28.There's lots about the security we don't need to know and shouldn't
:18:29. > :18:32.know, but whether or not there are armed guards is something we will
:18:33. > :18:38.find out quite soon and I'm asking you if you think there should be. If
:18:39. > :18:42.you think the judgment is by our security experts that there need to
:18:43. > :18:47.be more armed guards in certain places, then they will be deployed
:18:48. > :18:52.accordingly, but I think before we rush to make conclusions about
:18:53. > :18:56.lessons to be learned from Wednesday's appalling attack, it is
:18:57. > :18:59.important the police are allowed to get on with completing the interview
:19:00. > :19:05.of witnesses and their own officers, and then that there is considered
:19:06. > :19:10.view taken about what changes might need to be made and then they will
:19:11. > :19:14.be implemented. Let me come onto the triggering of Article 50 that begins
:19:15. > :19:20.our negotiations to exit the European Union. It will happen on
:19:21. > :19:23.Wednesday. John Claude Juncker told Germany's most popular newspaper
:19:24. > :19:29.that he wants to make an example of the UK to make everyone realise it's
:19:30. > :19:36.not worth leaving the EU. What do you make of that? I think all sorts
:19:37. > :19:40.of things are said in advance of negotiations beginning. Clearly the
:19:41. > :19:46.commission will want to ensure the EU 27 holds together. As the Prime
:19:47. > :19:51.Minister has said, that is a British national interest as well. She has
:19:52. > :19:56.been very clear... What do you make of President Juncker's remark? It
:19:57. > :20:04.doesn't surprise me ahead of negotiations but I think if rational
:20:05. > :20:07.mutual interest is to the fore that it's perfectly possible for an
:20:08. > :20:14.agreement to be negotiated between the UK and our 27 friends and allies
:20:15. > :20:17.that addresses all of the issues from trade to security, police
:20:18. > :20:22.cooperation, foreign policy co-operation, works for all
:20:23. > :20:27.countries. The EU wants to agree a substantial divorce bill before it
:20:28. > :20:34.will even discuss any future UK EU relations, what do you make of that?
:20:35. > :20:38.Article 50 says the terms of exit need to be negotiated in the context
:20:39. > :20:43.of the kind of future relationship that's going to exist between the
:20:44. > :20:48.departing country and the remaining member states. It seems it is simply
:20:49. > :20:53.not possible to separate those two. Clearly there will need to be a
:20:54. > :20:56.discussion about joint assets and join liabilities but I think if we
:20:57. > :21:01.all keep to the fore the fact we will continue to be neighbours, we
:21:02. > :21:03.will continue to be essential allies and trading partners, then it is
:21:04. > :21:20.possible to come to a deal that works for all size. The
:21:21. > :21:22.question is do you agree the divorce bill first and then look at the
:21:23. > :21:25.subsequent relations we will have or do you do them both in parallel?
:21:26. > :21:30.Article 50 itself says they have to run together. Do you think they have
:21:31. > :21:35.to be done together or sequentially? I think it is impossible to separate
:21:36. > :21:39.the two but we will get into negotiations very soon and then once
:21:40. > :21:46.David Davis is sitting down with Michel Barnier and others and the
:21:47. > :21:50.national governments become involved too, then I hope we can make steady
:21:51. > :21:55.progress. An early deal about each other's citizens would be a good
:21:56. > :22:03.piece of low hanging fruit. Is the Government willing to pay a
:22:04. > :22:07.substantial divorce bill? The Prime Minister has said we don't rule out
:22:08. > :22:13.some kind of continuing payments, for example there may be EU
:22:14. > :22:19.programmes in the future in which we want to continue to participate. 50
:22:20. > :22:25.billion? We don't envisage long-term payments of vast sums of money. So
:22:26. > :22:31.50 billion isn't even the Government ballpark? You are tempting me to get
:22:32. > :22:35.into the detail of negotiation, that is something that will be starting
:22:36. > :22:43.very soon and let's leave it to the negotiations. During the referendum
:22:44. > :22:48.there was no talk from the Leave side about any question of
:22:49. > :22:51.separation bill, now the talk is of 50 billion and I'm trying to find
:22:52. > :23:02.out if the British government thinks that of amount is on your radar. The
:23:03. > :23:08.Government is addressing the situation in which we now are, which
:23:09. > :23:12.is that we have a democratic obligation to implement the decision
:23:13. > :23:16.of the people in the referendum last year, and that we need to do that in
:23:17. > :23:21.a way that maximises the opportunity, the future prosperity
:23:22. > :23:24.and security of everybody in the UK. Let me try one more thing on the
:23:25. > :23:30.Great Repeal Bill, the white Paper will be published I think on
:23:31. > :23:35.Thursday, is that right? We haven't announced an exact date but you will
:23:36. > :23:40.see the white Paper very soon. Let's say it is Thursday, it will enshrine
:23:41. > :23:45.thousands of EU laws into UK law, it will use what's called Henry VIII
:23:46. > :23:51.powers, who of course was a dictator. Is this an attempt to
:23:52. > :23:58.avoid proper Parliamentary scrutiny? No, we are repealing the Communities
:23:59. > :24:02.Act 1972, then put existing EU legal obligations on the UK statutory
:24:03. > :24:09.footing, so business know where they stand. Then, because a lot of those
:24:10. > :24:16.EU regulations will for example refer to the commission or another
:24:17. > :24:21.regulator, you need to substitute a UK authority in place so we need to
:24:22. > :24:32.have a power under secondary legislation to tweak the European
:24:33. > :24:37.regulators so it is coherent. This is weather Henry VIII powers come
:24:38. > :24:42.in. It is secondary legislation and the scope, the definition of those
:24:43. > :24:45.powers and when they can be used in what circumstances is something the
:24:46. > :24:50.parliament will have to approve in voting through the bill itself. And
:24:51. > :24:56.if it is as innocuous as you say, will you accept the proposal of the
:24:57. > :24:59.Lords for an enhanced scrutiny process on the secondary
:25:00. > :25:04.legislation? Neither the relevant committee of the House of Lords, the
:25:05. > :25:09.constitution committee, nor anyone else has seen the text of the bill
:25:10. > :25:13.and I think when it comes out, I hope that those members of the House
:25:14. > :25:19.of Lords will find that reassuring, but as I say the definition of those
:25:20. > :25:24.powers are something the parliament itself will take the final decision.
:25:25. > :25:26.David Lidington, thank you for being with us.
:25:27. > :25:28.So, Ukip has lost its only MP - Douglas Carswell.
:25:29. > :25:30.He defected to Ukip from the Conservative Party
:25:31. > :25:32.almost three years ago, but yesterday announced
:25:33. > :25:34.that he was quitting to sit as an independent.
:25:35. > :25:36.His surprise defection came in August 2014 saying,
:25:37. > :25:39."Only Ukip can shake up that cosy little clique called Westminster".
:25:40. > :25:43.But his bromance with Nigel Farage turned sour when Mr Carswell
:25:44. > :25:45.criticised the so-called "shock and awful" strategy as
:25:46. > :25:50.Then, during the EU referendum campaign last year, Nigel Farage
:25:51. > :25:53.was part of the unofficial Leave.EU campaign, whereas Douglas Carswell
:25:54. > :25:59.opted to support the official Vote Leave campaign.
:26:00. > :26:01.Just last month, former Ukip leader Nigel Farage
:26:02. > :26:03.accused Douglas Carswell of thwarting his chances
:26:04. > :26:05.of being awarded a knighthood, writing that,
:26:06. > :26:13.Announcing his resignation on his website yesterday,
:26:14. > :26:15.Mr Carswell said, "I desperately wanted us to leave the EU.
:26:16. > :26:18.Now we can be certain that that is going to happen, I have
:26:19. > :26:21.decided that I will be leaving Ukip."
:26:22. > :26:23.When Mr Carswell left the Conservative Party in 2014
:26:24. > :26:26.he resigned as an MP, triggering a by-election.
:26:27. > :26:29."I must seek permission from my boss," he said referring
:26:30. > :26:37.This time, though, Mr Carswell has said there will be no by-election.
:26:38. > :26:44.We're joined now from Salford by Ukip leader, Paul Nuttall.
:26:45. > :26:53.Welcome back to the programme. Are you happy to see the back of your
:26:54. > :26:59.only MP? Well, do you know, I'm always sad when people leave Ukip at
:27:00. > :27:04.a grass roots level or Parliamentary level, but I'm sad but I'm not
:27:05. > :27:09.surprised by this. There has been adrift by Douglas and Ukip over the
:27:10. > :27:12.past couple of years, his relationship with Nigel Farage
:27:13. > :27:17.certainly hasn't helped, and it is a hangover from the former regime
:27:18. > :27:20.which I inherited. I try to bring the party together, I thought I had
:27:21. > :27:24.done that for a few months but it seems now as if I was only papering
:27:25. > :27:32.over the cracks. Douglas has gone and I think we will move on and be a
:27:33. > :27:35.more unified party as a result. Did Douglas Carswell jump because he
:27:36. > :27:38.expected to be pushed out your national executive committee
:27:39. > :27:41.tomorrow? He came before the National executive committee to
:27:42. > :27:46.answer questions regarding issues that have come to the fore over the
:27:47. > :27:53.last couple of months. There was the knighthood issue, the issue
:27:54. > :27:57.surrounding the Thanet election and his comments in a book which came
:27:58. > :28:02.out regarding Brexit. So was he under suspicion? He was coming to
:28:03. > :28:10.answer these questions and they would have been difficult. So he did
:28:11. > :28:14.jump in your view? No, I'm not saying he would have been pushed out
:28:15. > :28:22.of the party but he would have faced difficult questions. What is clear
:28:23. > :28:27.is that a fissure had developed and I'm not surprised by him leaving the
:28:28. > :28:32.party. You have also lost Diane James, Stephen Wolf, Arron Banks,
:28:33. > :28:37.you failed to win the Stoke by election, Mr Carswell is now a
:28:38. > :28:44.pundit on US television, Ukip now stands for the UK irrelevance party,
:28:45. > :29:00.doesn't it? Paul's hard us yesterday on 12%, membership continues to
:29:01. > :29:05.rise. -- the polls had us on 12%. 4 million people voted for Ukip. Over
:29:06. > :29:08.the summer exciting things will be happening in the party, we will
:29:09. > :29:12.rewrite the constitution, restructure the party, it will have
:29:13. > :29:18.a new feel to it and we will be launching pretty much the post
:29:19. > :29:22.Brexit Ukip. Arron Banks, who used to pay quite a lot of your bills, he
:29:23. > :29:26.said the current leadership, that would be you, couldn't knock the
:29:27. > :29:32.skin off a rice pudding, another way of saying you are relevant, isn't
:29:33. > :29:38.it? I don't think that's fair. I've only been in the job since November
:29:39. > :29:41.the 28th, we have taken steps to restructure the party already, the
:29:42. > :29:45.party is on a sound financial footing, we won't have a problem
:29:46. > :29:51.money wise going forward. It is a party which can really unified, look
:29:52. > :29:55.forward to the post Brexit Iraq, tomorrow we are launching our Brexit
:29:56. > :30:02.test for the Prime Minister. If it wasn't for Ukip there wouldn't have
:30:03. > :30:05.been a referendum and we wouldn't have Brexit. Every time you say you
:30:06. > :30:11.will unified, someone else leaves. Is Arron Banks still a member? No,
:30:12. > :30:16.not at this moment in time. He has been a generous donor in the past,
:30:17. > :30:21.he's done a great job of ensuring we get Brexit and I'm thankful for that
:30:22. > :30:25.but he isn't a member. He has just submitted an invoice of ?2000 for
:30:26. > :30:35.the use of call centres, will you pay that? No. That should be
:30:36. > :30:40.interesting to watch. In the aftermath of the Westminster
:30:41. > :30:44.attack, Nigel Farage told Fox News that it vindicates Donald Trump's
:30:45. > :30:50.extreme vetting of migrants. Since the attacker was born in Kent, like
:30:51. > :30:54.Nigel Farage, can you explain the relevance of the remark? I
:30:55. > :30:58.personally haven't supported Donald Trump's position on this, but what I
:30:59. > :31:03.will say, this is what Nigel has said as well, we have a problem
:31:04. > :31:08.within the Muslim community, it is a small number of people who hate the
:31:09. > :31:11.way we live... Can you explain the relevance of Mr Farage's remark? Mr
:31:12. > :31:28.Farage also made the point about multiculturalism being the
:31:29. > :31:29.problem as well and he is correct on that because we cannot have separate
:31:30. > :31:32.communities living separate lives and never integrating. How would
:31:33. > :31:35.extreme vetting of migrants help you track down a man who was born in
:31:36. > :31:38.Kent? In this case it wouldn't. Maybe in other cases it would. But,
:31:39. > :31:41.as I say, I'm not a supporter of Donald Trump's position on extreme
:31:42. > :31:45.vetting, never have been, so I'm the wrong person to ask the question
:31:46. > :31:49.too, Andrew. That has probably become clear in my efforts to get
:31:50. > :31:53.you to answer it. Let me as too, should there be a by-election in
:31:54. > :31:57.Clacton now? Douglas has called by-elections in the past when he has
:31:58. > :32:04.left a political party, I know certain people in Ukip are keen to
:32:05. > :32:06.go down this line, Douglas is always keen on recall and if 20% of people
:32:07. > :32:09.in his constituency want a by-election then maybe we should
:32:10. > :32:16.have won. Ukip will be opening nominations for Clacton very soon.
:32:17. > :32:23.Hold on with us, Mr Nuttall, I have Douglas Carswell here in the studio.
:32:24. > :32:29.Why not call a by-election? I'm not switching parties. You are, you are
:32:30. > :32:33.becoming independent. There is a difference, I've not submitted
:32:34. > :32:37.myself to the whip up a new party, if I was, I would be obliged to
:32:38. > :32:41.trigger a by-election. If every time an MP in the House of Commons
:32:42. > :32:45.resigned the whip or lost the whip, far from actually strengthening the
:32:46. > :32:50.democracy against the party bosses, that would give those who ran
:32:51. > :32:55.parties and enormous power, so I'm being absolutely consistent here,
:32:56. > :32:59.I'm not joining a party. It is a change of status and Nigel Farage
:33:00. > :33:07.has just said he will write to every constituent in Clacton and he wants
:33:08. > :33:12.to try and get 20% of constituents to older by-election. We are going
:33:13. > :33:16.to testing, he says, write to every house in Clacton, find out if his
:33:17. > :33:20.constituents want a by-election, if 20% do we will find out if Mr
:33:21. > :33:26.Carswell is honourable. I'm sure they will be delighted to hear from
:33:27. > :33:29.Nigel. There have been several by-elections when Nigel has had the
:33:30. > :33:35.opportunity to contact the electorate we did -- which did not
:33:36. > :33:39.always go to plan. If you got 20%, would you? Yesterday I sent an
:33:40. > :33:44.e-mail to 20,000 constituents, I have had a lot of responses back,
:33:45. > :33:51.overwhelmingly supported. Recently you said you were 100% Ukip, now you
:33:52. > :33:56.are 0%. What happened? I saw Theresa May triggering article 50, we won,
:33:57. > :34:01.Andrew. You knew a few months ago she was going to do that. On June
:34:02. > :34:05.the 24th I had serious thought about making the move but I wanted to be
:34:06. > :34:10.absolutely certain that Article 50 would be triggered and I think it is
:34:11. > :34:13.right. This is why ultimately Ukip exists, to get us out of the
:34:14. > :34:17.European Union. We should be cheerful instead of attacking one
:34:18. > :34:22.another, this is our moment, we made it happen. Did you try to sideline
:34:23. > :34:27.the former Ukip leader during the referendum campaign? Not at all, I
:34:28. > :34:32.have been open about this, the idea I have been involved in subterfuge.
:34:33. > :34:36.You try to sideline him openly rather than by subterfuge? I made
:34:37. > :34:40.the point we needed to be open, broad and progressive to win. I made
:34:41. > :34:44.it clear in my acceptance speech in Clacton and when I said that Vote
:34:45. > :34:47.Leave should get designation that the only way Euroscepticism would
:34:48. > :34:53.win was by being more than just angry natives. What do you make of
:34:54. > :35:01.that? I am over the moon that we have achieved Brexit, unlike Douglas
:35:02. > :35:04.I rarely have that much confidence in Theresa May because history
:35:05. > :35:08.proves that she is good at talking the talk but in walking the walk
:35:09. > :35:12.often fails, and I'm disappointed because I wanted Douglas to be part
:35:13. > :35:16.of the post Brexit Ukip where we move forward with a raft of domestic
:35:17. > :35:21.policies and go on to take seat at Westminster. Do you think you try to
:35:22. > :35:24.sideline Mr Farage during the referendum campaign? Vote Leave
:35:25. > :35:31.certainly didn't want Nigel Farage front of house, we know that. They
:35:32. > :35:37.freely admit that, they admitted it on media over the past year. Nigel
:35:38. > :35:41.still was front of house because he is Nigel Farage and if it wasn't for
:35:42. > :35:44.Nigel, as I said earlier, we wouldn't have at the referendum and
:35:45. > :35:50.we wouldn't have achieved Brexit because Nigel Farage appeals, like
:35:51. > :35:54.Ukip to a certain section of the population. If our primary motive is
:35:55. > :35:57.to get us out of the European Union, why are we having this row, why
:35:58. > :36:01.can't we just celebrate what is happening on Wednesday? We can, but
:36:02. > :36:06.you are far more confident that Theresa May will deliver on this
:36:07. > :36:09.than I am. Ukip may have been a single issue pressure group ten
:36:10. > :36:14.years ago, it wasn't a single issue pressure group that you joined in
:36:15. > :36:18.2014, it wasn't a single issue pressure group that you stood for in
:36:19. > :36:22.2015 at the general election, and I'm disappointed that you have left
:36:23. > :36:26.us when we are moving onto an exciting era. What specifically
:36:27. > :36:31.gives you a lack of confidence in Mrs May's ability deliver? Her
:36:32. > :36:35.record as Home Secretary, she said she would deal with radical Islam,
:36:36. > :36:39.nothing happened, she said she would get immigration down to the tens of
:36:40. > :36:43.thousands, last year in her last year as Home Secretary as city the
:36:44. > :36:46.size of Newcastle came to this country, that is not tens of
:36:47. > :36:51.thousands. I think we need to take yes for an answer eventually. The
:36:52. > :36:55.problem with some Eurosceptics is they never accept they have won the
:36:56. > :36:59.argument. We have one, Theresa May is going to do what we have wanted
:37:00. > :37:03.her to do, let's be happy, let's celebrate that. But let's wait until
:37:04. > :37:07.she starts bartering things away, until she betrays our fishermen,
:37:08. > :37:11.just as other Conservative prime ministers have done in the past.
:37:12. > :37:15.Let's wait until we end up still paying some sort of membership fee
:37:16. > :37:19.into the European Union or a large divorce bill. That is not what
:37:20. > :37:28.people voted for on June the 23rd and if you want to align yourself
:37:29. > :37:31.with that, you are clearly not a Ukipper in my opinion. So for Ukip
:37:32. > :37:36.to have relevance, it has to go wrong? I'm confident politics will
:37:37. > :37:40.come back to our terms but -- our turf but there will be a post Brexit
:37:41. > :37:43.Ukip that will stand for veterans, book slashing the foreign aid bill
:37:44. > :37:49.and becoming the party of law and order. Finally, to you, Douglas
:37:50. > :37:55.Carswell, you say you have confidence in Mrs May to deliver in
:37:56. > :38:00.the way that Paul Nuttall doesn't. You backed her, you were
:38:01. > :38:03.Conservative, you believe that Brexit will be delivered under a
:38:04. > :38:09.Conservative Government. Why would you not bite the 2020 election as a
:38:10. > :38:12.Conservative? I feel comfortable being independent. If you join a
:38:13. > :38:15.party you have to agree to a bunch of stuff I would not want to agree
:38:16. > :38:24.with. I am comfortable being independent. So you will go into
:38:25. > :38:28.2020 as an independent? If you look at the raising of funds, what Vote
:38:29. > :38:32.Leave did as a pop-up party... We only have five seconds, will you
:38:33. > :38:36.fight as an independent in the next general election? Let's wait and
:38:37. > :38:51.see. Very well! Thank you both very much.
:38:52. > :39:02.On today's show, our towns and cities are undergoing a bit
:39:03. > :39:05.of a regeneration boom at the moment - but is it all a bit corporate
:39:06. > :39:08.and just about high-end shopping centres and expensive flats?
:39:09. > :39:12.First, let's meet the two politicians, who will be
:39:13. > :39:17.Robert Gould is the Conservative leader of Dorset County Council
:39:18. > :39:19.and Bob Price is the Labour leader of Oxford City Council.
:39:20. > :39:30.Both of you are engaged in reorganising councils now. You're
:39:31. > :39:35.waiting to hear from The Secretary of State on Dorset. You are quite
:39:36. > :39:39.concerned about the idea to create one Oxon. You are fighting it. You
:39:40. > :39:46.think it would be better to have an elected city may? We are working
:39:47. > :39:52.with all the districts until December on a combined authority bid
:39:53. > :39:56.with an elected official. And in the New Year the county and two
:39:57. > :39:59.districts turned their backs on the proposal and went for a unitary
:40:00. > :40:05.option. We are now in combat with them about that proposition. And you
:40:06. > :40:09.are locked in combat with the district councils, three out of six
:40:10. > :40:14.saying they do not want Dorset to split into two councils. Not at all,
:40:15. > :40:21.actually. We have quite a high level of agreement and we want to replace
:40:22. > :40:24.the existing nine, two unitary, six district and county council, with
:40:25. > :40:27.two brand-new councils which I think will be more efficient, more
:40:28. > :40:33.accountable and more transparent for decision-making. And much more
:40:34. > :40:36.significant savings can be made by doing that. Possibly pop with the
:40:37. > :40:45.public, getting rid of so many councillors! It is true. 330 odd,
:40:46. > :40:49.they played an important role but do we need that many for a place the
:40:50. > :40:53.size of Dorset? I think we can do it. We have got a lot of good town
:40:54. > :40:56.and parish councillors and I think their role should be valued and
:40:57. > :41:02.enhanced for the future. That is something we are keen on. You will
:41:03. > :41:11.save 108,000,006 years? That is the basic projection. We think we can go
:41:12. > :41:15.further than bad. -- 100 ?8 million in six years. Now people that wants
:41:16. > :41:23.to do one Oxon come they say they can save ?100 million over five
:41:24. > :41:27.years. That is why we are sceptical about it. They're all sorts of
:41:28. > :41:32.expensive reports that have been written. The evidence the savings is
:41:33. > :41:37.minimal to say the least. If you look at the area where you might
:41:38. > :41:41.make savings, like councillors in terms of the actual services
:41:42. > :41:44.offered, reduction in back office costs in the last six years have
:41:45. > :41:50.been enormous. There is not a lot left to be reduced. Areas for
:41:51. > :41:54.reduction are in social care, in the county council remit. They had not
:41:55. > :41:59.tackled transformation. You would not be doing this if you are not
:42:00. > :42:02.having budgets cut. I think we should be doing it without the
:42:03. > :42:06.budget card but it is a catalyst to get things moving. We had a
:42:07. > :42:09.reference to transformation of services, really important, we are
:42:10. > :42:14.doing a lot of that. The structures you have got limit what you can
:42:15. > :42:17.transfer moving forward. I think we will continue the programme with or
:42:18. > :42:22.without local government reform but it will be a great boost and help to
:42:23. > :42:28.delivering those values. Do you think it will happen in Dorset? We
:42:29. > :42:33.had positive feedback from the secretary of state. And will it
:42:34. > :42:36.happen in Oxford? The Secretary of State has been clear that he would
:42:37. > :42:39.like it to be bottom-up and consensus. Four of our MPs are in
:42:40. > :42:44.opposition and public opinion is three quarters against. You were
:42:45. > :42:48.going to say three quarters in favour! Very good research has been
:42:49. > :42:54.carried out across the county. Our residents are strongly behind it.
:42:55. > :42:58.Ours showed 70% against it and the county council's own engagement, 74%
:42:59. > :43:01.against. We will see what can swing it and what can't.
:43:02. > :43:04.Now, council tax bills have been dropping onto doormats over the last
:43:05. > :43:07.few weeks and the chances are you've noticed an extra line in there,
:43:08. > :43:10.as they add the special levy to pay for adult social care.
:43:11. > :43:12.Throw in the extra two billion that the chancellor promised
:43:13. > :43:15.in the budget and that's adult social care all sorted,
:43:16. > :43:23.According to figures uncovered by the BBC's Panorama
:43:24. > :43:25.programme this week, 95 councils have had home-care
:43:26. > :43:27.contracts cancelled by the companies providing them because the payments
:43:28. > :43:30.were too small, and a quarter of the UK's care home providers
:43:31. > :43:33.Joining us now from our Tunbridge Wells studio
:43:34. > :43:42.is Nadra Ahmed of the National Care Association.
:43:43. > :43:50.You asked for more money, you are getting more money. Is there still a
:43:51. > :43:53.problem? I think we welcome the money, of course. It is better than
:43:54. > :43:56.nothing, which is what we have been getting for the last decade. And we
:43:57. > :44:04.have at cuts in the social care budget. -- have had. This is not a
:44:05. > :44:07.lot of money and it will not redress the challenge we face. Partly
:44:08. > :44:12.because I think it is too little and because I think it is too little and
:44:13. > :44:18.too late. But having said that, I think there is a responsibility to
:44:19. > :44:23.be absolutely clear that this money is for front line services and not
:44:24. > :44:30.to bolster social services departments. How much do you need? I
:44:31. > :44:37.think we needed 2.4 billion to stand still. That was the calculation. You
:44:38. > :44:43.got two billion plus whatever comes from the precept. That was to stand
:44:44. > :44:49.still. Now we have to look at the forward projections. What we have is
:44:50. > :44:55.1 million given this year. That is being divvied up among local
:44:56. > :45:00.authorities. We do not know how they will use it. What we are talking
:45:01. > :45:03.about is front-line services. Actually two billion in three years
:45:04. > :45:09.is still not making a sustainable option. People have actually gone
:45:10. > :45:16.out of business, there are people with 25% of the banks called a
:45:17. > :45:22.zombie provision, walking towards the edge of the cliff scenario. And
:45:23. > :45:26.this money will not help? I am hoping it will in some way, to
:45:27. > :45:30.create some sustainability of just standing still. That is what we are
:45:31. > :45:36.looking at with this money. It will not look at provision going forward.
:45:37. > :45:41.We must remember that social care services are now delivering health
:45:42. > :45:46.care tasks. That costs a lot more money than originally factored in.
:45:47. > :45:49.You can understand people looking at the council tax Bill and wondering
:45:50. > :45:55.how they can pay it, looking at the extra line and saying that is this a
:45:56. > :45:58.bottomless pit? Unfortunately this is something we said at the very
:45:59. > :46:02.beginning when the precept was introduced, that these kinds of
:46:03. > :46:07.taxes can never be withdrawn or taken away when you have got an
:46:08. > :46:11.ageing population. This is not about the same people we were looking
:46:12. > :46:17.after 20 years ago. This is a very different scenario. Actually, when
:46:18. > :46:23.you have got an ageing population, what we have done is systematically
:46:24. > :46:27.failed to recognise that we need to have more social care in place to
:46:28. > :46:34.meet rising demand. What we have done is reduce social care budgets,
:46:35. > :46:37.look at reducing the social care provision and now we are wondering
:46:38. > :46:41.why we are in the mess we are in, when we have more people who need
:46:42. > :46:48.social care and not less. Is it just a sticking plaster, Bob Price? I
:46:49. > :46:52.think the point she made about rising demand is important. We have
:46:53. > :46:54.got an ageing population and increasingly people needing longer
:46:55. > :47:00.periods of care. That requires specialist expertise in the home
:47:01. > :47:04.rather than special places. I think there is a rising demand which is
:47:05. > :47:07.probably not going to be covered. And for some councils it feels like
:47:08. > :47:10.they are not necessarily spending all the money on adult social care,
:47:11. > :47:15.because some people have moved it to other places. It certainly does not
:47:16. > :47:20.apply in Dorset. We have a good record of getting people out of
:47:21. > :47:23.hospital, or back home, or where most appropriate, which is better
:47:24. > :47:26.value for everybody. We have increased costs because of things
:47:27. > :47:30.like the National Living Wage, which is important, we want to make sure
:47:31. > :47:34.people providing service gets a proper income but I think we need a
:47:35. > :47:38.long-term solution. There was additional funding in the budget,
:47:39. > :47:42.which is very welcome. I think the Government has got the message they
:47:43. > :47:46.need to do something more radical to bring it in line. What would you
:47:47. > :47:48.suggest? I think we need to work more effectively with health service
:47:49. > :47:52.colleagues. We have a good record of colleagues. We have a good record of
:47:53. > :47:53.that in Dorset. We need to do more. The budget, if we can pull it across
:47:54. > :47:57.the better fund coming through in the better fund coming through in
:47:58. > :48:01.later years in the settlement, that will help, but we need confidence we
:48:02. > :48:05.have a long-term sustainable thing for the future. We cannot keep
:48:06. > :48:11.adding extra... Andy Burnham's National care service. We also have
:48:12. > :48:14.to work with providers. I am sorry but everybody fails to mention the
:48:15. > :48:20.providers. Of course you need to work closely with health colleagues.
:48:21. > :48:22.But it is the providers who are actually innovating to create the
:48:23. > :48:28.services. You aren't even talking to them as legal counsel. Are you
:48:29. > :48:31.talking enough? I agree with her point that it is important that it
:48:32. > :48:36.is an important part of the whole system of getting people the
:48:37. > :48:39.appropriate care. And we want people out of hospital and living
:48:40. > :48:44.independently either at home or in a care home. This is a Labour
:48:45. > :48:52.authority in Liverpool offering ?13.10 per hour to provide. How can
:48:53. > :48:56.you pay minimum wage in Liverpool, even? ?13.10 an hour doesn't cover
:48:57. > :49:00.it. And there is also the question of the providers having the right
:49:01. > :49:02.accommodation for people to go in. We do not have enough accommodation
:49:03. > :49:09.with the appropriate site for people to move into. Because we haven't
:49:10. > :49:14.invested. It is bricks and mortar as well as care itself. Where should we
:49:15. > :49:20.go from here? The integrated social care Bill is long overdue. Do you
:49:21. > :49:23.think integration in itself? I think integration, if we know what it
:49:24. > :49:27.means and somebody can focus down and tell me what they are talking
:49:28. > :49:31.about, because there seems to be integration which is different in
:49:32. > :49:35.some part of the country to others and in some places it doesn't exist
:49:36. > :49:38.at all. Everybody tells me they are integrating. These transformation
:49:39. > :49:43.plans mean nothing to the service user who is seeing less of their
:49:44. > :49:49.demand being met and these are assessed needs they know they have
:49:50. > :49:52.to fulfil, because we are creating a lonely environment for people
:49:53. > :49:56.keeping them at home, people handing back contracts, they can't deliver
:49:57. > :50:00.the service, so we are letting them down. Local authorities need to wake
:50:01. > :50:05.up and work with providers. There is a crisis averted but there is one
:50:06. > :50:09.around the corner. We have done some innovative work in Dorset, creating
:50:10. > :50:13.our own a trading company to provide care services for people. I think we
:50:14. > :50:15.need to join things up. But joining up with the health service is good
:50:16. > :50:19.but we need to introduce efficiencies and accountability
:50:20. > :50:23.which we have in local government into the health process to make sure
:50:24. > :50:29.we get the best value. Thank you very much for joining us today.
:50:30. > :50:34.Thank you. In terms of joining up, can I add, getting in early,
:50:35. > :50:41.prevention rather than cure. Useful extra thought, Bob. Thank you.
:50:42. > :50:44.Now, here's a topic to go to town on...
:50:45. > :50:46.Urban regeneration schemes are springing up across the South.
:50:47. > :50:50.It's city living like we've never seen it before.
:50:51. > :50:52.But is it a brave new world or a corporate take-over?
:50:53. > :50:55.Our Hampshire and Isle of Wight Political Reporter Jessica Parker
:50:56. > :51:06.But the sea itself is rather hard to find.
:51:07. > :51:19.Sorry, you haven't seen the sea, have you?
:51:20. > :51:20.With a rather built-up waterside, you've really
:51:21. > :51:36.Mayflower Park is one of the few places where people
:51:37. > :51:39.can get near the water here and there's a plan to redevelop the
:51:40. > :51:46.whole area, but not everyone's happy.
:51:47. > :51:49.When I looked at the plans here, I was totally...
:51:50. > :51:53.Shops, restaurants, a hotel and flats, a not untypical set
:51:54. > :52:03.The same sterile spaces, little bit of paving, same thing
:52:04. > :52:06.sticking up, same bit of green and the high end housing
:52:07. > :52:07.and commercial development just dominating the
:52:08. > :52:11.Commercial developments offering homes, retail and leisure
:52:12. > :52:13.are of course springing up, or planned, across the South.
:52:14. > :52:15.There's the Bracknell Lexicon, the Oxford
:52:16. > :52:17.Westgate Centre and back in Southampton, West Q2 is being
:52:18. > :52:19.finished up, but who is benefiting the most?
:52:20. > :52:28.It's a partnership, so we benefit because we get the business
:52:29. > :52:32.use to subsidise public services for everybody.
:52:33. > :52:35.We get the jobs and opportunities for people that live here.
:52:36. > :52:36.Development benefits because they get
:52:37. > :52:37.a viable development in a
:52:38. > :52:42.city that's growing and can make a profit.
:52:43. > :52:45.Without companies making profits there will not be any taxes
:52:46. > :52:50.Do people think it's all making the right kind of splash?
:52:51. > :52:52.Definitely the regeneration here has been fantastic.
:52:53. > :52:54.I have been here 21 years and it seems
:52:55. > :52:57.to be a massive development, money that they've put into the city since
:52:58. > :53:02.I think they've done some wonderful stuff down here.
:53:03. > :53:09.The council have not got their act together over the years, but now
:53:10. > :53:13.The nice thing is they have exposed the
:53:14. > :53:16.And before, well, you could see a little bit here and there.
:53:17. > :53:18.Simon Hill worked in council planning for decades.
:53:19. > :53:27.Some years ago the answer was always build more land in the
:53:28. > :53:30.In the last 20 years there has been much
:53:31. > :53:31.more national policy towards
:53:32. > :53:38.trying to intensify within the cities.
:53:39. > :53:41.Not only to save countryside land, but also you get that intensity
:53:42. > :53:43.of activity which makes it a more vibrant place.
:53:44. > :53:46.And developers, what are they looking to do in general?
:53:47. > :53:53.Some have got aspirations, they want to leave a good mark, they
:53:54. > :53:56.want to be seen in a good category of developer.
:53:57. > :53:58.There are others driven by the shareholders and
:53:59. > :54:01.accountants and it is just, what is the mix of development we can get
:54:02. > :54:06.And we can either sell or rent it afterwards.
:54:07. > :54:14.So how can councils know their new plans future proof?
:54:15. > :54:20.If you were to say what happened 20 years ago and
:54:21. > :54:23.where we are now, 20 years ago nobody had the internet, internet
:54:24. > :54:27.shopping didn't exist, so it is very difficult to predict.
:54:28. > :54:30.Generally speaking, people are still going to
:54:31. > :54:34.want to eat and see a film and still will need brilliant and excellent
:54:35. > :54:41.public rail space, which is what we have got here.
:54:42. > :54:43.For some, developer cash is being put before the community.
:54:44. > :54:45.The planners, holy, holy, developers coming to Southampton,
:54:46. > :54:48.they are going to give us some money and it is dominated by
:54:49. > :54:51.There is no sense of place, to my knowledge.
:54:52. > :54:55.Any big urban planning project can divide opinion.
:54:56. > :54:57.Some will see it as an innovation and others
:54:58. > :55:11.What is the perspective in Oxford, Bob? It is very difficult with
:55:12. > :55:15.historic listed buildings to make development work. Then you have high
:55:16. > :55:22.as prices, which I suppose may help in some ways. The Westgate
:55:23. > :55:24.development going up now replaces an unpleasant 1974 development, which
:55:25. > :55:27.rather destroyed the character of the inner-city part of the city. The
:55:28. > :55:34.new development has been designed carefully to fit in with the more
:55:35. > :55:37.historic part of the city. Four good architect companies working with the
:55:38. > :55:43.Crown estate on a long-term high quality development, which will
:55:44. > :55:48.combine, as Simon said, retail with cinema, leisure and very nice spaces
:55:49. > :55:55.for cultural activity. With online are taking away from the shops, can
:55:56. > :55:58.we rely on keeping the leisure industry to keep funding this or in
:55:59. > :56:03.the end will we have another way to find to pay for city centres? People
:56:04. > :56:04.still like shopping and going to restaurants. We have a large visitor
:56:05. > :56:09.economy in Oxford with nine or 10 economy in Oxford with nine or 10
:56:10. > :56:12.million visitors per year. They like to look at the colleges, green
:56:13. > :56:17.spaces but would also want to go shopping. And that costs you, as
:56:18. > :56:24.well, to keep the green spaces. To clean the city centre, yes. This is
:56:25. > :56:28.an interesting example, in Dorset. We are providing a range of houses
:56:29. > :56:33.at low cost, affordable housing with open market housing employment. And
:56:34. > :56:37.jobs, employment, retail. I think it linked back to what we were talking
:56:38. > :56:41.about in terms of local government reorganisation, to get a joined up
:56:42. > :56:44.strategic planning approach in the county, and also talking about care
:56:45. > :56:48.we need the right accommodation for the people working in the care
:56:49. > :56:52.sector. That is hard at the moment. We need appropriate affordable
:56:53. > :56:55.housing in the right places. A real challenge. It feels like the
:56:56. > :56:59.affordable housing has been pushed to one side for volume at the
:57:00. > :57:05.moment. Obviously by increasing volume you increase availability.
:57:06. > :57:10.That is important. Really? Build more houses? The prices... I think
:57:11. > :57:14.we need to build more but in the right place. We need to make sure
:57:15. > :57:18.that it is quality. Craig Reid Berry, good quality material, we
:57:19. > :57:24.mention. People like it. -- we mention good quality material. Other
:57:25. > :57:30.schemes like the Brewery Square and the regeneration, we do know retail
:57:31. > :57:33.is changing and it is more of a recreational activity with more
:57:34. > :57:37.restaurants and coffee places. We need to provide the right mixture. I
:57:38. > :57:42.think it is important to get it right. Should we not still be
:57:43. > :57:45.worried about housing, Bob? Yes, across the Southeast it is a very
:57:46. > :57:51.big problem. The mixture is important. Some private affordable
:57:52. > :57:53.and social rent, the mixture is important to get right to
:57:54. > :57:59.accommodate different types of employee we have in the area.
:58:00. > :58:04.Low-wage employees in retail and social care needs to have cheap rent
:58:05. > :58:07.rather than expensive housing. I think that is quite true. We are
:58:08. > :58:11.looking at all our assets to see if there is land that can be unlocked
:58:12. > :58:16.to be used as potential care home usage, or development for low-cost
:58:17. > :58:20.housing and rental. But it has to be a partnership. Yes, that is right.
:58:21. > :58:26.We're looking at the public and private partnership. One key
:58:27. > :58:29.priority is to rationalise property holdings as we work differently and
:58:30. > :58:33.do not need so many properties. There is a lot of potential which we
:58:34. > :58:38.need to unlock going forward. Finding a good partner is important.
:58:39. > :58:42.We are part of estates on the Barton scheme and they are long-term
:58:43. > :58:45.investments for quality. Pound rate is a good example. Interesting
:58:46. > :58:49.examples, thank you. Now our regular round-up
:58:50. > :58:51.of the political week The terrorist attack
:58:52. > :58:59.in Parliament was marked by Here in Sussex and the Portsmouth
:59:00. > :59:05.Guildhall, the bravery of the Bournemouth MP Tobias Ellwood,
:59:06. > :59:08.praised by the Prime Minister. We will remember the extraordinary
:59:09. > :59:12.efforts to save the life of PC Keith Palmer, including those by my right
:59:13. > :59:14.honourable friend, the member for
:59:15. > :59:19.Bournemouth East. Thames Water were handed a record
:59:20. > :59:21.?20 million fine for Hundreds of fish were killed
:59:22. > :59:28.in 2013, manholes overflowed, spilling sewage
:59:29. > :59:33.into nature reserves. The Oxford Cycling Network launched
:59:34. > :59:39.a vision for 366 miles of cycle routes, which will join every
:59:40. > :59:43.major town in the county, at a cost A return to prefab housing could be
:59:44. > :59:54.under way, with plans for a housing The city council will
:59:55. > :00:09.then transport them Might send some of those at the A34
:00:10. > :00:12.and 35. I think Southampton would like to purchase them! Let's talk
:00:13. > :00:17.about Tobias Ellwood quickly and the terrible events in Parliament. With
:00:18. > :00:21.all respect to the people who died on the bridge and the others, has
:00:22. > :00:25.there been too much in the media? Does it feed terrorism? I think we
:00:26. > :00:31.have to be careful about the balance. One lesson, the value of
:00:32. > :00:34.democracy, the important part of the country is the democratic process
:00:35. > :00:38.and it is popular to criticise MPs and we need to remember how
:00:39. > :00:43.important the processes. But we do need to get the coverage. But
:00:44. > :00:48.actually the deaths on the bridge and the tourist visiting... And the
:00:49. > :00:51.response of the emergency services. The police and health service
:00:52. > :00:55.responded extraordinarily quickly and effectively and we should give
:00:56. > :00:58.tribute to them. Our thoughts are with all those people affected by a
:00:59. > :01:03.terrible thing but we have to try and carry on and learn lessons.
:01:04. > :01:06.Democracy was the target. I was there and we got locked down. I
:01:07. > :01:12.wonder if this had happened in Exeter or even Oxford, is it
:01:13. > :01:17.different? Because it is Parliament? I think it would have been the same
:01:18. > :01:22.reaction. People are immediately sympathetic to the victims and wants
:01:23. > :01:28.to support, as Robert said, democracy and rule of law. It is
:01:29. > :01:29.wonderful what kicks in when people support whatever they are doing and
:01:30. > :01:34.our thoughts... We put a flag at our thoughts... We put a flag at
:01:35. > :01:35.half-mast yesterday and I have had loads of letters of support. Thank
:01:36. > :01:38.you. That's the Sunday Politics
:01:39. > :01:40.in the South, thanks to my guests Next week, I'll be joined
:01:41. > :01:44.by Labour's Rowenna Davis and Conservative MP Sir Gerald
:01:45. > :01:46.Howarth. can see you nodding in agreement but
:01:47. > :01:48.we don't have any more time! Thank you both for coming in, Andrew, back
:01:49. > :01:54.to you. So yesterday the European Union
:01:55. > :02:11.celebrated its 60th birthday at a party in Rome, the city
:02:12. > :02:14.where the founding document Leaders of 27 EU countries
:02:15. > :02:18.were there to mark the occasion - overshadowing it, though,
:02:19. > :02:20.the continued terrorist threat, And on Wednesday Theresa May,
:02:21. > :02:23.who wasn't in Rome yesterday, will trigger Article 50,
:02:24. > :02:24.formally starting The President of the European
:02:25. > :02:28.Council, Donald Tusk, made an appeal for unity
:02:29. > :02:34.at the gathering. Today in Rome, we are renewing
:02:35. > :02:39.the unique alliance of free nations that was initiated 60 years ago
:02:40. > :02:47.by our great predecessors. At that time, they did not
:02:48. > :02:50.discuss multiple speeds, they did not devise exits,
:02:51. > :02:54.but despite all the tragic circumstances of the recent history
:02:55. > :03:14.they placed all their faith Mr Tusk, he is Polish, the man that
:03:15. > :03:18.has the Council of ministers, and on that council where every member of
:03:19. > :03:22.the EU sits he is an important figure in what is now about to
:03:23. > :03:29.happen. We have got to negotiate our divorce terms, we've got to agree a
:03:30. > :03:32.new free trade deal, new crime-fighting arrangements, we've
:03:33. > :03:38.got to repatriate 50 international trade agreements, and all of that
:03:39. > :03:43.has to be ratified within two years, by 27 other countries. Can that
:03:44. > :03:47.really happen?! I don't think it is inconceivable because it is in the
:03:48. > :03:51.interests of those 27 EU member states to try and negotiate a deal
:03:52. > :03:55.that we can all live with, because that would be preferable to Britain
:03:56. > :04:00.crashing out within two years. But I think this is why Labour's position
:04:01. > :04:04.is becoming increasingly incoherent. Keir Starmer has briefed today that
:04:05. > :04:08.he will be making a speech tomorrow setting out six conditions which he
:04:09. > :04:10.wants the deal to meet, otherwise Labour won't vote for it, but if
:04:11. > :04:31.Labour doesn't vote for it that doesn't mean we will be able to
:04:32. > :04:33.negotiate an extension, that would be incredibly difficult and require
:04:34. > :04:36.the consent of each of the 27 member states, so if Labour votes against
:04:37. > :04:39.it we will just crash out, it is effectively Labour saying no deal is
:04:40. > :04:41.better than a poor deal, which is not supposed to be their position.
:04:42. > :04:43.Labour's position may be incoherent but I was not asking about their
:04:44. > :04:46.position, I was asking about the Government's position. The man
:04:47. > :04:48.heading the Badila said he wants it ready by October next year so that
:04:49. > :04:50.it can go through the ratification process, people looking at this
:04:51. > :04:55.would think it is Mission: Impossible. It seems impossible to
:04:56. > :05:01.me to be done in that time. The fact that it is 27 countries, the whole
:05:02. > :05:05.of the European Parliament as well, there will be too many people
:05:06. > :05:10.throbbing spanners in the works and quite rightly. We have embarked on
:05:11. > :05:15.something that is truly terrible and disastrous, and the imagery we can
:05:16. > :05:20.have of those 27 countries celebrating together 60 years of the
:05:21. > :05:23.most extraordinary successful movement for peace, for shared
:05:24. > :05:30.European values, and others not there... We were not there at the
:05:31. > :05:37.start either, and we are not there now! And we have been bad partners
:05:38. > :05:40.while we were inside, but now that we are leaving... They did not look
:05:41. > :05:46.like it was a birthday party to me! I think it was, there was a sense of
:05:47. > :05:51.renewal, Europe exists as a place envied in the world for its values,
:05:52. > :05:55.for its peacefulness, that is why people flocked to its borders, that
:05:56. > :06:02.is why they come here. Can you look at the agenda that faces the UK
:06:03. > :06:06.Government and EU 27, is it not possible, in fact even likely, that
:06:07. > :06:13.as the process comes to an end they will have to agree on a number of
:06:14. > :06:17.areas of transitional arrangements? I think they will and they will have
:06:18. > :06:21.to agree that soon, I would not be surprised if sometime soon there is
:06:22. > :06:24.an understanding is not a formal decision that this is a process that
:06:25. > :06:28.will extend over something closer to buy or seven than two years. On
:06:29. > :06:32.Wednesday article 50 will be filed and there will be lots of excitement
:06:33. > :06:37.and hubbub but nothing concrete can happen for a while. Elections in
:06:38. > :06:40.France in May, elections in Germany which could really result in a
:06:41. > :06:52.change of Government... That is the big change, Mrs Merkel might not be
:06:53. > :06:55.there by October. And who foresaw that a few months ago? So you might
:06:56. > :06:57.be into 28 Dean before you are into the substantive discussions about
:06:58. > :07:00.how much market access or regulatory observance. I cannot see it being
:07:01. > :07:04.completed in two years. I could see, if negotiations are not too
:07:05. > :07:07.acrimonious, that transitional agreement taking place. Let's look
:07:08. > :07:12.at the timetable again. The council doesn't meet until the end of April,
:07:13. > :07:15.it meets in the middle of the French elections, the first round will have
:07:16. > :07:19.taken place, they will need a second round so not much can happen.
:07:20. > :07:25.President Hollande will be representing France, then the new
:07:26. > :07:30.French government, if it is Marine le Pen all bets are off, but even if
:07:31. > :07:34.it is Mr Mac run, he does not have a party, he will not have a majority,
:07:35. > :07:39.the French will take a long while to sort out themselves. Then it is
:07:40. > :07:42.summer, we are off to the Cote d'Azur, particularly the Bolivian
:07:43. > :07:48.elite, then we come back from that and the Germans are in an election,
:07:49. > :07:52.it may be very messy, Mrs Merkel no longer a shoo-in, it could be Mr
:07:53. > :08:04.Schultz, he may have to try to form a difficult green red coalition,
:08:05. > :08:07.that would take a while. Before you know it, it is Guy Fawkes' Day and
:08:08. > :08:11.no substance has taken place, yet we are then less than a year before
:08:12. > :08:13.this has to be decided. It is a big task and I'm sure Jana is right that
:08:14. > :08:16.there will be transitional arrangements and not everything will
:08:17. > :08:20.be concluded in that two year timetable, but in some respects what
:08:21. > :08:24.you have described helps those of us on the Eurosceptic site because it
:08:25. > :08:27.means they cannot really be a meaningful parliamentary vote on the
:08:28. > :08:32.terms of the deal because nothing is going to be agreed quickly enough
:08:33. > :08:35.for them to be able to go back and agree something else if Parliament
:08:36. > :08:38.rejects it, so when the Government eventually have something ready to
:08:39. > :08:44.bring before Parliament it will be a take it or leave it boat. How
:08:45. > :08:48.extraordinary that people who have campaigned. Indeed give us our
:08:49. > :08:50.country back and say, isn't it wonderful, we won't have a
:08:51. > :08:56.meaningful boat for our parliamentarians of the most
:08:57. > :09:00.important... We don't know what the negotiation, the package is, day by
:09:01. > :09:03.day we see more and more complicated areas nobody ever thought about,
:09:04. > :09:09.nobody mentioned during the campaign, all of which has to be
:09:10. > :09:14.resolved and the European Council and the negotiators say nothing is
:09:15. > :09:19.agreed until everything is agreed. You lead us into a catastrophe.
:09:20. > :09:23.There will be plenty of opportunity for Parliament to have its say
:09:24. > :09:27.following the introduction of the Great Repeal Bill, it is not as if
:09:28. > :09:32.there will be no Parliamentary time devoted. The final package is what
:09:33. > :09:37.counts. We have two years to blog about this!
:09:38. > :09:46.There was a big Proview -- pro-EU march yesterday... I was there!
:09:47. > :09:51.Polly Toynbee was there, down to Parliament Square, lots of people
:09:52. > :09:55.there marching in favour of the European Union. We can see the EU
:09:56. > :10:02.flags there on flags, lots of national flags as well, the British
:10:03. > :10:10.one. Polly, is it the aim of people like you still to stop Brexit, or to
:10:11. > :10:15.soften Brexit? I think the aim is for the best you can possibly do to
:10:16. > :10:19.limit the damage. Of course, if it happens that once people have had a
:10:20. > :10:23.chance to see how much they were lied to during the campaign and how
:10:24. > :10:27.dreadful the deal is likely to be, if it happens that enough people in
:10:28. > :10:32.the population have changed their minds, then maybe... There is no
:10:33. > :10:36.sign up yet. But we have not even begun, people have not begun to
:10:37. > :10:41.confront what it is going to mean. Wait and see. I think it is just
:10:42. > :10:46.being as close as we can. Is that credible, do you think, to stop it
:10:47. > :10:50.or to ameliorate it in terms of the Remainers? I think it is far more
:10:51. > :10:55.credible to try and stop it but even then the scope is limited. It is
:10:56. > :10:56.fairly apparent Theresa May's interpretation of the referendum is
:10:57. > :11:17.the country wants an end to free movement, there is probably no way
:11:18. > :11:20.of doing that inside the single market. She also wants external
:11:21. > :11:23.trade deals, no way of doing that outside the customs unit, said the
:11:24. > :11:25.only night you can depend if you are pro-European is, let's not leave
:11:26. > :11:27.without any trade pact, at least let's meet Canada and have a
:11:28. > :11:30.formalised trade agreement. The idea of ace -- of a very soft exit is
:11:31. > :11:33.gone now because the public really did want an end to free movement and
:11:34. > :11:35.the Government really does want external trade deals. It depends
:11:36. > :11:43.what changes in Europe. I think the momentum behind the Remoaning
:11:44. > :11:47.movement will move away. One of the banners I saw being held up
:11:48. > :11:51.yesterday by a young boy on the news was, don't put my daddy on a boat.
:11:52. > :11:56.It gets a lot of its moral force from the uncertainty surrounding the
:11:57. > :12:01.fate of EU nationals here and our resident in the remainder of the EU
:12:02. > :12:04.and I think David Lidington is right that it will be concluded quite
:12:05. > :12:08.quickly once negotiations start and that will take a lot of the heat and
:12:09. > :12:13.momentum out of the remaining movement. Why didn't Theresa May
:12:14. > :12:18.allow that amendment that said, we will do that, as an act of
:12:19. > :12:22.generosity, we will say, of course those European citizens here are
:12:23. > :12:26.welcome to stay? It would have been such a good opening move in the
:12:27. > :12:32.negotiations, instead of which she blocked it. It does not augur well.
:12:33. > :12:35.I have interviewed many Tories about this and put that point to them but
:12:36. > :12:43.they often say the Prime minister's job is to look after UK citizen in
:12:44. > :12:48.the EU... Bargaining chips, I think you have to be generous and you have
:12:49. > :12:50.to wish you people in Spain and everywhere else where there are
:12:51. > :12:54.British citizens would have responded. The British Government
:12:55. > :12:56.did try and raise that with their EU counterparts and were told, we
:12:57. > :13:01.cannot begin to talk about that until article 50 has been triggered.
:13:02. > :13:05.Next week we will be able to talk about it. How generous it would have
:13:06. > :13:09.been, we would have started on a better note. Didn't happen, we will
:13:10. > :13:14.see what happens next with EU citizens. That is it for today, the
:13:15. > :13:16.Daily Politics will be back tomorrow at midday and every day next week on
:13:17. > :13:19.BBC Two as always. And there's also a Question Time
:13:20. > :13:21.special live tomorrow night from Birmingham -
:13:22. > :13:22.with guests including the Brexit Secretary David Davis,
:13:23. > :13:24.Labour's Keir Starmer, former Ukip leader Nigel Farage
:13:25. > :13:27.and the SNP's Alex Salmond - I'll be back next week
:13:28. > :13:33.at 11am here on BBC One. Until then, remember -
:13:34. > :13:35.if it's Sunday, it's MUSIC: The Elements
:13:36. > :14:42.by Tom Lehrer # There's Attenborough, micro.bit,
:14:43. > :14:46.The Bottom Line and In Our Time # And Terrific Scientific
:14:47. > :14:49.and Ten Pieces and All In The Mind