:01:47. > :01:57.we build our new houses? And are they all look Paul is waiting to be
:01:57. > :01:57.
:01:57. > :37:45.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 2147 seconds
:37:45. > :37:52.programme, a row over planning. Councils are scrambling to draw up
:37:52. > :37:58.plans from scratch. The council is putting together a 15 year plan but
:37:58. > :38:05.it will not finish until late 2014. And there is no up-to-date plan in
:38:05. > :38:12.between times, leaving the district and a vulnerable position. New money
:38:12. > :38:15.for physical education for every primary school. If it is spent in
:38:15. > :38:23.the correct way it could create a new impetus for primary school
:38:23. > :38:30.sport. We start with an intriguing idea from a new free school in
:38:30. > :38:38.Norwich. The Jane Austen school will open in September next year and is
:38:38. > :38:47.promising no home work, but a longer school day. It is an interesting
:38:47. > :38:53.idea. It encourages independent study. And it helps working parents
:38:53. > :39:01.and creates a strong environment for children to do that. I am joined by
:39:01. > :39:09.the Labour MP for Corby and the Conservative MP for Braintree.
:39:09. > :39:17.Staying at school until five p.m. . But there must be some downsides?
:39:17. > :39:27.a parent, it is music to my ears. When children come home you have the
:39:27. > :39:28.
:39:28. > :39:36.headache of bagging them to do their homework. -- nagging. Saw as a
:39:36. > :39:46.parent I see the positive side. But I do like the idea of hallmark. --
:39:46. > :39:48.
:39:48. > :39:55.will not work. -- hallmark. -- homework. And follow the children to
:39:55. > :39:59.have quality time with their parents. From a Labour point of view
:39:59. > :40:06.this seems to be another example of a free school come out with a new
:40:06. > :40:13.idea. But Labour is not keen on free schools. We are keen on a loving
:40:13. > :40:21.parents and teachers to innovate with the curriculum. -- alo ring.
:40:21. > :40:31.But we live with that -- where I would differ is that I think the
:40:31. > :40:34.
:40:34. > :40:38.hallmark in done at home matters. For children to see that their
:40:38. > :40:48.parents are interested and think they'll education as important as a
:40:48. > :40:53.
:40:53. > :41:00.good thing. Certainly at the dinner table we have great conversations.
:41:00. > :41:04.Maybe our children are at the same age. I think that as a family you
:41:04. > :41:12.can discuss issues around the table without what I would call the
:41:12. > :41:14.downside of having to stay on top of them doing the work. As a parent you
:41:14. > :41:22.can have that intellectual environment without necessarily
:41:22. > :41:26.having to do the detailed work. change in planning rules which many
:41:26. > :41:31.councils worry will give developers free rein to build estates in
:41:31. > :41:37.unsuitable locations. The councils say they have not been given enough
:41:38. > :41:41.time to draw up their own blueprints. It is an issue across
:41:41. > :41:51.the region but we have chosen Maldon district Council in Essex as it case
:41:51. > :42:02.
:42:02. > :42:06.eventually three-year-old Chloe will need something more permanent.
:42:06. > :42:14.Maldon in Essex has a growing population but many families cannot
:42:14. > :42:24.find affordable homes. I am living with my mother and Chloe. But it
:42:24. > :42:24.
:42:24. > :42:29.would nice to have our own space. And a similar story for Lee. I would
:42:29. > :42:39.like to stay here. But the only way we can do that is to look for a
:42:39. > :42:40.
:42:40. > :42:44.House elsewhere and move up the ladder that way. The old East of
:42:44. > :42:49.England plan, with the regional housing targets, was the first in
:42:49. > :42:53.the country to be abolished in January. So now it is down to local
:42:53. > :43:00.district councils to work out how many new homes are needed and where
:43:00. > :43:08.they should go. To protect a green fields like these that the council
:43:08. > :43:13.is putting together a further senior housing plan. -- 15 year. But there
:43:13. > :43:19.is no up-to-date plan in between times, leaving the district and a
:43:19. > :43:24.vulnerable position. While the council debate the new plan the risk
:43:24. > :43:31.is that a developer could apply to build a large number of houses on
:43:31. > :43:37.and on suitable site. If planning permission was refused that person
:43:37. > :43:45.could go to appeal and have that development allowed. Why is there
:43:45. > :43:49.not a plan in place already? We need to gather technical evidence. And
:43:49. > :43:56.there must be detailed consultation with a public chance to comment and
:43:56. > :44:02.participate. Councils say it takes between two and four years and
:44:02. > :44:10.others are in the same position. The draft plan here would provide 4500
:44:10. > :44:20.new homes in faith nine years. -- 15 years. You might think small
:44:20. > :44:21.
:44:21. > :44:25.businesses would welcome the entries. -- increase. But this shop
:44:25. > :44:35.owner and others nearby do not think the council has chosen the right
:44:35. > :44:37.
:44:37. > :44:45.sites. They are planning to have in excess of 400 and a houses there. --
:44:45. > :44:53.450. A nursery school, doctors surgery, retail units, a leisure
:44:53. > :45:03.facility, and a foot all club. sounds like the sort of things you
:45:03. > :45:13.need for an area like this. We need something, but that is too many.
:45:13. > :45:17.
:45:17. > :45:24.affordable houses may be what the AA and needs. -- the area.
:45:24. > :45:32.neighbourhood plan needs to conform to the LDP. At the moment we are in
:45:32. > :45:37.a situation where developers, it is open season for them to come to the
:45:37. > :45:42.town and attempts to get applications through prior to any
:45:42. > :45:51.restraints being put in place. is no real pressure to piece
:45:51. > :46:00.together plans. A policy framework published in 2012 gave councils won
:46:00. > :46:07.the year. -- one year. So councils like this could be powerless to stop
:46:07. > :46:15.developments that they do not want. Brandon Lewis as a minister for
:46:15. > :46:17.local government. He is also the MP for great Yarmouth. I suggested to
:46:17. > :46:27.him that the government had created this problem by not giving councils
:46:27. > :46:28.
:46:28. > :46:35.enough time. Quite a lot of councils already have plans in place. 75% of
:46:35. > :46:45.them are well down the line. Others have some way to go, understandably.
:46:45. > :46:50.We need to see them move forward. Great Yarmouth, you own area, saying
:46:50. > :46:57.they are an advanced but it will still be 2014 before the job is
:46:57. > :47:03.finished. You have left the job open for developers. That is the
:47:03. > :47:12.accusation. It is important that developers get local plans
:47:12. > :47:17.delivered. Plans that are right for the community, that have consulted
:47:17. > :47:26.with the community. Neighbourhood plans are hugely important and we
:47:26. > :47:32.are working well with communities are delivering that. Are you saying
:47:32. > :47:41.you have no sympathy for these local authorities? What if there is the
:47:41. > :47:50.ecology, archaeology in the way? Some authorities have managed to get
:47:50. > :47:56.through the process. 75% well down the road. We want to see them move
:47:56. > :48:02.forward with that. But I do appreciate there is an issue for
:48:03. > :48:09.authorities who have not quite got there yet. There is no top-down
:48:09. > :48:16.control as with the last government. But the council will look at every
:48:16. > :48:25.development opportunity coming forward. If a developer appeals, it
:48:25. > :48:31.goes to the planning inspector. if there is no neighbourhood plan in
:48:31. > :48:37.place, that is a supposition. People are saying that this opens the door
:48:37. > :48:43.to unsuitable development. That is why it is important for local
:48:43. > :48:46.authorities to get their plan in place. Is it the fault of the
:48:46. > :48:53.government for not allowing enough time for these local, neighbourhood
:48:53. > :49:02.plans to be put in place? Or are you laying blame at the door of local
:49:02. > :49:06.authorities? 50% have got their plans in place. It is clear that
:49:06. > :49:15.local authorities can do it. We are working with those who are not there
:49:15. > :49:21.yet. Local authorities wanted us to get the regional space strategy
:49:21. > :49:31.removed, that is gone, councils can now control their own destiny.
:49:31. > :49:33.
:49:33. > :49:40.you very much indeed. 50% of councils are there, 50% not. This
:49:40. > :49:50.smacks of an incompetent government policy. Now, it smacks of the devil
:49:50. > :49:57.
:49:57. > :50:03.being in the detail. There are 15 villages, each have their own plan,
:50:03. > :50:11.this takes time to filter through. But these are Conservative
:50:11. > :50:16.councillors. Are they dragging their heels? Public consultation is very
:50:16. > :50:21.important and if we did not have it there would be all sorts of appeals
:50:21. > :50:29.down the road. So I think if this takes another six or nine months to
:50:29. > :50:38.get right, rather that than rush it through. Nine months is too late.
:50:38. > :50:43.Nothing is too late. I would rather get it right then get on up front.
:50:43. > :50:48.It is important, when you come into government, and I hope that will be
:50:48. > :50:52.Labour next time, having won back the trust of people, what is
:50:52. > :51:00.important is that you do not throw up everything in the air without a
:51:00. > :51:06.proper plan. That is a classic move from this government. Reforming too
:51:06. > :51:13.quickly without making sure they know what they're to do. Do you
:51:13. > :51:22.think this is a shambles? I think the policy is a good idea and I
:51:22. > :51:27.don't think he is disagreeing with that. He is criticising the
:51:27. > :51:31.timescale for implementation. In Braintree I have 50 villages with
:51:31. > :51:37.parish council plans. It takes time to go through that in detail.
:51:37. > :51:43.Meantime, I know about the concerns of the planning issues, but they can
:51:43. > :51:53.still go through. There is a process. What is the Labour
:51:53. > :51:59.position? They should not have taken away the old framework before a new
:51:59. > :52:05.one is in place. That has left communities in limbo. The political
:52:05. > :52:11.spin, all their power has been taken away from them, because of the
:52:11. > :52:17.government presumption of growth. you do not disagree with the policy,
:52:17. > :52:22.just the timing? I don't think what the Conservatives have done was
:52:22. > :52:29.necessary, but will we throw it away again now that they have done it? No
:52:29. > :52:33.we won't. We are not dogmatic like this government. We will make
:52:33. > :52:39.changes without thinking through the impact on communities. -- we will
:52:39. > :52:43.not. Every primary school in the country will be given money to
:52:43. > :52:50.provide better physical education lessons to pupils. The new strategy
:52:50. > :52:59.will cost �150 million with money coming from the Department of
:52:59. > :53:03.health, education, and culture, media and sport. -- departments.
:53:03. > :53:10.Ofsted will be looking at sport when they carry out inspections for the
:53:10. > :53:15.first time. The more we have developed sport here at this school
:53:15. > :53:20.the more the parents have been brought together. They can see the
:53:20. > :53:24.way that their children have developed. Not just in typical
:53:24. > :53:34.academic subject but also for the children who do not showing so much
:53:34. > :53:35.
:53:35. > :53:43.in the classroom but can chain and physical education. -- shine. The
:53:43. > :53:48.parents are really on board and see where we're going. Some are
:53:48. > :53:52.concerned that there will be a rush to spend the money in the wrong way.
:53:52. > :54:02.That was on the minds of many experts at a national conference
:54:02. > :54:04.
:54:04. > :54:11.this week. The wrong way would be to just spend money on bringing people
:54:11. > :54:17.from out of school into school who will then go away. If the money does
:54:17. > :54:23.not last, is not repeated, then it is gone. A better way, and I say
:54:23. > :54:31.this as a former head teacher, is to train teachers in the school who
:54:31. > :54:38.will continue to drive performance forward. This money is welcome but
:54:38. > :54:44.it is only for two years. I would love it to be longer but the
:54:44. > :54:47.important thing is to see how it works and how the resources are
:54:47. > :54:54.spent. After the next general election, I suspect that has
:54:54. > :55:00.something to do with the timing, then we can reassess things. I hope
:55:00. > :55:04.it is permanently in place but two years is enough to see at work.
:55:04. > :55:11.Refreshing honesty to admit that this is a political bong ahead of
:55:11. > :55:18.the next election. They have squandered the Olympic legacy. --
:55:18. > :55:28.political bung. In the majority of schools in this country children are
:55:28. > :55:33.
:55:34. > :55:43.under Labour there was more land and playing field sold off than ever
:55:43. > :55:49.before. That is not true. You are not comparing like-for-like. There
:55:49. > :55:54.is a limited amount of money available. Let's see how that is
:55:54. > :56:02.spent and how it lasts. Two years is enough time to see if it makes sense
:56:02. > :56:08.then reassess things. What about the Ofsted involvement. People will be
:56:08. > :56:13.surprised to learn that they have not been involved up until now.
:56:13. > :56:15.is incoherent in terms of the role. On the one hand the government are
:56:15. > :56:23.seeing we will get schools freedom and we will not direct them around
:56:23. > :56:33.the curriculum. And now they have chosen it hit area. I agree it is
:56:33. > :56:34.
:56:34. > :56:40.important but it is for political reasons. -- a pet area.
:56:40. > :56:50.important is sport at the centre of the curriculum? Very important. As
:56:50. > :56:51.
:56:51. > :57:01.is music. I would support funding for both. The game resumed in
:57:01. > :57:07.
:57:07. > :57:15.Parliament this week. Here is the 62nd round up. -- 60 seconds. Harlow
:57:15. > :57:19.MP keeps up the campaign to show how much of the fuel bills go on tax.
:57:19. > :57:27.10% of agents here are waiting more than four hours to be treated. --
:57:27. > :57:37.patients. I know what the pressure is like. And it is in the evening in
:57:37. > :57:50.
:57:50. > :57:57.particular, when the Jeep the the whistle on assaults on foot all
:57:57. > :58:04.referees. It really should automatically mean a formal
:58:04. > :58:14.believes believes that if nothing is done
:58:14. > :58:18.
:58:18. > :58:24.people could be deterred from the police treat it as a sporting
:58:24. > :58:30.matter. 500 incidents like this in the country last year. Does
:58:30. > :58:35.something need to change? absolutely share the concern.
:58:35. > :58:43.Whether it is throwing out time at the Pops or on the foot all perch,
:58:43. > :58:49.if there is an assault, it needs to be dealt with by the law. Some of
:58:49. > :58:57.the worst behaviour when youngsters play is on the sailing by parents!
:58:57. > :59:04.-- side line. I agree. Assault as assault and the full force of the
:59:05. > :59:14.law should be brought home. Referees are no different and that is
:59:15. > :59:20.
:59:20. > :59:30.important we protect everybody. would have had more of a dustup A&E
:59:30. > :59:44.
:59:44. > :59:51.morning who were at a day for future cartwheels. -- careers. We want our
:59:51. > :59:58.sportsmen to be good role models. the United States one referee was
:59:58. > :00:05.even killed. It goes back to my point that they should be treated no