19/11/2017 Sunday Politics South

Morning everyone, and welcome

to the Sunday Politics.

I'm Sarah Smith.

And this is your guide

to all the big stories that

are shaping politics this weekend,

and a few of the smaller ones too.

Philip Hammond is getting ready

to deliver his latest Budget

on Wednesday and he's not short

of advice - to spend more,

show restraint, even

to stop being an Eyore -

but can he change the direction

of the country and his government?

Conservative Party darling

Jacob Rees-Mogg has

some advice of his own.

He thinks the Chancellor

is being far too gloomy about Brexit

- he joins me live to explain why.

The former Leave campaign leader,

Gisela Stuart, will be here debating

with pro-EU campaigner

Alastair Campbell, after taking

a trip to her native Germany

to speak to businesses

about Brexit.

And, as we wait to find out what's

on the menu for this week's budget,

we're in a diner off

the A1 in Peterborough,

finding out who people most trust

with the economy -

Philip Hammond or John McDonnell?

How she comes across all wants to

charge per visit,

All that coming up in the programme.

And with me for for all of it,

three journalists who've promised

not to show off like Michael Gove

by using any long economicky words -

although I'm not sure they really

know that many anyway -

it's Tom Newton Dunn,

Gaby Hinsliff and Iain Martin.

Let's take a look at the big

political stories making the news

this Sunday morning,

and as you might expect there's

plenty of speculation

about what might or not might be

in Philip Hammond's Budget.

The Chancellor is promising a big

investment in new technology,

including driverless cars -

which could be on the road by 2021.

He's been interviewed

in the Sunday Times,

where he talks about plans to reach

the target of building

300,000 homes every year,

or the equivalent of a city

the size of Leeds.

That paper speculates that he's

attempting to turn from "fiscal

Phil" into "hopeful Hammond"

as he tries to set out

a vision for the country,

not just a list of numbers.

The Sunday Telegraph thinks that

Mr Hammond is planning to offer

a pay rise to nurses as part

of a bid to take on Labour.

But that hasn't impressed

Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell.

He's spoken to a number of papers

and is calling for an emergency

budget to invest in public services

and help struggling households.

So that's a taste of what you might

hear on Wednesday and Mr Hammond

and Mr McDonnell have both been

appearing this morning

on the Andrew Marr Show.

I think Britain has a very

bright future ahead of it,

and we have to embrace

the opportunities that

a post-Brexit world will offer.

They will be opportunities that

are based on huge change,

huge technological evolution.

It's not always going to be easy,

but the British people have shown

time and time again that we're up

for these challenges.

For many people out there,

this is a depression.

We've had people whose wages

have been cut by 10%.

Nurses, for example.

We've had people who are now...

1.25 million food parcels handed out

in the sixth richest

country in the world.

That's what I call a recession

for large numbers of people.

We will be talking about Labour and

their economic policies in a moment,

but let's start with what we might

expect from the budget. We will talk

to our panel of political observers.

Philip Hammond is under pressure to

set out a bold vision and reset the

government's programme. Can we

expect that?

No, we can't. We have

heard enough from the Chancellor

across various broadcast and his

article in the Sunday Times. I think

we will not be getting a bold

budget. His precise words short... A

short time ago were a balanced

budget. Some Tory hearts will think.

They desperately want something to

go out and shout about, something to

capture people's imagination, and do

big and bold things, like how on

earth are they going to build those

new 300,000 houses a year? There are

good reasons why he has chosen what

appears to be a pretty staid,

Conservative budget, and that is

that they are probably unable to get

anything bold through Parliament.

His capital is so low among Tory

MPs. If you have a minority

government, it is tricky.

We have

seen ministers on programmes like

this in the last few weeks putting

in the bids for what they would like

spending on, whether it be payment

for nurses or parliament. Would he

struggled to get something radical

through the Commons?

Big ideas cost

money. That's the problem. Bold

ideas are controversial. In some

ways, Tory MPs are asking their

Chancellor to do the impossible.

Government is already doing

something big and bold, which is

Brexit. That has implications for

how much money is available, how

many risks you want to take with

everything else. What is crucial is

that he demonstrates a reputation

for competence. The reputation that

the Conservative government has for

economic competence, that many

people prefer them to Labour on the

issue of economic competence. The

worst thing he could do is come up

with a big, bold idea that

unravelled quickly. What they

absolutely don't want is to come up

with an exciting idea that falls

apart three days after the budget.

He is under pressure from

Brexiteers, who are suspicious of

him. Does he have to offer them

something?

Part of his problem is he

has to offer so many different

people different things. This is

Philip Hammond trying to be and

dynamic.

It is hard to tell

sometimes.

At least in theoretical

terms. His longer-term difficulty is

that, if you look at the economic

cycle, we are getting to a point

where we are probably overdue, if

you put Brexit to one side, overdue

some kind of correction or downturn,

if you look what has happened to

asset prices globally. What will be

worrying for the Treasury is, just

as everyone is saying we should turn

on the taps and build this or that,

we might be at the top of a cycle,

and the Treasury will want to lose

something in the armoury in terms of

probably growing the deficit if

there are economic difficulties in

the next two years, and then there

is Brexit as well.

It sounds

impossible.

I think so. Talking to

his friends and colleagues over the

last few days, he had to make a

call, which was precisely how much

can I get away with, with my

political capital being as low as it

is, with the mixed problems he had

at the last budget, and a lot of the

party disliking his approach to

Brexit. He is damned if he is,

damned if he doesn't. Universal

Credit, we are expecting a reduction

in the time it takes to wait,

business rates, affected by high

inflation... I think we will see a

problem fixing budget which will

probably do quite a lot of important

spadework in many areas.

We will

pick up on some of this later in the

programme.

Let's speak now to the Conservative

MP Jacob Rees-Mogg, this week

he helpfully launched an alternative

"budget for Brexit" and advised

the Chancellor to be less gloomy

about the consequences

of leaving the EU.

Thank you for joining us. Your

alternative budget is pretty

radical. Almost half corporation

tax, Cap Stamp duty to help the

London market. It seems you are

advocating the opposite from what we

will hear from your Chancellor on

Wednesday.

There are two parts to

the proposals I suggested. One is

that we should show that after we

have left the European Union, the UK

is open to the rest of the world. It

is about opening up to the rest of

the world. Secondly, looking at the

modelling that has been done by the

Treasury and some other forecasters,

which has been so comprehensively

wrong. The forecasts made about what

would happen after Brexit have

turned out to be hopelessly false.

The team at Cardiff University have

done some modelling based on the

classical economic principles and

what happens if you move to free

trade that would be very positive

for the economy.

You are predicting

a Brexit dividend of £135 billion,

which sounds fantastic. Why are you

right, and everybody else, including

the Bank of England and the

Institute for Fiscal Studies, why

are they all wrong?

It depends on

the type of modelling. The modelling

that have been done by the Treasury

have been based on gravity models,

which work on the basis of the

nearness of the market and the size

of the economy you are trading with.

These have been wrong in the past.

They predicted that if we joined the

euro, trade would grow by 300%. That

was then revised down to 200%, but

it is fantasyland. The model I am

working on, by Sir Patrick Minford,

who has a record of getting these

things right. He was right about the

exchange rate mechanism, right about

the euro.

Being right in the past

doesn't mean you are right about the

future. Why do you think the

Treasury will not pick up the same

numbers, if this is so obvious to

you?

I think the Treasury was

humiliated by the errors in its

forecast prior to Brexit, and is

trying to defend its position. The

short-term economic consequences of

a vote to leave was one of the most

dishonest documents to come out of

the Treasury, purely a piece of

political propaganda. They are

wounded by that and sticking to the

same script, rather than looking at

other forecasts and other experts.

You think the governor of the Bank

of England is an enemy of Brexit,

and it sounds like you think the

Treasury is opposed to it. As the

Chancellor fallen under their spell

as well, and been persuaded to be an

enemy of Brexit?

I have admiration

the Chancellor, but George Osborne,

his predecessor, was the architect

of Project Fear. He was too close to

the Bank of England and lost his

independence. That is what needs to

change. It is an opportunity in the

budget for Philip Hammond to show he

is putting aside the Treasury's

mistakes in the past. It is very

encouraging what he is saying this

morning, about a more positive

approach to Brexit.

Lord Lawson has

accused Philip Hammond of being very

close to sabotage on Brexit. He says

we need a can-do man at the Treasury

and not a prophet of doom.

I think

that Philip Hammond is an

exceptionally intelligent man, a

very thoughtful man. It is not a bad

thing to have a Chancellor who is

serious minded and steady, rather

than one who is a showman and uses

the Exchequer to interfere in

absolutely everything.

I have a lot

of confidence in the Chancellor.

When you launched your budget for

Brexit, you said the government has

to deliver the £350 million for the

NHS that was delivered during the

referendum, even though you didn't

think that promise should have been

made. Is that something they now

need to deliver wrong?

It is. This

only happens once we have left.

Politicians have to recognise that

voters don't look at the small print

of electoral policies. If you put

£350 million on the side of a bus

and say it may be available for the

NHS, it is reasonable for people to

think that is a promise. Brexit was

won by the Leave campaign, so it it

is important that they deliver on

that promise. Politicians must keep

faith with voters and deliver on

implied promises, as well as ones

that are set out in detail.

The

Cabinet will move on to talk about

the Brexit bill this week, and we

understand they may need to come up

with more money to satisfy EU

demands. The more money spent on

that is less money available for

things like spending on the NHS. Are

you worried about the size of the

exit bill?

You have your finger on

the important point. The government

will have to choose whether to give

lots of money to the European Union,

or whether to spend money on UK

public services, and that will be

part of the negotiation. On all

these issues, it comes down to

choice is the government makes. I

would encourage the government to

choose our own domestic public

services rather than expensive

schemes in continent or Europe.

Why

are you advocating that the

government should spend up to £2.5

billion on a no deal scenario?

It is important that we are ready to

leave in the event of no deal. If we

left with no deal we would on

current figures still be saving the

remains of 18 billion so we would be

saving 15 and a half billion against

paying for the financial framework.

To show we're ready on day one would

be money well spent and most would

be needed any way. We need to have

new customs arrangements in place

even if it is not for a no deal

situation.

There are suggestions

that the Government might back down

on the idea of putting the time and

date of leaving the EU on the face

of the bill. Would you be Exxon

certained if that was -- concerned

if that was remove prd the bill?

It

is in Article 50, unless Article 50

is extended by the Council of Europe

we leave on 20th March 2019 and it

makes accepts that should be the

same in -- sense that should be in

same in domestic law. But that is a

secondary concern from my point of

view. It is important that we leave

on that date.

Stay there if you

would.

We're joined in the studio

by the former minister

Stephen Hammond.

He's no relation to the Chancellor,

but he is a member

of the Treasury Select Committee

and he's one of the Tory MPs named

as "Brexit mutineers"

by the Daily Telegraph

this week - lucky him.

I'm assured you're no relation to

the Chancellor. Let's just pick up

on what Jacob Rees Mogg was saying.

How important is it to you as a

rebel that the Government does put

the date on.

I agree with Jacob it

is in the Article 50 process, the

key reason it is important is the

negotiations look like they're going

to be tricky and longer than we

expected and it may well be that we

are still negotiating up until March

2019. We could have a short couple

of weeks period of extension. Why do

harm to the economy by falling out

on a precise time? If those

negotiations need to be extended.

They won't go on for more than a

couple of weeks, because there will

be elections in Europe in June 2019

and there is no chance of a new

commission or Parliament dealing

with this. Giving it flexibility and

with this flexibility the government

said it wants flexibility in

negotiations, why give all the

advantage to the other side? Part of

that was evidenced yesterday by

somebody suggesting they will ask

for the Margaret Thatcher rebate to

be suspended. That is as a result of

putting the date on the bill.

You

did not agree with the Brexit

committee and think it is important

that we set the date and time?

I

think it is perfectly reasonable to

set the date and time and I think

these negotiations fill the time

available. The United States and

Australia agreed a free trade deal

between April 2003 and February

2004. These things don't need to be

interm Knabl if both sides want to

agree. I think the British

electorate would be very concerned

if nearly three years after the vote

to leave, we still hadn't left. I

think most people expected that we

would have left by now. The

negotiations realistically to get

through the approval of the European

Parliament and so on need to be

completed by at the end of next

year, going up to the last minute I

don't think is real is tick.

To move

on to talk about a trade deal and

getting that done, the EU need to

agree to move on and we need to

settle the divorce, cabinet are

going to be talking about the amount

that needs to be spent on that,

Stephen what manned, are you happy

for the Government to offer more?

I

hope that the Government will stick

to the Florence speech in terms of

ensuring that we fulfil our

liabilities and obligations. I'm not

clear exactly whether that is 20

billion or 40 billion and I'm not

sure the government is. If part of

the divorce bill is then some

settlement for getting the trade

deal, we will need to examine that

carefully.

Jacob Rees Mogg, is this

that might spark another war in the

party if the cabinet suggest they're

prepared to pay more?

I think we

need to go back to what you said,

that the - the EU said they want us

to settle the money first. The

Government doesn't need to follow

that. They need our money. If we

don't pay any money for the final 21

months of the framework, the EU has

about 20 billion pounds gap in its

finances and it has no legal

requirement to borrow. So it

insolvents or the Germans and the

others pay more. So our position on

money is very strong and we

shouldn't fall into the trap of

thinking just because Mr Barnier

said it it is as if he has received

tablets of stone like Moses, he has

not.

There is a sense that the

Government feels a mo generous offer

would set a good tone, the kind of

approach that Jacob Rees Mogg

suggests would not make for smooth

relations.

It probably wouldn't. But

we have to be clear what we are

paying for and what we are getting.

No one is suggesting we should hand

over money without proper scrutiny.

It may be appropriate to put money

to facilitate international trade to

secure jobs. We have to be careful

about the analysis about what the

scale and size of Brexit dividend is

and the size of payments will be.

You mustn't confuse gross and net

and there is disagreement about some

of the numbers.

On that, Jacob Rees

Mogg in his budget for Brexit

suggests in five years time we would

have a 135 billion Brexit bonus. Do

you think it is real is tick.

He is

using some analysis that has some

flaws. It is predicting a price drop

in the United Kingdom of 10%. Tariff

drops will only be 3 or 4%. It is

predicting huge productivity gains,

the likes of which we have not seen

in 20 years. Thirdly, despite his

view on modellers there is evidence

that they weren't and if you go into

the detail of the analysis, some of

the data is 14 years out of date.

Jacob Rees Mogg, you're being

hopelessly optimistic?

I don't think

that right. I think the fall in

prices comes because you make the

economy more competitive and you

take away tariffs which reduces the

price of food by 20%. That is a big

reduction. Bear in mind that the

biggest tariffs hit food, clothing

and foot wear that, harm the poorest

in society the most. The gains from

productivity come from is in

additional tariffs. Leading to other

saving and further investment I

think the modelling done by the

professor is as good as modelling

can be. That doesn't mean it is

infallible. The failure of gravity

model is well known.

Michael Gove

was accused of auditioning for the

job of Chancellor by using long

words. Do you know any good long

economic words?

I don't think that

we want to get into this type of

business actually. I think all

Conservatives and Steven and I very

much agree on this, want to show as

united a front as we can manage.

There are differences on some

aspects of policy, but in terms of

individuals we want to stand

together and support the best

interests of the government.

Thank

you.

Brexit Secretary David Davis

was in Berlin this week trying

to win the support of business

leaders there for a comprehensive

free trade deal with the EU.

He warned them against putting

'politics above prosperity'

and reportedly got a bit

of a frosty reception.

Well, the former Labour MP

Gisela Stuart was one of the leaders

of the Vote Leave referendum

campaign.

We travelled with Gisela to Germany

to meet the business leaders

she says will help secure a good

trade deal for the UK.

Here's her film.

I was born and brought up

in this part of Germany,

and although I've lived in the UK

for the past 40 years,

and represented the constituency

of Birmingham and Edgbaston for 20

years, my family still live here,

and I've kept many links.

I was chair of Vote Leave,

and together with only a handful

of other Labour MPs,

we campaigned to leave

the European Union because we

thought the country would be

better off outside.

It's hard to remember now, but back

in the 1970s, when we joined

the European Economic Community,

people thought that by joining

the club we would see the kind

of economic miracle Germany

experienced in the '70s back home.

The "Deutsche Wirtschaftswunder"

would come to Britain.

But, of course, it didn't.

Within a few short years

of the devastation of World War II,

Germany had emerged as

the largest economy in Europe.

Germany's extraordinary

success is down to

the pragmatism of its business.

German Mittelstand is family

dominated, forward-thinking,

long-term thinking, reliability,

are very important values.

Changing moods on a political

landscape and changing frameworks

are toxic for our way of doing

business, and we want

that to go away.

German business is not given

to making big political statements

out of step with government policy,

but talk to those in decision-making

positions, and it is clear

that they want to secure a good deal

with the United Kingdom.

BMW employs almost 90,000

people here in Germany,

and exports just under

1 million cars annually.

The UK is a vital market.

What we are really seeking right now

is more clarity, more certainty,

because in our cycle of investment,

cycle of development,

it's about a seven-year or so period

that we look at,

but we are now, of course, starting

to think about what comes next,

and what we need to see now

is what is going to be

the trading relationship,

how are the logistics going to look,

what is going to be

the requirements for people

moving across the continent?

Because all of these things

are important to us today.

And, by the way, they will be just

as important tomorrow.

Berlin is well aware that

if the European Commission

is allowed to put up trade barriers

against Britain, it will be

German business, German consumers

and German employees

who will suffer.

TRANSLATION:

I think it's very

important that we complete

the first phase successfully.

The first phase of the negotiations,

which looks at the financial

consequences of Great Britain

leaving the EU.

And then it's not a question

of punishment payments.

It's about when you are part

of a multilayer, contractual

obligation and you want to leave

that, then of course it takes

a whole lot of obligations

which you have to deal with,

so both sides are satisfied and can

live with the consequences.

It isn't everyone's interests

for the UK to part on good terms.

Of course there was going to be

upset when the UK voted to leave,

but creating uncertainty over

the terms of UK's exit will simply

have a disruptive effect

on exports to UK markets.

Far better to have a sensible,

amicable negotiation that results

both sides being able to trade

together and work

together post-Brexit.

Markus Krall is managing

director of Goetzpartners,

and heads the Financial

Institution Industry Group.

Is it true to say that,

if we negotiate Brexit well,

then a good Brexit can actually

strengthen the United Kingdom,

the European Union and Germany?

It's absolutely true.

I think that this

is about two things.

One, about proving that

free trade is possible

between a European Union that is

smaller and a former member country.

If you don't prove that free

trade is possible there,

then the question becomes,

what is Europe standing for?

Number two is, I also

believe the free trade,

free market and democratic and less

bureaucratic approach that Britain

has chosen as the path

into the future is a role

model for Europe.

The time has come both

for the United Kingdom

and for the EU to be more clear

about what kind of

deal we can achieve.

Both sides need to be bold.

As long as we remain open to free

trade and sensible co-operation,

we can arrive at something that

will benefit both sides.

But one thing's obvious -

if we are an open and free trading

economy, we've got one big

cheerleader on our side,

and that is German business.

That was Gisela Stuart

setting out her case

and we'll be hearing

from the opposite side

of the argument in the coming weeks.

Gisela Stuart joins us in the studio

now, as does Alastair Campbell.

He used to work for Tony Blair

in Number 10, set up

the New European Newspaper

to campaign against Brexit,

and is so pro-European that at this

year's Labour conference

he was heard playing Ode

to Joy on the bagpipes.

Welcome both of you.

We will start with your point in the

film, that you think the German

business once the EU to offer the UK

a generous deal because it is in

their interests, yet the president

of the German equivalent of the CBI

said that defending the single

market must be the priority for the

EU, and another says that the

cohesion of the remaining member

states remains the highest priority.

The president of the CBI just after

the referendum said that it would be

in nobody 's interest to introduce

tariffs and trade barriers. On the

UK side, I don't think there's a

full understanding that economic

interests are incredibly important,

that they are trying to cover

economic interests on the cohesion

of the 27. I think different

economic interests will raise the

head of different countries. The

German auto industry is as important

as the financial sector is here. The

banking crisis is far from over, but

the big riffs which were going on is

that the E U is losing its second

biggest net contributor. Countries

like Germany want a deal with the UK

that is a free open market. There

are other tensions in the EU that

wants to become more protectionist,

and that is a bad thing.

Looking at

the film there with the Jacob

Rees-Mogg interview. No matter what

side of leave you are, it is

delusional and all driven by wishful

thinking. You could find a

businessman who says Brexit will be

good for Germany. The vast bulk of

British businesses think this is a

disaster, as do the vast bulk of

European businesses. One of the

delusions on which they ran their

campaign is the idea that they need

us more than we need them. That is

not true.

Be you self about £80

billion more in goods and services

into the UK than we do to them, and

Germany has one of the biggest

deficits. It is in their interest.

Of course it is, but it is a myth

that they need us more than we need

them. The damage that will be done

to us, even with a good deal. Let's

be frank, where these negotiations

are, Theresa May is either going to

end up with a bad deal and dumber or

no Deal. A bad deal is bad, and a no

deal is a catastrophe.

You are

setting up ideas that which were not

there to begin with and knocking

them down. Delusional.

35 billion,

the Brexit bonus.

If we had a

referendum, it was a democratic

decision. I know you don't like it

and that a lot of business would

have preferred to stay with the

status quo. We have had the

referendum. Undermining political

institutions is in no one's

interests. It is functioning

democracies which lead to economic

stability.

Theresa May fought an

election Inc on a hard Brexit that

was rejected.

As we heard from BMW,

there is uncertainty for business.

There will be elections, European

elections, in 2019. There will be a

change of the Commission and the

parliament. We have a narrow window

to implement the mandate for the

referendum which Parliament voted

for. So rather than you undermining

this country, why don't you work

together to get the best deal?

Because we totally disagree.

You

don't want a good deal?

I'm in

favour of a good deal, and I could

give them some advice as to how they

get a good deal. First, you have a

cabinet that has an agreed strategy.

18 months in, they don't have that.

I am not undermining a deal. I am

continuing to pose questions about

what they are trying to do and how

they are trying to do it. This is

democracy. Democracy is the ability

for Parliament, which is not doing

its job properly, and the public, to

keep scrutinising, and if they want

to change their mind, having the

right to do that.

You were trying to

encourage the Taoiseach yesterday to

play hardball with the UK.

I am on

the side of the UK, and I am worried

that if we go down the path that we

are being taken down, and Theresa

May and Boris Johnson and the rest

of them, this shambolic path, we are

going to do fundamental, lasting

damage to the country we love. I

don't care about the Civil Aviation

Authority. I care about Britain. --

I don't care about the European

Union. If every lorry going into the

UK today was stopped for just two

minutes, we would create an instant

17 mile traffic jam. These people

just don't care...

I am not these

people! Let us not conflate... You

either decide that you are

implementing a democratic decision

of a referendum that was called and

over 17 million voted.

You will not

stop me debating it. Just as Nigel

Farage...

Stop talking about Nigel

Farrell Raj. Vote Leave was not

Nigel Farage. There is no desire in

Germany to punish the United

Kingdom.

They are behaving

reasonably.

There is a battle of

protectionism and free market going

on. If we implement this properly,

give businesses the kind of

incentives they want, we can get a

good deal. So you want a bad deal?

You are driven by wishful thinking.

Gisela Stuart, you are saying that

business will intervene to prevent

things like tariffs being put in

place? They are leaving it a bit

late to put pressure on.

You will

find that business is laying out the

kind of things they need to get

those deals. I can find as much

fault with the speed of the

progress, but what I really do

resent is that you are actually

encouraging other countries to

undermine...

Know I am not! I spoke

out in support of the Irish

Taoiseach because I spent a lot of

time with Tony Blair and his team on

the Good Friday Agreement. The

people who are driving this hard

Brexit without thinking it through,

still no answer on how you do Brexit

in our island without a hard border.

I think the Irish Taoiseach is right

to call out the government on the

incompetence and the fact they have

not thought it through.

You accept

the result of the referendum and the

fact that we will be leaving the EU?

I accept the result of the

referendum, but I do not accept that

the country will definitely leave,

because the country is entitled to

change its mind. As the chaos and

costs mount, the public is entitled

to change its mind and will change

its mind.

There is no evidence at

the moment.

Come out with me!

Allow

me to finish the sentence. There is

a changing of mind happening, a

crystallisation. Unlike you, I have

fought five elections and I have won

five elections. I have probably

spoken to more people like you.

You

may do, I'm just saying, come out on

the road with me...

40% of the

population in the middle just want

us to get on with it. What that film

showed is that if you want to make

it a self-fulfilling prophecy that

it's a disaster, which I don't. I

want to implement a deal that is

good for British jobs. The rest of

the world is changing in terms of

technology. Currently, Germany

hasn't even got a government, and

nobody is laughing about that.

And

they are stable without a

government!

Let's leave it there.

It's coming up to 11.40,

you're watching the Sunday Politics.

Coming up on the programme,

we'll be looking at the latest

opinion polls and we'll bring

you the results of our moodbox

asking whether Phllip Hammond

or John McDonnell should be running

the economy.

Welcome to Sunday politics

South my name's Peter Henley.

On today's show, Hampshire

County Council wants

to charge per visit for trips

to its rubbish tips,

otherwise it says half

will have to close.

But will that just

mean more fly-tipping?

More shortly.

First, let's meet the two

politicians who are here for the

rest of the programme.

Stephen Morgan is the Labour MP

for Portsmouth south, Robert Courts

is the Conservative MP for Whitney.

Two new MPs.

You've not been on this

programme as MPs before.

Looking forward to it.

It's a shame you've not

brought your Labradoodle, Albert.

I'm afraid not.

He's not done TV yet, so he was

looking forward to coming on

the show.

He was the dog of the year,

pipped to the post there.

And Robert Courts,

used to be a barrister.

Had to be with a name like Courts.

I'm afraid so.

Predetermined.

You got a dirty secret, I'm told.

Your great-grandfather was an MP.

For Cambridge.

And yet you're in Oxford.

And a Labour MP, as well.

Labour MP for Cambridgeshire,

that's right.

Yeah, that's right.

The other side of the country

and the other party.

Now you're in David

Cameron's old seat.

So, for the budget, what's your tip?

What would you really

like to see for Oxfordshire?

I'd really like to see

something to help

young people with

the cost of housing,

young people with the cost

of housing, rental and purchase,

it is that affordability issue

that is important and

I would like to see

the Chancellor addressing that.

Stephen?

This is the most important budget

we've seen for years.

I want to see a budget

that delivers for

Britain and for Portsmouth.

It's got to be about public

services protection,

our schools, the NHS,

dealing with our housing crisis that

we see.

We see more homes for local people,

that hugely important.

And end of austerity

budget, that has

been suggested.

Do you agree with that?

It is difficult to say in terms

of speculation of what will be

in the budget, we have

to have a balance.

We have to make sure we have

a strong economy and be able to

invest in our public services,

so we can pay for them.

We have to be sensible

about spending,...

You are expecting to

see some money being

handed out?

I am hoping there will be some

investments that matter to

us all.

That will shoot Labour's Fox

because there will be money spent.

The record of the Tories has

not been good enough.

We need to see much more

investment in our NHS, our

schools, those services that matter

to local people across our country.

Hopefully, we will see

that from the Tories.

I'm not sure we will get it.

The devil will be in

the detail next week.

The cost of going away

during the school holidays and the

difficulties of childcare

during the long summer break

are hardly news for parents

or anyone else tied to

school holidays for that matter.

Now the Isle of Wight has opened

the consultation to going from three

terms to four terms.

Joining me now is the education

union head, the new

union, this is probably

because it is the Isle of White

and they had this argument

with John Platt which

was in the headlines,

because he took his

daughter out of school.

It is something that

does concern parents,

does it concern teachers

as

well?

The holidays that people are taking,

it is not a new thing.

It is not a new idea

to be changing these.

The consultation is the important

part and it is talking to teachers

and parents.

At the moment, they have not

consulted with anyone,

usually they would take it to

the unions and have a conversation

around school holidays,

that hasn't been discussed.

This was attempted in Barnsley

and Barnsley Council

squashed the plans because there was

no academic reasons for extending

children's planning or making

children's learning better.

There might be some

social reasons, we

are...

It is seven days a week in most

places and learning the same,

seven days a week

for a lot of parents.

If it is making it easier that

you have four terms and maybe

you have it in one

place or in one school,

and then the next or one

is

different, or is that

too much confusion?

If you think about the Isle

of Wight, people live on the

Isle of Wight, they don't work

on the Isle of Wight.

There are differences.

We have teachers imports must

come across from the

Isle of Wight and teach.

It is a case of public

consultation, we did

survey our own members only two

months ago, two thirds of those

asked said they preferred to keep

six weeks and stated the reasons

why.

I think if it is consultation,

they have doesn't what they are

saying.

If you have got a good holiday,

they are spending time with

the family, a lot of

the time the school

is the family, but also

you

have got to have time

for the family to be together.

It doesn't seem possible

with modern lives unless

you were to have those

slightly smaller brakes.

I think the smaller break,

one of the things you said

right at the beginning

of the article, was

it is very expensive.

If you reduce school

holidays to four-weeks

that will double

the

price of the time you've

got to go on holiday.

That will rocket the

price is even more.

It is a big picture.

The world of education is changing,

we looking at various

things and consultation

has to be listened to.

One thing that schools are doing

at the moment it seems to

me especially in the south

of England is asking parents to

contribute to some of

the cost of education.

We have seen some schools absolutely

upfront saying £1 for

each day that the child

is at school.

What you think?

Outrageous.

We saw many teachers

lobbying Parliament

this week as part of

a

campaign which has been with unions,

teachers, parents, where we are

looking at their not

being enough money in schools.

It is not just about the pound

per day, it is about

the numbers of children

in class is growing,

there am all children

in

schools, there is less money.

The Government says

that every school is

going to see an increase in funding,

are you saying they are run?

They are wrong.

The school cuts website that the any

tea started and has now

got all the teacher trade unions

is relaunching this week with three

days left until the budget,

there are new figures,

there are 500 more schools

are going to be worse off

than even predicted,

so there are now 70,942

schools who are going

to

be worse off in the new budget.

Robert, that is not what

the Government is saying, is it?

I will be interested to see what the

school cuts website

says when relaunches

because currently it

is

using data that is out of date.

It is a very misleading website.

It is using DFE data.

It is using DFE data, she says.

Out of date.

Right.

So it is not looking ahead

to what you're promising

for the next two years.

Yes, it is not taking

into account...

That is not out of date,

that is not looking into the future.

No, it is using out of date data.

It is?

From a couple of years ago.

It is also not taking

into account what

the Government is putting in.

Of course, I would like to see more

money for schools, but I would also

like to see more money for the NHS

and for social care.

What the Government

is doing is quite

important.

We need to get it right in terms

of not conflating the cost

pressures and cuts.

The Government is putting

in more money into

schools.

No.

The new national funding

forecast is putting in an

extra 1.3 billion.

You've got £40 billion,

it is the largest school

budget on record, so that

money is going on.

I accept that there

are cost pressures that

schools are facing,

but there is no doubt

about it, the Government

is

putting in more money.

Let's not forget,

we have got brilliant,

outstanding schools,

certainly in west

Oxfordshire, 95% of them

are

good or outstanding.

Nationally, 1.8 million

in good or outstanding

schools.

Headteachers protesting in west

Oxfordshire just as much as

anywhere else.

Let me just go back

to Amanda, the IFA is say...

And they are the gold

standard, they say that

part pupil funding is being

protected over the next two years,

is that right?

Per pupil funding has,

but what they don't talk

about is...

I will just go back to the 1.3

billion, the Public Accounts

Committee says the efficiency

savings haven't been made to provide

that 1.3 billion yet,

so we are still waiting for where

that is going to come from.

That is down to the schools than?

Public accounts, as in

the Government haven't released that

money to stay that

money is coming from.

It was talked about,

we are still yet to see it.

If there is more money

per pupil, what they are

telling you is that

the costs of writing,

schools are treated

as

businesses.

They paid business rates,

they are paying to take their

rubbish away, they are also having

inflated cost of living standards,

wage bills have gone up,

heating has gone up,

all of those things have gone up,

so it is

actually not a cash cost

we are talking about,

it is the real terms

cuts that is happening.

Stephen Morgan, I'm

sure you'll agree with

Amanda about that,

but what about what Robert says

here which is that schools are not

the

only draw on the taxpayer at the

moment and you can't give money to

everything?

That is absolute right.

In the General Election we offered

a fully costed manifesto.

In terms of what Amanda

said, we agree.

What we're finding

is that head teachers,

teachers, parents are talking to us

about the cuts that we see in

schools and it is completely

unacceptable that in Theresa May's

constituency, people are being asked

to bring their own money to buy

pens.

In my own constituency,

Portsmouth South, in my own form

infant school, children have

to bring their own Prit Stick.

That is completely unacceptable.

We are a wealthy

part of the country.

In general, we are.

Shouldn't we contribute,

wouldn't parents want to

contribute to something?

Not for education,

that is a basic human rights.

It is hugely important that we see

more investment in our

education so that every single young

person in a country gets the best

possible chance in life.

It is something that

everybody who has a

parent, every grandparent,

really wants...

If they see standards falling

in schools, that is going to

be a vote loser or a vote winner.

It matters to us all.

My wife is a governor

of the local primary

school, the one my son will go to,

so of course it matters hugely, we

would all like to see more

investment, but we do have to know

where it is going to come from as

well and that is the important thing

and it is very important to remember

that the Government is putting

more in.

You can always say that even more

should be put in, I would love

to see that, but there are also

those competing pressures.

Is there any amount

of money in the budget that

would make you happy?

No.

I don't think there is going to be.

Because I think you're right,

you have to look at what the

spending is and where

it is coming from.

You have to look at what we're

spending on education as well as

putting more money in,

well we wasting money?

Right?

Ie., Ofsted, stats,

millions of pounds.

Oh, you'd cut back on some

of that administration?

Millions of pounds, you have

to look at what do we do

instead?

What is education today and what

does it matter and I think what

it means is that Headteachers need

to make educational decisions, not

economical ones.

Because kids have one chance.

Thank you for coming in to talk

to us and congratulations

because you are the president

of the new union when you go back.

I will be.

Thank you very much.

It is the Sunday politics

of fact, you see,

Penny Morgan came in a couple

of weeks ago, now she's the Cabinet.

It could happen to you.

Thank you.

Well, where there is muck, there

is brass, or so they say, but for

most councils dealing

with household waste,

it is an expense rather

than

a money making opportunity.

Hampshire County Council

is now proposing to

charge a nominal sum per visit

to its 24 household waste recycling

centres.

Our Hampshire reporter Hannah Bewley

skipped to the tip to

see if people were happy

or down in the dumps.

It's not called the new

cycle for nothing.

Plans to half tips in

Hampshire are back on the

table.

I love my local tip.

I know that is a weird

thing to say, but I

do.

With £140 million worth of cuts

to make, Hampshire county council

said it could axe more

than half the household

waste recycling centres

in

the county.

Knocking on doors,

delivering things.

Hash Hassan has already

started the fight for his.

I'm really scared about what will

happen if we lose it.

Your gardening waste,

your DIY waste, how do you

dispose of the things in your house

a few don't have somewhere to take

it to?

It doesn't sound important,

but it is important.

Hampshire County Council

wants to be the test

area for charging a small fee,

probably a pound, to use the tips.

It is currently against Government

rules, but that hasn't stopped

councillors knocking

on Minister's doors.

I need to save about 1.2 million

across the board on our 24

household waste recycling centres.

What we can do is have three

or 4 million visits a year, so by

charging a pound, we would generate

three or £4 million which we could

invest in making our household

waste recycling centre.

When would you hope

the pilot would start?

We are in the hands

of the ministers there, we

need to keep lobbying,

keep lobbying our MPs and hopefully

we can start this as

soon as possible can.

The council say

charging would mean no

tips would have to close.

Hold on a second...

The Government's own litter

strategy says that residents

should be able to get rid

of their waste for free.

It says any charges could be

counter-productive and lead

to more fly-tipping.

These rules are being

reviewed and Hampshire

councillors hope to find out

by the end of the year if the ban on

charging is to be reversed.

If this all sounds

rather familiar, it's

because we've been here before.

Campaigners saw off closures last

year and charges for some waste were

brought in.

You can get rid of your fridge,

scrap metal, mattresses,

carpets all for free.

But plasterboard and rubble?

For the past year,

you had to pay to get rid

of those in Hampshire.

In about October last year...

People want back then

that these charges could

lead to more fly-tipping.

Farmer Robert Sutcliffe

woke up one morning

a year ago to find a lorry load

of waste had been dumped

on it is land near Winchester.

Because we are next door

to the main road, very easy for

somebody to drive a lorry

in, every few yards

dumped loads of rubbish

all round here.

And then drove back

out and disappeared.

He thinks the extra charges

has made things worse.

I think one of the reasons you get

this is because the charges for

disposing of plasterboard and rubble

have now become very considerable.

Over a period of 12 months, there

were 20,000 incidents of fly-tipping

in Hampshire, including

Southampton and Portsmouth.

This has gone up from

17,500 four years ago.

Robin Edwards from

the country land and

business Association

says fly-tips on private

land aren't included

in

the Government's statistics.

I think people's ability

to dispose of waste

is getting harder and therefore

it is meaning that the number of

fly-tips are increasing.

I think people are

better at reporting it

which means that the numbers

are going up, but it is worth

noting that the Government's

statistics don't include private

tips which are reported

through local authorities.

The picture is much worse

than maybe the Government

makes out.

Robert Humby disagrees.

The evidence shows us

that the actual volume

of fly-tipping has gone down

over that period.

There are several things

in terms of the number of

incidents reported,

there is a better

reporting system, but

the

actual weight per volume

is actually gone down.

Still over 14,000 tonnes

of rubbish was fly-tipped in

Hampshire last year.

That is the same weight

as 110 double-decker

buses or as much waste

as is produced in a village of 1400

households over a year.

Some remarkable facts in that.

Yet the basic principle

that you have local

solutions to deal with recycling

is actually causing problems.

Don't we actually want consistency?

Across-the-board?

What you can tip,

where you can take it?

I think the challenge that we have

got is that the Government has

been cut in terms of the Tories by

40%, so local authorities have got

to find a solution to some

of the challenges that they face.

I'm very worried about this tip tax.

We have got real issues

there that the most

vulnerable people in society won't

be able to afford to pay those fees

when they go to tip and that is why

we see fly-tipping in our streets.

In Portsmouth, my own

constituency, we have

seen a slight reduction

in

the number of fly-tipping,

but I regularly get people...

Over what period of time?

Over the past year and only

slightly and that is because

there have been innovations such

as introducing an app where people

can report that issues directly

to the

council.

It is not acceptable and I don't

ever want to see fly-tippers

win and that is why it is rarely

important that local authorities

work as hard as they can

to deal with those issues.

We want to encourage

recycling, don't we?

It is 39% in Hampshire,

that's not good enough.

It is a blight on our communities

if we see fly-tipping.

Too often I see

mattresses and cabinets

and things like that

left on the side of

the road and something

must be done about it.

Robert, we are not counting

fly-tipping on private

land.

That doesn't seem right.

Fly-tipping clearly is something

that is a problem and we have to

make sure we stamp it out,

no matter where it is,

public or private land.

So the first step, surely would be

when you draw up how much

fly-tipping is there,

saying some of the figures are up

and overall for Hampshire,

there are quite a lot,

but if we are not counting

fly-tipping on private land as we

saw in the film there,

that needs to change.

It may be something

we need to look at,

to make sure we get

a

proper handle that the problem.

I would like to make quite clear

comment back on something Stephen

said, it's all very well saying

that the Tories have cut funding

to local government,

but let's not forget the

largest peacetime deficit in our

history, that is the reason why

there had to be this care

of the public spending.

Never forget the reason for it.

OK.

We won't forget it.

But it was supposed to protect

the front line as well.

Surely providing the right

facilities for recycling is

somewhere where you do

want to maintain services.

Of course.

I agree with you about that.

But what you need to do

is look at sometimes

bringing in a modest charge

which will enable people

still to have those services

without always having

recourse to council tax.

Can I just make one more point?

That is just that we need

to be careful about

cause and effect here because

sometimes it is households, but I

think households, responsible

households, will still go and pay

that modest charge.

Sometimes what does happen

is you do have unscrupulous

people who offered to dispose

of rubbish and then they fly-tip.

You don't necessarily

know where that

fly-tipping is coming

from, I'm simply saying

we need to be careful

about the cause and effect.

OK.

But in general, Hampshire

is a conservative

authority, as a lot

of

the councils around here

are and are you saying

that they should be doing this out

of their own resources?

They should just be more efficient?

They are saying that we can't manage

without charging people.

I appreciate that.

They have a lot of claims

on their resources, money for social

care, for example.

What they are looking

at is having a small

charge.

One that you think

that is all right.

OK.

Charging for schools is wrong,

charging for tips...

I think it is something

that is worth

looking at, it is reasonable,

if that helps with their finances.

You are against this sort of charge?

I think I am most worried

about the impact it will have

on our most vulnerable

in our society.

The evidence that

I have seen suggests

that people can't afford that.

People who need to access the tip

are struggling to do so.

Our regular round-up

of the political week in 60

seconds.

On Monday, Aylesbury County Hall

was besieged by children and

parents protecting the closure

of children's centres, councillors

agreed to put off the decision.

People in need of assistance do not

want to deal with several

professionals.

I don't see how nine

facilities can replace 35.

Odd socks for children

at Windmill primary

School in Oxford showing

support for anti-bullying

week by encouraging them

to embrace their

individuality.

Southampton Conservatives

have been accused of

bullying and covering

up racist incidents.

Harmeet Singh Brar claims

he was called the Little Brown boy

and told to fly home.

Conservative councillors

denied the comments were

made at Council events, but he says

the complaints weren't taken

seriously and a whistle-blower

was forced out.

Racism is not tolerated

in the party, it never has been, and

the party has slipped up here.

Finally, these are Reading council's

new style prefabs and they want

money for more in the budget.

There's an idea.

Prefab ways of providing housing.

We have had ideas of the Government

for doing more, the figures are up.

The house-building

is starting to happen.

He picked out 15 councils

who still haven't got a local plan,

so basically the Chancellor is

pulling out all the stops, isn't he,

to make sure housing will happen?

What would you add to that mix?

I think the prefab idea is

and that is really worth looking at.

There are some really,

really great quality off-site

building techniques now,

we need to look at those to

ensure...

You can sometimes find that housing

is cheaper at really

good quality and can be built

cheaper as well, so there's a real

solution there that

we need to look at.

And places to put it?

Even in Oxfordshire?

Of course, there are brown field

sites that can be used,

there are some areas that

are sustainable and suitable,

so we need to look at those.

It is innovation that is the key.

A lot of money coming

for Didcot, we think.

What about your ideas on housing?

Completely agree.

We definitely need to see more

homes for local people.

The Government aren't building

enough, we desperately need to see

more homes for people.

It's absolutely a key

priority for me.

It's something that people

regularly write to me

about, that they need

homes in the city and I

will be working hard

to

make that happen.

Likewise, we have seen

a doubling of people sleeping

rough in Portsmouth

and across the nation.

More must be done to

tackle rough sleeping.

Labour was promising 4000

houses for rough sleeping

across the country,

that is not a lot.

It is a start, I think,

and there is more that we can do to

tackle the homelessness crisis

that we see in our country.

Right, so it is just

building more houses