14/05/2017 Sunday Politics South

Download Subtitles




Andrew Neil and Peter Henley are joined by shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey, housing minister Brandon Lewis and American political pollster Frank Luntz.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 14/05/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



It's Sunday morning and this is the Sunday Politics.


Theresa May unveils plans to build many more affordable homes


in England, but with no price tag, timetable or building targets -


Labour takes aim at the City with what it calls a Robin Hood Tax


to fund public services, but will traders just


Don't look at the polls - Jeremy Corbyn, at least,


insists he can win this election - so which way will


We'll hear from a focus group in Leeds.


In the south, we are in Oxfordshire with an audience of voters


and three politicians who want to win their votes.


Will it be the NHS, transport or Brexit that swings it?


and here, what the parties are saying about tackling the air


pollution problem in London. And with me, our own scientifically


selected focus group of political pundits -


they're not so much undecided as clueless -


Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott They'll be tweeting


throughout the programme. So, we've got two new


policies this morning. Labour say they will introduce


a financial transaction tax if they win the general election


and what they're calling "the biggest crackdown on tax


avoidance in the country's history". The Conservatives say they'll work


with local authorities in England to build council houses


with the right to buy. Theresa May says the policy


"will help thousands of people get on the first rung


of the housing ladder". Steve, what do you make of them? I


have been conditioned after doing tax and spend debates in


pre-election periods for many decades to treat policy is not as


literal but as arguments. In other words if you look back to 2015 the


Tory plan to wipe out the deficit was never going to happen and yet it


framed and large event. In that sense the Robin Hood tax is a


sensible move for Labour to make at this point because it is part of a


narrative of reconfiguring taxation to be fair. Treating it as an


argument rather than something that would happen in day one of Labour


government is sensible. In terms of building houses Theresa May said


right from the beginning when she was in Number Ten that there is a


housing deficit in this country rather than the economic deficit


George Osborne was focusing on, and this is an example of trying to get


house-building going. It seems entirely sensible, not sure how it


works with right to buy but again as framing of a 90 minute it makes


sense. I disagree with Steve on one front which is how sensible Theresa


May's policy is on the housing announcement. I think more broadly


these two announcements have something in common which is that


over the next 24 hours both will probably unravel in different ways.


Ye of little faith! The Mayor of London has already said he doesn't


agree with this, and when people see the actual impact of what looks like


a populist tax will very potentially affect people's pensions, it might


become a lot less popular. On the Tory housing plans, I think it is


difficult to imagine how they are going to implement this huge, what


looks like a huge land and property grab. Through compulsory purchase


orders, which are not a simple instrument. They say they will


change the law but really the idea of paying people below the market


value for their assets is not something I can see sitting easily


with Tory backbenchers or the Tories in the House of Lords. Tom. Both


would appear superficially to be appealing to traditional left and


traditional right bases. What is more Tory than right to buy, then


councils sell on these houses, and Labour slapping a massive tax on the


city. The Tories' plan, I would say look a bit deeper and all of the


Tory narrative from the last six years which hasn't worked well is


talking about the private sector increasing supply in the market. Now


Mrs May is talking about the role for the state after all so this is


the shift creeping in. On the Labour transaction tax, one of the most


interesting things I heard in days was from Paul Mason, former BBC


correspondent, now a cog in Easter extreme. On Newsnight he said don't


worry about whether the Labour manifesto will add up, I'm promising


it will, the bigger Tory attack line should be what on earth will be the


macroeconomic effect of taking so much tax out of the system. Very


well, we shall see. At least we have some policies to talk about.


Now, on Tuesday Labour will launch its manifesto.


But we've already got a pretty good idea of what's in it -


that's because most of its contents were leaked to the media


Labour has a variety of spending pledges including an extra


?6 billion a year for the NHS, an additional ?8 billion for social


care over the lifetime of the next parliament,


as well as a ?250 billion in infrastructure over


The party will support the renewal of the Trident submarine system,


although any Prime Minister should be extremely cautious


about its use, and the party will hold a strategic defence


and security review immediately after the election.


In terms of immigration, Labour will seek "reasonable


management of migration", but it will not make "false


Elsewhere, university tuition fees will be abolished,


and the public sector pay cap, which limits pay rises


for public sector workers to 1%, will be scrapped.


The party also aims to renationalise the railways, the Royal Mail


and the National Grid, as well as creating at least one


A senior Labour backbencher described it to the Sunday Politics


as a manifesto for a leadership who don't "give a toss


about the wider public", and several other Labour candidates


told us they thought it had been deliberately


leaked by the leadership, with one suggesting


the leak was intended to "bounce the National Executive"


And we're joined now from Salford by the Shadow Business Secretary,


Welcome to the programme. The draft manifesto proposed to renationalise


the number of industry. You will wait for the franchises to run out


rather than buy them out at the moment so can you confirm the


railways will not be wholly nationalised until 2030, after three


Labour governments, and Jeremy Corbyn will be 80? I'm not going to


comment on leaks, you will just have to be patient and wait to see what


is in our manifesto. But you have already announced you will


nationalise the railways, so tell me about it. We have discussed taking


the franchises into public ownership as they expire, however the detail


will be set out in the manifesto so I'm not prepared to go into detail


until that policy is formally laid out on Tuesday. That doesn't sound


very hopeful but let's carry on. You will also nationalise the National


Grid, it has a market capitalisation of ?40 billion, why do you want to


nationalise that? Again, I'm not going to speculate on leaks, you


will just have to be patient. But you said you will nationalise the


National Grid so tell's Y. The leaks have suggested but you will just


have to wait and see what the final manifesto states on that one. So is


it a waste of time me asking you how you will pay for something that


costs 40 billion? Be patient, just couple of days to go, but what I


would say is there is growing pressure from the public to reform


the utilities sector. The Competition and Markets Authority


stated in 2015 that bill payers were paying over till debt -- ?2 billion


in excess of what they should be paying so there is a clear need for


reform. The bills we get are from the energy companies, you are not


going to nationalise them, you are going to nationalise the


distribution company and I wondered what is the case for nationalising


the distribution company? As I said, our full plans will be set out on


Tuesday. In relation to the big six energy companies, we know in recent


years they have been overcharging customers... There's no point in


answering questions I am not asking. I am asking what is the case for


nationalising the National Grid? There is a case for reforming the


energy sector as a whole and that looks at the activities of the big


six companies and it will look at other aspects too. You will have to


be patient and wait until Tuesday. What about the Royal Mail? Again,


you will have to wait until Tuesday. Why can't you just be honest with


the British voter? We know you are going to do this and you have a duty


to explain. I'm not even arguing whether it is right or wrong. The


Royal Mail was sold off and we know it was sold under value and British


taxpayers have a reason to feel aggrieved about that. There is a


long-term strategy that would ensure the Royal Mail was classified as a


key piece of infrastructure but the details of that will be set out in


our manifesto because we want to ensure businesses and households


ensure the best quality of service when it comes to their postal


providers. You plan to borrow an extra 25 billion per year, John


McDonnell has already announced this, on public investment, on top


of the around 50 billion already being planned for investment. You


will borrow it all so that means, if you can confirm, that many years


after the crash by 2021, Labour government would still be borrowing


75 billion a year. Is that correct? We have set out ?250 billion of


capital investment, and ?250 billion for a national investment bank. Our


financial and fiscal rules dictate we will leave the Government in a


state of less debt than we found it at the start of the parliament so we


won't increase the national debt at the end of our Parliamentary term.


How can you do that if by 2021 you will still be borrowing around 75


billion a year, which is more than we borrow at the moment? The 500


billion figure is set out over a period of ten years, it's a figure


that has been suggested by Peter Helm from Oxford University as a


figure that is necessary to bring us in line with other industrial


competitors. Similar figures have been suggested by groups such as the


CBI. By the way I have not included all 500 billion, just the 250


billion on public spending, not the extra money. You talk about the


fiscal rules. The draft manifesto said you will leave debt as a


proportion of trend GDP law at the end of each parliament, you have


just said a version of that. What is trend GDP? In clear terms we will


ensure the debt we acquire will be reduced by the end of the


parliament. We won't leave the Government finances in a worse state


than we found them. OK, but what is trend GDP? Our rule is we will


ensure public sector net debt is less than we found it when we came


to power in Government on June the 8th. But that is not what your draft


manifesto says. I'm not going to comment on leaks, you are just going


to have to wait until Tuesday to look at the fine detail and perhaps


we will have another chat then. You have published your plans for


corporation tax and you will increase it by a third and your


predictions assumed that will get an extra 20 billion a year by the end


of the parliament. But that assumes the companies don't change their


behaviour, that they move money around, they leave the country or


they generate smaller profits. Is that realistic? You are right to


make that point and you will see when we set out our policies and


costings in the manifesto that we haven't spent all of the tax take.


We have allowed for different differentials and potential changes


in market activity because that would be approved and direction to


take. But corporation tax is allowed to be cut in France and the United


States, it's only 12.5% in Dublin. Many companies based in Britain are


already wondering whether they should relocate because of Brexit,


if you increase this tax by a third couldn't that clinch it for a number


of them? No, we will still be one of the lowest corporation tax rate in


the G7. Let's look at what's important for business. Cutting


corporation tax in itself doesn't improve productivity, or business


investment and there's no suggestion cutting corporation tax in recent


years has achieved that. Businesses need an investment in tools in


things they need to thrive and prosper, they also need to reduce


the burden at the lower end of the tax scale, before we get to the


Prophet stage. One key example is business rates. We have made the


proposal to government to in -- exclude machinery so businesses can


invest and grow operations in the future but the Government refused.


Corporation tax has been cut since 2010. When it was 28% it brought in


?43 billion a year. Now it is down to 20%, it brought in ?55 billion a


year. By cutting it in the last year, it brought in 21% more, so


what is the problem? It might have brought in more money, but has it


increased business investment in the long term. It is not just about


cutting corporation tax, but it is on the ability of businesses to


thrive and prosper. Business investment in the UK is below are


industrial competitors. Wages are stagnating which doesn't indicate


businesses are not doing well. Let me get it right, you are arguing if


we increase business tax by a third, that will increase investment? I am


not saying that. You just did. Know I didn't, I said reducing business


tax isn't enough, you have to invest in the things businesses need to


thrive and prosper. You have also got to lessen the burden on


business. You have announced a financial transaction tax. Your own


labour Mayor of London said he has vowed to fight it. He said I do not


want a unilateral tax on business in our city, so why are you proceeding


with it? This isn't a new initiative, there is a growing


global pressure to make sure we have fairness in the financial sector.


Ordinary British people are paying for our banking crisis they didn't


cause. Another important point, stamp duty reserve tax was brought


in in the 1600 and there have been little reforms. The sector has


changed and we have do provide changes to the system for that


change. High-frequency trading where we have a state of affairs where a


lot of shares are traded on computers within milliseconds. We


need a tax system that keeps up with that. What happens if they move the


computers to another country? Emily Thornaby said this morning, other


countries had already introduced a financial transaction tax, what


other countries have done that? There are ten countries looking at


introducing a transaction tax. Which ones have done it so far? They will


be later announcing a final package, going through the finer detail at


the moment. But the European Commission tried to get this done in


2011 and it still hasn't happened in any of these countries. But you are


going to go ahead unilaterally and risk these businesses, which


generate a lot of money, moving to other jurisdictions. There is not a


significant risk of that happening. The stamp duty reserve tax is levied


at either where the person or company is domiciled or where the


instrument is issued rather than worth the transaction takes place.


This tax in itself is not enough to make people leave this country in


terms of financial services because there is more to keep these


businesses here in terms of the investment we are making, the


economy that Labour will build, in terms of productivity improvement we


will see. Thank you very much, Rebecca Long-Bailey.


And listening to that was the Home Office Minister, Brandon Lewis.


Over the years, you have got corporation tax by 20%, it is lower


than international standards, so why are so many global companies who


make money out of Great Britain, still not paying 20%? It is one of


the problems with the point Labour were making and Rebecca could not


answer, these companies can move around the world. One of the


important things is having a low tax economy but these businesses, it


encourages them to come at a rate they are prepared to pay. People may


say they are right, if they were paying 19, 20% incorporation tax.


But they are not. Google runs a multi-million pound corporation and


did not pay anywhere near 20%. There are companies that are trading


internationally and that is why we have to get this work done with our


partners around the world. Has there been an improvement? It is more than


they were paying before. Whether it is Google or any other company,


alongside them being here, apart from the tax they pay, it is the


people they employ. The deal was, if you cut the business tax, the


corporation tax on profits, we would get more companies coming here and


more companies paying their tax. It seems it doesn't matter how low, a


number of companies just pay a derisory amount and you haven't been


able to change that. As you outlined, the income taken from the


changing corporation tax has gone up. That is from established British


companies, not from these international companies. It is


because more companies are coming here and paying tax. That is a good


thing. There is always more to do and that is why we want to crack


down. In the last few weeks in the Finnish Parliament, Labour refused


to put to another ?8.7 billion of tax take we could have got by


cracking down further. You claim to have made great progress on cracking


down on people and companies to pay the tax they should. But the tax gap


is the difference between what HMRC takes in and what it should take in.


It has barely moved in five years, so where is the progress? He have


brought in 150 billion more where we have cracked down on those tax


schemes. The gap is still the same as it was five years ago. It's gone


from 6.8, 26.5. It has gone down. The Prime Minister and the


Chancellor said they want to continue work on to get more money


on these companies while still having a competitive rate to


encourage these companies. While big business and the wealthy continue to


prosper, the Office for Budget Responsibility tell us those on


average earnings in this country will be earning less in real terms


by 2021 than they did in 2008. How can that be fair? I don't see it


that way. I haven't seen the figures you have got. What I can say to you,


Andrew, we have made sure the minimum wage has gone up, the actual


income tax people pay has gone down. So in their pocket, real terms,


people have more money. You are the self-styled party of work. We keep


emphasising work. Under your government you can work for 13 years


and still not earn any more at the end of it, and you did at the start.


Where is the reward for effort in that? I have not seen those figures.


There are 2.8 million more people, more jobs in economy than there was.


1000 jobs every day and people are working and developing through their


careers. This is what I thought was odd in what Rebecca was saying,


investing in people is what the apprenticeship levy is about,


companies are investing their works force to take more opportunities


that there. We are talking about fairness, politicians talk about


hard-working people and we know the average earnings are no higher than


they were in 2008. We know the pay and bonuses of senior executives


have continued to grow and the Institute for Fiscal Studies has


shown 3 million of the poorest households will lose an average of


?2500 a year in the next Parliament, benefits frozen, further sanctions


kick in. 3 million of the poorest losing 2500. Under the Tories, one


law for the rich and another for the poor. It is quite wrong. First of


all, we have got to be fair to the taxpayer who is funding the welfare


and benefit system. Which is why the welfare was right. Get more people


in work and then it is important to get more people upscaling. As that


allowance rises, people have more of the money they earn in their pocket


to be able to use in the economy. People will be worse off. 2500,


among the poorest already. They will have more money in their pocket as


we increase the allowance before people pay tax. We have seen


millions of people coming out of tax altogether. The reason I ask these


questions, you and the Prime Minister go on and on about the just


about managing classes. I am talking about the just about managing and


below that. It is all talk, you haven't done anything for them. We


have made sure they have an increasing minimum wage, it has gone


up more under us than any other previous government. Their wages


will be still lower in real terms. Let me come on to this plan for


housing. We have announced a new plan to increase affordable housing,


social housing, some council housing and social housing built by the


associations. How much money is behind this? It is part of the 1.4


billion announced in the Autumn Statement. How many homes will you


get for 1.4 billion? That depends on the negotiations with local


authorities. It is local authorities, who know the area best.


I will not put a number on that. 1.4 billion, if you price the house at


100,000, which is very low, particularly for the South, back at


you 14,000 new homes. That is it. What we have seen before, how the


local government can leveraged to build thousands more homes. That is


what we want to see across the country. It is not just about the


money, for a lot of local authorities it is about the


expertise and knowledge on how to do this. That is why support from the


housing communities minister will help. What is the timescale, how


many more affordable homes will be built? I will not put a number on


it. You announced it today, so you cannot tell me how many more or what


the target is? It is a matter of working with the local authorities


who know what their local needs are, what land they have got available.


What we saw through the local elections with the Metro mayors,


they want to deliver in their areas, whether it is the West of England,


the north-east, Liverpool, Manchester and we want to work with


them. You have said variations of this for the past seven years and I


want some credibility. When you cannot tell us how much money, what


the target and timescale is, and this government, under which


affordable house building has fallen to a 24 year low. 1.2 million


families are on waiting lists for social housing to rent. That is your


record. Why should we believe a word you say? This is different to what


we have been doing over the last two years. We want to develop and have a


strong and stable economy that can sustain that 1.4 billion homes. This


is important. In 2010, we inherited the lowest level of house building,


75,000 new homes. That is about 189,000 over the last four years.


That is a big step forward after the crash, getting people back into the


industry. More first-time buyers onto the market. Final question, in


2010, 2011, your first year in government, there were 60,000


affordable homes built. May not be enough, but last day it was 30 2000.


So why should we trust anything you say about this? On housing, we have


delivered. We have delivered more social housing. Double what Labour


did in 13 years, in just five years. This is what this policy is about,


working with local authorities to deliver more homes to people in


their local areas. Thank you. Now, they have a deficit


of between 15 and 20% in the polls, but Jeremy Corbyn and those


around him insist Labour can win. If the polls are right they've got


three and half weeks to change voters' minds and persuade those


fabled undecided voters We enlisted the polling organisation


YouGov to help us find out how the performance of party leaders


will affect behaviour Leeds, a city of three quarters


of a million people, eight Parliamentary seats and home


to our very own focus group. Our panel was recruited


from a variety of backgrounds and the majority say they haven't


decided who to vote for yet. Watching behind the glass,


two experts on different sides Giles Cunningham, who headed up


political press at Downing Street under David Cameron


and Aaron Bastani, Corbin supporter, under David Cameron


and Aaron Bastani, Corbyn supporter, I think Theresa May sees herself


as a pound shop Thatcher. Milliband's policies but when it


came about who you want,


if you wake up on maybe a 2015, We found in a couple of focus


groups, people saying we'd be quite relieved,


even though some of those same people have been saying we quite


like the Labour policies. I think the fact that Corbyn's


going so hard on his values, this is a really progressive


manifesto, they live But I think that's a new challenge,


that wasn't there in 2015. Is there anyone here that


you don't recognise? After a little warm up,


the first exercise, recognising I think it's nice to have a strong


woman in politics, I do. But I've got to say,


when she comes on the news, I kind of do think,


here we go again. Tell me about Tim Farron, what


are your impressions of Tim Farron? It isn't going to do anything,


it isn't going to change anything. You'll be surprised to hear it's


actually the Greens. Strong and stable leadership


in the national interest. Yes, Team May, it's


the British equivalent of make What do we think about this one


for the many and not the few? It's not quite as bad


as strong and stable, but it will probably get


on our nerves after a while. We must seize that chance today


and every day until June the 8th. But that's not quite my


question, my question is, if you are Prime Minister,


we will leave, come hell or high water, whatever is on the table


at the end of the negotiations? If we win the election,


we'll get a good deal with Europe. Assertive and in control


and he felt comfortable But the second one, I thought


he was very hesitant. I thought he was kind of,


hovering around, skirting around and that's the second


time I've seen a similar interview with the question


being asked regarding Brexit. I don't think I'd have


any confidence with him You think you are going up


against some quite strong people, how are you going to stand


up for us? When you are in negotiations,


you need to be tough. And actually is right


to be tough sometimes, particularly when you are doing


something for the country. There's a reason for talking


about strong and stable leadership. It's about the future


of the country, it's It's just that people kind of listen


to that kind of thing and think Both on The One Show


and in the news. She attracts the public better


than what Corbyn does. She didn't answer the question


in a more articular way than Corbyn Imagine that Theresa


May is an animal. So, in your minds,


what animal is coming to mind I've done a Pekinese because I think


she's all bark and no bite. Alpaca because she's


superior looking and woolly I don't think his policies


are for the modern, real world. A mouse because they are weak


and they can be easily bullied, but also they can catch


you by surprise if you're What do you take away


from what you saw then, and what message would you send back


to the Tories now? I think what came over is people see


Theresa May as a strong politician, not everyone likes her,


but you don't need to be liked to be elected,


because ultimately it's about who do you trust with your future


and your security. I think what I also take out


of that focus group, was it was a group of floating


voters, there was no huge appetite for the Lib Dems and there was no


huge appetite for Ukip. So my messaged back to CCHQ


would be stick to the plan. I thought the response


to the manifesto was excellent. It's clear that people aren't


particularly keen on Theresa May, There are some associations with her


about strength and stability, which is exactly what the Tory party


want of course, but they are not positive and nobody thinks


that she has a vision So, what I'd say the Jeremy Corbyn,


what I'd say to the Labour Party is, they need to really emphasise


the manifesto in Jeremy Corbyn himself has to perform


out of his skin and I think he has to reemphasise those


characteristics which may be have come to the fore may be


over the last 12 months, resilience, strength and the fact


that he's come this far, why not take that final step and go


into ten Downing Street? We're joined now by the American


political consultant For the sake of this discussion,


assume the polls at the moment are broadly right, is there any hope for


Mr Corbyn in the undecided voters? Know, and this is a very serious


collection with serious consequences to who wins. Nobody cares whether


you can draw and what animal they represent, they want to know where


they stand, and I felt that was frivolous. I come to Britain to


watch elections because I learned from here. Your elections are more


substantial, more serious, more policy and less about personality


and that peace was only about personality. That's partly because


Mrs May has decided to make this a presidential election. You can see


on the posters it is all Team May. I agree with that, and in her language


she says not everyone benefits from a Conservative government, I don't


see how using anything Republicans have used in the past. In fact her


campaign is more of a centrist Democrats but it is a smart strategy


because it pushes Corbyn further to the left. Of course you said Hillary


Clinton have won. On election night the polling was so bad in America,


the exit polls that were done, the BBC told America she had won. No, I


was anchoring the programme that night, I ignored your tweet. The BBC


had the same numbers. Yes, but we did not say she had won, I can


assure you of that. Because of people like you we thought she had


but we didn't broadcast it. That was a smart approach. My point is other


than teasing you, maybe there is hope for Jeremy Corbyn. I think you


will have one of the lowest turnout in modern history and I think Labour


will fall to one of the lowest percentages, not percentage of


number of seats they have had, and this will be a matter of


soul-searching for both political parties. What you do with a sizeable


majority, and she has a responsibility to tell the British


people exactly what happens as she moves forward. He and Labour will


have to take a look at whether they still represent a significant slice


of the British population. Do you see a realignment in British


politics taking place? I see a crumbling of the left and yet there


is still a significant percentage of the British population that once


someone who is centre-left. And they like a lot of Mr Corbyn's policies.


I'm listening to Michael foot. I went to school here in the 1980s and


I feel like I'm watching the Labour Party of 35 years ago, in a


population that wants to focus on the future, not the past. Thank you.


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


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


Welcome to Sunday Politics South, my name's Peter Henley.


This is the first of our election hustings.


We're in Harwell in Oxfordshire with a group of voters


who are going to be grilling our three local politicians


on why their party should get their vote.


Laura Coyle is from the Liberal Democrats,


Nicola Blackwood is from the Conservatives,


Before we let our inquisitors loose on them, though,


as this has been the first proper week of campaigning


Frankie Peck has been taking a look


at what's been going on out on the campaign trail.


The constituents of Southampton Test


wait for years for a party leader,


and two come along in the same month.


This week, Theresa May popped up in the Conservative target seat,


and mostly spoke to loyal Conservative voters,


but she said it wasn't a day to speak to local media.


One resident filmed Theresa May knocking on his door,


but then posted on Twitter saying he was too scared to answer it.


# We're just trying to be friendly... #


Earlier this month, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn


ventured into a different part of the constituency,


talking to locals about cuts to benefits and bus routes.


So, I expect to see bus stops, a bigger car park...


I spend a lot of time listening to people.


It's what I've been doing all my life.


Listening was something Liberal Democrat Leader


Tim Farron had to do a lot of on a recent trip to Kidlington.


The NHS in particular is a major priority for us...


Over on the Isle of Wight, co-leader of the Green Party Caroline Lucas


used the carefully chosen backdrop of Saint Mary's Hospital,


part of the troubled health trust on the island,


for the announcement of the Green Party's


All of the parties have now nominated


pounding the streets, knocking on doors and bending your ears.


You may also have noticed this week I have been on my bicycle around the


South of England talking to voters. Do you know, three politicians, one


of the things a lot of people talked about was this was a contest between


Theresa May and labour. They didn't say and Jeremy Corbyn. It does seem


to be that it is the Labour Party that people might fought for rather


than Jeremy Corbyn when they say that. I do not think it matters if


you vote for the Labour Party and the broad church that we represent


or you vote for your local candidate working incredibly hard for you when


you live. I do not think it really matters, I just think we need to get


across the clear message that only Labour are going to get the


conservative out this election and we need to come out and we need you


to vote. But do people say Jeremy Corbyn, Prime Minister, really? I


think you always have that. People don't always identify with different


personalities but Jeremy Corbyn is consistent, strong, has been


supportive to me in my local area and I think that actually it is


about the manifesto, which I feel so positively about. We have got so


much to talk about. It is pushing Labour into a whole new aspirational


space and I just want people to read it, get behind it and see the


country could be. People do not talk about Conservatives. It is all


Theresa May on the bus. It is pushing her. Is that the whole


point? It absolutely does matter who you are leaders, especially at a


moment like this when we face a challenging national time when we


are going to have to go into Brexit negotiations and get the right deal


for the country so we have a stable economy which can


fund our public services, which matters so much to everyone in this


room and country. I am sorry, but I think that Theresa May is the right


person to do this and Jeremy Corbyn would be terrifying going into those


negotiations of the person responsible for our national


security. It matters to your leader is and what is that manifesto. The


Labour manifesto is a list of spending commitments about the way


to fund them. If we actually look at the way in which they would be


funded, it would be sky high debt, sky-high taxes and we cannot afford


to have that in this country if we want to have a stable economy. Well,


we will hear moment about what our voters think about that idea. They


did not the Liberal Democrat very much when I speak to them. It is all


about Labour or Theresa May. Well, I think there has always been a


struggle to get the Liberal Democrat message across. I have to say that I


think that in this campaign in particular, because of the focus on


Theresa May by the Torah party and the focus on Jeremy Corbyn by the


media in fact as well in terms of his ability to lead, our messages to


struggle to be sometimes. But I think that tells you something about


a party of law, because we have a very strong leader in Tim Farron. We


have an open, honest leader with a great deal of integrity, a very


normal leader who I think people do identify with when they meet him and


speak with him. But it is about the party. And about our messages. Not


all about the letter. Good. That's a good idea of the character. We got a


proper choice this time. We have always grumbled before! Deidre,


you're fought in the NHS or a long time. The NHS and social services.


What do you think about the state of things at the moment and what would


you like them to say to you to win your vote? I think a lot has been


done to try to help the crisis, far more older people with chronic


conditions, but in the old days we talked about a Berlin Wall between


Health and Social Care Act. The funding is separate social services


have got much less funding for an increased population. As the whole


emphasis now should be on here at home and prevention, the services


are not actually there. Not a joined up. The format I want to ask whether


there can be politicians getting together to work at a strategic plan


for the funding for both so that there are not these terrific


divisions of people not being in the right place. This happened in the


1960s and is still happening. People in hospital should be out and people


I would should be in hospital. Since the 1960s, Nicola, why are things


not changing? I am not only in history and health but my father is


a doctor. He was watching in the NHS as far back as the 1960s. My mother


is a nurse and I am a it is of the NHS. I have a chronic condition. A


lot of time as a sort of mystery shoppers will know exactly what it


is like to be on the inside but this issue is about being able to


integrate better not only prevention services but public services and


recognised. We have increased recognised. We have increased


funding to the NHS. Oh, come on! At the Oxford University observers, the


funding went up by 7% last year, 2% this year. Demand is


rising. Nobody is thing it is not difficult on the front line. Social


services, the funding also increased. An extra 2 billion went


in on top of the increase in benefits. Deidre, would you like to


pay more in tax to fund this? About the point about integration, because


this is the question that she asked, the fact is that if the funding


increases in the images and increases in social good, it does


not solve the problem of needing to get the flow of patients going


through the system more effectively through the system more effectively


and that is exactly what the sustainability and transformation


plans are designed to do, solve that problem. We are just at the


beginning of that process now and we need a Conservative government to


make sure we can do that. The funding is still separate and


I think, is the major problem. The I think, is the major problem. The


hospital is paying to get people out of hospital and they are going all


around the county, when it should be more local. The hospital should not


have to be doing this. Carroll, behind, you're also concerned about


the NHS. What do you think about the answer you heard from Nicola? I


think you have got a point that sustainable transformation plans are


an aspiration. I think a lot of the things that have been written into


pages, I think it is a 78 pages, of pages, I think it is a 78 pages, of


the Berkshire, Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire, commonly known as


Bob. But my comment at the end of that was that however good the


aspirations are, unless you put money into training more staff,


particularly staff who are specialists in what they are doing,


then it is not worth the paper it is written on and I just wonder what


you're going to do about making sure that we actually start the NHS


appalling to read that some appalling to read that some


hospitals are now putting yourself on 12 hour shifts. That is a patient


safety issue. Let's take Laura first of all on that point and then come


to you, Laetisia. The two main point we have been talking about,


integration and funding, as far as integration is concerned, Norman


Lamb, the Lib Dem houses both -- Hill sportsperson, has been working


to try to get cross-party on this. We cannot keep having the NHS of a


political football. We have got to try to work together to get a


solution for this precious resource our country has. Laetisia. The


greatest achievement of the Labour Party, the NHS. I also worked there


for eight years and also cherish our servers. Only Labour will invest in


the NHS... Nicholas as they are investing. In real terms, there has


been... A 7% increase... We need 6 billion investment, which is what


Labour has pledged. There are costed plans to fund it, Nicola, you know


there are. It is a non-costed manifesto. Let's let Deidre come


back in. And I finish my point, Peter? It is not just about funding,


at the moment the money comes from different places. I absolutely


agree. It has got to be joined up, then I've got to be changed. Social


care funding has gone to the council at exactly the same point as they


have cut defence budgets, which has meant that the most vulnerable


people has been on the end of these cuts. We all know it, we all know


that our NHS is in absolute crisis. What is experience, John? I am


concerned about the sustainability and transformation plans. Nicola has


said that they seem to be the great white wall but unfortunately, what


is going to happen is that the earlier to save 22 billion pounds


from the NHS, and in Oxfordshire, we have a local plan that supposedly is


no danger from hospital, as Deidre is asking for, to the community, but


without sufficient GPs who are going to have to take this up, without


care staff, without nurses. We do not have the facilities. At the


back, are you concerned about the NHS and the way it is being run?


Yes, I definitely do think so. I have been in hospital a couple of


times recently and there is not enough staff. Minor operations are


always cancelled. GP appointments cancelled regularly to fit other


people in. There is just not enough provision there. People are unhappy


at the moment. Since 2010, in Oxford university hospitals, there are 300


more doctors and 700 more nurses but the pressure on the service is


significant because the demand is increasing at a faster rate than we


have managed... THEY TALK OVER EACH OTHER it is not


simply a matter of money. It is also a matter of making sure that the


increase prevention so that people do not get sick as much, so that


there is not so much demand and some of the best of services that we have


are those that keep people out of hospital and the first place, such


as those working at a community hospital. The Conservatives cannot


congratulate themselves on staff recruitment. We have 700 vacancies


at the John Ratliff Hospital in Oxford at the moment. We are having


the port in services cut back and people are being sent to John Atlas,


and the staff cannot cope. I have had messages and e-mails to me from


the staff at the John Radcliffe Hospital then they cannot cope. They


are at crisis point and are worried about patient safety and the


Conservative Government and the Conservative councillors and MPs


locally are not... This is Oxfordshire. Other parts of the


South of England, the cities, are struggling even more. Has been a lot


of talk about funding and the need for funding and being clear about


where it will come from. We have a pledge, the Lib Dems, to find that 6


billion per year from putting 1p on the pound... As they made Labour? We


will take from income tax. 2 billion for social care and 4 billion for


the NHS health care. Most people in the British country are perfectly


prepared to be that extra 1p on income tax because they want to see


these servers is continuing. Linda, you have run a campaign trying to


save a surgery. Do you think it is just the money and they won't be on


income tax is an easy thing? Yes, I think that is what we need but I


think the rich and the bankers need to pay their taxes, and I think then


we will get our hospitals put up to date, we. The nurses going to food


banks, we will get our GPs service is up and running. Whitney is


absolutely fit to bursting. We have not got enough GP services. They are


struggling. We have to wait eight weeks to get a general appointment,


and there is 1000 people still on the Deer Park side that have not got


a doctor. They are coping on their own. People are going to the John


Radcliffe and the doctors are seeing people up there that I really,


really ill because they cannot get a doctors appointment or they have not


got a doctor. Sarah, can by bring you in? Our NHS is still the pride


of the country, is it not, and the research that is done in it as well?


You're interested in fires particularly. Do you think that


people are feeling worse about the NHS than they used to or better? It


is interesting. We talk about staffing and I personally believe


that given in all areas of Science and Technology Committee of care


when intended to be underrepresented, and I have got a


recent story about this. My friend has got to my children under three.


She wanted to have a part-time working arrangement job share to


make it fit. Her local hospital said no so she is moving to suffer


because of that. That really concerns me, because I think there


is a solution. More women working part-time. There is a lot of talent


there. There is a lot of going around Sarah's point. Richard, you


have had one good idea. You run the bus services, the volunteer bus


service. You have been helping people get the flu jab. It has been


running for a year and is a community led, volunteer - run


servers. It is filling the gaps in the NHS and social care, but now we


are looking to help other communities set up their own


operations. How are you going to help us do this? And they both cuts


is something that has troubled a lot of people. You see, as we are a


thing, it is not just more money for the NHS, it is getting people into


those surgeries as well. Neil? My issue is that people are depressed.


We have heard about the NHS for the last five or ten minutes. If you


drive, you have got portals to contend with. If you do not drive,


there are not only boss of any more because the subsidy has been taken


away and, in our area, we have lost some key services. How are you going


to reverse that and get a feel good feeling back into a time of great


uncertainty? You are looking at some of the local government cuts under


the organisation, do you think that this government is actually putting


money where it is needed? I think that there is a pretty big


disconnect between the government policy and assessing what the local


electorate and President actually want. For example, with the issue of


the unitary authorities at the local level, this restructuring of local


government, there is not only controversy but contradiction in the


different sides that are being presented. I see no reason why the


intelligence of the local residents should not be measured by something


like a referendum. We have been asked to vote on virtually


everything else, I think by the time of... Patrick is building a phase!


You are a first importer, aren't you? Sam Ricketts, I turned 18 last


week. I think the NHS is such an important part of Britain and I do


not think, to be honest, Theresa May is the right person to take us


forward with that. Political opinion. What about fresh thinking


in the government generally. Is it the same old you are hearing from


the politicians? You wanted your something new as a younger person?


Watching this debate, we are hearing the same rhetoric being repeated


that has been going on for years and I think we need somebody fresh even


take the NHS forward. But referendums cost so much money. That


is what the shake of the head was for! Fresh thinking, Laetisia, are


going to get that? We have plenty of fresh thinking. We can all agree


here, from this debate, it is not working as it is. We need to invest


in our social care, in our NHS, in business. We need to spend the 250


billion over ten years that Labour has pledged. We


system. We need digital system. We need digital


infrastructure to be invested in. We need energy to be invested in, our


roads, are transported to be integrated and invested in. We are


not up to standard and need to be. The complacent conservative voters


that are not enjoying having their GPs surgeries closed and not being


able to access their children's centres and hospitals, and seeing


domestic violence refuges being shut and feeling disgusted by it, get out


and vote Labour. It is the only party that will get the


Conservatives out. Complacent Conservatives, that is something


which I have heard people speaking. The idea that this election was


called just so that Theresa May could have a mandate, so that she


could go to Europe and negotiate, and yet there are other problems, as


we gear from the audience. Of course there are social challenges up and


down this country which we be strong, responsible, experienced


government that we can rely on, he will be able to address those


challenges. We are never going to be able to address them if we do not a


stable economy. You have had seven years to do it. That brings any


those public services. I am afraid those public services. I am afraid


that I do not see any fresh thinking in a manifesto that was back to the


1970s, which was what we have just seen from 90 and 70s. It is a


21st-century manifesto! You are criticising what I am saying. You


will not let me speak, which is one of the most old-fashioned things


from politicians. We have heard, you are just repeating the rhetoric. We


want to hear from Nicola. What I do agree with is that what we do need


to have its policies which will provide the training to meet


21st-century economy, an automated economy with the digital training


and skills. We do need more women in science. We need investment in a


able to fund our NHS and social able to fund our NHS and social


services in an integrated way. This is exactly what waters are calling


for and is what Conservatives have been committed... We can judge those


promises. Laura? I think it is just incredibly telling that both of the


previous speakers have managed to say so much without mentioning the


word Europe, and without mentioning the challenges that we are facing!


That is what the Lib Dems voted for. That is what the Lib Dems voted for.


They are getting is a different thing. You're not going to let


anybody speak, are you, what I do anybody speak, are you, what I do


think is quoted as respectful. What the Lib Dems are saying is that we


need to stay in the single market. We needed to stay on a customs union


in order to protect our business and protect public services. Even those


who wanted us to leave the European Union are saying that we are going


time for many years to come. We have time for many years to come. We have


not got a long left. We had you on our debate of the EU referendum. You


run a company online training. You were saying you're going to have to


leave the country. You were so keen on the main! You have not left,


you're still here. Listening to what we are hearing today, training is


going to be quite important! There is a bigger demand than you thought.


What about getting the stuff? When we meet the EU, are you going to be


able to cope? I think my biggest concern is around diversity and the


challenges on the planned cap on immigration. In order for us to find


the best cyber security instructors, we need to have an inclusive policy


of hiring the best talented minds in the world. If you do not have these


folks, I do not know how businesses are going to provide security. What


do you think about Brexit, is it a big issue or not? Brexit is a big


issue but, at the moment, especially in my corner of the world, Oxford,


there is lots of other things that are literally right in front of


people everyday. Every single children's Centre have had their


funding removed. The bus subsidy has been cut. People are ending up


becoming... May be having somebody strong as the Prime Minister to do


the vote imported? Definitely, having a leader that we all trust.


But is seen as having the party. When we look at all of the bigger


issues like diversity, and we mentioned training over you, what


about retraining all of the old people we have got in the UK to do


basic jobs, let alone the expertise? Is that going to happen with any of


the parties? Just very quickly, because they are coming to the end,


Tim Farron is not going to be prime minister, why as a Lib Dem both


worthwhile? Because the more Lib Dems that we can get into


parliament, the more we can hold to account whoever is in government and


in particular to stop a hard Brexit and to stop more Tory cuts. If you


give them a free rein and have a huge Tory majority, like she wants,


that is what we will see. Cuts. Why Theresa May, without saying a strong


and stable? The only way we are going to get a proper and effective


Brexit negotiation that we need to have in order to give us a stable


economy... You said it, I am sorry! Laetisia. OK, so, sorry if I was


disrespectful, I am just incredibly passionate and want to get my views


across. We are going to put income tax back-up to the label spending


and levels of the rest of Europe spent. That is why we are going to


generate the money to spend where we are seeing our social care and NHS


cut. Thank you to Tories are saying. It is a very


emotive subject and we have run out of time.


On Thursday nominations closed in the 650 parliamentary


seats across the country, so now we know exactly who's


We've been analysing the parties' candidates to find out


what they might tell us about the make-up of the House


Well, we know Theresa May is committed to delivering Brexit and


analysis of Conservative candidates has shown that


in their top 100 target seats, 37 candidates supported leave


during last year's referendum campaign


and 20 supported remain; 43 have not made public


In the last parliament, the vast majority of Labour MPs


were hostile to Jeremy Corbyn so how supportive are Labour


Well, of 50 of Labour's top 100 target seats


17 candidates have expressed support for Mr Corbyn.


20 candidates supported Owen Smith in last year's leadership contest


or have expressed anti-Corbyn sentiment, and


If they won those, the Labour benches would be


marginally more sympathetic to Mr Corbyn than they are now.


What do the figures tell us about where the other


Well, the Lib Dems have decided not to stand against the Greens


in Brighton Pavilion, and are fielding 629


candidates this year - that's two fewer than 2015.


The number of Ukip candidates has fallen dramatically.


They are standing in 247 fewer constituencies than 2015,


throwing their support behind solidly pro-Brexit Tories


in some areas such as Lewes and Norfolk North.


The Greens are fielding 103 fewer candidates


than at the last election, standing down to help


other progressive candidates in some places.


The most liking statistic is the demise in Ukip candidates, is this


their swansong? And I think so. It is remarkable how few Ukip


candidates are standing. It is hard to see they will suddenly revive in


the next couple of years. I think this is probably the end. Frank


Luntz mentioned the fragmentation of the left was a feature of this


election, but also there is the consolidation of the right, and if


you take the things together that could explain why the polls are


where they are. Absolutely, that's precisely what happened at the start


of the 1980s, the right was incredibly united and that's when we


started talking about majorities of over 100 or so. No matter what the


size of Theresa May's majority, it will be the total collapse of Ukip,


but not just because we are now leaving the EU and that was their


only reason for being, but a whole lot of people voted for Ukip because


they felt the Tories were no longer listening. Theresa May has given the


impression that she is listening, and that is the biggest possible


thing that could happen to the Tory vote. Fragmentation of the left,


consolidation of the right? It's one of the lessons that is never learnt,


it happened in the 1980s, it doesn't take much for the whole thing to


fracture so now you have on the centre-left the SNP, the Labour


Party, the Greens, the Liberal Democrats all competing for the same


votes and when you have, fleetingly perhaps, large numbers coalescing on


the right in one party, there is only going to be one outcome. It


happens regularly. It doesn't mean the Tories haven't got their own


fragility. Two years ago, David Cameron and George Osborne the


dominant figures, neither are in Parliament now which is a symptom of


the fragility this election is disguising. Mrs May's position in a


way reminds me of Mrs Thatcher in the 1980s, I won't be outflanked on


the right, Nicolas Sarkozy in France, I won't be outflanked on the


right, so the National Front didn't get through either timed he ran to


the second round on like this time, and now Mrs May on Brexit won't be


outflanked Iver and as a result has seen off right flank. And also she


is looking to the left as well with some of the state interventions.


What was interesting about the analysis you showed a few minutes


ago was the number of Tory candidates who have apparently not


declared which way they voted in the referendum, and you would have


thought if this election was all about Brexit, as some would claim,


that would become an unsustainable position, and actually more it's


about leadership. But the point that I'm now hearing from a number of


Labour candidates that they are seeing Tory leaflets that don't even


have the Tory candidate's name on them, it is just about Theresa May.


I am glad they are keeping to the law because by law they have to put


it on. It has been harder for some of the smaller parties too because


of the speed of the election being called. We have the manifesto is


coming out this week. I think Labour Forshaw on Tuesday, we are not yet


sure when the Tories will bring bears out. I suggest one thing, it


will at least for people like me bring an end to the question you


will have to wait for the manifesto. And Rebecca Long baby will never


have that excuse again, isn't it wonderful! She is not the only one.


When you are trying to take the north and Midlands from Labour, I


would go to one or the other. For me, I can barely hold back my


excitement over the Tory manifesto. This will be, I think, the most


important day for the British government for the next five years.


That wasn't irony there? You actually meant that? I'm not even


being cynical at all on Sunday Politics! This is a huge day and


it's because I think we will see... I don't think Mrs May will play it


safe and I don't think we will get the broadbrush stuff that she might


be advised to do. I think she will lay out precisely what you want to


do over the next five years and take some big risks. Then finally after a


year of this guessing and theorising, we will finally work out


what Mrs May is all about. She will say she doesn't want the next


parliament to be all about Brexit, though she knows that's the next


important thing she has to deliver in some way, so she gets a mandate


for that if the polls are right but she


does have very different ideas from Mr Cameron about how to run a


country. She will I assume one to mandate for what these different


ideas are. Otherwise there is no point in holding an early election.


You will get a majority, but if you get a mandate to carry on


implementing the Cameron and Osborne manifesto it would be utterly


pointless. I agree, it is the pivotal event of the election and it


will be interesting to see the degree to which she expands on the


line which interests me about its time to look at the good that


government can do. Because in a way this moves the debate on in UK


politics from, from 97 the Blair Brown governments were insecure


about arguing about the role of government. Cameron Osborne


government similarly so, so here you have a Labour Party talking about


the role of government and the state, and Tory leader apparently


doing so was well. I think that will be really interesting to see whether


it is fleshed out in any significant way. And it is not a natural Tory


message. Harold Macmillan talked about the role of the state, Ted


Heath Mark two was pretty big on the state, the industrial policy and so


on, and even if it is not thought to be that Tory, does she get away with


it because she deliver such a big victory if that's what she does


deliver? Just inject a little note of scepticism, I wonder how much of


this is authentically Theresa May. I was interested to and talk to


someone who used to sit in cabinet meetings during which Theresa May


never expressed an opinion on anything outside the Home Office


briefs. Other ministers were roving all over their colleagues' briefs.


So where are the ideas coming from? I think we can point to Nick


Timothy. One of her closest advisers in Downing Street. It will be


interesting to see how that evolves. On Thursday I think we will all be


talking about something called Urdington Toryism. Urdington is the


suburb of Birmingham where Nick Timothy comes from, who is very much


Theresa May's policy brain and leading inspiration. Urdington


Toryism is about connecting the party with traditional working class


voters, and their belief to do that is not just taking away government


out of their lives but showing them that government can actually help


their lives. It can be a force for good to rebuild the trust. A lot of


what Mrs May talks about is all... It is talk and then a lot of it


suddenly goes by the wayside. What happened to worker directors on the


boards. It is designed to appeal to that constituency and then nothing


happens. She had an excuse before in the sense that it wasn't in the 2015


manifesto and she had a small majority so therefore she arguably


had to water down some of the stuff for example in her Tory conference


speech, which had a lot of this active government material in it. If


she puts it in the manifesto, it is a sign she plans to do it and will


have no excuse if she then gets nervous afterwards because it will


be in there. If it wasn't for Brexit, this great overwhelming


issue, I think this election will be seen as quite a significant


development in terms of an argument around the role of government,


much-needed. But Brexit unfortunately overshadows it all. As


much as we like our arguments over the role of government we will hear


strong and stable, stable and strong ad nauseam, aren't we? Absolutely,


and we heard the same old lines from the Labour Party as well so they are


all at it. It will be a fascinating week, stop talking it down! Thanks


to our panel. The Daily Politics will be


back on BBC Two at noon I'll be back here at the same time


on BBC One next Sunday. Remember - if it's Sunday,


it's the Sunday Politics. When it came to my TV habits,


I'd watch anything... But now I can sign in online


and get more of what I love. I'm kept up to date


with the shows I love and I get suggestions


on subjects I'll like. A new personalised BBC


is on its way. To tailor the benefits to you,


sign in and introduce yourself.


Andrew Neil and Peter Henley are joined by shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and Home Office minister Brandon Lewis to discuss the party manifestos for the forthcoming general election. Plus American political pollster Frank Luntz, and a chat with undecided voters in Leeds. Journalists Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards review the papers.