17/11/2013 Sunday Politics South East

Morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.

Downing Street announces an inquiry into allegations of hardball tactics

and intimidation by unions in industrial disputes. That's our top

story. Thousands dead. Hundreds of

thousands without homes. Millions affected. What is Britain doing to

help the Philippines in the wake of Typhoon Haiyan? We'll ask

International Development Secretary Justine Greening.

Winter is coming and so, it seems, is another crisis in England's

hospitals. I'll be asking the Shadow Health Secretary how he'd put a stop

to the NHS's annual woes. It may be saving money but what

could fatalities on the capital's streets,

and renewed fatalities on the capital's streets,

and renewed calls to get lorries off the roads in peak hours.

With me, the best and brightest political panel that money can buy.

Janan Ganesh, Nick Watt and this week, Zoe Williams, who'll be

tweeting their thoughts throughout the programme.

The Government has announced a review to investigate what the Prime

Minister has called "industrial intimidation" by trade union

activists. Bruce Carr QC will chair a panel to examine allegations of

the kind of tactics that came to light during the Grangemouth

dispute, when the Unite union took their protests - replete with a

giant rat - outside the family homes of the firms' bosses. Earlier this

morning the Cabinet office minister, Francis Maude spoke to the BBC and

this is what he had to say. To look at whether the law currently works

and see if it is ineffective in preventing the kind of intimidatory

activity that was alleged to have taken place around range mouth

during the previous disputes -- Grangemouth. We make no presumptions

at the beginning of this. I do think it is a responsible thing for the

government to establish what happened and really do a proper

review into whether the law is adequate to meet the needs. That was

Francis Maude. This is a purely political move, isn't it? Unite did

this a couple of times, it is hardly happening all over the country but

the government want to say, we are prepared to investigate Unite

properly, Labour isn't. This seemed a lot worse when I thought it was a

real rat. I thought it was a giant dead rat. I am not sure if you know

much about rats but real rats are not this big, even the ones in

London. The thing is, obviously it is naked politics but I think it is

more intelligent than it looks. They are trying to taint Miliband as a

week union puppet and that doesn't really wash. They hammer away with

it and it might wash for some people. But it really castrates

Miliband in the important issues he has to tackle. Zero hours, living

wage, all of those things in which he needs to be in concert with the

unions, and to use their expertise. He is making them absolutely toxic

to go anywhere near. It keeps the Unite story alive, have to kill --

particularly since Mr Miller band is under pressure to reopen the

investigation into what Unite are up to -- Mr Miliband. They are

frustrated, not only at the BBC but the media generally at what they

think is a lack of coverage. I see the political rationale from that

respect. There is a risk. There are union members who either vote Tory

or are open to the idea of voting Tory. All Lib Dem. If the party

comes across as too zealous in as -- its antipathy, there is an electoral

consequence. Ed Miliband has been careful to keep a distance. Yes

they depend on vast amounts of money. When Len McCluskey had a real

go at the Blairites, Ed Miliband was straight out there with a very

strong statement. Essentially Len McCluskey wanted Blairites in the

shadow cabinet sacked and Ed Miliband was keen to distance

himself or for that is why it is not quite sticking. Another story in the

Sunday papers this morning, the Mail on Sunday got hold of some e-mails.

When I saw the headline I thought it was a huge cache of e-mails, it

turns out to be a couple. They peel away the cover on the relationship

between Ed Miliband and Ed Balls, with some of Ed Miliband's cohorts

describing what Mr balls is trying to do as a nightmare. How bad are

the relations? They are pretty bad and these e-mails confirm the

biggest open signal in Westminster, which is that relations are pretty

tense, -- open secret. That Ed Miliband doesn't feel that Ed Balls

is acknowledging the economy has grown that Labour needs to admit to

past mistakes. The sort of great open signal is confirmed. On a scale

of 1-10, assuming that Blair-Brown was ten. I think it is between six

and seven. They occupy this joint suite of offices that George Cameron

and -- David Cameron and George Osborne had. It is not just on the

economy that there were tensions, there were clearly tensions over

HS2, Ed Balls put a huge question over it at his conference. There

will be more tensions when it comes to the third runway because my

information is that Mr balls wants to do it and Ed Miliband almost

resigned over it when he was in government. I don't think Ed

Miliband is thinking very politically because he has tried

live without Ed Balls and that is not tenable either. -- life without.

He has defined a way of making it work. That is where Tony Blair had

the edge on any modern politician. He didn't want to make Ed Balls his

Shadow Chancellor, he had to. Somebody said to him, if you make Ed

Balls Shadow Chancellor, that will be the last decision you take as

leader of the Labour Party. Is it as bad? I was surprised at how tame the

e-mails were. At the FT it is compulsory, one French word per

sentence! To call him a nightmare, compared to what they are willing to

say in briefings, conversations bits of frustrations they express

verbally come what is documented in the e-mails is actually pretty

light. It has been a grim week for the people of the Philippines as

they count the cost of the devastation wrought by Typhoon

Haiyan. HMS Daring has just arrived near the worst hit areas - part of

Britain's contribution to bring aid to the country.

It has been one of the worst natural disasters in the history of the

Philippines. Typhoon Haiyan hit the country nine days ago, leaving

devastation in its wake. The numbers involved are shocking. The official

death toll is over 3600 people, with many thousands more unaccounted for.

More than half a million people have lost their homes and the UN

estimates 11 million have been affected. David Cameron announced on

Friday that the UK government is to give an extra ?30 million in aid,

taking the total British figure ?250 million. An RAF Sea 17 aircraft

landed yesterday with equipment to help aid workers get too hard to

reach areas. HMS Illustrious is on its way and due to arrive next

weekend. The British public have once again dipped into their pockets

and given generously. They have given more than ?30 million to the

Disasters Emergency Committee. The International Development

Secretary, Justine Greening, joins me now for the Sunday Interview

Good morning, Secretary of State. How much of the ?50 million that the

government has allocated has got through so far? All of it has landed

on the ground now. HMS Daring has turned up, that will be able to

start getting help out to some of those more outlying islands that

have been hard to reach. We have seen Save the Children and Oxfam

really being able to get aid out on the ground. We have a plane taking

off today that will not read just carrying out more equipment to help

clear the roads but will also have their staff on board, too. We have

?50 million of aid actually on the ground? We instantly chartered

flights directly from Dubai where we have preprepared human Terry and

supplies, and started humanity work -- humanitarian supplies.

A lot of it has now arrived. I think we have done a huge amount so far.

We have gone beyond just providing humanitarian supplies, to getting

the Royal Air Force involved. They have helped us to get equipment out

there quickly. We have HMS Illustrious sailing over there now.

Why has that taken so long? It was based in the Gulf and is not going

to get there until two weeks after the storm first hit and that is the

one ship we have with lots of helicopters. The first decision we

took was to make sure we could get the fastest vessel out there that

was able to help HMS Daring. HMS Illustrious was just finishing an

exercise and planning to start to head back towards the UK. We have

said to not do that, and diverted it. Shouldn't it have happened more

quickly? We took the decisions as fast as we were able to, you can't

just turn a big warship around like the HMS Illustrious. We made sure we

took those decisions and that is while it will be taking over from

HMS Daring come and that is why HMS Daring is ready there. It will be

able to provide key support and expertise that has not been there so

far. The US Navy is doing the heavy lifting here. The US Navy had the

USS Washington, there is an aircraft carrier, 80 planes, 5000 personnel

and they have the fleet, they are doing the real work. We obviously

helping but the Americans are taking the lead. It is a big international

effort. Countries like the US and the UK, that have a broader ability

to support that goes beyond simply call humanitarian supplies -- have

made sure we have brought our logistics knowledge, we have sent

out our naval vessels. It shows we are working across government to

respond to this crisis. Why does only just over 4% of your aid budget

go on emergency disaster and response? A lot depends on what

crises hit in any given year. We have done a huge amount, responding

to the crisis in Syria, the conflict there and the fact we have 2 million

refugees who have fled the country. We are part of an international

effort in supporting them. Shouldn't we beginning more money to that

rather than some of the other programmes where it is harder to see

the results question of if we were to give more money to the refugees,

it would be a visible result. We could see an improvement in the

lives of children, men and women. What we need to do is alongside that

is stop those situations from happening in the first place. A lot

of our development spend is helping countries to stay stable. Look at

some of the work we are doing in Somalia, much more sensible. Not

just from an immigration but there is a threat perspective. There is a

lot of terrorism coming from Somalia. You only have to look at

Kenya recently to see that. Which is why you talk about what we do with

the rest of the spend. It is why it is responsible to work with the

government of Somalia. Should we give more, bigger part of the budget

to disaster relief or not? I think we get it about right, we have to be

flexible and we are. This Philippine relief is on top of the work in

Syria. Where can you show me a correlation between us giving aid to

some failed nation, or nearly failed nation, and that cutting down on

terrorism? If you look at the work we have done in Pakistan, a huge

amount of work. Some of it short-term. It is written by

terrorism. That is -- ridden by terrorism. That is not going to fix

it self in a sense. Look at the work that we do in investing in

education. The things that little girls like Malala talk about as

being absolutely key. We are ramping up our aid to Pakistan, it will be

close to half ?1 billion by the time of the election. Why should British

taxpayers be giving half ?1 billion to a country where only 0.5% of

people in Pakistan pay income tax, and 70% of their own MPs don't pay

income tax. It is a good point and that is why we have been working

with their tax revenue authority to help them increase that and push

forward the tax reform. You are right, and I have setup a team that

will go out and work with many of these countries so they can raise

their own revenues. You really think you will raise the amount of tax by

sending out the British HRM see How many troops I we sending out to

protect them? They don't need troops. We make sure that we have a

duty of care alongside our staff, but we have to respond to any crisis

like the Philippines, and alongside other countries we have two work

alongside them so that they can reinvest in their own public

services. If they can create their own taxes, will we stop paying aid?

We need to look at that but the new Pakistan Government has been very

clear it is a priority and we will be helping them in pursuing that.

Let me show you a picture. Who are these young women? I don't know I'm

sure you are about to tell me. They are the Ethiopian Spice Girls and

I'm surprised you don't know because they have only managed to become so

famous because your department has financed them to the tune of ?4

million. All of the work we do with women on the ground, making sure

they have a voice in their local communities, making sure they have

some control over what happens to their own bodies in terms of

tackling FGM, female genital mutilation... Did you know your

department has spent ?4 million on the Ethiopian Spice Girls? Yes, I

do, and we have to work with girls and show them there is a life ahead

of them with opportunity and potential that goes beyond what many

of them will experience, which includes early and forced marriage.

It is part of the work we do with local communities to change

attitudes everything you have just said is immeasurable, and they

broadcast on a radio station that doesn't reach most of the country so

it cannot have the impact. It only reaches 20 million people and the

project has been condemned saying there were serious inefficiencies.

That aid report was done a while ago now, and it was talking about the

project when it first got going and a lot of improvements have happened

since. I would go back to the point that we are working in very

difficult environments where we are trying to get longer term change on

the ground and that means working directly with communities but also

investing for the long-term, investing in some of these girls

start changing attitudes in them and their communities. Why does the

British taxpayers spend ?5 million on a Bangladesh version of Question

Time? We work with the BBC to make sure we can get accountabilities...

That is bigger then the BBC Question Time Normal -- budget. That includes

the cost of David Dimbleby's tattoo! We are working to improve

people's prospects but also we are working to improve their ability to

hold their governments to account so that when they are not getting

services on the ground, they have ways they can raise those concerns

with the people who are there to deliver services for them. In your

own personal view, should the next Conservative Government, if there is

one, should you continue to ring fence spending on foreign aid? But

it is critical that if we are going to spend 7.7% of our national

income, we should make sure it is in our national interest and that means

having a clear approach to humanitarian responses, in keeping

the country safe, and a clearer approach on helping drive economic

development and jobs so there is a long-term end of the dependency Do

you believe in an shrine in the percentage of our GDP that goes on

foreign aid in law? Yes, and that is a coalition agreement. There have

been a lot of agreements that you are sceptical about ring fencing. We

are focused on shaking up the economy and improving our public

finances. Why haven't you done that? At the end of the day we will be

accountable but we are committed to doing that. You are running out of

time, will you do it? I hope we can find the Parliamentary time, but

even if we don't, we have acted as if that law is in place and we have

already met 0.7% commitment. If you are British voter that doesn't

believe that we should enshrine that in by law, which means that with a

growing economy foreign aid will rise by definition, and if you think

we should be spending less money on the Ethiopian Spice Girls, for whom

should you wrote in the next election? I think we have a very

sensible approach. I don't know what the various party manifestoes.. The

only party who thinks we shouldn't be doing this is UKIP. I think you

have to look at the response to both the Philippines crisis and Children

In Need. Of all the steps we are taking to get the country back on

track, it shows the British people will respond to need when they need

it and it is one of the things that makes Britain's special.

Thank you. "It's always winter but never Christmas" - that's how

doctors describe life inside accident and emergency. The College

of Emergency Medicine have warned that this year could bring the

"worst crisis on record". If that dire prediction comes, expect a

spring of political recriminations, but how prepared are the NHS in

England? And what do they make of this autumnal speculation? Giles has

been to Leeds to find out. This winter has already come to our

hospitals. It had an official start date, November the 3rd. That is when

weekly updates are delivered to the NHS's most senior planners, alerting

them to any sudden changes in patient numbers coming in. Where do

they numbers register most then A They are the barometer for what

is going on everywhere else, and they are the pressure point, so if

the system is beginning to struggle then it is in the A department

that we see the problems. It is not that the problems are the A

departments, but they are the place where it all comes together. Plans

to tackle those problems start being drawn up in May and they look at

trends, even taking notice of any flu epidemics in New Zealand. They

also look at the amount of bets But the weather, economic realities

structural reforms, and changes to the general health of the

population, are all factors they have to consider. We get huge

amounts of information through the winter in order to help the NHS be

the best it can be, but we had to redouble our efforts this year

because we expected to be a difficult winter. We know the NHS is

stretched so we are working hard to be as good as we can be. That means

they are looking at winter staffing levels, plans to ask for help from

neighbouring hospitals, and dovetailing help with GP surgeries,

and still having the ability to move up an extra gear, a rehearsed

emergency plan if the NHS had to face a major disease pandemic. You

spend any time in any of our hospitals and you realise the NHS

knows that winter is coming and they are making plans, but you also get a

palpable feeling amongst health workers across the entire system

that they do get fed up of being used as a political football.

Doctors and all health care professionals are frustrated about

the politics that surrounds the NHS in health care. They go to work to

treat patients as best as they can, and the political knock-about does

not help anyone. I find it frustrating when there is a

commentary that suggests the NHS does not planned, when it is

surprised by winter, and wherever that comes from it is hard to take,

knowing how much we do nationally and how much our hard working front

line staff are doing. When the Coalition have recently tried to

open up the NHS to be a more independent body, it is clear the

NHS feel they have had an unhealthy dose of political wrangling between

parties on policy. The NHS is not infallible or making any guarantees,

but they seem confident that they and their patients can survive the

winter. Joining me now from Salford in the

Shadow Health Secretary, Andy Burnham. Tell me this, if you were

health secretary now, you just took over in an emergency election, what

would you do to avoid another winter crisis? I would immediately halt the

closure of NHS walk-in centres. We heard this week that around one in

four walk-in centres are closed so it makes no sense whatsoever for the

Government to allow the continued closure of them. I would put nurses

back on the end of phones and restore an NHS direct style service.

The new 111 service is not in a position to provide help to people

this winter. I think the time has come to rethink how the NHS care is

particularly for older people so I propose the full integration of

health and social care. It cannot make any sense any more to have this

approach where we cut social care and let elderly people drift to

hospitals in greater numbers. We have two rethink it as a whole

service. So you would repeal some of the Tory reforms and move

commissioning to local authorities so the NHS should brace itself for

another major top-down health reorganisation? No, unlike Andrew

Lansley I will work with the organisations ie inherit. He could

work with primary care trusts but he turned it upside down when it needed

stability. I will not do that but I will repeal the health and social

care act because last week we heard that hospitals and health services

cannot get on and make sensible merger collaborations because of

this nonsense now that the NHS is bound by competition law. Let me get

your views on a number of ideas that have been floated either by the

press or the Coalition. We haven't got much time. Do you welcome the

plan to bring back named GPs for over 75s? Yes, but it has got harder

to get the GP appointment under this Government because David Cameron

scrapped the 48-hour guarantee that Tony Blair brought in. He was

challenged in the 2005 election about the difficulty of getting a GP

appointment, and Tony Blair brought in the commitment that people should

be able to get that within 48 hours. That has now been scrapped.

Do you welcome the idea of allowing everyone to choose their own GP

surgery even if it is not in our traditional catchment area? I

proposed that just before the last election, so yes. Do you welcome the

idea of how a practice is being rated being a matter of public

record, and of us knowing how much, at least from the NHS, our GP earns?

Of course, every political party supports transparency in the NHS.

More information for the public of that kind is a good thing. Do you

welcome this plan to make it will form the collect in an NHS hospital

-- make wilful neglect a criminal offence. It is important to say you

can't pick and mix these recommendations, you can't say we

will have that one and not the recommendations, you can't say we

others. It was a balanced package that Sir Robert Francis put forward.

My message is that it must be permitted in full. If we are to

learn the lessons, the whole package must be addressed, and that includes

safe staffing levels across the NHS. Staff have a responsible to two

patients at the government also has responsible at T2 NHS staff and it

should not let them work in understaffed, unsafe conditions -- a

responsibility to NHS staff. Is there a part of the 2004 agreements

that you regret and should be undone? A lot of myths have been

built up about the contract. When it came in, there was a huge shortage

of GPs across the country. Some communities struggle to recruit.

This myth that the government have built, that the 2004 GP contract is

responsible for the AM decries is, it is spin of the worst possible

kind -- the A crisis. You would redo that contract? It was redone

under our time in government and change to make it better value for

money. GPs should be focused on improving the health of their

patients and that is a very good principle. Not so great if you can't

get 24-hour access. I agree with that. We brought in evening and

weekend opening for GPs. That is another thing that has gone in

reverse under Mr Cameron. It is much harder to get a GP appointment under

him and that is one of the reasons why A is an oppressor. -- under

pressure. What do you make of the review into intimidatory tactics by

unions? If there has been intimidation, it is unacceptable,

and that should apply to unions as well as employers. Was Unite wrong

to turn up and demonstrate? I don't know the details, this review will

look into that presumably. I need reassurance that this is not a

pretty cool call by Mr Cameron on the designed to appear near the

election -- that this is not a political call. Are you sponsored by

unite? No. Do you get any money from Unite? No. What have you done wrong?

It seems others are getting money from Unite. Can I tell you what I

think is the scandal of British party political funding, two health

care companies have given ?1.5 million in donations to the Tory

party, they have ?1.5 billion in NHS contracts. I wonder why you don't

spend much time talking about that and obsess over trade union funding.

We are happy to talk about that. We see from e-mails that Mr Miliband's

closest advisers regard Mr Ed Balls as a bit of a nightmare, do you see

a bit of a nightmare about him as well? I don't at all, he is a very

good friend. I can't believe that you are talking about those e-mails

on a national political programme. My goodness, you obviously scraping

the barrel today. I have been in front-line labour politics for 20

years. I can't remember the front bench and the wider party being as

united as it is today and it is a great credit to Ed Miliband and Ed

Balls. We are going into a general election and we are going to get rid

of a pretty disastrous coalition government. It was worth spending a

few seconds to establish your not having nightmares. Thank you for

joining me. It's just gone 11:30am. You're

watching the Sunday Politics. Coming up in just over 20 minutes, I'll be

talking to the MP accused of using his political contacts

This is the Sunday Politics in the south`east. Coming up later ` it is

the heart of many communities but with pubs closing is enough being

done to save them. To talk about pubs and youth clubs. The Prime

Minister is talking on politicians to

Minister is talking on politicians talking about immigration. Is it

possible to control the language of a debate that is so emotive? Does it

make much difference what language is used? It is important that we use

the right language. It is also important that we recognise that

there is a problem. We should not be blaming people that have come to our

country. We should be blaming people that have let them come. Is it

possible to have a sensible and can debate? Even senior Labour figures

say that Labour got it wrong. Jack is a sensible person and he uses

sensible language. Language is terribly important. The problem with

UKIP is that they tell us we will be flooded with people from Romania and

Bulgaria and that's just not true. We need to have a sensible approach

to these things. Immigration controls are important and we have

to get it right. I am pleased that David Cameron has called for a

sensible language discourse or what is an important issue.

It has become a familiar story ` reductions in council budgets. Last

week West Sussex County Council confirmed further reductions in

services. Opposition councillors say the reductions are savage. Firstly

get the view of a volunteer worker. I am 16 and I volunteer at this

youth centre. I started coming into this centre a few years ago when I

was having trouble at school. The youth workers advise me on how to

stay in school. The youth service enables people to gain skills such

as cooking. It gives young people the chance to learn drug and alcohol

awareness. In April 2014 the people that use the services at the moment

will not be able to do so. If the young people do not have a youth

centre anti`social behaviour and crime rates will go up stop I am so

angry about it I have started my own petition. I have got 200 signatures

so far stop. I do not think any of the councillors have been to a youth

centre in their life. We are joined by Peter Evans. I have

visited youth centres. I came through the youth centres myself

when I was a youngster. West Sussex County Council has had to save ?79

million over the last three years. We are now facing further reductions

in. We have had to respond to these staggering reductions. You make

decisions about where the reductions are made. Do you understand young

people which Mac they do not want to make an appointment at the youth

club. They want to come and go at their leisure that is why the model

of a youth service we are changing too is a 16 have centre. There will

be 16 hubs throughout West Sussex. That will be throughout the county.

Early intervention is what we need to do. We need to work with young

people who have alcohol and drug problems. But if you do not have an

open door Wallasey how do you know who those needy children are

watching Mac we act them up through various federal systems. This

programme has been running for a few years. The communities have come

forward to years. The communities have come

forwarwar%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%war%%%%%%% years. The communities have come

forward to run the services. We have provided training and support to

enable communities to do that. We have transferred holdings to

community groups. What about the centre that's just close? The doors

are closed. We have removed our service because we are targeting

from other hubs. We want the communities to come forward and run

that universal service. That has been happening very successfully in

Crawley. It has been set up as a charity. I would like to see that

extended. Let us turn to our guests. Can we really expect that big

society, as it is called, to take over these resources? Is there still

a role for local authorities? We still need intervention from local

authorities. Young people and youth centres is a particular problem. We

have one of the best centres in my constituency. But the people who we

want to intervene do not attend. They do not want organised control.

That is a problem. We were talking about your efforts to keep a local

children's centre open last time. You said the fight was the central

Government. The point was being made that they have cut back on the

funding for local authorities. Should this argument with central

Government? There is a problem with central Government funding. But the

Government has a problem it inherited. But you said you would

take the fight to the Prime Minister I did. I handed a copy of that

letter from the Prime Minister. As a former social worker what do

you think happens to kids who have got nowhere else to go when the

youth centre closes? It will create problems in the community. Crawley

seems to have lost most of its youth services. Those who campaign against

the reductions are doing a worthwhile thing. We need to get the

Government to think again. Council tax ` last week it was said that

this cannot remain frozen. I am a great believer in local democracy.

Nobody likes paying any sort of attack. But people say they want to

see the money well spent. It depends where you are coming from. Council

tax is quite high. Council tax has been frozen over the last three

years. There is a cost of living crisis. There needs to be another

look at local Government funding. You have got to get the balance

right local council tax increases. Our high streets are changing. Papas

are becoming supermarkets and bookmakers.

Politicians are joining a campaign to save pubs. Do they deserve to be

saved? Our planning was to blame? It is a great addition institution

and the heart of many communities. That the pub is under threat on many

fronts whether from cheap alcohol being sold in supermarkets, or being

turned into supermarkets. Locals at this pub are fighting to keep it the

way it is. If this was to be turned into a supermarket it would destroy

the area. It is not just our building. It is like a home for

everyone else. This pub has been listed as an asset

of community value. Local people have the power to postpone a sale

for six months to raise funds to buy the pub for themselves. That is

off`putting for developers. They have two contest with us. We get

first choice. We have seen it in a few of the pubs in Tunbridge Wells.

Good community pubs are going that way. The Government says it is doing

everything it can to safeguard community pubs from closure. Nearly

200 hubs have now been listed as assets of community value. But some

fear this protection does not go far enough stop the developers could buy

a pub like this they would not need planning permission to convert it

into a supermarket. Campaigner is what this loophole to be plugged.

Two groups are asking local councils to join them in lobbying the

Government for better protection for community hubs. There is no record

on how many pubs are converted into shops or demolished because planning

permission is not needed. Because of the unique contribution

they bring to society and the economy they should be in their own

planning use class. Any change in use should require full consultation

and planning permission. The pub and brewing industry is of particular

importance in the south`east. We have more pubs than anywhere else in

the country. Hubs think they alien pounds per year `` pubs bring three

alien pounds per year. The meeting room will be there.

Hundreds of residents of this suburb formed Co`operative to reopen their

derelict local, but they would not have benefited from the property

becoming an item of community value. We got the tender. There is

no way we could raise the money. I am not knocking the idea that it is

not enough for communities like this. Is there a reason all the

community pubs are in posh areas? I know things are tight, but it is

more than a pub. Should we be calling time on the

lack of protection for our neighbourhood pubs?

Do all pubs deserve to be saved? I do not think we can save every pub

in the land. Attitudes have changed. Able do not go to the pub in the

same way that they did dirty years ago. `` 30 years ago.

A campaign group says that the big chains are more interested in

selling to developers. Should your members be able to sell off a valued

local? I do not think they are doing that. That is where the locals act

is in place. If you have 21 people in a community they can ask the

local authority to put it on a register. Changing the use class

orders, I would want to see more flexibility, particularly with the

regeneration of our town centres. I could give you for different things

that the Government could do. A change in planning laws is a step

too far? Absolutely right. View jury went up 42% in four years. If you go

to the supermarket tonight you can buy a meal to dine at home. You do

not pay VAT on that. You pay VAT in a pub. I am campaigning to have

extended hours for the World Cup next year. There are a lot of things

we could get behind to help our immunity pubs.

Let us start with the planning laws. Do you support a change in

planning laws so what would be harder for a local supermarket to

take over a pub? I am in favour of pubs. You have controlled drinking.

That is important. But changing the planning laws? I am not sure that

that is needed. We have got to do something about the effect that

supermarkets are having on the trade. They are able to sell beer at

a far cheaper price. The fact that pubs can turn into supermarkets is

not the problem, it is the fact that supermarkets sell beer more

cheaply. Now we are at holding pubs as a

force for social good. Times have changed. Absolutely. Cheap alcohol

in supermarkets has become a problem for them. The pubs that survive are

those that puts variety into what they offer. Good food is imported. I

like street corner pubs. But in the film they were talking

about the problem of money stop. They serve an area that is high in

deprivation status. I hope the campaign they have been waging works

and they can set up a thriving business.

The big society bash. Is that happening in your constituency? Just

opposite my office there is a new micro pub just opened. In that role

there is already just to pubs. I do not bid every road can have a pub

you used to have a pub in every road when everyone went to the pub and

they don't any more. It is time for a round`up of the

other political events of this week.

This hospital has insisted it will be able to cope this winter despite

figures showing that emergency admissions has gone up by 30%.

This category MP has called on the Government to broaden its ban on

so`called legal highs. This is a real challenge. That is a

high priority. A freedom of information requests

asks how often Michael Fallon has written correspondence to himself.

David Dimbleby revealed he has got at up to. It is just a bit of fun.

Have either of you been tempted to get a tattoo? Never. I have never

been tempted. That is all we have time for. We

will be here again next week with more political debate.

receiving it. We will return to this if we hear more. Thank you. Andrew,

it is if we hear more. Thank you. Andrew,

it is back to you. Who'd be an MP? It's a good

question. Certainly something Mark Pritchard must have asked himself

when his picture graced the front page of the Daily Telegraph, with

allegations that he had offered to set up business deals overseas in

return for hundreds of thousands of pounds. Mr Pritchard dismissed the

claims as hurtful and wrong. He referred himself to the

Parliamentary Standards Commissioner who has now said there is

insufficient evidence to investigate. In a moment we'll talk

to Mr Pritchard, but first let's take a look back at how the story

unfurled. A Conservative MP has denied allegations that he used his

Parliamentary contacts for financial gain... The daily Telegraph says

Mark Pritchard offered to broker investments overseas. In a statement

he said the allegations made by the Telegraph are false. Mr Pritchard

was secretly filmed... What do you make of these allegations? He has

referred himself to the Parliamentary Commissioner for

standards to clear his name and I suspect this story will reopen the

debate about what MPs should be allowed, having business interests

elsewhere. Is it not clear that you did ask for money in consultancy

services? First of all I would like to apologise for the sunglasses I

have had a lot of comments about that. On a serious point, these

claims by the Telegraph of false. You didn't ask for ?3000? They are

false, hurtful and malicious. It is known widely that I have sued the

Telegraph previously. I have also been critical of their coverage of

the plebgate affair, their reporting of that. I have been supportive of

the cross-party Royal Charter and I know that some people in the media

don't like my position on that. That is why it is malicious. I believe in

a free press. That free press also has a responsibility to be fair

accurate and lawful. In discussions with this business who turned out to

be a Telegraph reporter, it is true that you ask for ?3000 a month

consultancy fee. The point is.. That is the point. No. That video

has been cut and pasted to serve the Telegraph's story. The story was

that we want to get Mark Bridger, for whatever reason, at any cost. --

Mark Bridger hard. I would not go down the line they were hoping I

would go down. Everything I own outside of Parliament is openly

declared. We are allowed to have outside witness interests. The

Telegraph need to say clearly whether they accept that or they

don't. I think you need to say clearly whether you asked for the

money or not. You then went on to ask for ?300,000 if it was a 10

million deal, you asked for 3% commission. Let me be clear, if I

was asking for income in return for lobbying, or raising issues in

Parliament, or setting up Parliamentary groups, or going to

ministers, writing to ministers that would be completely

inappropriate. I was approached by somebody to advise them on business.

It is entirely proper and entirely within the rules for members of

Parliament to have outside consultancies and interests. Did you

or didn't you? I am answering the question in the way that I want to

answer it, not in the way that fits a particular narrative. The

narrative, unfortunately, of some parts of the Telegraph and to be

fair, there are some very good journalists, I know there is a

dispute about the direction of that paper at senior parts. Do they want

to return to being a Catholic, objective newspaper or do they want

to slip into the slippery slope of being an agnostic rag, looking for

sensationalist headlines? Part of this has come from your membership

of these all-party Parliamentary groups. You were in Malta when you

are first approached, I think you were on a trip there, Hungary is

another one, there is an uncomfortable overlap between your

political and business interests. I have no business interests in any of

those countries. Some of the country is the Telegraph mentioned, let me

be clear, I have not even visited. You were boasting that you knew the

Albanian Prime Minister and the Mayor of Teheran and the previous

prime minister. I make no apology for making foreign trips. I think it

is unfortunate we have a narrative developing in some parts of the

press that if a politician goes abroad at the taxpayers expense it

is wrong. If they go abroad at a host government's expense it is

wrong. If they go abroad with a charity, NGO and private company,

even if it is declared, it is wrong. We want people with an international

perspective in Parliament. Look at this map. You are a member of 5

country groups. I don't know what Canada has done not to deserve you,

or Australia. 54 groups, you are a part of. You're like... This is the

Mark Pritchard British Empire. That is very kind. If I had global

interests that white I would not be in Parliament. No, no, no. That is

the point... It is the suspicion, that you used these groups to drum

up business for your consultants. Prove it, that is the trouble. These

sorts of headlines, create suspicion. I am suing the

Telegraph... Have you issued a writ? I expect an apology. Have you issued

a writ? I have just answered your question. It is yes or no, have you

issued a writ? I am in final legal discussions tomorrow about issuing a

writ. You have raised something for top the fact is that is inaccurate.

I am a member of 40-something Parliamentary groups, of which I

make no apology. We have got 54 Let me answer the question if I may It

would be very useful. There are 196 countries around the world, it is

less than a quarter of the country groups on my figures. I make no

apology. One of my regrets is not having visited Syria, I don't know

if I am a member of the Syria group, part I should become a member, I

make no apology. -- perhaps I should become. When it came to the Syria

vote, I was blind sided foot of yes, we have excellent briefings. I had

to make a judgement based on part knowledge with nothing beats being

on the ground, as even BBC journalists recognised this week.

Nothing beats being on the ground. You posted about your connections in

Albania to getting a business contract. You meet these people

through these all Parliamentary groups. That is where there is an

unhealthy overlap. That is what the Telegraph said, let's wait and see.

Look... You are a newspaperman, you know lots of people in the newspaper

industry, as well as being a respected broadcaster. I am not

going to prejudice my legal proceedings against the Telegraph. I

make no apology. A good politician has to be local am a national and

international. Hang on hang on - has to be local, national and

international. We need politicians who get out of the Westminster

bubble, who have a business hinterland, who keep their foot in

the real world and have an international perspective. And ask

for 3% commission? I have answered the question. It was a cut and

pasted video, photo shopped to suit the agenda of the Telegraph. They

need to get back to serious news reporting and I wish those well at

the senior part of the Telegraph who want to get to those days. We look

forward to the writ. Thank you. Now - there's been more good news on

the economy for George Osborne this week - inflation's down, growth

forecasts have been revised up and unemployment has fallen again. On

Friday the former Bullingdon boy donned a head torch and went down't

pit for just one of many photo opportunities ahead of the Autumn

Statement, which he'll deliver in the Commons on fifth December. And,

who knows, he might even take his hard hat off for that.

# Going underground. # Let the boys all saying and let

the boys all shout for tomorrow # Lah, lah, love, love.

# I talk and talk until my head explodes.

# Make this boy shout, make this boy scream.

# Going underground. # Going underground.

# I'm going underground. # I'm going underground.

George Osborne in his heart out he probably sleeps with it on. This

Autumn Statement is becoming a more important part of the political

calendar for the coalition. It looks like this is where they are finally

going to come up with some kind of response to Ed Miliband's game

changing electricity price freeze. The idea which is mooted is they

will move people's green tax on two general bills which is not an answer

but cosmetically it could have apolitical impact. George Osborne is

receiving a lot of representations from lobby groups, business, MPs on

his own side, for tax cuts and extra bits spending and he has to spend

the next two weeks reminding people of something that has been skewered

by the economic recovery. This country has a fiscal deficit which

is twice that of France, supposedly the crisis economy in western Europe

or if you accept it will take another parliament again to

eliminate this deficit, we are not even halfway through the age of

austerity. He is in no position to give anything away. He has to hold

the line. Danny Alexander has been useful but this is his real

challenge. He is going to give stuff away. When the Autumn Statement

comes away, 15 months from an election, Nick Clegg has been

talking about raising the tax allowance threshold even further,

talk of moving green levies of the electricity bills, he is going to

give stuff away. We will get funding for free school meals that Nick

Clegg mentioned in his party conference. The significance of the

Autumn Statement is twice a year, a Chancellor stands up and we all look

at the state of the economy. If you talk to members of the Chancellor's

circle, it is interesting how nervous they are. They say, don t

assume we are going to have this wonderful growth for ever, don't

assume everything is fine in the eurozone. I think what would help

the Chancellor is if somebody was able to see some of that humility in

public. It is recognised that he was far too triumphalist

speech he made on the 9th of September, when he said to Ed Balls,

we have one and you cannot make an economic policy on the cost of

living -- we have... Won. economic policy on the cost of

people don't seem to learn from Norman Lamont's green shoots. Labour

has moved from complaining there is no growth, now there is, to say

has moved from complaining there is is gross but living standards are

not rising. If the economy grows by nearly 3% next year, even the bank

is saying it will grow by 2.8%, living standards could start to

rise. It does but everybody in a difficult position politically if

the economy starts growing, ironically. We need to remind

ourselves that economy, the natural direction of an economy is to grow.

Unless the politicians screw up Unless you have some idiot in

charge! It is not a cause for the Morris dance that they seem to be

doing, certainly on the Tory side. Osborne is put in a difficult

position goes he will have to stop giving stuff away, he cannot push

the austerity line at the same time as jangling his magical growth - he

will have to start giving stuff away. It puts Labour in a difficult

position, it is very unlikely that living standards will match GDP Not

since 2003, GDP has been a great indicator. Wages have stagnated for

ten years, food has gone up 17% energy has gone up 24%. That is a

decade in which everybody has got poorer. The real sweet spot comes

when wages start to outstrip inflation. It is a sweet spot and

will be a huge challenge for Ed Miliband. As ever on the economy

with a sweet spot, you have a danger moment because that is when the

governor of the Bank of England will have to look at interest rates.

Everything he was saying last week was when we move toward 7%

unemployment come that is not the trigger for raising interest rates,

it is the moment when we look at it. Everything was saying he did not

want to do that. When do you anticipate wages outstripping

inflation? It hasn't happened for so long. The second half of next year.

Wages and prices are not the sole measure of living standards, there

are broader measures which no one seems willing to use.

That's all for today. The Daily Politics will be back at tomorrow at

midday on BBC Two and I will back here on BBC One at 11:00am next

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