06/07/2014 Sunday Politics South East

Up to a million public sector workers will strike this week.

It's one of the biggest walk-outs since 201 .

The country's top trade unionist Frances O'Grady and

Tory Business Minister Matt Hancock go head-to-head.

The Tour de France seems to have cheered him up - just as well

for the Deputy Prime Minister hasn't got much else to smile about.

Nick Clegg joins me live from Sheffield to discuss the

Just over ten weeks until Scotland determines its future.

The man leading the campaign AGAINST independence, Alistair Darling,

joins me from Edinburgh. Could proposals by the European

And with me throughout the show three top-flight political

journalists always ahead of the peleton - Nick Watt,

They'll be tweeting faster than Tour de France cyclists can pedal.

The news is dominated this morning by stories swirling

around allegations of an historic Westminster paedophile ring.

Concern has grown because of the disappearance of a dossier

handed over to the Home Office in 1983, along with over 100 official

files related to it and possibly containing details of historic child

Labour is calling for a public inquiry led by a child protection

But speaking earlier on The Andrew Marr Show this morning

the Education Secretary Michael Gove ruled that out.

The most important thing that we need to do is ensure that the due

process of law pursues those who may be guilty of individual crimes and

we also learn lessons about what may or may not have gone wrong in the

past, but it is also important to emphasise that many of the

allegations that are being made are historic. And what we do now in

order to keep children safer is better and stronger than was the

case when 20 or 30 years ago. Without getting into a boring

tit-for-tat, public inquiry, "yes" or "no"? No. Helen, can the

Government go on resisting calls for a full-scale inquiry? It is very

hard. There are cynical and non-cynical reasons for calling for

an inquiry. The cynical one allows you to say I can't comment on this.

The non-cynical is it manages to get people to air allegations in a way

that is safe. What we saw at the Leveson Inquiry was helpful, people

who felt they had been shut out from justice getting a chance to tell

their side of the story. A public inquiry in this case is a good idea.

Labour have called for a lot of public inquiries. A list was made in

2012 of how many they called for. Not only Savile, but the West Coast

Main Line and breast implants. On this particular issue, the people

don't trust the politicians, they don't trust the police either

because they may have been complicit in a cover-up. They may not trust

the Home Office who we are told some of their officials were mentioned in

the dossier? That is what David Cameron is hanging on to. This is a

matter now because they are alleged criminal activity, it is for the

police to investigate. In that big piece in the Sunday Times, Tim

Shipman reports one of the people making the allegations lives in the

United States making the allegations lives in the

been out to the United States to interview him. The Prime Minister

would say that is how serious the police are taking it. The problem

for the Prime Minister - he police are taking it. The problem

allergic to big public inquiry. His finest moment was his response to

the Bloody Sunday inquiry shortly after he became Prime

inrequest -- that inquiry took 2 years to report. The problem is the

dossier has gone missing, the files have gone missing, more allegations

keep coming out either directly or indirectly. It doesn't look like it

is going to go away? The fact the dossiers are missing means it is

inappropriate for the Home Office to be investigating this. There is

inappropriate for the Home Office to a police investigation. If after

that, there are questions unanswered which can only be answered by

that, there are questions unanswered public inquiry, or which require

resources that can only be commanded by a public inquiry, I could see the

case for going down that road. I fear that sometimes in this country

we invest almost supernatural powers in what a public inquiry can do I

wonder whether there is another example of a country that goes

through this stale ritual every few years of a scandal emerging, the

opposition calling for an inquiry, the Government saying no and then

holding the line or giving in. I don't know what we think this

inquiries can do. It comes back to your point, Helen, you should be

careful what you call an inquiry on so it doesn't devalue the concept.

On Thursday up to a million public sector workers - including teachers,

firemen and council workers - will go on strike.

Their unions have differing gripes but the fact they're all striking

on the same day is designed to send a strong message to the government.

As the economy picks up again they're demanding an end

Growth has returned strongly to the UK economy

and unemployment is at its lowest level for more than five years.

So why is there still talk of austerity

The deficit is coming down but much more slowly than the government

And accumulated deficits - the national debt -

The UK is now in hock to the tune of ?1.3 trillion - and rising.

In fact, we're only 40% of the way through George Osborne's planned

austerity, with the chancellor now saying he won't manage to balance

Unions are now rebelling against tight pay controls.

Since 2010, average public sector pay, which goes to about 1 in 5

Over the same period, prices increased by 16% -

meaning the average public sector worker saw their pay squeezed

Going head-to-head on the public sector strikes and austerity -

the general secretary of the TUC Frances O'Grady, and Conservative

We have seen it, public sector pay squeezed by 9% under the Coalition

Government. Isn't it time to take your foot off the brake a bit? I

don't think it is the right time to let go of the public finances at

all. We were always clear that this is what's called a structural

deficit, it doesn't go away just because the growth is returning and

the economy is coming back. We have protected and are protecting the

lowest paid public sector workers who weren't part of the pay freeze

and now pay going up by 1%. These are difficult decisions. We have had

that discussion many times. They are necessary in order to keep that plan

on track and as we can see in the wider economy, it is working.

People's living standards will have to continue to fall if you are in

the public sector? We need to keep public spending under control and

pay restraint is one of the main ways of being able... The answer is

yes? The answer is this is necessary. The answer is yes, this

is necessary. It isn't because we want to. We have to. This strike

isn't going to change the Government's mind, is it? It does

seem like the Government isn't listening. We have had years... They

are listening, they just don't agree. Ordinary people, including

those in the public sector, are finding it really tough. What really

sticks in the throat is the idea that money can be found to give tax

cuts to billionaires, to millionaires and to big

corporations. But it can't be found to help 500,000 workers in local

government, dinner ladies, school meal workers, lollipop men and women

who are earning less than the living wage. What do you say to that? We

have protected those who are the least well-paid in the public

sector. But this is about a long-term... How can you? Hold on.

You have said you have protected them. This involves ordinary people,

many watching this programme, they have had a 1% pay rise in some cases

since 2010. The average gas bill is up 57%, electric bill up 22%, food

costs up 16%, running a car 11% in what way have you protected people

from spending they have to make Firstly, you read out the average

increases in public sector pay. That has had the biggest impact at the

top end and those at the bottom end have been best protected, as best we

could. Of course, we have also taken two million people out of income tax

and increased the income tax threshold which has a big positive

impact. We have frozen and then cut fuel duty, which would have been 20

pence higher. I wanted to take on this point about priorities. We have

got to make sure that we get the economy going at the same time and

we raised more money from those at the top than we did before 2010

partly because we have encouraged them to invest. And this is a really

important balance of making sure we get the books back in order, we have

stability for family finances and we get the economy going. Why not

spread the living wage? We know you could pay for that pay increase

itself if you spread the living wage through the private sector and

guarantee... The living wage being above the minimum wage? Absolutely.

?7.65 in the rest of the country, ?8.80 in London. What is the answer?

I'm a fan of the minimum wage. But not for public sector workers. Being

able to pay low-paid workers as much as possible within the constraints

of the public finances is something I have pushed very hard. The

evidence we can increase the minimum wage has to be balanced which the

Low Pay Commission do with the impact on the number of jobs... Even

after a pay freeze for quite a while among public sector workers, they

are still paid 15% on average more than those in the private sector?

That is not true. It is, according to the ONS figures. I read that

report this morning. If you look at the whole package, what they are

saying is public service workers are worse off. Average earnings in the

public sector are ?16.28 an hour compared to ?14.16 private. You are

comparing apples and pears. It's the kind of jobs and the size of the

workplace that people work in. They are still overall on average better

off? Lower paid workers tend to be better off because unions negotiate

better deals for lower paid workers. They are more unionised in the pry

private sector. The public sector is worse off. This is a political

strike, isn't it? There is a whole disparate range of reasons. The

strike is saying that you are against this Government, that is

what this is about? I this I what firefighters, local government

workers and health workers who are protesting, too, alongside teachers

are saying is that this Government is not listening, it is out of

touch, people can't carry on having cuts in their living standards

depending on benefits. When will the public sector worker ever get a real

increase in their pay under a Conservative Government? Well, we

certainly hope to have the books balanced by 2018. Not before then?

2018 is when we hope to be able to be in surplus. It is testament. .

So, no real pay increase for public sector workers before 2018?

Interestingly, this isn't just about the Conservatives and the Lib Dems,

the Labour Party leadership have said it is a test of their

credibility that they support the squeeze on public sector pay. I look

forward to them, they ought to come out and say very clearly that these

strikes are wrong and they are against the strikes and stop taking

union money. It is a democratic right. Hold on. They are - they

think the policy of pay restraint is necessary. Alright. On this point

about democracy... Ask yourself why so many ordinary decent public

service workers are so fed up. They have seen so many billions of pounds

wasted through outsourcing to organisations like G4 S. In Unite

and UNISON the turnout in this vote was under 20%. Alright. OK. One

final question... Hold on. You said millions and millions voted on

this... I want to ask you this question. Is the story in the Mail

on Sunday today that Mr Cameron s planning a big crackdown on the

unions over balloting, is that true? Well, strikes like this... I know

the cases, is it true you are going to dhang the law? Strikes like this

make that argument stronger. The Conservative Party is in Government

on the basis of 23% of the electorate... We have run out of

time. Thank you very much. "Should Scotland be

an independent country?" That's the question the people of

Scotland will answer in a referendum If the polls are to be believed

the voters will answer "no". But in 2011 - ten weeks before

the Holyrood elections - the polls told us that Labour was going to win

and look what happened there - a Alistair Darling is leading

the campaign against independnence. is one that puts the matter of

independence to bed for a generation. In numerical terms, what

would that be? We need a decisive result in September, I think we will

get that provided we get our arguments across in the next couple

of months. What would it be in figures? I am not going to put a

number on it. People will look at it and say, OK, you have had two and a

half years of debate and Scotland has now decided. The polls may be

encouraging at the moment but I am not complacent, there is still a

long way to go. Speculating... If you don't want to answer that, that

is fair enough. Your side claims that a vote for independence is a

vote for massive uncertainty but if it is a no vote there is lots of

uncertainty too. All of the Westminster parties are promising

devolution but there is no timetable, no certainty. Yes, there

is. For the first time I can remember, all three parties are more

or less on the same page in terms of additional powers, we already have

powers in terms of policing and transport, now more powers are

planned in relation to tax and welfare. But you are all saying

different things. Between 2009 and 2012, the three parties have

slightly different proposals but they came together and there was an

agreed series of reforms in relation to tax which are now on the statute

book. If you go back to the devolutionary settlement in 199 ,

people unified around a single proposition so there is history here

and these three parties have delivered and they will deliver in

the event of people saying we will stay part of the UK. If Scotland

vote no to independence, when will Scotland get these extra powers I

would imagine that in the general election all three parties will have

something in their manifesto and you would expect to see legislation in

the session of Parliament that follows that. Imagining is not

certainty. Because the three parties have said this is what they will do,

and it is important having said that they stick to it. If you look in the

past when the Nationalists said the same thing, when they cast doubt

over what would happen in 2012, we delivered. The only party that

walked out of both of these discussions were the Nationalists

because they are not interested in more powers, they want a complete

break. You cannot say that if Edinburgh gets more devolution that

wouldn't mean fewer Scottish MPs in Westminster, can you? Nobody has any

plans to reduce the number of MPs. If you step back from this moment,

what people have been asked to do in September is to vote on the future

of their country, Scotland, and whether we should be part of the UK.

When I say part of the UK, full members of the UK with

representation in the House of Commons and the institutions that

affect our lives. This is a critically important vote. We want

to see more decentralisation of power to Scotland, and to local

authorities within Scotland, but we don't want a complete break with the

uncertainties, the risks and the downright disadvantages that would

throw Scotland's away if we were to make that break. The economic

arguments are dominating people s thinking, the polls show, that is

what is dominating at the moment. You cannot guarantee continued

membership of the European Union given all the talk now about an

in-out UK referendum. Firstly I don't think anyone has ever argued

Scotland wouldn't get back in. The big question is the terms and

conditions we would have to meet and we are applying to get into

something that is established, it wouldn't be a negotiation. What we

have said is there is no way Europe would let Scotland keep the rebate

which Scotland has, there would be big questions over whether we have

to join the euro, and other terms and conditions. The European Union

does not act with any great speed, on average it takes eight and a half

years to get into Europe. I don t want that uncertainty or the

disadvantages that would come Scotland's away that come with

losing clout in the European Union. The second point you asked me about

is in relation to the UK's membership of the European Union,

and if you look at polls, the majority of people still want to

stay in the UK. Frankly, a lot of people on my side didn't make the

argument against independence for a long time, we have been doing that

over the last two and a half years and we are making progress and that

is why I can say I think we will win provided we continue to get our

arguments across. Similarly with the European Union, the case needs to be

made because it is a powerful case. Isn't it true that the Nationalists

win either way? They win if it is a yes vote, and they win if it is a no

vote. They wanted devolution max so they win either way. There is a

world of difference between devolution and further devolution

where you remain part of the UK There is a world of difference

between that and making a break where Scotland becomes a foreign

country to the rest of the UK. You lose that security and those

opportunities. You lose the same currency, the opportunity with

pensions and so on. They are entitled to argue this case with

passion, they want a break, but the two things are worlds apart. Gordon

Brown said that the no campaign was too negative, have you adjusted to

take that criticism into account? Ever since I launched this campaign

over two years ago I said we would make a strong powerful case for

remaining part of the UK. Look at our research, where we have had

warnings from people to say that if we do well with research in Scotland

we get more than our population share of the grand and we gain from

that. There is a positive case but equally nobody will stop me from

saying to the Nationalists, look at the assertions you make which are

collapsing like skittles at the moment. Their assertions don't stand

up. They assert that somehow milk and honey will be flowing. It is

perfectly healthy within a referendum campaign to say that what

you are saying simply isn't true. You have been negative, we all know

about the so-called Cyber Nats book you compared Alex Salmond to the

leader of North Korea. On! The context was that Alex Salmond was

being asked why it was that UKIP had additional seat and he appeared to

blame television being been doing from another country, from BBC South

of the border. If you cannot have humour in a debate, heaven help us.

I think it is important in this debate that people from outside

politics should be allowed to have their say whatever side they are on

because that will make for a far better, healthier debate. Nobody

should be put in a state of fear and alarm by worrying about what will

happen if they stand up. Despite the nastiness, more and more people are

making a stand. We have run out of time. Thank you.

I will be talking to the SNP's hippity leader, Nicola Sturgeon

next week on Sunday Politics. Scotland: For Richer or Poorer will

be on BBC Two at 9pm tomorrow. Disastrous results in the European

elections, it is fair to say the Lib Dems are down in the doldrums. In a

moment I will be speaking to Nick Clegg, but first Emily has been

asking what Lib Dems would say to the Prime -- Deputy Prime Minister

on Call Clegg. Our phone in this week is the challenges facing the

Liberal Democrats. They are rock bottom in the polls and have dire

results in the local and European elections so what can the party do

to turn things around? Get in touch, we are going straight to line

one and Gareth. How much is a problem of that loss of local

support? It is a massive problem because those are the building

blocks of our success. The councillors who gets the case work

done are also the people who go out and deliver the leaflets and knock

on doors. Interesting, and it is not just local support the party has

lost, is it? In the next general election there are some big-name

Liberal Democrat MPs standing down like Malcolm Bruce and Ming

Campbell, how much of a problem will that be? That is a real challenge

and we have some of our brightest and best reaching an age of maturity

at the same moment so that is quite an additional test in what will be a

difficult election anyway. So how does the party need to position

itself to win back support? Let s go to Chris online free, has the party

got its strategy right? There is always a danger of appearing to be a

party that merely dilutes Labour or dilutes the Conservatives. We have a

of is serious, positive messages and we need to get those across in the

next election because if we don t people will vote for the Tories

Nick, what do you think of the party's message at the moment? I

have had a look at early draft of our manifesto and there is some good

stuff in there but the authors are probably too interested in what may

think we have achieved in the last five years and not really focusing

on what the voters will want to be hearing about the next five years.

Perhaps they should get out more and test some of these messages on the

doorstep. So you want to see the top ranks of the party on the doorstep.

Gareth online one also wants to make a point about the manifesto. There

is clearly a problem somewhere near the top and there are some people

who seem to be obsessed with power for power's sake, and happy with a

timid offer but the Liberal Democrats want to change things We

are running out of time so let's try to squeeze one more call in. What

are your thoughts on the long-term future of the party? I think serious

long-term danger is that the party could be relegated to the fringes of

the UK and no longer being a national party. We have gone back

decades if that happens because for many years we have been represented

in every part of the country at some level and we have got to rescue

ourselves from that. Some interesting views but we are going

to have to wait until the general election next year to find out how

well the Lib Dems face up to these challenges. Thanks for listening, we

are going to finish with an old classic now.

# I'm sorry, I'm sorry... #. Nick Clegg, welcome to the

programme. I want to come onto your situation in a minute but as you

will have seen in the papers, there is mounting concern over and

historic Westminster paedophile ring, and files relating to it

mysteriously disappearing. Why are you against a full public enquiry

into this? I wouldn't rule anything out. I think we should do anything

it takes to uncover this and achieve justice.

delivered, even all these many years later. How do you do it? There is an

inquiry in the Home Office about what's happened to these documents,

serious questions need to be asked about what happened in the Home

Office and those questions need to be answered. There are inquiries in

the BBC, in the NHS and most importantly of all the police are

looking into the places where this abuse was alleged to have taken

place. All I would say is, let's make sure that justice is delivered,

truth is uncovered and I think that the way to do that, as we have seen,

is by allowing the police to get on with their work. You say that, but

there are only seven police involved in this inquiry. There are 195

involved in the hacking investigations. We can both agree

that child abuse is more important and serious than hacking. The Home

Office, there are reports that Home Office officials may have been

mentioned in the dossier, people don't trust people to investigate

themselves, Mr Clegg? No, I accept that we need to make sure that and

the police need to make sure that the police investigations are

thorough, well resourced. I can t think of anything more horrendous, I

can't, than powerful people organising themselves and worse

still, this is what is alleged, covering up for each other to abuse

the most vulnerable people in society's care - children. But at

the end of the day, the only way you can get people in the dock, the only

way you can get people charged, is by allowing the prosecuting

authorities and the police to do their job. I have an open mind about

what other inquiries take place A number of other inquiries are taking

place. I assume any additional inquiries wouldn't be able to second

guess or look into the matters which the police are looking into already.

All I would say is that people who have information, who want to

provide information which they think is relevant to this, please get in

touch with the police. Alright. Let's come on to our own inquiry

into the state of the Lib Dems. You have attempted to distance yourself

and the party from the Tories, but still stay in Government - it is

called aggressive differentiation. Why isn't it working? It's not

called aggressive differentiation. It is called "coalition". It is two

parties who retain different identities, different values, have

different aspirations for the future. But during this Parliament

have come together because we were facing a unique national emergency

back in 2010, the economy was teetering on the edge of a

precipice. I'm immensely proud, notwithstanding our political

challenges, which are real, I'm immensely proud that the Liberal

Democrats, we stepped up to the plate, held our nerve and without

the Liberal Democrats, there wouldn't now be that economic

recovery which is helping many people across the country. Why

aren't you getting any credit for it? Well, we won't get credit if we

spend all our time staring at our navals. If it wasn't for the Liberal

Democrats, there wouldn't be more jobs now available to people. They

don't believe you, they are giving the Tories the credit for the

recovery? Well, you might assert that, we will assert and I will

shout it from the rooftops that if we had not created the stability by

forming this Coalition Government and then hard-wired into the

Government's plans, not only the gory job of fixing the public

finances, but doing so much more fairly than would have been the

case, if the Conservatives had been in Government on their own, they

wouldn't have delivered these tax cuts. They wouldn't have delivered

the triple lock guarantee for pensions or the pupil premium. OK.

Why are you 8% in the polls? Well, because I think where we get our

message across - and I am here in my own constituency - this is a

constituency where I am a campaigning MP - we can dispel a lot

of the information and say we have done a decent thing by going into

Government and we have delivered big changes, big reforms which you can

touch and see in your school, in your pensions, in your taxes and

then people do support us and, in our areas of strength, we were

winning against both the Conservative and Labour parties It

is a big effort. Of course, there are lots of people from both left

and right who want to shout us down and want to vilify our role in

Government. What we also need to do - and Nick Harvey was quite right -

having been proud of our record of delivery, we also need to set out in

our manifesto as we are and as we will our promise of more, of more

support in schools. So why is it then... Why is it then that a Lib

Dem MP in our own film says you are in danger of no longer becoming a

National Party. That could be the Clegg legacy, you cease to be a

National Party? I'm a practical man. I believe passionately in what we

have done in politics. I am so proud of my party. I don't spend that much

time speculating that the end might be nigh. There is no point in doing

that. Let's get out there, which is what I do in my own constituency, in

challenges circumstances and say we are proud of what we have done, we

have done a good thing for the country, we have delivered more

Liberal Democrat policies than the party has ever dreamed delivering

before. We have a programme of change, of reform, of liberal

reform, which is very exciting. Just over the last few weeks, I have been

setting out our plans to provide more help to carers, to make sure

teachers in every classroom are properly qualified, that all kids in

school are being taught a proper core curriculum. That parts company

from the ideological rigidities with which the Conservatives deal with

education policy. Those are thing which speak to many of the values

that people who support us... Alright. When Mike Storey gets out

and about, he told this programme two weeks' ago that he finds that

you "are toxic on the doorstep" Look, as everybody knows, being the

leader of a party, which for the first time in its history goes into

Government, which is already a controversial thing to do because

you are governing with our enemies, the Conservatives, and on top of

that, doing all the difficult and unpopular things to fix the broken

economy which was left to us by Labour, of course as leader of that

party I get a lot of incoming fire from right and left. The right say

that I'm stopping the Conservatives doing what they want. There is a

good reason for that. They didn t win the election. The left say that

somehow we have lost our soul when we haven't. That happens day in day

out. Of course that will have some effect. My answer to that is not to

buckle to those criticisms, those misplaced Chris -- criticisms from

left and right, but to stand up proudly. Is it your intention to

fight the next election against an in-out referendum on Europe? Yes.

Unless there is major treaty change? Our position hasn't waivered, it

won't waiver, we are not going to flip-flop on the issue of the

referendum like the Conservatives did. We want an in-out referendum.

With ve legislated for the trigger when that will happen, when in u

powers are transferred to the European Union. That is what we have

said for years. We legislated for that... So no change? No change

Alright. We are expecting a reshuffle shortly. Will you keep

Vince Cable as Business Secretary to the election? I'm immensely proud of

what Vince has done. Yes, I intend to make sure that Vince continues to

serve in the Government in his present capacity Look what he has

done on apprenticeships, he's done more than many people for many years

to make sure we build-up manufacturing, the north here, not

just the south. I'm proud of what he's done. We have talked about some

heavy things. We know you have got into kickboxing. Is there any danger

of you becoming a mammal - you know what I mean - a middle-aged man in

Lycra! Will the Tour de France influence you? Absolutely no risk of

that whatsoever having seen the Tour de France start yesterday near

Leeds. I have the yellow Yorkshire sign on my pullover. I will see them

later whisk through my constituency. I will not try to emulate them. I'm

sure that is to the relief of a grateful nation. Thank you.

It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.

We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now

for Sunday Politics Scotland. Coming up here in 20 minutes,

the Week Ahead. Hello,

I'm Natalie Graham and this is the As East Sussex County Counchl begins

consulting on cuts to bus sdrvices, we'll be asking the Councillor

in charge whether this will leave Joining me

in the studio today to disctss buses and boats are two new guests for us

on the Sunday Politics South East. Lord Navnit Dholakia is

Deputy Leader of the Liberal he lives in West Sussex,

and Caroline Ansell has been selected to fight the seat

of Eastbourne for the Conservatives Before our main discussions,

I just wanted to get your vhew on the tricky and perennial issue

of how to bridge the gulf When asked which professions

the public most trust, our parliamentary represent`tives

come low down on the list, often below estate agents and bankers no

doubt down there with journ`lists. So could Nick Clegg's idea to hold

Prime Minister's Questions live in a prime time TV slot,

with questions submitted I think it is a brilliant idea

because what we have is a j`mboree of people getting together, shouting

each other down. Rather than taking them to account, all the Getty s

allegations against each political party. It may make a good tdlevision

show but it doesn't get the information. We have to get back to

the political system and thdn it will be better. The House of Lords

is an exciting place becausd question Time is for seeking

information. Quite often bedn ministers are being questioned on

various issues. It is very luch in terms of intelligent people and and

we are satisfied with the rdsponse that we get. This does not happen in

the Commons. Nick Clegg is puoted as saying this will put an end to the

chest beating shouting match of PMQs. What do you think abott it,

Caroline? With TV on demand, I am not sure prime time attracts a

family gathering around the television and I can't imaghne Prime

Minister 's questions competing with Doctor Who. I host an event in one

of my local pubs where we do gather and watch the debate and exchange

and some of the commentary `fter. We talk through some of the issues of

the day. It is a good way for people to come together and talk. Those

aggressive debates in the Commons get more coverage than local council

debates and indeed the Housd of Lords. Perhaps it is the

antagonistic attitude that lakes it popular. Does it actually gdt the

information? What is the legislation about? It is about getting

information from the politician on our behalf. Will the public engage?

They will when they realise sensible answers are coming. Everyond of us

is affected by the decisions that Parliament takes. It is important to

note the impact on those communities. Prime Minister 's

questions, it is diverting `nd a good thing to follow. It is not

representative of the good work of Parliament.

Now, fishing is an important indtstry

along the coast of Kent and Sussex, and one method used by many of the

smaller boats that fish close to the coast is called drift net fhshing.

The name speaks for itself ` a length of net is unravelled into the

water and left to drift for an hour or so and the fish swim into it

It's a traditional practice, but a proposal by the Europdan

In a minute we'll be hearing from the European Commission, but

first, Sara donned her lifejacket and went on board to speak to

Driftnet fishing like this has been at the heart of our co`stal

George worked off the coast of Ramsgate for 25 years.

He is out with his boat almost daily like hundreds

of other small`scale inshord fishermen around Kent and Stssex.

But, European plans to ban driftnet fishing is threatening to ptt him

It has taken my livelihood and a lot of other peoples'

80% of our fishing is now done through driftnet, either surface

Is there any reason for the EU to go ahead with a blanket ban?

If they want to get rid of small boats, then go ahe`d with

the ban but if they want to keep a friendly fishery, let us carry

The south east has more driftnet fisherman than anywhere elsd

For many, it provides a year`round income rather than being a seasonal

With 182 vessels capturing 440 tonnes of fish a year, that is

The European Commission wants to put an end to this style of fishing over

concerns that mammals like dolphins, turtles and seals are getting caught

Some conservationists call these nets walls of death.

This is what can happen when larger fish and mammals accidentally stray

It is already illegal to catch certain species like swordfhsh

in these nets but UK conservation groups and the fishing industry

argue that while drift nets are a problem in the Mediterranean, they

are safe and environmentallx friendly to use in UK waters where

many fisheries even have spdcial accreditation for sustainabhlity.

It is a low impact fishery, very low carbon footprint

and we catch what comes to ts and both species of cod, sole,

bass, skate and herring and mackrel at certain times of the year.

Take this fishery away from us and all it will do is imposd

Politicians are backing the fishermen.

In Westminster, the Fisheries Minister says

the European Commission oncd a one size fits all solution

and is calling for negotiathons to rethink plans to prohibit the use

We think an outright ban is the wrong approach.

Perhaps where localised bans in areas where the evidence

Particularly in the Mediterranean where it is a problem with tuna

However, what we will be ailing to do is get our license

and say we should have an ottright ban across the European Union.

We will be making the case in the months ahead.

Back on the boat and there is no fish today.

Emphasising the unpredictabhlity of life as a fisherman.

This ban, which could come hnto force next January, is seen as more

bad news for UK fishing fledts, already hit by tight EU quotas

So, can Britain's fishing industry afford to take another

blow or will it be enough to sink those traditional fishdrmen

Joining us now from Brussels is Helena, the official spokeslan

for the EU Commissioner in charge of fisheries who have

We have heard from the Brithsh minister saying he feels thhs is

the wrong approach, it is disproportionate.

Why are you proposing such a widespread ban?

It is the beginning of a long process

of debate that we are seeing now and we are very much welcomhng this

It is a proposal that aims to protect sea

mammals, turtles and seabirds which are still caught in those ndts.

We have evidence about this because they are living

so closely to the surface of the water where they need to brdathe.

That is in other parts of the EU and not in the UK.

We have heard from our small fishing industry which says it

They are being punished for the actions

This proposal doesn't come out of the blue.

We have based it on scientific studies that have looked at the use

We have asked stakeholders, local authorities,

to give us information about the use of the drift nets in their waters.

Other input is coming in now and the evidence that we had from this

input was first of all that there are incidents with drift nets where

mammals are being caught, that some national authorities have problems

to enforce it because these mammals are protected under European law.

Looking at your consultation process,

you had 40 responses from the whole of the EU and only one from the UK.

Are you happy with the level of response you have had?

We are not happy with the ldvel of responses we have because 40 is not

a lot but this is a proposal that we are putting out now and if we didn't

get the input at the time of the consultation and if we are getting

The evidence that we have received is that drift nets

That doesn't apply in the UK and the fisheries industry here are

Your Commissioner says she hs keen to have a less centralised `pproach,

a less broad approach but this seems to contradict that.

We think it should be done lore at regional level.

This is also why, again, we are still in listening mode.

We need this input from the fishermen now

The ball is in the court of the EU ministers, the EU Parliament to find

a compromise here and to find the right policx

approach that is adapted to the situation on the ground.

Thank you very much indeed for joining us.

They are obviously appearing to listen. A ban would hit the

Eastbourne fishermen hard. This is about imposing rules on states that

gives Europe a bad name and that plays into the hands of the

Conservative Party. What is important is there is a gendral

expectation that there will be an agenda on the basis with whhch this

discussion will take place. This is when the Prime Minister camd back

last week. What is important to bear in mind is the environmental impact

of driftnet fishing. There should be a concern about the birdlifd and

turtles. The point I want to make is we stick to the rules that they lay

out. In the Mediterranean countries, they swipe away anything thdy can

get from the Mediterranean Sea and I don't think they are being

questioned to the extent th`t they should be. Why doesn't the

commissioners say this is a member state issue? We have a very

different industry here with the small vessels. What we should be

saying is we should find out precisely the impact of what is

happening. It is less in thhs country. It is right and proper that

there is a proper consultathon but there is an impact analysis which is

available to the EU. There hs not a single way in which they trdat every

country. They have done an hmpact assessment. They found at a national

level it would be irrelevant. That statistic was jaw`dropping. They

have had 40 responses and only one from the UK. Should we be

encouraging more with Brussdls? It is a miserable result and not a

sound basis for proceeding with this choice. To prohibit across the

country and the fleets across the EU waters is the option of chohce. Of

the small boats, it will hit many and the livelihoods will be on the

line. In that respect, why the blanket ban? The rules are `lready

there. In 2002, they actually banned driftnet fishing. What is ilportant

is how they are looking at this We should look at the real imp`ct and

the point on this one is thd minister is right, if they cannot do

that consultation, other differ `` other departments should be

involved. It was distressing to see the dolphins and sharks there. We

will have to move on. When the cabinet of

East Sussex County Council let this week, on the agenda was a sdt

of proposals which would cut back The Council says the changes could

save ?1.8 million over two xears, but critics, including the Lib Dem

MP for Lewes and Government Minister The slash

and burn approach to bus services in my constituency and elsewhere

in East Sussex is unacceptable. The idea that we can have vhllagers

where the daily bus service of regular frequency cut

down to two days a week with no Saturday service, leaves people

without access to public tr`nsport Well, the man in charge of those

proposals is Councillor Carl You say this will affect

a minority of passengers but it s a significant minority ` people

in rural areas, often elderly, who depend on a daily service to get to

the shops or medical appointments. Were these proposals to comd to

pass, 91% of users will be unaffected by the proposals, 95 of

current bus users would still be eligible for a bus six days a week.

That minority is a signific`ntly vulnerable minority and that is the

argument Norman Baker was m`king. We have to look at the approach of

value for money for the Council There are buses trundling through

villages. They will go down to twice a week in some villages whereas now

they have a good daily servhce. These aren't commercially vhable

companies `` roots. In terms of those subsidised routes, we have

done a priority analysis. Enabling people to access services two days a

week, enabling people to get to work six days a week and we have looked

at school children accessing their closest school. We have dond that

with a reference group. The others can just be abandoned and not go

anywhere if they haven't got a car. East Sussex has a bad transport

network, the trains are overcrowded and the roads are always full. We

are talking about a very sm`ll number of people. Why should they

suffer? As Norman Baker will be aware, in terms of the publhc

finances, we know as a county council we have got to save in

excess of ?100 million and `t the moment we will still be offdring

services to the majority of residents with a small numbdr of

people affected. You have bden in local government but they h`ve

difficult choices to make thanks to the coalition. We have had cuts to

adult social care, Children's Services and they have diffhcult

choices to make. The chairm`n of the Local Government Association only

this week made an announcemdnt that the entire finances of local

government has to be looked at. There is far too much interference

from central government. Thd point I am making is do not underestimate

roll buses stop the way thex are stripping some of the social

structures in our villages, the community halls are disappe`ring. I

was stuck in a time of the floods. The most difficult part was to see

elderly people surrounded and could not go to their nearest shopping

Centre seven miles away. I say to them, work out the impact you are

causing on our community. London and the big towns are not the cdntre of

the universe and others havd the right to survive and create a

community spirit. Caroline, you have a fight on your hand in East Sussex.

It doesn't help when you're friends at County Hall on making thdse cuts.

What we are talking about is reducing subsidy. These are private

operators. They are also putting prices up on some routes. It is

important to look at that also. Look at the support we sub `` provide for

vulnerable older people. Thdy shouldn't be cutting subsidhes to

these bus services. Difficult decisions are never made lightly. We

are still dealing here with that legacy of debt left by Labotr.

Should we be spending money we don't have? Let us come back to that

minority. The consultation hs about to begin. There is scepticism about

consultation and the fact that you will affect a minority of elderly

residents. If they are the ones that respond, you will turn round and

say, "look, not many people replied. ". It is a 12 week

consultation and we welcome people's views. The other thing we

will be doing is there will be those subsidised routes that are

commercially viable. It may not be as bleak a picture as perhaps you

are putting forward. We will have to see.

That consultation on those proposed changes opens tomorrow

You can have your say by writing to East Sussex County

And now for a round`up of the other political events that

you might have missed this week with James Fitzgerald.

Budget cuts will be ongoing at Sussex police where 300 jobs have

The force could be looking `t the same again over the next five, says

We will need to find a diffdrent way of delivering the same level

Laura Sands and Roger Gale `re pushing for a Commons enquiry

into the role of smaller airports focusing on the recently closed

Manston where infrastructurd is up for auction including boardhng steps

The Hove and Portslade MP, Like Weatherley, noted for introducing

rock 'n' roll to the house has said he will not stand for re`eldction.

He said beating cancer had left him to review his future plans.

And undeterred by a failed bid to raise cotncil tax

by 4.75% this year, the Gredns on Brighton council have a new plan

We faced due to cuts a ?25 million gap in our budget

Navnit, used to be on policd Council.

There is no way she can achheve the targets unless the services are cut.

The money for the criteria when the services are cut, he has to work

hard. Caroline. On having to make cuts, crime is falling.

That's all we've got time for from the South East this wedk.

My thanks to our guests, Lord Dholakia and Caroline @nsell.

Julia will be here again next week with more politics from the

progress in London was being made before that started. I wish we had

longer for that. It is all over to you.

What will Thursday's mass public sector strike achieve?

Has David Cameron's anti-Juncker attacks clawed back support

And is Alan Johnson really thinking about challenging Ed Miliband

We will start with the strikes, Matt Hancock was hardline in the

head-to-head that he did with the TUC. I guess that the Tory internal

polling and focus groups must be telling them that there are votes in

taking a tough line? There is that and there is the fact that they are

now much more confident on any economic policy two or three years

ago. They shied away from it because the economy was shrinking, there was

still a danger that public sector job losses would lead to higher

unemployment overall. Now, the economy is growing, they have a good

story to sell about employment so they are much more bolshy and brazen

than they were two or three years ago. They know that it always causes

problems for Labour. Labour is naturally sympathetic to the public

sector workers, pay being squeezed, they are striking to make an issue

of it. And yet they can't quite come out and give the unions 100% Labour

support? Exactly. You saw Tristram Hunt on the Marr Show this morning

squirming to support the idea of strikes, but not this particular

strike. It was always the question that gets asked to Labour - who

funds you? That is a real problem. The bit that gets me is they trail

this ef are I time there is a - every time there is a strike, this

idea of cutting it to ballots and local election turnout was a third.

Boris Johnson was elected Mayor of London with 38% turnout. We need to

talk about-turnout across our democracy. That is an easy rebuttal

for Labour to make. Matt Hancock was hardline about changing the strike

law. When you asked him the question, if you are not going to

stabilise the public finances till 2018, does this mean the pay freeze

or no real term pay increase in the public sector will increase till

2018, h e was inner vous on that one. -- he was nervous on that one.

This strike is different to those strikes that took place in 2010 At

that time, the TUC and the Labour Leadership thought there was going

to be a great movement out there, not a kind of 1926 movement, but a

great movement out there. This time round, I think the climate is

different. Ed Miliband talking about wage increases being outstripped by

inflation and people not seeing the recovery coming through into their

pay packets. Slightly more tricky territory for the Tories. If The

Labour machine cannot make something out of Matt Hancock telling this

programme there will be no increase in pay for workers in the public

sector till 2018, they have a problem? They do have a problem

They have to say always that they would not just turn the money taps

on. That is the dance that you are locked in all the time. Can we all

agree that Alan Johnson is not going to stand against Ed Miliband this

side of the election? Some politicians are cynical enough. I

don't think Alan Johnson is one Do we agree? There is nothing in it for

Labour and certainly not for Alan Johnson. No way. It is the last

thing he would want to do. There are some desperate members going around

trying to find a stalking horse Alan Johnson will not be their man.

He has more important things to do on a Thursday night on BBC One!

Isn't it something about the febrile state of the Labour Party that

Labour, some Labour backbenchers or in the Shadow Cabinet, can float the

idea of this nonsense? If there was a time to do it, maybe it was in the

middle of the Parliament. With ten months left, you are stuck with the

leader you chose in 2010. I remember them failing to understand this in

January of 2010 when there was that last push against Gordon Brown. Five

months before an election, they were trying to do something. The deputy

Leader of the Labour Party had something to do with it. There is

deep unease about Ed Miliband. There are problems but Alan Johnson is not

the man. I think there is no chance of it!

If the most recent polls are to be believed, David Cameron appears to

have enjoyed a 'Juncker bounce' - clawing back some support from UKIP

after he very publicly opposed the appointment of Jean-Claude Juncker

to the post of EU Commission president. Last week Nigel Farage

took his newly enlarged UKIP contingent to Strasbourg

for the first session of the new European Parliament.

These two gentlemen have nothing to say today. It was the usual dull,

looking back to a model invented 50 years ago and we are the ones that

want democracy, we are the ones that want nation state, we are the ones

that want a global future for our countries, not to be trapped inside

this museum. Thank you. I can see we will be covering more of the

European Parliament at last! It's rumoured he's likely to stand

in the next general election in the Kent constituency of Thanet South,

currently held by the Conservatives. Last week the Conservatives selected

their candidate for the seat - Craig McKinlay -

a former deputy leader of UKIP. Did you get the short straw, you

have got a seat that Nigel Farage is probably going to fight? Not in the

slightest. It is a seat that I know well. It is a seat that there's

obvious euro scepticism there and my qualities are right for that seat.

UKIP got some very good... What are your qualities? Deep-seated

conservatism, I was a founder of UKIP, I wrote the script back in

1992. My heart is Conservative values. They are best put out to the

public by me in South Thanet. It would be ridiculous if Nigel chose

that seat. We need a building block of people like myself to form a

Government if we are going to have that referendum that is long

overdue. I don't think he's got the luxury of losing somebody who is

very similar in views to him. He would be best look looking

elsewhere. You wouldn't like him to stand in your seat, would you? It

would seem to make very little sense. People would say what is UKIP

all about if it's fighting people who have got a similar view to them?

We do need to build a majority Government for the Conservatives

next year because only us are offering that clear in-out

referendum. I want to be one of those building blocks that is part

of that renegotiation that we will put to public in a referendum.

Sounds to me like if the choice is between you and Nigel Farage next

May in Thanet South, it is Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee? Not at all The

danger to this country is another Labour Government. That is one of

the main reasons that I left UKIP in 2005 because that last five years of

the Labour Government was the most dangerous to the fundamentals of

Britain that we have ever seen. I'm happy with the Conservatives. I have

full Conservative values. I am a Euro-sceptic. Thank you for joining

us. The Westminster bubble yet again, which has a herd mentality, a

bubble with a herd mentality, it got it wrong yet again. Mr Cameron's

isolated, he is useless at diplomacy, all of which may be true,

but the British people liked it and his backbenchers liked it? True

Although some of us would say it is possible... You are speaking for the

bubble? I'm speaking for my segment of the bubble. Some of us argued

that he got it wrong diplomatically and it would be wrong politically.

It will be the passage of time. We saw UKIP decline between the 20 4

European elections and the 2005 General. You would expect something

similar to happen this time round. The question is how far low do they

fall? They are still registering 12-15% in the opinion polls. They

are. When Mr Cameron wielded his veto which again the Westminster

bubble said it's terrible, it is embarrassing, he overtook Labour in

the polls for a while doing that. He's had a Juncker bounce. If you

were a strategist, would you not conclude the more Euro-sceptic I am,

the better it is for me in the polls? In the short-term, yes. This

is the short-term thinking we are supposed to despise. The electricion

is very clever for a different - the selection is very clever for a

different reason. It is this anti-London feeling in Thanet South.

He is a councillor, he grew up in the constituency. He is a chartered

accountant. He is somebody who can be seen to be a champion of local

people. If they had parachuted in a special adviser, they would be in

real trouble. He wants to get out... This is the third representative of

the bubble? He wants to get out of the European Union which David

Cameron doesn't want to do. It was interesting for that statement to

MPs on Monday, there were mild Euro-sceptics who said, "I can't

take this." The Speaker said can the baying mob, the Conservative MPs,

quieten down, please. Ben Bradshaw, the former Minister made it, he

said, "I'm reminded when the leader of the Labour Party before Harold

Wilson made that famous Euro-sceptic speech and Mrs Gaitskell said

darling, the wrong people are cheering." That is the challenge.

Thank you, bubbles! The Daily Politics is back

at its usual Noon time every day And I'll be back here on BBC One

next Sunday at 11pm for the last Sunday Politics of the summer - I'll

be talking to Scotland's Deputy Remember, if it's Sunday,

it's the Sunday Politics.