22/01/2017 Sunday Politics North East and Cumbria

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.