:00:35. > :00:37.It's Sunday morning, and this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:38. > :00:40.Theresa May will be the first foreign leader to visit US
:00:41. > :00:43.President Donald Trump this week - she's promised to hold "very
:00:44. > :00:46.frank" conversations with the new and controversial
:00:47. > :00:53.Speaking of the 45th President of America,
:00:54. > :00:56.we'll be looking at what the Trump presidency could hold
:00:57. > :01:03.in store for Britain and the rest of the world.
:01:04. > :01:05.And with the Supreme Court expected to say that Parliament should
:01:06. > :01:09.have a vote before the Brexit process begins, we'll ask
:01:10. > :01:21.it is like about to get harder for what Labour will do next.
:01:22. > :01:22.it is like about to get harder for university students from
:01:23. > :01:32.disadvantaged backgrounds? And to talk about all of that
:01:33. > :01:35.and more, I'm joined by three journalists who, in an era
:01:36. > :01:38.of so-called fake news, can be relied upon for their accuracy,
:01:39. > :01:42.their impartiality - and their willingness
:01:43. > :01:45.to come to the studio It's Steve Richards,
:01:46. > :01:51.Julia Hartley-Brewer and Tom Newton Dunn,
:01:52. > :01:57.and during the programme they'll be tweeting as often as the 45th
:01:58. > :02:01.President of the USA in the middle So - the Prime Minister has been
:02:02. > :02:11.appearing on the BBC this morning. She was mostly talking
:02:12. > :02:14.about Donald Trump and Brexit, but she was also asked about a story
:02:15. > :02:17.on the front of this It's reported that an unarmed
:02:18. > :02:21.Trident missile test fired from the submarine HMS Vengeance
:02:22. > :02:27.near the Florida coast in June The paper says the incident took
:02:28. > :02:35.place weeks before a crucial Commons Well, let's have listen
:02:36. > :02:39.to Theresa May talking The issue that we were talking
:02:40. > :02:45.about in the House of Commons It was about whether or not
:02:46. > :02:49.we should renew Trident, whether we should look to the future
:02:50. > :02:52.and have a replacement Trident. That's what we were talking
:02:53. > :02:54.about in the House of Commons. That's what the House
:02:55. > :02:57.of Commons voted for. He doesn't want to defend our
:02:58. > :03:02.country with an independent There are tests that take place
:03:03. > :03:09.all the time, regularly, What we were talking about in that
:03:10. > :03:18.debate that took place... I'm not going to get
:03:19. > :03:29.an answer to this. Tom, it was clear this was going to
:03:30. > :03:34.come up this morning. It is on the front page of the Sunday Times. It
:03:35. > :03:40.would seem to me the Prime Minister wasn't properly briefed on how to
:03:41. > :03:44.reply. I think she probably was, but the Prime Minister we now have
:03:45. > :03:50.doesn't necessarily answer all questions in the straightest way.
:03:51. > :03:57.She didn't answer that one and all. Unlike previous ones? She made it
:03:58. > :04:02.quite clear she was briefed. You read between the Theresa May lines.
:04:03. > :04:07.By simply not answering Andrew Marr four times, it is obvious she knew,
:04:08. > :04:12.and that she knew before she went into the House of Commons and urged
:04:13. > :04:17.everyone to renew the ?40 billion replacement programme. Of course it
:04:18. > :04:23.is an embarrassment, but does it have political legs? I don't think
:04:24. > :04:30.so. She didn't mislead the Commons. If she wanted to close it down, the
:04:31. > :04:32.answer should have been, these are matters of national security.
:04:33. > :04:37.There's nothing more important in that than our nuclear deterrent. I'm
:04:38. > :04:44.not prepared to talk about testing. End of. But she didn't. Maybe you
:04:45. > :04:48.should be briefing her. That's a good answer. She is an interesting
:04:49. > :04:53.interviewee. She shows it when she is nervous. She was transparently
:04:54. > :04:57.uneasy answering those questions, and the fact she didn't answer it
:04:58. > :05:03.definitively suggests she did know and didn't want to say it, and she
:05:04. > :05:08.answered awkwardly. But how wider point, that the House of Commons
:05:09. > :05:12.voted for the renewal of Trident, suggests to me that in the broader
:05:13. > :05:16.sweep of things, this will not run, because if there was another vote, I
:05:17. > :05:22.would suggest she'd win it again. But it is an embarrassment and she
:05:23. > :05:29.handled it with a transparent awkwardness. She said that the tests
:05:30. > :05:33.go on all the time, but not of the missiles. Does it not show that when
:05:34. > :05:38.the Prime Minister leaves her comfort zone of Home Office affairs
:05:39. > :05:43.or related matters, she often struggles. We've seen it under
:05:44. > :05:49.questioning from Mr Corbyn even, and we saw it again today. Absolutely.
:05:50. > :05:55.Tests of various aspects of the missiles go on all the time, but
:05:56. > :05:59.there's only been five since 2000. What you described wouldn't have
:06:00. > :06:03.worked, because in previous tests they have always been very public
:06:04. > :06:14.about it. Look how well our missiles work! She may not have misled
:06:15. > :06:19.Parliament, but she may not have known about it. If she didn't know,
:06:20. > :06:24.does Michael Fallon still have a job on Monday? Should Parliament know
:06:25. > :06:31.about a test that doesn't work? Some would say absolutely not. Our
:06:32. > :06:36.deterrent is there to deter people from attacking us. If they know that
:06:37. > :06:42.we are hitting the United States by mistake rather than the Atlantic
:06:43. > :06:46.Ocean, then... There is such a thing as national security, and telling
:06:47. > :06:51.all the bad guys about where we are going wrong may not be a good idea.
:06:52. > :06:56.It was her first statement as Prime Minister to put her case for
:06:57. > :07:01.renewal, to have the vote on Trident, and in that context, it is
:07:02. > :07:03.significant not to say anything. If anyone knows where the missile
:07:04. > :07:06.landed, give us a call! So Donald Trump's inauguration day
:07:07. > :07:08.closed with him dancing to Frank Sinatra's My Way,
:07:09. > :07:11.and whatever your view on the 45th President of the United States
:07:12. > :07:14.he certainly did do it his way. Not for him the idealistic call
:07:15. > :07:17.for national unity - instead he used Friday's inaugural
:07:18. > :07:19.address to launch a blistering attack on the dark state
:07:20. > :07:22.of the nation and the political class, and to promise
:07:23. > :07:26.to take his uncompromising approach from the campaign trail
:07:27. > :07:31.to the White House. Here's Adam Fleming,
:07:32. > :07:34.with a reminder of how First, dropping by for a cup of tea
:07:35. > :07:43.and a slightly awkward exchange Then, friends, foes
:07:44. > :07:52.and predecessors watched I, Donald John Trump,
:07:53. > :07:59.do solemnly swear... The crowds seemed smaller
:08:00. > :08:03.than previous inaugurations, the speech tougher then any
:08:04. > :08:08.previous incoming president. From this day forth,
:08:09. > :08:15.it's going to be only America first. In the meantime, there were sporadic
:08:16. > :08:39.protests in Washington, DC. Opponents made their voices heard
:08:40. > :08:44.around the world too. The President,
:08:45. > :08:46.who'd criticised the work of the intelligence agencies,
:08:47. > :08:50.fitted in a visit to the CIA. There is nobody that feels stronger
:08:51. > :08:54.about the intelligence community And, back at the office,
:08:55. > :09:06.in the dark, a signature signalled the end of the Obama era
:09:07. > :09:11.and the dawn of Trump. So, as you heard there,
:09:12. > :09:18.President Trump used his inauguration to repeat his campaign
:09:19. > :09:20.promise to put "America first" in all his decisions, and offered
:09:21. > :09:38.some hints of what to expect He talked of in America in carnage,
:09:39. > :09:41.to be rebuilt by American hands and American Labour. President Trump has
:09:42. > :09:46.already started to dismantle key parts of the Obama Legacy, including
:09:47. > :09:51.the unwinding of the affordable care act, and the siding of the climate
:09:52. > :09:56.action plan to tackle global warning. Little to say about foreign
:09:57. > :10:01.policy, but promised to eradicate Islamic terrorism from the face of
:10:02. > :10:05.the Earth, insisting he would restore the US military to
:10:06. > :10:10.unquestioning dominance. He also said the US would develop a state
:10:11. > :10:15.missile defence system to deal with threats he sees from Iran and North
:10:16. > :10:22.Korea. In a statement that painted a bleak picture of the country he now
:10:23. > :10:27.runs, he said his would be a law and order Administration, and he would
:10:28. > :10:32.keep the innocents safe by building the border war with Mexico. One
:10:33. > :10:37.thing he didn't mention, for the first time ever, there is a
:10:38. > :10:40.Eurosceptic in the oval office, who is also an enthusiast for Brexit.
:10:41. > :10:43.We're joined now by Ted Malloch - he's a Trump supporter who's been
:10:44. > :10:45.tipped as the president's choice for US ambassador
:10:46. > :10:47.to the EU, and he's just flown back from Washington.
:10:48. > :10:50.And by James Rubin - he's a democrat who served
:10:51. > :11:00.Let's start with that last point I made in the voice over there. We now
:11:01. > :11:07.have a Eurosceptic in the oval office. He is pro-Brexit and not
:11:08. > :11:11.keen on further European Union integration. What are the
:11:12. > :11:16.implications of that? First of all, a renewal of the US- UK special
:11:17. > :11:22.relationship. You see the Prime Minister already going to build and
:11:23. > :11:27.rebuild this relationship. Already, the bust of Winston Churchill is
:11:28. > :11:32.back in the oval office. Interestingly, Martin Luther King's
:11:33. > :11:38.bust is also there, so there is an act of unity in that first movement
:11:39. > :11:43.of dusts. Donald Trump will be oriented between bilateral
:11:44. > :11:54.relationships and not multilateral or supernatural. Supranational full.
:11:55. > :11:59.What are the implications of someone in the White House now not believing
:12:00. > :12:04.in it? I think we are present in the unravelling of America's leadership
:12:05. > :12:09.of the West. There is now a thing called the west that America has led
:12:10. > :12:21.since the end of World War II, creating supranational - we just
:12:22. > :12:24.heard supernatural! These institutions were created. With
:12:25. > :12:29.American leadership, the world was at peace in Europe, and the world
:12:30. > :12:34.grew increasingly democratic and prosperous. Wars were averted that
:12:35. > :12:38.could be extremely costly. When something works in diplomacy, you
:12:39. > :12:44.don't really understand what the consequences could have been. I
:12:45. > :12:48.think we've got complacent. The new president is taking advantage of
:12:49. > :12:54.that. It is a terrible tragedy that so many in the West take for granted
:12:55. > :12:57.the successful leadership and institutions we have built. You
:12:58. > :13:06.could argue, as James Rubin has argued in some articles, that...
:13:07. > :13:13.Will Mr Trump's America be more involved in the world than the Obama
:13:14. > :13:21.won? Or will it continue the process with running shoes on that began
:13:22. > :13:24.with Mr Obama? President Obama stepped back from American
:13:25. > :13:29.leadership. He withdrew from the world. He had a horrendous eight
:13:30. > :13:34.years in office, and American powers have diminished everywhere in the
:13:35. > :13:40.world, not just in Europe. That power will reassert. The focus will
:13:41. > :13:43.be on America first, but there are foreign interests around the
:13:44. > :13:49.world... How does it reassert itself around the world? I think the
:13:50. > :13:56.institutions will be recreated. Some may be taken down. There could be
:13:57. > :13:59.some new ones. I think Nato itself, and certainly the Defence Secretary
:14:00. > :14:04.will have discussions with Donald Trump about how Nato can be
:14:05. > :14:08.reshaped, and maybe there will be more burden sharing. That is an
:14:09. > :14:13.important thing for him. You are tipped to be the US ambassador to
:14:14. > :14:18.Brussels, to the EU, and we are still waiting to hear if that will
:14:19. > :14:24.happen. Is it true to say that Mr Trump does not believe in EU
:14:25. > :14:34.integration? I think you made that clear in the speech. He talked about
:14:35. > :14:40.supranational. He does not believe in those kinds of organisations. He
:14:41. > :14:44.is investing himself in bilateral relationships, the first of which
:14:45. > :14:50.will be with the UK. So we have a president who does not believe in EU
:14:51. > :14:56.integration and has been highly critical of Nato. Do the people he
:14:57. > :15:00.has appointed to defend, Secretary of State, national security, do you
:15:01. > :15:06.think that will temper this anti-NATO wretched? Will he come
:15:07. > :15:12.round to a more pro-NATO situation? I think those of us who care about
:15:13. > :15:19.America's situation in the world will come in to miss President Obama
:15:20. > :15:22.a lot. I think the Secretary of State and the faculty of defence
:15:23. > :15:27.will limit the damage and will urge him not to take formal steps to
:15:28. > :15:32.unravel this most powerful and most successful alliance in history, the
:15:33. > :15:39.Nato alliance. But the damage is already being done. When you are the
:15:40. > :15:43.leader of the West, leadership means you are persuading, encouraging,
:15:44. > :15:48.bolstering your leadership and these institutions by the way you speak.
:15:49. > :15:53.Millions, if not hundreds of millions of people, have now heard
:15:54. > :15:57.the US say that what they care about is within their borders.
:15:58. > :16:07.What do you say to that? It is such an overstatement. The point is that
:16:08. > :16:14.Donald Trump is in a Jacksonian tradition of national populism. He
:16:15. > :16:19.is appealing to the people first. The other day, I was sitting below
:16:20. > :16:22.this page during the address, and he said, everyone sitting behind me as
:16:23. > :16:26.part of the problem. Everyone in front of me, the crowd and the crowd
:16:27. > :16:30.on television, is part of the solution, so we are giving the
:16:31. > :16:34.Government back to the people. That emphasis is going to change American
:16:35. > :16:41.life, including American International relations. It doesn't
:16:42. > :16:46.moving the leak back -- it doesn't mean we are moving out of Nato, it
:16:47. > :16:51.simply means we will put our national interests first. There were
:16:52. > :16:57.echoes of Andrew Jackson's inauguration address of 1820. That
:16:58. > :17:00.night, the Jacksonians trashed the White House, but Mr Trump's people
:17:01. > :17:06.didn't do that, so there is a difference there. He also said
:17:07. > :17:10.something else in the address - that protectionism would lead to
:17:11. > :17:16.prosperity. I would suggest there is no evidence for that in the post-war
:17:17. > :17:22.world. He talked about protecting the American worker, American jobs,
:17:23. > :17:29.the American economy. I actually think that Donald Trump will not
:17:30. > :17:36.turn out to be a protectionist. If you read the heart of the deal...
:17:37. > :17:38.This is referring to two Republican senators who introduce massive
:17:39. > :17:48.tariffs in the Hoover administration. Exactly. If you read
:17:49. > :17:52.The Art Of The Deal, you will see how Donald Trump deals with
:17:53. > :17:58.individuals and countries. There is a lot of bluster, positioning, and I
:17:59. > :18:02.think you already see this in bringing jobs by the United States.
:18:03. > :18:05.Things are going to change. Let's also deal with this proposition.
:18:06. > :18:13.China is the biggest loser of this election result. Let me say this:
:18:14. > :18:21.The first time in American history and American president has set forth
:18:22. > :18:27.his view of the world, and it is a mercantile view of the world, who
:18:28. > :18:32.makes more money, who gets more trade, it doesn't look at the shared
:18:33. > :18:36.values, leadership and defends the world needs. The art of the deal has
:18:37. > :18:39.no application to America's leadership of the world, that's what
:18:40. > :18:45.we're learning. You can be a great businessman and make great real
:18:46. > :18:48.estate deals - whether he did not is debatable - but it has nothing to do
:18:49. > :18:54.with inspiring shared values from the West. You saying China may lose,
:18:55. > :18:59.because he may pressure them to reduce their trade deficit with the
:19:00. > :19:04.US. They may or may not. We may both lose. Right now, his Secretary of
:19:05. > :19:08.State has said, and I think he will walk this back when he is brief,
:19:09. > :19:13.that they will prevent the Chinese from entering these islands in the
:19:14. > :19:17.South China Sea. If they were to do that, it would be a blockade, and
:19:18. > :19:22.there would be a shooting war between the United States and China,
:19:23. > :19:25.so US - China relations are the most important bilateral relationship of
:19:26. > :19:29.the United States, and they don't lend themselves to the bluff and
:19:30. > :19:35.bluster that may have worked when you are trying to get a big building
:19:36. > :19:42.on second Ave in Manhattan. Is China the biggest loser? I think the
:19:43. > :19:53.Chinese have a lot to lose. Gigi and Ping was in Davos this week -- Xi
:19:54. > :20:03.Jin Ping was in Davos. Is Germany the second biggest loser
:20:04. > :20:07.in the sense that I understand he hasn't agreed time to see Angela
:20:08. > :20:14.Merkel yet, also that those close to him believe that Germany is guilty
:20:15. > :20:18.of currency manipulation by adopting a weak your row instead of the
:20:19. > :20:22.strong Deutschmark, and that that is why they are running a huge balance
:20:23. > :20:28.of payments surplus with the United States. American - German relations
:20:29. > :20:33.may not be great. There is a point of view throughout Europe. You only
:20:34. > :20:37.have to talk to the southern Europeans about this question. It
:20:38. > :20:42.seems like the euro has been aligned to benefit Germany. Joe Stiglitz,
:20:43. > :20:49.the famous left of centre Democrat economist, made the same case in a
:20:50. > :20:53.recent book. In this case, I think Germany will be put under the
:20:54. > :20:57.spotlight. Angela Merkel has shown herself to be the most respected and
:20:58. > :21:03.the most successful leader in Europe. We who care about the West,
:21:04. > :21:07.who care about the shared values of the West, should pray and hope that
:21:08. > :21:12.she is re-elected. This isn't about dollars and cents. We're living in a
:21:13. > :21:17.time whether Russian leader has another country in Europe and for
:21:18. > :21:23.some inexplicable reason, the American president, who can use his
:21:24. > :21:28.insult diplomacy on everyone, including Mrs Merkel, the only
:21:29. > :21:33.person he can't seem to find anything to criticise about is Mr
:21:34. > :21:36.Putin. There are things more important than the actual details of
:21:37. > :21:40.your currency. There are things like preventing another war in Europe,
:21:41. > :21:47.preventing a war between the Chinese and the US. You talk about the
:21:48. > :21:51.Trident missile all morning, nuclear deterrence is extremely important.
:21:52. > :21:55.It doesn't lend itself to the bluff and bluster of a real estate deal. I
:21:56. > :21:58.understand all that, but the fact we are even talking about these things
:21:59. > :22:04.shows the new world we are moving into. I'd like to get you both to
:22:05. > :22:12.react to this. This is a man that ended the Bush Dynasty, a man that
:22:13. > :22:15.beat the Clinton machine. In his inauguration, not only did he not
:22:16. > :22:20.reach out to the Democrats, he didn't even mention the Republicans.
:22:21. > :22:24.These are changed days for us. They are, and change can be good or
:22:25. > :22:29.disastrous. I'm worried that it's easy in the world of diplomacy and
:22:30. > :22:34.in them -- for the leadership of the United States to break relationships
:22:35. > :22:43.and ruin alliances. These are things that were carefully nurtured. George
:22:44. > :22:46.Schultz, the American Secretary of State under Reagan talked about
:22:47. > :22:52.gardening, the slow, careful creation of a place with bilateral
:22:53. > :22:54.relationships that were blossoming and flowering multilateral
:22:55. > :22:57.relationships that take decades to create, and he will throw them away
:22:58. > :23:04.in a matter of days. The final word... I work for George Schultz.
:23:05. > :23:08.He was a Marine who stood up America, defended America, who would
:23:09. > :23:13.be in favour of many of the things that Donald Trump and the tramp
:23:14. > :23:18.Administration... Give him a call. His top aide macs that I've spoken
:23:19. > :23:23.to are appalled by Mr Trump's abdication of leadership. He is
:23:24. > :23:31.going to our radically -- he's going to eradicate extremist Islam from
:23:32. > :23:34.the face of the year. Is that realistic? I know people in the
:23:35. > :23:38.national security realm have worked on a plan. They say they will have
:23:39. > :23:47.such a plan in some detail within 90 days. Lets hope they succeed. We
:23:48. > :23:48.have run out of time. As a issues. Thank you, both. -- fascinating
:23:49. > :23:52.issues. So Theresa May promised a big speech
:23:53. > :23:55.on Brexit, and this week - perhaps against expectation -
:23:56. > :23:57.she delivered, trying to answer claims that the government didn't
:23:58. > :24:00.have a plan with an explicit wish-list of what she hopes to
:24:01. > :24:02.achieve in negotiations with the EU. To her allies it was ambitious,
:24:03. > :24:05.bold, optimistic - to her opponents it was full
:24:06. > :24:07.of contradictions Here's Adam again, with a reminder
:24:08. > :24:10.of the speech and how There are speeches,
:24:11. > :24:15.and there are speeches. Like Theresa May's 12 principles
:24:16. > :24:19.for a Brexit deal leading to the UK fully out of the EU
:24:20. > :24:22.but still friendly in terms This agreement should allow
:24:23. > :24:26.for the freest possible trade in goods and services between
:24:27. > :24:28.Britain and the EU's member states. It should give British
:24:29. > :24:34.companies the maximum operate within European markets
:24:35. > :24:37.and let European businesses do She also said no deal would be
:24:38. > :24:45.better than the wrong deal, We want to test what people think
:24:46. > :25:01.about what she's just said. Do we have any of our
:25:02. > :25:03.future negotiating As the European Parliament
:25:04. > :25:08.voted for its new president, its chief
:25:09. > :25:16.negotiator sounded off. Saying, OK, if our European
:25:17. > :25:18.counterparts don't accept it, we're going to make
:25:19. > :25:21.from Britain a sort of free zone or tax haven,
:25:22. > :25:23.I The Prime Minister of Malta,
:25:24. > :25:30.the country that's assumed the EU's rotating presidency,
:25:31. > :25:33.spoke in sorrow and a bit of anger. We want a fair deal
:25:34. > :25:37.for the United Kingdom, but that deal necessarily needs to be
:25:38. > :25:47.inferior to membership. Next, let's hear
:25:48. > :25:49.from some enthusiastic leavers, like, I don't
:25:50. > :25:55.know, the Daily Mail? The paper lapped it up
:25:56. > :25:58.with this adoring front page. For Brexiteers, it was
:25:59. > :26:02.all manna from heaven. I think today means we are a big
:26:03. > :26:04.step closer to becoming an independent country again,
:26:05. > :26:07.with control of our own laws, I was chuckling at some of it,
:26:08. > :26:13.to be honest, because There were various phrases there
:26:14. > :26:17.which I've used myself again and Do we have any of those
:26:18. > :26:22.so-called Remoaners? There will, at the end
:26:23. > :26:24.of this deal process, so politicians get to vote
:26:25. > :26:27.on the stitch-up, but We take the view as
:26:28. > :26:31.Liberal Democrats that if this process started
:26:32. > :26:33.with democracy last June, We trusted the people
:26:34. > :26:37.with departure, we must trust them Do we have anyone from
:26:38. > :26:43.Labour, or are you all watching it in a small
:26:44. > :26:45.room somewhere? Throughout the speech, there seemed
:26:46. > :26:53.to be an implied threat that somewhere along the line,
:26:54. > :26:56.if all her optimism of a deal with the European Union didn't work,
:26:57. > :26:58.we would move into a low-tax, corporate taxation,
:26:59. > :27:00.bargain-basement economy on the I think she needs to be
:27:01. > :27:04.a bit clearer about what The Labour leader
:27:05. > :27:11.suggested he'd tell his MPs to vote in favour
:27:12. > :27:14.of starting a Brexit process if Parliament was given the choice,
:27:15. > :27:16.sparking a mini pre-revolt among Finally, do we have anyone
:27:17. > :27:22.from big business here? Of course, your all in Davos
:27:23. > :27:31.at the World Economic Clarity, first of all, really
:27:32. > :27:41.codified what many of us have been anticipating since
:27:42. > :27:43.the referendum result, particularly around
:27:44. > :27:43.the I think what we've also seen
:27:44. > :27:48.today is the Government's willingness to put a bit of edge
:27:49. > :27:51.into the negotiating dynamic, and I Trade negotiations are negotiations,
:27:52. > :27:56.and you have to lay out, and you have to be pretty tough
:27:57. > :27:58.to get what you want. Although some business people
:27:59. > :28:00.on the slopes speculated about moving some of their
:28:01. > :28:02.operations out of Brexit Britain. We saw there the instant reaction
:28:03. > :28:21.of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, but how will the party respond
:28:22. > :28:23.to the challenge posed by Brexit Well, I'm joined now by the Shadow
:28:24. > :28:33.Home Secretary, Diane Abbott. People know that Ukip and the Tories
:28:34. > :28:38.are for Brexit. The Lib Dems are four remain. What is Labour for? For
:28:39. > :28:44.respecting the result of the referendum. It was a 72% turnout,
:28:45. > :28:47.very high for an election of that nature, and we believe you have to
:28:48. > :28:51.respect that result. You couldn't have a situation where people like
:28:52. > :28:55.Tim Farron are saying to people, millions of people, sorry, you got
:28:56. > :29:00.it wrong, we in London no better. However, how the Tories go forward
:29:01. > :29:06.from here has to be subject to parliamentary scrutiny. Is it Shadow
:29:07. > :29:11.Cabinet policy to vote for the triggering of Article 50? Our policy
:29:12. > :29:17.is not to block Article 50. That is what the leader was saying this
:29:18. > :29:23.morning. So are you for it? Our policy is not to block it. You are
:29:24. > :29:29.talking about voting for it. We don't know what the Supreme Court is
:29:30. > :29:31.going to say, and we don't know what legislation Government will bring
:29:32. > :29:37.forward, and we don't know what amendment we will move, but we're
:29:38. > :29:41.clear that we will not vote to block it. OK, so you won't bow to stop it,
:29:42. > :29:49.but you could abstain? No, what we will do... Either you vote for or
:29:50. > :29:53.against all you abstain. There are too many unanswered questions. For
:29:54. > :29:57.instance, the position of EU migrants working and living in this
:29:58. > :30:01.country. You may not get the answer to that before Article 50 comes
:30:02. > :30:07.before the Commons, so what would you do then? We are giving to amend
:30:08. > :30:11.it. We can only tell you exactly how we will amend it when we understand
:30:12. > :30:15.what sort of legislation the Government is putting forward, and
:30:16. > :30:19.in the course of moving those amendments, we will ask the
:30:20. > :30:20.questions that the people of Britain whether they voted to leave remain
:30:21. > :30:31.want answered. When you come to a collective view,
:30:32. > :30:35.will there be a three line whip? I can't tell you, because we have not
:30:36. > :30:43.seen the government 's legislation. But when you see it, you will come
:30:44. > :30:47.to a collective view. Many regard this as extremely important. Will
:30:48. > :30:52.there be a three line whip on Labour's collective view? Because it
:30:53. > :30:56.is important, we shouldn't get ahead of ourselves. When we see what the
:30:57. > :31:02.Supreme Court says, and crucially, when we see what the government
:31:03. > :31:07.position is, you will hear what the whipping is. Will shadow ministers
:31:08. > :31:14.be able to defy any three line whip on this? That is not normally the
:31:15. > :31:18.case. But they did on an early vote that the government introduced on
:31:19. > :31:24.Article 50. Those who voted against it are still there. In the Blair
:31:25. > :31:29.years, you certainly couldn't defy a three line whip. We will see what
:31:30. > :31:35.happens going forward. I remember when the Tories were hopelessly
:31:36. > :31:39.divided over the EU. All these Maastricht votes and an list
:31:40. > :31:52.arguments. Now it is Labour. Just another symptom of Mr Corbyn's poor
:31:53. > :31:57.leadership. Not at all. Two thirds voted to leave, a third to remain.
:31:58. > :32:02.We are seeking to bring the country and the party together. We will do
:32:03. > :32:12.that by pointing out how disastrous a Tory Brexit would be. Meanwhile,
:32:13. > :32:18.around 80 Labour MPs will defy a three line whip. It's too early to
:32:19. > :32:23.say that. Will you publish what you believe the negotiating goal should
:32:24. > :32:28.be? We are clear on it. We think that the economy, jobs and living
:32:29. > :32:33.standards should be the priority. What Theresa May is saying is that
:32:34. > :32:39.holding her party together is her priority. She is putting party above
:32:40. > :32:45.country. Does Labour think we should remain members of the single market?
:32:46. > :32:51.Ideally, in terms of jobs and the economy, of course. Ritt -ish
:32:52. > :32:54.business thinks that as well. Is Labour policy that we should remain
:32:55. > :32:59.a member of the single market? Labour leaves that jobs and the
:33:00. > :33:05.economy comes first, and if they come first, you would want to remain
:33:06. > :33:11.part of the single market. But to remain a member? Jobs and the
:33:12. > :33:17.economy comes first, and to do that, ideally, guess. So with that, comes
:33:18. > :33:21.free movement of people, the jurisdiction of the European, and a
:33:22. > :33:30.multi-million never shipped thief. Is Labour prepared to pay that?
:33:31. > :33:38.Money is neither here nor there. Because the Tories will be asked to
:33:39. > :33:44.pay a lot of money... The EU has made it clear that you cannot
:33:45. > :33:50.have... I am asking for Labour's position. Our position is rooted in
:33:51. > :33:54.the reality, and the reality is that you cannot have the benefits of the
:33:55. > :33:58.member of the European Union, including being a member of the
:33:59. > :34:03.single market, without responsibility, including free
:34:04. > :34:08.movement of people. Free movement, is remaining under the jurisdiction
:34:09. > :34:15.of the European Court of Justice. Is that the Labour position? You've
:34:16. > :34:20.said that Labour wants to remain a member of the single market. That is
:34:21. > :34:26.the price tag that comes with it. Does Labour agree with paying that
:34:27. > :34:31.price tag? We are not pre-empting negotiation. Our goals are protect
:34:32. > :34:36.jobs and the British economy. Is it Labour's position that we remain a
:34:37. > :34:50.member of the customs union? Well, if we don't, I don't see how Theresa
:34:51. > :34:55.May can keep our promises and has unfettered access... You said
:34:56. > :35:03.Labour's position was clear. It is! It is clear that Theresa May... I am
:35:04. > :35:10.not asking about Theresa May. Is it Labour's position to remain a member
:35:11. > :35:15.of the customs union? It is Labour's position to do what is right for
:35:16. > :35:20.British industry. Depending on how the negotiations go, it may prove
:35:21. > :35:24.that coming out of the customs union, as Theresa May has indicated
:35:25. > :35:31.she wants to do, could prove catastrophic, and could actually
:35:32. > :35:35.destroy some of her promises. You do accept that if we are member of the
:35:36. > :35:44.customs union, we cannot do our own free trade deals? What free trade
:35:45. > :35:50.deals are you talking about? The ones that Labour might want to do in
:35:51. > :35:53.the future. First, we have to protect British jobs and British
:35:54. > :35:58.industries. If you are talking about free trade deals with Donald Trump,
:35:59. > :36:03.the danger is that Theresa May will get drawn into a free-trade deal
:36:04. > :36:10.with America that will open up the NHS to American corporate... The
:36:11. > :36:15.cards are in Theresa May's hands. If she takes us out of the single
:36:16. > :36:19.market, if she takes us out of the customs union, we will have to deal
:36:20. > :36:25.with that. How big a crisis for Jeremy Corbyn will be if Labour
:36:26. > :36:31.loses both by-elections in February. I don't believe we will lose both.
:36:32. > :36:40.But if he did? I am not anticipating that. Is Labour lost two seats in a
:36:41. > :36:43.midterm of a Tory government, would that be business as usual? I'm not
:36:44. > :36:45.prepared to see us lose those seats, so I will not talk about something
:36:46. > :36:49.that will not happen. Thank you. You're watching
:36:50. > :36:50.the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers
:36:51. > :36:53.in Scotland, who leave us now Coming up here in 20
:36:54. > :36:56.minutes, The Week Ahead, when we'll be talking
:36:57. > :36:58.to Business Minister Margot James about the government's
:36:59. > :37:01.new industrial strategy and that crucial Supreme Court
:37:02. > :37:04.ruling on Brexit. First, though, the Sunday
:37:05. > :37:13.Politics where you are. Going underground, we reveal
:37:14. > :37:22.the real problems in the bowels of Westminster, making the case
:37:23. > :37:27.for moving Parliament elsewhere. I think the best thing
:37:28. > :37:32.is if we move out completely. I don't buy into this
:37:33. > :37:34.idea if we move out, And leading the campaign
:37:35. > :37:44.against moving Parliament, Shailesh Vara, the Conservative MP
:37:45. > :37:48.for North West Cambridgeshire, and with us also today,
:37:49. > :37:50.Dr Julian Huppert for the Lib Dems, former
:37:51. > :37:53.Cambridge MP who will fight But we start with maintenance
:37:54. > :37:58.grants for students. If you want to go to
:37:59. > :38:00.university this autumn, this week was the deadline
:38:01. > :38:02.for your application. It is the first year that
:38:03. > :38:05.disadvantaged students will no longer be able to get
:38:06. > :38:09.a maintenance grant. They've been scrapped
:38:10. > :38:11.by the Government and been According to the latest
:38:12. > :38:19.figures, in this region, 35,000 students received more
:38:20. > :38:21.than ?114 million in So, will it make a difference
:38:22. > :38:31.when they are withdrawn? Alexi is in his second year studying
:38:32. > :38:38.politics and sociology He receives around ?3500
:38:39. > :38:44.a year from the Government in maintenance grants,
:38:45. > :38:46.money to help with living costs of being at university that does not
:38:47. > :38:52.have to be paid back. Just a few more days
:38:53. > :38:57.and it will be over. A few more days and
:38:58. > :39:03.we can party hard. I am from a single-parent family
:39:04. > :39:06.and my sister and I are both at university now and it is
:39:07. > :39:09.a huge burden on my mum. Even the maintenance
:39:10. > :39:12.loan and grant together, there is a shortfall in terms of how
:39:13. > :39:15.much you actually need for living, particularly now my sister doesn't
:39:16. > :39:18.have a maintenance grant It means that there is a massive
:39:19. > :39:25.shortfall and she's going to have to pay a huge amount more interest
:39:26. > :39:27.when she leaves university in debt. There is concern the high levels
:39:28. > :39:31.of debt will make some people think I think the change from grants
:39:32. > :39:36.to loans will put off quite a few students,
:39:37. > :39:37.particularly students Partially because they are so debt
:39:38. > :39:44.averse and they are thinking about, once I have gone to university,
:39:45. > :39:47.how much debt am I going Only 3% of students from the most
:39:48. > :39:52.disadvantaged families go to top universities like these, compared
:39:53. > :39:57.to 20% from the most well off. This is something universities
:39:58. > :40:00.are keen to improve so will be watching with interest to see
:40:01. > :40:02.what impact the Government's In the latest figures from 2014,
:40:03. > :40:09.Cambridge University had 26% of students receiving
:40:10. > :40:11.maintenance grants. For the other universities
:40:12. > :40:15.in the east, the figures climb, and at the top on 56%
:40:16. > :40:20.is the University of Bedfordshire. One of the Cambridge colleges
:40:21. > :40:23.is trying to address this by introducing studentships
:40:24. > :40:28.and a grant of up to ?9,500 a year to help with living costs of those
:40:29. > :40:34.most in need. I want my students here in college
:40:35. > :40:36.to be financially sound, they can participate
:40:37. > :40:39.in all the educational activities that are happening in the college,
:40:40. > :40:46.without any financial worries. It is not just so-called elite
:40:47. > :40:48.universities trying to make sure Anglia Ruskin has an outreach
:40:49. > :40:53.programme that includes speaking to sixth formers and parents
:40:54. > :40:55.about the new student We've been presenting it to parents
:40:56. > :41:02.and students since we've known what the system is and I've not had
:41:03. > :41:07.a negative reaction from anyone. People take the information
:41:08. > :41:11.and are grateful for understanding what it is and how it is put
:41:12. > :41:14.together and it does not If you want to go to university,
:41:15. > :41:20.the system is the system presented to you and you consider
:41:21. > :41:22.the system you have got and you cannot wish for last
:41:23. > :41:26.year because that is not going to be For a normal boy like Alexi,
:41:27. > :41:30.going to King's College Cambridge is a dream come true and his hope
:41:31. > :41:35.for the future is that other students will be able
:41:36. > :41:37.to follow in his footsteps. For poorer people,
:41:38. > :41:39.finance is a priority, when it comes to deciding
:41:40. > :41:43.whether to go to university. To think about looming debt
:41:44. > :41:46.when you are leaving, as well as the interest
:41:47. > :41:49.you are paying on that, on that It was for me and I am sure
:41:50. > :41:57.it is for a lot of other people too. Well, the Government
:41:58. > :41:58.declined an interview, "We are already seeing record
:41:59. > :42:05.numbers of disadvantaged young We have increased maintenance
:42:06. > :42:09.support for students from the lowest Financial assistance is also
:42:10. > :42:22.available through all universities." Well, earlier this week,
:42:23. > :42:29.I spoke to the Vice Chancellor of the University of Bedfordshire
:42:30. > :42:31.and a former Universities Minister I asked if he was happy
:42:32. > :42:35.that enough people from disadvantaged backgrounds
:42:36. > :42:37.were going to university. Everybody who has the potential
:42:38. > :42:40.to benefit from going to university Historically, students
:42:41. > :42:45.from the poorest backgrounds have not participated at the same rate
:42:46. > :42:47.as those from more However, in the last decade or so,
:42:48. > :42:53.albeit from a low base, there has been a significant
:42:54. > :42:57.acceleration of access from students In fact, faster than the whole
:42:58. > :43:03.student cohort as a whole. That has been driven in part
:43:04. > :43:06.by nonrepayable student grants and it is in that context that
:43:07. > :43:09.I regret the fact that What difference do
:43:10. > :43:16.you think it will make? I think there is a risk that
:43:17. > :43:25.students who may be not willing to take out loan finance
:43:26. > :43:27.will be put off. In part, the Government
:43:28. > :43:29.is compensating by increasing the overall loan finance package
:43:30. > :43:38.that is available. It is going up by about 10% compared
:43:39. > :43:41.to the loan plus nonrepayable grant But of course, that is
:43:42. > :43:47.a loan you have to repay. I think it is really important
:43:48. > :43:50.that we get the message across that there is more money
:43:51. > :43:52.available to students whilst they are actually studying and also
:43:53. > :43:55.that the repayments mechanisms are progressive and fair
:43:56. > :43:57.and that you only repay when you are in work and earning
:43:58. > :44:00.more than ?21,000 a year. It is an affordable system
:44:01. > :44:03.and for anyone who is thinking of going to university,
:44:04. > :44:04.it is still the best But there are mixed signals
:44:05. > :44:08.from the Government. On the one hand, urging universities
:44:09. > :44:10.to recruit more students from poorer backgrounds,
:44:11. > :44:13.which is right, but at the same time, abolishing
:44:14. > :44:15.nonrepayable grants. Being in government,
:44:16. > :44:30.I know it from my background as a government minister,
:44:31. > :44:33.when the last government was in power, I know you have
:44:34. > :44:35.to make difficult choices. I would not have
:44:36. > :44:40.chosen to abolishing Nevertheless, I think
:44:41. > :44:47.it is important that we now are saddled with this system,
:44:48. > :44:49.it is important we get the benefits of the system
:44:50. > :44:51.across to potential students, particularly from the poorest
:44:52. > :44:54.backgrounds, the fact that overall loan finance is increasing
:44:55. > :45:00.by about 10% and the payback, once you are in work and earning,
:45:01. > :45:03.for someone with One last message from you,
:45:04. > :45:08.to anybody who is thinking about going to university
:45:09. > :45:10.and cannot afford it. I would say to anyone
:45:11. > :45:12.with the potential to benefit from going to university,
:45:13. > :45:14.do it, it is the best The vast majority of people never
:45:15. > :45:21.regret that decision The benefit will stay
:45:22. > :45:24.with you right the way up, Julian Huppert, what is your
:45:25. > :45:32.experience, you are in teaching? I think there is a real problem
:45:33. > :45:36.for people from poorer backgrounds and while the point has been made
:45:37. > :45:40.that people get loans which they can which they can pay off,
:45:41. > :45:43.the thing is, if you are doing the sums, you think
:45:44. > :45:46.about things one way. If you are a 17-year-old,
:45:47. > :45:49.you're probably not used to the idea of having thousands of pounds
:45:50. > :45:51.of debt sitting over you. I am worried it will have a huge
:45:52. > :45:55.effect on people like that. When I talk to students,
:45:56. > :45:58.many are not so concerned about what will happen in 10,
:45:59. > :46:01.20 years, they are concerned about having enough money now to pay
:46:02. > :46:03.for somewhere to live, for food, for drink,
:46:04. > :46:07.for the normal parts of life. I think it is really important
:46:08. > :46:09.to try to help, particularly people Otherwise we will continue to see
:46:10. > :46:13.ever growing inequality. But the Government is saying
:46:14. > :46:15.it is putting more money in, There is some money but it is loans
:46:16. > :46:27.and it makes a big difference. While people who may own a house
:46:28. > :46:31.are used to the idea of having a mortgage and people are not that
:46:32. > :46:33.worried about a mortgage, they do not see it as money
:46:34. > :46:36.they do not have and need It is very different if you are 17,
:46:37. > :46:40.18, contemplating owing many thousands of pounds,
:46:41. > :46:43.it has a huge effect on people. Finance a priority, we heard
:46:44. > :46:45.that young student say, Well, first of all, these
:46:46. > :46:48.are difficult decisions. In 2015, there was some ?1.6 billion
:46:49. > :46:57.spent on maintenance grants. If that were to continue,
:46:58. > :46:59.over the next decade, If you stop some poorer
:47:00. > :47:03.families going... When tuition fees were introduced,
:47:04. > :47:10.that was the argument that it would stop poorer
:47:11. > :47:12.people coming forward. If you look at the figures,
:47:13. > :47:18.again in 2015, 2015 alone, 4% more people from poorer
:47:19. > :47:20.backgrounds entered There is that element and also
:47:21. > :47:24.an element of fairness. What you are effectively
:47:25. > :47:29.saying is that people who have further education,
:47:30. > :47:34.we know that as a rule they will earn in their working life
:47:35. > :47:38.a lot more than those who do not We are asking people who do not have
:47:39. > :47:42.further education through taxes to pay for other people
:47:43. > :47:44.to have an education... To have an education
:47:45. > :47:48.which will allow them to have more I think we have to recognise
:47:49. > :47:52.the fairness element. Firstly, the reason why
:47:53. > :47:55.there were more people who came from poorer backgrounds
:47:56. > :47:58.was precisely because of schemes like this that were expanded to help
:47:59. > :48:01.fund people from poorer backgrounds. If you take that away,
:48:02. > :48:08.we will start seeing problems. Yes, people who have a higher
:48:09. > :48:10.education do earn more It is really useful to say
:48:11. > :48:14.that people should... Why should people who are earning
:48:15. > :48:20.pay for other people to go I think the point is
:48:21. > :48:24.that the 17-year-old from a very poor background who may well go
:48:25. > :48:30.on and earn more, if they do learn -- earn more, they will be paying
:48:31. > :48:33.income tax, they will be paying other taxes and we should be quite
:48:34. > :48:36.robust about collecting those, close the loopholes,
:48:37. > :48:38.many things we have talked about before, but at that
:48:39. > :48:40.point when someone of 17, like the man we saw,
:48:41. > :48:42.from a single-parent family, Disadvantage against advantage,
:48:43. > :48:50.those people from advantaged backgrounds are more likely
:48:51. > :48:54.to have a successful life. It has always been the case
:48:55. > :48:57.that those who have a generous wallet are going to be better off
:48:58. > :49:00.in life in many other ways. But there is more
:49:01. > :49:07.to life than money. What I would say to Julian
:49:08. > :49:11.about the 17-year-old boy, he is not going to be asked to repay
:49:12. > :49:15.that at the age of 17. There is a threshold that
:49:16. > :49:17.when he starts working, that is when he starts to pay,
:49:18. > :49:20.only if he is earning MPs have got a lot on their minds
:49:21. > :49:25.at the moment, including the future of the Houses
:49:26. > :49:28.of Parliament themselves. The building is in desperate
:49:29. > :49:30.need of renovation. Next week, MPs will discuss a plan
:49:31. > :49:33.to move out altogether for six years There are some strong
:49:34. > :49:44.feelings on the matter. Mr Vara is one of those who want
:49:45. > :49:48.them to stay where they are. We will hear from him
:49:49. > :49:50.in a moment about why. First, we have been on a special
:49:51. > :49:53.tour of one of the most famous Watch yourselves
:49:54. > :50:01.as you come through. We're heading into one of the main
:50:02. > :50:11.pipe vaults of the Palace which we are now walking through has
:50:12. > :50:19.been completely filled with pipework, wiring,
:50:20. > :50:21.everything you need to keep a big Practically, getting to this stuff
:50:22. > :50:26.right at the top now is impossible because of the way we have layered
:50:27. > :50:29.stuff on top of stuff. Everything you see here would have
:50:30. > :50:31.to be replaced under Lots of it dates from the 1950s,
:50:32. > :50:35.though as I said, there is stuff As you head deeper into the Palace,
:50:36. > :50:40.start to crouch down a lot more, we are in a situation
:50:41. > :50:42.where there is physically not enough That are 240 miles worth of cabling
:50:43. > :50:47.and it is just chaos. We know what type of cables
:50:48. > :50:50.they are but we do not know where they run,
:50:51. > :50:53.what they serve and what they do. This is our current
:50:54. > :50:55.telephone system. The real risk for us
:50:56. > :51:03.is a catastrophic failure of the systems leading to a fire
:51:04. > :51:07.and that fire could end up taking hold and we could lose big portions
:51:08. > :51:13.of the building. Everything you can see down
:51:14. > :51:25.here in the basement is visible but all of these pipes and wires end
:51:26. > :51:28.up in the 1100 rooms we have in the Palace,
:51:29. > :51:30.going through all the fine areas, so for us to replace this
:51:31. > :51:33.on the upper floors means pulling the building apart,
:51:34. > :51:35.all of those fine decorative panels would come off the wall for us
:51:36. > :51:38.to replace the system This is just another example
:51:39. > :51:42.of some of the crumbling conditions we have got,
:51:43. > :51:45.down to the extreme heat Some of this is superficial,
:51:46. > :51:48.just on the surface. At the end of the day,
:51:49. > :51:51.we should not be putting this building through the sort
:51:52. > :51:53.of pressures we are putting it through in terms of the environment
:51:54. > :51:56.we are forcing it to work in. Here we are in one of the almost
:51:57. > :51:59.forgotten courtyards of the Palace of Westminster,
:52:00. > :52:01.on the roof. One of the oldest
:52:02. > :52:03.courtyards we have got. You can start to see
:52:04. > :52:05.the crumbling conditions. That is down to pollution
:52:06. > :52:07.and generally the age. We need to get in here in this
:52:08. > :52:10.courtyard to do the huge amount of restoration
:52:11. > :52:11.work, conservation work. It is not just about doing
:52:12. > :52:16.the replacement of the mechanical and electrical plant
:52:17. > :52:18.in the basement, it is about Retaining what is an iconic
:52:19. > :52:24.building of Britain. Under the proposals, MPs would move
:52:25. > :52:31.into the Department of Health. The Lords would go to the Queen
:52:32. > :52:34.Elizabeth Conference Centre nearby. The plans will be
:52:35. > :52:40.debated on Wednesday. This is the centre of
:52:41. > :52:42.democracy in the world, This place here, if you start
:52:43. > :52:46.undermining the presence of MPs in Westminster,
:52:47. > :52:48.the elected MPs, then I think we are talking
:52:49. > :52:53.about a serious issue. You see steam pipes
:52:54. > :52:58.near electricity cables near communications cables
:52:59. > :53:00.and so on, it is an I think therefore that the safest
:53:01. > :53:04.option, as well as in the end the cheapest option is to get out
:53:05. > :53:07.of it, let the workers get on with it and then
:53:08. > :53:10.we will have the best result I think the best thing
:53:11. > :53:18.is if we move out completely. When the building was built 150
:53:19. > :53:23.years ago, over a 20-year period, the peers and the commoners insisted
:53:24. > :53:31.on operating within the ruins, if you like,
:53:32. > :53:36.and they complained day in, day out, about the noise,
:53:37. > :53:39.not enough being done for them, and it proved a great distraction
:53:40. > :53:41.to the engineers. Safest and cheapest,
:53:42. > :53:48.if they go out completely? The proposals say we should be
:53:49. > :53:57.leaving, peers and MPs and all our staff, in six years'
:53:58. > :54:01.time and then we would be out for another 6-8 years and they say
:54:02. > :54:03.it would cost 3.5 billion. But those are flawed figures
:54:04. > :54:06.because the report makes several caveats and in fact on the opening
:54:07. > :54:09.page, it says the budget still needs significant work by professionals
:54:10. > :54:11.to do proper costings. They do say it is going to cost
:54:12. > :54:15.a lot more if they work around you. What I'm saying is that an eight
:54:16. > :54:21.acre site, they should be I am not prepared to look
:54:22. > :54:25.a constituent in the eye and say that they cannot have extra money
:54:26. > :54:28.for whatever and yet commission ?3.5 billion to be spent
:54:29. > :54:31.on the place where I do my work. What I would suggest is that
:54:32. > :54:37.what they do is spend a longer time working around us and we will pay
:54:38. > :54:41.as the work gets done and it At a time of austerity,
:54:42. > :54:45.I do not think we should be The other thing, very important,
:54:46. > :54:49.at this very important time in our history,
:54:50. > :54:55.at a time of Brexit, when we are going to be wanting
:54:56. > :54:58.new friends overseas, seeking favourable trade agreements,
:54:59. > :55:00.do we really want to be working from a temporary House of Commons,
:55:01. > :55:03.in the courtyard of What are our opponents
:55:04. > :55:06.going to be saying? They will say, this is UK Plc,
:55:07. > :55:15.doing their own thing, they will have a picture
:55:16. > :55:18.of the temporary building and they will say, this is UK Plc
:55:19. > :55:21.doing its own thing. We ought to be making
:55:22. > :55:24.maximum use of this iconic It has a huge power
:55:25. > :55:30.in terms of soft sell. Yes, it is falling apart
:55:31. > :55:36.and work needs to be done. It is not fit to be a contemporary
:55:37. > :55:39.parliament building. There are all sorts of ways
:55:40. > :55:42.in which it is not good enough. I don't recall Julian ever once
:55:43. > :55:55.complaining it was not good enough. When you have an eight acre site
:55:56. > :55:57.that was designed... I think it is very archaic,
:55:58. > :56:06.not fit for the way democracy should work now, the way the Chamber is set
:56:07. > :56:09.up, the way it doesn't deal with electronics,
:56:10. > :56:11.the inability to get Wi-Fi He says he does not want to work
:56:12. > :56:22.in a courtyard somewhere else. I think working on a building site
:56:23. > :56:25.would look far more ridiculous. But far more important
:56:26. > :56:27.than the prestige is actually how much money is going to be
:56:28. > :56:29.spent on this. It is an iconic
:56:30. > :56:32.building, no question. I think both of those
:56:33. > :56:39.will probably go up. I would like to see something
:56:40. > :56:41.that is done cheaper, It is not about making MPs feel
:56:42. > :56:45.happy in a famous building but about not wasting taxpayers'
:56:46. > :56:47.money and getting One word from you, will the vote
:56:48. > :56:52.go your way or against you? This is going to be
:56:53. > :56:59.Westminster Hall where there Now for our round-up
:57:00. > :57:04.of the political Week Schoolchildren in Ipswich
:57:05. > :57:11.could benefit after it was named as one of the Government's
:57:12. > :57:15.new opportunity areas. The ?70 million scheme is designed
:57:16. > :57:28.to improve social mobility. Food producers from the region
:57:29. > :57:31.warned MPs this week that continued free
:57:32. > :57:34.access to migrant workers was absolutely vital
:57:35. > :57:35.for their businesses. We absolutely would not be able
:57:36. > :57:38.to operate without access In what might be a first,
:57:39. > :57:48.every single Conservative MP from Bedfordshire got to their feet
:57:49. > :57:51.at Prime Minister's Question Time, including a surprise
:57:52. > :57:54.intervention from a key member Could I commend my right honourable
:57:55. > :57:58.friend for her remarks yesterday, not least the constructive tone
:57:59. > :58:01.she took towards the EU and the future of the EU in marked
:58:02. > :58:04.contrast to others we have heard over the years from many
:58:05. > :58:08.different quarters in the UK? And not for the first time,
:58:09. > :58:16.Suffolk MP and Defra Minister was put in place by a helpful
:58:17. > :58:32.Speaker, John Bercow. LAUGHTER
:58:33. > :58:36.He praised the tone of the Prime Minister's speech, not the content.
:58:37. > :58:42.What is important here is the fact that there were a lot of remainers
:58:43. > :58:45.who recognise 17.4 million people voted in a particular way and we
:58:46. > :58:51.need to get on and respect that decision. Democracy has
:58:52. > :58:56.consequences. I think we are seeing more and more people than the macro
:58:57. > :58:59.problems. Food producers speaking. People did vote but it was partly on
:59:00. > :59:03.a promise we would stay in the single market and there would be
:59:04. > :59:07.extra for the NHS. We should give people the chance to comment on the
:59:08. > :59:11.deal. Where was the promise made about staying in the single market?
:59:12. > :59:20.I can point you to lots of vote leave websites. It is not saying
:59:21. > :59:25.that they will stay in it. It was a conservative manifesto commitment to
:59:26. > :59:30.stay in the single market. We said there would be a referendum and it
:59:31. > :59:34.would be a simple yes or no. It was in my literature. There was a
:59:35. > :59:38.separate peace. We can have a look. The great thing about faxes we can
:59:39. > :59:44.look at the manifesto. I would urge people to do that. -- facts. We need
:59:45. > :59:49.a vote on the deal. Is it what people wanted? Was it a good speech?
:59:50. > :59:53.No, I found it depressing. It will be hugely damaging for the country.
:59:54. > :59:59.Excellent speech, set out very clearly... Very loyal! Fine macro it
:00:00. > :00:03.made it clear to the European Union that there is something in this for
:00:04. > :00:07.both sides. Thank you both of us for being with us this week. You can
:00:08. > :00:07.keep in Dutch on our website. We are back
:00:08. > :00:10.have to do this. Thank you to you both.
:00:11. > :00:20.What exactly is the government's industrial strategy?
:00:21. > :00:23.Will ministers lose their supreme court battle over Brexit, and,
:00:24. > :00:36.Well, tomorrow Theresa May is launching the government's
:00:37. > :00:39.industrial strategy - and to talk about that we're joined
:00:40. > :00:47.by the Business Minister, Margot James - welcome to the show.
:00:48. > :00:54.When you look at what has already been released in advance of the
:00:55. > :01:00.Prime Minister's statement, it was embargoed for last night, it's not
:01:01. > :01:04.really an industrial strategy, it's just another skills strategy, of
:01:05. > :01:11.which we have had about six since the war, and our skills training is
:01:12. > :01:15.among the worst in Western Europe? There will be plenty more to be
:01:16. > :01:19.announced tomorrow in what is really a discussion document in the
:01:20. > :01:23.preparation of an industrial strategy which we intend to launch
:01:24. > :01:32.properly later in the year. Let's look at skills. You are allocating
:01:33. > :01:38.117 of funding to establish institutes of technology. How many?
:01:39. > :01:44.The exact number is to be agreed, but the spend is there, and it will
:01:45. > :01:47.be on top of what we are doing to the university, technical
:01:48. > :01:53.colleges... How many were lit bio create? We don't know exactly, but
:01:54. > :01:57.we want to put them in areas where young people are performing under
:01:58. > :02:04.the national average. But if you don't know how many, what is the
:02:05. > :02:08.basis of 170 million? That is the amount the Treasury have released.
:02:09. > :02:13.The something that is very important, we are agreed we need to
:02:14. > :02:19.devote more resources to vocational training and get it on a par with
:02:20. > :02:25.academic qualifications. I looked on the website of my old university,
:02:26. > :02:30.the University of Glasgow, the Russell group universities. Its
:02:31. > :02:38.spending budget every year is over 600 million. That's one University.
:02:39. > :02:43.And yet you have a mere 170 million foreign unspecified number of
:02:44. > :02:48.institutes of technology. It hasn't got equality with the academics? You
:02:49. > :02:52.have to remember that just as you have quoted figures from Glasgow
:02:53. > :02:56.University there are further education colleges all over the
:02:57. > :03:05.country. The government is already spending on 16 to 19-year-olds. But
:03:06. > :03:10.also, we are going to be adding... This is new money that is all to the
:03:11. > :03:15.good, because we are already spending a lot. We have already
:03:16. > :03:19.created 2 million more apprentices since 2010. That many are not in
:03:20. > :03:24.what we would call the stem skills, and a lot come nowhere near what the
:03:25. > :03:30.Dutch, Germans and Austrians would have. I'm not clear how another 170
:03:31. > :03:35.million would do. You said it is more than skills. In what way is
:03:36. > :03:46.this industrial strategy different from what Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne
:03:47. > :03:48.did before? It's different because it is involving every single
:03:49. > :03:51.government department, and bringing together everything that government
:03:52. > :03:54.does in a bid to make Britain more competitive as it disengages from
:03:55. > :04:00.the European Union. That is what the last Labour government did. They
:04:01. > :04:04.will much more targeted interventions. Under the Labour
:04:05. > :04:09.government, the auto industry got some benefit. A few more sectors
:04:10. > :04:13.were broached under the coalition government. This is all about
:04:14. > :04:18.communities all over the country, some of whom have fallen behind in
:04:19. > :04:24.terms of wage growth and good jobs. The Prime Minister has already
:04:25. > :04:31.announced 2 billion as a research and development priority in specific
:04:32. > :04:35.technologies, robotics, artificial intelligence, medical technology,
:04:36. > :04:40.satellites... So you are doing what has been done before. There is
:04:41. > :04:45.nothing new about this. Wait until tomorrow, because there will be some
:04:46. > :04:48.new strands emerging. It is the beginning of the dialogue with
:04:49. > :04:55.industry and with workers, and the responses will be invited up until
:04:56. > :05:00.April. That will inform a wider strategy that goes beyond skills. I
:05:01. > :05:05.have moved on to beyond them. I'm slightly puzzled as to how the
:05:06. > :05:11.government knows where to invest in robotics, when it can't even provide
:05:12. > :05:16.the NHS with a decent IT system. Discuss. I have to say I find it
:05:17. > :05:19.bizarre that the government is making an announcement about an
:05:20. > :05:24.amount of money and don't know where it's going. This is typical of all
:05:25. > :05:30.governments over all political shoes, which is total disregard for
:05:31. > :05:38.technical education, so different from Germany, who actually invest in
:05:39. > :05:44.the technological side. Germany has a long history. We want to emulate
:05:45. > :05:49.some of the best of what German companies do. Siemens sponsor
:05:50. > :05:55.primary schools, for example. We want to get a dialogue on with
:05:56. > :06:00.business. We don't want to decide where this money is going. By the
:06:01. > :06:05.way, it was 4.7 billion that the government has agreed to invest in
:06:06. > :06:09.science and research, which is the most significant increase in
:06:10. > :06:13.decades. Can you remind us what happened in Northern Ireland, when
:06:14. > :06:17.the government invested money in state-of-the-art technology for
:06:18. > :06:24.energy? No one needs to be reminded of that, and that is not what we are
:06:25. > :06:29.doing. We are inviting business and industry to advise where that money
:06:30. > :06:35.is best spent. That's very different from government deciding that a
:06:36. > :06:40.particular technology is for the future. The government's chief
:06:41. > :06:45.scientific adviser has determined that we will invest a huge amount in
:06:46. > :06:50.battery technology, which should benefit the electric car industry,
:06:51. > :06:57.and... This is taxpayers' money. Who gets it? Ultimately, business will
:06:58. > :07:02.get it, but often only when there is a considerable amount of private
:07:03. > :07:10.sector finance also drawn in. But who is held to account? Various
:07:11. > :07:15.government departments at local authorities will hold this list to
:07:16. > :07:21.account. A lot of it is about releasing private capital as well.
:07:22. > :07:29.Thank you very much. This week, the Supreme Court, I think we know the
:07:30. > :07:33.ruling is coming on Tuesday. And the expectation is that the judges will
:07:34. > :07:38.say Parliament will have to vote to trigger. Is this all much ado about
:07:39. > :07:42.nothing? Parliament will vote to trigger, and the government will win
:07:43. > :07:46.in the Lords and the Commons by substantial majorities, and it will
:07:47. > :07:51.be triggered? Completely. We've known that. Parliament is voted.
:07:52. > :07:55.Everyone is pretty confident that the Supreme Court will uphold the
:07:56. > :08:04.High Court's decision and say it has to go to MPs. There will be a bit of
:08:05. > :08:09.toing and froing among MPs on amendments. You heard Diane Abbott's
:08:10. > :08:13.slightly car crash interview there. The Lib Dems may throw something in,
:08:14. > :08:20.but we will trigger Article 50 by the end of March. If it also says
:08:21. > :08:25.that the roll of Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast should be picked up,
:08:26. > :08:29.that could complicate matters. Absolutely. That could delay the
:08:30. > :08:34.planned triggering of Article 50 before the end of March. Not what
:08:35. > :08:39.they say about the Westminster Parliament, because it is clear that
:08:40. > :08:44.it was. I never understood the furore about that original judgment,
:08:45. > :08:48.because every MP made it clear they wouldn't block it. Even though Diane
:08:49. > :08:54.Abbott was evasive on several fronts, she said they wouldn't block
:08:55. > :08:58.it. You are right, if they give a vote, or give some authorisation for
:08:59. > :09:03.the Scottish Parliament and other devolved assemblies, that might
:09:04. > :09:09.delay the whole sequence. That is the only significant thing to watch
:09:10. > :09:14.out for. Watch out on Tuesday. Mrs May goes to Washington. It will be
:09:15. > :09:19.another movie in the making! I would suggest that she has a tricky line
:09:20. > :09:24.to follow. She has got to be seen to be taking advantage of the fact that
:09:25. > :09:29.there is a very pro-British, pro-Brexit president in the Oval
:09:30. > :09:33.Office, who I am told is prepared to expend political capital on this.
:09:34. > :09:46.But on the other hand, to make sure that she is not what we used to call
:09:47. > :09:49.Mr Blair, George Bush's poodle. It is very difficult, and who would not
:09:50. > :09:53.want to be a fly on the wall in that meeting! I can't think of anyone in
:09:54. > :09:58.the world who would despise Mr Trump more than Mrs May, and for him, he
:09:59. > :10:09.dislikes any woman who does not look like a supermodel, no disrespected
:10:10. > :10:12.Mrs May. Most of it is actually anti-EU, and I think we should
:10:13. > :10:17.capitalise it. Let's get the Queen to earn her money, roll out the red
:10:18. > :10:25.carpet, invite him to dinner, spend the night, what ever we need...
:10:26. > :10:29.Trump at Balmoral! Here is the issue, because the agenda is, as we
:10:30. > :10:35.heard from Ted Malloch earlier, that this is not an administration that
:10:36. > :10:38.has much time for the EU, EU integration or Germany. I think
:10:39. > :10:43.Germany will be the second biggest loser to begin with. They will not
:10:44. > :10:51.even give a date for Angela Merkel to meet the president. This is an
:10:52. > :11:00.opportunity for Mrs May... It is a huge. It could sideline talks of the
:11:01. > :11:06.punishment beating from Germany. The Trump presidency has completely
:11:07. > :11:10.changed the field on Brexit. Along came Donald Trump, and Theresa May
:11:11. > :11:16.has this incredible opportunity here. Not of her making, but she has
:11:17. > :11:21.played her cards well. To an officially be the EU emissary to
:11:22. > :11:26.Washington, to get some sort of broker going. That gives us huge
:11:27. > :11:30.extra leveraged in the Brexit negotiations. People around the
:11:31. > :11:35.world think Germany as a currency manipulator, that it is benefiting
:11:36. > :11:39.from an underpriced euro, hence the huge surplus it runs of America, and
:11:40. > :11:45.they think it is disgraceful that a country that runs a massive budget
:11:46. > :11:50.surplus spends only 1.2% of its GDP on defence, and America runs a
:11:51. > :11:56.massive deficit and needs to spend a lot more. He's going for Germany.
:11:57. > :12:01.And what a massive shift. I think Obama was quite open, in a farewell
:12:02. > :12:06.interview, that he felt closer to Merkel than any other European
:12:07. > :12:13.leader. And Jamie kind of reflected that in our discussion. Yes, that's
:12:14. > :12:17.very interesting discussion. I think she was the last person he spoke to
:12:18. > :12:24.in the White House, Obama. And now you are getting the onslaught from
:12:25. > :12:28.Trump. This Thatcher- Reagan imagery is dangerous, though. Blair was
:12:29. > :12:33.hypnotised by it and was too scared to criticise Bush, because he wanted
:12:34. > :12:38.to be seen in that light, and we know where that led. Cameron
:12:39. > :12:42.similarly with Obama, which presented him with problems, as
:12:43. > :12:49.Obama didn't regard him as his number one pin up in Europe. I would
:12:50. > :12:54.put a note of caution in there about the Thatcher - Reagan parallel.
:12:55. > :12:59.Everything Trump is doing now is different from before, so Mrs May
:13:00. > :13:05.should not have any of these previous relationships in her mind.
:13:06. > :13:12.That is not entirely true. Donald Trump aches to be the new Ronald
:13:13. > :13:16.Reagan. He may be impeached first! He sees her as the new Margaret
:13:17. > :13:24.Thatcher, and that may her leveraged with him. Thank you.
:13:25. > :13:29.We'll be back here at the same time next week, and you can catch up
:13:30. > :13:31.on all the latest political news on the Daily Politics,
:13:32. > :13:35.In the meantime, remember - if it's Sunday,
:13:36. > :14:13.It's just pain, but it doesn't feel like pain,
:14:14. > :14:36.it feels much more violent, dark and exciting.
:14:37. > :14:41.Join Michael Buerk as he explores the dishes fit for kings and queens.
:14:42. > :14:46.When it comes to extravagance, few monarchs can compete with George IV.
:14:47. > :14:50.If that was for breakfast, I dread to think what he had for dinner.