27/11/2016 Sunday Politics East Midlands

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

Was Fidel Castro a revolutionary hero or a murderous dictator?

After the Cuban leader's death, politicians divide over his legacy.

Can the NHS in England find billions of pounds' worth of efficiency

The Shadow Health Secretary joins me live.

Should we have a second Brexit referendum on the terms

of the eventual withdrawal deal that's struck with the EU?

Former Lib Dem leader Paddy Ashdown and former Conservative cabinet

What does the Autumn Statement mean? go head-to-head.

And with me, Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards.

They'll be tweeting throughout the programme

Political leaders around the world have been reacting to the news

of the death of Fidel Castro, the Cuban revolutionary who came

to power in 1959 and ushered in a Marxist revolution.

Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson described the former leader

as an "historic if controversial figure" and said his death marked

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said Castro was "a champion of social

justice" who had "seen off a lot of US presidents"

President-elect Donald Trump described the former Cuban leader

as a "brutal dictator", adding that he hoped his death

would begin a new era "in which the wonderful Cuban people

finally live in the freedom they so richly deserve".

Meanwhile, the President of the European Commission,

Jean-Claude Juncker, said the controversial leader

was "a hero for many" but "his legacy will be judged

I guess we had worked that out ourselves. What do you make of the

reactions so far across the political divide? Predictable. And I

noticed that Jeremy Corbyn has come in for criticism for his tribute to

Castro. But I think it was the right thing for him to do. We all know he

was an admirer. He could have sat there for eight hours in his house,

agonising over some bland statement which didn't alienate the many

people who want to wade into attacked Castro. It would have been

inauthentic and would have just added to the sort of mainstream

consensus, and I think he was right to say what he believed in this

respect. Elsewhere, it has been wholly predictable that there would

be this device, because he divided opinion in such an emotive way.

Steve, I take your point about authenticity and it might have

looked a bit lame for Jeremy Corbyn to pretend that he had no affection

for Fidel Castro at all, but do you think he made a bit of an error

dismissing Castro's record, the negative side of it as just a floor?

He could have acknowledged in more elaborate terms the huge costs. He

wanted to go on about the health and education, which if you actually

look up the indices on that, they are good relative to other

countries. But they have come at such a huge cost. He was not a

champion of criminal justice. If he had done that, it would have been

utterly inauthentic. He doesn't believe it. And he would have

thought there would be many other people focusing on all the epic

failings. So he focused on what he believed. There are times when

Corbyn's prominence in the media world now as leader widens the

debate in an interesting and important way. I am not aware of any

criticisms that Mr Corbyn has ever announced about Mr Castro. There

were four words in his statement yesterday which is spin doctor would

have forced him to say, for all his flaws. He was on this Cuban

solidarity committee, which didn't exist to criticise Castro. It

existed to help protect Castro from those, particularly the Americans,

who were trying to undermine him. And Corbyn made a big deal yesterday

saying he has always called out human rights abuses all over the

world. But he said that in general, I call out human rights abuses. He

never said, I have called out human rights abuses in Cuba. In the weeks

ahead, more will come out about what these human rights abuses were. The

lid will come off what was actually happening. Some well authenticated

stories are pretty horrendous. I was speaking to a journalist who was

working there in the 1990s, who gave me vivid examples of that, and there

will be more to come. I still go back to, when a major figure diet

and you are a leader who has admired but major figure, you have to say

it. That is the trap he has fallen into. He has proved every criticism

that he is a duck old ideologue. But he is not the only one. Prime

Minister Trudeau was so if uses that I wondered if they were going to

open up a book of condolences. I think it reinforces Corbyn's failing

brand. It may be authentic, but authentic isn't working for him.

When I was driving, I heard Trevor Phillips, who is a Blairite, saying

the record was mixed and there were a lot of things to admire as well as

all the terrible things. So it is quite nuanced. But if you are a

leader issuing a sound bite, there is no space for new ones. You either

decide to go for the consensus, which is to set up on the whole, it

was a brutal dictatorship. Or you say, here is an extraordinary figure

worthy of admiration. In my view, he was right to say what he believed.

There was still a dilemma for the British government over who they

sent to the funeral. Do they sent nobody, do they say and Boris

Johnson as a post-ironic statement? There is now a post-Castro Cuba to

deal with. Trump was quite diplomatic about post-Castro Cuba.

And Boris Johnson's statement was restrained. The thing about Mr

Castro was the longevity, 50 years of keeping Marxism on the island.

That was what made it so fascinating.

Before the last election, George Osborne promised the NHS

in England a real-terms funding boost of ?8 billion per year by 2020

on the understanding that NHS bosses would also find ?22 billion worth

Since last autumn, NHS managers have been drawing up what they're calling

"Sustainability and Transformation Plans" to make these savings,

but some of the proposals are already running into local

opposition, while Labour say they amount to huge cuts to the NHS.

Help is on the way for an elderly person in need in Hertfordshire.

But east of England ambulance call operators

they're sending an early intervention vehicle

with a council-employed occupational therapist on board.

It's being piloted here for over 65s with

When they arrive, a paramedic judges if the patient can be

treated immediately at home without a trip to hospital.

Around 80% of patients have been treated this way,

taking the strain off urgently-needed hospital beds,

So the early intervention team has assessed the patient and decided

The key to successful integration for Hertfordshire being able

to collaboratively look at how we use our resources,

to have pooled budgets, to allow us to understand

where spend is, and to let us make conscientious decisions about how

best to use that money, to come up with ideas to problems

that sit between our organisations, to look at things collaboratively.

This Hertfordshire hospital is also a good example of how

You won't find an A unit or overnight beds here any more.

The closest ones are 20 minutes down the road.

What's left is nurse-led care in an NHS-built hospital.

Despite a politically toxic change, this reconfiguration went

through after broad public and political consultation

with hospital clinicians and GPs on board.

It's a notable achievement that's surely of interest to 60% of NHS

trusts in England that reported a deficit at the end of September.

It's not just here that the NHS needs to save money and provide

The Government is going to pour in an extra ?8 billion into the NHS

in England, but it has demanded ?22 billion

worth of efficiencies across the country.

In order to deliver that, the NHS has created 44 health

and care partnerships, and each one will provide

a sustainability and transformation plan, or STP, to integrate care,

provide better services and save money.

So far, 33 of these 44 regional plans, drawn up by senior people

in the health service and local government,

The NHS has been through five years of severely constrained spending

growth, and there are another 4-5 years on the way at least.

STPs themselves are an attempt to deal in a planned way

But with plans to close some A units and reduce the number

of hospital beds, there's likely to be a tough political battle

ahead, with many MPs already up in arms about proposed

This Tory backbencher is concerned about the local plans for his

I wouldn't call it an efficiency if you are proposing to close

all of the beds which are currently provided for those coming out

of the acute sector who are elderly and looking

That's not a cut, it's not an efficiency saving,

All 44 STPs should be published in a month's time,

But even before that, they dominated this week's PMQs.

The Government's sustainability and transformation plans

for the National Health Service hide ?22 billion of cuts.

The National Health Service is indeed looking for savings

within the NHS, which will be reinvested in the NHS.

There will be no escape from angry MPs for the Health Secretary either.

Well, I have spoken to the Secretary of State just this week

about the importance of community hospitals in general,

These are proposals out to consultation.

What could happen if these plans get blocked?

If STPs cannot be made to work, the planned changes don't come

to pass, then the NHS will see over time a sort of unplanned

deterioration and services becoming unstable and service

The NHS barely featured in this week's Autumn Statement

but the Prime Minister insisted beforehand that STPs

are in the interests of local people.

Her Government's support will now be critical for NHS England

to push through these controversial regional plans,

which will soon face public scrutiny.

We did ask the Department of Health for an interview,

I've been joined by the Shadow Health Secretary,

Do you accept that the NHS is capable of making ?22 billion of

efficiency savings? Well, we are very sceptical, as are number of

independent organisations about the ability of the NHS to find 22

billion of efficiencies without that affecting front line care. When you

drill down into the 22 billion, based on the information we have

been given, and there hasn't been much information, we can see that

some of it will come from cutting the budget which go to community

pharmacies, which could lead, according to ministers, to 3000

pharmacies closing, which we believe will increase demands on A and

GPs, and also that a lot of these changes which are being proposed,

which was the focus of the package, we think will mean service cuts at a

local level. Do they? The chief executive of NHS England says these

efficiency plans are "Incredibly important". He used to work from

Labour. The independent King's Fund calls them "The best hope to improve

health and care services. There is no plan B". On the sustainable

transformation plans, which will be across England to link up physical

health, mental health and social care, for those services to

collaborate more closely together and move beyond the fragmented

system we have at the moment is important. It seems that the ground

has shifted. It has moved into filling financial gaps. As we know,

the NHS is going through the biggest financial squeeze in its history. By

2018, per head spending on the NHS will be falling. If you want to

redesign services for the long term in a local area, you need to put the

money in. So of course, getting these services working better

together and having a greater strategic oversight, which we would

have had if we had not got rid of strategic health authority is in the

last Parliament. But this is not an attempt to save 22 billion, this is

an attempt to spend 22 billion more successfully, don't you accept that?

Simon Stevens said we need 8 billion, and we need to find 22

billion of savings. You have to spend 22 billion more efficiently.

But the Government have not given that 8 billion to the NHS which they

said they would. They said they would do it by 2020. But they have

changed the definitions of spending so NHS England will get 8 billion by

2020, but they have cut the public health budgets by about 4 million by

20 20. The budget that going to initiatives to tackle sexually

transmitted diseases, to tackle smoking have been cut back but the

commissioning of things like school nurses and health visitors have been

cut back as well. Simon Stevens said he can only deliver that five-year

project if there is a radical upgrade in public health, which the

Government have failed on, and if we deal with social care, and this week

there was an... I understand that, but if you don't think the

efficiency drive can free up 22 billion to take us to 30 billion by

2020, where would you get the money from? I have been in this post now

for five or six weeks and I want to have a big consultation with

everybody who works in the health sector, as well as patients, carers

and families. Though you don't know? I think it would be surprised if I

had an arbitrary figure this soon into the job. Your party said they

expected election of spring by this year, you need to have some idea by

now, you inherited a portfolio from Diane Abbott, did she have no idea?

To govern is to make choices and we would make different choices. The

budget last year scored billions of giveaways in things like

co-operating -- corporation tax. What I do want to do... Is work on a

plan and the general election, whenever it comes, next year or in

2020 or in between, to have costed plan for the NHS. But your party is

committed to balancing the books on current spending, that is currently

John McDonnell, the Shadow Chancellor's position. What we are

talking about, this extra 30 billion, that is essentially current

spending so if it doesn't come from efficiency savings, where does the

money come from? Some of it is also capital. Mainly current spending. If

you look at the details of the OBR, they have switched a million from

the capital into revenue. Why -- how do you balance spending?

That is why we need to have a debate. Every time we ask for

Labour's policy, we are always told me a debate. Surely it is time to

give some idea of what you stand for? There's huge doubts about the

Government 's policy on this. You are the opposition, how would you do

it? I want to work with John McDonnell to find a package to give

the NHS the money it needs, but of course our Shadow Chancellor, like

any Shadow Chancellor at this stage in the cycle, will want to see what

the books look like a head of an election before making commitments.

I am clear that the Labour Party has to go into the next general election

with a clear policy to give the NHS the funding it needs because it has

been going through the largest financial squeeze in its history.

You say Labour will always give the NHS the money it needs, that is not

a policy, it is a blank cheque. It is an indication of our commitment

to the NHS. Under this Conservative government, the NHS has been getting

a 1% increase. Throughout its history it has usually have about

4%. Under the last Labour government it was getting 4%, before that

substantially more. We think the NHS should get more but I don't have

access to the NHS books in front of me. The public thinks there needs to

be more money spent on health but they also think that should go cap

in hand with the money being more efficiently spent, which is what

this efficiency drive is designed to release 22 billion. Do you have an

efficiency drive if it is not the Government's one? Of course we

agree. We agree the NHS should be more efficient, we want to see

productivity increased. Do know how to do that? One way is through

investments, maintenance, but there is a 5 million maintenance backlog.

One of the most high risk backlogs is something like 730 million. They

are going to switch the capital spend into revenue spend. I believe

that when you invest in maintenance and capital in the NHS, that

contribute to increasing its productivity. You are now talking

about 5 billion the maintenance, the chief executive says it needs 30

billion more by 2020 as a minimum so that 35 billion. You want to spend

more on social care, another for 5 billion on that so we have proper

care in the community. By that calculation I'm up to about 40

billion, which is fine, except where do you get the and balance the

account at the same time? We will have to come up with a plan for that

and that's why I will work with our Shadow Treasury team to come up with

that plan when they head into the general election. At the moment we

are saying to the NHS, sorry, we are not going to give you the

investment, which is why we are seeing patient care deteriorating.

The staff are doing incredible things but 180,000 are waiting in

A beyond four hours, record levels of people delayed in beds in

hospitals because there are not the beds in the community to go to save

the NHS needs the investment. We know that and we know the

Government's response to that and many think it is inadequate. What

I'm trying to get from you is what your response would be and what your

reaction will be to these efficiency plans. Your colleague Heidi

Alexander, she had your job earlier this year, she warned of the danger

of knee jerk blanket opposition to local efficiency plans. Do you agree

with that? Yes. So every time a hospital is going to close as a

result of this, and some will, it is Labour default position not just

going to be we are against it? That is why we are going to judge each of

these sustainability plans by a number of yardsticks. We want to see

if they have the support of local clinicians, we want to see if they

have the support of local authorities because they now have a

role in the delivery of health care. We want to see if they make the

right decisions for the long-term trends in population for local area.

We want to see if they integrate social care and health. If they

don't and therefore you will not bank that as an efficiency saving,

you will say no, that's not the way to go, you are left then with

finding the alternative funding to keep the NHS going. If you are

cutting beds, for example the proposal is to cut something like

5000 beds in Derbyshire and if there is the space in the community sector

in Derbyshire, that will cause big problems for the NHS in the long

term so it is a false economy. An example like that, we would be very

sceptical the plans could work. Would it not be honest, given the

sums of money involved and your doubts about the efficiency plan,

which are shared by many people, to just say, look, among the wealthy

nations, we spend a lower proportion of our GDP on health than most of

the other countries, European countries included, we need to put

up tax if we want a proper NHS. Wouldn't that be honest? I'm not the

Shadow Chancellor, I don't make taxation policy. You are tempting me

down a particular road by you or I smile. John McDonnell will come up

with our taxation policy. We have had an ambition to meet the European

average, the way these things are measured have changed since then,

but we did have that ambition and for a few years we met it. We need

substantial investment in the NHS. Everyone accepts it was

extraordinary that there wasn't an extra penny for the NHS in the

Autumn Statement this week. And as we go into the general election,

whenever it is, we will have a plan for the NHS. Come back and speak to

us when you know what you are going to do. Thank you.

Theresa May has promised to trigger formal Brexit negotiations

before the end of March, but the Prime Minister must wait

for the Supreme Court to decide whether parliament must vote

If that is the Supreme Court's conclusion, the Liberal Democrats

and others in parliament have said they'll demand a second EU

referendum on the terms of the eventual Brexit deal before

And last week, two former Prime Ministers suggested

that the referendum result could be reversed.

In an interview with the New Statesman on Thursday,

Tony Blair said, "It can be stopped if the British people decide that,

having seen what it means, the pain-gain cost-benefit analysis

John Major also weighed in, telling a meeting

of the National Liberal Club that the terms of Brexit

were being dictated by the "tyranny of the majority".

He also said there is a "perfectly credible case"

That prompted the former Conservative leader

Iain Duncan Smith to criticise John Major.

He told the BBC, "The idea we delay everything simply

because they disagree with the original result does

seem to me an absolute dismissal of democracy."

So, is there a realistic chance of a second referendum on the terms

of whatever Brexit deal Theresa May manages to secure?

Lib Dem party leader Tim Farron has said, "We want to respect

the will of the people and that means they must have their say

in a referendum on the terms of the deal."

But the Lib Dems have just eight MPs - they'll need Labour support

One ally is former Labour leadership candidate Owen Smith.

He backs the idea of a second referendum.

But yesterday the party's deputy leader, Tom Watson, said that,

"Unlike the Lib Dem Brexit Deniers, we believe in respecting

To discuss whether or not there should be a second referendum

on the terms of the Brexit deal, I've been joined by two

In Somerset is the former Lib Dem leader Paddy Ashdown,

and in Shropshire is the former Conservative cabinet minister

Paddy Ashdown, let me come to you first. When the British people have

spoken, you do what they command, either you believe in democracy or

you don't. When democracy speaks, we obey. Your words on the night of the

referendum, what's changed? Nothing has changed, Andrew, that's what I

said and what I still believe in. The British people have spoken, we

will not block Parliament debating the Brexit decision, Article 50, but

we will introduce an amendment to say that we need to consult the

British people, not about if we go out but what destination we would

then achieve. There is a vast difference in ordinary people's

lives between the so-called hard Brexit and soft Brexit. Soft Brexit,

you remain in the single market, you have to accept and agree on

immigration. Hard Brexit you are out of the single market, we have many

fewer jobs... Why didn't you say before the referendum there would be

a second referendum on the terms? Forgive me, I said it on many

occasions, you may not have covered it, Andrew, but that's a different

thing. In every speech I gave I said this, and this has proved to be

true, since those who recommended Brexit refused to tell us the

destination they were recommending, they refuse to give any detail about

the destination, if we did vote to go out, it would probably be

appropriate to decide which destination, hard Brexit or soft

Brexit we go to. They deliberately obscure that because it made it more

difficult to argue the case. It wasn't part of the official campaign

but let me come to Owen Paterson. What's wrong with a referendum on

the terms of the deal? We voted to leave but we don't really know on

what conditions we leave so what's wrong with negotiating the deal and

putting that deal to the British people? This would be a ridiculous

idea, it would be a complete gift to the EU negotiators to go for an

impossibly difficult deal because they want to do everything to make

sure that Brexit does not go through. This nonsense idea of hard

Brexit and soft Brexit, it was never discussed during the referendum

campaign. We made it clear we wanted to take back control, that means

making our own laws, raising and spending the money agreed by elected

politicians, getting control of our own borders back, and getting

control of our ability to do trade deals around the world. That was

clear at all stages of the referendum. We got 17.4 million

votes, the biggest vote in history for any issue, that 52%, 10% more

than John Major got and he was happy with his record number of 14

million, more than Tony Blair got, which was 43%, so we have a very

clear mandate. Time and again people come up to me and say when are we

going to get on with this. The big problem is uncertainty. We want to

trigger Article 50, have the negotiation and get to a better

place. OK, I need to get a debate going.

Paddy Ashdown, the EU doesn't want us to leave. If they knew there was

going to be a second referendum, surely there was going to be a

second referendum, surely their incentive would be to give us the

worst possible deal would vote against it would put us in a

ridiculous negotiating position. On the contrary, the government could

go and negotiate with the European Union and anyway, the opinion of the

European Union is less important than the opinion of the British

people. It seems to me that Owen Paterson made the case for me

precisely. They refuse to discuss what kind of destination. Britain

voted for departure, but not a destination. Because Owen Paterson

and his colleagues refused to discuss what their model was. So the

range of options here and the impact on the people of Britain is huge.

There is nothing to stop the government going to negotiate,

getting the best deal it can and go into the British people and saying,

this is the deal, guys, do you agree? Owen Paterson? It is simple.

The British people voted to leave. We voted to take back control of our

laws, our money, our borders. But most people don't know the shape of

what the deal would be. So why not have a vote on it? Because it would

be a gift to the EU negotiators to drive the worst possible deal in the

hope that it might be chucked out with a second referendum. The

biggest danger is the uncertainty. We have the biggest vote in British

history. You have said all that. It was your side that originally

proposed a second referendum. The director of Leave said, there is a

strong democratic case for a referendum on what the deal looks

like. Your side. Come on, you are digging up a blog from June of 2015.

He said he had not come to a conclusion. He said it is a distinct

possibility. No senior members of the campaign said we would have a

second referendum. It is worth chucking Paddy the quote he gave on

ITV news, whether it is a majority of 1% or 20%, when the British

people have spoken, you do what they command. People come up to me and

keep asking, when are you going to get on with it? What do you say to

that, Paddy Ashdown? Owen Paterson has obviously not been paying

attention. You ask me that question at the start. Owen and his kind have

to stick to the same argument. During the referendum, when we said

that the Europeans have it in their interest to picket tough for us,

they would suffer as well. And that has proved to be right. The European

Union does not wish to hand as a bad deal, because they may suffer in the

process. We need the best deal for both sides. I can't understand why

Owen is now reversing that argument. Here is the question I am going to

ask you. If we have a second referendum on the deal and we vote

by a very small amount, by a sliver, to stay in, can we then make it

best-of-3? No, Andrew! Vince Cable says he thinks if you won, he would

have to have a decider. You will have to put that income tax, because

I don't remember when he said that. -- you have to put that in context.

Independent, 19th of September. That is a decision on the outcome. The

central point is that the British people voted for departure, not a

destination. In response to the claim that this is undemocratic, if

it is democratic to have one referendum, how can it be

undemocratic to have two? Owen Paterson, the British government, on

the brink of triggering article 50, cannot tell us if we will remain

members of the single market, if we will remain members of the customs

union. From that flows our ability to make trade deals, our attitude

towards freedom of movement and the rest of it. Given that the

government can't tell us, it is clear that the British people have

no idea what the eventual shape will be. That is surely the fundamental

case for a second referendum. Emphatically not. They have given a

clear vote. That vote was to take back control. What the establishment

figures like Paddy should recognise is the shattering damage it would do

to the integrity of the whole political process if this was not

delivered. People come up to me, as I have said for the third time now,

wanting to know when we will get article 50 triggered. Both people

who have voted to Remain and to Leave. If we do not deliver this, it

will be disastrous for the reputation and integrity of the

whole political establishment. Let me put that you Paddy Ashdown. It is

very Brussels elite - were ask your question but if we don't like the

answer, we will keep asking the question. Did it with the Irish and

French. It is... It would really anger the British people, would it

not? That is an interesting question, Andrew. I don't think it

would. All the evidence I see in public meetings I attended, and I

think it is beginning to show in the opinion polls, although there hasn't

been a proper one on this yet, I suspect there is a majority in

Britain who would wish to see a second referendum on the outcome.

They take the same view as I do. What began with an open democratic

process cannot end with a government stitch up. Contrary to what Owen

suggests, there is public support for this. And far from damaging the

government and the political class, it showed that we are prepared to

listen. We shall see. Paddy Ashdown, have you eaten your hat yet? Andrew,

as you well know, I have eaten five hats. You cannot have a second

referendum until you eat your hat on my programme. We will leave it

there. Paddy Ashdown and Owen Paterson, thank you much. I have

eaten a hat on your programme. I don't remember!

It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.

We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now

In the East Midlands, never mind the just managing jams,

what about those who are not managing at all?

We have brought the Chancellor's Autumn Statement to the town

that voted very heavily to leave the European Union.

And more money from the Chancellor for housing.

Will it be enough to cut the waiting list?

I don't think we've had a really good consistent housing policy for

Hello, I am Marie Ashby and my guests are the Conservative

former Chancellor himself, and the Labour MP for Gedling

Let's get your reaction to the Autumn Statement.

The Chancellor painted a picture of growing debt and

I was very reassured by the statement.

At last, after all the madness of the last few months,

there is the man who understands economic policy

and there is a sound and

tough guy when he needs to be talking about the real world.

And getting us all to face up to the fact that the next few

The global economy is in no great state either.

He explained how he is going to stick

to sensible economic policies and concentrate on what little money

he has got to try and develop a modern, competitive

economy to give people jobs for the future.

He is going to have to stick to that as well and not be

That infrastructure investment which has been promised is

Your party is attacking the Chancellor,

isn't it, for not tackling social care at all.

The first thing to say about the Autumn Statement was,

in or out of the EU, it was an admission of the failed

We now have a Government that can't see anything

about extra spending about on the NHS or social care

and is having to borrow an extra 122 billion over the period

of the next five years without a clear indication

of when the budget will come into surplus at the same

time as living standards are being squeezed.

I think people out there will see it as

an Autumn Statement that carries on the failed policies

He should apparently have spent a lot more money and somehow get rid

I think if you followed Vernon's remedy, the debt

Back in the real world, the fact is the

financial crash of 2006-2008 is the main cause of where

we were and we haven't successfully here or in the rest of

You predicted that there could be a recession.

After the Brexit vote, you predicted there could be a recession.

Could that still happen in your view?

I think there is a real risk of a recession.

I am usually quite a cheerful guy, as you will admit.

Yes, I think there is a serious risk of a recession in the next year

If that is the case, is it likely that Theresa May

I'm asking do you think she could do that?

The last Government that I was in that called

because it could not think of what else to do

What we need is a clear-headed man like Philip Hammond who is

not going to play silly short-term politics.

He knows you get lobbied for more money every time you go near the

House of Commons if you are the Chancellor.

A change of policy is

He was keen to spend money on infrastructure with more

than ?1 million for affordable housing.

Will that be enough to tackle the region's housing shortage?

Nottingham's new waterside neighbourhood is taking shape.

45 homes have just been finished on old

industrial land within spitting nistance of the city's sights.

The idea of living here on the banks of the Trent is

This development has taken 20 years to come about.

There are many other brown field sites in

Nottingham that have waited just as long to be built on.

On the surface things seem to be picking up.

In Nottingham, just over two and half thousand homes are

in the pipeline, being built or recently completed.

I guess the idea ultimately is that all of this land

we see in front of us here will be developed?

Yes, this is just the

start of a huge regeneration project.

There is economic uncertainty, however I think in

Nottingham we are determined to make this work.

We are determined to do

what we can to work with developers to bring sites forward, to make

development possible and to regenerate these areas.

The developer behind this project believes

successive governments could have done much more to help.

Arguably, we are not producing enough homes of the right type.

Clearly, the results show that we could doing better.

What did you make of the Autumn Statement?

The housing infrastructure fund is a step in the

The new money, additional money for affordable housing is important.

Some of the money announced on Wednesday's should

trickle down to the East Midlands and perhaps to affordable housing

Jordan has just moved into one of the new

council houses in a generation in this Conservative run district.

The local authority has paid for some of this

under the Right to Buy scheme and derelict houses are also

But money is tight and the extra cash on the Government is welcome.

It is fantastic news and we will be able to build more houses

We will be bidding for that money and building more developments

and getting people off the waiting lists.

45 families will have a new home here.

That is out of the waiting list of around a thousand.

The housing crisis will take some solving.

Housing is part of the big push on infrastructure.

What else is in it for the East Midlands?

We're joined by Maria Machancoses, the programme directors of

It is the body that has been set up to improve

Very few mentions of the Midland Engine in the Autumn Statement.

?5 million for a transport hub in Birmingham.

This is in addition to the 12 million that was announced

As you know, we are working very hard with the Trent eight

authorities and businesses, universities and colleges to submit

to Government our priorities. What this 5 million that we receive is to

help us shape some of the projects that we have in mind and these

projects will enable solutions to improve the east and west

connectivity between the cities and the towns. Tell us about those

projects. What will we see here in the Midlands? We will address some

the bottlenecks. They are not allowing businesses to connect with

each other in a faster and reliable way. There are a number of

interventions around Birmingham and also in the south-west and into the

East Midlands that would allow that connectivity to happen. That is what

we are calling the Midlands rail harp. We heard from a Economist last

week that says there are billions of pounds in cash for the Northern

Powerhouse. He could do it is a Government behind this Midland

engine? I believe in it strongly. We have got to spread the benefits of

economic success across the country. Stop it being in London and the

south-east. There is a limit to how far they can go down there. The

Midlands and the north should be able to support a moderate economy.

We have Rolls-Royce and hotel. Also a lot of smaller businesses. --

Toyota. Political lobbying and we have a marginal seat you, can we

have a bypass? We cannot afford that sort of stuff at the moment. I am

glad that Philip did not produce a list of projects that Gordon and

George did occasionally. What we need is for business people to focus

on where we need to spend money and cut business costs. Links between

Birmingham and Derby and Nottingham are attractive. Vernon Coker, can I

bring in here, is a Government behind this? I think I agree with

Ken about the need to secure economic growth. If we are talking

about transport and links with the east and west are important but the

big thing from our point of view is the lack that the Government is

saying they will lecture via the Midlands rail line by 2023. Nothing

is being said about that. Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield, the

electrification of that is very crucial. That is what businesses did

to me and the Government has not said anything at all. This is what

you are about, Maria. How concerned are you that this all education is

being delayed? It has been made clear that electrification on the

Midlands is very important. We are also putting the all education in

the context of high-speed rail to. It does seem sometimes that our

region is being sidelined. We are a waiting for it here and we're going

to be waiting long time for that. We had been talking about it for eight

years and we have not seen every evidence of it. I quite agree but

instead of going back to the usual political rows, equal to the West

Country and there's not enough coming here at, Scotland is

unfurling treated... Jobs are at stake. These are difficult times.

Why does it take so long? I would like to see that I would like to see

someone that electrified the Midlands rail line is the key

business. Business going to London could travel more comfortably

because it would be quieter. I want to see a good business case for what

that would do to stimulate economic activity. Jobs and investment

here... All of the big business leaders and people from the various

and people who use the line would and people who use the line would

all say the electrification make a big difference. When you have a

second-class line, as we have at the moment, it does influenced

investment decisions and the way people are talking about it.

High-speed rail going ahead is going to make a big difference. We might

as well have a moderate train. High-speed rail brings a new

capacity. That is important. I am glad that is steaming ahead.

Everyone else arguing what they would like to see in the real...

Another delay means businesses are very concerned about it. The money

you spend has got to be on something that has some immediate practical

impact. The only one that is not a electrified north to south. It is

the only one. It is a good service. It is not as good as it should be.

It is important. It is very important to show the certainty to

businesses and communities that we are doing our very best and planning

for the future to provide them for a faster and better connections,

north, south. What we are trying to do with the Midlands connect is that

certainty and providing businesses and the clear voice to Government

what it is we require in terms of infrastructure to support growth and

put us at the global stage. When will we see evidence of that? We are

submitting the final strategy in March and that will have a plan of

action. We will require when and hopefully it will be starting to get

the support from Government and getting them ready and starting now.

These projects take a long time to implement. We can see that. It is a

real thing and we are working with the Government of long-term planning

and support. Thank you very much indeed for joining us. We have

discussed some of the big policy ideas behind the Autumn Statement.

What affect will have on people here in the East Midlands? Here is our

political editor. We now know that Brexit means slow economic growth

and higher inflation. We have brought the Autumn Statement to

Mansfield, the town which voted 70% of all the European union -- leave

the European Union. When we get everything together we will be our

own country again and that is what we need. You do not think economic

bad news is enough to put you off? No, it will get better. I did not

think Brexit was a good idea but now we have gone that way it has to be

in the best interest of the country. You would hope so anyway. Modest and

medium term. Here in the final lounge it is all about people having

the money to spend. Productivity means sales and it is also about

getting here easily. That means spending money on transport

infrastructure. We need people into spend money and we also attract

people from further appeal to the field. People cannot get here, they

are not going to come and do that. -- further afield. The Autumn

Statement was trailed as one to help beat just about managing. There are

a lot of in that than to please. They are going to dig it off of us

-- to get off of us, the pensioners. There are people you lot worse off

than we are. Two independent think tank said said those on low incomes

face grim years. Credit unions use money to lend and encourage saving.

My message is to look at your budget and then at what you have coming in

and out and put something aside for a emergencies. Even a small amount

can make a big difference. What about those who have nothing?

Nowhere to sleep at night? The Government is going to spend ?10

million over two years. Is it enough? We are now seeing 39 people

sleeping rough in Nottingham on a single night. It was down to three

at one stage. The situation has got worse and got worse quickly. What we

need is not a ?10 million initiative, we need is a national

strategy. The Government delegated the responsibility to local

authorities. This is a national problem and not a local problem.

Back to those managing, a group which accounts for the politicians.

Does the Autumn Statement mean jam today and vote tomorrow? The

Institute for Fiscal Studies said that prospects for PR dreadful.

People on low wages may be earning less into thousand and 21 than in

2007. It is a grim outlook, isn't it? It is a very difficult time.

We... People have been badly hit by the fiscal collapse of a couple

years ago which we have not fully recovered from. There is no strong

economic growth taking place in any western country for very long. We

are getting to the end of the economic cycle and people who voted

to make themselves poor are believing the European Union, if

we're not careful. It is very difficult to look ahead without

telling yourself we have got to pull yourself together, pursue sensible

policies and make sure the living standards to go back to getting back

on a path. That means moderate businesses and moderate economy run

sensibly with access to the markets. Any reasons to be cheerful? Raising

the threshold in which people pay tax, increasing the living wage.

That is going to help people in work. It is going to be a tough

period. The choice of the Government have made are making that worse. If

you look at the Institute for Fiscal Studies are saying, it points out

the rise in the threshold is the freezing of work benefits has caused

problems. What could be Government have done, in your view, to made a

difference? It should not adopt look at the National insurance threshold.

What they should not have done was the changes to the in work benefits

which affect those people who are trying to do the right thing, going

to work. They are having more money ticking off them when they are at

work. That is a choice the Government has made. Some of the

backbenchers are saying that is the wrong thing to have done. As the

Government on the wrong thing? We were subsidising low pay, low

productivity and long hours culture with vast in work benefits which

have exploded over the last 20 years. We were running up debt and

relying on the tightness of strangers. The deficit... It was a

third of what it was in worst GDP ratio when Auden Brown went, thank

heavens. It has been difficult. -- Gordon. The immediate outlook is

worrying. The thing I would say is that if you go back to 2010 when

Labour lost the election, the economy was growing. The deficit was

falling and the economy was growing. It was the decisions made by the

coalition Government that choked off that growth and we had the severe

austerity imposed which turned out we were going to balance the books,

that field. We have ditched that moved to something else. We have

more people in work then we have before. We have created more than

30,000 jobs in three months as here. There are reasons to be positive,

are in there? You can point to that but what we point to is that living

standards have fallen. Living standards are likely to fall and if

you look at the analysis of the budget that has been made... The

Autumn Statement, rather. It is the purist and those just above that to

our paying the most. There are warnings that food inflation could

rise. That is not going to help anybody. All inflation is going to

rise a bit, I'm afraid. We have to minimise the impact. These are

predictions. They have been wrong before. We voted for Brexit and we

have had a crash in the value of sterling. People got the idea we

were going to leave the single market and the custom union... The

economy is growing. The economy is growing but it is slowing quite

rapidly. The idea that all we have to do is spend more public money...

All the people burning names are people I would love to be able to

help but Gordon is to have two budget eight year handing the stuff

out and he left us with the deepest recession... Time now for a round-up

of some of the other blood cult stories. Here's Tony with 60

seconds. -- the other political stories. The overnight closure of

the A services is to be referred to the Health Secretary. Campaigners

welcomed the move. The NHS as trust says it does not have enough doctors

to cover the overnight shifts. Plans to change the way Derby City Council

is elected have been rejected. Councillor voted against the planned

to switch to elections every four years. They will stick with the

current system of voting. Former striking miners and their families

have released a Christmas single to say thank you to the people who

provided food to help them through the 1984 strike. Proceeds of the

single will be given to food banks. There is a lack of Christmas cheer

in Leicester were some have said the city's tree is an embarrassment. The

council says it has had excellent feedback. It is not even December

yet. That is the Sunday politics here in the East Midlands. Thank you

to Ken Clarke and then in Cork for joining us in the studio. We will be

back next week. Now it is back to hand you back to Andrew

have got to make sure London is open. Thank you. Andrew, back to

you. Is Theresa May serious

about curbing executive pay? Who will be crowned Nigel Farage's

successor as Ukip leader? And can the Lib Dems pull off

a by-election upset in Richmond? So,,, on pay talk about the

executive of what executives get compared to the average worker in

the company, giving shareholders real power to vote down pay rises if

they don't like them, which is pretty much what Ed Miliband

proposed in the general election in 2015. Is she serious about this? She

is very serious, and the Tory party probably does owe Ed Miliband an

apology for trashing his ideas and 2015 and then putting them all up

for votes in November 20 16. She is very serious, and this all comes

back to her desperate fear that unless capitalism reforms itself and

becomes more acceptable to the just about managing or even 78% of the

country who are not earning vast wealth at anywhere near the figures

you see in the City, serious things will happen and the political sense

of trust will implode. She has already been bartered down by her

own Cabinet on this. She wanted to go further and make workers on the

board mandatory. They have managed to stop that. What will her fallback

position be on workers on the board if she is not able to get it into

some claw? We would like to have workers on the board, but whatever

they do on the board there will have no voting powers on the board. When

you look at what was leaked out over the weekend, that we should know the

ratio of the top to the average and that shareholders who own the

company should determine, in the end, the highest-paid salaries, you

kind of think, what could the possible objection be to any of

that? Two things. One, I agree with Tom that she is deadly serious about

this agenda and it comes under the banner, that sentence in the party

conference speech about "It's time to focus on the good that government

can do". She is by instinct more of an interventionist than Cameron and

Osborne. But she is incredibly cautious, whether it is through the

internal constraints of opposition within Cabinet, or her own small C

Conservative caution in implementing this stuff. Part of the problem is

the practicalities. George Osborne commission will Hutton to do a

report which came out with similar proposals, which were never

implemented. It is quite hard to enforce. It will antagonise business

leaders when she's to woo them again in this Brexit furore. So there are

problems with it. And judging by what has happened so far, my guess

is that the aim will be genuinely bold and interesting, and the

implementation incredibly cautious. Does it matter if she annoys some

business leaders? Isn't that part of her brand? Will there be problems on

the Tory backbenches with it? I think there will be and I think it

does matter at this sensitive time for when we are positioning

ourselves as a country and whether we are going to brand ourselves as a

great city of business, implementing quite interventionist policies. Any

suggestion that the government can control how much the top earners

get, I think would be received in a hostile way. What would be wrong

with the shareholders, who own the company, determining the pay of the

higher hands, the executives? Morally, you can absolutely make

that argument but to business leaders, they will not like it.

Ultimately, this will not come down to more than a row of beans. There

was a huge debate about whether there should be quotas of women on

boards. In the end, that never happened. All we get is figures. But

quotas of women, for which there is a case and a case against too, that

was a government mandate. This is not, this is simply empowering

shareholders who own the company to determine the pay of the people they

hire. There is a strong moral argument for it. Strong economic

argument. But the Tory backbenchers will not like this. The downside is

that this is a world where companies are thinking about upping sticks to

Europe. No, they say they are thinking of that. Not one has done

it yet. Others have made massive investments in this country. But is

it not an incentive for those making these threats to actually do it? In

Europe, bankers' pay is now mandated by Brussels. It is a vivid way of

showing you are addressing the issue of inequality. I think she will go

with it, but let's move on to Ukip. I think we will get the result

tomorrow. There are the top three candidates. Paul Nuttall, Suzanne

Evans and on my right, John Reid Evans. One of them will be the next

leader. Who is going to win? It is widely predicted to be Paul Nuttall

and is probably the outcome that the Labour Party fears most. Paul

Nuttall is a very effective communicator. He is not a household

name, far from it, but people will begin to learn more about him and

find that he is actually quite a strong leader. Can people Ukip

together again after this shambolic period since the referendum? If

anyone can, he can. And his brand of working collar, Northern Ukip is the

thing that will work for them. Do you think he is the favourite? It

would be amazing if he doesn't win. His greatest problem will be getting

Nigel Farage off his back. He is going on a speaking tour of North

America. A long speaking tour. Ukip won this EU referendum. They had the

chance to hoover up these discontented Labour voters in the

north, and all he has done is associated with Ukip with Farage.

But Nigel Farage is fed up of Ukip and will be glad to be hands of it.

The bigger problem is money. If it is Paul Nuttall, and we don't know

the results yet, but he is the favourite, if it is him, I would

suggest that that is the result Labour is frightened of most. To be

honest, I think they are frightened of Ukip whatever the result.

Possibly with good cause. The reason I qualify that is that what you call

a shambles over the summer has been something that goes beyond Monty

Python in its absurdity and madness. That calls into question whether it

can function as a political party when you have what has gone on. The

number of leaders itself has been an act of madness. In a context which

should be fantastic for them. They have won a referendum. There is a

debate about what form Brexit should take, it is a dream for them, and

they have gone bonkers. If he can turn it around, I agree that he is a

powerful media communicator, and then it is a threat to Labour. But

he has got to show that first. Indeed. The by-election in Richmond

in south-west London, called by Zac Goldsmith over Heathrow. Has it

turned out to be a by-election about Heathrow, or has it turned into a

by-election, which is what the Lib Dems wanted, about Brexit? We will

know on Thursday. If the Lib Dems win, they will turn it into an EU

referendum. It seems incredibly close now. The Lib Dems are swamping

Richmond. They had 1000 activists there yesterday. That is getting on

for 100th of the population of the place! If the Lib Dems don't manage

to win on Thursday and don't manage to turn it into an EU referendum

despite all their efforts, it will probably be a disaster for the

party. What do you hear, Isabel? I hear that the Lib Dems have

absolutely swamped the constituency, but this may backfire. I saw a bit

of this myself, living in Witney, when the Lib Dems also swamped and

people began to get fed up of their aggressive tactics. I understand

that Zac Goldsmith is cautiously optimistic that he will pull this

one off. Quick stab at the result? I don't know. But we are entering a

period when by-elections are acquiring significant again. If the

Lib Dems were to make a game, it would breathe life into that near

moribund party like nothing else. Similarly, other by-elections in

this shapeless political world we are in are going to become

significant. We don't know if we are covering it live on Thursday night

yet because we have to find at the time they are going to declare.

Richmond are quite late in declaring, but if it is in the early

hours, that is fine. If it is on breakfast television, they be not. I

want to show you this. Michael Gove was on the Andrew Marr Show this

morning. In the now notorious comment that I made, I was actually

cut off in midstream, as politicians often. The point I made was not that

all experts are that is nonsense. Expert engineers, doctors and

physicists are not wrong. But there is a subclass of experts,

particularly social scientists, who have to reflect on some of the

mistakes they have made. And the recession, which was predicted that

we would have if we voted to leave, has gone like a puff of smoke. So

economic experts, he talks about. The Chancellor has based all of his

forward predictions in this Autumn Statement on the economic expert

forecasters. The Office for Budget Responsibility has said it is 50-50,

which is the toss of a coin. But what was he supposed to do? You

would ideally have to have a Budget that had several sets of scenarios,

and that is impossible. Crystal ball territory. But you do wonder if

governments are right to do so much of their fiscal projections on the

basis of forecasts which turn out to be wrong. They have nothing else to

go on. The Treasury forecast is to be wrong. No doubt the OBR forecast

will prove not to be exact. As you say, they admitted that they are

navigating through fog at the moment. But he also added that it

was fog caused by Brexit. So Brexit, even if you accept that these

forecasts might be wrong, is causing such a level of uncertainty. He put

the figure at 60 billion. That could come to haunt him. He hasn't got a

clue. He admitted it. He said, Parliament mandates me to come up

with something, so I am going to give you a number. But I wouldn't

trust it if I were you, he basically said. I agree with you. The man who

borrowed 122 billion more off the back of a coin toss was Philip

Hammond. It begs the question, what does that say about the confidence

Philip Hammond has in his own government's renegotiation? Not a

huge amount. I agree. Philip Hammond quoted the OBR figures. He basically

said, this is uncertain and it looks bad, and on we go with it. It is a

very interesting situation, he said. He was for Remain and he works in a

department which regards it as a disaster, whatever everyone else

thinks. I have just been told we are covering the by-election. We are

part of the constitution. Jo Coburn will have more

Daily Politics tomorrow And I'll be back here on BBC One

next Sunday at 11. Remember - if it's Sunday,

it's the Sunday Politics. to signify the Africans

who were here. The story of Henry VIII

and his six wives and into the private lives

of Henry's six wives. My heart is filled with sorrow.

I am not a fool.