:00:42. > :00:46.It's Sunday morning, this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:47. > :00:48.The police believe the Westminster attacker Khalid Masood acted alone,
:00:49. > :00:51.but do the security services have the resources and
:00:52. > :00:54.We'll ask the leader of the House of Commons.
:00:55. > :00:57.As Theresa May prepares to trigger Brexit, details of
:00:58. > :01:03.Will a so-called Henry VIII clause give the Government too much power
:01:04. > :01:07.Ukip's only MP, Douglas Carswell, quits the party saying it's "job
:01:08. > :01:09.done" - we'll speak to him and the party's
:01:10. > :01:18.In London, a capital in recovery, but after this week's
:01:19. > :01:20.attack in Westminster, have the police resources to the job
:01:21. > :01:32.And with me - as always - the best and the brightest political
:01:33. > :01:34.panel in the business - Toby Young, Polly Toynbee
:01:35. > :01:40.and Janan Ganesh, who'll be tweeting throughout the programme.
:01:41. > :01:42.First, it was the most deadly terrorist attack
:01:43. > :01:46.The attacker was shot dead trying to storm Parliament,
:01:47. > :01:49.but not before he'd murdered four people and injured 50 -
:01:50. > :01:52.one of those is still in a critical condition in hospital.
:01:53. > :01:55.His target was the very heart of our democracy,
:01:56. > :01:57.the Palace of Westminster, and he came within metres
:01:58. > :02:00.of the Prime Minister and senior Cabinet ministers.
:02:01. > :02:04.Without the quick actions of the Defence Secretary's
:02:05. > :02:06.close protection detail, fortuitously in the vicinity
:02:07. > :02:14.at the time, the outcome could have been even worse.
:02:15. > :02:22.Janan Ganesh it is four days now, getting on. What thoughts should we
:02:23. > :02:26.be having this weekend? First of all, Theresa May's Parliamentary
:02:27. > :02:30.response was exemplary. In many ways, the moment she arrived as
:02:31. > :02:35.prime minister and her six years as Home Secretary showed a positive
:02:36. > :02:37.way. No other serving politician is as steeped in counterterror and
:02:38. > :02:42.national security experience as she is and I think it showed. As to
:02:43. > :02:45.whether politics is going now, it looks like the Government will put
:02:46. > :02:52.more pressure on companies like Google and Facebook to monitor
:02:53. > :02:55.sensor radical content that flows through their channels, and I wonder
:02:56. > :03:00.whether beyond that the Government, not just our Government but around
:03:01. > :03:04.the world, will start to open this question of, during a terror attack,
:03:05. > :03:08.as it is unfolding, should there be restrictions on what can appear on
:03:09. > :03:12.social media? I was on Twitter at the time last week, during the
:03:13. > :03:18.attack, and people were posting things which may have been useful to
:03:19. > :03:21.the perpetrators, not on that occasion but future occasions.
:03:22. > :03:27.Should there be restrictions on what and how much people can post while
:03:28. > :03:31.an attack is unfolding? I think we have learned that this is like the
:03:32. > :03:34.weather, it is going to happen, it is going to happen all over the
:03:35. > :03:39.world and in every country and we deal with it well, we deal with it
:03:40. > :03:44.stoically, perhaps we are more used to it than some. We had the IRA for
:03:45. > :03:48.years, we know how to make personal risk assessments, how to know the
:03:49. > :03:53.chances of being in the wrong place at the wrong time are infinitesimal,
:03:54. > :03:58.so people in London didn't say, I'm not going to go to the centre of
:03:59. > :04:03.London today, everything carried on just the same. Because we know that
:04:04. > :04:08.the odds of it, being unlucky, are very small. Life is dangerous, this
:04:09. > :04:14.is another very small risk and it is the danger of being alive. I think
:04:15. > :04:19.from an Isis Islamist propaganda point of view, it showed just what a
:04:20. > :04:23.poor target London and the House of Commons is, and it is hard to
:04:24. > :04:26.imagine the emergency services and local people, international
:04:27. > :04:33.visitors, reacting much better than they did. And the fact that our
:04:34. > :04:38.Muslim mayor was able to make an appearance so quickly afterwards
:04:39. > :04:42.shows, I think, that we are not city riddled with anti-Islamic prejudice.
:04:43. > :04:45.It couldn't really have been a better advertisement for the values
:04:46. > :04:48.that is attacking. OK, thank you for that.
:04:49. > :04:51.So, four days after the attack, what more do we know
:04:52. > :04:54.The police have made 11 arrests, but only one remains
:04:55. > :05:00.Here's Adam with the latest on the investigation.
:05:01. > :05:05.According to a police timeline, that's how long it took
:05:06. > :05:07.Khalid Masood to drive through a crowd on Westminster
:05:08. > :05:13.to crash his car into Parliament's perimeter...
:05:14. > :05:17.to fatally stab PC Keith Palmer, before being shot by a bodyguard
:05:18. > :05:28.The public are leaving tributes to the dead at Westminster.
:05:29. > :05:33.The family of PC Palmer released a statement saying:
:05:34. > :05:35."We would like to express our gratitude to the people
:05:36. > :05:38.who were with Keith in his last moments and who were
:05:39. > :05:41.There was nothing more you could have done,
:05:42. > :05:44.you did your best and we are just grateful he was not alone."
:05:45. > :05:47.Investigators say Masood's motive may have gone to the grave with him.
:05:48. > :05:50.Officers think he acted alone, despite reports he spent a WhatsApp
:05:51. > :05:57.The Home Secretary now has such encrypted messaging
:05:58. > :06:03.There should be no place for terrorists to hide.
:06:04. > :06:06.We need to make sure that organisations like WhatsApp,
:06:07. > :06:08.and there are plenty of others like that, don't provide a secret
:06:09. > :06:11.place for terrorists to communicate with each other.
:06:12. > :06:15.It used to be that people would steam open envelopes or just
:06:16. > :06:25.listen in on phones when they wanted to find out what people were doing,
:06:26. > :06:26.legally, through warrantry, but in this situation
:06:27. > :06:29.we need to make sure that our intelligence services
:06:30. > :06:31.have the ability to get into situations like encrypted
:06:32. > :06:34.She will ask the tech industry to suggest solutions
:06:35. > :06:36.at a meeting this week, although she didn't rule out
:06:37. > :06:40.But for those caught up in the attack, perhaps it will be
:06:41. > :06:48...not the policy implications that will echo the loudest.
:06:49. > :06:51.We're joined now from the Hague by the Director of Europol,
:06:52. > :06:56.the European Police Agency, Rob Wainwright.
:06:57. > :07:05.What role has Europol played in the aftermath of Wednesday's attacks? I
:07:06. > :07:07.can tell you we are actively supporting the investigation,
:07:08. > :07:11.because it is a live case I cannot of course go into the details, but
:07:12. > :07:15.to give you some context, Andrew, this is one of about 80
:07:16. > :07:19.counterterrorist cases we have been supporting across Europe this year,
:07:20. > :07:24.using a platform to shed thousands of intelligence messages between the
:07:25. > :07:27.very large counterterrorist community in Europe, and also
:07:28. > :07:31.tracking flows of terrorist finance, illegal firearms, and monitoring
:07:32. > :07:39.this terrible propaganda online as well. All of that is being made
:07:40. > :07:42.available now to the Metropolitan Police in London for this case. Do
:07:43. > :07:46.we know if there is any European link to those who may have inspired
:07:47. > :07:50.or directed Khalid Massoud? That is an active part of the inquiry being
:07:51. > :07:54.led by Metropolitan Police and it is not for me to comment or speculate
:07:55. > :07:59.on that. There are links of course in terms of the profile of the
:08:00. > :08:03.attacker and the way in which he launched these terrible events in
:08:04. > :08:07.Westminster, and those that we've seen, for example, in the Berlin
:08:08. > :08:12.Christmas market last year and the attack in Nice in the summer of last
:08:13. > :08:17.year, clear similarities between the fact that the attackers involved
:08:18. > :08:23.have criminal background, somewhat dislocated from society, each of
:08:24. > :08:27.them using a hired or stolen vehicle to deliberately aim at pedestrians
:08:28. > :08:31.in a crowded place and using a secondary weapon, whether it is a
:08:32. > :08:35.gun or a knife. So we are seeing a trend, I think, of the kind of
:08:36. > :08:38.attacks across Europe in the last couple of years and some of that at
:08:39. > :08:43.least was played out unfortunately in Westminster this week as well.
:08:44. > :08:46.Mass and was known to the emergency services, so were many of those
:08:47. > :08:50.involved in the Brussels, Paris and Berlin attacks, so something is
:08:51. > :08:56.going wrong here, we are not completely across this, are we?
:08:57. > :09:01.Actually most attacks are being stopped. This was I think at least
:09:02. > :09:05.the 14th terrorist plot or attempted attack in Britain since 2013 and the
:09:06. > :09:11.only one that has got through, and that fits a picture of what we see
:09:12. > :09:15.in France last year, 17 attempted attacks that were stopped, for
:09:16. > :09:20.example. Unfortunately some of them get through. But people on the
:09:21. > :09:24.security services' Radar getting through, in Westminster, Brussels,
:09:25. > :09:29.Paris and Berlin. There is clearly something we are not doing that
:09:30. > :09:35.could stop that. Again, if you look at what happened in Berlin and at
:09:36. > :09:39.least the first indications from what police are saying in London,
:09:40. > :09:43.these are people that haven't really appeared on Baha'i target list of
:09:44. > :09:48.the authorities, they are on the edge at best of radicalised
:09:49. > :09:52.community -- on the high target list. When you are dealing with a
:09:53. > :09:57.dispersed community of thousands of radicalised, Senate radicalised
:09:58. > :10:00.individuals, it is very difficult to monitor them 24/7, very difficult
:10:01. > :10:05.when these people, almost out of the blue and carry out the attacks that
:10:06. > :10:09.they did. I think you have to find a sense of perspective here around the
:10:10. > :10:12.work and the pressures of the work and the difficult target choices
:10:13. > :10:17.that police and security authorities have to make around Europe. The Home
:10:18. > :10:22.Secretary here in London said this morning it is time to tackle apps
:10:23. > :10:26.like WhatsApp, which we believe Massoud was using, because they
:10:27. > :10:30.encrypt from end to end and it is difficult for the security services
:10:31. > :10:36.to know what is happening there. What do you say, are you up for
:10:37. > :10:40.that? Across the hundreds of cases we have supported in recent years
:10:41. > :10:44.there is no doubt that encryption, encrypted communications are
:10:45. > :10:48.becoming more and more prominent in the way terrorists communicate, more
:10:49. > :10:51.and more of a problem, therefore, a real challenge for investigators,
:10:52. > :10:55.and that the heart of this is a stark inconsistency between the
:10:56. > :10:59.ability of the police to lawfully intercept telephone calls, but not
:11:00. > :11:05.when those messages are exchanged via a social media messaging board,
:11:06. > :11:08.for example, and that is an inconsistency in society and we have
:11:09. > :11:12.to find a solution through appropriate legislation perhaps of
:11:13. > :11:14.these technologies and law enforcement agencies working in a
:11:15. > :11:22.more constructive way. So you back that? I agree that there is
:11:23. > :11:27.certainly a problem, absolutely. We know there was a problem, I'm trying
:11:28. > :11:35.to find out if you agree with the Home Secretary's solution? I agree
:11:36. > :11:39.certainly with her calls for changes to be made. What the legislative
:11:40. > :11:42.solution for that is of course for her and other lawmakers to decide
:11:43. > :11:48.but from my point of view, yes, I would agree something has to be done
:11:49. > :11:50.to make sure we can apply more consistent interception of
:11:51. > :11:55.communication in all parts of the way in which terrorists invade our
:11:56. > :11:57.lives. Rob Wainwright of Europol, thank you very much.
:11:58. > :12:00.Here with me in the studio now is the Leader of the House
:12:01. > :12:07.What did last week's attack tell us about the security of the Palace of
:12:08. > :12:10.Westminster? It told us that we are looked after by some very
:12:11. > :12:19.courageous, very professional police officers. There is clearly going to
:12:20. > :12:24.be a lessons learned with you, as you would expect after any incident
:12:25. > :12:27.of this kind. That will look very carefully at what worked well but
:12:28. > :12:34.also whether there are changes that need to be made, that is already
:12:35. > :12:40.under way. And that is being run by professionals, by the police and
:12:41. > :12:48.security director at Parliament... Palace authorities, we will get
:12:49. > :12:51.reports from the professionals, particularly our own Parliamentary
:12:52. > :12:54.security director, and just as security matters in parliament are
:12:55. > :12:59.kept under constant review, if there are changes that need to be made as
:13:00. > :13:03.a result, then they will need to be made. Let's look at some of the
:13:04. > :13:07.issues it has thrown up, as we get some distance from these appalling
:13:08. > :13:10.events when our first reaction was always the people who lose their
:13:11. > :13:16.lives and suffer, and then we start to become a bit more analytical. Is
:13:17. > :13:20.it true that the authorities removed armed guards from Cowbridge gate,
:13:21. > :13:26.where the attacker made his entry, because they looked to threatening
:13:27. > :13:30.for tourists? -- carriage gate. No, the idea that a protest from MPs led
:13:31. > :13:38.to operational changes simply not the case. What happened in the last
:13:39. > :13:41.couple of years is that the security arrangements in new Palace Yard have
:13:42. > :13:46.actually been strengthened, but I don't think your view was would
:13:47. > :13:49.expect me to go into a detailed commentary upon operational security
:13:50. > :13:55.matters. Why were the armed guards removed? There are armed guards at
:13:56. > :14:00.all times in the Palace of Westminster, it is a matter for the
:14:01. > :14:05.security authorities and in particular for the police and direct
:14:06. > :14:11.command of those officers to decide how they are best deployed. Is it
:14:12. > :14:16.because, as some from Scotland Yard sources have reported to the papers
:14:17. > :14:19.this morning, was it done because of staffing shortages? I'm in no
:14:20. > :14:22.position to comment on the details of the operation but my
:14:23. > :14:28.understanding is that the number of people available is what the police
:14:29. > :14:32.and the security authorities working together have decided to deploy and
:14:33. > :14:38.that they think was commensurate with the threat that we faced. Is it
:14:39. > :14:43.not of concern that as the incident unfolded the gates were left
:14:44. > :14:48.unguarded by armed and unarmed, they were just unguarded, so much so
:14:49. > :14:54.that, as it was going on, a career with a parcel on a moped at was able
:14:55. > :15:00.to drive through? -- up career. I think we will need to examine that
:15:01. > :15:04.case as part of looking into any lessons learned, but what I don't
:15:05. > :15:07.yet know, because the police are still interviewing everybody
:15:08. > :15:12.involved, witnesses and police officers involved, was exactly who
:15:13. > :15:19.was standing where in the vicinity of the murder at a particular time.
:15:20. > :15:22.We have seen pictures, the gates were unguarded as people were
:15:23. > :15:28.concentrating on what was happening to the police man and to the
:15:29. > :15:32.attacker, but the delivery man was able to come through the gates with
:15:33. > :15:37.a parcel?! You have seen a particular camera angle, I think it
:15:38. > :15:41.is important before we rush to judgment, and we shouldn't be
:15:42. > :15:46.pointing fingers, we need... We are trying to get to the bottom of it.
:15:47. > :15:49.To get to the bottom of it means we have to look at what all the
:15:50. > :15:54.witnesses and all the police officers involved say about what
:15:55. > :15:57.happened, and then there needs to be a decision taken about what if any
:15:58. > :16:01.changes need to be made in light of that.
:16:02. > :16:10.We know the attacker was stopped in his tracks by the Defence
:16:11. > :16:14.Secretary's bodyguard, where was the armed roving unit that had replaced
:16:15. > :16:20.the armed guard at the gate? I cannot comment on operation details
:16:21. > :16:23.but my understanding is there were other armed officers who would have
:16:24. > :16:28.been able to prevent the attacker from getting to the chamber, as has
:16:29. > :16:34.been alleged it would be possible for him to do. Were you aware that a
:16:35. > :16:38.so-called table top simulation, carried out by Scotland Yard and the
:16:39. > :16:48.Parliamentary authorities, ended with four terrorists in this
:16:49. > :16:52.simulation able to storm parliament and killed dozens of MPs? No, that
:16:53. > :17:01.is the first time that has been mentioned to me. You are the leader
:17:02. > :17:07.of the house. These matters are dealt with by security professionals
:17:08. > :17:12.who are involved, they are advised by a security committee, chaired by
:17:13. > :17:16.the Deputy Speaker, but we do not debate operational details in
:17:17. > :17:21.public. I'm not asking for a debate, I raise this because it's been
:17:22. > :17:25.reported because it's quite clear that after this simulation, it
:17:26. > :17:31.raised serious questions about the security of the palace. Actions
:17:32. > :17:38.should have followed. What I've said to you is that these matters are
:17:39. > :17:42.kept under constant review and that there are always changes made both
:17:43. > :17:48.in the deployment of individual officers and security guards of the
:17:49. > :17:52.palace staff and other plans to strengthen the hard security of the
:17:53. > :17:59.perimeter. If you look back at Hansard December last year, they was
:18:00. > :18:04.a plan already been brought forward to strengthen the security at
:18:05. > :18:16.carriage Gates, looking at questions of access. Will there be armed
:18:17. > :18:21.guards now? You need to look not just at armed guards, you need to
:18:22. > :18:24.look at the entirety of the security engagements including fencing.
:18:25. > :18:28.There's lots about the security we don't need to know and shouldn't
:18:29. > :18:32.know, but whether or not there are armed guards is something we will
:18:33. > :18:39.find out quite soon and I'm asking you if you think there should be. If
:18:40. > :18:42.you think the judgment is by our security experts that there need to
:18:43. > :18:48.be more armed guards in certain places, then they will be deployed
:18:49. > :18:52.accordingly, but I think before we rush to make conclusions about
:18:53. > :18:57.lessons to be learned from Wednesday's appalling attack, it is
:18:58. > :19:00.important the police are allowed to get on with completing the interview
:19:01. > :19:05.of witnesses and their own officers, and then that there is considered
:19:06. > :19:10.view taken about what changes might need to be made and then they will
:19:11. > :19:15.be implemented. Let me come onto the triggering of Article 50 that begins
:19:16. > :19:20.our negotiations to exit the European Union. It will happen on
:19:21. > :19:24.Wednesday. John Claude Juncker told Germany's most popular newspaper
:19:25. > :19:29.that he wants to make an example of the UK to make everyone realise it's
:19:30. > :19:36.not worth leaving the EU. What do you make of that? I think all sorts
:19:37. > :19:41.of things are said in advance of negotiations beginning. Clearly the
:19:42. > :19:46.commission will want to ensure the EU 27 holds together. As the Prime
:19:47. > :19:52.Minister has said, that is a British national interest as well. She has
:19:53. > :19:56.been very clear... What do you make of President Juncker's remark? It
:19:57. > :20:04.doesn't surprise me ahead of negotiations but I think if rational
:20:05. > :20:08.mutual interest is to the fore that it's perfectly possible for an
:20:09. > :20:14.agreement to be negotiated between the UK and our 27 friends and allies
:20:15. > :20:18.that addresses all of the issues from trade to security, police
:20:19. > :20:23.cooperation, foreign policy co-operation, works for all
:20:24. > :20:28.countries. The EU wants to agree a substantial divorce bill before it
:20:29. > :20:34.will even discuss any future UK EU relations, what do you make of that?
:20:35. > :20:39.Article 50 says the terms of exit need to be negotiated in the context
:20:40. > :20:43.of the kind of future relationship that's going to exist between the
:20:44. > :20:48.departing country and the remaining member states. It seems it is simply
:20:49. > :20:53.not possible to separate those two. Clearly there will need to be a
:20:54. > :20:57.discussion about joint assets and join liabilities but I think if we
:20:58. > :21:01.all keep to the fore the fact we will continue to be neighbours, we
:21:02. > :21:03.will continue to be essential allies and trading partners, then it is
:21:04. > :21:20.possible to come to a deal that works for all size. The
:21:21. > :21:23.question is do you agree the divorce bill first and then look at the
:21:24. > :21:26.subsequent relations we will have or do you do them both in parallel?
:21:27. > :21:31.Article 50 itself says they have to run together. Do you think they have
:21:32. > :21:36.to be done together or sequentially? I think it is impossible to separate
:21:37. > :21:40.the two but we will get into negotiations very soon and then once
:21:41. > :21:46.David Davis is sitting down with Michel Barnier and others and the
:21:47. > :21:51.national governments become involved too, then I hope we can make steady
:21:52. > :21:55.progress. An early deal about each other's citizens would be a good
:21:56. > :22:04.piece of low hanging fruit. Is the Government willing to pay a
:22:05. > :22:08.substantial divorce bill? The Prime Minister has said we don't rule out
:22:09. > :22:13.some kind of continuing payments, for example there may be EU
:22:14. > :22:20.programmes in the future in which we want to continue to participate. 50
:22:21. > :22:25.billion? We don't envisage long-term payments of vast sums of money. So
:22:26. > :22:31.50 billion isn't even the Government ballpark? You are tempting me to get
:22:32. > :22:36.into the detail of negotiation, that is something that will be starting
:22:37. > :22:44.very soon and let's leave it to the negotiations. During the referendum
:22:45. > :22:48.there was no talk from the Leave side about any question of
:22:49. > :22:51.separation bill, now the talk is of 50 billion and I'm trying to find
:22:52. > :23:02.out if the British government thinks that of amount is on your radar. The
:23:03. > :23:08.Government is addressing the situation in which we now are, which
:23:09. > :23:12.is that we have a democratic obligation to implement the decision
:23:13. > :23:17.of the people in the referendum last year, and that we need to do that in
:23:18. > :23:21.a way that maximises the opportunity, the future prosperity
:23:22. > :23:25.and security of everybody in the UK. Let me try one more thing on the
:23:26. > :23:30.Great Repeal Bill, the white Paper will be published I think on
:23:31. > :23:35.Thursday, is that right? We haven't announced an exact date but you will
:23:36. > :23:40.see the white Paper very soon. Let's say it is Thursday, it will enshrine
:23:41. > :23:45.thousands of EU laws into UK law, it will use what's called Henry VIII
:23:46. > :23:51.powers, who of course was a dictator. Is this an attempt to
:23:52. > :23:59.avoid proper Parliamentary scrutiny? No, we are repealing the Communities
:24:00. > :24:03.Act 1972, then put existing EU legal obligations on the UK statutory
:24:04. > :24:10.footing, so business know where they stand. Then, because a lot of those
:24:11. > :24:17.EU regulations will for example refer to the commission or another
:24:18. > :24:21.regulator, you need to substitute a UK authority in place so we need to
:24:22. > :24:32.have a power under secondary legislation to tweak the European
:24:33. > :24:38.regulators so it is coherent. This is weather Henry VIII powers come
:24:39. > :24:42.in. It is secondary legislation and the scope, the definition of those
:24:43. > :24:45.powers and when they can be used in what circumstances is something the
:24:46. > :24:51.parliament will have to approve in voting through the bill itself. And
:24:52. > :24:56.if it is as innocuous as you say, will you accept the proposal of the
:24:57. > :25:00.Lords for an enhanced scrutiny process on the secondary
:25:01. > :25:04.legislation? Neither the relevant committee of the House of Lords, the
:25:05. > :25:10.constitution committee, nor anyone else has seen the text of the bill
:25:11. > :25:13.and I think when it comes out, I hope that those members of the House
:25:14. > :25:19.of Lords will find that reassuring, but as I say the definition of those
:25:20. > :25:25.powers are something the parliament itself will take the final decision.
:25:26. > :25:27.David Lidington, thank you for being with us.
:25:28. > :25:29.So, Ukip has lost its only MP - Douglas Carswell.
:25:30. > :25:31.He defected to Ukip from the Conservative Party
:25:32. > :25:32.almost three years ago, but yesterday announced
:25:33. > :25:35.that he was quitting to sit as an independent.
:25:36. > :25:37.His surprise defection came in August 2014 saying,
:25:38. > :25:39."Only Ukip can shake up that cosy little clique called Westminster".
:25:40. > :25:43.But his bromance with Nigel Farage turned sour when Mr Carswell
:25:44. > :25:45.criticised the so-called "shock and awful" strategy as
:25:46. > :25:50.Then, during the EU referendum campaign last year, Nigel Farage
:25:51. > :25:53.was part of the unofficial Leave.EU campaign, whereas Douglas Carswell
:25:54. > :25:59.opted to support the official Vote Leave campaign.
:26:00. > :26:01.Just last month, former Ukip leader Nigel Farage
:26:02. > :26:03.accused Douglas Carswell of thwarting his chances
:26:04. > :26:05.of being awarded a knighthood, writing that,
:26:06. > :26:13.Announcing his resignation on his website yesterday,
:26:14. > :26:16.Mr Carswell said, "I desperately wanted us to leave the EU.
:26:17. > :26:19.Now we can be certain that that is going to happen, I have
:26:20. > :26:21.decided that I will be leaving Ukip."
:26:22. > :26:24.When Mr Carswell left the Conservative Party in 2014
:26:25. > :26:27.he resigned as an MP, triggering a by-election.
:26:28. > :26:29."I must seek permission from my boss," he said referring
:26:30. > :26:38.This time, though, Mr Carswell has said there will be no by-election.
:26:39. > :26:44.We're joined now from Salford by Ukip leader, Paul Nuttall.
:26:45. > :26:54.Welcome back to the programme. Are you happy to see the back of your
:26:55. > :27:00.only MP? Well, do you know, I'm always sad when people leave Ukip at
:27:01. > :27:05.a grass roots level or Parliamentary level, but I'm sad but I'm not
:27:06. > :27:09.surprised by this. There has been adrift by Douglas and Ukip over the
:27:10. > :27:13.past couple of years, his relationship with Nigel Farage
:27:14. > :27:18.certainly hasn't helped, and it is a hangover from the former regime
:27:19. > :27:21.which I inherited. I try to bring the party together, I thought I had
:27:22. > :27:25.done that for a few months but it seems now as if I was only papering
:27:26. > :27:32.over the cracks. Douglas has gone and I think we will move on and be a
:27:33. > :27:36.more unified party as a result. Did Douglas Carswell jump because he
:27:37. > :27:39.expected to be pushed out your national executive committee
:27:40. > :27:42.tomorrow? He came before the National executive committee to
:27:43. > :27:46.answer questions regarding issues that have come to the fore over the
:27:47. > :27:53.last couple of months. There was the knighthood issue, the issue
:27:54. > :27:58.surrounding the Thanet election and his comments in a book which came
:27:59. > :28:02.out regarding Brexit. So was he under suspicion? He was coming to
:28:03. > :28:10.answer these questions and they would have been difficult. So he did
:28:11. > :28:14.jump in your view? No, I'm not saying he would have been pushed out
:28:15. > :28:22.of the party but he would have faced difficult questions. What is clear
:28:23. > :28:27.is that a fissure had developed and I'm not surprised by him leaving the
:28:28. > :28:32.party. You have also lost Diane James, Stephen Wolf, Arron Banks,
:28:33. > :28:37.you failed to win the Stoke by election, Mr Carswell is now a
:28:38. > :28:45.pundit on US television, Ukip now stands for the UK irrelevance party,
:28:46. > :29:01.doesn't it? Paul's hard us yesterday on 12%, membership continues to
:29:02. > :29:05.rise. -- the polls had us on 12%. 4 million people voted for Ukip. Over
:29:06. > :29:09.the summer exciting things will be happening in the party, we will
:29:10. > :29:13.rewrite the constitution, restructure the party, it will have
:29:14. > :29:18.a new feel to it and we will be launching pretty much the post
:29:19. > :29:23.Brexit Ukip. Arron Banks, who used to pay quite a lot of your bills, he
:29:24. > :29:27.said the current leadership, that would be you, couldn't knock the
:29:28. > :29:33.skin off a rice pudding, another way of saying you are relevant, isn't
:29:34. > :29:38.it? I don't think that's fair. I've only been in the job since November
:29:39. > :29:42.the 28th, we have taken steps to restructure the party already, the
:29:43. > :29:46.party is on a sound financial footing, we won't have a problem
:29:47. > :29:51.money wise going forward. It is a party which can really unified, look
:29:52. > :29:56.forward to the post Brexit Iraq, tomorrow we are launching our Brexit
:29:57. > :30:02.test for the Prime Minister. If it wasn't for Ukip there wouldn't have
:30:03. > :30:05.been a referendum and we wouldn't have Brexit. Every time you say you
:30:06. > :30:12.will unified, someone else leaves. Is Arron Banks still a member? No,
:30:13. > :30:16.not at this moment in time. He has been a generous donor in the past,
:30:17. > :30:22.he's done a great job of ensuring we get Brexit and I'm thankful for that
:30:23. > :30:25.but he isn't a member. He has just submitted an invoice of ?2000 for
:30:26. > :30:35.the use of call centres, will you pay that? No. That should be
:30:36. > :30:41.interesting to watch. In the aftermath of the Westminster
:30:42. > :30:45.attack, Nigel Farage told Fox News that it vindicates Donald Trump's
:30:46. > :30:50.extreme vetting of migrants. Since the attacker was born in Kent, like
:30:51. > :30:54.Nigel Farage, can you explain the relevance of the remark? I
:30:55. > :30:59.personally haven't supported Donald Trump's position on this, but what I
:31:00. > :31:03.will say, this is what Nigel has said as well, we have a problem
:31:04. > :31:08.within the Muslim community, it is a small number of people who hate the
:31:09. > :31:11.way we live... Can you explain the relevance of Mr Farage's remark? Mr
:31:12. > :31:28.Farage also made the point about multiculturalism being the
:31:29. > :31:30.problem as well and he is correct on that because we cannot have separate
:31:31. > :31:32.communities living separate lives and never integrating. How would
:31:33. > :31:35.extreme vetting of migrants help you track down a man who was born in
:31:36. > :31:38.Kent? In this case it wouldn't. Maybe in other cases it would. But,
:31:39. > :31:41.as I say, I'm not a supporter of Donald Trump's position on extreme
:31:42. > :31:45.vetting, never have been, so I'm the wrong person to ask the question
:31:46. > :31:50.too, Andrew. That has probably become clear in my efforts to get
:31:51. > :31:53.you to answer it. Let me as too, should there be a by-election in
:31:54. > :31:57.Clacton now? Douglas has called by-elections in the past when he has
:31:58. > :32:04.left a political party, I know certain people in Ukip are keen to
:32:05. > :32:07.go down this line, Douglas is always keen on recall and if 20% of people
:32:08. > :32:10.in his constituency want a by-election then maybe we should
:32:11. > :32:17.have won. Ukip will be opening nominations for Clacton very soon.
:32:18. > :32:23.Hold on with us, Mr Nuttall, I have Douglas Carswell here in the studio.
:32:24. > :32:30.Why not call a by-election? I'm not switching parties. You are, you are
:32:31. > :32:33.becoming independent. There is a difference, I've not submitted
:32:34. > :32:38.myself to the whip up a new party, if I was, I would be obliged to
:32:39. > :32:42.trigger a by-election. If every time an MP in the House of Commons
:32:43. > :32:46.resigned the whip or lost the whip, far from actually strengthening the
:32:47. > :32:50.democracy against the party bosses, that would give those who ran
:32:51. > :32:56.parties and enormous power, so I'm being absolutely consistent here,
:32:57. > :32:59.I'm not joining a party. It is a change of status and Nigel Farage
:33:00. > :33:08.has just said he will write to every constituent in Clacton and he wants
:33:09. > :33:12.to try and get 20% of constituents to older by-election. We are going
:33:13. > :33:16.to testing, he says, write to every house in Clacton, find out if his
:33:17. > :33:20.constituents want a by-election, if 20% do we will find out if Mr
:33:21. > :33:27.Carswell is honourable. I'm sure they will be delighted to hear from
:33:28. > :33:29.Nigel. There have been several by-elections when Nigel has had the
:33:30. > :33:36.opportunity to contact the electorate we did -- which did not
:33:37. > :33:40.always go to plan. If you got 20%, would you? Yesterday I sent an
:33:41. > :33:45.e-mail to 20,000 constituents, I have had a lot of responses back,
:33:46. > :33:52.overwhelmingly supported. Recently you said you were 100% Ukip, now you
:33:53. > :33:57.are 0%. What happened? I saw Theresa May triggering article 50, we won,
:33:58. > :34:01.Andrew. You knew a few months ago she was going to do that. On June
:34:02. > :34:05.the 24th I had serious thought about making the move but I wanted to be
:34:06. > :34:10.absolutely certain that Article 50 would be triggered and I think it is
:34:11. > :34:13.right. This is why ultimately Ukip exists, to get us out of the
:34:14. > :34:18.European Union. We should be cheerful instead of attacking one
:34:19. > :34:23.another, this is our moment, we made it happen. Did you try to sideline
:34:24. > :34:28.the former Ukip leader during the referendum campaign? Not at all, I
:34:29. > :34:33.have been open about this, the idea I have been involved in subterfuge.
:34:34. > :34:37.You try to sideline him openly rather than by subterfuge? I made
:34:38. > :34:40.the point we needed to be open, broad and progressive to win. I made
:34:41. > :34:44.it clear in my acceptance speech in Clacton and when I said that Vote
:34:45. > :34:48.Leave should get designation that the only way Euroscepticism would
:34:49. > :34:54.win was by being more than just angry natives. What do you make of
:34:55. > :35:02.that? I am over the moon that we have achieved Brexit, unlike Douglas
:35:03. > :35:05.I rarely have that much confidence in Theresa May because history
:35:06. > :35:08.proves that she is good at talking the talk but in walking the walk
:35:09. > :35:12.often fails, and I'm disappointed because I wanted Douglas to be part
:35:13. > :35:17.of the post Brexit Ukip where we move forward with a raft of domestic
:35:18. > :35:22.policies and go on to take seat at Westminster. Do you think you try to
:35:23. > :35:25.sideline Mr Farage during the referendum campaign? Vote Leave
:35:26. > :35:31.certainly didn't want Nigel Farage front of house, we know that. They
:35:32. > :35:37.freely admit that, they admitted it on media over the past year. Nigel
:35:38. > :35:42.still was front of house because he is Nigel Farage and if it wasn't for
:35:43. > :35:45.Nigel, as I said earlier, we wouldn't have at the referendum and
:35:46. > :35:50.we wouldn't have achieved Brexit because Nigel Farage appeals, like
:35:51. > :35:54.Ukip to a certain section of the population. If our primary motive is
:35:55. > :35:58.to get us out of the European Union, why are we having this row, why
:35:59. > :36:02.can't we just celebrate what is happening on Wednesday? We can, but
:36:03. > :36:07.you are far more confident that Theresa May will deliver on this
:36:08. > :36:10.than I am. Ukip may have been a single issue pressure group ten
:36:11. > :36:14.years ago, it wasn't a single issue pressure group that you joined in
:36:15. > :36:18.2014, it wasn't a single issue pressure group that you stood for in
:36:19. > :36:23.2015 at the general election, and I'm disappointed that you have left
:36:24. > :36:26.us when we are moving onto an exciting era. What specifically
:36:27. > :36:31.gives you a lack of confidence in Mrs May's ability deliver? Her
:36:32. > :36:36.record as Home Secretary, she said she would deal with radical Islam,
:36:37. > :36:40.nothing happened, she said she would get immigration down to the tens of
:36:41. > :36:43.thousands, last year in her last year as Home Secretary as city the
:36:44. > :36:47.size of Newcastle came to this country, that is not tens of
:36:48. > :36:51.thousands. I think we need to take yes for an answer eventually. The
:36:52. > :36:55.problem with some Eurosceptics is they never accept they have won the
:36:56. > :37:00.argument. We have one, Theresa May is going to do what we have wanted
:37:01. > :37:04.her to do, let's be happy, let's celebrate that. But let's wait until
:37:05. > :37:08.she starts bartering things away, until she betrays our fishermen,
:37:09. > :37:11.just as other Conservative prime ministers have done in the past.
:37:12. > :37:16.Let's wait until we end up still paying some sort of membership fee
:37:17. > :37:19.into the European Union or a large divorce bill. That is not what
:37:20. > :37:28.people voted for on June the 23rd and if you want to align yourself
:37:29. > :37:32.with that, you are clearly not a Ukipper in my opinion. So for Ukip
:37:33. > :37:37.to have relevance, it has to go wrong? I'm confident politics will
:37:38. > :37:41.come back to our terms but -- our turf but there will be a post Brexit
:37:42. > :37:44.Ukip that will stand for veterans, book slashing the foreign aid bill
:37:45. > :37:50.and becoming the party of law and order. Finally, to you, Douglas
:37:51. > :37:55.Carswell, you say you have confidence in Mrs May to deliver in
:37:56. > :38:01.the way that Paul Nuttall doesn't. You backed her, you were
:38:02. > :38:04.Conservative, you believe that Brexit will be delivered under a
:38:05. > :38:09.Conservative Government. Why would you not bite the 2020 election as a
:38:10. > :38:13.Conservative? I feel comfortable being independent. If you join a
:38:14. > :38:16.party you have to agree to a bunch of stuff I would not want to agree
:38:17. > :38:25.with. I am comfortable being independent. So you will go into
:38:26. > :38:28.2020 as an independent? If you look at the raising of funds, what Vote
:38:29. > :38:32.Leave did as a pop-up party... We only have five seconds, will you
:38:33. > :38:37.fight as an independent in the next general election? Let's wait and
:38:38. > :01:47.see. Very well! Thank you both very much.
:01:48. > :01:48.see. Very well! Thank you both very you both for coming in, Andrew, back
:01:49. > :01:55.to you. So yesterday the European Union
:01:56. > :02:12.celebrated its 60th birthday at a party in Rome, the city
:02:13. > :02:14.where the founding document Leaders of 27 EU countries
:02:15. > :02:18.were there to mark the occasion - overshadowing it, though,
:02:19. > :02:20.the continued terrorist threat, And on Wednesday Theresa May,
:02:21. > :02:23.who wasn't in Rome yesterday, will trigger Article 50,
:02:24. > :02:25.formally starting The President of the European
:02:26. > :02:28.Council, Donald Tusk, made an appeal for unity
:02:29. > :02:34.at the gathering. Today in Rome, we are renewing
:02:35. > :02:39.the unique alliance of free nations that was initiated 60 years ago
:02:40. > :02:48.by our great predecessors. At that time, they did not
:02:49. > :02:50.discuss multiple speeds, they did not devise exits,
:02:51. > :02:55.but despite all the tragic circumstances of the recent history
:02:56. > :03:15.they placed all their faith Mr Tusk, he is Polish, the man that
:03:16. > :03:18.has the Council of ministers, and on that council where every member of
:03:19. > :03:23.the EU sits he is an important figure in what is now about to
:03:24. > :03:29.happen. We have got to negotiate our divorce terms, we've got to agree a
:03:30. > :03:33.new free trade deal, new crime-fighting arrangements, we've
:03:34. > :03:38.got to repatriate 50 international trade agreements, and all of that
:03:39. > :03:44.has to be ratified within two years, by 27 other countries. Can that
:03:45. > :03:48.really happen?! I don't think it is inconceivable because it is in the
:03:49. > :03:51.interests of those 27 EU member states to try and negotiate a deal
:03:52. > :03:56.that we can all live with, because that would be preferable to Britain
:03:57. > :04:00.crashing out within two years. But I think this is why Labour's position
:04:01. > :04:05.is becoming increasingly incoherent. Keir Starmer has briefed today that
:04:06. > :04:09.he will be making a speech tomorrow setting out six conditions which he
:04:10. > :04:11.wants the deal to meet, otherwise Labour won't vote for it, but if
:04:12. > :04:31.Labour doesn't vote for it that doesn't mean we will be able to
:04:32. > :04:34.negotiate an extension, that would be incredibly difficult and require
:04:35. > :04:37.the consent of each of the 27 member states, so if Labour votes against
:04:38. > :04:39.it we will just crash out, it is effectively Labour saying no deal is
:04:40. > :04:41.better than a poor deal, which is not supposed to be their position.
:04:42. > :04:44.Labour's position may be incoherent but I was not asking about their
:04:45. > :04:46.position, I was asking about the Government's position. The man
:04:47. > :04:49.heading the Badila said he wants it ready by October next year so that
:04:50. > :04:51.it can go through the ratification process, people looking at this
:04:52. > :04:56.would think it is Mission: Impossible. It seems impossible to
:04:57. > :05:02.me to be done in that time. The fact that it is 27 countries, the whole
:05:03. > :05:06.of the European Parliament as well, there will be too many people
:05:07. > :05:11.throbbing spanners in the works and quite rightly. We have embarked on
:05:12. > :05:15.something that is truly terrible and disastrous, and the imagery we can
:05:16. > :05:20.have of those 27 countries celebrating together 60 years of the
:05:21. > :05:23.most extraordinary successful movement for peace, for shared
:05:24. > :05:30.European values, and others not there... We were not there at the
:05:31. > :05:37.start either, and we are not there now! And we have been bad partners
:05:38. > :05:41.while we were inside, but now that we are leaving... They did not look
:05:42. > :05:47.like it was a birthday party to me! I think it was, there was a sense of
:05:48. > :05:52.renewal, Europe exists as a place envied in the world for its values,
:05:53. > :05:56.for its peacefulness, that is why people flocked to its borders, that
:05:57. > :06:02.is why they come here. Can you look at the agenda that faces the UK
:06:03. > :06:07.Government and EU 27, is it not possible, in fact even likely, that
:06:08. > :06:13.as the process comes to an end they will have to agree on a number of
:06:14. > :06:18.areas of transitional arrangements? I think they will and they will have
:06:19. > :06:21.to agree that soon, I would not be surprised if sometime soon there is
:06:22. > :06:25.an understanding is not a formal decision that this is a process that
:06:26. > :06:29.will extend over something closer to buy or seven than two years. On
:06:30. > :06:33.Wednesday article 50 will be filed and there will be lots of excitement
:06:34. > :06:37.and hubbub but nothing concrete can happen for a while. Elections in
:06:38. > :06:41.France in May, elections in Germany which could really result in a
:06:42. > :06:53.change of Government... That is the big change, Mrs Merkel might not be
:06:54. > :06:56.there by October. And who foresaw that a few months ago? So you might
:06:57. > :06:58.be into 28 Dean before you are into the substantive discussions about
:06:59. > :07:01.how much market access or regulatory observance. I cannot see it being
:07:02. > :07:04.completed in two years. I could see, if negotiations are not too
:07:05. > :07:08.acrimonious, that transitional agreement taking place. Let's look
:07:09. > :07:12.at the timetable again. The council doesn't meet until the end of April,
:07:13. > :07:16.it meets in the middle of the French elections, the first round will have
:07:17. > :07:19.taken place, they will need a second round so not much can happen.
:07:20. > :07:26.President Hollande will be representing France, then the new
:07:27. > :07:31.French government, if it is Marine le Pen all bets are off, but even if
:07:32. > :07:35.it is Mr Mac run, he does not have a party, he will not have a majority,
:07:36. > :07:40.the French will take a long while to sort out themselves. Then it is
:07:41. > :07:43.summer, we are off to the Cote d'Azur, particularly the Bolivian
:07:44. > :07:48.elite, then we come back from that and the Germans are in an election,
:07:49. > :07:53.it may be very messy, Mrs Merkel no longer a shoo-in, it could be Mr
:07:54. > :08:05.Schultz, he may have to try to form a difficult green red coalition,
:08:06. > :08:08.that would take a while. Before you know it, it is Guy Fawkes' Day and
:08:09. > :08:11.no substance has taken place, yet we are then less than a year before
:08:12. > :08:13.this has to be decided. It is a big task and I'm sure Jana is right that
:08:14. > :08:17.there will be transitional arrangements and not everything will
:08:18. > :08:20.be concluded in that two year timetable, but in some respects what
:08:21. > :08:25.you have described helps those of us on the Eurosceptic site because it
:08:26. > :08:28.means they cannot really be a meaningful parliamentary vote on the
:08:29. > :08:32.terms of the deal because nothing is going to be agreed quickly enough
:08:33. > :08:36.for them to be able to go back and agree something else if Parliament
:08:37. > :08:39.rejects it, so when the Government eventually have something ready to
:08:40. > :08:45.bring before Parliament it will be a take it or leave it boat. How
:08:46. > :08:48.extraordinary that people who have campaigned. Indeed give us our
:08:49. > :08:51.country back and say, isn't it wonderful, we won't have a
:08:52. > :08:56.meaningful boat for our parliamentarians of the most
:08:57. > :09:00.important... We don't know what the negotiation, the package is, day by
:09:01. > :09:03.day we see more and more complicated areas nobody ever thought about,
:09:04. > :09:10.nobody mentioned during the campaign, all of which has to be
:09:11. > :09:14.resolved and the European Council and the negotiators say nothing is
:09:15. > :09:20.agreed until everything is agreed. You lead us into a catastrophe.
:09:21. > :09:23.There will be plenty of opportunity for Parliament to have its say
:09:24. > :09:27.following the introduction of the Great Repeal Bill, it is not as if
:09:28. > :09:32.there will be no Parliamentary time devoted. The final package is what
:09:33. > :09:38.counts. We have two years to blog about this!
:09:39. > :09:47.There was a big Proview -- pro-EU march yesterday... I was there!
:09:48. > :09:51.Polly Toynbee was there, down to Parliament Square, lots of people
:09:52. > :09:56.there marching in favour of the European Union. We can see the EU
:09:57. > :10:02.flags there on flags, lots of national flags as well, the British
:10:03. > :10:11.one. Polly, is it the aim of people like you still to stop Brexit, or to
:10:12. > :10:16.soften Brexit? I think the aim is for the best you can possibly do to
:10:17. > :10:19.limit the damage. Of course, if it happens that once people have had a
:10:20. > :10:23.chance to see how much they were lied to during the campaign and how
:10:24. > :10:28.dreadful the deal is likely to be, if it happens that enough people in
:10:29. > :10:33.the population have changed their minds, then maybe... There is no
:10:34. > :10:36.sign up yet. But we have not even begun, people have not begun to
:10:37. > :10:41.confront what it is going to mean. Wait and see. I think it is just
:10:42. > :10:47.being as close as we can. Is that credible, do you think, to stop it
:10:48. > :10:50.or to ameliorate it in terms of the Remainers? I think it is far more
:10:51. > :10:55.credible to try and stop it but even then the scope is limited. It is
:10:56. > :10:57.fairly apparent Theresa May's interpretation of the referendum is
:10:58. > :11:18.the country wants an end to free movement, there is probably no way
:11:19. > :11:20.of doing that inside the single market. She also wants external
:11:21. > :11:23.trade deals, no way of doing that outside the customs unit, said the
:11:24. > :11:25.only night you can depend if you are pro-European is, let's not leave
:11:26. > :11:27.without any trade pact, at least let's meet Canada and have a
:11:28. > :11:30.formalised trade agreement. The idea of ace -- of a very soft exit is
:11:31. > :11:33.gone now because the public really did want an end to free movement and
:11:34. > :11:35.the Government really does want external trade deals. It depends
:11:36. > :11:43.what changes in Europe. I think the momentum behind the Remoaning
:11:44. > :11:48.movement will move away. One of the banners I saw being held up
:11:49. > :11:52.yesterday by a young boy on the news was, don't put my daddy on a boat.
:11:53. > :11:56.It gets a lot of its moral force from the uncertainty surrounding the
:11:57. > :12:01.fate of EU nationals here and our resident in the remainder of the EU
:12:02. > :12:05.and I think David Lidington is right that it will be concluded quite
:12:06. > :12:09.quickly once negotiations start and that will take a lot of the heat and
:12:10. > :12:14.momentum out of the remaining movement. Why didn't Theresa May
:12:15. > :12:18.allow that amendment that said, we will do that, as an act of
:12:19. > :12:22.generosity, we will say, of course those European citizens here are
:12:23. > :12:26.welcome to stay? It would have been such a good opening move in the
:12:27. > :12:32.negotiations, instead of which she blocked it. It does not augur well.
:12:33. > :12:36.I have interviewed many Tories about this and put that point to them but
:12:37. > :12:43.they often say the Prime minister's job is to look after UK citizen in
:12:44. > :12:48.the EU... Bargaining chips, I think you have to be generous and you have
:12:49. > :12:51.to wish you people in Spain and everywhere else where there are
:12:52. > :12:54.British citizens would have responded. The British Government
:12:55. > :12:57.did try and raise that with their EU counterparts and were told, we
:12:58. > :13:02.cannot begin to talk about that until article 50 has been triggered.
:13:03. > :13:06.Next week we will be able to talk about it. How generous it would have
:13:07. > :13:10.been, we would have started on a better note. Didn't happen, we will
:13:11. > :13:14.see what happens next with EU citizens. That is it for today, the
:13:15. > :13:16.Daily Politics will be back tomorrow at midday and every day next week on
:13:17. > :13:19.BBC Two as always. And there's also a Question Time
:13:20. > :13:21.special live tomorrow night from Birmingham -
:13:22. > :13:23.with guests including the Brexit Secretary David Davis,
:13:24. > :13:25.Labour's Keir Starmer, former Ukip leader Nigel Farage
:13:26. > :13:28.and the SNP's Alex Salmond - I'll be back next week
:13:29. > :13:33.at 11am here on BBC One. Until then, remember -
:13:34. > :13:37.if it's Sunday, it's