16/01/2017 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 16/01/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello, and welcome to the Daily Politics.


It will be "a great thing", and Britain is "smart to get out".


How quickly could a trade deal be done with the


The Northern Ireland Government is on the verge of collapse


as the deadline approaches for the appointment


of a new Deputy First Minister, after the resignation of Martin


Should MPs and peers stay put during the proposed ?3.5 billion


Or could brushing shoulders with the builders end up costing


While Brexit Nativity does have an undeniable ring to it...


And how the marketing men and women are muscling


of the programme today are two of British politics'


campaigner Dominic Raab who now sits of the Brexit Select Committee.


And former Shadow Cabinet Minister Mary Creagh.


So, the man who will be US President by the end of the week has


love-bombed Britain, confirming what a big fan


Donald Trump's intervention comes as more details emerge of the stance


the UK will adopt in negotiations with the EU.


Tomorrow, Theresa May makes her big speech on leaving the EU,


where she is expected to push for a so-called "hard Brexit",


prioritising immigration controls and take us out of the customs union


Meanwhile, Chancellor Phillip Hammond, in an interview with German


newspaper Welt am Sonntag, warned that if the EU limits UK


market access after Brexit, Britain could look at an alternative


economic model, seen as a warning to the EU that UK could further


In an interview in the Times with former Conservative Cabinet


Minister Michael Gove, Donald Trump, who will become


President on Friday, said that a trade deal with the UK


would come "very quickly" and be done "properly".


He said it would be "good for both sides".


Mr Trump said he would be meeting Theresa May "right after I get


The President-elect said he had "great respect" for Angela Merkel,


but said that she made "one very catastrophic mistake" by opening


Germany's doors to what he called "all of these illegals from wherever


The European Union, Mr Trump said, is "a vehicle for Germany"


which is why Britain was right to get out.


He predicted other countries would soon follow Britain's lead.


I thought the UK was so smart in getting out.


And you were there, and you guys wrote it and put


Trump said that Brexit is going to happen.


Obama said they'd go to the back of the line,


meaning, if it does happen, and then he had to retract.


Are his comments on getting a quick deal a vindication of the Brexit


referendum? I think they are one instruction of


where the EU tried and failed to get a free trade deal, there are others


from Latin America to China and India, and shows Britain outside the


EU is well-placed to do those deals. Huge benefits for jobs, cutting


prices in the country it confirms what is already written into the


political and business markets, there are advantages and it is clear


we will have those. Can you trust Donald Trump to


deliver a trade deal? The truth is, as with all trade


deals with the US, we have to go through Congress. We have a new


president taking the opportunity of saying there is a win- win. His


language was interesting. That must be better than under President


Barack Obama who said we are at the back of the queue.


The rhetoric is better. It is nonsense. Looking at that photo of


Michael Gove, I was struck by the words, Lala land. No trade deal is


seen as completely fair on both sides. It can only take place after


2019 when we can leave the EU at earliest. Michael Gove says he wants


agencies -- a transitional vote. Trump won the election saying he was


against open trade, against the trade deal with the TE TEP. A


protectionist president. The idea he will open up to our market, we Stade


Toulousain our food standards and assurances.


He has a track record of God had it in himself -- to our market, we will


lose our food standards. But this cannot happen until we


leave the EU so it cannot be that quick. The EU commission has


reiterated that timetable, no free trade deal can be confirmed until


the UK has left the EU. I can understand why those on the


Remain side are disappointed. But it must be a good thing America with


its massive market is saying, we are up for this.


But not before 2019. We couldn't sign it before then. But


people have been talking about 20 years to do this deal. But it is a


priority for him. I am not sure why someone the other side feel so


disappointed by something which must be good news for British firms, jobs


and consumer prices. How can you be confident it will be


good news? It may well be, and they will want to hear more about the


deal. But, if you look at TTIP, which predates him, there was a lot


of concern about opening up our health service. People believe there


could have been public services opened up to the American privately


owned company, could that happen with a trade deal?


I think it is rather flawed. The way it was characterised was


wrong. But what was particularly subject to criticism was the dispute


settlement mechanism. The advantage of being outside the EU is we have


our own dispute settlement division which would kill this scaremongering


about the NHS. Looking at the UK economy, Mark


Carney, who was sceptical about post-Brexit, has said the economy is


growing faster than predicted. Now we have Donald Trump saying he can


get a quick trade deal. Brexit does seem to be working at the moment.


Brexit has not happened yet. The referendum, Mark Carney took very


strong action in the weeks following the referendum in order to shore up


the British economy. In the Autumn Statement from Philip Hammond, we


saw a ?59 billion black hole. What economic evidence is there to


say in the aftermath of the referendum the economy has tanked?


The reduction in our tax intake is the evidence of the economy has not


done as well. Downgrading the economy, the fact the pound is


trading... Hang on.


We are the fastest growing economy in the G7. In the aftermath of June,


growth went up, not down. Mark Carney dudes some action for


quantitive easing to stave off a shock to the UK economy -- Mark


Carney took action. The action the bank of England governor took has


postponed that shock. You are still expecting there to be


a shock? And the pound is now trading down.


The markets have reacted to some extent to what Theresa May is going


to say and Philip Hammond did say about taking action if you can't get


the deal you want with the EU. Are you worried? People might have said


the pound was overvalued, if it continues to slide and stayed at a


low level for a sustained period, that will hurt people.


15% devotion is pretty healthy. Mervyn King said the economy is


better placed to shift from a consumer spending model... You


haven't heard... He said better placed


post-referendum to move to a manufacturing and exporting model.


Actually, devaluation within certain parameters is a good thing.


For exports, it is better. No, our exports are made using


dollar traded, euro traded imports. Most things made in this country are


from components from outside the country.


Manufactures in Wakefield are concerned their prices are going up


and they cannot put their export prices up as much.


The construction industry is entering recession.


But it is going up, inflation. The global talent competitive


rankings have written post-Brexit moving up from seventh to third. We


need to be a competitive country driving growth, looking out to the


world. The EU is important but the point about Brexit, is actually that


the real opportunities for the future for businesses and consumers


as will be the growth markets. We export more to parts of Europe


and the idea we will leave this market, we are leaving it.


These are two different things. We are almost certainly going to leave


being a formal member of the customs union. But the opportunities...


To retain strong trade is acknowledged on the European side.


But not by those who are disappointed those outcomes had not


come to fruition. We'll get merry back on to


scrutinise this. Do you agree more countries will


leave the EU? I hope not. I don't think they will


because there is a mood... I was in Brussels in November, and there is a


determination from European leaders the EU will not fall apart as a


result of our vote. Some of the other statements less scrutinised by


Trump, dropping sanctions on Russia, and talking about native being


obsolete, these are things which will affect our security in the


months to come. What will Theresa May tomorrow say?


What would you like to hear about our negotiating position?


She has been clear since October the things we are not going to do, being


faithful to the referendum verdict, not subject to the free movement.


Get control over immigration, not subject to ECJ jurisdiction.


What we now need to do is turn the page and start talking with


confidence, the economy has proved resilient, and with a general state


of spirit, looking for the win- win. The EU is a flawed political club.


We still want strong trade, security cooperation. We are going into that


and Theresa May will spelt this out, the positive case for our


post-Brexit relationship with Europe.


And the unity between both sides? I don't agree with Donald Trump on


Russia but that is an illustration where the EU is irrelevant and


outside the EU we can demonstrate we can be a strong ally to our native


friends. The Chancellor implied if he


couldn't get a trade deal, Britain would take other action. -- Can be a


strong ally with our Nato friends. I do not want to see us moving to a


low welfare, no regulation type of offshoot of the US. That is a wrong


feature and not what people voted for in the referendum.


Theresa May is used to appearing in the newspapers.


But we learnt over the weekend that she's about to take a starring role


So, our question for today is, which magazine


At the end of the show, Dominic and Mary will give


pubs he doesn't know. He might know which one it isn't, put it that way.


Top gear. The Northern Ireland government


is on the verge of collapse this afternoon which could force


the Secretary of State, James Brokenshire,


to call fresh elections. At the moment we can't go to


Northern Ireland so we are going to talk about Parliament in terms of


the restoration. MPs and peers are being asked


to move out of the Houses of Parliament for five to eight


years whilst a ?3.5 billion But now, up to 100 MPs


of all parties are backing which allow them to remain


in the Palace of Westminster The Conservative MP


Shailesh Vara is one of them. This beautiful Gothic revival


celebration of democracy, designed by Charles Barry,


is almost 150 years old. And now it's due for


another major repair job. A recent report by my fellow MPs


and peers on the restoration and renewal of the Palace


of Westminster has recommended that the Commons and peers together


with all the other people who work on the site should leave the Palace


whilst work is carried out. The argument is that this


would be the cheaper option, rather than work being carried out


whilst we stay on-site. If this proposal does go ahead then


the Commons would move into the Department of Health along


Whitehall just along there and the Lords would move


into the QE2 Centre just The figures that are used


in the report don't take account The loss of revenue


at the QE2 Centre. Or the ?600 million that would be


spent in patch-up work before In fact, the report itself says that


significantly more work needs to be done before budgets can


be properly costed. Hardly surprising therefore


that the powerful and influential Treasury Select Committee


is carrying out an investigation We are told that the work needs


to be done urgently. So urgently that the full decant


would take place in six years' time. Instead, I'm suggesting that work


commences immediately Much of it in the basement


where lights are needed So if the work is done


round the clock in three shifts instead of one,


then clearly the timeframe would be Following the referendum result,


at a time when we need to make new friends abroad and secure


favourable trade agreements, we should be making the most of this


iconic building that is Parliament. At this crucial time,


it is absurd that we should be seeking to sell UK PLC


from a temporary building in the courtyard of


the Department of Health. The notion that we should be leaving


the Palace of Westminster for the convenience of the builders


is simply wrong. The Palace comprises


of some eight acres. There is plenty of room here for us


to stay while the work And Shailesh Vara joins us now,


as does the Labour MP, Chris Bryant, who sits of the Restoration


and Renewal Joint Committee. Welcome to both of you. Why can't


the restoration work be done around MPs while they remain in the Palace


of Westminster? There is restoration work to another moment, the rooms


are being done because there was a strange construction, one metre


square cast-iron slab put in in the 19th century, and that work can go


on now but what can't go on now is the major mechanical and electrical


engineering business that needs to be tackled. You only showed a tiny


proportion of that. It is the pipes. The building has 1.2 miles of


corridor in the basement and that is now chock-a-block with cables,


high-pressure steam central heating system next to electrical cables,


you would never put them next to each other and asbestos. Why are you


waiting to start the work if it's that urgent? Because we've got to do


it properly, strip out the electrics in the whole building, there's only


one drainage system and ends up just underneath the speakers Gardens and


so you can't split the building up into bits. I understand lots of MPs


would like to stay sitting in the chamber. That's what we did in the


19th century which led to a dramatic increase in the cost, and meant it


overran by 42 years. If that problem will have now. They have done the


work on it. You have come to it later. They have been through


endless research and quotes and budgets and surveys of the whole


building. Surely they are best placed to know what will cost less


and be the most efficient in terms of carrying out this work? I don't


accept that because anyone who reads the report will see it abundantly


clear they start off with the premise they want us out. Why would


they want that? The report only quotes people who say we should


leave. The fact is that the report makes a passing acknowledgement that


they could work there. They could do 12 stages and I think it's important


to remember 74% of the work is cables and pipes, much of it


underground, so there's no reason why a lot of the work can't carry on


underground. It only gives recognition to having one shift of


work. I'm sorry, the facts are wrong. They are not wrong. You are


just wrong about this. It's not all underground. There's only one


electric system, there's only one central heating system,


high-pressure steam system which is very unusual in the UK. You got to


take it out in one go. You can do that over the summer holidays? No,


it will take several years. There are 98 risers and at any moment if


you had a fire like we had the other day, completely inaccessible to the


fire patrols which go around 24 hours a day, because our building is


exempt from the fire regulations in the rest of the country, it would


spread throughout the building very rapidly. Our report only refers to


people saying you have to move out, that's because we asked every expert


could we stay in and they all said no, you've got to move out otherwise


it will cost more. Experts are not popular necessary following the


referendum but do you think it would be worth listening to them? No,...


Well, that was fairly clear! Visit a number of experts have given them


the answers they want. At the time the Brexit, we should make sure we


make the most use of this iconic building, parliament. Imagine our


opponents overseas, going out on our own, and saying, this is the new


headquarters of the UK Parliament. What if it falls into disrepair? It


won't. Why are they proposing six years? On one hand, they say there's


going to be a catastrophe if we don't do the work urgently and then


they want to do it in six years. In the meantime, they will spend ?100


million every year on catch up work. Sorry, you've already done a film.


The opening paragraph of the report says a significant amount of work


needs to be done to ascertain the problem of budgets. Hang on, let


Chris speak. It sounds to me like there's been work done, quite a few


interviews on the in-depth research done into this issue. There may be a


huge number of caveats but when you look at the project now and the cost


element, ?3.5 billion, are you saying that the cost would double if


you didn't move out and work around MPs and peers? That's the experience


of the 19th century and I can't see why are we any different. Let Chris


answer. The truth is, just one basic point, because there is one set of


electrics and all the rest of it, if you want to stay in the building,


and keep a bit of the building open during the work, you have got to put


temporary electrics and all the rest in and that immediately adds an


extra amount to the cost, added to which, as I understand it, his


proposal is the Commons should sit in the House of Lords and the Lords


should go in the gallery like happened in the Second World War but


the problem is, the Second World War, there were no divisions and


about 30 people turned up everyday. You are suggesting we would move


every day when there is a vote, 650 MPs going from portcullis house to


the House of Lords, walking along a public payment, the biggest security


risk you can imagine. Cut this objection actually delay the sale


process? That's my biggest anxiety. The government needs to allow the


House of Commons and the House of Lords, two different bodies, to make


their own decision about what had happened and the first thing is, we


shouldn't be saying let's do this, done, we should say, let's set up a


delivery authority like we did for the Olympics to make sure there's


proper coherent body of people and they can put together the business


plan. Six years to do that? The business plan will be ready in 18


months' time. We looked at this for one year. Are you prepared to move


out? First of all, I deferred to the infinitely superior knowledge of the


House of Commons. Although they don't agree. I will make whatever


solution works the best. I would like to say the least disruption for


the lowest cost and those other two big entities. It's the classic


construction dilemma, like working on the tube and railways forth the


evidence is, if you work on a live system could cost you twice as much


and take three times as long so my evidence from being Shadow Transport


Secretary, it's always best to move out. It's an iconic building at


every tourist in the world wants to have their photograph taken in front


of which is why we have to protect it. Don't talk over each other. With


the asbestos especially, the building could be closed down


tomorrow in definitely. Before I let you go, do you want to be Speaker of


the house? The Mail on Sunday rang me on Saturday, and I failed to


predict anything last year in politics. I'm finding it difficult


to predict anything this year. My ability to predict even my own


future, let alone John Bercow's is not. You would like to? I can't


predict anything. I'm not asking you to predict. I think that is yes.


Anyway, thank both very much. The Northern Ireland government


is on the verge of collapse this afternoon which could force


the Secretary of State, James Brokenshire,


to call fresh elections. The crisis has been prompted


by the resignation last week of Deputy First Minister,


Martin McGuiness, in protest at First Minister Arlene Foster's


involvement in the renewable heat incentive scheme - the so called


"cash for ash" scandal. Let's talk to our correspondent


Stephen Walker who's at Stormont. Stephen, give us the timings of


today. I understand 5pm is the deadline for Sinn Fein to find


another Deputy First Minister? Actually, in the last 20 minutes,


we've had political drama because the do you P have nominated Arlene


Foster as First Minister, it was expected, and Sinn Fein refused


declined to nominate Martin McGuinness and that was flagged up


in advance. We knew that was going to happen so now we are moving


towards this 5pm deadline when the Secretary of State has to call an


election. Basically, you can't have a First Minister without a Deputy


First Minister or vice versa pulled up they go together in this


executive. We have a situation now where we have a First Minister and


we don't have a Deputy First Minister, so there's got to be a


call at 5pm and it's looking like a certainty we will have an election.


What impact will that have on Brexit negotiations and Northern Ireland's


role in that? The British government to some extent are playing that


down. David broken Shire is saying just because we don't have a working


executive, it doesn't mean the views of Northern Ireland would be taken


on board. He said he is Northern Ireland Aqaba 's representative in


the Cabinet and will put those views forward and still have discussions


with committees and it will still take place in London. He says the


views of people install Montt, and the views of people in Northern


Ireland will be taken on board, so whilst they didn't want this to


happen, and it's an enormous headache for Downing Street, James


Brokenshire is saying the views of people in Northern Ireland, when it


comes to Brexit, will still be taken on board. If fresh elections are


called, it's likely we will have the do you P and Sinn Fein as the two


players gain full stop well they have resolved their differences,


because when I interviewed both sides, it went way beyond


cash-for-ash. Not at the end of this election campaign. What you are


looking at is a divisive campaign, the First Minister Arlene Foster is


on record as saying it's going to be a brutal campaign, some people


saying it's not an orange and green issue but the competence of people


behind me. It's going to be a divisive campaign, all those issues,


cash-for-ash, legacy, the past, the Irish language, are not going to be


resolved during the campaign but what people are saying is when they


come back after the campaign, they will have to do have negotiations


and if they can't solve that through the negotiations, technically, there


it will be another election and if that does not happen, then you would


think about the British government having direct rule serve as a whole


series of questions in this political crisis. Thank you very


much. When you think back to previous Prime Minister's and their


involvement in Northern Ireland and the peace process, bringing the two


sides together, Tony Blair or John Major, do you think Theresa May has


been present enough in this dispute? Not at all, the question for the


British Government is whether Brexit taking up all the political and


administrative bandwidth? The key thing is to protect that piece which


was so hard on after so many decades of war, and provide political


stability. Could she have done more to stop the


collapse of this coalition? It is disappointing to see this


political point scoring. We have no idea on the amount of


ground work which has been done. Any Westminster -based position


delving into Northern Ireland politics, that is precarious.


It is keyed to make sure we have as much stability and make sure we have


the mechanisms of dialogue to cover the well-known concerns over the


Common travel area but the opportunities of Brexit for the


whole country and different communities so they are fed through.


It is clear that has happened. We need to see these elections through.


And have some statesman is like behaviour on this side of the Irish


Sea. So we can support the sides coming to an agreement.


It is known when British prime ministers have got involved to try


and be an honest broker, it has worked.


You are talking about in relation to the conflict which was preceded by a


huge amount beneath the surface. I am sure that is going on. I don't


think anyone has been asleep at the wheel. There are clearly huge local


tensions. On the heat incentive scheme, that


was the trigger, but there are broader issues.


There is an issue around the Prime Minister needing the votes of the


Democratic Unionist Party, they have indicated they would support the


Brexit plans. I don't think that gets in a way of


what we all want to see in Westminster which is elections, the


democratic process set up after the Good Friday agreement, to make sure


Northern Irish politicians can resolve their problems locally as


far as possible. We have two respect that. And tried


to be a force for stability. Will it be difficult if the Supreme


Court upholds the view of the High Court before it's about giving the


devolved Assembly some say in Article 50 and triggering it, and


there are elections going on, and it has collapsed. How would that work


giving Northern Ireland invoice? The Supreme Court, we are expecting


a judgment in ten days. I am not clear whether we will get a judgment


on the constitutional issues in that at the same time.


It is clear to me the issues of the border, the potential imposition of


a hard border, are of great concern. The head of the Northern Ireland's


Police Federation has warned any hard border would be a target for


distance. We don't want to, there is a dilemma. If you keep borders open


you create a back channel for people traffickers.


That is not a domestic stability point on the radar.


Will the people of Northern Ireland to be heard if there are elections?


Nobody is speaking for them while Article 50 is ongoing.


Now, standing in the drizzle outside Parliament are two of Westminster's


But before we speak to them, let's have a look at the stories


Tonight, Jeremy Corbyn will address Labour MPs


Could there be some anxious faces as they try to work out who else


might take Tristram Hunt's lead and leave Parliament?


Tomorrow, Theresa May is making her first major speech


detailing the Government's strategy for leaving the EU.


We're being told she'll make the optimistic case for Brexit.


Also tomorrow, anyone who's anyone will be


gathering for the start of the World Economic


And then on Wednesday, the Prime Minister and Jeremy Corbyn


However, all this pales into insignificance because Friday


Donald Trump will be sworn in as the 45th President


We're joined now by the New Stateman's Anoosh Chakelian


and James Lyons from the Sunday Times.


Welcome. Anoosh, what do you expect to hear


from Theresa May tomorrow? We are expecting her to say she is


prepared to leave the single market, customs union, and take Britain out


of the European Court of Justice. This isn't new, we have known


Theresa May was going to put immigration ahead of the economy for


Brexit but she has been under fire for not having a plan.


At least we are hearing it now. And James? I expect to hear as


little as possible she can get away with saying. She does not like to


volunteer information willingly. She is being forced to deliver this


speech because of the Supreme Court case bearing down on us.


We are heading for what some might call a hard or clean Brexit.


Was that underlined by Philip Hammond in his interview with the


German paper at the weekend when he said he would take the required


action if he could not get a deal with the EU?


It was like he was issuing an ultimatum, saying, we could become


this aggressive corporate tax haven or you could let us have access to


the single market but us needing to keep free movement or any of the


status quo. In terms of Theresa May saying she


wasn't going to give a running commentary, the markets have


reacted. One of my colleagues at the Sunday


Times was told by people in Government last week they expected a


market correction. We were joking about buying some euros over the


weekend. There will be further market


reaction tomorrow. Jeremy Corbyn said yesterday in his


interview with Andrew Marr he said he thought Labour had had a good


week. Their week was mixed. Jeremy Corbyn


was prevaricating over immigration not saying whether he agreed Labour


was in favour of free movement. It has been his relaunch as a


populist leader. He keeps using language like, the system is raped,


the elite are taking Britain for a ride.


In a way that is working, his policy about wanting a wage cap on bosses


who earn 20 times more than their employees was popular.


You are looking quizzical, James? I don't think anyone could describe


it as mixed for Labour, it was a catastrophe, the diabolical relaunch


and the resignation of Tristram Hunt.


The interesting polling over the weekend was the one that showed


Theresa May has a 12 point lead on health. Traditionally the strongest


subject for Labour. That was in the middle of an NHS crisis last week.


Like you. No doubt you will be watching the inauguration.


A diabolical relaunch last week? We had a series of U-turns within 24


hours and what annoyed Labour MPs was after a reasonable performance


at Prime Minister is question is, to have the Leader of the Opposition


spokesperson briefing on Nato issues which were not raised, casting doubt


on whether a future Labour Government would respond under an


Article 5 provocation. That was appalling.


That person needs to be reined in. Does Labour support nuclear power?


We do, as part of an energy mix. We have dangerously low levels of


capacity in the British system. Jeremy Corbyn has a principled view


of being antinuclear but he says there should be a mix. Does he need


to say more in terms of what he believes about nuclear power when it


comes to the Copeland by-election? Workers want reassurance any Labour


and would protect their jobs and pensions, something we have tried to


do in opposition during the enterprise Bill. And before the


by-election was announced, we sought to do that through the back door


without Parliamentary scrutiny. Labour politicians have stood


alongside the workers of Sellafield and we will continue to stand by


them. You would like to hear Jeremy Corbyn


Seymore. In unequivocal terms. How dangerous


could Copeland be? Copeland and Stoke on Trent are


Hartland Labour seats which we held in 2015, and election we lost badly.


We have reasonable majorities and the Tories do not have much


representation locally. These are seats we should hold onto


particularly with the NHS in that area, the proposals to move the


maternity unit from -- down the road to Carlisle.


The poll says that Theresa May is more trusted over the NHS.


We need to see action in the polls as well, see movement.


The PLP meeting today, what will the atmosphere be like? Tristam Hunt,


Jamie Reid, stepping down to take jobs outside of politics. Do you


know any other politics -- Labour colleagues doing the same? Are you


surprised by this? No, I don't. I know Joan -- I know


Jamie had an eight hour journey to London with young children still at


home. This job is a vocation as much as employment. If people have the


opportunity to pursue a different location outside Parliament or feel


this is no longer their vocation, people have the right to make the


changes right for them and their families.


We stand again in 2020? Yes. Whenever the next election comes.


There has been criticism about Jeremy Corbyn by both those MPs


leaving. Do you agree? Both of them have been


critical. Last year, 122 MPs did a vote of no-confidence. That is not


something that exceptional. I do think people are looking to


their futures and working out what is best for them and their families.


We are a party that wants people to have better lives and it is allowed


for Labour MPs to have better lives. And back to that interview


with Donald Trump. In a moment, I'll be talking


to Michael Gove who conducted First, here's the President-elect


on his mother and her The UK, my mother


was very ceremonial. I think that's where I got this


aspect, cos my father She loved the ceremony


and the beauty, because nobody does And she had great


respect for the Queen. It was fascinating interviewing him,


he is a force of nature. You don't even need to ask a question. But it


comes, commentary on everything from Nato to Twitter.


Is he somebody ready to lead the free world?


What do you make of him? President Trump will be different from the


candidate. The candidate had a deliberate campaign style which was


big, bombastic, brash. As president, of course he will still be the


personality we know but he will look at things in a more businesslike


way. There is a difference between the marketeer, and the deal-maker in


office. We haven't seen evidence in change


in style, he is still tweeting away, will he continue?


He was clear he will continue to tweet, he regards that as a way of


cutting through what he regards as media distortion.


If you look at the people he has built around him in the Cabinet,


James Matias, it would have been unlikely someone of his stature


would have agreed to serve in Cabinet.


The team he is assembling, some of the things he says in an interview,


suggests he will govern not innate radically different way but in a


different way to how he campaigned. Did you give him a proper grilling?


We were there for one hour, we had the opportunity to ask questions on


a range of issues. The critical thing is when you are talking to


someone like Donald Trump, you can try to argue with him but he is like


a river in spate, when you ask a question, the flow of language just


comes at a torrent. Where were the difficult questions


from you on his links to Vladimir Putin? We asked specifically whether


or not he would stand by what he said Nato. He did shifters position.


We ask them about everything from the wrong deal to whether or not he


would stand down his campaign promise on Muslims, and he provided


that. The critical thing I thought was it was important for me and my


colleague from Germany to cover a wide range of topics and allow


newspaper readers to form their own opinion. You didn't challenge him on


his inconsistencies and there were many on very pressing issues. You


say yourself you asked on a wide-ranging topic, but why didn't


you challenge him before Christmas he said he wanted a nuclear arms


race with Russia. Very provocative language. Now he says he wants to


reduce it. Which is it? You can ask him when he appears on this


programme. But you had him therefore one hour. We managed to generate


from him compelling news on a variety of issues including a


commitment to a rapid trade deal with Theresa May. Do you trust that,


with his inconsistencies, like Syria, he was praised in Russia for


getting involved in that because they were bashing Isis and now he


says in your interview actually it has caused a humanitarian crisis in


Syria. These are diametrically opposite views so when he says he


wants a quick trade deal, do you trust him? I think he will be


different from candidates from. I think that inconsistency is a


different thing. A dangerous thing when it comes to foreign policy.


Many things he said as a candidate are deeply worrying and I hope in


the interests of the world he rolls back from some of them as President.


I think what he said about Nato during the course of the campaign


was dangerous and I think in the interview he suggests a more nuanced


approach. I hope that will be the case. But my role in the interview


was to make sure that he could speak for himself and people will form


their own judgments. There are inconsistencies between what he said


on the stump and what we may see in the White House. We can form a


judgment like the American people, about whether or not they think he's


doing a good job. The whole question of trust is ultimately one for the


American people and for the world leaders who will engage with him. I


was doing my job as a reporter to ensure he cover the waterfront and


then each of us, as citizens, will form our judgment. I said during the


campaign but I would have voted for Hillary Clinton and I've also said,


some of the things he said are not acceptable but there's a difference.


The BBC understands the reporter who allows a politician to speak for


themselves, and an individual who can form a judgment about what they


say. It's also about challenging, as a politician at the other end. If we


look at the picture here of you with Donald Trump, is that a very


professional, do you think? Thumbs up? Do you do that with all the


politicians you do? Yes, if you want to have a selfie with me afterwards,


you can. I've always never had the opportunity. Your German partner in


this didn't stand with his thumbs up. People might just say that's a


bit frivolous but you don't think so? I think the people should have


their own views about that picture. I think I got a smile on my face and


so has he. On that basis, you got there before Boris Johnson and


Theresa May in terms of face time with Donald Trump. Euan Nigel


Farage. Is not going to be Ambassador. Could you? I don't think


diplomacy is my strong suit. Would you like to? No, I like being an MP


and writing for the times. Why not a good ambassador? They require


different skills but we got a very good primer list at the moment in


Theresa May and a very good ambassador. How did the interview


come about? We approach them and Donald Trump thought was a good idea


to talk to Britain's best newspaper and the most successful newspaper.


And they chose you to do the interview, none of the other


political journalists? We made sure that we sent a professional team,


the photographer did a brilliant job, and I hope Times readers will


appreciate what we did but if people think it was shoddy journalism I can


only apologise because I'm a valid serve newcomer to the trade and I'll


do better with my next job. What is your job? You are elected by the


people in Surrey but you talk about standing up to people... Nothing


about comments on women. You are talking about a journalist as your


colleague but it creates questions about the second job you have got. I


think people will form their own judgment about the appropriateness


about politicians writing. And thumbs up? Whether it's Boris


Johnson or Tony Benn? Michael Foot would never have done that stand in


a million years. We can't know but Michael Foot combined a very


successful career as a local politician would also being a


journalist and was editor of the Evening Standard and worked for Lord


Beaverbrook. Before he was leader of the Labour Party. And I would never


want to be the leader of the Labour Party. And on that stunning piece of


news that are not going to be the Labour Party! We will stop this now.


Thank you for coming in. Now, are we seeing


the commercialisation of politics? By the end of the week,


a marketing man will be in the White House and an increasing


number of companies seem to have recognised the commercial


opportunities presented by politics. President Obama loves music


and has long been a fan So much so that he recently joked


that he was hoping for a job with the company when he


left the White House. And it seems Spotify's boss has just


the vacancy for him. He tweeted Obama a spoof


job description for So if you go for this job,


you should have at least eight years' experience of running


a highly regarded nation, a warm and friendly attitude


and a Nobel Peace Prize. In contrast, President-elect Trump


is used as the butt of a joke "Hurry, it won't last.


It's limited, very limited." He'll be voting Leave


on his next appraisal. The other big political campaign


of 2016, the EU referendum, has been used by several companies


in their marketing. The vote was often a hot topic


in Britain's public houses and possibly even more so in those


owned by Brexit-backer and pub He printed 200,000 beer mats


promoting the Leave campaign. Meanwhile, Ryanair offered cut-price


flights for people to fly And for those unhappy


with the Leave result, the chance to see no Europe,


hear no Europe and speak no Europe. Ryanair launched a sale with flights


costing just ?10 for people wanting But please note, other music


websites, food outlets, Here with us now to cast an expert


eye over those adverts is Murray MacLennan,


the worldwide CEO of the advertising Welcome to the Daily Politics. What


do you make of these companies using politics in the advertising? There's


nothing new in some respects because what we attempt to do is reflect


society and understand the target audience and the last three years


has seen unprecedented interest and emotion in politics, party politics,


but issues, independence, Brexit, Donald Trump, and its arguments


tween not just YouTube are people in the pub to advertisers and people


down the football ground, so people are going to companies to but the


minute advertising. We used to joke these things work not joked about


down in the dog and duck but now they are. Do think it's an effective


way of engaging consumers? It shows we are humorous. I think it would


take a brave advertiser to take sides. Ryanair does but their


history is about being opinionated and combative, so it's in their


brand, but I don't think you will see Tesco, NatWest, taking sides


shortly. They are very cautious, aren't they? It's not their job.


Over the New Year, we saw Lego take a stand against the Daily Mail and


not advertise whereas John Lewis said it's not our job to take sides.


Our customers have different views and were not there to tell them


that. Do you think those lines will be blurred in the future and it will


become more difficult for them not to take sides, even if it actually


is part of their moderate? They may choose to because what we are seeing


more and more companies and brands having points of view. They are


meant to fulfil something in society over and about making money for


their shareholders and a social purpose if you like and can you have


a social purpose without politics? Often but not always. I think with


greater engagement on these emotional subjects, and that need


for companies to have a point of view, you could do. Is it a growing


trend or these exceptions? I think they are so deep-rooted and


long-running, I think over the next two or three years we'll see more


companies having views, using the engagement of people in the


advertisements in these big issues, whether it is Brexit or trump. I


think it could well be a trend, I'm afraid. Does it surprise you? Not


really because it's been part of the political fabric for so long and I


can see the pitfalls, businesses being perceived to back a side, or


getting a challenge back themselves. I think for the politicians it's a


good thing. When you think about Brexit, 72% turnout, far higher than


people expected, and all forms of mediums, getting product placement,


to reach parts and voters in a way traditional politics doesn't appeal,


is a good thing. Would you advise any of your clients to piggyback big


political events which have happened like the referendum and the trump


inauguration? It depends on the brand and the company. It there is


strong brand and has political roots, spotter five know their


target audience. We have to know what their values are. If you are


reflecting their values, they like to be challenged, then we would do,


yes. What you think of this? I love the adverts. Britain is brilliant at


advertisements, and our industry is precious globally, loved and


revered, and our creativity and quirky character comes out in that


and I watched La La Land at the weekend and I watched an advert for


NatWest bank talking about climate change and I thought to myself,


there you go, NatWest are part of a crisis which means people have never


pay rise for eight years but now they are trying to do good. I'm glad


you've made that clear on the programme. The other thing is, I


think politics is more at the front now than it's ever been our public


discourse so why wouldn't you talk about the things people are talking


about? Just stay with us for the end of the programme.


There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.


The question was, which magazine will Theresa May be featuring in?


Vogue. It could be top gear. You both got it right. I'm going to


tread very carefully. Thanks very much to all of our guests today.


The One O'Clock News is starting over on BBC One now.


I'll be here at noon tomorrow with all the big


Download Subtitles