22/01/2017 Sunday Politics North East and Cumbria


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 22/01/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



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


Theresa May will be the first foreign leader to visit US


President Donald Trump this week - she's promised to hold "very


frank" conversations with the new and controversial


Speaking of the 45th President of America,


we'll be looking at what the Trump presidency could hold


in store for Britain and the rest of the world.


And with the Supreme Court expected to say that Parliament should


have a vote before the Brexit process begins, we'll ask


Here, will the north-east and what Labour will do next.


Here, will the north-east and Cumbria boys be heard during Brexit


negotiations. It's curtains And to talk about all of that


and more, I'm joined by three journalists who, in an era


of so-called fake news, can be relied upon for their accuracy,


their impartiality - and their willingness


to come to the studio It's Steve Richards,


Julia Hartley-Brewer and Tom Newton Dunn,


and during the programme they'll be tweeting as often as the 45th


President of the USA in the middle So - the Prime Minister has been


appearing on the BBC this morning. She was mostly talking


about Donald Trump and Brexit, but she was also asked about a story


on the front of this It's reported that an unarmed


Trident missile test fired from the submarine HMS Vengeance


near the Florida coast in June The paper says the incident took


place weeks before a crucial Commons Well, let's have listen


to Theresa May talking The issue that we were talking


about in the House of Commons It was about whether or not


we should renew Trident, whether we should look to the future


and have a replacement Trident. That's what we were talking


about in the House of Commons. That's what the House


of Commons voted for. He doesn't want to defend our


country with an independent There are tests that take place


all the time, regularly, What we were talking about in that


debate that took place... I'm not going to get


an answer to this. Tom, it was clear this was going to


come up this morning. It is on the front page of the Sunday Times. It


would seem to me the Prime Minister wasn't properly briefed on how to


reply. I think she probably was, but the Prime Minister we now have


doesn't necessarily answer all questions in the straightest way.


She didn't answer that one and all. Unlike previous ones? She made it


quite clear she was briefed. You read between the Theresa May lines.


By simply not answering Andrew Marr four times, it is obvious she knew,


and that she knew before she went into the House of Commons and urged


everyone to renew the ?40 billion replacement programme. Of course it


is an embarrassment, but does it have political legs? I don't think


so. She didn't mislead the Commons. If she wanted to close it down, the


answer should have been, these are matters of national security.


There's nothing more important in that than our nuclear deterrent. I'm


not prepared to talk about testing. End of. But she didn't. Maybe you


should be briefing her. That's a good answer. She is an interesting


interviewee. She shows it when she is nervous. She was transparently


uneasy answering those questions, and the fact she didn't answer it


definitively suggests she did know and didn't want to say it, and she


answered awkwardly. But how wider point, that the House of Commons


voted for the renewal of Trident, suggests to me that in the broader


sweep of things, this will not run, because if there was another vote, I


would suggest she'd win it again. But it is an embarrassment and she


handled it with a transparent awkwardness. She said that the tests


go on all the time, but not of the missiles. Does it not show that when


the Prime Minister leaves her comfort zone of Home Office affairs


or related matters, she often struggles. We've seen it under


questioning from Mr Corbyn even, and we saw it again today. Absolutely.


Tests of various aspects of the missiles go on all the time, but


there's only been five since 2000. What you described wouldn't have


worked, because in previous tests they have always been very public


about it. Look how well our missiles work! She may not have misled


Parliament, but she may not have known about it. If she didn't know,


does Michael Fallon still have a job on Monday? Should Parliament know


about a test that doesn't work? Some would say absolutely not. Our


deterrent is there to deter people from attacking us. If they know that


we are hitting the United States by mistake rather than the Atlantic


Ocean, then... There is such a thing as national security, and telling


all the bad guys about where we are going wrong may not be a good idea.


It was her first statement as Prime Minister to put her case for


renewal, to have the vote on Trident, and in that context, it is


significant not to say anything. If anyone knows where the missile


landed, give us a call! So Donald Trump's inauguration day


closed with him dancing to Frank Sinatra's My Way,


and whatever your view on the 45th President of the United States


he certainly did do it his way. Not for him the idealistic call


for national unity - instead he used Friday's inaugural


address to launch a blistering attack on the dark state


of the nation and the political class, and to promise


to take his uncompromising approach from the campaign trail


to the White House. Here's Adam Fleming,


with a reminder of how First, dropping by for a cup of tea


and a slightly awkward exchange Then, friends, foes


and predecessors watched I, Donald John Trump,


do solemnly swear... The crowds seemed smaller


than previous inaugurations, the speech tougher then any


previous incoming president. From this day forth,


it's going to be only America first. In the meantime, there were sporadic


protests in Washington, DC. Opponents made their voices heard


around the world too. The President,


who'd criticised the work of the intelligence agencies,


fitted in a visit to the CIA. There is nobody that feels stronger


about the intelligence community And, back at the office,


in the dark, a signature signalled the end of the Obama era


and the dawn of Trump. So, as you heard there,


President Trump used his inauguration to repeat his campaign


promise to put "America first" in all his decisions, and offered


some hints of what to expect He talked of in America in carnage,


to be rebuilt by American hands and American Labour. President Trump has


already started to dismantle key parts of the Obama Legacy, including


the unwinding of the affordable care act, and the siding of the climate


action plan to tackle global warning. Little to say about foreign


policy, but promised to eradicate Islamic terrorism from the face of


the Earth, insisting he would restore the US military to


unquestioning dominance. He also said the US would develop a state


missile defence system to deal with threats he sees from Iran and North


Korea. In a statement that painted a bleak picture of the country he now


runs, he said his would be a law and order Administration, and he would


keep the innocents safe by building the border war with Mexico. One


thing he didn't mention, for the first time ever, there is a


Eurosceptic in the oval office, who is also an enthusiast for Brexit.


We're joined now by Ted Malloch - he's a Trump supporter who's been


tipped as the president's choice for US ambassador


to the EU, and he's just flown back from Washington.


And by James Rubin - he's a democrat who served


Let's start with that last point I made in the voice over there. We now


have a Eurosceptic in the oval office. He is pro-Brexit and not


keen on further European Union integration. What are the


implications of that? First of all, a renewal of the US- UK special


relationship. You see the Prime Minister already going to build and


rebuild this relationship. Already, the bust of Winston Churchill is


back in the oval office. Interestingly, Martin Luther King's


bust is also there, so there is an act of unity in that first movement


of dusts. Donald Trump will be oriented between bilateral


relationships and not multilateral or supernatural. Supranational full.


What are the implications of someone in the White House now not believing


in it? I think we are present in the unravelling of America's leadership


of the West. There is now a thing called the west that America has led


since the end of World War II, creating supranational - we just


heard supernatural! These institutions were created. With


American leadership, the world was at peace in Europe, and the world


grew increasingly democratic and prosperous. Wars were averted that


could be extremely costly. When something works in diplomacy, you


don't really understand what the consequences could have been. I


think we've got complacent. The new president is taking advantage of


that. It is a terrible tragedy that so many in the West take for granted


the successful leadership and institutions we have built. You


could argue, as James Rubin has argued in some articles, that...


Will Mr Trump's America be more involved in the world than the Obama


won? Or will it continue the process with running shoes on that began


with Mr Obama? President Obama stepped back from American


leadership. He withdrew from the world. He had a horrendous eight


years in office, and American powers have diminished everywhere in the


world, not just in Europe. That power will reassert. The focus will


be on America first, but there are foreign interests around the


world... How does it reassert itself around the world? I think the


institutions will be recreated. Some may be taken down. There could be


some new ones. I think Nato itself, and certainly the Defence Secretary


will have discussions with Donald Trump about how Nato can be


reshaped, and maybe there will be more burden sharing. That is an


important thing for him. You are tipped to be the US ambassador to


Brussels, to the EU, and we are still waiting to hear if that will


happen. Is it true to say that Mr Trump does not believe in EU


integration? I think you made that clear in the speech. He talked about


supranational. He does not believe in those kinds of organisations. He


is investing himself in bilateral relationships, the first of which


will be with the UK. So we have a president who does not believe in EU


integration and has been highly critical of Nato. Do the people he


has appointed to defend, Secretary of State, national security, do you


think that will temper this anti-NATO wretched? Will he come


round to a more pro-NATO situation? I think those of us who care about


America's situation in the world will come in to miss President Obama


a lot. I think the Secretary of State and the faculty of defence


will limit the damage and will urge him not to take formal steps to


unravel this most powerful and most successful alliance in history, the


Nato alliance. But the damage is already being done. When you are the


leader of the West, leadership means you are persuading, encouraging,


bolstering your leadership and these institutions by the way you speak.


Millions, if not hundreds of millions of people, have now heard


the US say that what they care about is within their borders.


What do you say to that? It is such an overstatement. The point is that


Donald Trump is in a Jacksonian tradition of national populism. He


is appealing to the people first. The other day, I was sitting below


this page during the address, and he said, everyone sitting behind me as


part of the problem. Everyone in front of me, the crowd and the crowd


on television, is part of the solution, so we are giving the


Government back to the people. That emphasis is going to change American


life, including American International relations. It doesn't


moving the leak back -- it doesn't mean we are moving out of Nato, it


simply means we will put our national interests first. There were


echoes of Andrew Jackson's inauguration address of 1820. That


night, the Jacksonians trashed the White House, but Mr Trump's people


didn't do that, so there is a difference there. He also said


something else in the address - that protectionism would lead to


prosperity. I would suggest there is no evidence for that in the post-war


world. He talked about protecting the American worker, American jobs,


the American economy. I actually think that Donald Trump will not


turn out to be a protectionist. If you read the heart of the deal...


This is referring to two Republican senators who introduce massive


tariffs in the Hoover administration. Exactly. If you read


The Art Of The Deal, you will see how Donald Trump deals with


individuals and countries. There is a lot of bluster, positioning, and I


think you already see this in bringing jobs by the United States.


Things are going to change. Let's also deal with this proposition.


China is the biggest loser of this election result. Let me say this:


The first time in American history and American president has set forth


his view of the world, and it is a mercantile view of the world, who


makes more money, who gets more trade, it doesn't look at the shared


values, leadership and defends the world needs. The art of the deal has


no application to America's leadership of the world, that's what


we're learning. You can be a great businessman and make great real


estate deals - whether he did not is debatable - but it has nothing to do


with inspiring shared values from the West. You saying China may lose,


because he may pressure them to reduce their trade deficit with the


US. They may or may not. We may both lose. Right now, his Secretary of


State has said, and I think he will walk this back when he is brief,


that they will prevent the Chinese from entering these islands in the


South China Sea. If they were to do that, it would be a blockade, and


there would be a shooting war between the United States and China,


so US - China relations are the most important bilateral relationship of


the United States, and they don't lend themselves to the bluff and


bluster that may have worked when you are trying to get a big building


on second Ave in Manhattan. Is China the biggest loser? I think the


Chinese have a lot to lose. Gigi and Ping was in Davos this week -- Xi


Jin Ping was in Davos. Is Germany the second biggest loser


in the sense that I understand he hasn't agreed time to see Angela


Merkel yet, also that those close to him believe that Germany is guilty


of currency manipulation by adopting a weak your row instead of the


strong Deutschmark, and that that is why they are running a huge balance


of payments surplus with the United States. American - German relations


may not be great. There is a point of view throughout Europe. You only


have to talk to the southern Europeans about this question. It


seems like the euro has been aligned to benefit Germany. Joe Stiglitz,


the famous left of centre Democrat economist, made the same case in a


recent book. In this case, I think Germany will be put under the


spotlight. Angela Merkel has shown herself to be the most respected and


the most successful leader in Europe. We who care about the West,


who care about the shared values of the West, should pray and hope that


she is re-elected. This isn't about dollars and cents. We're living in a


time whether Russian leader has another country in Europe and for


some inexplicable reason, the American president, who can use his


insult diplomacy on everyone, including Mrs Merkel, the only


person he can't seem to find anything to criticise about is Mr


Putin. There are things more important than the actual details of


your currency. There are things like preventing another war in Europe,


preventing a war between the Chinese and the US. You talk about the


Trident missile all morning, nuclear deterrence is extremely important.


It doesn't lend itself to the bluff and bluster of a real estate deal. I


understand all that, but the fact we are even talking about these things


shows the new world we are moving into. I'd like to get you both to


react to this. This is a man that ended the Bush Dynasty, a man that


beat the Clinton machine. In his inauguration, not only did he not


reach out to the Democrats, he didn't even mention the Republicans.


These are changed days for us. They are, and change can be good or


disastrous. I'm worried that it's easy in the world of diplomacy and


in them -- for the leadership of the United States to break relationships


and ruin alliances. These are things that were carefully nurtured. George


Schultz, the American Secretary of State under Reagan talked about


gardening, the slow, careful creation of a place with bilateral


relationships that were blossoming and flowering multilateral


relationships that take decades to create, and he will throw them away


in a matter of days. The final word... I work for George Schultz.


He was a Marine who stood up America, defended America, who would


be in favour of many of the things that Donald Trump and the tramp


Administration... Give him a call. His top aide macs that I've spoken


to are appalled by Mr Trump's abdication of leadership. He is


going to our radically -- he's going to eradicate extremist Islam from


the face of the year. Is that realistic? I know people in the


national security realm have worked on a plan. They say they will have


such a plan in some detail within 90 days. Lets hope they succeed. We


have run out of time. As a issues. Thank you, both. -- fascinating


issues. So Theresa May promised a big speech


on Brexit, and this week - perhaps against expectation -


she delivered, trying to answer claims that the government didn't


have a plan with an explicit wish-list of what she hopes to


achieve in negotiations with the EU. To her allies it was ambitious,


bold, optimistic - to her opponents it was full


of contradictions Here's Adam again, with a reminder


of the speech and how There are speeches,


and there are speeches. Like Theresa May's 12 principles


for a Brexit deal leading to the UK fully out of the EU


but still friendly in terms This agreement should allow


for the freest possible trade in goods and services between


Britain and the EU's member states. It should give British


companies the maximum operate within European markets


and let European businesses do She also said no deal would be


better than the wrong deal, We want to test what people think


about what she's just said. Do we have any of our


future negotiating As the European Parliament


voted for its new president, its chief


negotiator sounded off. Saying, OK, if our European


counterparts don't accept it, we're going to make


from Britain a sort of free zone or tax haven,


I The Prime Minister of Malta,


the country that's assumed the EU's rotating presidency,


spoke in sorrow and a bit of anger. We want a fair deal


for the United Kingdom, but that deal necessarily needs to be


inferior to membership. Next, let's hear


from some enthusiastic leavers, like, I don't


know, the Daily Mail? The paper lapped it up


with this adoring front page. For Brexiteers, it was


all manna from heaven. I think today means we are a big


step closer to becoming an independent country again,


with control of our own laws, I was chuckling at some of it,


to be honest, because There were various phrases there


which I've used myself again and Do we have any of those


so-called Remoaners? There will, at the end


of this deal process, so politicians get to vote


on the stitch-up, but We take the view as


Liberal Democrats that if this process started


with democracy last June, We trusted the people


with departure, we must trust them Do we have anyone from


Labour, or are you all watching it in a small


room somewhere? Throughout the speech, there seemed


to be an implied threat that somewhere along the line,


if all her optimism of a deal with the European Union didn't work,


we would move into a low-tax, corporate taxation,


bargain-basement economy on the I think she needs to be


a bit clearer about what The Labour leader


suggested he'd tell his MPs to vote in favour


of starting a Brexit process if Parliament was given the choice,


sparking a mini pre-revolt among Finally, do we have anyone


from big business here? Of course, your all in Davos


at the World Economic Clarity, first of all, really


codified what many of us have been anticipating since


the referendum result, particularly around


the I think what we've also seen


today is the Government's willingness to put a bit of edge


into the negotiating dynamic, and I Trade negotiations are negotiations,


and you have to lay out, and you have to be pretty tough


to get what you want. Although some business people


on the slopes speculated about moving some of their


operations out of Brexit Britain. We saw there the instant reaction


of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, but how will the party respond


to the challenge posed by Brexit Well, I'm joined now by the Shadow


Home Secretary, Diane Abbott. People know that Ukip and the Tories


are for Brexit. The Lib Dems are four remain. What is Labour for? For


respecting the result of the referendum. It was a 72% turnout,


very high for an election of that nature, and we believe you have to


respect that result. You couldn't have a situation where people like


Tim Farron are saying to people, millions of people, sorry, you got


it wrong, we in London no better. However, how the Tories go forward


from here has to be subject to parliamentary scrutiny. Is it Shadow


Cabinet policy to vote for the triggering of Article 50? Our policy


is not to block Article 50. That is what the leader was saying this


morning. So are you for it? Our policy is not to block it. You are


talking about voting for it. We don't know what the Supreme Court is


going to say, and we don't know what legislation Government will bring


forward, and we don't know what amendment we will move, but we're


clear that we will not vote to block it. OK, so you won't bow to stop it,


but you could abstain? No, what we will do... Either you vote for or


against all you abstain. There are too many unanswered questions. For


instance, the position of EU migrants working and living in this


country. You may not get the answer to that before Article 50 comes


before the Commons, so what would you do then? We are giving to amend


it. We can only tell you exactly how we will amend it when we understand


what sort of legislation the Government is putting forward, and


in the course of moving those amendments, we will ask the


questions that the people of Britain whether they voted to leave remain


want answered. When you come to a collective view,


will there be a three line whip? I can't tell you, because we have not


seen the government 's legislation. But when you see it, you will come


to a collective view. Many regard this as extremely important. Will


there be a three line whip on Labour's collective view? Because it


is important, we shouldn't get ahead of ourselves. When we see what the


Supreme Court says, and crucially, when we see what the government


position is, you will hear what the whipping is. Will shadow ministers


be able to defy any three line whip on this? That is not normally the


case. But they did on an early vote that the government introduced on


Article 50. Those who voted against it are still there. In the Blair


years, you certainly couldn't defy a three line whip. We will see what


happens going forward. I remember when the Tories were hopelessly


divided over the EU. All these Maastricht votes and an list


arguments. Now it is Labour. Just another symptom of Mr Corbyn's poor


leadership. Not at all. Two thirds voted to leave, a third to remain.


We are seeking to bring the country and the party together. We will do


that by pointing out how disastrous a Tory Brexit would be. Meanwhile,


around 80 Labour MPs will defy a three line whip. It's too early to


say that. Will you publish what you believe the negotiating goal should


be? We are clear on it. We think that the economy, jobs and living


standards should be the priority. What Theresa May is saying is that


holding her party together is her priority. She is putting party above


country. Does Labour think we should remain members of the single market?


Ideally, in terms of jobs and the economy, of course. Ritt -ish


business thinks that as well. Is Labour policy that we should remain


a member of the single market? Labour leaves that jobs and the


economy comes first, and if they come first, you would want to remain


part of the single market. But to remain a member? Jobs and the


economy comes first, and to do that, ideally, guess. So with that, comes


free movement of people, the jurisdiction of the European, and a


multi-million never shipped thief. Is Labour prepared to pay that?


Money is neither here nor there. Because the Tories will be asked to


pay a lot of money... The EU has made it clear that you cannot


have... I am asking for Labour's position. Our position is rooted in


the reality, and the reality is that you cannot have the benefits of the


member of the European Union, including being a member of the


single market, without responsibility, including free


movement of people. Free movement, is remaining under the jurisdiction


of the European Court of Justice. Is that the Labour position? You've


said that Labour wants to remain a member of the single market. That is


the price tag that comes with it. Does Labour agree with paying that


price tag? We are not pre-empting negotiation. Our goals are protect


jobs and the British economy. Is it Labour's position that we remain a


member of the customs union? Well, if we don't, I don't see how Theresa


May can keep our promises and has unfettered access... You said


Labour's position was clear. It is! It is clear that Theresa May... I am


not asking about Theresa May. Is it Labour's position to remain a member


of the customs union? It is Labour's position to do what is right for


British industry. Depending on how the negotiations go, it may prove


that coming out of the customs union, as Theresa May has indicated


she wants to do, could prove catastrophic, and could actually


destroy some of her promises. You do accept that if we are member of the


customs union, we cannot do our own free trade deals? What free trade


deals are you talking about? The ones that Labour might want to do in


the future. First, we have to protect British jobs and British


industries. If you are talking about free trade deals with Donald Trump,


the danger is that Theresa May will get drawn into a free-trade deal


with America that will open up the NHS to American corporate... The


cards are in Theresa May's hands. If she takes us out of the single


market, if she takes us out of the customs union, we will have to deal


with that. How big a crisis for Jeremy Corbyn will be if Labour


loses both by-elections in February. I don't believe we will lose both.


But if he did? I am not anticipating that. Is Labour lost two seats in a


midterm of a Tory government, would that be business as usual? I'm not


prepared to see us lose those seats, so I will not talk about something


that will not happen. Thank you. You're watching


the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers


in Scotland, who leave us now Coming up here in 20


minutes, The Week Ahead, when we'll be talking


to Business Minister Margot James about the government's


new industrial strategy and that crucial Supreme Court


ruling on Brexit. First, though, the Sunday


Politics where you are. Hello and a warm welcome


to your local part of the show. This weekend, will nightschools soon


be a thing of the past? Some MPs claim adult education


classes could disappear altogether unless government cuts


are rapidly reversed. We'll also have the latest news


on the candidates fighting next month's crucial


by-election in Copeland. But first, can the north-east


and Cumbria flourish outside the EU Labour's Stephen Hughes has spent


30 years representing Northeastern European Parliament


and the Conservative MP You were a conservative who backed


Remain in the referendum and the PM seems to be taking us to one


of the hardest Brexits she could. I think the PM's


speech was very good. A logical approach to negotiations,


we are only about to start negotiations with Europe so she set


out our position, a starting point, over the course of the next year


we'll start to find out You must remember, before successful


negotiations you have She set up a logical decision


and I think we can prosper outside the European Common market


because we'll be able to do deals with other countries,


while at the same time I'm sure at the end of the day,


we will strike a bespoke EU deal. You spent 30 years working


in the European Parliament, to bring Britain and Europe closer


together, what do you I think one of the French


liberal MPs said well, you don't start a negotiation


with a threat. I think it was a mistake to use that


threat, the EU would be self mutilating if it took


a tougher approach. I don't think people like


the negotiator in the Parliament or Jean-Claude Juncker are trying


to play hardball. They are saying it's going to be


difficult because it is. But I think she's set out


a number of ideas that The objectives give us


an idea of the direction she would like to travel,


we have got to see John is right, takes two


to tango and we need to see Ukip were delighted by the tone


of Theresa May's speech. But the party remains concerned not


every Conservative MP It was a very good speech, in fact


it could have been a Ukip speech. The only thing is she didn't mention


was regaining our fishing ground, that was a bit of a disappointment


but she was very clear we'll be leaving the single


market and I welcome that. I'm still a bit worried


about the pace of the And I still worry that ultimately


Theresa May was a Remainer and she still has some of those MPs


in her Cabinet, that worries me. I hope they're fully on board


but we'll have to wait and see and that is the reason Ukip


needs to continue. John, not sure if you're flattered,


but that's the danger, you are aping their views by putting


immigration as the top priority, controlling it, ahead


of the welfare of the economy. No, I think any government


has to do this, looks at the laws about immigration,


future deals with other countries, government will do a number


of things at the same time but the consequence of taking back


control of boundaries means we are not part of the common


market, of the European market. But a lot of businesses wanted


to make sure they were in there We have the ability


to come to an agreement with the European Union about access


to their markets in exactly the same way they will have to come


to an arrangement with us I think at the end of the day you


end up with a bespoke EU UK deal. Are all constituents


as relaxed as you? They recognise it's not going to be


straightforward but I also think they accept the decision


of the British people and what we now need to do is make


sure we get the best possible deal, not just for the UK


but also in Europe. When we negotiate looking


towards mutual benefit I think If the Prime Minister is to address


the concerns of voters about immigration she clearly has no


choice but to leave If she wants to control immigration


she has to leave the single market. Free movement is a fundamental


part of access. We'll have a real problem


in attracting the sort 69% of firms are worried they can't


get recruits with skills they need, If we put these restrictions


in the way for people looking for jobs we have real bottlenecks


in the labour market, The predictions of economic doom


and gloom haven't come to pass, we had them


during the referendum, Does her speech change


the direction of that? We will end up with a bespoke deal,


but for the Parliament, the Maltese Foreign Minister,


on our side, says a country leaving the European Union can't be


seen to be better off It's at that point, that will become


extremely difficult, John, the Prime Minister


promised certainty, one But actually, this doesn't offer


that, we don't know what the deal will be at the end of the day,


we don't know if we get tariff free access companies like Pirelli


and companies like Nissan, the Chief Executive


talking about looking A deal already been done


might unravel if you At this stage we don't know


what the final deal will become What we have to do is make sure


we get the best possible deal for Britain and Europe,


at the same time,... You've got to reach an agreement


with 27 different countries. Someone like Nissan,


the Prime Minister spent time with them already saying,


we are going to have to look at this, the decisions we might have


made might have to be reversed. There is an acceptance any


negotiation will be tough but nevertheless at the end


of the day there will be an agreement between the EU and UK


that also gives us the opportunity to start negotiating with other


countries on our own terms, not with the EU as part


of the group. For example, we'll be able to do


deals with Australia, New Zealand, America,


Canada, there are opportunities for us and at the same time reaching


agreement with the EU. We promised that we get


the voice of the North heard Cumbria won't have a seat


at the discussions about We have representatives like myself


who will feed in views to the government ministers and that


happens throughout the country. The Tees Valley mayor will get a say


in negotiations apparently because there is a Mayor


but you can't involve the rest of the region,


doesn't have a figurehead. It's a shame the rest


of the region not decided not We get to see who will be elected


in the Tees corridor, Do you think the north interests


will be represented? The MEPs, the MPs will do


an excellent job in presenting But those areas with a mayor,


speaking on behalf of the local authority in their area will add


a little bit of oomph to it. More than 60 MPs have signed


a Commons motion condemning They warn traditional evening


classes in subjects like pottery and foreign languages may disappear


altogether because of The government says its putting


the emphasis where it's needed most They are back to class even though


they left school years ago. Adult education has seen funding


and participation fall but these two Now she's learning to weld, to help


her become a sculptor of metalwork. Alan was made redundant


from life as a steelworker. He hopes this access course will


lead to university and the chance to study social work. Both say the


experience as life changing. It opens up a new world, a new world of


opportunity and if you are made redundant, it's not the end of the


world. The standards are very high. So that sense of satisfaction of


achieving, getting your past and your exam pieces and practical


pieces is fantastic. Here at Hartlepool College all ages take


part in academic and technical learning but government austerity


has had an impact. The man in charge says funding is down with adult


enrolment tumbling 40%. Fewer students, fewer courses. About ten


years ago we were quite by bin, four nights a week, we've cut that down


to three, we want to make sure we have access to the adults of


Hartlepool but it's getting more difficult to do that the funding.


Unlike this needlework, the debate around adult learning has many


threads. Regulars at this Gateshead craft class say it's benefits or


social as well as educational. It's great. When you are retired you need


to keep your brain working and the creative side going, mixing with


people, it covers all of those. It's the social side, meeting people,


learning to crochet, learning to knit. Sessions like these are under


pressure. We have to turn down requests for classes like this all


the time. We have to be very selective because we got limited


funding and I think it would be brilliant if there was more funding


available so more people could participate and get back to society.


In a letter to ministers 60 MPs have called for a new adult education


strategy. They warn cuts to provision risk worsening a shortage


of skills. That is damaging the economy. And they say possibility of


makes the situation more pressing. makes the situation more pressing.


People need to be able to get the skills to get good, high skilled,


high wage jobs which employers need to be able to recruit those people.


Adult lifelong education is key if we are going to have a competitive


economy post Brexit. Supporters of the government accept money has been


tied up point to extra investment on the horizon. We've also got more


general adult learner loans, the budget for which is increasing from


200 million to 480 million, we've got the apprenticeships levy


delivering around 3 billion a year at the end of the Parliament from


large employers to help pay for the apprenticeship system. There is a


better financial envelope which should support adult education.


Never too late to learn but in a fast changing world, the challenges


to equip generations to change with it.


Two different kinds of adult education, let's deal with both, one


in particular, Stephen Hughes, people in Gateshead in the crochet


class felt they were getting a lot out of it. Surely it's better when


money is tight for them to fond of themselves or look for outside


sponsorship? I think the general government of individuals is


important. I think skills related to training is important because the


points made in that piece are right. Classes which you could look out for


leisure and pleasure? No. Any school that people pick up in life and


develop them as individuals and improve participation in society,


it's a shame if any class of any sort is cut. Education


across-the-board is worth investing in, the worry is it's not being


invested in. 40% reduction in adult education since 2010, three


worrying. The colleges think it could be gone altogether by 2020.


Let's deal with classes, some would say is leisure, it's a sad thing if


we don't place leisure on the course in Gateshead. If mental health


benefits from it, they and society benefit and it might keep them out


of the NHS? Education and training will always change, the amount of


money the government has to spend depends on economic circumstances.


This government has concentrated on apprenticeships, that was one of the


great successes, now an ambition to have 3 million apprenticeships. All


that kind of stuff goes... For instance, it's important we train up


the next generation. If you give me the next generation. If you give me


a chance to complete... It means every part of the workforce. What


I'm saying is the apprenticeships has been a success, continues to be


in this and we are funding that. Looking ahead, we've got the


apprenticeship levy coming in, that will raise nearly 3 billion by the


end of this Parliament. There will end of this Parliament. There will


be an opportunity for funding not just apprenticeships for youngsters


but adult apprenticeships. I think that's a sensible investment into


the economy, the workforce of the future and now we have to continue


to train, clearly skills will be vital for the future success of the


economy. Rather than rely on the taxpayer isn't it appropriate to get


us in this through the apprenticeship levy to fund


retraining of able or people to take loans so they have investment in


their own future? I think businesses should be investing more, we've a


real problem in this country that businesses don't invest in training


their own people, they'd rather puts their own people, they'd rather puts


them from other organisations but nevertheless, we need to go back to


time we subsidised adult education. When my dad left the mind he went to


an adult training centre which trained him to become an


electrician, he got an electronic qualification and got a totally


different career. There not the money. Of course there is, it's a


question of priorities. In Darlington, 25% of people don't have


formal qualifications. They are the long-term unemployed of the future


unless we begin to reinvest in adult education. Post Brexit we are going


firing on all cylinders if we are firing on all cylinders if we are


going to reduce the allowance on migrant workers and the signs are


not that good on this, if this continues, further education


colleges can provide retraining. I disagree, in the last parliament we


had 2 million new apprentices, this Parliament we should have 3 million,


we have the levy coming in, there will be funding. Employers are


crying over people with skills, they are not getting them. That's an


indication we have to up skill the workforce as best we can but what I


say, the government recognises we need to up the number of


apprenticeships, hence the increase that they want this Parliament and


that is a way to try and improve the skills that we need for a successful


economy. Labour and Ukip have selected the candidates for


couple and by-election, it will be couple and by-election, it will be


moved tomorrow in Parliament and the date of the contest that Labour


defends his slim majority is the 23rd of February. It will be a short


and intense campaign. He was 60 seconds.


Labour and Ukip have chosen their candidates for the couple and


by-election. Gillian Trout and a Labour councillor, the owner Mills


is the Cumbria chairman of Ukip. Rebecca Hanson the Lib Dem


candidate, the Conservatives and Greens will announce soon. Money


from the EU solidarity fund will come to the region, it's been


announced. Government is using most of it to repay the EU for funding it


says was misspent by the last Labour government. Councils in the


Northeast need more cash for social care according to Labour. The


government insists it is taking action but Bishop Auckland MP Helen


Goodman told the Commons extra money councils can raise to council tax


isn't enough. Has already had to make ?55 million of cuts. The


precept will bring in 4 million, there is another 40 million of cuts


in the pipeline. And finally plans in the pipeline. And finally plans


by Northumberland Council to install 16,000 solar panels in woodland near


Ashington have been shelved cos of subsidy worries.


We talked candidates fighting the by-election in a special edition


from West Cumbria next month. One of the issues in the by-election will


be jobs and the government believes it has a good story to tell.


Unemployment in the north-east and Cumbria cut by almost a half in the


last four years. Weber says many of the jobs are part-time or zero hours


contracts. Bob Cooper reports. The north-east stubbornly remains the


rate in the country but it's been rate in the country but it's been


falling in recent years. Today it stands at 620%, just over half of


what it was in 2011. -- 6.8. Good morning. How can I help. But --


Janus was out of work after a spell caring for her mother but works in a


travel centre. I feel valued. Never been out of work. Being out of work,


you lose a little bit of confidence. And feel that you are not


appreciated. As much. But now I'm in employment, I feel a different


person. The firm says it is employing more people now than at


any point in its history. When I any point in its history. When I


joined we had around 80 employees and we now have 140. We had 12 of


getting bigger and bigger. Back in getting bigger and bigger. Back in


the north-east the governments been keen to trumpet its record.


Unemployment in the north-east has come down quite a lot over the years


and that's a welcome thing, the and that's a welcome thing, the


investment that come into the region is something we all welcome. The


As is renewable energy and other As is renewable energy and other


sectors. Very encouraged by all of those things. Critics aren't


impressed, saying underemployment is still a big problem. We are a


blackspot for example in terms of zero or contracts, in terms of


underemployment, people want to work more hours but can't. If you scratch


the surface you see we have lots and lots of people working now in


poverty. The labour market now is certainly different from what it


was. Whether that's for good or ill, remains for debate.


Stephen Hughes, labour constantly making claims the jobs of zero or as


contracts, Andre plummet, part-time, few concrete stats to back it up,


since 2012, unemployment started since 2012, unemployment started


dropping, the number of part-time against full-time jobs has stayed


the same. Zero hours contracts, that's increased radically over the


region in that time period. Ian is right. We have a lot of low quality,


zero our contracts, and increase... How many? The last count, you can


find on Google, late 2015, 30,000 in the region, it's more than that. The


Office of National Statistics reckons over the same period the


zero hours contracts tripled, but there is a lot of underemployment.


Talk to the people that you know, you mix with, that is certainly the


case in Darlington, in the south of County Durham. Let's put this to


John Stephenson. Those figures are stark about zero our contracts


trebling... Not the sign of a great job market? Employment is higher now


than it's ever been, employment since 2007, the lost. Here the


economy is working. Cumbria is a good example in many respects,


virtually full implement in Carlisle. You also talk to people


who don't feel satisfied with the amount of money they're getting,


don't feel satisfied about the kind of job... There are jobs available,


if you come to my skills there, the employers are calling out for people


to come to the skills because they are looking for people to employ.


Quite clearly, there is a demand therefore people. It's the worker


spotted there are not paid enough? Or if the job isn't good enough? The


economy and creating jobs is doing well in Cumbria and I think that's a


success. What we want to do is killing up people so they can get


better paid jobs and improve their standards of living, we've got to


recognise unemployment is very low and employment is very high. That's


a success. You are looking churlish, that's the danger. Unemployment is


twice as high in the north-east as the Saudis but I'll go back to


something I said. About Skilling. -- skilling up people. I mentioned


earlier, in Darlington almost a quarter of the working population


have no formal qualifications, by 2020 for its estimated 2% of the


workforce will have no formal qualifications. There is a time bomb


ticking. Unless we reinvest in skills, those are going to become


the long-term unemployed. The unemployed and statistics of the


future. Could I say we accept that we must scale up the youth and


people for the future but look at Cumbria, we have a new problem, we


will actually have a shortage of workers. We need to encourage people


to come across to Cumbria to seek jobs that are going to be there.


Ideally from Europe? If you are saying an opponent is so high, the


north-east may gravitate to Cumbria... The jobs will be there.


There are problems that Stephen Hughes talks about. Statistics can


mask them. Sunderland is a big city in the north-east, one in four of


the young people are unemployed. That's not acceptable. I agree, we


want to do things to improve the economy there but we have to seize


the opportunities, jobs are being created and I go back to, great.


There is going to be a substantial number of new jobs created, we've


got to encourage people to come across and take them. Many of them


will be well paid. Will they be the people with the skills you are


looking for? That's something we've got to try and make sure that we


have this killed opportunities but at the same token I'm sure there are


people in the north-east who are skilled, would like a job, why don't


they come to Cumbria? Stephen and John, thank you. That's about it for


this week, back same time, same place next Sunday. But you can join


me. For now, back have to do this. Thank you to you


both. What exactly is the government's


industrial strategy? Will ministers lose their supreme


court battle over Brexit, and, Well, tomorrow Theresa May


is launching the government's industrial strategy -


and to talk about that we're joined by the Business Minister,


Margot James - welcome to the show. When you look at what has already


been released in advance of the Prime Minister's statement, it was


embargoed for last night, it's not really an industrial strategy, it's


just another skills strategy, of which we have had about six since


the war, and our skills training is among the worst in Western Europe?


There will be plenty more to be announced tomorrow in what is really


a discussion document in the preparation of an industrial


strategy which we intend to launch properly later in the year. Let's


look at skills. You are allocating 117 of funding to establish


institutes of technology. How many? The exact number is to be agreed,


but the spend is there, and it will be on top of what we are doing to


the university, technical colleges... How many were lit bio


create? We don't know exactly, but we want to put them in areas where


young people are performing under the national average. But if you


don't know how many, what is the basis of 170 million? That is the


amount the Treasury have released. The something that is very


important, we are agreed we need to devote more resources to vocational


training and get it on a par with academic qualifications. I looked on


the website of my old university, the University of Glasgow, the


Russell group universities. Its spending budget every year is over


600 million. That's one University. And yet you have a mere 170 million


foreign unspecified number of institutes of technology. It hasn't


got equality with the academics? You have to remember that just as you


have quoted figures from Glasgow University there are further


education colleges all over the country. The government is already


spending on 16 to 19-year-olds. But also, we are going to be adding...


This is new money that is all to the good, because we are already


spending a lot. We have already created 2 million more apprentices


since 2010. That many are not in what we would call the stem skills,


and a lot come nowhere near what the Dutch, Germans and Austrians would


have. I'm not clear how another 170 million would do. You said it is


more than skills. In what way is this industrial strategy different


from what Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne did before? It's different because


it is involving every single government department, and bringing


together everything that government does in a bid to make Britain more


competitive as it disengages from the European Union. That is what the


last Labour government did. They will much more targeted


interventions. Under the Labour government, the auto industry got


some benefit. A few more sectors were broached under the coalition


government. This is all about communities all over the country,


some of whom have fallen behind in terms of wage growth and good jobs.


The Prime Minister has already announced 2 billion as a research


and development priority in specific technologies, robotics, artificial


intelligence, medical technology, satellites... So you are doing what


has been done before. There is nothing new about this. Wait until


tomorrow, because there will be some new strands emerging. It is the


beginning of the dialogue with industry and with workers, and the


responses will be invited up until April. That will inform a wider


strategy that goes beyond skills. I have moved on to beyond them. I'm


slightly puzzled as to how the government knows where to invest in


robotics, when it can't even provide the NHS with a decent IT system.


Discuss. I have to say I find it bizarre that the government is


making an announcement about an amount of money and don't know where


it's going. This is typical of all governments over all political


shoes, which is total disregard for technical education, so different


from Germany, who actually invest in the technological side. Germany has


a long history. We want to emulate some of the best of what German


companies do. Siemens sponsor primary schools, for example. We


want to get a dialogue on with business. We don't want to decide


where this money is going. By the way, it was 4.7 billion that the


government has agreed to invest in science and research, which is the


most significant increase in decades. Can you remind us what


happened in Northern Ireland, when the government invested money in


state-of-the-art technology for energy? No one needs to be reminded


of that, and that is not what we are doing. We are inviting business and


industry to advise where that money is best spent. That's very different


from government deciding that a particular technology is for the


future. The government's chief scientific adviser has determined


that we will invest a huge amount in battery technology, which should


benefit the electric car industry, and... This is taxpayers' money. Who


gets it? Ultimately, business will get it, but often only when there is


a considerable amount of private sector finance also drawn in. But


who is held to account? Various government departments at local


authorities will hold this list to account. A lot of it is about


releasing private capital as well. Thank you very much. This week, the


Supreme Court, I think we know the ruling is coming on Tuesday. And the


expectation is that the judges will say Parliament will have to vote to


trigger. Is this all much ado about nothing? Parliament will vote to


trigger, and the government will win in the Lords and the Commons by


substantial majorities, and it will be triggered? Completely. We've


known that. Parliament is voted. Everyone is pretty confident that


the Supreme Court will uphold the High Court's decision and say it has


to go to MPs. There will be a bit of toing and froing among MPs on


amendments. You heard Diane Abbott's slightly car crash interview there.


The Lib Dems may throw something in, but we will trigger Article 50 by


the end of March. If it also says that the roll of Edinburgh, Cardiff


and Belfast should be picked up, that could complicate matters.


Absolutely. That could delay the planned triggering of Article 50


before the end of March. Not what they say about the Westminster


Parliament, because it is clear that it was. I never understood the


furore about that original judgment, because every MP made it clear they


wouldn't block it. Even though Diane Abbott was evasive on several


fronts, she said they wouldn't block it. You are right, if they give a


vote, or give some authorisation for the Scottish Parliament and other


devolved assemblies, that might delay the whole sequence. That is


the only significant thing to watch out for. Watch out on Tuesday. Mrs


May goes to Washington. It will be another movie in the making! I would


suggest that she has a tricky line to follow. She has got to be seen to


be taking advantage of the fact that there is a very pro-British,


pro-Brexit president in the Oval Office, who I am told is prepared to


expend political capital on this. But on the other hand, to make sure


that she is not what we used to call Mr Blair, George Bush's poodle. It


is very difficult, and who would not want to be a fly on the wall in that


meeting! I can't think of anyone in the world who would despise Mr Trump


more than Mrs May, and for him, he dislikes any woman who does not look


like a supermodel, no disrespected Mrs May. Most of it is actually


anti-EU, and I think we should capitalise it. Let's get the Queen


to earn her money, roll out the red carpet, invite him to dinner, spend


the night, what ever we need... Trump at Balmoral! Here is the


issue, because the agenda is, as we heard from Ted Malloch earlier, that


this is not an administration that has much time for the EU, EU


integration or Germany. I think Germany will be the second biggest


loser to begin with. They will not even give a date for Angela Merkel


to meet the president. This is an opportunity for Mrs May... It is a


huge. It could sideline talks of the punishment beating from Germany. The


Trump presidency has completely changed the field on Brexit. Along


came Donald Trump, and Theresa May has this incredible opportunity


here. Not of her making, but she has played her cards well. To an


officially be the EU emissary to Washington, to get some sort of


broker going. That gives us huge extra leveraged in the Brexit


negotiations. People around the world think Germany as a currency


manipulator, that it is benefiting from an underpriced euro, hence the


huge surplus it runs of America, and they think it is disgraceful that a


country that runs a massive budget surplus spends only 1.2% of its GDP


on defence, and America runs a massive deficit and needs to spend a


lot more. He's going for Germany. And what a massive shift. I think


Obama was quite open, in a farewell interview, that he felt closer to


Merkel than any other European leader. And Jamie kind of reflected


that in our discussion. Yes, that's very interesting discussion. I think


she was the last person he spoke to in the White House, Obama. And now


you are getting the onslaught from Trump. This Thatcher- Reagan imagery


is dangerous, though. Blair was hypnotised by it and was too scared


to criticise Bush, because he wanted to be seen in that light, and we


know where that led. Cameron similarly with Obama, which


presented him with problems, as Obama didn't regard him as his


number one pin up in Europe. I would put a note of caution in there about


the Thatcher - Reagan parallel. Everything Trump is doing now is


different from before, so Mrs May should not have any of these


previous relationships in her mind. That is not entirely true. Donald


Trump aches to be the new Ronald Reagan. He may be impeached first!


He sees her as the new Margaret Thatcher, and that may her leveraged


with him. Thank you. We'll be back here at the same time


next week, and you can catch up on all the latest political news


on the Daily Politics, In the meantime, remember -


if it's Sunday, It's just pain,


but it doesn't feel like pain, it feels much more violent,


dark and exciting. Join Michael Buerk as he explores


the dishes fit for kings and queens. When it comes to extravagance, few


monarchs can compete with George IV. If that was for breakfast, I dread


to think what he had for dinner.


Download Subtitles