10/04/2016 The Andrew Marr Show

After a terrible week for David Cameron,

the Prime Minister takes it on the chin.

Is it time for everyone to open the books?

Responding to the political crisis, I'm joined today by the Labour

And speaking for the Government, the Cabinet Minister Amber Rudd.

But it's been another important week in the European debate too,

and we're joined today by the former Chancellor Lord Lawson,

now a leader of the campaign to get us out of the EU.

Here to review the papers, Iain Dale, the Conservative

commentator and publisher, and Polly Toynbee of the Guardian,

which has been leading the way in British press

With the Queen's 90th birthday round the corner,

Dame Helen Mirren's been telling me about her part in the pageant.

Will she take to the stage as the Queen in front of the Queen?

The Queen will be the Queen, she is much better at it than I am!

And we've got music from Southern California

The Prime Minister has published details of his income and tax

payments over the past six years, in an effort to defuse controversy

David Cameron has faced difficult headlines after disclosing

that he profited from shares in an offshore trust set

CHANTING: David Cameron, shame on you!

All week, David Cameron has been under pressure on his tax affairs.

Yesterday, he faced protestors calling for more transparency.

The first Prime Minister in history to set out so many details

about his income and the tax he pays on it.

There is no evidence of tax avoidance, just further

We already knew that David Cameron received ?300,000 when his father

died in 2010 but we now know he got a further ?200,000 from his mother

Downing Street denied suggestions that this was done

Instead, it was to share the inheritance more fairly

And a leading tax expert says the evidence is

that the Prime Minister has payed everything that is due.

I think the main point from these tax returns is that he has put

to bed all the criticism and he has clearly paid all

And even beyond that, he set the bar very high

for future Prime Ministers by going beyond the call of duty.

The new details also revealed that the Prime Minister

and his wife, Samantha, were taxed on the ?47,000

they got each last year from renting out their home

in London's Notting Hill while living in Downing Street.

But critics say David Cameron still has questions to answer.

Why has only a four-page summary of his tax returns been produced

and not the full returns which go to Revenue and Customs?

And did any of the money that he received from shares

while he was Leader of the Opposition come from other

overseas trusts as well as from his father's investment company?

If the Prime Minister thought that greater transparency

would bring better headlines, he may well be thinking

The Prime Minister has announced that a new task force

will investigate allegations of tax dodging and money laundering,

The unit will be led by HM Revenue and Customs and the National Crime

Agency, and will include specialists from the Serious Fraud Office

Police in India say more than 80 people have been killed and 200

injured in a fire at a Hindu temple in the southern state of Kerala.

The blaze started during celebrations in the early

It's thought it could have been sparked by fireworks.

Thousands of people had gathered in the grounds of the Puttingal

The Medical Director of NHS England says junior doctors

will cause irreparable damage to their profession if they go ahead

with strike action extending to emergency care later this month.

Writing in the Observer, Sir Bruce Keogh says the planned

walkout in England in a dispute about a new contract will put

The British Medical Association said the action could be avoided, if

I'll be back with the headlines just before 10am.

As he heard, the front pages or not terribly nice reading for the Prime

Minister, the Observer, relatively neutral, Cameron faces questions

over ?200,000 gift from his mother and again, relatively neutral, the

Prime Minister reveals hidden wealth in the Sunday Times. Less neutral is

the Telegraph, Cameron in line to avoid inheritance tax of ?80,000. Is

that fair? The tax bill dodge on his mother 's gift, says the Daily Mail.

Particularly hostile, you would expect, the Sunday Mirror, the

?200,000 gift from mummy. Class War in the headlines. Moving away from

the headlines, let's get the details. The Observer? There is no

big story in the papers, nothing new apart from this gift from his mother

and if you look at the Observer, the inside pages, if you strokes of luck

but no shady shenanigans and you might expect the Observer to have a

go at David Cameron but they do not, they had detailed his tax return and

are some interesting things in taxable expenses, ?10,000 which some

people will be interested in, royalties from a book by Dylan

Jones. Basically, as he lied? He has not, nothing illegal, he has paid

his taxes. That should be the end of it and the Observer says that is

exactly what it is. Let us talk about this ?200,000 gift because

that is an every front page. What has happened is his mother has given

him money and she does not lie within seven years of being handed

over, he will not pay inheritance tax and that is something millions

of families do across the country. There is nothing abnormal about that

practice? That is the real story, not about him having done anything

abnormal for people as rich as him, simply being that rich. That is not

a crime. Once it is exposed in that regular way, it shocks people,

people know that the lot of them are multimillionaires and the elected

them as such but what Downing Street said, which is reasonable, this is

the kind of sensible, legal and proper tax planning that millions of

ordinary people do. Hang on, only one out of 20 estates pay any

inheritance tax. Because they were so small most people do not have

that wealth, this is phenomenally rich. This is the top 5% and they

are talking about them as ordinary but it is not. As highest prices

increase, more people are being dragged into inheritance tax. The

OBR had figures showing that had the most, it might get to one in ten.

That is quite a lot. We should abolish inheritance tax altogether

because it is double taxation. Not really because the houses have not

been taxed, 90% do not pay any inheritance tax so that is shocking,

he has not done anything abnormal. The politics of envy? Nobody will be

shocked. This is a sort of thing that happens around the country

every day of the week. Readers of the Sunday Mirror, the Prime

Minister gets ?200,000 as a gift from his mother, showing the kind of

people they are. And the kind of people most people would aspire to

be. That is tax planning. This shows what is normal, only one in four

people aged under 35 can buy, can get onto the property ladder so

while there is enormous wealth at the top, at the bottom, amongst the

young, only one in four people can buy themselves a home so what this

is about is the extraordinary growth of inequality in this country over

many decades. And the grudge this creates and it is difficult for

politicians to navigate and unless they can correct that, this will go

one. There are things we can do, we should perhaps be banned from owning

second homes, we contributed to the problem. Absolutely. If there is an

element of class envy about this, we do so many papers on the right join

in? Perhaps more viciously than on the left? What is going on? There is

this theory that the Eurosceptic papers have it in for David Cameron

so they will bash more than they otherwise might have done but the

Observer, which is not right-wing, as it also made the Brexit would

likely? The Prime Minister would not pretend he has handled this well, he

said he had not, he is guilty of certain hypocrisy of his comments on

Jimmy Carter but when you look at those details, tax experts and he

has done nothing wrong, trusts and Ireland, selling the shares... That

is effectively a tax haven. It is an EU member. Has this made the Brexit

more likely? I cannot see the connection. This is interesting. He

Sunday Telegraph and the Mail on Sunday, the most hostile to the

Prime Minister on the front pages. Owned by the Berkeley brothers, from

the Channel Islands! Ian Birrell, you think this is about money? It is

about Brexit, what you say, those campaigners, that chunk of the Tory

party rabidly Eurosceptic, taking revenge on David Cameron over the

referendum. I am interested in the centre spread, page three, the

Sunday Times, the story goes on, it is about what happens if we vote to

leave the EU, what he does if it is a narrow vote to stay in and it has

been suggested he brings back Boris Johnson and Michael Gove as

potentially deputy Prime Minister? They do not suggest what Boris

Johnson might have and that is a problem, what job to give him. We

could not be transport because of the Heathrow decision so that is

out. Culture, media and sport? That is quite low ranking. Home

Secretary? Get rid of the most successful in living memory, Theresa

May? I do not think so. You would not give Boris Johnson anything that

involves technical details. You would not give him benefits... A

special present to the junior doctors, health secretary. Michael

Gove, to my mind, people in the Conservative party are trying to

promote him as the next leader. He always said he would not have that

but like Boris Johnson, who knows? You are assuming we're voting to

leave, if we vote to stay, Cameron could sweep the lot of them away.

That would be very good for party cohesion? ! Worries that? The Civil

War in the Tory party is greater... You underestimate the tendency of

the Tory party to come together after crisis. After the 23rd of

June, I suspect it will be different and if not... I think it is much

more severe than that. If we Vote Leave, what happens to the Prime

Minister? He has gone the next day. If he lost the Scottish referendum,

he would have resigned. If you are going to resign over that, this is

far bigger. I hesitate to say this because people in Scotland will hate

me but this is bigger than the Scottish referendum. And it will

lead to Scotland going for the break-up of the UK and we will be

handing over to Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, Chris Grayling, Nigel

Farage, to run the country! Excellent! I much how much irony

there was in that! And big story... The Labour Party, John McDonnell

last week was talking about anti-Semitism and he was very strong

about having nothing to do with it. This will not go away? They should

immediately fire him forever and not taken back, Faber is unable to

control its various wings at local parties when people say appalling

things and are suddenly back in offices. What is interesting, we

will talk to Jeremy Corbyn, Labour MPs, a group of them urging him, he

is making his only important speech about Europe before the elections,

this week, urging him to be really tough. Labour is entirely united and

were irony in this? Nowhere. This has been in, out from the Tory party

and this is because Jeremy Corbyn and the people around him have

simply failed, they do not think this is important whereas for

everybody else in the country it is the most important thing for the

generation. It is because they are about as Eurosceptic as I am! Ask

him about that! They are quite. We have talked about that, they have

voted against the EU in the past and they come from a tradition, in many

ways, that has seen Europe as for bankers... The problem for John

McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn on Europe is if they sign up to the EU,

they have to support the Transatlantic Trade Investment

Partnership which is basically a big business racket. Will they really do

that? They keep saying, we will make our

own arrangements with America, do you think Britain on its own will

make a better deal than it can interrupt? Absolutely. Not a chance.

One of the story that caught my attention, the front page of the

Sunday Times, this big photo of British Muslims by Trevor Phillips.

This is allied to a small article about Siddique Khan, the candidate

format of London. According to the Sunday Times, in 2004 he said he

wanted every as of sharia law introduced to the UK, particularly

on inheritance tax, divided between wives. His spokesman insists he has

always opposed Sharia law, he says there is no place for it in the UK,

but this survey shows it is not the view of the majority of Muslims.

Wives should always about their husbands, 39%. It is acceptable for

British Muslims to have more than one wife, 31%. If you look at older

people who born abroad, quite a lot of that is quite like Britain 50

years ago. Polygamy less popular, though it depends which circles you

moved in. A lot of people would have said wives should obey their

husbands. Strong hostility to homosexuality. Love, honour and

obey, in the Church of England. I cover a lot of these Muslim issues.

The people that phone in to talk about them do not reflect that. They

are very much integrated and all the rest of it. But this survey will

include all Muslims,... Hot Muslims want gay sex to be outlawed. -- half

of Muslims. The next generation will be different. Older people amongst

the white population are also... Well worth it. An interesting review

of the papers, pretty, defensive. -- pretty comprehensive.

Something of a respite from April showers today. In spite of the

sunshine, it was quite a cold start, with a touch of Frost. There is rain

in the North of Scotland and the south-west of England, and strong

wind. It is generating large waves. We could see some coastal flooding

for the south coast of Cornwall. Elsewhere, increasingly hazy

sunshine through Wales, the Midlands, East Anglia. Generally, it

is warmer than yesterday. The rain in northern Scotland becomes light

and patchy by this evening. More rain drifting towards the Midlands,

parts of Wales and into Northern Ireland. Elsewhere, it is dry. By

dawn tomorrow, nowhere near as cold as it was this morning. Rain across

the south-west quadrant of the UK, but elsewhere it looks fine and dry.

By the afternoon, the temperatures could reach 16 degrees. The highest

temperatures towards the south-eastern corner. Maybe a bit

colder along the North Sea coast, but a decent day for many of us.

Any day now, a leaflet will drop through your door explaining why

the Government thinks we should all vote to stay in

It's infuriated those who want to leave, who see

this as another bump in an unfair playing field.

Vote Leave is one of the organisations vying

The former Conservative Chancellor Lord Lawson is a key figure in it,

What is your view as a former Chancellor of the current row about

the Prime Minister's tax arrangements?

David Cameron has made a mess of his handling of it, but there are more

important issues behind it. This arose out of the revelations in the

so-called panama papers. This shows beyond any shadow of a doubt that

international cooperation needs to be global. The idea it can be just a

European is crazy. The idea you have to be part of a political union to

have international cooperation is also completely mistaken.

Brilliantly taken towards the European argument, but what about

the tax haven issue? It evolved out of the 1980s and the relaxation of

exchange controls, which has brought many benefits, but it has allowed

lots of people to hide their money away from any national tax

authorities around the world. To do think we need a big international

effort to stop to crack down? There needs to be international

cooperation. It has to be completely global. There is a fair amount

already, the Revenue and Customs when I was in charge was called the

Inland Revenue, they cooperated considerably. They need to do more.

The abolition of exchange controls has been a huge boon, you would not

have had the development of the so-called emerging world is rapidly

as it has been if there had not been freedom of capital flows to those

countries. In the early stages in particular. It has done a great deal

of good, nobody wants to unwind that, but there needs to be

cooperation between the tax authorities around the world. Let's

move back to the European issue. ?9.3 million expenditure on a

leaflet and website and so forth to persuade people to stay inside the

EU has offended people on your side of the argument. Is it an unfair

playing field? A lot of people who have not made up their mind feel it

is outrageous that this propaganda leaflet should be put through... And

it is pure topic under, worthless propaganda. But out in the

Government's name with the civil service behind it at the taxpayer's

expense. Many people feel it is a scandal. We know there will be an

amendment put to the Finance Bill tomorrow on this subject, would you

support that if you were still in Parliament? It might well be, yes.

That move to the substance, one of the big problems we have tried to

discuss is whether or not we would be in a single market after leaving

the EU as an institution. It is not important. We live in a largely free

trading world. That is due to the way that the world is developed over

the past 20 or 30 years, due to the efforts of the World Trade

Organisation. The common external tariff is between three and 4%. That

is trivial. Currencies move more than that. What is striking is that

trade from outside the EU into the EU has risen much faster than trade

within the EU. You don't need to be within the single market to trade.

It is not an issue. In farming, the agricultural tariffs have been much

higher coming into the EU. One thing we have not talked about much is

what this does to British farmers. 60% of their income comes from EU

subsidies. If we leave the EU, should the British Government pick

up that level of subsidy, which is very expensive? Before we were in

the EU, there was agricultural support from the Government. We have

always supported farmers. I am quite sure that if we would leave, as I

hope we will, nothing will happen immediately, there will be a

transitional phase, but there will be support for farmers. Should a

British taxpayer pick up the 2.8 Ilion in terms of support for

farmers? It is a lot, but you would support it? What the British

taxpayer is doing now is not only paying for the European support, all

the things the farmers get from Europe are British taxpayers' money,

the things the scientists get, it is recycled, but we are paying ?10

billion a year more in than we get out. If we get out, we will be able

to afford more. A lot of farmers watching, they are having a tough

time, if we vote to leave, they will be protected? It is for the

Government of the day, I will not be a member of the Government. My

Government days are over, but I am sure that that is the position of

those who are in the Cabinet who are in favour of voting Leave. You live

in France, what about the more than 1 million British people living on

the continent? Huge numbers of people, French and other Europeans,

living here. There will not be a great exodus. There are legal

protections. The Vienna Convention and others. There is nothing to

fear. In France, there are quite a few Americans who live there,

America is not part of the European Union. If you are watching and you

are worried about the mutual arrangements on health care, for

instance, or recognising professional qualifications, those

things will be renegotiated post-leaving, and they would be

safe? Yes. One final area, what happens between North and South

Island? If we leave the Yukon and we are therefore completely outside the

EU, and we want to control our borders, surely we have to patrol

the border as well and close it? We have always made Ireland a special

case. Long before we were in the EU, even though the Irish free State, as

it was originally called, ... We have allowed the Irish to vote in

British elections, we don't allow anybody else who is not British to

vote in British elections. The Irish are for historical reasons a special

case, and they will remain a special case. The Anglo-Irish relationship

is a very special relationship, and it will continue to be so, it has

been ever since Irish independence was secured. Some people would say

it is a to migration into the UK from the rest of the EU and the

world. There would have to be border controls? Yes, but not a prevention

of genuine Irish from coming in. There would also be, as there is

now, particularly close cooperation between the security services in

Northern Ireland and in the Republic to make -- to prevent the IRA and

terrorist threat from being worse than it is. Sitting at the centre of

this, how do you think the pro Leave campaign is doing? In terms of the

arguments, the Leave campaign is winning more. In terms of votes, we

will have to see how strong. There is no campaign to love the EU. That

is conspicuous by its absence. All they are trying to do is to scare

the pants off everybody about leaving, but it is crazy. Most of

the countries in the world are outside the EU, and they are doing

very nicely. Thank you for joining us.

Dame Helen Mirren's latest film roles are poles apart but they're

both portrayals of hard-as-nails women hunting down their enemies.

In Trumbo, she's the anti-Semitic columnist Hedda Hopper,

baiting Communists in 1950s Hollywood.

When we met recently, however, Helen Mirren started by telling me

In it, she's a British colonel tracking an Englishwoman who's

Mirren calls in American air power to hit the terrorists

with drone missiles, even though a young girl may be

Lieutenant, we have this one opportunity.

I can when I see these guys moving and the girl

But I want to give her a chance to get out of the way.

There is a lot more at stake than what you see

Ma'am, I need you to run the collateral damage.

The idea of the strike is that this is a capture,

We don't want to kill this person, we just want to capture her.

It is an Englishwoman who has gone over to Isis and has become one

of the most sought after terrorists in the world.

And they have been hunting her for a long time.

And they finally have targeted where she is.

But in the discovery of where she is, they discover young

You, as a drone commander, can see everything on the ground.

And you can see an eight-year-old girl who might well be killed

So this lends a new edge to the morality of killing.

You are kind of a utilitarian, I would say, in this particular film.

Well, I think it is the issue that all warriors, all soldiers,

I have always said that the people who are actually on the front line

They are the ones with the bombs dropping on their heads.

So this idea, this so-called appalling phrase, collateral damage,

which is a horrible way of talking about people,

innocent people dying, it is not just in warfare

But it is almost like a philosophical seminar.

Is the eye in the sky the eye of God?

And we're very lucky we don't live in a society that has to deal

with those over our heads all the time.

I was at a wedding recently and they had a drone taking photos

I just wanted to shoot it out of the sky, it was so annoying!

But there are communities in the world who live with this

knowledge that they are being watched all the time.

Let's just pause for a second and talk about your co-star,

Alan Rickman, in whose memory the film has been made.

An extraordinary man, you have known him for a long time.

Talk to us a little bit about the man as well as the actor.

Well, I think Alan would have been really proud for this

Baddies and half-goodies, like Snape.

The Alan we see on the screen in Eye in the Sky is Alan

We need to put a Hellfire through the roof right now.

I told you, we came to witness a capture, not a kill.

Any action on the ground will lead to armed confrontation,

which we will not be able to contain.

Even with the vests, we need their approval for a strike.

Just tell them we have got her in our sight.

That alone should allow a Hellfire, the vests are a bonus.

She's a British citizen, they want her alive.

I want to ask you about other great recent character you played,

Hedda Hopper, who must be one of the nastiest women I have

ever seen on screen, if I may say so!

Yes, I think she knew she was hated, she loved being hated,

as a certain kind of female journalist does.

She thought of herself as a great patriot and I think to this

day there are Americans who would identify very strongly

with Hedda Hopper, with all of her beliefs and philosophies.

And say that is what a great, a true American should be.

Do you think I love every person on my payroll?

Then how about I make it crystal clear to my 35 million readers

exactly who runs Hollywood and won't fire these traitors?

I wonder to what extent it is also a parable about modern America

and excluding people and going for victims,

no longer communists, but perhaps other communities,

The Muslim community, I presume, really?

I'm thinking about aspects of the current Presidential...

Yes, I mean, I don't like to say it is specifically American

because I think all countries, all nationhoods, if you like,

are susceptible to that kind of attitude.

Well, you just brought out two really interesting,

morally complicated films for us to think about.

In terms of performance, I'm performing at the Queen's

The Queen will be the Queen, she is much better at it than I am!

It is going to be really wonderful, I am so excited about it.

Dame Helen Mirren, thank you very much.

And Eye In The Sky will be hitting cinemas across the UK this Friday.

The Labour leader has not minced his words in his attack

on the Prime Minister's personal financial arrangements.

Jeremy Corbyn accused David Cameron of misleading the public

and said he'd lost the trust of the British people.

He also demanded an investigation and a full statement to Parliament.

So is he satisfied with the publication

Mr Corbyn joins me now from Edinburgh.

Are you pleased and satisfied? Everyday, more comes out from

Downing Street about his tax arrangements but I still think we

need to know what benefit he or his trust received before 2010 and where

the money was put in an overseas tax haven in the first place and if

there is any tax owed on that period, it must be paid but he has

to register this in Parliament, there are rules concerning this in

Parliament and I am not suggesting he has broken them but we need to

know whether or not he did benefit before 2010. In terms of today, over

every front page it seems the mother of the Prime Minister gave them

money in the expectation that if it was seven years before she died, he

would not have to pay inheritance tax, something many parents around

the country do, is anything wrong in that? She has done that and that is

within the rules. Providing, of course, the person giving the money

lives for more than seven years and we obviously hope that she does. The

issue does reduce the level of inheritance tax available for the

Exchequer, is the case for looking at inheritance tax rules? Possibly,

but more important this week is looking at the question of tax

havens and British dependent territories and the way in which

large sums of money, huge sums of money, are placed in these tax

havens to evade tax in Britain, there is a moral case. If you earn

money, you pay tax and if you earn more money, you pay more tax and not

paying means under funded public services and that is what the Panama

Papers have shown, the moral case has to be made. Number 10 would say

the Prime Minister has paid tax on everything he owes taxon and is

unimpeachable and this is about the politics of envy, his mother having

?200,000 and so on. It is about the politics of openness, the politics

of tax evasion and avoidance on an industrial scale, which is the

Panama Papers have revealed. And we need to be much more assertive on

the question of overseas arrangements in British dependent

territories that are administered, self governed, usually locally, but

Britain obviously has a huge responsibility. Why are we allowing

and encouraging tax havens independent territories, knowing

that it short-changes everybody in this country? I want to come to that

but before that, you cannot point to any issue where the Prime Minister

has not paid his taxes? We need to see the papers, we need to do what

he has returned, we need to know why he put this money overseas in the

first place and whether he made anything out of this before 2010,

when he became Prime Minister, these questions he must answer and I think

there is a question for Parliament and a question for Parliamentary and

to question him on this and a question, big questions that must be

put to him by Parliament and that surely is the function of

Parliament. Has he been lying in any way about money he has had in the

past? I think you took a very long time to say what money he had in

those trusts, what Bonnie was given to him by his family and what money

he has received as a result. -- money. And what he paid on it in

tax, there have been ever-changing stories coming from Downing Street,

roughly one statement every 24 hours since last Monday and they do not

know why he could not see the entire thing last Monday and he is not

finished, he has not said how much taxi did pay? I just said ?200

million, it was, in fact, ?200,000. Yes, I was worried about that! What

can be done in the future. We have heard columnists on the centre-right

and centre-left recently saying that we have crossed the line whereby

everybody involved in politics should open their tax returns to the

public so the public can see what everybody gets and how much they

have got in terms of assets as well. There must be in public office, you

have to know what they are earning and when it comes from and what

influences come as a result of that. If, for example, you have a lot of

money in an overseas trust and that is not revealed to the public, if

you start lobbying not to open up the accounts of overseas trusts, it

begins to look more than a little bit bored so we must have openness

and transparency about this. Parliamentary scrutiny has become

significantly better during the time I have been in Parliament but it

still has a long way to go and we have suggested in a document we are

proposing today that there are tougher Parliamentary registration

rules for all overseas assets of a much lower value than at the present

time. There is a duty of care to represent your financial affairs --

affairs openly to Parliament so the public knows what influences your

under when you make decisions. Could we see a future Labour government

saying that if you want a role in public life, if you want to stand

for election and want to be on programmes like this interviewing

people, perhaps a newspaper editor or journalist, you bust in future

rubbish income tax return? -- you must publish your income tax return?

I think it is a good idea to move in that direction, money and politics

have to be treated with a greater sense of openness so we know what

influences are at work on any individual and one whatever

decisions they make. Should this new area cover more people than current

MPs? The general group of people involved in public life, around

politics as well? We need to consider how far it goes, two other

people involved in public life. You are involved in public life. As a

very important commentator on the BBC. As are many others. We need to

know what influences are at work and I have the greatest faith in your

objectivity, this is not an attack on you. There are lots of people

watching and thinking, is my income tax return going to be made public?

One Rover public life? -- one rule for public life? But this has shown

there is one rule for the rich people and another for the rest, in

a tax haven you get a big result, you will pay no tax on it. If you

are a care worker, street cleaner or a nurse, you do not have those

options or opportunities, you pay tax. And the anger out there from a

lot of people who work very hard, hey their tax and are not offered

any negotiation with HMRC, they are fined if they are late. Have you

gone around the Shadow Cabinet asking if they have any offshore

trusts? I have not. I will obviously be discussing this with my

colleagues on Tuesday. There were some good statements made yesterday

and a very good article in the New Statesman today. The other big area

in terms of public policy is what happens to these tax havens? You

said they should be required to be more open and transparent, just as

businesses and companies are in the UK itself. Otherwise other steps

must be taken. What? The steps must be, if you are a crime dependent

territory, or the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man, Caribbean, all of

those, they operate a zero tax environment, they all enjoy security

protection provided by the UK and they all have some form of self

governance. To some extent, that self-governance was even suspended

during the financial crisis. We must be very clear, we want openness on

who owns those companies, on the trusts and we want a tax-free sheen

that is reasonable so they all pay some kind of contribution. It cannot

be right that we are allowing people to shift resources offshore to avoid

taxation in the UK or in parts of Europe with the rather strange

behaviour of some companies such as Google, who moved billing

arrangements to lower tax regimes to avoid UK tax and many others as a

result. We must chase down this principle that operates amongst the

super-rich that somehow, tax is for somebody else and not for them. If

some sun-kissed island refuses, they should pull down the Union Jack and

no longer have protection? There are various measures, we can explain

that we want to see a proper tax regime, we want to see them paying

contributions, we will not allow people to place money there in order

to avoid tax on money that has been made from business or sales or

development or marketing would ever in the UK or any other part of the

EU. This is an international scandal and the Panama Papers have begun to

uncover this. This is the tip of a large iceberg. And people who see

their local services being cut, the health services in any country under

threat, they get very angry when they see the super-rich not paying

their way. A lot of criticism again in the

newspapers of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. Do you not need to do

more to reassure the Jewish community? It is absolutely a pollen

and wrong, anybody that commits any act of anti-Semitism, that makes any

remark, is automatically excluded, and an enquiry follows immediately.

We will suspend any member that behave that way, Inquiries Act are

ongoing. There is no place for any type of racism of any sort within

our party. I will ensure that it is rooted out where it exists, but I

have to say it is a very small number of cases over the country, we

are dealing with it. Polly Toynbee was hoping that there would be more

fire in your belly on the pro European case when you make your

speech later. Will there be fire in your belly, are you really committed

to get Labour voters to vote to stay in? We want people to vote to remain

so that we can develop a social Europe, they just Europe, we can

protect the workers' right, and we can argue for the protection of

rights in public services, should the transatlantic trade and

investment partnership ever, long, and we would seek to ensure there is

a social Europe, universal environmental protection and

protection of the advances we have made on workers' protection. What is

your view on this ?9 million Government expenditure to put

leaflets through everybody's doors, making the case to Remain? Everybody

should be fully informed, there should be a proper debate, and I

hope there will be an equality of airtime in the debate so that

everybody can understand the implications of a very important

decision. I hope that Labour supporters will hope -- will vote to

Remain. It is not without issues, such as I have pointed out, we are

not in favour of an unfettered free-market Europe, but we want a

Europe of social solidarity. Thank you for joining us.

Well, listening to that was the Cabinet Minister Amber Rudd.

Talking about David Cameron, what remains after this tsunami of

allegations is that his father was involved in setting up a company in

a part of the world where you pay no British taxes at all. Can you

understand why people find that offensive? The Prime Minister and

his family have done nothing wrong. The independent tax expert at the

start of this programme confirmed that, lots of experts have done so.

He did pay tax on any income from the company, the reason the company

was set up was due to exchange controls being changed. It said in

the minutes of the company that it was their partly so it would not

take British taxes. Anybody who received income from it do pay taxes

on it, so the Prime Minister pay taxes on anything he received. If

you are not paying taxes like other companies, presumably you will grow

your profits more, and therefore investors will do better in that

company. Therefore, the growth of income, on which we at knowledge the

Prime Minister has paid his tax, would have been bigger than it would

otherwise have been. You are going into criticising the whole area of

unit trusts. I am talking about offshore tax avoiding trusts

generally. A lot of unit trusts do invest in offshore trusts. Your

pension and mine may be in it, so that as a whole area of different

financial regulation. The Prime Minister and his family paid the

correct amount of tax they were due. You may have heard Jeremy Corbyn, he

said we have to go after offshore tax havens in a big way. Of course I

agree. I welcome him to that particular ambition, because we have

been doing that since 2010. The Chancellor and the Prime Minister

may this a key parity for the Government, we put in place 45

measures, 25 new measures coming in by 2020/21, international

transparency is essential to have a level playing field, and it remains

a priority. Do you have money in an offshore trust? No, but all MPs have

a transparent system, they disclose their funds and income, and an

expensive system. We may be moving towards a new system in which

everybody in public life is to make their tax return publicly available.

We may do. I am not sure it would be a good thing, we have to dig about

the balance between transparency and privacy, we don't want to put people

off who have substantial assets. It is worth having the debate, but I

don't think it is the case. MPs have to make a lot of declarations, so I

don't think it is the right thing to do, but it is worth looking into.

Would you be offended by publishing your tax return? No, but I don't

think it is the right way to go. The Prime Minister has taken an

unprecedented step of more disclosure, the people who need to

do this are the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition, Jeremy

Corbyn has said he will do it, so I would urge him to get on with it.

What we have also seen is this stage by stage revelation will stop the

Prime Minister has not handled it well, tell everything right at the

beginning? He has said that. It was mixed up with his own personal

family affairs. He has said all there is to be said about it, and

has taken the unprecedented step of publishing his financial affairs of.

We were talking about whether a lot of the venom erected against him is

part of the anti-European Union campaign, the two things have become

mingled together. I don't think that is true. I heard Chris Grayling

yesterday speaking up on the half of the Prime Minister, and he is a

leading campaigner for Leave. We don't go into people's families, but

your brother is a leading figure in the Panama Papers campaign. There

have been stories about jitters. -- in the Remain campaign. What is your

view? The Remain campaign has a very good case, the EU makes a very good

coach appreciative and economy. We can improve the EU for the better, I

putting competitiveness on the top of the agenda. The other

alternatives are bad for the country and for the economy and could cost

jobs. Putting the ?9 million into leaflets for every household in the

country is not fair. It means the Remain campaign is doing things that

your opponents cannot do. Some Conservative MPs are putting down

amendments to the Finance Bill to correct this unfairness. I would

urge them to reconsider, this is what the Government did in 1975.

This Government is not neutral. We believe we are stronger and safer in

a reformed EU. This is a crucial national choice, it could be a close

result, you cannot afford to have people afterwards saying, it was

fixed, it was not fair. There is precedent, and this is the

Government, the Government was elected and is delivering on this

referendum commitment, and wants to make the case on behalf of the

Government. My constituency says to me, what is the Government view?

That is why it is right to show them. If your side win, and the

Prime Minister has one, the first big question is whether he brings in

some of his you risk the critics back into top jobs. Does Boris get a

good job, is Michael Gove made a pity Prime Minister? It is a contest

between being a tough and routers and being open and engaging. If he

asked for your advice, what would you say? He is unlikely to ask my

advice, either lie on his good judgment to put together a Cabinet

that would unite the party and deliver on our core manifesto

commitments. The issue of the Irish border, 310 miles. If we leave the

EU, would it have to be sealed? We would have to wait and see, but it

highlights the dangerous prospect that are out there if we do leave.

The lack of certainty is what concerns me. If we left, but a

Conservative Government carry on supporting British farmers? Who

knows? There is uncertainty if we leave.

Now over to Jon for the news headlines.

The Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, has called for greater openness

from politicians and other figures in public life about their personal

He also said the UK Government should be much more assertive

and clamp down on overseas territories which

He was speaking after David Cameron published his income and tax details

Mr Corbyn told this programme the Prime Minister still had

We need to know what he has actually returned as a tax return.

We need to know why he put this money overseas in the first place.

And whether he made anything out of it or not before 2010,

I think there is a question for Parliament there.

There is a question for Parliamentary Standards

The Cabinet Minister Amber Rudd defended David Cameron,

saying the information he'd published today showed

he and his family had paid the correct amount of tax and had

First, let's have a look at what's coming up immediately

Join us from York at 10am, where we will ask just one Big Question.

In honour of Shakespeare's 400th anniversary, is there more truth

We have a very distinguished company of leading scholars,

performers, writers, theologians and historians

So take your seat in our audience at 10am on BBC One.

Andrew Neil will be here on BBC One in an hour with the Sunday Politics.

Next week, I'll be talking to the politician who many in France

hope might be their next President, the French Economy

But for now, as promised, we leave you with some

Sam Outlaw is on tour here at the moment.

From his album Angeleno, this is Ghost Town.

# Cos I'm on my way, through some kind of ghost town.

# I'm on my way, wish that I could slow down.

# You hardly see a car, truck, or train.

# There's no-one left to say what happened.

# Cos I'm on my way, through some kind of ghost town.

# I'm on my way, wish that I could slow down.

# Looking for some answers in the rubble, rocks and sand.

# Cos I'm on my way, through some kind of ghost town.

# I'm on my way, wish that I could slow down.

At the first light of dawn, it's the only thing we have on.

A friendly, familiar voice on the other side.