12/03/2017

:00:33. > :00:37.It's Sunday morning and this is the Sunday Politics.

:00:38. > :00:42.David Davis tells MPs to leave the Brexit bill untouched,

:00:43. > :00:44.ahead of a week which could see Britain begin the process

:00:45. > :00:49.We'll talk to a Tory rebel and Ukip's Nigel Farage.

:00:50. > :00:52.Phillip Hammond's first budget hit the rocks thanks to a tax rise

:00:53. > :01:00.But how should we tax those who work for themselves?

:01:01. > :01:02.And remember Donald Trump's claim that Barack Obama had ordered

:01:03. > :01:11.We'll talk to the former Tory MP who set the whole story rolling.

:01:12. > :01:15.As a home care agency in Gloucestershire goes bust, will the

:01:16. > :01:30.And joining me for all of that, three self-employed journalists

:01:31. > :01:34.who definitely don't deserve a tax break.

:01:35. > :01:35.It's Steve Richards, Julia Hartley-Brewer

:01:36. > :01:40.They'll be tweeting throughout the programme with all the carefree

:01:41. > :01:47.abandon of Katie Hopkins before a libel trial.

:01:48. > :01:50.BBC lawyers have suddenly got nervous!

:01:51. > :01:53.So first today, the government is gearing up to trigger Article 50,

:01:54. > :01:55.perhaps in the next 48 hours, and start negotiating Britain's

:01:56. > :01:59.Much has been written about the prospect of the Commons

:02:00. > :02:01.getting a "meaningful vote" on the deal Britain negotiates.

:02:02. > :02:03.Brexit Secretary David Davis was on the Andrew Marr programme

:02:04. > :02:06.earlier this morning and he was asked what happens

:02:07. > :02:16.Well, that is what is called the most favoured nation status deal

:02:17. > :02:21.There we go out, as it were, on WTO rules.

:02:22. > :02:24.That is why of course we do the contingency planning, to make

:02:25. > :02:31.The British people decided on June the 23rd last year

:02:32. > :02:36.My job, and the job of the government, is to make

:02:37. > :02:46.the terms on which that happens as beneficial as possible.

:02:47. > :02:54.There we have it, clearly, either Parliament votes for the deal when

:02:55. > :02:57.it is done or it out on World Trade Organisation rules. That's what the

:02:58. > :02:59.government means by a meaningful vote.

:03:00. > :03:06.I think we get over obsessed about whether there will be a legal right

:03:07. > :03:10.for Parliament to have a vote. If there is no deal or a bad deal, I

:03:11. > :03:13.think it would be politically impossible for the government to

:03:14. > :03:16.reject Parliament's desire for a vote because the atmosphere of

:03:17. > :03:19.politics will be completely different by then. I take David

:03:20. > :03:24.Davies seriously. Within Whitehall he has acquired a reputation as

:03:25. > :03:28.being the most conscientious and details sadly... And well briefed.

:03:29. > :03:31.Absolutely and well travelled in terms of European capitals of the

:03:32. > :03:35.three Brexit ministers. It is quite telling he said what he did and it

:03:36. > :03:40.is quite telling that within cabinet, two weeks ago he was

:03:41. > :03:43.floating the idea of no deal at all. Being if not the central estimate

:03:44. > :03:47.than a completely plausible eventuality. It is interesting. I

:03:48. > :03:53.would suggest the prospect of no deal is moving up the agenda. It is

:03:54. > :03:58.still less likely than more likely to happen. But it's no longer a kind

:03:59. > :04:01.of long tail way out there in the distance. Planning for no deal is

:04:02. > :04:04.the same as having contents insurance or travel insurance, plan

:04:05. > :04:08.for the worse case scenarios are prepared it happens. Even the worst

:04:09. > :04:12.case scenario, it's not that bad. Think of the Jeep 20, apart from the

:04:13. > :04:17.EU, four members of the G20 economies are successful members of

:04:18. > :04:20.the EU. The rest aren't and don't have trade deals but somehow these

:04:21. > :04:25.countries are prospering. They are growing at a higher rate. You are

:04:26. > :04:29.not frightened? Not remotely. We are obsessed with what we get from the

:04:30. > :04:32.EU and the key thing we get from leaving the EU is not the deal but

:04:33. > :04:36.the other deals we can finally make with other trading partners. They

:04:37. > :04:39.have higher growth than virtually every other EU country apart from

:04:40. > :04:44.Germany. It is sensible as a negotiating position for the

:04:45. > :04:47.government to say if there is no deal, we will accept there is no

:04:48. > :04:52.deal. We're not frightened of no deal. It was clear from what David

:04:53. > :04:55.Davies was saying that there will be a vote in parliament at the end of

:04:56. > :05:00.the process but there won't be a third option to send the government

:05:01. > :05:05.back to try to get a better deal. It is either the deal or we leave

:05:06. > :05:09.without a deal. In reality, that third option will be there. We don't

:05:10. > :05:13.know yet whether there will be a majority for the deal if they get

:05:14. > :05:19.one. What we do know now is that there isn't a majority in the

:05:20. > :05:24.Commons for no deal. Labour MPs are absolutely clear that no deal is

:05:25. > :05:27.worth then a bad deal. I've heard enough Tory MPs say the same thing.

:05:28. > :05:36.But they wouldn't get no deal through. When it comes to this vote,

:05:37. > :05:39.if whatever deal is rejected, there will then be, one way or another,

:05:40. > :05:43.the third option raised of go back again. But who gets to decide what

:05:44. > :05:47.is a bad deal? The British people will have a different idea than the

:05:48. > :05:55.two thirds of the Remain supporting MPs in the Commons. In terms of the

:05:56. > :05:58.vote, the Commons. Surely, if the Commons, which is what matters here,

:05:59. > :06:04.if the Commons were to vote against the deal as negotiated by the

:06:05. > :06:08.government, surely that would trigger a general election? If the

:06:09. > :06:11.government had recommended the deal, surely the government would then, if

:06:12. > :06:17.it still felt strongly about the deal, if the other 27 had said,

:06:18. > :06:21.we're not negotiating, extending it, it would in effect become a second

:06:22. > :06:25.referendum on the deal. In effect it would be a no-confidence vote in the

:06:26. > :06:28.government. You've got to assume that unless something massively

:06:29. > :06:32.changes in the opposition before then, the government would feel

:06:33. > :06:36.fairly confident about a general election on those terms. Unless the

:06:37. > :06:40.deal is hideously bad and obviously basso every vote in the country...

:06:41. > :06:44.The prior minister said if it is that bad she would have rather no

:06:45. > :06:49.deal. So that eventuality arrives. -- the Prime Minister has said. Not

:06:50. > :06:55.a second referendum general election in two years' time. Don't put any

:06:56. > :06:57.holidays for! LAUGHTER -- don't look any.

:06:58. > :07:00.So the Brexit bill looks likely to clear Parliament this week.

:07:01. > :07:03.That depends on the number of Conservative MPs who are prepared

:07:04. > :07:06.to vote against their government on two key issues.

:07:07. > :07:09.Theresa May could be in negotiations with our European

:07:10. > :07:11.partners within days, but there may be some

:07:12. > :07:14.wheeler-dealings she has to do with her own MPs, too.

:07:15. > :07:18.Cast your mind back to the beginning of month.

:07:19. > :07:20.The bill to trigger Article 50 passed comfortably

:07:21. > :07:28.But three Conservatives voted for Labour's amendments to ensure

:07:29. > :07:33.the rights of EU citizens already in the UK.

:07:34. > :07:35.Seven Tory MPs voted to force the government to give Parliament

:07:36. > :07:40.a say on the deal struck with the EU before it's finalised.

:07:41. > :07:45.But remember those numbers, they're important.

:07:46. > :07:48.On the issue of a meaningful vote on a deal, I'm told there might have

:07:49. > :07:51.been more rebels had it not been for this assurance from

:07:52. > :07:56.I can confirm that the government will bring forward a motion

:07:57. > :07:58.on the final agreement to be approved by both Houses

:07:59. > :08:03.And we expect, and intend, that this will happen before

:08:04. > :08:10.the European Parliament debates and votes on the final agreement.

:08:11. > :08:15.When the government was criticised for reeling back

:08:16. > :08:19.from when and what it would offer a vote on.

:08:20. > :08:22.The bill then moved into the Lords, where peers passed it

:08:23. > :08:29.And the second, that Parliament be given a meaningful vote on the terms

:08:30. > :08:32.of the deal or indeed a vote in the event of there

:08:33. > :08:36.The so-called Brexit bill will return to Commons

:08:37. > :08:41.Ministers insist that both amendments would weaken

:08:42. > :08:43.the government's negotiating hand and are seeking to overturn them.

:08:44. > :08:49.But, as ever, politics is a numbers game.

:08:50. > :08:51.Theresa May has a working majority of 17.

:08:52. > :08:55.On Brexit, though, it's probably higher.

:08:56. > :08:57.At least six Labour MPs generally vote with

:08:58. > :09:01.Plus, eight DUP MPs, two from the Ulster Unionist party

:09:02. > :09:08.If all Conservatives vote with the government as well,

:09:09. > :09:13.Therefore, 26 Conservative rebels are needed for the government to be

:09:14. > :09:20.So, are there rough waters ahead for Theresa May?

:09:21. > :09:23.What numbers are we looking at, in terms of a potential rebellion?

:09:24. > :09:26.I think we're looking at a large number of people who are interested

:09:27. > :09:29.This building is a really important building.

:09:30. > :09:31.It's symbolic of a huge amount of history.

:09:32. > :09:35.And for it not to be involved in this momentous time would,

:09:36. > :09:42.But he says a clear verbal statement from the government on a meaningful

:09:43. > :09:48.vote on any deal would be enough to get most Tory MPs onside.

:09:49. > :09:49.It was already said about David Jones.

:09:50. > :09:51.It's slightly unravelled a little bit during

:09:52. > :09:56.I think this is an opportunity to really get that clarity

:09:57. > :09:59.through so that we can all vote for Article 50 and get

:10:00. > :10:04.We've have spoken to several Tory MPs who say they are minded to vote

:10:05. > :10:07.One said the situation was sad and depressing.

:10:08. > :10:10.The other said that the whips must be worried because they don't

:10:11. > :10:17.A minister told me Downing Street was looking again at the possibility

:10:18. > :10:21.of offering a vote in the event of no deal being reached.

:10:22. > :10:23.But that its position was unlikely to change.

:10:24. > :10:26.And, anyway, government sources have told the Sunday Politics they're not

:10:27. > :10:33.That those Tory MPs who didn't back either amendment the first time

:10:34. > :10:37.round would look silly if they did, this time.

:10:38. > :10:40.It would have to be a pretty hefty lot of people changing their minds

:10:41. > :10:43.about things that have already been discussed in quite a lot of detail,

:10:44. > :10:47.last time it was in the Commons, for things to be reversed this time.

:10:48. > :10:50.There's no doubt that a number of Tory MPs are very concerned.

:10:51. > :10:52.Labour are pessimistic about the chances of enough Tory

:10:53. > :10:56.rebels backing either of the amendments in the Commons.

:10:57. > :10:58.The important thing, I think, is to focus on the fact

:10:59. > :11:01.that this is the last chance to have a say on this.

:11:02. > :11:05.If they're going to vote with us, Monday is the time to do it.

:11:06. > :11:07.Assuming the bill does pass the Commons unamended,

:11:08. > :11:10.it will go back to the Lord's on Monday night where Labour peers

:11:11. > :11:14.have already indicated they won't block it again.

:11:15. > :11:17.It means that the Brexit bill would become law and Theresa May

:11:18. > :11:21.would be free to trigger Article 50 within days.

:11:22. > :11:23.Her own deadline was the end of this month.

:11:24. > :11:29.But one minister told me there were advantages to doing it early.

:11:30. > :11:32.We're joined now from Nottingham by the Conservative MP Anna Soubry.

:11:33. > :11:35.She's previously voted against the government on the question

:11:36. > :11:41.of whether Parliament should have a final say over the EU deal.

:11:42. > :11:47.Anna Soubry, I think it was clear this morning from David Davies that

:11:48. > :11:51.what he means by meaningful vote is not what you mean by a meaningful

:11:52. > :11:56.vote. He thinks the choice for Parliament would be to either vote

:11:57. > :11:59.for the deal and if Parliament doesn't, we leave on World Trade

:12:00. > :12:05.Organisation rules, on a bare-bones structure. In the end, will he

:12:06. > :12:10.accept that in the Commons tomorrow? No, because my problem and I don't

:12:11. > :12:13.think it is a problem, but my problem, the government's problem is

:12:14. > :12:17.that what I want is then to answer this question. What happens in the

:12:18. > :12:22.event of their not being any deal? David Davies made it very clear that

:12:23. > :12:26.in the event of there being no deal, Parliament would have no say. It

:12:27. > :12:30.means through your elected representatives, the people of this

:12:31. > :12:35.country would have no say on what happens if the government doesn't

:12:36. > :12:37.get a deal. I think the request that Parliament should have a say on

:12:38. > :12:42.Parliamentary sovereignty, is perfectly reasonable. That is what I

:12:43. > :12:49.want David to say. If he says that, I won't be rebelling. If he does...

:12:50. > :12:54.They have refused to say that. Sorry. If he continues to say what

:12:55. > :12:59.he said the BBC this morning, which means that the vote will be either

:13:00. > :13:06.to accept the as negotiated or to leave on WTO rules, will you rebel

:13:07. > :13:10.on that question but no, no, sorry, if there's a deal, Parliament will

:13:11. > :13:13.have a say. So that's fine. And we will see what the deal is and we

:13:14. > :13:18.will look at the options two years down the road. When who knows

:13:19. > :13:22.what'll happen in our economy and world economy. That is one matter

:13:23. > :13:25.which I am content on. The Prime Minister, a woman of her word has

:13:26. > :13:31.said that in the event of a deal, Parliament will vote on any deal. I

:13:32. > :13:35.don't difficulty. To clarify, I will come onto that. These are important

:13:36. > :13:39.matters. I want to clarify, not argue with you. You are content that

:13:40. > :13:42.if there is a deal, we will come under no deal in a second, but if

:13:43. > :13:49.there is a deal, you are content with the choice of being able to

:13:50. > :13:52.vote for that deal or leaving on WTO terms? No, you're speculating as to

:13:53. > :13:58.what might happen in two years' time. What the options might be.

:13:59. > :14:01.Personally I find it inconceivable that the government will come back

:14:02. > :14:04.with a rubbish deal. They will either come back with a good deal,

:14:05. > :14:08.which I won't have a problem with or they will come back with no deal. To

:14:09. > :14:13.speculate about coming back with a deal, there is a variety of options.

:14:14. > :14:16.I understand that that is what the Lord amendments are about. They are

:14:17. > :14:24.about a vote at the end of the process. Do forgive me, the Lords

:14:25. > :14:26.amendment is not the same that I've voted for in Parliament. What we

:14:27. > :14:29.call the Chris Leslie amendment, which was talking about whatever the

:14:30. > :14:32.agreement is, whatever happens at the end of the negotiations,

:14:33. > :14:36.Parliament will have a vote. Parliament will have a say. The

:14:37. > :14:41.Lords amendment is a bit more technical. It is the principle of no

:14:42. > :14:45.deal that is agitating us. Let's clarify on this. They are

:14:46. > :14:49.complicated matters. What do you want the government to say? What do

:14:50. > :14:54.you want David Davis to say tomorrow on what should the Parliamentary

:14:55. > :14:58.process should be if there is no deal? Quite. I want a commitment

:14:59. > :15:02.from him that in the event of no deal, it will come into Parliament

:15:03. > :15:10.and Parliament will determine what happens next. It could be that in

:15:11. > :15:13.the event of no deal, the best thing is for us to jump off the cliff into

:15:14. > :15:16.WTO tariff is. I find it unlikely but that might be the reality. There

:15:17. > :15:21.might be other alternatives. Most importantly, including saying to the

:15:22. > :15:23.government, go back, carry on. The question that everybody has to ask

:15:24. > :15:35.is, why won't the government give My fear is what this is about is

:15:36. > :15:39.asked deliberately, not the Prime Minister, but others deliberately

:15:40. > :15:45.ensuring we have no deal and no deal pretty soon and in that event, we

:15:46. > :15:49.jumped off the cliff onto WTO tariffs and nobody in this country

:15:50. > :15:55.and the people of this country do not have a say. My constituents did

:15:56. > :15:59.not vote for hard Brexit. You do not want the government to

:16:00. > :16:06.have the ability if there is no deal to automatically fall back on the

:16:07. > :16:10.WTO rules? Quite. It is as simple as that. We are now speculating about

:16:11. > :16:16.what will happen in two years. I want to find out what happens

:16:17. > :16:21.tomorrow. What will you do if you don't get that assurance? I will

:16:22. > :16:26.either abstain, or I will vote to keep this amendment within the Bill.

:16:27. > :16:30.I will either vote against my government, which I do not do

:16:31. > :16:33.likely, I have never voted against my government until the Chris Leslie

:16:34. > :16:37.clause when the Bill was going through, or I will abstain, which

:16:38. > :16:41.has pretty much the same effect because it comes into the Commons

:16:42. > :16:47.with both amendments so you have positively to vote to take the map.

:16:48. > :16:53.Can you give us an idea of how many like-minded conservative colleagues

:16:54. > :16:58.there are. I genuinely do not know. You must talk to each other. I do

:16:59. > :17:06.not talk to every member of my party. You know people who are

:17:07. > :17:10.like-minded. I do. I am not doing numbers games. I know you want that

:17:11. > :17:15.but I genuinely do not know the figure. I think this is an

:17:16. > :17:21.uncomfortable truth. People have to understand what has happened in our

:17:22. > :17:25.country, two particular newspapers, creating an atmosphere and setting

:17:26. > :17:28.an agenda and I think many people are rather concerned, some

:17:29. > :17:35.frightened, to put their head over the parapet. There are many millions

:17:36. > :17:39.of people who feel totally excluded from this process. Many of them

:17:40. > :17:42.voted to remain. And they have lost their voice. We have covered the

:17:43. > :17:44.ground I wanted to. We're joined now by the Ukip MEP

:17:45. > :17:56.and former leader Nigel Farage. Article 50 triggered, we are leaving

:17:57. > :18:01.the EU, the single market and the customs union. What is left you to

:18:02. > :18:04.complain about? All of that will happen and hopefully we will get the

:18:05. > :18:09.triggered this week which is good news. What worries me a little I'm

:18:10. > :18:13.not sure the government recognises how strong their handers. At the

:18:14. > :18:16.summit in Brussels, the word in the corridors is that we are prepared to

:18:17. > :18:21.give away fishing waters as a bargaining chip and the worry is

:18:22. > :18:26.what deal we get. Are we leaving, yes I am pleased about that. You are

:18:27. > :18:31.under relevant voice in the deal because the deal will be voted on in

:18:32. > :18:35.Parliament and you have one MP. You are missing the point, the real vote

:18:36. > :18:39.in parliament is not in London but Strasbourg. This is perhaps the

:18:40. > :18:43.biggest obstacle the British Government faces. Not what happens

:18:44. > :18:48.in the Commons that the end of the two years, the European Parliament

:18:49. > :18:53.could veto the deal. What that means is people need to adopt a different

:18:54. > :18:56.approach. We do not need to be lobbying in the corridors of

:18:57. > :19:01.Brussels to get a good deal, we need is a country to be out there talking

:19:02. > :19:06.to the German car workers and Belgian chocolate makers, putting as

:19:07. > :19:09.much pressure as we can on politicians from across Europe to

:19:10. > :19:14.come to a sensible arrangement. It is in their interests more than

:19:15. > :19:21.ours. In what way is the vision of Brexit set out by David Davis any

:19:22. > :19:25.different from your own? I am delighted there are people now

:19:26. > :19:33.adopting the position I argued for many years. Good. But now... Like

:19:34. > :19:38.Douglas Carswell, he said he found David Davis' performers this morning

:19:39. > :19:43.reassuring. It is. And just as when Theresa May was Home Secretary every

:19:44. > :19:47.performance she gave was hugely reassuring. She was seen to be a

:19:48. > :19:53.heroine after her conference speeches and then did not deliver. I

:19:54. > :19:59.am concerned that even before we start we are making concessions. You

:20:00. > :20:03.described in the EU's divorce bill demands, 60 billion euros is floated

:20:04. > :20:09.around. You said it is laughable and I understand that. Do you maintain

:20:10. > :20:17.that we will not have to pay a penny to leave? It is nine months since we

:20:18. > :20:23.voted exit and assuming the trigger of Article 50, we would have paid 30

:20:24. > :20:27.billion in since we had a vote. We are still members. But honestly, I

:20:28. > :20:32.do not think there is an appetite for us to pay a massive divorce

:20:33. > :20:39.Bill. There are assets also. Not a penny? There will be some ongoing

:20:40. > :20:45.commitments, but the numbers talked about our 50, ?60 billion, they are

:20:46. > :20:50.frankly laughable. I am trying to find out if you are prepared to

:20:51. > :20:55.accept some kind of exit cost, it may be nowhere near 60 billion. We

:20:56. > :20:58.have to do a net agreement, the government briefed about our share

:20:59. > :21:04.of the European Union investment bank. Would you accept a

:21:05. > :21:10.transitional arrangement, deal, five, ten billion, as part of the

:21:11. > :21:14.divorce settlement? We are painted net ?30 million every single day at

:21:15. > :21:19.the moment, ?10 billion plus every year. That is just our contribution.

:21:20. > :21:26.We are going to make a massive saving on this. What do you make of

:21:27. > :21:31.what Anna Soubry said, that if there is no deal, and it is being talked

:21:32. > :21:35.about more. Maybe the government managing expectations. There is an

:21:36. > :21:40.expectation we will have a deal, but if there is no deal, that the

:21:41. > :21:46.government cannot just go to WTO rules, but it has to have a vote in

:21:47. > :21:48.parliament? By the time we get to that there will be a general

:21:49. > :21:54.election coming down the tracks and I suspect that if at the end of the

:21:55. > :21:58.two-year process there is no deal and by the way, no deal is a lot

:21:59. > :22:03.better for the nation than where we currently are, because we freed of

:22:04. > :22:06.regulations and able to make our own deals in the world. I think what

:22:07. > :22:13.would happen, and if Parliament said it did not back, at the end of the

:22:14. > :22:20.negotiation a general election would happen quickly. According to reports

:22:21. > :22:25.this morning, one of your most senior aides has passed a dossier to

:22:26. > :22:30.police claiming Tories committed electoral fraud in Thanet South, the

:22:31. > :22:35.seat contested in the election. What evidence to you have? I read that in

:22:36. > :22:38.the newspapers as you have. I am not going to comment on it. Will you not

:22:39. > :22:45.aware of the contents of the dossier? I am not aware of the

:22:46. > :22:51.dossier. He was your election strategists. I am dubious as to

:22:52. > :22:57.whether this dossier exists at all. Perhaps the newspapers have got this

:22:58. > :23:04.wrong. Concerns about the downloading of data the took place

:23:05. > :23:11.in that constituency, there are. Allegedly, he has refuted it, was it

:23:12. > :23:16.done by your MP to give information to the Tories, do you have evidence

:23:17. > :23:23.about? We have evidence Mr Carswell downloaded information, we have no

:23:24. > :23:27.evidence what he did with it. It is not just your aide who has been

:23:28. > :23:33.making allegations against the Conservatives in Thanet South and

:23:34. > :23:40.other seats, if the evidence was to be substantial, and if it was to

:23:41. > :23:44.result in another by-election being called an Thanet South had to be

:23:45. > :23:49.fought again, would you be the Ukip candidate? I probably would. You

:23:50. > :23:55.probably would? Yes. Just probably? Just probably. It would be your

:23:56. > :23:59.eighth attempt. Winning seats in parliament under first past the post

:24:00. > :24:02.is not the only way to change politics in Britain and I would like

:24:03. > :24:08.to think I proved that. Let's go back to Anna Soubry. The implication

:24:09. > :24:12.of what we were saying on the panel at the start of the show and what

:24:13. > :24:17.Nigel Farage was saying there would be that if at the end of the process

:24:18. > :24:21.whatever the vote, if the government were to lose it, it would provoke a

:24:22. > :24:26.general election properly. I think that would be right. Let's get real.

:24:27. > :24:30.The government is not going to come to Parliament with anything other

:24:31. > :24:39.than something it believes is a good deal and if it rejected it, would be

:24:40. > :24:42.unlikely, there would be a de facto vote of no confidence and it would

:24:43. > :24:47.be within the fixed term Parliaments act and that be it. The problem is,

:24:48. > :24:53.more likely, because of the story put up about the 50 billion, 60

:24:54. > :24:57.billion and you look at the way things are flagged up that both the

:24:58. > :25:01.Prime Minister and Boris Johnson saying, we should be asking them for

:25:02. > :25:06.money back, I think the big fear and the fear I have is we will be

:25:07. > :25:11.crashing out in six months. You think we could leave as quickly as

:25:12. > :25:17.six months. Explain that. I think they will stoke up the demand from

:25:18. > :25:21.the EU for 50, 60 billion back and my real concern is that within six

:25:22. > :25:26.months, where we're not making much progress, maybe nine months, and

:25:27. > :25:31.people are getting increasingly fed up with the EU because they are told

:25:32. > :25:34.it wants unreasonable demands, and then the crash. I think what is

:25:35. > :25:39.happening is the government is putting in place scaffolding at the

:25:40. > :25:44.bottom of the cliff to break our fall when we come to fall off that

:25:45. > :25:49.cliff and I think many in government are preparing not for a two-year

:25:50. > :25:55.process, but six, to nine months, off the cliff, out we go. That is my

:25:56. > :25:59.fear. That is interesting. I have not heard that express before by

:26:00. > :26:07.someone in your position. I suspect you have made Nigel Farage's date.

:26:08. > :26:12.It is a lovely thought. I would say to Anna Soubry she is out of date

:26:13. > :26:15.with this. 40 years ago there was a good argument for joining the common

:26:16. > :26:20.market because tariffs around the world was so high. That has changed

:26:21. > :26:24.with the World Trade Organisation. We are leaving the EU and rejoining

:26:25. > :26:33.a great big world and it is exciting. She was giving an

:26:34. > :26:34.interesting perspective on what could happen in nine months rather

:26:35. > :26:39.than two years. I thank you both. It was Philip Hammond's first

:26:40. > :26:41.budget on Wednesday - billed as a steady-as-she-goes

:26:42. > :26:47.affair, but turned out to cause uproar after the Chancellor appeared

:26:48. > :26:50.to contradict a Tory manifesto commitment with an increase

:26:51. > :26:52.in national insurance contributions. The aim was to address what some see

:26:53. > :27:01.as an imbalance in the tax system, where employees pay

:27:02. > :27:02.more National Insurance The controversy centres

:27:03. > :27:05.on increasing the so-called class 4 rate for the self-employed who make

:27:06. > :27:08.a profit of more than ?8,060 a year. It will go up in stages

:27:09. > :27:15.from 9% to 11% in 2019. The changes mean that over one

:27:16. > :27:19.and a half million will pay on average ?240 a year

:27:20. > :27:23.more in contributions. Some Conservative MPs were unhappy,

:27:24. > :27:29.with even the Wales Minister saying: "I will apologise to every

:27:30. > :27:32.voter in Wales that read the Conservative manifesto

:27:33. > :27:34.in the 2015 election." The Sun labelled Philip

:27:35. > :27:39.Hammond "spite van man". The Daily Mail called the budget

:27:40. > :27:42."no laughing matter". By Thursday, Theresa May

:27:43. > :27:44.said the government One of the first things I did

:27:45. > :27:51.as Prime Minister was to commission Matthew Taylor to review the rights

:27:52. > :27:54.and protections that were available to self-employed workers

:27:55. > :27:57.and whether they should be enhanced. People will be able to look

:27:58. > :28:00.at the government paper when we produce it, showing

:28:01. > :28:02.all our changes, and take And, of course, the Chancellor will

:28:03. > :28:07.be speaking, as will his ministers, to MPs, businesspeople and others

:28:08. > :28:12.to listen to the concerns. Well, the man you heard mentioned

:28:13. > :28:14.there, Matthew Taylor, has the job of producing

:28:15. > :28:27.a report into the future Welcome. The Chancellor has decided

:28:28. > :28:32.the self-employed should pay almost the same in National Insurance, not

:28:33. > :28:37.the same but almost, as the employed will stop what is left of your

:28:38. > :28:40.commission? The commission has a broader frame of reference and we

:28:41. > :28:46.are interested in the quality of work in the economy at the heart of

:28:47. > :28:51.what I hope will be proposing is a set of shifts that will improve the

:28:52. > :28:55.quality of that work so we have an economy where all work is fair and

:28:56. > :28:59.decent and all jobs give people scope for development and

:29:00. > :29:07.fulfilment. The issue of taxes a small part. You will cover that? We

:29:08. > :29:09.will, because the tax system and employment regulation system drive

:29:10. > :29:16.particular behaviours in our labour market. You approve I think of the

:29:17. > :29:21.general direction of this policy of raising National Insurance on the

:29:22. > :29:26.self-employed. Taxing them in return perhaps for more state benefits. Why

:29:27. > :29:30.are so many others on the left against it from Tim Farron to John

:29:31. > :29:35.McDonnell? Tax rises are unpopular and it is the role of the opposition

:29:36. > :29:39.parties to make capital from unpopular tax rises. I think as tax

:29:40. > :29:43.rises go this is broadly progressive. There are self-employed

:29:44. > :29:48.people on low incomes and they will be better off. It is economic league

:29:49. > :29:51.rational because the reason for the difference in National Insurance --

:29:52. > :29:56.economically. It was to do with state entitlements. The government

:29:57. > :30:02.is consulting about paid parental leave. A series of governments have

:30:03. > :30:06.not been good about thinking about medium sustainability of the tax

:30:07. > :30:10.base. Self-employment is growing. But it is eroding the tax base. It

:30:11. > :30:17.is important to address those issues. A number of think tanks have

:30:18. > :30:22.said this is a progressive move. Yet, a number of left-wing

:30:23. > :30:28.politicians have been against it. And a number of Tories have said

:30:29. > :30:32.this is a progressive move and not a Tory government move, the balance of

:30:33. > :30:37.you will pay more tax, but you will get more state benefits is not a

:30:38. > :30:40.Tory approach to things. That a Tory approach will be you will pay less

:30:41. > :30:43.tax but entitled to fewer benefits as well.

:30:44. > :30:53.I preferred in and policies to politics -- I prefer policies. When

:30:54. > :30:57.people look at the policy and when they look the fact that there is no

:30:58. > :31:00.real historical basis for that big national insurance differential,

:31:01. > :31:04.they see it is a sensible policy. I don't have to deal with the

:31:05. > :31:08.politics. There has been a huge growth in self-employment from the

:31:09. > :31:09.turn of the millennium. It's been strongest amongst older workers,

:31:10. > :31:17.women part-timers. Do you have any idea, do you have

:31:18. > :31:21.the data in your commission that could tell us how many are taking

:31:22. > :31:26.self-employment because they like the flexibility and they like the

:31:27. > :31:31.tax advantages that come with it, too, or they are being forced into

:31:32. > :31:35.it by employers who don't want the extra costs of employment? Do we

:31:36. > :31:42.know the difference? We do, broadly. Most surveys on self-employment and

:31:43. > :31:44.flexible forms of employment suggest about two thirds to three quarters

:31:45. > :31:48.enjoy it, they like the flexibility, they like the autonomy and about a

:31:49. > :31:53.third to one quarter are less happy. That tends to be because they would

:31:54. > :31:55.like to have a full-time permanent job. It is not necessary that they

:31:56. > :32:00.don't enjoy what they are doing, they would like to do other things.

:32:01. > :32:04.And some of the protections that come with it? Yes. There are some

:32:05. > :32:08.people who are forced into southern employees by high-risk but also some

:32:09. > :32:12.people feel like they can't get a proper job as it were. --

:32:13. > :32:18.self-employment by people who hire them. It is on the narrow matter of

:32:19. > :32:22.tax revenues but if you are employed on ?32,000 the state will take over

:32:23. > :32:26.?6,000 in national insurance contributions, that is quite chunky.

:32:27. > :32:31.If you are self-employed it is ?2300. But the big difference

:32:32. > :32:37.between those figures isn't what the employee is paying, it's the

:32:38. > :32:41.employer's contributions up to almost 14%, and cupped for as much

:32:42. > :32:50.as you are paid. What do you do about employers' contributions for

:32:51. > :32:54.the self employed? -- it is uncapped for as much. What I recommend is

:32:55. > :32:58.that we should probably move from taxing employment to taxing labour.

:32:59. > :33:02.We should probably have a more level playing field so it doesn't really

:33:03. > :33:06.matter... Explained that I thought it was the same thing. If you are a

:33:07. > :33:11.self-employed gardener, you are a different tax regime to a gardener

:33:12. > :33:19.who works for a gardening firm. On the individual side and on the firm

:33:20. > :33:22.side. As we see new business models, so-called gig working, partly with

:33:23. > :33:27.technology, we need a more level playing field saying that we're

:33:28. > :33:31.taxing people's work, not the form in which they deliver that. That is

:33:32. > :33:34.part of the reason we have seen the growth of particular business

:33:35. > :33:39.models. They are innovative and creative and partly driven by the

:33:40. > :33:43.fact that if you can describe yourself as self-employed there are

:33:44. > :33:45.tax advantages. Coming out in June? Will you come back and talk to us?

:33:46. > :33:47.Yes. We say goodbye to viewers

:33:48. > :33:52.in Scotland, who leave us now Coming up here in 20 minutes,

:33:53. > :33:57.we'll be talking to the former Tory MP who was the root

:33:58. > :34:13.of Donald Trump's allegation Hello and welcome to the Sunday

:34:14. > :34:15.politics here in the glorious west Tourists bring millions

:34:16. > :34:22.to the west's economy, but could some of the money plug a gap

:34:23. > :34:32.in council finances? With me are two politicians

:34:33. > :34:35.who could do with a few bob, they are bon Howlett

:34:36. > :34:37.Conservative MP for Bath and Martin Holmwood the former Lib Dem

:34:38. > :34:39.MP from Cheltenham. We'll hear from them

:34:40. > :34:41.in just a moment. First, what is to become

:34:42. > :34:43.of us when we get The Chancellor increased spending

:34:44. > :34:47.on social care by a couple of billion this week,

:34:48. > :34:49.but even some of his supporters say that is just

:34:50. > :34:58.a sticking plaster. After 63 years of marriage,

:34:59. > :35:00.Don and Enid Lewis need a little Because I am here

:35:01. > :35:13.with him all the time. I would rather have

:35:14. > :35:15.Don home than him But if we didn't have the carers,

:35:16. > :35:22.he would be in the home. Somebody to get me up

:35:23. > :35:30.in the morning, put me Pop in and make sure I can go

:35:31. > :35:43.to the toilet in the afternoon. Four times a day, carers come in,

:35:44. > :35:46.but it nearly went badly wrong. Earlier this month, the firm

:35:47. > :35:49.contracted to provide the care went Over the weekend, we had very

:35:50. > :35:55.few problems at all. Only four people said

:35:56. > :36:01.they had a staff member It is not clear why

:36:02. > :36:04.the care firm failed, but one factor could

:36:05. > :36:05.have We did encourage our

:36:06. > :36:08.providers to introduce national living wage which is

:36:09. > :36:10.fantastic for our carers, are domiciled carers, and I understand

:36:11. > :36:13.that providers have had a problem The council insists they have put

:36:14. > :36:18.more money into social With elections coming up,

:36:19. > :36:21.it is a sensitive time. Political rivals say

:36:22. > :36:23.the system needs to It has been an accident waiting

:36:24. > :36:26.to happen for too long. We would look to

:36:27. > :36:29.bring it in house so that we could have some control

:36:30. > :36:31.over what is happening. We wouldn't have a company

:36:32. > :36:34.suddenly pulling the rug. The central Government has been

:36:35. > :36:37.cutting local governments back and back and back over

:36:38. > :36:39.the last few years. From the Chancellor,

:36:40. > :36:44.a partial answer this Alongside additional funding,

:36:45. > :36:50.the health and community secretaries will announce measures to identify

:36:51. > :36:53.and support authorities which are Philip Hammond announced ?2 billion

:36:54. > :36:57.extra for social care. For years, local authorities had

:36:58. > :37:04.complained about the size of the Pressure including from senior

:37:05. > :37:09.Conservatives across the West Country has built to

:37:10. > :37:13.a crescendo fuelled Country has built to a crescendo

:37:14. > :37:16.fuelled by evidence At Westminster, many MPs

:37:17. > :37:27.here feel that party divisions to be set aside

:37:28. > :37:28.to come up with a proper

:37:29. > :37:36.long-term solution. Andrew Murrison is among a growing

:37:37. > :37:39.number of Conservatives We do need to have a general

:37:40. > :37:42.accommodation about the public any tax payers about how

:37:43. > :37:44.we fund these things. I think the best way

:37:45. > :37:47.to deal with this is to establish a commission with

:37:48. > :37:49.a reasonable and fairly tight time frame so that we can discuss

:37:50. > :37:53.and explode and explore all of those Find some way of finding

:37:54. > :37:55.the really quite Back in Cheltenham, Don and Enid

:37:56. > :38:00.are grateful for the care that they They simply hope to spend the rest

:38:01. > :38:07.of their lives together. The ?2 billion of the

:38:08. > :38:16.Chancellor gave in his budget to local councils, even

:38:17. > :38:18.some of his supporters Like Don and Enid, my grandparents

:38:19. > :38:22.who have recently died had a series of strokes,

:38:23. > :38:24.they had been in homes I think 2 billion is very welcome,

:38:25. > :38:29.but of course we need to be looking at the long-term shortfall

:38:30. > :38:32.in social care spending and we need to be making sure this is going

:38:33. > :38:36.to be financially sustainable. Thus, we need to be

:38:37. > :38:38.making sure that we integrate properly health and social

:38:39. > :38:41.care with housing and that is something that Bath

:38:42. > :38:43.and North East Somerset council Bath and North East Somerset

:38:44. > :38:50.Council's getting an extra ?2.6 million this year

:38:51. > :38:53.as a result of what the Chancellor It should be able

:38:54. > :38:57.to provide a lot more ?2.6 million needs to be spent

:38:58. > :39:02.on the front line, to do that we need to be make sure

:39:03. > :39:04.that those families who do need to

:39:05. > :39:05.be cared for at home have the right system

:39:06. > :39:09.in place for them to receive that at The Government's brought in this

:39:10. > :39:12.national living wage which is That is going to swallow up a lot

:39:13. > :39:17.of that 2.6 million, isn't it? Because the care homes

:39:18. > :39:19.will have to put up In order to compensate for that,

:39:20. > :39:23.the last Government before the reshuffle saw an increase in

:39:24. > :39:26.the social care preceptor, as well. Which has been almost universally

:39:27. > :39:27.supported in my authority and around all authorities across the rest

:39:28. > :39:30.of the country which should act to We have been calling

:39:31. > :39:38.for the 2 billion extra to be put into social care this year along

:39:39. > :39:41.with another 2 billion for NHS and That is what we think

:39:42. > :39:44.the urgent cash injection is Lib Dem MP Norman Lamb

:39:45. > :39:50.has called for that. As well as that, all-party

:39:51. > :39:53.talks to try and sort out This money the Chancellor

:39:54. > :39:56.is providing is spread over several years,

:39:57. > :39:58.so it seemed we won't be enough. The problem is the economics

:39:59. > :40:01.of providing this care if county council and other budgets

:40:02. > :40:03.are constantly decreasing. Care providers simply can't

:40:04. > :40:05.make the numbers add up. It was, but it was

:40:06. > :40:10.the Lib Dems who backed conservative austerity

:40:11. > :40:13.during the coalition Government that And yet this is happening

:40:14. > :40:17.on the Conservative's This has been going

:40:18. > :40:20.for years, hasn't it? The NHS deficits under

:40:21. > :40:23.the coalition, money was tight. Nobody was saying that everyone

:40:24. > :40:26.was flushed with money, but most NHS The last two years, two

:40:27. > :40:30.thirds of NHS trusts have gone into deficit, including

:40:31. > :40:33.Gloucestershire and that deficit is So the funding crisis

:40:34. > :40:36.in health and social care has got worse just

:40:37. > :40:43.in the last two years. Nobody is saying even under

:40:44. > :40:46.the coalition that we weren't flush with money,

:40:47. > :40:48.but the crisis has Conservatives have taken their eye

:40:49. > :40:52.off the ball and haven't appreciated the urgent cash crisis that is now

:40:53. > :40:55.facing health and social care. But the budget

:40:56. > :40:56.reductions were brought in and they were sort

:40:57. > :40:59.of loaded so they would take effect sometime down

:41:00. > :41:02.the line, won't they? Well, we differentiated

:41:03. > :41:05.ourselves actually at the end of the coalition from

:41:06. > :41:07.the Conservative's forward spending Where would the extra 4 billion that

:41:08. > :41:15.you said we need come from? It would have to come

:41:16. > :41:17.from public finances. Well, that is the urgent

:41:18. > :41:19.cash injection. Government's able

:41:20. > :41:24.to facilitate that. In a ?600 billion

:41:25. > :41:26.budget, you can find the extra 4 billion

:41:27. > :41:27.in the It is true, we need a long-term

:41:28. > :41:31.funding settlement for health and social

:41:32. > :41:32.care in this country. That is Norman Lamb has been

:41:33. > :41:35.calling for all-party talks that will bring everybody together

:41:36. > :41:38.and try and build a consensus for a The long and the short

:41:39. > :41:42.of it is this has not been created by either the coalition

:41:43. > :41:45.or the current Government, this is a We have had an ageing

:41:46. > :41:48.population, the system hasn't However much money you

:41:49. > :41:51.put into this system, Lib Democrat policy,

:41:52. > :41:54.potentially borrowing more money in order

:41:55. > :42:00.to do that, it will not solve

:42:01. > :42:02.the ultimate problem We have do introduce

:42:03. > :42:05.an integrated system. You can fiddle about with

:42:06. > :42:08.the budgets, but demand is going up, so it will need for more

:42:09. > :42:15.finances, won't it? We need to make sure

:42:16. > :42:17.the money that is being given on the front line

:42:18. > :42:20.because at the moment if you say ?400 million

:42:21. > :42:21.is going to be given to

:42:22. > :42:23.mental health budgets, for example, I can tell

:42:24. > :42:25.you directly in that local

:42:26. > :42:26.mental health trust, we are not seeing that money hitting

:42:27. > :42:29.the front line. And I don't want that

:42:30. > :42:31.to be subsumed into the Largely it is being

:42:32. > :42:36.subsumed into the deficits which are being provided

:42:37. > :42:40.and also other areas which are fashion commissioning

:42:41. > :42:42.budgets and all the We do to make sure it

:42:43. > :42:45.is a more efficient. Why are some conservatives

:42:46. > :42:47.now wanting all-party talks to discuss how we improve

:42:48. > :42:50.budgets for social care and indeed I have worked with the Department

:42:51. > :42:55.of Health and labour. I've worked with the last

:42:56. > :42:57.coalition Government now I I have seen all parties come to this

:42:58. > :43:01.with a very party political We're not seeing much better

:43:02. > :43:06.services on the front line. We have said if necessary

:43:07. > :43:11.new tax has to be brought And we absolutely have,

:43:12. > :43:16.the whole party has been calling We haven't taken a party

:43:17. > :43:18.political position. I very much hope

:43:19. > :43:20.that the Conservative select committee chair

:43:21. > :43:22.Sarah Williston will be receiving the full support

:43:23. > :43:24.of the Liberal Democrats and Sarah and Norman Lamb have both

:43:25. > :43:28.co-operated on this, so yes. It is not likely that

:43:29. > :43:30.Labour will give you the political cover to introduce

:43:31. > :43:32.difficult decisions on social If they wanted to take

:43:33. > :43:35.the party politics out of it and actually deliver real

:43:36. > :43:38.solutions that would make a big difference to the couple that

:43:39. > :43:41.you have been seen, then yes, they The trouble is that there is also

:43:42. > :43:45.a cash crisis right now. We have got Clevelink

:43:46. > :43:47.going bust in social care, You need that urgent cash injection

:43:48. > :43:54.now and this budget has The 2 billion shortfall

:43:55. > :43:59.is this year. Continued austerity means

:44:00. > :44:03.council budgets are likely to be squeezed for years

:44:04. > :44:06.to come, so no wonder they are looking for

:44:07. > :44:09.new ways to raise money. In Bath, one idea is to tap

:44:10. > :44:11.into the millions of pounds It's not hard to see why

:44:12. > :44:20.tourists flock to Bath. But could they help

:44:21. > :44:27.the council mend its This is something that

:44:28. > :44:34.applies across Europe, I personally am used to paying it

:44:35. > :44:38.when I go to holiday to It is not a large sum

:44:39. > :44:45.of money, but what we will get with the number

:44:46. > :44:48.of visitors that come to the city,

:44:49. > :44:52.a significant increase in revenue to fill some of the gaps that are

:44:53. > :44:55.created by changing finances that we The council stresses this

:44:56. > :44:59.is at the very earliest stages, There is an obstacle

:45:00. > :45:03.in the way of the city of Bath tapping into

:45:04. > :45:04.the hundreds of thousands of tourists

:45:05. > :45:07.who come here each year. The Government currently

:45:08. > :45:11.won't allow it. But councillors have

:45:12. > :45:13.been to London to lobby do so and a future metro mayor

:45:14. > :45:19.could pile on the pressure, too. But the tourists

:45:20. > :45:21.themselves, are they Would that put you off

:45:22. > :45:27.coming to Bath? Because it is a beautiful place

:45:28. > :45:33.and everything has to be kept up to standard, so if that is

:45:34. > :45:36.the only way to do it, then that is the way

:45:37. > :45:38.to do There is such a historic

:45:39. > :45:43.presence to the city, ?2 a It is really expensive

:45:44. > :45:49.anyway, so ?1 isn't going to make much of

:45:50. > :45:51.a difference, you know. One or ?2 would be OK, but of course

:45:52. > :45:54.we would prefer no extra ?2 a night might not sound much,

:45:55. > :46:06.but a family of four staying All the hoteliers in

:46:07. > :46:11.Bath that I have spoken It is one of the original

:46:12. > :46:17.Georgian drawing rooms This boutique hotel believes

:46:18. > :46:23.in such a competitive market, they would end

:46:24. > :46:25.up bearing the cost. One of the things that gets quoted,

:46:26. > :46:32.well it works in France and Italy. It works in those

:46:33. > :46:33.countries because those countries have recognised

:46:34. > :46:35.the They have made reductions

:46:36. > :46:40.in their rates of VAT. The idea that you can come

:46:41. > :46:44.along and just say well, we will put another pound or ?2

:46:45. > :46:46.a night onto Hotel accommodation is possibly the

:46:47. > :46:51.tipping point that starts to make people go, Bath is

:46:52. > :46:56.just too expensive. They also believe

:46:57. > :47:03.it is wrong to target They also believe it is wrong

:47:04. > :47:06.to target hotels alone They say they don't mind

:47:07. > :47:09.making a contribution. They are launching

:47:10. > :47:10.their own booking site with the money going back

:47:11. > :47:12.into promoting tourism. All the profits from that

:47:13. > :47:14.will go towards keeping It would pay for maybe

:47:15. > :47:18.contribution to festivals, to the Bath preservation

:47:19. > :47:20.trust, but it would be not only protect Bath,

:47:21. > :47:29.but also people would buy into it. But with the council

:47:30. > :47:33.still needing a change of law before they can

:47:34. > :47:35.introduce a charge, tourists will remain

:47:36. > :47:36.for now And to discuss that we are

:47:37. > :47:46.joined by a day-tripper. He is Dominic Tristram,

:47:47. > :47:48.the former Green party candidate for Bath who

:47:49. > :47:52.supports a tourist tax. You're very welcome

:47:53. > :47:56.on your day out here. How can you justify fleecing

:47:57. > :47:58.tourists who come to Bath? As has already been

:47:59. > :48:00.mentioned, we are facing a huge cut,

:48:01. > :48:02.a central Government cut, We can either increase

:48:03. > :48:09.council tax, which is a regressive tax where

:48:10. > :48:10.the poorest pay an unfair share,

:48:11. > :48:13.or we can actually put a charge How do you know that

:48:14. > :48:19.they can afford it? Because the number of people

:48:20. > :48:22.paying is quite high because Bath has a huge number

:48:23. > :48:25.of tourists, as has been mentioned. Other cities which are similar

:48:26. > :48:28.have a similar pool of tourists, Slap a charge on them

:48:29. > :48:39.as they come in? Actually, I don't like to think

:48:40. > :48:43.of it as a tax, I like to think of it as a tourist

:48:44. > :48:45.investment fund. We can take this money and we can

:48:46. > :48:49.act to make Bath a nice place to go. Because of cuts to central

:48:50. > :48:53.Government grants, we can't... We are going to shortly stop

:48:54. > :48:55.funding the arts in Bath. People come to Bath not

:48:56. > :48:59.because of just the places to go, they come because

:49:00. > :49:01.of the history, there Just before we bring

:49:02. > :49:05.in the other guests, would you charged just foreign

:49:06. > :49:07.visitors or all visitors? We're flexible

:49:08. > :49:09.because the legislation I would not charge

:49:10. > :49:14.the under tens, so families don't pay any more

:49:15. > :49:17.and I would actually make it That will mean that everyone

:49:18. > :49:22.who can afford to pay, If Dominic is going to charge me

:49:23. > :49:28.for his next dinner party, I would probably suggest I'm not

:49:29. > :49:30.going to attend, I'm afraid. But I am yet to be

:49:31. > :49:32.convinced about this, the Government is yet to be

:49:33. > :49:34.convinced about this. Bath in North East Somerset

:49:35. > :49:37.Council have made their representations, unlike

:49:38. > :49:48.what Dominic's just said, I'm quite concerned as to how progressive this

:49:49. > :49:51.tax is because if you look at this being larger hotels

:49:52. > :49:53.and interestingly the Queensbury would be exempt for this

:49:54. > :49:55.because it is too small a number of rooms,

:49:56. > :49:58.we are talking about a large hotels. Often the people who

:49:59. > :50:00.attend those large hotels like the Travelodges,

:50:01. > :50:01.obviously other supplies are available, those hotels actually see

:50:02. > :50:04.people from less wealthy background I think slapping a tax on the people

:50:05. > :50:08.would actually be very You heard the tourists

:50:09. > :50:11.in Bath that, people coming from America spending

:50:12. > :50:12.thousands and thousands on a European tour,

:50:13. > :50:13.they think a bedroom tax in Bath

:50:14. > :50:16.will make no difference whatsoever. facing the pressures at the moment,

:50:17. > :50:22.I don't think it ?56 charge per No, if you are looking at the seven

:50:23. > :50:25.night stay for example which we are looking

:50:26. > :50:28.to introduce, ?56 is a lot if it is only Bath

:50:29. > :50:31.doing this, then this is not universal across

:50:32. > :50:33.the First of all, I would say that

:50:34. > :50:39.Cheltenham's Lib Dem council manages to support the festivals and art

:50:40. > :50:41.councils without a tourist tax at We're just about to have

:50:42. > :50:45.250,000 people going to the turnstile at Cheltenham

:50:46. > :50:46.racecourse next week and that brings ?100 million

:50:47. > :50:49.in the local economy at the moment. I think that could be

:50:50. > :50:51.more if we could encourage more of those people

:50:52. > :50:54.to stay overnight in Cheltenham. I would worry that it

:50:55. > :50:56.could be less if We already have a high rate of VAT

:50:57. > :51:01.for tourist services in this country, it already feels quite

:51:02. > :51:03.expensive I think to tourists. I don't want to see

:51:04. > :51:05.that just getting But they support a lot

:51:06. > :51:19.of low paid jobs? We don't just have

:51:20. > :51:21.Gold Cup week, we have Jazz Festival, the science

:51:22. > :51:26.Festival, the other racing By and large, it adds up,

:51:27. > :51:33.it's waiters, its room cleaners. No, they spend money in local shops,

:51:34. > :51:36.local restaurant, they invest in local hotels that are actually

:51:37. > :51:38.investing back into the town. It is a lot of wear

:51:39. > :51:41.and tear into the town. And there is a supply chain

:51:42. > :51:44.to all of this that actually It is not just tourists

:51:45. > :51:47.that stay overnight, in Bath we get a lot

:51:48. > :51:49.of tourists coming in Bath we get a lot of tourists coming

:51:50. > :51:52.in to go to the theatre, festivals and music

:51:53. > :51:55.festivals, these guys will be losing out because of

:51:56. > :51:57.the grant being cut. There are people who come

:51:58. > :52:02.in from the States and Asia, they often stay in two or three

:52:03. > :52:05.places, Bath, London, go down to Parties who believe in a free

:52:06. > :52:10.market, it is interesting that they don't agree with charging the

:52:11. > :52:13.maximum we can get without losing Let's bring you back

:52:14. > :52:16.in on that, Ben. The supply chain is

:52:17. > :52:18.benefited by tourists. If it was to cross the entirety

:52:19. > :52:21.of the country, our Currently, it is only

:52:22. > :52:24.our city that is If other cities decided to introduce

:52:25. > :52:33.this, then our third highest overnight stay figure in the country

:52:34. > :52:35.would be detrimented. You can't just say, I'll go

:52:36. > :52:40.to Chippenham instead. We are helped by the

:52:41. > :52:45.uniqueness because tourists want to come

:52:46. > :52:48.and see that uniqueness. If we end up detriment in our image,

:52:49. > :52:52.our marketing brand And it would be

:52:53. > :52:56.round the rest of the world by doing this,

:52:57. > :52:59.it would cause people to go to areas around

:53:00. > :53:02.There is a huge hole in the public finances thanks

:53:03. > :53:04.to your failed ideology of austerity.

:53:05. > :53:12.Because that is what the question is.

:53:13. > :53:15.It is not will it put off tourists, it is how do we

:53:16. > :53:18.fix the hold that this failed Government has created in our

:53:19. > :53:22.OK, we are going to have two let that question hang in the

:53:23. > :53:26.Just stay with us for a moment or two because

:53:27. > :53:29.let's look now back at the political week in just 60 seconds.

:53:30. > :53:34.This is how the south-west MEP Lord Dartmouth

:53:35. > :53:40.reacted when he was asked about wind farms on his land.

:53:41. > :53:42.Three years on, it has been revealed he was

:53:43. > :53:44.negotiating behind-the-scenes for a deal which could have netted his

:53:45. > :53:48.The woman behind the Brexit court case, Gina Millor,

:53:49. > :53:50.told students in Bristol her life had been ransacked.

:53:51. > :53:53.I knew there would be a backlash, but not at the

:53:54. > :53:57.It came a day before a man was charged with

:53:58. > :54:01.Plans to reopen the railway line between

:54:02. > :54:05.Portishead and Bristol are being scaled back.

:54:06. > :54:08.The west of England partnership says the estimated cost

:54:09. > :54:13.has tripled, so the route will see just one train an hour.

:54:14. > :54:15.Salisbury MP John Glenn called for tougher

:54:16. > :54:19.Often, they are large groups who show

:54:20. > :54:24.Ministers say they will look again at whether police have enough

:54:25. > :54:36.Ben, have you ever lost your temper in public?

:54:37. > :54:44.I love journalists, as you well know.

:54:45. > :54:48.How important is it to keep your calm when you are in the public

:54:49. > :54:50.I think it is very important, actually.

:54:51. > :54:53.I think nobody likes that kind of aggressive confrontational

:54:54. > :54:56.One of the constant complaints about the way the House

:54:57. > :54:59.of Commons is represented on TV is that it focused

:55:00. > :55:04.on Prime Minister's Question Time, where you have

:55:05. > :55:06.certain elements both on Labour and Conservative side, who do this

:55:07. > :55:09.shouting and jeering and it is really, really bad for the

:55:10. > :55:17.Maybe it is because there are too few of us at the

:55:18. > :55:20.moment, but we will sort that out at the next election.

:55:21. > :55:22.Do you have any sympathy with politicians who are

:55:23. > :55:32.under pressure, but have to keep absolutely calm?

:55:33. > :55:34.I think a lot of reasons why people feel

:55:35. > :55:37.One of the reasons is that they don't

:55:38. > :55:38.believe politicians think about the things

:55:39. > :55:43.You have politician saying we must fixed the NHS and then they seem

:55:44. > :55:46.when they hear reports of the NHS collapsing.

:55:47. > :55:48.I think really a bit of anger and a bit of passion,

:55:49. > :55:50.people would like to see that in their politicians.

:55:51. > :55:52.Let's tend to Brexit before we leave it

:55:53. > :55:59.Ben, what is going to happen with the House of Lords?

:56:00. > :56:02.This is going to be a very interesting week.

:56:03. > :56:03.We're about to discuss the two amendments

:56:04. > :56:06.I am working currently with colleagues to make

:56:07. > :56:09.sure that there are a series of concessions that are raised and I

:56:10. > :56:12.will reserve my judgment as to whether on not to back the

:56:13. > :56:14.Government depending on the assurances that I get.

:56:15. > :56:18.As a young MP, you have got ambitions, I suspect.

:56:19. > :56:20.Ultimately, I want to represent my constituents in the

:56:21. > :56:23.To be frank, I have a very serious sense of

:56:24. > :56:25.constitutional question about whether the Government has got this

:56:26. > :56:27.right, or whether it has got it wrong,

:56:28. > :56:28.and those assurances are

:56:29. > :56:32.And I guess you will be backing him all the way.

:56:33. > :56:35.I certainly think that the Lord amendments are trying to introduce a

:56:36. > :56:40.Bit of humanity and moderation into the process will sub there is no

:56:41. > :56:45.mandate for this hardline Brexit Theresa May is pursuing and if she

:56:46. > :56:51.wants a mandate, then she should pursue it. Why Mac we will leave it

:56:52. > :56:55.there. My thanks to my guests. Please follow us on Twitter for the

:56:56. > :56:59.latest political news from the west. If you want to come you can watch

:57:00. > :57:03.the programme again to your hearts content. It is available on our tee

:57:04. > :57:19.Now the government plans for new grammar schools.

:57:20. > :57:20.The Education Secretary Justine Greening was

:57:21. > :57:22.speaking to a conference of headteachers on Friday.

:57:23. > :57:24.They're normally a pretty polite bunch, but they didn't

:57:25. > :57:31.Broadcasters weren't allowed into the speech,

:57:32. > :57:35.but this was captured on a camera phone.

:57:36. > :57:38.And we have to recognise actually for grammars, in terms of

:57:39. > :57:42.disadvantaged children, that they have, they really

:57:43. > :57:45.do help them close the attainment gap.

:57:46. > :57:47.And at the same time we should recognise that

:57:48. > :57:54...That parents also want choice for their children and that

:57:55. > :58:02.those schools are often very oversubscribed.

:58:03. > :58:10.I suppose it is a rite of passage for and education secretaries to

:58:11. > :58:15.have this at a head teachers conference book the head are usually

:58:16. > :58:19.more polite. Isn't part of the problem, whether one is for or

:58:20. > :58:25.against the expansion of grammar schools, the government plans are

:58:26. > :58:29.complicated, you cannot sum them up in a sentence. The proof of that is

:58:30. > :58:33.they can still get away with denying they are expanding grammar schools.

:58:34. > :58:36.They will find an alternative formulation because it is not as

:58:37. > :58:40.simple as a brute creation of what we used to know is grammar schools

:58:41. > :58:48.with the absolute cut-off of the 11 plus. I am surprised how easy they

:58:49. > :58:52.found it politically. We saw the clip of Justine Greening being

:58:53. > :58:55.jeered a little bit but in the grand scheme, compared to another

:58:56. > :59:00.government trying this idea a decade ago they have got away with it

:59:01. > :59:03.easily and I think what is happening is a perverse consequence of Brexit

:59:04. > :59:08.and the media attention on Brexit, the government of the day can just

:59:09. > :59:12.about get away with slightly more contentious domestic policies on the

:59:13. > :59:18.correct assumption we will be too busy investing our attention in

:59:19. > :59:22.Article 50 and two years of negotiations, WTO terms at

:59:23. > :59:26.everything we have been discussing. I wonder if after grammar schools

:59:27. > :59:30.there will be examples of contentious domestic policies

:59:31. > :59:38.Theresa May can slide in stock because Brexit sucks the life out,

:59:39. > :59:43.takes the attention away. You are a supporter. Broadly. Are you happy

:59:44. > :59:48.with the government approach? They need to have more gumption and stop

:59:49. > :59:52.being apologetic. It is a bazaar area of public policy where we judge

:59:53. > :59:57.the policy on grammar schools based on what it does for children whose

:59:58. > :00:02.parents are unemployed, living on sink estates in Liverpool. It is

:00:03. > :00:07.absurd, we don't judge any other policy like that. It is simple, not

:00:08. > :00:11.contentious, people who are not sure, ask them if they would apply

:00:12. > :00:18.to send their child there, six out of ten said they would. Parents want

:00:19. > :00:20.good schools for their children, we should have appropriate education

:00:21. > :00:23.and they should be straightforward, this is about the future of the

:00:24. > :00:27.economy and we need bright children to get education at the highest

:00:28. > :00:34.level, education for academically bright children. It is supposed to

:00:35. > :00:36.be a signature policy of the Theresa May administration that marks a

:00:37. > :00:41.government different from David Cameron's government who did not go

:00:42. > :00:45.down this road. The signature is pretty blurred, it is hard to read.

:00:46. > :00:53.It is. She is trying to address concerns about those who fail to get

:00:54. > :00:56.into these selective schools and tried to targeted in poorer areas

:00:57. > :01:00.and the rest of it. She will probably come across so many

:01:01. > :01:04.obstacles. It is not clear what form it will take in the end. It is

:01:05. > :01:07.really an example of a signature policy not fully thought through. I

:01:08. > :01:12.think it was one of her first announcements. It was. It surprised

:01:13. > :01:17.everybody. Surprised at the speed and pace at which they were planning

:01:18. > :01:21.to go. Ever since, there have been qualifications and hesitations en

:01:22. > :01:25.route with good cause, in my view. I disagree with Juliet that this is...

:01:26. > :01:29.We all want good schools but if you don't get in there and you end up in

:01:30. > :01:32.a less good school. They already do that. We have selection based on the

:01:33. > :01:36.income of parents getting into a good catchment area, based on the

:01:37. > :01:43.faith of the parents. That becomes very attainable! I might been too

:01:44. > :01:45.shot run christenings for these. -- I have been.

:01:46. > :01:48.Now, you may remember this time last week we were talking

:01:49. > :01:50.about the extraordinary claims by US President Donald Trump,

:01:51. > :01:52.on Twitter of course, that Barack Obama had ordered

:01:53. > :01:56.And there was me thinking that wiretaps went out

:01:57. > :02:01.Is it legal for a sitting President to do so, he asked,

:02:02. > :02:10.concluding it was a "new low", and later comparing it to Watergate.

:02:11. > :02:13.Since then, the White House has been pressed to provide evidence for this

:02:14. > :02:19.It hasn't, but it seems it may have initially come from a report on a US

:02:20. > :02:22.website by the former Conservative MP Louise Mensch.

:02:23. > :02:25.She wrote that the FBI had been granted a warrant to intercept

:02:26. > :02:32.communications between Trump's campaign and Russia.

:02:33. > :02:40.Well, Louise Mensch joins us now from New York.

:02:41. > :02:47.Louise, you claimed in early November that the FBI had secured a

:02:48. > :02:51.court warrants to monitor communications between trump Tower

:02:52. > :02:55.in New York at two Russian banks. It's now four months later. Isn't it

:02:56. > :03:00.the case that nobody has proved the existence of this warrant?

:03:01. > :03:06.First of all, forgive me Andrew, one takes 1's life in one's hand when it

:03:07. > :03:10.is you but I have to correct your characterisation of my reporting. It

:03:11. > :03:15.is very important. I did not report that the FBI had a warrant to

:03:16. > :03:19.intercept anything or that Trump tower was any part of it. What I

:03:20. > :03:24.reported was that the FBI obtained a warrant is targeted on all

:03:25. > :03:27.communications between two Russian banks and were, therefore, allowed

:03:28. > :03:34.to examine US persons in the context of their investigation. What the

:03:35. > :03:39.Americans call legally incidental collection. I certainly didn't

:03:40. > :03:43.report that the warrant was able to intercept or that it had location

:03:44. > :03:49.basis, for example Trump tower. I just didn't report that. The reason

:03:50. > :03:53.that matters so much is that I now believe based on the President's

:03:54. > :03:57.reaction, there may well be a wiretap act Trump Tower. If so,

:03:58. > :04:00.Donald Trump has just tweeted out evidence in an ongoing criminal case

:04:01. > :04:04.that neither I nor anybody else reported. He is right about

:04:05. > :04:08.Watergate because he will have committed obstruction of justice

:04:09. > :04:12.directly from his Twitter account. Let me come back as thank you for

:04:13. > :04:20.clarifying. Let me come back to the question. -- and thank you. We have

:04:21. > :04:24.not yet got proof that this warrant exists, do we? No and we are most

:04:25. > :04:28.unlikely to get it because it would be a heinous crime for Donald Trump

:04:29. > :04:32.to reveal its existence. In America they call it a Glomar response. I

:04:33. > :04:36.can neither confirm nor deny. That is what all American officials will

:04:37. > :04:40.have to say legally. If you are looking for proof, you won't get it

:04:41. > :04:45.until and unless a court cases brought. But that doesn't mean it

:04:46. > :04:49.doesn't exist. The BBC validated this two months after me in their

:04:50. > :04:54.reporting by the journalist Paul Wood. The Guardian, they also

:04:55. > :04:57.separately from their own sources validated the existence of the

:04:58. > :05:00.warrant. If you are in America, you would know that CNN and others are

:05:01. > :05:04.reporting that the investigation in ongoing. Let me come onto the wider

:05:05. > :05:09.point. You believe the Trump campaign including the president

:05:10. > :05:13.were complicit with the Russians during the 2016 election campaign to

:05:14. > :05:14.such an extent that Mr Trump should be impeached. What evidence did you

:05:15. > :05:24.have? That is an enormous amount of

:05:25. > :05:27.evidence. You could start with him saying, hey, Russia, if you are

:05:28. > :05:32.listening, please release all the Hillary Clinton's e-mails. That's

:05:33. > :05:35.not evidence. I think it rather is, actually. Especially if you look at

:05:36. > :05:40.some of the evidence that exists on Twitter and elsewhere of people

:05:41. > :05:43.talking directly to his social media manager, Dan should be no and

:05:44. > :05:48.telling him to do that before it happened. There is a bit out there.

:05:49. > :05:53.The BBC itself reported that in April of last year, a six agency

:05:54. > :05:56.task force, not just the FBI, but the Treasury Department, was looking

:05:57. > :06:00.at this. I believe there is an enormous amount of evidence. And

:06:01. > :06:02.then there is the steel dossier which was included in an official

:06:03. > :06:11.report of the US intelligence committee. You've also ... Just to

:06:12. > :06:15.be clear, we don't have hard evidence yet whether this warrant

:06:16. > :06:19.exists. It may or may not. There is doubt about... There are claims

:06:20. > :06:22.about whether there is evidence about Mr Trump and the Russians.

:06:23. > :06:29.That is another matter. You claimed that President Putin had Andrew

:06:30. > :06:34.Breitbart murdered to pave the way for Steve Bannon to play a key role

:06:35. > :06:39.in the Trump administration. I haven't. You said that Steve Bannon

:06:40. > :06:44.is behind bomb threats to Jewish community centres. Aren't you in

:06:45. > :06:48.danger of just peddling wild conspiracy theories? No. Festival, I

:06:49. > :06:53.haven't. No matter how many times people say this, it's not going to

:06:54. > :06:55.be true -- first of all. I said in twitter I believe that to be the

:06:56. > :07:02.case about the murder of Andrew Breitbart. You believe President

:07:03. > :07:06.Putin murdered him. I didn't! You said I reported it, but I believed

:07:07. > :07:12.it. You put it on twitter that you believed it but you don't have a

:07:13. > :07:16.shred of evidence. I do. Indeed, I know made assertions. What is the

:07:17. > :07:22.evidence that Mr Putin murdered Andrew Breitbart? I said I believe

:07:23. > :07:25.it. You may believe there are fairies at the bottom of your

:07:26. > :07:31.garden, it doesn't make it true. I may indeed. And if I say so, that's

:07:32. > :07:38.my belief. If I say I am reporting, as I did with the Fisa warrant

:07:39. > :07:44.exists, I have a basis in fact. They believe is just a belief. I know you

:07:45. > :07:51.are relatively new to journalism. Let me get the rules right. Andrew,

:07:52. > :07:55.jealousy is not your colour... If it is twitter, we don't believe it but

:07:56. > :08:00.if it is on your website, we should believe it? If I report something

:08:01. > :08:04.and I say this happened, then I am making an assertion. If I describe a

:08:05. > :08:09.belief, I am describing a belief. Subtlety may be a little difficult

:08:10. > :08:16.for you... No, no. If you want to be a journalist, beliefs have to be

:08:17. > :08:20.backed up with evidence. Really? Do you have a faith? It's not a matter

:08:21. > :08:26.of faith, maybe in your case, that President Putin murdered Andrew

:08:27. > :08:29.Breitbart. A belief and a report at two different things and no matter

:08:30. > :08:34.how often you say that they are the same, they will never be the same.

:08:35. > :08:42.You've said in today's Sunday Times here in London that you've turned

:08:43. > :08:48.into" a temporary superpower" where you "See things really clearly".

:08:49. > :08:53.Have you become delusional? No. I am describing a biological basis for

:08:54. > :08:56.ADHD, which I have. As any of your viewers who are doctors will know.

:08:57. > :09:00.It provides people with unfortunately a lot of scattered

:09:01. > :09:03.focus, they are very messy and absent-minded but when they are

:09:04. > :09:07.interested in things and they have ADHD they can have a condition which

:09:08. > :09:10.is hyper focus. You concentrate very hard on a given subject and you can

:09:11. > :09:17.see patterns and connections. That is biological. Thank you for

:09:18. > :09:22.explaining that. And for getting up early in New York. The first time

:09:23. > :09:26.ever I have interviewed a temporary superpower. Thank you. You are so

:09:27. > :09:30.lucky! You are so lucky! I don't think it's going to happen again.

:09:31. > :09:34.Please don't ask us to comment on that interview! I will not ask you,

:09:35. > :09:38.viewers will make up their own minds. Let's come back to be more

:09:39. > :09:43.mundane world of Article 50. Stop the killing!

:09:44. > :09:48.Will it get through at the government wanted it? Without the

:09:49. > :09:52.Lords amendment falling by the way that? I am sure the Lord will not

:09:53. > :09:55.try to ping-pong this back and forth. So we are at the end of this

:09:56. > :09:59.particular legislative phase. The fact that all three Brexit Cabinet

:10:00. > :10:03.ministers, number ten often don't like one of them going out on a

:10:04. > :10:07.broadcast interview on a Sunday, they've all been out and about. That

:10:08. > :10:11.suggests to me they are working on the assumption it will be triggered

:10:12. > :10:16.this week. This week. The negotiations will begin or at least

:10:17. > :10:19.the process begins. The negotiation process may be difficult, given all

:10:20. > :10:25.of the European elections. The Dutch this week. And then the French and

:10:26. > :10:28.maybe the Italians and certainly the Germans by the end of September,

:10:29. > :10:33.which is less predictable than it was. Given all that, what did you

:10:34. > :10:37.make of Anna Soubry's claim, Viacom on her part, that we may just end up

:10:38. > :10:43.crashing out in six months question -- fear on her part. It was not just

:10:44. > :10:45.that that we made that deliberately organising. I want us to get on with

:10:46. > :10:53.the deals. Everyone knows a good deal is the

:10:54. > :10:57.best option. Who knows what is going to be on the table when we finally

:10:58. > :11:02.go out? Fascinatingly, the demand for some money back, given the

:11:03. > :11:06.amount of money... Net gains and net costs in terms of us leaving for the

:11:07. > :11:13.EU. It is all to play for. That will be a possible early grounds for a

:11:14. > :11:19.confrontation between the UK and the EU. My understanding is that they

:11:20. > :11:22.expect to do a deal on reciprocal rights of EU nationals, EU nationals

:11:23. > :11:26.here, UK citizens there, quite quickly. They want to clear that up

:11:27. > :11:30.and that will be done. Then they will hit this problem that the EU

:11:31. > :11:35.will be saying you've got to agree the divorce Bill first before we

:11:36. > :11:38.talk about the free trade bill. David Davis saying quite clearly,

:11:39. > :11:43.no, they go together because of the size of the bill. It will be

:11:44. > :11:47.determined, in our part, by how good the access will be. The mutual

:11:48. > :11:51.recognition of EU residents' rights is no trouble. A huge amount of fuss

:11:52. > :11:55.is attracted to that subject but it is the easiest thing to deal with,

:11:56. > :11:58.as is free movement for tourists. Money is what will make it

:11:59. > :12:01.incredibly acrimonious. Incredibly quickly. I imagine the dominant

:12:02. > :12:06.story in the summer will be all about that. This was Anna Soubry's

:12:07. > :12:10.implication, members of the governors could strongly argue,

:12:11. > :12:13.things are so poisonous and so unpleasant at the moment, the

:12:14. > :12:17.dealers are advancing -- members of the government. Why not call it a

:12:18. > :12:21.day and go out on WTO terms while public opinion is still in that

:12:22. > :12:25.direction in that Eurosceptic direction? No buyers' remorse about

:12:26. > :12:29.last year's referendum. The longer they leave it, view more opportunity

:12:30. > :12:33.there is for some kind of public resistance and change of mind to

:12:34. > :12:37.take place. The longer believe it, the more people who voted for Brexit

:12:38. > :12:41.and people who voted Remain and think we didn't get world War three

:12:42. > :12:45.will start being quite angry with the EU for not agreeing a deal. In

:12:46. > :12:51.terms of the rights of EU nationals he and Brits abroad, by all

:12:52. > :12:54.accounts, 26 of the 27 have agreed individually. Angela Merkel is the

:12:55. > :12:58.only person who has held that up. That will be dealt with in a matter

:12:59. > :13:04.of days. The chances of a deal being done is likely but in ten seconds...

:13:05. > :13:08.It would not be a bad bet to protect your on something not happening, you

:13:09. > :13:12.might get pretty good odds? The odds are going up that a deal doesn't

:13:13. > :13:17.happen. But, as I said earlier, the House of Commons will not endorse no

:13:18. > :13:23.deal. We are either in an early election or she has to go back

:13:24. > :13:27.again. Either way, you will need us! We will be back at noon tomorrow on

:13:28. > :13:30.BBC Two ahead of what looks like being a big week in politics. We

:13:31. > :13:33.will be back here same time, same place.

:13:34. > :14:37.Remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.

:14:38. > :14:45.They're calling it an entertainment extravaganza

:14:46. > :14:49.audience fun and frolics and outrageous shenanigans.

:14:50. > :14:53.And I don't even know what those HONK words mean.