:00:17. > :00:21.It's Sunday Morning, and this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:22. > :00:23.Labour attacks Conservative plans for social care and to means-test
:00:24. > :00:26.So can Jeremy Corbyn eat into the Tory lead
:00:27. > :00:32.Theresa May says her party's manifesto is all about fairness.
:00:33. > :00:36.We'll be speaking to a Conservative cabinet minister about the plans.
:00:37. > :00:39.The polls have always shown healthy leads for the Conservatives.
:00:40. > :00:43.And in the Midlands: is Labour narrowing the gap?
:00:44. > :00:45.We've seen hospital issues turn politics upside down -
:00:46. > :00:48.now Telford feels the pulling power of Shropshire's tug-of-war over A
:00:49. > :01:04.And with me - as always - the best and the brightest political
:01:05. > :01:06.panel in the business: Sam Coates, Isabel Oakeshott
:01:07. > :01:08.and Steve Richards - they'll be tweeting throughout
:01:09. > :01:10.the programme, and you can get involved by using
:01:11. > :01:18.Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn says pensioners will be up to ?330 a year
:01:19. > :01:30.worse off under plans outlined in the Conservative manifesto.
:01:31. > :01:36.The Work Pensions Secretary Damian Green has said his party will not
:01:37. > :01:40.rethink their plans to fund social care in England. Under the plans in
:01:41. > :01:47.the Conservative manifesto, nobody with assets of less than ?100,000,
:01:48. > :01:51.would have to pay for care. Labour has attacked the proposal, and John
:01:52. > :01:55.McDonnell, Labour's Shadow Chancellor, said this morning that
:01:56. > :01:58.there needs to be more cross-party consensus.
:01:59. > :02:00.That's why we supported Dilnot, but we also supported
:02:01. > :02:04.Because we've got to have something sustainable over generations,
:02:05. > :02:06.so that's why we've said to the Conservative Party,
:02:07. > :02:09.Let's go back to that cross-party approach that actually
:02:10. > :02:12.I just feel we've all been let down by what's come
:02:13. > :02:23.Sam, is Labour beginning to get their argument across? What we had
:02:24. > :02:27.last week was bluntly what felt like not very Lynton Crosby approved
:02:28. > :02:31.Conservative manifesto. What I mean by that is that it looks like there
:02:32. > :02:36.are things that will cause political difficulties for the party over this
:02:37. > :02:40.campaign. I've been talking to MPs and ministers who acknowledge that
:02:41. > :02:46.the social care plan is coming up on the doorstep. It has cut through
:02:47. > :02:50.very quickly, and it is worrying and deterring some voters. Not just
:02:51. > :03:01.pensioners, that people who are looking to inherit in the future.
:03:02. > :03:04.They are all asking how much they could lose that they wouldn't have
:03:05. > :03:06.lost before. A difficult question for the party to answer, given that
:03:07. > :03:12.they don't want to give too much away now. Was this a mistake, or a
:03:13. > :03:19.sign of the Conservatives' confidence? It has the hallmarks of
:03:20. > :03:23.something that has been cobbled together in a very unnaturally short
:03:24. > :03:27.time frame for putting a manifesto together. We have had mixed messages
:03:28. > :03:31.from the Tory MPs who have been out on the airwaves this morning as to
:03:32. > :03:36.whether they will consult on it whether it is just a starting point.
:03:37. > :03:43.That said, there is still three weeks to go, and most of the Tory
:03:44. > :03:46.party this morning feel this is a little light turbulence rather than
:03:47. > :03:50.anything that leaves the destination of victory in doubt. It it flips the
:03:51. > :03:54.normal politics. The Tories are going to make people who have a
:03:55. > :04:01.reasonable amount of assets pay for their social care. What is wrong
:04:02. > :04:04.with that? First, total credit for them for not pretending that all
:04:05. > :04:09.this can be done by magic, which is what normally happens in an
:04:10. > :04:14.election. The party will say, we will review this for the 95th time
:04:15. > :04:18.in the following Parliament, so they have no mandate to do anything and
:04:19. > :04:22.so do not do anything. It is courageous to do it. It is
:04:23. > :04:28.electorally risky, for the reasons that you suggest, that they pass the
:04:29. > :04:34.target their own natural supporter. And there is a sense that this is
:04:35. > :04:39.rushed through, in the frenzy to get it done in time. I think the ending
:04:40. > :04:45.of the pooling of risk and putting the entire burden on in inverted
:04:46. > :04:53.commas the victim, because you cannot insure Fritz, is against the
:04:54. > :04:56.spirit of a lot of the rest of the manifesto, and will give them huge
:04:57. > :05:05.problems if they try to implement it in the next Parliament. Let's have a
:05:06. > :05:10.look at the polls. Nearly five weeks ago, on Tuesday the 18th of April,
:05:11. > :05:15.Theresa May called the election. At that point, this was the median
:05:16. > :05:21.average of the recent polls. The Conservatives had an 18 point lead
:05:22. > :05:29.over Labour on 25%. Ukip and the Liberal Democrats were both on 18%.
:05:30. > :05:34.A draft of Labour's manifesto was leaked to the press. In the
:05:35. > :05:37.intervening weeks, support for the Conservatives and Labour had
:05:38. > :05:43.increased, that it had decreased for the Lib Dems and Ukip. Last Tuesday
:05:44. > :05:49.came the launch of the official Labour manifesto. By that time,
:05:50. > :05:54.Labour support had gone up by another 2%. The Lib Dems and Ukip
:05:55. > :05:59.had slipped back slightly. Later in the week came the manifestos from
:06:00. > :06:03.the Lib Dems and the Conservatives. This morning, for more polls. This
:06:04. > :06:11.is how the parties currently stand on average. Labour are now on 34%,
:06:12. > :06:15.up 4% since the launch of their manifesto. The Conservatives are
:06:16. > :06:22.down two points since last Tuesday. Ukip and the Lib Dems are both
:06:23. > :06:27.unchanged on 8% and 5%. You can find this poll tracker on the BBC
:06:28. > :06:32.website, see how it was calculated, and see the results of national
:06:33. > :06:36.polls over the last two years. So Isabel, is this the Tories' wobbly
:06:37. > :06:40.weekend or the start of the narrowing? This is still an
:06:41. > :06:47.extremely healthy lead for the Tories. At the start of this
:06:48. > :06:53.campaign, most commentators expected to things to happen. First, the Lib
:06:54. > :06:58.Dems would have a significant surge. That hasn't happened. Second, Labour
:06:59. > :07:03.would crash and plummet. Instead they are in the health of the low
:07:04. > :07:09.30s. I wonder if that tells you something about the tribal nature of
:07:10. > :07:14.the Labour vote, and the continuing problems with the Tory brand. I
:07:15. > :07:19.would say that a lot of Tory MPs wouldn't be too unhappy if Labour's
:07:20. > :07:25.result isn't quite as bad as has been anticipated. They don't want
:07:26. > :07:32.Corbyn to go anywhere. If the latest polls were to be the result on June
:07:33. > :07:37.the 8th, Mr Corbyn may not be in a rush to go anywhere. I still think
:07:38. > :07:42.it depends on the number of seats. If there is a landslide win, I
:07:43. > :07:48.think, one way or another, he will not stay. If it is much narrower, he
:07:49. > :07:53.has grounds for arguing he has done better than anticipated. The polls
:07:54. > :07:58.are very interesting. People compare this with 83. In 83, the Tory lead
:07:59. > :08:11.widened consistently throughout the campaign. There was the SDP -
:08:12. > :08:14.Liberal Alliance doing well in the polls. Here, the Lib Dems don't seem
:08:15. > :08:16.to be doing that. So the parallels with 83 don't really stack up. But
:08:17. > :08:19.let's see what happens. Still early days for the a lot of people are
:08:20. > :08:24.saying this is the result of the social care policy. We don't really
:08:25. > :08:28.know that. How do you beat them? In the last week or so, there's been
:08:29. > :08:33.the decision by some to hold their nose and vote Labour, who haven't
:08:34. > :08:37.done so before. Probably the biggest thing in this election is how the
:08:38. > :08:44.Right has reunited behind Theresa May. That figure for Ukip is
:08:45. > :08:50.incredibly small. She has brought those Ukip voters behind her, and
:08:51. > :08:54.that could be the decisive factor in many seats, rather than the Labour
:08:55. > :08:59.share of the boat picking up a bit or down a bit, depending on how
:09:00. > :09:02.turbulent the Tory manifesto makes it. Thank you for that.
:09:03. > :09:05.We've finally got our hands on the manifestos of the two main
:09:06. > :09:07.parties and, for once, voters can hardly complain that
:09:08. > :09:11.So, just how big is the choice on offer to the public?
:09:12. > :09:13.Since the Liberal Democrats and SNP have ruled out
:09:14. > :09:15.coalitions after June 8th, Adam Fleming compares the Labour
:09:16. > :09:18.Welcome to the BBC's election centre.
:09:19. > :09:22.Four minutes from now, when Big Ben strikes 10.00,
:09:23. > :09:26.we can legally reveal the contents of this, our exit poll.
:09:27. > :09:28.18 days to go, and the BBC's election night studio
:09:29. > :09:38.This is where David Dimbleby will sit, although there is no chair yet.
:09:39. > :09:41.The parties' policies are now the finished product.
:09:42. > :09:44.In Bradford, Jeremy Corbyn vowed a bigger state,
:09:45. > :09:47.the end of austerity, no more tuition fees.
:09:48. > :09:55.The Tory campaign, by contrast, is built on one word - fear.
:09:56. > :10:03.Down the road in Halifax, Theresa May kept a promise to get
:10:04. > :10:06.immigration down to the tens of thousands, and talked
:10:07. > :10:09.of leadership and tough choices in uncertain times.
:10:10. > :10:16.Strengthen my hand as I fight for Britain, and stand with me
:10:17. > :10:22.And, with confidence in ourselves and a unity
:10:23. > :10:29.of purpose in our country, let us go forward together.
:10:30. > :10:32.Let's look at the Labour and Conservative
:10:33. > :10:38.On tax, Labour would introduce a 50p rate for top earners.
:10:39. > :11:02.The Conservatives ditched their triple lock, giving them
:11:03. > :11:04.freedom to put up income tax and national insurance,
:11:05. > :11:07.although they want to keep the overall tax burden the same.
:11:08. > :11:09.Labour offered a major overhaul of the country's wiring,
:11:10. > :11:11.with a pledge to renationalise infrastructure, like power,
:11:12. > :11:14.The Conservatives said that would cost a fortune,
:11:15. > :11:16.but provided few details for the cost of their policies.
:11:17. > :11:18.Labour have simply become a shambles, and, as yesterday's
:11:19. > :11:20.manifesto showed, their numbers simply do not add up.
:11:21. > :11:23.What have they got planned for health and social care?
:11:24. > :11:27.The Conservatives offered more cash for the NHS,
:11:28. > :11:30.reaching an extra ?8 billion a year by the end of the parliament.
:11:31. > :11:34.Labour promised an extra ?30 billion over the course of the same period,
:11:35. > :11:40.plus free hospital parking and more pay for staff.
:11:41. > :11:47.The Conservatives would increase the value of assets you could
:11:48. > :11:50.protect from the cost of social care to ?100,000, but your home would be
:11:51. > :11:52.added to the assessment of your wealth,
:11:53. > :11:56.There was a focus on one group of voters in particular
:11:57. > :12:02.Labour would keep the triple lock, which guarantees that pensions go up
:12:03. > :12:07.The Tories would keep the increase in line
:12:08. > :12:11.with inflation or earnings, a double lock.
:12:12. > :12:13.The Conservatives would end of winter fuel payments
:12:14. > :12:17.for the richest, although we don't know exactly who that would be,
:12:18. > :12:25.This is a savage attack on vulnerable pensioners,
:12:26. > :12:29.particularly those who are just about managing.
:12:30. > :12:33.It is disgraceful, and we are calling upon the Conservative Party
:12:34. > :12:40.When it comes to leaving the European Union, Labour say
:12:41. > :12:43.they'd sweep away the government's negotiating strategy,
:12:44. > :12:46.secure a better deal and straightaway guaranteed the rights
:12:47. > :12:52.The Tories say a big majority would remove political uncertainty
:12:53. > :13:04.Jeremy Vine's due here in two and a half weeks.
:13:05. > :13:10.I'm joined now by David Gauke, who is Chief Secretary to the Treasury.
:13:11. > :13:17.Welcome back to the programme. The Tories once promised a cap on social
:13:18. > :13:24.care costs. Why have you abandoned that? We've looked at it, and there
:13:25. > :13:29.are couple of proposals with the Dilnot proposal. Much of the benefit
:13:30. > :13:33.would go to those inheriting larger estates. The second point was it was
:13:34. > :13:39.hoped that a cap would stimulate the larger insurance products that would
:13:40. > :13:45.fill the gap, but there is no sign that those products are emerging.
:13:46. > :13:49.Without a cap, you will not get one. We have come forward with a new
:13:50. > :13:53.proposal which we think is fairer, provide more money for social care,
:13:54. > :13:58.which is very important and is one of the big issues we face as a
:13:59. > :14:03.country. It is right that we face those big issues. Social care is
:14:04. > :14:11.one, getting a good Brexit deal is another. This demonstrates that
:14:12. > :14:14.Theresa May has an ambition to lead a government that addresses those
:14:15. > :14:20.big long-term issues. Looking at social care. If you have assets,
:14:21. > :14:24.including your home, of over ?100,000, you have to pay for all
:14:25. > :14:28.your social care costs. Is that fair? It is right that for the
:14:29. > :14:34.services that are provided to you, that that is paid out of your
:14:35. > :14:38.assets, subject to two really important qualifications. First, you
:14:39. > :14:45.shouldn't have your entire estate wiped out. At the moment, if you are
:14:46. > :14:50.in residential care, it can be wiped out ?223,000. If you are in
:14:51. > :14:57.domiciliary care, it can be out to ?23,000, plus you're domiciliary.
:14:58. > :15:01.Nobody should be forced to sell their house in their lifetime if
:15:02. > :15:03.they or their spouse needs long-term care. Again, we have protected that
:15:04. > :15:13.in the proposals we set out. But the state will basically take a
:15:14. > :15:18.chunk of your house when you die and they sell. In an essence it is a
:15:19. > :15:22.stealth inheritance tax on everything above ?100,000. But we
:15:23. > :15:26.have those two important protections. I am including that. It
:15:27. > :15:30.is a stealth inheritance tax. We have to face up to the fact that
:15:31. > :15:35.there are significant costs that we face as a country in terms of health
:15:36. > :15:39.and social careful. Traditionally, politicians don't address those
:15:40. > :15:45.issues, particularly during election campaigns. I think it is too Theresa
:15:46. > :15:48.May's credit that we are being straightforward with the British
:15:49. > :15:51.people and saying that we face this long-term challenge. Our manifesto
:15:52. > :15:55.was about the big challenges that we face, one of which was
:15:56. > :15:59.intergenerational fairness and one of which was delivering a strong
:16:00. > :16:06.economy and making sure that we can do that. But in the end, someone is
:16:07. > :16:09.going to have to pay for this. It is going to have to be a balance
:16:10. > :16:12.between the general taxpayer and those receiving the services. We
:16:13. > :16:16.think we have struck the right balance with this proposal. But it
:16:17. > :16:20.is entirely on the individual. People watching this programme, if
:16:21. > :16:27.they have a fair amount of assets, not massive, including the home,
:16:28. > :16:31.they will need to pay for everything themselves until their assets are
:16:32. > :16:36.reduced to ?100,000. It is not a balance, you're putting everything
:16:37. > :16:42.on the original two individual. At the moment, for those in residential
:16:43. > :16:47.care, they have to pay everything until 20 3000. -- everything on the
:16:48. > :16:51.individual. But now they will face more. Those in individual care are
:16:52. > :16:54.seeing their protection going up by four times as much, so that is
:16:55. > :16:58.eliminating unfairness. Why should those in residential care be in a
:16:59. > :17:04.worse position than those receiving domiciliary care? But as I say, that
:17:05. > :17:07.money has to come from somewhere and we are sitting at a proper plan for
:17:08. > :17:11.it. While also made the point that we are more likely to be able to
:17:12. > :17:15.have a properly functioning social care market if we have a strong
:17:16. > :17:18.economy, and to have a strong economy we need to deliver a good
:17:19. > :17:23.deal on Brexit and I think Theresa May is capable of doing that. You
:17:24. > :17:28.have said that before. But if you have a heart attack in old age, the
:17:29. > :17:31.NHS will take care of you. If you have dementia, you now have to pay
:17:32. > :17:35.for the care of yourself. Is that they are? It is already the case
:17:36. > :17:40.that if you have long-term care costs come up as I say, if you are
:17:41. > :17:45.in residential care you pay for all of it until the last ?23,000, but if
:17:46. > :17:49.you are in domiciliary care, excluding your housing assets, but
:17:50. > :17:55.all of your other assets get used up until you are down to ?23,000 a
:17:56. > :18:02.year. And I think it is right at this point that a party that aspires
:18:03. > :18:05.to run this country for the long-term, to address the long-term
:18:06. > :18:10.challenges we have is a country, for us to be clear that we need to
:18:11. > :18:16.deliver this. Because if it is not paid for it this way, if it goes and
:18:17. > :18:20.falls on the general taxpayer, the people who feel hard pressed by the
:18:21. > :18:25.amount of income tax and VAT they pay, frankly we have to say to them,
:18:26. > :18:29.those taxes will go up if we do not address it. But they might go up
:18:30. > :18:35.anyway. The average house price in your part of the country is just shy
:18:36. > :18:39.of ?430,000, so if you told your own constituents that they might have to
:18:40. > :18:44.spend ?300,000 of their assets on social care before the state steps
:18:45. > :18:49.in to help...? As I said earlier, nobody will be forced to pay during
:18:50. > :18:55.their lifetime. Nobody will be forced to sell their houses. We are
:18:56. > :18:59.providing that protection because of the third premium. Which makes it a
:19:00. > :19:05.kind of death tax, doesn't it? Which is what you use to rail against.
:19:06. > :19:09.What it is people paying for the services they have paid out of their
:19:10. > :19:13.assets. But with that very important protection that nobody is going to
:19:14. > :19:18.be wiped out in the way that has happened up until now, down to the
:19:19. > :19:22.last three years. But when Labour propose this, George Osborne called
:19:23. > :19:26.it a death tax and you are now proposing a stealth death tax
:19:27. > :19:32.inheritance tax. Labour's proposals were very different. It is the same
:19:33. > :19:39.effect. Labour's were hitting everyone with an inheritance tax. We
:19:40. > :19:42.are saying that there are -- that there is a state contribution but
:19:43. > :19:48.the public receiving the services will have to pay for it out of
:19:49. > :19:52.assets, which have grown substantially. And which they might
:19:53. > :19:56.now lose to social care. But I would say that people in Hertfordshire pay
:19:57. > :20:01.a lot in income tracks, national insurance and VAT, and this is my
:20:02. > :20:05.bet is going to have to come from somewhere. Well, they are now going
:20:06. > :20:10.to pay a lot of tax and pay for social care. Turning to immigration,
:20:11. > :20:15.you promised to get net migration down to 100,020 ten. You failed. You
:20:16. > :20:19.promised again in 2015 and you are feeling again. Why should voters
:20:20. > :20:23.trust you a third time? It is very clear that only the Conservative
:20:24. > :20:29.Party has an ambition to control immigration and to bring it down. An
:20:30. > :20:32.ambition you have failed to deliver. There are, of course, factors that
:20:33. > :20:36.come into play. For example a couple of years ago we were going through a
:20:37. > :20:40.period when the UK was creating huge numbers of jobs but none of our
:20:41. > :20:43.European neighbours were doing anything like it. Not surprisingly,
:20:44. > :20:50.that feeds through into the immigration numbers that we see. But
:20:51. > :20:55.it is right that we have that ambition because I do not believe it
:20:56. > :20:59.is sustainable to have hundreds of thousands net migration, you're
:21:00. > :21:03.after year after year, and only Theresa May of the Conservative
:21:04. > :21:07.Party is willing to address that. It has gone from being a target to an
:21:08. > :21:11.ambition, and I am pretty sure in a couple of years it will become an
:21:12. > :21:17.untimed aspiration. Is net migration now higher or lower than when you
:21:18. > :21:22.came to power in 2010? I think it is higher at the moment. Let's look at
:21:23. > :21:27.the figures. And there they are. You are right, it is higher, so after
:21:28. > :21:34.six years in power, promising to get it down to 100,000, it is higher. So
:21:35. > :21:38.if that is an ambition and you have not succeeded. We have to accept
:21:39. > :21:43.that there are a number of factors. It continues to be the case that the
:21:44. > :21:47.UK economy is growing and creating a lot of jobs, which is undoubtedly
:21:48. > :21:50.drawing people. But you made the promise on the basis that would not
:21:51. > :21:53.happen? We are certainly outperforming other countries in a
:21:54. > :21:58.way that we could not have predicted in 2010. That is one of the factors.
:21:59. > :22:01.But if you look at a lot of the steps that we have taken over the
:22:02. > :22:07.course of the last seven years, dealing with bogus students, for
:22:08. > :22:11.example, tightening up a lot of the rules. You can say all that but it
:22:12. > :22:14.has made no difference to the headline figure. Clearly it would
:22:15. > :22:20.have gone up by much more and we not taken the steps. But as I say, we
:22:21. > :22:25.cannot for ever, it seems to me, have net migration numbers in the
:22:26. > :22:29.hundreds of thousands. If we get that good Brexit deal, one of the
:22:30. > :22:34.things we can do is tighten up in terms of access here. You say that
:22:35. > :22:38.but you have always had control of non-EU migration. You cannot blame
:22:39. > :22:41.the EU for that. You control immigration from outside the EU.
:22:42. > :22:48.Have you ever managed to get even that below 100,000? Well, no doubt
:22:49. > :22:54.you will present the numbers now. You haven't. You have got down a bit
:22:55. > :22:58.from 2010, I will give you that, but even non-EU migration is still a lot
:22:59. > :23:03.more than 100000 and that is the thing you control. It is 164,000 on
:23:04. > :23:06.the latest figures. There is no point in saying to the voters that
:23:07. > :23:09.when we get control of the EU migration you will get it down when
:23:10. > :23:15.the bit you have control over, you have failed to get that down into
:23:16. > :23:19.the tens of thousands. The general trend has gone up. Non-EU migration
:23:20. > :23:25.we have brought down over the last few years. Not by much, not by
:23:26. > :23:30.anywhere near your 100,000 target. But we clearly have more tools
:23:31. > :23:35.available to us, following Brexit. At this rate it will be around 2030
:23:36. > :23:38.before you get non-EU migration down to 100,000. We clearly have more
:23:39. > :23:42.tools available to us and I return to the point I made. In the last six
:23:43. > :23:46.or seven years, particularly the last four or five, we have seen the
:23:47. > :23:51.UK jobs market growing substantially. It is extraordinary
:23:52. > :23:53.how many more jobs we have. So you'll only promised the migration
:23:54. > :23:58.target because you did not think you were going to run the economy well?
:23:59. > :24:01.That is what you are telling me. I don't think anyone expected us to
:24:02. > :24:06.create quite a number of jobs that we have done over the last six or
:24:07. > :24:09.seven years. At the time when other European countries have not been.
:24:10. > :24:14.George Osborne says your target is economically illiterate. I disagree
:24:15. > :24:21.with George on that. He is my old boss but I disagree with him on that
:24:22. > :24:24.point. And the reason I say that is looking at the economics and the
:24:25. > :24:30.wider social impact, I don't think it is sustainable for us to have
:24:31. > :24:33.hundreds of thousands, year after year after year. Let me ask you one
:24:34. > :24:37.other thing because you are the chief secretary. Your promising that
:24:38. > :24:42.spending on health will be ?8 billion higher in five use time than
:24:43. > :24:45.it is now. How do you pay for that? From a strong economy, two years ago
:24:46. > :24:51.we had a similar conversation because at that point we said that
:24:52. > :24:55.we would increase spending by ?8 billion. And we are more than on
:24:56. > :24:59.track to deliver it, because it is a priority area for us. Where will the
:25:00. > :25:04.money come from? It will be a priority area for us. We will find
:25:05. > :25:09.the money. So you have not been able to show us a revenue line where this
:25:10. > :25:13.?8 billion will come from. We have a record of making promises to spend
:25:14. > :25:18.more on the NHS and delivering. One thing I would say is that the only
:25:19. > :25:23.way you can spend more money on the NHS is if you have a strong economy,
:25:24. > :25:27.and the biggest risk... But that is true of anything. I am trying to
:25:28. > :25:31.find out where the ?8 billion come from, where will it come from? Know
:25:32. > :25:35.you were saying that perhaps you might increase taxes, ticking off
:25:36. > :25:41.the lock, so people are right to be suspicious. But you will not tell us
:25:42. > :25:45.where the ?8 billion will come from. Andrew, a strong economy is key to
:25:46. > :25:49.delivering more NHS money. That does not tell us where the money is
:25:50. > :25:53.coming from. The biggest risk to a strong economy would be a bad
:25:54. > :25:58.Brexit, which Jeremy Corbyn would deliver. And we have a record of
:25:59. > :26:01.putting more money into the NHS. I think that past performance we can
:26:02. > :26:03.take forward. Thank you for joining us.
:26:04. > :26:05.So, the Conservatives have been taking a bit of flak
:26:06. > :26:10.But Conservative big guns have been out and about this morning taking
:26:11. > :26:13.Here's Boris Johnson on ITV's Peston programme earlier today:
:26:14. > :26:17.What we're trying to do is to address what I think
:26:18. > :26:20.everybody, all serious demographers acknowledge will be the massive
:26:21. > :26:24.problem of the cost of social care long-term.
:26:25. > :26:28.This is a responsible, grown-up, conservative approach,
:26:29. > :26:31.trying to deal with a long-term problem in a way that is equitable,
:26:32. > :26:33.allows people to pass on a very substantial sum,
:26:34. > :26:35.still, to their kids, and takes away the fear
:26:36. > :26:42.Joining me now from Liverpool is Labour's Shadow Chief Secretary
:26:43. > :26:53.Petered out, welcome to the programme. Let's start with social
:26:54. > :26:57.care. The Tories are saying that if you have ?100,000 or more in assets,
:26:58. > :27:03.you should pay for your own social care. What is wrong with that? Well,
:27:04. > :27:07.I think the issue at the end of the day is the question of fairness. Is
:27:08. > :27:11.it fair? And what we're trying to do is to get to a situation where we
:27:12. > :27:17.have, for example, the Dilnot report, which identified that you
:27:18. > :27:20.actually have cap on your spending on social care. We are trying to get
:27:21. > :27:26.to a position where it is a reasonable and fair approach to
:27:27. > :27:31.expenditure. But you will know that a lot of people, particularly in the
:27:32. > :27:35.south of country, London and the south-east, and the adjacent areas
:27:36. > :27:38.around it, they have benefited from huge house price inflation. They
:27:39. > :27:43.have seen their homes go up in value, if and when they sell, they
:27:44. > :27:49.are not taxed on that increase. Why should these people not pay for
:27:50. > :27:53.their own social care if they have the assets to do so? They will be
:27:54. > :27:58.paying for some of their social care but you cannot take social care and
:27:59. > :28:01.health care separately. It has to be an integrated approach. So for
:28:02. > :28:05.example if you do have dementia, you're more likely to be in an
:28:06. > :28:09.elderly person's home for longer and you most probably have been in care
:28:10. > :28:13.for a longer period of time. On the other hand, you might have, if you
:28:14. > :28:16.have had a stroke, there may be continuing care needs paid for by
:28:17. > :28:20.the NHS. So at the end of the date it is trying to get a reasonable
:28:21. > :28:29.balance and just to pluck a figure of ?100,000 out of thin air is not
:28:30. > :28:34.sensible. You will have heard me say about David Gold that the house
:28:35. > :28:38.prices in his area, about 450,000 or so, not quite that, and that people
:28:39. > :28:43.may have to spend quite a lot of that on social care to get down to
:28:44. > :28:48.?100,000. But in your area, the average house price is only
:28:49. > :28:53.?149,000, so your people would not have to pay anything like as much
:28:54. > :28:59.before they hit the ?100,000 minimum. I hesitate to say that but
:29:00. > :29:02.is that not almost a socialist approach to social care that if you
:29:03. > :29:07.are in the affluent Home Counties with a big asset, you pay more, and
:29:08. > :29:11.if you are in an area that is not so affluent and your house is not worth
:29:12. > :29:15.very much, you pay a lot less. What is wrong with that principle? I
:29:16. > :29:20.think the problem I am trying to get to is this issue about equity across
:29:21. > :29:25.the piece. At the end of the day, what we want is a system whereby it
:29:26. > :29:29.is capped at a particular level, and the Dilnot report, after much
:29:30. > :29:33.examination, said we should have a cap on care costs at ?72,000. The
:29:34. > :29:37.Conservatives decided to ditch that and come up with another policy
:29:38. > :29:41.which by all accounts seems to be even more Draconian. At the end of
:29:42. > :29:51.the day it is trying to get social care and an NHS care in a much more
:29:52. > :29:53.fluid way. We had offered the Conservatives to have a bipartisan
:29:54. > :29:58.approach to this. David just said that this is a long term. You do not
:29:59. > :30:04.pick a figure out of thin air and use that as a long-term strategy.
:30:05. > :30:09.The Conservatives are now saying they will increase health spending
:30:10. > :30:14.over the next five years in real terms. You will increase health
:30:15. > :30:20.spending. In what way is your approach to health spending better
:30:21. > :30:26.than the Tories' now? We are contributing an extra 7.2 billion to
:30:27. > :30:31.the NHS and social care over the next few years. But you just don't
:30:32. > :30:36.put money into the NHS or social care. It has to be an integrated
:30:37. > :30:40.approach to social and health care. What we've got is just more of the
:30:41. > :30:45.same. What we don't want to do is just say, we ring-fenced an out for
:30:46. > :30:54.here or there. What you have to do is try to get that... Let me ask you
:30:55. > :30:58.again. In terms of the amount of resource that is going to be devoted
:30:59. > :31:04.in the next five years, and resource does matter for the NHS, in what way
:31:05. > :31:08.are your plans different now from the Conservative plans? The key is
:31:09. > :31:14.how you use that resource. By just putting money in, you've got to say,
:31:15. > :31:20.if we are going to put that money on, how do we use it? As somebody
:31:21. > :31:24.who has worked in social care for 40 years, you have to have a different
:31:25. > :31:30.approach to how you use that money. The money we are putting in, 7.7,
:31:31. > :31:34.may be similar in cash terms to what the Tories claim they are putting
:31:35. > :31:48.in, but it's not how much you put in per se, it is how you use it. You
:31:49. > :31:51.are going to get rid of car parking charges in hospital, and you are
:31:52. > :31:53.going to increase pay by taking the cap on pay off. So it doesn't
:31:54. > :31:56.necessarily follow that the money, under your way of doing it, will
:31:57. > :32:00.follow the front line. What you need in the NHS is a system that is
:32:01. > :32:07.capable of dealing with the patience you have. What we have now is on at
:32:08. > :32:17.five Asian of the NHS. Staff leaving, not being paid properly. So
:32:18. > :32:21.pay and the NHS go hand in hand. Let's move onto another area of
:32:22. > :32:26.policy where there is some confusion. Who speaks for the Labour
:32:27. > :32:33.Party on nuclear weapons? Is it Emily Thornbury, or Nia Griffith,
:32:34. > :32:37.defence spokesperson? The Labour manifesto. It is clear. We are
:32:38. > :32:48.committed to the nuclear deterrent, and that is the definitive... Is it?
:32:49. > :32:52.Emily Thornbury said that Trident could be scrapped in the defence
:32:53. > :32:57.review you would have immediately after taking power. On LBC on Friday
:32:58. > :33:03.night. She didn't, actually. I listened to that. What she actually
:33:04. > :33:07.said is, as part of a Labour government coming in, a new
:33:08. > :33:12.government, there is always a defence review. But not the concept
:33:13. > :33:19.of Trident in its substance. She said there would be a review in
:33:20. > :33:23.terms of, and this is in our manifesto. When you reduce
:33:24. > :33:29.something, you review how it is operated. The review could scrap
:33:30. > :33:34.Trident. It won't scrap Trident. The review is in the context of how you
:33:35. > :33:40.protect it from cyber attacks. This will issue was seized upon that she
:33:41. > :33:45.was saying that we would have another review of Trident or Labour
:33:46. > :33:52.would ditch it. That is nonsense. You will have seen some reports that
:33:53. > :33:56.MI5 opened a file on Jeremy Corbyn in the early 90s because of his
:33:57. > :34:04.links to Irish republicanism. This has caused some people, his links to
:34:05. > :34:11.the IRA and Sinn Fein, it has caused some concern. Could you just listen
:34:12. > :34:18.to this clip and react. Do you condemn what the IRA did? I condemn
:34:19. > :34:22.all bombing. But do you condemn what the IRA did? I condemn what was done
:34:23. > :34:27.with the British Army as well as both sides as well. What happened in
:34:28. > :34:34.Derry in 1972 was pretty devastating as well. Do you distinguish between
:34:35. > :34:40.state forces, what the British Army did and the IRA? Well, in a sense,
:34:41. > :34:46.the treatment of IRA prisoners which made them into virtual political
:34:47. > :34:50.prisoners suggested that the British government and the state saw some
:34:51. > :34:57.kind of almost equivalent in it. My point is that the whole violence if
:34:58. > :35:04.you was terrible, was appalling, and came out of a process that had been
:35:05. > :35:09.allowed to fester in Northern Ireland for a very long time. That
:35:10. > :35:13.was from about two years ago. Can you explain why the Leader of the
:35:14. > :35:17.Labour Party, Her Majesty 's opposition, the man who would be our
:35:18. > :35:24.next Prime Minister, finds it so hard to condemn IRA arming? I think
:35:25. > :35:27.it has to be within the context that Jeremy Corbyn for many years trying
:35:28. > :35:36.to move the peace protest... Process along. So why wouldn't you condemn
:35:37. > :35:43.IRA bombing? Again, that was an issue, a traumatic event in Irish -
:35:44. > :35:49.British relations that went on for 30 years. It is a complicated
:35:50. > :35:54.matter. Bombing is not that complicated. If you are a man of
:35:55. > :35:58.peace, surely you would condemn the bomb and the bullet? Let me say
:35:59. > :36:04.this, I condemn the bomb and the bullet. Why can't your leader? You
:36:05. > :36:09.would have to ask Jeremy Corbyn, but that is in the context of what he
:36:10. > :36:11.was trying to do over a 25 year period to move the priest process
:36:12. > :36:14.along. Thank you for joining us. It's just gone 11.35,
:36:15. > :36:16.you're watching the Sunday Politics. Hello again.
:36:17. > :36:27.in Scotland and Wales. Welcome to the Sunday
:36:28. > :36:31.Politics in the Midlands. There's something about a hospital
:36:32. > :36:33.issue that can turn Now Telford feels the pulling power
:36:34. > :36:42.of Shropshire's tug-of-war over A The Conservatives edged
:36:43. > :36:44.Labour out two years ago, and it's just as hotly contested
:36:45. > :36:49.this time round. Pulling in opposite directions
:36:50. > :36:53.with us here today - Amanda Milling for the Conservatives
:36:54. > :36:57.and Adrian Bailey for Labour. Both MPs in the last
:36:58. > :37:00.Parliament, and hoping to be, And can the Green Party get
:37:01. > :37:11.the Green light in places where they have a nasty habit
:37:12. > :37:16.of seeing Red? Labour's is all about taxing,
:37:17. > :37:21.spending and re-nationalising. The Liberal Democrats promise
:37:22. > :37:25.another EU referendum. And the Conservatives restate
:37:26. > :37:30.their elusive immigration target, promise means-tested winter fuel
:37:31. > :37:46.payments, and charging We do have to take care with one set
:37:47. > :37:51.of opinion polls, but this is the first set to come out since the
:37:52. > :37:55.Conservative manifesto with those proposals on social care. Amanda,
:37:56. > :37:58.what would you say to somebody who's been thrifty all their lives,
:37:59. > :38:03.have assets of over ?100,000, and have assets of over ?100,000, and
:38:04. > :38:08.now they face what will seemed to many like dementia tax or death tax
:38:09. > :38:15.or a Gnostic combination of them both? Social care is we've discussed
:38:16. > :38:19.at length over months and years. With an ageing population where we
:38:20. > :38:27.need to find a solution so that we can provide the care that older
:38:28. > :38:33.people need. This is a credible solution being pro forward. Have you
:38:34. > :38:38.not alienated the people most likely to vote and most likely to vote for
:38:39. > :38:45.you? We're actually increasing the level of protection. We're going
:38:46. > :38:50.from the 23,000 figure up to ?100,000. We know Labour's response
:38:51. > :38:55.to this and that's understandable. If somebody is living in a house in
:38:56. > :39:00.less than ?100,000, this could look less than ?100,000, this could look
:39:01. > :39:05.like good news. In the current housing market, the great majority
:39:06. > :39:08.of people, and there are some exceptions in some cities, feel
:39:09. > :39:13.profoundly uneasy about these proposals. The fact is that
:39:14. > :39:20.hard-working people who throughout their lives have saved up and know
:39:21. > :39:24.their house is worth more than 100,000 know they could have a huge
:39:25. > :39:28.amount of money that their descendants will have to contribute
:39:29. > :39:36.to pave their care. They are very concerned. Are you preserving the
:39:37. > :39:39.intergenerational unfairness whether younger people take a
:39:40. > :39:43.disproportionately heavy load compare that with older people? Your
:39:44. > :39:50.preserving the triple lock, saying on winter fuel payments that the
:39:51. > :39:54.millionaire gets the same as everybody else? I believe there's a
:39:55. > :39:57.profound sense of unease that currently the great majority of
:39:58. > :40:03.people, including both pensioners and young people, are actually
:40:04. > :40:11.suffering whilst there is something like the top 5% and the corporation
:40:12. > :40:14.getting away. At the moment, the ordinary hard-working person,
:40:15. > :40:20.whether they are pensioner or young person, who is subsidising those at
:40:21. > :40:27.the top. Back to the nasty party. We need to ensure we have a strong
:40:28. > :40:31.economy. The Labour Party policy is very anti-business. And
:40:32. > :40:36.anti-aspiration. There's a real danger it will put our public
:40:37. > :40:42.services at risk by virtue... At this stage we have to move on.
:40:43. > :40:44.Something really odd happened here in the last general election,
:40:45. > :40:46.making a mockery of any idea of "uniform national swing".
:40:47. > :40:48.The Conservatives increased their majorities in their
:40:49. > :40:57.The Conservatives overturned a narrow Labour majority,
:40:58. > :41:00.with an even narrower one of their own.
:41:01. > :41:03.This time, Joanne Gallacher finds a town embroiled in a bitter battle
:41:04. > :41:11.On the march in Shropshire against proposals to downgrade
:41:12. > :41:15.services at Telford's Princess Royal Hospital.
:41:16. > :41:18.There's no doubt it's a big issue for voters here.
:41:19. > :41:21.What would you say are the main issues for people in Telford ahead
:41:22. > :41:29.The hospitals and the fact that the Women and Children's Centre
:41:30. > :41:34.Health bosses have recommended that the Accident Emergency unit
:41:35. > :41:37.at the Princess Royal is downgraded and services at the Women
:41:38. > :41:39.and Children's Centre, which was opened just two years ago
:41:40. > :41:47.at a cost of ?28 million, should be scaled down.
:41:48. > :41:49.When Lucy Allan took the seat from Labour
:41:50. > :41:52.for the Conservatives back in 2015, the future of services
:41:53. > :41:57.at the Princess Royal and the Royal Shrewsbury seemed secure.
:41:58. > :41:59.Just a year earlier, on a visit to Telford,
:42:00. > :42:01.the Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, had promised
:42:02. > :42:10.I was there when he said that and I think what we have now
:42:11. > :42:13.got are two A at two hospitals, one in Shrewsbury, one
:42:14. > :42:17.in Telford, going to be doing slightly different services.
:42:18. > :42:20.As a patient that might have a smash on the M54,
:42:21. > :42:23.I want to go as fast as possible to the place clinicians
:42:24. > :42:27.Local residents who want a walk-in A, they are still going to get
:42:28. > :42:29.that, and Shrewsbury is still going to have that,
:42:30. > :42:33.We're going to win and we're going to fight
:42:34. > :42:38.Labour want to turn this election into a referendum on the future
:42:39. > :42:42.They want Mr Hunt to honour his commitment to keep 24/7 A
:42:43. > :42:50.Jeremy Hunt promised, when he came in two years ago,
:42:51. > :42:54.over two years ago, that there will be two A
:42:55. > :42:56.One in Shrewsbury and one in Telford.
:42:57. > :42:58.Now we don't hear anything from Jeremy Hunt.
:42:59. > :43:04.This is one of the reasons people are confused.
:43:05. > :43:07.They don't know where our local MP stands.
:43:08. > :43:10.The Greens are standing in Telford after an offer to stand aside
:43:11. > :43:16.They've criticised Labour's campaign on the hospital issue.
:43:17. > :43:18.By calling the election a referendum on the hospital,
:43:19. > :43:23.I think it's a way of misdirecting and misleading the electorate.
:43:24. > :43:26.They're kind of creating this false narrative of one
:43:27. > :43:29.of the hospitals is going to stay, when in reality that is not
:43:30. > :43:34.The Liberal Democrats trailed in last in 2015
:43:35. > :43:41.They say the vote to leave the European Union could also damage
:43:42. > :43:45.Probably with what's happening over Brexit,
:43:46. > :43:48.a lot of the medical professionals are thinking have they actually got
:43:49. > :43:52.They might be thinking about going abroad.
:43:53. > :43:55.This sort of situation is going to get worse.
:43:56. > :43:58.Ukip aren't standing here this time and although Brexit may be an issue,
:43:59. > :44:01.it seems the future of the local hospital services is at the top
:44:02. > :44:14.of the political agenda for people in Telford in this general election.
:44:15. > :44:22.Labour say if they get in they will have a review of all these hospital
:44:23. > :44:27.plans. I suggest you, Adrian, that come what may, whichever government
:44:28. > :44:37.gets in, some of these A will have to close. There's a question
:44:38. > :44:44.over the one in the need to, Stafford, Burton. You will have to
:44:45. > :44:48.close some come what may. Can I complement Kuldip Sahota on the
:44:49. > :44:52.robust way he is exercising this campaign in order to protect
:44:53. > :44:57.services for his local residents. His experience in Telford is
:44:58. > :45:02.mirrored throughout the country but in the West Midlands in particular.
:45:03. > :45:07.In Staffordshire, yesterday it was announced they would have to be a
:45:08. > :45:12.closure of one of the hospital's Accident Emergency in order to
:45:13. > :45:18.save ?500 million. On the doorstep, NHS is the number-1 issue. This week
:45:19. > :45:22.I had to women who had been waiting eight months and five months for
:45:23. > :45:27.operations on cancer and were absolutely beside themselves with
:45:28. > :45:32.worry about their to get from the National Health Service the service
:45:33. > :45:40.they needed. The fact is that Labour will put in ?30 billion over the
:45:41. > :45:44.next five years designed to get the level of nurses and doctors and the
:45:45. > :45:48.facilities needed in order to get rid of these waiting times. Your
:45:49. > :45:52.candidate in Telford can say all she likes that this is about wider
:45:53. > :45:55.issues than just the health service, but if the constituents say it is
:45:56. > :46:00.about hospitals, that's the way it is. They are local issues, but at
:46:01. > :46:05.the end of the day this election is about who you want to be Prime
:46:06. > :46:10.Minister. Do you want a strong and stable leadership of Theresa May...
:46:11. > :46:17.What about the fierce people have. There is a question at the least
:46:18. > :46:22.over Stafford or Burton. I remember being on this show last time and we
:46:23. > :46:30.talked about Stafford and Burton Kadri Des. I was clear that myself
:46:31. > :46:35.and colleagues, Jeremy in Stafford and Andrew Griffiths in Burton, have
:46:36. > :46:41.been campaigning hard to make sure we retain our A services in both
:46:42. > :46:45.these hospitals. Looking at the very close contest in Telford, it makes
:46:46. > :46:51.me wonder why Labour have been spurning ideas of the Progressive
:46:52. > :46:54.Alliance. It's so nip and tuck, I would have thought that overture
:46:55. > :47:00.from the Greens might have offered a decent prospect of helping you get
:47:01. > :47:05.the Tories out. Before that... Strong and stable leadership. This
:47:06. > :47:09.is a leader who a few months ago introduced in the Budget an increase
:47:10. > :47:12.in national insurance for self-employed people and then
:47:13. > :47:18.scrapped it. That is not strong and stable. Let's get on to this point
:47:19. > :47:25.about the so-called Progressive Alliance. The fact is that Labour
:47:26. > :47:30.has a distinctive set of policies from those of the Green party or
:47:31. > :47:36.other political parties. We are fighting on those policies. If we
:47:37. > :47:42.get into power we will implement those policies. Labour has a strong
:47:43. > :47:47.brand, it has looked after working people over a century. We do not
:47:48. > :47:51.need the aid of parties that failed on that. I would argue that the
:47:52. > :47:58.Labour Party policies are such that they are going to crash the economy.
:47:59. > :48:02.As a result of that, they won't be able to fund these public services
:48:03. > :48:07.without borrowing huge sums of money. Jeremy Hunt was wrong, was he
:48:08. > :48:12.not, thinking of those Telford hospitals, to signal so much
:48:13. > :48:17.confidence that A in Telford and Shrewsbury would have a future. I
:48:18. > :48:24.can't discuss specifically what's going on in Shropshire hospitals.
:48:25. > :48:29.What I can say is I know the candidates, the MPs in Shropshire,
:48:30. > :48:30.have been campaigning very hard on these issues. Thank you.
:48:31. > :48:36.And I bet you think you know who I'm talking about.
:48:37. > :48:38.But no, it's not the Liberal Democrats, although there has been
:48:39. > :48:40.talk of a "progressive alliance" with them.
:48:41. > :48:42.The Green Party currently have 27 councillors
:48:43. > :48:50.They're fielding 58 general election candidates here this time round.
:48:51. > :48:52.That's slightly down on the number who stood two years ago,
:48:53. > :48:57.when only six of them managed to get enough votes to save their deposits.
:48:58. > :48:59.Our political reporter, Sian Grzeszczyk, asked
:49:00. > :49:01.their co-leader why the party has, so far, failed to
:49:02. > :49:09.We're not claiming to suddenly be forming the next government,
:49:10. > :49:12.I think everyone is clear about that, but what you can be
:49:13. > :49:14.clear about is when you vote for the Green Party,
:49:15. > :49:17.you send a very, very clear message to Westminster.
:49:18. > :49:18.The West Midlands has been neglected by Westminster
:49:19. > :49:22.Greens are fighting for the West Midlands and we're
:49:23. > :49:24.seeing that vote build and build and build.
:49:25. > :49:26.Perhaps not building as fast as we want it to,
:49:27. > :49:28.but the direction of travel is very, very clear.
:49:29. > :49:31.I'll make a prediction that in the next few general elections
:49:32. > :49:33.we'll see the Greens taking parliamentary seats
:49:34. > :49:36.OK, well, you've got that prediction there, but let me talk
:49:37. > :49:39.to you about your party's position on Brexit.
:49:40. > :49:42.You're offering a second referendum on that.
:49:43. > :49:46.When we take a look at the figures, the West Midlands was the region
:49:47. > :49:50.who voted most heavily in favour of leaving the European Union.
:49:51. > :49:53.How are you going to connect with the voters on that?
:49:54. > :50:00.But they all feel people should be given a final say on the final deal.
:50:01. > :50:04.What happens if Theresa May comes back and says this
:50:05. > :50:09.This is going to open up the NHS to privatisation
:50:10. > :50:11.through the transatlantic trade deal with the US as corporations
:50:12. > :50:18.What happens if she says we want to make us a tax haven
:50:19. > :50:21.When people see that, they might say, you know what,
:50:22. > :50:24.that wasn't what we voted for when we voted for leave
:50:25. > :50:27.Let's talk about another challenge to your party
:50:28. > :50:29.in the West Midlands and that's your
:50:30. > :50:34.What do you say to voters in places like Birmingham that stand
:50:35. > :50:38.to benefit economically from HS2 actually happening?
:50:39. > :50:42.We want the economy of Birmingham to get what it deserves and to have
:50:43. > :50:44.that major investment, but the question is,
:50:45. > :50:46.are you getting the best bang for your buck when you're investing
:50:47. > :50:51.Wouldn't it be better to put that money in a really good
:50:52. > :50:55.Why put all our eggs in one basket and focus on a very,
:50:56. > :50:58.very narrow project which actually won't deliver the range
:50:59. > :51:01.of benefits that we need for people in Birmingham.
:51:02. > :51:07.And we're also joined here today by one of the Green Party's candidates.
:51:08. > :51:09.Diana Toynbee is an educationalist and charity worker -
:51:10. > :51:21.You are one of the six who did save your deposits last time round. How
:51:22. > :51:28.many will save them this time? Six or fewer? I don't know, is very
:51:29. > :51:31.unpredictable. Probably more. We're running a really, really good
:51:32. > :51:35.campaign and we have great leaders who have been doing well in the
:51:36. > :51:40.national media. Why have the Greens got such a miserable record in this
:51:41. > :51:44.part of the country? They're under achievement speaks for itself. The
:51:45. > :51:50.indications are the smaller parties are being squeezed by the bigger
:51:51. > :51:53.two? The main problem is our ridiculously undemocratic voting
:51:54. > :52:00.system. But it's the one you have to work with. It is and we are working
:52:01. > :52:03.with it. If we had a more representative voting system, which
:52:04. > :52:10.people wanted, there would be 25 of us in Parliament at the moment. I
:52:11. > :52:16.was interested in HS2. The party has been consistent in its opposition. I
:52:17. > :52:20.don't understand why you're not welcome new -- welcoming these more
:52:21. > :52:24.energy-efficient trains, replacing the older ones that are less
:52:25. > :52:28.efficient? Good point. We are not against high-speed rail in
:52:29. > :52:32.principle, but looking at HS2 indeed tell, it doesn't look like there's a
:52:33. > :52:38.good economic or environmental case for it. Are you also not against the
:52:39. > :52:43.and investment? The vast majority of MPs think it will be very good for
:52:44. > :52:49.the economy, particularly areas like ours? Of course jobs are good. All
:52:50. > :52:54.jobs are good. We would like to invest money in jobs in new green
:52:55. > :52:58.technologies, renewable energy, this massive potential for that in this
:52:59. > :53:01.country and that would be a great way to invest as well. No sign of
:53:02. > :53:06.the Progressive Alliance getting anywhere in this part of the
:53:07. > :53:11.country? It depends on the constituency. I'm really proud to be
:53:12. > :53:16.representing the party that post on the Progressive Alliance, we've
:53:17. > :53:22.shown the way on it. People want to see politicians cooperating. It
:53:23. > :53:25.depends on the constituency. Who is most likely to beat the
:53:26. > :53:30.Conservatives. It's sad in Telford that Labour rebut our offer. We talk
:53:31. > :53:35.about the common good in the Green Party and putting us into practice.
:53:36. > :53:41.If we talking about alliances, the one that is key is the one where
:53:42. > :53:45.we're seeing Ukip tumbling into the laps of the Conservative Party. The
:53:46. > :53:52.right is consolidating while the left, as we keep airing -- hearing,
:53:53. > :54:00.is more fragmented than ever. My experience on the doorstep is people
:54:01. > :54:04.who had voted Ukip are very concerned... They wanted to vote for
:54:05. > :54:11.change when they voted Ukip. They are now concerned that where Ukip
:54:12. > :54:15.are joining the Conservatives to implement conservative policies at a
:54:16. > :54:21.local level, as in Dudley or potentially in Parliament, and
:54:22. > :54:27.actually they did not vote for the programme of cuts in education,
:54:28. > :54:34.health, police and so on that they know oh Conservative MP will
:54:35. > :54:38.deliver. Whatever happened to the Tories being the greenest
:54:39. > :54:43.government, greenest pledges, very little about air quality in the
:54:44. > :54:47.manifesto, little about the falling cost of renewables, very little to
:54:48. > :54:52.address the slippage in Kyle line change proposals. I would argue that
:54:53. > :54:58.we are looking at our energy mix to be much greener. In my own
:54:59. > :55:02.constituency, I had a coal-fired power station that closed last year.
:55:03. > :55:07.We are phasing out coal production. That's an example of how we are
:55:08. > :55:12.being green. A key element in your proposals is you do want to have
:55:13. > :55:16.another referendum on the European Union. Isn't the message that's
:55:17. > :55:20.coming through loud and clear again and again and again from the
:55:21. > :55:25.campaign Trail is people saying not another referendum. Are you backing
:55:26. > :55:29.the wrong horse? I think that's a good point. I thought at first, not
:55:30. > :55:33.another referendum. The more I learn about it the more I think it is
:55:34. > :55:38.important that people have another chance when they have we thought it.
:55:39. > :55:42.This is the beginning of a process not the end. Another referendum
:55:43. > :55:47.doesn't mean reversing it, it just means people have a chance to decide
:55:48. > :55:48.having had time to think. OK, thank you.
:55:49. > :55:51.So what else has been making the news on the campaign trail?
:55:52. > :55:58.Our round-up in 60 seconds is brought to us today by Joan Cummins:
:55:59. > :56:00.The Liberal Democrat leader, Tim Farron, made
:56:01. > :56:04.The party wants to legalise cannabis, but the pot on display
:56:05. > :56:13.The PM revealed she's read all of JK Rowling's books about the young
:56:14. > :56:18.wizard to pupils at the Nishkam primary school in Birmingham.
:56:19. > :56:20.Oops, Diane Abbott got slightly lost on her
:56:21. > :56:22.way to give a speech at the Police Federation's
:56:23. > :56:27.The Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, was then treated to some difficult
:56:28. > :56:32.What party of law and order, as you put it, cuts
:56:33. > :56:42.Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn addressed a rally in Birmingham
:56:43. > :56:44.calling on the Conservatives to drop what he calls their anti-pensioner
:56:45. > :56:52.And away from the election, there's been a change of power in Dudley.
:56:53. > :56:54.The Conservatives have taken control of the council from Labour
:56:55. > :57:13.An arrangement in Dudley dubbed by its opponents the regressive
:57:14. > :57:18.alliance. Doesn't it point out again the danger I was talking about a
:57:19. > :57:24.moment ago. In the Black Country, in the potteries, areas like that, off
:57:25. > :57:29.Ukip and the Conservatives consolidating against you. Frankly I
:57:30. > :57:34.think it's really regrettable and the people who will suffer will be
:57:35. > :57:40.the electorate of Dudley. You have a Labour minority counsel, very ably
:57:41. > :57:47.led by Pete Lowe, and with Ian Austin, formerly the MPs there,
:57:48. > :57:51.regenerating the area, a brand-new further education college. Now as a
:57:52. > :57:57.result of a squalid backroom deal, you have a coalition of losers that
:57:58. > :58:02.have taken over. I've fear you'll have a super time at US and Tory
:58:03. > :58:06.lead counsel working with the Tory government to inflict cuts on the
:58:07. > :58:12.electors of Dudley. A squalid coalition of losers. You think of
:58:13. > :58:17.that post the Lib Dems put out yesterday which rather unnervingly,
:58:18. > :58:21.I thought, showed Nigel Farage's face superimposed into the head and
:58:22. > :58:28.shoulders of Theresa May. That's the point they are making. You're
:58:29. > :58:32.turning into a very different party. The Dudley Council situation is that
:58:33. > :58:40.the Conservatives put forward a possible leader. There was no deal
:58:41. > :58:42.done, no backroom deal. This is a Conservative council now with
:58:43. > :58:49.conservative cabinet members. There's been no deals with Ukip.
:58:50. > :58:55.What are we to make of this talk of 200 Labour MPs would be OK? Managing
:58:56. > :58:59.expectations down? Briefly. Ridiculous. Ridiculous is the last
:59:00. > :59:00.word. My thanks to Amanda Milling
:59:01. > :59:02.and Adrian Bailey. Finally from me, a word
:59:03. > :59:05.about some special themed days We'll hook up with our other regions
:59:06. > :59:09.to reveal The Bigger Picture, beyond the claim and counter-claim
:59:10. > :59:11.of everyday electioneering. What's the right number
:59:12. > :59:14.of migrant workers? On Friday, the early years,
:59:15. > :59:17.from nursery school to university. This, though, is where
:59:18. > :59:21.we re-join Andrew Neil. cancelled. And rent to own is still
:59:22. > :59:28.our policy. Thank you very much, Tom Brake. Andrew, back to you.
:59:29. > :59:31.So, two and half weeks to go till polling day,
:59:32. > :59:33.let's take stock of the campaign so far and look ahead
:59:34. > :59:42.Sam, Isabel and Steve are with me again.
:59:43. > :59:50.Sam, Mrs May had made a great thing about the just about managing. Not
:59:51. > :59:56.the poorest of the poor, but not really affluent people, who are
:59:57. > :00:00.maybe OK but it's a bit of a struggle. What is in the manifesto
:00:01. > :00:04.for them? There is something about the high profile items in the
:00:05. > :00:10.manifesto. She said she wants to help those just above the poorest
:00:11. > :00:14.level. But if you look at things like the winter fuel allowance,
:00:15. > :00:18.which is going to be given only to the poorest. If you look at free
:00:19. > :00:23.school meals for infants, those for the poorest are going to be kept,
:00:24. > :00:30.but the rest will go. The social care plan, those who are renting or
:00:31. > :00:35.in properties worth up to ?90,000, they are going to be treated, but
:00:36. > :00:41.those in properties worth above that, 250,000, for example, will
:00:42. > :00:48.have to pay. Which leads to the question - what is being done for
:00:49. > :00:51.the just about managings? There is something, the personal allowance
:00:52. > :00:56.that David Cameron promised in 2015, that they are not making a big deal
:00:57. > :01:02.of that, because they cannot say by how much. So you are looking in tax
:01:03. > :01:11.rises on the just about managings. Where will the tax rises come from.
:01:12. > :01:17.We do not know, that there is the 40 million pounds gap for the Tories to
:01:18. > :01:23.reach what they are pledging in their manifesto. We do not know how
:01:24. > :01:28.that is going to be made up, more tax, or more borrowing? So that is
:01:29. > :01:32.why the questions of the implications of removing the tax
:01:33. > :01:36.lock are so potentially difficult for Tory MPs. The Labour manifesto
:01:37. > :01:39.gives figures for the cost of certain policies and where the
:01:40. > :01:45.revenue will come from. You can argue about the figures, but at
:01:46. > :01:49.least we have the figures. The Tory manifesto is opaque on these
:01:50. > :01:53.matters. That applies to both the manifestos. Looking at the Labour
:01:54. > :01:58.manifesto on the way here this morning, when you look at the
:01:59. > :02:01.section on care for the elderly, they simply say, there are various
:02:02. > :02:07.ways in which the money for this can be raised. They are specific on
:02:08. > :02:12.other things. They are, and we heard John McDonnell this morning being
:02:13. > :02:21.very on that, and saying there is not a single ? in Tory manifesto. I
:02:22. > :02:26.have only got to page 66. It is quite broad brush and they are very
:02:27. > :02:32.open to challenge. For example, on the detail of a number of their
:02:33. > :02:36.flagship things. There is no detail on their immigration policy. They
:02:37. > :02:40.reiterate the ambition, but not how they are going to do that, without a
:02:41. > :02:48.massive increase in resource for Borders officials. We are at a time
:02:49. > :02:55.where average wages are lagging behind prices. And in work benefits
:02:56. > :02:59.remain frozen. I would have thought that the just-about-managings are
:03:00. > :03:02.people who are in work but they need some in work benefits to make life
:03:03. > :03:11.tolerable and be able to pay bills. Doesn't she has to do more for them?
:03:12. > :03:17.Maybe, but this whole manifesto was her inner circle saying, right, this
:03:18. > :03:24.is our chance to express our... It partly reads like a sort of
:03:25. > :03:28.philosophical essay at times. About the challenges, individualism
:03:29. > :03:34.against collectivism. Some of it reads quite well and is quite
:03:35. > :03:39.interesting, but in terms of its detail, Labour would never get away
:03:40. > :03:43.with it. They wouldn't be allowed to be so vague about where taxes are
:03:44. > :03:47.going to rise. We know there are going to be tax rises after the
:03:48. > :03:55.election, but we don't know where they will be. 100%, there will be
:03:56. > :04:00.tax rises. We know that they wanted a tax rise in the last budget, but
:04:01. > :04:05.they couldn't get it through because of the 2015 manifesto. Labour do
:04:06. > :04:11.offer a lot more detail. People could disagree with it, but there is
:04:12. > :04:16.a lot more detail. More to get your teeth into. About capital gains tax
:04:17. > :04:21.and the rises for better owners and so on. The SNP manifesto comes out
:04:22. > :04:28.this week, and the Greens and Sinn Fein. We think Ukip as well. There
:04:29. > :04:34.are more manifestos to come. The Lib Dems have already brought theirs
:04:35. > :04:38.out. Isn't the Liberal Democrat campaign in trouble? It doesn't seem
:04:39. > :04:44.to be doing particular the well in the polls, or at the local elections
:04:45. > :04:48.a few weeks ago. The Liberal Democrats are trying to fish in
:04:49. > :04:54.quite a small pool for votes. They are looking to get votes from those
:04:55. > :04:58.remainers who want to reverse the result, in effect. Tim Farron is
:04:59. > :05:06.promising a second referendum on the deal at the end of the negotiation
:05:07. > :05:12.process. And that is a hard sell. So those voting for remain on June 23
:05:13. > :05:17.are not low hanging fruit by any means? Polls suggesting that half of
:05:18. > :05:22.those want to reverse the result, so that is a feeling of about 20% on
:05:23. > :05:25.the Lib Dems, and they are getting slightly less than half at the
:05:26. > :05:31.moment, but there are not a huge amount of votes for them to get on
:05:32. > :05:41.that strategy. It doesn't feel like Tim Farron and the Lib Dems have
:05:42. > :05:45.promised enough. They are making a very serious case on cannabis use in
:05:46. > :05:48.a nightclub, but the optics of what they are discussing doesn't make
:05:49. > :05:52.them look like an anchor in a future coalition government that they would
:05:53. > :05:56.need to be. I wonder if we are seeing the re-emergence of the
:05:57. > :06:01.2-party system? And it is not the same two parties. In Scotland, the
:06:02. > :06:05.dynamics of this election seemed to be the Nationalists against the
:06:06. > :06:20.Conservatives. In England, if you look at what has happened to be Ukip
:06:21. > :06:24.vote, and what Sam was saying about the Lib Dems are struggling a bit to
:06:25. > :06:25.get some traction, it is overwhelmingly Labour and the
:06:26. > :06:27.Conservatives. A different 2-party system from Scotland, but a 2-party
:06:28. > :06:32.system. There are a number of different election is going on in
:06:33. > :06:36.parallel. In Scotland it is about whether you are unionist or not.
:06:37. > :06:41.Here, we have the collapse of the Ukip vote, which looks as though it
:06:42. > :06:46.is being redistributed in the Tories' favour. This is a unique
:06:47. > :06:52.election, and will not necessarily set the trend for elections to come.
:06:53. > :06:56.In the Tory manifesto, I spotted the fact that the fixed term Parliament
:06:57. > :07:04.act is going to be scrapped. That got almost no coverage! It turned
:07:05. > :07:08.out to be academic anyway, that it tells you something about how
:07:09. > :07:13.Theresa May is feeling, and she wants the control to call an
:07:14. > :07:17.election whenever it suits her. Re-emergence of the 2-party system,
:07:18. > :07:26.for this election or beyond? For this election, yes, but it shows the
:07:27. > :07:30.sort of robust strength of parties and their fragility. In other words,
:07:31. > :07:34.the Lib Dems haven't really recovered from the losses in the
:07:35. > :07:39.last general election, and are therefore not really seen as a
:07:40. > :07:44.robust vehicle to deliver Remain. If they were, they might be doing
:07:45. > :07:49.better. The Labour Party hasn't recovered in Scotland, and yet, if
:07:50. > :07:54.you look at the basic divide in England and Scotland and you see two
:07:55. > :08:00.parties battling it out, it is very, very hard for the smaller parties to
:08:01. > :08:05.break through and last. Many appear briefly on the political stage and
:08:06. > :08:10.then disappear again. The election had the ostensible goal of Brexit,
:08:11. > :08:16.but we haven't heard much about it in the campaign. Perhaps the Tories
:08:17. > :08:19.want to get back onto that. David Davis sounding quite tough this
:08:20. > :08:25.morning, the Brexit minister, saying there is no chance we will talk
:08:26. > :08:28.about 100 billion. And we have to have power in the negotiations on
:08:29. > :08:33.the free trade deal or what ever it is. I think they are keen to get the
:08:34. > :08:38.subject of the manifesto at this point, because it has not started
:08:39. > :08:43.too well. There is an irony that Theresa May ostensibly called the
:08:44. > :08:47.election because she needed a stronger hand in the Brexit
:08:48. > :08:50.negotiations, and there was an opportunity for the Lib Dems, with
:08:51. > :08:55.their unique offer of being the party that is absolutely against the
:08:56. > :09:01.outcome of the referendum, and offering another chance. There
:09:02. > :09:05.hasn't been much airtime on that particular pledge, because instead,
:09:06. > :09:11.this election has segued into being all about leadership. Theresa May's
:09:12. > :09:17.leadership, and looking again at the Tory manifesto, I was struck that
:09:18. > :09:23.she was saying that this is my plan for the future, not ABBA plan. Even
:09:24. > :09:30.when talking about social care, he manages to work in a bit about
:09:31. > :09:34.Theresa May and Brexit. And Boris Johnson this morning, an interview
:09:35. > :09:38.he gave on another political programme this morning, it was
:09:39. > :09:43.extraordinarily sycophantic for him. Isn't Theresa May wonderful. There
:09:44. > :09:49.is a man trying to secure his job in the Foreign Office! Will he succeed?
:09:50. > :09:57.I think she will leave him. Better in the tent than out. What did you
:09:58. > :10:02.make of David Davis' remarks? He was basically saying, we will walk away
:10:03. > :10:10.from the negotiating table if the Europeans slam a bill for 100
:10:11. > :10:15.billion euros. The point is that the Europeans will not slam a bill for
:10:16. > :10:20.100 billion euros on the negotiating table. That is the gross figure.
:10:21. > :10:25.There are all sorts of things that need to be taken into account. I
:10:26. > :10:32.imagine they will ask for something around the 50 or ?60 billion mark.
:10:33. > :10:36.It looks that they are trying to make it look like a concession when
:10:37. > :10:40.they do make their demands in order to soften the ground for what is
:10:41. > :10:44.going to happen just two weeks after general election day. He makes a
:10:45. > :10:49.reasonable point about having parallel talks. What they want to do
:10:50. > :10:54.straightaway is deal with the bill, Northern Ireland and citizens
:10:55. > :10:57.rights. All of those things are very complicated and interlinked issues,
:10:58. > :11:01.which cannot be dealt with in isolation. I wouldn't be surprised
:11:02. > :11:05.if we ended up with parallel talks, just to work out where we are going
:11:06. > :11:12.with Northern Ireland and the border. Steve, you can't work out
:11:13. > :11:17.what the Northern Ireland border will be, and EU citizens' writes
:11:18. > :11:21.here, until you work out what our relationship with the EU in the
:11:22. > :11:27.future will be. Indeed. The British government is under pressure to deal
:11:28. > :11:32.quickly with the border issue in Ireland, but feel they can't do so
:11:33. > :11:35.because when you have a tariff free arrangement outcome, or an
:11:36. > :11:39.arrangement that is much more protectionist, and that will
:11:40. > :11:42.determine partly the nature of the border. You cannot have a quick
:11:43. > :11:46.agreement on that front without knowing the rest of the deal. I
:11:47. > :11:50.think the negotiation will be complex. I am certain they want a
:11:51. > :11:56.deal rather than none, because this is no deal thing is part of the
:11:57. > :12:00.negotiation at this early stage. Sounding tough in the general
:12:01. > :12:05.election campaign also works electorally. But after the election,
:12:06. > :12:11.it will be a tough negotiation, beginning with this cost of Brexit.
:12:12. > :12:14.My understanding is that the government feels it's got to make
:12:15. > :12:22.the Europeans think they will not do a deal in order to get a deal. They
:12:23. > :12:26.don't want no deal. Absolutely not. And I'm sure it plays into the
:12:27. > :12:31.election. I'm sure the rhetoric will change when the election is over.
:12:32. > :12:33.That's all for today, thank you to all my guests.
:12:34. > :12:36.The Daily Politics will be back on BBC Two at 12.00
:12:37. > :12:40.And tomorrow evening I will be starting my series of interviews
:12:41. > :12:42.with the party leaders - first up is the Prime
:12:43. > :12:44.Minister, Theresa May, that's at 7pm on BBC One.
:12:45. > :12:48.And I'll be back here at the same time on BBC One next Sunday.
:12:49. > :13:36.Remember - if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.
:13:37. > :13:38.We've made great strides tackling HIV.
:13:39. > :13:41.Imagine if we could create a movement