:00:41. > :00:42.Morning, folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics.
:00:43. > :00:44.Hard line remainers strike back at Brexit.
:00:45. > :00:46.Are they trying to overturn the result of June's referendum
:00:47. > :00:49.by forcing a second vote before we leave?
:00:50. > :00:52.Australia's man in London tells us that life outside the EU "can be
:00:53. > :00:57.pretty good" and that Brexit will "not be as hard as people say".
:00:58. > :00:59.Could leaving the EU free Britain to do more business
:01:00. > :01:05.It's been called "disgusting, dangerous and deadly"
:01:06. > :01:08.but how polluted is our air, how bad for our health,
:01:09. > :01:16.In London rough sleeping has doubled over the last six years.
:01:17. > :01:28.We join the outreach workers and the MP looking for answers.
:01:29. > :01:32.And with me in the Sunday Politics grotto, the Dasher, Dancer
:01:33. > :01:35.and Prancer of political punditry Iain Martin,
:01:36. > :01:43.They'll be delivering tweets throughout the programme.
:01:44. > :01:49.First this morning, some say they will fight
:01:50. > :01:52.for what they call a "soft Brexit", but now there's an attempt by those
:01:53. > :01:55.who campaigned for Britain to remain in the EU to allow the British
:01:56. > :01:58.people to change their minds - possibly with a second referendum -
:01:59. > :02:02.The Labour MEP Richard Corbett is revealed this morning to have
:02:03. > :02:04.tried to amend European Parliament resolutions.
:02:05. > :02:07.The original resolution called on the European Parliament
:02:08. > :02:10.to "respect the will of the majority of the citizens
:02:11. > :02:25.of the United Kingdom to leave the EU".
:02:26. > :02:31.He also proposed removing the wording "stress that this wish
:02:32. > :02:33.must be respected" and adding "while taking account of the 48.1%
:02:34. > :02:46.The amendments were proposed in October,
:02:47. > :02:49.but were rejected by a vote in the Brussels
:02:50. > :02:50.Constitutional Affairs Committee earlier this month.
:02:51. > :02:53.The report will be voted on by all MEPs in February.
:02:54. > :02:56.Well, joining me now from Leeds is the Labour MEP who proposed
:02:57. > :03:05.Good morning. Thanks for joining us at short notice. Is your aim to try
:03:06. > :03:10.and reverse what happened on June 23? My aim with those amendments was
:03:11. > :03:14.simply factual. It is rather odd that these amendments of two months
:03:15. > :03:20.ago are suddenly used paper headlines in three very different
:03:21. > :03:26.newspapers on the same day. It smacks of a sort of concerted effort
:03:27. > :03:31.to try and slapped down any notion that Britain might perhaps want to
:03:32. > :03:36.rethink its position on Brexit as the cost of Brexit emerges. You
:03:37. > :03:42.would like us to rethink the position even before the cost urges?
:03:43. > :03:47.I get lots of letters from people saying how one, this was an advisory
:03:48. > :03:53.referendum won by a narrow majority on the basis of a pack of lies and a
:03:54. > :03:56.questionable mandate. But if there is a mandate from this referendum,
:03:57. > :04:00.it is surely to secure a Brexit that works for Britain without sinking
:04:01. > :04:04.the economy. And if it transpires as we move forward, that this will be a
:04:05. > :04:09.very costly exercise, then there will be people who voted leave who
:04:10. > :04:13.said Hang on, this is not what I was told. I was told this would save
:04:14. > :04:15.money, we could put it in the NHS, but if it is going to cost us and
:04:16. > :04:32.our Monday leg, I would the right to reconsider. But
:04:33. > :04:36.your aim is not get a Brexit that would work for Britain, your aim is
:04:37. > :04:38.to stop it? If we got a Brexit that would work for Britain, that would
:04:39. > :04:41.respect the mandate. But if we cannot get that, if it is going to
:04:42. > :04:44.be a disaster, if it is going to cost people jobs and cost Britain
:04:45. > :04:48.money, it is something we might want to pause and rethink. The government
:04:49. > :04:53.said it is going to come forward with a plan. That is good. We need
:04:54. > :05:00.to know what options to go for as a country. Do we want to stay in the
:05:01. > :05:03.single market, the customs union, the various agencies? And options
:05:04. > :05:09.should be costed so we can all see how much they cost of Brexit will
:05:10. > :05:13.be. If you were simply going to try and make the resolution is more
:05:14. > :05:22.illegal, why did the constitutional committee vote them down? This is a
:05:23. > :05:27.report about future treaty amendments down the road for years
:05:28. > :05:36.to come. This was not the main focus of the report, it was a side
:05:37. > :05:41.reference, in which was put the idea for Association partnerships. Will
:05:42. > :05:49.you push for the idea before the full parliament? I must see what the
:05:50. > :05:56.text is. You said there is a widespread view in labour that if
:05:57. > :05:59.the Brexit view is bad we should not exclude everything, I take it you
:06:00. > :06:07.mean another referendum. When you were named down these amendments,
:06:08. > :06:11.was this just acting on your own initiative, or acting on behalf of
:06:12. > :06:19.the Labour Party? I am just be humble lame-duck MEP in the European
:06:20. > :06:23.Parliament. It makes sense from any point of view that if the course of
:06:24. > :06:27.action you have embarked on turns out to be much more costly and
:06:28. > :06:31.disastrous than you had anticipated, that you might want the chance to
:06:32. > :06:36.think again. You might come to the same conclusion, of course, but you
:06:37. > :06:42.might think, wait a minute, let's have a look at this. But let's be
:06:43. > :06:46.clear, even though you are deputy leader of Labour in the European
:06:47. > :06:53.Parliament, you're acting alone and not as Labour Party policy? I am
:06:54. > :06:58.acting in the constitutional affairs committee. All I am doing is stating
:06:59. > :07:01.things which are common sense. If as we move forward then this turns out
:07:02. > :07:06.to be a disaster, we need to look very carefully at where we are
:07:07. > :07:12.going. But if a deal is done under Article 50, and we get to see the
:07:13. > :07:17.shape of that deal by the end of 2019 under the two-year timetable,
:07:18. > :07:21.in your words, we won't know if it is a disaster or not until it is
:07:22. > :07:28.implemented. We won't be able to tell until we see the results about
:07:29. > :07:35.whether it is good or bad, surely? We might well be able to, because
:07:36. > :07:40.that has to take account of the future framework of relationships
:07:41. > :07:43.with the European Union, to quote the article of the treaty. That
:07:44. > :07:47.means we should have some idea about what that will be like. Will we be
:07:48. > :07:51.outside the customs union, for instance, which will be very
:07:52. > :07:56.damaging for our economy? Or will we have to stay inside and follow the
:07:57. > :08:00.rules without having a say on them. We won't know until we leave the
:08:01. > :08:04.customs union. You think it will be damaging, others think it will give
:08:05. > :08:08.us the opportunity to do massive trade deals. My case this morning is
:08:09. > :08:12.not what is right or wrong, we will not know until we have seen the
:08:13. > :08:16.results. We will know a heck of a lot more than we do now when we see
:08:17. > :08:19.that Article 50 divorce agreement. We will know the terms of the
:08:20. > :08:23.divorce, we will know how much we still have to pay into the EU budget
:08:24. > :08:28.for legacy costs. We will know whether we will be in the single
:08:29. > :08:33.market customs union or not. We will know about the agencies. We will
:08:34. > :08:36.know a lot of things. If the deal on the table looks as if it will be
:08:37. > :08:43.damaging to Britain, then Parliament will be in its rights to say, wait a
:08:44. > :08:46.minute, not this deal. And then you either renegotiate or you reconsider
:08:47. > :08:51.the whole issue of Brexit or you find another solution. We need to
:08:52. > :08:56.leave it there but thank you for joining us.
:08:57. > :09:03.Iain Martin, how serious is the attempt to in effect an wind what
:09:04. > :09:07.happened on June 23? I think it is pretty serious and that interview
:09:08. > :09:12.illustrates very well the most damaging impact of the approach
:09:13. > :09:18.taken by a lot of Remainers, which is essentially to say with one
:09:19. > :09:21.breath, we of course accept the result, but with every action
:09:22. > :09:24.subsequent to that to try and undermine the result or try and are
:09:25. > :09:30.sure that the deal is as bad as possible. I think what needed to
:09:31. > :09:35.happen and hasn't happened after June 23 is you have the extremists
:09:36. > :09:40.on both sides and you have in the middle probably 70% of public
:09:41. > :09:46.opinion, moderate leaders, moderate Remainers should be working together
:09:47. > :09:54.to try and get British bespoke deal. But moderate Leavers will not take
:09:55. > :09:58.moderate Remainers seriously if this is the approach taken at every
:09:59. > :10:08.single turn to try and rerun the referendum. He did not say whether
:10:09. > :10:12.it was Labour policy? That was a question which was ducked. I do not
:10:13. > :10:18.think it is Labour Party policy. I think most people are in a morass in
:10:19. > :10:22.the middle. I think the screaming that happens when anybody dares to
:10:23. > :10:26.question or suggest that you might ever want to think again about these
:10:27. > :10:30.things, I disagree with him about having another referendum but if he
:10:31. > :10:34.wants to campaign for that it is his democratic right to do so. If you
:10:35. > :10:39.can convince enough people it is a good idea then he has succeeded. But
:10:40. > :10:44.the idea that we would do a deal and then realise this is a really bad
:10:45. > :10:51.deal, let's not proceed, we will not really know that until the deal is
:10:52. > :10:55.implemented. What our access is to the single market, whether or not we
:10:56. > :10:59.are in or out of the customs union which we will talk about in a
:11:00. > :11:04.minute, what immigration policy we will have, whether these are going
:11:05. > :11:08.to be good things bad things, surely you have got to wait for four, five,
:11:09. > :11:12.six years to see if it has worked or not? Yes, and by which stage
:11:13. > :11:17.Parliament will have voted on it and there will be no going back from it,
:11:18. > :11:22.or maybe there will. We are talking now about the first three months of
:11:23. > :11:29.2019. That is absolutely the moment when Parliament agrees with Theresa
:11:30. > :11:40.May or not. One arch remain I spoke to, and arch Remainiac, he said that
:11:41. > :11:49.Theresa May will bring this to Parliament in 2019 and could say I
:11:50. > :11:54.recommend that we reject it. What is he on or she? Some strong chemical
:11:55. > :12:00.drugs! The point is that all manner of things could happen. I don't
:12:01. > :12:05.think any of us take it seriously for now but the future is a very
:12:06. > :12:09.long way away. Earlier, the trade Secretary Liam Fox was asked if we
:12:10. > :12:12.would stay in the customs union after Brexit.
:12:13. > :12:18.There would be limitations on what we would do in terms of tariff
:12:19. > :12:25.setting which could limit the deals we would do, but we want to look at
:12:26. > :12:28.all the different deals. There is hard Brexit and soft Brexit as if it
:12:29. > :12:33.is a boiled egg we are talking about. Turkey is in part of the
:12:34. > :12:41.customs union but not other parts. What we need to do is look at the
:12:42. > :12:44.cost. This is what I picked up. The government knows it cannot remain a
:12:45. > :12:49.member of the single market in these negotiations, because that would
:12:50. > :12:53.make us subject to free movement and the European Court. The customs
:12:54. > :12:57.union and the Prime Minister 's office doesn't seem to be quite as
:12:58. > :13:01.binary, that you can be a little bit in and a little bit out, but I would
:13:02. > :13:06.suggest that overall Liam Fox knows to do all the trade deals we want to
:13:07. > :13:10.do we basically have to be out. But what he also seems to know is that
:13:11. > :13:16.is a minority view in Cabinet. He said he was not going to give his
:13:17. > :13:25.opinion publicly. There is still an argument going on about it in
:13:26. > :13:28.Cabinet. When David Liddington struggled against Emily Thornbury
:13:29. > :13:31.PMQs, he did not know about the customs union. What is apparent is
:13:32. > :13:38.Theresa May has not told him what to think about that. If we stay in the
:13:39. > :13:45.customs union we cannot do our own free trade deals. We are behind the
:13:46. > :13:49.customs union, the tariff barriers set by Europe? Not quite. Turkey is
:13:50. > :13:54.proof of the pudding. There are limited exemptions but they can do
:13:55. > :14:02.free trade with their neighbours. Not on goods. They are doing a trade
:14:03. > :14:06.deal with Pakistan at the moment, it relies on foreign trade investment
:14:07. > :14:10.but Europe negotiates on turkey's behalf on the major free-trade
:14:11. > :14:14.deals. This is absolutely why the customs union will be the fault line
:14:15. > :14:18.for the deal we are trying to achieve. Interestingly, I thought
:14:19. > :14:23.Liam Fox suggested during that interview that he was prepared to
:14:24. > :14:28.suck up whatever it was. I think he was saying there is still an
:14:29. > :14:36.argument and he intends to win it. He wants to leave it because he
:14:37. > :14:41.wants to do these free-trade deals. There is an argument in the cabinet
:14:42. > :14:46.about precisely that. The other thing to consider is in this country
:14:47. > :14:50.we have tended to focus too much on the British angle in negotiations,
:14:51. > :14:53.but I think the negotiations are going to be very difficult. You look
:14:54. > :14:57.at the state of the EU at the moment, you look at what is
:14:58. > :15:04.happening in Italy, France, Germany, look at the 27. It is possible I
:15:05. > :15:08.think that Britain could design a bespoke sensible deal but then it
:15:09. > :15:16.becomes very difficult to agree which is why I ultimately think we
:15:17. > :15:17.are heading for a harder Brexit. It will be about developing in this
:15:18. > :15:21.country. So, we've had a warning this week
:15:22. > :15:24.that it could take ten years to do a trade deal
:15:25. > :15:27.with the EU after Brexit. But could opportunities to expand
:15:28. > :15:29.trade lie elsewhere? Australia was one of the first
:15:30. > :15:31.countries to indicate its willingness to do a deal
:15:32. > :15:34.with the UK and now its High Commissioner in London has told
:15:35. > :15:36.us that life outside the EU He made this exclusive film
:15:37. > :15:52.for the Sunday Politics. My father was the Australian High
:15:53. > :15:55.Commissioner in the early 70s when the UK joined
:15:56. > :15:57.the European Union, Now I'm in the job,
:15:58. > :16:05.the UK is leaving. Australia supported
:16:06. > :16:07.Britain remaining a member of the European Union,
:16:08. > :16:10.but we respect the decision that Now that the decision has been made,
:16:11. > :16:16.we hope that Britain will get on with the process
:16:17. > :16:20.of negotiating their exit from the European Union and make
:16:21. > :16:24.the most of the opportunities that Following the referendum decision,
:16:25. > :16:30.Australia approached the British Government
:16:31. > :16:32.with a proposal. We offered, when the time was right,
:16:33. > :16:35.to negotiate a free trade agreement. The British and Australian
:16:36. > :16:42.governments have already established a working group to explore a future,
:16:43. > :16:45.ambitious trade agreement once A free trade agreement will provide
:16:46. > :16:57.great opportunities for consumers Australian consumers could purchase
:16:58. > :17:02.British-made cars for less We would give British
:17:03. > :17:08.households access to cheaper, Our summer is during your winter,
:17:09. > :17:13.so Australia could provide British households with fresh produce
:17:14. > :17:17.when the equivalent British or Australian households would have
:17:18. > :17:24.access to British products Free-trade agreements
:17:25. > :17:37.are also about investment. The UK is the second-largest source
:17:38. > :17:41.of foreign investment in Australia. By the way, Australia also invests
:17:42. > :17:47.over ?200 billion in the UK, so a free trade agreement
:17:48. > :17:50.would stimulate investment, But, by the way, free-trade
:17:51. > :17:55.agreements are not just about trade and investment,
:17:56. > :17:59.they are also about geopolitics. Countries with good trade relations
:18:00. > :18:03.often work more closely together in other fields including security,
:18:04. > :18:07.the spread of democracy We may have preferred
:18:08. > :18:21.the UKto remain in the EU, We may have preferred the UK
:18:22. > :18:23.to remain in the EU, but life outside as we know can
:18:24. > :18:26.be pretty good. We have negotiated eight free-trade
:18:27. > :18:28.agreements over the last 12 years, including a free-trade agreement
:18:29. > :18:30.with the United States This is one of the reasons why
:18:31. > :18:42.the Australian economy has continued to grow over the last 25 years
:18:43. > :18:45.and we, of course, are not Australia welcomes Theresa May's
:18:46. > :18:55.vision for the UK to become a global We are willing to help
:18:56. > :19:25.in any way we can. Welcome to the programme. The
:19:26. > :19:29.Australian government says it wants to negotiate an important trade deal
:19:30. > :19:35.with the UK as efficiently and promptly as possible when Brexit is
:19:36. > :19:40.complete. How prompt is prompt? There are legal issues obviously.
:19:41. > :19:45.The UK, for as long as it remains in the EU, cannot negotiate individual
:19:46. > :19:50.trade deals. Once it leaves it can. We will negotiate a agreement with
:19:51. > :19:56.the UK when the time is right, by which we mean we can do preliminary
:19:57. > :20:01.examination. Are you talking now about the parameters? We are talking
:20:02. > :20:04.already, we have set up a joint working group with the British
:20:05. > :20:07.Government and we are scoping the issue to try to understand what
:20:08. > :20:14.questions will arise in any negotiation. But we cannot have
:20:15. > :20:20.formally a negotiation. Until the country is out. Why is there no
:20:21. > :20:24.free-trade deal between Australia and the European Union? It is a long
:20:25. > :20:30.and tortuous story. Give me the headline. Basically Australian
:20:31. > :20:36.agriculture is either banned or hugely restricted in terms of its
:20:37. > :20:40.access to the European Union. So we see the European Union, Australia's,
:20:41. > :20:46.is a pretty protectionist sort of organisation. Now we are doing a
:20:47. > :20:50.scoping study on a free-trade agreement with the European Union
:20:51. > :20:55.and we hope that next year we can enter into negotiations with them.
:20:56. > :21:00.But we have no illusions this would be a very difficult negotiation, but
:21:01. > :21:05.one we are giving priority to. Is there not a danger that when Britain
:21:06. > :21:10.leaves the EU the EU will become more protectionist? This country has
:21:11. > :21:14.always been the most powerful voice for free trade. I hope that does not
:21:15. > :21:20.happen, but the reason why we wanted Britain to remain in the European
:21:21. > :21:26.Union is because it brought to the table the whole free-trade mentality
:21:27. > :21:29.which has been an historic part of Britain's approach to international
:21:30. > :21:34.relations. Without the UK in the European Union you will lose that.
:21:35. > :21:37.It is a very loud voice in the European Union and you will lose
:21:38. > :21:43.that voice and that will be a disadvantage. The figure that jumped
:21:44. > :21:46.out of me in the film is it to you only 15 months to negotiate a
:21:47. > :21:52.free-trade deal with the United States. Yes, the thing is it is
:21:53. > :21:58.about political will. A free-trade agreement will be no problem unless
:21:59. > :22:02.you want to protect particular sectors of your economy. In that
:22:03. > :22:07.case there was one sector the Americans insisted on protecting and
:22:08. > :22:11.that was their sugar industry. In the end after 15 months of
:22:12. > :22:17.negotiation two relatively free trading countries have fixed up
:22:18. > :22:21.nearly everything. But we had to ask would be go ahead with this
:22:22. > :22:26.free-trade agreement without sugar west we decided to do that. Other
:22:27. > :22:30.than that it was relatively easy to negotiate because we are both
:22:31. > :22:34.free-trade countries. With the UK you cannot be sure, but I do not
:22:35. > :22:39.think a free-trade agreement would take very long to negotiate with the
:22:40. > :22:44.UK because the UK would not want to put a lot of obstacles in the way to
:22:45. > :22:48.Australia. Not to give away our hand, we would not want to put a lot
:22:49. > :22:55.of obstacles in the way of British exports. The trend in recent years
:22:56. > :22:59.is to do big, regional trade deals, but President-elect Donald Trump has
:23:00. > :23:04.made clear the Pacific trade deal is dead. The transatlantic trade deal
:23:05. > :23:08.is almost dead as well. The American election put a nail in the coffin
:23:09. > :23:14.and the French elections could put another nail in the coffin. Are we
:23:15. > :23:17.returning to a world of lateral trade deals, country with country
:23:18. > :23:25.rather than regional blocs? Not necessarily. In the Asia Pacific we
:23:26. > :23:28.will look at multilateral trade arrangements and even if the
:23:29. > :23:32.transpacific partnership is not ratified by the Americans, we have
:23:33. > :23:37.other options are there. However, our approach has been the ultimate
:23:38. > :23:43.would be free-trade throughout the world which is proving hard to
:23:44. > :23:46.achieve. Secondly, if we can get a lot of countries engaged in a
:23:47. > :23:53.free-trade negotiation, that is pretty good if possible. But it is
:23:54. > :23:58.more difficult. But we do bilateral trade agreements. We have one with
:23:59. > :24:02.China, Japan, the United States, Singapore, and the list goes on, and
:24:03. > :24:11.they have been hugely beneficial to Australia. You have been dealing
:24:12. > :24:14.with the EU free deal, what lessons are there? How quickly do you think
:24:15. > :24:21.Britain could do a free-trade deal with the EU if we leave? Well, there
:24:22. > :24:25.is a completely different concept involved in the case of Britain and
:24:26. > :24:30.the EU and that is at the moment there are no restrictions on trade.
:24:31. > :24:34.So you and the EU would be talking about whether you will direct
:24:35. > :24:39.barriers to trade. We are outsiders and we do not get too much involved
:24:40. > :24:46.in this debate except to say we do not want to see the global trade
:24:47. > :24:50.system disrupted by the direction of tariff barriers between the United
:24:51. > :24:55.Kingdom, the fifth biggest economy in the world, and the European
:24:56. > :25:00.Union. Our expectation is not just the British but the Europeans will
:25:01. > :25:05.try to make the transition to Brexit as smooth as possible particularly
:25:06. > :25:10.commercially. Say yes or no if you can. If Britain and Australia make a
:25:11. > :25:13.free-trade agreement, would that include free movement of the
:25:14. > :25:20.Australian and the British people? We will probably stick with our
:25:21. > :25:23.present non-discriminatory system. Australia does not discriminate
:25:24. > :25:28.against any country. The European Union's free movement means you
:25:29. > :25:33.discriminate against non-Europeans. Probably not.
:25:34. > :25:35.It could lead to a ban on diesel cars, prevent the building
:25:36. > :25:38.of a third runway at Heathrow, and will certainly make it
:25:39. > :25:40.more expensive to drive in our towns and cities.
:25:41. > :25:42.Air pollution has been called the "public health crisis
:25:43. > :25:45.of a generation" - but just how serious is the problem?
:25:46. > :25:58.40,000 early deaths result from air pollution every year in the UK.
:25:59. > :26:05.Almost 10,000 Londoners each year die prematurely.
:26:06. > :26:11.It seems at times we can get caught up in alarming assertions
:26:12. > :26:13.about air pollution, that this is a public health
:26:14. > :26:17.emergency, that it is a silent killer, coming from politicians,
:26:18. > :26:25.But how bad is air quality in Britain really?
:26:26. > :26:29.Tony Frew is a professor in respiratory medicine and works
:26:30. > :26:31.at Brighton's Royal Sussex County Hospital.
:26:32. > :26:33.He has been looking into the recent claims
:26:34. > :26:39.It's a problem and it affects people's health.
:26:40. > :26:42.But when people start talking about the numbers
:26:43. > :26:44.of deaths here, I think they are misusing the statistics.
:26:45. > :26:49.There have been tremendous improvements in air quality
:26:50. > :26:54.There is a lot less pollution than there used to be
:26:55. > :26:57.and none of that is coming through in the public
:26:58. > :27:02.So what does Professor Frew make of the claim that alarming levels
:27:03. > :27:05.of toxicity in the air in the UK causes 40,000 deaths each year?
:27:06. > :27:07.It is not 40,000 people who should have air pollution
:27:08. > :27:09.on their death certificate, or 40,000 people who
:27:10. > :27:14.It's a lot of people who had a little bit of life shortening
:27:15. > :27:20.To examine these figures further we travelled to Cambridge to visit
:27:21. > :27:25.I asked him about the data on which these claims
:27:26. > :27:30.They come from a study on how mortality rates in US cities
:27:31. > :27:37.First of all, it is important to realise that that 40,000 figure
:27:38. > :27:43.29,000, which are due to fine particles, and another 11,000
:27:44. > :27:51.I will just talk about this group for a start.
:27:52. > :27:55.These are what are known as attributable deaths.
:27:56. > :27:59.Known as virtual deaths, they come from a complex statistical model.
:28:00. > :28:03.Quite remarkably it all comes from just one number and this
:28:04. > :28:07.was based on a study of US cities and they found out that
:28:08. > :28:11.by monitoring these cities over decades that the cities which had
:28:12. > :28:17.a higher level of pollution had a higher mortality rate.
:28:18. > :28:22.They estimated that there was a 6% increased risk of dying
:28:23. > :28:27.each year for each small increase in pollution.
:28:28. > :28:30.So this is quite a big figure, but it is important to realise
:28:31. > :28:34.it is only a best estimate and the committee that advises
:28:35. > :28:40.the government says that this figure could be between 1% and 12%.
:28:41. > :28:43.So this 6% figure is used to work out the 29,000
:28:44. > :28:48.Yes, through a rather complex statistical model.
:28:49. > :28:53.And a similar analysis gives rise to the 11,000 attributable deaths
:28:54. > :29:00.How much should we invest in cycling?
:29:01. > :29:03.Should we build a third runway at Heathrow?
:29:04. > :29:07.We need reliable statistics to answer those questions,
:29:08. > :29:11.but can we trust the way data is being used by campaigners?
:29:12. > :29:16.I think there are people who have such a passion for the environment
:29:17. > :29:18.and for air pollution that they don't really
:29:19. > :29:24.see it as a problem if they are deceiving the public.
:29:25. > :29:26.Greenpeace have been running a campaign claiming that breathing
:29:27. > :29:29.London's air is the equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day.
:29:30. > :29:34.If you smoke 15 cigarettes a day through your adult life,
:29:35. > :29:37.that will definitely take ten years off your life expectancy.
:29:38. > :29:39.If you are poor and you are in social class five,
:29:40. > :29:41.compared to social class one, that would take seven
:29:42. > :29:46.If you are poor and you smoke, that will take 17 years off your life.
:29:47. > :29:49.Now, we are talking about possibly, if we could get rid of all
:29:50. > :29:52.of the cars in London and all of the road transport,
:29:53. > :29:55.we could make a difference of two micrograms per metre squared in air
:29:56. > :30:01.pollution which might save you 30 days of your life.
:30:02. > :30:03.There is no doubt that air pollution is bad for you,
:30:04. > :30:06.but if we exaggerate the scale of the problem and the impact
:30:07. > :30:10.on our health, are we at risk of undermining the case for making
:30:11. > :30:20.And we are joined now by the Executive Director
:30:21. > :30:38.You have called pollution and national crisis and a health
:30:39. > :30:42.emergency. Around the UK are levels increasing or falling? They are
:30:43. > :30:52.remaining fairly static in London. Nationally? If you look at the
:30:53. > :30:58.studies on where air pollution is measured, in 42 cities around the
:30:59. > :31:02.UK, 38 cities were found to be breaking the legal limit on air
:31:03. > :31:07.pollution so basically all of the cities were breaking the limit so if
:31:08. > :31:10.you think eight out of ten people live in cities, obviously, this is
:31:11. > :31:15.impacting a lot of people around the UK. We have looked at in missions of
:31:16. > :31:25.solvent dioxide, they have fallen and since 1970, nitrogen dioxide is
:31:26. > :31:31.down 69%. Let me show you a chart. There are the nitrogen oxides which
:31:32. > :31:36.we have all been worried about. That chart shows a substantial fall from
:31:37. > :31:41.the 1970s, and then a really steep fall from the 1980s. That is
:31:42. > :31:48.something which is getting better. You have to look at it in the round.
:31:49. > :31:55.If you look at particulates, and if you look at today's understanding of
:31:56. > :32:04.the health impact. Let's look at particulates. We have been really
:32:05. > :32:09.worried about what they have been doing to our abilities to breathe
:32:10. > :32:14.good air, again, you see substantial improvement. Indeed, we are not far
:32:15. > :32:23.from the Gothenberg level which is a very high standard. What you see is
:32:24. > :32:28.it is pretty flat. I see it coming down quite substantially. Over the
:32:29. > :32:32.last decade it is pretty flat. If you look at the World Health
:32:33. > :32:37.Organisation guidelines, actually, these are at serious levels and they
:32:38. > :32:40.need to come down. We know the impact, particularly on children, if
:32:41. > :32:44.you look at what is happening to children and children's lungs, if
:32:45. > :32:50.you look at the impact of asthma and other impacts on children in cities
:32:51. > :32:53.and in schools next to main roads where pollution levels are very
:32:54. > :32:57.high, the impact of very serious. You have many doctors, professors
:32:58. > :33:03.and many studies by London University showing this to be true.
:33:04. > :33:07.The thing is, we do not want pollution. If we can get rid of
:33:08. > :33:12.pollution, let's do it. And also we also have to get rid of CO2 which is
:33:13. > :33:16.causing climate change. We are talking air pollution at the moment.
:33:17. > :33:21.The point is there is not still more to do, it is clear there is and
:33:22. > :33:26.there is no question about that, my question is you seem to deny that we
:33:27. > :33:30.have made any kind of progress and that you also say that air pollution
:33:31. > :33:37.causes 40,000 deaths a year in the UK, that is not true. The figure is
:33:38. > :33:47.40,000 premature deaths is what has been talked about by medical staff.
:33:48. > :33:52.Your website said courses. It causes premature deaths. What we are
:33:53. > :33:57.talking about here is can we solve the problem of air pollution? If air
:33:58. > :34:01.pollution is mainly being caused by diesel vehicles then we need to
:34:02. > :34:05.phase out diesel vehicles. If there are alternatives and clean Turner
:34:06. > :34:08.tips which will give better quality of air, better quality of life and
:34:09. > :34:12.clean up our cities, then why don't we take the chance to do it? You had
:34:13. > :34:20.the Australian High Commissioner on this programme earlier. He said to
:34:21. > :34:26.me earlier, why is your government supporting diesel? That is the most
:34:27. > :34:32.polluting form of transport. That may well be right but I am looking
:34:33. > :34:37.at Greenpeace's claims. You claim it causes 40,000 deaths, it is a figure
:34:38. > :34:43.which regularly appears. Let me quote the committee on the medical
:34:44. > :34:52.effects of air pollutants, it says this calculation, 40,000 which is
:34:53. > :34:56.everywhere in Greenpeace literature, is not an estimate of the number of
:34:57. > :35:00.people whose untimely death is caused entirely by air pollution,
:35:01. > :35:04.but a way of representing the effect across the whole population of air
:35:05. > :35:10.pollution when considered as a contributory factor to many more
:35:11. > :35:19.individual deaths. It is 40,000 premature deaths. It could be
:35:20. > :35:23.premature by a couple of days. It could me by a year. -- it could be
:35:24. > :35:25.by a year. It could also be giving children asthma and breathing
:35:26. > :35:34.difficulties. We are talking about deaths. It could also cause stroke
:35:35. > :35:42.and heart diseases. Medical experts say we need to deal with this. Do
:35:43. > :35:50.you believe air pollution causes 40,000 deaths a year. I have defined
:35:51. > :36:00.that. You accept it does not? It leads to 40,000 premature deaths.
:36:01. > :36:05.But 40,000 people are not killed. You say air pollution causes 40,000
:36:06. > :36:09.deaths each year on your website. I have just explained what I mean by
:36:10. > :36:14.that in terms of premature deaths. The question is, are we going to do
:36:15. > :36:18.something about that? Air pollution is a serious problem. It is mainly
:36:19. > :36:23.caused by diesel. If we phased diesel out it will solve the problem
:36:24. > :36:28.of air pollution and deal with the wider problem of climate change. I
:36:29. > :36:35.am not talking about climate change this morning. Let's link to another
:36:36. > :36:41.claim... Do you want to live in a clean city? Do you want to breathe
:36:42. > :36:46.clean air? Yes, don't generalise. Let's stick to your claims. You have
:36:47. > :36:50.also said living in London on your life is equivalent to smoking 50
:36:51. > :36:57.cigarettes a day. That is not true either. What I would say is if you
:36:58. > :37:00.look at passive smoking, it is the equivalent of I don't know what the
:37:01. > :37:04.actual figure is, I can't remember offhand, but it is the equivalent
:37:05. > :37:10.effect of about ten cigarettes being smoked passively. The question is in
:37:11. > :37:16.terms of, you are just throwing me out all of these things... I am
:37:17. > :37:20.throwing things that Greenpeace have claimed. Greenpeace have claimed
:37:21. > :37:24.that living in London is equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day and
:37:25. > :37:28.that takes ten years off your life. Professor Froome made it clear to us
:37:29. > :37:32.that living in London your whole life with levels of pollution does
:37:33. > :37:37.take time off your life but it takes nine months of your life. Nine
:37:38. > :37:41.months is still too much, I understand that, but it is not ten
:37:42. > :37:44.years and that is what you claim. I would suggest you realise that is a
:37:45. > :37:50.piece of propaganda because you claim on the website, you have taken
:37:51. > :37:53.it down. I agree it has been corrected and I agree with what the
:37:54. > :37:58.professor said that maybe it takes up to a year off your life, but the
:37:59. > :38:02.thing is, there are much more wider issues as well, in terms of the
:38:03. > :38:08.impact on air pollution, and in terms of the impact on young
:38:09. > :38:13.children. We can argue about the facts... But these are your claims,
:38:14. > :38:17.this is why I am hitting it to you. It does not get away from the
:38:18. > :38:22.underlying issue that air pollution is a serious problem. We are not
:38:23. > :38:26.arguing for a moment that it is not. Do you think the way you exaggerate
:38:27. > :38:31.things, put false claims, in the end, for of course we all agree
:38:32. > :38:37.with, getting the best air we can, you undermine your credibility? I
:38:38. > :38:40.absolutely do not support false claims and if mistakes have been
:38:41. > :38:46.made then mistakes have been made and they will be corrected. I think
:38:47. > :38:50.the key issue is how we are going to deal with air pollution. Clearly,
:38:51. > :38:56.diesel is the biggest problem and we need to work out a way how we can
:38:57. > :39:00.get away from diesel as quickly and fast as possible. Comeback and see
:39:01. > :39:02.us in the New Year and we will discuss diesel. Thank you.
:39:03. > :39:04.It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:39:05. > :39:07.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now
:39:08. > :39:10.Coming up here in 20 minutes, the Year Ahead.
:39:11. > :39:17.First though, the Sunday Politics where you are.
:39:18. > :39:23.This week it's rising, some say sharply, and it's
:39:24. > :39:26.starting to become a feature that is noticed once again.
:39:27. > :39:34.Rough sleeping has doubled in the capital over the last six years.
:39:35. > :39:37.We have been talking to outreach workers and the London MP
:39:38. > :39:40.With me here this week, two more MPs.
:39:41. > :39:42.Mike Freer is Conservative MP for Finchley and Golders Green
:39:43. > :39:45.and Catherine West, Labour MP for Hornsey and Wood Green.
:39:46. > :39:49.Can we start this week by looking at how the finances are shaping up
:39:50. > :39:53.Transport for London has got to find savings of ?4 billion over the next
:39:54. > :39:58.five years and this week Sadiq Khan, who is presenting proposals
:39:59. > :40:02.for his first budget of course, says he needs to put ?4 on people's
:40:03. > :40:08.council tax bills to compensate for cuts to police budgets.
:40:09. > :40:10.Mike Freer, perfectly justifiable I suppose even though
:40:11. > :40:27.Well, I'm not sure, I have not seen the justification why he thinks
:40:28. > :40:29.we need these raises in council tax because of these numbers.
:40:30. > :40:33.As you say Boris was able to cut his precept and increase police numbers.
:40:34. > :40:39.Well, I think he's got bigger fish to fry in terms of his black holes.
:40:40. > :40:43.I would like to see the full detail of how he is going to address
:40:44. > :40:46.all of his spending pledges, not just the ones on policng,
:40:47. > :40:48.because he has made some promises and written some blank cheques
:40:49. > :40:52.I remember when he was campaigning to be Mayor, Catherine,
:40:53. > :40:54.he didn't want to oppose Boris Johnson's freeze.
:40:55. > :40:57.In fact he was reducing it in the final year of his Mayoralty.
:40:58. > :41:02.I think over the four years there will be a very
:41:03. > :41:05.small increase because, as you say, it is ?4 a year,
:41:06. > :41:08.which is a cup of coffee and a croissant for most people.
:41:09. > :41:11.What that will give us is more bobbies on the beat because we know
:41:12. > :41:14.that numbers are being reduced over the years and what people tell me
:41:15. > :41:16.is they are worried particularly about violent crime.
:41:17. > :41:18.They think having more bobbies on the beat would be
:41:19. > :41:23.In fact some of my wards around the Wood Green area could do
:41:24. > :41:25.with more police presence, so I'm quite pleased about the fact
:41:26. > :41:28.we will see more visible policing as opposed to police officers
:41:29. > :41:33.Often it's not the amount, it is the fact people resent
:41:34. > :41:35.they don't want to be paying anything more.
:41:36. > :41:38.They think someone should be finding savings and cuts and reducing it.
:41:39. > :41:41.?4 a year is not enormous to feel safer and I think after housing
:41:42. > :41:44.feeling safe is number two in terms of Londoners' expectations
:41:45. > :41:48.and what they would like to be seeing, the city feeling more safe.
:41:49. > :41:51.?4 a year, did Boris Johnson make a meal of the fact
:41:52. > :41:57.It is not very much, the Mayor's share of things,
:41:58. > :42:02.It was quite a big increase under Livingstone and what Boris
:42:03. > :42:05.was trying to do was reverse those hikes that he had inherited.
:42:06. > :42:09.People were feeling that they had been hammered under Livingstone
:42:10. > :42:12.and certainly when I do my residency, like many MPs do,
:42:13. > :42:18.It's the biggest bill they face after their mortgage and so people
:42:19. > :42:22.do feel they want to see value for money.
:42:23. > :42:25.They may well say ?4 is enough if they feel totally
:42:26. > :42:31.OK, here's another impending financial headache.
:42:32. > :42:34.Some say the most serious of all at the moment, social care.
:42:35. > :42:36.London councils claim they are facing a huge issue finding
:42:37. > :42:39.resources to care for the capital's elderly and it will only get worse
:42:40. > :42:45.The councils were told by the government this week
:42:46. > :42:53.they could raise more money themselves over the next two years.
:42:54. > :42:55.An ageing population and falling funding for local government.
:42:56. > :42:58.Social care is said to be in crisis and the government
:42:59. > :43:04.This social care crisis forces people to give up work to care
:43:05. > :43:07.for loved ones because there is not a system to do it.
:43:08. > :43:10.They should be cared for by all of us through a properly
:43:11. > :43:15.Get a grip and fund it properly, please.
:43:16. > :43:19.Their response, allowing increases to council tax bills to spend more
:43:20. > :43:26.Last year we agreed to the request by many leaders in local government
:43:27. > :43:32.to introduce a social care council tax precept of 2% a year,
:43:33. > :43:35.guaranteed to be spent on adult social care.
:43:36. > :43:38.We will now allow local councils to raise this funding
:43:39. > :43:45.Councils will be granted the flexibility to raise the precept
:43:46. > :43:51.by up to 3% next year and the year after.
:43:52. > :43:54.But town halls at the sharp end of government spending cuts say
:43:55. > :43:56.it is not enough as councils across London struggle
:43:57. > :44:01.This is not new money, it is simply a shifting of money.
:44:02. > :44:05.That does not really help us address the total funding
:44:06. > :44:10.If you are in a high need, low value area of the country,
:44:11. > :44:13.you have lots of lower band council tax properties then you will
:44:14. > :44:21.There are 150,000 people in our city who require social care support.
:44:22. > :44:24.By 2020, London boroughs as a whole will have an ?800 million funding
:44:25. > :44:32.Figures from an MP's freedom of information request seen
:44:33. > :44:34.by Sunday Politics show there is already substantial
:44:35. > :44:40.variation in how much councils spend on social care.
:44:41. > :44:43.Richmond council devotes ?815 a week per person on residential
:44:44. > :44:49.But if you are old and in need of residential care
:44:50. > :44:54.your council will spend half of that looking after you.
:44:55. > :44:58.Care providers say the challenges are particularly acute in London.
:44:59. > :45:01.London is very expensive to live in, so when you are working
:45:02. > :45:05.in a lower wage organisation, it is very difficult to be able
:45:06. > :45:12.Demographic and financial pressures make the problems seem intractable,
:45:13. > :45:17.but one former care minister has some ideas for a solution.
:45:18. > :45:20.What we really need is a radical overhaul of the way in which we pay
:45:21. > :45:27.What we need now is an earmarking of national insurance so people know
:45:28. > :45:34.when they see their pay slip that the money being paid
:45:35. > :45:36.for national insurance is going towards their health care
:45:37. > :45:40.Do you want to go over to the park, sweetheart?
:45:41. > :45:42.The new measure provides for the elderly over
:45:43. > :45:46.But as the population continues to age, how will councils care
:45:47. > :45:51.Well, you have both led London authorities not long ago.
:45:52. > :45:59.It is a bit of a nothing, but it is just a sticking plaster
:46:00. > :46:03.A 100-year-old woman, her daughter came to see me.
:46:04. > :46:06.Her daughter is in a care home because she is 70 and her mother has
:46:07. > :46:10.been reassessed and had care taken away from her, but she cannot get
:46:11. > :46:14.to the toilet on her own, she cannot get herself out of bed.
:46:15. > :46:18.If you are 100 and you need care, and you are not getting it,
:46:19. > :46:21.it shows how terrible the situation has become.
:46:22. > :46:24.I know that is across London and across many of the very
:46:25. > :46:28.expensive parts of the country they will be seeing that collapse,
:46:29. > :46:33.Some care homes are saying the money they get from
:46:34. > :46:40.Do you expect the government to come up with more cash rather
:46:41. > :46:42.than fiddling around and allowing councils to raise it?
:46:43. > :46:45.They will have to recoup it, they will have to lower
:46:46. > :46:50.That is right and the thing is that is such a short term vision
:46:51. > :46:52.when we have more people, thank goodness,
:46:53. > :46:56.That is great but equally they do have more expensive needs
:46:57. > :46:59.for a longer period and so this two or three-year deal isn't
:47:00. > :47:02.going to really help us and it will not help the NHS.
:47:03. > :47:06.As we know a night in a hospital costs about three or four times
:47:07. > :47:09.what it would cost in a care home or in your home looking
:47:10. > :47:15.London councils are representing all 33 boroughs of both parties
:47:16. > :47:22.Indeed, I used to be the lead member on London
:47:23. > :47:31.It is a perfect storm of rising costs of operating care homes.
:47:32. > :47:33.There is a difficulty recruiting quality care workers.
:47:34. > :47:36.On top of that you have got people who are not just living longer,
:47:37. > :47:40.So the health issues all come together to make
:47:41. > :47:47.This will buy a little bit of time but perhaps we need
:47:48. > :47:51.a more fundamental review, perhaps revisiting the idea
:47:52. > :47:57.In London you can be on one side of the road with a different form
:47:58. > :48:01.of care and you can on the other side where they have different
:48:02. > :48:04.criteria and that needs to be looked at so they have a better way
:48:05. > :48:06.of integrating with the NHS as well as social care
:48:07. > :48:12.and it is fair for our residents across the whole of London.
:48:13. > :48:15.In the short term are you not surprised there is not more money
:48:16. > :48:20.Rather than perhaps transferring the burden again onto local
:48:21. > :48:22.authorities, raising the council tax and thus taking the political
:48:23. > :48:28.I would have liked to have seen a bit more money
:48:29. > :48:39.I think what we are seeing is the new Chancellor being very
:48:40. > :48:41.cautious until he sees what the financial landscape
:48:42. > :48:44.looks like in the next few years, so he is not
:48:45. > :48:47.He is naturally a cautious Chancellor.
:48:48. > :48:49.So whilst he might have attempted to write a cheque,
:48:50. > :48:52.I think it gets us out of a sticking position for maybe a year
:48:53. > :48:55.or two and hopefully after he will be able to say,
:48:56. > :48:57.now we can provide a proper solution.
:48:58. > :49:00.But rather than just throw more money and write a bigger check,
:49:01. > :49:03.I would like a proper conversation about our social care and the NHS
:49:04. > :49:06.and what they should be doing together and how it should be funded
:49:07. > :49:10.What about the Liberal Democrats who not for the first time
:49:11. > :49:11.are meeting the idea of hypothecation, but hypothecation
:49:12. > :49:13.with national insurance for adult social care?
:49:14. > :49:16.I think we should look at everything and everything should be open
:49:17. > :49:18.for debate but I think what is really important
:49:19. > :49:21.is that the government devote some policy time to this,
:49:22. > :49:24.because my worry is that with Brexit coming round the corner as well,
:49:25. > :49:26.the recruitment crisis we could possibly have in the NHS
:49:27. > :49:29.and in social care, could actually make the situation worse.
:49:30. > :49:33.Is this something you could see with consensus being built?
:49:34. > :49:37.Sarah Woolaston the Chair of the Health Select Committee said
:49:38. > :49:40.that, that Jeremy Corbyn would be prepared to sit down
:49:41. > :49:50.If my recollection is correct, it was in 2010 that we could
:49:51. > :49:52.have a cross-party group which looked at this,
:49:53. > :49:54.which had some suggestions and the whole bogeyman
:49:55. > :49:56.of the inheritance tax situation flared up and also before
:49:57. > :49:59.an election is not the time to start doing that work.
:50:00. > :50:03.You have to do it in a very long-term way, and also look at that
:50:04. > :50:05.connection between the NHS and social care and make sure
:50:06. > :50:08.we have a national solution so that you are not disadvantaged
:50:09. > :50:11.From my knowledge of you, Mike Freer, and Barnet,
:50:12. > :50:14.and there was that period when Barnet was trying
:50:15. > :50:17.to reformulate services and what have you, where are you?
:50:18. > :50:20.Have we gone nearly as far as you expected in terms
:50:21. > :50:24.of the perspective of uniting health and social care services?
:50:25. > :50:29.I am looking carefully at what Manchester will be doing.
:50:30. > :50:34.I think that will be the litmus of how integrated services can be
:50:35. > :50:37.run and where you have the NHS much more working closely on social care,
:50:38. > :50:40.I don't think we have got anywhere close in London to getting that
:50:41. > :50:45.My local hospitals work very closely with Barnet Council.
:50:46. > :50:49.That is not the same as having an integrated service.
:50:50. > :50:51.Working together as an alliance is one thing, integration
:50:52. > :50:53.is something we should look at very carefully.
:50:54. > :50:59.Anecdotally, it is something people have started noticing again,
:51:00. > :51:01.the available indicators also back up the picture.
:51:02. > :51:04.There is a marked spike in the number of people sleeping
:51:05. > :51:09.rough on the streets as Andrew Cryan reports.
:51:10. > :51:13.Rough sleeping in London isn't yet at epidemic proportions,
:51:14. > :51:16.but it is the direction we might be heading in.
:51:17. > :51:18.According to government figures, in the last six years alone,
:51:19. > :51:21.we have seen the number of people who call the streets
:51:22. > :51:28.There have been difficulties with the economy back then,
:51:29. > :51:31.back in the early days, we have seen cuts to services,
:51:32. > :51:37.I think the housing market has been very difficult.
:51:38. > :51:40.In terms of why people end up on the streets and why
:51:41. > :51:43.they stay on the streets, I think the system isn't doing
:51:44. > :51:45.the job it needs to do, which is to find people help
:51:46. > :51:48.as quickly as possible when they do face that sort of crisis.
:51:49. > :51:51.On the streets every night, outreach teams from the charity
:51:52. > :51:55.St Mungo's look to help people in that position.
:51:56. > :51:58.Not long ago, one of the team we caught up with, Adrian Godfrey,
:51:59. > :52:04.He ended up homeless after going to his local council for help,
:52:05. > :52:06.but instead being given this blunt message.
:52:07. > :52:13.I had no kids or anybody like that I had to...
:52:14. > :52:23.No matter how healthy or unhealthy, we are all human beings.
:52:24. > :52:26.We all deserve the same compassion and help.
:52:27. > :52:28.Do you remember the conversation with the council?
:52:29. > :52:31.Were they apologetic or were they like...
:52:32. > :52:41.I sometimes think they are only implementing the law,
:52:42. > :52:48.But those rules might be about to change.
:52:49. > :52:52.In a large part thanks to this man, the Tory MP Bob Blackman.
:52:53. > :52:55.He is steering a Private Members Bill through Parliament designed
:52:56. > :52:57.to stop experiences like Adrian's from happening, by forcing local
:52:58. > :53:02.councils to help people who declare themselves homeless.
:53:03. > :53:06.What we are trying to do is to turn it on its head,
:53:07. > :53:09.so that if you're facing this crisis in your life, and you go
:53:10. > :53:13.to your local authority, they went say, sorry,
:53:14. > :53:17.Up to 56 days before you become homeless,
:53:18. > :53:20.they will produce a plan which will be agreed actions
:53:21. > :53:23.between the applicant and the local authority on getting the applicant
:53:24. > :53:28.People will get help and advice, rather than ending up
:53:29. > :53:32.on the streets and very sadly, a spiral of disaster
:53:33. > :53:38.down into what ends in death in many cases.
:53:39. > :53:41.But Labour say Bob Blackman's bill is not enough.
:53:42. > :53:44.This week they promised to eradicate rough sleeping completely,
:53:45. > :53:47.if they form a government, allocating thousands
:53:48. > :53:50.of Housing Association properties to rough sleepers.
:53:51. > :53:54.But for that to work, people will need to accept the help.
:53:55. > :53:57.Just now I have been to have a chat with a client
:53:58. > :54:02.He has been housed in the city a few times but he is quite an old school
:54:03. > :54:07.entrenched rough sleeper and most recently he had some issues
:54:08. > :54:10.in his accommodation around his benefits and this has led
:54:11. > :54:14.to him abandoning the accommodation and choosing to sleep rough.
:54:15. > :54:18.Someone like him, he is quite hard and to the weather and he doesn't
:54:19. > :54:21.acknowledge that it is an issue for him sleeping out.
:54:22. > :54:27.It is much, much easier if people are threatened with sleeping rough,
:54:28. > :54:30.then having the opportunity to go all out, have all the advice
:54:31. > :54:33.they need so that they never get to this stage,
:54:34. > :54:36.because after they get to this stage, it is a long
:54:37. > :54:42.The more politicians draw up plans, the reality for people sleeping
:54:43. > :54:49.on the streets this Christmas is it will be dark, cold and dangerous.
:54:50. > :54:51.Catherine, are people going to believe that you can
:54:52. > :54:57.It has got to scandalous proportions.
:54:58. > :55:01.A Tory MP crossed the river the other day on Westminster Bridge.
:55:02. > :55:04.A homeless man had passed away in the night.
:55:05. > :55:07.That is the kind of thing that in the fifth most wealthy
:55:08. > :55:10.country in the world, we cannot accept that level
:55:11. > :55:18.We also heard that some of these people are hard
:55:19. > :55:21.to reach to get into help, they won't take that kind
:55:22. > :55:25.I know, but if you combine the reductions in the London housing
:55:26. > :55:28.allowance which means that St Mungo's and those kind
:55:29. > :55:31.of charities simply cannot afford the rent any more in the inner
:55:32. > :55:35.London area, and by offering people things which are outside London,
:55:36. > :55:40.what is actually happening is that people are turning in to London
:55:41. > :55:43.and there is nowhere for them to be housed and so the plan Labour
:55:44. > :55:46.would enact is basically to try and get more properties
:55:47. > :55:48.through the housing associations, and housing associations tell us
:55:49. > :55:53.I just feel that homelessness is not inevitable.
:55:54. > :55:56.There is a bit of a feeling that homelessness is inevitable.
:55:57. > :56:00.I'm sure there is a small amount that there is but rough sleeping...
:56:01. > :56:03.Have you noticed how many more beggars there are?
:56:04. > :56:06.Outside tube stations, it is not acceptable.
:56:07. > :56:09.I just wonder what you are feeling about this as enabling Labour
:56:10. > :56:14.Do you accept people are saying they are beginning to notice?
:56:15. > :56:16.There are two issues, the homelessness
:56:17. > :56:23.Certainly in my own casework dealing with rough sleeping is very
:56:24. > :56:28.difficult because quite often there are people who are to help
:56:29. > :56:31.or often mental health issues are combined.
:56:32. > :56:34.So it is not just about saying we will get the housing
:56:35. > :56:38.If it was that easy, we could do it tomorrow.
:56:39. > :56:47.It takes much more of a multi agency approach.
:56:48. > :56:52.It does, but you know the pledge that was made by Boris Johnson,
:56:53. > :56:54.that he would get rid of it altogether.
:56:55. > :56:57.It has doubled in the last few years.
:56:58. > :57:01.This is something I keep talking to the health minister on,
:57:02. > :57:03.is the extra money that has been pumped into mental health
:57:04. > :57:06.does not seem to be getting down to the sharp end.
:57:07. > :57:09.We keep being told there is 100 million extra and yet
:57:10. > :57:13.That is the issue, where is the money going?
:57:14. > :57:15.If the government says, we are dealing with it,
:57:16. > :57:18.we have put 100 million in, because quite often rough sleepers
:57:19. > :57:21.will have mental health issues, not all, but quite a lot...
:57:22. > :57:25.We are going back to the social care picture that somehow there is not
:57:26. > :57:26.enough coordination, the money is disappearing
:57:27. > :57:31.And that goes back to the point of a proper review and what we need
:57:32. > :57:34.to do to tackle social care in its broadest sense,
:57:35. > :57:37.not just the elderly, but those who are threatened
:57:38. > :57:39.with homelessness and those who are rough sleeping.
:57:40. > :57:43.If you break that cycle, it saves you money because it saves
:57:44. > :57:46.the NHS a huge amount of money trying to deal with people
:57:47. > :57:53.Is it not more true that it doesn't start as a housing supply problem?
:57:54. > :57:55.If you go and allocate your housing association properties
:57:56. > :57:57.over to rough sleepers, what are you going to do
:57:58. > :57:59.about all those people in temporary accommodation,
:58:00. > :58:02.all those people you have promised to help house as well?
:58:03. > :58:05.If you look at the policy changes that this government has introduced,
:58:06. > :58:08.number one, completely cutting back on the amount of properties
:58:09. > :58:13.Number two, support of people, which was not just about a roof
:58:14. > :58:16.over your head, but the social care package, the help
:58:17. > :58:23.The crisis teams at local government level reduced by about 50%.
:58:24. > :58:26.The mental health beds, not enough beds in London
:58:27. > :58:28.for people who are suffering from mental health.
:58:29. > :58:31.I have heard stories of people who have got a mental health problem
:58:32. > :58:39.in north London and the closest that was down in Tooting.
:58:40. > :58:42.in north London and the closest bed was down in Tooting.
:58:43. > :58:44.We are in a complete meltdown because public services
:58:45. > :58:50.Would you be worried that this is suddenly going to become quite
:58:51. > :58:53.an issue again for London and it will affect the perception not just
:58:54. > :59:00.The whole issue of housing is a big problem in London.
:59:01. > :59:06.That effects whether people are in work or out of work,
:59:07. > :59:08.whether they are in a home, or homelessness or are sleeping.
:59:09. > :59:11.It is a bigger issue than just tackling rough sleeping.
:59:12. > :59:14.It needs a big piece of work to tackle housing in London
:59:15. > :59:19.and all of the issues it create if you get it wrong.
:59:20. > :59:22.Now it is time for the rest of the political news in 60 seconds.
:59:23. > :59:25.The controversial water cannon which London Mayor Boris Johnson
:59:26. > :59:32.ordered following the 2011 riots are to be sold.
:59:33. > :59:34.The three cannon cost ?90,000 in 2014.
:59:35. > :59:37.The following year then Home Secretary Theresa May refused
:59:38. > :59:43.to give permission for them to be used on safety grounds.
:59:44. > :59:45.London Mayor Sadiq Khan says the money raised from their sale
:59:46. > :59:50.A US firm could be stripped of a contract to provide probation
:59:51. > :59:55.A report said that probation services in the north of London had
:59:56. > :59:59.deteriorated to such an extent since MTC Novo took over that people
:00:00. > :00:05.were more at risk as a result and that this was unacceptable.
:00:06. > :00:09.A House of Lords report has said that thousands of jobs could be lost
:00:10. > :00:11.from the City if ministers do not agree on a deal
:00:12. > :00:22.And called for urgent action to secure a transitional deal
:00:23. > :00:27.on EU passporting rights for the financial sector.
:00:28. > :00:35.Catherine, we have got these water cannon now.
:00:36. > :00:37.Why don't we keep them just in case we need them
:00:38. > :00:43.I'm sorry but this is one of Boris' white elephants which was a complete
:00:44. > :00:48.It was about building up his own ego when actually the needs of Londoners
:00:49. > :00:50.are more police on the streets, more community cohesion,
:00:51. > :00:53.more of that sort of work, not just wasting people's money,
:00:54. > :00:59.If we were unable to sell them, what would we use them for?
:01:00. > :01:01.If we can't sell them, maybe we should direct one
:01:02. > :01:14.They are not flexible enough, many of our streets are too narrow.
:01:15. > :01:18.You need something that is nimble to be able to get around,
:01:19. > :01:21.not these great big lumbering chunks of metal that struggled
:01:22. > :01:31.Some people have been arguing that Met Police officers have been
:01:32. > :01:34.training on them and they help in Northern Ireland and they could
:01:35. > :01:37.be used in Northern Ireland and you have them in reserve
:01:38. > :01:44.We need high quality policing by consent which works for people
:01:45. > :01:47.which tries to have proper policy discussions so you do not end up
:01:48. > :01:50.with the politics and decisions people do not like and you work
:01:51. > :01:57.The best sort of law and order and public order policing is done
:01:58. > :02:00.by many of our very well-trained Met Police.
:02:01. > :02:03.Let's spend it on training and understanding community.
:02:04. > :02:08.Thanks to you both very much for coming in.
:02:09. > :02:21.Will Article 50 be triggered by the end of March,
:02:22. > :02:24.will President Trump start work on his wall and will
:02:25. > :02:29.Front National's Marine Le Pen provide the next electoral shock?
:02:30. > :02:52.2016, the Brexit for Britain and Trump for the rest of the world.
:02:53. > :02:56.Let's look back and see what one of you said about Brexit.
:02:57. > :02:58.If Mr Cameron loses the referendum and it is this year,
:02:59. > :03:01.will he be Prime Minister at the end of the year?
:03:02. > :03:08.I don't think he will lose the referendum, so I'm feeling
:03:09. > :03:16.It was clear if he did lose the referendum he would be out. I would
:03:17. > :03:21.like to say in retrospect I saw that coming on a long and I was just
:03:22. > :03:27.saying it to make good television! It is Christmas so I will be benign
:03:28. > :03:34.towards my panel! It is possible, Iain, that not much happens to
:03:35. > :03:37.Brexit in 2017, because we have a host of elections coming up in
:03:38. > :03:40.Europe, the French won in the spring and the German one in the autumn
:03:41. > :03:45.will be the most important. And until we know who the next French
:03:46. > :03:51.president is and what condition Mrs Merkel will be in, not much will
:03:52. > :03:56.happen? I think that is the likeliest outcome. Short of some
:03:57. > :04:02.constitutional crisis involving the Lords relating to Brexit, it is
:04:03. > :04:06.pretty clear it is difficult to properly begin the negotiations
:04:07. > :04:10.until it becomes clear who Britain is negotiating with. It will come
:04:11. > :04:14.down to the result of the German election. Germany is the biggest
:04:15. > :04:18.contributor and if they keep power in what is left of the European
:04:19. > :04:24.Union, will drive the negotiation and we will have to see if it will
:04:25. > :04:29.be Merkel. So this vacuum that has been seen and has been filled by
:04:30. > :04:33.people less than friendly to the government, even when we know
:04:34. > :04:38.Article 50 has been triggered and even if there is some sort of white
:04:39. > :04:42.paper to give us a better idea of the broad strategic outlines of what
:04:43. > :04:49.they mean by Brexit, the phoney war could continue? Iain is right. 2017
:04:50. > :04:56.is going to be a remarkably dull year for Brexit as opposed to 2016.
:04:57. > :05:01.We will have the article and a plan. The plan will say I would like the
:05:02. > :05:05.moon on a stick please. The EU will say you can have a tiny bit of moon
:05:06. > :05:11.and a tiny bit of stick and there will be an impasse. That will go on
:05:12. > :05:17.until one minute to midnight 2018 which is when the EU will act. There
:05:18. > :05:22.is one thing in the Foreign Office which is more important, as David
:05:23. > :05:25.Davis Department told me, they know there is nothing they can do until
:05:26. > :05:30.the French and Germans have their elections and they know the lie of
:05:31. > :05:35.the land, but the people who will be more helpful to us are in Eastern
:05:36. > :05:39.Europe and in Scandinavia, the Nordic countries. We can do quite a
:05:40. > :05:43.lot of schmoozing to try and get them broadly on side this year? It
:05:44. > :05:47.is very difficult because one of the things they care most about in
:05:48. > :05:53.Eastern Europe is the ability for Eastern European stew come and work
:05:54. > :05:57.in the UK. That is key to the economic prospects. But what they
:05:58. > :06:01.care most about is that those already here should not be under any
:06:02. > :06:07.pressure to leave. There is no guarantee of that. That is what Mrs
:06:08. > :06:11.May wants. There are a lot of things Mrs May wants and the story of 2017
:06:12. > :06:16.will be about what she gets. How much have we got to give people? It
:06:17. > :06:22.is not what we want, but what we are willing to give. The interesting
:06:23. > :06:26.thing is you can divide this out into two. There is a question of the
:06:27. > :06:33.European Union and our relationship with it but there is also the trick
:06:34. > :06:39.the polls did to London -- there is also the polls. There is question
:06:40. > :06:42.beyond the Western European security, that is about Nato and
:06:43. > :06:49.intelligence and security, and the rising Russian threat. That does not
:06:50. > :06:53.mean the Polish people will persuade everyone else to give us a lovely
:06:54. > :06:58.deal on the EU, but the dynamic is bigger than just a chat about
:06:59. > :07:01.Brexit. You cannot threaten a punishment beating for us if we are
:07:02. > :07:06.putting our soldiers on the line on the eastern borders of Europe. I
:07:07. > :07:11.think that's where Donald Trump changes the calculation because his
:07:12. > :07:19.attitude towards Russia is very different to Barack Obama's. It is
:07:20. > :07:24.indeed. Mentioning Russia, Brexit was a global story but nothing can
:07:25. > :07:28.match and American election and even one which gives Donald Trump as
:07:29. > :07:32.well. Let's have a look at what this panel was saying about Donald Trump.
:07:33. > :07:34.Will Donald Trump win the Republican nomination next year.
:07:35. > :07:47.So, not only did you think he would not be president, you did not think
:07:48. > :07:51.he would win the Republican nomination. We were not alone in
:07:52. > :07:56.that. And they're right put forward a motion to abolish punditry here
:07:57. > :08:02.now because clearly we are pointless! There is enough
:08:03. > :08:06.unemployment in the world already! We are moving into huge and charted
:08:07. > :08:10.territory with Donald Trump as president. It is incredibly
:08:11. > :08:18.unpredictable. But what has not been noticed enough is the Keynesian won.
:08:19. > :08:24.Trump is a Keynesian. He wants massive infrastructure spending and
:08:25. > :08:29.massive tax cuts. The big story next year will be the massive reflation
:08:30. > :08:36.of the American economy and indeed the US Federal reserve has already
:08:37. > :08:41.reacted to that by putting up interest rates. That is why he has a
:08:42. > :08:44.big fight with the rest of the Republican Party. He is nominally a
:08:45. > :08:50.Republican but they are not Keynesian. They are when it comes to
:08:51. > :08:55.tax cuts. They are when it hits the rich to benefit the poor. The big
:08:56. > :08:59.thing is whether the infrastructure projects land him in crony trouble.
:09:00. > :09:03.The transparency around who gets those will be extremely difficult.
:09:04. > :09:08.Most of the infrastructure spending he thinks can be done by the private
:09:09. > :09:15.sector and not the federal government. His tax cuts overlap the
:09:16. > :09:20.Republican house tax cuts speaker Ryan to give not all, but a fair
:09:21. > :09:24.chunk of what he wants. If the American economy is going to reflate
:09:25. > :09:29.next year, interest rates will rise in America, that will strengthen the
:09:30. > :09:34.dollar and it will mean that Europe will be, it will find it more
:09:35. > :09:38.difficult to finance its sovereign debt because you will get more money
:09:39. > :09:45.by investing in American sovereign debt. That is a good point because
:09:46. > :09:49.the dynamics will shift. If that happens, Trump will be pretty
:09:50. > :09:55.popular in the US. To begin with. To begin with. It is energy
:09:56. > :10:02.self-sufficient and if you can pull off the biggest trick in American
:10:03. > :10:07.politics which is somehow to via corporation tax cuts to allow the
:10:08. > :10:10.reassuring of wealth, because it is too expensive for American business
:10:11. > :10:13.to take back into the US and reinvest, if you combine all of
:10:14. > :10:20.those things together, you will end up with a boom on a scale you have
:10:21. > :10:25.not seen. It will be Reagan on steroids? What could possibly go
:10:26. > :10:30.wrong? In the short term for Britain, it is probably not bad
:10:31. > :10:35.news. Our biggest market for exports as a country is the United States.
:10:36. > :10:39.Our biggest market for foreign direct investment is the United
:10:40. > :10:42.States and the same is true vice versa for America in Britain. Given
:10:43. > :10:46.the pound is now competitive and likely the dollar will get stronger,
:10:47. > :10:52.it could well give a boost to the British economy? Could do bit you
:10:53. > :10:57.have to be slightly cautious about the warm language we are getting
:10:58. > :11:02.which is great news out of President Trump's future cabinet on doing a
:11:03. > :11:06.trade deal early, we are net exporters to the US. We benefit far
:11:07. > :11:10.more from trading with US than they do with us. I think we have to come
:11:11. > :11:16.up with something to offer the US for them to jump into bed with us. I
:11:17. > :11:26.think it is called two new aircraft carriers and modernising the fleet.
:11:27. > :11:30.Bring it on. I will raise caution, people in declining industries in
:11:31. > :11:34.some places in America, the rust belt who have faced big profound
:11:35. > :11:39.structural challenges and those are much harder to reverse. They face
:11:40. > :11:45.real problems now because the dollar is so strong. Their ability to
:11:46. > :11:49.export has taken a huge hit out of Ohio, Michigan and Illinois. And the
:11:50. > :11:55.Mexican imports into America is now dirt cheap so that is a major
:11:56. > :12:03.problem. Next year we have elections in Austria, France, the Netherlands,
:12:04. > :12:09.Germany, probably Italy. Which outcome will be the most dramatic
:12:10. > :12:16.for Brexit? If Merkel lost it would be a huge surprise. That is
:12:17. > :12:24.unlikely. And if it was not Filon in France that would be unlikely. The
:12:25. > :12:28.consensus it it will be Francois Filon against Marine Le Pen and it
:12:29. > :12:38.will be uniting around the far right candidate. In 2002, that is what
:12:39. > :12:48.happened. Filon is a Thatcherite. Marine Le Pen's politics --
:12:49. > :12:52.economics are hard left. Francois Filon is as much a cert to win as
:12:53. > :12:58.Hillary Clinton was this time last year. If he is competing against
:12:59. > :13:06.concerns about rising globalisation and his pitch is Thatcherite, it is
:13:07. > :13:13.a bold, brave strategy in the context so we will see. It will keep
:13:14. > :13:21.us busy next year, Tom? Almost as busy as this year but not quite.
:13:22. > :13:23.This year was a record year. I am up in my hours!
:13:24. > :13:25.That's all for today, thanks to all my guests.
:13:26. > :13:28.The Daily Politics will be back on BBC Two at noon tomorrow.
:13:29. > :13:30.I'll be back here on the 15th January.
:13:31. > :13:33.Remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.
:13:34. > :14:14.The most a writer can hope from a reader
:14:15. > :14:31.West Side Story took choreography in a radical new direction.
:14:32. > :14:36.The dance was woven into the storyline,