05/03/2017 Sunday Politics East Midlands


Andrew Neil talks to David Lidington about Brexit and discusses the upcoming Budget with Paul Johnson of the IFS. The programme also looks at Islamist terrorism in the UK.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 05/03/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



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


The Chancellor says that to embark on a spending spree


in Wednesday's Budget would be "reckless".


But will there be more money for social care and to ease


The UK terror threat is currently severe,


but where is that threat coming from?


We have the detailed picture from a vast new study of every


Islamist related terrorist offence committed over the last two decades.


What can we learn from these offences to thwart future attacks?


The government was defeated in the Lords on its


In the East Midlands: of Commons what he'll do if peers


Policing in a perilous state - we will be hearing from the boss


of a force criticised for how it handles emergencies.


And are we doing enough to tackle domestic violence?


All that coming up in the next hour and a quarter.


Now, some of you might have read that intruders managed


to get into the BBC news studios this weekend.


Well three of them appear not to have been ejected yet,


so we might as well make use of them as our political panel.


Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards.


They'll be tweeting throughout the programme.


Philip Hammond will deliver his second financial


statement as Chancellor and the last Spring Budget


for a while at least - they are moving to the Autumn


There's been pressure on him to find more money


for the Health Service, social care, schools funding,


But this morning the Chancellor insisted that he will not be


using the proceeds of better than expected tax receipts to embark


What is being speculated on is whether we might not have borrowed


quite as much as we were forecast to borrow. You will see the numbers on


Wednesday. But if your bank increases your credit card limit, I


do not think you feel obliged to go out and spent every last penny of it


He is moving the budget to the autumn, he told us that in his


statement, so maybe on Wednesday it will be like a spring statement


rather than a full-blown budget. Tinkering pre-Brexit and in November


he will have a more clear idea of the impact of Brexit and I suspect


that will be the bigger event than this one. It looks as if there will


be a bit of money here and there, small amounts, not enough in my


view, for social care and so on, possibly a review of social care


policy. A familiar device which rarely get anywhere. I think he has


got a bit more space to do more if he wanted to do now because of the


politics. They are miles ahead in the polls, so he could do more, but


it is not in his character, he is cautious. So he keeps his powder dry


on most things, he does some things, but he keeps it dry until November.


But also, as Steve says, he will know just how strong the economy has


been this year by November and whether he needs to do some pump


priming or whether everything is fine. He said it is too early to


make those sorts of judgments now. What is striking is the amount of


concern there is an Number ten and in the Treasury about the tone of


this budget, so less about the actual figures and more about what


message this is sending out to the rest of the world. I think some


senior MPs are calling it a kind of treading water budget and Phil


Hammond has got quite a difficult act to perform because he is


instinctively rather cautious, or very cautious, and instinctively


slightly gloomy about Brexit. He wanted to remain. But he does not


want this budget to sounded downbeat and he will be mauled if he makes it


sound downbeat, so he has to inject a little bit of optimism and we may


see that in the infrastructure spending plans. He has got some room


to manoeuvre. The deficit by the financial year ending in April we


now know will not be as big as the OBR told us only three and a half


months ago that it would be. They added 12 billion on and they may


take most of that off again. He is under pressure from his own side to


do something on social care and business rates and I bet some Tory


backbenchers would not mind a little bit more money for the NHS as well.


He is on a huge pressure to do a whole lot on a whole load, not just


social care. There is also how on earth do we pay for so many old


people? There is the NHS, defence spending, everything. But his words


this morning, which is I am not going to spend potentially an extra


30 billion I might have by 2020 because of improved economic growth


was interesting. You need to hold something back because Brexit might


go back and he was a bit of a remain campaign person. If you think


Britain is going to curl up into a corner and hideaway licking its


wounds, you have got another think coming. That 30 billion he might


have extra in his pocket could be worth deploying on building up


Britain with huge tax cuts in case there is no deal, a war chest if you


like. He will have more than 27 billion. He may decide 27 billion in


the statement, the margin by which he tries to get the structural


deficit down, he will still have 27 billion. If the receipts are better


than they are forecast, some people are saying he will have a war chest


of 60 billion. That money, as Mr Osborne found out, can disappear. He


clearly is planning not to go on a spending spree this Wednesday. It is


interesting in the FTB and the day, David Laws who was chief Secretary


for five minutes, was also enthusiastic about the original


George Osborne austerity programme and he said, we have reached the


limits to what is socially possible with this and a consensus is


beginning to emerge that he will have to spend more money than he


plans to this Wednesday. This is not just from Labour MPs, but from a lot


of Conservative MPs as well. People will wonder when this austerity will


end because it seems to be going on for ever. We will have more on the


budget later in the programme. Now, the government was defeated


last week in the House of Lords. Peers amended the bill that


will allow Theresa May to trigger Brexit to guarantee the rights of EU


nationals currently in the UK. The government says it will remove


the amendment when the bill returns But today a report from


the Common's Brexit committee also calls for the Government to make


a unilateral decision to safeguard the rights of EU


nationals living here. If the worst happened,


are we actually going to say to 3 million Europeans here,


who are nurses, doctors, serving us tea and coffee in restaurants,


giving lectures at Leeds University, picking and processing vegetables,


"Right, off you go"? No, of course we are not


going to say that. So, why not end the


uncertainty for them now? will help to create the climate


which will ensure everyone gets to say because that's


what all of us want. That is why we have unanimously


agreed this recommendation that the government should make unilateral


decision to say to EU citizens here, yes, you can stay, because we think


that is the right and fair thing to do.


And we're joined now from Buckinghamshire by the leader


of the House of Commons, David Lidington.


Welcome back to the programme. The House of Lords has amended the


Article 50 bill to allow the unilateral acceptance of EU


nationals' right to remain in the UK. Is it still the government was


my intention to remove that amendment in the comments? We have


always been clear that we think this bill is very straightforward, it


does nothing else except give the Prime Minister the authority that


the courts insist upon to start the Article 50 process of negotiating


with the other 27 EU countries. On the particular issue of EU citizens


here and British citizens overseas, the PM did suggest that the December


European summit last year that we do a pre-negotiation agreement on this.


That was not acceptable to all of the other 27 because they took the


view that you cannot have any kind of negotiation and to Article 50 has


been triggered. That is where we are. I hope with goodwill and


national self interest on all sides we can tackle this is right that the


start of those negotiations. But it is not just the Lords. We have now


got the cross-party Commons Brexit committee saying you should now make


the unilateral decision to safeguard the rights of EU nationals in the


UK. Even Michael go, Peter Lilley, John Whittington, agree. So why are


you so stubborn on this issue? I think this is a complex issue that


goes beyond the rise of presidents, but about things like the rights of


access to health care, to pension ratings and benefits and so on...


But you could settle back. It is also, Andrew, because you have got


to look at it from the point of view of the British citizens, well over 1


million living elsewhere in Europe. If we make the unilateral gesture,


it might make us feel good for Britain and it would help in the


short term those EU citizens who are here, but you have got those British


citizens overseas who would then be potential bargaining chips in the


hands of any of the 27 other governments. We do not know who will


be in office during the negotiations and they may have completely


extraneous reasons to hold up the agreement on the rights of British


citizens. The sensible way to deal with this is 28 mature democracies


getting around the table starting the negotiations and to agree to


something that is fair to all sides and is reciprocal. What countries


might take on UK nationals living in the EU? What countries are you


frightened of? The one thing that I know from my own experience in the


past of being involved in European negotiations is that issues come up


that maybe have nothing to do with British nationals, but another issue


that matters a huge amount to a particular government, it may not be


a government yet in office, and they decide we can get something out of


this, so let's hold up the agreement on British citizens until the


British move in the direction we want on issue X. I hope it does not


come to that. I think the messages I have had from EU ambassadors in


London and from those it my former Europe colleague ministers is that


we want this to be a done deal as quickly as possible. That is the


British Government's very clear intention. We hope that we can get a


reciprocal deal agreed before the Article 50 process. That was not


possible. I understand that, you have said that already. But even if


there is no reciprocal deal being done, is it really credible that EU


nationals already here would lose their right to live and work and


face deportation? You know that is not credible, that will not happen.


We have already under our own system law whereby some people who have


been lawfully resident and working here for five years can apply for


permanent residency, but it is not just about residents. It is about


whether residency carries with it certain rights of access to health


care. I understand that, but have made this point. But the point is


the right to live and work here that worries them at the moment. The Home


Secretary has said there can be no change in their status without a


vote in parliament. Could you ever imagine the British Parliament


voting to remove their right to live and work here? I think the British


Parliament will want to be very fair to EU citizens, as Hilary Benn and


others rightly say they have been overwhelmingly been here working


hard and paying taxes and contributing to our society. They


were equally want to make sure there is a fair deal for our own citizens,


more than a million, elsewhere in Europe. You cannot disentangle the


issue of residence from those things that go with residents. Is the


Article 50 timetabled to be triggered before the end of this


month, is it threatened by these amendments in the Lords? I sincerely


hope not because the House of Lords is a perfectly respectable


constitutional role to look again at bills sent up by the House of


commons. But they also have understood traditionally that as an


unelected house they have to give primacy to the elected Commons at


the end of the day. In this case it is not just the elected Commons that


sent the bill to be amended, but the referendum that lies behind that. It


is not possible? We are confident we can get Article 50 triggered by the


end of the month. One of the other Lords amendments


will be to have a meaningful vote on the Brexit deal when it is done at


the end of the process, what is your view on that? What would you


understand by a meaningful vote? The Government has already said there is


going to be a meaningful vote at the end of the process. What do you mean


by a meaningful vote? The parliament will get the opportunity to vote on


the deal before it finishes the EU level process of going to


consideration by the European Parliament. Parliament will be given


a choice, as I understand, for either a vote for the deal you have


negotiated or we leave on WTO rules and crash out anyway, is that what


you mean by a meaningful choice? Parliament will get the choice to


vote on the deal, but I think you have put your finger on the problem


with trying to write something into the bill because any idea that the


PM's freedom to negotiate is limited, any idea that if the EU 27


were to play hardball, that somehow that means parliament would take


fright, reverse the referendum verdict and set aside the views of


the British people, that would almost guarantee that it would be


much more difficult to get the sort of ambitious mutually beneficial


deal for us and the EU 27. Your idea of a meaningful vote in parliament


is the choices either to vote to accept this deal or we leave anyway,


that is your idea of a meaningful vote. The Article 50 process is


straightforward. There is the position of both parties in the


recent Supreme Court case that the Article 50 process once triggered is


irrevocable. That is in the EU Treaty already but we are saying


very clearly that Parliament will get that right to debate and vote. I


think the problem with what some in the House of Lords are proposing, I


hope it is not a majority, is that the amendments they would seek to


insert would tie the Prime Minister's hands, limit and


negotiating freedom and put her in a more difficult position to negotiate


on behalf of this country than should be the case. One year ago you


said it could take six to eight years to agree a free-trade deal


with the EU. Now you think you can do it in two, what's changed your


mind? There is a very strong passionate supporter of Remain, as


you know. I hope very much we are able to conclude not just the terms


of the exit deal but the agreement that we are seeking on the long-term


trade relationship... I understand that, but I'm trying to work out,


what makes you think you can do it in two years when only a year ago


you said it would take up to wait? The referendum clearly makes a big


difference, and I think that there is an understanding amongst real the


other 27 governments now that it is in everybody's interests to sort


this shared challenge out of negotiating a new relationship


between the EU 27 and the UK because European countries, those in and


those who will be out of the EU, share the need to face up to massive


challenges like terrorism and technological change. All of that


was pretty obvious one year ago but we will see what happens. Thank you,


David Lidington. Now, the Sunday Politics has had


sight of a major new report The thousand-page study,


which researchers say is the most comprehensive ever produced,


analyses all 269 Islamist telated terrorist offences


committed between 1998-2015. Most planned attacks were,


thankfully, thwarted, but what can we learn


from those offences? For the police and the intelligence


agencies to fight terror, Researchers at the security think


tank The Henry Jackson Society gave us early access to their huge


new report which analyses every Islamism related attack


and prosecution in the UK since 1998, that's 269 cases


involving 253 perpetrators. With issues as sensitive


as counterterrorism and counter radicalisation, it is really


important to have an evidence base from which you draw


policy and policing, This isn't my opinion,


this the facts. This chart shows the number


of cases each year combined with a small number


of successful suicide attacks. Notice the peak in the middle


of the last decade around the time of the 7/7 bombings


in London in 2005. Offences tailed off,


before rising again from 2010, when a three-year period accounted


for a third of all the terrorism cases since the researchers


started counting. What we are seeing is a combination


of both more offending, in terms of the threat increasing,


we know that from the security services and police statements,


but also I believe we are getting more efficient in terms


of our policing and we are actually A third of people were found to have


facilitated terrorism, that's providing encouragement,


documents, money. About 18% of people


were aspirational terrorists, 12% of convictions were related


to travel, to training And 37% of people were convicted


of planning attacks, although the methods have


changed over time. Five or six years ago,


we saw lots of people planning or attempting pipe bombs and most


of the time they had Inspire magazine in their possession,


that's a magazine, an Al-Qaeda English-language online


magazine that had specific More recently we have seen


Islamic State encouraging people to engage in lower tech knife


beheading, stabbings attacks and I think that's why we have


seen that more recently. Shasta Khan plotted with her


husband to bomb the Jewish In 2012 she received


an eight-year prison sentence. She's one of an increasing


number of women convicted of an Islamism related offence


although it is still overwhelmingly a crime carried out


by men in their 20s. Despite fears of foreign terrorists,


a report says the vast Most have their home in London,


around 43% of them. 18% lived in the West Midlands,


particularly in Birmingham, and the north-west is another


hotspot with around 10% Richard Dart lived in Weymouth


and tried to attend a terrorist He was a convert to Islam, as were


60% of the people in this report. He was a convert to Islam, as were


16% of the people in this report. Like the majority of cases,


he had a family, network. What's particularly interesting


is how different each story is in many ways,


but then within those differences So your angry young men,


in the one sense inspired to travel, seek training and combat experience


abroad, and then the older, recruiter father-figure types,


the fundraising facilitator types. There are types within


this terrorism picture, but the range of backgrounds


and experiences is huge. And three quarters of those


convicted of Islamist terrorism were on the radar of the authorities


because they had a previous criminal record, they had


made their extremism public, or because MI5 had them


under surveillance. To discuss the findings of this


report are the former Security Minister Pauline Neville-Jones,


Talha Ahmad from the Muslim Council of Britain, and Adam Deen


from the anti-extremist group The report finds the most segregated


Muslim community is, the more likely it is to incubate Islamist


terrorists, what is the MCB doing to encourage more integrated


communities? Its track record on calling for reaching out to the


wider society and having a more integrated and cohesive society I


think is a pretty strong one, so one thing we are doing for example very


recently I've seen we had this visit my mosque initiative, the idea was


that mosques become open to inviting people of other faiths and their


neighbours to come so we were encouraged to see so many


participating. It is one step forward. Is it a good thing or a bad


thing that in a number of Muslim communities, the Muslim population


is over 60% of the community? I personally and the council would


prefer to have more mixed communities but one of the reason


they are heavily concentrated is not so much because they prefer to but


often because the socio- economic reality forces them to. But you


would like to see less segregation? Absolutely, we would prefer more


diverse communities around the country. What is your reaction to


that? Will need more diverse communities but one of the


challenges we have right now with certain organisations is this


pushback against the Government, with its attempts to help young


Muslims not go down this journey of extremism. One of those things is


the Prevent strategy and we often hear organisations like the MCB


attacking the strategy which is counter-productive. What do you say


to that? Do we support the Government have initiatives to


counteract terrorism, of course we do. Do you support the Prevent


strategy? We don't because it scapegoats an entire community. The


report shows that contrary to a lot of lone wolf theories and people


being radicalised in their bedrooms on the Internet that 80% of those


convicted had connections with the extremist groups. Indeed 25% willing


to Al-Muhajiroun. I think this report, which is a thorough piece of


work, charts a long period and it is probably true to say that in the


earlier stages these organisations were very important, of course


subsequently we have had direct recruiting by IS one to one over the


Internet so we have a mixed picture of how people are recruited but


there's no doubt these organisations are recruiting sergeants. You were


once a member of one of these organisations, are we doing enough


to thwart them? If we just focus on these organisations, we will fail.


We -- the question is are we doing enough to neutralise them? The


Government strategy is in the right place, but where we need to focus on


is the Muslim community or communities. The Muslim community


must realise that these violent extremists are fringe but they share


ideas, a broad spectrum of ideas that penetrate deeply within Muslim


communities and we need to tackle those ideas because that is where it


all begins. Are you in favour of banning groups like Al-Muhajiroun?


Yes, it was the right thing to do and I can tell you the community has


moved a long way, Al-Muhajiroun does not have support. Do you agree with


that? Yes, but it is very simplistic attacking Al-Muhajiroun. ISIS didn't


bring about extremism, extremism brought about ISIS, ISIS is just the


brand and if we don't deal with the ideological ideas we will have other


organisations popping up. The report suggests that almost a quarter of


Islamist the latest offences were committed by individuals previous


unknown to the security services. And this is on the rise, these


numbers. This would seem to make an already difficult task for our


intelligence services almost impossible. Two points. It is over


80% I think were known, but it shows the intelligence services and police


have got their eyes open. But the trend has been towards more not on


the radar. That has been because the nature of the recruitment has also


changed and you have much more ISIS inspired go out and do it yourself,


get a knife, do something simple, so we have fewer of the big


spectaculars that ISIS organised. Now you have got locally organised


people, two or three people get together, do something together,


very much harder actually to get forewarning of that. That is where


intelligence inside the community, the community coming to the police


say I'm worried about my friend, this is how you get ahead of that


kind of attack. Should people in the Muslim community who are worried


about individuals being radicalised, perhaps going down the terrorist


route, should they bring in the police? Absolutely and we have been


consistent on telling the community that wherever they suspect someone


has been involved in terrorism or any kind of criminal activity, they


should call the police and cooperate. As the so-called


caliphate collapses in the Middle East, how worried should we be about


fighters returning here? Extremely worried. They fall into


three categories. You have ones who are disillusioned about Islamic


State. You have ones who are disturbed, and then you have the


dangerous who have not disavowed their ideas and who will have great


reasons to perform attacks. What do we do? Anyone who comes back, there


should be evidence looked into if they committed any crimes. But all


those categories should all be be radicalised. You cannot leave them


alone. Will we be sure if we know when they come back? That is


difficult to say. They could come in and we might not know. There is a


watch list so you have got a better chance. And you can identify them?


This is where working with other countries is absolutely crucial and


our border controls need to be good as well. I am not saying and the


government is not saying that anyone would ever slip through, but it is


our ability to know when somebody is coming through and to stop them at


the border has improved. An important question. Given your


experience, how prepared are away for a Paris style attack in a


medium-size, provincial city? The government has exercised this one.


It started when I was security minister and it has been taken


seriously. The single biggest challenge that the police and the


Army says will be one of those mobile, roving attacks. You have to


take it seriously and the government does. All right, we will leave it


Now, Brexit may have swept austerity from the front pages,


but the deficit hasn't gone away and the government is still


Just this week Whitehall announced that government departments have


been told to find another ?3.5bn worth of savings by 2020.


Last November the Independent office for Budget Responsibility


said the budget deficit would be ?68 billion in the current


It would still be ?17 billion by 2021-22.


On Wednesday the Chancellor is expected to announce


that the 2016-17 deficit has come in much lower than the OBR forecast.


Even so, the government is still aiming for the lowest level


of public spending as a percentage of national income since 2003-4,


coupled with an increase in the tax burden to its highest


So spending cuts will continue with reductions in day-to-day


government spending accelerating, producing a real terms cut of over


But capital spending, investment on infrastructure


like roads, hospitals, housing, is projected to grow,


producing a 16 billion real terms increase by 2021-22.


The Chancellor's task on Wednesday is to keep these fiscal targets


while finding some more money for areas under serious


pressure such as the NHS, social care and business rates.


We're joined now by Paul Johnson of the Institute for Fiscal Studies.


Welcome back to the programme. In last March's budget the OBR


predicted just over 2% economic growth for this year. By the Autumn


Statement in the wake of the Brexit vote it downgraded back to 1.4%. It


is now expected to revise that back around to 2% as the Bank of England


has again. It is speculated on the future. It looks like we will get a


growth forecast for this year not very different from where it was a


year ago. What the bank did was upgrade its forecast for the next


year or so, but not change very much. It was thinking about three or


four years' time, which is what really matters. It looked like the


OBR made a mistake in downgrading the growth in the Autumn Statement


three months ago. It was more optimistic than nearly all the other


forecasters and the Bank of England. It was wrong, but not as wrong as


everybody else. We don't know, but if it significantly upgraded its


growth forecast for the next three or four years, I would be surprised.


It also added 12 billion to the deficit for the current financial


year in the Autumn Statement, compared with March. It looks like


that deficit will probably be cut again by about 12 billion compared


to the last OBR forecast. It is quite difficult to make economic


policy on the basis of changes of that skill every couple of months.


That is one of the problems about having these two economic event so


close together. My guess is the number will come out somewhere


between the budget and the Autumn Statement numbers. There was a nice


surprise for the Chancellor last month which looked like tax revenues


were coming in a lot more strongly than he expected. But again the real


question is how much is this making a difference in the medium run? Is


this a one-off thing all good news for the next several years? If


growth and revenues are stronger, perhaps not as strong as the good


news last month, but if they are stronger than had been forecast in


the Autumn Statement, what does that mean for planned spending cuts? It


probably does not mean very much. Let's not forget the best possible


outcome of this budget will be that for the next couple of years things


look no worse than they did a year ago and in four years out they will


still look a bit worse, and in addition Philip Hammond did increase


his spending plans in November. However good the numbers look in a


couple of days' time, we will still be borrowing at least 20 billion


more by 2020 than we were forecasting a year ago. Still quite


constrained. George Osborne wanted to get us to budget surplus by 2019.


That has gone. Philip Hammond is quite happy with a big deficit and


is not interested in that. But what he is thinking to a large extent, as


you have made clear, there is a lot of uncertainty about the economic


reaction over the next three or four years. He says he wants some


headroom. If things go wrong, I do not want to announce more spending


cuts or more tax rises to keep the deficit down. I want to say things


have gone wrong for now and we will borrow. And I have got some money in


the kitty. He will not spend a lot of it now. I understand the


Chancellor is worried about the erosion of the tax base and it is


hard to put VAT up by more than 20%, millions have been taken out of


income tax, only 46% of people pay income tax, fuel duty is frozen for


ever, corporation tax has been cut, the growth in self-employed has


reduced revenues, is that a real concern? These are all worries for


him. We have as you said in the introduction to this, got a tax


burden which is rising very gradually, but it is rising to its


highest level since the mid-19 80s, but is not doing it through


straightforward increases to income tax. Lots of bits of pieces of


insurance premium tax is here and the apprenticeship levied there, and


that is higher personal allowance of income tax and a freeze fuel duty,


but at some point we will have to look at the tax system as a whole


and ask if we can carry on like this. We will have to start increase


fuel duties again, or look to those big but unpopular taxes to really


keep that money coming in to keep the challenges we will have over the


next 30 years. He is going to set up a commission on social care. He has


had quite a few commissions on social care. Thank you for being


with us. It's just gone 11.35,


you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers


in Scotland who leave us now Coming up here in twenty


minutes, the Week Ahead. In the East Midlands,


the campaigners fighting for a change in the law on domestic


violence, and more help to persuade I mean, I knew it was wrong,


and I was ashamed that I was... in my mind, I was allowing it


to happen to myself. So, I was embarrassed


to talk about it. And what would you put


in the Budget? We've got two very


different points of view. If we are going to be world beaters,


then we need more businesses to take advantage of opportunities


which come out of As far as the East Midlands


is concerned, it is to make sure that the economic growth benefits


every region of the country, Hello, I'm Marie Ashby,


and my guests this week - Edward Argar is the Conservative MP


for Charnwood, and Paddy Tipping is the Labour


Police and Crime Commissioner First, let's look at this week's


report from Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary,


that some forces are putting the public at risk by rationing how


they respond to emergency calls. The report said some forces


were downgrading the importance of 999 calls to justify


slower response times. It said three forces,


including Nottinghamshire, had not been responding


appropriately to emergency calls. So, Paddy Tipping,


as Nottinghamshire's Police and Crime Commissioner,


is this true, your force in Nottinghamshire has not been


reacting appropriately What is true is that the control


room is sometimes under You have to take the most important,


most vital calls first. And against that, we have got


to recognise that the police have lost resources,


25% of their resources So you are saying that is


the reason why they cannot Nationally, the HMIC,


who produced the report, say budgets are being cut,


we've got to make some tough decisions about priorities,


and we need to have a debate with the public about what those


priorities should be. Well, Nottinghamshire has been rated


"requires improvement", you set the budget for the force


and its priorities, you knew that the force


was underperforming in 2015. You surely now have to take


responsibility for this? We do take responsibility,


and if you look at the report from the Inspectorate,


it says since they did the inspection in September,


and number of things have happened. What it also says, in terms


of serious and organised crime, In terms of investigation,


Nottingham is good. What it says on the front page


is that during the period the HMIC were doing the report,


crime went down in Nottinghamshire by 6.3%, but it went up in the rest


of the country by 7.8%. OK, well, Edward Argar,


the Inspectorate said that British policing was in a perilous state


and that it said it was a consequence of rationing


of services because of cuts. Your government says that police


spending is protected, but it comes, let's face it,


after five years of deep cuts. Well, police spending


is protected, and actually, it's interesting to note,


I think it was a BBC analysis of this report yesterday which said


that the report doesn't actually say what is responsible for some


of the issues that are identified, they are saying this isn't possible


to say whether it is down to funding, or operational


decisions by Commissioners And actually, Paddy makes


a very good point there. Crime is coming down,


it is coming down in his force, and he quite rightly takes some


of the credit for that, it is coming So, yes, resourcing is tight,


but that police funding has been protected and we are seeing


considerable amounts of innovation from our police,


in Nottinghamshire, in Leicestershire


and across the region. That is clearly good to know,


but the Inspectorate also said that policing


in Leicestershire needs improving. As a Leicestershire MP,


aren't you worried about that? Well, I met just last


week with the Police and Crime Commissioner,


Willy Bach, and the Chief Constable from Leicestershire,


to talk about funding and funding priorities, but also about


what the work they are doing... Is requiring improvement


good enough? The Chief Constable has been very


clear that significant And as Paddy says, in the same way


as with Nottinghamshire, since that report was published,


or since that work was done and the investigation was done,


considerable improvement has been made, and all these forces are


working extremely hard to do that. What is important, I think, and it


applies to all of our county forces, is even under the current funding


formula, which we do not think actually allocates funding


as fairly as it could, we are not talking about the overall


size of the pot, we are talking about how it is shared out,


and we are arguing that our forces are not getting our fair


share of that nationally. OK, well, worryingly,


briefly, Paddy, one of the things that was mentioned


about the Nottinghamshire force, rated inadequate on protecting


people vulnerable from harm It is a damning indictment,


isn't it, if you can't even protect the most vulnerable


in your communities And the issue is about how


Nottinghamshire Police We will go on to talk


about that in a second. Other forces go straight to a case


conferencing system. Well, next, a campaign which began


here in the East Midlands, designed to raise the profile


of domestic abuse, Volunteers are making a patchwork


quilt, representing hundreds of women who died as a result


of domestic violence. Organisers have had contributions


from across the world, and to mark International Women's Day


on Wednesday, it will be presented It's a small gathering at a house


in Nottinghamshire that is reaching out across


the world. Each patch represents a woman killed


as a result of domestic violence. Patches have been sent


to the project from France, At the end of last year,


the femicide census came out, and the statistics it contained


and the number of women who had been Just thought there needed to be some


way to make these women more than just statistics,


to actually bring out the names The idea behind the quilt


is to acknowledge the people behind the statistics,


but some of these figures One in four women will be


abused by a partner, ex or family member at some point


during their lives. On average, two women a week die


from domestic violence. And women suffering from a violent


partner are four times more likely to tell a friend


than call the police. It was a friend that Emma Bradford


reached out to when her abusive He would leave bruises on my arms,


small bruises, where he had pushed me around or thumped me


or things like that. I never made any attempt


to cover them up. I suppose, in a way,


I wanted people to see, and reach out to me,


and ask me, because I could I started becoming more


timid, more reserved, I had my eyes closed


and I was screaming at the time, so I don't know whether it was


a punch or a slap, I don't know, I had a nosebleed and I think


when he saw the blood, he panicked, and then he,


all of a sudden, "I didn't mean to do it,


don't call the police." Emma is happy in a new relationship,


but has taken part in the project to honour the women


unable to escape. I'm really lucky to be


where I am right now. By remembering the names


of the ladies who have been killed, it just highlights what an epidemic


it really is. They plan to tour the country


with the finished quilt, and it has already inspired


a similar project in America. Well, I'm joined now


by Melanie Jeffs, the manager of the Nottingham Women's Centre,


who gave evidence to Parliament It made me go cold, just thinking


that each square of that quilt that we just saw represents


one woman's death, And we heard in that film,


domestic violence, domestic abuse, Um, sadly, I would say yes,


and I think particularly when you look at it


as part of a continuum So, the work that we have done


around misogyny hate crime and street harassment that women


face, we know that about 85% One in four women experience


domestic abuse at some point in their life,


and one in five, sexual violence. And when you put all that together,


I think it is very hard not to call OK, and this isn't just violence


abuse, not just abuse against women, it takes many different forms,


and in many cases, it is something that takes sometimes a long time


for people to realise it is actually They accept things and they will


give things without realising how serious it is moving on to beat.


Absolutely, because we understand the domestic abuse is often


underpinned by course of control. It is about power, domination, and it


is often hard for women to understand that it is happening to


them, are for people around them to see this and it can take a long time


for women to be able to seek help and get the help they need. Paddy


Tipping, research has said abused women are four times more likely to


relate their experiences and tell them to a friend rather than go to


the police. That is obviously understandable because it is so


personal and emotional, so raw that they would go to a friend. But what


more can the police do to help and support those people? We can do what


we are doing at the moment, there is a 24-hour helpline in


Nottinghamshire run by women, people want advice, they should go there.


In our police stations as as well as police officers to investigate, we


have women, independent advisers, and look, if you are in trouble,


come and seek help. Leaving your family, leaving a partner is a big


step. Maybe you will not do it first time, but get on the road. You


mentioned the triage earlier and one of the things that stopped Emma from


going to the police was that she did not know what that process would


involve. Supper anyone is watching involve. Supper anyone is watching


who might be in a similar position, can you explain what happens from


the moment the woman is brave enough to come forward, and report to the


police? It is up to the woman to break the choices. There are various


things they could do. We could get an injunction to get the abusive


partner out of the house, we are fortunate in Nottinghamshire that


refuge provision has been kept up. But there are lots of sources of


advice. It is tough when you are in that situation, but there are loads


of people to help and support you. At work, Theresa May recently


announced she is overseeing the creation of new laws which would


deal with domestic violence and a new act which would help and work


better for victims. That is obviously a way forward. But doesn't


all of this depend on funding to help support those victims and


funding the refuges and people like, organisations like Women's Aid? I


sat in Parliament earlier this week for a debate on International


Women's Day and it was chilling when one of my Labour colleagues, Jess


Phillips, read out the names of all those women who had died at the


hands of violent and aggressive men in the past year since that debate,


including of course my own former colleague, Jo Cox. And I think


Melanie is right to highlight the skill of the challenge. But it does


all depend on funding, doesn't it? You are right to highlight the Prime


Minister's work on this, but as Home Secretary and as Prime Minister. For


her, this is a hugely personal and important issue and pirated. And it


has been, she has Home Secretary oversaw new legislation around


controlling and coercive behaviour, and violence is not just physical,


it is meant as well. In terms of the funding, that does play a part and


we have now got relatively recently announced increased funding for


this, up to around 80 million in total. But equally it is about


reporting it, how about tackling it. -- 18 million. Melanie, you manage a


women's centre, are you getting enough funding? I think in terms of


Nottingham, I think in Nottingham General, we have weathered the cuts.


I think we have survived. The issue we are experiencing locally is that


there is a higher level of need. Even though funding remains steady,


we are seeing women coming in with more complex issues. A lot more


issues around mental health. So the need is Highers of the matter of


resources we need to put into supporting the women has also


increased but the funding does not always follow. It is encouraging


that will be an injection of around ?100,000 into Nottingham to help


organisations deliver services to those kind of complex cases. Do you


feel politicians generally are taking this issue more seriously?


You described it as an epidemic, are they taking it more seriously? There


is a growing recognition of the need to take this seriously. I think


generally one issue is the public awareness is still quite low and


when there are murders of women, the way that it is often reported means


that people do not see it as part of a pattern, we do not always join the


dots. They are displayed as isolated incidents and it is only when New


Year summerlike Jess Phillips reading at the names in Parliament


that you see these are connected on it is coming from that power and


control, and for a woman to leave is difficult and can be very dangerous,


we need people to understand that. If you have been affected by any of


the issues we have been discussing, you can find help and advice on the


BBC website. And that quilt with the names of the victims of domestic


violence is being taken to Parliament on Wednesday, but as well


as being International Women's Day, there is also the small matter of a


Budget to be unveiled on Monday as well. So what will be in that for


the East Midlands and what would you want to see? We asked two people to


give us their opinion. I am Natalie from the Federation Of Small


Businesses, Nottingham Schone -- Nottinghamshire And Yorkshire


Region. I would deliver pro-business budget. I am here today to meet one


of our members who is leading the way.


BOOING the immediate thing that is


happening is the workplace pension. -- The emergency -- the immediate


thing. I am the Midlands regional secretary for the TUC. If I was


Chancellor, minorities for this Budget would be rebalancing the


economy to make sure it works for you. There is wealth creation, but


it is in limited places. In the East Midlands, we are lagging behind. An


economic strategy we see as important and essential for the


future strength of the economy as far as the East Midlands concern is


to make sure that the economic growth benefits every region of the


country, not just London and the South East. If I was Chancellor the


first thing I would do is tackle the rising costs of implement. The


average business is set to CDs rise by ?2600. Infrastructure is


essential, the electrification of the mainline is key and overdue. The


skills agenda has got to be addressed to make sure we can have


companies and large employers like Toyota staying in the region


following Brexit. The East Midlands is a low skill economy based on


insecure work, we have got to make sure the jobs that come to this


region are high skilled and we have the workforce to match. If we are to


be world beaters, we need more businesses to take advantage of


opportunities which come out of research and develop them. If I was


Chancellor I would make sure more businesses were aware of Government


schemes like the research and development tax credits


opportunities. For the next part of our Budget we would follow through


on the commitment to having workers on board is. It was made by the


Prime Minister very early. It seems you get the best out of the work


forced by having zero hours contracts, we do not think that is


right or fair will stop having workers on the boards would lead to


better transparency to make sure they could question things and the


direction their companies took. Also in my Budget box, I would like to


introduce the delay to making attached digital, quarterly


reporting should not be rolled out until businesses have a chance to


understand the impact and cost indications.


So, tonight different views. Lee was saying the East Midlands has a


low-wage economy. -- two different. Thing we have already seen


significant progress made, we have the national leading -- living wage.


And in the East Midlands we have seen 188,000 new jobs created since


2010. Are they high wage jobs? Low-mac you have 2.8 million new


country. Of those, 75% are full-time country. Of those, 75% are full-time


permanent jobs. Only 3% are zero hours contracts. I appreciate that


Lee had a point to make but I do not think those statistics bear out what


you're saying. Paddy, you have to admit, there some positives right


now for the economy, growth is up, unemployment in the region is done,


is the Government on the right track? I think the big thing now is


Brexit, this is the first Budget since the referendum, and although


there are some signs of success, there are signs of weakness as well.


The strength of the plan, for example, inflation, that is


increasing. We also talked about increasing. We also talked about


public services, funding for the police here in Nottingham, A is in


crisis. But the big issue is around social care. The Chancellor has made


some extra money available, he needs to do much, much more. Not just in


the short-term, but we need to have a long-term solution. For a


long-term problem? A long-term problem that all the political


parties signed up to. Natalie was worried about the extra costs of


employing people with the living wage, the increases in National


Insurance, various pension schemes for people employed. It doesn't


sound like a very business friendly Government. We have seen under the


Government from 2010, for example, very business friendly measures, for


example the reduction in corporation tax, from that height of 20% down to


20%, and by 2020 it will be done to 17%. That is one very tangible


measure that makes a difference when it comes to a business, not only


surviving, but expanding and investing. Earlier this week, I was


at a fantastic business in my constituency who are a packaging


company, they employ over 100 people and they are looking to employ more.


They are a real success story. Paddy, what would you like to see in


this Budget, apart from rises brought in these budgets? I would


like to see the business of zero which is contracts sorted out,


Sports Direct is a real issue, there have been caught cases recently,


there is a need for legislation and we need to tackle it, I hope the


living wage goes up, I suspect it will, and I very much hope that the


Chancellor will resist the temptation to bring down the top


rate of income tax. OK, advert, will there be anything in this Budget


particularly for the East Midlands to look forward to? I think what we


have seen an budgets are measures that support the East Midlands


engine, the sort of industry and growth we have here. It is a


difficult balance in any Budget. You have to remember we had brought down


the budget deficit from over 10% that we inherited in 2010 to 3.5%.


But it still means we are spending more as a country that we are


bringing in income tax and we need to balance getting that deficit down


further and I think the Chancellor has opposed that, whilst also


encouraging and stimulating business. And Paddy is right when he


talked about one of the big issues, we need to work cross party to


OK. Time now for a round-up of some OK. Time now for a round-up of some


of the other political stories from the East Midlands.


Plans to electrify the Midland Main Line have been thrown into doubt by


a highly critical report from MPs. The Public Accounts Committee looked


at the electrification of the Great Western railway and said it was an


example of how not to handle a major body. It said the flaws could have


an impact on electrify the Midland Main Line.


Derby City Council has condemned the Unison Mac union after meeting to


discuss a strike by ditching support staff was broken up by Proteas. The


council said the union should suspend strikes. Unison says it


stands on a solidarity. Ken Clarke has become the new Father


of the House. This means the former Chancellor and Home Secretary is now


the longest serving MP. It was the biggest event of its


kind, Westminster register big reaction. The Amat publicity


estimated to be worth almost 500,000 Bas Dost by University report than


50 million saw or read about the courage.


And that is the Sunday Politics here in the East Midlands. Eggy to Edward


Parker and Paddy Tipping. Next week, my guests will be Heather Wheeler


and Lillian Greenwood. Lillian spent to date at a firefighter in


Nottinghamshire as part of a plan to find out more about life on the


front line four hour emergency services. She has certainly looking


the part! We will be finding out how she got on and if you got hold out


any fires next need Crossrail as well. We will be


poring over the entrails of the budget next week. Thank you very


much indeed. So the Brexit Bill is back in


the Lords next week and the Lib Dems They've ordered pizza and camp beds


to encourage their peers to keep talking all night,


only to be told by the Lord's authorities that their plans fall


foul of health and safety laws. Laws that they probably voted for.


What did you make of David Liddington's remarks on the Lords


amendments, particularly not just the one on EU nationals, but on what


is regarded as a meaningful vote at the end of the process? Let's be


clear, as ministers like to say, the meaningful vote vote is by far the


biggest thing that will happen in Parliament. It puts EU citizens into


a tiny corner. It will decide not just who is going to have the final


say on this, but who the EU is negotiating with. Is it directly


with Theresa May or is it with Parliament? Who will decide the


shape of Brexit, Parliament or Theresa May? The Lords amendment is


just the first chapter. They have voiced Theresa May to give them a


veto on everything she does, and there is a possible chance in the


Commons could uphold this amendment. The meaningful vote amendment? The


meaningful vote amendment. But is it a meaningful vote if the choice is


to either back the deal or crash out of the deal? That is what the remain


supporting MPs or hardline people who want to remain fear. What they


want is the power to be able to send Theresa May back to the negotiating


table. Why is that anathema to many Brexit supporters? They believed it


would crucially and critically undermine Theresa May's negotiating


hand and also create a long period of uncertainty for business. There


is already great uncertainty and this could extend it. The


government's position is in there was a proper, meaningful vote which


Parliament could reject what was on offer, that would be an incentive to


the EU to give us a bad deal? I think that is the fear. If you are


saying to the people you are negotiating with that that is


another authority and Theresa May will have to go back and have all of


this approved, I think it would have a very significant undermining


effect on her negotiating hand. Things change from day to day. We


are talking about 2019 and 2018 at the earliest, but if the government


lost a vote on the Brexit deal, would he not have to call in someone


else? That is why the vote will be meaningful even if the amendment on


this meaningful vote will be lost. You cannot do a deal on something as


historic as Brexit and have Parliament against you. So, whatever


form this vote takes, whenever it happens, it will be hugely


meaningful. Whatever label that is given and if she lost it she would


call a general election. She could not impose it. To call a general


election now you need a majority of MPs which she will not have, so


maybe she will not get her election after all. It would be very unlike


Labour not to vote for an election. It would be very unlike Labour not


to vote for an election. The elections to Stormont have given


a boost to the republicans and put the long term status


of Northern Ireland in some doubt. Sinn Fein's leader Gerry Adams


spoke to reporters Yesterday was in many,


many ways a watershed election, and we have just started a process


of reflecting what it all means, but clearly the union's majority


in the Assembly has been ended, and the notion of a permanent


or a perpetual unionist majority Is he right? Is this a watershed?


The nationalist vote in the assembly will now come to 39 and the


Unionists 38. It is only one member, but it is significant. This is a


very serious moment and because of everything else going on with Donald


Trump and Brexit it is taking a while for people here to realise


just how significant this is. Talking to someone who only recently


left a significant role in Northern Ireland politics last night, they


said they were very worried about what this means. It is likely there


will be a call for some kind of international figure to chair the


talks to try and see if there is a way of everybody working together.


All sides will probably try to extract more money from the


Treasury, but it is a very dangerous moment. Should we regard Michelle


O'Neill, who has replaced Mr McGuinness as the leader, it is she


the First Minister death probably not quite. An interesting thought.


Indeed, the daughter of an IRA man, a fascinating concept in itself. But


there are are still a large amount of MLAs who will not give Sinn Fein


what they need. But what effect does this have on the legacy of the


prosecutions and the great witchhunts which the British


Government has vowed to end. There is a majority left on the Stormont


assembly to end those. But some would keep them going for time


continuing, which is a headache for Theresa May. You have now got 27


Sinn Fein members, 28 DUP, then the SDLP bumps up the numbers a little


bit. You have got the British Government transfixed with Brexit


which has huge implications for the border between North and South in


Ireland, and the Irish government is pretty wavering as well and if there


is an election there, Sinn Fein could do well in the Dublin


parliament as well. There are a lot of moving pieces. There are and


there is a danger that we look at everything through the prism of


Brexit, but I found Friday and this weekend fascinating. Theresa May and


Scotland were Nicola Sturgeon is framing Brexit entirely through an


argument to have a second referendum on independence which she wants to


hold it she possibly can. And the Irish situation with the prospect of


a hard border with Northern Ireland voting majority to remain, quite a


substantial majority, again a few of the instability at the moment. That


We will be keeping an eye on it for sure.


Yesterday, US President Donald Trump tweeted allegations


that his predecessor, Barack Obama, had ordered


his phones to be tapped during the election campaign.


"Terrible!", Trump wrote, "Just found out that Obama


had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory.


I'm not quite sure what McCarthyism that is.


He followed up with a series of tweets comparing it to Watergate.


"How low has President Obama gone to tap my phones during the very


The sacred election process, I think at one stage he said it was a dodgy


election process, but now it is sacred.


You are frightened to go to bed at night, you do not know what you are


going to wake up to. Completely uncharted territory here. Little


more than a month ago at the inauguration they were making the


veneer of small talk and politely shaking hands. He saw Barack Obama


and Michelle off on the helicopter. You do not know what is coming next.


Is there a scintilla of evidence to back up Donald Trump's claims? Yes,


there is, although he is very muddled about it all. I will


explain. Remember what happened to Mike Flynn, talking to the Russian


and Ambassador will stop they were listening. Barack Obama does not


sign of warrants, but somebody else did. So why on earth would you not


want to listen to the president elect himself in case he might also


be breaking the law. Does that sound to you like convincing evidence or


just a supposition? I think Tom should go and work for him, that is


the most credible interpretation I have heard for a long time. Start


tweeting the case for the tweet. What is interesting about this is my


theory is he does not really like the idea of being a president. That


wild press conference he gave a couple of weeks ago there was one ad


lib that did not get repeated which was, I suppose I am a politician


now, as if he was humiliated at the idea of being a president. He likes


being the businessman with a swagger tweeting around the clock. And


campaigning again. He keeps going to what looked like campaign rallies. I


disagree with you about him not liking being president. I think he


loves the idea of being the president, but the reality is so


frustrating on every level, finding he does not have unlimited room for


manoeuvre and so many things have been put in place to stop them doing


things he would do in the business environment. We have had two more


tweets from him this morning, I guess when he woke up. Who was it


who secretly said to the Russian president, tell Vladimir that after


the election I will have more flexibility? Who was that? Possibly


Hillary Clinton. Is it true the Democratic National committee would


not allow the FBI access to check server or other equipment after


learning it was hacked? Can that be possible? This was all an issue in


the campaign. He is now a president. Shall I point out the flaw in Tom's


theory. They were not bugging Michael Flynn's phone, it was the


Russian Ambassador's telephone they were barking. Mr Neil, I would never


contradict you on this programme. But if you suspect there was


criminal activity going on, as there was by Michael Flynn, why would you


not want to put on a tap? I don't know. That is it for today.


I'll be back next week here on BBC One at 11am as usual.


The Daily Politics is back tomorrow at midday on BBC Two.


But remember - if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.


The thing that's so clear is that it's 100% honest.


We're right in the middle of the action.


Andrew Neil speaks to leader of the House of Commons David Lidington about Brexit, and talks about the upcoming Budget with Paul Johnson of the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Andrew also discusses Islamist terrorism in the UK with former security minister Baroness Neville-Jones, Adam Deen of the Quilliam Foundation and Tahla Ahmad of the Muslim Council of Britain.

Marie Ashby presents in the East Midlands.

On the political panel are the Sun's political editor Tom Newton Dunn and journalists Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards.

Download Subtitles