Andrew Neil and Richard Moss hear from the candidates for the Ukip leadership and look ahead to the chancellor's Autumn Statement.
Browse content similar to 20/11/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Morning folks - welcome to the Sunday Politics.
Theresa May says she'll deliver on Brexit but does that mean leaving
the EU's Single Market and the Customs Union?
Tory MPs campaign for a commitment from the Prime
The Chancellor pledges just over a billion pounds worth of spending
on Britain's roads but is that it or will there be
Their last leader was just 18 days in the job.
Here: Does Ukip really pose a threat to Labour dominance
And claims housing benefit changes might prevent some people
in London: Is the battle for Richmond Park based on the skies? Or
is it about a bigger conflict in Europe?
And with me - as always - and, no, these three aren't doing
the Mannequin challenge - it's our dynamic, demonstrative,
dazzling political panel - Helen Lewis, Isabel Oakeshott
and Tom Newton Dunn they'll also be tweeting throughout the programme.
First this morning - Theresa May has said
"Brexit means Brexit" - but can the Prime Minister -
who was on the Remain side of argument during the referendum
Well, Leave-supporting Tory MPs are re-launching
the "European Research Group" this morning to keep Mrs May's feet
Are you worried that you cannot trust Theresa May until payment to
deliver full Brexit was Magellan like I totally trust Theresa May,
100% behind her. She has displayed a massive amount of commitment to
making a success of Brexit for the country.
We don't know that yet, because nothing has happened. Why, then,
have you formed a pressure group? We were fed up with the negativity
coming out around Brexit. I feel positive about the opportunities we
face, and we are a group to provide suggestions. Who do you have in mind
when you talk about negativity - the Chancellor? No, from the Lib Dems,
for example, from Labour MPs. This is a pressure group for leaving
membership of the single market and customs union, correct? That is what
we are proposing. It has a purpose other than just to combat
negativity. When it comes to membership of the single market and
the customs union, can you tell us what Government policy is towards
both or either? Rightly, the Government hasn't made the position
clear, and I think that is the right approach, because we don't want to
review our negotiating hand. What we're saying... I'm not asking what
you are saying. Can you tell us what Government policy is towards
membership of these institutions? The Government wants to make sure
British businesses have the right to trade with EU partners, to forge new
trade deals with the rest of the world. We hope to Reza may speak at
Mansion house this week. -- we had Theresa May speak at Mansion house
this week. She has been clear, saying it was not a binary choice.
And she's right. Let's run that tape, because I want to pick up on
what she did say. This is what she had to say about the customs union
at Prime Minister's Question Time. On the whole question of the customs
union, trading relationships that we have with the European Union and
other parts of the world once we have left the European Union, we are
preparing carefully for the formal negotiations. We are preparing
carefully for the formal negotiations. We want to ensure we
have the best possible trading deal with the EU once we have left. Do
you know what she means when she says being in the customs union is
not a binary choice? I think she's right when she says that. At the
moment, and you know this, as long as we are in the customs union, we
cannot set our own tariffs or rules, cannot have a free trade agreement
with the US or China. We need to leave a customs union to do that.
Binary means either you are in or you are out, self which is it? We
still want to trade with the EU, and I think we can have a free trade
agreement with the EU. That is a separate matter, and it has to do
with the single market. What about the customs union? We need to leave
the customs union. We do it and properly. That is how to get the
most out of this opportunity. Summit is a binary choice? The Prime
Minister is right when she says it's not a binary choice. Both can't be
right. We can leave the customs union, get their benefits, and have
a free trade agreement with zero tariffs with the EU. So it is a
binary choice an either be stale really. Yellow like I am saying the
Prime Minister is right when she says it is not a binary choice. -- I
am saying the Prime Minister is right. We need clarity. Youth had
said -- you have said it is a binary choice. We need to leave the
constraints of the customs union. It pushes up prices. The EU is not
securing the right trade deals, and if we want to make the most of it,
we need to get out there and get some deals going. Do you accept that
if we remain in the customs union, we cannot do our own free-trade
deals? Yellow right 100%. That is why we have to leave. -- 100%. Do
you accept that if we leave the customs union but stay with
substantial access, I don't say membership, but substantial access
to the single market, that goods going from this country to the
single market because we're no longer in the union will be subject
to complicated rules of origin regulations, which could cost
business ?13 billion a year? I would like to see a free-trade agreement
between the UK and the EU. Look at the Canadian deal. I give you that,
but if we're not in the customs union, things that we bring in on
our own tariffs once we've left, we can't just export again willy-nilly
to the EU. They will demand to see rules of origin. Norway has to do
that at the moment and it is highly complicated expensive. I think if we
agree a particular arrangement as part of this agreement with the EU,
we can reach an agreement on that which sets a lower standard, which
sets a different level of tariffs, which protects some of our
industries. Let's suppose we have pretty much free trade with the EU
but we are out of the customs union, and let's suppose that the European
Union has a 20% tariff on Japanese whisky and we decide to have a 0%
tariff - what then happens to the whisky that comes into Britain and
goes on to the EU? The EU will not let that in. That will be part of
the negotiation. I think there is a huge benefit for external operators.
Every bottle of Japanese whisky, they will have to work out the rules
of origin. There have been studies that show there is a potential for
50% increase in global product if we leave. We're losing the benefits of
free trade. I understand, I am asking for your particular view.
Thank you for that. Is it not surprising Mr Hannan could
not bring himself to say we would leave the customs union? It is
messy. The reason there is this new group of Tory MPs signing up to a
campaign to make sure we get a genuine Brexit is because there is
this vacuum. It is being filled with all sorts of briefing from the other
side. There is a real risk in the minds of Brexit supporting MPs that
the remaining side are going to try to hijack the process, not only
through the Supreme Court action, which I think most Brexit MPs seem
to accept the appeal will fail, but further down the line, through
amendments to the great repeal bill. This is a pressure group to try to
hold the Prime Minister to account. There is plenty of pressure on the
Prime Minister effectively to stay in the single market and the customs
union, and if you do both of these things, de facto, you have stayed in
the EU. She is in a difficult position because there is no good
faith assumption about what Theresa May wants because she was a
Remainer. There is all this talk about a transitional arrangement,
but she can't sell that as someone who voted to remain. The way Isabel
has characterised it is interesting. There is a betrayal narrative.
Everyone is looking to say that she has betrayed the true Brexit. Since
the Government cannot give a clear indication of what it once in terms
of the customs union, which sets external tariffs, or the single
market, which is the free movement of people, capital, goods and
services, others are filling this vacuum. Right. The reasons they
can't do this are, first, they don't know if they can get it or not. We
saw this with the renegotiation the last Prime Minister. What are they
hoping to get? The world on a stick, to get cake and eat it. You go into
a negotiation saying, let's see what we can get in total. Are they going
to ask the membership of the single market? Yellow I think they will ask
for a free trade agreement involving everything. You can demand what you
want. The question is, do they stand a cat's chance in hell of getting
it? They don't know. Welcome back. We will be back, believe me. It is
150 day since we found out the UK had voted to leave the EU, but as we
have heard, remain and leave campaigners continue to battle about
what type of relationship we should have with the EU after exit.
Leave campaigners say that leaving the EU
also means quitting the
Single Market, the internal European trading bloc that includes free
movement of goods, services, capital and people.
They point to evidence that leading Leave supporting
politicians ruled out staying in the Single Market during
Andrea Leadsom, for example, said it would almost
certainly be the case that the UK would come out of the Single Market.
When asked for a yes or no on whether the UK should stay
"No, we should be outside the Single Market."
And Boris Johnson agreed with his erstwhile ally, saying, "Michael
Gove was absolutely right to say the UK
They've released a video of clips of Leave campaigners speaking before
the referendum apparently saying that the UK should stay in the
Nigel Farage, for example, once said that on leaving
the EU we'll find ourselves part of the European economic area
Owen Paterson, the former Environment Secretary,
once made the startling statement that only a madman would actually
And Matthew Elliott, the Vote Leave chief, said
that the Norwegian option would be initially attractive for some
But do these quotes create an accurate picture of what
To cast some light on where these quotes came from we're
joined by James McGrory, director of Open Britain
Welcome to the Sunday Politics. . Your video has statements from leave
campaigners hinting they want to stay in the single market. How many
were made during the referendum campaign? I don't know. Not one was
made during the referendum campaign. Indeed, only two of the 12
statements were recorded after Royal assent had been given to the
referendum. Only one was made this year before the referendum.
Throughout the campaign am a leave campaigners lauded the Norwegian
model. Norway are in the single market but not in the EU. They went
out of their way not to be pinned down on a specific trading
arrangement they want to see in the future with Europe, when the
Treasury model the different models it was the EEA or a free-trade
agreement. I understand. Does it not undermine your case that none of the
12 statements on your video were made during the campaign itself,
when people were giving really serious thought to such matters? The
Leave campaign weren't giving serious thought to such matters.
They did not set out the future trading model they wanted to see.
But you cannot produce a single video with somebody saying we should
stay in the single market during the campaign. Daniel Hanna had talked
about the Norwegian model as a future option. One comment from
Nigel Farage dates back to 2009, when we didn't even know if we would
have a referendum or not. Does it not stretch credibility to go back
to the time when Gordon Brown was Prime Minister? The overall point
stands. It is not supposed to be an exhaustive list of the options.
Daniel Hannan, described as the intellectual godfather of the Leave
movement is saying that no one is talking about threatening our place
in the signal market. I think it's legitimate to point out the Leave
campaign never came forward with a credible argument. We have
highlighted some of the quotes you picked out from leave campaigners
over time. Do you think you have fully encapsulated their arguments
accurately? I don't think in a 92nd video you can talk about the full
thing. -- a 90-2nd video. Some of them want to seek a free-trade
agreement, some to default on to World Trade Organisation tariffs.
There is a range of opinion in the Leave campaign. Let's listen to the
clip you used on Owen Paterson first.
Only a madman would actually leave the market.
Only a madman would actually leave the market.
It's not the EU which is
a political organisation delivering the prosperity and buying our goods.
It's the market, it's the members of the market and we'll carry on
I mean, are we really suggesting that the
economy in the world is not going to come to come
to a satisfactory trading arrangement with the EU?
Are we going to be like Sudan and North
It is ludicrous this idea that we are going to leap off a
What he said when he said only a madman would leave Europe, was that
we would continue to trade, we would continue to have access. Any country
in the world can have access. What the Leave campaign suggested is our
trade would continue uninterrupted, they are still at it today, David
Davis used the phrase, uninterrupted, from the dispatch box
recently. You misrepresented him by saying only a madman would leave the
Single Market and stopped it there, because he goes onto say that of
course we want Leave in the sense of continuing to have access. I don't
think he was about axis, he is talking
about membership. He doesn't use the word membership at all. He talks
about we are going to carry on trading with them, we will not leap
off, we will carry on trading. Anybody can trade with the EU, it's
the terms on which you trade that is important and leave campaigners and
Patterson is an example of this, saying we can trade as we do now,
the government saying we can trade without bureaucratic impediments and
tariff free. The viewers will make up their mind. Let's listen to the
views of Matthew Elliott, the Chief Executive of Vote Leave.
When it comes to the Norwegian option, the EEA option, I think that
it might be initially attractive for some business people.
So you then cut him off there but this is what he went on to say in
the same clip, let's listen to that. When it comes to the Norwegian
option, the EEA option, I think that it might be initially attractive
for some business people. But then again for voters
who are increasingly concerned about migration in the EU,
they will be very concerned that it allows free movement
of people to continue. Again, you have misrepresented him.
He said the Norwegian model has attractions but there are real
problems if it involves free movement of people, which it does.
But you cut that bit out. I challenge anyone to represent them
accurately because they took such a range of opinions. I don't know what
we are supposed to do. You are misrepresenting them. He is saying
the Norwegian option is attractive to business, I understand why. It
might not be attractive for voters. But then he said if it allowed free
movement of people it could be an issue. You took that out. You are
saying this is a definitive position. I'm suggesting you are
distorting it. This is what you had Mr Farage say.
On D+1 we'll find ourselves part of the European economic area
This is what he then went on to say in that same clip that you didn't
run. There is absolutely
nothing to fear in terms of trade from leaving
the on D+1 we'll find ourselves part
of the European Economic Area and we should use our
membership of the EEA as a holding position from which
we can negotiate as the European Union's biggest export
market in the world, as good a deal, my goodness me,
if Switzerland can have one we So there again, he says not that we
should stay in the Single Market as a member, but that we stay in the EA
as a transition until we negotiate something. -- EEA. This whole clip
is online, how would you get away with this distortion? It is not a
distortion, the whole point is to point out they do not have a
definitive position, he is arguing for membership of the Single Market,
for a transitional period. For the transition. How long does that go
on, what does he want to then achieve? Not very quickly but he
does not say we should stay members of the Single Market and you didn't
let people see what he went on to say, you gave the impression he
wanted to stay in the one it. It would not be a video then, it would
be a seven-week long lecture. They took so many positions, and the idea
now that they were clear with people that we should definitely leave the
Single Market I think is fictitious. You are trying to make out they all
had one position which was to remain members of the one it. You see the
full clips that is not what they are saying. We are trying to point out
there is no mandate to leave the Single Market. The idea the Leave
campaign spoke with unanimity and clarity of purpose and throughout
the whole campaign said we will definitely leave the Single Market
is not true. That is the whole point of the media. We showed in the
montage in the video just before we came on, we said that then Prime
Minister, the then Chancellor, Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, being
categorical that if you vote to leave the EU, you vote to leave
membership of the Single Market. What bit of that didn't you
understand? Under duress they occasionally said they wanted to
leave. Some of them wanted to leave the Single Market. All of the other
promises they made, whether ?350 million for the NHS, whether a VAT
cut on fuel, points-based system. You do not have a single quote of
any of these members saying they want to be a member. Daniel Hannan
has said consistently that Norway are a part of the Single Market. You
spend the referendum campaign criticising for Rim misrepresenting
and misrepresenting and lying and many thought they did. Having seen
this many will conclude that you are the biggest liars. I think it is
perfectly reasonable to point out that the Leave campaign did not have
a clear position on our future trading relationship with Europe.
That is all this video does. It doesn't say we definitely have to
stay in the Single Market, it just says they do have a mandate to drag
us out of our biggest trading partner.
Now people have seen the full quotes in context our viewers will make up
their mind. Thank you. Now - voting closes next week
in the the Ukip leadership contest. The second Ukip leadership contest
this year after the party's first female leader - Diane James -
stood down from the role Since then the party's lurched from
farce to fiasco. It's a world gripped by uncertainty,
split into factions. Yes, 2, because they're
having their second Watch as the alpha male,
the Ukip leader at Nigel Watch as the alpha male,
the Ukip leader Nigel Farage, hands power to the new alpha
female Diane James. The European Parliament
in Strasbourg, October. Another leading light and possible
future leader, the MEP Steven Wolfe,
has been laid low after an alleged tussle with a colleague
during a meeting. A few days later he is
out of hospital and I will be withdrawing my
application to become I'm actually withdrawing
myself from Ukip. You're resigning from the party?
I'm resigning with immediate effect. And this week a leaked document
suggested the party improperly spent EU funds on political
campaigning in the UK. Another headache for whoever takes
over the leadership of the pack. One contender is Suzanne Evans,
a former Tory councillor and was briefly suspended for
disloyalty. Also standing, Paul Nuttall,
an MEP from Liverpool who has been by Farage's side
as his deputy for six years. There's another big beast
in the Ukip leadership contest, and I'm told
that today he can be spotted He's John Rees-Evans,
a businessman and adventurer who is offering members the chance
to propose policies via a website We've got really dedicated
passionate supporters who feel like they're not really
being listened to and are not even Typically what happens
is they just basically sit there until six months before
a General Election when they are contacted and asked to go out
and leaflet and canvas. Even at branch level people feel
there is not an adequate flow of communication
up-and-down the party. Are you not going to take part in
any hustings? He left a hustings saying
the contest was an establishment coronation and has
made colourful comments in the past. He's in favour of the death penalty
for crimes like paedophilia. I think there is a clear
will amongst the offences should be dealt with
decisively. But again, on an issue like that,
that is something that Our members are not
going to agree with me on everything and I don't believe that
I would have any authority to have the say and determine
the future What method would you use
for the death penalty? Again, that is something that could
be determined by suggestions made So you'd have like an online
poll about whether you use the electric chair,
or lethal injection? For example, arguments would be made
in favour of This is such a small aspect
of what I'm standing for. Essentially, in mainstream media
they try to by focusing on pretty irrelevant
details. This is one vote that
the membership would have. What I'm actually trying to do
in this party is to revolutionise the democratic
process in the UK, and that's really what your viewers should
be concentrating on. With him at the helm he reckons Ukip
would win at Meanwhile, in New York,
on a visit to Trump Tower, Nigel Farage admired the plumage
of the President-elect, a man he has described as
a silverback gorilla, a friendship that's been condemned by some
in this leadership contest. There are also elections
to the party's National Executive Committee, a body
that's been roundly criticised by And we're joined now by two
of the candidates in the Ukip leadership election -
Suzanne Evans and Paul Nuttall. We are going to kick off by giving
each of them 30 seconds to lay out their case as to why they would be
the less leader starting with Suzanne Evans.
Ukip is at its best when it is scaring the political establishment,
forcing it to address those problems it would rather ignore. But it
really change people's lives for the better and fast, we need to win
seats and elections right across the country. To win at the ballot box we
need to attract more women, more ethnic
minorities, and more of those Labour voters who no longer recognise their
party. I know how to do that. Ukip under my
leadership will be the same page about it, common-sense, radical
party it has always been, just even more successful. Thank you, Suzanne
Evans, Paul Nuttall. I'm standing on a platform of unity and experience.
I believe the party must come together if it is to survive and
prosper. I believe I'm the best candidate to ensure that happens, I
am not part of any faction in the party, and beyond that I have done
every single job within the party, whether that is as head of policy,
whether that is Party Chairman, deputy leader for Nigel for the past
six years. I believe Ukip has great opportunities in Labour
constituencies where we can move in and become the Patriot invoice of
working people, and beyond that we have to ensure the government's feet
are held to the fire on Brexit and we get real Brexit, not a
mealy-mouthed version. How will you get a grip on this? People have to
realise that the cause is bigger than any personality, we have to get
together in a room and sort out not just a spokespeople role but roles
within the organisation, Party Chairman, party secretary, and
whatnot. But as I say, Ukip must unite, we are on 13% in the opinion
polls, the future is bright, there are open goals but Ukip must be on
the pitch to score them. He says he's the only one that can get a
grip on this party. I disagree, I have a huge amount of experience in
the party as well and also a background that I think means I can
help bring people together. I have always said nothing breeds unity
faster than success and under my leadership we will be successful.
There is concern about the future of our National Executive Committee
going forward. Mr Farage called it the lowest grade of people I have
ever met, do you agree? I think he must have been having a bad day, I
think we need to make it more accountable to the membership, more
open, more democratic. What would you do with the National Executive
Committee? I have been calling for the National Executive Committee to
be elected reasonably since 2010 giving the members better
communication lines and make it far more transparent. Would you have a
clear out of the office? I wouldn't, I think the chairman of the party,
Paul Upton, the interim chairman, is doing a good job and the only person
who has come out of the summer with his reputation enhanced. Let me show
you a picture we have all seen of your current leader, Mr Farage, with
President-elect Donald Trump. Paul Nuttall, you criticise Mr Farage's
decision to appear at rallies during the American election and called Mr
Trump appalling. Do you stick by that? I wouldn't have voted for him.
I made it clear. Do you still think he's appalling now that he is
President-elect? Some of the things he said were appalling during the
campaign that he said. But he would be good for Britain, trade,
pro-Brexit and he is an Anglo file and the first thing he did was put
the bust of Winston Churchill back in the Oval Office. You, Suzanne
Evans, called Mr Trump one of the weakest candidates the US has had. I
said the same about Hillary Clinton. They cannot both be the weakest. The
better candidate on either side would have beaten the other, that is
quite clear. Do you stand by that, or are you glad that your leader Mr
Farage has strong ties to him? I am, why wouldn't I be? For Ukip to have
that direct connection, it can be only good for a party. Were you not
out of step and Mr Farage is in step because it looks like your vote is
according to polling I have seemed like Mr Trump and his policies? Let
me finish. If I am the leader of Ukip I will not be involving myself
in foreign elections, I will because in trading here in this country
ensuring we get Ukip people elected to council chambers and get seats in
2020. The other thing your leader has in
common with Mr Trump is that he rather admires Vladimir Putin. Do
you? I don't. If you look at Putin's record, he has invaded Ukraine and
Georgia. I am absolutely not a fan. I think that Vladimir Putin is
pretty much a nasty man, but beyond that, I believe that in the Middle
East, he is generally getting it right in many areas. We need to
bring the conflict... Bombing civilians? We need to bring the
conflict to an end as fast as possible. The British and American
line before Donald Trump is to support rebels, including one is
affiliated to Al-Qaeda, to the Taliban. We need to clear these
people out and ensure that Syria becomes stable. This controversial
breaking point poster from during the referendum campaign. Mr Farage
unveiled it, there he is standing in front of it. You can bend it - do
you still? Yes, I think it was the wrong poster at the wrong time. I
was involved with the vote Leave campaign as well as Ukip's campaign,
and I felt strongly that those concerned about immigration were
already going to vote to leave because it was a fundamental truth
that unless we left the European Union we couldn't control
immigration. I thought it was about approaching those soft wavering
voters who weren't sure. I don't think I said it was racist, but it
was about sovereignty and trade and so forth. That was where we needed
to go. I was concerned it might put off some of those wavering voters.
People may well say, it was part of the winning campaign. It was Ukip
shock and all, which is what you stand for and what makes you
different. I said I would know how that I said I would not have gone
for that person and I thought it was wrong to do it just a week out from
the referendum. However, I believe it released legitimate concerns,
with a deluge of people making their way from the Middle East and Africa
into the European continent. Where is the low hanging fruit for you,
particularly in England? Is it Labour or Conservative voters? I
want to hang onto the Conservative voters we have got but I think the
low hanging fruit is Labour. Jeremy Corbyn won't sing the national
anthem, Emily Thornbury despises the English flag. Diane Abbott thinks
anyone talking about immigration is racist. Not to mention John
McDonnell's feelings about the IRA. Labour has ceased to be a party for
working people and I think Ukip is absolutely going to be that party.
It is clear, I absolutely concur with everything Suzanne has said. I
first voiced this back in 2008 that I believe Ukip has a fantastic
opportunity in working-class communities, and everyone laughed at
me. It is clear now that we resonate with working people, and you have
seen that in the Brexit result. Would you bring back the death
penalty? It wouldn't be Ukip policy. Absolutely not. Would you give more
money to the NHS and how would your fanatic? You like it is important to
fund it adequately, and it hasn't been to date. We promised in our
manifesto that we would give more money. Where does the money come
from? It is about tackling health tourism. I think the NHS is being
taken for a ride at the moment. That may be right, but where does the
money come from? It is about scaling back management in the NHS, because
that has burgeoned beyond control. They are spending far more money on
management. Where would you save money? We need to look at HS two,
foreign aid. Now we have Brexit and we will be saving on the membership
fee. We need to cut back on management, as Suzanne says. It
cannot be right that 51% of people who work for the NHS in England are
not clinically qualified. The NHS needs money now - where would you
get it? From HS two. That is capital spending spread over a long period.
Where will you get the money now? OK, another one. We spent ?25
million every day on foreign aid to countries who sometimes are richer
than ourselves. Through the Barnett formula. You would take money away
from Scotland? Yes, I think they get far too much. PG tips or Earl Grey?
Colegrave. PG tips. Strictly come dancing or X Factor? Neither.
Strictly. I would love to be on it one day. There you go. Thank you
It's just gone 11:35am, 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 very warm welcome to your local part of the show
This week, a Tyneside charity warns that government changes to housing
benefit could prevent some people from furnishing their homes.
Also coming up, can Ukip under a new leader really win Labour-held
I'll be asking my guests, the Labour Peer Jeremy Beecham
and Ukip North East Euro-MP Jonathan Arnott.
Also talking about all that and ward closures at her local
hospital in Northumberland is the Conservative MP
But let's start with high speed rail.
This week the government set out its preferred route to take HS2
Ministers say passengers in the North East and Cumbria
will benefit too with more services and extra seats on the east coast
And of course there's hopes Hitachi in Newton Aycliffe could end up
Or as some critics say, a giant vanity project?
It seems to me it's providing awful value for money, frankly.
When you look at this project, it seems to be that it is providing
fewer miles per pound spent on any project for high-speed rail
It seems incredibly expensive, it is something which is only
going to cut a relatively short amount of time of our train
journeys, and at the same time, it's costing tens of billions of pounds.
The cost is spiralling out of control.
You see the cost going up and up and up.
And nobody really realising at first hand what it was actually
And then you think, how much we could actually do
if we put that money into our regions across the UK,
including here in the north-east, and actually improve our roads
and rail infrastructure that we've got at the moment.
Spend the money more, perhaps on improving rail services,
roads in your area rather than a project, but it's only
going to have fringe benefits for us, isn't it?
I think one of the key issues, and that was the frustration I found
early on in this discussion, this isn't really about speed
as such as Jonathan says, it's about capacity.
Our train services are absolutely full.
It's great people are using trains more more,
which is really important, we need to see that capacity
expansion into the Midlands and up into the north-east.
I'm very pleased as part of the Secretary of State's
statement this week on this that the connection at Leeds
bringing us up into York at Newcastle is clearly set out,
and clearly those of us from the North will continue to look
It will knock about quarter of an hour off the fastest time.
It is not only about time, it is about capacity and ensuring
that we have got a whole new level of train network in order to keep
growing the use of trains, both for passengers and freight.
Labour have backed HS2 but slightly grudgingly at times,
talking about the budget needing to be under control,
fair enough but there is a kind of have your cake and eat it.
Slightly moan about it, but we should embrace it, shouldn't we?
Up to a point but when this matter was discussed in the Lords
of the other day, I declared an interest as you have to do.
I said it would be a posthumous interest.
Because by the time the service reaches the north-east,
17 years on, I was 72 yesterday, I don't think I'm going to be here.
I asked the Minister when it would actually reach
Newcastle and he's going to write to me about that.
And I think there's a lot of questions about the viability
of it and the length of time it's going to take.
But would you say the argument that we need it, apart
from the argument about high-speed rail itself, but alleviating
I think what we need is a much better connection
between the north-east and Yorkshire and the north-west.
The greater Manchester and Liverpool area.
That seems to me the most important advantage that we could get.
The London end I don't think is particularly relevant
I'm sure between now and 2033, if I'm still here, if any of us
are still here, we will be discussing that again.
Now, Ukip will have a new leader in a little over a week's time.
The bookies' favourite is North West Euro-MP Paul Nuttall.
He wants to target Labour-held constituencies in the north
which he says are an "open goal" for Ukip.
But can the party really translate anti-EU sentiment into votes
and how much of a threat do they pose to Labour?
Cast in favour of Leave was 82,000...
It's the city that put Britain on course for Brexit.
But when Sunderland became first to declare a vote for Leave,
did that point to a wider turn in the political tide?
From Remain supporting Labour to a party that made leaving
After the referendum celebrations, Ukip hoped to keep momentum going.
By targeting council and even Parliamentary seats here on Wearside
They've lost not one but two leaders and faced some
Some of her blooms may be purple, but the owner of this florist shop
voted Conservative blue at the last election.
She agrees with Ukip on Brexit but says the party lacks substance.
I don't think they come across as serious, I don't.
Because they've never actually proved anything as yet.
They need to buck up their ideas, get somebody in decent.
A few doors up, a different tune at the local record store.
Previously Labour, its owner switched to Ukip in 2015.
But worry the party could prove a one-hit wonder.
They've actually basically got what they wanted,
On the high street, shoppers also wonder
They can't decide who wants to be leader, there's one stepped down
Nobody seems strong enough at the moment.
The scuffle in Parliament, alleged scuffle, I don't think that
And despite the recent winning of seats in councils
like Hartlepool, Ukip faces policy confusion as well,
I think it's fair to say that Ukip are a bit in disarray at the moment,
as I think it always happens to populist parties.
They had one issue, which was to get us out of Europe,
the vote went the right way for them.
As it picks its leader, Ukip also faces a north-south dilemma.
Ukip's appeal in the south of England was to get Conservative
voters who wanted to have less government, lower taxes.
In the north, it was much more about having a sense
of regional identity, having concerns about housing.
Ukip supporters admit the leadership contest has been bruising,
but say Labour's neglect in the north-east
You've only got a small number of local councillors,
no MPs in this region, is talk of challenging
Over the years we've grown in strength.
We've consistently come second in the Parliamentary
and council elections, and this is our platform
for going that extra yard to cross the finishing line.
The night that Ukip's dreams came true, but after its referendum
revelry, the party's still dealing with a hangover.
Jonathan, you are backing Paul Nuttall for the leadership,
why will he deliver northern MPs where Nigel Farage failed?
Well, look, any new leader is going to build on the legacy
of Nigel Farage and Nigel has taken this party a very, very long way,
he deserves an immense amount of credit for what Nigel has done
But Paul, of course, is someone who is a northerner.
He gets it, he understands, he understands the north of this
country, he understands the problems that we face and he is somebody
who has spent an awful lot of time, actually, across in this region,
so many times, he has been across and helped out.
He is deputy leader of the party so he's got the internal experience,
And he's also somebody who talks the right language.
Who's going to start broadening the policy base,
who is going to make sure that we are not talking
about EU and immigration, but we're talking about crime,
which is an issue which is decimating our working class
It has actually gone back up fairly recently.
Lots of traditional Labour voters backed Brexit, they
I don't think it necessarily follows.
We can't, Labour doesn't take voters for granted.
We are trying to deal on the ground in our councils with huge problems,
massive cuts in, government cuts, and we have two really represent
There is a danger here, isn't there, that you look at what happened
in Scotland, the SNP, that is the danger.
That Labour takes an area for granted, that it has a God-given
right to get votes here, and what happens is the same that
We don't take the people for granted, in terms
of Parliamentary elections or indeed in local councils.
I don't people here are going to be particularly impressed by a party
whose ex-leader seems to be Donald Trump's best
And a party for that matter by the way pledged to abolish
inheritance tax is one of its main proposals in the last
Paul Nuttall's election could be bad news for your party, couldn't it?
Because the kind of agenda that Jonathan talked about,
tough on crime, he is talking about perhaps a referendum
on capital punishment, I can imagine that could appeal
I think you'll find the Conservative Party is perhaps
a far more broad church than that these days.
I'm not saying every Conservative voter, but some.
I think in Northumberland in particular, we have seen
absolutely a fragmentation of some of the Labour vote,
and it is now fragmented again because you have got
the Corbynite Labour vote which is a very clear part
of the Labour Party along with a fairly disenfranchised Labour
vote who is not sure where they should be
I think Ukip do continue to have a stronghold over that voter.
But you know there is a strain of working class conservatives
who vote in the north-east, but also working class voters voting
for Labour who may well have been thinking they could vote
Conservative because of your attitude to the European Union.
A strong leader like Paul Nuttall, that is going to be a problem
No, I think the, as you like to call the working-class voter,
I am seeing week in and week out over the last few weeks,
are very keen on supporting Theresa May's view of
the Conservative government, she is reaching out to everyone.
And I think that is something we are going to see,
a strengthening of the Conservative vote in the north-east.
It is the Phil Wilson question, Theresa May is going to deliver
Brexit, all the indications are that she will be
strong on ending freedom of movement of labour,
I thought the Phil Wilson question was quite absurd, frankly.
For him to say Ukip have got policy confusion when he is a member
of Jeremy Corbyn's Labour was I thought little bit rich.
Ukip have to be talking about issues that impact on working people.
That's why I said we broaden our appeal, it is beyond EU immigration,
we talk about crime, we talk about democracy,
we talk about how we are bringing power not just...
Can you really prove you are more than just a single issue party?
It was the EU that founded your success, and now that that Fox
is shot, we are leaving the European Union,
When I joined Ukip, I joined Ukip in 2001,
I didn't even at that time realise how big of an issue the EU was,
how much it impacted on our daily lives and how important
At that time, when I joined Ukip, I actually joined Ukip based
on the range of other policies that the party have.
And that was 15 years ago when we were still seen
We are certainly not that and we will never be that.
The political instincts of your party are like the Lib Dems,
Most of the MPs, a lot of the councillors would actually
quite like to fight to stay in the EU, still.
But because you are afraid of the voters who in this
region backed Brexit, you are not prepared
I don't know what you mean by nailing colours to the mast.
We have to accept that in our view the referendum went the wrong way,
and particularly the wrong way for this region, which has had
?800 million worth of investment over the last few years,
which is actually more than the government
were promising over 30 years in the devolution deal.
Aren't you making that point that isn't the Lib Dem position,
asking for a second referendum on the deal, a more coherent one
than Labour's which is like, we do not like it but we will go
I am not saying we are going along with it.
I think that is a possibility because at the moment we have got
a government which does not know, or does not tell people,
We have to seem what the government in fact wants
It is appalling that no steps at all to prepare for the contingency
of the referendum going, in my view, and the former
government's view, the wrong way, none at all.
Affording somewhere to live is a struggle for many people.
But even if you manage to rent a home there's the extra
At the moment local councils and housing associations can help
by providing furniture packs paid for through housing benefit.
But one Tyneside charity has warned that the Government's cap on housing
benefit will prevent many new tenants from
This is the lamp that I've got from the Foundation,
I paid ?15 for it, because there's two different prices ranges,
one if you're on benefits and one if you're working.
The wardrobe, we got from the Foundation,
It's better than any other wardrobe I've ever had, actually.
Wendy and her husband John were both out of work at the time
when they went to a charity that helps people on low
Furniture they might otherwise not have been able to afford.
If you're on benefits, you're really, your money
is going mainly to keep the house over your head.
You're paying for your utility bills which is going through the roof.
And people are really struggling to find decent furniture.
This is where Wendy and John's furniture came from,
the Foundations Furniture Project based in Gateshead on Tyneside.
It sells low-cost furniture to people on benefits, or,
through a credit union, helps them borrow money
at affordable rates to buy the furniture.
The charity fears it could be about to get a whole lot busier.
At the moment people living in social housing can have some
of the furniture paid for through their housing benefit.
But a new housing benefit cap might mean that's not
That housing benefit cap is being phased in by 2018.
Critics believe some people on benefits will then find it harder
to furnish their homes and could turn to very expensive
People have got their pride, they want to have a nice house and that.
So the only thing is they go to where they perhaps can
And sometimes they're so desperate that they're not really
particularly bothered, as long as they can get
So I think there is the potential there for people to get into a lot
The Department for Work and Pensions told us the cap on housing benefit
for tenants in social housing is fair because this brings payments
into line with those in the private rented sector.
And it also says it's providing councils with ?1 billion of funding
by 2020 to help tenants affected by the cap.
Doesn't this seem just another cruel punishment for those in need who
find themselves in dire circumstances? You get how is but
you cannot afford to furnish it. The key question is understanding the
purpose of the housing benefit cap which is making money available to
in private or social housing because in private or social housing because
there has been a disparity. That is fair on the taxpayer who is funding
the bill, so there should be fairness across the board. It is an
interesting piece that you have shown, I would worry if families who
are looking to get furniture for their home cannot get access but the
credit unions are always there to provide low-cost and supportive
finance. A lot of people will go to money lenders or the kind of
retailers who charge extortionate interest rates, that is the reality.
That is a risk now, the housing cap will not change that. More people
will be driven towards it. I hope that every council is there to
them to low-cost providers or the them to low-cost providers or the
councils will find ways to help. The cap is there to even out so everyone
whatever sort of housing they are in get support. Is that not fair, it
provides a pot of money for discretionary payments that councils
can pay-out when they find people in need. The reality is it will hit
people very hard. I asked a Parliamentary question about this,
the parliament said there are 580 households who want lose out on this
to the dead of ?1.3 million -- to the extent of ?1.3 million per year.
That is taken out of the local economy. The local housing allowance
is also being reduced. In that case, 1300 households are going to lose
something like 1.1 million a year. That is just in Newcastle. Nearly
2.5 million. But they are matching private sector tenants. The problem
is that private sector rents are higher. Government policy has been
to effectively kill off the to effectively kill off the
provision of new social housing, greater emphasis going into the
private rented sector, there are no control over those rents and that
has driven up the need for housing benefit in those sectors. They need
to be tackling the rent levels in the private sector. Money is tight
and the benefit caps help control spending, a lot of your supporters
will be stability to that. This has also chimed with your party. We have
to take a mature and reasoned attitude to this kind of thing. Of
course there were problems. Under the last Labour government there was
public sector overspend on everything and there was a need to
bring spending under control. If this measure you could support? The
problem comes that it seems that quite often it is a question of
taking an axe to something without being very careful and making sure
that you are not putting hard-working people on disadvantage.
Or people on benefits. One of the big problems in the benefit system,
particularly impact in people in the north-east, is the Employment
Support Allowance undercuts there. I am concerned about those cuts in
principle. Something has to change in the Autumn Statement,
particularly the freeze on benefits that will hit a lot of people if the
inflation goes up. If I knew any more than you would be the first to
share it. We need to make sure we have fairness across the board, I
have spent time with the CABG they making sure we -- CABG today Mickey
sure we have famous across the -- fairness across the system.
Unemployment fell in the north east this week to levels last
But while there was good news on jobs, concern is mounting over
Here's Fergus with that and the rest of the week's news in 60 seconds.
Unemployment in the north-east is at its lowest for a decade.
It was down 20,000 to 79,000 between July and September.
It's still the highest in the UK but fell faster than other part
A motion calling for accident and emergency and maternity
services to be retained at Darlington's Memorial Hospital
has been passed by councillors in North Yorkshire.
Middlesbrough South MP Tom Blenkinsop has urged
the government to put more money into the social care budget
but ministers say better coordination of services
CQC has commented that social care is on the verge of collapse.
The government has had six years of warnings in relation to this
matter, yet it has cut ?4 billion from the social care budget.
Will the Secretary of State for Health be talking
to his colleague the Chancellor of the Exchequer to ensure that that
?4 billion is replaced in the Autumn Statement?
And finally, a new NHS review has supported the continued closure
of an inpatient ward at Rothbury Community Hospital
There will now be a formal consultation on its future.
You were at the public meeting at Rothbury discussing the ward
Croatia, strong feelings but the figures are stark, it is only half
for most of the time, is it right to consult on its future? The hospital
is not at risk, they are looking at the 12 inpatient beds which they
have put a freeze on news of the moment. The occupancy has been below
50% for the last few years. The stresses in terms of staff that
Northumbria trust has got, they need to find a better way. I have been
working closely with the community over the summer and understanding
what we want those beds to be used for, because clearly they have not
been providing the right sort of service. There is a real issue with
palliative care and social care respite care for elderly couples. We
consultation to make sure that we consultation to make sure that we
can find a model that is going to work. People at the meeting once
these beds available to local patients for emergency care. The
challenge that we have it understand within that particular Community
Hospital building what level of medical care can be provided. It has
been a low metal core care. What is your view -- medical care. What is
your view? It needs to be opened to provide palliative care for those in
the last few weeks of their life, it has been used in an ad hoc way
already for that, but also provide a level of social care and respite for
families because we do not have that at all.
And that's it from us, we're back same time,
In the meantime for a northern slant on the Autumn Statement
follow me on Twitter, and we'll be dissecting
what the Chancellor's package means for our region on next week's show.
never happened and will not happen in four years. It is subject we
should spend more time on. Back to you.
What will the Chancellor have to say in his first big economic statement?
What impact will the forecasters say Brexit will have on the economy?
And who will face the Front National's Marine Le Pen in
Well, the Shadow Chancellor and the Chancellor have both been
touring the television studios this morning.
Let's be clear, a lot of this is going to be gimmicks and press
As I've said, in the pipeline, we've only
seen one in five delivered to construction, that's all.
So a lot of this will be a repeat of what
I'm not going to reveal what I'm going to say on
We don't have unlimited capacity, as one might
imagine from listening to John McDonnell, to borrow
hundreds of billions of pounds more for discretionary spending.
That simply doesn't exist if we're going to
retain this country's hard-won credibility in the financial markets
if we are going to remain an attractive place for business to
We didn't learn very much, Helen, but the papers were briefed this
morning that there will be another ?1.3 billion for roads and things
like that. ?1.3 billion is 0.08% of our GDP. Not exactly an
infrastructure investment programme, is it? Yellow like I have to say, it
was not thrilling to read the details. -- I have to say... It is
the first big financial statement that is going to come and I think
there will be a big row about the OBE are forecast because they cannot
set out a range, they have to commit to one forecast. Everything they do
is incredibly political. DOB are is on a hiding to nothing. -- DOB are
-- the Office for Budget Responsibility. I don't know how
they will square the circle. It is an interesting week. It is all about
the economy and public finances and we don't have to talk about Brexit
until next Sunday, but no, I have a terrible feeling that by the end of
Wednesday afternoon we will be screaming and shouting about how
Brexit is going to be for the economy. Just imagine the Treasury
comes out with his forecast that it is going to collapse growth and
collapsed Treasury takings, people will be apoplectic. Until now, the
economy has continued to grow strongly. Pretty well. They cannot
say, we have noticed it slowing down and that will continue. They have to
take a punt if they think it will slow down. It affects the
Chancellor's figures, because the more they say it is slowing down,
and I have seen that it will go from 2% down to 1.4%, the more the
Chancellor's deficit rises even without any more tax cuts and
spending. Absolutely. I think Tom is right. What we will see this week is
a continuation of the debate we have been having all along. If the Office
for Budget Responsibility has negative and gloomy predictions,
there will be howls of agony, and rightly howls of frustration from
Brexiteers who will say that all the dire predictions from before the
referendum have not come to pass and now you are talking things down in a
way that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. The money for roads, you
were dismissive about it, but every little helps. I don't dismiss it, I
say it doesn't amount to a fiscal stimulus in macro economic terms.
I'm sure if you are on that road, it will be useful. They are going to
build a super highway between Oxford and Cambridge. I would like to see
them go out to Japan and learn how to fill a hole in two days. I would
suggest the road from Oxford to Cambridge is not for the just
managing classes, even though it goes through Milton Keynes, and that
simply freezing due freezing fuel duty isn't going to hack it, either.
These just about managing people are potentially quite a big band. With
income tax rises, it means anything you do to help them is incredibly
expensive. The universal credit freeze is an interesting example of
that. Philip Hammond sounded ambivalent about it after
pre-briefings that it might not, the cuts might not go ahead. There are
people who are in work but because they are low paid don't have the
number of hours, they require welfare benefits to top up their
pay, and these welfare benefits, as it stands, are frozen until 2020,
and yet inflation is now starting to rise. That's a problem for the just
managing people. Correct. It is worse than that, because we are
talking about April 2017 when tax credits become universal credits, so
the squeeze will be greater. We will get a small highway between a couple
of university towns, but if he has any money left to spend at all, it
will be on some pretty seismic jazzman for the just about managing
people. I am so glad we're not calling them Jams on this programme,
because it is a patronising tone. What the Chancellor and Shadow
Chancellor did not confront is that Mr Trump's election is a watershed
in terms of being able to borrow cheaply. The Federal Reserve is
about to start raising rates. The days of cheap borrowing for
governments could be coming to an end. You can feel a bit sorry for
labour here because after having had six years of being told that we need
a surplus and these things are important, we can't deny the
deficit, we have switched now and the first thing that Philip Hammond
did was to scrap George Osborne's borrowing targets. He has given
himself more wriggle room than George Osborne had. He has and it
will cost them more. Debt servicing will now rise as a cost. Where is
the next political earthquake going to happen?
It could be Italy, or the French elections coming up next spring.
Now, who will face the Front National's Marine Le Pen in next
year's French Presidential elections?
Well, France's centre-right part, Les Republicans,
are selecting their candidate in the first round of
Well, France's centre-right part, Les Republicans,
are selecting their candidate in the first round of
Let's speak to our correspondent in Paris, Hugh Schofield.
Welcome to the programme. Three main candidates, the former -- two former
prime ministers and Nicolas Sarkozy, the former president. It is not
clear who the front runner is. Robbins it is quite an exciting
race, because four weeks it did look as if it was going to be Juppe. It
is a two round race. Two go through and the idea is that they rally all
the support together. It looked like the first round would be dominated
by Juppe and Nicolas Sarkozy, and there was a clear binary combination
there, because Sarkozy was looking for squeamish far right voters. In
other words, veering clearly to the right and far right on immigration
and identity issues. And Juppe is the opposite, saying we had to
appeal to the centre. That was what it looked like. But the third
candidate has made this really quite staggering surge in the last few
days. There was a debate on Thursday and he was deemed to have won it on
television. He is coming up strongly, and I wouldn't be at all
surprised to see him go through, which would be interesting from a
British perspective, because if the becomes president, he will be the
first president with a British wife. His wife Penelope is Welsh.
We will have to leave it there. I would suggest that the reason it is
fascinating is that whoever wins this primary for the centre-right
party is likely to be the next president, and who the next
president is will be very important for Britain in these Brexit
negotiations. Nothing will really happen until it is determined. Then
after the German elections in October. I would add one more
constituent part. The most important thing about the race is who can stop
Marine Le Pen. Marine Le Pen will almost be one of the ones in the
run-off. The Socialists don't expect much. Francois Hollande is done.
There is too much of a cliff to climb. Which one of these three
centre-right candidates can stop Marine Le Pen? We have had Brexit
and Trump, but we could also have Marine Le Pen. If it is Sarkozy, it
is the battle of the right. In some areas, he has moved to the right of
marine Le Pen. I suppose he feels he has do in order to take the wind out
of our sails. You wonder if she could succeed later on if she does
not this time. Talking to French analysts last night, there was
suggesting that she could not do it this time but could win the next
time. All the events in France over the last year seemed to provide the
most propitious circumstances for her to do well, and particularly if
you throw in Trump and Brexit. Suppose it is Mr Sarkozy, and he
goes through and wins the Republican nomination, and he and Marine Le Pen
go through to the second round, that would mean, think about it, is that
a lot of French socialist voters and those on the father left would have
to grit their teeth and vote for Nicolas Sarkozy. They might not do
it. We might see what we saw in America, where lots of potential
Clinton voters did not turn out. You got politicians like Melanchon on
the far left saying there are foreign workers taking bread out of
French workers' mounts. We sometimes forget, because we tend to emphasise
the National of the National front, but actually, there are economic
policy is quite Bennite. Sarkozy is the Hillary Clinton of the French
elections. He is Mr establishment. Juppe and the other third candidate
are the same. You have to re-establish candidates running
against an antiestablishment candidate. There are populist
economic policies from the National front. The other three want to raise
the retirement age and cut back on the 35 hour week, which are not
classic electoral appeals. Mr Juppe used to be the Mayor of Bordeaux.
And we are the biggest importers of claret, so that could have an
effect. In 2002, it was Jack Shear against John Marine Le Pen, and the
socialist campaign slogan was, vote for the Crook, not the fascist. We
will see what they come up with this time.
The Daily Politics is back at noon tomorrow on BBC Two,
where on Wednesday I will have full coverage of the Chancellor's Autumn
But remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.