:00:39. > :00:40.Morning, folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics.
:00:41. > :00:42.Hard line remainers strike back at Brexit.
:00:43. > :00:44.Are they trying to overturn the result of June's referendum
:00:45. > :00:48.by forcing a second vote before we leave?
:00:49. > :00:51.Australia's man in London tells us that life outside the EU "can be
:00:52. > :00:55.pretty good" and that Brexit will "not be as hard as people say".
:00:56. > :00:58.Could leaving the EU free Britain to do more business
:00:59. > :01:04.It's been called "disgusting, dangerous and deadly"
:01:05. > :01:15.In the West, teams and their how bad for our health,
:01:16. > :01:16.In the West, teams and their screens. The Cheltenham MP says
:01:17. > :01:26.young people are getting stressed young people are getting stressed
:01:27. > :01:30.And with me in the Sunday Politics grotto, the Dasher, Dancer
:01:31. > :01:33.and Prancer of political punditry Iain Martin,
:01:34. > :01:41.They'll be delivering tweets throughout the programme.
:01:42. > :01:47.First this morning, some say they will fight
:01:48. > :01:51.for what they call a "soft Brexit", but now there's an attempt by those
:01:52. > :01:54.who campaigned for Britain to remain in the EU to allow the British
:01:55. > :01:57.people to change their minds - possibly with a second referendum -
:01:58. > :02:00.The Labour MEP Richard Corbett is revealed this morning to have
:02:01. > :02:02.tried to amend European Parliament resolutions.
:02:03. > :02:05.The original resolution called on the European Parliament
:02:06. > :02:08.to "respect the will of the majority of the citizens
:02:09. > :02:23.of the United Kingdom to leave the EU".
:02:24. > :02:29.He also proposed removing the wording "stress that this wish
:02:30. > :02:32.must be respected" and adding "while taking account of the 48.1%
:02:33. > :02:44.The amendments were proposed in October,
:02:45. > :02:47.but were rejected by a vote in the Brussels
:02:48. > :02:49.Constitutional Affairs Committee earlier this month.
:02:50. > :02:51.The report will be voted on by all MEPs in February.
:02:52. > :02:54.Well, joining me now from Leeds is the Labour MEP who proposed
:02:55. > :03:03.Good morning. Thanks for joining us at short notice. Is your aim to try
:03:04. > :03:09.and reverse what happened on June 23? My aim with those amendments was
:03:10. > :03:12.simply factual. It is rather odd that these amendments of two months
:03:13. > :03:18.ago are suddenly used paper headlines in three very different
:03:19. > :03:24.newspapers on the same day. It smacks of a sort of concerted effort
:03:25. > :03:29.to try and slapped down any notion that Britain might perhaps want to
:03:30. > :03:35.rethink its position on Brexit as the cost of Brexit emerges. You
:03:36. > :03:40.would like us to rethink the position even before the cost urges?
:03:41. > :03:45.I get lots of letters from people saying how one, this was an advisory
:03:46. > :03:51.referendum won by a narrow majority on the basis of a pack of lies and a
:03:52. > :03:54.questionable mandate. But if there is a mandate from this referendum,
:03:55. > :03:58.it is surely to secure a Brexit that works for Britain without sinking
:03:59. > :04:03.the economy. And if it transpires as we move forward, that this will be a
:04:04. > :04:07.very costly exercise, then there will be people who voted leave who
:04:08. > :04:11.said Hang on, this is not what I was told. I was told this would save
:04:12. > :04:14.money, we could put it in the NHS, but if it is going to cost us and
:04:15. > :04:31.our Monday leg, I would the right to reconsider. But
:04:32. > :04:34.your aim is not get a Brexit that would work for Britain, your aim is
:04:35. > :04:36.to stop it? If we got a Brexit that would work for Britain, that would
:04:37. > :04:39.respect the mandate. But if we cannot get that, if it is going to
:04:40. > :04:42.be a disaster, if it is going to cost people jobs and cost Britain
:04:43. > :04:46.money, it is something we might want to pause and rethink. The government
:04:47. > :04:51.said it is going to come forward with a plan. That is good. We need
:04:52. > :04:58.to know what options to go for as a country. Do we want to stay in the
:04:59. > :05:01.single market, the customs union, the various agencies? And options
:05:02. > :05:08.should be costed so we can all see how much they cost of Brexit will
:05:09. > :05:12.be. If you were simply going to try and make the resolution is more
:05:13. > :05:20.illegal, why did the constitutional committee vote them down? This is a
:05:21. > :05:26.report about future treaty amendments down the road for years
:05:27. > :05:34.to come. This was not the main focus of the report, it was a side
:05:35. > :05:39.reference, in which was put the idea for Association partnerships. Will
:05:40. > :05:47.you push for the idea before the full parliament? I must see what the
:05:48. > :05:54.text is. You said there is a widespread view in labour that if
:05:55. > :05:58.the Brexit view is bad we should not exclude everything, I take it you
:05:59. > :06:05.mean another referendum. When you were named down these amendments,
:06:06. > :06:09.was this just acting on your own initiative, or acting on behalf of
:06:10. > :06:17.the Labour Party? I am just be humble lame-duck MEP in the European
:06:18. > :06:21.Parliament. It makes sense from any point of view that if the course of
:06:22. > :06:25.action you have embarked on turns out to be much more costly and
:06:26. > :06:30.disastrous than you had anticipated, that you might want the chance to
:06:31. > :06:34.think again. You might come to the same conclusion, of course, but you
:06:35. > :06:40.might think, wait a minute, let's have a look at this. But let's be
:06:41. > :06:44.clear, even though you are deputy leader of Labour in the European
:06:45. > :06:51.Parliament, you're acting alone and not as Labour Party policy? I am
:06:52. > :06:56.acting in the constitutional affairs committee. All I am doing is stating
:06:57. > :07:00.things which are common sense. If as we move forward then this turns out
:07:01. > :07:04.to be a disaster, we need to look very carefully at where we are
:07:05. > :07:10.going. But if a deal is done under Article 50, and we get to see the
:07:11. > :07:15.shape of that deal by the end of 2019 under the two-year timetable,
:07:16. > :07:19.in your words, we won't know if it is a disaster or not until it is
:07:20. > :07:26.implemented. We won't be able to tell until we see the results about
:07:27. > :07:33.whether it is good or bad, surely? We might well be able to, because
:07:34. > :07:38.that has to take account of the future framework of relationships
:07:39. > :07:41.with the European Union, to quote the article of the treaty. That
:07:42. > :07:45.means we should have some idea about what that will be like. Will we be
:07:46. > :07:49.outside the customs union, for instance, which will be very
:07:50. > :07:54.damaging for our economy? Or will we have to stay inside and follow the
:07:55. > :07:58.rules without having a say on them. We won't know until we leave the
:07:59. > :08:02.customs union. You think it will be damaging, others think it will give
:08:03. > :08:06.us the opportunity to do massive trade deals. My case this morning is
:08:07. > :08:10.not what is right or wrong, we will not know until we have seen the
:08:11. > :08:14.results. We will know a heck of a lot more than we do now when we see
:08:15. > :08:17.that Article 50 divorce agreement. We will know the terms of the
:08:18. > :08:22.divorce, we will know how much we still have to pay into the EU budget
:08:23. > :08:26.for legacy costs. We will know whether we will be in the single
:08:27. > :08:32.market customs union or not. We will know about the agencies. We will
:08:33. > :08:35.know a lot of things. If the deal on the table looks as if it will be
:08:36. > :08:41.damaging to Britain, then Parliament will be in its rights to say, wait a
:08:42. > :08:45.minute, not this deal. And then you either renegotiate or you reconsider
:08:46. > :08:49.the whole issue of Brexit or you find another solution. We need to
:08:50. > :08:55.leave it there but thank you for joining us.
:08:56. > :09:01.Iain Martin, how serious is the attempt to in effect an wind what
:09:02. > :09:06.happened on June 23? I think it is pretty serious and that interview
:09:07. > :09:10.illustrates very well the most damaging impact of the approach
:09:11. > :09:17.taken by a lot of Remainers, which is essentially to say with one
:09:18. > :09:19.breath, we of course accept the result, but with every action
:09:20. > :09:23.subsequent to that to try and undermine the result or try and are
:09:24. > :09:28.sure that the deal is as bad as possible. I think what needed to
:09:29. > :09:33.happen and hasn't happened after June 23 is you have the extremists
:09:34. > :09:38.on both sides and you have in the middle probably 70% of public
:09:39. > :09:45.opinion, moderate leaders, moderate Remainers should be working together
:09:46. > :09:52.to try and get British bespoke deal. But moderate Leavers will not take
:09:53. > :09:56.moderate Remainers seriously if this is the approach taken at every
:09:57. > :10:06.single turn to try and rerun the referendum. He did not say whether
:10:07. > :10:10.it was Labour policy? That was a question which was ducked. I do not
:10:11. > :10:16.think it is Labour Party policy. I think most people are in a morass in
:10:17. > :10:20.the middle. I think the screaming that happens when anybody dares to
:10:21. > :10:24.question or suggest that you might ever want to think again about these
:10:25. > :10:28.things, I disagree with him about having another referendum but if he
:10:29. > :10:32.wants to campaign for that it is his democratic right to do so. If you
:10:33. > :10:38.can convince enough people it is a good idea then he has succeeded. But
:10:39. > :10:42.the idea that we would do a deal and then realise this is a really bad
:10:43. > :10:49.deal, let's not proceed, we will not really know that until the deal is
:10:50. > :10:53.implemented. What our access is to the single market, whether or not we
:10:54. > :10:57.are in or out of the customs union which we will talk about in a
:10:58. > :11:02.minute, what immigration policy we will have, whether these are going
:11:03. > :11:07.to be good things bad things, surely you have got to wait for four, five,
:11:08. > :11:11.six years to see if it has worked or not? Yes, and by which stage
:11:12. > :11:15.Parliament will have voted on it and there will be no going back from it,
:11:16. > :11:20.or maybe there will. We are talking now about the first three months of
:11:21. > :11:27.2019. That is absolutely the moment when Parliament agrees with Theresa
:11:28. > :11:38.May or not. One arch remain I spoke to, and arch Remainiac, he said that
:11:39. > :11:47.Theresa May will bring this to Parliament in 2019 and could say I
:11:48. > :11:52.recommend that we reject it. What is he on or she? Some strong chemical
:11:53. > :11:58.drugs! The point is that all manner of things could happen. I don't
:11:59. > :12:03.think any of us take it seriously for now but the future is a very
:12:04. > :12:07.long way away. Earlier, the trade Secretary Liam Fox was asked if we
:12:08. > :12:11.would stay in the customs union after Brexit.
:12:12. > :12:17.There would be limitations on what we would do in terms of tariff
:12:18. > :12:23.setting which could limit the deals we would do, but we want to look at
:12:24. > :12:26.all the different deals. There is hard Brexit and soft Brexit as if it
:12:27. > :12:31.is a boiled egg we are talking about. Turkey is in part of the
:12:32. > :12:39.customs union but not other parts. What we need to do is look at the
:12:40. > :12:43.cost. This is what I picked up. The government knows it cannot remain a
:12:44. > :12:47.member of the single market in these negotiations, because that would
:12:48. > :12:51.make us subject to free movement and the European Court. The customs
:12:52. > :12:55.union and the Prime Minister 's office doesn't seem to be quite as
:12:56. > :12:59.binary, that you can be a little bit in and a little bit out, but I would
:13:00. > :13:04.suggest that overall Liam Fox knows to do all the trade deals we want to
:13:05. > :13:08.do we basically have to be out. But what he also seems to know is that
:13:09. > :13:14.is a minority view in Cabinet. He said he was not going to give his
:13:15. > :13:23.opinion publicly. There is still an argument going on about it in
:13:24. > :13:26.Cabinet. When David Liddington struggled against Emily Thornbury
:13:27. > :13:29.PMQs, he did not know about the customs union. What is apparent is
:13:30. > :13:36.Theresa May has not told him what to think about that. If we stay in the
:13:37. > :13:43.customs union we cannot do our own free trade deals. We are behind the
:13:44. > :13:48.customs union, the tariff barriers set by Europe? Not quite. Turkey is
:13:49. > :13:53.proof of the pudding. There are limited exemptions but they can do
:13:54. > :14:01.free trade with their neighbours. Not on goods. They are doing a trade
:14:02. > :14:04.deal with Pakistan at the moment, it relies on foreign trade investment
:14:05. > :14:08.but Europe negotiates on turkey's behalf on the major free-trade
:14:09. > :14:12.deals. This is absolutely why the customs union will be the fault line
:14:13. > :14:17.for the deal we are trying to achieve. Interestingly, I thought
:14:18. > :14:21.Liam Fox suggested during that interview that he was prepared to
:14:22. > :14:27.suck up whatever it was. I think he was saying there is still an
:14:28. > :14:35.argument and he intends to win it. He wants to leave it because he
:14:36. > :14:39.wants to do these free-trade deals. There is an argument in the cabinet
:14:40. > :14:44.about precisely that. The other thing to consider is in this country
:14:45. > :14:48.we have tended to focus too much on the British angle in negotiations,
:14:49. > :14:51.but I think the negotiations are going to be very difficult. You look
:14:52. > :14:55.at the state of the EU at the moment, you look at what is
:14:56. > :15:02.happening in Italy, France, Germany, look at the 27. It is possible I
:15:03. > :15:07.think that Britain could design a bespoke sensible deal but then it
:15:08. > :15:14.becomes very difficult to agree which is why I ultimately think we
:15:15. > :15:15.are heading for a harder Brexit. It will be about developing in this
:15:16. > :15:19.country. So, we've had a warning this week
:15:20. > :15:23.that it could take ten years to do a trade deal
:15:24. > :15:25.with the EU after Brexit. But could opportunities to expand
:15:26. > :15:27.trade lie elsewhere? Australia was one of the first
:15:28. > :15:29.countries to indicate its willingness to do a deal
:15:30. > :15:32.with the UK and now its High Commissioner in London has told
:15:33. > :15:35.us that life outside the EU He made this exclusive film
:15:36. > :15:51.for the Sunday Politics. My father was the Australian High
:15:52. > :15:53.Commissioner in the early 70s when the UK joined
:15:54. > :15:55.the European Union, Now I'm in the job,
:15:56. > :16:04.the UK is leaving. Australia supported
:16:05. > :16:05.Britain remaining a member of the European Union,
:16:06. > :16:08.but we respect the decision that Now that the decision has been made,
:16:09. > :16:14.we hope that Britain will get on with the process
:16:15. > :16:18.of negotiating their exit from the European Union and make
:16:19. > :16:22.the most of the opportunities that Following the referendum decision,
:16:23. > :16:28.Australia approached the British Government
:16:29. > :16:31.with a proposal. We offered, when the time was right,
:16:32. > :16:34.to negotiate a free trade agreement. The British and Australian
:16:35. > :16:40.governments have already established a working group to explore a future,
:16:41. > :16:43.ambitious trade agreement once A free trade agreement will provide
:16:44. > :16:55.great opportunities for consumers Australian consumers could purchase
:16:56. > :17:00.British-made cars for less We would give British
:17:01. > :17:06.households access to cheaper, Our summer is during your winter,
:17:07. > :17:12.so Australia could provide British households with fresh produce
:17:13. > :17:15.when the equivalent British or Australian households would have
:17:16. > :17:22.access to British products Free-trade agreements
:17:23. > :17:35.are also about investment. The UK is the second-largest source
:17:36. > :17:39.of foreign investment in Australia. By the way, Australia also invests
:17:40. > :17:45.over ?200 billion in the UK, so a free trade agreement
:17:46. > :17:48.would stimulate investment, But, by the way, free-trade
:17:49. > :17:53.agreements are not just about trade and investment,
:17:54. > :17:58.they are also about geopolitics. Countries with good trade relations
:17:59. > :18:01.often work more closely together in other fields including security,
:18:02. > :18:05.the spread of democracy We may have preferred
:18:06. > :18:19.the UKto remain in the EU, We may have preferred the UK
:18:20. > :18:21.to remain in the EU, but life outside as we know can
:18:22. > :18:24.be pretty good. We have negotiated eight free-trade
:18:25. > :18:26.agreements over the last 12 years, including a free-trade agreement
:18:27. > :18:28.with the United States This is one of the reasons why
:18:29. > :18:40.the Australian economy has continued to grow over the last 25 years
:18:41. > :18:43.and we, of course, are not Australia welcomes Theresa May's
:18:44. > :18:54.vision for the UK to become a global We are willing to help
:18:55. > :19:23.in any way we can. Welcome to the programme. The
:19:24. > :19:27.Australian government says it wants to negotiate an important trade deal
:19:28. > :19:33.with the UK as efficiently and promptly as possible when Brexit is
:19:34. > :19:38.complete. How prompt is prompt? There are legal issues obviously.
:19:39. > :19:43.The UK, for as long as it remains in the EU, cannot negotiate individual
:19:44. > :19:48.trade deals. Once it leaves it can. We will negotiate a agreement with
:19:49. > :19:54.the UK when the time is right, by which we mean we can do preliminary
:19:55. > :19:59.examination. Are you talking now about the parameters? We are talking
:20:00. > :20:03.already, we have set up a joint working group with the British
:20:04. > :20:06.Government and we are scoping the issue to try to understand what
:20:07. > :20:12.questions will arise in any negotiation. But we cannot have
:20:13. > :20:18.formally a negotiation. Until the country is out. Why is there no
:20:19. > :20:22.free-trade deal between Australia and the European Union? It is a long
:20:23. > :20:29.and tortuous story. Give me the headline. Basically Australian
:20:30. > :20:34.agriculture is either banned or hugely restricted in terms of its
:20:35. > :20:38.access to the European Union. So we see the European Union, Australia's,
:20:39. > :20:44.is a pretty protectionist sort of organisation. Now we are doing a
:20:45. > :20:48.scoping study on a free-trade agreement with the European Union
:20:49. > :20:53.and we hope that next year we can enter into negotiations with them.
:20:54. > :20:58.But we have no illusions this would be a very difficult negotiation, but
:20:59. > :21:04.one we are giving priority to. Is there not a danger that when Britain
:21:05. > :21:08.leaves the EU the EU will become more protectionist? This country has
:21:09. > :21:13.always been the most powerful voice for free trade. I hope that does not
:21:14. > :21:18.happen, but the reason why we wanted Britain to remain in the European
:21:19. > :21:24.Union is because it brought to the table the whole free-trade mentality
:21:25. > :21:27.which has been an historic part of Britain's approach to international
:21:28. > :21:32.relations. Without the UK in the European Union you will lose that.
:21:33. > :21:36.It is a very loud voice in the European Union and you will lose
:21:37. > :21:42.that voice and that will be a disadvantage. The figure that jumped
:21:43. > :21:44.out of me in the film is it to you only 15 months to negotiate a
:21:45. > :21:50.free-trade deal with the United States. Yes, the thing is it is
:21:51. > :21:56.about political will. A free-trade agreement will be no problem unless
:21:57. > :22:01.you want to protect particular sectors of your economy. In that
:22:02. > :22:05.case there was one sector the Americans insisted on protecting and
:22:06. > :22:09.that was their sugar industry. In the end after 15 months of
:22:10. > :22:15.negotiation two relatively free trading countries have fixed up
:22:16. > :22:19.nearly everything. But we had to ask would be go ahead with this
:22:20. > :22:24.free-trade agreement without sugar west we decided to do that. Other
:22:25. > :22:29.than that it was relatively easy to negotiate because we are both
:22:30. > :22:32.free-trade countries. With the UK you cannot be sure, but I do not
:22:33. > :22:37.think a free-trade agreement would take very long to negotiate with the
:22:38. > :22:42.UK because the UK would not want to put a lot of obstacles in the way to
:22:43. > :22:47.Australia. Not to give away our hand, we would not want to put a lot
:22:48. > :22:53.of obstacles in the way of British exports. The trend in recent years
:22:54. > :22:58.is to do big, regional trade deals, but President-elect Donald Trump has
:22:59. > :23:03.made clear the Pacific trade deal is dead. The transatlantic trade deal
:23:04. > :23:06.is almost dead as well. The American election put a nail in the coffin
:23:07. > :23:12.and the French elections could put another nail in the coffin. Are we
:23:13. > :23:15.returning to a world of lateral trade deals, country with country
:23:16. > :23:23.rather than regional blocs? Not necessarily. In the Asia Pacific we
:23:24. > :23:26.will look at multilateral trade arrangements and even if the
:23:27. > :23:30.transpacific partnership is not ratified by the Americans, we have
:23:31. > :23:36.other options are there. However, our approach has been the ultimate
:23:37. > :23:41.would be free-trade throughout the world which is proving hard to
:23:42. > :23:44.achieve. Secondly, if we can get a lot of countries engaged in a
:23:45. > :23:51.free-trade negotiation, that is pretty good if possible. But it is
:23:52. > :23:56.more difficult. But we do bilateral trade agreements. We have one with
:23:57. > :24:00.China, Japan, the United States, Singapore, and the list goes on, and
:24:01. > :24:09.they have been hugely beneficial to Australia. You have been dealing
:24:10. > :24:12.with the EU free deal, what lessons are there? How quickly do you think
:24:13. > :24:19.Britain could do a free-trade deal with the EU if we leave? Well, there
:24:20. > :24:23.is a completely different concept involved in the case of Britain and
:24:24. > :24:28.the EU and that is at the moment there are no restrictions on trade.
:24:29. > :24:33.So you and the EU would be talking about whether you will direct
:24:34. > :24:37.barriers to trade. We are outsiders and we do not get too much involved
:24:38. > :24:44.in this debate except to say we do not want to see the global trade
:24:45. > :24:48.system disrupted by the direction of tariff barriers between the United
:24:49. > :24:54.Kingdom, the fifth biggest economy in the world, and the European
:24:55. > :24:58.Union. Our expectation is not just the British but the Europeans will
:24:59. > :25:03.try to make the transition to Brexit as smooth as possible particularly
:25:04. > :25:08.commercially. Say yes or no if you can. If Britain and Australia make a
:25:09. > :25:11.free-trade agreement, would that include free movement of the
:25:12. > :25:18.Australian and the British people? We will probably stick with our
:25:19. > :25:22.present non-discriminatory system. Australia does not discriminate
:25:23. > :25:26.against any country. The European Union's free movement means you
:25:27. > :25:31.discriminate against non-Europeans. Probably not.
:25:32. > :25:34.It could lead to a ban on diesel cars, prevent the building
:25:35. > :25:36.of a third runway at Heathrow, and will certainly make it
:25:37. > :25:38.more expensive to drive in our towns and cities.
:25:39. > :25:41.Air pollution has been called the "public health crisis
:25:42. > :25:43.of a generation" - but just how serious is the problem?
:25:44. > :25:57.40,000 early deaths result from air pollution every year in the UK.
:25:58. > :26:03.Almost 10,000 Londoners each year die prematurely.
:26:04. > :26:09.It seems at times we can get caught up in alarming assertions
:26:10. > :26:12.about air pollution, that this is a public health
:26:13. > :26:16.emergency, that it is a silent killer, coming from politicians,
:26:17. > :26:23.But how bad is air quality in Britain really?
:26:24. > :26:27.Tony Frew is a professor in respiratory medicine and works
:26:28. > :26:30.at Brighton's Royal Sussex County Hospital.
:26:31. > :26:32.He has been looking into the recent claims
:26:33. > :26:37.It's a problem and it affects people's health.
:26:38. > :26:40.But when people start talking about the numbers
:26:41. > :26:42.of deaths here, I think they are misusing the statistics.
:26:43. > :26:47.There have been tremendous improvements in air quality
:26:48. > :26:52.There is a lot less pollution than there used to be
:26:53. > :26:56.and none of that is coming through in the public
:26:57. > :27:00.So what does Professor Frew make of the claim that alarming levels
:27:01. > :27:03.of toxicity in the air in the UK causes 40,000 deaths each year?
:27:04. > :27:05.It is not 40,000 people who should have air pollution
:27:06. > :27:07.on their death certificate, or 40,000 people who
:27:08. > :27:13.It's a lot of people who had a little bit of life shortening
:27:14. > :27:19.To examine these figures further we travelled to Cambridge to visit
:27:20. > :27:24.I asked him about the data on which these claims
:27:25. > :27:29.They come from a study on how mortality rates in US cities
:27:30. > :27:36.First of all, it is important to realise that that 40,000 figure
:27:37. > :27:41.29,000, which are due to fine particles, and another 11,000
:27:42. > :27:49.I will just talk about this group for a start.
:27:50. > :27:53.These are what are known as attributable deaths.
:27:54. > :27:58.Known as virtual deaths, they come from a complex statistical model.
:27:59. > :28:01.Quite remarkably it all comes from just one number and this
:28:02. > :28:05.was based on a study of US cities and they found out that
:28:06. > :28:09.by monitoring these cities over decades that the cities which had
:28:10. > :28:15.a higher level of pollution had a higher mortality rate.
:28:16. > :28:20.They estimated that there was a 6% increased risk of dying
:28:21. > :28:25.each year for each small increase in pollution.
:28:26. > :28:29.So this is quite a big figure, but it is important to realise
:28:30. > :28:32.it is only a best estimate and the committee that advises
:28:33. > :28:38.the government says that this figure could be between 1% and 12%.
:28:39. > :28:41.So this 6% figure is used to work out the 29,000
:28:42. > :28:46.Yes, through a rather complex statistical model.
:28:47. > :28:51.And a similar analysis gives rise to the 11,000 attributable deaths
:28:52. > :28:59.How much should we invest in cycling?
:29:00. > :29:01.Should we build a third runway at Heathrow?
:29:02. > :29:05.We need reliable statistics to answer those questions,
:29:06. > :29:09.but can we trust the way data is being used by campaigners?
:29:10. > :29:14.I think there are people who have such a passion for the environment
:29:15. > :29:16.and for air pollution that they don't really
:29:17. > :29:22.see it as a problem if they are deceiving the public.
:29:23. > :29:24.Greenpeace have been running a campaign claiming that breathing
:29:25. > :29:27.London's air is the equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day.
:29:28. > :29:33.If you smoke 15 cigarettes a day through your adult life,
:29:34. > :29:35.that will definitely take ten years off your life expectancy.
:29:36. > :29:38.If you are poor and you are in social class five,
:29:39. > :29:40.compared to social class one, that would take seven
:29:41. > :29:45.If you are poor and you smoke, that will take 17 years off your life.
:29:46. > :29:48.Now, we are talking about possibly, if we could get rid of all
:29:49. > :29:50.of the cars in London and all of the road transport,
:29:51. > :29:54.we could make a difference of two micrograms per metre squared in air
:29:55. > :29:59.pollution which might save you 30 days of your life.
:30:00. > :30:01.There is no doubt that air pollution is bad for you,
:30:02. > :30:04.but if we exaggerate the scale of the problem and the impact
:30:05. > :30:08.on our health, are we at risk of undermining the case for making
:30:09. > :30:18.And we are joined now by the Executive Director
:30:19. > :30:37.You have called pollution and national crisis and a health
:30:38. > :30:41.emergency. Around the UK are levels increasing or falling? They are
:30:42. > :30:51.remaining fairly static in London. Nationally? If you look at the
:30:52. > :30:56.studies on where air pollution is measured, in 42 cities around the
:30:57. > :31:00.UK, 38 cities were found to be breaking the legal limit on air
:31:01. > :31:05.pollution so basically all of the cities were breaking the limit so if
:31:06. > :31:09.you think eight out of ten people live in cities, obviously, this is
:31:10. > :31:13.impacting a lot of people around the UK. We have looked at in missions of
:31:14. > :31:23.solvent dioxide, they have fallen and since 1970, nitrogen dioxide is
:31:24. > :31:29.down 69%. Let me show you a chart. There are the nitrogen oxides which
:31:30. > :31:34.we have all been worried about. That chart shows a substantial fall from
:31:35. > :31:39.the 1970s, and then a really steep fall from the 1980s. That is
:31:40. > :31:46.something which is getting better. You have to look at it in the round.
:31:47. > :31:53.If you look at particulates, and if you look at today's understanding of
:31:54. > :32:02.the health impact. Let's look at particulates. We have been really
:32:03. > :32:08.worried about what they have been doing to our abilities to breathe
:32:09. > :32:12.good air, again, you see substantial improvement. Indeed, we are not far
:32:13. > :32:21.from the Gothenberg level which is a very high standard. What you see is
:32:22. > :32:26.it is pretty flat. I see it coming down quite substantially. Over the
:32:27. > :32:30.last decade it is pretty flat. If you look at the World Health
:32:31. > :32:35.Organisation guidelines, actually, these are at serious levels and they
:32:36. > :32:38.need to come down. We know the impact, particularly on children, if
:32:39. > :32:42.you look at what is happening to children and children's lungs, if
:32:43. > :32:48.you look at the impact of asthma and other impacts on children in cities
:32:49. > :32:51.and in schools next to main roads where pollution levels are very
:32:52. > :32:55.high, the impact of very serious. You have many doctors, professors
:32:56. > :33:01.and many studies by London University showing this to be true.
:33:02. > :33:05.The thing is, we do not want pollution. If we can get rid of
:33:06. > :33:11.pollution, let's do it. And also we also have to get rid of CO2 which is
:33:12. > :33:15.causing climate change. We are talking air pollution at the moment.
:33:16. > :33:19.The point is there is not still more to do, it is clear there is and
:33:20. > :33:24.there is no question about that, my question is you seem to deny that we
:33:25. > :33:29.have made any kind of progress and that you also say that air pollution
:33:30. > :33:36.causes 40,000 deaths a year in the UK, that is not true. The figure is
:33:37. > :33:45.40,000 premature deaths is what has been talked about by medical staff.
:33:46. > :33:50.Your website said courses. It causes premature deaths. What we are
:33:51. > :33:55.talking about here is can we solve the problem of air pollution? If air
:33:56. > :33:59.pollution is mainly being caused by diesel vehicles then we need to
:34:00. > :34:03.phase out diesel vehicles. If there are alternatives and clean Turner
:34:04. > :34:06.tips which will give better quality of air, better quality of life and
:34:07. > :34:10.clean up our cities, then why don't we take the chance to do it? You had
:34:11. > :34:18.the Australian High Commissioner on this programme earlier. He said to
:34:19. > :34:24.me earlier, why is your government supporting diesel? That is the most
:34:25. > :34:30.polluting form of transport. That may well be right but I am looking
:34:31. > :34:35.at Greenpeace's claims. You claim it causes 40,000 deaths, it is a figure
:34:36. > :34:41.which regularly appears. Let me quote the committee on the medical
:34:42. > :34:51.effects of air pollutants, it says this calculation, 40,000 which is
:34:52. > :34:54.everywhere in Greenpeace literature, is not an estimate of the number of
:34:55. > :34:58.people whose untimely death is caused entirely by air pollution,
:34:59. > :35:02.but a way of representing the effect across the whole population of air
:35:03. > :35:08.pollution when considered as a contributory factor to many more
:35:09. > :35:18.individual deaths. It is 40,000 premature deaths. It could be
:35:19. > :35:21.premature by a couple of days. It could me by a year. -- it could be
:35:22. > :35:23.by a year. It could also be giving children asthma and breathing
:35:24. > :35:32.difficulties. We are talking about deaths. It could also cause stroke
:35:33. > :35:41.and heart diseases. Medical experts say we need to deal with this. Do
:35:42. > :35:48.you believe air pollution causes 40,000 deaths a year. I have defined
:35:49. > :35:58.that. You accept it does not? It leads to 40,000 premature deaths.
:35:59. > :36:03.But 40,000 people are not killed. You say air pollution causes 40,000
:36:04. > :36:07.deaths each year on your website. I have just explained what I mean by
:36:08. > :36:12.that in terms of premature deaths. The question is, are we going to do
:36:13. > :36:16.something about that? Air pollution is a serious problem. It is mainly
:36:17. > :36:21.caused by diesel. If we phased diesel out it will solve the problem
:36:22. > :36:26.of air pollution and deal with the wider problem of climate change. I
:36:27. > :36:33.am not talking about climate change this morning. Let's link to another
:36:34. > :36:39.claim... Do you want to live in a clean city? Do you want to breathe
:36:40. > :36:44.clean air? Yes, don't generalise. Let's stick to your claims. You have
:36:45. > :36:48.also said living in London on your life is equivalent to smoking 50
:36:49. > :36:56.cigarettes a day. That is not true either. What I would say is if you
:36:57. > :36:58.look at passive smoking, it is the equivalent of I don't know what the
:36:59. > :37:02.actual figure is, I can't remember offhand, but it is the equivalent
:37:03. > :37:08.effect of about ten cigarettes being smoked passively. The question is in
:37:09. > :37:14.terms of, you are just throwing me out all of these things... I am
:37:15. > :37:18.throwing things that Greenpeace have claimed. Greenpeace have claimed
:37:19. > :37:22.that living in London is equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day and
:37:23. > :37:26.that takes ten years off your life. Professor Froome made it clear to us
:37:27. > :37:30.that living in London your whole life with levels of pollution does
:37:31. > :37:35.take time off your life but it takes nine months of your life. Nine
:37:36. > :37:39.months is still too much, I understand that, but it is not ten
:37:40. > :37:42.years and that is what you claim. I would suggest you realise that is a
:37:43. > :37:48.piece of propaganda because you claim on the website, you have taken
:37:49. > :37:51.it down. I agree it has been corrected and I agree with what the
:37:52. > :37:56.professor said that maybe it takes up to a year off your life, but the
:37:57. > :38:00.thing is, there are much more wider issues as well, in terms of the
:38:01. > :38:06.impact on air pollution, and in terms of the impact on young
:38:07. > :38:11.children. We can argue about the facts... But these are your claims,
:38:12. > :38:15.this is why I am hitting it to you. It does not get away from the
:38:16. > :38:20.underlying issue that air pollution is a serious problem. We are not
:38:21. > :38:25.arguing for a moment that it is not. Do you think the way you exaggerate
:38:26. > :38:30.things, put false claims, in the end, for of course we all agree
:38:31. > :38:35.with, getting the best air we can, you undermine your credibility? I
:38:36. > :38:39.absolutely do not support false claims and if mistakes have been
:38:40. > :38:44.made then mistakes have been made and they will be corrected. I think
:38:45. > :38:48.the key issue is how we are going to deal with air pollution. Clearly,
:38:49. > :38:54.diesel is the biggest problem and we need to work out a way how we can
:38:55. > :38:58.get away from diesel as quickly and fast as possible. Comeback and see
:38:59. > :39:00.us in the New Year and we will discuss diesel. Thank you.
:39:01. > :39:02.It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:39:03. > :39:17.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now
:39:18. > :39:27.Hello. Welcome to the Sunday politics. It is our last before
:39:28. > :39:30.Christmas. You might well be unwrapping a new tablet or phone on
:39:31. > :39:34.the 25th but are they causing more harm than good with teenagers
:39:35. > :39:44.staying up into the small hours to check their texts and tweets? My
:39:45. > :39:53.guests have promised to avoid checking their phones for the next
:39:54. > :39:57.half an hour or so. Welcome to you both. Let's start with the news that
:39:58. > :40:07.many schools in the West are set to get a funding boost. It follows a
:40:08. > :40:10.campaign. You are the vice-chair of the campaign group that wanted this.
:40:11. > :40:15.You got your own way but was it actually worth it in the end? I
:40:16. > :40:19.think the government is absolutely right to have grappled with this.
:40:20. > :40:23.This has been going on for 20 years and it is right that we should have
:40:24. > :40:27.funding based on need not on postcode but the formula that has
:40:28. > :40:32.come out is only one formula. We argued for a different formula. We
:40:33. > :40:37.have to immerse ourselves in the detail. The detail is is that you
:40:38. > :40:46.have got an increase of 0.6%. That pretty underwhelming. We have now
:40:47. > :40:50.got to sit down and work out precisely... We have to work out
:40:51. > :40:55.with the 40 local authorities that came together to look at the
:40:56. > :40:58.methodology that is being used because initial impressions are to
:40:59. > :41:03.is not the methodology that we wanted. So it has been a waste of
:41:04. > :41:07.time? No, not at all. You have got to look at it across the piece in
:41:08. > :41:12.terms of what has happened. The situation where you had places in
:41:13. > :41:18.London getting 6500 per head and places in Somerset getting 4000 is
:41:19. > :41:23.plainly unjustified. But how you make it fairer is what we have to
:41:24. > :41:31.look at. Somerset has done quite well out of this but it is a long
:41:32. > :41:34.time coming. 4.7%, which is good. But there are underlying cuts that
:41:35. > :41:41.the government is making to the overall schools budget as well
:41:42. > :41:47.forges a problem. We should focus on what is needed and making sure that
:41:48. > :41:56.schools get the surety that they need. It is a frequent sound in your
:41:57. > :42:01.house? The constant beeping of our phones and tablets question market
:42:02. > :42:04.is becoming a concern for Alex. He is worried about the effect that
:42:05. > :42:13.social media is having on today's youth. We will find out why in a
:42:14. > :42:16.moment but first this report. They are the first thing we pick up
:42:17. > :42:21.in the morning, the last thing we put down at night. We have become a
:42:22. > :42:32.nation of digital addicts, glued to our devices, keeping up to speed
:42:33. > :42:36.sultans of swiping or of course the sultans of swiping or of course the
:42:37. > :42:40.millennial 's. Using social media to stay in touch and have fun. Though
:42:41. > :42:44.even they underestimate how much they are on their phones. How many
:42:45. > :42:53.times a day do you check your phone? 30 times. About 50. 40 roughly. A
:42:54. > :42:57.recent study suggests we actually check our phones an average of 85
:42:58. > :43:01.times a day. Those we met up this chart school now use a giddying
:43:02. > :43:11.array of apps to stay in touch. It array of apps to stay in touch. It
:43:12. > :43:16.is like really when I get home until about two hours before I go to
:43:17. > :43:24.sleep. I would check my various social media is at least once every
:43:25. > :43:31.hour or so. And then I might maybe wake up during the night and if I am
:43:32. > :43:37.awake, I might think, I may as well awake, I might think, I may as well
:43:38. > :43:41.have a little scroll through. And she's not alone. New research shows
:43:42. > :43:45.that almost half of all secondary aged children do this, checking
:43:46. > :43:48.their phones after going to bed. It is being claimed one in ten look at
:43:49. > :43:55.their screens more than ten times a night. It is an addiction really. I
:43:56. > :44:00.know not just young people that adults that are falling into that
:44:01. > :44:04.habit of sort of a deep anxiety when they don't have their phone with
:44:05. > :44:14.them. They are constantly checking to see if they have had messages,
:44:15. > :44:20.likes, any posts that they may have posted. They are looking for
:44:21. > :44:25.validation and acceptance. And that becomes addictive. This virtual
:44:26. > :44:26.world has prompted a raft of vocabulary to explain some of the
:44:27. > :44:47.unwelcome side-effects. In a school environment, have you
:44:48. > :44:52.seen friends of yours, contemporaries of yours, being
:44:53. > :44:57.picked on on social media? Yes, I know a lot of people who have gone
:44:58. > :45:01.through a dark time. The chop MP has taken the issue to Parliament. He
:45:02. > :45:06.wants an enquiry in the New Year. Social media companies ought to be
:45:07. > :45:13.policing their code of conduct more effectively. They need to look at
:45:14. > :45:18.potentially a yellow card suspension and a red card. If it is just for a
:45:19. > :45:19.short period, it sends a message, these are the rules, abide by them.
:45:20. > :45:41.Facebook told us... Those who work in social media work
:45:42. > :45:48.Keynesian position be on education rather than a yellow or red card
:45:49. > :45:51.system. My first reaction is it seems quite naive that there is
:45:52. > :45:57.already pretty much a yellow and a red card system and most of those
:45:58. > :46:03.networks. You can block a post, or you can block a user. This stuff
:46:04. > :46:07.exists. We just need to educate people on the fact it is there. For
:46:08. > :46:14.teenagers who love their phones, they just want to be teenagers. Are
:46:15. > :46:28.these meaningful conversations? No, random. You just talk about random
:46:29. > :46:32.things, you don't know why. But while our devices can cope with any
:46:33. > :46:36.number of swipes, likes and online gripes, are we mere humans able to
:46:37. > :46:41.handle this new torrent of information in the digital age?
:46:42. > :46:45.Very interesting. This is your campaign. It is almost as if we knew
:46:46. > :46:50.you were coming on the programme. I don't quite get what you want
:46:51. > :46:53.because as the man said in the film, there are already blocking
:46:54. > :47:00.mechanisms. What would the difference be? I was a bit
:47:01. > :47:04.disappointed by that. Social media companies are abdicating
:47:05. > :47:08.responsibility for something that is clearly happening online to a far
:47:09. > :47:12.greater extent than they are prepared to accept. Of course it is
:47:13. > :47:16.possible you can delete a post and block a user but the question is,
:47:17. > :47:18.that relies on the individual to take what can be quite a serious
:47:19. > :47:25.step. What I would like to see them step. What I would like to see them
:47:26. > :47:29.doing is where they detect that people are bullying people,
:47:30. > :47:35.harassing people, they have got to intervene far more robustly than
:47:36. > :47:38.they are at the moment. The fact is, children are saying the occasions
:47:39. > :47:48.when people are suspended from the networks are vanishingly rare. It is
:47:49. > :47:52.very difficult to actually legislate and create rules for something... Do
:47:53. > :47:57.you treat somebody who has had a bit of a life... A public life in a
:47:58. > :48:04.different way from somebody who has not? Do you treat an 18-year-old
:48:05. > :48:08.differently to a 16-year-old Mark is very difficult. Facebook 's point is
:48:09. > :48:15.a good one but nonetheless I accept there is a problem. But it affects
:48:16. > :48:21.all ages, not just children and when all ages, not just children and when
:48:22. > :48:26.it comes to teenagers it is the job of the parent to keep an eye.
:48:27. > :48:34.Parents have a role to play but a lot of them are not digital natives
:48:35. > :48:40.and what we are seniors young people developing mental health problems on
:48:41. > :48:46.a scale we have not seen before. We have to look at prevention as well
:48:47. > :48:50.as cure. The Office for National Statistics say there is a
:48:51. > :48:53.correlation between time spent on social media and adverse mental
:48:54. > :49:00.health. We have to grapple with this. We cannot simply ignore it. He
:49:01. > :49:03.laughed to build resilience in your children and your children's friends
:49:04. > :49:13.because every parent knows other young people... Bullying was in the
:49:14. > :49:17.playground before it was on the phone. It is everywhere. But
:49:18. > :49:24.bullying used to stop at the playground gates. I don't think it
:49:25. > :49:29.did. But now, the bullies are in the bedroom. Facebook is a private
:49:30. > :49:33.company, it has been very successful. A billion people use it.
:49:34. > :49:39.It is impossible to expect them to police it in a thorough way, just as
:49:40. > :49:44.it would be impossible to ask BT to stop people saying rude things on
:49:45. > :49:48.the telephone. Well, it is a slightly different point. They are
:49:49. > :49:52.making a huge amount of money out of the people who are using it. I do
:49:53. > :49:55.not think it is beyond the realms of common sense that in the same way
:49:56. > :49:59.you say to a head teacher, if there is bullying going on in your school,
:50:00. > :50:04.you have a responsibility for it. If there is bullying taking place on
:50:05. > :50:09.their digital premises, they cannot wash their hands of it. It is much
:50:10. > :50:12.more important than when children or young people find themselves in
:50:13. > :50:19.difficulty they know where to go, what to do about it. But also we
:50:20. > :50:22.need to make up to be certain that there is mental health support out
:50:23. > :50:24.there for young people when they need help because actually look at
:50:25. > :50:27.the mental health services in my the mental health services in my
:50:28. > :50:37.area, you can wait six months for an appointment. My son came to me and
:50:38. > :50:44.said, one year. One year without Facebook. I hadn't even noticed
:50:45. > :50:49.are moderate users. The teenagers we are moderate users. The teenagers we
:50:50. > :50:52.saw there had a great deal of fun saw there had a great deal of fun
:50:53. > :50:56.with it and it is a great way of keeping in touch. In the good old
:50:57. > :51:02.days, you had a talk to your friend and you had to be on the phone with
:51:03. > :51:07.your dad going like this... Because of the phone bill. Now things have
:51:08. > :51:12.changed and move on and the kids are adept at dealing with it. Of course
:51:13. > :51:17.they are. Absolutely right. But we're also seeing this rising mental
:51:18. > :51:21.health problems and an association with social media. We could sweep it
:51:22. > :51:26.under the carpet and say bullying has always been with us or we can
:51:27. > :51:28.get to grips with it. Scientific studies are increasingly saying this
:51:29. > :51:39.is a problem and we'll all have to play our part. Income tax, Facebook
:51:40. > :51:47.have moved on the income tax issue. They have now agreed to pay tax on
:51:48. > :51:52.earnings. That is what we want. How was 2016 for you? Did anything much
:51:53. > :52:00.happened? To quote President-elect Trump, the world changed bigly.
:52:01. > :52:07.There was Brexit and the fall of a Prime Minister and leadership
:52:08. > :52:08.contest that the leadership contest. 2016 began with a bang. The
:52:09. > :52:28.political fireworks never stopped. It has been absolutely fascinating.
:52:29. > :52:35.To be in this place behind me, understanding how things evolve has
:52:36. > :52:40.been fascinating. It has been like the fifth day of the Lord's Ashes
:52:41. > :52:46.Test and England needing to win with only two wickets left. He went out
:52:47. > :52:49.to bat for Brexit and was one of the stars of the winning team. For the
:52:50. > :52:54.losing side, it feels rather different. Can you think of any
:52:55. > :52:59.highlights from 2016? Getting to the end of it in one piece. I'm not sure
:53:00. > :53:11.there were many highlights of 2016. The highlight was getting selected,
:53:12. > :53:19.Marvin as Maher of Bristol. But it was overshadowed by the referendum.
:53:20. > :53:24.It has caused some soul-searching. I think that this connection is very
:53:25. > :53:29.apparent in city like a bar. They have not had a voice for a very long
:53:30. > :53:33.period of time. And they think that politicians take them for granted.
:53:34. > :53:39.Politicians say one thing and do another thing. So, David Cameron
:53:40. > :53:45.went, sparking a leadership contest. Theresa May always looked a good
:53:46. > :53:51.bet, though not all Tory MPs. She is my new heroine. I think she's
:53:52. > :53:53.fantastic. I got the Conservative leadership hopelessly wrong. I
:53:54. > :53:58.thought it was essential that we have a lever to ensure that we left
:53:59. > :54:02.the European Union properly. I think that was a mistake. I think that
:54:03. > :54:08.having a remainder has been very powerful. While the Conservatives
:54:09. > :54:11.started to heal their wounds, Labour's civil war lasted much
:54:12. > :54:14.longer with critics of their leader still sharpening their knives. If
:54:15. > :54:18.the polls don't pick up then I think the polls don't pick up then I think
:54:19. > :54:24.people have said that we need to look at the situation again in 12
:54:25. > :54:28.months' time. Another leadership challenge? I am not calling for that
:54:29. > :54:32.at the moment. I think that any leader would want to take the party
:54:33. > :54:35.to a general election victory and ought to reflect on whether they are
:54:36. > :54:41.voted not just bring this a new voted not just bring this a new
:54:42. > :54:48.primaries do, it also meant a reshuffle in July. Out went several
:54:49. > :54:51.West MPs. One or two apparently their own accord whilst others were
:54:52. > :54:57.too closely linked to David Cameron. In came others with a top job for
:54:58. > :55:00.one return from the backbenches. Liam Fox became Secretary of State
:55:01. > :55:04.for International trade. He is a strong admirer of America and will
:55:05. > :55:11.want to do deals with the winner from the latest electoral shock. I
:55:12. > :55:16.think most American presidents are needed as bad as feared, nor as good
:55:17. > :55:20.as expected. Barack Obama came in with huge expectations and has
:55:21. > :55:23.turned out to be a wet flannel. Donald Trump, people are nervous
:55:24. > :55:27.political floss of years but I political floss of years but I
:55:28. > :55:34.suspect it will not be as bad as people are saying. 2016 proved
:55:35. > :55:39.unpredictable. What 2017 will bring his -- knowing what 2017 will bring
:55:40. > :55:44.is pretty impossible. That was the year that was. We are
:55:45. > :55:54.joined by the Chief Executive of the campaign group leave .edu. We all
:55:55. > :55:58.know you one. But we were given the impression it was going to be
:55:59. > :56:06.straightforward. At season. I think it is just such an unknown process,
:56:07. > :56:09.there is no prescribed mechanism for to do to think it feels like
:56:10. > :56:13.everyone is bumping along and what we need to do is make some quick
:56:14. > :56:18.decisions and actually lazy way of how we come out of the European
:56:19. > :56:24.Union. Theresa May does need to trigger Article 50 so we can start
:56:25. > :56:27.the talks. Lazy way. Do you think you should have been clear about the
:56:28. > :56:33.difficulties before the ballot? difficulties before the ballot?
:56:34. > :56:37.There are always going to be difficulties. It is always about the
:56:38. > :56:44.positives and the negatives. That was the information that people
:56:45. > :56:52.needed at the time. OK. What did you think of the year? I have been
:56:53. > :56:54.looking at it as Nick Clegg has been writing the Brexit challenge papers
:56:55. > :56:58.and they are quite interesting. There are quite a lot of people who
:56:59. > :57:04.voted leave in my area, including Lib Dems, they have looked at those
:57:05. > :57:12.and he has posed ten or 12 questions on a series of subjects, so he's
:57:13. > :57:14.just writing... Sounds riveting. It is perhaps something that maybe
:57:15. > :57:19.vote. There was some suggestion that vote. There was some suggestion that
:57:20. > :57:25.the Lib Dems should rebrand themselves the European party. But
:57:26. > :57:32.we are not uncritical of Europe. We have a whole raft of manifesto
:57:33. > :57:37.commitments. We felt it was better to be in. 48%, nearly half of the
:57:38. > :57:41.population, agreed on the day they went to vote. We are now talking
:57:42. > :57:50.about a ten minute years negotiation. -- 10-year negotiation.
:57:51. > :57:55.The European Union might not even be here in two years' time. It does
:57:56. > :58:00.that may follow suit. When you talk that may follow suit. When you talk
:58:01. > :58:03.about a 10-year negotiation, that is people's opinions. What we need to
:58:04. > :58:07.do is focus on getting round the table and getting the best deal for
:58:08. > :58:15.the UK and that means all of us coming together, so no more talk
:58:16. > :58:19.about moaning and leave... Is Arab Banks, your boss, going to be
:58:20. > :58:27.conciliatory as welcome as a mark or listen to get our objectives
:58:28. > :58:32.together. That is not what I asked. Have you got confidence in David
:58:33. > :58:36.Davies and Liam Fox and Boris to deliver us a great deal? Absolutely.
:58:37. > :58:40.It is going to be great. He made an important point. We had to get
:58:41. > :58:46.on-board team UK and get on and this. I am reassured to see Tessa
:58:47. > :58:54.Nottingham about. We have to get together. I was very concerned about
:58:55. > :58:55.some of the things that were said in Richmond. I think that is really
:58:56. > :59:02.dangerous to kick sand in the eyes dangerous to kick sand in the eyes
:59:03. > :59:10.of the British people. Your constituents voted for remain. As
:59:11. > :59:13.did I. I happen to think my decision was the right one but there it is,
:59:14. > :59:17.the British people have decided. As Paddy Ashdown himself said, when the
:59:18. > :59:22.British people command, you will obey. Which is why I do think there
:59:23. > :59:29.is a real problem for those who are now seeking to resist Brexit. Are
:59:30. > :59:34.you on the bus or not? I think we should all get on that bus and get
:59:35. > :59:36.the right deal for Britain. But it's really important. We voted to come
:59:37. > :59:41.out of the European Union because we believe it is the best decision for
:59:42. > :59:46.the economy, best for us to take our sovereignty back. How do you reach
:59:47. > :59:58.out to the 40% who didn't? The 60% in Bristol? It is tricky. There was
:59:59. > :00:04.a bus out there... Everybody understands that was a possibility.
:00:05. > :00:10.That has been taken as if it was read. It was there in red and white.
:00:11. > :00:17.It is project fear. We are debating again. It means different things to
:00:18. > :00:23.different people. And we have to protect everybody's interest. Nice
:00:24. > :00:28.to see you again. Find out which MP has had his gun collection taken
:00:29. > :00:36.away in our 62nd round up of the political week.
:00:37. > :00:42.Bristol University launched a scheme to broaden its intake. There will be
:00:43. > :00:46.five places for disadvantaged pupils for every school in the city based
:00:47. > :00:52.on the potential rather than grades. It got top marks on the Education
:00:53. > :00:58.Secretary. I would like to see more universities thinking this way to
:00:59. > :01:06.open their doors. Council tax can rise for up to 3% next year to fund
:01:07. > :01:09.the crisis in social care. Top civil servants and the boss of Network
:01:10. > :01:13.Rail faced a grilling from MPs on Wednesday. The Public Accounts
:01:14. > :01:18.Committee is to report on why the cost of electrifying the line to
:01:19. > :01:22.London has soared. And the Bridgwater MP was told it would take
:01:23. > :01:28.16 weeks to renew the licence for his shotguns and rifles. He gave the
:01:29. > :01:31.police both barrels, accusing them of utter incompetence. He says he
:01:32. > :01:38.will have to miss the shooting season this winter.
:01:39. > :01:42.That was the week that has just gone. The year has almost just gone
:01:43. > :01:47.as well. One quick thought from you both on your hopes for 2070. I would
:01:48. > :01:50.like the Lib Dems to do well in the West Country county council
:01:51. > :01:54.elections that take place in May. I would like to see the United Kingdom
:01:55. > :02:00.making a success of Brexit. Thank you very much indeed. Thank you to
:02:01. > :02:02.my guests. Have a super Christmas and we will see you in January for
:02:03. > :02:06.more West Country politics. Will Article 50 be triggered
:02:07. > :02:19.by the end of March, will President Trump start work
:02:20. > :02:23.on his wall and will Front National's Marine Le Pen
:02:24. > :02:48.provide the next electoral shock? 2016, the Brexit for Britain and
:02:49. > :02:50.Trump for the rest of the world. Let's look back and see what one of
:02:51. > :02:54.you said about Brexit. If Mr Cameron loses the referendum
:02:55. > :02:57.and it is this year, will he be Prime Minister at the end
:02:58. > :02:59.of the year? I don't think he will lose
:03:00. > :03:13.the referendum, so I'm feeling It was clear if he did lose the
:03:14. > :03:17.referendum he would be out. I would like to say in retrospect I saw that
:03:18. > :03:23.coming on a long and I was just saying it to make good television!
:03:24. > :03:28.It is Christmas so I will be benign towards my panel! It is possible,
:03:29. > :03:33.Iain, that not much happens to Brexit in 2017, because we have a
:03:34. > :03:36.host of elections coming up in Europe, the French won in the spring
:03:37. > :03:42.and the German one in the autumn will be the most important. And
:03:43. > :03:45.until we know who the next French president is and what condition Mrs
:03:46. > :03:51.Merkel will be in, not much will happen? I think that is the
:03:52. > :03:55.likeliest outcome. Short of some constitutional crisis involving the
:03:56. > :04:01.Lords relating to Brexit, it is pretty clear it is difficult to
:04:02. > :04:06.properly begin the negotiations until it becomes clear who Britain
:04:07. > :04:11.is negotiating with. It will come down to the result of the German
:04:12. > :04:15.election. Germany is the biggest contributor and if they keep power
:04:16. > :04:18.in what is left of the European Union, will drive the negotiation
:04:19. > :04:26.and we will have to see if it will be Merkel. So this vacuum that has
:04:27. > :04:30.been seen and has been filled by people less than friendly to the
:04:31. > :04:33.government, even when we know Article 50 has been triggered and
:04:34. > :04:38.even if there is some sort of white paper to give us a better idea of
:04:39. > :04:45.the broad strategic outlines of what they mean by Brexit, the phoney war
:04:46. > :04:51.could continue? Iain is right. 2017 is going to be a remarkably dull
:04:52. > :04:56.year for Brexit as opposed to 2016. We will have the article and a plan.
:04:57. > :05:02.The plan will say I would like the moon on a stick please. The EU will
:05:03. > :05:08.say you can have a tiny bit of moon and a tiny bit of stick and there
:05:09. > :05:12.will be an impasse. That will go on until one minute to midnight 2018
:05:13. > :05:18.which is when the EU will act. There is one thing in the Foreign Office
:05:19. > :05:22.which is more important, as David Davis Department told me, they know
:05:23. > :05:26.there is nothing they can do until the French and Germans have their
:05:27. > :05:31.elections and they know the lie of the land, but the people who will be
:05:32. > :05:35.more helpful to us are in Eastern Europe and in Scandinavia, the
:05:36. > :05:40.Nordic countries. We can do quite a lot of schmoozing to try and get
:05:41. > :05:43.them broadly on side this year? It is very difficult because one of the
:05:44. > :05:47.things they care most about in Eastern Europe is the ability for
:05:48. > :05:53.Eastern European stew come and work in the UK. That is key to the
:05:54. > :05:57.economic prospects. But what they care most about is that those
:05:58. > :06:03.already here should not be under any pressure to leave. There is no
:06:04. > :06:07.guarantee of that. That is what Mrs May wants. There are a lot of things
:06:08. > :06:12.Mrs May wants and the story of 2017 will be about what she gets. How
:06:13. > :06:18.much have we got to give people? It is not what we want, but what we are
:06:19. > :06:23.willing to give. The interesting thing is you can divide this out
:06:24. > :06:26.into two. There is a question of the European Union and our relationship
:06:27. > :06:36.with it but there is also the trick the polls did to London -- there is
:06:37. > :06:40.also the polls. There is question beyond the Western European
:06:41. > :06:46.security, that is about Nato and intelligence and security, and the
:06:47. > :06:49.rising Russian threat. That does not mean the Polish people will persuade
:06:50. > :06:53.everyone else to give us a lovely deal on the EU, but the dynamic is
:06:54. > :06:58.bigger than just a chat about Brexit. You cannot threaten a
:06:59. > :07:02.punishment beating for us if we are putting our soldiers on the line on
:07:03. > :07:06.the eastern borders of Europe. I think that's where Donald Trump
:07:07. > :07:12.changes the calculation because his attitude towards Russia is very
:07:13. > :07:20.different to Barack Obama's. It is indeed. Mentioning Russia, Brexit
:07:21. > :07:23.was a global story but nothing can match and American election and even
:07:24. > :07:26.one which gives Donald Trump as well. Let's have a look at what this
:07:27. > :07:30.panel was saying about Donald Trump. Will Donald Trump win the Republican
:07:31. > :07:43.nomination next year. So, not only did you think he would
:07:44. > :07:47.not be president, you did not think he would win the Republican
:07:48. > :07:52.nomination. We were not alone in that. And they're right put forward
:07:53. > :07:57.a motion to abolish punditry here now because clearly we are
:07:58. > :08:02.pointless! There is enough unemployment in the world already!
:08:03. > :08:07.We are moving into huge and charted territory with Donald Trump as
:08:08. > :08:14.president. It is incredibly unpredictable. But what has not been
:08:15. > :08:20.noticed enough is the Keynesian won. Trump is a Keynesian. He wants
:08:21. > :08:26.massive infrastructure spending and massive tax cuts. The big story next
:08:27. > :08:32.year will be the massive reflation of the American economy and indeed
:08:33. > :08:36.the US Federal reserve has already reacted to that by putting up
:08:37. > :08:41.interest rates. That is why he has a big fight with the rest of the
:08:42. > :08:46.Republican Party. He is nominally a Republican but they are not
:08:47. > :08:51.Keynesian. They are when it comes to tax cuts. They are when it hits the
:08:52. > :08:55.rich to benefit the poor. The big thing is whether the infrastructure
:08:56. > :09:00.projects land him in crony trouble. The transparency around who gets
:09:01. > :09:05.those will be extremely difficult. Most of the infrastructure spending
:09:06. > :09:09.he thinks can be done by the private sector and not the federal
:09:10. > :09:15.government. His tax cuts overlap the Republican house tax cuts speaker
:09:16. > :09:20.Ryan to give not all, but a fair chunk of what he wants. If the
:09:21. > :09:24.American economy is going to reflate next year, interest rates will rise
:09:25. > :09:31.in America, that will strengthen the dollar and it will mean that Europe
:09:32. > :09:35.will be, it will find it more difficult to finance its sovereign
:09:36. > :09:40.debt because you will get more money by investing in American sovereign
:09:41. > :09:45.debt. That is a good point because the dynamics will shift. If that
:09:46. > :09:52.happens, Trump will be pretty popular in the US. To begin with. To
:09:53. > :09:55.begin with. It is energy self-sufficient and if you can pull
:09:56. > :10:01.off the biggest trick in American politics which is somehow to via
:10:02. > :10:06.corporation tax cuts to allow the reassuring of wealth, because it is
:10:07. > :10:10.too expensive for American business to take back into the US and
:10:11. > :10:14.reinvest, if you combine all of those things together, you will end
:10:15. > :10:21.up with a boom on a scale you have not seen. It will be Reagan on
:10:22. > :10:26.steroids? What could possibly go wrong? In the short term for
:10:27. > :10:31.Britain, it is probably not bad news. Our biggest market for exports
:10:32. > :10:35.as a country is the United States. Our biggest market for foreign
:10:36. > :10:39.direct investment is the United States and the same is true vice
:10:40. > :10:43.versa for America in Britain. Given the pound is now competitive and
:10:44. > :10:49.likely the dollar will get stronger, it could well give a boost to the
:10:50. > :10:52.British economy? Could do bit you have to be slightly cautious about
:10:53. > :10:58.the warm language we are getting which is great news out of President
:10:59. > :11:02.Trump's future cabinet on doing a trade deal early, we are net
:11:03. > :11:06.exporters to the US. We benefit far more from trading with US than they
:11:07. > :11:12.do with us. I think we have to come up with something to offer the US
:11:13. > :11:17.for them to jump into bed with us. I think it is called two new aircraft
:11:18. > :11:26.carriers and modernising the fleet. Bring it on. I will raise caution,
:11:27. > :11:31.people in declining industries in some places in America, the rust
:11:32. > :11:35.belt who have faced big profound structural challenges and those are
:11:36. > :11:39.much harder to reverse. They face real problems now because the dollar
:11:40. > :11:46.is so strong. Their ability to export has taken a huge hit out of
:11:47. > :11:49.Ohio, Michigan and Illinois. And the Mexican imports into America is now
:11:50. > :11:56.dirt cheap so that is a major problem. Next year we have elections
:11:57. > :12:05.in Austria, France, the Netherlands, Germany, probably Italy. Which
:12:06. > :12:10.outcome will be the most dramatic for Brexit? If Merkel lost it would
:12:11. > :12:20.be a huge surprise. That is unlikely. And if it was not Filon in
:12:21. > :12:24.France that would be unlikely. The consensus it it will be Francois
:12:25. > :12:34.Filon against Marine Le Pen and it will be uniting around the far right
:12:35. > :12:41.candidate. In 2002, that is what happened. Filon is a Thatcherite.
:12:42. > :12:49.Marine Le Pen's politics -- economics are hard left. Francois
:12:50. > :12:53.Filon is as much a cert to win as Hillary Clinton was this time last
:12:54. > :13:03.year. If he is competing against concerns about rising globalisation
:13:04. > :13:07.and his pitch is Thatcherite, it is a bold, brave strategy in the
:13:08. > :13:14.context so we will see. It will keep us busy next year, Tom? Almost as
:13:15. > :13:19.busy as this year but not quite. This year was a record year. I am up
:13:20. > :13:21.in my hours! That's all for today,
:13:22. > :13:23.thanks to all my guests. The Daily Politics will be back
:13:24. > :13:26.on BBC Two at noon tomorrow. I'll be back here
:13:27. > :13:28.on the 15th January. Remember, if it's Sunday,
:13:29. > :13:32.it's the Sunday Politics. The most a writer
:13:33. > :14:12.can hope from a reader West Side Story took choreography
:14:13. > :14:30.in a radical new direction. The dance was woven
:14:31. > :14:34.into the storyline,