:00:37. > :00:40.Hello A and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:41. > :00:44.As a potential shortage of one of life's essentials, Marmite,
:00:45. > :00:47.is being blamed on Brexit thanks to the fall in the pound,
:00:48. > :00:49.there are continued calls for Parliament to have a vote
:00:50. > :00:56.Today the campaign by Remain supporters has even reached
:00:57. > :00:59.the courts - but are these legitimate attempts to hold
:01:00. > :01:01.the government to account and give parliament its proper role,
:01:02. > :01:05.or just sour grapes on the part of a losing side that won't give
:01:06. > :01:08.The SNP is holding its annual conference in Glasgow,
:01:09. > :01:11.and Nicola Sturgeon has signalled she intends to press
:01:12. > :01:12.ahead with legislating for a second
:01:13. > :01:21.We'll be speaking to the party's new, freshly elected, deputy leader.
:01:22. > :01:24.A new report says that Britain's cities have all the money,
:01:25. > :01:27.but because it's not shared around you might be better off
:01:28. > :01:34.We'll discuss it with one urban and one rural MP.
:01:35. > :01:36.And according to a group of university academics,
:01:37. > :01:39.David Cameron has joined the hall of shame of Britain's worst
:01:40. > :01:53.We'll be asking if that's harsh, or fair.
:01:54. > :02:01.Perspective. That was the motto of the Daleks. -- could be harsh but
:02:02. > :02:02.they are, depending on your perspective.
:02:03. > :02:05.All that in the next hour and with us for the duration
:02:06. > :02:14.She was an adviser to former Work and Pensions Secretary
:02:15. > :02:16.Iain Duncan Smith, and she's now head of something called
:02:17. > :02:19.Jo tells me Legatum is a Latin word, meaning legacy.
:02:20. > :02:25.We haven't yet worked out the meaning of Institute.
:02:26. > :02:27.Apparently its job is to spread prosperity.
:02:28. > :02:31.Let's hope she can spread a bit around the studio while she's here.
:02:32. > :02:35.Have you? It is about social as well as economic prosperity.
:02:36. > :02:38.First today you'll be staggered to hear we're going to be
:02:39. > :02:44.It continues to be the issue dominating politics at Westminster,
:02:45. > :02:46.cutting across nearly every other area of national debate,
:02:47. > :02:53.and dividing parties in some surprising ways.
:02:54. > :02:59.Yesterday saw MPs demanding more of a say on Brexit in the Commons.
:03:00. > :03:03.Today, that challenge has moved to the courts.
:03:04. > :03:05.Yes, today's challenge is to do with whether the Government can
:03:06. > :03:07.exercise the Royal perogative to take Britain out
:03:08. > :03:10.of the EU without seeking Parliamentary approval.
:03:11. > :03:13.The case, which has been brought by a group of people including
:03:14. > :03:16.an investment manager and a London hairdresser, could have major
:03:17. > :03:22.Well, our legal correspondent, Clive Coleman, is at the High Court.
:03:23. > :03:34.What chance does it have success? Sorry, there is an extremely loud
:03:35. > :03:38.ambulance going by. What chance does it have of success? Reasonable is
:03:39. > :03:41.the short answer. This is a perfectly respectable legal argument
:03:42. > :03:48.that is being brought and it goes like this. It says that the
:03:49. > :03:51.government, the executive, cannot lawfully, under our Constitution,
:03:52. > :03:55.use royal prerogative powers. These are a collection of executive powers
:03:56. > :03:59.derived from the crowd and then go back to medieval times when monarchs
:04:00. > :04:03.could pretty much do whatever they liked. The government cannot
:04:04. > :04:08.lawfully use prerogative powers to trigger Article 50, and what they
:04:09. > :04:14.need is the authority of an act of Parliament to do so. The government
:04:15. > :04:18.to take a different view. They say they are perfectly and lawfully and
:04:19. > :04:21.constitutionally entitled to use prerogative powers because
:04:22. > :04:24.essentially what we are doing is extricating ourselves from an
:04:25. > :04:29.international treaty and that is a prime example of where prerogative
:04:30. > :04:36.powers are preserved. But there is a battle royal going on in the Lord
:04:37. > :04:43.Chief Justice's caught behind me. 20 or so barristers appearing in this
:04:44. > :04:48.case. Lord Paddick at QC for the businesswoman bringing this
:04:49. > :04:51.challenge has said that the case raised issues of fundamental concert
:04:52. > :04:56.usual importance and the real nitty-gritty of this is that if the
:04:57. > :05:01.government use the royal prerogative to trigger Article 50, they will be
:05:02. > :05:08.obliterating rights enshrined in the 1972 European Community is act, and
:05:09. > :05:12.he said that it is no answer for the government to say they will restore
:05:13. > :05:19.rights later with an appeal bill. This is a rates will fall away and
:05:20. > :05:24.they cannot do that. What about the timing? We know that Theresa May
:05:25. > :05:28.intends to invoke Article 50 by March, so could that frustrate the
:05:29. > :05:37.timing? I don't think this will stop Brexit but it could frustrate the
:05:38. > :05:40.timing. Whichever side losers, inevitably they will take this to
:05:41. > :05:46.the Supreme Court. And we don't know quite how long that will take but it
:05:47. > :05:49.could be well into the New Year. It could have a serious effect on the
:05:50. > :05:59.timing of all this, and the manner in which we Brexit. A break from
:06:00. > :06:07.Brexit, some breaking news. Bob Dylan has won the Nobel literature
:06:08. > :06:12.prize 2016 for creating new poetic expressions within the great
:06:13. > :06:17.American song book. Bob Dylan wins the Nobel Prize for literature. Who
:06:18. > :06:18.saw that coming? And now, let's go back to Brexit.
:06:19. > :06:21.The question of Parliamentary scrutiny of the Brexit vote
:06:22. > :06:23.was debated at length in the Commons yesterday.
:06:24. > :06:26.The Secretary of State for Exiting the EU, David Davis,
:06:27. > :06:30.faced hostile questioning from the opposition benches and some
:06:31. > :06:32.remain-supporting Conservatives over the role Parliament should play
:06:33. > :06:47.We are debating a fundamental question, and that is whether the
:06:48. > :06:51.basic plans for exiting, for the negotiating position are going to be
:06:52. > :06:55.put before the house or not. That really matters. Of course there is a
:06:56. > :06:58.degree of detail that cannot be gone into, and of course there is
:06:59. > :07:02.flexibility that has to be there and of course the starting position may
:07:03. > :07:05.not be the end position. We all accept that and we are all grown up.
:07:06. > :07:08.So, we can make sure the decision people made on June 23rd
:07:09. > :07:13.We need to be explicit that while we commend and welcome
:07:14. > :07:15.parliamentary scrutiny, it must not be used as a vehicle
:07:16. > :07:17.to undermine the Government's negotiating position or thwart
:07:18. > :07:35.We're joined now by the Conservative MP Bernard Jenkin, he was a Leave
:07:36. > :07:38.supporter, and by the Labour MP Emma Reynold - she supported remain.
:07:39. > :07:46.Welcome to you both. When the government triggers Article 50 to
:07:47. > :07:52.begin the negotiating process, do you want Parliament to vote on that
:07:53. > :07:57.before it triggers? I want Parliament to vote on the terms but
:07:58. > :08:00.I am seeking that not to block the triggering of Article 50, but so
:08:01. > :08:04.that we can have a proper discussion from representatives of all
:08:05. > :08:08.different corners of the United Kingdom in an attempt to bring our
:08:09. > :08:12.country back together again on what kind of Brexit we want. Because
:08:13. > :08:15.people voted Leave for so many different reasons and there are so
:08:16. > :08:19.many different forms that leaving the EU could take that I think
:08:20. > :08:22.Parliament should have a role in scrutinising the government's
:08:23. > :08:27.negotiating strategy and helping to make sure we get the best outcome.
:08:28. > :08:31.So you think the government should publish its negotiating strategy,
:08:32. > :08:36.put it before Parliament and then have a vote? I think the government
:08:37. > :08:40.should make clear what its principal objectives are. That does not mean
:08:41. > :08:44.necessarily publishing the negotiating strategy but certainly I
:08:45. > :08:49.would like the government to prioritise the best possible access
:08:50. > :08:53.to the single market, because I think business is getting very
:08:54. > :08:57.jittery about that. Equally there are other considerations that needs
:08:58. > :09:02.to be taken into account. But should Parliament vote on it? I think
:09:03. > :09:08.Parliament should. But seven out of ten Labour MPs are like me. They
:09:09. > :09:13.campaigned to remain but they have constituencies, and the majority of
:09:14. > :09:18.constituents voted to leave. Therefore we do not want to thwart
:09:19. > :09:24.the will of the people. I understand that. What would be wrong with that?
:09:25. > :09:27.Well, the only reason some people are trying to get tabled in
:09:28. > :09:34.Parliament on Article 50 is presumably so they can vote it. Why
:09:35. > :09:37.do you say that? It is simply not true. What is the point of having a
:09:38. > :09:40.vote on something if we are all going to vote for it. Last night
:09:41. > :09:44.your party put down a motion where there was a huge row, which turned
:09:45. > :09:49.out not to be a row about anything because we voted in the same way.
:09:50. > :09:52.But you are someone who has always stood up for Parliamentary scrutiny
:09:53. > :09:55.of the executive but on this point you were saying there should not be
:09:56. > :09:59.scrutiny. It is a separate issue. I think that is perfectly legitimate
:10:00. > :10:09.and that is why we supported the motion yesterday. So, should the
:10:10. > :10:15.government publish the broad outlines of how it will approach the
:10:16. > :10:19.negotiations? I am certain that is what the government is going to do.
:10:20. > :10:22.And should it seek Parliamentary approval for that broad outline? If
:10:23. > :10:26.the government does not maintain the confidence of the House of Commons
:10:27. > :10:31.in its negotiating position, it will finish up losing a vote. So why not
:10:32. > :10:34.have a vote? The opposition had the opportunity to put down a motion
:10:35. > :10:38.yesterday about what they wanted in the withdrawal agreement and they
:10:39. > :10:42.did not put anything down. But the opposition does not run the country,
:10:43. > :10:47.the government does. They wanted a row about procedure. But I am not.
:10:48. > :10:53.What would be wrong, and I perfectly understand the point that you do not
:10:54. > :10:58.lay out your negotiating position, that would be absurd, you would tell
:10:59. > :11:06.the other side, but we lay out as a country the broad objectives, and we
:11:07. > :11:10.put these before Parliament and Parliament has a vote to say, yes,
:11:11. > :11:14.that is the broad outline and then you go forward. What would be wrong
:11:15. > :11:20.with that? One of the questions that people keep asking me, is the
:11:21. > :11:29.government going to be inside or outside the single market? Now, that
:11:30. > :11:33.is an issue that might be traded with a lot of other issues. And that
:11:34. > :11:36.could be covered by the government seeking to have the broadest
:11:37. > :11:39.possible access to the single market. Personally, I would argue
:11:40. > :11:43.that what the Prime Minister has said makes it quite clear. We are
:11:44. > :11:47.not going to be in the single market. I think if that is going to
:11:48. > :11:51.be the policy, the government needs to make the case. But they need to
:11:52. > :11:53.be clear about that because they have not been. David Davis said
:11:54. > :12:02.precisely nothing about that. What would happen if a vote to trigger
:12:03. > :12:07.Article 50 was put before Parliament and Parliament voted against it?
:12:08. > :12:11.Firstly, I do not think that will happen. How would you vote? I will
:12:12. > :12:18.not be voting against the triggering of Article 50. Unless they come up
:12:19. > :12:24.with a very, very hard Brexit plan and put that before Parliament. I
:12:25. > :12:29.think it would be a question, and I think it will be very unlikely,
:12:30. > :12:34.because the majority of MPs voted to remain on your side and our side,
:12:35. > :12:37.and we now accept the result because we are Democrats. But I do think
:12:38. > :12:41.that some of these issues, particularly access to the single
:12:42. > :12:46.market, is so important and actually business is crying out for clarity
:12:47. > :12:51.on this as well. Let me come back to that issue. It is one that you have
:12:52. > :12:54.mentioned several times. Philippa, you have written the Parliament
:12:55. > :12:58.house to deliver an Brexit or we will face a constitutional crisis of
:12:59. > :13:07.the highest order. What do you mean by that? What we meant was we have
:13:08. > :13:12.recently published a report looking at what was underneath the vote, and
:13:13. > :13:20.why people voted the way that they did. And what became very obvious
:13:21. > :13:25.was that the people expect, the 52% who voted to leave absolutely expect
:13:26. > :13:33.their vote to be delivered upon. Were that not to be the case, as
:13:34. > :13:36.Emma has outlined, if Parliament voted against the government's
:13:37. > :13:40.proposal, the would be a constitutional crisis. That would be
:13:41. > :13:56.extreme. I don't think that will happen. Maybe not in the Commons but
:13:57. > :14:01.the Lords is 6-1 against Brexit. Is there a mood in there to thwart the
:14:02. > :14:04.referendum result. Like there is in the Commons, there are numbers of
:14:05. > :14:07.members of the House of Lords who are very uncomfortable about Brexit.
:14:08. > :14:18.I am not sure that they would actually push it to thwarting the
:14:19. > :14:20.democratic will of the nation. I don't think they would do that
:14:21. > :14:24.although there was a lot of manoeuvring going on. I will come
:14:25. > :14:29.back to this issue but I want to play a short clip from the Foreign
:14:30. > :14:34.Secretary. He is called Boris Johnson and he was being quizzed in
:14:35. > :14:35.parliament, in the committee yesterday, about it. Let's hear what
:14:36. > :14:38.he had to say this morning. Nobody appears to have
:14:39. > :14:40.a Scooby, if you like, I tell you what, I will
:14:41. > :14:44.do it one last time. Is it even your objective to retain
:14:45. > :14:48.membership of the Single Market? Well, we are leaving
:14:49. > :14:49.the European Union. Let me try - you seem
:14:50. > :14:55.to think the Single Market is sort of like, you know,
:14:56. > :15:02.the Groucho Club or something. We will continue to have
:15:03. > :15:09.access for trade in goods I think we'll do a deal that will be
:15:10. > :15:27.to the benefit of both sides. That was Boris Johnson, telling us
:15:28. > :15:31.that membership of the single market is not like membership of the
:15:32. > :15:35.Groucho Club. Don't tell me there is no parliamentary scrutiny going on.
:15:36. > :15:39.It is a major development that we probably didn't know, that there was
:15:40. > :15:43.a difference between the Groucho Club and the European Union. On this
:15:44. > :15:49.business of the single market, surely the Government will say no
:15:50. > :15:54.more than that we are going to go for as much access to the single
:15:55. > :15:59.market, as is consistent with leaving the EU. Isn't that all it
:16:00. > :16:01.can say, surely? Well, if they had said that clearly at their
:16:02. > :16:06.conference, perhaps we wouldn't have had the jitters in the market and
:16:07. > :16:09.business we have seen. Unfortunately at their conference they put
:16:10. > :16:12.immigration above all else. I do think we need it tackle people's
:16:13. > :16:18.concerns about immigration, by the way but if they'd said - we want the
:16:19. > :16:23.best-possible access... Exactly what they said I didn't hear them say
:16:24. > :16:26.that loud and clear. I heard the Home Secretary about naming and
:16:27. > :16:29.shaming companies that employ... They did, I was in Birmingham. I
:16:30. > :16:34.heard them talk about immigration for about four days. They want the
:16:35. > :16:37.best access. The issue is that no-one can tell us what the best
:16:38. > :16:44.access means. We won't know that. But if you take the position, as the
:16:45. > :16:47.Government does, that we should no longer be justiceable by the
:16:48. > :16:51.European Court of Justice, if you take the position, as the Government
:16:52. > :16:54.does, that our borders should be controlled, including from the EU
:16:55. > :16:58.and migration and if you take the position, as the Government does,
:16:59. > :17:03.that we should have the freedom to make our own free trade agreements,
:17:04. > :17:08.it surely follow, that although we could still have quite wide access
:17:09. > :17:11.to the single market, we could not be a member on any one of these
:17:12. > :17:14.conditions? Well, I think that's right but then I don't understand
:17:15. > :17:19.why the Foreign Secretary doesn't answer that question. Obviously,
:17:20. > :17:22.there is still the EEA, which is slightly different but still has
:17:23. > :17:30.some of the same issues that you outline. They don't have the ECJ,
:17:31. > :17:35.they have a different court. Where you study court, it is jurisprudence
:17:36. > :17:39.on ECJ law. I think it is clear from what the Government has said they
:17:40. > :17:45.don't want access to the single market. Quite why they don't say it,
:17:46. > :17:47.I don't know. If that is conceded, before you have started your
:17:48. > :17:51.negotiation, you are making a concession which you don't need to
:17:52. > :17:57.make at this stage. Isn't it clear that is what they mean. Personally
:17:58. > :18:01.that's my view. So why are they so hesitant to say it. The other
:18:02. > :18:06.reason, of course s that David Cameron forbade Whitehall to make
:18:07. > :18:09.any preparations for Brexit, and, therefore, a great many officials
:18:10. > :18:12.and ministers are still getting their brains around the whole
:18:13. > :18:17.business of what Brexit means and how it is going to work. One of your
:18:18. > :18:19.MPs from the backbenches yesterday contradicted that and said there had
:18:20. > :18:23.actually been some work asome preparation. All that happened was -
:18:24. > :18:27.I'm Chairman of the committee she was referring to. The Constitutional
:18:28. > :18:32.Affairs Committee. The Cabinet Secretary told us that he had had an
:18:33. > :18:35.away day with Permanent Secretaries a few weeks before the referendum
:18:36. > :18:40.without the knowledge of the Prime Minister and wouted the knowledge of
:18:41. > :18:45.the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Was it the Groucho Club? I don't know
:18:46. > :18:51.where it was held, the location has not been disclosed. It was.
:18:52. > :18:54.My guess, is that although everything that is said, the logic
:18:55. > :18:57.is that we can no longer be a member of the single market, it doesn't
:18:58. > :19:02.want to admit that at the moment because it is going to put in a max
:19:03. > :19:07.mallist negotiating position and it is going to say - well, we would
:19:08. > :19:11.still like to be a member but we are not going to be in the ECJ and all
:19:12. > :19:15.the rest and then it'll get knocked back from that max mallist position.
:19:16. > :19:21.I think we are seeing an emerging of a negotiating position. So you have
:19:22. > :19:24.the strongest line that came out at conference, of the Britain's
:19:25. > :19:31.position and then at that weekend... What was the strongest line? Which
:19:32. > :19:37.was that, the triggering of Article 50, the Great Repeal Bill. Don't you
:19:38. > :19:43.mean the great incorporation bill, that incorporates the EU law into
:19:44. > :19:51.domestic legislation. The Great Consolidation Bill. In order to
:19:52. > :19:56.smooth transition and have security on transition but then you have the
:19:57. > :20:07.European Union response, that it damages businesses. Well they are
:20:08. > :20:12.putting their maximist position. ! Briefly Can I make one point. If we
:20:13. > :20:16.are going to leave the single market, and that's going to be the
:20:17. > :20:20.outcome, the Government has to make the case and reassure about that
:20:21. > :20:22.because a lot of people have legitimate concerns about what they
:20:23. > :20:26.don't know. But when does the Government start doing, that at the
:20:27. > :20:30.moment, as you say even from the clip of Boris Johnson being
:20:31. > :20:33.interviewed, I had Chris Grayling of the Tory conference telling me, that
:20:34. > :20:37.there was no such thing as membership of the single market
:20:38. > :20:41.Well, it is absolutely true. It is not There is something the EU calls
:20:42. > :20:47.the internal market and you can be in the internal market if you
:20:48. > :20:50.subscribe to either membership of the European economic area, or
:20:51. > :20:54.membership of the European... For all intents and purposes you are a
:20:55. > :20:58.member. What business are worried about is falling back on WTO member
:20:59. > :21:01.sh. That's why Nissan has said they'll make no further investment
:21:02. > :21:05.in Sunderland. This is the real discussion. It is. I don't think we
:21:06. > :21:09.should fall back on that membership. Is that the problem about not having
:21:10. > :21:13.a running commentary that it is being filled by... We need to be
:21:14. > :21:18.able to reassure people. There will be huge advantages of being outside
:21:19. > :21:27.the single market. I disagree with that. We should debate I'm glad to
:21:28. > :21:37.have that debate. We will have that debate - to. Put down a Megs for
:21:38. > :21:43.Opposition Day. Put down a motion.
:21:44. > :21:46.So is she Reynolds with an S? I'll jump in. They will never go.
:21:47. > :21:50.Yesterday as MPs debated Brexit in the Commons chamber -
:21:51. > :21:54.and more on that in a moment - speaker John Bercow had to give one
:21:55. > :21:57.MP, the SNP's Angus MacNeill, a bit of a ticking off for what he
:21:58. > :22:00.So, what had Mr MacNeill done wrong?
:22:01. > :22:14.At the end of the show Philippa will give us the correct answer.
:22:15. > :22:17.Although I image she has absolutely no clue whatsoever.
:22:18. > :22:20.Now, our Guest of the Day, Philippa Stroud, used to be
:22:21. > :22:22.an adviser to the former Work and Pensions Secretary,
:22:23. > :22:25.Iain Duncan Smith, and she played a big part in shaping the last
:22:26. > :22:27.Coalition Government's welfare reforms such as the introduction
:22:28. > :22:33.But just this week a report from the Office for Budget Responsibility
:22:34. > :22:35.concluded that the big headline-grabbing reforms have not
:22:36. > :22:38.been very good at saving money - a problem faced by governments
:22:39. > :22:51.My company was one of the first to sign up to the New Deal.
:22:52. > :22:54.It's about giving young people the opportunity to go to work.
:22:55. > :22:59.Despite New Labour's desire to encourage benefit recipients
:23:00. > :23:01.to pull their weight in work, welfare spending grew 40%
:23:02. > :23:06.The subsequent Coalition Government pledged to cut the large
:23:07. > :23:08.deficit they inherited and decrease welfare spending.
:23:09. > :23:10.If you go back to before the financial crisis,
:23:11. > :23:12.we were spending about 10% of national income
:23:13. > :23:18.During the course of the financial crisis, that bounced
:23:19. > :23:27.That's basically because a lot of benefits were being raised
:23:28. > :23:30.in line with inflation at a time that the economy was shrinking.
:23:31. > :23:32.So, essentially, what has happened over the last Parliament,
:23:33. > :23:35.and is continuing to happen over this one, is that the Government
:23:36. > :23:37.is getting that number back to 10% again.
:23:38. > :23:40.The rate of spending on welfare was decreased over the last six
:23:41. > :23:42.years when the Coalition Government cut benefits for high earnersp
:23:43. > :23:47.But the real savings, the big savings were achieved
:23:48. > :23:49.when the former Chancellor, George Osborne, increased
:23:50. > :23:51.the benefits that most people got, at a lower rate
:23:52. > :23:58.Uprating benefits at 1% means people get more cash but less
:23:59. > :24:04.than the rate of inflation and, taken together, we will save ?3.7
:24:05. > :24:07.billion in 2015-16 and deliver permanent savings each and every
:24:08. > :24:13.year from our country's welfare bill.
:24:14. > :24:18.But there were setbacks for the Chancellor,
:24:19. > :24:27.A so-called bedroom tax in unoccupied space in council homes
:24:28. > :24:29.would have decreased housing benefit, were it not
:24:30. > :24:34.Also, a year ago, the Government was dealt a major blow
:24:35. > :24:37.after the House of Lords voted twice to delay cuts in tax credits,
:24:38. > :24:39.and earlier this month, the retesting for eligibility
:24:40. > :24:41.for disability benefit was dropped for recipients with severe
:24:42. > :24:45.conditions and no prospect of getting better.
:24:46. > :24:48.So, what is the secret to cutting welfare spending effectively?
:24:49. > :24:50.The experience has been that those structural reforms have not gone
:24:51. > :24:53.as quickly as Government had hoped and haven't saved as much money
:24:54. > :25:02.They are a very complicated thing to do and it's turned out to be that
:25:03. > :25:05.simply making benefits less generous has been a much more reliable way
:25:06. > :25:07.to get the total amount of spending down.
:25:08. > :25:10.So, on that basis, we shouldn't be surprised that merging six benefits
:25:11. > :25:13.into one and moving seven million people on to a new Universal Credit
:25:14. > :25:19.It was originally launched three years ago by the then Work
:25:20. > :25:21.and Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, but it's been
:25:22. > :25:25.You said in September the system was working,
:25:26. > :25:31.We are now also looking at Universal Credit as something
:25:32. > :25:35.that is designed to save money, relative to the benefits it's
:25:36. > :25:37.replacing, rather than the earlier vision that it should be
:25:38. > :25:42.So that change and the current four-year freeze to many benefits,
:25:43. > :25:49.means the rate of welfare spending continues to fall.
:25:50. > :25:52.And we're joined now by Torsten Bell, who used to be
:25:53. > :25:54.Labour's Director of Policy, but now he's directing
:25:55. > :25:56.the think-tank Resolution Foundation.
:25:57. > :26:02.Welcome back to the programme. Philippa Stroud, you were an advisor
:26:03. > :26:06.to Duncan Smith in the last Parliament. Do you think Theresa
:26:07. > :26:13.May's Government is as committed to his welfare reforms? I do think
:26:14. > :26:17.Theresa May - well, is committed to his welfare reforms, particularly to
:26:18. > :26:24.Universal Credit. Some of the other reforms, because she wants to go for
:26:25. > :26:29.the group who are just managing - and we have seen already on
:26:30. > :26:32.disability there that she had long-term conditions - that people
:26:33. > :26:37.who have long-term conditions, she has eased up a little on. But I do
:26:38. > :26:41.think she is committed to actual welfare reform, not necessarily all
:26:42. > :26:46.the saving but actual welfare reform that leads to a making work pay
:26:47. > :26:48.agenda. To the structural changes we heard in the film are happening
:26:49. > :26:52.slightly more slowly than anticipated and they are not making
:26:53. > :26:56.the savings. Is she right? I do think she is right, yes. So was Iain
:26:57. > :27:01.Duncan Smith, were you wrong at that time for pushing too hard for just
:27:02. > :27:05.cost-cutting? We were not pushing for just cost-cutting. We were doing
:27:06. > :27:14.the major reforms at a time of austerity. That is really
:27:15. > :27:17.challenging. When we - at the Centre for Social Justice - designed
:27:18. > :27:22.Universal Credit, we had not envisaged having to do it in the
:27:23. > :27:27.economic climate T would be amazing, always to do welfare reform, not in
:27:28. > :27:31.a difficult economic climate but we didn't have that luxury. You are
:27:32. > :27:38.looking sceptical. It is how I look in general. It is a feature. I take
:27:39. > :27:40.that on board. But do you accept Philippa's claim that these big
:27:41. > :27:44.reforms, Universal Credit, did become more difficult during a time
:27:45. > :27:48.of austerity As a statement of fact as is harder to deliver large
:27:49. > :27:52.structural reforms when there is less money around, yes. On Theresa
:27:53. > :27:55.May and her plans now, what appears to be clear is she is committed to
:27:56. > :28:00.delivering Universal Credit, although I would say as a
:28:01. > :28:03.approximately policy rather than a religious fervour that it may have
:28:04. > :28:07.been for the past Government. What is not clear yet and this'll have to
:28:08. > :28:10.make a decision in the Autumn Statement - are they committed to
:28:11. > :28:14.so. Changes made to the Universal Credit towards the end of George
:28:15. > :28:17.Osborne's time as Chancellor that do seriously limit the benefits that
:28:18. > :28:21.the Universal Credit is meant to bring. If she isn't committed to
:28:22. > :28:25.those, it is very sensible because that is what will make Universal
:28:26. > :28:31.Credit able to tackle some of the big problems we face in the 21st
:28:32. > :28:34.century not the 1990s or 1980s. You said you weren't committed to just
:28:35. > :28:38.cost cutting but it was structural reforms but Iain Duncan Smith said
:28:39. > :28:43.he was resigned because there was too much cost-cutting by the
:28:44. > :28:48.Treasury. Did you experience that? Yes, I mean, yes, course he resigned
:28:49. > :28:52.because of that. There was always a tension between a reforming agenda
:28:53. > :28:59.and what is Chancellor has to do to bring budgets under control. I mean
:29:00. > :29:07.that is going to be written into the anles of history that there was that
:29:08. > :29:11.tension. I can agree, we saw at the back end - just before everything
:29:12. > :29:18.changed and the change of Chancellor, we saw the tax credit
:29:19. > :29:23.cuts reinstated. I would agree that, actually, if Theresa May wants to be
:29:24. > :29:26.the Prime Minister focussed on those who are just managing, that money
:29:27. > :29:30.now needs to be reinvested back into Universal Credit. Right. I would
:29:31. > :29:34.agree with that. On that basis, you say that was the right decision at
:29:35. > :29:37.the time to reinstate those tax credit reversals, although in a way
:29:38. > :29:41.they are just moving money along, aren't they? It is not going to make
:29:42. > :29:49.that much ditches over a period of time? It'll make a lot of difference
:29:50. > :29:52.to people right now who would have been ?3,000 worse off and they are
:29:53. > :29:56.now not. The issue underpinning this is what is the welfare changes that
:29:57. > :30:00.this new, the new Government, Theresa May inherited and what do
:30:01. > :30:04.they want to do? Those are basically to make Universal Credit a
:30:05. > :30:08.cost-saving advice, rather than welfare reform, saving ?3 billion by
:30:09. > :30:13.2020. That brings with it a serious problem - the problem that we as a
:30:14. > :30:16.country face now, low-pay, poverty, in-work Poff Tyne a lack of
:30:17. > :30:20.progression in work and the changes that are being made to Universal
:30:21. > :30:21.Credit, make it as a welfare tool, much peerer at dealing with those
:30:22. > :30:31.problems. He was if you agree with that, what
:30:32. > :30:35.is your view that seems to be discussed in government, an
:30:36. > :30:37.increasing work allowances? If you are talking about the people that
:30:38. > :30:40.Theresa May would like to help, people who are struggling, how much
:30:41. > :30:44.can people learn before they start to lose benefits, would you be in
:30:45. > :30:48.favour of that even though it costs money? There are lots of different
:30:49. > :30:55.ways in which you give money to those who are doing the right thing
:30:56. > :31:00.and in work, even at low pay. One of the ways in which George did it was
:31:01. > :31:04.that he raised the tax threshold. It is a very expensive way. And also
:31:05. > :31:10.everyone benefits. You and I benefit, everyone benefits. But some
:31:11. > :31:27.people earn below the threshold. But the ones who are paying taxes... And
:31:28. > :31:28.if you want that sends of, I am in work, so it makes a difference... So
:31:29. > :31:35.that seems to be the discussion that is going on. Would you be in favour
:31:36. > :31:38.of that? It is a good idea and it towards people that are working. It
:31:39. > :31:43.encourages them that if they earn an extra pound, they do not lose 76% of
:31:44. > :31:50.it in Universal Credit. The government has spoken about tax
:31:51. > :31:55.rises and they are committed to ?2 billion worth of tax cuts over the
:31:56. > :31:58.next to my dears. Simply not doing that would give them enough money to
:31:59. > :32:04.reverse all the cuts. What do you think about that? -- the next two
:32:05. > :32:09.years. I would invest that money into Universal Credit. Damian Green
:32:10. > :32:14.scrapped at the repeat medical assessment benefits for claimants
:32:15. > :32:18.with long-term sickness. It did cause a lot of pain and suffering
:32:19. > :32:23.for a significant number of people. Why was this not introduced while
:32:24. > :32:26.you were working in the department? It is actually something we were
:32:27. > :32:33.already looking at. But you did not introduce it? Reforms have to be
:32:34. > :32:36.done steadily. A green paper had already been announced which was
:32:37. > :32:41.going to bleed to a white Paper looking at precisely this issue, and
:32:42. > :32:46.a whole range of issues, like how do you support disabled people who want
:32:47. > :32:49.to work? They have managed to do at relatively quickly. One feels that
:32:50. > :32:53.either there was a reluctance by Iain Duncan Smith or he was
:32:54. > :32:58.overruled? Well, as I said before, there were always battles between
:32:59. > :33:01.the Treasury, it was always very tight. But he was genuinely
:33:02. > :33:04.committed to it? To reversing it? Yes.
:33:05. > :33:05.The Scottish National Party conference has opened
:33:06. > :33:13.First Minster and party leader Nicola Sturgeon has been talking
:33:14. > :33:15.about how she'll respond to the Brexit vote, but the other
:33:16. > :33:19.big question looming over the party is when it might begin a serious
:33:20. > :33:20.drive for a second referendum on Scottish independence.
:33:21. > :33:22.Our Adam's been to Dundee to find out more.
:33:23. > :33:27.Captin Scott's old ship, the Discovery.
:33:28. > :33:30.It's also one of the few places that voted yes to independence
:33:31. > :33:35.So let's put the two things together and discover if there is appetite
:33:36. > :33:46.Former SNP candidate, Tony, wants to get things moving
:33:47. > :33:52.And he's proposing a vote on another referendum at the party's
:33:53. > :33:55.The resolution is saying that the people of Scotland voted
:33:56. > :34:08.And if Theresa May will not respect that vote,
:34:09. > :34:12.we will be left with no choice but to move forward to a second
:34:13. > :34:14.independence referendum and start preparing for a second
:34:15. > :34:21.But the SNP leadership here in Dundee and the First Minister,
:34:22. > :34:24.Nicola Sturegon, reckon another referendum is probably a bit further
:34:25. > :34:29.Nicola has already said it's the Scottish
:34:30. > :34:33.people who will decide when there is a referendum
:34:34. > :34:36.and that is something which I think politicians and indeed journalists
:34:37. > :34:45.south of the border find very hard to understand.
:34:46. > :34:47.They see a future dominated by party politics, by politicians.
:34:48. > :34:50.I think she's perfectly correct to say that when the people
:34:51. > :34:52.are showing a demand for a referendum, that is
:34:53. > :35:06.Come along if you have the evening free.
:35:07. > :35:08.Out of everyone, the Scottish Socialists are the keenest
:35:09. > :35:12.So keen, they are handing out leaflets about it in the rain.
:35:13. > :35:15.I think the SNP are being very caution about it.
:35:16. > :35:19.They have to balance all their interests as a party
:35:20. > :35:22.whereas the grassroots movement has more leeway, they can go out
:35:23. > :35:24.and have the conversations that need to be had.
:35:25. > :35:32.Whereas the SNP, they have local elections next year
:35:33. > :35:34.and their own party advantage to think about,
:35:35. > :35:37.are itching to get back to talking the vote.
:35:38. > :35:40.The opinion polls show that the Scottish people aren't any
:35:41. > :35:43.more or less ready to sail away from the rest of the UK,
:35:44. > :35:46.and it is the Government in London at the helm because only
:35:47. > :35:48.they have the power to offer a legally binding second vote.
:35:49. > :35:52.Well, as Adam said, a second independence referendum needs to be
:35:53. > :35:55.agreed by the UK Government, and it's not clear when the SNP
:35:56. > :35:59.But First Minister Nicola Sturgeon made a serious statement
:36:00. > :36:01.of intent this morning, as she announced plans to publish
:36:02. > :36:08.a draft referendum bill as early as next week.
:36:09. > :36:11.On the morning after the referendum, I said I would protect Scotland's
:36:12. > :36:19.In our programme for government, I committed to publishing
:36:20. > :36:26.I am determined that Scotland will have the ability to reconsider
:36:27. > :36:28.the question of independence, and to do so before the UK leaves
:36:29. > :36:37.the EU, if that is necessary to protect our country's interests.
:36:38. > :36:47.So, I can confirm today that the independence referendum
:36:48. > :36:50.bill will be published for consultation next week.
:36:51. > :37:03.Well, the other big news from the SNP conference this morning
:37:04. > :37:09.is that the party has elected a new Deputy Leader -
:37:10. > :37:12.or Depute as they say in Scotland - it's Angus Robertson and I'm
:37:13. > :37:14.pleased to say we're joined by him now.
:37:15. > :37:20.Welcome back. He launched the lemur gloss the Scottish referendum in
:37:21. > :37:25.2014 but you want another one. You lost the Brexit referendum this year
:37:26. > :37:31.but you want to try to thwart the Brexit process. Do you need to take
:37:32. > :37:35.remedial classes in democracy? You missed out the key important fact in
:37:36. > :37:39.there which was that 62% of people in Scotland voted to remain in the
:37:40. > :37:45.European Union as Democrats, and we believe that if the people voted
:37:46. > :37:48.that way, they should remain. But we voted as the United Kingdom, we did
:37:49. > :37:53.not vote in Scotland, Wales or England. If you would be so kind as
:37:54. > :37:57.to let me finish answering your first question, it would also be
:37:58. > :38:01.fair to point out that in 2014 many people who voted no to Scottish
:38:02. > :38:04.independence did so because they were told that unless they did we
:38:05. > :38:09.would find ourselves out of the European Union. Things have been
:38:10. > :38:11.turned on their head. We are facing the prospect of being taken out of
:38:12. > :38:15.the European Union against the wish of the majority of people in
:38:16. > :38:18.Scotland and that is why it behoves all Scottish leaders to work
:38:19. > :38:21.together to find ways of protecting our place in Europe and that is why
:38:22. > :38:24.we have signalled that we are prepared to work with the UK
:38:25. > :38:30.Government to ensure that happens. The only problem with that is that
:38:31. > :38:34.it takes a UK Government to respect the wishes of the people of Scotland
:38:35. > :38:37.who wants to remain in Europe and to work with the government to deliver
:38:38. > :38:41.that. There is no sign whatsoever that the UK Government is prepared
:38:42. > :38:47.to do that. What would trigger a second Scottish referendum? For
:38:48. > :38:50.viewers down so that is important to understand that there is a process
:38:51. > :38:57.underway in Scotland. The Scottish Government has experts advising on
:38:58. > :39:01.the different potential routes through which we could protect
:39:02. > :39:04.Scotland's place in Europe. For example, is the way of Scotland is
:39:05. > :39:08.staying in the single market while the rest of the UK leads? Are there
:39:09. > :39:13.ways of protecting citizenship rights while the UK takes another
:39:14. > :39:18.course? We need to understand the answers to those questions. But we
:39:19. > :39:21.all know that there is a way in which Scotland can remain within the
:39:22. > :39:27.European Union and that is as a member state. And that is why the
:39:28. > :39:31.First Minister announced that the route to doing that, through a
:39:32. > :39:33.referendum, given that we live in a democracy, is the best way to do
:39:34. > :39:37.that and we will prepare the ground work in case there are no other ways
:39:38. > :39:42.in which we can protect Scotland's place in Europe. Let me try again.
:39:43. > :39:46.What would trigger a second Scottish referendum? I think of Scotland is
:39:47. > :39:49.taken out of the European Union against the wishes of the people of
:39:50. > :39:56.Scotland and the only way of protecting our place in Europe is to
:39:57. > :40:00.be a sovereign state, that is what will trigger a referendum. A poll
:40:01. > :40:04.this morning suggests that 55% of people in Scotland are in favour of
:40:05. > :40:08.another referendum if we face the prospect of a hard Tory Brexit and
:40:09. > :40:13.that is what we are heading towards. It is not only about the choices we
:40:14. > :40:16.make, it is about the choices that the UK Government makes an Theresa
:40:17. > :40:21.May should have heard by now if she has not yet that the Scottish
:40:22. > :40:26.Government and the SNP is deadly serious when we say that we expect
:40:27. > :40:29.the borders of Scotland is to be respected and the UK Government to
:40:30. > :40:32.take their wishes seriously. But that rather depends on the Prime
:40:33. > :40:37.Minister and the Tory Party respecting Scotland. We were told
:40:38. > :40:46.that Scotland was an equal partner in the UK. There has not been a
:40:47. > :40:51.single iota... I am hoping to help... I am trying to get some
:40:52. > :40:55.clarity, I am trying to get through the rhetoric and get some clarity.
:40:56. > :41:00.On the government's current timetable we are scheduled to leave
:41:01. > :41:06.the EU at the beginning of 2019. If that timetable is adhered to, when
:41:07. > :41:12.will there be a second Scottish referendum? Well, I am surprised you
:41:13. > :41:16.think you are having answers from the UK Government on anything to do
:41:17. > :41:20.with Brexit because we sat in Parliament... Why don't you answer
:41:21. > :41:23.my question? I don't think we know for certain when the UK is planning
:41:24. > :41:27.to leave the EU. I don't think we know the conditions of the exit. I
:41:28. > :41:30.don't think we know whether they want to remain within the single
:41:31. > :41:34.market and I don't think we know whether they are prepared... Let me
:41:35. > :41:40.try to help you to answer the question. If it is clear that we
:41:41. > :41:43.will not be a member of the single market, we will have access to it
:41:44. > :41:49.but we will not be a member of the way we are now, would that trigger a
:41:50. > :41:54.second referendum? I don't think there is any ambiguity about this
:41:55. > :42:00.whatsoever. Let me say this. I do not want Scotland to leave the
:42:01. > :42:08.European Union. Four. Not now and not in the future. Can you answer my
:42:09. > :42:11.question? The answer to the question is I do not want us to leave the EU
:42:12. > :42:15.so if it becomes clear that there is a timetable that takes us out on
:42:16. > :42:19.hard Brexit terms, detrimental to our economy, then I will support a
:42:20. > :42:24.Scottish independence of random and if that needs to take place within
:42:25. > :42:28.the years before 2019, I am in favour. And what if we go out on the
:42:29. > :42:32.soft Brexit terms? Would that mean you would not trigger the
:42:33. > :42:35.referendum? You are making the point yourself, whatever that means. You
:42:36. > :42:41.used the words hard Brexit, what does that mean to you? It means
:42:42. > :42:47.taking us out of the single market, it means having tariffs. So Scottish
:42:48. > :42:49.business, the Scotch whiskey industry, for example, they sing
:42:50. > :42:54.tariffs to sell to other European countries. You have made the point
:42:55. > :43:01.that I am trying to undermine the Li Na underline. We have is that the
:43:02. > :43:09.point I am trying to underline. What we have started is a process that is
:43:10. > :43:12.seeking to... If we have another referendum that will determine the
:43:13. > :43:15.identity of an independent Scotland within the European Union within a
:43:16. > :43:20.number of years, I am in favour of that. Scotland runs the largest
:43:21. > :43:24.fiscal deficit in the Western world. The price of oil has collapsed. The
:43:25. > :43:28.oil industry is on its knees and your financial sector is in poor
:43:29. > :43:31.shape. You have very slow growth and you could not tell us what the
:43:32. > :43:35.currency will be in an independent Scotland. Other than that, what is
:43:36. > :43:40.the economic case for independence today? This week we have learned
:43:41. > :43:45.that the UK is facing losing ?66 billion in revenue and the pound is
:43:46. > :43:49.heading through the floor. That was a Project Fear report and you know
:43:50. > :43:55.that. It is dated to April. What is the case for Scotland? The UK
:43:56. > :43:57.economy is heading in a direction where we cannot even buy certain
:43:58. > :44:04.products on high streets supermarkets. We did not choose the
:44:05. > :44:07.circumstances in which we have found ourselves. We voted to remain within
:44:08. > :44:12.the European Union. The timetable that is being forced by the UK
:44:13. > :44:17.Government is one that is forcing people in Scotland to a choice. Have
:44:18. > :44:24.we chosen all of the circumstances? No. We'll all be economic
:44:25. > :44:28.circumstances be ideal? No. Are they for the UK? No. These are tough
:44:29. > :44:32.circumstances for everyone who was involved but the difference is that
:44:33. > :44:37.we have a democratic mandate in this country to remain within the
:44:38. > :44:41.European Union and as Democrats, it behoves us to support the wishes of
:44:42. > :44:44.this country. Wearing your hat as Deputy, I asked you the economic
:44:45. > :44:49.case but we will probably come back to that and I will try to get an
:44:50. > :44:53.answer. But with your new role as deputy leader this time last year
:44:54. > :44:56.the SNP was dining out on how it was going to be the real opposition in
:44:57. > :45:03.the Westminster Parliament. Now a year later, we see that you have
:45:04. > :45:09.wasted ?230,000 on frivolous early day motions, celebrating a
:45:10. > :45:12.constituent getting into the final 13 of missed Scotland. The 50th
:45:13. > :45:16.anniversary of Star Trek. And the unavailing of a Christmas tree will
:45:17. > :45:21.stop that is your members putting these things down. It costs money.
:45:22. > :45:26.How is that being the real opposition?
:45:27. > :45:31.A political party asks questions turns up at committees, takes part
:45:32. > :45:35.in debates and somehow it is condemned. I know other
:45:36. > :45:40.commentators, perhaps less partisan has said the SNP is the effective
:45:41. > :45:45.Opposition at Westminster and week in and week out I hold Theresa May
:45:46. > :45:48.and previously David Cameron to account, asking the difficult
:45:49. > :45:52.questions that the Labour Party riddled by internal division is
:45:53. > :45:56.unable to do. Most neutral observers believe the SNP is doing a good job
:45:57. > :46:02.at Westminster and my plan is to continue doing this, so long as
:46:03. > :46:09.Scotland is part of the UK. At least as part of one of your early day
:46:10. > :46:10.motions, I did know it was the 50th anniversary of Star Trek. Thank you
:46:11. > :46:12.for joining us. Well, the answer to that
:46:13. > :46:17.will depend on a lot of things, but according to the think-tank run
:46:18. > :46:20.by our Guest of the Day Philippa Stroud it could have a lot to do
:46:21. > :46:23.with where you live. And they've come up with their own
:46:24. > :46:26.league table to underline what they say is a failure to spread
:46:27. > :46:28.opportunity across the country. The UK Prosperity Index
:46:29. > :46:31.maps how well 389 local It's not just about wealth -
:46:32. > :46:34.but also economic opportunity, the business environment,
:46:35. > :46:38.health and education, safety and security -
:46:39. > :46:41.what they call "social capital", Waverley in Surrey
:46:42. > :46:46.comes top of the list, followed by Mole Valley,
:46:47. > :46:53.also in Surrey, and Winchester. The least prosperous region
:46:54. > :46:56.in the UK is said to be Hull, followed by Blackpool and
:46:57. > :46:59.Middlesborough. The index claims to show
:47:00. > :47:02.that the wealth in many cities is not translating into better lives
:47:03. > :47:07.for citizens, while rural areas are more prosperous
:47:08. > :47:12.despite being poorer. It also reveals that areas that
:47:13. > :47:15.voted to leave the EU were far more Well, to discuss this we're joined
:47:16. > :47:21.by two MPs representing areas near the top and bottom
:47:22. > :47:23.of the index. Paul Beresford is the MP
:47:24. > :47:25.for Mole Valley in Surrey, and Lilian Greenwood is the MP
:47:26. > :47:32.for Nottingham South. Welcome, both of you. So Surrey
:47:33. > :47:37.scored twice, two places in Surrey. What is so great about the area? It
:47:38. > :47:42.is run by Conservativep councils, as simple as that. All of the Surrey
:47:43. > :47:46.constituencies or councils in the top 100, but if you really want it
:47:47. > :47:52.tell you move a little further away and move into London, you see
:47:53. > :47:55.Wandsworth was ranked 125, control controlled, its neighbour, Lambeth,
:47:56. > :48:00.Labour-controlled has been for donkeys years, poor, down on 279.
:48:01. > :48:05.And those are like-for-like on paper but not in reality. So you are not
:48:06. > :48:10.to do as an MP, your surge ploys be empty. No-one will have any issue or
:48:11. > :48:14.problems, to come to see you That I wish were so but as I discussed with
:48:15. > :48:17.others, the more you solve the problems, the more others bring up
:48:18. > :48:24.minor problems but it has been successful. Were you surprised. Paul
:48:25. > :48:26.makes a partisan point about Conservative councils means
:48:27. > :48:32.prosperous areas. In your case, were you are surprised you were so down
:48:33. > :48:41.the list? In a sense I wasn't. The boundaries are incredibly tightly
:48:42. > :48:45.drawn, you see Nottingham come 381, RushClough comes 394th. We know
:48:46. > :48:50.people come and work in noting ha. There are parts of that that are
:48:51. > :48:52.closer to Nottingham city centre than parts of my constituency which
:48:53. > :48:58.skews the results but there is no doubt there are huge challenges to
:48:59. > :49:02.be faced in the cities, if I had a response to Paul's rather partisan
:49:03. > :49:08.point is that whereas a lot of the authorities in the top 20 have seen
:49:09. > :49:12.cutses of around 10% in their spending, places like Nottingham and
:49:13. > :49:17.other deprived cities over the past five years have seen cuts in their
:49:18. > :49:20.spending power of 30% or more. So if the Government were serious about
:49:21. > :49:24.tackling the impacts of deprivation, they shouldn't be actually making
:49:25. > :49:29.them worse by cutting local authorities like ours. So, Philippa
:49:30. > :49:32.Stroud is it all about Government spending, fetedering the nests of
:49:33. > :49:36.Conservative councils and not giving money where it needed? Actually the
:49:37. > :49:40.report says almost the opposite to that. This is definitely a report
:49:41. > :49:45.defining prosperity as economic stepping and taking hold of the
:49:46. > :49:49.economic opportunities and driving those forward but also about social
:49:50. > :49:53.capital, about whether or not you feel like you have a family member
:49:54. > :49:56.who you could call on in times of trouble or whether or not you had
:49:57. > :49:59.friends in the community or whether or not there was volunteering going
:50:00. > :50:03.on in your community. It was about the strength of your community as
:50:04. > :50:09.well as the economic strength. And we've definitely seen that in rurl
:50:10. > :50:13.areas, even if they are less economically prosperous, actually
:50:14. > :50:16.the social cohesion and the way they work together, supporting one
:50:17. > :50:20.another, is much stronger than in some of our cities. Right. I mean
:50:21. > :50:26.they are very different places, clearly, cities and rural areas, we
:50:27. > :50:30.talking about villages compared to big city centres, but can't thereby
:50:31. > :50:35.cohesion in city centres or some other major metropolises?
:50:36. > :50:38.Absolutely. I mean this is a static snapshot, where I look at where
:50:39. > :50:42.Nottingham is going, there is lots of improvement. For example we are
:50:43. > :50:48.seeing high employment levels, going faster than other core cities. We
:50:49. > :50:50.have the lowest level of young people not in employment, education
:50:51. > :50:56.and training. There are challenges, I wouldn't deny that for a moment
:50:57. > :51:00.but it is ridiculous to suggest that funding levels don't matter, because
:51:01. > :51:04.libraries are a really important part of creating a social capital,
:51:05. > :51:09.hubs for local areas. I absolutely disagree. And the ability to invest
:51:10. > :51:15.in things that matter and actually in Nottingham there is investment
:51:16. > :51:18.going on. For For 20 to 25 years, since Wandsworth has been
:51:19. > :51:21.Conservative-controlled on a like-for-like basis it has received
:51:22. > :51:23.the lowest Government grant, regardless of the nature of the
:51:24. > :51:28.Government. Yet it has gone forward and up. If you go into Wandsworth
:51:29. > :51:31.now they have been building or planning more properties over the
:51:32. > :51:35.next five years than the rest of London put together. You have a lot
:51:36. > :51:39.of expertise in Wandsworth. Absolutely because I used to be the
:51:40. > :51:43.council... I wondered if there was any knowledge But I drive through it
:51:44. > :51:48.every day. I can see the difference. But Paul, it is no surprise, is t
:51:49. > :51:52.when you actually look at the list of the most prosperous authorities,
:51:53. > :51:55.they are in the south-east, broadly, excludeing London but they are in
:51:56. > :51:59.the south-east. Why is there still such a great divide between those
:52:00. > :52:02.areas and some of the #20u7b towns and cities, one of which Lilian
:52:03. > :52:05.represents - and the towns and cities. It depends on the local
:52:06. > :52:09.authority. One surprise I got was Manchester. I know a lot about
:52:10. > :52:12.Manchester. When I was a minister I was working with Manchester. To us
:52:13. > :52:17.Labour-controlled it is much lower down the scale than I thought it
:52:18. > :52:21.ought to be. It is go-ahead. I know it is Labour-controlled but it is
:52:22. > :52:25.go-ahead and moving forward and I think when we see Manchester in two,
:52:26. > :52:28.three, four years you will see it is a will the further up the scale. Do
:52:29. > :52:33.you not think Philippa, when you look at places like Hull and
:52:34. > :52:36.mid-brels yu, these are places in the UK that have suffered decades of
:52:37. > :52:39.structural problems because of the industries that were dominant there.
:52:40. > :52:43.-- Middlesbrough. They still haven't caught up. That must be Government
:52:44. > :52:47.that have not done enough to help? What was really interesting, we
:52:48. > :52:51.showcased Hull in the report. And you can see the devastation of the
:52:52. > :52:58.fishing industry and the impact that that has had. Inane you see the next
:52:59. > :53:01.- and you see the next generation coming through, uncertain about
:53:02. > :53:04.where they are going to go in terms of employment and skills but what is
:53:05. > :53:09.interesting is that the schools in Hull now are getting hold of that
:53:10. > :53:11.and are really beginning to talk about self-employment,
:53:12. > :53:15.entrepreneurialism. These are the ways of lifting the heads of these
:53:16. > :53:19.young people and saying - there are opportunities out there for you. So
:53:20. > :53:22.it wouldn't surprise me if, in a few years' time, we see Hull beginning
:53:23. > :53:26.to move up, but it is about empowering these individuals. Well
:53:27. > :53:36.come back next time and let's see if they have gone in reverse, Paul? ?
:53:37. > :53:41.Mole Valley and Nottingham? Is the area rich P because it is Tory or is
:53:42. > :53:42.it Tory because it is rich? That's today's existential question. Well,
:53:43. > :53:45.we'll leave that. Now, David Cameron this week
:53:46. > :53:47.revealed his first new job since he stepped down
:53:48. > :53:50.as Prime Minister and as an MP. It wasn't signing up
:53:51. > :53:52.for a lucrative lecture tour or a lucrative directorship -
:53:53. > :53:54.although of course those to expand the National Citizens
:53:55. > :53:59.Service, a kind of non-military But he needs to act fast
:54:00. > :54:05.to save his reputation if one survey It says that university academics
:54:06. > :54:11.specialising in politics believe he is among Britain's
:54:12. > :54:13.worst post-war PMs. I bet they wouldn't say that
:54:14. > :54:25.to his face. Let's look at the winners and loser
:54:26. > :54:31.in this particular Prime Minister hall of fame or shame and failure.
:54:32. > :54:35.survey, Labour's Clement Attlee, whose government created the NHS,
:54:36. > :54:37.He was followed by Margaret Thatcher,
:54:38. > :54:41.who - as the PM who declared victory over Argentina in the Falklands -
:54:42. > :54:43.scored highly for "shaping Britain's role in the world".
:54:44. > :54:45.Coming after the so-called "Iron Lady" was Tony Blair,
:54:46. > :54:48.who led Labour to a historic three terms in office -
:54:49. > :54:50.and, more controversially - took the UK to war in
:54:51. > :54:55.Sir Anthony Eden, whose term in office was overshadowed
:54:56. > :55:02.by the Suez crisis, was ranked last.
:55:03. > :55:05.Just above him was Sir Alec Douglas-Home, who was seen as out of
:55:06. > :55:07.touch and whose tenure as PM lasted only a year.
:55:08. > :55:10.He was ridiculed for saying that he used matchsticks to help him
:55:11. > :55:20.with 9 in 10 of those polled pointing to this year's EU
:55:21. > :55:28.One academic said it was the greatest defeat of any PM
:55:29. > :55:31."since Lord North lost America".
:55:32. > :55:33.The academics were asked to rank his two terms separately.
:55:34. > :55:36.When in Coalition with the Lib Dems, his score put him in
:55:37. > :55:40.But after taking into account his second term -
:55:41. > :55:42.as leader of the Conservative majority government -
:55:43. > :55:44.his overall score dropped.
:55:45. > :55:55.Joining us now is Kevin Theakston, Professor of British Politics
:55:56. > :55:59.at Leeds University, who carried out the survey.
:56:00. > :56:07.He is in our Leeds' studio. Welcome. You really think David Cameron
:56:08. > :56:12.deserves to be down there with Alec Douglas Hume who was only leader for
:56:13. > :56:17.about a year and Anthony Eden who took us into the disastrous Suez
:56:18. > :56:22.expedition? Well, David Cameron did look a pretty successful Prime
:56:23. > :56:26.Minister in 20 #15, as we have just seen and, you know - the 2015,
:56:27. > :56:30.running the Coalition Government success flan tackling the economy.
:56:31. > :56:34.That put him pretty much in the middle of our league table but I
:56:35. > :56:39.think the academics we polled see Brexit as a major disaster, a
:56:40. > :56:44.crisis, a self-inflicted one and that's put him down there at the
:56:45. > :56:49.bottom of our poll. To what extent is it that the academics that you
:56:50. > :56:53.polled are overwhelmingly in favour of Remain and just resent that Mr
:56:54. > :56:58.Cameron made it possible for us to leave? Well, I think it is true that
:56:59. > :57:03.a lot of university opinion is Remain. And there are understandable
:57:04. > :57:07.reasons for that. But I think the poll does say more about the Prime
:57:08. > :57:14.Ministers than about the professors, as it were. And it makes us think
:57:15. > :57:18.about what is behind successful leadership, and what the less
:57:19. > :57:24.successful Prime Ministers have in common, like losing elections, or
:57:25. > :57:31.facing major foreign policy disasters, or being drummed rather
:57:32. > :57:35.human I will latingly out of office. Well speaking of major foreign
:57:36. > :57:38.policy disasters, where is Tony Blair at number 3? It is an
:57:39. > :57:42.interesting score. The legacy of Iraq will loom large in the
:57:43. > :57:45.historical record. Still is. But Tony Blair did win three general
:57:46. > :57:50.elections in a rewith big majorities. He left a big record of
:57:51. > :57:55.domestic achievement. He changed the country in pretty fundamental ways
:57:56. > :58:00.and all of those things do help cement his reputation as a high
:58:01. > :58:05.achieving Prime Minister, overall. And why is Clem Attlee rated above
:58:06. > :58:11.Margaret Thatcher? Although you have Mrs Thatcher at 2 and Mr Attlee at
:58:12. > :58:13.1? Yes, I think those two Prime Ministers, Attlee and Thatcher, they
:58:14. > :58:17.are the great weather-makers of post-war Britain. They have major
:58:18. > :58:22.domestic legacies and they changed the political landscape. They
:58:23. > :58:26.affected politics for decades after them and all their successors had to
:58:27. > :58:31.respond to their agendas and their achievements. So they are pretty
:58:32. > :58:36.neck-and-neck but it looks like Attlee was just slightly ahead of
:58:37. > :58:41.thatch. A professor, a fascinating survey. Thank you for being with us
:58:42. > :58:47.today. Very briefly, would you place Mr Cameron down with Alex Douglas
:58:48. > :58:51.Hume and Anthony Eden I suspect he was placed there because he was most
:58:52. > :58:52.recent. I think Gordon Brown was the last one placed there. He was more
:58:53. > :58:54.in the middle. There's just time before we go
:58:55. > :58:57.to find out the answer to our quiz. The question was why was the SNP's
:58:58. > :59:00.Angus MacNeill ticked off for "unstatesmanlike behaviour"
:59:01. > :59:05.by the speaker John Bercow I don't think she knows.
:59:06. > :59:11.I'm sure Andrew can help? Or maybe not. Did he a, have his shirt
:59:12. > :59:13.untucked, was he picking his nose, chewing gum or, playing games on his
:59:14. > :59:16.mobile? Picking hi nose. Wrong. Chewing gum.
:59:17. > :59:21.The One O'Clock News is starting over on BBC One now.
:59:22. > :59:23.I'll be on This Week with Katie Hopkins, Miranda Green,
:59:24. > :59:26.Katie Melua, Michael Portillo and Michael Dugher