26/01/2014 Sunday Politics East

Morning folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.

Ed Balls has gone socialist and fiscal Conservative in one speech.

He promises to balance the biggest bit of the budget. And to bring back

the 50p top tax rate. Political masterstroke, or a return to old

Labour? If you go to work by public

transport, chances are the price of your ticket has just gone up -

again. We'll speak to Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin. He's

our Sunday Interview. And it's been another wet week

across much of the UK, but what s the outlook according to this man?

This morning.This morning. Held in recent years by party veterans like

Here in the east, what is a fair day's pay? Cancels campaign for a

living wage. And with me - as always - the

political panel so fresh-faced, entertaining and downright popular

they make Justin Bieber look like a boring old has-been just desperate

to get your attention. Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh, and

they'll be tweeting quicker than a yellow Lamborghini racing down Miami

Beach. Being political nerds, they have no idea what I'm talking about.

Ed Balls sprung a surprise on us all yesterday. We kinda thought Labour

would head for the election with a return to the 50p top rate of tax.

But we didn't think he'd do it now. He did! The polls say it's popular,

Labour activists now have a spring in their step. The Tories say it's a

return to the bad old days of the '70s, and bosses now think Labour is

anti-business. Here's the Shadow Chancellor speaking earlier this

morning. I was part of a Government which did very many things to open

up markets, to make the Bank of England independent, to work closely

with business, but the reality is we are in very difficult circumstances

and because if I'm honest you, George Osborne's failure in the last

few years, those difficult circumstances will last into the

next Parliament. Business people have said to me they want to get the

deficit down, of course they do But to cut the top rate... It is foolish

and feeds resentment I want to do the opposite and say look,

pro-business, pro investment, pro market, but pro fairness. Let's get

this deficit down in a fairway and make the reforms to make our economy

work for the long term. What are the political implications of Labour now

in favour of a 50%, in practise 352% top rate of tax? One of the

political implications I don't think exist is that they'll win new

voters. I'm not sure many people out there would think, I would love to

vote for Ed Miliband but I'm not sure if he wants to tax rich people

enough. It will con Dale their existing vote but I don't think it

is the kind of, in the 1990s we talked about triangulation, moving

beyond your core vote, I don't think it is a policy like that. If there

has been a policy like that this year, this month, it has been the

Tories' move on minimum wage. I thought Labour would come back with

their own version, a centre-right policy, and instead they have done

this. I think we talk about the 35% strategy that Labour supposed will

have, I think it is a policy in that direction rather than the thing Tony

Blair or Gordon Brown would have done. Where he was not clear is on

how much it would raise. We know the sum in the grand scheme of things

isn't much, the bedroom tax was about sending a message. What we are

going to see is George Osborne and Ed Balls lock as they try to push

the other one into saying things that are unpopular. The Tories,

the other one into saying things ?150,000 a year, that's exactly

the other one into saying things where Ed Balls want them to be. All

the other one into saying things three main parties have roughly the

same plan, to run a current budget surplus by the end of the next

Parliament. George Osborne said ?12 billion of welfare cuts, hasn't said

how he is going to do it. Ed Balls is giving an idea that he is going

to restore this 50 persons rate The contribution of that will be

deminimus. It is not much, but what does it say about your values.

Because it is that package, it is cleverer than people think. Where

the challenge is is the question that Peter Mandelson posed at the

last election, which is can the Labour Party win a general election

if it doesn't have business on its side? That's the big challenge and

that's the question looking difficult for them this morning

Does it matter if Labour has business on its side. I thought the

most fascinating thing about this announcement is it came from the guy

mindful of business support, Ed Balls. When in opposition and when a

Minister and as a shadow as a result, he's been far more conscious

than Ed Miliband about the need not to alienate the CB Bill. In the

run-up of an election. This is a measure of Ed Miliband's strength in

the Labour Party, that his view of things can prevail so easily over a

guy who for the last 15 years has taken a different view. Eight out of

ten businesses according to the CBI don't want us to leave business

Business is in a bit of a cleft stick. Ed Miliband would like to see

businesses squealing, and Ed Balls is clearly not so comfortable on

that one. There's a difference on that. Mind you, they were squealing

this morning from Davos. They probably had hangovers as well. The

other thing they would say is this is not like Ed Balls thinks that 50p

is the optimal rate forever, it what go eventually. Isn't that what

politicians said when income tax was introduced? Yeah, in '97 Labour

regarded 40 persons as the rate where it would stay.

It's been a bad week for the Lib Dems. Again. Actually, it's been one

of the worst weeks yet for Nick Clegg and his party in recent

memory, as they've gone from talking confidently about their role in

Government to facing a storm of criticism over claims of

inappropriate sexual behaviour by a Lib Dem peer, Chris Rennard, and a

Lib Dem MP, Mike Hancock. Here's Giles with the story of the week. A

challenge to Nick Clegg's authority as he face as growing row over the

Liberal Democrat... I want everyone to be treated with respect by the

Liberal Democrats. We are expecting him to show moral leadership on our

behalf. A good man has been publicly destroyed by the media with the

apparent support of Nick Clegg. I would like Nick Clegg to show

leadership and say, this has got to stop. When Nick Clegg woke up on

Monday morning he knew he was in trouble, staring down the barrel of

a stand justify with Lord Rennard over allegations that the peer had

inappropriately touched a number of women. Chris Rennard thought he was

cleared. Nick Clegg wanted more I said if he doesn't apologise, he

should withdraw from the House of Lords. If he does that today, what

do you do then? I hope he doesn t. I think no apology, no whip. 2014 was

starting badly for the Liberal Democrats. Chris Rennard refused to

apologise, saying you can't say sorry for something you haven't

done. The and he was leaning towards legal action. Butch us friends

better defending Pym and publicly. This is a good, decent man, who has

been punished by the party, with the leadership of the party that seems

to be showing scant regard for due process. But his accusers felt very

differently. It is untenable for the Lib Dems to have a credible voice on

qualities and women's issues in the future if Lord Rennard was allowed

to be back on the Lib Dem benches in the House of Lords. Therein lay the

problem that exposed the weaknesses the House of Lords. Therein lay the

of the Lib Dem leaders. The party's the House of Lords. Therein lay the

internal structures have all the simplicity of a circuit diagram for

a supercomputer, exposing the complexity of who runs the Liberal

Democrats? The simple question that arose of that was can the leader of

the Lib Dems remove a Lib Dem peer? The simple answer is no. The Lib Dem

whips in the Lords could do it but if enough Lib Dem peers disagreed,

they could overrule it. Some long-stand ng friends of roar

Rennard think he is either the innocent victim of a media

witch-hunt or at the least due process has been ridden over rough

shot by the leadership. Nobody ever did spot Lord Rennard as he didn't

turn up to the Lords, will citing ill health. But issued a statement

that ruled out an apology. He refused to do so and refused to

comply with the outcome of that report, so there was no alternative

but for the party to suspend his membership today. On Wednesday Nick

Clegg met Lib Dem peers, not for a crunch decision, but to discuss the

extraordinary prospect of legal action against the party by the man

long credited with building its success. The situation was making

the party look like a joke. One Tory MP said to one of my colleagues this

morning, the funny thing about the Liberal Democrats, you managed to

create a whole sex scandal without any sex. And we can laugh at

ourselves but actually it is rather serious. And it got more serious,

when an MP who had resigned the Lib Dem whip last year was expanded from

the party over a report into allegations of serious and unwelcome

sexual behaviour towards a constituent. All of this leaves the

Lib Dems desperately wishing these sagas had been dealt with long ago

and would now go away. Nick Clegg ended the week still party leader.

Lord Rennard, once one of their most powerful players, ended the week,

for now, no longer even in it. Giles on the Lib Dems' disastrous

week. Now, as you doubtless already know, on Tuesday Lib Dem MPs will

vote to choose a new deputy leader. You didn't know that? You do now.

The job of Nick Clegg's number two is to speak with a genuine Lib Dem

voice, untainted by the demands of coalition Government. At this point

in the show we had expected to speak to all three candidates for the

post, held in recent years by party veterans like Vince Cable and Simon

Hughes. We thought it being quite a significant week for the party, they

might have something to say. And here they are. Well that's their

pictures. For various reasons, all three are now unavailable. Malcolm

Bruce, he's reckoned to be the outsider. His office said he had a

"family commitment". Gordon Birtwistle, the Burnley MP, was

booked to appear but then told us, "I was at an event last night with

Lorely Burt" - she's one of the candidates - "and she told me it was

off". And Lorely Burt herself, seen by many as the red hot favourite,

told us: "Because of the Rennard thing we don't want to put ourselves

in a position where we have to answer difficult questions." How

refreshingly honest. Helen, how bad politically is all this for the Lib

Dems? What I think is the tragic irony of the Lib Dems is they've

been revealed as being too democratic. In the same way that

their party conference embarrassed Nick Clegg by voting sings that he

signed up to, and now everything has to be run past various

sub-committees first. Is it democratic or chaotic? It is

Byzantine. Mike Hancock was voluntarily suspended, and this week

he was properly suspended. It was new information into the public

domain that forced that. I'm already hearing Labour and Conservative

Party musing that if it is a long Parliament, we will form a minority

Government. It is a disaster for them. Voters like parties that

reflect and are interested this their concerns. Parties that are

self obsessed turn them off. The their concerns. Parties that are

third party, if they carry on like this, they'll be the fifth party in

the European elections, so they have got to draw a line under this. They

do that, if they do, through mediation. As I understand it, Chris

Rennard,s who has go devoted his entire life to the Liberal

Democrats, and previously the Liberal Party, is keen to draw a

line under this. He is up for mediation but he needs to know that

the women that he has clearly invaded their personal space, that

there wouldn't be a possible legal a action from them. The it is very

difficult to see how you could resolve that. Except he is

threatening through his friends these famous friends, to spill all

the beans about all the party's sex secrets. Isn't the danger for the

Lib Dems, this haunts them through to the European elections, where

they'll get thumped in the European elections? They'll get destroyed in

the European elections, which keeps it salient as a story over the

summer. And it has implications for Nick Clegg's leadership. He's done a

good job until now, perhaps better than David Cameron, of exercising

authority over his party. He had a good conference in September.

Absolutely, and now the Lib Dems have looked like a party without a

leader or a leadership structure. Part of that is down to the chaotic

or Byzantine organisational structure of the party. Part of it

is Nick Clegg's failure to assert himself and impose himself over

events. Is it Byzantine or Byzantine. It is labyrinthine. You

don't get these words on the Today programme. The cost of living has

been back on the agenda this week as Labour and the Tories argue over

whether the value of money in your pocket is going up or down. Well

there's one cost which has been racing ahead of inflation and that's

the amount you have to pay to travel by train, by bus and by air. Rail

commuters have been hard hit over the last four years, with the cost

of the average season ticket going up by 18% since January 2010, while

wages have gone up by just 3.6% over the same period. It means some rail

users are paying high prices with commuters from Kent shelling out

more than ?5,000 per year from the beginning of this month just to get

to work in London. It doesn't compare well with our European

counterparts. In the UK the average rail user spends 14% of their

average income on trains. It is just 1.5% in Italy. Regulated fares like

season tickets went up 3.1% at the beginning of this month, and with

ministers keen to make passengers fought more of the bills, there are

more fare rises coming down the track. And Patrick McLoughlin joins

me now for the Sunday Interview Welcome. You claim to be in the

party of hard-working people, so why is it that since you came to power

rail commuters have seen the cost of their average season ticket going up

in money terms by over 18% while their pay has gone up in money terms

by less than four? I would point out that this is the first year in ten

years that we have not had an above inflation increase on fares. The

Government accepts we have got to do as much as we can to help the

passengers. A big inflation increase since 2010. This is the first year

in ten years that it has not been above RPI, but we are also investing

huge amounts of money into the railways, building new trains for

the East Coast Main Line and the great Western. We are spending 500

million at Birmingham station, this is all increasing capacity, so we

are seeing investments. Over the next five years Network Rail will

invest over ?38 billion in the network structure. We also have an

expensive railway and it is ordinary people paying for it. A season

ticket from Woking in Surrey, commuter belt land in London, let's

look at the figures. This is a distance of over 25 miles, it cost

over ?3000 per year. We have picked similar distances to international

cities. The British commuter is being ripped

off. The British commuter is seeing record levels of investment in our

railways. The investment has to be paid for. We are investing huge

amounts of money and I don't know whether the figures you have got

here... I'm sure they are likewise, as you have managed to do... White

-- ten times more than the Italian equivalent. We have seen

transformational changes in our railway services and we need to

carry on investing. We were paying these prices even before you started

investing. We have always paid a lot more to commute in this country than

our European equivalents. I'm not quite sure I want to take on Italy

is a great example. You would if you were a commuter. You

is a great example. You would if you the other rates of taxation has to

be paid as well. Isn't it the case they are making profits out of these

figures and using them to subsidise cheaper fares back in their

homeland? The overall profit margin train companies make is 3%, a

reasonable amount, and we have seen a revolution as far as the railway

industry is concerned. a revolution as far as the railway

20 years we have seen passenger journeys going from 750 million to

1.5 billion. That is a massive revolution in rail. Let me look

1.5 billion. That is a massive spokesperson for the German

government, the Ministry of transport.

They are charging huge fares in Britain to take that money back to

subsidise fares in Germany. What do you say to that? We are seeing

British companies winning contracts in Germany. The National Express are

winning contracts to the railways. What about the ordinary commuter?

They are paying through the nose so German commuters can travel more

cheaply. We are still subsidising the railways in this country, but

overall we want to reduce the subsidy we are giving. We are still

seeing growth in our railways and I want to see more people using them.

Why do you increase rail fares at the higher RPI measure than the

lower CPI measurement? That is what has always been done, and we have

stopped. This is the first time in ten years that we have not raised

the rail figures above RPI. You still link fares to RPI. You use the

lower CPI figure when it suits you, to keep pension payments down for

example, but the higher one when it comes to increasing rail fares. We

are still putting a huge subsidy into the rail industry, there is

still a huge amount of money going from the taxpayer to support the

rail industry. I am not asking you about that, I am asking you

rail industry. I am not asking you link the figures to the higher RPI

vesture Mark if we are going to pay for the levels of investment, so all

the new trains being built at Newton Aycliffe for the East Coast Main

Line and the great Western, ?3. billion of investment, new rolling

stock coming online, then yes, we have to pay for it, and it is a

question of the taxpayer paying for it all the -- or the passenger.

You have capped parking fines until the next election, rail commuters we

have seen the cost of their ticket has gone up by nearly 20%, you are

the party of the drivers, not the passengers, aren't you?

We are trying to help everybody who has been struggling. I think we are

setting out long-term plans for our railways, investing heavily in them

and it is getting that balance right. But you have done more for

the driver than you have for the user of public transport. I don t

accept that. They are paying the same petrol prices as 2011. This is

the first time in ten years that there has not been an RPI plus

rise. We are investing record amounts. Bus fares are also rising,

4.2% in real terms in 2010, at a time when real take-home pay has

been falling. This hits commuters particularly workers who use buses

on low incomes, another cost of living squeeze. I was with

Stagecoach in Manchester on Friday, and I saw a bus company investing in

new buses. Last week First ordered new buses. Part of your hard-working

families you are always on about, they are the ones going to work

early in the morning, and yet you are making them pay more for their

buses in real terms than they did before. They would be happier if

they could travel more cheaply. It is about getting investment in

services, it has to be paid for Why not run the old buses for five more

years? Because then there is more pollution in the atmosphere, modern

buses have lower emissions, and we are still giving huge support

overall to the bus industry and that is very important because I fully

accept that the number of people, yes, use the train but a lot of

people use buses as well. High-speed two, it has been delayed because 877

pages of key evidence from your department were left on a computer

memory stick, part of the submission to environmental consultation. Your

department's economic case is now widely regarded as a joke, now you

do this. Is your department fit for purpose? Yes, and as far as what

happened with the memory stick, it is an acceptable and shouldn't have

happened, and therefore we have extended the time. There has been an

extension in the time for people to make representation, the bill for

this goes through Parliament in a different way to a normal bill. It

is vital HS2 provides what we want. different way to a normal bill. It

What I am very pleased about is different way to a normal bill. It

the paving bill was passed by Parliament just a few months ago,

there was overwhelming support, and I kept reading there was going to be

70 people voting against it, in the end 30 people voted against it and

there was a good majority in the House of Commons. So can you give a

guarantee that this legislation will get onto the statute books? I will

do all I can. I cannot tell you the exact Parliamentary time scale. The

bill will have started its progress through the House of Commons by

2015, and it may well have concluded. The new chairman of HS2

said he can bring the cost of the line substantially under the budget,

do you agree with that? The figure is ?42 billion with a large

contingency, and David Higgins, as chairman of HS2, is looking at the

whole cast and seeing if there are ways in which it can be built

faster. At the moment across London we are building Crossrail, ?14.

billion investment. There was a report last week saying what an

excellent job has been done. Crossrail started under Labour.

Actually it was Cecil Parkinson in the 1990 party conference. You may

get HS2 cheaper if you didn't pay people so much, why is the

nonexecutive chairman of HS2 on ?600,000? And the new chief

executive on ?750,000. These are very big projects and we need to

attract the best people become so we are going for the best engineers in

the world to engineer this project. It is a large salary, there is no

question about it, but I'm rather It is a large salary, there is no

pleased that engineers rather than bankers can be seen to get big

rewards for delivering what will be very important pieces of national

infrastructure. I didn't have time to ask you about your passenger duty

so perhaps another time. We are about to speak to Nigel Mills and

all of these MPs on your side who are rebelling against the

Government, how would you handle them? We have got to listen to what

our colleagues are talking about and try to respond it. Would you take

them for a long walk off a short pier? I'm sure I would have many

conversations with them. An immigration bill to tack the

immigration into the UK. When limits on migration from Bulgaria and

Romania were lifted this year there were warnings of a large influx of

migrant workerses from the two new European countries. So far it's been

more of a dribble than a flood. Who can forget Labour MP Keith Vaz

greeting a handful of arrivals at Luton Airport. But it is early days

and it is one of the reasons the Government's introduced a new

Immigration Bill. The Prime Minister is facing rebellion from

backbenchers who want tougher action on immigration from abroad. Nigel

Mills would reimpose restrictions on how many Romanians and Bulgarians

can come here. Joining me is Nigel Mills, Conservative MP behind the

amendment and Labour MP Diane Abbott. Welcome. Nigel Mills, there

hasn't been an influx of Romanians and Bulgarians. Why do you want to

restore these, kick these transitional controls way forward to

2019? I don't think any of us were expecting a rush on January 1st

Andrew. I think we were talking about a range of 250,000 to 350 000

people over five years. That's obviously a large amount of people,

especially when you think net migration to the UK was well in

excess of the Government's target of tens of thousands last year. The

real concern is that it would be ever increasing our population,

attracting lots of low-skilled, low-wage people, which keeps our

people out of work and wages down. Did you accept that if you were to

accept this, it would be in breach of the Treaty of Rome, the founding

principle of the European Union We were trying to keep the restrictions

that Bulgaria and Romania accepted for their first seven years of EU

membership, on the basis that when we signed the treaty we weren't

aware that we would have a huge and catastrophic recession we are still

recovering from. But you would be in breach of the law, correct? The UK

Parliament has a right to say we signed this deal before the terrible

recession, and we need a bit longer in our national interest. It is

worth noting that Bulgaria and Romania haven't met all their

accession requirements. The Bulgarian requirement passed a

law... So if they break the law it is alright for us to break the law?

Is we should be focusing on trying to get 2. 4 million of our own in

work, and 1 million people not in work... Let me bring in Diane

Abbott. Will you vote for this amendment and why? It is in breach

of the treaty. While I deplore MPs that try to cause trouble, these MPs

have been particularly mindless because what they want to do

wouldn't be legal. However, it is a Tory internal brief, if I might say

so. Maybe you can cause trouble by voting for it. No, that would be

going too far. Underlying it is a real antagonism for David Cameron.

They have had to hold off on this bill until January. It was supposed

to be debating before Christmas As we speak they've not cut a deal so

it could be pretty grus om. Nigel Mills, what do you say to that I

think there is a recognition that there is a problem with the amount

of migration from EU countries that we need to tackle. We could try to

achieve an annual cap perhaps, longer limits on when countries get

free movement. I think the debate is moving in the right direction, but I

think those people who are trapped out of work and desperately looking

for work want something to be done now and not wait a few more years

while we have more assessments Andrews. People are worried about

the level of immigration. They I it is too high. That's the consensus in

the country. We spoke to to migration centre in Hackney and they

said they are struggling to cope with the number of people using

their services. These are people with problems with the law. In the

past years EU migrants put in more to the economy in taxation than they

take out in benefits. When it comes to free movement, which is agitating

Nige em, that horse has bolted. We signed a treaty. There is nothing

people like Nigel Mills can do, unless they want to rip their party

apart, God forbid. Will you go as far as to rip your party apart,

Nigel Mills? Are you going to take this all the way? Would you rather

see this bill go down than your amendment not be accepted? This is a

very important bill. I think we all want to see measures on the statute

book, so the last thing we want to see is this bill go down. We do need

to set out clearly that we have real concerns about the level of EU

migration and something needs to be done. Would you rather have the bill

without your amendment or no bill at all? I am hoping we can have the

bill with the amendment. I know that, but if you can't? Is that will

depend on what the Labour Party decide to do. They are talking

tougher on immigration but will they take action on it? Your party has

been talking tough on immigration but I will be surprised if an Ed

Miliband Labour Party would vote for egg in direct cameravention of the

Treaty of Rome. It would make no sense. Nigel Mills is wishing for

the impossible. If I was a Tory I would be wringing high hands. He

hasn't ruled out crashing the bill. That's incredible. Where will this

end, Nigel Mills? We'll end with a vote on Thursday. There's a lot of

amendments people can use to show their concern about migration. We

want limited and proportionate action, and that's what I am

proposing. I want to see the bill on the statute book, I want the

restrictions on people who shouldn't be here getting bank accounts and

driving licences. I don't want to crash this bill but there's more

measures we need in it. Nigel Mills thank you. You are going to be -

popping up I think on the Sunday Politics East Midlands. Diane

Abbott, thank you as well. We're in for more heavy rain and

high winds across the UK today. You may remember that one UKIP

councillor - he's since been suspended - caused controversy last

weekend by blaming the recent flooding on the legalisation of gay

marriage. Why didn't I think of that? So who better than this man to

bring you the unofficial forecast. I'll be bringing you the late least

UKIP weather from your area. You're watching Sunday Politics

Also coming up in just over 20 minutes, I'll be looking at the week

ahead with our political panel. Hello, and welcome to the part of

the programme just for us here in the East. I'm Etholle George. Coming

up: Fighting for his political life, South Suffolk MP Tim Yeo's struggle

for re`selection. How much do you need to get by? The

councils increasing wages for full time workers who aren't earning

enough to live on. Some days I have to go to my dad's and have dinner at

there. I can't afford heating sometimes, it is so expensive.

And they were told they would get jobs when their Remploy factory

closed. We see how the promises panned out. I spend my day looking

in shop windows looking for jobs, going online and looking for jobs.

But first, let's meet our guests, Iain Stewart, the Conservative MP

for Milton Keynes South, and the Lib Dem Mayor of Bedford, Dave Hodgson.

Let's start with the war of words that's broken out this week between

Suffolk MP Tim Yeo and members of his local party. They have been

explaining why they decided to drop him as their candidate for 2015. In

the early stages when it was a new constituency, he was a good local

connect it MP. There was the odd scandal which was glossed over and

moved ahead with because generally he did a good job. Recently we have

seen little of him in the village or elsewhere and the criticisms comes

to me from other party members that they just don't see him, they don't

see him connected with what is going on in the constituency. The MP, who

has demanded a ballot of members, is fighting back. I look forward to the

results eagerly. AM happy to be judged on my record of what I have

done in Suffolk and Westminster for the Conservative Party and I am

confident that if people look to my record they will reach the verdict I

hope it will reach to reselect me. The ballot papers went out this

week. Iain Stewart, it is not an ideal situation. Tim is a revalued

and senior colleague. He brings a huge and mode of experience to

Parliament, especially in the climate change is sector. That said,

it makes the party look disunited, doesn't it? We have a democratic

structure in the party. All MPs have to go through a reselection

procedure and it is up to the Association to decide if they will

be adopted as a member or not. I had to go through it. I cannot comment

on what is happening in that constituency some distance from mind

that we all have to do it. Is there a way around these rows? The same

thing could happen in the Lib Dems, couldn't it? When I was reselected,

it is a ballot of all members. Members if they cannot make it or

offered a postal ballot, so that the party's position. Should the rules

be changed to avoid this kind of confrontation? No, I think it is

right. All MPs or candidates are adopted by their local association,

so they can be adopted by them. We have a structure that a sitting

member who wants to be re`. Did, first there is a vote of the

executive of the local association to adopt or not, but then sitting

members have a right of appeal. Who would you give the last word to? The

party members, and I think it is right for them to have the say.

Thank you for the moment. Now, how much is enough to live on?

While George Osborne has now changed his tune to back an increase for the

minimum wage next year, some of our councils are determined to pay the

higher "living" wage to help their low`paid workers get by. For workers

from Bedford Council, the change can't come soon enough. Deborah

McGurran reports. I can't afford to get my teeth done. I can't get my

eyes tested. I pay council tax and rolls up and that's why I have to do

the Ares I can. Mike has been a car park attendant for two years. He

earned ?7 55 and are for a 40 hour week. With a take`home pay at around

?300, he doesn't consider it a living wage. Do you feel your living

hand to mouth? Some days I have to go to my dad's and have dinner

there. I cannot afford heating sometimes, I have to quilt covers

over my bed to keep warm at night. It is very hard. Soon all this is

set to change because his employer, Bedford Council, is to introduce a

living wage. It will mean an extra ?40 a week, welcome news for Mike.

42 quid a week, that would be nice. Here in Bedford Borough there are

plans to introduce a living wage for all staff, more than 200 lower paid

council workers will receive ?7 65 and are instead of the minimum wage

of ?6 31. That means those on a minimum wage earning only ?12,000 a

year would receive a boost of ?14,000, with the introduction of

the living wage. The increase will help reduce the risk for working

people to supplement their wages with benefits. A lot of people on

minimum wage are getting working benefits, so when they go on to the

living wage, they get more money in their pockets from working. I think

that is very positive. Funding for the Council's 216 lowest paid staff

will be met through back office and efficiency savings. When we did the

sums in terms of what it would cost, we were pleasantly surprised that it

could be much larger and it seemed like the right thing to do. When you

look at the right `` the type of savings we are having to make, to

give people the correct weight they can live on. The council hopes firms

in Bedford will follow their lead. I think any businessman of any worth

wants to pay his staff a good weight `` a good wage for a quality of

life, and when many of the small businesses, in the retail sector

particularly, when you consider the number of hours dear putting in,

they are barely making minimum wage. A full`time job for a fair day's pay

will mean a good deal for Mike, and for him and others like him, the

April start date cannot come soon enough. Workers in Cambridgeshire

are not so lucky, though. Joining us now is the Conservative leader of

the County Council, Martin Curtis. It's not happening in Cambridge. Why

not? First we respect the fact that local government is what it is,

local, and different councils have to make decisions that are right for

them. For us implementing the living wage would cost 800 thousand pounds

a year, and if we did that well having to make ?38 million of

savings it would increase the number of redundancies. The fact that

figure is so large would seem to point out there are too many people

working for you who are not being paid enough. We are a big

organisation. A number of our employees are people working in the

catering sector or cleaning sector, where traditionally they have been

there were wage. Our drive as a County Council is to push forward on

our economy. That will mean reducing inflation, sorry, reducing

unemployment, and creating some of that demand for employment. We think

wages overall will increase in Cambridgeshire, including reducing

the number of people on minimum wage, so we would prefer to do what

we're trying to do, to raise overall standards and overall wages in the

county. FA council can't afford to pay a living wage, what hope is

there for other employers? There is hope, but other organisations are

not in that situation we are in. We have one of the biggest savings

targets across the country over the next 45 years, and so we're in a

situation where if we add another ?800,000 to the bill, it means less

jobs. We prefer to drive the economy forward. What is different now,

because the Conservatives are getting a better control on

immigration, we don't have immigration being used as a tool to

keep wages down which the Labour government did, so we will have less

people in Cambridge paid the minimum wage. We saw in the film how hard it

was poor people. Dave Hodgson can do it in Bedford, so why not in

Cambridge? I suspect the implications for Bedford are much

smaller than they are in Cambridgeshire, so that is one

issue. One thing that is important is what the Conservatives are doing

to drive up the minimum wage, putting representation to increase

the minimum wage. I think that is the right thing to do. Let's find

out how they are doing it in Bedford. There are just over 200

people who would be entitled to delivering wage, and we thought

76,000 was right. It depends how many people you have working for

you. I do having to make cuts elsewhere? There would be an irony

if you were making people redundant some work to give other people more

money. We are having to make people redundant, we have doubled in my

time on a much smaller council, but in terms of what they are delivering

for us and the commitment they are making to Bedford Borough, it is

important we recognise that. Overall this means a number of people would

be claiming other benefits. Iain Stewart, Labour authorities are

doing this as well, Ipswich, Harlow, Stevenage, Norwich, who are also

paying the living wage. Why don't more Tory authorities do the same,

because that could reduce the benefit Bill? Based on the

discussion now, each local authority is laid different situation. In my

own authority, Milton Keynes, the majority of employees are already

above the minimum wage, so each area has to decide for itself. From a

central government perspective, and this is what the coalition has

delivered, by raising virginal allowance by a significant amount of

money, you give the maximum benefit to people on the lowest wages. Those

figures have come up just this week and the Tories say there is more

take`home pay but people have now than previously, so perhaps you have

jumped the gun. The number of staff in Milton Keynes and above the

minimum wage, but we had a significant number of beanie that

living wage and that is important to recognise they need to be able to

afford to heat their homes. So you haven't jumped the gun because wages

are on the up anyway? No. The figures we saw released last week do

not take account of all things. There were figures until April 2013

giving things improving but a people have not seen an increase. George

Osborne says he is calling for a significant rise in the minimum

wage, and I quote, to "make sure that we have a recovery for all and

that work pays". So will you be pushing for a living wage in Milton

Keynes? The most important thing is with the minimum wage, set by the

low pay commission, to be set at a level where it is a sickly minimum

wage but not such a high level that it starts costing jobs. What

happened since 2008, the real terms value of the wage has slipped back.

Now the recovery is starting to take hold, I think it is appropriate to

look at an above inflation increase. I am sympathetic to that but if you

want to go above the minimum wage that has to be in addition for each

local area to take account of all the local circumstances. What might

be appropriate in Bedford may not be as appropriate in Cambridge. Martin

Curtis, are you persuaded by your cancer, a recovery for all?

Absolutely. Our big drive in Cambridge is about an economic

recovery and driving our economy forward `` Chancellor. Cambridge has

already played a major part in leading the country out of recession

and the city deal around the Cambridge area will benefit our

whole time `` or whole county. We know it will increase demand for

work and wages. Thank you for joining us.

Now, you might remember that last summer, after years of uncertainty,

the Remploy factory for disabled workers in Norwich closed for good.

The government said that it was an opportunity to support Remploy

factory employees into new work. Maria Veronese reports on whether

that dream of new jobs has come true. Harvey has been searching for

work since the factory closed in Norwich. He worked in the cardboard

packaging factory as a forklift driver. Of the 26 disabled

employees, who worked on the factory floor, only one has phoned part`time

cleaning work. Just six of the 24 ad men and sales that have both jobs. I

spent my day living in Chop windows for jobs, going online to find

jobs. I e`mail firms but no one seems to be interested. Like Harvey,

Susan is still jobless. She has autism and says employers aren't

interested in taking her on. I do to think when I worked there that I

would be there until I was retired, but when it was under threat in

2011, I could see it happen and now it has happened. My worst fears are

realised. They said they would get jobs for the disabled people. How we

got jobs? No. What of those promises? This is what the

government said in 2012. The important thing is for anyone

affected by this little here is to make sure the budget we are using to

support more disabled people is a chance to support more Remploy

employees into new work. I have heard that the money provided to

help support those workers into new jobs is in some cases being used to

pay contracting companies and organisations to provide them with

mentoring and skills support. It is not necessarily achieving anything

in terms of new work. The Gideon representing Remploy's former

employees believes money is the basis for the decision to close the

site. We think Remploy is valued at ?54 million. If you reported that

across factories have closed, it is in the significant money owned by

DWP. Anyone hiring just want to take on the best. What do you think your

chances are now? Unless there are employees `` employers who want to

give disabled people a fair chance, they could do worse than give us a

chance. We asked the Minister for Disabled

People, Mike Penning, to speak to us about the government scheme to find

former Remploy workers jobs. Unfortunately he wasn't available

but we have this statement from the Department for Work and Pensions.

The government was aiming for jobs for 70% of former Remploy workers.

The government was aiming for jobs for Even the best figure for Norwich

comes in at 14% which is nowhere near. The scheme is not working, is

it? If you look at figures nationally, that target has been

achieved. I understand the Norwich closure happened many `` later than

many others and the package of support runs for 18 months, so it is

premature to judge the success or failure of the scheme. One of the

very particle schemes that have been put in place is called Access to

work. If there is a small business that could take a disabled person on

and they would have to make some adjustments to the work station or

whatever it is, the small business would not have to meet the cost.

That would be taken by the government. Dave Hodgson, is it

realistic that these workers can get jobs in mainstream workplaces? We

heard in the film they don't feel they can compete. In Bedford we

don't have a Remploy factory. We want to get disabled people into

work and are working with disability groups to try to help some disabled

people get into employment, so we didn't have Remploy factories, and

in terms of individuals in Norwich, every individual who doesn't have a

job is a bad new story. We need to help them. They've effectively been

thrown on the scrap heap, haven't they? If you will forgive me, my

seat is not close to Norwich so I cannot comment on details there. We

did not have an Remploy factory in Milton Keynes but I can point to

some excellent organisations. There is a wonderful charity that takes on

people with disabilities and they get contracts with local employers

to make goods or various services and the people do that in a very

modern supported environment, so there is a lot of support there for

people with disabilities. Thank you. Eyes down for this week's political

round`up, when the MP for Harlow played caller for the bingo

industry. Here's Andrew Sinclair with 60Seconds.

In the south`east Cambridgeshire Conservative Association, the row

over the election won't go away. To members have not resigned. We have

ten to need to compound that by trying to justify the decision which

is not tenable. Harlow's Robert Halfon had do as Ingo calling but

he'd used Prime Minister's questions to raise another issue. Energy

companies are charging ?115 extra for people who don't pay by direct

debit. But the Environment Agency warned it may not be worth repairing

damaged sea defences. To reinstate those defences and then allow a

freshwater habitat to re`establish, or do we allow a hide that a tidal

habitat to re`establish? The new UK trade envoy, and they do look for

Bedford means at last be getting rid of their ugly town Hall.

Are you glad to see Bedford's town Hall go? Yes, we have a brand`new

publics or their and the new development. It is good news, and

the bus station is coming down on the same day. We understand much of

the material is being recycled. Yes, there has already been about ?100 of

stuff taken out to be recycled. Robert Halfon, apart from

campaigning to reduce bingo tax, is also, as we heard, pressing for

energy companies to stop penalising those who don't use direct debits.

It's not a fairer system at the moment. It has raised an important

issue. It is one thing for any company to offer people an incentive

to pave complaints or pay by direct debit. My gas company, if I pay my

bills straightaway I get a small discount from the next one. That is

fine but a good number of them seem to be levying severe penalties for

people who are not paying by direct debit and I think that is an

important issue we need to look into. We have to leave it there.

Iain Stewart and Dave Hodgson, thank you. That's all for now. You can

keep in touch via our website, where you will also find links to Deborah

McGurran's blog for all the latest political updates. We're back at the

same time political updates. We're back at the

constituency, very pleased. Andrew, back to you.

UKIP leader Nigel Farage is never far away from controversy, but this

week he's been outdoing himself He was hit over the head with a placard

by a protester in Kent, provoked outrage by saying women with

children are worth less to city firms, and said the ban on owning

handguns was 'crackers'. He also seemed less than sure of his party's

own policies when I interviewed him on the Daily Politics. And the story

that got everyone talking was the suggestion by a UKIP councillor that

flooding is linked to gay marriage. We'll talk about all of that in a

moment, but first, over to Nigel with the weather. Weather for all

areas of the British Isles but definitely not "Bongo Bongo Land."

You may have heard about a storm in a tea cup developed when you kip

councillor in Oxfordshire blamed the floods on the gay marriage Bill The

old party is focusing on the view of UKIP members like him, even though

he had said a sell yuj of things before when a Tory councillor. How

quickly things change depending on when the blouse. There are

occasional barmy views by people of all persuasions. In Whitby a Labour

councillor claimed of fathered a child with an extra terrorist ral,

and said his real mother was a foot green alien. And in Wales a

councillor thinking about heading off for the

slopes, there were flurries of embarrassment for the Tories after

Aidan Burly organised a Nazi skiing party in a resort.

Anyone heading to Brussels, perhaps on the gravy train, watch out for

hot air. In Britain temperatures are rising

ahead of the European elections in May. It could get stormy, so advise

light aircraft. Watch out for outbreaks of common sense, and no

chance of cyclonic fruit cakes. Back to you, Andrew, with the rest of the

Sunday Politics. Nick, if it was any other party that

had bon through the past week it would be in meltdown. And maybe it

is harming UKIP and maybe it isn't. What do you think? That just shows,

that great weather forecast, Prince Charles now has a rival to be an

excellent weather forecaster, as does the Duchess of Cornwall. It

shows why Nigel Farage is the fefr candidate to the European elections.

Our invitation to the British people to kick the establishment. The

establishment have spent five years that the European Parliament is a

waste of time, so who are you going to vote for? A Nigel Farage type of

person. What was important about your eadviceration of Nigel Farage

on Daily Politics is that when it came to the substance, they

flounder. But the point about that party is they may have the thinnest

set of policies, but people know what they stand for more than any

other parties - get out of Europe, a grammar school in every town. If any

other leading politician called for an end to the ban on handguns, at a

time when we've seen these appalling gun deaths in the United States now

almost one every week in some terrible siege in a school. It would

be a crisis. It seems to wash terrible siege in a school. It would

him. He's got congenital foot-and-mouthitis. Straight into

another wild nothing to do with why people might vote UKIP. I don't

think people are desperate to have handgun licences back in this

country. It is such an unusual phenomenon, UKIP, that if this was a

Tory or a Labour or a Lib Dem saying it, we've seen the damage done to

the Lib Dems on a much more serious manner, we would say this is

terminal. But maybe it adds to this image that we are not like the other

parties. I think that is it. We keep waiting for these scandals and

embarrassments to do damage to UKIP's poll ratings, but it's not

working. It is ultimately because if you are an antiestablishment party,

if you are an anti-system party the rules of the game which apply to the

establishment parties don't apply to you. And the more ramshackle and

embarrassing you are, the more authentic you seem. It what be take

something for them not to finish second in May. Do they spend the

following 12 months sinking in the poll snoos And George Osborne's

strategy is fame everything as Labour versus the Conservatives The

electorate will have their fun in May. Maybe the Tories will be beat

into third place but in thejection is that -- but in the general

election it is Labour versus the Tories. The Conservative Party will

run around, 46 letters to Graham Brady, a leadership contest. That

sort of scenario. UKIP, if it rules well in the European elections,

could cause big trouble for Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg couldn't it?

The big point about this, David Cameron said this is not a political

party but a pressure group. This is the way to look at UKIP, and the way

it is used by people in the right of the party, who say we have to do

this. I like the policy of painting the trains in their old liveries. It

would be like my old train set. I like the bigger passports.

Pre-GNER... And London and Midland. I used to be a train spotter.

Gordon Birtwhistle has been on the phone. Good to know you are watching

but pity you are not here. He wanted to clarify he had constituency

commitments to prevent him coming on the show to talk about becoming

leader of the party, but he didn't dispute anything we said on the

show. Yesterday, Ed Balls said that

housing investment will be a central priority for the next Labour

Government. It's a big issue, as the lack of new homes pushes up the the

price of owning or renting. Well, tomorrow the Tories will announce

what they say is the most ambitious programme of affordable

housebuilding for 20 years. The Government sees housing as a really

important part of the economy. That's why we are announcing a 23

billion package for 165,000 new affordable homes. So individual

builders, councils, housing associations can bid for that money.

Phase one, which we are halfway through at the moment, we've built

170,000 houses. 99,000 already coming out of the ground, so we ve

made real progress on that. So, 165,000 new, affordable homes. It is

a lot. Let me add three more words. Over three years. It is not such a

lot. It is not, and Labour's commitment is 200,000 homes a year

and even that isn't enough. The problem here is that the vest

interest is with people who already have homes. They have a vote in the

system through the planning regulations. In London there is a

gap in the hedge through Richmond Park through which you should be

able to see St Paul's Cathedral That's why you cannot build homes

able to see St Paul's Cathedral where you want them. I don't think

we want to build homes over Richmond Park. He wasn't saying that. That's

dies an Tyne -- that's Byzantine. You've got to deal with supply,

which is why Labour is talking about 200,000 a year, and what George

Osborne has done with supply is helping with demand. We know the

Help to Buy Scheme is pretty dangerous, and Mark Carney is keen

to put the break on that. If you are to deal with supply, you have to do

radical things. Chris Huhne talked about on brownfield sites you can

tax people who are holding the land as if the development has taken

place. Then if you are really going to deal with it you have to talk

about the greenfield sites, and you have to deal with the garden cities

argument, which is too much for the Tories. All the parties seem to

agree building new houses is a political winner. I hope that they

are right. I'm not sure they are. The housing market is the example of

what economists call the insider in-outsider problem. People who are

already homeowners have no rational incentive to vote for more housing

stock. Even if you leave aside the Conservative arable objections, if

you are a homeowner there is an interest to stick with the planning

promise that we have. So then we are stuck between a rock and a hard

place. Not only are we growing at the moment but our population is

growing. I've seen projects that in quite quickly we will overtake

Germany and become the largest populated country in Europe. If

that's the case we've got to build homes. We have. If you look at Tower

Hamlets in London, the population is r ging higher than the number of

dwelling. Classically the theory's been young people are most affected

by this and they don't vote much. But when their parents have young

Johnny stuck at home at 37, that's an electoral issue. That's why the

garden cities project is interesting, because they finance

themselves. You zone it for development, it is worth ?2 million

an acre and then you can build on it. But who is going to want the

greenfield sites gone. And how quickly can we build garden cities

today? Some were started before the Town and Country Planning Act. I've

read stats about the way Chinese and Japanese are building houses and

they were slower than that. Here's a thought, sticking on the housing

theme. Ed Miliband came up with the energy freeze, a populist

interventionist move. Then the use it or lose it to land developers.

Then breaking up the banks. Now the 50p tax rate. How much would you put

on Labour coming up for rent controls? That's already a big

split. They are split already on it. They have. In London it is a popular

policy. It might not play well in the rest of the country. I would say

50-50 on that. I think Labour supporting rent controls like the

Tories having a go at welfare. The policy may be individually popular

but it sends an impression about the party which might be less attract

active. It confirms underlying suspicions that vote these guys into

power and suddenly they are tampering with the private economy.

The memories of the '70s when Governments tried and failed to do

that. It is riskier than a superficial reading of the polls

would suggest. One to watch? I think they are looking at it. That was the

key message of the Ed Balls speech on housing, is looking at supply and

how you get to that 200,000 figure a year, which is substantially more

than what Kris Hopkins is talking about. What we didn't get to talk

about, remember we had Michael Wilshaw on, the Chief Inspector of

Schools. We all consumed was Mr Gove's man, the Education

Secretary's man. Now according to the Sunday Times he is spitting

blood about the way Mr Gove and his office are speaking about him behind

the scenes. We've checked the quotes and he stands by them, so I think

we'll have to have and he stands by them, so I think

Ofsted back on the programme. If you are watching, we're here. All that

to the Lib Dems who didn't come on today.

That's all for today. Thanks to all my guests. The Daily Politics is

back on Monday at midday on BBC Two, and I'll be here again next week.

Remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.

Britain, with 120,000 soldiers is now at war with Germany

This would be the first truly modern war.

and resolve of entire populations against each other.

A war that would turn the country upside down.