Tim Farron The Andrew Neil Interviews

In just one week, voters will go to the polls in the general election

to decide who will represent them in Parliament

and who'll lead the country.

So which of the party leaders has the best plan

for the future of the United Kingdom?

Tonight, I'm joined by the leader of the Liberal Democrats, Tim Farron.

Tim Farron, this election is about electing MPs

to sit in the British Parliament.

But you're fighting on a manifesto

which advocates UK laws being made in Brussels,

having no control over immigration policy,

and for Britain to stay under the jurisdiction

of the European Court of Justice - why?

Liberal Democrats are campaigning, in this election,

to trust the people, and we know that people voted

to leave the European Union last June.

I grew up with, you know, with people who voted to leave,

I completely respect those who did - obviously I hold a different view.

The issue now is, how do we move forward?

And we know that a deal will be negotiated

between Theresa May and those from Brussels,

and it's one that we'll have to live with,

our children will have to live with for generations.

So it seems to me the people should be sovereign,

it should not be a deal stitched up

by the politicians in Brussels and London.

Instead, it should be a deal that we agree with, as a country,

and that's what we're supporting.

We think that the people should be trusted with the final deal.

But you don't want to trust the British people.

You still want UK laws to be made in Brussels,

you still want no control over immigration policy,

and you want the European Court to have jurisdiction in Britain.

How is that trusting the British people?

So we have a history,

as a liberal movement, going back to the 1950s,

of being the party that believes that Britain's place is in Europe.

Now, we respect the electorate,

and we respect the result of the referendum -

that's the direction in which our country is currently heading,

but I think you'd be disappointed in us or indeed any politician

who changed their principles.

Much as I disagree with people like Bill Cash

and Nigel Farage and so on, I do kind of respect them,

after the referendum in the 1970s, for sticking to what they believe.

As a country, we can come together, but you also need somebody

who's prepared to say a different direction as possible.

And in the end, it kind of doesn't matter

whether you voted Leave or Remain last June.

What the Liberal Democrats offer you is the chance to be sovereign,

to have the final say on the final deal.

And it does matter, because of course Theresa May has made choices,

and it was not inevitable

that we would choose to be outside the single market,

ripping up our free-trade deal with Europe.

That's a choice she has made.

Jeremy Corbyn and Ukip, of course, backed her in that.

We say that's a choice, and if it's a choice that she's making,

surely the British people should have the final say,

not the politicians.

You always speak about an extreme Brexit.

What's extreme about having control of our own borders?

Well, I take the view that what our government is choosing

is a direction that was not necessarily implicit

in the referendum last year so...

But what's extreme about having control of our own borders?

Theresa May made a choice in June - sorry, in January -

to take us out of the single market, that is to rip up our free-trade

deal with Europe, where half of our goods are exported to,

and which massively impacts upon our jobs...

She hasn't ripped it up - she wants a different free-trade arrangement.

Well, she's basically not bid to remain

in the free-trade deal that we have, and that is fundamental.

As you know, the single market is more than a free-trade deal.

It is indeed.

The single market involves free movement of people,

it involves jurisdiction by the European Court of Justice,

and a common rule book - if we agree to all that,

in what way would we have left the European Union?

So you're absolutely dead right

to say that it's more than just a free-trade deal,

it's more than just the absence of tariffs.

It's all the nontariff obstructions as well.

Let me just tell you why this really matters so...

Well, I'd like you to tell me why, if we agree to all that,

we would still, in effect, have left the European Union.

Andrew, you asked me about what other than a free-trade deal

we're talking about here.

Let's remember why those nontariff and indeed tariff barriers

really matter to our business, let's go back to 2001...

No, Mr Farron, that's not what I'm asking you.

Well, let me finish this point...

It's an important question, and I'd like you to address my question,

which is that if we remain members of the single market, we'd

be subject to the European Court, we would need to agree to free

movement of people, we would have no control over our borders,

so therefore in what way...

You're making lots of assumptions here.

In what way would we have left the European Union?

Let's answer that question, then I'll go back to your first one.

Well, that was my first one. The important thing is this.

We are currently in a situation negotiating our exit and a new deal,

absolutely essential that we have a new deal

going forward with Europe, to protect jobs, to keep prices down

in the supermarket, to protect the future for our children.

Now, if Theresa May has the courage of her convictions and is willing

to go and fight for a strong deal in Europe, what you don't do

at the beginning is accept that you can't get the best deal.

And the best deal is surely one that leaves us with that free-trade deal

and leaves us in the single market.

Shall I give you one more chance to answer the question?

Which is that if we remain under the European Court's jurisdiction,

if we are subject to free movement of peoples,

if we are subject to laws and regulations made in Brussels,

in what way will we have left the European Union?

Well, for example, over the last 20 years, Nigel Farage and others have

toured the country telling us, "Let's be more like Norway."

What are Norway? In the single market, out of the European Union.

All I am saying to you... Norway is subject to free movement -

it's subject, in effect, to the European Court.

All I'm saying to you is that different options are available.

All right.

And the Prime Minister has made that extreme choice,

and here's why it does matter - I want to just get to this point,

because you asked me why this matters.

Let's go back to 2001, during another general election,

during the foot-and-mouth crisis.

Now, you will remember that the French could not exclude

British exports of beef and lamb to France quickly enough

because they had the excuse of that disease.

They will not wait a second to bring in similar tariffs and barriers

if we're outside the single market.

And that is why, accepting even if we leave the European Union,

fighting for Britain's place in our free-trade deal

that backs British jobs and keeps prices low is fundamental.

And if you are a patriot

and you are fighting Britain's corner in Europe,

you don't - as sadly Theresa May has done -

give up on the most important aspects of those negotiations.

And I'm going to give up on trying to get an answer to my question.

I think I've given you at least one.

You also describe yourself, and I think you kind

of want it both ways here, as "a bit of a Eurosceptic".

Can you think of any other Eurosceptics who would

launch their manifesto standing on an EU flag?

Well, when you talk about how you stand against

or alongside those institutions... You're not a Eurosceptic.

..a local council, the government, an assembly or indeed Europe,

you should be, as a liberal,

always prepared to be critical of those who hold power.

That's not what Euroscepticism means.

Well, it's important...

You are no Eurosceptic, Mr Farron, are you?

It's not honest to say that to the British people.

I'm passionate about the European ideal,

I am often critical of things the Commission does,

just as I'm critical of things the British Government does.

You also describe yourself in one of your leaflets

as Remoaner of the year!

So you're a Eurosceptic Remoaner - how does that work out?!

Well, if people, you know, cast insults at you,

it's quite good to own them if you possibly can -

I'm sure you do it from time to time.

You're just trying to have it both ways, aren't you?

You make an interesting point there about use of terminology.

You see, I do respect the outcome of the referendum,

and I nevertheless feel a sense of real concern that in this country,

if you stand by your principles,

if you question whether Theresa May is making the right choices,

and Jeremy Corbyn of course a factor in that,

then you are dismissed as a saboteur or a Remoaner.

No, I accept the result...

Hold on, that's the fourth time you've said that.

I would suggest to you that you don't accept the result,

you are fighting tooth and nail to undo the result, aren't you?

You don't accept the result.

To give the British people the final say.

Andrew, let me make this point, let me make this point,

and that is there something chilling about our democracy

if people who think differently to the Government are somehow silenced.

I think it's right that that positive vision of Britain,

working across this continent that we are part of,

should be put forward...

Nobody wants to silence you, Mr Farron -

what we're trying to do is get some more honesty.

Now, if we had this second referendum,

you would campaign for us to come back in, correct?

There can be nothing more honest than leading a party supporting

Britain's place in Europe, as we have since 1955...

In a second referendum, you would campaign

to overturn the decision we took last year, wouldn't you?

So we had a referendum last year... No, I know that, what's the answer?

Well, let's talk about what the referendum would be.

Just tell us - you would campaign for us to remain in.

Andrew, let me finish, let me finish,

you've asked a really good question, and it deserves an answer,

so here it comes. That's what I'm hoping for.

And the answer is simply this - we are going to have a deal

negotiated between Brussels and our government over the next...

let's say 12-18 months, we will drop out of the European Union

on the 1st of April 2019.

Now, it seems to me that,

having voted democratically for departure last June,

the British people should have the final say on destination.

And you would tell them to vote to remain.

And you're going to let me finish my question.

I'm trying to get you to the point!

Here is the point, and it is this, that we have the right

- surely, as the British people - to have the final say.

If you bought a house...

Mr Farron, I'm not arguing with this.

Look, let me just get to the point,

because frankly you sound to me like you're filibustering,

and I want you to address this simple point.

You're doing more talking than I am and...

I'm trying to get you to answer - the question is simple, Mr Farron.

That's exactly what I'm doing, Andrew.

Let me try to politely put it again - in the second referendum...

I'm politely answering it.

Will you campaign to remain in the European Union?

I'm politely answering it. What's the answer?

When the deal is put to the British people,

the British people have the right to either accept that deal,

and in that case we leave the European Union

on the 1st of April 2019, or to reject it and remain.

Now, I'll be very clear with you, as I have been over

this last 12 months - I cannot see any chance

of us getting a better deal than the one we have now.

So you will campaign to reject any deal.

In a democracy, it's right to stand by your principles, isn't it?

So can you just answer my question?

I just have, I just have - two or three times.

In any referendum campaign,

you will campaign to reject any deal, correct?

Well, let's look at the deal, but I don't imagine any of us can

imagine a deal that is better than the one we've got now.

So you'll campaign to remain.

The deal we've got now is membership of the European Union.

The deal we have now is, most fundamentally,

of the single market.

And then we have the opt-outs, we have the fact that we have

the rebate, we have exemption from Schengen, we don't have...

We know all that, Mr Farron.

Can we just finally try and get some clarity on this?

Because as you know... I think I've been really clear.

There's nothing worse than politicians not

answering questions, so can you just be clear that...

No, you can't keep on talking over me.

How this works is I ask questions and you try to answer them.

But I think the problem is...

No, you're doing it again, Mr Farron,

please hold on, no, Mr Farron.

When you keep talking, I can't answer...

Mr Farron, you're not in last night's debate,

you're in a one-on-one...

When you keep talking, I can't answer.

Mr Farron, will you please be quiet and listen to my question?

Do you accept that when you keep talking...

My question is quite simple.

..when you keep talking, I can't answer?

Mr Farron, you're not answering - let me try it one more time.

Mr Farron, let me try it one more time, you're not going to

heckle me out of this - I will ask my question.

Well, don't talk over me.

I will ask you my question - in the second referendum...

On the first referendum on the deal...

You will campaign... You're doing it again.

I'm correcting a wrong question.

You will campaign to reject any deal that Mrs May does?

I will campaign in that referendum on the basis

of what's best for Britain.

My view is I cannot see how Theresa May will be able to get

a deal better than the one we currently have -

which I told you about five minutes ago.

Let's move on to your manifesto

and see if we can do better there with clarity.

Last week's terrorist atrocity in Manchester underlined

the unprecedented threat facing this country.

Why, then, do you want, in your words, to

"roll back the surveillance powers of the security services"?

Well, the security services keep us all safe, and as somebody

who was in Manchester the Tuesday, the night after the bomb,

somebody who has four kids, all of whom had friends

who were either at or close to the gig that night,

it brings home to you how much...

So why do you want to roll back the surveillance powers?

..the police and security services do to keep us safe.

One of the things that is really critical is this -

as the police seek to keep us safe, what they need are resources.

Now, the security services have powers, so for example

we have the exclusion orders, and we've had those

since the coalition days - the Liberal Democrats

were fundamental in making sure that we have those,

and the Government's used them once in two years.

What I hear from the security services

is that they have the powers that they need -

what they need are the resources to make use of them.

But you want to take powers away.

And so what we need to make sure is that we don't have knee-jerk

responses to the kind of outrage...

But you want to take powers away - why?

Do I want to protect the privacy of individuals?

Yes, of course.

When you see terrorists seeking to undermine our freedoms,

our liberty, our very way of life, it is very important that we don't

allow politicians the easy answer of knee-jerk responses that give

away those liberties and freedoms.

But you want further to tie the hands of the security services.

That's not true.

Well, you're against restricting encryption.

So we know that encryption keeps people's bank accounts

and details and privacy safe, and it's about making sure

that we are smart in catching the terrorists.

And it's getting the basic things right.

You know, don't you, cos you read it yourself,

in the last few days it's emerged that the murderer of those 22

innocent people in Manchester last Monday was reported,

flagged up, not once but five times from the community that he came

from, and that tells you that we've got potentially ample powers,

not ample resources, in order to pursue those who seek to do us harm.

But you want to restrict the ability of the Security Services to deal

with these encrypted apps which is what the terrorists use, don't you?

We don't want to allow our politicians to go off down a rabbit

hole to do things that won't keep us safe.

This is not the politicians, this is the Security Services, who

want to access these apps.

The Security Services are very clear what they want is the resources to

be able to catch those people.

You don't, for example, at the moment,

we have a European database, that by the way Theresa May

is planning to take us out of, that has 16 notifications every

second of every minute of every hour of every day.

There is lots of intelligence out there, what there

aren't are the people to do the job of sifting it and following it up.

It would be wrong...

The Security Services want to use the encryption

and you don't want to give them the powers.

The Security Services certainly think it's wrong to take

us out of that European database.

That is another issue, I ask you a question

and you answer a different one.

I don't think that's true.

I think the fact is that those people

who murdered 22 innocent people and injured so many more and caused

such fear and panic, these people they do

it for a reason.

It is because they hate us.

They hate our neighbours as well.

I understand all that.

I'm trying to find out what your security policy is.

Well, start with ?300 million extra for our police services.

You want to be able to notify innocent people...

Hold on I want to ask you a question.

Well, I was answering the previous one.

Actually, you weren't.

Actually, I was.

You want to notify innocent people who have been placed under

targeted surveillance.

How would that work?

So without a doubt what we need to do is take advantage of

the fact that intelligence services have the ability under law now to

bug people's phones, to keep people under surveillance.

You don't tell them whilst you're doing it.

You let them know once an investigation is

completed if they have been proven innocent.

That is standard.

You said you want to notify innocent people who have been under targeted

surveillance.

I've just explained it to you.

Why you'd do that?

Once somebody's been declared and found

innocent, you let them know.

That is standard.

Alex Carlile...

I can't think of any person who would think

that is wrong.

Alex Carlile, the independent reviewer of

terrorist legislation, independent reviewer,

former Lib Dem, he says the idea is potty.

So it seems to me very standard that you have the

powers and you give the resources to people to hack phones, to

concentrate on trailing people, on tracking their movements

if a person has been discovered innocent, it

seems pretty right and pretty British to tell people afterwards.

All right.

Let me move on to tuition fees, a subject which has not been a

great one for your party.

You still seem to be suffering from the

promise to scrap university tuition fees and then agreeing to treble

them when you were in government.

You voted against that increase.

But your manifesto now doesn't mention

getting rid of them.

Why not?

It's important to have priorities and

you're right, I voted again the rise in tuition fees.

I always thought that was an issue of trust,

far more than it was about fees.

But you wouldn't get rid of them now?

We are looking at the university situation as it is now.

So somebody like me, who went to university from

a working class background, what was the thing that made

the difference for me?

And it was a maintenance grant.

Not fees?

That is what allowed me to basically be able

to go home, or go away from home to be able to pay for my rent, feed

myself and not be a massive burden on my mum, who frankly didn't have

the largest income, or my father.

Now then, what we are looking at now is dealing with that issue again.

So our priority when it comes to higher

education maintenance is to focus on providing people with a grant.

Now if there was you know untold amounts of

money out there, maybe you would do things differently.

We have chosen priorities I think are right for us.

I think the biggest challenge that is unwritten about yet and it is

because it is about to happen is what happens in education slightly

further down the years.

So as we sit now, it is half term most places, it

certainly is for my kids, we are therefore seven

weeks off the end of term and two out of three head

teachers in our country are preparing to sack at least one

teacher for budgetary reasons.

So Theresa May is about to do to our schools what she's already

done to our hospitals.

But I'm asking you about tuition fees.

I've told you what we will do about university maintenance.

Let's stick to tuition fees.

What's our priority for spending in education?

You said...

It is to stop Theresa May slashing school funding.

You said in 2010 education should be

available to all, not just those who can stomach the debt.

Hmm.

As you look now, that was wrong - that maintenance grants are more

important than tuition fees?

Well, you have to make judgments, don't you?

You were wrong?

You look at where we have got now and what the

money is available to Government and what we have done in what is a

fully costed and balanced manifesto.

We have chosen what our priorities are and I think if you look at what

is off putting to people who come from the kind of background that I

did, it is the fact that...

It is a maintenance grant.

To make it a personal debt during your time...

So you were wrong?

Now, in an ideal world there would be no charge at all.

But it's right you make wise choices that you can deliver on and

you don't - let's be blunt - make promises that you can't keep.

You say that workers are now suffering a

real fall in living standards, particularly

with the recent rise in

inflation, so why do you want to make their living standards even

worse by increasing their income tax?

Well, we have been very clear, if you look out there, National

Health Service in our country, we saw it in

Manchester didn't we, the

incredible dedication, professionalism and care of people

who work in our health service.

I know this, as a father.

We all agree with that, Mr Farron. We all share your admiration.

What is the answer to my question?

What happens next of course is you get

motherhood and apple pie from politicians who say

they can solve the NHS and social care problem.

So what the Liberal Democrats have done

is be honest and direct.

If you want the best funded and the best

National Health Service and social care system in the world, you will

have to pay for it.

So we have offered the British people, we will

give us, our country, you and your family,

the best NHS and care system in the world and it will cost a

penny on income tax and it will raise ?30 billion over five years.

Even if it means raising the taxes of those whose living standards you

have said are already in decline.

So it's the price of a cup of coffee a

week for most people.

And if you look at it in a bit more detail and

I think having the best NHS and care system in the world is worth

the price of a cup of coffee a week.

If you look at it in more detail, the

resolution foundation shows that 95% of the costs will be paid by the 50%

highest earners in our country.

But I believe in the welfare state.

We are all, to coin a phrase, in it together.

We all contribute to it, we all gain from it.

Even those people whose living standards are falling?

As I say, the average amount we will be paying per week is

the price of a cup of coffee.

Let me move on.

If you want the best NHS and social care in the world, that

is what we should.

You have said no, I want to move on.

Yes, but I want to make a point.

I know you do. Well, make it quickly.

Remember, this is an interview, not a party

political broadcast.

I get that.

Well, I'm not sure you do, Mr Farron.

My father's, my grandfather's sorry, my father-in-law's passage

into Alzheimer's and at the moment, we are seeing

wonderful people care for him, who can earn more stacking

shelves at the supermarket.

And that is why we need to invest more in

health and social care.

I'm going to move on.

And the penny...

No, you've said enough Mr Farron. I insist we move on.

I accept your insistence.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists says that the regular

use of cannabis doubles the risk of developing

a psychotic episode or

long-term schizophrenia, but you want to legalise it?

Well, here I am, as the leader of a party that

has looked at the evidence.

So has the Royal College.

What we can all agree with, the Royal College of

Psychiatrists and all the other people out there, the senior police

officers and others, who will all agree the current system

doesn't work.

So what the Liberal Democrats did two years ago was appoint an

expert panel, it included current, serving Chief

Constables, pharmacologists and others.

So the Royal College of Psychiatrists is

not expert enough?

Well of course it is and their expertise is part of

what we looked at.

What we have got to aim to do.

I'm somebody who thinks drugs do enormous harm in society.

Alcohol included.

But illegal drugs for certain. So...

Including cannabis?

Sure.

So what do we do is we ensure or we do our best

to ensure on the basis of the evidence that you minimise

harm to those who are vulnerable and you

maximise harm to those criminal gangs who take advantage of it.

Now, it's very easy for politicians to

just cave in.

You know, you ask difficult questions like this, which

you're absolutely right to ask, so politicians

will ignore what you really could do to minimise

harm and maximise harm to

those who are the criminals and you ignore that.

We chose instead to be rational and look at the evidence

and the evidence suggests that if you regulate the market, then you

can make sure that you protect people.

First and foremost you prevent the passage, which is what

the evidence suggests, around the world of people

using softer drugs, shall we say, on to harder drugs.

Because you build a wall if you like.

Except these so-called soft drugs, they double the risk of a

psychotic episode, or long-term schizophrenia.

Do you think parents watching tonight will be happy if

cannabis was legalised?

I'm a parent, I don't want my kids to take it.

But you want to legalise it.

But I also want to make sure we deal with a serious problem in an

intelligent way.

So out there on the streets, the evidence suggests that

the availability of skunk, very strong strain of cannabis, that does

potentially have a link to psychosis is being sold.

If you regulate it, you can control it.

I wouldn't propose to do something controversial like

this if the evidence didn't suggest that all of our children would be

more safe than they currently are and the criminal gangs under more

threats than they currently are.

Let's follow the evidence.

All right, well, I did quote the Royal

College evidence.

And we accept that.

You've ruled out any kind of coalition after the election.

Why?

I think I have been an active Liberal

since I was 16 and been through many elections, it seems one of the

things that stops you getting your message

across is the thought that

if you vote for the Liberal Democrats it is a proxy for X or

for Y.

Now at the moment, the biggest issue of

the day, never mind the

European Union, it is actually whether we are in the single market,

it is our commitment to a free trade deal.

The Liberal Democrats and the Liberal movement, who have been

characterised by nothing else this last couple of centuries, is an

absolutely commitment to free trade.

Not just for economic reasons, because it is good for jobs and

keeping prices down, it is also good for peace, keeping

countries together.

So why won't you enter a coalition?

So let me just finish the point.

You have Jeremy Corbyn with Labour backing Theresa May and of

course Ukip's position on exiting that free trade deal.

They want a free trade deal with Europe.

No, they have just voted to tear up the

one we have got.

No, they voted for a free trade deal.

Well you're very credulous if you believe that.

That's what you're going to get.

Anyway that's the reason why you don't want to go into

a coalition.

We are not in a position I don't think, where we

could potentially go into coalition with another party led by Theresa

May or Jeremy Corbyn which wants to take Britain out

of that free trade deal.

So your manifesto doesn't matter, does it?

Your manifesto is irrelevant.

If you're not going to work with other parties and go into

a coalition, your manifesto is irrelevant.

You can achieve a vast amount from opposition.

Your manifesto is a waste of time.

You can achieve a vast amount from opposition.

So what's happening now is we are in the final days of a

general election.

Really?

Called by Theresa May so she can get a landslide.

That was her assumption.

That is why she called the general election.

And here's the thing, every vote the Liberal Democrats gets,

and I want people out there, I'm going to say something I think

significant now and it is this, I just want to flag this up,

because...

I have got a few more questions and we are running out of time.

There are Labour and Conservative voters out there,

particularly in those huge tranches of the the country where the Liberal

Democrats are challenging the Conservatives.

Get to your point, please.

And in those places, I want you to lend me your vote and I will

tell you why.

Because that is the way we can prevent the dementia tax.

But they're not, are they?

At the moment Theresa May...

You have high hopes.

Let me finish the point.

No, you have made your point actually.

I want to know why your campaign has gone so badly.

Why has the campaign gone so badly?

You asked me...

Why has the campaign gone so badly...

In the final seconds, do me one favour

and answer my final question.

Why has your campaign gone so badly?

As every good student will tell you, the best thing to do is

challenge the assumption in the question.

The Liberal Democrats have been doing extremely well and here

is a reason why you should...

But you're a populist Mr Farron, that's

why your campaign's gone badly.

Worse sound bites than Paul Nuttall, but let me keep going.

Actually you...

Here is the big offer.

I'm sorry, we have run out of time for

your big offer, Mr Farron.

Lend me your vote...

You have talked yourself out.

Mr Farron, thank you very much.

Thank you.

I'm being arrested. What did you do?

Promise me you won't do anything

till you've come back to see me again. I promise.