18/12/2016

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:39. > :00:40.Morning, folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics.

:00:41. > :00:42.Hard line remainers strike back at Brexit.

:00:43. > :00:45.Are they trying to overturn the result of June's referendum

:00:46. > :00:48.by forcing a second vote before we leave?

:00:49. > :00:51.Australia's man in London tells us that life outside the EU "can be

:00:52. > :00:55.pretty good" and that Brexit will "not be as hard as people say".

:00:56. > :00:58.Could leaving the EU free Britain to do more business

:00:59. > :01:04.It's been called "disgusting, dangerous and deadly"

:01:05. > :01:07.but how polluted is our air, how bad for our health,

:01:08. > :01:13.Here: What does a North East and Cumbria Brexit deal look like?

:01:14. > :01:18.People living here say their community is being destroyed

:01:19. > :01:31.And with me in the Sunday Politics grotto, the Dasher, Dancer

:01:32. > :01:33.and Prancer of political punditry Iain Martin,

:01:34. > :01:42.They'll be delivering tweets throughout the programme.

:01:43. > :01:48.First this morning, some say they will fight

:01:49. > :01:51.for what they call a "soft Brexit", but now there's an attempt by those

:01:52. > :01:54.who campaigned for Britain to remain in the EU to allow the British

:01:55. > :01:57.people to change their minds - possibly with a second referendum -

:01:58. > :02:01.The Labour MEP Richard Corbett is revealed this morning to have

:02:02. > :02:03.tried to amend European Parliament resolutions.

:02:04. > :02:05.The original resolution called on the European Parliament

:02:06. > :02:09.to "respect the will of the majority of the citizens

:02:10. > :02:24.of the United Kingdom to leave the EU".

:02:25. > :02:29.He also proposed removing the wording "stress that this wish

:02:30. > :02:32.must be respected" and adding "while taking account of the 48.1%

:02:33. > :02:44.The amendments were proposed in October,

:02:45. > :02:48.but were rejected by a vote in the Brussels

:02:49. > :02:49.Constitutional Affairs Committee earlier this month.

:02:50. > :02:52.The report will be voted on by all MEPs in February.

:02:53. > :02:55.Well, joining me now from Leeds is the Labour MEP who proposed

:02:56. > :03:04.Good morning. Thanks for joining us at short notice. Is your aim to try

:03:05. > :03:09.and reverse what happened on June 23? My aim with those amendments was

:03:10. > :03:13.simply factual. It is rather odd that these amendments of two months

:03:14. > :03:19.ago are suddenly used paper headlines in three very different

:03:20. > :03:24.newspapers on the same day. It smacks of a sort of concerted effort

:03:25. > :03:30.to try and slapped down any notion that Britain might perhaps want to

:03:31. > :03:35.rethink its position on Brexit as the cost of Brexit emerges. You

:03:36. > :03:40.would like us to rethink the position even before the cost urges?

:03:41. > :03:45.I get lots of letters from people saying how one, this was an advisory

:03:46. > :03:52.referendum won by a narrow majority on the basis of a pack of lies and a

:03:53. > :03:55.questionable mandate. But if there is a mandate from this referendum,

:03:56. > :03:58.it is surely to secure a Brexit that works for Britain without sinking

:03:59. > :04:03.the economy. And if it transpires as we move forward, that this will be a

:04:04. > :04:07.very costly exercise, then there will be people who voted leave who

:04:08. > :04:12.said Hang on, this is not what I was told. I was told this would save

:04:13. > :04:14.money, we could put it in the NHS, but if it is going to cost us and

:04:15. > :04:31.our Monday leg, I would the right to reconsider. But

:04:32. > :04:34.your aim is not get a Brexit that would work for Britain, your aim is

:04:35. > :04:37.to stop it? If we got a Brexit that would work for Britain, that would

:04:38. > :04:40.respect the mandate. But if we cannot get that, if it is going to

:04:41. > :04:43.be a disaster, if it is going to cost people jobs and cost Britain

:04:44. > :04:46.money, it is something we might want to pause and rethink. The government

:04:47. > :04:52.said it is going to come forward with a plan. That is good. We need

:04:53. > :04:59.to know what options to go for as a country. Do we want to stay in the

:05:00. > :05:01.single market, the customs union, the various agencies? And options

:05:02. > :05:08.should be costed so we can all see how much they cost of Brexit will

:05:09. > :05:12.be. If you were simply going to try and make the resolution is more

:05:13. > :05:20.illegal, why did the constitutional committee vote them down? This is a

:05:21. > :05:26.report about future treaty amendments down the road for years

:05:27. > :05:34.to come. This was not the main focus of the report, it was a side

:05:35. > :05:40.reference, in which was put the idea for Association partnerships. Will

:05:41. > :05:47.you push for the idea before the full parliament? I must see what the

:05:48. > :05:55.text is. You said there is a widespread view in labour that if

:05:56. > :05:58.the Brexit view is bad we should not exclude everything, I take it you

:05:59. > :06:05.mean another referendum. When you were named down these amendments,

:06:06. > :06:10.was this just acting on your own initiative, or acting on behalf of

:06:11. > :06:17.the Labour Party? I am just be humble lame-duck MEP in the European

:06:18. > :06:22.Parliament. It makes sense from any point of view that if the course of

:06:23. > :06:25.action you have embarked on turns out to be much more costly and

:06:26. > :06:30.disastrous than you had anticipated, that you might want the chance to

:06:31. > :06:35.think again. You might come to the same conclusion, of course, but you

:06:36. > :06:41.might think, wait a minute, let's have a look at this. But let's be

:06:42. > :06:44.clear, even though you are deputy leader of Labour in the European

:06:45. > :06:52.Parliament, you're acting alone and not as Labour Party policy? I am

:06:53. > :06:56.acting in the constitutional affairs committee. All I am doing is stating

:06:57. > :07:00.things which are common sense. If as we move forward then this turns out

:07:01. > :07:05.to be a disaster, we need to look very carefully at where we are

:07:06. > :07:11.going. But if a deal is done under Article 50, and we get to see the

:07:12. > :07:16.shape of that deal by the end of 2019 under the two-year timetable,

:07:17. > :07:20.in your words, we won't know if it is a disaster or not until it is

:07:21. > :07:26.implemented. We won't be able to tell until we see the results about

:07:27. > :07:34.whether it is good or bad, surely? We might well be able to, because

:07:35. > :07:38.that has to take account of the future framework of relationships

:07:39. > :07:41.with the European Union, to quote the article of the treaty. That

:07:42. > :07:46.means we should have some idea about what that will be like. Will we be

:07:47. > :07:49.outside the customs union, for instance, which will be very

:07:50. > :07:55.damaging for our economy? Or will we have to stay inside and follow the

:07:56. > :07:58.rules without having a say on them. We won't know until we leave the

:07:59. > :08:02.customs union. You think it will be damaging, others think it will give

:08:03. > :08:07.us the opportunity to do massive trade deals. My case this morning is

:08:08. > :08:11.not what is right or wrong, we will not know until we have seen the

:08:12. > :08:14.results. We will know a heck of a lot more than we do now when we see

:08:15. > :08:18.that Article 50 divorce agreement. We will know the terms of the

:08:19. > :08:22.divorce, we will know how much we still have to pay into the EU budget

:08:23. > :08:27.for legacy costs. We will know whether we will be in the single

:08:28. > :08:32.market customs union or not. We will know about the agencies. We will

:08:33. > :08:35.know a lot of things. If the deal on the table looks as if it will be

:08:36. > :08:41.damaging to Britain, then Parliament will be in its rights to say, wait a

:08:42. > :08:45.minute, not this deal. And then you either renegotiate or you reconsider

:08:46. > :08:50.the whole issue of Brexit or you find another solution. We need to

:08:51. > :08:55.leave it there but thank you for joining us.

:08:56. > :09:02.Iain Martin, how serious is the attempt to in effect an wind what

:09:03. > :09:06.happened on June 23? I think it is pretty serious and that interview

:09:07. > :09:11.illustrates very well the most damaging impact of the approach

:09:12. > :09:17.taken by a lot of Remainers, which is essentially to say with one

:09:18. > :09:19.breath, we of course accept the result, but with every action

:09:20. > :09:23.subsequent to that to try and undermine the result or try and are

:09:24. > :09:28.sure that the deal is as bad as possible. I think what needed to

:09:29. > :09:33.happen and hasn't happened after June 23 is you have the extremists

:09:34. > :09:39.on both sides and you have in the middle probably 70% of public

:09:40. > :09:45.opinion, moderate leaders, moderate Remainers should be working together

:09:46. > :09:52.to try and get British bespoke deal. But moderate Leavers will not take

:09:53. > :09:57.moderate Remainers seriously if this is the approach taken at every

:09:58. > :10:07.single turn to try and rerun the referendum. He did not say whether

:10:08. > :10:11.it was Labour policy? That was a question which was ducked. I do not

:10:12. > :10:17.think it is Labour Party policy. I think most people are in a morass in

:10:18. > :10:20.the middle. I think the screaming that happens when anybody dares to

:10:21. > :10:25.question or suggest that you might ever want to think again about these

:10:26. > :10:29.things, I disagree with him about having another referendum but if he

:10:30. > :10:33.wants to campaign for that it is his democratic right to do so. If you

:10:34. > :10:38.can convince enough people it is a good idea then he has succeeded. But

:10:39. > :10:43.the idea that we would do a deal and then realise this is a really bad

:10:44. > :10:50.deal, let's not proceed, we will not really know that until the deal is

:10:51. > :10:53.implemented. What our access is to the single market, whether or not we

:10:54. > :10:57.are in or out of the customs union which we will talk about in a

:10:58. > :11:02.minute, what immigration policy we will have, whether these are going

:11:03. > :11:07.to be good things bad things, surely you have got to wait for four, five,

:11:08. > :11:11.six years to see if it has worked or not? Yes, and by which stage

:11:12. > :11:15.Parliament will have voted on it and there will be no going back from it,

:11:16. > :11:20.or maybe there will. We are talking now about the first three months of

:11:21. > :11:28.2019. That is absolutely the moment when Parliament agrees with Theresa

:11:29. > :11:39.May or not. One arch remain I spoke to, and arch Remainiac, he said that

:11:40. > :11:47.Theresa May will bring this to Parliament in 2019 and could say I

:11:48. > :11:52.recommend that we reject it. What is he on or she? Some strong chemical

:11:53. > :11:58.drugs! The point is that all manner of things could happen. I don't

:11:59. > :12:04.think any of us take it seriously for now but the future is a very

:12:05. > :12:08.long way away. Earlier, the trade Secretary Liam Fox was asked if we

:12:09. > :12:11.would stay in the customs union after Brexit.

:12:12. > :12:17.There would be limitations on what we would do in terms of tariff

:12:18. > :12:23.setting which could limit the deals we would do, but we want to look at

:12:24. > :12:27.all the different deals. There is hard Brexit and soft Brexit as if it

:12:28. > :12:32.is a boiled egg we are talking about. Turkey is in part of the

:12:33. > :12:39.customs union but not other parts. What we need to do is look at the

:12:40. > :12:43.cost. This is what I picked up. The government knows it cannot remain a

:12:44. > :12:48.member of the single market in these negotiations, because that would

:12:49. > :12:51.make us subject to free movement and the European Court. The customs

:12:52. > :12:56.union and the Prime Minister 's office doesn't seem to be quite as

:12:57. > :13:00.binary, that you can be a little bit in and a little bit out, but I would

:13:01. > :13:05.suggest that overall Liam Fox knows to do all the trade deals we want to

:13:06. > :13:09.do we basically have to be out. But what he also seems to know is that

:13:10. > :13:15.is a minority view in Cabinet. He said he was not going to give his

:13:16. > :13:24.opinion publicly. There is still an argument going on about it in

:13:25. > :13:26.Cabinet. When David Liddington struggled against Emily Thornbury

:13:27. > :13:30.PMQs, he did not know about the customs union. What is apparent is

:13:31. > :13:37.Theresa May has not told him what to think about that. If we stay in the

:13:38. > :13:44.customs union we cannot do our own free trade deals. We are behind the

:13:45. > :13:48.customs union, the tariff barriers set by Europe? Not quite. Turkey is

:13:49. > :13:53.proof of the pudding. There are limited exemptions but they can do

:13:54. > :14:01.free trade with their neighbours. Not on goods. They are doing a trade

:14:02. > :14:05.deal with Pakistan at the moment, it relies on foreign trade investment

:14:06. > :14:09.but Europe negotiates on turkey's behalf on the major free-trade

:14:10. > :14:13.deals. This is absolutely why the customs union will be the fault line

:14:14. > :14:17.for the deal we are trying to achieve. Interestingly, I thought

:14:18. > :14:22.Liam Fox suggested during that interview that he was prepared to

:14:23. > :14:27.suck up whatever it was. I think he was saying there is still an

:14:28. > :14:35.argument and he intends to win it. He wants to leave it because he

:14:36. > :14:39.wants to do these free-trade deals. There is an argument in the cabinet

:14:40. > :14:45.about precisely that. The other thing to consider is in this country

:14:46. > :14:48.we have tended to focus too much on the British angle in negotiations,

:14:49. > :14:52.but I think the negotiations are going to be very difficult. You look

:14:53. > :14:56.at the state of the EU at the moment, you look at what is

:14:57. > :15:03.happening in Italy, France, Germany, look at the 27. It is possible I

:15:04. > :15:07.think that Britain could design a bespoke sensible deal but then it

:15:08. > :15:14.becomes very difficult to agree which is why I ultimately think we

:15:15. > :15:16.are heading for a harder Brexit. It will be about developing in this

:15:17. > :15:20.country. So, we've had a warning this week

:15:21. > :15:23.that it could take ten years to do a trade deal

:15:24. > :15:26.with the EU after Brexit. But could opportunities to expand

:15:27. > :15:27.trade lie elsewhere? Australia was one of the first

:15:28. > :15:30.countries to indicate its willingness to do a deal

:15:31. > :15:32.with the UK and now its High Commissioner in London has told

:15:33. > :15:35.us that life outside the EU He made this exclusive film

:15:36. > :15:51.for the Sunday Politics. My father was the Australian High

:15:52. > :15:53.Commissioner in the early 70s when the UK joined

:15:54. > :15:56.the European Union, Now I'm in the job,

:15:57. > :16:04.the UK is leaving. Australia supported

:16:05. > :16:06.Britain remaining a member of the European Union,

:16:07. > :16:09.but we respect the decision that Now that the decision has been made,

:16:10. > :16:15.we hope that Britain will get on with the process

:16:16. > :16:19.of negotiating their exit from the European Union and make

:16:20. > :16:22.the most of the opportunities that Following the referendum decision,

:16:23. > :16:29.Australia approached the British Government

:16:30. > :16:31.with a proposal. We offered, when the time was right,

:16:32. > :16:34.to negotiate a free trade agreement. The British and Australian

:16:35. > :16:41.governments have already established a working group to explore a future,

:16:42. > :16:43.ambitious trade agreement once A free trade agreement will provide

:16:44. > :16:55.great opportunities for consumers Australian consumers could purchase

:16:56. > :17:01.British-made cars for less We would give British

:17:02. > :17:06.households access to cheaper, Our summer is during your winter,

:17:07. > :17:12.so Australia could provide British households with fresh produce

:17:13. > :17:16.when the equivalent British or Australian households would have

:17:17. > :17:23.access to British products Free-trade agreements

:17:24. > :17:35.are also about investment. The UK is the second-largest source

:17:36. > :17:40.of foreign investment in Australia. By the way, Australia also invests

:17:41. > :17:46.over ?200 billion in the UK, so a free trade agreement

:17:47. > :17:49.would stimulate investment, But, by the way, free-trade

:17:50. > :17:54.agreements are not just about trade and investment,

:17:55. > :17:58.they are also about geopolitics. Countries with good trade relations

:17:59. > :18:02.often work more closely together in other fields including security,

:18:03. > :18:06.the spread of democracy We may have preferred

:18:07. > :18:19.the UKto remain in the EU, We may have preferred the UK

:18:20. > :18:22.to remain in the EU, but life outside as we know can

:18:23. > :18:24.be pretty good. We have negotiated eight free-trade

:18:25. > :18:27.agreements over the last 12 years, including a free-trade agreement

:18:28. > :18:29.with the United States This is one of the reasons why

:18:30. > :18:41.the Australian economy has continued to grow over the last 25 years

:18:42. > :18:44.and we, of course, are not Australia welcomes Theresa May's

:18:45. > :18:54.vision for the UK to become a global We are willing to help

:18:55. > :19:24.in any way we can. Welcome to the programme. The

:19:25. > :19:27.Australian government says it wants to negotiate an important trade deal

:19:28. > :19:33.with the UK as efficiently and promptly as possible when Brexit is

:19:34. > :19:38.complete. How prompt is prompt? There are legal issues obviously.

:19:39. > :19:44.The UK, for as long as it remains in the EU, cannot negotiate individual

:19:45. > :19:49.trade deals. Once it leaves it can. We will negotiate a agreement with

:19:50. > :19:54.the UK when the time is right, by which we mean we can do preliminary

:19:55. > :20:00.examination. Are you talking now about the parameters? We are talking

:20:01. > :20:03.already, we have set up a joint working group with the British

:20:04. > :20:06.Government and we are scoping the issue to try to understand what

:20:07. > :20:13.questions will arise in any negotiation. But we cannot have

:20:14. > :20:19.formally a negotiation. Until the country is out. Why is there no

:20:20. > :20:22.free-trade deal between Australia and the European Union? It is a long

:20:23. > :20:29.and tortuous story. Give me the headline. Basically Australian

:20:30. > :20:35.agriculture is either banned or hugely restricted in terms of its

:20:36. > :20:39.access to the European Union. So we see the European Union, Australia's,

:20:40. > :20:45.is a pretty protectionist sort of organisation. Now we are doing a

:20:46. > :20:48.scoping study on a free-trade agreement with the European Union

:20:49. > :20:53.and we hope that next year we can enter into negotiations with them.

:20:54. > :20:59.But we have no illusions this would be a very difficult negotiation, but

:21:00. > :21:04.one we are giving priority to. Is there not a danger that when Britain

:21:05. > :21:08.leaves the EU the EU will become more protectionist? This country has

:21:09. > :21:13.always been the most powerful voice for free trade. I hope that does not

:21:14. > :21:19.happen, but the reason why we wanted Britain to remain in the European

:21:20. > :21:25.Union is because it brought to the table the whole free-trade mentality

:21:26. > :21:27.which has been an historic part of Britain's approach to international

:21:28. > :21:33.relations. Without the UK in the European Union you will lose that.

:21:34. > :21:36.It is a very loud voice in the European Union and you will lose

:21:37. > :21:42.that voice and that will be a disadvantage. The figure that jumped

:21:43. > :21:45.out of me in the film is it to you only 15 months to negotiate a

:21:46. > :21:50.free-trade deal with the United States. Yes, the thing is it is

:21:51. > :21:56.about political will. A free-trade agreement will be no problem unless

:21:57. > :22:01.you want to protect particular sectors of your economy. In that

:22:02. > :22:06.case there was one sector the Americans insisted on protecting and

:22:07. > :22:10.that was their sugar industry. In the end after 15 months of

:22:11. > :22:15.negotiation two relatively free trading countries have fixed up

:22:16. > :22:19.nearly everything. But we had to ask would be go ahead with this

:22:20. > :22:25.free-trade agreement without sugar west we decided to do that. Other

:22:26. > :22:29.than that it was relatively easy to negotiate because we are both

:22:30. > :22:33.free-trade countries. With the UK you cannot be sure, but I do not

:22:34. > :22:38.think a free-trade agreement would take very long to negotiate with the

:22:39. > :22:43.UK because the UK would not want to put a lot of obstacles in the way to

:22:44. > :22:47.Australia. Not to give away our hand, we would not want to put a lot

:22:48. > :22:53.of obstacles in the way of British exports. The trend in recent years

:22:54. > :22:58.is to do big, regional trade deals, but President-elect Donald Trump has

:22:59. > :23:03.made clear the Pacific trade deal is dead. The transatlantic trade deal

:23:04. > :23:07.is almost dead as well. The American election put a nail in the coffin

:23:08. > :23:12.and the French elections could put another nail in the coffin. Are we

:23:13. > :23:16.returning to a world of lateral trade deals, country with country

:23:17. > :23:24.rather than regional blocs? Not necessarily. In the Asia Pacific we

:23:25. > :23:27.will look at multilateral trade arrangements and even if the

:23:28. > :23:31.transpacific partnership is not ratified by the Americans, we have

:23:32. > :23:36.other options are there. However, our approach has been the ultimate

:23:37. > :23:41.would be free-trade throughout the world which is proving hard to

:23:42. > :23:45.achieve. Secondly, if we can get a lot of countries engaged in a

:23:46. > :23:51.free-trade negotiation, that is pretty good if possible. But it is

:23:52. > :23:56.more difficult. But we do bilateral trade agreements. We have one with

:23:57. > :24:01.China, Japan, the United States, Singapore, and the list goes on, and

:24:02. > :24:09.they have been hugely beneficial to Australia. You have been dealing

:24:10. > :24:13.with the EU free deal, what lessons are there? How quickly do you think

:24:14. > :24:19.Britain could do a free-trade deal with the EU if we leave? Well, there

:24:20. > :24:23.is a completely different concept involved in the case of Britain and

:24:24. > :24:29.the EU and that is at the moment there are no restrictions on trade.

:24:30. > :24:33.So you and the EU would be talking about whether you will direct

:24:34. > :24:38.barriers to trade. We are outsiders and we do not get too much involved

:24:39. > :24:45.in this debate except to say we do not want to see the global trade

:24:46. > :24:48.system disrupted by the direction of tariff barriers between the United

:24:49. > :24:54.Kingdom, the fifth biggest economy in the world, and the European

:24:55. > :24:59.Union. Our expectation is not just the British but the Europeans will

:25:00. > :25:03.try to make the transition to Brexit as smooth as possible particularly

:25:04. > :25:08.commercially. Say yes or no if you can. If Britain and Australia make a

:25:09. > :25:12.free-trade agreement, would that include free movement of the

:25:13. > :25:18.Australian and the British people? We will probably stick with our

:25:19. > :25:22.present non-discriminatory system. Australia does not discriminate

:25:23. > :25:27.against any country. The European Union's free movement means you

:25:28. > :25:31.discriminate against non-Europeans. Probably not.

:25:32. > :25:34.It could lead to a ban on diesel cars, prevent the building

:25:35. > :25:37.of a third runway at Heathrow, and will certainly make it

:25:38. > :25:39.more expensive to drive in our towns and cities.

:25:40. > :25:41.Air pollution has been called the "public health crisis

:25:42. > :25:44.of a generation" - but just how serious is the problem?

:25:45. > :25:57.40,000 early deaths result from air pollution every year in the UK.

:25:58. > :26:04.Almost 10,000 Londoners each year die prematurely.

:26:05. > :26:10.It seems at times we can get caught up in alarming assertions

:26:11. > :26:12.about air pollution, that this is a public health

:26:13. > :26:16.emergency, that it is a silent killer, coming from politicians,

:26:17. > :26:24.But how bad is air quality in Britain really?

:26:25. > :26:28.Tony Frew is a professor in respiratory medicine and works

:26:29. > :26:30.at Brighton's Royal Sussex County Hospital.

:26:31. > :26:32.He has been looking into the recent claims

:26:33. > :26:38.It's a problem and it affects people's health.

:26:39. > :26:40.But when people start talking about the numbers

:26:41. > :26:43.of deaths here, I think they are misusing the statistics.

:26:44. > :26:48.There have been tremendous improvements in air quality

:26:49. > :26:53.There is a lot less pollution than there used to be

:26:54. > :26:56.and none of that is coming through in the public

:26:57. > :27:00.So what does Professor Frew make of the claim that alarming levels

:27:01. > :27:03.of toxicity in the air in the UK causes 40,000 deaths each year?

:27:04. > :27:06.It is not 40,000 people who should have air pollution

:27:07. > :27:08.on their death certificate, or 40,000 people who

:27:09. > :27:13.It's a lot of people who had a little bit of life shortening

:27:14. > :27:19.To examine these figures further we travelled to Cambridge to visit

:27:20. > :27:24.I asked him about the data on which these claims

:27:25. > :27:29.They come from a study on how mortality rates in US cities

:27:30. > :27:36.First of all, it is important to realise that that 40,000 figure

:27:37. > :27:42.29,000, which are due to fine particles, and another 11,000

:27:43. > :27:50.I will just talk about this group for a start.

:27:51. > :27:54.These are what are known as attributable deaths.

:27:55. > :27:58.Known as virtual deaths, they come from a complex statistical model.

:27:59. > :28:01.Quite remarkably it all comes from just one number and this

:28:02. > :28:06.was based on a study of US cities and they found out that

:28:07. > :28:09.by monitoring these cities over decades that the cities which had

:28:10. > :28:16.a higher level of pollution had a higher mortality rate.

:28:17. > :28:21.They estimated that there was a 6% increased risk of dying

:28:22. > :28:26.each year for each small increase in pollution.

:28:27. > :28:29.So this is quite a big figure, but it is important to realise

:28:30. > :28:32.it is only a best estimate and the committee that advises

:28:33. > :28:38.the government says that this figure could be between 1% and 12%.

:28:39. > :28:41.So this 6% figure is used to work out the 29,000

:28:42. > :28:47.Yes, through a rather complex statistical model.

:28:48. > :28:52.And a similar analysis gives rise to the 11,000 attributable deaths

:28:53. > :28:59.How much should we invest in cycling?

:29:00. > :29:02.Should we build a third runway at Heathrow?

:29:03. > :29:06.We need reliable statistics to answer those questions,

:29:07. > :29:10.but can we trust the way data is being used by campaigners?

:29:11. > :29:15.I think there are people who have such a passion for the environment

:29:16. > :29:16.and for air pollution that they don't really

:29:17. > :29:23.see it as a problem if they are deceiving the public.

:29:24. > :29:25.Greenpeace have been running a campaign claiming that breathing

:29:26. > :29:27.London's air is the equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day.

:29:28. > :29:33.If you smoke 15 cigarettes a day through your adult life,

:29:34. > :29:35.that will definitely take ten years off your life expectancy.

:29:36. > :29:38.If you are poor and you are in social class five,

:29:39. > :29:40.compared to social class one, that would take seven

:29:41. > :29:45.If you are poor and you smoke, that will take 17 years off your life.

:29:46. > :29:48.Now, we are talking about possibly, if we could get rid of all

:29:49. > :29:51.of the cars in London and all of the road transport,

:29:52. > :29:54.we could make a difference of two micrograms per metre squared in air

:29:55. > :29:59.pollution which might save you 30 days of your life.

:30:00. > :30:02.There is no doubt that air pollution is bad for you,

:30:03. > :30:05.but if we exaggerate the scale of the problem and the impact

:30:06. > :30:08.on our health, are we at risk of undermining the case for making

:30:09. > :30:19.And we are joined now by the Executive Director

:30:20. > :30:37.You have called pollution and national crisis and a health

:30:38. > :30:41.emergency. Around the UK are levels increasing or falling? They are

:30:42. > :30:51.remaining fairly static in London. Nationally? If you look at the

:30:52. > :30:57.studies on where air pollution is measured, in 42 cities around the

:30:58. > :31:01.UK, 38 cities were found to be breaking the legal limit on air

:31:02. > :31:06.pollution so basically all of the cities were breaking the limit so if

:31:07. > :31:09.you think eight out of ten people live in cities, obviously, this is

:31:10. > :31:13.impacting a lot of people around the UK. We have looked at in missions of

:31:14. > :31:23.solvent dioxide, they have fallen and since 1970, nitrogen dioxide is

:31:24. > :31:30.down 69%. Let me show you a chart. There are the nitrogen oxides which

:31:31. > :31:35.we have all been worried about. That chart shows a substantial fall from

:31:36. > :31:39.the 1970s, and then a really steep fall from the 1980s. That is

:31:40. > :31:46.something which is getting better. You have to look at it in the round.

:31:47. > :31:54.If you look at particulates, and if you look at today's understanding of

:31:55. > :32:03.the health impact. Let's look at particulates. We have been really

:32:04. > :32:08.worried about what they have been doing to our abilities to breathe

:32:09. > :32:13.good air, again, you see substantial improvement. Indeed, we are not far

:32:14. > :32:21.from the Gothenberg level which is a very high standard. What you see is

:32:22. > :32:27.it is pretty flat. I see it coming down quite substantially. Over the

:32:28. > :32:31.last decade it is pretty flat. If you look at the World Health

:32:32. > :32:35.Organisation guidelines, actually, these are at serious levels and they

:32:36. > :32:39.need to come down. We know the impact, particularly on children, if

:32:40. > :32:43.you look at what is happening to children and children's lungs, if

:32:44. > :32:48.you look at the impact of asthma and other impacts on children in cities

:32:49. > :32:51.and in schools next to main roads where pollution levels are very

:32:52. > :32:56.high, the impact of very serious. You have many doctors, professors

:32:57. > :33:02.and many studies by London University showing this to be true.

:33:03. > :33:06.The thing is, we do not want pollution. If we can get rid of

:33:07. > :33:11.pollution, let's do it. And also we also have to get rid of CO2 which is

:33:12. > :33:15.causing climate change. We are talking air pollution at the moment.

:33:16. > :33:19.The point is there is not still more to do, it is clear there is and

:33:20. > :33:24.there is no question about that, my question is you seem to deny that we

:33:25. > :33:29.have made any kind of progress and that you also say that air pollution

:33:30. > :33:36.causes 40,000 deaths a year in the UK, that is not true. The figure is

:33:37. > :33:46.40,000 premature deaths is what has been talked about by medical staff.

:33:47. > :33:50.Your website said courses. It causes premature deaths. What we are

:33:51. > :33:55.talking about here is can we solve the problem of air pollution? If air

:33:56. > :34:00.pollution is mainly being caused by diesel vehicles then we need to

:34:01. > :34:03.phase out diesel vehicles. If there are alternatives and clean Turner

:34:04. > :34:07.tips which will give better quality of air, better quality of life and

:34:08. > :34:11.clean up our cities, then why don't we take the chance to do it? You had

:34:12. > :34:19.the Australian High Commissioner on this programme earlier. He said to

:34:20. > :34:24.me earlier, why is your government supporting diesel? That is the most

:34:25. > :34:30.polluting form of transport. That may well be right but I am looking

:34:31. > :34:36.at Greenpeace's claims. You claim it causes 40,000 deaths, it is a figure

:34:37. > :34:41.which regularly appears. Let me quote the committee on the medical

:34:42. > :34:51.effects of air pollutants, it says this calculation, 40,000 which is

:34:52. > :34:54.everywhere in Greenpeace literature, is not an estimate of the number of

:34:55. > :34:58.people whose untimely death is caused entirely by air pollution,

:34:59. > :35:03.but a way of representing the effect across the whole population of air

:35:04. > :35:08.pollution when considered as a contributory factor to many more

:35:09. > :35:18.individual deaths. It is 40,000 premature deaths. It could be

:35:19. > :35:22.premature by a couple of days. It could me by a year. -- it could be

:35:23. > :35:23.by a year. It could also be giving children asthma and breathing

:35:24. > :35:32.difficulties. We are talking about deaths. It could also cause stroke

:35:33. > :35:41.and heart diseases. Medical experts say we need to deal with this. Do

:35:42. > :35:49.you believe air pollution causes 40,000 deaths a year. I have defined

:35:50. > :35:59.that. You accept it does not? It leads to 40,000 premature deaths.

:36:00. > :36:03.But 40,000 people are not killed. You say air pollution causes 40,000

:36:04. > :36:08.deaths each year on your website. I have just explained what I mean by

:36:09. > :36:12.that in terms of premature deaths. The question is, are we going to do

:36:13. > :36:17.something about that? Air pollution is a serious problem. It is mainly

:36:18. > :36:21.caused by diesel. If we phased diesel out it will solve the problem

:36:22. > :36:26.of air pollution and deal with the wider problem of climate change. I

:36:27. > :36:34.am not talking about climate change this morning. Let's link to another

:36:35. > :36:39.claim... Do you want to live in a clean city? Do you want to breathe

:36:40. > :36:45.clean air? Yes, don't generalise. Let's stick to your claims. You have

:36:46. > :36:49.also said living in London on your life is equivalent to smoking 50

:36:50. > :36:56.cigarettes a day. That is not true either. What I would say is if you

:36:57. > :36:59.look at passive smoking, it is the equivalent of I don't know what the

:37:00. > :37:02.actual figure is, I can't remember offhand, but it is the equivalent

:37:03. > :37:09.effect of about ten cigarettes being smoked passively. The question is in

:37:10. > :37:14.terms of, you are just throwing me out all of these things... I am

:37:15. > :37:18.throwing things that Greenpeace have claimed. Greenpeace have claimed

:37:19. > :37:23.that living in London is equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day and

:37:24. > :37:26.that takes ten years off your life. Professor Froome made it clear to us

:37:27. > :37:30.that living in London your whole life with levels of pollution does

:37:31. > :37:35.take time off your life but it takes nine months of your life. Nine

:37:36. > :37:39.months is still too much, I understand that, but it is not ten

:37:40. > :37:43.years and that is what you claim. I would suggest you realise that is a

:37:44. > :37:48.piece of propaganda because you claim on the website, you have taken

:37:49. > :37:51.it down. I agree it has been corrected and I agree with what the

:37:52. > :37:57.professor said that maybe it takes up to a year off your life, but the

:37:58. > :38:01.thing is, there are much more wider issues as well, in terms of the

:38:02. > :38:07.impact on air pollution, and in terms of the impact on young

:38:08. > :38:11.children. We can argue about the facts... But these are your claims,

:38:12. > :38:16.this is why I am hitting it to you. It does not get away from the

:38:17. > :38:20.underlying issue that air pollution is a serious problem. We are not

:38:21. > :38:25.arguing for a moment that it is not. Do you think the way you exaggerate

:38:26. > :38:30.things, put false claims, in the end, for of course we all agree

:38:31. > :38:36.with, getting the best air we can, you undermine your credibility? I

:38:37. > :38:39.absolutely do not support false claims and if mistakes have been

:38:40. > :38:44.made then mistakes have been made and they will be corrected. I think

:38:45. > :38:49.the key issue is how we are going to deal with air pollution. Clearly,

:38:50. > :38:55.diesel is the biggest problem and we need to work out a way how we can

:38:56. > :38:58.get away from diesel as quickly and fast as possible. Comeback and see

:38:59. > :39:00.us in the New Year and we will discuss diesel. Thank you.

:39:01. > :39:03.It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.

:39:04. > :39:14.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now

:39:15. > :39:16.Hello, and a warm and festive welcome to your local

:39:17. > :39:22.On the weekend before Christmas what better than to settle down

:39:23. > :39:25.with a sherry and a mince pie and delve into the winter wonderland

:39:26. > :39:34.My guests joining me around my imaginary log fire

:39:35. > :39:36.are the Scarborough and Whitby MP Robert Goodwill who is also

:39:37. > :39:39.Immigration Minister, the Labour MP for Sedgefield Phil Wilson,

:39:40. > :39:42.and the chair of Ukip in Cumbria, Fiona Mills.

:39:43. > :39:44.Coming up today: People living in this Northumberland

:39:45. > :39:47.town say it's being destroyed by the pressure of new

:39:48. > :39:51.So if not here, just where should we be building the new homes that

:39:52. > :39:58.But let's start with social care - an issue which is rapidly turning

:39:59. > :40:03.This week the Government came up with what it hopes will be

:40:04. > :40:05.a short term solution - allowing local authorities to raise

:40:06. > :40:10.council tax by up to 6% over the next two years.

:40:11. > :40:12.But the plan was dismissed by Newcastle council's leader

:40:13. > :40:17.Nick Forbes as a "sticking plaster on a gaping wound".

:40:18. > :40:34.The Government seems to have finally accepted there

:40:35. > :40:37.is a problem here but council tax is that the right solution?

:40:38. > :40:40.Let us not forget we are investing 19.7 billion

:40:41. > :40:43.in social care this year but of this additional funding, each 1% will

:40:44. > :40:46.This is a substantial amount of money that

:40:47. > :40:48.will be able to be raised by local authorities for this.

:40:49. > :40:52.The demographic time bomb has been ticking for some time.

:40:53. > :40:55.Over 13 years of the Labour Government nothing was done.

:40:56. > :40:57.We are addressing the issue in terms of

:40:58. > :41:00.You know that money was taken out of councils for social

:41:01. > :41:02.care and the problem, here is a clear

:41:03. > :41:03.example, Sunderland, 3% on

:41:04. > :41:06.council tax would raise one third as much as it does in the

:41:07. > :41:10.North Yorkshire is half as much as the wealthiest parts of London.

:41:11. > :41:13.It does not work, the need is here but the money is

:41:14. > :41:26.It is more expensive to establish care homes.

:41:27. > :41:28.As was made at Prime Minister's Questions, how

:41:29. > :41:30.effectively that money is being spent?

:41:31. > :41:34.In some cases it is not being spent as effectively as it could be.

:41:35. > :41:36.Phil Wilson, this is a council service, why not raise extra

:41:37. > :41:46.More integration is needed between what

:41:47. > :41:51.councils are doing and the NHS, bed blocking within the NHS.

:41:52. > :41:54.Budgets are being cut by ?4.5 billion.

:41:55. > :41:56.That was not mentioned by the Chancellor in

:41:57. > :41:59.the Autumn Statement a few weeks ago.

:42:00. > :42:02.What the Government is actually doing is putting the burden back

:42:03. > :42:10.People in leafy suburbs in London are able to raise more through their

:42:11. > :42:12.council tax than in places like Durham.

:42:13. > :42:28.Even if we went for the full 6% it is not going to fill the

:42:29. > :42:33.It will mean on average council tax payers in Durham will be paying

:42:34. > :42:36.between ?60 and ?70 per year more because of doing this when in actual

:42:37. > :42:39.fact the money is being taken out of the system centrally.

:42:40. > :42:41.Durham is going to be losing ?30 million, 30%

:42:42. > :42:45.Government is finding an extra ?240 million as well which they may

:42:46. > :42:46.choose to compensate some of these councils.

:42:47. > :42:50.They might do that but 240 million when you cut the budget by

:42:51. > :42:56.Fiona Mills, does Ukip believe council tax

:42:57. > :43:05.We need to look at what they are actually spending at the

:43:06. > :43:07.moment and are we getting best value for money.

:43:08. > :43:09.Phil mentioned we need integration between the NHS and the

:43:10. > :43:12.public and social care to get best value for money.

:43:13. > :43:15.I work in the NHS and I can see that.

:43:16. > :43:17.The second reason I would say we should not

:43:18. > :43:19.raise it through council tax is the Government's spending

:43:20. > :43:30.We are currently spending ?12 billion per year on foreign aid and

:43:31. > :43:33.I believe that is going to increase to 16 billion by the end of the

:43:34. > :43:36.For the poorest people in the world...

:43:37. > :43:38.No, we are funding the rich people in poor

:43:39. > :43:43.We need to get our own house in order before we look to

:43:44. > :43:46.It does not all go to the third World.

:43:47. > :43:47.We gave a donation to Clinton foundation.

:43:48. > :43:50.Probably needs a bit of help at the moment.

:43:51. > :43:52.The people I saw last month at refugee camps in

:43:53. > :43:54.Jordan are not the richest people in the world,

:43:55. > :43:56.they were very poor people in great need.

:43:57. > :44:00.I am proud we are putting money in that way.

:44:01. > :44:02.But we must not forget under the last

:44:03. > :44:05.We have given carers more money to keep

:44:06. > :44:10.This is the legacy of trying to keep council tax bills down because money

:44:11. > :44:12.is not there now to support social care.

:44:13. > :44:15.Even with increases in council tax bills would be more than when we

:44:16. > :44:18.You have to come up with a long-term solution.

:44:19. > :44:20.Yes and Phil is right about integration across

:44:21. > :44:23.That is something that we have not got

:44:24. > :44:27.Are you going to have to get together with other political

:44:28. > :44:33.Labour ducked this issue but so has your Government.

:44:34. > :44:36.It's all about bed blocking, addressing that, which

:44:37. > :44:39.is why I'm delighted that we are looking at this again.

:44:40. > :44:41.There will be a White Paper in the New Year

:44:42. > :44:45.It has got to be said the last Government,

:44:46. > :44:48.I was Private Secretary to Andy Burnham at the time, we did

:44:49. > :44:52.other political parties in parliament to see

:44:53. > :44:57.cross-party agreement on this because it's such a massive issue.

:44:58. > :45:03.?350 million of course that we were going to get

:45:04. > :45:09.from the EU, is that going to solve the problem?

:45:10. > :45:12.That was Boris and everybody else on the Vote Leave bus.

:45:13. > :45:16.Yes, as soon as we do leave the EU, and I mean leave the EU, there will

:45:17. > :45:22.Now to another big political problem that

:45:23. > :45:24.proving tough to solve - the shortage of new homes.

:45:25. > :45:27.The Government says it wants a million of them to be built

:45:28. > :45:29.before the next election - although it's nowhere

:45:30. > :45:32.But exactly where should they all go?

:45:33. > :45:35.Developers of course want sites that are easy to build on and will prove

:45:36. > :45:38.popular with house buyers - and that often means large

:45:39. > :45:40.green spaces on the edge of existing communities.

:45:41. > :45:42.But critics say that's leading to over-development in places

:45:43. > :45:49.In the middle of Morpeth signs of Christmas make this historic

:45:50. > :45:57.But on its outskirts a different sort of sign

:45:58. > :46:00.The attractions of this leafy market town to

:46:01. > :46:02.house buyers are obvious but campaigners say that character is

:46:03. > :46:17.A short distance away more green space that's made way for

:46:18. > :46:27.And here in another corner of the town these grounds of

:46:28. > :46:29.a former hospital have been earmarked for a

:46:30. > :46:32.This is where people are walking their dogs...

:46:33. > :46:35.Showing me a field where building is planned, a resident

:46:36. > :46:37.They want to take this green field here, that

:46:38. > :46:40.green field there, to the north, to the south,

:46:41. > :46:45.left to enjoy an amenity for walking dogs, playing football.

:46:46. > :46:47.It is a great town but we are struggling.

:46:48. > :46:58.There are traffic queues over the bridge, it takes ages to get in.

:46:59. > :47:01.Campaigners say around 12 developments recently completed

:47:02. > :47:03.or planned in Morpeth will

:47:04. > :47:05.add around 3,000 to its previous stock of 6,500 homes.

:47:06. > :47:07.Across Northumberland as a whole there is a

:47:08. > :47:09.target for 24,000 homes over 20 years.

:47:10. > :47:12.The council says the aim is cheaper housing and a stronger

:47:13. > :47:19.What do you say to people in, I suppose, the honeypot towns

:47:20. > :47:21.who say we seem to be getting more than are justified?

:47:22. > :47:24.From my point of view housing is an economic

:47:25. > :47:31.We have got an affordable housing crisis in places like

:47:32. > :47:36.Young people particularly can't get on the housing ladder.

:47:37. > :47:39.Among shoppers the affordability of the new houses are

:47:40. > :47:47.They should be building more single person flats.

:47:48. > :47:50.Access in and out of Morpeth is already congested in the

:47:51. > :47:57.Environmentalists say derelict urban sites like this part of Newcastle's

:47:58. > :48:00.West End is a positive alternative to green field construction.

:48:01. > :48:02.But experts admit there are commercial

:48:03. > :48:07.It comes back to supply and demand and perceived

:48:08. > :48:16.Does a developer feel that this site is going to sell, that

:48:17. > :48:18.they're not going to be left with part of the site unsold?

:48:19. > :48:23.That did happen in the recession in 2007-2008.

:48:24. > :48:26.Homes are being built here but there are

:48:27. > :48:31.House-builders deny they are ignoring them.

:48:32. > :48:42.Some local authorities in the north-east have policies

:48:43. > :48:45.where to release any green field land there has to be an equivalent

:48:46. > :48:49.Rather like Christmas presents reaction to

:48:50. > :49:15.Everyone agrees we need more homes but is the best way to do it to

:49:16. > :49:17.affect the quality of life in existing

:49:18. > :49:19.towns, concentrating in

:49:20. > :49:24.The first point is about a third third of our country

:49:25. > :49:27.is protected in some way in National Parks.

:49:28. > :49:29.13% of the country is in green belt which is protected and

:49:30. > :49:32.we've seen very little, a minuscule amount built on the green belt.

:49:33. > :49:35.But there is tremendous pressure particularly in market towns and

:49:36. > :49:37.some of our bigger cities for development.

:49:38. > :49:49.That's why it is important that decisions are made locally not

:49:50. > :49:53.That could be more of a problem, if local

:49:54. > :49:56.communities get a say because a lot of them don't want more homes?

:49:57. > :49:59.We've got the new homes bonus in place

:50:00. > :50:02.which means that local communities do gain through them, getting

:50:03. > :50:04.council tax that they can use to invest in infrastructure, in

:50:05. > :50:07.schools, and other pressures that are put on towns.

:50:08. > :50:09.The Government has put more money in in the Autumn

:50:10. > :50:11.Statement so they can get more money into that

:50:12. > :50:12.for the infrastructure we

:50:13. > :50:13.need to release land particularly looking

:50:14. > :50:15.at brown field sites with it

:50:16. > :50:19.Phil Wilson you have raised concerns about housing developments in your

:50:20. > :50:27.We do need housing and I think talking to

:50:28. > :50:29.local communities, Sedgefield is a very

:50:30. > :50:35.rural area, what people are

:50:36. > :50:38.concerned about, is the infrastructure in the villagers.

:50:39. > :50:41.Where the housing is fine as long as it is affordable,

:50:42. > :50:50.It should be built on brown field land but a lot of the

:50:51. > :50:52.time it is not because the grants aren't there.

:50:53. > :50:54.We need some kind of public incentive to do so.

:50:55. > :50:56.People want to live in nice semirural

:50:57. > :51:00.Of course they do but we've got to look at the existing

:51:01. > :51:03.communities and what they are talking about is, do we have

:51:04. > :51:08.Even in the situation Sedgefield village is sewage works network,

:51:09. > :51:12.doesn't have the capacity to sustain more building?

:51:13. > :51:18.What we have had in Sedgefield, 300 more houses, and I

:51:19. > :51:20.can understand the local community now thinking,

:51:21. > :51:24.There has got to be that investment not just in new housing

:51:25. > :51:29.Fiona Mills, your party has been against a green

:51:30. > :51:32.We need homes, we need different people

:51:33. > :51:42.We will provide the grants. There are lots of sites and cities where

:51:43. > :51:46.it is derelict or wasteland and if that is developed in the right way

:51:47. > :51:47.that solves transport problems because people can walk into town

:51:48. > :51:58.and what to their GP. and what to their GP.

:51:59. > :52:01.People will prefer to have development on Brownfield sites

:52:02. > :52:05.within the city. They will vote against any near

:52:06. > :52:10.them. They possibly will do but should not people have their say? It

:52:11. > :52:16.sounds like a recipe for never getting any houses built. Robert

:52:17. > :52:24.Goodwill, there is pressure on the green belt, we should not be

:52:25. > :52:29.jeopardising that? As we heard from the report the priority is on

:52:30. > :52:35.building Brownfield sites and in some cases money is needed to clean

:52:36. > :52:39.up these sites but people do need to buy homes and we need to build these

:52:40. > :52:42.homes. Many people in my constituency want to stay in the

:52:43. > :52:45.communities where they have been born and if that is not some

:52:46. > :52:51.be able to do that. Northumberland, be able to do that. Northumberland,

:52:52. > :52:53.developments because they are developments because they are

:52:54. > :53:04.competing to get as many homes because it means more council tax.

:53:05. > :53:08.It has got to be sustainable. Every time you go through their ships to

:53:09. > :53:12.be a new housing development. I can understand that community feeling

:53:13. > :53:15.they are inundated. Of people were part of the process then you will

:53:16. > :53:19.get people who are prepared to accept more housing in the area. Two

:53:20. > :53:23.councils need to stop competing? They do not need to stop competing

:53:24. > :53:26.each other. There needs to be a process to take into account

:53:27. > :53:29.considerations and concerns of local people.

:53:30. > :53:32.Now we like to give you a Christmas treat here on Sunday Politics -

:53:33. > :53:35.and what better than the week's political news lovingly wrapped?

:53:36. > :53:37.Well Bob's been busy with the brown paper and string -

:53:38. > :53:49.Business and education leaders have in 60 seconds.

:53:50. > :53:53.Business and education leaders have called on Theresa May to support a

:53:54. > :53:57.north and time devolution deal arguing it would bring growth to the

:53:58. > :54:04.region after a wider north East deal fell through. Devolution is

:54:05. > :54:06.happening in the Tees Valley. Tim council has been named as

:54:07. > :54:11.Conservative candidate for mayor. Labour and Ukip well and I'd

:54:12. > :54:15.candidates in the New Year. The Business Secretary was grilled about

:54:16. > :54:24.what assurances were offered to Nissan Re: building and Sunderland.

:54:25. > :54:30.I understand, we understand, the importance as part of our

:54:31. > :54:38.negotiation to look to secure and continue that Tallis free access to

:54:39. > :54:47.the single market. Unemployment in our region fall by 14%.

:54:48. > :54:50.Now, this Friday it'll be six months since we voted in the EU referendum.

:54:51. > :54:55.Well since then of course the issue has dominated political life.

:54:56. > :54:57.But what does Brexit mean for the north?

:54:58. > :54:59.And do voters here believe the Government is on the right

:55:00. > :55:07.Here's some views from Cleator Moor in West Cumbria.

:55:08. > :55:13.The people has faltered. That is what democracy is all about. You

:55:14. > :55:18.vote and that is the result. People will not change their mind. People

:55:19. > :55:24.in the countryside have been ignored for too long. It is time they had a

:55:25. > :55:27.voice. They have spoken. Let it be Brexit. There does not seem to be a

:55:28. > :55:31.clear and concise plan as to what they want to do. Realistically more

:55:32. > :55:36.time and planning should have been put into it before we did the

:55:37. > :55:40.referendum. Then we could see a clear plan as too, this is what is

:55:41. > :55:47.going to happen when article 50 does gets triggered. Too much

:55:48. > :55:53.interference with Angela Merkel. As Theresa May determined to permit

:55:54. > :56:03.what the public want? Yes, because she does listen to everything that

:56:04. > :56:06.people say. What the public say. You have got confidence in the Prime

:56:07. > :56:16.Minister? I would not say that much confidence. Fiona Mills, you

:56:17. > :56:20.campaign to leave the European Union, have they got a clear idea

:56:21. > :56:26.what Brexit would mean for our region? It is the same for any

:56:27. > :56:31.region, leave the European Union. The sooner we get on with it the

:56:32. > :56:35.better. You do not worry about access to the single market? We need

:56:36. > :56:39.access to 160 countries in the world. We do not need to be a member

:56:40. > :56:44.of it, we do not need to pay a fee. It was crystal clear when we were

:56:45. > :56:46.campaigning and everybody was campaigning, the Prime Minister said

:56:47. > :56:51.everyone leaving the EU that means we read the single market. Does that

:56:52. > :56:55.mean you do not think about the implications? We have thought about

:56:56. > :56:58.the implications. On the league side we have done planning, there was no

:56:59. > :57:04.planning on the Government side. They need to get on with that. Phil

:57:05. > :57:10.Wilson, the Government has secured investment in Nissan and they have

:57:11. > :57:15.been talking to another farm, so the dire warnings are not coming true,

:57:16. > :57:19.there is another big drop in an apartment in the region? We have not

:57:20. > :57:23.actually left yet. What's business wants is certainty and as far as the

:57:24. > :57:27.the moon it is going ahead but what the moon it is going ahead but what

:57:28. > :57:33.does it mean? Is at the same deal they will give to train building,

:57:34. > :57:39.pharmaceuticals? It is securing cheap without tariffs? Is it? What

:57:40. > :57:44.if we cannot get that? What if we cannot get that negotiated with the

:57:45. > :57:46.EU? What if we do how to bring in the World Trade Organisation? In

:57:47. > :58:05.your constituency, what's to be want Mr Mac Hitachi wanted access to the

:58:06. > :58:09.single market to build locomotives for the European market -- Hitachi

:58:10. > :58:18.wanted access. People voted to leave wanted access. People voted to leave

:58:19. > :58:24.but what makes or do they want to go through? What does happen? It looks

:58:25. > :58:40.more rosy than many people forecast. Good news we have had from The Sun.

:58:41. > :58:45.There is as much. Jobs are coming to the region but he needs to ensure

:58:46. > :58:53.the best possible deal that we can secure. Theresa May is the best

:58:54. > :58:55.person to secure that deal. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland

:58:56. > :58:59.are getting our seat at the table, are getting our seat at the table,

:59:00. > :59:01.they are being consulted on what they need, what about regions like

:59:02. > :59:04.this one that voted strongly for this one that voted strongly for

:59:05. > :59:10.Brexit and are amongst the most vulnerable economically? We are

:59:11. > :59:14.representing this region. We are going to put the case strongly for

:59:15. > :59:18.what we need in the north-east. We need to ensure that our business can

:59:19. > :59:19.have the best possible opportunities to do business in Europe and in the

:59:20. > :59:25.wider world but also we need to wider world but also we need to

:59:26. > :59:28.control the numbers are come into our country from the rest of Europe

:59:29. > :59:32.which we have not been able to do before. How do you balance that? I

:59:33. > :59:38.sat to a Brexit committee the other week. Business was clear they did

:59:39. > :59:42.not want to see restrictions on immigration because they need

:59:43. > :59:46.skilled workers. How do you balance that with the desire of many voters

:59:47. > :59:50.to curb immigration? People coming to work in this country make a big

:59:51. > :59:55.contribution not least to the NHS but they put pressure on local

:59:56. > :59:58.services that is why in some cases... They do not this region.

:59:59. > :00:03.I'd be able to control numbers coming here we can manage that enemy

:00:04. > :00:06.we have never done before next year if we do need those skills to come

:00:07. > :00:10.then they can come in. Tighter controls on the site might be a

:00:11. > :00:14.problem for the north. You might need the lead controls. We are

:00:15. > :00:17.committed to providing 3 million apprenticeships. We need people

:00:18. > :00:20.skilled in this country to do those jobs. Often it has been too easy for

:00:21. > :00:26.employers to recruit elsewhere rather than our own people. Where

:00:27. > :00:29.does labour stand on immigration? One sees restrict that, the other

:00:30. > :00:33.says do not. We have got to look again at three movement. We should

:00:34. > :00:36.look at the basic principle which is the free movement of labour. The

:00:37. > :00:41.people who should be coming to this country from the rest of Europe

:00:42. > :00:46.should have a job to go to. That is fundamentally what three movement...

:00:47. > :00:53.It is three movement as far as Labour is concerned. We need to look

:00:54. > :00:57.at it again. We cannot just say that anybody who wants to come here can

:00:58. > :01:03.come here. There is an issue for business. It is that we need the

:01:04. > :01:05.skills. But where the skills are not available amongst the existing

:01:06. > :01:11.workforce that should not be allowed to go on if we cannot get people

:01:12. > :01:13.from elsewhere. We cannot cut off our nose to spite our face because

:01:14. > :01:16.of big or too hard on immigration of big or too hard on immigration

:01:17. > :01:22.businesses in this region will suffer. I agree. That is why we need

:01:23. > :01:26.a points-based system so what we need certain skills people can come

:01:27. > :01:30.to this country, that is what you get policy is. Phil seems to be at

:01:31. > :01:34.odds with his leader on immigration policy because Jeremy Corbyn is

:01:35. > :01:40.seeing three movement should continue, and Diane Abbott. What do

:01:41. > :01:47.you make of the Labour position on Brexit, is that clear? What we can

:01:48. > :01:54.say about it is that it is an ongoing debate. It is not clear. You

:01:55. > :01:58.can see that Kia Starmer is being clear to see that there must be a

:01:59. > :02:01.compromise on some kind of free movement and perhaps that is a

:02:02. > :02:04.rechargeable -- a regional way we can do this.

:02:05. > :02:07.And that's about it from us for this week -

:02:08. > :02:17.We're off to deck the halls with some more holly -

:02:18. > :02:20.Will Article 50 be triggered by the end of March,

:02:21. > :02:23.will President Trump start work on his wall and will

:02:24. > :02:28.Front National's Marine Le Pen provide the next electoral shock?

:02:29. > :02:50.2016, the Brexit for Britain and Trump for the rest of the world.

:02:51. > :02:55.Let's look back and see what one of you said about Brexit.

:02:56. > :02:57.If Mr Cameron loses the referendum and it is this year,

:02:58. > :03:00.will he be Prime Minister at the end of the year?

:03:01. > :03:06.I don't think he will lose the referendum, so I'm feeling

:03:07. > :03:15.It was clear if he did lose the referendum he would be out. I would

:03:16. > :03:20.like to say in retrospect I saw that coming on a long and I was just

:03:21. > :03:26.saying it to make good television! It is Christmas so I will be benign

:03:27. > :03:32.towards my panel! It is possible, Iain, that not much happens to

:03:33. > :03:35.Brexit in 2017, because we have a host of elections coming up in

:03:36. > :03:38.Europe, the French won in the spring and the German one in the autumn

:03:39. > :03:43.will be the most important. And until we know who the next French

:03:44. > :03:49.president is and what condition Mrs Merkel will be in, not much will

:03:50. > :03:54.happen? I think that is the likeliest outcome. Short of some

:03:55. > :04:01.constitutional crisis involving the Lords relating to Brexit, it is

:04:02. > :04:05.pretty clear it is difficult to properly begin the negotiations

:04:06. > :04:09.until it becomes clear who Britain is negotiating with. It will come

:04:10. > :04:12.down to the result of the German election. Germany is the biggest

:04:13. > :04:17.contributor and if they keep power in what is left of the European

:04:18. > :04:23.Union, will drive the negotiation and we will have to see if it will

:04:24. > :04:28.be Merkel. So this vacuum that has been seen and has been filled by

:04:29. > :04:31.people less than friendly to the government, even when we know

:04:32. > :04:36.Article 50 has been triggered and even if there is some sort of white

:04:37. > :04:41.paper to give us a better idea of the broad strategic outlines of what

:04:42. > :04:48.they mean by Brexit, the phoney war could continue? Iain is right. 2017

:04:49. > :04:55.is going to be a remarkably dull year for Brexit as opposed to 2016.

:04:56. > :05:00.We will have the article and a plan. The plan will say I would like the

:05:01. > :05:04.moon on a stick please. The EU will say you can have a tiny bit of moon

:05:05. > :05:10.and a tiny bit of stick and there will be an impasse. That will go on

:05:11. > :05:16.until one minute to midnight 2018 which is when the EU will act. There

:05:17. > :05:21.is one thing in the Foreign Office which is more important, as David

:05:22. > :05:24.Davis Department told me, they know there is nothing they can do until

:05:25. > :05:29.the French and Germans have their elections and they know the lie of

:05:30. > :05:33.the land, but the people who will be more helpful to us are in Eastern

:05:34. > :05:37.Europe and in Scandinavia, the Nordic countries. We can do quite a

:05:38. > :05:42.lot of schmoozing to try and get them broadly on side this year? It

:05:43. > :05:46.is very difficult because one of the things they care most about in

:05:47. > :05:51.Eastern Europe is the ability for Eastern European stew come and work

:05:52. > :05:55.in the UK. That is key to the economic prospects. But what they

:05:56. > :06:00.care most about is that those already here should not be under any

:06:01. > :06:06.pressure to leave. There is no guarantee of that. That is what Mrs

:06:07. > :06:10.May wants. There are a lot of things Mrs May wants and the story of 2017

:06:11. > :06:15.will be about what she gets. How much have we got to give people? It

:06:16. > :06:21.is not what we want, but what we are willing to give. The interesting

:06:22. > :06:25.thing is you can divide this out into two. There is a question of the

:06:26. > :06:32.European Union and our relationship with it but there is also the trick

:06:33. > :06:37.the polls did to London -- there is also the polls. There is question

:06:38. > :06:41.beyond the Western European security, that is about Nato and

:06:42. > :06:48.intelligence and security, and the rising Russian threat. That does not

:06:49. > :06:52.mean the Polish people will persuade everyone else to give us a lovely

:06:53. > :06:57.deal on the EU, but the dynamic is bigger than just a chat about

:06:58. > :07:00.Brexit. You cannot threaten a punishment beating for us if we are

:07:01. > :07:05.putting our soldiers on the line on the eastern borders of Europe. I

:07:06. > :07:10.think that's where Donald Trump changes the calculation because his

:07:11. > :07:18.attitude towards Russia is very different to Barack Obama's. It is

:07:19. > :07:22.indeed. Mentioning Russia, Brexit was a global story but nothing can

:07:23. > :07:27.match and American election and even one which gives Donald Trump as

:07:28. > :07:30.well. Let's have a look at what this panel was saying about Donald Trump.

:07:31. > :07:32.Will Donald Trump win the Republican nomination next year.

:07:33. > :07:45.So, not only did you think he would not be president, you did not think

:07:46. > :07:50.he would win the Republican nomination. We were not alone in

:07:51. > :07:55.that. And they're right put forward a motion to abolish punditry here

:07:56. > :08:00.now because clearly we are pointless! There is enough

:08:01. > :08:05.unemployment in the world already! We are moving into huge and charted

:08:06. > :08:09.territory with Donald Trump as president. It is incredibly

:08:10. > :08:16.unpredictable. But what has not been noticed enough is the Keynesian won.

:08:17. > :08:23.Trump is a Keynesian. He wants massive infrastructure spending and

:08:24. > :08:28.massive tax cuts. The big story next year will be the massive reflation

:08:29. > :08:34.of the American economy and indeed the US Federal reserve has already

:08:35. > :08:40.reacted to that by putting up interest rates. That is why he has a

:08:41. > :08:43.big fight with the rest of the Republican Party. He is nominally a

:08:44. > :08:49.Republican but they are not Keynesian. They are when it comes to

:08:50. > :08:53.tax cuts. They are when it hits the rich to benefit the poor. The big

:08:54. > :08:57.thing is whether the infrastructure projects land him in crony trouble.

:08:58. > :09:02.The transparency around who gets those will be extremely difficult.

:09:03. > :09:07.Most of the infrastructure spending he thinks can be done by the private

:09:08. > :09:14.sector and not the federal government. His tax cuts overlap the

:09:15. > :09:19.Republican house tax cuts speaker Ryan to give not all, but a fair

:09:20. > :09:23.chunk of what he wants. If the American economy is going to reflate

:09:24. > :09:28.next year, interest rates will rise in America, that will strengthen the

:09:29. > :09:33.dollar and it will mean that Europe will be, it will find it more

:09:34. > :09:37.difficult to finance its sovereign debt because you will get more money

:09:38. > :09:43.by investing in American sovereign debt. That is a good point because

:09:44. > :09:48.the dynamics will shift. If that happens, Trump will be pretty

:09:49. > :09:54.popular in the US. To begin with. To begin with. It is energy

:09:55. > :10:00.self-sufficient and if you can pull off the biggest trick in American

:10:01. > :10:05.politics which is somehow to via corporation tax cuts to allow the

:10:06. > :10:09.reassuring of wealth, because it is too expensive for American business

:10:10. > :10:12.to take back into the US and reinvest, if you combine all of

:10:13. > :10:19.those things together, you will end up with a boom on a scale you have

:10:20. > :10:24.not seen. It will be Reagan on steroids? What could possibly go

:10:25. > :10:29.wrong? In the short term for Britain, it is probably not bad

:10:30. > :10:33.news. Our biggest market for exports as a country is the United States.

:10:34. > :10:38.Our biggest market for foreign direct investment is the United

:10:39. > :10:41.States and the same is true vice versa for America in Britain. Given

:10:42. > :10:45.the pound is now competitive and likely the dollar will get stronger,

:10:46. > :10:51.it could well give a boost to the British economy? Could do bit you

:10:52. > :10:56.have to be slightly cautious about the warm language we are getting

:10:57. > :11:01.which is great news out of President Trump's future cabinet on doing a

:11:02. > :11:04.trade deal early, we are net exporters to the US. We benefit far

:11:05. > :11:09.more from trading with US than they do with us. I think we have to come

:11:10. > :11:15.up with something to offer the US for them to jump into bed with us. I

:11:16. > :11:25.think it is called two new aircraft carriers and modernising the fleet.

:11:26. > :11:29.Bring it on. I will raise caution, people in declining industries in

:11:30. > :11:33.some places in America, the rust belt who have faced big profound

:11:34. > :11:38.structural challenges and those are much harder to reverse. They face

:11:39. > :11:44.real problems now because the dollar is so strong. Their ability to

:11:45. > :11:48.export has taken a huge hit out of Ohio, Michigan and Illinois. And the

:11:49. > :11:54.Mexican imports into America is now dirt cheap so that is a major

:11:55. > :12:02.problem. Next year we have elections in Austria, France, the Netherlands,

:12:03. > :12:07.Germany, probably Italy. Which outcome will be the most dramatic

:12:08. > :12:15.for Brexit? If Merkel lost it would be a huge surprise. That is

:12:16. > :12:23.unlikely. And if it was not Filon in France that would be unlikely. The

:12:24. > :12:26.consensus it it will be Francois Filon against Marine Le Pen and it

:12:27. > :12:37.will be uniting around the far right candidate. In 2002, that is what

:12:38. > :12:47.happened. Filon is a Thatcherite. Marine Le Pen's politics --

:12:48. > :12:51.economics are hard left. Francois Filon is as much a cert to win as

:12:52. > :12:57.Hillary Clinton was this time last year. If he is competing against

:12:58. > :13:05.concerns about rising globalisation and his pitch is Thatcherite, it is

:13:06. > :13:12.a bold, brave strategy in the context so we will see. It will keep

:13:13. > :13:19.us busy next year, Tom? Almost as busy as this year but not quite.

:13:20. > :13:22.This year was a record year. I am up in my hours!

:13:23. > :13:24.That's all for today, thanks to all my guests.

:13:25. > :13:27.The Daily Politics will be back on BBC Two at noon tomorrow.

:13:28. > :13:29.I'll be back here on the 15th January.

:13:30. > :13:32.Remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.

:13:33. > :14:13.The most a writer can hope from a reader

:14:14. > :14:30.West Side Story took choreography in a radical new direction.

:14:31. > :14:35.The dance was woven into the storyline,