05/03/2017 Sunday Politics West Midlands

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

The Chancellor says that to embark on a spending spree

in Wednesday's Budget would be "reckless".

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

The UK terror threat is currently severe,

but where is that threat coming from?

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

Islamist related terrorist offence committed over the last two decades.

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

The government was defeated in the Lords on its

We'll ask the Leader of the House of Commons what he'll do if peers

And in the Midlands: We are at the wrong end of

hospital bed-blocking delays here are among the worst in England.

Join us without delay in half an hour.

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

Now, some of you might have read that intruders managed

to get into the BBC news studios this weekend.

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

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

Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards.

They'll be tweeting throughout the programme.

Philip Hammond will deliver his second financial

statement as Chancellor and the last Spring Budget

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

There's been pressure on him to find more money

for the Health Service, social care, schools funding,

But this morning the Chancellor insisted that he will not be

using the proceeds of better than expected tax receipts to embark

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

instinctively rather cautious, or very cautious, and instinctively

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

for five minutes, was also enthusiastic about the original

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

the amendment when the bill returns But today a report from

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

a unilateral decision to safeguard the rights of EU

nationals living here. If the worst happened,

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

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

giving lectures at Leeds University, picking and processing vegetables,

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

going to say that. So, why not end the

uncertainty for them now? will help to create the climate

which will ensure everyone gets to say because that's

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

agreed this recommendation that the government should make unilateral

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

that is the right and fair thing to do.

And we're joined now from Buckinghamshire by the leader

of the House of Commons, David Lidington.

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

Article 50 bill to allow the unilateral acceptance of EU

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

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

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

does nothing else except give the Prime Minister the authority that

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

citizens overseas who would then be potential bargaining chips in the

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

be in office during the negotiations and they may have completely

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

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

getting around the table starting the negotiations and to agree to

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

whether residency carries with it certain rights of access to health

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

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

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

vote in parliament. Could you ever imagine the British Parliament

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

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

others rightly say they have been overwhelmingly been here working

hard and paying taxes and contributing to our society. They

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

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

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

Article 50 timetabled to be triggered before the end of this

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

hope not because the House of Lords is a perfectly respectable

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

commons. But they also have understood traditionally that as an

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

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

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

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

end of the month. One of the other Lords amendments

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

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

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

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

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

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

consideration by the European Parliament. Parliament will be given

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

much more difficult to get the sort of ambitious mutually beneficial

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

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

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

straightforward. There is the position of both parties in the

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

this shared challenge out of negotiating a new relationship

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

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

challenges like terrorism and technological change. All of that

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

David Lidington. Now, the Sunday Politics has had

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

which researchers say is the most comprehensive ever produced,

analyses all 269 Islamist telated terrorist offences

committed between 1998-2015. Most planned attacks were,

thankfully, thwarted, but what can we learn

from those offences? For the police and the intelligence

agencies to fight terror, Researchers at the security think

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

new report which analyses every Islamism related attack

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

involving 253 perpetrators. With issues as sensitive

as counterterrorism and counter radicalisation, it is really

important to have an evidence base from which you draw

policy and policing, This isn't my opinion,

this the facts. This chart shows the number

of cases each year combined with a small number

of successful suicide attacks. Notice the peak in the middle

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

in London in 2005. Offences tailed off,

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

for a third of all the terrorism cases since the researchers

started counting. What we are seeing is a combination

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

we know that from the security services and police statements,

but also I believe we are getting more efficient in terms

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

facilitated terrorism, that's providing encouragement,

documents, money. About 18% of people

were aspirational terrorists, 12% of convictions were related

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

of planning attacks, although the methods have

changed over time. Five or six years ago,

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

of the time they had Inspire magazine in their possession,

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

magazine that had specific More recently we have seen

Islamic State encouraging people to engage in lower tech knife

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

seen that more recently. Shasta Khan plotted with her

husband to bomb the Jewish In 2012 she received

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

number of women convicted of an Islamism related offence

although it is still overwhelmingly a crime carried out

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

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

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

particularly in Birmingham, and the north-west is another

hotspot with around 10% Richard Dart lived in Weymouth

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

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

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

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

is how different each story is in many ways,

but then within those differences So your angry young men,

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

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

the fundraising facilitator types. There are types within

this terrorism picture, but the range of backgrounds

and experiences is huge. And three quarters of those

convicted of Islamist terrorism were on the radar of the authorities

because they had a previous criminal record, they had

made their extremism public, or because MI5 had them

under surveillance. To discuss the findings of this

report are the former Security Minister Pauline Neville-Jones,

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

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

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

terrorists, what is the MCB doing to encourage more integrated

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

wider society and having a more integrated and cohesive society I

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

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

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

neighbours to come so we were encouraged to see so many

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

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

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

prefer to have more mixed communities but one of the reason

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

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

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

diverse communities around the country. What is your reaction to

that? Will need more diverse communities but one of the

challenges we have right now with certain organisations is this

pushback against the Government, with its attempts to help young

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

the Prevent strategy and we often hear organisations like the MCB

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

to that? Do we support the Government have initiatives to

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

earlier stages these organisations were very important, of course

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

is the Muslim community or communities. The Muslim community

must realise that these violent extremists are fringe but they share

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Islamist the latest offences were committed by individuals previous

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

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

intelligence services almost impossible. Two points. It is over

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

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

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

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

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

spectaculars that ISIS organised. Now you have got locally organised

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

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

intelligence inside the community, the community coming to the police

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

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

about individuals being radicalised, perhaps going down the terrorist

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

consistent on telling the community that wherever they suspect someone

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

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

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

fighters returning here? Extremely worried. They fall into

three categories. You have ones who are disillusioned about Islamic

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This is where working with other countries is absolutely crucial and

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

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

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

the border has improved. An important question. Given your

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

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

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

seriously. The single biggest challenge that the police and the

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

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

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

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

Just this week Whitehall announced that government departments have

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

Last November the Independent office for Budget Responsibility

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

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

On Wednesday the Chancellor is expected to announce

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

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

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

coupled with an increase in the tax burden to its highest

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

government spending accelerating, producing a real terms cut of over

But capital spending, investment on infrastructure

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

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

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

while finding some more money for areas under serious

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

surprise for the Chancellor last month which looked like tax revenues

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

with us. It's just gone 11.35,

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

in Scotland who leave us now Welcome to the Sunday

Politics in the Midlands. They're two of the Government's

biggest headaches, and they're our main talking points here today:

the one's Brexit and the other's Hospitals in Coventry,

Birmingham and Stoke have some of the worst levels

of "bed-blocking" At least ministers have Brexit,

by way of light relief. Gisela Stuart chaired the victorious

"Vote Leave" campaign. She's the Labour MP

for Birmingham Edgbaston. Jeremy Wright sits in the Cabinet

as Attorney General. He's the Conservative MP

for Kenilworth and Southam. Good to have you both

with us here today. And we'll also be joined

by the former Conservative Health Secretary Stephen Dorrell,

who now chairs Let's begin, though,

with the election for the leadership of Britain's biggest union,

Unite, widely seen as a proxy war about who should

lead the Labour Party. Unite's Midlands Secretary,

Gerard Coyne, is campaigning to depose the left-wing

General Secretary Len McCluskey, who's one of Jeremy Corbyn's most

influential supporters. But Mr McCluskey now has the support

of the union's biggest branch, at Jaguar Land Rover in Solihull,

along with over 1,100 That's about 80% of the total,

compared with just 187 The result's expected

at the end of next month. Now, I know, Gisela,

you will tell me that this election is a matter for the union,

but in terms of this proxy issue about the future of the Labour Party

and the leadership, isn't it becoming increasingly clear, really,

that for moderates like you, the best way of seeing the end

of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership is to I am a Unite member,

so I shall have a vote in that, and I certainly will vote

for the man who has been good for the west Midlands,

and I hope he will continue to be good for the West Midlands

as a general secretary, so I hope Gerard Coyne does win,

because he understands the region and he would be someone

who will also understand that important link

between the unions and the party. But the evidence before us,

as I was trying to hint to you, whether you get the logic or not,

is that Mr Coyne's position doesn't look particularly good

at the moment, as we sit here today. Well, I think, you know,

the party nominations, the branch nominations are ones

that it will be one member, one Now, of course, from the Tory

perspective, I mean, when I talk to Tory MPs,

they feel that anything that helps preserve Jeremy Corbyn's position

as Labour leader is good news for your party,

so, presumably, you would favour Well, no, I think this

is a matter for Unite members, and they will have to choose

who they think will best represent them, and I think

they are going to be much more interested in who they think

will preserve their interests most successfully, and not so much

in who is going to be interested in influencing the future direction

of the leader of the Labour Party, so it is a matter for them,

and I have to say this, I think, regardless of what particular

nominations have been received for whom, if 2016

has told us anything, it is you really should wait

until the votes are counted before you make predictions of

any kind at all. A cautionary tale for

us all at the moment. Get better, and go home -

most patients don't want to linger in hospital any longer

than they absolutely have to, but it could amount to a death

sentence to discharge elderly or vulnerable people

without adequate support. With local authority budgets

under so much pressure, it's increasingly difficult for them

to fund social care, especially Shelley Phelps explains why

"bed-blocking" in our local There's been a sharp rise in cases

of hospital bed-blocking Bed-blocking continues to be

a problem for six health There seems to be a problem

at the other end of the system, Ambulances queuing outside

hospitals, patients waiting for hours on trolleys in corridors -

the British Red Cross called it Just after Christmas,

the NHS endured a day like no other. The Tuesday after Christmas

was the busiest day So-called "bed-blocking" is blamed

for fuelling for the crisis. Often, elderly patients can't be

discharged because they're waiting for a care assessment,

or NHS outpatient support. Figures compiled by the King's Fund

show the problem is particularly Birmingham, Stoke-on-Trent

and here in Coventry have some of the worst "bed-blocking" delays

in the country. Come on, then, we've got to sit

on the settee together. 82-year-old Ken Tucker

from Coventry has dementia. His wife Christine is one

of an army of "hidden carers" When he came out of hospital

she was there to help, but that's because there is a lot

that he has to have I do find it very lonely,

and I will say this - The Government says local

authorities can increase council tax by up to 3% over the next two years

to help plug the social These measures, together

with the changes we have made to the New Homes Bonus,

will make almost ?900 million of additional funding for adult

social care available over But council leaders

say it's not enough. Fundamentally, I don't believe

that's the right solution. It does not raise enough money

to fill the gap that we have now. So, nationally, it raises just

short of 600 million. The gap now, that's in one year,

the gap now is 1.3 billion. Retirement villages

like this one in Birmingham More like a hotel than a retirement

home, it's even pet-friendly. Most of the apartments cost

upwards of ?200,000, but some can be rented

through the council. Care is available on site

for those who need it, and there's a well-being service

that looks to capture We followed up 162 of our residents

from moving into an extra care environment, and we found that

actually when somebody goes into hospital with an unplanned

hospital stay, for something like breaking a hip,

the average length of stay is eight to 14 days,

whereas, with us, at extra care, the average stay is one to two days,

so that a massive difference But while the adult social care

funding crisis continues, for most people, places like this

will remain out of reach. And we're also joined here today

by the former Conservative Health Now Chair of the NHS Confederation,

he's also heading a five-year improvement drive on health

and social care across I am going to remind you, Stephen,

of a conversation you and I had when you were Health Secretary,

you said that you envisaged for the NHS what you called

a "best-value health service". How does that square

with this picture that we have their deficits,

bed-blocking, and the Well, I think one of the things

that we tried to do, and you were very kind to remember

what happened when I was Health Secretary,

it is quite a long time ago, but in the intervening years,

during the Labour years and the coalition years,

we have talked about the need to join the health service

with social care, and with other We have talked about it

but we haven't done it. And that's why last summer

Simon Stephens, the chief executive of the health service,

came, actually, to the NHS Confederation conference, and said,

if you want sustainable, good value health care,

you need to invest in social care and other public services

so that the health service isn't trying to deal with all of these

problems on its own, Investment, obviously, is a big

issue, but around the edges, I was surprised to be

contacted the other day by Hertfordshire County Council,

when they heard that we were doing this item, and they said that

they've actually established a, sort of, online one-stop shop,

where it's possible to see, almost like an app, what hospital

beds need, beds, care You can fit the two together

and there is even a system for health carers and individuals

to use these. That might be something that

could be used for more generally, and maybe in Birmingham

and Solihull as well. The essential truth is that

if you want to deliver high-value, high quality, good value health

care, you have to see the health service as part

of a range of public services. To quote an example,

when they address some of these issues in the state of New York

and other contributions to the NHS Confederation

conference last year, we asked, what is the most

effective health care intervention The answer was improved housing

for low income groups, so that people could look

after themselves and live independently, and not rely

on the health service to deliver It seems that what Stephen

is saying is that under the watch, if you like,

of both your administrations, we have become overdependent

on the most expensive form of health When Labour were in,

you double the investment in the health service and yet,

as we know, many hospitals were headed towards clinical

and financial unsustainability But what you can't do

is take this in isolation. So, we put more money

into the hospitals, which was right. The Conservative Government has then

taking 4.6 billion out of the social funding,

which is an integral part of that, and on top of that,

the change of demographic, which means that those

people who need it, So what I think you need to do is,

yes, look at the structural arrangements, but you do require

some cash injections on that which goes beyond just

raising the council tax. And we have just done surveys,

with Change Britain, which ever side on the Brexit

argument we are on, Leavers and Remainers,

over about 70% of them are saying that the Chancellor should actually

take about 100 million out of what we are going to save on our

EU membership and put But that is still less

than you would have promised But with the budget coming up,

maybe the Chancellor has quite We hear about maybe

an extra 12 billion or so. Well, I have got no idea

what the Chancellor will do in the budget, but you have heard

already from Sajid Javid that there will be more money

going into social care, and, of course, we're putting more

money, a lot more money But I think Gisela is

right, this money... This is much more than

a financial problem. This is a demographic problem

and it's a cultural problem. And I think we have to think not

just about the amount of money What we need to do to improve,

as Stephen says, the join I went through this with my own

father and many people will recognise this,

there are problems with There are problems with getting

people home with the necessary physical improvements

to their own home, even if it is as limited as a grab

rail in the bathroom. And, as the couple you saw

in the film they demonstrate, it is also about making sure that

carers back home are properly looked after, and that is why we need

to put more money into carers' assessments and to making

sure carers have breaks All of that has to happen

and function is effectively Briefly, Stephen, how do

you see this problem, in terms of what is widely seen

as an imbalance, not enough funding going into social care

and local authorities, and the whole question

of the deficits in the NHS? Well, I think the solution

is a combination, as Jeremy said, of more money to the health and care

sectors at home. And, frankly, I'd say

to both of my former colleagues in Parliament,

not playing party politics, one of the interesting things

about the health and care sector is that if you look through

the party politics, the trends... You can't see the change

of Government in the trends within health and social care,

except when governments Now, at the moment,

the budgets are unrealistically tight looking forward,

and what we need to do is to create more resource,

but address some of the policy questions that governments of both

political complexions have One line response,

if I can come to that. But you cannot say, yes,

I give you the right to the NHS, but then take, as I say,

4.6 billion out of You can't take it out and then

pretend it's not happening. We are doing that but it's also

about making sure that we run things If you take delayed discharges,

that's what we should call them, that is not a uniform

picture across the country. not bed-blocking, it's not the fault

of the people and events, that is not a uniform

picture across the country. In some areas, there are no

delayed discharges at all, so this is not a uniform picture,

and where we can do it better, that is the most

important thing to do. For the moment, thank

you all very much indeed. So to our other main

talking point today. Jeremy Wright may have lost

in the Supreme Court, but it was Labour who had trouble

when the Government's Brexit Bill 52 of their MPs defied

Jeremy Corbyn, to vote against it. The only Midlands rebel

was Paul Farrelly, despite a majority of just 650

in Newcastle-under-Lyme, where Down the line to Westminster,

I asked him why he was I think people appreciate

when they elect people where they stand, and I think people

do appreciate that, even if they disagree,

but where there are matters of principle involved that

you stick to your guns. I listened to the electorate

in the country, and I listen to the electorate in the potteries,

and in my constituency, Newcastle-under-Lyme,

and sometimes we may disagree. That's the nature of democracy

but we've always got elections that can sort that out one

way or another. There is, of course,

though, the old adage that the electorate is always right,

and thinking of your electorate there in Newcastle,

you have a majority of just 650. When people talk about someone

taking a brave decision, it's usually code for reckless

or even foolish. Well, in the country, the decision

was very narrow, 52% to 48%. And I would remind people

that my next door neighbour Bill Cash from Stone spent 40 years

supposedly disregarding the will of the people

from the overwhelming vote to stay in the European Community

in the 1970s. These votes are not

the beginning or the end. This is part of a process,

and, during that process, I and other people will be seeking

to make the arguments and also seek the protections that we need

for our potteries industry, for example, and indeed

for people in general, for people travelling and working

when all of this is decided, and we Your general hostility to Jeremy

Corbyn's leadership is well-known. We've talked about it on this

programme not long ago. Is that actually what is driving

your defiance of his three I believe that our membership

of the European Union is not just about prosperity but it's

about more than that. It's about peace, cooperation

and learning the right Britain needs to engage and not

disengage with the continent. If I continue to ask questions,

it's got nothing to do with Jeremy Corbyn, three-line

whip or otherwise. And the Government say they'll go

back to the Commons, to overturn last week's defeat

in the Lords. The former South Staffordshire MP,

Patrick, now Lord, Cormack, was one of seven Conservative peers

who defied Theresa May, over the rights of EU nationals

living in the UK after Brexit. Having watched Paul Farrelly there,

Gisela, what would you say to your fellow Labour backbencher,

who seems, pretty, to coin I would say on the 23rd of June over

17.5 million people voted to leave. That's more votes than any

Government has been elected by. And I think the public at large now

expect us to get the best deal out of this decision,

and I would urge him to say, yes, If he feels so strongly,

that is his decision, you know. And voting against the whip actually

doesn't come as easily as sometimes people think,

but all of these surveys we have done actually shows that,

whether you were voting for Leave or Remain, people I do think we have

already left or expect from all of us politicians to get

the best deal. And conservatives, obviously,

to some extent, will enjoy Labour's discomfort in this question,

but isn't the reality of this that, as time goes on and the Brexit

details start to emerge, that the pension is with

the Remoaners, or the new, sort of, The battle lines are going to become

more and more fraught with your party around the country

and in Parliament. Well, I think, as a Conservative,

you don't enjoy anyone's It brings back too

many bad memories. But I think, on this issue,

it's very, very simple, As far as I'm concerned,

the British people on the 23rd of June last year made a very clear

decision that they wanted And I can tell you as Attorney

General, that you cannot leave the European Union in accordance

with their international law possibilities without

triggering Article 50. So, the decision to trigger Article

50 is exactly the same decision that the public made in that

referendum last year. So you can't say simultaneously,

as people I think I've tried to, oh, I respect the outcome

of the referendum, I accept the decision of the British people,

and then not vote to trigger That is why almost every

Conservative member of Parliament did that, and that is why,

I think, Paul Farrelly was wrong But, as Gisela says,

it's his choice. OK. And this is where you put your other

hat on, the European Movement, I see this very differently

from my two former colleagues. I think those who voted

remain on the 23rd of June are in the classic position

of an opposition party on the morrow We respect the electorate's

decision, the Government has changed, the Government has

a perfect mandate to follow through its policy,

but when I was defeated in 1997 as a member of John Major's cabinet,

nobody expected me then to turn round and say,

all the policies I pursued It helped me when the Labour

Government then adopted some of those policies later on to be

able to say, actually, I think I think they were wrong

to reverse them and I think And I think that John Major

was right to say that the decision that was taken in the referendum

would, if it was carried out, be a historic mistake,

which is why I propose to continue to campaign to ensure

that it doesn't happen. So that means that you are lining

up with the other big Michael Heseltine is threatening

to demand a binding vote Tony Blair says the country should

rise up against Brexit. You are in line with

those other people. I am also actually in line

with the Prime Minister, who says that the decision will be

taken at the end of Now, if the decision

is to be taken then, it follows logically that it hasn't

been taken yet. And that's what we should be

campaigning about, that decision. Very briefly, final

words from each of you. I think that the thing

that is different here is that many of the same members

of Parliament voted for an act of Parliament

that gave this decision A referendum is different

from the general election. Thanks to all, and particular thanks

to you, Stephen Dorrell, So what other political developments

have been making the news Our round-up in 60 Seconds

is brought to us today Around 900 pupils at

Birmingham's Shenley Academy had to stay at home after travellers

moved onto the car park at their school before being evicted

by the City Council. Protesters made a last-ditch

attempt to persuade Birmingham City Council not to cut

funds for the Supporting People project, which provides care

for homeless and disabled people. New Stoke Central MP Gareth Snell

was greeted at Westminster by party leader Jeremy Corbyn before entering

the Commons where he was I will be faithful and bear true

allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, her

heirs and successors, Meanwhile Stoke South MP Rob Flello

is demanding an apology from the PM after she wrote a letter

to voters during the recent by-election campaign,

wrongly claiming he had voted And West Midlands Police

Commissioner David Jamieson welcomed tougher penalties for drivers

caught using mobiles. He was the Transport Minister

who first made using a phone And another thing - on Friday came

confirmation that the salary for the new Midlands Metro Mayor

will be ?79,000 a year, after the combined authority

accepted the recommendation It is less than the Police

Commissioner gets, which... Many people would think

the mayor is a bigger job. Patrick, I think it's a very bad

idea for politicians It is not much better

to comment on the pay of other politicians,

so I'd rather not. All I will say to you is this,

if Andy Street wins this election, he will earn every penny of that

and more working for the people And you would no doubt say

the same about Sion Simon. All the other parties

would say the same thing. It is a serious job,

and I think the individuals should That is why we handed over

to an independent body to set it. OK.

Let's leave it there. My thanks to Gisela Stuart

and Jeremy Wright. Finally, from me, Philip Hammond

isn't the only one talking On Tuesday, Coventry South's

Labour MP, Jim Cunningham, opens a Westminster debate on regulating

the sale of student loans, and the risks of further

privatisation in higher education. Then on Wednesday, Budget Day,

I'll report live from Westminster at 1.30 and 6.30, here

on BBC One on Midlands Today. This, though, is where

we rejoin Andrew Neil. need Crossrail as well. We will be

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

much indeed. So the Brexit Bill is back in

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

to encourage their peers to keep talking all night,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

would crucially and critically undermine Theresa May's negotiating

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

is already great uncertainty and this could extend it. The

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

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

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

saying to the people you are negotiating with that that is

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

a boost to the republicans and put the long term status

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

spoke to reporters Yesterday was in many,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

All sides will probably try to extract more money from the

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

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

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

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

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

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

prosecutions and the great witchhunts which the British

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

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

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

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

bit. You have got the British Government transfixed with Brexit

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

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

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

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

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

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

Scotland were Nicola Sturgeon is framing Brexit entirely through an

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

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

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

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

We will be keeping an eye on it for sure.

Yesterday, US President Donald Trump tweeted allegations

that his predecessor, Barack Obama, had ordered

his phones to be tapped during the election campaign.

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

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

I'm not quite sure what McCarthyism that is.

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

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

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

election process, but now it is sacred.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hillary Clinton. Is it true the Democratic National committee would

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We're right in the middle of the action.

The remarkable story of British photography.

The only cameras that were there that day

How pioneering artists and technology