23/02/2016 Daily Politics

Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.

The Prime Minister is on the road trying to sell his EU vision

to the public, while back here at Westminster his party

is firmly split over whether Britain should stay in or go out.

Big business has come to David Cameron's aid this morning,

with a third of the 100 biggest companies listed on the Stock

Exchange warning of the dangers of leaving.

But who do they represent, and what happened to the other two

As the UK and Scottish governments wrangle over a deal on funding,

we'll be talking to Labour's Scottish leader,

Kezia Dugdale, about her plans to raise income tax.

And then we're going to Washington, DC to take back the White House.

As the race to become US presidential candidate continues

to confound expectations, we'll hear from this man who nearly

made it to the race to the White House.

And MPs are dishing up a warning that the UK is in the grip

of a curry crisis - are immigration rules to blame

Regular viewers will remember a few weeks ago we were joined

by the Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson as our

Well, if you thought she had a tricky task ahead in this Scottish

election year, today I'm joined by a woman

of the toughest jobs in British politics -

Zia Dugdale. Kes da Dugdale. Kezmania Dugdale. Dugdale There are

a lot She's the leader of

the Scottish Labour Party So the btirf Conservative truce over

the referendum on our membership of the EU is well and truly over,

with many of this morning's papers focusing on the widening division

between MPs and the cabinet over Labour is relatively united

when it comes to Europe, but not so much on the tricky

issue of the Trident The latest party policy hearing

on whether to replace it takes place this afternoon, and two former

Labour defence secretaries - George Robertson and John Hutton -

have written an article saying that Labour's defence review

is "sliding into chaos". Is that how you see it? Not at all.

There is no doubt a mixture of positions in the Labour Party on

Trident. I inherited that when I became leader of the Scottish Labour

Party, in my approach, to have a healthy democratic debate within the

Scottish Labour Party. We devoted a day at our party conference in

October for the party to get into the nuts and bolts of this and

resolved that the position of the Scottish Labour Party was not to

renew Trident and every penny than could be saved from that should be

used to protect and invest in jobs in the communities affected in

Scotland. But that's in the your shoe, is it? I'm a multilateralist I

recognise on an issue that's complex, the way to deal with is a

healthy, democratic way. Do you want to have Trident renewed or not?

Everybody in the Labour Party is union nighted around seeing a world

free from nuclear weapons. It is about the best way to do that. I'm a

multi-naturalist and I'm leading a party which has taken a democratic

decision not to renew Trident. That was very healthy, good debate. We

have a leader in Scotland, you, and a matter in Scotland that don't

agree on this issue and we have Jeremy Corbyn as the leader of the

Labour Party and his parliamentary party that also don't agree, so,

yes, you could call it an understatement to say there is a

mixture of views. There is also a mixture of views in the terms of the

unions in Scotland and nationally, it is chaos, isn't it? I totally get

why there are mixed views across different parts of the party. Part

of that is because there is new leadership in Scotland and across

the UK. Both Jeremy and I are taking different approaches to resolve

this. What is clear from the Scottish Labour position is we

oppose the renewal of Trident and we would use any money we save from

that to protect the job. That's an honest position when you compare to

what the SNP say they would do. They say they would spend the money 12

difference ways, whether in childcare, the NHS, a new army. Will

you be making a submission? Scottish Labour will put forward its

position. with what she said would be her next

election battle bus. At the end of the show,

Kezia will give us The Prime Minister has been visiting

a business in where he's been hammering

home his message that a vote to leave the EU represents

a leap in the dark. And that message has been echoed

by leaders of some of Britain's largest companies, who warn leaving

would threaten jobs and put was signed by almost

200 business chiefs, including the bosses of Airbus,

HSBC and Marks Spencer. Together they employ more

than 1 million people. They said the PM had secured

a commitment from the EU "to reduce the burden of regulation"

and to sign off on "crucial The signatories included

the chairmen or chief executives of 36 FTSE 100 companies -

an index of the largest companies However, campaigners for Britain

to leave the EU point out two-thirds of FTSE 100 companies haven't signed

- among them major firms They also claim smaller

businesses are more sceptical about the advantages

of staying in the EU. They have also been critical of

number 10's involvement in organising the letter.

Well, as I said, David Cameron has been speaking

to an audience at a business in Slough this morning.

This is a decision, though, that lasts for life. We make this

decision and it is probably going to be the only time in our generation

when we make this decision. I was determined to make sure the British

people had the very best possible decision. So what I have done for

the last nine months is to try and sort out some of the things that

people are frustrated with, with the European Union. It is not a perfect

organisation. No organisation is perfect. David Cameron, there.

I'm joined now by Pete Chadha, who runs a technology business

and will be campaigning for the UK to leave the EU.

And by James McGrowery from the Britain Stronger in Europe group

which helped organise the letter. Are you disappointed there weren't

more FTSE 100 companies signed up to the letter? Not at all. 36 is a

great result. 36 of the biggest companies that employ 1 million

people in Britain, 1 million British jobs, all firmly saying we should

stay. What happened to the other two-thirds? #w8, some have

complicated corporate governance arrangements it would take a long

time to sign things off. -- some of them have. I would say at the moment

it is 36-0. There is not a single FTSE company coming out saying we

should leave. I think it is a spectacular piece of spin to suggest

a 36-0 is anything other than a pretty heavy defeat when it comes to

this letter, to those wishing to leave the European Union. Is it just

playing to fear, telling people it will be treacherous, difficult, if

Britain leaves the UK, by saying the economy will be at risk? I think it

is project reality, with you, Jo. You know, people who work in these

companies, think, want it hear from their bosses, what the impact would

be on this massive choice we face as a country. I think it is a perfectly

reasonable thing to do to ask people who employ 1 million people in the

country what the impact would be on investment, growth, and what the

impact will be on jobs and have them state clearly they think for all of

those reasons, we are much better off in the European Union. It is a

big blow to your campaign because these are very powerful people in

the sense they employ an awful lot of people and they have a very big

say. Are you saying they are all wrong? I'm saying that they are just

playing the card of risk and they are concerned about - you know, the

changes that will happen and they have vested interests in keeping us

within the EU. Real entrepreneurs like me, out there doing business

with the rest of the world, we think we should leave the EU to be master

of our own destiny and most smaller business people will say that.

People in large corporations don't want the hassle of changing and the

stock markets being nervous but Ron-term uks most entrepreneurs,

real entrepreneurs who take risks every day with lives, believe it is

the right thing. Is that an admission by you that big business

will suffer, bigger corporation that employ a lot of people will actually

suffer? Absolutely not but they have accountants and risk people saying

better the devil you know, than the devil you development real business

people out there, the man that uns are JCB and where is James Dyson.

Why aren't they signing a letter? I'm in the in charge of a campaign

and I'm not responsible for that. All I am is a businessman, providing

my views that actually the long term, we will be much more in

control of ourselves. They also have vested interest. People like Goldman

Sachs and all the other ones, they play Europe for tax reasons. That's

the real reason people are not picking up on. It suits them that

they can send money through the likes of Luxembourg and Netherlands

which the BBC showed a week or two back, they have vested interests in

controlling our involvement in Europe. If we were independent, like

Singapore, we are a safe haven for money this. Country can could great

trade deals with the rest of the world. Isn't that the risk of for

your campaign, you are seen as the big business campaign and in numbers

terms, when you look at small and medium-sized companies and

businesses, that is a large part of the population, involved in running

their own businesses and employing small numbers of people and you will

be seen as the establishment and vested interests Small businesses

are the back bone of the country and employ millions of people in

Britain, which ise think it is great there are a load of small business

that is have signed the letter. You are making a big deal about the FTSE

100 companies. It was the first question you asked, because they are

big names. I don't think it is a matter of vested interests for tax

reasons, I think they have vested interests, they employ 1 million

people, I think it is a pretty important interest for a million

families at home and the pay packets that depend on them. They can cope

with the red tape that we hear a lot from the leave campaign better than

small and medium-sized businesses Look at the survey that is have been

done of small businesses. The FSB did one that had more supporting

staying in than leaving. I'm not sure it is true. It was an FSB

survey. There was a survey last week in Start Up magazine, I put an

article there, I have a lot of support for small business who is

actually think we should be out. Every businessman knows to be in

control of our destiny is what we need to be doing. As a business

person we take risks every day. There is going to be upheaval, the

markets will complain a bit but long-term... The markets have

complained, one of the biggest s that the uncertainty your business

can take? I think these are just people playing the markets. Let's be

fair. What are the consequences of that? The year or two the euro was

?1 to one Europe. The markets are fickle and will always be. We are in

a great position. We buy more than we sell to Europe, much more, we are

in a great position, like a supermarket negotiating with a

farmer, we are in a position of power. It is not a position of

Norway and Switzerland. Except those are always the comparisons. I don't

think they are valid, we are the largest market. Does this remind

you, Kezia of the Scottish referendum battle and business came

in quite late in the campaign. Did it help? I think it did. Nibbledly

this is an argument about economics. It is about sustainability of our

economy, it is about ou we bring jobs to our country and give young

people opportunities. You have to remember, the Scottish referendum

was two-and-a-half years' long of a campaign, this is a much shorter

campaign. Day #1, you see businesses coming out, whereas much later in

the Scottish referendum campaign. It is important but it is not the only

argument. I think there is a particularly labour case about why

we should stay in Europe, swoshgers rights, social rights, protecting

maternity and approximate attorneyity leave. But the economy

seems to be the main issue here. James, how involved were Downing

Street? Did they write this, sign up everybody to it? Did they organise

it in the way it has been reported? Tncht has been a joint effort from

Britain Stronger in Europe campaign and the Government. -- It has B I

don't think it is surprising. David Cameron has gone out to Brussels and

come back and he is unambiguous, his position and the Government's

position is to stay in the European Union. So it is hardly surprising we

talk to businesses, large, medium and small to gain support. The leave

campaign are causing number ten and Britain Stronger in Europe of

co-ordinating this. Let me tell you, I know personal business people in

the UK who will not support the leave "leave" campaign because they

want to be on the right side of the Prime Minister but when you talk to

day-to-day business, working in Europe, working, they all want to

leave. They all want to... If that's true, why have some signed this

letter. I have texts on my phone telling me - we won't say so,

unless... Publish it. Are you saying businessmen and women don't know

their own minds? No, they are dealing, obviously they are dealing

with David Cameron from various different angles and they say - we

won't go against the Prime Minister. That's exactly the words. These

companies employ over 1 million people. I don't think they are

saying it to carry... They employ 1 million, I don't think they are

doing it to carry favour with one politician or another, this is

integral to how they run their business, how they get investment,

and create more jobs in the country. If you have all these business

people supporting you, let's hear from them and have the debate. I

don't think it is good enough to I a cert you have business support when

there is a letter with 200 businesses making our case. All

right. We will get you both back on I'm sure in the coming weeks.

Yesterday, the Prime Minister answered questions in the Commons

for three hours as he attempted to sell his package of reforms

to Britain's EU membership and make the case for remaining in.

Unusually, his biggest critics were behind him on the Conservative

benches, while he was frequently cheered by Labour MPs.

Let's have a look at some of the debate.

We should be clear that this process is not an invitation to rejoin,

Sadly, Mr Speaker, I have known a number of couples who have begun

divorce proceedings but I do not know of any who have begun divorce

proceedings in order to renew their marriage vows.

Labour believes the EU is a vital framework for European trade

A vote to remain is in the interests of people, not only in what the EU

delivers today, but as a framework through which we can achieve

Can I ask my right honourable friend, the Prime Minister,

to explain to to the House and the country, in exactly what way

this deal returns sovereignty over any field of law-making to these

This deal brings back some welfare powers.

It brings back some immigration powers.

Does the Prime Minister have any idea what the consequences would be

of Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wish

Would the Prime Minister agree with me, that it is also not just

about Britain's place in the European Union,

but also Britain's place in the world?

President Obama has been crystal clear that if Britain were to leave

the European Union, it would weaken, not strengthen,

The European Union is a failing organisation.

A single market that shackles us with regulation that makes

An immigration system that is betraying people

And not to mention the eurozone, which thank heavens we are not

So on the issue of migrants coming to Britain, coming

to the United Kingdom, when will they first begin to be

Don't tell us that he is going to work it out.

Tell us today in this House, when are they first going to become

Does he also agree it is not the politics of fear to point out

that those who advocate a "no" vote, don't seem to know

The Prime Minister has centred much of this

Can he tell the House, in in his estimation,

how much the welfare changes will reduce immigration from the EU

Does he believe we have more influence in the European Union

Surely the answer is more influence inside the European Union,

That's why I passionately believe we must

Joining us now is the DUP's Jeffrey Donaldson and Conservative

Philip Davies, who have declared for the "out" campaign,

and former cabinet minister Ken Clarke, who will campaign

No surprise there! And our guest of the day, Kezia Dugdale, is still

here and she is also backing and in vote. Let's talk about civility in

the Tory party. Many people will have been surprised, including me,

to read that the Primus to hug due at last night's 1922 committee. Is

that true? It is absolutely true. Why? You'll have to ask him! Who

didn't just randomly Gulf and hug you excite group we had a very good

meeting of the 1922 committee and we were having a friendly chat on the

way out and he just happened to have his arm around my shoulder. People

probably took that as a loving hug. I disagree with the Prime Minister

on many things, not just this, but we always get on very well and it's

never about personalities but about the issue. If I fell out with

everybody I disagree with, I wouldn't be speaking to anybody in

the Conservative party. There is no need to follow just because we

disagree. You say that but there has been a major falling out, clearly

demonstrated by David Cameron's comments clearly indirectly directed

towards America London, Boris Johnson. Steve Baker, one of your

colleagues, reportedly as the prime minister to be kind to Boris Johnson

and in the Telegraph today, Woody and hake has urged the Tories to be

civil. Will you be civil? I think we will. We are centre-right party and

nobody is denying that we don't agree Europe and never have entirely

since been in but the Labour Party is a centre-left party and its very

divided. The Labour Party rather specialises in disliking each other

and they argue, where is the Conservative party has kept itself

together. It is a party of government because we don't fall

out. Philip and I don't fall out personally and this isn't the only

subject we disagree on. William Hague obviously thinks there is a

real risk of near civil War. Everybody put pressure on us to try

to be more hostile to each other because it makes it more fun if you

are trying to keep the campaign because it makes it more fun if you

natural party because it makes it more fun if you

great thing about the Conservative party is pretty well every

Conservative wants to be party is pretty well every

government and that makes us realise, apart from the fat we are

also quite civilised people who don't fall out with all our

also quite civilised people who opponents, that we can behave. I

have a lot of friends in the Labour Party and I

have a lot of friends in the Labour them. Does it look harmonious from

where you're sitting? Not at all. I think it is a huge turn-off for

voters and another big turn-off is the complete and utter lack of

winning. Where are the female voices? Everything I've heard about

the EU referendum debate has voices? Everything I've heard about

done by men in suits. Anna Su Breanne Nicky Morgan come to mind.

Now the members are campaigning on their own views, they will be quite

Now the members are campaigning on forceful. It was dominated by Tory

men. It was but the Tory women are not quiet. There is a real danger in

this because this is ultimately about a country's future and it's

going to be a democratic event in the form of referendum so people

have to hear voices that look like and feel like

have to hear voices that look like That's why women have to be up

before of this. What about your comment, Ken Clarke, that we just

played in that film, comment, Ken Clarke, that we just

other outers don't actually know comment, Ken Clarke, that we just

what a no vote means? That could be comment, Ken Clarke, that we just

do vary. comment, Ken Clarke, that we just

first referendum and we'll have a second referendum.

first referendum and we'll have a that is what he thinks? That's what

he's said several times. He is the only person saying that. Other

Eurosceptics seem to only person saying that. Other

nothing will change apart from the things that they object to, so that

all the normal advantages of having access to the market will somehow

still carry on and, in fact, there is a set procedure. Once you leave,

and we'd have to leave if we vote no, you spent two years negotiating

exactly what your future relationship is going to be. Other

Europeans won't agree with British Eurosceptics and there will be

distinctly restricted access to the single market. Is that how you see

it? Do you know in your mind what out means? I certainly do and I'm

from the only part of the UK that has a land frontier with another EU

member state so we recognise fully the consequences of a decision like

this. How would it work? It will work the way it worked before we

joined the EU. We will have a common travel area. The Irish Republic is

not in Schengen so it will be much the same as it is now and there will

be a highlight of cooperation. I don't buy this idea that be you...

That we are so dependent on it that we can't live without it. I think we

can. And what I want to hear from Ken and others is not these kind of

scare tactics and negative campaigning, I want to hear the

positive case for what difference this deal will make in terms of

actually bringing and delivering the reforms that the European Union

needs, not just the UK but many other member states. I haven't heard

that. I didn't hear it yesterday from the Prime Minister and I

haven't heard it, with respect, from Ken. Do you accept that so far it

has been a little like the criticisms during the Scottish

referendum, negative, all about the dangers? I think we want to avoid

the dangers of the Scottish referendum and the criticism had

some foundation, in my opinion. I campaigned up there and I didn't go

on just about the fear, although we were right about North Sea oil. Even

yesterday, I made the positive campaign first but it was less

newsworthy. I actually congratulated... We could influence

events like international regulation trade deals and so on. Do you think

rest Johnson has overstepped the mark by taking so long to make a

decision? Many people felt that being mayor of London he would be an

inner, to join the out campaign? Boris attends the Cabinet and the

Prime Minister said the rules were that anybody who was in the Cabinet

had to wait until he had concluded his negotiations before they could

declare their position. As he attends the Cabinet, it seemed to me

that it was never be right that he abided by the rules the prime

minister set down. Do you think he's overstepped the mark? The Prime

Minister was few readers about it and pretty well said so with all the

comments about marriage and divorce and ambition. I watched it. He

looked furious! He was teasing him with the divorce joke. I think if I

was advising Boris, I would say he shouldn't have left it for two or

three days so he could be on his own on the Sunday. He did give an

ambiguous impression to what he did. Is he really pro-membership or is he

not? He is kind of pro if we can get some concessions but, unfortunately,

the concessions he wants are just incompatible being members of the

EU. Let's think about later. Let's say Britain does vote to leave. What

is the position, then, of David Cameron? Is he really then the man

to negotiate Britain leaving the EU? I've always thought so. I wrote a

letter to him a little while ago saying that if he lost the

referendum, I didn't see why he couldn't carry on as prime minister.

To you still feel that? What I felt yesterday was that he had sort of

thrown his lot in with winning this referendum and if he didn't win, he

was going to stand aside. By basically saying, which I understood

it, he couldn't negotiate a better deal than Norway has got, even

though we are the fifth biggest economy in the world, would indicate

to me he doesn't really have much confidence in doing this they go

Chez Chez. Is it right to say he is a poor negotiator? That may just be

a view he is making at the moment to argue his case but anybody who says

they couldn't do a better deal than Norway when we're the fifth biggest

economy in the world and we have a ?70 billion a year trade deficit

with the EU, if they can't do better than that and they are not fit to

hold those negotiations. I've done a lot of negotiating in my time in

Northern Ireland and I don't think the Prime Minister should have

rushed into this. I don't think the deal he had on the table was enough

and I think he should have held out. We've learned from our mistakes in

the past, when you rush into things and pushed deals over deadline and

you live to regret it. I think it is a rushed deal. We've got this 23rd

of June referendum date. Again, we're rushing into that. I respect

David Cameron. I think he has the ability to lead this country well.

Would he and could he, if he loses, from his perspective, the referendum

on June 23, would you still want him negotiating out? He is the prime

minister of the UK. Whether he will want to remain to do that, I don't

know. Would you want him to remain to do it? The Conservative Party won

the election, absolutely. He needs to go in there and do what he can to

negotiate the best deal. I just don't think the deal he has at the

moment is the best one. It is a matter for the Conservative Party.

I've been in a political party that's torn itself apart in the past

four stopped I don't think the Conservative Party will do that but

as to who reads the situation after the referendum, that's a matter for

the Conservative Party. To pick up an Ken Clarke's point about a second

referendum that Boris seemed to be flirting with, do you think that if

there is a vote for the EU to leave -- the UK to leave the EU, there

would be a second referendum in Scotland? The Scottish Parliament

elections are a matter of weeks away and when we conclude those, there

are seven weeks until the UK EU referendum. So if you believe that

it is in Scotland's interest to remain part of the EU and the UK, we

have to get on with making a positive case for why that is

important. But with the calls be so loud that if Britain left the EU

there would have to be a second independence referendum? You hear

that call from Nicola Sturgeon every day. But you are there. I think we

will move on to questions of currency. Nicola Sturgeon says she

wants an independent Scotland to keep the pound. If we were to leave

the EU, she would be in a situation where she was arguing for a sterling

zone across the UK with Scotland being part of the EU but the rest of

the UK not so her currency problems would be as big as they were during

the last referendum. There would be a huge amount of unanswered

questions for that debate. But you are campaigning on the same side as

the SNP when it comes to this referendum. Yes and please to do so.

What about the timing issue? Is it a problem? I assume that's why you

made your comment about you would have liked a longer lead-in time. In

Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales we got important elections in May

and that creates a difficulty with the proximity of the referendum

coming so soon afterwards. We would have preferred a longer time in

which to discuss and debate on these issues but the prime minister has

called it. We have to go with the 23rd. We will be there to put our

case. Do you think Jeremy Corbyn is doing enough to push the in

campaign, to push Labour's remain campaign? We don't really hear very

much from him on this. It's day 2 of the campaign. Well he hasn't changed

his mind, he is supposedly an enthusiastic supporter according to

Hilary Benn. I think there will be time Morientes Labour voices. We

need to hear from Alan Johnson, I suspect we will do that, there is a

strong Labour case for jobs, opportunities, children. And we have

to debate those specifics about why it is good for the UK to stay where

we are. Well, it is true, civil war didn't break out on this particular

debate. Let's talk now about the race

to become candidate for President of the United States,

where political outsiders Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders

are still causing an upset. It's a contest that

can change overnight - and few people know that

better than Howard Dean, who ran to be the Democratic

candidate back in 2004. He led the field for months

but crashed out of a contest that went on to be won by John Kerry,

who was then beaten Well, Howard Dean was in London last

night speaking to an event at Chatham House, and our Ellie went

to meet him. We're going to California

and Texas and New York. And we're going to South Dakota

and Oregon and Washington and Michigan and then we're

going to Washington DC to take back It became known as the

"I Have A Scream" speech. Having spent months

as a frontrunner, Howard Dean was suddenly seen as being angry,

over the top, not really fit to be A month or so later,

he withdrew his candidacy. Of course I have some

regrets that I lost. How fed up do you get with people

like me keep asking about that I came in third in Iowa,

and I should have come in first and that's because my campaign

had a lot of problems, I don't mind being asked

about it, I actually use it First of all, politics

is a substitute for war and there is nothing

fair about politics. Second of all, if you don't like it,

then you shouldn't be running because whatever I got

from the media, unfair as it was, and so forth and so on,

is nothing compared to sitting across the table from Putin

when he wants Alaska back. So if you can't stand the campaign,

you certainly shouldn't be 12 years on, Howard Dean

is throwing his experience behind another presidential

hopeful, Hillary Clinton. I think Hillary's strength is that

people know her and know she will do a good job

and she knows foreign policy. She is the only person running

who knows anything about foreign It doesn't often win elections

but given how dangerous a place the world is these days,

I think it does matter that she has expertise and she knows

what she is doing. But Bernie Sanders, the other

Democratic candidate, seems to know what he is doing, too,

and is still very much in the race. When the primaries are over,

it can be hard to create unity He is a very good politician

and in close races it is hard I had to work for about a month

to get my people to consider supporting John Kerry

when I didn't win, so, you know, it is hard,

it is a lot of work. On the other hand, the stakes

are enormous, especially given Here is a guy, throwing punches,

nasty as hell, screaming at everything else when we are

talking and he is walking out, you know the guards are gentle

with him, he is walking out like big high fives, smiling,

laughing, I would like to punch him in the face,

I tell you. He said things that would have

killed most politicians And I think that the establishment

of the Republican Party But, they may get

beaten in this one. He is just a populist

and is politically uncorrect is something will happen that

nobody will predict. How much have you been following the

campaign How much have you been following the

Dugdale? Abit. I am trying to work out whether I like those ideas of

rallies with the yeha at the end. What do you think about Donald Trump

possibly winning the Republican nomination? Utterly frightening.

Every country around the world I think will be fearful of that

happening. I was pro President Obama last time. I set up a campaign 20

campaign for him. What was it called? Scotland for Obama. How many

people signed up? Lots of Americans based in Scotland at universities.

So we had a rally in 2007. We had t-shirts. Because we did that

through Democrats Abroad we were able it raise money and pass it on.

You are not doing the same for Hillary Clinton? I'm a little busy

with other things at the moment. Just checking.

Now, is the UK in the grip of a curry crisis?

partly to blame for migration policies say they're

Here's the Labour MP Rupa Huq with her take on an issue

Curry's always been on the menu for me in one way or another.

My dad had two Indian restaurants at one stage.

But whether it's a vindaloo, korma or chicken tikka masala,

which the late Robin Cook called our national dish,

these great British favourites are now in a fight

Two curry houses a week are closing due to a range of factors

including rocketing business rates and online delivery services,

such as Just Eat, Deliveroo and Hungryhouse,

which take a hefty cut, making margins ever smaller.

The biggest threat of all is from new immigration rules.

From next month, the cost of employing a non-EU chef goes up

from ?18,000 to ?35,000, significantly above the UK average

Eric Pickles introduced curry colleges, to great fanfare.

Not one student has seen this course through to qualification.

The new measures will exacerbate existing problems and cause dire

staff shortages, adversely affecting the ability of British

businesses to bring in skilled chefs from countries such as India,

Pakistan and Bangladesh, as well as Turkey and China.

The Government needs to think again and relax its restrictions,

to allow skilled workers of all types to come here and train.

After all, the ethnic food industry contributes billions

We need now to save it and head off the coming curry crisis.

Rupa Huq is here in the studio now, and the Conservative MP

Come back rather than still being here. Is this a crisis, how are you

quantifying it? Two curry houses are shutting down each week in the UK?

Well crisis is overused in politics. But I think it is something, a wider

malaise that hits the high street. So the staples of our high street

that we knew as a child have gone. Gone there's no more Woolworths,

obviously you can't bring back a dodo if it is extinct but there are

things we can do to stop small businesses closing down, so two

curry houses but shocking figures about pubs. It is about, as you say,

Chinese restaurants, Turkish, kebab joints, they are closing, too. This

is really just symptomatic, in your mind of what is happening? You are

right, its a sector-wide problem throughout the catering industry.

Ethnic catering. I had one that said ?5.5 billion, I heard that last year

at Chinese new year, I don't know if this is' Chinese and Indian combined

but they contribute to the economy and risk taking entrepreneurs. Why

can't they get the chefs they need? A range of factors, some things can

he can't do much about. The food prices are rising and against the

weak wind it has gone wrong but the thing about immigration, the

restrictions on non-EU migrants, they have changed the threshold T

used to be you would pay them ?18,000. That has walloped up to

?35,000. That surely is I will killing off the industry slowly but

surely, it is a very high bar, ?35,000. Why does the Conservatives

want to do this? Well, I'm aFreud this is a consequence of being in

the EU. The can't Will Government can't control immigration from

within the EU, it is having to put -- I'm afraid, it is having to put

extra restrictions from people outside the EU so immigration

figures don't get phenomenally high. Justifying the wages being paid from

?18,000 to ?35,000. The Government are having to clamp down on

immigration from outside the EU in anyway it can to make migration

figures in anyway manageable. But they are not anyway. But if they

didn't have restrictions, migration figures would be even higher. It is

reality, isn't it? The only way that the Government can try and tackle,

and in this case fail, to bring down net migration figures, is actually

trying to make it more difficult for non-EU migrants to come here? There

are other imagine in ative things you can do that wouldn't be a burden

on the taxpayer -- imaginative. That wouldn't be a cost to the welfare

state. You could make temporary visa, maybe for two years maximum,

bring people n they have that in America, similar to the Greene card

points' system thing that people could come and G it looks like

recruitment of the host population, or whatever you call them, the Brits

here, people like myself. My dad had two Indian restaurants, but I'm in

the going into, that maybe the children of curry house owners don't

want to do it. It has relied on subcontinental migration. There were

the curry colleges, but they seem to have failed. They were set up by

Eric Pickles and didn't do anything. Are they worth trying to reinvent? I

don't think we need a state intervention. My constituency is in

Bradford. We have massive curry places sane a massive part of my

local economy. I have sympathy for the points being made. I don't it

needs state intervention. One of my curry houses, the man who runs that

has done work with Bradford college trying to train up chefs who live

here and giving them the skills in order to do this. I think some of

the curry houses and colleges can work together, to skill up people

who are already here without needing to bring other people in from around

the world. Is it a big problem on your high street? Very much so, I

have met with people from the Bangladeshi community in Edinburgh

who are anxious about the affect on restaurants in Edinburgh. Of all the

sensationalist scare-mongering arguments I have heard in the past

few days about why we have to leave the European Union, the idea that

the curry is under threat, it is petty... It is It is a fact of

immigration, that's why we have more restrictions. There are other things

you can do. As part of a manifesto we were going to cut rates for small

businesses. This Government doesn't seem to be doing that. What about,

though, trying to do something from a Governmental point of view, not to

do with immigration. There will be many people who will say - I cannot

believe you cannot recruit locally? There must be qualified chefs within

the communities like the Bangladeshi community that you can recruit from?

There's just not. These are skilled jobs. There is a very strong

argument from within the communities about why you have to bring people

in to do the jobs. The Tory Government do not have to raise this

threshold. It is an active political choice you are making. You can sit

there and say you regret it and it is bad for your constituency but

your Government is doing this, it is a choice. I have explained why the

Government have had to restrict immigration from non-EU countries.

It is a consequence of open borders from within the EU. You may in the

like that argument t may be an inconvenient fact but it is why the

Government are restricting non-EU immigration, whether you like it or

not Come to the kunchts take decent skilled, jobs, pay the tax, invest

in the fabric of society. I don't know what you don't like. These are

entrepreneurial, risk-taking people. I want to control immigration from

everywhere. If we had controlled immigration from within the EU, the

Government could afford to be relaxed about immigration from

outside the EU, that's a consequence of wanting to stay within the EU you

have to face up to the consequences It is a cheap argument. It might be

cheap, it is inconvenient, I appreciate but it is tru. That's why

non-EU immigration has been restricted for that single purpose.

Shouldn't the Government be doing more to get these people into work,

one way or the other, rather than making it more difficult, putting

the immigration issue to one side? Well I think we need to try and

everybody can help to skill up people who are already in the UK. We

have lots of people who are unemployed. We have lots of people

from ethic minorities who are unemployed. I think that some of the

restaurants and the colleges can work together to develop the skills

that people who are already here, have the skills for the future. What

is wrong with that? There used to be the possibility of overseas students

working at curry houses at weekends. That was taken away by this

Government. There are simple things that could be done. Do you people

don't want to do it? I think this argument is ridiculous and to use it

as a distraction to talk about the European Union, is cheap. What is

your favourite curry? Chicken Madras. Chicken tikka McSallia,

Robin Cook Madras. Chicken tikka McSallia,

dish. What about you? Keala gosh. The deal, or lack of one,

centres on how the block grant Brian, I won't ask you about

favourite curries. We will talk about the fiscal framework. I like

the really gentle ones. Let's get back to the substance of the matter.

Are the various parties here preparing their exit strategies

before a deal is even done? There's a bit of that going on. There is a

bit of blame game going on. Both sides are saying, we will publish

the papers as and when the negotiations break down, to show we

were in the right. At the moment they are saying they won't give a

running commentary on the individual details. John Swinney, the finance

secretary at Holyrood, was appearing before MSPs this morning at 8:30am

and he said that all other issues, like capital borrowing, the costs of

transition issues, the money to be devoted to welfare, all of those

were settled. The snag is that the one that remains is the big one,

which is how to calculate the money that is reduced from the Westminster

block grant to match the new income tax powers proposed for Scotland.

You'd think it was simple. You'd think it would be ?1 and income tax

and there for you have an extra pound in income tax and you take

away ?1 and block grant. But it isn't as simple as that. Do they use

an index system, whereby they calculate roughly what Scottish

income tax take is expected to be, then match that against population

share, much as against changes in the economy, and their four calculi

eight -- calculate the settlement? Mr Swinney said there was a

discrepancy between the Kaki oceans offered by the Treasury and the

Scottish government. When I discussed this with Ruth Davidson it

felt like we were right against the deadline and that was a few weeks

ago. Here we are and there's still no deal. We are right against it in

the sense that the Scottish Parliament will be dissolved on

March 23 and they go into the Holyrood elections and that's the

end of it. They're not right up against it in the sense that it

could then be revisited by a new Scottish Government in talks with

the continuing Treasury and they could try then to resurrect it. But

the new powers are blocked. They are stalled until this fiscal framework

is agreed. OK, it's a Westminster bill, the Scotland bill, but it has

to be agreed and endorsed by Hollywood as well and John Swinney

says that if there is no deal on the fiscal framework, there is no deal.

He will not accept the new tax powers. They could revisit them. Mr

Swinney said this morning that would simply be putting off the problem.

We said there is a fundamental disagreement between the UK

government and the Scottish government and they need to address

that, rather than talking about ways round it, of putting it off for

delaying. Is Scotland an election footing? Absolutely, very much so.

Every parliament everywhere is an footing from one election to the

next but they are very much in this mode. You have the SNP apparently

riding very high in the opinion polls, you have the other parties

trying to pick away at their record and saying it doesn't match the

glowing opinion that they apparently have from the voters. Scotland is

very much an election footing. Thank you. Kezia Dugdale, what is Scottish

Labour doing in terms of the fiscal framework? What, in your mind, can

be done to break the logjam? We support Nicola Sturgeon in her aim

to get the best deal for Scotland. But what does that look like? It may

be a big issue but surely everyone has thought about how much one

should be reduced if the other is going to be increased in terms of 12

taxation? I support what the SNP are calling for, per capita indexation.

If Scotland can't control its immigration, how may people there

are in the country, and we grow at a slower rate in the rest of the UK,

we shouldn't be punished for that. No detriment principle is really

important. It's not just about today but about five-years' time. I

support her right and her goal to get the best possible deal for

Scotland. And you'd be prepared to see this collapse to see the talks

collapse, to see further devolved powers come to Scotland on the basis

of this, you don't get what you say you share with Nicola Sturgeon? I

want the best possible deal but there must be a deal. So you are

prepared to make a compromise? I didn't say that. I would really like

to see a deal before the Scottish Parliament elections because I for

one would like to advocate how to use these new tax and welfare powers

in Labour's manifesto for the next parliament but of its possible to do

that before Parliament dissolves, I would like all the parties to get

round the table, keep talking right up until polling day. Nobody should

walk away from this to go Chez Chez. We must get the best possible deal

for Scotland. It's great to see the SNP arguing to retain the Barnett

formula. This is about redistributing resources across the

whole of the UK. That's what people voted for in the referendum.

Scottish Labour has proposed increasing income tax in Scotland.

Some people would say that's madness. Any political party

proposing an income tax rise doesn't win an election. The Scottish

Parliament tomorrow will vote on its budget, the budget advocated by the

SNP contains hundreds of millions of pounds of cuts to vital public

services and education. They argue it because they just haven't got

enough money to actually do what they would like to do so there have

to be some cuts somewhere, better than increasing taxes on vulnerable

and put people. We have protected vulnerable people. But we have been

told the decades that the Scottish Parliament, the institution itself,

would allow people in Scotland to take different choices to

Westminster. Nicola Sturgeon, her whole adult life, her whole

political career, has argued that more powers means fewer cuts. I'm

saying we now have the power in Scotland to set income tax. This is

the Scottish rate of income tax. It is the first time we've been able to

set this rate. I'm advocating that we should set it 1p higher than

George Osborne and in so doing, we don't have to make these cuts. For

the first time, the Scottish Parliament has a serious power, a

serious choice to take a different path for Scotland than Tory

austerity. Is it working? The polls don't seem to be demonstrating that

people are flocking to Scottish Labour as a result of that policy.

There was a poll in the daily record that showed that 48% people in

Scotland support the policy... They support the policy but are they

supporting Labour? It is early days but I'm putting forward a very clear

anti-austerity message. No longer will the Scottish Parliament just be

a conveyor belt for Tory cuts. The Labour Party in Scotland is the only

party with a clear anti-austerity message and I think that's what the

vast majority of voters in Scotland want to hear. You say that but they

are supporting the policy. People did support the individual policies

of Ed Miliband - the energy freeze was popular for a time - but it

didn't do him any good in the general election. They may support

the policy but where is the evidence that people are supporting Scottish

Labour? It is in that poll... For the policy. And the collection

campaign has just started. The SNP are considerably ahead of Labour and

it has been that way for some time. This problems of the Scottish Labour

Party didn't happen overnight and won't be fixed overnight or by one

person. The SNP was polling at 53%, Labour 22%. Is this some ploy for

you to have an eye-catching policy to try to differentiate yourself

from the SNP against whom you are making no dent at all? I totally

believe that this is the right thing to do. I think the best thing any

government can do in this modern age is investing its people. That's the

only way we can compete it for future jobs and the skills race

around the world. If we don't do that, we will pay a huge economic

price and I'm saying that faced with a choice between using the powers of

the Scottish Parliament to try a different track from Tory austerity

or to try to pass that on, I choose to use those powers. What does

success, in your eyes, look like for Scottish Labour in May? I've made a

very clear plan to review the Scottish Labour Party, so people

have to have a much clearer sense of who we are and what we stand for.

The tax policy does that. I've talked about bringing forward new

faces and we've just completed our selections. I've talked about

renewing the Labour family itself. So why would you be a member of the

Labour Party? What would be your benchmark for Scottish Labour? Will

you be second or will you be pushed a third? I don't believe for a

second that the Tories are going to come second in this election because

Ruth Davidson is a Tory, just like George Osborne, just like David

Cameron. She's advocated 1980s tax policies. She has no idea for the

future. They're not that far behind you. She says that she would be a

stronger opposition to the SNP, yet tomorrow she is going to vote for

their budget. How can they possibly be a strong opposition in that

context? Although you are standing with a flustered when it comes to

these go Chez Chez on the fiscal framework. That is fundamentally the

right thing to do with... How many constituencies will you win? I don't

have that as a metric in my head because my job to review the

Scottish Labour Party is far bigger than what happens in May. It is more

fundamental than how many seats we have. When people cast their vote in

the Hollywood elections, do you want them to think of you and Scottish

Labour or the vision Jeremy Corbyn is advocating for Westminster? Me.

I'm the leader of the Scottish Labour Party. It is my job to renew

its fortunes. I can't do that single-handedly or on my own but I

am in charge and I'm putting forward a strategy. It is my shadow cabinet

that will put forward the manifesto. I will be the one out on street

corners campaigning. As he convinced you that he could be Prime Minister?

Jeremy Corbyn and I get on very well. Has he convinced you he could

be premised? I believe very much that he wants to do that and he is

driven by his principles. I am protocol to my friend. Do you

believe he can do it? Yes, I believe he can.

Now, we began the show saying that our guest of the day,

Kezia Dugdale, has one of the toughest jobs in British

politics as leader of the Labour Party in Scotland.

Well, perhaps for that reason, it's also one of the jobs

with the highest turnover in British politics -

she is, in fact, the eighth person to lead the party

in the Scottish Parliament since devolution,

That's as many people as the Lib Dems have MPs.

It's so many, we thought, it would be hard for anyone

to remember them all and put them in the right order.

But we've decided to let Kezia have a go anyway,

I am here to help. I noticed you are looking worried so we are going to

help you out straightaway because of course one Hollywood parliament came

into existence, the first first Minister and previously Scottish

Secretary was Donald Dewar. There he is. Kezia, a bit of fun, mainly for

us, not you. Who came next? Henry McLeish. Straight out of the book.

Obviously after the tragic death of Donald Dewar. Henry McLeish does not

last long but can you remember why? A fiddle? Office gate they called it

in the press. Early on, those big, big characters in Scottish Labour...

You had a peek there. Who is next? Jack McConnell. Jack McConnell! What

happens in 2007? We lose the Scottish Parliament election by one

seat, arguably 40 votes in North Ayrshire and Aaron. So Jack

McConnell goes. Who takes over? Wendy Alexander. Wendy Alexander

does indeed. Do you remember what she said after she had to go, about

doing the role? It was a personal thing about it. No, I don't. She

said she'd regretted doing it quite so early because she had young

children at the time. Who came after her? Iain Gray. Iain Gray did

indeed. He might pop up later on. Who was after Iain Gray? Johann

Lamont. That is the only pause you had. I'll give you that. That takes

us right into this sort of period here and she's not going to stay on

there, is she? She doesn't stay there long because of the Scottish

independence vote. So who is next? I've got some tricky ones for you

never stop those of the deputies? I've got some tricky ones for you

Jim Murphy was the next leader and I was the deputy. That's true but

there was two months of him, Anas Sarwar. Then Jim Murphy, of course.

I said he might come back. There is one more before you.

I said he might come back. There is me? Goodness me! Iain Gray

I said he might come back. There is one more time. Our point being,

there has been a lot of them. Is this a factor

there has been a lot of them. Is its majority, or is it a symptom of

there has been a lot of them. Is the SNP taking over? And, of course,

you at the end. How long will you last? I think

There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.

The armoured car. Do you need that when you are campaigning in

Scotland? Is that why you chose it? That is the right answer.

I'll be back at 11.30 tomorrow with Andrew for live coverage

of Prime Minister's Questions - do join us then.