yes, this follows the big idea ian duncan smith back in 2000 and, we had this hugely complex welfared the idea was to roll it all together into one single payment, six or seven different benefits and the idea was that it would be tidier and it would be cheaper and that it would be more efficient and more effective. the problem is that we've been hearing rumblings and we've had different reports saying there's problems and various aspects of it but tomorrow, there's going to be a big reports from the national audit office that carries a bit more weight because it's meant to be an objective organisation. and it really sticks the knife in to universal credit. it says there's major delays in the roll—out and that is going to cost more than the systems it's meant to be replacing and this is a really critical one but actually we're never going to know if it's actually infected and or a government that is all about measurement by results that's a big blow. katie, still on government financed, the nhs getting all sorts of speculation about what the nhs is going to get in terms of a long—term

our viewers may not know that you worked with ian duncan smith in creating this system. we tell them that, therefore perhaps it is something that naturally you want to say is working even if it does have problems at the moment, but do you accept fundamentally that some people are suffering hardship because of this change in the welfare system ? because of this change in the welfare system? on your first point, all that we do as an organisation is based on how you actually help people out of poverty. we work with a 350 grassroots charities around the country, gather evidence from them and a number of them are saying this is a useful thing, universal credit, to make sure they can help support their clients more effectively whether it is addiction problems on debt that there are struggling with. on your second point, i do not think that the way it has been rolled out was perfect from the beginning. in fact, the way it was designed was such that it rolled out slowly, test and learn the process as you go along with such that you work out something is not working, stop for a w

the likes of you and in —— and your bridge in and ian duncan smith, any suggestion or motion coming fromg a meaningful say does bind her hand, doesn't it? yes, at the moment, you have what is an unresolved conflict. ultimately one side or the other will have to back down, the better —— battle will have to back down, the better — — battle has will have to back down, the better —— battle has been affirmed rather than resolved. but even when you strip out what mps are up to, print has been edging towards a softer brexit for a while, and that's because the irish border question has not been answered in a way that the eu accepts. many believe that britain will ultimately have to remain ina britain will ultimately have to remain in a customs union to avoid a ha rd remain in a customs union to avoid a hard irish border, and also to retain elements of the single market, which could ultimately, if brussels insist there can't be cherry picking, all of the uk has to stay in the single market. that's the greatest challenge the brexiteers face. we've talked a lot about the problems within the conserv

i want to talk to ian duncan smith whojoins me now. thank you very much forjoining us.nisterial resignation and a very powerful term from philip lee who says resigning was a last resort, and the brexit process takes place today, the vote, so isn't there an irony in your position, wanting to ta ke irony in your position, wanting to take back control and you don't want mps to have the final say on this negotiation. first of all on phillip lee, i was surprised he's resigned, i'm sorry he resigned, i didn't realise he felt strongly about it and he kept it quite quiet his to do so. it will be his responsibility to behave accordingly in the course of this debate but what i would say about the issue of the meaningful vote is quite straightforward. the amendment from the house of lords would be disastrous because what it would be disastrous because what it would do is place into the hands through statutory legislation the power in the lords which as we know is non—representative of anything at the moment, to actually come if they wanted, block the whole passage of brexit, so th