27/11/2016 Sunday Politics South

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

Was Fidel Castro a revolutionary hero or a murderous dictator?

After the Cuban leader's death, politicians divide over his legacy.

Can the NHS in England find billions of pounds' worth of efficiency

The Shadow Health Secretary joins me live.

Should we have a second Brexit referendum on the terms

of the eventual withdrawal deal that's struck with the EU?

Former Lib Dem leader Paddy Ashdown and former Conservative cabinet

In the south, the Chancellor is go head-to-head.

In the south, the Chancellor is promising millions for new

affordable homes but will it be And with me, Tom Newton Dunn,

Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards. They'll be tweeting

throughout the programme Political leaders around the world

have been reacting to the news of the death of Fidel Castro,

the Cuban revolutionary who came to power in 1959 and ushered

in a Marxist revolution. Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson

described the former leader as an "historic if controversial

figure" and said his death marked Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said

Castro was "a champion of social justice" who had "seen off

a lot of US presidents" President-elect Donald Trump

described the former Cuban leader as a "brutal dictator",

adding that he hoped his death would begin a new era

"in which the wonderful Cuban people finally live in the freedom

they so richly deserve". Meanwhile, the President

of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker,

said the controversial leader was "a hero for many"

but "his legacy will be judged I guess we had worked that out

ourselves. What do you make of the reactions so far across the

political divide? Predictable. And I noticed that Jeremy Corbyn has come

in for criticism for his tribute to Castro. But I think it was the right

thing for him to do. We all know he was an admirer. He could have sat

there for eight hours in his house, agonising over some bland statement

which didn't alienate the many people who want to wade into

attacked Castro. It would have been inauthentic and would have just

added to the sort of mainstream consensus, and I think he was right

to say what he believed in this respect. Elsewhere, it has been

wholly predictable that there would be this device, because he divided

opinion in such an emotive way. Steve, I take your point about

authenticity and it might have looked a bit lame for Jeremy Corbyn

to pretend that he had no affection for Fidel Castro at all, but do you

think he made a bit of an error dismissing Castro's record, the

negative side of it as just a floor? He could have acknowledged in more

elaborate terms the huge costs. He wanted to go on about the health and

education, which if you actually look up the indices on that, they

are good relative to other countries. But they have come at

such a huge cost. He was not a champion of criminal justice. If he

had done that, it would have been utterly inauthentic. He doesn't

believe it. And he would have thought there would be many other

people focusing on all the epic failings. So he focused on what he

believed. There are times when Corbyn's prominence in the media

world now as leader widens the debate in an interesting and

important way. I am not aware of any criticisms that Mr Corbyn has ever

announced about Mr Castro. There were four words in his statement

yesterday which is spin doctor would have forced him to say, for all his

flaws. He was on this Cuban solidarity committee, which didn't

exist to criticise Castro. It existed to help protect Castro from

those, particularly the Americans, who were trying to undermine him.

And Corbyn made a big deal yesterday saying he has always called out

human rights abuses all over the world. But he said that in general,

I call out human rights abuses. He never said, I have called out human

rights abuses in Cuba. In the weeks ahead, more will come out about what

these human rights abuses were. The lid will come off what was actually

happening. Some well authenticated stories are pretty horrendous. I was

speaking to a journalist who was working there in the 1990s, who gave

me vivid examples of that, and there will be more to come. I still go

back to, when a major figure diet and you are a leader who has admired

but major figure, you have to say it. That is the trap he has fallen

into. He has proved every criticism that he is a duck old ideologue. But

he is not the only one. Prime Minister Trudeau was so if uses that

I wondered if they were going to open up a book of condolences. I

think it reinforces Corbyn's failing brand. It may be authentic, but

authentic isn't working for him. When I was driving, I heard Trevor

Phillips, who is a Blairite, saying the record was mixed and there were

a lot of things to admire as well as all the terrible things. So it is

quite nuanced. But if you are a leader issuing a sound bite, there

is no space for new ones. You either decide to go for the consensus,

which is to set up on the whole, it was a brutal dictatorship. Or you

say, here is an extraordinary figure worthy of admiration. In my view, he

was right to say what he believed. There was still a dilemma for the

British government over who they sent to the funeral. Do they sent

nobody, do they say and Boris Johnson as a post-ironic statement?

There is now a post-Castro Cuba to deal with. Trump was quite

diplomatic about post-Castro Cuba. And Boris Johnson's statement was

restrained. The thing about Mr Castro was the longevity, 50 years

of keeping Marxism on the island. That was what made it so

fascinating. Before the last election,

George Osborne promised the NHS in England a real-terms funding

boost of ?8 billion per year by 2020 on the understanding that NHS bosses

would also find ?22 billion worth Since last autumn, NHS managers have

been drawing up what they're calling "Sustainability and Transformation

Plans" to make these savings, but some of the proposals

are already running into local opposition, while Labour say

they amount to huge cuts to the NHS. Help is on the way for an elderly

person in need in Hertfordshire. But east of England ambulance

call operators they're sending an early

intervention vehicle with a council-employed occupational

therapist on board. It's being piloted here

for over 65s with When they arrive, a paramedic judges

if the patient can be treated immediately at home

without a trip to hospital. Around 80% of patients have

been treated this way, taking the strain off

urgently-needed hospital beds, So the early intervention team has

assessed the patient and decided The key to successful integration

for Hertfordshire being able to collaboratively look at how

we use our resources, to have pooled budgets,

to allow us to understand where spend is, and to let us make

conscientious decisions about how best to use that money,

to come up with ideas to problems that sit between our organisations,

to look at things collaboratively. This Hertfordshire hospital is also

a good example of how You won't find an A unit

or overnight beds here any more. The closest ones are 20 minutes

down the road. What's left is nurse-led care

in an NHS-built hospital. Despite a politically toxic change,

this reconfiguration went through after broad public

and political consultation with hospital clinicians

and GPs on board. It's a notable achievement that's

surely of interest to 60% of NHS trusts in England that reported

a deficit at the end of September. It's not just here that the NHS

needs to save money and provide The Government is going to pour

in an extra ?8 billion into the NHS in England, but it has

demanded ?22 billion worth of efficiencies

across the country. In order to deliver that,

the NHS has created 44 health and care partnerships,

and each one will provide a sustainability and transformation

plan, or STP, to integrate care, provide better services

and save money. So far, 33 of these 44 regional

plans, drawn up by senior people in the health service

and local government, The NHS has been through five years

of severely constrained spending growth, and there are another 4-5

years on the way at least. STPs themselves are an attempt

to deal in a planned way But with plans to close some A

units and reduce the number of hospital beds, there's likely

to be a tough political battle ahead, with many MPs already up

in arms about proposed This Tory backbencher is concerned

about the local plans for his I wouldn't call it an efficiency

if you are proposing to close all of the beds which are currently

provided for those coming out of the acute sector

who are elderly and looking That's not a cut, it's not

an efficiency saving, All 44 STPs should be

published in a month's time, But even before that,

they dominated this week's PMQs. The Government's sustainability

and transformation plans for the National Health Service hide

?22 billion of cuts. The National Health Service

is indeed looking for savings within the NHS, which will be

reinvested in the NHS. There will be no escape from angry

MPs for the Health Secretary either. Well, I have spoken to the Secretary

of State just this week about the importance of community

hospitals in general, These are proposals

out to consultation. What could happen if these

plans get blocked? If STPs cannot be made to work,

the planned changes don't come to pass, then the NHS will see over

time a sort of unplanned deterioration and services becoming

unstable and service The NHS barely featured in this

week's Autumn Statement but the Prime Minister insisted

beforehand that STPs are in the interests

of local people. Her Government's support will now be

critical for NHS England to push through these

controversial regional plans, which will soon face

public scrutiny. We did ask the Department

of Health for an interview, I've been joined by

the Shadow Health Secretary, Do you accept that the NHS is

capable of making ?22 billion of efficiency savings? Well, we are

very sceptical, as are number of independent organisations about the

ability of the NHS to find 22 billion of efficiencies without that

affecting front line care. When you drill down into the 22 billion,

based on the information we have been given, and there hasn't been

much information, we can see that some of it will come from cutting

the budget which go to community pharmacies, which could lead,

according to ministers, to 3000 pharmacies closing, which we believe

will increase demands on A and GPs, and also that a lot of these

changes which are being proposed, which was the focus of the package,

we think will mean service cuts at a local level. Do they? The chief

executive of NHS England says these efficiency plans are "Incredibly

important". He used to work from Labour. The independent King's Fund

calls them "The best hope to improve health and care services. There is

no plan B". On the sustainable transformation plans, which will be

across England to link up physical health, mental health and social

care, for those services to collaborate more closely together

and move beyond the fragmented system we have at the moment is

important. It seems that the ground has shifted. It has moved into

filling financial gaps. As we know, the NHS is going through the biggest

financial squeeze in its history. By 2018, per head spending on the NHS

will be falling. If you want to redesign services for the long term

in a local area, you need to put the money in. So of course, getting

these services working better together and having a greater

strategic oversight, which we would have had if we had not got rid of

strategic health authority is in the last Parliament. But this is not an

attempt to save 22 billion, this is an attempt to spend 22 billion more

successfully, don't you accept that? Simon Stevens said we need 8

billion, and we need to find 22 billion of savings. You have to

spend 22 billion more efficiently. But the Government have not given

that 8 billion to the NHS which they said they would. They said they

would do it by 2020. But they have changed the definitions of spending

so NHS England will get 8 billion by 2020, but they have cut the public

health budgets by about 4 million by 20 20. The budget that going to

initiatives to tackle sexually transmitted diseases, to tackle

smoking have been cut back but the commissioning of things like school

nurses and health visitors have been cut back as well. Simon Stevens said

he can only deliver that five-year project if there is a radical

upgrade in public health, which the Government have failed on, and if we

deal with social care, and this week there was an... I understand that,

but if you don't think the efficiency drive can free up 22

billion to take us to 30 billion by 2020, where would you get the money

from? I have been in this post now for five or six weeks and I want to

have a big consultation with everybody who works in the health

sector, as well as patients, carers and families. Though you don't know?

I think it would be surprised if I had an arbitrary figure this soon

into the job. Your party said they expected election of spring by this

year, you need to have some idea by now, you inherited a portfolio from

Diane Abbott, did she have no idea? To govern is to make choices and we

would make different choices. The budget last year scored billions of

giveaways in things like co-operating -- corporation tax.

What I do want to do... Is work on a plan and the general election,

whenever it comes, next year or in 2020 or in between, to have costed

plan for the NHS. But your party is committed to balancing the books on

current spending, that is currently John McDonnell, the Shadow

Chancellor's position. What we are talking about, this extra 30

billion, that is essentially current spending so if it doesn't come from

efficiency savings, where does the money come from? Some of it is also

capital. Mainly current spending. If you look at the details of the OBR,

they have switched a million from the capital into revenue. Why -- how

do you balance spending? That is why we need to have a

debate. Every time we ask for Labour's policy, we are always told

me a debate. Surely it is time to give some idea of what you stand

for? There's huge doubts about the Government 's policy on this. You

are the opposition, how would you do it? I want to work with John

McDonnell to find a package to give the NHS the money it needs, but of

course our Shadow Chancellor, like any Shadow Chancellor at this stage

in the cycle, will want to see what the books look like a head of an

election before making commitments. I am clear that the Labour Party has

to go into the next general election with a clear policy to give the NHS

the funding it needs because it has been going through the largest

financial squeeze in its history. You say Labour will always give the

NHS the money it needs, that is not a policy, it is a blank cheque. It

is an indication of our commitment to the NHS. Under this Conservative

government, the NHS has been getting a 1% increase. Throughout its

history it has usually have about 4%. Under the last Labour government

it was getting 4%, before that substantially more. We think the NHS

should get more but I don't have access to the NHS books in front of

me. The public thinks there needs to be more money spent on health but

they also think that should go cap in hand with the money being more

efficiently spent, which is what this efficiency drive is designed to

release 22 billion. Do you have an efficiency drive if it is not the

Government's one? Of course we agree. We agree the NHS should be

more efficient, we want to see productivity increased. Do know how

to do that? One way is through investments, maintenance, but there

is a 5 million maintenance backlog. One of the most high risk backlogs

is something like 730 million. They are going to switch the capital

spend into revenue spend. I believe that when you invest in maintenance

and capital in the NHS, that contribute to increasing its

productivity. You are now talking about 5 billion the maintenance, the

chief executive says it needs 30 billion more by 2020 as a minimum so

that 35 billion. You want to spend more on social care, another for 5

billion on that so we have proper care in the community. By that

calculation I'm up to about 40 billion, which is fine, except where

do you get the and balance the account at the same time? We will

have to come up with a plan for that and that's why I will work with our

Shadow Treasury team to come up with that plan when they head into the

general election. At the moment we are saying to the NHS, sorry, we are

not going to give you the investment, which is why we are

seeing patient care deteriorating. The staff are doing incredible

things but 180,000 are waiting in A beyond four hours, record levels

of people delayed in beds in hospitals because there are not the

beds in the community to go to save the NHS needs the investment. We

know that and we know the Government's response to that and

many think it is inadequate. What I'm trying to get from you is what

your response would be and what your reaction will be to these efficiency

plans. Your colleague Heidi Alexander, she had your job earlier

this year, she warned of the danger of knee jerk blanket opposition to

local efficiency plans. Do you agree with that? Yes. So every time a

hospital is going to close as a result of this, and some will, it is

Labour default position not just going to be we are against it? That

is why we are going to judge each of these sustainability plans by a

number of yardsticks. We want to see if they have the support of local

clinicians, we want to see if they have the support of local

authorities because they now have a role in the delivery of health care.

We want to see if they make the right decisions for the long-term

trends in population for local area. We want to see if they integrate

social care and health. If they don't and therefore you will not

bank that as an efficiency saving, you will say no, that's not the way

to go, you are left then with finding the alternative funding to

keep the NHS going. If you are cutting beds, for example the

proposal is to cut something like 5000 beds in Derbyshire and if there

is the space in the community sector in Derbyshire, that will cause big

problems for the NHS in the long term so it is a false economy. An

example like that, we would be very sceptical the plans could work.

Would it not be honest, given the sums of money involved and your

doubts about the efficiency plan, which are shared by many people, to

just say, look, among the wealthy nations, we spend a lower proportion

of our GDP on health than most of the other countries, European

countries included, we need to put up tax if we want a proper NHS.

Wouldn't that be honest? I'm not the Shadow Chancellor, I don't make

taxation policy. You are tempting me down a particular road by you or I

smile. John McDonnell will come up with our taxation policy. We have

had an ambition to meet the European average, the way these things are

measured have changed since then, but we did have that ambition and

for a few years we met it. We need substantial investment in the NHS.

Everyone accepts it was extraordinary that there wasn't an

extra penny for the NHS in the Autumn Statement this week. And as

we go into the general election, whenever it is, we will have a plan

for the NHS. Come back and speak to us when you know what you are going

to do. Thank you. Theresa May has promised to trigger

formal Brexit negotiations before the end of March,

but the Prime Minister must wait for the Supreme Court to decide

whether parliament must vote If that is the Supreme Court's

conclusion, the Liberal Democrats and others in parliament have said

they'll demand a second EU referendum on the terms

of the eventual Brexit deal before And last week, two former

Prime Ministers suggested that the referendum result

could be reversed. In an interview with

the New Statesman on Thursday, Tony Blair said, "It can be stopped

if the British people decide that, having seen what it means,

the pain-gain cost-benefit analysis John Major also weighed

in, telling a meeting of the National Liberal Club

that the terms of Brexit were being dictated

by the "tyranny of the majority". He also said there is

a "perfectly credible case" That prompted the former

Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith to criticise John

Major. He told the BBC, "The idea

we delay everything simply because they disagree

with the original result does seem to me an absolute

dismissal of democracy." So, is there a realistic chance

of a second referendum on the terms of whatever Brexit deal Theresa May

manages to secure? Lib Dem party leader Tim Farron has

said, "We want to respect the will of the people and that

means they must have their say in a referendum on the terms

of the deal." But the Lib Dems have just eight MPs

- they'll need Labour support One ally is former Labour leadership

candidate Owen Smith. He backs the idea of

a second referendum. But yesterday the party's deputy

leader, Tom Watson, said that, "Unlike the Lib Dem Brexit Deniers,

we believe in respecting To discuss whether or not

there should be a second referendum on the terms of the Brexit deal,

I've been joined by two In Somerset is the former Lib Dem

leader Paddy Ashdown, and in Shropshire is the former

Conservative cabinet minister Paddy Ashdown, let me come to you

first. When the British people have spoken, you do what they command,

either you believe in democracy or you don't. When democracy speaks, we

obey. Your words on the night of the referendum, what's changed? Nothing

has changed, Andrew, that's what I said and what I still believe in.

The British people have spoken, we will not block Parliament debating

the Brexit decision, Article 50, but we will introduce an amendment to

say that we need to consult the British people, not about if we go

out but what destination we would then achieve. There is a vast

difference in ordinary people's lives between the so-called hard

Brexit and soft Brexit. Soft Brexit, you remain in the single market, you

have to accept and agree on immigration. Hard Brexit you are out

of the single market, we have many fewer jobs... Why didn't you say

before the referendum there would be a second referendum on the terms?

Forgive me, I said it on many occasions, you may not have covered

it, Andrew, but that's a different thing. In every speech I gave I said

this, and this has proved to be true, since those who recommended

Brexit refused to tell us the destination they were recommending,

they refuse to give any detail about the destination, if we did vote to

go out, it would probably be appropriate to decide which

destination, hard Brexit or soft Brexit we go to. They deliberately

obscure that because it made it more difficult to argue the case. It

wasn't part of the official campaign but let me come to Owen Paterson.

What's wrong with a referendum on the terms of the deal? We voted to

leave but we don't really know on what conditions we leave so what's

wrong with negotiating the deal and putting that deal to the British

people? This would be a ridiculous idea, it would be a complete gift to

the EU negotiators to go for an impossibly difficult deal because

they want to do everything to make sure that Brexit does not go

through. This nonsense idea of hard Brexit and soft Brexit, it was never

discussed during the referendum campaign. We made it clear we wanted

to take back control, that means making our own laws, raising and

spending the money agreed by elected politicians, getting control of our

own borders back, and getting control of our ability to do trade

deals around the world. That was clear at all stages of the

referendum. We got 17.4 million votes, the biggest vote in history

for any issue, that 52%, 10% more than John Major got and he was happy

with his record number of 14 million, more than Tony Blair got,

which was 43%, so we have a very clear mandate. Time and again people

come up to me and say when are we going to get on with this. The big

problem is uncertainty. We want to trigger Article 50, have the

negotiation and get to a better place.

OK, I need to get a debate going. Paddy Ashdown, the EU doesn't want

us to leave. If they knew there was going to be a second referendum,

surely there was going to be a second referendum, surely their

incentive would be to give us the worst possible deal would vote

against it would put us in a ridiculous negotiating position. On

the contrary, the government could go and negotiate with the European

Union and anyway, the opinion of the European Union is less important

than the opinion of the British people. It seems to me that Owen

Paterson made the case for me precisely. They refuse to discuss

what kind of destination. Britain voted for departure, but not a

destination. Because Owen Paterson and his colleagues refused to

discuss what their model was. So the range of options here and the impact

on the people of Britain is huge. There is nothing to stop the

government going to negotiate, getting the best deal it can and go

into the British people and saying, this is the deal, guys, do you

agree? Owen Paterson? It is simple. The British people voted to leave.

We voted to take back control of our laws, our money, our borders. But

most people don't know the shape of what the deal would be. So why not

have a vote on it? Because it would be a gift to the EU negotiators to

drive the worst possible deal in the hope that it might be chucked out

with a second referendum. The biggest danger is the uncertainty.

We have the biggest vote in British history. You have said all that. It

was your side that originally proposed a second referendum. The

director of Leave said, there is a strong democratic case for a

referendum on what the deal looks like. Your side. Come on, you are

digging up a blog from June of 2015. He said he had not come to a

conclusion. He said it is a distinct possibility. No senior members of

the campaign said we would have a second referendum. It is worth

chucking Paddy the quote he gave on ITV news, whether it is a majority

of 1% or 20%, when the British people have spoken, you do what they

command. People come up to me and keep asking, when are you going to

get on with it? What do you say to that, Paddy Ashdown? Owen Paterson

has obviously not been paying attention. You ask me that question

at the start. Owen and his kind have to stick to the same argument.

During the referendum, when we said that the Europeans have it in their

interest to picket tough for us, they would suffer as well. And that

has proved to be right. The European Union does not wish to hand as a bad

deal, because they may suffer in the process. We need the best deal for

both sides. I can't understand why Owen is now reversing that argument.

Here is the question I am going to ask you. If we have a second

referendum on the deal and we vote by a very small amount, by a sliver,

to stay in, can we then make it best-of-3? No, Andrew! Vince Cable

says he thinks if you won, he would have to have a decider. You will

have to put that income tax, because I don't remember when he said that.

-- you have to put that in context. Independent, 19th of September. That

is a decision on the outcome. The central point is that the British

people voted for departure, not a destination. In response to the

claim that this is undemocratic, if it is democratic to have one

referendum, how can it be undemocratic to have two? Owen

Paterson, the British government, on the brink of triggering article 50,

cannot tell us if we will remain members of the single market, if we

will remain members of the customs union. From that flows our ability

to make trade deals, our attitude towards freedom of movement and the

rest of it. Given that the government can't tell us, it is

clear that the British people have no idea what the eventual shape will

be. That is surely the fundamental case for a second referendum.

Emphatically not. They have given a clear vote. That vote was to take

back control. What the establishment figures like Paddy should recognise

is the shattering damage it would do to the integrity of the whole

political process if this was not delivered. People come up to me, as

I have said for the third time now, wanting to know when we will get

article 50 triggered. Both people who have voted to Remain and to

Leave. If we do not deliver this, it will be disastrous for the

reputation and integrity of the whole political establishment. Let

me put that you Paddy Ashdown. It is very Brussels elite - were ask your

question but if we don't like the answer, we will keep asking the

question. Did it with the Irish and French. It is... It would really

anger the British people, would it not? That is an interesting

question, Andrew. I don't think it would. All the evidence I see in

public meetings I attended, and I think it is beginning to show in the

opinion polls, although there hasn't been a proper one on this yet, I

suspect there is a majority in Britain who would wish to see a

second referendum on the outcome. They take the same view as I do.

What began with an open democratic process cannot end with a government

stitch up. Contrary to what Owen suggests, there is public support

for this. And far from damaging the government and the political class,

it showed that we are prepared to listen. We shall see. Paddy Ashdown,

have you eaten your hat yet? Andrew, as you well know, I have eaten five

hats. You cannot have a second referendum until you eat your hat on

my programme. We will leave it there. Paddy Ashdown and Owen

Paterson, thank you much. I have eaten a hat on your programme. I

don't remember! It's just gone 11.35,

you're watching the Sunday Politics. On today's show.

in Scotland, who leave us now The Chancellor promised money

for thousands of new homes this week, but is it any more

than a drop in the cement mixer? We will look at schemes

in the South in a building houses a lot cheaper

and finding out the latest on the eco-town proposal plan

for Borden in Hampshire. Molly Scott Cato is

from the Green Party and an MEP in the

south-west of England. And Dan Hannan is a Conservative MEP

for the Well, a lot of people

have a lot of names for 26 years I was working for Britain

becoming independent again, I've never felt more proud

than I did on the 24th of It is my wedding anniversary,

but now it has a new and special But what is your take

on the temperature of how Confident and optimistic

that we will get a satisfactory deal with

the European Union based We will all act in our own interests

and we have the same one, which is We will have open, good free trade

deals with the rest of the world, Australia, America and India, based

on consumers rather than producer cartels and I think a decade from

now, we will look back and wonder He should do the negotiations,

shouldn't he? Well, considering he's been

thinking about this the 26 years, I'm surprised there is more

of a clear plan coming forward. And I think we are

beginning to see what Brexit Britain is going

to look like, actually. It is a country with high debts,

low taxes, looking a bit like a tax haven, lower wages

are much higher prices. Since the Conservatives came

to power in 2010, the deficit has Now, there's going to be

122 black holes because The uncertainty is spelt out

in the Autumn Statement. It has doubled, it is

getting to the point where we are likely

to be like Japan. The deficit was under

the But it has doubled

in the Conservative Yes, because that's what happens

when you have a deficit... Actually, the amount

of money paid by the top 10% Let us come back to your

salaries as MEPs later. In the meantime, in his

Autumn Statement, the Chancellor made much of the planned investments

in infrastructure, though declined to mention specifics beyond saying

the south-west will be in line for ?191 million and London

and the south-east for The lion's share that will probably

go to the capital, I think we can Enterprise partnerships

across the country have put in bids to the growth fund,

but tough to wait to see exactly which ones

are Joining me now is Laura

Carver, the Dorset MEP. Short on detail, wasn't it,

the Autumn Statement? I think the details will follow very

shortly and we are looking forward

to that and it is positive. There's ?191 million coming

into the south-west. You have to say that,

because you are still This London and the south-east

figure surely is concealing the small

amount of money as it it all goes to the Northern

powerhouse and the Midland engine? We are in a great position that we

will have some money coming into Dorset for infrastructure, housing

and colleges and that is a good Skills and research and development

seemed to be a bit of a That is something Dorset can

do well, it isn't it? There are free colleges in Dorset,

we are hoping each of those will have further

funding to enhance their facilities to enable young people going there

to go straight to the local There are a lot of key sectors,

finance, manufacturing, we need to keep equipment

up-to-date in those places and have the business input to make

sure the young people Like everywhere, there

is a mixed view in Dorset. What we are able to do is work

with people like the Department of industry and trade, working

with our growth hope to make sure businesses wants to exports or look

at other Sorry, we know it's going to happen,

Theresa May says it is. You should be shock

proofing, shouldn't you? Isn't that what you

should be doing now? If one of the big finance people

move to Europe, what will we Ultimately, we are building

on the strengths we We are working with businesses

to help them grow their businesses and that is why we are looking at

housing and skills and working with Government departments

to build more resilience. There wasn't much

either on devolution. Dorset is supposed

to be progressing. Rural working with cities,

Bournemouth high-tech along with what happens

in West Dorset. But surely we should be further down

the road with taking It has had a recent consultation

on combine authority and unitary decisions, so actually,

the progress in Dorset is so what... It doesn't seem Philip Hammond

is as keen as George Osborne was on My understanding is yes,

there are opportunities for the taking and Dorset is working its way

through part of the process of looking at different

Government structures. I mean, Cambridge and the East bid

was supposed to be signed off by George Osborne

and now it is not as clear Well, I can't speak about Cambridge,

but Dorset is certainly progressing. The local authorities

are part of the LEP, so it is working, you know,

with a symbiotic relationship with local authorities that are

supportive of the combine authority and the LEP is working

with our partners to make sure we are in

the I would like to see our

counties and other cities taking on massive responsibility

on health care, on welfare, social Hampshire has the same

population as New New Hampshire runs its own

Criminal Justice System, its own I don't believe English

counties and cities are uniquely incapable

of self governance. Central Government never gives these

things without being The demand has to be

coming from below. is being knocked back

by Westminster, isn't it? Parties or always in

favour of devolution when And it's a different

thing when they are in I don't see any power

exercised by Holyrood under the 1998 Scotland Act that cannot

in England be exercised But what I see in the LEPs

is there isn't a degree of political control or oversight in the way

public money is being spent. I would like to see

powers following the money and to see much

what investment in the south-east of As you point out, George Osborne

was very focused on the There wasn't enough

coming to the south-west. The whole devolution plan he had

was a real blog's breakfast,

with the different power is going to No, it is our MPs fault for not

putting pressure on. And also, maybe there

should be more connections between you and me,

people of the local... There has been some movement,

which is unusual, in the sense we've now got in Manchester

and Birmingham these super Mayors. There is one, including other health

care, which is a big one. The big one I want is

tax at a local level. No, no, you do want

to break up the NHS. I want everything at

Well, who would be man enough to buy shares in the

Most people think in Britain that it is better.

I mean, this is something we've been hearing since

1979, the Tories are going to privatise the NHS.

Well, then, what are you worried about?

see social care in the NHS. It looks like the plans coming through from

some hospital areas mean that there is quite a reorganisation. I'd like

to see them run politically. If they are run, it should be further public

good. There should be no profit motive. Health and social care

should be combine and we need to move toward a system where we have

local political control over how they work. They both say be more

ambitious. What about health and social care at the NHS?

Unaccountability, local authorities plus business input for free and

voluntary boards. So you get what you would plus a bigger geography,

more strategic. Dorset is currently looking at the governance. Get that

right and you can deliver. Delivery is what we are all about, so Dorset

LEP has been delivering the growth fund and you can see things on the

ground and you can see building is changing, roads going up. We are

delivering and having the right Government structures enables

delivery. Ambition is part of that is, but it has to be one step at a

time or you may not get the result you want. Wouldn't it be wonderful

though if instead of a letter city and wanting more money from Philip

Allen and, if you could raise the money and control the revenue...

There are businesses, we do want the LEP raising the money. They are not

the majority of the board though, it is business people who make

decisions about public money spending. It is a joint decision,

bringing together the best of both worlds for the best outcomes. Thank

you. One area where the Chancellor was little more specific was

housing, and in particular the urgent need to provide more

affordable housing. The challenge of delivering the housing we so

desperately need in the places where it is currently least affordable is

not a new one, but the effect of unaffordable housing on our nation's

productivity makes it an urgent one. He also announced over ?2 billion to

help local authorities deliver 100,000 new homes and 1.4 billion on

top of that for affordable housing. Will make more than a dent in the

problem? It is clear the Government is willing to try a full range of

solutions. If we want to build the homes this country needs, we need a

mixture of new, larger settlements, new thriving villages and also

redeveloping Bromfield lands in our towns and cities. One place that was

supposed to combine reuse of a brown field sites with cutting-edge

building technology was proposed eco-town in Borden in Hampshire.

However been going? As befits a new technology development, the director

of Whitehill border drives an electric car. Steve Pearce has been

waiting a long time for this to happen. The employment opportunities

will be fantastic. The eco-town idea will be fantastic. The eco-town idea

started under Labour, to replace the old army training area. There have

been delays, but now the first of been delays, but now the first of

more than 3000 houses is being built. Very excited. This has been a

decade in the planning and the Army first spoke about moving out of the

town ten years ago and there has been a lot of consultation on what

might happen and maybe some labels will change, but what we are trying

to achieve is a green and healthy town and we will definitely deliver.

Some of the new roads have already been built, but existing residents

are worried that schools and health centres will be put under pressure

by new residents. They keep putting out things that they don't feel

matter to the residents that are already here. Such as they promised

facilities, well, I can't see any. There have also rode back on

environmental ambitions. The tree of solar panels on an old fire tower

and demonstration houses may be the only ones in the new estate. These

three houses are all that happened from the old eco-town proposal, but

the people behind the Bordon Whitehill development say they've

more likely to provide real homes more likely to provide real homes

for real people. One way of getting what you really want is to build it

yourself. Councillors from Cherwell are planning a self built

development of 2000 houses at Ravenhill. What Ravenhill provides

is land, a significant number of scale plots. Also, finances. Other

people get mortgages? It is not grand designs can lead only cash in

the bank, this is about building your dream home at different levels

of your life and spending different amounts of money. The new reality is

that off-the-shelf double glazing unconventional incher Laois and can

get environmentally sound results at low gust. This one bedroom detached

house has been built by the University for just ?50,000, using

standard techniques. It is not particularly technically advanced,

we have a problem with skill sets out the high end, so the purpose was

to make it as traditional as possible, so we could use local

labour that would help the local economy. Southampton council says

that this is desperately needed. The beauty of this scheme is it allows

you to use relatively small amounts of urban space and meet needs and is

adaptable. In a Bordon, the use of ex-Army land has kept down costs to

25% below local equivalents and in the end, it is the affordability of

sustainable homes that matters. Molly, sustainable and the cost. All

they are opposites or do you think they are opposites or do you think

we can build new housing that people will welcome? That depends on

Government policy. One thing I noted in the Autumn Statement was not a

single mention of climate change, single mention of climate change,

despite the fact we signed up to the Paris Agreement. If the Government

started providing tax incentives for eco-towns over people to make it

affordable to get higher levels of insulation, people would move in

that direction. Don't we just need houses? Not just any old houses, the

quality matters. One thing we proposed in our Autumn Statement

report is we should allow local authorities to borrow money so they

can build social housing which is genuinely affordable, because it

would be reasonable rent. At a time of historically low interest rates,

local authorities must be able to do that. They were always built to a

high standard, council houses? Yes, how they are now leading the way it

with ground sourced heat pumps, there are a lot of those in council

housing in my constituency. We can put the politics and a longer-term

perspective as well as make an affordable together. Is all that

stuff slowing down a housing which would get people off waiting lists?

No, there will be... I think that is more than a dent, 400,000 affordable

houses by 2020, these are big numbers. All the targets have

previously been missed. The Molly is right when she says what kind of

houses. There is something bizarre about essential decree on houses. A

bit like the soviet union said this is a mini tractors were going to

have. Is always better if it is locally and organically in response

to local people. It will work out way better. 2000 self built houses?

I bet they will be beautiful. I bet architects will back and say why did

trust people more? In the same way, we now have this mechanism being

used all over the south, to have a referendum on where to put houses,

where locals can come up with an alternative plan and local community

step by retired architects and account is coming under the weight

nothing. Well, it didn't lead to the targets being delivered. That's

because we need to change planning law in a way that retains the beauty

of this country. We have been lucky. Southern England has a slightly

higher population density than most of the Netherlands. When you look

there, we have done well. But current planning laws incentivise

the building of some hideous houses and do the opposite for Brownfield

land. We can make changes to make housing more affordable while

preserving the natural beauty of the country. It's not what they look

like that is important. People should be able to be creative and I

like the self build scheme. But it's also important that as a society, we

decide what is important is for all of us and the future, so we can't

allow people to build willy-nilly and ignore climate change and the

need to tackle carbon emissions. Philip Hammond made his money as a

property developer. Willie concreted over fields? I'm not worried. I

think it is an interest property developers rather than people in

need houses. All wheel on the market decide that, they build expensive

houses for rich people and what I would rather see is houses built for

can't afford to buy them. We will can't afford to buy them. We will

return to you in five years and will be houses be built? All the targets

be missed again? I think there will be more houses and less pressure

from migration I suspect. I suspect from migration I suspect. I suspect

that has peaked, but we will still have... It is a good problem to have

in a way. The basic reason why there's increasing demand for houses

is because we living longer. And with the Brexit economic disaster

people will be living to work elsewhere. You will achieve your

migration targets. Now for 60 seconds.

It has been revealed four Councillors in Oxfordshire received

court summons last year after failing to pay their council tax.

Including the Lord Mayor of Oxford who now was the council to do more

to remind people. Work has begun on a new Reading Gateway retail and

housing part, though some locals say it will not benefit them. Here's a

simple and cost-effective idea to help homeless people on the Isle of

White using a converted bus which can accommodate 16 people on council

land in Newport. They must also do a day of voluntary work, because they

are here during the day, so let us fill that space. Historic but

dilapidated buildings at Bletchley Park to be converted into an A-level

college specialising in studies for cyber security. Meet the robot seal

that is helping out in Oxfordshire care home. Clean and less votes band

aid real dog or cat. ?5,000 is quite an investment and has had a huge

impact for the residents. A brave new world talking to robot seals.

Isn't there an episode of The Simpsons with those seals when they

come mad and attack people? Given that they predict that the Trump

Presidency, that should make us afraid won kind of. You say

everybody saw Trump coming at Paris, which is why everyone rushed to sign

it. Ideas the reason that Obama was trying to sign it quickly and all

the other countries got on board was because there was a worry if Obama

did not sign up, Trump may not, and now he can't veto it for three

years, though it is worrying, his ideas like climate change. Hopefully

they are tied in for three years to making carbon reductions and

ecologist open up... Is there a role for MEPs now? This week Nigel Farage

was suggested as an ambassador, Diana James became an independent,

you two are MEPs. You're looking for another job, Brexit? I will be

unemployed in a couple of years so need something else. In the

meantime, I must see this process through and ensure I play my part in

getting the best possible deal and by that I mean terms that are

advantageous to others but also to the other countries. Do you trust

the Prime Minister? She's not put a foot wrong so far and she said she

wants Britain to be the world leader in free trade. Any chance of a

second referendum? Once we see what the deal is and if economics content

to decline does reach other serious think about whether this is the best

thing for the country. Wouldn't it be visited us all the people and

elect another? The be all change your mind, we should listen to it.

We have have got to make sure London is

open. Thank you. Andrew, back to you.

Is Theresa May serious about curbing executive pay?

Who will be crowned Nigel Farage's successor as Ukip leader?

And can the Lib Dems pull off a by-election upset in Richmond?

So,,, on pay talk about the executive of what executives get

compared to the average worker in the company, giving shareholders

real power to vote down pay rises if they don't like them, which is

pretty much what Ed Miliband proposed in the general election in

2015. Is she serious about this? She is very serious, and the Tory party

probably does owe Ed Miliband an apology for trashing his ideas and

2015 and then putting them all up for votes in November 20 16. She is

very serious, and this all comes back to her desperate fear that

unless capitalism reforms itself and becomes more acceptable to the just

about managing or even 78% of the country who are not earning vast

wealth at anywhere near the figures you see in the City, serious things

will happen and the political sense of trust will implode. She has

already been bartered down by her own Cabinet on this. She wanted to

go further and make workers on the board mandatory. They have managed

to stop that. What will her fallback position be on workers on the board

if she is not able to get it into some claw? We would like to have

workers on the board, but whatever they do on the board there will have

no voting powers on the board. When you look at what was leaked out over

the weekend, that we should know the ratio of the top to the average and

that shareholders who own the company should determine, in the

end, the highest-paid salaries, you kind of think, what could the

possible objection be to any of that? Two things. One, I agree with

Tom that she is deadly serious about this agenda and it comes under the

banner, that sentence in the party conference speech about "It's time

to focus on the good that government can do". She is by instinct more of

an interventionist than Cameron and Osborne. But she is incredibly

cautious, whether it is through the internal constraints of opposition

within Cabinet, or her own small C Conservative caution in implementing

this stuff. Part of the problem is the practicalities. George Osborne

commission will Hutton to do a report which came out with similar

proposals, which were never implemented. It is quite hard to

enforce. It will antagonise business leaders when she's to woo them again

in this Brexit furore. So there are problems with it. And judging by

what has happened so far, my guess is that the aim will be genuinely

bold and interesting, and the implementation incredibly cautious.

Does it matter if she annoys some business leaders? Isn't that part of

her brand? Will there be problems on the Tory backbenches with it? I

think there will be and I think it does matter at this sensitive time

for when we are positioning ourselves as a country and whether

we are going to brand ourselves as a great city of business, implementing

quite interventionist policies. Any suggestion that the government can

control how much the top earners get, I think would be received in a

hostile way. What would be wrong with the shareholders, who own the

company, determining the pay of the higher hands, the executives?

Morally, you can absolutely make that argument but to business

leaders, they will not like it. Ultimately, this will not come down

to more than a row of beans. There was a huge debate about whether

there should be quotas of women on boards. In the end, that never

happened. All we get is figures. But quotas of women, for which there is

a case and a case against too, that was a government mandate. This is

not, this is simply empowering shareholders who own the company to

determine the pay of the people they hire. There is a strong moral

argument for it. Strong economic argument. But the Tory backbenchers

will not like this. The downside is that this is a world where companies

are thinking about upping sticks to Europe. No, they say they are

thinking of that. Not one has done it yet. Others have made massive

investments in this country. But is it not an incentive for those making

these threats to actually do it? In Europe, bankers' pay is now mandated

by Brussels. It is a vivid way of showing you are addressing the issue

of inequality. I think she will go with it, but let's move on to Ukip.

I think we will get the result tomorrow. There are the top three

candidates. Paul Nuttall, Suzanne Evans and on my right, John Reid

Evans. One of them will be the next leader. Who is going to win? It is

widely predicted to be Paul Nuttall and is probably the outcome that the

Labour Party fears most. Paul Nuttall is a very effective

communicator. He is not a household name, far from it, but people will

begin to learn more about him and find that he is actually quite a

strong leader. Can people Ukip together again after this shambolic

period since the referendum? If anyone can, he can. And his brand of

working collar, Northern Ukip is the thing that will work for them. Do

you think he is the favourite? It would be amazing if he doesn't win.

His greatest problem will be getting Nigel Farage off his back. He is

going on a speaking tour of North America. A long speaking tour. Ukip

won this EU referendum. They had the chance to hoover up these

discontented Labour voters in the north, and all he has done is

associated with Ukip with Farage. But Nigel Farage is fed up of Ukip

and will be glad to be hands of it. The bigger problem is money. If it

is Paul Nuttall, and we don't know the results yet, but he is the

favourite, if it is him, I would suggest that that is the result

Labour is frightened of most. To be honest, I think they are frightened

of Ukip whatever the result. Possibly with good cause. The reason

I qualify that is that what you call a shambles over the summer has been

something that goes beyond Monty Python in its absurdity and madness.

That calls into question whether it can function as a political party

when you have what has gone on. The number of leaders itself has been an

act of madness. In a context which should be fantastic for them. They

have won a referendum. There is a debate about what form Brexit should

take, it is a dream for them, and they have gone bonkers. If he can

turn it around, I agree that he is a powerful media communicator, and

then it is a threat to Labour. But he has got to show that first.

Indeed. The by-election in Richmond in south-west London, called by Zac

Goldsmith over Heathrow. Has it turned out to be a by-election about

Heathrow, or has it turned into a by-election, which is what the Lib

Dems wanted, about Brexit? We will know on Thursday. If the Lib Dems

win, they will turn it into an EU referendum. It seems incredibly

close now. The Lib Dems are swamping Richmond. They had 1000 activists

there yesterday. That is getting on for 100th of the population of the

place! If the Lib Dems don't manage to win on Thursday and don't manage

to turn it into an EU referendum despite all their efforts, it will

probably be a disaster for the party. What do you hear, Isabel? I

hear that the Lib Dems have absolutely swamped the constituency,

but this may backfire. I saw a bit of this myself, living in Witney,

when the Lib Dems also swamped and people began to get fed up of their

aggressive tactics. I understand that Zac Goldsmith is cautiously

optimistic that he will pull this one off. Quick stab at the result? I

don't know. But we are entering a period when by-elections are

acquiring significant again. If the Lib Dems were to make a game, it

would breathe life into that near moribund party like nothing else.

Similarly, other by-elections in this shapeless political world we

are in are going to become significant. We don't know if we are

covering it live on Thursday night yet because we have to find at the

time they are going to declare. Richmond are quite late in

declaring, but if it is in the early hours, that is fine. If it is on

breakfast television, they be not. I want to show you this. Michael Gove

was on the Andrew Marr Show this morning. In the now notorious

comment that I made, I was actually cut off in midstream, as politicians

often. The point I made was not that all experts are that is nonsense.

Expert engineers, doctors and physicists are not wrong. But there

is a subclass of experts, particularly social scientists, who

have to reflect on some of the mistakes they have made. And the

recession, which was predicted that we would have if we voted to leave,

has gone like a puff of smoke. So economic experts, he talks about.

The Chancellor has based all of his forward predictions in this Autumn

Statement on the economic expert forecasters. The Office for Budget

Responsibility has said it is 50-50, which is the toss of a coin. But

what was he supposed to do? You would ideally have to have a Budget

that had several sets of scenarios, and that is impossible. Crystal ball

territory. But you do wonder if governments are right to do so much

of their fiscal projections on the basis of forecasts which turn out to

be wrong. They have nothing else to go on. The Treasury forecast is to

be wrong. No doubt the OBR forecast will prove not to be exact. As you

say, they admitted that they are navigating through fog at the

moment. But he also added that it was fog caused by Brexit. So Brexit,

even if you accept that these forecasts might be wrong, is causing

such a level of uncertainty. He put the figure at 60 billion. That could

come to haunt him. He hasn't got a clue. He admitted it. He said,

Parliament mandates me to come up with something, so I am going to

give you a number. But I wouldn't trust it if I were you, he basically

said. I agree with you. The man who borrowed 122 billion more off the

back of a coin toss was Philip Hammond. It begs the question, what

does that say about the confidence Philip Hammond has in his own

government's renegotiation? Not a huge amount. I agree. Philip Hammond

quoted the OBR figures. He basically said, this is uncertain and it looks

bad, and on we go with it. It is a very interesting situation, he said.

He was for Remain and he works in a department which regards it as a

disaster, whatever everyone else thinks. I have just been told we are

covering the by-election. We are part of the constitution.

Jo Coburn will have more Daily Politics tomorrow

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

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

to signify the Africans who were here.

The story of Henry VIII and his six wives

and into the private lives of Henry's six wives.