29/01/2017 Sunday Politics North West

Download Subtitles




Andrew Neil is joined by Nigel Farage, MEP. The Political Panel consists of Janan Ganesh of the Financial Times, Julia Hartley-Brewer of talkRADIO and journalist Steve Richards.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 29/01/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Donald Trump's travel ban on refugees and citizens of seven


mainly Muslim countries sparks protests at several US airports.


And in the north-west: Is the Northern Powerhouse picking up pace?


Plus, the Lancashire MP taking the lead on loneliness,


part of the legacy of the late Jo Cox.


Should she have spoken out more strongly?


We'll ask former Ukip leader and Trump confidant Nigel Farage


what he makes of the travel ban and the Prime Minister's


In London this week, the mayor, Sadiq Khan,


has been coming under pressure to explain his fares freeze


and why it doesn't apply to everybody.


And with me, the best and brightest political


panel in the business - Steve Richards, Julia


They'll be tweeting throughout the programme.


It was soon after Theresa May left the White House on Friday that


Donald Trump signed the executive order banning citizens from seven


President Trump's 90-day ban covers Iran, Iraq,


Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen and Syria, from


where refugees are banned from until further notice.


Donald Trump's executive order also imposes a complete ban


on all refugees coming to the US for the next 120 days.


Mr Trump said that the ban would keep radical Islamic terrorists out


But the ban has sparked protests across the US,


as people affected and already in the air were detained


US laws have begun legal action to challenge the ban, which many


At a press conference in Ankara, Turkey, Theresa May was asked


about the refugee ban three times before giving this response...


Well, the United States is responsible for the United States'


The United Kingdom is responsible for the United Kingdom's policy


on refugees, and our policy on refugees is to have a number


of voluntary schemes to bring Syrian refugees into the country.


Downing Street later issued a statement saying:


This morning, the Treasury Minister, David Gauke, was asked why


Theresa May had refused to condemn the travel ban at yesterday's


The Prime Minister is not a shoot-from-the-hip


She wants to see the evidence, she wants


to understand precisely what the implications are.


She'd been in a series of very lengthy meetings with


President Erdogan, and she's someone who wants to see the briefing and


understand it, and then will respond to that.


I think there are times where, you know, there's always


pressure to respond within a news cycle and so on.


The important thing is, we are saying we disagree with it


We're joined now from North London by the Conservative


Should the Government in general and Theresa May in particular be more


vocal in their criticism of Donald Trump's travel bans? Well, as David


just said, it is obviously right that Theresa has now said this is an


appropriate and not something we agree with in our Government, but I


wish she had said something at the time, not least because it affects


our own citizens. One of our own MPs, Nadhim, for example, because it


is also a global crisis. She had clearly built an excellent with


Donald Trump -- she had built an excellent relationship with him, but


she could have been firmer. Mrs May hasn't said any word of criticism


about the travel bans. She refused to say anything three times in


Ankara, and it is merely an anonymous Downing Street


spokesperson that has issued the subsequent mild criticism. We have


not heard from the Prime Minister at all on this matter in terms of


criticism. No, but the spokesperson will be speaking with her blessing,


so it is clearly something she has acknowledged. As I said before, I


wish she had said something at the time. The global climate at the


moment is delicate and we need our leaders to work together to address


things like the refugee crisis. Potentially, this plays into the


hands of Daesh. It is absolutely not the right message. What would you


like the Prime Minister to say? As with any new relationship, it is


about testing the boundaries. They had clearly got on well, so she


should have felt braver to say something there and then. I would


have preferred her to say, for example, I need to talk to Donald


Trump about this. It is not something I support and I want to


understand why because I believe there is a better way to deal with


the terrorist threat. I would have liked her to suggest that she would


engage with him to do that. The president has instituted a 90 day


temporary ban on people coming from seven mainly Muslim majority


population countries. The seven were on President Obama's list of the


biggest terrorist threats to the United States. Mr Trump wants this


temporary ban until he puts tougher vetting procedures in place. What is


wrong with that? Because it appeared to me that it wasn't thought through


and it was affecting ordinary citizens and some British citizens.


It can't be right that a president in that position of power can


arbitrarily come up with executive powers like that. It has already


been challenged by his own courts. So it is not the considered approach


I want to see in a global leader. Who do you believe will be hurt by


this, given that there can be exceptions on a case-by-case basis?


I think potentially, our global reputation is going to be hurt by


this. I have been to the refugee camps in Europe myself. There are


desperate people trying to free persecution who will be hurt by


this. We are trying to heal the wounds in this country not only


because of Brexit. This is a time of coming together, not about saying it


is located discriminatory against race and religion in this way. Do


you believe that Mr Trump's state visit should go ahead? Well, he is


the leader of America, so it does need to go ahead and we need to work


with him. I believe Theresa has started in a positive manner was


that she just needs to continue in that vein. If he comes to our


country, he needs to respect the way we feel about things. But yes, he is


the president, so he does need to come to the UK. There is some debate


within Westminster as to where it is appropriate for him to speak to MPs,


but it is right that he comes. But if he does come on a state visit,


should he be granted what this country has always thought of as a


great honour, which is a joint address to both Houses of


Parliament? I haven't been an MP long enough to understand the


protocol of where is the right location for him to do that, but I


believe in the past, it has been the greatest leaders, when they have


achieved great things globally, it is Westminster Hall. But there are a


number of MPs saying that is not the most appropriate place and I am


inclined to agree. You don't think he should be accorded the privilege


of speaking to a joint session of Parliament? I think there are places


where he can do that, but Westminster Hall is not yet the


right place. Thank you for joining us.


Steve, within 24 hours, we have seen the difficulty of becoming Donald


Trump's best friend. On the one hand, it could have huge advantages,


particularly for a Brexit Britain. On the other hand, if you are going


to be his best friend, you don't have to give a running commentary on


every major thing he does. Yeah. We have learned a bit about Theresa


May, that when she has to produce a set piece speech which she has time


to prepare, she can get it totally right and sometimes more than right.


When she is faced with a fast-moving story, she is leaden footed and


can't think quickly on her feet. We know, did she regret not saying


more? Evidently she did, because we got a statement from the Downing


Street spokesperson saying more. So she can't think quickly. She's going


to have to think very quickly in response to some of the things he's


going to be doing, because she will be asked about it all the time. It


does highlight the wider danger that the assumption that the special


relationship is always a safe and fertile place to be has been proven


wrong before and I think it will be proven wrong big-time in this case.


You're shaking your head. I don't see why we are responsible for


American domestic policy. I am as appalled as the next person by what


Donald Trump has done. He said he was going to do this, which was why


I did not want Americans to vote for him. In fact, what he has


implemented is much less than what he said he would do when he was


campaigning. I have always felt that the campaigning Trump was the real


Trump. But what he has done is actually constitutional. He has the


executive power to issue this order. It is within the rules in terms of a


class of aliens deemed to be a risk to the United States. It is a 90 day


limited ban. The last president who did this was a Democrat president,


President Carter. He did it in the aftermath of the Iranian crisis.


Well, given the spate of terror attacks on American territory in


recent years, you could argue that he meant well. I don't agree with


Donald Trump. But have people from these countries that he has banned


been involved in terrorist attacks? That is the absurdity. He has not


included Egypt or Pakistan. But I don't remove everyone getting in


such a state about President Carter. The reality is that it is a legal


thing for him to do. I don't like it. But it is not my territory. It


is illegal, because they have been given a right to remain by a judge


in Brooklyn and another judging Alexandra. That is a different issue


for people who have already gone through the vetting. I don't agree


with this. However, I don't think it's reasonable to say that Theresa


May, because she wants to do a deal with Donald Trump, I don't give is


reasonable to say she have to agree with each of his policies. It is


nonsense. But the issue, Janan, is not whether she needs to agree with


him. The question is that she will be questioned about him all the time


now. And although these are matters of domestic policy, the refugee


policy is international. They speak to issues that affect Britain as


well, and I would suggest that she will not get away with this


anonymous statement from Downing Street. People will demand a she


says something on the record. She would get away with it indefinitely.


These situations will recur every time Donald Trump says or does


something contentious. She will be pressed to this associate her


administration from his. She will probably be in a better logistical


situation to do so. She has spent a big chunk of the past 72 hours in


the air. She flew from Washington to Ankara, than from Ankara to London.


We don't have Air Force One, we don't have those frictionless


communications with the ground. She would have been incommunicado for


large periods of time when this story was breaking. That doesn't


excuse the stiff response when she landed and issued a statement via


Downing Street. But during that delay, she did have a plausible


excuse. She has also got a much more tricky geopolitical situation than


many other world leaders. She has to strike a favourable trade deal with


the new US president. It is all very well people saying Justin Trudeau of


Canada was much more vociferous in his criticism of Donald Trump. He is


already in Nafta, he is not striking a new deal. For how long, we don't


know. Exactly, he's trying to stay in Nafta, but he is in a less tricky


situation than she is. Now, Theresa May's was the first


foreign leader to meet President Trump and the visit


was seen as quite a coup for the Prime Minister,


keen for a new trading relationship with the United States


in the wake of Brexit. The Prime Minister congratulated


the new US President for his "stunning election victory"


but might not have intended to be pictured walking


through the White House with him That picture of Donald Trump helping


Theresa May down the steps through the White House colonnade


will be the enduring image Mrs May said the President


told her he was "100% behind Nato". And for her part, the Prime Minister


said she would work hard to make sure other Nato countries


increased their defence spending It's been announced


that there will be a new trade negotiation agreement,


with high-level talks The hope is that this will lead


to a new trade deal between the two countries as soon as


Britain leaves the EU. Mr Trump said he believed "Brexit's


going to be a wonderful thing". On Russia, Theresa May made clear


to Donald Trump her continued


backing for sanctions. And following the controversy over


the President's support for torture, Mr Trump said he would defer


to his Secretary of Defense, General James Mattis, who argues


that the practice doesn't work. And I'm joined now by the former


Ukip leader, Nigel Farage. Do you agree with Mr Trump's


decision to ban Syrian refugees indefinitely from entering the


United States? I agree with the concept of democracy, a point which


appears to be missed by almost all commentators including the BBC. He


was elected to get tough and say he would do everything in his power to


protect America from infiltration by ISIS terrorists. There are seven


countries on that list. He's entitled to do this. I didn't ask if


he was entitled, I asked if agree with it. I do, because if you just


look at what's happening in France and Germany, if you look at Angela


Merkel's policy which was to allow virtually anyone in from anywhere,


look what it led to. You said in 2013 there's a responsibility on all


of us in the free west to help some of those people fleeing Syria


literally in fear of their lives. That's the Christian community in


virtually all of those country, it is almost too late because many have


been wiped out but if you are looking for a genuine definition of


a refugee, going back to 1951, it is someone in direct fear of


persecution of their life because of their race, religion or beliefs. But


you didn't talk about only Christians, and in January 2014 you


said, I seem to recall it was Ukip who started the debate on allowing


Syrian refugees, you seem to be in favour of allowing proper refugees


into this country. If they can be defined. Mr Trump won't let any in.


He is running American policy, not British policy. Since I made those


comments, we have had the Angela Merkel madness and I think Trump's


policy in many ways has been shaped by what Angela Merkel did. He is


fully entitled to do this, and as far as we are concerned in this


country, I would like to see extreme vetting. Since 9/11 can you name any


terrorist event in the United States that has involved refugees that have


been allowed into the country? No, in fact the terrorist events have


been US citizens radicalised. When you have a problem already, why


would you wish to add to it? I would remind you that of the eight people


that committed those atrocities in Paris, five of them had got into


Europe posing as refugees so there is an issue here. But perhaps not


for America because it has the most rigorous and lengthy screening


process in the world, especially for Syrians. You have to register with


the UN agency for refugees, which then recommend certain names to


America, they then go through biometric screening, database


screening, intelligent screenings, including four separate intelligence


agencies screening you. How more rigorous would you want it to be? It


is much more rigorous than we are or the rest of Europe. This is why we


have elections, so voters can make choices and they voted for Donald


Trump to become president and he said he would put bans in place and


then move towards extreme vetting. As far as the Syrians are concerned


he's made that decision but that's what he was voted in fourth. Since


you know him, you have met him, you are confident of his, I'm testing


you on the logic of it. Not that he's democratically elected, I'm not


asking about that, I'm trying to get the case, particularly since if you


take the seven countries of which the ban applies for 19 days, again,


of these seven countries, its citizens have not been involved in


terrorist attacks in the United States. It would be a mistake to say


it is just Muslim countries because the biggest Muslim countries in the


world have not been included in this. The point is they have made


this assessment, they bought themselves 90 days to think about


the policy. This is exactly what Trump's voters would have wanted him


to do. You said the President's rhetoric on immigrants made even you


feel very uncomfortable. Because he started by saying there was a total


ban, then amended it to say there would be vetting. My guess is that


what he will do is try to genuinely help Syrian people and he will be


talking about the creation of some safe zones. Let's see. He hasn't. We


will see. I suspect something like that is coming down the trap. What


advice did you give to the president and his advisers ahead of Theresa


May's visit? That I wanted us to talk about trade and to give the


Prime Minister the impression that actually... When she has been


surrounded by her whole career by civil servants and politicians who


say that everything takes five years or seven years or ten years, to make


it clear to the Prime Minister that if there is will, these things can


be done quickly. Isn't there a danger of a British Prime Minister


who has to deal with the president of the United States, to Ally


herself so closely with such an unpredictable, controversial


president, banning Muslims in certain ways and refugees, building


a war with Mexico, threatening trade was with other countries, thinking


of ending sanctions against Russia? I missing something here, what is


controversial about defending the Mexican border? Bill Clinton spoke


in tough terms, George Bush built six miles of fence, and because it


is Donald Trump there is uproar. So you think there is no risk of the


British by Minister being the best friend of this type of president? I


think there is no risk in putting together a trade deal and no risk in


her being the bridge between America and the rest of Nato to say to Nato


members if you don't pay your 2% he is serious so on those things there


is no risk at all. It was clear from her Lancaster house speech that the


Brexiteers in the Government had won pretty much every argument in terms


of negotiations to come out. What you want from her? She was very good


as Home Secretary, Tory party conferences, the Tory press saying


this was the new Thatcher and she failed. She even failed to control


immigration from outside the European Union so yes, it was a good


speech and for many on the Eurosceptic side of the argument, I


could scarcely believe that a British Prime Minister was saying


things which I had been roundly abused and vilified for. But I have


a feeling we may be in for a very frustrating 2017. The mood as I can


see it in Brussels is that negotiating with Britain is not a


priority, they are far more worried about Dutch elections, French


elections, German elections and possibly even Italian elections. I


worry that by the end of this year we may not have made much progress


and that's why the Trump visit suddenly things brings into focus.


What if by the middle of June, for argument 's sake, the Americans say


OK we reached this position with the British, compromised on the tough


stuff, food standards and things like that, we are ready to sign a


deal now, and Theresa May is to say actually Mr Juncker says I cannot


sign this until we leave. What will they do? They cannot throw us out,


we are living anyway. But everybody agrees you can talk about the deal,


maybe even do the heads of agreement but you cannot sign a treaty until


we have left the EU. Let me predict that at the end of this year we will


find a European Union who frankly don't want to talk to us and


countries around the world that want to get on and do things and that


will be the big tension for Mrs May over the course of this year. If the


Prime Minister is giving you everything you want on Brexit, you


agree that she's trying to get from your point of view the right things.


If she delivers on that and get Brexit on the terms of which you


approve, what's the point of Ukip? You could argue that about any


political party. If we have achieved the goal that we set out to achieve,


there are right now out there 4 million people who are Ukip


loyalists. They are delighted that by voting Ukip we got a referendum,


they will be even happier if they seek us leave the European Union and


I think there is still a gap in British politics for a party that


says it as it sees it, is not afraid by political correctness and is seen


to be on the side of the little people, and that's why, with the


Labour Party is fundamentally split, and it really is totally split over


this European question, I think Ukip is in good shape. That proposition


will be put to test at the Stoke Central by-election, one of Ukip's


best prospects in the country. Some people call it the capital of


Brexit. Labour is in chaos over Article 50, is picked a candidate to


fight Stoke Central who has described Brexit is a pile of notes.


If your successor, Paul Nuttall, cannot win the Stoke by-election,


there's not much hope for you, is there? I think he will. I've always


been told don't make predictions but I think he will win. If you doesn't


it will be tough, we will still have our 4 million loyalists, but if it


does we can actually see Labour are beatable in their heartlands and


Ukip will be off to the second big stage. Nigel Farage, thank you for


being with us. It's just gone 11.25,


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


in Scotland, who leave us now Coming up here in 15 minutes, I'll


be talking to our political panel. The Lancashire MP taking a lead


on loneliness and the legacy Seema Kennedy on that


campaign a little later. But here in this studio


we welcome Justin Madders, the Labour MP for Ellesmere Port


and Neston, and Mark Menzies, We start with Brexit and this week's


ruling that Parliament will vote on whether we begin


the exit process. Here are a couple of MPs


who've said they will vote The Government are trying


to persuade the public they can It is all going to end in tears


in one way or another unless people reflect positively,


and with clarity, on the outcome when negotiations are complete,


and that requires, I think, Up until now, I have not heard


any convincing argument from the Government about the kind


of negotiation that they want to enter into, which will look


after the people of So, no surprises on the Lib Dem


stance - they want a public vote Much trickier for Labour


MPs and Conservative, whose constituents voted to remain


in the European Union, Justin, is Jeremy Corbyn right


to impose a three-line whip on this, knowing there will be a big crisis


of conscience for lots of his MPs? Well, he is the leader so he has got


to lead on these things, and I think sometimes people


are a bit unfair on him So, I think the shoe's


on the other foot. The criticism of him on this,


I think, is a bit misplaced. But I do appreciate that MPs


who are representing constituencies who heavily voted for Remain


are going to be put in a very difficult position,


and they have got to listen to what the constituents say,


as well as the wider electorate. Jeff Smith and Ann Coffey have both


declared that they will vote Do you think we are likely


to see more rebellion? I think, certainly, we have got


to look at what the votes That is to try to predict


where people are going to vote, and obviously Jeff's example, 76%


of his constituents voted Remain, and I don't think anyone can


argue that he is not reflecting the wishes of his own


individual constituents. But I think the majority of Labour


MPs will vote to trigger Article 50. Has the Prime Minister had


to compromise twice this week, once conceding to the House when it


comes to voting on triggering, and secondly she has said


she will reveal her hand when it She did not want to do


either of those things. Well, compromise is


a word that you use. I would actually say


"setting out a clear position". So, you know, people have been


asking for some clarity The Prime Minister,


not just on the issue of the White Paper this week,


but more importantly in the speech that she made the previous week,


made it very, very clear on the key points were that she


would be entering in And one of the principal thinks


that people in the north-west is one of the principal things


that the Prime Minister's concerned about, is ensuring


that there is no free movement of people in the way


that we had in the past, and also ensuring that we have got


as much access for British goods and services, not just in Europe


but across the globe. Well, we learnt a little bit this


week in that respect. One man who has an unenviable task


over the next couple of years is Lindsay Hoyle,


the Deputy Speaker of the House. He is going to have to go


through all of those amendments This is going to be an incredibly


messy divorce, isn't it? Do you think the two-year timetable


for agreeing on a deal, I suppose one of the criticisms


we can marvel at Theresa May is that she could have got


on with this process a little bit earlier,


had she fought the court case. That has been a complete


waste of time and money, because every legal opinion


was clear that she was not So we have lost considerable time,


but we could have been And I think it is very important,


from my constituents' perspective, that the rights that we have got


from Europe, particularly in terms of employment protection,


are retained, and of course for the manufacturing industry


in my area that we have as good access as possible


to the free market. And that means no


tariffs, if possible. Prime Minister back in the autumn


made it very clear that Article 50 Article 50 will be


triggered in March. It looks set to the timetable


for now, but I am sure we will be The cabinet came to


the north-west this week. With an industry-themed 60


Seconds, here's Carol Lowe. From Westminster to Warrington -


the Prime Minister brought the top table of Government


to the north-west to unveil her industrial strategy and commitment


to the local economy. Investment in the Northern


Powerhouse that will bring jobs - that's part of our industrial


strategy, which is about ensuring the economy is working


across the whole country. Later in the week, the Minister


in charge of delivering the Northern Powerhouse came


to Ellesmere Port to open Also in the money was Blackpool,


which is hoping to bring back party conferences with ?15 million


of Government funding I hope it will start to make many,


many people in Blackpool feel that Labour's Steve Rotheram


launched his campaign for metro mayor of the Liverpool City region


with a pledge to improve apprenticeships and fight


for more devolved powers. And one of the region's most


prestigious manufacturers is celebrating a record year -


there were bumper sales So, I met the Prime Minister on


Monday when she was in Warrington. The thing that stood out


about my interview with her was, in the space of a very short


interview, she mentioned She was really reluctant to use that


phrase last summer, wasn't she? And can we take from that fact


it's alive and well? Does it feel like it's something


tangible, Justin, to you? Or is it just a phrase


that means nothing? I've always felt it was a little bit


of PR spin, and not a lot The announcements on investment


this week have been repeated twice before,


so there is nothing new there. And particularly I am disappointed


for my constituency because we had a bid put in to regenerate


Ellsemere Port town centre, which appears to have been


completely kicked out. But we do know there will be highway


improvement in and Cheshire, funding for new bridges and cycle


routes, all around Well, it's no bad thing, but,


at the moment, my constituents can't get from one side


of the constituency to the other on public


transport after six o'clock. The whole area turned


into gridlock whenever there's an accident on the M56,


because the Government And when you have six times as much


investment per person in London as you get in the rest


of the country, I think we are miles away


from the Northern Powerhouse Well, let's have a look at how the


rest of the money was divided up. We found out that, in total,


there will be more than ?320 million for local enterprise partnerships


across the north-west. Greater Manchester will get almost


as much as Liverpool And Cumbria got just


less than ?13 million - less than a tenth of what it


had bid for. Do you think that Cumbria,


Cheshire and Lancashire are missing out because they've not reached


a devo deal? No, I think more importantly


it is about the quality of the leadership in


the local enterprise partnerships... A few of them have dynamic people


leading and driving them But to pick up just on one thing -


we saw in your package Blackpool For years, people in Blackpool have


been crying out for investment Conferences, as you know,


on the big scale, have gone People were marched up the hill


by Labour promising them a super-casino to be let


down at the last minute. This is now starting to deliver


to the tourist economy That's something this


Government has delivered But certainly come up in Cumbria,


they think that the LEP They think they are being punished


by the Government for not Well, on Monday I asked


a question on nuclear. I mean, nuclear fuels


in my constituency, nuclear power is hugely significant


for the north-west. Greg Clark, in his reply, started


to lay out the nuclear vision, which will impact on great tens


of thousands of jobs Nuclear power station in Cumbria -


21,000 jobs alone. The Prime Minister has made it


clear that she backs it. Now, that, to me, is


a Northern Powerhouse. And, Justin, when it comes to job


creation and when it comes to industry and when it comes


to unemployment, that is somewhere where public perception is much more


on the side of the public Government Well, I think there's a whole


debate that we need have We know that real earnings have not


risen for ten years, and there's millions of people


now in insecure And I think when we are looking


at investing in industry, we also need to look at what sort


of jobs we create. Are we creating sustainable,


long-term jobs that allow people to put down roots and invest


in their own futures as well? Do you feel there is that


pressure in Cheshire as well to form a devolution deal,


to have an elected mayor so that you can stand


as one voice and say, To put in bids the way that


Greater Manchester and Merseyside I think there is a very


clear message coming from the Government on that,


and I think it does, kind of, contradict a little bit


the whole devolution stance, in the sense that the Government


is saying, you can have devolution but it has to be


on these specific terms. That's not really listening to


what local communities are saying. Are they holding


communities to ransom? I was up in Wyre this


week, which is not far They have no interest in having


an elected mayor there, and yet they would be handed money,


literally, if they agree to it. No, I think that the town


of Wyre are right. And I think there is no such thing


as one size fits all. The principle of combined


authorities in many parts of the country is absolutely


the right thing to do, And I think, in my part


of the world as well, I'm beginning to question


what is in it for the people that I represent in a combined authority,


and I think we are going to see The Government have told us, though,


the Department for Communities and Local Government told me this


morning that you simply are in a position to make stronger


bids if you are part of a combined authority, and a unified voice is


better than a lot of single voices. I think some of this


is about Emperor's new clothes. But I think it's time that we got


solutions that fitted each area, Very quickly, Justin,


would you like to see Personally, I don't think it's


the right fit for Cheshire. There's lots of different towns


with different priorities. It's not like in Liverpool


and Manchester when you've got a very clear city


centre and hinterland. I would like to see more


devolution and more power is going to local communities,


but, personally, I'm not persuaded that a mayor is the right


vehicle to deliver that. Seven months ago, the murder


of Jo Cox shocked the country, and close to the Labour MP's heart


was what she called Before her death, the mum-of-two


from Yorkshire started a cross-party Now a Conservative from this side


of the Pennines is looking At the Seasons group in Preston,


older people come together to talk They come, they get a coffee,


and they sit and chat These gatherings are organised


by Longford community church, but anyone is welcome


whether they're religious or not. Figures suggest millions


of older people feel Before her murder, Jo Cox had begun


planning a Loneliness Commission She wanted it to be cross-party


and she wanted to involve lots of partner organisations


and have a year of looking at the issue of loneliness,


which is a really heading Now, Seema Kennedy and colleagues


are taking the mantle on, working with 13 charities to look


into loneliness and come up So, Beryl, what was it that brought


you to Seasons for the first time? Well, I'd heard about Seasons


because I was lonely ,and I was looking for a church


as well, but he came here because there were people


who were like-minded The highlight of many people's


day is the food that The Commission will also look at how


other age groups are affected. Key is a charity in Leyland that


helps vulnerable teenagers They can meet other young


people who have been through similar situations,


and we know that they can feel a real sense of


belonging to this place. What's your experiences


of coming down to Key Youth? Coming here, it just feels more


better than being sat at home. I will come here and drop


in to colour and talk What she said in her maiden speech,


and what we think about, there is more in common and we need


to love like Jo and have that great empathy for everybody


in our communities. The commission


will produce a manifesto and call on Government to take action,


but it's also hoped that highlighting the issue over the next


year will ensure individuals make And a successful commission


on loneliness that crosses party divides would be a great legacy


for someone who is obviously You know, Seema was working on this


with Jo at the time of Jo's death. And rather than let this drop,


you know, Seema feels that she owes this, and is working together


with Labour MPs such as Rachel Reeves in order


to really drive this, and make it happen as part


of the memory, just part And, you know, why this matters


is that there are thousands of people in all of our areas,


in my constituency, of all age It is people that suffer


from bereavement. They may have gone through a health


crisis, and they find themselves suddenly isolated,


and just needing a bit of support, And there is nothing


more cruel or wicked And, Justin, is it something you see


in your constituency as well, And it needs intervention


from the state? It does, and I think it needs


as all to have a look at ourselves There is in my constituency a great


organisation that has started having elderly people in who are isolated


and getting them a meal, getting them a bit of entertainment


and a bit of company, and that really can make such


a difference to people's lives. We should do an awful


lot more of it. It can be the tiniest


thing, that it? There is an organisation


called Just Good Friends. A nice plug for


Just Good Friends, there. A big thank you to


this week's guests, It's time to hand you back


to Andrew Neil in London. air-pollution. Thank you for being


here. Welcome back and let's get back


to Donald Trump's travel ban on refugees and citizens from seven


mainly Muslim countries. Earlier, the Labour leader,


Jeremy Corbyn, told ITV that a state visit by President Trump to the UK


should not go ahead I think it would be totally wrong


for him to be coming here while that situation is going on. He has to be


challenged on this. So until the ban is lifted, you don't think he should


come? I am not happy about him coming here until the ban is lifted.


Look at what is happening with those countries. What will be the long


term effect of this on the rest of the world? Is this state visit going


to become a matter of huge political debate in this country? It would be


anyway, but it is a temporary ban, so Jeremy Corbyn is on safe


territory. It will be over by April and he is not due to come until


summer. But there are three bands. There is the 90 day ban on people


coming from the southern countries. There is the 120 day ban on refugees


from anywhere in the world, and there is the indefinite ban on


Syrian refugees. So there may still be some bans in place. But bear in


mind the number of Syrian refugees and refugees from around the world


that President Obama took over his eight years. There were years when


it was not even up to 50 Syrian refugees that were taken since the


civil war has started. This is an ongoing American policy. 12,500


Syrian refugees have come in the last year. Before that, it was a


hundred and sometimes under 50. But they are reasonable numbers now,


although not something America couldn't absorb. Donald Trump is


discovering that being a president is different from being a business


man. And Jeremy Corbyn has to learn the art of leadership, having been a


backbench MP, and has struggled to do it, as we are about to discuss


with article 50. With this, you have to dramatise the politics of this,


and this is what he has done with that statement. Most controversial


ever state visit now? I would imagine so. Even regardless of any


opposition from the opposition to trump's physical presence in the


streets, the presence of demonstrators will be an


international new story. If trump's demands for the details of the visit


are quite as extreme and as picky as some of the Sunday papers have


suggested, that could also be the source of controversy. What do you


have in mind? Isn't he anxious that only certain members of the Royal


Family turn up? He doesn't want a one-on-one with Prince Charles. Who


would, though! Some people may be sympathetic on that. It is the one


subject where he is in line with British opinion. Playing golf in


front of the Queen may be a higher priority. We have to be realistic.


Given the other people from around the world that the Queen has played


host to, like the Chinese president and Saudi kings and the like, we


have had a lot worse come to visit than Donald Trump. Brexit - how


serious our neighbour's problems on this? Very serious, but they often


are with Europe. Labour were splits when we joined in the 70s, and still


won general elections, in 1974 and 1975. There were all over the place


in terms of the single currency. Blair said one thing one day and the


opposite the next day. Brown did the same.


Brown usually set the opposite of what Blair said! They won landslide


because they have the political skills to put all of the pressure on


the major government, even though their position on the single


currency was the same as major's. It is about with Europe the art of


leadership. You have to be a political conjuror, you have to


dissemble authoritative leak when you lead a divided party over


Europe, and Jeremy Corbyn to his personal credit cannot dissemble,


but he's not an individual person on this. He's leading a split party in


danger of falling apart, and you need the skills of a political


conjurer. Clearly self-evidently he's not displaying it because we


are talking about the chaotic split which will manifest itself in that


vote on Article 50. Labour and the SNP and the Lib Dems too I would


have thought will all put amendments down to the short Article 50 piece


of legislation. Do they have any chance of succeeding? No substantial


world is changing amendments. I don't think Theresa May has much to


worry about actually. I think if anything the reason she's pushed the


legal appeal is that it helps her to have a big chunk of the media and a


big chunk of public opinion worrying that the popular will of last year


is in danger of being overturned and so even if it was a completely


hopeless legal appeal, it generated headlines for a week that as an


incumbent Prime Minister trying to execute believe vote suits you


politically. I think it is a much bigger problem for Labour, we've


already seen some Shadow Cabinet issues in the previous week. You


have got to remember it's not just a majority of Labour MPs that want to


stay in the European Union, but a majority of Labour constituencies,


and a majority of labour macro voters wanted to stay as well so we


have three lines of division. One amendment that might get through if


it was called, and it is in the hands of the Deputy speaker who will


be chairing these debates, and that will be an amendment that said


regardless of how the Europeans treat our citizens in Europe, all EU


citizens here will be afforded full rights to remain. That might get


through. It may indeed and lots of backbench MPs would backpack. We all


know there will not be mass deportations, it is not legal, it


won't happen, it is simply a negotiating tactic. I agree with


those who say you shouldn't be using people as a negotiating tactic, but


the reality as it is the EU leaders that are doing that because it's


already been offered. The remain as should be attacking the EU


governments for not offering that in return. Article 50 is the easy bit


for her. I agree with other members of the panel that she will get it


through and the court case almost helps her by getting an easy journey


through Parliament, then it gets really difficult. All of this has


been a preamble and once she begins that nightmarish negotiation, there


will be opportunities for a smart opposition to make quite a lot of


the turmoil to come. Whether Labour are capable of that, let's wait and


see. The divisions in Labour are nightmarish for them but by no means


unprecedented. Arguably it was much more complicated in the early 1970s


when you had Titans on either side, big ex-cabinet ministers... Tony


Benn... Michael Foot, they were all at it. The fundamental issue of in


or out, and they won two elections, so you have got to be really clever.


But also how money more Labour MPs will resign. We shall find out this


week. The Daily Politics is back


tomorrow at midday and all I'll be back here


on BBC one next week. Remember - if it's Sunday,


it's the Sunday Politics.