one from westminster, ‘can may govern?‘ discussing the aftershocks from thursday's election. it was broadcast earlier this evening before news of the dup outline agreement. politics has never looked a more lonelyjob. tonight, as her top aides quit, the pm seems more isolated than ever. ferociously loyal and always in step, fiona hill and nick timothy were forced to resign. does this save theresa may? and forjust how long? what's protecting theresa may right now is not the loyalty, the respect or even the fear of her party. it's the fact that they can't see anyone obvious with whom to replace her. nor can they see an obvious process to find that person that doesn't risk plunging the party and the government into potentially fatal instability. there were frustrations in the party. it was about whether or not all of us felt included in her project. is europe laughing at us, or as confused as we are? mark urban speaks to

angela merkel‘s right—hand man. we should not waste time. we should go into the details as soon as possible. and do we have to define a new direction for britain now? who are the left—behinds, and what are they asking for? we speak to nigel farage, simon schama and kerry—ann mendoza. good evening and welcome to westminster. newsnight in daylight. do not be fooled by mellow sunshine, do not be fooled by the gentle breeze of a summer weekend. today saw no calm, no respite in the pace of change and power—shifting that gives this place its identity. senior conservatives began the day calling for the resignation of theresa may's joint chiefs of staff. by the afternoon, they got what they wanted. nick timothy and fiona hill were known for their unwavering loyalty. the pm was accused of relying on them too heavily,

closing her eyes perhaps to a more collegiate, consensual type of government. two unelected names. two broadly unrecognisable faces. yet these chiefs of staff were at the very heart of government. they knew theresa may inside out, knew how to shield her from the hostile parts of the job she wished to avoid. they were notjust moral support — they were, nick clegg told us, instrumental to practically every decision she took. i asked her not to bring the special advisers with her into the meetings that i used to have with her because ijust found it all rather disruptive, but i did find that, as a result, i could never get a decision out of her in the meetings, because she'd have to go back and, i assume, test her ideas and test my suggestions with people around her. nick timothy offered reason for his resignation by letter, nodding to the high number

of conservative votes on thursday, but accepting his part too in the disaster that was the social care policy, admitting he should have offered a cap as well as a floor for the cost of it. fiona hill said less in valediction. she was known to rub many in number 10 up the wrong way. her erratic behaviour became the stuff of hushed legend. insiders will tell you of the time she spat at the chancellor philip hammond, or the sweary texts she wrote to elected ministers — allegations unproven and denied. the party's former director of communications didn't pull her punches this morning. katie perrier accused them both of creating a dysfunctional and toxic atmosphere in downing street. well, we were going into an 8.30 meeting every morning at theresa may's office and the atmosphere would be great if the chiefs of staff were not there, and terrible if the chiefs of staff were there. this is nick timothy and fiona hill? correct. and so we would be able to speak freely if they weren't around and if they were around, you don't speak.

but it was senior tories who demanded their heads. they wouldn't have gone if they hadn't intended theresa may to stay. they were meant to be the sacrifice, the front—line casualties, protecting their general from further arrows but, whatever the objective, their departure leaves theresa may more isolated than ever. a bleeding swimmer in shark—infested waters when the boat sails off to call for help. so does this preserve the pm? for a day or two certainly it gives her breathing space, butjeremy corbyn is still waiting in the wings. and the questions still abound. who will govern britain now and how? our political editor nick watt is here. talk today, nick, of a dup alliance, or coalition — what would that work as? well, the conservative chief whip gavin williamson has been in northern ireland today meeting arlene foster, the leader of the dup, and other dup leaders, and i am told they are looking at the full range of possibilities, from just an informal undertaking all the way through to a full coalition agreement, and i am told that what the dup are looking at is securing welfare benefits, so keep the pension triple lock and preserve universal benefits

such as the winter fuel allowance for pensioners. it allows the dup to say, we're notjust acting in the interests of northern ireland — we are true unionists, acting in the interests of the whole of the uk. and then it would allow the tories to remove parts of their manifesto that became so toxic with pensioners. i spoke to one senior source, quoting lynton crosby, the man who ran the conservative campaign in the final stages — it would allow the tories to remove the barnacles from the boat. it sounds like she's preparing to stay, but was it always that way? well, it's a feverish atmosphere at the moment and there is uncertainty among cabinet ministers over the long—term future of the prime minister, and i am told in this ratherfebrile atmosphere, serious consideration was given in the early hours of friday morning as to whether the prime minister should resign. i am told by the time of her count in maidenhead,

by which time it was clear she was in trouble, the prime minister was completely devastated. there is even talk that a resignation speech was drafted in the early hours of friday morning — the idea was the prime minister would then make a statement later on on friday. as i understand it, what happened was that amid the uncertainty over the result, senior tory figures said that they should look at how to respond to all outcomes of the election, because it's the duty of any prime minister to respond to all those various outcomes, and remember, for a brief period — you were there — there was even talk jeremy corbyn might lead the largest party but it soon became clear that theresa may would lead the largest party and, at that point, it was her duty — as she later said on friday — to form a government. which is why we are now looking towards a reshuffle this evening. yes, we were expecting a full reshuffle earlier on today. as i understand it, it has been described

as the elastoplast reshuffle. this is basically reappointing mainly the existing cabinet, and the phrase they are saying, elastoplast reshuffle, until the leadership of the conservative party is sorted out. that means either theresa may does continue when she has a full deal with the dup, or there is a contest. nick, thanks very much. in politics, as president fd roosevelt once remarked, nothing happens by accident. if it happens, you can bet it was planned. to suggest the country knew it would elect a minority conservative government backed up, potentially, by the dup may be a stretch. but perhaps the electorate knew what it was doing when it refused to wholly embrace either theresa may orjeremy corbyn in their whole vision for britain and brexit. many accepted beliefs turned

out to be plain wrong. we, as a country, particularly perhaps the young, are learning we have more of a voice than perhaps we believed. so what does this election suggest about a new direction for britain now? david grossman reports. this is the first full day of minority government britain. the rising sun, however, provided little warmth to theresa may — nor much illumination of her path forward. what's protecting theresa may right now is not the loyalty, the respect, or even the fear of her party. it's the fact that they can't see anyone obvious with whom to replace her, nor can they see an obvious process to find that person that doesn't risk plunging the government into potentially fatal instability. in the words of the poet hilare belloc, they are only holding onto nurse for fear of finding something worse. there may be little public activity, but in whatsapp chat groups and in private discreet telephone conversations, conservative mps are venting their anger about what happened to their party and their majority. ed vaizey was close to david cameron, and campaigned to remain in the eu.

he believes theresa may must now change both her approach and her policies if she's to hold the party together. she will, i think, have to make sure that she takes us all with her. that it becomes a very inclusive government that reaches out to all wings of the party. and i hope as well that she will have read the tea leaves in terms of i think the message that voters sent us. and the message that i got loud and clear is that voters have rejected a hard brexit. we can't any more talk about no deal being better than a bad deal. the view that the nature of brexit will have to change is supported by the fact that the conservatives‘ new partners, the ten mps of the dup, want the uk to stay in the customs union, and want a frictionless border in northern ireland. so is this the end of what critics call a hard brexit? we've got to remember that labour lost this election. you know, when given the choice as to who should lead the country through the brexit negotiations, people, by a majority on the popular

vote, chose for theresa may. and they did that in the full knowledge of the plan that she's laid out, set out in her lancaster house speech, which sets out that we want to guarantee the rights of eu citizens as quickly as possible, but that we want to be a global nation determining our own trade policy. that we want to have our supremacy over our courts. and i think that those, amongst other issues, are the clear objectives of brexit, and that really is what brexit means to me. we have in a sense been here before. in the 70s, a minority labour administration. lord armstrong was principal private secretary to the then prime minister, harold wilson. 1974 does demonstrate that when you have a government which has not got a firm overall majority, then the great uncertainty that prevails spreads over a lots of things. certainly over the brexit negotiations. but over other matters of policy as well. it will affect all the social welfare legislation, which the conservatives announced that they wanted. it will affect a great many things, i think. all this, and injust nine days‘

time the government must present a queen's speech to parliament, and brexit negotiations with the rest of europe are scheduled to start. theresa may's weakness in her party, and in parliament, make these daunting jobs even more difficult. well, lord barker, greg barker, is a former minster under david cameron — he's with us. can she survive this? that really remains to be seen. it will be the mood of the parliamentary party in the commons when they come together that will really judge that, but i detect that there is certainly no appetite in the party for an immediate leadership contest. so i think we'll have to see what the commons has to say

when they meet. but how does she stay in place when there is so much anger in conservative homes — two thirds of mps saying she should go? there is no trust left, is there? well, there is clearly not going to be another election with theresa may at the head. we discovered that she's a competent minister, potentially a tough negotiator, but a terrible campaigner. so i think the parliamentary party, if this potential agreement with the dup sticks, and anticipates there won't be a general election for several years potentially five years, it gives theresa may some time for the parliamentary party and the wider party to work out what they actually want to replace her. you are in the lords, not an mp. but there will be many who were very, very worried about their seats or indeed lost them. in your opinion, should she go now for what she has done? i think, as i said, there's no way we will want her to lead us into another election.

the question of timing now is critical. this is unlike david cameron's position after the brexit vote, because we are right on the edge of really serious negotiations. we also learnt from david cameron, you know, a lot of people wished he had not gone so quickly — i'm certainly one of them. so i don't think the tory party will rush into making the mistake of pushing out the leader. that suggests brexit negotiations will be on track. as they were. do you believe that to be the case, though? it is chicken and egg, isn't it? if the leader is not in place, clearly the brexit negotiations will be pushed back. but if theresa may can command the confidence of the party in the commons, then i think it will be on track. would you like to be on track? i would, but what we need to know what is the brexit negotiation aiming to achieve? i'm very much agreeing

with what ed vaizey said in your piece there that we need to think again about what the brexit we are going to be pushing for looks like, and certainly i think hard brexit has had its day, and we need a greater consensus, notjust within the party, but theresa may needs to play a national role and try to forge a greater consensus across the house of commons on what brexit should look like. that is the role — if she could actually transcend parties, and try to bring people together... it you're right and a hard brexit has had its day, presumably she would not be the right person to see it through. are there not other people you can see taking on the helm who perhaps understand this new mood of the country better than she clearly did? i think in the long term, that's right. the question is... it's not if, but when. who? we need someone who can clearly campaign, is articulate, that is more animated than theresa may, but also has the values that will capture the imagination of younger voters as well as our traditional base. that is quite a tall order — the only person i can see who might

fit that bill would be amber rudd, but she's only been in the cabinet a couple of years. so you would rule out presumably boris johnson, david davis, people who seem to align along the brexit, hard brexit line? what we do know is that you've got to be able to go to the electorate with more than one message. the idea that you can have a single issue election, whenever it comes, is for the birds. so in electing a tory leader, we've got to have someone that can speak to the whole conservative agenda, and that agenda needs a massive reboot. we need to look to the success of ruth davidson in scotland and embrace her positive, outward looking optimistic style of politics. i'm just hearing from nick watt that the dup may align itself with the conservative party in a confidence and supply arrangement. would that suit you? i think that would be ideal. so you would not mind, and there will be many people,

conservative voters and wider voters, who say the dup represents everything that theresa may meant when she talked about a nasty party. they are certainly not our allies of choice. personally i would prefer to do a deal with the lib dems. we actually had a strong and stable coalition for five years with the lib dems. but that is not on the cards. so what is the alternative? it would be giving the keys tojeremy corbyn. we are looking at a party that is homophobic, doesn't really believe in climate change, that talks about creationism. sure, and i abhor all of those things. i mean that could drag the party backwards, away from the young? if it's just confidence supply, which basically means that they back us on the big votes when it counts, they're not going to get their hands on... the anti—austerity vote? well, on the budget, and on the queen's speech. they're not going to get their hands on the levers of power

in any meaningful way. but the alternative is to letjeremy corbyn in. and his allies in hamas, the provisional ira... the idea that you could have somebody who calls hamas theirfriend... their agenda for lbgt rights is truly horrific. nobody is talking about an allegiance with hamas! thank you very much. the best seats of the house in this extraordinary election may yet be those in europe. our friends on the continent watched on as the country tried to tear itself apart over a brexit referendum. only to go back to the ballot box and tell the leader who promised them a "strong and stable" brexit deal they didn't really want one. will they be laughing? will they be as confused as we are? certainly it may be the best deterrent merkel could ever imagine to more countries demanding their own exit from the eu. mark urban has been speaking to one of angel merkel‘s ministers, peter altmaier, in germany. he began by asking him whether brexit negotiations will still begin a week on monday.

it depends on the uk's decision, of course, largely, when they will start. what we know so far is that the uk has triggered article 50, and that means a delay of two years will be available to negotiate transitional periods, citizens‘ rights. and we hope that all this can be done in due time. but we have never interfered with domestic political debates in the uk. we have allowed for sufficient time to decide when to trigger article 50. we have allowed for a reshuffle last year in august. and certainly we have understood that the uk is in a situation where some things have to be considered. and therefore we will respect widely and as good as we can the decisions of the british government. what would happen if the uk tried to change its mind about the whole thing, and tried to withdraw the article 50 declaration? my god, this is a trap!

this is a trap, and i‘ve avoided these types of traps now for almost one year. because the question of whether article 50 application has to be changed or not is something to be decided in the uk. we are not interfering with that. theresa may has explained brexit means brexit. this is until today the official position of the british government, and this is understood and accepted by europe. to what extent do you think attitudes across europe are now changing? over the last two months we have seen a considerable shift in public opinion. we have seen it in france. we have seen it in germany, where angela merkel has the support of a growing number of citizens and is leading the polls. we have seen it in the uk. nobody knows the result of this. younger people are more interested in politics than ever over the last 20 years. we have a more vivid political debate. it‘s of course awfully difficult,

but it presents also a chance. it presents a chance for reflection about the challenges of the world widescale. and this is something we want to do together with the united kingdom, either inside or outside the european union. to discuss these extraordinary few days, we‘re joined by the historian simon schama, the fomrer ukip leader nigel farage, and the canary‘s editor—in—chief, kerry—anne mendoza. lovely to have you all here. nigel, you brought your party, you brought this country to a place where brexit became possible. do you still believe that that brexit you envisioned will go ahead? brexit will go ahead, i‘m certain of that. after all 85% of people voted for pro—brexit parties. one of the reason corbyn managed to hoover up the ukip votes, he made it clear in the manifesto that labour supports brexit. having said that, do i think now today that we‘re going to get the kind of brexit but most of the voters thought they were going to get?

i think that is imperilled. i suspect what we will see is a government that will struggle to get things through the commons. i think we‘re probably headed towards a norway type situation, two and a half years down the road. that would be ok with you? norway is better than where we are now, but it is certainly not where i want to finish up. is it enough to get you back into ukip in a meaningful way? i‘m not sure of the answer to that at the moment. but you are considering... paul nuttall said he would happily swap your lbc radio show for the leadership, and he is gone now. so, yes, there is a vacancy! yes, i am thinking about it. but it‘s not top of my bucket list. for me, getting the referendum and helping to win it, i thought i was done. but i do think we will see it backsliding. did you hear 85% backing for brexit? that was nigel farage‘s point, that labour and the conservatives were backing brexit. is that how you read the vote on thursday night? no.

i think theresa may and people like nigel farage worked very hard to make this election about brexit. what this election was really about for people was hope versus fear. it was about what kind of country do we want to live in. do we want to live in a country which is cruel, lacks compassion, lets us get to a situation where nurses are dependent on food banks? or do we want to be a compassionate country at home and abroad? that was the message that won the day. it was a message that we would invest in each other, in our nhs, in our education system, and our future. so not about brexit at all? theresa may phrased it about brexit. it was a wholly unnecessary election because there was nothing in the commons and lords that was going to stop publishing brexit and through. simon, last time we asked after the brexit bogut by where a quantity of left behind people that have been ignored and we had to take them seriously. who do you think be left behind people now, when you see this vote and the way gone?

well, i think it's not a question of who has been ignored, but what has been ignored. what has been ignored as the debate between hard brexit and soft brexit. i agree with kerry that bread—and—butter issues, the basic civil decencies of life, became extremely important and they were rather brilliantly pushed to the foreground by the labour campaign. but, first of all, i must say the headline in the daily mail tomorrow, i am sure they are going to change the mail on sunday, to "farage ok with norway". i‘m not ok with that. i said, it‘s better than where we are, but it‘s not what we voted for. the positive thing about brexit was that we were voting to be free to engage with the rest of the world and you can‘t do that if you‘re stuck inside the customs union. if there was a customs union which meant more freedom to people in terms of immigration,

then in your terms we‘re back where we started, are we? is it still a good enough reason to leave the eu? if we finish up at the end of this process with the free movement of people and without the ability to cut our own global deals, frankly we‘re not that much furtherforward. to be honest i think this is part of the reason that ukip were wiped out of this election, the hope versus fear issue. for years that we have had nigel farage walking around like a poundland pinochet promising people but the problems they had... —— nigel's party's answer is to scapegoat the most marginalised and vulnerable communities. but now the only answer is to scapegoat the most marginalised, vulnerable communities. no, no, no. at the conservative campaign failed to address that? i think you're being too binary about this. there are very important issues

about what they call a social decency of life, and then the issues with britain intends the sovereign state. they've come together precisely because the labour party manifesto did make a difference. jeremy corbyn said and the labour party said that the kind of brexit to which we are hurtling is not the one endorsed by the labour party. so i'm saying that those who were worried about theresa may's endless mantra, brexit is brexit, are exactly those worried about what is our fate going to be? what is social care to be like? what is our health, or the future for us in terms of the issues of our daily life if we simply mechanically moved towards a hard brexit? jeremy corbyn did also make clear that leaving the european union would mean the ending of freedom of movement. you know, he did say these things. people who voted labour, they were voting for this. that's quite true... moving ahead... there will be lots of reading the tea leaves of what the labour party meant about brexit in a place where they needed votes.

when you look to the future now, do you think... ukip‘s share of the vote is 2%. does that sound like a rejection of nasty britain, or a brexit but didn‘t like the language of intolerance? in the last general election, 13% of the country voted for a pro—brexit party. this time it was 85%. that is the effect that ukip has had. the day before the election was called, three separate opinion polls showed... you don‘t mind ukip carrying on as a part of the other parties, is that what you were saying? that up to 70% of the country wanted us to get on with brexit. as far as ukip is concerned, if we don‘t get the brexit we wanted, we will be backing brexit with a big way. kerry—anne mendoza, the future of theresa may, for the young people this has been a rejection of tabloid headlines, anti—media. what is your take on where theresa may lies now? theresa may has to go.

she's done. she's done politically, she has no vision for this country that has compelled anybody. you've got a labour party that is reinvigorated, and more importantly a labour movement which is reinvigorated. it's engaging the young, the old, the gay, the straight, the black, white, and brown, and all the colours in between. and we need to go that way. all of what ukip but uncomfortable with? i think that‘s theresa may in the end will go. corbyn looked comfortable in his own skin. there was energy right from the moment he launched the manifesto. i said, wow. may had none of that. this‘ll be a seminal moment in our history, as we said brexit was. as a historian, where do you think this will take us? we want someone who actually does embody a sense of the national interest. it comes out of theresa may's mouth of a robotic mantra. you cannot possibly have someone as incompetent, spectacularly incompetent, as theresa may has proved herself, going forward to the

negotiations for brexit. you might as well pick someone at random out of the yellow pages. they would be better than her! do you think... the other problem is she doesn‘t believe in it. she doesn't believe in anything, nigel, that's the problem. so you all agreeing from all areas of the spectrum that theresa may has got to go? doesn‘t this just show you how fickle the uk electorate is? when she went to the polls in april, she thought she was going to come back with a massive majority. the british electorate, god bless it, sussed her out. she got found out, and her managers got found out, and politics, the machine, got found out. she has been an invisible pm since she came to office. she has had very little contact with the public. she has been issuing legislation through decree basically, and when the british public got to see her face to face, they didn't like it and went another way.

thank you all very much indeed. that‘s all we have time for this evening. we‘re back on monday at our usual time. enjoy your weekend. have a good evening. this is bbc news. i‘m duncan golestani. our top stories: theresa may says she‘s reached an outline agreement with a northern irish party that will allow her minority government to pass laws. but after mrs may‘s poor result in the general election, two of her key political advisers resign. us special forces join the fight against islamic militants holed up in the philippine city of marawi for nearly three weeks. rescued by a cruise ship after a storm leaves a lone yachtsman stranded in the middle of the atlantic. hello, and welcome to bbc news.