02/03/2014 Sunday Politics East


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 02/03/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Morning folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.


Fears that Ukraine could face invasion escalate this morning as


Russian forces take control of Crimea. President Obama and his


European allies tell President Putin to back off. It doesn't sound like


he's listening. Shadow Education Secretary Tristram


Hunt has started spelling out Labour's plans for schools. So


what's the verdict - full marks or must try harder? He joins us for the


Sunday Interview. And all the big political parties


are desperate to broaden their appeal. We'll look at some unusual


and people deal with benefit changes. And tightening household


finances. And with me, as always, three


journalists who'd make a clean sweep if they were handing out Oscars for


political punditry in LA tonight. But just like poor old Leonardo


DiCaprio they've never won so much as a Blue Peter badge! Yes, it's


Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh. Instead of acceptance


speeches they'll be tweeting faster than the tears roll down Gwyneth


Paltrow's face. Yes, that's as luvvie as we get on this show.


Events have been moving quickly in Ukraine this weekend. The interim


government in Kiev has put the Ukrainian military on full combat


alert after Russia's parliament rubber-stamped the deployment of


Russian troops anywhere in Ukraine. Russian troops seem already to be in


control of the mainly Russian troops seem already to be in


where Russia has a massive naval base. President Obama told President


Putin that Russia has flouted international law by sending in


Russian troops but the Kremlin is taking no notice. This is now


turning into the worst stand-off between Russia and the West since


the conflict between Georgia and Russia in 2008, though nobody


expects any kind of military response from the West. Foreign


Secretary William Hague is on his way to Kiev this morning to show his


support for the new government, though how long it will survive is


another matter. We can speak to our correspondent David Stern, he's in


Kiev. As things look from Kiev, can we


take it they've lost Crimea, it is now in all essence under Russian


control? Yes, well for the moment, Crimea is under Russian control


Russian troops in unmarked uniforms have moved throughout the peninsula


taking up various positions, also at the Ismis which links Ukraine into


Crimea. They've surrounded Ukrainon troops there. Three units have been


captured according to a top officials. We can say at the moment


Russia controls the peninsula. It should also be said, also they have


the support of the ethnic Russian population. The ethnic Russians make


up the majority of the population. They are also not entirely in


control because there are other groups, namely the Tatar as and the


ethnic Ukrainian speakers who are at least at the moment tacitly


resisting. We'll see what they'll start to do in the coming days.


David, I'm putting up some pictures showing Russian troops digging in on


the border between Crimea and Ukraine. I get the sense that is


just for show. There is, I would assume, no possibility that the


Ukrainians could attempt to retake Crimea by military force? It seems


that the Ukrainians are weighing their options right now. Their


options are very limited. Any head-to-head conflict with Russia


would probably work against the Ukrainians. They seem to be taking


more of a long-term gain. They are waiting for the figs's first move.


They are trying not to create any excuse that the Russians can stage


an even larger incursion into Crimea or elsewhere, for that matter. They


also seem to be trying to get international support. It should be


said, this is a new Government. It has only been installed this week.


They are trying to gain their footing. This is a major crisis


They have to count on the loyalty of the army they might have some


resistance from solders from the eastern part of the country who are


Russian speaking. They probably could count on Ukrainian speakers


and people from the centre and west of the country as well as regular


Ukrainians. A lot of people are ready to fight to defend Ukrainian


Terre Tory. Where does the Kremlin go next? They have Crimea to all


intents and purposes. There's a weak Government in Kiev. Do they move to


the eastern side of Ukraine which is largely Russian speaking and there's


already been some unrest there? That's the big question, that's what


everybody's really asking now. Where does this go from here? We've had


some unrest in the eastern part of the country. There have been


demonstrations and clashes. More ominously, there have been noises


from the Kremlin they might actually move into eastern Ukraine. Putin in


his conversation with Barack Obama said they might protect their


interests there. It should be said, if they do expand, in fact, they've


also said they are dead against the new Government seeing it as


illegitimate and fascist. It does contain risks. They will have to


deal with international reactions. America said there will be a deep


reaction to this and it will affect Russia's relations with Ukraine and


the international community. They have to deal with the reaction in


Ukraine. This may unite Ukrainians behind this new interim Government.


Once Russia moves in, they will be seen as an invading force. It plays


on historical feelings of Russia being an imperial force.


Joining me is MP Mark Field who sits on the security Security and


Intelligence Committee in the House of Commons. What should the western


response be to these events? I can understand why William Hague is


going to Kiev tomorrow to stand side by side whizz whoever's in charge.


They need to CEOP sit numbers and also President Putin. The truth is


we are all co significant fatries to the Budapest Memorandum of almost 20


years ago which was designed to maintain the integrity of the


Ukraine and Crimea. There needs to be a discussion along those lines.


The difficulty is President Putin has watched events in recent months,


in relation to Syria, it is palpable President Obama's focus of attention


ask the other side of the Pacific rather than the Atlantic. The vote


in the House of Commons, I was very much against the idea of military


action or providing weapons to the free Syrian army. My worry is,


events proved this, the majority of the other options toed as sad are


rather worse. It is clear now we are in a constitutional mess in this


country. We cannot even contemplate military action without a


parliamentary vote that moves against quick reaction that is


required from the executive or, I suspect, there will be very little


appetite for any military action from the West over in Ukraine. We


are corn tours under the agreement of less than 20 years ago. We may be


but we've guaranteed an agreement which it is clear we haven't the


power to enforce. You wrote this morning, Britain is a diminished


voice. Clams Iley navigating the Syrian conflict we relick wished


voice. Clams Iley navigating the decisions to the whims of


parliamentary approval. That may or may not be but the Kremlin's not


watching how we voted on the Syrian issue? In relation to Syria, it was


where is the western resolve here. The truth ask Putin's position is


considerably less strong. In diplomatic terms. He had a victory


in Syria in relation to chemical weapons and in relation to the


West's relationship with Iran. Putin is a vital inter locking figure In


demographic and economic terms, Russia's in very deep trouble. The


oil price started to fall to any degree, oil and gas price, given the


importance of mineral wealth and exports for the Russian economy


Putin would be in a lot of trouble. It requires an engagement from the


EU and the EU are intending to look at their internal economic problems


and will be smarting from the failure within a matter of hours of


the deal they tried to broker only nine days' ago.


You say if Mr Putin decides to increase the stakes and moves into


the east, takes over the whole place, our Government, you say, will


find itself with another colossal international headache. Some people


watching this will be thinking, what's it got to do with us? It s a


long way away from Britain. We haven't a dog in this fight? We have


in this regard for the longer term here. I think if there were to be


some military action in Ukraine the sense of Russia taking over, it


could have a major impact on the global economy in very quick order.


You should not deny that. There will be move to have sanctions against


Russia. The escalation of that will be difficult. The other fact is


looking at our internal affairs and reform, partners, the Baltic states,


Finland, Poland, the Czech Republic, they will be looking at a resurgent


Russia now and think they'll need to hold as tightly as possible to the


EU institutions and the power of Germany at the centre of that. This


whole appetite for the reforms politically and economically will be


closed very much within a matter of a short period of time. It has


longer term implications. Mark Field, thank you.


We're joined now by BBC News night's Diplomatic Editor Mark Urban. Is


there any prospect of a western military response? Clearly at the


moment, it is nil. The boat has sailed with the Crimean. It has been


per performed by Russian forces It is now a matter of coordinating a


plate cal line. European foreign ministers tomorrow. To say what will


our future limits be? Where could we possibly draw red lines? To try to


think a couple of steps down this, what happens if Russia interrupts


energy supplies to EU member states ornate owe countries? These are the


important steps they have to think about. It is quite clear we are in a


different world here now. Also, Ukraine is facing a urgent foreign


exchange crisis. Within literally a few weeks they could run out of


money. All of these are rushing towards decision makers very fast.


There is an interim and I suggestion unstable Government in Kiev. Crimea


semi-to be under Russian control. There are clashes between the


reformers and Russian nationals in the east of the country. What does


Mr Putin do next? He has lots of options, of course. He has this


carte blanch carte blanch from his Parliament to go in to the rest of


Ukraine if he wants to. His military deployment suggests the one bite at


a time, just Crimea to start with. See what response comes from the


Ukrainian Government. Of course See what response comes from the


far, there hasn't been a coherent response. The really worrying thing


about recent months, not just recent days, are the indications that the


future of Ukraine as a unitary state is now in doubt. Look at it from the


other side of the equation. The President when faced with


demonstrations, many extremists he was unable to deal with that. Now we


have the other side, if you like, the Russian speakers, the other side


of the fight, Russian nationalists showing they can get away with


unilateral action more or less with impunity. The Ukrainian chiefs have


been sacked. I think there are considerable questions now as to


whether Ukraine is falling apart and, if that happens, we're into a


Yugoslav-type situation which will continue posing very serious


questions for the EU and NATO for months or years to come. So, Janan,


Ukraine is over? Where the west to concede to the Russian in Crimea, it


would perversely be a net loss for Russia. You'd assume the rest of


Ukraine would become an un unambiguously a member of the the


EU, maybe NATO. On top of that a Russian dream of Eurasion dream


they will look at Putin's behaviour and is a, no, thanks, we'll head


towards the EU. It is a short-term victory for Putin which backfires on


his broader goals in Well, many people said if he grabs Crimea, he


loses Ukraine, which is your point. We have seen violent demonstrations


in the big eastern cities in Ukraine yesterday. People taking control of


certain buildings. The risk is there of spreading beyond Crimea. I think


the lack of any unified or visible response from Ukrainian armed


forces... They allowed Russian troops to walk into the bases in


Crimea. They have supposedly gone on red alert but they have done


absolutely nothing. We don't see them deploying from barracks. There


are serious questions about whether they would just fall apart. Putin is


not going to let them split away. I would have thought he would like the


entire Ukraine to come into the Russian ambit. Barack Obama is


saying this will not stand. He has a 90 minute conversation with Vladimir


Putin and what is his response? I am suspending my cooperation in the


run-up to the Sochi Summit. What is the EU doing? Nothing. There is


nothing they can do and Putin knows there are a series of lines that he


is able to cross and get away with it. Why should Berlin, London,


Washington be surprised by the strength of Vladimir Putin's


reaction? It was never going to let Ukraine just fall into the arms of


the EU. That is the interesting point. And who does he listen to?


Paddy Ashdown was saying sent Angela Merkel because she is the only


person who can talk to him and I find that response worrying. We need


to speak with a united voice but nobody knows what we should be


saying. Military intervention is out for the West so we go to economic


sanctions. Doesn't Vladimir Putin just say, oh, you want sanctions? I


have turned off the gas tap. Yes, it is move and countermove, and it is


difficult to predict where it will end up. In all these meetings that


are being held, they do think a step or two ahead and try and set out


clear lines. Thank you for coming in this morning.


Labour has been struggling since 2010 to decide exactly how to take


education secretary Michael Gove, one of the boldest reformers of the


coalition and most divisive figures. Ed Miliband appointed TV historian


Tristram Hunt and many thought Labour had found the man to teach


Michael Gove a lesson. But how much do we really know about the party's


plans for England's schools? Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are a


devolved matter. Child has been back to school to find out. A politician


once told me, do you know why education secretaries changed


schools? Because they can. Michael Gove might dispute the motive but he


is changing schools, like this one. The changes he is ringing in our


encouraging them to be academies, free from local authorities to


control their own budgets, ushering in free schools, focusing on


toughening exams and making them the core of the curriculum with less


coursework, and offering heads more discretion on tougher discipline.


And he is in a hurry to put all this in place. But has


And he is in a hurry to put all this chance for a Labour Government to


change it all themselves and do they really want to? Any questions?


Visiting a different school, first in line to get a crack at that


would-be Labour's third shadow education secretary since 2010,


Tristram Hunt. In post, he has not been taken about fine tuning


previous direct opposition to free schools and he has also suggested


teachers in England would have to be licensed under a Labour Government,


allowing the worst to be sacked and offering training and development to


others and of course ending coalition plans to allow unqualified


teachers into classrooms. Full policy detail is still unmarked


work. Your opinion about evolution? What is very clear is that Labour's


education policy is still evolving. We are learning that they have some


clear water, but we also seem, from the sting at the back, to get the


feeling that there is not a great deal of difference from them and the


current Government on types of schools and the way education should


proceed. -- from listening at the back. So what exactly is different


about their policy? What Tristram Hunt's job is to do is to be open


and honest about the shared agenda between us and the Tories. There are


a lot of areas where there is clear water between us and Tristram Hunt


as to turn his back, shared agenda, stop fighting it, and forge our


agenda, which I think people will be really interested in. The art of


Government, of course, is to balance competing pictures of policy, even


inside your own party. It is fair to say that if Labour reflects and


draws its own visions of a shared agenda, it might have to square that


idea with teaching unions, who are already unhappy with the pace and


tone of change that the Government had sketched out. What we sincerely


hope is that if Labour were to form the next Government, that they would


look at a serious review of accountability measures. That is


really what ways on teachers every single day. Actually they would look


at restoring the possibility, for example, of local councillors to be


able to open schools. That seems eminently sensible. If they are not


going to move back from the free schools and academies programme at


the very least they need to say that academy chains will be inspected


because at the moment they are not. Labour have balls in the air on


education and are still throwing around precise policy detail. There


are areas that they could grab hold of and seize possession. A focus on


the rounding of the people, developing character, the impact of


digitalisation on the classroom Also the role and handling of


teachers in the system and the interdependence of schools. That is


all still to play for. Currently I think the difference between the


parties is that the coalition policies, while we do not agree with


all of them, are clear and explicit, and Labour's policies are yet to be


formulated in a way that everybody can understand clearly. I don't


think that Tristram Hunt or Miliband will want to pick unnecessary fights


before the election. I think we will have quite a red, pinkish fuzziness


around the whole area of policy but after the election there will be


grey steel from Tristram Hunt. But if fuzzy policy before the election


is the lesson plan, it does rather risk interested voters being left in


the dark. Tristram Hunt joins me now for the


Sunday interview. Welcome. Thank you. Which of Michael


Gove's school reforms would you repeal? We are not interested in


throwing a change for the sake of it. When I go round schools,


teachers have been through very aggressive changes in the last three


years, so when it comes to some of the curriculum reforms we have seen,


we are not interested in changing those for the sake of it. Where we


are interested in making change is having a focus on technical and


vocational education, making sure that the forgotten 15% is properly


addressed in our education system. What we saw in your package was an


interesting description of how we have seen structural reforms in the


names of schools. Academies, free schools, all the rest of it.


International evidence is clear that it is the quality of leadership of


the headteachers and the quality of teaching in the classroom that


transforms the prospects of young people. Instead of tinkering around


the names of schools, we focus on teacher quality. Viewers will be


shocked to note that this Government approves of unqualified teachers in


the classroom. We want to have fully qualified, passionate, motivated


teachers in the classroom. It sounds like you might not repeal anything.


You might build on it and you might go in a different direction, with


more emphasis on technological education but no major repeal of the


reforms of Michael Gove? I don't think you want to waste energy on


undoing reforms. In certain situations they build on Labour


Party policy. We introduced the sponsored academy programmes and we


began the Teach First programmes, and we began the London challenge


which transformed the educational prospects of children in London We


want to roll that out across the country. You have said there will be


no more free schools, which Michael Gove introduced, but you will allow


parents let academies, which just means free schools by a different


name. No, because they will be in certain areas. We want to create new


schools with parents. What we have at the moment is a destructive and


market-driven approach to education. I was in Stroud on


Thursday and plans for a big new school, in an area with surplus


places, threatened to destroy the viability of local, rural schools.


We want schools to work together in a network of partnership and


challenge, rather than this destructive market-driven approach.


You say that, but your version of free schools, I think, would only be


allowed where there is a shortage of places. That means that where there


is an excess of bad schools, parents will have no choice. They still have


to send their kids to bad schools. And we have to transform bad schools


and that was always the Labour way in Government. At the moment we just


have an insertion of new schools. Schools currently underperforming


are now underperforming even more. Children only have one chance at


education. What about their time in school? Our focus is on the


leadership of the headteacher and having quality teachers in the


classroom. So they cannot set up new better schools and they have to go


to the bad schools. Tony Blair said it should be easier for parents to


set up new schools where they are dissatisfied with existing schools.


You are not saying that. Even where they are dissatisfied with existing


schools, they cannot set up free schools and you are reneging on


that. We live in difficult economic circumstances where we have got to


focus public finances on the areas of absolute need. We need 250,0 0


new school places. 150,000 in London alone. We have to focus on building


new schools and where we have to put them. And secondly... Absolutely


not. Focusing on those schools. Making sure we turned them around,


just as we did in Government. We have had a remarkable degree of


waste under the free school programme. If you think of the free


school in Derby, the Academy in Bradford, and as we saw in the


Telegraph on Friday, the free schools in Suffolk, a great deal of


waste of public money on underperforming free schools. That


is not the Labour way. We focus on making sure that kids in schools at


the moment get the best possible education. Except that in your own


backyard, in Stoke, only 34% of secondary school pupils attend a


good or outstanding school. 148 out of 150 of the worst performing local


authorities and it is Labour-controlled. Still terrible


schools and yet you say parents should not have the freedom to start


a better school. We have great schools in Stoke-on-Trent as well.


We face challenges, just as Wolverhampton does and the Isle of


Wight and Lincolnshire. Just like large parts of the country. What is


the solution to that? Making sure we share excellence among the existing


schools and making sure we have quality leadership in schools. Those


schools in Stoke-on-Trent are all academies. It is not a question only


of structure but of leadership. It is also a question of going back to


the responsibility of parents to make sure their kids are school


ready when they get to school. To make sure they are reading to their


children in the evening. We can t put it all on teachers. Parents have


responsibilities. I understand that but you have told me Labour's policy


would not be to set up new schools which parents hope will be better.


Parents continue to send their kids to bad schools in areas like Stoke.


Labour has had plenty of time to sort out these schools in Stoke and


they are still among the worst performing in the country. You are


condemning these parents to having to send their kids to bad schools.


Where we have seen the sett ing up of Derby, Suffolk, we have seen that


is not the simple solution. Is simply setting up a new is not a


successful model. What works is good leadership. I was in Birmingham on


Friday at a failing comprehensive is not a successful model. What works


is good leadership. I was in Birmingham on Friday at a failing


comprehensive school and now people are queueing round the block to get


into it. You can turn with the right leadership,


passionate and motivated teachers, and parents engaged with the


learning outcome of their kids. In the last few years of the Labour


Government, only four kids from your this Government would set up the new


school. In Birmingham, they got in a great headmaster and turned the


school around and now people are queueing round the block to get into


it. You can turnaround schools with the right leadership, passionate and


motivated teachers, and parents engaged with the learning outcome of


their kids. In the last few years of a Labour Government, only four kids


from your area of and you had plenty of chances to put this right but


only four got to the two and you had plenty of chances to put this right


but only four got to the two leading universities. Traditionally young


people could leave school at 16 and walking two jobs in the potteries,


the steel industry, the traditionally young people could


leave school at 16 and walking two jobs in the potteries, the steel


industry, the but also to get an apprenticeship at Jaguar Land


Rover, JCB, Rolls-Royce. That is why Ed Miliband's focus on the forgotten


15%, which we have just not seen from this Government, focusing on


technical and vocational pathways, is fundamental to Your headmaster


was guiles Slaughter. Was he a good teacher? He He never taught me.


Over 90% of teeners in the private sector are qualified. They look for


not simply teachers with qualified teacher status. Teachers with MAs.


Teachers who are improving them cephalitis. Becoming better


educators. cephalitis. Becoming better


teaching. You were taught by unqualified teachers. Your parents


paid over ?15,000 a year for you being taught by unqualified


teachers. Why did you make such a big deal of it? Because we've seen


right around the world those education systems which focus on


having the most qualified teachers perform the best. It cannot be right


that anyone can simply turn up, as at the moment, have schools at


veritising for unqualified teachers teaching in the classroom. We want


the best qualified teachers with the deepest subject knowledge, for the


passion in learning for their kids. It is absurd we are having arguments


about this. Simply having a paper qualification doesn't make you a


great teacher. Let me take you to Brighton college. It is gone from


the 147th to the 18 18th best private school in the land. Fllt the


headmaster says: This is the top Sundaytimes school


of the year. The school in derby where this Government allowed


unqualified teaching assist taints. We had teachers who could barely


speak English. That is because if We had teachers who could barely


you have unqualified teachers you end up with a dangerous situation.


The problem with that school was not unqualified teachers. People were


running that school who were unfit to run a school. We have an issue


about discipline and behaviour management in some of our schools.


Some of the skills teachers gain through qualifications and learning


is how to manage classes and get the best out of kids at every stage It


doesn't end with a qualified teacher status. That's just the beginning.


We want our teachers to have continue it will development. It is


not good enough to have your initial teacher trainingaged work through


your career for 30 years. You need continual learning. Learning how to


deal with digital technology. Refresh your subject knowledge. As


deal with digital technology. an historian I help teachers. You've


taught as an unqualified teacher. Not in charge of a subject group. I


give the odd lecture. I'm-y to go to as many schools as possible. I don't


blame you. It is uplifting. Would you sack all unqualified teachers?


We'd want them all to gain teacher status. What if they say no? If they


are not interested in improving skills and deepening their knowledge


they should not be in the classroom. If a free school or academy hired a


teach thinking they are a great teacher but unqualified, if they are


then forced by you to fire them they will be in breach of the law.


They are being urged by us to make sure they have


They are being urged by us to make status. We've lots of unqualified


teachers as long as they are on the pathway to making sure they are


qualified. But if they say they don't want to do this, will you fire


them? It is not an unreasonable suggestion is that the teachers in


charge of our young people have qualifications to teach and inspire


our young people particularly when we face global competition from


Shanghai, Korea and so on. The head teacher of Brighton college finds


incredibly inspeechational teachers who don't' necessarily have a


teaching qualifications. It is a different skill to teach ten young


nice boys and girls in Brighton to teaches 20 or 30 quids with


challenging circumstances, special educational needs, different


ability. Being a teacher at Brighton college is an easy gig in comparison


to other schools. Where we want teachers to have a capacity to teach


properly. Do you think Tristram could ever lead the Labour Party? I


think Ed is a great leader, the reforms yesterday were a real sign


for his leadership. And the fact David Owen, the man with a


pre-history with our party is back with us. It is great. Even Gideon


had to change his name to George. Have you thought of switching to


Tommy or Tony? Maybe not Tony! Michael Foot was called Dingle Foot.


I love the Labour because it accepts everybody from me to Len McCluskey.


We are a big, broad happy family on our way to Government. Thank you


very much. You're watching The Sunday Politics.


We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us for Sunday


politics Scotland. In over 20 minutes I'll


Well come to that part of the programme with us here in the East.


Relatives of those scorned hn the First World War for refusing to take


up arms commemorate their loved ones. They were fighting for what


they believed was right. UKIP's leader addresses the party


faithful at its spring confdrence and we speak to are NCP abott the


party's fortunes in the East. Guess which politician won `


crackerjack pencil decades `go. First let's meet our guests. Keith


Simpson, chairman of the World War I commemoration committee. Kelvin


Hopkins from Labour. More from them later. I want to start with those


shocking events in the North Sea. Two men thought to have been


deported jumped off a ferry. A huge rescue effort was launched but is


now one has been found. This was a desperate act. If it was thd act of


illegal deportees is there `n issue over security? We do not know if it


is a desperate act. There are some questions about what really


happened. We do not know thd details of what they were expecting to get


at the other end. I cannot genuinely believe that somebody is so


desperate that they are going to do this kind of thing.


Can you believe that somebody could be so desperate to do that? Indeed.


I have a large minority comlunity in my constituency and immigration is


part of my postbag. I have come across people who are fearftl of


being deported, often two countries that are not so liberal as Britain.


Is your Government creating an atmosphere around immigration that


is perhaps making people take things into their own hands? Kelvin Hopkins


is right that there are certain countries you could be deported to.


But getting the Harwich Ferry is not taking you to one of them. Hf you


were going to some of the more desperate parts of Africa or Asia.


Public opinion is on our side. Labour did hugely under esthmate the


numbers of people that are going to come here from the EU. Has that in


part treated the problem? Yds, I suspect that many of the deportees


are not going to the Europe`n Union. They did under estimated massively.


I raised it at the time. I still think there is a problem with free


movement within the European Union. But the people I am talking about


are going to countries that are far less safe than anything in Durope.


Immigration has been just one of their talking points at the UKIP


spring gathering. It seems the party cannot stop winning seats in this


region. It plays a major role in our local Government. A survey last year


showed UKIP supports your at 21 , the highest in the country.


According to research of thd council by`elections that had taken place


since last summer the Tory vote is down by 6.5%, the Lib Dem voters


down by 6%, Labour is down by 4 , UKIP is up by 17%. Nevertheless the


party has come up for criticism about whether it has any policies.


Yes, says the party leader Nigel Farage, despite calling his own 2010


manifesto drivel. Now, says the man who wrote it, former UKIP NDP for


the East later defected to the Conservatives.


These people are not fit for Government. They are not a serious


political party. Nigel Farage is not interested in


all says. He would rather h`ve a blank aid of paper. They will not be


a European manifesto. You fhnd out what they believe in after the


election which is no way for a serious was a coal party to act You


have to believe in policies to be a proper political party. UKIP have


been found wanting. I am joined by a UKIP NEP for the


East, Stewart Agnew. You are not fit for Governmdnt. You


need policies to be credibld. We are keeping things close to our chest


until the campaign for the general election because we do not want our


policy is stolen. However where we can have policies on other subject


which the EU Government, our agricultural policy is now coming


out. I have an influential hn that. I am sure almost people in the East


who are showing their support for UKIP would like to know abott your


policies. Let us start locally. Council tax. Are you going to freeze


council tax? That is the aspiration, but that policy as yet


has not come out properly. @s I said at the beginning we are keeping our


cards close to our chest. This is not a general election that is


coming up. It is a European Parliament election. Our policy on


council tax is not relevant to that election.


How can people vote for you if they do not know what they are voting


for? And council tax is verx close to people 's hearts. What are you


going to do about local services? On both of these subjects, these are


questions for the general election. We are not launching our general


election manifesto 18 months before the election. We are facing a


European Parliament election. We have got local elections coling up.


Are you not concerned about those? Surely you want this opporttnity to


tell everyone what your polhcies are? I have not got our loc`l


manifesto in front of me as I speak. But you can see that where we have


managed to form a group in the Norfolk County Council that we have


managed to break the committee system there. That is something we


want to do. We have managed to achieve it. Why do you think you


have so much support in this region? The number`1 reason is that


we are the of emigration from Eastern Europe. Are you not just a


protest vote? People accuse us of being a protest party. But the


polling we have done suggests that 60% of those who vote for us for


four hours because of the policies that they have read, rather than


just as a protest. But you `re not telling us about your poliches. I am


not want to talk about the general election Wallasey. We are holding us


back. We do not want our policy is stolen. We are very concerndd about


that happening. We want to produce a general election manifesto that is


short and to the point. We want a chance and the opportunity to


discuss those over the next few months. We are not talking `bout


that at the moment. Do you think that it is your stance on


immigration that is winning support? Yes. There are three or four main


platforms. Immigration is now the number one in most people 's minds.


That is the number one issud in this country. There is also the cost 53


million homes every single day. Then there is the problem of democracy.


Our laws are made by people that we do not collect. Then there hs the


big worry of the EU energy policy putting up all our electrichty


bills. Those are the things that we are fighting the selection on.


3.5 million jobs. That is what the Government says is linked to EU


membership. That has to be ` good thing. It is total nonsense. I would


like to see it more stronglx. It is nonsense. But we were to le`ve the


European Union we have 63 mhllion relatively affluent customers goods


produced in the European Unhon. We are in the driving seat. We buy far


more from them we sell to them. They need our custom. We are not going to


see a trade war. This idea of 3 5 million jobs is nonsense.


Thank you for joining us. What do you make of that? It was


very revealing that Stewart Agnew did not want to produce any form of


manifesto. More seriously, what Kelvin Hopkins and I have to take


into account that in the last couple of years there has been a rhse in


support of UKIP. That is for lots of reasons. It is not only thehr core


policy of emigration. I suspect as well it is none of the abovd.


Labour, Liberal Democrats, Conservatives, are dissatisfied


Your share of the voters down by 6.5% Mr Mac are you worried? Yes.


UKIP is a party to the right of the Conservative Party, so miles away


from Labour. They are very anti`socialist. They are on the


free`market right wing of politics. Labour voters have no interdst in


voting for a party of that kind In Britain we have a big Labour


majority. `` in Luton. Figures show there was an increase


in net immigration of one third UKIP says you cannot control your


borders and less you are out of the EU.


Government has reduced emigration. A lot of the EU emigration has been


because of the accession of Romania and Bulgaria. The irony is that


because the UK economy has started to pick up freedom of movemdnt of


workers, they are here. Stewart Agnew is a farmer. It does seem to


me that the NFU are saying that they are happy to employ lots of foreign


workers. He cannot have it both ways. Kelvin Hopkins, you are a


Eurosceptic. He said Ed Milhband was unwise to call people barking for


wanting to leave the EU. Yot are on the side of UKIP. I am a socialist


of the left. 40 years ago L`bour was the Eurosceptic party. It w`s Edward


Heath got us into the Europdan Union. I want a democratic socialist


Europe, not one built on frde`market capitalist principles.


This year marks the centenary of the outbreak of the First World War But


it was not only those who fought and died who suffered. We found the


grandchildren of a prominent Quaker who spent over two years behind bars


for his beliefs and was branded a coward.


I call to arms in 1914. Thotsands of men enlisted in a wave of p`triotic


fervour, but not all voluntdered to fight.


A respected member of the Qtakers was a pacifist. They joined the


friends and owns unit is a ledical orderly serving in France in 19 6.


He served the country in th`t sense. At the end of the war he was given a


couple of medals. His familx have been researching the story `nd


discovered from letters to the grandmother that he was worried


about the military nature of the adults unit. `` of the ambulance


unit. Had I known how things are I would not have joined. He w`s one of


16,000 men who refuse to fight wins conscription was introduced in 916.


He had left the ambulance unit. He was tried by local tribunal and


jailed three times as a conscientious objector. He spent two


and a half years in prison. My grandmother always said that the


years he spent in prison aided his early death. I know that shd was


sent a white feather, as a lot of people were. Some prison sentences


for conscientious objectors were harsh. They were given work to do


which had no point or value. At that time the idea that you were not a


real man and miss you fought for your country was a hard one to stand


against. The moral stand must have won him


some support. After the war he was elected Labour councillors here at


City Hall. In 1946 he becamd Sheriff of Norwich. His whole life was spent


in endeavours to help other people. That shows the character of the man.


His purpose was never selfish. He was always doing what he cotld for


others. He died in 1949 following a stroke,


aged just 60. I can remember him as a very gentle kindly man. Mx


grandmother was much more stern My grandfather did lots of things with


us when we were there. I am very proud of him. I was like to be able


to see that I am the ground. Of that gentleman. He was a man who had


principles. I admire him for sticking by his principles. Anybody


who went through the war, whether on the front, or as conscientious


objectors, on both sides of the story they both suffered. Pdople


like him and the 16,000 othdrs at conscientious objectors werd not


coward 's. What they did to a great deal of courage.


Kelvin Hopkins, should therd be more recognition of the sacrificd made by


conscientious objectors? I think they are recognised. People


understand. War is a pond to millions of us. It is an appalling


thing to do. Some awards had to be fought. I understand those who feel


that killing other human behngs is absolutely immoral and something


that should not do. I understand and I sympathise. The fact that there


are people like pacifists, like Quakers, who see all killing is


wrong, is something to make us all think.


Should conscientious objectors the commemorative? They will be. The


Government has said that under a programme of commemoration let 000


flowers bloom. There will bd all kinds of organisations. We will look


at different aspects. Those who were conscientious objectors werd part of


our national story. They re`lly were a tiny minority. The right to


conscientious objection is still not guaranteed in Europe is it? Each


country is different. In Brhtain most of our military servicd has


been voluntarily. We did not have conscription until 1916. It is the


credit of Parliament that the amended the military servicd act to


enable their to be conscientious objection. Most countries now within


NATO have a very strong and easy way of opting out of what you and I


would call National service or conscription. Kelvin Hopkins, is


there a danger of celebrating war rather than commemorating? Hndeed.


My knowledge of this First World War, I just think of the horror of


the trenches. My wife's Rand father died on the Somme. `` the


grandfather of my wife. I rdmember as a child many elderly wom`n who


were the wives and girlfriends of those who died in the First World


War. It was a horror not to be repeated. And yet we still


celebrated today. I think wd must remember the people that night and


salute them for their bravery and what they went through. `` the


people that died. What do you see as the key `im of


this year's emanations? The key aim is to remember why we went to war,


in particular in terms of young people, thinking about how original


conflict can burst into a world war. Even as we are speaking there is a


crisis in the Ukraine. Secondly to commemorate the changes that took


place. It was world. Thirdlx to commemorate the participation of all


our ancestors. Not just the men who became soldiers or those who were


conscientious and sectors, but hundreds of thousands of wolen were


directly affected. It is not a celebration. It is a commemoration.


I hope that young people will look at the evidence and come to their


own conclusions. What do you hope young people will


take from it? I hope that they will see that human beings must not do


these things in future. We lust work for a world that is peaceful. That


means equality, social justhce, so that context do not arise.


It is time for our 62nd round up of the week.


There are no crackerjack pencils for guessing who made an appear`nce on


the TV show many years before he got used to playing the game of politics


in the House of Commons. Ipswich MP Ben Gummer proposed in


the House this week that National Insurance should be renamed the


Earnings Tax. It walks like a tax. We should call it a tax.


Peter Bone 's says that he `nd his wife are innocent of allegations of


fraud relating to the care of his mother`in`law.


Staff working for the policd in Sapphic protested over proposals to


close the control room as plans to merge operations. Both Suffolk and


Norfolk's finances will be dire The Dean committed the Speaker on


his new post. I congratulatd you on your new role.


John Bercow might have hoped that this footage of him losing on


crackerjack had remained N the archive.


Your prize is a crackerjack pencils. I wondered if he still has that


pencil. Have either of you got archive footage waiting in the


wings? I dread to think. I do have. I did the last ever after d`rk on


Channel four with Oliver Redd. You can watch it on YouTube. I have


never forgotten it. Let us go back to that police story.


Norfolk and Suffolk to mergd control rooms. Both need to save money. What


is your take on it? Provided that operational aspects are not diluted


it will make sense. We do that with the district councils. A lot of the


back of this stuff is done. I know that there are objections. Somebody


said they would be a lack of local knowledge. In Norfolk at thd moment


if you see you are falling from a certain place, there is somdwhere


else that sounds very simil`r. The Police and Crime Commissioner 's


are not in agreement over it. That is interesting. One concern I have


is that the jobs are being lost We live in a period of high and


implement. I used to work for Unison and now go. I am concerned for them.


The most important point is to preserve local is in policing slugs


so that we have local contacts. so that we have local contacts.


Government to change it. Thank you both for being here. Andrew, back to


you. This week grant Shap said he wanted


to rebrand the Tories as the workers' party to show it can reach


out to blue-collar workers. One Conservative Party MP said they


should scrap what he said was their boring old logo. We asked him and


two other independent MPs how they'd freshen up their logos.


Aspiration's always been our core value. About helping people get on


with life. Giving people ladders of opportunity. That's why our symbol


must reflect our values of aspiration and why I'm calling for


our symbol to be changed from a tree to a ladder which symbolises social


mobility and stands up for everything conservatism represents.


I like an he will fanned, an animal that never forgets. We're the only


party which seems to remember what life was like before the NHS and


minimum wage and the global financial crash was caused by too


little regulation not too much. We have a leader who can spot the


elephant in the room, the lack of women on the Tory frontbench. The


republicans in America have had the same idea. Theirs is a suspicious


blue. Our would be deepest red. We love our Liberal Democrat bird. Mrs


Thatcher called it the dead parrot when we launched it. We won the


Eastbourne by-election off the Tories very soon aftered with.


Perhaps it feels like we're in a coalition cage but we're escaping


that soon. Why does it fly to the right? Most Liberal Democrats would


want it to fly to the left. I hope it will soon.


Interesting there. Let's stick with the Robert Hall pin one. He was


being serious. The others were fun. It is interesting that talking about


appealing to the blue collared vote, the upper working class, lower


middle class, curiously now neither Mr Cameron nor Mr Miliband has great


cut through with these people. But in wanting to be the Workers Party,


how do you square that with choosing five old Etonians to draw up four


next manifesto. Labour said one of the things was cutting inheritance


tax, after all their priorities they went to privilege rather than earned


income. Rebranding is not enough. The one question the modernisers


never asked themselves when they took party ten years ago is the


thing we know as the Conservative Party, salvageable as a brand? I'm


beginning to think it isn't. If you look at all public opinion research,


there are lots of people in this contrary with Conservative views.


They won't vote Tory or contemplate the possibility of voting Tory. Can


we get over the electoral problems by relaunching as a different


pro-business, pro-worker party. That means new name, new logo. It will


mean new people as well. If you say you're on the sides of what Thatcher


called the strivers, the people themselves want to see you have


strivers in the people who run themselves want to see you have


party so you know what we've been through, the struggles we've had.


How many of the six drawing up the manifesto have had ever a mortgage.


The one who's not an old Etonian went to St Paul's. He's a day


schoolboy! It is interesting and it was funny you mentioned an elephant.


Don't think of an elephant as the title of that book. Calling it the


Workers Party draws attention to the Tories biggest electoral weakness.


The idea they are a class apart Out of touch. I think it is interesting,


they have identified their elections are won or lost by this particular


demo graphic of the C 1, and C . Mrs Thatcher got them by the shed


load, Tony Blair got them. His failure in 2010 is the reason David


Cameron didn't win an overall majority. I'm disappointed with the


ladder. You should have a hammer or sickle! The Conservatives have a


terrible brand problem. You heard them explaining why they did badly


in the Wythenshawe by-election, saying there's quite a large council


estate there In 1961, I think the Conservatives won a by-election back


then, they were getting through to those sort of voters. There is not a


single Conservative councillor in Manchester. They have this terrible


problem. You're right for them to pick up on the five Etonians writing


their manifesto. David Cameron sir rounding himself with his own. He


doesn't have to do that. I seas things like isn't Robert Halpen


great. He decides and has his own. He has some more slightly common


people from St Paul's! One of the ways the Conservatives hoped to


broaden their appeal is the tougher line on immigration. We learned net


immigration is rising substantially. Back up over 200,000. Nigel Farage


of UKIP wrapped up the rhetoric In scores of our cities and market


towns, this country, in a short space of time, has become N'Zonzi


rkable whether it is -- unrecognisable. Whether it is the


impact on local schools and hospitals. In many parts of England


you don't hospitals. In many parts of England


is not the kind of the community we want to leave to our children and


grandchildren. Helen, maybe people, I assume, will love the sentiments.


Others will say, this is getting... It is going down a dangerous road.


Nigel Farage's wife is German and he shares a flat with Godfully Bloom,


nobody knows what he's saying half of the time. You can handle the


letters from Yorkshire. Alex Salmond does not make his case on Scotland


for the Scottish. Let's put aside whether the policy's right or wrong.


How bad, by the Tories own lights, is the fact the net figure for


immigration went up 60,000? It looks really bad. If I was a Tory


strategist, I'd be philosophical about it. Immigration, even if they


were meeting the target, I don't think the public would believe it.


It is like crime a few years ago, the crime rates had been declining


for the best part of 20 years but the fear of crime remains high.


There's such a degree of cynicism that regardless of your


administrative record in Government, the public will remain hostile to


you. This is where Nigel Farage can be potent. He said it is not about


numbers. It is about community. It is about people seeing their


communities change. And in the Sunday Telegraph, it was said this


isn't a dog whistle, a it is a meaty bone for a bull terrier. The problem


for the Government on these figures is we know why the net migration


figures are not looking good. They got down the non-EU figures but the


EU figures are going up. From Italy and Spain as their economies tanked,


people came here. If he hadn't made such a big deal of the numbers, the


Tories, I mean, you could present this as a huge success story. If you


believe immigration was good for the country. You would say it doesn t


matter what Labour says, the best and the brightest young people from


all over Europe are voting with their feet to come to Britain. But


you never hear that case being made and certainly not by Labour. They


acknowledge although immigration is best in the abstract for the


economy, people don't feel it best in the abstract for the


their daily lives. There's a huge vacuum for the case where


immigration should be in our public life. I remember a time when the


economy was in such decline there was a rush to the door in the


sixties and seventies. Now we are claiming our economy's doing better


than any of the other major economies bar Germany, people want


to join in our success. London was a declining city until the


mid-eighties. Theresa May cannot be honest. She was proposing a cap on


immigration. Not going to happen. Today she is saying maybe people


from poorer member states cannot come in until their economies grow.


That's future accession states. That's Turkey in ten years' time It


is causing divisions with the coalition. She's bashing Vince


Cable. You often see Liberal Democrats bashing the Tories. You


don't often see a Tory minister bash Vince Cable. She does on the


immigration figures. He thought they were good news. Last week, Vince


responded to the news by saying it was a policy he was happy for the


gift to flunk. The problem was going for a cap. There are six moving


parts. UK citizens leaving, coming back. EU citizens leaving and coming


back and then third party nationals. And students coming to study. Of


course. You only have control over the EU citizens. Have you to clamp


down on ace strayian, Chinese or American graduates. They should have


gone for the Australian points system. I don't have a pure cap on


numbers just background etc. Tim Farran said in the European election


either vogue Liberal Democrat or UKIP. He turned that to his


advantage. It is hopeful but he s come up with a way to spin this


Labour has his special conference. Was it or was it not an event? Not


sure it was the biggest moment in the party since 1918. But things


fell apart in the special conference in 1981. 2004 got another special


conference. Who's on board? David Owen who founded the gang of four.


He's not joined but he's given them money. He's not going to sit with


them in the Lord's. He's given money. They lost the gang of four.


Back comes David Owen. Not historic? Why would he want it to be more


significant than it was. There's a tendency to see him taking the fight


to his party. Why would he want that? The fact it has not pleased


Grant Shapps is not a test to see whether this has worked. It has been


described as an historic moment and incremental of what John did. The


trade union block voters disappeared a long time ago. They still have 50%


of the vote. But 2,000 of union members voting for this guy has


gone. It is a reform from 20 years ago. Welcome but not historic. Ed


Miliband's stored up trouble. Len McCluskey wants a million new homes


and answered to the benefit caps is not reconcilable with the deficit


reduction strategy. In five years' time if there is a Labour Government


it becomes very difficult. We should keep an eye on it? Always. Labour


Party process is never ending. Unlike this programme. That's all


from us today. Continuing reports of events in the Ukraine on the BBC


News Channel. There's no Daily Politics tomorrow because of cover


Arg of the Nelson Mandela memorial service at Westminster Abbey on BBC


Two live. We'll be back on the Daily Politics on Tuesday at midday.


Two live. We'll be back on the Daily be back here next week with the Work


and Pensions Secretary, Ian Smith. If it is Sunday, it is the Sunday




Download Subtitles