09/03/2014

:00:36. > :00:42.Morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.

:00:43. > :00:45.He's a man on a mission. But is it mission impossible? Iain Duncan

:00:46. > :00:49.Smith has started the radical reform of our welfare state. No tall order.

:00:50. > :00:54.And not everything's going to plan. We'll be talking to the man himself.

:00:55. > :00:57.Nick Clegg's hosting his party's spring conference in York. He's

:00:58. > :01:01.getting pretty cosy with the party faithful. Not so cosy, though, with

:01:02. > :01:05.his Coalition partners. In fact things are getting a wee bit nasty.

:01:06. > :01:09.We'll be talking to his right-hand man, Danny Alexander.

:01:10. > :01:12.And are all politicians self-obsessed? Don't all shout at

:01:13. > :01:18.once. We'll be Here in the East,the governlent s

:01:19. > :01:21.final warning to the federation running schools and colleges in

:01:22. > :01:22.Bedfordshire. And the rural communities paying for flood

:01:23. > :01:26.defences from their own pockets In London, we're focusing on the

:01:27. > :01:29.biggest social housing landlords. Can Southwark Council really build

:01:30. > :01:34.11,000 new homes in the next three decades?

:01:35. > :01:40.And with me, as always, three of the best and the brightest political

:01:41. > :01:43.panel in the business. At least that's what it says in the Sunday

:01:44. > :01:48.Politics template. Back from the Oscars empty handed, Helen Lewis,

:01:49. > :01:51.Janan Ganesh and Iain Martin. Yes, three camera-shy hacks, who've never

:01:52. > :01:55.taken a selfie in their life. We'll be coming to that later. They just

:01:56. > :01:56.like to tweet. And they'll be doing so throughout the programme.

:01:57. > :02:02.Welcome. Now, first this morning, the Liberal

:02:03. > :02:05.Democrat Spring Conference in York. I know you speak of nothing else!

:02:06. > :02:10.The Yorkshire spring sunshine hasn't made the Lib Dems think any more

:02:11. > :02:13.kindly of their Coalition partners. Indeed, Tory bashing is now the Lib

:02:14. > :02:19.Dem default position. Here's Danny Alexander speaking yesterday.

:02:20. > :02:20.Repairing the economy on its own isn't enough. We have to do it

:02:21. > :02:30.fairly. isn't enough. We have to do it

:02:31. > :02:35.the agenda a decision to cut taxes, income taxes, for working people.

:02:36. > :02:40.Now, conference, note that word - forced. We have had to fight for

:02:41. > :02:44.this at the last election and at every budget and at every Autumn

:02:45. > :02:52.Statement since 2010 and what a fight it has been.

:02:53. > :02:58.Danny Alexander joins us now. Are we going to have to suffer 14 months of

:02:59. > :03:02.you and your colleagues desperately trying to distance yourself from the

:03:03. > :03:08.Tories? It's not about distancing ourselves. It's about saying, " this

:03:09. > :03:14.is what we as a party have achieved in government together with the

:03:15. > :03:18.Conservatives". And saying, " this is what our agenda is for the

:03:19. > :03:24.future" . It's not just about the fact that this April we reach that

:03:25. > :03:25.?10,000 income tax allowance that we promised in our manifesto in 20 0

:03:26. > :03:31.promised in our manifesto in 2010 but also that we want to go further

:03:32. > :03:37.in the next parliament and live that to ?12,500, getting that over a

:03:38. > :03:40.2-term Liberal Democrat government. It's very important for all parties

:03:41. > :03:44.to set out their own agenda, ideas and vision for the future, whilst

:03:45. > :03:49.also celebrating what we're achieving jointly in this Coalition,

:03:50. > :03:54.particularly around the fact that we are, having taken very difficult

:03:55. > :03:58.decisions, seeing the economy improving and seeing jobs creation

:03:59. > :04:01.in this country, which is something I'm personally very proud and, as

:04:02. > :04:04.the Coalition, we have achieved and wouldn't have if it hadn't been for

:04:05. > :04:08.the decisions of the Liberal Democrats. Lets try and move on.

:04:09. > :04:12.Democrats. Lets try and move on You've made that point about 50

:04:13. > :04:15.times on this show alone. You now seem more interested in Rowling with

:04:16. > :04:23.each other than running the country, don't you? -- rowing with each

:04:24. > :04:28.other. I think we are making sure we take the decisions, particularly

:04:29. > :04:32.about getting our economy on the right track. Of course, there are

:04:33. > :04:37.lots of things where the Conservatives have one view of the

:04:38. > :04:41.future and we have a different view and it's quite proper that we should

:04:42. > :04:43.set those things out. There are big differences between the Liberal

:04:44. > :04:46.Democrats and the Conservatives, just as there were big differences

:04:47. > :04:50.between the Liberal Democrats and the Labour Party. I believe we're

:04:51. > :04:54.the only party that can marry that commitment delivering a strong

:04:55. > :04:57.economy, which Labour can't do, and that commitment to delivering a

:04:58. > :05:01.fairer society, which the Tories can't be trusted to do by

:05:02. > :05:04.themselves. You are going out of your way to pick fights with the

:05:05. > :05:09.Tories at the moment. It's a bit like American wrestling. It is all

:05:10. > :05:12.show. Nobody is really getting hurt. I've been compared to many things

:05:13. > :05:18.but an American wrestler is a first! I don't see it like that It

:05:19. > :05:21.first! I don't see it like that. It is right for us as a party to set

:05:22. > :05:25.out what we've achieved and show people that what we promised on 2010

:05:26. > :05:31.on income tax cuts is what this government is delivering. But nobody

:05:32. > :05:35.seems convinced by these manufactured rows with the Tories.

:05:36. > :05:39.You've just come last in a council by-election with 56 votes. You were

:05:40. > :05:51.even bitten by an Elvis impersonator! Yes, that is true --

:05:52. > :05:54.beaten. I could equally well quote council by-elections that we've won

:05:55. > :06:00.recently, beating Conservatives, the Labour Party and UKIP. Our record on

:06:01. > :06:05.that is pretty good. You can always pick one that shows one or other

:06:06. > :06:08.party in a poor light. Our party is having real traction with the

:06:09. > :06:12.electric and the places where we have a real chance of winning. If

:06:13. > :06:17.you're not an American wrestler maybe you should be an Elvis

:06:18. > :06:23.impersonator! You told your spring forum... You don't want to hear me

:06:24. > :06:27.sing! You want to raise the personal allowance to ?12,500 in the next

:06:28. > :06:32.Parliament. Will you refuse to enter into Coalition with any party that

:06:33. > :06:35.won't agree to that? What I said yesterday is that this will be

:06:36. > :06:40.something which is a very high priority for the Liberal Democrats.

:06:41. > :06:45.It's something that we will very much seek to achieve if we are

:06:46. > :06:52.involved... We know that - will it be a red line? If you are a number

:06:53. > :06:56.in 2010, on the front page of our manifesto, we highlighted four

:06:57. > :07:01.policies... I know all that. Will it be a red line? It will be something

:07:02. > :07:06.that is a very high priority for the Liberal Democrats to deliver. For

:07:07. > :07:11.the fifth time, will it be a red line? It will be, as I said, a very

:07:12. > :07:15.high priority for the Liberal Democrats in the next Parliament.

:07:16. > :07:20.That's my language. We did that in the next election. The number-1

:07:21. > :07:23.promise on our manifesto with a ?10,000 threshold and we've

:07:24. > :07:26.delivered that in this Parliament. People can see that when we say

:07:27. > :07:33.something is a top priority, we deliver it. Is it your claim... Are

:07:34. > :07:36.you claiming that the Tories would not have raised the starting point

:07:37. > :07:41.of income tax if it hadn't been for the Liberal Democrats? If you

:07:42. > :07:46.remember back in the leaders' debates in the 2010 election

:07:47. > :07:48.campaign, Nick Clegg was rightly championing this idea and David

:07:49. > :07:55.Cameron said it couldn't be afforded. Each step of the way in

:07:56. > :08:00.the Coalition negotiations within government, we've had to fight for

:08:01. > :08:06.that. The covert overtures have other priorities. -- the

:08:07. > :08:10.Conservatives. I don't want to go back into history. I'd like to get

:08:11. > :08:13.to the present. Have the Conservatives resisted every effort

:08:14. > :08:18.to raise the starting point of income tax? As I said, we promised

:08:19. > :08:24.this in 2010, they said it couldn't be done. We've made sure it was

:08:25. > :08:28.delivered in the Coalition. Have they resisted it? We've argued for

:08:29. > :08:33.big steps along the way and forced it on to the agenda. They've wanted

:08:34. > :08:39.to deliver other things are so we've had to fight for our priority... Did

:08:40. > :08:44.had to fight for our priority.. Did the Conservatives resist every

:08:45. > :08:47.attempt? It has been resisted, overall the things I'm talking

:08:48. > :08:51.about, by Conservatives, because they have wanted to deliver other

:08:52. > :08:56.things and, of course, in a Coalition you negotiate. Both

:08:57. > :09:00.parties have their priorities. Our priority has been a very consistent

:09:01. > :09:04.one. Last year, they were arguing about tax breaks for married

:09:05. > :09:11.couples. They were arguing in 2 10 for tax cuts for millionaires. Our

:09:12. > :09:14.priority in all these discussions has been a consistent one, which is

:09:15. > :09:22.to say we want cutbacks for working people. -- we want to cut tax for

:09:23. > :09:26.working people. That has been delivered by both parties in the

:09:27. > :09:30.Coalition government full top So what do you think when the Tories

:09:31. > :09:34.take credit for it? I understand why they want to try to do that. Most

:09:35. > :09:42.people understand what we have just said. Not if the polls are to be

:09:43. > :09:50.believed... You're under 10%. This is one of the things, when I talk to

:09:51. > :09:53.people, but I find they know that the Lib Dems have delivered in

:09:54. > :09:57.government. People know we promised it in 2010 and we're the ones who

:09:58. > :10:01.forced this idea onto the agenda in our election manifesto. You've said

:10:02. > :10:09.that five times in this interview alone. The reality is, this is now a

:10:10. > :10:13.squabbling, loveless marriage. We're getting bored with all your tests,

:10:14. > :10:21.the voters. Why don't you just divorced? -- all your arguments. I

:10:22. > :10:24.don't accept that. On a lot of policy areas, the Coalition

:10:25. > :10:27.government has worked very well together. We're delivering an awful

:10:28. > :10:31.lot of things that matter to this country. Most importantly, the mess

:10:32. > :10:35.that Labour made of the economy we are sorting out. We are getting our

:10:36. > :10:39.finances on the right track, making our economy more competitive,

:10:40. > :10:42.creating jobs up and down this country, supporting businesses to

:10:43. > :10:47.invest in growth. That is what this Coalition was set up to do, what it

:10:48. > :10:49.is delivering, and both myself and George Osborne are proud to have

:10:50. > :10:54.worked together to deliver that record. Danny Alexander, thanks for

:10:55. > :11:00.that. Enjoyed York. Helen, is anybody listening? I do worry that

:11:01. > :11:04.another 40 months of this might drive voter apathy up to record

:11:05. > :11:11.levels. There is a simple answer to why they don't divorced - it's the

:11:12. > :11:15.agreement that Parliament will last until 2015. MPs are bouncing around

:11:16. > :11:19.Westminster with very little to do. They are looking for things to put

:11:20. > :11:22.in the Queen's Speech and we are going to have rocks basically the 40

:11:23. > :11:27.months and very little substantial difference in policies. Do you

:11:28. > :11:31.believe Danny Alexander when he says there would have been no rise in the

:11:32. > :11:36.starting rate of income tax if not for the Lib Dems? He's gilding the

:11:37. > :11:44.lily. If you look back at papers are written in 2001 suggesting precisely

:11:45. > :11:50.this policy, written by a Tory peer, you see there are plenty of Tories

:11:51. > :11:55.which suggest there would have been this kind of move. I can see why

:11:56. > :11:58.Danny Alexander needs to do this and they need to show they've achieved

:11:59. > :12:02.something in government because they are below 10% in the polls and

:12:03. > :12:08.finding it incredibly difficult to get any traction at all. The other

:12:09. > :12:13.leg of this Lib Dem repositioning is now to be explicitly the party of

:12:14. > :12:19.Europe and to be the vanguard of the fight to be all things pro-Europe.

:12:20. > :12:23.Mr Clegg is going to debate Nigel Farage in the run-up to the European

:12:24. > :12:49.elections. If, despite that, the Lib Dems come last of the major parties,

:12:50. > :12:54.doesn't it show how out of touch different. They are targeting a

:12:55. > :12:59.section of the electorate who are a bit more amenable to their views

:13:00. > :13:03.than the rest. They wouldn't get 20% of the vote. They are targeting that

:13:04. > :13:06.one section. They have to do disproportionately well amongst

:13:07. > :13:10.those and it will payoff and they will end up with something like 15%.

:13:11. > :13:15.How many seats will the Lib Dems losing the next election? Ten. 20.

:13:16. > :13:24.losing the next election? Ten. 0. 15. Triangulation! We'll keep that

:13:25. > :13:27.on tape and see what actually happens!

:13:28. > :13:31.The Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith is a man on a mission.

:13:32. > :13:34.He's undertaken the biggest overhaul in our welfare state since it was

:13:35. > :13:38.invented way back in the black-and-white days of the late

:13:39. > :13:43.1940s. A committed Roman Catholic, he's said he has a moral vision to

:13:44. > :13:47.reverse the previous welfare system, which he believes didn't create

:13:48. > :13:51.enough incentive for people to work. But are his reforms working? Are

:13:52. > :13:55.they fair? As he bitten off more than he can chew? In a moment, we'll

:13:56. > :13:59.speak to the man himself but first, here's Adam.

:14:00. > :14:02.Hackney in north London and we're on the road with the man who might just

:14:03. > :14:07.be the most ambitious welfare secretary there's ever been. It s a

:14:08. > :14:12.journey that started in the wind and rain on a Glasgow council estate 12

:14:13. > :14:15.years ago when he was Tory leader. He came face-to-face with what it

:14:16. > :14:21.meant to be poor. A selection of teddy bears. It's where he

:14:22. > :14:25.discovered his recipe for reform, according to one of the advisers who

:14:26. > :14:31.was with him. There are things that if you do get a job, keep your

:14:32. > :14:35.family together, stay off drugs and alcohol, make sure you have a proper

:14:36. > :14:41.skill - that's what keeps you of poverty. He, very ambitiously, wants

:14:42. > :14:46.to redefine the nature of what it means to be poor and how you get

:14:47. > :14:50.away from poverty. Back in north London, he's come to congratulate

:14:51. > :14:54.the troops on some good news. In this borough, the number of people

:14:55. > :14:56.on job-seeker's allowance has gone down by 29% in the last year, up

:14:57. > :15:01.from around 1700 to around 1200. down by 29% in the last year, up

:15:02. > :15:05.from around 1700 to around 1200 But the picture in his wider changes to

:15:06. > :15:11.the welfare state is a bit more mixed. A cap on the total amount of

:15:12. > :15:15.benefits a family can get, of ?26,000 a year, is hugely popular

:15:16. > :15:19.but there have been howls of protest over cuts to housing benefit,

:15:20. > :15:24.labelled the bedroom tax by some. Protests, too, about assessments for

:15:25. > :15:27.people on disability benefits, inherited from the previous

:15:28. > :15:31.government. Iain Duncan Smith has been accused of being heartless and

:15:32. > :15:36.the company doing them, Atos, has pulled out. And then the big one -

:15:37. > :15:41.and universal credit, a plan to roll six benefits into one monthly

:15:42. > :15:45.payment, in a way designed to ensure that work always pays. Some of the

:15:46. > :15:49.IT has been written off and the timetable seems to be slipping.

:15:50. > :15:52.Outside the bubble of the stage-managed ministerial trip, a

:15:53. > :15:58.local Labour MP reckons he's bitten off more than he can chew. The great

:15:59. > :16:03.desire is to say, " let's have one simple one size fits all approach" .

:16:04. > :16:08.And there isn't one size of person or family out there. People need to

:16:09. > :16:11.change and they can challenge on the turn of a penny almost. One minute

:16:12. > :16:15.they are doing the right thing, working hard. Next minute, they need

:16:16. > :16:19.a level of support and if this simple system doesn't deliver that

:16:20. > :16:24.for them, they're in a difficult position. And that's the flying

:16:25. > :16:30.visit to the front line finished. He does not like to hang about and just

:16:31. > :16:35.as well do - his overhaul of the entire benefits system still has

:16:36. > :16:43.quite a long way to go. And Iain Duncan Smith joins me now. Before I

:16:44. > :16:47.come onto the interview on welfare reform, is Danny Alexander right

:16:48. > :16:54.when he claims the Lib Dems had to fight to get the Tories to raise the

:16:55. > :16:58.income tax threshold? That is not my recollection of what happened. These

:16:59. > :17:03.debates took place in the Coalition. The Conservatives are in

:17:04. > :17:08.favour of reducing the overall burden of taxation, so the question

:17:09. > :17:14.was how best do we do it? The conversation took place, they were

:17:15. > :17:19.keen on raising the threshold, there were also other ways of doing it but

:17:20. > :17:23.it is clear from the Conservatives that we always wanted to improve the

:17:24. > :17:27.quality of life of those at the bottom so raising the threshold fit

:17:28. > :17:33.within the overall plan. If it was a row, it was the kind of row you have

:17:34. > :17:44.over a cup of tea round the breakfast table. We have got a lot

:17:45. > :17:49.to cover. There are two criticisms mainly of what you are doing - will

:17:50. > :17:56.they work, and will they be fair? Leslie Roberts, one of our viewers,

:17:57. > :17:59.wants to know why so much has already been written off due to

:18:00. > :18:08.failures of the universal credit system even though it has been

:18:09. > :18:14.barely introduced. Relatively it has been a ?2 billion investment

:18:15. > :18:20.project, in the private sector programmes are written off regularly

:18:21. > :18:25.at 30, 40%. The IT is working, we are improving as we go along, the

:18:26. > :18:29.key thing is to keep your eye on the parts that don't work and make sure

:18:30. > :18:38.they don't create a problem for the programme. 140 million has been

:18:39. > :18:43.wasted! The 40 million that was written off was just do with

:18:44. > :18:48.security IT, and I took that decision over a year and a half ago

:18:49. > :18:54.so the programme continued to roll out. Those figures include the

:18:55. > :19:03.standard right down, the aggregation of cost over a period of time. The

:19:04. > :19:09.computers were written down years ago but they continue to work now.

:19:10. > :19:13.Universal credit is rolling out we are doing the Pathfinders and

:19:14. > :19:21.learning a lot but I will not ever do this again like the last

:19:22. > :19:28.government, big band launches, you should do it phrase by phrase. Even

:19:29. > :19:34.your colleague Francis Maude says the implementation of universal

:19:35. > :19:37.credit has been pretty lamentable. He was referring back to the time

:19:38. > :19:44.when I stopped that element of the process and I agreed with that. I

:19:45. > :19:49.intervened to make the changes. The key point is that it is rolling out

:19:50. > :19:55.and I invite anyone to look at where it is being rolled out to. You were

:19:56. > :20:00.predicting that a million people would be an universal credit, this

:20:01. > :20:04.is the new welfare credit which rolls up six existing welfare

:20:05. > :20:11.benefits and you were predicting a million people would be on it by

:20:12. > :20:20.April, well it is March and only 3200 are on it. I changed the way we

:20:21. > :20:23.rolled it out and there was a reason for that. Under the advice of

:20:24. > :20:28.someone we brought from outside, he someone we brought from outside he

:20:29. > :20:32.said that you are better rolling it out slower and gaining momentum

:20:33. > :20:36.later on. On the timetables for rolling out we are pretty clear that

:20:37. > :20:40.it will roll out within the timescale is originally set. We will

:20:41. > :20:46.roll it out into the Northwest so that we replicate the north and the

:20:47. > :20:54.Northwest, recognise how it works properly. You will not hit 1 million

:20:55. > :20:57.by April. I have no intention of claiming that, and it is quite

:20:58. > :21:03.deliberate because that is the wrong thing to do. We want to roll it out

:21:04. > :21:07.carefully so we make sure everything about it works. There are lots of

:21:08. > :21:12.variables in this process but if you do it that way, you will not end up

:21:13. > :21:17.with the kind of debacle where in the past something like ?28 billion

:21:18. > :21:26.worth of IT programmes were written off. ?38 billion of net benefits,

:21:27. > :21:33.which is exactly what the N a O Z, so it is worth getting it right.

:21:34. > :21:38.William Grant wants to know, when will the universal credit cover the

:21:39. > :21:42.whole country? By 2016, everybody who is claiming one of those six

:21:43. > :21:51.benefits will be claiming universal credit. Some and sickness benefits

:21:52. > :21:56.will take longer to come on because it is more difficult. Many of them

:21:57. > :22:00.have no work expectations on them, but for those on working tax

:22:01. > :22:06.credits, on things like job-seeker's allowance, they will be making

:22:07. > :22:11.claims on universal credit. Many of them are already doing that now

:22:12. > :22:18.there are 200,000 people around the country already on universal credit.

:22:19. > :22:27.You cannot give me a date as to when everybody will be on it? 2016 is

:22:28. > :22:33.when everybody claiming this benefit will be on, then you have to bring

:22:34. > :22:38.others and take them slower. Universal credit is a big and

:22:39. > :22:43.important reform, not an IT reform. The important point is that it will

:22:44. > :22:49.be a massive cultural reform. Right now somebody has to go to work and

:22:50. > :22:52.there is a small job out there. They won't take that because the way

:22:53. > :22:57.their benefits are withdrawn, it will mean it is not worth doing it.

:22:58. > :23:01.Under the way we have got it in the Pathfinders, the change is

:23:02. > :23:06.dramatic. A job-seeker can take a small part time job while they are

:23:07. > :23:11.looking for work and it means flexibility for business so it is a

:23:12. > :23:16.big change. Lets see if that is true because universal credit is meant to

:23:17. > :23:23.make work pay, that is your mantra. Let me show you a quote Minister in

:23:24. > :23:46.the last -- in the last Tory conference. It

:23:47. > :23:52.has only come down to 76%. Actually form own parents, before they get to

:23:53. > :23:57.the tax bracket it is well below that. That is a decision the

:23:58. > :24:03.Government takes about the withdrawal rate so you can lower

:24:04. > :24:07.that rate or raise it. And do your reforms, some of the poorest

:24:08. > :24:19.people, if they burn an extra pound, will pay a marginal rate of

:24:20. > :24:24.76%. -- if they earn an extra pound. The 98% he is talking about is a

:24:25. > :24:31.specific area to do with lone parents but there are specific

:24:32. > :24:36.compound areas in the process that mean people are better off staying

:24:37. > :24:40.at home then going to work. They will be able to identify how much

:24:41. > :24:45.they are better off without needing to have a maths degree to figure it

:24:46. > :24:51.out. They are all taken away at different rates at the moment, it is

:24:52. > :24:57.complex and chaotic. Under universal credit that won't happen, and they

:24:58. > :25:02.will always be better off than they are now. Would you work that bit

:25:03. > :25:12.harder if the Government was going to take away that portion of what

:25:13. > :25:17.you learned? At the moment you are going to tax poor people at the same

:25:18. > :25:22.rate the French government taxes billionaires. Millions will be

:25:23. > :25:26.better off under this system of universal credit, I promise you and

:25:27. > :25:32.that level of withdrawal then becomes something governments have

:25:33. > :25:38.to publicly discussed as to whether they lower or raise it. But George

:25:39. > :25:44.Osborne wouldn't give you the extra money to allow for the taper, is

:25:45. > :25:49.that right? The moment somebody crosses into work under the present

:25:50. > :25:53.system, there are huge cliff edges, in other words the immediate

:25:54. > :25:58.withdrawal makes it worse for them to go into work than otherwise. If

:25:59. > :26:08.he had given you more money, you could have tapered it more gently?

:26:09. > :26:11.Of course, but the Chancellor can always ultimately make that

:26:12. > :26:18.decision. These decisions are made by chancellors like tax rates, but

:26:19. > :26:23.it would be much easier under this system for the public to see what

:26:24. > :26:29.the Government chooses as its priorities. At the moment nobody has

:26:30. > :26:34.any idea but in the future it will be. Under the Pathfinders, we are

:26:35. > :26:36.finding people are going to work faster, doing more job searches, and

:26:37. > :26:44.faster, doing more job searches and more likely to take work under

:26:45. > :26:52.universal credit. Public Accounts Committee said this programme has

:26:53. > :26:54.been worse than doing nothing, for the long-term credit. It has not

:26:55. > :27:02.been a glorious success, has it? been a glorious success, has it

:27:03. > :27:07.That is wrong. Right now the work programme is succeeding, more people

:27:08. > :27:11.are going to work, somewhere in the order of 500,000 people have gone

:27:12. > :27:17.back into work as a result of the programme. Around 280,000 people are

:27:18. > :27:21.in a sustained work over six months. Many companies are well

:27:22. > :27:26.above it, and the whole point about the work programme is that it is

:27:27. > :27:30.setup so that we make the private sector, two things that are

:27:31. > :27:35.important, there is competition in every area so that people can be

:27:36. > :27:41.sucked out of the programme and others can move in. The important

:27:42. > :27:45.point here as well is this, that actually they don't get paid unless

:27:46. > :27:50.they sustain somebody for six months of employment. Under previous

:27:51. > :27:54.programmes under the last government, they wasted millions

:27:55. > :27:59.paying companies who took the money and didn't do enough to get people

:28:00. > :28:05.into work. The best performing provider only moved 5% of people off

:28:06. > :28:14.benefit into work, the worst managed only 2%. It is young people. That

:28:15. > :28:19.report was on the early first months of the work programme, it is a

:28:20. > :28:24.two-year point we are now and I can give you the figures for this. They

:28:25. > :28:28.are above the line, the improvement has been dramatic and the work

:28:29. > :28:29.programme is better than any other back to work programme under the

:28:30. > :28:40.last government. So why is long term last government. So why is long-term

:28:41. > :28:45.unemployment rising? It is falling. We have the largest number of people

:28:46. > :28:52.back in work, there is more women in work than ever before, more jobs

:28:53. > :28:58.being created, 1.6 million new jobs being created. The work programme is

:28:59. > :29:02.working, our back to work programmes are incredibly successful at below

:29:03. > :29:07.cost so we are doing better than the last government ever did, and it

:29:08. > :29:12.will continue to improve because this process is very important. The

:29:13. > :29:16.competition is what drives up performance. We want the best

:29:17. > :29:21.performers to take the biggest numbers of people. You are

:29:22. > :29:27.practising Catholic, Archbishop Vincent Nichols has attached your

:29:28. > :29:31.reforms -- attack to your reforms, saying they are becoming more

:29:32. > :29:37.punitive to the most vulnerable in the land. What do you say? I don't

:29:38. > :29:40.agree. It would have been good if you called me before making these

:29:41. > :29:51.attacks because most are not correct.

:29:52. > :29:55.For the poorest temper sent in their society, they are now spending, as a

:29:56. > :30:00.percentage of their income, less than they did before. I'm not quite

:30:01. > :30:05.sure what he thinks welfare is about. Welfare is about stabilising

:30:06. > :30:09.people but most of all making sure that households can achieve what

:30:10. > :30:13.they need through work. The number of workless households under

:30:14. > :30:20.previous governments arose consistently. It has fallen for the

:30:21. > :30:24.first time in 30 years by nearly 18%. Something like a quarter of a

:30:25. > :30:27.million children were growing up in workless households and are now in

:30:28. > :30:30.households with work and they are three times more likely to grow up

:30:31. > :30:35.with work than they would have been in workless households. Let me come

:30:36. > :30:40.into something that he may have had in mind as being punitive - some

:30:41. > :30:43.other housing benefit changes. A year ago, the Prime Minister

:30:44. > :30:47.announced that people with severely disabled children would be exempt

:30:48. > :30:54.from the changes but that was only after your department fought a High

:30:55. > :30:58.Court battle over children who couldn't share a bedroom because of

:30:59. > :31:00.severe disabilities. Isn't that what the Archbishop means by punitive or,

:31:01. > :31:04.some may describe it, heartless We some may describe it, heartless. We

:31:05. > :31:11.were originally going to appeal that and I said no. You put it up for an

:31:12. > :31:16.appeal and I said no. We're talking about families with disabled

:31:17. > :31:19.children. There are good reasons for this. Children with conditions like

:31:20. > :31:24.that don't make decisions about their household - their parents do -

:31:25. > :31:28.so I said we would exempt them. But for adults with disabilities the

:31:29. > :31:32.courts have upheld all of our decisions against complaints. But

:31:33. > :31:34.you did appeal it. It's just that, having lost in the appeal court,

:31:35. > :31:36.you did appeal it. It's just that, having lost in the appeal court you

:31:37. > :31:40.didn't then go to the Supreme Court. You make decisions about this. My

:31:41. > :31:46.view was that it was right to exempt them at that time. I made that

:31:47. > :31:50.decision, not the Prime Minister. Let's get this right - the context

:31:51. > :31:54.of this is quite important. Housing benefit under the last government

:31:55. > :32:00.doubled under the last ten years to ?20 billion. It was set to rise to

:32:01. > :32:04.another 25 billion, the fastest rising of the benefits, it was out

:32:05. > :32:07.of control. We had to get it into control. It wasn't easy but we

:32:08. > :32:12.haven't cut the overall rise in housing. We've lowered it but we

:32:13. > :32:16.haven't cut housing benefit and we've tried to do it carefully so

:32:17. > :32:19.that people get a fair crack. On the spare room subsidy, which is what

:32:20. > :32:23.this complaint was about, the reality is that there are a quarter

:32:24. > :32:26.of a million people living in overcrowded accommodation. The last

:32:27. > :32:29.government left us with 1 million people on a waiting list for housing

:32:30. > :32:33.and there were half a million people sitting in houses with spare

:32:34. > :32:37.bedrooms they weren't using. As we build more houses, yes we need more,

:32:38. > :32:40.but the reality is that councils and others have to use their

:32:41. > :32:43.accommodation carefully so that they actually improve the lot of those

:32:44. > :32:47.living in desperate situations in overcrowded accommodation, and

:32:48. > :32:51.taxpayers are paying a lot of money. This will help people get

:32:52. > :32:55.back to work. They're more likely to go to work and more likely,

:32:56. > :33:01.therefore, to end up in the right sort of housing. We've not got much

:33:02. > :33:04.time left. A centre-right think tank that you've been associated with, on

:33:05. > :33:08.job-seeker's allowance, says 70 000 job-seeker's allowance, says 70,000

:33:09. > :33:16.job-seekers' benefits were withdrawn unfairly. A viewer wants to know,

:33:17. > :33:20.are these reforms too harsh and punitive? Those figures are not

:33:21. > :33:25.correct. The Policy Exchange is wrong? Those figures are not correct

:33:26. > :33:31.and we will be publishing corrected figures. The reality is... Some

:33:32. > :33:35.people have lost their job-seeker benefits and been forced to go to

:33:36. > :33:41.food backs and they shouldn't have. No, they're not. What he is

:33:42. > :33:44.referring to is that we allowed an adviser to make a decision if some

:33:45. > :33:48.but it is not cooperating. We now make people sign a contract, where

:33:49. > :33:52.they agree these things. These are things we do for you and if you

:33:53. > :33:55.don't do these things, you are likely to have your benefit

:33:56. > :33:59.withdrawn on job-seeker's allowance. Some of this was an fairly

:34:00. > :34:04.withdrawn. There are millions of these things that go through. This

:34:05. > :34:06.is a very small subset. But if you lose your job-seeker benefit

:34:07. > :34:10.unfairly, you have no cash flow. unfairly, you have no cash flow

:34:11. > :34:16.There is an immediate review within seven days of that decision. Within

:34:17. > :34:19.seven days, that decision is reviewed. They are able to get a

:34:20. > :34:24.hardship fund straightaway if there is a problem. We have nearly ?1

:34:25. > :34:32.billion setup to help people, through crisis, hardship funds and

:34:33. > :34:36.in many other ways. We've given more than ?200 million to authorities to

:34:37. > :34:42.do face-to-face checks. This is not a nasty, vicious system but a system

:34:43. > :34:45.that says, "look, we ask you to do certain things. Taxpayers pay this

:34:46. > :34:49.money. You are out of work but you have obligations to seek work. We

:34:50. > :34:54.simply ask that you stick to doing those. Those sanctions are therefore

:34:55. > :34:57.be but he will not cooperate" . I think it is only fair to say to

:34:58. > :34:59.those people that they make choices throughout their life and if they

:35:00. > :35:05.choose not to cooperate, this is what happens. Is child poverty

:35:06. > :35:12.rising? No, it is actually falling in the last figures. 300,000 it fell

:35:13. > :35:18.in the last... Let me show you these figures. That is a projection by the

:35:19. > :35:24.Institute of fiscal studies. It also shows that it has gone up every year

:35:25. > :35:27.and will rise by 400,000 in this Parliament, and your government, and

:35:28. > :35:31.will continue to rise. But never mind the projection. It may be

:35:32. > :35:38.right, may be wrong. It would be 400,000 up compared to when -- what

:35:39. > :35:43.you inherited when this Parliament ends. That isn't a projection but

:35:44. > :35:48.the actual figures. But the last figures show that child poverty has

:35:49. > :35:52.fallen by some 300,000. The important point is... Can I just

:35:53. > :35:56.finished this point of? Child poverty is measured against 60% of

:35:57. > :36:02.median income so this is an issue about how we measure child poverty.

:36:03. > :36:06.You want to change the measure. I made the decision not to publish our

:36:07. > :36:09.change figures at this point because we've still got a bit more work to

:36:10. > :36:13.do on them but there is a big consensus that the way we measure

:36:14. > :36:18.child poverty right now does not measure exactly what requires to be

:36:19. > :36:21.done. For example, a family with an individual parent who may be drug

:36:22. > :36:24.addicted and gets what we think is enough money to be just over the

:36:25. > :36:28.line, their children may be living in poverty but they won't be

:36:29. > :36:31.measured so we need to get a measurement that looks at poverty in

:36:32. > :36:37.terms of how people live, not just in terms of the income levels they

:36:38. > :36:41.have. You can see on that chart - 400,000 rising by the end of this

:36:42. > :36:45.Parliament - you are deciding over an increase. Speedier I want to

:36:46. > :36:49.change it because under the last government child poverty rose

:36:50. > :36:55.consistently from 2004 and they ended up chucking huge sums of money

:36:56. > :37:02.into things like tax credits. In tax credits, in six years before the

:37:03. > :37:04.last election, the last government spent ?175 billion chasing a poverty

:37:05. > :37:07.target and they didn't achieve what they set out to achieve. We don't

:37:08. > :37:10.they set out to achieve. We don t want to continue down that line

:37:11. > :37:15.where you simply put money into a welfare system to alter a marginal

:37:16. > :37:19.income line. It doesn't make any sense. That's why we want to change

:37:20. > :37:30.it, not because some projection says it might be going up. I will point

:37:31. > :37:37.out again it isn't a projection up to 2013-14. You want it to make work

:37:38. > :37:40.pay but more people in poverty are now in working families than in

:37:41. > :37:46.workless families. For them, workers not paying. Those figures referred

:37:47. > :37:52.to the last government's time in government. What is interesting

:37:53. > :37:57.about it is that until 2010, under the last government, those in

:37:58. > :38:02.working families - poverty in working families rose by half a

:38:03. > :38:06.million. For the two years up to the end of those figures, it has been

:38:07. > :38:09.flat, under this government. These are figures at the last

:38:10. > :38:15.government... You inherited and it hasn't changed. The truth is, even

:38:16. > :38:20.if you are in poverty in a working family, your children, if they are

:38:21. > :38:21.in workless families, are three times more likely to be out of work

:38:22. > :38:27.and to suffer real hardship. So, in and to suffer real hardship. So in

:38:28. > :38:33.other words, moving people up the scale, into work and then on is

:38:34. > :38:36.important. The problem with the last government system with working tax

:38:37. > :38:40.credit is it locks them into certain hours and they didn't progress.

:38:41. > :38:44.We're changing that so that you progress on up and go out of poverty

:38:45. > :38:48.through work and beyond it. But those figures you're referring to

:38:49. > :38:53.refer to the last government's tenure and they spent ?175 billion

:38:54. > :38:58.on a tax credit which still left people in work in poverty. Even 20

:38:59. > :39:02.minutes isn't enough to go through all this. A lot more I'd like to

:39:03. > :39:07.talk about. I hope you will come back. I will definitely come back.

:39:08. > :39:10.Thank you for joining us. You're watching the Sunday

:39:11. > :39:12.Politics. We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now for

:39:13. > :39:19.Sunday Politics Scotland. Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics

:39:20. > :39:22.East, I'm Etholle George. Later Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics

:39:23. > :39:24.East, I'm Etholle George. L`ter in East, I'm Etholle George. Later in

:39:25. > :39:29.the programme, defending our coasts and rivers. Let down by the

:39:30. > :39:33.government, the locals having to foot the bill for their own flood

:39:34. > :39:36.defences. We will try to raise it by donations of land that can then be

:39:37. > :39:42.used for housing. The development value of that land will then be able

:39:43. > :39:47.to pass on to the trust for funding the programme of upgrading.

:39:48. > :39:49.Get back on track or face closure. The warning from the government to

:39:50. > :39:52.Get back on track or face closure. The warning from the governlent to a

:39:53. > :39:54.group running a college and schools in Bedfordshire. What's happened

:39:55. > :39:56.since we got those allegations from the whistle`blowers demonstrates how

:39:57. > :40:03.quickly and comprehensively we have dealt with this problem.

:40:04. > :40:10.So let's meet our guests thhs week. Andy Sawford, Labour MP for Corby.

:40:11. > :40:12.And also, Rupert Read, who is the And also, Rupert Read, who is the

:40:13. > :40:13.Green Party lead candidate `t And also, Rupert Read, who hs the

:40:14. > :40:14.Green Party lead candidate at the Green Party lead candidate `t the

:40:15. > :40:18.forthcoming European elections and the party's transport spokesperson.

:40:19. > :40:22.That is where I would like to start. The scenes of extraordinary chaos in

:40:23. > :40:26.Northampton this week. This is the gridlock in the town centre as a

:40:27. > :40:31.result of the opening of a new bus station. The police had to be called

:40:32. > :40:33.in to help clear the traffic. Roads to the town centre had to bd

:40:34. > :40:33.in to help clear the traffic. Roads to the town centre had to be blocked

:40:34. > :40:37.to the town centre had to bd blocked off. Engineers worked through the

:40:38. > :40:39.night to change parts of the road layout. Andy Sawford, clearly a huge

:40:40. > :40:41.embarrassment for the counchl after embarrassment for the council after

:40:42. > :40:46.this new bus station was latnched. this new bus station was launched.

:40:47. > :40:49.Was it simply unfortunate or an oversight? It is a growing town, a

:40:50. > :40:52.oversight? It is a growing town a county town in my area. This was

:40:53. > :40:56.absolutely foreseeable. Thex county town in my area. This was

:40:57. > :40:58.absolutely foreseeable. They have absolutely foreseeable. They have

:40:59. > :41:04.gone from a very large bus station to a much smaller one. They had not

:41:05. > :41:06.planned it properly. Just as when they closed roads around thd A4

:41:07. > :41:09.they closed roads around the A43 improvements in Corby, they did not

:41:10. > :41:13.properly communicate with the public and think about how to manage it.

:41:14. > :41:17.Rupert Read, is there just only so much traffic that an urban centre

:41:18. > :41:19.like this can take? I think Andy is right in what he just said. But we

:41:20. > :41:24.also need to look at the deeper also need to look at the dedper

:41:25. > :41:26.roots of the problem. In Northampton, we haven't had any park

:41:27. > :41:28.and ride. We haven't had any guided and ride. We haven't had anx guided

:41:29. > :41:32.busway. That's very interesting. A busway. That's very interesting A

:41:33. > :41:34.former Labour MP for Northampton former Labour MP for Northalpton

:41:35. > :41:36.essentially stymied the guided busway project and then went on to

:41:37. > :41:40.open one in Cambridge. We haven't open one in Cambridge. We h`ven t

:41:41. > :41:43.really had anything. All we have is this inadequate bus station. Where

:41:44. > :41:46.is the vision? In the Greens, we are saying their needs to be far more

:41:47. > :41:48.serious investment in public transport. That is the future. Thank

:41:49. > :41:51.you for the moment. Now, spring may be in the air. But

:41:52. > :41:54.Now, spring may be in the ahr. But no one will forget the damage caused

:41:55. > :41:56.by the storms this winter. Flood defences in the East were put

:41:57. > :41:58.by the storms this winter. Flood defences in the East were ptt under

:41:59. > :42:01.enormous pressure. That has raised questions over how much to spend on

:42:02. > :42:12.flooding and where. Many rural communities here feel abandoned by

:42:13. > :42:19.the government. It has been a winter people on our

:42:20. > :42:22.coasts wwn't forget. `` won't forget. Onslaught after onslaught.

:42:23. > :42:26.Tidal surge. Breached defences. Seemingly relentless storms. All

:42:27. > :42:28.taking their toll on sea defences. Now the criteria used to decide what

:42:29. > :42:30.we spend on defences and where Now the criteria used to decide what

:42:31. > :42:30.we spend on defences and whdre being we spend on defences and where being

:42:31. > :42:33.challenged. Some argue the `pproach challenged. Some argue the approach

:42:34. > :42:37.to defending our coast is flawed and needs a radical overhaul. Linda

:42:38. > :42:42.Lodge is among them. In 2006, she bought her bungalow on the Cliff at

:42:43. > :42:44.Scratby in Norfolk. Just a few years ago, the policy here was to defend

:42:45. > :42:47.this stretch of coast. Not any ago, the policy here was to defend

:42:48. > :42:49.this stretch of coast. Not `ny more. Now plans to extend a successful

:42:50. > :42:50.rock defence, to protect thd eroding rock defence, to protect the eroding

:42:51. > :42:57.cliff, have also failed to pualify cliff, have also failed to pualify

:42:58. > :42:59.for funding. They are not going to do the rock burn. I think that was

:43:00. > :43:04.three million. And to do thd cages three million. And to do thd cages

:43:05. > :43:09.for the stones is half a million. That is not an awful lot of money to

:43:10. > :43:12.save a village. And it will be saving the whole village. It's not

:43:13. > :43:15.just saving these houses along the cliff top. Because if we go, the

:43:16. > :43:17.houses behind will go. And we thought we had a good 50`60 years

:43:18. > :43:20.here. And now what can it be? thought we had a good 50`60 years

:43:21. > :43:24.here. And now what can it be? Three years? Five years? Who knows? Defra

:43:25. > :43:26.rules state, for each pound spent on new defences, ?8 of damage must

:43:27. > :43:29.rules state, for each pound spent on new defences, ?8 of damage lust be

:43:30. > :43:35.prevented by them. Scratby, like the Somerset Levels, doesn't qualify.

:43:36. > :43:38.The council leader says the rules failed to take into account the

:43:39. > :43:43.millions of pounds that tourism brings to the local economy every

:43:44. > :43:50.year. The ?8 benefit to the pound spent on defences is a nonsdnse It

:43:51. > :43:54.spent on defences is a nonsense. It is just never going to help places

:43:55. > :43:58.like Scratby or Winterton or Hemsby along our coastline. Huge amounts at

:43:59. > :44:02.stake. I don't know the millions that the villagers bring into the

:44:03. > :44:04.borough, the local economy. But it is millions. Scratby isn't `lone.

:44:05. > :44:07.There are scores of flood defence There are scores of flood defence

:44:08. > :44:08.projects that are on hold effectively, because those projects

:44:09. > :44:10.can't attract the funding needed. effectively, because those projects

:44:11. > :44:11.can't attract the funding needed. So what do communities that ard

:44:12. > :44:11.can't attract the funding ndeded. So what do communities that are under

:44:12. > :44:16.what do communities that ard under threat do? Increasingly, some are

:44:17. > :44:23.scrabbling around to try to find the money themselves. Five years ago, at

:44:24. > :44:28.East Lane in Suffolk, they did just that. Landowners donated three

:44:29. > :44:32.blocks of land for housing. The money raised helped to pay for new

:44:33. > :44:33.defences. The trouble is, there wasn't enough money to repair

:44:34. > :44:35.defences. The trouble is, there wasn't enough money to repahr the

:44:36. > :44:41.entire defence. Now the sea is threatening once again. Even though

:44:42. > :44:47.the policy here is to hold the line, East Lane also fails to qualify for

:44:48. > :44:49.funding. There is barely a single location on the entire Suffolk

:44:50. > :44:56.coastline that meets the current Environment Agency 8/1 ratio. Blyth,

:44:57. > :45:01.two. Alde and Ore, three or less. Another, naught to two. Are we

:45:02. > :45:03.really saying we are going to abandon the entire coastline?

:45:04. > :45:04.really saying we are going to abandon the entire coastlind? So is

:45:05. > :45:09.abandon the entire coastline? So is self help the way forward? Ht

:45:10. > :45:09.abandon the entire coastlind? So is self help the way forward? It will

:45:10. > :45:11.cost around ?7 million to r`ise self help the way forward? Ht will

:45:12. > :45:11.cost around ?7 million to raise the cost around ?7 million to r`ise the

:45:12. > :45:14.river walls on the internationally river walls on the internathonally

:45:15. > :45:16.renowned Alde and Ore Estuary to protect it from tidal surges. A new

:45:17. > :45:18.partnership involving landowners, businesses and local people hopes to

:45:19. > :45:19.raise the money and complete the raise the money and complete the

:45:20. > :45:24.work within ten years. We whll raise the money and completd the

:45:25. > :45:26.work within ten years. We will try work within ten years. We will try

:45:27. > :45:30.to raise it by donations of land that can then be used for the

:45:31. > :45:35.development of housing. The development of that land will then

:45:36. > :45:38.be able to pass on to the trust for funding the programme of upgrading.

:45:39. > :45:43.Back at Scratby, there is no such hope in prospect. Here they fear the

:45:44. > :45:44.establishment of a mindset. An acceptance of the abandonment of

:45:45. > :45:46.entire committees. All while acceptance of the abandonment of

:45:47. > :45:47.entire committees. All whild others entire committees. All whild others

:45:48. > :45:50.across the water defend theirs. entire committees. All while others

:45:51. > :45:52.across the water defend thehrs. I across the water defend theirs. I

:45:53. > :45:57.think the Dutch have spent the time and the money on getting it right.

:45:58. > :46:00.They have been there to protect their people. When you think most of

:46:01. > :46:04.the people along here are rdtired the people along here are rdtired

:46:05. > :46:08.people. They have paid in all their lives and they are getting nothing

:46:09. > :46:16.back. At all. And it just doesn't seem right.

:46:17. > :46:19.Joining us from Norwich is floods Minister Brandon Lewis, who is also

:46:20. > :46:22.the MP for Great Yarmouth, where people living in his constituency

:46:23. > :46:27.have also started work on their own sea defences this week. Hemsby gave

:46:28. > :46:32.us the most memorable images of this winter's tidal surge. Houses there

:46:33. > :46:37.crashed into the sea. Mr Lewis, we are going to see more images like

:46:38. > :46:41.that, are we not, on the east coast? Houses crashing into the se`? You

:46:42. > :46:43.Houses crashing into the sea? You are simply not prepared to defend

:46:44. > :46:52.our coastline. That is not puite our coastline. That is not quite

:46:53. > :46:55.true. When you talk to experts, such as the Environment Agency, they made

:46:56. > :46:59.clear that, for example in Hemsby, that the coastal erosion protection

:47:00. > :47:00.that we want to see in Hemsby would not necessarily have protected those

:47:01. > :47:01.properties from the tidal surge not necessarily have protected those

:47:02. > :47:02.properties from the tidal strge of properties from the tidal strge of

:47:03. > :47:04.the skill we saw back on the properties from the tidal surge of

:47:05. > :47:08.the skill we saw back on the fifth and 6th of December. `` of the

:47:09. > :47:16.scale. That is quite a diffdrent issue. But it is right that we want

:47:17. > :47:21.to see them protected. Somewhere like Hemsby, that has approximately

:47:22. > :47:26.?80 million per year to tourism industry. And one of the things we

:47:27. > :47:31.have announced today with the Coastal Communities Fund actually

:47:32. > :47:34.does give an opportunity for those types of communities to bid in. But

:47:35. > :47:40.next door, we also have Scr`tby and next door, we also have Scr`tby and

:47:41. > :47:45.other committees who want to see the money already being given to them

:47:46. > :47:47.spent to get those coastal drosion protections in place. We heard

:47:48. > :47:51.protections in place. We he`rd people in the film seeing the

:47:52. > :47:53.funding formula for them is not working and they feel abandoned.

:47:54. > :47:54.working and they feel abandoned Scratby, which was mentioned. We had

:47:55. > :47:58.a Pathfinder scheme. Great Yarmouth a Pathfinder scheme. Great Yarmouth

:47:59. > :48:00.Borough Council still sitting on about ?80,000 of their monex

:48:01. > :48:00.Borough Council still sitting on about ?80,000 of their money to

:48:01. > :48:04.about ?80,000 of their monex to spend on that scheme. We want to

:48:05. > :48:07.make sure that what we do in one community does not detrimentally

:48:08. > :48:10.affect another. But it is also important to be in mind that,

:48:11. > :48:13.particularly where we are looking at protecting and developing jobs for

:48:14. > :48:16.the future. And in areas where we have tourism. On the Suffolk

:48:17. > :48:17.coastline or on the Norfolk coastline. Under the new re`met,

:48:18. > :48:20.coastline. Under the new re`met criteria announced this week for the

:48:21. > :48:21.Coastal Communities Fund, they can read into that fund. So there is

:48:22. > :48:23.another opportunity for thel read into that fund. So there is

:48:24. > :48:23.another opportunity for them to bid. another opportunity for thel to bid.

:48:24. > :48:27.But we heard Linda Lodge there But we heard Linda Lodge there

:48:28. > :48:28.saying that she believes it could be half a million pounds to defend her

:48:29. > :48:32.home and others in Scratby. ?80,000 home and others in Scratby. ?80,000

:48:33. > :48:33.isn't going to go anywhere. It needs more funding. This Coastal

:48:34. > :48:36.Communities Fund you keep talking Communities Fund you keep t`lking

:48:37. > :48:37.about is lottery money, isn't it? The Coastal Communities Fund is

:48:38. > :48:39.going forward now, ?64 millhon. The going forward now, ?64 million. The

:48:40. > :48:42.third round is now open. Colmunities third round is now open. Colmunities

:48:43. > :48:43.can bid. It's not just Local Authorities. We have had great

:48:44. > :48:46.Authorities. We have had grdat success with that fund over the last

:48:47. > :48:48.couple of rounds across Norfolk and Suffolk. We have announced bids in

:48:49. > :48:51.Suffolk and Great Yarmouth `nd North Suffolk and Great Yarmouth `nd North

:48:52. > :48:53.Norfolk this week. It is no good doing these things in isolation We

:48:54. > :48:56.doing these things in isolation. We need to look at the bigger picture.

:48:57. > :48:57.The whole coast surely needs defending. We heard people darlier

:48:58. > :49:01.defending. We heard people earlier this week saying, if you defend

:49:02. > :49:04.parts of the coast up in Norfolk, which some people are doing at their

:49:05. > :49:05.own expense, others further down could suffer. It is absolutdly

:49:06. > :49:07.could suffer. It is absolutely right. What you do in one p`rt of

:49:08. > :49:11.right. What you do in one part of the coastline can have an ilpact

:49:12. > :49:14.elsewhere. That is why experts like the Environment Agency are there to

:49:15. > :49:17.advise and look at that. Do those assessments. That is what whll be

:49:18. > :49:19.happening in Hemsby. The work being done there now. But somebodx in the

:49:20. > :49:23.report also mentioned the Dutch. It report also mentioned the Dutch. It

:49:24. > :49:26.is true to say that, over there they have retreated from parts of

:49:27. > :49:28.their coast in order to protect other parts. Is that what is at the

:49:29. > :49:30.heart of this? You are prepared other parts. Is that what is at the

:49:31. > :49:31.heart of this? You are prep`red to heart of this? You are prepared to

:49:32. > :49:34.sacrifice some communities here in the East for others? Actually, if we

:49:35. > :49:37.look at the shoreline managdment plan that was approved for Great

:49:38. > :49:39.Yarmouth, across the Norfolk and Suffolk coastline, I was ond

:49:40. > :49:40.Yarmouth, across the Norfolk and Suffolk coastline, I was one of

:49:41. > :49:43.those fighting for more protection in there. I was pleased we managed

:49:44. > :49:45.to get that for communities, whether it is Hemsby, Scratby, all of which

:49:46. > :49:47.we got adjusted to give them more we got adjusted to give thel more

:49:48. > :49:49.protection. I know my colleague we got adjusted to give them more

:49:50. > :49:51.protection. I know my colleague did the same in North Norfolk. @nd

:49:52. > :49:52.protection. I know my colle`gue did the same in North Norfolk. And it

:49:53. > :49:56.was also done for the Suffolk coastline. We have more protection

:49:57. > :49:57.in there. We also have to make sure we get the right schemes th`t

:49:58. > :49:58.in there. We also have to m`ke sure we get the right schemes that have

:49:59. > :49:59.the right impact. We will h`ve we get the right schemes th`t have

:50:00. > :50:01.the right impact. We will have to the right impact. We will h`ve to

:50:02. > :50:03.leave it there. Thank you. Andy Sawford, let's talk about

:50:04. > :50:04.Northamptonshire. Not much goes there. But inland flood defdnces.

:50:05. > :50:07.There has been a lot of money there. But inland flood defences.

:50:08. > :50:10.There has been a lot of mondy spent there, because you have built up

:50:11. > :50:12.areas. It's not fair, is it? We have had flooding in Northamptonshire and

:50:13. > :50:13.in my own constituency. A pdrsistent in my own constituency. A persistent

:50:14. > :50:15.problem in the centre of thd in my own constituency. A pdrsistent

:50:16. > :50:17.problem in the centre of the town. problem in the centre of thd town.

:50:18. > :50:20.Really, there needs to be work in urban areas to, for example, clear

:50:21. > :50:23.out the grates. I have been talking to the Environment Agency and

:50:24. > :50:26.Northamptonshire County Council about that. But in terms of the

:50:27. > :50:28.coastal flooding, I don't think that we should abandon these comlunities.

:50:29. > :50:32.Clearly, the government are getting this wrong at the moment. What they

:50:33. > :50:36.are doing is reacting to evdnts letting the floods have a terrible

:50:37. > :50:41.toll on communities. As we have seen at the Somerset Levels. And then,

:50:42. > :50:43.seeing they will pump money in there and not giving a fair deal to the

:50:44. > :50:45.coastline in this region. Let's and not giving a fair deal to the

:50:46. > :50:51.coastline in this region. Let's talk about this funding formula. You have

:50:52. > :50:55.to draw the line somewhere. The other side of the fence is you can't

:50:56. > :51:00.defend everywhere. It is not financially possible. That hs true.

:51:01. > :51:02.But I think also, there is something wrong with basing the way this

:51:03. > :51:04.formula works entirely on money. formula works entirely on money.

:51:05. > :51:06.There is something fairly obscene about saying a human life is worth

:51:07. > :51:08.this much money, or a beauthful about saying a human life is worth

:51:09. > :51:12.this much money, or a beautiful view is worth that much. We really need

:51:13. > :51:16.to get out of that mindset of thinking only in terms of money. And

:51:17. > :51:17.think in terms of what is rdally important. The things that make

:51:18. > :51:19.think in terms of what is really important. The things that lake our

:51:20. > :51:21.lives worth living. In terms of what Brandon Lewis said about this in

:51:22. > :51:21.lives worth living. In terms of what Brandon Lewis said about thhs in his

:51:22. > :51:23.Brandon Lewis said about this in his piece we saw, one thing I phcked

:51:24. > :51:25.Brandon Lewis said about thhs in his piece we saw, one thing I picked up

:51:26. > :51:29.on is he mentioned the Environment Agency. And something important here

:51:30. > :51:31.is that the Environment Agency are losing 550 staff, who are

:51:32. > :51:35.specifically supposed to work on flood protection, because of

:51:36. > :51:37.government cuts. So really, it is quite outrageous of him to come on

:51:38. > :51:41.here and say he is doing something here and say he is doing something

:51:42. > :51:45.about this when it is his government making the cuts. Andy Sawford, you

:51:46. > :51:51.could say it is not just about this government, but successive

:51:52. > :51:54.governments. P we have heard MPs saying this week that these flood

:51:55. > :51:57.defences are 1950s, 1960s some of them. It is successive governments

:51:58. > :52:03.that have failed to grasp it. Actually, there was a great deal of

:52:04. > :52:05.work done by the last government. And that had a really benefhcial

:52:06. > :52:07.And that had a really beneficial effect this winter. And what we were

:52:08. > :52:15.wanting to do. The report by Michael wanting to do. The report bx Michael

:52:16. > :52:16.Pitt a few years ago made a whole series of recommendations. And the

:52:17. > :52:20.government could be doing mtch more government could be doing much more

:52:21. > :52:23.to augment those. But this Green idea that money doesn't matter, of

:52:24. > :52:26.course money matters. We have got to spend money, but let's not abandon

:52:27. > :52:30.areas in this region. We will have to move on. Thank you.

:52:31. > :52:32.Now to the damning reports into a federation running academy schools

:52:33. > :52:35.and a college in Luton. The government has given the Barnfield

:52:36. > :52:37.Federation one month to improve or it could be shut down. The report

:52:38. > :52:38.said the college had wrongly it could be shut down. The report

:52:39. > :52:40.said the college had wronglx claimed said the college had wrongly claimed

:52:41. > :52:44.nearly ?1 million for students it had no records of teaching. And it

:52:45. > :52:48.has lost ?1.25 million on f`iled has lost ?1.25 million on f`iled

:52:49. > :52:51.projects. The government has called for a complete overhaul of the

:52:52. > :52:52.organisation's structure and half of the existing governors to be

:52:53. > :52:56.the existing governors to bd replaced. Just three years ago, the

:52:57. > :53:00.Barnfield Federation was held up by the government as a beacon of the

:53:01. > :53:03.academy movement. The report has revealed that its former boss, Sir

:53:04. > :53:09.Peter Birkett, was given two payoffs. Holiday allowances and a

:53:10. > :53:12.car. That was when he resigned. Despite only being entitled to and

:53:13. > :53:15.asking for holiday pay. The report states that the investigation was

:53:16. > :53:19.prompted by the actions of whistle`blowers. One former teacher

:53:20. > :53:22.told us, at the end of last year, when we first highlighted the

:53:23. > :53:25.problems, just how difficult it was to report their concerns. I did try

:53:26. > :53:29.ringing them. And it was re`lly ringing them. And it was re`lly

:53:30. > :53:33.difficult. The person at the end of the line at the Department for

:53:34. > :53:37.Education said, I do not know who you need to speak to. I felt like I

:53:38. > :53:40.was going round in circles. So I gave up. Debra McGurran raised that

:53:41. > :53:43.point with the skills Minister Matthew Hancock earlier this week.

:53:44. > :53:47.As soon as we heard the whistle`blower's allegations, we

:53:48. > :53:53.investigated. We moved very quickly to act and to find out what was

:53:54. > :53:58.happening. The report lays bare what was found. We have put in place new

:53:59. > :54:00.leadership already. And we will do whatever it takes to make stre we

:54:01. > :54:03.get the highest possible education get the highest possible edtcation

:54:04. > :54:04.standards for students and potential students in the area. We have spoken

:54:05. > :54:06.to whistle`blowers who wantdd to to whistle`blowers who wanted to

:54:07. > :54:11.report to the DFE and had tdrrible report to the DFE and had terrible

:54:12. > :54:12.trouble doing so. Some whistle` blowers told me that they h`d

:54:13. > :54:13.trouble doing so. Some whistle` blowers told me that they had been

:54:14. > :54:17.blowers told me that they h`d been waiting on the phone for 20 minutes

:54:18. > :54:19.to report their concerns. What has happened since we got those

:54:20. > :54:21.allegations from the whistle`blowers demonstrates how quickly and

:54:22. > :54:32.comprehensively we have dealt with this problem. What if the government

:54:33. > :54:39.wants to see Barnfield kept together? Will you back thel in that

:54:40. > :54:44.or do you want to see it split up? We have made it very clear that we

:54:45. > :54:46.have a report into what went on And we have put in new leadership.

:54:47. > :54:48.have a report into what went on. And we have put in new leadershhp. Now

:54:49. > :54:51.we will look at how we make sure that Barnfield is structured for the

:54:52. > :54:54.best possible outcome for the students in the future. That is

:54:55. > :54:57.still an open question. We will look into that over the coming weeks.

:54:58. > :54:59.still an open question. We will look into that over the coming wdeks If

:55:00. > :55:00.this school had been under local authority control, don't you

:55:01. > :55:00.this school had been under local authority control, don't yot think

:55:01. > :55:06.these concerns would have surfaced these concerns would have strfaced

:55:07. > :55:09.sooner? I don't think so. Bdcause as soon as the whistle` blower's

:55:10. > :55:13.allegations were brought to us, we acted immediately. I think it is

:55:14. > :55:17.acted immediately. I think ht is hard to see how we could have acted

:55:18. > :55:18.any more quickly than taking very seriously their actions. Another

:55:19. > :55:24.problem here was the rapid dxpansion problem here was the rapid expansion

:55:25. > :55:27.of schools in this federation. Doesn't it make it more difficult to

:55:28. > :55:32.deal with when you have multiple sites like this? Dealing with

:55:33. > :55:39.Barnfield is very important as a priority. And making sure that the

:55:40. > :55:40.education is as good as possible. And any education organisathon that

:55:41. > :55:42.has difficulties as severe as And any education organisation that

:55:43. > :55:43.has difficulties as severe `s this, clearing that up is always

:55:44. > :55:49.difficult. But we are absolttely on difficult. But we are absolttely on

:55:50. > :55:54.top of it. We have put new leadership in place already. Very

:55:55. > :55:55.experienced leadership. We will take whatever action is necessary

:55:56. > :55:55.experienced leadership. We will take whatever action is necessarx to get

:55:56. > :56:03.whatever action is necessary to get the best school education.

:56:04. > :56:06.Dashboards `` best possible education. But if there are more

:56:07. > :56:07.sites, doesn't that make it more difficult with the academy lodel

:56:08. > :56:08.creating this federation. Because creating this federation. Bdcause

:56:09. > :56:11.this is a federation with real this is a federation with real

:56:12. > :56:14.problems at its heart, as your report says. I think what is

:56:15. > :56:18.important is that when allegations are brought to light, we acted very

:56:19. > :56:22.quickly. We have new leadership in place. We have done an investigation

:56:23. > :56:29.and report. And now we will take action. Whatever the scalel of an

:56:30. > :56:33.institution, what matters is that, as soon as you find out there is a

:56:34. > :56:38.problem, you grip the probldm and you do whatever is necessary. ``

:56:39. > :56:42.whatever the scale. And at the front of your mind the interests of the

:56:43. > :56:42.pupils and the potential pupils in the area.

:56:43. > :57:02.This is Barnfield's statement.. Rupert Read, we had talk of multiple

:57:03. > :57:05.sites there. Do you think it makes it harder to get a grip of a

:57:06. > :57:07.it harder to get a grip of ` federation that is running multiple

:57:08. > :57:09.sites? Definitely. Let's get to the root cause of the problem hdre.

:57:10. > :57:11.sites? Definitely. Let's get to the root cause of the problem here. And

:57:12. > :57:12.that is the academy system. This absurd system created, let's not

:57:13. > :57:15.forget, by a Labour government, forget, by a Labour government,

:57:16. > :57:16.continued by the current government. It enables rich people to bty

:57:17. > :57:17.continued by the current government. It enables rich people to buy access

:57:18. > :57:19.It enables rich people to bty access to the state education system for

:57:20. > :57:21.derisory sums. A few rich businessmen control the education of

:57:22. > :57:22.our children. We in the Greens think our children. We in the Greens think

:57:23. > :57:24.that is completely wrong. Ldt's our children. We in the Gredns think

:57:25. > :57:28.that is completely wrong. Let's put that is completely wrong. Ldt's put

:57:29. > :57:38.that to Andy Sawford. Labour introduced them. Did you not foresee

:57:39. > :57:41.problems like this? Under Labour, there was an approach where, if

:57:42. > :57:43.schools were struggling over a long period of time, that to givd

:57:44. > :57:43.schools were struggling over a long period of time, that to give them a

:57:44. > :57:46.period of time, that to givd them a fresh start they were made

:57:47. > :57:48.academies. That was a very small number in the overall scheme. The

:57:49. > :57:49.number in the overall schemd. The real problem is this government

:57:50. > :57:49.number in the overall scheme. The real problem is this governlent is

:57:50. > :57:52.pushing academies as their approach pushing academies as their approach

:57:53. > :57:54.for all schools. Particularly secondary schools. There are very

:57:55. > :58:00.few left that are maintained. There are over 3500 created by this

:58:01. > :58:02.government. And there is very poor accountability and they varx

:58:03. > :58:04.anonymously. So I have great schools in my area. But we hear somd

:58:05. > :58:04.anonymously. So I have great schools in my area. But we hear some really

:58:05. > :58:07.in my area. But we hear somd really difficult examples of poor

:58:08. > :58:09.leadership. Things going wrong. Poor financial management. Ultimately, in

:58:10. > :58:12.the end, we have responsibility to the children. There is nothhng

:58:13. > :58:13.intrinsically wrong with thd academy system. There will always be

:58:14. > :58:15.system. There will always bd underperforming schools. Won't

:58:16. > :58:17.there? Andy has just admittdd underperforming schools. Won't

:58:18. > :58:17.there? Andy has just admitted his there? Andy has just admittdd his

:58:18. > :58:26.party created the academy system, party created the academy sxstem,

:58:27. > :58:29.just like the created PFI. It is no good him blaming the Conservatives

:58:30. > :58:35.for simply continuing something be created. It is time for an

:58:36. > :58:38.alternative. Time for a proper state education and proper public

:58:39. > :58:44.services. That is what the Greens are calling for. It seems a bit of

:58:45. > :58:45.point`scoring unnecessarily. This Barnfield is going wrong for years

:58:46. > :58:47.into a Conservative governmdnt. They into a Conservative governmdnt. They

:58:48. > :58:50.have a completely different academies programme to the Labour

:58:51. > :58:52.programme, which was about two and failing schools. Not completely

:58:53. > :58:54.different. It is surely a continuation of the same thhng.

:58:55. > :58:57.continuation of the same thing. Children are not interested in this

:58:58. > :58:59.kind of point`scoring or evdn in the nameplate on the door of the

:59:00. > :58:59.kind of point`scoring or even in the nameplate on the door of thd school.

:59:00. > :59:01.They just want a good education. They just want a good education

:59:02. > :59:02.Children do not want their education Children do not want their education

:59:03. > :59:05.to be controlled by a few rhch to be controlled by a few rich

:59:06. > :59:06.businessmen. Tell me about the system of education the gredn

:59:07. > :59:09.system of education the green support, then. Do you want things

:59:10. > :59:11.back on local authority control completely? Yes, with strong parent

:59:12. > :59:15.involvement and stakeholder involvement. We want to see money

:59:16. > :59:18.not being put in by rich businessmen who then get to control what the

:59:19. > :59:20.children are taught. We want to see an education system that actually

:59:21. > :59:22.works for the benefit of the common works for the benefit of thd common

:59:23. > :59:25.good. Andy Sawford, academies are good. Andy Sawford, academids are

:59:26. > :59:28.here to stay, aren't they? The Corby Business Academy in my constituency

:59:29. > :59:31.is teaching my nieces. They are doing really well. And of course, I

:59:32. > :59:32.will support those schools. But there is an issue about

:59:33. > :59:33.accountability. Also an issue there is an issue about

:59:34. > :59:35.accountability. Also an isste about accountability. Also an issue about

:59:36. > :59:36.where these are opened up about school plays planning. We h`ve a

:59:37. > :59:39.school plays planning. We have a crisis of primary places in my

:59:40. > :59:41.constituency. So there is a proper role for government. We shotldn t

:59:42. > :59:45.role for government. We shouldn't just abdicate education to the

:59:46. > :59:48.schools themselves. Thank you. Now for the political round`up of

:59:49. > :59:52.the week when someone showed a clean pair of heals in the annual MP's

:59:53. > :59:57.pancake race. Here is our 60 second round`up. `` heels.

:59:58. > :00:01.Peterborough MP, Stewart Jackson, was delighted to hear this week that

:00:02. > :00:04.he has won his legal battle with the parliamentary expenses watchdog over

:00:05. > :00:08.whether his house had gained in value. Ofsted inspectors were not

:00:09. > :00:09.pleased with the performance value. Ofsted inspectors were not

:00:10. > :00:11.pleased with the performancd of pleased with the performancd of

:00:12. > :00:13.schools in Suffolk at key stages two and four and is still well below the

:00:14. > :00:20.national average. While I recognise national average. While I rdcognise

:00:21. > :00:23.and welcome the Ofsted report that has been published today, there are

:00:24. > :00:28.elements of that report I do not agree with. Patients at Northampton

:00:29. > :00:30.General Hospital did not like the fact that all non`urgent opdrations

:00:31. > :00:33.fact that all non`urgent operations had been cancelled because of the

:00:34. > :00:36.extreme pressure on accident and emergency. The Green Party is

:00:37. > :00:38.calling for action to allow the East Coast Main Line to remain in public

:00:39. > :00:44.ownership. But the MP for Cambridge, ownership. But the MP for Cambridge,

:00:45. > :00:46.Julian Huppert, was ahead of the pack at the start of the MP's

:00:47. > :00:48.charity pancake race. But his pack at the start of the MP's

:00:49. > :00:48.charity pancake race. But hhs team charity pancake race. But hhs team

:00:49. > :00:55.failed to take the tape at the end. Rupert Read, why should the East

:00:56. > :01:01.Coast Main Line remain in public Coast Main Line remain in public

:01:02. > :01:08.ownership? Because last year, it made a profit of ?208 million. And

:01:09. > :01:11.because it had a low inflathon price because it had a low inflation price

:01:12. > :01:21.rise this year, unlike virtually any other part of the rail network. The

:01:22. > :01:23.East Coast Main Line is showing how a proper joined up railway system

:01:24. > :01:24.could be run if we renation`lise could be run if we renation`lise

:01:25. > :01:28.railways, as ourMP, Caroline Lucas, railways, as ourMP, Caroline Lucas,

:01:29. > :01:30.is hoping to do. `` as our MP. It is a real shame the other parthes would

:01:31. > :01:32.a real shame the other parties would get behind this. `` won't gdt

:01:33. > :01:35.get behind this. `` won't get behind. Andy Sawford, how concerned

:01:36. > :01:38.are you about the problems we saw there that Northampton general? Very

:01:39. > :01:40.concerned. At Kettering General Hospital and Northampton, there are

:01:41. > :01:41.real pressures on accident and emergency and services. I w`nt

:01:42. > :01:42.real pressures on accident `nd emergency and services. I want to

:01:43. > :01:43.emergency and services. I w`nt to see new urgent treatment centres

:01:44. > :01:45.opened up. How soon does that need opened up. How soon does that need

:01:46. > :01:50.to happen? There is now an trgent to happen? There is now an trgent

:01:51. > :01:54.care centre in Corby, but it is the only one in the county. We need to

:01:55. > :01:58.see them across the county which will benefit my constituency is and

:01:59. > :02:00.everybody in the area. OK, we will have to leave it there. Thank you

:02:01. > :02:02.very much. As always, you can have to leave it there. Thank you

:02:03. > :02:04.very much. As always, you c`n keep very much. As always, you can keep

:02:05. > :02:07.in touch via our website, where you will also find links to Debra

:02:08. > :02:11.McGurran's blogs for the latest political updates. We are b`ck at

:02:12. > :02:14.the same time next week when we look forward to the budget and whether

:02:15. > :02:16.there will be financial support announced for our cities. For now,

:02:17. > :02:19.Gove is right to focus. We've run out of time. Thanks for being here.

:02:20. > :02:36.Andrew, back to you. Now, without further ado, more from

:02:37. > :02:39.our political panel. Iain Martin, what did you make of Iain Duncan

:02:40. > :02:45.Smith's response to the Danny Alexander point I'd put to him? I

:02:46. > :02:48.thought it was a cheekily put response but actually, on Twitter,

:02:49. > :02:51.people have been tweeting while on air that there are lots of examples

:02:52. > :02:56.where the Tories have demanded the raising of the threshold. The 2006

:02:57. > :03:00.raising of the threshold. The 2 06 Forsyth tax omission is another

:03:01. > :03:07.example. Helen, on the bigger issue of welfare reforms, is welfare

:03:08. > :03:11.reform, as we head into the election, despite all the

:03:12. > :03:16.criticisms, still a plus for the government? I don't think so.

:03:17. > :03:20.Whatever the opposite of a Midas touch is, Iain Duncan Smith has got

:03:21. > :03:24.it. David Cameron never talks about universal credit any more. The

:03:25. > :03:26.record on personal independence payment, for example... We didn't

:03:27. > :03:33.payment, for example... We didn t get onto that. Only one in six of

:03:34. > :03:40.those notes have been paid. A toss pulling out of their condiment has

:03:41. > :03:43.been a nightmare. It's a very big minus point for the Secretary of

:03:44. > :03:56.State. -- Atos pulling out of bed contract. Welfare cuts are an

:03:57. > :04:01.unambiguous point for the government but other points more ambiguous. I

:04:02. > :04:06.don't think it's technical complexity that makes IDS's reform a

:04:07. > :04:11.problem. The IT gets moved out with time. But even if it's in fermented

:04:12. > :04:16.perfectly, what it will achieve has been slightly oversold, I think and

:04:17. > :04:20.simplified incredibly. All it does is improve incentives to work for

:04:21. > :04:25.one section of the income scale and diminishes it at another. Basically,

:04:26. > :04:30.you are encouraged to go from working zero hours to 16 hours but

:04:31. > :04:33.your incentive to work beyond 16 goes down. That's not because it's a

:04:34. > :04:36.horrendous policy but because in work benefits systems are

:04:37. > :04:47.imperceptible. Most countries do worse than we do. -- benefits

:04:48. > :04:50.systems cannot be perfected. They need to tone down how much this can

:04:51. > :04:52.achieve even if it all goes flawlessly. There are clearly

:04:53. > :04:58.problems, particularly within limitation, but Labour is still wary

:04:59. > :05:04.of welfare reform. -- with implementation. Polls suggest it is

:05:05. > :05:11.rather popular. People may not know what's involved were like the sound

:05:12. > :05:14.of it. I think Janan is right to mark out the differences between

:05:15. > :05:21.welfare cuts and welfare reforms. They are related but distinct. Are

:05:22. > :05:28.we saying cuts are more popular than reform? They clearly are. The

:05:29. > :05:36.numbers, when you present people numbers on benefit reductions, are

:05:37. > :05:40.off the scale. Reform, for the reasons you explored in your

:05:41. > :05:45.interview, is incredibly compensated. What's interesting is

:05:46. > :05:50.that Labour haven't really definitively said what their

:05:51. > :05:55.position is on this. I think they like - despite what they may see in

:05:56. > :05:58.public occasionally - some of what universal credit might produce but

:05:59. > :06:06.they don't want to be associated with it. We probably won't know

:06:07. > :06:11.until if Ed Miliband is Prime Minister precisely what direction

:06:12. > :06:15.Labour will go. Immigration is still a hot topic in Westminster and

:06:16. > :06:18.throughout the country. This new Home Office minister, James

:06:19. > :06:24.Brokenshire, made an intervention. Let's see what he had to say. For

:06:25. > :06:28.too long, the benefits of immigration went to employers who

:06:29. > :06:31.wanted an easy supply of cheap labour or to the wealthy

:06:32. > :06:34.metropolitan elite who wanted cheap tradesmen and services, but not to

:06:35. > :06:39.the ordinary hard-working people of this country. With the result that

:06:40. > :06:44.the Prime Minister and everyone else has to tell us all whether they've

:06:45. > :06:48.now got Portuguese or whatever it is Nanny is. Is this the most

:06:49. > :06:53.cack-handed intervention on an immigration issue in a long list? I

:06:54. > :06:59.think it is and when I saw this being trailed the night before, I

:07:00. > :07:01.worried for him. As soon as a minister of the Crown uses the

:07:02. > :07:37.phrase "wealthy metropolitan elite" more likely we see it in recession.

:07:38. > :07:44.We've just had the worst recession in several decades. It's no small

:07:45. > :07:48.problem but compared to what ministers like James Brokenshire has

:07:49. > :07:52.been saying for the past few years and also the reluctance to issue the

:07:53. > :07:57.report earlier, I thought that, combined with the speech, made it

:07:58. > :08:01.quite a bad week for the department. Was this a cack-handed attempt to

:08:02. > :08:05.appeal to the UKIP voters? I think so and he's predecessor had to leave

:08:06. > :08:10.the job because of having a foreign cleaner. It drew attention to the

:08:11. > :08:14.Tories' biggest problem, the out of touch problem. Most people around

:08:15. > :08:20.the country probably don't have a Portuguese nanny and you've just put

:08:21. > :08:25.a big sign over David Cameron saying, this man can afford a

:08:26. > :08:27.Portuguese Nanny. It is not the finest political operation ever

:08:28. > :08:31.conducted and the speech was definitely given by the Home Office

:08:32. > :08:37.to Number Ten but did Number Ten bother to read it? It was a complete

:08:38. > :08:41.shambles. The basic argument that there is a divide between a wealthy

:08:42. > :08:47.metropolitan elite and large parts of Middle Britain or the rest of the

:08:48. > :08:48.country I think is basically sound. It is but they are on the wrong side

:08:49. > :08:53.of it. What do you mean by that The of it. What do you mean by that? The

:08:54. > :08:59.Tory government is on the wrong side. This is appealing to UKIP

:09:00. > :09:03.voters and we know that UKIP is appealing to working-class voters

:09:04. > :09:04.who have previously voted Labour and Tory. If you set up that divide,

:09:05. > :09:10.Tory. If you set up that divide make sure you are on the right side

:09:11. > :09:13.stop When you talk about metropolitan members of the media

:09:14. > :09:19.class, they say that it is rubbish and everyone has a Polish cleaner.

:09:20. > :09:25.No, they don't. I do not have a clean! I don't clean behind the

:09:26. > :09:30.fridge, either! Most people in the country don't have a cleaner. The

:09:31. > :09:41.problem for the Tories on this is, why play that game? You can't

:09:42. > :09:44.out-UKIP UKIP. After two or three years of sustained Tory effort to do

:09:45. > :09:51.that, they will probably finish behind UKIP. Do we really want a

:09:52. > :09:55.political system where it becomes an issue of where your nanny or your

:09:56. > :10:01.cleaner is from, if you've got one? Unless, of course, they're illegal.

:10:02. > :10:06.But Portuguese or Italian or Scottish... And intervention was

:10:07. > :10:13.from Nick Clegg who said his wife was Dutch -- his mum was Dutch and

:10:14. > :10:19.his wife was Spanish. Not communism but who your cleaner is! It's the

:10:20. > :10:24.McCarthy question! Where does your cleaner come from. A lot of people

:10:25. > :10:30.will say are lucky to have a cleaner. I want to move onto selfies

:10:31. > :10:34.but first, on the Nigel Farage Nick Clegg debate, let's stick with

:10:35. > :10:42.the TV one. Who do you think will win? Nigel Farage. Clegg. He is a

:10:43. > :10:46.surprisingly good in debates and people have forgotten. I think Clegg

:10:47. > :10:56.is going to win. I think Farage has peaked. We're going to keep that on

:10:57. > :11:02.tape as well! Two 214 Clegg there. Selfies. Politicians are attempting

:11:03. > :11:04.to show they're down with the kids. Let's look at some that we've seen

:11:05. > :11:50.in recent days. Why are they doing this, Helen? I'm

:11:51. > :11:55.so embarrassed you call me reading the SNP manifesto, as I do every

:11:56. > :11:58.Saturday! They do it because it makes them seem authentic and that's

:11:59. > :12:03.the big Lie that social media tells you - that you're seeing the real

:12:04. > :12:06.person. You're not, you're seeing a very carefully manicured, more witty

:12:07. > :12:14.person. That doesn't work for politicians. It looks so fake and

:12:15. > :12:19.I'm still suffering the cringe I see every time I see Cameronserious

:12:20. > :12:23.phone face. Does Mr Cameron really think it big Sim up because he's on

:12:24. > :12:32.the phone to President Obama? Obama is not the personality he once was.

:12:33. > :12:36.There is an international crisis in Ukraine - of course we are expecting

:12:37. > :12:40.to be speaking to Obama! And if you were in any doubt about what a man

:12:41. > :12:45.talking on the telephone looks like, here's a photo. I must confess, I

:12:46. > :12:52.didn't take my own selfie. Did your nanny? My father-in-law took it.

:12:53. > :13:06.Where is your father-in-law from? Scotland. Just checking. Janan, I

:13:07. > :13:14.think we've got one of you. The 1%! What a great telephone! Where did

:13:15. > :13:20.you get that telephone? It looks like Wolf Of Wall Street! That's

:13:21. > :13:24.what I go to bed in. It showed how excited Cameron was to be on the

:13:25. > :13:29.phone to Obama. All our politicians think they are living a mini version

:13:30. > :13:33.of US politics. President Obama goes on a big plane and we complain when

:13:34. > :13:36.George Osborne goes first class on first Great Western. They want to be

:13:37. > :13:41.big and important like American politics but it doesn't work. We'll

:13:42. > :13:46.see your top at next week! That's it for this week. Faxed all

:13:47. > :13:51.our guests. The Daily Politics is on all this week at lunchtime on BBC

:13:52. > :13:55.Two. We'll be back here same time, same place next week. Remember, if

:13:56. > :14:00.it's Sunday, it is the Sunday Politics.