:00:40. > :00:41.Morning, folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics.
:00:42. > :00:43.Hard line remainers strike back at Brexit.
:00:44. > :00:46.Are they trying to overturn the result of June's referendum
:00:47. > :00:49.by forcing a second vote before we leave?
:00:50. > :00:52.Australia's man in London tells us that life outside the EU "can be
:00:53. > :00:56.pretty good" and that Brexit will "not be as hard as people say".
:00:57. > :00:59.Could leaving the EU free Britain to do more business
:01:00. > :01:05.It's been called "disgusting, dangerous and deadly"
:01:06. > :01:10.but how polluted is our air, how bad for our health,
:01:11. > :01:11.On the Sunday Politics in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire,
:01:12. > :01:14.there are just two weeks to go until Hull
:01:15. > :01:27.We'll find out what will be the long-term legacy for the city.
:01:28. > :01:31.And with me in the Sunday Politics grotto, the Dasher, Dancer
:01:32. > :01:34.and Prancer of political punditry Iain Martin,
:01:35. > :01:43.They'll be delivering tweets throughout the programme.
:01:44. > :01:49.First this morning, some say they will fight
:01:50. > :01:52.for what they call a "soft Brexit", but now there's an attempt by those
:01:53. > :01:55.who campaigned for Britain to remain in the EU to allow the British
:01:56. > :01:58.people to change their minds - possibly with a second referendum -
:01:59. > :02:02.The Labour MEP Richard Corbett is revealed this morning to have
:02:03. > :02:03.tried to amend European Parliament resolutions.
:02:04. > :02:06.The original resolution called on the European Parliament
:02:07. > :02:09.to "respect the will of the majority of the citizens
:02:10. > :02:25.of the United Kingdom to leave the EU".
:02:26. > :02:30.He also proposed removing the wording "stress that this wish
:02:31. > :02:33.must be respected" and adding "while taking account of the 48.1%
:02:34. > :02:45.The amendments were proposed in October,
:02:46. > :02:48.but were rejected by a vote in the Brussels
:02:49. > :02:50.Constitutional Affairs Committee earlier this month.
:02:51. > :02:53.The report will be voted on by all MEPs in February.
:02:54. > :02:55.Well, joining me now from Leeds is the Labour MEP who proposed
:02:56. > :03:05.Good morning. Thanks for joining us at short notice. Is your aim to try
:03:06. > :03:10.and reverse what happened on June 23? My aim with those amendments was
:03:11. > :03:14.simply factual. It is rather odd that these amendments of two months
:03:15. > :03:19.ago are suddenly used paper headlines in three very different
:03:20. > :03:25.newspapers on the same day. It smacks of a sort of concerted effort
:03:26. > :03:31.to try and slapped down any notion that Britain might perhaps want to
:03:32. > :03:36.rethink its position on Brexit as the cost of Brexit emerges. You
:03:37. > :03:41.would like us to rethink the position even before the cost urges?
:03:42. > :03:46.I get lots of letters from people saying how one, this was an advisory
:03:47. > :03:52.referendum won by a narrow majority on the basis of a pack of lies and a
:03:53. > :03:56.questionable mandate. But if there is a mandate from this referendum,
:03:57. > :03:59.it is surely to secure a Brexit that works for Britain without sinking
:04:00. > :04:04.the economy. And if it transpires as we move forward, that this will be a
:04:05. > :04:08.very costly exercise, then there will be people who voted leave who
:04:09. > :04:13.said Hang on, this is not what I was told. I was told this would save
:04:14. > :04:15.money, we could put it in the NHS, but if it is going to cost us and
:04:16. > :04:32.our Monday leg, I would the right to reconsider. But
:04:33. > :04:35.your aim is not get a Brexit that would work for Britain, your aim is
:04:36. > :04:38.to stop it? If we got a Brexit that would work for Britain, that would
:04:39. > :04:41.respect the mandate. But if we cannot get that, if it is going to
:04:42. > :04:43.be a disaster, if it is going to cost people jobs and cost Britain
:04:44. > :04:47.money, it is something we might want to pause and rethink. The government
:04:48. > :04:53.said it is going to come forward with a plan. That is good. We need
:04:54. > :05:00.to know what options to go for as a country. Do we want to stay in the
:05:01. > :05:02.single market, the customs union, the various agencies? And options
:05:03. > :05:09.should be costed so we can all see how much they cost of Brexit will
:05:10. > :05:13.be. If you were simply going to try and make the resolution is more
:05:14. > :05:21.illegal, why did the constitutional committee vote them down? This is a
:05:22. > :05:27.report about future treaty amendments down the road for years
:05:28. > :05:35.to come. This was not the main focus of the report, it was a side
:05:36. > :05:41.reference, in which was put the idea for Association partnerships. Will
:05:42. > :05:48.you push for the idea before the full parliament? I must see what the
:05:49. > :05:56.text is. You said there is a widespread view in labour that if
:05:57. > :05:59.the Brexit view is bad we should not exclude everything, I take it you
:06:00. > :06:06.mean another referendum. When you were named down these amendments,
:06:07. > :06:10.was this just acting on your own initiative, or acting on behalf of
:06:11. > :06:18.the Labour Party? I am just be humble lame-duck MEP in the European
:06:19. > :06:22.Parliament. It makes sense from any point of view that if the course of
:06:23. > :06:26.action you have embarked on turns out to be much more costly and
:06:27. > :06:31.disastrous than you had anticipated, that you might want the chance to
:06:32. > :06:36.think again. You might come to the same conclusion, of course, but you
:06:37. > :06:42.might think, wait a minute, let's have a look at this. But let's be
:06:43. > :06:45.clear, even though you are deputy leader of Labour in the European
:06:46. > :06:53.Parliament, you're acting alone and not as Labour Party policy? I am
:06:54. > :06:57.acting in the constitutional affairs committee. All I am doing is stating
:06:58. > :07:01.things which are common sense. If as we move forward then this turns out
:07:02. > :07:05.to be a disaster, we need to look very carefully at where we are
:07:06. > :07:11.going. But if a deal is done under Article 50, and we get to see the
:07:12. > :07:16.shape of that deal by the end of 2019 under the two-year timetable,
:07:17. > :07:21.in your words, we won't know if it is a disaster or not until it is
:07:22. > :07:27.implemented. We won't be able to tell until we see the results about
:07:28. > :07:35.whether it is good or bad, surely? We might well be able to, because
:07:36. > :07:39.that has to take account of the future framework of relationships
:07:40. > :07:42.with the European Union, to quote the article of the treaty. That
:07:43. > :07:47.means we should have some idea about what that will be like. Will we be
:07:48. > :07:50.outside the customs union, for instance, which will be very
:07:51. > :07:56.damaging for our economy? Or will we have to stay inside and follow the
:07:57. > :07:59.rules without having a say on them. We won't know until we leave the
:08:00. > :08:03.customs union. You think it will be damaging, others think it will give
:08:04. > :08:07.us the opportunity to do massive trade deals. My case this morning is
:08:08. > :08:11.not what is right or wrong, we will not know until we have seen the
:08:12. > :08:15.results. We will know a heck of a lot more than we do now when we see
:08:16. > :08:19.that Article 50 divorce agreement. We will know the terms of the
:08:20. > :08:23.divorce, we will know how much we still have to pay into the EU budget
:08:24. > :08:28.for legacy costs. We will know whether we will be in the single
:08:29. > :08:33.market customs union or not. We will know about the agencies. We will
:08:34. > :08:36.know a lot of things. If the deal on the table looks as if it will be
:08:37. > :08:42.damaging to Britain, then Parliament will be in its rights to say, wait a
:08:43. > :08:46.minute, not this deal. And then you either renegotiate or you reconsider
:08:47. > :08:51.the whole issue of Brexit or you find another solution. We need to
:08:52. > :08:56.leave it there but thank you for joining us.
:08:57. > :09:02.Iain Martin, how serious is the attempt to in effect an wind what
:09:03. > :09:07.happened on June 23? I think it is pretty serious and that interview
:09:08. > :09:11.illustrates very well the most damaging impact of the approach
:09:12. > :09:18.taken by a lot of Remainers, which is essentially to say with one
:09:19. > :09:20.breath, we of course accept the result, but with every action
:09:21. > :09:24.subsequent to that to try and undermine the result or try and are
:09:25. > :09:29.sure that the deal is as bad as possible. I think what needed to
:09:30. > :09:34.happen and hasn't happened after June 23 is you have the extremists
:09:35. > :09:40.on both sides and you have in the middle probably 70% of public
:09:41. > :09:46.opinion, moderate leaders, moderate Remainers should be working together
:09:47. > :09:53.to try and get British bespoke deal. But moderate Leavers will not take
:09:54. > :09:58.moderate Remainers seriously if this is the approach taken at every
:09:59. > :10:07.single turn to try and rerun the referendum. He did not say whether
:10:08. > :10:12.it was Labour policy? That was a question which was ducked. I do not
:10:13. > :10:18.think it is Labour Party policy. I think most people are in a morass in
:10:19. > :10:21.the middle. I think the screaming that happens when anybody dares to
:10:22. > :10:26.question or suggest that you might ever want to think again about these
:10:27. > :10:30.things, I disagree with him about having another referendum but if he
:10:31. > :10:33.wants to campaign for that it is his democratic right to do so. If you
:10:34. > :10:39.can convince enough people it is a good idea then he has succeeded. But
:10:40. > :10:44.the idea that we would do a deal and then realise this is a really bad
:10:45. > :10:51.deal, let's not proceed, we will not really know that until the deal is
:10:52. > :10:54.implemented. What our access is to the single market, whether or not we
:10:55. > :10:58.are in or out of the customs union which we will talk about in a
:10:59. > :11:03.minute, what immigration policy we will have, whether these are going
:11:04. > :11:08.to be good things bad things, surely you have got to wait for four, five,
:11:09. > :11:12.six years to see if it has worked or not? Yes, and by which stage
:11:13. > :11:16.Parliament will have voted on it and there will be no going back from it,
:11:17. > :11:21.or maybe there will. We are talking now about the first three months of
:11:22. > :11:29.2019. That is absolutely the moment when Parliament agrees with Theresa
:11:30. > :11:40.May or not. One arch remain I spoke to, and arch Remainiac, he said that
:11:41. > :11:48.Theresa May will bring this to Parliament in 2019 and could say I
:11:49. > :11:53.recommend that we reject it. What is he on or she? Some strong chemical
:11:54. > :11:59.drugs! The point is that all manner of things could happen. I don't
:12:00. > :12:05.think any of us take it seriously for now but the future is a very
:12:06. > :12:09.long way away. Earlier, the trade Secretary Liam Fox was asked if we
:12:10. > :12:12.would stay in the customs union after Brexit.
:12:13. > :12:18.There would be limitations on what we would do in terms of tariff
:12:19. > :12:24.setting which could limit the deals we would do, but we want to look at
:12:25. > :12:28.all the different deals. There is hard Brexit and soft Brexit as if it
:12:29. > :12:32.is a boiled egg we are talking about. Turkey is in part of the
:12:33. > :12:40.customs union but not other parts. What we need to do is look at the
:12:41. > :12:44.cost. This is what I picked up. The government knows it cannot remain a
:12:45. > :12:49.member of the single market in these negotiations, because that would
:12:50. > :12:52.make us subject to free movement and the European Court. The customs
:12:53. > :12:57.union and the Prime Minister 's office doesn't seem to be quite as
:12:58. > :13:00.binary, that you can be a little bit in and a little bit out, but I would
:13:01. > :13:06.suggest that overall Liam Fox knows to do all the trade deals we want to
:13:07. > :13:10.do we basically have to be out. But what he also seems to know is that
:13:11. > :13:15.is a minority view in Cabinet. He said he was not going to give his
:13:16. > :13:25.opinion publicly. There is still an argument going on about it in
:13:26. > :13:27.Cabinet. When David Liddington struggled against Emily Thornbury
:13:28. > :13:31.PMQs, he did not know about the customs union. What is apparent is
:13:32. > :13:37.Theresa May has not told him what to think about that. If we stay in the
:13:38. > :13:44.customs union we cannot do our own free trade deals. We are behind the
:13:45. > :13:49.customs union, the tariff barriers set by Europe? Not quite. Turkey is
:13:50. > :13:54.proof of the pudding. There are limited exemptions but they can do
:13:55. > :14:02.free trade with their neighbours. Not on goods. They are doing a trade
:14:03. > :14:06.deal with Pakistan at the moment, it relies on foreign trade investment
:14:07. > :14:10.but Europe negotiates on turkey's behalf on the major free-trade
:14:11. > :14:14.deals. This is absolutely why the customs union will be the fault line
:14:15. > :14:18.for the deal we are trying to achieve. Interestingly, I thought
:14:19. > :14:23.Liam Fox suggested during that interview that he was prepared to
:14:24. > :14:28.suck up whatever it was. I think he was saying there is still an
:14:29. > :14:36.argument and he intends to win it. He wants to leave it because he
:14:37. > :14:40.wants to do these free-trade deals. There is an argument in the cabinet
:14:41. > :14:46.about precisely that. The other thing to consider is in this country
:14:47. > :14:49.we have tended to focus too much on the British angle in negotiations,
:14:50. > :14:53.but I think the negotiations are going to be very difficult. You look
:14:54. > :14:57.at the state of the EU at the moment, you look at what is
:14:58. > :15:04.happening in Italy, France, Germany, look at the 27. It is possible I
:15:05. > :15:08.think that Britain could design a bespoke sensible deal but then it
:15:09. > :15:15.becomes very difficult to agree which is why I ultimately think we
:15:16. > :15:17.are heading for a harder Brexit. It will be about developing in this
:15:18. > :15:21.country. So, we've had a warning this week
:15:22. > :15:24.that it could take ten years to do a trade deal
:15:25. > :15:26.with the EU after Brexit. But could opportunities to expand
:15:27. > :15:28.trade lie elsewhere? Australia was one of the first
:15:29. > :15:31.countries to indicate its willingness to do a deal
:15:32. > :15:33.with the UK and now its High Commissioner in London has told
:15:34. > :15:36.us that life outside the EU He made this exclusive film
:15:37. > :15:52.for the Sunday Politics. My father was the Australian High
:15:53. > :15:54.Commissioner in the early 70s when the UK joined
:15:55. > :15:57.the European Union, Now I'm in the job,
:15:58. > :16:05.the UK is leaving. Australia supported
:16:06. > :16:07.Britain remaining a member of the European Union,
:16:08. > :16:10.but we respect the decision that Now that the decision has been made,
:16:11. > :16:16.we hope that Britain will get on with the process
:16:17. > :16:20.of negotiating their exit from the European Union and make
:16:21. > :16:23.the most of the opportunities that Following the referendum decision,
:16:24. > :16:30.Australia approached the British Government
:16:31. > :16:32.with a proposal. We offered, when the time was right,
:16:33. > :16:35.to negotiate a free trade agreement. The British and Australian
:16:36. > :16:41.governments have already established a working group to explore a future,
:16:42. > :16:44.ambitious trade agreement once A free trade agreement will provide
:16:45. > :16:56.great opportunities for consumers Australian consumers could purchase
:16:57. > :17:01.British-made cars for less We would give British
:17:02. > :17:07.households access to cheaper, Our summer is during your winter,
:17:08. > :17:13.so Australia could provide British households with fresh produce
:17:14. > :17:17.when the equivalent British or Australian households would have
:17:18. > :17:24.access to British products Free-trade agreements
:17:25. > :17:36.are also about investment. The UK is the second-largest source
:17:37. > :17:40.of foreign investment in Australia. By the way, Australia also invests
:17:41. > :17:47.over ?200 billion in the UK, so a free trade agreement
:17:48. > :17:50.would stimulate investment, But, by the way, free-trade
:17:51. > :17:55.agreements are not just about trade and investment,
:17:56. > :17:59.they are also about geopolitics. Countries with good trade relations
:18:00. > :18:03.often work more closely together in other fields including security,
:18:04. > :18:06.the spread of democracy We may have preferred
:18:07. > :18:20.the UKto remain in the EU, We may have preferred the UK
:18:21. > :18:23.to remain in the EU, but life outside as we know can
:18:24. > :18:25.be pretty good. We have negotiated eight free-trade
:18:26. > :18:28.agreements over the last 12 years, including a free-trade agreement
:18:29. > :18:30.with the United States This is one of the reasons why
:18:31. > :18:42.the Australian economy has continued to grow over the last 25 years
:18:43. > :18:45.and we, of course, are not Australia welcomes Theresa May's
:18:46. > :18:55.vision for the UK to become a global We are willing to help
:18:56. > :19:24.in any way we can. Welcome to the programme. The
:19:25. > :19:28.Australian government says it wants to negotiate an important trade deal
:19:29. > :19:34.with the UK as efficiently and promptly as possible when Brexit is
:19:35. > :19:39.complete. How prompt is prompt? There are legal issues obviously.
:19:40. > :19:45.The UK, for as long as it remains in the EU, cannot negotiate individual
:19:46. > :19:50.trade deals. Once it leaves it can. We will negotiate a agreement with
:19:51. > :19:55.the UK when the time is right, by which we mean we can do preliminary
:19:56. > :20:00.examination. Are you talking now about the parameters? We are talking
:20:01. > :20:04.already, we have set up a joint working group with the British
:20:05. > :20:07.Government and we are scoping the issue to try to understand what
:20:08. > :20:13.questions will arise in any negotiation. But we cannot have
:20:14. > :20:20.formally a negotiation. Until the country is out. Why is there no
:20:21. > :20:23.free-trade deal between Australia and the European Union? It is a long
:20:24. > :20:30.and tortuous story. Give me the headline. Basically Australian
:20:31. > :20:36.agriculture is either banned or hugely restricted in terms of its
:20:37. > :20:40.access to the European Union. So we see the European Union, Australia's,
:20:41. > :20:46.is a pretty protectionist sort of organisation. Now we are doing a
:20:47. > :20:49.scoping study on a free-trade agreement with the European Union
:20:50. > :20:54.and we hope that next year we can enter into negotiations with them.
:20:55. > :21:00.But we have no illusions this would be a very difficult negotiation, but
:21:01. > :21:05.one we are giving priority to. Is there not a danger that when Britain
:21:06. > :21:09.leaves the EU the EU will become more protectionist? This country has
:21:10. > :21:14.always been the most powerful voice for free trade. I hope that does not
:21:15. > :21:20.happen, but the reason why we wanted Britain to remain in the European
:21:21. > :21:25.Union is because it brought to the table the whole free-trade mentality
:21:26. > :21:28.which has been an historic part of Britain's approach to international
:21:29. > :21:34.relations. Without the UK in the European Union you will lose that.
:21:35. > :21:37.It is a very loud voice in the European Union and you will lose
:21:38. > :21:43.that voice and that will be a disadvantage. The figure that jumped
:21:44. > :21:46.out of me in the film is it to you only 15 months to negotiate a
:21:47. > :21:51.free-trade deal with the United States. Yes, the thing is it is
:21:52. > :21:57.about political will. A free-trade agreement will be no problem unless
:21:58. > :22:02.you want to protect particular sectors of your economy. In that
:22:03. > :22:07.case there was one sector the Americans insisted on protecting and
:22:08. > :22:11.that was their sugar industry. In the end after 15 months of
:22:12. > :22:16.negotiation two relatively free trading countries have fixed up
:22:17. > :22:20.nearly everything. But we had to ask would be go ahead with this
:22:21. > :22:25.free-trade agreement without sugar west we decided to do that. Other
:22:26. > :22:30.than that it was relatively easy to negotiate because we are both
:22:31. > :22:33.free-trade countries. With the UK you cannot be sure, but I do not
:22:34. > :22:39.think a free-trade agreement would take very long to negotiate with the
:22:40. > :22:44.UK because the UK would not want to put a lot of obstacles in the way to
:22:45. > :22:48.Australia. Not to give away our hand, we would not want to put a lot
:22:49. > :22:54.of obstacles in the way of British exports. The trend in recent years
:22:55. > :22:59.is to do big, regional trade deals, but President-elect Donald Trump has
:23:00. > :23:04.made clear the Pacific trade deal is dead. The transatlantic trade deal
:23:05. > :23:07.is almost dead as well. The American election put a nail in the coffin
:23:08. > :23:13.and the French elections could put another nail in the coffin. Are we
:23:14. > :23:16.returning to a world of lateral trade deals, country with country
:23:17. > :23:24.rather than regional blocs? Not necessarily. In the Asia Pacific we
:23:25. > :23:28.will look at multilateral trade arrangements and even if the
:23:29. > :23:31.transpacific partnership is not ratified by the Americans, we have
:23:32. > :23:37.other options are there. However, our approach has been the ultimate
:23:38. > :23:42.would be free-trade throughout the world which is proving hard to
:23:43. > :23:46.achieve. Secondly, if we can get a lot of countries engaged in a
:23:47. > :23:52.free-trade negotiation, that is pretty good if possible. But it is
:23:53. > :23:57.more difficult. But we do bilateral trade agreements. We have one with
:23:58. > :24:02.China, Japan, the United States, Singapore, and the list goes on, and
:24:03. > :24:10.they have been hugely beneficial to Australia. You have been dealing
:24:11. > :24:14.with the EU free deal, what lessons are there? How quickly do you think
:24:15. > :24:20.Britain could do a free-trade deal with the EU if we leave? Well, there
:24:21. > :24:24.is a completely different concept involved in the case of Britain and
:24:25. > :24:30.the EU and that is at the moment there are no restrictions on trade.
:24:31. > :24:34.So you and the EU would be talking about whether you will direct
:24:35. > :24:39.barriers to trade. We are outsiders and we do not get too much involved
:24:40. > :24:45.in this debate except to say we do not want to see the global trade
:24:46. > :24:49.system disrupted by the direction of tariff barriers between the United
:24:50. > :24:55.Kingdom, the fifth biggest economy in the world, and the European
:24:56. > :25:00.Union. Our expectation is not just the British but the Europeans will
:25:01. > :25:04.try to make the transition to Brexit as smooth as possible particularly
:25:05. > :25:09.commercially. Say yes or no if you can. If Britain and Australia make a
:25:10. > :25:13.free-trade agreement, would that include free movement of the
:25:14. > :25:19.Australian and the British people? We will probably stick with our
:25:20. > :25:23.present non-discriminatory system. Australia does not discriminate
:25:24. > :25:28.against any country. The European Union's free movement means you
:25:29. > :25:32.discriminate against non-Europeans. Probably not.
:25:33. > :25:35.It could lead to a ban on diesel cars, prevent the building
:25:36. > :25:38.of a third runway at Heathrow, and will certainly make it
:25:39. > :25:40.more expensive to drive in our towns and cities.
:25:41. > :25:42.Air pollution has been called the "public health crisis
:25:43. > :25:44.of a generation" - but just how serious is the problem?
:25:45. > :25:58.40,000 early deaths result from air pollution every year in the UK.
:25:59. > :26:04.Almost 10,000 Londoners each year die prematurely.
:26:05. > :26:11.It seems at times we can get caught up in alarming assertions
:26:12. > :26:13.about air pollution, that this is a public health
:26:14. > :26:17.emergency, that it is a silent killer, coming from politicians,
:26:18. > :26:25.But how bad is air quality in Britain really?
:26:26. > :26:29.Tony Frew is a professor in respiratory medicine and works
:26:30. > :26:31.at Brighton's Royal Sussex County Hospital.
:26:32. > :26:33.He has been looking into the recent claims
:26:34. > :26:39.It's a problem and it affects people's health.
:26:40. > :26:41.But when people start talking about the numbers
:26:42. > :26:44.of deaths here, I think they are misusing the statistics.
:26:45. > :26:49.There have been tremendous improvements in air quality
:26:50. > :26:53.There is a lot less pollution than there used to be
:26:54. > :26:57.and none of that is coming through in the public
:26:58. > :27:01.So what does Professor Frew make of the claim that alarming levels
:27:02. > :27:04.of toxicity in the air in the UK causes 40,000 deaths each year?
:27:05. > :27:07.It is not 40,000 people who should have air pollution
:27:08. > :27:09.on their death certificate, or 40,000 people who
:27:10. > :27:14.It's a lot of people who had a little bit of life shortening
:27:15. > :27:20.To examine these figures further we travelled to Cambridge to visit
:27:21. > :27:25.I asked him about the data on which these claims
:27:26. > :27:30.They come from a study on how mortality rates in US cities
:27:31. > :27:37.First of all, it is important to realise that that 40,000 figure
:27:38. > :27:43.29,000, which are due to fine particles, and another 11,000
:27:44. > :27:51.I will just talk about this group for a start.
:27:52. > :27:55.These are what are known as attributable deaths.
:27:56. > :27:59.Known as virtual deaths, they come from a complex statistical model.
:28:00. > :28:02.Quite remarkably it all comes from just one number and this
:28:03. > :28:06.was based on a study of US cities and they found out that
:28:07. > :28:10.by monitoring these cities over decades that the cities which had
:28:11. > :28:16.a higher level of pollution had a higher mortality rate.
:28:17. > :28:22.They estimated that there was a 6% increased risk of dying
:28:23. > :28:27.each year for each small increase in pollution.
:28:28. > :28:30.So this is quite a big figure, but it is important to realise
:28:31. > :28:33.it is only a best estimate and the committee that advises
:28:34. > :28:39.the government says that this figure could be between 1% and 12%.
:28:40. > :28:42.So this 6% figure is used to work out the 29,000
:28:43. > :28:48.Yes, through a rather complex statistical model.
:28:49. > :28:53.And a similar analysis gives rise to the 11,000 attributable deaths
:28:54. > :29:00.How much should we invest in cycling?
:29:01. > :29:03.Should we build a third runway at Heathrow?
:29:04. > :29:06.We need reliable statistics to answer those questions,
:29:07. > :29:11.but can we trust the way data is being used by campaigners?
:29:12. > :29:15.I think there are people who have such a passion for the environment
:29:16. > :29:17.and for air pollution that they don't really
:29:18. > :29:24.see it as a problem if they are deceiving the public.
:29:25. > :29:26.Greenpeace have been running a campaign claiming that breathing
:29:27. > :29:28.London's air is the equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day.
:29:29. > :29:34.If you smoke 15 cigarettes a day through your adult life,
:29:35. > :29:36.that will definitely take ten years off your life expectancy.
:29:37. > :29:39.If you are poor and you are in social class five,
:29:40. > :29:41.compared to social class one, that would take seven
:29:42. > :29:46.If you are poor and you smoke, that will take 17 years off your life.
:29:47. > :29:49.Now, we are talking about possibly, if we could get rid of all
:29:50. > :29:52.of the cars in London and all of the road transport,
:29:53. > :29:55.we could make a difference of two micrograms per metre squared in air
:29:56. > :30:00.pollution which might save you 30 days of your life.
:30:01. > :30:03.There is no doubt that air pollution is bad for you,
:30:04. > :30:06.but if we exaggerate the scale of the problem and the impact
:30:07. > :30:09.on our health, are we at risk of undermining the case for making
:30:10. > :30:19.And we are joined now by the Executive Director
:30:20. > :30:38.You have called pollution and national crisis and a health
:30:39. > :30:42.emergency. Around the UK are levels increasing or falling? They are
:30:43. > :30:52.remaining fairly static in London. Nationally? If you look at the
:30:53. > :30:58.studies on where air pollution is measured, in 42 cities around the
:30:59. > :31:02.UK, 38 cities were found to be breaking the legal limit on air
:31:03. > :31:07.pollution so basically all of the cities were breaking the limit so if
:31:08. > :31:10.you think eight out of ten people live in cities, obviously, this is
:31:11. > :31:14.impacting a lot of people around the UK. We have looked at in missions of
:31:15. > :31:24.solvent dioxide, they have fallen and since 1970, nitrogen dioxide is
:31:25. > :31:31.down 69%. Let me show you a chart. There are the nitrogen oxides which
:31:32. > :31:35.we have all been worried about. That chart shows a substantial fall from
:31:36. > :31:40.the 1970s, and then a really steep fall from the 1980s. That is
:31:41. > :31:47.something which is getting better. You have to look at it in the round.
:31:48. > :31:55.If you look at particulates, and if you look at today's understanding of
:31:56. > :32:04.the health impact. Let's look at particulates. We have been really
:32:05. > :32:09.worried about what they have been doing to our abilities to breathe
:32:10. > :32:14.good air, again, you see substantial improvement. Indeed, we are not far
:32:15. > :32:22.from the Gothenberg level which is a very high standard. What you see is
:32:23. > :32:28.it is pretty flat. I see it coming down quite substantially. Over the
:32:29. > :32:31.last decade it is pretty flat. If you look at the World Health
:32:32. > :32:36.Organisation guidelines, actually, these are at serious levels and they
:32:37. > :32:40.need to come down. We know the impact, particularly on children, if
:32:41. > :32:43.you look at what is happening to children and children's lungs, if
:32:44. > :32:49.you look at the impact of asthma and other impacts on children in cities
:32:50. > :32:52.and in schools next to main roads where pollution levels are very
:32:53. > :32:57.high, the impact of very serious. You have many doctors, professors
:32:58. > :33:03.and many studies by London University showing this to be true.
:33:04. > :33:07.The thing is, we do not want pollution. If we can get rid of
:33:08. > :33:12.pollution, let's do it. And also we also have to get rid of CO2 which is
:33:13. > :33:16.causing climate change. We are talking air pollution at the moment.
:33:17. > :33:20.The point is there is not still more to do, it is clear there is and
:33:21. > :33:25.there is no question about that, my question is you seem to deny that we
:33:26. > :33:30.have made any kind of progress and that you also say that air pollution
:33:31. > :33:37.causes 40,000 deaths a year in the UK, that is not true. The figure is
:33:38. > :33:46.40,000 premature deaths is what has been talked about by medical staff.
:33:47. > :33:51.Your website said courses. It causes premature deaths. What we are
:33:52. > :33:56.talking about here is can we solve the problem of air pollution? If air
:33:57. > :34:01.pollution is mainly being caused by diesel vehicles then we need to
:34:02. > :34:04.phase out diesel vehicles. If there are alternatives and clean Turner
:34:05. > :34:08.tips which will give better quality of air, better quality of life and
:34:09. > :34:12.clean up our cities, then why don't we take the chance to do it? You had
:34:13. > :34:19.the Australian High Commissioner on this programme earlier. He said to
:34:20. > :34:25.me earlier, why is your government supporting diesel? That is the most
:34:26. > :34:31.polluting form of transport. That may well be right but I am looking
:34:32. > :34:37.at Greenpeace's claims. You claim it causes 40,000 deaths, it is a figure
:34:38. > :34:42.which regularly appears. Let me quote the committee on the medical
:34:43. > :34:52.effects of air pollutants, it says this calculation, 40,000 which is
:34:53. > :34:55.everywhere in Greenpeace literature, is not an estimate of the number of
:34:56. > :34:59.people whose untimely death is caused entirely by air pollution,
:35:00. > :35:04.but a way of representing the effect across the whole population of air
:35:05. > :35:09.pollution when considered as a contributory factor to many more
:35:10. > :35:19.individual deaths. It is 40,000 premature deaths. It could be
:35:20. > :35:22.premature by a couple of days. It could me by a year. -- it could be
:35:23. > :35:24.by a year. It could also be giving children asthma and breathing
:35:25. > :35:33.difficulties. We are talking about deaths. It could also cause stroke
:35:34. > :35:42.and heart diseases. Medical experts say we need to deal with this. Do
:35:43. > :35:50.you believe air pollution causes 40,000 deaths a year. I have defined
:35:51. > :36:00.that. You accept it does not? It leads to 40,000 premature deaths.
:36:01. > :36:04.But 40,000 people are not killed. You say air pollution causes 40,000
:36:05. > :36:09.deaths each year on your website. I have just explained what I mean by
:36:10. > :36:13.that in terms of premature deaths. The question is, are we going to do
:36:14. > :36:18.something about that? Air pollution is a serious problem. It is mainly
:36:19. > :36:22.caused by diesel. If we phased diesel out it will solve the problem
:36:23. > :36:27.of air pollution and deal with the wider problem of climate change. I
:36:28. > :36:35.am not talking about climate change this morning. Let's link to another
:36:36. > :36:40.claim... Do you want to live in a clean city? Do you want to breathe
:36:41. > :36:45.clean air? Yes, don't generalise. Let's stick to your claims. You have
:36:46. > :36:50.also said living in London on your life is equivalent to smoking 50
:36:51. > :36:57.cigarettes a day. That is not true either. What I would say is if you
:36:58. > :36:59.look at passive smoking, it is the equivalent of I don't know what the
:37:00. > :37:03.actual figure is, I can't remember offhand, but it is the equivalent
:37:04. > :37:09.effect of about ten cigarettes being smoked passively. The question is in
:37:10. > :37:15.terms of, you are just throwing me out all of these things... I am
:37:16. > :37:19.throwing things that Greenpeace have claimed. Greenpeace have claimed
:37:20. > :37:24.that living in London is equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day and
:37:25. > :37:27.that takes ten years off your life. Professor Froome made it clear to us
:37:28. > :37:31.that living in London your whole life with levels of pollution does
:37:32. > :37:36.take time off your life but it takes nine months of your life. Nine
:37:37. > :37:40.months is still too much, I understand that, but it is not ten
:37:41. > :37:44.years and that is what you claim. I would suggest you realise that is a
:37:45. > :37:49.piece of propaganda because you claim on the website, you have taken
:37:50. > :37:52.it down. I agree it has been corrected and I agree with what the
:37:53. > :37:58.professor said that maybe it takes up to a year off your life, but the
:37:59. > :38:02.thing is, there are much more wider issues as well, in terms of the
:38:03. > :38:08.impact on air pollution, and in terms of the impact on young
:38:09. > :38:12.children. We can argue about the facts... But these are your claims,
:38:13. > :38:17.this is why I am hitting it to you. It does not get away from the
:38:18. > :38:21.underlying issue that air pollution is a serious problem. We are not
:38:22. > :38:26.arguing for a moment that it is not. Do you think the way you exaggerate
:38:27. > :38:31.things, put false claims, in the end, for of course we all agree
:38:32. > :38:37.with, getting the best air we can, you undermine your credibility? I
:38:38. > :38:40.absolutely do not support false claims and if mistakes have been
:38:41. > :38:45.made then mistakes have been made and they will be corrected. I think
:38:46. > :38:49.the key issue is how we are going to deal with air pollution. Clearly,
:38:50. > :38:56.diesel is the biggest problem and we need to work out a way how we can
:38:57. > :38:59.get away from diesel as quickly and fast as possible. Comeback and see
:39:00. > :39:01.us in the New Year and we will discuss diesel. Thank you.
:39:02. > :39:04.It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:39:05. > :39:13.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now
:39:14. > :39:15.Hello, you're watching the Sunday Politics
:39:16. > :39:20.Today, we're looking forward to a party as Hull becomes
:39:21. > :39:27.It's your year, go out and enjoy it, you know.
:39:28. > :39:33.So what can a year of arts events do to trigger
:39:34. > :39:36.regeneration and attract new investment?
:39:37. > :39:39.Not just to Hull but to the entire region.
:39:40. > :39:43.How much is it all costing and who will be on the guest list?
:39:44. > :39:45.Well, I look forward to the opportunity to come to Hull.
:39:46. > :39:49.It's great that it's going to be hosting this City of Culture.
:39:50. > :39:53.I think it's going to bring huge benefits to the local area.
:39:54. > :39:56.Yes, even the Prime Minister is planning a visit and it all
:39:57. > :40:01.Our guests today are Alan Johnson,
:40:02. > :40:03.MP for Hull West and Hessle, of course,
:40:04. > :40:08.Martin Green is the chief executive and director of the Hull 2017 team
:40:09. > :40:12.and Anita Pace chairs the local bondholders which markets the Humber
:40:13. > :40:15.to a national and international stage.
:40:16. > :40:20.Well, let's catch up on the story so far.
:40:21. > :40:23.How did Hull become UK City of Culture?
:40:24. > :40:26.What does it hope to achieve and what can it
:40:27. > :40:33.Our culture correspondent Annemarie Tasker has been finding out.
:40:34. > :40:38.The UK City of Culture 2017 is Hull. CHEERING
:40:39. > :40:41.When that announcement was made three years ago,
:40:42. > :40:45.After all, the City Council had promised winning would boost
:40:46. > :40:52.A promise based on the returns culture brought to another city
:40:53. > :40:59.The idea of having a UK City of Culture was born here
:41:00. > :41:08.in Liverpool which, as European capital of culture in 2008,
:41:09. > :41:12.saw visitors and investment come flooding in.
:41:13. > :41:15.Liverpool got huge events and huge development.
:41:16. > :41:21.Organisers say the visitor economy doubled to more than ?4 billion.
:41:22. > :41:24.The year's director and former TV producer Phil Redmond saw the
:41:25. > :41:30.to set up the UK's own cultural title.
:41:31. > :41:33.I said to Andy Burnham, when he was then Culture Secretary, well,
:41:34. > :41:35.if it worked for Liverpool, is could work elsewhere.
:41:36. > :41:40.Instead of waiting, at the time I think it was another 30 years
:41:41. > :41:42.for European capital of culture to come back,
:41:43. > :41:48.Every four years, let's get everybody to focus on one city.
:41:49. > :41:52.The first UK City of Culture was Derry Londonderry.
:41:53. > :41:58.It comes with no funding whatsoever, instead the hope visit
:41:59. > :42:07.After lobbying from Hull's MPs, the Chancellor gave the city
:42:08. > :42:12.?13 million in the last budget to create a cultural legacy.
:42:13. > :42:14.We were very conscious that other parts of the country,
:42:15. > :42:18.particularly Manchester, were getting money around the arts
:42:19. > :42:21.and we thought that actually money should be
:42:22. > :42:25.coming into our city so we lobbied very hard.
:42:26. > :42:26.Certainly, Alan Johnson had meetings with the Chancellor
:42:27. > :42:30.at that time and I was raising in Parliament with ministers
:42:31. > :42:34.to say that we need some more money to make this a real success.
:42:35. > :42:39.In 2014, the Government-funded Arts Council England
:42:40. > :42:43.gave institutions in London ?69 per head of population
:42:44. > :42:48.Redressing the balance, it says it's getting
:42:49. > :42:54.Hull's arts organisations and museums prepare for 2017.
:42:55. > :42:57.But with the country in debt and struggling
:42:58. > :42:59.to fund hospitals and adult social care,
:43:00. > :43:05.should money be spent on an arts event at all?
:43:06. > :43:08.The impact that the city are looking for is an
:43:09. > :43:09.economic growth impact, isn't it, over time?
:43:10. > :43:12.And with economic growth, they'll be able to grow their tax
:43:13. > :43:16.base and they'll be able to put more into solving some of those problems,
:43:17. > :43:19.You know, this is going to significantly boost tourism
:43:20. > :43:20.for the year itself, it's going to
:43:21. > :43:22.significantly improve the profile of the city.
:43:23. > :43:24.You know, inward investors who perhaps have
:43:25. > :43:27.never even heard of Hull will notice it for the first time, we'll see
:43:28. > :43:33.And I think that we will see, as we've seen in places
:43:34. > :43:35.like Liverpool and Glasgow, that there is a long-term transformation.
:43:36. > :43:41.The investment in culture in terms of increasing people's ability to
:43:42. > :43:44.talk to each other, to build, to have confidence, ambition only
:43:45. > :43:49.to move on is infinitesimal compared to the amount
:43:50. > :43:51.of cash we really need to resolve
:43:52. > :43:54.the issues in the national health and education.
:43:55. > :43:56.And ironically, the more you can engage people
:43:57. > :43:59.in cultural activities, creativity activities, you actually
:44:00. > :44:03.reduce the social problems that education and health and the
:44:04. > :44:10.But will culture bring a new dawn in Hull?
:44:11. > :44:16.The proof of that will only come after the sun has set on 2017.
:44:17. > :44:22.Alan Johnson, I remember when Hull was announced as UK City of Culture.
:44:23. > :44:27.You know, there were one or two eyebrows raised,
:44:28. > :44:31.one or two sniggers at the prospect of Hull
:44:32. > :44:34.one or two sniggers at the prospect of Hull becoming UK City of Culture.
:44:35. > :44:41.Not in terms of its rich cultural heritage, but what you have
:44:42. > :44:44.to understand about our bid, and the reason why I think it was
:44:45. > :44:46.successful, there were another 14 cities who
:44:47. > :44:53.is because City Council under Steve Brady placed
:44:54. > :44:58.There was a wider plan to regenerate Hull, to get more jobs
:44:59. > :45:01.in, to improve the economy and City of Culture was a facet of that.
:45:02. > :45:06.It was part of an overall plan and I think in that sense,
:45:07. > :45:08.we didn't have to trade on our rich heritage.
:45:09. > :45:09.Andrew Marvell, William Wilberforce, Stevie Smith,
:45:10. > :45:15.What we had to demonstrate was that we would
:45:16. > :45:17.use culture as part of our economic redevelopment.
:45:18. > :45:20.Martin Green, I know you've been involved with a number
:45:21. > :45:25.Is there a clear economic legacy for Hull?
:45:26. > :45:28.Because that's the word we always use, don't we, when we talk
:45:29. > :45:33.And we'll spend next year monitoring that.
:45:34. > :45:37.You can see it in the city already, more small businesses
:45:38. > :45:40.have opened in the last couple of years, our tourism figures
:45:41. > :45:44.are up which is actually bucking a national trend.
:45:45. > :45:46.So it's not just about that year, it's been happening
:45:47. > :45:50.since we won the bid and it will continue for a long time after
:45:51. > :45:54.because like Alan says, the intelligence that this council did
:45:55. > :45:58.was they put culture with an a realm of other facets and when they all
:45:59. > :46:04.Anita Pace, do you think City of Culture will change many people's
:46:05. > :46:10.I absolutely think it well and there's proven
:46:11. > :46:14.When you look back at what happened with Glasgow
:46:15. > :46:16.and Liverpool as European capitals of culture,
:46:17. > :46:19.that their images have changed as a result of what happened
:46:20. > :46:26.And we know that through that constant drip feed of media
:46:27. > :46:28.coverage, there will be a change in people's
:46:29. > :46:32.People are actually going to be talking
:46:33. > :46:35.about Hull in a way that it's never been
:46:36. > :46:37.talked about before, so that
:46:38. > :46:39.constant coverage in the media will,
:46:40. > :46:43.over a period of time, make an absolute difference
:46:44. > :46:47.be thinking about Hull in a different way.
:46:48. > :46:50.Yeah, the Today programme on Radio 4 is coming here
:46:51. > :46:53.I mean, when you look at arts funding,
:46:54. > :46:55.London, of course, gets a huge chunk of money.
:46:56. > :46:58.The North gets the crumbs from the table.
:46:59. > :47:02.We are, and that's the point that's been made
:47:03. > :47:07.consistently and here's where City of Culture can really change things
:47:08. > :47:10.because, thanks to the hard work of Martin and his team,
:47:11. > :47:13.we are bringing up the London Philharmonic,
:47:14. > :47:16.we're bringing up the Turner prize, the BBC -
:47:17. > :47:19.your employer, Tim - put an awful lot of effort
:47:20. > :47:22.into this, so people are coming and seeing Hull
:47:23. > :47:32.and, as Martin says, there has to be a legacy
:47:33. > :47:35.to that so it's not just a one-year -
:47:36. > :47:38.brilliant though that would be - this is about our future.
:47:39. > :47:39.Will it change, Martin Green, that disparity?
:47:40. > :47:42.The fact that London and the South East get so much money
:47:43. > :47:47.Will more money floods up the M1, not just to Hull but to other
:47:48. > :47:51.We've got to investigate this argument a little bit.
:47:52. > :47:54.The article is have put currently 4 or ?5 million into
:47:55. > :47:59.this city for City of Culture and it's part of a legacy programme.
:48:00. > :48:02.Successful applications from artist in the city
:48:03. > :48:05.to the Arts Council have gone up by 400%,
:48:06. > :48:07.so as a stimulus tool, it's working.
:48:08. > :48:10.I would also say this, we need to be very careful
:48:11. > :48:18.It's turned into an either/or conversation and it cannot be.
:48:19. > :48:20.It must be an "as well as" conversation.
:48:21. > :48:23.No one's saying that London should have less education or health
:48:24. > :48:26.provision, why should it have less arts so we can have more?
:48:27. > :48:30.Anita Pace, when you talk to people in Hull on the street,
:48:31. > :48:33.in the pubs, on the housing estates, is everybody as
:48:34. > :48:36.enthusiastic about City of Culture as you lot are or do some people
:48:37. > :48:41.still see it as a cultural jamboree for a bunch of luvvies?
:48:42. > :48:43.I think the message is reaching out
:48:44. > :48:50.I think Martin and his team are doing an excellent job
:48:51. > :48:52.taking the City of Culture out to the council estates,
:48:53. > :48:56.Because it is a community wide celebration
:48:57. > :49:00.There is a sense of optimism, there's no question,
:49:01. > :49:02.but that optimism is building and you can feel it
:49:03. > :49:06.as we are approaching the 1st of January.
:49:07. > :49:08.So, whenever you get an event on the scale, many people
:49:09. > :49:13.ask, what's it going to cost, who's going to pay for it and what
:49:14. > :49:18.Sarah Sanderson has been trying to answer some of
:49:19. > :49:28.The orange barriers in Hull city centre have become a common sight.
:49:29. > :49:31.The construction work is part of the public realm
:49:32. > :49:36.improvement project that's been ongoing for some time.
:49:37. > :49:39.This was always going to happen, but the City of Culture title
:49:40. > :49:45.It's costing nearly ?25 million and the money has come from
:49:46. > :49:50.This is money which is put aside to acquire
:49:51. > :49:53.and upgrade land and buildings.
:49:54. > :49:59.So how much has the council spent on the City of Culture?
:50:00. > :50:01.Well, it handed over ?3.6 million from its revenue budget.
:50:02. > :50:04.That's the part of money used for day-to-day costs such as bin
:50:05. > :50:09.And that investment has then attracted
:50:10. > :50:11.funding from elsewhere, bringing the total raised
:50:12. > :50:16.for City of Culture to ?32 million.
:50:17. > :50:20.61 partners have pledged financial support all in all
:50:21. > :50:27.And the Hull East MP says this shows real
:50:28. > :50:30.It's great to see people working together,
:50:31. > :50:31.communities, volunteers coming forward.
:50:32. > :50:34.You know, I'm on the train regularly and you hear people saying
:50:35. > :50:36.they're visiting Hull for a City of Culture,
:50:37. > :50:41.pre-City of Culture event, so people are talking about us,
:50:42. > :50:46.During the year, I think there's going to be over a million visitors
:50:47. > :50:50.The culture company which was designed
:50:51. > :50:54.to deliver the Hull 2017 programme says that
:50:55. > :50:55.everyone in the city will have an opportunity
:50:56. > :51:01.It says 68% of the money will be dedicated to public activities and a
:51:02. > :51:04.further 11% spent on ensuring that the City of Culture legacy
:51:05. > :51:11.And for the first time, several fund investors have
:51:12. > :51:14.approached Hull themselves, showing an interest in
:51:15. > :51:17.putting their money against potential future projects
:51:18. > :51:22.I think this follows a lot of investment
:51:23. > :51:27.so Siemens, Reckitt Benckiser - now known as RB - smith, etc.
:51:28. > :51:30.Also, the UK City of Culture which is also sponsored by
:51:31. > :51:32.some very big global companies as well.
:51:33. > :51:35.So we've actually achieved, through City of Culture, we've
:51:36. > :51:39.entered the global stage and we kind of got interest now from people
:51:40. > :51:42.thinking, I'd like a slice of what's going on in Hull.
:51:43. > :51:46.Meanwhile, the Prime Minister says she's full of
:51:47. > :51:52.I look forward to the opportunity to come to Hull.
:51:53. > :51:55.It's great that it's going to be hosting the
:51:56. > :51:58.I think it's going to bring huge benefits to local area.
:51:59. > :52:01.We're already seeing, obviously, money
:52:02. > :52:04.being invested in the local area and I'm sure it's going to be
:52:05. > :52:10.There's hope now that the tide is turning for Hull's fortunes
:52:11. > :52:18.Well, were also joined now by Stephen Brady,
:52:19. > :52:24.We've heard very that there are big financial investors
:52:25. > :52:30.Tell us more, what sort of projects will they be putting money into?
:52:31. > :52:33.Well, I think at the moment, with talks going on in
:52:34. > :52:38.the background, I don't think it's for me to divulge at this stage.
:52:39. > :52:44.No, no, no, it's confidentiality and I think
:52:45. > :52:48.there will be many a surprise along the way, good surprises.
:52:49. > :52:50.Which is what we've wanted for Hull people
:52:51. > :52:55.Now, the City Council has spent ?3.5 million
:52:56. > :53:01.Some may suggest that isn't a good use of council money
:53:02. > :53:04.when there are so many other priorities out there,
:53:05. > :53:11.Well, this 3.5 million invested initially has had a return
:53:12. > :53:16.straightaway of over ?32 million and that's all credit
:53:17. > :53:22.But the money that's been invested has given
:53:23. > :53:27.People are confident themselves in Hull that
:53:28. > :53:33.things are getting better and we want that to be long and sustained
:53:34. > :53:38.growth and it's already beginning to happen in Hull.
:53:39. > :53:41.If I can ask you, Alan Johnson, is it right that we're
:53:42. > :53:43.funding arts and culture from the public purse
:53:44. > :53:53.Culture cannot regenerate the city by itself,
:53:54. > :53:56.but it's a very powerful tool along with the Siemens
:53:57. > :53:58.investment, along with the investment in Reckitt Benckiser,
:53:59. > :54:04.I mean, this city is attracting more investment, as the CBI
:54:05. > :54:07.pointed out on Monday, than any other place in Britain, so, of
:54:08. > :54:14.course, you have to invest to accumulate and invest to save
:54:15. > :54:17.further down the track, so it's a very important part of what the
:54:18. > :54:20.And of course, it's capital money, it's not revenue.
:54:21. > :54:23.Anita Pace, one of the traditional problems in Hull when you see to
:54:24. > :54:30.many businesses is that people don't spend their money here in the city.
:54:31. > :54:32.They'll go out to Leeds, to York, to Meadowhall...
:54:33. > :54:34.Will City of Culture overcome that, do you believe?
:54:35. > :54:37.I sincerely hope so because I think what City of Culture will do
:54:38. > :54:41.And it might be for the first time and hopefully
:54:42. > :54:43.they'll come and they'll experience something
:54:44. > :54:44.that will be positive and that will
:54:45. > :54:46.encourage them to come back again.
:54:47. > :54:48.You're right, we do have some problems in Hull.
:54:49. > :54:53.But, as Alan said, there's a huge amount of investment.
:54:54. > :54:56.People are starting to set up and take notice of what's
:54:57. > :54:59.happening here on the east coast and I think this
:55:00. > :55:01.is just going to be a catalyst for change
:55:02. > :55:04.with the city and it's the start of a new chapter
:55:05. > :55:08.and I think we will see things change in a good way.
:55:09. > :55:10.Martin Green, you've had one or two teething problems,
:55:11. > :55:13.There's a massive fireworks display on New Year's Day.
:55:14. > :55:15.When those tickets were offered to the public,
:55:16. > :55:19.How confident are you you're not going to have
:55:20. > :55:24.Well, the website's been used heavily ever since then
:55:25. > :55:32.You know, this is a new project, we're building new products.
:55:33. > :55:35.Could have made a website to last us 365 days.
:55:36. > :55:39.Build a digital project that will last for many, many years
:55:40. > :55:41.and I'd rather have the teething problems and have a legacy
:55:42. > :55:47.than just build something that we throw away.
:55:48. > :56:02.Steve Brady, when we arrived at the city today,
:56:03. > :56:04.there's still a lot of work going on.
:56:05. > :56:06.There are orange barriers up, there are men
:56:07. > :56:09.digging up the pavements, is Hull going to be ready on time?
:56:10. > :56:11.Well, I was in Manchester on Wednesday and
:56:12. > :56:14.I've never seen so many barriers in all my life and that is
:56:15. > :56:17.But Manchester's not City of Culture in
:56:18. > :56:20.I'm just trying to tell you, wherever you go,
:56:21. > :56:21.whether it be Leeds, Manchester, London,
:56:22. > :56:23.you will see barriers up and the reason
:56:24. > :56:25.barriers are up is because they are doing something
:56:26. > :56:27.positive, that they are doing something for the future.
:56:28. > :56:30.And in Hull, yes, I'll be glad to do the
:56:31. > :56:32.back barriers because, you know, you do get
:56:33. > :56:34.the frustrations and rightly so, people are frustrated by it, but
:56:35. > :56:37.I'm glad to say that over the next few weeks,
:56:38. > :56:39.the barriers will be disappearing and people will see
:56:40. > :56:41.a beautiful new city centre that's going
:56:42. > :56:43.to be a great credit to the city,
:56:44. > :56:45.that's going to bring in businesses.
:56:46. > :56:49.40 new businesses have moved into the city centre in the
:56:50. > :56:55.last year, so we're going to see increasing amounts of businesses
:56:56. > :57:00.looking at the opportunities and I'm very confident about the future.
:57:01. > :57:10.Obviously, I'll be pleased when people aren't
:57:11. > :57:11.having a little dig as they're passing,
:57:12. > :57:16.about the barriers and, you know, I think we might keep one
:57:17. > :57:19.just for old times sake so that we can look up and see
:57:20. > :57:23.Well, let's get a taster now of some of the events
:57:24. > :57:32.The BBC's face of Hull for City of Culture year
:57:33. > :57:36.Now, he's got a round-up of some of the events
:57:37. > :57:51.I'm Kofi Smiles and welcome to Hull, the UK City of Culture for 2017.
:57:52. > :57:55.It's a national celebration of arts, culture, which takes place
:57:56. > :57:59.in a different host city every four years.
:58:00. > :58:04.There's so much going on and I'm just so excited.
:58:05. > :58:06.The Humber Bridge is going to be turned into
:58:07. > :58:09.a giant musical instrument by Opera North.
:58:10. > :58:16.Hull will host the Turner prize, Women of the World Festival,
:58:17. > :58:20.The No Limits learning programme is going to inspire
:58:21. > :58:24.Plus, some of our regular local events like the Hull folk and
:58:25. > :58:26.Maritime Festival, the Humber Street sesh, and the Freedom Festival
:58:27. > :58:29.are getting super-sized for 2017, making them
:58:30. > :58:35.bigger and better than they already are.
:58:36. > :58:51.That was the BBC's face of Hull, Kofi Smiles, there.
:58:52. > :58:53.Well, let me ask you all, give us one highlight.
:58:54. > :58:55.Why should people come to Hull next year?
:58:56. > :58:58.People watching us maybe in Rotherham or in Halifax
:58:59. > :59:01.or in Bradford or in Doncaster, why should they come to Hull?
:59:02. > :59:04.Well, I think after two years of planning,
:59:05. > :59:07.I'm looking forward to the first thing we do,
:59:08. > :59:08.our opening event, Made In Hull.
:59:09. > :59:09.It's a projection and sound installation
:59:10. > :59:13.right the way through the city centre and runs for seven nights
:59:14. > :59:15.from the first to the 7th of January.
:59:16. > :59:19.And tells the story of the city, so that people who live here
:59:20. > :59:22.can remember fond memories of people who are coming here for the first
:59:23. > :59:25.time can get an education of what this city has done
:59:26. > :59:33.Tonnes I'm looking forward to, but particularly John Grant.
:59:34. > :59:35.I think he made the best album of the last decade,
:59:36. > :59:39.He's coming here for four days to do...
:59:40. > :59:41.He's an American, but he's part of a Nordic Festival here
:59:42. > :59:43.and I'm really looking forward to that.
:59:44. > :59:48.I'm a music fan, so for me, quite tiny actually,
:59:49. > :59:55.Looking forward to that and it's probably just worth
:59:56. > :59:59.acknowledging as well that the US ambassador this week has declared
:00:00. > :00:02.Hull the best place, the best city to visit in the UK
:00:03. > :00:05.and that after visiting 125 cities over 3.5 years,
:00:06. > :00:07.so there's obviously something worth seeing here.
:00:08. > :00:10.I saw that, he's a big fan of the Venn diagram
:00:11. > :00:16.And one of our big art projects is that we've completely repainted
:00:17. > :00:19.the Drypool bridge as a tribute to Venn by a local
:00:20. > :00:22.artist and that is unveiled in the next few weeks.
:00:23. > :00:26.Steve Brady, what's your highlights next year?
:00:27. > :00:29.I think the opening of the art gallery
:00:30. > :00:32.and the new theatre, well loved theatre.
:00:33. > :00:38.And I think people will be really, you know, pleased when they
:00:39. > :00:44.see the new, revamped theatre and some wonderful
:00:45. > :00:51.And, obviously, maybe a combo the new barriers
:00:52. > :00:58.that are going in around all the works
:00:59. > :01:02.So, Martin Green, if wished it here next year, how will
:01:03. > :01:04.the success of City of Culture be judged?
:01:05. > :01:09.Well, you'll measure it in facts and figures, in economic benefits,
:01:10. > :01:11.in the amount of visitors, in what businesses are reporting
:01:12. > :01:14.so will have facts and figures, but also you'll
:01:15. > :01:22.Events like this make cities very proud and
:01:23. > :01:25.proud cities are confident cities and confident cities can do anything
:01:26. > :01:28.Of course, the big question we want to know, Alan,
:01:29. > :01:30.is are you going to be bringing your guitar?
:01:31. > :01:32.Are you going to be performing next year?
:01:33. > :01:35.Well, I've been asked by many impresarios to do that.
:01:36. > :01:37.The Spiders From Mars are coming, of course,
:01:38. > :01:40.three of them came from Hull, and they're talking to me
:01:41. > :01:46.about whether I could replace Bowie who sadly died this year.
:01:47. > :01:48.And I'm just chewing it over at the moment.
:01:49. > :01:52.Well, I might bring my ukelele and come and join you.
:01:53. > :01:54.Anyway, thank you all for your thoughts today.
:01:55. > :01:55.This has been the Sunday Politics
:01:56. > :01:59.Thanks very much to the Spencer Group for letting us use
:02:00. > :02:02.their balcony today and before we hand back to Andrew Neil in
:02:03. > :02:04.London, I will of course wish you a very happy Christmas
:02:05. > :02:17.on behalf of all the team and we'll see you in 2017.
:02:18. > :02:21.Will Article 50 be triggered by the end of March,
:02:22. > :02:24.will President Trump start work on his wall and will
:02:25. > :02:29.Front National's Marine Le Pen provide the next electoral shock?
:02:30. > :02:51.2016, the Brexit for Britain and Trump for the rest of the world.
:02:52. > :02:55.Let's look back and see what one of you said about Brexit.
:02:56. > :02:58.If Mr Cameron loses the referendum and it is this year,
:02:59. > :03:01.will he be Prime Minister at the end of the year?
:03:02. > :03:07.I don't think he will lose the referendum, so I'm feeling
:03:08. > :03:16.It was clear if he did lose the referendum he would be out. I would
:03:17. > :03:21.like to say in retrospect I saw that coming on a long and I was just
:03:22. > :03:27.saying it to make good television! It is Christmas so I will be benign
:03:28. > :03:33.towards my panel! It is possible, Iain, that not much happens to
:03:34. > :03:36.Brexit in 2017, because we have a host of elections coming up in
:03:37. > :03:39.Europe, the French won in the spring and the German one in the autumn
:03:40. > :03:44.will be the most important. And until we know who the next French
:03:45. > :03:50.president is and what condition Mrs Merkel will be in, not much will
:03:51. > :03:55.happen? I think that is the likeliest outcome. Short of some
:03:56. > :04:02.constitutional crisis involving the Lords relating to Brexit, it is
:04:03. > :04:06.pretty clear it is difficult to properly begin the negotiations
:04:07. > :04:10.until it becomes clear who Britain is negotiating with. It will come
:04:11. > :04:13.down to the result of the German election. Germany is the biggest
:04:14. > :04:18.contributor and if they keep power in what is left of the European
:04:19. > :04:24.Union, will drive the negotiation and we will have to see if it will
:04:25. > :04:29.be Merkel. So this vacuum that has been seen and has been filled by
:04:30. > :04:32.people less than friendly to the government, even when we know
:04:33. > :04:37.Article 50 has been triggered and even if there is some sort of white
:04:38. > :04:42.paper to give us a better idea of the broad strategic outlines of what
:04:43. > :04:49.they mean by Brexit, the phoney war could continue? Iain is right. 2017
:04:50. > :04:56.is going to be a remarkably dull year for Brexit as opposed to 2016.
:04:57. > :05:01.We will have the article and a plan. The plan will say I would like the
:05:02. > :05:05.moon on a stick please. The EU will say you can have a tiny bit of moon
:05:06. > :05:11.and a tiny bit of stick and there will be an impasse. That will go on
:05:12. > :05:17.until one minute to midnight 2018 which is when the EU will act. There
:05:18. > :05:22.is one thing in the Foreign Office which is more important, as David
:05:23. > :05:25.Davis Department told me, they know there is nothing they can do until
:05:26. > :05:30.the French and Germans have their elections and they know the lie of
:05:31. > :05:34.the land, but the people who will be more helpful to us are in Eastern
:05:35. > :05:38.Europe and in Scandinavia, the Nordic countries. We can do quite a
:05:39. > :05:43.lot of schmoozing to try and get them broadly on side this year? It
:05:44. > :05:47.is very difficult because one of the things they care most about in
:05:48. > :05:52.Eastern Europe is the ability for Eastern European stew come and work
:05:53. > :05:56.in the UK. That is key to the economic prospects. But what they
:05:57. > :06:01.care most about is that those already here should not be under any
:06:02. > :06:07.pressure to leave. There is no guarantee of that. That is what Mrs
:06:08. > :06:11.May wants. There are a lot of things Mrs May wants and the story of 2017
:06:12. > :06:16.will be about what she gets. How much have we got to give people? It
:06:17. > :06:22.is not what we want, but what we are willing to give. The interesting
:06:23. > :06:25.thing is you can divide this out into two. There is a question of the
:06:26. > :06:33.European Union and our relationship with it but there is also the trick
:06:34. > :06:38.the polls did to London -- there is also the polls. There is question
:06:39. > :06:42.beyond the Western European security, that is about Nato and
:06:43. > :06:48.intelligence and security, and the rising Russian threat. That does not
:06:49. > :06:53.mean the Polish people will persuade everyone else to give us a lovely
:06:54. > :06:58.deal on the EU, but the dynamic is bigger than just a chat about
:06:59. > :07:01.Brexit. You cannot threaten a punishment beating for us if we are
:07:02. > :07:06.putting our soldiers on the line on the eastern borders of Europe. I
:07:07. > :07:11.think that's where Donald Trump changes the calculation because his
:07:12. > :07:19.attitude towards Russia is very different to Barack Obama's. It is
:07:20. > :07:23.indeed. Mentioning Russia, Brexit was a global story but nothing can
:07:24. > :07:28.match and American election and even one which gives Donald Trump as
:07:29. > :07:31.well. Let's have a look at what this panel was saying about Donald Trump.
:07:32. > :07:33.Will Donald Trump win the Republican nomination next year.
:07:34. > :07:46.So, not only did you think he would not be president, you did not think
:07:47. > :07:51.he would win the Republican nomination. We were not alone in
:07:52. > :07:56.that. And they're right put forward a motion to abolish punditry here
:07:57. > :08:01.now because clearly we are pointless! There is enough
:08:02. > :08:05.unemployment in the world already! We are moving into huge and charted
:08:06. > :08:10.territory with Donald Trump as president. It is incredibly
:08:11. > :08:17.unpredictable. But what has not been noticed enough is the Keynesian won.
:08:18. > :08:24.Trump is a Keynesian. He wants massive infrastructure spending and
:08:25. > :08:29.massive tax cuts. The big story next year will be the massive reflation
:08:30. > :08:35.of the American economy and indeed the US Federal reserve has already
:08:36. > :08:41.reacted to that by putting up interest rates. That is why he has a
:08:42. > :08:44.big fight with the rest of the Republican Party. He is nominally a
:08:45. > :08:50.Republican but they are not Keynesian. They are when it comes to
:08:51. > :08:54.tax cuts. They are when it hits the rich to benefit the poor. The big
:08:55. > :08:58.thing is whether the infrastructure projects land him in crony trouble.
:08:59. > :09:03.The transparency around who gets those will be extremely difficult.
:09:04. > :09:08.Most of the infrastructure spending he thinks can be done by the private
:09:09. > :09:15.sector and not the federal government. His tax cuts overlap the
:09:16. > :09:19.Republican house tax cuts speaker Ryan to give not all, but a fair
:09:20. > :09:24.chunk of what he wants. If the American economy is going to reflate
:09:25. > :09:29.next year, interest rates will rise in America, that will strengthen the
:09:30. > :09:34.dollar and it will mean that Europe will be, it will find it more
:09:35. > :09:37.difficult to finance its sovereign debt because you will get more money
:09:38. > :09:44.by investing in American sovereign debt. That is a good point because
:09:45. > :09:49.the dynamics will shift. If that happens, Trump will be pretty
:09:50. > :09:55.popular in the US. To begin with. To begin with. It is energy
:09:56. > :10:01.self-sufficient and if you can pull off the biggest trick in American
:10:02. > :10:06.politics which is somehow to via corporation tax cuts to allow the
:10:07. > :10:10.reassuring of wealth, because it is too expensive for American business
:10:11. > :10:13.to take back into the US and reinvest, if you combine all of
:10:14. > :10:20.those things together, you will end up with a boom on a scale you have
:10:21. > :10:25.not seen. It will be Reagan on steroids? What could possibly go
:10:26. > :10:30.wrong? In the short term for Britain, it is probably not bad
:10:31. > :10:34.news. Our biggest market for exports as a country is the United States.
:10:35. > :10:38.Our biggest market for foreign direct investment is the United
:10:39. > :10:42.States and the same is true vice versa for America in Britain. Given
:10:43. > :10:46.the pound is now competitive and likely the dollar will get stronger,
:10:47. > :10:52.it could well give a boost to the British economy? Could do bit you
:10:53. > :10:57.have to be slightly cautious about the warm language we are getting
:10:58. > :11:02.which is great news out of President Trump's future cabinet on doing a
:11:03. > :11:05.trade deal early, we are net exporters to the US. We benefit far
:11:06. > :11:10.more from trading with US than they do with us. I think we have to come
:11:11. > :11:15.up with something to offer the US for them to jump into bed with us. I
:11:16. > :11:26.think it is called two new aircraft carriers and modernising the fleet.
:11:27. > :11:30.Bring it on. I will raise caution, people in declining industries in
:11:31. > :11:34.some places in America, the rust belt who have faced big profound
:11:35. > :11:39.structural challenges and those are much harder to reverse. They face
:11:40. > :11:45.real problems now because the dollar is so strong. Their ability to
:11:46. > :11:48.export has taken a huge hit out of Ohio, Michigan and Illinois. And the
:11:49. > :11:55.Mexican imports into America is now dirt cheap so that is a major
:11:56. > :12:03.problem. Next year we have elections in Austria, France, the Netherlands,
:12:04. > :12:08.Germany, probably Italy. Which outcome will be the most dramatic
:12:09. > :12:16.for Brexit? If Merkel lost it would be a huge surprise. That is
:12:17. > :12:24.unlikely. And if it was not Filon in France that would be unlikely. The
:12:25. > :12:27.consensus it it will be Francois Filon against Marine Le Pen and it
:12:28. > :12:37.will be uniting around the far right candidate. In 2002, that is what
:12:38. > :12:48.happened. Filon is a Thatcherite. Marine Le Pen's politics --
:12:49. > :12:52.economics are hard left. Francois Filon is as much a cert to win as
:12:53. > :12:58.Hillary Clinton was this time last year. If he is competing against
:12:59. > :13:06.concerns about rising globalisation and his pitch is Thatcherite, it is
:13:07. > :13:12.a bold, brave strategy in the context so we will see. It will keep
:13:13. > :13:20.us busy next year, Tom? Almost as busy as this year but not quite.
:13:21. > :13:23.This year was a record year. I am up in my hours!
:13:24. > :13:25.That's all for today, thanks to all my guests.
:13:26. > :13:28.The Daily Politics will be back on BBC Two at noon tomorrow.
:13:29. > :13:30.I'll be back here on the 15th January.
:13:31. > :13:33.Remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.
:13:34. > :14:14.The most a writer can hope from a reader
:14:15. > :14:31.West Side Story took choreography in a radical new direction.
:14:32. > :14:35.The dance was woven into the storyline,