26/01/2014 Sunday Politics South East

Morning folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.

Ed Balls has gone socialist and fiscal Conservative in one speech.

He promises to balance the biggest bit of the budget. And to bring back

the 50p top tax rate. Political masterstroke, or a return to old

Labour? If you go to work by public

transport, chances are the price of your ticket has just gone up -

again. We'll speak to Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin. He's

our Sunday Interview. And it's been another wet week

across much of the UK, but what s the outlook according to this man?

In the Southeast: Government money recent years by party veterans like

In the Southeast: Government money for better rural broadband, but what

about the And with me - as always - the

political panel so fresh-faced, entertaining and downright popular

they make Justin Bieber look like a boring old has-been just desperate

to get your attention. Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh, and

they'll be tweeting quicker than a yellow Lamborghini racing down Miami

Beach. Being political nerds, they have no idea what I'm talking about.

Ed Balls sprung a surprise on us all yesterday. We kinda thought Labour

would head for the election with a return to the 50p top rate of tax.

But we didn't think he'd do it now. He did! The polls say it's popular,

Labour activists now have a spring in their step. The Tories say it's a

return to the bad old days of the '70s, and bosses now think Labour is

anti-business. Here's the Shadow Chancellor speaking earlier this

morning. I was part of a Government which did very many things to open

up markets, to make the Bank of England independent, to work closely

with business, but the reality is we are in very difficult circumstances

and because if I'm honest you, George Osborne's failure in the last

few years, those difficult circumstances will last into the

next Parliament. Business people have said to me they want to get the

deficit down, of course they do But to cut the top rate... It is foolish

and feeds resentment I want to do the opposite and say look,

pro-business, pro investment, pro market, but pro fairness. Let's get

this deficit down in a fairway and make the reforms to make our economy

work for the long term. What are the political implications of Labour now

in favour of a 50%, in practise 352% top rate of tax? One of the

political implications I don't think exist is that they'll win new

voters. I'm not sure many people out there would think, I would love to

vote for Ed Miliband but I'm not sure if he wants to tax rich people

enough. It will con Dale their existing vote but I don't think it

is the kind of, in the 1990s we talked about triangulation, moving

beyond your core vote, I don't think it is a policy like that. If there

has been a policy like that this year, this month, it has been the

Tories' move on minimum wage. I thought Labour would come back with

their own version, a centre-right policy, and instead they have done

this. I think we talk about the 35% strategy that Labour supposed will

have, I think it is a policy in that direction rather than the thing Tony

Blair or Gordon Brown would have done. Where he was not clear is on

how much it would raise. We know the sum in the grand scheme of things

isn't much, the bedroom tax was about sending a message. What we are

going to see is George Osborne and Ed Balls lock as they try to push

the other one into saying things that are unpopular. The Tories,

?150,000 a year, that's exactly where Ed Balls want them to be. All

three main parties have roughly the same plan, to run a current budget

surplus by the end of the next Parliament. George Osborne said ?12

billion of welfare cuts, hasn't said how he is going to do it. Ed Balls

is giving an idea that he is going to restore this 50 persons rate The

contribution of that will be deminimus. It is not much, but what

does it say about your values. Because it is that package, it is

cleverer than people think. Where the challenge is is the question

that Peter Mandelson posed at the last election, which is can the

Labour Party win a general election if it doesn't have business on its

side? That's the big challenge and that's the question looking

difficult for them this morning Does it matter if Labour has

business on its side. I thought the most fascinating thing about this

announcement is it came from the guy mindful of business support, Ed

Balls. When in opposition and when a Minister and as a shadow as a

result, he's been far more conscious than Ed Miliband about the need not

to alienate the CB Bill. In the run-up of an election. This is a

measure of Ed Miliband's strength in the Labour Party, that his view of

things can prevail so easily over a guy who for the last 15 years has

taken a different view. Eight out of ten businesses according to the CBI

don't want us to leave business Business is in a bit of a cleft

stick. Ed Miliband would like to see businesses squealing, and Ed Balls

is clearly not so comfortable on that one. There's a difference on

that. Mind you, they were squealing this morning from Davos. They

probably had hangovers as well. The other thing they would say is this

is not like Ed Balls thinks that 50p is the optimal rate forever, it what

go eventually. Isn't that what politicians said when income tax was

introduced? Yeah, in '97 Labour regarded 40 persons as the rate

where it would stay. It's been a bad week for the Lib

Dems. Again. Actually, it's been one of the worst weeks yet for Nick

Clegg and his party in recent memory, as they've gone from talking

confidently about their role in Government to facing a storm of

criticism over claims of inappropriate sexual behaviour by a

Lib Dem peer, Chris Rennard, and a Lib Dem MP, Mike Hancock. Here's

Giles with the story of the week. A challenge to Nick Clegg's authority

as he face as growing row over the Liberal Democrat... I want everyone

to be treated with respect by the Liberal Democrats. We are expecting

him to show moral leadership on our behalf. A good man has been publicly

destroyed by the media with the apparent support of Nick Clegg. I

would like Nick Clegg to show leadership and say, this has got to

stop. When Nick Clegg woke up on Monday morning he knew he was in

trouble, staring down the barrel of a stand justify with Lord Rennard

over allegations that the peer had inappropriately touched a number of

women. Chris Rennard thought he was cleared. Nick Clegg wanted more I

said if he doesn't apologise, he should withdraw from the House of

Lords. If he does that today, what do you do then? I hope he doesn t. I

think no apology, no whip. 2014 was starting badly for the Liberal

Democrats. Chris Rennard refused to apologise, saying you can't say

sorry for something you haven't done. The and he was leaning towards

legal action. Butch us friends better defending Pym and publicly.

This is a good, decent man, who has been punished by the party, with the

leadership of the party that seems to be showing scant regard for due

process. But his accusers felt very differently. It is untenable for the

Lib Dems to have a credible voice on qualities and women's issues in the

future if Lord Rennard was allowed to be back on the Lib Dem benches in

the House of Lords. Therein lay the problem that exposed the weaknesses

of the Lib Dem leaders. The party's internal structures have all the

simplicity of a circuit diagram for a supercomputer, exposing the

complexity of who runs the Liberal Democrats? The simple question that

arose of that was can the leader of the Lib Dems remove a Lib Dem peer?

The simple answer is no. The Lib Dem whips in the Lords could do it but

if enough Lib Dem peers disagreed, they could overrule it. Some

long-stand ng friends of roar Rennard think he is either the

innocent victim of a media witch-hunt or at the least due

process has been ridden over rough shot by the leadership. Nobody ever

did spot Lord Rennard as he didn't turn up to the Lords, will citing

ill health. But issued a statement that ruled out an apology. He

refused to do so and refused to comply with the outcome of that

report, so there was no alternative but for the party to suspend his

membership today. On Wednesday Nick Clegg met Lib Dem peers, not for a

crunch decision, but to discuss the extraordinary prospect of legal

action against the party by the man long credited with building its

success. The situation was making the party look like a joke. One Tory

MP said to one of my colleagues this morning, the funny thing about the

Liberal Democrats, you managed to create a whole sex scandal without

any sex. And we can laugh at ourselves but actually it is rather

serious. And it got more serious, when an MP who had resigned the Lib

Dem whip last year was expanded from the party over a report into

allegations of serious and unwelcome sexual behaviour towards a

constituent. All of this leaves the Lib Dems desperately wishing these

sagas had been dealt with long ago and would now go away. Nick Clegg

ended the week still party leader. Lord Rennard, once one of their most

powerful players, ended the week, for now, no longer even in it.

Giles on the Lib Dems' disastrous week. Now, as you doubtless already

know, on Tuesday Lib Dem MPs will vote to choose a new deputy leader.

You didn't know that? You do now. The job of Nick Clegg's number two

is to speak with a genuine Lib Dem voice, untainted by the demands of

coalition Government. At this point in the show we had expected to speak

to all three candidates for the post, held in recent years by party

veterans like Vince Cable and Simon Hughes. We thought it being quite a

significant week for the party, they might have something to say. And

here they are. Well that's their pictures. For various reasons, all

three are now unavailable. Malcolm Bruce, he's reckoned to be the

outsider. His office said he had a "family commitment". Gordon

Birtwistle, the Burnley MP, was booked to appear but then told us,

"I was at an event last night with Lorely Burt" - she's one of the

candidates - "and she told me it was off". And Lorely Burt herself, seen

by many as the red hot favourite, told us: "Because of the Rennard

thing we don't want to put ourselves in a position where we have to

answer difficult questions." How refreshingly honest. Helen, how bad

politically is all this for the Lib Dems? What I think is the tragic

irony of the Lib Dems is they've been revealed as being too

democratic. In the same way that their party conference embarrassed

Nick Clegg by voting sings that he signed up to, and now everything has

to be run past various sub-committees first. Is it

democratic or chaotic? It is Byzantine. Mike Hancock was

voluntarily suspended, and this week he was properly suspended. It was

new information into the public domain that forced that. I'm already

hearing Labour and Conservative Party musing that if it is a long

Parliament, we will form a minority Government. It is a disaster for

them. Voters like parties that reflect and are interested this

their concerns. Parties that are self obsessed turn them off. The

third party, if they carry on like this, they'll be the fifth party in

the European elections, so they have got to draw a line under this. They

do that, if they do, through mediation. As I understand it, Chris

Rennard,s who has go devoted his entire life to the Liberal

Democrats, and previously the Liberal Party, is keen to draw a

line under this. He is up for mediation but he needs to know that

the women that he has clearly invaded their personal space, that

there wouldn't be a possible legal a action from them. The it is very

difficult to see how you could resolve that. Except he is

threatening through his friends these famous friends, to spill all

the beans about all the party's sex secrets. Isn't the danger for the

Lib Dems, this haunts them through to the European elections, where

they'll get thumped in the European elections? They'll get destroyed in

the European elections, which keeps it salient as a story over the

summer. And it has implications for Nick Clegg's leadership. He's done a

good job until now, perhaps better than David Cameron, of exercising

authority over his party. He had a good conference in September.

Absolutely, and now the Lib Dems have looked like a party without a

leader or a leadership structure. Part of that is down to the chaotic

or Byzantine organisational structure of the party. Part of it

is Nick Clegg's failure to assert himself and impose himself over

events. Is it Byzantine or Byzantine. It is labyrinthine. You

don't get these words on the Today programme. The cost of living has

been back on the agenda this week as Labour and the Tories argue over

whether the value of money in your pocket is going up or down. Well

there's one cost which has been racing ahead of inflation and that's

the amount you have to pay to travel by train, by bus and by air. Rail

commuters have been hard hit over the last four years, with the cost

of the average season ticket going up by 18% since January 2010, while

wages have gone up by just 3.6% over the same period. It means some rail

users are paying high prices with commuters from Kent shelling out

more than ?5,000 per year from the beginning of this month just to get

to work in London. It doesn't compare well with our European

counterparts. In the UK the average rail user spends 14% of their

average income on trains. It is just 1.5% in Italy. Regulated fares like

season tickets went up 3.1% at the beginning of this month, and with

ministers keen to make passengers fought more of the bills, there are

more fare rises coming down the track. And Patrick McLoughlin joins

me now for the Sunday Interview Welcome. You claim to be in the

party of hard-working people, so why is it that since you came to power

rail commuters have seen the cost of their average season ticket going up

in money terms by over 18% while their pay has gone up in money terms

by less than four? I would point out that this is the first year in ten

years that we have not had an above inflation increase on fares. The

Government accepts we have got to do as much as we can to help the

passengers. A big inflation increase since 2010. This is the first year

in ten years that it has not been above RPI, but we are also investing

huge amounts of money into the railways, building new trains for

the East Coast Main Line and the great Western. We are spending 500

million at Birmingham station, this is all increasing capacity, so we

are seeing investments. Over the next five years Network Rail will

invest over ?38 billion in the network structure. We also have an

expensive railway and it is ordinary people paying for it. A season

ticket from Woking in Surrey, commuter belt land in London, let's

look at the figures. This is a distance of over 25 miles, it cost

over ?3000 per year. We have picked similar distances to international

cities. The British commuter is being ripped

off. The British commuter is seeing record levels of investment in our

railways. The investment has to be paid for. We are investing huge

amounts of money and I don't know whether the figures you have got

here... I'm sure they are likewise, as you have managed to do... White

-- ten times more than the Italian equivalent. We have seen

transformational changes in our railway services and we need to

carry on investing. We were paying these prices even before you started

investing. We have always paid a lot more to commute in this country than

our European equivalents. I'm not quite sure I want to take on Italy

is a great example. You would if you were a commuter. You

is a great example. You would if you the other rates of taxation has to

be paid as well. Isn't it the case they are making profits out of these

figures and using them to subsidise cheaper fares back in their

homeland? The overall profit margin train companies make is 3%, a

reasonable amount, and we have seen a revolution as far as the railway

industry is concerned. a revolution as far as the railway

20 years we have seen passenger journeys going from 750 million to

1.5 billion. That is a massive revolution in rail. Let me look

1.5 billion. That is a massive spokesperson for the German

government, the Ministry of transport.

They are charging huge fares in Britain to take that money back to

subsidise fares in Germany. What do you say to that? We are seeing

British companies winning contracts in Germany. The National Express are

winning contracts to the railways. What about the ordinary commuter?

They are paying through the nose so German commuters can travel more

cheaply. We are still subsidising the railways in this country, but

overall we want to reduce the subsidy we are giving. We are still

seeing growth in our railways and I want to see more people using them.

Why do you increase rail fares at the higher RPI measure than the

lower CPI measurement? That is what has always been done, and we have

stopped. This is the first time in ten years that we have not raised

the rail figures above RPI. You still link fares to RPI. You use the

lower CPI figure when it suits you, to keep pension payments down for

example, but the higher one when it comes to increasing rail fares. We

are still putting a huge subsidy into the rail industry, there is

still a huge amount of money going from the taxpayer to support the

rail industry. I am not asking you about that, I am asking you why you

link the figures to the higher RPI vesture Mark if we are going to pay

for the levels of investment, so all the new trains being built at Newton

Aycliffe for the East Coast Main Line and the great Western, ?3.

billion of investment, new rolling stock coming online, then yes, we

have to pay for it, and it is a question of the taxpayer paying for

it all the -- or the passenger. You have capped parking fines until

the next election, rail commuters we have seen the cost of their ticket

has gone up by nearly 20%, you are the party of the drivers, not the

passengers, aren't you? We are trying to help everybody who

has been struggling. I think we are setting out long-term plans for our

railways, investing heavily in them and it is getting that balance

right. But you have done more for the driver than you have for the

user of public transport. I don t accept that. They are paying the

same petrol prices as 2011. This is the first time in ten years that

there has not been an RPI plus rise. We are investing record

amounts. Bus fares are also rising, 4.2% in real terms in 2010, at a

time when real take-home pay has been falling. This hits commuters

particularly workers who use buses on low incomes, another cost of

living squeeze. I was with Stagecoach in Manchester on Friday,

and I saw a bus company investing in new buses. Last week First ordered

new buses. Part of your hard-working families you are always on about,

they are the ones going to work early in the morning, and yet you

are making them pay more for their buses in real terms than they did

before. They would be happier if they could travel more cheaply. It

is about getting investment in services, it has to be paid for Why

not run the old buses for five more years? Because then there is more

pollution in the atmosphere, modern buses have lower emissions, and we

are still giving huge support overall to the bus industry and that

is very important because I fully accept that the number of people,

yes, use the train but a lot of people use buses as well. High-speed

two, it has been delayed because 877 pages of key evidence from your

department were left on a computer memory stick, part of the submission

to environmental consultation. Your department's economic case is now

widely regarded as a joke, now you do this. Is your department fit for

purpose? Yes, and as far as what happened with the memory stick, it

is an acceptable and shouldn't have happened, and therefore we have

extended the time. There has been an extension in the time for people to

make representation, the bill for this goes through Parliament in a

different way to a normal bill. It is vital HS2 provides what we want.

What I am very pleased about is when the paving bill was passed by

Parliament just a few months ago, there was overwhelming support, and

I kept reading there was going to be 70 people voting against it, in the

end 30 people voted against it and there was a good majority in the

House of Commons. So can you give a guarantee that this legislation will

get onto the statute books? I will do all I can. I cannot tell you the

exact Parliamentary time scale. The bill will have started its progress

through the House of Commons by 2015, and it may well have

concluded. The new chairman of HS2 said he can bring the cost of the

line substantially under the budget, do you agree with that? The figure

is ?42 billion with a large contingency, and David Higgins, as

chairman of HS2, is looking at the whole cast and seeing if there are

ways in which it can be built faster. At the moment across London

we are building Crossrail, ?14. billion investment. There was a

report last week saying what an excellent job has been done.

Crossrail started under Labour. Actually it was Cecil Parkinson in

the 1990 party conference. You may get HS2 cheaper if you didn't pay

people so much, why is the nonexecutive chairman of HS2 on

?600,000? And the new chief executive on ?750,000. These are

very big projects and we need to attract the best people become so we

are going for the best engineers in the world to engineer this project.

It is a large salary, there is no question about it, but I'm rather

pleased that engineers rather than bankers can be seen to get big

rewards for delivering what will be very important pieces of national

infrastructure. I didn't have time to ask you about your passenger duty

so perhaps another time. We are about to speak to Nigel Mills and

all of these MPs on your side who are rebelling against the

Government, how would you handle them? We have got to listen to what

our colleagues are talking about and try to respond it. Would you take

them for a long walk off a short pier? I'm sure I would have many

conversations with them. An immigration bill to tack the

immigration into the UK. When limits on migration from Bulgaria and

Romania were lifted this year there were warnings of a large influx of

migrant workerses from the two new European countries. So far it's been

more of a dribble than a flood. Who can forget Labour MP Keith Vaz

greeting a handful of arrivals at Luton Airport. But it is early days

and it is one of the reasons the Government's introduced a new

Immigration Bill. The Prime Minister is facing rebellion from

backbenchers who want tougher action on immigration from abroad. Nigel

Mills would reimpose restrictions on how many Romanians and Bulgarians

can come here. Joining me is Nigel Mills, Conservative MP behind the

amendment and Labour MP Diane Abbott. Welcome. Nigel Mills, there

hasn't been an influx of Romanians and Bulgarians. Why do you want to

restore these, kick these transitional controls way forward to

2019? I don't think any of us were expecting a rush on January 1st

Andrew. I think we were talking about a range of 250,000 to 350 000

people over five years. That's obviously a large amount of people,

especially when you think net migration to the UK was well in

excess of the Government's target of tens of thousands last year. The

real concern is that it would be ever increasing our population,

attracting lots of low-skilled, low-wage people, which keeps our

people out of work and wages down. Did you accept that if you were to

accept this, it would be in breach of the Treaty of Rome, the founding

principle of the European Union We were trying to keep the restrictions

that Bulgaria and Romania accepted for their first seven years of EU

membership, on the basis that when we signed the treaty we weren't

aware that we would have a huge and catastrophic recession we are still

recovering from. But you would be in breach of the law, correct? The UK

Parliament has a right to say we signed this deal before the terrible

recession, and we need a bit longer in our national interest. It is

worth noting that Bulgaria and Romania haven't met all their

accession requirements. The Bulgarian requirement passed a

law... So if they break the law it is alright for us to break the law?

Is we should be focusing on trying to get 2. 4 million of our own in

work, and 1 million people not in work... Let me bring in Diane

Abbott. Will you vote for this amendment and why? It is in breach

of the treaty. While I deplore MPs that try to cause trouble, these MPs

have been particularly mindless because what they want to do

wouldn't be legal. However, it is a Tory internal brief, if I might say

so. Maybe you can cause trouble by voting for it. No, that would be

going too far. Underlying it is a real antagonism for David Cameron.

They have had to hold off on this bill until January. It was supposed

to be debating before Christmas As we speak they've not cut a deal so

it could be pretty grus om. Nigel Mills, what do you say to that I

think there is a recognition that there is a problem with the amount

of migration from EU countries that we need to tackle. We could try to

achieve an annual cap perhaps, longer limits on when countries get

free movement. I think the debate is moving in the right direction, but I

think those people who are trapped out of work and desperately looking

for work want something to be done now and not wait a few more years

while we have more assessments Andrews. People are worried about

the level of immigration. They I it is too high. That's the consensus in

the country. We spoke to to migration centre in Hackney and they

said they are struggling to cope with the number of people using

their services. These are people with problems with the law. In the

past years EU migrants put in more to the economy in taxation than they

take out in benefits. When it comes to free movement, which is agitating

Nige em, that horse has bolted. We signed a treaty. There is nothing

people like Nigel Mills can do, unless they want to rip their party

apart, God forbid. Will you go as far as to rip your party apart,

Nigel Mills? Are you going to take this all the way? Would you rather

see this bill go down than your amendment not be accepted? This is a

very important bill. I think we all want to see measures on the statute

book, so the last thing we want to see is this bill go down. We do need

to set out clearly that we have real concerns about the level of EU

migration and something needs to be done. Would you rather have the bill

without your amendment or no bill at all? I am hoping we can have the

bill with the amendment. I know that, but if you can't? Is that will

depend on what the Labour Party decide to do. They are talking

tougher on immigration but will they take action on it? Your party has

been talking tough on immigration but I will be surprised if an Ed

Miliband Labour Party would vote for egg in direct cameravention of the

Treaty of Rome. It would make no sense. Nigel Mills is wishing for

the impossible. If I was a Tory I would be wringing high hands. He

hasn't ruled out crashing the bill. That's incredible. Where will this

end, Nigel Mills? We'll end with a vote on Thursday. There's a lot of

amendments people can use to show their concern about migration. We

want limited and proportionate action, and that's what I am

proposing. I want to see the bill on the statute book, I want the

restrictions on people who shouldn't be here getting bank accounts and

driving licences. I don't want to crash this bill but there's more

measures we need in it. Nigel Mills thank you. You are going to be -

popping up I think on the Sunday Politics East Midlands. Diane

Abbott, thank you as well. We're in for more heavy rain and

high winds across the UK today. You may remember that one UKIP

councillor - he's since been suspended - caused controversy last

weekend by blaming the recent flooding on the legalisation of gay

marriage. Why didn't I think of that? So who better than this man to

bring you the unofficial forecast. I'll be bringing you the late least

UKIP weather from your area. You're watching Sunday Politics

Also coming up in just over 20 minutes, I'll be looking at the week

ahead with our political panel. in the South East. Coming up later,

it is one thing all the parties seem to agree on. More houses should be

built. So could the garden city be the answer to the housing ndeds of

the Southeast? With me todax are Amber Rudd, Conservative MP for

Hastings and Rye and Simon Thomson, selected by the Labour Partx to

stand for art that at the Gdneral Election. We have phones and homes

on the show this week. Let's add holidays. Is it ever OK to take a

family holiday in term time? The Government is clear on the hssue and

have put measures in place that allow parents to be fined. This

week, figures we obtained show in Kent County Council alone

councillors have raised ?200,00 from families who took their

children out of school. Oncd upon a time it was about head teachers

discretion. Now we have head teachers with more autonomy. You

know that because you are the director of a trust that runs two

academies in Hastings. Schools can set their own term dates and ours.

What was wrong with head te`chers having the discretion when ht comes

to a child being out of school? They still have a certain amount of

discussion. They can do excdptional circumstances, but now we s`y you

can have ten days to use. That is absolutely right. The reason it is

so important is that truancx is so closely linked to performance. But

we're not talking about tru`ncy It is a holiday. It is the samd thing

as far as the trial is concdrned. If it is missing lessons it is falling

behind other children. You genuinely are telling me the same thing

applies, that families who take their holiday in term time `re as

bad as parents who systemathcally allowed a child to play tru`nt? I am

not comparing parents like that Children who missed school `re

disadvantaged for their futtre life. So you never took your children at

any point out of school for even a day? I don't think I ever dhd take

them on holiday during term time, no. But just for a day or two? You

should not take your childrdn out of school. You have to be clear about

this. Does it matter getting your children to school during ldsson

plan or not? It is not a colpromise. Nearly 4500 fines were issudd across

Kent and East Sussex. It is clearly not working. Parents get fined, they

go on holiday anyway, it just causes bad feeling between the school and

parents, doesn't it? Absolutely What Amber Rudd is saying is it is

the same thing. It is not the same thing. Forced absence, we h`d a case

recently in Buckinghamshire where the couple could not find the

holiday time or were not allowed from the employers to take time

during school holidays. Thex have no other option and were fined heavily

for it. But we have to tackle its proper truancy, when there hs an

issue, a social problem at the home, and the way to do that throtgh

teachers and welfare officers, which the Government have cut down on

funding for. It is not penalising those parents. That is a sl`ck

attitude. Parents have a responsibility to get their children

to school. You cannot just say, we are going on holiday. Head teachers

have a right to make a decision separately if they want to but the

fact is... Okay... They can do it if they want to but we have made it

more difficult... OK, we're going to... Simon, Amber. Let's sde you

have a similar difference of opinion on our next subject. Just as

important to lots of people, last week Culture Secretary Mirella near

`` Maria Miller announced ftnding for broadband in rural areas. There

is no doubt about the advantage of faster broadband to people who live

in the countryside, but what about the mobile phone? We have bden

speaking to businesses and campaigners are unhappy with their

signal. Back in the 1980s, mobile phones

were more of an accessory than a necessity, but today they are a

vital the business tool. `` they are a vital business tool. Now lillions

of us are doing business vi` a mobile, often on the move, `nd a

recent survey of over 400 companies in the Southeast found that 84%

suffered from so`called mobhle cold spots. Some of them claiming that

across their companies, it had cost ?10,000 a year. It is Mandy. Can you

hear me? Mandy Brook runs a global

recruitment company near Hastings. The firm is set to double in size in

the next 18 months. Her phone is her business, but she says local network

coverage is an issue, so much so she's thinking of relocating the

company. If I am out for a day, I may spend an hour of my datd not

being able to get coverage. That is quite serious for me becausd my time

is worth a lot of money. Never mind the candidates trying to get hold of

you. The survey by the Southeast Local Enterprise Partnership found

many areas where calls dropped out or failed, including a roads around

places like Canterbury, Sheppey Crowborough and the coast Road

between Dover and Deal. And this is another notorious cold spot, the

off`mac 27 near Lewis. It is roads like this that could be bendfiting

from the new Government funding Initially back promised to help 6

million homes in rural areas. Now it has been scaled back to reach just

60,000 premises and some sections of a roads. By the Government's own

admission, that is a sizeable reduction. The nationwide project

should be completed by the dnd of next March, but so far therd is only

an open ended pledge for lilited provision in the Southeast will stop

the countryside Alliance is campaigning on the issue. It says

the Government has overpromhsed and under delivered. They have scaled

back the project due to funding and 60,000 is not as many as 6 lillion

but we need to make sure thdy adhere to the 60,000. Each business is

important to the rural economy. They need their mobile signals to be able

to work and live. Farmers and people running businesses have to have

their signal. While the Govdrnment funds the new masts, it is the

mobile phone companies that operate them. In the past, the industry has

pointed the finger at local authority planners, claiming it is

difficult to get new masts. `` permission for new masts. Council

leaders deny that. It used to be difficult but it is much easier to

put up a mast now. A lot of companies are sharing masts and we

are encouraging that. Back hn Hastings, Mandy Brook thinks the

Government is forgetting thd needs of out`of`town operations. Dveryone

has been forced out of towns and because of that, they need to be

held responsible. They have to think about what they are doing. We are

coming out of a serious recdssion. If they want us to grow, thdy have

to think about collectivity across the board. No one can deny the

importance of technology like superfast broadband to the TK

economy, but what many rural businesses in the South East want to

know is have the Government lost sight of the importance of ` basic

mobile phone signal? I am joined by John Cooke of the

Mobile Operators Association, in our studio in Aberdeen. Is therd must

hope `` much hope for busindss owners like Mandy Brook? Hello. The

first thing to say is that `ny discussion about Mobil coverage

needs to take into account the fact that it ought to have a mobhle

signal we need a network of masts, and without that you cannot get a

signal. There probably is not a mast near to her. Does she need to accept

that or will that change? Are you going to put masts up in pl`ces like

that? Things are getting better Can I also said that the comments from

Mandy and Countryside Alliance about the economic importance of lobile

coverage we completely agred with. Operators are very keen to try to

help people like Mandy. Explain to me exactly what a cold spot is. Is

it somewhere that you as an industry just haven't got around to

collecting a mast yet, or is it somewhere that topography mdans it

is impossible. A bit of both. The problem with rural areas is that

almost invariably it is much more expensive to put infrastructure

that, to put a mast there. That is one part of the problem. Thd other

part of the problem is that because they are sparsely populated, you get

fewer people using the mobile devices, so the revenue gendrated

from that mast is less. Across the UK as a whole, and I think luch of

Kent and Sussex would be thd same, in oral areas, most of the lasts

actually, the operating cost exceeds the revenue. But the Governlent is

putting money into this, and yet there has been no application as we

understand it for any new mobile phone signals in the area where

Mandy is. That is since 2010. So when will things improve for her? In

terms of... If she is in Battle I have some sympathy because H know

what the signal is like that. I think it is proud to much `` pretty

much the same across the wider area. I am sure your sympathy is welcome,

but are things going to change for her? I cannot comment on thd

specifics in Battle, on a specific network. What I can say is that that

is exactly the sort of area where I would anticipate things getting

better in the not too distant future. Thank you. We must leave it

there. John Cooke, there. It does not really sound like Mandy has got

much hope. Amber, what would your advice be? I think you know Mandy.

Yes, she runs a very successful business. Your interviewer said the

good news is Battle is exactly the sort of place where we would expect

a mast to be put up. The Government has put in thousands of pounds. The

last mast was putting ahead of schedule, so it is a bit early to

assess this. George Osborne may the pledge in 2011 to improve coverage

to 60,000 households. An awful lot of people are going to get left

out, and there are no detailed plans. I heard the same answer as

you and I got the impression that was wishful thinking. We have to

talk to the council and there are no impending plans for a mast hn

Mandy's area. It has only jtst started. This interview we has told

us it is a good place and there will be an application scene. He said it

is the sort of place where there might be improvements in thd future.

You are dismissing it too e`rly You are a former local journalist.

People would rather have a last now than not have them, wouldn't they? I

think there is still concern in some quarters about the impact of another

phone mast that we have the support of our communities to get those

mobile phone masts up there. I know for a fact that in Amber Rudd's

constituency there is poor coverage. How can you encourage

local companies to grow when they can't even get a signal? I thought

he was saying that there is still time to improve things. The

Government is behind in its schedule. There are two`year delays,

and you have mucked up for G coverage. Of come are playing a

role. We have to take into consideration the fact that

taxpayer's money is in play here. We have to make sure it is spent it

economically. You could takd some of the money kept for the citids and

put it into rural areas. No point robbing Peter to pay Paul. The first

one at the end of last year was ahead of schedule. But you `re

talking about March next ye`r. You are never going to meet that

schedule! We will have you back on. It is one of the things most of our

politicians agree on. We nedd to build more houses, particul`rly in

the South East, where demand is so high, but how to do this and

crucially where is rather more divisive. Last week Deputy Prime

Minister Nick Clegg said David Cameron must be honest and tpfront

about Government plans to btild two new garden cities, one could be in

Kent. It is an old concept. Here is a history lesson.

Garden cities sprang from the late Victorian arts and crafts movement,

a reaction to the sprawling urban squalor of industrialism by

returning to nature. Ebenezdr Howard had a vision of utopian

self`sufficient communities for whom the natural landscape was

complemented by spacious, wdll planned settlement. His deshgns were

pioneered at Letchworth. I `m standing in Milton Keynes,

Britain's newest city. Soon came the new towns like Milton Keynes and

Stevenage which sought to rdlieve the cities of the expanding

populations. As well as relocating those whose homes were bombdd during

World War II. These were social projects as much as building

projects. They were aimed at changing lifestyle as well `s

housing provision. So whethdr or not a modern garden city would confirm

to Ebenezer Howard's radical original vision remains to be seen,

but could a modern version of this 20th`century idea be the answer to

housing needs of today? Let's find out the answer to that

question. Joining us now from our studio in London is Ricky Btrdett, a

professor and expert in London planning `` in urban planning at the

London School of economics. Could garden cities be the answer to the

housing crisis? Any form of redevelopment is something we need

to look at. We cannot keep ht the way it is, because we cannot `` but

we cannot look back on something that worked 100 years ago and think

that is the solution today. Those garden cities were to get away from

congestion, pollution, overcrowding of the industrial city. That is not

the problem today. Today we have a lot of extra space, even in London,

if you think of the Thames, Gateway. Why go and build new stuff out on

the edges of the city when we still have opportunities close to hand?

Why is everybody frightened of building in the countryside? There

is heaps of land in the South East and it cannot all be agricultural

land. We have an understandhng of sustainability and the environment

now. Everyone understands that if you reduce the need for people to

sit in a car and commute maxbe half an hour, and our day, you c`n walk

or take public transport to go to work or school or hospital, that

must be a good thing. So given that there is a lot of space left in some

of our cities, particularly the South East, why go and encroach on

the countryside, which is going to take valuable land away frol nature

when we can use a lot of thd Brownfield land which is wahting for

us? But if you use the Brownfield sites and infill, you add to the

existing towns and cities. Doesn't that just cause congestion on

existing roads, more compethtion for school places and doctors

appointments? That is where planning comes in. We know we have to plan

cities well. There is not overcrowding on the streets or in

the non`central parts of London and other cities in the South E`st. That

is not the problem. The real issue is that if you start putting people

way out on the edges on thehr own, not only do you not even have access

to hospitals because there `re no hospitals there, you do not have

access to public transport because there is no public transport there,

you actually run the risk of creating debtors of communities

which are out on their own, and all they are our homes. You might solve

the House prices, but you do not create a community. `` you light

solve the housing crisis. That is the key issue. Some interesting

points that we can put to the politicians in the studio. The

politicians have got it wrong, Simon. If you ask an expert, the

last thing we should be doing is building new cities, and yet this is

what Ed Miliband promised in his latest conference speech, a

generation of garden cities and towns. Has he got it wrong? No, he

hasn't. The professor was rhght we should look at filling in Brownfield

sites first. Ed Miliband has made that commitment of new housds built

by 2020. We need that. I have been speaking to so many people

struggling to get on the hotsing ladder or even pay rent in Dartford

and elsewhere in the South Dast Brownfield sites first and then we

need to make sure the infrastructure is in place. Too often, devdlopers

are sitting on land. We need to say to them, no, you use it or lose it.

Brownfield sites in alone are not going to create enough spacd. We

have been told we need more. I think the answer is to provide a sort of

smorgasbord of different options. What was so interesting frol the

professor is that there is lore awareness and planning about homes

and community. I have heard the Secretary of State talk abott God

and settlements, so not shrhnk to garden cities, in areas that are

half Brownfield, half town. Not necessarily in the middle of cities.

We should be looking at garden settlements, Brownfield, and new

areas. We need a solution that covers all these areas. But one of

the difficulties is what thd planning authorities say. I have

spoken to one authority on BBC Radio Kent and they say there is no way

they will endorse a new garden city. How do you get around that? I

do not think either of you have an idea about how you get around the

fact that this is what you need but it may not be what local authorities

are going to be able to sell to the people who live there. You have to

work with them, sit down with several local authorities, not just

one. To have one in Yalding as you mentioned makes no sense. You need

to sit down with a number of authorities and say, what are the

incentives, what infrastructure do you need, and then you start

planning. Amber Rudd, what to pick up on this thought about wh`t people

think in this country. The professor said there is no overcrowding but I

will tell you people phone hnto the radio show saying over and over

again, we are full. Until politicians are really honest and

say that is not true, we nedd to change that narrative, you `re never

going to persuade people to accept these development is. You are right,

we need to explain to peopld why it is needed. It is not just about

immigration, it is about falilies and children. There is one Local Rd

currently being built which will provide a site for 2000 new homes.

And that is planning permission that was granted, so authorities will

work with you sometime. The other events this week: No

fracking in Balcombe is the promise of energy firm Cuadrilla.

Protesters there are concerned the company is still planning other

means of oil extraction. ?NDWLINE In Margate man has been charged with

assaulting Nigel Farage. Thd UKIP leader was hit over the head during

this fracas, with a placard. 28,000 homes were left without power

in Kent during recent storms. Pulled before the Energy Select Colmittee,

energy bosses were accused of a complacent response. You displayed a

neglect for your customers which I personally find absolutely

astonishing. But thank you `ll for coming in.

Meanwhile, a Kent County Cotncil report has admitted that although

its response to the storms was first`class, it still needs a better

flood plan. Making his own weather forecast MP

Simon Kirby responded to a TKIP councillor who blamed the storms on

legalised same`sex marriage by saying the future's bright for the

city's gay community. The wdather in Brighton is nearly always vdry

sunny. CHEERING. It would only be fair if Brighton Kemptown w`s

actually put in place on thd shipping forecast.

That is it for this week. Mx thanks to our guests, Simon Thomson and

Amber Rudd. constituency, very pleased. Andrew,

back to you. UKIP leader Nigel Farage is never

far away from controversy, but this week he's been outdoing himself He

was hit over the head with a placard by a protester in Kent, provoked

outrage by saying women with children are worth less to city

firms, and said the ban on owning handguns was 'crackers'. He also

seemed less than sure of his party's own policies when I interviewed him

on the Daily Politics. And the story that got everyone talking was the

suggestion by a UKIP councillor that flooding is linked to gay marriage.

We'll talk about all of that in a moment, but first, over to Nigel

with the weather. Weather for all areas of the British Isles but

definitely not "Bongo Bongo Land." You may have heard about a storm in

a tea cup developed when you kip councillor in Oxfordshire blamed the

floods on the gay marriage Bill The old party is focusing on the view of

UKIP members like him, even though he had said a sell yuj of things

before when a Tory councillor. How quickly things change depending on

when the blouse. There are occasional barmy views by people of

all persuasions. In Whitby a Labour councillor claimed of fathered a

child with an extra terrorist ral, and said his real mother was a

foot green alien. And in Wales a councillor

thinking about heading off for the slopes, there were flurries of

embarrassment for the Tories after Aidan Burly organised a Nazi skiing

party in a resort. Anyone heading to Brussels, perhaps

on the gravy train, watch out for hot air.

In Britain temperatures are rising ahead of the European elections in

May. It could get stormy, so advise light aircraft. Watch out for

outbreaks of common sense, and no chance of cyclonic fruit cakes. Back

to you, Andrew, with the rest of the Sunday Politics.

Nick, if it was any other party that had bon through the past week it

would be in meltdown. And maybe it is harming UKIP and maybe it isn't.

What do you think? That just shows, that great weather forecast, Prince

Charles now has a rival to be an excellent weather forecaster, as

does the Duchess of Cornwall. It shows why Nigel Farage is the fefr

candidate to the European elections. Our invitation to the British people

to kick the establishment. The establishment have spent five years

that the European Parliament is a waste of time, so who are you going

to vote for? A Nigel Farage type of person. What was important about

your eadviceration of Nigel Farage on Daily Politics is that when it

came to the substance, they flounder. But the point about that

party is they may have the thinnest set of policies, but people know

what they stand for more than any other parties - get out of Europe, a

grammar school in every town. If any other leading politician called for

an end to the ban on handguns, at a time when we've seen these appalling

gun deaths in the United States now almost one every week in some

terrible siege in a school. It would be a crisis. It seems to wash off

him. He's got congenital foot-and-mouthitis. Straight into

another wild nothing to do with why people might vote UKIP. I don't

think people are desperate to have handgun licences back in this

country. It is such an unusual phenomenon, UKIP, that if this was a

Tory or a Labour or a Lib Dem saying it, we've seen the damage done to

the Lib Dems on a much more serious manner, we would say this is

terminal. But maybe it adds to this image that we are not like the other

parties. I think that is it. We keep waiting for these scandals and

embarrassments to do damage to UKIP's poll ratings, but it's not

working. It is ultimately because if you are an antiestablishment party,

if you are an anti-system party the rules of the game which apply to the

establishment parties don't apply to you. And the more ramshackle and

embarrassing you are, the more authentic you seem. It what be take

something for them not to finish second in May. Do they spend the

following 12 months sinking in the poll snoos And George Osborne's

strategy is fame everything as Labour versus the Conservatives The

electorate will have their fun in May. Maybe the Tories will be beat

into third place but in thejection is that -- but in the general

election it is Labour versus the Tories. The Conservative Party will

run around, 46 letters to Graham Brady, a leadership contest. That

sort of scenario. UKIP, if it rules well in the European elections,

could cause big trouble for Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg couldn't it?

The big point about this, David Cameron said this is not a political

party but a pressure group. This is the way to look at UKIP, and the way

it is used by people in the right of the party, who say we have to do

this. I like the policy of painting the trains in their old liveries. It

would be like my old train set. I like the bigger passports.

Pre-GNER... And London and Midland. I used to be a train spotter.

Gordon Birtwhistle has been on the phone. Good to know you are watching

but pity you are not here. He wanted to clarify he had constituency

commitments to prevent him coming on the show to talk about becoming

leader of the party, but he didn't dispute anything we said on the

show. Yesterday, Ed Balls said that

housing investment will be a central priority for the next Labour

Government. It's a big issue, as the lack of new homes pushes up the the

price of owning or renting. Well, tomorrow the Tories will announce

what they say is the most ambitious programme of affordable

housebuilding for 20 years. The Government sees housing as a really

important part of the economy. That's why we are announcing a 23

billion package for 165,000 new affordable homes. So individual

builders, councils, housing associations can bid for that money.

Phase one, which we are halfway through at the moment, we've built

170,000 houses. 99,000 already coming out of the ground, so we ve

made real progress on that. So, 165,000 new, affordable homes. It is

a lot. Let me add three more words. Over three years. It is not such a

lot. It is not, and Labour's commitment is 200,000 homes a year

and even that isn't enough. The problem here is that the vest

interest is with people who already have homes. They have a vote in the

system through the planning regulations. In London there is a

gap in the hedge through Richmond Park through which you should be

able to see St Paul's Cathedral That's why you cannot build homes

where you want them. I don't think we want to build homes over Richmond

Park. He wasn't saying that. That's dies an Tyne -- that's Byzantine.

You've got to deal with supply, which is why Labour is talking about

200,000 a year, and what George Osborne has done with supply is

helping with demand. We know the Help to Buy Scheme is pretty

dangerous, and Mark Carney is keen to put the break on that. If you are

to deal with supply, you have to do radical things. Chris Huhne talked

about on brownfield sites you can tax people who are holding the land

as if the development has taken place. Then if you are really going

to deal with it you have to talk about the greenfield sites, and you

have to deal with the garden cities argument, which is too much for the

Tories. All the parties seem to agree building new houses is a

political winner. I hope that they are right. I'm not sure they are.

The housing market is the example of what economists call the insider

in-outsider problem. People who are already homeowners have no rational

incentive to vote for more housing stock. Even if you leave aside the

Conservative arable objections, if you are a homeowner there is an

interest to stick with the planning promise that we have. So then we are

stuck between a rock and a hard place. Not only are we growing at

the moment but our population is growing. I've seen projects that in

quite quickly we will overtake Germany and become the largest

populated country in Europe. If that's the case we've got to build

homes. We have. If you look at Tower Hamlets in London, the population is

r ging higher than the number of dwelling. Classically the theory's

been young people are most affected by this and they don't vote much.

But when their parents have young Johnny stuck at home at 37, that's

an electoral issue. That's why the garden cities project is

interesting, because they finance themselves. You zone it for

development, it is worth ?2 million an acre and then you can build on

it. But who is going to want the greenfield sites gone. And how

quickly can we build garden cities today? Some were started before the

Town and Country Planning Act. I've read stats about the way Chinese and

Japanese are building houses and they were slower than that. Here's a

thought, sticking on the housing theme. Ed Miliband came up with the

energy freeze, a populist interventionist move. Then the use

it or lose it to land developers. Then breaking up the banks. Now the

50p tax rate. How much would you put on Labour coming up for rent

controls? That's already a big split. They are split already on it.

They have. In London it is a popular policy. It might not play well in

the rest of the country. I would say 50-50 on that. I think Labour

supporting rent controls like the Tories having a go at welfare. The

policy may be individually popular but it sends an impression about the

party which might be less attract active. It confirms underlying

suspicions that vote these guys into power and suddenly they are

tampering with the private economy. The memories of the '70s when

Governments tried and failed to do that. It is riskier than a

superficial reading of the polls would suggest. One to watch? I think

they are looking at it. That was the key message of the Ed Balls speech

on housing, is looking at supply and how you get to that 200,000 figure a

year, which is substantially more than what Kris Hopkins is talking

about. What we didn't get to talk about, remember we had Michael

Wilshaw on, the Chief Inspector of Schools. We all consumed was Mr

Gove's man, the Education Secretary's man. Now according to

the Sunday Times he is spitting blood about the way Mr Gove and his

office are speaking about him behind the scenes. We've checked the quotes

and he stands by them, so I think we'll have to have the head of

Ofsted back on the programme. If you are watching, we're here. All that

to the Lib Dems who didn't come on today.

That's all for today. Thanks to all my guests. The Daily Politics is

back on Monday at midday on BBC Two, and I'll be here again next week.

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

Britain, with 120,000 soldiers is now at war with Germany

This would be the first truly modern war.

and resolve of entire populations against each other.

A war that would turn the country upside down.