09/01/2017 Daily Politics

Hello, and welcome to the Daily Politics.

Theresa May fleshes out her vision for a new "shared society"

in the UK, with a pledge to end the stigma of mental illness.

The Prime Minister also says she wants the best possible deal

for trading with the EU's single market and says she's ruling

nothing in or out before starting Brexit talks.

After the Red Cross warns that hospitals in England are facing

a "humanitarian crisis", Labour call on the Government

to pump an extra ?700 million into the NHS this winter.

We'll discuss whether extra cash is the answer.

And we'll hear from the Ukip leader Paul Nuttall,

on his ambition to be the "guard dogs of Brexit", and bring back

All that in the next hour, and with us for the whole

of the programme today, the Labour MP Lucy Powell and

In the last hour, Theresa May has been making the first of a series

of speeches which are expected to flesh out the Prime Minister's

Yesterday Mrs May talked about her desire for a "shared society",

where government takes a more active role to help people who face

The PM this morning announced several new measures to help people

For too long, mental illness has been something of a hidden

injustice in our country, shrouded in a completely

unacceptable stigma and dangerously disregarded as a secondary issue

Left unaddressed, it destroys lives, separates people from each other,

and deepens the divisions within our society.

Changing this goes right to the heart of our humanity,

to the heart of the kind of country we are, the attitudes we hold

I'm joined now by our political correspondent, Vicki Young.

Can you elaborate on what the "shared society" means? The emphasis

has been on mental health today but no detailed new policies. It's the

broader vision that is interesting. Theresa May calling it a new

philosophy. I think the idea is that because Brexit will of course

dominate her premiership, she is here in the first big speech of the

New Year, trying to set out what she feels about other things, too. In

the "shared society" I think she is outlining that people feel we have a

divided nation, that the government often isn't working for them, people

feel. She wants to change all that. She talks about not just helping the

very poorest. We've heard before about the "Just about managing",

that's where her emphasis will be. The question is always how do you do

this. It's all very well saying we are going to be more interventionist

and the state will step up and be more effective, but how can they

actually do this? How do you make people feel part of this community,

and make sure you help them, when frankly there isn't a lot of money

around. How then does she seek to transform the provision for mental

health? She is talking very much about best practice. Some would say

that by making mental health of this speech, in itself it does raise the

profile. We heard before from ministers about parity, about people

looking at physical health and thinking the same about mental

health. How you do that is difficult. She's talked about young

people, schools, making sure teachers are aware and able to

educate children, to make sure it's not just about going into hospital.

Many will say, without new funding, the fact that a lot of health care

money has been used for physical health because hospitals feel they

are so short of cash, that is a major problem and something she will

have to address, and something the Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt will

talk about today. He is making a statement this afternoon. Thank you.

We did ask for an interview with someone from the government

on Theresa May's speech, but no minister was available.

Nadhim Zahawi, do we think that provision for mental health should

be treated and put on an equal footing with physical disorders?

That is the commitment that we have made, to bring it to parity. What is

important about today is the Prime Minister, the big boss of the

country, sets out her priorities. I think when the boss does that, you

tend to get the machine moving behind it. There will be more

details from Jeremy Hunt on this. What is really encouraging is

support for schools. Most mental health sets in below the age of 18.

If you can catch it early on it makes a huge difference to the

outcomes. Is support, I think the budget is around ?70 million, of

on-line help. Rather than going to see their GP, people can get online

help. There is a series of measures. A couple of years ago we clearly set

out that we didn't want people with mental health problems ending up in

police cells. That has been cut by 50%. It's the prioritisation that

actually makes a difference, but it's a long haul. Let me manage

expectations. It is a long haul. The direction of travel is we will get

to parity. I don't know about your statistic about the number of people

ending up in police cells has been cut by 50%. It has. If you want to

put it on parity, surely you have to give more funding than ?67 million?

If you look at the overall funding to the NHS... Let's look at the

commitment to mental health. Our position set up by Jeremy and the

government, by the way, David Cameron's government set this out in

the first place and Theresa May is following through. Is this rhetoric

or is this going to be a proper commitment that will transform the

provision of mental health? Our school is really the right place to

actually start looking seriously at mental health issues? Ten teachers

have enough to do? They certainly do. Of course it's the right place

to start but you've got to see this in context. This feels like another

fact platitude from the Prime Minister, that bears no fixation in

reality. Why not? Nadhim Zahawi is saying by stating it, by making it a

priority, you may find that good practice follows. Let's look at two

cases in point. Over the last six years we've seen huge cuts to mental

health services. We've got over 6000 fewer mental health nurses today

than we did six years ago. This is quite a big cut to the mental health

budget. The second issue about schools, the context of what is

happening in schools today is that over the course of this Parliament,

every school in the country has got to find 8% worth of cuts to their

school budgets. There is a fantastic mental health charity, The Place To

Be, that does exactly this kind of support. That's the first thing

headteachers are telling me they've got to cut. They've got to find

these cuts to their school. You can have these big speeches but if they

aren't backed up by actual money, actual policy, and seeing the

context in which our public health and teachers are operating in, they

will mean nothing. Training teachers in mental health first aid and

crisis cafes which is one of the ideas being put forward, is that a

like-for-like substitute for properly trained mental health

nurses that have been cut? Of course not. I don't accept that mental

health nurses have been cut, overall... That's a king 's fund

figure. It's unfortunate that you are turning this into a political

issue. It's a factual issue. Have the number of mental health nurses

being cut or not? I don't believe they have. They increase the number

of nurses and doctors. We will check that during the programme. It's a

figure from The King's Fund. If the. Is it good enough to have crisis

cafes for people to go to if they have mental health problems? I think

it is good that we have people in school who have the ability to

identify early on if children are depressed or have mental health

issues. It's good to have crisis cafes. I have similar provision in

my constituency and it works really well, because people actually want

an informal way to talk about this stuff. It's exactly what's going.

Theresa May is raising its profile. She's put her hand up and said let's

do this on a cross-party basis. What you get today is party politics

being played with the health service which I think is completely wrong.

It was ever thus on both sides. I applaud any attempt to raise the

issue of mental health. I said that at the beginning. I'm sorry, you

have to accept what is actually happening on the ground. In my

constituency, Moss side, areas of the country where you've got 50% of

children with child poverty, many mental health issues across all

different backgrounds, webby headteachers are telling me they are

having to cut initiatives like The Place To Be, which is exactly what

Theresa May is talking about. I will support cross-party but it's got to

be rooted in reality and backed up by actual plans and money to deliver

it. Let's look more broadly at what Theresa May has been talking about.

This idea of a "shared society", looking after people who are just

about managing. And talking about the role of the state. Issue right

to call for more state intervention as a Tory Prime Minister to help

people who have, in her words, been failed by the market? She is at the

Luke Wright. In many areas, including housing, where it is right

to intervene when actually the amount of housing hasn't been

delivered. The market can't meet the needs of a modern economy in every

way? The government has a place in the market intervene where it needs

to intervene. I applaud her for doing that. If you remember her

roads is every decision she will bake, she will make with those

people just managing -- her words. Ed Miliband was right when he talked

about the squeezed middle. That there is a group of people who have

been failed by successive governments and who are struggling

and she's moving into what we would call social Democratic territory,

politically. She's moving into one nation Conservative territory. She's

moving there because Labour aren't, they vacated. Do you accept they

vacated territory that should be your party's? I don't. She's in

government and we aren't so her ability to do and say things is

greater than ours. I think Ed Miliband in the last parliament, his

one nation agenda, his agenda around... Although he failed to win

the election on that agenda. He did but these are exactly the arguments

he was making, that markets in and of themselves don't work, they need

intervention as well. He led that way. Sometimes history affords you

more credit than you get at the time. It's something we've got to

build on over the course of this Parliament. I think the

Conservatives will be found out, as they are already found out by many

people, because it isn't being backed up by what's happening on the

ground. Although the polls don't demonstrate that. There is a bigger

problem here, you see these big speeches and spins put on this new

agenda of "shared society" which is pretty meaningless. It's not just

about money but it's about actual delivery on the ground. We will see

how the year unfolds. The question for today is all about

David Cameron's breakfast habits. According to the Conservative MP,

Jake Berry, who somehow knows about this, the former

Prime Minister had a rather a) Freshly-squeezed orange

juice with no bits. b) Having the fat

removed from his bacon. Or d) having the crusts

cut off his toast. I have all of those things done at

breakfast time, don't you?! At the end of the show,

we'll see if Nadhim and Lucy can Theresa May started

the new political year with a set-piece TV interview

yesterday, during which she was asked about the Government's

strategy for the upcoming The Prime Minister argued that,

post-Brexit, the UK will be able to control immigration,

and have good trading So, what do we know

about the government's plans? The PM hinted the UK is on course

to leave both the single market and the customs union,

saying the UK could not keep "bits The single market allows 28

countries in Europe to trade with each other free of tariffs

under a common set of rules. It operates on the basis of "four

freedoms", the free movement from one member country to another

of goods, people, While the EU's single market

allows countries to trade freely with one another,

the customs union imposes external However, members of

the customs union can't Leaving the single market

and the customs union would mean the UK needed a new trade deal

with the EU. The question is how

long that might take. Before he resigned last week,

the UK's ambassador to the EU Sir Ivan Rogers was criticised

for suggesting other EU leaders think the process

will take a decade. But the Prime Minister has said it

should be possible to conclude a trade deal with the bloc

within two years, in parallel Meanwhile, the Government has been

working on plans for free trade International Trade Secretary Liam

Fox has said his department is looking in detail at plans

for new deals with more than 50 countries including

Brazil, China and India. There are seven "working

groups" in total. Yesterday, Foreign Secretary Boris

Johnson was in New York to meet several of Donald Trump's key

advisers, with the prospect of a post-Brexit trade deal

between the US and UK one And I'm joined now by the trade

lawyer Shanker Singham. He's chair of a new commission

on trade at the Legatum Institute, a thinktank that looks at economic

and political freedom. welcome to the programme. Assuming

that the UK does leave the single market, how easy will it be to

negotiate a trade deal with the EU after Brexit? I think what you're

going to see is tricking of Article 50 and withdraw. It will take a

two-year process from March, assuming we trigger it in March this

year. I think how long it takes to do trade deals depends on the

baggage the countries have and the integrated nature of their

relationship. Are ballpark guess? How long? Probably longer than a

two-year period we have the triggering of Article 50 and the

conclusion of the withdrawal agreement by don't think it will

take a lot longer than that. Two years after that would be a

reasonable amount of time. Would that be too long, four years from

triggering of Article 50? You have got to step back and look at what

the Prime Minister said, we've got to get the best deal possible for

making sure that we control the borders, and for business, services

and manufacturing. For them to have unfettered access to that market. To

sit here and speculate as to... It's like sending someone to negotiate

with one arm tied behind their back by saying you have to do it within

two years. They have to strike the best deal. The timing is crucial

because if, in two years' time, there is a limit of course

negotiation with the EU, post-Article 50, there is not a

trade deal negotiated, then the UK presumably in your mind falls to the

trade union organisation tariffs. Timing is not crucial because we

have to take a step back and look at what is the goal because if you

don't know where you are going, any road will get you there. I think the

government knows where it's going and Theresa May 's outline speech

did that. What changed in her material yesterday? The vision. That

vision is essentially free trade agreements with other countries,

agreements with developing countries that require a certain amount of

agricultural openers, and our own domestic productivity and consumer

welfare agenda. In order to do that, not to ask yourself, to get to that

point, what do I need to do now? What should I not do and there are

three fundamental pillars of Brexit which outlining yesterday and they

must not be eroded because if you do, you won't get to your ultimate

goal. They are? We can't be part of a customs union because in order to

negotiate these agreements with other countries we have to have

control of our own tariffs. You are assuming we be out in the customs

union and the single market? The single market is different. What you

said about the 80% of our economy being services is very important

because we have unique economy and you can't negotiate services unless

you are able to negotiate your own domestic regulation which is why we

can't be a member of the single market. That doesn't mean we don't

have access to the EEA. We would seek to negotiate maximum access

that we can possibly get that will be done a trade agreement and

ultimately, but also in a series of interim measures at the end of the

withdrawal agreement where Europe has a big interest in getting those

interim measures in place than we do. Do you agree with those three

pillars, coming out of the single market, out of the customs union,

and it will enable the UK to negotiate free-trade deals with

non-EU countries which we couldn't do if you were part of the customs

union? I don't agree at all and I don't think it's what actually was

the argument being put down at the time of the Brexit about either. But

now, listening to Theresa May? It looks like that is what her position

is but I'm not sure how other ministers will square that with the

likes of Nissan who they've already made promises to about still being

in the single market or having maximum access to the single market.

You don't think we could get tariff free access? The issue with a single

market is not just about the tariff free, but it's to ensure that there

is a level playing field in terms of the regulations around the

manufacture of those goods and services. That's a key issue both

for our exporters and manufacturers in the UK, but also a key issue for

other European countries looking to export to the UK, so I don't

understand how car manufacturing and other big industries like that can

continue to operate without those. How likely do you think it is that

we will end up contributing to the EU budget for access to the single

market? David Davis hinted that were still on the table, didn't rule it

out full is up to you think we will contribute to it? Just to answer

that question, the customs clearance point, the harmonisation is of

regulations, that's something we will have anyway because we will

conform our regulations. Customs clearance is something a lot of

countries have one not members of the EU. I don't think paying for

access to the single market is a good president to set. It's not

something you do in a trade agreement. It has to stand or fall

on its own merits so Nissan and the car companies who want access to the

European market has got to make commercial sense, and it eminently

does make that. If Norway and Switzerland pay into the EU budget,

why would we not have to do the same? Those are two different

examples. Norway is a member of the single market and Switzerland is not

as many deals with the EU. We may pay for certain things, it's

possible to pay for things... So we would contribute? It's a matter for

negotiation of the government. The issue is, paying for access to the

single market does not make sense in a commercial setting because what

makes sense is having access to the single market, not only your

suppliers, and your supply chains need access, but European supply

chain to me that as well so it's very likely at the end of the

withdrawal process there will be a series of narrowly defined interim

measures including customs clearance,... So you see an interim

deal question mark otherwise there would be a cliff edge? The UK

economy would fall off? I don't think it's a cliff edge but a series

of issues. In a negotiations... Is that semantics? Not really. You have

to look at where the problems are. There are very specific areas where,

if we come out of financial services, you want to have some sort

of new mutual recognition and conformity assessment because there

is not a mechanism for third country passport ring. That makes people

feel uncertain. You want to explain that early on. European interests

are as great if not greater. Of course, that's what members of the

government argue, people like Nadhim. If we were no longer members

of the single market had access, which body would arbitrate in the

case of trade disputes? In any trade agreement, the trade agreement sets

up a dispute settlement mechanism within the framework. It would be an

EU UK trade agreement and the speed to be arbitrated by that. There

would no longer be the European Court of Justice. No, that is what

we rely on now to ensure Europe complies with its own... The

mechanism would be costly for British business if they are reliant

constantly on special tribunal to settle disputes, wouldn't it? Not at

all, it happens in international trade all the time. There are

hundreds of trade agreement who have dispute mechanisms and arbitration

mechanisms and it's the normal way business is conducted in itself.

It's about arbitrating between Europe and the UK and not simply to

look at European law and regulation. If we look to years ahead and I know

you say you don't want to speculate but the has to be some planning and

I forwarded spoken on this programme to the High Commission of New

Zealand, before Christmas, who would like to do a free-trade deal with

the UK but were not going to talk about it until the deal has been

done between the UK and the EU. That will be quite a long way down the

road. Do you accept that? Lots of trade companies want to do deals

with the UK. But not until after the deal. Fair enough. But a lot of

preparatory work is needed. He said he would like to see the colour of

the money of the deal between the UK and the EU because otherwise it

would affect his membership. Of course, but what is interesting to

be just heard about the position the UK, today BMW announced some of its

members. The Chief Executive was asked, if the fourth largest market,

yet there is no idea of them falling manufacturing out of UK because

we're such an important market for companies like BMW, so let's not

talk ourselves down. What the message should be is we will

negotiate in good faith, we expect the EU to negotiate in good faith,

which I think they will. All the noises I've heard... But it could

take ten years to do the deal. Long time. Canada, that deal took a long

time. You can do trade deals very quickly. But the EU and Canada was

seven years. That had a lot of baggage in terms of agriculture.

There's a lot of agricultural interests. Doing a deal with them?

The integrated nature of our manufacturing and we are in the same

thing is different for every other country. You Bob at the accepted

could take a while and your example of agriculture, is there a case

where, in the end, the UK will swap subsidies from the EU that back up

the agricultural industry here, for us subsidising our own agriculture

or should be cast farmers offer want competitive? The third pillar I

mentioned, vital for Brexit, one of them is we have to be more open on

agriculture to get these deals with other countries. It would be a price

worth paying? It does not mean you cut farmers. It does mean there are

certain things we can do. Products we don't produce, whether is no

direct competitive nurse, there's no reason to have tariffs on that, we

can move to a direct transfer payment for farmers, a lot we can do

in terms of environment. But we would subsidise the industry? We

would pay something. At least until 2020. Beyond that, we don't know.

There will be more focused direct payments. About New Zealand, the New

Zealand High Commissioner is negotiating so naturally they would

say we want to negotiate with the UK. Fair enough. What they are

looking at is to see are you going to be out of a customs union to

negotiate a deal? This is not a negotiation in a vacuum. There's

many other deals they can do with the EU. We don't know. They may yet

tell us in the coming months by have to finish there. Thank you very

much. Now, new year, new broom

at the top of Ukip. Paul Nuttall became the party's

third leader of the year last November, so now he's had Christmas

to have a mull over things, and he's decided to stick with the job,

how is he preparing the party In a moment we'll be asking him,

but before that, let's remind MUSIC: "A Little Bit

Independent" by Fats Waller. # A little bit independent

with your smile # A little bit independent

in your style...# We have achieved so much,

in such little time. We forced the referendum,

and you helped to win it. # A little bit

independent in your walk # A little bit independent

in your talk...# Well, after just 18 days in charge,

it's been reported tonight that the Ukip leader Diane James

is set to stand down. I'm standing in this election

as the unity candidate, the candidate who wants to let

bygones be bygones. I'm going to break in,

because Ukip has a new leader. They've already announced it,

its second new leader My call for unity has now

received the biggest mandate Welcome to The Daily Politics. You

said you want Ukip to be the guard dogs of Brexit, how do you plan on

stopping any black -- backsliding from Theresa May given that you have

only one MP and a diminishing team of NEPs? Ukip has to remain an

electorally viable force. Let's be clear, what people voted for on June

23 was to control our own borders, to control our own finances, and to

be able to sign free trade deals all over the globe. If we stay in the

single market we can do none of those things. How would you stop her

backsliding? She may not but how will you stop her if you think she

is? We forced David Cameron into having the referendum in the first

place by being strong electorally. We intend to ensure Theresa May

doesn't backslide by doing the same thing. It's important I came into

this role, that's why I decided to stand, because Ukip is more

important than ever before. Do you worry that forever being on the back

of Theresa May and her government over Brexit, that your pressure,

trying to outflank on the right, we'll end up with the government

getting a worse deal for the UK? I think they'll get the best deal.

Britain will be able to look into this century confident, able to sign

its own trade deals, not paying a membership fee to the European Union

and not having to comply with EU regulations. I think that means a

strong, confident and democratic UK. Do you agree it was Ukip who forced

David Cameron to call the referendum? Of course not. Paul

knows the Conservative Party has a long history of opposing the single

currency. Talking about William Hague and us being locked in a

burning building without a key to get out of it. Paul has a problem of

unity. Diane James lasted five minutes. Steven Woolfe got whacked

in more than one way! Neither of them are now in the party. Your

biggest owner doesn't think any of the candidates were up to scratch,

and Nigel Farage is still headline news! Your leadership could be

undermined by the fact the party is falling apart at the seams. It's not

falling apart. Since I've taken over we've gone up in the polls,

membership has risen for the first time in a year and we finished

second in a by-election. The party is coming together now. The problem

we have in Ukip is this, the designation process for the

referendum basically created a cancer in the party. It split the

party in two. So no further defections? To ask there may well

be. From Ukip to the Conservative Party? You're confident about that?

Absolutely. Who's your leader in the group in the Welsh assembly? Neil

Hamilton. Even though Nathan Gill was appointed? He is not a member of

the assembly so he can't be. Would it be a failure of your leadership

if anyone else defects from Ukip? I would be amazed... But would it be a

failure of your leadership? It would be a failure of unity and I would be

very disappointed if people leave the party. We've put a smile back on

peoples faces. Myself and my deputy are changing the way this party

behaves, and forward to a successful 2017. After the referendum there

seemed to be a cancer in the party, to use your words. There seem to be

infighting as the party fought it out. That leads people to believe

Ukip can no longer be a single issue party. Let's look at some of the

ideas you've had, no doubt you've been thinking about it over

Christmas, a distinctive change in Ukip policy. What are your

distinctive ideas? If you look at our last manifesto in 2015, it was

regarded by member vulnerable many of the political commentary to be

the best manifesto on offer. The first time our manifesto was fully

costed an economic think tank. We will be fleshing out policies within

the next couple of months. I've only been in the job six. Our spring

conference is on February the 16th and 17th in Bolton, there will be

big policy announcements then. You said you want to challenge Labour in

its northern strongholds, what are your policies to challenge Labour?

What are you going to say on workers' rights? Firstly, workers'

rights will be protected. We are going to flesh out these policies

and make a big announcement at Spring conference. We will continue

to talk about the issues that matter the working class people. Which are?

Ultimately what they are. Its immigration, they want a fair but

firm immigration policy, because wages have been driven down by

uncontrolled and unfettered immigration. They are law and order.

They feel as though there is no deterrent in society. Because

British working class people are the most likely to be the victims of

crime, it's about putting British people first whether that's in the

job market... Do you support the rail union strikes at the moment? I

think trade unions have done a great job... Do you support the strikes?

There's different strikes going on, Jo. The RMT strikes, if you are

supporting workers' rights and you want to challenge Labour in the

northern strongholds, do you support the strikes? I don't agree with the

strike on Southern Rail. You've ready got the union leader who

agreed that trains, without ticket collectors, were not a problem,

before Christmas and now suddenly he thinks they are. Do you still

support the triple lock on pensions? Yes I do. Would you like to see

increased spending on capital projects? Yes I would. How much? I'm

not going to give you a figure right now. There will be big announcements

at the spring conference. But we will continue to do is we will

continue to talk about the things that matter to working people and we

will replace the Labour Party, I believe, as the patriotic voice of

working people. What do you say to that? I think you've got a long way

to go. What will become clear, and this is a challenge for the Labour

Party to make sure we filled the space as much, but as Brexit becomes

a reality, and many of people in Manchester or the North of England

who voted for Britain to leave the EU, will still feel disaffected,

even once we have left the European Union... Will they look to Ukip

rather than Labour? I don't think so. Many of the concerns they have

about their changing communities, loss of control, private rented

sector, taking hold, the loss of the high streets, Ukip with their

free-market agenda, to privatise the NHS, will do nothing to secure those

communities. I think Paul, I wish him well, he's a good Northerner,

but I think he will fall foul of the fact he's got nothing to say to

communities like mine in Manchester, once we get over this Brexit issue.

Respond to that. I think we will... What's your benchmark going to be?

You've got a Labour Party led by a guy who seems to be obsessed with

the issues that swirl around the Islington dinner party, climate

change, fair trade, Palestine and all that stuff. These don't matter

to people in your constituency or my constituency. Does he have a point?

In my constituency... There's definitely some truth to that,

that's part of the reason we're having the conversations within the

Labour Party that we are having. My constituency seat a strong labour

council in Manchester, Renaissance in parts of the North, but they want

to see that spreading further. They want to see their communities

flourishing once again and not in decline. I think strong Labour

voices in the North will offer that not Paul. There are big elections

this year in Europe, will you be campaigning alongside Marine Le Pen?

We will not be involved in any foreign elections. There will be no

campaigning alongside Marine Le Pen? She has said there's not a heads

breadth of difference between what you thinks and what the National

front things, let's be truthful. You're not going to go there? I'm

focused on council elections in this country. What about your MEPs? They

won't be there. They won't have any campaigning alongside? It's not

going to happen. So you are going to tell them? Yes. Thank you very much.

So Westminster gets back down to business

Let's take a look at what's in store this week.

Parliament goes back to work today after the Christmas recess break

and it is expected that Jeremy Hunt will make a statement on the NHS

and the pressure on services over the winter this afternoon.

London Underground is currently holding a 24-hour strike

and tomorrow thousands of British Airways cabin crew

will begin a two-day walk-out, while Southern Rail network users

will suffer disruptions due to industrial action on Tuesday,

Tuesday marks the end of the ten-week public consultation

period on whether to go ahead with part two of the Leveson Inquiry

and investigate specific phone-hacking allegations

at News International and other media organisations.

On Wednesday, Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn will face off

The Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, will give evidence

to the Treasury Select Committee on Thursday afternoon.

And on Saturday, Jeremy Corbyn will deliver a speech

And we're joined now by the Sunday Express'

Ben Glaze of the Daily Mirror from a rather grey College Green.

Sadly our other guest has been caught up in the tube strike, she is

not alone. Jeremy Hunt's statement in the Commons this afternoon on the

NHS, what can we expect? He's going to come under some love calls to put

more cash into the NHS. We had the warning from the British Red Cross

that the NHS is facing a humanitarian crisis. It's quite

colourful language, there have been lots of delays in A, 140 casualty

departments. Close at certain points over December. Jeremy Hunt will be

confronted with that sort of detail and opposition MPs are likely to

call on him to put more money into the NHS. He's going to tell them

that the NHS asked for ?8 billion and the government is putting in ?10

billion. That figure has come in for a lot of criticism, particularly

from the Commons health select committee who say the figure is more

like ?6 billion. Of which ?3.5 billion has come from other budgets.

What about pressure on Chris Grayling? We've been talking about

strikes on the London Underground, Southern Rail and British Airways,

how much pressure is he an do? It doesn't look good, a wave of

transport strikes, it's like back to the bad old days. The one he is

vulnerable on is the strike on Southern Rail. That is going to ramp

up calls for the government to renationalise the railways

generally, but particularly with Southern. There have been problems

on Southern for several years, the industrial action this week began

about a year ago. The service on that line has been bad for many

years. Each time the unions go out on strike, the public see that as a

battle between the workers and the company. It ramps up the calls for

that line to be taken back into public ownership. What about Jeremy

Corbyn's relaunch? We heard about it before Christmas and there are

always warnings about explicitly saying you're going to relaunch your

leadership campaign. What are we expecting in his speech tomorrow?

It's in the Thurrock in Essex, a big Ukip area. He is likely to talk

about immigration. It's a bit of a vulnerable area of the Jeremy Corbyn

because he and Diane Abbott don't want any curbs on free movement.

Lots of Labour MPs, particularly those in northern areas and the

Midlands, they realise that unlimited migration is an issue for

their constituents, and they want to see the party hierarchy move on

this. We don't think Jeremy Corbyn is likely to heed that, he's going

to stick to his guns on not curbing freedom of movement. This is all

part of a relaunch, he's going to try and take on this Donald Trump

mantle of presenting himself as a populist. For those of us who are

going to be told this is "Corbyn unspun" we've spent 16 months

following him, he's not been spun very well in those 16 months. Thank

you for standing out in the rain. On that point, an immigration, are you

with the Labour MPs who say there should be curbs on immigration?

There two issues, how do we challenge the government right now

to get the best possible deal in these negotiations? It's clear the

vote on the 23rd of June, people were saying they do want to end

freedom of movement. That has to be part of our negotiations now, we

should be clear about that and make it clear... Is the Labour Party

being clear at the moment? Tom Watson says the party isn't clear. I

think what he said was the government weren't being clear so

it's hard to oppose them. The second issue for all of us as political

parties, is going into the next general election, the Brexit deal

will already have been done or close to being done at that point, and the

question is, Wilbur Labour Party have a commitment at that election

to rejoin the European movement and rejoin free movement, or will we

have a commitment to stick with the deal that's been done? The status

quo as we operate in now has gone. My position would be, at that

election, that we wouldn't be saying we'll bring back free movement as it

would be. Let's leave it there. The Israeli ambassador in London has

apologised after an official at the embassy was secretly filmed

saying he wanted to "take down" some British MPs including

the Foreign Office Minister, Shai Masot, a senior political

officer at the embassy, made the remarks to Maria Strizzolo,

a former aide to Education Minister Robert Halfon,

during footage filmed in a London restaurant by an

undercover reporter. We've been joined by Marcus Dysch,

political editor at Welcome to the programme. Labour

have said this is improper interference in our democratic

politics. In other words, it goes beyond the mildly embarrassing

scenario for the embassy. It's more than mildly embarrassing for the

embassy for that we shouldn't get too carried away. I've met Shai

Masot and Maria Strizzolo, and as good at their jobs as they were,

given that they are both now out of work, I think we should be wary of

over breaking exactly what's gone on here. They are two pretty junior

staff members. Particularly Shai Masot at the embassy. He's not

lobbying the Prime Minister or something. These are two young

political hopefuls, diplomatic hopefuls, trying to impress each

other. I'm not sure there's too much to it. Does this mean Labour should

say that there's been political interference? It's a very serious

incident. These are serious things to say. It seems action has been

taken swiftly and they are junior members of the team, so as the

official opposition, it is right for us to ask those questions. It was an

informal enquiry Emily asked for. Ask the questions, make sure that

this is not something that goes deeper, it's not part of a cultural

issue or anything like that within the way the institution operates and

deals with it in that way. What evidence has there been of improper

interference by Israelis on government policy? Look, this is a

conversation in a restaurant, an informal conversation. I would hope

if you see me gossiping with my friends... Why, what are you

saying?! Don't tempt us! I do think it was a very serious thing to be

discussing like that, and if it was myself on the end of that

conversation, I would be rightly very angry and want to know, not

just with the individuals themselves not have been dealt with the

leadership in the organisation made sure this wasn't a wider problem.

What was your response when he saw that clip, talking about Sir Alan

Duncan? I think it was serious enough for both of the individuals

to resign and the other's career has been cut short in the UK. There were

apologies right away. We should send condolences to the state of Israel

for the terrorist attack which occurred in the last 48 hours. This

is an important ally to the UK. As has already been said, if the

ambassador has come out so clearly and quickly to apologise to Sir

Alan, and the Foreign Secretary, this thing is a storm in a teacup.

So you don't think there should be an enquiry? Into what? A strong ally

like Israel is not conducting any covert operation to do anything.

These are relatively junior people in the civil service but also in the

Israeli embassy. Immediately, they said this is really wrong, quite

rightly apologised, and they both said it was a gossip conversation

over a glass of wine. Let's get these things in perspective. You

said it was standard behaviour, but embarrassing, around Whitehall and

the embassy circuit. Is this the sort of thing that goes on? I'm not

sure I put that strongly. People suggested on Twitter this was an

assassination attempt, to assassinate Sir Alan Duncan, and

that's getting things completely out of perspective. Do people talk about

tackling ministers and so on, yes. But did it reveal thinking within

the embassy? He may have been a junior member of the team, but

doesn't reveal a strain of thinking within the Israeli government that

could be reflected at a higher level? Whatever he says publicly, is

not going to reveal what goes on. I don't know exactly what the thinking

is in the Israeli government. The British and Israeli governments are

cooperating on a very high level, counterterrorism and cyber security

and pharmaceuticals and NHS and all these different things. Are their

British politicians the Israeli government don't agree with, yes, of

course. Sir Alan Duncan has been a thorn in the side of the Israeli

government for many years about settlements. Were they rather he

wasn't in the Foreign Office, perhaps. Chatting about it over

dinner in a Kensington restaurant, doesn't add up to anything? I doubt

it. Be careful where you go for dinner. Thank you very much.

The NHS is facing a humanitarian crisis this winter

A third of hospital trusts in England warned they needed action

to cope with patient numbers last month and over the weekend

Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn took to the airwaves to demand

Prime Minister Theresa May appear before MPs to explain how she plans

This morning, Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt responded by saying

improvements are needed, but that that if we make it just

He's due to make a statement this afternoon.

Well, one person who believes even more radical changes are needed

to improve the NHS is the director of the Reform thinktank,

Over Christmas, Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron joined the long

list of politicians wanting to spend billions more on the NHS.

That is exactly the wrong prescription for the NHS.

A revolution in health care practice and technology

which is going to transform the service and help

This is the office of Babylon, one of the world's leading

This isn't Silicon Valley in California.

The Babylon team runs an app which is currently used by 300,000

people in the UK and which the NHS itself is rolling out

to a million more people in London later this month.

The app can monitor a person's vital signs, blood pressure,

These developers are learning how to use the data to predict

With these ideas, the NHS can prevent ill-health

This team are experts in artificial intelligence.

Users of the app enter their symptoms.

The app then tells the patient whether the problem can be cared

for at home or whether it needs medical attention either

This team can also organise face-to-face appointments with a GP

over video with an average waiting time of only 46 minutes

Better healthcare is also better value for money.

If we prevent ill-health, if we treat it quicker,

if we make it much easier to see the doctor, the whole process

is cheaper and delivers better care for patients.

Every political party wants to improve the NHS.

The way to do it is through innovation and new ideas.

Simply pouring in more money is not the answer.

You say the NHS doesn't need more money, yet the NHS Trust finished

2015-16 with a deficit of nearly ?2.5 billion. The NHS had Simon

Stephens at the case for an urgent cash injection into social care was

unarguable. It needs more money. What the NHS needs is changed. Whole

new way of doing business. You referred to the Red Cross early on

in this programme. To go into A hospitals is to see a service under

real strain but that is due to the way the service works, it encourages

patients into hospitals rather than to GPs and other areas of the health

service. In other words, it's making poor use of the money it gets and it

needs to work differently. The partition is not saying it's just

poor use of money, but emergency rooms hospitals are in an acute

state of distress due to chronic underfunding. So not just recent

funding but chronic. Are you saying the NHS wouldn't benefit from having

more money? No, what I'm saying is, and I think Jeremy had would say

this this afternoon, the NHS has agreed with the government to do

what we have needed to do for years, a thorough review, get people who

are going to hospital unnecessarily out-of-hospital, stronger primary

care, a better use of technology, that the change needed. If the NHS

hears it getting a windfall, it will not feel the need for change, it

won't act on it, it will put off the change and that will be a big

mistake. Do you agree that given more money just won't make the

reforms? No, we are talking about different things. My husband is head

of dark apartment in the A -- head of Department. Of course, we

have got to make sure more money is put into prevention. That are

critical issue. Social care in particular but also in health care,

mental health care, or early years, and so on. All the money is always

geared up to the acute care people need and they know when they go into

A they get to see a high-level doctor and all the diagnostics. But

the government has absolutely slashed and burned all these

preventative measures so social care has gone to the bone, early years,

Sure Start, helping families when they first have children, mental

health services, so that's why the pressure is so much on, so we need

money in those preventative services to make that innovation. Earlier we

were talking about the level and number of mental health nurses.

While there were 45,380 more mental health nurses working in England in

2010, they were just 38,000 in July 2016. A fall of 6610 mental health

nurses. You accept there has been a cat? The government has deprived

preventative care in medicine and funds it needs and that's why we

have a crisis, do you agree? No, I will tell you why because there's so

many issues here. Simon Stephens is brought in by the Labour government,

and they said I need the money to deliver the five-year plan and we

gave him more than that. So the budget now was 98 billion, and 2020

budget is 120 billion full stop that's what's going into the NHS.

You are conflating two things in coming up with a wrong answer. Yes,

of course we have to deliver the funding but also have good

leadership. But social care provision at one end. On social care

with pop one money into it. No, you haven't. Actually, we could use the

money quicker now to help. Let's be clear, councils make that decision.

You say more money has been put into social care provision that councils

will say about their budgets cut. You're talking about the last year.

It's a very important point, when you say they are putting more money

in, you're comparing this year to last year. When I say there's huge

cuts come and comparing it to six years ago, a huge cat, which has now

gone up slightly in the last 12 months. That's why my husband will

tell you everybody turning up at A should be cared for at home. Glenn

Burley is doing a fantastic job, a brand-new hospital in Stratford

because a really good leadership, so leadership matters. The reform

programme will make a massive difference. If we don't play

politics,... Thank you, you got seven seconds to come the answer to

the quiz. What is his icky habit? It is cutting the crusts on his toast.

Thank you very much. Thanks to Lucy, Nadhim

and all my guests. The One O'Clock News is starting

over on BBC One now. I'll be here at noon

tomorrow with all the big told through recordings

he made over decades. Troubled, tragic,

utterly compelling. Everybody's got a story to tell,

something they're hiding.