:00:39. > :00:39.Morning, folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics.
:00:40. > :00:42.Hard line remainers strike back at Brexit.
:00:43. > :00:44.Are they trying to overturn the result of June's referendum
:00:45. > :00:47.by forcing a second vote before we leave?
:00:48. > :00:50.Australia's man in London tells us that life outside the EU "can be
:00:51. > :00:55.pretty good" and that Brexit will "not be as hard as people say".
:00:56. > :00:57.Could leaving the EU free Britain to do more business
:00:58. > :01:03.It's been called "disgusting, dangerous and deadly"
:01:04. > :01:06.but how polluted is our air, how bad for our health,
:01:07. > :01:30.And with me in the Sunday Politics grotto, the Dasher, Dancer
:01:31. > :01:33.and Prancer of political punditry Iain Martin,
:01:34. > :01:41.They'll be delivering tweets throughout the programme.
:01:42. > :01:47.First this morning, some say they will fight
:01:48. > :01:50.for what they call a "soft Brexit", but now there's an attempt by those
:01:51. > :01:53.who campaigned for Britain to remain in the EU to allow the British
:01:54. > :01:56.people to change their minds - possibly with a second referendum -
:01:57. > :02:00.The Labour MEP Richard Corbett is revealed this morning to have
:02:01. > :02:02.tried to amend European Parliament resolutions.
:02:03. > :02:05.The original resolution called on the European Parliament
:02:06. > :02:08.to "respect the will of the majority of the citizens
:02:09. > :02:23.of the United Kingdom to leave the EU".
:02:24. > :02:28.He also proposed removing the wording "stress that this wish
:02:29. > :02:31.must be respected" and adding "while taking account of the 48.1%
:02:32. > :02:43.The amendments were proposed in October,
:02:44. > :02:47.but were rejected by a vote in the Brussels
:02:48. > :02:48.Constitutional Affairs Committee earlier this month.
:02:49. > :02:51.The report will be voted on by all MEPs in February.
:02:52. > :02:54.Well, joining me now from Leeds is the Labour MEP who proposed
:02:55. > :03:03.Good morning. Thanks for joining us at short notice. Is your aim to try
:03:04. > :03:08.and reverse what happened on June 23? My aim with those amendments was
:03:09. > :03:12.simply factual. It is rather odd that these amendments of two months
:03:13. > :03:18.ago are suddenly used paper headlines in three very different
:03:19. > :03:24.newspapers on the same day. It smacks of a sort of concerted effort
:03:25. > :03:29.to try and slapped down any notion that Britain might perhaps want to
:03:30. > :03:34.rethink its position on Brexit as the cost of Brexit emerges. You
:03:35. > :03:40.would like us to rethink the position even before the cost urges?
:03:41. > :03:44.I get lots of letters from people saying how one, this was an advisory
:03:45. > :03:51.referendum won by a narrow majority on the basis of a pack of lies and a
:03:52. > :03:54.questionable mandate. But if there is a mandate from this referendum,
:03:55. > :03:58.it is surely to secure a Brexit that works for Britain without sinking
:03:59. > :04:02.the economy. And if it transpires as we move forward, that this will be a
:04:03. > :04:06.very costly exercise, then there will be people who voted leave who
:04:07. > :04:11.said Hang on, this is not what I was told. I was told this would save
:04:12. > :04:13.money, we could put it in the NHS, but if it is going to cost us and
:04:14. > :04:30.our Monday leg, I would the right to reconsider. But
:04:31. > :04:34.your aim is not get a Brexit that would work for Britain, your aim is
:04:35. > :04:36.to stop it? If we got a Brexit that would work for Britain, that would
:04:37. > :04:39.respect the mandate. But if we cannot get that, if it is going to
:04:40. > :04:42.be a disaster, if it is going to cost people jobs and cost Britain
:04:43. > :04:46.money, it is something we might want to pause and rethink. The government
:04:47. > :04:51.said it is going to come forward with a plan. That is good. We need
:04:52. > :04:58.to know what options to go for as a country. Do we want to stay in the
:04:59. > :05:01.single market, the customs union, the various agencies? And options
:05:02. > :05:07.should be costed so we can all see how much they cost of Brexit will
:05:08. > :05:11.be. If you were simply going to try and make the resolution is more
:05:12. > :05:20.illegal, why did the constitutional committee vote them down? This is a
:05:21. > :05:25.report about future treaty amendments down the road for years
:05:26. > :05:33.to come. This was not the main focus of the report, it was a side
:05:34. > :05:39.reference, in which was put the idea for Association partnerships. Will
:05:40. > :05:47.you push for the idea before the full parliament? I must see what the
:05:48. > :05:54.text is. You said there is a widespread view in labour that if
:05:55. > :05:57.the Brexit view is bad we should not exclude everything, I take it you
:05:58. > :06:05.mean another referendum. When you were named down these amendments,
:06:06. > :06:09.was this just acting on your own initiative, or acting on behalf of
:06:10. > :06:17.the Labour Party? I am just be humble lame-duck MEP in the European
:06:18. > :06:21.Parliament. It makes sense from any point of view that if the course of
:06:22. > :06:25.action you have embarked on turns out to be much more costly and
:06:26. > :06:29.disastrous than you had anticipated, that you might want the chance to
:06:30. > :06:34.think again. You might come to the same conclusion, of course, but you
:06:35. > :06:40.might think, wait a minute, let's have a look at this. But let's be
:06:41. > :06:43.clear, even though you are deputy leader of Labour in the European
:06:44. > :06:51.Parliament, you're acting alone and not as Labour Party policy? I am
:06:52. > :06:56.acting in the constitutional affairs committee. All I am doing is stating
:06:57. > :06:59.things which are common sense. If as we move forward then this turns out
:07:00. > :07:04.to be a disaster, we need to look very carefully at where we are
:07:05. > :07:10.going. But if a deal is done under Article 50, and we get to see the
:07:11. > :07:15.shape of that deal by the end of 2019 under the two-year timetable,
:07:16. > :07:19.in your words, we won't know if it is a disaster or not until it is
:07:20. > :07:26.implemented. We won't be able to tell until we see the results about
:07:27. > :07:33.whether it is good or bad, surely? We might well be able to, because
:07:34. > :07:38.that has to take account of the future framework of relationships
:07:39. > :07:40.with the European Union, to quote the article of the treaty. That
:07:41. > :07:45.means we should have some idea about what that will be like. Will we be
:07:46. > :07:49.outside the customs union, for instance, which will be very
:07:50. > :07:54.damaging for our economy? Or will we have to stay inside and follow the
:07:55. > :07:58.rules without having a say on them. We won't know until we leave the
:07:59. > :08:02.customs union. You think it will be damaging, others think it will give
:08:03. > :08:06.us the opportunity to do massive trade deals. My case this morning is
:08:07. > :08:10.not what is right or wrong, we will not know until we have seen the
:08:11. > :08:14.results. We will know a heck of a lot more than we do now when we see
:08:15. > :08:17.that Article 50 divorce agreement. We will know the terms of the
:08:18. > :08:21.divorce, we will know how much we still have to pay into the EU budget
:08:22. > :08:26.for legacy costs. We will know whether we will be in the single
:08:27. > :08:31.market customs union or not. We will know about the agencies. We will
:08:32. > :08:34.know a lot of things. If the deal on the table looks as if it will be
:08:35. > :08:41.damaging to Britain, then Parliament will be in its rights to say, wait a
:08:42. > :08:44.minute, not this deal. And then you either renegotiate or you reconsider
:08:45. > :08:49.the whole issue of Brexit or you find another solution. We need to
:08:50. > :08:54.leave it there but thank you for joining us.
:08:55. > :09:01.Iain Martin, how serious is the attempt to in effect an wind what
:09:02. > :09:05.happened on June 23? I think it is pretty serious and that interview
:09:06. > :09:10.illustrates very well the most damaging impact of the approach
:09:11. > :09:16.taken by a lot of Remainers, which is essentially to say with one
:09:17. > :09:19.breath, we of course accept the result, but with every action
:09:20. > :09:22.subsequent to that to try and undermine the result or try and are
:09:23. > :09:28.sure that the deal is as bad as possible. I think what needed to
:09:29. > :09:32.happen and hasn't happened after June 23 is you have the extremists
:09:33. > :09:38.on both sides and you have in the middle probably 70% of public
:09:39. > :09:44.opinion, moderate leaders, moderate Remainers should be working together
:09:45. > :09:52.to try and get British bespoke deal. But moderate Leavers will not take
:09:53. > :09:56.moderate Remainers seriously if this is the approach taken at every
:09:57. > :10:06.single turn to try and rerun the referendum. He did not say whether
:10:07. > :10:10.it was Labour policy? That was a question which was ducked. I do not
:10:11. > :10:16.think it is Labour Party policy. I think most people are in a morass in
:10:17. > :10:19.the middle. I think the screaming that happens when anybody dares to
:10:20. > :10:24.question or suggest that you might ever want to think again about these
:10:25. > :10:28.things, I disagree with him about having another referendum but if he
:10:29. > :10:32.wants to campaign for that it is his democratic right to do so. If you
:10:33. > :10:37.can convince enough people it is a good idea then he has succeeded. But
:10:38. > :10:42.the idea that we would do a deal and then realise this is a really bad
:10:43. > :10:49.deal, let's not proceed, we will not really know that until the deal is
:10:50. > :10:53.implemented. What our access is to the single market, whether or not we
:10:54. > :10:57.are in or out of the customs union which we will talk about in a
:10:58. > :11:02.minute, what immigration policy we will have, whether these are going
:11:03. > :11:06.to be good things bad things, surely you have got to wait for four, five,
:11:07. > :11:10.six years to see if it has worked or not? Yes, and by which stage
:11:11. > :11:14.Parliament will have voted on it and there will be no going back from it,
:11:15. > :11:20.or maybe there will. We are talking now about the first three months of
:11:21. > :11:27.2019. That is absolutely the moment when Parliament agrees with Theresa
:11:28. > :11:38.May or not. One arch remain I spoke to, and arch Remainiac, he said that
:11:39. > :11:47.Theresa May will bring this to Parliament in 2019 and could say I
:11:48. > :11:52.recommend that we reject it. What is he on or she? Some strong chemical
:11:53. > :11:58.drugs! The point is that all manner of things could happen. I don't
:11:59. > :12:03.think any of us take it seriously for now but the future is a very
:12:04. > :12:07.long way away. Earlier, the trade Secretary Liam Fox was asked if we
:12:08. > :12:10.would stay in the customs union after Brexit.
:12:11. > :12:16.There would be limitations on what we would do in terms of tariff
:12:17. > :12:23.setting which could limit the deals we would do, but we want to look at
:12:24. > :12:26.all the different deals. There is hard Brexit and soft Brexit as if it
:12:27. > :12:31.is a boiled egg we are talking about. Turkey is in part of the
:12:32. > :12:38.customs union but not other parts. What we need to do is look at the
:12:39. > :12:42.cost. This is what I picked up. The government knows it cannot remain a
:12:43. > :12:47.member of the single market in these negotiations, because that would
:12:48. > :12:51.make us subject to free movement and the European Court. The customs
:12:52. > :12:55.union and the Prime Minister 's office doesn't seem to be quite as
:12:56. > :12:59.binary, that you can be a little bit in and a little bit out, but I would
:13:00. > :13:04.suggest that overall Liam Fox knows to do all the trade deals we want to
:13:05. > :13:08.do we basically have to be out. But what he also seems to know is that
:13:09. > :13:14.is a minority view in Cabinet. He said he was not going to give his
:13:15. > :13:23.opinion publicly. There is still an argument going on about it in
:13:24. > :13:26.Cabinet. When David Liddington struggled against Emily Thornbury
:13:27. > :13:29.PMQs, he did not know about the customs union. What is apparent is
:13:30. > :13:36.Theresa May has not told him what to think about that. If we stay in the
:13:37. > :13:43.customs union we cannot do our own free trade deals. We are behind the
:13:44. > :13:47.customs union, the tariff barriers set by Europe? Not quite. Turkey is
:13:48. > :13:52.proof of the pudding. There are limited exemptions but they can do
:13:53. > :14:00.free trade with their neighbours. Not on goods. They are doing a trade
:14:01. > :14:04.deal with Pakistan at the moment, it relies on foreign trade investment
:14:05. > :14:08.but Europe negotiates on turkey's behalf on the major free-trade
:14:09. > :14:12.deals. This is absolutely why the customs union will be the fault line
:14:13. > :14:16.for the deal we are trying to achieve. Interestingly, I thought
:14:17. > :14:21.Liam Fox suggested during that interview that he was prepared to
:14:22. > :14:26.suck up whatever it was. I think he was saying there is still an
:14:27. > :14:34.argument and he intends to win it. He wants to leave it because he
:14:35. > :14:39.wants to do these free-trade deals. There is an argument in the cabinet
:14:40. > :14:44.about precisely that. The other thing to consider is in this country
:14:45. > :14:48.we have tended to focus too much on the British angle in negotiations,
:14:49. > :14:51.but I think the negotiations are going to be very difficult. You look
:14:52. > :14:55.at the state of the EU at the moment, you look at what is
:14:56. > :15:02.happening in Italy, France, Germany, look at the 27. It is possible I
:15:03. > :15:06.think that Britain could design a bespoke sensible deal but then it
:15:07. > :15:14.becomes very difficult to agree which is why I ultimately think we
:15:15. > :15:15.are heading for a harder Brexit. It will be about developing in this
:15:16. > :15:19.country. So, we've had a warning this week
:15:20. > :15:22.that it could take ten years to do a trade deal
:15:23. > :15:25.with the EU after Brexit. But could opportunities to expand
:15:26. > :15:27.trade lie elsewhere? Australia was one of the first
:15:28. > :15:29.countries to indicate its willingness to do a deal
:15:30. > :15:32.with the UK and now its High Commissioner in London has told
:15:33. > :15:34.us that life outside the EU He made this exclusive film
:15:35. > :15:50.for the Sunday Politics. My father was the Australian High
:15:51. > :15:53.Commissioner in the early 70s when the UK joined
:15:54. > :15:55.the European Union, Now I'm in the job,
:15:56. > :16:03.the UK is leaving. Australia supported
:16:04. > :16:05.Britain remaining a member of the European Union,
:16:06. > :16:08.but we respect the decision that Now that the decision has been made,
:16:09. > :16:14.we hope that Britain will get on with the process
:16:15. > :16:18.of negotiating their exit from the European Union and make
:16:19. > :16:21.the most of the opportunities that Following the referendum decision,
:16:22. > :16:28.Australia approached the British Government
:16:29. > :16:30.with a proposal. We offered, when the time was right,
:16:31. > :16:33.to negotiate a free trade agreement. The British and Australian
:16:34. > :16:40.governments have already established a working group to explore a future,
:16:41. > :16:42.ambitious trade agreement once A free trade agreement will provide
:16:43. > :16:55.great opportunities for consumers Australian consumers could purchase
:16:56. > :17:00.British-made cars for less We would give British
:17:01. > :17:06.households access to cheaper, Our summer is during your winter,
:17:07. > :17:11.so Australia could provide British households with fresh produce
:17:12. > :17:15.when the equivalent British or Australian households would have
:17:16. > :17:22.access to British products Free-trade agreements
:17:23. > :17:35.are also about investment. The UK is the second-largest source
:17:36. > :17:39.of foreign investment in Australia. By the way, Australia also invests
:17:40. > :17:45.over ?200 billion in the UK, so a free trade agreement
:17:46. > :17:48.would stimulate investment, But, by the way, free-trade
:17:49. > :17:53.agreements are not just about trade and investment,
:17:54. > :17:57.they are also about geopolitics. Countries with good trade relations
:17:58. > :18:01.often work more closely together in other fields including security,
:18:02. > :18:05.the spread of democracy We may have preferred
:18:06. > :18:19.the UKto remain in the EU, We may have preferred the UK
:18:20. > :18:21.to remain in the EU, but life outside as we know can
:18:22. > :18:24.be pretty good. We have negotiated eight free-trade
:18:25. > :18:26.agreements over the last 12 years, including a free-trade agreement
:18:27. > :18:28.with the United States This is one of the reasons why
:18:29. > :18:40.the Australian economy has continued to grow over the last 25 years
:18:41. > :18:43.and we, of course, are not Australia welcomes Theresa May's
:18:44. > :18:53.vision for the UK to become a global We are willing to help
:18:54. > :19:23.in any way we can. Welcome to the programme. The
:19:24. > :19:27.Australian government says it wants to negotiate an important trade deal
:19:28. > :19:33.with the UK as efficiently and promptly as possible when Brexit is
:19:34. > :19:38.complete. How prompt is prompt? There are legal issues obviously.
:19:39. > :19:43.The UK, for as long as it remains in the EU, cannot negotiate individual
:19:44. > :19:48.trade deals. Once it leaves it can. We will negotiate a agreement with
:19:49. > :19:54.the UK when the time is right, by which we mean we can do preliminary
:19:55. > :19:59.examination. Are you talking now about the parameters? We are talking
:20:00. > :20:02.already, we have set up a joint working group with the British
:20:03. > :20:05.Government and we are scoping the issue to try to understand what
:20:06. > :20:12.questions will arise in any negotiation. But we cannot have
:20:13. > :20:18.formally a negotiation. Until the country is out. Why is there no
:20:19. > :20:22.free-trade deal between Australia and the European Union? It is a long
:20:23. > :20:28.and tortuous story. Give me the headline. Basically Australian
:20:29. > :20:34.agriculture is either banned or hugely restricted in terms of its
:20:35. > :20:38.access to the European Union. So we see the European Union, Australia's,
:20:39. > :20:44.is a pretty protectionist sort of organisation. Now we are doing a
:20:45. > :20:48.scoping study on a free-trade agreement with the European Union
:20:49. > :20:53.and we hope that next year we can enter into negotiations with them.
:20:54. > :20:58.But we have no illusions this would be a very difficult negotiation, but
:20:59. > :21:03.one we are giving priority to. Is there not a danger that when Britain
:21:04. > :21:08.leaves the EU the EU will become more protectionist? This country has
:21:09. > :21:12.always been the most powerful voice for free trade. I hope that does not
:21:13. > :21:18.happen, but the reason why we wanted Britain to remain in the European
:21:19. > :21:24.Union is because it brought to the table the whole free-trade mentality
:21:25. > :21:27.which has been an historic part of Britain's approach to international
:21:28. > :21:32.relations. Without the UK in the European Union you will lose that.
:21:33. > :21:35.It is a very loud voice in the European Union and you will lose
:21:36. > :21:41.that voice and that will be a disadvantage. The figure that jumped
:21:42. > :21:44.out of me in the film is it to you only 15 months to negotiate a
:21:45. > :21:50.free-trade deal with the United States. Yes, the thing is it is
:21:51. > :21:55.about political will. A free-trade agreement will be no problem unless
:21:56. > :22:00.you want to protect particular sectors of your economy. In that
:22:01. > :22:05.case there was one sector the Americans insisted on protecting and
:22:06. > :22:09.that was their sugar industry. In the end after 15 months of
:22:10. > :22:15.negotiation two relatively free trading countries have fixed up
:22:16. > :22:19.nearly everything. But we had to ask would be go ahead with this
:22:20. > :22:24.free-trade agreement without sugar west we decided to do that. Other
:22:25. > :22:28.than that it was relatively easy to negotiate because we are both
:22:29. > :22:32.free-trade countries. With the UK you cannot be sure, but I do not
:22:33. > :22:37.think a free-trade agreement would take very long to negotiate with the
:22:38. > :22:42.UK because the UK would not want to put a lot of obstacles in the way to
:22:43. > :22:46.Australia. Not to give away our hand, we would not want to put a lot
:22:47. > :22:53.of obstacles in the way of British exports. The trend in recent years
:22:54. > :22:57.is to do big, regional trade deals, but President-elect Donald Trump has
:22:58. > :23:02.made clear the Pacific trade deal is dead. The transatlantic trade deal
:23:03. > :23:06.is almost dead as well. The American election put a nail in the coffin
:23:07. > :23:12.and the French elections could put another nail in the coffin. Are we
:23:13. > :23:15.returning to a world of lateral trade deals, country with country
:23:16. > :23:23.rather than regional blocs? Not necessarily. In the Asia Pacific we
:23:24. > :23:26.will look at multilateral trade arrangements and even if the
:23:27. > :23:30.transpacific partnership is not ratified by the Americans, we have
:23:31. > :23:35.other options are there. However, our approach has been the ultimate
:23:36. > :23:41.would be free-trade throughout the world which is proving hard to
:23:42. > :23:44.achieve. Secondly, if we can get a lot of countries engaged in a
:23:45. > :23:51.free-trade negotiation, that is pretty good if possible. But it is
:23:52. > :23:56.more difficult. But we do bilateral trade agreements. We have one with
:23:57. > :24:00.China, Japan, the United States, Singapore, and the list goes on, and
:24:01. > :24:08.they have been hugely beneficial to Australia. You have been dealing
:24:09. > :24:12.with the EU free deal, what lessons are there? How quickly do you think
:24:13. > :24:19.Britain could do a free-trade deal with the EU if we leave? Well, there
:24:20. > :24:23.is a completely different concept involved in the case of Britain and
:24:24. > :24:28.the EU and that is at the moment there are no restrictions on trade.
:24:29. > :24:32.So you and the EU would be talking about whether you will direct
:24:33. > :24:37.barriers to trade. We are outsiders and we do not get too much involved
:24:38. > :24:44.in this debate except to say we do not want to see the global trade
:24:45. > :24:48.system disrupted by the direction of tariff barriers between the United
:24:49. > :24:53.Kingdom, the fifth biggest economy in the world, and the European
:24:54. > :24:58.Union. Our expectation is not just the British but the Europeans will
:24:59. > :25:03.try to make the transition to Brexit as smooth as possible particularly
:25:04. > :25:07.commercially. Say yes or no if you can. If Britain and Australia make a
:25:08. > :25:11.free-trade agreement, would that include free movement of the
:25:12. > :25:18.Australian and the British people? We will probably stick with our
:25:19. > :25:21.present non-discriminatory system. Australia does not discriminate
:25:22. > :25:26.against any country. The European Union's free movement means you
:25:27. > :25:30.discriminate against non-Europeans. Probably not.
:25:31. > :25:33.It could lead to a ban on diesel cars, prevent the building
:25:34. > :25:36.of a third runway at Heathrow, and will certainly make it
:25:37. > :25:38.more expensive to drive in our towns and cities.
:25:39. > :25:40.Air pollution has been called the "public health crisis
:25:41. > :25:43.of a generation" - but just how serious is the problem?
:25:44. > :25:56.40,000 early deaths result from air pollution every year in the UK.
:25:57. > :26:03.Almost 10,000 Londoners each year die prematurely.
:26:04. > :26:09.It seems at times we can get caught up in alarming assertions
:26:10. > :26:11.about air pollution, that this is a public health
:26:12. > :26:15.emergency, that it is a silent killer, coming from politicians,
:26:16. > :26:23.But how bad is air quality in Britain really?
:26:24. > :26:27.Tony Frew is a professor in respiratory medicine and works
:26:28. > :26:29.at Brighton's Royal Sussex County Hospital.
:26:30. > :26:31.He has been looking into the recent claims
:26:32. > :26:37.It's a problem and it affects people's health.
:26:38. > :26:40.But when people start talking about the numbers
:26:41. > :26:42.of deaths here, I think they are misusing the statistics.
:26:43. > :26:47.There have been tremendous improvements in air quality
:26:48. > :26:52.There is a lot less pollution than there used to be
:26:53. > :26:55.and none of that is coming through in the public
:26:56. > :26:59.So what does Professor Frew make of the claim that alarming levels
:27:00. > :27:03.of toxicity in the air in the UK causes 40,000 deaths each year?
:27:04. > :27:05.It is not 40,000 people who should have air pollution
:27:06. > :27:07.on their death certificate, or 40,000 people who
:27:08. > :27:12.It's a lot of people who had a little bit of life shortening
:27:13. > :27:18.To examine these figures further we travelled to Cambridge to visit
:27:19. > :27:23.I asked him about the data on which these claims
:27:24. > :27:28.They come from a study on how mortality rates in US cities
:27:29. > :27:35.First of all, it is important to realise that that 40,000 figure
:27:36. > :27:41.29,000, which are due to fine particles, and another 11,000
:27:42. > :27:49.I will just talk about this group for a start.
:27:50. > :27:53.These are what are known as attributable deaths.
:27:54. > :27:57.Known as virtual deaths, they come from a complex statistical model.
:27:58. > :28:01.Quite remarkably it all comes from just one number and this
:28:02. > :28:05.was based on a study of US cities and they found out that
:28:06. > :28:09.by monitoring these cities over decades that the cities which had
:28:10. > :28:15.a higher level of pollution had a higher mortality rate.
:28:16. > :28:20.They estimated that there was a 6% increased risk of dying
:28:21. > :28:25.each year for each small increase in pollution.
:28:26. > :28:28.So this is quite a big figure, but it is important to realise
:28:29. > :28:32.it is only a best estimate and the committee that advises
:28:33. > :28:38.the government says that this figure could be between 1% and 12%.
:28:39. > :28:41.So this 6% figure is used to work out the 29,000
:28:42. > :28:46.Yes, through a rather complex statistical model.
:28:47. > :28:51.And a similar analysis gives rise to the 11,000 attributable deaths
:28:52. > :28:58.How much should we invest in cycling?
:28:59. > :29:01.Should we build a third runway at Heathrow?
:29:02. > :29:05.We need reliable statistics to answer those questions,
:29:06. > :29:09.but can we trust the way data is being used by campaigners?
:29:10. > :29:14.I think there are people who have such a passion for the environment
:29:15. > :29:16.and for air pollution that they don't really
:29:17. > :29:22.see it as a problem if they are deceiving the public.
:29:23. > :29:24.Greenpeace have been running a campaign claiming that breathing
:29:25. > :29:27.London's air is the equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day.
:29:28. > :29:32.If you smoke 15 cigarettes a day through your adult life,
:29:33. > :29:35.that will definitely take ten years off your life expectancy.
:29:36. > :29:37.If you are poor and you are in social class five,
:29:38. > :29:39.compared to social class one, that would take seven
:29:40. > :29:44.If you are poor and you smoke, that will take 17 years off your life.
:29:45. > :29:47.Now, we are talking about possibly, if we could get rid of all
:29:48. > :29:50.of the cars in London and all of the road transport,
:29:51. > :29:53.we could make a difference of two micrograms per metre squared in air
:29:54. > :29:59.pollution which might save you 30 days of your life.
:30:00. > :30:01.There is no doubt that air pollution is bad for you,
:30:02. > :30:04.but if we exaggerate the scale of the problem and the impact
:30:05. > :30:08.on our health, are we at risk of undermining the case for making
:30:09. > :30:18.And we are joined now by the Executive Director
:30:19. > :30:36.You have called pollution and national crisis and a health
:30:37. > :30:40.emergency. Around the UK are levels increasing or falling? They are
:30:41. > :30:50.remaining fairly static in London. Nationally? If you look at the
:30:51. > :30:56.studies on where air pollution is measured, in 42 cities around the
:30:57. > :31:00.UK, 38 cities were found to be breaking the legal limit on air
:31:01. > :31:05.pollution so basically all of the cities were breaking the limit so if
:31:06. > :31:08.you think eight out of ten people live in cities, obviously, this is
:31:09. > :31:13.impacting a lot of people around the UK. We have looked at in missions of
:31:14. > :31:23.solvent dioxide, they have fallen and since 1970, nitrogen dioxide is
:31:24. > :31:29.down 69%. Let me show you a chart. There are the nitrogen oxides which
:31:30. > :31:34.we have all been worried about. That chart shows a substantial fall from
:31:35. > :31:39.the 1970s, and then a really steep fall from the 1980s. That is
:31:40. > :31:46.something which is getting better. You have to look at it in the round.
:31:47. > :31:53.If you look at particulates, and if you look at today's understanding of
:31:54. > :32:02.the health impact. Let's look at particulates. We have been really
:32:03. > :32:07.worried about what they have been doing to our abilities to breathe
:32:08. > :32:12.good air, again, you see substantial improvement. Indeed, we are not far
:32:13. > :32:21.from the Gothenberg level which is a very high standard. What you see is
:32:22. > :32:26.it is pretty flat. I see it coming down quite substantially. Over the
:32:27. > :32:30.last decade it is pretty flat. If you look at the World Health
:32:31. > :32:34.Organisation guidelines, actually, these are at serious levels and they
:32:35. > :32:38.need to come down. We know the impact, particularly on children, if
:32:39. > :32:42.you look at what is happening to children and children's lungs, if
:32:43. > :32:48.you look at the impact of asthma and other impacts on children in cities
:32:49. > :32:51.and in schools next to main roads where pollution levels are very
:32:52. > :32:55.high, the impact of very serious. You have many doctors, professors
:32:56. > :33:01.and many studies by London University showing this to be true.
:33:02. > :33:05.The thing is, we do not want pollution. If we can get rid of
:33:06. > :33:10.pollution, let's do it. And also we also have to get rid of CO2 which is
:33:11. > :33:14.causing climate change. We are talking air pollution at the moment.
:33:15. > :33:19.The point is there is not still more to do, it is clear there is and
:33:20. > :33:24.there is no question about that, my question is you seem to deny that we
:33:25. > :33:28.have made any kind of progress and that you also say that air pollution
:33:29. > :33:35.causes 40,000 deaths a year in the UK, that is not true. The figure is
:33:36. > :33:45.40,000 premature deaths is what has been talked about by medical staff.
:33:46. > :33:50.Your website said courses. It causes premature deaths. What we are
:33:51. > :33:55.talking about here is can we solve the problem of air pollution? If air
:33:56. > :33:59.pollution is mainly being caused by diesel vehicles then we need to
:34:00. > :34:03.phase out diesel vehicles. If there are alternatives and clean Turner
:34:04. > :34:06.tips which will give better quality of air, better quality of life and
:34:07. > :34:10.clean up our cities, then why don't we take the chance to do it? You had
:34:11. > :34:18.the Australian High Commissioner on this programme earlier. He said to
:34:19. > :34:24.me earlier, why is your government supporting diesel? That is the most
:34:25. > :34:29.polluting form of transport. That may well be right but I am looking
:34:30. > :34:35.at Greenpeace's claims. You claim it causes 40,000 deaths, it is a figure
:34:36. > :34:41.which regularly appears. Let me quote the committee on the medical
:34:42. > :34:50.effects of air pollutants, it says this calculation, 40,000 which is
:34:51. > :34:54.everywhere in Greenpeace literature, is not an estimate of the number of
:34:55. > :34:58.people whose untimely death is caused entirely by air pollution,
:34:59. > :35:02.but a way of representing the effect across the whole population of air
:35:03. > :35:08.pollution when considered as a contributory factor to many more
:35:09. > :35:17.individual deaths. It is 40,000 premature deaths. It could be
:35:18. > :35:21.premature by a couple of days. It could me by a year. -- it could be
:35:22. > :35:23.by a year. It could also be giving children asthma and breathing
:35:24. > :35:32.difficulties. We are talking about deaths. It could also cause stroke
:35:33. > :35:40.and heart diseases. Medical experts say we need to deal with this. Do
:35:41. > :35:48.you believe air pollution causes 40,000 deaths a year. I have defined
:35:49. > :35:58.that. You accept it does not? It leads to 40,000 premature deaths.
:35:59. > :36:03.But 40,000 people are not killed. You say air pollution causes 40,000
:36:04. > :36:07.deaths each year on your website. I have just explained what I mean by
:36:08. > :36:12.that in terms of premature deaths. The question is, are we going to do
:36:13. > :36:16.something about that? Air pollution is a serious problem. It is mainly
:36:17. > :36:21.caused by diesel. If we phased diesel out it will solve the problem
:36:22. > :36:25.of air pollution and deal with the wider problem of climate change. I
:36:26. > :36:33.am not talking about climate change this morning. Let's link to another
:36:34. > :36:39.claim... Do you want to live in a clean city? Do you want to breathe
:36:40. > :36:44.clean air? Yes, don't generalise. Let's stick to your claims. You have
:36:45. > :36:48.also said living in London on your life is equivalent to smoking 50
:36:49. > :36:55.cigarettes a day. That is not true either. What I would say is if you
:36:56. > :36:58.look at passive smoking, it is the equivalent of I don't know what the
:36:59. > :37:02.actual figure is, I can't remember offhand, but it is the equivalent
:37:03. > :37:08.effect of about ten cigarettes being smoked passively. The question is in
:37:09. > :37:14.terms of, you are just throwing me out all of these things... I am
:37:15. > :37:18.throwing things that Greenpeace have claimed. Greenpeace have claimed
:37:19. > :37:22.that living in London is equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day and
:37:23. > :37:26.that takes ten years off your life. Professor Froome made it clear to us
:37:27. > :37:30.that living in London your whole life with levels of pollution does
:37:31. > :37:35.take time off your life but it takes nine months of your life. Nine
:37:36. > :37:39.months is still too much, I understand that, but it is not ten
:37:40. > :37:42.years and that is what you claim. I would suggest you realise that is a
:37:43. > :37:48.piece of propaganda because you claim on the website, you have taken
:37:49. > :37:51.it down. I agree it has been corrected and I agree with what the
:37:52. > :37:56.professor said that maybe it takes up to a year off your life, but the
:37:57. > :38:00.thing is, there are much more wider issues as well, in terms of the
:38:01. > :38:06.impact on air pollution, and in terms of the impact on young
:38:07. > :38:11.children. We can argue about the facts... But these are your claims,
:38:12. > :38:15.this is why I am hitting it to you. It does not get away from the
:38:16. > :38:20.underlying issue that air pollution is a serious problem. We are not
:38:21. > :38:24.arguing for a moment that it is not. Do you think the way you exaggerate
:38:25. > :38:29.things, put false claims, in the end, for of course we all agree
:38:30. > :38:35.with, getting the best air we can, you undermine your credibility? I
:38:36. > :38:38.absolutely do not support false claims and if mistakes have been
:38:39. > :38:44.made then mistakes have been made and they will be corrected. I think
:38:45. > :38:48.the key issue is how we are going to deal with air pollution. Clearly,
:38:49. > :38:54.diesel is the biggest problem and we need to work out a way how we can
:38:55. > :38:57.get away from diesel as quickly and fast as possible. Comeback and see
:38:58. > :39:00.us in the New Year and we will discuss diesel. Thank you.
:39:01. > :39:02.It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:39:03. > :39:13.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now
:39:14. > :39:16.I'm Julia George and this is the Sunday Politics
:39:17. > :39:19.Coming up later: Hanging out at the youth club -
:39:20. > :39:22.but might these teenagers soon be hanging out on the street?
:39:23. > :39:24.We'll take a look at proposals in Brighton and Hove to drastically
:39:25. > :39:27.cut the money that goes to youth services.
:39:28. > :39:30.Joining me today to discuss this and other stories are the Labour
:39:31. > :39:32.leader of Brighton and Hove City council, Warren Morgan.
:39:33. > :39:35.And Tim Loughton - Conservative MP for neighbouring
:39:36. > :39:41.Let's start with an update on Southern Trains.
:39:42. > :39:43.And the worst rail disruption in 20 years.
:39:44. > :39:45.For three days this week, the rolling stock stood
:39:46. > :39:48.still as drivers from the Aslef union walked out.
:39:49. > :39:49.Transport Secretary Chris Grayling insists the Government doesn't
:39:50. > :39:53.have the power to step in and has hinted at a change in the law that
:39:54. > :39:56.could make this kind of industrial action more difficult in the future.
:39:57. > :40:10.The government needs to step in and resolve it because it's
:40:11. > :40:15.It's absolutely disgraceful and I think the PM needs to get
:40:16. > :40:18.involved because people are losing jobs and it is completely
:40:19. > :40:24.I don't really get the point of us of it any more.
:40:25. > :40:26.It's really aggravating and something needs to be done
:40:27. > :40:31.Again, ruined my journey to work so now I have to find
:40:32. > :40:40.What's the impact, would you say, on your constituents?
:40:41. > :40:44.This is the biggest single issue any MP in Sussex and South London
:40:45. > :40:49.Daily dozens and dozens of e-mails, tweets of yet another disastrous day
:40:50. > :40:55.I quoted at Prime Minister's Questions on Wednesday a specific
:40:56. > :40:59.case of a constituent on life-saving cancer drug trials who has to get to
:41:00. > :41:10.University College Hospital Who had to leave at the crack of dawn,
:41:11. > :41:13.and expensive taxi that day, just to get to London for that.
:41:14. > :41:15.People are losing their jobs, people are not getting to school
:41:16. > :41:18.and colleges and now we hear that employers are not recruiting people
:41:19. > :41:21.This is a devastating effect on constituents.
:41:22. > :41:23.None of us underestimate the impact of this.
:41:24. > :41:25.Warren Morgan, exactly the same question.
:41:26. > :41:26.In Brighton and Hove, what telling you?
:41:27. > :41:28.They are saying it is affecting our economy.
:41:29. > :41:30.Obviously, we're very reliant on retail, on tourism,
:41:31. > :41:34.They require really good links to London to provide that custom,
:41:35. > :41:37.those links to business and it is having an effect.
:41:38. > :41:40.We'll see some of the figures for that in the coming weeks.
:41:41. > :41:42.Let's talk about the politics of all of this.
:41:43. > :41:45.Your government says it's powerless to intervene, but, increasingly,
:41:46. > :41:46.passengers don't seem to believe that.
:41:47. > :41:49.The group of passengers marched to the Department for Transport this
:41:50. > :41:50.week calling for answers from Chris Grayling.
:41:51. > :41:53.One of them is quoted in the papers as saying,
:41:54. > :41:55."We are at breaking point if he fails to act.
:41:56. > :42:02.Well, I've been pretty measured in my criticism of the government
:42:03. > :42:06.and the Department for Transport of them management of this and now
:42:07. > :42:09.to the unions who are completely responsible for these unnecessary
:42:10. > :42:12.strikes which are causing such mayhem at the moment.
:42:13. > :42:20.What the government is going to do is look at legislation about making
:42:21. > :42:23.sure this sort of complete disruption, holding hundreds
:42:24. > :42:25.of thousands of commuters to ransom, can't happen in the future.
:42:26. > :42:30.That doesn't do anything for this particular dispute, though, does it?
:42:31. > :42:32.Not immediately, but that legislation could go
:42:33. > :42:36.What the government has also suggested and what I've said
:42:37. > :42:39.all along, frankly this franchise is too big to manage.
:42:40. > :42:43.I do think GTR up to managing it so I think we've got to see a change
:42:44. > :42:45.in our franchise as soon as possible in the New Year.
:42:46. > :42:48.But none of this will get the service back to normal
:42:49. > :42:51.while as left and RMT continue on this crazy strike
:42:52. > :42:55.about whose switches the button for the doors whilst,
:42:56. > :43:01.at the same time, you can travel from London to Brighton on a Thames
:43:02. > :43:03.link train driven by Aslef who operate the doors,
:43:04. > :43:05.calling at the same stations on the same lines.
:43:06. > :43:09.For goodness sake, let's suspend the strike action and talk
:43:10. > :43:13.about any safety concerns, residual it's and get back to some
:43:14. > :43:17.Just to come act to the politics with Warren Morgan for a moment.
:43:18. > :43:19.The Prime Minister is calling on direct
:43:20. > :43:28.She wants Jeremy Corbyn to call up what she referred to as his friends,
:43:29. > :43:31.the rail union bosses, and to get them to call
:43:32. > :43:35.It's quite a shocking abdication of a government's authority when it
:43:36. > :43:38.says it's the opposition that should resolve a strike.
:43:39. > :43:40.When you're elected to office, as I been in Brighton and Hove,
:43:41. > :43:43.you have the responsibility to resolve these kinds of dispute.
:43:44. > :43:45.They should strip Govia Thameslink Rail of their franchise.
:43:46. > :43:49.The Mayor of London has offered to have the service run by transport
:43:50. > :43:52.for London and that would be an interim solution.
:43:53. > :43:54.If the government can't deliver this...
:43:55. > :43:57.They are the ones in power and should take responsibility.
:43:58. > :44:00.If he can't handle it then Chris Grayling should go.
:44:01. > :44:08.The trouble is there is not a queue of people wanting to take on that
:44:09. > :44:15.TFL, for everything you say, is just not big enough to be able
:44:16. > :44:18.to deal with the largest train franchise in the country.
:44:19. > :44:22.And I have no problem with taking the franchise away from them, GTR,
:44:23. > :44:25.but somebody has got to run the railways and it will end up
:44:26. > :44:27.with a Department for Transport running it where everyone
:44:28. > :44:29.is criticising their not fit for purpose.
:44:30. > :44:33.How does this end, for the people watching today who have had enough?
:44:34. > :44:35.Everyone has got to be around the table as they are
:44:36. > :44:42.Then I think the franchise needs to be restructured in the New Year
:44:43. > :44:44.and more investment to sort out the hold-ups.
:44:45. > :44:48.Also, we need to find the rail operators when they're not
:44:49. > :44:51.bringing a decent service and I have a private members bill
:44:52. > :44:55.on Tuesday which is changing the whole conversation system
:44:56. > :45:01.which might give a sense of urgency to GTR that this really has got
:45:02. > :45:08.to be resolved than they need to run a reliable system for the passengers
:45:09. > :45:10.for the passengers that absolutely depend on it for the everyday lives.
:45:11. > :45:14.I hope we are all not talking about it in January.
:45:15. > :45:16.For the rest of today's programme today we're going to look at funding
:45:17. > :45:19.for the oldest and the youngest people in our communities.
:45:20. > :45:21.We've been hearing this week that adult social care is teetering
:45:22. > :45:25.Will it eventually become every family for itself?
:45:26. > :45:28.Are politicians doing anything meaningful to protect the most
:45:29. > :45:30.Well let's examine this week's announcements.
:45:31. > :45:32.The government told local authorities they can bring forward
:45:33. > :45:35.council tax rises over the next two years, and a transfer of ?240
:45:36. > :45:42.Here's the Labour leader speaking at PMQs this week.
:45:43. > :45:45.The Prime Minister doesn't seem to be aware that 4.6 billion was cut
:45:46. > :45:47.from the social care budget in the last Parliament
:45:48. > :45:50.and that her talk of putting it on to local governments
:45:51. > :45:58.2% of council tax is clearly a nonsense.
:45:59. > :46:01.95% of councils used this social care precept and it raised less
:46:02. > :46:09.than 3% of the money they planned to spend on adult social care.
:46:10. > :46:12.We see many councils around the country that have taken
:46:13. > :46:15.the benefit of social care precept and have seen the result
:46:16. > :46:21.of more people accessing social care and needs being met.
:46:22. > :46:23.Sadly, there are also some councils across the country,
:46:24. > :46:26.some Labour councils, who haven't taken that opportunity
:46:27. > :46:31.where we do see a worst performance in relation to social care.
:46:32. > :46:34.The Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition at
:46:35. > :46:37.Warren Morgan, the government says you and other council leaders can
:46:38. > :46:40.pull in more council tax more quickly to pay for good care
:46:41. > :46:47.It's a sticking plaster for a gaping wound.
:46:48. > :46:50.We can raise an extra ?1 million through this extra 1% that's been
:46:51. > :46:53.bought forward from the end of Parliament to fund social care.
:46:54. > :46:57.We've got increases in social care costs of ?7 million
:46:58. > :47:04.Our total social care bill is ?150 million.
:47:05. > :47:08.We only bring in ?125 million in total from council tax.
:47:09. > :47:11.On top of that, we had to run 700 other services.
:47:12. > :47:14.It is just not possible, nor sustainable.
:47:15. > :47:16.This isn't a problem with Labour councils.
:47:17. > :47:19.It's a problem for top tier authorities, county councils,
:47:20. > :47:28.You've given us the figures for last year of ?8.7 million overspend,
:47:29. > :47:31.sorry, that's the East Sussex council and yours is 3.8 million.
:47:32. > :47:36.We've seen a lot of care homes close.
:47:37. > :47:39.The BBC have said that one in five care homes is at risk of closure
:47:40. > :47:44.Costs have risen because of the national living wage,
:47:45. > :47:48.funding has not replaced that and the government is simply passing
:47:49. > :47:51.the buck to local councils, as it has done with so many
:47:52. > :47:54.other services, and said, this is your problem.
:47:55. > :47:57.You raise the tax from local people, you take the blame, you take
:47:58. > :48:02.OK, this extra council tax, which Jeremy Corbyn referred
:48:03. > :48:08.All the Communities Secretary has done is given local authorities
:48:09. > :48:11.the opportunity to take an extra 3% over two years rather
:48:12. > :48:24.I don't think it's a con, but I agree with Warren that it's
:48:25. > :48:27.Taking the politics aside, successive governments have
:48:28. > :48:30.Social care for increasingly aged adult population is the single
:48:31. > :48:32.biggest challenge to local governments and we've got
:48:33. > :48:35.to grasp the nettle, come up with a long-term solution
:48:36. > :48:38.as to how we finance it for a population that is getting
:48:39. > :48:44.older, how we integrated much better than what's going on in hospitals.
:48:45. > :48:46.Some parts of the country are doing it better.
:48:47. > :48:49.There are 24 local authorities responsible for 50% of those older
:48:50. > :48:53.people in hospital who could be discharged but there's not
:48:54. > :49:01.If you take somewhere like Worthing, four and a half percent
:49:02. > :49:03.of the population is over the age of 85.
:49:04. > :49:06.People come to Worthing and live for a long time
:49:07. > :49:08.because it's a great place, but those people place extra demands
:49:09. > :49:12.West Sussex is not only dealing with a large elderly population,
:49:13. > :49:15.but a very old, elderly population as well and it can only
:49:16. > :49:19.Let's throw party politics out and sit here and say,
:49:20. > :49:27.Look at countries like France where there is an obligation
:49:28. > :49:39.I think you can be prosecuted if you don't visit your elderly parents in.
:49:40. > :49:55.We need a properly funded, integrated social care and health
:49:56. > :49:59.We've got a think tank in Brighton and Hove that
:50:00. > :50:01.looking at and integration, looking at good examples
:50:02. > :50:04.Of course, no solution can happen without adequate funding.
:50:05. > :50:07.I and the Leader of the Opposition have called for money that's
:50:08. > :50:09.earmarked for tax cuts for multinationals to be put
:50:10. > :50:13.So much for throwing party politics at the window in this discussion!
:50:14. > :50:21.Is it about redistributing some of the money that is
:50:22. > :50:25.A couple of weeks ago on the programme we had the Work
:50:26. > :50:27.and Pensions Secretary who said the pensions triple lock only
:50:28. > :50:31.People have looked at that as a possible source of more money
:50:32. > :50:38.It may be a combination of all of those things because there
:50:39. > :50:42.Absolutely I think families could step up to do more
:50:43. > :50:45.but they need to be supported to do that.
:50:46. > :50:48.So if we want older people to be able to stay in their own homes
:50:49. > :50:51.or close to their own families they need to have the support from
:50:52. > :50:55.But we are wasting money at the moment.
:50:56. > :50:59.It cost something like ?1300 to have someone in an Acute Hospital bed
:51:00. > :51:03.when they could be at a residential home or supported in their own homes
:51:04. > :51:06.if we integrated or joined up the system so much better
:51:07. > :51:13.So, what's the impact of all of this on young people?
:51:14. > :51:16.Well, in Brighton and Hove they're struggling to keep on top
:51:17. > :51:18.of the cost of elderly care, and the draft budget
:51:19. > :51:20.for next year includes deep cuts to youth services.
:51:21. > :51:29.They say they come here because they feel they belong.
:51:30. > :51:31.I never used to get out of the house.
:51:32. > :51:42.My friend took me there once and I made friends.
:51:43. > :51:45.It helps socialise with younger people.
:51:46. > :51:47.I think I've grown more as a person since coming here.
:51:48. > :51:50.This centre kind of functions as a home for a lot of people.
:51:51. > :51:53.Some of Brighton's most vulnerable teenagers come to the Brighton youth
:51:54. > :51:55.centre and drop-in groups like it, but these initiatives
:51:56. > :51:58.face an uncertain future as the city council plans to cut
:51:59. > :52:03.A move that could wipe out almost all of this kind of support.
:52:04. > :52:05.If you weren't able to go to the youth centre,
:52:06. > :52:13.Or I'd be on the streets with people that I shouldn't be with.
:52:14. > :52:17.That's where I'd probably see myself.
:52:18. > :52:22.The future generation needs this to be helped.
:52:23. > :52:25.I think it gives a lot of people the skills to go into adulthood
:52:26. > :52:28.and I think cutting something that is as intrinsic as this
:52:29. > :52:31.is to youth culture I think is doing a disservice to young people
:52:32. > :52:38.I've got friends here and got to take part in similar
:52:39. > :52:41.activities that I would never have even considered.
:52:42. > :52:43.The proposals affect 11 different youth groups,
:52:44. > :52:46.eight of which operate as the Brighton and Hove Youth
:52:47. > :52:49.Collective, a group of charities that together work with almost 3,000
:52:50. > :52:53.young people a year in some of the most deprived
:52:54. > :52:58.Almost ten years ago, Sophie was one of them and now
:52:59. > :53:02.she works on to youth projects and says it was intervention
:53:03. > :53:06.from youth workers that helped her find her way.
:53:07. > :53:09.I think that youth work has pretty much changed my path
:53:10. > :53:15.For me, at 14, I was vulnerable like a lot of young people
:53:16. > :53:19.are and like a lot of young people will continue to be,
:53:20. > :53:22.which is why I think youth work is really important because we go
:53:23. > :53:29.Brighton and Hove City Council is struggling to balance the books
:53:30. > :53:34.and needs to save ?24 million next year.
:53:35. > :53:37.By pulling the funding from these groups, the City Council could
:53:38. > :53:40.save some ?1.3 million over the next three years.
:53:41. > :53:43.But youth workers say they're concerned about the
:53:44. > :53:47.long-term impact of the move which they fear could leave some young
:53:48. > :53:49.people at risk of joining gangs, left on the streets are exposed to
:53:50. > :53:57.the dangers of drugs, alcohol and crime.
:53:58. > :53:59.Community preventative services, that's what we see
:54:00. > :54:02.ourselves providing, and I fear that if those start
:54:03. > :54:07.disappearing then young people's problems and
:54:08. > :54:10.challenges will become greater, they will still need to access other
:54:11. > :54:14.services such as statutory mental health services or social services
:54:15. > :54:21.and the cost will admit we be greater to the local authorities.
:54:22. > :54:26.And is not just happening in Brighton.
:54:27. > :54:29.Research by the union Unison says in the last six years
:54:30. > :54:32.youth services in the UK have been cut by ?387 million.
:54:33. > :54:33.Back in Brighton, a petition has been
:54:34. > :54:36.launched and demonstrators have protested against the proposed cuts,
:54:37. > :54:41.but with council budgets so tight, is there any alternatives?
:54:42. > :54:44.Joining us now from Brighton is the Leader of the Green Party
:54:45. > :54:48.She ran Children's Services for the council and has spent 35
:54:49. > :55:05.Let us go straight to the Labour leader of the Council and ask why
:55:06. > :55:09.the drastic cuts to youth services are being made. Because we've had
:55:10. > :55:17.six years of very drastic cuts from the government and for some of these
:55:18. > :55:21.absolutely vital services that provide a long-term saving, there is
:55:22. > :55:26.no scope for those any more. If it wasn't youth services we would be
:55:27. > :55:30.looking at early intervention, nurseries or children centres and
:55:31. > :55:36.got ?24 million of cuts to make this got ?24 million of cuts to make this
:55:37. > :55:41.year and there simply are aren't the scopes to do that. So he is saying
:55:42. > :55:53.he has no choice, broadly. Can you see why he feels that? Yes, I was
:55:54. > :55:57.involved in the council so I know it's a difficult choice to be made
:55:58. > :56:03.across council budgets. I know the chair and the co-chair of the party
:56:04. > :56:06.and the city but we need to look again at youth work because it's
:56:07. > :56:11.such a vital service to young people. It gives them somewhere to
:56:12. > :56:15.go and something to do and adults who aren't parents or teachers to
:56:16. > :56:17.talk to. The support that is offered is vital to some of the most money
:56:18. > :56:24.trouble young people in our city and trouble young people in our city and
:56:25. > :56:27.it's a fairly small budget -- vulnerable people.
:56:28. > :56:34.A lot of people have spent time trying to bid for the money and we
:56:35. > :56:43.also have in-house services which are vital as well. We haven't a huge
:56:44. > :56:48.amount of time. If you think it such a small amount, where would you cut
:56:49. > :56:54.that from the budget instead? It's about looking across the whole
:56:55. > :56:57.council budget and not just at children's services. I would urge
:56:58. > :57:02.Councillor Morgan to talk to the other parties to look at what other
:57:03. > :57:08.money might be available and the government is the main problem. They
:57:09. > :57:12.are spending over ?1 million on the National citizenship service which
:57:13. > :57:15.only deals with 15 and 16-year-olds and a small number across the
:57:16. > :57:22.country and it is not being taken out widely. There are other choices
:57:23. > :57:27.to be made. Let me put that pointed to him. Sue Shanks thinks the
:57:28. > :57:32.argument is with your government. As argument is with your government. As
:57:33. > :57:36.is always the case and she doesn't come up with an alternative for
:57:37. > :57:40.funding. I was a minister for children and young people and
:57:41. > :57:44.produced a document about the future of youth and I think it's
:57:45. > :57:50.short-sighted where there have been cuts to youth services. I helped to
:57:51. > :57:55.design a service that is the biggest single youth volunteering service in
:57:56. > :58:00.the country at the moment and it's a fantastic project for many young
:58:01. > :58:04.people and we want to have younger people coming in to put fair for
:58:05. > :58:09.their national citizen service as well. I understand why you want to
:58:10. > :58:15.defend that, but let's stay closer to home. Darren Morgan, the
:58:16. > :58:20.teenagers affected by the cut cuts and the children don't have a
:58:21. > :58:26.they're an easy target. As with they're an easy target. As with
:58:27. > :58:29.early years services, what we wanted to do and see mentioned are planned
:58:30. > :58:35.to transfer it to the voluntary sector, that should have happened
:58:36. > :58:40.three or four years ago. I would ask see why she didn't begin the process
:58:41. > :58:45.earlier. We've run out of time. We're making savings from a whole
:58:46. > :58:49.range of 700 council services but we've now got to make some pretty
:58:50. > :58:55.desperate savings to balance the books by March. Unison is calling
:58:56. > :59:00.for youth services to become statutory in the same way that
:59:01. > :59:04.I have some sympathy with that. The I have some sympathy with that. The
:59:05. > :59:11.trouble is that youth services needed to be reformed. What certain
:59:12. > :59:16.parts of the country have done is bring together local authorities
:59:17. > :59:22.with voluntary organisations and businesses as well to come up with
:59:23. > :59:28.youth sounds and services that young people want to use at times when
:59:29. > :59:32.they want to. Into many parts of the country, youth services were not
:59:33. > :59:39.very user-friendly for use as well. We saw how user-friendly the
:59:40. > :59:44.services were. Is there any hope for those people who feel their youth
:59:45. > :59:48.centres are just a complete lifeline for them? We'll keep working as long
:59:49. > :59:53.as we possibly can to try and keep them going. I was a trustee at a
:59:54. > :59:59.club in my ward for eight years and know the value of really good
:00:00. > :00:03.universal open offer youth services and I would urge anyone in the city
:00:04. > :00:11.who can help us out to step in and trying keep their sentences going.
:00:12. > :00:18.And your last thought on this? -- to keep those services going. I think
:00:19. > :00:22.open access services are vital and the money deduced collective gets
:00:23. > :00:26.brings in extra money but our own in-house service is also important.
:00:27. > :00:31.We've undervalued youth service in this country for a long time and a
:00:32. > :00:36.lot of people who go to them will tell you how valuable they are. Just
:00:37. > :00:45.time for some other news you may have missed in 60 seconds.
:00:46. > :00:51.The MP for Becks Hill and Battle says many schools in his
:00:52. > :00:55.constituency will be worse off under new government plans for school
:00:56. > :00:59.funding. It comes after a long-running campaign by MPs in
:01:00. > :01:05.Sussex calling for a fairer system. He says he wants a meeting to
:01:06. > :01:11.discuss the proposals. I didn't expect that I would see a reduction
:01:12. > :01:16.as well. Kent MP has for government support to stop lorries parking
:01:17. > :01:20.Mid Kent asked by Minister to Mid Kent asked by Minister to
:01:21. > :01:25.support her campaign. The government shares the desire to ensure we don't
:01:26. > :01:28.see this parking of lorries across Kent and it's something the
:01:29. > :01:32.government is working on and we'll find a solution.
:01:33. > :01:37.Travellers in Brighton and Hove say they are being unfairly targeted by
:01:38. > :01:43.new powers being given to the City Council next month. And that a new
:01:44. > :01:44.order, people can be fined ?75 for pitching tents or caravans without
:01:45. > :01:47.permission. That's all we've got time
:01:48. > :01:50.for from the South East this week My thanks to our guests,
:01:51. > :01:56.Tim Loughton and Warren Morgan. We will be back in January
:01:57. > :01:59.with coverage of all the south east Will Article 50 be triggered
:02:00. > :02:19.by the end of March, will President Trump start work
:02:20. > :02:22.on his wall and will Front National's Marine Le Pen
:02:23. > :02:48.provide the next electoral shock? 2016, the Brexit for Britain and
:02:49. > :02:49.Trump for the rest of the world. Let's look back and see what one of
:02:50. > :02:54.you said about Brexit. If Mr Cameron loses the referendum
:02:55. > :02:56.and it is this year, will he be Prime Minister at the end
:02:57. > :02:59.of the year? I don't think he will lose
:03:00. > :03:12.the referendum, so I'm feeling It was clear if he did lose the
:03:13. > :03:16.referendum he would be out. I would like to say in retrospect I saw that
:03:17. > :03:22.coming on a long and I was just saying it to make good television!
:03:23. > :03:28.It is Christmas so I will be benign towards my panel! It is possible,
:03:29. > :03:33.Iain, that not much happens to Brexit in 2017, because we have a
:03:34. > :03:36.host of elections coming up in Europe, the French won in the spring
:03:37. > :03:41.and the German one in the autumn will be the most important. And
:03:42. > :03:44.until we know who the next French president is and what condition Mrs
:03:45. > :03:50.Merkel will be in, not much will happen? I think that is the
:03:51. > :03:55.likeliest outcome. Short of some constitutional crisis involving the
:03:56. > :04:01.Lords relating to Brexit, it is pretty clear it is difficult to
:04:02. > :04:06.properly begin the negotiations until it becomes clear who Britain
:04:07. > :04:10.is negotiating with. It will come down to the result of the German
:04:11. > :04:15.election. Germany is the biggest contributor and if they keep power
:04:16. > :04:18.in what is left of the European Union, will drive the negotiation
:04:19. > :04:26.and we will have to see if it will be Merkel. So this vacuum that has
:04:27. > :04:30.been seen and has been filled by people less than friendly to the
:04:31. > :04:33.government, even when we know Article 50 has been triggered and
:04:34. > :04:37.even if there is some sort of white paper to give us a better idea of
:04:38. > :04:44.the broad strategic outlines of what they mean by Brexit, the phoney war
:04:45. > :04:50.could continue? Iain is right. 2017 is going to be a remarkably dull
:04:51. > :04:56.year for Brexit as opposed to 2016. We will have the article and a plan.
:04:57. > :05:02.The plan will say I would like the moon on a stick please. The EU will
:05:03. > :05:08.say you can have a tiny bit of moon and a tiny bit of stick and there
:05:09. > :05:12.will be an impasse. That will go on until one minute to midnight 2018
:05:13. > :05:18.which is when the EU will act. There is one thing in the Foreign Office
:05:19. > :05:22.which is more important, as David Davis Department told me, they know
:05:23. > :05:26.there is nothing they can do until the French and Germans have their
:05:27. > :05:30.elections and they know the lie of the land, but the people who will be
:05:31. > :05:35.more helpful to us are in Eastern Europe and in Scandinavia, the
:05:36. > :05:40.Nordic countries. We can do quite a lot of schmoozing to try and get
:05:41. > :05:43.them broadly on side this year? It is very difficult because one of the
:05:44. > :05:47.things they care most about in Eastern Europe is the ability for
:05:48. > :05:53.Eastern European stew come and work in the UK. That is key to the
:05:54. > :05:57.economic prospects. But what they care most about is that those
:05:58. > :06:02.already here should not be under any pressure to leave. There is no
:06:03. > :06:07.guarantee of that. That is what Mrs May wants. There are a lot of things
:06:08. > :06:12.Mrs May wants and the story of 2017 will be about what she gets. How
:06:13. > :06:18.much have we got to give people? It is not what we want, but what we are
:06:19. > :06:22.willing to give. The interesting thing is you can divide this out
:06:23. > :06:26.into two. There is a question of the European Union and our relationship
:06:27. > :06:35.with it but there is also the trick the polls did to London -- there is
:06:36. > :06:39.also the polls. There is question beyond the Western European
:06:40. > :06:45.security, that is about Nato and intelligence and security, and the
:06:46. > :06:48.rising Russian threat. That does not mean the Polish people will persuade
:06:49. > :06:53.everyone else to give us a lovely deal on the EU, but the dynamic is
:06:54. > :06:58.bigger than just a chat about Brexit. You cannot threaten a
:06:59. > :07:02.punishment beating for us if we are putting our soldiers on the line on
:07:03. > :07:05.the eastern borders of Europe. I think that's where Donald Trump
:07:06. > :07:12.changes the calculation because his attitude towards Russia is very
:07:13. > :07:19.different to Barack Obama's. It is indeed. Mentioning Russia, Brexit
:07:20. > :07:23.was a global story but nothing can match and American election and even
:07:24. > :07:26.one which gives Donald Trump as well. Let's have a look at what this
:07:27. > :07:29.panel was saying about Donald Trump. Will Donald Trump win the Republican
:07:30. > :07:43.nomination next year. So, not only did you think he would
:07:44. > :07:47.not be president, you did not think he would win the Republican
:07:48. > :07:51.nomination. We were not alone in that. And they're right put forward
:07:52. > :07:57.a motion to abolish punditry here now because clearly we are
:07:58. > :08:02.pointless! There is enough unemployment in the world already!
:08:03. > :08:06.We are moving into huge and charted territory with Donald Trump as
:08:07. > :08:13.president. It is incredibly unpredictable. But what has not been
:08:14. > :08:20.noticed enough is the Keynesian won. Trump is a Keynesian. He wants
:08:21. > :08:26.massive infrastructure spending and massive tax cuts. The big story next
:08:27. > :08:31.year will be the massive reflation of the American economy and indeed
:08:32. > :08:36.the US Federal reserve has already reacted to that by putting up
:08:37. > :08:41.interest rates. That is why he has a big fight with the rest of the
:08:42. > :08:45.Republican Party. He is nominally a Republican but they are not
:08:46. > :08:51.Keynesian. They are when it comes to tax cuts. They are when it hits the
:08:52. > :08:55.rich to benefit the poor. The big thing is whether the infrastructure
:08:56. > :09:00.projects land him in crony trouble. The transparency around who gets
:09:01. > :09:05.those will be extremely difficult. Most of the infrastructure spending
:09:06. > :09:09.he thinks can be done by the private sector and not the federal
:09:10. > :09:15.government. His tax cuts overlap the Republican house tax cuts speaker
:09:16. > :09:20.Ryan to give not all, but a fair chunk of what he wants. If the
:09:21. > :09:24.American economy is going to reflate next year, interest rates will rise
:09:25. > :09:31.in America, that will strengthen the dollar and it will mean that Europe
:09:32. > :09:35.will be, it will find it more difficult to finance its sovereign
:09:36. > :09:40.debt because you will get more money by investing in American sovereign
:09:41. > :09:45.debt. That is a good point because the dynamics will shift. If that
:09:46. > :09:52.happens, Trump will be pretty popular in the US. To begin with. To
:09:53. > :09:55.begin with. It is energy self-sufficient and if you can pull
:09:56. > :10:01.off the biggest trick in American politics which is somehow to via
:10:02. > :10:06.corporation tax cuts to allow the reassuring of wealth, because it is
:10:07. > :10:10.too expensive for American business to take back into the US and
:10:11. > :10:14.reinvest, if you combine all of those things together, you will end
:10:15. > :10:21.up with a boom on a scale you have not seen. It will be Reagan on
:10:22. > :10:25.steroids? What could possibly go wrong? In the short term for
:10:26. > :10:30.Britain, it is probably not bad news. Our biggest market for exports
:10:31. > :10:35.as a country is the United States. Our biggest market for foreign
:10:36. > :10:39.direct investment is the United States and the same is true vice
:10:40. > :10:42.versa for America in Britain. Given the pound is now competitive and
:10:43. > :10:49.likely the dollar will get stronger, it could well give a boost to the
:10:50. > :10:52.British economy? Could do bit you have to be slightly cautious about
:10:53. > :10:58.the warm language we are getting which is great news out of President
:10:59. > :11:02.Trump's future cabinet on doing a trade deal early, we are net
:11:03. > :11:05.exporters to the US. We benefit far more from trading with US than they
:11:06. > :11:11.do with us. I think we have to come up with something to offer the US
:11:12. > :11:17.for them to jump into bed with us. I think it is called two new aircraft
:11:18. > :11:25.carriers and modernising the fleet. Bring it on. I will raise caution,
:11:26. > :11:30.people in declining industries in some places in America, the rust
:11:31. > :11:34.belt who have faced big profound structural challenges and those are
:11:35. > :11:39.much harder to reverse. They face real problems now because the dollar
:11:40. > :11:45.is so strong. Their ability to export has taken a huge hit out of
:11:46. > :11:48.Ohio, Michigan and Illinois. And the Mexican imports into America is now
:11:49. > :11:55.dirt cheap so that is a major problem. Next year we have elections
:11:56. > :12:05.in Austria, France, the Netherlands, Germany, probably Italy. Which
:12:06. > :12:09.outcome will be the most dramatic for Brexit? If Merkel lost it would
:12:10. > :12:19.be a huge surprise. That is unlikely. And if it was not Filon in
:12:20. > :12:24.France that would be unlikely. The consensus it it will be Francois
:12:25. > :12:34.Filon against Marine Le Pen and it will be uniting around the far right
:12:35. > :12:41.candidate. In 2002, that is what happened. Filon is a Thatcherite.
:12:42. > :12:49.Marine Le Pen's politics -- economics are hard left. Francois
:12:50. > :12:53.Filon is as much a cert to win as Hillary Clinton was this time last
:12:54. > :13:02.year. If he is competing against concerns about rising globalisation
:13:03. > :13:07.and his pitch is Thatcherite, it is a bold, brave strategy in the
:13:08. > :13:14.context so we will see. It will keep us busy next year, Tom? Almost as
:13:15. > :13:19.busy as this year but not quite. This year was a record year. I am up
:13:20. > :13:21.in my hours! That's all for today,
:13:22. > :13:23.thanks to all my guests. The Daily Politics will be back
:13:24. > :13:26.on BBC Two at noon tomorrow. I'll be back here
:13:27. > :13:28.on the 15th January. Remember, if it's Sunday,
:13:29. > :13:31.it's the Sunday Politics. The most a writer
:13:32. > :14:12.can hope from a reader West Side Story took choreography
:14:13. > :14:29.in a radical new direction. The dance was woven
:14:30. > :14:34.into the storyline,