10/11/2013 Sunday Politics South East

Morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. Ed Miliband's on

the war path over pay day loans, your energy bill and what he calls

the bedroom tax. His spinners say he's resurgent though the polls

don't show it. We'll be talking to his right hand woman, Labour's

Deputy Leader, Harriet Harman. From resurgent to insurgent. Nigel Farage

won an award this week for being a political insurgent. We'll be

talking to the UKIP leader. And Harriet hates, hates, hates page

three. She wants rid of it. But what do you think? We sent Adam out with

some balls. Stay. It is good fun for the guys.

And in the South East. Six months after UKIP's breakthrough

in the local elections in Kent and West Sussex, will it really be a

springboard for future success in national politics?

row over the super sewer rumbles on. And with me, fresh from their

success at yesterday's Star Wars auditions, Darth Vader. Obi Wan

Kenobi and R2D2. Congratulations on your new jobs. We'll miss you. Nick

Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh. First, the talks with Iran in

Geneva. They ended last night without agreement despite hopes of a

breakthrough. America and its allies didn't think Iran was prepared to go

far enough to freeze its nuclear programme. But some progress has

been made and there's to be another meeting in ten days' time, though at

a lower level. The Foreign Secretary, William Hague, had this

to say a little earlier. On the question of, or will it happen in

the next few weeks? There is a good chance of that. We will be trying

again on 20th, 21st of November and negotiators will be trying again. We

will keep an enormous amount of energy and persistence behind

solving this. Will that be a deal which will please everyone? No, it

will not. Compromises will need to be made. I had discussions with

Israeli ministers yesterday and put the case for the kind of deal we are

looking the case for the kind of deal we are

interests of the whole world, including

interests of the whole world, the world, to reach a diplomatic

agreement we can be confident in in this issue. This otherwise will

threaten the world with nuclear proliferation and conflict in the

future. The interesting thing about this is that it seems

future. The interesting thing about prepared to go far enough over the

Iraq heavy water plutonium reactor it is building. The people who took

the toughest line - the French. France has always had a pretty tough

line on Iran. They see it as a disruptive influence in Lebanon I

am reasonably optimistic a deal will be done later this month when the

talks reconvene. Western economic sanctions have had such an impact on

Iran domestic league. They have pushed inflation up to 40%.

Dashes-macro domestically. The new president had a campaign pledge

saying, I will deal with sanctions. I actually think, by the end of this

year, we will see progress in these talks. Should we be optimistic? The

next round of talks will be at official level. The place to watch

will be Israel. The language which has been coming out of there is

still incredibly angry, incredibly defensive. They do not want a deal

at all. Presumably John Kerry has to go away and tried to get Israel to

be quiet about it, even if they cannot be happy about it. They

cannot agree to a deal which allows the Iraq reactor with plutonium

heavy water. You do not need that with a peaceful nuclear power

programme will stop that is why the Israelis are so nervous. If there is

an international deal, Israel could still bomb that but it would be

impossible. The French tactics are interesting. It says the French

blocked it in part because they are trying to carry favour with Israel

but also the Gulf Arab states, who are really nervous about and

Iranians nuclear capability. Who is that? Saudi Arabia. Newsnight had a

story saying that Pakistan is prepared to provide them with

nuclear weapons. You are right about Saudi Arabia. They are much more

against this deal than Israel. Who is Herman van Rompuy's favourite

MEP? It is probably not Nigel Farage. He plummeted to the bottom

of the EU president's Christmas card list after comparing him to a bank

clerk with the charisma of a damp rag. And he's been at it again this

week. Have a look. Today is November the 5th, a big celebration festival

day in England. That was an attempt to blow up the Houses of Parliament

with dynamite and destroy the Constitution. You have taken the

Dahl, technocratic approach to all of these things. What you and your

colleagues save time and again you talk about initiatives and what you

are going to do about unemployment. The reality is nothing in this union

is getting better. The accounts have not been signed off for 18 years. I

am now told it is 19 and you are doing your best to tone down any

criticism. Whatever growth figures you may have, they are anaemic.

Youth unemployment in the Mediterranean is over 50% in several

states. You will notice there is a rise in opposition dashed real

opposition. Much of it ugly opposition, not stuff that I would

want to link hands with. And Nigel Farage joins me now. Let me put to

you what the editor of the Sun had to say. He says, UKIP will peak at

the European election and then it will begin to get marginalised as we

get closer to 2015 because there is now that clear blue water between

Labour and the Tories. What do you say to that? There may be layered

blue water on energy pricing but on Eastern Europe, there is no

difference at all. When Ed Miliband offers the referendum to match

Cameron, even that argument on Europe will be gone. The one thing

that will keep UKIP strong, heading towards 2015, is if people think in

some constituencies we can win. I cannot sit here right now and say

that will be the case. If we get over the hurdle of the European

elections clearly, I think there will be grounds to say that UKIP can

win seats in Westminster. You are going to run? Without a shadow of a

doubt. I do not know which constituency. The welcome I got in

Edinburgh was not that friendly Edinburgh is not everything in

Scotland. I think we have a realistic chance of winning those

elections. If we do that, we will have the momentum behind us. You

might be the biggest party after the May elections. The National front is

likely to do very well in France as well. They have won the crucial

by-election in the South of France. Have you talked about joining full

season in Parliament? The leader has tried to take the movement into a

different direction than her father. The man she beat, to become leader,

actually attended the BNP conference. The problem she has with

her party and we have with her party is that anti-Semitism is too deep

and we will not be doing a deal with the French national government. You

can guarantee you will not be joining such groups. I can guarantee

that. Let's move on to Europe. Let's accept that the pro-Europeans

exaggerate the loss of jobs that would follow the departure of

Britain from the UK. Is there no risk of jobs whatsoever? No risk

whatsoever. There is no risk at all. There have been some weak and lazy

arguments put around about this We will go on doing business - go on

doing trade with Europe. We will have increased opportunities to do

trade deals with the rest of the world and they will create jobs The

head of Nissan, the head of Hitachi and CBI many other voices in British

business, when they all expressed concern about the potential loss of

jobs and incoming investment, we should just ignore them. With

Nissan, the BBC News is making this a huge story. The boss did not say

what was reported. He said there was a potential danger to his future

investment. They have already made the investments. They have built the

plant in Sunderland, which they say is operating well. We should be

careful of what bosses of big businesses say. This man said they

may have two leaves Sunderland if we did not join the euro. I do not take

that seriously. As for the CBI, they wanted us to join the euro and now

they do not. Even within the CBI, there is a significant minority

saying, we do not agree with what the CBI director-general is saying.

The former boss of the organisation is saying we need a referendum and

we need a referendum soon. It depends on the renegotiation. There

is not the uniformity. What we are beginning to see in the world, is,

manufacturing and small businesses are a lot more voices saying, the

costs of membership outweigh any potential benefit. If you look at

the polls, if Mr Cameron does repatriate some powers and he joins

with Labour, the Lib Dems, the Nationalists in Scotland and Wales,

most of business, all of the unions to say we should stay in, you are

going to lose, aren't you? In 1 75, the circumstances were exactly the

same. Mr Wilson promised a renegotiation and he got very

little. The establishment gathered around him and they voted for us to

stay in. I do not think that will happen now. The scales have fallen.

We do not want to be governed by Herman Van Rompuy and these people.

These people are Eurosceptic but they do not seem to feel strongly

enough about it that they are going to defy all the major parties they

vote for, companies that employ them, unions they are members of. I

am absolutely confident there will be a lot voices in business saying,

we need to take this opportunity to break free, give ourselves a chance

of a low regulation lowball trader. -- global trade. In 1970 53 small

publications said to vote yes. I am not contemplating losing. The most

important thing is to get the referendum. If UKIP is not strong,

there will not be a referendum. Earlier in the year, your party

issued a leaflet about the remaining sample parents being able to come to

this country. The EU will allow 29 million Bulgarians and remaining is

to come to the UK. That is technically correct but we both know

that is not the case. It is an open door to these people. Why take the

risk? By make out there are 29 million people? I stand by that

verdict. It is an open door. 29 million are not going to come. They

can if they want. Also 29 million people from France can come. After

these countries have joined, we will do another leaflet saying that Mr

Cameron wants to open the door to 70 million people from Turkey. That is

scaremongering. I would not say that. We have a million young

British workers between 16 and 4 without work. A lot of them want

work and we do not need another massive oversupply in the unskilled

labour market. Why did you have such a bad time on question Time this

week? The folk that did not buy your anti-immigration stick. Do you think

that group of people in the room was representative of the voters of

Boston? What would make you think it was unrepresentative? When the

county council elections took place this year in Boston, of the seven

seats, UKIP won five and almost won the other two. I don't think that

audience reflected that, but that doesn't matter. How an audience is

put together, how a panel is put together, on one programme, it

doesn't mean much at all. It shows that your anti-immigrant measure

doesn't fly as easily as you hoped it would? The opinion polls which

will be launched on Monday that we are conducting and nearing

completion, they show two things. Firstly, an astonishing number of

people who think it's irresponsible and wrong to open the doer to

Romania and Bulgaria, secondly and crucially, a number of people whose

vote in the European elections and subsequent general elections may be

determined by the immigration issues. This does matter. It would

be the perfect run group the European elections in May for you if

a lot of Bulgarians and remainians flooded in. You would like that to

happen? I think it will happen. Whether I like it or not, it will

happen. You think it will be good for you, it will stir things up If

you say to people in poor countries, you can come here, get a job, have a

safety net of a benefits system claim child allowance for your kids

in Bucharest, people will come You are ready with the arguments

already? You will be disappointed if only ten turn up? Whether lots come

or not we should. Taking the risk and yes, we are going to make it a

major issue in the European election. Let's leave it there.

Thank you very much, Nigel Farage. The summer of 2013 was not good for

Ed Miliband, with questions over his leadership, low ratings and

complaints about no policies. He bounced back with a vengeance at the

Labour Conference in September, delivering a speech which this week

won the spectator political speech of the year aword. In that speech he

focussed on the cost-of-living and promised a temporary freeze on

energy prices. Even said this. The next election isn't just going to be

about policy. It's going to be about how we lead and the character we

show. I've got a message for the Tories today. If they want to have a

debate, about leadership and character, be my guest And if you

want to know the difference between me and David Cameron, here is an

easy way to remember it. When it was Murdoch v the McCanns, he took the

side of Murdoch. When it was the tobacco lobby versus the cancer

charities, he took the side of the tobacco lobby. When the millionaires

wanted a tax cut as people pay the bedroom tax, he took the side of the

millionaires. A come to think of it, here is an easier way to remember

it. David Cameron was a Prime Minister who introduced the bedroom

tax. I'll be the Prime Minister who repeals the bedroom tax There we go,

that will go down with the party faithful on Tuesday. There will be a

debate on the bedroom tax. Labour's Deputy Leader, Harriet Harman,

joints me now. Let's begin with the bedroom tax or bedroom subsidy.

Nearly 11% of people who've come off Housing Benefits all together after

their spare room subsidy was stopped, isn't that proof that

reform was necessary? No. I think that the whole way that the bet room

tax has been attempted to be justified is completely wrong. What

it's said is that it will actually help take people off the waiting

lists by putting them into homes that have been vacated by people

who've downsized by being incentivised by the bedroom tax so

basically if you are a council tenant or Housing Association tenant

in a property with spare bedrooms, then because the penalty is imposed,

you will move to a smaller property. That is the justification for it.

But actually, something like 96 of the people who're going to be hit by

the bedroom tax, there isn't a smaller property for them to move

into. I understand that. Therefore they are, like the people in my

constituency, if they have got one spare bedroom, they are hit by 700

a year extra to pay and that is completely unfair As a consequence

of people losing the subsidy for their spare room, they have decided

to go out and get work and not depend on Housing Benefit at all?

11% of them. What's wrong with that? Well, they are going to review the

way 2 the bedroom tax is working. What is wrong with that? But that's

not working. That's the result of Freedom of Information, 141 councils

provided the figures, 25,000 who've come off benefits, of the 233,0 0

affected, it's about 11%. These people were clearly able to get a

job was having the Housing Benefit in the first place? But of course

the people who're on the benefits who're not in work are always

looking for work and many of them will find work which is a good

thing, but for those who don't find work, or who find work where it s

low-paid and need help with their rent, it's wrong to penalise them on

the basis of the fact that their family might have grown up and moved

away and so you have either got to move out of your home, away from

your family and your neighbourhood, or you've got to stay where you are

and, despite the fact that you are low-paid or unemployed, you have got

to find an extra ?700 a year because of your rent. So it's very unfair

The Government that was commissioning independent research

on the impact of this work change and welfare policy, particularly on

the impact on the most vulnerable, some of which you have been talking

about there, shouldn't they have waited until you have got the

independent research, that independent investigation before

determining your policy? No. In fact, the Government should have

waited until they'd have done their independent research before they

bought into effect something and imposed it on people in a way which

is really unfair. They could have known. Why didn't you wait? What

they could have done is, they could have asked councils, are people

going to be able to Manifest into smaller homes if we impose the

bedroom tax and the answer from councils and Housing Associations

would have been no, they can't move into smaller homes because which

haven't got them there. They should have done the evaluation before they

introduced the policy. We are absolutely clear and you can see the

evidence, people are falling into rent arrears. Many people, it's a

terrifying thing to find that you can't pay your rent, and some of the

people go to payday loan companies to get loans to pay their rent. It

is very, very unfair. The justification for it, which is

people will move, is completely bogus. There aren't places for them

to go. On the wider issue of welfare reform, a call for the TUC showed

that voters support the Government's welfare reforms, including a

majority of Labour voters. Why are you so out of touch on welfare

issues, even with your own supporters? Nobody wants to see

people who could be in a job actually living at the taxpayers'

expense. That's why we have said that we'll introduce a compulsory

jobs guarantee, so that if you are a young person who's been unemployed

for a year, you will have to take a job absolutely have to take a job,

and if you have been unemployed as somebody over 25, there'll be a

compulsory thing after two years of unemployment. So if you have been on

welfare two years? So the main issue about the welfare bill actually is

people who're in retirement who need support. We have said for the

richest pensioners, they shouldn't have to pay their winter fuel

allowance. My point wasn't abouts the sub stance, it's about how you

don't reflect public opinion -- substance. The Parliamentary aid

said the political backlog of benefits and social security is "not

yet one that we have won. Labour must accept that they are not

convincing on these matters,". Well, redo have to convince people and

explain the policies we have got and the view we take. So, for example,

for pensioners, who're well off we are saying they don't need the

Winter Fuel Payment that. 's me saying to you and us saying to

people in this country, we do think that there should be that

tightening. For young people, who've been unemployed, they should be

offered jobs but they've got to take them. So yes, we have to make our

case. OK. The energy freeze which we showed there, on the speech, as

popular. The living wage proseles have been going down well as well.

Why is Labour's lead oaf the Conservatives being cut to 6% in the

latest polls? Ed Miliband's own personal approval rating's gotten

worse. Why is that? I'm not going to disdues ins and outs of weekly

opinion polls with you or anybody else because I'm not a political

commentator, but let me say to you the facts of what's happened since

Ed Miliband's been leader of the Labour Party. We have got 1,950 New

Labour councillors, all of those... But you're... All those who've won

their seats against the Conservatives or the Liberal

Democrats and no, Andrew you don't always get that in opposition. In

1997 after Tony Blair was elected, the Tories carried on losing council

seats. Exceptional circumstances and these days Mr Blair was 25% ahead in

the polls. You were six. The economy grew at an annual rate of 3% in the

third quarter just gone. Everybody, private and public forecasters now

saying that Britain in this coming year will grow faster than France,

Italy, Spain, even Germany will grow faster. Your poll ratings are

average when the economy was flatlining, what happens to them

when the economy starts to grow Well, I've just said to you, I'm not

a political commentator or a pundit on opinion polls. We are putting

policies forward and we are holding the Government to account for what

they are doing and we think that what they did opt economy pulled the

plugs from the economy, delayed the recovery, made it stagnate and we

have had three years lost growth. I understand that, but it's now

starting to grow. Indeed. If you are no political commentator, let me ask

you this, you anticipated the growth, so you switched your line to

no growth to this is growth and living standards are rising. If the

economy does grow up towards 3% next year, I would suggest that living

standards probably will start to rise with that amount of growth

What do you do then? We have not switched our line because the

economy started to grow. All the way along, we said the economy will

recover, but it's been delayed and we have had stagnation for far too

long because of the economic policies. We have been absolutely

right to understand the concerns people have and recognise that they

are struggling with the cost-of-living. Sure. And we are

right to do that. What kind of living standards stuck to rise next

year? -- start to rise next year. I hope they will. For 40 months of

David Cameron's Prime Ministership, for 39 of those, wages have risen

slower than prices, so people are worse off. I understand that. You

will know that the broader measurement, real household

disposable income doesn't show that decline because it takes everything

into account. Going around the country, people feel it. They say

where's the recovery for me. Living standards now start to rise? If that

happens, what is your next line There is a set of arguments about

living standards, the National Health Service, about the problems

that there is in A, which caused -- are caused by the organisation. I

can put forward other lines. All right. Let me ask you one other

question If no newspapers have signed up to the Government-backed

Labour-backed Royal Charter on press regular lace by 2015 and it looks

like the way things are going none will have, if you are in power, will

a Labour Government legislate to make them? They don't have to sign

up to the Royal Charter, that's not the system. What the Royal Charter

does is create a recogniser and basically says it's for the

newspapers to set up their own regulator. They are doing that. My

question is... Let me finish. If they decide to have nothing to do

with the Royal Charter that was decided in Miliband's office in the

wee small hours, will you pass legislation to make them? The

newspapers are currently setting up what they call... I know that,

Harriet Harman. Just let me finish. OK. Because the newspapers are

setting up the independent Press Standards Organisation. Right. If it

is independent, as they say it is, then the recogniser will simply say,

we recognise that this is independent and the whole point is

that, in the past when there's been skaen deals a tend press have really

turned people's lives upside down and the press have said OK we'll

sort things out, leave it to us then they have sorted things out but

a few years later they have slipped back, all this recogniser will do is

check it once every three years and say yes, you have got an independent

system and it's remained independent and therefore that is the guarantee

things won't slip back. Very interesting. Thank you for that

That's really interesting that if they get their act right, you won't

force the alternative on them. We want the system as set forward by

Leveson which is not statute and direct regulation. I want to stick

with the press because I want to ask, is this a British institution

or an out-of-date image for a by gone age. The Sun's Page 3 has been

dividing the nation since it first appeared way back in 1970. That s 43

years ago. Harriet Harman's called for it to be removed, so we sent

Adam out to ask whether the topless photographs should stay or go. We

have asked people if page three should stay or go. Page three. What

do you think? Nothing wrong with it at all. I think it is cheap and

exploits women. It is a family newspaper. Should it stay or go Go.

I will look like the bad guy. It should go. You have changed your

mind. It is free choice. Girls do not have to be photographed. Old men

get the paper just for that. Know when your age does that? Not really.

Dashes-macro know what your age Page three girls, should they stay

or go? I am not bothered. There are other ways of getting noticed. Page

three of the Sun newspaper every day, there is a woman with no top

on. We got rid of that about 40 years ago in Australia. I am not in

favour of censorship. It has been long enough. It can stay there. What

is wrong with it? We want to encourage children to read the

newspapers. I do not want my children to look at that. It is

degrading. Do you think we will see the day when they get rid of it

Yes, I do. I am wondering if I can turn this into some kind of a

shelter. It is tipping it down. I think the council should do

something about their car parks Mother nature, the human body. It

should stay. Is some people like it, that is fine. I have nothing against

it. You know what has surprised me, lots of women saying it should stay.

Maybe they are seeing it as empowering. As I have a baby

daughter in there, I am happy to see it go. Imagine my grandad opening up

his paper and they're being my bats! It should go. There is nothing wrong

with it. He wants it to go. What about people who think that page

three should be banned? Idiots. Do you know a girl called Lacey, aged

22, from Bedford? Good luck to her. I do not know her as a person that I

have heard she is nice. What about her decision to be on page three?

Nothing to lose. Do you think she has made Bedford proud? That is not

hard. What have we learned? More people want page three to stay down

for it to go. Most people do not really seem to care, do they? You

have heard a range of views. I am not arguing it should be banned. I

have not argued for it to be banned but I have disapproved of it since

the 1970s. You do not think it should be banned? I do not think

there should be dictating content but I do think, if you arrive from

outer space in this country in 21st-century Britain, and asked

yourself what was the role of women in society... To stand in their

knickers and nothing else, I think women have more to aspire to than to

be able to take their clothes off in public. The sun no longer has the

circulation, or the political importance, that it had in the 1980s

when page three was at its height. Aren't people just voting with their

feet anyway? The market is sorting this out. Half the number of people

buy it now than they did 20 years ago. Until the time the sun does not

have page three any more, I am entitled to my view that it is

outdated and wrong. I am happy to establish that you do not want to

ban it. What should happen? Should people boycott the paper? I have

never implied or said it should be banned. I have always been

forthright. Should people boycott the paper? I have not called for a

boycott. The women's movement, of which I am part, and this is not

about politicians censoring the press. I am part of the movement

which says women can do better than taking off their clothes and being

in their knickers in the newspapers. Why don't you do something about it?

I am doing something about it by saying it is outdated. I am not

doing anything more about it. Should people buy the paper as long as

there is a page three? Would you like to say to viewers, as long as

page three is in the sand, you should not buy it? Dashes-macro be

Son. I am saying, wake up to what the role of women in society should

be, which is more than page three. If they changed it in Australia,

which is where Rupert Murdoch came from, why can they not change it in

this country? You're watching the Sunday Politics. Coming up in just

over 20 minutes... I'll be talking to man leading the campaign for an

English I'm Natalie Graham and this is the

Sunday Politics in the South East. Coming up later, Ed Miliband

launches an attack on the Wonga Economy so what does that mean for

places like Medway which has the greatest concentration of payday

lenders in the whole country? Joining me in the studio today to

discuss that and other topics is Paul Carter, the Conservative leader

of Kent County Council and Janice Atkinson, a UKIP candidate for next

year's European elections in the South East. Welcome to you both.

Now, don't drink and... Well, we can all complete that important piece of

safety advice, but it's been reported that councillors in West

Sussex have been advised by the council not to drink and tweet just

in case they say something on social media they later regret. Is that

sound advice? Or a little too much management of our local politicians'

engagement with the public? Well, Janice, you tweet, how careful are

you? Have you ever type something in and said, I am not going to send

that? No, because I always have a rule. Never drink and tweet, sent an

e`mail or do Facebook. It is a great medium for getting across our

points, our points on politics, engaging with journalists. You have

got to be careful. Journalists and your political opponents will be

watching for everything for you to say to trip up. You have to be

careful, but the good thing is, you only have 140 characters. Never

drink and do it, ever! Do we have to advise our councillors, should they

not know that already? I think so, I do not use Twitter, I survive

without it, others do a lot of tweeting and nobody yet on the

Conservative benches at County Hall has got themselves into trouble. The

Freedom of information act does a good job on opening up our e`mail

accounts to the world to see on any issues. We are pretty open and

transparent and regulation encourages that and rightly so.

Now, it's six months since the local election results which changed the

political landscape across the south east. For the first time UKIP, which

had been a minor force until then, took a huge 37 council seats across

the region. It made them the official opposition in both Kent and

West Sussex. So, what has their record in local government

since those results? And can they really use it as they'd like to, as

a springboard towards even greater success at the general election? We

sent Bhavani Vadde to Thanet in Kent where UKIP got their best results in

the country. # Purple rain, purple rain.

It was a sea of blue that saw ways of purple crashing in on the South

East's political scene. You can's `` UKIP's results meant they became the

biggest opposition in Kent and West Sussex.

The party grabbed the media's attention. But, as they say,

today's headlines become tomorrow's chip paper. Six months on, is UKIP

proving that Ron? What do people think at this Ramsgate chip shop

about the impact of the new UKIP councillors on local politics? I

can't say I have noticed a great deal of difference. The thing that

will be noticed is the way they are making the other politicians who run

the country a more attention to what they are trying to do on immigration

and various other things. I do not have a clue who UKIP are but I am

always busy working. UKIP's strongest victory in the south`east

was inside it. The party took seven out of eight seats in this district

while Labour's won the remainder one. Because of their stance on

immigration, people are alienated and they feel they cannot get in

touch with them. People who may have come to this country who may need

help getting into their local primary school, for example, they do

not like they can contact their UKIP counsellor so I am being contacted

by them. I am eating up casework which I am happy to do but this is

the problem. There is a large community in Thanet which are not

being representative by their local councillors. There is greater UKIP

residents in Kent suddenly were asked in the country. So how have

they performed so far? The group has a good attendance record since May.

They were present at 85% of beatings they were expected to be at. So far

they have `` 85% of meetings. So far they have failed to table in

emotions. `` any notions. A keen observer of local government

believes that UKIP has a piecemeal approach. They are not a whipped

group, so within the group, individual councillors make look at

things differently to their colleagues. So they are not

particularly cohesive as an opposition force. One of the main

reasons is a manifesto which was very nationally focused, they have

come to the council without having any real engagement or experience of

having a counsellor `` being a councillor, or voting on policies on

schools or social care, which is key to local residents. One reason for

UKIP's apparent low profile could be the lack of experience. Most of its

councillors are relatively new to politics. Only three have prior

experience of local councils. So will be party have enough

high`calibre candidates to draw from the next general election when they

plan to contest every constituency in the country? It is a disgrace, a

disgrace. The spotlight on the party has already thrown up a number of

embarrassing controversies. MEP Godfrey Bloom was sacked from UKIP

after joking that a group of female activists were sluts. Before his

election, Martin Heal said he regretted the aim and active matter

`` member of the National front in the 1970s. And Jeffrey Clark was

suspended after claiming that unborn babies with Downs syndrome should be

compulsorily aborted. I do not think their performance in local

government is going to be a big factor in their performance in the

general election. What will matter will be the performance of their

leadership team and particularly Nigel Harwich, and whether or not ``

Nigel Franche, and whether or not they pick people who can do well or

they make their usual mistake of picking nutters. Six months ago, the

impact of UKIP was felt across the region but it seems they are yet to

capitalise on that. While the party `` will the party be a serious force

in politics or will its power in the next general election be limited to

splitting the force on the right and undermining the Tories?

We'll talk about the threat to the right ring vote with Paul in a

moment. First let's deal with perhaps the most serious accusation

in Bhavani's report, that your party isn't representing the people of

Kent because you've alienated so many of them. They do not feel they

can approach their councillors because of the language that has

been used. I do not understand that. We'll go be made that point in the

report. But he did not find any. It is just the Labour politician

accusing UKIP. You must have heard this accusation before. We represent

everyone, everyone should feel copped a ball coming to us, ``

comfortable coming to us, whether he is alluding to immigrants, they

should feel confident. But when people like Nigel Harwich talk about

things like Romanian criminal gangs come into the country... Let's talk

about that, 92% of ATM criminal crime is done by Romanian gangs. We

are talking about that language, that alienate a lot of people on the

local level. I do not accept it. What about the other accusation,

that you do not do any emotions. I am not on the council, I am here to

talk about Europe. There is an accusation that you do not have a

cohesive party strategy, that applies nationally as well. Do you

mean a whipping system? We take the view that one size does not fit all.

If in one ward they have issues with schools or roads, it does not

translate into the next ward. Especially in Kent, East Kent and

West Kent are very different. The danger is when it comes to European

elections, people are not sure what your party stand for. We have a full

manifesto. That is not coming through at local level. If it is not

coming to add local level now, that could damage your electoral

prospects. We stood on a local manifesto, we will have a full

manifesto for the European and 2015 elections. But people are not sure

what you stand for on specific issues. They will do, we will have a

full and investors. But so far they do not. But we do, have a manifesto.

In Europe, you are accused of being a lazy party. But we do not go there

to tweak legislation, we say, we do not believe any legislation should

come down from Europe. We go there and vote no, we do not fit their

tweaking and say that things should be voted on, 84% of legislation

comes from Europe. So we say no. That quote from Tim Luckhurst, the

problem you have got is that you do not have any high`calibre halibut,

and then `` can and do it, and therefore you will end up selecting

nutters, his quote was. He would say that. We have 330 applicants to the

seat which was narrowed down, I went to that process and I have also been

to the Conservative process and it was very vigorous. We have got

growing pains as a growing party. We are going to stand a full slate of

candidates. We have still got people from the old party but we are the

only party who do not allow people in from the BNP or the National

front. Labour do, they have got people who used to be BNP labours.

`` councillors. How concerned are you about the further damage this

party can do at the next election? The most difficult days in the last

few years that I have experienced in politics, UKIP did better than was

anticipated in the south`east particularly in Kent and Essex. We

are working alongside UKIP is the major opposition party, they were

enormously winded and quite shocked when some of the candidates were

enormously winded and quite shocked when some of the candidates woke up

to being county councillors. They have been enormously impressed by

what we do and carry out at County Hall in both the administration and

the context of the other services that we run. But when it comes to

national and European politics, which Janice is concerned about, how

much does it concern you when you hear the language in your party

changing when David Cameron talks about ways is in support of the EU?

Ed Miliband has accused your party of navel`gazing, that becomes a

destruction and its split the vote because people go to UKIP. It is a

big threat, we have the European elections coming up in June next

year. That is going to be a massive test. I think the issues at the

moment our immigration and our future in Europe. I think David

Cameron and the conservative National party has got to start

articulating what a re`negotiated arrangement looks like within the

European community, with our friends in the European Community because we

need to know. Personally I am on the fence, I neither am a Eurosceptic or

a Europhile, I can see problems. Let's have a good debate and start

that now. I don't Janice would love to start that now but we will have

to live that now `` leave it there! First it was the Big Six electricity

firms, then the water companies, and now Ed Miliband has set his sights

on the Wonga Economy. That's the payday lenders who add to what he

calls the cost of living crisis facing many families. Medway in Kent

has the greatest concentration of such companies in the country. So,

are they a dangerous force which, as the Labour leader says, are running

riot through our communities, or companies that offer an important

service to people in need of short`term loans? Earlier this week,

MPs on a House of Commons Select Committee questioned the bosses of

some of the biggest payday lenders, including Wonga. Do you think that

your charges are extortionate? You are a rapacious organisation buys

Mac no, we do not accept that. The product is used moderately by most

people, and competitive market of those people traditionally using

overdrafts and credit cards. What is your interest rate when people go

over the period of time, the overdraft equivalent? The

unauthorised overdraft charges... How much is that? If you borrow

?100, over 30 days, it is ?115. If you borrow from Wonga, it is ?37.

Our business loans to people who can pay us back, that is how we make our

money. The vast majority of people pay as back on time but we are

lending to vast amount of people small forms of credit. That compares

favourably to credit cards and banks. We're joined in the studio by

Councillor Vince Maple. Vince is a Labour councillor in Medway. It was

his party's initiative that brought about a ban on payday loan companies

advertising on council websites. You've taken some action, but you're

limited in what you can do? That is right. We have seen over the last

two years a fairly cross`party approach to this in Medway.

Councillors have all been frustrated in all`party administrations by

issues like the planning law which means we have no power to say, we

have got too many of these shops in our high street. We have seen

evidence from people like the CLB who have been shocking with the

levels of debt that people have and the link to payday lenders,

particularly those on our high streets, who I have been campaigning

very hard against. It is not just about saying payday lenders are bad.

It is also saying, what is the community alternative? That is where

credit unions are critical to the debate. That is one of the things

you would like, and I know Ed Miliband would like to take money,

tax the companies and spend it on publicly funded alternatives like

credit unions. You also want greater powers for local authorities so they

can stop the shops opening. That is right. We have seized the word

localism banded about more than ever recently, but local councillors, we

are representatives of our community, we are powerless at the

moment. We need to see big changes in planning laws to say it should be

local representatives elected by the community to form what the high

street and town centre looks like. All Carter, do you support the push

for greater powers locally? I think there should be national

localisation `` regulation, encouraging credit unions to

flourish where possible. These payday loan companies do fulfil a

function but the track record of people getting more and more into

debt and getting into all sorts of financial problems built on top of

each other and escalating, it needs to have limits. The sister stick

from the citizens advice bureau is interesting, clearly when most

people are feeling poorer in these difficult times with benefit

reductions and income reductions, there needs to be sensible, national

regulation and the preference for establishing good credit unions that

can lend money responsibly at affordable rates. Ed Miliband says

he wants a cap at the cost of credit, at 4000% APR charged by

these companies, whereas a credit union offers 26.8%. A cap sound

sensible. And 26.8 makes your eyes water as well. This is a difficult

area of business, there does need to be provision for short`term loans to

type people over difficult period in their family finances. This is the

problem, people need short`term help with their finances. These are

companies which exist because there is a market for them. The danger is

if we camped down too much, people go to loan sharks. If we have a cap

on interest rates, and I do not think the committee went too far on

that `` far enough on that, you should also have a cap on people

having loans in the year. There is a great credit union in our area that

we promote. You have to ask why people are in this state in the

first place, it is the cap on benefit and universal credit is not

going to work unless we reform certain other areas. If you look at

the common agricultural policy, for argument's say, it costs every

family 25%... Let's stick to payday loans, we are all agreed that more

needs to be done. Let's bring Vince back in. These are companies, you

heard their argument in the comments, they are quite sensible

and quite often more responsible in their lending than some of the banks

and credit card companies. I think it is about looking internationally.

Janice would love us to look at international issues but in lots of

countries, these organisations have been banned outright. It is about

looking at what has happened elsewhere. Absolutely about

promoting our credit unions to be great community cooperatives, and

making each other is a total cup on the cost of credit. `` making sure

there is a total cap on the cost of credit.

And now a round`up of the other political events that you might have

missed this week with our Political Editor, Louise Stewart.

Kent county council is consulted as on plans `` is consulting on plans

to end a three`year freeze on council. It has to save ?270 million

and looks likely to reject the extra money from the government. We would

not do fracking if we do not think it was face. The Mayor of London

used typical colourful language when he urged the company to enter the

dither and build an airport in the Thames in history.

And Nigel Farage does not seem to have learned his lesson. There was a

plot to blow up the Houses of Parliament. That was a violet

approach, you, of course, have taken the bowl and technocratic approach.

`` deep L and technocratic. You used quite strong language about

Eric 's pickles `` Eric pickles's approach to reduce council tax, you

called it a bribe, are you sticking to that? We have sought his help but

it does not solve the underlying pace budget problem with budgets in

local authorities. We have frozen council tax and used every trick in

the book, we have taken up his small amounts of money when we have had to

make savings of ?90 million. We have to find that again every year. You

are sticking two fingers up by the sounds that! It is not adequate. We

are consulting on a council tax increase on nine point `` 1.90%,

just below the cap. That only produces ?10 million when we have

two save ?90 million for three years. Does your heart sinks when

you hear Nigel Farage talk like that? Absolutely not. That is why

people vote for UKIP, that is why people are fed up with the

coalition. At least the media are now reporting what is going on over

there, 84% of our laws come from Europe, that has got to stop. That

is all we have got time for. Thank you to our guests. Julia will be

here next week. We learned this week that no more

warships will be built at Portsmouth, the home of the Royal

Navy since the days of the Mary Rose and Francis Drake. But has the city

been sacrificed to save jobs on the Clyde in Scotland? Is England the

loser in an effort to keep the United Kingdom intact? Let's speak

to Eddie Bone, he leads the campaign for an English Parliament. Is

England the loser in this attempt to keep the

doubt, Andrew. We would look at it from the campaign for the English

Parliament that the British governance is bribing the Scots to

stay with the union at the cost of English jobs. What is the best

outcome for England when Scotland votes in the referendum next year?

We have got to have an English parliament. What I mean by that is

an endless governor and with a first minister speaking on behalf of the

people of England. -- and English government. If Scotland votes for

independence, that is the union coming to an end. It will be

dissolved legally. England would be going to negotiating table without

true representation. The union continues but it continues without

Scotland. I want to come back to my... That is the constitutional

position. You may not agree with me but that is the constitutional

position. Do you want Scotland to vote for independence next year We

want a fair deal with equality for England. If that can be maintained

or England can have a fair deal within the union, that is brilliant.

Let's have a federal system are all the nations are treated equally If

that cannot happen and Scotland decides to stay, if Scotland goes,

it is an independent England, isn't it? If Scotland votes to leave the

union, what is left of the United Kingdom would be so dominated by

England at Westminster would, in effect, Beale English Parliament,

wouldn't it? I do not agree with you. I think that is a British, deny

list approach. The act of union was a fusion with the King of England to

the King of Scotland. That would come to an end. The Welsh are very

concerned. They are a very small nation. If you have a botched

British come English Parliament the Welsh would be in a very vulnerable

situation. They would not be listened to. Also a situation with

Northern Ireland. There are voices in Northern Ireland talking about

trying to reunite Northern Ireland. It would be a very volatile

situation. Would you prefer England to become an independent nation

separate from what was left of the UK, which would be Wales and

Northern Ireland? Would you like to see England have a seat in the UN? I

want their representation for the people of England. English jobs were

sacrificed because the British government wanted Scotland to

remain... You have answered that very quickly. I am -- very clearly.

Would you want England, without Northern Ireland and Wales to become

a separate nation state? If that is what it takes for people of England

to have their representation - representation that looks at

policies of the NHS, education very different from Wales and Northern

Ireland - then so be it. Independence will need to be the way

forward. We have a small window of opportunity that the federal system

might still work. D1 indenting have a system like Scotland? -- do you

want England to have a system like Scotland? What we need to do now is

implement the process is to get their representation for England. I

would urge your viewers to join our campaign because it is the only way

to protect jobs in England, protect the NHS, protect education.

Otherwise we will see the people in England continually penalised by the

British government is trying desperately to save the union by

giving more to Scotland and Wales. Nice to talk to you. Helen, on this

business of the Clyde versus Portsmouth, it would have been

pretty inconceivable of the British government that believes in the

union to have allowed the Clyde to close. That would have been a

disaster. It would have been. It's dumped Nicola Sturgeon. Hang on a

minute, if there was Scottish independence, England were not allow

its warships to be built in a foreign country. She was unable to

admit there were any downsides to Scottish independence. It would be

dangerous for Scotland to talk about this. You have a Lib Dem and a

Conservative MP with reasonable majorities. They will find that a

killer on their doorstep in the next election. There are no results in

this for Mr Cameron. He has one MP and he will be lucky to have two.

And the South of England, I know Portsmouth is quite an industrial

area, but the South of England is overall Tory territory. He has

backed the Clyde where there are no Tory votes. The Tory problem in

Scotland is crucial. The trend to look out for is the rise of English

nationalism within the Conservative Party. They have the word Unionist

in their official title. If, in election after election, they failed

to win a significant presence in Scotland, and they are failing to

win a majority in Westminster because of that, it is not hard to

imagine that in ten years time that would be a party which has more

autonomy. One person we know who does not sign up to that. David

Cameron is a romantic Unionist at heart he may say that are not any

vote in Scotland but he want to keep the union together. With the Clyde,

you saw a rival together of economic and political interests. It is

economic or the case the greatest shipbuilding capability in the

United Kingdom is in the Clyde. It is politically very helpful for this

government to say to people in Scotland, look at the benefits of

being in the United Kingdom and under their breath, or in the case

of Alistair Carmichael to a camera, look what might go if you leave

That came together very conveniently to the government. Now, how do you

like your politicians? Squeaky clean with an impeccable past? Or are you

happy for them to have a few skeletons in the closet? Well, last

week the Toronto Mayor Rob Ford admitted smoking crack cocaine. He

said he took the drug about a year ago whilst in a drunken stupor. So,

what impact do confessions have on a political career? In a moment, we'll

hear what our panel has to say, but first, take a look at this. Yes I

have smoked crack cocaine. Am I an addict? No. Have I tried it?

Probably one of my drunken stupor is, about a year ago. I have used

drugs in the past. I have used class a drugs in the past. About 30 years

ago at university, I did smoke cannabis. I took cannabis is a few

times at university and it was wrong. Have you snorted cocaine I

tried to but unsuccessfully years ago. I sneezed. The people around

you who took cocaine, they went .. Is it better to confess or the that

get you into even more hot water? It is absolutely better. The confession

by Jacqui Smith was without glamour. Finding a Labour politician who once

smoked cannabis 25 years ago... I do not think it makes you think that

she cannot be a serious politician. Politicians should brace thing about

them which everyone knows. In the case of Ed Miliband, he should not

deny being geeky. That would reek of in authenticity. The Tory MP meant

to be regarded as a rising star turns out he was claiming to heat

his horses stables at the expense of the tax payer. He had made a

generous claim for energy bills in his constituency home. He went

through the papers and found he had been using it to heat the stables

and he laid it all out and did the right thing. He was completely

honest. Is that the end of it? It will still haunt in because energy

is such a big issue. He was right to be honest about it. Helen was

saying, absolutely, you need to be honest about your past. Harriet

Harman said she smoked pot at university. If you have smoked pot,

you can have a front line career. If you have taken class a drugs, you

cannot have a front line career There is the politician confessing

and the remarkable willingness of the public to forgive. It is

enlightened and progressive to forgive a politician for an affair

or taking soft drugs at university. To smoke crack cocaine and demand be

mad of following the Mayor of Toronto does astonishes me. There

was an example in America a few years ago. It was crack cocaine He

was elected having confessed to smoking crack cocaine. I draw the

line around class a drugs. We will put the team on to investigate him.

Help to Bible come back into the headlines again. Mr Cameron will

surroundings by the people who are benefiting from buying their homes

on this scheme in the same way that this is that you used to visit those

who had bought their council houses. It will become hugely politicised.

The Bank of England thinks that unemployment will drop late 201 ,

early 2015. They will put interest rates up. Those with 95% mortgages

will have two find an extra ?40 a month to pay them off. I would not

be surprised if David Cameron is setting up himself with this

trouble. They will not want to raise interest rates. Mark Carney was very

careful to give himself three get out clauses. If unemployment hits a

certain level, Key has three measures which have to be fulfilled

before he goes ahead and raises interest rates. As a Tory

strategist, would you rather go into the election with low and implement

or low interest rates? I think they would stick to low interest rates.

-- low unemployment. It is not just panellists who are raising questions

about it, it is senior figures people in senior economic positions.

They are saying the scheme is fine at the moment. David Cameron will be

surrounded by people who have taken mortgages out at low levels and it

is all fine right now but if interest rates go up, it will not be

cosy. That's all folks. The Daily Politics is back tomorrow on BBC Two

at midday. I'll be back next Sunday at the normal time of 11am.

Remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.