08/12/2013 Sunday Politics South East

The morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. First, some Sunday

morning cheer, if you are an MP, that is. You are set to get an 11%

pay rise. The Chancellor has gone from zero to hero for some, who

credit him for turning the economy around. We will be taking a fine

tooth comb to his Autumn Statement. Should this man get a pay rise?

Complete denial about the central facts... And 11% pay rise for Ed

Balls? He was certainly working hard to be heard last Thursday. We will

be reviewing his performance. What about this man? We will be joined by

England's Chief Inspector of schools.

In the south`east, as Chatham historic dockyard gets ?4.5 million

of had on the capital, its politics and

those who met him. With me, three scruffy eternal

students. They would celebrate if they achieved a C+. But they are all

we could afford and there will be no pay rise for them. They will be

glued to an electronic device throughout the programme and if we

are lucky they might stop there internet shopping and tweet

something intelligent. But don't hold your breath. Janan Ganesh,

Helen Lewis and Nick Watt. Last week, storms were battering Britain,

the East Coast was hit by the worst tidal surge in more than a century,

thousands of people had to be evacuated and Nelson Mandela died.

The downed the news agenda was the small matter of George Osborne's

Autumn Statement. His giveaways, his takeaways and his first opportunity

to announce some economic cheer. It might be winter outside, but in

the studios it is awesome. Autumn Statement time. -- autumn. This is a

moment of TV history. Normally when the Chancellor delivers these

statements, he has to say the economy is actually a lot worse than

everyone predicted. This time, he can stand up and say the economy is

better than everybody predicted. A lot better.

Britain is currently growing faster than any other major advanced

economy. Faster than France, which is contracting, faster than Germany,

faster even than America. At this Autumn Statement last year, there

were repeated predictions that borrowing would go up. Instead,

borrowing is down, and down significantly more than forecast.

But George Osborne said the good numbers still mean more tough

decisions. We will not give up in giving in our country's debts. We

will not spend the money from lower borrowing. We will not squander the

harder and games of the British people. -- hard earned gains. In

other news, further cuts to government departments. The state

pension age will increase in the 2040s, affecting people in their 40s

now. There were some goodies, like discounted business rates for small

businesses, free school meals for infants, favoured by the Lib Dems,

and those marriage tax breaks below that by the Tories. But, as with all

big fiscal events, it takes a while for the details to sink in.

The marriage tax allowance is a long-standing commitment that he

could not abandon. It does help those families were only one goes

out to work. It does not go to higher rate taxpayers, I don't

think. Perhaps it does, I can't remember. It makes me feel guilty, I

am taking them very seriously, but... Shall I give you them? There

is the Autumn Statement. Have that, a free gift from the Sunday

Politics. Is there no limit to the generosity of the BBC?

In the meantime, Twitter was awash with unflattering pictures of a

red-faced Ed Balls giving his response. Some pictures were more

than flattering than others. Is Ed Balls OK? Should we be worrying

about him? He looks very stressed. There is nothing to worry about in

terms of Ed balls and his analysis. He and Ed Miliband have been setting

the pace in terms of the focus on the living standards crisis. It was

very telling that there was not a mention of living standards last

time, we got 12 mentions this time. Never mind what he was saying, by

now everybody has a copy of the all-important paperwork. Time to

hand over to number cruncher extraordinaire Paul Johnson from the

Institute for Fiscal Studies. Of course it means that things are

significantly better this year and next than we thought they would be

just nine months ago. That has got to be good news. But it is also

worth looking at the growth figures a few years out. They have been

revised down a little bit. The reason is, the view of the office of

budget response ability is that the long run has not really changed very

much. We are getting a bit more growth now, but their view is that

it is at the cost of a little bit of the growth we will expect in the

years after the next general election. As the day draws to a

close, the one place there has definitely been no growth is the

graphics budget of my colleague, Robert Preston. It's as good as it

gets these days, I don't think the viewers will mind. It's very Sunday

Politics, if I might say. That is very worrying.

Was this a watershed for George Osborne? Was it a watershed for Ed

Balls? We can all make the case that it is the wrong sort of recovery, a

consumer led recovery. People are spending money they don't have. At

the end of the day, it for George Osborne, it is growth, the first

time he has been able to talk about growth. It allows him to control the

baseline, the fiscal debate for the next generation. For Ed Balls,

nearly not a good performance. But don't write this man off. Judging by

Twitter, Iain Dale, no friend of it all is, said he did a good interview

this morning on a rival TV channel. I feel the fact that the Tories hate

Ed Balls so passionately is probably a good reason that they should hang

onto him, in that Labour sends his effectiveness. May be the Tories

hope that they hold on to him as well? A lot of people shouting at

someone and mocking their speech impediment, that is politics that

doesn't make me want to engage. The takeaway will be lots of people

thinking that none of these people are people they like. Who is the

main heckler on the Labour front bench West remarked I suppose he

can't cast any stones. It would be easier to sympathise with him, if it

were not that David Cameron went through a similar situation and John

Bercow did not step in to stop the wall of noise. It was guaranteed a

good happen to a Labour politician. It's painful to remove him because

he had a Parliamentary following and he will kick up a fuss. I think he's

much more pragmatic on issues like business than Ed Miliband. I'm told

he wasn't keen on the energy price freeze. The problem with Ed Balls,

to have the first words that you say, the Chancellor is in denial,

after he is presiding over growth, it means nobody is listening to you.

Who would replace him? Certainly not Alistair Darling, the side of the

referendum and even afterwards. Ed Balls did get a roasting in the

press and on Twitter. He seemed to disappear from public view following

the Autumn Statement. But a little bird tells me he managed one

interview this morning before he went off to an all-important piano

recital this afternoon. Watch out, Jools Holland, he could be after

your job. How bad was his performance on Thursday? Here is the

Shadow Chancellor in action. The Chancellor is incomplete denial

about the central facts that are defining this government in office.

He used to say he would balance the books in 2015. Now he wants us to

congratulate him for saying he will do it in 2019, Mr Speaker. With this

government, it is clearly not just the badgers that move the goalposts.

No mention of the universal credit in the statement. IDS, in deep

shambles, Mr Speaker. Chris Leslie is the Shadow Chief Secretary to the

Treasury. He is Ed Balls's deputy, in other words. Why do more and more

of your Labour colleagues think that your boss is below the water line?

I'm not sure I accept the premise of your suggestion. I don't think my

colleagues believe that George Osborne has a superior argument. I

think Ed Balls will certainly trying his best, loud and clear, to make

the case there is a cost of living crisis in this country and the

Chancellor doesn't understand this. That was essentially the heat of the

debate on the Autumn Statement day. One leading Labour MPs said to me

that Ed Balls is always looking back, fixated with the rear-view

mirror, that was the exact quote. A Labour MP told Sky News, Labour has

a strong argument to make, unfortunately it was not made well

in the chamber today. Quoting the Daily Mail, this is two poor

performances. A quote that I can't use because it uses too many four

letter words. Baroness Armstrong, speaking at Progress, a former

Labour Cabinet minister, we are not sufficiently concerned about public

spending, how we would pay for what we are talking about. Quite a

battering? There were two sets of quotes you were giving. The couple

were about the strategy for tackling public expenditure. I think it's

fair that we talk about that. The rest were pretty unattributed,

nameless sources. You have never given and of the record briefing? We

have conversations off camera, but I don't think you have a wealth of

evidence to say that somehow Ed Balls's arguments were wrong. He was

making the point that, ultimately, it is a government that does not

have its finger on the pulse about what most of your viewers are

concerned about, that wages are being squeezed and prices are

getting higher and higher. You have had time to study the Autumn

Statement. What part of it does Labour disagree with? It is a very

big question. I think the overall strategy the Autumn Statement is

setting out does not deal with the fundamental problems in the economy.

What measures do you disagree with? A lot of it is the absence of

measures we would have put in if we were doing the Autumn Statement. If

you are going to deal with the cost of living crisis, you have got to

get productivity levels up in our society. One of the best ways of

doing that is on infrastructure. We believe in bringing forward 's

investment and housing, getting some of the fundamentals right in our

economy. By planting, the business lending we have to do. We have seen

a lamentable failing. There are big structural reforms that we need.

Ultimately, the public are concerned about the cost of living crisis.

That has got to be childcare help, a 10p starting rate of tax. Above

all, and energy price freeze, which still this government are refusing

to do. On Friday, you told me you supported the principle of a welfare

cap. But you change bling claim the Chancellor's cap included pensions.

You have now seen the figures, and it does not include pensions,

correct? We do want a welfare cap. The government have said they are

going to put more detail on this in the March budget. But it does not

include pensions? We think they have a short term approach to the welfare

cap. They put in some pension benefits. The state pension is not

in the short-term plan because, as we believe, a triple lock is a good

idea. In the longer term, if you are talking about structural welfare

issues, you do have to think about pensions because they have to be

sustainable if we are living longer. I think that is about the

careful management. Let me show you what Ed Balls said on this programme

at the start of the summer. As for pensioners, I think this is a real

question. George Osborne is going to announce his cap in two weeks time.

I don't know if he will exclude pension spending or including. Our

plan is to include it. Pension spending would be included in the

welfare cap? That is our plan, exactly what I just said. Over the

long-term, if you have a serious welfare cap structural welfare

issues, over 20, 30, 40 year period, you can't say that we will

not work and pensions as part of that. Pensions would be part of the

Labour cap? In the longer term. What is the longer term? If you win 2015?

We want to stick with the triple lock on the pension, that is the

Government approach to their short-term welfare cap. In the

longer term, for example, on the winter fuel allowance, we should not

necessarily be... There are lots of benefits... I understand that, I am

talking about the basic state pension, is that part of your

welfare cap or not? In a 20, 30, 40 year frame... Even you will not be

around in government, then. You are writing me off already. You have to

focus on welfare changes, pensions have to be affordable as part of

that. It's dangerous to say, well, if you are going to have a serious

welfare cap, we should not look at pensions cost. It would be

irresponsible. Will pensions be part of the cap from 2015 until 2020 if

Labour is in power? In our long-term cap we have to make sure... I'm

talking about 2015-16. We haven't seen the proposition the Government

has put before us. You claim people of ?1600 worse off

under the coalition. That is true when you compare to pay and prices.

Can you confirm that calculation does not include the ?700 tax cut

from raising the income tax threshold, huge savings on mortgages

because of low interest or the freezing of council tax? It doesn't

include the tax and benefit changes. If you do want to look at

those, last year, the ISS said they could be making people worse off. It

might not include those factors. The VAT increase, tax credit cuts, child

benefit cuts, they all add up. My understanding is that the ISS

figures have said people are ?891 worse off if you look at the tax and

benefit changes since 2010. You have to look at wages and prices. The ISS

confirmed our approach was broadly the right way of assessing what is

happening. The Chancellor was saying, real household disposable

incomes are rising. He is completely out of touch. Can you sum up the

macro economic policy for Labour? Invest in the future, make sure we

have the right approach for the long-term politicking. Tackle the

cost of living crisis people are facing.

Now, let's talk to the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Sajid

Javid. Discovery, underpinned by rising

house prices, increasing personal debt, do you accept that is

unsustainable? I accept the OBE are also said the

reason why this country is facing more these challenges -- OBR.

That is because we went through a Labour recession, the worst we have

seen in 100 years. But do you accept that a recovery underpinned by these

things I have just read out isn't sustainable? We set out a long-term

plan for recovery, and again this week. We have shown with the tough

decisions we have made already, the country can enjoy a recovery. There

are still a lot of difficult decisions. The biggest risk are

Labour's plans. The March projections work at for those -- for

both business investment and exports. Suddenly it is expected to

rise 5% next year, a 10% turnaround in investment. How is it credible? I

have been in business before politics. Any business person

listening will know, when you have gone through a recession, the

deepest in 100 years, it will hit investment, profits, you can't make

plans again until you have confidence in the economy. That is

what this country is seeing now under this government. This is an

assumption made independently. The fall in business investment is

because of the recession. The forecast increases, 5% next year,

and so on, it is based on the independent forecast. Based on fact.

If you look at the investment plans of companies, this week, the

Chancellor went to JCB, Jaguar Land Rover has plans to create more

jobs, these investment plans are coming through now because of the

confidence generated by this government, such as the cut in

corporation tax which Labour would increase. Are the export forecasts

more credible? The 15 years, our share of world trade decline.

Suddenly starting next year, it stops falling. That's not credible.

I worked in finance the 20 years. I have yet to find any forecast which

is fully right. Under Labour, we would have forecasts made by Gordon

Brown who would announce he would hit all his targets. Now we have an

independent system. Do you accept, if exports or

business investment do not pick up, then a purely consumer led recovery

is not sustainable? We need more than a consumer led recovery. We

need consumer investment to go up. On Xbox, it is noticeable that

experts are primarily down because the markets we trade with, the

eurozone markets, are depressed. Many have just come out of

recession. Or they are still in recession. If you look at exports to

non-EU countries, they are up 30%. 120% to China. 100% to Russia.

Will you keep the triple lock for the state pension beyond 2015? Yes,

long term. That's why it is not part of our welfare cap. Chris Leslie

cannot answer that question. It is straightforward.

House prices are now rising ten times faster than average earnings.

That's not good. House prices are rising, partly reflecting recovery.

Ten times faster than average earnings, how can people afford to

buy homes if it carries on? What you would hope, this is the evidence, if

you look at the plans of the month companies, they are planning new

homes which will mean that, as this demand spurs that investment, more

homes will come about. We need to give people the means to buy those

homes. We have introduced the help to buy scheme. I accept the OBR says

it will start rising again but as household debt rises again Petr Cech

reduces, -- as household debt reduces, we need to make sure there

are checks in place. Wages have not been rising in real terms for quite

some time. Over the next five years, even as the economy grows, by about

15% according the OBR to the OBR -- but people will not benefit. These

hard-working families will not share in the recovery. What is the best

way to help those families? The government doesn't set wages. What

we can do is influence the overall economy. We don't have a magic

lever. Wages have been stagnating for five years. When will people get

a proper salary? The best way for wage growth is a growing economy,

more jobs. We have more people employed in Britain today than at

any time in our history. The biggest risk to recovery is if we let Labour

into the Treasury with more spending and more debt. Which got us into

this trouble. By whatever measure you care to choose, would people be

better off come the 20 15th election than they were in 2010? Yes, they

will be. Look at jobs. Already more people employed than at any other

time in history. Will they be better off? The best way for anyone to

raise their living standards is access to a growing job market. But

will they be better off? I believe people will be. Compared to 2010.

Yes. In terms of take-home pay. This is a credible measure.

Now, what do you think the Education Secretary, Michael Gove, was like at

school? Hard-working? Hand always up? Top of the class? Well, if he

wasn't passionate about education then, he is now. In fact, since he

took office, it seems he hasn't stopped working very hard indeed.

When the coalition came to power, Michael Gove evoked Mao, saying they

were on a long march to reform education. Just like Mao, they faced

a baby boom, so pledged ?5 billion for new school places. They extended

Labour's academy programme. There's now about 3,000 in England. But

then, they marched even further, creating free schools run by

parents, funded by taxpayers. 174 have opened so far. The schools

admission code was changed, to give parents more choice.

And a pupil premium was introduced, currently, an extra ?900 funding for

each disadvantaged child. An overhaul of the national

curriculum provoked criticism. Chairman Gove mocked detractors as

"bad academia". But exam reforms didn't quite go to plan. Although

GCSEs got harder, plans to replace A-levels had to be abandoned.

Ultimately, the true test of these reforms will be what happens in the

classroom. The person in charge of making sure those classrooms are up

to scratch in England is the Chief Inspector Of Schools, head of

Ofsted, Michael Wilshaw, who joins me now.

Over the past 15 years, we have doubled spending on schools even

allowing for inflation. By international standards, we are

stagnating, why? I said last year that mediocrity had settled into the

system. Too many children were coasting in schools, which is why we

changed the grading structure, we removed that awful word,

satisfactory. Saying that good is now the only acceptable standard and

schools had a limited time in which to get to that. We are seeing

gradually, it is difficult to say this in the week we have had the

OECD report. Things have gradually improved. I will come onto that in a

minute. Explain this. International comparisons show us flat-lining or

even falling in some subjects, including science. For 20 years, our

domestic exam results just got better and better. Was this a piece

of fiction fed to us by the educational establishment, was there

a cover-up? There is no question there has grade inflation. I speak

as an ex-headteacher who saw that in examinations. Perceptual state is

actually doing something about that. Most good heads will say that is

about time. We have to be credible. Do politicians and educationalists

conspire in this grade inflation? It might suit politicians to say things

are going up every year. As a head, I knew a lot of the exams youngsters

were sitting were not up to scratch. The latest OECD study places us 36th

for maths, 23rd reading, slipping down to 21st in science. Yet,

Ofsted, your organisation, designates 80% of schools as good or

outstanding. That's another fiction. This year, we have. If we see this

level of progress, it has been a remarkable progress over the last

years since we changed our grading structure, then... In a year,

absolutely. We have better teachers coming into our school system.

Better leaders. Better schools. The big challenge for our country is

making sure that progress is maintained which will eventually

translate into better outcomes. These figures are pretty much

up-to-date. Are you saying within a year 80% of the schools are good

enough? All of the schools we upgraded have had better grades in

GCSE and grade 2. We have to make sure that is maintained. The

Government has based its reforms on similar reforms in Sweden. In

opposition they were endlessly going to Stockholm to find out how it was

done. Swedish schools are doing even worse than ours in the tables. Why

are we copying failure? The secretary of state believes, and I

actually believe, as somebody who has come from an academy model, that

if you hand power and resources, you hand autonomy to the people on the

ground, to the people in the classroom, in the corridors, in the

playgrounds, things work. If you allow the great monoliths that used

to have responsibility for education in the past to take control again,

you will see a reverse in standards. You have got to actually empower

those people that make the difference. That is why autonomy and

freedom is important. We spent a lot of money moving what were local

authority schools to become academies and new free school czar

being set up as well. When the academies are pretty much the same

level of autonomy, the free school is maybe a little bit more, the

evidence we have had so far is that they don't really perform any better

than local authority schools? Indeed, Encore GCSE subjects, they

might even be doing worse? These are early days. We will say more about

this on weapons they when we produce the annual report. The sponsored

academies that took over the worst schools in the country, in the most

difficult circumstances, in the most disadvantaged communities, are doing

much better now. What about GCSE? They are doing GCSE equivalents, the

lass academic subjects question my cull OK, but they are doing better

than previous schools. If you look at the top performing nations in the

world, they focus on the quality of teaching. The best graduates coming

to education. They professionally develop them. They make sure they

spot the brightest talents and get them into positions as soon as

possible. We have got to do the same if we are going to catch up with

those jurisdictions. This isn't just a British problem. It seems to be a

European problem. The East Asian countries now dominate the top of

the tables. What's the most important lesson we should learn

from East Asia? Attitudes to work. We need to make sure that we invest

in good teachers, good leaders. We have to make sure that students have

the right attitudes to work. It's no good getting good people into the

classroom and then seeing them part of teaching by bad behaviour,

disaffected youngsters and poor leadership. We see young teachers

doing well for a time and then being put off teaching and leaving from

that sort of culture in our schools. Are you a cheerleader for government

education policy rather than independent inspectors? I am

independent, Ofsted is independent. I believe we are saying the right

things on standards. The Association of teachers and lecturers say you

are an arm of government. The NUT has called for your resignation.

Another wants to abolish or Inspectorate. Have you become a

pariah amongst teaching unions? If we are challenging schools to become

better, that is our job, we will carry on doing that. I am not going

to preside over the status quo. We will challenge the system to do

better, we will challenge schools and colleges to do better. We will

also challenge government when we think they are going wrong. Many

people in the education establishment think your primary

purpose is to do the Government's bidding by shepherding schools into

becoming academies. Not true at all. You are a big supporter of

academies? Yes, I believe the people that do the business in schools are

the people that are free to do what is necessary to raise standards. I

am a big supporter of autonomy in the school system. But where we see

academies Vale, where we see free schools fail, we will say so. The

study does not find much evidence that competition and choice raise

standards, but it does go with you and say that strong school

leadership, coupled with autonomy, can make a difference. Can somebody

with no experience in education be in charge of a school? A lot of hot

air has been expounded on the issue of whether teachers should be

qualified or not. If qualified teacher status was the gold

standard, why is it that one in three teachers, one in three lessons

that will observe are not good enough. Taught by qualified

teachers. I've not yet met a headteacher that has not appointed

by qualified staff when they cannot get qualified teachers. Their job is

to make sure they get accredited as soon as possible and come up to

scratch in the classroom. Do you support the use of unqualified

teachers? I do. I have done it. If I could not get a maths, physics or

modern languages teacher and I thought somebody straight from

university, without qualified teachers start this, that they could

communicate well with youngsters, I would get that person into the

classroom and get them accredited if they delivered the goods. If we are

going to allow schools to have more autonomy and not be accountable to

local authorities, free schools academies, don't you have to do...

New entrants will be coming into the market, the educational marketplace.

Do you not have to act more quickly when it is clear, and there has been

examined recently, where it is clearly going badly wrong and

children's education at risk? Absolutely. I made a point to the

secretary of state and it is something I will talk more about

over the coming year. We need to be in school is much more often. If a

school fails at the moment, or underperforms, goes into this new

category, Her Majesty 's inspectors stay with that institution until it

improves. Sometimes we don't see a school for five or seven years. That

is wrong. My argument is that Ofsted should pay a much greater part in

monitoring the performance of schools between those inspections.

Are you enjoying it? It is a tough job. Are you enjoying it? This is a

tough job, but I enjoy it. Sometimes.

You are watching Sunday Politics. Coming up in just over 20 minutes,

Diane Abbott will be joining us. And we will have more from our

Hello, I'm Natalie Graham and this is the Sunday Politics in the South

East. Coming up later: It's our last show of the year, so, from the local

elections to protests in Balcombe, crime commissioners to council cuts,

we will be taking a look back at the political highs and lows of 2013.

Joining me in the studio today is the journalist and Conservative MEP

for the South East, Daniel Hannan. And Paul Clark, the former MP for

Gillingham and Rainham, who is hoping to win back the seat for

Labour in 2015. Welcome to you both. First, last week was a busy one at

Westminster. The Chancellor, George Osborne, delivered his Autumn

Statement. And he had good news for energy companies who might want to

explore for shale gas, but bad news for those of us who were hoping to

draw their pension at 65. Daniel, you are an MEP. What do you think,

in the announcement buried in the statement, which was the most

significant for this part of the world? Specifically for this part of

the world, it is that rail fares will only rise with RPI, they will

not increase more than inflation, and that is a huge improvement. As

Transport Minister, Paul never managed to do that. We felt we were

the guinea pigs, the one with inflation plus 1%, plus 3%, and

after a lot of lobbying by giddy Conservative MPs in this area and by

other local authorities, we managed to at least help people with that

part, which is a huge issue for people in this region. It is a fair

point, Paul? It would be if they were delivering something. Of course

it is welcome, any code that leads to 40 or ?50 pay to 40 or ?50 off a

ticket is welcome in these hard times. But, obviously, the

south`east were not guinea pigs. People will remember the investment

that went into have a reliable train service, on time, punctuality,

getting rid of the 40s and 50s rolling stock that was still there

in 1997 was absolutely critical and that is what the money went into, to

deliver the rail service. Was that the most significant announcement

for the south`east? I have to say, what would have been helpful would

have been in terms of helping young people today. The number of young

people that are unemployed, long`term unemployed, is still far

too high. There are some announcement in there that will come

into force in 2015, but you are talking about young people today

that need help and support. They will be worse off in five years? One

of the big changes being brought in now is that we have made it cheaper

to employ people under 21, we have given an incentive to employers as

part of a general effort of boosting small businesses, the people who

generate the revenue that we politicians spend, the small

entrepreneurs, employers, shopkeepers, we have taken ?1000 out

of the Islamist threat that high street retailers are paying. It is

true that people are feeling the squeeze `` we have taken ?1000 out

of the business rates that high`street retailers are paying.

The single biggest strain for most houses is tax. The one thing

politicians can do is lower the tax bill will stop we are going to move

on, I'm sorry. There are plenty more opportunities later in the show.

Chatham's historic dockyard is a fascinating place. It tells the

story of 400 years of naval history, and is one of the only dockyards in

the world which does. But is it on a par with the Taj Mahal and the Great

Wall of China? Medway Council thinks so. It is hoping the dockyard will

be selected by the Government as a candidate to become a World Heritage

Site. When the dockyard closed, the effects on the Medway towns were

devastating. But could the World Heritage accolade

effect? In a moment, we will hear from one expert who says it could

hinder regeneration. But first, Bhavani Vadde went to Chatham to

find out what difference such a title could make.

Silent and imposing, these vessels are the physical legacy of

Britain's dominance as a global naval power. For more than 400

years, Chatham's dockyard played a vital role in supporting the Royal

Navy and helping secure its supremacy at sea. It is now a

tourist attraction and last week secured ?4.5 million of Heritage

Lottery Fund inks for a project called Command Of The Oceans. It

will tell the story of the military links and how it enabled trade and

empire to flourish as well as play a role in the Industrial Revolution.

But those with stewardship of Chatham's historic dockyard have

greater ambitions for it. They want the dockyard and its defences to be

listed as a UNESCO world Heritage site. But what benefits would that

bring to the attraction and to Medway as a whole? The site already

contributes ?60 million a year to Medway's economy and supports more

than 500 jobs, according to an economic impact report completed

last year. Many believe World Heritage Site status would achieve

even more great. It is about economic regeneration and economic

impact. More visitors, more tourists, it means more money spent

in local shops and businesses. It is also about the sense of place that

is driven to an area. People move to successful places, people move

businesses to places that are recognised as being important. So

there is a much wider potential benefit that comes from World

Heritage Site status. It is the ultimate heritage tourism stamp of

approval. In King of the doctor at a Chatham, Chatham in general, in the

same context as the Taj Mahal and the Great Wall of China, it would

set in stone in everybody's mind the significance and importance of the

Heritage year. `` of the heritage here. There are 28 World Heritage

Site around the country. Canterbury Cathedral along with two other

churches in the city mark their 25th anniversary of receiving the award

next week. The cathedral now receives more than 1 million

visitors a year. This is a very important site. For us, the World

Heritage Site is knit simply Canterbury Cathedral. It is Saint

Martin's Church and Saint Augustin's Abbey. All three of us

are part of the recognition that this is important in the life and

history of this country, where the reintroduction of Christianity

started. The concept is excellent. The fact that they have made a step

for the recognition and therefore improving the preservation of these

sites, which are important in world history, is very good. The proposed

World Heritage Site at Chatham covers much more than the historic

dockyard. The bid also includes the Heritage Park, part of the River

Medway, and other fortifications. Medway Council started investigating

the benefits of World Heritage Site status in 2002. So far, the council

estimates the bid has cost ?380,000, although none of that has been from

council funds. As a result, more than ?3 million has been invested in

the Heritage Park and has led to free access for the public to Fort

Amherst's heartland. There seems to be cross`party consensus at Medway

Council on the benefits of World Heritage Site status, and the

Conservative administration is confident even more investment will

follow as a result of bidding for the accolade. Inward investment will

come. We optimised very much in Medway is a place to come in terms

of business. But this will increase it considerably. By looking at other

areas that have this status within this country, they have been very

clear how much benefit both in tourism, inward investment, and in

the overall economy of their specific area. The government is

likely to decide next year which sites should be nominated from the

UK to UNESCO for World Heritage Site status. But is an international

stamp of approval really necessary to appreciate the value of

Chatham's naval heritage? I'm joined now by Paul Finch, a

writer on architecture. Paul, you are not quite as enthusiastic as the

people we heard from in the film about the idea of an attraction like

Chatham Docks becoming a World Heritage Site. Why? In a general

sense, good luck to Chatham. But on another level you have to say,

actually, this whole process is rather sick making. Let's face it,

what they are doing is giving awards to the obsolete. Chatham gets it

because it does not make ships any more. I suppose they will give World

Heritage data is to Portsmouth soon now that they are shutting down...

You heard there be possible benefits. Visitor numbers alone.

This area badly needs the money that this could bring. There is no harm

in giving it the status, is there? It is a travel agent's ramp, and if

you want everyone else in Britain to fund this, that is fine, but UNESCO

does not give a single penny or your rope towards the protection... But

it is accolade, the ultimate seal of approval. What exactly do you think

the effect of becoming a World Heritage Site will have? I am

worried about what has happened in Westminster. Because the Palace of

Westminster, a 19th century building, not exactly the great

Pyramids, has become a World Heritage Site, UNESCO and English

Heritage, and Westminster Council, are telling councils on the other

side of the river what buildings they can put up in case it

interferes with the view from the World Heritage Site. I would be

worried if I was Chatham to think it is not of views of the historic

area, what happens if somebody wants to do a development next door and

somebody says, oh, but this is interfering with a World Heritage

Site, we should not do this? You have to be very, very careful about

this. The dead hand of heritage at its worst means you cannot do

anything new and it sets up a cultural assumption that anything

new is in opposition to the past. This is very dangerous. So it is the

interference that UNESCO would have in the local planning process?

No`one have elected UNESCO. They are in receipt of global taxpayer money

and go around telling people what to do. I am happy for Chatham council

to do whatever it wants to do but none of the buildings are World

Heritage Site because UNESCO says so. They have cultural value because

of what they have been, and for UNESCO to say that nothing is a

World Heritage Site lest they declare it to be so, there is a

cultural arrogance. I will turn out to Paul Clark. You know the area

well, the dockyards and their history. What Paul Finch is saying

is interesting, this could backfire if you are not allowed to regenerate

the area because of the rules that come with the UNESCO status which

could stifle Chatham. Within the dockyard there are 47 scheduled

monuments, you have hundred businesses, 500 jobs, and you have

got development plans including housing. These have already happened

within the confines of the dockyard with the heritage that it has. That

heritage is not just looking back to the past. The Chatham dockyard is

what makes the Medway Council what they are today. You need to keep

that but interweave it, of course, with the 21st`century. But you could

say it is already celebrating the heritage. What will this at apart

from a bit of status? It does add. When we introduced the National

museums programme a few years ago, which brought in models and so and

from the National Maritime Museum and the Imperial War Museum, it

increased visitor numbers by 25%. Clearly, UNESCO World Heritage Site

status would give us that. It is not just the dockyard, it is including

the great Lions and Fort Amherst. The whole of this process, the

reason we got the ?4.5 million, is because of the journey that we have

been on in developing this. You heard about Westminster, it is not

about preserving the area but also the view from the area. You need to

regenerate the Medway Council. If you cannot build new buildings

because UNESCO says no, it would be frustrating. The former dockyard

contains the commercial part of Chatham Maritime, it includes

development of businesses that are there, it includes the universities

of Medway, as well as the actual historical dockyard part. So it is

already happening and it is not constraining to recognise the

heritage that is their that is absolutely critical. Let's build on

that to create jobs. I completely agree with the point that Paul just

made. Paul Finch, who we just heard from, is right to tell us we do not

need UNESCO to tell us that we are Maritime people, tied to the sea, it

is part of our heritage without Paris decreeing it to be so. But

this poll is right that there is no conflict between heritage and

modernity. Somebody had come from anywhere else in the world when they

were at their height in the dockyard, they would have been

struck by what a modern people we were... You are a champion of

localism. If you said to `` if UNESCO said, you cannot develop...

That would not happen. What is coming out of the area now,

cutting`edge, creative art, media. The world is not buying our ships

any more, and it is sad. But what are they buying instead? They are

buying Call The Midwife, Sherlock Holmes, of the things made in the

area. There are probably more people employed in the area today than when

it was run at the dockyard. Quite right to have political consensus

here in the studio! There is consensus also on the council about

this. Does it worry you that nobody is asking questions about this? The

feasibility studies and so on that have been done look at what it

means, what is required. I have to tell you the planning requirements

are no different, as I understand, from those that have studied this,

with a UNESCO badge of approval. It has the badge of approval but it

does not add planning restrictions over and above what are already

there. If you are going to value the heritage and develop it in a way

that helps the 21st`century, then you will respect. Let's go back to

Paul Finch. You heard a lot of opposition to what you are saying.

If anyone thinks it does not make a difference, called Lambeth or

Southwark council and they will tell you otherwise. This is a cultural

imposition and the reason I object to it is it promotes the idea that

culture is about the obsolete, and the idea that we should make video

programmes in Chatham dockyard and therefore it is all hunky`dory and

it is a World Heritage Site, it is totally laughable. It is not the Taj

Mahal or the great Pyramids, it is a redundant dockyard. Come and have a

look, Paul! It is not the Taj Mahal!

All right, we are going to move on. Now, this is our last programme of

the year, so we thought we would take the opportunity to take stock.

It has been quite a year in the politics of the South East: the rise

of UKIP as a serious force in opposition on the council in Kent

and West Sussex, protests in Balcombe against fracking, and the

first year of our police and crime commissioners. It has been busy. So,

here is a little reminder of a few of the important bits of 2013.

I will act with integrity and diligence in my role.

I accept that I have made comments on social networking sites which

have offended many people and I am truly sorry for any offence that has

been caused. Our policies resonate with the man on the ground. I am not

been nastier, but it is not working. We have two close the back door.

I don't think the performance in local government is going to be a

big factor in UKIP's performance in the general election. What will

matter for them is whether they make the traditional the of selecting

nutters who embarrass them. It is a huge privilege to be here in

Margate today to welcome the opening of this extraordinary scheme. Build

a bonfire, build a bonfire, but Cameron on the top!

Fracking three Sussex! It is a national event, I believe, because

it is about energy security for the country and I am sure this will not

be a one`off. I did not come into politics to

close Children's Centres but we have got to the point where we have got

as much fat of the bonus we can. I don't think the councillors have

been to a youth centre in their life and probably think we sit around and

play table tennis all day. My message to them is, save our youth

sessions. Do you know who that is? No, I don't. No, I don't. Do you

know who this is? No, I don't. Out of all of those, which do you

think will be the most significant next year? Let's take it as read

that the Green Council in Brighton is going to lose as a result of

that. I think the wake issue is fracking. I can tell you, hand on

heart, as MEP for bulk, I have had more protests about the

demonstrators than about any drilling. They were demonstrating in

a place where no`one was fracking and no`one was proposing to sack,

which tells you how skewed the has become. This is a potential boon to

the UK. But we will see more protests next? Look at the flip

side. People are complaining about the cost of energy, understandably.

Cheaper energy is what has got the US economy moving again, factory

prices coming down, exports becoming more competitive. This could be what

call was to our ancestors. Out of all of those issues... ? I think

energy is merely a major issue. Ed Miliband has been leading on that,

which is why we have seen the U`turn by the government. I think it will

be the continued problems with the families and constituents of

cutbacks in services. The closures of children's services. This week

72,000 lights are being switched off at midnight, raising questions about

safety and security, while crime has gone up by 9%. Neither of you

mentioned UKIP and we have got European elections next year.

Anyway, time to have a look at the other political events that you

might have missed this week with our political editor, Louise Stewart.

The general election is 18 months away but campaigning seems to be

underway. Ed Miliband started the week with a busy to Crawley to talk

about apprenticeships. It happens to be one of Labour's key target seats.

I will be here a lot right across the region. If there was any doubt

about the position on fracking, George Osborne was clear in the

Autumn Statement when he announced tax breaks for companies extracting

shale gas, welcomed by the Sevenoaks MP Michael Fallon. We are getting

serious about shale gas. Plans to build 10,000 new homes in the Sussex

countryside work and dent in the Commons by Nicholas Soames. It is

causing the greatest possible anxiety and concern amongst local

people. Sports minister Helen Grant may want to brush up on her

knowledge after being given a plain English kicking the pants award. She

caught the attention of the panel a journalist asked her five sporting

questions and she was unable to answer a single one.

Paul Clark, you have been a minister, you must feel sorry for

having grand? Getting caught out like that at the last minute is

always a problem, always a hazard, but you need to brief up, and I was

going to say man, but I mean just be there to take it and get on with it.

Ministers are there to represent ordinary people rather than the

professionals in their department, so I'm delighted...

That's all we've got time for from Tomorrow, the House of Commons will

pay its tributes to Nelson Mandela. Our nation has lost its greatest

son. Our people have lost a father. The first thing I ever did that

involved an issue or policy, or politics, was protest against

apartheid. I think his greatest legacy, to

South Africa and to the world, is the emphasis which he has always put

on the need for a conciliation, on the importance of human rights. He

also made us understand that we can change the world. We can change the

world by changing attitudes, by changing perceptions. For this

reason, I would like to pay him tribute as a great human being, who

raised the standard of humanity. Thank you for the gift of Madiba.

Thank you for what he has enabled us to know we can become.

We are joined now by the Labour MP Diane Abbott. You met Mr Mandela not

one after he was released from prison in 1990. He went as an

election observer for the first one person, one-vote in South Africa. I

would guess, of all the people you met in your life, you must have been

the most impressive and biggest influence? He was extraordinary. He

had just come out of prison, 28 years in reason. He had seen a lot

of his colleagues tortured, blown up and killed. He was entirely without

bitterness. That is what came across. That was key to his

achievement, to achieve a peaceful transition. Everybody thought that

if you have black majority rule, you might have a bloodbath. It's down to

Nelson Mandela but didn't happen. I remember FW de Klerk saying that

Mandela was the key to getting a peaceful transition. Absolutely the

key, an amazing man. London was one of the centres, people talked about

it as being the other centre of the anti-apartheid struggle. That

anti-apartheid struggle in London, it had an effect on black politics

in Britain? Oh, yes. If you were black and politically active at the

time, the apartheid struggle, the struggle against white supremacy in

South Africa, was very important. Whatever your colour, the

anti-apartheid struggle, for our generation, was the political

campaign. We have the 50th anniversary of Kennedy's

assassination. Mr Mandela's death. We are kind of running out of people

that inspired us? I will never forget where I was when I saw him

come out of prison, hand-in-hand with the women, I might add. If you

have spent your whole teenage years and 20 is boycotting, marching,

picketing, to see him actually come out was amazing. Do you think it was

more exciting to meet you or the Spice Girls? I think the Spice

Girls. What did the Labour backbenchers think about Ed Balls's

performance after the Autumn Statement? Luck, Ed Balls is a

brilliant man, but I think even he would say that it was not his best

performance. But if you look at the polls, the public liked the points

he made. The backbenchers were quiet, there was something wrong? I

noticed that. It was like a wall of sound, deliberately. They know that

under pressure his stamina might come back and it is difficult for

him. That is what they were trying to incite. I have had experience

first hand, a look at all of these anonymous and sometimes not

anonymous quotes in the media. The spinning has begun against him? This

is the party of brotherly love, no matter what the Tories say, we can

say worse about each other. How could it be that two former aides to

Gordon Brown do not like each other? Far be it from me to say. If he

wanted to do it, and I'm not saying he does, is Mr Miliband ruthless

enough to get rid of Ed Balls? I mean, he got rid of you, he got rid

of his brother? One thing you should not do is under estimate Ed

Miliband's capacity for ruthlessness. If he feels it is the

right thing to do, he will do it. It's not just a matter of... Ed

Balls is a big, powerful personality. He's great to interview

because he is across his subject, you can have a really good argument

with him, a man that knows his brief, his facts. But it's not just

about the personality. There is a kind of sense that Labour needs to

look forwards more on economic policy. Of course, the standard of

living has been hugely successful for Labour. But it needs more than

that on economic policy? I think he has been one of the most effective

member 's Shadow Cabinet, and he's always associated with the Brown

years, where there is always an element about, you were the guys

that got it wrong. I think Ed Miliband will be very tempted to

replace him with Alistair Darling. The scenario goes like this,

Alistair Darling saves the union and then in September he saves the

Labour Party. Ultimately, I don't think he would do it. Talk about

shifting tectonic plates, it would, wouldn't it? But it is a step too

far. Ed Balls would not be too happy. It is not something you would

want to do lightly. That sounds a bit of a threat. Not from you. I

can't see Ed Balls magnanimously retreating and say, go on, Alistair

Darling, take the job I have been after all career. Where do you put

him? Do you make him a middle ranking business or welfare

secretary? He wouldn't do that. If you sack him, he would retreat to

the backbenchers. He might take up knitting and practices piano scales,

or he might have a blood feud with Ed Miliband. I don't know which

could be. You look back to when he was schools Secretary, you could

feel he was constantly fuming. I think he is better inside the tent,

looking out, than the other way around. The thing one Labour

strategist said to me was that he is too much looking into the rear-view

mirror, when it comes to economic policy. He needs to look ahead

through the windscreen. That had some resonance? He was at the centre

of Labour's economic policy-making from the mid-90s. So it's hard for

him but he has to look forward. There is an interesting comparison

with 2009. Gordon Brown got in trouble when he said the choice is

between Labour investment and Tory cuts. Everybody knew it was between

Labour cuts and Tory cuts. In other words, he was not acknowledging

reality. With Ed Balls, OK, we can say it is the wrong sort of

recovery, but there is a recovery. Does he not need to absorb that

punch and say there is a recovery, then people will listen to him?

Possibly. We know that the macroeconomics are looking better.

We also know people are not experiencing it as a recovery in

living standards. No one, not even Tories, really believe that David

Cameron knows what it is like for middle-income people to live normal

lives. Living standards is particularly powerful because of the

composition of the government? Don't go away. This time last year we

ambushed our political panel with a quiz. They didn't come out of it

smelling of roses, but they did come out rather smelly.

Will the coalition still be in place a year from now? Yes. Definitely. I

say definitely as well. From now, one year, will we know the date of

the European referendum? Yes. No. I say no as well. How much growth will

there be? Less than 1%. Father Christmas is less qualified than me,

but I will go for one. I will go for a quarter of that. 0.4%. Sorry, a

third of that. I am with you, and 1%. We didn't do too badly. What

will growth be next year? I will remind you, the OBR has upgraded to

2.4%. Better stick with the OBR, got it wrong last year. Well, they went

down in March and then went back in December. I'm going to go under and

claim credit where it's higher. I'm going to say 1%. Deliberately get it

wrong. Given our record, if we say there is going to be spectacular

growth, does it mean we're going to go into recession? There is

incentive to be cautious. 2%. 2.4%, because the housing market in London

is rocketing. It would be closer to 3% and 2.4, mark my words. We'll Ed

Balls be Shadow Chancellor by this time next year? Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes,

I value my life. Will UKIP mean the European elections, by which I mean

have the highest percentage of the vote? Yes. Second behind Labour.

Second behind Labour. Will Alex Salmond win the independence

referendum? No, but it will be closer than we think. No, unless

they do something catastrophic like let Cameron debate him. Too close to

call. Controversial. How many Romanians and Bulgarians will come

to Britain in 2014? Far fewer than anyone thinks. The entire population

of Romania and Bulgaria, like Nigel Farage thanks. I'll go with that,

I'm confident. A change of tone for your magazine. Not many will come,

but a lot here already will normalise and be counted into

figures. Too many for most right-wing commentators. I think

quite a few will come, but not the kind of numbers that made such a

huge difference. This time, everybody is open. They do like to

speak English, that is the reason they want to come. We'll all three

of you still be here by this time next year? Yes. Would you recommend

that? Yes, keep them. And he has lovely boots. Shiny red boots. If

you can keep affording me, I will be here. I hope so, it sounds like you

have a firing squad outside. I hope so, maybe you will find some true

talent. Very pragmatic, aren't they? Let me put this to you, I think you

will agree. The coalition will not break now, this side of the election

next year? There will not be... They will not go their own ways by this

time next year? Of next year, maybe just after. Early 2015. This side of

the election? What is the UKIP view? I don't think there is an advantage

to either of them. If the Lib Dems pulled out, they would look like

there were a lodger in the Tory house of government. I think it

would suit the Lib Dems to break just before the election. I think

that is what Vince Cable wants to do. I don't think it is what Nick

Clegg would like to do. The Tories would love it. They would have all

of the toys to themselves. Yellow marker they would look like the

grown-ups. The problem for Vince Cable is that he's not the force

that used to be after his temper tantrum at the Conference.

I will be back with the Daily Politics next week. If Santer gives

you a diary in your stocking, pencil in Sunday the 20th of January, the

first Sunday Politics of 2014. Remember, if it is Sunday, it is the

Sunday Politics. Unless it is Christmas. And New Year.