19/11/2017 Sunday Politics North West

Morning everyone, and welcome

to the Sunday Politics.

I'm Sarah Smith.

And this is your guide

to all the big stories that

are shaping politics this weekend,

and a few of the smaller ones too.

on Wednesday and he's not short

of advice - to spend more,

show restraint, even

to stop being an Eyore -

but can he change the direction

of the country and his government?

some advice of his own.

He thinks the Chancellor

is being far too gloomy about Brexit

The former Leave campaign leader,

Gisela Stuart, will be here debating

with pro-EU campaigner

Alastair Campbell, after taking

a trip to her native Germany

to speak to businesses

about Brexit.

And, as we wait to find out what's

on the menu for this week's budget,

we're in a diner off

the A1 in Peterborough,

finding out who people most trust

with the economy -

And in the northwest,

freedom of movement.

Well, there's plenty in

these feet, but what

about post Brexit?

Will the Irish here still

be dancing with joy?

And with me for for all of it,

three journalists who've promised

not to show off like Michael Gove

by using any long economicky words -

although I'm not sure they really

know that many anyway -

it's Tom Newton Dunn,

Gaby Hinsliff and Iain Martin.

Let's take a look at the big

political stories making the news

this Sunday morning,

and as you might expect there's

plenty of speculation

about what might or not might be

in Philip Hammond's Budget.

The Chancellor is promising a big

investment in new technology,

including driverless cars -

which could be on the road by 2021.

He's been interviewed

in the Sunday Times,

where he talks about plans to reach

the target of building

300,000 homes every year,

or the equivalent of a city

the size of Leeds.

That paper speculates that he's

attempting to turn from "fiscal

Phil" into "hopeful Hammond"

as he tries to set out

a vision for the country,

not just a list of numbers.

The Sunday Telegraph thinks that

Mr Hammond is planning to offer

a pay rise to nurses as part

of a bid to take on Labour.

But that hasn't impressed

Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell.

He's spoken to a number of papers

and is calling for an emergency

budget to invest in public services

and help struggling households.

So that's a taste of what you might

hear on Wednesday and Mr Hammond

and Mr McDonnell have both been

appearing this morning

on the Andrew Marr Show.

I think Britain has a very

bright future ahead of it,

and we have to embrace

the opportunities that

a post-Brexit world will offer.

They will be opportunities that

are based on huge change,

huge technological evolution.

It's not always going to be easy,

but the British people have shown

time and time again that we're up

for these challenges.

For many people out there,

this is a depression.

We've had people whose wages

have been cut by 10%.

Nurses, for example.

We've had people who are now...

1.25 million food parcels handed out

in the sixth richest

country in the world.

That's what I call a recession

for large numbers of people.

We will be talking about Labour and

their economic policies in a moment,

but let's start with what we might

expect from the budget. We will talk

to our panel of political observers.

Philip Hammond is under pressure to

set out a bold vision and reset the

government's programme. Can we

expect that?

No, we can't. We have

heard enough from the Chancellor

across various broadcast and his

article in the Sunday Times. I think

we will not be getting a bold

budget. His precise words short... A

short time ago were a balanced

budget. Some Tory hearts will think.

They desperately want something to

go out and shout about, something to

capture people's imagination, and do

big and bold things, like how on

earth are they going to build those

new 300,000 houses a year? There are

good reasons why he has chosen what

appears to be a pretty staid,

Conservative budget, and that is

that they are probably unable to get

anything bold through Parliament.

His capital is so low among Tory

MPs. If you have a minority

government, it is tricky.

We have

seen ministers on programmes like

this in the last few weeks putting

in the bids for what they would like

spending on, whether it be payment

for nurses or parliament. Would he

struggled to get something radical

through the Commons?

Big ideas cost

money. That's the problem. Bold

ideas are controversial. In some

ways, Tory MPs are asking their

Chancellor to do the impossible.

Government is already doing

something big and bold, which is

Brexit. That has implications for

how much money is available, how

many risks you want to take with

everything else. What is crucial is

that he demonstrates a reputation

for competence. The reputation that

the Conservative government has for

economic competence, that many

people prefer them to Labour on the

issue of economic competence. The

worst thing he could do is come up

with a big, bold idea that

unravelled quickly. What they

absolutely don't want is to come up

with an exciting idea that falls

apart three days after the budget.

He is under pressure from

Brexiteers, who are suspicious of

him. Does he have to offer them

something?

Part of his problem is he

has to offer so many different

people different things. This is

Philip Hammond trying to be and

dynamic.

It is hard to tell

sometimes.

At least in theoretical

terms. His longer-term difficulty is

that, if you look at the economic

cycle, we are getting to a point

where we are probably overdue, if

you put Brexit to one side, overdue

some kind of correction or downturn,

if you look what has happened to

asset prices globally. What will be

worrying for the Treasury is, just

as everyone is saying we should turn

on the taps and build this or that,

we might be at the top of a cycle,

and the Treasury will want to lose

something in the armoury in terms of

probably growing the deficit if

there are economic difficulties in

the next two years, and then there

is Brexit as well.

It sounds

impossible.

I think so. Talking to

his friends and colleagues over the

last few days, he had to make a

call, which was precisely how much

can I get away with, with my

political capital being as low as it

is, with the mixed problems he had

at the last budget, and a lot of the

party disliking his approach to

Brexit. He is damned if he is,

damned if he doesn't. Universal

Credit, we are expecting a reduction

in the time it takes to wait,

business rates, affected by high

inflation... I think we will see a

problem fixing budget which will

probably do quite a lot of important

spadework in many areas.

We will

pick up on some of this later in the

programme.

Let's speak now to the Conservative

MP Jacob Rees-Mogg, this week

he helpfully launched an alternative

"budget for Brexit" and advised

the Chancellor to be less gloomy

about the consequences

of leaving the EU.

Thank you for joining us. Your

alternative budget is pretty

radical. Almost half corporation

tax, Cap Stamp duty to help the

London market. It seems you are

advocating the opposite from what we

will hear from your Chancellor on

Wednesday.

There are two parts to

the proposals I suggested. One is

that we should show that after we

have left the European Union, the UK

is open to the rest of the world. It

is about opening up to the rest of

the world. Secondly, looking at the

modelling that has been done by the

Treasury and some other forecasters,

which has been so comprehensively

wrong. The forecasts made about what

would happen after Brexit have

turned out to be hopelessly false.

The team at Cardiff University have

done some modelling based on the

classical economic principles and

what happens if you move to free

trade that would be very positive

for the economy.

You are predicting

a Brexit dividend of £135 billion,

which sounds fantastic. Why are you

right, and everybody else, including

the Bank of England and the

Institute for Fiscal Studies, why

are they all wrong?

It depends on

the type of modelling. The modelling

that have been done by the Treasury

have been based on gravity models,

which work on the basis of the

nearness of the market and the size

of the economy you are trading with.

These have been wrong in the past.

They predicted that if we joined the

euro, trade would grow by 300%. That

was then revised down to 200%, but

it is fantasyland. The model I am

working on, by Sir Patrick Minford,

who has a record of getting these

things right. He was right about the

exchange rate mechanism, right about

the euro.

Being right in the past

doesn't mean you are right about the

future. Why do you think the

Treasury will not pick up the same

numbers, if this is so obvious to

you?

I think the Treasury was

humiliated by the errors in its

forecast prior to Brexit, and is

trying to defend its position. The

short-term economic consequences of

a vote to leave was one of the most

dishonest documents to come out of

the Treasury, purely a piece of

political propaganda. They are

wounded by that and sticking to the

same script, rather than looking at

other forecasts and other experts.

You think the governor of the Bank

of England is an enemy of Brexit,

and it sounds like you think the

Treasury is opposed to it. As the

Chancellor fallen under their spell

as well, and been persuaded to be an

enemy of Brexit?

I have admiration

the Chancellor, but George Osborne,

his predecessor, was the architect

of Project Fear. He was too close to

the Bank of England and lost his

independence. That is what needs to

change. It is an opportunity in the

budget for Philip Hammond to show he

is putting aside the Treasury's

mistakes in the past. It is very

encouraging what he is saying this

morning, about a more positive

approach to Brexit.

Lord Lawson has

accused Philip Hammond of being very

close to sabotage on Brexit. He says

we need a can-do man at the Treasury

and not a prophet of doom.

I think

that Philip Hammond is an

exceptionally intelligent man, a

very thoughtful man. It is not a bad

thing to have a Chancellor who is

serious minded and steady, rather

than one who is a showman and uses

the Exchequer to interfere in

absolutely everything.

I have a lot

of confidence in the Chancellor.

When you launched your budget for

Brexit, you said the government has

to deliver the £350 million for the

NHS that was delivered during the

referendum, even though you didn't

think that promise should have been

made. Is that something they now

need to deliver wrong?

It is. This

only happens once we have left.

Politicians have to recognise that

voters don't look at the small print

of electoral policies. If you put

£350 million on the side of a bus

and say it may be available for the

NHS, it is reasonable for people to

think that is a promise. Brexit was

won by the Leave campaign, so it it

is important that they deliver on

that promise. Politicians must keep

faith with voters and deliver on

implied promises, as well as ones

that are set out in detail.

The

Cabinet will move on to talk about

the Brexit bill this week, and we

understand they may need to come up

with more money to satisfy EU

demands. The more money spent on

that is less money available for

things like spending on the NHS. Are

you worried about the size of the

exit bill?

You have your finger on

the important point. The government

will have to choose whether to give

lots of money to the European Union,

or whether to spend money on UK

public services, and that will be

part of the negotiation. On all

these issues, it comes down to

choice is the government makes. I

would encourage the government to

choose our own domestic public

services rather than expensive

schemes in continent or Europe.

Why

are you advocating that the

government should spend up to £2.5

billion on a no deal scenario?

It is important that we are ready to

leave in the event of no deal. If we

left with no deal we would on

current figures still be saving the

remains of 18 billion so we would be

saving 15 and a half billion against

paying for the financial framework.

To show we're ready on day one would

be money well spent and most would

be needed any way. We need to have

new customs arrangements in place

even if it is not for a no deal

situation.

There are suggestions

that the Government might back down

on the idea of putting the time and

date of leaving the EU on the face

of the bill. Would you be Exxon

certained if that was -- concerned

if that was remove prd the bill?

It

is in Article 50, unless Article 50

is extended by the Council of Europe

we leave on 20th March 2019 and it

makes accepts that should be the

same in -- sense that should be in

same in domestic law. But that is a

secondary concern from my point of

view. It is important that we leave

on that date.

Stay there if you

would.

We're joined in the studio

by the former minister

Stephen Hammond.

He's no relation to the Chancellor,

but he is a member

of the Treasury Select Committee

and he's one of the Tory MPs named

as "Brexit mutineers"

by the Daily Telegraph

this week - lucky him.

I'm assured you're no relation to

the Chancellor. Let's just pick up

on what Jacob Rees Mogg was saying.

How important is it to you as a

rebel that the Government does put

the date on.

I agree with Jacob it

is in the Article 50 process, the

key reason it is important is the

negotiations look like they're going

to be tricky and longer than we

expected and it may well be that we

are still negotiating up until March

2019. We could have a short couple

of weeks period of extension. Why do

harm to the economy by falling out

on a precise time? If those

negotiations need to be extended.

They won't go on for more than a

couple of weeks, because there will

be elections in Europe in June 2019

and there is no chance of a new

commission or Parliament dealing

with this. Giving it flexibility and

with this flexibility the government

said it wants flexibility in

negotiations, why give all the

advantage to the other side? Part of

that was evidenced yesterday by

somebody suggesting they will ask

for the Margaret Thatcher rebate to

be suspended. That is as a result of

putting the date on the bill.

You

did not agree with the Brexit

committee and think it is important

that we set the date and time?

I

think it is perfectly reasonable to

set the date and time and I think

these negotiations fill the time

available. The United States and

Australia agreed a free trade deal

between April 2003 and February

2004. These things don't need to be

interm Knabl if both sides want to

agree. I think the British

electorate would be very concerned

if nearly three years after the vote

to leave, we still hadn't left. I

think most people expected that we

would have left by now. The

negotiations realistically to get

through the approval of the European

Parliament and so on need to be

completed by at the end of next

year, going up to the last minute I

don't think is real is tick.

To move

on to talk about a trade deal and

getting that done, the EU need to

agree to move on and we need to

settle the divorce, cabinet are

going to be talking about the amount

that needs to be spent on that,

Stephen what manned, are you happy

for the Government to offer more?

I

hope that the Government will stick

to the Florence speech in terms of

ensuring that we fulfil our

liabilities and obligations. I'm not

clear exactly whether that is 20

billion or 40 billion and I'm not

sure the government is. If part of

the divorce bill is then some

settlement for getting the trade

deal, we will need to examine that

carefully.

Jacob Rees Mogg, is this

that might spark another war in the

party if the cabinet suggest they're

prepared to pay more?

I think we

need to go back to what you said,

that the - the EU said they want us

to settle the money first. The

Government doesn't need to follow

that. They need our money. If we

don't pay any money for the final 21

months of the framework, the EU has

about 20 billion pounds gap in its

finances and it has no legal

requirement to borrow. So it

insolvents or the Germans and the

others pay more. So our position on

money is very strong and we

shouldn't fall into the trap of

thinking just because Mr Barnier

said it it is as if he has received

tablets of stone like Moses, he has

not.

There is a sense that the

Government feels a mo generous offer

would set a good tone, the kind of

approach that Jacob Rees Mogg

suggests would not make for smooth

relations.

It probably wouldn't. But

we have to be clear what we are

paying for and what we are getting.

No one is suggesting we should hand

over money without proper scrutiny.

It may be appropriate to put money

to facilitate international trade to

secure jobs. We have to be careful

about the analysis about what the

scale and size of Brexit dividend is

and the size of payments will be.

You mustn't confuse gross and net

and there is disagreement about some

of the numbers.

On that, Jacob Rees

Mogg in his budget for Brexit

suggests in five years time we would

have a 135 billion Brexit bonus. Do

you think it is real is tick.

He is

using some analysis that has some

flaws. It is predicting a price drop

in the United Kingdom of 10%. Tariff

drops will only be 3 or 4%. It is

predicting huge productivity gains,

the likes of which we have not seen

in 20 years. Thirdly, despite his

view on modellers there is evidence

that they weren't and if you go into

the detail of the analysis, some of

the data is 14 years out of date.

Jacob Rees Mogg, you're being

hopelessly optimistic?

I don't think

that right. I think the fall in

prices comes because you make the

economy more competitive and you

take away tariffs which reduces the

price of food by 20%. That is a big

reduction. Bear in mind that the

biggest tariffs hit food, clothing

and foot wear that, harm the poorest

in society the most. The gains from

productivity come from is in

additional tariffs. Leading to other

saving and further investment I

think the modelling done by the

professor is as good as modelling

can be. That doesn't mean it is

infallible. The failure of gravity

model is well known.

Michael Gove

was accused of auditioning for the

job of Chancellor by using long

words. Do you know any good long

economic words?

I don't think that

we want to get into this type of

business actually. I think all

Conservatives and Steven and I very

much agree on this, want to show as

united a front as we can manage.

There are differences on some

aspects of policy, but in terms of

individuals we want to stand

together and support the best

interests of the government.

Thank

you.

Brexit Secretary David Davis

was in Berlin this week trying

to win the support of business

leaders there for a comprehensive

free trade deal with the EU.

He warned them against putting

'politics above prosperity'

and reportedly got a bit

of a frosty reception.

Well, the former Labour MP

Gisela Stuart was one of the leaders

of the Vote Leave referendum

campaign.

We travelled with Gisela to Germany

to meet the business leaders

she says will help secure a good

trade deal for the UK.

Here's her film.

I was born and brought up

in this part of Germany,

and although I've lived in the UK

for the past 40 years,

and represented the constituency

of Birmingham and Edgbaston for 20

years, my family still live here,

and I've kept many links.

I was chair of Vote Leave,

and together with only a handful

of other Labour MPs,

we campaigned to leave

the European Union because we

thought the country would be

better off outside.

It's hard to remember now, but back

in the 1970s, when we joined

the European Economic Community,

people thought that by joining

the club we would see the kind

of economic miracle Germany

experienced in the '70s back home.

The "Deutsche Wirtschaftswunder"

would come to Britain.

But, of course, it didn't.

Within a few short years

of the devastation of World War II,

Germany had emerged as

the largest economy in Europe.

Germany's extraordinary

success is down to

the pragmatism of its business.

German Mittelstand is family

dominated, forward-thinking,

long-term thinking, reliability,

are very important values.

Changing moods on a political

landscape and changing frameworks

are toxic for our way of doing

business, and we want

that to go away.

German business is not given

to making big political statements

out of step with government policy,

but talk to those in decision-making

positions, and it is clear

that they want to secure a good deal

with the United Kingdom.

BMW employs almost 90,000

people here in Germany,

and exports just under

1 million cars annually.

The UK is a vital market.

What we are really seeking right now

is more clarity, more certainty,

because in our cycle of investment,

cycle of development,

it's about a seven-year or so period

that we look at,

but we are now, of course, starting

to think about what comes next,

and what we need to see now

is what is going to be

the trading relationship,

how are the logistics going to look,

what is going to be

the requirements for people

moving across the continent?

Because all of these things

are important to us today.

And, by the way, they will be just

as important tomorrow.

Berlin is well aware that

if the European Commission

is allowed to put up trade barriers

against Britain, it will be

German business, German consumers

and German employees

who will suffer.

TRANSLATION:

I think it's very

important that we complete

the first phase successfully.

The first phase of the negotiations,

which looks at the financial

consequences of Great Britain

leaving the EU.

And then it's not a question

of punishment payments.

It's about when you are part

of a multilayer, contractual

obligation and you want to leave

that, then of course it takes

a whole lot of obligations

which you have to deal with,

so both sides are satisfied and can

live with the consequences.

It isn't everyone's interests

for the UK to part on good terms.

Of course there was going to be

upset when the UK voted to leave,

but creating uncertainty over

the terms of UK's exit will simply

have a disruptive effect

on exports to UK markets.

Far better to have a sensible,

amicable negotiation that results

both sides being able to trade

together and work

together post-Brexit.

Markus Krall is managing

director of Goetzpartners,

and heads the Financial

Institution Industry Group.

Is it true to say that,

if we negotiate Brexit well,

then a good Brexit can actually

strengthen the United Kingdom,

the European Union and Germany?

It's absolutely true.

I think that this

is about two things.

One, about proving that

free trade is possible

between a European Union that is

smaller and a former member country.

If you don't prove that free

trade is possible there,

then the question becomes,

what is Europe standing for?

Number two is, I also

believe the free trade,

free market and democratic and less

bureaucratic approach that Britain

has chosen as the path

into the future is a role

model for Europe.

The time has come both

for the United Kingdom

and for the EU to be more clear

about what kind of

deal we can achieve.

Both sides need to be bold.

As long as we remain open to free

trade and sensible co-operation,

we can arrive at something that

will benefit both sides.

But one thing's obvious -

if we are an open and free trading

economy, we've got one big

cheerleader on our side,

and that is German business.

That was Gisela Stuart

setting out her case

and we'll be hearing

from the opposite side

of the argument in the coming weeks.

Gisela Stuart joins us in the studio

now, as does Alastair Campbell.

He used to work for Tony Blair

in Number 10, set up

the New European Newspaper

to campaign against Brexit,

and is so pro-European that at this

year's Labour conference

he was heard playing Ode

to Joy on the bagpipes.

Welcome both of you.

We will start with your point in the

film, that you think the German

business once the EU to offer the UK

a generous deal because it is in

their interests, yet the president

of the German equivalent of the CBI

said that defending the single

market must be the priority for the

EU, and another says that the

cohesion of the remaining member

states remains the highest priority.

The president of the CBI just after

the referendum said that it would be

in nobody 's interest to introduce

tariffs and trade barriers. On the

UK side, I don't think there's a

full understanding that economic

interests are incredibly important,

that they are trying to cover

economic interests on the cohesion

of the 27. I think different

economic interests will raise the

head of different countries. The

German auto industry is as important

as the financial sector is here. The

banking crisis is far from over, but

the big riffs which were going on is

that the E U is losing its second

biggest net contributor. Countries

like Germany want a deal with the UK

that is a free open market. There

are other tensions in the EU that

wants to become more protectionist,

and that is a bad thing.

Looking at

the film there with the Jacob

Rees-Mogg interview. No matter what

side of leave you are, it is

delusional and all driven by wishful

thinking. You could find a

businessman who says Brexit will be

good for Germany. The vast bulk of

British businesses think this is a

disaster, as do the vast bulk of

European businesses. One of the

delusions on which they ran their

campaign is the idea that they need

us more than we need them. That is

not true.

Be you self about £80

billion more in goods and services

into the UK than we do to them, and

Germany has one of the biggest

deficits. It is in their interest.

Of course it is, but it is a myth

that they need us more than we need

them. The damage that will be done

to us, even with a good deal. Let's

be frank, where these negotiations

are, Theresa May is either going to

end up with a bad deal and dumber or

no Deal. A bad deal is bad, and a no

deal is a catastrophe.

You are

setting up ideas that which were not

there to begin with and knocking

them down. Delusional.

35 billion,

the Brexit bonus.

If we had a

referendum, it was a democratic

decision. I know you don't like it

and that a lot of business would

have preferred to stay with the

status quo. We have had the

referendum. Undermining political

institutions is in no one's

interests. It is functioning

democracies which lead to economic

stability.

Theresa May fought an

election Inc on a hard Brexit that

was rejected.

As we heard from BMW,

there is uncertainty for business.

There will be elections, European

elections, in 2019. There will be a

change of the Commission and the

parliament. We have a narrow window

to implement the mandate for the

referendum which Parliament voted

for. So rather than you undermining

this country, why don't you work

together to get the best deal?

Because we totally disagree.

You

don't want a good deal?

I'm in

favour of a good deal, and I could

give them some advice as to how they

get a good deal. First, you have a

cabinet that has an agreed strategy.

18 months in, they don't have that.

I am not undermining a deal. I am

continuing to pose questions about

what they are trying to do and how

they are trying to do it. This is

democracy. Democracy is the ability

for Parliament, which is not doing

its job properly, and the public, to

keep scrutinising, and if they want

to change their mind, having the

right to do that.

You were trying to

encourage the Taoiseach yesterday to

play hardball with the UK.

I am on

the side of the UK, and I am worried

that if we go down the path that we

are being taken down, and Theresa

May and Boris Johnson and the rest

of them, this shambolic path, we are

going to do fundamental, lasting

damage to the country we love. I

don't care about the Civil Aviation

Authority. I care about Britain. --

I don't care about the European

Union. If every lorry going into the

UK today was stopped for just two

minutes, we would create an instant

17 mile traffic jam. These people

just don't care...

I am not these

people! Let us not conflate... You

either decide that you are

implementing a democratic decision

of a referendum that was called and

over 17 million voted.

You will not

stop me debating it. Just as Nigel

Farage...

Stop talking about Nigel

Farrell Raj. Vote Leave was not

Nigel Farage. There is no desire in

Germany to punish the United

Kingdom.

They are behaving

reasonably.

There is a battle of

protectionism and free market going

on. If we implement this properly,

give businesses the kind of

incentives they want, we can get a

good deal. So you want a bad deal?

You are driven by wishful thinking.

Gisela Stuart, you are saying that

business will intervene to prevent

things like tariffs being put in

place? They are leaving it a bit

late to put pressure on.

You will

find that business is laying out the

kind of things they need to get

those deals. I can find as much

fault with the speed of the

progress, but what I really do

resent is that you are actually

encouraging other countries to

undermine...

Know I am not! I spoke

out in support of the Irish

Taoiseach because I spent a lot of

time with Tony Blair and his team on

the Good Friday Agreement. The

people who are driving this hard

Brexit without thinking it through,

still no answer on how you do Brexit

in our island without a hard border.

I think the Irish Taoiseach is right

to call out the government on the

incompetence and the fact they have

not thought it through.

You accept

the result of the referendum and the

fact that we will be leaving the EU?

I accept the result of the

referendum, but I do not accept that

the country will definitely leave,

because the country is entitled to

change its mind. As the chaos and

costs mount, the public is entitled

to change its mind and will change

its mind.

There is no evidence at

the moment.

Come out with me!

Allow

me to finish the sentence. There is

a changing of mind happening, a

crystallisation. Unlike you, I have

fought five elections and I have won

five elections. I have probably

spoken to more people like you.

You

may do, I'm just saying, come out on

the road with me...

40% of the

population in the middle just want

us to get on with

population in the middle just want

us to get on with it. What that film

showed is that if you want to make

it a self-fulfilling prophecy that

it's a disaster, which I don't. I

it a self-fulfilling prophecy that

want to implement a deal that is

good for British jobs. The rest of

want to implement a deal that is

the world is changing in terms

want to implement a deal that is

technology. Currently, Germany

hasn't even got a government, and

technology. Currently, Germany

nobody is laughing about that.

And

they are stable without a

nobody is laughing about that.

And

government!

Let's leave it there.

It's coming up to 11.40,

you're watching the Sunday Politics.

Coming up on the programme,

you're watching the Sunday Politics.

opinion polls and we'll bring

you the results of our moodbox

asking whether Phllip Hammond

or John McDonnell should be running

I'm Nina Warhurst.

Coming up in the Northwest...

Freedom of movement.

There's plenty in these feet,

what about post Brexit?

Why the region's Irish

aren't all doing a jig.

Everybody is just feeling,

I suppose, a little bit anxious

at the moment as to really

what is going to

happen for the Irish,

both at home and here in the UK.

Together in the studio,

but not necessarily in step

are this week's guests...

Damien Moore is the Conservative

MP for Southport.

Cat Smith the Labour MP for

Lancaster and Fleetwood and Shadow

Minister for Voter Engagement and

Youth Affairs, a very long title.

Welcome to you both.

We start today with Ivan

Lewis because he is a

contender to be Labour's

mayoral candidate, now

stood down from Andy Burnham's team

after the Labour Party said it was

investigating an allegation

of sexual harassment.

Mr Lewis has apologised,

saying he is sorry if he

has made women feel uncomfortable.

Cat, do we celebrate that this

enters the public domain and

arguably encourages alleged victims

to come forward or is Ivan entitled

to some privacy while

the investigation is ongoing?

Well, I think that it

is good that it is

being talked about now.

I think for a long

time, there has been

behaviour going on which has been

unacceptable and I think that what

we have seen actually is because one

woman spoke up, another woman

spoke up.

And what we have seen is a sort

of snowballing effect of people

feeling brave enough to speak out,

really, about the kind of behaviour,

which is totally unacceptable.

The Labour Party put

in a new process

back in July about sexual harassment

in the Labour Party.

There is obviously

an ongoing process now for

Ivan, but I would encourage anybody

who feels that they have been

treated inappropriately by anyone

in a position of power to speak out.

Damien, your thoughts.

Absolutely.

Every single one of these cases

should be investigated thoroughly

and fairly and people should not

feel afraid to speak out if anything

inappropriate has happened.

I think it is absolutely

right and proper

that we follow thorough and fair

processes in dealing with these.

We await the outcome

of the investigation.

Ivan Lewis, of course,

denies the allegations.

Next, do you think that Cat

and Damien have enough power?

No answers on a postcard

this time, please.

Damien's Merseyside has an elected

mayor, Cat's Lancaster doesn't.

That means that Merseyside along

with Holton has been trusted

That means that Merseyside along

with Halton has been trusted

with more regional decision-making.

So is that enough?

Or do these two and their colleagues

have too much power in Westminster?

A question we put to all of our MPs.

The clashes started way back

with those naughty Normans

compiling their doomsday book

and London started

keeping track of everything.

Some say the North

has an falling to its

powers ever since.

On his old turf at the treasury,

now Andy Burnham

has his own battle cry.

It's definitely time for change.

It is why I have

personally made a change

by kind of saying, "Thanks

for the memories, but I'm

leaving you behind."

"I'm off."

"I'm going."

Here, it was a daily

struggle he said to get

the North on the agenda.

Like when they were

deciding where it to

invest in top medical

research centres.

The list was Oxford,

Cambridge and three universities

in London.

And I said, "No,

what about Manchester?"

And I got all of this stuff back

about when Manchester

-why Manchester wasn't good enough.

I went through it and

eventually we disproved it

and Manchester in the end

was given that status,

but the system isn't naturally built

a favour our part of the world.

It's just not in the mindset?

No, it is not in the mindset.

It's not deliberately

rigged, though, is it?

It's not as if there

is a conscious effort to

neglect the North.

So what is behind it?

Maybe there's a snobbery,

I don't know.

The people in this building live

largely within the M25.

You might say God bless America

where each state can raise and keep

their own taxes.

Or here in Germany,

where individual states can even set

some of their own laws.

Here in Britain,

tradition prevails and

everything from whether we take

military action abroad to how much

your council is given to provide

services like bin collections,

all of those decisions are taken

here

in this building or in the streets

surrounding it.

We asked our 72 MPs...

Of the 40 who responded,

70% said yes, 15%

Of the 40 who responded,

70% said yes, 15%

said no, the same say

they didn't know.

Suggestions for change mostly came

from Labour MPs and included a

wider regional assembly beyond city

devolution, but almost all

Conservatives said

change isn't needed.

Off the record, one told us...

Another said...

And a third set hang on...

And some experts agree

progress is moving nicely.

I think the ball

is rolling now for a

number of different reasons.

City regional mayors

were a product of

Tony Blair and David Cameron

and George Osborne.

They are no longer in power,

but the momentum created

by their interests

are still with us.

But momentum is not enough.

For the mayor who once

had an eye on Downing

Street, but now says

Manchester's Oxford Street

is far more important.

Damien, the message couldn't be

clearer from our MPs.

70% say, "All right,

enough is enough.

"Westminster is taking

advantage of the North.

"Things desperately need

to change and quick."

Well, historically, we have had

a much more centralised

system than most European countries.

And that is just part

of our history and tradition.

One of the differences

now, of course, is that

we are getting the city

regional mayors.

Manchester and Liverpool both have

those where they have got

the ability to have much more

of a say in the affairs

of both of those areas.

MPs like Louise Ellman, one

of your neighbours, thinks actually

it just leads to a patchwork

north of England.

Cat doesn't have a mayor.

You do.

Speaking on behalf of

the North, is that going

to lead to greater powers up here?

I think it is not as simple as that.

I think it should be

a bigger part of

a package of local

government reforms.

My personal view on that.

I think local government is long

overdue for reforms to actually see

areas that feel as though they can

work in a cohesive way together.

So what would that mean?

Under local councils having

more devolved powers?

I think we need to move more

into a single-tier authority

structure whereby people feel

as though they can work together

as part of that area.

I think that we are seeing

in some of those areas

some positivity about

the potential that is there.

We will see further powers

potentially being devolved

down the line.

I think some people would view

Damien's comments about

moving to a single-tier Council

as power being removed further away

from them.

If we were to lose districts

and potentially parish

councils and move...

A lot of people would see

that as power being

shifted from where they live.

I think it is very difficult

especially here in the northwest

where we've had a very patchwork

approach to the dissolution.

As you said, I don't

have a mayor in Lancashire

whereas Damien on Merseyside does.

have a mayor in Lancashire

And the power and the

money that come with

that benefits the big urban areas.

Whereas those of us

were outside the Liverpool...

But you would rather

have a Northwest assembly.

Is that not the same thing?

I think it is something

you could view as in addition to the

district councils that we have.

Lose the mayors?

Would you like to lose the mayors?

I don't think the mayors

particularly add to it.

I don't think we should

have to accept

a mayor in order to get

the resources, in order to get

devolution.

So you would undo the current

devolution deal and you

would have a Northwest assembly?

Now we have ended up

in such a messy position

where even Manchester

in

and Merseyside have very different

deals from each other.

It is very messy.

That's the point, isn't it?

The government didn't

have a plan B for

areas like Lancashire that can come

up with a devolution deal.

Well, let's look at the situation.

If you want to in

Lancashire where the

proposal was to have a combined

authority and areas within that

combined authority didn't feel

as though they could work together.

And there has to be

agreement from all

the parts of the area where

they feel they can work together.

Is it right that the government then

distances itself from responsibility

and allows parts of the North

to

move forward while others don't

have a devolution deal together?

Where you can get

agreement where people

do feel as though they can work

together, it is absolutely right and

proper.

Where they cannot, that honestly

cannot happen because it

work together into the same area.

-- do not feel as

though they can work

together shoehorned

into the same area.

We have a little bit of that

in my own area where people are

wanting to actually get out of, not

of the city region in particular,

but certainly out

of the local council.

Damien, when we talk

about it in County blocks.

So for instance, we are talking

about Lancaster now, but

what about Cumbria?

Again, they haven't

got a devolution deal.

Whereas certainly part of my

constituency and the Lancaster end

of my constituency has very close

economic ties with South Lakeland

and Brough but because they fall

Cumbria, we cannot get an answer

from Greg Clark as to

whether or not we can

get a devolution deal

that

could potentially cross

between two county boundaries.

I would like to see more

open-minded thinking.

I would like to be

a bit more creative

about this.

And work on where people

are actually living, working and

doing business.

A very quick one from both of you.

It has been suggested to bring

Parliament to Liverpool.

Yes or no?

Well, we have to move out

for those renovation

works, so why not have a road show?

We could tour the whole

of the United Kingdom.

After all, we are a part

of the whole of the United

Kingdom.

Just the Northwest.

One of those tasks with changing

the balance of power

is Steve Rotheram, the Labour

mayor of the Liverpool

city region.

Six months after his election,

this week he announced his

vision for Merseyside and Halton.

Now that vision includes

harnessing the power

of the Mersey to create

renewable energy.

He also wants to build on existing

science and innovation in

places like darts.

to create the digital capital of the

UK.

And he has a promise on new homes,

25,000 new ones over the past

five years.

All of them on Brownfield sites.

And what did you make

of Steve's vision for 2025?

He wanted us to step

into the future were

have become this utopia.

Realistic?

Well I have had meetings

with Steve Rogheram and he

is very enthusiastic and positive

about what the city region can

offer.

To go back to our earlier

conversation, I think one of the

issues is that people feel

distanced from power

and certainly being

on

the very periphery of Merseyside our

people are saying to me what are we

going to get out of it?

Is it all going to be

centred in Liverpool?

Exactly, the Southport feel included

in the Liverpool city region?

Because there was resistance

when it came into being.

Are they buying into it?

Greater Manchester, it has taken

20 years for it to...

I think there is

natural apprehension.

I've just been to

a economic forum this

morning where that has been

explained to people there talking

about the advantages and benefits.

And I obviously work in the interest

of my constituents to

ensure that we can get people coming

in the business economy and

investment.

We just had £2 million being put

into

one of our local hotels, which has

just had the award of the best hotel

in Merseyside.

I think that is great news

for my local constituents.

We will all be there

on our hoverboards

looking at the Mersey barrier

in ten years, won't we?

Around three quarters

of people in Steve

Rotheram's Liverpool

have Irish heritage.

It is thought that that figure

across the region is about

one in four.

Now, we also trade more with Ireland

than any other part of

the country does.

And as Brexit negotiations

continue, there is

growing anxiety about how

relationships could change.

As Kevin Fitzpatrick reports.

Whether they came to escape

the potato famine or dig the ship

canal and fire the Industrial

Revolution, Irish migrants have

helped make the Northwest

what it is today.

The Irish have absolutely been

central to the -- the Irish

have actually been really

central to the economics,

social and cultural

infrastructure of the North.

They have worked on

the railways, on the

canals, new construction,

in health and education.

We have the fourth-largest group

of workers in the NHS.

Lift, two, three.

Keep to the music...

With the South remaining

in the European Union, and the UK

including the North on their way

out, the future is far from certain.

Originally from Dublin,

they made their home

in Liverpool in 2001.

Nobody seems to know, nobody has

the answers to any questions.

Everybody is just failing,

I suppose, a little

anxious at the moment

as to really what is

going to happen for

the

Irish, both at home

and here in the UK.

What you are looking at here in this

warehouse is actually a billion

individual screws.

The possibility of no

exit deal being

agreed means free trade

across the Irish Sea could end.

That accounts for 10%

of business at this company.

I remain confident of a positive

outcome, simply because both sides

share the same objective,

which is an invisible

frictionless border,

but worst-case scenario, if we do

end up with let's call it a hard

border and the tariffs that go with

that, it is a logistical step,

and extra logistical step for our

business, which I believe,

we can manage.

It is the number of components

involved in finding an

agreement on Ireland that make it

such a challenge for Brexit

negotiators.

They have to find solutions

on trade, on people and

crucially on the border

between North and South.

And time is pressing.

You can't sort out the issue

of the border without sorting

out the nature of

the trade deal first.

We need to know where there

are going to be tariffs on goods

travelling between

the UK and Ireland.

Once we know that, we can sort out

the issue of the border.

But if there are tariffs on goods

going across the border, then

frankly, there will be

a reinvigorated border and that is

hugely politically sensitive.

The Manchester bomb in 1996

was the largest on the mainland

in the whole of the Troubles.

For many who left that conflict

behind to settle here,

a return of barriers between North

and South is a big worry.

It will take us back

30 years, 40 years.

And I think we will

be back to where we

were and it would have political

repercussions as well.

Once the barge is clear

at the centre, the

gates are closed.

Bridging the gap on the size

of the Brexit divorce

bill may still be dominating

negotiations, but it is cleared the

future of the UK's relationship

with Ireland will be just

as difficult an issue to solve.

What struck me about Kevin's piece

is we talk all the time about the

economic impact.

It is that emotional,

cultural impact for families.

Just across the water.

You've got Irish

heritage, I've got Irish

heritage, most people

in the

Northwest or a big proportion

of people in the Northwest have.

Is it a responsibility,

then, Damien,

for the government to just crack

on and let people know where they

stand?

I think it is important that

the government does crack on with

these negotiations

and actually make sure

that we do protect

the

situation we've got

there at the moment.

We need to ensure that all the

principles of the

We need to ensure that all the

principles of the Belfast agreement

are upheld. We have to make sure

that we have a soft border and not a

hard border. Also when you think

about negotiations with direct

clinic Ireland. This thing going on

a long time.

But this does talk the

fire. The EU says without offering

more money, we can't entertain

talking about border. The David

Davis just have to say OK let's just

give more money?

That is part of the

negotiations we're going into. We

said we will pay what is right and

proportionate fair. I think that is

the right way of getting what we

need from the situation with the

Irish border.

Even if it leaves

families feeling vulnerable feeling

that their futures are ambiguous?

I

think we have been in situations

where you have felt horrible but

then the reassurance does come. I

think we now need to tackle this

issue. It is very important

particulate to this country and

particularly those with that

heritage.

It was also said that it

was flatly not going to entertain no

deal.

If we have no deal, that means

by default we have a hard border.

Just as Damon has just mention it is

totally unacceptable for all sides.

So it's not really an option. If no

deal is not an obsidian, then it is

free to the Mac market for you to

demand whatever you want.

I think it

is obvious that no deal is not an

option. When we look at the

situation in Northern Ireland in

particular, where you can travel

between the two, other than

roadsides changing, there is no

difference. But it is so... I can't

stress enough how delicate the

situation is. And how important it

is. Not just for Northern Ireland,

but for the rest of the United

Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.

Very quickly.

We could get this

right for the EU as well. The EU has

got to show it self to be

accommodating to the Irish Republic.

We have to move on from Brexit to

the budget. Teachers are heading to

Downing Street handing them a letter

asking for more money. They are

saying that they have to make

desperate requests from parents for

voluntary donations. On a not to Mac

on their list are to just leaving

the profession. The Education

Secretary has been to the northwest

to launch a training scheme to help

to stop them. We have a report.

Preparing for GCSE ease wood this is

a new scheme to help teachers as

well.

We have looked at the impact

of on-the-job training for them.

We

want to mirror that. The Education

Secretary was at the launch. It is a

specialist graduate school that will

offer courses for teachers, trading

on the job as they take classes. One

of six organisations sharing almost

£70 million of government money to

support and train teachers.

We give

teachers great training, not only do

they get better in the classroom,

they get better year on year on

year. They are happier and they stay

in their jobs for longer.

That is

crucial. Because a recent report

showed more teachers are now leaving

before retirement than five years

ago. Schools are finding it tougher

to fill posts. Are they going to

feel valued if they get these new

qualifications are they going to get

the pay rise to go with it?

We're

going to make sure that teachers

that are doing these sorts of

courses doing the qualifications

absolutely get the recognition.

It

comes as the funding of schools in

England are going big changes. And

claims that many schools are

England are going big changes. And

claims that many schools are

struggling to meet their costs. The

government has promised more money.

But the Labour Party and others say

that funding will fall once

But the Labour Party and others say

that funding will fall once

inflation is taken into account. It

is warned that counties with the

worst scores will be hit with

funding cuts. They want to leave

because of the growing pressure,

funding cuts and growing pupils.

I

think it is important whatever that

is happening around our schools and

there is record funding going into

our schools at the moment, we invest

in lifting up the teaching

profession.

So as the pressure on

teacher grows, it is tempting -- is

training the way to go?

There needs

to be a clear pathway to get better

and master what happens in the

classroom.

If extra support makes

teachers feel more valued, it is

hoped that will slow the flow of

teachers from the profession and

increase the quality of education

for students and teachers. We know

what the Labour Party would do. They

are calling for more money. He is

not frightened of borrowing more

money. How will that wash?

We have

seen Philip Hammond Barro more in

his first year than any other

Chancellor has done before. But the

reality is our public services are

in crisis. And teachers are voting

with their feet. They are dealing in

greater numbers. The impact that is

having on our children's future and

the UK economy of course is going to

be disastrous.

If you want to be the

government, that is a very hard

sell, extra debt for the swing seat.

I think people want good schools.

They don't want headlines like we've

seen this week were teachers have

written home to parents asking them

to be able to bring in money so they

can buy pens and paper and glue for

schoolchildren.

This is a good

point, isn't it Damien, not having

enough money.

The budget will go up

by 2019.

Rightly so if there are

more kids going into school.

But we

have faced considerable budgetary

pressures. And that is because of

that economic situation we face when

we came into the government.

You

can't keep talking about that.

As it

improves, we would want to see extra

money spent there, but the way to do

that is not to borrow too much

today. But is it not time to spend?

Then those children have to pay that

back...

Do we not see social

problems coming into the classroom

because of austerity?

I have visited

a number of schools in my

constituencies and we are seeing

schools performing better and yes,

there will be more advantageous to

spend more, I would like to see...

As the economy rises, I would like

to see more teachers, more funding

for schools. No MP doesn't want to

see well-funded schools.

Teachers

say I can't work any situations.

Some of the school is ex-accosting

them because they are having to pay

teachers for hiring. Those teachers

have earned that. Absolutely.

Damien

is talking about it like we can fix

this later. But for the children who

are at school today. It matters now.

And school standards are rising.

We

will get reaction to the budget next

week. My thanks to my guests. I will

hand you back to Sarah London.

Philip Hammond will deliver his

Budget on Wednesday -

he's moved it to the Autumn

if you remember - and he'll be

hoping it can help re-define

the Government in the eyes

of the public.

But when it comes to

the economy, do people trust

the Conservatives, or Labour?

Here's Ellie Price

with the moodbox.

MUSIC: The Road to Nowhere

by Talking Heads.

All eyes will be on the Chancellor

this week as we find out

what he has been cooking

up in his Budget.

So we have pulled off the A1

near Peterborough to ask people here

who they trust with the economy -

is it the Chancellor,

Philip Hammond, or is it

Labour's John McDonnell?

No 7.

Which one's Tory?

I voted Conservative

for the last two

elections, don't feel very confident

now, so I'm going to swap.

If I said to you which

of these characters

would you trust with the economy,

what would you say?

The one who's currently

running it, because they

seem to be bringing

the deficit down.

Labour.

Why?

Because I'm an NHS worker.

For me, it's just about

spending, public spending.

Labour always overspend.

John McDonnell, I think

capitalism as we know it is tanked

and I think we need

a radical re-think.

Broken his egg, who do you trust

more on the economy?

No one.

Why?

Because they never come up trumps

with anything that they

reckon they're going to do.

If I had to make you

choose one of them?

The man that's there, Hammond.

I wouldn't trust

Philip Hammond with a

bag of marbles or a plastic ball!

Hello, Bob.

Oh, hello.

Who do you trust

more on the economy?

Oh, the Conservatives.

Do you?

Why's that?

I just think they're better

for the small businessman.

We need a Maggie or

a Winston Churchill,

somebody in there with

balls to say, right,

that's the direction

we are

going in, that's what

we are going to do.

I've got balls!

What are you doing?

Putting balls in holes

by the look of it!

I suppose the lesser of the two

evils is anything but Tory,

but I say that without a great

deal of conviction.

Having grown up in the '70s

with all the rubbish on the

streets, the strikes, the unions.

Re-nationalisation and they're

going to spend a lot of money

and increase taxes and it will pull

the country down.

I've seen an awful loft of all-day

breakfasts today, but it

is clearing up time here

at the diner and time

to reveal the Moodbox.

Take it away, Tim.

As you can say it was

a close-run thing, but

like any fiscally responsible

Chancellor, I've done my maths and

counted and Philip Hammond got six

more votes than John McDonnell.

Oh, chip, thank you very much!

That was Ellie and the entirely

unscientific Moodbox,

at the Stibbington diner near

Peterborough.

But for a slightly more scientific

understanding of how the public view

the parties on this and other

issues, let's have a look

at some recent polling.

Here's where the Conservatives

and Labour stood on the economy back

when the Prime Minister called

the snap election in April,

when the Conservatives had a big

lead, as they did in many

other areas.

The most recent poll by the same

company reckoned Labour had narrowed

the gap significantly,

as they have in other areas,