Keir Starmer

As we leave the E.U., freedom of movement falls away, because it\'s an E.U. rule... What we then have to say is, \'What then is on the blank piece of paper that is an immigration policy?\'

We have to make the argument that the only economically sound place to be is within Europe - we have to remember, it\'s history again, that there are reasons we bound ourselves together as a set of European nations and it all came out of the second world war.

I don\'t subscribe to the view that people who are better off don\'t want to live in a more equal society.

If you really probe, people are anxious about their job, anxious about their home, their children\'s future. Obviously it gets translated into things like immigration, but that is nothing new.

By remaining inside a customs union and the single market in a transitional phase we would be certain that goods and services could continue to flow between the E.U. and the U.K. without tariffs, customs checks or additional red tape.

Labour has repeatedly emphasised that in order to avoid a cliff edge for our economy there will need to be a time-limited transitional period between our exit from the E.U. and the new lasting relationship we build with our European partners.

We need a transitional Brexit deal that provides maximum certainty and stability. Labour will deliver it.

There is very, very little chance of bespoke transitional arrangements being negotiated at the same time as the rest of Article 50.

We need to remind ourselves that Europe will be our biggest trading partner for the next several decades and probably beyond, so getting the deal with Europe right should be our primary focus.

I am well aware of different views across my own party and across parliament on pretty well all Brexit issues.

There are potentially many offences that journalists could commit in the course of their business. It would be very unhealthy if you had a situation where a journalist felt that they needed to go to their lawyer before they pursued any lead or asked any question.

If you lose your job because there has been an influx of labour from another country, that is a legitimate cause for concern.

It will be increasingly difficult to keep Scotland as a part of the U.K. I hope that doesn\'t happen, but everyone knows David Cameron has put that at risk.

I would reject wholeheartedly any notion of a Labour Party that is not committed to returning to power at the first opportunity. Of course that needs to be principled power. But standing on the sidelines looking for the purest ideology is a dereliction of the duty for any Labour member.

I spent five years prosecuting some of the most dangerous terrorists in this country, so it would be quite difficult for people to pin the charge of being soft on terrorism on me.

My parents didn\'t have the opportunities they would have liked, but they didn\'t complain about that because they thought they were part of a society where the next generation would have those opportunities.

Part of the reason I moved from law to politics was an increasingly profound belief that how we rebuild after the 2008 crash is going to define us for a generation.

For better or worse, when I was director of public prosecutions I had to deal with every challenge that came up, and come up with an answer. Being in opposition, you\'re not taking the decisions; you\'re saying what you would do if you were in power, and that\'s deeply frustrating.

My background is not typical of a lawyer or a DPP. My dad was a toolmaker before he retired, so he worked in a factory all his life.

If you go into a police station and report a burglary the first question is not: \'Are you telling the truth?\' If you are the victim of a sexual offence, very often in the past that has been the first question.

If immigration is simply seen as a numbers game, nobody will ever win that debate. The question should be: what is it we want to achieve? What do we expect of those who are arriving? What is the basic deal?

For far too long, victims\' rights have been discussed only in the context of sentencing. Sentencing is very important, but the debate obscures something much more fundamental: most victims have so little faith in our criminal justice system that they do not access it at all.

I always say, it\'s better to be asked why you\'re leaving, rather than when you\'re leaving.

Rights compliance helps effective outcomes, it does not hinder them. That should come as no surprise because the \'human rights\' in the Human Rights Act are the rights adopted in the aftermath of the horrors of the second world war, and are designed to protect all of us from oppression.

Defining of the public interest is always very, very difficult.

Brexit is so important, it would have been neglect of duty to simply sit it out.

It\'s really important we make the case that this is not the country of Nigel Farage and Tommy Robinson. That intolerance and hatred and division is not representative of our country.

There is nothing quite like working on a counter-terrorism case in real time.

Labour\'s priorities are clear: jobs and the economy must come first; not party interests or ideological fantasies.

We were right to make the case for the U.K. to negotiate a comprehensive customs union with the E.U. And we are right to argue for a strong single market deal, based on common standards, protections and regulations: the right balance of rights and obligation.