05/03/2017 Sunday Politics East Midlands

It's Sunday Morning and this is the Sunday Politics.

The Chancellor says that to embark on a spending spree

in Wednesday's Budget would be "reckless".

But will there be more money for social care and to ease

The UK terror threat is currently severe,

but where is that threat coming from?

We have the detailed picture from a vast new study of every

Islamist related terrorist offence committed over the last two decades.

What can we learn from these offences to thwart future attacks?

The government was defeated in the Lords on its

In the East Midlands: of Commons what he'll do if peers

Policing in a perilous state - we will be hearing from the boss

of a force criticised for how it handles emergencies.

And are we doing enough to tackle domestic violence?

All that coming up in the next hour and a quarter.

Now, some of you might have read that intruders managed

to get into the BBC news studios this weekend.

Well three of them appear not to have been ejected yet,

so we might as well make use of them as our political panel.

Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards.

They'll be tweeting throughout the programme.

Philip Hammond will deliver his second financial

statement as Chancellor and the last Spring Budget

for a while at least - they are moving to the Autumn

There's been pressure on him to find more money

for the Health Service, social care, schools funding,

But this morning the Chancellor insisted that he will not be

using the proceeds of better than expected tax receipts to embark

What is being speculated on is whether we might not have borrowed

quite as much as we were forecast to borrow. You will see the numbers on

Wednesday. But if your bank increases your credit card limit, I

do not think you feel obliged to go out and spent every last penny of it

He is moving the budget to the autumn, he told us that in his

statement, so maybe on Wednesday it will be like a spring statement

rather than a full-blown budget. Tinkering pre-Brexit and in November

he will have a more clear idea of the impact of Brexit and I suspect

that will be the bigger event than this one. It looks as if there will

be a bit of money here and there, small amounts, not enough in my

view, for social care and so on, possibly a review of social care

policy. A familiar device which rarely get anywhere. I think he has

got a bit more space to do more if he wanted to do now because of the

politics. They are miles ahead in the polls, so he could do more, but

it is not in his character, he is cautious. So he keeps his powder dry

on most things, he does some things, but he keeps it dry until November.

But also, as Steve says, he will know just how strong the economy has

been this year by November and whether he needs to do some pump

priming or whether everything is fine. He said it is too early to

make those sorts of judgments now. What is striking is the amount of

concern there is an Number ten and in the Treasury about the tone of

this budget, so less about the actual figures and more about what

message this is sending out to the rest of the world. I think some

senior MPs are calling it a kind of treading water budget and Phil

Hammond has got quite a difficult act to perform because he is

instinctively rather cautious, or very cautious, and instinctively

slightly gloomy about Brexit. He wanted to remain. But he does not

want this budget to sounded downbeat and he will be mauled if he makes it

sound downbeat, so he has to inject a little bit of optimism and we may

see that in the infrastructure spending plans. He has got some room

to manoeuvre. The deficit by the financial year ending in April we

now know will not be as big as the OBR told us only three and a half

months ago that it would be. They added 12 billion on and they may

take most of that off again. He is under pressure from his own side to

do something on social care and business rates and I bet some Tory

backbenchers would not mind a little bit more money for the NHS as well.

He is on a huge pressure to do a whole lot on a whole load, not just

social care. There is also how on earth do we pay for so many old

people? There is the NHS, defence spending, everything. But his words

this morning, which is I am not going to spend potentially an extra

30 billion I might have by 2020 because of improved economic growth

was interesting. You need to hold something back because Brexit might

go back and he was a bit of a remain campaign person. If you think

Britain is going to curl up into a corner and hideaway licking its

wounds, you have got another think coming. That 30 billion he might

have extra in his pocket could be worth deploying on building up

Britain with huge tax cuts in case there is no deal, a war chest if you

like. He will have more than 27 billion. He may decide 27 billion in

the statement, the margin by which he tries to get the structural

deficit down, he will still have 27 billion. If the receipts are better

than they are forecast, some people are saying he will have a war chest

of 60 billion. That money, as Mr Osborne found out, can disappear. He

clearly is planning not to go on a spending spree this Wednesday. It is

interesting in the FTB and the day, David Laws who was chief Secretary

for five minutes, was also enthusiastic about the original

George Osborne austerity programme and he said, we have reached the

limits to what is socially possible with this and a consensus is

beginning to emerge that he will have to spend more money than he

plans to this Wednesday. This is not just from Labour MPs, but from a lot

of Conservative MPs as well. People will wonder when this austerity will

end because it seems to be going on for ever. We will have more on the

budget later in the programme. Now, the government was defeated

last week in the House of Lords. Peers amended the bill that

will allow Theresa May to trigger Brexit to guarantee the rights of EU

nationals currently in the UK. The government says it will remove

the amendment when the bill returns But today a report from

the Common's Brexit committee also calls for the Government to make

a unilateral decision to safeguard the rights of EU

nationals living here. If the worst happened,

are we actually going to say to 3 million Europeans here,

who are nurses, doctors, serving us tea and coffee in restaurants,

giving lectures at Leeds University, picking and processing vegetables,

"Right, off you go"? No, of course we are not

going to say that. So, why not end the

uncertainty for them now? will help to create the climate

which will ensure everyone gets to say because that's

what all of us want. That is why we have unanimously

agreed this recommendation that the government should make unilateral

decision to say to EU citizens here, yes, you can stay, because we think

that is the right and fair thing to do.

And we're joined now from Buckinghamshire by the leader

of the House of Commons, David Lidington.

Welcome back to the programme. The House of Lords has amended the

Article 50 bill to allow the unilateral acceptance of EU

nationals' right to remain in the UK. Is it still the government was

my intention to remove that amendment in the comments? We have

always been clear that we think this bill is very straightforward, it

does nothing else except give the Prime Minister the authority that

the courts insist upon to start the Article 50 process of negotiating

with the other 27 EU countries. On the particular issue of EU citizens

here and British citizens overseas, the PM did suggest that the December

European summit last year that we do a pre-negotiation agreement on this.

That was not acceptable to all of the other 27 because they took the

view that you cannot have any kind of negotiation and to Article 50 has

been triggered. That is where we are. I hope with goodwill and

national self interest on all sides we can tackle this is right that the

start of those negotiations. But it is not just the Lords. We have now

got the cross-party Commons Brexit committee saying you should now make

the unilateral decision to safeguard the rights of EU nationals in the

UK. Even Michael go, Peter Lilley, John Whittington, agree. So why are

you so stubborn on this issue? I think this is a complex issue that

goes beyond the rise of presidents, but about things like the rights of

access to health care, to pension ratings and benefits and so on...

But you could settle back. It is also, Andrew, because you have got

to look at it from the point of view of the British citizens, well over 1

million living elsewhere in Europe. If we make the unilateral gesture,

it might make us feel good for Britain and it would help in the

short term those EU citizens who are here, but you have got those British

citizens overseas who would then be potential bargaining chips in the

hands of any of the 27 other governments. We do not know who will

be in office during the negotiations and they may have completely

extraneous reasons to hold up the agreement on the rights of British

citizens. The sensible way to deal with this is 28 mature democracies

getting around the table starting the negotiations and to agree to

something that is fair to all sides and is reciprocal. What countries

might take on UK nationals living in the EU? What countries are you

frightened of? The one thing that I know from my own experience in the

past of being involved in European negotiations is that issues come up

that maybe have nothing to do with British nationals, but another issue

that matters a huge amount to a particular government, it may not be

a government yet in office, and they decide we can get something out of

this, so let's hold up the agreement on British citizens until the

British move in the direction we want on issue X. I hope it does not

come to that. I think the messages I have had from EU ambassadors in

London and from those it my former Europe colleague ministers is that

we want this to be a done deal as quickly as possible. That is the

British Government's very clear intention. We hope that we can get a

reciprocal deal agreed before the Article 50 process. That was not

possible. I understand that, you have said that already. But even if

there is no reciprocal deal being done, is it really credible that EU

nationals already here would lose their right to live and work and

face deportation? You know that is not credible, that will not happen.

We have already under our own system law whereby some people who have

been lawfully resident and working here for five years can apply for

permanent residency, but it is not just about residents. It is about

whether residency carries with it certain rights of access to health

care. I understand that, but have made this point. But the point is

the right to live and work here that worries them at the moment. The Home

Secretary has said there can be no change in their status without a

vote in parliament. Could you ever imagine the British Parliament

voting to remove their right to live and work here? I think the British

Parliament will want to be very fair to EU citizens, as Hilary Benn and

others rightly say they have been overwhelmingly been here working

hard and paying taxes and contributing to our society. They

were equally want to make sure there is a fair deal for our own citizens,

more than a million, elsewhere in Europe. You cannot disentangle the

issue of residence from those things that go with residents. Is the

Article 50 timetabled to be triggered before the end of this

month, is it threatened by these amendments in the Lords? I sincerely

hope not because the House of Lords is a perfectly respectable

constitutional role to look again at bills sent up by the House of

commons. But they also have understood traditionally that as an

unelected house they have to give primacy to the elected Commons at

the end of the day. In this case it is not just the elected Commons that

sent the bill to be amended, but the referendum that lies behind that. It

is not possible? We are confident we can get Article 50 triggered by the

end of the month. One of the other Lords amendments

will be to have a meaningful vote on the Brexit deal when it is done at

the end of the process, what is your view on that? What would you

understand by a meaningful vote? The Government has already said there is

going to be a meaningful vote at the end of the process. What do you mean

by a meaningful vote? The parliament will get the opportunity to vote on

the deal before it finishes the EU level process of going to

consideration by the European Parliament. Parliament will be given

a choice, as I understand, for either a vote for the deal you have

negotiated or we leave on WTO rules and crash out anyway, is that what

you mean by a meaningful choice? Parliament will get the choice to

vote on the deal, but I think you have put your finger on the problem

with trying to write something into the bill because any idea that the

PM's freedom to negotiate is limited, any idea that if the EU 27

were to play hardball, that somehow that means parliament would take

fright, reverse the referendum verdict and set aside the views of

the British people, that would almost guarantee that it would be

much more difficult to get the sort of ambitious mutually beneficial

deal for us and the EU 27. Your idea of a meaningful vote in parliament

is the choices either to vote to accept this deal or we leave anyway,

that is your idea of a meaningful vote. The Article 50 process is

straightforward. There is the position of both parties in the

recent Supreme Court case that the Article 50 process once triggered is

irrevocable. That is in the EU Treaty already but we are saying

very clearly that Parliament will get that right to debate and vote. I

think the problem with what some in the House of Lords are proposing, I

hope it is not a majority, is that the amendments they would seek to

insert would tie the Prime Minister's hands, limit and

negotiating freedom and put her in a more difficult position to negotiate

on behalf of this country than should be the case. One year ago you

said it could take six to eight years to agree a free-trade deal

with the EU. Now you think you can do it in two, what's changed your

mind? There is a very strong passionate supporter of Remain, as

you know. I hope very much we are able to conclude not just the terms

of the exit deal but the agreement that we are seeking on the long-term

trade relationship... I understand that, but I'm trying to work out,

what makes you think you can do it in two years when only a year ago

you said it would take up to wait? The referendum clearly makes a big

difference, and I think that there is an understanding amongst real the

other 27 governments now that it is in everybody's interests to sort

this shared challenge out of negotiating a new relationship

between the EU 27 and the UK because European countries, those in and

those who will be out of the EU, share the need to face up to massive

challenges like terrorism and technological change. All of that

was pretty obvious one year ago but we will see what happens. Thank you,

David Lidington. Now, the Sunday Politics has had

sight of a major new report The thousand-page study,

which researchers say is the most comprehensive ever produced,

analyses all 269 Islamist telated terrorist offences

committed between 1998-2015. Most planned attacks were,

thankfully, thwarted, but what can we learn

from those offences? For the police and the intelligence

agencies to fight terror, Researchers at the security think

tank The Henry Jackson Society gave us early access to their huge

new report which analyses every Islamism related attack

and prosecution in the UK since 1998, that's 269 cases

involving 253 perpetrators. With issues as sensitive

as counterterrorism and counter radicalisation, it is really

important to have an evidence base from which you draw

policy and policing, This isn't my opinion,

this the facts. This chart shows the number

of cases each year combined with a small number

of successful suicide attacks. Notice the peak in the middle

of the last decade around the time of the 7/7 bombings

in London in 2005. Offences tailed off,

before rising again from 2010, when a three-year period accounted

for a third of all the terrorism cases since the researchers

started counting. What we are seeing is a combination

of both more offending, in terms of the threat increasing,

we know that from the security services and police statements,

but also I believe we are getting more efficient in terms

of our policing and we are actually A third of people were found to have

facilitated terrorism, that's providing encouragement,

documents, money. About 18% of people

were aspirational terrorists, 12% of convictions were related

to travel, to training And 37% of people were convicted

of planning attacks, although the methods have

changed over time. Five or six years ago,

we saw lots of people planning or attempting pipe bombs and most

of the time they had Inspire magazine in their possession,

that's a magazine, an Al-Qaeda English-language online

magazine that had specific More recently we have seen

Islamic State encouraging people to engage in lower tech knife

beheading, stabbings attacks and I think that's why we have

seen that more recently. Shasta Khan plotted with her

husband to bomb the Jewish In 2012 she received

an eight-year prison sentence. She's one of an increasing

number of women convicted of an Islamism related offence

although it is still overwhelmingly a crime carried out

by men in their 20s. Despite fears of foreign terrorists,

a report says the vast Most have their home in London,

around 43% of them. 18% lived in the West Midlands,

particularly in Birmingham, and the north-west is another

hotspot with around 10% Richard Dart lived in Weymouth

and tried to attend a terrorist He was a convert to Islam, as were

60% of the people in this report. He was a convert to Islam, as were

16% of the people in this report. Like the majority of cases,

he had a family, network. What's particularly interesting

is how different each story is in many ways,

but then within those differences So your angry young men,

in the one sense inspired to travel, seek training and combat experience

abroad, and then the older, recruiter father-figure types,

the fundraising facilitator types. There are types within

this terrorism picture, but the range of backgrounds

and experiences is huge. And three quarters of those

convicted of Islamist terrorism were on the radar of the authorities

because they had a previous criminal record, they had

made their extremism public, or because MI5 had them

under surveillance. To discuss the findings of this

report are the former Security Minister Pauline Neville-Jones,

Talha Ahmad from the Muslim Council of Britain, and Adam Deen

from the anti-extremist group The report finds the most segregated

Muslim community is, the more likely it is to incubate Islamist

terrorists, what is the MCB doing to encourage more integrated

communities? Its track record on calling for reaching out to the

wider society and having a more integrated and cohesive society I

think is a pretty strong one, so one thing we are doing for example very

recently I've seen we had this visit my mosque initiative, the idea was

that mosques become open to inviting people of other faiths and their

neighbours to come so we were encouraged to see so many

participating. It is one step forward. Is it a good thing or a bad

thing that in a number of Muslim communities, the Muslim population

is over 60% of the community? I personally and the council would

prefer to have more mixed communities but one of the reason

they are heavily concentrated is not so much because they prefer to but

often because the socio- economic reality forces them to. But you

would like to see less segregation? Absolutely, we would prefer more

diverse communities around the country. What is your reaction to

that? Will need more diverse communities but one of the

challenges we have right now with certain organisations is this

pushback against the Government, with its attempts to help young

Muslims not go down this journey of extremism. One of those things is

the Prevent strategy and we often hear organisations like the MCB

attacking the strategy which is counter-productive. What do you say

to that? Do we support the Government have initiatives to

counteract terrorism, of course we do. Do you support the Prevent

strategy? We don't because it scapegoats an entire community. The

report shows that contrary to a lot of lone wolf theories and people

being radicalised in their bedrooms on the Internet that 80% of those

convicted had connections with the extremist groups. Indeed 25% willing

to Al-Muhajiroun. I think this report, which is a thorough piece of

work, charts a long period and it is probably true to say that in the

earlier stages these organisations were very important, of course

subsequently we have had direct recruiting by IS one to one over the

Internet so we have a mixed picture of how people are recruited but

there's no doubt these organisations are recruiting sergeants. You were

once a member of one of these organisations, are we doing enough

to thwart them? If we just focus on these organisations, we will fail.

We -- the question is are we doing enough to neutralise them? The

Government strategy is in the right place, but where we need to focus on

is the Muslim community or communities. The Muslim community

must realise that these violent extremists are fringe but they share

ideas, a broad spectrum of ideas that penetrate deeply within Muslim

communities and we need to tackle those ideas because that is where it

all begins. Are you in favour of banning groups like Al-Muhajiroun?

Yes, it was the right thing to do and I can tell you the community has

moved a long way, Al-Muhajiroun does not have support. Do you agree with

that? Yes, but it is very simplistic attacking Al-Muhajiroun. ISIS didn't

bring about extremism, extremism brought about ISIS, ISIS is just the

brand and if we don't deal with the ideological ideas we will have other

organisations popping up. The report suggests that almost a quarter of

Islamist the latest offences were committed by individuals previous

unknown to the security services. And this is on the rise, these

numbers. This would seem to make an already difficult task for our

intelligence services almost impossible. Two points. It is over

80% I think were known, but it shows the intelligence services and police

have got their eyes open. But the trend has been towards more not on

the radar. That has been because the nature of the recruitment has also

changed and you have much more ISIS inspired go out and do it yourself,

get a knife, do something simple, so we have fewer of the big

spectaculars that ISIS organised. Now you have got locally organised

people, two or three people get together, do something together,

very much harder actually to get forewarning of that. That is where

intelligence inside the community, the community coming to the police

say I'm worried about my friend, this is how you get ahead of that

kind of attack. Should people in the Muslim community who are worried

about individuals being radicalised, perhaps going down the terrorist

route, should they bring in the police? Absolutely and we have been

consistent on telling the community that wherever they suspect someone

has been involved in terrorism or any kind of criminal activity, they

should call the police and cooperate. As the so-called

caliphate collapses in the Middle East, how worried should we be about

fighters returning here? Extremely worried. They fall into

three categories. You have ones who are disillusioned about Islamic

State. You have ones who are disturbed, and then you have the

dangerous who have not disavowed their ideas and who will have great

reasons to perform attacks. What do we do? Anyone who comes back, there

should be evidence looked into if they committed any crimes. But all

those categories should all be be radicalised. You cannot leave them

alone. Will we be sure if we know when they come back? That is

difficult to say. They could come in and we might not know. There is a

watch list so you have got a better chance. And you can identify them?

This is where working with other countries is absolutely crucial and

our border controls need to be good as well. I am not saying and the

government is not saying that anyone would ever slip through, but it is

our ability to know when somebody is coming through and to stop them at

the border has improved. An important question. Given your

experience, how prepared are away for a Paris style attack in a

medium-size, provincial city? The government has exercised this one.

It started when I was security minister and it has been taken

seriously. The single biggest challenge that the police and the

Army says will be one of those mobile, roving attacks. You have to

take it seriously and the government does. All right, we will leave it

Now, Brexit may have swept austerity from the front pages,

but the deficit hasn't gone away and the government is still

Just this week Whitehall announced that government departments have

been told to find another ?3.5bn worth of savings by 2020.

Last November the Independent office for Budget Responsibility

said the budget deficit would be ?68 billion in the current

It would still be ?17 billion by 2021-22.

On Wednesday the Chancellor is expected to announce

that the 2016-17 deficit has come in much lower than the OBR forecast.

Even so, the government is still aiming for the lowest level

of public spending as a percentage of national income since 2003-4,

coupled with an increase in the tax burden to its highest

So spending cuts will continue with reductions in day-to-day

government spending accelerating, producing a real terms cut of over

But capital spending, investment on infrastructure

like roads, hospitals, housing, is projected to grow,

producing a 16 billion real terms increase by 2021-22.

The Chancellor's task on Wednesday is to keep these fiscal targets

while finding some more money for areas under serious

pressure such as the NHS, social care and business rates.

We're joined now by Paul Johnson of the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

Welcome back to the programme. In last March's budget the OBR

predicted just over 2% economic growth for this year. By the Autumn

Statement in the wake of the Brexit vote it downgraded back to 1.4%. It

is now expected to revise that back around to 2% as the Bank of England

has again. It is speculated on the future. It looks like we will get a

growth forecast for this year not very different from where it was a

year ago. What the bank did was upgrade its forecast for the next

year or so, but not change very much. It was thinking about three or

four years' time, which is what really matters. It looked like the

OBR made a mistake in downgrading the growth in the Autumn Statement

three months ago. It was more optimistic than nearly all the other

forecasters and the Bank of England. It was wrong, but not as wrong as

everybody else. We don't know, but if it significantly upgraded its

growth forecast for the next three or four years, I would be surprised.

It also added 12 billion to the deficit for the current financial

year in the Autumn Statement, compared with March. It looks like

that deficit will probably be cut again by about 12 billion compared

to the last OBR forecast. It is quite difficult to make economic

policy on the basis of changes of that skill every couple of months.

That is one of the problems about having these two economic event so

close together. My guess is the number will come out somewhere

between the budget and the Autumn Statement numbers. There was a nice

surprise for the Chancellor last month which looked like tax revenues

were coming in a lot more strongly than he expected. But again the real

question is how much is this making a difference in the medium run? Is

this a one-off thing all good news for the next several years? If

growth and revenues are stronger, perhaps not as strong as the good

news last month, but if they are stronger than had been forecast in

the Autumn Statement, what does that mean for planned spending cuts? It

probably does not mean very much. Let's not forget the best possible

outcome of this budget will be that for the next couple of years things

look no worse than they did a year ago and in four years out they will

still look a bit worse, and in addition Philip Hammond did increase

his spending plans in November. However good the numbers look in a

couple of days' time, we will still be borrowing at least 20 billion

more by 2020 than we were forecasting a year ago. Still quite

constrained. George Osborne wanted to get us to budget surplus by 2019.

That has gone. Philip Hammond is quite happy with a big deficit and

is not interested in that. But what he is thinking to a large extent, as

you have made clear, there is a lot of uncertainty about the economic

reaction over the next three or four years. He says he wants some

headroom. If things go wrong, I do not want to announce more spending

cuts or more tax rises to keep the deficit down. I want to say things

have gone wrong for now and we will borrow. And I have got some money in

the kitty. He will not spend a lot of it now. I understand the

Chancellor is worried about the erosion of the tax base and it is

hard to put VAT up by more than 20%, millions have been taken out of

income tax, only 46% of people pay income tax, fuel duty is frozen for

ever, corporation tax has been cut, the growth in self-employed has

reduced revenues, is that a real concern? These are all worries for

him. We have as you said in the introduction to this, got a tax

burden which is rising very gradually, but it is rising to its

highest level since the mid-19 80s, but is not doing it through

straightforward increases to income tax. Lots of bits of pieces of

insurance premium tax is here and the apprenticeship levied there, and

that is higher personal allowance of income tax and a freeze fuel duty,

but at some point we will have to look at the tax system as a whole

and ask if we can carry on like this. We will have to start increase

fuel duties again, or look to those big but unpopular taxes to really

keep that money coming in to keep the challenges we will have over the

next 30 years. He is going to set up a commission on social care. He has

had quite a few commissions on social care. Thank you for being

with us. It's just gone 11.35,

you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers

in Scotland who leave us now Coming up here in twenty

minutes, the Week Ahead. In the East Midlands,

the campaigners fighting for a change in the law on domestic

violence, and more help to persuade I mean, I knew it was wrong,

and I was ashamed that I was... in my mind, I was allowing it

to happen to myself. So, I was embarrassed

to talk about it. And what would you put

in the Budget? We've got two very

different points of view. If we are going to be world beaters,

then we need more businesses to take advantage of opportunities

which come out of As far as the East Midlands

is concerned, it is to make sure that the economic growth benefits

every region of the country, Hello, I'm Marie Ashby,

and my guests this week - Edward Argar is the Conservative MP

for Charnwood, and Paddy Tipping is the Labour

Police and Crime Commissioner First, let's look at this week's

report from Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary,

that some forces are putting the public at risk by rationing how

they respond to emergency calls. The report said some forces

were downgrading the importance of 999 calls to justify

slower response times. It said three forces,

including Nottinghamshire, had not been responding

appropriately to emergency calls. So, Paddy Tipping,

as Nottinghamshire's Police and Crime Commissioner,

is this true, your force in Nottinghamshire has not been

reacting appropriately What is true is that the control

room is sometimes under You have to take the most important,

most vital calls first. And against that, we have got

to recognise that the police have lost resources,

25% of their resources So you are saying that is

the reason why they cannot Nationally, the HMIC,

who produced the report, say budgets are being cut,

we've got to make some tough decisions about priorities,

and we need to have a debate with the public about what those

priorities should be. Well, Nottinghamshire has been rated

"requires improvement", you set the budget for the force

and its priorities, you knew that the force

was underperforming in 2015. You surely now have to take

responsibility for this? We do take responsibility,

and if you look at the report from the Inspectorate,

it says since they did the inspection in September,

and number of things have happened. What it also says, in terms

of serious and organised crime, In terms of investigation,

Nottingham is good. What it says on the front page

is that during the period the HMIC were doing the report,

crime went down in Nottinghamshire by 6.3%, but it went up in the rest

of the country by 7.8%. OK, well, Edward Argar,

the Inspectorate said that British policing was in a perilous state

and that it said it was a consequence of rationing

of services because of cuts. Your government says that police

spending is protected, but it comes, let's face it,

after five years of deep cuts. Well, police spending

is protected, and actually, it's interesting to note,

I think it was a BBC analysis of this report yesterday which said

that the report doesn't actually say what is responsible for some

of the issues that are identified, they are saying this isn't possible

to say whether it is down to funding, or operational

decisions by Commissioners And actually, Paddy makes

a very good point there. Crime is coming down,

it is coming down in his force, and he quite rightly takes some

of the credit for that, it is coming So, yes, resourcing is tight,

but that police funding has been protected and we are seeing

considerable amounts of innovation from our police,

in Nottinghamshire, in Leicestershire

and across the region. That is clearly good to know,

but the Inspectorate also said that policing

in Leicestershire needs improving. As a Leicestershire MP,

aren't you worried about that? Well, I met just last

week with the Police and Crime Commissioner,

Willy Bach, and the Chief Constable from Leicestershire,

to talk about funding and funding priorities, but also about

what the work they are doing... Is requiring improvement

good enough? The Chief Constable has been very

clear that significant And as Paddy says, in the same way

as with Nottinghamshire, since that report was published,

or since that work was done and the investigation was done,

considerable improvement has been made, and all these forces are

working extremely hard to do that. What is important, I think, and it

applies to all of our county forces, is even under the current funding

formula, which we do not think actually allocates funding

as fairly as it could, we are not talking about the overall

size of the pot, we are talking about how it is shared out,

and we are arguing that our forces are not getting our fair

share of that nationally. OK, well, worryingly,

briefly, Paddy, one of the things that was mentioned

about the Nottinghamshire force, rated inadequate on protecting

people vulnerable from harm It is a damning indictment,

isn't it, if you can't even protect the most vulnerable

in your communities And the issue is about how

Nottinghamshire Police We will go on to talk

about that in a second. Other forces go straight to a case

conferencing system. Well, next, a campaign which began

here in the East Midlands, designed to raise the profile

of domestic abuse, Volunteers are making a patchwork

quilt, representing hundreds of women who died as a result

of domestic violence. Organisers have had contributions

from across the world, and to mark International Women's Day

on Wednesday, it will be presented It's a small gathering at a house

in Nottinghamshire that is reaching out across

the world. Each patch represents a woman killed

as a result of domestic violence. Patches have been sent

to the project from France, At the end of last year,

the femicide census came out, and the statistics it contained

and the number of women who had been Just thought there needed to be some

way to make these women more than just statistics,

to actually bring out the names The idea behind the quilt

is to acknowledge the people behind the statistics,

but some of these figures One in four women will be

abused by a partner, ex or family member at some point

during their lives. On average, two women a week die

from domestic violence. And women suffering from a violent

partner are four times more likely to tell a friend

than call the police. It was a friend that Emma Bradford

reached out to when her abusive He would leave bruises on my arms,

small bruises, where he had pushed me around or thumped me

or things like that. I never made any attempt

to cover them up. I suppose, in a way,

I wanted people to see, and reach out to me,

and ask me, because I could I started becoming more

timid, more reserved, I had my eyes closed

and I was screaming at the time, so I don't know whether it was

a punch or a slap, I don't know, I had a nosebleed and I think

when he saw the blood, he panicked, and then he,

all of a sudden, "I didn't mean to do it,

don't call the police." Emma is happy in a new relationship,

but has taken part in the project to honour the women

unable to escape. I'm really lucky to be

where I am right now. By remembering the names

of the ladies who have been killed, it just highlights what an epidemic

it really is. They plan to tour the country

with the finished quilt, and it has already inspired

a similar project in America. Well, I'm joined now

by Melanie Jeffs, the manager of the Nottingham Women's Centre,

who gave evidence to Parliament It made me go cold, just thinking

that each square of that quilt that we just saw represents

one woman's death, And we heard in that film,

domestic violence, domestic abuse, Um, sadly, I would say yes,

and I think particularly when you look at it

as part of a continuum So, the work that we have done

around misogyny hate crime and street harassment that women

face, we know that about 85% One in four women experience

domestic abuse at some point in their life,

and one in five, sexual violence. And when you put all that together,

I think it is very hard not to call OK, and this isn't just violence

abuse, not just abuse against women, it takes many different forms,

and in many cases, it is something that takes sometimes a long time

for people to realise it is actually They accept things and they will

give things without realising how serious it is moving on to beat.

Absolutely, because we understand the domestic abuse is often

underpinned by course of control. It is about power, domination, and it

is often hard for women to understand that it is happening to

them, are for people around them to see this and it can take a long time

for women to be able to seek help and get the help they need. Paddy

Tipping, research has said abused women are four times more likely to

relate their experiences and tell them to a friend rather than go to

the police. That is obviously understandable because it is so

personal and emotional, so raw that they would go to a friend. But what

more can the police do to help and support those people? We can do what

we are doing at the moment, there is a 24-hour helpline in

Nottinghamshire run by women, people want advice, they should go there.

In our police stations as as well as police officers to investigate, we

have women, independent advisers, and look, if you are in trouble,

come and seek help. Leaving your family, leaving a partner is a big

step. Maybe you will not do it first time, but get on the road. You

mentioned the triage earlier and one of the things that stopped Emma from

going to the police was that she did not know what that process would

involve. Supper anyone is watching involve. Supper anyone is watching

who might be in a similar position, can you explain what happens from

the moment the woman is brave enough to come forward, and report to the

police? It is up to the woman to break the choices. There are various

things they could do. We could get an injunction to get the abusive

partner out of the house, we are fortunate in Nottinghamshire that

refuge provision has been kept up. But there are lots of sources of

advice. It is tough when you are in that situation, but there are loads

of people to help and support you. At work, Theresa May recently

announced she is overseeing the creation of new laws which would

deal with domestic violence and a new act which would help and work

better for victims. That is obviously a way forward. But doesn't

all of this depend on funding to help support those victims and

funding the refuges and people like, organisations like Women's Aid? I

sat in Parliament earlier this week for a debate on International

Women's Day and it was chilling when one of my Labour colleagues, Jess

Phillips, read out the names of all those women who had died at the

hands of violent and aggressive men in the past year since that debate,

including of course my own former colleague, Jo Cox. And I think

Melanie is right to highlight the skill of the challenge. But it does

all depend on funding, doesn't it? You are right to highlight the Prime

Minister's work on this, but as Home Secretary and as Prime Minister. For

her, this is a hugely personal and important issue and pirated. And it

has been, she has Home Secretary oversaw new legislation around

controlling and coercive behaviour, and violence is not just physical,

it is meant as well. In terms of the funding, that does play a part and

we have now got relatively recently announced increased funding for

this, up to around 80 million in total. But equally it is about

reporting it, how about tackling it. -- 18 million. Melanie, you manage a

women's centre, are you getting enough funding? I think in terms of

Nottingham, I think in Nottingham General, we have weathered the cuts.

I think we have survived. The issue we are experiencing locally is that

there is a higher level of need. Even though funding remains steady,

we are seeing women coming in with more complex issues. A lot more

issues around mental health. So the need is Highers of the matter of

resources we need to put into supporting the women has also

increased but the funding does not always follow. It is encouraging

that will be an injection of around ?100,000 into Nottingham to help

organisations deliver services to those kind of complex cases. Do you

feel politicians generally are taking this issue more seriously?

You described it as an epidemic, are they taking it more seriously? There

is a growing recognition of the need to take this seriously. I think

generally one issue is the public awareness is still quite low and

when there are murders of women, the way that it is often reported means

that people do not see it as part of a pattern, we do not always join the

dots. They are displayed as isolated incidents and it is only when New

Year summerlike Jess Phillips reading at the names in Parliament

that you see these are connected on it is coming from that power and

control, and for a woman to leave is difficult and can be very dangerous,

we need people to understand that. If you have been affected by any of

the issues we have been discussing, you can find help and advice on the

BBC website. And that quilt with the names of the victims of domestic

violence is being taken to Parliament on Wednesday, but as well

as being International Women's Day, there is also the small matter of a

Budget to be unveiled on Monday as well. So what will be in that for

the East Midlands and what would you want to see? We asked two people to

give us their opinion. I am Natalie from the Federation Of Small

Businesses, Nottingham Schone -- Nottinghamshire And Yorkshire

Region. I would deliver pro-business budget. I am here today to meet one

of our members who is leading the way.

BOOING the immediate thing that is

happening is the workplace pension. -- The emergency -- the immediate

thing. I am the Midlands regional secretary for the TUC. If I was

Chancellor, minorities for this Budget would be rebalancing the

economy to make sure it works for you. There is wealth creation, but

it is in limited places. In the East Midlands, we are lagging behind. An

economic strategy we see as important and essential for the

future strength of the economy as far as the East Midlands concern is

to make sure that the economic growth benefits every region of the

country, not just London and the South East. If I was Chancellor the

first thing I would do is tackle the rising costs of implement. The

average business is set to CDs rise by ?2600. Infrastructure is

essential, the electrification of the mainline is key and overdue. The

skills agenda has got to be addressed to make sure we can have

companies and large employers like Toyota staying in the region

following Brexit. The East Midlands is a low skill economy based on

insecure work, we have got to make sure the jobs that come to this

region are high skilled and we have the workforce to match. If we are to

be world beaters, we need more businesses to take advantage of

opportunities which come out of research and develop them. If I was

Chancellor I would make sure more businesses were aware of Government

schemes like the research and development tax credits

opportunities. For the next part of our Budget we would follow through

on the commitment to having workers on board is. It was made by the

Prime Minister very early. It seems you get the best out of the work

forced by having zero hours contracts, we do not think that is

right or fair will stop having workers on the boards would lead to

better transparency to make sure they could question things and the

direction their companies took. Also in my Budget box, I would like to

introduce the delay to making attached digital, quarterly

reporting should not be rolled out until businesses have a chance to

understand the impact and cost indications.

So, tonight different views. Lee was saying the East Midlands has a

low-wage economy. -- two different. Thing we have already seen

significant progress made, we have the national leading -- living wage.

And in the East Midlands we have seen 188,000 new jobs created since

2010. Are they high wage jobs? Low-mac you have 2.8 million new

country. Of those, 75% are full-time country. Of those, 75% are full-time

permanent jobs. Only 3% are zero hours contracts. I appreciate that

Lee had a point to make but I do not think those statistics bear out what

you're saying. Paddy, you have to admit, there some positives right

now for the economy, growth is up, unemployment in the region is done,

is the Government on the right track? I think the big thing now is

Brexit, this is the first Budget since the referendum, and although

there are some signs of success, there are signs of weakness as well.

The strength of the plan, for example, inflation, that is

increasing. We also talked about increasing. We also talked about

public services, funding for the police here in Nottingham, A is in

crisis. But the big issue is around social care. The Chancellor has made

some extra money available, he needs to do much, much more. Not just in

the short-term, but we need to have a long-term solution. For a

long-term problem? A long-term problem that all the political

parties signed up to. Natalie was worried about the extra costs of

employing people with the living wage, the increases in National

Insurance, various pension schemes for people employed. It doesn't

sound like a very business friendly Government. We have seen under the

Government from 2010, for example, very business friendly measures, for

example the reduction in corporation tax, from that height of 20% down to

20%, and by 2020 it will be done to 17%. That is one very tangible

measure that makes a difference when it comes to a business, not only

surviving, but expanding and investing. Earlier this week, I was

at a fantastic business in my constituency who are a packaging

company, they employ over 100 people and they are looking to employ more.

They are a real success story. Paddy, what would you like to see in

this Budget, apart from rises brought in these budgets? I would

like to see the business of zero which is contracts sorted out,

Sports Direct is a real issue, there have been caught cases recently,

there is a need for legislation and we need to tackle it, I hope the

living wage goes up, I suspect it will, and I very much hope that the

Chancellor will resist the temptation to bring down the top

rate of income tax. OK, advert, will there be anything in this Budget

particularly for the East Midlands to look forward to? I think what we

have seen an budgets are measures that support the East Midlands

engine, the sort of industry and growth we have here. It is a

difficult balance in any Budget. You have to remember we had brought down

the budget deficit from over 10% that we inherited in 2010 to 3.5%.

But it still means we are spending more as a country that we are

bringing in income tax and we need to balance getting that deficit down

further and I think the Chancellor has opposed that, whilst also

encouraging and stimulating business. And Paddy is right when he

talked about one of the big issues, we need to work cross party to

OK. Time now for a round-up of some OK. Time now for a round-up of some

of the other political stories from the East Midlands.

Plans to electrify the Midland Main Line have been thrown into doubt by

a highly critical report from MPs. The Public Accounts Committee looked

at the electrification of the Great Western railway and said it was an

example of how not to handle a major body. It said the flaws could have

an impact on electrify the Midland Main Line.

Derby City Council has condemned the Unison Mac union after meeting to

discuss a strike by ditching support staff was broken up by Proteas. The

council said the union should suspend strikes. Unison says it

stands on a solidarity. Ken Clarke has become the new Father

of the House. This means the former Chancellor and Home Secretary is now

the longest serving MP. It was the biggest event of its

kind, Westminster register big reaction. The Amat publicity

estimated to be worth almost 500,000 Bas Dost by University report than

50 million saw or read about the courage.

And that is the Sunday Politics here in the East Midlands. Eggy to Edward

Parker and Paddy Tipping. Next week, my guests will be Heather Wheeler

and Lillian Greenwood. Lillian spent to date at a firefighter in

Nottinghamshire as part of a plan to find out more about life on the

front line four hour emergency services. She has certainly looking

the part! We will be finding out how she got on and if you got hold out

any fires next need Crossrail as well. We will be

poring over the entrails of the budget next week. Thank you very

much indeed. So the Brexit Bill is back in

the Lords next week and the Lib Dems They've ordered pizza and camp beds

to encourage their peers to keep talking all night,

only to be told by the Lord's authorities that their plans fall

foul of health and safety laws. Laws that they probably voted for.

What did you make of David Liddington's remarks on the Lords

amendments, particularly not just the one on EU nationals, but on what

is regarded as a meaningful vote at the end of the process? Let's be

clear, as ministers like to say, the meaningful vote vote is by far the

biggest thing that will happen in Parliament. It puts EU citizens into

a tiny corner. It will decide not just who is going to have the final

say on this, but who the EU is negotiating with. Is it directly

with Theresa May or is it with Parliament? Who will decide the

shape of Brexit, Parliament or Theresa May? The Lords amendment is

just the first chapter. They have voiced Theresa May to give them a

veto on everything she does, and there is a possible chance in the

Commons could uphold this amendment. The meaningful vote amendment? The

meaningful vote amendment. But is it a meaningful vote if the choice is

to either back the deal or crash out of the deal? That is what the remain

supporting MPs or hardline people who want to remain fear. What they

want is the power to be able to send Theresa May back to the negotiating

table. Why is that anathema to many Brexit supporters? They believed it

would crucially and critically undermine Theresa May's negotiating

hand and also create a long period of uncertainty for business. There

is already great uncertainty and this could extend it. The

government's position is in there was a proper, meaningful vote which

Parliament could reject what was on offer, that would be an incentive to

the EU to give us a bad deal? I think that is the fear. If you are

saying to the people you are negotiating with that that is

another authority and Theresa May will have to go back and have all of

this approved, I think it would have a very significant undermining

effect on her negotiating hand. Things change from day to day. We

are talking about 2019 and 2018 at the earliest, but if the government

lost a vote on the Brexit deal, would he not have to call in someone

else? That is why the vote will be meaningful even if the amendment on

this meaningful vote will be lost. You cannot do a deal on something as

historic as Brexit and have Parliament against you. So, whatever

form this vote takes, whenever it happens, it will be hugely

meaningful. Whatever label that is given and if she lost it she would

call a general election. She could not impose it. To call a general

election now you need a majority of MPs which she will not have, so

maybe she will not get her election after all. It would be very unlike

Labour not to vote for an election. It would be very unlike Labour not

to vote for an election. The elections to Stormont have given

a boost to the republicans and put the long term status

of Northern Ireland in some doubt. Sinn Fein's leader Gerry Adams

spoke to reporters Yesterday was in many,

many ways a watershed election, and we have just started a process

of reflecting what it all means, but clearly the union's majority

in the Assembly has been ended, and the notion of a permanent

or a perpetual unionist majority Is he right? Is this a watershed?

The nationalist vote in the assembly will now come to 39 and the

Unionists 38. It is only one member, but it is significant. This is a

very serious moment and because of everything else going on with Donald

Trump and Brexit it is taking a while for people here to realise

just how significant this is. Talking to someone who only recently

left a significant role in Northern Ireland politics last night, they

said they were very worried about what this means. It is likely there

will be a call for some kind of international figure to chair the

talks to try and see if there is a way of everybody working together.

All sides will probably try to extract more money from the

Treasury, but it is a very dangerous moment. Should we regard Michelle

O'Neill, who has replaced Mr McGuinness as the leader, it is she

the First Minister death probably not quite. An interesting thought.

Indeed, the daughter of an IRA man, a fascinating concept in itself. But

there are are still a large amount of MLAs who will not give Sinn Fein

what they need. But what effect does this have on the legacy of the

prosecutions and the great witchhunts which the British

Government has vowed to end. There is a majority left on the Stormont

assembly to end those. But some would keep them going for time

continuing, which is a headache for Theresa May. You have now got 27

Sinn Fein members, 28 DUP, then the SDLP bumps up the numbers a little

bit. You have got the British Government transfixed with Brexit

which has huge implications for the border between North and South in

Ireland, and the Irish government is pretty wavering as well and if there

is an election there, Sinn Fein could do well in the Dublin

parliament as well. There are a lot of moving pieces. There are and

there is a danger that we look at everything through the prism of

Brexit, but I found Friday and this weekend fascinating. Theresa May and

Scotland were Nicola Sturgeon is framing Brexit entirely through an

argument to have a second referendum on independence which she wants to

hold it she possibly can. And the Irish situation with the prospect of

a hard border with Northern Ireland voting majority to remain, quite a

substantial majority, again a few of the instability at the moment. That

We will be keeping an eye on it for sure.

Yesterday, US President Donald Trump tweeted allegations

that his predecessor, Barack Obama, had ordered

his phones to be tapped during the election campaign.

"Terrible!", Trump wrote, "Just found out that Obama

had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory.

I'm not quite sure what McCarthyism that is.

He followed up with a series of tweets comparing it to Watergate.

"How low has President Obama gone to tap my phones during the very

The sacred election process, I think at one stage he said it was a dodgy

election process, but now it is sacred.

You are frightened to go to bed at night, you do not know what you are

going to wake up to. Completely uncharted territory here. Little

more than a month ago at the inauguration they were making the

veneer of small talk and politely shaking hands. He saw Barack Obama

and Michelle off on the helicopter. You do not know what is coming next.

Is there a scintilla of evidence to back up Donald Trump's claims? Yes,

there is, although he is very muddled about it all. I will

explain. Remember what happened to Mike Flynn, talking to the Russian

and Ambassador will stop they were listening. Barack Obama does not

sign of warrants, but somebody else did. So why on earth would you not

want to listen to the president elect himself in case he might also

be breaking the law. Does that sound to you like convincing evidence or

just a supposition? I think Tom should go and work for him, that is

the most credible interpretation I have heard for a long time. Start

tweeting the case for the tweet. What is interesting about this is my

theory is he does not really like the idea of being a president. That

wild press conference he gave a couple of weeks ago there was one ad

lib that did not get repeated which was, I suppose I am a politician

now, as if he was humiliated at the idea of being a president. He likes

being the businessman with a swagger tweeting around the clock. And

campaigning again. He keeps going to what looked like campaign rallies. I

disagree with you about him not liking being president. I think he

loves the idea of being the president, but the reality is so

frustrating on every level, finding he does not have unlimited room for

manoeuvre and so many things have been put in place to stop them doing

things he would do in the business environment. We have had two more

tweets from him this morning, I guess when he woke up. Who was it

who secretly said to the Russian president, tell Vladimir that after

the election I will have more flexibility? Who was that? Possibly

Hillary Clinton. Is it true the Democratic National committee would

not allow the FBI access to check server or other equipment after

learning it was hacked? Can that be possible? This was all an issue in

the campaign. He is now a president. Shall I point out the flaw in Tom's

theory. They were not bugging Michael Flynn's phone, it was the

Russian Ambassador's telephone they were barking. Mr Neil, I would never

contradict you on this programme. But if you suspect there was

criminal activity going on, as there was by Michael Flynn, why would you

not want to put on a tap? I don't know. That is it for today.

I'll be back next week here on BBC One at 11am as usual.

The Daily Politics is back tomorrow at midday on BBC Two.

But remember - if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.

The thing that's so clear is that it's 100% honest.

We're right in the middle of the action.