16/02/2014 Sunday Politics South East

Good morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. It would be

extremely difficult, if not impossible, for an independent

Scotland to join the European Union, so says the President of the

European Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, in a significant

development in the independence debate. It's our top story. He has

the power to bring travel chaos to the nation's capital. Bob Crow

joined us for the Sunday interview. Another by-election and

joined us for the Sunday interview. Coming up later: From the C`nterbury

and Yalding to the Sussex coast communities across the region have

felt the impact look at his decisions and priorities

with the help of his chief of staff. With me, the best and brightest

political panel in the business The twits will be as incessant and

probably as welcome as the recent rain. A significant new development

in the debate over Scottish independence this morning, the

President of the European Commission, President Jose Manuel

Barroso, has confirmed what the Nationalists have long denied, that

an independent Scotland would have to reply to join the European Union

as a new member, that it would require the agreement of all 28

member states and that would be in his words, extremely difficult, if

not impossible. In case there is a new country, a new state coming out

of a current member state, it will have to apply and, this is very

important, the application to the union would have to be approved by

all of the other member states. Countries like Spain, with the

secessionist issues they have? I don't want to interfere in your

democratic discussion here, but of course, it will be extremely

difficult to get the approval of all of the other member states, to have

a new member coming in from one member state. We have seen that that

Spain has been opposing even the recognition, for instance, so it is

a similar state. It is a new country. I believe it is great to be

externally difficult, if not impossible. Well, he says he doesn't

want to interfere, but he has just dropped a medium-sized explosive

into the debate on Scottish independence? A huge story. Alex

Salmond must be wondering what is going to go wrong next. His pitch to

the Scottish people is based on two things, the currency union with

England and the rest of the United Kingdom, which was blown apart last

week, and this morning, his claims that Scotland would automatically

get into the European Union has been dynamited. He's not only saying that

they would have to apply, it is also saying it might be impossible to get

the agreement of all 28 members to allow Scotland in. That's even more

significant than the application? The reference to Spain is

interesting, we talk about Catalan independence, an economic and active

area that Spain does not want to be independent. About five other

countries are blocking Kosovo's accession to the EU. There is no

reason they would want to encourage the secessionist in their country by

letting Scotland do the same. If Scotland does have to apply, and it

does get in, it solves the currency problem because all new members have

to accept the Euro? At the moment, the SNP are rejecting that quite

strongly. What an interesting intervention today. However, I know

that those arguing that Scotland should stay in the union are worried

that the polls are tightening. A lot of these interventions, parents care

arguments, they don't look like they are convincing the Scottish people.

We haven't had any polls yet? We haven't, but we have since the

currency debate was reignited in the last few weeks and it shows the

polls tightening slightly. I think Alistair Darling's campaign would

prefer to be much further ahead at the stage. They are worried that

these technical commandments are not having much sway. Are the polls

tightening slightly? They could be within the statistical margin for

error. They are, but not much. Alex Salmond's main page is one of

reassurance. He wants to say you can vote for independence, a pound in

the pocket will be the same as before and you will still be a

member of the European Union. In the last three or four matter days, both

of those claims have been blown apart. Angus MacNeil has already

told BBC Radio 5 Live that the remarks are nonsense and he is

playing more politics. We hope to speak to the SNP's finance minister,

John Swinney, a little bit later in the programme. It is not just the

constant rain that London commuters have had to deal with. There was

also a strike on the tube that disrupted the travel of millions. A

second stoppage was on the cards, but it was called off at the last

minute. The leader of the biggest

underground workers union, the RMT, is Bob Crow, who has led his members

into 24 strikes on the tube since 2005, as well as disputes on the

national rail network. Under his leadership, the union's membership

has grown from 57,000 in 2002 to more than 80,000, at a time when

union membership overall has been shrinking. The current dispute has

seen Bob Crow squaring up to Boris Johnson over the mayor's plans to

close tube station ticket offices. The 48-hour stoppage at the

beginning of this month is estimated to have cost the London economy ?100

million. The two sides have agreed a truce, for now, but Mr Crow has

threatened further action if the mayor imposes his changes.

Bob Crow joins me now for the Sunday interview.

Welcome to the Sunday Politics. You have suspended the strike for the

moment. What will it take to call it off entirely? Want to know first of

all wider booking office has to close. The Mayor of London made it

quite clear in his election programme that the booking offices

would remain open. It was strange, really, because Ken Livingstone

wanted to close them down and the mayor thought it was popular to keep

them open and put in his campaign to keep them open. However, we have not

the news figures. We are being told only 3% of people use the booking

offices. That's not true. In research done, if somebody does to a

booking office with somebody sitting there and asks for a ticket of less

than ?5, they are not allowed to sell them a ticket, it is madness.

Do you use the ticket office? When it is open, yes. You said to ITV

that he didn't. I don't know what I said to ITV, I don't know what time

people use them, sometimes they are open and sometimes they are closed.

People make out that these ticket office staff are people that sit

behind barriers like a newsagent. I'm not knocking a newsagent,

however, these people were the same people treated like Lions when they

were helping people named in the terrorist incidents, taking them out

of the panels. Suddenly they are lazy people that sit in ticket

offices. My understanding is that the people would come from behind

and be out and about now. It is the management wants to run the

underground without ticket offices, isn't that their prerogative? They

are paid to manage, not you, not your members, they are the managers?

Managers are there to manage, and we want good managers. But we've got

some really bad managers that are not looking at the railway as a

whole. This is a successful industry, not an industry in

decline, one of the most successful in Britain. It is moving 3.4 million

people a day. All of the forecast is or it will move to 3.6 million per

day. The mayor wants to run services on a Friday and Saturday night. We

are not opposed to that. However, it does not make sense that if more

people are going to be using the tube on Friday and Saturday, coming

home at two o'clock three o'clock in the morning, a lot of people

drinking, a lot of people not dragging, why take 1000 people of

the network that come to the aid of people that are looking to people? I

want to show you this picture. This is you. Taking a break in Brazil, I

think it is. I was trying to copy you. You deserve this break because

you have done a fantastic job for your members. Yes, I don't see what

that has got to do with it. Let s get every editor of the daily

newspapers and see where they go on their holidays, I would like to

know. What I choose to do... I'm not attacking you for doing that...

You've got a picture up there, I've got to say, why don't they go and

follow Boris Johnson when he was away on holiday, when the riots were

taking place in London, and he refused to come back? Why don't they

go and view the editors of newspapers, where they go on

holiday? Why do they look at you when you go on holiday? They

sometimes do, actually. The basic pay of a tube driver will soon be

?52,000. Ticket office workers are already earning over ?35,000. Never

mind a holiday on Copacabana beach, or membership by your house for what

you have done for them? When you look at the papers this morning I

see that Wayne Rooney is going to get a ?70 million deal over the next

four deals. I see NHS doctors are getting ?3000 a shift. I see a lot

of people that do a lot of people that, in my opinion, don't do

anything for society. The top paid people in this country should be

doctors and nurses. Unfortunately, we live in a jungle. If you are not

strong, the bosses will walk all over you. The reason why we got good

terms and conditions is because we fought for them. The reality is all

of these three political parties, liberals, Tories and Labour, they

have all put no programme that to defend working people. So we have to

do it on our own. And that is why you have done such a great job for

your members and why union membership has been rising, people

want to be part of a successful operation. But it has come at a cost

for less well-paid workers, who travel on the cheap? If everyone

believes if London Underground tube workers take a pay freeze they are

going to redistribute the money to the rest of the workers that work on

the cheap... But the people that travel on the tube, let's look at

some of them, they are the ones that suffer from your strike action. The

starting salary of a cheap driver now, ?48,000. The starting salary

for a nurses only ?26,000, ?22, 00 for a young policeman, ?27,000 for a

teacher starting out. As your members have spread, they have had

to live through 24 strikes in 1 years to push up your members

wages. It's I'm all right Jack? The have put a pay freeze on by

conservatives and liberals. The police constables, so have the

teachers. We have had the ability to go and fight. The reality is, at the

end of the day, as I have said before, no one is going to put up

the cause for workers. Not one single party in parliament are

fighting the cause for workers. They all support privatisation, they all

support keeping the anti-trade union laws, they all support illegal wars

around the world. Unless they have a fighting trade union, our members

pay would be as low as some others. You said we could not care less if

we have 1 million strikes. But these people, the lower paid people who

travel on the tube, who need it as an essential service, they care Of

course they care, I've said before that I apologise to the troubling

public for the dispute that took place. 24 strikes in 13 years? It

two to tango. If the boy never imposed terms and conditions on us

against our will... But you've got great terms and conditions! But it's

a constant battle, they are trying to change them. Drivers are having

their pay going up to ?50,000. You said they are making it worse, it is

going up. They are trying to make things worse for workers. You said

at the start of the interview that the tube strike cost ?100 million in

two days. It means that when members go to work for two days it is worth

?100 million. That demonstrates what they are worth. Only a fighting

trade union can defend workers out there. Your members should enjoy

what you have got for them, because it's not going to last, is it?

Technology will change the whole way your business operates. As Karl Marx

says, you said I was a mixture of Karl Marx, Only Fools And Horses and

the Sopranos. I thought that was quite funny... The Karl Marx part of

it, the only thing that is constant is change. We have been crying out

for new technology. But for who To put people on the dole, so they

can't do anything and do anything for society, or technology so

everybody benefits, lower fares better service and better terms and

conditions for the workers. But you have made Labour so expensive on the

underground that management now has a huge incentive to substitute

technology for Labour. And that s what it's going to do, it is closing

the ticket offices and very soon, starting in 2016, the driverless

trains coming. What I am saying is that your members should enjoy this

because it's not going to last. Driverless trains are not coming

in, it is not safe. We have them in Nuremberg, Shanghai, Sao Paulo, it

is not safe? These are new lines that have been built so that when it

breaks down, people can get out of the tunnel. Would you want to be

stuck on a summers day on the Northern line? A pregnant woman who

cannot get off the train? Absolute panic that takes place, the reality

is simple, it is a nonsense. It s not going to happen because it is a

Victorian network. On Docklands railway for example it is driverless

but when the train breaks down, it is above ground on a very small

section. All of these other cities managed to have it. You remind me

about Henry Ford in the 1930s when he said, you see that robot over

their, he cannot buy a car. All sorts of new jobs are being created

all the time in other areas. Come back to the ticket offices, not many

people use the ticket offices any more, what is wrong with getting the

stuff out of the ticket office on to the concourses, meeting and

greeting, helping disabled people and tourists and making it a better

service? They can do more on the concourse than they can in the

ticket office. Andrew, he took the decision to close down every single

ticket office. You cannot compare for example Chesham with the likes

of Heathrow. Are you telling me people are going to be on a long

transatlantic flight, arrived at Heathrow and cannot get a ticket.

The stuff will be redeployed on the concourse. The simple problem is

that it is not just about the booking office, it is about people

having a visual. If you are partially sighted, you cannot use

the machines. If British is not your first language, you cannot use the

offices. How many languages do your members speak? I don't know, I

struggle with English. The machines can speak many different languages.

They are dehumanising things. You phone the bank, all you hear is

press one for this, two for that. People want to hear it human being

and what makes the London Underground so precious is that

people want to see people. Having well-dressed, motivated people out

on the concourse, what part of that don't you like? They will be on the

concourse and they will have machines. The fact is that London

Underground did a risk assessment of closing down their booking offices

and it is clear that if you are disabled, if you are partially

sighted, London Underground becomes more dangerous. You are posing the

closing of ticket offices, opposing driverless trains, when you opposed

to the Oyster card when it came in? No, Oyster cards, it is how you deal

with it. It is not the only way They should supplement the staff and

the job. If more people used the London Underground system, you want

more staff to deal with them. Let's look at your mandate to strike. Of

your members who work on the Tube, only 40% bothered to vote. Only 30%

voted for the strike, so 70% actually didn't vote to strike of

your members, but the strike went ahead. Isn't it right to have a

higher threshold before you can cause this disruption? It would be

lovely if everyone voted but the Tories took that away. We used to

have ballots at the workplace. What I'm trying to say to you is that we

used to have a ballot box at the workplace and the turnouts were

higher. The Tories believe that if they can have a secret ballot where

ballot papers went to people's home addresses, where they could be

persuaded by the bosses, votes would be different. Let's go back to the

workplace ballot because you get a bigger turnout. Will the RMT

re-affiliate to the Labour Party? I have no intention to. We got

expelled from the Labour Party. But you will give some money to the

Labour councils? Those that support our basic policies get money, we

don't give money directly to MPs, we give it to constituencies. Are you

going to stand for re-election in 2016? I might do, I might not. You

haven't decided yet? No, but more than likely I will do. And will you

stand again as an anti-EU candidate? Yes, I am standing in London, and

right across, completely different to UKIP's policies. They are

anti-European, they believe all of the faults of Europe are down to the

immigrants. We are anti-European Union. If London Underground is as

badly run as you think, why don t you run for mayor? That is down the

road, it has not come up yet. I m not ruling anything out. I'm not

ruling out getting your job on the Sunday Politics. You have got to

retire as well, you have got to put your feet up. I will get you to

renegotiate my package. Shall we go on strike first? If I could have

your wages, I would have two trips to Rio every year. Good luck. And if

you're in the London region they'll have more on the Tube strike later

in the programme. Let's get back to those comments from Jose Manuel

Barroso, and reaction to these comments from John Swinney. Scottish

Nationalists denied all along you would have to reapply, we have now

heard it without any caveats, you will and you might not get in. I

think Jose Manuel Barroso's comments were preposterous this morning. He

compared the situation to the one in Kosovo. Britain is the member,

Scotland is not the member. If you go independent, you will have to

reapply, he says. All of the arrangements we have in place are

compatible with the workings of the European Union because we have been

part of it for 40 years. The propositions we put forward work

about essentially negotiating the continuity of Scotland's membership

of the European Union and that position has now been explained and

debated and discussed and reinforced by comments made by experts. We are

talking about the president of the European commission and we have

spoken to him since he gave that interview on the BBC this morning,

it was an intervention that he made that he wanted to lay out that

Scotland should be in no doubt that if they vote for independence they

will have to apply for European membership and they may not get it

if it is vetoed by other members. What he didn't say is that no state

of the European Union have indicated they would veto Scottish

membership. The Spanish foreign minister has. They have said that if

there is an agreed process within the UK that Scotland becomes an

independent country, then Spain has got nothing to say about the issue.

That indicates to me clearly that the Spanish government will have no

stance to take on the Scottish membership of the European Union

because it is important that Scotland is already part of the

European Union, our laws are compatible with the European Union

and we play our part. The only threat to Scotland's participation

in the European Union is the potential in/out referendum that

David Cameron wants to have in 017. It has not been a great week for

you, has it? Everything you seem to want, the monetary union, that has

been blown out of the water by the Westminster parties, now Jose Manuel

Barroso has said you will have to reapply to the European Union, it

has not been a good week. You will follow the debate closely, and the

Sunday newspapers are full about the backlash taking place within

Scotland at the bullying remarks of the Chancellor and his cohorts. Is

Jose Manuel Barroso a bully is well now? He is making an indirect

comparison between Scotland and Kosovo. If you vote for independence

and you do have two apply again to join, if you do get in it solves

your currency problem because you will have to accept the euro. We

have set out an option on the currency arrangements which would be

to establish the currency union You would have to adopt the euro. That's

not rate because you have to be part of the exchange-rate mechanism for

two years before you can apply for membership and an independent

Scotland has no intention of signing up to the exchange rate mechanism or

the single currency. We are concentrating on setting out our

arguments for maintaining the pound sterling, which is in the interests

of Scotland and the UK. Thank you for joining us this morning.

This week's least surprising news was that Labour won the safe seat of

Wythenshawe and Sale East in a by-election, following the death of

the MP Paul Goggins. With the result so predictable, all eyes were on

whether this would be the sixth time this parliament that UKIP would come

second. And whether they'd chip away at Labour's vote, not just the

Tories and the Lib Dems. Adam stayed up all night to find out what it all

meant. Forget the hype. Forget the theorising. And yes - everyone has a

theory. UKIP are learning from us. What have they picked up from you?

To be silly. Thanks to this week's by-election we've got some hard

evidence in paper form that helps answer the question: How are UKIP

doing? Turns out the answer is well, but not well enough to beat Labour.

I'm therefore claim -- declare that Mike Cane is elected. So UKIP have

come second and increased their share of the vote quite

significantly. But their performance isn't as good as their performances

in some of the other by-elections this parliament. Just don't suggest

to them that their bandwagon has ground to a halt. A week ago you'd

told me you were going to win, what happened? No, I didn't, I said I

wanted to win. My mistake. How are you feeling? It is a Labour

stronghold, we always knew it was going to be a fight. Labour were

running scared of letting us present our arguments. UKIP's campaign in

Wythenshawe didn't point to the right but to the left, with leaflets

that branded Labour as a party of millionaires who didn't care about

the working class. It wasn't a winning strategy but it did help

them beat the Tories who focused on dog mess and potholes instead.

Professional UKIP-watcher Rob Ford from Manchester Uni thinks they

could be on the right track. He s analysed the views of 5,000 UKIP

voters for a new book, which could confound the received wisdom about

the party. The common media image of the typical UKIP voter is a ruddy

faced golf club and -- member from the south-east of the UK and many

UKIP activists do resemble that stereotype to some extent, they do

pick up a lot of activists from the Conservative party, but UKIP voters

are older, more working class, more likely to live in Northern, urban

areas, and they are much more anti-system than anti-EU. And

they're precisely the voters that the Tory MP David Mowat needs if

he's to hold on to his narrow majority in the constituency just

down the road. Do you have a UKIP strategy in your seat? Our UKIP

strategy is to point out that if they want a referendum on if they

want to be in the EU or not, there is one way to get it, for the

Conservatives to form their next government and for me to be their

MP. UKIP could accidentally destroy what they want? I'm not sure it will

be accidental. People need to realise that if Ed Miliband is the

Prime Minister, there will be no referendum on the EU and UKIP may

have made their point but they would not have got their referendum. Over

at UKIP local HQ, it is tidying up time. Not helping, Nigel? I had

major surgery on the 19th of November and I am still weak as a

kitten. I can barely lift a pint with my right hand, it is as serious

as that. The answer is, Carreon chaps, you're all doing a very good

job. There will be carrying on to the European elections in May, which

will provide more evidence of if the UKIP and wagon is powering on or if

it is just parked. -- bandwagon With me now is the Conservative MEP

Vicky fraud and UKIP director of medication is Patrick O'Flynn. He

will also be a candidate in the upcoming European elections. You

came second in Manchester, but it was not a close second. -- Vicky

Ford. There is nothing that is a game changer? I think it is very

unusual for any insurgent party like the liberals used to be, to

actually win a safe seat of the opposition. Those shocks, going back

to Walkington etc, it tended to be winning seats against an unpopular

government. We did extraordinarily well in Wythenshawe. Labour

compressed the campaign down to the shortest possible time and maxed out

the postal vote. Whatever we think about Labour, they do have an

efficient machine, lots of union activists signed a lot of people

with a lot of know-how. It pushed you into third place and showed the

increasing irrelevance of the Tories in the North? Tory minded voters in

the North Sea more inclined to vote for UKIP than you? I think

by-elections are by-elections. The same day, we took a seat from Labour

in Birmingham. Well, that was a by-election as well, so we should

discount that as well. You should learn from them, and we need to look

forward to the elections in 201 . That is in May this year, when we

have a chance to really grab this change in Europe, grab this change

that we were talking about just now. You don't worry, particularly in the

north, if people want to vote against Labour your supporters are

drifting to UKIP? I think people vote UKIP in a European election and

they have done that for many years. They vote that because they want

change. The problem is, Patrick s party have had MEPs since 1999 and

they cannot deliver that change They can't because they don't have

seats in Westminster. It was on that video, the only way we are going to

get the change we want in Europe is to have that referendum and have the

renegotiation, and that means vote Tory. What do you say to that? Let's

get real, the Conservative Party has not won a Parliamentary majority in

22 years. But the only way you will get a referendum, if that is what

motivates you, and with UKIP it is, the only way it will be a referendum

on Europe in this country as if there is a majority Conservative

government at the next election And you could well stop that from

happening? I don't accept that. I believe, just as we forced David

Cameron and into a referendum pledge he explicitly ruled out making

before through our success, and I was there in PMQs, when his MPs

asked him and he said it would not be in the national interest because

he didn't want to leave, our electoral success forced that

pledge. I believe by winning the European action this May we can

force Ed Miliband, again, against his will, to match that pledge.

Then, whatever formulation varies in the next Parliament, we will get a

referendum. Labour MPs have just had the chance to say we want a

referendum. They refused to do it. The only way you are going to get a

renegotiation, a change in our relationship with Europe and an in

or out referendum is to have a Conservative Government. Please

UKIP, stop pretending that you can deliver, because you don't deliver

and you don't... We have delivered, we forced David Cameron to give a

pledge for a referendum he didn t want to make. We will know if you

are right about Ed Miliband or not, you will have to tell us going into

the campaign. If you are wrong, what do you do then? There are still

loads of reasons for people to vote UKIP. A referendum is one thing

David Cameron, and I asked him directly, thermally wants to stay

in. He wants to be the Edward Heath of the 21st century. The Tories are

going to say, vote UKIP, get Ed Miliband. What would you say to

that? I would say we have probably maxed out the Tory vote we are going

to get because David Cameron has been incredibly helpful in sending

them in our direction. Our potential for growth now, would we are

concentrating on, his those disenchanted former Labour voters

and more and more of them are coming towards us on things like

immigration and law and order. We want to renegotiate our relationship

with Europe. We need to have people who are going to turn up to

negotiate with people like Barroso. That meant a Prime Minister that is

not Ed Miliband but David Cameron. UKIP MEPs do not turn up to

defenders. If President Hollande is as good as his word and says there

will be no substantial renegotiation, certainly no treaty

change this side of 2017 when he is up for the election, what do you do

then? He is a French Socialist Prime Minister, I don't expect him to

agree. But you can't bring anything of substance back with these

negotiations. Then people will vote to leave. The Prime Minister has

been very clear that British public opinion is on a knife edge and

unless we get what we want from a renegotiation, we will leave. You

would vote to leave? Let's see what we get with the deal on the table in

2017. If the status quo was what we have today, I would vote to leave.

But I want to renegotiate. We will have to move on. For those viewers

lucky enough to live in the East of England, they will be seeing more of

Patrick in a moment. You are watching Sunday Politics. Coming up

in just over 20 minutes, I will be talking about, what else, the

weather, with our political This is the Sunday Politics in the

South East. Coming up later: They come for a good time, `nd fuel

the local economy, so what does Brighton and Hove City Council hope

to achieve by turning its attention to the party`houses where the hens

and stags stay? We have a wdalth of journalistic experience in our

studio today. Joining us ard two reporters who are very familiar with

their respective patch in the south east. Tim Ridgway is Head of News

for Brighton's Latest TV Colpany, which will start broadcasting later

this year. He is also a coltmnist for the Argus where he was the

political correspondent for several years. And Paul Francis is the

Political Correspondent for Kent Online and writes for the Kdnt

Messenger. Welcome to you both. Before we move on to our mahn

discussions, there really is just one issue that's dominated this

week, the weather. From the Canterbury and Yalding to the Sussex

coast, communities across the region have felt the impact of the wettest

winter in living memory. But when the waters recede, will we have a

different approach to where we build new homes? Concern has been

expressed by some ` including the Sussex MP Nick Herbert ` th`t too

many homes are being built on flood plains. When asked whether

inappropriate development h`d made flooding worse, here's what Eric

Pickles had to say. I did look very carefully at the

figures with regard to the building weather was an acute risk of

flooding. I'm delighted to tell you that the amount of buildings on at

risk areas is at an all`timd low. I am also pleased to say that further

been objections from the environmental agency they h`ve been

adhered to in 99.3% of occasions. Is Eric Pickles right? He had ` good

word to say about the Environment Agency which is interesting. The

problem has always been in the South East region the tension between

protecting countryside and building the right number of affordable homes

in order to have people herd who can fuel the South East economy. The

Conservatives are very keen on protecting the countryside. Their

politicians are in control of rural shires. They are arguing th`t the

new planning and policy fralework means houses are being built in a

sustainable way, but the top`down targets from government are putting

pressure on local councils. The reason the government introduced a

new planning framework was to get rid of the top`down targets and to

see to local communities, you know best, you can set the target and

we'll do our best. Where we don t agree, we will try to see some

middle ground. The wider issue of flooding generally, I think people

are probably expecting too luch from the government. They say thd

government should be doing this and dredging rivers and stopping the

planning process, but the government only has a minimal amount of money

and they cannot control the weather. The public to realise that. In terms

of local planning decisions, where is the pressure coming from? Do you

think the developers have some power when it comes to what gets the

go`ahead? The government is saying that councils can decide wh`t is

appropriate. They have taken that on board. At the same time, thdy are

aiming to safeguard the envhronment and protect the countryside. We all

know that housing is in desperate shortage. We have this tenshon in

the region. The need for hotses and the fierce need to protect the

environment. What do you thhnk will change as a result of the floods? I

think there will be a flash in the pan and in a couple of months' time

people will forget about it and move onto the next thing. Housing is a

key issue. In Brighton and Hove the council have taken a stance and said

they need to find linking toes and homes. If they cannot find that

number, they will settle for 11 500. I think other councils will need to

come to a compromise. There is talk of secret plans for a garden city in

our region. Do you think anxthing will change? Councils will have to

take on board more seriouslx the issues around the impact of

potential flooding when it comes to decisions about housing devdlopment.

The idea of a garden city is frankly preposterous. I think there will

always be this tension betwden those who want to see more houses because

they are aware that if you have a growing economy you need solewhere

for people to live, and I think that will still be the main issud.

It is becoming as tradition`l as cutting the cake or throwing the

bouquet ` the hen and stag do. And it's big business in Brighton and

Hove with many groups staying in rented accommodation known `s party

houses. But they are getting a bad reputation in the city. Somd

residents blame them for nohse and anti`social behaviour. For their

part, the rental companies running the properties point to the hard

work they put in to ensuring there is no disruption. Now the council is

looking at the issue too, as has our reporter.

Hen and stag parties are big business for Brighton, which

attracts eight million people a year and is one of the UK 's top

destinations for a prenupti`l knees`up with companies offdring

tailor`made weekend breaks. They arrange accommodation, often in the

so`called party houses. How many houses are like this in the city is

a disputed figure, but it is certainly over 100. People would

arrive, Thursday lunchtime, unpack their beer and barbecues and it

would start. Then we had thd naked butlers. And the women getthng

noisier and noisier. This woman lived next door to one last summer.

The property has now been sold and is privately owned. It is a

four`bedroom house and was advertised as sleeping 18. We had

incidents of people coming home late at night drunk and not able to find

their keys. Trying to climb over fences. Although it was nothing to

do with us, we could not get to sleep until we knew they were safe.

It was a dreadful nuisance `ll last summer. With concerns about noise,

anti`social behaviour and the regulation of the industry hn

general, Brighton and Hove Council launched a scrutiny panel to look at

the issue. They have many experts on the group. They aim to agred a

framework of best practice for the industry. Businesses organising

these weekends so they have already been successfully self`regulating

for years. This company brings in up to 600 hen and stag is each week

into Brighton. The owner fedls the industry is being demonised. I think

it is an easy target. It is the same picture that appears in the local

papers every time this is mdntioned. The same complaints are mooted time

and time and time again. I think we have been the gold standard for the

last five years. We did not have to wait for a scrutiny panel to get

this together. Property man`gement companies already meet regularly and

have formed an association. They say many of the houses are soundproofed

and most companies have sectrity or a noise patrol. I look after the

noise patrol during the weekend evenings, usually from 9pm tntil

6am. We have a telephone nulber that residents can call should they have

a problem. We probably get one or two calls in a month. Probably 0%

of those are noise complaints which are nothing to do with our

properties. 13% of the city 's economy comes from tourism. 330

million a year comes in and supports 7,000 jobs. It is a profitable

industry. All of that money is spent in Brighton. Businesses will pay

staff and it is great for the local economy. Unlike many British seaside

resorts, Brighton has a strong year`round economy which is growing

with big spending weekend vhsitors. The question is, can the city

currently afford to be pickx about who brings in the cash?

I'm joined now by Councillor Geoffrey Bowden, the chair of the

Scrutiny Panel on Brighton `nd Hove City Council that is currently

looking at the whole issue of these so`called party houses. How much of

a problem are party houses? Do they really merit a scrutiny pandl? I

wonder how much of a problel they really are. Do we really merit a

council scrutiny panel? This was prompted by a number of complaints

at local level. Some people say that we don't get noise complaints from

the council, but we only have two environment officers covering the

whole of the city working from 0pm until 3am on Friday night and

Saturday night. They have the whole of the city to cover. Some of the

evidence we heard from the first sitting of the panel from those who

live next water party houses said they don't bother worrying the

environmental health officers or phone the police. These things never

come up on the radar of the agents or the owners. People have given up.

We had evidence yesterday from someone who came to the scrttiny

panel who kept two years of noise diaries. A noise diary, when you're

being disturbed at 3am in the morning... Lots of residents in your

very busy and popular city has to put up with a lot of noise, not

least from the student population. There are 100 of these housds. I

know they are a problem in the Kent Town area, but are we talking about

a few middle`class voters who are complaining to you and does it

really merit this kind of attention? Are you demonising them? I was quite

surprised. When I put in a request to have a look at this to the

scrutiny panel and I copied all local councillors, I was intndated

with messages from councillors across the city. It's not jtst my

ward. We heard evidence frol the lady you spoke to who was rdferring

to a party house in leafy Roedeen. A chap sport was yesterday and has

four in his cul`de`sac. Thex are all over the place. The people who own

and manage these properties sound very responsible. They employ people

to monitor the noise. Of all the complaints they get, they s`id only

a fraction turn out to be bdcause of the party houses. This feelhng they

are being demonised, there hs a wider problem here of anti`social

Behaviour, and the party hotses are being demonised. The neighbours of

these houses would dispute that We don't want to demonise anyone.

There's no doubt that well operated properties that are not just

catering for him and stagnates, the short`term let market is a very

valuable asset in the portfolio for Brighton and Hove. 8% of all visitor

market use these types of properties. It's not in the

interests for them to be run poorly. This is your dilemma. You c`n't

afford to shut out that verx important stream of income. We don't

want to. What do you think xou can do as an authority to changd the

situation? We are shining a torch on this. Undoubtedly, there ard some

really first`rate operators. It was described yesterday as a grdy

tourist economy. You were t`lking about the housing crisis. These are

family homes that are turned over into moneymaking entities. Nothing

wrong with that at all, but there has to be some kind of regulation.

We had a legal officer talk to us yesterday who gave a person`l

opinion that the sort of regulation that houses of multiple occtpancy

use, that might be a model for looking at these. I was sitting next

to the fire officer from East Sussex Fire and rescue service who has been

working with agents for two years, looking at this. They have closed

down some operations which were frankly unsafe. We will get to a way

where hopefully those peopld from your package to talk about the way

they run things, that will become the model for everyone. Thank you.

How much of a problem do yot think the party houses are? I think there

are issues. There is a general issue about people forgetting where they

live. You live in cities and there is bound to be noise. There is bound

to be late`night disturbancds. That is one of the negatives of living in

a city like Brighton. I think this will go in peaks and troughs. Stag

and hen parties were big business in the 1980s and 90s. Perhaps we are

coming on the back up again after the downturn. Hopefully the council

will come up with some senshble suggestions to sort this out. This

is big business. But they nded to keep residents happy. Do yot think

there is anything that councils can do in this situation? The scrutiny

panel will come up with all sorts of frameworks, but probably wh`t they

need is more environmental officers. The key recommendation this panel

will make will be that you need more people to monitor the noise. These

guys come into the city for a weekend and go. It is unlikdly there

going to have effective control of the situation. It is diffictlt to

see what they can do against landlords or these companies. They

might want to look at powers that be have against those who organise

these events. Once, a council budget meethng might

elicit a few headlines and ` piece or two by local hacks like Paul and

Tim. But increasingly, with budgets squeezed and hard decisions about

which services to cut or kedp, they are now the source of huge debate

for councillors and voters `like. This week, many of our councils

across the South East finalhsed their budgets. Some, like Kdnt,

Surrey and East Sussex agredd an increase in council tax. With two

guests who are extremely faliliar with the inside of a council

chamber, let's chew over thd highs and lows. Tim, you've coverdd

Brighton for five years. Patl, you've covered local politics since

the 1990s. How many council meetings do you think you have attended in

your time? A fair few memor`ble ones and some many unmemorable ones. I

have not kept a tally. I have probably nodded off a few thmes

They are not always the most riveting occasions? Local ddmocracy

has its moments. There was `nother spectacular meeting in Brighton and

Hove. This week, the Greens suffered a defeat for their plans to increase

council tax by 5%. It has ldft Labour in a difficult posithon. He

have ended up voting in favour of austerity. Brighton and Hovd is a

unique situation. Labour have a large say in the way decisions are

made. When it comes to setthng the budget, the Greens want a 5$

increase in council tax, thd Tories who want a freeze and labour who

want to percent. Politicians are quite stubborn. The plans for the

rise from the Greens was 40 down by Labour and the Conservatives.

Chances are that a referendtm is unlikely. By doing that, thd Greens

have done very well politic`lly out of it has the have said two people,

we are fed up by austerity `nd we are going to try to take evdry

measure we can to challenge it. Many councils in our region are going for

a rise. Is this two fingers to Eric Pickles? I think this is a realistic

and pragmatic decision. Thex have been squeezed so much over the last

few years. The earnout `` they are now at a point where a council tax

rise is needed. If they are playing a political game, it is quite a

reckless scheme. The increases we are seeing are genuinely motivated.

Residents who have had a frdeze for three years don't like the hdea of

paying more for council tax. You have said Brighton and Hove will

always be a little different to other councils, but does it make the

meeting is more interesting than the have been in recent years?

Fascinating. The way the budget is set, it is almost like a gale of

chess. There is a lot of room to manoeuvre. It is fascinating to

cover from the benches. Our newspaper have done lots to get the

public involves. Are people getting more interested in council leetings?

Social media has helped as well I think there will always be ` sense

of antipathy, but there are some signs that people are getting more

engaged with it. And now it's time for some of the

other political stories you might have missed this week with James

Fitzgerald. Henry Smith expressed concern about

home`grown extremism after ht was claimed a British man suspected of a

suicide bombing in Syria was from Crawley. The UK Government `re right

to seek to prohibit all but official travel to Syria. 12 permanent

pitches will be set up in the South Downs National Park. A 15 foot

sinkhole opened up on the M2. Highways Agency spent much of the

week investigating. Carolind Lucas slot assurance that the Prile

Minister would heed the warnings of the Met office and his advisers who

warned that I'm an change whll lead to more such events in the future.

David Cameron dodged a question about removing people from his

cabinet who did not believe in climate change. We need to do

everything we can to improvd the resilience of our country.

That was the ultimate pothole! It was almost a metaphor for the black

hole in council budgets. Thdre is something fascinating about a

recall. `` about a big hole. All our councils

direction? No, in real terms now the rent is falling in London. Andrew,

back to you. Welcome back. Let's start by talking

about the weather. What could be more British? It has been

practically the only topic of conversation for the past few

weeks. This morning, Ed Miliband has made the direct link, declaims,

between this exceptionally wet and windy weather and climate change.

That's an interesting development, taking place. Ed Miliband is the

author of the 2008 Climate Change Act, so he has to stick to that line

or his life 's work goes up in smoke. When he passed it, there was

Westminster consensus. Now the Tories are beginning to appeal off.

UKIP has definitely peeled off. Labour and Lib Dems are sticking to

their guns, there is now a debate? It has moved from consensus to very

fragile consensus. It's an interesting tactic for Ed Miliband

to take. He could either approach the floods talking about government

failures and handling, instead he has gone for the intellectual

argument, try and turn this into a debate about ideology and climate

change. I think he will find that quite difficult. Partly, I don't

think the public I get listening to an argument like that. Partly

because only one in three of the public totally agree with him. The

polls for The Times think that about one in three think that man-made I'm

a change is responsible for these floods, the rest do not. I'm not

sure that the interventions will be particularly well picked up. It puts

David Cameron in a difficult position. He was hugging those

huskies, it was going to be the greenest Government ever, and now he

has an Environment secretary that doesn't really believe in climate

change. Well, we don't know where he stands. That is not where he was in

2010. It has always been sold to us that he is statesman-like and

pragmatic, but that drifts into he doesn't really believe anything

This is a worldwide phenomenon now. You've got the Canadian government,

they are pretty sceptical these days. The new Australian government

is pretty sceptical. The Obama administration has been attacked by

the green movement across the United States, he is probably about to

approve the keystone pipeline that will take over the Texas refineries.

What was a huge consensus across the globe is a guinea to break down

Probably started to break down about the time of the financial crisis,

the age of austerity, when suddenly people had more to worry about than

green issues. Even at home it is a slightly risky tactic for Ed

Miliband. The idea there is a scientific consensus on this, there

isn't. You look at Professor Collins this morning, climate systems

expert, saying, actually, the jet stream is not operating further

south because of climate change Or if it is, it is beyond our

knowledge. He flies in the face of what Ed Miliband as saying. He's

saying the wet weather is caused by global warming, the head of science

at Exeter University says the IPCC originally looked at whether climate

change could affect what happens to the jet stream and, because it had

no evidence it had any effect, it decided not to include it at all in

the IPCC report. The problem we have got is that any individual

phenomenon is difficult to attribute to climate change. But the Labour

Leader just have? And The Met Office have done the same thing. It's a

fragile in, but overall we can say we are getting more extreme weather

than ever. The most extreme weather, hurricanes and tropical storm is,

they have been in decline. Equally, we have had ten of the hottest

summers in the last ten years since 1998. Overall, there is a case that

can be made that we are getting more. Each individual thing is

difficult to say. Until recently, almost everyone agreed with that

case. Now the parties are reflecting differences. I wanted to move on,

what did you make of two interesting things that happened with the

interview with UKIP and the Tories, one Cory saying I am voting to come

out, and the UKIP chap saying we are maxed out on Tory defectors, we

can't get any more? I think that was a dangerous admission from Patrick

O'Flynn from UKIP, essentially saying that their vote has peaked.

Looking at the by-elections, I'm not sure that was a particularly wise

reflection on that. They got 18 , 23% last year. The case he is making

is that there are more votes to be gained by attracting former Labour

voters than former Tories. I'm not sure that red UKIP, the bit of UKIP

that tries to make benefit protection and some other kind of

social issues at the heart really sits comfortably with their

insurgent, anti-state message. I don't think it will do particularly

well. This is why they are pushing the message, it is their response to

the idea and suggestion of a Tory rallying cry that they vote for

Nigel Farage, and it is really a vote for Ed Miliband. Patrick is a

very good journalist, a very good commentator. He answered almost as a

commentator rather than head of communications for a political

party. The Government are still trying to rid itself of troublesome

priests, an attack on welfare reforms from the Catholic Archbishop

of Westminster. Let's have a look and see what he said. The basic

safety net that was there to guarantee that people would not be

left in hunger or in destitution has actually been torn apart. It no

longer exists. And it is a real real, dramatic crisis. The second is

that, in this context, the administration of social assistance,

I am told, has become more and more punitive. If applicants do not get

it right, they have to wait and they have to wait for ten days, two

weeks, with nothing. Has the basic safety net disappeared? I don't see

how it is possible to argue that. It is certainly the case that there

have been reductions in various benefits, some benefits have been

scrapped and there is a welfare reform programme. But this country

is still spending ?94 billion a year on working age benefits. Excluding

pensions? The idea that this equates to some sort of wiping out of the

safety net is... He has gone on a full frontal assault on the Tory

reforms, not the kind of attack that Labour would be prepared to make?

No, they know that it doesn't play very well in the country. He's not

up for election. Whether or not you agree about the safety net, I think

the welfare reforms have been poorly managed and I don't think that is a

full dispute. Universal credit, it is in some very long grass. It had

some stupid ideas, like the idea that it would be paid monthly,

instead of weekly, meaning that people are more likely to run out of

money by the end of the month. It's interesting, in the past, when

members of the cloth have attacked the government for welfare reforms,

the Government have responded by trying to paint them as lefties

ideological driven. I think that is hard in this case, an assault made

deliberately in the Telegraph from somebody who feels they come from a

centre-right position. I think there will be a bit of awkwardness about

this intervention. It is not the kind of thing they wanted to see. Is

it politically damaging for the Government? It is if it makes them

look mean-spirited. But that is the problem with welfare reforms. You

can say all sorts of things about Iain Duncan Smith's competence. But

the whole thing springs from a moral mission, as he sees it, to liberate

the poor and extend opportunity One of the worst moments for the Tories

was blaming the low level of voting in Wythenshawe and sale in the fact

that the constituency had, in the words of one senior Tory, the

largest council estate in Europe inside its constituency boundary.

The point being what? Because you live in a council estate you don't

vote? That they don't see people living in council estate as one of

them, not an impulse that Margaret Thatcher would have had. I think

it's dangerous if they are painting is people as opponents rather than

trying to win them over. When they do vote, they determine elections!

The idea that there is no such thing as a working-class Tory is toxic. I

want to show you a picture. There we go. It is behind me, on the 5th of

February, it is all men. And then, on the next, look at that, the 2th,

there are a few women. Not exactly many, but some. It is an

improvement. But it is so transparent, isn't it? We phoned up

one of the women that sat behind David Cameron to ask, why the sudden

change? They said, I don't know why you are bothering to ask, it is

completely natural, we didn't do anything to stage manage it. Did his

nose gets longer? It is something that is very transparent and

depressing about the way politicians choose to react to these moments.

Every week they put two women behind David Cameron, so that a tight shot

shows them. It is called the doughnut. They don't have many women

to shuffle around, there are only four among 14 in the Shadow Cabinet.

Also, the fact that women, younger women in particular, are much less

likely to vote Tory than five or ten years ago. David Cameron, it drives

and furious, he is obviously aware this is one of the biggest potential

demographic problem is that they have. It also reminds us of how the

public can actually see the wiring behind a lot of the stuff. Do they

really think your blog so stupid that they will not notice that the

following week the front bench is packed with women? I think it just

increases contempt for the entire rocket. It is an issue where Labour

seem to have pulled ahead of the other parties. We are being told

that 50% of candidates in their 100 target seats will be female. It

looks like the composition of Labour continues to go towards a kind of

rough 50-50 split, eventually. Although that is true, I think the

faces we see on the telly, Ed Miliband, Ed Balls, Chris Leslie,

they are almost always men. There is a Rachel Reeves, a prominent female

face that goes up a lot. But really, the number of e-mails they put up is

proportionally a lot smaller. Is the Miliband team still a men's club?

Behind the scenes, it is very blokey. It's been described as a

kind of seminar room at a university. I think that is true.

The Observer did the cutout and keep of the people behind Mr Miliband. As

opposed to the Shadow Cabinet, with lots of women in it, it was very

male. The one reason Labour have all of these women to put up in

constituencies is all women short lists is. If Tories want to change

things, I know they can be prone to minute -- and in relation, but they

work. In ten years time, I think it will give Labour an immense

advantage. By then, I think they will have a woman leader. Who will

that be? Potentially somebody not even yet in the Commons. You can see

how quickly people can rise to the top, but the Labour Party is going

to be increasingly donated by women. Do you think there will be a Labour

Leader before Theresa May becomes leader of the Conservatives? I think

it is ultimately about Osborne trying to stop Boris. I think I

would be astonished if she managed it. The first female Labour Leader?

I would pick Rachel Reeves the way it is currently going, she knows her

stuff and does well on TV. That is all for this week. We have a week

off now. I'll be back in the week after next. Remember, if it is

Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics, unless it's a Parliamentary recess.