:00:39. > :00:40.It's Sunday morning, and this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:41. > :00:44.Theresa May will be the first foreign leader to visit US
:00:45. > :00:47.President Donald Trump this week - she's promised to hold "very
:00:48. > :00:50.frank" conversations with the new and controversial
:00:51. > :00:57.Speaking of the 45th President of America,
:00:58. > :01:00.we'll be looking at what the Trump presidency could hold
:01:01. > :01:06.in store for Britain and the rest of the world.
:01:07. > :01:09.And with the Supreme Court expected to say that Parliament should
:01:10. > :01:12.have a vote before the Brexit process begins, we'll ask
:01:13. > :01:18.Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott what Labour will do next.
:01:19. > :01:22.In the capital, a ?2 billion regeneration scheme in north London.
:01:23. > :01:25.Is a public-private partnership the best way,
:01:26. > :01:39.And to talk about all of that and more, I'm joined by three
:01:40. > :01:42.journalists who, in an era of so-called fake news, can be
:01:43. > :01:45.relied upon for their accuracy, their impartiality -
:01:46. > :01:48.and their willingness to come to the studio
:01:49. > :01:55.It's Steve Richards, Julia Hartley-Brewer
:01:56. > :02:01.and Tom Newton Dunn, and during the programme they'll be
:02:02. > :02:05.tweeting as often as the 45th President of the USA in the middle
:02:06. > :02:15.So - the Prime Minister has been appearing on the BBC this morning.
:02:16. > :02:17.She was mostly talking about Donald Trump and Brexit,
:02:18. > :02:20.but she was also asked about a story on the front of this
:02:21. > :02:24.It's reported that an unarmed Trident missile test fired
:02:25. > :02:30.from the submarine HMS Vengeance near the Florida coast in June
:02:31. > :02:39.The paper says the incident took place weeks before a crucial Commons
:02:40. > :02:43.Well, let's have listen to Theresa May talking
:02:44. > :02:48.The issue that we were talking about in the House of Commons
:02:49. > :02:52.It was about whether or not we should renew Trident,
:02:53. > :02:56.whether we should look to the future and have a replacement Trident.
:02:57. > :02:58.That's what we were talking about in the House of Commons.
:02:59. > :03:00.That's what the House of Commons voted for.
:03:01. > :03:06.He doesn't want to defend our country with an independent
:03:07. > :03:13.There are tests that take place all the time, regularly,
:03:14. > :03:21.What we were talking about in that debate that took place...
:03:22. > :03:29.I'm not going to get an answer to this.
:03:30. > :03:35.Tom, it was clear this was going to come up this morning. It is on the
:03:36. > :03:40.front page of the Sunday Times. It would seem to me the Prime Minister
:03:41. > :03:46.wasn't properly briefed on how to reply. I think she probably was, but
:03:47. > :03:49.the Prime Minister we now have doesn't necessarily answer all
:03:50. > :03:57.questions in the straightest way. She didn't answer that one and all.
:03:58. > :04:04.Unlike previous ones? She made it quite clear she was briefed. You
:04:05. > :04:09.read between the Theresa May lines. By simply not answering Andrew Marr
:04:10. > :04:13.four times, it is obvious she knew, and that she knew before she went
:04:14. > :04:19.into the House of Commons and urged everyone to renew the ?40 billion
:04:20. > :04:22.replacement programme. Of course it is an embarrassment, but does it
:04:23. > :04:29.have political legs? I don't think so. She didn't mislead the Commons.
:04:30. > :04:34.If she wanted to close it down, the answer should have been, these are
:04:35. > :04:37.matters of national security. There's nothing more important in
:04:38. > :04:44.that than our nuclear deterrent. I'm not prepared to talk about testing.
:04:45. > :04:49.End of. But she didn't. Maybe you should be briefing her. That's a
:04:50. > :04:55.good answer. She is an interesting interviewee. She shows it when she
:04:56. > :04:59.is nervous. She was transparently uneasy answering those questions,
:05:00. > :05:04.and the fact she didn't answer it definitively suggests she did know
:05:05. > :05:08.and didn't want to say it, and she answered awkwardly. But how wider
:05:09. > :05:14.point, that the House of Commons voted for the renewal of Trident,
:05:15. > :05:19.suggests to me that in the broader sweep of things, this will not run,
:05:20. > :05:25.because if there was another vote, I would suggest she'd win it again.
:05:26. > :05:30.But it is an embarrassment and she handled it with a transparent
:05:31. > :05:36.awkwardness. She said that the tests go on all the time, but not of the
:05:37. > :05:40.missiles. Does it not show that when the Prime Minister leaves her
:05:41. > :05:45.comfort zone of Home Office affairs or related matters, she often
:05:46. > :05:51.struggles. We've seen it under questioning from Mr Corbyn even, and
:05:52. > :05:55.we saw it again today. Absolutely. Tests of various aspects of the
:05:56. > :06:00.missiles go on all the time, but there's only been five since 2000.
:06:01. > :06:04.What you described wouldn't have worked, because in previous tests
:06:05. > :06:12.they have always been very public about it. Look how well our missiles
:06:13. > :06:20.work! She may not have misled Parliament, but she may not have
:06:21. > :06:25.known about it. If she didn't know, does Michael Fallon still have a job
:06:26. > :06:31.on Monday? Should Parliament know about a test that doesn't work? Some
:06:32. > :06:37.would say absolutely not. Our deterrent is there to deter people
:06:38. > :06:42.from attacking us. If they know that we are hitting the United States by
:06:43. > :06:47.mistake rather than the Atlantic Ocean, then... There is such a thing
:06:48. > :06:53.as national security, and telling all the bad guys about where we are
:06:54. > :06:57.going wrong may not be a good idea. It was her first statement as Prime
:06:58. > :07:03.Minister to put her case for renewal, to have the vote on
:07:04. > :07:06.Trident, and in that context, it is significant not to say anything. If
:07:07. > :07:10.anyone knows where the missile landed, give us a call!
:07:11. > :07:12.So Donald Trump's inauguration day closed with him dancing
:07:13. > :07:15.to Frank Sinatra's My Way, and whatever your view on the 45th
:07:16. > :07:18.President of the United States he certainly did do it his way.
:07:19. > :07:20.Not for him the idealistic call for national unity -
:07:21. > :07:22.instead he used Friday's inaugural address to launch a blistering
:07:23. > :07:26.attack on the dark state of the nation and the political
:07:27. > :07:30.class, and to promise to take his uncompromising approach
:07:31. > :07:34.from the campaign trail to the White House.
:07:35. > :07:38.Here's Adam Fleming, with a reminder of how
:07:39. > :07:47.First, dropping by for a cup of tea and a slightly awkward exchange
:07:48. > :07:55.Then, friends, foes and predecessors watched
:07:56. > :08:02.I, Donald John Trump, do solemnly swear...
:08:03. > :08:07.The crowds seemed smaller than previous inaugurations,
:08:08. > :08:11.the speech tougher then any previous incoming president.
:08:12. > :08:18.From this day forth, it's going to be only America first.
:08:19. > :08:43.In the meantime, there were sporadic protests in Washington, DC.
:08:44. > :08:48.Opponents made their voices heard around the world too.
:08:49. > :08:49.The President, who'd criticised the work of
:08:50. > :08:54.the intelligence agencies, fitted in a visit to the CIA.
:08:55. > :08:57.There is nobody that feels stronger about the intelligence community
:08:58. > :09:09.And, back at the office, in the dark, a signature signalled
:09:10. > :09:15.the end of the Obama era and the dawn of Trump.
:09:16. > :09:22.So, as you heard there, President Trump used his
:09:23. > :09:24.inauguration to repeat his campaign promise to put "America first"
:09:25. > :09:27.in all his decisions, and offered some hints of what to expect
:09:28. > :09:43.He talked of in America in carnage, to be rebuilt by American hands and
:09:44. > :09:47.American Labour. President Trump has already started to dismantle key
:09:48. > :09:52.parts of the Obama Legacy, including the unwinding of the affordable care
:09:53. > :09:57.act, and the siding of the climate action plan to tackle global
:09:58. > :10:02.warning. Little to say about foreign policy, but promised to eradicate
:10:03. > :10:07.Islamic terrorism from the face of the Earth, insisting he would
:10:08. > :10:12.restore the US military to unquestioning dominance. He also
:10:13. > :10:17.said the US would develop a state missile defence system to deal with
:10:18. > :10:22.threats he sees from Iran and North Korea. In a statement that painted a
:10:23. > :10:27.bleak picture of the country he now runs, he said his would be a law and
:10:28. > :10:32.order Administration, and he would keep the innocents safe by building
:10:33. > :10:38.the border war with Mexico. One thing he didn't mention, for the
:10:39. > :10:41.first time ever, there is a Eurosceptic in the oval office, who
:10:42. > :10:44.is also an enthusiast for Brexit. We're joined now by Ted Malloch -
:10:45. > :10:47.he's a Trump supporter who's been tipped as the president's
:10:48. > :10:49.choice for US ambassador to the EU, and he's
:10:50. > :10:51.just flown back from Washington. And by James Rubin -
:10:52. > :11:02.he's a democrat who served Let's start with that last point I
:11:03. > :11:09.made in the voice over there. We now have a Eurosceptic in the oval
:11:10. > :11:12.office. He is pro-Brexit and not keen on further European Union
:11:13. > :11:19.integration. What are the implications of that? First of all,
:11:20. > :11:24.a renewal of the US- UK special relationship. You see the Prime
:11:25. > :11:28.Minister already going to build and rebuild this relationship. Already,
:11:29. > :11:33.the bust of Winston Churchill is back in the oval office.
:11:34. > :11:37.Interestingly, Martin Luther King's bust is also there, so there is an
:11:38. > :11:44.act of unity in that first movement of dusts. Donald Trump will be
:11:45. > :11:54.oriented between bilateral relationships and not multilateral
:11:55. > :12:00.or supernatural. Supranational full. What are the implications of someone
:12:01. > :12:06.in the White House now not believing in it? I think we are present in the
:12:07. > :12:10.unravelling of America's leadership of the West. There is now a thing
:12:11. > :12:18.called the west that America has led since the end of World War II,
:12:19. > :12:27.creating supranational - we just heard supernatural! These
:12:28. > :12:31.institutions were created. With American leadership, the world was
:12:32. > :12:35.at peace in Europe, and the world grew increasingly democratic and
:12:36. > :12:40.prosperous. Wars were averted that could be extremely costly. When
:12:41. > :12:44.something works in diplomacy, you don't really understand what the
:12:45. > :12:48.consequences could have been. I think we've got complacent. The new
:12:49. > :12:54.president is taking advantage of that. It is a terrible tragedy that
:12:55. > :12:59.so many in the West take for granted the successful leadership and
:13:00. > :13:07.institutions we have built. You could argue, as James Rubin has
:13:08. > :13:12.argued in some articles, that... Will Mr Trump's America be more
:13:13. > :13:20.involved in the world than the Obama won? Or will it continue the process
:13:21. > :13:26.with running shoes on that began with Mr Obama? President Obama
:13:27. > :13:31.stepped back from American leadership. He withdrew from the
:13:32. > :13:35.world. He had a horrendous eight years in office, and American powers
:13:36. > :13:41.have diminished everywhere in the world, not just in Europe. That
:13:42. > :13:45.power will reassert. The focus will be on America first, but there are
:13:46. > :13:51.foreign interests around the world... How does it reassert itself
:13:52. > :13:55.around the world? I think the institutions will be recreated. Some
:13:56. > :14:01.may be taken down. There could be some new ones. I think Nato itself,
:14:02. > :14:05.and certainly the Defence Secretary will have discussions with Donald
:14:06. > :14:09.Trump about how Nato can be reshaped, and maybe there will be
:14:10. > :14:15.more burden sharing. That is an important thing for him. You are
:14:16. > :14:19.tipped to be the US ambassador to Brussels, to the EU, and we are
:14:20. > :14:24.still waiting to hear if that will happen. Is it true to say that Mr
:14:25. > :14:33.Trump does not believe in EU integration? I think you made that
:14:34. > :14:41.clear in the speech. He talked about supranational. He does not believe
:14:42. > :14:45.in those kinds of organisations. He is investing himself in bilateral
:14:46. > :14:50.relationships, the first of which will be with the UK. So we have a
:14:51. > :14:57.president who does not believe in EU integration and has been highly
:14:58. > :15:01.critical of Nato. Do the people he has appointed to defend, Secretary
:15:02. > :15:06.of State, national security, do you think that will temper this
:15:07. > :15:13.anti-NATO wretched? Will he come round to a more pro-NATO situation?
:15:14. > :15:19.I think those of us who care about America's situation in the world
:15:20. > :15:23.will come in to miss President Obama a lot. I think the Secretary of
:15:24. > :15:29.State and the faculty of defence will limit the damage and will urge
:15:30. > :15:33.him not to take formal steps to unravel this most powerful and most
:15:34. > :15:40.successful alliance in history, the Nato alliance. But the damage is
:15:41. > :15:44.already being done. When you are the leader of the West, leadership means
:15:45. > :15:50.you are persuading, encouraging, bolstering your leadership and these
:15:51. > :15:54.institutions by the way you speak. Millions, if not hundreds of
:15:55. > :15:56.millions of people, have now heard the US say that what they care about
:15:57. > :16:06.is within their borders. What do you say to that? It is such
:16:07. > :16:15.an overstatement. The point is that Donald Trump is in a Jacksonian
:16:16. > :16:18.tradition of national populism. He is appealing to the people first.
:16:19. > :16:24.The other day, I was sitting below this page during the address, and he
:16:25. > :16:28.said, everyone sitting behind me as part of the problem. Everyone in
:16:29. > :16:32.front of me, the crowd and the crowd on television, is part of the
:16:33. > :16:36.solution, so we are giving the Government back to the people. That
:16:37. > :16:39.emphasis is going to change American life, including American
:16:40. > :16:48.International relations. It doesn't moving the leak back -- it doesn't
:16:49. > :16:53.mean we are moving out of Nato, it simply means we will put our
:16:54. > :16:57.national interests first. There were echoes of Andrew Jackson's
:16:58. > :17:03.inauguration address of 1820. That night, the Jacksonians trashed the
:17:04. > :17:05.White House, but Mr Trump's people didn't do that, so there is a
:17:06. > :17:11.difference there. He also said something else in the address - that
:17:12. > :17:19.protectionism would lead to prosperity. I would suggest there is
:17:20. > :17:24.no evidence for that in the post-war world. He talked about protecting
:17:25. > :17:27.the American worker, American jobs, the American economy. I actually
:17:28. > :17:34.think that Donald Trump will not turn out to be a protectionist. If
:17:35. > :17:40.you read the heart of the deal... This is referring to two Republican
:17:41. > :17:49.senators who introduce massive tariffs in the Hoover
:17:50. > :17:54.administration. Exactly. If you read The Art Of The Deal, you will see
:17:55. > :17:57.how Donald Trump deals with individuals and countries. There is
:17:58. > :18:03.a lot of bluster, positioning, and I think you already see this in
:18:04. > :18:08.bringing jobs by the United States. Things are going to change. Let's
:18:09. > :18:15.also deal with this proposition. China is the biggest loser of this
:18:16. > :18:21.election result. Let me say this: The first time in American history
:18:22. > :18:29.and American president has set forth his view of the world, and it is a
:18:30. > :18:33.mercantile view of the world, who makes more money, who gets more
:18:34. > :18:38.trade, it doesn't look at the shared values, leadership and defends the
:18:39. > :18:41.world needs. The art of the deal has no application to America's
:18:42. > :18:46.leadership of the world, that's what we're learning. You can be a great
:18:47. > :18:51.businessman and make great real estate deals - whether he did not is
:18:52. > :18:55.debatable - but it has nothing to do with inspiring shared values from
:18:56. > :18:59.the West. You saying China may lose, because he may pressure them to
:19:00. > :19:06.reduce their trade deficit with the US. They may or may not. We may both
:19:07. > :19:10.lose. Right now, his Secretary of State has said, and I think he will
:19:11. > :19:14.walk this back when he is brief, that they will prevent the Chinese
:19:15. > :19:18.from entering these islands in the South China Sea. If they were to do
:19:19. > :19:23.that, it would be a blockade, and there would be a shooting war
:19:24. > :19:27.between the United States and China, so US - China relations are the most
:19:28. > :19:31.important bilateral relationship of the United States, and they don't
:19:32. > :19:35.lend themselves to the bluff and bluster that may have worked when
:19:36. > :19:40.you are trying to get a big building on second Ave in Manhattan. Is China
:19:41. > :19:57.the biggest loser? I think the Chinese have a lot to lose. Gigi and
:19:58. > :20:02.Ping was in Davos this week -- Xi Jin Ping was in Davos.
:20:03. > :20:08.Is Germany the second biggest loser in the sense that I understand he
:20:09. > :20:16.hasn't agreed time to see Angela Merkel yet, also that those close to
:20:17. > :20:19.him believe that Germany is guilty of currency manipulation by adopting
:20:20. > :20:23.a weak your row instead of the strong Deutschmark, and that that is
:20:24. > :20:29.why they are running a huge balance of payments surplus with the United
:20:30. > :20:35.States. American - German relations may not be great. There is a point
:20:36. > :20:38.of view throughout Europe. You only have to talk to the southern
:20:39. > :20:42.Europeans about this question. It seems like the euro has been aligned
:20:43. > :20:48.to benefit Germany. Joe Stiglitz, the famous left of centre Democrat
:20:49. > :20:56.economist, made the same case in a recent book. In this case, I think
:20:57. > :21:00.Germany will be put under the spotlight. Angela Merkel has shown
:21:01. > :21:05.herself to be the most respected and the most successful leader in
:21:06. > :21:09.Europe. We who care about the West, who care about the shared values of
:21:10. > :21:14.the West, should pray and hope that she is re-elected. This isn't about
:21:15. > :21:19.dollars and cents. We're living in a time whether Russian leader has
:21:20. > :21:25.another country in Europe and for some inexplicable reason, the
:21:26. > :21:28.American president, who can use his insult diplomacy on everyone,
:21:29. > :21:34.including Mrs Merkel, the only person he can't seem to find
:21:35. > :21:38.anything to criticise about is Mr Putin. There are things more
:21:39. > :21:42.important than the actual details of your currency. There are things like
:21:43. > :21:45.preventing another war in Europe, preventing a war between the Chinese
:21:46. > :21:52.and the US. You talk about the Trident missile all morning, nuclear
:21:53. > :21:57.deterrence is extremely important. It doesn't lend itself to the bluff
:21:58. > :22:00.and bluster of a real estate deal. I understand all that, but the fact we
:22:01. > :22:05.are even talking about these things shows the new world we are moving
:22:06. > :22:09.into. I'd like to get you both to react to this. This is a man that
:22:10. > :22:17.ended the Bush Dynasty, a man that beat the Clinton machine. In his
:22:18. > :22:19.inauguration, not only did he not reach out to the Democrats, he
:22:20. > :22:26.didn't even mention the Republicans. These are changed days for us. They
:22:27. > :22:30.are, and change can be good or disastrous. I'm worried that it's
:22:31. > :22:36.easy in the world of diplomacy and in them -- for the leadership of the
:22:37. > :22:40.United States to break relationships and ruin alliances. These are things
:22:41. > :22:48.that were carefully nurtured. George Schultz, the American Secretary of
:22:49. > :22:51.State under Reagan talked about gardening, the slow, careful
:22:52. > :22:56.creation of a place with bilateral relationships that were blossoming
:22:57. > :22:59.and flowering multilateral relationships that take decades to
:23:00. > :23:05.create, and he will throw them away in a matter of days. The final
:23:06. > :23:09.word... I work for George Schultz. He was a Marine who stood up
:23:10. > :23:14.America, defended America, who would be in favour of many of the things
:23:15. > :23:19.that Donald Trump and the tramp Administration... Give him a call.
:23:20. > :23:23.His top aide macs that I've spoken to are appalled by Mr Trump's
:23:24. > :23:32.abdication of leadership. He is going to our radically -- he's going
:23:33. > :23:37.to eradicate extremist Islam from the face of the year. Is that
:23:38. > :23:40.realistic? I know people in the national security realm have worked
:23:41. > :23:46.on a plan. They say they will have such a plan in some detail within 90
:23:47. > :23:52.days. Lets hope they succeed. We have run out of time. As a issues.
:23:53. > :23:55.Thank you, both. -- fascinating issues.
:23:56. > :23:58.So Theresa May promised a big speech on Brexit, and this week -
:23:59. > :24:01.perhaps against expectation - she delivered, trying to answer
:24:02. > :24:03.claims that the government didn't have a plan with an explicit
:24:04. > :24:06.wish-list of what she hopes to achieve in negotiations with the EU.
:24:07. > :24:08.To her allies it was ambitious, bold, optimistic -
:24:09. > :24:10.to her opponents it was full of contradictions
:24:11. > :24:14.Here's Adam again, with a reminder of the speech and how
:24:15. > :24:19.There are speeches, and there are speeches.
:24:20. > :24:23.Like Theresa May's 12 principles for a Brexit deal leading
:24:24. > :24:26.to the UK fully out of the EU but still friendly in terms
:24:27. > :24:29.This agreement should allow for the freest possible trade
:24:30. > :24:32.in goods and services between Britain and the EU's member states.
:24:33. > :24:37.It should give British companies the maximum
:24:38. > :24:41.operate within European markets and let European businesses do
:24:42. > :24:49.She also said no deal would be better than the wrong deal,
:24:50. > :25:05.We want to test what people think about what she's just said.
:25:06. > :25:07.Do we have any of our future negotiating
:25:08. > :25:12.As the European Parliament voted for its new
:25:13. > :25:19.president, its chief negotiator sounded off.
:25:20. > :25:21.Saying, OK, if our European counterparts don't accept
:25:22. > :25:24.it, we're going to make from Britain a sort
:25:25. > :25:27.of free zone or tax haven, I
:25:28. > :25:33.The Prime Minister of Malta, the country that's assumed the EU's
:25:34. > :25:36.rotating presidency, spoke in sorrow and a bit of anger.
:25:37. > :25:40.We want a fair deal for the United Kingdom, but
:25:41. > :25:50.that deal necessarily needs to be inferior to membership.
:25:51. > :25:53.Next, let's hear from some enthusiastic
:25:54. > :25:58.leavers, like, I don't know, the Daily Mail?
:25:59. > :26:01.The paper lapped it up with this adoring front page.
:26:02. > :26:05.For Brexiteers, it was all manna from heaven.
:26:06. > :26:08.I think today means we are a big step closer to becoming
:26:09. > :26:11.an independent country again, with control of our own laws,
:26:12. > :26:17.I was chuckling at some of it, to be honest, because
:26:18. > :26:21.There were various phrases there which I've used myself again and
:26:22. > :26:26.Do we have any of those so-called Remoaners?
:26:27. > :26:28.There will, at the end of this deal process,
:26:29. > :26:31.so politicians get to vote on the stitch-up, but
:26:32. > :26:34.We take the view as Liberal Democrats that
:26:35. > :26:36.if this process started with democracy last June,
:26:37. > :26:41.We trusted the people with departure, we must trust them
:26:42. > :26:47.Do we have anyone from Labour, or are you all
:26:48. > :26:49.watching it in a small room somewhere?
:26:50. > :26:56.Throughout the speech, there seemed to be an implied threat that
:26:57. > :26:59.somewhere along the line, if all her optimism of a deal
:27:00. > :27:01.with the European Union didn't work, we would move
:27:02. > :27:03.into a low-tax, corporate taxation, bargain-basement economy on the
:27:04. > :27:07.I think she needs to be a bit clearer about what
:27:08. > :27:14.The Labour leader suggested he'd tell
:27:15. > :27:17.his MPs to vote in favour of starting a Brexit process if
:27:18. > :27:20.Parliament was given the choice, sparking a mini pre-revolt among
:27:21. > :27:25.Finally, do we have anyone from big business here?
:27:26. > :27:34.Of course, your all in Davos at the World Economic
:27:35. > :27:44.Clarity, first of all, really codified what many of us have been
:27:45. > :27:46.anticipating since the referendum result,
:27:47. > :27:47.particularly around the
:27:48. > :27:52.I think what we've also seen today is the Government's
:27:53. > :27:55.willingness to put a bit of edge into the negotiating dynamic, and I
:27:56. > :27:59.Trade negotiations are negotiations, and you have to lay out, and you
:28:00. > :28:02.have to be pretty tough to get what you want.
:28:03. > :28:04.Although some business people on the slopes speculated
:28:05. > :28:06.about moving some of their operations out of Brexit Britain.
:28:07. > :28:24.We saw there the instant reaction of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn,
:28:25. > :28:27.but how will the party respond to the challenge posed by Brexit
:28:28. > :28:31.Well, I'm joined now by the Shadow Home Secretary, Diane Abbott.
:28:32. > :28:40.People know that Ukip and the Tories are for Brexit. The Lib Dems are
:28:41. > :28:44.four remain. What is Labour for? For respecting the result of the
:28:45. > :28:49.referendum. It was a 72% turnout, very high for an election of that
:28:50. > :28:52.nature, and we believe you have to respect that result. You couldn't
:28:53. > :28:57.have a situation where people like Tim Farron are saying to people,
:28:58. > :29:00.millions of people, sorry, you got it wrong, we in London no better.
:29:01. > :29:07.However, how the Tories go forward from here has to be subject to
:29:08. > :29:12.parliamentary scrutiny. Is it Shadow Cabinet policy to vote for the
:29:13. > :29:16.triggering of Article 50? Our policy is not to block Article 50. That is
:29:17. > :29:23.what the leader was saying this morning. So are you for it? Our
:29:24. > :29:28.policy is not to block it. You are talking about voting for it. We
:29:29. > :29:33.don't know what the Supreme Court is going to say, and we don't know what
:29:34. > :29:37.legislation Government will bring forward, and we don't know what
:29:38. > :29:43.amendment we will move, but we're clear that we will not vote to block
:29:44. > :29:51.it. OK, so you won't bow to stop it, but you could abstain? No, what we
:29:52. > :29:55.will do... Either you vote for or against all you abstain. There are
:29:56. > :29:59.too many unanswered questions. For instance, the position of EU
:30:00. > :30:03.migrants working and living in this country. You may not get the answer
:30:04. > :30:08.to that before Article 50 comes before the Commons, so what would
:30:09. > :30:13.you do then? We are giving to amend it. We can only tell you exactly how
:30:14. > :30:16.we will amend it when we understand what sort of legislation the
:30:17. > :30:20.Government is putting forward, and in the course of moving those
:30:21. > :30:24.amendments, we will ask the questions that the people of Britain
:30:25. > :30:29.whether they voted to leave remain want answered.
:30:30. > :30:38.When you come to a collective view, will there be a three line whip? I
:30:39. > :30:42.can't tell you, because we have not seen the government 's legislation.
:30:43. > :30:48.But when you see it, you will come to a collective view. Many regard
:30:49. > :30:54.this as extremely important. Will there be a three line whip on
:30:55. > :30:59.Labour's collective view? Because it is important, we shouldn't get ahead
:31:00. > :31:03.of ourselves. When we see what the Supreme Court says, and crucially,
:31:04. > :31:07.when we see what the government position is, you will hear what the
:31:08. > :31:14.whipping is. Will shadow ministers be able to defy any three line whip
:31:15. > :31:20.on this? That is not normally the case. But they did on an early vote
:31:21. > :31:25.that the government introduced on Article 50. Those who voted against
:31:26. > :31:30.it are still there. In the Blair years, you certainly couldn't defy a
:31:31. > :31:36.three line whip. We will see what happens going forward. I remember
:31:37. > :31:39.when the Tories were hopelessly divided over the EU. All these
:31:40. > :31:46.Maastricht votes and an list arguments. Now it is Labour. Just
:31:47. > :31:58.another symptom of Mr Corbyn's poor leadership. Not at all. Two thirds
:31:59. > :32:03.voted to leave, a third to remain. We are seeking to bring the country
:32:04. > :32:09.and the party together. We will do that by pointing out how disastrous
:32:10. > :32:18.a Tory Brexit would be. Meanwhile, around 80 Labour MPs will defy a
:32:19. > :32:23.three line whip. It's too early to say that. Will you publish what you
:32:24. > :32:29.believe the negotiating goal should be? We are clear on it. We think
:32:30. > :32:34.that the economy, jobs and living standards should be the priority.
:32:35. > :32:40.What Theresa May is saying is that holding her party together is her
:32:41. > :32:46.priority. She is putting party above country. Does Labour think we should
:32:47. > :32:51.remain members of the single market? Ideally, in terms of jobs and the
:32:52. > :32:56.economy, of course. Ritt -ish business thinks that as well. Is
:32:57. > :33:01.Labour policy that we should remain a member of the single market?
:33:02. > :33:04.Labour leaves that jobs and the economy comes first, and if they
:33:05. > :33:12.come first, you would want to remain part of the single market. But to
:33:13. > :33:19.remain a member? Jobs and the economy comes first, and to do that,
:33:20. > :33:23.ideally, guess. So with that, comes free movement of people, the
:33:24. > :33:30.jurisdiction of the European, and a multi-million never shipped thief.
:33:31. > :33:35.Is Labour prepared to pay that? Money is neither here nor there.
:33:36. > :33:44.Because the Tories will be asked to pay a lot of money... The EU has
:33:45. > :33:51.made it clear that you cannot have... I am asking for Labour's
:33:52. > :33:57.position. Our position is rooted in the reality, and the reality is that
:33:58. > :34:01.you cannot have the benefits of the member of the European Union,
:34:02. > :34:03.including being a member of the single market, without
:34:04. > :34:08.responsibility, including free movement of people. Free movement,
:34:09. > :34:16.is remaining under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Is
:34:17. > :34:21.that the Labour position? You've said that Labour wants to remain a
:34:22. > :34:26.member of the single market. That is the price tag that comes with it.
:34:27. > :34:32.Does Labour agree with paying that price tag? We are not pre-empting
:34:33. > :34:37.negotiation. Our goals are protect jobs and the British economy. Is it
:34:38. > :34:46.Labour's position that we remain a member of the customs union? Well,
:34:47. > :34:56.if we don't, I don't see how Theresa May can keep our promises and has
:34:57. > :35:05.unfettered access... You said Labour's position was clear. It is!
:35:06. > :35:10.It is clear that Theresa May... I am not asking about Theresa May. Is it
:35:11. > :35:17.Labour's position to remain a member of the customs union? It is Labour's
:35:18. > :35:20.position to do what is right for British industry. Depending on how
:35:21. > :35:25.the negotiations go, it may prove that coming out of the customs
:35:26. > :35:31.union, as Theresa May has indicated she wants to do, could prove
:35:32. > :35:36.catastrophic, and could actually destroy some of her promises. You do
:35:37. > :35:44.accept that if we are member of the customs union, we cannot do our own
:35:45. > :35:50.free trade deals? What free trade deals are you talking about? The
:35:51. > :35:55.ones that Labour might want to do in the future. First, we have to
:35:56. > :35:59.protect British jobs and British industries. If you are talking about
:36:00. > :36:04.free trade deals with Donald Trump, the danger is that Theresa May will
:36:05. > :36:11.get drawn into a free-trade deal with America that will open up the
:36:12. > :36:16.NHS to American corporate... The cards are in Theresa May's hands. If
:36:17. > :36:21.she takes us out of the single market, if she takes us out of the
:36:22. > :36:26.customs union, we will have to deal with that. How big a crisis for
:36:27. > :36:32.Jeremy Corbyn will be if Labour loses both by-elections in February.
:36:33. > :36:41.I don't believe we will lose both. But if he did? I am not anticipating
:36:42. > :36:45.that. Is Labour lost two seats in a midterm of a Tory government, would
:36:46. > :36:49.that be business as usual? I'm not prepared to see us lose those seats,
:36:50. > :36:52.so I will not talk about something that will not happen. Thank you.
:36:53. > :36:53.You're watching the Sunday Politics.
:36:54. > :36:56.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now
:36:57. > :36:59.Coming up here in 20 minutes, The Week Ahead,
:37:00. > :37:01.when we'll be talking to Business Minister Margot James
:37:02. > :37:04.about the government's new industrial strategy and that
:37:05. > :37:07.crucial Supreme Court ruling on Brexit.
:37:08. > :00:10.First, though, the Sunday Politics where you are.
:00:11. > :00:13.have to do this. Thank you to you both.
:00:14. > :00:23.What exactly is the government's industrial strategy?
:00:24. > :00:27.Will ministers lose their supreme court battle over Brexit, and,
:00:28. > :00:39.Well, tomorrow Theresa May is launching the government's
:00:40. > :00:43.industrial strategy - and to talk about that we're joined
:00:44. > :00:50.by the Business Minister, Margot James - welcome to the show.
:00:51. > :00:58.When you look at what has already been released in advance of the
:00:59. > :01:03.Prime Minister's statement, it was embargoed for last night, it's not
:01:04. > :01:07.really an industrial strategy, it's just another skills strategy, of
:01:08. > :01:14.which we have had about six since the war, and our skills training is
:01:15. > :01:19.among the worst in Western Europe? There will be plenty more to be
:01:20. > :01:22.announced tomorrow in what is really a discussion document in the
:01:23. > :01:27.preparation of an industrial strategy which we intend to launch
:01:28. > :01:35.properly later in the year. Let's look at skills. You are allocating
:01:36. > :01:42.117 of funding to establish institutes of technology. How many?
:01:43. > :01:47.The exact number is to be agreed, but the spend is there, and it will
:01:48. > :01:50.be on top of what we are doing to the university, technical
:01:51. > :01:57.colleges... How many were lit bio create? We don't know exactly, but
:01:58. > :02:01.we want to put them in areas where young people are performing under
:02:02. > :02:08.the national average. But if you don't know how many, what is the
:02:09. > :02:12.basis of 170 million? That is the amount the Treasury have released.
:02:13. > :02:16.The something that is very important, we are agreed we need to
:02:17. > :02:22.devote more resources to vocational training and get it on a par with
:02:23. > :02:28.academic qualifications. I looked on the website of my old university,
:02:29. > :02:33.the University of Glasgow, the Russell group universities. Its
:02:34. > :02:41.spending budget every year is over 600 million. That's one University.
:02:42. > :02:46.And yet you have a mere 170 million foreign unspecified number of
:02:47. > :02:52.institutes of technology. It hasn't got equality with the academics? You
:02:53. > :02:55.have to remember that just as you have quoted figures from Glasgow
:02:56. > :03:00.University there are further education colleges all over the
:03:01. > :03:08.country. The government is already spending on 16 to 19-year-olds. But
:03:09. > :03:13.also, we are going to be adding... This is new money that is all to the
:03:14. > :03:19.good, because we are already spending a lot. We have already
:03:20. > :03:23.created 2 million more apprentices since 2010. That many are not in
:03:24. > :03:28.what we would call the stem skills, and a lot come nowhere near what the
:03:29. > :03:34.Dutch, Germans and Austrians would have. I'm not clear how another 170
:03:35. > :03:38.million would do. You said it is more than skills. In what way is
:03:39. > :03:50.this industrial strategy different from what Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne
:03:51. > :03:52.did before? It's different because it is involving every single
:03:53. > :03:54.government department, and bringing together everything that government
:03:55. > :03:57.does in a bid to make Britain more competitive as it disengages from
:03:58. > :04:03.the European Union. That is what the last Labour government did. They
:04:04. > :04:07.will much more targeted interventions. Under the Labour
:04:08. > :04:12.government, the auto industry got some benefit. A few more sectors
:04:13. > :04:17.were broached under the coalition government. This is all about
:04:18. > :04:22.communities all over the country, some of whom have fallen behind in
:04:23. > :04:28.terms of wage growth and good jobs. The Prime Minister has already
:04:29. > :04:35.announced 2 billion as a research and development priority in specific
:04:36. > :04:39.technologies, robotics, artificial intelligence, medical technology,
:04:40. > :04:44.satellites... So you are doing what has been done before. There is
:04:45. > :04:49.nothing new about this. Wait until tomorrow, because there will be some
:04:50. > :04:52.new strands emerging. It is the beginning of the dialogue with
:04:53. > :04:58.industry and with workers, and the responses will be invited up until
:04:59. > :05:04.April. That will inform a wider strategy that goes beyond skills. I
:05:05. > :05:09.have moved on to beyond them. I'm slightly puzzled as to how the
:05:10. > :05:14.government knows where to invest in robotics, when it can't even provide
:05:15. > :05:19.the NHS with a decent IT system. Discuss. I have to say I find it
:05:20. > :05:22.bizarre that the government is making an announcement about an
:05:23. > :05:27.amount of money and don't know where it's going. This is typical of all
:05:28. > :05:33.governments over all political shoes, which is total disregard for
:05:34. > :05:42.technical education, so different from Germany, who actually invest in
:05:43. > :05:48.the technological side. Germany has a long history. We want to emulate
:05:49. > :05:53.some of the best of what German companies do. Siemens sponsor
:05:54. > :05:58.primary schools, for example. We want to get a dialogue on with
:05:59. > :06:03.business. We don't want to decide where this money is going. By the
:06:04. > :06:09.way, it was 4.7 billion that the government has agreed to invest in
:06:10. > :06:12.science and research, which is the most significant increase in
:06:13. > :06:17.decades. Can you remind us what happened in Northern Ireland, when
:06:18. > :06:20.the government invested money in state-of-the-art technology for
:06:21. > :06:28.energy? No one needs to be reminded of that, and that is not what we are
:06:29. > :06:33.doing. We are inviting business and industry to advise where that money
:06:34. > :06:38.is best spent. That's very different from government deciding that a
:06:39. > :06:43.particular technology is for the future. The government's chief
:06:44. > :06:49.scientific adviser has determined that we will invest a huge amount in
:06:50. > :06:54.battery technology, which should benefit the electric car industry,
:06:55. > :07:01.and... This is taxpayers' money. Who gets it? Ultimately, business will
:07:02. > :07:06.get it, but often only when there is a considerable amount of private
:07:07. > :07:14.sector finance also drawn in. But who is held to account? Various
:07:15. > :07:18.government departments at local authorities will hold this list to
:07:19. > :07:25.account. A lot of it is about releasing private capital as well.
:07:26. > :07:32.Thank you very much. This week, the Supreme Court, I think we know the
:07:33. > :07:36.ruling is coming on Tuesday. And the expectation is that the judges will
:07:37. > :07:42.say Parliament will have to vote to trigger. Is this all much ado about
:07:43. > :07:45.nothing? Parliament will vote to trigger, and the government will win
:07:46. > :07:50.in the Lords and the Commons by substantial majorities, and it will
:07:51. > :07:55.be triggered? Completely. We've known that. Parliament is voted.
:07:56. > :07:59.Everyone is pretty confident that the Supreme Court will uphold the
:08:00. > :08:07.High Court's decision and say it has to go to MPs. There will be a bit of
:08:08. > :08:13.toing and froing among MPs on amendments. You heard Diane Abbott's
:08:14. > :08:17.slightly car crash interview there. The Lib Dems may throw something in,
:08:18. > :08:24.but we will trigger Article 50 by the end of March. If it also says
:08:25. > :08:29.that the roll of Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast should be picked up,
:08:30. > :08:33.that could complicate matters. Absolutely. That could delay the
:08:34. > :08:37.planned triggering of Article 50 before the end of March. Not what
:08:38. > :08:42.they say about the Westminster Parliament, because it is clear that
:08:43. > :08:47.it was. I never understood the furore about that original judgment,
:08:48. > :08:52.because every MP made it clear they wouldn't block it. Even though Diane
:08:53. > :08:57.Abbott was evasive on several fronts, she said they wouldn't block
:08:58. > :09:02.it. You are right, if they give a vote, or give some authorisation for
:09:03. > :09:07.the Scottish Parliament and other devolved assemblies, that might
:09:08. > :09:13.delay the whole sequence. That is the only significant thing to watch
:09:14. > :09:18.out for. Watch out on Tuesday. Mrs May goes to Washington. It will be
:09:19. > :09:22.another movie in the making! I would suggest that she has a tricky line
:09:23. > :09:28.to follow. She has got to be seen to be taking advantage of the fact that
:09:29. > :09:32.there is a very pro-British, pro-Brexit president in the Oval
:09:33. > :09:37.Office, who I am told is prepared to expend political capital on this.
:09:38. > :09:49.But on the other hand, to make sure that she is not what we used to call
:09:50. > :09:53.Mr Blair, George Bush's poodle. It is very difficult, and who would not
:09:54. > :09:56.want to be a fly on the wall in that meeting! I can't think of anyone in
:09:57. > :10:02.the world who would despise Mr Trump more than Mrs May, and for him, he
:10:03. > :10:12.dislikes any woman who does not look like a supermodel, no disrespected
:10:13. > :10:16.Mrs May. Most of it is actually anti-EU, and I think we should
:10:17. > :10:21.capitalise it. Let's get the Queen to earn her money, roll out the red
:10:22. > :10:28.carpet, invite him to dinner, spend the night, what ever we need...
:10:29. > :10:33.Trump at Balmoral! Here is the issue, because the agenda is, as we
:10:34. > :10:39.heard from Ted Malloch earlier, that this is not an administration that
:10:40. > :10:41.has much time for the EU, EU integration or Germany. I think
:10:42. > :10:47.Germany will be the second biggest loser to begin with. They will not
:10:48. > :10:55.even give a date for Angela Merkel to meet the president. This is an
:10:56. > :11:03.opportunity for Mrs May... It is a huge. It could sideline talks of the
:11:04. > :11:10.punishment beating from Germany. The Trump presidency has completely
:11:11. > :11:14.changed the field on Brexit. Along came Donald Trump, and Theresa May
:11:15. > :11:19.has this incredible opportunity here. Not of her making, but she has
:11:20. > :11:25.played her cards well. To an officially be the EU emissary to
:11:26. > :11:30.Washington, to get some sort of broker going. That gives us huge
:11:31. > :11:34.extra leveraged in the Brexit negotiations. People around the
:11:35. > :11:38.world think Germany as a currency manipulator, that it is benefiting
:11:39. > :11:43.from an underpriced euro, hence the huge surplus it runs of America, and
:11:44. > :11:48.they think it is disgraceful that a country that runs a massive budget
:11:49. > :11:53.surplus spends only 1.2% of its GDP on defence, and America runs a
:11:54. > :12:00.massive deficit and needs to spend a lot more. He's going for Germany.
:12:01. > :12:04.And what a massive shift. I think Obama was quite open, in a farewell
:12:05. > :12:09.interview, that he felt closer to Merkel than any other European
:12:10. > :12:16.leader. And Jamie kind of reflected that in our discussion. Yes, that's
:12:17. > :12:21.very interesting discussion. I think she was the last person he spoke to
:12:22. > :12:27.in the White House, Obama. And now you are getting the onslaught from
:12:28. > :12:32.Trump. This Thatcher- Reagan imagery is dangerous, though. Blair was
:12:33. > :12:37.hypnotised by it and was too scared to criticise Bush, because he wanted
:12:38. > :12:42.to be seen in that light, and we know where that led. Cameron
:12:43. > :12:45.similarly with Obama, which presented him with problems, as
:12:46. > :12:52.Obama didn't regard him as his number one pin up in Europe. I would
:12:53. > :12:57.put a note of caution in there about the Thatcher - Reagan parallel.
:12:58. > :13:02.Everything Trump is doing now is different from before, so Mrs May
:13:03. > :13:08.should not have any of these previous relationships in her mind.
:13:09. > :13:16.That is not entirely true. Donald Trump aches to be the new Ronald
:13:17. > :13:19.Reagan. He may be impeached first! He sees her as the new Margaret
:13:20. > :13:27.Thatcher, and that may her leveraged with him. Thank you.
:13:28. > :13:32.We'll be back here at the same time next week, and you can catch up
:13:33. > :13:34.on all the latest political news on the Daily Politics,
:13:35. > :13:39.In the meantime, remember - if it's Sunday,