16/10/2016 The Andrew Marr Show

This week Theresa May was confronted by MPs from all sides

demanding that Parliament should be given a say on how we leave

Is it really possible that the Commons could frustrate the

Speaking for the government, the leading Leave campaigner

And challenging Theresa May, while planning for a second Scottish

independence referendum, Nicola Sturgeon.

And leading that revolt in the Commons,

In our paper review this morning, experienced figures from both sides

Lucy Thomas, former leading light of Stronger In.

Fresh from his starring role in David Bowie's swansong Lazarus,

Dexter and Six Feet Under star, Michael C Hall looks back

# Looked up here, man, I am in danger.

# I've got nothing left to lose. A reminiscent voice.

But first the news with Tina Daheley.

Boris Johnson said Britain remaining in the European Union would be

a "boon for the world and for Europe" in a previously

The Foreign Secretary wrote the Remain-backing article two days

before he revealed he would be campaigning for Brexit.

Sources close to Mr Johnson say the piece was only written as a way

of helping him clarify his thoughts as political correspondent

It's well known that Boris Johnson wavered over which side

Just days before declaring he backed Brexit, Mr Johnson wrote

a series of articles, not all intended for

publication, setting out the conflicting arguments.

Now the Sunday Times has printed the column in which he made

In it, Mr Johnson said the UK should be intimately engaged with the EU.

He suggested Brexit could lead to an economic shock or the break-up

of the UK and said access to the single market came with just

a small membership fee, directly contradicting his public

stance both during the referendum campaign and since becoming

Sources said Mr Johnson only wrote the piece to help

articulate his thoughts and it made him realise the case

And while critics will say the existence of this column

undermines Mr Johnson's commitment to Brexit,

the full content appears only to highlight his

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has been strongly criticised for failing

to provide "consistent leadership" in tackling anti-Semitism

The Commons Home Affairs Committee said this had created a "safe space"

for those with "vile attitudes" towards Jewish people.

But Mr Corbyn accused the committee of placing a disproportionate

US Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump

has accused his rival Hillary Clinton of having been

"on some kind of drug" during their last debate.

At a rally in New Hampshire, Mr Trump said both he and his

White House rival should take a drugs test before their next

South Korea and the United States say a missile test by North Korea

The rocket is said to have exploded soon after its launch.

It has an estimated range of up to 2,500 miles,

which would be enough to hit Japan and the US territory of Guam.

Pyongyang has not yet reacted to the news.

The British director Steve McQueen has been given

the BFI's highest honour - a Fellowship - at the

The Oscar-winning director of 12 Years a Slave was presented

with the award last night by actor Michael Fassbender

That's all from me, now back to you, Andrew.

Nobody here on any drugs apart from caffeine, we are wired on caffeine,

I have to more new. The headlines, 13-year-old allegations against

British troops make the front pages of a couple of papers. The Mail on

Sunday. The same on the front of the Sunday Telegraph with army outrage

at betrayal of Iraqi war troops. The Sunday Times has the story about

Boris Johnson. We will talk about that in a moment. And also the

Select Committee report and the safe space for anti-Semitism. We will

start with the Boris Johnson story. It is giving us most amusement. I am

not sure if he had come out with that as a remain campaigner it would

have convinced people. He starts it asking whether David Cameron thinks

the renegotiation, half of it is the renegotiation and the end is I

cannot bring myself to back him so it was a political calculation, not

about what was best for the country, what is best for the economy, he

slips in the fact that it could lead to the break-up of the United

Kingdom and it could lead to Russian aggression, there could be serious

consequences but for me this is politics. It is reasonable to lay

out the argument in two ways, but most unfortunate for him that they

obtained the peace and printed it. I think now that we can read the

column that was never published, that is not news, we knew he had

written the two columns. Now that we can read it, we can see that he

could not really persuade himself that coming out for Remain was a

good idea, containing passages that if we fail to get reform Britain

would have a great future outside, but we have no reform, so nothing

for it then. And he calls the Prime Minister's deal a bit of a dud. It

undermines his account, that he tried to write the column to see if

he could find a way to make the argument for Remain. None of it is

about the detail, what does life outside the EU looked like? Nobody

thought about that, while prices go up, there was no thinking of that,

it was purely if the renegotiation is enough, and is the status quo the

right thing, not about life outside. The detail that follows is obsessed

in the Commons and the courts. The Sun newspaper has a piece about this

coalition building up in the Commons to put Theresa May on the spot. It

is the story I believe you will talk to Nick Clegg about, an attempt by

various Remoaners to cobble together a cross-party parliamentary alliance

to try to insist on a vote on what the Brexit strategy should be. My

problem with this is not just... It is the third attempt. It is the

remain as moaning -- remain group. If there is

a vote I think a majority of MPs will vote to trigger Article 50.

There was the Owen Smith attempt there should be a vote once we know

the terms of the deal before finally pulling the trigger after Article 50

has been triggered and now the third attempt which means that ought to be

a Parliamentary vote on the terms on Theresa May negotiates on. Is it

reasonable to say we voted to leave, but quite what that means is not

clear and therefore there are issues that MPs have right to discuss? The

problem is that if MPs decide they will reject a hard Brexit and

Theresa May should take that off the table before going into the

negotiation it is like sending her in the boxing ring with one hand

tied behind her back, if she cannot threaten a hard Brexit she is less

likely to get concessions on freedom of movement. Why do this to her

going into this process? There is a ferocious attack on people like Toby

in the Observer editorial and a defence of these blockheads as the

Sun newspaper described them. What I would say is it is the ultimate

irony that a campaign based on making our Parliament, more

sovereignty for the UK, more democratic accountability, but the

biggest decision constitutionally this country has taken, you do not

want Parliament have a say because it is a bit inconvenient. The

details would be gone over and I do understand showing your hand early

can have an impact on negotiations but it is a huge decision and

calling us Remoaners when all we care about is the country getting

the best deal, accepting the results. What does the deal looked

like? None of your friends on the Leave campaign saw fit to say what

the deal would be. And hard Brexit is worse than a softer Brexit. We

knew what they were against. I said to Michael Gove, does it mean we are

outside the single market and he said absolutely yes. Those things

were clear and it was clear in the course of the referendum campaign

that if people, voting to leave were voting to take back control over

immigration and do that you cannot be in the single market, they say

and quite a lot of this is clear and pushes us towards a hard Brexit.

Except for the implications, prices going up. And falling back on world

trade tariffs. Somebody on the news was heartbreaking, saying why did

nobody warn us prices go up? We tried and were told it was Project

Fear. These are the implications and I am sorry people will see their

cost of living go up. We are seeing it with food and petrol. That is the

sadness, people voted for ?350 million a week for the NHS and that

will not happen. It is clear we voted to leave the EU and the latest

tactic, even though people like Nick Clegg said they just want a vote on

how to negotiate, it is a blocking tactic by those unhappy at losing

the referendum. The curiosity of the new tactic is they emphasise the

reason levers voted to leave was because they cared passionately

about sovereignty until now, they accused us as being racist but

finally they acknowledge that it is actually more about Parliamentary

sovereignty than it is about immigration. I would say, Lucy,

there will be an opportunity for Parliament to vote, they will vote

on the great repeal Bill so it is not as if the principle is at stake.

There will be a Parliamentary vote on Brexit. In the Sunday Telegraph.

Tell us about that. It is more of the same saying it is Project Fear

mark two. It is sad the level of debate has got to this where you

cannot have a grown-up discussion about what the terms. If people did

not feel they fully understood the facts they should be a proper debate

and the fact we are labelled Remoaners, there should be scrutiny.

Let's try and grow up because it has got divisive. Lots of us sit around

talking about it but this has Cabinet level. A spread in the mail

on the Sunday suggests we could lose Chancellor Philip Hammond who is

angry about the way he has been excluded from meetings, he is

leading the so-called soft Brexit. This story is that Philip Hammond

the Chancellor is irritated because he has been excluded from critical

meetings of which the Brexit negotiating strategy has been

discussed and he may resign if his views aren't taken into account in

future. It feels like a leak from the new cross-party Rebel Alliance,

trying to strengthen their hand. You must listen to us and have a

parliamentary vote otherwise you risk prominent resignations. We know

that Theresa May's Brexit subcommittee of the Cabinet is

evenly divided between those wanting to remain an Brexiteer is. She seems

to want to hold the line between the groups. Ultimately it has to be

conducted taking on board those concerns. Philip Hammond has met

with a lot of business and knows from his time in the Foreign Office

about the practicalities and it is right he should be there and those

concerns are taken into account. Let's move on to the other big

political story, the Home Affairs Select Committee has attacked the

Labour Party and have many other people for allowing anti-Semitism to

grow in this country. You have the story. It is a story in the Observer

which is usually reasonably friendly to labour and reports investigation

by the committee into anti-Semitism in the Labour Party and it is a

damning report which refers to various anti-Semitic incidents that

have been insufficiently investigated in the Labour Party and

criticises Shami Chakrabarti for her whitewash and calls into question

again what the timeline was of her being offered a peerage and whether

it was an incentive. She has been on the programme and said absolutely

she was not offered the peerage before doing the enquiry. Nobody

suggests that Jeremy Corbyn's anti-Semitic himself but this is to

do with the Israeli and Palestinian issue, the people who are

passionately pro-Palestinian going over the line? The Corbyn defence

has always been there is a difference between being

anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic but the problem is that the illusion

that takes place is that anything that is critical against Israel,

even if it is often anti-Semitic is fine because there is a difference

between being anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic. We will talk to Tim

Laut, the acting chair of the committee after this, I hope.

We must turn to the other part of the political agenda, which is

Scotland. Nicola Sturgeon is bringing forward legislation for a

second referendum on independence if she doesn't get what she wants on

our kind of Brexit. This is the Scottish Herald, saying she wants to

trigger another referendum. I feel she got the result she wanted from

the referendum and it allows her to call for this independence

referendum. She didn't necessarily agree with the kind of campaign we

ran, she thought it was a bit too much like project fear, but what is

interesting... She said to me on air, she said don't try to rerun

project fear because it doesn't work and you will get the wrong answer.

It is a terribly sad thing that did happen, but what's interesting here

is that opinion hasn't changed so there isn't actually in Scotland

more support for independence. Anecdotally some friends of mine

have said it does make me think differently because the EU

membership was a big deal in the first referendum, so there will be

people who voted to remain part of the UK as a result of keeping in the

EU. The opinion polls suggest there is less support for independence now

than there was in 2014. I don't find this credible because if there was

another Scottish referendum they would lose by a bigger margin, but I

don't buy this idea that if Scotland became independent of the UK it

could somehow retain its membership of the EU. Spain would kick up the

most almighty fuss because it would give incentives for the Basque

separatist. Who would pay their massive welfare bills? As I came

into the building, the only thing people were asking is, have you got

Donald Trump on the programme? As if! But it's what everyone wants to

talk about. Yes, there is peace in the Sunday Telegraph summarising the

accusations of assault made by women since Donald Trump categorically

denied he had assaulted anyone in the debate last week. What I find

one of the extraordinary aspects of this story is that Donald Trump is

so cross with the New York Times for running an account of these women

that he has threatened the New York Times with a libel suit. He has

described every Mexican immigrant of a rapist. It sounds like he is going

slightly doolally, suggesting Hillary Clinton was on performance

enhancing drugs in the last debate, and his people saying the election

will now be fixed. There is an air of desperation and nastiness

spreading through this. Absolutely, he's grasping, clutching at straws,

trying to find anything outrageous to get airtime but I think the part

you referred to, that the outcome is being set up to be seen as

illegitimate if Hillary wins, it just sets up so much anger and so

much outcry afterwards that they will end up with a hugely divided

society. I did use you two don't agree on absolutely everything but

thank you for an excellent paper review.

We've been hearing about that report on anti-Semitism, the acting chair

of the Home Affairs Committee, Tim Loughton, joins me now.

Let's explain to people who haven't been watching too closely exactly

what your committee report says, firstly about the Labour Party. It

is reporting to anti-Semitism in this country which we have been

looking into since June, and we published it today. There's some

hard-hitting points. Firstly this is about anti-Semitism in the country

generally and there has been an increase of 11% in the last year

alone of anti-Semitic crimes, but it's also about how it is affecting

political parties and we have made particular criticism of the way

anti-Semitism instance in the Labour Party haven't been handled well by

Jeremy Corbyn. What is at the core of your criticism? This is about

anti-Semitism within all the parties but you cannot deny the spate of

anti-Semitic incidents and allegations made against the Labour

Party members and many elected members has raised the whole profile

of this issue, and it was because of that that Jeremy Corbyn commissioned

the so-called independent Shami Chakrabarti report, and he still

seems to be in denial about the nature of the problem. You come

close to accusing Shami Chakrabarti of being corrupt in this report. We

don't say corrupt but we are awaiting a reply about the timings

of when she was offered a peerage which she now has. If this is

supposed to be an independent report, written by someone sitting

round the Shadow Cabinet table with Jeremy Corbyn, a report that

describes these incidents as unhappy incidents, I'm afraid a lot of

people have said it isn't worth the paper it is written on. Shami

Chakrabarti, sitting in the chair, I asked her and she said she had not

been offered a peerage before she wrote the report and therefore she

denied there is only what she called transactional funny business going

on. I don't think Jeremy Corbyn has got an anti-Semitic bone in his

body, but is your suggestion he has allowed a culture to emerge inside

the Labour Party which allows out right Jew haters too much free rein?

We paid tribute to Jeremy Corbyn's proud record of fighting racism over

many years, that is not in doubt. What we do question is his

leadership in doing something serious about this emerging problem

of anti-Semitism. Up to 50 members of the Labour Party, collected in

many cases, have been suspended over the last year on his watch. Some

have been readmitted without explanation, some have been

suspended again. I'm afraid there is a culture, and it came from many

witnesses, many from within the Labour Party, that this

mismanagement has created an air of it being safe for these anti-Semites

within the Labour Party to operate. That is not in the interest of all

political parties and that's why every member of the select committee

across all parties should support this report unanimously without a

vote and that's why it needs to be taken seriously. Thank you very much

for joining us. We haven't got a lot of time, it is a very busy morning.

Turning from politics, has it ever felt more hot and fetid?

It's a bit of a relief to turn to the cool, bright

So far, I'm really enjoying this autumn.

A bit of something for everyone over the next few days. This morning

certainly got off to a mixed start, some had a lovely start with a

beautiful sunrise, that was captured in North Yorkshire, but for many it

was quite the opposite. Leaden skies and quite a bit of rain. We have a

band of rain in the forecast is moving its way steadily northwards.

Once it has moved through, things will brighten up nicely. You can see

we have this band of rain across much of England, pushing northwards.

After a decent start in Scotland it goes downhill. Behind it, a few

showers on the breeze but some good spells of sunshine and it will be

quite warm. 18 degrees in the south-eastern corner. It stays windy

in the north and west with further showers but the central eastern

areas the skies will be clear and it stays dry. 11 degrees to start the

day on Monday, and it will be a bright and breezy day for central

eastern areas. Good spells of sunshine once again and relatively

mild. Further north and west, a bit of a breeze, more cloud and showers

moving through on the breeze. As I say, quite a mild day you get across

the south and east. Many thanks.

As we've been hearing, after a week when the Commons has

demanded more from Theresa May over her Brexit plans,

a cross-party group of MPs are trying to force a vote

on the Government's Brexit deal when it comes.

At the centre of all of this is a familiar face.

The former Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg joins me now.

Can we start by establishing exactly what you are trying to achieve. We

want to achieve the previous Conservative government did prior to

some major European talks. When John Major had to go to the rest of

Europe and negotiate the Maastricht Treaty, he first put in effect

something similar to a white Paper to the House of Commons and said

these are my objectives, this is the way I want to approach these talks,

will you give me your backing. Incidentally it is the exact same

approach Theresa May took under the coalition government when she

negotiated a new deal on police and judicial co-operation across the

European Union. It is a good president because it gives the

Government much greater authority with the backing of its parliament.

In those cases there hadn't been a referendum with the whole country

first. If she comes to the House of Commons and says this is the kind of

Brexit deal I want and that is voted down, that means the House of

Commons would vote down the way she wants to negotiate, make her

position almost impossible, wouldn't it? She would have to go back and

improve her negotiating stance. Personally I think Theresa May has

nothing to fear. Those who campaigned to remain in the European

Union of course accept the mandate, but what the Government doesn't

have, because of course the Brexiteers withheld from the British

people what they meant by Brexit, which means they don't have a

mandate how to take us out of the European Union. It is important the

Government subjects its ideas to the scrutiny of parliament before they

go to the negotiations elsewhere in Europe. If this vote happens and the

Government loses, then they cannot trigger Article 50 so this could

delay that. Yes, and that would be a good thing anyway because Theresa

May has already made a fundamental tactical error by saying, frankly

just to throw red meat to her backbenchers, but she will trickle

Article 50 in March next year -- trigger. Nothing is going to

meaningfully happen until the end of next year after the German election.

This is an attempt to ensure that as the Government pursues its mandate

of pulling us out of the European Union, they do so in a workable,

legal way, and in a way that doesn't throw the single market baby out

with the EU bath water. Do you have the numbers? I strongly suspect that

if the Government comes with a coherent plan for Brexit, they will

win a majority across the sides of the House of Commons. So you don't

have a majority of Conservative Europhiles with the opposition which

could defeat the Government on a substantive issue in the House of

Commons? I am not a whit, I have not been totting up numbers, but what

I'm keen to do, along with MPs from other parties including

Conservatives, is to say, we live in a representative democracy where the

Government has the to take us out of the European Union but it doesn't

have a mandate to do that without any scrutiny or accountability. It

is absurd to say that after a party winds an election it can do whatever

it likes. I put it to you that it is pretty clear what we were voting for

the of the referendum. I put it to Michael Gove, does this mean coming

out of the single market? He said it absolutely does. He was clear that

taking back control over immigration meant things that made our

membership of the single market incompatible, and therefore this

fantasy of the soft Brexit is simply a fantasy. I put it to you that you

are trying to subvert the will of the British people. They knew what

they were voting for and they were clear. They were not clear.

Apparently people like Michael Gove claimed immigration had nothing to

do with it. What is coming back to haunt the Brexiteers... People like

me are called Bremoaners but I think they are in a state of denial. The

Remain campaign in my view was listless, it didn't claim we were

going to get ?350 million in the NHS every week, it claimed there was a

utopia awaiting us, but the point is this, if they had dispelled out with

one voice, in other words if the cast of opportunist and chancers had

agreed on what Brexit was, then they would have a mandate to implement

the plan, but they deliberately withheld that from the British

people. Why? Because they didn't have a plan they could agree on and

don't still have a plan they appear to agree on about what Brexit means

in practice. It sounds to me if you want it to mean a so-called soft

Brexit, staying inside the single market, which is not compatible with

the promises given during the campaign and therefore you are

trying to subvert what happened in the referendum because you cannot

take back control of immigration and end the free movement of people and

stay inside the single market. Donald Tusk, Michael Gove may not

agree on much but they both agree on that.

they are both wrong, there are countries such as Norway who have

greater powers of control and yet they have full participation in the

single market. My view has always been if this government was smart,

tough and smart with diplomatic fancy footwork, it could square the

circle on changing the rules of freedom of movement but retaining

full membership of the single market. What it cannot do, which is

what the Conservatives appear to say, and it is there a contradiction

that is skewering now, you cannot say I want unfettered access to a

single market of rules but I do not want to abide by those rules. That

is impossible but it was not a problem created by the people who

voted for Brexit, it is created by the contradictions in the

Conservative Party. What you said to the Leave voters who look at you and

say it is a classic example of an establishment liberal trying to go

behind and fix the result afterwards, this is the betrayal we

were frightened of? If I was Leave voter, I would feel betrayed I voted

in the belief that the Brexiteer is me what they were doing. I put my

faith in Michael Gove Nigel Farage and I would be increasingly angry as

my electricity and gas prices went up and I could not take my children

on holiday to Spain because it was more expensive. I would be angry

that these people will not come clean by what they mean by Brexit.

Priti Patel was one of the dominant voices in the victorious Leave

campaign, and although a sceptic about the aid department, DFID,

She's also on Theresa May's key Brexit cabinet committee -

an influential voice as the Prime Minister charts

Britain's path out of the European Union.

We heard from Nick Clegg saying they should be a vote in the Commons on

the terms of Brexit and making the point the parliament is supposed to

be sovereign. Good morning. I think the Prime Minister could not have

been clearer when it comes to Parliament and discussions and

debates forthcoming in the Commons. She is not going to allow a vote. We

have seen debates and questions in the Commons nearly every day. There

will be a full discussion when we have the great repeal bill which of

course will be about repealing the European communities act and that

will go through the Parliamentary process and gives plenty of

parliamentarians enough time and the right time to discuss the repeal.

People like Nick Clegg would say the great repeal bill comes too late and

before that, before Article 50 is triggered, we need a discussion in

the Commons about what kind of relationship we want with the EU

after we leave it. We are having that debate right now, we have had

statements and debates in the Commons twice this week alone. That

debate is happening. The point about the Bill is it is a milestone, the

first significant milestone in terms of repealing legislation. Having the

Parliamentary conventions and debates and also focusing on aspects

of EU law that do not work for Britain. We have to do that so we

can get the right deal that works in our national interests. It is an

important bill but comes later in the process. What is your message to

those people who say we ought to have a vote on the floor of the

Commons about our new relationship with the EU, before it is too late?

I would say respectfully the job of the government is to deliver the

result of the referendum. The Prime Minister has said Brexit means

Brexit. We have seen the largest vote in the country through the

referendum, the British people have spoken. We will deliver for them. It

is not using Parliament as a vehicle to subvert the democratic will of

the public. There will be several debates I suspect around the great

repeal bill. We have new committees, a new Secretary of State in David

Davis and his department. They are in and out of the Commons on a near

daily basis and the debates are taking place. We as government are

focused on delivering Brexit and delivering the important vote the

British public voted on. You talked about using Parliament, in fact

Parliament is the sovereign body. Your colleague Stephen Phillips said

today, and he voted for Brexit, I think, I and many others did not

exercise our vote on the referendum to restore sovereignty of Parliament

only to see what we regarded as the tyranny of the EU replaced by that

of a government that apparently wishes to ignore the views of the

house on the most important issue facing the nation. There is no

ignoring the views of my colleagues in Parliament. If you do not have a

vote it is just talk. There will be votes on the great repeal bill.

There are discussions taking place every day in the Commons. My

colleague David Davis is assiduous at answering questions in the

Commons, he has done that on a near daily basis and rightly so. He is

being held to account by the Commons and Parliament. The other point I

would like to make, a broader point about the negotiations, we are not

going to come on every day and give a running commentary. If I played

poker with you, I would not show you my cards before we start playing the

game. One more on this, the Commons will have a series of votes, but

these MPs are determined to have an early vote and in the end as a

cabinet minister you cannot stop that will stop what happens to the

government if there is a vote on Article 50 and the government loses?

We look at everything that happens in Parliament and the debates taking

place now and the debates people are alluding to, we will work with all

colleagues. This is not about them or us mentality, we are listening to

colleagues respectfully as we have the debate this week, there has been

one debate, a statement in the Commons, Select Committee

discussions. We will work with all colleagues and the point is we are

clear, we have to deliver for the British public and we will do that

in the right way. We have to government departments, committees,

colleagues working together, and we will continue that. Can we clear one

thing up, it is not possible for us to stay inside a tariff free single

market? I am not going to be specific about this. This is a

long-standing negotiation and we are negotiating how we are going to

reform our relationship with EU. The Prime Minister is leading that. You

said during the campaign we would be outside the single market as did

Michael Gove. Nobody can see any way we can stay inside a single market

if we take back control over immigration, that is impossible.

Everybody in Europe says it's impossible, why can the government

not acknowledge it? We look at it from a different. We are looking at

new opportunities leaving will bring which means new trading

opportunities and opportunities in terms of taking back control of

immigration in the way the British public are asked through the vote in

June. We have to be open-minded. We are looking at all options and

rightly so, it is the job at the government to look at options as we

enter the negotiation. The Prime Minister is heading to India for a

trade visit. It is Bangladesh, not India, I know, but you said it would

be good news for curry houses, we would get more curry chefs if we

left the EU. If we get down to tens of thousands and non-EU immigration

is now 190,000, you would have to have severe measures to cut back

non-EU immigration, including from India. I spoke about this, the

objective was to take back control of our immigration controls, that is

what the British public want. We want to attract the brightest and

best. There are sensitivities and people have concerns about EU

immigration and the fact because of free movement we have not been in

control of our policies. The point about immigration outside of the EU,

we will look at all options to support the brightest and the best,

we are an open economy and want to ensure those who have the talent to

grow our economy continues. How will you cut the numbers? The point about

the Prime Minister's visit is to build on the links with new

countries and trading opportunities. In terms of reducing numbers, the

Home Secretary and Cabinet will develop an immigration policy that

works for Britain and is not subject to what we have seen with free

movement and the fact we have not been able to control immigration

because of membership of the EU. You were vociferous in your criticism of

the department you now lead before you lead it, you were critical about

our attitude to overseas aid. You are announcing aid for Haiti today.

What is that about? And are you going native already? Aid plays a

crucial role in terms of Britain's place in the world I have been

unequivocal terms of our commitment to the percentage of our aid budget.

You will not underspend that? Absolutely not. When you look at the

state of the world, Haiti is a good example. We are spending over 7

billion in Haiti, Haiti is a catastrophe, a human disaster. I

announced an additional ?3 million to support Haiti. There is a cholera

epidemic right now. We are sending in food, shelter kits, water

purification units. When it comes to aid we need to be more coordinated.

We need to spend aid better, following the money and people and

outcomes. I will make no apologies when it comes to targeting money so

it serves national interests but also serves the poorest in the

world. We want better outcomes for the poorest in the world who do not

have the same opportunities that we do and also through developing new

trading relationships. These will be many countries. We will see a

different kind of DFID policy under Priti Patel? I will focus on

prosperity, jobs, economic development, the things that take

people out of poverty but also ensure we have trading relationships

for the future as well. Nicola Sturgeon, the SNP

leader and First Minister, In her recent speech to the SNP,

she told Scotland to prepare for a second independence referendum

so it could stay inside the EU Good morning. Good morning. You have

a double strategy. You want to try to get the best for Scotland inside

the UK and if you fail on that you want a second independence

referendum. Can I ask about the first part of the strategy and

exactly how you can persuade London to allow Scotland somehow to stay

inside the single market when the rest of the UK leads? We will try to

work with others across the political divide to a fertile Brexit

not just for Scotland but for the UK. I don't believe there is a

mandate to take the UK out of the single market. I don't believe there

is a majority in parliament. Secondly, as I lead out to a party

conference, we will publish proposals that would allow Scotland

to stay in the single market to preserve aspects of our relationship

with the EU even if the rest of the UK is intending to leave. I don't

suggest it would be straightforward or without challenge, but in the

unprecedented circumstances, I think there is an obligation to try to

work out solutions that will allow the vote in Scotland to be respected

just as I understand Theresa May wants the vote in other parts of the

UK to be respected. Let's take the first part. Nick Clegg said he and

others are putting down a motion to oblige Theresa May to come to the

Commons and layout in detail her plans for Brexit and that Article 50

should not be triggered until the Commons has voted on that. Are you

going to support that? In principle. We have not seen the terms of the

motion but I cannot see why we would not support that, because we agree

with the position there should be a vote in the Commons on the broad

negotiating strategy. I think we saw last week there is a lot of support

across the Commons for that proposition. The SNP, labour,

liberals and moderate Tories. I do not believe there is a majority in

the Commons for hard Brexit and the Commons should make sure there is

input into the position as it develops. Can I challenge you on

hard and soft Brexit. It was clear in the referendum voting to leave

meant voting to quote, take back control over immigration and end

free movement of people. If you do that you cannot be part of the

single market and I suggest people were voting for hard Brexit. Much of

what the Leave campaign put forward was they, promising extra money for

the NHS which will not materialise. I remember hearing prominent Leave

campaigners saying leaving the EU does not mean leaving the single

market and many of those campaigners talked about the single market being

the only aspect of the EU they thought was worth anything. The Tory

manifesto that Theresa May, every Tory MP was elected on in 2015, made

it clear they thought the UK should stay in the single market. I don't

believe there is a mandate to take the UK out of the single market and

if MPs vote to do what they think is right I do not think there is a

majority in the Commons and I don't think those who want to see the UK

as a whole stay in the single market should give up on that argument.

We are going to put forward proposals that we would hope the UK

Government would be prepared to listen to that would allow Scotland

to preserve its place in the single market, preserve aspects... How all

that possibly work? We will look at different ways in which that could

work. At that point the UK is in unchartered territory, this is an

unprecedented situation. There is a need to be creative to square the

circle because Scotland voted overwhelmingly to stay in the

European Union and if our voice is to count for something, there must

be a willingness to look at different options. We certainly

require new powers. Can I ask how the talks have been going on in

Brussels to allow Scotland to stay inside the EU when the rest of

Britain leaves? Talks are focusing on the UK Government. I have been

talking to people across the European Union, we are not at the

stage yet where we are asking people across the European Union to agree

specific proposition, because we first require the UK Government to

look at a specific proposition. Our discussions with the UK Government.

I will soon be meeting with the Prime Minister and other devolved

administrations to discuss how the devolved administrations, not just

Scotland but also Wales and Ireland, will be involved in this process.

She is rather pricing you out at the moment. It is frustrating, to be

diplomatic about it. Theresa May came to Edinburgh a couple of days

after she became Prime Minister and gave a commitment to me that she

would listen to options put forward. I think it is fair to say that

promise has not yet fully been honoured and I hope we will see it

honoured in the days to come. The Spanish Prime Minister has said, I

wish to be very clear, Scotland does not have the competence to negotiate

with the European Union. Spain opposes any negotiation by anyone

other than the Government of the UK. I'm extremely against it, the

treaties are against it, and everyone is against it. If the UK

leaves, Scotland leaves. I don't think anyone will be surprised at

that quote. That is the position of Spain, given the circumstances

around Catalonia it is well-known. At the moment we have to, if we are

looking at options for Scotland within the UK, in the first instance

we have to seek to have that discussion in the context of the UK

developing its Article 50 negotiation which is why I'm putting

so much emphasis on that strand of discussion at this stage. Is it also

because it is so difficult for you to win an independence referendum in

the future if Scotland has to get back into the EU you would have to

have the euro and big spending cuts. The deficit is now 9% and they say

it has got to be 3%, it is a big gap to close, and you might even have to

have a hard border with England. There is a lot of supposition there,

which is fair enough but what I'm trying to do is explore options

whereby Scotland doesn't have to leave the European Union or the

single market because we voted to stay in. There is a fundamental

principle here about, does Scotland's voice matter? Does how we

vote count for anything? That is what will be put to the test in the

next weeks and months. Theresa May perfectly legitimately says she

values the UK, she wants to keep the UK together. In the independence

referendum Scotland was repeatedly told it was an equal partner in the

UK, and it is now time to prove these things and demonstrate a

Scotland that our voice does count within the UK. Because of that's not

the case, I think Scotland would have the right to decide whether to

go down a different path. Your education spokesman has asked

whether the SNP might vote down English Grammar schools legislation,

which seems very cheeky. What she actually said is if that legislation

impacts on Scotland, you are very familiar, Andrew, with the Barnett

formula, we have talked about it a lot in the past, it always comes

back to the Barnett formula! Whereby decisions made on English education,

if that affects spending, it can affect spending in Scotland through

the Barnett formula so we will assess any legislation that perhaps

on the face of it looks as if it only applies to England to make sure

it doesn't have an impact in Scotland. We would vote if it had an

impact in Scotland. But where legislation is actually and the only

English only, of course we wouldn't vote on that and it would be wrong

to do so. To sum up your message with brutal clarity, it is if you

don't listen to Scotland, Theresa May, we will help frustrate your

plans for Brexit at Westminster? That is certainly brutal and if I

can perhaps be more diplomatic, I don't think it is right for the UK

as a whole to be taken out of the single market and I don't think

there is a mandate for that. It's not about frustrating that to be

difficult, it is about standing up for what is right. Absolutely yes, I

will stand up for Scotland's voice to be heard. I don't think it is

right for Scotland to be dragged out of the single market with ruinous

implications for our economy when we didn't vote that. If that faces us,

Scotland would have the right to follow a different and in my view

better path. Thank you for talking to us.

David Bowie earlier this year shocked his millions

One of his final achievements is the critically acclaimed stage

musical "Lazarus", co-written with Enda Walsh,

from Bowie's iconic catalogue as well as new music and has just

Lazarus opens soon at a specially built space at King's Cross

in London after a rapturous run in New York, a run which Bowie

It stars Michael C Hall, who got to know

David Bowie personally towards the end of the star's life,

Many people will look at you and save Dexter, serial killer, but you

have got Bowie's voice extraordinarily accurately. Thank

you, that is not something I'm trying to do, it is just the luck of

the timber of my voice. When you are involved in this musical, a sort of

sequel of The Man Who Fell From A, what was it like to work with him.

None of us knew he was ill. His enthusiasm about the work we were

doing, positivity really preceded any awareness of any frailty or

illness so my experience of him was someone who was incredibly positive,

incredibly gracious, and had a remarkable ability to diffuse the

inevitable pins and needles people would be on in his presence. He was

a remarkably kind man. And you yourself had a brush with cancer, so

this must have been a strange experience doing this. I think the

cast were about to rehearse and perform his songs when you heard

that he had died? That's right, we awoke to the news on a Monday

morning that he had died and it just so happened that was the very day we

were scheduled to record the cast album, which we went ahead and did.

It was a very sad day, a very eerie day and awe-inspiring day, just

taking in the accomplishment he had managed to turn his final chapter

into art. We were glad we were able to get together and celebrate his

life by recording the album. And the album includes three songs we didn't

know, he had recorded and written himself. Yes, on Lazarus there are

three songs that are part of the show and those versions of the songs

will be on the album. Fantastic, and we will hear you singing Lazarus in

just a second. Thank you for talking to us. Here is what is coming up

after the programme. Coming up on Sunday Morning Live:

After pop star Lily Allen stirs up controversy over an apology

to an Afghan migrant, we ask should we care

what celebrities think A leading businesswoman

says maternity breaks can damage careers -

are they too long? Katie Melua sings, and we meet

the campaigning Sister Rita, Join me at the same time next week

when my guests will include Kenneth Branagh, who'll be be

telling me how he's taking his current West End

play, The Entertainer, For now, as promised,

we leave you with something very special - Michael C Hall and band

with David Bowie's Lazarus. # I'm so high it

makes my brain whirl And there is a huge part of me

that wrote these books but to change, I hope,

the culture of not speaking. In 1973, a group

of pioneering young women with the aim of changing

the way the world saw women. we'll be exploring the ways

in which, alone and together, they do or don't

make us who and what we are.