11/05/2014 Sunday Politics South

Morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics, where we're talking

about the Europe-wide contest that really matters. No, not Eurovision.

The European elections. There are local elections across England too

on May 22nd. The party leaders are campaigning ahead of polling day.

The results could be a pointer to the Big One, May 2015. We'll be

speaking to the man in charge of Labour's election battle plan. Has

the opposition really got its sights set on all-out victory in 2015? Or

will it just be content with squeaking home? And you can't

mention elections these days without talking about the impact of this

In the South: As the local dlections him if UKIP really

In the South: As the local dlections loom, have we just got too lany

councils with too many councillors sitting on them? And if a ther has

to be shed, which boroughs. What will make a

difference to the way you vote? And I'm joined by three journalists

guaranteed to bring a touch of Eurovision glamour to your Sunday

morning. With views more controversial than a bearded

Austrian drag act and twice the dress sense, it's Nick Watt, Helen

Lewis and Janan Ganesh. So you might have thought you've already heard

David Cameron promise an in-out referendum on EU membership in 017

if he's still Prime Minister. Many times. Many, many times. Well he

obviously doesn't think you've been listening, because he's been saying

it again today. Here he is speaking to the BBC earlier. We will hold a

referendum by the end of 2017. It will be a referendum on an in-out

basis. Do we stay in a reformed European Union or do we leave? And

I've said very clearly that whatever the outcome of the next election,

and of course I want an overall majority and I'm hoping and

believing I can win an overall majority, that people should be in

no doubt I will not become Prime Minister unless I can guarantee that

we will hold a referendum. Here s saying there that an overall

majority there will definitely be a referendum. If these are the

minority position, he won't form a new coalition unless they agree to a

referendum, too. The Lib Dems a pulmonary agree to that. They

probably will because the Prime ministers have a strong argument

which is I gave you a referendum back in 2010 so the least I need is

theirs and the Lib Dems are the only party who have stood in recent

elections on a clear mandate to hold a referendum, so it is difficult for

them to say no, there was interesting the interview he did

earlier today. He named everything was going to ask for. The most

controversial with him, as he said in his speech last year, he wants to

take Britain out of the commitment to make the European Union and ever

closer union. That is a very big ask, but the point is, he may well

get it because the choice for the European Union now, France and

Germany, is a clear wonderful do Britain in or out? Previously, it

was can you put up with a British prime ministers being annoying? I

think you'll find the answer is they are willing to pay a price but not

any price to keep Britain in. In this scenario, Labour would have

lost the election again because we are talking the slowly happen if Mr

Cameron is the largest party or has an overall majority. Could you then

see Labour deciding we had better go along with a referendum, too? I

think that's unlikely because as I think that's unlikely because

there's a huge upside for that for I think what's interesting is the idea

he would for minority government. Would you get confidence and look at

other options that might well happen with the way the arithmetic is going

or is he going to hold out and say the only way I will be Prime

Minister is in a majority Conservative government? No, the

implication of his remarks was I wouldn't form a coalition government

unless my coalition partners would also agree to vote for a referendum.

He's basically talking about is negotiating strategy in those

coalition talks. It's a red line and a huge opportunity for the Lib Dems,

because they know David Cameron absolutely has to do, for accidental

reasons, as a person who survives as Tory leader, to ask for that

referendum, so they can ask anything they want in return and if I was

Nick Clegg, I would work out in the next year one absolute colossal

negotiating demand for those coalition talks. For a party around

10% in the polls, they will do have the Prime Minister over a barrel on

this one, assuming that coalition talks goes well. They could make

Michael Gove Tbyte meeting. OK, we need to move on. So, the politicians

are out and about on what used to be called the stump ahead of local and

European elections in less than two weeks' time. But, without wanting to

depress you on a damp Sunday morning, the party strategists are

already hard at work on their campaign plans for the General

Election next May. Yes, it's less than a year to go. They may have

taken their time, but Labour's battleplan for 2015 is starting to

take shape. As well as take promising to freeze your energy

bills, and reintroduce the 50p rate of tax, Ed Miliband now says he

wants to intervene in the housing market to keep rents down. There's

even talk that the party leadership wants to bring more railway lines

into public ownership. And Labour is gambling that its big push on the

cost of living will see it through to the general election despite

evidence that growth is firmly back. Labour's campaign chief Douglas

Alexander hopes it all adds up to victory next May. But so far, the

evidence is hitting home very thin. One survey today shows that 56% of

people don't think Mr Miliband is up to the job of Prime Minister. As we

head towards one of the least predictable general elections in 70

years, has Labour got a message to win seats up and down the country?

And Labour's election co-ordinator and Shadow Foreign Secretary,

Douglas Alexander, joins me now Welcome to Sunday Politics. A lot of

these policies announced polar pretty well. By popular with the

country. When you add them together, it's a move to the left and what

would be wrong with that? I think is your packet suggests, the contours

in the coming campaign are becoming clear. Our judgement is the defining

issue of the year in British politics will be the widening gap

between the wealth of the country and the finances of ordinary

families. We believe it will be a cost of living election and we have

been setting out our thinking in relation to energy prices and rent,

but you will hear more from Labour Party in the coming months because

we're now less than one year away from a decisive moment. If the

leftish think tank suggested any of his policies in that Tony Blair

years, you would have opposed them. Let's be clear, when not going for

an interest but seeking to secure a majority for the only way to do that

is not simply to appeal to your base, but to the centre ground. I

believe we got genuine opportunities in the next year. You have the

Conservatives in a struggle with UKIP on the right of politics. The

Lib Dems 9% of trying to find their base, and there's a genuine

opportunity in the next year for Labour to dominate the centre ground

of politics and secure the majority Labour government we are planning

for in the coming year. I notice you didn't deny you wouldn't have

opposed. You say you have got an message for aspirational voters in

the South. This is what John Denham said. He thinks you're talking too

much to your core vote. He is right to recognise we took a

terrible beating in 2010. 29%. If you look at what we've done in the

last week, for example, the signature policy on rent Ed Miliband

announced to launch the campaign, there's now more than 9 million

people in the country in the private rented sector, more than 1 million

families. Many of them are in the south-east. They are seeing

circumstances where, suddenly, landlord will increase the rent and

they put the pressure involved in schooling, health care facing the

families, so it is important both in terms of policy and in terms of

politics that we speak to the whole country, not simply to one part of

it falls up what is the average rise in event last year? I don't know.

Can you tell me? 1%. 1% not in real terms. I'm not sure what the problem

is. It will happen to wages in last year, we are facing circumstances

where people will be worse off, up to ?1600 off worse and frankly, if

our opponents want to argue that the economy has healed and they deserve

a victory lap, good luck to them because actually, what we are

hearing from the Buddhist public, not just in the north and south is

not the cost living crisis is continuing and it affects families.

There was nothing aspirational about your party election broadcast for

the European elections. It looked like crude class war to money

people. That's a bit of it. Bedroom tax. Isn't it going to look bad that

two thirds of those affected are disabled? Who cares? They can't

fight back. Shall be lay-offs and NHS nurses? The National Health

Service? Oh yes. Mr Cameron? Who said that? Me. My gosh. The man has

shrunk. He's actually shrunk. What shall we do with him? Can we hunt

him? Nothing about Europe, Labour policy. News that the Tories would

result in negative campaigning and smear. You didn't tell you would be

just as bad. Let's start the party broadcast. The one thing guaranteed

to have most people reaching for the remote control these days are the

words, there now follows a party but the broadcast. I make no apology in

the factory to be innovative in how we presented. It's factual. It was a

policy -based critic of this government. And the Lib Dems role

within it. So you're claiming it's factual to betray the camera and

cabinet is not even knowing what the NHS is, -- the Cameron Cabinet. They

attack the disabled because they can't fight back. The Pinellas

Tanner severely Prime Minister Sun and he was treated during a short

life by the NHS. It's a fact many disabled people across the country

including in my constituency have been directly affected by the

bedroom tax. And ultimately, this Conservative led government,

including the Lib Dems, will be held accountable by the politicians. You

say that, the Prime Minister, who had a severely disabled son of. I

you not ashamed about? I shadowed Iain Duncan Smith of five months

also they don't have the excuses of seeing that saying nobody told them

the consequences of the bedroom tax. They went into this with their eyes

open. They knew about the hardship and difficulty. If they were

one-bedroom properties available across the country for people to

move into, their argument would be OK but they knew they were dealing

with the most vulnerable people Did you sign off that part of the

broadcast? Of course I stand by the fact of it. I wish David Cameron and

Iain Duncan Smith would apologise to the disabled people of the country

and the poorest people for the effects of the bedroom tax. I hope

we get that apology between now and election. As someone who thinks

integrity is important in politics, not ashamed of this kind of thing?

It's important we scrutinise the policies of this government as well

as adding a positive agenda for change. You want that you won't

promise this is the last time we'll see such a negative press campaign?

I don't think it is negative or personal to scrutinise the

government. So we'll get more of this? I'm less interested in the

background of the cabinet than their views. You call the upper-class

twits. It's for the British public to make a judgement in terms of the

British... That's how you depicted them. We are held in accountable for

the bedroom tax, the NHS, taxation, and our record they have to defend.

One reason are so fearful in this election is actually because they

know they have a poor record. Let's look at other part of the election

campaign. This poster. Particularly digitally doing the rounds. On that

shopping basket, can you tell us which items take the full 20% VAT?

It's representative of household shopping, which includes items like

cleaning products, and we know that food is not that trouble. People

don't go to the supermarket and say this is -- vatable. So you are

denying that ?450 extra is being paid? Yes, where'd you get that

figure? For an average family to pay ?450 a year extra VAT, they would

have to spend ?21,600 a year on vatable products at 20%. The average

take-home pay is only 21,009. They have got to spend on all sorts of

things which are zero VAT. So in addition to the items, has a range

of products people face in terms of VAT. How could an average family of

?21,000 a year spent 21,006 and the pound a year on 20% vatable items?

It's not an annual figure, is it? So what is it then? If it's an annual,

what is it? The increased VAT in this parliament is calculated over

the course of a Parliament. For the whole of the Parliament? And you're

illustrated this with a shopping basket which almost has no VAT on it

at all? People will be buying a weekly shop in the course of this

Parliament every week. Did you sign off on this as well? Of course. It

didn't dawn on you you're putting things on it which have no VAT? If

you want to argue some people go to the shops and say these are vatable

or not, I disagree. Even your rent cap announcement went wrong. You're

working on the rent rises and it turns out it wasn't. It was a post

your policy. It is the exception rather than the rule to have the

position we have at the moment. In Northern Ireland we have seen the

continued rise in terms of the rented sector but there is a

widespread recognition that for those people in the rented sector,

change is necessary. Are you coordinating this campaign? It seems

accident prone. This is a party that has set the agenda more effectively

than a Conservative party that said when David Cameron was elected he

wasn't going to bang on about Europe. The day after the election

we expect the Conservative party to be engulfed in crisis. I'm proud of

what we talk about and I think there is a clear contrast about a party

talking about issues people care about, and a Conservative party

talking about exclusively a referendum. Are you in charge of the

campaign? I am coordinating the campaign is, yes. The expensive

election guru you have hired, has he been involved in any of this? We

have started our discussions with him. You are going to have to brief

him about British politics because he doesn't know anything about it. I

make no apology for hiring him. He has a lot of experience in winning

tight elections and that is what we are expecting. If you are expecting

us to say, they have passed and we have to hold them accountable, then

I am sorry but we have a campaign that holds the Government and the

Conservatives to account for what I think is a very hopeless record in

government. Thank you. He leads a party with zero MPs but

his media presence is huge. He's had an expenses scandal, but the public

didn't seem to mind. He's got a privileged background but he's seen

as an anti-establishment champion. Nothing seems to stick to him, not

even eggs. I speak of course of Nigel Farage. We'll talk to him in a

moment, but first Giles has been out on the campaign trail ahead of

elections that could make or break the UKIP leader.

Nigel Farage likes a stage, and at this stage of the Euro and local

election campaign he is, like his party, in buoyant mood. They feel

they are on the verge of what they see as causing an earthquake in

British politics. Today Nigel is filling thousands seat venues and

bigger. Not that there's much sign of that at this press launch. But

it's a threat with serious money behind it, that they believe the

media and the political elite just haven't realised yet, much less

learned how to counter it. Not that it's all been plain sailing.

Offensive comments from some candidates has not only seen UKIP

labelled as racist, but necessitated a rally by the party to visibly and

verbally challenge that. The offensive idiotic statements made by

this handful of people have been lifted up and presented to the great

British public as if they represent the view of this party, which they

do not. They never have and they never will. APPLAUSE

I don't care what you call us, but from this moment on, please do not

call must trust a racist party. We are not a racist party.

The need to say that is not just about the European and local

elections even at that campaign launch it's clear UKIP's leader has

set his sights firmly on the ultimate prize. I come from the

south of England and I would not want to be seen as an opportunist

heading to the north, north Norfolk or whatever it will be. I will make

my mind up and stand in the general election for somewhere in Kent, East

Sussex, Hampshire, somewhere in my home patch. Back at UKIP HQ they are

still drilling down how the last fortnight of campaigning should go.

They aren't taking any chances, and one imagines having offices above

those of Max Clifford is a reminder how fragile built reputations can be

of the bubble bursting. They want their reputation to be built on

votes and they know anything but significant success on May 22nd and

some seats in Westminster in 20 5 isn't going to be good enough. And

after that, having sold yourselves as the honest outsiders, that stance

is harder to maintain once your people are on the inside. And subtle

changes from the past are already noticeable. The ordinary man of the

people stance is still working. Characteristically outside a pub,

Nigel Farage is glad handed by a customer. Two weeks to go, let's

cause an upset. Wouldn't that be great? The only sign that such an

interaction is different now is the ever presence of bodyguards who

shadow his every move. Over lunch ahead of Question Time, a radio

appearance, and then off to Scotland, I ask him if some of those

minded to vote UKIP who see him as a man they'd be comfortable having a

drink with are the sort of people he'd be entirely comfortable sitting

down with. Every political party attracts support from across the

spectrum and there will be some magnificent people who vote for us

and some ne'er-do-wells. The one common thing about UKIP voters is

that they are often not very political. And it's that people s

army that if UKIP can get to a polling booth might just create that

earthquake they want. Nigel Farage joins me now. When you

decided not to stand at the new work by election coming said if you lost

it that the bubble would have burst. What did you mean by that? I

was asked at seven 20p -- at 7: 1pm if I would stand, I have decided by

the next morning that I would not. I didn't know he was going to resign.

You claim only a handful of UKIP candidates have ever said things

that are either stupid or offensive, I'm right on that, yes? 0.1%, I d

rather it was non-. But why have you chosen a candidate to fight this

by-election that has said many things most people would regard as

stupid or offensive? Roger is fighting this for us, someone of 70

years of age who grew up with a strong Christian Bible background,

in an age when homosexuality was imprisonable. He had a certain set

of views which he maintained for many years which he now says he

accepts the world has moved on and he is relaxed about it. The comments

about homosexuality are not from the dark ages, they are from two or

three years ago. From when he was a Conservative, yes, so will you be

asking David Cameron that question? I have never seen a single comment

from Roger that would be deemed to be offensive. Do you regard his

comments on homosexuality as offensive? When he grew up,

homosexuality was illegal in this country. But this was in 2012 but he

said that. Most people have his age still feel uncomfortable about it --

of his age. In 2012 he said, if two men can be married, why not three,

why not a commune. Many people in this country are disconcerted by the

change in the meaning of marriage and in a tolerant society we

understand that some people have different views. But he has changed

his views now in only two years He says he is more relaxed about it.

Was he your candidate? He is a first-class campaigner who has had

30 years in industry, he served in the European Parliament, he is a

good candidate. This morning's papers suggest you are about to

select Victoria Ayling for Grimsby, but she is on camera saying that, of

immigrants, I just want to send a lot back. This is all very

interesting, and we can talk about it, all we could talk about the fact

that in 12 days we have a European election and every voter across the

UK can vote on it and it is really interesting. Are you happy to pick a

candidate that says of immigrants, I just want to send a lot back? I have

seen the tape, it is a complete misquote and she says it in the

context of illegal immigrants. I have seen the full quote and in the

context it is not about illegal immigrants. Let's come onto the

European campaign, you have used a company that employs Eastern

European is to deliver leaflets in London and the Home Counties. Have

we? I'm told that in Croydon one branch might have done that. Have

you found some indigenous Brits to deliver leaflets in Europe? We have

thousands joining the party every month and they are not all

indigenous because what is interesting is that in today's

opinion polls, UKIP is above the Lib Dems and the Conservatives amongst

the indigenous voting. We have not agreed a manifesto for

the general election, we will do over the course of the summer. This

is in your local election. We are having local elections in some part

of the country but we are fighting a European election. It is impossible

with the British media to have an intelligent debate on the European

question. But as I say, we are also fighting the local elections too.

You have promised these tax cuts, how much will they cost? I have met

-- read the local election manifesto and it doesn't make those promises.

We do talk about local services we do talk about the need to keep

council tax down but we don't talk about income tax. Absolutely not. In

local election campaigning you say you would restore cuts to policing,

double prison places, restore cuts to front line NHS, spend more on

roads, how much would that cost You are obviously reading different

documents to me. We are voting for local councillors in district

councils who have got little local budgets. Every party in a manifesto

puts his aspirations in it. Have you read it? Of course I have, cover to

cover, which is why I'm saying you are misquoting it. By the way, on

the bubble bursting, you told that to Norman Smith of the BBC. 75% of

British laws are now made in the European Union. Now AstraZeneca is

potentially going to be taken over by Pfizer. The BBC is refusing to

show the public that that decision cannot be taken here but by an

elected European commissioner, and we sit and argue about what is in or

not in the local election manifesto. It is my job, but let me come on to

AstraZeneca. Is it your view that a British government should stop the

takeover of AstraZeneca? It cannot. Can we please get this clear. I sat

next to Chuka Umunna the other day at question time and he said what

could and couldn't be done. He said I am being studiously neutral, and

the reason is we don't have this power. That is what the European

elections is about. Should France have the takeover of the food

company Danan? We seem to do things to the Nth degree and nobody else

does, perhaps because we have this culture and we obey it. In your

view, you don't think Pfizer should be able to take over AstraZeneca?

There is some good science within AstraZeneca which is in danger of

being asset stripped and lost. Because it is run by a Swede and a

Frenchman and most of its employees are overseas. I understand that but

there are still some good science being produced here. What did you

think of the Prime Minister saying he would not form a government after

the election unless he was able to have a referendum in 2017? I sat

here talking to you and you said to me that David Cameron had given a

cast-iron guarantee that if David Cameron becomes Prime Minister he

will have a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, but he didn't deliver on

that. He knows that people struggle to believe the renegotiation is

worth a row of beans. He is saying he will not form a government unless

he can go forward with the referendum. I know he is desperately

trying to pretend to be Eurosceptic whilst at the same time saying he

will campaign for Britain to remain in. In a sense, that is what this

election is about. We have three traditional parties, all of whom

passionately believe in the continued membership of the European

Union and we have UKIP saying we want trade and cooperation but there

is a bigger and better world out there. You are now travelling with I

think four bodyguards, has this affected you and your family life? I

can't stand it. I've always wondered about the place and on my own thing.

Sadly we have a couple of organisations out there headed up by

senior Labour Party figures who purport to be against fascism and

extremism, who received funding from the Department of communities, from

the trade unions, who have acted in a violent wait more than once. You

are saying the Labour Party is behind the threats? No, I said a

taxpayer funded, trade union funded and headed by senior Labour Party

figures, and I'm happy for them to come to my meetings and have an

itinerant with me, but it's not so much fun when there are banging you

over the head. I is still keen to be an MP? Yes, what UKIP will then do

is target before the general election next year for the one life

be easier if you just went to the Lords? That's the last thing I want

to do. There's an awful lot to do. Most of all, I will not rest until

we are free from political union and government from Brussels. Nigel

Farage, thank you for being with us. It's just gone 11.30am. 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

a Welcome to Sunday Politics South. big stories of the week. First

a Welcome to Sunday Politics South. My name's Peter Henley. We've got

rather a different programmd for you today. We're looking at the local

elections, which are just 10 days away now, and we've invited in

politicians from the three parties which run local authorities in our

region. Paul Harvey is a Labour councillor from Basingstoke and

Deane Borough Council, Donn` Jones is the leader of the Conservative

group on Portsmouth City Cotncil and Keith House is the Liberal Democrat

leader of Eastleigh Borough Council. And the deal is that they'rd here to

talk about their party's eldctoral prospects Thursday week, not to

electioneer about their indhvidual councils. Councillors electdd in

2010 with their seats at st`ke. What are Labour working on? Doorstep

action, talking to as many people as we can. The key point coming across

for us, public transport, housing. The pitch were making on rented

housing in particular strikds a chord in the south`east. Thd economy

is improving. Is all about dconomy? There are local issues that

actually, what the Conservatives are focused on is money and how well off

people are in their pockets and ensuring that taxation is going

down, public services are protected, like public health

spending, and the Conservathves in the region are focused on m`king

sure that we stand up for those people to go out and work, pay taxes

and ensure they are getting something back from the comlunity in

which they live. I am the d`ughter of a bricklayer. I am a classic

example of a conservative. Hn 2 10, these councillors were separate

They were Lib Dems in a verx different way. Are you trying to

draw apart from the Conserv`tives? In local government, we do not stand

with the Conservatives. Where we are running councils, we are st`nding on

our record of success. We are standing on our record of holding

parties to account, making progress in the future and preparing for the

general election as well. Btt Liberal Democrats are saying,

surely, we have nothing to do with that Nick Clegg? Of course we are in

government and we have a grdat record in government, too. Three

items in our manifesto promhses Pensions, education, taking millions

of people out of income tax, those are Liberal Democrat achievdments in

government. Liberal Democrats have the best record in the country of

keeping taxation down. That's not true! Look at our own region. We

have that council tax incre`ses for two out of the last three ydars in

Portsmouth. Even though a Conservative Secretary of State has

put forward the freeze grants, that was not taken advantage of. Localism

is the answer but if we look at the country as a whole, Liberal Democrat

councils have a better record of holding council tax town burn either

Conservatives all labour. You are in government and the cost of living

crisis people are suffering, through fuel bills and cuts to local

governments, those have slashed services in social care, supporting

people, public transport, and both of you are responsible for that

That is something that does concern voters. A Labour alternativd cares

about people. Neither of yot can escape the fact you are responsible

for that in government. This is the Labour copout, to be fair. Lake ``

many local councils have avoided cuts. Many councils have cut things

to make it look like they h`ve got to cut deeper than they need to He

is saying what he has just said about the cost of living crhsis in

the UK is like a mother givhng her child Swedes 365 days of"

distancing, why are my child's teeth falling out? `` days a year. The

cost of living crisis is because the Labour Party failed to get ` grip of

the balance sheet for ten ydars in government, and that's why `

Conservative and Liberal co`lition government have had to make tough

decisions and tough cuts. Btt actually, to make sure the balance

sheet is healthy for generations are people going forward. If we had done

it your way, the country wotld be bankrupt and we would have lost our

credit rating. It would probably be minus now. That would have `

knock`on effect for every btsiness, borrow and savour in this country.

The issue is they are cutting to the bone now. In Hampshire county

council, we're talking about ?1 5 million cuts to public transport.

There have been protests about services, but in local government, a

lot of efficiency has been found. Talk to people in housing arrears,

facing eviction, in the food banks because they can't afford to heat

their homes because of fuel poverty, talk to people in real crishs. You

can't and shouldn't deny it. There is a genuine issue in terms of

inequality that we are seeing because of the policies of the

coalition. There have been huge claims made by the Liberal Democrats

about how they have helped people and yet, it isn't found. Yes and no.

You have been popping up wh`t has been done as a coalition government.

Where I sit in Hampshire, IC cuts but I believe are the wrong way of

managing public sector finance. I have labelled them the Consdrvative

cuts of choice because they have decided to hit vulnerable pdople,

mainly because vulnerable pdople's electro` voice is not as lotd. ``

electoral voice. The bedrool taxes is not a tax. It's a reducthon in

benefits. He is talking abott the crisis of people who are behng

forced to move out of their home or have a massive loss of incole

because they are living in ` three`bedroom council house and

their children have moved ott. What I would say to him, he needs to look

at the crisis of the family who have got three small children under the

age of five who are living hn a one`bedroom flat that is dalp

because they are overcrowded and I would say, look at their crhsis Why

have we brought in this bedroom tax? Because we have a housing crisis.

And look at the lack of affordable housing and building and sed people

who cannot get on the ladder, who cannot get a home. When you talk

about the bedroom tax, let's talk about the two thirds of people who

are disabled hit by the bedroom tax to have no option. I have a case of

a disabled couple who need two bedrooms or their equipment and they

are trapped. They have got to reduce to a one bed flat. They can't put

the equipment in one`bedrool. That is an exception where you h`ve

overridden them. The spare room subsidy is right but the pr`ctice

has caused the difficulty. The policy should have been implemented

more sympathetically. Peopld with disabilities are a classic dxample.

That is something the government will get to, hopefully. There is a

great deal at stake. There are around 50 district

councils, county councils or unitary authorities in our region, `nd that

doesn't include all the parhsh councils. That's a whole lot of

local government. Is it maybe too much? In tough economic timds, when

all councils are looking to save money, could we maybe save `

substantial amount by doing away with some councils and, shock

horror, councillors? Our Dorset political reporter, Tristan Pascoe,

has been considering who might be suitable for the chop.

Because of the financial crhsis and economic downturn, councils have

seen huge cuts in their funding from government. Many are now sh`ring

services and merging departlents. This stretch of coastline rdally

typifies the arguments for reducing bureaucracy locally. From hdre, you

can see Christchurch, Bourndmouth, Poole and Purbeck to the West, each

with their own distinct identities, but each with their own sep`rate

authorities. One group in Dorset is calling for a brand`new unitary

authority from Bournemouth, Poole and Christchurch. We could see a

reduction in the number of councillors, for example, from

around 125 to about 54, which is the size of Bristol, with all the

benefits of promoting, internationally, a major

conurbation. To actually have one management is going to save, we

believe, quite a lot of mondy, several million in the year one

Right. Pay attention. This is Dorset. Currently, `ll

councils are signed up to the Dorset Waste Partnership, with the

exception of the two unitarx authorities in Bournemouth `nd

Poole. Still with me? Good. In the east of the county, Christchurch

Borough Council are currently involved in a partnership whth East

Dorset District Council. Thdy also share a joint chief executive.

They're involved in the Stotr Valley Partnership, for revenues and

benefits, with North Dorset District Council, soon to be joined by the

borough of Poole. Wake up at the back! In the west of the cotnty

West Dorset District Council and Weymouth and Portland Borough

Council currently share manx services and there are ongohng

discussions to bring North Dorset District Council into a tripartite

system. That's an awful lot of sharing of services. So why not cut

out the middleman altogether, the districts, and have a singld unitary

for Dorset? District councillors in West Dorset

get a minimum of ?4,000 each as their council allowance. Thdre are

48 of them. That's more district councillors than there are county

councillors, of which there are only 45. I would rather have a shngle,

unitary, rural authority th`t saves money but packs a punch in the

battle with the conurbation which, at the moment, takes most of the

resources that are availabld in this county. The middle tier is ` huge

waste of money. Shows just how money... How much money really has

been wasted over many, many years. With that sort of level of

representation, makes me wonder what they all do, to be honest whth you.

Should there be one authority for all Dorset? It would probably make

more sense but that's not rdally going to happen any time soon, I

wouldn't have thought. I thhnk it would be the way forward, as other

authorities are doing as well across the land. I don't expect thd left

hand what the right hand's doing. So, the people are up for it. What

about the county council le`der The current coalition made it clear

when they came to power in 2010 there would be no local govdrnment

reorganisation. But here in Dorchester, you've got 20 town

councillors, 48 district cotncillors and 45 county councillors. That s

too many, isn't it? It is always a temptation to think it is a panacea

for change by reducing the number of members. All those members `re

working hard for their commtnities and doing it because they to. We

shouldn't undervalue what they do. The biggest cost of any council is

the service it delivers. But potentially there are huge savings

to be made. In Wiltshire, fhve years ago, they did exactly that. They

reduce the number of councillors from more than 250 down to 88. They

also reduce their property portfolio from 98 council buildings to three,

including this new hub in S`lisbury, and saved a tonne of cash in the

process. We have saved ?100 million over four years. It was difficult.

But many people in Wiltshird only thought there was one counchl in the

beginning. And people said to us, we want a council that delivers us good

services are good value for money. But despite the obvious fin`ncial

benefits, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

People's perceptions of councils, they don't realise they provide

services. Local government having three tiers can be confusing for the

public. It's important for councillors who do a lot of work in

the community. There is a great deal of talk back efficiency but also

representation and making stre people's voices are heard. That s

the real benefit of the smaller tier councils. A group of people in the

community were able to choose what they want to take the most local

decisions. We also have this European election. It's hugd. Is

UKIP going to make a differdnce to Labour? The way the Labour vote is

holding up across the south`east, it's holding up strongly. Btt UKIP

has this message of anti`politics. It is trying to tap into solething

that is relating to how people feel about politics, but when yot talk

about local councillors and what they do on the ground, that such an

important part of their rold. Hampshire is so remote from

Basingstoke because it is in Winchester. You feel remote, so who

is your representative in Winchester? There is a real issue of

remoteness. When it comes to UKIP, they are not there. They must take

votes from conservatives. Originally, they were a right of

centre party, but now, they are appealing to everybody. I do believe

they are taking votes across the board. Where you have got trade

unions against the cuts, a left of centre original party. They are big

in Oxford but don't exist in most parts of the south`east. Thdy are a

great protest party. They are tending to take votes from other

parties. Labour and Conserv`tives, last year, we saw those votds

collapse. However, a bubble is about to burst.

Now our regular round`up of the political week in the South in 0

seconds, and this week, it's a jungle out there.

The personal details of 18,000 people in Berkshire were

accidentally released into the wild. Wokingham council sold them after

what they said was a software glitch. Residents may find they get

junk mail that they weren't expecting to get through thd post.

No apology from water for the shooting of migratory birds,

discussed by MPs this week. Our turtledoves have declined bx 95

since 1970. Flocking to Bournemouth, though

international students. Language schools reported a 30% incrdase in

places. Finally, our snappy politichan

feature went viral. This twdet went wild on the Internet.

A great shot! Is there anything new on the campaign trail? Talkhng to

people. It's true. My best experience was I walked round the

corner from my door and this woman runs at an herbage armours. She

said, I wanted to tell you how I will vote. `` runs out in hdr

pyjamas. One of my candidatds, Frank Jonas, he has got a big motorbike

and he has taken to riding `round Portsmouth on his motorbike would

vote Frank on the back. Sochal media is a big thing, so Facebook,

Twitter, taking photographs of the streets you have just canvassed

Don't steal the idea! That's the Sunday Politics hn the

South. Thanks to my guests, Paul Harvey, Donna Jones and Keith House.

Next week, we'll be grilling some of the politicians who'd like to

represent us in Brussels. If you bump into the PM or any othdr

politician, don't forget to tweet it to #snapapolitician, but for now,

it's back to Andrew. the website now. Now it is back to

you, Andrew. Welcome back, let's go straight to

our panel. What did you make of Mr Alexander's defence of the Labour

party election broadcast? It is difficult for them because they

started by saying they were not going to do negative campaigning and

they have thrown that away for an advert which is funny but crude in

the class war sense. He didn't look thrilled to be defending it. There

is a page in Tony Blair's memoirs talking about negative campaigning,

and he says that anything too extreme turns off the average voter

so his line of attack on Hague was funny jokes but... I think this

failed the Blair test, it was too vicious. If your strategy is to

shore up your car vote, that advert was genius. If your strategy is to

reach out to a broader number of voters, Middle Britain, then that

advert was a complete disaster. It looks like there is a lot of

negativity and smears all round in the next year. That definitely looks

the way we are going. They will be essentially trying to re-run by --

the American election. I am slightly puzzled why we cannot have our own

election gurus who live here and understand the country. I should

point out that the ?450 extra VAT that was claimed in that Labour

poster, both Ed Balls and the Labour Treasury team have said that is ?450

per year. Nonsense the VAT rise one year. I should also point out that

Nigel Farage said to Norman Smith, the BBC is always reliable Norman

Smith that if you run in Newark and lost the bubble would burst. I

should also point out that although a number of the tax rises I

mentioned on council tax, minimum wage tax and some other things that

UKIP wants to cuts, a couple of these are in the local manifesto but

several are not. They are on the UKIP website, which is still current

and dated 2014. We like to make sure we are absolutely right. Let's talk

about Nick Clegg and Michael Gove and the latest spat. Let me show you

this headline in the Observer this morning. From both the Independent,

he called him a zealot, lunatic is of -- another word. Do we take this

seriously? It hinges on this question of what counts as an area

of need in education. The Lib Dems say an area of need is one where

there are not enough school places to meet local demand. He says it can

also be a place where there are surplus places but that is for a

reason. Local places don't trust those schools to do a good job for

their kids. It surprises me because there isn't a yawning distance

between David Laws and Michael Gove. David Laws has found himself between

a rock and a hard place because I asked -- as I understand it most Lib

Dems don't like the free schools but Mr laws was quite sympathetic to it

and he is now having to this respect it. When they asked people who are

the most hated politicians in a poll were this week, Michael Gove is off

the charts, far above David Cameron or George Osborne. This is

tit-for-tat war. The Liberal Democrats believe Michael Gove had a

hand in leaking the document that showed Nick Clegg was opposing the

tougher Chris Grayling position on knife crime. They are saying there

were Cabinet ministers who never usually attend the sub Cabinet

meeting, they turned up and the document is leaked so what we are

getting is tit for tat on that. It is inevitable but it is not good for

either side of the Coalition. Voters will look at it and say it is

politics of the playground. I read in the Mail on Sunday this morning

that some Tory insiders are accusing Lib Dems of spreading rumours about

the camera in marriage. The rebuttals of education story is that

the free school meals is sucking money away. I always thought they

would work together without fuss and yet it has been more the source of

disagreement then I would have expected a couple of years ago. Is

it serious? It is serious obviously, using that language, but is it fatal

for the Coalition? I think it is a road bump because I don't think

anybody wants to dissolve the Coalition. It is a challenge for

Labour because where do they stand on the free schools? They invented

the Academy programme so it is difficult for them to take a

hands-off approach at this stage. There was a danger for Michael Gove

that he looks ideological but the danger for the Liberal Democrats is

that they are breaking the rules for the Coalition they said that they

wouldn't break which is that they looked like opposition in

government. Is Michael Gove's position safe? Very safe. If he

moves in a reshuffle that will be to a a job. That's all for today. The

Daily Politics will be back on BBC Two at lunchtime from Tuesday

onwards. I'll be back here on BBC One at 11am next week. Remember if

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