30/10/2016 Sunday Politics North East and Cumbria


With guests Iain Duncan Smith, Chi Onwurah and Haras Rafiq of the Quilliam Foundation. Isabel Oakeshott, Steve Richards and Tim Shipman are on the political panel.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 30/10/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Morning folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.


Theresa May says she wants to help people who are


"just about managing" - so should she reverse


George Osborne's cuts to benefits that are supposed to help people


Prominent London Imam Shakeel Begg is an extremist speaker,


says the High Court, after claims made on this programme.


So why is Mr Begg still being allowed to advise the Police?


Hillary Clinton fights back over the FBI's renewed investigation


into her use of a private email server - is this the boost


Help chances of winning the White House?


Here, good news for Nissan, but what about the rest


Now it is just a question of building that runway with the


political problems that lie ahead. And haunting the studio


on this Halloween weekend, the most terrifying political


panel in the business - Tim 'Ghost' Shipman,


'Eerie' Isabel Oakeshott and First this morning, two


new models of car to be built, securing 7,000 jobs at the car plant


in Sunderland and a further 28, 00 The news from Nissan on Thursday


was seized on by Leave campaigners as evidence that the British


economy is in rude health This morning, the Business


Secretary, Greg Clark, was asked what assurances were given


to the Japanese firm's bosses Well, it's in no-one's the interest


for there to be tariff barriers to the continent


and vice versa. So, what I said is that our


objective would be to ensure that we have continued access to the markets


in Europe and vice versa, without tariffs and without


bureaucratic impediments. That is how we will approach


those negotiations. We're joined now from Newcastle


by the Shadow Business Welcome to the programme. Labour has


been a bit sceptical about this Nissan decision. Can we begin by


making it clear just what a great achievement this is, above all for


the workers of Sunderland who have some of the highest productivity in


the world, have never been on strike for 30 years, and produce cars of


incredible quality. This is their victory, isn't it? Andrew, you are


absolutely right. The Nissan plant in Sunderland is among the most


productive in the world. The workers of Nissan are amongst the most


productive as well. And it's really a victory for them and for the trade


unions and the business organisations, and everybody who


campaigned to make sure that the government couldn't ignore their


future. It's our future. I'm the MP for Newcastle. It makes a huge


difference to the region. We are a region that still likes to make


things that work. It is a huge part of our advanced manufacturing


sector. So it's really something we welcome as well as the job security.


I'm glad we have got that on the record from the Labour shadow


business secretary. But your Shadow Chancellor, John McDonnell, claims


the government is ignoring manufacturers and cares only about a


small banking elite. In what way is safeguarding 30,000 industrial jobs


in the North safeguarding a financial elite? As I said, we're


really pleased that the campaigning by trade unions and the workforce,


and business organisations, meant the government felt they couldn t


ignore Nissan workers. Let's also be clear that we want that kind of job


security for all of those working in manufacturing and in other sectors


as well. And sweetheart deals for one company, no matter how important


they are, that does not an industrial strategy make. Why'd you


say it is a sweetheart deal? Greg Clark told the BBC this morning that


what was assured to Nissan is an assurance he gives to the whole


industrial sector? I was really pleased to see Greg Clark felt he


had to say something, even though it's sad that we having our


industrial strategy, you like, or our approach to Brexit delivered


piecemeal to the media rather than to the British people and Nissan,


actually. But he want published the letter. He said he has told us what


is in the letter and that reassurances given on training, on


science and on supporting the supply chain for the automated sector. You


must be in favour all -- of all of that? We are in favour of an


industrial strategy. Greg Clark unlike Sajid Javid, cannot say


industrial strategy. I'm still puzzling to find out what it is you


disagree with. Let me put the question. You said the assurances he


has given to Nissan are available to the car manufacturing sector in


general and indeed to industry in general. What is your problem with


that? Two things. Let him publish the letter so we can see that, let


him have the transparency he's pretending to offer. But also, we


need an industrial strategy that values -- that is values based and


joined. He talked about electric cars and supporting green cars. That


was in regard to Nissan. At the same time the government has slashed


support for other areas of green technology. So what is it? That is


not to do with the Nissan deal. Labour implied at some stage there


was some financial inducement, some secret bribes, that doesn't seem to


be the case. You are not claiming that any more -- any more. Then you


claimed it was a sweetheart deal for one company. That turns out not to


be the case. What criticism are you left with on this Nissan deal? I


would be really surprised if all that Nissan got was the reassurances


that Greg Clark is shared with us. He didn't answer the question of


what happens if we can't get continued tariff free access to the


single market, if we are not within the single market or the Customs


Union. Do you really think a negotiator like Nissan, who are very


good at negotiating, they would have excepted making this significant


investment without some further reassurances? Do you think there is


some kind of financial bride and if so what is the evidence? I would


like to see the letter published and I would also like to understand what


would happen... There are 27 countries which need to agree with


the deal we have from Brexit. What will Nissan, how will Nissan remain


competitive? How will the automotive industry remain competitive? Greg


Clark says he reassured them on that. But how will that be so if we


do not get access? We haven't heard anything about that. He talks about


reassurances given to Nissan. We need to make -- to know where we're


going to make sure Brexit is in the interest of all workers, not only


those who work for a Nissan and not only those who can get the attention


of Greg Clark. He assured Nissan that Britain would remain a


competitive place to do business. That was the main assurance he gave


them. He would help with skills and infrastructure and all the rest


Since you are -- intend to repeal the trade union laws that have made


strikes in Britain largely a thing of the past, and you plan to raise


corporation tax, you couldn't give Nissan the same assurance, could


you? We could absolutely give Nissan the assurance that we will be, our


vision of the future of the UK, is based on having a strong


manufacturing sector. Repealing trade union laws? As we have seen at


Nissan, the industrial sector is dependent on having highly trained,


well skilled workers. -- highly skilled, well-trained. You don't


have that by getting -- having an aggressive policy and trade union


laws or by slashing corporation tax and not supporting manufacturing


investment. Remember, the last government took away the


Manufacturing allowances which supported Manufacturing and slashed


corporation tax. That is their solution. It is a low tax, low skill


economy they want. Thank you. Sorry I had to rush you.


I'm grateful for you joining us I'm still struggling to see what is


left of Labour's criticism? Yeah, except for this. This was a valid


point she just made. What we know for sure is that Greg Clark could


say to Nissan, my aim is to get tariff free deal. There is no way he


could guarantee that. None of us know that. I don't think that was


enough. I think clearly there was a more detailed package involving


training and other things. He has acknowledged this, albeit we do not


know the precise mechanism. What I think is interesting about this is


if you reverse what happened this week, at a time when the government


says Britain is open for business and it is going to have an


industrial strategy, so far it is a bit vaguely defined. Nissan hadn't


made this commitment. Imagine what would have happened? It is an


impossible scenario. The government seems to me was obliged to make sure


this didn't happen. Let's not forget Nissan has invested hundreds of


millions in the north-east. It has been a huge success story. When I


spoke to workers from Nissan, they were so proud because they went to


Japan to teach the Japanese had to be more productive. The idea that


Nissan was just going to walk away from this given its track record,


its importance, wasn't really credible. The government had some


bargaining chips. Absolutely, of course they weren't going to walk


away. The majority of people in the area in which Nissan is braced -


based, voted for Brexit. Nissan knows it is in a powerful position


because it is an emotive sector Clearly the government didn't want


to have some big showdown. I honestly don't think this is a


smoking gun. The Labour Shadow minister really struggled to


articulate what exactly she thinks the government is hiding. I think


the reassurances were given were pretty anodyne, really. They were


anodyne and general. And what Greg Clark was setting out was an


objective and he made the right noises, and Nissan exercised its


right to sabre rattle. It does have a history of doing that. The one


thing that would now be clear given Greg Clark's performance this


morning on the BBC, is that if we were to discover some kind of


financial incentive directly linked to this investment, not more for


skills or infrastructure, that is fine, but some direct financial


investment, compensation for tariffs, which would be illegal


under World Trade Organisation rules, what you might call a


financial bride, the sect -- the business Secretary's position would


be untenable? He would be in a very difficult position indeed. Just


released the letter. There is nothing to hide. Put it out there.


The most revealing thing is that people are getting wildly excited


about the fact Greg Clark announced Britain's negotiating position would


be that we would like tariff free trade with Europe. This is regarded


as an insight into what this comment is doing and it says a great deal


about how little we have been told in Parliament and the media about


what they are up. Do you think it is exciting we are going for tariff


free trade? We're easily excited these days. We don't know. This is


where these things are at such a tentative phase. We don't know how


the rest of the European Union is going to respond to Britain's


negotiating hand. We know Britain once the best of everything, please.


It is a starting point. But that is not how it is going to end up. We


are getting wider than that. We have will have to see.


Now, Universal Credit, a single payment made to welfare


claimants that would roll together a plethora of benefits whilst


encouraging people into work by making work pay.


But have cuts to the flagship welfare scheme reduced work


incentives and hit the incomes of the least well-off?


Well, some of the government's own MPs think so, and,


as Mark Lobel reports, want the cuts reversed.


Theresa May says she wants a country that works


for everyone, that's on the side of ordinary, working people.


It means never writing off people who can work and consigning them


to a life on benefits, but giving them the chance to go out


and earn a living and to enjoy the dignity that comes


But now some in her party are worried that the low earners


will be hit by changes to Universal Credit benefit system


originally set up to encourage more people into work.


We also need to focus tax credits and Universal Credit


Concern centred on the Government's decision in the July 2015 budget


to find ?3 billion worth of savings from the Universal Credit bill.


Conservative MP Heidi Allen is working on a campaign to get MPs


in her party to urge the Prime Minister to think again.


I want her to understand for herself what the outcomes might


be if we press ahead with the Universal Credit,


Do you think Theresa May, right now, understands what you understand


To be fair, unless you really get into the detail,


and I have through my work on the Work and Pensions


Select Committee, I don't think anybody does.


Independent economic analysts at the IFS agree with Heidi Alan


that cuts to Universal Credit weaken incentives to work.


One of the key parts of the Universal Credit system


That is how much you can earn before your credit


As the Government has sought to save money,


both under the Coalition and now they Conservative Government,


both under the Coalition and now the Conservative Government,


that work allowance has been cut, time and time again.


The biggest cuts happened in the summer budget of 2015.


That basically reduces the amount of earnings you get to keep


It weakens the incentive people have to move into work.


What do changes to the Universal Credit system mean?


The Resolution Foundation think tank has crunched the numbers.


If you compare what would have happened before the July 2015 summer


budget to what will happen by 2 20, even if you take into account gains


in the National Living Wage and income tax cuts,


recipients will be hit by annual deductions.


Couples and parents would receive, on average, ?1000 less.


A dual-earning couple with two children under four,


with one partner working full-time on ?10.50 an hour and the other


working part-time on the minimum wage for around 20


hours a week, they would receive ?1800 less.


Hit most by the changes would be a single parent


with a child under four, working full-time


I think, if I'm honest, it is unrealistic, given


the economic climate, to expect everything to be reversed.


What I would like to see is an increase in the work


allowances to those people who will be hardest hit.


That is single parents and second earners hoping to return to work,


because they are the people we need to absolutely make


The Sunday Politics understands that about 15 to 20 Conservative MPs


are pushing for changes ahead of the Autumn Statement.


A former cabinet minister told us that they believed further impact


analysis should be done to find out if any mitigation measures


Former Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith, an architect


of the system, now says the cuts should be reversed.


But his former department has told us that it has no plans to revisit


the work allowance changes announced in the budget last year.


What I would say to Heidi Allen and IDS, they got it right the first


time and they should stick to the vote they cast last year


because these reforms actually do make sense.


What interests me is the fact we are trying to move people


off welfare into work, we are raising the wages people


earn by massively increasing the minimum wage and this


People are coming off welfare and into work.


Campaigners are pushing for savings to come from other areas to relieve


The other thing we have to start looking at is the triple


Financially it has been a great policy, and it was absolutely right


that we lifted pensioners who were significantly behind,


for many years, in terms of income levels, but they have


I think it is time for us to look at that policy again,


because is costing us an awful lot of money.


With just over three weeks to wait until the Conservative leadership's


new economic plan is unveiled in the Autumn Statement,


its top team is under pressure from within its own ranks to use it


And I'm joined now by former Work and Pensions Secretary,


Welcome back to the programme. Theresa May said she is on the side


of the just managing, the working poor. But they are about to be hit


from all sides. Their modest living standards are going to be squeezed


as inflation overtakes pay rises, they will be further squeezed


because top-up benefits in work are frozen. Incentives to work are going


to be reduced by the cuts in universal benefits. So much for


being on the side of those just managing? Theresa was right to focus


on this group. The definition has to be the bottom half, in economic


terms, of the social structure. It doesn't look good for them? This is


the point I am making, it is an opportunity to put some of this


right. One of the reasons I resigned in March is because I felt the


direction of travel we had been going in had been to take far too


much money out of that group of people when there are other areas


which, if you need to make some of those savings, you can. The key bit


is that the group needs to be helped through into work and encouraged to


stay in work. There was a report done with the IFS, when we were


there, at Universal Credit. It said Universal Credit rolled out, as it


should have been before the cuts, people would be much more likely to


stay in work longer and earn more money. It is a net positive, but


that is now called into question. Let's unpick some of the detail but


first, do you accept the words of David Willets? It says on the basis


of the things I read out to you that the just managing face a significant


and painful cut in real terms if we continue on the way we are going. I


do, in essence. That is the reason why I resigned. I felt Heidi raised


that issue as well, that we got the balance wrong. It is right that


pensioners get to a certain point, when they are on a level par, doing


the right thing over five years Staying with that process has cost


us ?18 billion extra this year, in total. It will go on costing another


5 billion. Then there is the issue of tax allowances. I want to remind


you and viewers what David Cameron told the Conservative conference in


2009. If you are a single mother with two children, earning ?150 a


week, the withdrawal of your benefits and the additional taxes


that you pay me on that for every extra you earn, you keep just 4p.


What kind of incentive is that? 30 years ago, this party won and


election fighting against 98% tax rates for the Rex richest. I want us


today to show even more anger about 96% tax rates for the very poorest


in our country. Real anger, and effective rate of over 90%.


Universal Credit reduces that. Some will still face, as they lose


benefits and pay tax, a marginal rate of over 75%. That is still too


high? Yes, it is the collision between those going into work at the


moment they start paying tax. A racial Universal Credit is set at


65%. You can call that the base marginal tax rate. 1.2 million will


face 75%? That is the point about why the allowances are so important.


The point about the allowances which viewers might not fully understand


is that it was set, as part of Universal Credit, to allow you to


get certain people, with certain difficulties, as they cross into


work, to retain more benefit before it is tapered away as they go up in


hours. A lone parent, who might have various issues, you want her to have


a bigger incentive than a single person that does not have the same


commitments. It is structured so that somebody who has difficulty


going to work, they all have slightly different rates. What


happened is that last year a decision was taken to reduce tax


credits, and, on the back of that, to reduce allowances. I believe


given everything that happened now, we need to restore that to the point


where it helps those people crossing over. You say a decision was taken,


it was a decision by the former Chancellor George Osborne in the


summer budget. Other decisions were taken in successive Budgets to raise


the Universal Credit budget, which resulted in the disincentive being


higher than many people wanted. Do you accept that has been the


consequence of his decisions? I was in the Government, we take


collective responsibility. I argued this was not the right way to go,


but when you are in you have to stay with it if you lose that argument.


There was another attempt before the spending review last year to


increase the taper, so the marginal rate would have gone up. I managed


to stop that. I'm Sibley saying what we made as a decision last


year, given the circumstances and given that the net effect of all of


that, I think it is time for the Government to ask the question, if


we are in this to help that group of people, Universal Credit is


singularly the most powerful tool. One of the Argentine aid in the


paper published on Thursday, we are set going on doing two more races of


the tax threshold, taking more people out of tax. That has a


diminishing effect on the bottom section. Only 25p in that tax rate


will help any of those. Most of it goes to middle income? You and I


will benefit more from that. With Universal Credit, every pound you


put into that will go to the bottom five tenths. That is why I designed


it like that. He pressed the button and immediately start to changed


circumstances. Should the cuts in Universal Credit that Mr Osborne


introduced, against your argument, should they be reversed? I believe


so. I believe you can do it even if there is concern about spending I


don't believe you need to go through with the continuing raise the tax


threshold. Cost is dependent on inflation, but give or take. It is


in the Tory manifesto? Has more than doubled. What is in the manifesto,


and Lasse Prime Minister made this clear in conference, we want to


improve the life chances of people. Today's announcement on the Green


paper is what I wrote over the last two and a half years. Big changes


necessary to how we deal with sickness benefit. That can now be


done because of Universal Credit, because people can go back to work


and it tapers away their benefits. It is the most powerful tool to sort


our people that live in poverty Universal Credit. We need to make


sure it lands positively. If Mr Osborne's cuts were reversed, what


you and some of your backbench Tory colleagues want to do, how would


that improve the incentives of the working poor, as they try to get on


in life? They have to pay more tax, they lose some benefits. How would


it improve it? Would many still face a 75% rate? The key question is


first and foremost, as people move through income to the point where


they are getting taxed, that group will be enormously benefited by the


re-emergence of these allowances at the right level. That is what the


IFS have said, that is what the Resolution Foundation are saying,


and the Centre For Social Justice is saying. You have to get that group,


because they are most likely to be drifting into poverty and less


incomes are right. Would it help those who face a 75% margin? We


don't face that. Exactly right. People much poorer than us do. I


would love to get the marginal rate down to testify percent, and lower,.


-- down to 65%. It is a balance of how you spend the money. I would


prefer to do that rather than necessarily go ahead with threshold


razors. I think the coronation of the marginal reduction of 65%,


getting it down to 60%, plus more allowances, will allow Universal


Credit to get to the group that is going to be, and the report written


by the IFS and ourselves, it shows it is going to be the most dynamic


and direct ability of a Government to be able to influence the way that


people improve their incomes in the bottom five deciles. Would you take


on extra work if you knew you were going to lose 75% of it? Even 6 %?


This has been my argument all along. Universal Credit can help that


enormously. One point that goes missing, 70% of the bottom five


deciles will be on Universal Credit. Whatever change you make to


Universal Credit has a dramatic and immediate effect I am arguing,


genuinely, it is time to rethink this. The Prime Minister wants to


make this a priority. I am completely with her on this. I think


she made a really good start. To deliver this, we need to... You have


a lot of work to do to deliver it. Because it is a manifesto


commitment, or because they want to do it, stopping increasing the


personal allowances are not acceptable, what about bringing to


an end, by the end of the parliament, the pension triple lock


that pensioners enjoy to improve and put more money to the working poor?


What about that? Well, you are absolutely right that there is now


the danger, I think, of a mess balance between the generations


Quite rightly at the beginning, when we came in, we have a commitment as


a Conservative Party in a manifesto to get pensions back onto earnings.


It was moved to a triple lock that guaranteed a minimum. What about


ending up now? I understand it is a promise through the Parliament, but


after 2020? I am in favour of getting it back to innings and


allowing it to rise at reasonable levels. Moving from earnings to the


triple lock has cost ?18 billion this year. Here was a high, under


pressure, as the Government was scratching around to pay more money


out of working age areas, when the budget was almost out of control on


the pension side. I'm in favour of helping pensioners, but now they are


up to a reasonable level, at a steady rate, that can be afforded by


Government, which takes the pressure off, working age people have to pay


for that. In years to come, time to end the triple lock


and use the savings to help these people we have been talking about?


As part of a load of packages, yes. It would also help with the


intergenerational fairness argument. Thank you for being with us.


Now, a prominent London Imam called Shakeel Begg -


who is Chief Imam the Lewisham Islamic Centre - is an extremist.


That was the verdict of the judge in a libel action that Mr Begg took


against the BBC, after we described him as an Islamic extremist


Mr Begg had complained about a short segment in an interview in November


2013 with Farooq Murad, the then head of the Muslim Council


of Britain, an organisation which claims to represent British


In that interview, we described Mr Begg as an extremist speaker


who had hailed jihad is the greatest of deeds.


From his base of the Lewisham Islamic Centre, Mr Begg has been


involved in a number of community organisations, including


the Police Independent Advisory Group in Lewisham,


Lewisham Council's Advisory Council on Religious Education


and as a volunteer chaplain at Lewisham Hospital.


But in his judgment, Mr Justice Haddon-Cave called


Mr Begg a Jekyll and Hyde character - a trusted figure in his local


community, but when talking to predominantly Muslim audiences


he shed the cloak of respectability and revealed the horns of extremism.


The judge cited one speech made by Mr Begg at a rally


outside Belmarsh Prisonm- the high security prison that houses


terrorists - as particularly sinister.


The judge said the imam was expressing admiration and praise


Following Friday's judgment, the hospital trust have told us that


Mr Begg's status as a voluntary chaplain has been terminated.


We have been told by Lewisham Council he is no longer


on their Religious Education Committee.


The Metropolitan Police have confirmed that


Mr Begg remains a member of their Independent Advisory Group


in Lewisham, as well as the borough's faith group.


I am joined by Haras Rafiq, chief executive of the Quilliam


Foundation. Welcome to the programme. I have here in my hand a


statement from the trustees of the Lewisham Islamic Centre. They reject


the judge's ruling as fanciful and say they are unequivocal and


unwavering in their support of Shakeel Begg as their head imam


What do you make of that? To be honest, it doesn't surprise me. At


the end of the day he is only the imam of that mosque because he


belongs to the same theological fundamentalist views that the mosque


would portray. If they were to say he was an extremist, they would be


saying in fact that they have allowed extremist preaching and


extremist theology within their walls. I think this is a very


important decision and a very important judgment by the judge


First of all, these people like to operate in a linear, under a veneer


of respectability. When that veneer is taken away, there are a number of


things that can happen. First of all, the BBC did very well to stand


by their guns and say, we're not going to be intimidated by somebody


who is threatening to taking -- to take us to court for potential


libel. Many other media companies have done that in the past and


people have capitulated. Also, this has exposed him. Legally now, here's


some deal can be classified as an extremist preacher, somebody who


promotes religious violence. I think the mosque really needs to take a


step back and say, how we part of the problem that we are facing


within society? Or are we going to be part of the solution? It really


concerns me. The High Court judge says that Mr Begg's speeches were


consistent with an extremist Salafist is the most worldview. What


is Salafist is and how widespread is it in UK mosques? -- mosque. It


comes from the Middle East. It is from Saudi Arabia. The enemy for


them was the old colonial Ottoman Empire. There is the quiet Salafist


to get some with their lives, lives outside society. There is a


revolutionary who tries to convert other people to their worldview And


then there is the Salafist jihad ease. People like Islamic State etc.


We have seen of increased in recent decades because of money that has,


growing from the Middle East. When that is mixed with a political


ideology, it becomes potent. Do we have a political -- particular


problem in Britain with this in our mosques? Absolutely. Without the


theology that says hate the other, hate other Muslims, that


excommunicate other people, that says it is OK to fight and is good


to fight when you have got an enemy, we wouldn't really have a jihadi


problem. Really that is something we have to tackle. The number of


mosques and institutions supporting Salafist and Islam is has been on


the increase. Do we have a problem with what the judge called Jekyll


and Hyde characters who hide their extremism except when they are


speaking to specific groups? Absolutely. One of the things we


have focused on in the past, a number of hate preachers now in


prison, people like Anjem Choudary, and everybody focused on them. But


there is a range of people operating under that level. People who will


show one face to the community because they actually need that for


a respectability. They need that for a legitimacy. They need that to


operate. When they are behind closed doors and talking to their


constitution, that is when you will see the real face of what these


people believe. It is an increasing phenomenon. We are seeing it more.


And we're going to carry on seeing it. Not just has the Lewisham mosque


stuck by him, but given the clarity of the judge's ruling, are you


surprised that the Metropolitan police would wish to continue with


Mr Begg as an adviser? I'm absolutely shocked that that


decision. What Uzzy going to do Advise them on how to deal with


extremist preachers and promote religiously motivated violence? I


don't know what he's going to advise them on. Because we now have a judge


that has ruled against him and actually classified him as an


extremist and somebody who promotes religious violence, we actually have


a possibility for the CPS to actually prosecute him. There is a


law that has been in place since 2005 called religiously motivated


violence. If he has been classified as somebody who promotes this, there


is a potential for the CPS to prosecute. I want to called into


question other organisations, interfaith organisations, other


Muslims groups, who say they want to fight extremism, I call on them to


say, this guy is an extremist preacher, we should cut our ties


from him. This was a very high risk strategy by the BBC. The exposure


could have been over ?1.5 million of licence payers money. Will this make


it more difficult for Jekyll and Hyde characters to behave as Mr Begg


has behaved? Absolutely. It will do. One of the things they will now have


to make sure is that they are a lot more careful. Careful with what they


say to their own constituency. It won't solve the theological problem.


But it will actually stop other people from operating in this manner


and allow other media organisations to have the confidence to expose


them when they do. Haras Rafiq, thank you for joining us.


It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.


We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now


Coming up here in 20 minutes, the Week Ahead.


Hello and a warm welcome to your local part of the show.


This week, good news for Nissan as the government offers "stpport


and assurances" about life after Brexit,


but what about the rest of the region's industries?


I will be asking my guests, North East Labour Euro-MP P`ul


Brannen and Guy Opperman, the Conservative MP for Hexham.


And we will be getting reaction from the chairman of UKIP


Also this week, do our councils have enough money to provide adepuate


care to older and disabled people? We report from Cumbria.


It has been a week dominated by transport.


We will talk about Nissan and the motor industry in a moment,


but let us get a reaction fhrst to the expansion


Transport Secretary Chris Grayling came to Newcastle this week,


to explain how a third runw`y would be good for business


And as part of the Heathrow deal, he said Durham Tees Valley @irport


will also see the reintroduction of flights to London.


Another big expansion announcement for the south?


Crumbs from the table for this region?


This is what the Chamber of Commerce, the airports and `ll the


local businesses have been asking for ages.


And it was very significant that the first place the Tr`nsport


Secretary went to after the announcement about Heathrow Airport


Coming to Newcastle Airport, explaining how


the connectivity we will get by the expansion of Heathrow,


making the north-east a much better place for business


Better for business and generally


If you can explain Labour's position on this you are a


A lot of local Labour MPs s`y it is that a good decision.


They are enthusiastic about the expansion of Heathrow


The party leadership does not seem to know, does it?


I think both of the major parties have politicians on


There are people in the Conservative Party


opposed to the expansion of Heathrow.


I personally am a long-standing climate change


campaigner and I am not happy about the expansion of air


travel at the moment, when we are trying to tackld


Does the party not need to come to some sort of conclusion?


The divisions within the Conservative Party, but the


We are not in the position to have to take that decision.


The Labour Party position, as I understand it


at the moment, is that the party is in favour of an expansion to


But there are senior figures within the party, going right


to the top of the leadership, who are not happy with the decision.


I think it is a story which will be rumbling


Now, Nissan's decision to build two new models


at its Sunderland plant is, everybody accepts, great


But what are the political implications?


Labour says the government needs to come clean on any secret deal,


while ministers deny taxpaydrs' cash has been promised to the colpany.


It has all come in the week MPs at Westminster debated


the impact Brexit will have upon the North East's econoly.


The news from Nissan was grdat for the North East -


The PM and other ministers had several meetings with the company


and believe the reassurances they offered were crucial.


They have been convinced, through the conversations wd have


had, that the government sh`res their enthusiasm and is detdrmined,


as part of our industrial strategy, that this will be the best place in


the world for them to make these investments.


We have been showing Nissan and others that we are


determined to get the best possible deal from the future relationship


we will be negotiating with the European Union.


We wish to ensure - and asstre the competitiveness


Nissan say they were not offered any special deal.


Ministers say no cheque book was flourished.


assurances could lead to anx financial commitment.


Ahead of the announcement, concerns were raised in Parliament


I believe it is incumbent on the government to tell us


Because it seems to me that the much-vaunted windf`ll


to the Exchequer of not being in the EU will not be


available for spending in the NHS, if ever it was, because it will be


needed to subsidise industrx in a way we did not need to before.


Other North East MPs want to know what may be


If some sort of agreement is made around the automotive


industry, that would not necessarily involve all of the companies


involved in the supply chain to Nissan.


Because they also produce p`rts for other companies'


manufacturing, they would not necessarily be protected by any


special deal being done for the automotive industry.


What about the rest of the manufacturing


What are ministers planning to do to safeguard their interests?


What of the growing tech st`rt-ups in my constituency and elsewhere?


But for Brexiteers this is proof positive that the region's


industries will thrive outwith the EU and even


I find it very depressing that Labour continue to ignore


both the wishes of the North East voters, who made it very,


very clear that they wanted a different relationship


with the EU, by voting in enormous numbers to leave.


I have had business knocking on my door consistently durhng


the summer excited about the prospect of exporting in a more


Being in the single market is not the be


Nissan will be remaining here post-Brexit, but questhons


remain about the type of de`l they got and what other deals might


be on offer for other industries in the region.


But you were one of the dool-mongers during the referendum.


You told us that Brexit would jeopardise jobs


You were wrong and the government is doing everything


it can to make sure there is a thriving automotive industry


in the north-east well into the future.


I am very happy to say this is absolutely fantastic news.


It is the best piece of news I have heard since the decision to leave


I am delighted for the north-east and


delighted for the people who work at Nissan.


And also delighted for the people who work in the supply chain,


because there is a lot more jobs at stake than purely those


It is fantastic news, but I think there is a


question about what the arrangement has been.


We may have a rather odd situation now, where senior


people within Nissan Japan know more about


our Brexit arrangements than we know in our own country,


particularly in the House of Commons.


Ministers have been a bit shady about the details of this.


The conclusion has to be th`t some sort of deal was cooked up.


They are a company with their head screwed on.


Going back to your tape, Nissan accepted that


there was no cash incentives, nothing of that manner.


What they have said is that we will ensure that the United Kingdom and


the north-east is the most competitive place to do bushness,


the easiest place to do manufacturing and the best


corporation tax and investmdnt rates. The corporation tax. It is no


less and 20%. Investment support, apprenticeships, they arrow. All of


us in the weeks Nissan were saying they were very concerned. They had


multiple meetings with ministers, the impression given in somd


newspapers is that Nissan worker told you will not lose out because


of Brexit. The implication was that there may not be money no, but there


could be in the future. No, they were told that the United Khngdom


was totally the best place for you to do business. Better than other


places in Europe. You seem that is all they did to persuade thd


company? Why not tell us wh`t the deal actually was? This shotld apply


to all businesses, from a corner shop to every business in the


country. It just happens th`t Nissan was the first in the queue for


discussion. Fiona, this is not a Brexit vivid income a better deal


having to be made with a colpany, all of which will have to bd done in


the future. The company said there was no financial deal made. It is in


everyone's interest that we have free trade after we leave the


European Union. If all the discussions feel, it will cost the


European Union more tariffs. We are in a very strong position. H think


we will get the free trade deal There is no certainty that.


Common-sense dictates that we will. Tony Blair has suggested th`t Nissan


were told that we would be pursuing a deal which would get is a town of


three deal in the market. Clearly, something has happened. Nissan Had


concerns and worries. Why don't we short-circuit the whole process If


there are going to be a serhes of meetings with other companids, why


does the Minister not come out and seek these are the arrangemdnts


employees for all companies. This is what we have struck with Nissan and


we will do the same with others If there are other negotiations, for


help will be on offer to other businesses and corporations? Just


relating to corporation tax? We need to make sure we have the most


competitive country in Europe. The objective is clear. We wish to seek


access to the single market with greater control over borders,


sovereignty and the legal sxstem. How you take forward that is the


prospect of two and a half xears negotiation. But you have to give


reassurance to business. Will every industry have helped? It is not the


question of help. It is not the type of situation. It is making sure of


this country and this region is the most competitive place to do Europe


-- business in the hall of Durope. Europe preference for a heart


Brexit, leaving the single larket is quickly as possible, could be


disastrous for export industries? Ideally, we want a free trade


agreement. But you also want control of the Borders, which the Etropean


Union hubby Collier will not happen. Obviously, we have a trade deficit


and it isn't the interest to strike a deal. If the debt given a good


deal, other countries could look at this and say, we would be bdtter


looking at the -- leaving the European Union. Surely it is in


their interest to play very hard with the United Kingdom. I do not


think there is anything to worry about in that regard. Even hf we had


to resort to world trade organisation rules, we will be


better off. Now, Labour has warned


that the majority of local councils can no longer afford the cost


of providing adequate They say rising demand,


coupled with government cuts, is putting unprecedented prdssure


upon services for the most But the government says loc`l


authorities can raise more loney from the council tax to spend


on the care system. Caring for those who need it,


the mark of a compassionate society. Hal is autistic and has


a learning disability. But the future of his care


is still undecided and the Both Cumbria County


Council and the NHS are involved, but neither


would comment on the case. I think there are massive


staff shortages. It is affecting those


who are vulnerable. People like Kyle can't even


do their own shopping. I have got a little


bit of confidence. I have been fighting for hil


since he was three years old. Adult social care is mainly


funded by local councils. So, what is the picture


in our region? Cumbria County Council


is trying to save ?24 million Durham Council is consulting on


savings of ?12.5 million next year. Newcastle Council is trying to cut


over ?18 million over four xears. And Cleveland is saving


?6.5 million over four years. This is a huge challenge


for county councils. Not only have they been havhng


to cope with government cuts over the past six years,


which have been very severe, but you also have an ageing


population and you are also having to increase staffing costs


because of the introduction of So, it is a massive challenge,


but we cannot let down the most vulnerable


people in our society. We did ask the Care Minister


to take part in the He did send us


a statement, pointing out that councils can now incre`se


funds for social care But where savings are being made,


it is not easy for those affected to always


understand what is going on. Any changes whatsoever


have an impact on carers. The consultations are quite


difficult to read through and I think they sometimes


do lack a bit of explanation as to how they have


come to these decisions. Cumbria County Council


declined to be interviewed. It did say it had been transparent


in publicising a wide range of saving options


with the public. There is now a consultation


in Cumbria about closing care homes and, across the system,


there is a lot of uncertainty. What is going to happen?


What is going to happen to him? When ministers talk about council 's


raising more money by incre`sing council tax, they are always been


faced with these huge cuts. Counsels us for greater fundraising powers.


This 2% increase in council tax That allows them to raise money But


the also have to look at how they run individual councils. In


Northumberland, they are pl`nning to spend ?50 million a new centre. But


you know it would not make ` difference to the social care


budget. It is a different p`rt of money. You cannot have a situation


Priya Northumberland is continually in debt and chooses to go bty


shopping centres. You cannot do that and then say, you can have the %


and run it in a better way. But this is councils across the north-east.


We all recognise there is a problem with the National Health Service and


social services not integrating in a better way. Successive governments


have addressed this with grdater and more difficulty. There are dxamples


of integrated systems. That is the way forward. When you bring the two


services together. When things come under one roof, as they do hn


Manchester, that is a success story. Councils will get that extr` money


from council tax. The government is recognising it as an issue `nd


dealing with it? One of the difficulties of the option of


raising council tax, you max get punished, an election. Therd is an


issue there. There are two other things. One is the bigger phcture.


Labour do not cause the recdssion, the Conservatives did not c`use a


recession. When there is a shortage of money, when we have the lowest


borrowing rates. The governlent should be borrowing. So, more


borrowing, for more money at this? No, not at all. We talk abott this


year after year. What has this got to do with the vulnerable pdople


that the councils may well be choosing to spend money on other


things? Do the big infrastrtcture projects, employ more peopld we have


got high unemployment here, more money for taxes, more for the


government to hand out. Less austerity. That is not a short-term


solution. These cuts to sochal care, is that not the root of the problem.


It is very short-sighted because it puts dwarf strain on hospit`ls. If


you spent more than social care you make is to help ease the burden on


the National Health Service. We want social care and hospitals to work


hand in glove. Take Manchester. They have come together to address this


problem. Is it all about throwing more money on a system? No,. You


have got the ability through raising council tax to adopt ?241 mhllion to


the system. Whatever you thhnk about the economic future, this is not the


way to handle this. We are doing is taking money away here meanhng we


have to spend more on the N`tional Health Service. Elderly people are


falling down all because thdy are falling down all because thdy are


not that the key of the need, the ending up in hospital for long


periods of time. They could have been staying or for a relathvely


small amount of money. Now, normally at this point


in the programme we bring you 6 Seconds ? our round-up


of the week s political news. But this week, we thought


you would enjoy something a little bit different -


a light-hearted moment from the Commons, as the MP


for Bishop Auckland, Helen Goodman, considered


the important issues of light pollution, Brexit and,


erm, the problems of mating birds. Light pollution is not just


a problem for those wanting It is also confusing for birds,


who get confused as to when They sing for so long


that they do not have any I am sure the minister


will understand I wish to hear the Honourable


lady, at such point that she has the opportunitx


to regain the necessary composure! From birds to big cats now,


In particular, this beast, which in case you do not recognise


it, is a Eurasian Lynx. It has been suggested that five


pairs of them could be rele`sed into the wild at Kielder


forest in Northumberland. It is an idea that's


not gone down very well with farmers and the local LP,


who has called the idea "cr`zy" I like cats. What is wrong with the


lynx? This is a lot bigger than a domestic cat and it happens to eat


sheep, attack other animals. Every farmer Ray spoken to thinks it is a


terrible idea. -- you have surveyed everyone? I have sent letters to 400


people in that district. They were here a hundred ye`rs ago.


What are we going to do next, introduce dinosaurs? It is hard to


be a farmer when they are bding told that we are going to reintroduce


lynx, so look forward to losing your sheep. I am more open-minded about


this. They are having a major consultation about this. It is not a


decision which will be taken lightly. There is an opinion poll


that 90% of people think th`t it is a good idea. Not in my district


they do not. People living hn London came to see these sort of things.


But they actually have a vidw. Taxpayers down there are subsidising


the rural areas. So they ard entitled to the queue. We do not


believe in large cats terrorising local populations!


And that is about it from us for this week.


Barely more than a week now until polling day,


and a new revelation rocks the US Presidential election campaign.


If it wasn't bizarre enough, it just got more bizarre.


The FBI have reopened their investigation into Hillary Clinton's


use of private email servers whilst she was Secretary


of State, after the discovery of further emails.


Though not on her laptop or even the State Department.


Donald Trump is saying that it's bigger than Watergate -


so could it swing the election in his favour?


We spoke to top US pollster, Frank Luntz.


The FBI investigation is happening so late in the election process


that it would be very difficult to derail a Clinton victory.


That said, if there is one thing that could keep Hillary Clinton


from the presidency, it's an FBI investigation.


But there's still only four states that really matter, Florida, Ohio,


Right now, Clinton has beyond the margin of error leads


This would have to have a truly significant impact for the election


There is a point about a week ago when I was prepared to say that


Clinton had a 95% chance of winning this election.


Based on what has happened in the last 48 hours,


It is still very likely, but I wouldn't bet on it.


I thought the 2000 election would be the best election of my lifetime,


And then I thought 2008 would be amazing, because we had two


challenger candidates and the first African-American President.


It is ugly, it's painful, it is as negative as anything


The public is angry, the country, overall, is frustrated.


But for entertainment value, these candidates probably should


have charged us money, because it's better than any movie


at ever seen, it's better than any TV show.


That was Frank Luntz. He may be right or wrong about Mrs Clinton


still having an 80% chance of winning. I would bet on an 80%


chance? Yes, absolutely. I spoke to a high-profile American pollster and


strategist last night and he took a rather different view to Frank


Luntz. He thought, and I think some other high-profile commentators


agree, that this is actually much more serious than some people


realise. There are an awful lot of undecided voters out there looking


for an excuse to vote Trump. They do not like what they see in either


candidate. But because this FBI probe is not going to conclude


before the election, the question, the doubt over Hillary Clinton,


gives them an excuse to back Trump. The thing that will play on the


minds of the voters is, could the 100 day honeymoon turning to the 100


day divorce? Which even be impeached? It may give some people


an excuse not to vote for Mrs Clinton. It could provide a problem


in terms of energising her base The battle ground almost matters more


than the polls. Florida and Pennsylvania have been trending to


Mrs Clinton. Mr Trump needs to win both. He does not get in without


both. He needs both. Just coming up in the latest BBC News, the


Washington Post tracking poll, Mrs Clinton is now only one point ahead


in the national poll. One point Even given my caveat that the state


battles are most important. That is incredibly close? It is. Polls


yesterday showed Trump nationally closing of. -- up. There is a clear


trend and movement. This has reinforced everything that people


who have a problem with Hillary Clinton know about Hillary Clinton.


Trump is running this insurgent campaign. We have seen at here with


Brexit. If you are running an insurgent campaign, you want to be


against the ultimate establishment insider and that is what Hillary


Clinton is. I suggested it was bizarre. Fathoming the behaviour of


the FBI is interesting as well. This is a separate investigation into a


former congressman, Anthony Wiener, who had done all sorts of things. He


seemed to be sex text thing a minor. A 15-year-old girl. The FBI


investigate. They get his laptop to see what else he has been too. In


the course of that, his wife, now separated, the closest adviser to


Hillary Clinton, they find on the laptop e-mails involving the Clinton


server to her. And yet the FBI cannot, it needs now a separate


warrant to access these e-mails It hasn't got that yet. It has got a


warrant to do the congressman e-mails. On the basis of not knowing


the content, this has happened. Yeah. Who knows? He is a Republican,


this guy. Earlier this year he was being praised to the hilt by


Democrats. Absolutely. The timing is a nightmare for her. You described


the whole sequence. There is nothing definitive to doubt in this


sequence. All he is saying is he has discovered more e-mails in effect.


They are from the congressman's former wife. On Anthony Wiener's


laptop, which apparently she used sometimes. But what that shows is


that for all the scrutiny of modern politicians, they cannot escape


caricature. And as Tim was just saying, her weakness is perceived to


be secretive, elitism and complacency about that elitism. And


so just the announcement of a reopening of the investigation so


fuels that caricature, you have just revealed a poll giving her a 1%


lead. That must be related to what has happened. It is without a shred


of evidence that she has done anything wrong. You can see how


because people only see things encourage kids, that is deadly


serious. -- in caricature. An American friend of mine said we have


got our October surprise but we don't know what it is. The FBI must


surely come under massive pressure. It did its -- it did this against


the Justice Department. The difficulty the FBI had was that this


information, for what it's worth, it came to them. Were they not to have


said something and it worked to have come out later, they would have been


accused of a massive cover-up. They are dammed if they do, dammed if


they don't. There is still time for another surprise. And early November


surprise. Who knows if there might still be something that comes out on


Donald Trump? This is the first election where I can remember we


have had two October surprises already. There are is stuff about


tapes knocking around about Donald Trump saying racist things. The


Clintons have got a lot of friends. It would be a big surprise if we did


not see anything else in the next few days.


Just when you think it could not get more interesting, it has. There has


been plenty in the papers lately about the Ukip leadership saying


unpleasant things about each other. But what about Mr Farage himself?


What's he up to? Well, on BBC Two tonight we may


find out the answer. Well, I'm led to believe


she's very experienced. But I don't think Strictly Come


Dancing is for me. That is, unless, of course,


you fancy popping a cheeky zero No, I don't think Strictly


Come Dancing is for me. Well, you tell Mr Balls he has just


lost your programme one viewer. I might have nothing to do these


days but, realistically, Well, that wasn't Nigel Farage. It


is a BBC comedy on tonight. Nigel Farage gets his life back. A number


of runners and riders. Let's come straight down to it. Who would be


the next leader of Ukip? Probably Paul Nuttall. He is the favourite.


The one who has the backing, not very enthusiastic backing, is Rahim


Cassandra. And also Aaron Banks a big donor. The best of a rather weak


lot. I think Paul Nuttall should squeak through. I interviewed all


three of them this week. Mr Cassandra is a lively character and


he knows how to make a few headlines. With a bit of money


behind him, anything is possible. This is a guy who has been to the


States, who has literally studied what Trump has done. Pees on


secondment for the time being. The guy who is his line manager is one


of Donald Trump's campaign stop He is extraordinarily right-wing. I am


told he kept a picture of Enoch Powell by his bed. Barry Goldwater


is one of his heroes, for example. There are other candidates. I would


suggest, put out as a hypothesis, Paul Nuttall is Labour's worst


nightmare. They are more vulnerable in the North. Paul Nuttall is from


Merseyside, a working-class background, performs well on


television. He is a really good interviewee. He is one of the best


around in politics at the moment. However, I think whoever gets it has


a massive task. The clip of this Nigel Farage satire partly shows


why. His dominance was overwhelming. He, in many ways, did a brilliant


job at keeping the show on the road. The trouble for all new political


parties is keeping it going is tough. A very different party, the


SDP, with all those glamorous figures in it, lasted eight years,


something like that. I think they are in real trouble at the moment


because of the implosion we have been seeing in front of our eyes and


the ideal -- ideological splits Whoever gets it will face a tough


tussle. All three of the main contenders want to put Nigel Farage


in the House of Lords. They were falling over themselves to soak up


two farads. That is how you win this election.


Mr Aaron Banks, who is he putting his money on? He said he supports


Rahim. I know Mr Banks is utterly fed with the shenanigans in Ukip. He


thinks it is terribly disorganised, dysfunctional and doesn't want a


great deal to do with it for the foreseeable future.


It is not quite Trump the Clinton but it is interesting. That is it.


The Daily Politics is back tomorrow. And all of next week. Jo Coburn will


be your next Sunday because I am off to the United States to begin to


rehearse presenting the BBC's US election night coverage on the th


of November. It will be here on BBC One, BBC


world, BBC News Channel and BBC online.


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


A stone stained with blood and beset with a curse.


The Moonstone is of inestimable value in India.


Its appointed guardians would move heaven and earth to reclaim it


Let us not let the past haunt all of our actions.


You've got to do something! It's only you that can!


He's a scientist, brilliant apparently.


But you may be bringing people over here who did things during the war.


I will not work for you. I will not work for the British Government


Let us not let the past haunt all of our actions.


You've got to do something! It's only you that can!


Andrew Neil and Richard Moss are joined by Iain Duncan Smith, Chi Onwurah and Haras Rafiq of the Quilliam Foundation. The Daily Mail's Isabel Oakeshott, commentator Steve Richards and Tim Shipman of The Sunday Times are on the political panel.

Download Subtitles