12/03/2017

:00:34. > :00:38.It's Sunday morning and this is the Sunday Politics.

:00:39. > :00:43.David Davis tells MPs to leave the Brexit bill untouched,

:00:44. > :00:46.ahead of a week which could see Britain begin the process

:00:47. > :00:50.We'll talk to a Tory rebel and Ukip's Nigel Farage.

:00:51. > :00:53.Phillip Hammond's first budget hit the rocks thanks to a tax rise

:00:54. > :01:01.But how should we tax those who work for themselves?

:01:02. > :01:03.And remember Donald Trump's claim that Barack Obama had ordered

:01:04. > :01:11.We'll talk to the former Tory MP who set the whole story rolling.

:01:12. > :01:14.Here: A North East Tory MP urges the Chancellor to abandon changes

:01:15. > :01:19.And a council warns parks may have to close -

:01:20. > :01:29.unless they're handed over to a charity to run.

:01:30. > :01:32.And joining me for all of that, three self-employed journalists

:01:33. > :01:35.who definitely don't deserve a tax break.

:01:36. > :01:36.It's Steve Richards, Julia Hartley-Brewer

:01:37. > :01:41.They'll be tweeting throughout the programme with all the carefree

:01:42. > :01:48.abandon of Katie Hopkins before a libel trial.

:01:49. > :01:51.BBC lawyers have suddenly got nervous!

:01:52. > :01:54.So first today, the government is gearing up to trigger Article 50,

:01:55. > :01:56.perhaps in the next 48 hours, and start negotiating Britain's

:01:57. > :02:00.Much has been written about the prospect of the Commons

:02:01. > :02:02.getting a "meaningful vote" on the deal Britain negotiates.

:02:03. > :02:04.Brexit Secretary David Davis was on the Andrew Marr programme

:02:05. > :02:07.earlier this morning and he was asked what happens

:02:08. > :02:17.Well, that is what is called the most favoured nation status deal

:02:18. > :02:22.There we go out, as it were, on WTO rules.

:02:23. > :02:25.That is why of course we do the contingency planning, to make

:02:26. > :02:32.The British people decided on June the 23rd last year

:02:33. > :02:37.My job, and the job of the government, is to make

:02:38. > :02:48.the terms on which that happens as beneficial as possible.

:02:49. > :02:55.There we have it, clearly, either Parliament votes for the deal when

:02:56. > :02:58.it is done or it out on World Trade Organisation rules. That's what the

:02:59. > :03:01.government means by a meaningful vote.

:03:02. > :03:07.I think we get over obsessed about whether there will be a legal right

:03:08. > :03:11.for Parliament to have a vote. If there is no deal or a bad deal, I

:03:12. > :03:14.think it would be politically impossible for the government to

:03:15. > :03:17.reject Parliament's desire for a vote because the atmosphere of

:03:18. > :03:20.politics will be completely different by then. I take David

:03:21. > :03:25.Davies seriously. Within Whitehall he has acquired a reputation as

:03:26. > :03:29.being the most conscientious and details sadly... And well briefed.

:03:30. > :03:33.Absolutely and well travelled in terms of European capitals of the

:03:34. > :03:36.three Brexit ministers. It is quite telling he said what he did and it

:03:37. > :03:41.is quite telling that within cabinet, two weeks ago he was

:03:42. > :03:44.floating the idea of no deal at all. Being if not the central estimate

:03:45. > :03:48.than a completely plausible eventuality. It is interesting. I

:03:49. > :03:54.would suggest the prospect of no deal is moving up the agenda. It is

:03:55. > :03:59.still less likely than more likely to happen. But it's no longer a kind

:04:00. > :04:02.of long tail way out there in the distance. Planning for no deal is

:04:03. > :04:05.the same as having contents insurance or travel insurance, plan

:04:06. > :04:09.for the worse case scenarios are prepared it happens. Even the worst

:04:10. > :04:13.case scenario, it's not that bad. Think of the Jeep 20, apart from the

:04:14. > :04:18.EU, four members of the G20 economies are successful members of

:04:19. > :04:21.the EU. The rest aren't and don't have trade deals but somehow these

:04:22. > :04:26.countries are prospering. They are growing at a higher rate. You are

:04:27. > :04:30.not frightened? Not remotely. We are obsessed with what we get from the

:04:31. > :04:33.EU and the key thing we get from leaving the EU is not the deal but

:04:34. > :04:37.the other deals we can finally make with other trading partners. They

:04:38. > :04:41.have higher growth than virtually every other EU country apart from

:04:42. > :04:45.Germany. It is sensible as a negotiating position for the

:04:46. > :04:48.government to say if there is no deal, we will accept there is no

:04:49. > :04:53.deal. We're not frightened of no deal. It was clear from what David

:04:54. > :04:56.Davies was saying that there will be a vote in parliament at the end of

:04:57. > :05:01.the process but there won't be a third option to send the government

:05:02. > :05:06.back to try to get a better deal. It is either the deal or we leave

:05:07. > :05:10.without a deal. In reality, that third option will be there. We don't

:05:11. > :05:14.know yet whether there will be a majority for the deal if they get

:05:15. > :05:20.one. What we do know now is that there isn't a majority in the

:05:21. > :05:25.Commons for no deal. Labour MPs are absolutely clear that no deal is

:05:26. > :05:28.worth then a bad deal. I've heard enough Tory MPs say the same thing.

:05:29. > :05:37.But they wouldn't get no deal through. When it comes to this vote,

:05:38. > :05:40.if whatever deal is rejected, there will then be, one way or another,

:05:41. > :05:44.the third option raised of go back again. But who gets to decide what

:05:45. > :05:48.is a bad deal? The British people will have a different idea than the

:05:49. > :05:56.two thirds of the Remain supporting MPs in the Commons. In terms of the

:05:57. > :06:00.vote, the Commons. Surely, if the Commons, which is what matters here,

:06:01. > :06:05.if the Commons were to vote against the deal as negotiated by the

:06:06. > :06:09.government, surely that would trigger a general election? If the

:06:10. > :06:12.government had recommended the deal, surely the government would then, if

:06:13. > :06:18.it still felt strongly about the deal, if the other 27 had said,

:06:19. > :06:22.we're not negotiating, extending it, it would in effect become a second

:06:23. > :06:26.referendum on the deal. In effect it would be a no-confidence vote in the

:06:27. > :06:29.government. You've got to assume that unless something massively

:06:30. > :06:33.changes in the opposition before then, the government would feel

:06:34. > :06:37.fairly confident about a general election on those terms. Unless the

:06:38. > :06:41.deal is hideously bad and obviously basso every vote in the country...

:06:42. > :06:45.The prior minister said if it is that bad she would have rather no

:06:46. > :06:50.deal. So that eventuality arrives. -- the Prime Minister has said. Not

:06:51. > :06:56.a second referendum general election in two years' time. Don't put any

:06:57. > :06:58.holidays for! LAUGHTER -- don't look any.

:06:59. > :07:01.So the Brexit bill looks likely to clear Parliament this week.

:07:02. > :07:04.That depends on the number of Conservative MPs who are prepared

:07:05. > :07:07.to vote against their government on two key issues.

:07:08. > :07:10.Theresa May could be in negotiations with our European

:07:11. > :07:12.partners within days, but there may be some

:07:13. > :07:15.wheeler-dealings she has to do with her own MPs, too.

:07:16. > :07:19.Cast your mind back to the beginning of month.

:07:20. > :07:21.The bill to trigger Article 50 passed comfortably

:07:22. > :07:29.But three Conservatives voted for Labour's amendments to ensure

:07:30. > :07:34.the rights of EU citizens already in the UK.

:07:35. > :07:36.Seven Tory MPs voted to force the government to give Parliament

:07:37. > :07:41.a say on the deal struck with the EU before it's finalised.

:07:42. > :07:46.But remember those numbers, they're important.

:07:47. > :07:49.On the issue of a meaningful vote on a deal, I'm told there might have

:07:50. > :07:52.been more rebels had it not been for this assurance from

:07:53. > :07:57.I can confirm that the government will bring forward a motion

:07:58. > :07:59.on the final agreement to be approved by both Houses

:08:00. > :08:04.And we expect, and intend, that this will happen before

:08:05. > :08:11.the European Parliament debates and votes on the final agreement.

:08:12. > :08:16.When the government was criticised for reeling back

:08:17. > :08:20.from when and what it would offer a vote on.

:08:21. > :08:23.The bill then moved into the Lords, where peers passed it

:08:24. > :08:31.And the second, that Parliament be given a meaningful vote on the terms

:08:32. > :08:34.of the deal or indeed a vote in the event of there

:08:35. > :08:37.The so-called Brexit bill will return to Commons

:08:38. > :08:42.Ministers insist that both amendments would weaken

:08:43. > :08:44.the government's negotiating hand and are seeking to overturn them.

:08:45. > :08:50.But, as ever, politics is a numbers game.

:08:51. > :08:52.Theresa May has a working majority of 17.

:08:53. > :08:56.On Brexit, though, it's probably higher.

:08:57. > :08:58.At least six Labour MPs generally vote with

:08:59. > :09:02.Plus, eight DUP MPs, two from the Ulster Unionist party

:09:03. > :09:09.If all Conservatives vote with the government as well,

:09:10. > :09:14.Therefore, 26 Conservative rebels are needed for the government to be

:09:15. > :09:21.So, are there rough waters ahead for Theresa May?

:09:22. > :09:24.What numbers are we looking at, in terms of a potential rebellion?

:09:25. > :09:27.I think we're looking at a large number of people who are interested

:09:28. > :09:30.This building is a really important building.

:09:31. > :09:32.It's symbolic of a huge amount of history.

:09:33. > :09:36.And for it not to be involved in this momentous time would,

:09:37. > :09:43.But he says a clear verbal statement from the government on a meaningful

:09:44. > :09:49.vote on any deal would be enough to get most Tory MPs onside.

:09:50. > :09:51.It was already said about David Jones.

:09:52. > :09:52.It's slightly unravelled a little bit during

:09:53. > :09:57.I think this is an opportunity to really get that clarity

:09:58. > :10:00.through so that we can all vote for Article 50 and get

:10:01. > :10:05.We've have spoken to several Tory MPs who say they are minded to vote

:10:06. > :10:08.One said the situation was sad and depressing.

:10:09. > :10:12.The other said that the whips must be worried because they don't

:10:13. > :10:18.A minister told me Downing Street was looking again at the possibility

:10:19. > :10:22.of offering a vote in the event of no deal being reached.

:10:23. > :10:25.But that its position was unlikely to change.

:10:26. > :10:27.And, anyway, government sources have told the Sunday Politics they're not

:10:28. > :10:34.That those Tory MPs who didn't back either amendment the first time

:10:35. > :10:37.round would look silly if they did, this time.

:10:38. > :10:41.It would have to be a pretty hefty lot of people changing their minds

:10:42. > :10:44.about things that have already been discussed in quite a lot of detail,

:10:45. > :10:48.last time it was in the Commons, for things to be reversed this time.

:10:49. > :10:51.There's no doubt that a number of Tory MPs are very concerned.

:10:52. > :10:53.Labour are pessimistic about the chances of enough Tory

:10:54. > :10:57.rebels backing either of the amendments in the Commons.

:10:58. > :11:00.The important thing, I think, is to focus on the fact

:11:01. > :11:02.that this is the last chance to have a say on this.

:11:03. > :11:06.If they're going to vote with us, Monday is the time to do it.

:11:07. > :11:08.Assuming the bill does pass the Commons unamended,

:11:09. > :11:11.it will go back to the Lord's on Monday night where Labour peers

:11:12. > :11:15.have already indicated they won't block it again.

:11:16. > :11:18.It means that the Brexit bill would become law and Theresa May

:11:19. > :11:22.would be free to trigger Article 50 within days.

:11:23. > :11:24.Her own deadline was the end of this month.

:11:25. > :11:30.But one minister told me there were advantages to doing it early.

:11:31. > :11:33.We're joined now from Nottingham by the Conservative MP Anna Soubry.

:11:34. > :11:36.She's previously voted against the government on the question

:11:37. > :11:43.of whether Parliament should have a final say over the EU deal.

:11:44. > :11:48.Anna Soubry, I think it was clear this morning from David Davies that

:11:49. > :11:52.what he means by meaningful vote is not what you mean by a meaningful

:11:53. > :11:57.vote. He thinks the choice for Parliament would be to either vote

:11:58. > :12:00.for the deal and if Parliament doesn't, we leave on World Trade

:12:01. > :12:07.Organisation rules, on a bare-bones structure. In the end, will he

:12:08. > :12:11.accept that in the Commons tomorrow? No, because my problem and I don't

:12:12. > :12:15.think it is a problem, but my problem, the government's problem is

:12:16. > :12:19.that what I want is then to answer this question. What happens in the

:12:20. > :12:23.event of their not being any deal? David Davies made it very clear that

:12:24. > :12:27.in the event of there being no deal, Parliament would have no say. It

:12:28. > :12:31.means through your elected representatives, the people of this

:12:32. > :12:36.country would have no say on what happens if the government doesn't

:12:37. > :12:39.get a deal. I think the request that Parliament should have a say on

:12:40. > :12:43.Parliamentary sovereignty, is perfectly reasonable. That is what I

:12:44. > :12:50.want David to say. If he says that, I won't be rebelling. If he does...

:12:51. > :12:55.They have refused to say that. Sorry. If he continues to say what

:12:56. > :13:00.he said the BBC this morning, which means that the vote will be either

:13:01. > :13:07.to accept the as negotiated or to leave on WTO rules, will you rebel

:13:08. > :13:11.on that question but no, no, sorry, if there's a deal, Parliament will

:13:12. > :13:15.have a say. So that's fine. And we will see what the deal is and we

:13:16. > :13:19.will look at the options two years down the road. When who knows

:13:20. > :13:23.what'll happen in our economy and world economy. That is one matter

:13:24. > :13:26.which I am content on. The Prime Minister, a woman of her word has

:13:27. > :13:32.said that in the event of a deal, Parliament will vote on any deal. I

:13:33. > :13:36.don't difficulty. To clarify, I will come onto that. These are important

:13:37. > :13:40.matters. I want to clarify, not argue with you. You are content that

:13:41. > :13:43.if there is a deal, we will come under no deal in a second, but if

:13:44. > :13:50.there is a deal, you are content with the choice of being able to

:13:51. > :13:53.vote for that deal or leaving on WTO terms? No, you're speculating as to

:13:54. > :13:59.what might happen in two years' time. What the options might be.

:14:00. > :14:02.Personally I find it inconceivable that the government will come back

:14:03. > :14:05.with a rubbish deal. They will either come back with a good deal,

:14:06. > :14:09.which I won't have a problem with or they will come back with no deal. To

:14:10. > :14:14.speculate about coming back with a deal, there is a variety of options.

:14:15. > :14:18.I understand that that is what the Lord amendments are about. They are

:14:19. > :14:25.about a vote at the end of the process. Do forgive me, the Lords

:14:26. > :14:27.amendment is not the same that I've voted for in Parliament. What we

:14:28. > :14:31.call the Chris Leslie amendment, which was talking about whatever the

:14:32. > :14:33.agreement is, whatever happens at the end of the negotiations,

:14:34. > :14:37.Parliament will have a vote. Parliament will have a say. The

:14:38. > :14:42.Lords amendment is a bit more technical. It is the principle of no

:14:43. > :14:47.deal that is agitating us. Let's clarify on this. They are

:14:48. > :14:50.complicated matters. What do you want the government to say? What do

:14:51. > :14:55.you want David Davis to say tomorrow on what should the Parliamentary

:14:56. > :14:59.process should be if there is no deal? Quite. I want a commitment

:15:00. > :15:03.from him that in the event of no deal, it will come into Parliament

:15:04. > :15:11.and Parliament will determine what happens next. It could be that in

:15:12. > :15:14.the event of no deal, the best thing is for us to jump off the cliff into

:15:15. > :15:18.WTO tariff is. I find it unlikely but that might be the reality. There

:15:19. > :15:22.might be other alternatives. Most importantly, including saying to the

:15:23. > :15:24.government, go back, carry on. The question that everybody has to ask

:15:25. > :15:36.is, why won't the government give My fear is what this is about is

:15:37. > :15:40.asked deliberately, not the Prime Minister, but others deliberately

:15:41. > :15:46.ensuring we have no deal and no deal pretty soon and in that event, we

:15:47. > :15:50.jumped off the cliff onto WTO tariffs and nobody in this country

:15:51. > :15:56.and the people of this country do not have a say. My constituents did

:15:57. > :16:00.not vote for hard Brexit. You do not want the government to

:16:01. > :16:07.have the ability if there is no deal to automatically fall back on the

:16:08. > :16:11.WTO rules? Quite. It is as simple as that. We are now speculating about

:16:12. > :16:17.what will happen in two years. I want to find out what happens

:16:18. > :16:22.tomorrow. What will you do if you don't get that assurance? I will

:16:23. > :16:27.either abstain, or I will vote to keep this amendment within the Bill.

:16:28. > :16:31.I will either vote against my government, which I do not do

:16:32. > :16:34.likely, I have never voted against my government until the Chris Leslie

:16:35. > :16:38.clause when the Bill was going through, or I will abstain, which

:16:39. > :16:42.has pretty much the same effect because it comes into the Commons

:16:43. > :16:48.with both amendments so you have positively to vote to take the map.

:16:49. > :16:54.Can you give us an idea of how many like-minded conservative colleagues

:16:55. > :16:59.there are. I genuinely do not know. You must talk to each other. I do

:17:00. > :17:07.not talk to every member of my party. You know people who are

:17:08. > :17:11.like-minded. I do. I am not doing numbers games. I know you want that

:17:12. > :17:16.but I genuinely do not know the figure. I think this is an

:17:17. > :17:22.uncomfortable truth. People have to understand what has happened in our

:17:23. > :17:26.country, two particular newspapers, creating an atmosphere and setting

:17:27. > :17:29.an agenda and I think many people are rather concerned, some

:17:30. > :17:36.frightened, to put their head over the parapet. There are many millions

:17:37. > :17:41.of people who feel totally excluded from this process. Many of them

:17:42. > :17:44.voted to remain. And they have lost their voice. We have covered the

:17:45. > :17:45.ground I wanted to. We're joined now by the Ukip MEP

:17:46. > :17:57.and former leader Nigel Farage. Article 50 triggered, we are leaving

:17:58. > :18:02.the EU, the single market and the customs union. What is left you to

:18:03. > :18:06.complain about? All of that will happen and hopefully we will get the

:18:07. > :18:10.triggered this week which is good news. What worries me a little I'm

:18:11. > :18:14.not sure the government recognises how strong their handers. At the

:18:15. > :18:17.summit in Brussels, the word in the corridors is that we are prepared to

:18:18. > :18:22.give away fishing waters as a bargaining chip and the worry is

:18:23. > :18:27.what deal we get. Are we leaving, yes I am pleased about that. You are

:18:28. > :18:32.under relevant voice in the deal because the deal will be voted on in

:18:33. > :18:36.Parliament and you have one MP. You are missing the point, the real vote

:18:37. > :18:40.in parliament is not in London but Strasbourg. This is perhaps the

:18:41. > :18:44.biggest obstacle the British Government faces. Not what happens

:18:45. > :18:49.in the Commons that the end of the two years, the European Parliament

:18:50. > :18:54.could veto the deal. What that means is people need to adopt a different

:18:55. > :18:57.approach. We do not need to be lobbying in the corridors of

:18:58. > :19:02.Brussels to get a good deal, we need is a country to be out there talking

:19:03. > :19:07.to the German car workers and Belgian chocolate makers, putting as

:19:08. > :19:10.much pressure as we can on politicians from across Europe to

:19:11. > :19:15.come to a sensible arrangement. It is in their interests more than

:19:16. > :19:23.ours. In what way is the vision of Brexit set out by David Davis any

:19:24. > :19:26.different from your own? I am delighted there are people now

:19:27. > :19:34.adopting the position I argued for many years. Good. But now... Like

:19:35. > :19:40.Douglas Carswell, he said he found David Davis' performers this morning

:19:41. > :19:44.reassuring. It is. And just as when Theresa May was Home Secretary every

:19:45. > :19:48.performance she gave was hugely reassuring. She was seen to be a

:19:49. > :19:54.heroine after her conference speeches and then did not deliver. I

:19:55. > :20:00.am concerned that even before we start we are making concessions. You

:20:01. > :20:04.described in the EU's divorce bill demands, 60 billion euros is floated

:20:05. > :20:10.around. You said it is laughable and I understand that. Do you maintain

:20:11. > :20:18.that we will not have to pay a penny to leave? It is nine months since we

:20:19. > :20:24.voted exit and assuming the trigger of Article 50, we would have paid 30

:20:25. > :20:28.billion in since we had a vote. We are still members. But honestly, I

:20:29. > :20:33.do not think there is an appetite for us to pay a massive divorce

:20:34. > :20:40.Bill. There are assets also. Not a penny? There will be some ongoing

:20:41. > :20:46.commitments, but the numbers talked about our 50, ?60 billion, they are

:20:47. > :20:51.frankly laughable. I am trying to find out if you are prepared to

:20:52. > :20:56.accept some kind of exit cost, it may be nowhere near 60 billion. We

:20:57. > :20:59.have to do a net agreement, the government briefed about our share

:21:00. > :21:05.of the European Union investment bank. Would you accept a

:21:06. > :21:11.transitional arrangement, deal, five, ten billion, as part of the

:21:12. > :21:16.divorce settlement? We are painted net ?30 million every single day at

:21:17. > :21:20.the moment, ?10 billion plus every year. That is just our contribution.

:21:21. > :21:27.We are going to make a massive saving on this. What do you make of

:21:28. > :21:32.what Anna Soubry said, that if there is no deal, and it is being talked

:21:33. > :21:36.about more. Maybe the government managing expectations. There is an

:21:37. > :21:41.expectation we will have a deal, but if there is no deal, that the

:21:42. > :21:47.government cannot just go to WTO rules, but it has to have a vote in

:21:48. > :21:49.parliament? By the time we get to that there will be a general

:21:50. > :21:55.election coming down the tracks and I suspect that if at the end of the

:21:56. > :21:59.two-year process there is no deal and by the way, no deal is a lot

:22:00. > :22:04.better for the nation than where we currently are, because we freed of

:22:05. > :22:07.regulations and able to make our own deals in the world. I think what

:22:08. > :22:14.would happen, and if Parliament said it did not back, at the end of the

:22:15. > :22:21.negotiation a general election would happen quickly. According to reports

:22:22. > :22:27.this morning, one of your most senior aides has passed a dossier to

:22:28. > :22:31.police claiming Tories committed electoral fraud in Thanet South, the

:22:32. > :22:36.seat contested in the election. What evidence to you have? I read that in

:22:37. > :22:40.the newspapers as you have. I am not going to comment on it. Will you not

:22:41. > :22:46.aware of the contents of the dossier? I am not aware of the

:22:47. > :22:52.dossier. He was your election strategists. I am dubious as to

:22:53. > :22:58.whether this dossier exists at all. Perhaps the newspapers have got this

:22:59. > :23:05.wrong. Concerns about the downloading of data the took place

:23:06. > :23:12.in that constituency, there are. Allegedly, he has refuted it, was it

:23:13. > :23:18.done by your MP to give information to the Tories, do you have evidence

:23:19. > :23:24.about? We have evidence Mr Carswell downloaded information, we have no

:23:25. > :23:29.evidence what he did with it. It is not just your aide who has been

:23:30. > :23:34.making allegations against the Conservatives in Thanet South and

:23:35. > :23:42.other seats, if the evidence was to be substantial, and if it was to

:23:43. > :23:45.result in another by-election being called an Thanet South had to be

:23:46. > :23:50.fought again, would you be the Ukip candidate? I probably would. You

:23:51. > :23:57.probably would? Yes. Just probably? Just probably. It would be your

:23:58. > :24:00.eighth attempt. Winning seats in parliament under first past the post

:24:01. > :24:03.is not the only way to change politics in Britain and I would like

:24:04. > :24:09.to think I proved that. Let's go back to Anna Soubry. The implication

:24:10. > :24:13.of what we were saying on the panel at the start of the show and what

:24:14. > :24:18.Nigel Farage was saying there would be that if at the end of the process

:24:19. > :24:23.whatever the vote, if the government were to lose it, it would provoke a

:24:24. > :24:27.general election properly. I think that would be right. Let's get real.

:24:28. > :24:31.The government is not going to come to Parliament with anything other

:24:32. > :24:40.than something it believes is a good deal and if it rejected it, would be

:24:41. > :24:43.unlikely, there would be a de facto vote of no confidence and it would

:24:44. > :24:49.be within the fixed term Parliaments act and that be it. The problem is,

:24:50. > :24:54.more likely, because of the story put up about the 50 billion, 60

:24:55. > :24:58.billion and you look at the way things are flagged up that both the

:24:59. > :25:02.Prime Minister and Boris Johnson saying, we should be asking them for

:25:03. > :25:07.money back, I think the big fear and the fear I have is we will be

:25:08. > :25:12.crashing out in six months. You think we could leave as quickly as

:25:13. > :25:18.six months. Explain that. I think they will stoke up the demand from

:25:19. > :25:23.the EU for 50, 60 billion back and my real concern is that within six

:25:24. > :25:27.months, where we're not making much progress, maybe nine months, and

:25:28. > :25:32.people are getting increasingly fed up with the EU because they are told

:25:33. > :25:35.it wants unreasonable demands, and then the crash. I think what is

:25:36. > :25:40.happening is the government is putting in place scaffolding at the

:25:41. > :25:45.bottom of the cliff to break our fall when we come to fall off that

:25:46. > :25:50.cliff and I think many in government are preparing not for a two-year

:25:51. > :25:56.process, but six, to nine months, off the cliff, out we go. That is my

:25:57. > :26:01.fear. That is interesting. I have not heard that express before by

:26:02. > :26:08.someone in your position. I suspect you have made Nigel Farage's date.

:26:09. > :26:13.It is a lovely thought. I would say to Anna Soubry she is out of date

:26:14. > :26:16.with this. 40 years ago there was a good argument for joining the common

:26:17. > :26:21.market because tariffs around the world was so high. That has changed

:26:22. > :26:25.with the World Trade Organisation. We are leaving the EU and rejoining

:26:26. > :26:34.a great big world and it is exciting. She was giving an

:26:35. > :26:36.interesting perspective on what could happen in nine months rather

:26:37. > :26:40.than two years. I thank you both. It was Philip Hammond's first

:26:41. > :26:42.budget on Wednesday - billed as a steady-as-she-goes

:26:43. > :26:48.affair, but turned out to cause uproar after the Chancellor appeared

:26:49. > :26:51.to contradict a Tory manifesto commitment with an increase

:26:52. > :26:53.in national insurance contributions. The aim was to address what some see

:26:54. > :27:02.as an imbalance in the tax system, where employees pay

:27:03. > :27:03.more National Insurance The controversy centres

:27:04. > :27:06.on increasing the so-called class 4 rate for the self-employed who make

:27:07. > :27:10.a profit of more than ?8,060 a year. It will go up in stages

:27:11. > :27:16.from 9% to 11% in 2019. The changes mean that over one

:27:17. > :27:20.and a half million will pay on average ?240 a year

:27:21. > :27:24.more in contributions. Some Conservative MPs were unhappy,

:27:25. > :27:31.with even the Wales Minister saying: "I will apologise to every

:27:32. > :27:33.voter in Wales that read the Conservative manifesto

:27:34. > :27:35.in the 2015 election." The Sun labelled Philip

:27:36. > :27:40.Hammond "spite van man". The Daily Mail called the budget

:27:41. > :27:43."no laughing matter". By Thursday, Theresa May

:27:44. > :27:46.said the government One of the first things I did

:27:47. > :27:52.as Prime Minister was to commission Matthew Taylor to review the rights

:27:53. > :27:56.and protections that were available to self-employed workers

:27:57. > :27:58.and whether they should be enhanced. People will be able to look

:27:59. > :28:01.at the government paper when we produce it, showing

:28:02. > :28:03.all our changes, and take And, of course, the Chancellor will

:28:04. > :28:08.be speaking, as will his ministers, to MPs, businesspeople and others

:28:09. > :28:13.to listen to the concerns. Well, the man you heard mentioned

:28:14. > :28:15.there, Matthew Taylor, has the job of producing

:28:16. > :28:28.a report into the future Welcome. The Chancellor has decided

:28:29. > :28:33.the self-employed should pay almost the same in National Insurance, not

:28:34. > :28:38.the same but almost, as the employed will stop what is left of your

:28:39. > :28:41.commission? The commission has a broader frame of reference and we

:28:42. > :28:47.are interested in the quality of work in the economy at the heart of

:28:48. > :28:52.what I hope will be proposing is a set of shifts that will improve the

:28:53. > :28:56.quality of that work so we have an economy where all work is fair and

:28:57. > :28:59.decent and all jobs give people scope for development and

:29:00. > :29:08.fulfilment. The issue of taxes a small part. You will cover that? We

:29:09. > :29:11.will, because the tax system and employment regulation system drive

:29:12. > :29:17.particular behaviours in our labour market. You approve I think of the

:29:18. > :29:22.general direction of this policy of raising National Insurance on the

:29:23. > :29:27.self-employed. Taxing them in return perhaps for more state benefits. Why

:29:28. > :29:31.are so many others on the left against it from Tim Farron to John

:29:32. > :29:36.McDonnell? Tax rises are unpopular and it is the role of the opposition

:29:37. > :29:40.parties to make capital from unpopular tax rises. I think as tax

:29:41. > :29:44.rises go this is broadly progressive. There are self-employed

:29:45. > :29:49.people on low incomes and they will be better off. It is economic league

:29:50. > :29:52.rational because the reason for the difference in National Insurance --

:29:53. > :29:57.economically. It was to do with state entitlements. The government

:29:58. > :30:03.is consulting about paid parental leave. A series of governments have

:30:04. > :30:07.not been good about thinking about medium sustainability of the tax

:30:08. > :30:11.base. Self-employment is growing. But it is eroding the tax base. It

:30:12. > :30:18.is important to address those issues. A number of think tanks have

:30:19. > :30:23.said this is a progressive move. Yet, a number of left-wing

:30:24. > :30:29.politicians have been against it. And a number of Tories have said

:30:30. > :30:33.this is a progressive move and not a Tory government move, the balance of

:30:34. > :30:38.you will pay more tax, but you will get more state benefits is not a

:30:39. > :30:41.Tory approach to things. That a Tory approach will be you will pay less

:30:42. > :30:44.tax but entitled to fewer benefits as well.

:30:45. > :30:54.I preferred in and policies to politics -- I prefer policies. When

:30:55. > :30:58.people look at the policy and when they look the fact that there is no

:30:59. > :31:01.real historical basis for that big national insurance differential,

:31:02. > :31:05.they see it is a sensible policy. I don't have to deal with the

:31:06. > :31:09.politics. There has been a huge growth in self-employment from the

:31:10. > :31:10.turn of the millennium. It's been strongest amongst older workers,

:31:11. > :31:18.women part-timers. Do you have any idea, do you have

:31:19. > :31:22.the data in your commission that could tell us how many are taking

:31:23. > :31:27.self-employment because they like the flexibility and they like the

:31:28. > :31:32.tax advantages that come with it, too, or they are being forced into

:31:33. > :31:36.it by employers who don't want the extra costs of employment? Do we

:31:37. > :31:43.know the difference? We do, broadly. Most surveys on self-employment and

:31:44. > :31:45.flexible forms of employment suggest about two thirds to three quarters

:31:46. > :31:50.enjoy it, they like the flexibility, they like the autonomy and about a

:31:51. > :31:54.third to one quarter are less happy. That tends to be because they would

:31:55. > :31:56.like to have a full-time permanent job. It is not necessary that they

:31:57. > :32:01.don't enjoy what they are doing, they would like to do other things.

:32:02. > :32:05.And some of the protections that come with it? Yes. There are some

:32:06. > :32:09.people who are forced into southern employees by high-risk but also some

:32:10. > :32:13.people feel like they can't get a proper job as it were. --

:32:14. > :32:19.self-employment by people who hire them. It is on the narrow matter of

:32:20. > :32:23.tax revenues but if you are employed on ?32,000 the state will take over

:32:24. > :32:28.?6,000 in national insurance contributions, that is quite chunky.

:32:29. > :32:32.If you are self-employed it is ?2300. But the big difference

:32:33. > :32:38.between those figures isn't what the employee is paying, it's the

:32:39. > :32:42.employer's contributions up to almost 14%, and cupped for as much

:32:43. > :32:51.as you are paid. What do you do about employers' contributions for

:32:52. > :32:55.the self employed? -- it is uncapped for as much. What I recommend is

:32:56. > :32:59.that we should probably move from taxing employment to taxing labour.

:33:00. > :33:03.We should probably have a more level playing field so it doesn't really

:33:04. > :33:07.matter... Explained that I thought it was the same thing. If you are a

:33:08. > :33:12.self-employed gardener, you are a different tax regime to a gardener

:33:13. > :33:20.who works for a gardening firm. On the individual side and on the firm

:33:21. > :33:23.side. As we see new business models, so-called gig working, partly with

:33:24. > :33:28.technology, we need a more level playing field saying that we're

:33:29. > :33:33.taxing people's work, not the form in which they deliver that. That is

:33:34. > :33:35.part of the reason we have seen the growth of particular business

:33:36. > :33:40.models. They are innovative and creative and partly driven by the

:33:41. > :33:44.fact that if you can describe yourself as self-employed there are

:33:45. > :33:46.tax advantages. Coming out in June? Will you come back and talk to us?

:33:47. > :33:48.Yes. We say goodbye to viewers

:33:49. > :33:53.in Scotland, who leave us now Coming up here in 20 minutes,

:33:54. > :33:58.we'll be talking to the former Tory MP who was the root

:33:59. > :34:11.of Donald Trump's allegation Hello and a warm welcome

:34:12. > :34:14.to your local part of the show. This weekend, has the Government's

:34:15. > :34:16.budget delivered for I'll be asking Labour's Chief Whip,

:34:17. > :34:23.the Newcastle East MP Nick Brown and Northumberland Conservative

:34:24. > :34:25.councillor Wayne Daley. Also, Victorian civic

:34:26. > :34:33.pride built our parks - but today's councils say they just

:34:34. > :34:36.can't afford to look after them. Has Newcastle come

:34:37. > :34:37.up with a solution? And we'll have the very latest

:34:38. > :34:41.on the issue that dominated the Copeland by-election -

:34:42. > :34:43.the future of Not a great deal that was directed

:34:44. > :34:52.purely at the North - apart from money for

:34:53. > :34:53.some road improvements. But there were plenty

:34:54. > :34:55.of talking points. Plans for specialist maths schools

:34:56. > :34:57.and investment in skills were both warmly welcomed

:34:58. > :34:59.by Berwick's Conservative MP But she put herself at the forefront

:35:00. > :35:03.of those urging the Chancellor to think again about his

:35:04. > :35:05.National Insurance increase For me the self-employed

:35:06. > :35:10.are the seeds of future growth, they are not being paid their wages

:35:11. > :35:14.at the end of the week or month, they are taking all the risk

:35:15. > :35:17.themselves and my concern is that we are looking to fill

:35:18. > :35:20.a difficult challenge with the pension pot,

:35:21. > :35:23.everyone is living longer and that's great but there's a big pension bill

:35:24. > :35:26.coming and I am concerned that the Treasury is trying

:35:27. > :35:30.to squeeze money out of the core group who are doing the most

:35:31. > :35:33.important job in our economy, Wayne Daley, given the National

:35:34. > :35:39.Insurance change seems to have annoyed some Conservative MPs

:35:40. > :35:42.and upset some of your natural allies in the press,

:35:43. > :35:45.was it a mistake? I think what it shows is that no

:35:46. > :35:48.government has got a magic wand to get everything right

:35:49. > :35:51.and when I heard this proposal I was concerned and I think

:35:52. > :35:55.it was more of the presentation. The principle is the right one that

:35:56. > :35:59.as people who are self-employed get some of the benefits they had not

:36:00. > :36:04.had like a public pension, maybe they should contribute more

:36:05. > :36:07.but I think the presentation Presentation isn't going to matter

:36:08. > :36:15.to the white van man who finds ?400 We're talking about a few hundred

:36:16. > :36:21.pounds contribution for something that will benefit them for thousands

:36:22. > :36:25.over a period of years, but the principle that the people

:36:26. > :36:28.who are the bedrock, as Anne-Marie Trevelyan rightly

:36:29. > :36:31.said, the bedrock of our economy, have helped to grow the economy,

:36:32. > :36:36.to feel they are being singled out, I think the policy needs to be

:36:37. > :36:45.looked at, and it will be part of a review later on but we have

:36:46. > :36:50.to accept that this country will grow on the back of the one man

:36:51. > :36:55.bands and the people who are working in the private sector and we have

:36:56. > :36:59.to encourage them and do everything we can to stimulate that part

:37:00. > :37:01.of the economy. Nick Brown, this is

:37:02. > :37:04.an acknowledgement that the tax system is changing, more people

:37:05. > :37:06.are self-employed these days, more self-employed are getting these

:37:07. > :37:10.benefits they didn't use to get, you can imagine a Labour Chancellor

:37:11. > :37:12.doing this, couldn't you? No, I could imagine

:37:13. > :37:14.a Labour Chancellor having the study on the relationship

:37:15. > :37:19.between National Insurance benefits and the self-employed first and then

:37:20. > :37:26.looking at the National Insurance rates adjustments afterwards

:37:27. > :37:30.in the light of the study. It's grotesquely unfair

:37:31. > :37:34.to have the tax imposed first It would be better if the study came

:37:35. > :37:40.first and then the results were put in front of Parliament

:37:41. > :37:42.with consequential tax But you accept there is a principle

:37:43. > :37:48.here that needs looking at. Yes, but I would look

:37:49. > :37:51.at it first and then make But you're not saying

:37:52. > :37:55.that the self-employed It is grossly unfair to say people

:37:56. > :37:59.should be taxed extra and then study whether or not they should

:38:00. > :38:02.have been afterwards. How does that fit in

:38:03. > :38:05.with your party's policy It fits in nicely with our party's

:38:06. > :38:10.policy because if people should pay more it should be those who are best

:38:11. > :38:18.placed to pay more and that doesn't mean across the board tax

:38:19. > :38:20.increases for the self-employed. Wayne Daley, Speadsheet Phil wanted

:38:21. > :38:29.a boring budget, for the north There was so little in there

:38:30. > :38:33.specifically for the North. It was the last spring

:38:34. > :38:35.budget we will have, there will be a proper budget later

:38:36. > :38:39.in the year, so it was to set the scene and the parameters around

:38:40. > :38:42.what Brexit can mean and employment There are elements which will impact

:38:43. > :38:45.across the country, he mentioned education,

:38:46. > :38:47.an extra ?10 billion in terms of the infrastructure

:38:48. > :38:50.of schools, that is good. Where are the bold and brave

:38:51. > :38:53.moves ahead of Brexit? I accept he is keeping a pot

:38:54. > :39:02.of money if things go wrong but the infrastructure that

:39:03. > :39:04.could have helped? When Labour left power in 2010

:39:05. > :39:07.Britain was the 33rd in the world in terms

:39:08. > :39:09.of infrastructure investment. This government has

:39:10. > :39:14.committed billions of Go onto the streets,

:39:15. > :39:18.you will see things being built, roads being improved,

:39:19. > :39:20.and that's good, we need The true figures for the North,

:39:21. > :39:27.the northern powerhouse got one mention in the budget,

:39:28. > :39:31.it gets three paragraphs in the Budget Red Book,

:39:32. > :39:35.the only thing that's for certain is there may be a bit more transport

:39:36. > :39:39.infrastructure investment in the long-term programme

:39:40. > :39:43.of the Department for It's not clear to me

:39:44. > :39:50.that the current Chancellor even has the previous Chancellor's commitment

:39:51. > :39:54.to the northern powerhouse. There is no industrial

:39:55. > :39:58.investment set out at all. Cutting corporation tax to 17%,

:39:59. > :40:03.it was 28% under Labour, that's a commitment to businesses

:40:04. > :40:06.in the North East. How many people up here are worried

:40:07. > :40:09.about the rates of corporation tax? Jeremy Corbyn's response

:40:10. > :40:12.to the budget, a lot of people say it was just a list of things

:40:13. > :40:14.he didn't like. Was there a sense of

:40:15. > :40:16.an alternative vision? I'm very proud to be in a party that

:40:17. > :40:20.has a leader that wants to stand up for the poor and dispossessed

:40:21. > :40:23.and we didn't hear much about their needs and concerns

:40:24. > :40:26.in the budget statement. At least we know it's not

:40:27. > :40:29.a pre-election budget statement, Well, at the end of his Budget

:40:30. > :40:35.speech, the Chancellor also laid down the Conservatives' claim to be

:40:36. > :40:38.the party of the NHS, pointing to the Tories' success

:40:39. > :40:40.in the recent Copeland by-election. But as Bob Cooper reports,

:40:41. > :40:42.the problems facing the NHS in West Cumbria -

:40:43. > :40:47.and elsewhere - aren't going away. As the voters of Copeland

:40:48. > :40:50.so clearly understood, A bold claim by a Chancellor

:40:51. > :40:59.after a campaign in which the Tories pledged to fight for the NHS and now

:41:00. > :41:03.need to deliver. I would like to take this

:41:04. > :41:08.opportunity to thank the people of Copeland for voting for me,

:41:09. > :41:12.for having faith in me. The Conservatives may be riding high

:41:13. > :41:14.politically after their victory over Labour in Copeland

:41:15. > :41:19.but in the meantime the problems of the country haven't gone away

:41:20. > :41:22.with increasing pressures on services like these

:41:23. > :41:30.at the West Cumberland Hospital. This week crucial decisions

:41:31. > :41:33.were made on the future of Cumbrian health services facing a shortage

:41:34. > :41:35.of cash and staff. Some like small community hospitals

:41:36. > :41:39.will see the cutbacks many feared but much-valued maternity care

:41:40. > :41:42.in Copeland led by consultants was saved for the time being,

:41:43. > :41:46.allowing a review to take place. The decision yesterday,

:41:47. > :41:49.it was encouraging for me because it gives us a window of opportunity

:41:50. > :41:52.to make sure we recruit What the review will do

:41:53. > :42:01.is by being able to work with the Royal College

:42:02. > :42:03.of Anaesthetists, will identify I'll be hands on making sure we work

:42:04. > :42:09.with the community, staff, We don't want a review,

:42:10. > :42:14.we want a proper plan. I've been asking for a recruitment

:42:15. > :42:20.plan for the past 12 months. It's been since the Coalition

:42:21. > :42:27.Government came in in 2010 we have seen trusts getting into the red,

:42:28. > :42:31.before they were all in the black across the country, now

:42:32. > :42:33.they are pretty much all in the red And that, say experts,

:42:34. > :42:40.is because demand is rising This is the government's challenge

:42:41. > :42:47.as there are many more Copelands Well, the Budget did

:42:48. > :42:50.offer some solutions It came in the form of extra money

:42:51. > :42:54.to place GPs into accident and emergency units to reduce

:42:55. > :42:57.waiting times - and ?2 billion of new funding over three

:42:58. > :42:59.years for social care. That money for social care

:43:00. > :43:03.which hopefully helps to free up hospital beds being blocked by older

:43:04. > :43:05.people and a commitment to look at a long-term

:43:06. > :43:09.solution, fair enough? I welcome the money announced

:43:10. > :43:13.in the Budget but it isn't enough. The scale of the problem is much

:43:14. > :43:17.larger than the general announcement in the Budget,

:43:18. > :43:22.I'm not sure what the distribution arrangements will be for that

:43:23. > :43:26.but the need for social care and the local government

:43:27. > :43:29.which will have to bear the brunt of this are not evenly spread

:43:30. > :43:37.and so for authorities like urban ones in the north-east,

:43:38. > :43:40.they will end up with more to do That's the point, this

:43:41. > :43:45.will not be enough money. For our councils in particular,

:43:46. > :43:49.they can raise council tax as Northumberland is to pay

:43:50. > :43:52.for social care, but because they raise less council tax

:43:53. > :43:54.here than in southern authorities, it will lead to inadequate care

:43:55. > :43:57.and a strain on local services. There clearly is an issue

:43:58. > :44:00.with social care in this country. Over a million people rely on that

:44:01. > :44:15.and I think the money the government We need to go further and one

:44:16. > :44:19.thing I would want to see is that we have a Royal commission

:44:20. > :44:23.on the NHS and social care. We've been here before and we had

:44:24. > :44:25.Royal commissions and politicians The NHS has turned into

:44:26. > :44:31.a political ping-pong. Five years, a new government,

:44:32. > :44:32.things change. We've got to realise that this

:44:33. > :44:41.is an asset for this country. The last Royal commission we had

:44:42. > :44:45.on the NHS was in '75 and it looked We have to have dialogue

:44:46. > :44:48.with the British people because when it was set up

:44:49. > :44:51.it was set up to deal We now deal with bunions

:44:52. > :44:57.to brain surgery. A dialogue would be

:44:58. > :44:59.introducing charging We need to have a discussion

:45:00. > :45:03.with the public to look at what we can do to make

:45:04. > :45:06.sure our NHS is fit for the future. I want an NHS free at the point

:45:07. > :45:11.of delivery, I use the NHS, my children were born in the NHS,

:45:12. > :45:14.it's something I am passionate about but we have to accept

:45:15. > :45:21.as an ageing population we need to trust people to take part

:45:22. > :45:24.in a dialogue but the essence is free, I don't want

:45:25. > :45:26.a private NHS service. Labour's solution is always to throw

:45:27. > :45:33.extra billions at these problems whether it's social care or the NHS

:45:34. > :45:36.but there are better ways of working which are being tried

:45:37. > :45:38.in Northumberland, bringing councils and the NHS together,

:45:39. > :45:41.and that idea of putting GPs in A, there are things you can do before

:45:42. > :45:45.you reach for more taxpayers' money. No, the problem is so severe that it

:45:46. > :45:47.will require more money The demographic pressures

:45:48. > :45:54.are in the opposite direction, we are living longer,

:45:55. > :45:56.growing older, these ought to be good things but for people that can

:45:57. > :45:59.no longer quite look after themselves, there is a need

:46:00. > :46:03.for help and assistance, social care and that has

:46:04. > :46:06.to be provided. But given the NHS is such a trump

:46:07. > :46:18.card for your party, with strains in the system,

:46:19. > :46:20.why isn't it turning At the Copeland by-election,

:46:21. > :46:24.the NHS was a huge issue I was over there doing my little bit

:46:25. > :46:28.to try to help us win, we didn't and I congratulate

:46:29. > :46:31.the Conservative Party on their victory but on the health

:46:32. > :46:35.service people were clear Why weren't they convinced your

:46:36. > :46:41.party was the answer to that? There isn't even good

:46:42. > :46:46.neighbouring provision, it's a two-hour bus journey

:46:47. > :46:48.away, in Carlisle. Why didn't they conclude

:46:49. > :46:52.Labour was the party A range of reasons and the

:46:53. > :47:11.postmortem has been much explored but I don't think it had anything

:47:12. > :47:14.to do with the health service. Wayne Daley, a lot of people say

:47:15. > :47:17.the NHS is under unprecedented strain and the government

:47:18. > :47:23.is in denial because they aren't talking about this commission,

:47:24. > :47:25.they are just throwing a bit Money is in real terms by 2020

:47:26. > :47:29.there will be an extra ?10 billion. If you look at the spending

:47:30. > :47:32.line, it's pretty flat. There is a clear issue

:47:33. > :47:39.within the NHS and part of the issue is that A departments

:47:40. > :47:44.are being used by some people who could go to a pharmacist

:47:45. > :47:51.so that is why the ?100 million in the third front line

:47:52. > :47:53.triage services there to move people out of A,

:47:54. > :47:55.stopping that system We will see what that delivers

:47:56. > :48:02.in the next few weeks and months. Now, it's not all been

:48:03. > :48:05.about the Budget this week. There's been controversial plans

:48:06. > :48:07.to develop Northumberland Council's Here's Bob with that -

:48:08. > :48:11.and the rest of the week's news Plans to build a retail park,

:48:12. > :48:15.200 homes and a school on the site of Northumberland county council

:48:16. > :48:17.headquarters in Morpeth have been Business Secretary Greg Clark met

:48:18. > :48:22.employers and trade unions from the north-east to discuss

:48:23. > :48:25.Brexit. The future of Nissan

:48:26. > :48:32.and Hitachi were on the agenda. Calls to give the Coast

:48:33. > :48:35.to Coast Walk the status could boost the region's

:48:36. > :48:37.tourism and business. Middlesbrough South MP

:48:38. > :48:41.Tom Blenkinsop gave his support to the debate led by Conservative MP

:48:42. > :48:44.for Richmond Rishi Sunak. Texas has oil, Australia has gold

:48:45. > :48:46.mines and North Yorkshire Of course North Yorkshire,

:48:47. > :48:55.the Esk Valley, Cleveland had Part of the route that

:48:56. > :49:02.the honourable gentleman is talking about includes historic sites

:49:03. > :49:06.like Kildare, Rosedale, And tax on cigarettes

:49:07. > :49:09.went up in the budget but the north-east is still the area

:49:10. > :49:13.with the most smokers. Now, the Victorians created them

:49:14. > :49:17.as precious green spaces But today, the cost of running

:49:18. > :49:22.of our parks is becoming a struggle In Newcastle they believe

:49:23. > :49:25.the solution is to transfer parks to a charitable trust -

:49:26. > :49:28.a model that's only been tried But as Luke Walton reports,

:49:29. > :49:33.not everybody is convinced it's Saltwell Park in Gateshead,

:49:34. > :49:43.dating back to Victorian times, has been at the centre of local

:49:44. > :49:47.life for generations. Turning the clock forward

:49:48. > :49:53.more than 70 years, the view here at Saltwell Park

:49:54. > :49:56.is still very recognisable and though the crowds aren't out

:49:57. > :50:00.today, green spaces like these are still hugely valued by local

:50:01. > :50:05.people, still vital to our sense of well-being but in an age

:50:06. > :50:08.of austerity, protecting places like this is becoming

:50:09. > :50:12.an increasing problem. In neighbouring Newcastle,

:50:13. > :50:15.parks have been the victim The man in charge says

:50:16. > :50:20.without a radical rethink My personal opinion is that

:50:21. > :50:34.over the next few years maintenance will slip

:50:35. > :50:36.so much that we will have to close some parks

:50:37. > :50:39.because they won't be safe. That's not an option,

:50:40. > :50:43.that's what we won't do but that would be the consequence

:50:44. > :50:47.of doing nothing. Newcastle Council's solution

:50:48. > :50:49.is to consult on plans to transfer parks and allotments

:50:50. > :50:51.to a charitable trust. Sunderland is also

:50:52. > :50:53.considering the idea. One place where local parks

:50:54. > :50:55.are already in the hands There are advantages

:50:56. > :51:02.in having a trust dedicated to looking after parks,

:51:03. > :51:14.we are not up against demands where all the income is ring-fenced

:51:15. > :51:17.used back in those parks means Newcastle Council also believes

:51:18. > :51:21.a parks charity would have more flexibility to raise income and use

:51:22. > :51:27.volunteers like these ones, although at this local project

:51:28. > :51:29.there are misgivings. Volunteers are brilliant and it's

:51:30. > :51:33.great to see people getting involved and taking pride in their parks

:51:34. > :51:36.but I don't think it's fair to rely completely on them because it puts

:51:37. > :51:39.a bit too much strain on them and you need paid staff

:51:40. > :51:42.working in the park. The body which represents

:51:43. > :51:46.Newcastle Park volunteers says the fall in funding is already

:51:47. > :51:49.having an impact with vandalism and neglect

:51:50. > :51:55.increasingly in evidence. There's been a 95% reduction

:51:56. > :51:58.since 2010 approximately, the answer is there's no skilled

:51:59. > :52:04.maintenance happening the moment. The area's left

:52:05. > :52:05.to fall into decline. She questions whether a new

:52:06. > :52:08.organisation would fill the gap. We don't know how much it will cost

:52:09. > :52:12.to maintain green spaces and the council isn't telling us how

:52:13. > :52:17.much this social enterprise will The City Council says it's

:52:18. > :52:28.still assessing the funding a parks trust would generate but insists

:52:29. > :52:30.there are guarantees. The council maintains ownership,

:52:31. > :52:34.the parks charity will have in its objectives statements

:52:35. > :52:38.like free access is essential, There might be charging to do some

:52:39. > :52:43.things but not to come in, so those basic principles

:52:44. > :52:47.which for over 100 years have been held by the Council would be held

:52:48. > :52:55.by the charitable trust. They have been our pride

:52:56. > :53:00.and our playground through the ages but how to preserve parks

:53:01. > :53:09.for the future is now the challenge. Nick Brown, this could be happening

:53:10. > :53:12.to parks in your constituency. I think the Council

:53:13. > :53:15.are in an impossible position. In 2011 the budget for

:53:16. > :53:18.parks across the whole The budget for this year

:53:19. > :53:27.is ?250,000, so the budget has fallen dramatically

:53:28. > :53:28.and that is Maintaining parks is not

:53:29. > :53:38.a statutory function many people associate it with local

:53:39. > :53:47.government so the council are stuck. They have to look at ways forward

:53:48. > :53:50.and I think they are right I haven't pored over

:53:51. > :53:53.Newcastle's budget in detail but there are choices that could be

:53:54. > :53:57.made by councils. Is it the right choice to decide

:53:58. > :54:04.that you're going to pass this buck over to members of the community

:54:05. > :54:07.who might have no expertise in how That's not what the suggestion

:54:08. > :54:16.is but as for choices, the councils have not been left

:54:17. > :54:18.with any choice. Their budgets are slowly

:54:19. > :54:20.being squeezed so every non-statutory function

:54:21. > :54:22.is being squeezed out of their budget, this is happening

:54:23. > :54:24.right across the North East, and the statutory functions are now

:54:25. > :54:27.under pressure as well even though the government have given them

:54:28. > :54:29.the legal obligation The changes coming into the domestic

:54:30. > :54:33.and business rate will make matters worse for every authority

:54:34. > :54:37.in the North East. That may be a debate

:54:38. > :54:38.for another day. We've discussed it

:54:39. > :54:46.on this programme. How have we got to the point where

:54:47. > :54:56.parks gifted to the communities or developed for public good more

:54:57. > :54:59.than 100 years ago could face being being shut or handed over

:55:00. > :55:05.to a charity? There was a commitment there that

:55:06. > :55:07.parks won't be shut, If councils can't

:55:08. > :55:10.make a charity work. And hats off to Newcastle City

:55:11. > :55:13.Council for looking at this solution because one effect is it opens up

:55:14. > :55:16.a parks trust to access funding a council could never touch,

:55:17. > :55:20.for example the park in Wallsend has had a massive transformation

:55:21. > :55:22.because of funding from Other parks have benefited

:55:23. > :55:27.and I think a bit of innovation and building community spirit,

:55:28. > :55:31.it's the one thing we have been But this is council despair,

:55:32. > :55:38.it's like we have no other choice, I think use it as an opportunity

:55:39. > :55:43.and we saw about volunteers getting involved, you don't want things

:55:44. > :55:47.to be run completely by volunteers but this is a tremendous opportunity

:55:48. > :55:50.to get funding that you wouldn't normally have got to galvanise

:55:51. > :55:55.community spirit and improve the parks

:55:56. > :55:57.because everyone uses them so let's get everyone together

:55:58. > :56:09.to try to protect them. Galvanising community spirit, that's

:56:10. > :56:11.how a lot of these park started And they are very much associated

:56:12. > :56:18.with local government. I think it's slightly better

:56:19. > :56:20.than a council of despair, my fear is although the parks

:56:21. > :56:23.will still be free for people to use, everything that goes

:56:24. > :56:25.on within the parks, whether it's charitable

:56:26. > :56:27.or commercial management, They're talking openly

:56:28. > :56:35.about raising money. People will pay for

:56:36. > :56:37.a cafe or a service. It seems there are reasonable ways

:56:38. > :56:41.of doing it and there might be less reasonable ways of doing it

:56:42. > :56:43.so I would want to sound You wouldn't want families

:56:44. > :56:48.with young children to feel they would get gouged every time

:56:49. > :56:52.they go into the park. We're back same time,

:56:53. > :56:56.same place, next Sunday. Until then, do keep up to date

:56:57. > :56:59.by following me on Twitter. For now it's back to Andrew

:57:00. > :57:04.for the rest of the show. Now the government plans for new

:57:05. > :57:20.grammar schools. The Education Secretary

:57:21. > :57:21.Justine Greening was speaking to a conference

:57:22. > :57:23.of headteachers on Friday. They're normally a pretty polite

:57:24. > :57:25.bunch, but they didn't Broadcasters weren't

:57:26. > :57:32.allowed into the speech, but this was captured

:57:33. > :57:37.on a camera phone. And we have to recognise actually

:57:38. > :57:40.for grammars, in terms of disadvantaged children,

:57:41. > :57:43.that they have, they really do help them close

:57:44. > :57:46.the attainment gap. And at the same time

:57:47. > :57:48.we should recognise that ..That parents also want choice

:57:49. > :57:55.for their children and that those schools are often

:57:56. > :58:10.very oversubscribed. I suppose it is a rite of passage

:58:11. > :58:14.for and education secretaries to have this at a head teachers

:58:15. > :58:18.conference book the head are usually more polite. Isn't part of the

:58:19. > :58:24.problem, whether one is for or against the expansion of grammar

:58:25. > :58:28.schools, the government plans are complicated, you cannot sum them up

:58:29. > :58:33.in a sentence. The proof of that is they can still get away with denying

:58:34. > :58:36.they are expanding grammar schools. They will find an alternative

:58:37. > :58:40.formulation because it is not as simple as a brute creation of what

:58:41. > :58:46.we used to know is grammar schools with the absolute cut-off of the 11

:58:47. > :58:50.plus. I am surprised how easy they found it politically. We saw the

:58:51. > :58:54.clip of Justine Greening being jeered a little bit but in the grand

:58:55. > :58:57.scheme, compared to another government trying this idea a decade

:58:58. > :59:03.ago they have got away with it easily and I think what is happening

:59:04. > :59:06.is a perverse consequence of Brexit and the media attention on Brexit,

:59:07. > :59:11.the government of the day can just about get away with slightly more

:59:12. > :59:16.contentious domestic policies on the correct assumption we will be too

:59:17. > :59:20.busy investing our attention in Article 50 and two years of

:59:21. > :59:26.negotiations, WTO terms at everything we have been discussing.

:59:27. > :59:28.I wonder if after grammar schools there will be examples of

:59:29. > :59:33.contentious domestic policies Theresa May can slide in stock

:59:34. > :59:41.because Brexit sucks the life out, takes the attention away. You are a

:59:42. > :59:47.supporter. Broadly. Are you happy with the government approach? They

:59:48. > :59:51.need to have more gumption and stop being apologetic. It is a bazaar

:59:52. > :59:57.area of public policy where we judge the policy on grammar schools based

:59:58. > :00:01.on what it does for children whose parents are unemployed, living on

:00:02. > :00:06.sink estates in Liverpool. It is absurd, we don't judge any other

:00:07. > :00:10.policy like that. It is simple, not contentious, people who are not

:00:11. > :00:14.sure, ask them if they would apply to send their child there, six out

:00:15. > :00:20.of ten said they would. Parents want good schools for their children, we

:00:21. > :00:23.should have appropriate education and they should be straightforward,

:00:24. > :00:27.this is about the future of the economy and we need bright children

:00:28. > :00:33.to get education at the highest level, education for academically

:00:34. > :00:37.bright children. It is supposed to be a signature policy of the Theresa

:00:38. > :00:40.May administration that marks a government different from David

:00:41. > :00:42.Cameron's government who did not go down this road. The signature is

:00:43. > :00:52.pretty blurred, it is hard to read. It is. She is trying to address

:00:53. > :00:55.concerns about those who fail to get into these selective schools and

:00:56. > :00:59.tried to targeted in poorer areas and the rest of it. She will

:01:00. > :01:03.probably come across so many obstacles. It is not clear what form

:01:04. > :01:07.it will take in the end. It is really an example of a signature

:01:08. > :01:09.policy not fully thought through. I think it was one of her first

:01:10. > :01:14.announcements. It was. It surprised everybody. Surprised at the speed

:01:15. > :01:19.and pace at which they were planning to go. Ever since, there have been

:01:20. > :01:24.qualifications and hesitations en route with good cause, in my view. I

:01:25. > :01:28.disagree with Juliet that this is... We all want good schools but if you

:01:29. > :01:32.don't get in there and you end up in a less good school. They already do

:01:33. > :01:36.that. We have selection based on the income of parents getting into a

:01:37. > :01:41.good catchment area, based on the faith of the parents. That becomes

:01:42. > :01:44.very attainable! I might been too shot run christenings for these. --

:01:45. > :01:46.I have been. Now, you may remember this time last

:01:47. > :01:49.week we were talking about the extraordinary claims by US

:01:50. > :01:51.President Donald Trump, on Twitter of course,

:01:52. > :01:53.that Barack Obama had ordered And there was me thinking

:01:54. > :01:57.that wiretaps went out Is it legal for a sitting

:01:58. > :02:02.President to do so, he asked, concluding it was a "new low",

:02:03. > :02:11.and later comparing it to Watergate. Since then, the White House has been

:02:12. > :02:14.pressed to provide evidence for this It hasn't, but it seems it may have

:02:15. > :02:20.initially come from a report on a US website by the former Conservative

:02:21. > :02:23.MP Louise Mensch. She wrote that the FBI had been

:02:24. > :02:26.granted a warrant to intercept communications between Trump's

:02:27. > :02:33.campaign and Russia. Well, Louise Mensch joins

:02:34. > :02:46.us now from New York. Louise, you claimed in early

:02:47. > :02:49.November that the FBI had secured a court warrants to monitor

:02:50. > :02:54.communications between trump Tower in New York at two Russian banks.

:02:55. > :02:56.It's now four months later. Isn't it the case that nobody has proved the

:02:57. > :03:06.existence of this warrant? First of all, forgive me Andrew, one

:03:07. > :03:09.takes 1's life in one's hand when it is you but I have to correct your

:03:10. > :03:13.characterisation of my reporting. It is very important. I did not report

:03:14. > :03:18.that the FBI had a warrant to intercept anything or that Trump

:03:19. > :03:22.tower was any part of it. What I reported was that the FBI obtained a

:03:23. > :03:27.warrant is targeted on all communications between two Russian

:03:28. > :03:33.banks and were, therefore, allowed to examine US persons in the context

:03:34. > :03:36.of their investigation. What the Americans call legally incidental

:03:37. > :03:43.collection. I certainly didn't report that the warrant was able to

:03:44. > :03:47.intercept or that it had location basis, for example Trump tower. I

:03:48. > :03:52.just didn't report that. The reason that matters so much is that I now

:03:53. > :03:57.believe based on the President's reaction, there may well be a

:03:58. > :04:00.wiretap act Trump Tower. If so, Donald Trump has just tweeted out

:04:01. > :04:04.evidence in an ongoing criminal case that neither I nor anybody else

:04:05. > :04:08.reported. He is right about Watergate because he will have

:04:09. > :04:12.committed obstruction of justice directly from his Twitter account.

:04:13. > :04:18.Let me come back as thank you for clarifying. Let me come back to the

:04:19. > :04:22.question. -- and thank you. We have not yet got proof that this warrant

:04:23. > :04:26.exists, do we? No and we are most unlikely to get it because it would

:04:27. > :04:31.be a heinous crime for Donald Trump to reveal its existence. In America

:04:32. > :04:35.they call it a Glomar response. I can neither confirm nor deny. That

:04:36. > :04:39.is what all American officials will have to say legally. If you are

:04:40. > :04:43.looking for proof, you won't get it until and unless a court cases

:04:44. > :04:49.brought. But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The BBC validated

:04:50. > :04:53.this two months after me in their reporting by the journalist Paul

:04:54. > :04:56.Wood. The Guardian, they also separately from their own sources

:04:57. > :05:00.validated the existence of the warrant. If you are in America, you

:05:01. > :05:04.would know that CNN and others are reporting that the investigation in

:05:05. > :05:08.ongoing. Let me come onto the wider point. You believe the Trump

:05:09. > :05:12.campaign including the president were complicit with the Russians

:05:13. > :05:16.during the 2016 election campaign to such an extent that Mr Trump should

:05:17. > :05:21.be impeached. What evidence did you have?

:05:22. > :05:27.That is an enormous amount of evidence. You could start with him

:05:28. > :05:29.saying, hey, Russia, if you are listening, please release all the

:05:30. > :05:35.Hillary Clinton's e-mails. That's not evidence. I think it rather is,

:05:36. > :05:38.actually. Especially if you look at some of the evidence that exists on

:05:39. > :05:43.Twitter and elsewhere of people talking directly to his social media

:05:44. > :05:47.manager, Dan should be no and telling him to do that before it

:05:48. > :05:51.happened. There is a bit out there. The BBC itself reported that in

:05:52. > :05:55.April of last year, a six agency task force, not just the FBI, but

:05:56. > :05:59.the Treasury Department, was looking at this. I believe there is an

:06:00. > :06:03.enormous amount of evidence. And then there is the steel dossier

:06:04. > :06:11.which was included in an official report of the US intelligence

:06:12. > :06:14.committee. You've also ... Just to be clear, we don't have hard

:06:15. > :06:18.evidence yet whether this warrant exists. It may or may not. There is

:06:19. > :06:21.doubt about... There are claims about whether there is evidence

:06:22. > :06:27.about Mr Trump and the Russians. That is another matter. You claimed

:06:28. > :06:33.that President Putin had Andrew Breitbart murdered to pave the way

:06:34. > :06:38.for Steve Bannon to play a key role in the Trump administration. I

:06:39. > :06:42.haven't. You said that Steve Bannon is behind bomb threats to Jewish

:06:43. > :06:47.community centres. Aren't you in danger of just peddling wild

:06:48. > :06:51.conspiracy theories? No. Festival, I haven't. No matter how many times

:06:52. > :06:55.people say this, it's not going to be true -- first of all. I said in

:06:56. > :06:59.twitter I believe that to be the case about the murder of Andrew

:07:00. > :07:05.Breitbart. You believe President Putin murdered him. I didn't! You

:07:06. > :07:09.said I reported it, but I believed it. You put it on twitter that you

:07:10. > :07:15.believed it but you don't have a shred of evidence. I do. Indeed, I

:07:16. > :07:19.know made assertions. What is the evidence that Mr Putin murdered

:07:20. > :07:24.Andrew Breitbart? I said I believe it. You may believe there are

:07:25. > :07:29.fairies at the bottom of your garden, it doesn't make it true. I

:07:30. > :07:37.may indeed. And if I say so, that's my belief. If I say I am reporting,

:07:38. > :07:44.as I did with the Fisa warrant exists, I have a basis in fact. They

:07:45. > :07:50.believe is just a belief. I know you are relatively new to journalism.

:07:51. > :07:54.Let me get the rules right. Andrew, jealousy is not your colour... If it

:07:55. > :07:58.is twitter, we don't believe it but if it is on your website, we should

:07:59. > :08:03.believe it? If I report something and I say this happened, then I am

:08:04. > :08:08.making an assertion. If I describe a belief, I am describing a belief.

:08:09. > :08:12.Subtlety may be a little difficult for you... No, no. If you want to be

:08:13. > :08:19.a journalist, beliefs have to be backed up with evidence. Really? Do

:08:20. > :08:22.you have a faith? It's not a matter of faith, maybe in your case, that

:08:23. > :08:28.President Putin murdered Andrew Breitbart. A belief and a report at

:08:29. > :08:33.two different things and no matter how often you say that they are the

:08:34. > :08:36.same, they will never be the same. You've said in today's Sunday Times

:08:37. > :08:46.here in London that you've turned into" a temporary superpower" where

:08:47. > :08:50.you "See things really clearly". Have you become delusional? No. I am

:08:51. > :08:56.describing a biological basis for ADHD, which I have. As any of your

:08:57. > :08:59.viewers who are doctors will know. It provides people with

:09:00. > :09:02.unfortunately a lot of scattered focus, they are very messy and

:09:03. > :09:06.absent-minded but when they are interested in things and they have

:09:07. > :09:11.ADHD they can have a condition which is hyper focus. You concentrate very

:09:12. > :09:16.hard on a given subject and you can see patterns and connections. That

:09:17. > :09:21.is biological. Thank you for explaining that. And for getting up

:09:22. > :09:25.early in New York. The first time ever I have interviewed a temporary

:09:26. > :09:29.superpower. Thank you. You are so lucky! You are so lucky! I don't

:09:30. > :09:34.think it's going to happen again. Please don't ask us to comment on

:09:35. > :09:38.that interview! I will not ask you, viewers will make up their own

:09:39. > :09:40.minds. Let's come back to be more mundane world of Article 50. Stop

:09:41. > :09:47.the killing! Will it get through at the

:09:48. > :09:51.government wanted it? Without the Lords amendment falling by the way

:09:52. > :09:55.that? I am sure the Lord will not try to ping-pong this back and

:09:56. > :09:59.forth. So we are at the end of this particular legislative phase. The

:10:00. > :10:02.fact that all three Brexit Cabinet ministers, number ten often don't

:10:03. > :10:06.like one of them going out on a broadcast interview on a Sunday,

:10:07. > :10:09.they've all been out and about. That suggests to me they are working on

:10:10. > :10:14.the assumption it will be triggered this week. This week. The

:10:15. > :10:19.negotiations will begin or at least the process begins. The negotiation

:10:20. > :10:22.process may be difficult, given all of the European elections. The Dutch

:10:23. > :10:27.this week. And then the French and maybe the Italians and certainly the

:10:28. > :10:31.Germans by the end of September, which is less predictable than it

:10:32. > :10:36.was. Given all that, what did you make of Anna Soubry's claim, Viacom

:10:37. > :10:41.on her part, that we may just end up crashing out in six months question

:10:42. > :10:46.-- fear on her part. It was not just that that we made that deliberately

:10:47. > :10:49.organising. I want us to get on with the deals.

:10:50. > :10:57.Everyone knows a good deal is the best option. Who knows what is going

:10:58. > :11:00.to be on the table when we finally go out? Fascinatingly, the demand

:11:01. > :11:05.for some money back, given the amount of money... Net gains and net

:11:06. > :11:12.costs in terms of us leaving for the EU. It is all to play for. That will

:11:13. > :11:16.be a possible early grounds for a confrontation between the UK and the

:11:17. > :11:22.EU. My understanding is that they expect to do a deal on reciprocal

:11:23. > :11:25.rights of EU nationals, EU nationals here, UK citizens there, quite

:11:26. > :11:29.quickly. They want to clear that up and that will be done. Then they

:11:30. > :11:32.will hit this problem that the EU will be saying you've got to agree

:11:33. > :11:37.the divorce Bill first before we talk about the free trade bill.

:11:38. > :11:42.David Davis saying quite clearly, no, they go together because of the

:11:43. > :11:47.size of the bill. It will be determined, in our part, by how good

:11:48. > :11:50.the access will be. The mutual recognition of EU residents' rights

:11:51. > :11:54.is no trouble. A huge amount of fuss is attracted to that subject but it

:11:55. > :11:58.is the easiest thing to deal with, as is free movement for tourists.

:11:59. > :12:01.Money is what will make it incredibly acrimonious. Incredibly

:12:02. > :12:06.quickly. I imagine the dominant story in the summer will be all

:12:07. > :12:08.about that. This was Anna Soubry's implication, members of the

:12:09. > :12:12.governors could strongly argue, things are so poisonous and so

:12:13. > :12:15.unpleasant at the moment, the dealers are advancing -- members of

:12:16. > :12:21.the government. Why not call it a day and go out on WTO terms while

:12:22. > :12:25.public opinion is still in that direction in that Eurosceptic

:12:26. > :12:29.direction? No buyers' remorse about last year's referendum. The longer

:12:30. > :12:32.they leave it, view more opportunity there is for some kind of public

:12:33. > :12:36.resistance and change of mind to take place. The longer believe it,

:12:37. > :12:40.the more people who voted for Brexit and people who voted Remain and

:12:41. > :12:44.think we didn't get world War three will start being quite angry with

:12:45. > :12:48.the EU for not agreeing a deal. In terms of the rights of EU nationals

:12:49. > :12:54.he and Brits abroad, by all accounts, 26 of the 27 have agreed

:12:55. > :12:57.individually. Angela Merkel is the only person who has held that up.

:12:58. > :13:02.That will be dealt with in a matter of days. The chances of a deal being

:13:03. > :13:07.done is likely but in ten seconds... It would not be a bad bet to protect

:13:08. > :13:11.your on something not happening, you might get pretty good odds? The odds

:13:12. > :13:17.are going up that a deal doesn't happen. But, as I said earlier, the

:13:18. > :13:21.House of Commons will not endorse no deal. We are either in an early

:13:22. > :13:26.election or she has to go back again. Either way, you will need us!

:13:27. > :13:29.We will be back at noon tomorrow on BBC Two ahead of what looks like

:13:30. > :13:31.being a big week in politics. We will be back here same time, same

:13:32. > :13:34.place. Remember, if it's Sunday,

:13:35. > :14:38.it's the Sunday Politics. They're calling it an

:14:39. > :14:46.entertainment extravaganza audience fun and frolics

:14:47. > :14:50.and outrageous shenanigans. And I don't even know what

:14:51. > :14:54.those HONK words mean.