12/03/2017 Sunday Politics East Midlands

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

David Davis tells MPs to leave the Brexit bill untouched,

ahead of a week which could see Britain begin the process

We'll talk to a Tory rebel and Ukip's Nigel Farage.

Phillip Hammond's first budget hit the rocks thanks to a tax rise

But how should we tax those who work for themselves?

And remember Donald Trump's claim that Barack Obama had ordered

We'll talk to the former Tory MP who set the whole story rolling.

In the deed to kick-start the East Midlands

And joining me for all of that, three self-employed journalists

who definitely don't deserve a tax break.

It's Steve Richards, Julia Hartley-Brewer

They'll be tweeting throughout the programme with all the carefree

abandon of Katie Hopkins before a libel trial.

BBC lawyers have suddenly got nervous!

So first today, the government is gearing up to trigger Article 50,

perhaps in the next 48 hours, and start negotiating Britain's

Much has been written about the prospect of the Commons

getting a "meaningful vote" on the deal Britain negotiates.

Brexit Secretary David Davis was on the Andrew Marr programme

earlier this morning and he was asked what happens

Well, that is what is called the most favoured nation status deal

There we go out, as it were, on WTO rules.

That is why of course we do the contingency planning, to make

The British people decided on June the 23rd last year

My job, and the job of the government, is to make

the terms on which that happens as beneficial as possible.

There we have it, clearly, either Parliament votes for the deal when

it is done or it out on World Trade Organisation rules. That's what the

government means by a meaningful vote.

I think we get over obsessed about whether there will be a legal right

for Parliament to have a vote. If there is no deal or a bad deal, I

think it would be politically impossible for the government to

reject Parliament's desire for a vote because the atmosphere of

politics will be completely different by then. I take David

Davies seriously. Within Whitehall he has acquired a reputation as

being the most conscientious and details sadly... And well briefed.

Absolutely and well travelled in terms of European capitals of the

three Brexit ministers. It is quite telling he said what he did and it

is quite telling that within cabinet, two weeks ago he was

floating the idea of no deal at all. Being if not the central estimate

than a completely plausible eventuality. It is interesting. I

would suggest the prospect of no deal is moving up the agenda. It is

still less likely than more likely to happen. But it's no longer a kind

of long tail way out there in the distance. Planning for no deal is

the same as having contents insurance or travel insurance, plan

for the worse case scenarios are prepared it happens. Even the worst

case scenario, it's not that bad. Think of the Jeep 20, apart from the

EU, four members of the G20 economies are successful members of

the EU. The rest aren't and don't have trade deals but somehow these

countries are prospering. They are growing at a higher rate. You are

not frightened? Not remotely. We are obsessed with what we get from the

EU and the key thing we get from leaving the EU is not the deal but

the other deals we can finally make with other trading partners. They

have higher growth than virtually every other EU country apart from

Germany. It is sensible as a negotiating position for the

government to say if there is no deal, we will accept there is no

deal. We're not frightened of no deal. It was clear from what David

Davies was saying that there will be a vote in parliament at the end of

the process but there won't be a third option to send the government

back to try to get a better deal. It is either the deal or we leave

without a deal. In reality, that third option will be there. We don't

know yet whether there will be a majority for the deal if they get

one. What we do know now is that there isn't a majority in the

Commons for no deal. Labour MPs are absolutely clear that no deal is

worth then a bad deal. I've heard enough Tory MPs say the same thing.

But they wouldn't get no deal through. When it comes to this vote,

if whatever deal is rejected, there will then be, one way or another,

the third option raised of go back again. But who gets to decide what

is a bad deal? The British people will have a different idea than the

two thirds of the Remain supporting MPs in the Commons. In terms of the

vote, the Commons. Surely, if the Commons, which is what matters here,

if the Commons were to vote against the deal as negotiated by the

government, surely that would trigger a general election? If the

government had recommended the deal, surely the government would then, if

it still felt strongly about the deal, if the other 27 had said,

we're not negotiating, extending it, it would in effect become a second

referendum on the deal. In effect it would be a no-confidence vote in the

government. You've got to assume that unless something massively

changes in the opposition before then, the government would feel

fairly confident about a general election on those terms. Unless the

deal is hideously bad and obviously basso every vote in the country...

The prior minister said if it is that bad she would have rather no

deal. So that eventuality arrives. -- the Prime Minister has said. Not

a second referendum general election in two years' time. Don't put any

holidays for! LAUGHTER -- don't look any.

So the Brexit bill looks likely to clear Parliament this week.

That depends on the number of Conservative MPs who are prepared

to vote against their government on two key issues.

Theresa May could be in negotiations with our European

partners within days, but there may be some

wheeler-dealings she has to do with her own MPs, too.

Cast your mind back to the beginning of month.

The bill to trigger Article 50 passed comfortably

But three Conservatives voted for Labour's amendments to ensure

the rights of EU citizens already in the UK.

Seven Tory MPs voted to force the government to give Parliament

a say on the deal struck with the EU before it's finalised.

But remember those numbers, they're important.

On the issue of a meaningful vote on a deal, I'm told there might have

been more rebels had it not been for this assurance from

I can confirm that the government will bring forward a motion

on the final agreement to be approved by both Houses

And we expect, and intend, that this will happen before

the European Parliament debates and votes on the final agreement.

When the government was criticised for reeling back

from when and what it would offer a vote on.

The bill then moved into the Lords, where peers passed it

And the second, that Parliament be given a meaningful vote on the terms

of the deal or indeed a vote in the event of there

The so-called Brexit bill will return to Commons

Ministers insist that both amendments would weaken

the government's negotiating hand and are seeking to overturn them.

But, as ever, politics is a numbers game.

Theresa May has a working majority of 17.

On Brexit, though, it's probably higher.

At least six Labour MPs generally vote with

Plus, eight DUP MPs, two from the Ulster Unionist party

If all Conservatives vote with the government as well,

Therefore, 26 Conservative rebels are needed for the government to be

So, are there rough waters ahead for Theresa May?

What numbers are we looking at, in terms of a potential rebellion?

I think we're looking at a large number of people who are interested

This building is a really important building.

It's symbolic of a huge amount of history.

And for it not to be involved in this momentous time would,

But he says a clear verbal statement from the government on a meaningful

vote on any deal would be enough to get most Tory MPs onside.

It was already said about David Jones.

It's slightly unravelled a little bit during

I think this is an opportunity to really get that clarity

through so that we can all vote for Article 50 and get

We've have spoken to several Tory MPs who say they are minded to vote

One said the situation was sad and depressing.

The other said that the whips must be worried because they don't

A minister told me Downing Street was looking again at the possibility

of offering a vote in the event of no deal being reached.

But that its position was unlikely to change.

And, anyway, government sources have told the Sunday Politics they're not

That those Tory MPs who didn't back either amendment the first time

round would look silly if they did, this time.

It would have to be a pretty hefty lot of people changing their minds

about things that have already been discussed in quite a lot of detail,

last time it was in the Commons, for things to be reversed this time.

There's no doubt that a number of Tory MPs are very concerned.

Labour are pessimistic about the chances of enough Tory

rebels backing either of the amendments in the Commons.

The important thing, I think, is to focus on the fact

that this is the last chance to have a say on this.

If they're going to vote with us, Monday is the time to do it.

Assuming the bill does pass the Commons unamended,

it will go back to the Lord's on Monday night where Labour peers

have already indicated they won't block it again.

It means that the Brexit bill would become law and Theresa May

would be free to trigger Article 50 within days.

Her own deadline was the end of this month.

But one minister told me there were advantages to doing it early.

We're joined now from Nottingham by the Conservative MP Anna Soubry.

She's previously voted against the government on the question

of whether Parliament should have a final say over the EU deal.

Anna Soubry, I think it was clear this morning from David Davies that

what he means by meaningful vote is not what you mean by a meaningful

vote. He thinks the choice for Parliament would be to either vote

for the deal and if Parliament doesn't, we leave on World Trade

Organisation rules, on a bare-bones structure. In the end, will he

accept that in the Commons tomorrow? No, because my problem and I don't

think it is a problem, but my problem, the government's problem is

that what I want is then to answer this question. What happens in the

event of their not being any deal? David Davies made it very clear that

in the event of there being no deal, Parliament would have no say. It

means through your elected representatives, the people of this

country would have no say on what happens if the government doesn't

get a deal. I think the request that Parliament should have a say on

Parliamentary sovereignty, is perfectly reasonable. That is what I

want David to say. If he says that, I won't be rebelling. If he does...

They have refused to say that. Sorry. If he continues to say what

he said the BBC this morning, which means that the vote will be either

to accept the as negotiated or to leave on WTO rules, will you rebel

on that question but no, no, sorry, if there's a deal, Parliament will

have a say. So that's fine. And we will see what the deal is and we

will look at the options two years down the road. When who knows

what'll happen in our economy and world economy. That is one matter

which I am content on. The Prime Minister, a woman of her word has

said that in the event of a deal, Parliament will vote on any deal. I

don't difficulty. To clarify, I will come onto that. These are important

matters. I want to clarify, not argue with you. You are content that

if there is a deal, we will come under no deal in a second, but if

there is a deal, you are content with the choice of being able to

vote for that deal or leaving on WTO terms? No, you're speculating as to

what might happen in two years' time. What the options might be.

Personally I find it inconceivable that the government will come back

with a rubbish deal. They will either come back with a good deal,

which I won't have a problem with or they will come back with no deal. To

speculate about coming back with a deal, there is a variety of options.

I understand that that is what the Lord amendments are about. They are

about a vote at the end of the process. Do forgive me, the Lords

amendment is not the same that I've voted for in Parliament. What we

call the Chris Leslie amendment, which was talking about whatever the

agreement is, whatever happens at the end of the negotiations,

Parliament will have a vote. Parliament will have a say. The

Lords amendment is a bit more technical. It is the principle of no

deal that is agitating us. Let's clarify on this. They are

complicated matters. What do you want the government to say? What do

you want David Davis to say tomorrow on what should the Parliamentary

process should be if there is no deal? Quite. I want a commitment

from him that in the event of no deal, it will come into Parliament

and Parliament will determine what happens next. It could be that in

the event of no deal, the best thing is for us to jump off the cliff into

WTO tariff is. I find it unlikely but that might be the reality. There

might be other alternatives. Most importantly, including saying to the

government, go back, carry on. The question that everybody has to ask

is, why won't the government give My fear is what this is about is

asked deliberately, not the Prime Minister, but others deliberately

ensuring we have no deal and no deal pretty soon and in that event, we

jumped off the cliff onto WTO tariffs and nobody in this country

and the people of this country do not have a say. My constituents did

not vote for hard Brexit. You do not want the government to

have the ability if there is no deal to automatically fall back on the

WTO rules? Quite. It is as simple as that. We are now speculating about

what will happen in two years. I want to find out what happens

tomorrow. What will you do if you don't get that assurance? I will

either abstain, or I will vote to keep this amendment within the Bill.

I will either vote against my government, which I do not do

likely, I have never voted against my government until the Chris Leslie

clause when the Bill was going through, or I will abstain, which

has pretty much the same effect because it comes into the Commons

with both amendments so you have positively to vote to take the map.

Can you give us an idea of how many like-minded conservative colleagues

there are. I genuinely do not know. You must talk to each other. I do

not talk to every member of my party. You know people who are

like-minded. I do. I am not doing numbers games. I know you want that

but I genuinely do not know the figure. I think this is an

uncomfortable truth. People have to understand what has happened in our

country, two particular newspapers, creating an atmosphere and setting

an agenda and I think many people are rather concerned, some

frightened, to put their head over the parapet. There are many millions

of people who feel totally excluded from this process. Many of them

voted to remain. And they have lost their voice. We have covered the

ground I wanted to. We're joined now by the Ukip MEP

and former leader Nigel Farage. Article 50 triggered, we are leaving

the EU, the single market and the customs union. What is left you to

complain about? All of that will happen and hopefully we will get the

triggered this week which is good news. What worries me a little I'm

not sure the government recognises how strong their handers. At the

summit in Brussels, the word in the corridors is that we are prepared to

give away fishing waters as a bargaining chip and the worry is

what deal we get. Are we leaving, yes I am pleased about that. You are

under relevant voice in the deal because the deal will be voted on in

Parliament and you have one MP. You are missing the point, the real vote

in parliament is not in London but Strasbourg. This is perhaps the

biggest obstacle the British Government faces. Not what happens

in the Commons that the end of the two years, the European Parliament

could veto the deal. What that means is people need to adopt a different

approach. We do not need to be lobbying in the corridors of

Brussels to get a good deal, we need is a country to be out there talking

to the German car workers and Belgian chocolate makers, putting as

much pressure as we can on politicians from across Europe to

come to a sensible arrangement. It is in their interests more than

ours. In what way is the vision of Brexit set out by David Davis any

different from your own? I am delighted there are people now

adopting the position I argued for many years. Good. But now... Like

Douglas Carswell, he said he found David Davis' performers this morning

reassuring. It is. And just as when Theresa May was Home Secretary every

performance she gave was hugely reassuring. She was seen to be a

heroine after her conference speeches and then did not deliver. I

am concerned that even before we start we are making concessions. You

described in the EU's divorce bill demands, 60 billion euros is floated

around. You said it is laughable and I understand that. Do you maintain

that we will not have to pay a penny to leave? It is nine months since we

voted exit and assuming the trigger of Article 50, we would have paid 30

billion in since we had a vote. We are still members. But honestly, I

do not think there is an appetite for us to pay a massive divorce

Bill. There are assets also. Not a penny? There will be some ongoing

commitments, but the numbers talked about our 50, ?60 billion, they are

frankly laughable. I am trying to find out if you are prepared to

accept some kind of exit cost, it may be nowhere near 60 billion. We

have to do a net agreement, the government briefed about our share

of the European Union investment bank. Would you accept a

transitional arrangement, deal, five, ten billion, as part of the

divorce settlement? We are painted net ?30 million every single day at

the moment, ?10 billion plus every year. That is just our contribution.

We are going to make a massive saving on this. What do you make of

what Anna Soubry said, that if there is no deal, and it is being talked

about more. Maybe the government managing expectations. There is an

expectation we will have a deal, but if there is no deal, that the

government cannot just go to WTO rules, but it has to have a vote in

parliament? By the time we get to that there will be a general

election coming down the tracks and I suspect that if at the end of the

two-year process there is no deal and by the way, no deal is a lot

better for the nation than where we currently are, because we freed of

regulations and able to make our own deals in the world. I think what

would happen, and if Parliament said it did not back, at the end of the

negotiation a general election would happen quickly. According to reports

this morning, one of your most senior aides has passed a dossier to

police claiming Tories committed electoral fraud in Thanet South, the

seat contested in the election. What evidence to you have? I read that in

the newspapers as you have. I am not going to comment on it. Will you not

aware of the contents of the dossier? I am not aware of the

dossier. He was your election strategists. I am dubious as to

whether this dossier exists at all. Perhaps the newspapers have got this

wrong. Concerns about the downloading of data the took place

in that constituency, there are. Allegedly, he has refuted it, was it

done by your MP to give information to the Tories, do you have evidence

about? We have evidence Mr Carswell downloaded information, we have no

evidence what he did with it. It is not just your aide who has been

making allegations against the Conservatives in Thanet South and

other seats, if the evidence was to be substantial, and if it was to

result in another by-election being called an Thanet South had to be

fought again, would you be the Ukip candidate? I probably would. You

probably would? Yes. Just probably? Just probably. It would be your

eighth attempt. Winning seats in parliament under first past the post

is not the only way to change politics in Britain and I would like

to think I proved that. Let's go back to Anna Soubry. The implication

of what we were saying on the panel at the start of the show and what

Nigel Farage was saying there would be that if at the end of the process

whatever the vote, if the government were to lose it, it would provoke a

general election properly. I think that would be right. Let's get real.

The government is not going to come to Parliament with anything other

than something it believes is a good deal and if it rejected it, would be

unlikely, there would be a de facto vote of no confidence and it would

be within the fixed term Parliaments act and that be it. The problem is,

more likely, because of the story put up about the 50 billion, 60

billion and you look at the way things are flagged up that both the

Prime Minister and Boris Johnson saying, we should be asking them for

money back, I think the big fear and the fear I have is we will be

crashing out in six months. You think we could leave as quickly as

six months. Explain that. I think they will stoke up the demand from

the EU for 50, 60 billion back and my real concern is that within six

months, where we're not making much progress, maybe nine months, and

people are getting increasingly fed up with the EU because they are told

it wants unreasonable demands, and then the crash. I think what is

happening is the government is putting in place scaffolding at the

bottom of the cliff to break our fall when we come to fall off that

cliff and I think many in government are preparing not for a two-year

process, but six, to nine months, off the cliff, out we go. That is my

fear. That is interesting. I have not heard that express before by

someone in your position. I suspect you have made Nigel Farage's date.

It is a lovely thought. I would say to Anna Soubry she is out of date

with this. 40 years ago there was a good argument for joining the common

market because tariffs around the world was so high. That has changed

with the World Trade Organisation. We are leaving the EU and rejoining

a great big world and it is exciting. She was giving an

interesting perspective on what could happen in nine months rather

than two years. I thank you both. It was Philip Hammond's first

budget on Wednesday - billed as a steady-as-she-goes

affair, but turned out to cause uproar after the Chancellor appeared

to contradict a Tory manifesto commitment with an increase

in national insurance contributions. The aim was to address what some see

as an imbalance in the tax system, where employees pay

more National Insurance The controversy centres

on increasing the so-called class 4 rate for the self-employed who make

a profit of more than ?8,060 a year. It will go up in stages

from 9% to 11% in 2019. The changes mean that over one

and a half million will pay on average ?240 a year

more in contributions. Some Conservative MPs were unhappy,

with even the Wales Minister saying: "I will apologise to every

voter in Wales that read the Conservative manifesto

in the 2015 election." The Sun labelled Philip

Hammond "spite van man". The Daily Mail called the budget

"no laughing matter". By Thursday, Theresa May

said the government One of the first things I did

as Prime Minister was to commission Matthew Taylor to review the rights

and protections that were available to self-employed workers

and whether they should be enhanced. People will be able to look

at the government paper when we produce it, showing

all our changes, and take And, of course, the Chancellor will

be speaking, as will his ministers, to MPs, businesspeople and others

to listen to the concerns. Well, the man you heard mentioned

there, Matthew Taylor, has the job of producing

a report into the future Welcome. The Chancellor has decided

the self-employed should pay almost the same in National Insurance, not

the same but almost, as the employed will stop what is left of your

commission? The commission has a broader frame of reference and we

are interested in the quality of work in the economy at the heart of

what I hope will be proposing is a set of shifts that will improve the

quality of that work so we have an economy where all work is fair and

decent and all jobs give people scope for development and

fulfilment. The issue of taxes a small part. You will cover that? We

will, because the tax system and employment regulation system drive

particular behaviours in our labour market. You approve I think of the

general direction of this policy of raising National Insurance on the

self-employed. Taxing them in return perhaps for more state benefits. Why

are so many others on the left against it from Tim Farron to John

McDonnell? Tax rises are unpopular and it is the role of the opposition

parties to make capital from unpopular tax rises. I think as tax

rises go this is broadly progressive. There are self-employed

people on low incomes and they will be better off. It is economic league

rational because the reason for the difference in National Insurance --

economically. It was to do with state entitlements. The government

is consulting about paid parental leave. A series of governments have

not been good about thinking about medium sustainability of the tax

base. Self-employment is growing. But it is eroding the tax base. It

is important to address those issues. A number of think tanks have

said this is a progressive move. Yet, a number of left-wing

politicians have been against it. And a number of Tories have said

this is a progressive move and not a Tory government move, the balance of

you will pay more tax, but you will get more state benefits is not a

Tory approach to things. That a Tory approach will be you will pay less

tax but entitled to fewer benefits as well.

I preferred in and policies to politics -- I prefer policies. When

people look at the policy and when they look the fact that there is no

real historical basis for that big national insurance differential,

they see it is a sensible policy. I don't have to deal with the

politics. There has been a huge growth in self-employment from the

turn of the millennium. It's been strongest amongst older workers,

women part-timers. Do you have any idea, do you have

the data in your commission that could tell us how many are taking

self-employment because they like the flexibility and they like the

tax advantages that come with it, too, or they are being forced into

it by employers who don't want the extra costs of employment? Do we

know the difference? We do, broadly. Most surveys on self-employment and

flexible forms of employment suggest about two thirds to three quarters

enjoy it, they like the flexibility, they like the autonomy and about a

third to one quarter are less happy. That tends to be because they would

like to have a full-time permanent job. It is not necessary that they

don't enjoy what they are doing, they would like to do other things.

And some of the protections that come with it? Yes. There are some

people who are forced into southern employees by high-risk but also some

people feel like they can't get a proper job as it were. --

self-employment by people who hire them. It is on the narrow matter of

tax revenues but if you are employed on ?32,000 the state will take over

?6,000 in national insurance contributions, that is quite chunky.

If you are self-employed it is ?2300. But the big difference

between those figures isn't what the employee is paying, it's the

employer's contributions up to almost 14%, and cupped for as much

as you are paid. What do you do about employers' contributions for

the self employed? -- it is uncapped for as much. What I recommend is

that we should probably move from taxing employment to taxing labour.

We should probably have a more level playing field so it doesn't really

matter... Explained that I thought it was the same thing. If you are a

self-employed gardener, you are a different tax regime to a gardener

who works for a gardening firm. On the individual side and on the firm

side. As we see new business models, so-called gig working, partly with

technology, we need a more level playing field saying that we're

taxing people's work, not the form in which they deliver that. That is

part of the reason we have seen the growth of particular business

models. They are innovative and creative and partly driven by the

fact that if you can describe yourself as self-employed there are

tax advantages. Coming out in June? Will you come back and talk to us?

Yes. We say goodbye to viewers

in Scotland, who leave us now Coming up here in 20 minutes,

we'll be talking to the former Tory MP who was the root

of Donald Trump's allegation In the East Midlands: There's

a boost for the region Spreadsheet Phil unveils his plans

to kick start the Midlands Engine, with thousands of jobs

and billions invested. I know that the East Midlands is a

powerhouse of small business across these midlands, Nottingham,

Leicester, huge centres of successful entrepreneurial small

businesses and we are backing them all the way.

And an overhaul of qualifications, will the new T levels give

students the work skills to boost our economy?

Last year I went on site and I wasn't confident at all doing what I

was doing but now there is a split and I'm learning and working it has

definitely boosted my confidence. My guests this week,

Heather Wheeler is the Conservative MP for South Derbyshire

and Lilian Greenwood is Labour's MP Welcome. Understandably, the Budget

news. Heather, you cannot be feeling news. Heather, you cannot be feeling

too comfortable at the backlash to your back's party's changes to

self-insurance. There are two fax to that. One is

that it is a separate peace to the budgets of it is not voted on when

we vote on the Budget, it is noted in the autumn and the rhythmic in

between there is a consultation so many fears will be allayed in the

consultation before the autumn. consultation before the autumn.

So it might not happen? It is not popular. Their fears will

be allayed because there has been a lot of nonsense over this. 60% of

people who are stubborn pride will not be any worse off whatsoever. And

it is amazing how that figure has not been brought up by the media.

Ultimately, if the rich pay the rich pay.

It is about fairness. If your figures are about 40% will be worse

off. If you are earning more than

?100,000 you can afford it. Heather is putting a very kind gloss

on what has been an absolute disaster for the Chancellor and the

Government. They promised in their manifesto just 18 months ago, that

they were not going to increase national insurance contributions and

now hard-working self-employed people start ups, people running

small businesses are finding that they are going to see an increase in

the national insurance contributions.

Many would say it seems to make sense to equalise national Insurance

contributions. As I say, people are seeing a broken

promise from this Tory Government. And it comes in... You did not say

any of that eight months ago. Jeremy Corbyn did not say that.

In the last election campaign when reporters from the Tory party saying

that Ed Miliband was going to be dug National Insurance contribution due

promise not to put up national insurance contributions that is

precisely what you have done. USA your party agrees that is the

hardest thing for people to swallow is a broken promise.

This change is coming at a low level there are going to hit people in

changes that they were not expecting pass money has been given away in in

changes to inheritance tax, corporation tax, this is a choice

that this Government are making and you can see how unpopular it is

proving. Clearly I do not agree. Since the

election apart from anything else we've got the referendum and we got

Brexit, things change. But more than that we passed a new act since the

18 months of the election and national insurance contributions

change then, national insurance and change then, national insurance and

abuse and is changing now. So nobody screamed and squealed then.

The Chancellor took time off from the row over National Insurance

to finally kick start the Midlands Engine.

After years of playing second fiddle to the Northern Powerhouse,

Phillip Hammond announced the region would get almost ?400 million

for the project which is aiming to create 300,000 jobs.

And he wasn't the only one handing out the cash -

government ministers flocked to the region to announce big hand

Here's our Political Editor Tony Roe.

The Chancellor is known as spreadsheet fell because of his love

of planning. This wiki unveils some big plans for the Midlands. Top of

his agenda, heated to the stage in Dudley to formally launch the

Midlands engine with the promise of ?392 million.

I'll tell you the good news. I used to live in Nottingham is when I talk

about the Midlands don't just think about the West Midlands grinder that

the East Midlands is a powerhouse of small business. Nottingham,

Leicester, huge centres of successful entrepreneurial small

businesses and we are backing them all the way.

The focus returned to the East Midlands were local Government

minister was at the space centre to announce list of Leicester and

package worth ?26 million including package worth ?26 million including

The space industry SA huge sector The space industry SA huge sector

and one that is growing very quickly. And the Government through

its industrial strategy and enterprise it as an area where we

high-value jobs to the economy and high-value jobs to the economy and

he relaxed they are at the forefront of that sector that is why we are

backing the project that the local enterprise partnership put forward.

A few moments later Andrew Percy was in Sherwood Forest play Robin Hood

and handing out ?63 million to the poor. Well, to the enterprise

partnership to be exact. At the million included for a new visitor

centre here. Daddy the governments pick winners

between different regions of the country is nonsense. Of course we

are investing in these Midlands as we are investing in other areas

because we're genuine when we say one to create an economy that does

work for everybody. Derby will get ?11 million to help

with the regeneration of the city centre and Nottingham will get 10

million towards the ?150 million free vamp of their broad March.

That is not the end of the spending, though. Back there's Loughborough

motorway. It regularly gets motorway. It regularly gets

congested so they are going to spend ?12 million improving the roads

around here. That is going to free up land for 4000 new homes. It is

all part of improving the infrastructure, the Midlands connect

part of the Midlands engine. The Government wants to increase

productivity, part of what is holding the region and the nation

back is other transport system. Clogged roads, slowing us down

costing time and money. It can be tiring at times because of

locations in the local area which locations in the local area which

could do with improvement. So long-term plans to invest in road

and rail is good for business. It will reduce traffic on the road

for us and it will give us greater accuracy in our delivery times for

our customers. We run our trucks 24 hours a

night and day and we have a lot of night and day and we have a lot of

deliveries. Any delays have a knock-on effect on by the end of the

day we end up having bit more vehicles on the road to cover the

jobs we have covered the got. The ultimate prize will be a 34

million published the economy and 300,000 new jobs. For years there

has been talk of the Midlands engine but not much sign of action. For the

chance of this was the wheat from the boxes for boosting this region's

economy began to be ticked. The challenge now will be to make it run

smoothly. it?

Of course. It is good they are the moment we exist. A lot of this money

is re-spending money that has a ready been announced but certainly

it is welcome. I think there are two issues for me. We're hearing about

millions of pounds now but we know that our local authorities have lost

many many times more over the last few years will stop Nottingham City

Council has lost ?82 million in the last four years and that makes it

difficult to do things like maintaining the roads and naturally

that leads to problems. Of course our number one transport priority

for the region has been the electrification of Midland mainline.

That is ready been delayed by four years and now we know that its

future is in doubt. Yes, it is welcome. Is it in doubt?

Why is the Government holding back from letting us know where you stand

on it? Where is the funding? If you

actually read the Midlands connect brochure it is in their front and

centre. So your Government is fully

Absolutely. Why wouldn't the Absolutely. Why wouldn't the

Minister commit to it being completed by 2023 when I challenged

him at the last transport questions? You know very well but we have a

number of Victorian bridges that are going to need major lift up because

of the extra amount for the electric cables. It is huge.

So it was met at the 2019 and it has been delayed by four years there is

no commitment from rail Minister for it to be completed as promised.

It is in the brochure. Please read it. Let's talk about the

deals on the table this week. Is it enough cash your body Midlands

engine? The northern powerhouse got ?556 million back in January. There

work done in our region. work done in our region.

Is it you not? Of course not apart Is it you not? Of course not apart

from anything else you know that we've got HS2 coming and believe it

or not that means it comes to the Midlands report gets to the not so

there is a huge amount of money being spent. The regeneration, we

have been waiting years to get that apple. That is ?4.4 million that the

Government allocated to that. We've got to buy ?2 million for the Draco

bridge between South Derbyshire and Burton. All these pins point that

are going to be sorted out. There were a lot of bandwidth.

Our infrastructure has been a problem. So we're doing it down. All

you can say is, fantastic new Prime Minister.

What else would I need to say? There are details whichever alludes to

that will make a big difference here in the East Midlands will. Also the

funding to rebuild the assembly rooms in Derby, improving the broad

Marsh area as you know which is long overdue. Even better road junctions

around Loughborough. 20 needed to become it is going to be done out.

As I said, it is welcome that almost seven years later the Government

have remembered that the Midlands exist and have thrown some money at

the problem. It pales into insignificance besides the sort of

cuts that our local authorities, local transport authorities had to

deal with. The matter what Heather says there is no certainty about

electrification. About that, all the talk about making us HS2 ready. If

we cannot run classic compatible services by having an electrified

Midland Bay Mabel will not be able to reap the full benefits. At the

same time as we're trying to prepare for jobs and growth we are facing

all the uncertainty that Brexiters going to mean for our region.

I just think that as usual, we only have negative things from Labour. We

don't have anything about the positives. We're going to talk about

education tribal leader for Ben. But there is so much about the way

businesses have approached Government and said this bit here we

need fixing. This bit here we need fixing and we have listened.

Is this part of the post-Brexit plan? It is because it is about

making us that the global Britain and be looking wider than our

neighbours in Europe because that is what I think people demand a bus.

And that is what we want to do. As this is vital to our incredibly

worried about what the future will hold, particularly manufacturing

businesses who want to be part of the customs union and were worried

about being able to attract and became skilled staff. A huge amount

of uncertainty and I think it is far from clear that the Government has

properly addressed the answers. It hardly even got a mention in the

Budget because the Government know that they are creating huge

difficulties. There is an interesting feature.

growth are India, China, the US, growth are India, China, the US,

Africa, the Middle East. Note you countries. Is this how it is going

to look in the future? It is the way we have to look. Look

at the economy of Europe. It is shrinking so why on earth would you

make companies insist that they grow their marketing Europe won't as a

to look to the countries that are to look to the countries that are

expanding. When you have got to Ghana and places like that with a

GDP going up 6%, of course that's GDP going up 6%, of course that's

where you want your businesses to talk about exporting to. The idea of

us not been prepared to do free trade agreement around the world,

the spoke deals, we are absolutely ready and up for it.

Time to give up on the EU? Those are our nearest neighbours, they are our

major trading partners. It would be crazy to think about giving up on

companies in the east Midlands who companies in the east Midlands who

rely on being able to export from the EU we know we need to get the

closest possible ties, albeit that the Government have already thrown

away without even the negotiations having started, membership of the

having started, membership of the single market.

If we are to boost our economy, improving the skills among

The region has traditionally lagged behind much of the rest

of the country when it comes to a skilled workforce and suffers

Now the government's launching a new qualification.

"T levels " will concentrate on providing more vocational

training for students to try to boost productivity

Here's our political reporter, Wesley Mallin.

Get any group of people together from the technical and engineering

or construction industries and eventually the conversation will

turn to the skills gap. Bridging that gap means starting with the

younger generation and human Derby younger generation and human Derby

the students are getting a hands-on introduction to construction at an

event aimed at getting more women into the industry.

You should do more days like this to encourage girls to get into

construction. People do prefer women going into the house is bonanza I

think it is helpful that I could be a construction worker.

It really encouraged me as a female to go into the construction industry

as it shows that the mouse can do it as much as males can do.

Businesses say we need more people doing more vocational work back

two-way across-the-board. The Government announced it was bringing

in T levels alongside A-levels but with a greater concentration on

teaching skills that lead directly into employment for subjects

including business skills, digital T levels and construction.

The new qualifications, think it puts digital skill sets that all

forefront of educational attainment. forefront of educational attainment.

And certainly other members have very much welcomed and the new fund

that is clearly going to support that.

There will be 15 subjects for students to choose from, replacing

more than 13,000 courses at the moment. The amount of time spent

training will go up by 50%. The technical group relaxed we be

more fit for purpose and will enable young people to either going to work

more ready, because they've had such a large amount of practical

experience all take the pension route.

Katie is an apprentice bricklayer who is enjoying combining studying

with practical work. Last year I went on site and I

wasn't confident at doing what I was doing. But now there is a spit and

I'm learning and working. It is definitely boosting my confidence

and it is good. The new qualifications, ?500 million

of funding from the higher education of funding from the higher education

sector. Critics say it has been hard-hit by cuts and more is needed

to invest in facilities and prevent colleges from closing causes. The

Government insists it is a radical overhaul that will boost

overhaul that will boost the economy.

Is this shake-up wise women know your Government is under attack from

teachers who say they are struggling with a reduced curriculum and

increased class sizes? That is an interesting take on

something that is unbelievably positive and for the future for our

children. We know that we needed to up skill are children. We know that

in the East Midlands, historically, for years we are not done well

enough by four children. Again, businesses have been crying out for

us to do this. This has been done in partnership with local colleges and

businesses in the training is just going to be absolutely excellent for

them. Not just hands-on style but really high-tech, high technology

stuff. We ought to look at what stuff. We ought to look at what

Germany has been doing for years, you have a skill set that has high

esteem in their communities. Why would we not want to do that as

well? We lag behind some of our European

neighbours. There is ?500 million of funding for this. That has got to be

welcomed, hasn't it? It is welcome there is now an

investment coming in technical education. You might ask why to take

on the Government six and a half years to notice that this was

something that needed to be done because actually, 16 - 18 education

has been incredibly hard hit with cuts and whilst the 500 million is

welcome, that might does even start coming through until 2018. But we

have to seize on the wider context wishes our schools under funding,

pressures as never before. Children are being pushed into a very

academic curriculum there has been a terrible failure to get careers

advice to those young people. If we wanted to be able to choose a

technical education and to give that proper standards then we need to

deal with the wider context as well. And that is what you were alluding

to. It all links back to the Midlands engine and the need to

improve skills in our region and the report which came out this week

actually said that in these Midlands only 32% of the workforce have

degrees. The national average is 37%. Education is clearly keen we

are to our productivity. What I find really interesting is

when you go round all of the schools, and we do this all the

enterprise partnerships, how they enterprise partnerships, how they

link in the businesses with education. We've got... I'm really

lucky. I've got to good colleges and they're so good at what they channel

the kids towards. Proper apprenticeships, really good quality

training and then the apprentice ship that go all the way up through

to doing degrees as an apprentice. That is Nirvana.

You have concerns about underfunding and other areas in education. Do you

think that this will help productivity, these are T levels?

The emphasis on vocational training? All the emphasis is on young people

and frankly we want to invest in the next generation but what we are in

danger of missing is the huge skills gap for loss of the existing

workforce. ?40 million to put in to look at how to address lifelong

learning and that is so inadequate. We need to up skill all of our

workforce. If we're going to face the challenges that we are going to

happen as a result of leaving the European Union. So it is just too

little too late. How would you do that with the money

that is available and the bees also that are available?

Some of that is about providing sufficient resources looking at the

skills needs of the whole workforce. And providing opportunities for

everybody to up so that they can meet what employers are demanding

and they will have two. Employers are really worried about how they

are going to recruit the workers of the future if they cannot access

European union workers. I think that is absolutely spurious

and a complete red herring. If you go around companies like Nestle, and

the company in Hatton has grown from 200 pupils nearly 1000 people, they

are taking apprentices at all ages. And that is wonderful that somebody

coming in a 45 balls they, do you know what question of this is what I

want to learn. And Nestle are prepared to invest in them.

And Nestle are prepared to invest in them.

Time now for a round up of some of the other political stories

Commercial vehicles like buses, lorries and taxis with older diesel

engines may be tried for entering Derby city centre. The Government

has said Derby City Council has to cut emissions by 2020. The council

cabinet will discuss plans for a clean air next week. Surgeons

performing children's heart operations at Glenfield Hospital in

Leicester have come up with a solution they hope could keep the

unit open. Doctors want other hospitals to refer its patients to

Glenn Field's congenital heart unit which has the lowest waiting list in

the country. Not a Nottinghamshire could be in for an unexpected boost

from the Budget. The Chancellor announced funding to promote the

400th anniversary of the Pilgrim Fathers arriving in America. Some

came from our region. Lillian Greenwood is spending how weekends

with the region's emergency services. She's going out on the

front line with 999 crews to understand first-hand the they face.

How did you find it? How did you learn? One of the good

things is that it was a relatively quiet couple of shifts which was not

as exciting for me but I guess that was good for people in Nottingham

but I guess I saw our staff are incredibly dedicated, they are well

prepared to deal with the situation and they're dealing with change,

which is doing a lot more preventative work, helping people

with home safety checks, it is really useful.

I would love to go out. Other local fire brigade are amazing, absolutely

amazing. They might take you up on it.

That's the Sunday Politics in the East Midlands,

thanks to Lilian Greenwood and Heather Wheeler.

Next week Amanda Solloway and Willy Bach will be here.

Now the government plans for new grammar schools.

The Education Secretary Justine Greening was

speaking to a conference of headteachers on Friday.

They're normally a pretty polite bunch, but they didn't

Broadcasters weren't allowed into the speech,

but this was captured on a camera phone.

And we have to recognise actually for grammars, in terms of

disadvantaged children, that they have, they really

do help them close the attainment gap.

And at the same time we should recognise that

..That parents also want choice for their children and that

those schools are often very oversubscribed.

I suppose it is a rite of passage for and education secretaries to

have this at a head teachers conference book the head are usually

more polite. Isn't part of the problem, whether one is for or

against the expansion of grammar schools, the government plans are

complicated, you cannot sum them up in a sentence. The proof of that is

they can still get away with denying they are expanding grammar schools.

They will find an alternative formulation because it is not as

simple as a brute creation of what we used to know is grammar schools

with the absolute cut-off of the 11 plus. I am surprised how easy they

found it politically. We saw the clip of Justine Greening being

jeered a little bit but in the grand scheme, compared to another

government trying this idea a decade ago they have got away with it

easily and I think what is happening is a perverse consequence of Brexit

and the media attention on Brexit, the government of the day can just

about get away with slightly more contentious domestic policies on the

correct assumption we will be too busy investing our attention in

Article 50 and two years of negotiations, WTO terms at

everything we have been discussing. I wonder if after grammar schools

there will be examples of contentious domestic policies

Theresa May can slide in stock because Brexit sucks the life out,

takes the attention away. You are a supporter. Broadly. Are you happy

with the government approach? They need to have more gumption and stop

being apologetic. It is a bazaar area of public policy where we judge

the policy on grammar schools based on what it does for children whose

parents are unemployed, living on sink estates in Liverpool. It is

absurd, we don't judge any other policy like that. It is simple, not

contentious, people who are not sure, ask them if they would apply

to send their child there, six out of ten said they would. Parents want

good schools for their children, we should have appropriate education

and they should be straightforward, this is about the future of the

economy and we need bright children to get education at the highest

level, education for academically bright children. It is supposed to

be a signature policy of the Theresa May administration that marks a

government different from David Cameron's government who did not go

down this road. The signature is pretty blurred, it is hard to read.

It is. She is trying to address concerns about those who fail to get

into these selective schools and tried to targeted in poorer areas

and the rest of it. She will probably come across so many

obstacles. It is not clear what form it will take in the end. It is

really an example of a signature policy not fully thought through. I

think it was one of her first announcements. It was. It surprised

everybody. Surprised at the speed and pace at which they were planning

to go. Ever since, there have been qualifications and hesitations en

route with good cause, in my view. I disagree with Juliet that this is...

We all want good schools but if you don't get in there and you end up in

a less good school. They already do that. We have selection based on the

income of parents getting into a good catchment area, based on the

faith of the parents. That becomes very attainable! I might been too

shot run christenings for these. -- I have been.

Now, you may remember this time last week we were talking

about the extraordinary claims by US President Donald Trump,

on Twitter of course, that Barack Obama had ordered

And there was me thinking that wiretaps went out

Is it legal for a sitting President to do so, he asked,

concluding it was a "new low", and later comparing it to Watergate.

Since then, the White House has been pressed to provide evidence for this

It hasn't, but it seems it may have initially come from a report on a US

website by the former Conservative MP Louise Mensch.

She wrote that the FBI had been granted a warrant to intercept

communications between Trump's campaign and Russia.

Well, Louise Mensch joins us now from New York.

Louise, you claimed in early November that the FBI had secured a

court warrants to monitor communications between trump Tower

in New York at two Russian banks. It's now four months later. Isn't it

the case that nobody has proved the existence of this warrant?

First of all, forgive me Andrew, one takes 1's life in one's hand when it

is you but I have to correct your characterisation of my reporting. It

is very important. I did not report that the FBI had a warrant to

intercept anything or that Trump tower was any part of it. What I

reported was that the FBI obtained a warrant is targeted on all

communications between two Russian banks and were, therefore, allowed

to examine US persons in the context of their investigation. What the

Americans call legally incidental collection. I certainly didn't

report that the warrant was able to intercept or that it had location

basis, for example Trump tower. I just didn't report that. The reason

that matters so much is that I now believe based on the President's

reaction, there may well be a wiretap act Trump Tower. If so,

Donald Trump has just tweeted out evidence in an ongoing criminal case

that neither I nor anybody else reported. He is right about

Watergate because he will have committed obstruction of justice

directly from his Twitter account. Let me come back as thank you for

clarifying. Let me come back to the question. -- and thank you. We have

not yet got proof that this warrant exists, do we? No and we are most

unlikely to get it because it would be a heinous crime for Donald Trump

to reveal its existence. In America they call it a Glomar response. I

can neither confirm nor deny. That is what all American officials will

have to say legally. If you are looking for proof, you won't get it

until and unless a court cases brought. But that doesn't mean it

doesn't exist. The BBC validated this two months after me in their

reporting by the journalist Paul Wood. The Guardian, they also

separately from their own sources validated the existence of the

warrant. If you are in America, you would know that CNN and others are

reporting that the investigation in ongoing. Let me come onto the wider

point. You believe the Trump campaign including the president

were complicit with the Russians during the 2016 election campaign to

such an extent that Mr Trump should be impeached. What evidence did you

have? That is an enormous amount of

evidence. You could start with him saying, hey, Russia, if you are

listening, please release all the Hillary Clinton's e-mails. That's

not evidence. I think it rather is, actually. Especially if you look at

some of the evidence that exists on Twitter and elsewhere of people

talking directly to his social media manager, Dan should be no and

telling him to do that before it happened. There is a bit out there.

The BBC itself reported that in April of last year, a six agency

task force, not just the FBI, but the Treasury Department, was looking

at this. I believe there is an enormous amount of evidence. And

then there is the steel dossier which was included in an official

report of the US intelligence committee. You've also ... Just to

be clear, we don't have hard evidence yet whether this warrant

exists. It may or may not. There is doubt about... There are claims

about whether there is evidence about Mr Trump and the Russians.

That is another matter. You claimed that President Putin had Andrew

Breitbart murdered to pave the way for Steve Bannon to play a key role

in the Trump administration. I haven't. You said that Steve Bannon

is behind bomb threats to Jewish community centres. Aren't you in

danger of just peddling wild conspiracy theories? No. Festival, I

haven't. No matter how many times people say this, it's not going to

be true -- first of all. I said in twitter I believe that to be the

case about the murder of Andrew Breitbart. You believe President

Putin murdered him. I didn't! You said I reported it, but I believed

it. You put it on twitter that you believed it but you don't have a

shred of evidence. I do. Indeed, I know made assertions. What is the

evidence that Mr Putin murdered Andrew Breitbart? I said I believe

it. You may believe there are fairies at the bottom of your

garden, it doesn't make it true. I may indeed. And if I say so, that's

my belief. If I say I am reporting, as I did with the Fisa warrant

exists, I have a basis in fact. They believe is just a belief. I know you

are relatively new to journalism. Let me get the rules right. Andrew,

jealousy is not your colour... If it is twitter, we don't believe it but

if it is on your website, we should believe it? If I report something

and I say this happened, then I am making an assertion. If I describe a

belief, I am describing a belief. Subtlety may be a little difficult

for you... No, no. If you want to be a journalist, beliefs have to be

backed up with evidence. Really? Do you have a faith? It's not a matter

of faith, maybe in your case, that President Putin murdered Andrew

Breitbart. A belief and a report at two different things and no matter

how often you say that they are the same, they will never be the same.

You've said in today's Sunday Times here in London that you've turned

into" a temporary superpower" where you "See things really clearly".

Have you become delusional? No. I am describing a biological basis for

ADHD, which I have. As any of your viewers who are doctors will know.

It provides people with unfortunately a lot of scattered

focus, they are very messy and absent-minded but when they are

interested in things and they have ADHD they can have a condition which

is hyper focus. You concentrate very hard on a given subject and you can

see patterns and connections. That is biological. Thank you for

explaining that. And for getting up early in New York. The first time

ever I have interviewed a temporary superpower. Thank you. You are so

lucky! You are so lucky! I don't think it's going to happen again.

Please don't ask us to comment on that interview! I will not ask you,

viewers will make up their own minds. Let's come back to be more

mundane world of Article 50. Stop the killing!

Will it get through at the government wanted it? Without the

Lords amendment falling by the way that? I am sure the Lord will not

try to ping-pong this back and forth. So we are at the end of this

particular legislative phase. The fact that all three Brexit Cabinet

ministers, number ten often don't like one of them going out on a

broadcast interview on a Sunday, they've all been out and about. That

suggests to me they are working on the assumption it will be triggered

this week. This week. The negotiations will begin or at least

the process begins. The negotiation process may be difficult, given all

of the European elections. The Dutch this week. And then the French and

maybe the Italians and certainly the Germans by the end of September,

which is less predictable than it was. Given all that, what did you

make of Anna Soubry's claim, Viacom on her part, that we may just end up

crashing out in six months question -- fear on her part. It was not just

that that we made that deliberately organising. I want us to get on with

the deals. Everyone knows a good deal is the

best option. Who knows what is going to be on the table when we finally

go out? Fascinatingly, the demand for some money back, given the

amount of money... Net gains and net costs in terms of us leaving for the

EU. It is all to play for. That will be a possible early grounds for a

confrontation between the UK and the EU. My understanding is that they

expect to do a deal on reciprocal rights of EU nationals, EU nationals

here, UK citizens there, quite quickly. They want to clear that up

and that will be done. Then they will hit this problem that the EU

will be saying you've got to agree the divorce Bill first before we

talk about the free trade bill. David Davis saying quite clearly,

no, they go together because of the size of the bill. It will be

determined, in our part, by how good the access will be. The mutual

recognition of EU residents' rights is no trouble. A huge amount of fuss

is attracted to that subject but it is the easiest thing to deal with,

as is free movement for tourists. Money is what will make it

incredibly acrimonious. Incredibly quickly. I imagine the dominant

story in the summer will be all about that. This was Anna Soubry's

implication, members of the governors could strongly argue,

things are so poisonous and so unpleasant at the moment, the

dealers are advancing -- members of the government. Why not call it a

day and go out on WTO terms while public opinion is still in that

direction in that Eurosceptic direction? No buyers' remorse about

last year's referendum. The longer they leave it, view more opportunity

there is for some kind of public resistance and change of mind to

take place. The longer believe it, the more people who voted for Brexit

and people who voted Remain and think we didn't get world War three

will start being quite angry with the EU for not agreeing a deal. In

terms of the rights of EU nationals he and Brits abroad, by all

accounts, 26 of the 27 have agreed individually. Angela Merkel is the

only person who has held that up. That will be dealt with in a matter

of days. The chances of a deal being done is likely but in ten seconds...

It would not be a bad bet to protect your on something not happening, you

might get pretty good odds? The odds are going up that a deal doesn't

happen. But, as I said earlier, the House of Commons will not endorse no

deal. We are either in an early election or she has to go back

again. Either way, you will need us! We will be back at noon tomorrow on

BBC Two ahead of what looks like being a big week in politics. We

will be back here same time, same place.

Remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.