:00:39. > :00:47.Good morning, welcome. 2014 is barely under way, and the
:00:48. > :00:51.coalition is fighting over cuts Nick Legg says Tory plans to balance
:00:52. > :00:55.the books would hit the poorest hardest. He will not say what he
:00:56. > :01:00.will cut. That is the top story Chris Grayling called for a
:01:01. > :01:04.completely new deal with Europe as he battles will rings from the
:01:05. > :01:09.European Court of Human Rights. He joins me.
:01:10. > :01:10.Labour promises to shift house-building up a gear, but how
:01:11. > :01:17.will they In the East: Counting the cost of
:01:18. > :01:25.the tidal surge. A In the East: Counting the cost of
:01:26. > :01:33.be serious. Have cuts left to the service being overstretched?
:01:34. > :01:41.With me for the duration, a top trio of political pundits, Helen Lewis,
:01:42. > :01:49.Jan and Ganesh and Nick Watt. They will be tweeting faster than France
:01:50. > :01:53.or long scoots through Paris. Nick Clegg sticks to his New Year
:01:54. > :01:57.resolution to sock it to the Tories, the is how he described Tory plans
:01:58. > :02:01.for another 12 billion of cuts on welfare after the next election
:02:02. > :02:06.You cannot say, as the Conservatives are, that we are all in it together
:02:07. > :02:09.and then say that the welfare will not make any additional
:02:10. > :02:13.contributions from their taxes if there is a Conservative government
:02:14. > :02:19.after 2015 in the ongoing effort to balance the books. We are not even
:02:20. > :02:26.going to ask that very wealthy people who have retired who have
:02:27. > :02:29.benefits, paid for by the hard-pressed taxpayers, will make a
:02:30. > :02:35.sacrifice. The Conservatives appear to be saying only the working age
:02:36. > :02:38.pork will be asked to make additional sacrifices to fill the
:02:39. > :02:43.remaining buckle in the public finances.
:02:44. > :02:49.Nick Legg eating up on the Tories a, happens almost every day. I
:02:50. > :02:55.understand it is called aggressive differentiation. Will it work for
:02:56. > :03:00.them? It has not for the past two years. This began around the time of
:03:01. > :03:05.the AV referendum campaign, that is what poisoned the relations between
:03:06. > :03:11.the parties. They have been trying to differentiation since then, they
:03:12. > :03:17.are still at barely 10% in the polls, Nick Clegg's personal ratings
:03:18. > :03:22.are horrendous, so I doubt they will do much before the next election. It
:03:23. > :03:26.is interesting it has been combined with aggressive flirtation with Ed
:03:27. > :03:30.Balls and the Labour Party. There was always going to be some sort of
:03:31. > :03:36.rapprochement between them and the Labour Party, it is in the Labour
:03:37. > :03:39.Party's interests, and it is intent macro's interests, not to be defined
:03:40. > :03:45.as somebody who can only do deals with the centre-right. A colleague
:03:46. > :03:49.of yours, Helen, told me there was more talk behind closed doors in the
:03:50. > :03:55.Labour Party high command, they have to think about winning the election
:03:56. > :03:59.in terms of being the largest party, but not necessarily an overall
:04:00. > :04:02.majority. There is a feeling it was foolish before the last election not
:04:03. > :04:07.to have any thought about what a coalition might be, but the language
:04:08. > :04:12.has changed. Ed Miliband had said, I cannot deal with this man, but now,
:04:13. > :04:18.I have to be prismatic, it is about principles. Even Ed Balls. Nick
:04:19. > :04:23.Clegg had specifically said that Ed Balls was the man in politics that
:04:24. > :04:29.he hated. He said that was just a joke. Of course, it is about
:04:30. > :04:33.principles, not people! When Ed Balls said those nice things about
:04:34. > :04:37.Nick Clegg, he said, I understood the need to get a credible deficit
:04:38. > :04:43.reduction programme, although he said Nick Clegg went too far. The
:04:44. > :04:46.thing about Nick Clegg, he feels liberated, he bears the wounds from
:04:47. > :04:52.the early days of the coalition and maybe those winds will haunt him all
:04:53. > :04:58.the way to the general election But he feels liberated, he says, we will
:04:59. > :05:01.be the restraining influence on both the Conservatives, who cannot insure
:05:02. > :05:05.that the recovery is fair, and the Labour Party, that do not have
:05:06. > :05:09.economic red ability. He feels relaxed, and that is why he is
:05:10. > :05:18.attacking the Tories and appearing pretty relaxed. He could also be
:05:19. > :05:21.falling into a trap. The Tories think what they suggesting on
:05:22. > :05:26.welfare cuts is possible. The more he attacks it, the more Tories will
:05:27. > :05:31.say, if you gave us an overall majority, he is the one it. He keeps
:05:32. > :05:35.taking these ostensibly on popular positions and it only makes sense
:05:36. > :05:40.when you talk to them behind the scenes, they are going after a tiny
:05:41. > :05:46.slice of the electorate, 20%, who are open to the idea of voting Lib
:05:47. > :05:53.Dem, and their views are a bit more left liberal than the bulk of the
:05:54. > :05:59.public. There is a perverse logic in them aggressively targeting that
:06:00. > :06:03.section of voters. In the end, ten macro's problem, if you do not like
:06:04. > :06:08.what this coalition has been doing, you will not vote for somebody who
:06:09. > :06:16.was part of it, you will vote for the Labour Party. The Tories are too
:06:17. > :06:19.nasty, Labour are to spendthrift, Lib Dem, a quarter of their vote has
:06:20. > :06:25.gone to Labour, and that is what could hand the largest party to
:06:26. > :06:29.Labour. That small number of voters, soft Tory voters, the problem for
:06:30. > :06:34.the Liberal Democrats is, if you fight, as they did, three general
:06:35. > :06:38.elections to the left of the Labour Party, and at the end of the third,
:06:39. > :06:43.you find yourself in Colour Vision with the Conservatives, you have a
:06:44. > :06:50.problem. Chris Grayling is a busy man, he has
:06:51. > :06:54.had to deal with aid riot at HM Prison Oakwood, barristers on strike
:06:55. > :07:05.and unhappy probation officers taking industrial action.
:07:06. > :07:16.Prison works. It ensures that we are protected from murderers, muggers
:07:17. > :07:24.and rapists. It makes many who are tempted to commit crime think twice.
:07:25. > :07:28.Traditional Tory policy on criminal justice and prisons has been tough
:07:29. > :07:33.talking and tough dealing. Not only have they tended to think what they
:07:34. > :07:38.are offering is right, but have had the feeling, you thinking what they
:07:39. > :07:44.thinking. But nearly two decades after Michael Howard's message, his
:07:45. > :07:47.party, in Colour Vision government, is finding prison has to work like
:07:48. > :07:52.everything else within today's financial realities. The Justice
:07:53. > :07:57.Secretary for two years after the election had previous in this field.
:07:58. > :08:04.Ken Clarke. Early on, he signalled a change of direction. Just binding up
:08:05. > :08:08.more and more people for longer without actively seeking to change
:08:09. > :08:18.them is, in my opinion, what you would expect of Victorian England.
:08:19. > :08:25.The key to keeping people out of prison now, it seems, is giving them
:08:26. > :08:28.in a job, on release. Ironically, Ken Clarke was released from his job
:08:29. > :08:36.15 months ago and replaced by Chris Grayling. But here, within HM Prison
:08:37. > :08:39.Liverpool, Timpson has been working since 2009 with chosen offenders to
:08:40. > :08:43.offer training and the chance of a job. Before you ask, they do not
:08:44. > :08:48.teach them keep cutting in a category B prison. The Academy is
:08:49. > :08:53.deliberately meant to look like a company store, not a prison. It
:08:54. > :08:57.helps. You forget where you are at times, it feels weird, going back to
:08:58. > :09:06.a wing at the end of the day. It is different. A different atmosphere.
:09:07. > :09:09.That is why people like it. Timpson have six academies in prisons,
:09:10. > :09:13.training prisoners inside, and outside they offer jobs to
:09:14. > :09:17.ex-offenders, who make up 8% of their staff. It has been hard work
:09:18. > :09:24.persuading some governors that such cooperation can work. I have seen a
:09:25. > :09:28.dramatic change positively, working with prisoners, particularly in the
:09:29. > :09:35.last five years. They understand now what business's expectation is.
:09:36. > :09:40.Timpson do not just employ offenders, but as one ex-prisoner
:09:41. > :09:44.released in February and now managing his own store says, the
:09:45. > :09:50.point is many others will not employ offenders at all. From what I have
:09:51. > :09:55.experienced, on one hand, you have somebody with a criminal conviction,
:09:56. > :09:58.on the other, somebody who does not have one, so it is a case of
:09:59. > :10:02.favouring those who have a clean record. Anybody with a criminal
:10:03. > :10:08.conviction is passed to one side and overlooked. That, amongst myriad
:10:09. > :10:13.other changes to prison and how we deal with prisoners, is on the desk
:10:14. > :10:17.of the man at the top. Ever since Chris Grayling became Secretary of
:10:18. > :10:21.State for Justice, he has wanted to signal a change of direction of
:10:22. > :10:25.policy, and he is in a hurry to make radical reforms across the board,
:10:26. > :10:29.from size and types of prisons to probation services, reoffending
:10:30. > :10:33.rates, legal aid services, and there has been opposition to that from
:10:34. > :10:37.groups who do not agree with him. But what might actually shackle him
:10:38. > :10:40.is none of that. It is the fact that he is in government with a party
:10:41. > :10:44.that does not always agree with him, he has to abide by the rulings of
:10:45. > :10:50.the European Court of Human Rights, and in those famous words, there is
:10:51. > :10:56.no money left. We would like to go further and faster. I would like him
:10:57. > :10:59.too, but we are where we are. If the Liberal Democrats want to be wiped
:11:00. > :11:04.out at the next election based on what they believe, that is fair
:11:05. > :11:09.enough. We accept there has to be savings, but there are areas where
:11:10. > :11:16.we feel that there is ideological driven policy-making going on, and
:11:17. > :11:22.privatising may not save any money at all, and so does not make any
:11:23. > :11:30.sense. The question is, we'll all of that means some of Chris Grayling's
:11:31. > :11:40.reforms need closer inspection? Chris Grayling joins me now.
:11:41. > :11:48.Welcome. We have a lot to cover If you get your way, your own personal
:11:49. > :11:50.way, will be next Tory manifesto promise to withdraw from the
:11:51. > :11:58.European Convention of human rights? It will contain a promise
:11:59. > :12:02.for radical changes. We have to curtail the role of the European
:12:03. > :12:08.court here, replace our human rights act from the late 1990s, make our
:12:09. > :12:12.Supreme Court our Supreme Court they can be no question of decisions
:12:13. > :12:16.over riding it elsewhere, and we have to have a situation where our
:12:17. > :12:22.laws contain a balance of rights and responsibilities. People talk about
:12:23. > :12:26.knowing their rights, but they do not accept they have responsible it
:12:27. > :12:36.is. This is what you said last September, I want to see our Supreme
:12:37. > :12:40.Court being supreme again... That is clear, but let's be honest, the
:12:41. > :12:43.Supreme Court cannot be supreme as long as its decisions can be
:12:44. > :12:49.referred to the European Court in Strasbourg. There is clearly an
:12:50. > :12:54.issue, that was raised recency - recently. We have been working on a
:12:55. > :12:59.detailed reform plan, we will publish that in the not too distant
:13:00. > :13:02.future. What we will set out is a direction of travel for a new
:13:03. > :13:07.Conservative government that will mean wholesale change in this area.
:13:08. > :13:13.You already tried to reform the European Court, who had this
:13:14. > :13:18.declaration in 2012, do you accept that the reform is off the table?
:13:19. > :13:22.There is still a process of reform, but it is not going fast enough and
:13:23. > :13:24.not delivering the kind of change we need. That is why we will bring
:13:25. > :13:29.forward a package that for the different from that and will set a
:13:30. > :13:33.different direction of travel. We are clear across the coalition, we
:13:34. > :13:39.have a different view from our colleagues. You cannot be half
:13:40. > :13:45.pregnant on this, either our decisions from our Supreme Court are
:13:46. > :13:50.subject to the European Cup or not, in which case, we are not part of
:13:51. > :13:53.the European court. I hope you will see from our proposals we have come
:13:54. > :13:56.up with a sensible strategy that deals with this issue once and for
:13:57. > :14:03.all. Can we be part of the Strasbourg court and yet our Supreme
:14:04. > :14:08.Court be supreme? That is by point, we have to curtail the role of the
:14:09. > :14:12.court in the UK. I am clear that is what we will seek to do. It is what
:14:13. > :14:18.we will do for this country. But how? I am not going to announce the
:14:19. > :14:22.package of policies today, but we will go into the next election with
:14:23. > :14:28.a clear strategy that will curtail the role of the European Court of
:14:29. > :14:33.Human Rights in the UK. The decisions have to be taken in
:14:34. > :14:36.Parliament in this country. Are you sure that you have got your own side
:14:37. > :14:55.on this? Look at what the Attorney General says.
:14:56. > :15:07.I would be asking Strasberg a different question to that. If the
:15:08. > :15:10.best in class, he is saying is enough is enough, actually somebody
:15:11. > :15:15.in Strasberg should be asking if this has gone the way it should have
:15:16. > :15:19.done. I would love to see wholesale reform in the court tomorrow, I m
:15:20. > :15:24.not sure it is going to happen which is why we are going to the election
:15:25. > :15:29.with a clear plan for this country. Would you want that to be a red line
:15:30. > :15:35.in any coalition agreement? My mission is to win the next election
:15:36. > :15:41.with a majority. But you have to say where your red lines would be. We
:15:42. > :15:46.have been very clear it is an area where we don't agree as parties but
:15:47. > :15:50.in my view the public in this country are overwhelmingly behind
:15:51. > :15:54.the Conservative party. 95 Conservative MPs have written to the
:15:55. > :15:59.Prime Minister, demanding he gives the House of Commons the authority
:16:00. > :16:03.to veto any aspect of European Union law. Are you one of the people who
:16:04. > :16:08.wanted to sign that letter but you couldn't because you are minister? I
:16:09. > :16:22.haven't been asked to sign the letter. We need a red card system
:16:23. > :16:27.for European law. I'm not convinced my colleagues... I don't think it is
:16:28. > :16:32.realistic to have a situation where one parliament can veto laws across
:16:33. > :16:36.the European Union. I understand the concerns of my colleagues, but when
:16:37. > :16:41.we set out to renegotiate our membership, we have got to deliver
:16:42. > :16:45.renegotiation and deliver a system which is viable, and I'm not
:16:46. > :16:48.convinced we can have a situation where one Parliament can prevent
:16:49. > :16:56.laws across the whole European Union. So you wouldn't have signed
:16:57. > :17:04.this letter? I'm not sure it is the right approach. I support the system
:17:05. > :17:07.I just talked about. Iain Duncan Smith has suggested EU migrants
:17:08. > :17:12.coming to work in this country should have to wait for two years
:17:13. > :17:19.before they qualify for welfare benefits, do you agree? Yes, I think
:17:20. > :17:23.there should be an assumption that before you can move from one country
:17:24. > :17:27.to another, before you can start to take back from that country's social
:17:28. > :17:33.welfare system, you should have made a contribution to it. I spent two
:17:34. > :17:37.and a half years working in Brussels trying to get the European
:17:38. > :17:41.Commission to accept the need for change. There is a groundswell of
:17:42. > :17:46.opinion out there which is behind Iain Duncan Smith in what he is
:17:47. > :17:50.saying. I think we should push for a clear system that says people should
:17:51. > :17:56.be able to move from one country to get a job, but to move to another
:17:57. > :18:03.country to live off the state is not acceptable. You are planning a new
:18:04. > :18:07.2000 capacity mega prison and other smaller presence which will be run
:18:08. > :18:14.by private firms. After what has happened with G4S, why would you do
:18:15. > :18:20.that? No decision has been made about whether it will be public or
:18:21. > :18:28.private. What do you think it will be? I'm not sure yet. There is no
:18:29. > :18:33.clear correlation over public and private prisons and whether there
:18:34. > :18:37.are problems or otherwise. Oakwood is in its early stages, it has had
:18:38. > :18:43.teething problems at the start, but the rate of disturbance there is
:18:44. > :18:49.only typical for an average prison of its category. If you take an
:18:50. > :18:55.example of Parc prison in Wales a big private run prison, run by G4S,
:18:56. > :19:00.when it was first launched under the last government it had teething
:19:01. > :19:05.problems of the same kind as Oakwood and is now regarded as one of the
:19:06. > :19:10.best performing prisons. Why would you give it to a private company
:19:11. > :19:15.then? We have only just got planning permission for the so we will not be
:19:16. > :19:22.thinking about this for another few years. Some of the companies who run
:19:23. > :19:29.prisons are under investigation with dreadful track records. In the case
:19:30. > :19:32.of G4S, what we have experienced is acceptable and they have not been
:19:33. > :19:36.able to go ahead with a number of contracts they might have otherwise
:19:37. > :19:43.got. They are having to prove to the Government they are fit to win
:19:44. > :19:48.contracts from the Government again. They are having to pay compensation
:19:49. > :19:53.to the Government and the taxpayer. What has happened is unacceptable.
:19:54. > :20:04.So why would you give them a 20 0 capacity mega prison? Or anyone like
:20:05. > :20:10.them? It cannot be said that every private company is bad. In addition
:20:11. > :20:13.to problems at Oakwood, you are quite unique now in your position
:20:14. > :20:18.that you have managed to get the barristers out on strike the first
:20:19. > :20:25.time since history began. What happens if the bar refuses to do
:20:26. > :20:31.work at your new rates of legal aid and the courts grind to a halt? I
:20:32. > :20:35.don't believe that will happen. When the barristers came out on strike,
:20:36. > :20:39.three quarters of Crown Courts were operating normally, 95% of
:20:40. > :20:44.magistrates courts were operating normally. We are having to take
:20:45. > :20:49.difficult decisions across government, I have no desire to cut
:20:50. > :20:55.back lately but we are spending over ?2 billion on legal aid at the
:20:56. > :21:00.moment at a time when budgets are becoming tougher. You issued
:21:01. > :21:07.misleading figures about criminal barristers, you said that 25% of
:21:08. > :21:13.them earn over ?100,000 per year but that is their turnover, including
:21:14. > :21:18.VAT. 33% of that money goes on their expenses, they have to pay for their
:21:19. > :21:24.own pensions and insurance. People are not getting wealthy out of doing
:21:25. > :21:30.this work. I don't publish figures, our statisticians do, with caveats
:21:31. > :21:32.in place explaining the situation. Where you have high-cost cases,
:21:33. > :21:38.where we have taken the most difficult decisions, we have tried
:21:39. > :21:47.hard in taking difficult decisions to focus the impact higher up the
:21:48. > :21:54.income scale. But do you accept their take-home pay is not 100, 00?
:21:55. > :21:58.I accept they have to take out other costs, although some things like
:21:59. > :22:09.travelling to the court, you and I and everyone else has to pay for
:22:10. > :22:15.travelling to work. That is net of VAT. We have had a variety of
:22:16. > :22:21.figures published, some are and some are not. Let's be clear, the gross
:22:22. > :22:26.figures for fees from legal payments include 20% VAT. On a week when even
:22:27. > :22:36.a cabinet minister can be fitted up by the police, don't we all need
:22:37. > :22:40.well-financed legal aid? There is no chance that as a result
:22:41. > :22:52.well-financed legal aid? There is no changes people will end up in court
:22:53. > :22:55.unable to defend themselves. We have said in exceptional circumstances,
:22:56. > :22:59.if you haven't got any money to pay, we will support you, but there is no
:23:00. > :23:04.question of anyone ended up in court, facing a criminal charge
:23:05. > :23:10.where they haven't got a lawyer to defend them. Let's look at how so
:23:11. > :23:16.many dangerous criminals have managed to avoid jail. Here are the
:23:17. > :23:25.figures for 2012. Half the people for sexual assault found guilty not
:23:26. > :23:32.jailed. I thought you were meant to be tough on crime? Those figures
:23:33. > :23:37.predate my time, but since 2010 the number of those people going to jail
:23:38. > :23:42.has been increasing steadily. If you put the figures for 2010 on there,
:23:43. > :23:47.you would see a significant change. We will never be in a position where
:23:48. > :23:52.everybody who commits violence will end up in jail. The courts will
:23:53. > :23:56.often decided to his more appropriate to give a community
:23:57. > :24:01.sentence, but the trend is towards longer sentences and more people
:24:02. > :24:07.going to jail. That maybe but it is even quite hard to get sent to jail
:24:08. > :24:12.if you do these things a lot, again and again. In 2012 one criminal
:24:13. > :24:23.avoided being sent to jail despite having more than 300 offences to his
:24:24. > :24:27.name. 36,000 avoided going to jail despite 15 previous offences. That
:24:28. > :24:33.is why we are taking steps to toughen up the system. Last autumn
:24:34. > :24:38.we scrapped repeat cautions. You could find people getting dozens. As
:24:39. > :24:42.of last autumn, we have scrapped repeat cautions. If you commit the
:24:43. > :24:48.same offence twice within a two year period you will go to court. You
:24:49. > :24:56.still might end up not going to jail. More and more people are going
:24:57. > :25:02.to jail. I cannot just magic another 34,000 prison places. You haven t
:25:03. > :25:06.got room to put bad people in jail? The courts will take the decisions,
:25:07. > :25:12.and it is for them to take the decisions and not me, that two men
:25:13. > :25:18.in a bar fight do not merit a jail sentence. These figures contain a
:25:19. > :25:24.huge amount of offences from the most minor of offences to the most
:25:25. > :25:28.despicable. Something is wrong if you can commit 300 offences and
:25:29. > :25:33.still not end up in jail. That's right, and we are taking steps so
:25:34. > :25:40.this cannot happen any more. Nick Clegg said this morning you are
:25:41. > :25:49.going to make 12 billion of welfare cuts on the back of this, he is
:25:50. > :25:56.right, isn't he? People on the lowest incomes are often not paying
:25:57. > :26:02.tax at all, the rich... But these cuts will fall disproportionately on
:26:03. > :26:09.average earners, correct? Let's look at the proposal to limit housing
:26:10. > :26:15.benefit for under 25s. Until today, after people have left school or
:26:16. > :26:19.college, the live for a time with their parents. For some, that is not
:26:20. > :26:23.possible and we will have to take that into account, but we have said
:26:24. > :26:28.there is a strong case for saying you will not get housing benefit
:26:29. > :26:32.until you are some years down the road and have properly established
:26:33. > :26:40.yourselves in work. And by definition these people are on lower
:26:41. > :26:45.than average salaries. Give me a case in which those on the higher
:26:46. > :26:50.tax band will contribute to the cuts. We have already put in place
:26:51. > :26:54.tax changes so that the highest tax rate is already higher than it was
:26:55. > :27:03.in every year of the last government. The amount of tax..
:27:04. > :27:08.There is no more expected of the rich. We will clearly look at future
:27:09. > :27:12.policy and work out how best to distribute the tax burden in this
:27:13. > :27:18.country and it is not for me to second-guess George Osborne's future
:27:19. > :27:23.plans, but we need to look at for example housing benefit for the
:27:24. > :27:29.under 25s. Is it right for those who are not working for the state to
:27:30. > :27:34.provide accommodation for them? Thank you for being with us.
:27:35. > :27:36.All three major parties at Westminster agree there's an urgent
:27:37. > :27:39.need to build more homes for Britain's growing population. But
:27:40. > :27:42.how they get built, and where, looks set to become a major battle ground
:27:43. > :27:44.in the run-up to the next general election.
:27:45. > :27:47.Although 16% more house-builds were started in 2012/13 than the previous
:27:48. > :27:55.year, the number actually completed fell by 8% - the lowest level in
:27:56. > :27:57.peacetime since 1920. The Office for National Statistics estimates that
:27:58. > :28:05.between now and 2021 we should expect 220,000 new households to be
:28:06. > :28:07.created every year. At his party's conference last autumn, Ed Miliband
:28:08. > :28:16.promised a Labour government would massively increase house-building. I
:28:17. > :28:21.will have a clear aim but by the end of the parliament, Britain will be
:28:22. > :28:25.building 200,000 homes per year more than at any time for a
:28:26. > :28:29.generation. That is how we make Britain better than this. The Labour
:28:30. > :28:32.leader also says he'd give urban councils a "right to grow" so rural
:28:33. > :28:37.neighbours can't block expansion and force developers with unused land to
:28:38. > :28:39.use it or lose it. The Government has been pursuing its own ideas
:28:40. > :28:43.including loan guarantees for developers and a new homes bonus to
:28:44. > :28:47.boost new house-building. But David Cameron could have trouble keeping
:28:48. > :28:49.his supporters on side - this week the senior backbencher Nadhim Zahawi
:28:50. > :28:56.criticised planning reforms for causing "physical harm" to the
:28:57. > :28:59.countryside. Nick Clegg meanwhile prefers a radical solution - brand
:29:00. > :29:13.new garden cities in the south east of England. In a speech tomorrow,
:29:14. > :29:16.Labour's shadow housing minister Emma Reynolds will give more details
:29:17. > :29:19.of how Labour would boost house-building, and she joins me
:29:20. > :29:23.now. It is not the politicians to blame, it is the lack of
:29:24. > :29:29.house-builders? We want a vibrant building industry, and at the moment
:29:30. > :29:33.that industry is dominated by big house-builders. I want to see a more
:29:34. > :29:39.diverse and competitive industry, where self build plays a greater
:29:40. > :29:45.role. In France over 60% of new homes are built by self builders,
:29:46. > :29:50.but small builders build more homes as well. 25 years ago they were
:29:51. > :29:55.building two thirds of new homes, now they are not building even a
:29:56. > :29:58.third of new homes. That's because land policies have been so
:29:59. > :30:04.restrictive that it is only the big companies who can afford to buy the
:30:05. > :30:08.land, so little land is being released for house building. I
:30:09. > :30:11.agree, there are some fundamental structural problems with the land
:30:12. > :30:15.market and that is why we have said there doesn't just need to be
:30:16. > :30:20.tinkering around the edges, there needs to be real reforms to make
:30:21. > :30:24.sure that small builders and self build and custom-built have access
:30:25. > :30:29.to land. They are saying they have problems with access to land and
:30:30. > :30:36.finance. At the end of the day it will not be self, small builders who
:30:37. > :30:40.reach your target, it will be big builders. I think it is pretty
:30:41. > :30:48.shameful that in Western Europe the new houses built in the UK are
:30:49. > :30:53.smaller than our neighbours. But isn't not the land problem? France
:30:54. > :31:02.is 2.8 times bigger in land mass and we are and that is not a problem for
:31:03. > :31:06.them. There is a perception we are going to build on the countryside,
:31:07. > :31:16.but not even 10% is on the countryside. There is enough for us
:31:17. > :31:20.to have our golf courses. There is enough other land for us to build on
:31:21. > :31:24.that is not golf courses. The planning minister has said he wants
:31:25. > :31:27.to build our National Parks, I am not suggesting that. The single
:31:28. > :31:33.biggest land border is the public sector. It is not. There are great
:31:34. > :31:39.opportunities for releasing public land, that is why I have been asking
:31:40. > :31:43.the government, they say they are going to release and of public land
:31:44. > :31:47.for tens of thousands of new homes to be built, but they say they are
:31:48. > :31:54.not monitoring how many houses are being built on the site. When your
:31:55. > :31:59.leader says to landowners, housing development owners, either use the
:32:00. > :32:06.land or lose it, in what way will they lose it? Will you confiscated?
:32:07. > :32:11.This is about strengthening the hand of local authorities, and they say
:32:12. > :32:14.to us that in some cases, house-builders are sitting on land.
:32:15. > :32:21.In those cases, we would give the power to local authorities to
:32:22. > :32:26.escalate fees. This would be the compulsory purchase orders, a matter
:32:27. > :32:34.of last resort, and you would hope that by strengthening the hand of
:32:35. > :32:37.local authorities, you could get the house-builders to start building the
:32:38. > :32:43.homes that people want. Would you compulsory purchase it? We would
:32:44. > :32:48.give the local authority as a last resort, after escalating the fees,
:32:49. > :32:52.the possibility and flexible it is to use the compulsory purchase
:32:53. > :32:56.orders to sell the land on to a house builder who wants to build
:32:57. > :33:00.houses that we need. Can you name one report that has come back in
:33:01. > :33:03.recent years that shows that hoarding of land by house-builders
:33:04. > :33:07.is a major problem? The IMF, the Conservative mayor of London and the
:33:08. > :33:11.Local Government Association are telling us that there is a problem
:33:12. > :33:15.with land hoarding. Therefore, we have said, where there is land with
:33:16. > :33:21.planning permission, and if plots are being sat on... Boris Johnson
:33:22. > :33:25.says there are 180,000 plots in London being sat on. We need to make
:33:26. > :33:33.sure the house-builders are building the homes that young families need.
:33:34. > :33:37.They get planning permission and sell it on to the developer. There
:33:38. > :33:42.is a whole degree of complicity but there is another problem before
:33:43. > :33:46.that. That is around transparency about land options. There is
:33:47. > :33:51.agricultural land that house-builders have land options on,
:33:52. > :33:55.and we do not know where that is. Where there is a need for housing,
:33:56. > :34:01.and the biggest demand is in the south-east of England, that is where
:34:02. > :34:06.many local authorities are most reluctant to do it, will you in
:34:07. > :34:10.central government take powers to force these authorities to give it?
:34:11. > :34:20.We have talked about the right to grow, we were in Stevenage
:34:21. > :34:25.recently. What we have said is we want to strengthen the hand of local
:34:26. > :34:30.authorities like Stevenage so they are not blocked every step of the
:34:31. > :34:34.way. They need 16,000 new homes but they do not have the land supply.
:34:35. > :34:38.What about the authorities that do not want to do it? They should be
:34:39. > :34:42.forced to sit down and agree with the neighbouring authority. In
:34:43. > :34:46.Stevenage, it is estimated at ?500,000 has been spent on legal
:34:47. > :34:52.fees because North Hertfordshire is blocking Stevenage every step of the
:34:53. > :34:57.way. Michael Lyons says the national interest will have to take President
:34:58. > :35:02.over local interest. Voice cannot mean a veto. The local community in
:35:03. > :35:08.Stevenage is crying out for new homes. Do you agree? There has to be
:35:09. > :35:14.land available for new homes to be built, and in areas like Oxford
:35:15. > :35:15.Luton and Stevenage... Do you agree with Michael Lyons? The national
:35:16. > :35:37.interest does have to be served with Michael Lyons? The national
:35:38. > :35:43.will put the five new towns? We have asked him to look at how we can
:35:44. > :35:48.incentivise local authorities to come forward with sites for new
:35:49. > :35:53.towns. You cannot tell us where they are going to be? I cannot. We will
:35:54. > :35:59.have to wait for him. When you look at the historic figures overall not
:36:00. > :36:02.at the moment, Private Housing building is only just beginning to
:36:03. > :36:06.recover, but it has been pretty steady for a while. The big
:36:07. > :36:10.difference between house-building now and in the past, since Mrs
:36:11. > :36:13.Thatcher came to power a and including the Tony Blair government,
:36:14. > :36:18.we did not build council houses Almost none. Will the next Labour
:36:19. > :36:25.government embark on a major council has programme? We inherited housing
:36:26. > :36:31.stock back in 1997... This is important. Will the next Labour
:36:32. > :36:35.government embark on a major council has programme? We have called on
:36:36. > :36:39.this government to bring forward investment in social housing. We
:36:40. > :36:44.want to see an investment programme in social housing, I cannot give you
:36:45. > :36:49.the figures now. We are 18 months away from the election. Will the
:36:50. > :36:54.next Labour government embark on a major council house Northern
:36:55. > :36:57.programme? I want to see a council house building programme, because
:36:58. > :37:06.there is a big shortage of council homes. That is a guess? Yes. We got
:37:07. > :37:13.there in the end. -- that is a yes? We will be talking to Patrick homes
:37:14. > :37:16.in the West Midlands in a moment. You are watching the Sunday
:37:17. > :37:18.Politics. Coming up in just over 20 minutes, I will look at the week
:37:19. > :37:21.ahead with our political Hello. Happy New Year. Coming up:
:37:22. > :37:42.government bail them out? Hello. Happy New Year. Coming up:
:37:43. > :37:48.Counting the cost of last month's flooding. Who is fitting the bill
:37:49. > :37:54.and is the government doing enough? The district council spends ?3
:37:55. > :37:57.million, and we are only expecting to get ?1.6 million through
:37:58. > :38:09.insurance so we need help from the government. A New Year but another
:38:10. > :38:15.hike in rail fares with commuters taking the brunt. And another
:38:16. > :38:19.resignation at Colchester Hospital where investigations into cancer
:38:20. > :38:30.waiting times rumble on. Let's meet our guests. Welcome to you. Let's
:38:31. > :38:38.start with the fatal helicopter crash which happened earlier this
:38:39. > :38:43.week. The US air force has paid tribute to the three men and woman
:38:44. > :38:48.who died. It came down on marshes close to the sea and the accident
:38:49. > :38:53.has sparked concerns about low`level flying in the area and the amount of
:38:54. > :39:01.military aircraft in the skies. People, on the whole, are very proud
:39:02. > :39:04.of the tradition of the RAF and US military being in our region but
:39:05. > :39:09.communities have to feel safe and there are proper steps which need to
:39:10. > :39:15.be taken to make sure the risk to communities is minimised. You are a
:39:16. > :39:22.former shadow defence minister, do we need to tighten up on low`flying?
:39:23. > :39:31.There have to be investigations into this accident. We have very mature
:39:32. > :39:34.safety systems in this country so the short answer is no, we should
:39:35. > :39:38.not jump to conclusions but there may be something to learn from this
:39:39. > :39:44.to prevent further accidents. Military aircraft have to do
:39:45. > :39:49.low`flying training. We do not know what went wrong. In your
:39:50. > :39:55.constituency there are a lot of people living under the flight path
:39:56. > :40:02.for Luton airport so it is the same for them, is it not? More than
:40:03. > :40:10.aviation is a fact of life and we should be proud of aircraft safety
:40:11. > :40:13.in this country. We have a fantastic investigation team who go in and
:40:14. > :40:18.understand what has gone wrong and any lessons will be learned and
:40:19. > :40:21.applied in other contexts. Do communities have to put up with
:40:22. > :40:29.these risks and accept them as part of everyday life postmark yes, but
:40:30. > :40:34.you can be reassured that aviation is the safest form of transport. Air
:40:35. > :40:46.accidents are very rare and far more people are killed on the road. Does
:40:47. > :40:52.it bring low`flying into question? It would be crazy to bring
:40:53. > :40:58.low`flying into densely populated areas but that does not happen. Do
:40:59. > :41:04.you agree? Broadly. The answer is we do not know yet. If low`flying was
:41:05. > :41:09.involved in the incident then I am sure that will come out in the
:41:10. > :41:14.incident. We should trust the military pilots from the East of
:41:15. > :41:21.England. The last thing we want is a knee jerk reaction. Of course, it
:41:22. > :41:26.has been a month since the biggest tidal surge for 60 years. Buildings
:41:27. > :41:31.were destroyed and hundreds of homes were flooded. Clearing up the mess
:41:32. > :41:36.is the responsibility of our local councils, and it is a costly
:41:37. > :41:45.business. Research has shown that last month's storm has led to a bill
:41:46. > :41:52.of ?3 billion. There are worries that it will not be enough. In many
:41:53. > :41:58.places along the coast there is still a lot of work to do. Here in
:41:59. > :42:03.North Norfolk, 100 metres of Promenade needs to be rebuilt along
:42:04. > :42:07.with the local cafe. A few miles away BPF has been badly and large
:42:08. > :42:17.chunks have been taken out of the bank. `` the pier. We reckon the
:42:18. > :42:22.district council has spent ?3 million and we are only expecting to
:42:23. > :42:26.get ?1.6 million through our insurance so we need help from the
:42:27. > :42:34.government to plug that gap. If you do not get that help, what will you
:42:35. > :42:38.do? We will have to dig into the reserves. For every authority along
:42:39. > :42:44.the coast, last month's storm surge was expensive. North Norfolk was
:42:45. > :42:50.worst hit but other councils say they will struggle to meet bills.
:42:51. > :42:57.For the last 30 years there has been a scheme for financial assistance to
:42:58. > :43:00.help councils who have incurred unforeseen expenses in dealing with
:43:01. > :43:08.emergencies, particularly whether emergencies. Named after a former
:43:09. > :43:16.Environment Minister, the scheme reimburses counsel for 85% of
:43:17. > :43:21.eligible expenditure. It will also refund councils for repair work, but
:43:22. > :43:25.only temporary repair work and that is one of the problems. North
:43:26. > :43:29.Norfolk does not want to do temporary repair work which means a
:43:30. > :43:36.lot of their costs may not be covered under the scheme. It is for
:43:37. > :43:41.plugging the gap in the short term and we could not see the point in
:43:42. > :43:44.doing that. Some of the breaches in defences, it was the matter of
:43:45. > :43:50.getting them repaired in case it happens again. There are other
:43:51. > :43:53.concerns about the scheme. Councils have to spend above a certain
:43:54. > :43:58.threshold before they can claim and even then they may not get their
:43:59. > :44:04.money back. With so much flooding elsewhere in the country, will there
:44:05. > :44:09.be enough to go round? Meanwhile, MPs at Westminster have uncovered
:44:10. > :44:13.another problem. They say the scheme works well for inland flooding which
:44:14. > :44:18.can be repaired quickly and coastal damage takes longer to sort out.
:44:19. > :44:25.Under the scheme, you have to carry out the works within two months and
:44:26. > :44:31.foot the bill within three months. This is not appropriate within this
:44:32. > :44:42.case where repairs could go on for many months. I do have concerns that
:44:43. > :44:44.a scheme that was introduced in 1993 for events that happened
:44:45. > :44:50.occasionally are now happening fairly regularly. I am concerned
:44:51. > :44:55.about whether it is fit for purpose in today's world. Whether or not it
:44:56. > :45:00.is down to global warming, bad weather seems to be happening more
:45:01. > :45:04.often and growing demands are being put on our local authorities, but
:45:05. > :45:10.the cost of responding could lead them out of pocket. Days after the
:45:11. > :45:13.tidal surge, the government said up a committee to oversee the
:45:14. > :45:21.reconstruction of homes and businesses. Brandon Lewis, we heard
:45:22. > :45:25.in the film that you have to do have the work done within three months,
:45:26. > :45:36.that is not realistic for larger projects, is it? On the East Coast
:45:37. > :45:37.there are people dealing with insurance companies, local
:45:38. > :45:43.authorities and the Environment Agency, working through what they
:45:44. > :45:48.need to do. The Environment Agency are still doing local assessments.
:45:49. > :45:53.The local councils are getting on with the clear up work and getting
:45:54. > :45:57.people into the homes. What about compensation, what about the
:45:58. > :46:08.three`month deadline? It is only for temporary were spares `` repairs?
:46:09. > :46:13.There is a different issue their food is ``. The scheme will put what
:46:14. > :46:23.people want to claim into central government. We have already had two
:46:24. > :46:27.councils expressing in interest. For the longer term work, that
:46:28. > :46:33.infrastructure work for the Department for Transport and the
:46:34. > :46:41.Environment Agency will be putting their working. Let me put the points
:46:42. > :46:49.to you again. Is three`month a sufficient amount of time to claim
:46:50. > :46:57.under this scheme? It does work. The scheme has been in place since 1983.
:46:58. > :47:01.Local authorities know how it works, they are used to it and it does
:47:02. > :47:04.work. I would say to local authorities that if they have a
:47:05. > :47:08.concern, come to see us and talked about and we will do what we can to
:47:09. > :47:14.make sure we get the reparations right. What about the fact that the
:47:15. > :47:21.scheme only covers temporary repairs? Well, that is where the
:47:22. > :47:28.agencies like the highways agency and the Department for Transport,
:47:29. > :47:34.they do their work separately to the scheme. It is a specific scheme for
:47:35. > :47:39.unexpected emergencies for natural disasters like flooding. It helps
:47:40. > :47:47.with the extra costs that were not expected. Do they need to rethink
:47:48. > :47:53.it? It was to deal with infrequent weather events and we seem to be
:47:54. > :47:57.getting them more often. It does work. Local authorities understand
:47:58. > :48:02.how it works and it gets them the money they need. I always said to
:48:03. > :48:07.local authorities, if they have a particular issue or concern, and I
:48:08. > :48:13.was talking to great Yarmouth and North Norfolk in the days after the
:48:14. > :48:19.the event, we will work with them and do what we can. They still have
:48:20. > :48:25.to make a big outlay in their capital expenditure, is that right?
:48:26. > :48:32.It depends on what the area and issue is. Local authorities
:48:33. > :48:36.understand what the risks are. An area like Great Yarmouth knows it
:48:37. > :48:42.has a flood issue and it had it in 2007 as well as in December. They
:48:43. > :48:54.will make allowances for that in their budget. Where they do have an
:48:55. > :48:59.increased cost that is out of their control, the scheme is there to
:49:00. > :49:07.recover costs. Thank you for joining us. You had coastal flooding in your
:49:08. > :49:11.constituency so are you satisfied that this will not cost your
:49:12. > :49:20.constituents any money? We got off very lightly. It was about ?30,000
:49:21. > :49:27.worth of damage. There was very little wind and the moon was out. We
:49:28. > :49:35.got off very lightly. You have got a minister there representing coastal
:49:36. > :49:39.constituencies, you cannot have anybody who understands it better.
:49:40. > :49:42.The big capital schemes funded by the Environment Agency, and is
:49:43. > :49:52.looking at some of the damage in your film, it is going to need
:49:53. > :49:57.complete renewal and Apple have to come under capital schemes. We have
:49:58. > :50:09.a big amount being spent on flood defences. Is the scheme fit for
:50:10. > :50:15.purpose? It can be but I am looking for new solutions. Back in 2007, the
:50:16. > :50:21.last time we had significant flooding inland and on the coast, we
:50:22. > :50:26.funded 100% of the cost. We had a scheme in place for the East Coast
:50:27. > :50:29.where you have significant coastal issues, and we were spending the
:50:30. > :50:33.most that has ever been spent on flood protection. We know that
:50:34. > :50:43.climate change is going to make this problem worse. Perhaps the scheme is
:50:44. > :50:48.OK, but we could go further? Are their alteration that need to be
:50:49. > :50:58.made to it? What about the money that needs to come out of local
:50:59. > :51:04.authority contingency? Some of the sea wall embankments will need big
:51:05. > :51:07.capital spend and that will have to come out of the programme. Luckily,
:51:08. > :51:13.we are spending more than ever before on the major capital
:51:14. > :51:23.programmes. The scheme is like any government policy. When you claim on
:51:24. > :51:28.your own insurance, you will always find there are restrictions on what
:51:29. > :51:36.you can claim on... They could amend the scheme? In practice, we did have
:51:37. > :51:46.to tweak many of the details of the scheme, but it points towards a more
:51:47. > :51:51.regular occurrence, and every pound you spend on flood defences, you get
:51:52. > :51:56.?7 back in the economy. We have to leave it there. Two Southeast
:51:57. > :51:58.Cambridge where it has been claimed that the local Tories may have
:51:59. > :52:10.picked the wrong candidate to represent them. We reported that
:52:11. > :52:16.Lucy Fraser was elected but there has been concern over the number of
:52:17. > :52:23.votes she received. A crisis meeting was called. Lucy Fraser arrived
:52:24. > :52:28.knowing there was a lot of anger in the local party about her election.
:52:29. > :52:32.London barrister, highly regarded, she happened to be the favourite to
:52:33. > :52:39.win. When complaints are merged about ballot papers not being
:52:40. > :52:43.properly printed, Conservative headquarters told the local party to
:52:44. > :52:47.sort out the shambles and decide whether to back their candidate or
:52:48. > :52:55.rerun the election. We made a mistake and we put our hands up, and
:52:56. > :53:00.we are going to openly and honestly run this whole campaign against. I
:53:01. > :53:10.voted for Lucy, she is an amazing woman. The meeting, which took place
:53:11. > :53:13.away from the cameras, was heated at times with the majority of speakers
:53:14. > :53:21.calling for a rerun. When it came to the vote, the majority endorsed the
:53:22. > :53:25.candidate. I wish for party unity and the desire to bring this to a
:53:26. > :53:31.conclusion lay behind the decision to support Ms Fraser. Despite her
:53:32. > :53:38.victory she left without making a comment. It has not been the best of
:53:39. > :53:42.starts to her political career. For tens of thousands of people in the
:53:43. > :53:46.east, the New Year brought another rise in rail fares and the cost of
:53:47. > :53:51.commuting. Season tickets to the capital have increased by 3%, lower
:53:52. > :53:57.than in previous years, but adds to this the spiralling cost of living,
:53:58. > :54:04.and the New Year is looking bleak. I have not had a pay rise for four
:54:05. > :54:11.years. The benefits of privatisation have now faded. We go to work, eat
:54:12. > :54:17.and sleep, we do not have the money for anything else. The cost of a
:54:18. > :54:25.season ticket to gluten from London is over ?3000 a year. `` Luton. You
:54:26. > :54:29.criticise the coalition for these rises but it was Labour who
:54:30. > :54:41.incessantly put up rail fares. Actually, we capped increases. Wages
:54:42. > :54:44.were outstripping prices. In 41 out of the last 42 months, people are
:54:45. > :54:51.spending more on goods than their wages. There needs to be dramatic
:54:52. > :55:00.action taken. The fare from Colchester to London is ?4680. It is
:55:01. > :55:03.a 2.7% rise. People's wages are stuck in a right and they have to
:55:04. > :55:08.find another hundred pounds for their season ticket. You say you
:55:09. > :55:14.understand the squeeze on ordinary families at the policies seem to
:55:15. > :55:18.suggest otherwise. There is no magic wand. The economy is getting better
:55:19. > :55:24.but I doubt whether people will feel that in their wage packets and their
:55:25. > :55:31.standards of living. We inherited such a horrendous debt situation
:55:32. > :55:37.from the previous government. That has to be put right. If you have
:55:38. > :55:43.borrowed too much previously, then you have to put that right. Do you
:55:44. > :55:47.not have the opportunity to freeze these rail price rises in the
:55:48. > :55:54.future? I think there are things you could do. Not giving lows of money
:55:55. > :56:05.out to private operators... Why will your party not commit to rail fare
:56:06. > :56:11.freezes? We are a responsible government. We are tackling things
:56:12. > :56:16.like the energy price freeze. It is also wages and if you are not going
:56:17. > :56:24.to take action to decrease the cost of living crisis, then there is no
:56:25. > :56:30.question. The amount of fares will cover operating costs soon. Is there
:56:31. > :56:39.not a tipping point where the government can say, that is enough,
:56:40. > :56:49.we will give it a restful. We hope we will cost tax increases in 2018.
:56:50. > :56:55.It is very tough for commuters at the moment but we must try and put
:56:56. > :57:00.the economy back on its feet. There is no magic wand, and we can only
:57:01. > :57:09.carry on improving the efficiency of the railway. Under privatisation,
:57:10. > :57:17.there was a big change in efficiency but under Labour, it went up the
:57:18. > :57:30.spout. Next it is a new political year but one old hand is still
:57:31. > :57:33.causing a stir in the House. Barristers and lawyers across the
:57:34. > :57:38.region walked out over cuts to legal aid funding. Lawyers are not immune
:57:39. > :57:46.from the economic pressures that apply to the rest of the country.
:57:47. > :57:50.Companies helping economic migrants claim benefits came into criticism.
:57:51. > :57:59.We do not want people coming to Peter Brett as benefit tourists. We
:58:00. > :58:04.want people who will work. Prince William begins a course in
:58:05. > :58:10.agriculture at Cambridge University. Colchester Hospital has lost its
:58:11. > :58:21.deputy chief executive, Sue Barnett. There was consternation in the House
:58:22. > :58:35.for the suggestion that UKIP leader Nigel Farage joins the lead debates.
:58:36. > :58:46.So, Nick and Nigel is the question. I would rather have neither.
:58:47. > :58:51.Colchester Hospital, a new chief executive, there have been several
:58:52. > :58:57.resignations. You were there to back the management, were you not? You
:58:58. > :59:02.have to back the people you think are doing the best job. He chose to
:59:03. > :59:10.go and we always knew there was going to be a problem. A great many
:59:11. > :59:18.positive changes were made by the previous chief executive. Do you not
:59:19. > :59:27.feel now, in hindsight, that you did have the wool pulled over your eyes?
:59:28. > :59:31.No, I did not. We knew other things would come out as a result of this.
:59:32. > :59:39.These are problems that affect the whole of the NHS. The abilities of
:59:40. > :59:44.the junior staff, and for the senior staff to be open and receptive to
:59:45. > :59:48.what is going on. For the clinical staff to accept responsibility about
:59:49. > :59:52.what is going on. You are still backing the hospital? This hospital
:59:53. > :59:57.is much safer than it was three years ago but, like many other
:59:58. > :00:06.hospitals, it has to make many improvements. Will you monitor the
:00:07. > :00:13.hospital care facility? There is an organisation called Monitor that
:00:14. > :00:17.inspects the hospital. I had a meeting with members of Parliament
:00:18. > :00:19.to ask them how they are addressing the changes that have been
:00:20. > :00:24.recommended. Thank you, both. the changes that have been
:00:25. > :00:33.will not be revoked. And I wouldn't want it to go. Thank you, back to
:00:34. > :00:38.Andrew. Can David Cameron get his way on EU
:00:39. > :00:43.migration? Will he ever be able to satisfy his backbenchers on Europe?
:00:44. > :00:53.Is Ed Miliband trying to change the tone of PMQ 's? More questions for
:00:54. > :00:57.the week ahead. We are joined by Jacob Rees Mogg
:00:58. > :01:02.from his constituency in Somerset. Welcome to the programme. You one of
:01:03. > :01:09.the 95 Tory backbenchers who signed this letter? Suddenly. Laws should
:01:10. > :01:16.be made by our democratically elected representatives, not from
:01:17. > :01:25.Brussels. How could Europe work with a pick and mix in which each
:01:26. > :01:31.national parliament can decide what Brussels can be in charge of? The
:01:32. > :01:34.European Union is a supernatural body that is there for the
:01:35. > :01:41.cooperation amongst member states to do things that they jointly want to
:01:42. > :01:44.do. It ought not be there to force -- to enforce uniform rules on
:01:45. > :01:47.countries that do not want to participate. It is the vision of
:01:48. > :01:53.Europe that people joined when we signed up to it and came in in 973.
:01:54. > :01:57.It has accreted powers to itself without having the support of the
:01:58. > :02:02.public of the member states. This is just a way of preparing the ground
:02:03. > :02:07.for you to get out of Europe altogether, isn't it? I do not big
:02:08. > :02:11.so. There is a role for an organisation that does some
:02:12. > :02:16.coordination and that has trade agreements within it, I do not think
:02:17. > :02:21.there is a role for a federal state. Europe seems to be dominating the. I
:02:22. > :02:26.remember your leader telling you not to bang on about Europe, your
:02:27. > :02:31.backbench colleagues seem to have ignored that. Would you like to
:02:32. > :02:38.restrict the flow of EU migrants to come to work in this country? Yes. I
:02:39. > :02:43.think we should have control of our own borders, so we can decide who we
:02:44. > :02:46.want to admit for the whole world. What we have at the moment is a
:02:47. > :02:51.restrictive control of people coming from anywhere other than the EU
:02:52. > :02:56.There is a big decrease in the number of New Zealanders who came in
:02:57. > :03:01.the last quarter for which figures are available, but a huge increase
:03:02. > :03:05.in people coming from the continent. Does it really make sense to stop
:03:06. > :03:09.our second cousins coming so that we can allow people freely to come from
:03:10. > :03:14.the continent? I do not think so, we need to have domestic control of our
:03:15. > :03:18.borders in the interests of the United Kingdom. There are still lots
:03:19. > :03:23.more people coming from the rest of the world than from the European
:03:24. > :03:30.Union. That has been changing. But there are still more. A lot more.
:03:31. > :03:36.The permanent residence coming from the European Union are extremely
:03:37. > :03:40.high. In the period when the Labour Party was in charge, we had to put 5
:03:41. > :03:45.million people coming here, of whom about 1 billion were from Poland. --
:03:46. > :03:52.we had 2.5 million people coming here. We have no control over them.
:03:53. > :03:57.Like the clock behind you, you are behind the times on these figures. I
:03:58. > :04:01.have stopped the clock for your benefit, because it was going to
:04:02. > :04:09.chime otherwise! I thought that might be distracting! Only a Tory
:04:10. > :04:20.backbencher could stop a clock! Helen, when you at this up, it is
:04:21. > :04:22.preparing to get out, is it not We have had this one bill about a
:04:23. > :04:27.referendum that seems to have tied us up in knots for months on end. If
:04:28. > :04:33.Parliament could scrutinise every piece of EU legislation, we would
:04:34. > :04:39.never get anything else done. It would be incredible. Even Chris
:04:40. > :04:46.Grayling said earlier that you can not have a national veto on anything
:04:47. > :04:49.that the EU proposes. I am surprised that Jacob Rees Mogg is talking
:04:50. > :04:54.about dismantling one of Margaret Thatcher's most important legacies,
:04:55. > :04:58.the creation of the single market, and the person sent there to dream
:04:59. > :05:02.it up under Margaret Thatcher said the only way you can run this
:05:03. > :05:07.sensibly is by not having national vetoes, because if you have that,
:05:08. > :05:12.guess what will happen? The French will impose lots of protectionist
:05:13. > :05:14.measures. It was Margaret Thatcher's idea that national
:05:15. > :05:22.parliaments should never veto. How could you fly in the face of the
:05:23. > :05:29.lady? Even the great lady makes mistakes. Excuse me, Jacob Rees Mogg
:05:30. > :05:36.says even Margaret Thatcher makes mistakes! No wonder the clock has
:05:37. > :05:42.stopped! Even be near divine Margaret made a mistake! But on the
:05:43. > :05:48.single market, it has been used as an excuse for massive origination of
:05:49. > :05:50.domestic affairs. We should be interested in free trade in Europe
:05:51. > :05:56.and allowing people to export and import freely, not to have uniform
:05:57. > :06:02.regulations, as per the single market, because what that allows is
:06:03. > :06:04.thought unelected bureaucrats to determine the regular vision. We
:06:05. > :06:09.want the British people to decide the rules for themselves. If this
:06:10. > :06:12.makes the single market not work, that is not the problem, because we
:06:13. > :06:19.can still have free trade, which is more important. If David Cameron is
:06:20. > :06:26.watching this, I am sure he is, it will be nice for you to come on and
:06:27. > :06:31.give us an interview, he must be worried. He is beginning to think, I
:06:32. > :06:37.am losing control. It is a clever letter, the tone is ingratiating and
:06:38. > :06:41.pleasant, every time, you have stood up to Brussels, you have achieved
:06:42. > :06:47.something, but the content is dramatic. If you want Parliament to
:06:48. > :06:50.have a veto, you want to leave the EU, because the definition is
:06:51. > :06:55.accepting the primacy of European law. The MPs should be clear about
:06:56. > :06:59.that. It is almost a year since the Europe speech in which David Cameron
:07:00. > :07:04.committed to the referendum. The political objective was to put that
:07:05. > :07:09.issue to bed until the next election. It has failed. David
:07:10. > :07:13.Cameron is going to have to pull off a major miracle in any
:07:14. > :07:21.renegotiations to satisfy all of this. Yes, it makes me think how
:07:22. > :07:24.much luckier he has been in coalition with the Liberal
:07:25. > :07:27.Democrats, because there is a bit of the Tory party that is
:07:28. > :07:32.irreconcilable to what he wants to do. The Conservative MPs are making
:07:33. > :07:37.these demands just as David Cameron is seeing the debate goes his way in
:07:38. > :07:42.Europe. Angela Merkel has looked over the cliff and said, do I want
:07:43. > :07:47.the UK out? No, they are a counterbalance to France. France one
:07:48. > :07:52.the UK to leave, but they do not, because they do not want to lose the
:07:53. > :07:56.only realistic military power Tom other than themselves. Just when the
:07:57. > :08:04.debate is going David Cameron's way, Jacob Rees Mogg would take us out.
:08:05. > :08:09.Let me move on to another subject. That is nonsense. The debate is not
:08:10. > :08:14.beginning to go David Cameron's way. We are having before us on Monday a
:08:15. > :08:20.bill about European citizenship and spending British taxpayers money so
:08:21. > :08:23.that Europe can go and say we are all EU citizens, but we signed up to
:08:24. > :08:29.being a part of a multinational organisation. The spin that it is
:08:30. > :08:32.going the way of the leader of a political party is one that has been
:08:33. > :08:39.used before, it was said of John Major, it was untrue then and it is
:08:40. > :08:44.now. It is, for the continuing deeper integration of the European
:08:45. > :08:51.Union. I want to ask a quick question. Chris Grayling said to us
:08:52. > :08:55.that the Tories would devise a way in which the British Supreme Court
:08:56. > :08:58.would be supreme in the proper meaning of that, but we could still
:08:59. > :09:06.be within the European Court of Human Rights. Can that circle be
:09:07. > :09:11.squared? I have no idea, the Lord Chancellor is an able man, and I am
:09:12. > :09:18.sure he is good at squaring circles. I am not worried about whether we
:09:19. > :09:25.remain in the convention or not PMQ 's, we saw a bit about this week,
:09:26. > :09:32.Paul Gorgons had died, so the house was more subdued, but he wants a
:09:33. > :09:33.more subdued and serious prime ministers questions. Let's remind
:09:34. > :09:40.ourselves what it was like until now.
:09:41. > :09:43.What is clear is that he is floundering around and he has no
:09:44. > :09:49.answer to the Labour Party's energy price freeze. The difference is
:09:50. > :09:54.John Major is a good man, the Right Honourable gentleman is acting like
:09:55. > :09:59.a conman. Across the medical profession, they say there is a
:10:00. > :10:04.crisis in accident and emergency, and we have a Prime Minister saying,
:10:05. > :10:08.crisis, what crisis? How out of touch can hate the? You do not need
:10:09. > :10:17.it to be Christmas to know when you are sitting next to a turkey.
:10:18. > :10:20.It is not a bad line. Is Ed Miliband trying to change the tone of prime
:10:21. > :10:25.ministers questions? Is he right to do so? The important point is this
:10:26. > :10:32.was a special prime ministers questions, because everybody was
:10:33. > :10:36.really sad and by the death of Paul Goggins and in the country, the
:10:37. > :10:39.legacy of the floods. That was the first question that Ed Miliband
:10:40. > :10:44.asked about, so that cast a pall over proceedings. When it suits him,
:10:45. > :10:48.Ed Miliband would like to take a more statesman-like stance, but will
:10:49. > :10:54.it last? That is how David Cameron started. His first prime ministers
:10:55. > :10:58.questions, he said to Tony Blair, I would like to support you on
:10:59. > :11:03.education, and he did in a vote which meant Tony Blair could see off
:11:04. > :11:10.a naughty operation from Gordon Brown. But it did not last, they are
:11:11. > :11:14.parties with different visions. Jacob Rees Mogg, would you like to
:11:15. > :11:19.see it more subdued? I like a bit of Punch and Judy. You need to have
:11:20. > :11:25.fierce debate and people putting their views passionately, it is
:11:26. > :11:29.excellent. I am not good at it, I sit there quite quietly, but it is
:11:30. > :11:35.great fun, very exciting, and it is the most watched bit of the House of
:11:36. > :11:39.Commons each week. If it got as dull as ditchwater, nobody would pay
:11:40. > :11:45.attention. Three cheers for Punch and Judy. Ed Miliband is going to
:11:46. > :11:51.make a major speech on the economy this week. You can now define the
:11:52. > :11:56.general approach. We had it from Emma Reynolds, we have seen it over
:11:57. > :12:01.energy prices, this market is bust, the market is not working properly,
:12:02. > :12:06.and that will therefore justify substantial government intervention.
:12:07. > :12:11.Intervention which does not necessarily cost money. It is the
:12:12. > :12:14.deletion and reorganising industries. It constitutes an answer
:12:15. > :12:17.to the question which has been hounding him, what is the point of
:12:18. > :12:21.the Labour Party when there is no money left? He says, you do not
:12:22. > :12:26.spend a huge amount fiscally, but you arrange markets to achieve
:12:27. > :12:31.socially just outcomes without expenditure. It is quite serious
:12:32. > :12:37.stance. I am not sure it will survive the rigours of an election
:12:38. > :12:41.campaign, but it is an answer. Is that an approach, to use broken
:12:42. > :12:46.markets, to justify substantial state intervention? Yes, and the
:12:47. > :12:50.other big plank is infrastructure spending. The Lib Dems would not be
:12:51. > :12:56.against capital investment for info structure will stop Emma Reynolds
:12:57. > :12:59.talking about house-building, the idea of pumping money into the
:13:00. > :13:04.economy through infrastructure is something that the Labour Party will
:13:05. > :13:10.look at. Jacob Rees Mogg, you once thought Somerset should have its own
:13:11. > :13:15.time zone, and today, you have delivered on that promise! Live on
:13:16. > :13:21.the Sunday Politics! I try to deliver on my promises!
:13:22. > :13:26.That is all for today, the Daily Politics is on BBC Two every day
:13:27. > :13:33.this week, just before lunch. I aren't back next Sunday here on BBC
:13:34. > :13:39.One at 11am. -- I am back. If it is Sunday, it is the Sunday Politics.