:00:36. > :00:40.It's Sunday Morning, and this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:41. > :00:42.Labour attacks Conservative plans for social care and to means-test
:00:43. > :00:45.So can Jeremy Corbyn eat into the Tory lead
:00:46. > :00:51.Theresa May says her party's manifesto is all about fairness.
:00:52. > :00:55.We'll be speaking to a Conservative cabinet minister about the plans.
:00:56. > :00:58.The polls have always shown healthy leads for the Conservatives.
:00:59. > :01:02.But, now we've seen the manifestos, is Labour narrowing the gap?
:01:03. > :01:04.In the West: Protests about school funding,
:01:05. > :01:07.and at the other end of the scale: the elderly may lose out,
:01:08. > :01:23.And with me - as always - the best and the brightest political
:01:24. > :01:25.panel in the business: Sam Coates, Isabel Oakeshott
:01:26. > :01:27.and Steve Richards - they'll be tweeting throughout
:01:28. > :01:29.the programme, and you can get involved by using
:01:30. > :01:38.Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn says pensioners will be up to ?330 a year
:01:39. > :01:49.worse off under plans outlined in the Conservative manifesto.
:01:50. > :01:55.The Work Pensions Secretary Damian Green has said his party will not
:01:56. > :02:00.rethink their plans to fund social care in England. Under the plans in
:02:01. > :02:06.the Conservative manifesto, nobody with assets of less than ?100,000,
:02:07. > :02:11.would have to pay for care. Labour has attacked the proposal, and John
:02:12. > :02:14.McDonnell, Labour's Shadow Chancellor, said this morning that
:02:15. > :02:17.there needs to be more cross-party consensus.
:02:18. > :02:19.That's why we supported Dilnot, but we also supported
:02:20. > :02:23.Because we've got to have something sustainable over generations,
:02:24. > :02:25.so that's why we've said to the Conservative Party,
:02:26. > :02:28.Let's go back to that cross-party approach that actually
:02:29. > :02:32.I just feel we've all been let down by what's come
:02:33. > :02:42.Sam, is Labour beginning to get their argument across? What we had
:02:43. > :02:46.last week was bluntly what felt like not very Lynton Crosby approved
:02:47. > :02:50.Conservative manifesto. What I mean by that is that it looks like there
:02:51. > :02:55.are things that will cause political difficulties for the party over this
:02:56. > :02:59.campaign. I've been talking to MPs and ministers who acknowledge that
:03:00. > :03:05.the social care plan is coming up on the doorstep. It has cut through
:03:06. > :03:09.very quickly, and it is worrying and deterring some voters. Not just
:03:10. > :03:21.pensioners, that people who are looking to inherit in the future.
:03:22. > :03:23.They are all asking how much they could lose that they wouldn't have
:03:24. > :03:26.lost before. A difficult question for the party to answer, given that
:03:27. > :03:31.they don't want to give too much away now. Was this a mistake, or a
:03:32. > :03:38.sign of the Conservatives' confidence? It has the hallmarks of
:03:39. > :03:42.something that has been cobbled together in a very unnaturally short
:03:43. > :03:47.time frame for putting a manifesto together. We have had mixed messages
:03:48. > :03:50.from the Tory MPs who have been out on the airwaves this morning as to
:03:51. > :03:55.whether they will consult on it whether it is just a starting point.
:03:56. > :04:02.That said, there is still three weeks to go, and most of the Tory
:04:03. > :04:05.party this morning feel this is a little light turbulence rather than
:04:06. > :04:09.anything that leaves the destination of victory in doubt. It it flips the
:04:10. > :04:13.normal politics. The Tories are going to make people who have a
:04:14. > :04:20.reasonable amount of assets pay for their social care. What is wrong
:04:21. > :04:23.with that? First, total credit for them for not pretending that all
:04:24. > :04:28.this can be done by magic, which is what normally happens in an
:04:29. > :04:33.election. The party will say, we will review this for the 95th time
:04:34. > :04:37.in the following Parliament, so they have no mandate to do anything and
:04:38. > :04:41.so do not do anything. It is courageous to do it. It is
:04:42. > :04:47.electorally risky, for the reasons that you suggest, that they pass the
:04:48. > :04:53.target their own natural supporter. And there is a sense that this is
:04:54. > :04:58.rushed through, in the frenzy to get it done in time. I think the ending
:04:59. > :05:04.of the pooling of risk and putting the entire burden on in inverted
:05:05. > :05:12.commas the victim, because you cannot insure Fritz, is against the
:05:13. > :05:16.spirit of a lot of the rest of the manifesto, and will give them huge
:05:17. > :05:25.problems if they try to implement it in the next Parliament. Let's have a
:05:26. > :05:29.look at the polls. Nearly five weeks ago, on Tuesday the 18th of April,
:05:30. > :05:34.Theresa May called the election. At that point, this was the median
:05:35. > :05:40.average of the recent polls. The Conservatives had an 18 point lead
:05:41. > :05:49.over Labour on 25%. Ukip and the Liberal Democrats were both on 18%.
:05:50. > :05:53.A draft of Labour's manifesto was leaked to the press. In the
:05:54. > :05:56.intervening weeks, support for the Conservatives and Labour had
:05:57. > :06:02.increased, that it had decreased for the Lib Dems and Ukip. Last Tuesday
:06:03. > :06:08.came the launch of the official Labour manifesto. By that time,
:06:09. > :06:13.Labour support had gone up by another 2%. The Lib Dems and Ukip
:06:14. > :06:18.had slipped back slightly. Later in the week came the manifestos from
:06:19. > :06:22.the Lib Dems and the Conservatives. This morning, for more polls. This
:06:23. > :06:30.is how the parties currently stand on average. Labour are now on 34%,
:06:31. > :06:34.up 4% since the launch of their manifesto. The Conservatives are
:06:35. > :06:41.down two points since last Tuesday. Ukip and the Lib Dems are both
:06:42. > :06:46.unchanged on 8% and 5%. You can find this poll tracker on the BBC
:06:47. > :06:51.website, see how it was calculated, and see the results of national
:06:52. > :06:55.polls over the last two years. So Isabel, is this the Tories' wobbly
:06:56. > :07:00.weekend or the start of the narrowing? This is still an
:07:01. > :07:06.extremely healthy lead for the Tories. At the start of this
:07:07. > :07:12.campaign, most commentators expected to things to happen. First, the Lib
:07:13. > :07:17.Dems would have a significant surge. That hasn't happened. Second, Labour
:07:18. > :07:22.would crash and plummet. Instead they are in the health of the low
:07:23. > :07:28.30s. I wonder if that tells you something about the tribal nature of
:07:29. > :07:33.the Labour vote, and the continuing problems with the Tory brand. I
:07:34. > :07:38.would say that a lot of Tory MPs wouldn't be too unhappy if Labour's
:07:39. > :07:45.result isn't quite as bad as has been anticipated. They don't want
:07:46. > :07:51.Corbyn to go anywhere. If the latest polls were to be the result on June
:07:52. > :07:56.the 8th, Mr Corbyn may not be in a rush to go anywhere. I still think
:07:57. > :08:01.it depends on the number of seats. If there is a landslide win, I
:08:02. > :08:07.think, one way or another, he will not stay. If it is much narrower, he
:08:08. > :08:12.has grounds for arguing he has done better than anticipated. The polls
:08:13. > :08:17.are very interesting. People compare this with 83. In 83, the Tory lead
:08:18. > :08:30.widened consistently throughout the campaign. There was the SDP -
:08:31. > :08:33.Liberal Alliance doing well in the polls. Here, the Lib Dems don't seem
:08:34. > :08:35.to be doing that. So the parallels with 83 don't really stack up. But
:08:36. > :08:39.let's see what happens. Still early days for the a lot of people are
:08:40. > :08:43.saying this is the result of the social care policy. We don't really
:08:44. > :08:47.know that. How do you beat them? In the last week or so, there's been
:08:48. > :08:52.the decision by some to hold their nose and vote Labour, who haven't
:08:53. > :08:56.done so before. Probably the biggest thing in this election is how the
:08:57. > :09:03.Right has reunited behind Theresa May. That figure for Ukip is
:09:04. > :09:09.incredibly small. She has brought those Ukip voters behind her, and
:09:10. > :09:13.that could be the decisive factor in many seats, rather than the Labour
:09:14. > :09:18.share of the boat picking up a bit or down a bit, depending on how
:09:19. > :09:21.turbulent the Tory manifesto makes it. Thank you for that.
:09:22. > :09:24.We've finally got our hands on the manifestos of the two main
:09:25. > :09:26.parties and, for once, voters can hardly complain that
:09:27. > :09:30.So, just how big is the choice on offer to the public?
:09:31. > :09:32.Since the Liberal Democrats and SNP have ruled out
:09:33. > :09:34.coalitions after June 8th, Adam Fleming compares the Labour
:09:35. > :09:37.Welcome to the BBC's election centre.
:09:38. > :09:41.Four minutes from now, when Big Ben strikes 10.00,
:09:42. > :09:45.we can legally reveal the contents of this, our exit poll.
:09:46. > :09:48.18 days to go, and the BBC's election night studio
:09:49. > :09:57.This is where David Dimbleby will sit, although there is no chair yet.
:09:58. > :10:01.The parties' policies are now the finished product.
:10:02. > :10:03.In Bradford, Jeremy Corbyn vowed a bigger state,
:10:04. > :10:06.the end of austerity, no more tuition fees.
:10:07. > :10:14.The Tory campaign, by contrast, is built on one word - fear.
:10:15. > :10:22.Down the road in Halifax, Theresa May kept a promise to get
:10:23. > :10:25.immigration down to the tens of thousands, and talked
:10:26. > :10:29.of leadership and tough choices in uncertain times.
:10:30. > :10:35.Strengthen my hand as I fight for Britain, and stand with me
:10:36. > :10:41.And, with confidence in ourselves and a unity
:10:42. > :10:48.of purpose in our country, let us go forward together.
:10:49. > :10:51.Let's look at the Labour and Conservative
:10:52. > :10:57.On tax, Labour would introduce a 50p rate for top earners.
:10:58. > :11:21.The Conservatives ditched their triple lock, giving them
:11:22. > :11:23.freedom to put up income tax and national insurance,
:11:24. > :11:26.although they want to keep the overall tax burden the same.
:11:27. > :11:28.Labour offered a major overhaul of the country's wiring,
:11:29. > :11:30.with a pledge to renationalise infrastructure, like power,
:11:31. > :11:33.The Conservatives said that would cost a fortune,
:11:34. > :11:35.but provided few details for the cost of their policies.
:11:36. > :11:37.Labour have simply become a shambles, and, as yesterday's
:11:38. > :11:40.manifesto showed, their numbers simply do not add up.
:11:41. > :11:42.What have they got planned for health and social care?
:11:43. > :11:46.The Conservatives offered more cash for the NHS,
:11:47. > :11:49.reaching an extra ?8 billion a year by the end of the parliament.
:11:50. > :11:53.Labour promised an extra ?30 billion over the course of the same period,
:11:54. > :11:59.plus free hospital parking and more pay for staff.
:12:00. > :12:06.The Conservatives would increase the value of assets you could
:12:07. > :12:10.protect from the cost of social care to ?100,000, but your home would be
:12:11. > :12:11.added to the assessment of your wealth,
:12:12. > :12:15.There was a focus on one group of voters in particular
:12:16. > :12:21.Labour would keep the triple lock, which guarantees that pensions go up
:12:22. > :12:27.The Tories would keep the increase in line
:12:28. > :12:30.with inflation or earnings, a double lock.
:12:31. > :12:33.The Conservatives would end of winter fuel payments
:12:34. > :12:36.for the richest, although we don't know exactly who that would be,
:12:37. > :12:45.This is a savage attack on vulnerable pensioners,
:12:46. > :12:49.particularly those who are just about managing.
:12:50. > :12:52.It is disgraceful, and we are calling upon the Conservative Party
:12:53. > :12:59.When it comes to leaving the European Union, Labour say
:13:00. > :13:02.they'd sweep away the government's negotiating strategy,
:13:03. > :13:05.secure a better deal and straightaway guaranteed the rights
:13:06. > :13:11.The Tories say a big majority would remove political uncertainty
:13:12. > :13:23.Jeremy Vine's due here in two and a half weeks.
:13:24. > :13:29.I'm joined now by David Gauke, who is Chief Secretary to the Treasury.
:13:30. > :13:36.Welcome back to the programme. The Tories once promised a cap on social
:13:37. > :13:43.care costs. Why have you abandoned that? We've looked at it, and there
:13:44. > :13:48.are couple of proposals with the Dilnot proposal. Much of the benefit
:13:49. > :13:53.would go to those inheriting larger estates. The second point was it was
:13:54. > :13:58.hoped that a cap would stimulate the larger insurance products that would
:13:59. > :14:04.fill the gap, but there is no sign that those products are emerging.
:14:05. > :14:08.Without a cap, you will not get one. We have come forward with a new
:14:09. > :14:12.proposal which we think is fairer, provide more money for social care,
:14:13. > :14:17.which is very important and is one of the big issues we face as a
:14:18. > :14:23.country. It is right that we face those big issues. Social care is
:14:24. > :14:30.one, getting a good Brexit deal is another. This demonstrates that
:14:31. > :14:33.Theresa May has an ambition to lead a government that addresses those
:14:34. > :14:39.big long-term issues. Looking at social care. If you have assets,
:14:40. > :14:43.including your home, of over ?100,000, you have to pay for all
:14:44. > :14:47.your social care costs. Is that fair? It is right that for the
:14:48. > :14:53.services that are provided to you, that that is paid out of your
:14:54. > :14:57.assets, subject to two really important qualifications. First, you
:14:58. > :15:04.shouldn't have your entire estate wiped out. At the moment, if you are
:15:05. > :15:09.in residential care, it can be wiped out ?223,000. If you are in
:15:10. > :15:16.domiciliary care, it can be out to ?23,000, plus you're domiciliary.
:15:17. > :15:20.Nobody should be forced to sell their house in their lifetime if
:15:21. > :15:22.they or their spouse needs long-term care. Again, we have protected that
:15:23. > :15:32.in the proposals we set out. But the state will basically take a
:15:33. > :15:37.chunk of your house when you die and they sell. In an essence it is a
:15:38. > :15:41.stealth inheritance tax on everything above ?100,000. But we
:15:42. > :15:45.have those two important protections. I am including that. It
:15:46. > :15:49.is a stealth inheritance tax. We have to face up to the fact that
:15:50. > :15:54.there are significant costs that we face as a country in terms of health
:15:55. > :15:58.and social careful. Traditionally, politicians don't address those
:15:59. > :16:04.issues, particularly during election campaigns. I think it is too Theresa
:16:05. > :16:07.May's credit that we are being straightforward with the British
:16:08. > :16:10.people and saying that we face this long-term challenge. Our manifesto
:16:11. > :16:14.was about the big challenges that we face, one of which was
:16:15. > :16:18.intergenerational fairness and one of which was delivering a strong
:16:19. > :16:25.economy and making sure that we can do that. But in the end, someone is
:16:26. > :16:28.going to have to pay for this. It is going to have to be a balance
:16:29. > :16:31.between the general taxpayer and those receiving the services. We
:16:32. > :16:35.think we have struck the right balance with this proposal. But it
:16:36. > :16:39.is entirely on the individual. People watching this programme, if
:16:40. > :16:46.they have a fair amount of assets, not massive, including the home,
:16:47. > :16:50.they will need to pay for everything themselves until their assets are
:16:51. > :16:55.reduced to ?100,000. It is not a balance, you're putting everything
:16:56. > :17:01.on the original two individual. At the moment, for those in residential
:17:02. > :17:06.care, they have to pay everything until 20 3000. -- everything on the
:17:07. > :17:10.individual. But now they will face more. Those in individual care are
:17:11. > :17:13.seeing their protection going up by four times as much, so that is
:17:14. > :17:17.eliminating unfairness. Why should those in residential care be in a
:17:18. > :17:23.worse position than those receiving domiciliary care? But as I say, that
:17:24. > :17:26.money has to come from somewhere and we are sitting at a proper plan for
:17:27. > :17:30.it. While also made the point that we are more likely to be able to
:17:31. > :17:34.have a properly functioning social care market if we have a strong
:17:35. > :17:37.economy, and to have a strong economy we need to deliver a good
:17:38. > :17:42.deal on Brexit and I think Theresa May is capable of doing that. You
:17:43. > :17:47.have said that before. But if you have a heart attack in old age, the
:17:48. > :17:50.NHS will take care of you. If you have dementia, you now have to pay
:17:51. > :17:55.for the care of yourself. Is that they are? It is already the case
:17:56. > :17:59.that if you have long-term care costs come up as I say, if you are
:18:00. > :18:04.in residential care you pay for all of it until the last ?23,000, but if
:18:05. > :18:08.you are in domiciliary care, excluding your housing assets, but
:18:09. > :18:14.all of your other assets get used up until you are down to ?23,000 a
:18:15. > :18:21.year. And I think it is right at this point that a party that aspires
:18:22. > :18:25.to run this country for the long-term, to address the long-term
:18:26. > :18:29.challenges we have is a country, for us to be clear that we need to
:18:30. > :18:36.deliver this. Because if it is not paid for it this way, if it goes and
:18:37. > :18:39.falls on the general taxpayer, the people who feel hard pressed by the
:18:40. > :18:44.amount of income tax and VAT they pay, frankly we have to say to them,
:18:45. > :18:48.those taxes will go up if we do not address it. But they might go up
:18:49. > :18:54.anyway. The average house price in your part of the country is just shy
:18:55. > :18:58.of ?430,000, so if you told your own constituents that they might have to
:18:59. > :19:03.spend ?300,000 of their assets on social care before the state steps
:19:04. > :19:08.in to help...? As I said earlier, nobody will be forced to pay during
:19:09. > :19:14.their lifetime. Nobody will be forced to sell their houses. We are
:19:15. > :19:18.providing that protection because of the third premium. Which makes it a
:19:19. > :19:24.kind of death tax, doesn't it? Which is what you use to rail against.
:19:25. > :19:29.What it is people paying for the services they have paid out of their
:19:30. > :19:32.assets. But with that very important protection that nobody is going to
:19:33. > :19:37.be wiped out in the way that has happened up until now, down to the
:19:38. > :19:41.last three years. But when Labour propose this, George Osborne called
:19:42. > :19:45.it a death tax and you are now proposing a stealth death tax
:19:46. > :19:51.inheritance tax. Labour's proposals were very different. It is the same
:19:52. > :19:58.effect. Labour's were hitting everyone with an inheritance tax. We
:19:59. > :20:01.are saying that there are -- that there is a state contribution but
:20:02. > :20:07.the public receiving the services will have to pay for it out of
:20:08. > :20:11.assets, which have grown substantially. And which they might
:20:12. > :20:15.now lose to social care. But I would say that people in Hertfordshire pay
:20:16. > :20:20.a lot in income tracks, national insurance and VAT, and this is my
:20:21. > :20:24.bet is going to have to come from somewhere. Well, they are now going
:20:25. > :20:29.to pay a lot of tax and pay for social care. Turning to immigration,
:20:30. > :20:34.you promised to get net migration down to 100,020 ten. You failed. You
:20:35. > :20:38.promised again in 2015 and you are feeling again. Why should voters
:20:39. > :20:43.trust you a third time? It is very clear that only the Conservative
:20:44. > :20:48.Party has an ambition to control immigration and to bring it down. An
:20:49. > :20:51.ambition you have failed to deliver. There are, of course, factors that
:20:52. > :20:55.come into play. For example a couple of years ago we were going through a
:20:56. > :20:59.period when the UK was creating huge numbers of jobs but none of our
:21:00. > :21:02.European neighbours were doing anything like it. Not surprisingly,
:21:03. > :21:09.that feeds through into the immigration numbers that we see. But
:21:10. > :21:15.it is right that we have that ambition because I do not believe it
:21:16. > :21:18.is sustainable to have hundreds of thousands net migration, you're
:21:19. > :21:22.after year after year, and only Theresa May of the Conservative
:21:23. > :21:26.Party is willing to address that. It has gone from being a target to an
:21:27. > :21:30.ambition, and I am pretty sure in a couple of years it will become an
:21:31. > :21:36.untimed aspiration. Is net migration now higher or lower than when you
:21:37. > :21:41.came to power in 2010? I think it is higher at the moment. Let's look at
:21:42. > :21:46.the figures. And there they are. You are right, it is higher, so after
:21:47. > :21:53.six years in power, promising to get it down to 100,000, it is higher. So
:21:54. > :21:57.if that is an ambition and you have not succeeded. We have to accept
:21:58. > :22:02.that there are a number of factors. It continues to be the case that the
:22:03. > :22:06.UK economy is growing and creating a lot of jobs, which is undoubtedly
:22:07. > :22:09.drawing people. But you made the promise on the basis that would not
:22:10. > :22:12.happen? We are certainly outperforming other countries in a
:22:13. > :22:18.way that we could not have predicted in 2010. That is one of the factors.
:22:19. > :22:20.But if you look at a lot of the steps that we have taken over the
:22:21. > :22:26.course of the last seven years, dealing with bogus students, for
:22:27. > :22:30.example, tightening up a lot of the rules. You can say all that but it
:22:31. > :22:33.has made no difference to the headline figure. Clearly it would
:22:34. > :22:39.have gone up by much more and we not taken the steps. But as I say, we
:22:40. > :22:44.cannot for ever, it seems to me, have net migration numbers in the
:22:45. > :22:48.hundreds of thousands. If we get that good Brexit deal, one of the
:22:49. > :22:53.things we can do is tighten up in terms of access here. You say that
:22:54. > :22:57.but you have always had control of non-EU migration. You cannot blame
:22:58. > :23:00.the EU for that. You control immigration from outside the EU.
:23:01. > :23:07.Have you ever managed to get even that below 100,000? Well, no doubt
:23:08. > :23:13.you will present the numbers now. You haven't. You have got down a bit
:23:14. > :23:17.from 2010, I will give you that, but even non-EU migration is still a lot
:23:18. > :23:22.more than 100000 and that is the thing you control. It is 164,000 on
:23:23. > :23:25.the latest figures. There is no point in saying to the voters that
:23:26. > :23:28.when we get control of the EU migration you will get it down when
:23:29. > :23:34.the bit you have control over, you have failed to get that down into
:23:35. > :23:38.the tens of thousands. The general trend has gone up. Non-EU migration
:23:39. > :23:44.we have brought down over the last few years. Not by much, not by
:23:45. > :23:49.anywhere near your 100,000 target. But we clearly have more tools
:23:50. > :23:54.available to us, following Brexit. At this rate it will be around 2030
:23:55. > :23:57.before you get non-EU migration down to 100,000. We clearly have more
:23:58. > :24:01.tools available to us and I return to the point I made. In the last six
:24:02. > :24:05.or seven years, particularly the last four or five, we have seen the
:24:06. > :24:10.UK jobs market growing substantially. It is extraordinary
:24:11. > :24:12.how many more jobs we have. So you'll only promised the migration
:24:13. > :24:17.target because you did not think you were going to run the economy well?
:24:18. > :24:20.That is what you are telling me. I don't think anyone expected us to
:24:21. > :24:25.create quite a number of jobs that we have done over the last six or
:24:26. > :24:28.seven years. At the time when other European countries have not been.
:24:29. > :24:33.George Osborne says your target is economically illiterate. I disagree
:24:34. > :24:40.with George on that. He is my old boss but I disagree with him on that
:24:41. > :24:43.point. And the reason I say that is looking at the economics and the
:24:44. > :24:49.wider social impact, I don't think it is sustainable for us to have
:24:50. > :24:52.hundreds of thousands, year after year after year. Let me ask you one
:24:53. > :24:56.other thing because you are the chief secretary. Your promising that
:24:57. > :25:01.spending on health will be ?8 billion higher in five use time than
:25:02. > :25:04.it is now. How do you pay for that? From a strong economy, two years ago
:25:05. > :25:10.we had a similar conversation because at that point we said that
:25:11. > :25:14.we would increase spending by ?8 billion. And we are more than on
:25:15. > :25:18.track to deliver it, because it is a priority area for us. Where will the
:25:19. > :25:23.money come from? It will be a priority area for us. We will find
:25:24. > :25:28.the money. So you have not been able to show us a revenue line where this
:25:29. > :25:33.?8 billion will come from. We have a record of making promises to spend
:25:34. > :25:37.more on the NHS and delivering. One thing I would say is that the only
:25:38. > :25:42.way you can spend more money on the NHS is if you have a strong economy,
:25:43. > :25:46.and the biggest risk... But that is true of anything. I am trying to
:25:47. > :25:50.find out where the ?8 billion come from, where will it come from? Know
:25:51. > :25:54.you were saying that perhaps you might increase taxes, ticking off
:25:55. > :26:00.the lock, so people are right to be suspicious. But you will not tell us
:26:01. > :26:05.where the ?8 billion will come from. Andrew, a strong economy is key to
:26:06. > :26:09.delivering more NHS money. That does not tell us where the money is
:26:10. > :26:12.coming from. The biggest risk to a strong economy would be a bad
:26:13. > :26:17.Brexit, which Jeremy Corbyn would deliver. And we have a record of
:26:18. > :26:20.putting more money into the NHS. I think that past performance we can
:26:21. > :26:22.take forward. Thank you for joining us.
:26:23. > :26:25.So, the Conservatives have been taking a bit of flak
:26:26. > :26:29.But Conservative big guns have been out and about this morning taking
:26:30. > :26:32.Here's Boris Johnson on ITV's Peston programme earlier today:
:26:33. > :26:36.What we're trying to do is to address what I think
:26:37. > :26:39.everybody, all serious demographers acknowledge will be the massive
:26:40. > :26:43.problem of the cost of social care long-term.
:26:44. > :26:47.This is a responsible, grown-up, conservative approach,
:26:48. > :26:50.trying to deal with a long-term problem in a way that is equitable,
:26:51. > :26:52.allows people to pass on a very substantial sum,
:26:53. > :26:54.still, to their kids, and takes away the fear
:26:55. > :27:01.Joining me now from Liverpool is Labour's Shadow Chief Secretary
:27:02. > :27:12.Petered out, welcome to the programme. Let's start with social
:27:13. > :27:16.care. The Tories are saying that if you have ?100,000 or more in assets,
:27:17. > :27:22.you should pay for your own social care. What is wrong with that? Well,
:27:23. > :27:26.I think the issue at the end of the day is the question of fairness. Is
:27:27. > :27:31.it fair? And what we're trying to do is to get to a situation where we
:27:32. > :27:36.have, for example, the Dilnot report, which identified that you
:27:37. > :27:39.actually have cap on your spending on social care. We are trying to get
:27:40. > :27:46.to a position where it is a reasonable and fair approach to
:27:47. > :27:50.expenditure. But you will know that a lot of people, particularly in the
:27:51. > :27:55.south of country, London and the south-east, and the adjacent areas
:27:56. > :27:57.around it, they have benefited from huge house price inflation. They
:27:58. > :28:02.have seen their homes go up in value, if and when they sell, they
:28:03. > :28:08.are not taxed on that increase. Why should these people not pay for
:28:09. > :28:12.their own social care if they have the assets to do so? They will be
:28:13. > :28:17.paying for some of their social care but you cannot take social care and
:28:18. > :28:20.health care separately. It has to be an integrated approach. So for
:28:21. > :28:24.example if you do have dementia, you're more likely to be in an
:28:25. > :28:28.elderly person's home for longer and you most probably have been in care
:28:29. > :28:32.for a longer period of time. On the other hand, you might have, if you
:28:33. > :28:35.have had a stroke, there may be continuing care needs paid for by
:28:36. > :28:39.the NHS. So at the end of the date it is trying to get a reasonable
:28:40. > :28:48.balance and just to pluck a figure of ?100,000 out of thin air is not
:28:49. > :28:53.sensible. You will have heard me say about David Gold that the house
:28:54. > :28:57.prices in his area, about 450,000 or so, not quite that, and that people
:28:58. > :29:03.may have to spend quite a lot of that on social care to get down to
:29:04. > :29:07.?100,000. But in your area, the average house price is only
:29:08. > :29:12.?149,000, so your people would not have to pay anything like as much
:29:13. > :29:18.before they hit the ?100,000 minimum. I hesitate to say that but
:29:19. > :29:21.is that not almost a socialist approach to social care that if you
:29:22. > :29:26.are in the affluent Home Counties with a big asset, you pay more, and
:29:27. > :29:30.if you are in an area that is not so affluent and your house is not worth
:29:31. > :29:34.very much, you pay a lot less. What is wrong with that principle? I
:29:35. > :29:39.think the problem I am trying to get to is this issue about equity across
:29:40. > :29:45.the piece. At the end of the day, what we want is a system whereby it
:29:46. > :29:48.is capped at a particular level, and the Dilnot report, after much
:29:49. > :29:53.examination, said we should have a cap on care costs at ?72,000. The
:29:54. > :29:56.Conservatives decided to ditch that and come up with another policy
:29:57. > :30:01.which by all accounts seems to be even more Draconian. At the end of
:30:02. > :30:10.the day it is trying to get social care and an NHS care in a much more
:30:11. > :30:13.fluid way. We had offered the Conservatives to have a bipartisan
:30:14. > :30:17.approach to this. David just said that this is a long term. You do not
:30:18. > :30:23.pick a figure out of thin air and use that as a long-term strategy.
:30:24. > :30:28.The Conservatives are now saying they will increase health spending
:30:29. > :30:33.over the next five years in real terms. You will increase health
:30:34. > :30:39.spending. In what way is your approach to health spending better
:30:40. > :30:45.than the Tories' now? We are contributing an extra 7.2 billion to
:30:46. > :30:50.the NHS and social care over the next few years. But you just don't
:30:51. > :30:55.put money into the NHS or social care. It has to be an integrated
:30:56. > :30:59.approach to social and health care. What we've got is just more of the
:31:00. > :31:05.same. What we don't want to do is just say, we ring-fenced an out for
:31:06. > :31:13.here or there. What you have to do is try to get that... Let me ask you
:31:14. > :31:17.again. In terms of the amount of resource that is going to be devoted
:31:18. > :31:23.in the next five years, and resource does matter for the NHS, in what way
:31:24. > :31:27.are your plans different now from the Conservative plans? The key is
:31:28. > :31:33.how you use that resource. By just putting money in, you've got to say,
:31:34. > :31:39.if we are going to put that money on, how do we use it? As somebody
:31:40. > :31:43.who has worked in social care for 40 years, you have to have a different
:31:44. > :31:49.approach to how you use that money. The money we are putting in, 7.7,
:31:50. > :31:53.may be similar in cash terms to what the Tories claim they are putting
:31:54. > :32:07.in, but it's not how much you put in per se, it is how you use it. You
:32:08. > :32:10.are going to get rid of car parking charges in hospital, and you are
:32:11. > :32:12.going to increase pay by taking the cap on pay off. So it doesn't
:32:13. > :32:15.necessarily follow that the money, under your way of doing it, will
:32:16. > :32:19.follow the front line. What you need in the NHS is a system that is
:32:20. > :32:26.capable of dealing with the patience you have. What we have now is on at
:32:27. > :32:36.five Asian of the NHS. Staff leaving, not being paid properly. So
:32:37. > :32:40.pay and the NHS go hand in hand. Let's move onto another area of
:32:41. > :32:45.policy where there is some confusion. Who speaks for the Labour
:32:46. > :32:52.Party on nuclear weapons? Is it Emily Thornbury, or Nia Griffith,
:32:53. > :32:57.defence spokesperson? The Labour manifesto. It is clear. We are
:32:58. > :33:07.committed to the nuclear deterrent, and that is the definitive... Is it?
:33:08. > :33:11.Emily Thornbury said that Trident could be scrapped in the defence
:33:12. > :33:17.review you would have immediately after taking power. On LBC on Friday
:33:18. > :33:22.night. She didn't, actually. I listened to that. What she actually
:33:23. > :33:27.said is, as part of a Labour government coming in, a new
:33:28. > :33:31.government, there is always a defence review. But not the concept
:33:32. > :33:38.of Trident in its substance. She said there would be a review in
:33:39. > :33:42.terms of, and this is in our manifesto. When you reduce
:33:43. > :33:48.something, you review how it is operated. The review could scrap
:33:49. > :33:53.Trident. It won't scrap Trident. The review is in the context of how you
:33:54. > :33:59.protect it from cyber attacks. This will issue was seized upon that she
:34:00. > :34:04.was saying that we would have another review of Trident or Labour
:34:05. > :34:11.would ditch it. That is nonsense. You will have seen some reports that
:34:12. > :34:15.MI5 opened a file on Jeremy Corbyn in the early 90s because of his
:34:16. > :34:24.links to Irish republicanism. This has caused some people, his links to
:34:25. > :34:30.the IRA and Sinn Fein, it has caused some concern. Could you just listen
:34:31. > :34:37.to this clip and react. Do you condemn what the IRA did? I condemn
:34:38. > :34:42.all bombing. But do you condemn what the IRA did? I condemn what was done
:34:43. > :34:46.with the British Army as well as both sides as well. What happened in
:34:47. > :34:53.Derry in 1972 was pretty devastating as well. Do you distinguish between
:34:54. > :34:59.state forces, what the British Army did and the IRA? Well, in a sense,
:35:00. > :35:05.the treatment of IRA prisoners which made them into virtual political
:35:06. > :35:09.prisoners suggested that the British government and the state saw some
:35:10. > :35:16.kind of almost equivalent in it. My point is that the whole violence if
:35:17. > :35:23.you was terrible, was appalling, and came out of a process that had been
:35:24. > :35:28.allowed to fester in Northern Ireland for a very long time. That
:35:29. > :35:32.was from about two years ago. Can you explain why the Leader of the
:35:33. > :35:36.Labour Party, Her Majesty 's opposition, the man who would be our
:35:37. > :35:43.next Prime Minister, finds it so hard to condemn IRA arming? I think
:35:44. > :35:46.it has to be within the context that Jeremy Corbyn for many years trying
:35:47. > :35:56.to move the peace protest... Process along. So why wouldn't you condemn
:35:57. > :36:03.IRA bombing? Again, that was an issue, a traumatic event in Irish -
:36:04. > :36:08.British relations that went on for 30 years. It is a complicated
:36:09. > :36:13.matter. Bombing is not that complicated. If you are a man of
:36:14. > :36:18.peace, surely you would condemn the bomb and the bullet? Let me say
:36:19. > :36:24.this, I condemn the bomb and the bullet. Why can't your leader? You
:36:25. > :36:28.would have to ask Jeremy Corbyn, but that is in the context of what he
:36:29. > :36:30.was trying to do over a 25 year period to move the priest process
:36:31. > :36:33.along. Thank you for joining us. It's just gone 11.35,
:36:34. > :36:36.you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers
:36:37. > :36:45.in Scotland and Wales. Hello and welcome to the Sunday
:36:46. > :36:49.Politics here in the West. On the march: A noisy protest
:36:50. > :36:58.in Bristol yesterday complained But are the politicians keeping
:36:59. > :37:08.quiet about austerity? I'm joined by four candidates -
:37:09. > :37:11.They are the Conservative Richard Graham; Karin Smyth for Labour;
:37:12. > :37:14.Wera Hobhouse for the Lib Dems All the talk in the papers this
:37:15. > :37:23.morning is about the so-called weekend wobble, after the Tory
:37:24. > :37:27.manifesto which tackled social care The Conservatives are trying
:37:28. > :37:31.to limit the damage - the Work and Pensions Secretary said
:37:32. > :37:33.on Andrew Marr this morning that it is wrong for people
:37:34. > :37:41.like Mick Jagger to get it. Everyone who is in genuine
:37:42. > :37:44.need of the winter fuel But we think the money
:37:45. > :37:48.that is currently being spent on people who need it less,
:37:49. > :37:56.many of whom have come up and said to me over the years,
:37:57. > :37:59."really, should I be getting this?" That money is better set in a social
:38:00. > :38:03.care system that we all agree is one of the great challenges
:38:04. > :38:10.facing our country. Richard Graham for the
:38:11. > :38:14.Conservatives, just when it was going so well for you, this
:38:15. > :38:18.manifesto doesn't seem to have gone down terribly well, particularly
:38:19. > :38:21.with the elderly? I think the manifesto has gone done extremely
:38:22. > :38:24.well with people whose major concerns are education and health. I
:38:25. > :38:29.think they're absolute commitment to making sure there was a huge, real
:38:30. > :38:31.terms increase in spending on the NHS and education is incredibly
:38:32. > :38:37.reassuring for many of my constituents. People are worried
:38:38. > :38:43.that dementia might not only take their minds but actually take their
:38:44. > :38:46.homes as well? I think it is incredibly insensitive
:38:47. > :38:47.scaremongering to talk about dementia tax, my mother had dementia
:38:48. > :38:52.and died of it, this is not a tax, and died of it, this is not a tax,
:38:53. > :38:58.this is about a fair contribution to the cost of care to all taxpayers
:38:59. > :39:01.and the families affected. We will increase by four times the amount of
:39:02. > :39:07.assets you can hand onto your family after your death. It could go down
:39:08. > :39:11.to the last ?100,000 was like if you have a house in this part of the
:39:12. > :39:15.world, worked hard all your life and a queue Nolito home, you could lose
:39:16. > :39:24.it. If you need 15 years of care, you could lose the lot. -- you could
:39:25. > :39:28.lose your home. It's the family that's going? It's the assets you
:39:29. > :39:32.are handing of us that you can hand on ?100,000. But yes, those with
:39:33. > :39:36.assets worth a lot of money will have to contribute more because that
:39:37. > :39:40.is about how we can afford a social care system that we don't have at
:39:41. > :39:46.Now, what we need to look at here is Now, what we need to look at here is
:39:47. > :39:49.ensuring that all the people who have contributed to society, who
:39:50. > :39:53.have families, are kept above the poverty line. The Green party policy
:39:54. > :39:59.is to ensure year-on-year that is what happened. If the cost of living
:40:00. > :40:05.increases, people and pensioners need to afford to live... The
:40:06. > :40:10.handing of you I'm down to your family, or should that wealthy a
:40:11. > :40:17.part of your estate for which you could pave your own care? What the
:40:18. > :40:22.Green party seeks to do is provide everyone who needs social care with
:40:23. > :40:27.social care. Free? Free at the point of use. That comes under the whole
:40:28. > :40:31.banner of health care. People should be able to access health care... You
:40:32. > :40:39.should make no contribution no should make no contribution no
:40:40. > :40:44.matter how wealthy? The wealth tax that the Green party refer to is
:40:45. > :40:49.something that is more in line with contributing and he austerity
:40:50. > :40:58.measures. The wealthiest will be paying... Green policy, do you get
:40:59. > :41:05.free social care or not? Yes, the Green policy is to provide social
:41:06. > :41:09.care when people need it. The Lib Dem approach to this issue is
:41:10. > :41:14.different. We are addressing head-on that we need to raise more money. So
:41:15. > :41:17.we are saying 1p in the pound from income tax, so everyone makes a
:41:18. > :41:28.contribution. That will go nowhere. We will raise ?6 billion a year. If
:41:29. > :41:30.we increase that by year, we can guarantee the health and social care
:41:31. > :41:37.bills will be paid for. And the whole approach is about solidarity.
:41:38. > :41:40.People pay according to their ability, but everyone makes a
:41:41. > :41:43.contribution and whether people are getting ill and needing long-term
:41:44. > :41:52.care or not, the burden will be shared. So you can put your house?
:41:53. > :41:59.City keep your house? We're not saying that people lose
:42:00. > :42:06.people who are higher earners and more... I'm not talking about cash,
:42:07. > :42:13.I'm talking about houses. We have not said anything -- we have not
:42:14. > :42:19.said anything about times, we will guarantee that everyone in will get
:42:20. > :42:24.their hopes health and social care paid for. We are now seeing this
:42:25. > :42:28.myth of strong and stable going away and think there was no compassion at
:42:29. > :42:31.the heart of this Conservative government. I have thought about
:42:32. > :42:35.this to four years. Last time they said there would be a cap on care.
:42:36. > :42:40.They get older people certainty and dignity at all the rage, got into
:42:41. > :42:44.power two months later they kicked it into the long glass to lay grass.
:42:45. > :42:51.Out of the blue this week, they landed this bomb shell on older
:42:52. > :42:54.people and their families. We need to contribute over time but it is a
:42:55. > :43:01.major discussion for all the generations you have. The deal not
:43:02. > :43:03.proposals, gave a degree of certainty, and we could think how we
:43:04. > :43:06.do involve people in the discussion do involve people in the discussion
:43:07. > :43:09.about the best method to raise the money. With all due respect,
:43:10. > :43:13.Richard, I'm afraid the resurrection of this as a death tax to say to
:43:14. > :43:17.people, whatever else you should get, you don't know what will happen
:43:18. > :43:23.to you. You'll have to suddenly alter your entire life plan. That
:43:24. > :43:26.loss of dignity and care, and people are talking on the doorstep,
:43:27. > :43:31.yesterday I went to a woman whose husband has a stroke inside her
:43:32. > :43:35.house. The real cruelty about this is about suddenly having to pay for
:43:36. > :43:42.your social care costs, keeping people at home out of hospital, a
:43:43. > :43:45.major issue for hospitals, social care is a bit of a term people don't
:43:46. > :43:50.understand. That is helping people get dressed in the morning, taking
:43:51. > :43:53.their medication. If they went to hospital they get it free? If they
:43:54. > :43:58.have to come home, then that would be totalled up and when you're dead
:43:59. > :44:02.you get the bill? We don't know the details because of the out of the
:44:03. > :44:08.blue. There will be some details. There are no details of four people
:44:09. > :44:11.vote. On a day which is the anniversary of the murder of Jo Cox
:44:12. > :44:14.with her strong belief that what brings us together is more important
:44:15. > :44:18.than what divides us, we should recognise that there was no
:44:19. > :44:22.government yet that has resolved the issue of social care. There's a plan
:44:23. > :44:27.on the table which you have kicked around for two years, done nothing
:44:28. > :44:32.about it, and you put out of the blue. Because you think you're
:44:33. > :44:37.walking this election. If I can briefly reply. The Dilnot commission
:44:38. > :44:41.proposal will have provided a cap on the amount any family had to pay.
:44:42. > :44:45.But would not have been right for a millionaire living and an enormous
:44:46. > :44:51.house with a huge amount of assets, let's take Philip Green for the sake
:44:52. > :44:55.of either. The total costs his family would pay... He's a long way
:44:56. > :44:59.from my constituency and yours. We have capped the floor so everyone
:45:00. > :45:05.knows they can hand over ?100,000 of assets, whatever the cost of their
:45:06. > :45:08.care. This has been a subject of Royal commissions for 20 years and I
:45:09. > :45:12.know the Conservative Party doesn't like to hear about experts, but the
:45:13. > :45:14.experts have gone through this and massive details, there is a plan on
:45:15. > :45:20.the deep in the Department of Health, that
:45:21. > :45:27.has been thrown City that is then thrown into the air. If you read the
:45:28. > :45:32.papers this morning it is full of the latest manifesto stories and the
:45:33. > :45:39.wedding of Pippa Middleton. Should the Middleton 's get a fuel
:45:40. > :45:45.allowance? They have spent tens of thousands on this wedding, the
:45:46. > :45:49.honeymoon is ?300,000. Do people like that, decently partial, but do
:45:50. > :45:54.they deemed a fuel allowance? The basis of our society, of this
:45:55. > :45:57.country, I'm astonished in this election, it's five years since we
:45:58. > :46:02.took my family to the Olympics to celebrate how great this country and
:46:03. > :46:07.our culture. We come together and pool are risks, we give according to
:46:08. > :46:11.our means... You need to spend money on rich people claiming fuel? The
:46:12. > :46:17.basis of our way of telling whether welfare Society is taxing people --
:46:18. > :46:23.bases of our welfare society is taxing people fairly. If the
:46:24. > :46:26.Middleton 's don't get it, they should be taxed fairly. There were
:46:27. > :46:35.long way from our constituents. Hang on. It's being part of the entire
:46:36. > :46:39.system. Absolutely. I keep stressing, we believe in solidarity.
:46:40. > :46:42.I don't want to start with the politics of envy, Saint bees before
:46:43. > :46:48.the habit of those shouldn't be allowed because they can afford a
:46:49. > :46:57.wonderful wedding. Mike Pepper. -- like Pippa Middleton. Is it fair
:46:58. > :47:01.that a quarter of us that will house dementia, why shouldn't we share
:47:02. > :47:04.that burden around? Is not just the tragedy of looking after somebody
:47:05. > :47:09.with a long-term condition but what happens to the families afterwards.
:47:10. > :47:13.One must quit word from Charley. Irrespective of fuel that respect of
:47:14. > :47:19.fuel tax, everyone should be able to heat their home, cook their food,
:47:20. > :47:25.but the people that don't need it don't have to take it, is the
:47:26. > :47:27.answer, surely. Means testing is greatly unfair.
:47:28. > :47:34.If one word has dominated politics over the past seven
:47:35. > :47:37.Tough government spending cuts designed to fix
:47:38. > :47:40.But it's hardly been mentioned during the current
:47:41. > :47:42.We sent Dickon Hooper to find out why.
:47:43. > :47:46.Yes, we're going to have to make difficult decisions, yes,
:47:47. > :47:51.we're going to have to make some difficult and painful cuts.
:47:52. > :48:03.One of the biggest economic crises of the post-war era.
:48:04. > :48:09.Let me make it clear, austerity is a political choice.
:48:10. > :48:12.It's also something not really being discussed in this election.
:48:13. > :48:19.But its effects are definitely being felt.
:48:20. > :48:23.You've got to learn to know what your limitations are.
:48:24. > :48:29.Rich has run this coffee stand in a Bristol park
:48:30. > :48:36.He's angry the park's historic swings were demolished,
:48:37. > :48:40.and won't be replaced because of the cuts.
:48:41. > :48:43.So the community is raising money itself.
:48:44. > :48:47.We've raised about ?4000 so far, so we're a third of the way
:48:48. > :48:52.The swings were cut because of austerity,
:48:53. > :48:55.but people have rallied around, is that sustainable?
:48:56. > :48:58.This is the first time we've had to go to the community
:48:59. > :49:01.and ask them to help pay for a piece of equipment.
:49:02. > :49:04.If we were doing that every year, every six months, people
:49:05. > :49:10.A small example of austerity perhaps, but it's important
:49:11. > :49:17.Is it important to voters in the general election though?
:49:18. > :49:19.What's the most important issue in this election for you?
:49:20. > :49:30.I'm a teacher and I have two children, one of which is
:49:31. > :49:32.about to start school and the cuts are massive.
:49:33. > :49:36.What about the swings here, do you miss them?
:49:37. > :49:49.They are a sign of austerity aren't they?
:49:50. > :49:55.We are seeing school trips cancelled...
:49:56. > :49:58.This protest attracted maybe a thousand people
:49:59. > :50:05.A noisy end to a week in which the main parties
:50:06. > :50:11.And for those pouring over the small print,
:50:12. > :50:20.austerity should still be a talking point.
:50:21. > :50:22.Austerity and cuts ought to be a big issue, because certainly
:50:23. > :50:25.the Conservatives are still planning some pretty big cuts going forward
:50:26. > :50:28.to most areas of public spending and really tough on public sector
:50:29. > :50:32.pay, relative, particularly, to what the Labour Party are suggesting.
:50:33. > :50:34.So there are differences between the parties.
:50:35. > :50:37.There's a lot of austerity still to come, we think,
:50:38. > :50:41.Their manifesto is not very explicit.
:50:42. > :50:44.And quite big spending increases if we get a Labour
:50:45. > :50:50.government, so some big differences between them.
:50:51. > :50:52.So voters perhaps should wake up and smell the coffee.
:50:53. > :50:56.Austerity is still with us, And the parties have very different
:50:57. > :51:14.Cameron Smith from Labour, four more bank holidays if Labour getting, and
:51:15. > :51:18.NT public sector pay restraint, money to spend on nationalisation,
:51:19. > :51:23.where is the cash coming from? As you know, and has been debated this
:51:24. > :51:26.morning, our manifesto is costed fully and like the Conservative. But
:51:27. > :51:31.I disagree with your film, the only thing people are talking about is
:51:32. > :51:34.the cuts. Particularly around education, the school gates at my
:51:35. > :51:39.constituency every school is losing out, parents know that. There was a
:51:40. > :51:43.big march in Bristol yesterday. And the health service. That is all the
:51:44. > :51:48.people are talking about now. Spending actually going up? The
:51:49. > :51:50.Prime Minister called this election because she wanted to look strong
:51:51. > :51:55.and stable, and people love the boat is because they are talking fixing
:51:56. > :51:59.Mac with the voters because they talk about things that matter to
:52:00. > :52:09.them, there Talanoa the when you say about the cuts, do you
:52:10. > :52:12.say, don't worry about those under a Labour government, there won't be
:52:13. > :52:17.any quiver that I listen to what people are saying. I say clearly,
:52:18. > :52:22.vote for a strong voice locally from the Labour Party. We will stand up
:52:23. > :52:28.for you on those things. I have been talking about more services in South
:52:29. > :52:32.Bristol hospital, GP services, a GP service close to my constituency.
:52:33. > :52:35.People in my constituency and self but are well aware... We are talking
:52:36. > :52:42.that individual things. Putter are not talk about individual thing. I
:52:43. > :52:48.do you not tell people to vote for Corbyn? I tell people to vote for
:52:49. > :52:54.the Labour Party. Do you think Auburn will be ago by Minister? I
:52:55. > :53:00.want to Labour by Minister. But we know she will court called the
:53:01. > :53:04.selection... Can you say that Jeremy Corbyn will be ago by Minister? Of
:53:05. > :53:10.course I can say Jeremy Corbyn. He'll be better than the a
:53:11. > :53:14.Conservative government. To nationalise the water companies
:53:15. > :53:18.alone would use ?70 billion of money. Try and listen occasionally
:53:19. > :53:24.to someone else, just as we listen to you. The idea that we can promise
:53:25. > :53:28.everything on public spending, nationalisation, and all the rest of
:53:29. > :53:34.it, is, I'm afraid, simply not credible. The truth of the word
:53:35. > :53:41.austerity is that it really means living within your means and when
:53:42. > :53:43.they get. We had ?150 billion of deficit every year, we got it down
:53:44. > :53:47.to just under 50 billion, and we've to just under 50 billion, and we've
:53:48. > :53:52.got a way to go. What we have done is stretched this out over a longer
:53:53. > :53:55.period of time, so there isn't too much pain specifically in health and
:53:56. > :54:00.education which are crucial sectors. But we have got to keep finding ways
:54:01. > :54:07.of living within our means. Why wasn't your manifesto costed? There
:54:08. > :54:10.are things on the winter fuel allowance, it's right that we
:54:11. > :54:16.shouldn't be giving it to the richest people... And what level?
:54:17. > :54:21.You had people calling over the Labour manifesto trying to find
:54:22. > :54:25.bombs, and you haven't done your own? That's because we haven't made
:54:26. > :54:28.the same reckless spending commitments that the Labour have,
:54:29. > :54:31.we're not renationalisation costs a fortune, and we aren't making
:54:32. > :54:35.promises that we can't deliver. You not worried about the damage done to
:54:36. > :54:38.the fabric of our society by continual reductions in spending in
:54:39. > :54:41.real terms was not worried about the damage done to the fabric of our
:54:42. > :54:43.society by continual reductions in spending in real terms? Particularly
:54:44. > :54:49.schools? Now. Because we made this commitment that we have 4 billion
:54:50. > :54:53.extra over what inflation will likely amount to over the next five
:54:54. > :54:56.years. We put a huge amount of money into expenditure programme for
:54:57. > :55:00.schools to expand to more pupils, and I have seen in my own
:55:01. > :55:02.constituency that the number of schools which are delivering either
:55:03. > :55:06.good or outstanding Ofsted results and getting chills and the results
:55:07. > :55:12.they want is increasing all the time. Let's bring in Wera. The Lib
:55:13. > :55:13.Dems in their manifesto claimed they will eliminate the deficit in three
:55:14. > :55:20.years. That is harsher than anybody years. That is harsher than anybody
:55:21. > :55:23.else in this room? It was definitely important to cut the deficit
:55:24. > :55:32.originally. After the financial crisis, I want to finish my point.
:55:33. > :55:33.What the cuts are being done now just cool and they are damaging
:55:34. > :55:47.long-term Young people are future and we need
:55:48. > :55:52.to put money into them. Two of three head teachers say they have two lay
:55:53. > :55:56.off members of staff. I have been a headteacher in the school, that is
:55:57. > :55:59.damaging. We know the problem. Have pledged to pay off the deficit in
:56:00. > :56:07.three years, that would mean you would have to make a large cuts.
:56:08. > :56:13.Our manifesto is costed. It is important that we make sure that the
:56:14. > :56:17.money, particularly the pupil premium is there for disadvantaged
:56:18. > :56:23.young people to make progress in school. These are the areas we are
:56:24. > :56:27.focusing on. This is what we need to do because of current cuts. I'm not
:56:28. > :56:35.quite clear whether spending savings are coming from in your case. We are
:56:36. > :56:39.not going ahead with County corporation tax and our manifesto is
:56:40. > :56:42.also fully costed. I think it's interesting that Richard mentions
:56:43. > :56:47.the true meaning of austerity because we all know austerity is a
:56:48. > :56:50.choice that his government made to effectively pack tax the poor rather
:56:51. > :56:57.than the rich. There was essentially a choice. You could increment
:56:58. > :57:00.transactions tax, maybe 0.05% of transactions with brings billions
:57:01. > :57:05.but instead, they are choosing to take swings away from local parks or
:57:06. > :57:09.take teachers away from school. Taking nurses to food banks. That is
:57:10. > :57:15.choice that has been made by the choice that has been made by the
:57:16. > :57:17.Tory government. How would you the Green party create wealth cover for
:57:18. > :57:24.your good at spending money, and that's not much that I have seen...
:57:25. > :57:29.You would not write of student debt? We wouldn't write off student that
:57:30. > :57:34.because... But ?14 billion. Its ?14 billion of its all paid. But a small
:57:35. > :57:38.amount is actually paid anyway. Why should we tax our young people going
:57:39. > :57:41.into the future quiz of the weight of the money come from? How would
:57:42. > :57:47.you create wealth. How do you grow the pie? Can you go pie? I think
:57:48. > :57:52.that is the expression that the business users. Wealth can come from
:57:53. > :57:58.many different sources, one of them being actively enforcing corporation
:57:59. > :58:03.tax. How would you grow it? That is growing at. What the current
:58:04. > :58:07.government has done in austerity is taking away from the poor, and the
:58:08. > :58:14.most vulnerable. Let's start taking some money away from the top 1%, the
:58:15. > :58:17.top 1% of earners. The top 1% of earners earn money each year, taxing
:58:18. > :58:22.than just a little bit more, this is just the top 1%. Can you give me one
:58:23. > :58:29.way of how the Greens would grow the economy? Just one? The renewable
:58:30. > :58:34.sector. A huge sector that we have in this country and could grow.
:58:35. > :58:41.Doing what? The Tory argument on Hinckley is that it's going to make
:58:42. > :58:47.jobs and money, how is that not growing the economy to invest in
:58:48. > :58:50.young people. That's taking money, what industries would you grow? The
:58:51. > :58:55.renewable sector is an industry, David. It's an industry where people
:58:56. > :58:59.have jobs where you are providing for the communities and that is a
:59:00. > :59:03.whole sector and the whole industry that would generate billions. Karin,
:59:04. > :59:07.a quick word. The investment in our young people in the future is a
:59:08. > :59:10.different view of society than the one we're now getting from the
:59:11. > :59:15.Conservative government. They are worried about the future and Brexit,
:59:16. > :59:17.there is a deal of uncertainty. That uncertainty is the greatest thing I
:59:18. > :59:20.faced talking to people everyday. There was nothing provided by the
:59:21. > :59:29.Conservative government to sure that up. Very last. Why uncertainty? You
:59:30. > :59:32.need a strong government with the leadership going to be to take us
:59:33. > :59:35.through this rather than having parties which are fighting like rats
:59:36. > :59:39.with each other. That's all we got time for this week I'm afraid.
:59:40. > :59:41.cancelled. And rent to own is still our policy. Thank you very much, Tom
:59:42. > :59:47.Brake. Andrew, back to you. So, two and half weeks
:59:48. > :59:50.to go till polling day, let's take stock of the campaign
:59:51. > :59:52.so far and look ahead Sam, Isabel and Steve
:59:53. > :00:06.are with me again. Sam, Mrs May had made a great thing
:00:07. > :00:11.about the just about managing. Not the poorest of the poor, but not
:00:12. > :00:17.really affluent people, who are maybe OK but it's a bit of a
:00:18. > :00:21.struggle. What is in the manifesto for them? There is something about
:00:22. > :00:25.the high profile items in the manifesto. She said she wants to
:00:26. > :00:30.help those just above the poorest level. But if you look at things
:00:31. > :00:35.like the winter fuel allowance, which is going to be given only to
:00:36. > :00:40.the poorest. If you look at free school meals for infants, those for
:00:41. > :00:45.the poorest are going to be kept, but the rest will go. The social
:00:46. > :00:51.care plan, those who are renting or in properties worth up to ?90,000,
:00:52. > :00:58.they are going to be treated, but those in properties worth above
:00:59. > :01:03.that, 250,000, for example, will have to pay. Which leads to the
:01:04. > :01:08.question - what is being done for the just about managings? There is
:01:09. > :01:13.something, the personal allowance that David Cameron promised in 2015,
:01:14. > :01:19.that they are not making a big deal of that, because they cannot say by
:01:20. > :01:26.how much. So you are looking in tax rises on the just about managings.
:01:27. > :01:35.Where will the tax rises come from. We do not know, that there is the 40
:01:36. > :01:39.million pounds gap for the Tories to reach what they are pledging in
:01:40. > :01:45.their manifesto. We do not know how that is going to be made up, more
:01:46. > :01:48.tax, or more borrowing? So that is why the questions of the
:01:49. > :01:53.implications of removing the tax lock are so potentially difficult
:01:54. > :01:57.for Tory MPs. The Labour manifesto gives figures for the cost of
:01:58. > :02:00.certain policies and where the revenue will come from. You can
:02:01. > :02:06.argue about the figures, but at least we have the figures. The Tory
:02:07. > :02:10.manifesto is opaque on these matters. That applies to both the
:02:11. > :02:14.manifestos. Looking at the Labour manifesto on the way here this
:02:15. > :02:18.morning, when you look at the section on care for the elderly,
:02:19. > :02:23.they simply say, there are various ways in which the money for this can
:02:24. > :02:29.be raised. They are specific on other things. They are, and we heard
:02:30. > :02:36.John McDonnell this morning being very on that, and saying there is
:02:37. > :02:43.not a single ? in Tory manifesto. I have only got to page 66. It is
:02:44. > :02:48.quite broad brush and they are very open to challenge. For example, on
:02:49. > :02:53.the detail of a number of their flagship things. There is no detail
:02:54. > :02:58.on their immigration policy. They reiterate the ambition, but not how
:02:59. > :03:05.they are going to do that, without a massive increase in resource for
:03:06. > :03:10.Borders officials. We are at a time where average wages are lagging
:03:11. > :03:15.behind prices. And in work benefits remain frozen. I would have thought
:03:16. > :03:20.that the just-about-managings are people who are in work but they need
:03:21. > :03:26.some in work benefits to make life tolerable and be able to pay bills.
:03:27. > :03:34.Doesn't she has to do more for them? Maybe, but this whole manifesto was
:03:35. > :03:40.her inner circle saying, right, this is our chance to express our... It
:03:41. > :03:45.partly reads like a sort of philosophical essay at times. About
:03:46. > :03:49.the challenges, individualism against collectivism. Some of it
:03:50. > :03:55.reads quite well and is quite interesting, but in terms of its
:03:56. > :04:00.detail, Labour would never get away with it. They wouldn't be allowed to
:04:01. > :04:04.be so vague about where taxes are going to rise. We know there are
:04:05. > :04:09.going to be tax rises after the election, but we don't know where
:04:10. > :04:16.they will be. 100%, there will be tax rises. We know that they wanted
:04:17. > :04:22.a tax rise in the last budget, but they couldn't get it through because
:04:23. > :04:27.of the 2015 manifesto. Labour do offer a lot more detail. People
:04:28. > :04:33.could disagree with it, but there is a lot more detail. More to get your
:04:34. > :04:39.teeth into. About capital gains tax and the rises for better owners and
:04:40. > :04:45.so on. The SNP manifesto comes out this week, and the Greens and Sinn
:04:46. > :04:48.Fein. We think Ukip as well. There are more manifestos to come. The Lib
:04:49. > :04:55.Dems have already brought theirs out. Isn't the Liberal Democrat
:04:56. > :05:02.campaign in trouble? It doesn't seem to be doing particular the well in
:05:03. > :05:04.the polls, or at the local elections a few weeks ago. The Liberal
:05:05. > :05:10.Democrats are trying to fish in quite a small pool for votes. They
:05:11. > :05:15.are looking to get votes from those remainers who want to reverse the
:05:16. > :05:20.result, in effect. Tim Farron is promising a second referendum on the
:05:21. > :05:28.deal at the end of the negotiation process. And that is a hard sell. So
:05:29. > :05:34.those voting for remain on June 23 are not low hanging fruit by any
:05:35. > :05:39.means? Polls suggesting that half of those want to reverse the result, so
:05:40. > :05:43.that is a feeling of about 20% on the Lib Dems, and they are getting
:05:44. > :05:48.slightly less than half at the moment, but there are not a huge
:05:49. > :05:56.amount of votes for them to get on that strategy. It doesn't feel like
:05:57. > :06:02.Tim Farron and the Lib Dems have promised enough. They are making a
:06:03. > :06:05.very serious case on cannabis use in a nightclub, but the optics of what
:06:06. > :06:09.they are discussing doesn't make them look like an anchor in a future
:06:10. > :06:14.coalition government that they would need to be. I wonder if we are
:06:15. > :06:18.seeing the re-emergence of the 2-party system? And it is not the
:06:19. > :06:22.same two parties. In Scotland, the dynamics of this election seemed to
:06:23. > :06:24.be the Nationalists against the Conservatives. In England, if you
:06:25. > :06:42.look at what has happened to be Ukip vote, and what Sam was saying about
:06:43. > :06:43.the Lib Dems are struggling a bit to get some traction, it is
:06:44. > :06:46.overwhelmingly Labour and the Conservatives. A different 2-party
:06:47. > :06:48.system from Scotland, but a 2-party system. There are a number of
:06:49. > :06:53.different election is going on in parallel. In Scotland it is about
:06:54. > :06:57.whether you are unionist or not. Here, we have the collapse of the
:06:58. > :07:04.Ukip vote, which looks as though it is being redistributed in the
:07:05. > :07:09.Tories' favour. This is a unique election, and will not necessarily
:07:10. > :07:12.set the trend for elections to come. In the Tory manifesto, I spotted the
:07:13. > :07:21.fact that the fixed term Parliament act is going to be scrapped. That
:07:22. > :07:25.got almost no coverage! It turned out to be academic anyway, that it
:07:26. > :07:29.tells you something about how Theresa May is feeling, and she
:07:30. > :07:34.wants the control to call an election whenever it suits her.
:07:35. > :07:43.Re-emergence of the 2-party system, for this election or beyond? For
:07:44. > :07:47.this election, yes, but it shows the sort of robust strength of parties
:07:48. > :07:52.and their fragility. In other words, the Lib Dems haven't really
:07:53. > :07:57.recovered from the losses in the last general election, and are
:07:58. > :08:00.therefore not really seen as a robust vehicle to deliver Remain. If
:08:01. > :08:06.they were, they might be doing better. The Labour Party hasn't
:08:07. > :08:10.recovered in Scotland, and yet, if you look at the basic divide in
:08:11. > :08:15.England and Scotland and you see two parties battling it out, it is very,
:08:16. > :08:20.very hard for the smaller parties to break through and last. Many appear
:08:21. > :08:26.briefly on the political stage and then disappear again. The election
:08:27. > :08:31.had the ostensible goal of Brexit, but we haven't heard much about it
:08:32. > :08:38.in the campaign. Perhaps the Tories want to get back onto that. David
:08:39. > :08:42.Davis sounding quite tough this morning, the Brexit minister, saying
:08:43. > :08:46.there is no chance we will talk about 100 billion. And we have to
:08:47. > :08:51.have power in the negotiations on the free trade deal or what ever it
:08:52. > :08:55.is. I think they are keen to get the subject of the manifesto at this
:08:56. > :09:00.point, because it has not started too well. There is an irony that
:09:01. > :09:05.Theresa May ostensibly called the election because she needed a
:09:06. > :09:08.stronger hand in the Brexit negotiations, and there was an
:09:09. > :09:11.opportunity for the Lib Dems, with their unique offer of being the
:09:12. > :09:17.party that is absolutely against the outcome of the referendum, and
:09:18. > :09:22.offering another chance. There hasn't been much airtime on that
:09:23. > :09:28.particular pledge, because instead, this election has segued into being
:09:29. > :09:33.all about leadership. Theresa May's leadership, and looking again at the
:09:34. > :09:40.Tory manifesto, I was struck that she was saying that this is my plan
:09:41. > :09:46.for the future, not ABBA plan. Even when talking about social care, he
:09:47. > :09:50.manages to work in a bit about Theresa May and Brexit. And Boris
:09:51. > :09:55.Johnson this morning, an interview he gave on another political
:09:56. > :09:59.programme this morning, it was extraordinarily sycophantic for him.
:10:00. > :10:06.Isn't Theresa May wonderful. There is a man trying to secure his job in
:10:07. > :10:12.the Foreign Office! Will he succeed? I think she will leave him. Better
:10:13. > :10:18.in the tent than out. What did you make of David Davis' remarks? He was
:10:19. > :10:24.basically saying, we will walk away from the negotiating table if the
:10:25. > :10:32.Europeans slam a bill for 100 billion euros. The point is that the
:10:33. > :10:36.Europeans will not slam a bill for 100 billion euros on the negotiating
:10:37. > :10:41.table. That is the gross figure. There are all sorts of things that
:10:42. > :10:46.need to be taken into account. I imagine they will ask for something
:10:47. > :10:54.around the 50 or ?60 billion mark. It looks that they are trying to
:10:55. > :10:56.make it look like a concession when they do make their demands in order
:10:57. > :11:02.to soften the ground for what is going to happen just two weeks after
:11:03. > :11:06.general election day. He makes a reasonable point about having
:11:07. > :11:09.parallel talks. What they want to do straightaway is deal with the bill,
:11:10. > :11:14.Northern Ireland and citizens rights. All of those things are very
:11:15. > :11:18.complicated and interlinked issues, which cannot be dealt with in
:11:19. > :11:23.isolation. I wouldn't be surprised if we ended up with parallel talks,
:11:24. > :11:29.just to work out where we are going with Northern Ireland and the
:11:30. > :11:33.border. Steve, you can't work out what the Northern Ireland border
:11:34. > :11:38.will be, and EU citizens' writes here, until you work out what our
:11:39. > :11:43.relationship with the EU in the future will be. Indeed. The British
:11:44. > :11:48.government is under pressure to deal quickly with the border issue in
:11:49. > :11:52.Ireland, but feel they can't do so because when you have a tariff free
:11:53. > :11:55.arrangement outcome, or an arrangement that is much more
:11:56. > :12:00.protectionist, and that will determine partly the nature of the
:12:01. > :12:03.border. You cannot have a quick agreement on that front without
:12:04. > :12:07.knowing the rest of the deal. I think the negotiation will be
:12:08. > :12:12.complex. I am certain they want a deal rather than none, because this
:12:13. > :12:18.is no deal thing is part of the negotiation at this early stage.
:12:19. > :12:21.Sounding tough in the general election campaign also works
:12:22. > :12:29.electorally. But after the election, it will be a tough negotiation,
:12:30. > :12:32.beginning with this cost of Brexit. My understanding is that the
:12:33. > :12:37.government feels it's got to make the Europeans think they will not do
:12:38. > :12:42.a deal in order to get a deal. They don't want no deal. Absolutely not.
:12:43. > :12:45.And I'm sure it plays into the election. I'm sure the rhetoric will
:12:46. > :12:50.change when the election is over. That's all for today,
:12:51. > :12:52.thank you to all my guests. The Daily Politics will be
:12:53. > :12:55.back on BBC Two at 12.00 And tomorrow evening I will be
:12:56. > :12:59.starting my series of interviews with the party leaders -
:13:00. > :13:01.first up is the Prime Minister, Theresa May,
:13:02. > :13:03.that's at 7pm on BBC One. And I'll be back here at the same
:13:04. > :13:07.time on BBC One next Sunday. Remember - if it's Sunday,
:13:08. > :13:56.it's the Sunday Politics. We've made great strides
:13:57. > :13:57.tackling HIV. Imagine if we could
:13:58. > :13:59.create a movement Hello, there!
:14:00. > :14:32.I bet you weren't expecting me. Well, I'm thrilled to tell you
:14:33. > :14:41.that today but no battle like the battle
:14:42. > :14:45.we're going to see today