15/01/2017

:00:33. > :00:37.It's Sunday morning, and this is the Sunday Politics.

:00:38. > :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. > :01:12.In the South... well, joins us live.

:01:13. > :01:14.Yet more rail misery for southern passengers,

:01:15. > :01:18.But is it really about a clash between the government

:01:19. > :01:31.And to help me make sense of all that, three of the finest

:01:32. > :01:34.hacks we could persuade to work on a Sunday - Steve Richards,

:01:35. > :01:42.They'll be tweeting throughout the programme, and you can join

:01:43. > :01:48.So, Theresa May is preparing for her big Brexit speech on Tuesday,

:01:49. > :01:51.in which she will urge people to give up on "insults"

:01:52. > :01:55.and "division" and unite to build, quote, a "global Britain".

:01:56. > :01:58.Some of the Sunday papers report that the Prime Minister will go

:01:59. > :02:02.The Sunday Telegraph splashes with the headline: "May's big

:02:03. > :02:06.gamble on a clean Brexit", saying the Prime Minister

:02:07. > :02:08.will announce she's prepared to take Britain out of membership

:02:09. > :02:13.of the single market and customs union.

:02:14. > :02:16.The Sunday Times has a similar write-up -

:02:17. > :02:18.they call it a "clean and hard Brexit".

:02:19. > :02:22.The Brexit Secretary David Davis has also written a piece in the paper

:02:23. > :02:25.hinting that a transitional deal could be on the cards.

:02:26. > :02:28.And the Sunday Express says: "May's Brexit Battle Plan",

:02:29. > :02:31.explaining that the Prime Minister will get tough with Brussels

:02:32. > :02:34.and call for an end to free movement.

:02:35. > :02:36.Well, let's get some more reaction on this.

:02:37. > :02:38.I'm joined now from Cumbria by the leader

:02:39. > :02:45.of the Liberal Democrats, Tim Farron.

:02:46. > :02:50.Mr Farron, welcome back to the programme. The Prime Minister says

:02:51. > :02:54.most people now just want to get on with it and make a success of it.

:02:55. > :03:00.But you still want to stop it, don't you? Well, I certainly take the view

:03:01. > :03:03.that heading for a hard Brexit, essentially that means being outside

:03:04. > :03:08.the Single Market and the customs union, is not something that was on

:03:09. > :03:11.the ballot paper last June. For Theresa May to adopt what is

:03:12. > :03:16.basically the large all Farage vision of Britain's relationship

:03:17. > :03:20.with Europe is not what was voted for last June. It is right for us to

:03:21. > :03:23.stand up and say that a hard Brexit is not the democratic choice of the

:03:24. > :03:27.British people, and that we should be fighting for the people to be the

:03:28. > :03:31.ones who have the Seat the end of this process, not have it forced

:03:32. > :03:35.upon them by Theresa May and David Davis. When it comes though dual

:03:36. > :03:39.position that we should remain in the membership of the Single Market

:03:40. > :03:45.and the customs union, it looks like you are losing the argument, doesn't

:03:46. > :03:49.it? My sense is that if you believe in being in the Single Market and

:03:50. > :03:53.the customs union are good things, I think many people on the leave site

:03:54. > :03:58.believe that, Stephen Phillips, the Conservative MP until the autumn who

:03:59. > :04:01.resigned, who voted for Leave but believe we should be in the Single

:04:02. > :04:06.Market, I think those people believe that it is wrong for us to enter the

:04:07. > :04:10.negotiations having given up on the most important part of it. If you

:04:11. > :04:13.really are going to fight Britain's corner, then you should go in there

:04:14. > :04:19.fighting the membership of the Single Market, not give up and

:04:20. > :04:24.whitefly, as Theresa May has done before we even start. -- and wave

:04:25. > :04:28.the white flag. Will you vote against regret Article 50 in the

:04:29. > :04:31.Commons? We made it clear that we want the British people to have the

:04:32. > :04:36.final Seat -- vote against triggering. Will you vote against

:04:37. > :04:42.Article 50. Will you encourage the House of Lords to vote against out

:04:43. > :04:46.Article 50? I don't think they will get a chance to vote. They will have

:04:47. > :04:49.a chance to win the deuce amendments. One amendment we will

:04:50. > :04:54.introduce is that there should be a referendum in the terms of the deal.

:04:55. > :04:57.It is not right that Parliament on Government, and especially not civil

:04:58. > :05:01.servants in Brussels and Whitehall, they should stitch-up the final

:05:02. > :05:05.deal. That would be wrong. It is right that the British people have

:05:06. > :05:11.the final say. I understand that as your position. You made it clear

:05:12. > :05:14.Britain to remain a member of the Single Market on the customs union.

:05:15. > :05:17.You accept, I assume, that that would mean remaining under the

:05:18. > :05:19.jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, continuing free movement

:05:20. > :05:26.of people, and the free-trade deals remained in Brussels' competence. So

:05:27. > :05:30.it seems to me that if you believe that being in the Single Market is a

:05:31. > :05:34.good thing, then you should go and argue for that. Whilst I believe

:05:35. > :05:37.that we're not going to get a better deal than the one we currently have,

:05:38. > :05:40.nevertheless it is up to the Government to go and argue for the

:05:41. > :05:45.best deal possible for us outside. You accept your position would mean

:05:46. > :05:49.that? It would mean certainly being in the Single Market and the customs

:05:50. > :05:52.union. It's no surprise to you I'm sure that the Lib Dems believe the

:05:53. > :05:56.package we have got now inside the EU is going to be of the Nutley

:05:57. > :06:00.better than anything we get from the outside, I accept the direction of

:06:01. > :06:04.travel -- is going to be the Nutley better. At the moment, what the

:06:05. > :06:08.Government are doing is assuming that all the things you say Drew,

:06:09. > :06:11.and there is no way possible for us arguing for a deal that allows in

:06:12. > :06:14.the Single Market without some of those other things. If they really

:06:15. > :06:19.believed in the best for Britain, you would go and argue for the best

:06:20. > :06:26.for Britain. Let's be clear, if we remain under the jurisdiction of the

:06:27. > :06:29.ECJ, which is the court that governs membership of the Single Market,

:06:30. > :06:34.continued free movement of people, the Europeans have made clear, is

:06:35. > :06:38.what goes with the Single Market. And free-trade deals remaining under

:06:39. > :06:42.Brussels' competence. If we accepted all of that is the price of

:06:43. > :06:44.membership of the Single Market, in what conceivable way with that

:06:45. > :06:51.amount to leaving the European Union? Well, for example, I do

:06:52. > :06:54.believe that being a member of the Single Market is worth fighting for.

:06:55. > :06:58.I personally believe that freedom of movement is a good thing. British

:06:59. > :07:02.people benefit from freedom of movement. We will hugely be hit as

:07:03. > :07:07.individuals and families and businesses. Mike I understand, but

:07:08. > :07:12.your writing of leaving... There the butt is that if you do except that

:07:13. > :07:17.freedom of movement has to change, I don't, but if you do, and if you are

:07:18. > :07:21.Theresa May, and the problem is to go and fight for the best deal,

:07:22. > :07:24.don't take it from Brussels that you can't be in the Single Market

:07:25. > :07:30.without those other things as well, you don't go and argue the case. It

:07:31. > :07:33.depresses me that Theresa May is beginning this process is waving the

:07:34. > :07:38.white flag, just as this morning Jeremy Corbyn was waving the white

:07:39. > :07:41.flag when it comes to it. We need a Government that will fight Britain's

:07:42. > :07:45.corner and an opposition that will fight the Government to make sure

:07:46. > :07:51.that it fights. Just explain to our viewers how we could remain members,

:07:52. > :07:57.members of the Single Market, and not be subject to the jurisdiction

:07:58. > :08:01.of the European court? So, first of all we spent over the last many,

:08:02. > :08:04.many years, the likes of Nigel Farage and others, will have argued,

:08:05. > :08:08.you heard them on this very programme, that Britain should

:08:09. > :08:11.aspire to be like Norway and Switzerland for example, countries

:08:12. > :08:15.that are not in the European Union but aren't the Single Market. It is

:08:16. > :08:19.very clear to me that if you want the best deal for Britain -- but are

:08:20. > :08:23.in the Single Market. You go and argue for the best deal. What is the

:08:24. > :08:29.answer to my question, you haven't answered it

:08:30. > :08:34.the question is, how does the Prime Minister go and fight for the best

:08:35. > :08:39.deal for Britain. If we think that being in the Single Market is the

:08:40. > :08:43.right thing, not Baxter -- not access to it but membership of it,

:08:44. > :08:46.you don't wave the white flag before you enter the negotiating room. I'm

:08:47. > :08:50.afraid we have run out of time. Thank you, Tim Farron.

:08:51. > :08:56.The leaks on this speech on Tuesday we have seen, it is interesting that

:08:57. > :09:04.Downing Street has not attempted to dampen them down this morning, in

:09:05. > :09:08.the various papers, do they tell us something new? Do they tell us more

:09:09. > :09:12.of the Goverment's aims in the Brexit negotiations? I think it's

:09:13. > :09:15.only a confirmation of something which has been in the mating really

:09:16. > :09:21.for the six months that she's been in the job. The logic of everything

:09:22. > :09:26.that she's said since last July, the keenness on re-gaining control of

:09:27. > :09:29.migration, the desire to do international trade deals, the fact

:09:30. > :09:32.that she is appointed trade Secretary, the logic of all of that

:09:33. > :09:35.is that we are out of the Single Market, quite probably out of the

:09:36. > :09:39.customs union, what will happen this week is a restatement of a fairly

:09:40. > :09:43.clear position anyway. I think Tim Farron is right about one thing, I

:09:44. > :09:46.don't think she will go into the speech planning to absolutely

:09:47. > :09:54.definitively say, we are leaving those things. Because even if there

:09:55. > :09:56.is a 1% chance of a miracle deal, where you stay in the Single Market,

:09:57. > :09:59.somehow get exempted from free movement, it is prudent to keep

:10:00. > :10:04.hopes on that option as a Prime Minister. -- to keep open that

:10:05. > :10:07.option. She is being advised both by the diplomatic corps and her

:10:08. > :10:10.personal advisers, don't concede on membership of the Single Market yet.

:10:11. > :10:19.We know it's not going to happen, but let them Europeans knock us back

:10:20. > :10:23.on that,... That is probably the right strategy for all of the

:10:24. > :10:27.reasons that Jarlan outlined there. What we learned a bit today is the

:10:28. > :10:30.possibility of some kind of transition or arrangements, which

:10:31. > :10:34.David Davies has been talking about in a comment piece for one of the

:10:35. > :10:39.Sunday papers. My sense from Brexiteers aborting MPs is that they

:10:40. > :10:43.are very happy with 90% of the rhetoric -- Brexit sporting MPs. The

:10:44. > :10:50.rhetoric has not been dampened down by MPs, apart from this transitional

:10:51. > :10:53.arrangement, which they feel and two France, on the one front will

:10:54. > :10:57.encourage the very dilatory EU to spend longer than ever negotiating a

:10:58. > :11:01.deal, and on the other hand will also be exactly what our civil

:11:02. > :11:05.service looks for in stringing things out. What wasn't explained

:11:06. > :11:09.this morning is what David Davies means by transitional is not that

:11:10. > :11:12.you negotiate what you can in two years and then spend another five

:11:13. > :11:18.years on the matter is that a lot of the soul. He thinks everything has

:11:19. > :11:21.to be done in the two years, -- of the matter are hard to solve. But it

:11:22. > :11:26.would include transitional arrangements over the five years.

:11:27. > :11:31.What we are seeing in the build-up is the danger of making these kind

:11:32. > :11:34.of speeches. In a way, I kind of admired her not feeding the media

:11:35. > :11:40.machine over the autumn and the end of last year cars, as Janan has

:11:41. > :11:44.pointed out in his columns, she has actually said quite a lot from it,

:11:45. > :11:49.you would extrapolate quite a lot. We won't be members of the Single

:11:50. > :11:55.Market? She said that in the party conference speech, we are out of

:11:56. > :11:59.European court. Her red line is the end of free movement, so we are out

:12:00. > :12:03.of the Single Market. Why has she sent Liam Fox to negotiate all of

:12:04. > :12:07.these other deals, not that he will succeed necessarily, but that is the

:12:08. > :12:10.intention? We are still in the customs union. You can extrapolate

:12:11. > :12:15.what she will say perhaps more cautiously in the headlines on

:12:16. > :12:18.Tuesday. But the grammar of a big speech raises expectations, gets the

:12:19. > :12:22.markets worked up. So she is doing it because people have said that she

:12:23. > :12:26.doesn't know what she's on about. But maybe she should have resisted

:12:27. > :12:29.it. Very well, and she hasn't. The speech is on Tuesday morning.

:12:30. > :12:32.Now, the public consultation on press regulation closed this

:12:33. > :12:34.week, and soon ministers will have to decide whether to

:12:35. > :12:36.enact a controversial piece of legislation.

:12:37. > :12:38.Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act, if implemented,

:12:39. > :12:41.could see newspapers forced to pay legal costs in libel and privacy

:12:42. > :12:51.If they don't sign up to an officially approved regulator.

:12:52. > :12:53.The newspapers say it's an affront to a free press,

:12:54. > :12:56.while pro-privacy campaigners say it's the only way to ensure

:12:57. > :12:57.a scandal like phone-hacking can't happen again.

:12:58. > :13:03.Ellie Price has been reading all about it.

:13:04. > :13:07.It was the biggest news about the news for decades,

:13:08. > :13:12.a scandal that involved household names, but not just celebrities.

:13:13. > :13:15.They've even hacked the phone of a murdered schoolgirl.

:13:16. > :13:18.It led to the closure of the News Of The World,

:13:19. > :13:27.a year-long public inquiry headed up by the judge Lord Justice Leveson,

:13:28. > :13:31.and in the end, a new press watchdog set up by Royal Charter,

:13:32. > :13:32.which could impose, among other things, million-pound fines.

:13:33. > :13:35.If this system is implemented, the country should have confidence

:13:36. > :13:36.that the terrible suffering of innocent victims

:13:37. > :13:39.like the Dowlers, the McCanns and Christopher Jefferies should

:13:40. > :13:45.To get this new plan rolling, the Government also passed

:13:46. > :13:49.the Crime and Courts Act, Section 40 of which would force

:13:50. > :13:52.publications who didn't sign up to the new regulator to pay legal

:13:53. > :13:56.costs in libel and privacy cases, even if they won.

:13:57. > :13:59.It's waiting for sign-off from the Culture Secretary.

:14:00. > :14:03.We've got about 50 publications that have signed up...

:14:04. > :14:06.This is Impress, the press regulator that's got the backing

:14:07. > :14:11.of the Royal Charter, so its members are protected

:14:12. > :14:15.from the penalties that would be imposed by Section 40.

:14:16. > :14:20.It's funded by the Formula One tycoon Max Mosley's

:14:21. > :14:26.I think the danger if we don't get Section 40 is that

:14:27. > :14:27.you have an incomplete Leveson project.

:14:28. > :14:30.I think it's very, very likely that within the next five or ten years

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

:14:34. > :14:35.standards, everyone will be saying to the Government,

:14:36. > :14:38."Why on Earth didn't you sort things out when you had the chance?"

:14:39. > :14:41.Isn't Section 40 essentially just a big stick to beat

:14:42. > :14:49.We hear a lot about the stick part, but there's also a big juicy carrot

:14:50. > :14:51.for publishers and their journalists who are members of an

:14:52. > :14:54.They get huge new protections from libel threats,

:14:55. > :14:56.from privacy actions, which actually means they've got

:14:57. > :15:05.a lot more opportunity to run investigative stories.

:15:06. > :15:08.Impress has a big image problem - not a single national

:15:09. > :15:13.Instead, many of them are members of Ipso,

:15:14. > :15:16.the independent regulator set up and funded by the industry that

:15:17. > :15:22.doesn't seek the recognition of the Royal Charter.

:15:23. > :15:25.The male cells around 22,000 each day...

:15:26. > :15:27.There are regional titles too, who, like the Birmingham Mail,

:15:28. > :15:30.won't sign up to Impress, even if they say the costs

:15:31. > :15:34.are associated with Section 40 could put them out of business.

:15:35. > :15:37.Impress has an umbilical cord that goes directly back to Government

:15:38. > :15:38.through the recognition setup that it has.

:15:39. > :15:41.Now, we broke free of the shackles of the regulated press

:15:42. > :15:44.when the stamp duty was revealed 150 years ago.

:15:45. > :15:51.If we go back to this level of oversight, then I think

:15:52. > :15:56.we turn the clock back, 150 years of press freedom.

:15:57. > :15:59.The responses from the public have been coming thick and fast

:16:00. > :16:00.since the Government launched its consultation

:16:01. > :16:03.In fact, by the time it closed on Tuesday,

:16:04. > :16:08.And for that reason alone, it could take months before

:16:09. > :16:12.a decision on what happens next is taken.

:16:13. > :16:15.The Government will also be minded to listen to its own MPs,

:16:16. > :16:21.One described it to me as Draconian and hugely damaging.

:16:22. > :16:23.So, will the current Culture Secretary's thinking be

:16:24. > :16:32.I don't think the Government will repeal section 40.

:16:33. > :16:35.What I'm arguing for is not to implement it, but it will remain

:16:36. > :16:40.on the statute book and if it then became apparent that Ipso simply

:16:41. > :16:43.was failing to work, was not delivering effective

:16:44. > :16:46.regulation and the press were behaving in a way

:16:47. > :16:51.which was wholly unacceptable, as they were ten years ago,

:16:52. > :16:55.then there might be an argument at that time to think well in that

:16:56. > :16:57.case we are going to have to take further measures,

:16:58. > :17:02.The future of section 40 might not be so black and white.

:17:03. > :17:05.I'm told a compromise could be met whereby the punitive parts

:17:06. > :17:09.about legal costs are dropped, but the incentives

:17:10. > :17:12.to join a recognised regulator are beefed up.

:17:13. > :17:15.But it could yet be some time until the issue of press freedom

:17:16. > :17:25.I'm joined now by Max Mosley - he won a legal case against the News

:17:26. > :17:28.Of The World after it revealed details about his private life,

:17:29. > :17:32.and he now campaigns for more press regulation.

:17:33. > :17:41.Are welcome to the programme. Let me ask you this, how can it be right

:17:42. > :17:45.that you, who many folk think have a clear vendetta against the British

:17:46. > :17:50.press, can bankroll a government approved regulator of the press? If

:17:51. > :17:54.we hadn't done it, nobody would, section 40 would never have come

:17:55. > :17:58.into force because there would never have been a regulator. It is

:17:59. > :18:03.absolutely wrong that a family trust should have to finance something

:18:04. > :18:08.like this. It should be financed by the press or the Government. If we

:18:09. > :18:09.hadn't done it there would be no possibility of regulation. But it

:18:10. > :18:37.means we end up with a regulator financed by you, as I say

:18:38. > :18:39.many people think you have a clear vendetta against the press. Where

:18:40. > :18:41.does the money come from? From a family trust, it is family money.

:18:42. > :18:44.You have to understand that somebody had to do this. I understand that.

:18:45. > :18:47.People like to know where the money comes from, I think you said it came

:18:48. > :18:50.from Brixton Steyn at one stage. Ages ago my father had a trust there

:18:51. > :18:54.but now all my money is in the UK. We are clear about that, but this is

:18:55. > :19:00.money that was put together by your father. Yes, my father inherited it

:19:01. > :19:04.from his father and his father. The whole of Manchester once belonged to

:19:05. > :19:09.the family, that's why there is a Mosley Street. That is irrelevant

:19:10. > :19:12.because as we have given the money, I have no control. If you do the

:19:13. > :19:22.most elementary checks into the contract between my family trust,

:19:23. > :19:27.the trust but finances Impress, it is impossible for me to exert any

:19:28. > :19:33.influence. It is just the same as if it had come from the National

:19:34. > :19:38.lottery. People will find it ironic that the money has come from

:19:39. > :19:47.historically Britain's best-known fascist. No, it has come from my

:19:48. > :19:51.family, the Mosley family. This is complete drivel because we have no

:19:52. > :19:56.control. Where the money comes from doesn't matter, if it had come from

:19:57. > :20:00.the national lottery it would be exactly the same. Impress was

:20:01. > :20:06.completely independent. But it wouldn't exist without your money,

:20:07. > :20:10.wouldn't it? But that doesn't give you influence. It might exist

:20:11. > :20:16.because it was founded before I was ever in contact with them. Isn't it

:20:17. > :20:20.curious then that so many leading light show your hostile views of the

:20:21. > :20:26.press? I don't think it is because I don't know a single member of the

:20:27. > :20:31.Impress board. The chairman I have met months. The only person I know

:20:32. > :20:38.is Jonathan Hayward who you had on just now. In one recent months he

:20:39. > :20:44.tweeted 50 attacks on the Daily Mail, including some calling for an

:20:45. > :20:50.advertising boycott of the paper. He also liked a Twitter post calling me

:20:51. > :20:55.Daily Mail and neofascist rag. Are these fitting for what is meant to

:20:56. > :20:59.be impartial regulator? The person you should ask about that is the

:21:00. > :21:03.press regulatory panel and they are completely independent, they

:21:04. > :21:08.reviewed the whole thing. You have probably produced something very

:21:09. > :21:10.selective, I have no idea but I am certain that these people are

:21:11. > :21:15.absolutely trustworthy and independent. It is not just Mr

:21:16. > :21:20.Hayward, we have a tonne of things he has tweeted calling for boycotts,

:21:21. > :21:26.remember this is the man that would be the regulator of these papers.

:21:27. > :21:32.He's the chief executive, that is a separate thing. The administration,

:21:33. > :21:41.the regulator. Many leading light show your vendetta of the press. I

:21:42. > :21:57.do not have a vendetta. Let's take another one. This person is on the

:21:58. > :22:03.code committee. Have a look at this. As someone with these views fit to

:22:04. > :22:07.be involved in the regulation of the press? You said I have a vendetta

:22:08. > :22:12.against the press, I do not, I didn't say that and it is completely

:22:13. > :22:18.wrong to say I have a vendetta. What do you think of that? I don't agree,

:22:19. > :22:29.I wouldn't ban the Daily Mail, I think it's a dreadful paper but I

:22:30. > :22:37.wouldn't ban it. Another Impress code committee said I hate the Daily

:22:38. > :22:41.Mail, I couldn't agree more, others have called for a boycott. Other

:22:42. > :22:45.people can say what they want and many people may think they are right

:22:46. > :22:52.but surely these views make them unfit to be partial regulators? I

:22:53. > :22:55.have no influence over Impress therefore I cannot say anything

:22:56. > :23:01.about it. You should ask them, not me. All I have done is make it

:23:02. > :23:07.possible for Impress to exist and that was the right thing to do. I'm

:23:08. > :23:13.asking you if people with these kind of views are fit to be regulators of

:23:14. > :23:18.the press. You would have to ask about all of their views, these are

:23:19. > :23:25.some of their views. A lot of people have a downer on the Daily Mail and

:23:26. > :23:29.the Sun, it doesn't necessarily make them party pre-. Why would

:23:30. > :23:35.newspapers sign up to a regulator run by what they think is run by

:23:36. > :23:39.enemies out to ruin them. If they don't like it they should start

:23:40. > :23:46.their own section 40 regulator. They could make it so recognised, if only

:23:47. > :23:55.they would make it independent of the big newspaper barons but they

:23:56. > :24:05.won't -- they could make Ipso recognised. Is the Daily Mail

:24:06. > :24:09.fascist? It certainly was in the 1930s. Me and my father are

:24:10. > :24:14.relevant, this whole section 40 issue is about access to justice.

:24:15. > :24:18.The press don't want ordinary people who cannot afford to bring an action

:24:19. > :24:22.against the press, don't want them to have access to justice. I can

:24:23. > :24:28.understand that but I don't sympathise. What would happen to the

:24:29. > :24:35.boss of Ofcom, which regulates broadcasters, if it described

:24:36. > :24:44.Channel 4 News is a Marxist scum? If the press don't want to sign up to

:24:45. > :24:53.Impress they can create their own regulator. If you were to listen we

:24:54. > :24:58.would get a lot further. The press should make their own Levenson

:24:59. > :25:03.compliant regulator, then they would have no complaints at all. Even

:25:04. > :25:07.papers like the Guardian, the Independent, the Financial Times,

:25:08. > :25:14.they show your hostility to tabloid journalism. They have refused to be

:25:15. > :25:18.regulated by Impress. I will say it again, the press could start their

:25:19. > :25:23.own regulator, they do not have to sign... Yes, but Levenson compliant

:25:24. > :25:28.one giving access to justice so people who cannot afford an

:25:29. > :25:31.expensive legal action have a proper arbitration service. The Guardian,

:25:32. > :25:36.the Independent, the Financial Times, they don't want to do that

:25:37. > :25:41.either. That would suggest there is something fatally flawed about your

:25:42. > :25:53.approach. Even these kind of papers, the Guardian, Impress is hardly

:25:54. > :26:02.independent, the head of... Andrew, I am sorry, you are like a dog with

:26:03. > :26:06.a bone. The press could start their own regulator, then people like the

:26:07. > :26:09.Financial Times, the Guardian and so one could decide whether they wanted

:26:10. > :26:13.to join or not but what is absolutely vital is that we should

:26:14. > :26:16.have a proper arbitration service so that people who cannot afford an

:26:17. > :26:22.expensive action have somewhere to go. This business of section 40

:26:23. > :26:26.which you want to be triggered which would mean papers that didn't sign

:26:27. > :26:30.up to Impress could be sued in any case and they would have to pay

:26:31. > :26:38.potentially massive legal costs, even if they win. Yes. This is what

:26:39. > :26:44.the number of papers have said about this, if section 40 was triggered,

:26:45. > :26:51.the Guardian wouldn't even think of investigation. The Sunday Times said

:26:52. > :26:54.it would not have even started to expose Lance Armstrong. The Times

:26:55. > :26:59.journalist said he couldn't have done the Rotherham child abuse

:27:00. > :27:03.scandal. What they all come it is a full reading of section 40 because

:27:04. > :27:10.that cost shifting will only apply if, and I quote, it is just and

:27:11. > :27:14.equitable in all the circumstances. I cannot conceive of any High Court

:27:15. > :27:19.judge, for example the Lance Armstrong case or the child abuse,

:27:20. > :27:24.saying it is just as equitable in all circumstances the newspaper

:27:25. > :27:30.should pay these costs. Even the editor of index on censorship, which

:27:31. > :27:34.is hardly the Sun, said this would be oppressive and they couldn't do

:27:35. > :27:40.what they do, they would risk being sued by warlords. No because if

:27:41. > :27:45.something unfortunate, some really bad person sues them, what would

:27:46. > :27:48.happen is the judge would say it is just inequitable normal

:27:49. > :27:52.circumstances that person should pay. Section 40 is for the person

:27:53. > :27:56.that comes along and says to a big newspaper, can we go to arbitration

:27:57. > :28:01.because I cannot afford to go to court. The big newspaper says no.

:28:02. > :28:06.That leaves less than 1% of the population with any remedy if the

:28:07. > :28:12.newspapers traduce them. It cannot be right. From the Guardian to the

:28:13. > :28:18.Sun, and including Index On Censorship, all of these media

:28:19. > :28:21.outlets think you are proposing a charter for conmen, warlords, crime

:28:22. > :28:25.bosses, dodgy politicians, celebrities with a grievance against

:28:26. > :28:34.the press. I will give you the final word to address that. It is pure

:28:35. > :28:38.guff and the reason is they want to go on marking their own homework.

:28:39. > :28:43.The press don't want anyone to make sure life is fair. All I want is

:28:44. > :28:47.somebody who has got no money to be able to sue in just the way that I

:28:48. > :28:51.can. All right, thanks for being with us.

:28:52. > :28:53.The doctors' union, the British Medical Association,

:28:54. > :28:55.has said the Government is scapegoating GPs in England

:28:56. > :28:59.The Government has said GP surgeries must try harder to stay

:29:00. > :29:02.open from 8am to 8pm, or they could lose out on funding.

:29:03. > :29:04.The pressure on A services in recent weeks has been intense.

:29:05. > :29:08.It emerged this week that 65 of the 152 Health Trusts in England

:29:09. > :29:10.had issued an operational pressure alert in the first

:29:11. > :29:16.At either level three, meaning major pressures,

:29:17. > :29:18.or level four, indicating an inability to deliver

:29:19. > :29:24.On Monday, Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt told the Commons

:29:25. > :29:27.that the number of people using A had increased by 9 million

:29:28. > :29:35.But that 30% of those visits were unnecessary.

:29:36. > :29:37.He said that the situation at a number of Trusts

:29:38. > :29:42.On Tuesday, the Royal College of Physicians wrote

:29:43. > :29:45.to the Prime Minister saying the health service was being

:29:46. > :29:50.paralysed by spiralling demand, and urging greater investment.

:29:51. > :29:54.On Wednesday, the Chief Executive of NHS England, Simon Stevens,

:29:55. > :29:59.told a Select Committee that NHS funding will be highly constrained.

:30:00. > :30:03.And from 2018, real-terms spending per person would fall.

:30:04. > :30:07.The Prime Minister described the Red Cross's claim that A

:30:08. > :30:11.was facing a "humanitarian crisis" as "irresponsible and overblown".

:30:12. > :30:14.And the National Audit Office issued a report that found almost half,

:30:15. > :30:21.46%, of GP surgeries closed at some point during core hours.

:30:22. > :30:25.Yesterday, Mrs May signalled her support for doctors' surgeries

:30:26. > :30:29.opening from 8am to 8pm every day of the week, in order to divert

:30:30. > :30:36.To discuss this, I'm joined now by the Conservative

:30:37. > :30:38.MP Maria Caulfield - she was an NHS nurse in a former

:30:39. > :30:41.life - and Clare Gerada, a former chair of the Royal College

:30:42. > :30:51.Welcome to you both. So, Maria Caulfield, what the Government is

:30:52. > :30:56.saying, Downing Street in effect is saying that GPs do not work hard

:30:57. > :30:59.enough and that's the reason why A was under such pressure? No, I don't

:31:00. > :31:03.think that is the message, I think that is the message that the media

:31:04. > :31:08.have taken up. That is not the expression that we want to give. I

:31:09. > :31:12.still work as a nurse, I know how hard doctors work in hospitals and

:31:13. > :31:17.GP practices. When the rose 30% of people turning up at A for neither

:31:18. > :31:22.an accident or an emergency, we do need to look at alternative. Where

:31:23. > :31:26.is the GPs' operability in this? We know from patients that if they

:31:27. > :31:29.cannot get access to GPs, they will do one of three things. They will

:31:30. > :31:33.wait two or three weeks until they can get an appointment, they will

:31:34. > :31:37.forget about the problem altogether, which is not good, we want patients

:31:38. > :31:46.to be getting investigations at early stages, or they will go to

:31:47. > :31:49.A And that is a problem. I'm not quite sure what the role that GPs

:31:50. > :31:52.play in this. What is your response in that? I think about 70% of

:31:53. > :31:55.patients that I see should not be seen by me but should still be seen

:31:56. > :31:59.by hospital consultants. If we look at it from GPs' eyes and not from

:32:00. > :32:03.hospital's eyes, because that is what it is, we might get somewhere.

:32:04. > :32:08.Tomorrow morning, every practice in England will have about 1.5 GPs

:32:09. > :32:13.shot, that's not even counting if there is traffic problems, sickness

:32:14. > :32:16.or whatever. -- GPs shot. We cannot work any harder, I cannot

:32:17. > :32:24.physically, emotionally work any harder. We are open 12 hours a day,

:32:25. > :32:28.most of us, I run practices open 365 days per year 24 hours a day. I

:32:29. > :32:32.don't understand this. It is one thing attacking me as a GP from

:32:33. > :32:35.working hard enough, but it is another thing saying that GPs as a

:32:36. > :32:41.profession and doing what they should be doing. Let me in National

:32:42. > :32:48.Audit Office has coming up with these figures showing that almost

:32:49. > :32:51.half of doctors' practices are not open during core hours at some part

:32:52. > :32:55.of the week. That's where the implication comes, that they are not

:32:56. > :33:00.working hard enough. What do you say to that? I don't recognise this. I'm

:33:01. > :33:04.not being defensive, I'm just don't recognise it. There are practices

:33:05. > :33:07.working palliative care services, practices have to close home visits

:33:08. > :33:11.if they are single-handed, some of us are working in care homes during

:33:12. > :33:18.the day. They may shot for an hour in the middle of the data will sort

:33:19. > :33:20.out some of the prescriptions and admin -- they may shot. My practice

:33:21. > :33:23.runs a number of practices across London. If we shut during our

:33:24. > :33:28.contractual hours we would have NHS England coming down on us like a

:33:29. > :33:33.tonne of bricks. Maria Caulfield, I'm struggling to understand, given

:33:34. > :33:35.the problems the NHS faces, particularly in our hospitals, what

:33:36. > :33:39.this has got to do with the solution? Obviously there are GP

:33:40. > :33:44.practices that are working, you know, over and above the hours. But

:33:45. > :33:50.there are some GP practices, we know from National Audit Office, there

:33:51. > :33:53.are particular black sports -- blackspots in the country that only

:33:54. > :33:56.offer services for three hours a week. That's causing problems if

:33:57. > :34:01.they cannot get to see a GP they will go and use A Nobody is

:34:02. > :34:05.saying that this measure would solve problems at A, it would address

:34:06. > :34:10.one small part of its top blog we shouldn't be starting this, as I

:34:11. > :34:13.keep saying, please to this from solving the problems at A We

:34:14. > :34:17.should be starting it from solving the problems of the patients in

:34:18. > :34:23.their totality, the best place they should go, not from A This really

:34:24. > :34:28.upsets me, as a GP I am there to be a proxy A doctor. I am a GP, a

:34:29. > :34:32.highly skilled doctor, looking after patients from cradle to grave across

:34:33. > :34:38.the physical, psychological and social, I am not an A doctor. I

:34:39. > :34:42.don't disagree with that, nobody is saying that GPs are not working hard

:34:43. > :34:46.enough. You just did, actually, about some of them. In some

:34:47. > :34:51.practices, what we need to see, it's not just GPs in GP surgeries, it is

:34:52. > :34:55.advanced nurse practitioners, pharmacists. It doesn't necessarily

:34:56. > :35:01.need to be all on the GPs. I think advanced nurse practitioners are in

:35:02. > :35:04.short supply. Position associate or go to hospital, -- physician

:35:05. > :35:08.associates. We have very few trainees, junior doctors in general

:35:09. > :35:11.practice, unlike hospitals, which tend to have some slack with the

:35:12. > :35:16.junior doctor community and workforce. This isn't an argument,

:35:17. > :35:19.this is about saying, let's stop looking at the National health

:35:20. > :35:26.system as a National hospital system. GPs tomorrow will see about

:35:27. > :35:30.1.3 million patients. That is a lot of thoughtful. A lot of activity

:35:31. > :35:35.with no resources. If you wanted the GPs to behave better, in your terms,

:35:36. > :35:39.when you allocated more money to GPs, part of the reforms, because

:35:40. > :35:43.that's where it went, shouldn't you have targeted it more closely to

:35:44. > :35:47.where they want to operate? That is exactly what the Prime Minister is

:35:48. > :35:51.saying, extra funding is being made available by GPs to extend hours and

:35:52. > :35:54.services. If certain GP practices cannot do that, the money will

:35:55. > :35:58.follow the patient to where they move onto. We have no doctors to do

:35:59. > :36:01.it. I was on a coach last week, the coach driver stopped in the service

:36:02. > :36:06.station for an hour, they were stopping for a rest. We cannot do

:36:07. > :36:13.it. Even if you gave us millions more money, and thankfully NHS is

:36:14. > :36:15.recognising that we need a solution through the five-day week, we

:36:16. > :36:19.haven't got the doctors to deliver this. It would take a while to get

:36:20. > :36:22.them? That's my point, that's why we need to be using all how care

:36:23. > :36:25.professional. Even if you got this right, would it make a difference to

:36:26. > :36:29.what many regard as the crisis in our hospitals? I think it would. If

:36:30. > :36:34.you look at patients, they just want to go to a service that will address

:36:35. > :36:38.the problems. In Scotland for example, pharmacists have their own

:36:39. > :36:41.patient list. Patients go and see the pharmacists first. There are

:36:42. > :36:47.lots of conditions, for example if you want anticoagulants, you don't

:36:48. > :36:51.necessarily need to see a doctor, a pharmacist can manage that and free

:36:52. > :36:55.up the doctor in other ways. The Prime Minister has said that if

:36:56. > :36:58.things do not change she is threatening to reduce funding to

:36:59. > :37:01.doctors who do not comply. Can you both agree, that is probably an

:37:02. > :37:06.empty threat, that's not going to happen? I hope it's an empty threat.

:37:07. > :37:10.We're trying our best. People like me in my profession, the seniors in

:37:11. > :37:14.our profession, are really trying to pull up morale and get people into

:37:15. > :37:18.general practice, which is a wonderful profession, absolutely

:37:19. > :37:22.wonderful place to be. But slapping us off and telling us that we are

:37:23. > :37:26.lazy really doesn't help. I really don't think anybody is doing that.

:37:27. > :37:29.We have run out of time, but I'm certain that we will be back to the

:37:30. > :37:31.subject before this winter is out. It's just gone 11:35am,

:37:32. > :37:34.you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers

:37:35. > :37:36.in Scotland, who leave us now Welcome to Sunday Politics South

:37:37. > :37:48.for the first time in 2017, On today's show: Yet more misery

:37:49. > :37:53.on the trains as the drivers' union Aslef launches three days of strikes

:37:54. > :37:57.on Southern railways. Is it really all about safety,

:37:58. > :38:01.as the unions claim, or a more ideological struggle

:38:02. > :38:05.between government and the unions? First, let's meet the two

:38:06. > :38:09.politicians who'll be with me Anneliese Dodds is the Labour MEP

:38:10. > :38:15.for south-east England. And Chris Chope is the Conservative

:38:16. > :38:20.MP for Christchurch. Theresa May is to make,

:38:21. > :38:24.what's being billed, as the keynote speech on Brexit next

:38:25. > :38:26.Tuesday. What sort of red lines

:38:27. > :38:29.will you be looking for? Firstly, I'm very pleased she's

:38:30. > :38:33.making this speech because we've had so much uncertainty and lack

:38:34. > :38:35.of clarity about what the government actually wants for so long,

:38:36. > :38:38.so thank goodness she is making it. You don't mind, as long

:38:39. > :38:43.as it's clear and obvious Having said that, I think

:38:44. > :38:49.particularly for local businesses I represent in the South East,

:38:50. > :38:52.we really need to have access to the single market and I'm pretty

:38:53. > :38:55.disturbed about some of the mood music that's been floating along

:38:56. > :38:57.saying, actually we don't really want this any more,

:38:58. > :39:00.we're not going to fight for it. We were promised, including

:39:01. > :39:04.people who voted to leave, that we'd still be able to have

:39:05. > :39:06.access to the single market, So now, they've got

:39:07. > :39:10.to deliver on that. That's not in our hands,

:39:11. > :39:13.that's a European think That's not in our hands,

:39:14. > :39:15.that's a European thing But if we're not even asking for it

:39:16. > :39:21.then we are very unlikely to get it. I think in terms of red lines,

:39:22. > :39:26.first we need to get on with this. To leave the European Union

:39:27. > :39:30.and none of this talk about transitional arrangements,

:39:31. > :39:32.let's get it done. I think Theresa is going to make

:39:33. > :39:35.a speech where she's going to say we are leaving,

:39:36. > :39:37.we are going to actually have a really good future outside

:39:38. > :39:40.and I think this week the announcement by the Governor

:39:41. > :39:43.of the Bank of England that actually it's the rest of the European Union

:39:44. > :39:46.who's got more to fear if they don't have open markets

:39:47. > :39:48.with the United Kingdom, No, it really doesn't,

:39:49. > :39:53.unfortunately. I am kind of in the heart

:39:54. > :39:56.of some of this, I suppose. I'm listening to what people

:39:57. > :39:59.are saying in Brussels and of course, they do read British

:40:00. > :40:02.newspapers, a lot of them speak English and they see

:40:03. > :40:04.what Theresa May and others are saying and they see we don't

:40:05. > :40:07.seem to be prioritising having access to those markets,

:40:08. > :40:10.that many people have given that up. But aren't a lot of those Brussels

:40:11. > :40:12.politicians completely out of touch with for example,

:40:13. > :40:13.manufacturing industry And isn't the business community

:40:14. > :40:18.in the European Union actually going to get real

:40:19. > :40:21.with their politicians and say, you've got to have a deal

:40:22. > :40:24.with the United Kingdom that enables us to access the United

:40:25. > :40:28.Kingdom's internal market. With respect, I talk to them

:40:29. > :40:32.as well as manufacturers and service industry people in this region

:40:33. > :40:35.and they are saying, please, please, please can you get the government

:40:36. > :40:37.to start actually shouting out for us and trying to

:40:38. > :40:40.fight for this for us. If they are out of touch

:40:41. > :40:42.with their own manufacturing industry, they are not going to be

:40:43. > :40:45.listening to them either, they will just make

:40:46. > :40:47.a deal which punishes us. That's the danger, but of course it

:40:48. > :40:50.won't punish us as much But it will be too late

:40:51. > :40:56.by the time that happens. If you've got open markets,

:40:57. > :40:59.what's the fallback position? The fallback position is the WTO

:41:00. > :41:02.and that's not a bad deal because we are trading with most

:41:03. > :41:05.countries in the world It's extremely bad for farmers

:41:06. > :41:16.and no, we're not trading with most other countries on WTO

:41:17. > :41:18.terms necessarily, we've got trade deals that have been

:41:19. > :41:22.arranged through the EU. But if you want clarity whatever,

:41:23. > :41:25.that's likely to happen, isn't it? We are just going to get booted

:41:26. > :41:28.out and that's that? Unless our government really start

:41:29. > :41:30.standing up for our country and really start saying

:41:31. > :41:32.to our European partners that their manufacturing

:41:33. > :41:33.industry is dependent on, for example, finance from the city

:41:34. > :41:37.and they are not doing that. If European Union Eurocrats

:41:38. > :41:39.are not listening, With all due respect,

:41:40. > :41:43.I think we should start, stopping and thinking if we just

:41:44. > :41:45.shout as British politicians Why can't Theresa May make

:41:46. > :41:52.some of these arguments and say to Siemens, we need

:41:53. > :41:55.you to understand that Do you think she'll say

:41:56. > :41:59.something that conservatives Do you think she'll say

:42:00. > :42:01.something that Conservatives I'm sure the Conservatives

:42:02. > :42:05.will be very happy with... Well, not with whatever she says,

:42:06. > :42:08.but I think she's very much in tune with the feeling

:42:09. > :42:11.of the Parliamentary party and I think that will be reflected

:42:12. > :42:14.in what she says on Tuesday. Maybe not with the views

:42:15. > :42:17.of the country, but we will see. If you're a commuter on Southern

:42:18. > :42:20.railways it must feel as if the disputes and cancellations

:42:21. > :42:22.and restricted timetables And this week brought yet more

:42:23. > :42:26.of the same with three one-day strikes by the drivers union Aslef

:42:27. > :42:29.being added to the company's Throughout the week South Today

:42:30. > :42:32.has been featuring some of the individual stories

:42:33. > :42:34.of Southern's passengers caught up Here's a flavour

:42:35. > :42:39.of their experiences. That's the proportion of Southern

:42:40. > :42:47.trains being replaced Even so, the first commuter services

:42:48. > :42:56.from Chichester were quiet. Many, it seems, heeding Southern's

:42:57. > :42:59.advised to stay away. Amongst the passengers who had no

:43:00. > :43:01.choice, there was resignation. Well, I've got to get to Horsham

:43:02. > :43:04.everyday, I'm a teacher. But, this is just

:43:05. > :43:09.one of those things. It just means I have

:43:10. > :43:12.to get up a lot earlier, Probably adds another two to three

:43:13. > :43:24.hours onto my daily travelling. It's quite nice to not have to go

:43:25. > :43:27.and do the trains today. Every cloud has a silver lining

:43:28. > :43:31.and for Harriet and Sally, not being able to get to London

:43:32. > :43:34.today, meant a chance to meet socially for once,

:43:35. > :43:36.usually only seen each other as a group of 20 or so regular

:43:37. > :43:39.commuters on the same train. But even in this domestic setting,

:43:40. > :43:42.talk quickly turns to their life crammed onto packed trains

:43:43. > :43:46.which are frequently cancelled. When I moved here, I would walk

:43:47. > :43:52.in the door just after 7pm. The way that I feel

:43:53. > :44:07.we are being treated, if I was cattle, I know I've got

:44:08. > :44:10.essentially my area, 100% Now I don't get 100% of my area,

:44:11. > :44:15.when I'm standing up on a train Alison's job means she can work

:44:16. > :44:19.from home on strike days and she accepts others

:44:20. > :44:22.are in a far worse situation. She says she isn't

:44:23. > :44:24.prounion or management, instead she is on the side

:44:25. > :44:26.of her fellow commuters. I pay almost ?4500 for a season

:44:27. > :44:29.ticket where you don't even get a seat, you get

:44:30. > :44:31.this miserable service. You are surrounded by people,

:44:32. > :44:35.like-minded people who just You are being held to

:44:36. > :44:47.ransom, effectively. Don't forget because this

:44:48. > :44:50.is a government-operated franchise the taxpayer is picking up the tab

:44:51. > :44:53.for the dispute. ?60 million so far,

:44:54. > :44:55.according to the RMT. The Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn

:44:56. > :45:00.told me this week the solution We, you and me, the public, our

:45:01. > :45:08.money has gone into the development Network Rail is publicly owned,

:45:09. > :45:16.we own the carriages and all these things,

:45:17. > :45:19.why can't we run the whole service How many of your MPs would join

:45:20. > :45:25.you on a Southern rail picket line? They know it sends the wrong

:45:26. > :45:27.message to the commuters. The message to the

:45:28. > :45:29.commuters is simply this, we want a rail system that

:45:30. > :45:32.works, we want everyone to understand it is in nobody's

:45:33. > :45:35.interests to have a strike, it's in nobody's interests

:45:36. > :45:37.to have a disruption, but that's what happens

:45:38. > :45:39.when a company doesn't recognise that there are legitimate

:45:40. > :45:42.safety concerns. The Transport Secretary refused

:45:43. > :45:44.to talk to us all this week, though stopped in the street

:45:45. > :45:47.he denied the dispute That's very clear from what

:45:48. > :45:56.the independent regulator has said. So my message to the unions is,

:45:57. > :45:59.get back the table, If your members have got

:46:00. > :46:06.concerns will look at things like transitional arrangements that

:46:07. > :46:08.might help allay those concerns, but it's simply not right,

:46:09. > :46:11.it's simply not fair to be imposing this level of disruption on people

:46:12. > :46:13.around the south-east. What are you as Transport Secretary

:46:14. > :46:16.doing about it though? Don't you have a duty to step

:46:17. > :46:19.on behalf of the public? The government is engaged day in,

:46:20. > :46:22.day out in trying to find a way to get this issue resolved

:46:23. > :46:25.and they'll carry on doing that. So if this dispute is not

:46:26. > :46:27.about safety, what is it Well, Thames Link are operating

:46:28. > :46:31.the same trains on that same line with driver

:46:32. > :46:35.only operation. It's about the unions exploiting

:46:36. > :46:48.a situation in which the... Well, the franchise,

:46:49. > :46:51.under the terms of the franchise, which is more

:46:52. > :46:54.of a management agreement, really. Normally in an industrial dispute,

:46:55. > :46:58.there is an economic balance, but in this case, because the operator of

:46:59. > :47:04.the line is not actually suffering from the loss of income

:47:05. > :47:08.when the trains don't run because the fare boxes been

:47:09. > :47:12.picked up by the taxpayer, And that's been exploited

:47:13. > :47:18.by the trade unions... Those people on strike

:47:19. > :47:20.are losing money each time But the company isn't really losing

:47:21. > :47:28.any money and that's the problem. What do you think the motivation

:47:29. > :47:30.of the unions is? I think the motivation

:47:31. > :47:32.of the unions is as It is because they want

:47:33. > :47:38.to have the railways back in public ownership so they can hold,

:47:39. > :47:40.not just the commuters in this part of the south-east to

:47:41. > :47:43.ransom, but all commuters to ransom. The public generally do

:47:44. > :47:49.want to see public ownership. Every poll has shown that,

:47:50. > :47:52.but anyway, I really don't think the majority of staff who are

:47:53. > :47:55.on strike are motivated by some They have to vote about

:47:56. > :48:06.whether they want to go on strike and have actually got

:48:07. > :48:09.stricter rules on that by just about any other country in

:48:10. > :48:11.the developed world. So they've got to vote to say

:48:12. > :48:14.whether they want to go on strike or not and they said they did

:48:15. > :48:17.want to in this instance. What do you think the company's

:48:18. > :48:19.motivation is here? Do you think they are just trying

:48:20. > :48:22.to drive their costs down, this is costing, it's costing

:48:23. > :48:24.the taxpayer a fortune, but it's not the railway

:48:25. > :48:27.they would like to run, it's damaging the reputation

:48:28. > :48:28.of an international company? It is, but ultimately,

:48:29. > :48:31.I think this is about safety. I actually think the regulator

:48:32. > :48:33.was wrong to say it wasn't, because we have had

:48:34. > :48:36.instances when people have been Why do you think the

:48:37. > :48:40.company won't settle? Because they know that ultimately,

:48:41. > :48:42.the balance of evidence I just want to make one other point,

:48:43. > :48:48.it's not just about safety, it's also about the fact,

:48:49. > :48:50.if you are a disabled person in a wheelchair

:48:51. > :48:52.and you are trying to get on to a train

:48:53. > :48:55.that only has a driver operating it, you have to have told the rail

:48:56. > :48:58.company when you are going Why do you think the company

:48:59. > :49:04.won't settle this? Because I think they feel

:49:05. > :49:07.if they got dragged into talking about any of the detail they'd have

:49:08. > :49:10.to concede they are wrong on this. Jeremy Corbyn says their strings

:49:11. > :49:12.are being pulled by the government, do

:49:13. > :49:17.you agree with that? Yes, because if you look at when all

:49:18. > :49:20.of this move towards a lot of driverless trains happened

:49:21. > :49:23.in more general use across the networks, we're not talking just

:49:24. > :49:25.about some services for airports, whatever, when all of that started

:49:26. > :49:28.to happen, the government completely Now they are trying to wash

:49:29. > :49:33.their hands and say this is just something between the rail

:49:34. > :49:35.companies and the unions. Actually, it's a battle

:49:36. > :49:40.between the labour movement and a Actually, it's a battle

:49:41. > :49:43.between the Labour movement and a But it's you two who are

:49:44. > :49:47.putting the commuters The commuters are being held

:49:48. > :49:50.to ransom, as was said in By both sides, by a government

:49:51. > :49:54.paying ?60 million to keep Yes, but what do you think

:49:55. > :49:58.the government can do that they are not

:49:59. > :50:01.doing at the moment? What the government is saying,

:50:02. > :50:05.on the same line, Thames Link are running, not driverless,

:50:06. > :50:08.but trains with drivers only. And that is working fine,

:50:09. > :50:13.no problem on safety. What are we expecting

:50:14. > :50:17.the government to do? Because of the problem in the

:50:18. > :50:23.franchise arrangements, I think it means the government is not able

:50:24. > :50:26.to say to the company, if you carry on like this,

:50:27. > :50:29.you will have to pay the bill. You need public control don't you,

:50:30. > :50:31.if that's the problem? So long as this is

:50:32. > :50:34.a political dispute, and I think that's pretty much

:50:35. > :50:37.what most people have no thought, It needs politicians

:50:38. > :50:41.to say, we want to stop It's very disappointing

:50:42. > :50:44.Jeremy Corbyn didn't use his position to say

:50:45. > :50:46.to the unions, why don't you Anybody watching this will think

:50:47. > :50:56.oh my goodness, we have two politicians arguing about this

:50:57. > :51:00.and this is incredibly annoying. Ultimately, what we've

:51:01. > :51:02.always got to preserve I'm terribly sorry,

:51:03. > :51:07.but it really is. If it doesn't come down to politics,

:51:08. > :51:13.it comes down to safety? With all due respect,

:51:14. > :51:19.lots of experts would not agree with that, I'm sorry,

:51:20. > :51:21.but they really wouldn't. It would be nice to get some

:51:22. > :51:23.resolution wouldn't it, but I don't think any of us

:51:24. > :51:26.will be able to do it. I think it's desperate

:51:27. > :51:29.that we must find a solution. If you've been wincing at the recent

:51:30. > :51:32.rises in petrol prices, maybe going electric is starting

:51:33. > :51:34.to look attractive. You won't be alone, electric

:51:35. > :51:36.vehicle ownership has more But the number of charging points

:51:37. > :51:42.where you can plug in and re-juice an Ultra Low Emission Vehicle,

:51:43. > :51:45.or ULEV, is struggling to keep There are over 30 cars

:51:46. > :52:02.million on our roads. We all enjoy the convenience,

:52:03. > :52:04.whether that is commuting But with air pollution

:52:05. > :52:10.at an all-time high and an increased demand on fossil fuels,

:52:11. > :52:11.shouldn't we be looking This could be any other car,

:52:12. > :52:20.but if you listen, it's so quiet and that's because it's

:52:21. > :52:25.an electric car. There's over 85,000

:52:26. > :52:28.of these on the Road. There's over 85,000

:52:29. > :52:30.of these on the road. It might not seem all

:52:31. > :52:33.like that many, but in 2013, And by 2020, that number is expected

:52:34. > :52:40.to leap to more than a million. If the infrastructure was out

:52:41. > :52:43.there to support this and we can make driving an EV easy

:52:44. > :52:46.and you haven't got to constantly worry where you can charge this,

:52:47. > :52:49.or if you are going to run out of charge, I think that

:52:50. > :53:01.promotes the change to EV. InstaVolt in Basingstoke

:53:02. > :53:03.is cashing in on the demand. They are not focusing

:53:04. > :53:05.on the cars, but ensuring there is the infrastructure

:53:06. > :53:07.to support the predicted boom. They have identified a gap

:53:08. > :53:10.in the market particularly relating The infrastructure to support

:53:11. > :53:14.a electric vehicles in the UK isn't Yes, that's the boardroom,

:53:15. > :53:20.this is going to be Their offices aren't quite ready,

:53:21. > :53:27.but the orders are coming in. The company will make its money

:53:28. > :53:29.by charging the drivers Their rapid charging system means

:53:30. > :53:36.the battery can be charged up to 80% in half an hour and that will cost

:53:37. > :53:41.the driver about ?7. Back in 2015, George Osborne spoke

:53:42. > :53:47.of the government's continued dedication to electric

:53:48. > :53:49.vehicles, or EVs. Support the low carbon

:53:50. > :53:50.electricity and renewables The development and sale

:53:51. > :53:54.of ultralow emission vehicles It's a policy the government

:53:55. > :54:00.continues to push, offering But as the solar industry found out

:54:01. > :54:05.after its funding was cut, the government could row back

:54:06. > :54:14.on its promises at any time. InstaVolt isn't tied to any

:54:15. > :54:16.government scheme and has raised over ?12 million

:54:17. > :54:18.from the private sector. Whenever you are lying

:54:19. > :54:19.on government grants, it's always a finite

:54:20. > :54:22.amount of money. Typically, local authorities have

:54:23. > :54:25.had to bid for grant money, typically it's been oversubscribed

:54:26. > :54:27.and therefore a number of local authorities haven't been able

:54:28. > :54:30.to install the infrastructure they'd Finite or not, Oxford is taking

:54:31. > :54:37.advantage and tapping into an ?800,000 grant,

:54:38. > :54:39.which will allow the council to try different ways

:54:40. > :54:42.of powering up these vehicles. And those in the know

:54:43. > :54:45.at the transport research laboratory in Woking are convinced EVs

:54:46. > :54:48.are the future. The question now is about making

:54:49. > :54:51.sure the charging and infrastructure It's the right technology,

:54:52. > :54:56.it's fit for purpose and looking a few years ahead so people can make

:54:57. > :55:00.those buying decisions for vehicles feeling comfortable that in a few

:55:01. > :55:03.years' time it will still be relevant, acceptable

:55:04. > :55:07.and accessible for them. Here in the centre of Basingstoke

:55:08. > :55:10.we found one user who says charging We realise it's in its early

:55:11. > :55:24.stages, but the key I have noticed motorway services,

:55:25. > :55:28.there is quite a queue sometimes Low emission vehicles

:55:29. > :55:35.are currently more expensive, which does put some people off,

:55:36. > :55:38.but the transition from standard We have never been through this

:55:39. > :55:43.transition before in Ever since horse and carriage, they

:55:44. > :55:47.used internal combustion engine. We are figuring out how this

:55:48. > :55:51.is going to happen and evolve. Whether that evolution is driven

:55:52. > :55:53.through government policy or the private sector,

:55:54. > :55:59.the EV market is gathering momentum. We haven't come a long way

:56:00. > :56:14.in 20 years, have we? Chris Chope, ?600 million

:56:15. > :56:22.the government is going to put in to subsidise electric

:56:23. > :56:25.vehicles over the next five years, 50,000 plug-in points,

:56:26. > :56:26.100,000 people getting Is that the sort of money

:56:27. > :56:30.you'd put in in subsidy? Well, we did subsidise

:56:31. > :56:32.the commencement of unleaded We gave a fiscal incentive

:56:33. > :56:35.to encourage people to buy unleaded petrol and for the

:56:36. > :56:37.producers to develop it. So I'm not against it in principle,

:56:38. > :56:40.but I think the bigger I have great hopes

:56:41. > :56:43.Graphene batteries will transform the attractiveness

:56:44. > :56:46.of this form of transport because Graphene batteries have the prospect

:56:47. > :56:50.of being able to take your car 400 miles rather than very

:56:51. > :56:55.short distances. They would be lighter

:56:56. > :56:57.and if they are mass-produced, they It's all great until

:56:58. > :57:04.the subsidy does run out. The government doesn't always keep

:57:05. > :57:06.things going, does it? It didn't for unleaded petrol either

:57:07. > :57:09.and it shouldn't have done. I think the technological

:57:10. > :57:10.development here is a lot more sophisticated and that

:57:11. > :57:14.is where there is a difference. And that's where actually I think,

:57:15. > :57:16.having a continuing appropriate, well spent, well-run

:57:17. > :57:18.subsidies is important. It then also crowds in firms

:57:19. > :57:20.focusing on this in our region Whereas with unleaded,

:57:21. > :57:26.it is a relatively simple change. With the development of this

:57:27. > :57:29.technology it's very, very difficult and I want

:57:30. > :57:31.to see our firms here I want to have British companies

:57:32. > :57:35.doing it, just like the It does mean we shouldn't

:57:36. > :57:39.have, for example, the halving of the grant that is

:57:40. > :57:42.available to individuals to have one We shouldn't see that

:57:43. > :57:46.chop and change. Like we saw with solar, which has

:57:47. > :57:50.been so detrimental, we need to have that stability because otherwise

:57:51. > :57:52.you will get British It would be better if we invested

:57:53. > :57:59.in trying to get Graphene, because the Graphene has a prospect

:58:00. > :58:04.of transforming this bull market. because the Graphene has a prospect

:58:05. > :58:07.of transforming this whole market. The government was putting subsidies

:58:08. > :58:09.in trying to develop that new technology, wouldn't

:58:10. > :58:11.that be a better way? Some people think that government

:58:12. > :58:13.should pick winners, others think they should create

:58:14. > :58:16.the conditions for the market Perhaps we would agree on that

:58:17. > :58:20.and perhaps this is the case where we need to build up the demand

:58:21. > :58:23.and that's where government should be doing more than it's

:58:24. > :58:25.doing at the moment. And as I said, not

:58:26. > :58:27.chopping and changing. And would it make a difference

:58:28. > :58:30.for the environment as well if we had more

:58:31. > :58:32.of those electric vehicles? Now our regular round-up

:58:33. > :58:34.of the political week The Prime Minister, Theresa May,

:58:35. > :58:41.visited Hampshire as she launched The Well Being Centre in Aldershot

:58:42. > :58:50.provide support for people I thought she was going

:58:51. > :58:54.to be a bit more stern, but she was very laid

:58:55. > :58:56.back, quite relaxed. Campaigners, angry about the lack

:58:57. > :58:59.of provision for homeless people in Oxford have taken over a former

:59:00. > :59:02.car showroom to use as a centre. I don't want to see

:59:03. > :59:04.anyone freezing to death They have created sleeping areas

:59:05. > :59:08.and are offering hot food. To speed the queue of

:59:09. > :59:13.cars past Stonehenge, will cost ?1.4 billion,

:59:14. > :59:16.that's the cost of a tunnel around You will have 1.8 miles

:59:17. > :59:21.of clear space within We would look to start

:59:22. > :59:27.construction in early 2020. Finally, a practical course in bike

:59:28. > :59:30.awareness for the drivers of Aylesbury District Council bin

:59:31. > :59:36.lorries. All agreed the experience of two

:59:37. > :59:40.wheels was an eye-opener. Actually, ?1.4 billion for that

:59:41. > :59:46.tunnel, that could have done an awful lot of good in the homeless

:59:47. > :59:49.shelter, couldn't it? Is it a waste of money,

:59:50. > :59:51.the Stonehenge tunnel? Well, it's a very difficult one

:59:52. > :59:54.because some people would say In Oxford's case you've got

:59:55. > :59:59.a council there that's building new homes, but a lot of other

:00:00. > :00:03.councils won't let them do that, so it's not even all

:00:04. > :00:05.a bit about the money. The road, the A303

:00:06. > :00:09.needs to be speeded up. And Hindhead Tunnel

:00:10. > :00:12.is a demonstration of how having tunnel technology can

:00:13. > :00:15.really be worthwhile. And improve the environment,

:00:16. > :00:17.which is what they are That's the Sunday Politics

:00:18. > :00:21.in the South, thanks to my guests Next week we're going to be taking

:00:22. > :00:25.a look at the fairer funding formula for schools and who've been

:00:26. > :00:27.winners and losers. Now, if anyone thought Donald Trump

:00:28. > :00:49.would tone things down after the American election

:00:50. > :01:00.campaign, they may have The period where he has been

:01:01. > :01:04.President-elect will make them think again. The inauguration is coming up

:01:05. > :01:05.on Friday. Never has the forthcoming

:01:06. > :01:07.inauguration of a president been In a moment, we'll talk

:01:08. > :01:11.to a man who knows Mr Trump But first, let's have a look

:01:12. > :01:15.at the press conference Mr Trump gave on Wednesday,

:01:16. > :01:17.in which he took the opportunity to rubbish reports that Russia has

:01:18. > :01:19.obtained compromising information You are attacking our

:01:20. > :01:35.news organisation. Can you give us a chance,

:01:36. > :01:40.you are attacking our news organisation, can you give us

:01:41. > :01:43.a chance to ask a question, sir? As far as Buzzfeed,

:01:44. > :01:49.which is a failing pile of garbage, writing it, I think they're

:01:50. > :01:53.going to suffer the consequences. Does anyone really

:01:54. > :01:56.believe that story? I'm also very much of

:01:57. > :01:59.a germaphobe, by the way. If Putin likes Donald Trump,

:02:00. > :02:01.guess what, folks, that's called The only ones that care about my tax

:02:02. > :02:09.returns are the reporters, OK? Do you not think the American

:02:10. > :02:24.public is concerned? The Wiggo, Donald Trump at his first

:02:25. > :02:26.last conference. The Can will he change as President? Because he

:02:27. > :02:31.hasn't changed in the run-up to being inaugurated? I don't think he

:02:32. > :02:34.will commit he doesn't see any point in changing. Why would he change

:02:35. > :02:39.from the personality that just one, as he just said, I just one. All of

:02:40. > :02:41.the bleeding-heart liberals can wail and brush their teeth and say how

:02:42. > :02:46.ghastly that all this, Hillary should have won and so on, but he

:02:47. > :02:49.has got an incredible mandate. Remember, Trump has the House

:02:50. > :02:53.committee has the Senate, he will have the Supreme Court. He has

:02:54. > :02:57.incredible power right now. He doesn't have to listen to anybody. I

:02:58. > :03:01.spoke to him a couple of weeks ago specifically about Twitter, I asked

:03:02. > :03:06.him what the impact was of Twitter. He said, I have 60 million people

:03:07. > :03:10.following me on Twitter. I was able to bypass mainstream media, bypass

:03:11. > :03:14.all modern political convention and talk directly to potential voters.

:03:15. > :03:18.Secondly, I can turn on the TV in the morning, I can see a rival

:03:19. > :03:23.getting all of the airtime, and I can fire off a tweet, for free, as a

:03:24. > :03:27.marketing man he loves that, and, boom, I'm on the news agenda again.

:03:28. > :03:30.He was able to use that magnificently. Twitter to him didn't

:03:31. > :03:42.cost him a dollar. He is going to carry on tweeting in the last six

:03:43. > :03:46.weeks, he was not sleeping. Trump has never had an alcoholic drink a

:03:47. > :03:51.cigarette or a drug. He is a fit by the 70, he has incredible energy and

:03:52. > :03:54.he is incredibly competitive. At his heart, he is a businessman. If you

:03:55. > :03:59.look at him as a political ideologue, you completely missed the

:04:00. > :04:02.point of trouble. Don't take what he says literally, look upon it as a

:04:03. > :04:06.negotiating point that he started from, and try to do business with

:04:07. > :04:10.him as a business person would, and you may be presently surprised so

:04:11. > :04:15.pleasantly surprised. He treats the press and the media entirely

:04:16. > :04:22.differently to any other politician or main politician in that normally

:04:23. > :04:26.the politicians try to get the media off a particular subject, or they

:04:27. > :04:29.try to conciliate with the media. He just comes and punches the media in

:04:30. > :04:36.the nose when he doesn't like them. This could catch on, you know! You

:04:37. > :04:42.are absolutely right, for a start, nobody could accuse him of letting

:04:43. > :04:45.that victory go to his head. You know, he won't say, I will now be

:04:46. > :04:49.this lofty president. He's exactly the same as he was before. What is

:04:50. > :04:53.fascinating is his Laois and ship with the media. I haven't met, and

:04:54. > :04:57.I'm sure you haven't, met a party leader who is obsessed with the

:04:58. > :05:03.media. But they pretend not to be. You know, they state, oh, somebody

:05:04. > :05:10.told me about a column, I didn't read it. He is utterly transparent

:05:11. > :05:14.in his obsession with the media, he doesn't pretend. How that plays out,

:05:15. > :05:18.who knows? It's a completely different dynamic than anyone has

:05:19. > :05:23.seen by. Like he is the issue, he has appointed an unusual Cabinet,

:05:24. > :05:26.that you could criticise in many ways. Nearly all of them are

:05:27. > :05:31.independent people in their own right. A lot of them are wealthy,

:05:32. > :05:34.too. They have their own views. They might not like what he tweaked at

:05:35. > :05:39.3am, and he does have to deal with his Cabinet now. Mad dog matters,

:05:40. > :05:45.now the Defence Secretary, he might not like what's said about China at

:05:46. > :05:49.three in morning - general matters. This is what gets very conjugated.

:05:50. > :05:52.We cannot imagine here in our political system any kind of

:05:53. > :05:55.appointments like this. Using the wouldn't have a line-up of

:05:56. > :05:58.billionaires of the kind of background that he has chosen -- you

:05:59. > :06:03.simply wouldn't have. But that won't stop him saying and reading what he

:06:04. > :06:05.thinks. Maybe it will cause him some internal issues when the following

:06:06. > :06:10.day he has the square rigged with whatever they think. But he's going

:06:11. > :06:18.to press ahead. Are we any clearer in terms of policy. I know policy

:06:19. > :06:21.hasn't featured hugely in this campaign of 2016. Do we have any

:06:22. > :06:28.really clear idea what Mr Trump is hoping to achieve? He has had some

:06:29. > :06:32.consistent theme going back over 25 years. One is a deep scepticism

:06:33. > :06:35.about international trade and the kind of deals that America has been

:06:36. > :06:39.doing over that period. It has been so consistent that is has been hard

:06:40. > :06:42.to spin as something that you say during the course of a campaign of

:06:43. > :06:46.something to get elected. Ultimately, Piers is correct, he

:06:47. > :06:49.won't change. When he won the election committee gave a relatively

:06:50. > :06:54.magnanimous beach. I thought his ego had been sated and he had got what

:06:55. > :06:57.he wanted. He will end up governing as is likely eccentric New York

:06:58. > :07:01.liberal and everything will be fine. In the recent weeks it has come to

:07:02. > :07:04.my attention that that might not be entirely true!

:07:05. > :07:08.LAUGHTER It is a real test of the American

:07:09. > :07:13.system, the Texan bouncers, the foreign policy establishment which

:07:14. > :07:17.is about to have the orthodoxies disrupted -- the checks and

:07:18. > :07:21.balances. I think he has completely ripped up the American political

:07:22. > :07:24.system. Washington as we know it is dead. From his garage do things his

:07:25. > :07:30.way, he doesn't care, frankly, what any of us thinks -- Trump is going

:07:31. > :07:36.to do things his way. If he can deliver for the people who voted for

:07:37. > :07:42.him who fault this disenfranchised, -- who voted for him who felt this

:07:43. > :07:46.disenfranchised. They voted accordingly. They want to see jobs

:07:47. > :07:50.and the economy in good shape, they want to feel secure. They want to

:07:51. > :07:55.feel that immigration has been tightened. If Trump can deliver on

:07:56. > :07:59.those main theme for the rust belt communities of America, I'm telling

:08:00. > :08:02.you, he will go down as a very successful president. All of the

:08:03. > :08:05.offensive rhetoric and the argy-bargy with CNN and whatever it

:08:06. > :08:13.may be will be completely irrelevant. Let me finish with a

:08:14. > :08:15.parochial question. Is it fair to say quite well disposed to this

:08:16. > :08:17.country? And that he would like, that he's up for a speedy

:08:18. > :08:24.free-trade, bilateral free-trade you'll? Think we have to be sensible

:08:25. > :08:28.as the country. Come Friday, he is the president of the United States,

:08:29. > :08:32.the most powerful man and well. He said to me that he feels half

:08:33. > :08:35.British, his mum was born and raised in Scotland until the age of 18, he

:08:36. > :08:39.loves British, his mother used to love watching the Queen, he feels

:08:40. > :08:44.very, you know, I would roll out the red carpet for Trump, let him eat

:08:45. > :08:50.Her Majesty. The crucial point for us as a country is coming -- let him

:08:51. > :08:54.me to Her Majesty. If we can do a speedy deal within an 18 month

:08:55. > :08:58.period, it really sends a message that well but we are back in the

:08:59. > :09:02.game, that is a hugely beneficial thing for this country. Well, a man

:09:03. > :09:08.whose advisers were indicating that maybe he should learn a few things

:09:09. > :09:12.from Donald Trump was Jeremy Corbyn. Yes, MBE. Mr Corbyn appeared on the

:09:13. > :09:15.Andrew Marr Show this morning. -- yes, indeed.

:09:16. > :09:18.If you don't win Copeland, and if you don't win

:09:19. > :09:19.Stoke-on-Trent Central, you're toast, aren't you?

:09:20. > :09:24.Our party is going to fight very hard in those elections,

:09:25. > :09:27.as we are in the local elections, to put those policies out there.

:09:28. > :09:29.It's an opportunity to challenge the Government on the NHS.

:09:30. > :09:32.It's an opportunity to challenge them on the chaos of Brexit.

:09:33. > :09:34.It's an opportunity to challenge them on the housing shortage.

:09:35. > :09:36.It's an opportunity to challenge them on zero-hours contracts.

:09:37. > :09:41.Is there ever a moment that you look in the mirror and think,

:09:42. > :09:45.you know what, I've done my best, but this might not be for me?

:09:46. > :09:47.I look in the mirror every day and I think,

:09:48. > :09:50.let's go out there and try and create a society where there

:09:51. > :09:52.are opportunities for all, where there aren't these terrible

:09:53. > :09:54.levels of poverty, where there isn't homelessness,

:09:55. > :09:56.where there are houses for all, and where young people aren't

:09:57. > :09:59.frightened of going to university because of the debts

:10:00. > :10:02.they are going to end up with at the end of their course.

:10:03. > :10:08.Mr Corbyn earlier this morning. Steve, would it be fair to say that

:10:09. > :10:12.the mainstream of the Labour Party has now come to the conclusion that

:10:13. > :10:15.they just have to let Mr Corbyn get on with it, that they are not going

:10:16. > :10:20.to try and influence what he does. They will continue to try and have

:10:21. > :10:25.their own views, but it's his show, it's up to him, if it's a mess, he

:10:26. > :10:28.has to live with it and we'll have clean hands? For now, yes. I think

:10:29. > :10:31.they made a mistake when he was first elected to start in some cases

:10:32. > :10:36.tweeting within seconds that it was going to be a disaster, this was

:10:37. > :10:39.Labour MPs. They made a complete mess of that attempted coup in the

:10:40. > :10:45.summer, which strengthened his position. And he did, it gave Corbyn

:10:46. > :10:49.the space with total legitimacy to say that part of the problem is,

:10:50. > :10:55.we're having this public Civil War. In keeping quiet, that disappeared

:10:56. > :11:00.as part of the explanation for why Labour and low in the polls. I think

:11:01. > :11:05.they are partly doing that. But they are also struggling, the so-called

:11:06. > :11:09.mainstream Labour MPs, to decide what the distinctive agenda is. It's

:11:10. > :11:13.one of the many differences with the 80s, where you had a group of people

:11:14. > :11:17.sure of what they believed in, they left to form the SDP. What's

:11:18. > :11:21.happening now is that they are leaving politics altogether. That is

:11:22. > :11:25.a crisis of social Democrats all across Europe, including the French

:11:26. > :11:33.Socialists, as we will find out later in the spring. Let Corbyn

:11:34. > :11:35.because then, that's the strategy. There is a weary and sometimes

:11:36. > :11:37.literal resignation from the moderates in the Labour Party. If

:11:38. > :11:40.you talk to them, they are no longer angry, they have always run out of

:11:41. > :11:43.steam to be angry about what's going on. They are just sort of tired and

:11:44. > :11:47.feel that they've just got to see this through now. I think the

:11:48. > :11:51.by-elections will be interesting. When Andrew Marr said, you're toast,

:11:52. > :11:56.and you? I thought, he's never posed! That was right. A quick

:11:57. > :12:01.thought from view? One thing Corbyn has in common with Trump is immunity

:12:02. > :12:09.to bad news. I think he can lose Copeland and lose Stoke, and as long

:12:10. > :12:11.as it is not a sequence of resignations and by-elections

:12:12. > :12:14.afterwards, with maybe a dozen or 20 Labour MPs going, he can still enjoy

:12:15. > :12:20.what. It may be more trouble if Labour loses the United trade union

:12:21. > :12:22.elections. We are in a period of incredible unpredictability

:12:23. > :12:27.generally in global politics. If you look at the way the next year plays

:12:28. > :12:30.out, if for example brags it was a disaster and it starts to unravel

:12:31. > :12:33.very quickly, Theresa May is attached to that, clearly label

:12:34. > :12:37.would have a great opportunity potentially disease that higher

:12:38. > :12:43.ground, and when Eddie the Tories -- Labour would have an opportunity. Is

:12:44. > :12:48.Corbyn the right guy? We interviewed him, what struck me was that he

:12:49. > :12:51.talked about being from, a laughable comparison, but when it is really

:12:52. > :12:56.laughable is this - Hillary Clinton, what were the things she stood for,

:12:57. > :13:00.nobody really knew? What does Trump stand for? Everybody knew. Corbyn

:13:01. > :13:04.has the work-out four or five messages and bang, bang, bang. He

:13:05. > :13:06.could still be in business. Thank you for being with us.

:13:07. > :13:09.I'll be back at the same time next weekend.

:13:10. > :13:11.Remember - if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.