:00:38. > :00:42.It's Sunday morning, and this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:43. > :00:45.Theresa May pledged to help people who are "just about managing",
:00:46. > :00:48.and this week her government will announce new measures to boost
:00:49. > :00:51.the number of affordable homes and improve conditions for renters.
:00:52. > :01:01.After a US court suspends Donald Trump's travel ban and rules
:01:02. > :01:05.it could be unconstitutional, one of the President's inner circle
:01:06. > :01:08.tells me there is no "chaos", and that Donald Trump's White House
:01:09. > :01:12.is making good on his campaign promises.
:01:13. > :01:14.As the Government gets into gear for two years
:01:15. > :01:17.of Brexit negotiations, we report on the haggling to come
:01:18. > :01:20.over the UK's Brexit bill for leaving the European Union -
:01:21. > :01:25.and the costs and savings once we've left.
:01:26. > :01:30.Now that the Assembly has more powers, is it time to have more AMs?
:01:31. > :01:32.And the head of German business in the UK
:01:33. > :01:42.tells us what he'd like to see from Brexit.
:01:43. > :01:45.And with me, as always, a trio of top political
:01:46. > :01:47.journalists - Helen Lewis, Tom Newton Dunn
:01:48. > :01:51.They'll be tweeting throughout the programme,
:01:52. > :01:57.So, more anguish to come this week for the Labour party as the House
:01:58. > :02:00.of Commons continues to debate the bill which paves the way
:02:01. > :02:06.Last week, Labour split over the Article 50 bill,
:02:07. > :02:09.with a fifth of Labour MPs defying Jeremy Corbyn to vote against.
:02:10. > :02:14.Five shadow ministers resigned, and it's expected Mr Corbyn
:02:15. > :02:17.will have to sack more frontbenchers once the bill is voted
:02:18. > :02:21.Add to that the fact that the Labour Leader's close ally
:02:22. > :02:24.Diane Abbot failed to turn up for the initial vote -
:02:25. > :02:26.blaming illness - and things don't look too rosy
:02:27. > :02:29.The Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry was asked
:02:30. > :02:33.about the situation earlier on the Andrew Marr show.
:02:34. > :02:37.The Labour Party is a national party and we represent the nation,
:02:38. > :02:41.and the nation is divided on this, and it is very difficult.
:02:42. > :02:46.Many MPs representing majority Remain constituencies have this very
:02:47. > :02:49.difficult balancing act between - do I represent my constituency,
:02:50. > :02:52.Labour, as a national party, have a clear view.
:02:53. > :03:01.We fought to stay in Europe, but the public have spoken,
:03:02. > :03:06.But the important thing now is not to give Theresa May a blank check,
:03:07. > :03:12.we have to make sure we get the right deal for the country.
:03:13. > :03:19.That was Emily Thornberry. Helen, is this like a form of Chinese water
:03:20. > :03:23.torture for the Labour Party? And for journalists, to! We are in a
:03:24. > :03:27.situation where no one really thinks it's working. A lot of authority has
:03:28. > :03:31.drained away from Jeremy Corbyn but no one can do anything about it.
:03:32. > :03:36.What we saw from the leadership contest is on the idea of a Blairite
:03:37. > :03:40.plot to get rid of him. You are essentially stuck in stasis. The
:03:41. > :03:45.only person that can remove Jeremy Corbyn is God or Jeremy Corbyn.
:03:46. > :03:49.Authority may have moved from Mr Corbyn but it's not going anywhere
:03:50. > :03:56.else, there's not an alternative centre of authority? Not quite, but
:03:57. > :04:00.Clive Lewis is name emerging, the Shadow Business Secretary. A lot of
:04:01. > :04:04.the Labour left, people like Paul Mason, really like him and would
:04:05. > :04:08.like to see him in Corbyn. I think that's why Jeremy Corbyn do
:04:09. > :04:14.something extraordinary next week and abstain from Article 50, the
:04:15. > :04:20.main bill itself, to keep his Shadow Cabinet together. That clip on
:04:21. > :04:25.Andrew Marr, point blank refusing to say if Labour will vote for Article
:04:26. > :04:30.50. The only way Jeremy Corbyn can hold this mess together now is to
:04:31. > :04:33.abstain, which would be catastrophic across Brexit constituencies in the
:04:34. > :04:40.North. The problem with abstention is everyone will say on the issue of
:04:41. > :04:45.our time, the official opposition hasn't got coherent or considered
:04:46. > :04:48.policy? I love the way Emily Thornberry said the country is
:04:49. > :04:51.divided and we represent the country, in other words we are
:04:52. > :04:54.divided at the party as well. The other thing that was a crucial
:04:55. > :04:59.moment this week is the debate over whether there should be a so-called
:05:00. > :05:03.meaningful vote by MPs on the deal that Theresa May gets. That is a
:05:04. > :05:10.point of real danger for Brexit supporters. It may well be there is
:05:11. > :05:13.a coalition of Labour and SNP and Remain MPs, Tory MPs, who vote for
:05:14. > :05:18.that so-called meaningful vote that could undermine Theresa May's
:05:19. > :05:23.negotiation. So Theresa May could have had troubles as well, not plain
:05:24. > :05:28.sailing for her? There is no point, apart from lonely Ken Clarke voting
:05:29. > :05:31.against Article 50, no point in Tory remainders rebelling. It would have
:05:32. > :05:35.been a token gesture with no support. But there might be
:05:36. > :05:39.meaningful amendments. One might be on the status of EU nationals... The
:05:40. > :05:48.government could lose that. There might be a majority for some of
:05:49. > :05:50.those amendments. The ins and outs of the Labour Party, it fascinates
:05:51. > :05:52.the Labour Party and journalists. I suspect the country has just moved
:05:53. > :05:57.on and doesn't care. You are probably quite right. To be honest I
:05:58. > :06:02.struggled to get Labour split stories in my paper any more, the
:06:03. > :06:08.bar is so high to make it news. Where it does matter is now not
:06:09. > :06:13.everyone will pay huge amounts to the -- of attention to the vote on
:06:14. > :06:18.Wednesday. But come the general election in 2020, maybe a little
:06:19. > :06:21.earlier, every Tory leaflet and every labour constituency will say
:06:22. > :06:24.this guy, this goal, they refuse to vote for Brexit, do you want them in
:06:25. > :06:29.power? That is going to be really hard for them. The story next week
:06:30. > :06:34.may be Tory splits rather than just Labour ones, we will see.
:06:35. > :06:38.Theresa May has made a big deal out of her commitment to help people
:06:39. > :06:40.on middle incomes who are "just about managing", and early this week
:06:41. > :06:43.we should get a good sense of what that means in practice -
:06:44. > :06:46.when plans to bring down the cost of housing and protect renters
:06:47. > :06:48.are published in the Government's new white paper.
:06:49. > :06:51.Theresa May has promised she'll kick off Brexit negotiations with the EU
:06:52. > :06:53.by the end of March, and after months of shadow-boxing
:06:54. > :06:57.Ellie Price reports on the battle to come over the UK's Brexit bill,
:06:58. > :07:00.and the likely costs and savings once we've left.
:07:01. > :07:02.It was the figure that defined the EU referendum campaign.
:07:03. > :07:08.It was also a figure that was fiercely disputed, but the promise -
:07:09. > :07:11.vote leave and Britain won't have to pay into the EU are any more.
:07:12. > :07:13.So, is that what's going to happen now?
:07:14. > :07:16.The trouble with buses is you tend to have to wait for them
:07:17. > :07:18.and when Theresa May triggers Article 50, the clock starts
:07:19. > :07:23.She needs something quicker, something more sporty.
:07:24. > :07:30.According to the most recent Treasury figures,
:07:31. > :07:32.Britain's gross contribution to the EU, after the rebate
:07:33. > :07:35.is taken into account, is about ?14 billion a year.
:07:36. > :07:40.There are some complicating factors that means it can go up
:07:41. > :07:43.or down year on year, but that's roughly how much the UK
:07:44. > :07:45.will no longer sending to Brussels post-Brexit.
:07:46. > :07:48.But, there are other payments that Britain will have to shell out for.
:07:49. > :07:51.First and foremost, the so-called divorce settlement.
:07:52. > :07:57.It is being said, and openly by Commissioner Barnier
:07:58. > :08:01.and others in the Commission, that the total financial liability
:08:02. > :08:04.as they see it might be in the order of 40-60 billion
:08:05. > :08:09.The BBC understands the figure EU negotiators are likely
:08:10. > :08:14.to settle on is far lower, around 34 billion euros,
:08:15. > :08:17.but what does the money they are going to argue
:08:18. > :08:23.Well, that's how much Britain owes for stuff in the EU budget that's
:08:24. > :08:25.already signed up for until 2020, one year after we are
:08:26. > :08:30.Historically, Britain pays 12% in contributions,
:08:31. > :08:33.so the cost to the UK is likely to be between ten
:08:34. > :08:42.Then they will look at the 200-250 billion euros of underfunded
:08:43. > :08:43.spending commitments, the so-called RAL.
:08:44. > :08:51.Britain could also be liable for around 5-7 billion euros
:08:52. > :08:55.for its share in the pensions bill for EU staff, that's again
:08:56. > :08:57.12% of an overall bill of 50-60 billion.
:08:58. > :09:00.Finally there's a share of our assets held by the EU.
:09:01. > :09:05.They include things like this building, the European Commission
:09:06. > :09:12.Britain could argue it deserves a share back of around 18 billion
:09:13. > :09:16.euros from a portfolio that's said to be worth 153 billion euros.
:09:17. > :09:18.So, lots for the two sides to discuss in two years of talks.
:09:19. > :09:21.They have a great opportunity with the Article 50 talks
:09:22. > :09:26.because actually they can hold us to ransom.
:09:27. > :09:29.They can say, "You figure out money, we will talk about your trade.
:09:30. > :09:31.But until you've figured out the money, we won't," so I think
:09:32. > :09:34.a lot of European states think they are in a very strong
:09:35. > :09:37.negotiating position at the moment and they intend to make
:09:38. > :09:42.The principle is clear, the days of Britain making vast
:09:43. > :09:47.contributions to the European Union every year will end.
:09:48. > :09:52.Theresa May has already indicated that she would want to sign back up
:09:53. > :09:57.to a number of EU agencies on a program-by-program basis.
:09:58. > :09:59.The Europol for example, that's the European crime
:10:00. > :10:04.agency, or Erasmus Plus, which wants student exchanges.
:10:05. > :10:08.If everything stays the same as it is now, it would cost the UK
:10:09. > :10:10.675 million euros a year, based on analysis by
:10:11. > :10:19.But there are likely to be agencies we don't choose to participate in.
:10:20. > :10:28.If we only opted back to those dealing with security,
:10:29. > :10:30.trade, universities and, say, climate change,
:10:31. > :10:33.it could come with a price tag of 370 million euros per year.
:10:34. > :10:35.Of course that's if our European neighbours allow us.
:10:36. > :10:37.I wonder if they're going to let me in!
:10:38. > :10:40.There will also be a cost to creating a new system to resolve
:10:41. > :10:43.trade disputes with other nations once we are no longer part
:10:44. > :10:48.Take the EFTA Court which rules on disputes
:10:49. > :10:50.between the EU and Norway, Iceland and Lichtenstein.
:10:51. > :10:56.That costs 4 million euros to run each year,
:10:57. > :10:58.though in the Brexit White Paper published this week,
:10:59. > :11:00.the Government said it will not be constrained by precedent
:11:01. > :11:06.Finally, would the EU get behind the idea of Britain making some
:11:07. > :11:12.contribution for some preferential access to its market?
:11:13. > :11:14.The sort of thing that Theresa May seems to be hinting
:11:15. > :11:17.at are sectoral arrangements, some kind of partial membership
:11:18. > :11:25.Switzerland, which has a far less wide-ranging deal than Norway,
:11:26. > :11:28.pays about 320 million a year for what it gets into the EU budget,
:11:29. > :11:31.but it's not exactly the Swiss deal that we're after.
:11:32. > :11:33.The EU institutions hate the Swiss deal because it is codified
:11:34. > :11:36.in a huge number of treaties that are messy, complicated
:11:37. > :11:38.and cumbersome, and they really don't want to replicate
:11:39. > :11:45.Theresa May has been at pains to insist she's in the driving seat
:11:46. > :11:47.when it comes to these negotiations, and that she's
:11:48. > :11:56.But with so much money up for discussion, it may not be such
:11:57. > :12:14.Sadly she didn't get to keep the car!
:12:15. > :12:16.And I've been joined to discuss the Brexit balance sheet
:12:17. > :12:19.by the director of the Centre for European Reform, Charles Grant,
:12:20. > :12:21.and by Henry Newman who runs the think tank Open Europe.
:12:22. > :12:29.Henry Newman, these figures that are being thrown about in Brussels at
:12:30. > :12:33.the moment, and exit bill of 40-60,000,000,000. What do you make
:12:34. > :12:36.of them? I think it is an opening gambit from the institutions and we
:12:37. > :12:42.should take them seriously. We listened to Mr Rogers, the former
:12:43. > :12:46.ambassador to Brussels in the House of Commons last week, speaking about
:12:47. > :12:50.the sort of positions the EU is likely to take in the negotiation. I
:12:51. > :12:54.personally think the Prime Minister should be more concerned about
:12:55. > :12:56.getting the right sort of trade arrangements, subsequent to our
:12:57. > :13:01.departure, than worrying about the exact detail of the divorce
:13:02. > :13:06.settlement and the Bill. They might not let them go on to trade until
:13:07. > :13:10.they resolve this matter. Where does the Brexit bill, the cost of exit,
:13:11. > :13:16.if there is to be one, in terms of a sum of money, where does that come
:13:17. > :13:20.in the negotiations, upfront or at the end? The European Commission has
:13:21. > :13:24.a firm line on this. You have to talk about the Brexit bill and the
:13:25. > :13:27.divorce settlement before you talk about the future relationship.
:13:28. > :13:31.Therefore they are saying if you don't sign up for 60 billion or
:13:32. > :13:35.thereabouts, we won't talk about the future. Other member states take a
:13:36. > :13:37.softer line than that and think you probably have to talk about the
:13:38. > :13:43.divorce settlement and Brexit bill as the same -- at the same time as
:13:44. > :13:48.the economic situation. If you can do both at the same time, the
:13:49. > :13:52.atmosphere may be better natured. You have spoken to people in
:13:53. > :13:59.Brussels and are part of a think tank, how Revista gives the figure
:14:00. > :14:03.or is it an opening gambit? Most member states and EU institutions
:14:04. > :14:05.believe they think it is the true figure but when the negotiations
:14:06. > :14:09.start adding the number will come down. As long as the British are
:14:10. > :14:15.prepared to sign up to the principle of we owe you a bit of money, as the
:14:16. > :14:20.cheque, then people will compromise. What is the ballpark? You had a
:14:21. > :14:24.figure of 34 billion, that is news to me, nobody knows because
:14:25. > :14:29.negotiations haven't started but I think something lower than 60. Even
:14:30. > :14:34.60 would be politically toxic for a British government? I think Theresa
:14:35. > :14:37.May is in a strong position, she has united the Conservative Party. You
:14:38. > :14:43.could expect coming into this year all the Conservative divisions would
:14:44. > :14:49.be laid bare by Gina Miller. But she is leading a united party. Labour
:14:50. > :14:54.Party are divided... Coogee get away with paying 30 billion? We should
:14:55. > :14:57.give her the benefit of the doubt going into these negotiations, let
:14:58. > :15:01.her keep her cards close to her chest. The speech he gave a few
:15:02. > :15:04.weeks ago at Lancaster House, our judgment was she laid out as much
:15:05. > :15:10.detail as we could have expected at that point. I don't think it's
:15:11. > :15:13.helpful for us now to say, we shouldn't be introducing further red
:15:14. > :15:18.line. I want you to be helpful and find things out. I would suggest if
:15:19. > :15:23.there is a bill, let's say it's 30 billion, let's make it half of what
:15:24. > :15:26.the current claims coming out of Brussels. And of course it won't
:15:27. > :15:30.have to be paid in one year, I assume it's not one cheque but
:15:31. > :15:34.spread over. But we will wait a long time for that 350 million a week or
:15:35. > :15:40.what ever it was that was meant to come from Brussels to spend on the
:15:41. > :15:45.NHS. That's not going to happen for the next five, six or seven years.
:15:46. > :15:51.Everyone has been clear there will be a phased exit programme. The
:15:52. > :15:55.question of whether something is political possible for her in terms
:15:56. > :15:58.of the divorce settlement will depend on what she gets from the
:15:59. > :16:03.European Union in those negotiations. If she ends up
:16:04. > :16:07.settling for a bill of about 30 billion which I think would be
:16:08. > :16:13.politically... No matter how popular she is, politically very difficult
:16:14. > :16:17.for her, it does kill any idea there is a Brexit dividend for Britain.
:16:18. > :16:22.Some of the senior officials in London and Brussels are worried this
:16:23. > :16:26.issue could crash the talks because it may be possible for Theresa May
:16:27. > :16:31.to accept a Brexit bill of 30 billion and if there is no deal and
:16:32. > :16:38.will leave EU without a settlement, there is massive legal uncertainty.
:16:39. > :16:40.What contract law applies? Can our planes take off from Heathrow?
:16:41. > :16:46.Nobody knows what legal rights there are for an EU citizen living here
:16:47. > :16:53.and vice versa. If there is no deal at the end of two years, it is quite
:16:54. > :16:57.bad for the European economy, therefore they think they have all
:16:58. > :17:01.the cards to play and they think if it is mishandled domestically in
:17:02. > :17:07.Britain than we have a crash. But there will be competing interests in
:17:08. > :17:10.Europe, the Baltic states, Eastern Europe, maybe quite similar of the
:17:11. > :17:15.Nordic states, that in turn different from the French, Germans
:17:16. > :17:21.or Italians. How will Europe come to a common view on these things? At
:17:22. > :17:28.the moment they are quite united backing a strong line, except for
:17:29. > :17:34.the polls and Hungarians who are the bad boys of Europe and the Irish who
:17:35. > :17:38.will do anything to keep us happy. We should remember their priority is
:17:39. > :17:43.not economics, they are not thinking how can they maximise trade with the
:17:44. > :17:47.UK, they are under threat. The combination of Trump and Brexit
:17:48. > :17:54.scares them. They want to keep the institutions strong. They also want
:17:55. > :17:59.to keep Britain. That is the one strong card we have, contributing to
:18:00. > :18:03.security. We know we won't be members of the single market, that
:18:04. > :18:08.was in the White Paper. The situation of the customs union is
:18:09. > :18:15.more complicated I would suggest. Does that have cost? If we can be a
:18:16. > :18:20.little bit pregnant in the customs union, does that come with a price
:18:21. > :18:25.ticket? We have got some clarity on the customs union, the Prime
:18:26. > :18:30.Minister said we would not be part of the... We would be able to do our
:18:31. > :18:34.own trade deals outside the EU customs union, and also not be part
:18:35. > :18:37.of the common external tariff. She said she is willing to look at other
:18:38. > :18:41.options and we don't know what that will be so as a think tank we are
:18:42. > :18:44.looking at this over the next few weeks and coming up with
:18:45. > :18:47.recommendations for the Government and looking at how existing
:18:48. > :18:52.boundaries between the EU customs union and other states work in
:18:53. > :18:56.practice. For example between Switzerland and the EU border,
:18:57. > :19:02.Norway and Switzerland, and the UK and Canada. We will want is a
:19:03. > :19:09.country the freedom to do our own free trade deals, that seems to be
:19:10. > :19:14.quite high up there, and to change our external tariffs to the rest of
:19:15. > :19:18.the world. If that's the case, we do seem to be wanting our cake and
:19:19. > :19:22.eating it in the customs union. Talking to some people in London, it
:19:23. > :19:28.is quite clear we are leaving the essentials of the customs union, the
:19:29. > :19:33.tariff, so even if we can minimise controls at the border by having
:19:34. > :19:36.mutual recognition agreements, so we recognise each other's standards,
:19:37. > :19:41.but there will still have to be checks for things like rules of
:19:42. > :19:44.origin and tariffs if tariffs apply, which is a problem for the Irish
:19:45. > :19:48.because nobody has worked out how you can avoid having some sort of
:19:49. > :19:51.customs control on the border between Northern Ireland and the
:19:52. > :19:55.South once we are out of the customs union. I think it's important we
:19:56. > :20:01.don't look at this too much as one side has to win and one side has to
:20:02. > :20:05.lose scenario. We can find ways. My Broadview is what we get out of the
:20:06. > :20:08.negotiation will depend on politics more than economic reality. Economic
:20:09. > :20:25.reality is strong, there's a good case for a trade deal on the
:20:26. > :20:28.solution on the customs deal, but Britain will need to come up with a
:20:29. > :20:30.positive case for our relationship and keep making that case. If it
:20:31. > :20:33.turns out the Government thinks the bill is too high, that we can't
:20:34. > :20:36.really get the free trade deal done in time and it's left hanging in the
:20:37. > :20:40.wind, what are the chances, how I as things stand now that we end up
:20:41. > :20:43.crashing out? I'd say there's a 30% chance that we don't get the free
:20:44. > :20:49.trade agreement at the end of it that Mrs May is aiming for. The very
:20:50. > :20:53.hard crash is you don't even do an Article 50 divorce settlement from
:20:54. > :20:58.you go straight to World Trade Organisation rules. The less hard
:20:59. > :21:01.crash is doing the divorce settlement and transitional
:21:02. > :21:07.arrangements would require European Court of Justice arrangements. We
:21:08. > :21:09.will leave it there. Thank you, both.
:21:10. > :21:11.Donald Trump's flagship policy of extreme vetting of immigrants
:21:12. > :21:13.and a temporary travel ban for citizens of seven mainly-muslim
:21:14. > :21:15.countries was stopped in its tracks this weekend.
:21:16. > :21:18.On Friday a judge ruled the ban should be lifted and that it
:21:19. > :21:23.That prompted President Trump to fire off a series of tweets
:21:24. > :21:26.criticising what he says was a terrible decision
:21:27. > :21:28.by a so-called judge, as he ordered the State Department
:21:29. > :21:36.Now the federal appeals court has rejected his request to reinstate
:21:37. > :21:47.the ban until it hears the case in full.
:21:48. > :21:52.Well yesterday I spoke to Sebastian Gorka, Deputy Assistant
:21:53. > :21:55.I asked him if the confusion over the travel ban
:21:56. > :21:57.was a sign that the President's two-week-old administration
:21:58. > :22:10.There is no chaos, you really shouldn't believe the spin, the
:22:11. > :22:16.facts speak for themselves. 109 people on Saturday were mildly
:22:17. > :22:22.inconvenienced by having their entry into the United States delayed out
:22:23. > :22:31.of 325,000. So let's not get carried away with the left-wing media bias
:22:32. > :22:35.and spin. Hold on, 60,000 - 90,000 people with visas, their visas are
:22:36. > :22:39.no longer valid. That's another issue. You need to listen to what
:22:40. > :22:46.I'm saying. The people who entered on the day of the executive order
:22:47. > :22:52.being implemented worth 109 people out of 325. Whether people won't
:22:53. > :23:01.travelling to America were affected is another matter, so there is no
:23:02. > :23:06.chaos to comment on. Following Iran's latest missile tests,
:23:07. > :23:12.National Security adviser Flint said the US was "Putting Iran on notice",
:23:13. > :23:15.what does that mean? It means we have a new president and we are not
:23:16. > :23:21.going to facilitate the rise of one of the most dangerous nations in the
:23:22. > :23:29.world. We are jettisoning this naive and dangerous policy of the Obama
:23:30. > :23:33.Administration to try and make the Shi'ite dictatorial democracy some
:23:34. > :23:37.kind of counter balance to extremist Sunni groups in the region and that
:23:38. > :23:41.they cannot continue to behave in the way they have behaved for the
:23:42. > :23:47.last 30 years. It is a very simple message. So are there any
:23:48. > :23:53.multilateral alliances that Mr Trump would like to strengthen?
:23:54. > :23:56.Absolutely. If we are looking at the region, if you listen to what
:23:57. > :24:02.President Trump has said and specifically to also the speeches of
:24:03. > :24:06.general Flint, his national security adviser, we are incredibly vested in
:24:07. > :24:13.seeing our Sunni allies in the region come together in a real
:24:14. > :24:20.coalition. The so-called vaunted 66 nation coalition that was created
:24:21. > :24:24.under the Obama administration... There was no coalition. But we want
:24:25. > :24:32.to help our Sunni allies, especially the Egyptians, the Jordanians, come
:24:33. > :24:38.together in a real partnership to take the fight to ISIS and groups
:24:39. > :24:43.like Al-Qaeda. But there is not a formal multilateral alliance with
:24:44. > :24:47.these countries. Which of the existing, formal multilateral
:24:48. > :24:51.alliances does Mr Trump wants to strengthen? If you are specifically
:24:52. > :24:56.talking about Nato, it is clear that we are committed to Nato but we wish
:24:57. > :25:00.to see a more equitable burden sharing among the nations that are
:25:01. > :25:04.simply not spending enough on their own defence so the gentleman 's
:25:05. > :25:08.agreement of 2% of GDP has to be stuck to, unlike the, I think it's
:25:09. > :25:13.only Six Nations that reach the standard today out of almost 30. So
:25:14. > :25:24.he does want to strengthen Nato then? Absolutely, he believes Nato
:25:25. > :25:30.is the most successful military alliances. You mustn't believe the
:25:31. > :25:34.spin and hype. EU leaders now see the Trump administration as a threat
:25:35. > :25:41.up there with Russia, China, terrorism. What's your response to
:25:42. > :25:47.that? I have to laugh. The idea that the nation that came to the
:25:48. > :25:53.salvation of Europe twice in the 20th century hummer in World War I
:25:54. > :26:05.and World War II, was central to the defeat of the totalitarian... It is
:26:06. > :26:09.not even worth commenting on. Would it matter to the Trump
:26:10. > :26:12.administration if the European Union broke up? The United States is very
:26:13. > :26:19.interested in the best relations possible with all the nations of the
:26:20. > :26:24.EU am a whether the European union wishes to stay together or not is up
:26:25. > :26:30.to the nations of the European Union. I understand that but I was
:26:31. > :26:35.wondering what the US view would be. Until Mr Trump, EU foreign policy
:26:36. > :26:39.was quite consistent in wanting to see the EU survive, prosper and even
:26:40. > :26:43.become more integrated. Now that doesn't seem to be the case, so
:26:44. > :26:48.would it matter to the Trump administration if the EU broke up? I
:26:49. > :26:51.will say yet again, it is in the interests of the United States to
:26:52. > :26:56.have the best relations possible with our European allies, and
:26:57. > :27:00.whether that is in the formation of the EU or if the EU by itself
:27:01. > :27:04.suffers some kind of internal issues, that's up to the European
:27:05. > :27:09.nations and not something we will comment on. Listening to that
:27:10. > :27:14.answer, it would seem as if this particular president's preference is
:27:15. > :27:19.to deal with individual nation states rather than multilateral
:27:20. > :27:27.institutions. Is that fair? I don't think so. There's never been an
:27:28. > :27:30.unequivocal statement by that effect by the statement. Does he share the
:27:31. > :27:35.opinion of Stephen Bannon that the 21st century should see a return to
:27:36. > :27:41.nation states rather than growing existing multilateral ways? I think
:27:42. > :27:44.it is fair to say that we have problems with political elites that
:27:45. > :27:50.don't take the interests of the populations they represent into
:27:51. > :27:56.account. That's why Brexit happened. I think that's why Mr Trump became
:27:57. > :28:00.President Trump. This is the connected phenomena. You are
:28:01. > :28:03.obsessing about institutions, it is not about institutions, it's about
:28:04. > :28:08.the health of democracy and whether political elites do what is in the
:28:09. > :28:11.interests of the people they represent. Given the
:28:12. > :28:14.unpredictability of the new president, you never really know
:28:15. > :28:19.what he's going to do next, would it be wise for the British Prime
:28:20. > :28:26.Minister to hitch her wagon to his star? This is really churlish
:28:27. > :28:30.questioning. Come on, you don't know what he's going to do next, listen
:28:31. > :28:35.to what he says because he does what he's going to say. I know this may
:28:36. > :28:39.be shocking to some reporters, but look at his campaign promises, and
:28:40. > :28:45.the fact that in the last 15 days we have executed every single one that
:28:46. > :28:50.we could in the time permissible so there is nothing unpredictable about
:28:51. > :28:56.Donald Trump as president. OK then, if we do know what he's going to do
:28:57. > :29:00.next, what is he going to do next? Continue to make good on his
:29:01. > :29:07.election promises, to make America great again, to make the economy are
:29:08. > :29:11.flourishing economy, and most important of all from your
:29:12. > :29:16.perspective in the UK, to be the best friend possible to our friends
:29:17. > :29:21.and the worst enemy to our enemies. It is an old Marine Corps phrase and
:29:22. > :29:29.we tend to live by it. Thank you for your time, we will leave it there.
:29:30. > :29:36.Doctor Gorka, making it clear this administration won't spend political
:29:37. > :29:37.capital on trying to keep the European Union together, a watershed
:29:38. > :29:40.change in American foreign policy. Theresa May has made a big deal out
:29:41. > :29:43.of her commitment to help people on middle incomes who are "just
:29:44. > :29:46.about managing", and early this week we should get a good sense
:29:47. > :29:49.of what that means in practice - when plans to bring down the cost
:29:50. > :29:52.of housing and protect renters are published in the Government's
:29:53. > :29:54.new white paper. The paper is expected to introduce
:29:55. > :29:56.new rules on building Communities Secretary Sajid Javid
:29:57. > :30:02.has previously said politicians should not stand in the way
:30:03. > :30:05.of development, provided all options Also rumoured are new measures
:30:06. > :30:09.to speed up building the 1 million new homes the Government promised
:30:10. > :30:11.to build by 2020, including imposing five-year quotas
:30:12. > :30:15.on reluctant councils. Reports suggest there will be
:30:16. > :30:17.relaxation of building height restrictions,
:30:18. > :30:19.allowing home owners and developers to build to the height
:30:20. > :30:22.of the tallest building on the block without needing to seek
:30:23. > :30:28.planning permission. Other elements trialled include
:30:29. > :30:32.new measures to stop developers sitting on parcels of land
:30:33. > :30:34.without building homes, land banking, and moving railway
:30:35. > :30:36.station car parks Underground, The Government today said it
:30:37. > :30:45.will amend planning rules so more homes can be built specifically
:30:46. > :30:47.to be rented out through longer term tenancies, to provide more stability
:30:48. > :30:49.for young families, alongside its proposed ban
:30:50. > :30:57.on letting agent fees. And the Housing Minister,
:30:58. > :31:06.Gavin Barwell, joins me now. Welcome to the programme. Home
:31:07. > :31:10.ownership is now beyond the reach of most young people. You are now
:31:11. > :31:14.emphasising affordable homes for rent. Why have you given up on the
:31:15. > :31:18.Tory dream of a property owning democracy? We haven't given up on
:31:19. > :31:23.that. The decline on home ownership in this country started in 2004. So
:31:24. > :31:26.far we have stopped that decline, we haven't reversed it but we
:31:27. > :31:31.absolutely want to make sure that people who want to own and can do
:31:32. > :31:34.so. The Prime Minister was very clear a country that works for
:31:35. > :31:38.everyone. That means we have to have say something to say to those who
:31:39. > :31:42.want to rent as well as on. Home ownership of young people is 35%,
:31:43. > :31:47.used to be 60%. Are you telling me during the lifetime of this
:31:48. > :31:52.government that is going to rise? We want to reverse the decline. We have
:31:53. > :31:56.stabilised it. The decline started in 2004 under Labour. They weren't
:31:57. > :32:00.bothered about it. We have taken action and that has stop the
:32:01. > :32:04.decline... What about the rise? We have to make sure people work hard
:32:05. > :32:08.the right thing have the chance to own their home on home. We have
:32:09. > :32:13.helped people through help to buy, shared ownership, that is part of
:32:14. > :32:16.it, but we have to have something to say to those who want to rent. You
:32:17. > :32:22.say you want more rented homes so why did you introduce a 3%
:32:23. > :32:26.additional stamp duty levied to pay those investing in build to rent
:32:27. > :32:30.properties? That was basically to try and stop a lot of the
:32:31. > :32:33.speculation in the buy to let market. The Bank of England raised
:32:34. > :32:39.concerns about that. When you see the white paper, you will see there
:32:40. > :32:45.is a package of measures for Bill to rent, trying to get institutional
:32:46. > :32:49.investment for that, different to people going and buying a home on
:32:50. > :32:54.the private market and renting out. You are trying to get institutional
:32:55. > :32:56.money to comment, just as this government and subsequent ones
:32:57. > :32:59.before said it would get pension fund money to invest in
:33:00. > :33:04.infrastructure and it never happened. Why should this happen? Is
:33:05. > :33:07.already starting to happen. If you go around the country you can see
:33:08. > :33:12.some of these builder rent scheme is happening. There are changes in the
:33:13. > :33:22.White Paper... How much money from institutions is going into bill to
:33:23. > :33:25.rent modular hundreds of millions. I was at the stock exchange the other
:33:26. > :33:28.day celebrating the launch of one of our bombs designed to get this money
:33:29. > :33:30.on. There are schemes being... There is huge potential to expand it. We
:33:31. > :33:33.need more homes and we are too dependent on a small number of large
:33:34. > :33:41.developers. -- to launch one of our bonds. You talk about affordable
:33:42. > :33:46.renting, what is affordable? Defined as something that is at least 20%
:33:47. > :33:50.below the market price. It will vary around the country. Let me put it
:33:51. > :33:55.another way. The average couple renting now have to spend 50% of
:33:56. > :33:58.their income on rent. Is that affordable? That is exactly what
:33:59. > :34:02.we're trying to do something about. Whether you're trying to buy or
:34:03. > :34:06.rent, housing in this country has become less and less affordable
:34:07. > :34:09.because the 30-40 years governments haven't built in times. This white
:34:10. > :34:13.Paper is trying to do something about that. You have been in power
:34:14. > :34:21.six, almost seven years. That's right. Why are ownership of new
:34:22. > :34:24.homes to 24 year low? It was a low figure because it's a new five-year
:34:25. > :34:29.programme. That is not a great excuse. It's not an excuse at all.
:34:30. > :34:32.The way these things work, you have a five-year programme and in the
:34:33. > :34:36.last year you have a record number of delivery and when you start a new
:34:37. > :34:40.programme, a lower level. If you look at the average over six years,
:34:41. > :34:45.this government has built more affordable housing than the previous
:34:46. > :34:52.one. Stiletto 24 year loss, that is an embarrassment. Yes. We have the
:34:53. > :34:55.figures, last year was 32,000, the year before 60 6000. You get this
:34:56. > :35:00.cliff edge effect. It is embarrassing and we want to stop it
:35:01. > :35:04.happening in the future. You want to give tenants more secure and longer
:35:05. > :35:11.leases which rent rises are predictable in advance. Ed Miliband
:35:12. > :35:15.promoted three-year tenancies in the 2015 general election campaign and
:35:16. > :35:20.George Osborne said it was totally economically illiterate. What's
:35:21. > :35:25.changed? You are merging control of the rents people in charge, which
:35:26. > :35:29.we're not imposing. We want longer term tenancies. Most people have
:35:30. > :35:34.six-month tenancies... Within that there would be a control on how much
:35:35. > :35:38.the rent could go up? Right? It would be set for the period of the
:35:39. > :35:42.tenancies. That's what I just said, that's what Ed Miliband proposed. Ed
:35:43. > :35:47.Miliband proposed regulating it for the whole sector. One of the reasons
:35:48. > :35:51.institutional investment is so attractive, if you had a spare home
:35:52. > :35:56.and you want to rent out, you might need it any year, so you give it a
:35:57. > :36:00.short tenancy. If you have a block, they are interested in a long-term
:36:01. > :36:07.return and give families more security. You have set a target,
:36:08. > :36:11.your government, to build in the life of this parliament 1 million
:36:12. > :36:19.new homes in England by 2020. You're not going to make that? I think we
:36:20. > :36:21.are. If you look at 2015-16 we had 190,000 additional homes of this
:36:22. > :36:29.country. Just below the level we need to achieve. Over five...
:36:30. > :36:35.2015-16. You were probably looking at the new homes built. Talking
:36:36. > :36:39.about completions in England. That is not the best measure, with
:36:40. > :36:44.respect. You said you will complete 1 million homes by 2020 so what is
:36:45. > :36:49.wrong with it? We use a national statistic which looks at new homes
:36:50. > :36:51.built and conversions and changes of use minus demolitions. The total
:36:52. > :36:57.change of the housing stock over that year. On that basis I have the
:36:58. > :37:02.figures here. I have the figures. You looking I just completed. 1
:37:03. > :37:07.million new homes, the average rate of those built in the last three
:37:08. > :37:12.quarters was 30 6000. You have 14 more quarters to get to the 1
:37:13. > :37:16.million. You have to raise that to 50 6000. I put it to you, you won't
:37:17. > :37:21.do it. You're not looking at the full picture of new housing in this
:37:22. > :37:24.country. You're looking at brand-new homes and not including conversions
:37:25. > :37:29.or changes of use are not taking off, which we should, demolitions.
:37:30. > :37:35.If you look at the National statistic net additions, in 2015-16,
:37:36. > :37:40.100 and 90,000 new homes. We are behind schedule. -- 190,000. I am
:37:41. > :37:44.confident with the measures in the White Paper we can achieve that. It
:37:45. > :37:48.is not just about the national total, we need to build these homes
:37:49. > :37:55.are the right places. Will the green belt remain sacrosanct after the
:37:56. > :37:58.white paper? Not proposing to change the existing protections that there
:37:59. > :38:03.for green belts. What planning policy says is councils can remove
:38:04. > :38:05.land from green belts but only in exceptional circumstances and should
:38:06. > :38:11.look at at all the circumstances before doing that. No change? No. We
:38:12. > :38:17.have a manifesto commitment. You still think you will get 1 million
:38:18. > :38:21.homes? The green belt is only 15%. This idea we can only fix our broken
:38:22. > :38:24.housing market by taking huge swathes of land out of the green
:38:25. > :38:28.belt is not true. We will leave it there, thank you for joining us,
:38:29. > :38:29.Gavin Barwell. It is coming up to 11.40.
:38:30. > :38:32.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now
:38:33. > :38:41.Coming up here in 20 minutes, the Week Ahead...
:38:42. > :38:44.Hello and welcome to the Sunday Politics Wales.
:38:45. > :38:47.In a few minutes, we'll be speaking to the Welsh MP who wants to bring
:38:48. > :38:50.in a new law to prevent rape complainants being questioned
:38:51. > :38:53.about their sexual history, and the man who represents German
:38:54. > :38:58.businesses here tells us of his concerns over Brexit.
:38:59. > :39:06.In the week when the Welsh Bill became an Act,
:39:07. > :39:09.the Assembly has acquired new responsibilities.
:39:10. > :39:12.The Presiding Officer has told this programme
:39:13. > :39:15.having more AMs would be a hard sell to the public.
:39:16. > :39:19.And there are several other issues, as Cemlyn Davies reports.
:39:20. > :39:22.There's a certain reliability to the number 60.
:39:23. > :39:28.But with 60 seconds in a minute and 60 minutes in an hour,
:39:29. > :39:31.it's a number which also represents the ultimate limit on what can be
:39:32. > :39:35.done and so the argument goes there's only so much work that can
:39:36. > :39:39.be carried out here with 60 Assembly Members.
:39:40. > :39:43.With more work and responsibility being placed upon AMs,
:39:44. > :39:47.there have long been calls to increase their number.
:39:48. > :39:52.The Wales Bill, which received Royal assent this week, and Brexit,
:39:53. > :39:55.mean the politicians elected here will soon have an even
:39:56. > :40:02.And now the person in charge of the day-to-day running of this
:40:03. > :40:08.The Presiding Officer has set up an expert panel to consider exactly
:40:09. > :40:12.how many Assembly Members are needed to cope with the new
:40:13. > :40:17.Assembly Members currently and Assembly Members in the future
:40:18. > :40:21.will be very stretched in their workload and people,
:40:22. > :40:24.when they're stretched in their workloads, don't
:40:25. > :40:27.do their work as effectively as they could.
:40:28. > :40:30.We need to make sure our democratic system in Wales and our national
:40:31. > :40:34.parliament is working at its most effective and that we do that
:40:35. > :40:38.for the benefit of the people of Wales so that we are legislating
:40:39. > :40:41.and scrutinising government effectively for all concerned.
:40:42. > :40:45.Elin Jones accepts it's unusual for the Presiding Officer rather
:40:46. > :40:49.than ministers to take the lead on an issue like this but she says
:40:50. > :40:52.the Welsh Government already has enough on its plate and doing things
:40:53. > :40:56.this way means the Assembly as a whole has ownership
:40:57. > :41:01.A second group will also be set up to allow all the parties
:41:02. > :41:06.Mark Reckless will represent Ukip in these discussions.
:41:07. > :41:10.The former MP says his workload here is similar to Westminster
:41:11. > :41:13.and he isn't convinced of the need for more AMs.
:41:14. > :41:15.I think we work hard in the Assembly.
:41:16. > :41:19.In terms of the committee work we do, people are realeased
:41:20. > :41:24.to committees and they are generally attendant and I have been quite
:41:25. > :41:28.impressed by the workrate of most people I see here.
:41:29. > :41:31.But a lot of people who are listening to your show
:41:32. > :41:34.will work hard in their jobs and they don't have the option just
:41:35. > :41:38.to expand the number of people doing it so they don't have to work
:41:39. > :41:42.so hard and I'm just not convinced that we should take more money
:41:43. > :41:48.The way politicians are elected to this chamber is also
:41:49. > :41:53.At the moment, the Assembly uses the additional member system,
:41:54. > :41:56.where 40 AMs are elected by first past the post.
:41:57. > :42:00.The other 20 regional AMs are elected via a form
:42:01. > :42:07.Picking a new system that is to everyone's taste will be
:42:08. > :42:10.a challenge but time is melting away, according to the
:42:11. > :42:15.We should remember that if we don't have an electoral system with more
:42:16. > :42:21.Members in place for 2021, we are waiting until 2026, and,
:42:22. > :42:25.to be honest, we can't afford to allow that gap with the Assembly
:42:26. > :42:29.underpowered with all the challenges that Wales currently faces.
:42:30. > :42:32.So what are the options and how could each one affect
:42:33. > :42:38.Using the outcome of last year's election, the ERS has drawn up some
:42:39. > :42:43.scenarios based on a hypothetical 87-seat Assembly, where three
:42:44. > :42:48.members represent each of the 29 constituencies on the proposed
:42:49. > :42:53.Under a modified first past the post system,
:42:54. > :42:56.Labour would have a comfortable majority with 57 seats,
:42:57. > :43:00.Ukip wouldn't have any AMs, but the Liberal Democrats
:43:01. > :43:05.Under the additional member system, Labour would have fallen
:43:06. > :43:09.short of a majority, winning just 39 of the 87 seats.
:43:10. > :43:13.Ukip and the Lib Dems would both have AMs and the Abolish
:43:14. > :43:16.the Assembly Party would be represented too.
:43:17. > :43:20.The single transferable vote system would see Labour again fall short
:43:21. > :43:24.of the 44 seats needed for a majority and, under this
:43:25. > :43:28.method, the Conservatives not Plaid Cymru would be
:43:29. > :43:34.Any legislation to change the voting system would require a two thirds
:43:35. > :43:40.That means, ultimately, it would need Labour's backing,
:43:41. > :43:44.as would any proposal to increase the number of AMs.
:43:45. > :43:47.I don't for a minute doubt that quite a lot of the Labour AMs
:43:48. > :43:51.would like there to be more AMs but that doesn't necessarily mean
:43:52. > :43:55.that getting two thirds of the Assembly to vote for more AMs
:43:56. > :43:59.And it doesn't really matter what the electoral
:44:00. > :44:05.Let's assume this is definitely going to happen, a huge amount
:44:06. > :44:09.of work has to go in to persuade people that it is a good thing to do
:44:10. > :44:14.That is politics red in tooth and claw.
:44:15. > :44:18.Building political consensus and public consensus around
:44:19. > :44:22.any change is critical, is crucial, to ultimately having
:44:23. > :44:26.a vote in the National Assembly of two thirds of members
:44:27. > :44:30.to implement such change and therefore all political parties
:44:31. > :44:34.and the public more generally can engage themselves in this process
:44:35. > :44:38.at the appropriate time if legislation is considered.
:44:39. > :44:41.Elin Jones wants to give the Assembly every chance to make
:44:42. > :44:46.any necessary reforms in time for the next election in 2021.
:44:47. > :44:49.It's an ambitious aim, especially when, as she put it,
:44:50. > :44:59.Now, a Plaid Cymru MP wants to tighten the law about what rape
:45:00. > :45:04.Liz Saville Roberts wants to ban people being asked
:45:05. > :45:07.about their sexual history in cases like this.
:45:08. > :45:10.When I spoke to her a little earlier, I asked what she
:45:11. > :45:16.Victims in rape cases now are extremely inconfident in coming
:45:17. > :45:20.forward and are concerned that the way they will be treated,
:45:21. > :45:24.that their characters in effect will be in the dock and it will be
:45:25. > :45:28.a defence strategy to try and destroy their characters
:45:29. > :45:32.in terms of their previous sexual behaviour or their characters
:45:33. > :45:36.in themselves or even in their appearances.
:45:37. > :45:39.We have been working with an organisation called
:45:40. > :45:43.Voices For Victims and we have had numerous cases coming
:45:44. > :45:46.forward of women who have had their previous history,
:45:47. > :45:50.sexual history, used against them in court,
:45:51. > :45:53.even down to the fact someone was asked why she was
:45:54. > :45:57.The current legislation has safeguards there.
:45:58. > :46:01.That past sexual history should not be used in court
:46:02. > :46:06.unless there are strong cases for having that.
:46:07. > :46:10.Is your problem here rather the way the current legislation is applied
:46:11. > :46:17.The current legislation was put in place in 1999 so it is 18 years
:46:18. > :46:22.old and it was intended at the time to be a rape shield but we have seen
:46:23. > :46:28.from work done by Dame Vera Baird QC in Northumbria that over 30% of rape
:46:29. > :46:32.cases there, that this evidence was allowed through this Section 41
:46:33. > :46:36.in the law and the evidence is supposed to be presented
:46:37. > :46:41.in writing before the hearing and we found that in the vast
:46:42. > :46:44.majority of cases this was not being done correctly.
:46:45. > :46:49.Victims were not having the opportunity to answer back
:46:50. > :46:55.And in the case studies, your bill has some explanatory notes in it,
:46:56. > :46:58.and in the case studies it states, "Ivy, a rape victim,
:46:59. > :47:01."was told her sexual history would not be used and yet it
:47:02. > :47:05."did come up in court, there was no judicial intervention."
:47:06. > :47:07.That's not the weakness of the legislation, that's
:47:08. > :47:10.a weakness of the judge not applying it correctly so isn't
:47:11. > :47:16.Talking about this with lawyers and also the police,
:47:17. > :47:20.I spent time with the Amethyst team in North Wales Police this summer,
:47:21. > :47:23.there's a real concern that this Section 41 is so complicated
:47:24. > :47:30.We really do need to have a situation where...
:47:31. > :47:33.Now we have victims who are truly concerned about coming forward.
:47:34. > :47:37.The law needs to give victims of rape the confidence to come
:47:38. > :47:39.forward and the sense they will have justice in the criminal
:47:40. > :47:45.We had nearly 36,000 cases of rape last year and of those only 7.5%
:47:46. > :47:49.went to a successful conviction so the law does need to be seen
:47:50. > :47:54.How do you decide what's relevant and what's not and do you accept
:47:55. > :47:59.that there are circumstances perhaps where a victim's past sexual history
:48:00. > :48:05.I think, first and foremost, what is relevant is whether it can
:48:06. > :48:08.be shown that somebody is presenting falsehoods or not.
:48:09. > :48:11.I would honestly ask, in what occasion would it be now
:48:12. > :48:14.where the victim's consent is an issue when it's
:48:15. > :48:20.What we have here is confusion about consent and this social
:48:21. > :48:24.attitude that women who are proven to be promiscuous, proven to have
:48:25. > :48:27.given consent to other men, that their evidence then
:48:28. > :48:31.is diminished in the eyes of juries, and we do need, for the sake
:48:32. > :48:33.of criminal justice, to address that.
:48:34. > :48:37.Liz Saville Roberts, thank you for your time this morning.
:48:38. > :48:41.We've heard a lot about what Brexit would mean for Welsh companies,
:48:42. > :48:43.but what about firms from across Europe
:48:44. > :48:49.The head of German Industry UK, their version of the CBI,
:48:50. > :48:52.Bernd Atenstaedt says German companies will be watching
:48:53. > :48:55.carefully to see what kind agreement is reached.
:48:56. > :48:58.I met him in Pwllheli, home of CK Tools,
:48:59. > :49:00.the oldest German company in Wales,
:49:01. > :49:03.and asked him what he made of Brexit.
:49:04. > :49:09.But we now have a lot of challenges because we have
:49:10. > :49:13.no idea at the moment what is going to happen.
:49:14. > :49:17.Once the UK is going to start negotiations in Brussels,
:49:18. > :49:22.once Article 50 is initiated and properly started in April,
:49:23. > :49:28.we have looked at all the various, let's say possibilities,
:49:29. > :49:36.massive cost increases possible for us, and we are not too happy.
:49:37. > :49:39.What is the concern in terms of cost?
:49:40. > :49:42.How damaging do German businesses in the UK feel
:49:43. > :49:52.Cost increases is possible if the free access to the UK market,
:49:53. > :49:56.tariffs, no tariffs, non-tariff barriers might go,
:49:57. > :50:03.We have of course then to rearrange our supply chain,
:50:04. > :50:09.we have possibly different rules and regulations in the UK
:50:10. > :50:18.We are worried about free movement of our people.
:50:19. > :50:25.We employ in our companies in the UK not only German people, from abroad,
:50:26. > :50:29.many British people, but also other EU people.
:50:30. > :50:35.We are very concerned about the free movement of people and also that
:50:36. > :50:38.includes apprentices, which is very important to us.
:50:39. > :50:45.We are of course concerned about the status of the EU citizens,
:50:46. > :50:50.German citizens in the UK, what's going to happen to them.
:50:51. > :50:54.Are they going to have permanent residence or secured residence
:50:55. > :50:58.in the UK after the negotiations are finished or not?
:50:59. > :51:02.Obviously, we are also concerned about British citizens
:51:03. > :51:05.working for us in Germany and what is going
:51:06. > :51:12.What will be the key priorities for the German businesses?
:51:13. > :51:17.Key priorities, we would like to have continued access,
:51:18. > :51:21.free access, no tariffs, no non-tariff barriers,
:51:22. > :51:27.to the UK market because most of our companies, the 2,500,
:51:28. > :51:36.500 of these are manufacturing here but most of them
:51:37. > :51:42.It's about 15,000 German companies altogether sell to the UK
:51:43. > :51:47.so continued free access to the UK, this is our major interest,
:51:48. > :51:52.but also some of us here, like Rolls Royce, like Siemens,
:51:53. > :51:56.like Bentley, all German companies, they export out of the UK
:51:57. > :52:00.so we would like, like a lot of British companies,
:52:01. > :52:05.continued free access without tariff or non-tariff barriers
:52:06. > :52:12.So I guess on that level, if you want the continuing free
:52:13. > :52:15.access, that would be closer to the UK Government
:52:16. > :52:20.and perhaps your concerns should be addressed to the other EU countries
:52:21. > :52:24.who are talking about making life more difficult for the UK
:52:25. > :52:28.to deal with the remainder of the European Union.
:52:29. > :52:36.But there are other concerns as well.
:52:37. > :52:40.We would like the UK to protect the economic
:52:41. > :52:47.We are not sure, there are a lot of joint ventures with British
:52:48. > :52:52.What is going to be the future there?
:52:53. > :52:57.Is it going to be more difficult for joint ventures and working
:52:58. > :53:08.Could it lead to some German companies who have a presence
:53:09. > :53:13.in the UK to decide, look, the obstacles are too great
:53:14. > :53:21.Obviously, we have to consider what the outcome is and if it's
:53:22. > :53:25.a massive cost increase, we might have to consider it.
:53:26. > :53:29.It's worse continuing in the United Kingdom.
:53:30. > :53:34.At the moment, I will say to you I have not heard of any
:53:35. > :53:38.German enterprise company in the United Kingdom saying
:53:39. > :53:41.this is it and we're going to go out of the UK.
:53:42. > :53:47.We all wait now for the outcome of the negotiations once Brexit,
:53:48. > :53:52.once Article 50 is initiated, and then we will make
:53:53. > :53:57.It is such an important market, such a vital country,
:53:58. > :54:01.we were not going to leave here, we are going to continue here,
:54:02. > :54:04.but there might be one or two reconsidering it.
:54:05. > :54:10.We have heard from Carwyn Jones, the First Minister.
:54:11. > :54:12.Well, listening to that interview and here to discuss what's
:54:13. > :54:16.going to happen in the Commons this week over Brexit is the Chair
:54:17. > :54:18.of the Commons Welsh Affairs Committee and Monmouth MP,
:54:19. > :54:32.Listening to what was said there, some concerns they have got, the
:54:33. > :54:36.uncertainty, what do you make of it? Perhaps not surprising but I think
:54:37. > :54:41.he should see this as an opportunity. Let's talk about EU
:54:42. > :54:46.citizens in the UK. My wife happens to be one, a Hungarian with a strong
:54:47. > :54:49.German background. She has not applied for a British passport,
:54:50. > :54:54.she's not worried. Theresa May is not going to round up people and
:54:55. > :55:01.throw them out. Then why not give that guarantee? She pretty well has.
:55:02. > :55:05.It is unthinkable. We need to make sure that the EU citizens in Germany
:55:06. > :55:10.are not thrown out of Germany. Art the German government going to do
:55:11. > :55:19.that? Are the French? Of course not. It is all scare stories. Stephen
:55:20. > :55:23.Crabb, former Secretary of State for Wales, he wrote over the weekend
:55:24. > :55:26.saying, Theresa May should make this perfectly clear that EU citizens
:55:27. > :55:31.have a right to stay. She has made it clear enough for me that my wife
:55:32. > :55:35.is not looking for a British passport and it would cause me quite
:55:36. > :55:39.a problem if she had to leave. I am not police bit worried and I have
:55:40. > :55:43.got a pretty big dog in that race. It is very important to me that EU
:55:44. > :55:48.citizens are allowed to stay and I have no worries about this. The
:55:49. > :55:51.second point is, there are huge opportunities here. One of two
:55:52. > :55:57.things it is going to happen, either we get a free trade deal, we want
:55:58. > :56:00.one, the Germans want one, the German manufacturers, the MPs want
:56:01. > :56:05.one as well because they want to carry on selling this stuff to us.
:56:06. > :56:11.Even if that doesn't happen, this is a very worst-case scenario, we get
:56:12. > :56:15.no trade deal, we pay a tariff. If I export a cab to Germany, I will have
:56:16. > :56:18.to pay a tariff on that, but the price of the pound at the moment is
:56:19. > :56:22.so low that the cup is still going to be cheaper even with the tariff
:56:23. > :56:28.on than it was previously so I am going to sell more. German countries
:56:29. > :56:34.have to pay a tariff when they sell to us and we will get that back. If
:56:35. > :56:37.we revert to the World Trade Organisation rules, you will know
:56:38. > :56:43.there are different tariffs. On average, it would mean things in the
:56:44. > :56:52.EU would cost 5% more. How much has the pound fallen by? How much has
:56:53. > :57:01.the pound fallen by? We buy more cars from Germany than we sell back.
:57:02. > :57:05.Even if we pay 10% on a car, that car that we make in the UK is still
:57:06. > :57:13.going to be as cheap or even cheaper. This is a worst-case
:57:14. > :57:17.scenario. But when the pound strengthens again, the car
:57:18. > :57:24.industry... Then we are really starting to look into the future of
:57:25. > :57:27.what currency movements might be. The reality is, we could look into
:57:28. > :57:32.the future and think about what is going to happen to the Euro. Are the
:57:33. > :57:35.German people going to want to continue bailing out Greece and
:57:36. > :57:39.other parts of the European Union indefinitely? I don't think that's
:57:40. > :57:43.going to happen. We could be in for a very big recession across the rest
:57:44. > :57:47.of Europe because of the way the euro is set up. The reality is,
:57:48. > :57:50.anyone who tries to make too many predictions about the economy falls
:57:51. > :57:54.flat on their face and that is why in today's times, credit Suisse who
:57:55. > :58:00.were predicting a recession before the Brexit vote are now saying, 1.4%
:58:01. > :58:04.growth. The bank of England, predicting falls in growth before
:58:05. > :58:10.Brexit, not pulling out of the EU, the vote itself, now predicting a
:58:11. > :58:15.rise. We might be able to more accurately predict after next week
:58:16. > :58:21.in the Commons. I'm not sure about that. What would you like to see? We
:58:22. > :58:26.know there will be attempts to amend the legislation to force the hand of
:58:27. > :58:31.Theresa May, that she has two comeback to MPs and say, this is the
:58:32. > :58:39.deal, before I say OK to Brussels, what do you think? Is that fair? No,
:58:40. > :58:46.because people have voted to leave. But not on the details. No, they
:58:47. > :58:51.voted to leave, end of story. When I came in to discuss Brexit, people
:58:52. > :58:54.said, you have no plan, there is no plan on the table, how can you
:58:55. > :58:58.expect them to vote to leave, and we argued it and they voted to leave.
:58:59. > :59:03.It would be wrong to say to Theresa May you have to go and get various
:59:04. > :59:10.things otherwise we will vote it down. Whatever she gets? Of course,
:59:11. > :59:15.because we have voted to leave. Trading as an independent nation is
:59:16. > :59:19.far better than being part of the European make -- European Union. In
:59:20. > :59:23.a negotiation, you have to be able to walk away from the table without
:59:24. > :59:27.a deal. If we centre is made to Brussels and say you have to get
:59:28. > :59:30.something or you will not be able to leave, the European Union will say
:59:31. > :59:34.we will give some things but not others. But it has been proposed
:59:35. > :59:39.that she negotiates whatever deal is best for the UK and then has to come
:59:40. > :59:42.back and ask MPs and the whole point for many people of the referendum
:59:43. > :59:46.campaign was to have Parliament, let's have our sovereignty back for
:59:47. > :59:51.Parliament, what you are doing, one of the most important issues for
:59:52. > :59:55.decades in the UK, is ceding power from Parliament and giving it all to
:59:56. > :59:59.Theresa May. Parliament is going to give Theresa May to do what she
:00:00. > :00:05.needs to do but Parliament itself cannot carry out a negotiation like
:00:06. > :00:10.this especially when one side don't want to leave. We need to be able to
:00:11. > :00:14.say, say to Theresa May and her team, here is the power, go and do
:00:15. > :00:18.your best. I know Theresa May is going to do a really good job
:00:19. > :00:27.anyway. I have got 100% confidence in her. The worst possible scenario
:00:28. > :00:30.is the one I have just talked about. Some people would say the worst
:00:31. > :00:35.possible scenario is what Theresa May she would be happy to do is walk
:00:36. > :00:40.away and then change the UK's economy to make it a low tax, low
:00:41. > :00:46.regulation competitor to attract businesses from the EU. I am not
:00:47. > :00:50.sure that is a bad thing. But it is a massive fundamental change to the
:00:51. > :00:53.economy. The economy is more competitive and lower tax than most
:00:54. > :00:58.other economies in the European Union and look at things like
:00:59. > :01:01.unemployment, we see 50% youth unemployment in some EU countries.
:01:02. > :01:05.We basically have almost full employment in this country and that
:01:06. > :01:09.is why so many people are coming over at the moment. What we are not
:01:10. > :01:15.going to do is to cut workers' rights, that is a scare story. We
:01:16. > :01:17.are not going to do anything about reducing health and safety or
:01:18. > :01:22.environmental protection. We support that absolutely. And Theresa May was
:01:23. > :01:26.right to highlight, we will never privatise the NHS. We have been
:01:27. > :01:28.accused of this in every election since 1987, it will never happen.
:01:29. > :01:30.Thank you for coming in. You can follow all the latest
:01:31. > :01:34.on twitter - we're @walespolitics. Time to go back to Andrew.
:01:35. > :01:36.programme at another time an airport Will the Government's plan
:01:37. > :01:48.to boost house-building Could a handful of Conservative
:01:49. > :01:51.MPs cause problems for And what is President
:01:52. > :02:10.Trump going to do next? You have been following the genesis
:02:11. > :02:15.of this housing white paper. What do you make of it? I think it will be
:02:16. > :02:21.quite spectacular, pretty radical stuff. We heard bits about beating
:02:22. > :02:24.up on developers. I understand it will be a whack, walk, covering
:02:25. > :02:30.every single problem with housing supply and trying to solve it. Which
:02:31. > :02:33.means bad news if you are a huge fan of the green belt, because they will
:02:34. > :02:36.go round that the other way by forcing large quotas on councils are
:02:37. > :02:42.making it down to councils where they build. If you fill up your
:02:43. > :02:45.brown space in towns they will have to trigger the exceptional
:02:46. > :02:49.circumstances bit of the bill to beat on green belts. Beating up
:02:50. > :02:54.developers, opening up the market for renters across the board. And
:02:55. > :02:59.Theresa May, one of the most defining thing she could do on the
:03:00. > :03:04.domestic agenda. I am not as excited as Tom about this. I look back to
:03:05. > :03:10.2004, do you remember the Kate Barker report? Successive
:03:11. > :03:17.governments, successive prime ministers have been promising to
:03:18. > :03:20.address the housing shortage. In 2004 Kate Barker recommended
:03:21. > :03:25.hundreds of thousands new homes. Gordon Brown talked about 3 million
:03:26. > :03:30.new homes by 2020 in 2007. It never happens. The reason is at the end of
:03:31. > :03:33.the day this is local politics, local councillors need to keep their
:03:34. > :03:35.seats and they won't keep their seats if there are hugely
:03:36. > :03:40.controversial developments locally that they support. Yes, the
:03:41. > :03:45.government can and are proposing to overrule councils that don't back
:03:46. > :03:49.local developments, but they may find themselves completely inundated
:03:50. > :03:53.with those cases. I think that is the whole point of it, to take on
:03:54. > :04:02.those NIMBY often Tory councils and force them to build. I can't think
:04:03. > :04:06.of a better defining issue for Theresa May than sticking one in the
:04:07. > :04:12.eye of some quite well off half Tory countryside councils. The government
:04:13. > :04:16.gives councils a quota of homes they have to fill, if they don't have to
:04:17. > :04:20.fill that all run out overland to fill the quota, the government then
:04:21. > :04:24.comes in and tells them they have to built on the green belt? How is that
:04:25. > :04:27.going to work? At the moment the green belt is absolutely sacrosanct
:04:28. > :04:34.in British politics. They'll have to do some work on educating people on
:04:35. > :04:39.what green belts means. Potato farms, golf courses... At the moment
:04:40. > :04:43.the idea people have of the green belt being verdant fields needs to
:04:44. > :04:48.be dismantled. You are right. I agree with Tom, 11 million people in
:04:49. > :04:51.the private rental sector in the UK. In the last election more voted
:04:52. > :04:55.Labour than conservative. This is an area where Theresa May would look to
:04:56. > :04:59.expand her vote. The problem has always been, the same problem we
:05:00. > :05:04.have with pension policy and why pensioners have done better than
:05:05. > :05:10.working families in recent years. They are older and they vote more
:05:11. > :05:17.and anything to the detriment of older people. I wonder how they will
:05:18. > :05:20.get private money to come in on anything like this go they would
:05:21. > :05:25.need to have a huge expansion? There is a huge amount of speculation and
:05:26. > :05:29.one of the thing that locks up the system as you have people buying
:05:30. > :05:33.land, taking out a stake of land in the hope that one point it may at
:05:34. > :05:38.some point free up. At the end of the day, unless you have councils
:05:39. > :05:41.far more willing to quickly fast track these applications, which they
:05:42. > :05:46.won't for the reason I said before, it's a very long-term investment. Ed
:05:47. > :05:52.Miliband proposed three-year leases in which the rent could only go up
:05:53. > :05:56.by an agreed formula, probably the three years to give the young
:05:57. > :06:01.families a certain stability over that period. He had a use it or lose
:06:02. > :06:05.it rules for planning development, if you don't use it you lose the
:06:06. > :06:10.planning rights. Somebody else gets it. The Tories disparaged that at
:06:11. > :06:15.the time. This is at the centre of their policy now.
:06:16. > :06:18.This is probably item number four of Ed Miliband's policy book Theresa
:06:19. > :06:23.May has wholesale pinched in the last six months or so. Why not? I
:06:24. > :06:28.think if you look at the change in mood across housing and planning
:06:29. > :06:33.over the last 5-6 years, it used to be an issue very much of green belt
:06:34. > :06:35.versus London planners. Now you have grandparents living in houses in the
:06:36. > :06:39.countryside, knowing their grandchildren can't get on the
:06:40. > :06:44.housing ladder any longer. Maybe a bit more intervention in the market,
:06:45. > :06:47.tougher on renting conditions, maybe that is exactly what the country
:06:48. > :06:53.needs. Will they meet the 1 million target? It would be a defiance of
:06:54. > :06:59.every political thing that has happened in the last ten years. I
:07:00. > :07:01.think Tom is right, if there is only one difference between Theresa May
:07:02. > :07:06.and David Cameron it's the willingness of the state to
:07:07. > :07:11.intervene. When Ed Miliband said that he was seen as communism, but
:07:12. > :07:18.Theresa May can get away with it. How serious is this talk of a couple
:07:19. > :07:24.of dozen Tories who were very loyal over voting for the principle of
:07:25. > :07:27.Article 50 but may now be tempted to vote for some amendments to Article
:07:28. > :07:32.50 legislation that they would find quite attractive? I think that
:07:33. > :07:38.threat has certainly been taken seriously by levers. I spoke to the
:07:39. > :07:42.campaign group Leaves Means Leave last night. The figure they
:07:43. > :07:45.mentioned was up to 20 remaining Tories. That sounds a lot to me but
:07:46. > :07:50.that is what they are concerned about and those Tories would come
:07:51. > :07:54.together with Labour and the SNP to vote for that amendment. Although
:07:55. > :07:59.that amendment sounds rather nice and democratic, actually in the eyes
:08:00. > :08:03.of many levers that is a wrecking amendment. Because what you are
:08:04. > :08:07.doing is giving Parliament a sort of veto over whatever deal Theresa May
:08:08. > :08:11.brings back. What they want is the vote to be before that deal is
:08:12. > :08:16.finalised. It isn't necessarily the case that if Parliament decided they
:08:17. > :08:20.didn't like that deal we would just go to WTO, we would fall out of the
:08:21. > :08:26.European Union. There are mixed views as to whether we might remain
:08:27. > :08:30.in and things could be extended. My understanding is the people making
:08:31. > :08:34.the amendments, they won any deal that is done to be brought to
:08:35. > :08:41.Parliament in time, so that if Parliament fancies it it's done, but
:08:42. > :08:44.if it does and it doesn't just mean go to WTO rules. There will be time
:08:45. > :08:49.to go back, renegotiate or think again? The question is where it puts
:08:50. > :08:57.Britain's negotiating hand. Nine of the options... Once we trigger
:08:58. > :09:00.Article 50 the two negotiation begins on the power switches to
:09:01. > :09:04.Europe. They can run out the clock and it will be worse for us than
:09:05. > :09:08.them. I don't think either option is particularly appealing. I think what
:09:09. > :09:12.seems like a rather Serena week for Article 50 this week isn't going to
:09:13. > :09:16.be reflective of what will happen next. The way the government's
:09:17. > :09:21.position is at the moment, if at the end the only choice Parliament has
:09:22. > :09:24.is to vote for the deal or crash out on WTO rules, then even the
:09:25. > :09:28.remainder is going to vote for the deal even if they don't like it,
:09:29. > :09:34.because they would regard crashing out as the worst of all possible
:09:35. > :09:39.results. Possibly. It will be a great game of bluff if Theresa May
:09:40. > :09:41.fights off any of these amendments on Wednesday and gets a
:09:42. > :09:45.straightforward deal or no Deal vote. I have a funny feeling this
:09:46. > :09:48.amendment, if it's chosen, we must remember because we don't know if
:09:49. > :09:55.they will choose this amendment, if it does go to a vote on Wednesday it
:09:56. > :09:57.will be very tight indeed. Remember, one final thing Theresa May can do
:09:58. > :10:04.if she gets Parliament voting against, as Isabel would have it,
:10:05. > :10:07.she could try to get a new parliament and go for a general
:10:08. > :10:13.election. And probably get a huge majority to do so. The Lords, it
:10:14. > :10:24.goes there after the February recess. They are very pro-Europe,
:10:25. > :10:29.but does their instinct for self-preservation override that? I
:10:30. > :10:32.think that is it. A Tory Lord said this morning I will vote to block it
:10:33. > :10:38.on a conscience measure, but you have the likes of Bill Cash, veteran
:10:39. > :10:42.Eurosceptics, suddenly converted to the Lords reform saying is an
:10:43. > :10:45.outrage. I doubt they will vote for their own demise, to hasten their
:10:46. > :10:53.own demise by blocking it. What did you make of Doctor Gorka smart
:10:54. > :10:57.fascinating. Cut from the same cloth as his boss. I thought it was
:10:58. > :11:00.extraordinary listening to him, saying everything is going dutifully
:11:01. > :11:04.to plan. But at the end of the day, what they are doing is what people
:11:05. > :11:09.in America voted for Trump to do. If you look at Lord Ashcroft's polling
:11:10. > :11:13.on why America voted for Trump, they went into this with their eyes wide
:11:14. > :11:19.open. One of the top fears among American voters, particularly
:11:20. > :11:21.Republican leading ones was America's immigration policy is or
:11:22. > :11:26.could be letting in terror arrests. As far as he is concerned, he is
:11:27. > :11:30.doing what he was elected to do. This whole year is turning into a
:11:31. > :11:33.wonderful year long lecture series on how democracy works at a
:11:34. > :11:36.fundamental level. I'm not sure anyone wanted it but it's what we've
:11:37. > :11:42.got. This same in the way we've been talking about direct democracy and
:11:43. > :11:46.Parliamentary democracy. The same is happening in America between
:11:47. > :11:50.executive and judicial branches. We are seeing the limits of
:11:51. > :11:54.presidential power. Regardless of the fact that people voted for Trump
:11:55. > :12:00.they voted for senators. The judge who blocks this was appointed by
:12:01. > :12:04.George W Bush. So-called Judge Eckert Mac so-called George W Bush!
:12:05. > :12:08.It's fascinating we're having all these conversations now that I never
:12:09. > :12:12.bought five years ago we would be having at such a fundamental level.
:12:13. > :12:17.Has the media yet worked out how to cover the Trump administration or
:12:18. > :12:22.has he got us behaving like headless chickens? He says something
:12:23. > :12:27.incendiary and we all run over to do that and when you pick it off it
:12:28. > :12:30.turns out not to be as incendiary as we thought? And then back doing
:12:31. > :12:36.something and we all rush over there. Is he making fools of us? Is
:12:37. > :12:41.exactly what he did in the election campaign. So many quick and fast
:12:42. > :12:44.outrageous comments frontrunner on a daily basis, no one single one of
:12:45. > :12:48.them had full news cycle time to be pored over and examined. I think
:12:49. > :12:53.there is a problem with this. Although he keeps the upper hand,
:12:54. > :12:57.keeps the agenda and keeps on the populist ground, the problem is it
:12:58. > :13:01.easy to campaign like that. If you are governing in a state of
:13:02. > :13:03.semi-hysteria, I wonder how long the American public will be comfortable
:13:04. > :13:07.with that. They don't really want their government to be swirling
:13:08. > :13:11.chaos all the time, as fascinating as it might be on TV. They will be
:13:12. > :13:17.exhausted by it, I already am. I have been interviewing White House
:13:18. > :13:21.administration official since 1976 and that is the first time someone
:13:22. > :13:23.hasn't given me a straight answer on America supporting the EU. That is a
:13:24. > :13:25.different world. Jo Coburn will be on BBC Two
:13:26. > :13:28.tomorrow at midday with the Daily Politics -
:13:29. > :13:32.and I'll be back here Remember, if it's Sunday -
:13:33. > :13:37.it's the Sunday Politics.