01/07/2011 Daily Politics

Hello and welcome to The Daily Politics.

What should we make of last night's by-election? Labour held on in

Inverclyde. But the SNP surged, slashed their majority, and helped

themselves to virtually the entire Liberal Democrat vote in the

process. The quiet man is turning up the

volume on migrant workers. Iain Duncan Smith says half the new jobs

we create go to foreigners from outside the EU. So is it time to

get a grip on immigration? And the most dangerous man in

Britain turned national treasure - Tony Benn will be here to tell us

why he changed a law that threatened to destroy his career 50

With me today are Andrew Pearce from the Mail and The Mirror's

Kevin Maguire, welcome to the show. First up, Labour will be breathing

a sigh of relief after the results came in for the Inverclyde by-

election. It managed to retain the seat with 15,118 votes over the

SNP's 9,280. The Conservatives came third with 2,784, and it was a bad

night for the Liberal Democrats who only managed 627. At the last

election they got just over 5,000 votes. UKIP came last with 288. So

whilst Labour won their vote, its share of the vote was down two

points. The SNP was up 15. The Tories, down two points and the

Liberal Democrats were down 11 points, as around four in every

five of their voters deserted them. Kevin Maguire, disastrous for the

Liberal Democrats, and the pain goes on for them, doesn't it?

Absolutely, they seem to take all the blame that everything the

coalition does. That vote is considered to be wrong. They

thought they were going to win the seat in Oldham, they fell behind.

In Barnsley, they came six and lost the deposit. It is disastrous and

they are getting all the blame, while the Conservatives seemed to

sail on. It wasn't great for Labour, they sort of stood still, lost a

bit, and the SNP picked up those Liberal Democrat votes. I think

they will have been pretty relieved to have won with 5,000 to spare,

the SNP would have liked to have won that, particularly because the

Queen is opening the Scottish Parliament today. It is a disaster

for the Lib Dems. They chased and experienced, light weight candidate

-- they chose an experience -- and inexperienced, light weight

In they are in real trouble north of the border and Charles Kennedy

could even lose his seat. It is Labour and the SNP north of the

border now. A lot of questions swirling around Ed Miliband, quite

rightly, about his leadership, but he has successfully negotiated four

tricky by-elections. They did not do very well in those Holyrood

elections. No, which is what makes Inverclyde even better. They got

hammered in Holyrood when the SNP got a majority on an electoral

system which was designed to stop any party get the majority. The

reason they got the majority was that all the Liberal Democrat vote

seem to have left the Liberal Democrats and gone to the SNP.

Tories will be quietly pleased. They want Ed Miliband to have some

victories now. The last thing the Tories want is the Labour Party to

get rid of a leader who they think is very beatable. Looking at his

personal poll ratings, you can see why. David Cameron won't be too

displeased. Fair enough. Hundreds of thousands of teachers

and civil servants went on strike yesterday. But although that was

all about their pensions, many public sector workers are also

worried about their jobs. The Government is spending less in

order to pay down the deficit. And that could mean job losses in some

areas. What ministers hope, of course, is that the private sector

takes off as a result and overall more people are employed in British

industry and small businesses. But that's not going to help much if

most of those new jobs go to those coming from overseas. So, today,

the Work and Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, is making a plea

to British businesses. Currently, youth unemployment stands at 19%

and Mr Duncan Smith claims that more than half the new jobs we

create are going to people coming In short, he wants British jobs for

British Workers. A slogan we've heard somewhere before.

This is our vision, Britain leading the global economy, by skills,

creativity, enterprise, flexibility, investment in transport and

infrastructure, a world leader in science, financial and business

services, in energy and the environment, from nuclear to

renewables. A world leader in the creative industries, and a world

leader in modern manufacturing as well, drawing on the talents of all,

to create British jobs for British That was Gordon Brown, from a

conference a few years ago. We are joined by Mark Serwotka and Justine

Greening, welcome to both of you. Marks are Walker, urging British

businesses to give youngsters here jobs before falling back on work

from abroad, music to your ears? -- Mark Serwotka. Not necessarily. We

have a million people unemployed and that is a real problem. We need

to create jobs. This is about giving the job that existed British

youngsters, surely you support that? I support creating jobs, not

having a policy that could end up raising real racial tensions. I

think when there are people who are unemployed, we have to be very

careful that we don't get them to blame people who are immigrants,

rather than ask the question, why aren't we creating more jobs?

would it create racial tensions if Iain Duncan Smith is talking about

people from outside the EU? Why wouldn't youngsters from Britain be

given a chance ahead of them? not saying people shouldn't have a

chance. I am saying, we need to create more jobs. Last year, I was

seriously ill in hospital for six weeks. When I looked at the people

who treated me, the porters, the cleaners, the Net is -- nesses,

consultants, doctors, they came from all over the world -- the

nurses. It made me think that our diversity is something we should be

celebrating, not be close to whipping up potential racial

tensions. To answer that point, will that policy whip up racial

tensions? I think it is plain common sense. We have 5 million

people who are either unemployed, or on some sort of incapacity

benefit. The overwhelming majority of them want to have a chance of

getting a job. Surely it makes sense that for them, and for public

finances, and for the broader communities which they are part of,

it makes sense to say we should be trying to make sure they have a

fair shot at getting some of the jobs that are being created. What

is wrong with plain common sense? You can't take that line in

isolation from everything else that is being done. Merthyr Tydfil,

where I went to school, 1700 people unemployed, 39 jobs advertised in

the Jobcentre. The people they need job creation. If we create jobs,

which is what I would like to see, decent, well-paid jobs, that is the

type of future I want to see. In that sense, I want British used to

get on the jobs ladder, but I wanted because of job creation. --

British views. Isn't the problem for the government that they can't

force businesses to do this? Beijing is an admission that they

can't do anything. -- the word, Do you agree there should be a

tougher immigration policy? That is what we are putting in place right

now. The other half of this is making sure that people coming

through school have got the right skills that companies need. Too

often in the past, they haven't. It is about schooling and education,

but work placements and apprenticeships. That is why we

have such a big focus on that. Talking about education youngsters

in schools, -- educating youngsters. The day of action yesterday. It was

a fantastic success. In terms of public support, which is finely

balanced, how do you measure that? It was a success, even in the terms

of rumbling the government. We saw a government in disarray. Francis

Maude had to be withdrawn from the field, Danny Alexander introduced

as a late substitute. He changed the script, started reinterpreting

Lord Hutton's report. It exposes that the government have no eye for

the detail, which is why negotiations were unsuccessful.

is finely balanced, are you sure that you are going to maintain

public support for strike action? think we will because I think the

public see this as a thin end of the wedge. They see it as a part of

austerity packages that target the vulnerable, those in welfare and

public sector workers, and they feel it is unfair. It is difficult

for David Cameron and the government to judge the mood of the

country. Where is the government prepared to negotiate? That is what

everybody says they want, they negotiated or discussed settlement.

-- a negotiated or discussed. Hutton came up with a set of

recommendations to make sure that public sector pensions are

sustainable going forward. Those recommendations are what we are

discussing with the unions? Where will you negotiate? On the increase

in the age they have to work? On the contributions? Or the tactical

scheme they will have when they retire? Which are negotiable?

talks are ongoing, they are covering a whole range of this --

different aspects of how we can make sure we still have public

sector pensions among the best in the world. Also for the taxpayer,

that they are sustainable as well. One of the most important points

that Lord Hutton made was that you could not make a 50 year bet that

the schemes we have in place would be sustainable if then. For the

people working in the public sector, they deserve to know that the

pension scheme they will get when they retire is one they can rely on.

That is what we are trying to sort out. It is plain common sense.

this going to be resolved? Not in the short term, because the

government won't budge. They won't say if they are going to compromise.

The other unions have demands. The lower rate of inflation, CPI

against RPI and so on. David Cameron said the public pensions

work broken. That is not the case. The Hutton report confirms that.

There is a battle for public opinion, he thought it was a home

win. The rally was like a revolt of Middle England. There were rebuked

-- lots of young women who you would not expect to be on strike,

demonstrating. I think the fairness argument will seek out into the

wider population. I think it was about 20% of civil servants who

went on strike. It was not a triumph. I think Downing Street...

They are hugely relieved because they do not think public opinion is

on the side of the trade unions. have covered industrial disputes

for 25 years and the employer always claims to be relieved.

didn't have that sort of feeling of a standstill. Newspapers and some

broadcasters, whooping it up as if the world was going to end... That

wasn't the case. It was Dave Prentis from Unison talking about a

general strike. It was a 24 hour strike, designed to draw the

public's attention to the issue, and in that it was spectacularly

successful. The one thing it might achieve is that the ministers we

are talking to might bother to read the report, because they had not

before. Is that the sum total of the success? Is it going to yield

results? They are two issues. One is the sub-standard issue about

Does yesterday's strike make it closer? I think it is -- the answer

is no. The way we are going to get through it is by sitting down and

talking. Many unions yesterday were not on strike. Only about 10% of

civil servants went on strike. The overwhelming which majority put the

public first. The figure of 10% is a joke. We will now show the public

that ministers have to engage on the detail and we shouldn't be

forced to work longer, pay more and get less. More meetings on that,

from today. Thank you. This week's change-maker is well known to

anyone who's followed politics over the years. Tony Benn's Peerages Act

of 1963 is probably not his biggest legacy but, without it, this

"persistent commoner", as he likes to call himself, might never have

got his career off the ground. This is the central lobby of

Parliament, and the man we're featuring today is a famous, long-

standing parliamentarian. He went from the Commons to the Lords, then

back to the Commons, before he retired. He did not change the law

himself, but the law was changed because of the things he did.

There were public opinion shifts, and then the guys in parliament

realised they had to concede. Benn's father was an MP, and in

1941, for political reasons, he accepted a hereditary peerage. This

Act would not have affected his second son's political carrier

until his first son was tragically killed in the war. From then on, he

knew that one day a problem would arise, since a peer would not sit

in the Commons. For over a decade, he fought tirelessly to renounce

his title, but events overtook him. My dad was taken ill in Parliament

and I went with him to the hospital. He died and I was with him when he

died. And I knew at that moment that a situation would develop. So,

I rang up the Speaker, and the Speaker said, you can't come any

more. I said, I'm a member of parliament. He said, sorry, you're

disqualified. Losing passes and access to the Commons, Tony Benn

took the unusual step of fighting anyway, and won. We had a very hard

fight. The Conservatives was saying, there is no point in voting for him,

he will be disqualified. I wrote to Winston Churchill and asked for his

support, I said, now you're free, can you support me? He sent me a

letter of support. I must be the only Labour candidate who has had

that. But winning wasn't enough, as the newly elected MP discovered.

When I went to the door of the House, as a new member, the

doorkeeper said, you can't come in, and I said, have you had

instruction to use force to keep me out? And he said yes. I was not

interested in a fight, so I turned away. And the man I had beaten took

my seat. Footing the years, his opponent held the seat as Tony Benn

fought in the courts at his own expense to change the law. But

changes in the Tory TANYA STEVENSON: Proved more important.

The Government changed the law at the time because they wanted Alec

Douglas-Home to become Prime Minister, and he was a peer. But

the real argument was, did my constituency have the right to

choose who they wanted to represent them? That choice was finally

recognise, the new law allowing him to renounce the peerage and fight a

by-election - again - and win - again. They will not lock the door

this time. It was a significant change, but the 1963 peerages Act

has affected few actual people. But for Tony Benn, it has an actual

value. If I went to the dentist and he started drilling my teeth, and

he said, I am not a dentist, but my father was a very good dentist, I

think on the whole I would go to a different man to do my teeth.

anyone ever suggest in your career that you should move to the Lords?

When I left Parliament in 2001, a hint was dropped, was there

anything I would like? I think they might have been happy to make me

appear, but I would not be seen dead in the place. -- to make me a

peer. Looking and listening to that film, it was pretty brutal, the way

they barred you from the House of Commons, I had no idea that that is

how they dealt with it. Well, I was not the first person who complained.

Quentin Hogg inherited a peerage in 1950 and tried to keep it and stay

in the Commons and they turned him down. So it was not a brand new

issue, but I decided the the Government thing to do was to fight

it. I studied peerage history, and I realised that over the years,

governments could do what they like. In the Middle Ages there was one

man who killed his father because he wanted his title, so they kept

him out, and there are a lot of other examples. I put it to them on

a personal level and they turned me down, and then I had another by-

election. Were you surprised about the way the Houses of Parliament

behaved, bearing in mind, this was not the will of Tony Benn.

stuffy old British establishment. Of course it was because it was

Tony Benn II, it was a little bit personal. And you got the backing

of the opposition, not just Winston Churchill, but also of the Tory

party? Well, one or two Conservatives supported me, but

most didn't. There were some people in the Labour Party who wondered

whether it wasn't a diversion. So you were looking for support from

various sources, but it was mainly my constituents that made the

difference. You have said that politics should be about policies

and not personalities. And yet you are most treasured now for your

personality, not necessarily for the issues. In that case, it was

the constituency that won. They voted for me when I was

disqualified, they have the right to choose what they wanted to

represent them, that was the real issue. The fact that I was thrown

out and unemployed was a minor question. You know what the media

are like. I have no idea what you're talking about! But don't you

think that Tony Blair and his treasured as a personality now, not

just for the issues he has campaigned about? -- Tony Benn.

including my son, who used to vilify you 30 years ago, but

yesterday we went on the rally, and you were cheered the moment you

appeared. But it is a fascinating battle you fought, because there

are so many people now lobbying party political leaders to try to

get into the House of Lords, demanding peerages - you gave it up.

But it is unfinished business in many ways. You go to the House of

Lords, it is the upper chamber, the Commons is the lower chamber. It is

very opulent and gilded, it is the MPs who have to go to the House of

Lords for the Queen's Speech. almost 50 years later, we have

still got 94 hereditary peers, which is astonishing. Are you

amazed that we are still looking at the issue of House of Lords reform?

When I started this you could not get into the Lord's unless you were

a hereditary peer. Now, you can't get in and anyone can get out. So

it did bring about a bit of a change. But the Lords is still

treated as the Upper House, though how anyone can except a Parliament

whether membership is made up of people appointed by the Prime

Minister and not elected at all cost an incredible to me.

coalition is reducing the number of MPs from 650 to 600. And yet since

the election he has created nearly 120 new peers. Why did you not stay

in the Lords? I never went near the place. Why was that? I believe in

democracy, it is very straightforward. I have been

elected for Bristol several times. I was very proud to be a member of

Parliament. But you could have helped your party in the House of

Lords? And I just did not believe in it. I believe in democracy and I

believe in elected parliaments, I know that is a controversial view.

Tony Benn, thank you very much. Our weekly reminder now of what else

has been happening in the world of politics over the last seven days.

Here's The Week In 60 Seconds. The Greek government survived

another make-or-break vote in the Athens parliament. Violence in the

streets did not stop Greek MPs backing a new austerity package.

Protests, too, in England and Wales, as strikes closed thousands of

schools. Public sector workers are up in arms about changes to their

pensions. The Chinese premier was on a visit

to the UK. David Cameron announced �1.4 billion in trade deals, but

the Chinese leader said the British should stop finger-pointing over

human rights. What he thought of the sword waving was not recorded.

Scottish students will continue to get free education in Scottish

universities. For students from elsewhere in the UK, fees will rise

to �9,000 -- to up to �9,000. And Ken Clarke announced that it is OK

to hit a burglar with a burglar. If you were a grand mother, you can go

even further. If an old lady picks up a kitchen knife and sticks it in

the 18-year-old burglar, she has not committed a criminal offence,

and we will make that clear. We saw Greece and the chaos there -

we're joined now by Sharon Bowles, who was named recently as one of

the most powerful people in the world in the field of financial

regulation, because she chairs the European Parliament's Economic and

Monetary Affairs Committee. More powerful even than George Osborne -

surely not! On the subject of Greece, to a lot of people from the

outside, it seems unsustainable for Greece to remain as part of the

eurozone... I think the problems of any exit of

Greece from the eurozone, or any other attempt at breaking up the

eurozone, would cause ramifications that would be bad for everybody.

Why would it not just cut the losses, and Greece could bail-out

and devalue their currency and that would be that? Technically they

would be in default or more of their loans, which would be very

expensive for them. And of course it would be very expensive for many

of Europe's banks. Especially for those which are exposed to Greek

banks. And it would impact the UK severely. Although we may not have

a lot of Greek sovereign debt, we are exposed through our banks to

other banks which are exposed. So it could be a Lehman Brothers

scenario all over again. How do you justify it to Europeans, not least

the Germans, that they should continue drip-feeding the Greek

economy with no guarantee that things will improve? There are

several branches to this. First of all it has got to be understood

that Germany gains 100 billion euros a year from being in the euro,

which is pegged at a much more competitive level than it would

have been if it was the Deutschmark. So, they are benefited handsomely

from being in the euro, partly because less competitive countries

like Spain and Portugal are in it. What about us? We are

interconnected to it because they are our largest trading partners.

We do not benefit to the same extent as the Germans, in that

sense? Know, because we are not in the euro, but we are linked to it.

And we are linked to the economies in the euro. So the demise of the

euro in any shape or form would be harmful for the UK. There you go,

it would be very harmful for us, Andrew Pierce... It is harmful now,

because we are under writing Greek debt. The European Union budget is

increasing and we have massively increased our support to the IMF to

help pay for the bail-outs. It is ironic because we did not join the

euro, thank God, something at least we can thank Gordon Brown for.

Because it is a basket case. If the euro is a basket case, would you

support one of the plans which has been put forward, Kevin Maguire,

for example, the French plan to try to keep Greece afloat until it can

pay back some of its debts, or would you think it should be cut

off? No, I think that is a better way forward. Christine Lagarde, the

French woman running the IMF, George Osborne backed her, and she

backs that policy, to keep Greece in. Before we write of the euro,

and it is suffering terrible strains and stresses, people who go

on holiday in France and Spain and Portugal, there are finding their

pound is buying a lot less than it did a few years ago, because the

euro has not collapsed. Are you seriously saying we should join the

Eurocamp? I did not say that, but you're writing it off. If I had a

pound for every time I heard a right winger saying, it is

collapsing, it is gone. They're right, it is collapsing. Would you

like to see Britain joining the euro? I think it is off the agenda

for some time now because there are going to be fundamental reforms

which draw the economies closer together. It is a kind of closeness

which I think the UK would be less than comfortable with. That is one

of the main reasons we did not join in the first place. But you would

support the idea of Britain joining? In the long term, if they

can get the euro fixed as it should have been in the first place, many

things which the UK said would need to be done, then in the long term,

I would see that the UK could join, but it is not a current political

debate. What do you support in terms of dealing with the Greek

situation? I think the European side of the bail-out has to be made

more sustainable and affordable, not just the Greece, but for

Portugal and Ireland. The rate of interest which are being charged...

So that the countries which are making loans - Don't forget, these

are loans - countries are making a nice little tidy profit out of it,

and that should not be the case. But it is all based on the idea of

repayment, which seems to be in the never-never land. Again, I think

they should extend the terms of the loans in the interest of

sustainability. The interest which is paid as an insurance, if you

like, that could be treated like returnable collateral. We have only

recently paid off America for all of the loans from the Second World

War, so it is quite common in international finance to take out

loans which you repay many decades later. Thank you very much. That's