09/01/2017 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 09/01/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



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.


Download Subtitles