15/01/2017 Sunday Politics North East and Cumbria


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 15/01/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



It's Sunday morning, and this is the Sunday Politics.


Is the Prime Minister prepared to end Britain's membership


of the EU's single market and its customs union?


We preview Theresa May's big speech, as she seeks to unite the country


Is the press a force for good or a beast that needs taming?


As the Government ponders its decision, we speak to one


of those leading the campaign for greater regulation.


Just what kind of President will Donald Trump be?


Piers Morgan, a man who knows him well, joins us live.


In our region, Labour faces a by-election in Cumbria and


And we speak exclusively to Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn,


as the Copeland campaigning gets underway.


And to help me make sense of all that, three of the finest


hacks we could persuade to work on a Sunday - Steve Richards,


They'll be tweeting throughout the programme, and you can join


So, Theresa May is preparing for her big Brexit speech on Tuesday,


in which she will urge people to give up on "insults"


and "division" and unite to build, quote, a "global Britain".


Some of the Sunday papers report that the Prime Minister will go


The Sunday Telegraph splashes with the headline: "May's big


gamble on a clean Brexit", saying the Prime Minister


will announce she's prepared to take Britain out of membership


of the single market and customs union.


The Sunday Times has a similar write-up -


they call it a "clean and hard Brexit".


The Brexit Secretary David Davis has also written a piece in the paper


hinting that a transitional deal could be on the cards.


And the Sunday Express says: "May's Brexit Battle Plan",


explaining that the Prime Minister will get tough with Brussels


and call for an end to free movement.


Well, let's get some more reaction on this.


I'm joined now from Cumbria by the leader


of the Liberal Democrats, Tim Farron.


Mr Farron, welcome back to the programme. The Prime Minister says


most people now just want to get on with it and make a success of it.


But you still want to stop it, don't you? Well, I certainly take the view


that heading for a hard Brexit, essentially that means being outside


the Single Market and the customs union, is not something that was on


the ballot paper last June. For Theresa May to adopt what is


basically the large all Farage vision of Britain's relationship


with Europe is not what was voted for last June. It is right for us to


stand up and say that a hard Brexit is not the democratic choice of the


British people, and that we should be fighting for the people to be the


ones who have the Seat the end of this process, not have it forced


upon them by Theresa May and David Davis. When it comes though dual


position that we should remain in the membership of the Single Market


and the customs union, it looks like you are losing the argument, doesn't


it? My sense is that if you believe in being in the Single Market and


the customs union are good things, I think many people on the leave site


believe that, Stephen Phillips, the Conservative MP until the autumn who


resigned, who voted for Leave but believe we should be in the Single


Market, I think those people believe that it is wrong for us to enter the


negotiations having given up on the most important part of it. If you


really are going to fight Britain's corner, then you should go in there


fighting the membership of the Single Market, not give up and


whitefly, as Theresa May has done before we even start. -- and wave


the white flag. Will you vote against regret Article 50 in the


Commons? We made it clear that we want the British people to have the


final Seat -- vote against triggering. Will you vote against


Article 50. Will you encourage the House of Lords to vote against out


Article 50? I don't think they will get a chance to vote. They will have


a chance to win the deuce amendments. One amendment we will


introduce is that there should be a referendum in the terms of the deal.


It is not right that Parliament on Government, and especially not civil


servants in Brussels and Whitehall, they should stitch-up the final


deal. That would be wrong. It is right that the British people have


the final say. I understand that as your position. You made it clear


Britain to remain a member of the Single Market on the customs union.


You accept, I assume, that that would mean remaining under the


jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, continuing free movement


of people, and the free-trade deals remained in Brussels' competence. So


it seems to me that if you believe that being in the Single Market is a


good thing, then you should go and argue for that. Whilst I believe


that we're not going to get a better deal than the one we currently have,


nevertheless it is up to the Government to go and argue for the


best deal possible for us outside. You accept your position would mean


that? It would mean certainly being in the Single Market and the customs


union. It's no surprise to you I'm sure that the Lib Dems believe the


package we have got now inside the EU is going to be of the Nutley


better than anything we get from the outside, I accept the direction of


travel -- is going to be the Nutley better. At the moment, what the


Government are doing is assuming that all the things you say Drew,


and there is no way possible for us arguing for a deal that allows in


the Single Market without some of those other things. If they really


believed in the best for Britain, you would go and argue for the best


for Britain. Let's be clear, if we remain under the jurisdiction of the


ECJ, which is the court that governs membership of the Single Market,


continued free movement of people, the Europeans have made clear, is


what goes with the Single Market. And free-trade deals remaining under


Brussels' competence. If we accepted all of that is the price of


membership of the Single Market, in what conceivable way with that


amount to leaving the European Union? Well, for example, I do


believe that being a member of the Single Market is worth fighting for.


I personally believe that freedom of movement is a good thing. British


people benefit from freedom of movement. We will hugely be hit as


individuals and families and businesses. Mike I understand, but


your writing of leaving... There the butt is that if you do except that


freedom of movement has to change, I don't, but if you do, and if you are


Theresa May, and the problem is to go and fight for the best deal,


don't take it from Brussels that you can't be in the Single Market


without those other things as well, you don't go and argue the case. It


depresses me that Theresa May is beginning this process is waving the


white flag, just as this morning Jeremy Corbyn was waving the white


flag when it comes to it. We need a Government that will fight Britain's


corner and an opposition that will fight the Government to make sure


that it fights. Just explain to our viewers how we could remain members,


members of the Single Market, and not be subject to the jurisdiction


of the European court? So, first of all we spent over the last many,


many years, the likes of Nigel Farage and others, will have argued,


you heard them on this very programme, that Britain should


aspire to be like Norway and Switzerland for example, countries


that are not in the European Union but aren't the Single Market. It is


very clear to me that if you want the best deal for Britain -- but are


in the Single Market. You go and argue for the best deal. What is the


answer to my question, you haven't answered it


the question is, how does the Prime Minister go and fight for the best


deal for Britain. If we think that being in the Single Market is the


right thing, not Baxter -- not access to it but membership of it,


you don't wave the white flag before you enter the negotiating room. I'm


afraid we have run out of time. Thank you, Tim Farron.


The leaks on this speech on Tuesday we have seen, it is interesting that


Downing Street has not attempted to dampen them down this morning, in


the various papers, do they tell us something new? Do they tell us more


of the Goverment's aims in the Brexit negotiations? I think it's


only a confirmation of something which has been in the mating really


for the six months that she's been in the job. The logic of everything


that she's said since last July, the keenness on re-gaining control of


migration, the desire to do international trade deals, the fact


that she is appointed trade Secretary, the logic of all of that


is that we are out of the Single Market, quite probably out of the


customs union, what will happen this week is a restatement of a fairly


clear position anyway. I think Tim Farron is right about one thing, I


don't think she will go into the speech planning to absolutely


definitively say, we are leaving those things. Because even if there


is a 1% chance of a miracle deal, where you stay in the Single Market,


somehow get exempted from free movement, it is prudent to keep


hopes on that option as a Prime Minister. -- to keep open that


option. She is being advised both by the diplomatic corps and her


personal advisers, don't concede on membership of the Single Market yet.


We know it's not going to happen, but let them Europeans knock us back


on that,... That is probably the right strategy for all of the


reasons that Jarlan outlined there. What we learned a bit today is the


possibility of some kind of transition or arrangements, which


David Davies has been talking about in a comment piece for one of the


Sunday papers. My sense from Brexiteers aborting MPs is that they


are very happy with 90% of the rhetoric -- Brexit sporting MPs. The


rhetoric has not been dampened down by MPs, apart from this transitional


arrangement, which they feel and two France, on the one front will


encourage the very dilatory EU to spend longer than ever negotiating a


deal, and on the other hand will also be exactly what our civil


service looks for in stringing things out. What wasn't explained


this morning is what David Davies means by transitional is not that


you negotiate what you can in two years and then spend another five


years on the matter is that a lot of the soul. He thinks everything has


to be done in the two years, -- of the matter are hard to solve. But it


would include transitional arrangements over the five years.


What we are seeing in the build-up is the danger of making these kind


of speeches. In a way, I kind of admired her not feeding the media


machine over the autumn and the end of last year cars, as Janan has


pointed out in his columns, she has actually said quite a lot from it,


you would extrapolate quite a lot. We won't be members of the Single


Market? She said that in the party conference speech, we are out of


European court. Her red line is the end of free movement, so we are out


of the Single Market. Why has she sent Liam Fox to negotiate all of


these other deals, not that he will succeed necessarily, but that is the


intention? We are still in the customs union. You can extrapolate


what she will say perhaps more cautiously in the headlines on


Tuesday. But the grammar of a big speech raises expectations, gets the


markets worked up. So she is doing it because people have said that she


doesn't know what she's on about. But maybe she should have resisted


it. Very well, and she hasn't. The speech is on Tuesday morning.


Now, the public consultation on press regulation closed this


week, and soon ministers will have to decide whether to


enact a controversial piece of legislation.


Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act, if implemented,


could see newspapers forced to pay legal costs in libel and privacy


If they don't sign up to an officially approved regulator.


The newspapers say it's an affront to a free press,


while pro-privacy campaigners say it's the only way to ensure


a scandal like phone-hacking can't happen again.


Ellie Price has been reading all about it.


It was the biggest news about the news for decades,


a scandal that involved household names, but not just celebrities.


They've even hacked the phone of a murdered schoolgirl.


It led to the closure of the News Of The World,


a year-long public inquiry headed up by the judge Lord Justice Leveson,


and in the end, a new press watchdog set up by Royal Charter,


which could impose, among other things, million-pound fines.


If this system is implemented, the country should have confidence


that the terrible suffering of innocent victims


like the Dowlers, the McCanns and Christopher Jefferies should


To get this new plan rolling, the Government also passed


the Crime and Courts Act, Section 40 of which would force


publications who didn't sign up to the new regulator to pay legal


costs in libel and privacy cases, even if they won.


It's waiting for sign-off from the Culture Secretary.


We've got about 50 publications that have signed up...


This is Impress, the press regulator that's got the backing


of the Royal Charter, so its members are protected


from the penalties that would be imposed by Section 40.


It's funded by the Formula One tycoon Max Mosley's


I think the danger if we don't get Section 40 is that


you have an incomplete Leveson project.


I think it's very, very likely that within the next five or ten years


there will be a scandal, there'll be a crisis in press


standards, everyone will be saying to the Government,


"Why on Earth didn't you sort things out when you had the chance?"


Isn't Section 40 essentially just a big stick to beat


We hear a lot about the stick part, but there's also a big juicy carrot


for publishers and their journalists who are members of an


They get huge new protections from libel threats,


from privacy actions, which actually means they've got


a lot more opportunity to run investigative stories.


Impress has a big image problem - not a single national


Instead, many of them are members of Ipso,


the independent regulator set up and funded by the industry that


doesn't seek the recognition of the Royal Charter.


The male cells around 22,000 each day...


There are regional titles too, who, like the Birmingham Mail,


won't sign up to Impress, even if they say the costs


are associated with Section 40 could put them out of business.


Impress has an umbilical cord that goes directly back to Government


through the recognition setup that it has.


Now, we broke free of the shackles of the regulated press


when the stamp duty was revealed 150 years ago.


If we go back to this level of oversight, then I think


we turn the clock back, 150 years of press freedom.


The responses from the public have been coming thick and fast


since the Government launched its consultation


In fact, by the time it closed on Tuesday,


And for that reason alone, it could take months before


a decision on what happens next is taken.


The Government will also be minded to listen to its own MPs,


One described it to me as Draconian and hugely damaging.


So, will the current Culture Secretary's thinking be


I don't think the Government will repeal section 40.


What I'm arguing for is not to implement it, but it will remain


on the statute book and if it then became apparent that Ipso simply


was failing to work, was not delivering effective


regulation and the press were behaving in a way


which was wholly unacceptable, as they were ten years ago,


then there might be an argument at that time to think well in that


case we are going to have to take further measures,


The future of section 40 might not be so black and white.


I'm told a compromise could be met whereby the punitive parts


about legal costs are dropped, but the incentives


to join a recognised regulator are beefed up.


But it could yet be some time until the issue of press freedom


I'm joined now by Max Mosley - he won a legal case against the News


Of The World after it revealed details about his private life,


and he now campaigns for more press regulation.


Are welcome to the programme. Let me ask you this, how can it be right


that you, who many folk think have a clear vendetta against the British


press, can bankroll a government approved regulator of the press? If


we hadn't done it, nobody would, section 40 would never have come


into force because there would never have been a regulator. It is


absolutely wrong that a family trust should have to finance something


like this. It should be financed by the press or the Government. If we


hadn't done it there would be no possibility of regulation. But it


means we end up with a regulator financed by you, as I say


many people think you have a clear vendetta against the press. Where


does the money come from? From a family trust, it is family money.


You have to understand that somebody had to do this. I understand that.


People like to know where the money comes from, I think you said it came


from Brixton Steyn at one stage. Ages ago my father had a trust there


but now all my money is in the UK. We are clear about that, but this is


money that was put together by your father. Yes, my father inherited it


from his father and his father. The whole of Manchester once belonged to


the family, that's why there is a Mosley Street. That is irrelevant


because as we have given the money, I have no control. If you do the


most elementary checks into the contract between my family trust,


the trust but finances Impress, it is impossible for me to exert any


influence. It is just the same as if it had come from the National


lottery. People will find it ironic that the money has come from


historically Britain's best-known fascist. No, it has come from my


family, the Mosley family. This is complete drivel because we have no


control. Where the money comes from doesn't matter, if it had come from


the national lottery it would be exactly the same. Impress was


completely independent. But it wouldn't exist without your money,


wouldn't it? But that doesn't give you influence. It might exist


because it was founded before I was ever in contact with them. Isn't it


curious then that so many leading light show your hostile views of the


press? I don't think it is because I don't know a single member of the


Impress board. The chairman I have met months. The only person I know


is Jonathan Hayward who you had on just now. In one recent months he


tweeted 50 attacks on the Daily Mail, including some calling for an


advertising boycott of the paper. He also liked a Twitter post calling me


Daily Mail and neofascist rag. Are these fitting for what is meant to


be impartial regulator? The person you should ask about that is the


press regulatory panel and they are completely independent, they


reviewed the whole thing. You have probably produced something very


selective, I have no idea but I am certain that these people are


absolutely trustworthy and independent. It is not just Mr


Hayward, we have a tonne of things he has tweeted calling for boycotts,


remember this is the man that would be the regulator of these papers.


He's the chief executive, that is a separate thing. The administration,


the regulator. Many leading light show your vendetta of the press. I


do not have a vendetta. Let's take another one. This person is on the


code committee. Have a look at this. As someone with these views fit to


be involved in the regulation of the press? You said I have a vendetta


against the press, I do not, I didn't say that and it is completely


wrong to say I have a vendetta. What do you think of that? I don't agree,


I wouldn't ban the Daily Mail, I think it's a dreadful paper but I


wouldn't ban it. Another Impress code committee said I hate the Daily


Mail, I couldn't agree more, others have called for a boycott. Other


people can say what they want and many people may think they are right


but surely these views make them unfit to be partial regulators? I


have no influence over Impress therefore I cannot say anything


about it. You should ask them, not me. All I have done is make it


possible for Impress to exist and that was the right thing to do. I'm


asking you if people with these kind of views are fit to be regulators of


the press. You would have to ask about all of their views, these are


some of their views. A lot of people have a downer on the Daily Mail and


the Sun, it doesn't necessarily make them party pre-. Why would


newspapers sign up to a regulator run by what they think is run by


enemies out to ruin them. If they don't like it they should start


their own section 40 regulator. They could make it so recognised, if only


they would make it independent of the big newspaper barons but they


won't -- they could make Ipso recognised. Is the Daily Mail


fascist? It certainly was in the 1930s. Me and my father are


relevant, this whole section 40 issue is about access to justice.


The press don't want ordinary people who cannot afford to bring an action


against the press, don't want them to have access to justice. I can


understand that but I don't sympathise. What would happen to the


boss of Ofcom, which regulates broadcasters, if it described


Channel 4 News is a Marxist scum? If the press don't want to sign up to


Impress they can create their own regulator. If you were to listen we


would get a lot further. The press should make their own Levenson


compliant regulator, then they would have no complaints at all. Even


papers like the Guardian, the Independent, the Financial Times,


they show your hostility to tabloid journalism. They have refused to be


regulated by Impress. I will say it again, the press could start their


own regulator, they do not have to sign... Yes, but Levenson compliant


one giving access to justice so people who cannot afford an


expensive legal action have a proper arbitration service. The Guardian,


the Independent, the Financial Times, they don't want to do that


either. That would suggest there is something fatally flawed about your


approach. Even these kind of papers, the Guardian, Impress is hardly


independent, the head of... Andrew, I am sorry, you are like a dog with


a bone. The press could start their own regulator, then people like the


Financial Times, the Guardian and so one could decide whether they wanted


to join or not but what is absolutely vital is that we should


have a proper arbitration service so that people who cannot afford an


expensive action have somewhere to go. This business of section 40


which you want to be triggered which would mean papers that didn't sign


up to Impress could be sued in any case and they would have to pay


potentially massive legal costs, even if they win. Yes. This is what


the number of papers have said about this, if section 40 was triggered,


the Guardian wouldn't even think of investigation. The Sunday Times said


it would not have even started to expose Lance Armstrong. The Times


journalist said he couldn't have done the Rotherham child abuse


scandal. What they all come it is a full reading of section 40 because


that cost shifting will only apply if, and I quote, it is just and


equitable in all the circumstances. I cannot conceive of any High Court


judge, for example the Lance Armstrong case or the child abuse,


saying it is just as equitable in all circumstances the newspaper


should pay these costs. Even the editor of index on censorship, which


is hardly the Sun, said this would be oppressive and they couldn't do


what they do, they would risk being sued by warlords. No because if


something unfortunate, some really bad person sues them, what would


happen is the judge would say it is just inequitable normal


circumstances that person should pay. Section 40 is for the person


that comes along and says to a big newspaper, can we go to arbitration


because I cannot afford to go to court. The big newspaper says no.


That leaves less than 1% of the population with any remedy if the


newspapers traduce them. It cannot be right. From the Guardian to the


Sun, and including Index On Censorship, all of these media


outlets think you are proposing a charter for conmen, warlords, crime


bosses, dodgy politicians, celebrities with a grievance against


the press. I will give you the final word to address that. It is pure


guff and the reason is they want to go on marking their own homework.


The press don't want anyone to make sure life is fair. All I want is


somebody who has got no money to be able to sue in just the way that I


can. All right, thanks for being with us.


The doctors' union, the British Medical Association,


has said the Government is scapegoating GPs in England


The Government has said GP surgeries must try harder to stay


open from 8am to 8pm, or they could lose out on funding.


The pressure on A services in recent weeks has been intense.


It emerged this week that 65 of the 152 Health Trusts in England


had issued an operational pressure alert in the first


At either level three, meaning major pressures,


or level four, indicating an inability to deliver


On Monday, Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt told the Commons


that the number of people using A had increased by 9 million


But that 30% of those visits were unnecessary.


He said that the situation at a number of Trusts


On Tuesday, the Royal College of Physicians wrote


to the Prime Minister saying the health service was being


paralysed by spiralling demand, and urging greater investment.


On Wednesday, the Chief Executive of NHS England, Simon Stevens,


told a Select Committee that NHS funding will be highly constrained.


And from 2018, real-terms spending per person would fall.


The Prime Minister described the Red Cross's claim that A


was facing a "humanitarian crisis" as "irresponsible and overblown".


And the National Audit Office issued a report that found almost half,


46%, of GP surgeries closed at some point during core hours.


Yesterday, Mrs May signalled her support for doctors' surgeries


opening from 8am to 8pm every day of the week, in order to divert


To discuss this, I'm joined now by the Conservative


MP Maria Caulfield - she was an NHS nurse in a former


life - and Clare Gerada, a former chair of the Royal College


Welcome to you both. So, Maria Caulfield, what the Government is


saying, Downing Street in effect is saying that GPs do not work hard


enough and that's the reason why A was under such pressure? No, I don't


think that is the message, I think that is the message that the media


have taken up. That is not the expression that we want to give. I


still work as a nurse, I know how hard doctors work in hospitals and


GP practices. When the rose 30% of people turning up at A for neither


an accident or an emergency, we do need to look at alternative. Where


is the GPs' operability in this? We know from patients that if they


cannot get access to GPs, they will do one of three things. They will


wait two or three weeks until they can get an appointment, they will


forget about the problem altogether, which is not good, we want patients


to be getting investigations at early stages, or they will go to


A And that is a problem. I'm not quite sure what the role that GPs


play in this. What is your response in that? I think about 70% of


patients that I see should not be seen by me but should still be seen


by hospital consultants. If we look at it from GPs' eyes and not from


hospital's eyes, because that is what it is, we might get somewhere.


Tomorrow morning, every practice in England will have about 1.5 GPs


shot, that's not even counting if there is traffic problems, sickness


or whatever. -- GPs shot. We cannot work any harder, I cannot


physically, emotionally work any harder. We are open 12 hours a day,


most of us, I run practices open 365 days per year 24 hours a day. I


don't understand this. It is one thing attacking me as a GP from


working hard enough, but it is another thing saying that GPs as a


profession and doing what they should be doing. Let me in National


Audit Office has coming up with these figures showing that almost


half of doctors' practices are not open during core hours at some part


of the week. That's where the implication comes, that they are not


working hard enough. What do you say to that? I don't recognise this. I'm


not being defensive, I'm just don't recognise it. There are practices


working palliative care services, practices have to close home visits


if they are single-handed, some of us are working in care homes during


the day. They may shot for an hour in the middle of the data will sort


out some of the prescriptions and admin -- they may shot. My practice


runs a number of practices across London. If we shut during our


contractual hours we would have NHS England coming down on us like a


tonne of bricks. Maria Caulfield, I'm struggling to understand, given


the problems the NHS faces, particularly in our hospitals, what


this has got to do with the solution? Obviously there are GP


practices that are working, you know, over and above the hours. But


there are some GP practices, we know from National Audit Office, there


are particular black sports -- blackspots in the country that only


offer services for three hours a week. That's causing problems if


they cannot get to see a GP they will go and use A Nobody is


saying that this measure would solve problems at A, it would address


one small part of its top blog we shouldn't be starting this, as I


keep saying, please to this from solving the problems at A We


should be starting it from solving the problems of the patients in


their totality, the best place they should go, not from A This really


upsets me, as a GP I am there to be a proxy A doctor. I am a GP, a


highly skilled doctor, looking after patients from cradle to grave across


the physical, psychological and social, I am not an A doctor. I


don't disagree with that, nobody is saying that GPs are not working hard


enough. You just did, actually, about some of them. In some


practices, what we need to see, it's not just GPs in GP surgeries, it is


advanced nurse practitioners, pharmacists. It doesn't necessarily


need to be all on the GPs. I think advanced nurse practitioners are in


short supply. Position associate or go to hospital, -- physician


associates. We have very few trainees, junior doctors in general


practice, unlike hospitals, which tend to have some slack with the


junior doctor community and workforce. This isn't an argument,


this is about saying, let's stop looking at the National health


system as a National hospital system. GPs tomorrow will see about


1.3 million patients. That is a lot of thoughtful. A lot of activity


with no resources. If you wanted the GPs to behave better, in your terms,


when you allocated more money to GPs, part of the reforms, because


that's where it went, shouldn't you have targeted it more closely to


where they want to operate? That is exactly what the Prime Minister is


saying, extra funding is being made available by GPs to extend hours and


services. If certain GP practices cannot do that, the money will


follow the patient to where they move onto. We have no doctors to do


it. I was on a coach last week, the coach driver stopped in the service


station for an hour, they were stopping for a rest. We cannot do


it. Even if you gave us millions more money, and thankfully NHS is


recognising that we need a solution through the five-day week, we


haven't got the doctors to deliver this. It would take a while to get


them? That's my point, that's why we need to be using all how care


professional. Even if you got this right, would it make a difference to


what many regard as the crisis in our hospitals? I think it would. If


you look at patients, they just want to go to a service that will address


the problems. In Scotland for example, pharmacists have their own


patient list. Patients go and see the pharmacists first. There are


lots of conditions, for example if you want anticoagulants, you don't


necessarily need to see a doctor, a pharmacist can manage that and free


up the doctor in other ways. The Prime Minister has said that if


things do not change she is threatening to reduce funding to


doctors who do not comply. Can you both agree, that is probably an


empty threat, that's not going to happen? I hope it's an empty threat.


We're trying our best. People like me in my profession, the seniors in


our profession, are really trying to pull up morale and get people into


general practice, which is a wonderful profession, absolutely


wonderful place to be. But slapping us off and telling us that we are


lazy really doesn't help. I really don't think anybody is doing that.


We have run out of time, but I'm certain that we will be back to the


subject before this winter is out. It's just gone 11:35am,


you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers


in Scotland, who leave us now Hello and the warmest of welcomes


to your local part of the show and 2017 is already shaping up to be


full of political drama again. As by-elections are in the offings,


Jeremy Corbyn has been talking exclusively to us


about the one his party is facing We are also reporting


on the upcoming contest they'll face to be first elective mayor


of the Tees Valley. With me here in the studio is North


Tyneside Conservative Councillor, Judith Wallace, and in London,


the Labour MP for Stockton Let's start with that


by-election in Copeland caused Let's start with that by-election


in Copland caused by the resignation of MP Jamie Reid is going to work


in community Labour is defending a narrow


majority is so it's going to be Labour has held Copeland


and the previous Whitehaven seat since 1930s but recent boundary


changes and a declining labour vote When Jamie Reid retained the seat


in 2015, the Labour majority over the Conservatives was just 2564,


making it one of the most marginal It's a constituency


that is dominated by Sellafield and the new power station is also


planned at Moorside stop and the new power station is also


planned at Moorside. The Tories will want to make much


of Jeremy Corbyn's past opposition More than six in ten voting


to leave the EU last year But Labour will hope


the NHS is their trump card because of public concern


about the future of services Hardly surprising that two


on the short list to be Labour's candidate are at the forefront


of the Hospital campaign. Former Cumbrian woman of the year,


Rachel Holliday, is one of them. The other, County Councillor


and surgeon, Gillian Troutman. The ex-Penrith and border


candidate, Barbara Cannon, Jamie Reid begins his new role


at Sellafield on February first. But Labour may want to delay poll


to local election day in May. Copeland contains England's highest


mountain and deepest lake. Labour will be intent on making


sure they don't face Tristan Hunt is triggering the Stoke


by-election this week. This is a major test


for your party now. Both contests, you have


to win, don't you? There are tough contests in both


Copeland and in Stoke but we are confident


that the messages we have on the health services,


jobs and on investment, we believe the people


will respond to the Labour Party Most parliaments, and opposition


defending their seats, Isn't this a sign of a party,


to lose Jamie Reid and Tristan Hunt, two very talented, bright people,


held important positions in the party in the past,


they have decided there are better but the important thing for us


is to secure the Labour MP for Copeland to ensure


we can defend the NHS, look after the hospital


that is under threat, the hospital where they're


going to lose their maternity unit. They're going to lose


the maternity unit there and... They are calculating


that there is no chance of a Labour They still need people to defend


the services there and Jamie Reid and many others that have worked


hard to establish new services there, we've got to defend them


rather than see them disintegrate. Judith Wallace, given recent


polling, your party will be disappointed it didn't


win in Copeland. The bookies have made


you the favourites. Indeed so and I think it's


absolutely astonishing that we've had not one,


but two Labour MPs resign their seats and not that long


after a general election. It wasn't long ago that


a Conservative resigned, Well, it is unusual for them to be


going on to other jobs and shows a distinct lack of confidence


in their ability to retain their seats at the next election


and the ability of the Labour Party I think it's most unlikely that


Labour in its current shambles will hold the seats or former


government in the future. You say you're going


to winning Copeland, I think we have a very good record


and I think people can see the shambles that the Labour Party


is in at the moment and the economic We'll chat with the


results as they happen. There's more to discuss


because our correspondent, Luke Walton, has spoken


to Jeremy Corbyn is weak and suggested that Copeland


was a seat that Labour must win. We're going to be out


there campaigning, we going to be We're going to be out


there campaigning, we're going to be out there supporting the people


of the whole area, addressing the issues of low wages,


housing problems and crucially, the future of our National Health


Service is and their problems and hospitals throughout Cumbria


and other emergency services The people of Cumbria


deserve a fair deal. Another big local issue


there is the nuclear industry. Thousands of people


in West Cumbria rely on that. You have spoken out over a long


period against nuclear power. Doesn't that make you the Achilles


heel of labour in that area? Sellafield is there,


Sellafield employs a lot of people and it would be very helpful


if they treated their pensioners properly and treated the pension


fund properly as well. Those workers in Sellafield deserve


a fair deal just like everybody else and we are working


with them on that. You were on Conservative


leaflets and your comments about decommissioning power stations


is already making hay It is very odd that Conservative


leaflet is so well funded, so beautifully produced


and so expensive. Didn't find even that amount


of space to say something about the National Health Service,


about the crisis in I suggest to Conservatives,


they are in government, As Prime Minister, would you approve


a plan for a new nuclear power station next to Sellafield


which 20,000 jobs rely on? Well, we're not sure when that's


going to come up yet. That may have happened before


the general election takes place. I want to see an energy mix


in Britain, I want to see I don't know what the circumstances


would be at that time. I've obviously been very concerned


about nuclear safety as indeed has I want to see a safe nuclear system,


I want to see a strong energy mix in Britain which other


countries like Germany... So you don't rule out approving


a new nuclear power station? Let's look at the issue


when it comes up. I'll be all over Cumbria


in the election campaign. Someone who is worried


about your antinuclear stance is the departing MP,


Jamie Reid. He's talked about you poisoning


the Labour Party and not being fit I thanked him for his work and also


admired the way he stood up, particularly for very isolated rural


communities in his constituency. We had a very good discussion


about the need for public investment in good quality,


transport infrastructure, improvement of the rail


line along the coast, improvement of the rail links,


but also issues such as rural bus services such as communication


with isolated communities and also post industrial communities,


those people that used to work Jamie's voices Jamie's


responsibility. I'm happy to have those


discussions with him. We've had some good discussions


about these issues. We want to see a country where


communities are not left behind, where people don't end up forever


on zero hours contracts and low-paid jobs, where young people


can get into college, can go to university and can get


the apprenticeships they deserve. Jeremy Corbyn talking


to Luke Walton there. Alex, we know Jeremy Corbyn has been


against nuclear power as long That could be a source of disaster


in a constituency where the nuclear We believe in a thorough


energy mix and nuclear We have been very clear


in stressing this. Jeremy said he believes


in the mix that is necessary and we will continue to have nuclear


power in the mix. We're not going to do anything


at all that's going to jeopardise thousands of jobs in West Cumbria


and across the county where people are paid good wages,


very good wages in many cases and we don't want to


see any of that lost. He said he will make a decision


about that at the time. If he's a man of principle,


why doesn't he tell us he wouldn't sanction a nuclear power station


because he doesn't believe in it instead of trying to fudge


the issue and try and pretend It was a Labour government that


approved the plans for a power Very different Labour Party


from now, perhaps. There may be some different people


around and we have a different leader and he's got to determine


exactly what the situation is, if he is called


to make that decision. I hope there is going to be no


further delay and we can get those jobs there that can get this power


station built and the benefits can Judith Wallace, the reason you want


this by-election is you don't want to talk about the NHS


because their problems with the hospital that are mirrored


in hospitals all around the region. That's why you want


to avoid it, isn't it? There is an indication


that the Prime Minister is looking at the situation in Cumbria


and the NHS is under pressure. Some of the problems in A come


about because people misused A My local newspaper is reporting


they have had cases of going I think Labour, by removing from GPs


the out-of-hours services, We know about the threat


of the consultant led maternity services there,


we know women in difficult labours can face a 40 mile trip in order


to get to an alternative hospital. These decisions are made


by the local health trust, They are everything to do


with the government. Ultimately the health service


reports to the government they should be getting their fingers


out and saying, "That maternity unit is safe,


that A is safe and the people of West Cumbria can rest


assured the NHS is safe." As David Cameron said,


it is in the Tory's hands. It is cynical to put out a leaflet


which talks about nuclear power and doesn't address what is a big


issue in West Cumbria I think having heard


what Jeremy Corbyn had to say on that tape,


it's no wonder the Labour Party want to postpone this by-election


until May which would leave the local people without any


representation whilst It is worrying that Jeremy Corbyn


wants nuclear facilities That would have a massive effect


for this constituency and a disastrous affect


for the security of the country. Alex, you quit Labour's front bench


with many others because you had no confidence in Jeremy Corbyn,


that he wasn't fit Are you any more convinced


that he could be the man to hold on and win voters over


in Copland and Stockton? I have been enjoying


Prime Minister's Question Time. We have seen Jeremy Corbyn wipe


the floor with Theresa May. It doesn't matter what the subject


is, he's actually putting forward the arguments and most of those


are in social care, around our NHS. He has been getting that message


across and it has been So you reverse your


opinion from the summer. I believe certainly that


Jeremy Corbyn will lead us into the election and we will win


that election because we've got ideas, we talked


about the nationalisation of the railway system which has


tremendous public support. We have talked about ensuring jobs


are advertised in this country rather than abroad,


we can build an opportunity Judith, you can be smug


about Labour's current poll ratings. There's a danger is making


you complacent on that There will be no extra money for


the and Theresa May is in denial. We know the NHS receives billions


and billions of pounds and it is right and proper that


local people should Local decisions are made


by the local trust. There is medical profession


after medical professional saying you're not doing enough and this


is a huge crisis. The NHS were constantly told


as the envy of the world yet know other country chooses


to have the same system. We have to be looking


at the outcomes which are being Headlines made for the wrong


reasons, I suppose. You know your constituency,


will the people of Stockton North know what their immigration


policy is now? I would hope so because we spent


quite a bit of time on the streets of Stockton talking


to people about that. We believe that we've got to protect


jobs into the long term, we got to make sure that there


is still the skills In favour of freedom


of movement or not? I think it's no longer


really an issue. The British people have made it


clear that they do not believe They don't believe in it but we've


got to make sure the government do their best for our country


and if we require some form of movement of people across the EU,


we've got to have that in order to secure the markers


that we require. Judith, this is a man


of principle on immigration. Your party promised action


and never delivered. We have no idea what


Jeremy Corbyn's policy is. The speech this week


was supposed to clear that up. You promised on it and never


delivered it on immigration. The only way we can deliver on it is


by leaving the European Union. I've always been very


clear about that. As we leave the European Union,


Theresa May has been clear we will regain control


of our borders and that is what will happen,


commencing is important to people. The by-elections in Copland


and Stoke aren't the only big tests for the parties coming up


in the next few months. Campaigning will soon get underway


in the contest to choose the first-ever mayor of the Tees


Valley. Could one person represent an area


that includes not just Middlesbrough and Stockton but also Darlington,


Hartlepool and Redcar also. David McMillan took a tour around


Teesside to find out. It stretches from the North Sea


to North Yorkshire stop 670,000 people in a city region


with five different centres. Industrial, post-industrial


and occasionally rural. These offices in Stockton


where Tees Valley's But he or she will have a joint task


on their hands creating growth and prosperity across a large


and diverse region. Four parties have identified people


they believe can do just that. The local Councillor


is their candidate. There is a thread when it


comes to transport and Being from the area,


I have a good understanding of how My key drive is not to be looking


at what is great for the suburbs of Yarm because if Stockton


succeeds, Middlesbrough, Redcar, Hartlepool and


Darlington all succeed. South Barton near


Middlesbrough is one of many It is suffering in the


post-industrial age. Hugh Jeffrey, the leader of Redcar


and Cleveland Council says the closure of SSI shows how closely


linked the Tees Valley It didn't just affect Redcar,


it affected all five It is not going to be


about fighting each other, it's going to be about working


together, being pragmatic and working to deliver the goals


we have the Tees Valley which is and growing our jobs,


economy, a proven skills. North of Stockton, their rural


partnerships which contrasts sharply with the traditional image


of Teesside the north-east party's John Tait, says they can make sharp


contrast with the region's Transport will enliven


the whole area. Railways, roads, we need proper


ambition on how to put a transport infrastructure that is not fiddling


with the past but is ambitious and looks towards the future


and spreads prosperity Hartlepool is Ukip's


strongest race on Teesside. John Tennant is that


prospective candidate Andy has We're looking at the possibility of


bringing back the Tees Valley Metro system which was shelved


a few years ago. It will cost a lot of money to build


and we will have to find that money but you need a maypr who's


going to fight for the right We would expect the politicians


to insist that they can find unity and harmony to bring five distinct


areas together but one local journalist thinks they may be


underestimating the challenge. There is no natural empathy


with the concept of Tees Valley. Teesside is Middlesbrough


and Stockton and I don't think Darlington as a town wants to be


part of that. It's an artificial construct


and the mayor has got to create a region for them


to be the figurehead. The Lib Dems expect to name


their mayoral candidate at the start of February and there's still plenty


of time for others to join the race. The challenge for whoever becomes


the first Tees Valley Mayor is to make their new devolved powers


work to the benefit of every corner Alex, if you ask people


in Stockton where they live, they wouldn't say they lived


in the Tees Valley. It will be a tough sell to convince


voters that what is good for Hartlepool is also good


for Stockton and Middlesbrough. I have been very impressed


with the way our five local authorities have


worked closely together. They work hard and while other


authorities were falling about about creating deals to work


with the government to bring prosperity to the area,


our area was working I am confident there may


be a weird construct, people will work hard together,


they will deliver for the whole Fine for councils to operate,


but it doesn't need an election Voters will say, "Why am


I being called out to do this?" This is an opportunity the


Conservatives have given local authorities to take powers from


Whitehall and get the money that goes with them. There was no


compulsion to take part. Full marks for driving this policy on. Full


marks to the local authorities in Tees Valley to take up the


opportunity. They decide the geographic boundaries and the


powers. There will be deals. More money and more powers. They can get


more money if they are successful in driving economic growth. It is sad


further north in the region, the Labour leaders and elected mayor


have not been able to reach agreements. The danger is this


election could raise expectations that cannot be delivered. The Tees


Valley Metro, the money is not there to achieve that. Candidates cannot


deliver. There will be uneconomic mayor and we will have the


development corporation who have a good record of driving growth. More


more growth, an opportunity to have more money from the government to


extend the powers. We are talking about adult skills, infrastructure


and the key to driving jobs. Alex, are you convinced it will be


transformative? I hope so. We have seen cuts to our local authority


budgets and lots of things they were able to do before can no longer be


done. We have to put eggs into this basket and make sure we have strong


person in Sue Jeffery as the new elected mayor. We have the


possibility of a Tees crossing which will be expensive. We need an agenda


that will drive jobs and ensure people have the skills to take those


jobs and give our communities the prosperity we need. And you will be


favourites to win this election. If you use it as a platform to talk


about the cuts to funding, it's not going to get very far. Do you need


to get all the parties together and sing from the same hymn sheet so it


has some cloud with government? I am always surprised when I talk to


people and I tell them I work cooperatively with other people from


the other parties. They are surprised about that. That is what I


do and what the mayor will do and what the local authorities will do.


They work together as a team with their communities to deliver. The


impact of Brexit on the north-east was debated in the Lords this week.


MPs and unions have criticised plans to change and close two of the post


offices in Billingham and concept. They will be located in to new


shops. They want to raise council tax by 4.9%. 3% will help towards


social care. Lord beef has said the impact on the colour me off the


north-east needs to be fully considered in future Brexit


negotiations. The north-east of England has had the most positive


trade balance of any region of the UK. 58% of these exports are to


European Union countries. North-east hospital's a Mac -- A has dealt


with over 2 million people and a rise of 4%. North Tyneside Council


has approved plans for two huge cranes to be used in the wind


turbine industry at Wallsend. One is turbine industry at Wallsend. One is


six times bigger than the Angel of the North. That is about it from us.


Tomorrow night, inside out and asks if the NHS is to the National


Service orders where you live matter to when you want to get treatment.


We are back next Sunday. We will have a packed agenda. Why not follow


me on Twitter. Details on the screen.


Now, if anyone thought Donald Trump would tone things down


after the American election campaign, they may have


The period where he has been President-elect will make them think


again. The inauguration is coming up on Friday.


Never has the forthcoming inauguration of a president been


In a moment, we'll talk to a man who knows Mr Trump


But first, let's have a look at the press conference


Mr Trump gave on Wednesday, in which he took the opportunity


to rubbish reports that Russia has obtained compromising information


You are attacking our news organisation.


Can you give us a chance, you are attacking our news


organisation, can you give us a chance to ask a question, sir?


As far as Buzzfeed, which is a failing pile of garbage,


writing it, I think they're going to suffer the consequences.


Does anyone really believe that story?


I'm also very much of a germaphobe, by the way.


If Putin likes Donald Trump, guess what, folks, that's called


The only ones that care about my tax returns are the reporters, OK?


Do you not think the American public is concerned?


The Wiggo, Donald Trump at his first last conference. The Can will he


change as President? Because he hasn't changed in the run-up to


being inaugurated? I don't think he will commit he doesn't see any point


in changing. Why would he change from the personality that just one,


as he just said, I just one. All of the bleeding-heart liberals can wail


and brush their teeth and say how ghastly that all this, Hillary


should have won and so on, but he has got an incredible mandate.


Remember, Trump has the House committee has the Senate, he will


have the Supreme Court. He has incredible power right now. He


doesn't have to listen to anybody. I spoke to him a couple of weeks ago


specifically about Twitter, I asked him what the impact was of Twitter.


He said, I have 60 million people following me on Twitter. I was able


to bypass mainstream media, bypass all modern political convention and


talk directly to potential voters. Secondly, I can turn on the TV in


the morning, I can see a rival getting all of the airtime, and I


can fire off a tweet, for free, as a marketing man he loves that, and,


boom, I'm on the news agenda again. He was able to use that


magnificently. Twitter to him didn't cost him a dollar. He is going to


carry on tweeting in the last six weeks, he was not sleeping. Trump


has never had an alcoholic drink a cigarette or a drug. He is a fit by


the 70, he has incredible energy and he is incredibly competitive. At his


heart, he is a businessman. If you look at him as a political


ideologue, you completely missed the point of trouble. Don't take what he


says literally, look upon it as a negotiating point that he started


from, and try to do business with him as a business person would, and


you may be presently surprised so pleasantly surprised. He treats the


press and the media entirely differently to any other politician


or main politician in that normally the politicians try to get the media


off a particular subject, or they try to conciliate with the media. He


just comes and punches the media in the nose when he doesn't like them.


This could catch on, you know! You are absolutely right, for a start,


nobody could accuse him of letting that victory go to his head. You


know, he won't say, I will now be this lofty president. He's exactly


the same as he was before. What is fascinating is his Laois and ship


with the media. I haven't met, and I'm sure you haven't, met a party


leader who is obsessed with the media. But they pretend not to be.


You know, they state, oh, somebody told me about a column, I didn't


read it. He is utterly transparent in his obsession with the media, he


doesn't pretend. How that plays out, who knows? It's a completely


different dynamic than anyone has seen by. Like he is the issue, he


has appointed an unusual Cabinet, that you could criticise in many


ways. Nearly all of them are independent people in their own


right. A lot of them are wealthy, too. They have their own views. They


might not like what he tweaked at 3am, and he does have to deal with


his Cabinet now. Mad dog matters, now the Defence Secretary, he might


not like what's said about China at three in morning - general matters.


This is what gets very conjugated. We cannot imagine here in our


political system any kind of appointments like this. Using the


wouldn't have a line-up of billionaires of the kind of


background that he has chosen -- you simply wouldn't have. But that won't


stop him saying and reading what he thinks. Maybe it will cause him some


internal issues when the following day he has the square rigged with


whatever they think. But he's going to press ahead. Are we any clearer


in terms of policy. I know policy hasn't featured hugely in this


campaign of 2016. Do we have any really clear idea what Mr Trump is


hoping to achieve? He has had some consistent theme going back over 25


years. One is a deep scepticism about international trade and the


kind of deals that America has been doing over that period. It has been


so consistent that is has been hard to spin as something that you say


during the course of a campaign of something to get elected.


Ultimately, Piers is correct, he won't change. When he won the


election committee gave a relatively magnanimous beach. I thought his ego


had been sated and he had got what he wanted. He will end up governing


as is likely eccentric New York liberal and everything will be fine.


In the recent weeks it has come to my attention that that might not be


entirely true! LAUGHTER


It is a real test of the American system, the Texan bouncers, the


foreign policy establishment which is about to have the orthodoxies


disrupted -- the checks and balances. I think he has completely


ripped up the American political system. Washington as we know it is


dead. From his garage do things his way, he doesn't care, frankly, what


any of us thinks -- Trump is going to do things his way. If he can


deliver for the people who voted for him who fault this disenfranchised,


-- who voted for him who felt this disenfranchised. They voted


accordingly. They want to see jobs and the economy in good shape, they


want to feel secure. They want to feel that immigration has been


tightened. If Trump can deliver on those main theme for the rust belt


communities of America, I'm telling you, he will go down as a very


successful president. All of the offensive rhetoric and the


argy-bargy with CNN and whatever it may be will be completely


irrelevant. Let me finish with a parochial question. Is it fair to


say quite well disposed to this country? And that he would like,


that he's up for a speedy free-trade, bilateral free-trade


you'll? Think we have to be sensible as the country. Come Friday, he is


the president of the United States, the most powerful man and well. He


said to me that he feels half British, his mum was born and raised


in Scotland until the age of 18, he loves British, his mother used to


love watching the Queen, he feels very, you know, I would roll out the


red carpet for Trump, let him eat Her Majesty. The crucial point for


us as a country is coming -- let him me to Her Majesty. If we can do a


speedy deal within an 18 month period, it really sends a message


that well but we are back in the game, that is a hugely beneficial


thing for this country. Well, a man whose advisers were indicating that


maybe he should learn a few things from Donald Trump was Jeremy Corbyn.


Yes, MBE. Mr Corbyn appeared on the Andrew Marr Show this morning. --


yes, indeed. If you don't win Copeland,


and if you don't win Stoke-on-Trent Central,


you're toast, aren't you? Our party is going to fight very


hard in those elections, as we are in the local elections,


to put those policies out there. It's an opportunity to challenge


the Government on the NHS. It's an opportunity to challenge


them on the chaos of Brexit. It's an opportunity to challenge


them on the housing shortage. It's an opportunity to challenge


them on zero-hours contracts. Is there ever a moment that you look


in the mirror and think, you know what, I've done my best,


but this might not be for me? I look in the mirror


every day and I think, let's go out there and try


and create a society where there are opportunities for all,


where there aren't these terrible levels of poverty, where


there isn't homelessness, where there are houses for all,


and where young people aren't frightened of going to university


because of the debts they are going to end up


with at the end of their course. Mr Corbyn earlier this morning.


Steve, would it be fair to say that the mainstream of the Labour Party


has now come to the conclusion that they just have to let Mr Corbyn get


on with it, that they are not going to try and influence what he does.


They will continue to try and have their own views, but it's his show,


it's up to him, if it's a mess, he has to live with it and we'll have


clean hands? For now, yes. I think they made a mistake when he was


first elected to start in some cases tweeting within seconds that it was


going to be a disaster, this was Labour MPs. They made a complete


mess of that attempted coup in the summer, which strengthened his


position. And he did, it gave Corbyn the space with total legitimacy to


say that part of the problem is, we're having this public Civil War.


In keeping quiet, that disappeared as part of the explanation for why


Labour and low in the polls. I think they are partly doing that. But they


are also struggling, the so-called mainstream Labour MPs, to decide


what the distinctive agenda is. It's one of the many differences with the


80s, where you had a group of people sure of what they believed in, they


left to form the SDP. What's happening now is that they are


leaving politics altogether. That is a crisis of social Democrats all


across Europe, including the French Socialists, as we will find out


later in the spring. Let Corbyn because then, that's the strategy.


There is a weary and sometimes literal resignation from the


moderates in the Labour Party. If you talk to them, they are no longer


angry, they have always run out of steam to be angry about what's going


on. They are just sort of tired and feel that they've just got to see


this through now. I think the by-elections will be interesting.


When Andrew Marr said, you're toast, and you? I thought, he's never


posed! That was right. A quick thought from view? One thing Corbyn


has in common with Trump is immunity to bad news. I think he can lose


Copeland and lose Stoke, and as long as it is not a sequence of


resignations and by-elections afterwards, with maybe a dozen or 20


Labour MPs going, he can still enjoy what. It may be more trouble if


Labour loses the United trade union elections. We are in a period of


incredible unpredictability generally in global politics. If you


look at the way the next year plays out, if for example brags it was a


disaster and it starts to unravel very quickly, Theresa May is


attached to that, clearly label would have a great opportunity


potentially disease that higher ground, and when Eddie the Tories --


Labour would have an opportunity. Is Corbyn the right guy? We interviewed


him, what struck me was that he talked about being from, a laughable


comparison, but when it is really laughable is this - Hillary Clinton,


what were the things she stood for, nobody really knew? What does Trump


stand for? Everybody knew. Corbyn has the work-out four or five


messages and bang, bang, bang. He could still be in business. Thank


you for being with us. I'll be back at the same


time next weekend. Remember - if it's Sunday,


it's the Sunday Politics.


Download Subtitles