:00:40. > :00:44.Good afternoon, and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:45. > :00:49.A coalition rift opens up over the choice of a new quango king or queen
:00:50. > :00:51.to run the schools inspectorate. Was Michael Gove right to ask its
:00:52. > :00:56.Labour-supporting head to leave? The Prime Minister wants a different
:00:57. > :01:00.relationship with Europe. The French aren't keen. But, can the Foreign
:01:01. > :01:01.Secretary persuade the new German government, or anyone else, of the
:01:02. > :01:08.case for reform? It's a top priority for voters, and
:01:09. > :01:10.a big political issue. But what's the truth about immigration, and is
:01:11. > :01:18.it good or bad for us? It's a tough life as a peer of the
:01:19. > :01:22.realm. We'll reveal the gastronomic faux pas that have the Lords and
:01:23. > :01:24.Ladies all hot under their ermine collars.
:01:25. > :01:38.All that in the next hour. With us today is a former diplomat
:01:39. > :01:41.who's now on the advisory council of the pressure group Migration Watch.
:01:42. > :01:44.Alp Mehmet, welcome to the programme.
:01:45. > :01:47.First, this morning, to the row over who chairs the education watchdog,
:01:48. > :01:49.Ofsted. The current chair, Labour-supporting Sally Morgan, has
:01:50. > :01:52.not had her period of office extended, and has accused Number Ten
:01:53. > :01:55.of interfering with the appointment, amidst rumours that she is to be
:01:56. > :02:01.replaced by a Conservative supporter. The Liberal Democrat
:02:02. > :02:12.Schools Minister is said to be furious, and has demanded to be
:02:13. > :02:16.consulted over her replacement. This is what Education Secretary Michael
:02:17. > :02:21.Gove had to say yesterday. There is a principle across
:02:22. > :02:24.government that there should be no automatic reappointment, and after
:02:25. > :02:27.three or four years, whatever the term is, it is appropriate to bring
:02:28. > :02:35.in a fresh pair of eyes. Joining me now the previous chair of
:02:36. > :02:42.Ofsted, Zenna Atkins. Is failing to reappoint Sally Morgan
:02:43. > :02:47.politically motivated? I think Michael Gove it right in
:02:48. > :02:50.saying a three-year appointment is not automatically renewed. The proof
:02:51. > :02:54.of the pudding comes in seeing who replaces her and whether they go
:02:55. > :02:58.through a fair and transparent appointment process.
:02:59. > :03:04.If she is replaced by a Conservative donor, but that change your mind
:03:05. > :03:07.over whether it was political not to reappoint her? If you can
:03:08. > :03:11.demonstrate, I don't think it matters whether someone is a Labour
:03:12. > :03:16.supporter or Conservative donor. If they have been through a fair and
:03:17. > :03:20.open and transparent process of appointment and I genuinely the
:03:21. > :03:25.right candidate. There are a lot of people who could serve Ofsted very
:03:26. > :03:43.well. As long as they have a relevant background experience and
:03:44. > :03:45.something to add, that is OK. If it is somebody left-field, simply
:03:46. > :03:47.because they were a Conservative donor, it is not acceptable.
:03:48. > :03:50.Isn't it curious that Michael Gove was at great pains at the weekend to
:03:51. > :03:52.say Sally Morgan had done a fantastic job. Superlative, he said.
:03:53. > :03:56.So why let her go? His view is it is useful to have a
:03:57. > :04:01.fresh face at the top. Three years is quite short. Four or five years,
:04:02. > :04:06.usually after that, it is a good idea to bring in someone new. The
:04:07. > :04:11.same applies to most boards. But three years is a short period. There
:04:12. > :04:16.is a difficulty in saying we extend it for one year. They thought it was
:04:17. > :04:22.time to go out for a new appointment after her first term. You surprised
:04:23. > :04:26.by this furore, what is your analysis of that?
:04:27. > :04:30.It is unusual when your term of office, because I have held a number
:04:31. > :04:33.of public appointments, it is unusual to complain at the end of
:04:34. > :04:39.your term of office. Most of us accepts there is a need
:04:40. > :04:43.for change and move on. There have been rumour mills. Partly, people
:04:44. > :04:48.are worried about political appointments. This is on the tail
:04:49. > :04:52.end of quite a few women in public office and seemingly not renewed in
:04:53. > :04:57.their posts. I would really hate to think we are going to take a step
:04:58. > :05:05.backwards into the 1990s when these non-departmental public bodies or
:05:06. > :05:08.quangos are run by men. That would be very unhelpful, diversity is
:05:09. > :05:12.vital. Does this worry use someone like
:05:13. > :05:18.Sally Morgan is not going to be reappointed, another woman, to
:05:19. > :05:24.another high-profile role? If this is going to be the general
:05:25. > :05:29.trend, we have started to see this. I am not interested in women on
:05:30. > :05:36.boards for the sake of that. We need diversity, different opinions and
:05:37. > :05:42.experiences. All the research shows this. If we are going back to the
:05:43. > :05:46.dreaded days I will be personally disappointed. Sir David Bell has
:05:47. > :05:52.said Michael Gove should not surround himself with yes-men, a
:05:53. > :05:56.criticism that while Sally Morgan may have generally backed him, now
:05:57. > :06:03.he wants someone who will do it more robustly. That is good advice from
:06:04. > :06:06.David Bell. It is not the issue of yes-men.
:06:07. > :06:12.Ofsted has a unique role to play in public confidence. Unless Ofsted is
:06:13. > :06:16.seen to be independent... It inspects the government framework.
:06:17. > :06:22.It must be seen to be doing that without fear or favour, that is
:06:23. > :06:24.essential. Does look like a political decision?
:06:25. > :06:28.I am not close enough to Michael Gove to know but I suspect he is
:06:29. > :06:32.under enough pressure now to ensure there is a proper appointment
:06:33. > :06:38.process. You have said how important it is from a public perception that
:06:39. > :06:42.trust isn't undermined. Do you think now that it won't be
:06:43. > :06:47.seen as independent as it has in the past?
:06:48. > :06:51.No, I don't fear that. There is some work that needs to be done by
:06:52. > :06:56.Michael Gove to demonstrate to the public that the next appointment is
:06:57. > :07:03.fair and transparent. Myself, I went through headhunters, a panel
:07:04. > :07:07.interview, and their work to clear candidates. As long as we see a
:07:08. > :07:09.process like that, I think the public will be satisfied.
:07:10. > :07:16.Disappointment could be taken forward by the office of Public
:07:17. > :07:22.appointments which could give it more distance and transparency. What
:07:23. > :07:25.is your view of the criticisms levelled at Ofsted in terms of the
:07:26. > :07:32.questions they are asking, the way they are carrying out inspections.
:07:33. > :07:37.That preceded this row. There is an inevitability, certainly
:07:38. > :07:46.at the time I chaired Ofsted. There were criticisms then, all the way,
:07:47. > :07:53.because schools get worried. It is easy to say Ofsted says, therefore
:07:54. > :07:57.we can't do this good practice. That is quite common currency. The
:07:58. > :08:01.important thing is the inspection frameworks are seen to be fair and
:08:02. > :08:07.robust. I see nothing to suggest the frameworks introduced by Michael
:08:08. > :08:14.Wilshaw are anything but that. But it is used by schools as an excuse.
:08:15. > :08:21.Does this look political from Michael Gove? Inevitably it will be
:08:22. > :08:26.seen as political. The proof of the pudding will be who is selected, how
:08:27. > :08:30.they perform afterwards, not just who is selected. Quite often it
:08:31. > :08:35.seems to be the right person and we end up with a dead duck. I would
:08:36. > :08:43.like to see someone, give them a couple of years. I am a governor of
:08:44. > :08:48.a school in Hertfordshire. We got an outstanding report from Ofsted. I
:08:49. > :08:52.have no problems. However, it is an area that needs to be thought
:08:53. > :09:00.through carefully. I am sure Michael Gove is doing exactly that. Michael
:09:01. > :09:06.Gove still gets to pick a successor. Why not? Secretaries of State have
:09:07. > :09:13.been picking people who run... The criticism levelled is that it is
:09:14. > :09:17.politically motivated. When I was working in Whitehall and Labour was
:09:18. > :09:22.in office, there wasn't any shortage of political appointees in those
:09:23. > :09:27.days. I don't think that is a valid argument. The Lib Dems are furious,
:09:28. > :09:31.David laws is said to be furious. Is this more about coalition politics
:09:32. > :09:36.than the independence of Ofsted? David laws would say that, wouldn't
:09:37. > :09:40.he? He wants to attract attention. He has a reputation to build
:09:41. > :09:42.himself. It is an opportunity for him to say something to catch the
:09:43. > :09:48.eye and he has done just that. After a busy weekend of Oxfordshire
:09:49. > :09:51.pub lunches with French President Francois Hollande for David Cameron,
:09:52. > :09:53.it's the turn of William Hague to play host today, as new German
:09:54. > :09:56.Foreign Minister Frank Walter Steinmeier is in town. The
:09:57. > :09:59.Conservatives are trying to find some kindred spirits on the
:10:00. > :10:02.continent, as they press ahead with renegotiating Britain's relationship
:10:03. > :10:06.with the EU. It's proving to be a pretty tricky dating show for
:10:07. > :10:12.Cameron and co, as they look for a partner in Europe. It didn't get off
:10:13. > :10:14.to the best start, when the Private Members' Bill to legislate for an
:10:15. > :10:22.in-out referendum before 2017 effectively bit the dust in the
:10:23. > :10:31.House of Lords. Meanwhile, David Cameron was trying to win the heart
:10:32. > :10:34.of President Hollande. But he spurned the Prime Minister's
:10:35. > :10:37.advances, saying that EU treaty change was not a priority. The
:10:38. > :10:40.German Chancellor Angela Merkel had been making some encouraging noises
:10:41. > :10:43.for Mr Cameron, suggesting that even this pro-European powerhouse was
:10:44. > :10:49.keen on the idea of reform in certain areas. But Mrs Merkel has
:10:50. > :10:55.just entered her own marriage with new coalition partners, the solidly
:10:56. > :10:57.pro-European Social Democrats. The new Foreign Minister, Frank Walter
:10:58. > :11:01.Steinmeier, is as Social Democrat, and so an unlikely partner for
:11:02. > :11:07.William Hague when they have their own date later today. So, with no
:11:08. > :11:11.match-making success for David Cameron and William Hague in Europe,
:11:12. > :11:14.will the Tories have any success in renegotiations? Or will any
:11:15. > :11:26.referendum in 2017 be a question of "take me out" of the EU on the
:11:27. > :11:29.current terms. Joining me now to discuss this is
:11:30. > :11:32.German journalist John Jungclaussen. And Conservative MP, and member of
:11:33. > :11:38.the Fresh Start group, Tim Loughton. Welcome to you both. How much common
:11:39. > :11:42.ground will William Haig find with Steinmeier on the subject of the EU
:11:43. > :11:47.reform and treaty change? The interesting question for Steinmeier
:11:48. > :11:52.is what it is he should be engaging with. For German politicians and
:11:53. > :12:00.much of the continent, what they hear from Britain is a lot of
:12:01. > :12:08.hysteria. One of the sound bites which stuck with politicians in
:12:09. > :12:17.Berlin was Britain being shackled to the court that is Europe. So there
:12:18. > :12:23.is no positive engagement -- to the corpse. Instead of going to Europe
:12:24. > :12:30.and saying this is what we put forward, all they have said here is
:12:31. > :12:36.they want out. How will you carry on, the government carry on with a
:12:37. > :12:40.negotiation, when all they have heard it hysteria, sound bites and
:12:41. > :12:50.exit. Hopefully by persuading the general press in Germany that this
:12:51. > :12:55.is not our typical attitude. What our group is all about representing
:12:56. > :13:01.the majority of Conservative MPs is a positive version of Europe, which
:13:02. > :13:07.is sustainable for the whole of Europe. The problem at the moment,
:13:08. > :13:11.the EU is not sustainable. Germany knows that, we know that, the rest
:13:12. > :13:16.of the nations need to work that out. If we can work out a way
:13:17. > :13:22.forward where we can stay in the EU, where the EU can become more
:13:23. > :13:34.sustainable. Why do the Germans only hear the test area -- hysteria? Was
:13:35. > :13:38.it a failure of leadership by David Cameron? We are in a difficult
:13:39. > :13:43.position. We have a coalition partner not committed to a
:13:44. > :13:50.referendum. In a limbo. We want to speak to politicians from all the
:13:51. > :13:55.other EU countries to show we are serious about wanting an EU which
:13:56. > :14:00.the UK can stay in and which is sustainable in the global economy.
:14:01. > :14:06.In the next five years, the GDP of the EU will be 60% A level what it
:14:07. > :14:14.was back in the 1990s. Does the German government accept that, the
:14:15. > :14:23.need for negotiation and reform? I am sure Steinmeier doubts. And the
:14:24. > :14:29.SPD? Secretly, certainly. And publicly? We do not know. Steinmeier
:14:30. > :14:34.gave an interesting big speech as Foreign Minister on Friday. He
:14:35. > :14:50.announced his determination to conduct a more engaging, proactive
:14:51. > :14:57.German foreign policy. But that also indicates there might be greater
:14:58. > :15:02.engagement with Britain. If you talk about the difficulties of the
:15:03. > :15:08.Conservative party in the coalition government to talk about the issues,
:15:09. > :15:11.the whole thing seems to be a nationwide diplomatic failure
:15:12. > :15:18.because, what you hear from the Labour Party is nothing that vacuous
:15:19. > :15:22.sentences about wanting to work within Europe. But they haven't
:15:23. > :15:26.committed to a referendum. The public debate not just across Europe
:15:27. > :15:45.but in Britain is dominated by this. What should the starting point for
:15:46. > :15:53.William Hague be? ) give me examples of what he should say. Ultimately we
:15:54. > :15:57.want the UK to stay in the EU. At the moment it is unsustainable.
:15:58. > :16:03.Let's see what the EU should be looking like for the next 20, 30
:16:04. > :16:10.years and not be shackled by the concept of ever closer union. That
:16:11. > :16:14.is dead and buried. What have you got in common? Angela Merkel says
:16:15. > :16:24.she understands the need for reform but no one is interested in treaty
:16:25. > :16:29.change. The banking union involves treaty change. Is there a
:16:30. > :16:37.willingness to have major treaty change in Germany? No, there is not.
:16:38. > :16:41.Germans want banking union. We are not part of that. Two thirds of the
:16:42. > :16:46.population will be subject to banking union. That can only happen
:16:47. > :16:50.with treaty change. We need to make sure there is no disconnection
:16:51. > :16:56.between those in the EU and those outside of it. There is a bridge to
:16:57. > :17:01.be built. If John is saying the Germans do not want treaty change,
:17:02. > :17:04.on some of the issues I have here and the most recent example is
:17:05. > :17:17.freedom of movement of people, that is a cornerstone of the EU. Is that
:17:18. > :17:24.up for negotiation? Research has identified things which do not
:17:25. > :17:30.involve treaty change. 71% of the GDP of the EU is in services. Any
:17:31. > :17:41.3.5% is into EU country trade. That is crazy. We joined the EU for a
:17:42. > :17:47.single market. Have you spoken to German MPs about that? There is an
:17:48. > :17:50.idea that the single market is something that German politics would
:17:51. > :17:56.wholeheartedly embrace. That is why we help this big conference last
:17:57. > :18:00.month. Business leaders came to the conference where we were talking
:18:01. > :18:06.politics. We were talking about the detail of how we could reform. There
:18:07. > :18:18.was consensus across the 28 nations that Europe cannot go on as it is.
:18:19. > :18:25.Germany is not signed up to renegotiating desk? No. There is
:18:26. > :18:30.every chance of that happening. If we do not get reform of social and
:18:31. > :18:35.Labour laws, if we do not get better, robust financial management
:18:36. > :18:44.of economies, Germany will have to bail out the 77% youth unemployment
:18:45. > :18:51.rate. It is not sustainable. To be fair to Tim, of course, there is a
:18:52. > :18:55.need for Europe to change. We should not pretend that the idea in Europe
:18:56. > :19:00.is prevailing that Europe can continue as it is. There will have
:19:01. > :19:05.to be changes. To what extent they can be incremental and on the muddle
:19:06. > :19:10.through basis, or have to be enshrined in a new treaty within the
:19:11. > :19:15.next two years, which is the way Europe has tended to organise itself
:19:16. > :19:22.over the last few decades, that is another matter. There is movement.
:19:23. > :19:32.What the Germans do not hear is this concrete engagement. How is this
:19:33. > :19:35.conversation going to go? It will not go very well, will it? What
:19:36. > :19:40.everyone seems to have forgotten is the most important factor and that
:19:41. > :19:45.is the people. The people in Germany, the Netherlands and
:19:46. > :19:50.Austria, even France. Free movement was designed for a very different
:19:51. > :19:56.animal than the one we have got now. You need treaty change. That does
:19:57. > :20:00.not seem to be on the table. It was not completely ruled out by
:20:01. > :20:06.President Francois Hollande last week. In Germany, the Christian
:20:07. > :20:12.Democrats and the CSU, their sister party, are much keener than perhaps
:20:13. > :20:16.the Social Democrats are. I think there will be increasing pressure on
:20:17. > :20:23.the politicians to address this issue. Is it all going to be done
:20:24. > :20:29.and dusted, this renegotiation, by 2017? I doubt it. That is the basis
:20:30. > :20:35.by which David Cameron has said the people of Britain can have a
:20:36. > :20:41.referendum on which to decide the future of Europe on the renegotiated
:20:42. > :20:46.settlement. The fact is, if you look at the time scale, to me, I may be
:20:47. > :20:54.completely wrong, but it does not seem possible to get everything in
:20:55. > :21:01.place. Not by the 17th. Eventually it will happen. You think you could
:21:02. > :21:04.do incremental steps but you could not radically renegotiate things
:21:05. > :21:08.around the movement of people, around policing and crime. These are
:21:09. > :21:15.the areas which need to be looked at. Nothing like the prospect of a
:21:16. > :21:18.referendum focuses the mind 's. We have a Conservative government
:21:19. > :21:21.committed to that referendum and all the other nations of Europe will
:21:22. > :21:26.have to take the British position much more seriously and sit down
:21:27. > :21:37.around the table. There is a clear window between 2015 and 2017. You
:21:38. > :21:41.cannot do this in two years. If there has not been a successful
:21:42. > :21:48.renegotiation on the basis of some of your points, which way will you
:21:49. > :21:55.vote? If we have not achieved what we need to for proper reform of
:21:56. > :21:59.Europe, I will vote Labour. It is right that people have that
:22:00. > :22:10.opportunity. That is an honest, straightforward answer to that
:22:11. > :22:15.question. They care not enough to sign up to an idea where Britain has
:22:16. > :22:20.all the rights of EU members without being an actual member. It is not
:22:21. > :22:24.just what we want, it is what Europe needs to be sustainable. Immigration
:22:25. > :22:26.- it's the one of the most important issues for voters along with the
:22:27. > :22:31.economy and, unsurprisingly, politicians take it very seriously
:22:32. > :22:33.indeed. But for something which generates such heat, there's
:22:34. > :22:38.surprisingly little light on the actual facts and figures. It often
:22:39. > :22:41.seems that one person's flood is another's trickle, and both sides of
:22:42. > :22:45.the argument throw stats at each other with gay abandon. So, is it
:22:46. > :22:49.possible to get hard and fast data on the number of people coming into
:22:50. > :22:58.the country and what exactly do we mean by immigration anyway?
:22:59. > :23:05.Immigration, it seems everyone has a view. Do we really know what we are
:23:06. > :23:09.talking about? Is it legal, illegal? Perhaps, more to the point, does
:23:10. > :23:15.anyone honestly know how many migrants are in the country? The
:23:16. > :23:18.only two countries I know of where I reckon they have a pretty good idea
:23:19. > :23:24.of how many migrants go in and come out and stay there illegally, on
:23:25. > :23:29.North Korea and, in the same breath, Australia. In one case there
:23:30. > :23:34.was a particular type of government. In the other case, it is a large
:23:35. > :23:40.island and everyone is clocked in and out. According to the Office for
:23:41. > :23:45.National Statistics comment net migration was 182,000. That is plus
:23:46. > :23:52.or -35,000. The actual number could be anything from 147,000 to 217,000.
:23:53. > :23:57.If the official number crunchers do not know the answer, how can we
:23:58. > :24:02.expect anyone else to? That is based on the passenger survey which, it is
:24:03. > :24:10.claimed for it is not accurate enough. The best way of doing it is
:24:11. > :24:15.a population register. A number of countries have a population
:24:16. > :24:21.register. As soon as you mention the motion of compiling a register of
:24:22. > :24:26.population in the UK, people start thinking about ID cards and
:24:27. > :24:29.invasions of privacy. It becomes politically impossible. It is not
:24:30. > :24:35.just this government that has struggled with the numbers. In
:24:36. > :24:40.2004, Labour claimed there would be 13,000 immigrants from Poland and
:24:41. > :24:46.other European countries. In 2010, net migration peaked at 250,000. Is
:24:47. > :24:53.there a better way of dealing with this? The debate that needs to be
:24:54. > :24:57.handled in a way which gets to the facts. What sort of migration do we
:24:58. > :25:03.want to see? What are the best mechanics we can put in place? Very
:25:04. > :25:09.reportedly, how can we have a system that is good for the country but
:25:10. > :25:14.which people perceive as being fair. There has to be a compromise between
:25:15. > :25:20.the polarised views. The compromise is to look at individual migration
:25:21. > :25:29.streams. That is Labour, asylum, students, family. Look at what we
:25:30. > :25:37.want from each of those migration streams. Where the compromise might
:25:38. > :25:40.be sought. There is nothing new about immigration and nothing new
:25:41. > :25:48.about it being controversial. What is new is how much we do not know
:25:49. > :25:56.about who is coming to the country and why. Joining us now is the
:25:57. > :26:03.Labour MP, Diane Abbott. The Oxford University migration Department has
:26:04. > :26:07.said we cannot make accurate predictions about the number of
:26:08. > :26:12.Bulgarians and Romanians who come to the UK. They know full well that you
:26:13. > :26:18.have to make a judgment. Our judgment has been based on a number
:26:19. > :26:22.of factors. It is not a wild guess. There is no scientific way of
:26:23. > :26:27.establishing what the precise numbers will be. For example, those
:26:28. > :26:34.who have already come over the last five years, comparing income levels
:26:35. > :26:40.between Romania, bog area and the United Kingdom. -- bog area. Have
:26:41. > :26:46.they been like that for the last few years? There have been something
:26:47. > :26:52.like 30,000. That is at a time when there were constraints on those
:26:53. > :26:58.coming here. No one said, we certainly have not said, everyone
:26:59. > :27:04.was waiting on the border to come here on 31st of December. It was not
:27:05. > :27:08.what we were saying. Some of the tabloids may have been saying that.
:27:09. > :27:15.We said, over five years, on average, there would be between
:27:16. > :27:23.30000 and 70,000 a year coming here. A central figure of 50,000. I firmly
:27:24. > :27:29.stick by that. You do not think that will be disproven? Exactly the same
:27:30. > :27:33.thing was said when in 2004 the other Eastern Europeans came in.
:27:34. > :27:39.Everyone said, you are wrong, only a few thousand will come in. Between
:27:40. > :27:44.five and 13,000. In the end, it was a lot more than that. We believe
:27:45. > :27:49.that will happen again this time around. According to a poll
:27:50. > :27:54.conducted by YouGov, the majority think that immigration has been bad
:27:55. > :28:00.for the British economy. Why do they think that? Historically, whenever
:28:01. > :28:05.you have an economic downturn, people are hurting. They look for
:28:06. > :28:11.scapegoats and scapegoats are always immigrants, or others. It is a
:28:12. > :28:18.historical, political phenomenon. The fact is, the same polling
:28:19. > :28:21.company wildly over estimate. The problem with immigration, there are
:28:22. > :28:31.two things which make it to Google to bandy figures. Innovation has
:28:32. > :28:37.always been a euphemism. -- difficult to bandy figures. Some
:28:38. > :28:43.people might be refugees and asylum seekers. My son is a
:28:44. > :28:48.third-generation British national. Do you think people have not become
:28:49. > :28:52.more sophisticated that views on immigration have been influenced by
:28:53. > :28:59.what happened when many Polish people came to this country. If you
:29:00. > :29:04.read about the history of immigration, what they say about
:29:05. > :29:12.Eastern European is what they said about the Irish in the 19th century.
:29:13. > :29:18.The narrative is always the same. I disagree very strongly on that. It
:29:19. > :29:22.is not to do with race. What has changed hugely in my time in this
:29:23. > :29:27.country is that people no longer look at people like Diane and me and
:29:28. > :29:32.say, there is a foreigner. That does not happen any more. You only need
:29:33. > :29:36.to look at football, cricket and any other sporting team to know this is
:29:37. > :29:41.about the volume and the speed with which it is happening. That is not
:29:42. > :29:47.in the interests of anyone, including those already here. Maybe
:29:48. > :29:51.that is true in London. When you are outside of London and he ask someone
:29:52. > :29:56.what they mean by immigrants, they mean Muslims were people who go to a
:29:57. > :30:02.mosque. It is a very emotive subject. Immigration is not now, and
:30:03. > :30:08.whether you are talking about the Jews in the 20th century, it has
:30:09. > :30:15.never been about facts. Why did Labour feel it should apologise? I
:30:16. > :30:27.do not know. We did indeed get that big a wrong on the polls. Wildly
:30:28. > :30:32.wrong. We had no border controls. It was nonsense. Did too many people
:30:33. > :30:36.come over? I have filing cabinets are people under a Labour government
:30:37. > :30:42.who waited years and years to bring husbands, wives and children. It was
:30:43. > :30:46.the Labour administration, I did not approve of it, which took away money
:30:47. > :30:52.from immigrants and gave them vouchers instead. We did not have an
:30:53. > :30:57.open door. The figures about the Polish were wrong but it was not an
:30:58. > :31:01.open door. That is a myth. Finer grid things happened which made it
:31:02. > :31:11.considerably easier for people to come here. -- things did happen. In
:31:12. > :31:13.the first year alone, the public man -- Public Accounts Committee said
:31:14. > :31:24.people who were students actually came here to work.
:31:25. > :31:30.You see things differently. What I seek is the people who didn't get
:31:31. > :31:39.in. Should we be encouraging more immigration?
:31:40. > :31:50.The thing about migration, is not about saying we want more or less.
:31:51. > :32:00.In the EU, we have free movement. Underlying all this is economic
:32:01. > :32:04.trends. James Dyson has launched a scathing attack on immigration
:32:05. > :32:13.policy accusing ministers of turning away bright foreign engineers which
:32:14. > :32:22.the UK desperately needs. This is a nonsense. If you look at the numbers
:32:23. > :32:27.coming here to study at university, they went out last year despite the
:32:28. > :32:32.immigration policies, and the year before they went up. Apart from
:32:33. > :32:37.that, there is an opportunity, Dyson can bring in as many people he likes
:32:38. > :32:43.as long as he pays them enough. We should be training our own people
:32:44. > :32:49.anyway. We can't turn to cheap labour to bring people in. Isn't
:32:50. > :32:56.that the point? It is low-paid people in this country who have
:32:57. > :33:01.suffered more than other parts of the population, because until now
:33:02. > :33:06.they have been undercut. These other people 's labour is bent to be
:33:07. > :33:13.sticking up for. This is the oldest story in the book. The point is...
:33:14. > :33:18.People talk about this as if Eastern Europeans are paying themselves low
:33:19. > :33:25.wages, and employers are innocent bystanders. We need to enforce a
:33:26. > :33:32.minimum wage, reinforce the gang masters legislation, and trade union
:33:33. > :33:38.rights and freedoms. We should not stigmatise migrants. If you want to
:33:39. > :33:43.reduce immigration, you would have to leave the EU. First of all, on
:33:44. > :33:47.that point, I would hate to give the impression I was trying to
:33:48. > :33:53.stigmatise migrants. I don't do that. When we talk about the numbers
:33:54. > :33:57.coming into this country, half a million people a year are coming in.
:33:58. > :34:06.Simply a case of bringing that number down, not stopping it.
:34:07. > :34:10.Time to get our regular Monday update from the Westminster press
:34:11. > :34:16.corps on the big stories of the week. Let's talk to Emily Ashton of
:34:17. > :34:25.the Sun. And Andrew Grice of the Independent.
:34:26. > :34:35.Andrew, coalition tensions seem to have exploded to the surface, the
:34:36. > :34:39.Lib Dems gunning for Michael Gove. Education was an area where the
:34:40. > :34:44.coalition parties cooperated well at the start. In the last few months,
:34:45. > :34:49.we have seen significant differences. The Lib Dems are not
:34:50. > :34:54.happy about unqualified teachers in classrooms and have attacked that.
:34:55. > :35:00.Now, they are livid Michael Gove has not given Sally Morgan a second
:35:01. > :35:04.three-year term. How significant do you see this? In the real world, I
:35:05. > :35:13.don't think people are talking about Baroness Morgan. The Lib Dems are
:35:14. > :35:16.getting cross because they want to differentiate themselves from the
:35:17. > :35:21.Tories in the run-up to the election. David Laws is miffed he
:35:22. > :35:27.wasn't consulted. In reality, what does it matter to real people? When
:35:28. > :35:37.Labour were in power, there were a lot of Labour people at the head of
:35:38. > :35:47.quangos then. The Tory MP selection row now. Meetings are taking place
:35:48. > :35:54.as we speak over Tim Yeo. They want local party members to be
:35:55. > :36:01.accountable, there have been criticisms over the workrate of Tim
:36:02. > :36:06.Yeo. There is a crucial ballot today. Local party members want to
:36:07. > :36:11.make sure they have got an MP totally committed to that area which
:36:12. > :36:17.is a good thing for politics. Is this a sign of The Times, people
:36:18. > :36:24.holding their MPs to account if they don't do their constituency work? It
:36:25. > :36:27.is interesting how Tim Yeo and and Macintosh are both chairs of
:36:28. > :36:33.committees which takes up a lot of time. In the run-up to the election,
:36:34. > :36:41.constituency work becomes more important. Backbenchers will be
:36:42. > :36:49.thinking about this. What about labour reforms? The Labour Party
:36:50. > :36:54.could be poorer as a result of changing its relationship with the
:36:55. > :37:00.unions, is it a price worth paying? I think it is. Some people around
:37:01. > :37:09.Miliband are comparing this to the decision by Tony Blair to scrap
:37:10. > :37:16.clause 4. It is a historic change, union members who want to contribute
:37:17. > :37:20.to funds will have to opt in rather than opting out. That is a
:37:21. > :37:25.significant change. It could be followed in a few years by other
:37:26. > :37:30.changes to the union power base within the Labour Party, their 50%
:37:31. > :37:34.vote at the annual conference, 11 of the 33 seats on the national
:37:35. > :37:41.executive committee. This is the start of a process. This may not be
:37:42. > :37:50.of great interest to the public but could it be, further down the line?
:37:51. > :37:54.It is the effect, will be unions have less influence? We had Len
:37:55. > :38:06.McCluskey saying it was music to his is these reforms were coming in. --
:38:07. > :38:15.to his ears. Labour will get to contemplate this.
:38:16. > :38:20.It sounds to me as if the unions will not lose much influence at
:38:21. > :38:26.all. They will have less influence. The sort of party Ed Miliband is
:38:27. > :38:31.envisaging is one where you have 200,000 members, ordinary members of
:38:32. > :38:35.the party, which already exists. He was to attract 100,000 registered
:38:36. > :38:41.supporters who don't want to be full members but would pay a small sum
:38:42. > :38:47.and take part in local selections. And perhaps 100,000 trade union
:38:48. > :38:54.affiliated members. That would not mean the unions dominating the
:38:55. > :38:55.party, the ordinary members would. They would become a true one member
:38:56. > :39:00.one vote party. Let's return to education because,
:39:01. > :39:04.Michael Gove's been making a speech this morning - he wants the state
:39:05. > :39:11.schools to offer the same quality of education available to private
:39:12. > :39:16.school pupils. More great schools, more great teachers, more pupils
:39:17. > :39:19.achieving great results. The conclusion is English state
:39:20. > :39:25.education is no longer bog-standard, it is getting better and better.
:39:26. > :39:30.When Channel four make documentaries about great competences, academies,
:39:31. > :39:36.in Essex and Yorkshire, when BBC Three makes heroes at tough, young
:39:37. > :39:40.teachers. When even tattler publishes a guide to the best state
:39:41. > :39:43.schools because they are better than independent schools, you know the
:39:44. > :39:47.tectonic plates have started to shift.
:39:48. > :39:51.I've been joined by Labour's Seema Malhotra. Ian Swales for the Liberal
:39:52. > :39:57.Democrats. And the Conservative MP Chris Skidmore who is on the
:39:58. > :40:02.Education Select Committee. Welcome to all of you. We have heard
:40:03. > :40:05.reports, David Laws is so furious with Michael Gove. Why doesn't he
:40:06. > :40:11.say so himself? I think he more or less has said it
:40:12. > :40:15.himself. What we want to see is independent scrutiny of the
:40:16. > :40:21.education system through Ofsted. We don't want someone in there who is
:40:22. > :40:24.in there for political reasons. Why do think that independence will be
:40:25. > :40:28.lost? We don't know. The real test is who
:40:29. > :40:33.Michael Gove will appoint into this role. The suspicion is it will be
:40:34. > :40:39.somebody who is a donor to the Tory party and we feel that make up their
:40:40. > :40:44.independence. You weren't unhappy with a Labour supporting chair?
:40:45. > :40:47.We have to look at the experience of people and Sally Morgan has massive
:40:48. > :40:52.experience and has done a really good job. David Laws is miffed
:40:53. > :40:59.because he wasn't consulted even though here's Schools Minister. Is
:41:00. > :41:04.this a serious coalition bust up? It is a disagreement over this issue.
:41:05. > :41:09.As your reports have said, we are in strong agreement on education with
:41:10. > :41:16.Michael Gove, and support anything he is trying to do. Is there any
:41:17. > :41:21.support for winning votes over this row? I do not think this is
:41:22. > :41:25.particularly party political, we are just trying to do the right thing
:41:26. > :41:29.for education. What is your reaction that the Lib Dems are so angry? It
:41:30. > :41:31.is your reaction that the Lib Dems are so angry? It isn't great if
:41:32. > :41:35.you're coalition partners who have by and large been pretty
:41:36. > :41:41.supportive, now it has all gone in the wind? It is a distraction from
:41:42. > :41:46.the main speech on education today where Michael Gove will set out his
:41:47. > :41:51.clear plans. Lengthening the school day. Increasing standards by making
:41:52. > :41:56.sure what is available to private schools is available to state
:41:57. > :42:04.schools. Sally Morgan has not been sacked, her contract has not been
:42:05. > :42:08.renewed. The Lib Dem donor Paul Marshall will be chairing the
:42:09. > :42:15.selection committee. That will make you happy? Let's see what the result
:42:16. > :42:21.is. We need education screwed -- we need independent scrutiny of
:42:22. > :42:27.education. Your point that you want to offer state school pupils the
:42:28. > :42:33.same as on offer in private schools. An extended school day to allow
:42:34. > :42:37.pupils to attend homework clubs in school. Clear messages when it comes
:42:38. > :42:43.to subject choice, discipline. To ensure that education is the engine
:42:44. > :42:50.of sociability. The too long we have had a clear divide between the state
:42:51. > :42:55.and private sectors. We need to go further to ensure every pupil,
:42:56. > :43:01.particularly from disadvantaged backgrounds, get chances in life.
:43:02. > :43:09.How much more is spent in a private school? That gap is closing. When
:43:10. > :43:16.you take a pupil in Tower Hamlets, ?8,900 per pupil per year. In a
:43:17. > :43:21.private school, ?50,000. Let us broadly say double. Why not just put
:43:22. > :43:27.the money death? We have done. The pupil premium has made sure there is
:43:28. > :43:33.directly targeted funds going to the poorest pupils. We have increased
:43:34. > :43:40.the pupil premium up to ?1400 per pupil. So we are moving the money
:43:41. > :43:46.towards greater standards. Education takes up ?70 billion of public
:43:47. > :43:51.money. We are ensuring we have structures and standards in place.
:43:52. > :43:58.If it's not just about the money and you want to emulate private
:43:59. > :44:04.schools, they have twice as much money per head to play with. Not
:44:05. > :44:09.everywhere. When you look in areas like tower hamlets, they have three
:44:10. > :44:13.times money they have in South Gloucestershire. The private schools
:44:14. > :44:19.have twice as much money per pupil to spend than in state schools. You
:44:20. > :44:24.are asking state schools to do an awful lot with less money. That is a
:44:25. > :44:29.false argument. When you look at private schools, selective grammar
:44:30. > :44:37.schools, they have higher standards. They are also offering subject
:44:38. > :44:42.choices. Things that not all schools are offering. Making that are
:44:43. > :44:44.available. Providing support, continuing professional development.
:44:45. > :45:03.Are you signed up to those reforms? What we have seen is politicisation
:45:04. > :45:11.of the chair of Ofsted. Why has it been politicised? There were heads
:45:12. > :45:16.of public bodies who have been Labour. The question of merit has
:45:17. > :45:22.always been there in relation to public appointments. What is behind
:45:23. > :45:28.some of the reforms and why he is said to Baroness Morgan that she was
:45:29. > :45:36.laid and that is the reason she was not reappointed. The reports are
:45:37. > :45:38.that that is what was said. There is something more fundamental about
:45:39. > :45:44.reforms and what you need in order to drive up standards in schools.
:45:45. > :45:47.What we all know and what research has shown is that improving school
:45:48. > :45:51.standards starts with qualified teachers in the classroom. Michael
:45:52. > :45:54.Gove has not yet answered the accusation that not having qualified
:45:55. > :46:04.teachers in the classroom has the potential to reduce this. If you
:46:05. > :46:07.want to tackle behaviour and look at increasing opportunities for wider
:46:08. > :46:13.learning within school, which we all support, if you want to look at
:46:14. > :46:18.increasing outcomes, what you need is a way to improve school standards
:46:19. > :46:25.through quality teaching. We will pick up your point on quality. You
:46:26. > :46:29.are worried about the politicisation of appointments using the chair of
:46:30. > :46:34.Ofsted as an example. Do you accept that when Labour is in power it
:46:35. > :46:38.stuffed Labour supporting people as heads of all sorts of quangos? We
:46:39. > :46:43.have a graft to show you. You can see the red line chewing the time
:46:44. > :46:49.Labour was in office compared with the Lib Dems and the Conservatives.
:46:50. > :46:54.The Graaf speaks for itself. Even now it is only just coming down, and
:46:55. > :47:00.that is three years after the Coalition Government came in in
:47:01. > :47:06.2010. The issue is about merit. Do you access there were a lot more
:47:07. > :47:11.Labour appointments? What we have always believed in what Labour is
:47:12. > :47:16.asking for is increasing diversity and having talent through increasing
:47:17. > :47:21.number of women, ethnic minorities, to get those voices in and enrich
:47:22. > :47:25.the debate which is a challenge. You are in danger of being criticised in
:47:26. > :47:36.getting rid of someone Michael Gove says is marvellous her job and
:47:37. > :47:41.replacing her. Her contract ran out. People watching this will think, we
:47:42. > :47:47.have the left leaning glitterati, Primrose sect, who believe they are
:47:48. > :47:55.born to quango. That is unacceptable. We need to move away
:47:56. > :47:59.from people who think they can waltz into six-figure salaried jobs. What
:48:00. > :48:03.this is about is Michael Gove reducing the voices that may be a
:48:04. > :48:06.challenge to him. It is a real question about whether or not people
:48:07. > :48:13.voices will be heard within the system and he will really be able to
:48:14. > :48:19.listen to what can go wrong. Do you agree in terms of the general
:48:20. > :48:25.reforms? Better discipline and more discipline in schools? Do you
:48:26. > :48:29.support a longer school day? I do. I also agree we want to see qualified
:48:30. > :48:34.teachers in schools. Schools should not be run for profit. Within the
:48:35. > :48:38.coalition, we have been battling to make sure the school system works
:48:39. > :48:45.effectively. I also believe the point about quangos, I would like to
:48:46. > :48:50.see a lot less tribalism all round. There are lots of people out on the
:48:51. > :48:58.street who are not aligned to any political party, who have great
:48:59. > :49:02.merits. The problem about qualified teachers will not go away. The
:49:03. > :49:09.Liberal Democrats and Labour will fight you on this. How do you define
:49:10. > :49:13.a good teacher? Slapping a badge and saying, you have qualified teacher
:49:14. > :49:18.status, does not make you a good teacher. 15,000 people have this
:49:19. > :49:23.status and they are appalling teachers. They need to be removed
:49:24. > :49:27.from the classroom. You have missed the point. Teaching is a far more
:49:28. > :49:31.complex job and being able to deliver. You need to establish
:49:32. > :49:39.better techniques for managing behaviour. How you manage it in a
:49:40. > :49:43.positive way. How you deal with children who could be from all sorts
:49:44. > :49:55.of backgrounds. Children who go to school hungry in the mornings. There
:49:56. > :49:59.are increases in food banks. We have been working with the teaching
:50:00. > :50:05.profession on trying to seek continual development. Every
:50:06. > :50:08.profession is looking at developer and opportunities for their own
:50:09. > :50:14.members. I want to challenge the point from Chris about why it is
:50:15. > :50:21.irrelevant to be talking about food banks. If children are going to
:50:22. > :50:25.school hungry, they tend to be more aggressive, tend to need calming
:50:26. > :50:31.down. What you need to look at holistically is the welfare of
:50:32. > :50:36.children will stop -- the welfare of children. Teachers need to have
:50:37. > :50:43.experience and training to deal with a whole range of issues for
:50:44. > :50:47.children. I agree about the wider issues of children. We have
:50:48. > :50:51.introduced the pupil premium and free school meals for younger
:50:52. > :50:56.children. We know that educational attainment is linked to resources,
:50:57. > :51:02.particularly in deprived areas, and also to being welfare. We totally
:51:03. > :51:10.support that. Is alienating the teaching profession really the way
:51:11. > :51:17.to go? I disagree. As a result of the reforms, changes in PGCE, we are
:51:18. > :51:23.having new, young teachers coming into schools. Four times as many
:51:24. > :51:29.graduates will start than in 2010. We are actually revolutionising and
:51:30. > :51:39.bringing in excellent, young teachers. Tomorrow, Labour 's NEC
:51:40. > :51:42.will meet to approve plans to reform Labour's relationship with the trade
:51:43. > :51:45.unions. A review commissioned by Ed Miliband is proposing abolishing the
:51:46. > :51:48.Electoral College that gives unions a third of the vote in leadership
:51:49. > :51:52.contests and introducing one member, one vote. Union members will be able
:51:53. > :51:55.to decide whether to donate to the party which would give them the
:51:56. > :51:59.right to participate in any leadership ballot. Here's how the
:52:00. > :52:04.General Secretary of the GMB union reacted to the changes on
:52:05. > :52:10.yesterday's Sunday Politics. It is certainly a big, bold move,
:52:11. > :52:15.certainly in terms of the electoral college. That elected him in the
:52:16. > :52:19.first place. Everybody really admits that has needed reforming for some
:52:20. > :52:28.time. And moving to a one member, one vote situation. That seems to me
:52:29. > :52:32.to be a sensible idea. I know some people are upset about it, mostly
:52:33. > :52:40.MPs, who will lose their golden share. It really is nonsense that
:52:41. > :52:45.one MP should have the same voting strength as 1000 party members. Are
:52:46. > :52:50.you upset about it? It seems the real losers are Labour MPs. It is a
:52:51. > :52:55.really exciting change. My vote should be the same as any other
:52:56. > :53:01.members in the party. What this change will do, I believe, will
:53:02. > :53:06.route these reforms, route the party much more in with the British
:53:07. > :53:09.people, in which workers who are members of unions, and who actually
:53:10. > :53:13.have not had an individual relationship with the Labour Party.
:53:14. > :53:16.This is about strengthening and reforming the links between the
:53:17. > :53:20.trade unions and Labour. Someone like me, I think it is right, I
:53:21. > :53:25.should have one vote rather than a vote as a member of Parliament,
:53:26. > :53:30.about the trade union member, a vote of the Fabian Society member and a
:53:31. > :53:44.boat as an individual. But he will have less safe. -- a vote. -- but
:53:45. > :53:49.you will have less say. It is about saying, if you want politics that is
:53:50. > :53:56.engaging so many people quite unique in way in which you are opening the
:53:57. > :54:00.doors and increasing access. I was speaking to a Conservative MP who
:54:01. > :54:06.said that if you can make this work, it will have implications for us
:54:07. > :54:11.all. We will come on to the effects on other parties. Criticism has
:54:12. > :54:14.always been about union influence whether leadership elections or
:54:15. > :54:20.conferences, or whether it is policy platforms. Actually, that will not
:54:21. > :54:23.change. That is why he is looking so relaxed in talking about these
:54:24. > :54:31.changes. His power will not be reduced, it? Unions represent
:54:32. > :54:38.millions of working people. These criticisms have been levelled at
:54:39. > :54:46.Labour, saying they have too much influence. The Labour Party has
:54:47. > :54:50.changed. It has changed over the last 100 years. To say you are
:54:51. > :54:54.allowing collective affiliation of units but changing the way in which
:54:55. > :54:59.individuals can have a greater say has be reformed in line with what we
:55:00. > :55:02.have today. You keep going on about Ed Miliband and the Labour Party
:55:03. > :55:09.being controlled by union barons. You cannot say that any more. Len
:55:10. > :55:16.McCluskey said, this is music to my ears. Ed Miliband will love it as
:55:17. > :55:23.well. He was elected by the unions in the first place. Why not say, for
:55:24. > :55:29.every person who is a member of the Labour Party, they get one vote? Why
:55:30. > :55:38.should unionists get an extra vote for ?3? I am on the policy board and
:55:39. > :55:45.I do not know of any donors who have influence. In comparison to the
:55:46. > :55:54.unions, who really have Labour 's arms twisted behind their back... I
:55:55. > :55:59.get a very good strapline but it is not the reality. Lib Dems looked at
:56:00. > :56:06.this with mild amusement. We have always had one member, one vote for
:56:07. > :56:12.the leader. The devil is in the detail on the union issue. Union
:56:13. > :56:16.leaders are quite relaxed about it. If they organise well, they only
:56:17. > :56:22.have to get one in ten members to affiliate, have a bigger say in who
:56:23. > :56:28.the next leader of the next Labour Party -- of the Labour Party is. On
:56:29. > :56:33.funding, it poses a problem. Whether it is right or not, that is for
:56:34. > :56:35.others to judge. Whether you are routinely Labour Party more firmly
:56:36. > :56:43.in the minds of working people, financially, it is going to cause
:56:44. > :56:47.problems. This is a choice and a risk. The majority of funding
:56:48. > :56:51.already comes from individual members. If you want to do the right
:56:52. > :56:56.thing, sometimes you have to take a small hit. Over a period of time, we
:56:57. > :57:01.will see these changes making the Labour Party a stronger and more
:57:02. > :57:06.sustainable party. It is that there are a more democratic party. Now, it
:57:07. > :57:09.is a hard life in the House of Lords, although they enjoy tax-payer
:57:10. > :57:12.subsided restaurant and bars. It seems dining standards are slipping.
:57:13. > :57:14.A rather mischievous FOI request has revealed peers' complaints about
:57:15. > :57:18.catering in the Upper Chamber. They were seriously unimpressed by the
:57:19. > :57:21.quality of a new coffee machine. As one wrote, you could not have
:57:22. > :57:24.calculated a move more likely to spread ill will. Another complained
:57:25. > :57:28.a 15 minutes wait to be seated lost some of the finesse of the afternoon
:57:29. > :57:31.and, sadly, meant his guests didn't have enough time to eat the
:57:32. > :57:34.beautiful cake selection. But some concerns were more prosaic - and
:57:35. > :57:38.pedantic. A note requested canteen staff to stop asking whether we want
:57:39. > :57:47.butter on jacket potatoes when what they mean is marge. Your response? I
:57:48. > :57:52.think the whole thing should be taken into the private sector. This
:57:53. > :57:56.whole debate around subsidies and is therefore not go away until we
:57:57. > :58:01.remove taxpayer funding for the catering service. The thing is, we
:58:02. > :58:06.have eventually got to come to some further reform. Should they be
:58:07. > :58:10.complaining? It is all about lowering the costs of the way the
:58:11. > :58:15.Houses of Parliament work. As a new MP, I was quite surprised with some
:58:16. > :58:26.of what I saw. I have already been lots of changes. It is a strong
:58:27. > :58:30.argument in the House of Lords. There is a real concern about some
:58:31. > :58:33.of the points that were raised. It does make the House of Lords look
:58:34. > :58:37.quite out of touch, particularly with what the country is going
:58:38. > :58:41.through, in terms of some of those complaints. The staff across the
:58:42. > :58:46.House of Commons and the House of Lords work incredibly hard and a
:58:47. > :58:48.huge amount of pressure. We need to separate some of these issues out
:58:49. > :58:53.and give them credit for what they do. I think the food is very good in
:58:54. > :59:00.the House of Lords. Thank you to all my guests. The one o'clock news is
:59:01. > :59:04.starting over on BBC One now. Bye-bye.