Browse content similar to 09/10/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Theresa May was cheered by the Tory faithful
as she charted her vision for Brexit.
We'll be talking about the plan - or what we know of it -
with Lib Dem leader Tim Farron and former Tory Cabinet
The olive branch might have withered but Jeremy Corbyn has
stamped his authority on the Labour Party
with a Shadow Cabinet reshuffle that's rewarded allies
And one Ukip MEP is still in hospital following an altercation
Just what exactly happened in a week which has seen
In London, after the Brexit decision, negotiations for more
But what can the mayor and London's councils expect to get?
And we'll be talking about the tape that's derailing Donald Trump's bid
We've also reshuffled our own top team here in the studio,
and we've ended up with three journalists who show all the unity
the humour of a Conservative Party conference speech,
and the anger management of a meeting of Ukip MEPS.
that means they'll probably be fighting in a few minutes.
Yes, it's Helen Lewis, Tim Shipman and Isabel Oakeshott.
So, where else would we start but with Brexit?
And the Defence Secretary Michael Fallon has been talking
He coined a new term - full Brexit - and he was asked
if Britain was going to be leaving the EU's single market.
This is Brexit. This is full Brexit if you like. We are going to be
outside the European Union but we still, because it is over 40% of our
trade, we still want to maximise our trade with it. A final question in
the papers today. You see soft Brexiteers briefing against hard
Brexiteers and vice versa. This is terribly damaging for the Cabinet
presumably. We are all Brexiteers now. We have to make a success of
it. So, a lot of briefing against Mr Hammond after his speech to the Tory
conference. Then Mr Hammond's people briefing
against people like Liam Fox David Davis, Boris Johnson. Today, one
phrase was they were talking nonsense and garbage. When did we
get the first Brexit resignation? A good question. We have full Brexit,
open and close Brexit, hard and soft Brexit. The Prime Minister does not
want to provide a running commentary so ministers are trying to tell us
nothing but in interesting ways. I do not think anyone will resign but
what is interesting as you get a situation where everyone is a
Brexiteer now but there were very different views about how this is
going to go forward. The Prime Minister herself, she did two things
last week. She gave a speech for a domestic audience and a foreign
audience. She is trying to embody the hopes and dreams of a group of
people who feel they have been left out, the people who have been left
behind on the domestic front and also voted for Brexit. By embodying
those people fighting for their causes she is having to take a hard
line on immigration. There may be no one about to resign now but we are
only 100 days into this many government and the briefing on both
sides of the so-called hard Brexit versus the so-called soft Brexit was
the Treasury. It seems to embody the soft Brexit approach. The briefing
is fierce. It is going to lead to trouble, to blood. This is a
peak-time will stop we have just come away from the Tory Party
conference where every journalist worth their salt is working the
party circuit, going to dinners. It is an easy agenda to get every
cabinet minister you lunch or dine with to give you their version of
what Brexit said -- should mean. There is a melting pot here which is
bubbling away. Things may become more disciplined in the week ahead.
I do not think it is sustainable for Theresa May to say she will not give
a running commentary. It is a red rag to every journalist and all her
own Cabinet. You cannot keep that going for the next few months. She
will have to give a clearer guide as to whether it is hard, soft, in or
out, whatever it is. Theresa May is going to have to deploy the smack or
firm government. She has been smacking away already. All three
Brexit is happening to be airing personal opinions. The fact they are
ministers in charge of this is totally irrelevant. There is
political and economic things at work. What no one will say is that
you can have hard Brexit but it will probably almost certainly have
economic consequences. How do you go as a politician of the country and
say we hear you want to control Iraq -- immigration but that means the
country will be poorer? People will always be straddling it in a really
uncomfortable way. OK. We'll be talking more about this as the
programme goes on, you will not be surprised to hear.
This week, Theresa May closed her party's conference
with a speech designed to grab the centre ground
She positioned the Conservatives as champion of the working classes
and pledged to help those left behind by globalisation.
We'll wait to see what any of that that means in practice.
But it was what she had to say about Britain's exit
from the EU that had the biggest immediate impact,
not least on the value of the pound, as the world began to get a clearer
We now know when the process of leaving the EU will begin.
Theresa May has set a deadline of the end of next March
for triggering Article 50, which formally begins the Brexit
That allows only two years to do a deal, so we should be out
of the EU by the end of March 2019 by the latest.
The Government will also introduce a so-called Great Repeal
Bill next year, which will end our membership of the EU.
Theresa May talked of Britain being a fully
The Prime Minister also said she will prioritise
controlling immigration by ending the free movement
Because being subject to the European Court of Justice
and free movement are key requirements of membership
of the EU single market, this strongly suggests the Prime
Minister does not see Britain remaining a member.
But there were some mixed messages about life after Brexit.
The ability of EU citizens to stay in the UK remains a grey area.
Brexit secretary David Davis said they would be 100% able to stay
while Theresa May struck a more cautious tone.
And Home Secretary Amber Rudd's plan to shame firms that
take on foreign, rather than British, staff, faced a backlash
from business and political opponents.
There was also a range of mood music about life as we head for the door.
Chancellor Philip Hammond was at one end, warning the country
to brace for a roller-coaster ride ahead.
But Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson attacked what he called
gloomadon poppers and said Britain would be more active on the world
Well, I'm joined now by the Liberal Democrat Leader Tim Farron.
And the former Conservative Cabinet minister, Iain Duncan Smith.
Let me come straight to the point, first of all with you, Iain Duncan
Smith. Is it now clear that whatever relationship we will have with the
single market, we will not be a member of the single market when
Brexit is complete? I think when you add all these things together, it
becomes, I believe, is pretty clear that what the Prime Minister said,
what has been said by a number of Cabinet ministers, if the centre of
our negotiations is that we intend to control our borders and the flow
of migrants from the European Union, which has caused, in some cases, a
great deal of damage to workers and their incomes at the bottom level,
the skilled level, that means there is no way that the European Union
will be able to allow us to be a member of the single market. That is
not the same as access. Tim Farron, do you accept that is the way we are
going? Whatever access arrangements we have, and we will have some
arrangements. Even North Korea has access to the single market. But we
won't be a member. That looks to be the way the Government is taking us.
It is a massive mistake. I think Ian is wrong to say there has been a
massive decision in favour of us leaving the single market and if
that is what he is implying. It is given that a small majority voted to
leave the EU but no one voted to leave the common or single market.
It seems to me to be flying in the face of all the economic indicators
of whatever the British people want, or is best for British jobs. It
seems, for the Conservative Party, to be a reinterpretation of the
result for a hard Brexit that nobody voted for. That is strong point. We
do not have too much time this morning, so I'm going to try to keep
this moving quickly. How do respond to that, Iain Duncan Smith? It is
utter rubbish. The British people made it clear decision. They were
asked a simple question. Do you want to stay in or leave the European
Union? Were they asked whether they wanted to leave the single market?
You need to have a look at the rules around this. The single market as
part of the European Union, whether you like it or not. Do you think we
should be in the single market? Do you agree with the overwhelming
majority? No, no. I am sorry. The massive benefits which exist are
asked to be able to trade with the European Union and have access.
America has access. They sell more to the European Union than we do.
Hold on. There is no point talking over each other because you are too
far-away. Let me come to Tim Farron. If you want to be in the single
market, you have to accept free movement. You have to accept the
jurisdiction of the European port. In effect, that is membership of the
EU. Isn't that what we voted against? -- the European Court. Tim
Farron I am talking to. The reality is, and I accept the result of the
referendum. It is the direction of the United Kingdom being towards the
European Union as we stand. The deal we get at the end, as Lord Kurt, the
writer of Article 50, agreed with me overnight because destination is not
the same. You cannot start this process with democracy and end up
with a stitch up, which is what the British people will get. Many people
around the country voted to leave the European Union but there will
not agree, I am certain, with having imposed upon them complete exit from
any relationship with the nearest market and friends and neighbours,
which will cost tens and hundreds of thousands of jobs. Let me get you to
respond to that, Iain Duncan Smith. When article 50 was drafted, he did
not mean it to help any country leave, he deliberately designed it
so it would make it so difficult to leave it would almost be nigh on
impossible. The second thing about the point that Tim makes, which is
complete nonsense, is the added that we will lose tens of thousands of
jobs. What we are looking for is a free trade relationship with the
European Union. That is the key point. We are not leaving Europe, we
are leaving the European Union. This is the problem. There is not a
problem in that for common-sense and decent people. Hold on, Tim Farron.
Sterling has slumped at the prospect of hard Brexit as it has dawned on
the markets that the Government is heading for a so-called hard Brexit.
Doesn't that give you pause for thought? Doesn't it make you think
it might not be the right course? If you go to the airport at the moment,
you would be lucky to get 1 euro for ?1. Doesn't that make you think? Not
really. What you know about the free-flowing currency is it will
fall and rise in accordance with what people speculate about and the
prospects for the future. The point to look at is what the underlying
story is for UK business. It used to be that the BBC generally spent its
whole time telling us how terrible things work if you look at the FTSE
250 or the FTSE 100. In the same period we have seen the FTSE 250,
the small and medium companies, at record levels high. Much higher than
before we decided to leave the European Union. Here is the other
point. There is hugely a story about a strong dollar. The pound rose
against the yen was the dollar rose against the euro, the yen, and the
pout. Here is the deal. The pound is doing our supporters a of good. --
the pound. There is no point heckling. That is my job. The point
is that the pound having fallen means British business is doing very
well. And that is a very good thing. Other than the slump in Stirling,
what has gone wrong for the UK economy since the 23rd of June?
First of all, I am not saying everything is completely calamitous.
I take the views of all of the business leaders, people who wrote
to the Financial Times yesterday, people who are former members of the
Prime Minister's business advisory council, who say that whatever your
view on leaving the European Union, departure from the single market
would be calamitous. Really worrying indicator, this 31 year low drop in
the pound, and we have not even left yet. That is what worries me. And
what worries me more than anything else is that you've got the British
business community, who now feel that the Conservative Party are
listening to the English nationalist forces that have taken over the Tory
party, rather than to good common-sense business practice. When
Roger, who, the Ukip MEP, tells you that you have gone too far here,
then you probably have gone too far. Iain Duncan Smith, let me bring you
back in. We haven't got time for speeches this morning, from either
of you. Iain Duncan Smith - don't we need to give just a bit on free
movement, to secure open access? If we want really good access to the
single market, we will have to give something on free movement?
Actually, I wrote about a week ago in a paper which set out how you
have control of your migration policy which is flexible enough to
allow people to come into jobs inside the UK or outside the UK. And
that is the kind of flexibility which leaves the British Government
controlling the idea about how you access work through work permits.
That means for higher skilled people, it will be a very light
touch regime, but for the low skilled, which is where the most
damage has been done, you have tight regime. You say, listen to British
businesses - these are the self appointed losers of British
business. That meet you something - these are the same people who told
us before that Brexit... They told us, just like you did, Tim, that we
would crash and burn afterwards, there would be a calamitous fall,
the British economy would be destroyed. Some of us had a more
lofty view. I wish everybody would get calm because what we want is
Britain to do well. It is not my party... I have got one more
question for you, Tim Farron - why have you now lost a second here in
the House of Lords, Baroness Manzoor, who says you are not
recognising the will of the people in the referendum by calling for a
second referendum? She has joined the Tories, so that's Brive - how
many more to go? Well, we are 20,000 up, Andrew. It is a peculiar
decision which I totally respect. You only need to look at what's
happened since June, with the Liberal Democrats gaining 20,000
members. Thousands of them from the Conservatives, hundreds since their
conference last week. You look at the by-election gains, the Liberal
Democrats winning 18 in the last few months, and half of them... You are
not set to lose her? I am always sad to lose people, but I am joined
overjoyed to have gained 20,000. Come and joiners in the studio next
time, where we can get a proper grip on this debate!
With Parliament returning tomorrow, Jeremy Corbyn has been
reshuffling his Shadow Cabinet, following his thumping win in this
And unlike previous reshuffles, it's been a pretty decisive affair,
which has seen him give big jobs to his supporters.
Mr Corbyn has moved ally Dianne Abbott to Shadow
Home Secretary, keeping Emily Thornberry at Shadow
Foreign Secretary and moving Clive Lewis to Business.
He's been replaced on the Defence brief by Nia Griffith,
There's also a job for new Labour peer Shami Chakrabarti,
who recently carried out a report into anti-semitism in the party.
And chief whip Rosie Winterton is out.
She's replaced by the veteran whip Nick Brown.
You may remember him from the Gordon Brown years.
Mr Corbyn has also brought back a number
of Shadow Cabinet members, who resigned in protest
They include Jon Ashworth, as Shadow Health Secretary.
Although he's also been removed from the National Executive
Committee, Labour's ruling body, where power has been finely balanced
Well, to discuss this, we're joined by the Labour MP, John Mann.
John Mann, who is a Corbynite critic. Mr Corbyn says this is the
most diverse shadow cabinet ever, the best team to take Labour forward
- what do you say? Well, it's his choice of team. And I think we
should get on with the job now. Think he has won, whether people
like it or not. And the last and we want I think is a year of
internalised, inward looking navel-gazing. Like the last year?
Like the last year. And I have said, I was not in favour of the timing of
this challenge, but we actually have to get to grips with the referendum
result and the fact that quite a lot of Labour voters voted to leave,
unlike the general view in the Labour Party. There's lots of issues
we should be looking at, but we should not be looking inwards. Is
there much of an olive branch from Mr Corbyn to the Parliamentary
Labour Party in this? I would not call it an olive branch. But if I
was him, I would have done pretty much what he has done. He's won the
election. If I was leader, I might choose different people. That
probably goes for everyone of the 200-plus members of the
Parliamentary party. But I think there is a bit of a... The idea you
can negotiate a shadow cabinet or cabinet, I mean, it's important that
he has all viewpoints represented somewhere, otherwise we'll be much
weaker. And so we wait to see whether every view is going to get
proper Leanne Wood. That's vital. But he's got to make the choices. --
every view is going to get properly aired.. Quite a lot of London
representation - how does that help people like you in the north and the
Midlands? It's following the trends of Tony Blair, was always keen on
having lots of people who worked in London, and Ed Miliband even more
so. So it is not a new trait. He's chosen the people, but what's
crucial is, with ceremony people from the metropolitan area, that
they spend a lot of time out in areas like mean, not talking to the
members, not doing photocalls, they can do that if they want, but going
and talking to voters. If they do that, I've got no objection. If they
don't, then that will mean that there is not sufficient knowledge of
what the wider electorate is thinking. Those shadow cabinet
members, every week, should be out there knocking on real doors, in
areas that perhaps they are not too familiar with. Keir Starmer, your
new shadow Brexit secretary, he has said that there should be a vote on
article 50, that when the Government moves it, Parliament should vote.
What do you think of that? Well, let's see what... We are quite a way
away from seeing what Google is going to do. I think what is vital
in terms of Brexit is actually to get into the detail, because there's
a lot of slogans, the full Brexit, the soft Brexit, the hard Brexit...
Actually, the issue is, what access do we get to markets, what access do
we give to our markets? And is there any form of restriction on the free
movement of labour? They are the three big issues. We need detail.
And it's the negotiation not in the British Parliament but with the
Germans and the French in particular that is vital. And of course that
hasn't begun. Mr Corbyn told us at the Labour Party conference that he
was not really that interested in controlling immigration. Keir
Starmer said this morning on the BBC that immigration has become down -
you must encouraged by that? What a coalition! Keir Starmer as the
person responsible I hope we'll be talking to those of us who supported
the Leave campaign in the Vale, and more fundamentally, getting out of
those areas where the vast majority of Labour voters voted to leave. If
he's going to do his job properly, that is critical. I'm confident that
he will do that. Do you know yet what the party policy is on
immigration? I'm sure that will emerge over the time. I do not know
what the Conservative Party's ease, either. We do not know what the
response of the Germans and the French will be. They have got
elections next year. This is rather a movable feast in those countries.
Therefore, we should be in 20 new negotiations, as Labour. It's
crucial that our leadership talks and listens to Labour voters and to
those who have voted Labour in the past.
Jeremy Corbyn's re-shuffle has upset the Chair
He represents the party's backbench MPs.
In an e-mail, John Cryer said Mr Corbyn "did not
engage" in a promised plan to reunite the party by allowing MPs
Mr Cryer said he had been in talks with the leadership
with the aim of "striking an agreement which would allow
some places to be filled through elections, while the leader
But on Wednesday it became clear "a reshuffle was under way,
which had not been discussed or mentioned".
Well, we're joined now by Barry Gardiner.
He's kept his job as Shadow International Trade Secretary.
What happened to the idea of electing at least part of the Shadow
Cabinet? Well, I was part of the discussions in the Shadow Cabinet,
with Rosie Winterton, who was the chief whip. And she made it very
clear that what would need to happen is, there would need to be a vote
first of all at the NEC to change the party rules. So I don't think
anybody was under any illusion that we could have direct elections now
to the Shadow Cabinet without that change in the party rules. Is the
idea dead for the foreseeable future? Doormen, is the honest
answer. That is for Jeremy to decide. But I think what would be
clearly wrong is, if we now going to almost rerunning what was the
election contest. And it would be foolish to saddle a leader with a
group of people in the Shadow Cabinet that were out of sympathy.
And indeed, that was why the Parliamentary Labour Party, when Ed
Miliband asked us to give him the right to appoint the Shadow Cabinet,
rather than the previous system, which had been elected... What do
you make of the chair of the Parliamentary Labour Party, Mr
Cryer, complaining that Mr Corbyn did not engage with him in this
reshuffle? Look, I don't know what discussions took place. John is a
very good friend. He's a very good representative of the PLP, as its
chair. But he's one of the best connected people in the party, and
the idea that anything took face without his knowledge I find it
difficult to believe. He says, Niall Quinn OMP backing him up was a
charades in the negotiations? That is a separate question. And I don't
think that's true at all. Because the Shadow Cabinet said to the
previous NEC meeting delegation, to actually initiate those
negotiations. But I think John Mann, who sat here just a few moments ago,
got it absolutely right - the Labour Party now must not look inwards for
the next year, it must begin to look outwards. It must be challenging the
government on what it is doing in our education system and saying, it
is wrong to segregate our children. They must be challenging the
government on housing and homelessness. I am delighted that
John has come back into the Shadow Cabinet, nobody better to take
forward our fight for housing in this country. If you want to appeal
across the country, are there not too many London metropolitan types
at the top? The four great Shadow offices of state all seemed to come
from within walking distance of each other. It's a kind of shadow cabinet
of all BMW one talents? Well, you could ever welcomed the fact that
two of those great offices of state, for the first time ever, are held by
women. -- NW1 talents. Broomstick is, it is very London centric. It is
not because you have got five MPs from the north-east in the Shadow
Cabinet, four from Greater Manchester, all of whom are women.
You've got five from Yorkshire. In terms of the population of the
country as a whole, it's very representative of whether Labour
votes are. John Ashworth accepted the Shadow bridge but is no longer
on the National Executive Committee. Does Mr Corbyn now have a majority
on the NEC, the ruling body of the Labour Party? The majority would
always be on issue by issue. I don't think anybody goes to the NEC
determined to wage wall or battle. I assure that people go there to
listen to arguments and decide what is in the best interest of the party
and the country and take Ossetians accordingly. Why was it important
that Mr Ashworth stepped down? I don't know whether it was important.
John has been a superb member of the Shadow Cabinet. He has always
represented very clearly the views of party members, and I think he
will do a fantastic job at health. We will leave it there.
I still have energy and can. When we last spoke, I put it to you that we
were massive importers of energy including gas. I came here primed
for that. Next time I will bring the power with meat!
The party with the third highest vote share at the general election
has, just since Tuesday, lost a leader, seen
the return of Nigel Farage - even if only temporarily -
and seen the favourite to take over end up in hospital
after an altercation in the European Parliament.
Our Ellie's been watching the soap opera unfold.
So, we've all heard the rumours about the internal
Well, this week, they played out in front of our very eyes on the TV
screens in the most dramatic of ways.
It was only just over three weeks ago.
18 days later, she realised that wasn't going to happen.
In her resignation statement, she said she didn't have
sufficient authority, nor the full support, of her MEP
colleagues and party officers to continue.
There was also this clue in the official form she filled
in for the Electoral Commission, where she signed her name
In the meantime, Nigel Farage seemed pretty chipper, explaining
I keep getting over the wall and running for the hills.
Before I am finally free, they drag me back.
It doesn't have one because she's resigned.
The Ukip constitution is quite clear.
In these circumstances, the National Executive Committee has
the right to appoint an interim leader, which I presume it will do
at its meeting on the 17th of October.
I'm told the NEC might have met earlier but someone
is on is on a cruise, so it wouldn't be quorate.
It was starting to feel a bit like a soap opera.
It's almost like being a part of Dynasty.
By close of play, this man, who probably would have been leader
last time if he hadn't been barred from standing had thrown
But then things went really off script, when he, Steven Woolfe,
after a meeting with colleagues that went...
There are mixed accounts of what happened.
It's two grown men getting involved in an altercation.
We're talking about a dispute that finished up physically.
I understand there was an argument between some MEPs and Steven,
I think, picked a fight with one of them, and came off worst.
It later transpired that the MEPs had been arguing about reports that
Mr Woolfe had considered defecting to the Tories.
That had ended in a scuffle with this man.
It was, as people in Hull would say, handbags at dawn.
He even tweeted a picture of his hands to prove it.
But Mr Woolfe's team questioned that version of events and said his
Either way, the two men have been in touch and say
they want to meet - handbags and all -
But that might not be the end of the story.
So, part of Ukip's charm has always been to say and do
things the other party would never even dream of.
But this week has been different and a number of senior Ukip sources
have told me that what happens next will be make or break for the party.
They say that will depend on who the next leader is.
Before all this happens, Steven Woolfe, seen
as a disciple of Nigel Farage, would have been favourite.
It must surely have been obvious to anybody, having seen this,
that Steven Woolfe, and of course Mike Hookem,
I don't think Mike would put his hat into the ring.
Surely they can't now consider that either of them could stand
The party's biggest donor, Arron Banks,
It's fairly indicative of the party split between those who think
the new leader should be moulded in Nigel Farage's image,
and those who can think of little worse.
The party is bigger than any one individual.
Everybody has a responsibility within Ukip to safeguard
its reputation and that's what I'm asking all people to do now
The drama may be over for this week but with the leadership campaign
looming, there will be plenty more episodes to come.
And we're joined now by the Ukip MEP Bill Etheridge.
He was at the meeting where the "altercation"
between Steven Woolfe and Mike Hookem took place,
and he stood to be leader in the party's last
leadership contest, which only finished in September.
We have learned, while on-air, that Steven Woolfe has left the hospital
in Strasbourg. Bill Etheridge, were punches thrown? First of all, as all
MEPs we should apologise to our member ship and supporters for all
this nonsense. With regards to punches thrown, I was first on the
scene. I did not see punches thrown. I saw Mike with his hands down his
side and is Steven Wolfe halfway through and unlatched door. --
Steven Woolfe. He was on the floor. Before you got on the scene, there
could have been blows exchanged? In the 15 to 30 seconds before I got
there, there is a possibility but Mike has denied that there were any
punches thrown and I have not seen any evidence that their world. The
friends of Steven Woolfe has said independent medical examinations
suggests he does have wounds and bruising which cannot be explained
by simply a fall to the floor. I am sure the chairman of the party will
look into that and see the exact information being discussed. When it
is something put out by sources or friends, let's wait and see the
actual information. Was it the idea of Steven Woolfe that the dispute
should be settled outside? Yes, Stephen stood up and said, if this
is the temperature of your comments, I think we should sort out
man-to-man. He took off his jacket and walked outside. Unfortunately,
and he has said he regrets it, Mike went outside and did the same thing
himself was that neither of them should have done it. It was foolish.
If that is response by Steven Woolfe to an argument, no matter how
heated, among his own MEPs, does that disqualify him to stand as
leader? It does not disqualify him. It says something about his
temperament. What I will say is it was not heated argument at the
start. We were discussing the fact he had been in a conversation with
the Conservative Party about joining. Only a day or two earlier
he had said he was not going to join for that we asked if that was to do
with the fact that he heard Diane James was standing down. That was
the purpose of the meeting, to find out what Steven Woolfe was doing
about the Conservative Party. Due to this altercation, we never got an
answer. I personally would like need to know what he was doing. What was
said? I and stand this happened quite quickly into the meeting. What
was it that was said which meant, take the jacket off, we will settle
this outside? Steven Woolfe had said about how upset he was that he could
not stand in the summer, his form were late by 17 minutes. Mike said
whether it is your fault and no one else's. Steven Woolfe reacted
angrily and we could get no further conversation. That was the extent of
the provocation, to say it was your fault. He was not swearing but he
basically said, that's your fault, it is your responsibility. Are you
going to stand in this leadership contest now? Up until this happens,
I was seriously considering rolling in to try to make sure we did not
have people who had been negative towards the party and towards Nigel
taking over. Now I do not feel I can support Steven Woolfe and, yes, I
will be standing. Isn't the bitter truth, your previously the last for
18 days. Two MPs have now said to step outside and we will sort this
with jackets. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that Ukip is not a
proper, functioning party without Nigel Farage at the helm? You cannot
survive without him. Nigel is a fantastic leader. He has led us very
strongly and powerfully. It is up to us to take responsibility. That is
one reason I want to do it to bring the party together. Every time he
goes quickly fall apart. There is no functioning Ukip I would suggest
without Nigel Farage. Up to us to make sure we get systems in place
and make sure we have strong leadership and pull the party
together. We can do it. We have 4 million voters than 30,000 members.
They must be feeling very let down. It is up to us to make sure we do
the right thing and look after them and be there to represent them.
Thank you. We say goodbye to
viewers in Scotland, who leave us now for
Sunday Politics Scotland. Coming up here in 20 minutes,
the Week Ahead, when we'll be talking about the recording,
which some think could derail Donald Trump's bid
for the White House. Just what exactly is the
Government's see an asking fans to recall how many foreign workers they
employ? Has Donald Trump's is at a campaign been halted ill of the
water line? Two big questions for our Week Ahead. The Home Office is
pumping out briefings as we speak, trying to clarify what the Tubman
Palacios, announced by Amber Rudd at the Tory conference. -- the
Government plan is. They wanted companies having lists of people who
worked. Now it may be just industrywide for that we're not
going to name the companies or publish any lists. And it sounds
like a classic party conference kite flyers and it has gone hideously
wrong when even the brother of the Home Secretary is hitting out at it.
Lotsa people would not have a problem imprisonable with the idea
companies having to give an idea of the proportion of foreign workers
employed. Where it gets sinister is where you are naming people and that
becomes very difficult. Does not seem that the Government, even as it
badly briefed this out, posted the Amber red speech there was never the
intention of publishing a list of there being 500 migrants working for
this company and these are the names. That would be absurd. What is
the point? The latest line is it would be a private list for
government. It reflects a bigger problem. Individually, these
measures, you can see a principled argument. There was an avalanche
building up with a hostile climate towards migrants. That might start
making people queasy. Lots of parents have been text being and
saying whether their children have a passport. You are going to need to
do this data collection. It makes people uneasy. There was a plus in
the idea. Ed Miliband had proposed something similar. The Americans do
it. The idea that we look at those industries or companies where there
is a high proportion of migrant workers, it sends a message that
that is where our skilled effort should go. We should be training the
people here already in these skills because we are short of them. That
would seem to be part of a sensible labour market policy. But that, I
would suggest to you, is entirely lost in this. It has been a
catastrophe in the way has been put out. What you have is different
levels of what Brexit looks like. The Home Secretary voted for Remain
and the Prime Minister voted for Remain. They are all trying to be
tough. If you speak to Amber Road when she does not think there should
be any controls over skilled immigration. The message wit is
coming through is we are going to clamp down on this stuff. -- which
is coming through. She is broadly liberal in outlets. Was she trying
to be more Brexit than Brexit? It is a really difficult position for that
she is running the department that will have to implement all the
things she does not believe in. Theresa May is failing to implement
proper immigration controls. She is following Mrs May in the job she has
to do. Let's move on to something rather bigger. This is this video,
broadcast, which has emerged of the Republican presidential candidate,
Donald Trump. It seems to be a watershed moment in the presidential
campaign of 2016. He is caught on tape making lewd comments about
women. It is a long tape so let's have a look at a part of it.
And there is lots more where that came from. Yesterday other tapes
came out of Mr Trump making inappropriate remarks in the past
when the microphone was also running. Yesterday in the United
States has been a remarkable day, almost unprecedented. Senior
Republicans are now poised to abandon Mr Trump as Republican
candidate. Two dozen Republican lawmakers have already disowned him.
Senior figures like Senator Mike Leigh of Utah and John McCain, who
was the Republican candidate several years ago from Arizona. Senator --
the Senator in New Hampshire who has a tough race to work. We are joined
by Jan from publicans Overseas. This is a catastrophe for your party. It
is. It is not as catastrophic as people are making it. You have
listed the elites. They are the ones that loss throughout the primaries.
Jeb Bush wasted 154 million. Monitoring all the polls, it is only
making Trump's port is that much stronger. May be the elites were
right that Mr Trump was a wholly unsuitable person to be your party's
and did it. Is he unsuitable? How much of understanding what the
voters want and how much they messed up the Government plays into it? I
am beyond being able to defend him. Yes, I am. Is number of people in
your party are poised to disown him? There is another part for me. As a
psychologist I wrote an international bestseller where I
interviewed 4000 men and followed slides. Some of this is not
shocking. I have experienced men in power who speak as Donald Trump
does. You may not want someone like that as president. The Republican
National committee has, as of now, frozen any further spending on the
Donald Trump presidential campaign. The Republican National committee. I
agree that they needed to do this if they wanted to even retain any women
in the party. This has been a very smart move. Basically, we need to
watch the debate tonight. I can come on your show tomorrow and tell you
whether it is all over or not. This debate could well be major in Saint
Louis. Nine o'clock UK time cost of the people who are worried now are
the senators, who are up for re-election. There are a lot of
them, a lot more than Democrats. The House is all up. They are up every
two years, and governors are up for re-election as well. They are
terrified. They thought they could do is to budget with Donald Trump as
head of the ticket. Now they are really worried they cannot. There is
not time to get rid of him, as I understand it from legal opinions
which have come out. There is not enough time. Only if he is willing
to go. Clearly he is not. This interview says it all. The comments
are basically indefensible. What can you say apart from it being locker
room banter. The real danger is the debate tonight, I think this could
be the most explosive debate we have ever seen in American politics.
Donald Trump is that only play is to drag Bill Clinton into this. He said
that Bill Clinton said worse things on the golf course. There is a great
phrase from Ronald Reagan on Gary Hart back in 1988 saying, boys
should be boys but boy should not be president either. I think tonight
you will see boys being boys again. Some Republicans are saying that
Donald Trump should be replaced by the governor of Indiana. The problem
is, the ballot papers have already been printed. 400,000 have already
voted in the election in early voting and, constitutionally, it is
by no means clear that you can, at this late stage, drop the top of the
ticket and replace him with somebody else. They have not been a great
deal of opposition research done on Mike pence. This is the same as with
Bernie Sanders. You do not know until you get into the heat of the
election. There are prominent Republicans saying that is an
option. It is extraordinary to think this is the point where people have
ditched him. There has been comment after comment and relating to the
fact he was already falling in the polls after the Republican National
Convention who was becoming within a whisker that he was catching up with
Hillary Clinton. Now he has tailed away four. A senior Republican said
to me, we have lost the White House and need to do what we can to hold
on to the Senate figures really badly, we could lose that as well.
It is very serious right now. For one who would like a Republican in
the White House and to us to retain the Senate, and Congress, it is
going to be worrying. As I said, we need to see what happens tonight and
then we are going to really know. Live from Saint Louis it will be on
the BBC News Channel at nine o'clock London time. Get in the popcorn and
maybe an extra bottle of Blue None! The Daily Politics will be back from
midday tomorrow. Remember, if it is Sunday, it is the Sunday Politics.
Andrew Neil is joined by leader of the Liberal Democrats Tim Farron, Conservative Iain Duncan Smith and Ukip's Bill Etheridge. Panellists include Helen Lewis of the New Statesman, Isabel Oakeshott of the Daily Mail and Tim Shipman of the Sunday Times. (see regional variations for details).