:00:39. > :00:40.Morning, folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics.
:00:41. > :00:42.Hard line remainers strike back at Brexit.
:00:43. > :00:44.Are they trying to overturn the result of June's referendum
:00:45. > :00:48.by forcing a second vote before we leave?
:00:49. > :00:51.Australia's man in London tells us that life outside the EU "can be
:00:52. > :00:55.pretty good" and that Brexit will "not be as hard as people say".
:00:56. > :00:58.Could leaving the EU free Britain to do more business
:00:59. > :01:04.It's been called "disgusting, dangerous and deadly"
:01:05. > :01:07.but how polluted is our air, how bad for our health,
:01:08. > :01:26.We have come to the Christmas market in Milton
:01:27. > :01:30.And with me in the Sunday Politics grotto, the Dasher, Dancer
:01:31. > :01:33.and Prancer of political punditry Iain Martin,
:01:34. > :01:42.They'll be delivering tweets throughout the programme.
:01:43. > :01:47.First this morning, some say they will fight
:01:48. > :01:51.for what they call a "soft Brexit", but now there's an attempt by those
:01:52. > :01:54.who campaigned for Britain to remain in the EU to allow the British
:01:55. > :01:57.people to change their minds - possibly with a second referendum -
:01:58. > :02:00.The Labour MEP Richard Corbett is revealed this morning to have
:02:01. > :02:02.tried to amend European Parliament resolutions.
:02:03. > :02:05.The original resolution called on the European Parliament
:02:06. > :02:08.to "respect the will of the majority of the citizens
:02:09. > :02:24.of the United Kingdom to leave the EU".
:02:25. > :02:29.He also proposed removing the wording "stress that this wish
:02:30. > :02:32.must be respected" and adding "while taking account of the 48.1%
:02:33. > :02:44.The amendments were proposed in October,
:02:45. > :02:47.but were rejected by a vote in the Brussels
:02:48. > :02:49.Constitutional Affairs Committee earlier this month.
:02:50. > :02:51.The report will be voted on by all MEPs in February.
:02:52. > :02:54.Well, joining me now from Leeds is the Labour MEP who proposed
:02:55. > :03:04.Good morning. Thanks for joining us at short notice. Is your aim to try
:03:05. > :03:09.and reverse what happened on June 23? My aim with those amendments was
:03:10. > :03:12.simply factual. It is rather odd that these amendments of two months
:03:13. > :03:18.ago are suddenly used paper headlines in three very different
:03:19. > :03:24.newspapers on the same day. It smacks of a sort of concerted effort
:03:25. > :03:30.to try and slapped down any notion that Britain might perhaps want to
:03:31. > :03:35.rethink its position on Brexit as the cost of Brexit emerges. You
:03:36. > :03:40.would like us to rethink the position even before the cost urges?
:03:41. > :03:45.I get lots of letters from people saying how one, this was an advisory
:03:46. > :03:51.referendum won by a narrow majority on the basis of a pack of lies and a
:03:52. > :03:54.questionable mandate. But if there is a mandate from this referendum,
:03:55. > :03:58.it is surely to secure a Brexit that works for Britain without sinking
:03:59. > :04:03.the economy. And if it transpires as we move forward, that this will be a
:04:04. > :04:07.very costly exercise, then there will be people who voted leave who
:04:08. > :04:12.said Hang on, this is not what I was told. I was told this would save
:04:13. > :04:14.money, we could put it in the NHS, but if it is going to cost us and
:04:15. > :04:31.our Monday leg, I would the right to reconsider. But
:04:32. > :04:34.your aim is not get a Brexit that would work for Britain, your aim is
:04:35. > :04:36.to stop it? If we got a Brexit that would work for Britain, that would
:04:37. > :04:40.respect the mandate. But if we cannot get that, if it is going to
:04:41. > :04:42.be a disaster, if it is going to cost people jobs and cost Britain
:04:43. > :04:46.money, it is something we might want to pause and rethink. The government
:04:47. > :04:52.said it is going to come forward with a plan. That is good. We need
:04:53. > :04:58.to know what options to go for as a country. Do we want to stay in the
:04:59. > :05:01.single market, the customs union, the various agencies? And options
:05:02. > :05:08.should be costed so we can all see how much they cost of Brexit will
:05:09. > :05:12.be. If you were simply going to try and make the resolution is more
:05:13. > :05:20.illegal, why did the constitutional committee vote them down? This is a
:05:21. > :05:26.report about future treaty amendments down the road for years
:05:27. > :05:34.to come. This was not the main focus of the report, it was a side
:05:35. > :05:40.reference, in which was put the idea for Association partnerships. Will
:05:41. > :05:47.you push for the idea before the full parliament? I must see what the
:05:48. > :05:54.text is. You said there is a widespread view in labour that if
:05:55. > :05:58.the Brexit view is bad we should not exclude everything, I take it you
:05:59. > :06:05.mean another referendum. When you were named down these amendments,
:06:06. > :06:09.was this just acting on your own initiative, or acting on behalf of
:06:10. > :06:17.the Labour Party? I am just be humble lame-duck MEP in the European
:06:18. > :06:21.Parliament. It makes sense from any point of view that if the course of
:06:22. > :06:25.action you have embarked on turns out to be much more costly and
:06:26. > :06:30.disastrous than you had anticipated, that you might want the chance to
:06:31. > :06:34.think again. You might come to the same conclusion, of course, but you
:06:35. > :06:40.might think, wait a minute, let's have a look at this. But let's be
:06:41. > :06:44.clear, even though you are deputy leader of Labour in the European
:06:45. > :06:52.Parliament, you're acting alone and not as Labour Party policy? I am
:06:53. > :06:56.acting in the constitutional affairs committee. All I am doing is stating
:06:57. > :07:00.things which are common sense. If as we move forward then this turns out
:07:01. > :07:04.to be a disaster, we need to look very carefully at where we are
:07:05. > :07:10.going. But if a deal is done under Article 50, and we get to see the
:07:11. > :07:15.shape of that deal by the end of 2019 under the two-year timetable,
:07:16. > :07:20.in your words, we won't know if it is a disaster or not until it is
:07:21. > :07:26.implemented. We won't be able to tell until we see the results about
:07:27. > :07:34.whether it is good or bad, surely? We might well be able to, because
:07:35. > :07:38.that has to take account of the future framework of relationships
:07:39. > :07:41.with the European Union, to quote the article of the treaty. That
:07:42. > :07:45.means we should have some idea about what that will be like. Will we be
:07:46. > :07:49.outside the customs union, for instance, which will be very
:07:50. > :07:55.damaging for our economy? Or will we have to stay inside and follow the
:07:56. > :07:58.rules without having a say on them. We won't know until we leave the
:07:59. > :08:02.customs union. You think it will be damaging, others think it will give
:08:03. > :08:06.us the opportunity to do massive trade deals. My case this morning is
:08:07. > :08:10.not what is right or wrong, we will not know until we have seen the
:08:11. > :08:14.results. We will know a heck of a lot more than we do now when we see
:08:15. > :08:17.that Article 50 divorce agreement. We will know the terms of the
:08:18. > :08:22.divorce, we will know how much we still have to pay into the EU budget
:08:23. > :08:27.for legacy costs. We will know whether we will be in the single
:08:28. > :08:32.market customs union or not. We will know about the agencies. We will
:08:33. > :08:35.know a lot of things. If the deal on the table looks as if it will be
:08:36. > :08:41.damaging to Britain, then Parliament will be in its rights to say, wait a
:08:42. > :08:45.minute, not this deal. And then you either renegotiate or you reconsider
:08:46. > :08:50.the whole issue of Brexit or you find another solution. We need to
:08:51. > :08:55.leave it there but thank you for joining us.
:08:56. > :09:01.Iain Martin, how serious is the attempt to in effect an wind what
:09:02. > :09:06.happened on June 23? I think it is pretty serious and that interview
:09:07. > :09:10.illustrates very well the most damaging impact of the approach
:09:11. > :09:17.taken by a lot of Remainers, which is essentially to say with one
:09:18. > :09:19.breath, we of course accept the result, but with every action
:09:20. > :09:23.subsequent to that to try and undermine the result or try and are
:09:24. > :09:28.sure that the deal is as bad as possible. I think what needed to
:09:29. > :09:33.happen and hasn't happened after June 23 is you have the extremists
:09:34. > :09:39.on both sides and you have in the middle probably 70% of public
:09:40. > :09:45.opinion, moderate leaders, moderate Remainers should be working together
:09:46. > :09:52.to try and get British bespoke deal. But moderate Leavers will not take
:09:53. > :09:56.moderate Remainers seriously if this is the approach taken at every
:09:57. > :10:06.single turn to try and rerun the referendum. He did not say whether
:10:07. > :10:10.it was Labour policy? That was a question which was ducked. I do not
:10:11. > :10:17.think it is Labour Party policy. I think most people are in a morass in
:10:18. > :10:20.the middle. I think the screaming that happens when anybody dares to
:10:21. > :10:24.question or suggest that you might ever want to think again about these
:10:25. > :10:29.things, I disagree with him about having another referendum but if he
:10:30. > :10:32.wants to campaign for that it is his democratic right to do so. If you
:10:33. > :10:38.can convince enough people it is a good idea then he has succeeded. But
:10:39. > :10:43.the idea that we would do a deal and then realise this is a really bad
:10:44. > :10:50.deal, let's not proceed, we will not really know that until the deal is
:10:51. > :10:53.implemented. What our access is to the single market, whether or not we
:10:54. > :10:57.are in or out of the customs union which we will talk about in a
:10:58. > :11:02.minute, what immigration policy we will have, whether these are going
:11:03. > :11:07.to be good things bad things, surely you have got to wait for four, five,
:11:08. > :11:11.six years to see if it has worked or not? Yes, and by which stage
:11:12. > :11:15.Parliament will have voted on it and there will be no going back from it,
:11:16. > :11:20.or maybe there will. We are talking now about the first three months of
:11:21. > :11:28.2019. That is absolutely the moment when Parliament agrees with Theresa
:11:29. > :11:38.May or not. One arch remain I spoke to, and arch Remainiac, he said that
:11:39. > :11:47.Theresa May will bring this to Parliament in 2019 and could say I
:11:48. > :11:52.recommend that we reject it. What is he on or she? Some strong chemical
:11:53. > :11:58.drugs! The point is that all manner of things could happen. I don't
:11:59. > :12:04.think any of us take it seriously for now but the future is a very
:12:05. > :12:08.long way away. Earlier, the trade Secretary Liam Fox was asked if we
:12:09. > :12:11.would stay in the customs union after Brexit.
:12:12. > :12:17.There would be limitations on what we would do in terms of tariff
:12:18. > :12:23.setting which could limit the deals we would do, but we want to look at
:12:24. > :12:27.all the different deals. There is hard Brexit and soft Brexit as if it
:12:28. > :12:31.is a boiled egg we are talking about. Turkey is in part of the
:12:32. > :12:39.customs union but not other parts. What we need to do is look at the
:12:40. > :12:43.cost. This is what I picked up. The government knows it cannot remain a
:12:44. > :12:48.member of the single market in these negotiations, because that would
:12:49. > :12:51.make us subject to free movement and the European Court. The customs
:12:52. > :12:56.union and the Prime Minister 's office doesn't seem to be quite as
:12:57. > :12:59.binary, that you can be a little bit in and a little bit out, but I would
:13:00. > :13:04.suggest that overall Liam Fox knows to do all the trade deals we want to
:13:05. > :13:08.do we basically have to be out. But what he also seems to know is that
:13:09. > :13:14.is a minority view in Cabinet. He said he was not going to give his
:13:15. > :13:24.opinion publicly. There is still an argument going on about it in
:13:25. > :13:26.Cabinet. When David Liddington struggled against Emily Thornbury
:13:27. > :13:30.PMQs, he did not know about the customs union. What is apparent is
:13:31. > :13:36.Theresa May has not told him what to think about that. If we stay in the
:13:37. > :13:43.customs union we cannot do our own free trade deals. We are behind the
:13:44. > :13:48.customs union, the tariff barriers set by Europe? Not quite. Turkey is
:13:49. > :13:53.proof of the pudding. There are limited exemptions but they can do
:13:54. > :14:01.free trade with their neighbours. Not on goods. They are doing a trade
:14:02. > :14:04.deal with Pakistan at the moment, it relies on foreign trade investment
:14:05. > :14:09.but Europe negotiates on turkey's behalf on the major free-trade
:14:10. > :14:13.deals. This is absolutely why the customs union will be the fault line
:14:14. > :14:17.for the deal we are trying to achieve. Interestingly, I thought
:14:18. > :14:21.Liam Fox suggested during that interview that he was prepared to
:14:22. > :14:27.suck up whatever it was. I think he was saying there is still an
:14:28. > :14:35.argument and he intends to win it. He wants to leave it because he
:14:36. > :14:39.wants to do these free-trade deals. There is an argument in the cabinet
:14:40. > :14:45.about precisely that. The other thing to consider is in this country
:14:46. > :14:48.we have tended to focus too much on the British angle in negotiations,
:14:49. > :14:52.but I think the negotiations are going to be very difficult. You look
:14:53. > :14:55.at the state of the EU at the moment, you look at what is
:14:56. > :15:02.happening in Italy, France, Germany, look at the 27. It is possible I
:15:03. > :15:07.think that Britain could design a bespoke sensible deal but then it
:15:08. > :15:14.becomes very difficult to agree which is why I ultimately think we
:15:15. > :15:15.are heading for a harder Brexit. It will be about developing in this
:15:16. > :15:20.country. So, we've had a warning this week
:15:21. > :15:23.that it could take ten years to do a trade deal
:15:24. > :15:25.with the EU after Brexit. But could opportunities to expand
:15:26. > :15:27.trade lie elsewhere? Australia was one of the first
:15:28. > :15:29.countries to indicate its willingness to do a deal
:15:30. > :15:32.with the UK and now its High Commissioner in London has told
:15:33. > :15:35.us that life outside the EU He made this exclusive film
:15:36. > :15:51.for the Sunday Politics. My father was the Australian High
:15:52. > :15:53.Commissioner in the early 70s when the UK joined
:15:54. > :15:55.the European Union, Now I'm in the job,
:15:56. > :16:04.the UK is leaving. Australia supported
:16:05. > :16:06.Britain remaining a member of the European Union,
:16:07. > :16:09.but we respect the decision that Now that the decision has been made,
:16:10. > :16:14.we hope that Britain will get on with the process
:16:15. > :16:18.of negotiating their exit from the European Union and make
:16:19. > :16:22.the most of the opportunities that Following the referendum decision,
:16:23. > :16:28.Australia approached the British Government
:16:29. > :16:31.with a proposal. We offered, when the time was right,
:16:32. > :16:34.to negotiate a free trade agreement. The British and Australian
:16:35. > :16:40.governments have already established a working group to explore a future,
:16:41. > :16:43.ambitious trade agreement once A free trade agreement will provide
:16:44. > :16:55.great opportunities for consumers Australian consumers could purchase
:16:56. > :17:00.British-made cars for less We would give British
:17:01. > :17:06.households access to cheaper, Our summer is during your winter,
:17:07. > :17:12.so Australia could provide British households with fresh produce
:17:13. > :17:15.when the equivalent British or Australian households would have
:17:16. > :17:22.access to British products Free-trade agreements
:17:23. > :17:35.are also about investment. The UK is the second-largest source
:17:36. > :17:39.of foreign investment in Australia. By the way, Australia also invests
:17:40. > :17:46.over ?200 billion in the UK, so a free trade agreement
:17:47. > :17:48.would stimulate investment, But, by the way, free-trade
:17:49. > :17:54.agreements are not just about trade and investment,
:17:55. > :17:58.they are also about geopolitics. Countries with good trade relations
:17:59. > :18:01.often work more closely together in other fields including security,
:18:02. > :18:05.the spread of democracy We may have preferred
:18:06. > :18:19.the UKto remain in the EU, We may have preferred the UK
:18:20. > :18:22.to remain in the EU, but life outside as we know can
:18:23. > :18:24.be pretty good. We have negotiated eight free-trade
:18:25. > :18:27.agreements over the last 12 years, including a free-trade agreement
:18:28. > :18:28.with the United States This is one of the reasons why
:18:29. > :18:40.the Australian economy has continued to grow over the last 25 years
:18:41. > :18:44.and we, of course, are not Australia welcomes Theresa May's
:18:45. > :18:54.vision for the UK to become a global We are willing to help
:18:55. > :19:23.in any way we can. Welcome to the programme. The
:19:24. > :19:27.Australian government says it wants to negotiate an important trade deal
:19:28. > :19:33.with the UK as efficiently and promptly as possible when Brexit is
:19:34. > :19:38.complete. How prompt is prompt? There are legal issues obviously.
:19:39. > :19:44.The UK, for as long as it remains in the EU, cannot negotiate individual
:19:45. > :19:48.trade deals. Once it leaves it can. We will negotiate a agreement with
:19:49. > :19:54.the UK when the time is right, by which we mean we can do preliminary
:19:55. > :19:59.examination. Are you talking now about the parameters? We are talking
:20:00. > :20:03.already, we have set up a joint working group with the British
:20:04. > :20:06.Government and we are scoping the issue to try to understand what
:20:07. > :20:12.questions will arise in any negotiation. But we cannot have
:20:13. > :20:19.formally a negotiation. Until the country is out. Why is there no
:20:20. > :20:22.free-trade deal between Australia and the European Union? It is a long
:20:23. > :20:29.and tortuous story. Give me the headline. Basically Australian
:20:30. > :20:35.agriculture is either banned or hugely restricted in terms of its
:20:36. > :20:39.access to the European Union. So we see the European Union, Australia's,
:20:40. > :20:44.is a pretty protectionist sort of organisation. Now we are doing a
:20:45. > :20:48.scoping study on a free-trade agreement with the European Union
:20:49. > :20:53.and we hope that next year we can enter into negotiations with them.
:20:54. > :20:58.But we have no illusions this would be a very difficult negotiation, but
:20:59. > :21:04.one we are giving priority to. Is there not a danger that when Britain
:21:05. > :21:08.leaves the EU the EU will become more protectionist? This country has
:21:09. > :21:13.always been the most powerful voice for free trade. I hope that does not
:21:14. > :21:19.happen, but the reason why we wanted Britain to remain in the European
:21:20. > :21:24.Union is because it brought to the table the whole free-trade mentality
:21:25. > :21:27.which has been an historic part of Britain's approach to international
:21:28. > :21:32.relations. Without the UK in the European Union you will lose that.
:21:33. > :21:36.It is a very loud voice in the European Union and you will lose
:21:37. > :21:42.that voice and that will be a disadvantage. The figure that jumped
:21:43. > :21:45.out of me in the film is it to you only 15 months to negotiate a
:21:46. > :21:50.free-trade deal with the United States. Yes, the thing is it is
:21:51. > :21:56.about political will. A free-trade agreement will be no problem unless
:21:57. > :22:01.you want to protect particular sectors of your economy. In that
:22:02. > :22:05.case there was one sector the Americans insisted on protecting and
:22:06. > :22:10.that was their sugar industry. In the end after 15 months of
:22:11. > :22:15.negotiation two relatively free trading countries have fixed up
:22:16. > :22:19.nearly everything. But we had to ask would be go ahead with this
:22:20. > :22:24.free-trade agreement without sugar west we decided to do that. Other
:22:25. > :22:29.than that it was relatively easy to negotiate because we are both
:22:30. > :22:32.free-trade countries. With the UK you cannot be sure, but I do not
:22:33. > :22:38.think a free-trade agreement would take very long to negotiate with the
:22:39. > :22:43.UK because the UK would not want to put a lot of obstacles in the way to
:22:44. > :22:47.Australia. Not to give away our hand, we would not want to put a lot
:22:48. > :22:53.of obstacles in the way of British exports. The trend in recent years
:22:54. > :22:58.is to do big, regional trade deals, but President-elect Donald Trump has
:22:59. > :23:03.made clear the Pacific trade deal is dead. The transatlantic trade deal
:23:04. > :23:06.is almost dead as well. The American election put a nail in the coffin
:23:07. > :23:12.and the French elections could put another nail in the coffin. Are we
:23:13. > :23:15.returning to a world of lateral trade deals, country with country
:23:16. > :23:23.rather than regional blocs? Not necessarily. In the Asia Pacific we
:23:24. > :23:26.will look at multilateral trade arrangements and even if the
:23:27. > :23:30.transpacific partnership is not ratified by the Americans, we have
:23:31. > :23:36.other options are there. However, our approach has been the ultimate
:23:37. > :23:41.would be free-trade throughout the world which is proving hard to
:23:42. > :23:44.achieve. Secondly, if we can get a lot of countries engaged in a
:23:45. > :23:51.free-trade negotiation, that is pretty good if possible. But it is
:23:52. > :23:56.more difficult. But we do bilateral trade agreements. We have one with
:23:57. > :24:01.China, Japan, the United States, Singapore, and the list goes on, and
:24:02. > :24:09.they have been hugely beneficial to Australia. You have been dealing
:24:10. > :24:12.with the EU free deal, what lessons are there? How quickly do you think
:24:13. > :24:19.Britain could do a free-trade deal with the EU if we leave? Well, there
:24:20. > :24:23.is a completely different concept involved in the case of Britain and
:24:24. > :24:28.the EU and that is at the moment there are no restrictions on trade.
:24:29. > :24:33.So you and the EU would be talking about whether you will direct
:24:34. > :24:38.barriers to trade. We are outsiders and we do not get too much involved
:24:39. > :24:44.in this debate except to say we do not want to see the global trade
:24:45. > :24:48.system disrupted by the direction of tariff barriers between the United
:24:49. > :24:54.Kingdom, the fifth biggest economy in the world, and the European
:24:55. > :24:58.Union. Our expectation is not just the British but the Europeans will
:24:59. > :25:03.try to make the transition to Brexit as smooth as possible particularly
:25:04. > :25:08.commercially. Say yes or no if you can. If Britain and Australia make a
:25:09. > :25:12.free-trade agreement, would that include free movement of the
:25:13. > :25:18.Australian and the British people? We will probably stick with our
:25:19. > :25:22.present non-discriminatory system. Australia does not discriminate
:25:23. > :25:26.against any country. The European Union's free movement means you
:25:27. > :25:31.discriminate against non-Europeans. Probably not.
:25:32. > :25:34.It could lead to a ban on diesel cars, prevent the building
:25:35. > :25:36.of a third runway at Heathrow, and will certainly make it
:25:37. > :25:39.more expensive to drive in our towns and cities.
:25:40. > :25:41.Air pollution has been called the "public health crisis
:25:42. > :25:43.of a generation" - but just how serious is the problem?
:25:44. > :25:57.40,000 early deaths result from air pollution every year in the UK.
:25:58. > :26:03.Almost 10,000 Londoners each year die prematurely.
:26:04. > :26:09.It seems at times we can get caught up in alarming assertions
:26:10. > :26:12.about air pollution, that this is a public health
:26:13. > :26:16.emergency, that it is a silent killer, coming from politicians,
:26:17. > :26:24.But how bad is air quality in Britain really?
:26:25. > :26:28.Tony Frew is a professor in respiratory medicine and works
:26:29. > :26:30.at Brighton's Royal Sussex County Hospital.
:26:31. > :26:32.He has been looking into the recent claims
:26:33. > :26:38.It's a problem and it affects people's health.
:26:39. > :26:40.But when people start talking about the numbers
:26:41. > :26:42.of deaths here, I think they are misusing the statistics.
:26:43. > :26:48.There have been tremendous improvements in air quality
:26:49. > :26:52.There is a lot less pollution than there used to be
:26:53. > :26:56.and none of that is coming through in the public
:26:57. > :27:00.So what does Professor Frew make of the claim that alarming levels
:27:01. > :27:03.of toxicity in the air in the UK causes 40,000 deaths each year?
:27:04. > :27:06.It is not 40,000 people who should have air pollution
:27:07. > :27:08.on their death certificate, or 40,000 people who
:27:09. > :27:13.It's a lot of people who had a little bit of life shortening
:27:14. > :27:19.To examine these figures further we travelled to Cambridge to visit
:27:20. > :27:24.I asked him about the data on which these claims
:27:25. > :27:29.They come from a study on how mortality rates in US cities
:27:30. > :27:36.First of all, it is important to realise that that 40,000 figure
:27:37. > :27:41.29,000, which are due to fine particles, and another 11,000
:27:42. > :27:50.I will just talk about this group for a start.
:27:51. > :27:53.These are what are known as attributable deaths.
:27:54. > :27:58.Known as virtual deaths, they come from a complex statistical model.
:27:59. > :28:01.Quite remarkably it all comes from just one number and this
:28:02. > :28:05.was based on a study of US cities and they found out that
:28:06. > :28:09.by monitoring these cities over decades that the cities which had
:28:10. > :28:15.a higher level of pollution had a higher mortality rate.
:28:16. > :28:21.They estimated that there was a 6% increased risk of dying
:28:22. > :28:26.each year for each small increase in pollution.
:28:27. > :28:29.So this is quite a big figure, but it is important to realise
:28:30. > :28:32.it is only a best estimate and the committee that advises
:28:33. > :28:38.the government says that this figure could be between 1% and 12%.
:28:39. > :28:41.So this 6% figure is used to work out the 29,000
:28:42. > :28:47.Yes, through a rather complex statistical model.
:28:48. > :28:51.And a similar analysis gives rise to the 11,000 attributable deaths
:28:52. > :28:59.How much should we invest in cycling?
:29:00. > :29:01.Should we build a third runway at Heathrow?
:29:02. > :29:05.We need reliable statistics to answer those questions,
:29:06. > :29:09.but can we trust the way data is being used by campaigners?
:29:10. > :29:14.I think there are people who have such a passion for the environment
:29:15. > :29:16.and for air pollution that they don't really
:29:17. > :29:22.see it as a problem if they are deceiving the public.
:29:23. > :29:25.Greenpeace have been running a campaign claiming that breathing
:29:26. > :29:27.London's air is the equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day.
:29:28. > :29:33.If you smoke 15 cigarettes a day through your adult life,
:29:34. > :29:35.that will definitely take ten years off your life expectancy.
:29:36. > :29:38.If you are poor and you are in social class five,
:29:39. > :29:40.compared to social class one, that would take seven
:29:41. > :29:45.If you are poor and you smoke, that will take 17 years off your life.
:29:46. > :29:48.Now, we are talking about possibly, if we could get rid of all
:29:49. > :29:51.of the cars in London and all of the road transport,
:29:52. > :29:54.we could make a difference of two micrograms per metre squared in air
:29:55. > :29:59.pollution which might save you 30 days of your life.
:30:00. > :30:02.There is no doubt that air pollution is bad for you,
:30:03. > :30:05.but if we exaggerate the scale of the problem and the impact
:30:06. > :30:08.on our health, are we at risk of undermining the case for making
:30:09. > :30:18.And we are joined now by the Executive Director
:30:19. > :30:37.You have called pollution and national crisis and a health
:30:38. > :30:41.emergency. Around the UK are levels increasing or falling? They are
:30:42. > :30:51.remaining fairly static in London. Nationally? If you look at the
:30:52. > :30:57.studies on where air pollution is measured, in 42 cities around the
:30:58. > :31:00.UK, 38 cities were found to be breaking the legal limit on air
:31:01. > :31:05.pollution so basically all of the cities were breaking the limit so if
:31:06. > :31:09.you think eight out of ten people live in cities, obviously, this is
:31:10. > :31:13.impacting a lot of people around the UK. We have looked at in missions of
:31:14. > :31:23.solvent dioxide, they have fallen and since 1970, nitrogen dioxide is
:31:24. > :31:29.down 69%. Let me show you a chart. There are the nitrogen oxides which
:31:30. > :31:34.we have all been worried about. That chart shows a substantial fall from
:31:35. > :31:39.the 1970s, and then a really steep fall from the 1980s. That is
:31:40. > :31:46.something which is getting better. You have to look at it in the round.
:31:47. > :31:53.If you look at particulates, and if you look at today's understanding of
:31:54. > :32:02.the health impact. Let's look at particulates. We have been really
:32:03. > :32:08.worried about what they have been doing to our abilities to breathe
:32:09. > :32:12.good air, again, you see substantial improvement. Indeed, we are not far
:32:13. > :32:21.from the Gothenberg level which is a very high standard. What you see is
:32:22. > :32:27.it is pretty flat. I see it coming down quite substantially. Over the
:32:28. > :32:30.last decade it is pretty flat. If you look at the World Health
:32:31. > :32:35.Organisation guidelines, actually, these are at serious levels and they
:32:36. > :32:38.need to come down. We know the impact, particularly on children, if
:32:39. > :32:42.you look at what is happening to children and children's lungs, if
:32:43. > :32:48.you look at the impact of asthma and other impacts on children in cities
:32:49. > :32:51.and in schools next to main roads where pollution levels are very
:32:52. > :32:55.high, the impact of very serious. You have many doctors, professors
:32:56. > :33:01.and many studies by London University showing this to be true.
:33:02. > :33:06.The thing is, we do not want pollution. If we can get rid of
:33:07. > :33:11.pollution, let's do it. And also we also have to get rid of CO2 which is
:33:12. > :33:15.causing climate change. We are talking air pollution at the moment.
:33:16. > :33:19.The point is there is not still more to do, it is clear there is and
:33:20. > :33:24.there is no question about that, my question is you seem to deny that we
:33:25. > :33:29.have made any kind of progress and that you also say that air pollution
:33:30. > :33:36.causes 40,000 deaths a year in the UK, that is not true. The figure is
:33:37. > :33:45.40,000 premature deaths is what has been talked about by medical staff.
:33:46. > :33:50.Your website said courses. It causes premature deaths. What we are
:33:51. > :33:55.talking about here is can we solve the problem of air pollution? If air
:33:56. > :33:59.pollution is mainly being caused by diesel vehicles then we need to
:34:00. > :34:03.phase out diesel vehicles. If there are alternatives and clean Turner
:34:04. > :34:07.tips which will give better quality of air, better quality of life and
:34:08. > :34:11.clean up our cities, then why don't we take the chance to do it? You had
:34:12. > :34:18.the Australian High Commissioner on this programme earlier. He said to
:34:19. > :34:24.me earlier, why is your government supporting diesel? That is the most
:34:25. > :34:30.polluting form of transport. That may well be right but I am looking
:34:31. > :34:35.at Greenpeace's claims. You claim it causes 40,000 deaths, it is a figure
:34:36. > :34:41.which regularly appears. Let me quote the committee on the medical
:34:42. > :34:51.effects of air pollutants, it says this calculation, 40,000 which is
:34:52. > :34:54.everywhere in Greenpeace literature, is not an estimate of the number of
:34:55. > :34:58.people whose untimely death is caused entirely by air pollution,
:34:59. > :35:02.but a way of representing the effect across the whole population of air
:35:03. > :35:08.pollution when considered as a contributory factor to many more
:35:09. > :35:18.individual deaths. It is 40,000 premature deaths. It could be
:35:19. > :35:21.premature by a couple of days. It could me by a year. -- it could be
:35:22. > :35:23.by a year. It could also be giving children asthma and breathing
:35:24. > :35:32.difficulties. We are talking about deaths. It could also cause stroke
:35:33. > :35:41.and heart diseases. Medical experts say we need to deal with this. Do
:35:42. > :35:48.you believe air pollution causes 40,000 deaths a year. I have defined
:35:49. > :35:58.that. You accept it does not? It leads to 40,000 premature deaths.
:35:59. > :36:03.But 40,000 people are not killed. You say air pollution causes 40,000
:36:04. > :36:08.deaths each year on your website. I have just explained what I mean by
:36:09. > :36:12.that in terms of premature deaths. The question is, are we going to do
:36:13. > :36:16.something about that? Air pollution is a serious problem. It is mainly
:36:17. > :36:21.caused by diesel. If we phased diesel out it will solve the problem
:36:22. > :36:26.of air pollution and deal with the wider problem of climate change. I
:36:27. > :36:33.am not talking about climate change this morning. Let's link to another
:36:34. > :36:39.claim... Do you want to live in a clean city? Do you want to breathe
:36:40. > :36:44.clean air? Yes, don't generalise. Let's stick to your claims. You have
:36:45. > :36:49.also said living in London on your life is equivalent to smoking 50
:36:50. > :36:56.cigarettes a day. That is not true either. What I would say is if you
:36:57. > :36:58.look at passive smoking, it is the equivalent of I don't know what the
:36:59. > :37:02.actual figure is, I can't remember offhand, but it is the equivalent
:37:03. > :37:08.effect of about ten cigarettes being smoked passively. The question is in
:37:09. > :37:14.terms of, you are just throwing me out all of these things... I am
:37:15. > :37:18.throwing things that Greenpeace have claimed. Greenpeace have claimed
:37:19. > :37:22.that living in London is equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day and
:37:23. > :37:26.that takes ten years off your life. Professor Froome made it clear to us
:37:27. > :37:30.that living in London your whole life with levels of pollution does
:37:31. > :37:35.take time off your life but it takes nine months of your life. Nine
:37:36. > :37:39.months is still too much, I understand that, but it is not ten
:37:40. > :37:42.years and that is what you claim. I would suggest you realise that is a
:37:43. > :37:48.piece of propaganda because you claim on the website, you have taken
:37:49. > :37:51.it down. I agree it has been corrected and I agree with what the
:37:52. > :37:56.professor said that maybe it takes up to a year off your life, but the
:37:57. > :38:00.thing is, there are much more wider issues as well, in terms of the
:38:01. > :38:06.impact on air pollution, and in terms of the impact on young
:38:07. > :38:11.children. We can argue about the facts... But these are your claims,
:38:12. > :38:15.this is why I am hitting it to you. It does not get away from the
:38:16. > :38:20.underlying issue that air pollution is a serious problem. We are not
:38:21. > :38:25.arguing for a moment that it is not. Do you think the way you exaggerate
:38:26. > :38:30.things, put false claims, in the end, for of course we all agree
:38:31. > :38:36.with, getting the best air we can, you undermine your credibility? I
:38:37. > :38:39.absolutely do not support false claims and if mistakes have been
:38:40. > :38:44.made then mistakes have been made and they will be corrected. I think
:38:45. > :38:48.the key issue is how we are going to deal with air pollution. Clearly,
:38:49. > :38:54.diesel is the biggest problem and we need to work out a way how we can
:38:55. > :38:58.get away from diesel as quickly and fast as possible. Comeback and see
:38:59. > :39:00.us in the New Year and we will discuss diesel. Thank you.
:39:01. > :39:02.It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:39:03. > :39:18.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now
:39:19. > :39:22.Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics East.
:39:23. > :39:29.I'm Stuart White and we're at the Christmas
:39:30. > :39:43.Christmas markets originated in Germany where they just
:39:44. > :39:46.Next year, Milton Keynes is 50 years old and over those 50 years,
:39:47. > :39:48.they've developed a very good relationship with foreign companies,
:39:49. > :39:54.There are about 3000 people or more working for German
:39:55. > :39:58.So what effect will Brexit have next year?
:39:59. > :40:09.Milton Keynes, a market, of course, for the big German brands.
:40:10. > :40:11.Global names, but here, you also find German
:40:12. > :40:13.An international conglomerate into metals, chemicals, construction.
:40:14. > :40:16.mining, in Milton Keynes, it produces parts for
:40:17. > :40:29.There are aerospace companies around the world.
:40:30. > :40:32.They are involved in distributing product through the aerospace.
:40:33. > :40:34.We are based here in Milton Keynes but we have
:40:35. > :40:42.A German company that believes written outside
:40:43. > :40:55.We need to be able to trade tariff free.
:40:56. > :40:56.We need to be able to move our people.
:40:57. > :40:59.We have people in this business that are working in Germany,
:41:00. > :41:02.We can't have a situation where they'll need visas.
:41:03. > :41:04.They aren't citizens of those countries, they are citizens
:41:05. > :41:07.in the UK who are able to travel and work and be employed
:41:08. > :41:10.with freedoms and benefits all around Europe and we need
:41:11. > :41:14.to have access to the single market free of tariffs.
:41:15. > :41:22.Making more than 1.2 billion in sales in 2015.
:41:23. > :41:29.This site alone generated ?38 million in global sales
:41:30. > :41:35.Companies like this one will be wanting to know what a post-Brexit
:41:36. > :41:39.trade deal will look like and will be wondering,
:41:40. > :41:45.can they stay here or will they have to the continent?
:41:46. > :41:51.From huge conglomerates to huge heating companies.
:41:52. > :41:56.Jeff Wyatt imports German-made electric radiators to Milton Keynes.
:41:57. > :42:00.Sold and fitted all over Britain, his business is built on German
:42:01. > :42:08.The only noticeable difference that I've seen since June 24
:42:09. > :42:10.is the exchange rate strengthening which has caused a little bit
:42:11. > :42:16.It has cost me a little bit of money but we are only
:42:17. > :42:24.The Germans want to trade with is precious.
:42:25. > :42:32.The single market isn't the be all and end all.
:42:33. > :42:34.The trading will take its natural level once things all settle down.
:42:35. > :42:37.Mercedes-Benz has its UK HQ in Milton Keynes and is home
:42:38. > :42:43.German rail companies have been invested here.
:42:44. > :42:50.Food and drink, logistics, technology, much more.
:42:51. > :42:53.German companies employ 500,000 people in the UK.
:42:54. > :42:55.Half a million British nationals are employed by German
:42:56. > :43:02.British companies employ 250,000 people in Germany.
:43:03. > :43:06.So the economies of both companies are hugely linked and yes
:43:07. > :43:12.the statistic everybody reels out is the BMW's and Volkswagens.
:43:13. > :43:17.It is chemicals, Airbus, industrial goods and it's
:43:18. > :43:22.manufactured products that go into a vast range from health care,
:43:23. > :43:30.In Milton Keynes, everything from German owned steelworks
:43:31. > :43:35.Two country's economies solidly linked.
:43:36. > :43:38.The question is what will Brexit trade talks bring and what will that
:43:39. > :43:44.mean for MK business in Germany and the EU?
:43:45. > :43:50.Let's speak to Chairman and Chief Executive
:43:51. > :43:55.They are an organisation which supports business
:43:56. > :44:01.How important is this country to German business?
:44:02. > :44:10.It is our location worldwide after the United States.
:44:11. > :44:14.It is also our third most important market worldwide
:44:15. > :44:24.It is absolutely vital, the UK, for us.
:44:25. > :44:28.Here in Milton Keynes, we've got Mercedes-Benz,
:44:29. > :44:33.Do you think that companies in Germany will continue to invest
:44:34. > :44:40.This is such an important market and such an important location.
:44:41. > :44:43.We will continue to trade with the UK and will
:44:44. > :44:52.When we hear that negotiations will start in March, what do
:44:53. > :45:15.and we have a number of requirements and we have a number of requirements
:45:16. > :45:25.or things we would like the British government to negotiate. Obviously a
:45:26. > :45:31.continued tariff free access to the UK. Most of our companies and we
:45:32. > :45:39.have 2500 companies in the UK, most of them are trading. We are
:45:40. > :45:45.concerned about possibly new rules and regulations which might come
:45:46. > :46:03.once the UK has left. We hope to continue as before. Another idea of
:46:04. > :46:07.hours is we would like access for our employees and apprentices which
:46:08. > :46:12.now come freely into the UK and go back to Germany. We would like to
:46:13. > :46:21.have continued access for these employees of hours. At least cut the
:46:22. > :46:31.red tape. Are you confident that it will all work out or not? I am
:46:32. > :46:35.always optimistic as we are in business and have to be positive. We
:46:36. > :46:42.hope it will be a good outcome and it'll be a deal in the end. Thank
:46:43. > :46:51.you very much for being with us. Let us put some of those points to our
:46:52. > :46:57.guests, Mark Lancaster and Peter Marland,. It is very important for
:46:58. > :47:02.Milton Keynes that these ties with Europe and Germany are maintained.
:47:03. > :47:08.Germany is our biggest trading partner and the companies in Milton
:47:09. > :47:14.Keynes are hugely important to our economy. It is not just the European
:47:15. > :47:18.companies. We have companies from outside the UK that rely on our
:47:19. > :47:24.relationship with the EU to trade. It is vital for our jobs and
:47:25. > :47:27.prosperity. The idea is we develop these trading partners outside of
:47:28. > :47:32.the EU. You are saying you have paved the way for that? The
:47:33. > :47:38.relationship is with the view -- is with the EU and we are having to
:47:39. > :47:44.make sure those terms are favourable to those companies and making sure
:47:45. > :47:51.whatever the negotiations take us, we listen to those companies and
:47:52. > :47:53.understand what they need. You both remain as before the vote. Are you
:47:54. > :47:57.less confident or more confident less confident or more confident
:47:58. > :48:03.than you were after the vote was taken? Last week I voted in the
:48:04. > :48:08.Commons to trigger article 50 by the end of March. I am increasingly
:48:09. > :48:12.confident and believe, especially when you come to Milton Keynes and
:48:13. > :48:18.you see the way we are open for business, we have a -- attracted
:48:19. > :48:23.business after the vote. The Kooij is positive. Brexit is a negotiation
:48:24. > :48:28.and we have seen the opening rounds. The more we stand up and demand what
:48:29. > :48:37.we want, the more confident I am that the future firm thumb -- for
:48:38. > :48:43.Milton Keynes and the UK is excellent. The opening position is
:48:44. > :48:48.going to be the best possible position that you want to get. After
:48:49. > :48:52.a while, they should be a win, win deal. When you listen to German
:48:53. > :48:57.businesses about what they want when it comes to trading with the UK, it
:48:58. > :49:01.is what we want with them. Whatever the politicians may say on either
:49:02. > :49:05.side of the divide, I am convinced we will end up with an agreement
:49:06. > :49:12.that is positive for both sides and will enable our trade to continue.
:49:13. > :49:18.here and asked them whether they are here and asked them whether they are
:49:19. > :49:19.confident or not? Hours at a business meeting last night.
:49:20. > :49:25.Businesses technical logical Businesses technical logical
:49:26. > :49:29.companies and the open University are worried. They are worried about
:49:30. > :49:34.their trade terms, worried about attracting the right people and I
:49:35. > :49:47.think when we go into negotiations, we have to do so with our eyes open.
:49:48. > :49:53.There is a positive. We are in a free market Wales. We are in
:49:54. > :49:59.competition with Poland, China. -- we are in a free-market world. Are
:50:00. > :50:04.we going to be able to give them the favourable terms to enable them to
:50:05. > :50:08.stay here. Let us have a look at what triggering article 50 and
:50:09. > :50:18.Brexit might mean that people living in Germany. This is an Weisman who
:50:19. > :50:22.specialises in European law at the open University. As far as Germany
:50:23. > :50:28.is concerned and your knowledge of Germany, do you think they are as
:50:29. > :50:34.aware of Brexit as we think they are? I do think they are. I don't
:50:35. > :50:39.see newspapers covering the issue on a daily basis. There is nowhere near
:50:40. > :50:46.as much discussion about the impact on Germany. That is understandable
:50:47. > :50:50.because the Germany, nothing much will change. It is the UK that needs
:50:51. > :51:00.to redefine its relationship with the EU. Not many people worry just
:51:01. > :51:02.yet. They don't know what Brexit is. The general public isn't as engaged
:51:03. > :51:11.in the debate. We have seen the in the debate. We have seen the
:51:12. > :51:17.changes in the way people vote. The disenfranchised getting a vote. Will
:51:18. > :51:23.it affect Angela Merkel? Not that the Brexit issue but for the issue
:51:24. > :51:27.of the intake of refugees and the general movement of people. That is
:51:28. > :51:33.a bigger threat to her and her re-election than the UK's
:51:34. > :51:36.relationship to the EU. We have heard how people in business want
:51:37. > :51:43.those links between Germany and here to stay. Politically, do you think
:51:44. > :51:49.people deep down what those links to stay? I'm sure they will. Many have
:51:50. > :51:53.some sort of business or personal links to this country and Angela
:51:54. > :51:57.Merkel has always said how she considers the UK as a partner in the
:51:58. > :52:02.business but also for cultural reasons. I don't think it is a
:52:03. > :52:11.question of the two countries not come together and finding some sort
:52:12. > :52:16.of arrangement. I think they were liked for the discussion not to be
:52:17. > :52:22.necessary. Do you think she will be in power after elections in 2017? It
:52:23. > :52:30.is difficult to say because we don't know the candidate for the SPD
:52:31. > :52:34.partner -- party yet. It will be a very difficult assumption to make at
:52:35. > :52:41.this point. If she isn't in power, will that be good for the UK or bad?
:52:42. > :52:49.I don't think it will matter. Whoever is in power in October next
:52:50. > :52:54.year, and it might take some time for them to figure out, because
:52:55. > :52:59.usually we have a coalition government and that can take up to
:53:00. > :53:05.Christmas. We might not know who will be in the government until this
:53:06. > :53:11.time next year. Does that tell you with hope or despair? We will have
:53:12. > :53:17.to wait and see. I am the wrong person to ask who will win the
:53:18. > :53:27.German election because I didn't think Trump would be voted and I
:53:28. > :53:33.voted Remain. Only time will tell. Across Europe, there seems to be a
:53:34. > :53:39.vote for change. Is that good for somewhere like middle -- like Milton
:53:40. > :53:41.Keynes? That is an interesting question. It depends on what type of
:53:42. > :53:50.change. The vote that we have seen change. The vote that we have seen
:53:51. > :53:57.in the world this year, not just America or Brexit, we have seen a
:53:58. > :54:01.huge fall right voting Australian have the French elections. It is a
:54:02. > :54:06.vote of desperation on behalf of many people. When people work 60
:54:07. > :54:11.hour weeks in companies on zero hours contracts, that is not fair
:54:12. > :54:17.and they see other people doing really well that possibly don't put
:54:18. > :54:20.in as much effort in. They think the world is not treating them right and
:54:21. > :54:29.they are not getting out what they put in. It is a real cry for help
:54:30. > :54:33.from many people. In the past, they might have voted Labour and now you
:54:34. > :54:37.are saying they are drifting to the right. It is simplistic to say they
:54:38. > :54:47.voted Labour. The Labour vote has always been more complex as has the
:54:48. > :54:55.Conservative vote. Also the Ukip and Green vote. Is there a Ukip in
:54:56. > :54:59.Germany? They sit on the same right-wing side. Angela Merkel has
:55:00. > :55:05.faced struggles on that end. They so faced struggles on that end. They so
:55:06. > :55:12.far haven't gained much room on the federal level but in each of the
:55:13. > :55:18.federal states, we had a couple of elections and they have been quite
:55:19. > :55:21.successful. We have seen voting -- people voting who normally don't
:55:22. > :55:28.bow. They have felt the need to vote and that is what is causing these
:55:29. > :55:32.unknown factors and uncertainties. Getting people engaged in policies
:55:33. > :55:37.is a good thing. Thank you very much for being with us today. Now we will
:55:38. > :55:45.look back at the political week in 60 seconds.
:55:46. > :55:52.The first meeting has been held at the shadow combined authority which
:55:53. > :55:56.will bring devolution to Cambridgeshire and Peterborough. It
:55:57. > :56:00.will receive some powers in February before the mayoral elections in May.
:56:01. > :56:05.We will have a smooth running organisation for the mayor to arrive
:56:06. > :56:09.in May. Whoever they may be. The government has announced formula
:56:10. > :56:15.will see an increase of between one will see an increase of between one
:56:16. > :56:19.and 2% but Luton will see a fall in funding per pupil. The crisis in
:56:20. > :56:23.adult social care has prompted the government to let councils add an
:56:24. > :56:28.extra 3% of bills that the next two years. It will help authorities who
:56:29. > :56:33.are struggling to cope with the growing cost of looking after
:56:34. > :56:40.elderly and vulnerable people. That extra 1% announced today, you know,
:56:41. > :56:45.it still leaves us with 32.5 million that we have to take out of adult
:56:46. > :56:52.social care. Peterboro broke the rules in the Commons by donning a
:56:53. > :56:57.crazy hat the charity which wasn't appreciated by the Speaker. I have
:56:58. > :57:08.indulged the speaker but I am glad he has taken his hat off. I hope you
:57:09. > :57:14.won't take it on again. There we are. Social care. That is a big
:57:15. > :57:20.issue. As far as you are concerned, should the NHS and social care be
:57:21. > :57:23.linked? I think integration is key and it is something we do well here
:57:24. > :57:26.in Milton Keynes. We are a model in Milton Keynes. We are a model
:57:27. > :57:31.that others could follow because it would be wrong to separate the
:57:32. > :57:34.component parts out. Through good communication on a daily basis, it
:57:35. > :57:41.is one of the best ways we can ensure what assets we have, beds,
:57:42. > :57:46.for example, are used to their best capacity. It is not just about
:57:47. > :57:49.money. At the moment in Milton Keynes, social care is OK
:57:50. > :57:56.financially but looking ahead, you will have some problems. There are
:57:57. > :58:00.huge pressures as our population gets older and a lot of people that
:58:01. > :58:06.moved here in the 1970s and 80s are reaching an age at the same time. We
:58:07. > :58:12.are in a financial balance and it is a huge strain on the council. The
:58:13. > :58:19.are allowed to put this extra money are allowed to put this extra money
:58:20. > :58:22.onto the council tax bill, will that make any difference? It'll help but
:58:23. > :58:29.it is nowhere near the amount we need to fund the level of social
:58:30. > :58:33.care we are facing. Even while social care for adults goes up, the
:58:34. > :58:39.children social care bill is going up and the Housing bill is going up.
:58:40. > :58:43.Just in terms of our general demand, the level of council tax we can
:58:44. > :58:48.raise nowhere near meets the demand we are facing. It sounds a lot of
:58:49. > :58:53.money but it is a few million pounds and it will not solve the problem.
:58:54. > :58:57.It is 900 million across the country. This extra money is to
:58:58. > :59:02.solve the problem we face at the moment but it is not a long-term
:59:03. > :59:07.fix. The argument about whether it is local councils or central
:59:08. > :59:13.government as to who should pay, it is a false argument. The taxpayer is
:59:14. > :59:18.going to have to pay. How can you get the long-term fix? We need to
:59:19. > :59:23.come and accept we have a problem and come up with some solutions. It
:59:24. > :59:26.is not just about money. We have talked about integration and it is
:59:27. > :59:32.about making best use of the facilities we have. We want to have
:59:33. > :59:42.a look at some of the highlights from 2016 and it has been a very
:59:43. > :59:46.eventful yet. MUSIC PLAYS.. This is a really massive decision for our
:59:47. > :59:56.country. It is a huge decision for you as young people. We are talking
:59:57. > :00:00.about open markets, free market and being in charge once again. The EU
:00:01. > :00:02.brings us huge opportunities in terms of being able to work
:00:03. > :00:12.overseas. We will have to agree to overseas. We will have to agree to
:00:13. > :00:14.disagree. I am not anti immigrant. It is people versus the
:00:15. > :00:18.establishment battle. There is a establishment battle. There is a
:00:19. > :00:27.fundamental difference between significant parts of the electorate
:00:28. > :00:31.and me. I am one of the group of people who really believe in the
:00:32. > :00:38.opportunity that the referendum throws up for the UK. That is a
:00:39. > :00:46.British passport. There should never have been a leadership contest. It
:00:47. > :00:50.was at the height of folly. If any of the sport politics was going to
:00:51. > :00:59.get boring after a coalition, we were wrong. That is our review of
:01:00. > :01:07.the year. Highlights of the year and what you expect from next year. Mine
:01:08. > :01:10.was Jeremy Corbyn visiting Milton Keynes twice. During the local
:01:11. > :01:19.elections and during his re-election campaign. Whatever you think of
:01:20. > :01:22.number of people in politics. The number of people in politics. The
:01:23. > :01:29.more we can engage people in politics, the better. Your
:01:30. > :01:33.highlight? The way the Conservative Party came together after the EU
:01:34. > :01:39.referendum and facilitated the smooth transition. You are both
:01:40. > :01:43.being very political and stop I could say Jeremy Corbyn coming to
:01:44. > :01:49.Milton Keynes. A look at the 20 17th. I hope for a good result in
:01:50. > :01:53.France and the French elections because a victory for the far right
:01:54. > :01:59.would be disastrous. What is good for the UK is good for the EU and we
:02:00. > :02:05.get a smooth transition. Thank you very much for being with us today.
:02:06. > :02:06.That is it from all of us. Happy Christmas and a
:02:07. > :02:20.Will Article 50 be triggered by the end of March,
:02:21. > :02:23.will President Trump start work on his wall and will
:02:24. > :02:28.Front National's Marine Le Pen provide the next electoral shock?
:02:29. > :02:50.2016, the Brexit for Britain and Trump for the rest of the world.
:02:51. > :02:54.Let's look back and see what one of you said about Brexit.
:02:55. > :02:57.If Mr Cameron loses the referendum and it is this year,
:02:58. > :02:59.will he be Prime Minister at the end of the year?
:03:00. > :03:06.I don't think he will lose the referendum, so I'm feeling
:03:07. > :03:15.It was clear if he did lose the referendum he would be out. I would
:03:16. > :03:20.like to say in retrospect I saw that coming on a long and I was just
:03:21. > :03:25.saying it to make good television! It is Christmas so I will be benign
:03:26. > :03:32.towards my panel! It is possible, Iain, that not much happens to
:03:33. > :03:35.Brexit in 2017, because we have a host of elections coming up in
:03:36. > :03:38.Europe, the French won in the spring and the German one in the autumn
:03:39. > :03:43.will be the most important. And until we know who the next French
:03:44. > :03:49.president is and what condition Mrs Merkel will be in, not much will
:03:50. > :03:54.happen? I think that is the likeliest outcome. Short of some
:03:55. > :04:01.constitutional crisis involving the Lords relating to Brexit, it is
:04:02. > :04:04.pretty clear it is difficult to properly begin the negotiations
:04:05. > :04:08.until it becomes clear who Britain is negotiating with. It will come
:04:09. > :04:12.down to the result of the German election. Germany is the biggest
:04:13. > :04:17.contributor and if they keep power in what is left of the European
:04:18. > :04:23.Union, will drive the negotiation and we will have to see if it will
:04:24. > :04:27.be Merkel. So this vacuum that has been seen and has been filled by
:04:28. > :04:31.people less than friendly to the government, even when we know
:04:32. > :04:36.Article 50 has been triggered and even if there is some sort of white
:04:37. > :04:41.paper to give us a better idea of the broad strategic outlines of what
:04:42. > :04:47.they mean by Brexit, the phoney war could continue? Iain is right. 2017
:04:48. > :04:55.is going to be a remarkably dull year for Brexit as opposed to 2016.
:04:56. > :04:59.We will have the article and a plan. The plan will say I would like the
:05:00. > :05:04.moon on a stick please. The EU will say you can have a tiny bit of moon
:05:05. > :05:09.and a tiny bit of stick and there will be an impasse. That will go on
:05:10. > :05:16.until one minute to midnight 2018 which is when the EU will act. There
:05:17. > :05:20.is one thing in the Foreign Office which is more important, as David
:05:21. > :05:24.Davis Department told me, they know there is nothing they can do until
:05:25. > :05:29.the French and Germans have their elections and they know the lie of
:05:30. > :05:33.the land, but the people who will be more helpful to us are in Eastern
:05:34. > :05:37.Europe and in Scandinavia, the Nordic countries. We can do quite a
:05:38. > :05:42.lot of schmoozing to try and get them broadly on side this year? It
:05:43. > :05:46.is very difficult because one of the things they care most about in
:05:47. > :05:51.Eastern Europe is the ability for Eastern European stew come and work
:05:52. > :05:55.in the UK. That is key to the economic prospects. But what they
:05:56. > :06:00.care most about is that those already here should not be under any
:06:01. > :06:06.pressure to leave. There is no guarantee of that. That is what Mrs
:06:07. > :06:10.May wants. There are a lot of things Mrs May wants and the story of 2017
:06:11. > :06:14.will be about what she gets. How much have we got to give people? It
:06:15. > :06:20.is not what we want, but what we are willing to give. The interesting
:06:21. > :06:24.thing is you can divide this out into two. There is a question of the
:06:25. > :06:32.European Union and our relationship with it but there is also the trick
:06:33. > :06:37.the polls did to London -- there is also the polls. There is question
:06:38. > :06:41.beyond the Western European security, that is about Nato and
:06:42. > :06:47.intelligence and security, and the rising Russian threat. That does not
:06:48. > :06:52.mean the Polish people will persuade everyone else to give us a lovely
:06:53. > :06:56.deal on the EU, but the dynamic is bigger than just a chat about
:06:57. > :07:00.Brexit. You cannot threaten a punishment beating for us if we are
:07:01. > :07:05.putting our soldiers on the line on the eastern borders of Europe. I
:07:06. > :07:09.think that's where Donald Trump changes the calculation because his
:07:10. > :07:18.attitude towards Russia is very different to Barack Obama's. It is
:07:19. > :07:22.indeed. Mentioning Russia, Brexit was a global story but nothing can
:07:23. > :07:26.match and American election and even one which gives Donald Trump as
:07:27. > :07:30.well. Let's have a look at what this panel was saying about Donald Trump.
:07:31. > :07:32.Will Donald Trump win the Republican nomination next year.
:07:33. > :07:45.So, not only did you think he would not be president, you did not think
:07:46. > :07:50.he would win the Republican nomination. We were not alone in
:07:51. > :07:55.that. And they're right put forward a motion to abolish punditry here
:07:56. > :08:00.now because clearly we are pointless! There is enough
:08:01. > :08:04.unemployment in the world already! We are moving into huge and charted
:08:05. > :08:09.territory with Donald Trump as president. It is incredibly
:08:10. > :08:16.unpredictable. But what has not been noticed enough is the Keynesian won.
:08:17. > :08:23.Trump is a Keynesian. He wants massive infrastructure spending and
:08:24. > :08:27.massive tax cuts. The big story next year will be the massive reflation
:08:28. > :08:34.of the American economy and indeed the US Federal reserve has already
:08:35. > :08:39.reacted to that by putting up interest rates. That is why he has a
:08:40. > :08:43.big fight with the rest of the Republican Party. He is nominally a
:08:44. > :08:49.Republican but they are not Keynesian. They are when it comes to
:08:50. > :08:53.tax cuts. They are when it hits the rich to benefit the poor. The big
:08:54. > :08:57.thing is whether the infrastructure projects land him in crony trouble.
:08:58. > :09:02.The transparency around who gets those will be extremely difficult.
:09:03. > :09:06.Most of the infrastructure spending he thinks can be done by the private
:09:07. > :09:14.sector and not the federal government. His tax cuts overlap the
:09:15. > :09:18.Republican house tax cuts speaker Ryan to give not all, but a fair
:09:19. > :09:23.chunk of what he wants. If the American economy is going to reflate
:09:24. > :09:28.next year, interest rates will rise in America, that will strengthen the
:09:29. > :09:33.dollar and it will mean that Europe will be, it will find it more
:09:34. > :09:36.difficult to finance its sovereign debt because you will get more money
:09:37. > :09:43.by investing in American sovereign debt. That is a good point because
:09:44. > :09:47.the dynamics will shift. If that happens, Trump will be pretty
:09:48. > :09:54.popular in the US. To begin with. To begin with. It is energy
:09:55. > :10:00.self-sufficient and if you can pull off the biggest trick in American
:10:01. > :10:05.politics which is somehow to via corporation tax cuts to allow the
:10:06. > :10:09.reassuring of wealth, because it is too expensive for American business
:10:10. > :10:12.to take back into the US and reinvest, if you combine all of
:10:13. > :10:19.those things together, you will end up with a boom on a scale you have
:10:20. > :10:24.not seen. It will be Reagan on steroids? What could possibly go
:10:25. > :10:29.wrong? In the short term for Britain, it is probably not bad
:10:30. > :10:33.news. Our biggest market for exports as a country is the United States.
:10:34. > :10:37.Our biggest market for foreign direct investment is the United
:10:38. > :10:41.States and the same is true vice versa for America in Britain. Given
:10:42. > :10:45.the pound is now competitive and likely the dollar will get stronger,
:10:46. > :10:51.it could well give a boost to the British economy? Could do bit you
:10:52. > :10:56.have to be slightly cautious about the warm language we are getting
:10:57. > :11:01.which is great news out of President Trump's future cabinet on doing a
:11:02. > :11:04.trade deal early, we are net exporters to the US. We benefit far
:11:05. > :11:08.more from trading with US than they do with us. I think we have to come
:11:09. > :11:14.up with something to offer the US for them to jump into bed with us. I
:11:15. > :11:25.think it is called two new aircraft carriers and modernising the fleet.
:11:26. > :11:29.Bring it on. I will raise caution, people in declining industries in
:11:30. > :11:32.some places in America, the rust belt who have faced big profound
:11:33. > :11:38.structural challenges and those are much harder to reverse. They face
:11:39. > :11:43.real problems now because the dollar is so strong. Their ability to
:11:44. > :11:47.export has taken a huge hit out of Ohio, Michigan and Illinois. And the
:11:48. > :11:53.Mexican imports into America is now dirt cheap so that is a major
:11:54. > :12:01.problem. Next year we have elections in Austria, France, the Netherlands,
:12:02. > :12:07.Germany, probably Italy. Which outcome will be the most dramatic
:12:08. > :12:14.for Brexit? If Merkel lost it would be a huge surprise. That is
:12:15. > :12:23.unlikely. And if it was not Filon in France that would be unlikely. The
:12:24. > :12:26.consensus it it will be Francois Filon against Marine Le Pen and it
:12:27. > :12:36.will be uniting around the far right candidate. In 2002, that is what
:12:37. > :12:47.happened. Filon is a Thatcherite. Marine Le Pen's politics --
:12:48. > :12:51.economics are hard left. Francois Filon is as much a cert to win as
:12:52. > :12:57.Hillary Clinton was this time last year. If he is competing against
:12:58. > :13:05.concerns about rising globalisation and his pitch is Thatcherite, it is
:13:06. > :13:11.a bold, brave strategy in the context so we will see. It will keep
:13:12. > :13:19.us busy next year, Tom? Almost as busy as this year but not quite.
:13:20. > :13:21.This year was a record year. I am up in my hours!
:13:22. > :13:23.That's all for today, thanks to all my guests.
:13:24. > :13:26.The Daily Politics will be back on BBC Two at noon tomorrow.
:13:27. > :13:28.I'll be back here on the 15th January.
:13:29. > :13:32.Remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.
:13:33. > :14:13.The most a writer can hope from a reader
:14:14. > :14:30.West Side Story took choreography in a radical new direction.
:14:31. > :14:34.The dance was woven into the storyline,