20/06/2014 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 20/06/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Fierce battles are under way in parts of Iraq as Islamist


militants and government forces fight for control


We'll discuss the latest developments


and the threat posed by these jihadists back here in Britain.


Iain Duncan Smith comes under fire over his welfare reforms, as


Which county has adopted a flag with three black pears as its standard?


And why are people across England going crazy for celebrating


We'll talk to the country's leading vexillologist and a town crier.


And we'll profile this 17th century philosopher in the latest of our


series on Britain's favourite political thinkers.


It's surprising, really, that this most conservative philosophers


should promote ideas that were radical and would have such a


revolutionary impact. And with us for the duration two


newspaper columnists - Peter Oborne of the Daily Telegraph,


and Jackie Ashley of the Guardian. Now, there's a glut of stories this


morning about various aspects of To take us through them all,


let's talk to our political It's like alphabet soup. PIP, USA,


the PAC. Let's start with Margaret Hodge's Public Accounts Committee?


Behind those acronyms there are a few pretty important stories. You


need to get through the thick et to get to them. Personal independence


payments, money to help people suffering from a long-term


disability. There was a report by the National Audit Office, the


official number crunchers, in February, that found all sorts of


fundamental issues. The Government not realising ing how many


assessments would have to be done. How serious they would be and how


long they would take. Margaret Hodge, the chair of the Public


Accounts Committee, a woman who cuts through these things defendant lane


strongly has given her -- defendantly and strongly has given


her characteristic robust response. It has been a shambolic fiasco.


People have had to wait for far too long to be assessed. Remember we are


talking about vulnerable people, disabled people who need extra money


to live in their home. They will have been through a life-changing,


or experiencing a life-changing condition, for example, they may


have had a stroke, they've got cancer. They may have had a motor


cycle accident and they need this benefit to live. And the Government


says all that assessment is based on old figures, old numbers, they say


they are on time and on budge wet that plan. Speak being on budge


eted. The Government's limit on welfare spending, recently unveiled.


There is a story about that might be breached because of spending on ESA.


Tell us about that? The employment and support allowance. It is not new


T replaced income support in 2008 T appears there are problems.


Documents leaked to the BBC show civil servants scratching their


heads and saying - this is costing a lot of money, what do we do about


it? And coming to the conclusion that they weren't awfully sure. One


of the documents suggest this is one of the largest fiscal risks


currently facing the Government and they also suggest the risk is so


great it could breach the Government's welfare cap. The cap on


the amount of money it spent on most, not all of welfare for


2015/16. The people at the Department for Work and Pensions say


these are spurious scone oar yes, sir and they say they are very sure


they will not be in a position where they breach that cap.


sir and they say they are very sure they will not be However much some


of their civil servants appear to have worried about it. And finally


the big idea of the Government's welfare reform, to roll up a number


of the major benefits into Universal Credit. You get a single payment


instead of a raft of payments, it is Iain Duncan Smith's big plan, it has


had a lot of critics on the implications and the application of


it. Where are we with that? That's thushl. Critics about the way it is


being done. -- this is' crucial. It is not necessarily about it


happening at all. It has had pretty much cross-party support but the


application has note gone smoothly. There are only ten job centres at


the moment where you can get this. Something like 6,500 people are


getting Universal Credit. They hoped it might be 1 million originally by


now. As of Monday there will be an extra four job centres to add to


those ten. They hope by the end of the year, another 86 in the


north-west of England. You shove all these things together and Labour see


a department on the point of crisis. They say - look, this tells you all


you need to know about how this place is being run by Iain Duncan


Smith and those working for him. Inside the DWP they argue and they


argue pretty forcibly it has to be said - you simply cannot say that.


They have put in place complex stuff, also inrollment on pensions,


a new jobs website. A contract they also say for people taking up


employment and they argue they can deliver things and where things have


had problems in the past they are sorting it out. The big issue with


all of this, we are not just talking about theory and politics and who is


up and who is down, when this goes wrong, people suffer, July they


shall people don't get money, that's why it is so high profile and why it


matters and the figures on the national books are huge. It is


difficult stuff this. You have got to get it right. Thank you very


much. I think you may need to go and lie in a dark room to recover after


that. The interesting thing about this, is


as a general principle the Government's welfare reforms are


popular. Even Labour seems this week to be running to try to catch up.


But the devil is in the detail. A lot of that seems to be going wrong.


I think the problem is they have had a long time to prepare for this. It


has been Iain Duncan Smith's baby for many years now, this whole idea


of reforming welfare. But they have not piloted the properly. The idea


was to pilot it in lots of areas first and then roll it out. They


have not taken into account that by doing more individual assessments,


the basis behind t to get rid of what they call the scroungers, it is


taking time. It is taking time for people to do that and getting the


appointments done. No-one has looked into the mechanics of how it would


operate which is why it seems to be falling to pieces. Is the welfare


reform project still on the rails, or is it in danger of falling off


the rails? It is definitely on the rails. I think it is worth just


looking back a bit and thinking why it had to be done. Basically the


beverage bell fair state was in collapse. In an act, I think --


Beverage Welfare state was in collapse. I think Gordon Brown used


the to create a basis for Labour voters. In other words the welfare


state paid you to be remain unemployment and have no hope in


your life. If you went on to get a job, financially it became an


impossible thing to do. Mr Brown did that? That was Mr Brown did, that it


was evil. As Chancellor, what he did was abuse this great noble yfted


welfare state, to help people if they lose jobs, if -- great noble


idea of the welfare state. To help people if they lose jobs and are


suffering abject property and made it a lifestyle. We saw it in


Benefits Street that successful programme. People who were supported


by the state to be out of a job. You think that Gordon Brown did this


deliberately? I think it was something Labour boasted about. It


created a system that was so complex that you couldn't get off the dole.


It is an incredibly brave and wonder ful thing which Iain Duncan Smith is


doing and trying to do. Now, what these reports have shown and we have


had it with the Universal Credit, is it has been very, very difficult to


change the basis. I think the signs are that they are certainly trying


still to push it through. Thank you. I'd better let Jackie reply. I can't


quite believe I heard people say that Gordon Brown deliberately


wanted people to sit at home. I thought he was a big believer in


that Scottish Presbyterian work ethic? And he need ed to balance the


books. It wasn't good for the question. It was disastrous.


It became too complicated and too many benefits and some people taking


advantage and Iain Duncan Smith has struck a chord when he says it is


wrong for whole families to be on benefits for years and years. The


human stories that the Public Accounts Committee uncovered during


their inquiry is really shocking and it shouldn't be allowed to happen


this quickly, leaving people with months and months with no benefits.


I can't prove he deliberately did it in that way but that was the effect


of the Brown system, to create a base of people dependent on the


state. I remember the Thatcher Government taking people off


unemployment benefit and putting them on disability benefit because


it was open-ended. Which is why you have the employment and support


allowance problem. Anyway, the debate continues but for us. Time


for the daily quiz: According to the Secretary General


of NATO, with which British pressure group is Vladimir Putin said to be


plotting against? A) Anti-fracking campaigners,


b) The Cat Protection League, c) Fathers 4 Justice, or d)


The Automobile Association? At the end of the show Jackie


and Peter will give us In Iraq the fighting between


the Islamist-led militants ISIS and pro-government forces is continuing.


Fierce battles are being fought at Baiji, the country's biggest oil


refinery and Tal Afar airport in northern Iraq, which


the rebels claim to have seized. The United States,


the only Western power with any real ability to intervene,


doesn't seem to have the appetite. President Obama is reluctant to get


involved and that reflects US opinion.


But he said yesterday he'd send 300 military advisers to help the Iraqi


government. We have had advisors in Iraq through


our embassy and we are prepared to send a small number of


our embassy and we are prepared to send a small number additional


American military advisors, up to 300, to assess how we can best


train, advice and support 300, to assess how we can best


train, advice Iraqi security forces going forward. American forces will


not be returning to combat in Iraq. But we will help Iraqis as they take


the fight to terrorists who threaten the Iraqi people in the region and


American interests as well. Tlr concerns over the danger of


blowback into their own countries. Earlier this week David Cameron said


"It was the most serious concern to British security." Pointing to


British jihadists returning to Britain.


Is David Cameron right? Are Jihadis returning from eastern, western


Iraq, the biggest threat to the UK from terror? They are one of the


biggest threats. They have warned Western


from terror? They are one of the biggest threats. They have countries


of the fact they intend to return to attack here. They have thousands of


fighters, foreign fighters, who have come from different countries to


join them in Syria and Iraq and relatively unnoticed we've had a


successful attack on European soil. It happened to be a French jihadist


who attacked the Jewish museum in Belgium. He was a returning fighter


from Syria. Though it has gone relatively unnoticed, that precedent


has been set. We have arrests in Britain where people have attempted


to attack after returning from Syria. We have had fluent


English-speaking fighters warn Canada and America that they'll


return to their countries of origin and attack and it is worrying


because at this moment in time we have more foreign and European


fighters in Syria than ever went to Afghanistan. We have all heard of


the Afghan blowback and I think we are woefully unprepared for the


Syria blowback. Our own Frankrd Gardener, the BBC's security


correspondent that estimates are 2,000 have gone from Europe, of


which between 400 and 450 have come from this country. I suppose the


danger is, that it is quite clear that they are being well-trained,


that they will be or are already battle-hardened, that they are


extreme. We know that ISIS is extreme. So, they are, if they come


back, the potential for them to be dangerous people, when they come


back I would have thought is very high. A no-brainer. When you say,


treem, let's put in context how extreme. This is a group that's too


extreme for Al-Qaeda, Al-Qaeda has expelled ISIS from its Chan fra be


chies. They believe them to be too unruly and uncontrollable. That's


what we are dealing W there are roughly 400 British born and raised


citizens who have gone there. They are joining a group too extreme for


Al-Qaeda. There is no turning back. ISIS after the conquest of Mosul and


other cities amounting to one-third of Iraq, has set a new global


standard for global jihadists. Al-Qaeda is yesterday's news. People


coming to join them, are joining ISIS. It is the new zeitgeist. It is


very worrying, they are literally unhinged as a nation. Speaking of


the British nationals, do we know who they are and why they have gone?


The security forces have a these early saying security services who


seem to have no idea that ISIS was about to take the second biggest


city in Iraq and huge chunks of the desert. If they didn't know that,


why would we have confidence that they know who these people are? It


is sad, it is unfortunate that last year I warned on the BBC of foreign


fighters for a film we made with this week. People reacted by saying


it was sensationalist, it was not going to happen. A couple of weeks


before ISIS took most of all, we were warned they would go into Iraq.


-- moulds all. We seem to have a pendulum approach to these sorts of


issues. We did not like what happened with the original invasion


of Iraq. We have taken a back foot. These people, when they returned to


Britain, or they may go to Turkey, Pakistan... Are we in any position


to know that when they land at Heathrow Airport or at Dover, that


we know who they are and where they have been? No. It is complicated by


the fact that some people have gone for a genuinely charitable and


medical purposes. The real concern is that there are up to 400 who have


gone to fight. It is very difficult to fill in. You can take a holiday


in Turkey and walk through the porous border. It is difficult to


avoid the little's incentives are in fact it. If this is a long-term stop


there is no short-term fix. Until now, there is no "too challenging


extremism in this country. Given that the security services don't


know what is going on, how do you have for the fourth of humour I say


that. There are organisations are actively monitoring and verify


individual voices from the cases they have been interviewed. There


are hundreds of fighters from you. Would review the side, I don't think


there is any doubt that there are some, sometimes these figures are


thrown out as they gain currency. You're never sure what the


provinces. But assuming this is a problem, what do we do about them?


We have first of all to acknowledge that we created a lot of the


problem. The last three years Britain has been enabling and


helping this lot in Syria. It has been part of the British policy to


bring them on our side. We have been very careless about the people we


have entered alliances with. The ISIS fighters, from the Baathist


army. They come from the groups we have created in order to get out of


Iraq cleanly. They come party from these jihadist groups who worked


alongside our allies in Qatar. In what way has Britain helped ISIS? It


was our policy to bring down Assad. We did not have the will or microbes


are perhaps not the ability to intervene directly to get rid of


Assad. So we allowed the Saudis and the Qataris to fund these terror


groups. How could we stop the -- how could we stop them? They are our


allies. The use of the jihad e-groups, they were on our side. We


wanted Assad out. We must acknowledge that is part of the


legacy of our Syrian rhetoric. I understand all that but you have not


explained how we have directly helped ISIS. I did not say that. All


of that is water under the bridge. The issue is what is to be done now.


We think there are a number of these people. They are British national.


If they are nationalised British citizens, we have the power to stop


them. If they are British nationals, born here, there is not a lot we can


do. The intelligence services, someone said to me in a previous


programme, the intelligence services would have to monitor them. I think


part of the problem is that ever since the weapons of mass


destruction weren't there, there is a great sense of not believing the


security services know when they say there are all of these people. I'm


sure this is part of the problem you are finding. People say nothing is


happening. We have really got to get the public onside and say, this is a


thread. -- threat. All of that is fine. It doesn't address the major


problem is that if these people, when they come back to this country,


as many of them will do, and they present their passports to border


control, and if we are lucky enough to know that they have been part of


ISIS, part of beheading squads, part of rounding up people and killing


them, shooting them in the back, what do we do? There is very little


in the short term. We don't know who is gone in the first place. There is


very little in the short term we can do. We must start counter messaging


online. ISIS have an app. They have a smartphone. They are so far ahead.


We are so far behind. We are so far behind in terms of grassroots and


communities in this country. 400 fighters roughly do not just get up


and risk their lives without coming from a certain atmosphere that


generates the sympathy for that cause. Yet the communities in local


government department, four years too late, is yet to publish its


non--- is extremist strategy. That may help deal with the problem in


the future. Where we seem to have no policy response at all is in how we


deal with those that have already gone. Some of them are in prison.


The national vendor 's management service does not have a


comprehensive the radicalisation plan for prisons. Jihadist groups


are openly recruiting in prisons. And there is no strategy in place to


start the counter messaging and presence. There are 3% of this


country who are Muslims yet 20% are in the prison population. They are


vulnerable to radicalisation and predisposed to violent environments.


We have two take out finger out and challenge extremism. Sadly, we are


dithering on this subject and we have been for too long. Is their any


good news?! ISIS appears to want to control a state. It needs oil


fields. That means boarders at the end of the day. That means it has


certain conventional... Al-Qaeda had no designs. It was not based


anywhere. That suggests to me there is a possibility that eventually


they will settle down and become an area of land which you can negotiate


with. I don't know. That is a bit of a silver


with. I don't know. That is a bit lining there!


Now if you're an avid follower of the Daily Politics,


you'll know about our long-running series which showcases some of the


We've discussed Karl Marx, Niccolo Machiavelli, Friedrich Hayek, Peter


You can see all of the films in the series on our website.


Today we're looking at the 17th century English


These video is not running. I will now give a lecture on John Locke. --


the video. I did political philosophy at University. He was


quite a good writer. He liked the odd cup of tea in the morning.


And Lisa Nandy joins us now from our studios in Salford.


You have no idea how happy I am to see you! Hi, Andrew! I will take


that as a compliment. You are a champion for John Locke. Tell us


why. Quite simply because he had such an astonishing impact not just


here in Britain but on the rest of the world as well. He had this huge


inside the Government 's don't get their power handed to them by God.


They get their power from the people and rule only by the well and


consent of the people. That gave us the basis of Parliamentary democracy


and sparked off revolutions in France, America and you can see John


Locke basically written into every line of the American Constitution


still today. Can we count him among those philosophers both in this


country and in continental Europe, that began laying down the


philosophical case for governments to be held accountable by the


people? Absolutely. He went further than that. He said governments have


two rule in the interests of the people that put them there. And if


they don't do that, they can be removed. Although John Locke was


actually quite an establishment figure, he certainly was not a


radical or revolutionary. He went on -- it was that that provided the


underpinning for the American and French revolutions. He made a huge


impact around the world. If you think now as well that there are


still people fighting for the right to be recognised as the people are


power should reside, with limits on executives and their ability to rule


over them. These things are really important. I have got more questions


to ask you. I am delighted to say, we have put a shilling in the meter


and there is just a chance your film will run. Let me hold my breath and


see what happens. John Locke life. He joined in safe


in the and here in the library I have in front of me letters that


John Locke wrote back to the Royal Society. One from Montpelier.


Observations of the moon. Here, in Paris, a letter written on


observations of a medical quirk. Here, a constitution, a part of


colonial America. Things like this became the foundation for the


American Constitution. This is a man with varied interests and


interesting things to say. Today we would call him a polymath. I am off


to meet a Labour MP who thinks his philosophy of politics is what makes


him relevant. Let's start at the very beginning. Lisa, we have come


to a nursery, which may seem odd but it is one of John Locke's big theory


is that we were all born a blank slate and accumulate knowledge. What


excited you about John Locke? That theory made a huge splash at the


time. What excited me was the theory of a quality he puts forward. We are


surrounded by children, all of them with different characteristics. What


John Locke argued was that for the purposes of political representation


none of those differences matter. We are all equal. When I first picked


up these books at university and found this radical idea in what is


really quite an established and -- establishment figure, I thought he


was worth reading. Those radical ideas get him into trouble with the


establishment. I want to take you to the scene of what may or may have


been -- may not have been a plot. Let's go. Lisa, this is right house.


It is just a gatehouse now. In 1683, John Locke is implicated in a plot


to kill Charles II, who was king, and his brother James, who will


become king. John Locke asked to flee Netherlands. He does not come


back to Britain. -- John Locke asked to flee to the Netherlands. William


of Orange is installed on this wrong. It seems he is adapting to


those people in power because they seem to believe what he believes? I


think you are looking at this the wrong way round. He was riding for


those people in power. People who had the ability to change things. At


times this makes his philosophy seem inconsistent, perhaps a little bit


incoherent. The really exciting thing about John Locke is that he


was a doer as well as a thinker. He lived through these tremendous


times, the battle for power between King and Parliament. His argument


about the limits of power changed what was to happen next. Doctor


Elizabeth Fraser of Oxford University is clear that not only


does John Locke affect what happens next year, but abroad, too, by


making a simple argument. He's the great theorist of anti-patriarch


it. He set out to argue that patriarchal list theory, which was


very common in the 17th century, the idea that political power is the


power of the father over his son, it is the power of the husband over his


wife, that is what the King's power is, he set out to show that that is


false. This is where John Locke worshipped


for the last 13 years of his life. He is buried in the churchyard.


Church is quite important to one of his principal philosophies, the


separation of power between church and government? Locke was concerned


with the limits of Government power. Instead of seeing the monarchy what


happeneded down divine right from God. He seen it as the power of the


people. This of paved the way for the American War of Independence and


the French revolution. If you look at the American constitution, you


can see Locke written into every line of that document. It's


surprising, really, that this most conservative of philosophers should


end up pushing forwards ideas that were tremendously radical and have


such a revolutionary impact. Speaking about the church, he is


very interested in religion, isn't he? He writes this profound defence


of religion toleration. He might have been doing that for political


reasons, but the impact was to launch the first sustained campaign


for religion freedom from inside the Church of England. Let's see if we


can find his grave, in the churchyard.


I think, if I'm right, yes, there he is. There we go. The plaque here was


actually put together by the American and British Commonwealth


association. So, clearly, they understand the importance that he


has in the American political system but what relevance does John Locke


have to us today? I think he is hugely relevant. His defence of


toleration set up broad principles which mattered with the far right


sweeping Europe. But there is something more than that, that I


think he will be remembered for. He set out the foundation of Western


democracy, this idea that Government only derives its legitimacy from the


will of the people and with trust in politicians at an all-time low and


people dissatisfied with politics as a whole, we could do so much worse


than to revisit the writings of a man from the 17th century to find


answers to some of the really challenging problems that we face


today. Now back to Lisa Nandy who was on


the film, in Salford now. There were Coentra digses to what he wrote. You


say he wanted religion toleration, but not for atheists. Yes. But


interestingly, though, on the other side he was way ahead of his time in


that he disliked the power of man over women, at a time when even


progressive philosophers were largely writing about men? Yes,


there were lots of contradictions in his writing. I think that was


largely because he was writing for political purposes. He wrote about


the way of stopping a Catholic from descending the throne and he wrote


about religion toleration to prevent Catholicism taking over, as as he


saw T whether what he did was by design or accident what he did


provoked the freedom of thought. Not just religious thought but this idea


that the Government and churches don't have any right toll tell us


what we believe and violence isn't ineffective it is also illegitimate


that. Defence has lasted for much longer and can be easily extended to


things like women's rights, for example, for to atheists' rights to


believe what they may believe. Locke might have been horrified that that


would have been where his argument ended up being used but envelopes it


makes him an important figure. OK, thank you for that.


Jackie, I suspect he might also have been surprised that once we got


government that is were accountable to the people, how disillusioned we


became with them. A more verious defence of Locke, I'm not sure I


would describe him as the first great feminist thinker which seemed


to be coming out of Lisa's analysis He Weualities put our values out of


other generations. For me, not enough social justice in his


philosophy. A great man. Jackie has put her finger on T it is marvellous


to see that the Labour Party is coming to appreciate John Locke the


great defender of property. He was also - and fabulous to see some


Oxford don making out he is the project of feminism. He was a


radical philosopher at the time but he became - he is now a very


conservative philosopher because his ideas were embodied in the American


state. And he's - and we should celebrate him as Conservatives and


it is wonderful that Labour... celebrate him as Conservatives and


it is wonderful Didn't he have a wonderful nose didn't you think? It


was quite a hooter. I wouldn't disagree with this point about


feminism. I don't think you can make a strong case for Locke as a


feminist at all. I think the point about property is


feminist at all. I think the point about quite interesting because one


of the things that Locke argues is that we only derive our ownership of


property because we expend our energy in creating something with T


he has this huge section of his philosophy where he talks about


tilling the land and mixing your labour with the land and that is


where you derive your ownership from the fruits of that labour from.


That, was an idea that was to become pretr he men duesly significant


later on when it was taken up by Karl Marx. It is right to say he is


a Conservative philosopher but he has had an impact in many, many way


that is he would never have anticipated. All right. Lisa Nandy


thank you very much. Good to talk to you. Thanks. As I say, you can see


all of our pen portraits of philosophers over the centuries gone


by on our websites. Are there any women among them? I'm not sure. Oh,


dear. Mary Wilson, perhaps. She'll do. Phew! This was meant to


be an easy segment of the problem. # neck -- of the programme.


It was a hard fought competition, and despite a valiant effort it's


But I'm not talking about some soccer tournament in


South America, I'm talking about the Europe's next Commission President.


I know you've been talking about nothing else.


David Cameron will have one final chance to stop the coronation


of Luxembourger Jean-Claude Junker at next week's EU summit -


As well as being in charge of the money, the Commission initiates


all EU legislation, acts as a guardian of the EU treaties and it


Whilst European leaders propose who becomes the President,


they now have to make the choice taking into account the elections to


The European People's Party won that election and proposed Mr Junker


as its candidate, a man who David Cameron described


Just to make it even harder, Britain doesn't have a veto


The decision is made by qualified majority and the


Prime Minister needs support from countries representing 38% of the


Whilst a number of leaders have privately expressed reservations,


Just like the England football team, there is still a slim chance


of success and it rests on the Italians.


Italy's Prime Minister Metteo Renzi could be an unlikely ally.


Mr Renzi is said to be unhappy at Juncker's austerity plans and may


this week. the Presidency was clear in PMQs


It is a simple principle, much more connected to the principle than the


name. It is this, I think it will 's be shared on every side of the


House. The members of the European Council who are the elected Prime


Ministers and elected presidents under the treaties, we should choose


who runs the European Commission. I don't mind how many people on the


European Council disagree with me, I will fight this right to the very


end. And what I would say - what I would say to my colleagues on the


European Council, many of whom have expressed interesting views about


both this principle and this person, "If you want reform in Europe, you


have to stand up for it." If you want change, you have to vote for


it. That's the message I will take and that is is the right message for


our country. joined by Stephen Booth, research


director at the think-tank Open Is it a done deal, will Mr Juncker


get the job? He is the favourite. The irony is what has been held up


is the great hope for pan-European democracy has descended in horse


trading and backroom deals we have seen in the past. As you mentioned


earlier, it sli still a swing voter and there is still a degree of


unpredictability there. If there are others, other than Mr Cameron who


don't like the prospect of Mr Juncker, why don't they speak out,


too? Lots of things going on. Cameron has made it a point of


principle, about the national leadership of the Commission


President, not the European Parliament. People like Matteo Renzi


in Italy is fighting a different battle, he is concerned about get


concessions from germ on on how the eurozone is run. People may end up


on the same side but for different reasons. President of the European


Parliament think it is should be Mr Juncker and even if it is agreed


that they were not going to do that by the European Council, there could


be a stalemate because if they nominate somebody else, he or she


still has to be approved by the European Parliament? That's right.


The European Parliament has a veto over the apartment in the end. You


could end up having two or three rounds of this process where


national leaders put someone forward and it is either accepted or


rejected by MEPs. You are quite keen for Mr Juncker to get the job, I


understand, but perhaps not for the same reasons as Mr Juncker? No, no,


I think speaking as a yurpted, a Conservative eurosceptic, those who


don't wish Europe particularly well, want it to bring itself into


disrepute. And some sort of clueless, sort of ex-premier of


Luxembourg, that sort of world centre of tax-dodging and


corruption, where they are held in complete disdain by other world


leaders, a man wrededdedsed to some 1970s bankrupt ideology, this is the


man we need, the full ghastliness of the European idea will be brought


into widespread attention. #12k3w4r it is, is it not, quite remarkable


that -- It is, is it not, quite remarkable that given the European


elections and events in the eurozone, youth unemployment and so


on, that there is deep disillusion with the European project across not


just in this country. I mean the National Front won the election in


France and they are as eurosceptic as you can get but the response of


the European elite is to choose a man synonymous with the European


establishment way of doing things? I have to grant you, that is true. I


would prefer to talk about David Cameron and I think he's being


damaged by this - I'm going to fight this on the beaches and that. That's


just process. It is not. When he talks about the great reforms he is


going to win from the European Union he will then put before the British


people in his referendum, people are not going to be so sure he can


achieve them. People have said - absolutely he is going to stop this


man, Juncker. Was he right? He has a point of view, he is entitled to it.


That's not what I asked. Is he right? I think in the way he did it


was foolish. A typical Labour response. You sit on the fence doing


nothing. I'm not. Is he right or wrong? Should we have Juncker or


not? I don't feel strongly whether we have him or not. You don't have


any opinion on the subject. Labour has been criticising the process of


how he has handled T we can all be Monday morning quarterbacks on that.


European is a labyrinthite operation. We do know what Mr


Cameron stands for on this, he doesn't want Juncker or a


federalist. We don't know what Labour or the Liberal Democrats


want. Well, the Liberal Democrats can speak for themselves, as can


Labour. What we do have to do is work with everyone in Europe to


achieve a candidate. You can't go out on a limb as calm reason seems


to keep doing saying - I'm going to have this and that and I'm in the


going to work with the rest. Don't you think it would be popular given


what this man stands for and given the mood of the British people for


Mr Cameron to say - I may not have won because I don't have the votes


but I fought against this guy. It may work out in practice, we will


have to wait and see. This brings home actual lit disastrous position


which Miliband is in. He is not really on -- actually the


disastrous. Mr Miliband. On this programme, you are quite right.


Cameron is going out there and fighting a very honourable battle


for reform inside Europe. We can see he is on the right side. He


expresses himself. And these sort of halfwhich thes in Brussels. It is


not only the half wits, in Brussels. Idiots I might say. Who are


apparently saying one thing to David Cameron and another thing publicly.


It is not just the people in Brussels who want Juncker, it is


lots of other European leaders, you can't Diss them as well. Why do so


many people in Luxembourg get the top jobs? Is there something in the


coffee? If The one side for a camera and this is that people will be


falling over themselves out of this certainly the offside for the


camera. Angela Merkel made this clear


yesterday. Britain has to take this on the chin. But they will do a deal


later on. What will be said is that if Mr Cameron could not get his way


over Mr Juncker, how will he get his way over the repatriations of major


powers from Brussels back to the UK? That is a fair charge. That was


always the risk of thinking is a fair charge. That was always the


risk of taking a strategy That is a commission job. That is relevant to


the repatriations. That is just frustrating in Brussels. If he


cannot get his way on this, how does he get away -- his way on the more


complicated matter of convincing Europeans that he should be able to


repatriate all of these powers? We have to wait and see. The European


Commission is not the only entity that can make or break David


Cameron's renationalisation agenda. The commission is important. But a


lot of things will be decided among national governments. What do you


make of Peter Cockburn who says that getting Mr Juncker in would be great


for Euroscepticism to matter as Mac? I agree. The problem with this is


that if the UK does stay in a reformed European Union, we do not


want to set the president -- precedent whereby the Parliament


selects the president. I thought we thought there was a democratic


deficit and we want to do something about it? We do. But I don't think


anybody thinks that younger is going to be elected on a wave of


democratic sentiment across the union. Thank you.


Now, while the England flag is being flown from pub windows, on car roofs


and even in Downing Street, another, lesser know flag has this week been


On Monday a brand new flag for Sussex was flown by Eric Pickles


on his department's office block, in celebration of Sussex Day.


It's a relatively new invention, and it got the team here at


Daily Politics wondering whether other counties in England


Every county has its own character but when it comes to choosing a


county flag there seems to be some common themes. Put something local


on it. Nottinghamshire nodded towards its most famous local outlaw


when it first adopted bears. Two, there is always immense local pride.


Listen to the good folk of Worcestershire as the three pairs


graced the flagpole for the first time. It is great. It represents the


county. It is good. Very impressed, yes. And third, they are usually


chosen through some sort of competition, for example, how would


the people of Northamptonshire choose between these four beauties?


But as we found in Derbyshire a few years ago, you cannot please all of


the people all of the time. Out of these three it was my least


favourite but not to worry. It goes to show that across our green and


pleasant land, county pride is flourishing. Not flagging.


Joining us now in the studio is Graham Bartram who


is the Flag Institute's chief vexillologist - that's an expert


And in our Brighton studios is Peter White, a Sussex town crier who


Let me come to, FIFA 5-to celebrate so six-day? With the raising of the


flight. They help to raise days running. That's my with the raising


of the flag. Other than raising the flag, what


else did you do? There is a charter. Sometimes people read the Sussex


Charter. There is a Sussex Charter that can be read. Sometimes the


person reading it decides to customising a little so that it


applies to the town in which it is being read as well as the wonderful


counties of east and West Sussex. Does not sound like a lot of laughs.


Did you have a party? There was a party in one place and people


celebrated with a cup of tea in another. What do you make of the


Sussex flag to I am a traditionalist and I still prefer the old red and


gold. That is just me. The new flag has got its plans. It has also hurt


his detractors. People are not quite sure where it came from. It has now


been approved. Those people who are a little worried about Europe also


point out that it is blue and gold like the European flag. When the


town council finds money for the new one, they will probably switch. I


understand you prefer to flag is six? You could risk setting county


against county. They have had their own flag since the 1880s. Very


interesting. Graham Bartram, it is not just Sussex. A lot of English


counties are no choosing their own flag. Why is that? It is all to do


with having an identity. Global identity becoming more important as


a counterpoint to globalisation. As we all become more of the same, it


is more important to be identified as different. To connect more with


our local roots. Has the -- has it got anything to do with the


increasing, the most entire uses often now, where they used the


Scottish sole tyre? They are linked but not caused by. They are caused


by the same thing. It is a desire to have a strong identity. It is much


easier to have a strong identity of something closer to you than it is


to have something more amorphous, such as Europe or the world. Peter,


for a long time in post-war Britain, we seem to be determined to


snuff out English county identity, local government reforms got rid of


all names etc. Do you think the sense of belonging to a county is


coming back to people? There was this illusion in the 1960s and 1970s


when Middlesex disappeared and half of Surrey disappear. There has been


a swing public mood. People are becoming more enthusiastic. Cornwall


and Yorkshire have always been like that. Other counties are catching


up. Graham, who decides what the flag should the parties county? It


varies. Sometimes the County Council decided to give the flag to the


people. Northumberland is like that. Hertfordshire is like that.


Sometimes it is very old historical flag. The gold markets on blue is


actually the flag of Sussex from 1622. It feels like a long way. It


has got nothing to do with European partners. That's my theory goes back


a long way. Lots of them behind us. That is a dragon. That is Somerset.


That is quite a new one. That is a dragon! They have ripped it off. The


red rose of Lancashire and the white rose of Yorkshire are traditional


emblems. We can show your Dorset flag, Peter. There is. What you


think that is there still a bit of pride in new? Is the heart beating?


I think this is tremendous. We could on to Edward Heath's does that --


disastrous local government regulations. That was local


government organisation. The counties still existed. Middlesex


still exists. My relatives were born in Lancashire suddenly became


Cheshire. I have never got over that. If you were to say your


identity has to be based on collect your litter bins, how many people in


Somerset police their identity is far North East Somerset? I don't


think many people would be. And so far four Somerset. I live in


Knightsbridge and we have a flag. It is the Russian Federation! Gave us a


ring of your belt. If you are absolutely happy with that and your


sound engineers are. God Save The Queen! Thank you very much for that.


Who's had a good week, and who's had a shocker?


Here's Adam, with the political week - in just 60 seconds.


Heathrow to give his party leg above the four election results. This will


be independent liberal professor from an independent Liberal party.


They have all got a constitution as an independent Scotland would have


won, too. That's according to Nicola Sturgeon. Three years after it was


wrecked by a frying mob, the British embassy in Iran is to reopen. Who


fancies being our man in Teheran? Ed Miliband set out some fairly thickly


changes to the benefits system and with impeccable timing the dark Lord


returned with some helpful advice. It may work. It may well be


successful. Presumably the Chinese prime minister got through passport


control of it but we unveiled a new Visa regime for tourists from his


country. He shall find deals for nuclear power and high-speed rail.


That he shall find deals. A fourth and fifth in there were


little and any demonstrations. Human Rights Watch kicked into the long


grass. It is changed days. It really is. I was talking to a couple of


human rights lawyers and as if ever I've read. They think the way to get


human rights improve his bike trade. We are in different ways. The


jurisprudence of all of these contracts in London. They get the


big fees? Your life that is a regrettable but necessary fact. I am


sorry you missed the whole. That was the big story of the week. What do


you do with a problem like Ed Miliband? We have this quiz. We have


got to give the answer. With richer -- British press Vladimir Putin try


to stop? That which British pressure group is Vladimir Putin meant to


stop? It was the anti-fracking lobby. Why? Because fracking


represents a serious threat to Mr Putin's gas prices, of which 70% of


its revenues depend. Thanks to Jackie Ashley,


Peter Oborne and all my guests. I'll be back on BBC One on Sunday


with the Sunday Politics, when I'll be talking to


Labour's Rachel Reeves.


Download Subtitles