:00:39. > :00:40.Morning, folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics.
:00:41. > :00:42.Hard line remainers strike back at Brexit.
:00:43. > :00:45.Are they trying to overturn the result of June's referendum
:00:46. > :00:48.by forcing a second vote before we leave?
:00:49. > :00:51.Australia's man in London tells us that life outside the EU "can be
:00:52. > :00:55.pretty good" and that Brexit will "not be as hard as people say".
:00:56. > :00:58.Could leaving the EU free Britain to do more business
:00:59. > :01:04.It's been called "disgusting, dangerous and deadly"
:01:05. > :01:07.but how polluted is our air, how bad for our health,
:01:08. > :01:14.Are we blowing too hot and cold on wind power?
:01:15. > :01:17.And not just for Christmas - what should happen to churches
:01:18. > :01:31.And with me in the Sunday Politics grotto, the Dasher, Dancer
:01:32. > :01:33.and Prancer of political punditry Iain Martin,
:01:34. > :01:42.They'll be delivering tweets throughout the programme.
:01:43. > :01:48.First this morning, some say they will fight
:01:49. > :01:51.for what they call a "soft Brexit", but now there's an attempt by those
:01:52. > :01:54.who campaigned for Britain to remain in the EU to allow the British
:01:55. > :01:57.people to change their minds - possibly with a second referendum -
:01:58. > :02:01.The Labour MEP Richard Corbett is revealed this morning to have
:02:02. > :02:03.tried to amend European Parliament resolutions.
:02:04. > :02:05.The original resolution called on the European Parliament
:02:06. > :02:09.to "respect the will of the majority of the citizens
:02:10. > :02:24.of the United Kingdom to leave the EU".
:02:25. > :02:29.He also proposed removing the wording "stress that this wish
:02:30. > :02:32.must be respected" and adding "while taking account of the 48.1%
:02:33. > :02:44.The amendments were proposed in October,
:02:45. > :02:48.but were rejected by a vote in the Brussels
:02:49. > :02:49.Constitutional Affairs Committee earlier this month.
:02:50. > :02:52.The report will be voted on by all MEPs in February.
:02:53. > :02:55.Well, joining me now from Leeds is the Labour MEP who proposed
:02:56. > :03:04.Good morning. Thanks for joining us at short notice. Is your aim to try
:03:05. > :03:09.and reverse what happened on June 23? My aim with those amendments was
:03:10. > :03:13.simply factual. It is rather odd that these amendments of two months
:03:14. > :03:19.ago are suddenly used paper headlines in three very different
:03:20. > :03:24.newspapers on the same day. It smacks of a sort of concerted effort
:03:25. > :03:30.to try and slapped down any notion that Britain might perhaps want to
:03:31. > :03:35.rethink its position on Brexit as the cost of Brexit emerges. You
:03:36. > :03:40.would like us to rethink the position even before the cost urges?
:03:41. > :03:45.I get lots of letters from people saying how one, this was an advisory
:03:46. > :03:52.referendum won by a narrow majority on the basis of a pack of lies and a
:03:53. > :03:55.questionable mandate. But if there is a mandate from this referendum,
:03:56. > :03:58.it is surely to secure a Brexit that works for Britain without sinking
:03:59. > :04:03.the economy. And if it transpires as we move forward, that this will be a
:04:04. > :04:07.very costly exercise, then there will be people who voted leave who
:04:08. > :04:12.said Hang on, this is not what I was told. I was told this would save
:04:13. > :04:14.money, we could put it in the NHS, but if it is going to cost us and
:04:15. > :04:31.our Monday leg, I would the right to reconsider. But
:04:32. > :04:34.your aim is not get a Brexit that would work for Britain, your aim is
:04:35. > :04:37.to stop it? If we got a Brexit that would work for Britain, that would
:04:38. > :04:40.respect the mandate. But if we cannot get that, if it is going to
:04:41. > :04:43.be a disaster, if it is going to cost people jobs and cost Britain
:04:44. > :04:46.money, it is something we might want to pause and rethink. The government
:04:47. > :04:52.said it is going to come forward with a plan. That is good. We need
:04:53. > :04:59.to know what options to go for as a country. Do we want to stay in the
:05:00. > :05:01.single market, the customs union, the various agencies? And options
:05:02. > :05:08.should be costed so we can all see how much they cost of Brexit will
:05:09. > :05:12.be. If you were simply going to try and make the resolution is more
:05:13. > :05:20.illegal, why did the constitutional committee vote them down? This is a
:05:21. > :05:26.report about future treaty amendments down the road for years
:05:27. > :05:34.to come. This was not the main focus of the report, it was a side
:05:35. > :05:40.reference, in which was put the idea for Association partnerships. Will
:05:41. > :05:47.you push for the idea before the full parliament? I must see what the
:05:48. > :05:55.text is. You said there is a widespread view in labour that if
:05:56. > :05:58.the Brexit view is bad we should not exclude everything, I take it you
:05:59. > :06:05.mean another referendum. When you were named down these amendments,
:06:06. > :06:10.was this just acting on your own initiative, or acting on behalf of
:06:11. > :06:17.the Labour Party? I am just be humble lame-duck MEP in the European
:06:18. > :06:22.Parliament. It makes sense from any point of view that if the course of
:06:23. > :06:25.action you have embarked on turns out to be much more costly and
:06:26. > :06:30.disastrous than you had anticipated, that you might want the chance to
:06:31. > :06:35.think again. You might come to the same conclusion, of course, but you
:06:36. > :06:41.might think, wait a minute, let's have a look at this. But let's be
:06:42. > :06:44.clear, even though you are deputy leader of Labour in the European
:06:45. > :06:52.Parliament, you're acting alone and not as Labour Party policy? I am
:06:53. > :06:56.acting in the constitutional affairs committee. All I am doing is stating
:06:57. > :07:00.things which are common sense. If as we move forward then this turns out
:07:01. > :07:05.to be a disaster, we need to look very carefully at where we are
:07:06. > :07:11.going. But if a deal is done under Article 50, and we get to see the
:07:12. > :07:16.shape of that deal by the end of 2019 under the two-year timetable,
:07:17. > :07:20.in your words, we won't know if it is a disaster or not until it is
:07:21. > :07:26.implemented. We won't be able to tell until we see the results about
:07:27. > :07:34.whether it is good or bad, surely? We might well be able to, because
:07:35. > :07:38.that has to take account of the future framework of relationships
:07:39. > :07:41.with the European Union, to quote the article of the treaty. That
:07:42. > :07:46.means we should have some idea about what that will be like. Will we be
:07:47. > :07:49.outside the customs union, for instance, which will be very
:07:50. > :07:55.damaging for our economy? Or will we have to stay inside and follow the
:07:56. > :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. > :08:07.us the opportunity to do massive trade deals. My case this morning is
:08:08. > :08:11.not what is right or wrong, we will not know until we have seen the
:08:12. > :08:14.results. We will know a heck of a lot more than we do now when we see
:08:15. > :08:18.that Article 50 divorce agreement. We will know the terms of the
:08:19. > :08:22.divorce, we will know how much we still have to pay into the EU budget
:08:23. > :08:27.for legacy costs. We will know whether we will be in the single
:08:28. > :08:32.market customs union or not. We will know about the agencies. We will
:08:33. > :08:35.know a lot of things. If the deal on the table looks as if it will be
:08:36. > :08:41.damaging to Britain, then Parliament will be in its rights to say, wait a
:08:42. > :08:45.minute, not this deal. And then you either renegotiate or you reconsider
:08:46. > :08:50.the whole issue of Brexit or you find another solution. We need to
:08:51. > :08:55.leave it there but thank you for joining us.
:08:56. > :09:02.Iain Martin, how serious is the attempt to in effect an wind what
:09:03. > :09:06.happened on June 23? I think it is pretty serious and that interview
:09:07. > :09:11.illustrates very well the most damaging impact of the approach
:09:12. > :09:17.taken by a lot of Remainers, which is essentially to say with one
:09:18. > :09:19.breath, we of course accept the result, but with every action
:09:20. > :09:23.subsequent to that to try and undermine the result or try and are
:09:24. > :09:28.sure that the deal is as bad as possible. I think what needed to
:09:29. > :09:33.happen and hasn't happened after June 23 is you have the extremists
:09:34. > :09:39.on both sides and you have in the middle probably 70% of public
:09:40. > :09:45.opinion, moderate leaders, moderate Remainers should be working together
:09:46. > :09:52.to try and get British bespoke deal. But moderate Leavers will not take
:09:53. > :09:57.moderate Remainers seriously if this is the approach taken at every
:09:58. > :10:07.single turn to try and rerun the referendum. He did not say whether
:10:08. > :10:11.it was Labour policy? That was a question which was ducked. I do not
:10:12. > :10:17.think it is Labour Party policy. I think most people are in a morass in
:10:18. > :10:20.the middle. I think the screaming that happens when anybody dares to
:10:21. > :10:25.question or suggest that you might ever want to think again about these
:10:26. > :10:29.things, I disagree with him about having another referendum but if he
:10:30. > :10:33.wants to campaign for that it is his democratic right to do so. If you
:10:34. > :10:38.can convince enough people it is a good idea then he has succeeded. But
:10:39. > :10:43.the idea that we would do a deal and then realise this is a really bad
:10:44. > :10:50.deal, let's not proceed, we will not really know that until the deal is
:10:51. > :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. > :11:07.to be good things bad things, surely you have got to wait for four, five,
:11:08. > :11:11.six years to see if it has worked or not? Yes, and by which stage
:11:12. > :11:15.Parliament will have voted on it and there will be no going back from it,
:11:16. > :11:20.or maybe there will. We are talking now about the first three months of
:11:21. > :11:28.2019. That is absolutely the moment when Parliament agrees with Theresa
:11:29. > :11:39.May or not. One arch remain I spoke to, and arch Remainiac, he said that
:11:40. > :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. > :12:04.think any of us take it seriously for now but the future is a very
:12:05. > :12:08.long way away. Earlier, the trade Secretary Liam Fox was asked if we
:12:09. > :12:11.would stay in the customs union after Brexit.
:12:12. > :12:17.There would be limitations on what we would do in terms of tariff
:12:18. > :12:23.setting which could limit the deals we would do, but we want to look at
:12:24. > :12:27.all the different deals. There is hard Brexit and soft Brexit as if it
:12:28. > :12:32.is a boiled egg we are talking about. Turkey is in part of the
:12:33. > :12:39.customs union but not other parts. What we need to do is look at the
:12:40. > :12:43.cost. This is what I picked up. The government knows it cannot remain a
:12:44. > :12:48.member of the single market in these negotiations, because that would
:12:49. > :12:51.make us subject to free movement and the European Court. The customs
:12:52. > :12:56.union and the Prime Minister 's office doesn't seem to be quite as
:12:57. > :13:00.binary, that you can be a little bit in and a little bit out, but I would
:13:01. > :13:05.suggest that overall Liam Fox knows to do all the trade deals we want to
:13:06. > :13:09.do we basically have to be out. But what he also seems to know is that
:13:10. > :13:15.is a minority view in Cabinet. He said he was not going to give his
:13:16. > :13:24.opinion publicly. There is still an argument going on about it in
:13:25. > :13:26.Cabinet. When David Liddington struggled against Emily Thornbury
:13:27. > :13:30.PMQs, he did not know about the customs union. What is apparent is
:13:31. > :13:37.Theresa May has not told him what to think about that. If we stay in the
:13:38. > :13:44.customs union we cannot do our own free trade deals. We are behind the
:13:45. > :13:48.customs union, the tariff barriers set by Europe? Not quite. Turkey is
:13:49. > :13:53.proof of the pudding. There are limited exemptions but they can do
:13:54. > :14:01.free trade with their neighbours. Not on goods. They are doing a trade
:14:02. > :14:05.deal with Pakistan at the moment, it relies on foreign trade investment
:14:06. > :14:09.but Europe negotiates on turkey's behalf on the major free-trade
:14:10. > :14:13.deals. This is absolutely why the customs union will be the fault line
:14:14. > :14:17.for the deal we are trying to achieve. Interestingly, I thought
:14:18. > :14:22.Liam Fox suggested during that interview that he was prepared to
:14:23. > :14:27.suck up whatever it was. I think he was saying there is still an
:14:28. > :14:35.argument and he intends to win it. He wants to leave it because he
:14:36. > :14:39.wants to do these free-trade deals. There is an argument in the cabinet
:14:40. > :14:45.about precisely that. The other thing to consider is in this country
:14:46. > :14:48.we have tended to focus too much on the British angle in negotiations,
:14:49. > :14:52.but I think the negotiations are going to be very difficult. You look
:14:53. > :14:56.at the state of the EU at the moment, you look at what is
:14:57. > :15:03.happening in Italy, France, Germany, look at the 27. It is possible I
:15:04. > :15:07.think that Britain could design a bespoke sensible deal but then it
:15:08. > :15:14.becomes very difficult to agree which is why I ultimately think we
:15:15. > :15:16.are heading for a harder Brexit. It will be about developing in this
:15:17. > :15:20.country. So, we've had a warning this week
:15:21. > :15:23.that it could take ten years to do a trade deal
:15:24. > :15:26.with the EU after Brexit. But could opportunities to expand
:15:27. > :15:27.trade lie elsewhere? Australia was one of the first
:15:28. > :15:30.countries to indicate its willingness to do a deal
:15:31. > :15:32.with the UK and now its High Commissioner in London has told
:15:33. > :15:35.us that life outside the EU He made this exclusive film
:15:36. > :15:51.for the Sunday Politics. My father was the Australian High
:15:52. > :15:53.Commissioner in the early 70s when the UK joined
:15:54. > :15:56.the European Union, Now I'm in the job,
:15:57. > :16:04.the UK is leaving. Australia supported
:16:05. > :16:06.Britain remaining a member of the European Union,
:16:07. > :16:09.but we respect the decision that Now that the decision has been made,
:16:10. > :16:15.we hope that Britain will get on with the process
:16:16. > :16:19.of negotiating their exit from the European Union and make
:16:20. > :16:22.the most of the opportunities that Following the referendum decision,
:16:23. > :16:29.Australia approached the British Government
:16:30. > :16:31.with a proposal. We offered, when the time was right,
:16:32. > :16:34.to negotiate a free trade agreement. The British and Australian
:16:35. > :16:41.governments have already established a working group to explore a future,
:16:42. > :16:43.ambitious trade agreement once A free trade agreement will provide
:16:44. > :16:55.great opportunities for consumers Australian consumers could purchase
:16:56. > :17:01.British-made cars for less We would give British
:17:02. > :17:06.households access to cheaper, Our summer is during your winter,
:17:07. > :17:12.so Australia could provide British households with fresh produce
:17:13. > :17:16.when the equivalent British or Australian households would have
:17:17. > :17:23.access to British products Free-trade agreements
:17:24. > :17:35.are also about investment. The UK is the second-largest source
:17:36. > :17:40.of foreign investment in Australia. By the way, Australia also invests
:17:41. > :17:46.over ?200 billion in the UK, so a free trade agreement
:17:47. > :17:49.would stimulate investment, But, by the way, free-trade
:17:50. > :17:54.agreements are not just about trade and investment,
:17:55. > :17:58.they are also about geopolitics. Countries with good trade relations
:17:59. > :18:02.often work more closely together in other fields including security,
:18:03. > :18:06.the spread of democracy We may have preferred
:18:07. > :18:19.the UKto remain in the EU, We may have preferred the UK
:18:20. > :18:22.to remain in the EU, but life outside as we know can
:18:23. > :18:24.be pretty good. We have negotiated eight free-trade
:18:25. > :18:27.agreements over the last 12 years, including a free-trade agreement
:18:28. > :18:29.with the United States This is one of the reasons why
:18:30. > :18:41.the Australian economy has continued to grow over the last 25 years
:18:42. > :18:44.and we, of course, are not Australia welcomes Theresa May's
:18:45. > :18:54.vision for the UK to become a global We are willing to help
:18:55. > :19:24.in any way we can. Welcome to the programme. The
:19:25. > :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. > :19:44.The UK, for as long as it remains in the EU, cannot negotiate individual
:19:45. > :19:49.trade deals. Once it leaves it can. We will negotiate a agreement with
:19:50. > :19:54.the UK when the time is right, by which we mean we can do preliminary
:19:55. > :20:00.examination. Are you talking now about the parameters? We are talking
:20:01. > :20:03.already, we have set up a joint working group with the British
:20:04. > :20:06.Government and we are scoping the issue to try to understand what
:20:07. > :20:13.questions will arise in any negotiation. But we cannot have
:20:14. > :20:19.formally a negotiation. Until the country is out. Why is there no
:20:20. > :20:22.free-trade deal between Australia and the European Union? It is a long
:20:23. > :20:29.and tortuous story. Give me the headline. Basically Australian
:20:30. > :20:35.agriculture is either banned or hugely restricted in terms of its
:20:36. > :20:39.access to the European Union. So we see the European Union, Australia's,
:20:40. > :20:45.is a pretty protectionist sort of organisation. Now we are doing a
:20:46. > :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. > :20:59.But we have no illusions this would be a very difficult negotiation, but
:21:00. > :21:04.one we are giving priority to. Is there not a danger that when Britain
:21:05. > :21:08.leaves the EU the EU will become more protectionist? This country has
:21:09. > :21:13.always been the most powerful voice for free trade. I hope that does not
:21:14. > :21:19.happen, but the reason why we wanted Britain to remain in the European
:21:20. > :21:25.Union is because it brought to the table the whole free-trade mentality
:21:26. > :21:27.which has been an historic part of Britain's approach to international
:21:28. > :21:33.relations. Without the UK in the European Union you will lose that.
:21:34. > :21:36.It is a very loud voice in the European Union and you will lose
:21:37. > :21:42.that voice and that will be a disadvantage. The figure that jumped
:21:43. > :21:45.out of me in the film is it to you only 15 months to negotiate a
:21:46. > :21:50.free-trade deal with the United States. Yes, the thing is it is
:21:51. > :21:56.about political will. A free-trade agreement will be no problem unless
:21:57. > :22:01.you want to protect particular sectors of your economy. In that
:22:02. > :22:06.case there was one sector the Americans insisted on protecting and
:22:07. > :22:10.that was their sugar industry. In the end after 15 months of
:22:11. > :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. > :22:25.free-trade agreement without sugar west we decided to do that. Other
:22:26. > :22:29.than that it was relatively easy to negotiate because we are both
:22:30. > :22:33.free-trade countries. With the UK you cannot be sure, but I do not
:22:34. > :22:38.think a free-trade agreement would take very long to negotiate with the
:22:39. > :22:43.UK because the UK would not want to put a lot of obstacles in the way to
:22:44. > :22:47.Australia. Not to give away our hand, we would not want to put a lot
:22:48. > :22:53.of obstacles in the way of British exports. The trend in recent years
:22:54. > :22:58.is to do big, regional trade deals, but President-elect Donald Trump has
:22:59. > :23:03.made clear the Pacific trade deal is dead. The transatlantic trade deal
:23:04. > :23:07.is almost dead as well. The American election put a nail in the coffin
:23:08. > :23:12.and the French elections could put another nail in the coffin. Are we
:23:13. > :23:16.returning to a world of lateral trade deals, country with country
:23:17. > :23:24.rather than regional blocs? Not necessarily. In the Asia Pacific we
:23:25. > :23:27.will look at multilateral trade arrangements and even if the
:23:28. > :23:31.transpacific partnership is not ratified by the Americans, we have
:23:32. > :23:36.other options are there. However, our approach has been the ultimate
:23:37. > :23:41.would be free-trade throughout the world which is proving hard to
:23:42. > :23:45.achieve. Secondly, if we can get a lot of countries engaged in a
:23:46. > :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. > :24:01.China, Japan, the United States, Singapore, and the list goes on, and
:24:02. > :24:09.they have been hugely beneficial to Australia. You have been dealing
:24:10. > :24:13.with the EU free deal, what lessons are there? How quickly do you think
:24:14. > :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. > :24:29.the EU and that is at the moment there are no restrictions on trade.
:24:30. > :24:33.So you and the EU would be talking about whether you will direct
:24:34. > :24:38.barriers to trade. We are outsiders and we do not get too much involved
:24:39. > :24:45.in this debate except to say we do not want to see the global trade
:24:46. > :24:48.system disrupted by the direction of tariff barriers between the United
:24:49. > :24:54.Kingdom, the fifth biggest economy in the world, and the European
:24:55. > :24:59.Union. Our expectation is not just the British but the Europeans will
:25:00. > :25:03.try to make the transition to Brexit as smooth as possible particularly
:25:04. > :25:08.commercially. Say yes or no if you can. If Britain and Australia make a
:25:09. > :25:12.free-trade agreement, would that include free movement of the
:25:13. > :25:18.Australian and the British people? We will probably stick with our
:25:19. > :25:22.present non-discriminatory system. Australia does not discriminate
:25:23. > :25:27.against any country. The European Union's free movement means you
:25:28. > :25:31.discriminate against non-Europeans. Probably not.
:25:32. > :25:34.It could lead to a ban on diesel cars, prevent the building
:25:35. > :25:37.of a third runway at Heathrow, and will certainly make it
:25:38. > :25:39.more expensive to drive in our towns and cities.
:25:40. > :25:41.Air pollution has been called the "public health crisis
:25:42. > :25:44.of a generation" - but just how serious is the problem?
:25:45. > :25:57.40,000 early deaths result from air pollution every year in the UK.
:25:58. > :26:04.Almost 10,000 Londoners each year die prematurely.
:26:05. > :26:10.It seems at times we can get caught up in alarming assertions
:26:11. > :26:12.about air pollution, that this is a public health
:26:13. > :26:16.emergency, that it is a silent killer, coming from politicians,
:26:17. > :26:24.But how bad is air quality in Britain really?
:26:25. > :26:28.Tony Frew is a professor in respiratory medicine and works
:26:29. > :26:30.at Brighton's Royal Sussex County Hospital.
:26:31. > :26:32.He has been looking into the recent claims
:26:33. > :26:38.It's a problem and it affects people's health.
:26:39. > :26:40.But when people start talking about the numbers
:26:41. > :26:43.of deaths here, I think they are misusing the statistics.
:26:44. > :26:48.There have been tremendous improvements in air quality
:26:49. > :26:53.There is a lot less pollution than there used to be
:26:54. > :26:56.and none of that is coming through in the public
:26:57. > :27:00.So what does Professor Frew make of the claim that alarming levels
:27:01. > :27:03.of toxicity in the air in the UK causes 40,000 deaths each year?
:27:04. > :27:06.It is not 40,000 people who should have air pollution
:27:07. > :27:08.on their death certificate, or 40,000 people who
:27:09. > :27:13.It's a lot of people who had a little bit of life shortening
:27:14. > :27:19.To examine these figures further we travelled to Cambridge to visit
:27:20. > :27:24.I asked him about the data on which these claims
:27:25. > :27:29.They come from a study on how mortality rates in US cities
:27:30. > :27:36.First of all, it is important to realise that that 40,000 figure
:27:37. > :27:42.29,000, which are due to fine particles, and another 11,000
:27:43. > :27:50.I will just talk about this group for a start.
:27:51. > :27:54.These are what are known as attributable deaths.
:27:55. > :27:58.Known as virtual deaths, they come from a complex statistical model.
:27:59. > :28:01.Quite remarkably it all comes from just one number and this
:28:02. > :28:06.was based on a study of US cities and they found out that
:28:07. > :28:09.by monitoring these cities over decades that the cities which had
:28:10. > :28:16.a higher level of pollution had a higher mortality rate.
:28:17. > :28:21.They estimated that there was a 6% increased risk of dying
:28:22. > :28:26.each year for each small increase in pollution.
:28:27. > :28:29.So this is quite a big figure, but it is important to realise
:28:30. > :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. > :28:47.Yes, through a rather complex statistical model.
:28:48. > :28:52.And a similar analysis gives rise to the 11,000 attributable deaths
:28:53. > :28:59.How much should we invest in cycling?
:29:00. > :29:02.Should we build a third runway at Heathrow?
:29:03. > :29:06.We need reliable statistics to answer those questions,
:29:07. > :29:10.but can we trust the way data is being used by campaigners?
:29:11. > :29:15.I think there are people who have such a passion for the environment
:29:16. > :29:16.and for air pollution that they don't really
:29:17. > :29:23.see it as a problem if they are deceiving the public.
:29:24. > :29:25.Greenpeace have been running a campaign claiming that breathing
:29:26. > :29:27.London's air is the equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day.
:29:28. > :29:33.If you smoke 15 cigarettes a day through your adult life,
:29:34. > :29:35.that will definitely take ten years off your life expectancy.
:29:36. > :29:38.If you are poor and you are in social class five,
:29:39. > :29:40.compared to social class one, that would take seven
:29:41. > :29:45.If you are poor and you smoke, that will take 17 years off your life.
:29:46. > :29:48.Now, we are talking about possibly, if we could get rid of all
:29:49. > :29:51.of the cars in London and all of the road transport,
:29:52. > :29:54.we could make a difference of two micrograms per metre squared in air
:29:55. > :29:59.pollution which might save you 30 days of your life.
:30:00. > :30:02.There is no doubt that air pollution is bad for you,
:30:03. > :30:05.but if we exaggerate the scale of the problem and the impact
:30:06. > :30:08.on our health, are we at risk of undermining the case for making
:30:09. > :30:19.And we are joined now by the Executive Director
:30:20. > :30:37.You have called pollution and national crisis and a health
:30:38. > :30:41.emergency. Around the UK are levels increasing or falling? They are
:30:42. > :30:51.remaining fairly static in London. Nationally? If you look at the
:30:52. > :30:57.studies on where air pollution is measured, in 42 cities around the
:30:58. > :31:01.UK, 38 cities were found to be breaking the legal limit on air
:31:02. > :31:06.pollution so basically all of the cities were breaking the limit so if
:31:07. > :31:09.you think eight out of ten people live in cities, obviously, this is
:31:10. > :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. > :31:30.down 69%. Let me show you a chart. There are the nitrogen oxides which
:31:31. > :31:35.we have all been worried about. That chart shows a substantial fall from
:31:36. > :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. > :31:54.If you look at particulates, and if you look at today's understanding of
:31:55. > :32:03.the health impact. Let's look at particulates. We have been really
:32:04. > :32:08.worried about what they have been doing to our abilities to breathe
:32:09. > :32:13.good air, again, you see substantial improvement. Indeed, we are not far
:32:14. > :32:21.from the Gothenberg level which is a very high standard. What you see is
:32:22. > :32:27.it is pretty flat. I see it coming down quite substantially. Over the
:32:28. > :32:31.last decade it is pretty flat. If you look at the World Health
:32:32. > :32:35.Organisation guidelines, actually, these are at serious levels and they
:32:36. > :32:39.need to come down. We know the impact, particularly on children, if
:32:40. > :32:43.you look at what is happening to children and children's lungs, if
:32:44. > :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. > :32:56.high, the impact of very serious. You have many doctors, professors
:32:57. > :33:02.and many studies by London University showing this to be true.
:33:03. > :33:06.The thing is, we do not want pollution. If we can get rid of
:33:07. > :33:11.pollution, let's do it. And also we also have to get rid of CO2 which is
:33:12. > :33:15.causing climate change. We are talking air pollution at the moment.
:33:16. > :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. > :33:29.have made any kind of progress and that you also say that air pollution
:33:30. > :33:36.causes 40,000 deaths a year in the UK, that is not true. The figure is
:33:37. > :33:46.40,000 premature deaths is what has been talked about by medical staff.
:33:47. > :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. > :34:00.pollution is mainly being caused by diesel vehicles then we need to
:34:01. > :34:03.phase out diesel vehicles. If there are alternatives and clean Turner
:34:04. > :34:07.tips which will give better quality of air, better quality of life and
:34:08. > :34:11.clean up our cities, then why don't we take the chance to do it? You had
:34:12. > :34:19.the Australian High Commissioner on this programme earlier. He said to
:34:20. > :34:24.me earlier, why is your government supporting diesel? That is the most
:34:25. > :34:30.polluting form of transport. That may well be right but I am looking
:34:31. > :34:36.at Greenpeace's claims. You claim it causes 40,000 deaths, it is a figure
:34:37. > :34:41.which regularly appears. Let me quote the committee on the medical
:34:42. > :34:51.effects of air pollutants, it says this calculation, 40,000 which is
:34:52. > :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. > :35:03.but a way of representing the effect across the whole population of air
:35:04. > :35:09.pollution when considered as a contributory factor to many more
:35:10. > :35:18.individual deaths. It is 40,000 premature deaths. It could be
:35:19. > :35:22.premature by a couple of days. It could me by a year. -- it could be
:35:23. > :35:23.by a year. It could also be giving children asthma and breathing
:35:24. > :35:33.difficulties. We are talking about deaths. It could also cause stroke
:35:34. > :35:41.and heart diseases. Medical experts say we need to deal with this. Do
:35:42. > :35:49.you believe air pollution causes 40,000 deaths a year. I have defined
:35:50. > :35:59.that. You accept it does not? It leads to 40,000 premature deaths.
:36:00. > :36:04.But 40,000 people are not killed. You say air pollution causes 40,000
:36:05. > :36:08.deaths each year on your website. I have just explained what I mean by
:36:09. > :36:13.that in terms of premature deaths. The question is, are we going to do
:36:14. > :36:17.something about that? Air pollution is a serious problem. It is mainly
:36:18. > :36:22.caused by diesel. If we phased diesel out it will solve the problem
:36:23. > :36:26.of air pollution and deal with the wider problem of climate change. I
:36:27. > :36:34.am not talking about climate change this morning. Let's link to another
:36:35. > :36:39.claim... Do you want to live in a clean city? Do you want to breathe
:36:40. > :36:45.clean air? Yes, don't generalise. Let's stick to your claims. You have
:36:46. > :36:49.also said living in London on your life is equivalent to smoking 50
:36:50. > :36:56.cigarettes a day. That is not true either. What I would say is if you
:36:57. > :36:59.look at passive smoking, it is the equivalent of I don't know what the
:37:00. > :37:02.actual figure is, I can't remember offhand, but it is the equivalent
:37:03. > :37:09.effect of about ten cigarettes being smoked passively. The question is in
:37:10. > :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. > :37:23.that living in London is equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day and
:37:24. > :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. > :37:43.years and that is what you claim. I would suggest you realise that is a
:37:44. > :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. > :37:57.professor said that maybe it takes up to a year off your life, but the
:37:58. > :38:01.thing is, there are much more wider issues as well, in terms of the
:38:02. > :38:07.impact on air pollution, and in terms of the impact on young
:38:08. > :38:11.children. We can argue about the facts... But these are your claims,
:38:12. > :38:16.this is why I am hitting it to you. It does not get away from the
:38:17. > :38:20.underlying issue that air pollution is a serious problem. We are not
:38:21. > :38:25.arguing for a moment that it is not. Do you think the way you exaggerate
:38:26. > :38:30.things, put false claims, in the end, for of course we all agree
:38:31. > :38:36.with, getting the best air we can, you undermine your credibility? I
:38:37. > :38:39.absolutely do not support false claims and if mistakes have been
:38:40. > :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. > :38:55.diesel is the biggest problem and we need to work out a way how we can
:38:56. > :38:58.get away from diesel as quickly and fast as possible. Comeback and see
:38:59. > :39:00.us in the New Year and we will discuss diesel. Thank you.
:39:01. > :39:03.It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:39:04. > :39:05.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now
:39:06. > :39:19.Coming up on the Sunday Politics here in the South West...
:39:20. > :39:25.As 2016 draws its final breath - how fair blows the wind for renewables?
:39:26. > :39:28.And when O Come All Ye Faithful turns into Silent Night,
:39:29. > :39:31.what should happen to churches which are no longer
:39:32. > :39:38.And for the next 20 minutes, I'm joined by Exeter's Labour MP
:39:39. > :39:42.Ben Bradshaw and the Conservative East Devon MP Hugo Swire.
:39:43. > :39:47.At a time of year when many of us are contemplating driving
:39:48. > :39:50.home for Christmas, Devon County Councillors have
:39:51. > :39:54.approved a controversial new route for one of the region's key roads,
:39:55. > :40:01.Nearly 1,000 people locally signed a petition against the scheme
:40:02. > :40:05.which will go through an area of outstanding natural beauty.
:40:06. > :40:09.The local MP Neil Parish has also withdrawn his support and speaking
:40:10. > :40:12.to the BBC earlier this week, didn't take kindly to his fellow
:40:13. > :40:16.MP, and our guest today, Hugo Swire giving his view.
:40:17. > :40:19.I think in fairness, I don't think I would comment
:40:20. > :40:22.on what is happening in Hugo Swire's constituency.
:40:23. > :40:25.I therefore feel that it is my constituency and I have
:40:26. > :40:28.to deal with everybody, not only those that want the road,
:40:29. > :40:31.but those who will be affected by the routes and the orange route
:40:32. > :40:35.still affects a lots of people and I have to have a balance
:40:36. > :40:39.between getting the environment right and getting the road right.
:40:40. > :40:42.So, Hugo, you vocally backed this scheme.
:40:43. > :40:45.What do you think about Mr Parish saying you shouldn't
:40:46. > :40:48.Well, we have this discussion regularly.
:40:49. > :40:51.The fact is that my constituents have to go on the A30 to get
:40:52. > :40:58.But Neil has the constraint of having to deal with
:40:59. > :41:01.the Blackdown Hills, the lobby group and so forth.
:41:02. > :41:04.But he is right, there has to be a balance between the environment
:41:05. > :41:09.But I think with modern technology and landscaping, we can do that.
:41:10. > :41:12.And I'm fed up with this discussion going round and round in
:41:13. > :41:17.Ever since I have been an MP, over 16 years now, we have had
:41:18. > :41:22.I think the time has come to get on and do it.
:41:23. > :41:25.Ben, it is notoriously difficult to get funding for infrastructure,
:41:26. > :41:27.should Neil Parish be opposed to it at all?
:41:28. > :41:30.Shouldn't we make sure this road is coming
:41:31. > :41:35.Well, if he thinks there is a less environmentally damaging route,
:41:36. > :41:37.then he should speak up for his constituents.
:41:38. > :41:39.We are not talking about a dualling, after all.
:41:40. > :41:49.Passages of three lanes. Yes, I think necessarily dangerous.
:41:50. > :41:54.There is a question as to whether this will ever happen
:41:55. > :41:57.because once once you dual the A358, from Ilminster to Taunton,
:41:58. > :41:59.you will take away a lot of the pressure
:42:00. > :42:01.for that Blackdown Hills route which is very
:42:02. > :42:05.So you would agree with Neil Parish not to do this?
:42:06. > :42:07.I'm not an expert on one route against another,
:42:08. > :42:10.I have always been a sceptic as to whether driving a new road
:42:11. > :42:12.through the Blackdown Hills would ever happen because of
:42:13. > :42:14.the environmental challenges and because of the fact
:42:15. > :42:16.that the A358 is going to be dualled.
:42:17. > :42:19.So disagreement already. We must move on.
:42:20. > :42:22.Wind farms were pioneered here in the South West 25 years ago.
:42:23. > :42:24.Yet tighter planning regulations and cuts in subsidies have seen
:42:25. > :42:30.Now new research published this week suggests that wind could play a much
:42:31. > :42:34.bigger role in cutting greenhouse emissions than previously thought.
:42:35. > :42:36.Scott Bingham has been assessing whether it's time to stop
:42:37. > :42:43.blowing hot and cold on this natural resource.
:42:44. > :42:47.Love them or loathe them, they are part of the landscapes
:42:48. > :42:53.across much of the South West and especially so here in Cornwall.
:42:54. > :43:03.And it is celebrating its 25th anniversary this month.
:43:04. > :43:09.And these four large turbines generate twice the power
:43:10. > :43:14.of the ten original turbines they replaced in 2011.
:43:15. > :43:18.The wind industry has come a long way in those 25 years.
:43:19. > :43:23.We are in a situation now where last year wind alone generated about 12%
:43:24. > :43:29.Renewables as a whole, around one quarter of our electricity demand.
:43:30. > :43:35.Figures show large wind deployment in England reached a peak of 451
:43:36. > :43:50.But that fell to 183 megawatts last year with the dropping down
:43:51. > :43:55.to a worsening planning environment and falling subsidies.
:43:56. > :43:57.Onshore wind is the lowest cost form of new electricity
:43:58. > :44:01.It is low carbon, it generates jobs, it generates investment.
:44:02. > :44:03.So it really is a win for the environment,
:44:04. > :44:09.And, it seems, wind could be even greener than first thought.
:44:10. > :44:12.Researchers at Edinburgh University have published a study
:44:13. > :44:16.which they say shows carbon savings from wind turbines were vastly
:44:17. > :44:20.underestimated, by more than three million tonnes
:44:21. > :44:26.In real terms, it's the equivalent of taking 220,000 cars off
:44:27. > :44:33.It is really significant in that it shows that wind power has been
:44:34. > :44:42.It therefore means that when farms are viable,
:44:43. > :44:51.an even more viable option and was grievously accepted.
:44:52. > :44:59.On top of that, renewables bring jobs.
:45:00. > :45:02.At a recent meeting in Plymouth, the Greens say the sector
:45:03. > :45:04.could support much more than the 13,000 already
:45:05. > :45:07.This Conservative government has decided to undermine the renewables
:45:08. > :45:10.industry by removing subsidies, particularly the feed in tariff.
:45:11. > :45:12.And we are arguing very strongly that that should be
:45:13. > :45:14.replaced and we should be supporting our renewables
:45:15. > :45:16.infrastructure and our renewable industry because we have got
:45:17. > :45:18.fantastic opportunities for that here in the South.
:45:19. > :45:20.But the government maintains it has increased certainty for businesses
:45:21. > :45:25.That's why we have got actually such a big deployment already
:45:26. > :45:27.of renewable energy technology and we want to see that continue.
:45:28. > :45:32.In fact it's because the deployment has been so extensive and so rapid
:45:33. > :45:37.that it has been possible to bring the subsidies down over time.
:45:38. > :45:40.Now, Good Energy is looking to go one step further.
:45:41. > :45:43.It wants to build the first community owned wind farm to operate
:45:44. > :45:51.without government subsidy on this site near Bude.
:45:52. > :45:54.Could that turn the wind in a favourable direction once more?
:45:55. > :46:00.Ben, many of the target set for the UK for renewable
:46:01. > :46:04.Post Brexit, it's not clear what will happen to these targets.
:46:05. > :46:08.Well, they didn't come from Europe, we negotiated...
:46:09. > :46:10.A lot of them have been negotiated negotiated with Europe.
:46:11. > :46:17.Well, Europe has a position, but there are international positions.
:46:18. > :46:22.Paris, recently is an international agreement and it takes in America,
:46:23. > :46:25.China, the whole world. So it's nothing to do with Europe.
:46:26. > :46:27.Europe has been at the forefront arguing for stronger
:46:28. > :46:29.renewable energy, and I think that is a good thing.
:46:30. > :46:32.It's nice to see a positive report about wind power,
:46:33. > :46:35.So you don't think that anything post Brexit
:46:36. > :46:38.Unlike Molly Scott Cato, who seems to be thinking
:46:39. > :46:44.I think this government is going in the wrong direction,
:46:45. > :46:48.but is nothing to do with the fact that we might be
:46:49. > :46:51.I think the withdrawal of support for not just wind,
:46:52. > :46:54.This stop-go approach towards renewables.
:46:55. > :46:57.But the good news is that renewables, as your report said,
:46:58. > :47:00.They are a fantastic resource and they soon won't need
:47:01. > :47:04.And that's why, in my view, whatever happened in the United States
:47:05. > :47:07.I was going to say, you talk about internationally,
:47:08. > :47:09.Trump coming in makes a difference as well.
:47:10. > :47:11.Well, we'll see. Let's see.
:47:12. > :47:14.He has appointed a lot of climate change deniers, which is a worry.
:47:15. > :47:15.But America has ratified the Paris Agreement.
:47:16. > :47:18.And any sensible person looking at the evidence,
:47:19. > :47:19.looking in the future, is going to realise
:47:20. > :47:24.If you don't get on the bus to that new technology,
:47:25. > :47:27.you will lose out in terms of jobs and investment in the future.
:47:28. > :47:29.Hugo, are we getting on the bus enough?
:47:30. > :47:30.Because the Green MEP Molly Scott Cato said
:47:31. > :47:34.That the Tory government has cut subsidies and is taking us
:47:35. > :47:38.She is behind the curve on this. She's talking about subsidies.
:47:39. > :47:47.Ben has set himself, we are at the point now that a loss
:47:48. > :47:55.subsidy at all because the take-up has been so good and the price
:47:56. > :47:58.of a lot of solar has dropped. They can stand alone.
:47:59. > :48:01.Hence you are talking about having a community initiative near Bude.
:48:02. > :48:03.That couldn't have happened ten or 15 years ago.
:48:04. > :48:05.What about Theresa May having change the name for the Department
:48:06. > :48:08.of Energy and Climate Change to a new Department of Business,
:48:09. > :48:11.Energy and Industrial Strategy? Is that the Tories going backwards?
:48:12. > :48:13.No, I don't think so. Ben is absolutely right.
:48:14. > :48:15.I would make a distinction between Trump on Twitter
:48:16. > :48:17.and Trump as a president with an administration.
:48:18. > :48:20.He wants to create jobs in the United States and he would be
:48:21. > :48:22.completely crazy to ignore the renewable energy sector market.
:48:23. > :48:26.Battery research, you have seen what is happening with Telstra
:48:27. > :48:34.As far as the impact on the South West of all of that,
:48:35. > :48:36.would you like to see more wind farms?
:48:37. > :48:39.No, I wouldn't like to see any more onshore wind farms...
:48:40. > :48:42.Because there have been a lot of Tory MPs down here who been very
:48:43. > :48:45.outspoken about not wanting to see any more wind farms
:48:46. > :48:53.Well, I like offshore wind farms and I like how energy,
:48:54. > :49:07.wave energy and other forms of renewable.
:49:08. > :49:09.There is a balance between trying to create something great
:49:10. > :49:11.for the environment, which is reducing carbon,
:49:12. > :49:13.but destroying the landscape by putting wind farms
:49:14. > :49:17.I don't think they destroy the landscape.
:49:18. > :49:21.And when I realise that they are delivering carbon-free energy,
:49:22. > :49:25.So I wish the Tories would stop this opposition to wind farms
:49:26. > :49:29.because they are the future and it is where we are going to get
:49:30. > :49:33.But they don't have to be onshore. They don't have to be onshore?
:49:34. > :49:36.No, but they are much cheaper onshore so they are much better
:49:37. > :49:39.value for the taxpayer and better returns for these communities.
:49:40. > :49:40.Carols, candlelight, Christingles and Christmas trees -
:49:41. > :49:43.for many people the season wouldn't be complete without a trip
:49:44. > :49:48.Some parishes have thriving congregations, while others
:49:49. > :49:50.are dwindling, with a number of church buildings in the South
:49:51. > :49:55.Janine Jansen has been looking at what the future holds for some
:49:56. > :50:03.# Rocking around the Christmas tree...#
:50:04. > :50:07.in South Molton looks sparkling at this time of year.
:50:08. > :50:09.It's popular Christmas Tree Festival attracts people like a magnet.
:50:10. > :50:13.Many people used to go to church every Sunday.
:50:14. > :50:16.The Methodist Church here in Ashburton closed last year.
:50:17. > :50:18.A dwindling congregation and ongoing repair costs didn't help.
:50:19. > :50:25.But it has just been designated a community asset and this man
:50:26. > :50:28.wants it to be an art centre for the town.
:50:29. > :50:30.It's a lovely space, it's really fabulous
:50:31. > :50:36.People come into buildings and you get an instant feel
:50:37. > :50:38.for whether it's a friendly and pleasant place to be.
:50:39. > :50:44.It has obviously been loved for many, many decades and it
:50:45. > :50:49.would be a tragedy if it were lost to the community.
:50:50. > :50:51.There is a sadness. We are working through that.
:50:52. > :50:54.It is a bereavement process that you work through.
:50:55. > :50:57.But people are also very positive about worshipping where we do now,
:50:58. > :51:02.Clearly, there is a sadness about leaving a part of your history.
:51:03. > :51:05.The building will be sold to the highest bidder next year.
:51:06. > :51:08.Fundraising is already underway to try to keep the grade two listed
:51:09. > :51:18.Across the border into Cornwall, and St Pinnock's church
:51:19. > :51:21.is another house of God with an uncertain future.
:51:22. > :51:24.Discussions about closing it started around 25 years ago
:51:25. > :51:31.but the congregation fought to keep the Church alive.
:51:32. > :51:36.The parishioners can now worship in nearby Liskeard and a decision
:51:37. > :51:41.about the future of the building has yet to be made.
:51:42. > :51:44.One thing is clear, its grade one listed which means
:51:45. > :51:49.it can't be demolished or converted into housing.
:51:50. > :51:53.Well, St Paul's church here in Truro has been closed
:51:54. > :52:01.Not due to a dwindling congregation, but due to health and safety
:52:02. > :52:10.A report says it will cost ?3.7 million to restore it.
:52:11. > :52:14.It's sad for historical and conservation reasons
:52:15. > :52:34.but it is even sadder is an image of the church.
:52:35. > :52:37.The Church of England in Cornwallis vibrant and lively,
:52:38. > :52:39.we want to be preoccupied with sharing the love of God,
:52:40. > :52:41.especially at Christmas time and this is the picture
:52:42. > :52:47.And that is why we are working as hard as we can with as many
:52:48. > :52:50.partners as we can to find the right long-term solution to how this
:52:51. > :52:55.The Cornish buildings group has launched a petition to save St Paul.
:52:56. > :52:56.They say the tower doesn't need demolishing.
:52:57. > :52:59.But in eight years, no one has come forward yet
:53:00. > :53:06.One thing is for sure, it won't be enjoying much
:53:07. > :53:11.Joining us now from Exeter Cathedral we have the right
:53:12. > :53:12.Reverend Robert Atwell. Welcome to the programme.
:53:13. > :53:17.Churches, many of them empty at the moment,
:53:18. > :53:23.should there be government funding that props these churches up?
:53:24. > :53:28.Well, here in Devon, we have got 609 churches scattered
:53:29. > :53:32.across the county and occasionally we have to close one of two
:53:33. > :53:37.but that is because populations change and shift around and that has
:53:38. > :53:43.The thing is to adapt to a changing situation
:53:44. > :53:47.But also, we find ourselves opening new churches.
:53:48. > :53:50.Here in Exeter, as Ben Bradshaw knows well, we have opened
:53:51. > :53:55.a new church in Cranbrook and another one in Newport and down
:53:56. > :53:58.of Plymouth where that whole new village complex is going up,
:53:59. > :54:01.we are planting a new church in the next couple of years.
:54:02. > :54:07.For us, one of the biggest challenges is the rural church
:54:08. > :54:10.because we've got lots of them, some wonderful medieval churches
:54:11. > :54:17.But the situation for us in Devon is that the rural population
:54:18. > :54:21.has shrunk considerably from what it was 150 years ago
:54:22. > :54:24.and that has really threatened the whole infrastructure
:54:25. > :54:40.So in the last ten to 20 years, it has seen the village school has
:54:41. > :54:43.gone, pubs have gone I mean, four pubs are closing
:54:44. > :54:47.Is that a reason to try and save these church buildings?
:54:48. > :54:50.Always what you are saying that the new ones opening elsewhere,
:54:51. > :54:55.Well, what I would say is that often many parts of the county and I'm
:54:56. > :54:57.sure our situation in Devon is replicated elsewhere
:54:58. > :55:01.in the country, the Parish Church is the only community building
:55:02. > :55:04.we have got there in the village and we need to invest in that.
:55:05. > :55:07.Because it is about the health of our communities.
:55:08. > :55:11.A lot of our medieval churches, the nave was for the people.
:55:12. > :55:14.And I just want people to reclaim their naves and do
:55:15. > :55:21.Some of the things we are doing in Devon like St Peter's Ugborough,
:55:22. > :55:25.where the local post office closed some time ago and that has come
:55:26. > :55:29.into the church so it is being used for worship on Sundays but also
:55:30. > :55:33.on Tuesday, when the post office is open, the local church is running
:55:34. > :55:38.a coffee place there for lonely and isolated people to come to.
:55:39. > :55:42.And innovative ideas like that are going across Devon.
:55:43. > :55:49.With ideas like that coming in, you use the church was something
:55:50. > :55:52.else, for a community purpose, does that mean that more government
:55:53. > :55:54.funding, because there is already some available to churches,
:55:55. > :56:00.Are these important enough to prop them up?
:56:01. > :56:02.It depends on the church and the location and
:56:03. > :56:06.But I would say the government does need to intervene.
:56:07. > :56:08.This is part of our heritage, our built heritage and
:56:09. > :56:13.I am all for using, if there is no alternative,
:56:14. > :56:16.and adapting the usage of a church if there is not a big enough
:56:17. > :56:18.congregation to worship there, I would rather it was used
:56:19. > :56:21.as a place of worship, but then I would rather it
:56:22. > :56:24.still existed and was supported by the community.
:56:25. > :56:27.I do regret sometimes when the pews are stripped out,
:56:28. > :56:30.never to be used as a church again, but we have to live in modern
:56:31. > :56:34.times when congregations are smaller as the bishop said,
:56:35. > :56:43.a lot of rural communities are a lot smaller as well and they have used
:56:44. > :56:53.But at the end of the day, I fundamentally believe that we owe
:56:54. > :56:55.it to future generations to preserve these magnificent buildings.
:56:56. > :57:00.Also public funding be more for things like the NHS,
:57:01. > :57:02.the growing problems with social care?
:57:03. > :57:04.These buildings, and people are not using them as churches,
:57:05. > :57:14.I'm the son of the rural vicar and I love our historical churches,
:57:15. > :57:17.and I'm also a practising Christian so there is a real dilemma
:57:18. > :57:20.for us in the church as to whether we spend our money
:57:21. > :57:25.and resources and time and energy on preserving old buildings
:57:26. > :57:30.or preaching the Christian gospel and because the message
:57:31. > :57:38.And I think the Bishop got it right, where you have got a church
:57:39. > :57:41.that you can integrate into a community hub or something
:57:42. > :57:43.like that and that does attract more support,
:57:44. > :57:45.is not government money, it's Lottery money for the main,
:57:46. > :57:48.so it's not taxpayers money that would otherwise go into the health
:57:49. > :57:51.service, that is absolutely the right thing to do.
:57:52. > :57:54.But in some cases, we are going to have to just
:57:55. > :57:56.abandon the very isolated, very rural churches for which no
:57:57. > :58:01.If we come back to you, Right Reverend Robert Atwell,
:58:02. > :58:04.on that point, is it better sometimes to leave these churches?
:58:05. > :58:06.The Victorians had an idea that you could have a beautiful
:58:07. > :58:15.Could we not see sometimes these old churches in villages
:58:16. > :58:22.or on the edge of villages, become a beautiful rolling?
:58:23. > :58:26.Well, occasionally that has happened.
:58:27. > :58:28.It is always sad when it does happen.
:58:29. > :58:29.But these things are not incompatible.
:58:30. > :58:32.There are also the ways that we can do things
:58:33. > :58:34.which are imaginative and innovative which secure their use
:58:35. > :58:38.I think that is one of the thing that is really important.
:58:39. > :58:42.For example, here in the diocese of Exeter, starting next year,
:58:43. > :58:44.we are launching a whole project called growing the rural church
:58:45. > :58:48.and we are putting money and people to actually help some of our belief
:58:49. > :58:50.that rural communities to think in imaginative ways how these
:58:51. > :58:52.ancient landmarks can be preserved for future generations...
:58:53. > :58:55.I'm going to have to stop you there, but thank you very
:58:56. > :59:00.Now our regular round-up of the political week
:59:01. > :59:05.Now council tax could go up by 6% to pay for care.
:59:06. > :59:10.I really don't feel that we are going far enough in this
:59:11. > :59:13.House to address the scale of the increase in demand
:59:14. > :59:16.if we are going to allow people to be careful with dignity
:59:17. > :59:25.What will Brexit mean for Brixham's fishermen?
:59:26. > :59:29.We still want to fish sustainably, some things will change and it
:59:30. > :59:32.The funding formula for schools is changing.
:59:33. > :59:34.Some here are winners, others worse off.
:59:35. > :59:36.Campaigning side-by-side, the Health Secretary and the Cornish
:59:37. > :59:39.She reaches people that politicians can never reach.
:59:40. > :59:46.And Ben Bradshaw hence Russia could be behind
:59:47. > :00:02.I don't think we have even begun to wake up to what Russia is doing
:00:03. > :00:11.You have caused a bit of a storm on social media this week by saying
:00:12. > :00:13.that Russia may have had some kind of influence in the
:00:14. > :00:18.I was talking about propaganda and this sort of Twitter
:00:19. > :00:20.storms and fake news sites that the Kremlin funds.
:00:21. > :00:26.But if you look at what is happening now in America when there is clear
:00:27. > :00:28.evidence of actual attacks in America and our own header
:00:29. > :00:31.cyber security at GCHQ since my comments in the Commons,
:00:32. > :00:33.also warning about the possibility here and what's happening
:00:34. > :00:35.in Germany, evidence already, we need to wake up to
:00:36. > :00:38.It's not just cyber, it's also the propaganda war
:00:39. > :00:42.And I'm afraid if we don't do something about it very soon,
:00:43. > :00:44.the indications for democracy could be quite serious.
:00:45. > :00:46.In terms of the referendum, what kind of influence
:00:47. > :00:53.If you look at what they have been doing, and this has been well
:00:54. > :00:55.documented in the states about having these twitter storms
:00:56. > :00:58.and very close tie up they have a far right parties
:00:59. > :01:00.across the world, not just with America and France,
:01:01. > :01:02.but also here as well, the fake news sites...
:01:03. > :01:03.And the e-mail hacking. Yes, well...
:01:04. > :01:06.Not sure that's... The CIA is talking about that.
:01:07. > :01:08.The CIA is not only talking about it, they are investigating it
:01:09. > :01:11.and Barack Obama has said there is clear evidence that Putin
:01:12. > :01:17.I think cyber warfare is an increasing threat from not
:01:18. > :01:23.It's the first time I have heard any suggestion that the Russians may
:01:24. > :01:26.have been involved in the E referendum in the UK.
:01:27. > :01:30.But I think what the head of GCHQ was warning about was that we should
:01:31. > :01:32.be alert to the possibilities of being interfered
:01:33. > :01:40.I don't think he was saying we have been.
:01:41. > :01:42.And I think there is no distinction there.
:01:43. > :01:44.But clearly, in the United States, something serious has happened.
:01:45. > :01:47.So you don't think Ben Pozner comments have been out there?
:01:48. > :01:49.Ben can speak for himself. He speaks up very...
:01:50. > :01:51.I don't think anybody should be surprised that
:01:52. > :01:56.That's the Sunday Politics in the South West.
:01:57. > :02:00.Now back to Andrew with the Week Ahead.
:02:01. > :02:06.Have a happy Christmas and we'll see you in the new year.
:02:07. > :02:20.Will Article 50 be triggered by the end of March,
:02:21. > :02:23.will President Trump start work on his wall and will
:02:24. > :02:28.Front National's Marine Le Pen provide the next electoral shock?
:02:29. > :02:50.2016, the Brexit for Britain and Trump for the rest of the world.
:02:51. > :02:55.Let's look back and see what one of you said about Brexit.
:02:56. > :02:57.If Mr Cameron loses the referendum and it is this year,
:02:58. > :03:00.will he be Prime Minister at the end of the year?
:03:01. > :03:06.I don't think he will lose the referendum, so I'm feeling
:03:07. > :03:15.It was clear if he did lose the referendum he would be out. I would
:03:16. > :03:20.like to say in retrospect I saw that coming on a long and I was just
:03:21. > :03:26.saying it to make good television! It is Christmas so I will be benign
:03:27. > :03:32.towards my panel! It is possible, Iain, that not much happens to
:03:33. > :03:35.Brexit in 2017, because we have a host of elections coming up in
:03:36. > :03:38.Europe, the French won in the spring and the German one in the autumn
:03:39. > :03:43.will be the most important. And until we know who the next French
:03:44. > :03:49.president is and what condition Mrs Merkel will be in, not much will
:03:50. > :03:54.happen? I think that is the likeliest outcome. Short of some
:03:55. > :04:01.constitutional crisis involving the Lords relating to Brexit, it is
:04:02. > :04:05.pretty clear it is difficult to properly begin the negotiations
:04:06. > :04:09.until it becomes clear who Britain is negotiating with. It will come
:04:10. > :04:12.down to the result of the German election. Germany is the biggest
:04:13. > :04:17.contributor and if they keep power in what is left of the European
:04:18. > :04:23.Union, will drive the negotiation and we will have to see if it will
:04:24. > :04:28.be Merkel. So this vacuum that has been seen and has been filled by
:04:29. > :04:31.people less than friendly to the government, even when we know
:04:32. > :04:36.Article 50 has been triggered and even if there is some sort of white
:04:37. > :04:41.paper to give us a better idea of the broad strategic outlines of what
:04:42. > :04:48.they mean by Brexit, the phoney war could continue? Iain is right. 2017
:04:49. > :04:55.is going to be a remarkably dull year for Brexit as opposed to 2016.
:04:56. > :05:00.We will have the article and a plan. The plan will say I would like the
:05:01. > :05:04.moon on a stick please. The EU will say you can have a tiny bit of moon
:05:05. > :05:10.and a tiny bit of stick and there will be an impasse. That will go on
:05:11. > :05:16.until one minute to midnight 2018 which is when the EU will act. There
:05:17. > :05:21.is one thing in the Foreign Office which is more important, as David
:05:22. > :05:24.Davis Department told me, they know there is nothing they can do until
:05:25. > :05:29.the French and Germans have their elections and they know the lie of
:05:30. > :05:33.the land, but the people who will be more helpful to us are in Eastern
:05:34. > :05:37.Europe and in Scandinavia, the Nordic countries. We can do quite a
:05:38. > :05:42.lot of schmoozing to try and get them broadly on side this year? It
:05:43. > :05:46.is very difficult because one of the things they care most about in
:05:47. > :05:51.Eastern Europe is the ability for Eastern European stew come and work
:05:52. > :05:55.in the UK. That is key to the economic prospects. But what they
:05:56. > :06:00.care most about is that those already here should not be under any
:06:01. > :06:06.pressure to leave. There is no guarantee of that. That is what Mrs
:06:07. > :06:10.May wants. There are a lot of things Mrs May wants and the story of 2017
:06:11. > :06:15.will be about what she gets. How much have we got to give people? It
:06:16. > :06:21.is not what we want, but what we are willing to give. The interesting
:06:22. > :06:25.thing is you can divide this out into two. There is a question of the
:06:26. > :06:32.European Union and our relationship with it but there is also the trick
:06:33. > :06:37.the polls did to London -- there is also the polls. There is question
:06:38. > :06:41.beyond the Western European security, that is about Nato and
:06:42. > :06:48.intelligence and security, and the rising Russian threat. That does not
:06:49. > :06:52.mean the Polish people will persuade everyone else to give us a lovely
:06:53. > :06:57.deal on the EU, but the dynamic is bigger than just a chat about
:06:58. > :07:00.Brexit. You cannot threaten a punishment beating for us if we are
:07:01. > :07:05.putting our soldiers on the line on the eastern borders of Europe. I
:07:06. > :07:10.think that's where Donald Trump changes the calculation because his
:07:11. > :07:18.attitude towards Russia is very different to Barack Obama's. It is
:07:19. > :07:22.indeed. Mentioning Russia, Brexit was a global story but nothing can
:07:23. > :07:27.match and American election and even one which gives Donald Trump as
:07:28. > :07:30.well. Let's have a look at what this panel was saying about Donald Trump.
:07:31. > :07:32.Will Donald Trump win the Republican nomination next year.
:07:33. > :07:45.So, not only did you think he would not be president, you did not think
:07:46. > :07:50.he would win the Republican nomination. We were not alone in
:07:51. > :07:55.that. And they're right put forward a motion to abolish punditry here
:07:56. > :08:00.now because clearly we are pointless! There is enough
:08:01. > :08:05.unemployment in the world already! We are moving into huge and charted
:08:06. > :08:09.territory with Donald Trump as president. It is incredibly
:08:10. > :08:16.unpredictable. But what has not been noticed enough is the Keynesian won.
:08:17. > :08:23.Trump is a Keynesian. He wants massive infrastructure spending and
:08:24. > :08:28.massive tax cuts. The big story next year will be the massive reflation
:08:29. > :08:34.of the American economy and indeed the US Federal reserve has already
:08:35. > :08:40.reacted to that by putting up interest rates. That is why he has a
:08:41. > :08:43.big fight with the rest of the Republican Party. He is nominally a
:08:44. > :08:49.Republican but they are not Keynesian. They are when it comes to
:08:50. > :08:53.tax cuts. They are when it hits the rich to benefit the poor. The big
:08:54. > :08:57.thing is whether the infrastructure projects land him in crony trouble.
:08:58. > :09:02.The transparency around who gets those will be extremely difficult.
:09:03. > :09:07.Most of the infrastructure spending he thinks can be done by the private
:09:08. > :09:14.sector and not the federal government. His tax cuts overlap the
:09:15. > :09:19.Republican house tax cuts speaker Ryan to give not all, but a fair
:09:20. > :09:23.chunk of what he wants. If the American economy is going to reflate
:09:24. > :09:28.next year, interest rates will rise in America, that will strengthen the
:09:29. > :09:33.dollar and it will mean that Europe will be, it will find it more
:09:34. > :09:37.difficult to finance its sovereign debt because you will get more money
:09:38. > :09:43.by investing in American sovereign debt. That is a good point because
:09:44. > :09:48.the dynamics will shift. If that happens, Trump will be pretty
:09:49. > :09:54.popular in the US. To begin with. To begin with. It is energy
:09:55. > :10:00.self-sufficient and if you can pull off the biggest trick in American
:10:01. > :10:05.politics which is somehow to via corporation tax cuts to allow the
:10:06. > :10:09.reassuring of wealth, because it is too expensive for American business
:10:10. > :10:12.to take back into the US and reinvest, if you combine all of
:10:13. > :10:19.those things together, you will end up with a boom on a scale you have
:10:20. > :10:24.not seen. It will be Reagan on steroids? What could possibly go
:10:25. > :10:29.wrong? In the short term for Britain, it is probably not bad
:10:30. > :10:33.news. Our biggest market for exports as a country is the United States.
:10:34. > :10:38.Our biggest market for foreign direct investment is the United
:10:39. > :10:41.States and the same is true vice versa for America in Britain. Given
:10:42. > :10:45.the pound is now competitive and likely the dollar will get stronger,
:10:46. > :10:51.it could well give a boost to the British economy? Could do bit you
:10:52. > :10:56.have to be slightly cautious about the warm language we are getting
:10:57. > :11:01.which is great news out of President Trump's future cabinet on doing a
:11:02. > :11:04.trade deal early, we are net exporters to the US. We benefit far
:11:05. > :11:09.more from trading with US than they do with us. I think we have to come
:11:10. > :11:15.up with something to offer the US for them to jump into bed with us. I
:11:16. > :11:25.think it is called two new aircraft carriers and modernising the fleet.
:11:26. > :11:29.Bring it on. I will raise caution, people in declining industries in
:11:30. > :11:33.some places in America, the rust belt who have faced big profound
:11:34. > :11:38.structural challenges and those are much harder to reverse. They face
:11:39. > :11:44.real problems now because the dollar is so strong. Their ability to
:11:45. > :11:48.export has taken a huge hit out of Ohio, Michigan and Illinois. And the
:11:49. > :11:54.Mexican imports into America is now dirt cheap so that is a major
:11:55. > :12:02.problem. Next year we have elections in Austria, France, the Netherlands,
:12:03. > :12:07.Germany, probably Italy. Which outcome will be the most dramatic
:12:08. > :12:15.for Brexit? If Merkel lost it would be a huge surprise. That is
:12:16. > :12:23.unlikely. And if it was not Filon in France that would be unlikely. The
:12:24. > :12:26.consensus it it will be Francois Filon against Marine Le Pen and it
:12:27. > :12:37.will be uniting around the far right candidate. In 2002, that is what
:12:38. > :12:47.happened. Filon is a Thatcherite. Marine Le Pen's politics --
:12:48. > :12:51.economics are hard left. Francois Filon is as much a cert to win as
:12:52. > :12:57.Hillary Clinton was this time last year. If he is competing against
:12:58. > :13:05.concerns about rising globalisation and his pitch is Thatcherite, it is
:13:06. > :13:12.a bold, brave strategy in the context so we will see. It will keep
:13:13. > :13:19.us busy next year, Tom? Almost as busy as this year but not quite.
:13:20. > :13:22.This year was a record year. I am up in my hours!
:13:23. > :13:24.That's all for today, thanks to all my guests.
:13:25. > :13:27.The Daily Politics will be back on BBC Two at noon tomorrow.
:13:28. > :13:29.I'll be back here on the 15th January.
:13:30. > :13:32.Remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.
:13:33. > :14:13.The most a writer can hope from a reader
:14:14. > :14:30.West Side Story took choreography in a radical new direction.
:14:31. > :14:35.The dance was woven into the storyline,