:00:35. > :00:38.It's Sunday morning, and this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:39. > :00:41.Is the Prime Minister prepared to end Britain's membership
:00:42. > :00:44.of the EU's single market and its customs union?
:00:45. > :00:48.We preview Theresa May's big speech, as she seeks to unite the country
:00:49. > :00:55.Is the press a force for good or a beast that needs taming?
:00:56. > :00:57.As the Government ponders its decision, we speak to one
:00:58. > :01:02.of those leading the campaign for greater regulation.
:01:03. > :01:08.Just what kind of President will Donald Trump be?
:01:09. > :01:13.Piers Morgan, a man who knows him well, joins us live.
:01:14. > :01:16.In London this week: With the rail and Tube strikes bringing
:01:17. > :01:18.the capital to a standstill, can a political solution be found
:01:19. > :01:32.And to help me make sense of all that, three of the finest
:01:33. > :01:35.hacks we could persuade to work on a Sunday - Steve Richards,
:01:36. > :01:43.They'll be tweeting throughout the programme, and you can join
:01:44. > :01:50.So, Theresa May is preparing for her big Brexit speech on Tuesday,
:01:51. > :01:53.in which she will urge people to give up on "insults"
:01:54. > :01:57.and "division" and unite to build, quote, a "global Britain".
:01:58. > :02:00.Some of the Sunday papers report that the Prime Minister will go
:02:01. > :02:03.The Sunday Telegraph splashes with the headline: "May's big
:02:04. > :02:07.gamble on a clean Brexit", saying the Prime Minister
:02:08. > :02:10.will announce she's prepared to take Britain out of membership
:02:11. > :02:15.of the single market and customs union.
:02:16. > :02:17.The Sunday Times has a similar write-up -
:02:18. > :02:20.they call it a "clean and hard Brexit".
:02:21. > :02:23.The Brexit Secretary David Davis has also written a piece in the paper
:02:24. > :02:27.hinting that a transitional deal could be on the cards.
:02:28. > :02:30.And the Sunday Express says: "May's Brexit Battle Plan",
:02:31. > :02:32.explaining that the Prime Minister will get tough with Brussels
:02:33. > :02:35.and call for an end to free movement.
:02:36. > :02:37.Well, let's get some more reaction on this.
:02:38. > :02:39.I'm joined now from Cumbria by the leader
:02:40. > :02:46.of the Liberal Democrats, Tim Farron.
:02:47. > :02:52.Mr Farron, welcome back to the programme. The Prime Minister says
:02:53. > :02:55.most people now just want to get on with it and make a success of it.
:02:56. > :03:01.But you still want to stop it, don't you? Well, I certainly take the view
:03:02. > :03:05.that heading for a hard Brexit, essentially that means being outside
:03:06. > :03:09.the Single Market and the customs union, is not something that was on
:03:10. > :03:13.the ballot paper last June. For Theresa May to adopt what is
:03:14. > :03:17.basically the large all Farage vision of Britain's relationship
:03:18. > :03:21.with Europe is not what was voted for last June. It is right for us to
:03:22. > :03:25.stand up and say that a hard Brexit is not the democratic choice of the
:03:26. > :03:28.British people, and that we should be fighting for the people to be the
:03:29. > :03:33.ones who have the Seat the end of this process, not have it forced
:03:34. > :03:37.upon them by Theresa May and David Davis. When it comes though dual
:03:38. > :03:40.position that we should remain in the membership of the Single Market
:03:41. > :03:46.and the customs union, it looks like you are losing the argument, doesn't
:03:47. > :03:50.it? My sense is that if you believe in being in the Single Market and
:03:51. > :03:54.the customs union are good things, I think many people on the leave site
:03:55. > :03:59.believe that, Stephen Phillips, the Conservative MP until the autumn who
:04:00. > :04:03.resigned, who voted for Leave but believe we should be in the Single
:04:04. > :04:08.Market, I think those people believe that it is wrong for us to enter the
:04:09. > :04:12.negotiations having given up on the most important part of it. If you
:04:13. > :04:15.really are going to fight Britain's corner, then you should go in there
:04:16. > :04:21.fighting the membership of the Single Market, not give up and
:04:22. > :04:25.whitefly, as Theresa May has done before we even start. -- and wave
:04:26. > :04:29.the white flag. Will you vote against regret Article 50 in the
:04:30. > :04:32.Commons? We made it clear that we want the British people to have the
:04:33. > :04:38.final Seat -- vote against triggering. Will you vote against
:04:39. > :04:44.Article 50. Will you encourage the House of Lords to vote against out
:04:45. > :04:47.Article 50? I don't think they will get a chance to vote. They will have
:04:48. > :04:51.a chance to win the deuce amendments. One amendment we will
:04:52. > :04:55.introduce is that there should be a referendum in the terms of the deal.
:04:56. > :04:58.It is not right that Parliament on Government, and especially not civil
:04:59. > :05:02.servants in Brussels and Whitehall, they should stitch-up the final
:05:03. > :05:06.deal. That would be wrong. It is right that the British people have
:05:07. > :05:13.the final say. I understand that as your position. You made it clear
:05:14. > :05:15.Britain to remain a member of the Single Market on the customs union.
:05:16. > :05:18.You accept, I assume, that that would mean remaining under the
:05:19. > :05:21.jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, continuing free movement
:05:22. > :05:27.of people, and the free-trade deals remained in Brussels' competence. So
:05:28. > :05:32.it seems to me that if you believe that being in the Single Market is a
:05:33. > :05:35.good thing, then you should go and argue for that. Whilst I believe
:05:36. > :05:38.that we're not going to get a better deal than the one we currently have,
:05:39. > :05:41.nevertheless it is up to the Government to go and argue for the
:05:42. > :05:47.best deal possible for us outside. You accept your position would mean
:05:48. > :05:50.that? It would mean certainly being in the Single Market and the customs
:05:51. > :05:54.union. It's no surprise to you I'm sure that the Lib Dems believe the
:05:55. > :05:57.package we have got now inside the EU is going to be of the Nutley
:05:58. > :06:01.better than anything we get from the outside, I accept the direction of
:06:02. > :06:05.travel -- is going to be the Nutley better. At the moment, what the
:06:06. > :06:10.Government are doing is assuming that all the things you say Drew,
:06:11. > :06:13.and there is no way possible for us arguing for a deal that allows in
:06:14. > :06:16.the Single Market without some of those other things. If they really
:06:17. > :06:21.believed in the best for Britain, you would go and argue for the best
:06:22. > :06:27.for Britain. Let's be clear, if we remain under the jurisdiction of the
:06:28. > :06:30.ECJ, which is the court that governs membership of the Single Market,
:06:31. > :06:35.continued free movement of people, the Europeans have made clear, is
:06:36. > :06:40.what goes with the Single Market. And free-trade deals remaining under
:06:41. > :06:44.Brussels' competence. If we accepted all of that is the price of
:06:45. > :06:46.membership of the Single Market, in what conceivable way with that
:06:47. > :06:52.amount to leaving the European Union? Well, for example, I do
:06:53. > :06:56.believe that being a member of the Single Market is worth fighting for.
:06:57. > :07:00.I personally believe that freedom of movement is a good thing. British
:07:01. > :07:04.people benefit from freedom of movement. We will hugely be hit as
:07:05. > :07:08.individuals and families and businesses. Mike I understand, but
:07:09. > :07:13.your writing of leaving... There the butt is that if you do except that
:07:14. > :07:18.freedom of movement has to change, I don't, but if you do, and if you are
:07:19. > :07:23.Theresa May, and the problem is to go and fight for the best deal,
:07:24. > :07:26.don't take it from Brussels that you can't be in the Single Market
:07:27. > :07:32.without those other things as well, you don't go and argue the case. It
:07:33. > :07:35.depresses me that Theresa May is beginning this process is waving the
:07:36. > :07:40.white flag, just as this morning Jeremy Corbyn was waving the white
:07:41. > :07:43.flag when it comes to it. We need a Government that will fight Britain's
:07:44. > :07:46.corner and an opposition that will fight the Government to make sure
:07:47. > :07:53.that it fights. Just explain to our viewers how we could remain members,
:07:54. > :07:59.members of the Single Market, and not be subject to the jurisdiction
:08:00. > :08:03.of the European court? So, first of all we spent over the last many,
:08:04. > :08:06.many years, the likes of Nigel Farage and others, will have argued,
:08:07. > :08:09.you heard them on this very programme, that Britain should
:08:10. > :08:12.aspire to be like Norway and Switzerland for example, countries
:08:13. > :08:16.that are not in the European Union but aren't the Single Market. It is
:08:17. > :08:20.very clear to me that if you want the best deal for Britain -- but are
:08:21. > :08:25.in the Single Market. You go and argue for the best deal. What is the
:08:26. > :08:31.answer to my question, you haven't answered it
:08:32. > :08:35.the question is, how does the Prime Minister go and fight for the best
:08:36. > :08:40.deal for Britain. If we think that being in the Single Market is the
:08:41. > :08:45.right thing, not Baxter -- not access to it but membership of it,
:08:46. > :08:48.you don't wave the white flag before you enter the negotiating room. I'm
:08:49. > :08:52.afraid we have run out of time. Thank you, Tim Farron.
:08:53. > :08:58.The leaks on this speech on Tuesday we have seen, it is interesting that
:08:59. > :09:05.Downing Street has not attempted to dampen them down this morning, in
:09:06. > :09:10.the various papers, do they tell us something new? Do they tell us more
:09:11. > :09:13.of the Goverment's aims in the Brexit negotiations? I think it's
:09:14. > :09:16.only a confirmation of something which has been in the mating really
:09:17. > :09:23.for the six months that she's been in the job. The logic of everything
:09:24. > :09:27.that she's said since last July, the keenness on re-gaining control of
:09:28. > :09:30.migration, the desire to do international trade deals, the fact
:09:31. > :09:33.that she is appointed trade Secretary, the logic of all of that
:09:34. > :09:37.is that we are out of the Single Market, quite probably out of the
:09:38. > :09:41.customs union, what will happen this week is a restatement of a fairly
:09:42. > :09:45.clear position anyway. I think Tim Farron is right about one thing, I
:09:46. > :09:48.don't think she will go into the speech planning to absolutely
:09:49. > :09:55.definitively say, we are leaving those things. Because even if there
:09:56. > :09:58.is a 1% chance of a miracle deal, where you stay in the Single Market,
:09:59. > :10:00.somehow get exempted from free movement, it is prudent to keep
:10:01. > :10:06.hopes on that option as a Prime Minister. -- to keep open that
:10:07. > :10:09.option. She is being advised both by the diplomatic corps and her
:10:10. > :10:12.personal advisers, don't concede on membership of the Single Market yet.
:10:13. > :10:21.We know it's not going to happen, but let them Europeans knock us back
:10:22. > :10:24.on that,... That is probably the right strategy for all of the
:10:25. > :10:28.reasons that Jarlan outlined there. What we learned a bit today is the
:10:29. > :10:32.possibility of some kind of transition or arrangements, which
:10:33. > :10:36.David Davies has been talking about in a comment piece for one of the
:10:37. > :10:40.Sunday papers. My sense from Brexiteers aborting MPs is that they
:10:41. > :10:45.are very happy with 90% of the rhetoric -- Brexit sporting MPs. The
:10:46. > :10:51.rhetoric has not been dampened down by MPs, apart from this transitional
:10:52. > :10:55.arrangement, which they feel and two France, on the one front will
:10:56. > :10:59.encourage the very dilatory EU to spend longer than ever negotiating a
:11:00. > :11:02.deal, and on the other hand will also be exactly what our civil
:11:03. > :11:07.service looks for in stringing things out. What wasn't explained
:11:08. > :11:10.this morning is what David Davies means by transitional is not that
:11:11. > :11:13.you negotiate what you can in two years and then spend another five
:11:14. > :11:19.years on the matter is that a lot of the soul. He thinks everything has
:11:20. > :11:23.to be done in the two years, -- of the matter are hard to solve. But it
:11:24. > :11:28.would include transitional arrangements over the five years.
:11:29. > :11:33.What we are seeing in the build-up is the danger of making these kind
:11:34. > :11:36.of speeches. In a way, I kind of admired her not feeding the media
:11:37. > :11:42.machine over the autumn and the end of last year cars, as Janan has
:11:43. > :11:46.pointed out in his columns, she has actually said quite a lot from it,
:11:47. > :11:50.you would extrapolate quite a lot. We won't be members of the Single
:11:51. > :11:56.Market? She said that in the party conference speech, we are out of
:11:57. > :12:01.European court. Her red line is the end of free movement, so we are out
:12:02. > :12:05.of the Single Market. Why has she sent Liam Fox to negotiate all of
:12:06. > :12:08.these other deals, not that he will succeed necessarily, but that is the
:12:09. > :12:12.intention? We are still in the customs union. You can extrapolate
:12:13. > :12:16.what she will say perhaps more cautiously in the headlines on
:12:17. > :12:20.Tuesday. But the grammar of a big speech raises expectations, gets the
:12:21. > :12:23.markets worked up. So she is doing it because people have said that she
:12:24. > :12:28.doesn't know what she's on about. But maybe she should have resisted
:12:29. > :12:31.it. Very well, and she hasn't. The speech is on Tuesday morning.
:12:32. > :12:33.Now, the public consultation on press regulation closed this
:12:34. > :12:36.week, and soon ministers will have to decide whether to
:12:37. > :12:37.enact a controversial piece of legislation.
:12:38. > :12:39.Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act, if implemented,
:12:40. > :12:42.could see newspapers forced to pay legal costs in libel and privacy
:12:43. > :12:52.If they don't sign up to an officially approved regulator.
:12:53. > :12:55.The newspapers say it's an affront to a free press,
:12:56. > :12:57.while pro-privacy campaigners say it's the only way to ensure
:12:58. > :12:59.a scandal like phone-hacking can't happen again.
:13:00. > :13:05.Ellie Price has been reading all about it.
:13:06. > :13:09.It was the biggest news about the news for decades,
:13:10. > :13:14.a scandal that involved household names, but not just celebrities.
:13:15. > :13:17.They've even hacked the phone of a murdered schoolgirl.
:13:18. > :13:19.It led to the closure of the News Of The World,
:13:20. > :13:29.a year-long public inquiry headed up by the judge Lord Justice Leveson,
:13:30. > :13:32.and in the end, a new press watchdog set up by Royal Charter,
:13:33. > :13:34.which could impose, among other things, million-pound fines.
:13:35. > :13:36.If this system is implemented, the country should have confidence
:13:37. > :13:38.that the terrible suffering of innocent victims
:13:39. > :13:40.like the Dowlers, the McCanns and Christopher Jefferies should
:13:41. > :13:47.To get this new plan rolling, the Government also passed
:13:48. > :13:51.the Crime and Courts Act, Section 40 of which would force
:13:52. > :13:53.publications who didn't sign up to the new regulator to pay legal
:13:54. > :13:57.costs in libel and privacy cases, even if they won.
:13:58. > :14:01.It's waiting for sign-off from the Culture Secretary.
:14:02. > :14:05.We've got about 50 publications that have signed up...
:14:06. > :14:07.This is Impress, the press regulator that's got the backing
:14:08. > :14:13.of the Royal Charter, so its members are protected
:14:14. > :14:16.from the penalties that would be imposed by Section 40.
:14:17. > :14:21.It's funded by the Formula One tycoon Max Mosley's
:14:22. > :14:27.I think the danger if we don't get Section 40 is that
:14:28. > :14:29.you have an incomplete Leveson project.
:14:30. > :14:32.I think it's very, very likely that within the next five or ten years
:14:33. > :14:35.there will be a scandal, there'll be a crisis in press
:14:36. > :14:37.standards, everyone will be saying to the Government,
:14:38. > :14:40."Why on Earth didn't you sort things out when you had the chance?"
:14:41. > :14:42.Isn't Section 40 essentially just a big stick to beat
:14:43. > :14:50.We hear a lot about the stick part, but there's also a big juicy carrot
:14:51. > :14:53.for publishers and their journalists who are members of an
:14:54. > :14:56.They get huge new protections from libel threats,
:14:57. > :14:58.from privacy actions, which actually means they've got
:14:59. > :15:07.a lot more opportunity to run investigative stories.
:15:08. > :15:09.Impress has a big image problem - not a single national
:15:10. > :15:14.Instead, many of them are members of Ipso,
:15:15. > :15:17.the independent regulator set up and funded by the industry that
:15:18. > :15:23.doesn't seek the recognition of the Royal Charter.
:15:24. > :15:27.The male cells around 22,000 each day...
:15:28. > :15:29.There are regional titles too, who, like the Birmingham Mail,
:15:30. > :15:32.won't sign up to Impress, even if they say the costs
:15:33. > :15:36.are associated with Section 40 could put them out of business.
:15:37. > :15:38.Impress has an umbilical cord that goes directly back to Government
:15:39. > :15:40.through the recognition setup that it has.
:15:41. > :15:43.Now, we broke free of the shackles of the regulated press
:15:44. > :15:46.when the stamp duty was revealed 150 years ago.
:15:47. > :15:53.If we go back to this level of oversight, then I think
:15:54. > :15:58.we turn the clock back, 150 years of press freedom.
:15:59. > :16:00.The responses from the public have been coming thick and fast
:16:01. > :16:02.since the Government launched its consultation
:16:03. > :16:05.In fact, by the time it closed on Tuesday,
:16:06. > :16:09.And for that reason alone, it could take months before
:16:10. > :16:13.a decision on what happens next is taken.
:16:14. > :16:16.The Government will also be minded to listen to its own MPs,
:16:17. > :16:23.One described it to me as Draconian and hugely damaging.
:16:24. > :16:25.So, will the current Culture Secretary's thinking be
:16:26. > :16:33.I don't think the Government will repeal section 40.
:16:34. > :16:37.What I'm arguing for is not to implement it, but it will remain
:16:38. > :16:41.on the statute book and if it then became apparent that Ipso simply
:16:42. > :16:44.was failing to work, was not delivering effective
:16:45. > :16:48.regulation and the press were behaving in a way
:16:49. > :16:53.which was wholly unacceptable, as they were ten years ago,
:16:54. > :16:56.then there might be an argument at that time to think well in that
:16:57. > :16:59.case we are going to have to take further measures,
:17:00. > :17:04.The future of section 40 might not be so black and white.
:17:05. > :17:06.I'm told a compromise could be met whereby the punitive parts
:17:07. > :17:10.about legal costs are dropped, but the incentives
:17:11. > :17:13.to join a recognised regulator are beefed up.
:17:14. > :17:16.But it could yet be some time until the issue of press freedom
:17:17. > :17:27.I'm joined now by Max Mosley - he won a legal case against the News
:17:28. > :17:30.Of The World after it revealed details about his private life,
:17:31. > :17:34.and he now campaigns for more press regulation.
:17:35. > :17:42.Are welcome to the programme. Let me ask you this, how can it be right
:17:43. > :17:47.that you, who many folk think have a clear vendetta against the British
:17:48. > :17:51.press, can bankroll a government approved regulator of the press? If
:17:52. > :17:56.we hadn't done it, nobody would, section 40 would never have come
:17:57. > :18:00.into force because there would never have been a regulator. It is
:18:01. > :18:05.absolutely wrong that a family trust should have to finance something
:18:06. > :18:10.like this. It should be financed by the press or the Government. If we
:18:11. > :18:11.hadn't done it there would be no possibility of regulation. But it
:18:12. > :18:38.means we end up with a regulator financed by you, as I say
:18:39. > :18:41.many people think you have a clear vendetta against the press. Where
:18:42. > :18:43.does the money come from? From a family trust, it is family money.
:18:44. > :18:46.You have to understand that somebody had to do this. I understand that.
:18:47. > :18:49.People like to know where the money comes from, I think you said it came
:18:50. > :18:52.from Brixton Steyn at one stage. Ages ago my father had a trust there
:18:53. > :18:55.but now all my money is in the UK. We are clear about that, but this is
:18:56. > :19:01.money that was put together by your father. Yes, my father inherited it
:19:02. > :19:05.from his father and his father. The whole of Manchester once belonged to
:19:06. > :19:10.the family, that's why there is a Mosley Street. That is irrelevant
:19:11. > :19:13.because as we have given the money, I have no control. If you do the
:19:14. > :19:24.most elementary checks into the contract between my family trust,
:19:25. > :19:28.the trust but finances Impress, it is impossible for me to exert any
:19:29. > :19:35.influence. It is just the same as if it had come from the National
:19:36. > :19:39.lottery. People will find it ironic that the money has come from
:19:40. > :19:48.historically Britain's best-known fascist. No, it has come from my
:19:49. > :19:52.family, the Mosley family. This is complete drivel because we have no
:19:53. > :19:58.control. Where the money comes from doesn't matter, if it had come from
:19:59. > :20:02.the national lottery it would be exactly the same. Impress was
:20:03. > :20:08.completely independent. But it wouldn't exist without your money,
:20:09. > :20:11.wouldn't it? But that doesn't give you influence. It might exist
:20:12. > :20:17.because it was founded before I was ever in contact with them. Isn't it
:20:18. > :20:22.curious then that so many leading light show your hostile views of the
:20:23. > :20:28.press? I don't think it is because I don't know a single member of the
:20:29. > :20:32.Impress board. The chairman I have met months. The only person I know
:20:33. > :20:40.is Jonathan Hayward who you had on just now. In one recent months he
:20:41. > :20:45.tweeted 50 attacks on the Daily Mail, including some calling for an
:20:46. > :20:52.advertising boycott of the paper. He also liked a Twitter post calling me
:20:53. > :20:57.Daily Mail and neofascist rag. Are these fitting for what is meant to
:20:58. > :21:01.be impartial regulator? The person you should ask about that is the
:21:02. > :21:04.press regulatory panel and they are completely independent, they
:21:05. > :21:09.reviewed the whole thing. You have probably produced something very
:21:10. > :21:11.selective, I have no idea but I am certain that these people are
:21:12. > :21:17.absolutely trustworthy and independent. It is not just Mr
:21:18. > :21:21.Hayward, we have a tonne of things he has tweeted calling for boycotts,
:21:22. > :21:27.remember this is the man that would be the regulator of these papers.
:21:28. > :21:33.He's the chief executive, that is a separate thing. The administration,
:21:34. > :21:42.the regulator. Many leading light show your vendetta of the press. I
:21:43. > :21:58.do not have a vendetta. Let's take another one. This person is on the
:21:59. > :22:05.code committee. Have a look at this. As someone with these views fit to
:22:06. > :22:09.be involved in the regulation of the press? You said I have a vendetta
:22:10. > :22:14.against the press, I do not, I didn't say that and it is completely
:22:15. > :22:19.wrong to say I have a vendetta. What do you think of that? I don't agree,
:22:20. > :22:30.I wouldn't ban the Daily Mail, I think it's a dreadful paper but I
:22:31. > :22:38.wouldn't ban it. Another Impress code committee said I hate the Daily
:22:39. > :22:42.Mail, I couldn't agree more, others have called for a boycott. Other
:22:43. > :22:47.people can say what they want and many people may think they are right
:22:48. > :22:53.but surely these views make them unfit to be partial regulators? I
:22:54. > :22:57.have no influence over Impress therefore I cannot say anything
:22:58. > :23:03.about it. You should ask them, not me. All I have done is make it
:23:04. > :23:09.possible for Impress to exist and that was the right thing to do. I'm
:23:10. > :23:14.asking you if people with these kind of views are fit to be regulators of
:23:15. > :23:20.the press. You would have to ask about all of their views, these are
:23:21. > :23:26.some of their views. A lot of people have a downer on the Daily Mail and
:23:27. > :23:31.the Sun, it doesn't necessarily make them party pre-. Why would
:23:32. > :23:37.newspapers sign up to a regulator run by what they think is run by
:23:38. > :23:41.enemies out to ruin them. If they don't like it they should start
:23:42. > :23:47.their own section 40 regulator. They could make it so recognised, if only
:23:48. > :23:57.they would make it independent of the big newspaper barons but they
:23:58. > :24:07.won't -- they could make Ipso recognised. Is the Daily Mail
:24:08. > :24:11.fascist? It certainly was in the 1930s. Me and my father are
:24:12. > :24:15.relevant, this whole section 40 issue is about access to justice.
:24:16. > :24:20.The press don't want ordinary people who cannot afford to bring an action
:24:21. > :24:24.against the press, don't want them to have access to justice. I can
:24:25. > :24:30.understand that but I don't sympathise. What would happen to the
:24:31. > :24:36.boss of Ofcom, which regulates broadcasters, if it described
:24:37. > :24:46.Channel 4 News is a Marxist scum? If the press don't want to sign up to
:24:47. > :24:55.Impress they can create their own regulator. If you were to listen we
:24:56. > :24:59.would get a lot further. The press should make their own Levenson
:25:00. > :25:05.compliant regulator, then they would have no complaints at all. Even
:25:06. > :25:09.papers like the Guardian, the Independent, the Financial Times,
:25:10. > :25:16.they show your hostility to tabloid journalism. They have refused to be
:25:17. > :25:20.regulated by Impress. I will say it again, the press could start their
:25:21. > :25:25.own regulator, they do not have to sign... Yes, but Levenson compliant
:25:26. > :25:29.one giving access to justice so people who cannot afford an
:25:30. > :25:33.expensive legal action have a proper arbitration service. The Guardian,
:25:34. > :25:38.the Independent, the Financial Times, they don't want to do that
:25:39. > :25:43.either. That would suggest there is something fatally flawed about your
:25:44. > :25:55.approach. Even these kind of papers, the Guardian, Impress is hardly
:25:56. > :26:03.independent, the head of... Andrew, I am sorry, you are like a dog with
:26:04. > :26:08.a bone. The press could start their own regulator, then people like the
:26:09. > :26:11.Financial Times, the Guardian and so one could decide whether they wanted
:26:12. > :26:15.to join or not but what is absolutely vital is that we should
:26:16. > :26:18.have a proper arbitration service so that people who cannot afford an
:26:19. > :26:23.expensive action have somewhere to go. This business of section 40
:26:24. > :26:28.which you want to be triggered which would mean papers that didn't sign
:26:29. > :26:31.up to Impress could be sued in any case and they would have to pay
:26:32. > :26:40.potentially massive legal costs, even if they win. Yes. This is what
:26:41. > :26:46.the number of papers have said about this, if section 40 was triggered,
:26:47. > :26:53.the Guardian wouldn't even think of investigation. The Sunday Times said
:26:54. > :26:55.it would not have even started to expose Lance Armstrong. The Times
:26:56. > :27:00.journalist said he couldn't have done the Rotherham child abuse
:27:01. > :27:04.scandal. What they all come it is a full reading of section 40 because
:27:05. > :27:11.that cost shifting will only apply if, and I quote, it is just and
:27:12. > :27:15.equitable in all the circumstances. I cannot conceive of any High Court
:27:16. > :27:20.judge, for example the Lance Armstrong case or the child abuse,
:27:21. > :27:26.saying it is just as equitable in all circumstances the newspaper
:27:27. > :27:31.should pay these costs. Even the editor of index on censorship, which
:27:32. > :27:35.is hardly the Sun, said this would be oppressive and they couldn't do
:27:36. > :27:42.what they do, they would risk being sued by warlords. No because if
:27:43. > :27:46.something unfortunate, some really bad person sues them, what would
:27:47. > :27:49.happen is the judge would say it is just inequitable normal
:27:50. > :27:54.circumstances that person should pay. Section 40 is for the person
:27:55. > :27:58.that comes along and says to a big newspaper, can we go to arbitration
:27:59. > :28:03.because I cannot afford to go to court. The big newspaper says no.
:28:04. > :28:07.That leaves less than 1% of the population with any remedy if the
:28:08. > :28:14.newspapers traduce them. It cannot be right. From the Guardian to the
:28:15. > :28:19.Sun, and including Index On Censorship, all of these media
:28:20. > :28:22.outlets think you are proposing a charter for conmen, warlords, crime
:28:23. > :28:27.bosses, dodgy politicians, celebrities with a grievance against
:28:28. > :28:35.the press. I will give you the final word to address that. It is pure
:28:36. > :28:40.guff and the reason is they want to go on marking their own homework.
:28:41. > :28:44.The press don't want anyone to make sure life is fair. All I want is
:28:45. > :28:49.somebody who has got no money to be able to sue in just the way that I
:28:50. > :28:53.can. All right, thanks for being with us.
:28:54. > :28:54.The doctors' union, the British Medical Association,
:28:55. > :28:56.has said the Government is scapegoating GPs in England
:28:57. > :29:00.The Government has said GP surgeries must try harder to stay
:29:01. > :29:03.open from 8am to 8pm, or they could lose out on funding.
:29:04. > :29:06.The pressure on A services in recent weeks has been intense.
:29:07. > :29:09.It emerged this week that 65 of the 152 Health Trusts in England
:29:10. > :29:11.had issued an operational pressure alert in the first
:29:12. > :29:18.At either level three, meaning major pressures,
:29:19. > :29:20.or level four, indicating an inability to deliver
:29:21. > :29:25.On Monday, Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt told the Commons
:29:26. > :29:29.that the number of people using A had increased by 9 million
:29:30. > :29:36.But that 30% of those visits were unnecessary.
:29:37. > :29:39.He said that the situation at a number of Trusts
:29:40. > :29:44.On Tuesday, the Royal College of Physicians wrote
:29:45. > :29:46.to the Prime Minister saying the health service was being
:29:47. > :29:51.paralysed by spiralling demand, and urging greater investment.
:29:52. > :29:55.On Wednesday, the Chief Executive of NHS England, Simon Stevens,
:29:56. > :30:01.told a Select Committee that NHS funding will be highly constrained.
:30:02. > :30:05.And from 2018, real-terms spending per person would fall.
:30:06. > :30:08.The Prime Minister described the Red Cross's claim that A
:30:09. > :30:13.was facing a "humanitarian crisis" as "irresponsible and overblown".
:30:14. > :30:16.And the National Audit Office issued a report that found almost half,
:30:17. > :30:23.46%, of GP surgeries closed at some point during core hours.
:30:24. > :30:27.Yesterday, Mrs May signalled her support for doctors' surgeries
:30:28. > :30:30.opening from 8am to 8pm every day of the week, in order to divert
:30:31. > :30:37.To discuss this, I'm joined now by the Conservative
:30:38. > :30:40.MP Maria Caulfield - she was an NHS nurse in a former
:30:41. > :30:43.life - and Clare Gerada, a former chair of the Royal College
:30:44. > :30:53.Welcome to you both. So, Maria Caulfield, what the Government is
:30:54. > :30:58.saying, Downing Street in effect is saying that GPs do not work hard
:30:59. > :31:01.enough and that's the reason why A was under such pressure? No, I don't
:31:02. > :31:04.think that is the message, I think that is the message that the media
:31:05. > :31:09.have taken up. That is not the expression that we want to give. I
:31:10. > :31:13.still work as a nurse, I know how hard doctors work in hospitals and
:31:14. > :31:18.GP practices. When the rose 30% of people turning up at A for neither
:31:19. > :31:23.an accident or an emergency, we do need to look at alternative. Where
:31:24. > :31:27.is the GPs' operability in this? We know from patients that if they
:31:28. > :31:31.cannot get access to GPs, they will do one of three things. They will
:31:32. > :31:34.wait two or three weeks until they can get an appointment, they will
:31:35. > :31:38.forget about the problem altogether, which is not good, we want patients
:31:39. > :31:48.to be getting investigations at early stages, or they will go to
:31:49. > :31:50.A And that is a problem. I'm not quite sure what the role that GPs
:31:51. > :31:53.play in this. What is your response in that? I think about 70% of
:31:54. > :31:56.patients that I see should not be seen by me but should still be seen
:31:57. > :32:01.by hospital consultants. If we look at it from GPs' eyes and not from
:32:02. > :32:05.hospital's eyes, because that is what it is, we might get somewhere.
:32:06. > :32:09.Tomorrow morning, every practice in England will have about 1.5 GPs
:32:10. > :32:15.shot, that's not even counting if there is traffic problems, sickness
:32:16. > :32:18.or whatever. -- GPs shot. We cannot work any harder, I cannot
:32:19. > :32:25.physically, emotionally work any harder. We are open 12 hours a day,
:32:26. > :32:29.most of us, I run practices open 365 days per year 24 hours a day. I
:32:30. > :32:33.don't understand this. It is one thing attacking me as a GP from
:32:34. > :32:37.working hard enough, but it is another thing saying that GPs as a
:32:38. > :32:42.profession and doing what they should be doing. Let me in National
:32:43. > :32:50.Audit Office has coming up with these figures showing that almost
:32:51. > :32:53.half of doctors' practices are not open during core hours at some part
:32:54. > :32:57.of the week. That's where the implication comes, that they are not
:32:58. > :33:01.working hard enough. What do you say to that? I don't recognise this. I'm
:33:02. > :33:06.not being defensive, I'm just don't recognise it. There are practices
:33:07. > :33:09.working palliative care services, practices have to close home visits
:33:10. > :33:13.if they are single-handed, some of us are working in care homes during
:33:14. > :33:19.the day. They may shot for an hour in the middle of the data will sort
:33:20. > :33:22.out some of the prescriptions and admin -- they may shot. My practice
:33:23. > :33:25.runs a number of practices across London. If we shut during our
:33:26. > :33:30.contractual hours we would have NHS England coming down on us like a
:33:31. > :33:34.tonne of bricks. Maria Caulfield, I'm struggling to understand, given
:33:35. > :33:37.the problems the NHS faces, particularly in our hospitals, what
:33:38. > :33:41.this has got to do with the solution? Obviously there are GP
:33:42. > :33:46.practices that are working, you know, over and above the hours. But
:33:47. > :33:51.there are some GP practices, we know from National Audit Office, there
:33:52. > :33:54.are particular black sports -- blackspots in the country that only
:33:55. > :33:58.offer services for three hours a week. That's causing problems if
:33:59. > :34:03.they cannot get to see a GP they will go and use A Nobody is
:34:04. > :34:06.saying that this measure would solve problems at A, it would address
:34:07. > :34:11.one small part of its top blog we shouldn't be starting this, as I
:34:12. > :34:15.keep saying, please to this from solving the problems at A We
:34:16. > :34:18.should be starting it from solving the problems of the patients in
:34:19. > :34:25.their totality, the best place they should go, not from A This really
:34:26. > :34:29.upsets me, as a GP I am there to be a proxy A doctor. I am a GP, a
:34:30. > :34:34.highly skilled doctor, looking after patients from cradle to grave across
:34:35. > :34:39.the physical, psychological and social, I am not an A doctor. I
:34:40. > :34:43.don't disagree with that, nobody is saying that GPs are not working hard
:34:44. > :34:48.enough. You just did, actually, about some of them. In some
:34:49. > :34:52.practices, what we need to see, it's not just GPs in GP surgeries, it is
:34:53. > :34:57.advanced nurse practitioners, pharmacists. It doesn't necessarily
:34:58. > :35:02.need to be all on the GPs. I think advanced nurse practitioners are in
:35:03. > :35:06.short supply. Position associate or go to hospital, -- physician
:35:07. > :35:09.associates. We have very few trainees, junior doctors in general
:35:10. > :35:13.practice, unlike hospitals, which tend to have some slack with the
:35:14. > :35:17.junior doctor community and workforce. This isn't an argument,
:35:18. > :35:20.this is about saying, let's stop looking at the National health
:35:21. > :35:27.system as a National hospital system. GPs tomorrow will see about
:35:28. > :35:32.1.3 million patients. That is a lot of thoughtful. A lot of activity
:35:33. > :35:36.with no resources. If you wanted the GPs to behave better, in your terms,
:35:37. > :35:40.when you allocated more money to GPs, part of the reforms, because
:35:41. > :35:45.that's where it went, shouldn't you have targeted it more closely to
:35:46. > :35:48.where they want to operate? That is exactly what the Prime Minister is
:35:49. > :35:52.saying, extra funding is being made available by GPs to extend hours and
:35:53. > :35:55.services. If certain GP practices cannot do that, the money will
:35:56. > :36:00.follow the patient to where they move onto. We have no doctors to do
:36:01. > :36:03.it. I was on a coach last week, the coach driver stopped in the service
:36:04. > :36:07.station for an hour, they were stopping for a rest. We cannot do
:36:08. > :36:15.it. Even if you gave us millions more money, and thankfully NHS is
:36:16. > :36:17.recognising that we need a solution through the five-day week, we
:36:18. > :36:20.haven't got the doctors to deliver this. It would take a while to get
:36:21. > :36:24.them? That's my point, that's why we need to be using all how care
:36:25. > :36:27.professional. Even if you got this right, would it make a difference to
:36:28. > :36:31.what many regard as the crisis in our hospitals? I think it would. If
:36:32. > :36:36.you look at patients, they just want to go to a service that will address
:36:37. > :36:40.the problems. In Scotland for example, pharmacists have their own
:36:41. > :36:43.patient list. Patients go and see the pharmacists first. There are
:36:44. > :36:48.lots of conditions, for example if you want anticoagulants, you don't
:36:49. > :36:53.necessarily need to see a doctor, a pharmacist can manage that and free
:36:54. > :36:56.up the doctor in other ways. The Prime Minister has said that if
:36:57. > :37:00.things do not change she is threatening to reduce funding to
:37:01. > :37:03.doctors who do not comply. Can you both agree, that is probably an
:37:04. > :37:08.empty threat, that's not going to happen? I hope it's an empty threat.
:37:09. > :37:12.We're trying our best. People like me in my profession, the seniors in
:37:13. > :37:15.our profession, are really trying to pull up morale and get people into
:37:16. > :37:20.general practice, which is a wonderful profession, absolutely
:37:21. > :37:24.wonderful place to be. But slapping us off and telling us that we are
:37:25. > :37:28.lazy really doesn't help. I really don't think anybody is doing that.
:37:29. > :37:31.We have run out of time, but I'm certain that we will be back to the
:37:32. > :37:33.subject before this winter is out. It's just gone 11:35am,
:37:34. > :37:35.you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers
:37:36. > :37:38.in Scotland, who leave us now Coming up here in 20
:37:39. > :00:43.minutes: The Week Ahead. Now, if anyone thought Donald Trump
:00:44. > :00:51.would tone things down after the American election
:00:52. > :01:01.campaign, they may have The period where he has been
:01:02. > :01:05.President-elect will make them think again. The inauguration is coming up
:01:06. > :01:07.on Friday. Never has the forthcoming
:01:08. > :01:08.inauguration of a president been In a moment, we'll talk
:01:09. > :01:13.to a man who knows Mr Trump But first, let's have a look
:01:14. > :01:16.at the press conference Mr Trump gave on Wednesday,
:01:17. > :01:19.in which he took the opportunity to rubbish reports that Russia has
:01:20. > :01:21.obtained compromising information You are attacking our
:01:22. > :01:37.news organisation. Can you give us a chance,
:01:38. > :01:42.you are attacking our news organisation, can you give us
:01:43. > :01:44.a chance to ask a question, sir? As far as Buzzfeed,
:01:45. > :01:50.which is a failing pile of garbage, writing it, I think they're
:01:51. > :01:54.going to suffer the consequences. Does anyone really
:01:55. > :01:57.believe that story? I'm also very much of
:01:58. > :02:00.a germaphobe, by the way. If Putin likes Donald Trump,
:02:01. > :02:03.guess what, folks, that's called The only ones that care about my tax
:02:04. > :02:10.returns are the reporters, OK? Do you not think the American
:02:11. > :02:25.public is concerned? The Wiggo, Donald Trump at his first
:02:26. > :02:27.last conference. The Can will he change as President? Because he
:02:28. > :02:32.hasn't changed in the run-up to being inaugurated? I don't think he
:02:33. > :02:35.will commit he doesn't see any point in changing. Why would he change
:02:36. > :02:40.from the personality that just one, as he just said, I just one. All of
:02:41. > :02:43.the bleeding-heart liberals can wail and brush their teeth and say how
:02:44. > :02:47.ghastly that all this, Hillary should have won and so on, but he
:02:48. > :02:51.has got an incredible mandate. Remember, Trump has the House
:02:52. > :02:55.committee has the Senate, he will have the Supreme Court. He has
:02:56. > :02:59.incredible power right now. He doesn't have to listen to anybody. I
:03:00. > :03:02.spoke to him a couple of weeks ago specifically about Twitter, I asked
:03:03. > :03:07.him what the impact was of Twitter. He said, I have 60 million people
:03:08. > :03:11.following me on Twitter. I was able to bypass mainstream media, bypass
:03:12. > :03:16.all modern political convention and talk directly to potential voters.
:03:17. > :03:20.Secondly, I can turn on the TV in the morning, I can see a rival
:03:21. > :03:24.getting all of the airtime, and I can fire off a tweet, for free, as a
:03:25. > :03:28.marketing man he loves that, and, boom, I'm on the news agenda again.
:03:29. > :03:32.He was able to use that magnificently. Twitter to him didn't
:03:33. > :03:43.cost him a dollar. He is going to carry on tweeting in the last six
:03:44. > :03:48.weeks, he was not sleeping. Trump has never had an alcoholic drink a
:03:49. > :03:52.cigarette or a drug. He is a fit by the 70, he has incredible energy and
:03:53. > :03:55.he is incredibly competitive. At his heart, he is a businessman. If you
:03:56. > :04:01.look at him as a political ideologue, you completely missed the
:04:02. > :04:04.point of trouble. Don't take what he says literally, look upon it as a
:04:05. > :04:07.negotiating point that he started from, and try to do business with
:04:08. > :04:11.him as a business person would, and you may be presently surprised so
:04:12. > :04:17.pleasantly surprised. He treats the press and the media entirely
:04:18. > :04:23.differently to any other politician or main politician in that normally
:04:24. > :04:27.the politicians try to get the media off a particular subject, or they
:04:28. > :04:31.try to conciliate with the media. He just comes and punches the media in
:04:32. > :04:37.the nose when he doesn't like them. This could catch on, you know! You
:04:38. > :04:44.are absolutely right, for a start, nobody could accuse him of letting
:04:45. > :04:47.that victory go to his head. You know, he won't say, I will now be
:04:48. > :04:51.this lofty president. He's exactly the same as he was before. What is
:04:52. > :04:55.fascinating is his Laois and ship with the media. I haven't met, and
:04:56. > :04:58.I'm sure you haven't, met a party leader who is obsessed with the
:04:59. > :05:04.media. But they pretend not to be. You know, they state, oh, somebody
:05:05. > :05:12.told me about a column, I didn't read it. He is utterly transparent
:05:13. > :05:16.in his obsession with the media, he doesn't pretend. How that plays out,
:05:17. > :05:19.who knows? It's a completely different dynamic than anyone has
:05:20. > :05:25.seen by. Like he is the issue, he has appointed an unusual Cabinet,
:05:26. > :05:28.that you could criticise in many ways. Nearly all of them are
:05:29. > :05:32.independent people in their own right. A lot of them are wealthy,
:05:33. > :05:35.too. They have their own views. They might not like what he tweaked at
:05:36. > :05:41.3am, and he does have to deal with his Cabinet now. Mad dog matters,
:05:42. > :05:46.now the Defence Secretary, he might not like what's said about China at
:05:47. > :05:50.three in morning - general matters. This is what gets very conjugated.
:05:51. > :05:54.We cannot imagine here in our political system any kind of
:05:55. > :05:56.appointments like this. Using the wouldn't have a line-up of
:05:57. > :06:00.billionaires of the kind of background that he has chosen -- you
:06:01. > :06:04.simply wouldn't have. But that won't stop him saying and reading what he
:06:05. > :06:07.thinks. Maybe it will cause him some internal issues when the following
:06:08. > :06:12.day he has the square rigged with whatever they think. But he's going
:06:13. > :06:19.to press ahead. Are we any clearer in terms of policy. I know policy
:06:20. > :06:23.hasn't featured hugely in this campaign of 2016. Do we have any
:06:24. > :06:30.really clear idea what Mr Trump is hoping to achieve? He has had some
:06:31. > :06:33.consistent theme going back over 25 years. One is a deep scepticism
:06:34. > :06:37.about international trade and the kind of deals that America has been
:06:38. > :06:40.doing over that period. It has been so consistent that is has been hard
:06:41. > :06:44.to spin as something that you say during the course of a campaign of
:06:45. > :06:47.something to get elected. Ultimately, Piers is correct, he
:06:48. > :06:51.won't change. When he won the election committee gave a relatively
:06:52. > :06:56.magnanimous beach. I thought his ego had been sated and he had got what
:06:57. > :06:59.he wanted. He will end up governing as is likely eccentric New York
:07:00. > :07:02.liberal and everything will be fine. In the recent weeks it has come to
:07:03. > :07:06.my attention that that might not be entirely true!
:07:07. > :07:10.LAUGHTER It is a real test of the American
:07:11. > :07:14.system, the Texan bouncers, the foreign policy establishment which
:07:15. > :07:19.is about to have the orthodoxies disrupted -- the checks and
:07:20. > :07:22.balances. I think he has completely ripped up the American political
:07:23. > :07:26.system. Washington as we know it is dead. From his garage do things his
:07:27. > :07:32.way, he doesn't care, frankly, what any of us thinks -- Trump is going
:07:33. > :07:38.to do things his way. If he can deliver for the people who voted for
:07:39. > :07:44.him who fault this disenfranchised, -- who voted for him who felt this
:07:45. > :07:48.disenfranchised. They voted accordingly. They want to see jobs
:07:49. > :07:52.and the economy in good shape, they want to feel secure. They want to
:07:53. > :07:57.feel that immigration has been tightened. If Trump can deliver on
:07:58. > :08:00.those main theme for the rust belt communities of America, I'm telling
:08:01. > :08:03.you, he will go down as a very successful president. All of the
:08:04. > :08:06.offensive rhetoric and the argy-bargy with CNN and whatever it
:08:07. > :08:14.may be will be completely irrelevant. Let me finish with a
:08:15. > :08:17.parochial question. Is it fair to say quite well disposed to this
:08:18. > :08:19.country? And that he would like, that he's up for a speedy
:08:20. > :08:25.free-trade, bilateral free-trade you'll? Think we have to be sensible
:08:26. > :08:29.as the country. Come Friday, he is the president of the United States,
:08:30. > :08:33.the most powerful man and well. He said to me that he feels half
:08:34. > :08:37.British, his mum was born and raised in Scotland until the age of 18, he
:08:38. > :08:41.loves British, his mother used to love watching the Queen, he feels
:08:42. > :08:45.very, you know, I would roll out the red carpet for Trump, let him eat
:08:46. > :08:51.Her Majesty. The crucial point for us as a country is coming -- let him
:08:52. > :08:56.me to Her Majesty. If we can do a speedy deal within an 18 month
:08:57. > :08:59.period, it really sends a message that well but we are back in the
:09:00. > :09:04.game, that is a hugely beneficial thing for this country. Well, a man
:09:05. > :09:10.whose advisers were indicating that maybe he should learn a few things
:09:11. > :09:14.from Donald Trump was Jeremy Corbyn. Yes, MBE. Mr Corbyn appeared on the
:09:15. > :09:17.Andrew Marr Show this morning. -- yes, indeed.
:09:18. > :09:19.If you don't win Copeland, and if you don't win
:09:20. > :09:21.Stoke-on-Trent Central, you're toast, aren't you?
:09:22. > :09:25.Our party is going to fight very hard in those elections,
:09:26. > :09:29.as we are in the local elections, to put those policies out there.
:09:30. > :09:31.It's an opportunity to challenge the Government on the NHS.
:09:32. > :09:34.It's an opportunity to challenge them on the chaos of Brexit.
:09:35. > :09:36.It's an opportunity to challenge them on the housing shortage.
:09:37. > :09:38.It's an opportunity to challenge them on zero-hours contracts.
:09:39. > :09:43.Is there ever a moment that you look in the mirror and think,
:09:44. > :09:46.you know what, I've done my best, but this might not be for me?
:09:47. > :09:49.I look in the mirror every day and I think,
:09:50. > :09:52.let's go out there and try and create a society where there
:09:53. > :09:54.are opportunities for all, where there aren't these terrible
:09:55. > :09:55.levels of poverty, where there isn't homelessness,
:09:56. > :09:58.where there are houses for all, and where young people aren't
:09:59. > :10:00.frightened of going to university because of the debts
:10:01. > :10:04.they are going to end up with at the end of their course.
:10:05. > :10:10.Mr Corbyn earlier this morning. Steve, would it be fair to say that
:10:11. > :10:13.the mainstream of the Labour Party has now come to the conclusion that
:10:14. > :10:16.they just have to let Mr Corbyn get on with it, that they are not going
:10:17. > :10:22.to try and influence what he does. They will continue to try and have
:10:23. > :10:26.their own views, but it's his show, it's up to him, if it's a mess, he
:10:27. > :10:30.has to live with it and we'll have clean hands? For now, yes. I think
:10:31. > :10:33.they made a mistake when he was first elected to start in some cases
:10:34. > :10:37.tweeting within seconds that it was going to be a disaster, this was
:10:38. > :10:40.Labour MPs. They made a complete mess of that attempted coup in the
:10:41. > :10:46.summer, which strengthened his position. And he did, it gave Corbyn
:10:47. > :10:50.the space with total legitimacy to say that part of the problem is,
:10:51. > :10:57.we're having this public Civil War. In keeping quiet, that disappeared
:10:58. > :11:02.as part of the explanation for why Labour and low in the polls. I think
:11:03. > :11:07.they are partly doing that. But they are also struggling, the so-called
:11:08. > :11:10.mainstream Labour MPs, to decide what the distinctive agenda is. It's
:11:11. > :11:15.one of the many differences with the 80s, where you had a group of people
:11:16. > :11:19.sure of what they believed in, they left to form the SDP. What's
:11:20. > :11:23.happening now is that they are leaving politics altogether. That is
:11:24. > :11:26.a crisis of social Democrats all across Europe, including the French
:11:27. > :11:34.Socialists, as we will find out later in the spring. Let Corbyn
:11:35. > :11:36.because then, that's the strategy. There is a weary and sometimes
:11:37. > :11:39.literal resignation from the moderates in the Labour Party. If
:11:40. > :11:42.you talk to them, they are no longer angry, they have always run out of
:11:43. > :11:45.steam to be angry about what's going on. They are just sort of tired and
:11:46. > :11:48.feel that they've just got to see this through now. I think the
:11:49. > :11:53.by-elections will be interesting. When Andrew Marr said, you're toast,
:11:54. > :11:57.and you? I thought, he's never posed! That was right. A quick
:11:58. > :12:03.thought from view? One thing Corbyn has in common with Trump is immunity
:12:04. > :12:10.to bad news. I think he can lose Copeland and lose Stoke, and as long
:12:11. > :12:12.as it is not a sequence of resignations and by-elections
:12:13. > :12:15.afterwards, with maybe a dozen or 20 Labour MPs going, he can still enjoy
:12:16. > :12:22.what. It may be more trouble if Labour loses the United trade union
:12:23. > :12:24.elections. We are in a period of incredible unpredictability
:12:25. > :12:28.generally in global politics. If you look at the way the next year plays
:12:29. > :12:32.out, if for example brags it was a disaster and it starts to unravel
:12:33. > :12:35.very quickly, Theresa May is attached to that, clearly label
:12:36. > :12:39.would have a great opportunity potentially disease that higher
:12:40. > :12:44.ground, and when Eddie the Tories -- Labour would have an opportunity. Is
:12:45. > :12:49.Corbyn the right guy? We interviewed him, what struck me was that he
:12:50. > :12:53.talked about being from, a laughable comparison, but when it is really
:12:54. > :12:58.laughable is this - Hillary Clinton, what were the things she stood for,
:12:59. > :13:02.nobody really knew? What does Trump stand for? Everybody knew. Corbyn
:13:03. > :13:06.has the work-out four or five messages and bang, bang, bang. He
:13:07. > :13:07.could still be in business. Thank you for being with us.
:13:08. > :13:11.I'll be back at the same time next weekend.
:13:12. > :13:13.Remember - if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.