22/01/2017 Sunday Politics Yorkshire and Lincolnshire

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

Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott what Labour will do next.

Will Yorkshire and Lincolnshire need to punch above its weight

to attract Northern Powerhouse investment,

with no plans for any elected mayors this year?

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.

First, though, the Sunday Politics where you are.

Hello, you're watching the Sunday Politics for Yorkshire and

Lincolnshire. Coming up today:

With hopes for elected mayors on the ropes

how will the region fight for its fair share

We've seen no investment within Knottingley for as long as I

can remember, now, you know, there's just a decline, decline

And is President Trump a winner or a wazzock?

We've been to Lincolnshire to find out if a local

Our guests today are Clive Betts, Labour MP for Sheffield South-east,

and and Andrew Percy, Conservative MP for Brigg and Gould,

who is also the Northern Powerhouse Minister.

It's the first time you've come back to us

Is yours a world now of chauffeur driven

limos, flunkies, ambassadors receptions?

I mean, Ferrero Rocher are just everywhere.

Don't give us the product placement! If only that was the case.

No, but it's an interesting role I've taken on, and

I particularly like the local focus, I get to announce a lot of

investment in our area and am also lucky because Clive is our selective

chairman who keeps us in line and scrutinises us,

so it's a Yorkshire Minister getting scrutinised...

Or a Yorkshire and Lincolnshire Minister

getting scrutinised by a Yorkshire Labour MP, so that's good.

Clive Betts, do you think people you represent, do you think they

understand this concept of the Northern Powerhouse?

probably not.

I mean, I think it's a name they may have heard about, they're

not sure what it means, what it's going to change.

In the end what matters to them is not whether there

is a minister with that title or even whether there is a mayor

elected to do the work, it's whether there's more jobs,

whether their wages and conditions are better,

whether transport's better, where there are more skills programmes.

They are the things that really matter to people

see those come to fruition of course.

Well, we'll talk about some of those things in a moment but of

course it was David Cameron and George

course it was David Cameron and George Osborne's big project,

A proposal that would attract investment, boost the

economy and enable big northern cities to rival the success of

On the other side of the Pennines are

Manchester and Liverpool, electing their own Metro mayors this

year, securing millions of extra government money, but with no such

elections in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire this year, how will we

fight our corner? Here's Richard Edwards.

and people here are used to fighting their corner.

Out in the town, though, it's been a bruising 12 months

For more than three years the government has been

talking about giving the economy a bit more push by setting up

something called a Northern Powerhouse.

But for parents and coaches at the boxing club in the

Miners' Welfare, it's an idea that has yet to hit home.

If I was to say to you the words Northern Powerhouse,

To be honest it's a term, I've never heard of it,

I've never heard of it at all until tonight.

So if I was to say to you there's been a big push by the

government, it began under the Cameron Osborne

governments to boost the

I think I've never heard of it, I've never heard

of it before as I say, I've never seen any finances come in this

Club Steward Paul Green has heard of the powerhouse plan,

but wants politicians to call time on the talking and get

We've seen no investment within Knottingley for as long as I

can remember, now, you know, there's just a decline, decline,

People here have been hit by a series of body blows.

Ferrybridge C power station has gone,

And council cuts are beginning to bite as the local pool

So do business leaders feel a bit brighter about the powerhouse plans

to help hard-hit areas by building and linking

It is that if you get the rail system working

better and you get conductivity with the road and with other public

transport services and the whole system works better, and that's not

just good for you and I, getting to work, also from an external

business investment point of view, that starts to make this area look

like a compelling place to put a new business in.

30 miles down the road in Doncaster, it's said the

This building will be home to a national college

This building will be home to a national college which will supply

engineers for the planned high-speed rail link between London and

The size of the investment that is behind us, you

can see, and the numbers of the guys that we are putting through the

building, it's obvious to see that, you know,

it's work available for these local guys,

and it's on the doorstep.

When you look at the amount of money that's been spent

in the south in infrastructure compared to the north, it pales into

We're going to be a very large voice shouting out and

bringing it forward, the north, because it's the right economy.

And we've got the skills here to do it.

Back in Knottingley, there is no immediate lift

from the high-speed rail plans, but people are hoping

the knock-on effect isn't too far down the line.

For children like the ones behind me here, living in the

economy of Knottingley, it's much more than aspiration.

The Northern Powerhouse success or failure will

have a direct bearing on their futures.

Andrew Percy, are you surprised to hear many

people don't know what the Northern Powerhouse is, and they certainly

Well I don't expect people to have read

the Northern Powerhouse strategy ought to have looked at the Northern

I actually don't think that's important, I'm not in the slightest

bit bothered by that was what is important is that people understand

and see the investment that is happening, so we have

?2.8 billion of improvements coming to these new rail franchises.

You only have to look just down the road from

Knottingley at the M62, big investments in improving the road

network there, so there are all sorts of projects, ?13 billion of

funds, projects across the north which are all part of our investment

So people see that, and actually if you

look at somewhere like Knottingley, unemployment's been falling,

unemployment is at record low levels in many parts of the north,

we've got massive amounts of foreign investment

we've got massive amounts of foreign investment coming in,

But people don't need to be au fait with the Northern Powerhouse

strategy, what's important is they see the results

But there's still this huge disparity when it comes to the north

I mean, London's got a ?15 billion railway Crossrail to

You can't even get the Hulme to Selby railway electrified.

The Hulme to Selby rail line is getting new

trains on it which are going to be using part electric...

They don't need to be, the same trains

whether we electrify the line or not, will be

These brand-new trains which are trains which are built in the north,

serving northern routes and northern networks,

so actually we are seeing significant improvements there.

But actually you're quite right, this is a decades long issue

of the divide between the north and the south, and

you know, that's why we're seeing investment like HS2,

we've got plans for a high-speed rail across

the north, east-west, as well,

and Transport For The North will be delivering on that, and

actually just tomorrow I'm going to be announcing tens of millions of

pounds of new investment from the government

into the Leeds and Hull areas... Across our whole region, actually,

but I'll be doing Leeds and Hull, so there's lots of money coming in.

Clive Betts, last week, we reported on the fact that the

planned elections for a new mayor for the Sheffield city region have

Now, how will that affect your area when it comes to

tapping into the Northern Powerhouse?

Well, I think it's going to delay it, I think it is,

certainly, we can all see we need to devolve more powers to the

large cities and economic hinterlands in the north.

It is also important government does have a

transfer of spending from the south to the north.

Despite what Andrew's just said, billions

of pounds more are spent in London and

the south-east then spent in our more depressed northern areas.

Nevertheless the reality is that Manchester and Liverpool will elect

their mayors this year and what then will happen in my view is

if there is money to go into northern products they will have a

better claim on them, they will have a better argument

for them than Sheffield and Leeds, so I'm

disappointed that we aren't going ahead in May, and it's really

important that we sort ourself out so there are elections for elective

mayors in our region in May 2018, to make

So the big Yorkshire cities are the poor relations of the

Well, no, we're still going to be investing and we still are and this

announcement I'm going to be making tomorrow's

going to be in areas that

don't have devolution deals, but Clive's quite right, actually.

From a government point of view, from a

more importantly investment point of view, from this may way going to

have a single figure it in Manchester, a single figure in

Liverpool with substantial powers, powers that are being taken from

Westminster and some extra cash, so when investors are looking

at where to come, it's going to be much

easier for them to deal with that one person exercising planning

powers over a big area in Manchester and Liverpool than here,

but unfortunately it's a failure within our

region for us to get an agreement on this

and you know, people keep coming up with crazy proposals for

John Trickett, Labour's devolution supremo,

Yorkshire wide Mayor, and many other people

One thing that would have been helpful is if

first of all John had talked to the MPs for

We have an arrangement, we have six councils who are committed

to going forward to have an elective mayor for their area.

Of course, including Chesterfield and Bassetlaw,

which aren't within Yorkshire, they're within Derbyshire and

Nottinghamshire, they want to be part of the Sheffield city region,

because devolution should happen on an economic area

because people live in Chesterfield and work in Sheffield,

live in Worksop and work in Sheffield,

That's how it should work and really,

John has really muddied the waters

But Yorkshire is now a global brand as a county.

What's wrong with a single figurehead for the whole county?

Well, the fact is, Tim, what John proposed last week

Because it doesn't fit with the legislation.

But we've negotiated this really good deal

with South Yorkshire which will bring ?1 billion

we want to make good on that deal and I would say to any of the

leaders of those councils in South Yorkshire if they walk away from

that deal then I make it absolutely from a government point of view it

will come off the table and that will be the end of the matter.

Those powers and that money will not come

But actually we also have to accept there are

distinct differences within the region

and what we're trying to do

for these mayoral organisations, these mayoral structures is economic

development, is grow economic development.

So, South Yorkshire is a very fine fit for that him and

That's done, that deal was locked down by government some time ago.

So the question is what do we do with

So we've got to get east, west and north sorted out,

and Clive's absolutely right, when people keep throwing in these

grenades which ask us to view things which aren't even legal, it means

we're further from getting the powers we want from Westminster

and we are putting ourselves even further behind,

and I'm afraid Leeds City Council have been engaging in that this

week as well with their chief executive also backing a proposal.

We're going to have come to this another time.

Basically, we want this deal for the Sheffield

city Region, or we want this deal, we

It's on the table, let's get it and let

start spending it to improve jobs and economy in the Sheffield city

Let's get more of the week's political news now.

Trudy Scanlon has our round-up in 60 Seconds.

A question from Boston MP Matt Warman prompted praise from the

For the reaction of east coast emergency services to the

storm surge which last week threatened people and properties.

Rotherham born born education minister Justine Greening

when she announced that Doncaster and Bradford

would join the town as

They are places where we think young people could do

a lot better but we need to work hard if we going to get a change on

the ground, and that means working not just inside schools on helping

them improve but also helping outside of schools.

Philip Davies, the Shipley MP, challenged the

equality and human rights commission to get

its own house in order on the

pay gap between groups of staff working there.

And back with praise from the Prime Minister.

This time, for Lincoln MP Karl McCartney's

Can I join my honourable friend in congratulating

Lincoln city on their victory last night,

and can I say, I think it was a fitting tribute

to Graham Taylor that they won that match.

So, what was the big story of the week for you, Andrew Percy?

I think the Prime Minister's Brexit speech.

I was really surprised actually, pleasantly surprised just how many

constituents e-mailed me and got in touch afterwards to say that

week the way that she delivered it and what she proposed was absolutely

spot on, so that was clearly the big story of the week.

Well yes, Brexit speech, you know, but actually the

bigger story will come when government can't deliver what it

promises in two years, impossible to do a full deal

The other one is, the ongoing problems in the health

service and social care, there is a crisis there which isn't being

Lack of money, people waiting on trolleys,

longer and longer, and it is going to be a severe

winter so heaven knows what

happens if we have a really cold spell in the next few weeks.

Will you vote to trigger Article 50 when

I have said that to my constituents, it was an

advisory referendum, but we ask the British people's

And if Parliament, you know, it's unlikely,

but if Parliament decides that Brexit shouldn't go ahead, what

Well, I mean lots of people speculate that there will

I think it would be very difficult if

Parliament, particularly House of Commons will be a

problem but if the House of Lords wants to be a problem, can you

An unelected house thwarting the will of the British

I don't think it will happen but in that situation I think many

experts and many commentators would suggest there would be a general

But a lot more debates to come, it's not just the Article 50

and then the discussions happen, it's what comes out of those

discussions and what sort of agreement are we left with, indeed,

at the end of two years, are we left with any agreement?

I mean, there's some real challenges that, so it's

not as simple as voting for and against Article 50, the real

Do you expect a big Labour rebellion?

You know, Labour MPs saying they will vote not

There will be some Labour MPs, particularly in

constituencies which voted to remain, where the MP voted to remain

themselves and argued for it as their constituents did,

I'm very clear, I argued for the remain campaign, I campaigned

very hard for it but in the end I know my constituents, the majority

of them voted to leave and I will respect that

Now, the most controversial US president in living memory has been

sworn into office, so how will Donald Trump's presidency effect

You may think it's too early to tell but last year

one Lincolnshire MP said that her constituents may well

So, we're asking today will President Trump be judged

You will be so proud of your president, you will be so proud.

Grimsby-based journalist Nadia Hussain has followed Donald Trump's

road to the White House with interest.

As a woman and a Muslim, she says she was shocked by some of

Mr Trump's rhetoric on the campaign trail.

He's saying it in front of millions, and so people are now

feeling justified to feel that way so the already sexist people are

thinking that's great, I can say these things

because he served them come and people that are already

Islamophobic or have fear of the other are now feeling oh, that's

wonderful, if the most powerful man in the world can say them, I can

Donald J Trump is calling for a total and complete

shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.

It was that pledge to ban Muslims from entering the United

States that led to a petition over here calling for Mr Trump himself to

There was even a debate in parliament where a Lincolnshire MP

used a word rarely heard in the corridors of power.

And if he met one or two of my constituents in one of

the many excellent pubs in my constituency, then they may well

tell him that he is a wazzock for dealing with this issue in this way.

So, is that really how the good people

of Louth would describe the

Just like the rest the world, Donald

I don't know too much about him but from

what I know I think he's sexist, his

he's racist, I think is going to cause a

lot of chaos but at the end of the

He's coming from a fresh viewpoint,

They're fed up with the political system as indeed some people are

over here, and the wind of change is

blowing right across the world, isn't it?

The way he speaks, he's got no respect, I don't think, for

I mean, people get in a panic saying, oh, Brexit,

Trump, the world's coming to an end. No it hasn't.

It's taken rather an amusing turn where nobody was

One Yorkshire MP was at Friday's presidential

inauguration as part of his role as the UK representative

creating jobs, creating growth, creating stability, and I'm sure he

will quickly recognise that stability comes with stable

partnerships and stable military affairs.

All therefore I think that he will quickly come to realise

that Nato plays an important role in

growing the GDP of a country like ours as much as anybody else's.

And the waters of the United 's states rule...

My friend just went recently to America.

She whether the hijab, and she was worried about all of the

story she's been hearing, you know, from how people have been treated.

She literally said she has never been treated with so much respect

and politeness from the American people.

she almost wanted to cry at how generous people were.

I know that they aren't everywhere, I

know so much injustice is happening everywhere not just an hour,

but they are the stories I want to remember.

So, it's fair to say the jury's out on President Trump, but

love him or loathe him, this is a man who will dominate global

So what impact do we think Donald Trump's presidency will have

I don't know come he's actually a great unknown in terms of making

Some of the steps shown so the racism and sexism, you know, I

certainly feel uncomfortable with. certainly feel uncomfortable with.

Two things really worrying me are the Nato issue, his and lukewarm

support for Nato at a time when the tin is showing aggression in army

and the Ukraine I think is a real worry. The other big issue is

climate change. In, at the very time that the United States and, -- China

have managed to reach an agreement, President Trump comes in denying

climate change exists stop I think this is a real worry for the future

Trump? I think it has been Trump? I think it has been

interesting watching liberal outrage in this country about Trump. If you

tolerant it is, it is actually in tolerant it is, it is actually in

content to Europe where fascists, neo-Nazis and other extreme

right-wing parties get elected. America isn't the case normally,

this is a tolerant country. He has said many things on the campaign

Trail I don't want to associate with but I don't think it has been fairly

covered here, it is being presented as a dope was a great servers are

and some of the things he's been saying and why, you get to see that

of people feel left behind and have of people feel left behind and have

legitimate concerns will be people that voted for John, and we

shouldn't pooh-pooh them, because we think Trump got funny hair. If you

look at the campaign, the commentators talking about the rust

belt, people worried about jobs, immigration, being let down by

politicians. That could have been Yorkshire. This is true. They are

left behind groups in our own industrial areas who now gets

part-time jobs, jobs through agencies come as contract, all the

ways people get employed these days. I think Donald Trump given these

philosophies will not do anything to improve his condition. The idea of

putting a wall round the state and trade protections, that won't solve

the US problems, anything that will solve problems here either. I think

we have the bigger real high blood at our society and a look at how

much some people are paying themselves increasingly at the top

of our society and then look at the conditions at the Beeb at the

bottom. As a country we have a responsibility to actually reward

people better for some very important jobs like care workers,

for example. They get paid the minimum amount of money for doing a

really important job for our society. What are the parallels for

Brexit? Yes, and no. I think the same demographic of people certainly

were drawn to Brexit that were drawn the drug but eventually the scope

the service I have looked at some polling focus groups done Brexit

boat is in the UK and actually they were more free-trade than people who

voted remain here whereas the job voted remain here whereas the job

message is very anti-free trade so I think it is a lazy comparison that

grab activators they want us to be grab activators they want us to be

global, buy into what the Prime Minister said on Monday about 's

free trade, and what we have said is that we have to be careful with

strong, the element of protectionism, but that is no 1's

interest. His half British, and he said he was a trade deal with

Britain, so let's focus on the positives, because he is the

president whether anybody like him or not. Absolutely. We have to

challenge him in areas, and nothing have to challenge him to be a full

member of Nato because United States is crucially important than our

there. We can't carry on for the next four years with a president

denying climate change and not entering into the negotiations. And

also green energy, and at an industry in our world. Also a

massive industry in the States, a huge job creation there. Let's see

how his industry view changes when he gets pressure from members

relying on that. Clive is absolutely right. This is where we have a role

in Britain, because we are seen as a natural Ali, we have a special

relationship. -- natural ally. Our prime ministers should negotiate

well in the hope that some of the issues around Nato and trade we can

have a positive impact on him. History of cores will be the judge

of all political careers including both of yours. That is assuming we

have one! Let me know when it starts! Thank you both. Clive Betts

and Andrew Percy. 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,