20/10/2013 Sunday Politics East Midlands

Good morning and welcome to The Sunday Politics. Alex Salmond says a

vote for Scottish independence would be an act of national self belief.

His deputy joins us live from the SNP conference in Perth. Is

Whitehall meddling too much in modern affairs? The Communities

Secretary, Eric Pickles, joins me for The Sunday Interview. Senior

coppers will be answering questions this

And in or out ` as your job depend on Europe? And as more

London, does the London assembly have one arm tied behind its back?

All of that to come. And the Home Office minister sacked by Nick

Clegg, who says his party is like a wonky shopping trolley, which keeps

veering off to the left. He will join us live at noon. With me to

unpack all of this, Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Iain Martin. They will be

tweeting throughout the programme, using hashtag #bbcsp. It is the last

day of the Scottish national party conference in Perth. We have

discovered that Alex Salmond has been on the same diet as Beyonce.

The SNP leader compared his attempts to lose weight with the campaign for

independence - lots achieved so far, 20 more to do. In a moment, I will

be joined by the deputy leader of the SNP, Nicola Sturgeon. First

they report on the independence campaign. September 18 2014, the

date of destiny for Scotland, the day when these campaigners hope its

people will decide to vote yes for independence. In a recent poll, only

14% said they knew enough to vote either way. That is unlikely to

change any time soon. I think the Scottish people will be going to the

polls next year still not knowing an awful lot of stuff which is

important, because the outcome, in terms of taxation, debt, exactly

what will happen to the allocation of assets between the two countries,

will come about as a result of negotiation between a Scottish

government and the UK Government. That is not stuff which will be

known year. At the moment, polls suggest Scotland will decide to

remain within the UK. A recent survey found that 44% of those

questioned planned to vote no, 5% yes. But interestingly, the

undecideds were at 31%, suggesting that Alex Salmond's task might be

tough but not impossible. There are a number of reasons which make a

vanilla campaign a good idea. It does not put off cautious voters, it

allows for people to imagine their own version of what independence

will be like, and crucially, it allows for the yes campaign to take

advantage of any mistakes by the no campaign. In other words, the yes

campaign are not out there with big ideas, they are just waiting for the

no campaign to trip up. What we do know is that whatever happens next

September, Scotland will be getting more power. From 2016, a separate

income tax regime will come into force, giving the Scottish

Parliament control over billions of pounds of revenue. What we do not

know yet is how the alternative would pan out. There are issues

which would be raised by independence, issues about how the

national debt is allocated, what the currency will look like, how an

independent Scotland would balance the books, because it would have a

bigger job to do, even down the Whitehall government has to do.

Those are really big issues, which a Scottish government would have to

face, on top of whatever negotiation it had to have with the UK

Government. The Scottish government's White Paper on

independence, two to be published within weeks, should fill in some of

the banks. But how Scotland votes in September may yet be determined by

what it feels rather than what it knows. And joining me from Perth is

Scotland's Deputy First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon. Nicola Sturgeon, we

meet again! Hello, Andrew. Former leader of the SNP Gordon Wilson

said, if this referendum fails, it will fail on the basis that people

put their British identity ahead of their Scottish identity, so we have

got to attack on the British identity - what does he mean? Gordon

Wilson is a very respected, much loved former leader of the SNP. My

view is that I do not think the independence referendum is really

about identity. I am secure and proud of my Scottish identity, but

this is a decision about where power best lies. Do decision-making powers

best lie here in Scotland, with a government which is directly

accountable to the people of Scotland, or does it best lie in

Westminster, with governments which, very often, people in Scotland do

not vote for? That is the issue at the heart of the campaign. Let me

just clarify, you do not agree with him, that you need to go on the

attack with regard to the British identity of Scottish people? No I

do not think we are required to attack British identity. It is

absolutely compatible for somebody to feel a sense of British identity

but still support Scottish independence, because Scottish

independence is about a transfer of power. It is about good government,

accountable government, ensuring that decisions are taking here in

Scotland, by people who have got the biggest stake in getting those

decisions right. I represent a constituency in the south side of

Glasgow, and if you speak to many people in my constituency, if you

ask them their national identity, many of them would say Irish,

Pakistani, Indian, Polish, and many of them will vote yes next year

because they understand the issue at stake, which is the issue of where

decisions are best taken. It looks like you are changing tack ex-, you

have realised the softly softly approach, of saying that actually,

nothing much will change, we will still have the Queen, the currency,

and all the rest of it, is moving over towards voting for a left-wing

future for Scotland... Well, I know that what we are doing is pointing

out is pointing out the choice between two futures. If we vote yes,

we take our own future into our own hands. We make sure that for ever

after, we have governments which will be in demented policies which

we have voted for. If we do not become independent, then we continue

to run the risk of having governments not only that we do not

vote for, but often, that Scotland rejects. We are seeing the

dismantling of our system of social security. There are politicians in

all of the UK parties who are itching to cut Scotland's share of

spending. So Scotland faces a choice of two futures, and it is right to

point out the positive consequences of voting yes, but also the

consequences of voting no. But you are promising to reverse benefit

cuts and increase the minimum wage. You would renationalise the Royal

Mail, though how you would do that nobody knows. You are promising to

cut energy bills. These are the kind of promises that parties make in a

general election campaign, not in a once in 300 years extra stench or

choice. Is the future of Scotland really going to be decided on the

size of the minimum wage? -- existential choice. A yes vote would

be about bringing decision-making powers home, but we are also setting

out some of the things an SNP government would do, if elected A

decision on what the first government of an independent

Scotland would be would not be taken in the referendum, that decision

would be taken in the 2016 election. And all of the parties will put

forward their offers to the electorate. We are setting out some

of the things which we think it is important to be prioritised. These

are things which have a lot of support in Scotland. We see the pain

being felt by people because of the rising cost of energy bills, there

is widespread opposition to some of the welfare cuts. So, we are setting

out the options which are open to Scotland, but only open to Scotland

if we have the powers of independence. Given that you seem to

be promising aid permanent socialist near Varna, if Scotland is

independent, if you are right of centre in Scotland, and I understand

that is a minority pursuit where you are, but it would be a big mistake

to vote for independence, in that case, wouldn't it? No, because the

whole point of independence is that people get the country they want,

and the government a vote for. So, right of centre people should not

vote for independence? No, because people who are of that political

persuasion in Scotland get the opportunity to vote for parties

which represent that persuasion and if they can persuade a majority to

vote likewise, then they will get a government which reflects that. That

is the essence of independence. Right now, we have a Westminster

government which most people in Scotland rejected at the last

general election. That is hardly democratic. It is right and proper

that the SNP, as the current government, points out the

opportunities that would be opening up. Can I just clarify one thing,

when we spoke on The Daily Politics earlier last week, you made it clear

to me that Alex Salmond, we know he wants to debate with David Cameron,

but you made it clear to me that he would debate with Alistair Darling

as well, and Mr Carmichael... He made it clear yesterday. Well, he

said to the BBC this morning that he would only debate with these people

after he had had a debate with Mr Cameron, so who is right? I was

making the point last week, and Alex Salmond was making it yesterday and

this morning - let's have that agreement by David Cameron to come

and debate with Alex Salmond, and then Alex Salmond, just like me

will debate with allcomers. So if he does not get the David Cameron

debate, then he will not do the others, is that right? Let's focus

on is wading David Cameron to do the right thing. So, in other words he

will not debate, yes or no? Members of the SNP government... We know

that, but what about Alex Salmond? He said yesterday, we will debate

with all sorts of people, including the people you have spoken about,

but David Cameron should not be let off the hook just putting aside the

independence issue, energy prices are now even playing into the SNP,

so every political party has to do something about energy prices. Yes,

it is clearly it is interesting is the difference between the SNP and

the Labour approach. Ed Miliband electrified the party conference

season when he said he would freeze energy prices for 20 months,

seemingly having an amazing control over the energy market, where we

know that essentially what pushes prices up the wholesale prices on

world market. What Nicola Sturgeon is talking about is actually saying,

this amount is added to your bills for green levies, and we are going

to take them off your bills and they will be paid out of general taxation

in an independent Scotland. That is a credible government, making a

credible case, very different to what Labour is saying, although

playing to the same agenda. So, Labour has got a populist policy,

the SNP has also got a populist policy, the one group of people that

do not have a decent response to this is the coalition? Exactly. What

the SNP also have is a magic money pot, so that speech yesterday, you

are right, it was very left wing, social democratic, but there was

none of the icing like Labour has been talking about, with fiscal

responsibility. I think that is the difference between the two. We know

what the Tories would really like to do, all of these green levies which

were put on our bills in the good times, when they were going to be

the greenest party ever, the Tories would like to say, let's just wipe

out some of them, put the rest on to some general government spending,

but they have a problem, which is in the Department of Energy and Climate

Change. Not only that, they really are stuck now. But there is

something in the free schools debate this morning, the parties are now

determined to send a message to their potential voters at the next

election, that they are trying to fight their coalition partners. Do

not expected any change in coalition policy or free schools policy before

the election, but we can expect to hear the parties try to pretend that

they are taking on their coalition partners. Mr Clegg has said, we

would put this free schools policy into our manifesto, so is it not

possible that the Tories will say, if you give us an overall majority,

we will cut your electricity bill because we will get rid of these

green levies? I think that is entirely possible. The Tories know

that they are stuck on this, they do not have a response to Ed Miliband.

How much should ministers in Whitehall medal in local decisions

across England? In opposition, David Cameron said he wanted a fundamental

shift of power from Whitehall to local people. He said, when one size

fits all solution is... Eric Pickles described it as "an

historic shift of power". But the Communitites and Local Government

Secretary can't stop meddling. In the past few months Mr Pickles has

tried to ban councils from using CCTV cameras and "spy cars" to fine

motorists... Told councils how to act quicker to shut down illegal

travellers' sites... Criticised councils who want to raise council

tax... Insisted councils release land to residents hoping to build

their own property... And stated new homes should have a special built in

bin storage section. It seems not a week goes by without a policy

announcement from the hyper active Mr Pickles. So is the government

still committed to localism, or is it all about centralism now?

And Communities Secretary Eric Pickles joins me now for the Sunday

Interview. Welcome. Nice to be here. You said

in July you were going to give town halls the power to wreak their local

magic. So why issue diktats from Westminster? It is not about giving

power to local councils, it is going beyond that to local people. If

local councils refuse to open up their books, we have to go straight

to local people. You have attacked councillors using so-called spy

cameras to enforce parking rules. Why is that your business? Because

there is an injustice taking place. You cannot use fines to raise money

and that is plainly happening. If you get yourself a ticket from a

CCTV, it could be days or weeks before that lands on your doorstep

and you have virtually no possibility to be able to defend

yourself. But just leave it to people to vote out the council then.

We are trying to enforce the law and it clearly states that you cannot

use parking fines in order to fund general rate. So why are you not

taking them to court if they are breaking the law? There have been a

number of court cases taken by local residents. I am there to stand by

local residents. Your even trying to micromanage, allowing motorist s to

park for 15 minutes in local high street. Why is that your business?

I'm trying to ensure that local authorities understand the

importance of the town centre. If you look at all opinion polls, right

now there is a five-minute leeway but there are many cases of people

being jumped on by parking officials for quite trivial things. It is

about saying, surely I can go and get a pint of milk. But a party that

dines out on localism, that is a matter for local people, not the men

in Whitehall. I have to be on the side of local people. That person

who wants to go and get a pint of milk. Ultimately it is a matter for

them. It is a matter for the council. But a little bit of

criticism is not a bad thing. You have now declared war on the wheelie

bin and suggested that new homes should have built in storage

sections. You just cannot help meddling! I suppose that is

possible. You are a meddler! I am in charge of building regulations and

planning. So I may have some responsibility there. Another one,

interfering in local planning decisions. A couple of places, you

ruled in favour of developers. They want to build over 200 houses

against the wishes of the parish and district councils. The local MP said

the Secretary of State's decision runs roughshod over any concept of

localism. Now I have to be a blushing violet because of course

this is still potentially subject to judicial review. I have to act

properly. And Apple went is entitled to justice. -- an applicant. A local

authority has a duty to ensure that is adequate housing for people in

their area. This was not a decision that I took as a personal decision,

it was on the advice of an inspector. But you contradict what

David Cameron himself said in 2 12, he spoke about a vision where we

give communities much more say and local control. People in villages

fear big housing estates being plonked from above. You have just

done exactly that. After a proper quasi judicial enquiry. What we have

is planning framework which local people can decide where it goes But

they cannot say, nothing here. They have to have a five-year housing

supply. Previous to this government decided exactly where houses would

go, now local people can take the lead. Anna Silbury said because of

the way your department rules, local authorities now have no alternative

but to agree development on green belt land. I do not accept that I

think around Nottingham there are particular problems with regards to

the green belt. The matter has been referred back.

the green belt. The matter has been want to see development on the green

belt but on Brownfield site. We want to see underused land. But you have

to remember why we have the green belt. Not

to remember why we have the green nice, it is their to prevent

conurbations bumping into one another. Your

conurbations bumping into one is vocal about the need to deal

what he calls the historic under provision of housing. Shelter says

we need 250,000 new homes per year. provision of housing. Shelter says

Houston statistics are getting there, but nowhere near that. -

housing. You cannot there, but nowhere near that. -

localism agenda as well as meeting housing demand. I do not accept

that. We inherited a position where the lowest level of building since

the 1920s was in place. But it has steadily improved. It does take a

while. You cannot have a localism agenda where people call the shots

on housing as well as meeting the housing demand. People have a duty

to ensure that future generations have somewhere to live. You cannot

pull up the drawbridge. There is nothing incompatible between that

and localism. Because someone has to be the voice of those people who are

going to live there and to make sure there is the proper amount. Plans

now exist for more than 150,000 homes to be built on protected land,

including the green belt. That will mean riding over local concerns

Each application will be taken on its own merits. To suggest that

there is an assault on the green belt is as far from the truth as you

can imagine. Should Andrew Mitchell get his job back if the years

exonerated? I would be honoured to sit with Andrew Mitchell in the

Cabinet. I have always believed his version. But it is a matter for the

Prime Minister who he has in government. He would have no problem

in seeing him back in Cabinet? Absolutely not. Your mother answered

Vulcan junior minister Nick balls said about the Royal Charter for the

press, there's nothing we have done that troubles me as much as this. Is

that your view? It is not. I accept the compromise agreement put

together. If the press want to have an additional protection that the

Royal Charter offers, then they can move into the system. But if they

want to continue independently that is acceptable to me. But you

previously echoed Thomas Jefferson, you said for a free society to

operate the river of a free press has to flow without restriction

That is what I said at the time We had to find a compromise. And that

seems to me to be a better compromise. Let me just show you

this little montage of pictures that we have. I could not be happier

Then you are in the Desert and there you are in San Francisco. Then you

are in the casino. That is my personal favourite. These students

took a cardboard cutout of you and took it round the world with them.

Did you ever think you would become a student icon? I always felt

secretly that that might happen one day. But it came earlier in my

career than I thought! Why would they do that? I think they thought I

could do with a bit of an airing! I went to Norfolk earlier, but that

looks better. Thank you. On Wednesday senior police folk

including chief constables, will be questioned by MPs about what's

become known as Plebgate. That's the incident in Downing Street last year

which led to the resignation of the government chief whip Andrew

Mitchell. Last week the Independent Police Complaints Commission

questioned the "honesty and integrity" of police officers who

met Mr Mitchell following the row. So do scandals like this affect

public trust in the police? Here's Adam Fleming.

It's a story of politics, the police, and CCTV. No, not Andrew

Mitchell, but an MP's researcher called Alex Bryce and his partner

Iain Feis. It started on a summer night in

2011. They'd been in Parliament After a few words with a police

officer, Ian was wrestled to the ground. Alex came to have a look and

the same thing happened to him. Both were arrested and charged. These

pictures emerged on day one of their trial. A trial that was halted

because the police version of events just didn't match the footage. A lot

of people with incidence like this which we experienced, people think

there is no smoke without fire. So when we said we did nothing wrong,

people would think police just would not do that. There is always that

underlying view that some people have. I think that has been

challenged and people who know us believe that. This year the Met

apologised and paid compensation. And it's led to an unlikely sort of

friendship. When the truth came out about the Andrew Mitchell story I

actually sent him an e-mail to congratulate him about the truth

coming out. He did send a reply acknowledging that. So where are we

with THAT saga? Remember last September? Andrew Mitchell had a row

with police at the gates of Downing Street about his bike. He lost his

job as chief whip after accusations he called the officers plebs. That,

he's always denied. This week the police watchdog the IPCC suggested

that three officers may have lied about a meeting with him at the

height of the scandal. Add that to the charge sheet of cases that

haven't exactly flattered the police. Like the revelation of a

cover up over Hillsborough. The prosecution of an officer from the

Met over the death of Ian Tomlinson during protests in 2009. Along with

news that undercover officers were told to smear the family of Stephen

Lawrence. During Thursday's protest by teachers in Westminster the

police operation was really, really relaxed. And recent scandals have

done nothing to affect society's view of the boys and girls in blue -

or should I say hi-vis. About 6 % of the public say they trust the

police. And that's not budged since pollsters started measuring it 0

years ago. Of course, in Britain, crime is

down, so the perception might be that the police is doing a good

job. And the rank-and-file recently seamed pretty chipper at this awards

ceremony. Is it a good time to be a police officer? It is a good time.

Despite all of the headlines? Still a good time. But speak to officers

privately, and they say Plebgate is affecting how the public see them.

Some of them also think politicians, the Tories especially,

are enjoying that a little too much. Adam Fleming reporting there. Going

head-to-head on this issue of trust in the police, a Sunday Mirror

columnist and Peter Kirkham, former chief inspector. Peter Kirkham, let

me come to you first. Plebgate, the cover-ups over John Charles De

menace, the death of Ian Tomlinson, the industrial deception over

Hillsborough, why is the culture of deceit so prevalent in the police? I

do not agree there is a cultural deceit. These are all individual

incidents which raise individual issues. I would suggest that your

short headline summarising each of them has taken the most negative

view of it. How can you be positive about the police's behaviour over

Hillsborough? It remains to be seen with the inquiry but we are probably

talking about a handful of senior officers, dealing with the

paperwork. Well over 100 testimonies being doctored by the police. Well,

those testimonies were true to start with, so the officers have told the

truth, and they have been changed for some reason. By the police. By

the police all lawyers we have got this thing that the police conflates

everything. There are 43 forces, there is ACPO, there is the College

Of Policing... People say it was a handful of police officers, it

wasn't, it was six senior police officers who were alleged to have

doctored 106 D4 statements. Even today we are hearing that more than

1000 officers are yet to be spoken to about Hillsborough. -- 164. Do we

pretend that Hillsborough, and some of these examples, are the exception

rather than the rule? What is the evidence that this is now prevalent

in our police? I think there is a lot of evidence, and Plebgate is

probably the thing which has clinched it. The public want to

know, how deep does this girl? The audacity of a group of policemen who

think they can set up a Cabinet minister. Five of those who were

arrested and bailed still have not been charged. One of those officers

actually wrote an e-mail pretending to be a member of the public. I do

not see what the problem is in prosecuting them for that. Taking

Plebgate, there are loads of different bits of that incident.

There is the officers on duty in Downing Street, the issue of who

leaked the story to the Sun, there are the officers who claim to have

been there who would appear not to have been there, and then we have

got the West Midlands meeting issue, which has sort of been

resolved this week. There has been misconduct. But at a lower level.

But it is the audacity of an organisation which thinks it can

take on an elected minister and destroy him for their own political

purposes, at a time when the Government are cutting please pay,

when they are freezing their pensions and reducing their numbers.

It looks very much to all of us, the public, that the police are at war

with the government, and they are going to do anything they can to

discredit the Government. The police would have every reason to be at war

with the Government, because there if there is a crisis of trust... But

it looks like they fitted up a Cabinet minister. That remains to be

seen, it is being investigated. We know that those Birmingham officers,

they totally misrepresented to, if not lied outright, about what was

said. Again, that is a misrepresentation of what happened.

If you actually go and look at what is said, it is plain from the

context, they were saying, he has told us nothing new. But he had in

the transcript, it said he hadn't. He would not admit he had used the

word pleb. He apologised profusely, he said it would never happen again,

he said many things that he had not said before. I agree, which is

presumably... Thereon many police forces in this country, they have

one of the toughest jobs in the land, they end up getting involved

in almost anything which happens in society, and there are obviously a

number of difficult examples, but what is the evidence that it is out

of hand, other than just several bad apples? This bad apples argument, we

have some amazing police people, thank God, but it is because of

have some amazing police people, those that we have to root out the

bad ones, the ones that are possibly corrupt. From where most of us are

standing, the ones who are being accused of being corrupt, there does

not seem to be any process to deal with these people. The trouble with

a rotten apple is that it spreads. It is not fair on the good cops to

be tainted by this, and I think the police force, as an institution...

For all of us, we have to respect the police. There is a problem, is

there not? People do worry that if you can fit up a Cabinet minister,

you can fit up anybody... . I would disagree that anybody has proved

that anybody has been fitted up. We are yet to hear what happened at the

gates of Downing Street. But what we do know about the gates of Downing

Street is that we were told by the police officers that passers-by had

heard this incredible row, where Mitchell's file went was bullied.

That is not true... . They did not use those words, actually. All

right, but it is clear that the Police Federation jumped on this as

a politically motivated campaign... I have always said that politics

should be kept out of policing. The federation, they cannot go on

strike, but this was to covertly political, so I criticise them for

that. Do we need a better way of monitoring the police? We need a

more competent and properly resourced Independent police

commission. But if you look at those Bravery Awards, every police

officer, every year, who acts with bravery... That is the police force

we want to believe in. That is the police force you have got. We will

leave it there. Coming up in just over 20 minutes, I will be speaking

to former Lib Minister Jeremy Browne. And in The Week Ahead,

East Midlands manufacturers say they want us to stay in Europe, but what

do you think? Were England, aren't we? I think we can do it ourselves.

I live and work in Germany right now and I assume that is easy because we

are part of Europe. And as another local authority sells

off its care homes for the elderly, we look at what the future holds for

our ageing population. Running a business to make money out of

elderly care I don't believe should be a factor. The care and compassion

has to come first in my view. Hello, I'm John Hess. My guests this

week ` the Liberal Democrat's MEP for the East Midlands, Bill

Newton`Dunn, and the Labour leader of Derbyshire County Council, Anne

Western. Welcome to you both and first ` jobs. Unemployment in the

East Midlands is bucking the national trend and heading in the

wrong direction. Figures this month showed a slight rise of 1,000 in the

number of people out of work here, whilst nationally the figure was

falling. Labour's Ed Balls has been on the

patch talking about his party's plans for creating jobs. The Shadow

Chancellor was at Fisher Scientific, a logistics business in Loughborough

to meet staff and apprentices ` and try his hand at the world of work.

He said Labour would concentrate on combating youth unemployment. We're

saying repeat the tax on bank bonuses and guarantee a job for

every young person. I grew up in Nottingham in the 1980s where there

was long`term unemployment becoming entrenched for young people. We

cannot repeat that mistake. Let's get young people back to work. Ed

Balls talking about his own experience there. But this is a

problem across Europe now, isn't it? Well, there are different

predicaments in different countries. In Spain, youth

unemployment is scarily high. In Germany, it was compulsory for

businesses to supply apprenticeships. Should we do that

here? It is voluntary in Britain. I would like to see everybody taking

youngsters on and giving them a skilled. Anne, that is an idea at a

national level. What about local government ideas? In Derbyshire, we

have a good apprenticeship scheme. We are recruiting at a rapid rate.

We have to get the balance right though because we don't want to

substitute apprenticeships the jobs. We're not being so successful

getting apprenticeships into the private sector. I was talking to the

chamber of commerce last week and the offer we are making does not

seem to be the right offer to appeal to businesses. There is a small

amount of money as an incentive but they are looking for more support.

Ed Balls was talking about finding the money to pay for this job is

guarantee Labour was talking about to get anyone under 25 either into

work or training, is that an IDA European governments have been

talking about? Absolutely. In these times where everyone 0

talking about? Absolutely. In these times where everyone is short of

cash, it is about finding the money. Politics is about priorities. Some

European countries are saying, we have to help our youngsters. For

county like yours, Anne, what are the consequences of long`term youth

unemployment? Well, it is disastrous, isn't it? It is not just

now, but the future. If young people can't find a way into the workplace

then they become an overlooked generation because you never get

those opportunities again. So we're trying to pull everyone together

across the county, colleges, businesses and other councils as

well, to get to the bottom of what we can do best to support the youth.

This is massive youth unemployment happening on your watch. What is the

answer? I would like to see Nick Clegg spending more money on it. If

he can get more money out of the Chancellor to give young people more

skills and get them apprenticeships or training is `` or whatever is

possible. Well, jobs again ` this time

European ones. The subject of whether to be in or out of the EU is

back again. A new survey by the manufacturing organisation EEF has

found that 85% of its businesses want to stay in the EU. It matters

here in the East Midlands in particular, because of the important

role manufacturing still plays in our economy.

302,000 people in the East Midlands worked in the manufacturing sector.

That is 13.9% of the workforce, the highest in the UK. What's more, it's

on the increase. In the last three years, the number of manufacturing

jobs in our region has increased by 16%, compared with a national

average of `1%. Arnab Dutt is a Leicestershire businessmen are

alarmed by talk of leaving the European Union. He supplies and

equipment for escalators around the world. We have ten people working in

our factory. On a monthly basis, 30% of output is going to Europe. The

wheels you see behind me are on their way to Germany next week. I

passionately is `` believe it is important we stay in the UK. Back in

the EU. We are part of a much larger supply chain. If the companies that

export to Europe disappear, we will be in big trouble. The strength of

being in the US we are part of a collective bargaining group. The UK

has an disproportionate amount of leverage when we negotiate with the

US and Asia. So by staying in the EEO, we have greater access to the

world markets than if we were on our own.

Arnab Dutt, and his strong case to stay in the European Union. But not

everyone in the business community is so sure.

We're joined by Stephen Castens, who runs a Nottingham`based advertising

and marketing firm which operates globally. He's also a Conservative

candidate for next year's European parliamentary elections.

Stephen, the fact is that the EU matters for the economy of the East

Midlands. Aren't we risking any revival by the Euro`sceptic talk of

a referendum? Yes, it could be, but the thing we've got to realise with

all the Eurosceptic talk is Europe is very important, whether we are in

or out, both nationally and locally. It is not going to be the case that

if we left we would then suddenly go out to the middle Atlantic and bury

our heads in the ocean. We have to have a strong working relationship

with Europe. If David Cameron doesn't get is renegotiated terms

and we go to a referendum, what happens? 0

and we go to a referendum, what happens? Do you think the UK should

come out if we don't get those improved terms? It is very difficult

to say, because it entirely depends on what he actually does get. What

do you want him to get? I wanted to get a strong renegotiation. On what?

On the way Europe works. It is important the business, we need that

open market, we need the opportunity to export. But, on the other hand,

what we don't want us some of the difficult bureaucratic elements that

keep creeping in. Arnab Dutt was telling us he registered a patent

for one of his products and he said that the ?700 and filling in one

form he could get protection in 28 countries across the youth. `` the

EU. That sounds great, that doesn't sound like bureaucracy. It is very

good. But it is about the cost of running everything in Brussels. That

whole bureaucratic element is not giving us the best deal. Bill,

you've been a member of the European Parliament longer than most. You

must feel you're bashing your pro`EU head against a Euro sceptical wall.

It is healthy there is a debate. There are things that need changing,

nothing is perfect. It is eight compromise of 28 countries, so it

will not be perfect. But we have to stay because we have to have a say

and a voice and a boat to influence the others. If we quit and become

like Norway, who just received faxes about what has been decided, that is

thrown away our influence. UKIP are not going to be satisfied with what

your programmers at the moment, which seems to be wanting the best

of both worlds. They are clear, and that will be attracted to the

electorate, won't it? It is an easy message to give but I think the

electorate are wise to this. What we have to remember is the whole

origins of the new go back to the 1970s when it was a brave difficult

situation. The whole spectre of the Second World War was hanging over

things, and a lot of countries were thinking about that, as were the

eastern European countries. Anne, can you imagine with the UK out of

the EU? No, I agree, you have to be on the inside to change things. It

is easy for people to see what we pretend to be EU, we don't always

see what we get out. There are big investments in Chesterfield,

including the market Hall investment. European money is

helping us to roll out broadband across the country. There are a

whole load of rural benefits that people perhaps don't act knowledge.

If we do have a referendum, you will have a say on Europe. And Des has

been out in Nottingham to get your views.

IU in out? In. I don't want Britain to be isolated from a business point

of view. We need to be able to export to Europe, to be able to

climb out of the recession. We've got a business, and personally I

would stay out of Europe. Why? Because this country needs to stand

alone. You don't need anybody telling you what you've got to do,

what you can't do with your business. All these EU laws have a

vast impact on everything. I said we should be in Europe. The simple

reason is, it should be able to give us more jobs and opportunities to do

other things as well as business abroad. I think we ought to come

out. Wearing blender, we can do it ourselves. I live and work in

Germany now and I assume that is easy because we are in Europe and we

have good relationships. There are a lot of advantages. Does it really

matter what I think? Our street interviews showed 0

matter what I think? Our street interviews showed that

people are actually quite well informed on the issue and have a

view. Stephen, why wait until after the general election for a

referendum? Let's have it now. It's too soon, the debate has to happen.

There has to be discussion. If we do get the opportunity to have a

renegotiation ` let's remember a lot of other countries are supporting

that as well ` then it is very important that we put our best team

forward. We should put people from all sides into that negotiation and

get the best for Britain. But it is a long process, it could take two or

three years to get a proper negotiation. Anne detailed some of

the benefits for her part of Derbyshire, is that not what the

pro`Europeans have to do? Spell out in practical terms what it means for

ordinary people? Yes, and the report you mentioned earlier actually says

that public opinion is due to very poor information and not knowing the

facts. I would welcome a referendum. I'm certain it's coming. It has to

be after the renegotiation, not before. Then the public can get the

real facts and I'm certain they will vote to stay in. Within the Labour

Party, it strikes me that they have their own problems on this issue. I

can think of at least two of your colleagues who want out. Yes, they

have their own views. The discussion today is around business. Given what

we've said about the East Midlands being centred on manufacturing, we

cannot as a country stand alone. We are not self`sufficient. We import

and we export. If you look at Toyota, over 80% of their production

is exported to the EU. Anything creating a barrier there would have

an impact on their business. What do you say to people like Steve and use

a future economic growth is not going to come within the EU? ``

people like Stephen who say. We've got much more strength than 28

individual countries trying to wake `` try to make their way into new

markets. As long as we stay in, business is on a level playing

field. There are too many examples where we are over interpreting

implementation of legislation. What can be done about it? It is

Westminster. The House of Commons fails to do its job of scrutinising

legislation. Next: an issue that's likely to

affect all of us in one way or another ` how we care for our

growing elderly population. The squeeze on councils means they're

looking to cut back on the cost of providing care. This week, Leicester

City Council became the latest to announce big changes ` selling off

half of its homes, and closing the rest. Our political reporter Tim

Parker's been taking a look at the challenges facing councils.

It is becoming a rare sight, residents in a home owned by the

local authority. But the people living here are pretty happy with

how things are run now. The food is all right. At night time I've got my

tally and the phone. I'm not wanting for anything. It's as good as being

at home before `` because you are so well looked after. They are very

good to hours and kind. The food is beautiful. What more could you want?

When you're on your own, you realise how important these places are and

how much you really like it. This is a home in South Derbyshire, one of

26 elderly persons homes owned by Derbyshire County Council. But

across the East Midlands, the trend is to sell homes to private

operators. This week, Leicester City Council is the latest to announce

the closure of all eight of its homes. We are in tough times. That

doesn't mean we have to stop caring, that doesn't mean we don't

do the work with commitment and compassion, but it does mean that,

in the short term, there are changes that are hard for people to come to

terms with. Leicestershire County Council completed the sale of all

its elderly persons homes earlier this year. We are the same as most

councils. We used to have a lot and in my time at the maximum we owned

is 20. We are now entirely privately operated. That's my mother when she

was a nurse 40 years ago. John Wright's mum has been in this

council run home for two years. He says he would be concerned if

politicians decided to sell it off. Profit should not be the overriding

factor. Running a business to make money out of elderly care I don't

believe should be the dominating factor. The care and compassion has

to come first, I think. It's a message not lost on councillors, but

the most, balancing the budget is now a bigger priority.

Anne, with so many of your neighbouring authorities selling off

their care homes, how long can Derbyshire hold off? There are two

ways of looking at dealing with the financial situation. We can either

just shrink and shrink and shrink the services we got until there is

nothing left, or sell them off, or we can reinvent what we do and how

we do it. In the six months we've been in control, we've started to

talk to partners like the NHS in the county, talking to them about what

they need in terms of preventing old people ending up in hospital. Aren't

other local authorities doing that as well? They may be, but our

priority is doing what the people want, and what they want is council

run homes. Because of the quality of care, the supervision and training,

and because it is accountable. If something is wrong, they know they

can take it to the council. Bill, this is happening on your

watch. The Liberal Democrats are in government. Is it accept it by the

rank and file? No, we are very worried, just like Anne. Populations

all over Europe are getting older. The problem we have is going to be

bigger in five or ten years. We are going to need to find the money. If

you look at Sweden, probably the best run country in Europe, they

have far higher taxation and they pay for it that way. In the `` in

the UK, that is difficult to achieve in the short term. So the Lib Dems

say, abolish Trident. Nick Clegg is not in favour that. I won't speak

that privately, but as the coalition partner, he has to make

compromises. But if we got rid of Trident, we could save a fortune the

country by fighting international crime. It costs ?19 million to run

your counsel homes. The overall cost to Derbyshire is ?72 million. That

is a big budget that surely will come under pressure. The Prime

Minister the other week said that any increasing cuts would be modest.

We're trying to prioritise the care services, whether it is elderly,

disabled or children people in the county. We want to support people in

their own homes for longer as well so they don't have to go into

residential care. If they need to, we want them to be able to have a

choice. As regards to David Cameron, I think he is playing with numbers.

This is not just me as a Labour council leader. There are

Conservative council leaders up and down the country are doing the

case. I'm afraid we have to end it there. Time for a round`up of some

of the other political stories in the East Midlands this week ` here's

Rob Pittam with 60 seconds. Dennis Skinner brought a harsh to

the House of Commons when he told MPs of a constituent suffering from

cancer who was denied benefits. For 11 months he waited for an appeal.

Then his aggressive cancer took his site. Took his hearing. Then, last

Friday, took his life. The MP demanded the abolition of the body

assessing whether people are fit to work. It insists it provides a

compassionate service. The battle for the bones of Richard

the bird took a new step this week. The petition calling for the King's

remains to remain in Leicester has more than 40,000 signatures.

And watch out dog owners. A council is stepping up homes to match owners

who fail to poop and Scoop. Those who do get the chance to win a ?50

voucher and grooming session ` for the dogs, that is.

That's all from us this week. Thanks to my guests. Don't forget to catch

up with my latest political blog. Now, back to London.

down immigration, but not in any way which links in with this. Thank you

to both of you for being my guests today.

Are the Lib Dems like a wonky shopping trolley? Why is Nick Clegg

kicking off over free schools? And what about Boris and George's love

bombing of China? All questions for The Week Ahead. We are joined now by

the former Home Office minister and Liberal Democrat MP Jeremy Browne.

Jeremy Browne, let me ask you this key question - ??GAPNEXT who is in

the ascendancy in your party, those who would fear to the left, or those

who would fear to the centre? The point I was making in the interview

that I gave to the times was that I want us to be unambiguously and on

up genetically -- and unapologetically a Liberal party. I

do not want us to be craving the approval of columnists like Polly

Toynbee. I do not want us to be a pale imitation of the Labour Party.

I think we should be proud and unambiguously a authentic Liberal

party. That is my ambition for the party. If it is, as you put it,

fearing to the left, then I think that is a mistake, I think we should

be on the liberal centre ground But is it actually veering to the left,

your party? I think there is a danger when a party, or any

organisation, feels that it is in a difficult position, to look

inwards, to look for reassuring familiar policy positions. I do not

want us to be the party which looks inwards and speaks to the 9% of

people who are minded to support us already. I want us to look outwards

and speak to the 91% of the population, for whom I think we have

got a good story to tell about the contribution we have made to getting

the deficit down, cutting crime keeping interest rates low, and

also, distinctive Liberal Democrat policies for example on income tax

and pupil premiums. If we look like we are a party which is uneasy and

ambivalent about our role in government, people will not give us

credit for the successes of the government, and we will not be able

to claim the authorship which we should be able to claim for our

policies excesses in government I want us to be confident, outward

looking, and authentically liberal. If we are that, people real sense

that and they will respond positively. Does that not therefore

make it rather strange that Nick Craig should choose to distance

himself from the coalition's schools policy? Well, I support free

schools, I think they are a liberal policy. Education is a fascinating

area, so let's explore it a bit We have had two very significant and

troubling reports in the last fortnight, one from Alan Milburn,

saying that social mobility has stalled in this country, in other

words, what your parents do is a reliable guide to how you will get

on in life and the other saying that Britain lags behind our

competitors, the other industrialised countries, in terms

of the educational attainment of 15-year-olds. Both of those are

worrying. We have a scandalous situation in this country where two

thirds of children from disadvantaged backgrounds are

failing to get five Grade A to Grade C. Some get none at all. If we were

the world leaders in education, we could have an interesting

conversation about how we are able to maintain that position, but we

are not. Whether there are good things one less good things which

have happened in our schools over the last 30-40 years, we really need

to raise our game and stop letting young people down who need a good

quality education in order to realise their full potential in

life. It sounds like you do not share Mr Clegg's designations? I

think there are two big dangers for us as a party. I do not think we

should be instinctively statist and I do not think either we should be

instinctively in favour of the status quo. I want us to have a

restless, radical, energetic, liberal reforming instinct, which is

about putting more power and responsible at the end opportunity

in the hands of individual people. As I say, we look at the education

system, of course there are good teachers and good outcomes in some

schools and for some pupils, overall, our performance in this

country is not good enough, so the status quo has not been a successful

stop I am interested in how we can innovate. -- has not been a success.

Are the Tories wooing you? Well I do not know if that is the right

word, I have been reported, and I have set myself, that the

Conservatives have, if you like made some advances or generous

suggestions to me, but I am a liberal, and I am a Liberal

Democrat. I have been a member of the Lib Dems since the party was

founded, I joined when I was 18 years old. I have campaigned

tirelessly for the Liberal Democrats for my entire adult life, so I am

not about to go and join another political party. I would turn this

on its head, let me put it like this, I think there are quite a few

liberals in the other political parties, people like Alan Milburn,

who wrote a report on social mobility, people like Nick Bowles in

the Conservative Party. Our ambition, as Liberal Democrats,

should be to attract liberals from other political parties, and no

political party, to the Lib Dems. Just briefly, have you suggested

that the Tories do not run a candidate against you in the next

election? I have not suggested anything of the sort. The

Conservatives have to make their own decisions about which candidates

they select, and I will take on whoever is select it from each of

the political parties. Thank you for joining us. There is a danger not

from Jeremy Browne, but from Mr Clegg, in that, having been part of

a coalition which has gone through an enormous squeeze in living

standards for three years, it did not look like both was coming, it

was being regarded overall as a failure, but now, it may be turning

the corner, so why would you then start to disassociate yourself from

the coalition's policies? Yes, the danger for Nick Clegg is that he

makes the Liberal Democrats looked like visitors in a guesthouse, a

guesthouse which is owned by the Conservatives. As you say, they were

there for the three difficult years, and just at the moment when the

economy seems to be coming right, and we are getting some nice growth,

they seek to distance themselves. It is interesting that Jeremy Browne

came out with the outrageously disloyal statement that he supported

free schools statement. That is a disloyal Liberal Democrat view, but

on Thursday, of course, the Liberal Democrat party was in favour of free

schools, because in that statement about the Al-Madinah school, David

Laws made a passionate defence about what Nick Clegg is now criticising,

which is having on qualified teachers. If things are now coming

right, the big risk for the Liberal Democrats always was that they would

not get the credit anyway. Well if they diss associate themselves like

this, they definitely will not get the credit. It depends which voters

their opinion poll ratings are dire, he spoke about 9%, and sometimes it

is less than that. So, where are they going to get those voters

from? They have not got those anti-Iraq war voters. Is it not

Mission impossible, getting Labour voters test surely the left of the

Lib Dem vote is peeling off towards labour, not away from Labour? I

wonder to what extent, and this might be speculation, this might be

organised and arranged, that Cameron and Clegg both understand that they

have groups of voters that they need to get, so they need to send

messages out to different groups, it looks like a bit of a setup to me.

Boris in China, along with boy George - let's have a look... Who,

according to JK Rowling, was Harry Potter's first girlfriend? That s

right, and she is Chinese overseas student, is that not right at

Hogwarts? Actually, we are not sure it is right, she is actually from

Scotland. It is not only London which has a diverse society. Putting

that to one side, we are inviting the Chinese into finance our power

stations, to run big banks in the cities, we are giving out more visas

to them, are we right to embrace the Dragon? What worries me about the

power stations then, it is 30% of investment, and it reminds me a lot

of PFI, the idea that you do not want a huge investment on your

balance sheet, but if somebody bails out halfway through, we cannot stop

with a half finished power station. It is EDF, the French company, which

will actually build it, and we will be guaranteeing the debt for them.

It is extraordinary that there has been so little adverse comment after

George Osborne and Boris's trip to China, and is it now really the UK

Government policy, to sell Britain to the Chinese? There was a debate

in government about this, as they were getting ready for the trip and

there will be at some point in the next six months be a David Cameron

trip to China. He has had to wait three years because they were

annoyed about him meeting the Dalai llama. There were some people in the

Foreign Office who were saying, fine, but tread carefully. George

Osborne's view is absolutely not, get in there, I do not care about

any of these problems, get stuck in. I think he is storing up five

years since the financial crisis, Chinese banks are being given a

special, light touch regulatory regime. What could possibly go

wrong?! There is lots to see. Energy prices have continued to dominate

this week. We have got the EDF deal, whereby we are going to be giving

them twice the market rate for their energy. But for the coalition, all

eyes are on the GDP figures. The expectation and hope is that the

recovery will be stronger than the figures have suggested so far, on

which basis it can influence the result of the next general

election. The chief economist at the Bank of England was saying on

Twitter last week that the Bank of England may now bring forward the

assessment when it says, maybe we are going to have to change monetary

policy, if unemployment goes below 7%. And we know what that means

interest rates. The Bank of England on Twitter! That is it for today.

The Daily Politics is back tomorrow on BBC Two. I will be back with

prime Minster 's questions on Wednesday, and of course, we will be

back at 11 o'clock on BBC One next Sunday.