:00:00. > :00:42.It's Sunday morning and this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:43. > :00:46.David Davis tells MPs to leave the Brexit bill untouched,
:00:47. > :00:49.ahead of a week which could see Britain begin the process
:00:50. > :00:53.We'll talk to a Tory rebel and Ukip's Nigel Farage.
:00:54. > :00:56.Phillip Hammond's first budget hit the rocks thanks to a tax rise
:00:57. > :01:04.But how should we tax those who work for themselves?
:01:05. > :01:07.And remember Donald Trump's claim that Barack Obama had ordered
:01:08. > :01:18.We'll talk to the former Tory MP who set the whole story rolling.
:01:19. > :01:20.In London this week, a rise in anti-Semitic
:01:21. > :01:23.Universities urged to take a tougher approach.
:01:24. > :01:35.And joining me for all of that, three self-employed journalists
:01:36. > :01:38.who definitely don't deserve a tax break.
:01:39. > :01:40.It's Steve Richards, Julia Hartley-Brewer
:01:41. > :01:44.They'll be tweeting throughout the programme with all the carefree
:01:45. > :01:52.abandon of Katie Hopkins before a libel trial.
:01:53. > :01:54.BBC lawyers have suddenly got nervous!
:01:55. > :01:57.So first today, the government is gearing up to trigger Article 50,
:01:58. > :02:00.perhaps in the next 48 hours, and start negotiating Britain's
:02:01. > :02:03.Much has been written about the prospect of the Commons
:02:04. > :02:05.getting a "meaningful vote" on the deal Britain negotiates.
:02:06. > :02:08.Brexit Secretary David Davis was on the Andrew Marr programme
:02:09. > :02:10.earlier this morning and he was asked what happens
:02:11. > :02:20.Well, that is what is called the most favoured nation status deal
:02:21. > :02:25.There we go out, as it were, on WTO rules.
:02:26. > :02:28.That is why of course we do the contingency planning, to make
:02:29. > :02:36.The British people decided on June the 23rd last year
:02:37. > :02:41.My job, and the job of the government, is to make
:02:42. > :02:51.the terms on which that happens as beneficial as possible.
:02:52. > :02:58.There we have it, clearly, either Parliament votes for the deal when
:02:59. > :03:02.it is done or it out on World Trade Organisation rules. That's what the
:03:03. > :03:04.government means by a meaningful vote.
:03:05. > :03:10.I think we get over obsessed about whether there will be a legal right
:03:11. > :03:14.for Parliament to have a vote. If there is no deal or a bad deal, I
:03:15. > :03:17.think it would be politically impossible for the government to
:03:18. > :03:20.reject Parliament's desire for a vote because the atmosphere of
:03:21. > :03:23.politics will be completely different by then. I take David
:03:24. > :03:29.Davies seriously. Within Whitehall he has acquired a reputation as
:03:30. > :03:32.being the most conscientious and details sadly... And well briefed.
:03:33. > :03:36.Absolutely and well travelled in terms of European capitals of the
:03:37. > :03:39.three Brexit ministers. It is quite telling he said what he did and it
:03:40. > :03:44.is quite telling that within cabinet, two weeks ago he was
:03:45. > :03:47.floating the idea of no deal at all. Being if not the central estimate
:03:48. > :03:51.than a completely plausible eventuality. It is interesting. I
:03:52. > :03:57.would suggest the prospect of no deal is moving up the agenda. It is
:03:58. > :04:02.still less likely than more likely to happen. But it's no longer a kind
:04:03. > :04:05.of long tail way out there in the distance. Planning for no deal is
:04:06. > :04:08.the same as having contents insurance or travel insurance, plan
:04:09. > :04:12.for the worse case scenarios are prepared it happens. Even the worst
:04:13. > :04:16.case scenario, it's not that bad. Think of the Jeep 20, apart from the
:04:17. > :04:21.EU, four members of the G20 economies are successful members of
:04:22. > :04:25.the EU. The rest aren't and don't have trade deals but somehow these
:04:26. > :04:29.countries are prospering. They are growing at a higher rate. You are
:04:30. > :04:33.not frightened? Not remotely. We are obsessed with what we get from the
:04:34. > :04:36.EU and the key thing we get from leaving the EU is not the deal but
:04:37. > :04:40.the other deals we can finally make with other trading partners. They
:04:41. > :04:44.have higher growth than virtually every other EU country apart from
:04:45. > :04:48.Germany. It is sensible as a negotiating position for the
:04:49. > :04:52.government to say if there is no deal, we will accept there is no
:04:53. > :04:56.deal. We're not frightened of no deal. It was clear from what David
:04:57. > :04:59.Davies was saying that there will be a vote in parliament at the end of
:05:00. > :05:04.the process but there won't be a third option to send the government
:05:05. > :05:09.back to try to get a better deal. It is either the deal or we leave
:05:10. > :05:13.without a deal. In reality, that third option will be there. We don't
:05:14. > :05:18.know yet whether there will be a majority for the deal if they get
:05:19. > :05:23.one. What we do know now is that there isn't a majority in the
:05:24. > :05:28.Commons for no deal. Labour MPs are absolutely clear that no deal is
:05:29. > :05:31.worth then a bad deal. I've heard enough Tory MPs say the same thing.
:05:32. > :05:40.But they wouldn't get no deal through. When it comes to this vote,
:05:41. > :05:44.if whatever deal is rejected, there will then be, one way or another,
:05:45. > :05:47.the third option raised of go back again. But who gets to decide what
:05:48. > :05:51.is a bad deal? The British people will have a different idea than the
:05:52. > :05:59.two thirds of the Remain supporting MPs in the Commons. In terms of the
:06:00. > :06:03.vote, the Commons. Surely, if the Commons, which is what matters here,
:06:04. > :06:09.if the Commons were to vote against the deal as negotiated by the
:06:10. > :06:13.government, surely that would trigger a general election? If the
:06:14. > :06:16.government had recommended the deal, surely the government would then, if
:06:17. > :06:22.it still felt strongly about the deal, if the other 27 had said,
:06:23. > :06:26.we're not negotiating, extending it, it would in effect become a second
:06:27. > :06:29.referendum on the deal. In effect it would be a no-confidence vote in the
:06:30. > :06:32.government. You've got to assume that unless something massively
:06:33. > :06:36.changes in the opposition before then, the government would feel
:06:37. > :06:40.fairly confident about a general election on those terms. Unless the
:06:41. > :06:44.deal is hideously bad and obviously basso every vote in the country...
:06:45. > :06:48.The prior minister said if it is that bad she would have rather no
:06:49. > :06:54.deal. So that eventuality arrives. -- the Prime Minister has said. Not
:06:55. > :06:59.a second referendum general election in two years' time. Don't put any
:07:00. > :07:01.holidays for! LAUGHTER -- don't look any.
:07:02. > :07:04.So the Brexit bill looks likely to clear Parliament this week.
:07:05. > :07:08.That depends on the number of Conservative MPs who are prepared
:07:09. > :07:10.to vote against their government on two key issues.
:07:11. > :07:14.Theresa May could be in negotiations with our European
:07:15. > :07:16.partners within days, but there may be some
:07:17. > :07:18.wheeler-dealings she has to do with her own MPs, too.
:07:19. > :07:22.Cast your mind back to the beginning of month.
:07:23. > :07:24.The bill to trigger Article 50 passed comfortably
:07:25. > :07:32.But three Conservatives voted for Labour's amendments to ensure
:07:33. > :07:37.the rights of EU citizens already in the UK.
:07:38. > :07:40.Seven Tory MPs voted to force the government to give Parliament
:07:41. > :07:44.a say on the deal struck with the EU before it's finalised.
:07:45. > :07:49.But remember those numbers, they're important.
:07:50. > :07:52.On the issue of a meaningful vote on a deal, I'm told there might have
:07:53. > :07:55.been more rebels had it not been for this assurance from
:07:56. > :08:00.I can confirm that the government will bring forward a motion
:08:01. > :08:03.on the final agreement to be approved by both Houses
:08:04. > :08:07.And we expect, and intend, that this will happen before
:08:08. > :08:14.the European Parliament debates and votes on the final agreement.
:08:15. > :08:20.When the government was criticised for reeling back
:08:21. > :08:23.from when and what it would offer a vote on.
:08:24. > :08:26.The bill then moved into the Lords, where peers passed it
:08:27. > :08:34.And the second, that Parliament be given a meaningful vote on the terms
:08:35. > :08:37.of the deal or indeed a vote in the event of there
:08:38. > :08:41.The so-called Brexit bill will return to Commons
:08:42. > :08:45.Ministers insist that both amendments would weaken
:08:46. > :08:47.the government's negotiating hand and are seeking to overturn them.
:08:48. > :08:53.But, as ever, politics is a numbers game.
:08:54. > :08:55.Theresa May has a working majority of 17.
:08:56. > :08:59.On Brexit, though, it's probably higher.
:09:00. > :09:01.At least six Labour MPs generally vote with
:09:02. > :09:05.Plus, eight DUP MPs, two from the Ulster Unionist party
:09:06. > :09:12.If all Conservatives vote with the government as well,
:09:13. > :09:18.Therefore, 26 Conservative rebels are needed for the government to be
:09:19. > :09:24.So, are there rough waters ahead for Theresa May?
:09:25. > :09:27.What numbers are we looking at, in terms of a potential rebellion?
:09:28. > :09:30.I think we're looking at a large number of people who are interested
:09:31. > :09:33.This building is a really important building.
:09:34. > :09:35.It's symbolic of a huge amount of history.
:09:36. > :09:39.And for it not to be involved in this momentous time would,
:09:40. > :09:46.But he says a clear verbal statement from the government on a meaningful
:09:47. > :09:52.vote on any deal would be enough to get most Tory MPs onside.
:09:53. > :09:54.It was already said about David Jones.
:09:55. > :09:55.It's slightly unravelled a little bit during
:09:56. > :10:01.I think this is an opportunity to really get that clarity
:10:02. > :10:03.through so that we can all vote for Article 50 and get
:10:04. > :10:08.We've have spoken to several Tory MPs who say they are minded to vote
:10:09. > :10:12.One said the situation was sad and depressing.
:10:13. > :10:15.The other said that the whips must be worried because they don't
:10:16. > :10:21.A minister told me Downing Street was looking again at the possibility
:10:22. > :10:26.of offering a vote in the event of no deal being reached.
:10:27. > :10:28.But that its position was unlikely to change.
:10:29. > :10:30.And, anyway, government sources have told the Sunday Politics they're not
:10:31. > :10:37.That those Tory MPs who didn't back either amendment the first time
:10:38. > :10:41.round would look silly if they did, this time.
:10:42. > :10:44.It would have to be a pretty hefty lot of people changing their minds
:10:45. > :10:47.about things that have already been discussed in quite a lot of detail,
:10:48. > :10:51.last time it was in the Commons, for things to be reversed this time.
:10:52. > :10:54.There's no doubt that a number of Tory MPs are very concerned.
:10:55. > :10:56.Labour are pessimistic about the chances of enough Tory
:10:57. > :11:00.rebels backing either of the amendments in the Commons.
:11:01. > :11:03.The important thing, I think, is to focus on the fact
:11:04. > :11:05.that this is the last chance to have a say on this.
:11:06. > :11:10.If they're going to vote with us, Monday is the time to do it.
:11:11. > :11:12.Assuming the bill does pass the Commons unamended,
:11:13. > :11:15.it will go back to the Lord's on Monday night where Labour peers
:11:16. > :11:18.have already indicated they won't block it again.
:11:19. > :11:21.It means that the Brexit bill would become law and Theresa May
:11:22. > :11:25.would be free to trigger Article 50 within days.
:11:26. > :11:27.Her own deadline was the end of this month.
:11:28. > :11:34.But one minister told me there were advantages to doing it early.
:11:35. > :11:37.We're joined now from Nottingham by the Conservative MP Anna Soubry.
:11:38. > :11:39.She's previously voted against the government on the question
:11:40. > :11:46.of whether Parliament should have a final say over the EU deal.
:11:47. > :11:51.Anna Soubry, I think it was clear this morning from David Davies that
:11:52. > :11:55.what he means by meaningful vote is not what you mean by a meaningful
:11:56. > :12:00.vote. He thinks the choice for Parliament would be to either vote
:12:01. > :12:03.for the deal and if Parliament doesn't, we leave on World Trade
:12:04. > :12:10.Organisation rules, on a bare-bones structure. In the end, will he
:12:11. > :12:14.accept that in the Commons tomorrow? No, because my problem and I don't
:12:15. > :12:18.think it is a problem, but my problem, the government's problem is
:12:19. > :12:22.that what I want is then to answer this question. What happens in the
:12:23. > :12:26.event of their not being any deal? David Davies made it very clear that
:12:27. > :12:31.in the event of there being no deal, Parliament would have no say. It
:12:32. > :12:34.means through your elected representatives, the people of this
:12:35. > :12:39.country would have no say on what happens if the government doesn't
:12:40. > :12:42.get a deal. I think the request that Parliament should have a say on
:12:43. > :12:46.Parliamentary sovereignty, is perfectly reasonable. That is what I
:12:47. > :12:53.want David to say. If he says that, I won't be rebelling. If he does...
:12:54. > :12:58.They have refused to say that. Sorry. If he continues to say what
:12:59. > :13:04.he said the BBC this morning, which means that the vote will be either
:13:05. > :13:10.to accept the as negotiated or to leave on WTO rules, will you rebel
:13:11. > :13:14.on that question but no, no, sorry, if there's a deal, Parliament will
:13:15. > :13:18.have a say. So that's fine. And we will see what the deal is and we
:13:19. > :13:22.will look at the options two years down the road. When who knows
:13:23. > :13:26.what'll happen in our economy and world economy. That is one matter
:13:27. > :13:29.which I am content on. The Prime Minister, a woman of her word has
:13:30. > :13:36.said that in the event of a deal, Parliament will vote on any deal. I
:13:37. > :13:40.don't difficulty. To clarify, I will come onto that. These are important
:13:41. > :13:43.matters. I want to clarify, not argue with you. You are content that
:13:44. > :13:47.if there is a deal, we will come under no deal in a second, but if
:13:48. > :13:53.there is a deal, you are content with the choice of being able to
:13:54. > :13:56.vote for that deal or leaving on WTO terms? No, you're speculating as to
:13:57. > :14:02.what might happen in two years' time. What the options might be.
:14:03. > :14:05.Personally I find it inconceivable that the government will come back
:14:06. > :14:09.with a rubbish deal. They will either come back with a good deal,
:14:10. > :14:12.which I won't have a problem with or they will come back with no deal. To
:14:13. > :14:17.speculate about coming back with a deal, there is a variety of options.
:14:18. > :14:21.I understand that that is what the Lord amendments are about. They are
:14:22. > :14:28.about a vote at the end of the process. Do forgive me, the Lords
:14:29. > :14:31.amendment is not the same that I've voted for in Parliament. What we
:14:32. > :14:34.call the Chris Leslie amendment, which was talking about whatever the
:14:35. > :14:36.agreement is, whatever happens at the end of the negotiations,
:14:37. > :14:40.Parliament will have a vote. Parliament will have a say. The
:14:41. > :14:45.Lords amendment is a bit more technical. It is the principle of no
:14:46. > :14:50.deal that is agitating us. Let's clarify on this. They are
:14:51. > :14:54.complicated matters. What do you want the government to say? What do
:14:55. > :14:58.you want David Davis to say tomorrow on what should the Parliamentary
:14:59. > :15:03.process should be if there is no deal? Quite. I want a commitment
:15:04. > :15:06.from him that in the event of no deal, it will come into Parliament
:15:07. > :15:14.and Parliament will determine what happens next. It could be that in
:15:15. > :15:17.the event of no deal, the best thing is for us to jump off the cliff into
:15:18. > :15:21.WTO tariff is. I find it unlikely but that might be the reality. There
:15:22. > :15:25.might be other alternatives. Most importantly, including saying to the
:15:26. > :15:28.government, go back, carry on. The question that everybody has to ask
:15:29. > :15:39.is, why won't the government give My fear is what this is about is
:15:40. > :15:44.asked deliberately, not the Prime Minister, but others deliberately
:15:45. > :15:49.ensuring we have no deal and no deal pretty soon and in that event, we
:15:50. > :15:53.jumped off the cliff onto WTO tariffs and nobody in this country
:15:54. > :16:00.and the people of this country do not have a say. My constituents did
:16:01. > :16:04.not vote for hard Brexit. You do not want the government to
:16:05. > :16:10.have the ability if there is no deal to automatically fall back on the
:16:11. > :16:14.WTO rules? Quite. It is as simple as that. We are now speculating about
:16:15. > :16:21.what will happen in two years. I want to find out what happens
:16:22. > :16:25.tomorrow. What will you do if you don't get that assurance? I will
:16:26. > :16:30.either abstain, or I will vote to keep this amendment within the Bill.
:16:31. > :16:34.I will either vote against my government, which I do not do
:16:35. > :16:38.likely, I have never voted against my government until the Chris Leslie
:16:39. > :16:42.clause when the Bill was going through, or I will abstain, which
:16:43. > :16:45.has pretty much the same effect because it comes into the Commons
:16:46. > :16:51.with both amendments so you have positively to vote to take the map.
:16:52. > :16:57.Can you give us an idea of how many like-minded conservative colleagues
:16:58. > :17:03.there are. I genuinely do not know. You must talk to each other. I do
:17:04. > :17:10.not talk to every member of my party. You know people who are
:17:11. > :17:14.like-minded. I do. I am not doing numbers games. I know you want that
:17:15. > :17:19.but I genuinely do not know the figure. I think this is an
:17:20. > :17:26.uncomfortable truth. People have to understand what has happened in our
:17:27. > :17:30.country, two particular newspapers, creating an atmosphere and setting
:17:31. > :17:32.an agenda and I think many people are rather concerned, some
:17:33. > :17:39.frightened, to put their head over the parapet. There are many millions
:17:40. > :17:44.of people who feel totally excluded from this process. Many of them
:17:45. > :17:47.voted to remain. And they have lost their voice. We have covered the
:17:48. > :17:48.ground I wanted to. We're joined now by the Ukip MEP
:17:49. > :18:01.and former leader Nigel Farage. Article 50 triggered, we are leaving
:18:02. > :18:05.the EU, the single market and the customs union. What is left you to
:18:06. > :18:09.complain about? All of that will happen and hopefully we will get the
:18:10. > :18:13.triggered this week which is good news. What worries me a little I'm
:18:14. > :18:17.not sure the government recognises how strong their handers. At the
:18:18. > :18:21.summit in Brussels, the word in the corridors is that we are prepared to
:18:22. > :18:25.give away fishing waters as a bargaining chip and the worry is
:18:26. > :18:30.what deal we get. Are we leaving, yes I am pleased about that. You are
:18:31. > :18:35.under relevant voice in the deal because the deal will be voted on in
:18:36. > :18:39.Parliament and you have one MP. You are missing the point, the real vote
:18:40. > :18:43.in parliament is not in London but Strasbourg. This is perhaps the
:18:44. > :18:47.biggest obstacle the British Government faces. Not what happens
:18:48. > :18:52.in the Commons that the end of the two years, the European Parliament
:18:53. > :18:57.could veto the deal. What that means is people need to adopt a different
:18:58. > :19:00.approach. We do not need to be lobbying in the corridors of
:19:01. > :19:06.Brussels to get a good deal, we need is a country to be out there talking
:19:07. > :19:10.to the German car workers and Belgian chocolate makers, putting as
:19:11. > :19:13.much pressure as we can on politicians from across Europe to
:19:14. > :19:18.come to a sensible arrangement. It is in their interests more than
:19:19. > :19:26.ours. In what way is the vision of Brexit set out by David Davis any
:19:27. > :19:29.different from your own? I am delighted there are people now
:19:30. > :19:37.adopting the position I argued for many years. Good. But now... Like
:19:38. > :19:43.Douglas Carswell, he said he found David Davis' performers this morning
:19:44. > :19:47.reassuring. It is. And just as when Theresa May was Home Secretary every
:19:48. > :19:51.performance she gave was hugely reassuring. She was seen to be a
:19:52. > :19:57.heroine after her conference speeches and then did not deliver. I
:19:58. > :20:03.am concerned that even before we start we are making concessions. You
:20:04. > :20:07.described in the EU's divorce bill demands, 60 billion euros is floated
:20:08. > :20:14.around. You said it is laughable and I understand that. Do you maintain
:20:15. > :20:22.that we will not have to pay a penny to leave? It is nine months since we
:20:23. > :20:27.voted exit and assuming the trigger of Article 50, we would have paid 30
:20:28. > :20:31.billion in since we had a vote. We are still members. But honestly, I
:20:32. > :20:36.do not think there is an appetite for us to pay a massive divorce
:20:37. > :20:43.Bill. There are assets also. Not a penny? There will be some ongoing
:20:44. > :20:49.commitments, but the numbers talked about our 50, ?60 billion, they are
:20:50. > :20:54.frankly laughable. I am trying to find out if you are prepared to
:20:55. > :20:59.accept some kind of exit cost, it may be nowhere near 60 billion. We
:21:00. > :21:02.have to do a net agreement, the government briefed about our share
:21:03. > :21:09.of the European Union investment bank. Would you accept a
:21:10. > :21:14.transitional arrangement, deal, five, ten billion, as part of the
:21:15. > :21:19.divorce settlement? We are painted net ?30 million every single day at
:21:20. > :21:23.the moment, ?10 billion plus every year. That is just our contribution.
:21:24. > :21:30.We are going to make a massive saving on this. What do you make of
:21:31. > :21:35.what Anna Soubry said, that if there is no deal, and it is being talked
:21:36. > :21:39.about more. Maybe the government managing expectations. There is an
:21:40. > :21:44.expectation we will have a deal, but if there is no deal, that the
:21:45. > :21:50.government cannot just go to WTO rules, but it has to have a vote in
:21:51. > :21:52.parliament? By the time we get to that there will be a general
:21:53. > :21:58.election coming down the tracks and I suspect that if at the end of the
:21:59. > :22:02.two-year process there is no deal and by the way, no deal is a lot
:22:03. > :22:07.better for the nation than where we currently are, because we freed of
:22:08. > :22:10.regulations and able to make our own deals in the world. I think what
:22:11. > :22:18.would happen, and if Parliament said it did not back, at the end of the
:22:19. > :22:24.negotiation a general election would happen quickly. According to reports
:22:25. > :22:30.this morning, one of your most senior aides has passed a dossier to
:22:31. > :22:34.police claiming Tories committed electoral fraud in Thanet South, the
:22:35. > :22:39.seat contested in the election. What evidence to you have? I read that in
:22:40. > :22:43.the newspapers as you have. I am not going to comment on it. Will you not
:22:44. > :22:50.aware of the contents of the dossier? I am not aware of the
:22:51. > :22:55.dossier. He was your election strategists. I am dubious as to
:22:56. > :23:01.whether this dossier exists at all. Perhaps the newspapers have got this
:23:02. > :23:09.wrong. Concerns about the downloading of data the took place
:23:10. > :23:15.in that constituency, there are. Allegedly, he has refuted it, was it
:23:16. > :23:21.done by your MP to give information to the Tories, do you have evidence
:23:22. > :23:28.about? We have evidence Mr Carswell downloaded information, we have no
:23:29. > :23:32.evidence what he did with it. It is not just your aide who has been
:23:33. > :23:38.making allegations against the Conservatives in Thanet South and
:23:39. > :23:45.other seats, if the evidence was to be substantial, and if it was to
:23:46. > :23:48.result in another by-election being called an Thanet South had to be
:23:49. > :23:54.fought again, would you be the Ukip candidate? I probably would. You
:23:55. > :24:00.probably would? Yes. Just probably? Just probably. It would be your
:24:01. > :24:03.eighth attempt. Winning seats in parliament under first past the post
:24:04. > :24:06.is not the only way to change politics in Britain and I would like
:24:07. > :24:12.to think I proved that. Let's go back to Anna Soubry. The implication
:24:13. > :24:16.of what we were saying on the panel at the start of the show and what
:24:17. > :24:22.Nigel Farage was saying there would be that if at the end of the process
:24:23. > :24:26.whatever the vote, if the government were to lose it, it would provoke a
:24:27. > :24:31.general election properly. I think that would be right. Let's get real.
:24:32. > :24:34.The government is not going to come to Parliament with anything other
:24:35. > :24:43.than something it believes is a good deal and if it rejected it, would be
:24:44. > :24:46.unlikely, there would be a de facto vote of no confidence and it would
:24:47. > :24:52.be within the fixed term Parliaments act and that be it. The problem is,
:24:53. > :24:57.more likely, because of the story put up about the 50 billion, 60
:24:58. > :25:01.billion and you look at the way things are flagged up that both the
:25:02. > :25:05.Prime Minister and Boris Johnson saying, we should be asking them for
:25:06. > :25:10.money back, I think the big fear and the fear I have is we will be
:25:11. > :25:16.crashing out in six months. You think we could leave as quickly as
:25:17. > :25:22.six months. Explain that. I think they will stoke up the demand from
:25:23. > :25:26.the EU for 50, 60 billion back and my real concern is that within six
:25:27. > :25:30.months, where we're not making much progress, maybe nine months, and
:25:31. > :25:35.people are getting increasingly fed up with the EU because they are told
:25:36. > :25:39.it wants unreasonable demands, and then the crash. I think what is
:25:40. > :25:43.happening is the government is putting in place scaffolding at the
:25:44. > :25:49.bottom of the cliff to break our fall when we come to fall off that
:25:50. > :25:54.cliff and I think many in government are preparing not for a two-year
:25:55. > :25:59.process, but six, to nine months, off the cliff, out we go. That is my
:26:00. > :26:04.fear. That is interesting. I have not heard that express before by
:26:05. > :26:11.someone in your position. I suspect you have made Nigel Farage's date.
:26:12. > :26:16.It is a lovely thought. I would say to Anna Soubry she is out of date
:26:17. > :26:19.with this. 40 years ago there was a good argument for joining the common
:26:20. > :26:24.market because tariffs around the world was so high. That has changed
:26:25. > :26:29.with the World Trade Organisation. We are leaving the EU and rejoining
:26:30. > :26:37.a great big world and it is exciting. She was giving an
:26:38. > :26:39.interesting perspective on what could happen in nine months rather
:26:40. > :26:43.than two years. I thank you both. It was Philip Hammond's first
:26:44. > :26:45.budget on Wednesday - billed as a steady-as-she-goes
:26:46. > :26:51.affair, but turned out to cause uproar after the Chancellor appeared
:26:52. > :26:54.to contradict a Tory manifesto commitment with an increase
:26:55. > :26:56.in national insurance contributions. The aim was to address what some see
:26:57. > :27:05.as an imbalance in the tax system, where employees pay
:27:06. > :27:06.more National Insurance The controversy centres
:27:07. > :27:10.on increasing the so-called class 4 rate for the self-employed who make
:27:11. > :27:13.a profit of more than ?8,060 a year. It will go up in stages
:27:14. > :27:19.from 9% to 11% in 2019. The changes mean that over one
:27:20. > :27:23.and a half million will pay on average ?240 a year
:27:24. > :27:28.more in contributions. Some Conservative MPs were unhappy,
:27:29. > :27:34.with even the Wales Minister saying: "I will apologise to every
:27:35. > :27:36.voter in Wales that read the Conservative manifesto
:27:37. > :27:38.in the 2015 election." The Sun labelled Philip
:27:39. > :27:43.Hammond "spite van man". The Daily Mail called the budget
:27:44. > :27:46."no laughing matter". By Thursday, Theresa May
:27:47. > :27:49.said the government One of the first things I did
:27:50. > :27:55.as Prime Minister was to commission Matthew Taylor to review the rights
:27:56. > :27:59.and protections that were available to self-employed workers
:28:00. > :28:01.and whether they should be enhanced. People will be able to look
:28:02. > :28:04.at the government paper when we produce it, showing
:28:05. > :28:06.all our changes, and take And, of course, the Chancellor will
:28:07. > :28:11.be speaking, as will his ministers, to MPs, businesspeople and others
:28:12. > :28:16.to listen to the concerns. Well, the man you heard mentioned
:28:17. > :28:18.there, Matthew Taylor, has the job of producing
:28:19. > :28:32.a report into the future Welcome. The Chancellor has decided
:28:33. > :28:36.the self-employed should pay almost the same in National Insurance, not
:28:37. > :28:41.the same but almost, as the employed will stop what is left of your
:28:42. > :28:44.commission? The commission has a broader frame of reference and we
:28:45. > :28:51.are interested in the quality of work in the economy at the heart of
:28:52. > :28:56.what I hope will be proposing is a set of shifts that will improve the
:28:57. > :29:00.quality of that work so we have an economy where all work is fair and
:29:01. > :29:03.decent and all jobs give people scope for development and
:29:04. > :29:11.fulfilment. The issue of taxes a small part. You will cover that? We
:29:12. > :29:14.will, because the tax system and employment regulation system drive
:29:15. > :29:20.particular behaviours in our labour market. You approve I think of the
:29:21. > :29:25.general direction of this policy of raising National Insurance on the
:29:26. > :29:30.self-employed. Taxing them in return perhaps for more state benefits. Why
:29:31. > :29:35.are so many others on the left against it from Tim Farron to John
:29:36. > :29:39.McDonnell? Tax rises are unpopular and it is the role of the opposition
:29:40. > :29:43.parties to make capital from unpopular tax rises. I think as tax
:29:44. > :29:47.rises go this is broadly progressive. There are self-employed
:29:48. > :29:52.people on low incomes and they will be better off. It is economic league
:29:53. > :29:55.rational because the reason for the difference in National Insurance --
:29:56. > :30:00.economically. It was to do with state entitlements. The government
:30:01. > :30:06.is consulting about paid parental leave. A series of governments have
:30:07. > :30:11.not been good about thinking about medium sustainability of the tax
:30:12. > :30:15.base. Self-employment is growing. But it is eroding the tax base. It
:30:16. > :30:22.is important to address those issues. A number of think tanks have
:30:23. > :30:27.said this is a progressive move. Yet, a number of left-wing
:30:28. > :30:32.politicians have been against it. And a number of Tories have said
:30:33. > :30:36.this is a progressive move and not a Tory government move, the balance of
:30:37. > :30:41.you will pay more tax, but you will get more state benefits is not a
:30:42. > :30:44.Tory approach to things. That a Tory approach will be you will pay less
:30:45. > :30:48.tax but entitled to fewer benefits as well.
:30:49. > :30:57.I preferred in and policies to politics -- I prefer policies. When
:30:58. > :31:01.people look at the policy and when they look the fact that there is no
:31:02. > :31:04.real historical basis for that big national insurance differential,
:31:05. > :31:08.they see it is a sensible policy. I don't have to deal with the
:31:09. > :31:12.politics. There has been a huge growth in self-employment from the
:31:13. > :31:13.turn of the millennium. It's been strongest amongst older workers,
:31:14. > :31:21.women part-timers. Do you have any idea, do you have
:31:22. > :31:26.the data in your commission that could tell us how many are taking
:31:27. > :31:30.self-employment because they like the flexibility and they like the
:31:31. > :31:35.tax advantages that come with it, too, or they are being forced into
:31:36. > :31:39.it by employers who don't want the extra costs of employment? Do we
:31:40. > :31:46.know the difference? We do, broadly. Most surveys on self-employment and
:31:47. > :31:48.flexible forms of employment suggest about two thirds to three quarters
:31:49. > :31:53.enjoy it, they like the flexibility, they like the autonomy and about a
:31:54. > :31:57.third to one quarter are less happy. That tends to be because they would
:31:58. > :32:00.like to have a full-time permanent job. It is not necessary that they
:32:01. > :32:04.don't enjoy what they are doing, they would like to do other things.
:32:05. > :32:09.And some of the protections that come with it? Yes. There are some
:32:10. > :32:12.people who are forced into southern employees by high-risk but also some
:32:13. > :32:16.people feel like they can't get a proper job as it were. --
:32:17. > :32:22.self-employment by people who hire them. It is on the narrow matter of
:32:23. > :32:26.tax revenues but if you are employed on ?32,000 the state will take over
:32:27. > :32:31.?6,000 in national insurance contributions, that is quite chunky.
:32:32. > :32:35.If you are self-employed it is ?2300. But the big difference
:32:36. > :32:41.between those figures isn't what the employee is paying, it's the
:32:42. > :32:46.employer's contributions up to almost 14%, and cupped for as much
:32:47. > :32:54.as you are paid. What do you do about employers' contributions for
:32:55. > :32:58.the self employed? -- it is uncapped for as much. What I recommend is
:32:59. > :33:02.that we should probably move from taxing employment to taxing labour.
:33:03. > :33:07.We should probably have a more level playing field so it doesn't really
:33:08. > :33:11.matter... Explained that I thought it was the same thing. If you are a
:33:12. > :33:15.self-employed gardener, you are a different tax regime to a gardener
:33:16. > :33:23.who works for a gardening firm. On the individual side and on the firm
:33:24. > :33:26.side. As we see new business models, so-called gig working, partly with
:33:27. > :33:32.technology, we need a more level playing field saying that we're
:33:33. > :33:36.taxing people's work, not the form in which they deliver that. That is
:33:37. > :33:38.part of the reason we have seen the growth of particular business
:33:39. > :33:43.models. They are innovative and creative and partly driven by the
:33:44. > :33:48.fact that if you can describe yourself as self-employed there are
:33:49. > :33:50.tax advantages. Coming out in June? Will you come back and talk to us?
:33:51. > :33:51.Yes. We say goodbye to viewers
:33:52. > :33:56.in Scotland, who leave us now Coming up here in 20 minutes,
:33:57. > :34:01.we'll be talking to the former Tory MP who was the root
:34:02. > :34:07.of Donald Trump's allegation that he had been put
:34:08. > :34:10.under surveillance by First though, the Sunday
:34:11. > :57:08.Politics where you are. Now the government plans for new
:57:09. > :57:23.grammar schools. The Education Secretary
:57:24. > :57:24.Justine Greening was speaking to a conference
:57:25. > :57:26.of headteachers on Friday. They're normally a pretty polite
:57:27. > :57:28.bunch, but they didn't Broadcasters weren't
:57:29. > :57:35.allowed into the speech, but this was captured
:57:36. > :57:40.on a camera phone. And we have to recognise actually
:57:41. > :57:43.for grammars, in terms of disadvantaged children,
:57:44. > :57:46.that they have, they really do help them close
:57:47. > :57:49.the attainment gap. And at the same time
:57:50. > :57:51.we should recognise that ..That parents also want choice
:57:52. > :57:58.for their children and that those schools are often
:57:59. > :58:13.very oversubscribed. I suppose it is a rite of passage
:58:14. > :58:17.for and education secretaries to have this at a head teachers
:58:18. > :58:22.conference book the head are usually more polite. Isn't part of the
:58:23. > :58:28.problem, whether one is for or against the expansion of grammar
:58:29. > :58:31.schools, the government plans are complicated, you cannot sum them up
:58:32. > :58:36.in a sentence. The proof of that is they can still get away with denying
:58:37. > :58:39.they are expanding grammar schools. They will find an alternative
:58:40. > :58:43.formulation because it is not as simple as a brute creation of what
:58:44. > :58:49.we used to know is grammar schools with the absolute cut-off of the 11
:58:50. > :58:53.plus. I am surprised how easy they found it politically. We saw the
:58:54. > :58:58.clip of Justine Greening being jeered a little bit but in the grand
:58:59. > :59:01.scheme, compared to another government trying this idea a decade
:59:02. > :59:06.ago they have got away with it easily and I think what is happening
:59:07. > :59:10.is a perverse consequence of Brexit and the media attention on Brexit,
:59:11. > :59:14.the government of the day can just about get away with slightly more
:59:15. > :59:19.contentious domestic policies on the correct assumption we will be too
:59:20. > :59:23.busy investing our attention in Article 50 and two years of
:59:24. > :59:29.negotiations, WTO terms at everything we have been discussing.
:59:30. > :59:31.I wonder if after grammar schools there will be examples of
:59:32. > :59:36.contentious domestic policies Theresa May can slide in stock
:59:37. > :59:44.because Brexit sucks the life out, takes the attention away. You are a
:59:45. > :59:51.supporter. Broadly. Are you happy with the government approach? They
:59:52. > :59:55.need to have more gumption and stop being apologetic. It is a bazaar
:59:56. > :00:00.area of public policy where we judge the policy on grammar schools based
:00:01. > :00:04.on what it does for children whose parents are unemployed, living on
:00:05. > :00:09.sink estates in Liverpool. It is absurd, we don't judge any other
:00:10. > :00:13.policy like that. It is simple, not contentious, people who are not
:00:14. > :00:17.sure, ask them if they would apply to send their child there, six out
:00:18. > :00:23.of ten said they would. Parents want good schools for their children, we
:00:24. > :00:26.should have appropriate education and they should be straightforward,
:00:27. > :00:30.this is about the future of the economy and we need bright children
:00:31. > :00:36.to get education at the highest level, education for academically
:00:37. > :00:40.bright children. It is supposed to be a signature policy of the Theresa
:00:41. > :00:44.May administration that marks a government different from David
:00:45. > :00:45.Cameron's government who did not go down this road. The signature is
:00:46. > :00:55.pretty blurred, it is hard to read. It is. She is trying to address
:00:56. > :00:59.concerns about those who fail to get into these selective schools and
:01:00. > :01:02.tried to targeted in poorer areas and the rest of it. She will
:01:03. > :01:06.probably come across so many obstacles. It is not clear what form
:01:07. > :01:10.it will take in the end. It is really an example of a signature
:01:11. > :01:13.policy not fully thought through. I think it was one of her first
:01:14. > :01:17.announcements. It was. It surprised everybody. Surprised at the speed
:01:18. > :01:22.and pace at which they were planning to go. Ever since, there have been
:01:23. > :01:27.qualifications and hesitations en route with good cause, in my view. I
:01:28. > :01:31.disagree with Juliet that this is... We all want good schools but if you
:01:32. > :01:35.don't get in there and you end up in a less good school. They already do
:01:36. > :01:39.that. We have selection based on the income of parents getting into a
:01:40. > :01:45.good catchment area, based on the faith of the parents. That becomes
:01:46. > :01:47.very attainable! I might been too shot run christenings for these. --
:01:48. > :01:50.I have been. Now, you may remember this time last
:01:51. > :01:52.week we were talking about the extraordinary claims by US
:01:53. > :01:54.President Donald Trump, on Twitter of course,
:01:55. > :01:57.that Barack Obama had ordered And there was me thinking
:01:58. > :02:00.that wiretaps went out Is it legal for a sitting
:02:01. > :02:05.President to do so, he asked, concluding it was a "new low",
:02:06. > :02:14.and later comparing it to Watergate. Since then, the White House has been
:02:15. > :02:17.pressed to provide evidence for this It hasn't, but it seems it may have
:02:18. > :02:23.initially come from a report on a US website by the former Conservative
:02:24. > :02:26.MP Louise Mensch. She wrote that the FBI had been
:02:27. > :02:29.granted a warrant to intercept communications between Trump's
:02:30. > :02:36.campaign and Russia. Well, Louise Mensch joins
:02:37. > :02:49.us now from New York. Louise, you claimed in early
:02:50. > :02:52.November that the FBI had secured a court warrants to monitor
:02:53. > :02:58.communications between trump Tower in New York at two Russian banks.
:02:59. > :02:59.It's now four months later. Isn't it the case that nobody has proved the
:03:00. > :03:09.existence of this warrant? First of all, forgive me Andrew, one
:03:10. > :03:13.takes 1's life in one's hand when it is you but I have to correct your
:03:14. > :03:16.characterisation of my reporting. It is very important. I did not report
:03:17. > :03:22.that the FBI had a warrant to intercept anything or that Trump
:03:23. > :03:25.tower was any part of it. What I reported was that the FBI obtained a
:03:26. > :03:30.warrant is targeted on all communications between two Russian
:03:31. > :03:37.banks and were, therefore, allowed to examine US persons in the context
:03:38. > :03:40.of their investigation. What the Americans call legally incidental
:03:41. > :03:46.collection. I certainly didn't report that the warrant was able to
:03:47. > :03:50.intercept or that it had location basis, for example Trump tower. I
:03:51. > :03:55.just didn't report that. The reason that matters so much is that I now
:03:56. > :04:00.believe based on the President's reaction, there may well be a
:04:01. > :04:03.wiretap act Trump Tower. If so, Donald Trump has just tweeted out
:04:04. > :04:07.evidence in an ongoing criminal case that neither I nor anybody else
:04:08. > :04:11.reported. He is right about Watergate because he will have
:04:12. > :04:15.committed obstruction of justice directly from his Twitter account.
:04:16. > :04:21.Let me come back as thank you for clarifying. Let me come back to the
:04:22. > :04:26.question. -- and thank you. We have not yet got proof that this warrant
:04:27. > :04:30.exists, do we? No and we are most unlikely to get it because it would
:04:31. > :04:35.be a heinous crime for Donald Trump to reveal its existence. In America
:04:36. > :04:38.they call it a Glomar response. I can neither confirm nor deny. That
:04:39. > :04:43.is what all American officials will have to say legally. If you are
:04:44. > :04:46.looking for proof, you won't get it until and unless a court cases
:04:47. > :04:52.brought. But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The BBC validated
:04:53. > :04:56.this two months after me in their reporting by the journalist Paul
:04:57. > :04:59.Wood. The Guardian, they also separately from their own sources
:05:00. > :05:03.validated the existence of the warrant. If you are in America, you
:05:04. > :05:07.would know that CNN and others are reporting that the investigation in
:05:08. > :05:11.ongoing. Let me come onto the wider point. You believe the Trump
:05:12. > :05:15.campaign including the president were complicit with the Russians
:05:16. > :05:19.during the 2016 election campaign to such an extent that Mr Trump should
:05:20. > :05:25.be impeached. What evidence did you have?
:05:26. > :05:30.That is an enormous amount of evidence. You could start with him
:05:31. > :05:33.saying, hey, Russia, if you are listening, please release all the
:05:34. > :05:38.Hillary Clinton's e-mails. That's not evidence. I think it rather is,
:05:39. > :05:42.actually. Especially if you look at some of the evidence that exists on
:05:43. > :05:46.Twitter and elsewhere of people talking directly to his social media
:05:47. > :05:50.manager, Dan should be no and telling him to do that before it
:05:51. > :05:55.happened. There is a bit out there. The BBC itself reported that in
:05:56. > :05:59.April of last year, a six agency task force, not just the FBI, but
:06:00. > :06:03.the Treasury Department, was looking at this. I believe there is an
:06:04. > :06:06.enormous amount of evidence. And then there is the steel dossier
:06:07. > :06:14.which was included in an official report of the US intelligence
:06:15. > :06:17.committee. You've also ... Just to be clear, we don't have hard
:06:18. > :06:21.evidence yet whether this warrant exists. It may or may not. There is
:06:22. > :06:25.doubt about... There are claims about whether there is evidence
:06:26. > :06:30.about Mr Trump and the Russians. That is another matter. You claimed
:06:31. > :06:37.that President Putin had Andrew Breitbart murdered to pave the way
:06:38. > :06:41.for Steve Bannon to play a key role in the Trump administration. I
:06:42. > :06:45.haven't. You said that Steve Bannon is behind bomb threats to Jewish
:06:46. > :06:50.community centres. Aren't you in danger of just peddling wild
:06:51. > :06:54.conspiracy theories? No. Festival, I haven't. No matter how many times
:06:55. > :06:58.people say this, it's not going to be true -- first of all. I said in
:06:59. > :07:02.twitter I believe that to be the case about the murder of Andrew
:07:03. > :07:08.Breitbart. You believe President Putin murdered him. I didn't! You
:07:09. > :07:12.said I reported it, but I believed it. You put it on twitter that you
:07:13. > :07:18.believed it but you don't have a shred of evidence. I do. Indeed, I
:07:19. > :07:22.know made assertions. What is the evidence that Mr Putin murdered
:07:23. > :07:28.Andrew Breitbart? I said I believe it. You may believe there are
:07:29. > :07:32.fairies at the bottom of your garden, it doesn't make it true. I
:07:33. > :07:40.may indeed. And if I say so, that's my belief. If I say I am reporting,
:07:41. > :07:47.as I did with the Fisa warrant exists, I have a basis in fact. They
:07:48. > :07:53.believe is just a belief. I know you are relatively new to journalism.
:07:54. > :07:57.Let me get the rules right. Andrew, jealousy is not your colour... If it
:07:58. > :08:01.is twitter, we don't believe it but if it is on your website, we should
:08:02. > :08:06.believe it? If I report something and I say this happened, then I am
:08:07. > :08:11.making an assertion. If I describe a belief, I am describing a belief.
:08:12. > :08:15.Subtlety may be a little difficult for you... No, no. If you want to be
:08:16. > :08:23.a journalist, beliefs have to be backed up with evidence. Really? Do
:08:24. > :08:25.you have a faith? It's not a matter of faith, maybe in your case, that
:08:26. > :08:32.President Putin murdered Andrew Breitbart. A belief and a report at
:08:33. > :08:36.two different things and no matter how often you say that they are the
:08:37. > :08:40.same, they will never be the same. You've said in today's Sunday Times
:08:41. > :08:49.here in London that you've turned into" a temporary superpower" where
:08:50. > :08:53.you "See things really clearly". Have you become delusional? No. I am
:08:54. > :09:00.describing a biological basis for ADHD, which I have. As any of your
:09:01. > :09:02.viewers who are doctors will know. It provides people with
:09:03. > :09:06.unfortunately a lot of scattered focus, they are very messy and
:09:07. > :09:10.absent-minded but when they are interested in things and they have
:09:11. > :09:14.ADHD they can have a condition which is hyper focus. You concentrate very
:09:15. > :09:19.hard on a given subject and you can see patterns and connections. That
:09:20. > :09:25.is biological. Thank you for explaining that. And for getting up
:09:26. > :09:29.early in New York. The first time ever I have interviewed a temporary
:09:30. > :09:32.superpower. Thank you. You are so lucky! You are so lucky! I don't
:09:33. > :09:37.think it's going to happen again. Please don't ask us to comment on
:09:38. > :09:42.that interview! I will not ask you, viewers will make up their own
:09:43. > :09:43.minds. Let's come back to be more mundane world of Article 50. Stop
:09:44. > :09:51.the killing! Will it get through at the
:09:52. > :09:54.government wanted it? Without the Lords amendment falling by the way
:09:55. > :09:58.that? I am sure the Lord will not try to ping-pong this back and
:09:59. > :10:02.forth. So we are at the end of this particular legislative phase. The
:10:03. > :10:05.fact that all three Brexit Cabinet ministers, number ten often don't
:10:06. > :10:09.like one of them going out on a broadcast interview on a Sunday,
:10:10. > :10:12.they've all been out and about. That suggests to me they are working on
:10:13. > :10:17.the assumption it will be triggered this week. This week. The
:10:18. > :10:22.negotiations will begin or at least the process begins. The negotiation
:10:23. > :10:26.process may be difficult, given all of the European elections. The Dutch
:10:27. > :10:30.this week. And then the French and maybe the Italians and certainly the
:10:31. > :10:34.Germans by the end of September, which is less predictable than it
:10:35. > :10:39.was. Given all that, what did you make of Anna Soubry's claim, Viacom
:10:40. > :10:44.on her part, that we may just end up crashing out in six months question
:10:45. > :10:50.-- fear on her part. It was not just that that we made that deliberately
:10:51. > :10:53.organising. I want us to get on with the deals.
:10:54. > :11:00.Everyone knows a good deal is the best option. Who knows what is going
:11:01. > :11:03.to be on the table when we finally go out? Fascinatingly, the demand
:11:04. > :11:09.for some money back, given the amount of money... Net gains and net
:11:10. > :11:16.costs in terms of us leaving for the EU. It is all to play for. That will
:11:17. > :11:20.be a possible early grounds for a confrontation between the UK and the
:11:21. > :11:25.EU. My understanding is that they expect to do a deal on reciprocal
:11:26. > :11:28.rights of EU nationals, EU nationals here, UK citizens there, quite
:11:29. > :11:33.quickly. They want to clear that up and that will be done. Then they
:11:34. > :11:36.will hit this problem that the EU will be saying you've got to agree
:11:37. > :11:41.the divorce Bill first before we talk about the free trade bill.
:11:42. > :11:45.David Davis saying quite clearly, no, they go together because of the
:11:46. > :11:50.size of the bill. It will be determined, in our part, by how good
:11:51. > :11:54.the access will be. The mutual recognition of EU residents' rights
:11:55. > :11:57.is no trouble. A huge amount of fuss is attracted to that subject but it
:11:58. > :12:01.is the easiest thing to deal with, as is free movement for tourists.
:12:02. > :12:04.Money is what will make it incredibly acrimonious. Incredibly
:12:05. > :12:09.quickly. I imagine the dominant story in the summer will be all
:12:10. > :12:12.about that. This was Anna Soubry's implication, members of the
:12:13. > :12:15.governors could strongly argue, things are so poisonous and so
:12:16. > :12:19.unpleasant at the moment, the dealers are advancing -- members of
:12:20. > :12:25.the government. Why not call it a day and go out on WTO terms while
:12:26. > :12:28.public opinion is still in that direction in that Eurosceptic
:12:29. > :12:32.direction? No buyers' remorse about last year's referendum. The longer
:12:33. > :12:35.they leave it, view more opportunity there is for some kind of public
:12:36. > :12:40.resistance and change of mind to take place. The longer believe it,
:12:41. > :12:44.the more people who voted for Brexit and people who voted Remain and
:12:45. > :12:48.think we didn't get world War three will start being quite angry with
:12:49. > :12:52.the EU for not agreeing a deal. In terms of the rights of EU nationals
:12:53. > :12:57.he and Brits abroad, by all accounts, 26 of the 27 have agreed
:12:58. > :13:00.individually. Angela Merkel is the only person who has held that up.
:13:01. > :13:06.That will be dealt with in a matter of days. The chances of a deal being
:13:07. > :13:10.done is likely but in ten seconds... It would not be a bad bet to protect
:13:11. > :13:14.your on something not happening, you might get pretty good odds? The odds
:13:15. > :13:20.are going up that a deal doesn't happen. But, as I said earlier, the
:13:21. > :13:24.House of Commons will not endorse no deal. We are either in an early
:13:25. > :13:29.election or she has to go back again. Either way, you will need us!
:13:30. > :13:33.We will be back at noon tomorrow on BBC Two ahead of what looks like
:13:34. > :13:34.being a big week in politics. We will be back here same time, same
:13:35. > :13:37.place. Remember, if it's Sunday,
:13:38. > :13:42.it's the Sunday Politics.