19/03/2017 Sunday Politics East

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

She faces huge political fights over Brexit, Scottish independence,

After a tumultuous political week, we'll analyse the PM's prospects.

With chatter increasing about a possible early General Election,

Jeremy Corbyn's campaign chief joins me live.

NHS bosses warn health services in England are facing "mission

impossible" and waiting times for operations will rocket,

unless hospitals are given more cash this year.

Here in the East: Providers joins me live.

will businesses in our region take off or will they be grounded

after we move closer to leaving the EU?

All that to come before 12:15pm, and I'll also be talking

to the former leader of the Liberal Democrats Nick Clegg

from his party's spring conference in York.

With me here in the studio, throughout the programme,

three of the country's top political commentators:

Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards.

They'll be tweeting their thoughts using #bbcsp.

So, the political challenges facing Theresa May are stacking up.

As well as negotiating Britain's exit from the EU,

the PM must now deal with SNP demands for a second referendum

on Scottish independence, backbenchers agitating against cuts

to school budgets, and a humiliated Chancellor forced to u-turn on a key

budget measure just one week after announcing it.

Here's Adam Fleming on aturbulent political week

Monday, 11:30am, TV crews gather in the residence of the First

Minister of Scotland, who's got a surprise.

She wants a vote on whether Scotland should leave the UK

By taking the steps I have set out today I am ensuring that Scotland's

future will be decided, not just by me, the

Scottish Government, or the

SNP, it will be decided by the people of Scotland.

Westminster, 6:25pm the same day, MPs reject

amendments to the legislation authorising the Prime Minister to

The Bill ceremonially heads to the Lords where peers abandoned

attempts to change it and it becomes law.

But Downing Street doesn't trigger Article 50 as many had expected.

Some say they were spooked by Nicola Sturgeon.

We get an e-mail from the Treasury can the

We get an e-mail from the Treasury cancelling

the planned rise in National Insurance for

the self-employed announced the budget.

It's just minutes before Prime Minister's Questions at noon.

The trend towards greater self-employment does create a

We will bring forward further proposals

but we will not bring forward increases to NICs later in this

It seems to me like a government in a bit of chaos here.

By making this change today we are listening to our colleagues

fulfil both the letter and the spirit of our manifesto tax

Thursday, 7am, Conservative campaign HQ and the

Electoral Commission fines the party ?70,000 for misreporting spending

But that's not what the Prime Minister

Because at 12:19pm she gives her verdict on a

We should be working together, not pulling apart.

We should be working together to get that

right deal for Scotland, that

So, as I say, that's my job as Prime Minister and

so for that reason I say to the SNP now is not the time.

Friday and time for the faithful to gather.

SNP activists at their spring conference

Conservatives in Cardiff to hear the Prime Minister

promote her plan for a more meritocratic Brexit Britain.

At 11:10am comes some news about a newspaper that's frankly

I'm thrilled and excited to be the new editor of The

Evening Standard and, you know, with so many

big issues in our world what

good analysis, great news journalism.

It's a really important time for good journalism that The

Evening Standard is going to provide.

There was no let-up yesterday as Gordon Brown launched proposals

Under my proposals we keep the Barnett

Formula, we keep the fiscal transfers, but we also bring the

and fisheries back to the Scottish Parliament.

And just think, all this and we're still counting down to the

What a week in politics. It has been a torrid week for the government,

Isabel Oakeshott, but does Theresa May shake it off, or is this a sign

of worse to come? We may all be feeling a bit breathless after the

events of last week and we are in for a a long war of attrition with

the SNP, Nicola Sturgeon's strategy will be to foster over lengthy

periods of time as much resentment and anger as she can in Scotland and

try to create the impression that independence is somehow inevitable.

Is Scotland the biggest challenge for Theresa May in the next year or

so? I think it probably is because if you look at how relatively easily

the Brexit bill went through on an issue where people could hardly feel

more passionate in the Commons, and actually despite all the potential

drama it has gone through quite smoothly. To go back to your

original question, she just carries on. Don't underestimate the basic

quiet and will towards Theresa May amongst the majority of Tory

backbenchers. Yes, there are difficult little issues over school

funding, sorry, it's not a little issue, it is a big one but she will

get over that and treat each thing as it comes and keep pressing on.

Has she not called Nicola Sturgeon's Bluff in that the First Minister

said I want a referendum, here is roughly when I wanted, the Prime

Minister says you're not having one. What happens next? She has done

quite well and impact the progress Theresa May made this week in

frustrating Nicola Sturgeon was evident when Nicola Sturgeon said,

OK, maybe we can talk about the timing after. Nicola Sturgeon has

already been the first one to blink. I would slightly disagree with

Isabel Oakeshott, I don't agree Scotland will be the biggest hurdle

for her. What this week showed as is Theresa May... It was a reality

bites week. Theresa May is juggling four mammoth crises at the same

time, Brexit obviously which I still think will be the biggest challenge

to get a good deal, Trump left field who popped up at GCHQ on Friday and

Scotland and the fiscal challenge, this enormous great problem, and it

reinforced the point this is not an easy time in politics. The budget is

over four years. That was one small problem, the immediate problem is

how to fill the social care crisis and the ageing demographic. This is

not normal times in British politics and Theresa May does not have a

normal workload on her plate, hence why I think we will see more

mistakes made as time goes on and as she has this almost impossible

workload to juggle. How tempted do you think the Prime Minister is to

call an early election? There is more chatter about it now. Is she

tempted and if there is will she succumb? I will answer that in a

second as Harold Wilson used to say. I want to agree, disagree with the

rest of the panel about how she has out manipulated Nicola Sturgeon this

week. I think Nicola Sturgeon expected Theresa May to say no to

her expected timetable. It would be amazing if she had said yes. She

expected her to say no but Sturgeon catalyst that will fuel support for

her cause. There is no sign of that. The latest poll this morning shows

66-44 against independence and only 13% think they would be better off

with an independent Scotland and a clear majority do not want a second

referendum. But the calculation of resistance from Westminster combined

with Brexit which hasn't started yet, I think this is her

calculation, she didn't expect Theresa May to say, sure, go ahead,

I'm sure she expected Theresa May to say no, you can't have it at your

desired timetable. On the wider point, I think Theresa May is in a

fascinating position, she is both strong because she faces weak

opposition and is ahead in the opinion polls. But faces the most

daunting agenda of any Prime Minister for 40 or 50 years, I

think. So it's a weird combination. I don't think she wants to call an

election. I don't think she has thought about how you would

manipulate it, what the trigger would be, and whether she's got the

energy and space to prepare for and then mount a campaign was beginning

the Brexit negotiation. Now, you could see the cause would be the

small majorities that will make her life hellish, which it will do.

Whether a landslide would help is another question, they can be

difficult too. But I think the problems outweigh the advantages of

going early. Do you think she would go for an early election? I don't

and I think you have to look at the rhetoric coming out of No 10 which

is so firm on this question, it is a delicious prospect for us as

commentators to think there might be an election around the corner but

they are so firm on this I can't see it happening. I agree, we are in

unanimous agreement on this one. It is superficially attractive because

she would love the big majority and she would get a lot more through

Parliament especially with Brexit. The nitty-gritty of it makes an

early General Election this year almost impossible. How do you write

a manifesto on high Brexit versus soft Brexit, it opens up a Pandora's

box of uncertainties. And there is enough with the European elections.

The EU will say are we negotiating with you or the person who may

replace you? How do you keep the Tory party united going to an

election? How do you call one, with a vote of no confidence in yourself

you may end up losing. Easy on paper but difficult in practice. We shall

see. So if Theresa May did go

for an early election this spring, The party's campaigns

and elections chief Andrew Gwynne Andrew Gwynne, the government, as we

have just been talking about, executed one of the most

embarrassing U-turns in recent history this week. It has been a

torrid time for the Theresa May government. Why are the Tories still

so chipper? The Labour Party has been on an

early election footing since before Christmas and we are preparing

ourselves for that eventuality in case that does come. That means that

we've got to get ourselves into a position whereby we can not only

challenge the government but we can also offer a valuable alternative

for the British people to choose from should that election arise. So,

would you welcome an early General Election? Well, of course, I don't

want this government to be in power so of course if there is an

opportunity to put a case to the British people as to why there is a

better way, and I believe the Labour way is the better way than of course

we would want to put that case to the country. So, would Labour vote

in the Commons for an early election? Well, of course as an

opposition, not wanting to be in opposition, wanting to be in

government should the government put forward a measure in accordance with

the Fixed-term Parliaments Act then that's something we would very

seriously have to consider. I know you would have to consider it but

would you vote for an early election or not? Well, of course we want to

be the government so if the current government puts forward measures to

bring forward a General Election we would want to put our case to the

British public and that's one of the jobs that I've been given, together

Labour Party organisation early into a position where we can fight a

General Election -- organisationally. For the avoidance

of doubt, if the Government work to issue a motion in the Commons for an

early election, the Labour Party would vote for an early election?

It would be very difficult not, Andrew. If the Government wants to

dissolve parliament, wants a General Election, we don't want the Tories

in government, we want to be in government and we want to have that

opportunity to put that case to the British people.

Are you ready for an early election? You say you have been on a war all

but since the Labour conference last autumn, but are you ready for one?

How big is the election fighting fund? We have substantial amounts of

money in our fighting fund, that is true, because not only has the

Labour Party managed to eliminate its own financial deficit that it

inherited from previous election campaigns, we have also managed to

build up a substantial fund in the off chance we have an election. We

have also expanded massively operations at Labour HQ, we are

taking on additional staff, and one of the jobs that myself and Ian

Lavery who I job share with are currently doing is to go around the

Parliamentary Labour Party to make sure that Labour colleagues have the

support and the resources that they need, should they have to face the

electorate in their constituencies. So you are on a war footing, ready

for the fight, you say you would vote for the fight, so have you got

your tax and spend policies ready to roll out? That is something the

shadow Treasury team will be discussing. One of the things is, if

there is an early General Election, the normal timetable for these

things gets fast-track because our policy decision-making body, its

annual conference, we have the national policy forum that creates

policies suggestions. You have been on a war footing since the last

Labour conference, that is what Mr Corbyn told us. So you must have a

fair idea of what policies you would fight an early election on. How much

extra per year would you spend on the NHS? Well, look, I'm not going

to set out the Labour manifesto for an election that hasn't been called.

I'm just asking you about the NHS. You must have a policy for that. We

have a policy for the NHS. So how much extra? I will not set out

Labour's tax-and-spend policies here on The Sunday Politics when there

hasn't even been election called. You said you had been on a war

footing and you are prepared to vote for one, so if you can't Tommy that,

can you tell me what the corporation rate tax on company profits be under

a Labour government -- tell me that. You will have to be patient. I have.

And wait for Mrs May to trigger an early election. If there is an

election on the 4th of May the rich would have to be issued on the 27th

of March, so that's not long to wait. If that date passes we aren't

having an election on the 4th of May and the normal timetable for policy

development will continue. All right. You lost Copeland, I think

you were in charge of a by-election for Labour, your national poll

ratings are still dire, even after week of terrible times for the

Tories. Sometimes you even lose local government by-elections in

safe seats, including in the place you are now, in Salford. How long

does Mr Corbyn have to turn this around? Well, look, the issue of the

Labour leadership was settled last year. The last thing the Labour

Party now needs is another period of introspection with the Labour Party

merely talks to the Labour Party. We are now on an election footing in

case Mrs May does trigger an early General Election. We need to be

talking to the British people are not to ourselves. So any speculation

about the Labour leadership might excite you in the media but actually

for us in the Labour Party it's about re-engaging and reconnecting

with the voters. Rather than being excited, I feel quite daunted at the

prospect of an early election. So I wouldn't get that right. Normally,

given the number of mistakes this government has made, and its

mid-term, you would expect any self-respecting opposition to be

about ten points ahead. On the latest polls this morning you are 17

behind. There is a 27-30 point gap from where you should normally be as

an opposition. Are you telling me that if that doesn't change, you

still fight the General Election with Mr Corbyn?

These are matters for the future. I believe the leadership issue was

settled last year. We have had two leadership contest in two years.

Would you seriously contemplate going into the next election, if it

is early I perfectly understand Jeremy Corbyn is your man, but if it

is not until 2020, and you are still 17 points behind in the polls, will

you go into the next election like that? There is a lot of future

looking and speculation there, I don't know what the future holds,

where the Labour Party will be in 12 months let alone by 2020 summit

cross those bridges when we come to it. My main challenge is to make

sure the Labour Party is in the best possible place organisationally to

fight an election, that's my challenge and I'm up for that to

make sure we are in the best possible place to make sure Labour

returns as many Labour MPs as possible. Thank you for joining us.

And we're joined now from the Liberal Democrats' spring

conference in York by the former Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg.

Good morning. In his conference speech today, Tim Farron lumps

Theresa May with Vladimir Putin, Marine Le Pen and Donald Trump. In

what way is Mrs May similar to Marine Le Pen? Of course he is not

saying Theresa May is identical to Marine Le Pen, I think what Tim

Wilby spelling out shortly in his speech is that we need to be aware

what's going on in the world, the International settlement that was

arrived at after the First World -- Second World War, that bound

supranational organisations is under attack from characters as diverse as

Vladimir Putin, Marine Le Pen and Donald Trump, and that by side in so

ostentatiously with Donald Trump and pursuing this very hard Brexit,

Theresa May appears to be giving succour to that much more

isolationist chauvinist view of the world than the multilateral approach

that Britain has subscribed to for a long time. The exact words he plans

to use are welcome to the New World order, Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump,

Marine Le Pen, Theresa May, aggressive and teenage to, anti-EU,

nationalistic. In what way is Mrs May fitting into any of that? In

what way is she similar to Vladimir Putin? I'm not aware she has

interfered with other people's elections. The clue is in the quote

you just read out, which is the world order. The world order over

the last half century or more, by the way a lesson I'm afraid we have

to learn in Europe because of the terrible bloodshed of two world was

in the space of a few decades, was based on the idea might is not

right. Strong arm leaders cannot throw their weight around. What we

have now with Putin, the populism across parts of Europe and Donald

Trump who thinks the EU will unravel is a shift to a radically different

view of the world. Mrs May doesn't think any of that. She is not

antenatal, not anti-EU, she says she wants the EU to succeed. She's not

aggressive as far as I'm aware so I'm not sure why you would lump the

British Prime Minister in with these other characters. Let me explain, by

choosing this uncompromising approach to Brexit, clearly in doing

so she, in my view, maybe not yours or others, is pursuing a self

harming approach to the United Kingdom but also pulling up the

threads that bind the rest of the European Union together, in so

ostentatiously siding with Donald Trump, somehow declaring in my view

speciously that we can make up with the trade we will lose, she's not

challenging the shift to a more chauvinist approach to world affairs

that is happening in many places. You are at your party's Spring

conference, I think we can agree any Lib Dem come back will take a long

time. Would Tory dominance be more effectively challenged by a

realignment of the centre and the centre-left? Are you working towards

that? I missed half the question but I think you are talking about a

realignment. As a cook a way to get over Tory dominance, would you want

that to happen? Are you working towards that? My view is the

recovery of the Lib Dems will be quicker than you suggest. People

often forget that even the low point of our fortunes in the last election

we still got a million more votes than the SNP, it's only because we

have got this crazy electoral system... But the SNP fight in

Scotland, you fight in the whole country! But I'm saying the way

seats are allocated overlooks the fact that 2.5 million still voted

for us. But my own view is of course there are people feeling

increasingly homeless in the liberal wing of the Conservative Party

because they are now in a party which is in effect indistinguishable

from Ukip on some of the biggest issues of the day, and homeless folk

on the rational, reasonable wing of the Labour Party. I would invite

them to join the Liberal Democrats and I would invite everyone across

parties to talk about the idea is that bind us because the Westminster

village can invest a lot of energy building new castles in the sky,

inventing new names for parties when actually what you want is for people

on the progressive centre ground of British politics to talk about the

ideas that unite them, from the dilemmas of artificial intelligence

to climate change. Do you think in your own view, can Brexit still be

thwarted or is it now a matter of getting the best terms? I think we

are in an interlude, almost a calm between two storms, the storm of the

referendum itself and the collision between the Government's stated

ambitions for Brexit and the reality of having to negotiate something

unworkable with 27 other governments. The one thing I can

guarantee you is that what the Government has promised to the

British people cannot happen. Over a slower period of time we will work

out our new relationship with the European Union. Theresa May said she

will settle divorce arrangements, and pensions, so one, negotiate new

trade agreements, new climate change policies and so on, and have all of

that ratified within two years, that will not happen so I think there

will be a lot of turbulence in the next couple of years. Will you use

this turbulence to try to thwart Brexit, to find a way of rolling

back the decision? It's not about repeating the debates of the past or

thwarting the will of the people but it is comparing what people were

promised from the ?350 million for the NHS every week through to this

glittering array of new trade agreements we will sign across the

world, with the reality that will transpire in the next couple of

years and at that point, yes it is my belief people should be able to

take a second look at if that is what they really want. A couple of

quick questions, would you welcome an early general election? I always

welcome them, we couldn't do worse than we did last time. That is

certainly true. You have a column in the Evening Standard, have you

spoken to the new editor about whether he will keep your column or

spike it? No, I wait in nervous anticipation. Can you be a newspaper

editor in the morning and an MP in the afternoon? Do I think that's

feasible? Sorry, I missed a bit. There is no prohibition, no law

against MPs being editors. They have been in the past and no doubt will

again in the future. He is taking a lot on, he is an editor, also

wanting to be an MP, a jetsetting academic in the States, working in

the city, I suspect something will give. It seems to me even by his

self-confidence standards in his own abilities I suspect he is taking on

a little bit too much. Very diplomatic, Mr Clegg, I'm sure you

will get to keep the column. Thanks for joining us.

Now, for the last six months England's NHS bosses have been

warning the health service needs more money to help it meet

But in his first Budget, the Chancellor offered

no immediate relief, and today the head of

the organisation representing England's NHS trusts says hundreds

of thousands of patients will have to wait longer for both emergency

care and planned operations, unless the Government

Warnings over funding are not exactly new.

Back in 2014 the head of the NHS in England, Simon Stevens,

published his plan for the future of the health service.

In his five-year forward view, Stevens said the NHS in England

would face a funding shortfall of up to ?30 billion by 2020.

To bridge that gap he said the NHS would need more money

from the Government, at least ?8 billion extra,

and that the health service could account for the rest by making

The Government says it's given the health service more than what it

asked for, and that NHS in England will have received

That number is disputed by NHS managers and the chair

of Parliament's health committee, who say the figure is more

like ?4.5 billion, while other parts of the health and social care budget

have been cut, putting pressure on the front line.

Last year, two thirds of NHS trusts in England finished

the year in the red, and despite emergency bailouts

from the Government, the NHS is likely to record

Meanwhile national targets on waiting times for A

departments, diagnostic tests, and operations are being

This month's Budget provided ?2 billion for social care

but there was no new cash for the NHS, leading trusts to warn

that patient care is beginning to suffer, and what is being asked

And I'm joined now by the Chief Executive of NHS

Providers in England, Chris Hopson.

Welcome to the programme. Morning, Andrew. I will come onto the extra

money you need to do your job properly in a minute but first, part

of the deal was you had to make 22 billion in efficiency savings, not a

bank that money but spend it on patient care, the front line, and so

on. How is that going? So, last parliament we realised around 18

billion of productivity and efficiency savings, we are realising

more this year so we are on course to realise 3 billion this year, that

is a quarter of a billion more than last year but all of us in the NHS

knew the 22 billion would be a very stretching target and we are

somewhat inevitably falling short. So it is 22 billion by 2,020.

Roughly. That was the time. We are now into 2017. So how much of the 22

billion have you achieved? We realised around 3 billion last year

and we will realise 3 billion this year, Court of billion more, 3.25

billion this year, so we are on course for 18-19,000,000,000. By the

2021 period? You are not that far away. The problem is the degree to

which demand is going up. We have record demand over the winter period

and that actually meant we have seen more people than we have ever seen

before but performance is still under real pressure. Let me come

onto that. When you agreed on the 22 billion efficiency savings plus some

extra money from the government, I know there is a bit of an argument

about how much that is actually worth, had you not factored in this

extra demand that you saw coming over the next three or four years?

Let's be very clear committee referred to Simon Stevens's forward

view and we signed up to it but the 22 billion was a process run at the

centre of government by the Department of Health with its arms

length bodies, NHS England and others and is not something that was

consulted on with the NHS. But you signed up to it. We always said that

the day that that Spending Review was announced, the idea that the NHS

where customer demand goes up something like four or 5% every

year, the idea that in the middle years of Parliament we would be able

to provide the same level of service when we were only getting funding

increases of 1.3%, 0.4% and 0.7%, and I can show you the press release

we issued, we always said there was going to be a gap and that we would

not be able to deliver what was required. The full 22 billion in

other words? What we said to Simon Stevens at the Public Accounts

Committee a few months ago, the NHS didn't get what it was asked for.

Today the NHS, cope with the resources it has according to you.

How much more does it need? Are reported is about 2017-18 and we

estimate that what we are being asked to do, and again, Andrew, you

clearly set it out in the package, we are a long way off the four-hour

A target and a long way off the 92%. The waiting times and

operations. How much more do you need? And we are making up a ?900

million deficit. If you take all of those into account we estimate you

would need an extra ?3.5 billion next year in order to deliver all of

those targets and eliminate the deficit. That would be 3.5 billion

on top of what is already planned next year and that would be 3.5

billion repeated in the years to come too? Yes, Andrew it is

important we should make an important distinction about the NHS

versus other public services. When the last government, the last Labour

government put extra money into the NHS it clearly said that in return

for that it would establish some standards in the NHS Constitution,

the 95% A target we have talked about and the 92% elective surgery

we have talked about. The trust we represent are very clear, they would

want to realise those standards, but you can only do it if you pay for

it. The problem is at the moment is we are in the longest and deepest

financial squeeze in NHS history. As we have said, funding is only going

up by 1% per year but every year just to stand still cost and demand

go up by more than 4%. There is clearly a demand for more money. I

think people watching this programme will think probably the NHS is going

to have to get more money to meet the goals you have been given. I

think they would also like to be sure that your Mac running the NHS

as efficiently as it could be. We read this morning that trusts have

got ?100 million of empty properties that cost 10 million to maintain, 36

office blocks are not being used, you have surplus land equivalent to

1800 football pitches. Yes, there are a number of things that we know

in the NHS we need to do better but let me remind you, Andrew, in the

last Parliament we realised ?18 billion worth of cost improvement

gains. We are going to realise another 3 billion this year, 0.25

billion more than last year so these things are being targeted. But

having that surplus land, it is almost certainly in areas where

there is a demand for housing. Absolutely. So why not release it

for housing? You get the money, the people get their houses and its

contribution and a signal that you are running NHS assets as

efficiently as you can? Tell me if I'm going to too much detail for

you. One of the reasons as to why our trusts are reluctant to realise

those land sales is because there is an assumption that the money would

go back to the Treasury and wouldn't benefit NHS trusts. You could make a

deal, couldn't you? That's part of the conversation going on at the

moment. The issue is that we would want to ensure that if we do release

land, quite rightly the benefit, particularly in foundation trusts

which are, as you will remember, deliberately autonomous

organisations, that they should keep the benefit of those land sales.

Have you raised that with the government?

Yes we have. What did they say? They are in discussions of it. We heard

somebody who moved from one job and then to another job and given a big

salary and then almost ?200,000 as a payoff. There is a national mood for

the NHS to get more money. But before you give anybody any more

money you want to be sure that the money you have got already is being

properly spent, which for us, is the patient at the end of the day. And

yet there seem to be these enormous salaries and payoffs. I've worked in

a FTSE 100 on the board of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs and I

have worked in large organisations. I can look you completely straight

in the eye and tell you that the jobs that our hospital, community,

mental health and ambulance chief Executives do are amongst the most

complicated leadership roles I have ever seen. It doesn't seem to me to

be unreasonable that in order to get the right quality of people we

should pay an appropriate salary. The reality is the salaries are paid

are not excessive when talking about managing budgets of over ?1 billion

a year and talking about managing tens of thousands of staff. There

was a doctor working as a locum that earned an extra ?375,000. One of the

problems in the NHS is a mismatch between the number of staff we need

and the number of staff coming through the pipeline. What is having

to happen is if you want to keep a service going you have to use Mackem

and agency staff. Even at that cost? You would not want to pay those

amounts. But you are. The chief Executives's choice in those areas

is giving the service open or employing a locum. I'm sure you

could find a locum prepared to work for less than that. What indication,

what hopes do you have of getting the extra ?3 billion? The government

has been very clear, for the moment it wants to stick to the existing

funding settlement it has agreed. So there was nothing in the budget. Can

I finish by making one important point. Please, finish. This is the

first time the NHS has said before the year has even started that we

can't deliver on those standards. We believe, as do most people who work

in the NHS, that the NHS is on a gradual slow decline. This is a very

important inflection point to Mark, this is the first time before the

financial year starts that we say we cannot meet the targets we are being

asked to deliver and are in the NHS Constitution. We have run out of

time. Chris Hopson, thank you for being with me.

It's just gone 11:35am, you're watching the Sunday Politics.

We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now

In the programme - on the road to leaving the EU

as the bill becomes law, we'll see what lies

We speak to the MP leading the charge against some

It does fall upon the Conservative parliamentary party to actually

go through everything in detail and provide a

holding the Government to account type of organisation

because the opposition are not doing that.

With me this week, Kelvin Hopkins the Labour MP for Luton North

and James Cartilage, the Conservative MP

But let's start with local lotteries, a new way for councils

Local authorities who have seen their Government funding cut

by 40% since 2010 were given the powers to set up their own

The first in the country was set up last year in Buckinghamshire.

Now, there are plans for a growing number of council lotteries

across the region, in places including Daventry,

Kings Lane, Corby, Peterborough and across Essex.

Cooking up skills for the future, the Teamwork Trust in Corby offers

classes like this for people with learning difficulties

As some pots of grant funding have been cut,

they have signed up to benefit from a new lottery run

To find funding that makes a difference to general day-to-day

opportunities we give our members, we have...

We find ourselves doing more and more bids.

The opportunity that the lottery gives us will help significantly.

It is hoped in the Corby lottery will raise ?20,000 a year for local

That is around one tenth of the amount the local borough

The council insists this is not to replace grant funding.

We do have a considerable amount we give out in small grants,

but helping organisations receive more is a good thing to do.

Regardless of local authorities having less and less money,

This is about supporting our local community.

Others warn about becoming reliant on lottery funding.

The thing about a lottery, of course, it is dependent

If it completely replaces grant funding, I think

If it is additional to grant funding, fantastic.

I think the reality is, it is replacing a large part

of grant funding because the money just isn't available any more.

At least the voluntary sector will have access to funding.

Tickets will be sold online and cost ?1.

Another 20p will go towards admin and VAT.

The Corby lottery still needs approval

But people here seem keen on taking part for a ?25,000 jackpot.

Better than the National Lottery, because I think the National Lottery

If it goes towards good causes locally, excellent.

It is a good idea, will they reduce my council tax?

No, there is no council tax reduction if you play.

There you go, then, so I wouldn't play it.

The fact that most of us go to things around here

to help local stuff, it is absolutely great.

There was also enthusiasm in Buckinghamshire.

Aylesbury Vale District Council was the first in the country

to launch a lottery and raised ?70,000 for good

It is a winner for the good causes, naturally.

It is a winner for the council, because it shows that they are

taking seriously the loss in Government grants

Who quite often can be perhaps the first port of call

For now, lottery income will be just another ingredient when it comes

But it will become more important as council budgets continue

Kelvin Hopkins, if it puts money into good causes,

Well, it is a relatively small amount.

But it is really about the savage cuts in funding for local

authorities, from central Government under six years of George

Whatever they say, that is what it is really about.

I think local authorities have suffered terribly from underfunding

from central Government and we have to restore that so that they provide

I think if we are going to make money we ought to consciously vote

for the monies that is going to be spent and raised.

So we pay our taxes, and those who are better off pay most,

Lotteries tend to be played by people who are on low incomes.

Even in the National Lottery, which supports our Olympic

athletes and whatever, even there it tends

to redistribute from the less better off to the better off

because the better off would pay higher taxes.

Otherwise, the poor substitute that cash by playing the lotteries.

The answer is to put more money into our local

To be clear, is about I think discretionary sums of money.

It can be a huge amount of money if you are on a low income

and you are putting money into that that you can't really afford to do.

I think people who do are people who are going to be able

The point is, if a local authority chooses to raise funds for charities

and some good causes that we saw in your piece, I think

It is a good example of local innovation.

You worried that actually you may think it is going to a charity that

you would like to support but it is up to somebody

on the council who will decide whether the money goes?

And it may not go where you want it to go?

Think people responding in the piece were happy

that it was going to something in their area.

I don't think they expect to have an absolute say

They said, it is supporting my local community.

I think that is attractive as a prospect.

I suppose the problem is if the lottery doesn't have money

to give to these charities and good causes, and the money dries up?

One problem I think is that there is only a certain amount of money

available for putting into lotteries and it might just be

that the National Lottery will lose a bit to local lotteries.

But actually the total amount being raised in national

You are against that, you are in favour of it?

If it does what it is supposed to do, it is a good thing?

This week, we moved one step closer to leaving the EU.

The bill preparing the way finally passed through Parliament,

well before Theresa May's deadline at the end of the month.

In the run-up to the formal process of Brexit, we have been

what challenges are facing us on the road ahead.

# There must be some kind of way out of here #.

That is what the Prime Minister will start negotiating.

It is down to her, with a bit of sovereignty

What we know is that there won't be as much free movement within the EU.

And we are leaving the single market.

We are driving to a destiny where the detail is still unknown.

And as we go full throttle So into the Brexit age,

Great minds are essential to the machines made

in Great Britain that race on Northamptonshire's circuits.

Nearby, Cambridge is arguably the brain of Britain.

It has the largest pharmaceutical hub outside America.

Many scientists backed Remain, but a pharmaceutical bosses

I think it is a question of how we use the Freedom of Brexit.

It is not Brexit itself, it is what we do with it.

The investment in biopharmaceuticals is investment not for now but for 15

It is up to the Government to allow a us to invest and grow here.

The benefit, or the strength of Cambridge is that the world best

and brightest have always come here to do their research.

We are assuming that the enthusiasm of the Cambridge environment assumes

that that will be more the case in the future.

So medicine transcends borders globally.

Right now, all goods to and from Europe do as well.

All 15,000 containers on this ship could come off at Felixstowe,

But if we leave the customs union, Britain's

busiest container port might have to start taking a look

at what is inside containers that come from the continent.

44% of the country's containers arrive in Suffolk,

A quarter of these container's content come from the EU.

I think the ports could end up being losers because they will have

to invest more time and money in making space and people

available to do inspections for security checks,

The point at the moment, when cargo comes in,

it is all governed around the European Union and their checks.

If the Government decide to keep the checks the same, then it should

But it is the other type of port where the most challenging Brexit

Luton and Stansted took off with the boom in budget airlines.

The EU created a free aviation area, which today often makes it cheaper

to fly to Copenhagen and get a train from here to Clapton.

All along the ?60 billion aviation industry, they are watching

and lobbying to keep the status quo with the EU.

I think it is a priority that we need to really strike

with Government that they need to prioritise in terms

of that open access, that single aviation

The lobbying that we are doing with our partners, airlines

and other airports is to ensure that that is the number one priority.

The Department for Transport have and the Government have

Most airlines were against Britain leaving the EU.

Recently, Ryanair has said that it will still expand

here at its main base, adding more flights from Stansted.

But Brexit brings uncertainty, and elsewhere, airlines are waiting

to see what deal is struck with Europe over the skies.

Here were medals were won in 2012, the loudest Leave voice was heard.

Castle Point voted 74% for Brexit, the pressure to please the people

and make a Team GB style success of our future outside of the EU

You have got ports in Suffolk, the airport at Stansted.

Are you convinced that everything will be OK when we pull out?

There is no way of knowing sitting here.

As I have also to my constituents corresponding about this

since the Referendum, the key thing is we are about to

It is difficult to predict what will come from that.

My view has always been, once we decide to leave, the priority

is to have a negotiation which is good spirited.

By that, I mean we are seeking a deal that is good for both parties.

If it happens like that, I think we will reach a good deal.

Do you really think it will be like that?

I think most accept that, when it starts, there will be

the usual sort of playing to the gallery and so on.

It might be confrontational to some extent.

There will be the influence of elections.

When all is said and done, it is in both parties' interest

The alternative is highly uncertain for both sides

You wanted to remain, yet you wanted to pull out,

and you have an airport at home in Luton?

With the shortage of capacity in the South East which is going

to go on for a long time yet, Luton can fill up.

We are at the moment expanding and I think it is going to continue

to expand more quickly than investments can go in.

And we are investing massively as well.

I am very optimistic about Luton, and it is a major part

As far as Brexit in general is concerned, I think

Already, experts are starting to increase, manufacturing

is going to benefit from the lower value of the pound, and we have

seen massive investments going into motor industry...

The big question for the motor industry.

The fact is, we have had big investment planned

Just today, we have heard that Toyota making massive

They did say they wanted reassurances about what was going

But the reality is, we're massive net importers of motor vehicles.

If the pound stays down at a sensible level as it is now,

the advantage of investing in Britain rather than elsewhere

Already, Vauxhall in Luton, the new owners have said

they are looking at expanding the supply chain in Britain

because it would be the sensible thing to do given that the pound has

depreciated to a more sensible level.

There were always benefits and negatives to both sides.

Obviously, the biggest benefit of leaving is that

eventually we will be able to negotiate our own trade deal.

I never disputed that things like that would be

He seems confident that there is no risk.

Hopefully it is outweighed by the potential for this

My view is the key to it is the nature of a negotiation.

As I say, if it sort of unravels and becomes confrontational,

then I think that the markets will be unsteady, I think

the country will be nervous, investors will be uncertain.

I am confident that will not prevail in the long term

because it is in both side's interest to come to a good deal.

First of all, I entirely understand from the public point of view

That we could have an area of immigration from the EU

Clearly they have partly voted to leave in order to control that.

I think we do have to be honest and say that the country

will still need immigration because they are such an important

part of our labour force, they do a fantastic job.

They work so hard. We should be open about that.

But I think we will have a deal that has some control.

Just seven days after being announced in the budget,

the Government has scrapped a plan to increase National Insurance

In what has been called a screeching U-turn,

the Chancellor Philip Hammond admitted that it was breaking

the spirit if not the letter of a manifesto pledge.

But it was Conservative backbenchers like Stevenage MP Stephen McPartland

Earlier this week, I spoke to him about whether the plan

flew in the face of Conservative values.

This is something that has come out of a civil servant's bottom drawer,

At the end of the day, there is issues arounds people

who are self-employed paying slightly less National Insurance

You know, those people have often set up the risk

of creating their own small business, many of which

They are the backbone of our economy.

Also, they don't really get maternity pay or holiday pay,

statutory sick pay, other benefits that people who are employed to get.

To try and say that we are going to equalise National Insurance

of it is fair because they receive the same benefits, it

There is an argument that says everybody should pay the same amount

If everybody is receiving the same benefits for their contribution

to National Insurance, that is something that

As I have said, those people who are self employed

receive holiday pay, sick pay, maternity

There is a whole variety of benefits they do not receive.

This isn't the first time you have been a lightning rod.

You stood up to the Government over tax credits.

You are beginning to get yourself a reputation.

From our point of view, I have spoken on a number of issues.

And been successful on almost all of those issues.

Occasionally, you have to stand up and speak out and say,

I am standing up for ordinary working families in my constituency

I am happy to speak out and if the members of Parliament

are happy for me to do that, I am pleased.

I don't speak on anybody else's behalf, I speak on my own.

What does this say about the opposition when backbenchers

are the people who seem to be holding the Government to account?

The one on tax credits was done inside the Conservative Party.

They don't recognise the problems, they don't know what is coming down

the line, they don't really do their homework.

It does fall on the Conservative parliamentary party to actually go

through everything in detail and provide holding the Government

to account type of organisation because the opposition

Stephen McPartland, thank you very much.

Kelvin Hopkins, the opposition is incredibly weak.

He would say that, but I think the Government has got it wrong.

Come on, it is Conservative backbenchers who are holding

the Chancellor to account, not the opposition.

When we were in the New Labour Government, it was often

backbenchers like myself, Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell

who made the Government change its mind on a number of issues.

Because that is what backbenchers as opposed to do.

I think the Government is refusing to grasp the nettle

of collecting the taxes which are avoided and evaded.

This tax change was going to produce ?2 billion per year.

Mr Corbyn was criticised for his performance at PM's

Mr Corbyn was criticised for his performance at PM's Question Time.

He were the first person to put his name in the hat.

I wasn't in Prime Minister's questions this week, I didn't see.

On the other hand, I stand by Jeremy.

I think he represents historic Labour values and millions

I think that is the way, he is the one for us.

When you look, I mean, where you one of the backbenchers

Are you reluctant to join in with these?

I look to the underlying picture here, and that is that I respect

the fact people to take risks starting a business.

But we have an unavoidable mathematical fact which is

that the cost of delivering welfare including the NHS, the state

pension and many other benefits is increasing.

You think the NIC increase was right?

Think the underlying policy is right.

We do have a huge change in the economy here.

We have less tax coming in from more and more people

We can choose to become more and more in depth as a country

I think that's the way that the Chancellor executed it,

in respect of the reaction to what was in the manifesto, we are

But the underlying policy direction he will pursue, I welcome that.

I think the country will have to come to terms with the fact that,

when the economy changes, policy has to change with it.

Are there other things they are going to have to do

a U-turn on, do you think from the Budget and recent policies?

We will have to wait and see on that one.

I think that the broader direction is very sensible.

We are very fortunate to have such low unemployment.

I think we should remember how lucky we are compared

They'll will still be decisions to make in the future.

Is it a strong man who changes his mind, or somebody who doesn't

If someone says, you have got it wrong and they prove their point,

John Maynard Keynes, perhaps the greatest intellectual

of the 20th century in Britain, said always used to say that.

Now for our 60 Second round up of the week with Deborah.

In the wake of January's flood warnings for the East Anglian Coast

a new report has identified 64 problems and mistakes

I think there are some big lessons to learn.

But I think of the smaller things, sometimes it is human error,

sometimes a systematic failure, but the important thing

is that they are going to address it for the future from the review.

MP WIll Quint is hoping that some of the money earmarked for accident

and emergency departments in the last week's budget

Colchester Hospital's A E department has excellent staff,

but suffers from poor layout and patient flow.

Warnings that withdrawing from the EU will cost

They do not worry long-time Brexiteer Peter Bone.

When you have a divorce, don't you split the net amount in two ?

So that would be ?92 billion that should be paid back to us.

Did the Prime Minister have the chance to bring this up?

And Boaty McBoatface. Finally gets an outing.

Scientists from the Cambridge-based British Antarctic Survey

will be heading off for its first expedition.

Both of you, thank you very much for being with us this week.

pricing of these buildings. Thank you both. Say goodbye. Goodbye. Back

to you. So, can George Osborne stay

on as a member of Parliament Will Conservative backbenchers force

a Government re-think And is Theresa May about to cap gas

and electricity prices? Whose idea was that first of all?

They are all questions for the Week Ahead to.

Let's start with the story that is too much fun to miss, on Friday it

was announced the former Chancellor would be the new editor of London's

Evening Standard newspaper, a position he will take up in mid-May

on a salary of ?200,000 for four days a week.

But Mr Osborne has said he will not be stepping down as MP

for Tatton in Cheshire, a job he's held since 2001,

Alongside these duties, he's also chairman of

While being committed to one day a week at Black Rock,

an American asset management firm - a part-time role that earns him

Then he's polishing his academic credentials, as a fellow

at the McCain Institute, an American thinktank,

And finally as a member of the Washington Speaker's Bureau,

he also earns his keep as an after-dinner speaker, banking

around ?750,000 since last summer.

So there you go. Nice little earners if you can get them. The problem,

though, is he has put second jobs on the agenda and lots of his fellow

MPs are not happy because they have got second jobs but not making that

kind of money. No, and a lot of MPs on both sides actually are unhappy

about it exactly for those reasons. I find it a very interesting

appointment. We have got these people on the centre and centre

right of politics who have been used to power since 1997, they have been

on the airwaves today, Tony Blair, Nick Clegg, George Osborne, and they

are all seeking other platforms now because power has moved elsewhere.

So Tony Blair is setting up this new foundation, Nick Clegg refused to

condemn George Osborne, Tony Blair praised the appointment. They are

all searching for new platforms. They might have overestimated the

degree to which this will be a huge influential platform. The standard

was very pro-Tory at the 2015 election but London voted Labour, it

was pro-Zac Goldsmith but they elected Sadiq Khan. It might be

overestimating the degree to which this is a hugely influential paper.

But I can see why it attracts him as a platform when all these platforms

have disappeared, eg power and government. All of these people who

used to be in power are quietly getting together again, Mr Blair on

television this morning, George Osborne not only filling his bank

account but now in charge of London's most important newspaper,

Nick Clegg out today not saying Brexit was a done deal, waiting to

see what happens, even John Major was wheeled out again today in the

Mail on Sunday. They are all playing for position. I half expect David

Cameron to turn up as features editor on The Evening Standard.

Brexit and breakfast! With Mr Clegg, did he not? I do not think this is

sustainable for George Osborne, I worked at The Evening Standard and I

was there for three years, I know what the hours are like for a humble

journalist, never mind the editor. If he thinks he can get at 4am

everyday to be in the offices at 5am to oversee the splash, manage

everything in the way and edited should he is in cloud cuckoo land.

What this says to people is there is a kind of feel of soft corruption

about public life here, where you see what you can get away with. He

thinks he can brazen this out and maybe he can but what kind of

message does that send to people about how seriously people take the

role of being an MP? He must have known. He applied for the job. The

Russian owner didn't approach him, he approached Lebedev, the

proprietor, for it. He must have calculated there would be some

kickback. I wonder if he realised there would be quite the kickback

there has been. I think that's probably right. This hasn't finished

yet, by the way, this will go on and on. How on earth does George Osborne

cover the budget in the autumn? Big budget, lots of physical changes and

tax rises to deal with the messages out of this week. You can see

already, Theresa May budget crashes. It could be worse. She's useless!

Or, worse than that, me, brilliant budget, terrible newspaper, I've

never buying it again. He has hoisted his own petard. He has not

bought it properly through. It's a something interesting about his own

future calculations, if he wants to stay on as an MP in 2020 and be

Prime Minister as he has or was wanted to be he has got to find a

new seat. How do you go into an association and say I should be an

MP, I can do it for at least four hours Purdy after editing The

Evening Standard, making a big speech and telling Black Rock how to

make a big profit. The feature pages have to be approved for the next day

and feature pages are aware the editor gets to make their mark. The

news is the news. The feature is what concerns you, what he is in

your bonnet. That defines the newspaper, doesn't it? It is not

over yet. Too much 101 on newspapers. And Haatheq at.

School funding, the consultation period ends, it has been a tricky

one for the government, some areas losing. I guess we are seeing this

through the prism of the National Insurance contributions now, it is a

small majority, if Tory MPs are unhappy she may not get her way.

Talking to backbench MPs who are unhappy the feeling is it is not

going to go ahead in the proposed form that the consultation has been

on. No 10 will definitely have to move on this. It is unclear whether

they will scrap it completely, or will they bring in something

possibly like a base level, floor level pupil funding below which you

can't go? You would then still need to find some extra money. So there

are no easy solutions on this but what is clear it is not going to go

ahead in its current form. Parents have been getting letters across the

country in England about what this will mean for teachers and so on in

certain schools. It's not just a matter of the education Department,

the schools, or the teachers and Tory backbenchers. Parents are being

mobilised on this. The point of the new funding formula is to allocate

more money to the more disadvantaged. That means schools in

the more prosperous suburbs are going to lose money. Budget cuts on

schools which are already struggling. It comes down again to

be huge problem, the ever smaller fiscal pool, ever greater demands,

NHS, social care, education as well, adding to Theresa May and Phillip

Hammond's enormous problems. Here is an interesting issue, Steve. There

was a labour Leader of the Opposition that once suggested

perhaps given these huge energy companies which seemed to be good at

passing on energy rises but not so good at cutting energy prices when

it falls, that perhaps we should put a cap on them until at least we

study how the market goes. This was obviously ludicrous Marxism and

quite rightly knocked down by the Conservatives, except that Mrs May

is now talking about putting a cap on energy prices. Yes, I think if it

wasn't for Brexit we would focus much more on Theresa May's Ed

Miliband streak. Whether this translates into policies, let us

see. That bit we don't know. That bit we don't know but in terms of

argument her speech to the Conservative conference on Friday

was about the third or fourth time where she said as part of the

speech, let's focus on the good that government can do, including in

intervening in markets, exactly in the way that he used to argue. As

you say, we await the policy consequences of that. She seems more

cautious in terms of policy in fermentation. But in terms of the

industrial strategy, in terms of implying intervention in certain

markets, there is a kind of Milibandesque streak. And there

comes a time when she has to walk the walk as well as talk the talk.

They talk a lot about the just about managing, just about managing face

rising food bills because of the lower pound and face rising fuel

bills because of the rise in oil and in other commodities. One of the two

things you could do to help the just about managing is to cut their food

bills and the second would be to cut their fuel bills. At some stage she

has to do something for them. We don't know what is going to happen

to food bills under Brexit, that could become a really serious issue.

They could abolish tariffs. There has been a lot of talking the talk

and big announcements put out and not following through so I agree

with you on that but lots of Tory MPs will have a big problem on

this and the principle of continually talking about

interfering in markets, whether it's on executive pay, whether it is on

energy, at a time when Britain needs to send out this message to the

world in their view, in the view of Brexit supporting MPs, that we are

open for business and the government is not about poking around and doing

this kind of thing. Of course, you could argue there is not a problem

in the market for energy, it is a malfunctioning market that doesn't

operate like a free market should, so that provides even Adam Smith,

the inventor of market economics would have said on that basis you

should intervene. I was in Cardiff to listen to Theresa May's latest

explanation for doing this. By the way, we've been waiting nine months,

this was one of her big ideas. You are right, let's see a bit of the

meat, please. My newspaper has been calling for some pretty hefty

government action on this for quite some time. For the just about

managings? Yes and specifically to sort out an energy market dominated

by the big six, which is manifestly ripping people off left, right and

centre. Theresa May's argument in Cardiff on Friday morning which, by

the way, went down like a proverbial windbreak at the proverbial funeral

because Tories... You know what I mean Andrew, the big hand coming

into from the state telling businesses what to do. They went

very quiet indeed. They were having saving the union and Nato but there

was no clapping for that. The point being, this is what she needs to do

to prove her assault, to prove those first words on the steps of Downing

Street. We await to see the actions taken.

On that unusual agreement we will leave it there. The Daily Politics

will be back on BBC Two tomorrow at noon and everyday during the week.

And I'll be here on BBC One next Sunday at 11am.

Remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.

I've not given myself that time to sit down

Two years ago, former England captain Rio Ferdinand lost his wife