02/10/2016 The Andrew Marr Show


Andrew Marr interviews key newsmakers and shines a light on what is happening in the world. His guests are prime minister Theresa May MP, Sir Craig Oliver and Dominic Cooper.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 02/10/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Good morning from a crisply, sunny Birmingham.


Britain will once more be an independent and sovereign nation.


That's the Prime Minister's message to the Tory Conference


But as she lays out her plans for leaving the EU, what do those


Theresa May is still, frankly, the unknown


Today we'll try to find out a little more.


And speaking for the Tories' exiled regime, David Cameron's former


communications director Sir Craig Oliver, who's written


a book about how his former boss gambled and lost.


And speaking of drama at Westminster,


Dominic Cooper has been talking about playing London's wickedest


And here on a hugely significant weekend in politics,


to review the news, Anushka Asthana from the Guardian


and Matthew Parris of the Times, who's been warning Mrs May


All that coming up, but first the news with Sally Nugent.


Prime Minister Theresa May has said that her Government will introduce


a 'Great Repeal Bill' to begin the process for Britain's exit


The announcement comes as the first Conservative Party conference


since the referendum gets under way in Birmingham.


Our Political Correspondent Carole Walker's report contains flash


Theresa May arrived last night for her first party conference


Keen to demonstrate her Government is getting


She says shall begin the process of making the UK and sovereign


and independent country with a Great Repeal Bill to overturn


the legislation which took Britain into what was then


The European Communities Act 1972, set out on vellum scroll, will be


This will mean that all EU laws will be


transferred into UK law and will no longer override domestic


The new bill will be introduced next spring but it will


not take effect until the moment Britain leaves the EU, and does not


affect the formal process of negotiations under Article 50.


The move to give the UK control over its


own laws is exactly what many of the leading figures in campaign


to leave the EU have been calling for, and it


will delight many at this conference, but it still leaves


questions over when the Prime Minister will trigger


Article 50 to begin the formal negotiations and what the


future deal. The new Prime Minister wants to use this conference


domestic agenda under the slogan, "a country that works for everyone".


But today's announcements won't stop all


the discussions and arguments over Brexit.


Gulf countries have urged the United Nations to intervene


immediately in Syria to stop the aerial attacks


The appeal came hours after a medical charity said


the largest hospital in the rebel-held part of the city


The polls have opened in Hungary in a referendum called


by the country's Prime Minister to challenge migrant quotas.


Viktor Orban is expected to secure an overwhelming majority.


In the past year he's sealed southern borders with a razor-wire


fence patrolled by thousands of soldiers and police.


The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and their children have left Canada


In a statement, Prince William said they were incredibly grateful


to the country for the warmth and hospitality they'd been shown.


Back to you, Andrew, at the Conservative Party


And it is a deep-fried feast for politics addict. There's the front


page of the Sunday Times, Ken Clarke and his memoirs, and of course the


Prime Minister Theresa May fires the Brexit starting gun, that's what we


will be talking about probably all of the programme. May takes her acts


to EU law, and the Observer has a story from Nicky Morgan, who was


fired by Theresa May, hard Brexit will breed new bigotry. We will talk


about all of that, but we will start with the main piece of journalism of


the day, the interview with the Prime Minister in the Sunday Times.


Absolutely and she has told us at last how it will be done. She gives


a recipe for her mother's jam scone and not much more, except the Great


Repeal Bill. In a way there is less to this than meets the eye because


there was never any possibility we would decouple from the EU without


legislation, but in a way it is a risk for her to focus on it so early


because it makes us focus on how she will get it through Parliament. For


all of those watching saying what is this great repeal act, it is


basically saying from the minute we leave the EU, all EU laws cease to


apply and they are translated into British laws which can be repealed


or changed. Yes, it means we have our hat and gloves ready for when we


decide to go out the door. That is an interesting interview, as you say


not a lot of detail, and Anushka there is an interesting spread by


the Observer's political editor laying out the divisions inside the


Conservative Party. Hard Brexit and soft Brexit. That's right, Toby has


written this piece about the problems Theresa May may face when


it comes to getting this through. I think it is interesting because it


remembers that David Cameron came here to Birmingham for his first


conference as Conservative Prime Minister. Think back to this, he was


best mates with Nick Clegg back then, apparently he named the big


society ten times in his speech, and he told Tory MPs to stop banging on


about Europe. That worked well! Things have changed, today it is all


about Europe. I used the terrible jargon hard Brexit and soft Brexit,


which is a bit like left and right, wet and dry, but we don't know


exactly what it means. We know Brexit means Brexit, and now people


are talking about a good Brexit. It is the balance between immigration


and controlling our borders, and to do with economic access to the EU.


Those like Nicky Morgan looking for the soft Brexit want to prioritise


the economy and say we may not be able to control our borders as much


as some may hope. So do a deal, stay inside the tariff free single market


is soft Brexit, and hard Brexit is walk away and start the new world.


Get out now, and repeal the laws we don't want to be part of. But as


Matthew says, it will be difficult to do that because the laws come


into British law and then Theresa May has got to go through Parliament


to get rid of anything she wants to. In a way it is a triumph for the


people who have been writing for years about Europe, and Christopher


Booker in the Sunday Telegraph has been banging on about this for years


and his moment has come. Here is one of them, Christopher Booker is so


anti-European and has been so anti-European for so long he has his


own column in the Sunday Telegraph. I wouldn't say he's getting cold


feet but he is beginning to think, well he describes hard Brexit as


plunging us over a cliff. The hard Brexit people, you will know, don't


want to call it hard Brexit, they want to call it clean Brexit.


Sensible Brexit or nice Brexit versus fair Brexit. That's even


worse. One of the key pro-European figures right back to the Margaret


Thatcher days has produced memoirs, Ken Clarke is always good for a good


quote. He will be on the show next week I sincerely hope, but he has an


interview again in the Sunday Times. These are extracts from his new


book. I don't think you're supposed to use the word legend when you are


talking about somebody who is alive, but Ken Clarke is a legend. He says


what he thinks and he doesn't care. Yes, he does! We can have an


overdose of him in this new book and in this extract the docs about his


relationship with Theresa May. He says they couldn't be more


different. She used to say I lock them up, he lets them out, that's


when he was just a secretary. He remembers back to a conference


previously when they had a row over a cat, whether a cat had been used


to talk about someone's human rights. I love this memory, he talks


about the cartoons in the newspapers of his Hush Puppies and Theresa


May's kitten heels attacking each other. Ken Clarke's unguarded


remarks are very cleverly pondered beforehand. I once asked him why


didn't you complain when Sky broadcast what you said, and he


said, because I think it. He has said many things when he didn't know


the microphone was on. Here is a policy being discussed in the Sunday


Mirror, Matthew. A very humane and shrewd start of the Tory conference.


Tories end cruel benefit tests for long-term sick. It probably won't


cost any money because you have got to pay, the Government has got to


pay for the tests. You can imagine how that was brought in in David


Cameron's day, somebody said let's crack down on malingerers who are


not ill any longer but hasn't said so. Everybody says let's do that,


then Theresa May will stop making these people go back for test every


six months, it is a gift that keeps on giving. And Iain Duncan Smith has


said he wishes he was still there and could do it himself. A bigger


problem perhaps for Theresa May is this inquiry into child abuse and


its aspects across Britain which seems to be falling to pieces. This


is quite shocking, this inquiry set up by Theresa May when she was Home


Secretary, after we had those allegations that start with all we


learnt about Jimmy Savile and these allegations about people in


political life. It is falling apart, it has had four people leading it so


far, now we have had three of the leading lawyers stepping away. Ben


Emmerson, but also two others from his team. We don't really know what


happened but there's a lot of criticism that one of the problems


is it is too broad, there's no time limit and there is no kind of


precise brief as to what they should be trying to get out of it.


Increasingly people are saying we won't get anywhere if we carry on


this. Is there a moral about public inquiry is generally in this, that


if they are very specific they may work, but the bigger they go, the


worse they are. This is a big thing to get to the bottom of, and it can


often be very difficult because of the people you are dealing with.


This it is Theresa May's inquiry and it will be interesting to see if she


still takes ownership of it. If she is not clean it will carry on, I


think she will leave it to the Home Secretary. Amber Rudd, to deal with.


It is easy to forget there have been big political stories across Europe


at the moment, probably no more bigger than in Hungary, under a very


anti-migrant leader, Viktor Orban, and they have a referendum on. Yes,


they have these huge walls keeping the migrants out and this is a


rather disturbing development that countries just have advisory


referendums, which basically put two fingers up to the European Union but


because they are only advisory you cannot stop them doing it. When the


Hungary Aryans get the huge majority I think they will get against taking


a quota of refugees, it will strengthen Hungary's negotiating


position. And they were traditionally the front line against


the Ottoman Empire and so forth, and a particular edge to the migration


problem for that reason. Yes, they don't mind using the term Christian


in an unashamed way. I think possibly the Hungarians are more of


a problem for Brussels when we are at the moment. Donald Trump, again


he marches on. A few months ago we were saying he is wobbling, Hillary


Clinton is coming back again, but he's extraordinarily resilient in


terms of the polls. There's only three points in it according to


these polls. Donald Trump is on 44.4%, he cannot stop shocking us.


It is this beauty queen story that I confess I find puzzling to work out.


I have to say women's rights are something I am passionate about. And


he probably is not. I don't think so. This comes after a Twitter row


with someone he described as Miss Piggy but now people at his former


golf club said he used to complain that some of the women who worked


there were not pretty enough or too fat. But what you have got to know


about him is that he's not trying to win over people like me or you,


because quite a lot of people like what he is. But I suspect if you


talk to some of those individual people, they wouldn't agree on


points. There is Purgatory in the papers, Amber Rudd, Home Secretary.


She has written an ode to safe sex. Think of now and our romance, O


darling you are less appealing, what you say is so revealing, if risk is


your mood and speech, how about bingo on the beach? Three cheers for


trying. And finally not on the safe sex scene, but on the sexy dancing


theme, the rooster that is Ed Balls worries on delighting the country in


Strictly Come Dancing. It is great, suddenly Ed Balls is human,


everybody loves him and his not that good at dancing. I love some of the


quotes from the judges, I cannot believe it, said Bruno, what a


compact, Tony Blair would be proud. Then Darcey Bussell, you were losing


character, I didn't think I would see that musical bounce through your


body all the way through. That is a site I don't wish to see again. What


is the great scoop I will get from Theresa May, if she said she was


going to go on Strictly Come Dancing that will secure the headlines all


day and all week. Thank you, both. Now to the weather. It is beautiful


today as we head towards proper Autumn. It is going to be hard to


more soft bottom. What a difference a day makes. We do


have some patchy mist and fog around northern areas. A lovely weather


watcher picture. The fog is lifting and because the sun is out, there


will be a lot. We so have some light showers in Cornwall and


Pembrokeshire. Those are moving away during the morning. A bit of fair


weather cloud bubbling up. Temperatures will be 14 or 15.


Overnight, the temperatures will drop quickly. There will be a breeze


towards the West. Further east we will have clear skies. The


temperatures will be close to freezing and there could be mist and


fog patches. For a while, there will be more clothes for Northern


Ireland. Labia spot of rain. Essentially, it is a dry and fine


day. -- maybe a spot of rain. It is a quiet weather week ahead.


Throughout the EU referendum, Downing Street was at the centre


of a raw, often tetchy and ultimately unsuccessful struggle


to keep the Tory party and the nation on board for the EU.


David Cameron aside, one of the key players throughout


was his communications director Craig Oliver, knighted recently.


He's just published his account of those hectic months,


Craig, or is it certainly? It is circling but I'm very happy for you


to call me Craig. People are quite squeamish about using titles they


get. They are given an honour and then are squeamish. I am not


squeamish, it is one of those things. Somebody said, why is this


not on the title of your book? Sir Alex Ferguson did not use it on his


title, and the thought never occurred to me. One of the things


that comes out of that period and the period you describe is


dishonesty. There are three examples where the government was dishonest,


I would say. They come directly from your book. The first is when Cameron


said under different circumstances he might lead a campaign to leave


Europe. Reading your book, that is completely inconceivable and in


fact, even before the negotiations have started you are organising what


would become the Remain campaign. I don't think it was inconceivable.


There were points when he was very frustrated with Europe. The big


question was whether this was an organisation capable of change. That


only emerged over time and he was only able to see that over time.


What you've got to remember is during this period, business leaders


and economists were coming out with reports saying they were concerned


about it. It was across a spectrum over time. Another example, a more


direct one, David Cameron came onto this programme, and I said if you


lose, will you stay on as prim minister? He looked me in the eye


and he said, definitely. That was always nonsense. You were asking him


to speculate about his future and he answered the question at the time.


The reality is you can only judge circumstances is they actually


happened and when you approach those circumstances he took the decision


that actually it would not be the right thing for him to do. To hold


them to account for something he said a few weeks before when the


reality of this situation was impacting on him was very different.


But you say in the book in his heart there were almost no circumstances


in which he would stay and yet he was saying publicly he would stay.


It is a simple thing, directly dishonest. I'm describing the moment


when he is facing defeat and learns that he is defeated and in his heart


he knew that he could not stay on. We discussed it and we thought about


it. You think when I asked him about that he thought he could stay on. I


think he thought there were circumstances when he could stay on


and the reality is had he said, I will leave, that would have changed


a lot. But he did believe there were circumstances. This is what leads


cynicism about politics, politicians don't give honest, direct answers.


And they give correct answers that are correct at the time. He was a


human being faced with the reality of that loss and it is only about


moment that you can truly know. A third example was when Boris Johnson


announced he was involved in the Leave campaign that only nine


minutes previously he'd sent a text to the Prime Minister telling him


what he was going to do. That seemed like bad behaviour and coloured our


view of Boris Johnson for a long time. It turns out he had been


detecting and e-mailing the Prime Minister about his agonising choice


for some time. -- sending text messages. Let me clear what happened


up, when we came back from the renegotiation on the morning we were


discussing what David Cameron would say. There was a message came in and


he stopped, he looked at his phone and spent some time reading the


message and he looked up and said, it is out. We knew that he was


talking about Boris. He went through a very human, very well argued and


human message. A few hours later I received a phone call saying, not


said anything about Boris being out you? I had not. He was saying that


Boris was at that point saying he could be reconsidering. He was not


so sure. We were in a period of not going which way he was going to go.


The final confirmation came nine minutes before. We could have


revealed the extent to which he was wobbling all over the place like a


wonky shopping trolley, as he described it himself, but we chose


not to. I think that was an honourable thing to do. It made it


look as if he'd kept the Prime Minister in the dark until the last


minute. Which would have been better? That we had revealed? It is


always better that you reveal. I don't think Boris would have thanked


us for that. Let's turn to Michael Gove, you are very harsh on him. You


said he was a destructive game player who suffers from a vaulting


ambition and preparedness to mislead. Did he realise what the


British people thought, he had a principled position against the EU


which you did not have as he was right and you were all wrong? I


think we did have principled positions. I'm not questioning that


Michael Gove is a Eurosceptic. That is a legitimate position. But let's


look at some of the things that happened and why I describe them in


that way. Two days before he announced he was going to be chair


of the Leave campaign, he said he would not be taking a leading role.


When he was part of that it was questioning policies that were only


tangentially related to Europe. He questioned the integrity of the


Prime Minister, saying that he was corroding public trust. That was not


behaviour that we necessarily expected from them. Let's ask about


Theresa May because she appears on the edges of the story again and


again. You describe her as a submarine under the water. You're


never sure which way she's going to go. Somebody once says, we're not


sure if she is working for the other side. You are pretty negative about


her. Is the truth that actually, she saw it better than you guys? She put


out a statement saying she did not want to insult people's intelligence


by claiming everything is perfect about the EU or that the sky will


fall in if we vote to leave. You would not let her say that. What I


was happy for her to do was to express their opinions and say what


was right and she was sincere in those and that was acceptable. In


the book, I describe what it was like to be in the middle of that


vultures campaign. It was difficult in the lead up to that campaign


having a Home Secretary not reveal which side she was on. When she did


reveal what's IT was on it was 51-49 and very equivocal. -- what side she


was on. It is perfectly legitimate for her to do that. What the book


was doing is recounting what it was like to be part of this. And during


that story, again and again and again, you are very angry about what


you call the lies of the Leave side, and yet from your point of view,


terrible things were said which turned out not to be true, the


punishment budget, we were going to have a ferocious budget if we voted


to leave. That's not happened. Let us take two links. You are saying


about the leave campaign. We were prepared to say that the NHS claims


were not true. There is going to be an EU army. Turkey is going to be


forced to join. Millions of people will come to this country. That is


not true. I'm dealing with this point. In terms of our site, the


punishment budget was George Osborne saying, independent economic experts


were saying there will be a ?30 billion black hole in the economy.


You can do that by raising tactics, -- raising taxes, or you can raise


borrowing. Nothing has happened, we are members of the EU on the same


terms as the 23rd of June. But there has been some good economic news but


also the currency has dropped 15%, we've had growth forecast downgraded


and we've also had the Chancellor of the Exchequer saying that he's going


to reset fiscal policy. That sounds like a lot more borrowing to me.


Let's wait and see. Thank you for joining us. Very interesting book.


Dominic Cooper made his name as one of Alan Bennett's History Boys


alongside his best friend James Corden.


He's starred in the film version of Mamma Mia,


played Saddam Hussein's son and is now back in London's West End


as The Libertine, John Wilmot, Earl of Rochester, poet,


When we met recently, Dominic Cooper began by telling me


about his latest screen success in the TV series Preacher,


You know it's a sin just to ask for that?


I'm the preacher of this small town and I get consumed or this energy


called Genesis enters my body and can't exist anywhere else.


Which has come from outer space?


It is a very, very strange piece of TV, but it was a huge hit


in the States, why do you think that is?


It reminded me when I first read it of something I used to love -


Twin Peaks when it first came out, or early Tarantino work,


and it was the people who made Breaking Bad.


I thought if anyone is going to make this man like this,


they are the people to do it, and from what I've seen they've done


And it's crucial to your character, he's a man who is struggling


with whether or not God exists, and struggling with his own belief,


which takes us to the stage play you're doing - Rochester,


We have John Wilmot, Earl of Rochester.


If somebody wrote a cartoon book about whom no one would believe it.


One of the most extraordinary figures in English poetry.


I always find it hard to imagine where we are now to believe


that anyone like that who was so forward-thinking


in his time existed then, so many years ago.


I don't think you would, you certainly wouldn't be able


to write a comic depicting a man that existed then who was doing


Blasphemer, libels the king, a filthy poet, probably an atheist,


may have had a deathbed conversion back to Christianity or not,


we don't know, dies at 33 of syphilis, cross-dresser,


first poem in the English language in praise of sodomy...


Now you put it like that, it's wonderful.


Yes, all those things, which is why I had to play him.


And it's a very physically demanding role, isn't it?


Yes, I've never experienced anything so versatile in that way.


I don't stop talking and I don't stop physically moving around


But that's him, his energy, his emphaticness and his enthusiasm


towards life at the beginning, which slowly...


Rather rapidly deteriorates, is what makes the man or the man


If you read his poetry, his love letters he wrote


to his mistress or his wife, they are beautiful and you see that


side of him, you see a true part of the man,


then you learn what he was like in his younger years


when he travelled Europe and the chaos he got up to.


And then, for me, very much the relationship he had


with his father and with the king, and he never


really got over the loss of his father, and he blamed it on the


He almost wanted to taste everything and experience everything


and take everything as far as possible,


must always exceed otherwise I don't feel like I'm alive.


But he could never reach those heights.


You have had some great roles but one of the


greatest was Uday Hussein, Saddam Hussein's psychotic son.


Tell me about that character, in terms of


That was in relation to his father, and if


you have a father like Saddam you don't have a


But he was an absolute monster, and it was very hard.


Whenever you play these characters, you've got to find some redeeming


qualities that other people saw in them that they could exist with,


You have to find the human truth because there must


have been a glimmer of something good somewhere.


Something that is so repressed deep down, some dark,


nasty, vile thing that happened to them as children or that you


experienced and you need to access that.


Nobody must know this,


Tell anybody and I will have to cut your tongue out.


You were not born with a golden spoon in your


mouth, you did not go to Eton, you needed


bursaries and help to get into acting.


You said recently London is becoming a


really tough place for actors young actors who are not already rich


I luckily live at home because I'm from London.


How on earth many of the students came from elsewhere paying


Yes, I did say in that interview, I hope what makes


this city so beautiful and wonderful and interesting and


intriguing to be part of, which is much to do with the art,


is not pushing the artists out to a point


where they won't exist anymore and the city will become


Thank you very much for talking to us.


Dominic Cooper, one of our most interesting and versatile actors.


Now a look at what's coming up after this programme...


Coming up on Sunday Morning Live: Sam Allardyce says 'entrapment has


A baby with three genetic parents is unveiled -


we ask where is this line of research taking us.


And we have Harris J, who's been called the Muslim Justin


And without more ado - she doesn't like fuss -


You are announcing today this Great Repeal Bill, can you start off by


explaining what it means. Yes, when the United Kingdom joined the


European Union, legislation was passed in the European Communities


Act which enshrined that relationship we have is a member of


the European Union. What we will be doing with the Great Repeal Bill is


repealing that European Communities Act. That means the UK will be an


independent sovereign nation making its own laws. I cannot quite work


out, is this a statement of the blindingly obvious? In other words


we know we are leaving the EU, and at that point EU law ceases to


apply, but is it such a big deal really? It is an important step we


are taking because firstly it makes it very clear to the British people


who voted for us to leave the EU that is exactly what we are doing.


Secondly it gives that greater degree of clarity about the sort of


timetables we are following. And crucially, it is important for us to


set this out now so we have the timing so when we leave the European


Union there is a smooth transition. I think that is important,


particularly for the economy and business. So all of those European


laws people have been complaining about for years, they become British


laws? We will take European law into UK law, then because we will be


independent and sovereign in relation to this, we will be able to


decide on those laws. Parliament will be able to decide whether we


wish to change those or keep those laws and I think it is important to


bring that body of law into UK law because it is that which protects


workers' writes. I can see a lot of MPs saying rather than incorporating


this into UK law, I would like to change it. Are you sure you will be


able to get this bill through the House of Commons? It is an important


step in leaving the European Union. Parliament voted 6-1 to give the


British people the choice as to whether to stay in the EU or leave.


People voted, they want us to leave. This is an important step, and in


terms of getting this through, I think it is important we have this


in place so there is a smooth transition, so workers know their


rights are protected, businesses know where they stand, then we will


be able to make our laws and determine whether we want to change


them. In terms of the brutal politics, there are lots of


opposition MPs who might want to vote this down, and a lot of Tories


on the so-called soft Brexit argument who might want to vote this


down. You may not be able to get this through, and if you can't is


that the trigger for another general election? As I have just said, when


Parliament voted for a referendum on staying in the EU, Parliament voted


6-1 to say to the British people, this is your choice, you give your


voice. The British people have determined that we will leave the


European Union and I think anybody looking at this Great Repeal Bill,


which will make us that independent sovereign nation once again, anybody


looking at that should remember this is about delivering for the British


people, and to me it's not just about leaving the EU, it's about


that essential question of the trust people can live in their


politicians. The people have spoken, we will deliver. Again, some MPs may


say hold on, we have no idea at all what kind of Wrexham you are taking


us to, why should we give you a blank check before you set out on


it? Of course we will be starting the negotiations once we have


triggered Article 50, but I think it is important as we go through that


process of negotiation, I want to get the right deal for the British


people. I'm not as mystic about the opportunities available to the UK,


we want the right deal for our continuing relationship with


countries and inside the EU and with the EU itself, but it is not right


to give a running commentary or set out at every stage what are


negotiating hand is because you don't get a good deal if that's how


you approach it. Do we actually need negotiations with the EU? I think we


want to negotiate with them what the relationship will be. Life will be


different in the future, we will be that independent country, but


crucially we want still to have a good relationship with countries


inside the European Union and with the EU itself. That's important for


our economy, for jobs in the UK, for us to be able to continue working


with them on issues around crime and security. There are some of your own


MPs, Bernard Jenkin and others, who said we don't need a negotiation.


Article 50 will chart us in a series of talks, and actually all we need


to do now is say, we will not put tariffs on your goods coming in, we


don't expect you to put tariffs on our goods coming to you, take it or


leave it, goodbye. The process of leaving the European Union is quite


complex, we have got to look at a range of issues... Must it be


complex? There is complexity in our relationship with the EU at the


moment. I think we owe it to people in terms of their job and protection


of workers in the UK, we owe it to businesses, people who want to


invest in the UK in the future to make sure we get the right deal for


trade in goods and services and I think that's about sitting down with


the European Union. It's not just about what we want, I think we want


a strong EU that we can continue to trade with, they have an interest in


trading with us and that's how we will get the right deal for Britain.


You say no one in commentary, and all commentators gasp at that, but


much more importantly people who are making big investment decisions,


most recently Nissan say they cannot decide whether to invest more money


in new factories and products until they know roughly speaking where you


are going. Aren't you in danger by not giving commentary about which


kind of exit you want but you are starving Britain of investment?


There is a difference between not giving any commentary and giving


running commentary. Today I'm setting out some further detail on


the timing and the way we will approach this whole question and of


course the Great Repeal Bill. That will give people greater clarity, so


when I think it is right to be talking about the approach we are


taking, we of course will do that. But everybody assumes, commentators


want to have a day by day, what is it you are talking about now, that


is the wrong way to deal with the negotiation. Just now you talked


about timing which allows me to ask again about the timing of triggering


Article 50. Boris Johnson suggested maybe early next year, Donald Tusk


has suggested he thinks the same thing, are they right? I have been


saying we wouldn't trigger it before the end of this year, so we can get


some cooperation in place, but we will be triggering it before March


next year. And following that we have two years to conclude these


negotiations? Yes. So once you trigger Article 50, then what


happens? The remaining members of the EU have got to decide what the


process of negotiation is. I hope and I will be saying to them, now


they know what our timing will be, it is not an exact date but they


know it will be in the first quarter of next year, we will be able to


have some preparatory work so when the trigger comes we will have a


smooth the process of negotiation. It is not just important for the UK,


it is important for Europe as a whole that we are able to do this in


the best possible way so we have the least disruption for businesses. You


were talking about investors earlier in your questions. And when we leave


the EU, we have a smooth transition. Can I ask about Parliament itself


because all of this is about making Parliament sovereign, and yet at the


moment it suggests we will go through this negotiation and the


most important talks probably this country has had for generations,


without Parliament knowing what is going on. Parliament needs to know


stage by stage what is happening surely? The Great Repeal Bill we


have just been talking about, Parliament will be having its say on


that and at various stages we will be keeping Parliament informed. This


is not about keeping silent for two years, but it's about making sure we


are able to negotiate, that we don't set out all the cards in our


negotiation because as anybody will know who has been involved in these


things, if you do that upfront you don't get the right deal. What I'm


determined to do is get the right deal for Britain. The argument


running through the Conservative Party in Birmingham is about the


nature of the exit we negotiate. I know this soft and hard thing is


irritating jargon but nonetheless there is a truth there. There are


those who say it is important to keep tariff free market open, that


will require a detailed negotiation and we might have to concede stuff


to allow that to happen. Others say no, we turn our back on the EU in


effect, we say take it or leave it and we have a blanket ban on the


free movement of people from the rest of the EU. Can you give any


indication in which you are tending? When the vote took place, apart from


the message of leaving the European Union, I think there was also a


clear message from the British people that they wanted us to


control movement of people from the EU coming into the UK so we will


deliver on that. But I don't look at it in the terms you have set out. We


want to negotiate what we believe will be the right deal for the


British people, the right deal for Britain when we leave the EU. That's


about negotiating on things like trading in goods and services and


making sure we get that good deal. I don't look at it is it this model or


that one, I say what is going to be right for the UK, let's go and get


it. Let's talk about migration in particular. I can remember having a


discussion with you when you were Home Secretary. You were seething


with frustration because I kept saying you cannot control the number


of people going in and at that point you couldn't, but are you a clear


that after the vote people want complete control so you are able to


say as Prime Minister nobody comes in or actually it benefits us to get


70,000 engineers in, but the control will definitely be in Parliament and


there will be an end to the free movement of people in all


circumstances across the EU? What people that a government that


can set the rules of who comes into the country. The frustration was


people could come into the UK from the European Union. There are a


number of ways you can do this, and we need to look at what is best for


the UK. The important point is to have rules that are set by the


government so it is the UK Government who determines, and


ensures we have control. Those involved in universities, car


manufacturing, whatever it is, who are thinking, I need some more


people in, I need skilled workers, some kind of work permit system


might be a way forward? We will look at various ways in which we can


bring in the control the people would want. We will make sure the


brightest and best can come to the UK. You mentioned the word skills.


That lights up another issue, why it is we've not been skilling up people


in the UK to take on these jobs. I want to make sure we have a society


where everyone can go as far as their talents can take them. How


important is it that British business has access to the single


market. I want the right deal and what David Davis and his department


are doing is listening to businesses in the UK, finding out what it is


they find most important to them. I've been sitting there with big and


small British businesses and listened to investors in the UK. I


sat down with some investors and companies, those who are providing


jobs in the UK. We are listening to people and failure what it is most


important. This process starts, article 50 is triggered by the end


of March. By the end of March next year. You wanted this to be a moment


when you appealed to the middle, people pupil Robert yours -- people


who are making ends meet. All politicians want to win elections in


the centre ground, what more is it than warm words? You talk about the


centre ground, as a party we are building a new centre Brendan


British politics. -- a new centre in British politics. I want politics


that works for everyone, society that works for everyone so people


can have the opportunity to go where their talents take them. We started


setting that out in different areas, I've made a key speech on education


about ensuring young people are given the opportunity to develop


their talents. I want a society that I called a great meritocracy,


they're what matters about your future is how hard you work and your


talents, not where you come from or your parents, what your accent is. I


understand that. You raised grammar schools. What do you say to people


watching who say, we don't want to go back to 1955 and a stark


separation of children at the age of 11. Wonderful for those who are


chosen but could be very damaging or devastating for those who feel those


exams -- who did not pass. We're not going back to that system of binary


education. We're not going back to the 1950s. What will be different


is, we've had great success in improving schools. Academies and


free schools have had an impact. 1.4 million children are in schools


which are good or outstanding. But there are a quarter of a million in


schools that are underperforming. We need to increase the capacity of the


system and that's what my speech was about. We will be building on the


free school policies and continuing those but crucially, we are saying


we want universities to take more of an interest, the independent sector,


we are changing the rules on faith schools. I want to remove the ban we


have in our system, the legislation that says you cannot set up a


selective school. We all know in practice what happens out there is


the selection by house price. Or by well. I want to make sure that good


quality education is available across the board. Once you have


academic selection and children chosen, I come back to this brutal


thing that happened at 11, a lot of people saying you cannot go back to


that. It will not be completely binary, there will be different


types of schools providing education. What I've always said


throughout my political career, we want the education that is right for


every child. I think for those, the point about what we're doing is


removing the ban on selection and saying to grammar schools, if you


are setting up a school we want you to show that you are genuinely


reaching out across society in giving those opportunities to young


people and ensuring... Does that mean targets for less well-off kids?


It could mean a variety of things. We are consulting as to the best


approach on this. It will be about making sure that when schools are


expanding their reaching out, making sure the quality of education is


there through a system. It is also one of the other things in the


consultation was about how we identify those children for whom


free school meals has always been used as a measure in education. When


I was cheering and education committee we were talking about


other measures. Looking at how we identify those people not captured


by that who are struggling. If there's a huge new policy for the


whole of England? Are we going to see a grammar school in every small


town in England? This is about letting the system developed. The


government is taking off the ban on a particular type of school. It is


letting the system. People will come forward. The speech I made and the


announcement I made, everybody is focused on this but it is about


ensuring we have good school places for every child and the capacity of


the system across the board. Let's move onto one other thing. We used


to have an honours system in this country which meant people who'd


given back something extra to society, money to charity or time to


charity, got an honour. It was per people who'd really pretend


something above and beyond. We seem to have drifted into an honours


system which rewards people who are already rich and successful. They


are often famous and on telly. Or they've got friends in government.


Many people wonder whether it is a fair system. Would you like to see


it returned to a more basic system? If you look at any of the honours,


the vast majority are people who've given something to the local


community or been involved in charities. The focus is always on


the big names and the headlines in that sense. I agree that we want an


honours system that ensures we can recognise when people are


contributing to their communities. It takes me on to the question of


yourself. As I said at the beginning lots of people don't know who you


are. Can I ask you about your early upbringing? Were you stringent or


comfortably off? First of all, very happy and stable and I think what


was important was my parents always give me the message, whatever you


do, try and do your best. That's what I've followed throughout my


life. It was not... Brotherly Conservatives? We did not talk about


politics. I was brought up as an only child of a great interest in


current affairs. My father was a clergyman as you know. He took a


very simple view. He was the clergyman for the whole of this


parish, the local vicar, it was not right for him to set out his


politics, because he should be appealing and working with everybody


in his parish. I was limited as to what I was able to do publicly


because he wanted to make sure that there was nobody who felt they could


not approach him. You lost him and your mother very early on. I did


that affect you as a person and a politician? I did lose them both


very early. One after the other. I hope what I have continued to do I


would try to do the best in whatever job I do. Want to give back. I


learned a strong belief in public service and in trying to understand


what you need to do for other people. It is not just about what


you think. It is about getting out there and hearing from people,


listening to their voice. Delivering for them. Like Margaret Thatcher you


had a father who was a liberal just -- who was a religious leader, you


would describe yourself as a believing Christian, you came from a


family that was not very rich. As the Conservative Party better off


when it is led by someone from that background. The Conservative Party


has had leaders from all sorts of background. I think what David


Cameron did is really important, he took us into the first majority


government for nearly a quarter of a century and change the party whilst


doing that. Others, each leader will approach the leadership of the party


in their own way. But the party as a whole is strongest when it works for


everyone. It is strongest when it is reaching into every part of the


country and every part of society. This sounds to me like what George


Osborne said about representing the liberal mainstream. Why did you sack


him? He's contributed hugely to British politics over the last few


years, in government and opposition. And you sack him. I was put together


my team, I have a great deal of Cabinet ministers, we have great


discussions about the table, as we put policies together and share that


vision of a country that works for everyone. Warren -- can I ask you


about your cabinet, because people say you're returning it to an


old-fashioned one, discussing it around the table, by committee,


going back to the traditional Parliamentary style of government.


Is that accurate? We are looking at more Cabinet discussion. I've set up


three new subcommittees. Secretaries of state are coming together in


different groupings more frequently than they have in the past to look


different issues. I've said we will be a government that will work more


with green papers and white papers. We are hearing voices as we develop


policy. Do you think there was too much silver government? Too many


chums sitting around and not enough process? -- too much sofa


government. I think what we've done is the way that it is important to


take government forward. Over the last few years we've achieved a lot


as a Conservative government. One very final question. Everybody wants


to know, is your husband going to be on the platform when you make your


speech? I don't know why they want to know that. You'll have to wait


and see. On that note, thank you very much, Theresa May, Prime


Minister. Next week I'm going to speak to Ken Clarke, looking back on


his long life in politics. Andrea will be here in one hour, when his


guests will include Iain Duncan Smith. Thank you for now. -- Andrew




Andrew Marr interviews key newsmakers and shines a light on what is happening in the world. Andrew's guests are prime minister Theresa May MP, actor Dominic Cooper and Sir Craig Oliver, former director of communications for David Cameron. Matthew Parris from The Times and The Guardian's Anushka Asthana review the papers.

Download Subtitles