15/01/2017

:00:33. > :00:36.It's Sunday morning, and this is the Sunday Politics.

:00:37. > :00:40.Is the Prime Minister prepared to end Britain's membership

:00:41. > :00:43.of the EU's single market and its customs union?

:00:44. > :00:46.We preview Theresa May's big speech, as she seeks to unite the country

:00:47. > :00:53.Is the press a force for good or a beast that needs taming?

:00:54. > :00:56.As the Government ponders its decision, we speak to one

:00:57. > :01:00.of those leading the campaign for greater regulation.

:01:01. > :01:06.Just what kind of President will Donald Trump be?

:01:07. > :01:15.Piers Morgan, a man who knows him well, joins us live.

:01:16. > :01:19.And in the south-east, almost ?400 million, that's the estimated cost

:01:20. > :01:28.to the economy And to help me make sense

:01:29. > :01:31.of all that, three of the finest hacks we could persuade to work

:01:32. > :01:34.on a Sunday - Steve Richards, They'll be tweeting throughout

:01:35. > :01:42.the programme, and you can join So, Theresa May is preparing for her

:01:43. > :01:48.big Brexit speech on Tuesday, in which she will urge people

:01:49. > :01:51.to give up on "insults" and "division" and unite to build,

:01:52. > :01:55.quote, a "global Britain". Some of the Sunday papers report

:01:56. > :01:58.that the Prime Minister will go The Sunday Telegraph splashes

:01:59. > :02:02.with the headline: "May's big gamble on a clean Brexit",

:02:03. > :02:06.saying the Prime Minister will announce she's prepared to take

:02:07. > :02:08.Britain out of membership of the single market

:02:09. > :02:13.and customs union. The Sunday Times has

:02:14. > :02:15.a similar write-up - they call it a "clean and hard

:02:16. > :02:18.Brexit". The Brexit Secretary David Davis has

:02:19. > :02:21.also written a piece in the paper hinting that a transitional deal

:02:22. > :02:25.could be on the cards. And the Sunday Express says:

:02:26. > :02:28."May's Brexit Battle Plan", explaining that the Prime Minister

:02:29. > :02:31.will get tough with Brussels and call for an end

:02:32. > :02:34.to free movement. Well, let's get some

:02:35. > :02:36.more reaction on this. I'm joined now from

:02:37. > :02:37.Cumbria by the leader of the Liberal Democrats,

:02:38. > :02:49.Tim Farron. Mr Farron, welcome back to the

:02:50. > :02:52.programme. The Prime Minister says most people now just want to get on

:02:53. > :02:58.with it and make a success of it. But you still want to stop it, don't

:02:59. > :03:01.you? Well, I certainly take the view that heading for a hard Brexit,

:03:02. > :03:05.essentially that means being outside the Single Market and the customs

:03:06. > :03:09.union, is not something that was on the ballot paper last June. For

:03:10. > :03:12.Theresa May to adopt what is basically the large all Farage

:03:13. > :03:18.vision of Britain's relationship with Europe is not what was voted

:03:19. > :03:22.for last June. It is right for us to stand up and say that a hard Brexit

:03:23. > :03:25.is not the democratic choice of the British people, and that we should

:03:26. > :03:29.be fighting for the people to be the ones who have the Seat the end of

:03:30. > :03:33.this process, not have it forced upon them by Theresa May and David

:03:34. > :03:37.Davis. When it comes though dual position that we should remain in

:03:38. > :03:40.the membership of the Single Market and the customs union, it looks like

:03:41. > :03:46.you are losing the argument, doesn't it? My sense is that if you believe

:03:47. > :03:51.in being in the Single Market and the customs union are good things, I

:03:52. > :03:54.think many people on the leave site believe that, Stephen Phillips, the

:03:55. > :04:00.Conservative MP until the autumn who resigned, who voted for Leave but

:04:01. > :04:05.believe we should be in the Single Market, I think those people believe

:04:06. > :04:08.that it is wrong for us to enter the negotiations having given up on the

:04:09. > :04:13.most important part of it. If you really are going to fight Britain's

:04:14. > :04:17.corner, then you should go in there fighting the membership of the

:04:18. > :04:22.Single Market, not give up and whitefly, as Theresa May has done

:04:23. > :04:26.before we even start. -- and wave the white flag. Will you vote

:04:27. > :04:30.against regret Article 50 in the Commons? We made it clear that we

:04:31. > :04:34.want the British people to have the final Seat -- vote against

:04:35. > :04:41.triggering. Will you vote against Article 50. Will you encourage the

:04:42. > :04:44.House of Lords to vote against out Article 50? I don't think they will

:04:45. > :04:47.get a chance to vote. They will have a chance to win the deuce

:04:48. > :04:51.amendments. One amendment we will introduce is that there should be a

:04:52. > :04:55.referendum in the terms of the deal. It is not right that Parliament on

:04:56. > :04:58.Government, and especially not civil servants in Brussels and Whitehall,

:04:59. > :05:02.they should stitch-up the final deal. That would be wrong. It is

:05:03. > :05:10.right that the British people have the final say. I understand that as

:05:11. > :05:12.your position. You made it clear Britain to remain a member of the

:05:13. > :05:15.Single Market on the customs union. You accept, I assume, that that

:05:16. > :05:18.would mean remaining under the jurisdiction of the European Court

:05:19. > :05:24.of Justice, continuing free movement of people, and the free-trade deals

:05:25. > :05:28.remained in Brussels' competence. So it seems to me that if you believe

:05:29. > :05:32.that being in the Single Market is a good thing, then you should go and

:05:33. > :05:36.argue for that. Whilst I believe that we're not going to get a better

:05:37. > :05:38.deal than the one we currently have, nevertheless it is up to the

:05:39. > :05:41.Government to go and argue for the best deal possible for us outside.

:05:42. > :05:47.You accept your position would mean that? It would mean certainly being

:05:48. > :05:50.in the Single Market and the customs union. It's no surprise to you I'm

:05:51. > :05:54.sure that the Lib Dems believe the package we have got now inside the

:05:55. > :05:58.EU is going to be of the Nutley better than anything we get from the

:05:59. > :06:02.outside, I accept the direction of travel -- is going to be the Nutley

:06:03. > :06:06.better. At the moment, what the Government are doing is assuming

:06:07. > :06:10.that all the things you say Drew, and there is no way possible for us

:06:11. > :06:13.arguing for a deal that allows in the Single Market without some of

:06:14. > :06:16.those other things. If they really believed in the best for Britain,

:06:17. > :06:21.you would go and argue for the best for Britain. Let's be clear, if we

:06:22. > :06:28.remain under the jurisdiction of the ECJ, which is the court that governs

:06:29. > :06:31.membership of the Single Market, continued free movement of people,

:06:32. > :06:36.the Europeans have made clear, is what goes with the Single Market.

:06:37. > :06:39.And free-trade deals remaining under Brussels' competence. If we accepted

:06:40. > :06:43.all of that is the price of membership of the Single Market, in

:06:44. > :06:49.what conceivable way with that amount to leaving the European

:06:50. > :06:53.Union? Well, for example, I do believe that being a member of the

:06:54. > :06:57.Single Market is worth fighting for. I personally believe that freedom of

:06:58. > :07:01.movement is a good thing. British people benefit from freedom of

:07:02. > :07:04.movement. We will hugely be hit as individuals and families and

:07:05. > :07:10.businesses. Mike I understand, but your writing of leaving... There the

:07:11. > :07:14.butt is that if you do except that freedom of movement has to change, I

:07:15. > :07:18.don't, but if you do, and if you are Theresa May, and the problem is to

:07:19. > :07:23.go and fight for the best deal, don't take it from Brussels that you

:07:24. > :07:26.can't be in the Single Market without those other things as well,

:07:27. > :07:32.you don't go and argue the case. It depresses me that Theresa May is

:07:33. > :07:35.beginning this process is waving the white flag, just as this morning

:07:36. > :07:40.Jeremy Corbyn was waving the white flag when it comes to it. We need a

:07:41. > :07:42.Government that will fight Britain's corner and an opposition that will

:07:43. > :07:47.fight the Government to make sure that it fights. Just explain to our

:07:48. > :07:52.viewers how we could remain members, members of the Single Market, and

:07:53. > :07:59.not be subject to the jurisdiction of the European court? So, first of

:08:00. > :08:02.all we spent over the last many, many years, the likes of Nigel

:08:03. > :08:06.Farage and others, will have argued, you heard them on this very

:08:07. > :08:10.programme, that Britain should aspire to be like Norway and

:08:11. > :08:13.Switzerland for example, countries that are not in the European Union

:08:14. > :08:17.but aren't the Single Market. It is very clear to me that if you want

:08:18. > :08:22.the best deal for Britain -- but are in the Single Market. You go and

:08:23. > :08:23.argue for the best deal. What is the answer to my question, you haven't

:08:24. > :08:32.answered it the question is, how does the Prime

:08:33. > :08:35.Minister go and fight for the best deal for Britain. If we think that

:08:36. > :08:41.being in the Single Market is the right thing, not Baxter -- not

:08:42. > :08:45.access to it but membership of it, you don't wave the white flag before

:08:46. > :08:46.you enter the negotiating room. I'm afraid we have run out of time.

:08:47. > :08:55.Thank you, Tim Farron. The leaks on this speech on Tuesday

:08:56. > :08:58.we have seen, it is interesting that Downing Street has not attempted to

:08:59. > :09:06.dampen them down this morning, in the various papers, do they tell us

:09:07. > :09:10.something new? Do they tell us more of the Goverment's aims in the

:09:11. > :09:13.Brexit negotiations? I think it's only a confirmation of something

:09:14. > :09:17.which has been in the mating really for the six months that she's been

:09:18. > :09:24.in the job. The logic of everything that she's said since last July, the

:09:25. > :09:27.keenness on re-gaining control of migration, the desire to do

:09:28. > :09:30.international trade deals, the fact that she is appointed trade

:09:31. > :09:33.Secretary, the logic of all of that is that we are out of the Single

:09:34. > :09:37.Market, quite probably out of the customs union, what will happen this

:09:38. > :09:41.week is a restatement of a fairly clear position anyway. I think Tim

:09:42. > :09:45.Farron is right about one thing, I don't think she will go into the

:09:46. > :09:52.speech planning to absolutely definitively say, we are leaving

:09:53. > :09:55.those things. Because even if there is a 1% chance of a miracle deal,

:09:56. > :09:58.where you stay in the Single Market, somehow get exempted from free

:09:59. > :10:01.movement, it is prudent to keep hopes on that option as a Prime

:10:02. > :10:06.Minister. -- to keep open that option. She is being advised both by

:10:07. > :10:09.the diplomatic corps and her personal advisers, don't concede on

:10:10. > :10:13.membership of the Single Market yet. We know it's not going to happen,

:10:14. > :10:21.but let them Europeans knock us back on that,... That is probably the

:10:22. > :10:25.right strategy for all of the reasons that Jarlan outlined there.

:10:26. > :10:28.What we learned a bit today is the possibility of some kind of

:10:29. > :10:32.transition or arrangements, which David Davies has been talking about

:10:33. > :10:36.in a comment piece for one of the Sunday papers. My sense from

:10:37. > :10:42.Brexiteers aborting MPs is that they are very happy with 90% of the

:10:43. > :10:47.rhetoric -- Brexit sporting MPs. The rhetoric has not been dampened down

:10:48. > :10:52.by MPs, apart from this transitional arrangement, which they feel and two

:10:53. > :10:56.France, on the one front will encourage the very dilatory EU to

:10:57. > :10:59.spend longer than ever negotiating a deal, and on the other hand will

:11:00. > :11:03.also be exactly what our civil service looks for in stringing

:11:04. > :11:07.things out. What wasn't explained this morning is what David Davies

:11:08. > :11:10.means by transitional is not that you negotiate what you can in two

:11:11. > :11:14.years and then spend another five years on the matter is that a lot of

:11:15. > :11:20.the soul. He thinks everything has to be done in the two years, -- of

:11:21. > :11:24.the matter are hard to solve. But it would include transitional

:11:25. > :11:28.arrangements over the five years. What we are seeing in the build-up

:11:29. > :11:33.is the danger of making these kind of speeches. In a way, I kind of

:11:34. > :11:38.admired her not feeding the media machine over the autumn and the end

:11:39. > :11:42.of last year cars, as Janan has pointed out in his columns, she has

:11:43. > :11:46.actually said quite a lot from it, you would extrapolate quite a lot.

:11:47. > :11:50.We won't be members of the Single Market? She said that in the party

:11:51. > :11:56.conference speech, we are out of European court. Her red line is the

:11:57. > :12:01.end of free movement, so we are out of the Single Market. Why has she

:12:02. > :12:05.sent Liam Fox to negotiate all of these other deals, not that he will

:12:06. > :12:09.succeed necessarily, but that is the intention? We are still in the

:12:10. > :12:12.customs union. You can extrapolate what she will say perhaps more

:12:13. > :12:16.cautiously in the headlines on Tuesday. But the grammar of a big

:12:17. > :12:20.speech raises expectations, gets the markets worked up. So she is doing

:12:21. > :12:23.it because people have said that she doesn't know what she's on about.

:12:24. > :12:26.But maybe she should have resisted it. Very well, and she hasn't. The

:12:27. > :12:29.speech is on Tuesday morning. Now, the public consultation

:12:30. > :12:32.on press regulation closed this week, and soon ministers will have

:12:33. > :12:34.to decide whether to enact a controversial

:12:35. > :12:35.piece of legislation. Section 40 of the Crime

:12:36. > :12:38.and Courts Act, if implemented, could see newspapers forced to pay

:12:39. > :12:41.legal costs in libel and privacy If they don't sign up to an

:12:42. > :12:51.officially approved regulator. The newspapers say it's

:12:52. > :12:53.an affront to a free press, while pro-privacy campaigners say

:12:54. > :12:56.it's the only way to ensure a scandal like phone-hacking

:12:57. > :12:57.can't happen again. Ellie Price has been

:12:58. > :13:03.reading all about it. It was the biggest news

:13:04. > :13:07.about the news for decades, a scandal that involved household

:13:08. > :13:12.names, but not just celebrities. They've even hacked the phone

:13:13. > :13:15.of a murdered schoolgirl. It led to the closure

:13:16. > :13:18.of the News Of The World, a year-long public inquiry headed up

:13:19. > :13:27.by the judge Lord Justice Leveson, and in the end, a new press watchdog

:13:28. > :13:31.set up by Royal Charter, which could impose, among other

:13:32. > :13:32.things, million-pound fines. If this system is implemented,

:13:33. > :13:35.the country should have confidence that the terrible suffering

:13:36. > :13:36.of innocent victims like the Dowlers, the McCanns

:13:37. > :13:39.and Christopher Jefferies should To get this new plan rolling,

:13:40. > :13:45.the Government also passed the Crime and Courts Act,

:13:46. > :13:49.Section 40 of which would force publications who didn't sign up

:13:50. > :13:52.to the new regulator to pay legal costs in libel and privacy

:13:53. > :13:56.cases, even if they won. It's waiting for sign-off

:13:57. > :13:59.from the Culture Secretary. We've got about 50 publications

:14:00. > :14:03.that have signed up... This is Impress, the press regulator

:14:04. > :14:06.that's got the backing of the Royal Charter,

:14:07. > :14:11.so its members are protected from the penalties that would be

:14:12. > :14:14.imposed by Section 40. It's funded by the Formula One

:14:15. > :14:20.tycoon Max Mosley's I think the danger if we don't

:14:21. > :14:26.get Section 40 is that you have an incomplete

:14:27. > :14:27.Leveson project. I think it's very, very likely that

:14:28. > :14:30.within the next five or ten years there will be a scandal,

:14:31. > :14:33.there'll be a crisis in press standards, everyone will be

:14:34. > :14:35.saying to the Government, "Why on Earth didn't you sort things

:14:36. > :14:38.out when you had the chance?" Isn't Section 40 essentially

:14:39. > :14:41.just a big stick to beat We hear a lot about the stick part,

:14:42. > :14:49.but there's also a big juicy carrot for publishers and their journalists

:14:50. > :14:51.who are members of an They get huge new protections

:14:52. > :14:54.from libel threats, from privacy actions,

:14:55. > :14:56.which actually means they've got a lot more opportunity to run

:14:57. > :15:05.investigative stories. Impress has a big image problem -

:15:06. > :15:08.not a single national Instead, many of them

:15:09. > :15:13.are members of Ipso, the independent regulator set up

:15:14. > :15:15.and funded by the industry that doesn't seek the recognition

:15:16. > :15:22.of the Royal Charter. The male cells around 22,000 each

:15:23. > :15:25.day... There are regional titles too, who,

:15:26. > :15:27.like the Birmingham Mail, won't sign up to Impress,

:15:28. > :15:30.even if they say the costs are associated with Section 40

:15:31. > :15:34.could put them out of business. Impress has an umbilical cord that

:15:35. > :15:37.goes directly back to Government through the recognition setup

:15:38. > :15:38.that it has. Now, we broke free of the shackles

:15:39. > :15:41.of the regulated press when the stamp duty was revealed

:15:42. > :15:44.150 years ago. If we go back to this level

:15:45. > :15:51.of oversight, then I think we turn the clock back,

:15:52. > :15:56.150 years of press freedom. The responses from the public have

:15:57. > :15:59.been coming thick and fast since the Government

:16:00. > :16:00.launched its consultation In fact, by the time

:16:01. > :16:03.it closed on Tuesday, And for that reason alone,

:16:04. > :16:08.it could take months before a decision on what happens

:16:09. > :16:12.next is taken. The Government will also be minded

:16:13. > :16:15.to listen to its own MPs, One described it to me as Draconian

:16:16. > :16:21.and hugely damaging. So, will the current

:16:22. > :16:23.Culture Secretary's thinking be I don't think the Government

:16:24. > :16:32.will repeal section 40. What I'm arguing for is not

:16:33. > :16:35.to implement it, but it will remain on the statute book and if it then

:16:36. > :16:40.became apparent that Ipso simply was failing to work,

:16:41. > :16:43.was not delivering effective regulation and the press

:16:44. > :16:46.were behaving in a way which was wholly unacceptable,

:16:47. > :16:51.as they were ten years ago, then there might be an argument

:16:52. > :16:55.at that time to think well in that case we are going to have

:16:56. > :16:57.to take further measures, The future of section 40 might not

:16:58. > :17:02.be so black and white. I'm told a compromise could be met

:17:03. > :17:05.whereby the punitive parts about legal costs are dropped,

:17:06. > :17:09.but the incentives to join a recognised

:17:10. > :17:12.regulator are beefed up. But it could yet be some time

:17:13. > :17:15.until the issue of press freedom I'm joined now by Max Mosley -

:17:16. > :17:25.he won a legal case against the News Of The World after it revealed

:17:26. > :17:28.details about his private life, and he now campaigns

:17:29. > :17:38.for more press regulation. Are welcome to the programme. Let me

:17:39. > :17:44.ask you this, how can it be right that you, who many folk think have a

:17:45. > :17:48.clear vendetta against the British press, can bankroll a government

:17:49. > :17:52.approved regulator of the press? If we hadn't done it, nobody would,

:17:53. > :17:56.section 40 would never have come into force because there would never

:17:57. > :18:00.have been a regulator. It is absolutely wrong that a family trust

:18:01. > :18:05.should have to finance something like this. It should be financed by

:18:06. > :18:09.the press or the Government. If we hadn't done it there would be no

:18:10. > :18:34.possibility of regulation. But it means we end up with a

:18:35. > :18:38.regulator financed by you, as I say many people think you have a clear

:18:39. > :18:40.vendetta against the press. Where does the money come from? From a

:18:41. > :18:43.family trust, it is family money. You have to understand that somebody

:18:44. > :18:46.had to do this. I understand that. People like to know where the money

:18:47. > :18:49.comes from, I think you said it came from Brixton Steyn at one stage.

:18:50. > :18:52.Ages ago my father had a trust there but now all my money is in the UK.

:18:53. > :18:57.We are clear about that, but this is money that was put together by your

:18:58. > :19:02.father. Yes, my father inherited it from his father and his father. The

:19:03. > :19:06.whole of Manchester once belonged to the family, that's why there is a

:19:07. > :19:11.Mosley Street. That is irrelevant because as we have given the money,

:19:12. > :19:15.I have no control. If you do the most elementary checks into the

:19:16. > :19:25.contract between my family trust, the trust but finances Impress, it

:19:26. > :19:30.is impossible for me to exert any influence. It is just the same as if

:19:31. > :19:37.it had come from the National lottery. People will find it ironic

:19:38. > :19:44.that the money has come from historically Britain's best-known

:19:45. > :19:49.fascist. No, it has come from my family, the Mosley family. This is

:19:50. > :19:53.complete drivel because we have no control. Where the money comes from

:19:54. > :19:59.doesn't matter, if it had come from the national lottery it would be

:20:00. > :20:03.exactly the same. Impress was completely independent. But it

:20:04. > :20:08.wouldn't exist without your money, wouldn't it? But that doesn't give

:20:09. > :20:13.you influence. It might exist because it was founded before I was

:20:14. > :20:19.ever in contact with them. Isn't it curious then that so many leading

:20:20. > :20:24.light show your hostile views of the press? I don't think it is because I

:20:25. > :20:28.don't know a single member of the Impress board. The chairman I have

:20:29. > :20:36.met months. The only person I know is Jonathan Hayward who you had on

:20:37. > :20:40.just now. In one recent months he tweeted 50 attacks on the Daily

:20:41. > :20:48.Mail, including some calling for an advertising boycott of the paper. He

:20:49. > :20:54.also liked a Twitter post calling me Daily Mail and neofascist rag. Are

:20:55. > :20:57.these fitting for what is meant to be impartial regulator? The person

:20:58. > :21:01.you should ask about that is the press regulatory panel and they are

:21:02. > :21:05.completely independent, they reviewed the whole thing. You have

:21:06. > :21:09.probably produced something very selective, I have no idea but I am

:21:10. > :21:13.certain that these people are absolutely trustworthy and

:21:14. > :21:18.independent. It is not just Mr Hayward, we have a tonne of things

:21:19. > :21:23.he has tweeted calling for boycotts, remember this is the man that would

:21:24. > :21:28.be the regulator of these papers. He's the chief executive, that is a

:21:29. > :21:37.separate thing. The administration, the regulator. Many leading light

:21:38. > :21:45.show your vendetta of the press. I do not have a vendetta. Let's take

:21:46. > :22:00.another one. This person is on the code committee. Have a look at this.

:22:01. > :22:05.As someone with these views fit to be involved in the regulation of the

:22:06. > :22:09.press? You said I have a vendetta against the press, I do not, I

:22:10. > :22:16.didn't say that and it is completely wrong to say I have a vendetta. What

:22:17. > :22:22.do you think of that? I don't agree, I wouldn't ban the Daily Mail, I

:22:23. > :22:33.think it's a dreadful paper but I wouldn't ban it. Another Impress

:22:34. > :22:39.code committee said I hate the Daily Mail, I couldn't agree more, others

:22:40. > :22:43.have called for a boycott. Other people can say what they want and

:22:44. > :22:48.many people may think they are right but surely these views make them

:22:49. > :22:53.unfit to be partial regulators? I have no influence over Impress

:22:54. > :23:00.therefore I cannot say anything about it. You should ask them, not

:23:01. > :23:05.me. All I have done is make it possible for Impress to exist and

:23:06. > :23:10.that was the right thing to do. I'm asking you if people with these kind

:23:11. > :23:15.of views are fit to be regulators of the press. You would have to ask

:23:16. > :23:21.about all of their views, these are some of their views. A lot of people

:23:22. > :23:26.have a downer on the Daily Mail and the Sun, it doesn't necessarily make

:23:27. > :23:33.them party pre-. Why would newspapers sign up to a regulator

:23:34. > :23:38.run by what they think is run by enemies out to ruin them. If they

:23:39. > :23:44.don't like it they should start their own section 40 regulator. They

:23:45. > :23:49.could make it so recognised, if only they would make it independent of

:23:50. > :24:00.the big newspaper barons but they won't -- they could make Ipso

:24:01. > :24:08.recognised. Is the Daily Mail fascist? It certainly was in the

:24:09. > :24:11.1930s. Me and my father are relevant, this whole section 40

:24:12. > :24:16.issue is about access to justice. The press don't want ordinary people

:24:17. > :24:20.who cannot afford to bring an action against the press, don't want them

:24:21. > :24:25.to have access to justice. I can understand that but I don't

:24:26. > :24:29.sympathise. What would happen to the boss of Ofcom, which regulates

:24:30. > :24:37.broadcasters, if it described Channel 4 News is a Marxist scum? If

:24:38. > :24:51.the press don't want to sign up to Impress they can create their own

:24:52. > :24:56.regulator. If you were to listen we would get a lot further. The press

:24:57. > :25:00.should make their own Levenson compliant regulator, then they would

:25:01. > :25:04.have no complaints at all. Even papers like the Guardian, the

:25:05. > :25:10.Independent, the Financial Times, they show your hostility to tabloid

:25:11. > :25:16.journalism. They have refused to be regulated by Impress. I will say it

:25:17. > :25:21.again, the press could start their own regulator, they do not have to

:25:22. > :25:25.sign... Yes, but Levenson compliant one giving access to justice so

:25:26. > :25:30.people who cannot afford an expensive legal action have a proper

:25:31. > :25:34.arbitration service. The Guardian, the Independent, the Financial

:25:35. > :25:38.Times, they don't want to do that either. That would suggest there is

:25:39. > :25:49.something fatally flawed about your approach. Even these kind of papers,

:25:50. > :25:57.the Guardian, Impress is hardly independent, the head of... Andrew,

:25:58. > :26:04.I am sorry, you are like a dog with a bone. The press could start their

:26:05. > :26:07.own regulator, then people like the Financial Times, the Guardian and so

:26:08. > :26:12.one could decide whether they wanted to join or not but what is

:26:13. > :26:15.absolutely vital is that we should have a proper arbitration service so

:26:16. > :26:20.that people who cannot afford an expensive action have somewhere to

:26:21. > :26:24.go. This business of section 40 which you want to be triggered which

:26:25. > :26:28.would mean papers that didn't sign up to Impress could be sued in any

:26:29. > :26:36.case and they would have to pay potentially massive legal costs,

:26:37. > :26:40.even if they win. Yes. This is what the number of papers have said about

:26:41. > :26:47.this, if section 40 was triggered, the Guardian wouldn't even think of

:26:48. > :26:52.investigation. The Sunday Times said it would not have even started to

:26:53. > :26:55.expose Lance Armstrong. The Times journalist said he couldn't have

:26:56. > :27:01.done the Rotherham child abuse scandal. What they all come it is a

:27:02. > :27:08.full reading of section 40 because that cost shifting will only apply

:27:09. > :27:12.if, and I quote, it is just and equitable in all the circumstances.

:27:13. > :27:16.I cannot conceive of any High Court judge, for example the Lance

:27:17. > :27:20.Armstrong case or the child abuse, saying it is just as equitable in

:27:21. > :27:27.all circumstances the newspaper should pay these costs. Even the

:27:28. > :27:32.editor of index on censorship, which is hardly the Sun, said this would

:27:33. > :27:38.be oppressive and they couldn't do what they do, they would risk being

:27:39. > :27:42.sued by warlords. No because if something unfortunate, some really

:27:43. > :27:46.bad person sues them, what would happen is the judge would say it is

:27:47. > :27:49.just inequitable normal circumstances that person should

:27:50. > :27:54.pay. Section 40 is for the person that comes along and says to a big

:27:55. > :27:59.newspaper, can we go to arbitration because I cannot afford to go to

:28:00. > :28:04.court. The big newspaper says no. That leaves less than 1% of the

:28:05. > :28:10.population with any remedy if the newspapers traduce them. It cannot

:28:11. > :28:14.be right. From the Guardian to the Sun, and including Index On

:28:15. > :28:20.Censorship, all of these media outlets think you are proposing a

:28:21. > :28:23.charter for conmen, warlords, crime bosses, dodgy politicians,

:28:24. > :28:32.celebrities with a grievance against the press. I will give you the final

:28:33. > :28:36.word to address that. It is pure guff and the reason is they want to

:28:37. > :28:40.go on marking their own homework. The press don't want anyone to make

:28:41. > :28:44.sure life is fair. All I want is somebody who has got no money to be

:28:45. > :28:47.able to sue in just the way that I can. All right, thanks for being

:28:48. > :28:51.with us. The doctors' union,

:28:52. > :28:53.the British Medical Association, has said the Government

:28:54. > :28:55.is scapegoating GPs in England The Government has said GP surgeries

:28:56. > :28:59.must try harder to stay open from 8am to 8pm,

:29:00. > :29:02.or they could lose out on funding. The pressure on A services

:29:03. > :29:04.in recent weeks has been intense. It emerged this week that 65

:29:05. > :29:08.of the 152 Health Trusts in England had issued an operational pressure

:29:09. > :29:09.alert in the first At either level three,

:29:10. > :29:16.meaning major pressures, or level four, indicating

:29:17. > :29:18.an inability to deliver On Monday, Health Secretary Jeremy

:29:19. > :29:24.Hunt told the Commons that the number of people using A

:29:25. > :29:27.had increased by 9 million But that 30% of those

:29:28. > :29:35.visits were unnecessary. He said that the situation

:29:36. > :29:37.at a number of Trusts On Tuesday, the Royal College

:29:38. > :29:42.of Physicians wrote to the Prime Minister saying

:29:43. > :29:45.the health service was being paralysed by spiralling demand,

:29:46. > :29:50.and urging greater investment. On Wednesday, the Chief Executive

:29:51. > :29:54.of NHS England, Simon Stevens, told a Select Committee that NHS

:29:55. > :29:59.funding will be highly constrained. And from 2018, real-terms spending

:30:00. > :30:03.per person would fall. The Prime Minister described

:30:04. > :30:07.the Red Cross's claim that A was facing a "humanitarian crisis"

:30:08. > :30:11.as "irresponsible and overblown". And the National Audit Office issued

:30:12. > :30:14.a report that found almost half, 46%, of GP surgeries closed at some

:30:15. > :30:21.point during core hours. Yesterday, Mrs May signalled her

:30:22. > :30:25.support for doctors' surgeries opening from 8am to 8pm every day

:30:26. > :30:29.of the week, in order to divert To discuss this, I'm joined

:30:30. > :30:35.now by the Conservative MP Maria Caulfield -

:30:36. > :30:38.she was an NHS nurse in a former life - and Clare Gerada,

:30:39. > :30:49.a former chair of the Royal College Welcome to you both. So, Maria

:30:50. > :30:54.Caulfield, what the Government is saying, Downing Street in effect is

:30:55. > :30:57.saying that GPs do not work hard enough and that's the reason why A

:30:58. > :31:01.was under such pressure? No, I don't think that is the message, I think

:31:02. > :31:04.that is the message that the media have taken up. That is not the

:31:05. > :31:10.expression that we want to give. I still work as a nurse, I know how

:31:11. > :31:15.hard doctors work in hospitals and GP practices. When the rose 30% of

:31:16. > :31:19.people turning up at A for neither an accident or an emergency, we do

:31:20. > :31:24.need to look at alternative. Where is the GPs' operability in this? We

:31:25. > :31:28.know from patients that if they cannot get access to GPs, they will

:31:29. > :31:31.do one of three things. They will wait two or three weeks until they

:31:32. > :31:35.can get an appointment, they will forget about the problem altogether,

:31:36. > :31:38.which is not good, we want patients to be getting investigations at

:31:39. > :31:48.early stages, or they will go to A And that is a problem. I'm not

:31:49. > :31:50.quite sure what the role that GPs play in this. What is your response

:31:51. > :31:53.in that? I think about 70% of patients that I see should not be

:31:54. > :31:57.seen by me but should still be seen by hospital consultants. If we look

:31:58. > :32:02.at it from GPs' eyes and not from hospital's eyes, because that is

:32:03. > :32:06.what it is, we might get somewhere. Tomorrow morning, every practice in

:32:07. > :32:10.England will have about 1.5 GPs shot, that's not even counting if

:32:11. > :32:15.there is traffic problems, sickness or whatever. -- GPs shot. We cannot

:32:16. > :32:22.work any harder, I cannot physically, emotionally work any

:32:23. > :32:25.harder. We are open 12 hours a day, most of us, I run practices open 365

:32:26. > :32:30.days per year 24 hours a day. I don't understand this. It is one

:32:31. > :32:34.thing attacking me as a GP from working hard enough, but it is

:32:35. > :32:37.another thing saying that GPs as a profession and doing what they

:32:38. > :32:42.should be doing. Let me in National Audit Office has coming up with

:32:43. > :32:50.these figures showing that almost half of doctors' practices are not

:32:51. > :32:53.open during core hours at some part of the week. That's where the

:32:54. > :32:58.implication comes, that they are not working hard enough. What do you say

:32:59. > :33:02.to that? I don't recognise this. I'm not being defensive, I'm just don't

:33:03. > :33:06.recognise it. There are practices working palliative care services,

:33:07. > :33:09.practices have to close home visits if they are single-handed, some of

:33:10. > :33:13.us are working in care homes during the day. They may shot for an hour

:33:14. > :33:19.in the middle of the data will sort out some of the prescriptions and

:33:20. > :33:22.admin -- they may shot. My practice runs a number of practices across

:33:23. > :33:26.London. If we shut during our contractual hours we would have NHS

:33:27. > :33:30.England coming down on us like a tonne of bricks. Maria Caulfield,

:33:31. > :33:34.I'm struggling to understand, given the problems the NHS faces,

:33:35. > :33:38.particularly in our hospitals, what this has got to do with the

:33:39. > :33:42.solution? Obviously there are GP practices that are working, you

:33:43. > :33:45.know, over and above the hours. But there are some GP practices, we know

:33:46. > :33:51.from National Audit Office, there are particular black sports --

:33:52. > :33:54.blackspots in the country that only offer services for three hours a

:33:55. > :33:59.week. That's causing problems if they cannot get to see a GP they

:34:00. > :34:03.will go and use A Nobody is saying that this measure would solve

:34:04. > :34:06.problems at A, it would address one small part of its top blog we

:34:07. > :34:11.shouldn't be starting this, as I keep saying, please to this from

:34:12. > :34:15.solving the problems at A We should be starting it from solving

:34:16. > :34:19.the problems of the patients in their totality, the best place they

:34:20. > :34:26.should go, not from A This really upsets me, as a GP I am there to be

:34:27. > :34:30.a proxy A doctor. I am a GP, a highly skilled doctor, looking after

:34:31. > :34:37.patients from cradle to grave across the physical, psychological and

:34:38. > :34:39.social, I am not an A doctor. I don't disagree with that, nobody is

:34:40. > :34:44.saying that GPs are not working hard enough. You just did, actually,

:34:45. > :34:50.about some of them. In some practices, what we need to see, it's

:34:51. > :34:52.not just GPs in GP surgeries, it is advanced nurse practitioners,

:34:53. > :34:57.pharmacists. It doesn't necessarily need to be all on the GPs. I think

:34:58. > :35:02.advanced nurse practitioners are in short supply. Position associate or

:35:03. > :35:06.go to hospital, -- physician associates. We have very few

:35:07. > :35:09.trainees, junior doctors in general practice, unlike hospitals, which

:35:10. > :35:14.tend to have some slack with the junior doctor community and

:35:15. > :35:17.workforce. This isn't an argument, this is about saying, let's stop

:35:18. > :35:23.looking at the National health system as a National hospital

:35:24. > :35:27.system. GPs tomorrow will see about 1.3 million patients. That is a lot

:35:28. > :35:33.of thoughtful. A lot of activity with no resources. If you wanted the

:35:34. > :35:37.GPs to behave better, in your terms, when you allocated more money to

:35:38. > :35:40.GPs, part of the reforms, because that's where it went, shouldn't you

:35:41. > :35:44.have targeted it more closely to where they want to operate? That is

:35:45. > :35:49.exactly what the Prime Minister is saying, extra funding is being made

:35:50. > :35:52.available by GPs to extend hours and services. If certain GP practices

:35:53. > :35:56.cannot do that, the money will follow the patient to where they

:35:57. > :36:00.move onto. We have no doctors to do it. I was on a coach last week, the

:36:01. > :36:03.coach driver stopped in the service station for an hour, they were

:36:04. > :36:12.stopping for a rest. We cannot do it. Even if you gave us millions

:36:13. > :36:14.more money, and thankfully NHS is recognising that we need a solution

:36:15. > :36:17.through the five-day week, we haven't got the doctors to deliver

:36:18. > :36:20.this. It would take a while to get them? That's my point, that's why we

:36:21. > :36:24.need to be using all how care professional. Even if you got this

:36:25. > :36:28.right, would it make a difference to what many regard as the crisis in

:36:29. > :36:32.our hospitals? I think it would. If you look at patients, they just want

:36:33. > :36:36.to go to a service that will address the problems. In Scotland for

:36:37. > :36:40.example, pharmacists have their own patient list. Patients go and see

:36:41. > :36:44.the pharmacists first. There are lots of conditions, for example if

:36:45. > :36:48.you want anticoagulants, you don't necessarily need to see a doctor, a

:36:49. > :36:53.pharmacist can manage that and free up the doctor in other ways. The

:36:54. > :36:56.Prime Minister has said that if things do not change she is

:36:57. > :37:00.threatening to reduce funding to doctors who do not comply. Can you

:37:01. > :37:03.both agree, that is probably an empty threat, that's not going to

:37:04. > :37:08.happen? I hope it's an empty threat. We're trying our best. People like

:37:09. > :37:11.me in my profession, the seniors in our profession, are really trying to

:37:12. > :37:14.pull up morale and get people into general practice, which is a

:37:15. > :37:20.wonderful profession, absolutely wonderful place to be. But slapping

:37:21. > :37:24.us off and telling us that we are lazy really doesn't help. I really

:37:25. > :37:29.don't think anybody is doing that. We have run out of time, but I'm

:37:30. > :37:31.certain that we will be back to the subject before this winter is out.

:37:32. > :37:34.It's just gone 11:35am, you're watching the Sunday Politics.

:37:35. > :37:36.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now

:37:37. > :37:51.Coming up here in 20 minutes: The Week Ahead.

:37:52. > :38:01.Hello, I am Natalie Graham. This is. Though politics in the south-east.

:38:02. > :38:10.Coming up later, the country's economists is too focused on the

:38:11. > :38:15.south-east, so should we be worried? Joining me now is the new Minister

:38:16. > :38:20.for industrial strategy who was also the MP for Tunbridge Wells. First,

:38:21. > :38:26.it has been yet another miserable week not a happy New Year for

:38:27. > :38:30.southern commuters. The dispute over who should open the doors is costing

:38:31. > :38:35.some people not just their journey to work but their livelihood as

:38:36. > :38:39.well. One coffee shop owner at Eastbourne said the lack of

:38:40. > :38:43.communities -- commuters has meant she has had to lay off half her

:38:44. > :38:47.staff since last year. We are held to ransom the cars we don't know

:38:48. > :38:53.what we can do to make things better. We are losing business and

:38:54. > :38:55.people are losing confidence. I used to come in early to get the

:38:56. > :38:59.commuters coming to work but commuters coming to work but

:39:00. > :39:04.obviously, like this morning, I was in here at 7:30am and my first

:39:05. > :39:08.customer was at one o'clock. We are having to cancel appointments and

:39:09. > :39:12.perspiring appointment and that is an awful image for a professional

:39:13. > :39:16.company to have. We were slightly concerned that the emphasis from the

:39:17. > :39:19.government was all about commuters. Very important, don't get me wrong,

:39:20. > :39:26.but they also need to have an impression of the impact it is

:39:27. > :39:29.having on the economy. You are the Secretary of State for business.

:39:30. > :39:37.million. What -- how concerned are million. What -- how concerned are

:39:38. > :39:40.you? Very concerned. It is vital to the economy. Commuters are very

:39:41. > :39:47.important but actually people getting across country is equally

:39:48. > :39:49.important. The impact on parents, for example, getting back from work

:39:50. > :39:54.worrying whether they will be in time to pick up their children from

:39:55. > :39:56.school. Why do you think the lady from the Chamber of Commerce doesn't

:39:57. > :40:02.understand that businesses are suffering? We do and it is very

:40:03. > :40:08.serious, you're absolutely right. I think everybody must reflect after

:40:09. > :40:13.this week, the appalling destruction, enough is enough. This

:40:14. > :40:16.is a time when people should get round the negotiating table. No

:40:17. > :40:22.one's going to lose their jobs. That has been made clear about this. The

:40:23. > :40:27.Independent experts have certified the safety. Let's just take it...

:40:28. > :40:31.And you are taking the same tack that the transport secretary is

:40:32. > :40:35.taking, Chris Grayling, but he has made it clear just the other day in

:40:36. > :40:38.the House of Commons that he is supportive broadly of Southern,

:40:39. > :40:41.critical of the unions and the Labour Party. It has got to the

:40:42. > :40:48.point where both main parties are aligning with the two parties in the

:40:49. > :40:52.dispute. Isn't it time to step above that and stop banging heads

:40:53. > :40:56.together, speak to the unions and stop refusing to speak to them, in

:40:57. > :40:59.Chris Grayling's case? I think you are right that the temperature needs

:41:00. > :41:09.to be taken down and people should get around the negotiating table. I

:41:10. > :41:13.don't think it is helpful. I know I am not partisan but to say that he

:41:14. > :41:22.joined the picket line rather than saying ordinary people here are

:41:23. > :41:25.suffering here... Yet again, your government seems to be politicising

:41:26. > :41:30.the situation as much as the people involved. After nearly a year and

:41:31. > :41:31.?400 million cost, people are looking to the government to help

:41:32. > :41:34.them, to step above all this, be the them, to step above all this, be the

:41:35. > :41:39.grown up in this situation and yet it is all coming down to party

:41:40. > :41:44.politics. I'm sorry, I don't agree with that. You are absolutely right

:41:45. > :41:47.that this must be resolved by the workers who serve the people that

:41:48. > :41:52.are being inconvenienced. They know that. I know that I have heard about

:41:53. > :41:55.the concerns that the people on the railways have on this, just on

:41:56. > :42:01.Thursday night, coming down on this line. Seeing people shovelling the

:42:02. > :42:06.snow on the platforms. They have concern about the welfare of their

:42:07. > :42:09.customers. They want, as much as because -- the passengers and the

:42:10. > :42:16.government, for everyone to get around the table. That is the only

:42:17. > :42:19.way it will be resolved. Forgive me, but we have been sitting in the

:42:20. > :42:23.studio listening to people on all sides saying the same thing, week

:42:24. > :42:27.in, week out. Let's get together. It has become clear over the last two

:42:28. > :42:29.weeks that the two sides are further apart. It is such a war of words.

:42:30. > :42:33.They will not agree a compromise any They will not agree a compromise any

:42:34. > :42:38.time soon save the government needs to step in. Just like operation

:42:39. > :42:47.Stack last year, a lot of people feel that the government really

:42:48. > :42:49.isn't understanding what they are going through and it is being very

:42:50. > :42:52.slow to act. We absolutely are. This is a dispute between the company and

:42:53. > :42:56.the government cannot dictate terms to settle that. What the gum and

:42:57. > :43:02.candy and is doing is encouraging people to get together to talk. You

:43:03. > :43:05.could step in. I mean, would legislation be the way forward? That

:43:06. > :43:13.is what one of the Conservative MPs in this region is suggesting. If you

:43:14. > :43:17.brought up legislation to stop the unions from striking, would you be

:43:18. > :43:22.in support about? This dispute is going on now so any new legislation

:43:23. > :43:26.would not be relevant to this. But in principle is that the kind of

:43:27. > :43:32.action that they should -- this government should be taking to

:43:33. > :43:34.prevent this from spreading? We are changing the threshold for

:43:35. > :43:38.industrial action so in future you will need a 50% turnout and you will

:43:39. > :43:41.need more people showing that they are in favour of it. We are changing

:43:42. > :43:47.that, but in terms of this particular dispute, it seems obvious

:43:48. > :43:52.to me that the only way this is going to be resolved is if people do

:43:53. > :43:55.want... How these things are always sold, you suspend the strikes, you

:43:56. > :44:00.get round the table, you go through the night if necessary and you come

:44:01. > :44:04.to a sensible conclusion in the interests of those passengers,

:44:05. > :44:07.whether they are commuters or local customers. To summarise to the

:44:08. > :44:14.people who have been suffering, day in, day out for ten months now, you

:44:15. > :44:19.are not offering any hope of change? I think that everyone who has any

:44:20. > :44:25.influence or say in this, and I would say the same to, I would

:44:26. > :44:30.encourage the opposition, I would encourage my political opponents to

:44:31. > :44:34.use their links with the trade unions, not to say I will join you

:44:35. > :44:37.on the picket line, but to encourage them to be sensible, to sit around

:44:38. > :44:42.the table and to talk about a resolution to those things. I think

:44:43. > :44:47.people know that this is... You are asking Jeremy Corbyn to speak to the

:44:48. > :44:51.unions. Would you put pressure on Southern as the government from your

:44:52. > :44:56.end? Of course they need to sit down and talk. The key thing is that they

:44:57. > :45:00.talk and resolve these things but I think we should also be clear, that

:45:01. > :45:05.when you have those talks, you have got to be sensible and

:45:06. > :45:09.straightforward. This business, they are saying it is about safety, but

:45:10. > :45:16.everyone knows it is not. You have got to be sensible when they have

:45:17. > :45:24.these talks. Enough is enough. It is time we did concentrate on resolving

:45:25. > :45:27.this and not having the other issues... It doesn't sound like you

:45:28. > :45:32.think the government should step in, as everyone is begging you to do? In

:45:33. > :45:35.terms of stepping in, I have called on the unions and Chris Grayling has

:45:36. > :45:40.called on the unions to do everything they can. As I said, you

:45:41. > :45:44.suspend the action, you come round the table... So far, that hasn't

:45:45. > :45:49.worked but we are going round in circles. Let's move on, because in

:45:50. > :45:54.2017 an issue that will undoubtedly dominate politics is Brexit. In that

:45:55. > :45:58.context, the government is publishing an economic strategy.

:45:59. > :46:01.They say economic growth is unbalanced and focused too much on

:46:02. > :46:05.London and the south-east. So what do business here want to see from

:46:06. > :46:10.the grand plan? We went to hear from some of them in Kent and Sussex. It

:46:11. > :46:15.was one of Theresa May's first actions as prime minister, to create

:46:16. > :46:18.a department specifically for developing an industrial strategy. I

:46:19. > :46:24.want an industrial strategy that will be ambitious for business and

:46:25. > :46:32.ambitious for Britain. It's a new way for thinking for government, a

:46:33. > :46:34.new approach, about government stepping up, not stepping back. The

:46:35. > :46:37.stated aim, to generate wealth in every corner of the country and

:46:38. > :46:42.provide stability as we move towards leaving the EU. So what will a new

:46:43. > :46:46.industrial strategy mean for the Southeast? The government wants

:46:47. > :46:50.Britain to become the go to place for innovators and scientists. Steve

:46:51. > :46:54.trim fits that bill. Based at the discovery Park in Sandwich, his

:46:55. > :47:00.company tries to find component of venom that can be turned into new

:47:01. > :47:03.medicines. Steve said East Kent has a strong background in drug

:47:04. > :47:11.discovery and hopes the industrial strategy will help his sector broke

:47:12. > :47:14.again. Brexit was a shock to the scientific community and I

:47:15. > :47:20.personally know people whose careers have changed dramatically as a

:47:21. > :47:24.result of Brexit and nervousness over it funding. The biggest barrier

:47:25. > :47:32.we see for growing business, getting funding for the ideas, as cash flow

:47:33. > :47:36.is absolutely critical, so we would be looking for funding to support

:47:37. > :47:42.those ideas, to actually see if they will be a ground-breaking product.

:47:43. > :47:46.My question to the Secretary of State is how are you going to make

:47:47. > :47:50.sure that effective funding for development reaches the small and

:47:51. > :47:55.medium-sized businesses that need it? Also based at the discovery Park

:47:56. > :47:58.is Doctor Robert Stewart he was a GP and runs a very different kind of

:47:59. > :48:02.enterprise, called the design and learning Centre. He has been working

:48:03. > :48:05.with health professionals overseas to test new technologies that can

:48:06. > :48:12.help people take control of their own health. So, our global position

:48:13. > :48:16.is actually quite unique. Partly that's because we are in Kent and we

:48:17. > :48:20.have been in the gateway to Europe. Now with Brexit we need to be

:48:21. > :48:25.looking further afield from Matt. The industrial strategy is very

:48:26. > :48:28.important. I hope that it will also value the small innovation centres

:48:29. > :48:34.like ourselves who are able to implement new ways of working. My

:48:35. > :48:40.question to the Secretary of State is how can your industrial strategy

:48:41. > :48:45.help my design and learning Centre enhance global collaboration and

:48:46. > :48:53.make Kent the Centre for technology and robotics? A key theme of the

:48:54. > :48:56.industrial strategy is that the country's economic success is to

:48:57. > :49:01.unbalanced and focus on London and the south-east. That's a concern for

:49:02. > :49:07.Derek Godfrey, who sits on the Eastbourne chamber of commerce and

:49:08. > :49:10.is also the managing director of a construction company that has been

:49:11. > :49:14.operating in the region for 25 years. Theresa May, in her speech,

:49:15. > :49:19.actually said that the south-east was doing well and is quite often

:49:20. > :49:23.grabbed all the attention but within the south-east, pockets like

:49:24. > :49:28.Eastbourne, Hastings, New Haven, have got fantastic potential and we

:49:29. > :49:31.want to realise that potential. We have a problem with infrastructure

:49:32. > :49:34.on a very unfit for purpose road network and we have been lobbying

:49:35. > :49:41.the government for some time to actually improve that. My question

:49:42. > :49:44.for the Secretary of State is how will the industrial strategy help us

:49:45. > :49:51.in the south-east or will we be overlooked? We are joined now by

:49:52. > :49:56.Jason who works as head of policy and Public affairs for an online

:49:57. > :50:02.accountancy business but you may know him better as the former Green

:50:03. > :50:08.party leader. Welcome back. If you could quickly answer those questions

:50:09. > :50:11.before we come to Jason. That last one, how can you be sure the

:50:12. > :50:16.south-east that it will not be overlooked in favour of parts of the

:50:17. > :50:20.North? We need to boost the north and the Midlands but not at the

:50:21. > :50:24.expense of London and the south-east. What we need to do as a

:50:25. > :50:28.country as part of the industrial strategy is to build on our

:50:29. > :50:32.strengths. Any good strategy, you build on your strengths. The

:50:33. > :50:37.south-east is a strength. As your interviewee pointed out there. Of

:50:38. > :50:41.course we have challenges in some parts of the south-east, so that

:50:42. > :50:44.will be very important. Quite often it feels down here like you are

:50:45. > :50:48.being lumped together with London, the government says you are OK, you

:50:49. > :50:53.are economically successful, we need to concentrate on the north and you

:50:54. > :50:56.can understand people's concern? Absolutely, the advantage of being

:50:57. > :50:59.an MP in this studio over the years is that we know we are fortunate to

:51:00. > :51:04.have some great businesses and prosperity but we do have parts of

:51:05. > :51:09.the area that RA challenge and we need to make sure they are helped.

:51:10. > :51:11.Moving on to the other one, funding for research and development

:51:12. > :51:16.reaching the small businesses who need it. How will we guarantee that?

:51:17. > :51:20.I was delighted to hear that because one of the things we got the

:51:21. > :51:26.Chancellor's Autumn Statement in November was an ?2 billion a year to

:51:27. > :51:29.be available for research and development. Again, something we are

:51:30. > :51:34.really good at, but you are right. It needs to go to small businesses,

:51:35. > :51:39.not just the big ones. So in this consultation, which is what it is,

:51:40. > :51:40.we will be composing ways in which small businesses can access some of

:51:41. > :51:46.these funds. Third quick question these funds. Third quick question

:51:47. > :51:49.before we bring in Jason, all in the context of Brexit, how will you

:51:50. > :51:54.companies like Doctor Stuart's reach companies like Doctor Stuart's reach

:51:55. > :51:59.out beyond Kent and beyond Europe to global collaborators? This I think

:52:00. > :52:03.is part of the timeliness of the industrial strategy. Lots of

:52:04. > :52:08.countries around the world have laid out their policies severed inward

:52:09. > :52:14.investors, domestic investors know what their plans are for the future.

:52:15. > :52:20.This is what we are doing. Of course Brexit has some uncertainties, but

:52:21. > :52:25.the clarity of investment, infrastructure, this will be laid

:52:26. > :52:29.out. Jason, do we need an industrial strategy? I think it is great that

:52:30. > :52:34.we are taking that approach and as Greg says, many other countries do

:52:35. > :52:37.it, but the temptation is to focus on big boxes like car factories. I

:52:38. > :52:42.hope and I have been reassured so far that there will be a focus on

:52:43. > :52:47.smaller businesses. 5 million people working businesses of five or fewer

:52:48. > :52:52.employees. And in recent south-east we have more small businesses than

:52:53. > :52:55.anywhere outside London, so here it is particularly important? What are

:52:56. > :53:00.you looking for at a small business in the green paper? A long-term

:53:01. > :53:03.certainty and clarity about direction of clarity. What

:53:04. > :53:07.businesses hate are lots of short-term changes and surprises.

:53:08. > :53:11.Putting Brexit to one side, there are things around the text and

:53:12. > :53:15.spending policy that we could be given certainty on. We know what

:53:16. > :53:19.corporation tax will be until 2020, but we don't know about national

:53:20. > :53:25.insurance, income tax and VAT. Those are things that affect people's urge

:53:26. > :53:28.to invest. Unblocking infrastructure and broadband, things like that,

:53:29. > :53:33.which I'm sure Greg has heard before, are key. But you can't

:53:34. > :53:34.deliver all of that in one green paper, can you, with the uncertainty

:53:35. > :53:38.about Brexit West we don't know about Brexit West we don't know

:53:39. > :53:46.where we will be in five or ten years' time. The green paper is a

:53:47. > :53:50.long-term strategy. For something to endure, you have to build a

:53:51. > :53:55.consensus around it. One of the big things that we want to do which

:53:56. > :54:00.addresses a lot of the points made is getting more decisions are made

:54:01. > :54:03.locally. In the greater Brighton city Deal, for example, we join

:54:04. > :54:08.together with all of the local authorities, businesses and the

:54:09. > :54:12.government to invest in some of the services for digital start-ups and

:54:13. > :54:20.was proposed by people locally. And was proposed by people locally. And

:54:21. > :54:24.as a former city council leader, you look very pleased about that? It has

:54:25. > :54:29.been a great success and it is the model that we work from. The idea

:54:30. > :54:34.not workable so we need to not workable so we need to

:54:35. > :54:39.appreciate people like Greg who recognise we need local support and

:54:40. > :54:43.input. Let's move onto something linked to this which is the green

:54:44. > :54:50.investment bank. It was set up by the government and invested billion

:54:51. > :54:53.in green projects. The proposal to sell a majority stake in the bank

:54:54. > :55:00.has been criticised by politicians on both sides of the house. Here is

:55:01. > :55:04.an urgent question from last Wednesday. This week we heard that

:55:05. > :55:08.the green investment bank stands on the brink of not just being flogged

:55:09. > :55:14.green purses discarded. Founded in green purses discarded. Founded in

:55:15. > :55:21.2012, it has been widely recognised as a true success story,

:55:22. > :55:30.kick-starting innovative low carbon projects across the country and yet

:55:31. > :55:33.McQuarrie has a dismal record on environmental issues, it also has a

:55:34. > :55:36.terrible record on asset stripping. Isn't this the wrong time to be

:55:37. > :55:44.selling the bank given that the government has decided to invest on

:55:45. > :55:52.a new strategy which must have green issues at its store -- at its core?

:55:53. > :55:56.Can you explain what the green investment bank does for anyone who

:55:57. > :56:00.hasn't heard of it? Put simply, it is funding for projects which will

:56:01. > :56:04.have an environment of benefit. For example, in Hove, it was used to

:56:05. > :56:08.fund low-energy streetlights. I think the bank is a good thing and

:56:09. > :56:14.there is universal agreement on that. This programme is an example

:56:15. > :56:21.of how uncertainty can affect things. No one really knows what is

:56:22. > :56:25.concerning. I know you are going to concerning. I know you are going to

:56:26. > :56:28.sensitive but those guarantees that sensitive but those guarantees that

:56:29. > :56:32.the green investment bank will continue to invest in green

:56:33. > :56:36.projects, how can you guarantee that if you are selling it? First of all,

:56:37. > :56:41.it has been a great success and we want to build on that. There is some

:56:42. > :56:47.confidentiality there, there's a bidding process, so I can't comment

:56:48. > :56:51.on, and we have made their decisions are I can't comment on that. But

:56:52. > :56:56.whoever buys it, how can you guarantee it will still do this?

:56:57. > :57:01.Part of the reason for getting private sector funders that it can

:57:02. > :57:05.embark -- it can expand its investments. What Parliament has set

:57:06. > :57:08.up is an independent set of trustees, including some people with

:57:09. > :57:15.very strong green credentials. They are there to be the guarantor is. I

:57:16. > :57:20.have a special share, a kind of veto on its purses, and they are there to

:57:21. > :57:27.make sure it continues to have this crucially important and successful

:57:28. > :57:32.green input. Is that enough of a guarantee for you? Often the devil

:57:33. > :57:36.is in the details. If it continues in this spirit, great, but the track

:57:37. > :57:43.where God of the elected bidder is dreadful. But the question is, why

:57:44. > :57:47.do this? One of the reasons for doing this is that if it is a

:57:48. > :57:51.government institution, it is restricted. We can't give subsidies,

:57:52. > :57:58.for example. If it has private capital, it is much freer to invest

:57:59. > :58:01.in what is a hugely expanding set of projects. What does this mean for

:58:02. > :58:08.Grampian to wind farm for example? It is still being built. It is all

:58:09. > :58:12.about future projects. Those that have been invested in are done. What

:58:13. > :58:17.we want to do is increase the volume of investments. We are a world

:58:18. > :58:21.leading now in offshore wind. We want to expand the ability of this

:58:22. > :58:24.bank to invest. Your critics would say that this underlines what they

:58:25. > :58:27.already know which is that this government doesn't really care about

:58:28. > :58:32.the environment? Quite the opposite. The creation of my department to

:58:33. > :58:36.bring in energy, climate change in business together is to make sure

:58:37. > :58:43.that we reap the benefits of this. I happy pleasure in Harlem of opening

:58:44. > :58:48.a new Siemens wind blade factory which is creating 1000 jobs. We will

:58:49. > :58:50.move on now to the other news you may have missed this week in 60

:58:51. > :59:01.seconds. Children in Brighton and Hove will

:59:02. > :59:06.be fined if they return their library books late. The move could

:59:07. > :59:09.mean an extra ?8,000 a year for the cash-strapped council. Labour

:59:10. > :59:12.councillor Kevin Allen said children had to take this possibility for

:59:13. > :59:15.their actions. The new Chief inspector of schools for England has

:59:16. > :59:21.been criticised by a Kent MP after she described government proposals

:59:22. > :59:24.to create more grammar schools as a distraction. The South Thanet MPs

:59:25. > :59:30.that the comments were out of line. The new agenda is supported

:59:31. > :59:32.particularly by people in Kent and this is and why civil servants to

:59:33. > :59:38.step out of line and start talking against the government's agenda.

:59:39. > :59:45.Hundreds of people have signed a petition to stop the Post Office's

:59:46. > :59:49.branch in sure. And Crawley branch in sure. And Crawley

:59:50. > :59:54.celebrates its 70th anniversary. The new town was created in 1947 in the

:59:55. > :00:01.wake of the Second World War. Today, it has more than 100,000 people

:00:02. > :00:06.living there. Jason, when you hear about those

:00:07. > :00:09.plans in Brighton and Hove to charge children for overdue library books,

:00:10. > :00:13.does it make you glad that you are not sitting in those offices having

:00:14. > :00:16.to make difficult decisions about funding? There's no doubt it's a

:00:17. > :00:19.really tough time for local government. It's personally not a

:00:20. > :00:24.choice I would have encouraged. If paradigm children to read is vital

:00:25. > :00:28.it is the local government. They are it is the local government. They are

:00:29. > :00:32.under huge pressure. Thank you very much. That's all we have time for

:00:33. > :00:35.from the south-east this weekend. Thanks to both my guests, Jason Kit

:00:36. > :00:41.Kat and Greg Clark. Julia will be back next week.

:00:42. > :00:49.Now, if anyone thought Donald Trump would tone things down

:00:50. > :00:51.after the American election campaign, they may have

:00:52. > :01:04.The period where he has been President-elect will make them think

:01:05. > :01:05.again. The inauguration is coming up on Friday.

:01:06. > :01:07.Never has the forthcoming inauguration of a president been

:01:08. > :01:11.In a moment, we'll talk to a man who knows Mr Trump

:01:12. > :01:15.But first, let's have a look at the press conference

:01:16. > :01:17.Mr Trump gave on Wednesday, in which he took the opportunity

:01:18. > :01:19.to rubbish reports that Russia has obtained compromising information

:01:20. > :01:35.You are attacking our news organisation.

:01:36. > :01:40.Can you give us a chance, you are attacking our news

:01:41. > :01:43.organisation, can you give us a chance to ask a question, sir?

:01:44. > :01:49.As far as Buzzfeed, which is a failing pile of garbage,

:01:50. > :01:53.writing it, I think they're going to suffer the consequences.

:01:54. > :01:56.Does anyone really believe that story?

:01:57. > :01:59.I'm also very much of a germaphobe, by the way.

:02:00. > :02:01.If Putin likes Donald Trump, guess what, folks, that's called

:02:02. > :02:09.The only ones that care about my tax returns are the reporters, OK?

:02:10. > :02:11.Do you not think the American public is concerned?

:02:12. > :02:25.The Wiggo, Donald Trump at his first last conference. The Can will he

:02:26. > :02:29.change as President? Because he hasn't changed in the run-up to

:02:30. > :02:32.being inaugurated? I don't think he will commit he doesn't see any point

:02:33. > :02:37.in changing. Why would he change from the personality that just one,

:02:38. > :02:40.as he just said, I just one. All of the bleeding-heart liberals can wail

:02:41. > :02:45.and brush their teeth and say how ghastly that all this, Hillary

:02:46. > :02:48.should have won and so on, but he has got an incredible mandate.

:02:49. > :02:51.Remember, Trump has the House committee has the Senate, he will

:02:52. > :02:55.have the Supreme Court. He has incredible power right now. He

:02:56. > :02:58.doesn't have to listen to anybody. I spoke to him a couple of weeks ago

:02:59. > :03:03.specifically about Twitter, I asked him what the impact was of Twitter.

:03:04. > :03:09.He said, I have 60 million people following me on Twitter. I was able

:03:10. > :03:12.to bypass mainstream media, bypass all modern political convention and

:03:13. > :03:16.talk directly to potential voters. Secondly, I can turn on the TV in

:03:17. > :03:20.the morning, I can see a rival getting all of the airtime, and I

:03:21. > :03:25.can fire off a tweet, for free, as a marketing man he loves that, and,

:03:26. > :03:28.boom, I'm on the news agenda again. He was able to use that

:03:29. > :03:36.magnificently. Twitter to him didn't cost him a dollar. He is going to

:03:37. > :03:44.carry on tweeting in the last six weeks, he was not sleeping. Trump

:03:45. > :03:49.has never had an alcoholic drink a cigarette or a drug. He is a fit by

:03:50. > :03:52.the 70, he has incredible energy and he is incredibly competitive. At his

:03:53. > :03:57.heart, he is a businessman. If you look at him as a political

:03:58. > :04:01.ideologue, you completely missed the point of trouble. Don't take what he

:04:02. > :04:04.says literally, look upon it as a negotiating point that he started

:04:05. > :04:09.from, and try to do business with him as a business person would, and

:04:10. > :04:13.you may be presently surprised so pleasantly surprised. He treats the

:04:14. > :04:17.press and the media entirely differently to any other politician

:04:18. > :04:23.or main politician in that normally the politicians try to get the media

:04:24. > :04:28.off a particular subject, or they try to conciliate with the media. He

:04:29. > :04:33.just comes and punches the media in the nose when he doesn't like them.

:04:34. > :04:37.This could catch on, you know! You are absolutely right, for a start,

:04:38. > :04:44.nobody could accuse him of letting that victory go to his head. You

:04:45. > :04:48.know, he won't say, I will now be this lofty president. He's exactly

:04:49. > :04:51.the same as he was before. What is fascinating is his Laois and ship

:04:52. > :04:55.with the media. I haven't met, and I'm sure you haven't, met a party

:04:56. > :05:01.leader who is obsessed with the media. But they pretend not to be.

:05:02. > :05:08.You know, they state, oh, somebody told me about a column, I didn't

:05:09. > :05:13.read it. He is utterly transparent in his obsession with the media, he

:05:14. > :05:15.doesn't pretend. How that plays out, who knows? It's a completely

:05:16. > :05:21.different dynamic than anyone has seen by. Like he is the issue, he

:05:22. > :05:25.has appointed an unusual Cabinet, that you could criticise in many

:05:26. > :05:28.ways. Nearly all of them are independent people in their own

:05:29. > :05:32.right. A lot of them are wealthy, too. They have their own views. They

:05:33. > :05:38.might not like what he tweaked at 3am, and he does have to deal with

:05:39. > :05:41.his Cabinet now. Mad dog matters, now the Defence Secretary, he might

:05:42. > :05:47.not like what's said about China at three in morning - general matters.

:05:48. > :05:50.This is what gets very conjugated. We cannot imagine here in our

:05:51. > :05:53.political system any kind of appointments like this. Using the

:05:54. > :05:56.wouldn't have a line-up of billionaires of the kind of

:05:57. > :06:00.background that he has chosen -- you simply wouldn't have. But that won't

:06:01. > :06:04.stop him saying and reading what he thinks. Maybe it will cause him some

:06:05. > :06:07.internal issues when the following day he has the square rigged with

:06:08. > :06:16.whatever they think. But he's going to press ahead. Are we any clearer

:06:17. > :06:20.in terms of policy. I know policy hasn't featured hugely in this

:06:21. > :06:26.campaign of 2016. Do we have any really clear idea what Mr Trump is

:06:27. > :06:30.hoping to achieve? He has had some consistent theme going back over 25

:06:31. > :06:33.years. One is a deep scepticism about international trade and the

:06:34. > :06:37.kind of deals that America has been doing over that period. It has been

:06:38. > :06:40.so consistent that is has been hard to spin as something that you say

:06:41. > :06:44.during the course of a campaign of something to get elected.

:06:45. > :06:47.Ultimately, Piers is correct, he won't change. When he won the

:06:48. > :06:51.election committee gave a relatively magnanimous beach. I thought his ego

:06:52. > :06:55.had been sated and he had got what he wanted. He will end up governing

:06:56. > :06:59.as is likely eccentric New York liberal and everything will be fine.

:07:00. > :07:01.In the recent weeks it has come to my attention that that might not be

:07:02. > :07:07.entirely true! LAUGHTER

:07:08. > :07:09.It is a real test of the American system, the Texan bouncers, the

:07:10. > :07:14.foreign policy establishment which is about to have the orthodoxies

:07:15. > :07:18.disrupted -- the checks and balances. I think he has completely

:07:19. > :07:22.ripped up the American political system. Washington as we know it is

:07:23. > :07:28.dead. From his garage do things his way, he doesn't care, frankly, what

:07:29. > :07:32.any of us thinks -- Trump is going to do things his way. If he can

:07:33. > :07:40.deliver for the people who voted for him who fault this disenfranchised,

:07:41. > :07:44.-- who voted for him who felt this disenfranchised. They voted

:07:45. > :07:48.accordingly. They want to see jobs and the economy in good shape, they

:07:49. > :07:52.want to feel secure. They want to feel that immigration has been

:07:53. > :07:56.tightened. If Trump can deliver on those main theme for the rust belt

:07:57. > :08:01.communities of America, I'm telling you, he will go down as a very

:08:02. > :08:03.successful president. All of the offensive rhetoric and the

:08:04. > :08:07.argy-bargy with CNN and whatever it may be will be completely

:08:08. > :08:14.irrelevant. Let me finish with a parochial question. Is it fair to

:08:15. > :08:16.say quite well disposed to this country? And that he would like,

:08:17. > :08:21.that he's up for a speedy free-trade, bilateral free-trade

:08:22. > :08:26.you'll? Think we have to be sensible as the country. Come Friday, he is

:08:27. > :08:30.the president of the United States, the most powerful man and well. He

:08:31. > :08:34.said to me that he feels half British, his mum was born and raised

:08:35. > :08:37.in Scotland until the age of 18, he loves British, his mother used to

:08:38. > :08:42.love watching the Queen, he feels very, you know, I would roll out the

:08:43. > :08:48.red carpet for Trump, let him eat Her Majesty. The crucial point for

:08:49. > :08:53.us as a country is coming -- let him me to Her Majesty. If we can do a

:08:54. > :08:56.speedy deal within an 18 month period, it really sends a message

:08:57. > :08:59.that well but we are back in the game, that is a hugely beneficial

:09:00. > :09:04.thing for this country. Well, a man whose advisers were indicating that

:09:05. > :09:10.maybe he should learn a few things from Donald Trump was Jeremy Corbyn.

:09:11. > :09:12.Yes, MBE. Mr Corbyn appeared on the Andrew Marr Show this morning. --

:09:13. > :09:15.yes, indeed. If you don't win Copeland,

:09:16. > :09:18.and if you don't win Stoke-on-Trent Central,

:09:19. > :09:19.you're toast, aren't you? Our party is going to fight very

:09:20. > :09:24.hard in those elections, as we are in the local elections,

:09:25. > :09:27.to put those policies out there. It's an opportunity to challenge

:09:28. > :09:29.the Government on the NHS. It's an opportunity to challenge

:09:30. > :09:32.them on the chaos of Brexit. It's an opportunity to challenge

:09:33. > :09:34.them on the housing shortage. It's an opportunity to challenge

:09:35. > :09:36.them on zero-hours contracts. Is there ever a moment that you look

:09:37. > :09:41.in the mirror and think, you know what, I've done my best,

:09:42. > :09:45.but this might not be for me? I look in the mirror

:09:46. > :09:47.every day and I think, let's go out there and try

:09:48. > :09:50.and create a society where there are opportunities for all,

:09:51. > :09:52.where there aren't these terrible levels of poverty, where

:09:53. > :09:54.there isn't homelessness, where there are houses for all,

:09:55. > :09:57.and where young people aren't frightened of going to university

:09:58. > :09:59.because of the debts they are going to end up

:10:00. > :10:07.with at the end of their course. Mr Corbyn earlier this morning.

:10:08. > :10:09.Steve, would it be fair to say that the mainstream of the Labour Party

:10:10. > :10:13.has now come to the conclusion that they just have to let Mr Corbyn get

:10:14. > :10:18.on with it, that they are not going to try and influence what he does.

:10:19. > :10:23.They will continue to try and have their own views, but it's his show,

:10:24. > :10:26.it's up to him, if it's a mess, he has to live with it and we'll have

:10:27. > :10:30.clean hands? For now, yes. I think they made a mistake when he was

:10:31. > :10:34.first elected to start in some cases tweeting within seconds that it was

:10:35. > :10:38.going to be a disaster, this was Labour MPs. They made a complete

:10:39. > :10:44.mess of that attempted coup in the summer, which strengthened his

:10:45. > :10:47.position. And he did, it gave Corbyn the space with total legitimacy to

:10:48. > :10:53.say that part of the problem is, we're having this public Civil War.

:10:54. > :10:57.In keeping quiet, that disappeared as part of the explanation for why

:10:58. > :11:03.Labour and low in the polls. I think they are partly doing that. But they

:11:04. > :11:07.are also struggling, the so-called mainstream Labour MPs, to decide

:11:08. > :11:11.what the distinctive agenda is. It's one of the many differences with the

:11:12. > :11:15.80s, where you had a group of people sure of what they believed in, they

:11:16. > :11:19.left to form the SDP. What's happening now is that they are

:11:20. > :11:23.leaving politics altogether. That is a crisis of social Democrats all

:11:24. > :11:27.across Europe, including the French Socialists, as we will find out

:11:28. > :11:34.later in the spring. Let Corbyn because then, that's the strategy.

:11:35. > :11:36.There is a weary and sometimes literal resignation from the

:11:37. > :11:39.moderates in the Labour Party. If you talk to them, they are no longer

:11:40. > :11:42.angry, they have always run out of steam to be angry about what's going

:11:43. > :11:45.on. They are just sort of tired and feel that they've just got to see

:11:46. > :11:49.this through now. I think the by-elections will be interesting.

:11:50. > :11:54.When Andrew Marr said, you're toast, and you? I thought, he's never

:11:55. > :11:58.posed! That was right. A quick thought from view? One thing Corbyn

:11:59. > :12:07.has in common with Trump is immunity to bad news. I think he can lose

:12:08. > :12:09.Copeland and lose Stoke, and as long as it is not a sequence of

:12:10. > :12:12.resignations and by-elections afterwards, with maybe a dozen or 20

:12:13. > :12:15.Labour MPs going, he can still enjoy what. It may be more trouble if

:12:16. > :12:21.Labour loses the United trade union elections. We are in a period of

:12:22. > :12:25.incredible unpredictability generally in global politics. If you

:12:26. > :12:28.look at the way the next year plays out, if for example brags it was a

:12:29. > :12:32.disaster and it starts to unravel very quickly, Theresa May is

:12:33. > :12:36.attached to that, clearly label would have a great opportunity

:12:37. > :12:39.potentially disease that higher ground, and when Eddie the Tories --

:12:40. > :12:44.Labour would have an opportunity. Is Corbyn the right guy? We interviewed

:12:45. > :12:49.him, what struck me was that he talked about being from, a laughable

:12:50. > :12:54.comparison, but when it is really laughable is this - Hillary Clinton,

:12:55. > :12:58.what were the things she stood for, nobody really knew? What does Trump

:12:59. > :13:02.stand for? Everybody knew. Corbyn has the work-out four or five

:13:03. > :13:04.messages and bang, bang, bang. He could still be in business. Thank

:13:05. > :13:06.you for being with us. I'll be back at the same

:13:07. > :13:09.time next weekend. Remember - if it's Sunday,

:13:10. > :13:11.it's the Sunday Politics.