22/01/2017 Sunday Politics West


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 22/01/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



It's Sunday morning, and this is the Sunday Politics.


Theresa May will be the first foreign leader to visit US


President Donald Trump this week - she's promised to hold "very


frank" conversations with the new and controversial


Speaking of the 45th President of America,


we'll be looking at what the Trump presidency could hold


in store for Britain and the rest of the world.


And with the Supreme Court expected to say that Parliament should


have a vote before the Brexit process begins, we'll ask


In the West business of Brexit, as what Labour will do next.


In the West business of Brexit, as BPM puts together an new


relationship with And to talk about all of that


and more, I'm joined by three journalists who, in an era


of so-called fake news, can be relied upon for their accuracy,


their impartiality - and their willingness


to come to the studio It's Steve Richards,


Julia Hartley-Brewer and Tom Newton Dunn,


and during the programme they'll be tweeting as often as the 45th


President of the USA in the middle So - the Prime Minister has been


appearing on the BBC this morning. She was mostly talking


about Donald Trump and Brexit, but she was also asked about a story


on the front of this It's reported that an unarmed


Trident missile test fired from the submarine HMS Vengeance


near the Florida coast in June The paper says the incident took


place weeks before a crucial Commons Well, let's have listen


to Theresa May talking The issue that we were talking


about in the House of Commons It was about whether or not


we should renew Trident, whether we should look to the future


and have a replacement Trident. That's what we were talking


about in the House of Commons. That's what the House


of Commons voted for. He doesn't want to defend our


country with an independent There are tests that take place


all the time, regularly, What we were talking about in that


debate that took place... I'm not going to get


an answer to this. Tom, it was clear this was going to


come up this morning. It is on the front page of the Sunday Times. It


would seem to me the Prime Minister wasn't properly briefed on how to


reply. I think she probably was, but the Prime Minister we now have


doesn't necessarily answer all questions in the straightest way.


She didn't answer that one and all. Unlike previous ones? She made it


quite clear she was briefed. You read between the Theresa May lines.


By simply not answering Andrew Marr four times, it is obvious she knew,


and that she knew before she went into the House of Commons and urged


everyone to renew the ?40 billion replacement programme. Of course it


is an embarrassment, but does it have political legs? I don't think


so. She didn't mislead the Commons. If she wanted to close it down, the


answer should have been, these are matters of national security.


There's nothing more important in that than our nuclear deterrent. I'm


not prepared to talk about testing. End of. But she didn't. Maybe you


should be briefing her. That's a good answer. She is an interesting


interviewee. She shows it when she is nervous. She was transparently


uneasy answering those questions, and the fact she didn't answer it


definitively suggests she did know and didn't want to say it, and she


answered awkwardly. But how wider point, that the House of Commons


voted for the renewal of Trident, suggests to me that in the broader


sweep of things, this will not run, because if there was another vote, I


would suggest she'd win it again. But it is an embarrassment and she


handled it with a transparent awkwardness. She said that the tests


go on all the time, but not of the missiles. Does it not show that when


the Prime Minister leaves her comfort zone of Home Office affairs


or related matters, she often struggles. We've seen it under


questioning from Mr Corbyn even, and we saw it again today. Absolutely.


Tests of various aspects of the missiles go on all the time, but


there's only been five since 2000. What you described wouldn't have


worked, because in previous tests they have always been very public


about it. Look how well our missiles work! She may not have misled


Parliament, but she may not have known about it. If she didn't know,


does Michael Fallon still have a job on Monday? Should Parliament know


about a test that doesn't work? Some would say absolutely not. Our


deterrent is there to deter people from attacking us. If they know that


we are hitting the United States by mistake rather than the Atlantic


Ocean, then... There is such a thing as national security, and telling


all the bad guys about where we are going wrong may not be a good idea.


It was her first statement as Prime Minister to put her case for


renewal, to have the vote on Trident, and in that context, it is


significant not to say anything. If anyone knows where the missile


landed, give us a call! So Donald Trump's inauguration day


closed with him dancing to Frank Sinatra's My Way,


and whatever your view on the 45th President of the United States


he certainly did do it his way. Not for him the idealistic call


for national unity - instead he used Friday's inaugural


address to launch a blistering attack on the dark state


of the nation and the political class, and to promise


to take his uncompromising approach from the campaign trail


to the White House. Here's Adam Fleming,


with a reminder of how First, dropping by for a cup of tea


and a slightly awkward exchange Then, friends, foes


and predecessors watched I, Donald John Trump,


do solemnly swear... The crowds seemed smaller


than previous inaugurations, the speech tougher then any


previous incoming president. From this day forth,


it's going to be only America first. In the meantime, there were sporadic


protests in Washington, DC. Opponents made their voices heard


around the world too. The President,


who'd criticised the work of the intelligence agencies,


fitted in a visit to the CIA. There is nobody that feels stronger


about the intelligence community And, back at the office,


in the dark, a signature signalled the end of the Obama era


and the dawn of Trump. So, as you heard there,


President Trump used his inauguration to repeat his campaign


promise to put "America first" in all his decisions, and offered


some hints of what to expect He talked of in America in carnage,


to be rebuilt by American hands and American Labour. President Trump has


already started to dismantle key parts of the Obama Legacy, including


the unwinding of the affordable care act, and the siding of the climate


action plan to tackle global warning. Little to say about foreign


policy, but promised to eradicate Islamic terrorism from the face of


the Earth, insisting he would restore the US military to


unquestioning dominance. He also said the US would develop a state


missile defence system to deal with threats he sees from Iran and North


Korea. In a statement that painted a bleak picture of the country he now


runs, he said his would be a law and order Administration, and he would


keep the innocents safe by building the border war with Mexico. One


thing he didn't mention, for the first time ever, there is a


Eurosceptic in the oval office, who is also an enthusiast for Brexit.


We're joined now by Ted Malloch - he's a Trump supporter who's been


tipped as the president's choice for US ambassador


to the EU, and he's just flown back from Washington.


And by James Rubin - he's a democrat who served


Let's start with that last point I made in the voice over there. We now


have a Eurosceptic in the oval office. He is pro-Brexit and not


keen on further European Union integration. What are the


implications of that? First of all, a renewal of the US- UK special


relationship. You see the Prime Minister already going to build and


rebuild this relationship. Already, the bust of Winston Churchill is


back in the oval office. Interestingly, Martin Luther King's


bust is also there, so there is an act of unity in that first movement


of dusts. Donald Trump will be oriented between bilateral


relationships and not multilateral or supernatural. Supranational full.


What are the implications of someone in the White House now not believing


in it? I think we are present in the unravelling of America's leadership


of the West. There is now a thing called the west that America has led


since the end of World War II, creating supranational - we just


heard supernatural! These institutions were created. With


American leadership, the world was at peace in Europe, and the world


grew increasingly democratic and prosperous. Wars were averted that


could be extremely costly. When something works in diplomacy, you


don't really understand what the consequences could have been. I


think we've got complacent. The new president is taking advantage of


that. It is a terrible tragedy that so many in the West take for granted


the successful leadership and institutions we have built. You


could argue, as James Rubin has argued in some articles, that...


Will Mr Trump's America be more involved in the world than the Obama


won? Or will it continue the process with running shoes on that began


with Mr Obama? President Obama stepped back from American


leadership. He withdrew from the world. He had a horrendous eight


years in office, and American powers have diminished everywhere in the


world, not just in Europe. That power will reassert. The focus will


be on America first, but there are foreign interests around the


world... How does it reassert itself around the world? I think the


institutions will be recreated. Some may be taken down. There could be


some new ones. I think Nato itself, and certainly the Defence Secretary


will have discussions with Donald Trump about how Nato can be


reshaped, and maybe there will be more burden sharing. That is an


important thing for him. You are tipped to be the US ambassador to


Brussels, to the EU, and we are still waiting to hear if that will


happen. Is it true to say that Mr Trump does not believe in EU


integration? I think you made that clear in the speech. He talked about


supranational. He does not believe in those kinds of organisations. He


is investing himself in bilateral relationships, the first of which


will be with the UK. So we have a president who does not believe in EU


integration and has been highly critical of Nato. Do the people he


has appointed to defend, Secretary of State, national security, do you


think that will temper this anti-NATO wretched? Will he come


round to a more pro-NATO situation? I think those of us who care about


America's situation in the world will come in to miss President Obama


a lot. I think the Secretary of State and the faculty of defence


will limit the damage and will urge him not to take formal steps to


unravel this most powerful and most successful alliance in history, the


Nato alliance. But the damage is already being done. When you are the


leader of the West, leadership means you are persuading, encouraging,


bolstering your leadership and these institutions by the way you speak.


Millions, if not hundreds of millions of people, have now heard


the US say that what they care about is within their borders.


What do you say to that? It is such an overstatement. The point is that


Donald Trump is in a Jacksonian tradition of national populism. He


is appealing to the people first. The other day, I was sitting below


this page during the address, and he said, everyone sitting behind me as


part of the problem. Everyone in front of me, the crowd and the crowd


on television, is part of the solution, so we are giving the


Government back to the people. That emphasis is going to change American


life, including American International relations. It doesn't


moving the leak back -- it doesn't mean we are moving out of Nato, it


simply means we will put our national interests first. There were


echoes of Andrew Jackson's inauguration address of 1820. That


night, the Jacksonians trashed the White House, but Mr Trump's people


didn't do that, so there is a difference there. He also said


something else in the address - that protectionism would lead to


prosperity. I would suggest there is no evidence for that in the post-war


world. He talked about protecting the American worker, American jobs,


the American economy. I actually think that Donald Trump will not


turn out to be a protectionist. If you read the heart of the deal...


This is referring to two Republican senators who introduce massive


tariffs in the Hoover administration. Exactly. If you read


The Art Of The Deal, you will see how Donald Trump deals with


individuals and countries. There is a lot of bluster, positioning, and I


think you already see this in bringing jobs by the United States.


Things are going to change. Let's also deal with this proposition.


China is the biggest loser of this election result. Let me say this:


The first time in American history and American president has set forth


his view of the world, and it is a mercantile view of the world, who


makes more money, who gets more trade, it doesn't look at the shared


values, leadership and defends the world needs. The art of the deal has


no application to America's leadership of the world, that's what


we're learning. You can be a great businessman and make great real


estate deals - whether he did not is debatable - but it has nothing to do


with inspiring shared values from the West. You saying China may lose,


because he may pressure them to reduce their trade deficit with the


US. They may or may not. We may both lose. Right now, his Secretary of


State has said, and I think he will walk this back when he is brief,


that they will prevent the Chinese from entering these islands in the


South China Sea. If they were to do that, it would be a blockade, and


there would be a shooting war between the United States and China,


so US - China relations are the most important bilateral relationship of


the United States, and they don't lend themselves to the bluff and


bluster that may have worked when you are trying to get a big building


on second Ave in Manhattan. Is China the biggest loser? I think the


Chinese have a lot to lose. Gigi and Ping was in Davos this week -- Xi


Jin Ping was in Davos. Is Germany the second biggest loser


in the sense that I understand he hasn't agreed time to see Angela


Merkel yet, also that those close to him believe that Germany is guilty


of currency manipulation by adopting a weak your row instead of the


strong Deutschmark, and that that is why they are running a huge balance


of payments surplus with the United States. American - German relations


may not be great. There is a point of view throughout Europe. You only


have to talk to the southern Europeans about this question. It


seems like the euro has been aligned to benefit Germany. Joe Stiglitz,


the famous left of centre Democrat economist, made the same case in a


recent book. In this case, I think Germany will be put under the


spotlight. Angela Merkel has shown herself to be the most respected and


the most successful leader in Europe. We who care about the West,


who care about the shared values of the West, should pray and hope that


she is re-elected. This isn't about dollars and cents. We're living in a


time whether Russian leader has another country in Europe and for


some inexplicable reason, the American president, who can use his


insult diplomacy on everyone, including Mrs Merkel, the only


person he can't seem to find anything to criticise about is Mr


Putin. There are things more important than the actual details of


your currency. There are things like preventing another war in Europe,


preventing a war between the Chinese and the US. You talk about the


Trident missile all morning, nuclear deterrence is extremely important.


It doesn't lend itself to the bluff and bluster of a real estate deal. I


understand all that, but the fact we are even talking about these things


shows the new world we are moving into. I'd like to get you both to


react to this. This is a man that ended the Bush Dynasty, a man that


beat the Clinton machine. In his inauguration, not only did he not


reach out to the Democrats, he didn't even mention the Republicans.


These are changed days for us. They are, and change can be good or


disastrous. I'm worried that it's easy in the world of diplomacy and


in them -- for the leadership of the United States to break relationships


and ruin alliances. These are things that were carefully nurtured. George


Schultz, the American Secretary of State under Reagan talked about


gardening, the slow, careful creation of a place with bilateral


relationships that were blossoming and flowering multilateral


relationships that take decades to create, and he will throw them away


in a matter of days. The final word... I work for George Schultz.


He was a Marine who stood up America, defended America, who would


be in favour of many of the things that Donald Trump and the tramp


Administration... Give him a call. His top aide macs that I've spoken


to are appalled by Mr Trump's abdication of leadership. He is


going to our radically -- he's going to eradicate extremist Islam from


the face of the year. Is that realistic? I know people in the


national security realm have worked on a plan. They say they will have


such a plan in some detail within 90 days. Lets hope they succeed. We


have run out of time. As a issues. Thank you, both. -- fascinating


issues. So Theresa May promised a big speech


on Brexit, and this week - perhaps against expectation -


she delivered, trying to answer claims that the government didn't


have a plan with an explicit wish-list of what she hopes to


achieve in negotiations with the EU. To her allies it was ambitious,


bold, optimistic - to her opponents it was full


of contradictions Here's Adam again, with a reminder


of the speech and how There are speeches,


and there are speeches. Like Theresa May's 12 principles


for a Brexit deal leading to the UK fully out of the EU


but still friendly in terms This agreement should allow


for the freest possible trade in goods and services between


Britain and the EU's member states. It should give British


companies the maximum operate within European markets


and let European businesses do She also said no deal would be


better than the wrong deal, We want to test what people think


about what she's just said. Do we have any of our


future negotiating As the European Parliament


voted for its new president, its chief


negotiator sounded off. Saying, OK, if our European


counterparts don't accept it, we're going to make


from Britain a sort of free zone or tax haven,


I The Prime Minister of Malta,


the country that's assumed the EU's rotating presidency,


spoke in sorrow and a bit of anger. We want a fair deal


for the United Kingdom, but that deal necessarily needs to be


inferior to membership. Next, let's hear


from some enthusiastic leavers, like, I don't


know, the Daily Mail? The paper lapped it up


with this adoring front page. For Brexiteers, it was


all manna from heaven. I think today means we are a big


step closer to becoming an independent country again,


with control of our own laws, I was chuckling at some of it,


to be honest, because There were various phrases there


which I've used myself again and Do we have any of those


so-called Remoaners? There will, at the end


of this deal process, so politicians get to vote


on the stitch-up, but We take the view as


Liberal Democrats that if this process started


with democracy last June, We trusted the people


with departure, we must trust them Do we have anyone from


Labour, or are you all watching it in a small


room somewhere? Throughout the speech, there seemed


to be an implied threat that somewhere along the line,


if all her optimism of a deal with the European Union didn't work,


we would move into a low-tax, corporate taxation,


bargain-basement economy on the I think she needs to be


a bit clearer about what The Labour leader


suggested he'd tell his MPs to vote in favour


of starting a Brexit process if Parliament was given the choice,


sparking a mini pre-revolt among Finally, do we have anyone


from big business here? Of course, your all in Davos


at the World Economic Clarity, first of all, really


codified what many of us have been anticipating since


the referendum result, particularly around


the I think what we've also seen


today is the Government's willingness to put a bit of edge


into the negotiating dynamic, and I Trade negotiations are negotiations,


and you have to lay out, and you have to be pretty tough


to get what you want. Although some business people


on the slopes speculated about moving some of their


operations out of Brexit Britain. We saw there the instant reaction


of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, but how will the party respond


to the challenge posed by Brexit Well, I'm joined now by the Shadow


Home Secretary, Diane Abbott. People know that Ukip and the Tories


are for Brexit. The Lib Dems are four remain. What is Labour for? For


respecting the result of the referendum. It was a 72% turnout,


very high for an election of that nature, and we believe you have to


respect that result. You couldn't have a situation where people like


Tim Farron are saying to people, millions of people, sorry, you got


it wrong, we in London no better. However, how the Tories go forward


from here has to be subject to parliamentary scrutiny. Is it Shadow


Cabinet policy to vote for the triggering of Article 50? Our policy


is not to block Article 50. That is what the leader was saying this


morning. So are you for it? Our policy is not to block it. You are


talking about voting for it. We don't know what the Supreme Court is


going to say, and we don't know what legislation Government will bring


forward, and we don't know what amendment we will move, but we're


clear that we will not vote to block it. OK, so you won't bow to stop it,


but you could abstain? No, what we will do... Either you vote for or


against all you abstain. There are too many unanswered questions. For


instance, the position of EU migrants working and living in this


country. You may not get the answer to that before Article 50 comes


before the Commons, so what would you do then? We are giving to amend


it. We can only tell you exactly how we will amend it when we understand


what sort of legislation the Government is putting forward, and


in the course of moving those amendments, we will ask the


questions that the people of Britain whether they voted to leave remain


want answered. When you come to a collective view,


will there be a three line whip? I can't tell you, because we have not


seen the government 's legislation. But when you see it, you will come


to a collective view. Many regard this as extremely important. Will


there be a three line whip on Labour's collective view? Because it


is important, we shouldn't get ahead of ourselves. When we see what the


Supreme Court says, and crucially, when we see what the government


position is, you will hear what the whipping is. Will shadow ministers


be able to defy any three line whip on this? That is not normally the


case. But they did on an early vote that the government introduced on


Article 50. Those who voted against it are still there. In the Blair


years, you certainly couldn't defy a three line whip. We will see what


happens going forward. I remember when the Tories were hopelessly


divided over the EU. All these Maastricht votes and an list


arguments. Now it is Labour. Just another symptom of Mr Corbyn's poor


leadership. Not at all. Two thirds voted to leave, a third to remain.


We are seeking to bring the country and the party together. We will do


that by pointing out how disastrous a Tory Brexit would be. Meanwhile,


around 80 Labour MPs will defy a three line whip. It's too early to


say that. Will you publish what you believe the negotiating goal should


be? We are clear on it. We think that the economy, jobs and living


standards should be the priority. What Theresa May is saying is that


holding her party together is her priority. She is putting party above


country. Does Labour think we should remain members of the single market?


Ideally, in terms of jobs and the economy, of course. Ritt -ish


business thinks that as well. Is Labour policy that we should remain


a member of the single market? Labour leaves that jobs and the


economy comes first, and if they come first, you would want to remain


part of the single market. But to remain a member? Jobs and the


economy comes first, and to do that, ideally, guess. So with that, comes


free movement of people, the jurisdiction of the European, and a


multi-million never shipped thief. Is Labour prepared to pay that?


Money is neither here nor there. Because the Tories will be asked to


pay a lot of money... The EU has made it clear that you cannot


have... I am asking for Labour's position. Our position is rooted in


the reality, and the reality is that you cannot have the benefits of the


member of the European Union, including being a member of the


single market, without responsibility, including free


movement of people. Free movement, is remaining under the jurisdiction


of the European Court of Justice. Is that the Labour position? You've


said that Labour wants to remain a member of the single market. That is


the price tag that comes with it. Does Labour agree with paying that


price tag? We are not pre-empting negotiation. Our goals are protect


jobs and the British economy. Is it Labour's position that we remain a


member of the customs union? Well, if we don't, I don't see how Theresa


May can keep our promises and has unfettered access... You said


Labour's position was clear. It is! It is clear that Theresa May... I am


not asking about Theresa May. Is it Labour's position to remain a member


of the customs union? It is Labour's position to do what is right for


British industry. Depending on how the negotiations go, it may prove


that coming out of the customs union, as Theresa May has indicated


she wants to do, could prove catastrophic, and could actually


destroy some of her promises. You do accept that if we are member of the


customs union, we cannot do our own free trade deals? What free trade


deals are you talking about? The ones that Labour might want to do in


the future. First, we have to protect British jobs and British


industries. If you are talking about free trade deals with Donald Trump,


the danger is that Theresa May will get drawn into a free-trade deal


with America that will open up the NHS to American corporate... The


cards are in Theresa May's hands. If she takes us out of the single


market, if she takes us out of the customs union, we will have to deal


with that. How big a crisis for Jeremy Corbyn will be if Labour


loses both by-elections in February. I don't believe we will lose both.


But if he did? I am not anticipating that. Is Labour lost two seats in a


midterm of a Tory government, would that be business as usual? I'm not


prepared to see us lose those seats, so I will not talk about something


that will not happen. Thank you. You're watching


the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers


in Scotland, who leave us now Coming up here in 20


minutes, The Week Ahead, when we'll be talking


to Business Minister Margot James about the government's


new industrial strategy and that crucial Supreme Court


ruling on Brexit. Hello.


Politics where you are. Welcome to Sunday


Politics in the West. Coming up, is it one mayor too many,


we've got Lord Mayors and elected mayors, soon will get a West


of England Metro Mayor. And there's also a new American


president, of course, We did think of inviting him


on the programme today, but he's probably building


a wall somewhere! And anyway, we are only interested


in A-listers on our little show. So we have two people


who for one big in Bristol, they are Charlotte Leslie


for the Conservatives, Charlotte, do you think that


Donald Trump can make I think expectations are so low,


maybe we are going to be I think we have to keep calm


and carry on, not panic. He is there for a reason,


people might lament yesteryear, when Obama was there,


but that regime is what led I think we just have


to see what happens. And he speaks, obviously,


he does speak for a lot And I think it's a mistake


to dismiss all those How he's going to respond


is going to be very interesting. We just have to try and make


the most of whatever happens. People have been out saying,


build bridges and all that, do you think we should


give him a chance? He's been elected president, and,


like it or not, he's there. For the duration, well,


possibly not for the duration. But, you know, it is hugely


depressing, particularly when I don't agree with Charlotte,


she says that Obama's eight years has led to this,


you've got to remember that Hillary Clinton actually got nearly


3 million more votes than tempted. But he did connect


with the working class. He connected with a


particular demographic. You must look at Jeremy Corbyn


and think well if a billionaire can connect with the working classes why


can't Mr Corbyn? There's always this odd thing,


it's like Nigel Farage was public school educated,


a stockbroker, very wealthy. He is somehow seen as the voice


of the working class in the UK because he's photographed drinking


a pint of beer. There's a real issue


about a disconnect between certainly the left, the appeal


the Metropolitan voters, if you like, and then


the vote to the post People that lost their jobs


in the big factories, there's not that sense


of cohesion anymore. I would say his message


is all about who he hates, You know, Obama was about hope,


Clinton was about hope, and I just think Obama was such


a decent, dignified man, I would hope that Trump doesn't just


destroy that legacy. Brexit means Brexit,


used to be the catch phrase trotted out to deflect difficult questions


about the future outside the EU. But this week as the Prime Minister


shed more light on the issue, if you know you're single market


from your customs union then But businesses here


have been complaining What I am proposing cannot mean


membership of the single market. It was the week when her


words echoed across We will pursue a bold and ambitious


free trade agreement Brexit must mean control


of the number of people who come No deal for Britain is better


than a bad deal for Britain. Assembling such a complex trade deal


inside two years will require this But while we wait for negotiations


to start changes already happening. Speak to any firm in the West that


does business with Europe and they'll tell you that Brexit


is already having It's down to the weakening value


of this, British Sterling, These caravans are being


fitted with a German Since the referendum last June


there's been a 15% rise That is being passed


on to the customer with the price tag for a new caravan


or motorhome up 5%. The costs might be rising,


but bosses remain upbeat. One of the upsides for us


is a weaker pound means that overseas holidays


are more expensive. As a result people will holiday


in the UK which is good for us. The staycation phenomenon


will continue. A weak pound makes life tougher


for those who import goods, but businesses that this food


and drinks then in Bristol are being Look what the pound


has done since Brexit. The pound has never been as weak,


well, not for decades, Our products, people


love our products, they've just got There is no legislation at the


moment, or very little, crack on! Political turbulence isn't


to everyone's taste. The bank, HSBC, is moving


a thousand UK staff to Paris. At this clothing distribution


business near Bristol Boss, Charlie Allen,


isn't taking on new staff For him, any end to free trade


might mean moving some At the moment he ships


in skateboarding clothes from China to Bristol,


where they are hit He then distribute them


on to markets across the EU. The single market means


he pays no further fees. But he worries Brexit might mean


new trade barriers with Europe, which is why he has costed out


starting up a new warehouse It's a decision we weren't


making until we can see We hope to be able to keep


all of our warehousing here. But it all hinges


on those negotiations. One third come from Europe,


and he's offered to pay for them He says it's to reassure them


that they can carry on living here. I preferred it when we just used


to sell skateboards, Ultimately, it's hardly huge


impact our business. In London and on the Swiss Alps this


week the Prime Minister But still not clear enough for some


West Country businesses feeling That was Robin Barkwell, Charlotte,


what mandate has the Prime Minister got for a hard Brexit


when the country was pretty evenly split on whether we


should leave the EU? I think you can rehearse


whether a referendum result means a referendum result,


there was a majority We do face a challenge of a very


divided country now with a section But was she right to say out


of the single market, possibly out of the customs union,


the whole works. The independent think tank,


told Europe, which has been neutral on this,


and just pragmatic, said that her speech


was a masterclass in common sense. And I think what she was doing


is looking at the realities and doing her best to make it


work for Britain. You can't base what you want to do


one a fantasy, however much you might want the world to be


something else, it isn't. As we saw in your clip,


there are difficult challenges to overcome, but there arch


two members upsides. Particularly for Britain, but also,


for emerging economies like Africa, for whom Europe has been a real


barrier to trade. Britain now has a chance to deal


with them and help lift those I think the problem


was that we still, we had a little bit more clarity from Theresa May,


but she just outlined 12 She's now got to go around 27


European countries and get I simply don't think she's


going to get, you know, it was a very positive speech


about this new era. These countries aren't


going to sign away... We can't go into this negotiation


saying we want all the good bits, and we don't want any of the bits


we don't like. That still seems to be


the negotiation stance. Is there anything at all


that she is prepared to give up, because we want complete access


to the market, we don't want to pay anything into it,


we don't want free movement. I think they really important point


she made is that a lot of this, a of the success of Europe,


she said we want a strong Europe, It hasn't been said


enough in the past. She was saying, look,


we are up for being pragmatic. And we really want


you to succeed as well. And, actually, an awful lot of this


is a choice for Europe, whether it wants to punish us


because it are proud of its project, or whether it wants


prosperity and pragmatism. So the pragmatic thing is for them


to give us everything, The pragmatic thing is to do a deal


whereby we do well, they do well. Often it said that Britain want


something for it so that other countries don't want,


but Britain, I think, would say to any other country


in Europe that wants to play to its strengths and not be part


of a homogenous group together, you can do


that as well. Kerry, do you accept that this


was a debate about immigration? This is what Theresa May,


sort of, understands. I think, certainly,


during the referendum campaign a lot of people who voted leave voted


because they had concerns about the level of


immigration in this country. I think that is something that does


have to be addressed. This is why the whole discussion


about membership of the single market would mean you sign up


to the full freedoms which would I think almost everybody accepts


that we do have two address that. But you also have to acknowledge


that a lot of the businesses, we heard from a business on that


clip that has a lot of European Food sector, farming sector,


across the south-west, there are workers that depend


on that Labour. That leads very neatly


to the next question. Do you accept that you got it


wrong on immigration, Do you think it should be cut back


drastically from Europe? Or should we continue


to have free movement? It's difficult to unpick


because you have... It is, because your party,


in the Bristol scenario a lot of immigration would be people,


refugees, asylum seekers, We are talking about people


moving from Europe. When people voted and expressed


concerns at immigration they weren't just talking


about Eastern European immigration. They were talking about


immigration across the board. You do have to look


at it in the round. I think that what hasn't been


answered is how we square that, where people, sometimes,


justified, sometimes unjustified concerns about immigration,


how do you square that I'm none the wiser, really,


about whether you think there should Yes, I think we need


European workers. I think there are so


many businesses... I'm not saying that they shouldn't


be some restrictions, but I am saying that we cannot just


close the doors One word answers from you both,


will you vote to trigger Article 50? I think, unless Theresa May comes


forward with the white paper with clarity, unless she explains


how on earth she thinks she's going to manage to get this deal


on the table with about 18 Mr Corbyn said on Friday


that he expected all Labour MPs to support the triggering


of article 50. I think it's a serious issue,


but I'm going to give it 900,000 people in the West will soon


be getting a brand-new type of political leader, a Metro Mayor in


May. Voters will go to the polls in South Gloucestershire, Bath, North


East Somerset and Bristol. Most candidates have been chosen for what


should be a high-profile job. They may struggle to get voters


interested. The West already has plenty of


Mayor. Most perform ceremonial roles in the town and cities. The


collected Mayor so far is in Bristol. The new Metro Mayor will be


different, covering Bristol, South Gloucestershire and Bath and North


East Somerset. But with separate powers from central government over


things like transport, planning and adult education. That has so far


failed to make an impact on many voters.


To be honest I don't know. I've heard that there is a process,


but I don't know what it is. These three areas have different


needs. It doesn't seem a good idea to me.


No. Not aware. It's different for those involved in


the West's politics. They have been focused on it since they voted for


the change last summer. They know the result is far from a foregone


conclusion. Based on the votes cast across the


sea council areas in the last general election the Conservatives,


who came well ahead, reckon they are favourites for the contest. But go


back to 2010 and the Lib Dems came first. Labour know the area can be


good for them. They got the most votes in the three previous general


elections. Local elections usually see the


party and government suffer at the polls. The Conservatives hope to


buck that trend. There was a smile on the face of Tim Bowles who was


yesterday chosen as their candidate. Genuinely absolutely thrilled and


humbled. It was an amazing turnout. A to reflect thing to see so many


people. I know the other candidates got to know them well. They were to


whether brilliant candidates and I was really surprised to learn from


every body else how many other good quality candidates we had.


Labour's selection of Leslie Mansell has pleased the other parties.


Especially the Liberal Democrats. Two are competing to be their


candidate, council leader Simon Clark and ex-Bristol West MP Stephen


Williams who feels they are on the up.


Ask me a year ago could the Liberal Democrats aspire to win an election


across the West country I would have said no. We need more time to


recover. Maybe by 2020 we will have done, but the referendum vote, the


Brexit outcome has transformed British politics.


Morale is very, very bullish. There is a smile back on our faces. We've


stopped being disillusioned and stopped being disillusioned and


disgruntled. We are going to win. Ukip's candidate is Aaron foot. They


are likely to concentrate on other more winnable contest. The Greens


have selected former Parliamentary candidate for Bristol West.


I think Bristol and Bath is one of those places where people are aware


of the next generation. They are aware of the pressures from climate


change. They are aware of the need for jobs that are resilient in the


future. I think we've got a good opportunity in the Bristol and Bath


area. All will now be getting about


campaigning, but the hardest task may not be winning electors over as


getting them to actually vote. The biggest problem is that this is


going to be the fourth election for the electorate in two years. I


strongly suspect that we could see turnouts fall below 20%. That is


going to be very difficult for all the parties.


The candidates have just over 100 days to sell themselves around the


new role to the people of the West. So we've got another election coming


up. Does anybody want a Metro Mayor? We want the things they could


accomplish. Such as what? A joined up transport


strategy for the region. Don't be ridiculous! I'd like to


think that a Metro Mayor could accomplish that.


Would they be senior to the Bristol Mayor?


One of the arguments for a Mayor and Bristol know that the public know


who is accountable. Marvin is well-established. People know who


they are. I worry that the Metro Mayor will be an obscure person and


no one is quite sure who they are or what they do.


You won't have that accountability. You won't have that accountability.


Who your candidate Leslie Mansell. Would you put her in that category?


It isn't about the individual. It's about the way it is structured. How


do you establish yourself in such a role? Anyone will find it difficult


because people won't understand. It might be that once they are imposed,


you see this with police and crime commission is, we get low turnouts,


and the lot of people just don't realise why they are there and what


they are doing. It's a bit of a democratic deficit.


That is a reasonable point, isn't it? Voter fatigue, and we've got a


Mayor, why do we want another one? It's having another election, do


people know what this other Mayor is? That's a big effort to explain


to people and not long to do it. This is the first time the role is


there, we'll be voting again and next time people will have an idea


who they are. Secondly, what this Mayor can do to make the roll their


own. I think there is huge potential. Bristol's region


misanthrope again and again because we haven't spoken together.


But we could have had a transport authority in the other big cities


have always had these passenger transport executive 's. You could


have had leaders coming together. We've always tried to do it on an ad


hoc basis. You will remember anyone, is this a way of bringing back an


evil authority which can look at the big issues across a wide area? --


Avon authority. We both campaigned for transport


authority but it didn't happen. Maybe the Metro Mayor will enable


the change to take place. I think it was sort of imposed on people. At


had a referendum. We were the only had a referendum. We were the only


city, all the others rejected the idea.


We've been pushed into this. Bad personality, whoever it is, will


have to come to a working arrangement with the leaders of the


other, smaller authorities, given the historic differences between


local authorities that won't be easy.


It may not be easy, but I think they Metro Mayor could be in a good


position to do that. They key task should be to bring areas that think


they are different to be a wider region.


Would you go for it? I wouldn't, I'm happy being an MP.


I have more than enough to keep me I have more than enough to keep me


busy for a while yet. So that they may be? It's a no!


Now, let's take a whistle-stop tour of the news this week in 60 seconds.


Bristol's other banks become Aaron Banks launched an antiestablishment


website, the Brexit campaigners said West Munster would shake up the


media. He was among a handful of Brits to go to Donald Trump 's's


inauguration. He won't be afraid to bring in that other people don't


find very palatable. The man in charge of promoting


businesses in Somerset about a row by getting a 26% pay rise. Local


enterprise partnership said it put Chris Garcia's salary in line with


reverence. Somerset Council leader claimed it


was out of touch. Councillors in Bath say they are now looking at


just two sites for the city's new park and ride. They will decide next


week. Campaigners oppose both. And more councils announced inflation


tax rises, they will all be charging 3.5% more. They save money is needed


to social care. -- to fund social care. That was the week, it has


flown by. Let's talk about council tax than this referendum suggesting


a very large increase in the tax. Is that something Labour would support?


After all, you've been asking for better public services for years.


What we want is very funding. The problem with devolutionist


austerities that poorer communities aren't able to raise as much as the


wealthier committees but are the ones that probably have more need


for services. It can be unfair. It's always a combination of local


funding, but National funding as well. That's why we're making case


for a Meno, government funding, to support what Bristol needs. Marvin


has got fined ?100 million with cuts in five years, that's sustainable.


Charlotte, is very excuse for continued austerity and local


government? We had to make efficiencies.


Interestingly, the area of the country having the rest around them,


if they are at their council tax they will still be below the average


national council tax. They have had real efficiencies, they are only


rising their tax to an average level. I think Bristol council still


has the enormous efficiencies it could make.


Name one. I'd like to see what they spend on consultancies and


recruitment agencies. We will ask them. That is it from the West this


week, my thanks to my guest, Charlotte Leslie and Kerry McCarthy.


Follow us on Twitter for the latest news from the West. Catch up on my


player, this would be available there. For now, back


have to do this. Thank you to you both.


What exactly is the government's industrial strategy?


Will ministers lose their supreme court battle over Brexit, and,


Well, tomorrow Theresa May is launching the government's


industrial strategy - and to talk about that we're joined


by the Business Minister, Margot James - welcome to the show.


When you look at what has already been released in advance of the


Prime Minister's statement, it was embargoed for last night, it's not


really an industrial strategy, it's just another skills strategy, of


which we have had about six since the war, and our skills training is


among the worst in Western Europe? There will be plenty more to be


announced tomorrow in what is really a discussion document in the


preparation of an industrial strategy which we intend to launch


properly later in the year. Let's look at skills. You are allocating


117 of funding to establish institutes of technology. How many?


The exact number is to be agreed, but the spend is there, and it will


be on top of what we are doing to the university, technical


colleges... How many were lit bio create? We don't know exactly, but


we want to put them in areas where young people are performing under


the national average. But if you don't know how many, what is the


basis of 170 million? That is the amount the Treasury have released.


The something that is very important, we are agreed we need to


devote more resources to vocational training and get it on a par with


academic qualifications. I looked on the website of my old university,


the University of Glasgow, the Russell group universities. Its


spending budget every year is over 600 million. That's one University.


And yet you have a mere 170 million foreign unspecified number of


institutes of technology. It hasn't got equality with the academics? You


have to remember that just as you have quoted figures from Glasgow


University there are further education colleges all over the


country. The government is already spending on 16 to 19-year-olds. But


also, we are going to be adding... This is new money that is all to the


good, because we are already spending a lot. We have already


created 2 million more apprentices since 2010. That many are not in


what we would call the stem skills, and a lot come nowhere near what the


Dutch, Germans and Austrians would have. I'm not clear how another 170


million would do. You said it is more than skills. In what way is


this industrial strategy different from what Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne


did before? It's different because it is involving every single


government department, and bringing together everything that government


does in a bid to make Britain more competitive as it disengages from


the European Union. That is what the last Labour government did. They


will much more targeted interventions. Under the Labour


government, the auto industry got some benefit. A few more sectors


were broached under the coalition government. This is all about


communities all over the country, some of whom have fallen behind in


terms of wage growth and good jobs. The Prime Minister has already


announced 2 billion as a research and development priority in specific


technologies, robotics, artificial intelligence, medical technology,


satellites... So you are doing what has been done before. There is


nothing new about this. Wait until tomorrow, because there will be some


new strands emerging. It is the beginning of the dialogue with


industry and with workers, and the responses will be invited up until


April. That will inform a wider strategy that goes beyond skills. I


have moved on to beyond them. I'm slightly puzzled as to how the


government knows where to invest in robotics, when it can't even provide


the NHS with a decent IT system. Discuss. I have to say I find it


bizarre that the government is making an announcement about an


amount of money and don't know where it's going. This is typical of all


governments over all political shoes, which is total disregard for


technical education, so different from Germany, who actually invest in


the technological side. Germany has a long history. We want to emulate


some of the best of what German companies do. Siemens sponsor


primary schools, for example. We want to get a dialogue on with


business. We don't want to decide where this money is going. By the


way, it was 4.7 billion that the government has agreed to invest in


science and research, which is the most significant increase in


decades. Can you remind us what happened in Northern Ireland, when


the government invested money in state-of-the-art technology for


energy? No one needs to be reminded of that, and that is not what we are


doing. We are inviting business and industry to advise where that money


is best spent. That's very different from government deciding that a


particular technology is for the future. The government's chief


scientific adviser has determined that we will invest a huge amount in


battery technology, which should benefit the electric car industry,


and... This is taxpayers' money. Who gets it? Ultimately, business will


get it, but often only when there is a considerable amount of private


sector finance also drawn in. But who is held to account? Various


government departments at local authorities will hold this list to


account. A lot of it is about releasing private capital as well.


Thank you very much. This week, the Supreme Court, I think we know the


ruling is coming on Tuesday. And the expectation is that the judges will


say Parliament will have to vote to trigger. Is this all much ado about


nothing? Parliament will vote to trigger, and the government will win


in the Lords and the Commons by substantial majorities, and it will


be triggered? Completely. We've known that. Parliament is voted.


Everyone is pretty confident that the Supreme Court will uphold the


High Court's decision and say it has to go to MPs. There will be a bit of


toing and froing among MPs on amendments. You heard Diane Abbott's


slightly car crash interview there. The Lib Dems may throw something in,


but we will trigger Article 50 by the end of March. If it also says


that the roll of Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast should be picked up,


that could complicate matters. Absolutely. That could delay the


planned triggering of Article 50 before the end of March. Not what


they say about the Westminster Parliament, because it is clear that


it was. I never understood the furore about that original judgment,


because every MP made it clear they wouldn't block it. Even though Diane


Abbott was evasive on several fronts, she said they wouldn't block


it. You are right, if they give a vote, or give some authorisation for


the Scottish Parliament and other devolved assemblies, that might


delay the whole sequence. That is the only significant thing to watch


out for. Watch out on Tuesday. Mrs May goes to Washington. It will be


another movie in the making! I would suggest that she has a tricky line


to follow. She has got to be seen to be taking advantage of the fact that


there is a very pro-British, pro-Brexit president in the Oval


Office, who I am told is prepared to expend political capital on this.


But on the other hand, to make sure that she is not what we used to call


Mr Blair, George Bush's poodle. It is very difficult, and who would not


want to be a fly on the wall in that meeting! I can't think of anyone in


the world who would despise Mr Trump more than Mrs May, and for him, he


dislikes any woman who does not look like a supermodel, no disrespected


Mrs May. Most of it is actually anti-EU, and I think we should


capitalise it. Let's get the Queen to earn her money, roll out the red


carpet, invite him to dinner, spend the night, what ever we need...


Trump at Balmoral! Here is the issue, because the agenda is, as we


heard from Ted Malloch earlier, that this is not an administration that


has much time for the EU, EU integration or Germany. I think


Germany will be the second biggest loser to begin with. They will not


even give a date for Angela Merkel to meet the president. This is an


opportunity for Mrs May... It is a huge. It could sideline talks of the


punishment beating from Germany. The Trump presidency has completely


changed the field on Brexit. Along came Donald Trump, and Theresa May


has this incredible opportunity here. Not of her making, but she has


played her cards well. To an officially be the EU emissary to


Washington, to get some sort of broker going. That gives us huge


extra leveraged in the Brexit negotiations. People around the


world think Germany as a currency manipulator, that it is benefiting


from an underpriced euro, hence the huge surplus it runs of America, and


they think it is disgraceful that a country that runs a massive budget


surplus spends only 1.2% of its GDP on defence, and America runs a


massive deficit and needs to spend a lot more. He's going for Germany.


And what a massive shift. I think Obama was quite open, in a farewell


interview, that he felt closer to Merkel than any other European


leader. And Jamie kind of reflected that in our discussion. Yes, that's


very interesting discussion. I think she was the last person he spoke to


in the White House, Obama. And now you are getting the onslaught from


Trump. This Thatcher- Reagan imagery is dangerous, though. Blair was


hypnotised by it and was too scared to criticise Bush, because he wanted


to be seen in that light, and we know where that led. Cameron


similarly with Obama, which presented him with problems, as


Obama didn't regard him as his number one pin up in Europe. I would


put a note of caution in there about the Thatcher - Reagan parallel.


Everything Trump is doing now is different from before, so Mrs May


should not have any of these previous relationships in her mind.


That is not entirely true. Donald Trump aches to be the new Ronald


Reagan. He may be impeached first! He sees her as the new Margaret


Thatcher, and that may her leveraged with him. Thank you.


We'll be back here at the same time next week, and you can catch up


on all the latest political news on the Daily Politics,


In the meantime, remember - if it's Sunday,


It's just pain, but it doesn't feel like pain,


it feels much more violent, dark and exciting.


Join Michael Buerk as he explores the dishes fit for kings and queens.


Download Subtitles