:00:33. > :00:37.It's Sunday morning, and this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:38. > :00:40.Theresa May pledged to help people who are "just about managing",
:00:41. > :00:43.and this week her government will announce new measures to boost
:00:44. > :00:46.the number of affordable homes and improve conditions for renters.
:00:47. > :00:56.After a US court suspends Donald Trump's travel ban and rules
:00:57. > :01:00.it could be unconstitutional, one of the President's inner circle
:01:01. > :01:03.tells me there is no "chaos", and that Donald Trump's White House
:01:04. > :01:07.is making good on his campaign promises.
:01:08. > :01:09.As the Government gets into gear for two years
:01:10. > :01:12.of Brexit negotiations, we report on the haggling to come
:01:13. > :01:15.over the UK's Brexit bill for leaving the European Union -
:01:16. > :01:22.and the costs and savings once we've left.
:01:23. > :01:25.And coming up on Sunday Politics Scotland: The Scottish Secretary
:01:26. > :01:27.David Mundell on Brexit, Article 50 and whether a second
:01:28. > :01:40.And with me, as always, a trio of top political
:01:41. > :01:42.journalists - Helen Lewis, Tom Newton Dunn
:01:43. > :01:47.They'll be tweeting throughout the programme,
:01:48. > :01:53.So, more anguish to come this week for the Labour party as the House
:01:54. > :01:56.of Commons continues to debate the bill which paves the way
:01:57. > :02:02.Last week, Labour split over the Article 50 bill,
:02:03. > :02:05.with a fifth of Labour MPs defying Jeremy Corbyn to vote against.
:02:06. > :02:10.Five shadow ministers resigned, and it's expected Mr Corbyn
:02:11. > :02:13.will have to sack more frontbenchers once the bill is voted
:02:14. > :02:17.Add to that the fact that the Labour Leader's close ally
:02:18. > :02:20.Diane Abbot failed to turn up for the initial vote -
:02:21. > :02:22.blaming illness - and things don't look too rosy
:02:23. > :02:25.The Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry was asked
:02:26. > :02:29.about the situation earlier on the Andrew Marr show.
:02:30. > :02:33.The Labour Party is a national party and we represent the nation,
:02:34. > :02:37.and the nation is divided on this, and it is very difficult.
:02:38. > :02:42.Many MPs representing majority Remain constituencies have this very
:02:43. > :02:45.difficult balancing act between - do I represent my constituency,
:02:46. > :02:48.Labour, as a national party, have a clear view.
:02:49. > :02:57.We fought to stay in Europe, but the public have spoken,
:02:58. > :03:02.But the important thing now is not to give Theresa May a blank check,
:03:03. > :03:07.we have to make sure we get the right deal for the country.
:03:08. > :03:15.That was Emily Thornberry. Helen, is this like a form of Chinese water
:03:16. > :03:19.torture for the Labour Party? And for journalists, to! We are in a
:03:20. > :03:23.situation where no one really thinks it's working. A lot of authority has
:03:24. > :03:27.drained away from Jeremy Corbyn but no one can do anything about it.
:03:28. > :03:32.What we saw from the leadership contest is on the idea of a Blairite
:03:33. > :03:36.plot to get rid of him. You are essentially stuck in stasis. The
:03:37. > :03:41.only person that can remove Jeremy Corbyn is God or Jeremy Corbyn.
:03:42. > :03:45.Authority may have moved from Mr Corbyn but it's not going anywhere
:03:46. > :03:52.else, there's not an alternative centre of authority? Not quite, but
:03:53. > :03:56.Clive Lewis is name emerging, the Shadow Business Secretary. A lot of
:03:57. > :04:00.the Labour left, people like Paul Mason, really like him and would
:04:01. > :04:04.like to see him in Corbyn. I think that's why Jeremy Corbyn do
:04:05. > :04:09.something extraordinary next week and abstain from Article 50, the
:04:10. > :04:16.main bill itself, to keep his Shadow Cabinet together. That clip on
:04:17. > :04:20.Andrew Marr, point blank refusing to say if Labour will vote for Article
:04:21. > :04:26.50. The only way Jeremy Corbyn can hold this mess together now is to
:04:27. > :04:29.abstain, which would be catastrophic across Brexit constituencies in the
:04:30. > :04:36.North. The problem with abstention is everyone will say on the issue of
:04:37. > :04:41.our time, the official opposition hasn't got coherent or considered
:04:42. > :04:43.policy? I love the way Emily Thornberry said the country is
:04:44. > :04:46.policy? I love the way Emily divided and we represent the
:04:47. > :04:49.country, in other words we are divided at the party as well. The
:04:50. > :04:52.other thing that was a crucial moment this week is the debate over
:04:53. > :04:57.whether there should be a so-called meaningful vote by MPs on the deal
:04:58. > :05:02.that Theresa May gets. That is a point of real danger for Brexit
:05:03. > :05:08.supporters. It may well be there is a coalition of Labour and SNP and
:05:09. > :05:12.Remain MPs, Tory MPs, who vote for that so-called meaningful vote that
:05:13. > :05:16.could undermine Theresa May's negotiation. So Theresa May could
:05:17. > :05:21.have had troubles as well, not plain sailing for her? There is no point,
:05:22. > :05:25.apart from lonely Ken Clarke voting against Article 50, no point in Tory
:05:26. > :05:29.remainders rebelling. It would have been a token gesture with no
:05:30. > :05:34.support. But there might be meaningful amendments. One might be
:05:35. > :05:42.on the status of EU nationals... The government could lose that. There
:05:43. > :05:45.might be a majority for some of those amendments. The ins and outs
:05:46. > :05:47.of the Labour Party, it fascinates the Labour Party and journalists. I
:05:48. > :05:50.suspect the country has just moved on and doesn't care. You are
:05:51. > :05:55.probably quite right. To be honest I struggled to get Labour split
:05:56. > :06:00.stories in my paper any more, the bar is so high to make it news.
:06:01. > :06:07.Where it does matter is now not everyone will pay huge amounts to
:06:08. > :06:11.the -- of attention to the vote on Wednesday. But come the general
:06:12. > :06:15.election in 2020, maybe a little earlier, every Tory leaflet and
:06:16. > :06:19.every labour constituency will say this guy, this goal, they refuse to
:06:20. > :06:24.vote for Brexit, do you want them in power? That is going to be really
:06:25. > :06:25.hard for them. The story next week may be Tory splits rather than just
:06:26. > :06:30.Labour ones, we will see. Theresa May has made a big deal out
:06:31. > :06:34.of her commitment to help people on middle incomes who are "just
:06:35. > :06:36.about managing", and early this week we should get a good sense
:06:37. > :06:39.of what that means in practice - when plans to bring down the cost
:06:40. > :06:42.of housing and protect renters are published in the Government's
:06:43. > :06:44.new white paper. Theresa May has promised she'll kick
:06:45. > :06:46.off Brexit negotiations with the EU by the end of March,
:06:47. > :06:49.and after months of shadow-boxing Ellie Price reports on the battle
:06:50. > :06:53.to come over the UK's Brexit bill, and the likely costs and savings
:06:54. > :06:56.once we've left. It was the figure that defined
:06:57. > :06:58.the EU referendum campaign. It was also a figure that was
:06:59. > :07:04.fiercely disputed, but the promise - vote leave and Britain won't have
:07:05. > :07:07.to pay into the EU are any more. So, is that what's
:07:08. > :07:09.going to happen now? The trouble with buses is you tend
:07:10. > :07:12.to have to wait for them and when Theresa May triggers
:07:13. > :07:14.Article 50, the clock starts She needs something quicker,
:07:15. > :07:19.something more sporty. According to the most
:07:20. > :07:26.recent Treasury figures, Britain's gross contribution
:07:27. > :07:28.to the EU, after the rebate is taken into account,
:07:29. > :07:31.is about ?14 billion a year. There are some complicating factors
:07:32. > :07:36.that means it can go up or down year on year,
:07:37. > :07:39.but that's roughly how much the UK will no longer sending
:07:40. > :07:41.to Brussels post-Brexit. But, there are other payments that
:07:42. > :07:44.Britain will have to shell out for. First and foremost,
:07:45. > :07:47.the so-called divorce settlement. It is being said, and openly
:07:48. > :07:53.by Commissioner Barnier and others in the Commission,
:07:54. > :07:57.that the total financial liability as they see it might
:07:58. > :08:00.be in the order of 40-60 billion The BBC understands the figure EU
:08:01. > :08:05.negotiators are likely to settle on is far lower,
:08:06. > :08:10.around 34 billion euros, but what does the money
:08:11. > :08:13.they are going to argue Well, that's how much Britain owes
:08:14. > :08:19.for stuff in the EU budget that's already signed up for until 2020,
:08:20. > :08:21.one year after we are Historically, Britain pays
:08:22. > :08:26.12% in contributions, so the cost to the UK is likely
:08:27. > :08:29.to be between ten Then they will look at the 200-250
:08:30. > :08:37.billion euros of underfunded spending commitments,
:08:38. > :08:39.the so-called RAL. Britain could also be liable
:08:40. > :08:47.for around 5-7 billion euros for its share in the pensions bill
:08:48. > :08:51.for EU staff, that's again 12% of an overall bill
:08:52. > :08:53.of 50-60 billion. Finally there's a share
:08:54. > :08:56.of our assets held by the EU. They include things like this
:08:57. > :09:01.building, the European Commission Britain could argue it deserves
:09:02. > :09:08.a share back of around 18 billion euros from a portfolio that's said
:09:09. > :09:11.to be worth 153 billion euros. So, lots for the two sides
:09:12. > :09:14.to discuss in two years of talks. They have a great opportunity
:09:15. > :09:17.with the Article 50 talks because actually they can hold
:09:18. > :09:22.us to ransom. They can say, "You figure out money,
:09:23. > :09:25.we will talk about your trade. But until you've figured out
:09:26. > :09:27.the money, we won't," so I think a lot of European states think
:09:28. > :09:30.they are in a very strong negotiating position at the moment
:09:31. > :09:33.and they intend to make The principle is clear,
:09:34. > :09:38.the days of Britain making vast contributions to the European Union
:09:39. > :09:43.every year will end. Theresa May has already indicated
:09:44. > :09:48.that she would want to sign back up to a number of EU agencies
:09:49. > :09:53.on a program-by-program basis. The Europol for example,
:09:54. > :09:55.that's the European crime agency, or Erasmus Plus,
:09:56. > :10:00.which wants student exchanges. If everything stays the same
:10:01. > :10:04.as it is now, it would cost the UK 675 million euros a year,
:10:05. > :10:06.based on analysis by But there are likely to be agencies
:10:07. > :10:15.we don't choose to participate in. If we only opted back to those
:10:16. > :10:24.dealing with security, trade, universities and,
:10:25. > :10:26.say, climate change, it could come with a price tag
:10:27. > :10:29.of 370 million euros per year. Of course that's if our European
:10:30. > :10:31.neighbours allow us. I wonder if they're
:10:32. > :10:33.going to let me in! There will also be a cost
:10:34. > :10:36.to creating a new system to resolve trade disputes with other nations
:10:37. > :10:39.once we are no longer part Take the EFTA Court
:10:40. > :10:44.which rules on disputes between the EU and Norway,
:10:45. > :10:46.Iceland and Lichtenstein. That costs 4 million
:10:47. > :10:52.euros to run each year, though in the Brexit White Paper
:10:53. > :10:54.published this week, the Government said it will not be
:10:55. > :10:56.constrained by precedent Finally, would the EU get behind
:10:57. > :11:02.the idea of Britain making some contribution for some preferential
:11:03. > :11:08.access to its market? The sort of thing that
:11:09. > :11:10.Theresa May seems to be hinting at are sectoral arrangements,
:11:11. > :11:13.some kind of partial membership Switzerland, which has a far less
:11:14. > :11:21.wide-ranging deal than Norway, pays about 320 million a year
:11:22. > :11:24.for what it gets into the EU budget, but it's not exactly the Swiss
:11:25. > :11:27.deal that we're after. The EU institutions hate the Swiss
:11:28. > :11:29.deal because it is codified in a huge number of treaties that
:11:30. > :11:32.are messy, complicated and cumbersome, and they really
:11:33. > :11:34.don't want to replicate Theresa May has been at pains
:11:35. > :11:40.to insist she's in the driving seat when it comes to these negotiations,
:11:41. > :11:42.and that she's But with so much money up
:11:43. > :11:52.for discussion, it may not be such Sadly she didn't get to keep the
:11:53. > :12:10.car! And I've been joined to discuss
:12:11. > :12:12.the Brexit balance sheet by the director of the Centre
:12:13. > :12:15.for European Reform, Charles Grant, and by Henry Newman who runs
:12:16. > :12:22.the think tank Open Europe. Henry Newman, these figures that are
:12:23. > :12:27.being thrown about in Brussels at the moment, and exit bill of
:12:28. > :12:31.40-60,000,000,000. What do you make of them? I think it is an opening
:12:32. > :12:35.gambit from the institutions and we should take them seriously. We
:12:36. > :12:40.listened to Mr Rogers, the former ambassador to Brussels in the House
:12:41. > :12:45.of Commons last week, speaking about the sort of positions the EU is
:12:46. > :12:48.likely to take in the negotiation. I personally think the Prime Minister
:12:49. > :12:51.should be more concerned about getting the right sort of trade
:12:52. > :12:55.arrangements, subsequent to our departure, than worrying about the
:12:56. > :12:59.exact detail of the divorce settlement and the Bill. They might
:13:00. > :13:04.not let them go on to trade until they resolve this matter. Where does
:13:05. > :13:09.the Brexit bill, the cost of exit, if there is to be one, in terms of a
:13:10. > :13:13.sum of money, where does that come in the negotiations, upfront or at
:13:14. > :13:19.the end? The European Commission has a firm line on this. You have to
:13:20. > :13:21.talk about the Brexit bill and the divorce settlement before you talk
:13:22. > :13:24.about the future relationship. Therefore they are saying if you
:13:25. > :13:29.don't sign up for 60 billion or thereabouts, we won't talk about the
:13:30. > :13:32.future. Other member states take a softer line than that and think you
:13:33. > :13:36.probably have to talk about the divorce settlement and Brexit bill
:13:37. > :13:42.as the same -- at the same time as the economic situation. If you can
:13:43. > :13:45.do both at the same time, the atmosphere may be better natured.
:13:46. > :13:50.You have spoken to people in Brussels and are part of a think
:13:51. > :13:56.tank, how Revista gives the figure or is it an opening gambit? Most
:13:57. > :14:00.member states and EU institutions believe they think it is the true
:14:01. > :14:03.figure but when the negotiations start adding the number will come
:14:04. > :14:07.down. As long as the British are prepared to sign up to the principle
:14:08. > :14:14.of we owe you a bit of money, as the cheque, then people will compromise.
:14:15. > :14:18.What is the ballpark? You had a figure of 34 billion, that is news
:14:19. > :14:23.to me, nobody knows because negotiations haven't started but I
:14:24. > :14:27.think something lower than 60. Even 60 would be politically toxic for a
:14:28. > :14:32.British government? I think Theresa May is in a strong position, she has
:14:33. > :14:34.united the Conservative Party. You could expect coming into this year
:14:35. > :14:44.all the Conservative divisions would be laid bare by Gina Miller. But she
:14:45. > :14:48.is leading a united party. Labour Party are divided... Coogee get away
:14:49. > :14:51.with paying 30 billion? We should give her the benefit of the doubt
:14:52. > :14:55.going into these negotiations, let her keep her cards close to her
:14:56. > :14:59.chest. The speech he gave a few weeks ago at Lancaster House, our
:15:00. > :15:02.judgment was she laid out as much detail as we could have expected at
:15:03. > :15:07.that point. I don't think it's helpful for us now to say, we
:15:08. > :15:12.shouldn't be introducing further red line. I want you to be helpful and
:15:13. > :15:15.find things out. I would suggest if there is a bill, let's say it's 30
:15:16. > :15:20.billion, let's make it half of what the current claims coming out of
:15:21. > :15:24.Brussels. And of course it won't have to be paid in one year, I
:15:25. > :15:28.assume it's not one cheque but spread over. But we will wait a long
:15:29. > :15:34.time for that 350 million a week or what ever it was that was meant to
:15:35. > :15:36.come from Brussels to spend on the NHS. That's not going to happen for
:15:37. > :15:46.the next five, six or seven years. Everyone has been clear there will
:15:47. > :15:49.be a phased exit programme. The question of whether something is
:15:50. > :15:53.political possible for her in terms of the divorce settlement will
:15:54. > :15:57.depend on what she gets from the European Union in those
:15:58. > :16:01.negotiations. If she ends up settling for a bill of about 30
:16:02. > :16:06.billion which I think would be politically... No matter how popular
:16:07. > :16:11.she is, politically very difficult for her, it does kill any idea there
:16:12. > :16:15.is a Brexit dividend for Britain. Some of the senior officials in
:16:16. > :16:20.London and Brussels are worried this issue could crash the talks because
:16:21. > :16:23.it may be possible for Theresa May to accept a Brexit bill of 30
:16:24. > :16:32.billion and if there is no deal and will leave EU without a settlement,
:16:33. > :16:35.there is massive legal uncertainty. What contract law applies? Can our
:16:36. > :16:40.planes take off from Heathrow? Nobody knows what legal rights there
:16:41. > :16:46.are for an EU citizen living here and vice versa. If there is no deal
:16:47. > :16:50.at the end of two years, it is quite bad for the European economy,
:16:51. > :16:54.therefore they think they have all the cards to play and they think if
:16:55. > :17:00.it is mishandled domestically in Britain than we have a crash. But
:17:01. > :17:04.there will be competing interests in Europe, the Baltic states, Eastern
:17:05. > :17:09.Europe, maybe quite similar of the Nordic states, that in turn
:17:10. > :17:15.different from the French, Germans or Italians. How will Europe come to
:17:16. > :17:21.a common view on these things? At the moment they are quite united
:17:22. > :17:27.backing a strong line, except for the polls and Hungarians who are the
:17:28. > :17:33.bad boys of Europe and the Irish who will do anything to keep us happy.
:17:34. > :17:37.We should remember their priority is not economics, they are not thinking
:17:38. > :17:41.how can they maximise trade with the UK, they are under threat. The
:17:42. > :17:46.combination of Trump and Brexit scares them. They want to keep the
:17:47. > :17:53.institutions strong. They also want to keep Britain. That is the one
:17:54. > :17:57.strong card we have, contributing to security. We know we won't be
:17:58. > :18:01.members of the single market, that was in the White Paper. The
:18:02. > :18:09.situation of the customs union is more complicated I would suggest.
:18:10. > :18:14.Does that have cost? If we can be a little bit pregnant in the customs
:18:15. > :18:17.union, does that come with a price ticket? We have got some clarity on
:18:18. > :18:23.the customs union, the Prime Minister said we would not be part
:18:24. > :18:28.of the... We would be able to do our own trade deals outside the EU
:18:29. > :18:31.customs union, and also not be part of the common external tariff. She
:18:32. > :18:35.said she is willing to look at other options and we don't know what that
:18:36. > :18:39.will be so as a think tank we are looking at this over the next few
:18:40. > :18:41.weeks and coming up with recommendations for the Government
:18:42. > :18:46.and looking at how existing boundaries between the EU customs
:18:47. > :18:50.union and other states work in practice. For example between
:18:51. > :18:56.Switzerland and the EU border, Norway and Switzerland, and the UK
:18:57. > :18:59.and Canada. We will want is a country the freedom to do our own
:19:00. > :19:06.free trade deals, that seems to be quite high up there, and to change
:19:07. > :19:11.our external tariffs to the rest of the world. If that's the case, we do
:19:12. > :19:16.seem to be wanting our cake and eating it in the customs union.
:19:17. > :19:21.Talking to some people in London, it is quite clear we are leaving the
:19:22. > :19:26.essentials of the customs union, the tariff, so even if we can minimise
:19:27. > :19:30.controls at the border by having mutual recognition agreements, so we
:19:31. > :19:34.recognise each other's standards, but there will still have to be
:19:35. > :19:38.checks for things like rules of origin and tariffs if tariffs apply,
:19:39. > :19:42.which is a problem for the Irish because nobody has worked out how
:19:43. > :19:45.you can avoid having some sort of customs control on the border
:19:46. > :19:49.between Northern Ireland and the South once we are out of the customs
:19:50. > :19:54.union. I think it's important we don't look at this too much as one
:19:55. > :19:59.side has to win and one side has to lose scenario. We can find ways. My
:20:00. > :20:04.Broadview is what we get out of the negotiation will depend on politics
:20:05. > :20:19.more than economic reality. Economic reality is strong, there's a
:20:20. > :20:23.good case for a trade deal on the solution on the customs deal, but
:20:24. > :20:25.Britain will need to come up with a positive case for our relationship
:20:26. > :20:28.and keep making that case. If it turns out the Government thinks the
:20:29. > :20:31.bill is too high, that we can't really get the free trade deal done
:20:32. > :20:34.in time and it's left hanging in the wind, what are the chances, how I as
:20:35. > :20:37.things stand now that we end up crashing out? I'd say there's a 30%
:20:38. > :20:42.chance that we don't get the free trade agreement at the end of it
:20:43. > :20:47.that Mrs May is aiming for. The very hard crash is you don't even do an
:20:48. > :20:51.Article 50 divorce settlement from you go straight to World Trade
:20:52. > :20:55.Organisation rules. The less hard crash is doing the divorce
:20:56. > :21:01.settlement and transitional arrangements would require European
:21:02. > :21:03.Court of Justice arrangements. We will leave it there. Thank you,
:21:04. > :21:05.both. Donald Trump's flagship policy
:21:06. > :21:07.of extreme vetting of immigrants and a temporary travel ban
:21:08. > :21:09.for citizens of seven mainly-muslim countries was stopped
:21:10. > :21:11.in its tracks this weekend. On Friday a judge ruled the ban
:21:12. > :21:14.should be lifted and that it That prompted President Trump
:21:15. > :21:19.to fire off a series of tweets criticising what he says
:21:20. > :21:22.was a terrible decision by a so-called judge,
:21:23. > :21:24.as he ordered the State Department Now the federal appeals court has
:21:25. > :21:32.rejected his request to reinstate the ban until it hears
:21:33. > :21:43.the case in full. Well yesterday I spoke
:21:44. > :21:48.to Sebastian Gorka, Deputy Assistant I asked him if the confusion
:21:49. > :21:51.over the travel ban was a sign that the President's
:21:52. > :22:03.two-week-old administration There is no chaos, you really
:22:04. > :22:10.shouldn't believe the spin, the facts speak for themselves. 109
:22:11. > :22:15.people on Saturday were mildly inconvenienced by having their entry
:22:16. > :22:21.into the United States delayed out of 325,000. So let's not get carried
:22:22. > :22:30.away with the left-wing media bias and spin. Hold on, 60,000 - 90,000
:22:31. > :22:34.people with visas, their visas are no longer valid. That's another
:22:35. > :22:39.issue. You need to listen to what I'm saying. The people who entered
:22:40. > :22:47.on the day of the executive order being implemented worth 109 people
:22:48. > :22:53.out of 325. Whether people won't travelling to America were affected
:22:54. > :22:59.is another matter, so there is no chaos to comment on. Following
:23:00. > :23:05.Iran's latest missile tests, National Security adviser Flint said
:23:06. > :23:09.the US was "Putting Iran on notice", what does that mean? It means we
:23:10. > :23:14.have a new president and we are not going to facilitate the rise of one
:23:15. > :23:18.of the most dangerous nations in the world. We are jettisoning this naive
:23:19. > :23:26.and dangerous policy of the Obama Administration to try and make the
:23:27. > :23:30.Shi'ite dictatorial democracy some kind of counter balance to extremist
:23:31. > :23:35.Sunni groups in the region and that they cannot continue to behave in
:23:36. > :23:41.the way they have behaved for the last 30 years. It is a very simple
:23:42. > :23:46.message. So are there any multilateral alliances that Mr Trump
:23:47. > :23:51.would like to strengthen? Absolutely. If we are looking at the
:23:52. > :23:56.region, if you listen to what President Trump has said and
:23:57. > :24:01.specifically to also the speeches of general Flint, his national security
:24:02. > :24:04.adviser, we are incredibly vested in seeing our Sunni allies in the
:24:05. > :24:11.region come together in a real coalition. The so-called vaunted 66
:24:12. > :24:18.nation coalition that was created under the Obama administration...
:24:19. > :24:23.There was no coalition. But we want to help our Sunni allies, especially
:24:24. > :24:31.the Egyptians, the Jordanians, come together in a real partnership to
:24:32. > :24:35.take the fight to ISIS and groups like Al-Qaeda. But there is not a
:24:36. > :24:39.formal multilateral alliance with these countries. Which of the
:24:40. > :24:45.existing, formal multilateral alliances does Mr Trump wants to
:24:46. > :24:50.strengthen? If you are specifically talking about Nato, it is clear that
:24:51. > :24:54.we are committed to Nato but we wish to see a more equitable burden
:24:55. > :24:57.sharing among the nations that are simply not spending enough on their
:24:58. > :25:03.own defence so the gentleman 's agreement of 2% of GDP has to be
:25:04. > :25:07.stuck to, unlike the, I think it's only Six Nations that reach the
:25:08. > :25:12.standard today out of almost 30. So he does want to strengthen Nato
:25:13. > :25:21.then? Absolutely, he believes Nato is the most successful military
:25:22. > :25:29.alliances. You mustn't believe the spin and hype. EU leaders now see
:25:30. > :25:32.the Trump administration as a threat up there with Russia, China,
:25:33. > :25:39.terrorism. What's your response to that? I have to laugh. The idea that
:25:40. > :25:46.the nation that came to the salvation of Europe twice in the
:25:47. > :25:57.20th century hummer in World War I and World War II, was central to the
:25:58. > :26:02.defeat of the totalitarian... It is not even worth commenting on. Would
:26:03. > :26:06.it matter to the Trump administration if the European Union
:26:07. > :26:10.broke up? The United States is very interested in the best relations
:26:11. > :26:17.possible with all the nations of the EU am a whether the European union
:26:18. > :26:22.wishes to stay together or not is up to the nations of the European
:26:23. > :26:28.Union. I understand that but I was wondering what the US view would be.
:26:29. > :26:34.Until Mr Trump, EU foreign policy was quite consistent in wanting to
:26:35. > :26:37.see the EU survive, prosper and even become more integrated. Now that
:26:38. > :26:42.doesn't seem to be the case, so would it matter to the Trump
:26:43. > :26:46.administration if the EU broke up? I will say yet again, it is in the
:26:47. > :26:49.interests of the United States to have the best relations possible
:26:50. > :26:54.with our European allies, and whether that is in the formation of
:26:55. > :26:58.the EU or if the EU by itself suffers some kind of internal
:26:59. > :27:02.issues, that's up to the European nations and not something we will
:27:03. > :27:07.comment on. Listening to that answer, it would seem as if this
:27:08. > :27:12.particular president's preference is to deal with individual nation
:27:13. > :27:17.states rather than multilateral institutions. Is that fair? I don't
:27:18. > :27:25.think so. There's never been an unequivocal statement by that effect
:27:26. > :27:28.by the statement. Does he share the opinion of Stephen Bannon that the
:27:29. > :27:34.21st century should see a return to nation states rather than growing
:27:35. > :27:38.existing multilateral ways? I think it is fair to say that we have
:27:39. > :27:43.problems with political elites that don't take the interests of the
:27:44. > :27:49.populations they represent into account. That's why Brexit happened.
:27:50. > :27:54.I think that's why Mr Trump became President Trump. This is the
:27:55. > :27:57.connected phenomena. You are obsessing about institutions, it is
:27:58. > :28:02.not about institutions, it's about the health of democracy and whether
:28:03. > :28:06.political elites do what is in the interests of the people they
:28:07. > :28:08.represent. Given the unpredictability of the new
:28:09. > :28:13.president, you never really know what he's going to do next, would it
:28:14. > :28:19.be wise for the British Prime Minister to hitch her wagon to his
:28:20. > :28:24.star? This is really churlish questioning. Come on, you don't know
:28:25. > :28:29.what he's going to do next, listen to what he says because he does what
:28:30. > :28:33.he's going to say. I know this may be shocking to some reporters, but
:28:34. > :28:37.look at his campaign promises, and the fact that in the last 15 days we
:28:38. > :28:42.have executed every single one that we could in the time permissible so
:28:43. > :28:48.there is nothing unpredictable about Donald Trump as president. OK then,
:28:49. > :28:54.if we do know what he's going to do next, what is he going to do next?
:28:55. > :29:01.Continue to make good on his election promises, to make America
:29:02. > :29:04.great again, to make the economy are flourishing economy, and most
:29:05. > :29:09.important of all from your perspective in the UK, to be the
:29:10. > :29:14.best friend possible to our friends and the worst enemy to our enemies.
:29:15. > :29:17.It is an old Marine Corps phrase and we tend to live by it. Thank you for
:29:18. > :29:28.your time, we will leave it there. Doctor Gorka, making it clear this
:29:29. > :29:33.administration won't spend political capital on trying to keep the
:29:34. > :29:36.European Union together, a watershed change in American foreign policy.
:29:37. > :29:39.Theresa May has made a big deal out of her commitment to help people
:29:40. > :29:42.on middle incomes who are "just about managing", and early this week
:29:43. > :29:45.we should get a good sense of what that means in practice -
:29:46. > :29:48.when plans to bring down the cost of housing and protect renters
:29:49. > :29:50.are published in the Government's new white paper.
:29:51. > :29:52.The paper is expected to introduce new rules on building
:29:53. > :29:58.Communities Secretary Sajid Javid has previously said politicians
:29:59. > :30:01.should not stand in the way of development, provided all options
:30:02. > :30:05.Also rumoured are new measures to speed up building the 1 million
:30:06. > :30:07.new homes the Government promised to build by 2020,
:30:08. > :30:11.including imposing five-year quotas on reluctant councils.
:30:12. > :30:13.Reports suggest there will be relaxation of building
:30:14. > :30:15.height restrictions, allowing home owners and developers
:30:16. > :30:18.to build to the height of the tallest building on the block
:30:19. > :30:24.without needing to seek planning permission.
:30:25. > :30:28.Other elements trialled include new measures to stop developers
:30:29. > :30:30.sitting on parcels of land without building homes,
:30:31. > :30:32.land banking, and moving railway station car parks Underground,
:30:33. > :30:40.The Government today said it will amend planning rules so more
:30:41. > :30:43.homes can be built specifically to be rented out through longer term
:30:44. > :30:45.tenancies, to provide more stability for young families,
:30:46. > :30:53.alongside its proposed ban on letting agent fees.
:30:54. > :30:59.And the Housing Minister, Gavin Barwell, joins me now.
:31:00. > :31:05.Welcome to the programme. Home ownership is now beyond the reach of
:31:06. > :31:08.most young people. You are now emphasising affordable homes for
:31:09. > :31:11.rent. Why have you given up on the Tory dream of a property owning
:31:12. > :31:17.democracy? We haven't given up on that. The decline on home ownership
:31:18. > :31:20.in this country started in 2004. So far we have stopped that decline, we
:31:21. > :31:24.haven't reversed it but we absolutely want to make sure that
:31:25. > :31:28.people who want to own and can do so. The Prime Minister was very
:31:29. > :31:31.clear a country that works for everyone. That means we have to have
:31:32. > :31:37.say something to say to those who want to rent as well as on. Home
:31:38. > :31:41.ownership of young people is 35%, used to be 60%. Are you telling me
:31:42. > :31:45.during the lifetime of this government that is going to rise? We
:31:46. > :31:49.want to reverse the decline. We have stabilised it. The decline started
:31:50. > :31:54.in 2004 under Labour. They weren't bothered about it. We have taken
:31:55. > :31:59.action and that has stop the decline... What about the rise? We
:32:00. > :32:03.have to make sure people work hard the right thing have the chance to
:32:04. > :32:07.own their home on home. We have helped people through help to buy,
:32:08. > :32:11.shared ownership, that is part of it, but we have to have something to
:32:12. > :32:16.say to those who want to rent. You say you want more rented homes so
:32:17. > :32:20.why did you introduce a 3% additional stamp duty levied to pay
:32:21. > :32:24.those investing in build to rent properties? That was basically to
:32:25. > :32:28.try and stop a lot of the speculation in the buy to let
:32:29. > :32:30.market. The Bank of England raised concerns about that. When you see
:32:31. > :32:39.the white paper, you will see there is a package of measures for Bill to
:32:40. > :32:41.rent, trying to get institutional investment for that, different to
:32:42. > :32:45.people going and buying a home on people going and buying a home on
:32:46. > :32:50.the private market and renting out. You are trying to get institutional
:32:51. > :32:52.money to comment, just as this government and subsequent ones
:32:53. > :32:55.before said it would get pension fund money to invest in
:32:56. > :33:00.infrastructure and it never happened. Why should this happen? Is
:33:01. > :33:03.already starting to happen. If you go around the country you can see
:33:04. > :33:07.some of these builder rent scheme is happening. There are changes in the
:33:08. > :33:18.White Paper... How much money from institutions is going into bill to
:33:19. > :33:21.rent modular hundreds of millions. I was at the stock exchange the other
:33:22. > :33:23.day celebrating the launch of one of our bombs designed to get this money
:33:24. > :33:26.on. There are schemes being... There is huge potential to expand it. We
:33:27. > :33:29.need more homes and we are too dependent on a small number of large
:33:30. > :33:36.developers. -- to launch one of our bonds. You talk about affordable
:33:37. > :33:40.renting, what is affordable? Defined as something that is at least 20%
:33:41. > :33:45.below the market price. It will vary around the country. Let me put it
:33:46. > :33:50.another way. The average couple renting now have to spend 50% of
:33:51. > :33:54.their income on rent. Is that affordable? That is exactly what
:33:55. > :33:57.we're trying to do something about. Whether you're trying to buy or
:33:58. > :34:01.rent, housing in this country has become less and less affordable
:34:02. > :34:04.because the 30-40 years governments haven't built in times. This white
:34:05. > :34:09.Paper is trying to do something about that. You have been in power
:34:10. > :34:16.six, almost seven years. That's right. Why are ownership of new
:34:17. > :34:20.homes to 24 year low? It was a low figure because it's a new five-year
:34:21. > :34:25.programme. That is not a great excuse. It's not an excuse at all.
:34:26. > :34:27.The way these things work, you have a five-year programme and in the
:34:28. > :34:31.last year you have a record number of delivery and when you start a new
:34:32. > :34:35.programme, a lower level. If you look at the average over six years,
:34:36. > :34:41.this government has built more affordable housing than the previous
:34:42. > :34:47.one. Stiletto 24 year loss, that is an embarrassment. Yes. We have the
:34:48. > :34:50.figures, last year was 32,000, the year before 60 6000. You get this
:34:51. > :34:55.cliff edge effect. It is embarrassing and we want to stop it
:34:56. > :34:59.happening in the future. You want to give tenants more secure and longer
:35:00. > :35:06.leases which rent rises are predictable in advance. Ed Miliband
:35:07. > :35:10.promoted three-year tenancies in the 2015 general election campaign and
:35:11. > :35:15.George Osborne said it was totally economically illiterate. What's
:35:16. > :35:20.changed? You are merging control of the rents people in charge, which
:35:21. > :35:24.we're not imposing. We want longer term tenancies. Most people have
:35:25. > :35:29.six-month tenancies... Within that there would be a control on how much
:35:30. > :35:33.the rent could go up? Right? It would be set for the period of the
:35:34. > :35:37.tenancies. That's what I just said, that's what Ed Miliband proposed. Ed
:35:38. > :35:42.Miliband proposed regulating it for the whole sector. One of the reasons
:35:43. > :35:46.institutional investment is so attractive, if you had a spare home
:35:47. > :35:51.and you want to rent out, you might need it any year, so you give it a
:35:52. > :35:56.short tenancy. If you have a block, they are interested in a long-term
:35:57. > :36:03.return and give families more security. You have set a target,
:36:04. > :36:06.your government, to build in the life of this parliament 1 million
:36:07. > :36:14.new homes in England by 2020. You're not going to make that? I think we
:36:15. > :36:16.are. If you look at 2015-16 we had 190,000 additional homes of this
:36:17. > :36:24.country. Just below the level we need to achieve. Over five...
:36:25. > :36:28.country. Just below the level we 2015-16. You were probably looking
:36:29. > :36:33.at the new homes built. Talking about completions in England. That
:36:34. > :36:36.is not the best measure, with respect. You said you will complete
:36:37. > :36:41.1 million homes by 2020 so what is wrong with it? We use a national
:36:42. > :36:44.statistic which looks at new homes built and conversions and changes of
:36:45. > :36:46.use minus demolitions. The total built and conversions and changes of
:36:47. > :36:52.change of the housing stock over that year. On that basis I have the
:36:53. > :36:57.figures here. I have the figures. You looking I just completed. 1
:36:58. > :37:02.million new homes, the average rate of those built in the last three
:37:03. > :37:07.quarters was 30 6000. You have 14 more quarters to get to the 1
:37:08. > :37:11.million. You have to raise that to 50 6000. I put it to you, you won't
:37:12. > :37:16.do it. You're not looking at the full picture of new housing in this
:37:17. > :37:19.country. You're looking at brand-new homes and not including conversions
:37:20. > :37:25.or changes of use are not taking off, which we should, demolitions.
:37:26. > :37:30.If you look at the National statistic net additions, in 2015-16,
:37:31. > :37:35.100 and 90,000 new homes. We are behind schedule. -- 190,000. I am
:37:36. > :37:39.confident with the measures in the White Paper we can achieve that. It
:37:40. > :37:44.is not just about the national total, we need to build these homes
:37:45. > :37:50.are the right places. Will the green belt remain sacrosanct after the
:37:51. > :37:53.white paper? Not proposing to change the existing protections that there
:37:54. > :37:58.for green belts. What planning policy says is councils can remove
:37:59. > :38:00.land from green belts but only in exceptional circumstances and should
:38:01. > :38:07.look at at all the circumstances before doing that. No change? No. We
:38:08. > :38:12.have a manifesto commitment. You still think you will get 1 million
:38:13. > :38:16.homes? The green belt is only 15%. This idea we can only fix our broken
:38:17. > :38:19.housing market by taking huge swathes of land out of the green
:38:20. > :38:23.belt is not true. We will leave it there, thank you for joining us,
:38:24. > :38:24.Gavin Barwell. It is coming up to 11.40.
:38:25. > :38:34.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now
:38:35. > :38:36.Good morning and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland.
:38:37. > :38:43.Is the Scottish Government's strategy for staying in the single
:38:44. > :39:00.I'll be asking David Mundell, the Scottish Secretary.
:39:01. > :39:02.And is an advert inviting foreign investment to Ireland
:39:03. > :39:14.This week the Scottish Secretary will be in Brussels
:39:15. > :39:15.as the legislative process to trigger article
:39:16. > :39:20.David Mundell was the only Scottish MP to vote for the motion in last
:39:21. > :39:23.Tomorrow the bill moves to the committee stage.
:39:24. > :39:27.David Mundell joins me now from London.
:39:28. > :39:37.Why are you going to Brussels this week? As part of the preparations
:39:38. > :39:44.for the negotiations beginning on Brexit. I'm going to explain to a
:39:45. > :39:49.lot of Scottish interests based in Brussels for the UK Government's
:39:50. > :39:54.approach is. Particularly on what we have been doing regarding indigenous
:39:55. > :40:05.stakeholders in Scotland. Are you taking part in negotiations with the
:40:06. > :40:11.European Union as such? There is a great diaspora from Scotland and
:40:12. > :40:14.Brussels. The resource that a lot of Scottish interests they are pursuing
:40:15. > :40:20.Scottish interests in the EU. We want to know what the UK
:40:21. > :40:24.Government's approaches to these negotiations. We are not beginning
:40:25. > :40:30.the negotiation process. That will happen when Article 50 is triggered.
:40:31. > :40:35.This week, we passed the bill which will allow that process to begin. It
:40:36. > :40:41.will be in Parliament this week for committee stage. Amendments will be
:40:42. > :40:46.brought forward. We hope we are now in a position to move forward with
:40:47. > :40:51.the Prime Minister's timetable two treble Article 50 by the end of
:40:52. > :40:56.March and that is when the formal negotiation process will begin. The
:40:57. > :41:00.substantive bill on coming out of the European Union, not the bill to
:41:01. > :41:05.trigger Article 50, you said that would need to be subject to a
:41:06. > :41:09.legislative consent motion in the Scottish parliament and of the
:41:10. > :41:13.Scottish Parliament didn't pass it, there would be very serious
:41:14. > :41:20.consequences. What did you mean? Whatever setting out was there are
:41:21. > :41:26.several pieces of legislation which will be required to see as leave the
:41:27. > :41:33.EU. The first, as the Supreme Court determined, will be the bill to
:41:34. > :41:38.trigger Article 50, hopefully and act by the end of March. We will
:41:39. > :41:45.then have to set a new arrangements for our relationship with what was
:41:46. > :41:50.the EU, our relationship with what was EU law. The first thing the
:41:51. > :41:55.great repeal bill will do is to try and bring the body of EU law back
:41:56. > :41:59.into Scots law and other legal systems in the UK so that at five
:42:00. > :42:06.minutes after midnight the day we leave the EU, there isn't a gap in
:42:07. > :42:09.the legal system. It will also abolish or repeal the European
:42:10. > :42:15.Communities Act. The other thing it will do is look at how we repatriate
:42:16. > :42:19.powers which are currently exercise in Brussels to the United Kingdom
:42:20. > :42:24.and whether they come to Westminster or pilot come to Scotland or whether
:42:25. > :42:30.there is some sort of mix. Because it's likely that bill will impact on
:42:31. > :42:32.the powers and responsibilities of the Scottish parliament, then my
:42:33. > :42:40.anticipation is that would be subject to the legislative consent
:42:41. > :42:46.process in the Scottish parliament, unlike the Article 50 bill which is
:42:47. > :42:50.a reserved matter. Should a Scottish parliament say they don't like any
:42:51. > :42:55.of these Brexit things and say they are not going to pass it, what are
:42:56. > :42:58.these serious consequences? My priority is to ensure we get
:42:59. > :43:03.agreement on the Scottish Parliament for that they'll. That's why I will
:43:04. > :43:09.focus about when the bill comes forward. If we left the EU and the
:43:10. > :43:13.legal system that we previously operated under in relation to the
:43:14. > :43:18.various rules and regulations that apply to so many things in relation,
:43:19. > :43:23.for example, to the environment, didn't apply any more and was
:43:24. > :43:27.effectively a gap in the law, that would be a very serious situation.
:43:28. > :43:32.That's what the bill is about remedying. I hope and believe it
:43:33. > :43:38.would get support in the Scottish Parliament. Your comment about very
:43:39. > :43:44.serious consequences, do you mean just in the sense that the Scottish
:43:45. > :43:48.parliament would not have done what you have just described in terms of
:43:49. > :43:54.homologated law from Europe into Scots law? Or do you mean very
:43:55. > :43:58.serious consequences for the whole of the UK? In particular, serious
:43:59. > :44:02.consequences for Scotland if we were not able to ensure the body of
:44:03. > :44:07.European law as currently exist and applies in Scotland did not come
:44:08. > :44:12.into force immediately when we left the EU. I think there is widespread
:44:13. > :44:17.agreement on that. That's what we want to ensure we achieve. What I'm
:44:18. > :44:20.about is working closely with the Scottish Parliament, with the
:44:21. > :44:24.Scottish Government, to make sure we can get agreement on the great
:44:25. > :44:31.repeal Bill. That is not about whether or not we leave the EU, it's
:44:32. > :44:35.about having sensible and proper arrangements in place when we do.
:44:36. > :44:38.And I'm sure that MS peas and stakeholders right across Scotland
:44:39. > :44:44.will understand the importance of that piece of legislation. Will
:44:45. > :44:49.bring it forward in a White Paper to allow for discussion and debate
:44:50. > :44:52.ahead of the bill being introduced in the Queen's Speech. I expect
:44:53. > :45:00.there to be significant engagement across Scotland in that regard.
:45:01. > :45:04.Continuing engagement with the Scottish Government. We've already
:45:05. > :45:08.had serious discussions with them about that. The Scottish Government
:45:09. > :45:10.has produced this paper about what it wants out of Brexit, which is
:45:11. > :45:15.basically to stay in the single it wants out of Brexit, which is
:45:16. > :45:22.market. It said unless it gets that, it will hold are very likely to hold
:45:23. > :45:28.another independence referendum. To do that, it would need authorisation
:45:29. > :45:31.from the British government. Michael Fallon seemed to imply this week
:45:32. > :45:36.that the British government would not give that authorisation or at
:45:37. > :45:44.least not before Brexit Ossetians have finished. He said, we have no
:45:45. > :45:48.plans to help them hold a second independence referendum. Do you
:45:49. > :45:54.agree? The Scottish Government should forget about holding another
:45:55. > :45:58.independence referendum. I understand you don't want one.
:45:59. > :46:05.Should the British government withhold one? Polling is
:46:06. > :46:12.overwhelmingly clear that another referendum would be a very divisive
:46:13. > :46:19.event. Will your government withhold authorisation? I have set out many
:46:20. > :46:24.times previously on this programme and others, the issue is not about
:46:25. > :46:29.whether there could be another independence referendum, of course
:46:30. > :46:35.there could be. That is a process issue. As you indicate, as the
:46:36. > :46:40.Scottish Government indicated in their own White Paper consultation,
:46:41. > :46:46.that would require the agreement of the UK Government and legislation at
:46:47. > :46:50.Westminster. The argument remains, should there be another independence
:46:51. > :46:53.referendum? And that's where the debate needs to be and I'm
:46:54. > :46:57.absolutely clear that there shouldn't be another
:46:58. > :47:03.absolutely clear that there referendum. You're completely
:47:04. > :47:09.avoiding the issue here. Let's take a step back. I don't understand why
:47:10. > :47:12.I'm avoiding the issue. Further to be another independence referendum,
:47:13. > :47:17.there would have to be agreement between the UK Government and the
:47:18. > :47:27.Scottish Government. Should the UK Government give that agreement?
:47:28. > :47:32.There is not currently a proposal on the table, but I don't want to have
:47:33. > :47:37.the sort of process argument that the SNP luxuriate in. I won't have
:47:38. > :47:41.the argument about whether or not there should be another independence
:47:42. > :47:46.referendum. I believe firmly the answer to that question is no. It
:47:47. > :47:51.would be extremely divisive. The people of Scotland have already made
:47:52. > :48:00.their decision. What they want is to see the two government working
:48:01. > :48:13.together to get the best possible deal for Scotland as we negotiate
:48:14. > :48:16.with the 27 other members of the EU. This week, everyone from Nicola
:48:17. > :48:23.Sturgeon down words was tweeting about Michael Fallon's remarks which
:48:24. > :48:27.you won't address. Michael Fallon implied, forget it when it comes to
:48:28. > :48:32.a second referendum. You know perfectly well that cannot be a
:48:33. > :48:35.second referendum unless your government approves it. On this
:48:36. > :48:42.programme, you have previously implied that you should not stand in
:48:43. > :48:45.their way. Will you repeat that should the Scottish Government
:48:46. > :48:50.organise another referendum, the British government will not stand in
:48:51. > :48:54.its way. I don't understand how I'm not making the position is clear as
:48:55. > :48:59.it absolutely is. There would require to be agreement between the
:49:00. > :49:04.two government, between the Scottish Parliament and the UK Parliament,
:49:05. > :49:10.for another referendum to proceed. There is not currently a proposal on
:49:11. > :49:15.the table for another referendum. That's why I think the focus of the
:49:16. > :49:23.argument has to be on whether there should or should not be another
:49:24. > :49:28.referendum. You said this 50 times. It is a process issue. The people of
:49:29. > :49:30.Scotland are clearly don't want one and that's what we need to continue
:49:31. > :49:35.to debate about. I'm not afraid of and that's what we need to continue
:49:36. > :49:40.another referendum because I think it's pretty clear that the outcome
:49:41. > :49:47.would be the same. But I dread it because I think it would be a
:49:48. > :49:52.divisive and seriously unpleasant event. I don't think people want to
:49:53. > :49:56.see that. They want to see the two governments working together at this
:49:57. > :50:03.time to get the best possible deal for Scotland and the rest of the UK
:50:04. > :50:09.as we leave the European Union. I think that sentence will get into
:50:10. > :50:12.the Guinness book Of Records. Let's do some role-play. I'm Nicola
:50:13. > :50:16.Sturgeon. I say, I know you don't want another independence
:50:17. > :50:21.referendum, but we've decided were having one. Winnie need a permission
:50:22. > :50:27.of the UK Government to have that. Is your answer yes or no? Firstly,
:50:28. > :50:34.it's a matter for the Scottish Parliament to determine. It's not a
:50:35. > :50:37.matter for the Scottish Government. If there is to be another
:50:38. > :50:42.referendum, it would proceed on the basis, as set I've set out
:50:43. > :50:46.repeatedly during the course of this interview and previously, on an
:50:47. > :50:50.equivalent of the Edinburgh agreement. The two government is
:50:51. > :50:55.reaching agreement. But there's not a proposal on the table and
:50:56. > :50:59.therefore the debate shouldn't be about the process issue, which is
:51:00. > :51:02.what the SNP love to have, about whether or not there could be
:51:03. > :51:08.another referendum, the issue is should there be another referendum?
:51:09. > :51:13.The answer to that is absolutely and categorically no. The people of
:51:14. > :51:26.Scotland have voted decisively. We have
:51:27. > :51:29.run out of according to all polls, people do not want another
:51:30. > :51:31.referendum, the note would be divisive and unpleasant. Instead,
:51:32. > :51:34.they want to get on with the decision that was previously made.
:51:35. > :51:39.We have run out of time. I wanted to ask you one very brief question. The
:51:40. > :51:44.Scottish Government's proposal is to stay in the single market by
:51:45. > :51:48.Scotland becoming a member of the European free trade agreement. While
:51:49. > :51:55.remaining part of the United Kingdom. Is there any possibility
:51:56. > :51:59.whatsoever of that happening? It's not impossible, but I believe that
:52:00. > :52:04.it is better to proceed on the basis that the Prime Minister set out of
:52:05. > :52:08.getting access to the single market for the whole of the United Kingdom
:52:09. > :52:13.with a free-trade agreement. I don't see the evidence to suggest that
:52:14. > :52:18.Scotland needs or would benefit from a differentiated agreement, but my
:52:19. > :52:20.mind is open and with intensified discussions to look at that. Thank
:52:21. > :52:23.you. How do you regenerate Scotland's
:52:24. > :52:25.former industrial areas? Cumnock in East Ayrshire thinks it
:52:26. > :52:28.may have hit on a winning formula. It's similar to many former mining
:52:29. > :52:31.areas which are grappling with how to reinvent themselves
:52:32. > :52:33.for a post-industrial age. With most of the country's
:52:34. > :52:35.population in towns not cities, the Government is keen to see
:52:36. > :52:37.collaboration between residents and organisations lead to new life
:52:38. > :52:41.in the places where most of us live. John McManus has been
:52:42. > :52:52.to East Ayrshire to find If a is the story for mining
:52:53. > :52:58.communities across Scotland. Digging coal brought a rich seam of jobs,
:52:59. > :53:02.but scarred the landscape. Then the jobs dried up, now towns across east
:53:03. > :53:06.Ayrshire are wondering how to reinvent themselves and do the same
:53:07. > :53:13.time tackle deprivation and unemployment. It is remarkable,
:53:14. > :53:20.isn't it? In 2007, Prince Charles acquired land here. Outline planning
:53:21. > :53:23.permission was given for several hundred houses with reports this
:53:24. > :53:29.would be an eco-village run on sustainable principles and built by
:53:30. > :53:35.locals. But so far, only a few dozen houses have been completed. A
:53:36. > :53:38.spokesman for the Prince said he it will be grown organically and
:53:39. > :53:43.slowly, but could not say how many homes were planned for the next
:53:44. > :53:48.phase. Locals have identified a new source of ideas. They want to
:53:49. > :53:54.revitalise it partly on green principles. One idea is to use this
:53:55. > :54:00.river to generate hydroelectric power and jobs. It is low-down on
:54:01. > :54:04.the valley many rivers run through it, so you have a unique opportunity
:54:05. > :54:11.that you harness hydroelectric power. You can put solar panels on
:54:12. > :54:16.many buildings. We've got a brand-new campus we have built, so
:54:17. > :54:23.you have got a huge amount of different green energy sources that
:54:24. > :54:25.you could use. Consortium of organisations may provide the
:54:26. > :54:31.start-up funding. It could be payback time. The surrounding area
:54:32. > :54:34.has actually been what has power to Scotland and indeed the UK. We have
:54:35. > :54:38.taken a lot of coal out of the ground. There was a lot of these
:54:39. > :54:44.places around Scotland and we need to be looking at how to future proof
:54:45. > :54:49.the economy and these areas. Eco-towns are unusual, but not
:54:50. > :54:51.unknown. Freiburg in Germany has won awards for its aggressively
:54:52. > :54:57.integrated low-carbon housing and transport. Come that may not be the
:54:58. > :55:01.new Freiburg, but plans are already afoot to place solar panels on shops
:55:02. > :55:08.like these. On the shopping centre that will soon spring up here and a
:55:09. > :55:13.proposed newsgroup could be powered by biomass from crops like this one
:55:14. > :55:17.in the nearby Dumfries house. The challenges as with hundreds of other
:55:18. > :55:21.towns they are trying to regenerate, how to get local people involved in
:55:22. > :55:24.the plans, and to get them to take ownership of them as well so they
:55:25. > :55:30.have a real stake in making sure that the town succeeds. Over coffee,
:55:31. > :55:33.two residents tell me this is a five-year plan. It is important for
:55:34. > :55:43.the local community to be involved in the decision-making. We have went
:55:44. > :55:47.some way towards that, we have a 60.6 return rate in the service that
:55:48. > :55:52.we did. Part of that was real community engagement, it is about
:55:53. > :55:56.communication. We have found that the most important thing is sitting
:55:57. > :56:02.across from Sunbury having a cup of tea, talking about what we're doing
:56:03. > :56:13.like now. -- talking across from somebody. With other kids growing up
:56:14. > :56:17.and experiencing Cumnock, it is giving us the same kind of chances
:56:18. > :56:22.we had growing up. Working towards the future really. Cumnock could
:56:23. > :56:27.help the Government to meet its climate change targets in the future
:56:28. > :56:32.and transform itself. Close by, you have got very successful trip to the
:56:33. > :56:36.Mac towns that have reinvented on a theme. Your back Castle Douglas was
:56:37. > :56:41.a similar size, that is now the food capital of the south of Scotland.
:56:42. > :56:46.Further rundown, you have got this contest artists capital and then you
:56:47. > :56:52.have got the nation 's boot capital. Why can't Cumnock come together and
:56:53. > :56:54.be Scotland's first sustainable town?
:56:55. > :56:56.Phil Prentice, ending that report by John McManus.
:56:57. > :56:58.What will Britain look like outside the European Union?
:56:59. > :57:00.Of course, a question we can't answer yet.
:57:01. > :57:03.But the agency in Ireland which bids for foreign direct investment has
:57:04. > :57:05.put out its latest advert where it appears to be directly targeting
:57:06. > :57:08.investment which might have previously been destined for the UK
:57:09. > :57:22.We are 4.75 million. We are any number of tech -based enterprises.
:57:23. > :57:27.We are 33% under 25. We are last 353. We are the one English-speaking
:57:28. > :57:33.country in the Eurozone. We are home to 15 of the world's top 25
:57:34. > :57:36.financial services companies. We are at 12 half percent corporate tax
:57:37. > :57:38.rate. We are 100% committed to the EU.
:57:39. > :57:41.Does this pitch threaten Scotland or is it a wise move
:57:42. > :57:46.by the Irish Government ahead of the UK leaving the Europe?
:57:47. > :57:50.Well joining me now from London is the News Editor of the Irish Times,
:57:51. > :57:52.Mark Hennessy and in our Edinburgh studio is Judith O'Leary who's
:57:53. > :58:05.Mark, I dare say I know these adverts are put out all the time,
:58:06. > :58:08.but there is thinking going on in Dublin, isn't there? About how it
:58:09. > :58:12.could attract particularly finance companies that might otherwise go to
:58:13. > :58:19.the UK or perhaps even ones that are in Scotland or England. Yes indeed.
:58:20. > :58:22.Certainly, we have two protect foreign investment that we have got
:58:23. > :58:26.the next chapter of that investment. What you saw there is a very
:58:27. > :58:30.professional piece of work and it is being pushed out quite strongly by
:58:31. > :58:34.the IDA, but from the Irish point of view Brexit is the biggest foreign
:58:35. > :58:39.policy challenge that we have faced in half a century, if not more. And
:58:40. > :58:44.there are opportunities for us being the last English-speaking country
:58:45. > :58:49.left in the European Union, once the United Kingdom has gone.
:58:50. > :58:51.Unfortunately, this is Premier League politics. If Britain is going
:58:52. > :58:57.to put itself out of the game, then other countries are going to see if
:58:58. > :59:00.they can take part of that cake and we do have certain advantages
:59:01. > :59:05.because of time zone, because of education standards, because of
:59:06. > :59:09.largely an Anglo-Saxon business model in terms of very similar
:59:10. > :59:15.thoughts to Britain on regulation and a whole variety of other issues.
:59:16. > :59:18.There are opportunities. But the reality for Ireland is we would
:59:19. > :59:23.prefer if you haven't decided what you did. Because you have, we have
:59:24. > :59:26.to take advantage of it. We will come under the downside of it in a
:59:27. > :59:32.moment, to your knowledge, our people in Ireland, the IDA and other
:59:33. > :59:37.places, going to cases like New York and saying look, we are the best
:59:38. > :59:41.place now for you to come to? Yes, we are doing that. All elements of
:59:42. > :59:46.the Irish political system is doing that. That isn't just a question of
:59:47. > :59:50.trying to take flesh off the bone of the United Kingdom. It is also to
:59:51. > :59:53.prevent damage being sustained by the Irish Republic because we have
:59:54. > :59:59.so many people who are absolutely unaware of the fact that Ireland is
:00:00. > :00:03.an independent country and it isn't still part of the United Kingdom. We
:00:04. > :00:07.are being caught in the crossfire. If you go to Southeast Asia and you
:00:08. > :00:11.ask people in China and elsewhere what their knowledge is of the
:00:12. > :00:14.political structures of the British Isles, in its geographical sense,
:00:15. > :00:20.you will find that there is zero knowledge and we have two emphasise
:00:21. > :00:24.at every possible opportunity that we get that Ireland is a stand-alone
:00:25. > :00:27.country, that it is a member of the European Union and it is not going
:00:28. > :00:32.anywhere. Could you can be sure whilst the Irish are trying to
:00:33. > :00:36.emphasise our attractiveness to foreign direct investment, you will
:00:37. > :00:39.find people on the continent who are making exactly that same run to
:00:40. > :00:47.Silicon Valley and elsewhere and saying, well, the Brits gone are
:00:48. > :00:52.gone, so you have to be careful of the Irish. We have to make sure we
:00:53. > :00:58.don't get caught in the crossfire. What is the feeling on business
:00:59. > :01:02.here? Are you worried about what the Irish or the French or the Germans
:01:03. > :01:07.are getting up to? I think we need to concentrate on what we have got
:01:08. > :01:09.here. We have a very, very strong and robust market. Really,
:01:10. > :01:12.businesses in Scotland are very and robust market. Really,
:01:13. > :01:15.confident of the future. They know that they have to make decisions
:01:16. > :01:19.themselves and take their future into their own hands and they are
:01:20. > :01:23.doing that. Ireland is looking to support what it is doing for its
:01:24. > :01:28.economy, but it is remembering that Britain is very important to the
:01:29. > :01:33.Irish economy. Surely Scotland would be affected? Let's say there is no
:01:34. > :01:37.deal on this issue called passport in for financial firms, which would
:01:38. > :01:41.mean that if you are a financial firm as I understand in Britain, you
:01:42. > :01:44.will have to set up these inside the European Union in order to take
:01:45. > :01:50.advantage of the single market. Presumably, there would be companies
:01:51. > :01:54.in Scotland, investment management companies and suchlike, that Mark's
:01:55. > :01:57.friends in the IDA can come to an sake, you will have to set up in the
:01:58. > :02:01.European Union. If you're going to do that, why don't you set up an
:02:02. > :02:08.office in Dublin? Absolutely, it is compelling. Ireland being the
:02:09. > :02:11.English speaking country in the EU. I can see why that is an attraction.
:02:12. > :02:15.We mustn't be afraid that fossil Ireland and Scotland are very good
:02:16. > :02:18.friends, as we saw in the rugby yesterday, there is every special
:02:19. > :02:21.relationship there. Countries do need to leave Scotland and being the
:02:22. > :02:25.EU country, then perhaps Ireland's good place for them to be and we
:02:26. > :02:28.should really work at that special relationship to make it work for
:02:29. > :02:33.both companies. Using to be accepting that there may well be a
:02:34. > :02:35.case for financial companies in Scotland to leave here. -- you seem
:02:36. > :02:40.to be. That is a decision for the Scotland to leave here. -- you seem
:02:41. > :02:44.company. If they feel they need to be in the EU, the may have to take
:02:45. > :02:48.that decision. We can't impact that. What we can do is make sure that we
:02:49. > :02:55.make the best possible case for remaining in Britain and there are
:02:56. > :02:58.benefits of being here. They're obviously huge benefits of being in
:02:59. > :03:02.the European Union, that is what they would not be allowed to do.
:03:03. > :03:06.Quite. We took that decision when we voted for the Brexit vote. That
:03:07. > :03:09.decision has been taken and we are faced with the outcomes of that and
:03:10. > :03:12.we have to work to make the best possible case for remaining here. Of
:03:13. > :03:16.those companies decide that they do need to live, then perhaps Ireland's
:03:17. > :03:20.good place for them to go and we should maybe perhaps think that that
:03:21. > :03:24.is a good opportunity for us to develop that relationship going
:03:25. > :03:29.forward. You have referred, marked, to other countries trying to get
:03:30. > :03:35.into the act. I know Paris is making a big pitch for it. I suspect
:03:36. > :03:39.Frankfurt as well. Is the feeling in Ireland that you are well placed to
:03:40. > :03:42.compete with them? I think the French in particular seem to be
:03:43. > :03:46.putting a lot of effort into this. The French are and so are the
:03:47. > :03:51.Germans and Milan. All of the indication so far is that Ireland
:03:52. > :03:52.will benefit from the transfer of some financial operations. We saw
:03:53. > :03:58.last week the week before when some financial operations. We saw
:03:59. > :04:03.Barclays said they are putting an operation in Dublin. That is 150
:04:04. > :04:08.people, not 1500 people and that I think will be the most likely
:04:09. > :04:13.outcome. That UK City of London based companies will do the minimum
:04:14. > :04:19.necessary to set up our sporting operations in other EU states,
:04:20. > :04:22.whilst they keep much of their operation in London simply because
:04:23. > :04:25.it would be too difficult to transfer it. There will be elements
:04:26. > :04:28.that disappear completely. The City of London is going to lose jobs.
:04:29. > :04:33.Will it be a basket case at the end of London is going to lose jobs.
:04:34. > :04:38.of this? No. Not in the short term. London may not get new products,
:04:39. > :04:42.financial products, as they develop, but how any of the existing ones
:04:43. > :04:44.will they lose? There is a wealth of experience and talent in London that
:04:45. > :04:51.doesn't want to go and live in Frankfurt. What about the other side
:04:52. > :04:57.of this? You talk to the beginning about opportunities. Is there a
:04:58. > :05:03.feeling in business in Scotland that there is huge opportunities are
:05:04. > :05:06.coming out of the EU? Yes, it is massively destructive, but there are
:05:07. > :05:16.other markets such as China and India that we need to go for now. In
:05:17. > :05:19.a business community in Edinburgh people are taking their destiny in
:05:20. > :05:22.their own hands and I think people are just saying, well, it has
:05:23. > :05:27.happened, we need to move forward and we're going to do so with gusto.
:05:28. > :05:31.There is a lot of support here for businesses who want to work out with
:05:32. > :05:34.the EU and as I say, China and India present ready strong opportunities
:05:35. > :05:39.for us here. We will have to leave it here. They very much.
:05:40. > :05:43.Now it's time to review the week gone by and look at what's happening
:05:44. > :05:48.in the next seven days on the Week Ahead.
:05:49. > :05:50.Joining me this week is the Columnist Kevin McKenna
:05:51. > :05:55.and the Writer and Journalist Katie Grant.
:05:56. > :06:00.Just before we talk to the peer review, let's have a little look at
:06:01. > :06:04.something which has been happening in America.
:06:05. > :06:07.Now, on Friday a Seattle based judge, James Robart,
:06:08. > :06:10.imposed a national temporary halt to President Trump's travel ban.
:06:11. > :06:15.I find the court should and will grant the temporary restraining
:06:16. > :06:17.order. Well, this morning, the US
:06:18. > :06:19.Appeals Court has delivered another A judge in San Francisco rejected
:06:20. > :06:23.the government's request The Appeals Court has given
:06:24. > :06:26.the Trump administration until the end of
:06:27. > :06:35.tomorrow to respond. Kevin, we have been having
:06:36. > :06:42.discussions in the office based on an understanding of the legal system
:06:43. > :06:50.which is not very much. This seems to imply it's all me a stay until
:06:51. > :06:54.tomorrow and the court has said to both sides, the administration and
:06:55. > :06:59.the states which brought the action, come and give us some evidence and
:07:00. > :07:05.we will have a think about it. There's two ways of looking at this.
:07:06. > :07:11.As you said, you could see this is yet another blow to Donald Trump.
:07:12. > :07:16.People like me looking in from the outside would say, why was this not
:07:17. > :07:22.predicted? Why was this not part of the model for his first 100 days
:07:23. > :07:25.that something like this might have happened? The other way of looking
:07:26. > :07:34.at it is perhaps this is exactly what he wanted to happen. He claims
:07:35. > :07:42.to be clearing out the swarm. And the swamp seems to be middle-class
:07:43. > :07:49.people and judges and he wants to reach the people. I don't think
:07:50. > :07:55.Donald Trump accepts that he lost the popular vote by almost 3 million
:07:56. > :08:00.people. It's a high risk strategy. These judges are courting the
:08:01. > :08:08.constitution saying the president is not above the Constitution. That is
:08:09. > :08:13.one of its great strength is. There are people trying to get back to the
:08:14. > :08:21.United States who had been blocked. They have 18 hours. They will be
:08:22. > :08:26.busy online buying air tickets. I think this is part of Donald Trump's
:08:27. > :08:31.strategy that trade and immigration were big reasons why I want and
:08:32. > :08:35.therefore the travel ban is what the people want. Whether we think that's
:08:36. > :08:42.true or not, how do we know? We didn't even predict that he would
:08:43. > :08:47.win. He would say he is simply implementing what he said in his
:08:48. > :08:51.campaign he would do. He's implementing a restricted version of
:08:52. > :08:56.what he said. He is indeed. I think that's one of his great strengths.
:08:57. > :09:00.We see so many politicians, particularly over Brexit, rambling
:09:01. > :09:08.on where nobody really knows what's going on. In America, with Donald
:09:09. > :09:13.Trump, he's doing what he said he would do in all his manifestos and
:09:14. > :09:17.in his inauguration speech. We can hardly say we didn't know this and
:09:18. > :09:22.squint happen. I think he is appealing beyond what he sees as the
:09:23. > :09:26.establishment, in which he includes the judges, he is appealing beyond
:09:27. > :09:31.them and he is imagining, whether it is true or not, that people will be
:09:32. > :09:35.within. Only time will tell whether that is true. But I think it's
:09:36. > :09:41.worrying you might get a stand-off between the president and the
:09:42. > :09:46.judiciary. When well that ends? That's where maybe the American
:09:47. > :09:54.people will see that they don't really know where this will go
:09:55. > :10:08.either. We were talking to David Mundell about Brexit. They are
:10:09. > :10:15.suggesting that it would be disruptive for the Scottish
:10:16. > :10:23.Government to have one during Brexit negotiations. Is that a reasonable
:10:24. > :10:27.position? Both sides on this are reasonable. I think Nicola Sturgeon
:10:28. > :10:36.must rather want a block on the referendum because it makes her look
:10:37. > :10:42.like Westminster are stopping them from doing what they want. They talk
:10:43. > :10:46.about the people of Scotland, but they don't really know what the
:10:47. > :10:53.people of Scotland want. It is disastrous for them to have another
:10:54. > :10:57.referendum and they lose in present circumstances, it couldn't really be
:10:58. > :11:06.more propitious. There is a lot of grandstanding going on. The business
:11:07. > :11:11.community are already looking beyond Brexit. It's unclear whether there
:11:12. > :11:15.is a mass of people in Scotland wanting to have another independence
:11:16. > :11:28.referendum. What's your view on that, Kevin? Would it be reasonable
:11:29. > :11:35.for the British government to say that the people need to see what we
:11:36. > :11:37.negotiate regarding Brexit? I think that's a reasonable position. The
:11:38. > :11:42.only problem is I don't think even Theresa May or anyone in the British
:11:43. > :11:47.government knows when Brexit negotiations, and by that I mean all
:11:48. > :11:52.the trade negotiations are going to follow, how much scrutiny there will
:11:53. > :11:56.be by Parliament, not just on trickling Article 50, but what it
:11:57. > :11:59.might look like. David Davis has said there might be a second
:12:00. > :12:06.referendum to allow the British people to scrutinise the aspects of
:12:07. > :12:17.our separation from Europe. I get that. On the other hand, Nicola
:12:18. > :12:21.Sturgeon, as we have just heard, she leads and Independence party. She
:12:22. > :12:26.has said on four different occasions that the hopelessness and chaos of
:12:27. > :12:36.the British government's attitude and conduct over Brexit leaves -- is
:12:37. > :12:41.beginning to leave her no option but to hold an independence referendum.
:12:42. > :12:46.To come back to something that David Mundell said. He said there is no
:12:47. > :12:50.popular mandate for this. Over the last three years, there has been a
:12:51. > :13:02.UK election and the Scottish election where the SNP and the Green
:13:03. > :13:05.Party have got overwhelming support. You backed independence. If you are
:13:06. > :13:14.running the place, would you hold another one? I would hold another
:13:15. > :13:21.one. I wrote in a column a few weeks ago, I was docking about 2019. My
:13:22. > :13:24.problem with waiting too long, and I think Nicola Sturgeon ideally would
:13:25. > :13:28.love to see what the implications and the fallout from Brexit was
:13:29. > :13:34.before she holds one, but there is never an ideal time to have a second
:13:35. > :13:39.independence referendum and there is such a thing as waiting too long and
:13:40. > :13:47.the window beginning to shut. Would you hold off, if you were Nicola
:13:48. > :13:52.Sturgeon? I would hold off, but then you are in danger of things coming
:13:53. > :13:57.from the left field, about which we know nothing. Thank you very much.
:13:58. > :13:58.I'll be back at the same time next week.