06/07/2014 Sunday Politics East


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 06/07/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Up to a million public sector workers will strike this week.


It's one of the biggest walk-outs since 201 .


The country's top trade unionist Frances O'Grady and


Tory Business Minister Matt Hancock go head-to-head.


The Tour de France seems to have cheered him up - just as well


for the Deputy Prime Minister hasn't got much else to smile about.


Nick Clegg joins me live from Sheffield to discuss the


Just over ten weeks until Scotland determines its future.


The man leading the campaign AGAINST independence, Alistair Darling,


In hearing the east, new session for MPs.


And with me throughout the show three top-flight political


journalists always ahead of the peleton - Nick Watt,


They'll be tweeting faster than Tour de France cyclists can pedal.


The news is dominated this morning by stories swirling


around allegations of an historic Westminster paedophile ring.


Concern has grown because of the disappearance of a dossier


handed over to the Home Office in 1983, along with over 100 official


files related to it and possibly containing details of historic child


Labour is calling for a public inquiry led by a child protection


But speaking earlier on The Andrew Marr Show this morning


the Education Secretary Michael Gove ruled that out.


The most important thing that we need to do is ensure that the due


process of law pursues those who may be guilty of individual crimes and


we also learn lessons about what may or may not have gone wrong in the


past, but it is also important to emphasise that many of the


allegations that are being made are historic. And what we do now in


order to keep children safer is better and stronger than was the


case when 20 or 30 years ago. Without getting into a boring


tit-for-tat, public inquiry, "yes" or "no"? No. Helen, can the


Government go on resisting calls for a full-scale inquiry? It is very


hard. There are cynical and non-cynical reasons for calling for


an inquiry. The cynical one allows you to say I can't comment on this.


The non-cynical is it manages to get people to air allegations in a way


that is safe. What we saw at the Leveson Inquiry was helpful, people


who felt they had been shut out from justice getting a chance to tell


their side of the story. A public inquiry in this case is a good idea.


Labour have called for a lot of public inquiries. A list was made in


2012 of how many they called for. Not only Savile, but the West Coast


Main Line and breast implants. On this particular issue, the people


don't trust the politicians, they don't trust the police either


because they may have been complicit in a cover-up. They may not trust


the Home Office who we are told some of their officials were mentioned in


the dossier? That is what David Cameron is hanging on to. This is a


matter now because they are alleged criminal activity, it is for the


police to investigate. In that big piece in the Sunday Times, Tim


Shipman reports one of the people making the allegations lives in the


United States making the allegations lives in the


been out to the United States to interview him. The Prime Minister


would say that is how serious the police are taking it. The problem


for the Prime Minister - he police are taking it. The problem


allergic to big public inquiry. His finest moment was his response to


the Bloody Sunday inquiry shortly after he became Prime


inrequest -- that inquiry took 2 years to report. The problem is the


dossier has gone missing, the files have gone missing, more allegations


keep coming out either directly or indirectly. It doesn't look like it


is going to go away? The fact the dossiers are missing means it is


inappropriate for the Home Office to be investigating this. There is


inappropriate for the Home Office to a police investigation. If after


that, there are questions unanswered which can only be answered by


that, there are questions unanswered public inquiry, or which require


resources that can only be commanded by a public inquiry, I could see the


case for going down that road. I fear that sometimes in this country


we invest almost supernatural powers in what a public inquiry can do I


wonder whether there is another example of a country that goes


through this stale ritual every few years of a scandal emerging, the


opposition calling for an inquiry, the Government saying no and then


holding the line or giving in. I don't know what we think this


inquiries can do. It comes back to your point, Helen, you should be


careful what you call an inquiry on so it doesn't devalue the concept.


On Thursday up to a million public sector workers - including teachers,


firemen and council workers - will go on strike.


Their unions have differing gripes but the fact they're all striking


on the same day is designed to send a strong message to the government.


As the economy picks up again they're demanding an end


Growth has returned strongly to the UK economy


and unemployment is at its lowest level for more than five years.


So why is there still talk of austerity


The deficit is coming down but much more slowly than the government


And accumulated deficits - the national debt -


The UK is now in hock to the tune of ?1.3 trillion - and rising.


In fact, we're only 40% of the way through George Osborne's planned


austerity, with the chancellor now saying he won't manage to balance


Unions are now rebelling against tight pay controls.


Since 2010, average public sector pay, which goes to about 1 in 5


Over the same period, prices increased by 16% -


meaning the average public sector worker saw their pay squeezed


Going head-to-head on the public sector strikes and austerity -


the general secretary of the TUC Frances O'Grady, and Conservative


We have seen it, public sector pay squeezed by 9% under the Coalition


Government. Isn't it time to take your foot off the brake a bit? I


don't think it is the right time to let go of the public finances at


all. We were always clear that this is what's called a structural


deficit, it doesn't go away just because the growth is returning and


the economy is coming back. We have protected and are protecting the


lowest paid public sector workers who weren't part of the pay freeze


and now pay going up by 1%. These are difficult decisions. We have had


that discussion many times. They are necessary in order to keep that plan


on track and as we can see in the wider economy, it is working.


People's living standards will have to continue to fall if you are in


the public sector? We need to keep public spending under control and


pay restraint is one of the main ways of being able... The answer is


yes? The answer is this is necessary. The answer is yes, this


is necessary. It isn't because we want to. We have to. This strike


isn't going to change the Government's mind, is it? It does


seem like the Government isn't listening. We have had years... They


are listening, they just don't agree. Ordinary people, including


those in the public sector, are finding it really tough. What really


sticks in the throat is the idea that money can be found to give tax


cuts to billionaires, to millionaires and to big


corporations. But it can't be found to help 500,000 workers in local


government, dinner ladies, school meal workers, lollipop men and women


who are earning less than the living wage. What do you say to that? We


have protected those who are the least well-paid in the public


sector. But this is about a long-term... How can you? Hold on.


You have said you have protected them. This involves ordinary people,


many watching this programme, they have had a 1% pay rise in some cases


since 2010. The average gas bill is up 57%, electric bill up 22%, food


costs up 16%, running a car 11% in what way have you protected people


from spending they have to make Firstly, you read out the average


increases in public sector pay. That has had the biggest impact at the


top end and those at the bottom end have been best protected, as best we


could. Of course, we have also taken two million people out of income tax


and increased the income tax threshold which has a big positive


impact. We have frozen and then cut fuel duty, which would have been 20


pence higher. I wanted to take on this point about priorities. We have


got to make sure that we get the economy going at the same time and


we raised more money from those at the top than we did before 2010


partly because we have encouraged them to invest. And this is a really


important balance of making sure we get the books back in order, we have


stability for family finances and we get the economy going. Why not


spread the living wage? We know you could pay for that pay increase


itself if you spread the living wage through the private sector and


guarantee... The living wage being above the minimum wage? Absolutely.


?7.65 in the rest of the country, ?8.80 in London. What is the answer?


I'm a fan of the minimum wage. But not for public sector workers. Being


able to pay low-paid workers as much as possible within the constraints


of the public finances is something I have pushed very hard. The


evidence we can increase the minimum wage has to be balanced which the


Low Pay Commission do with the impact on the number of jobs... Even


after a pay freeze for quite a while among public sector workers, they


are still paid 15% on average more than those in the private sector?


That is not true. It is, according to the ONS figures. I read that


report this morning. If you look at the whole package, what they are


saying is public service workers are worse off. Average earnings in the


public sector are ?16.28 an hour compared to ?14.16 private. You are


comparing apples and pears. It's the kind of jobs and the size of the


workplace that people work in. They are still overall on average better


off? Lower paid workers tend to be better off because unions negotiate


better deals for lower paid workers. They are more unionised in the pry


private sector. The public sector is worse off. This is a political


strike, isn't it? There is a whole disparate range of reasons. The


strike is saying that you are against this Government, that is


what this is about? I this I what firefighters, local government


workers and health workers who are protesting, too, alongside teachers


are saying is that this Government is not listening, it is out of


touch, people can't carry on having cuts in their living standards


depending on benefits. When will the public sector worker ever get a real


increase in their pay under a Conservative Government? Well, we


certainly hope to have the books balanced by 2018. Not before then?


2018 is when we hope to be able to be in surplus. It is testament. .


So, no real pay increase for public sector workers before 2018?


Interestingly, this isn't just about the Conservatives and the Lib Dems,


the Labour Party leadership have said it is a test of their


credibility that they support the squeeze on public sector pay. I look


forward to them, they ought to come out and say very clearly that these


strikes are wrong and they are against the strikes and stop taking


union money. It is a democratic right. Hold on. They are - they


think the policy of pay restraint is necessary. Alright. On this point


about democracy... Ask yourself why so many ordinary decent public


service workers are so fed up. They have seen so many billions of pounds


wasted through outsourcing to organisations like G4 S. In Unite


and UNISON the turnout in this vote was under 20%. Alright. OK. One


final question... Hold on. You said millions and millions voted on


this... I want to ask you this question. Is the story in the Mail


on Sunday today that Mr Cameron s planning a big crackdown on the


unions over balloting, is that true? Well, strikes like this... I know


the cases, is it true you are going to dhang the law? Strikes like this


make that argument stronger. The Conservative Party is in Government


on the basis of 23% of the electorate... We have run out of


time. Thank you very much. "Should Scotland be


an independent country?" That's the question the people of


Scotland will answer in a referendum If the polls are to be believed


the voters will answer "no". But in 2011 - ten weeks before


the Holyrood elections - the polls told us that Labour was going to win


and look what happened there - a Alistair Darling is leading


the campaign against independnence. is one that puts the matter of


independence to bed for a generation. In numerical terms, what


would that be? We need a decisive result in September, I think we will


get that provided we get our arguments across in the next couple


of months. What would it be in figures? I am not going to put a


number on it. People will look at it and say, OK, you have had two and a


half years of debate and Scotland has now decided. The polls may be


encouraging at the moment but I am not complacent, there is still a


long way to go. Speculating... If you don't want to answer that, that


is fair enough. Your side claims that a vote for independence is a


vote for massive uncertainty but if it is a no vote there is lots of


uncertainty too. All of the Westminster parties are promising


devolution but there is no timetable, no certainty. Yes, there


is. For the first time I can remember, all three parties are more


or less on the same page in terms of additional powers, we already have


powers in terms of policing and transport, now more powers are


planned in relation to tax and welfare. But you are all saying


different things. Between 2009 and 2012, the three parties have


slightly different proposals but they came together and there was an


agreed series of reforms in relation to tax which are now on the statute


book. If you go back to the devolutionary settlement in 199 ,


people unified around a single proposition so there is history here


and these three parties have delivered and they will deliver in


the event of people saying we will stay part of the UK. If Scotland


vote no to independence, when will Scotland get these extra powers I


would imagine that in the general election all three parties will have


something in their manifesto and you would expect to see legislation in


the session of Parliament that follows that. Imagining is not


certainty. Because the three parties have said this is what they will do,


and it is important having said that they stick to it. If you look in the


past when the Nationalists said the same thing, when they cast doubt


over what would happen in 2012, we delivered. The only party that


walked out of both of these discussions were the Nationalists


because they are not interested in more powers, they want a complete


break. You cannot say that if Edinburgh gets more devolution that


wouldn't mean fewer Scottish MPs in Westminster, can you? Nobody has any


plans to reduce the number of MPs. If you step back from this moment,


what people have been asked to do in September is to vote on the future


of their country, Scotland, and whether we should be part of the UK.


When I say part of the UK, full members of the UK with


representation in the House of Commons and the institutions that


affect our lives. This is a critically important vote. We want


to see more decentralisation of power to Scotland, and to local


authorities within Scotland, but we don't want a complete break with the


uncertainties, the risks and the downright disadvantages that would


throw Scotland's away if we were to make that break. The economic


arguments are dominating people s thinking, the polls show, that is


what is dominating at the moment. You cannot guarantee continued


membership of the European Union given all the talk now about an


in-out UK referendum. Firstly I don't think anyone has ever argued


Scotland wouldn't get back in. The big question is the terms and


conditions we would have to meet and we are applying to get into


something that is established, it wouldn't be a negotiation. What we


have said is there is no way Europe would let Scotland keep the rebate


which Scotland has, there would be big questions over whether we have


to join the euro, and other terms and conditions. The European Union


does not act with any great speed, on average it takes eight and a half


years to get into Europe. I don t want that uncertainty or the


disadvantages that would come Scotland's away that come with


losing clout in the European Union. The second point you asked me about


is in relation to the UK's membership of the European Union,


and if you look at polls, the majority of people still want to


stay in the UK. Frankly, a lot of people on my side didn't make the


argument against independence for a long time, we have been doing that


over the last two and a half years and we are making progress and that


is why I can say I think we will win provided we continue to get our


arguments across. Similarly with the European Union, the case needs to be


made because it is a powerful case. Isn't it true that the Nationalists


win either way? They win if it is a yes vote, and they win if it is a no


vote. They wanted devolution max so they win either way. There is a


world of difference between devolution and further devolution


where you remain part of the UK There is a world of difference


between that and making a break where Scotland becomes a foreign


country to the rest of the UK. You lose that security and those


opportunities. You lose the same currency, the opportunity with


pensions and so on. They are entitled to argue this case with


passion, they want a break, but the two things are worlds apart. Gordon


Brown said that the no campaign was too negative, have you adjusted to


take that criticism into account? Ever since I launched this campaign


over two years ago I said we would make a strong powerful case for


remaining part of the UK. Look at our research, where we have had


warnings from people to say that if we do well with research in Scotland


we get more than our population share of the grand and we gain from


that. There is a positive case but equally nobody will stop me from


saying to the Nationalists, look at the assertions you make which are


collapsing like skittles at the moment. Their assertions don't stand


up. They assert that somehow milk and honey will be flowing. It is


perfectly healthy within a referendum campaign to say that what


you are saying simply isn't true. You have been negative, we all know


about the so-called Cyber Nats book you compared Alex Salmond to the


leader of North Korea. On! The context was that Alex Salmond was


being asked why it was that UKIP had additional seat and he appeared to


blame television being been doing from another country, from BBC South


of the border. If you cannot have humour in a debate, heaven help us.


I think it is important in this debate that people from outside


politics should be allowed to have their say whatever side they are on


because that will make for a far better, healthier debate. Nobody


should be put in a state of fear and alarm by worrying about what will


happen if they stand up. Despite the nastiness, more and more people are


making a stand. We have run out of time. Thank you.


I will be talking to the SNP's hippity leader, Nicola Sturgeon


next week on Sunday Politics. Scotland: For Richer or Poorer will


be on BBC Two at 9pm tomorrow. Disastrous results in the European


elections, it is fair to say the Lib Dems are down in the doldrums. In a


moment I will be speaking to Nick Clegg, but first Emily has been


asking what Lib Dems would say to the Prime -- Deputy Prime Minister


on Call Clegg. Our phone in this week is the challenges facing the


Liberal Democrats. They are rock bottom in the polls and have dire


results in the local and European elections so what can the party do


to turn things around? Get in touch, we are going straight to line


one and Gareth. How much is a problem of that loss of local


support? It is a massive problem because those are the building


blocks of our success. The councillors who gets the case work


done are also the people who go out and deliver the leaflets and knock


on doors. Interesting, and it is not just local support the party has


lost, is it? In the next general election there are some big-name


Liberal Democrat MPs standing down like Malcolm Bruce and Ming


Campbell, how much of a problem will that be? That is a real challenge


and we have some of our brightest and best reaching an age of maturity


at the same moment so that is quite an additional test in what will be a


difficult election anyway. So how does the party need to position


itself to win back support? Let s go to Chris online free, has the party


got its strategy right? There is always a danger of appearing to be a


party that merely dilutes Labour or dilutes the Conservatives. We have a


of is serious, positive messages and we need to get those across in the


next election because if we don t people will vote for the Tories


Nick, what do you think of the party's message at the moment? I


have had a look at early draft of our manifesto and there is some good


stuff in there but the authors are probably too interested in what may


think we have achieved in the last five years and not really focusing


on what the voters will want to be hearing about the next five years.


Perhaps they should get out more and test some of these messages on the


doorstep. So you want to see the top ranks of the party on the doorstep.


Gareth online one also wants to make a point about the manifesto. There


is clearly a problem somewhere near the top and there are some people


who seem to be obsessed with power for power's sake, and happy with a


timid offer but the Liberal Democrats want to change things We


are running out of time so let's try to squeeze one more call in. What


are your thoughts on the long-term future of the party? I think serious


long-term danger is that the party could be relegated to the fringes of


the UK and no longer being a national party. We have gone back


decades if that happens because for many years we have been represented


in every part of the country at some level and we have got to rescue


ourselves from that. Some interesting views but we are going


to have to wait until the general election next year to find out how


well the Lib Dems face up to these challenges. Thanks for listening, we


are going to finish with an old classic now.


# I'm sorry, I'm sorry... #. Nick Clegg, welcome to the


programme. I want to come onto your situation in a minute but as you


will have seen in the papers, there is mounting concern over and


historic Westminster paedophile ring, and files relating to it


mysteriously disappearing. Why are you against a full public enquiry


into this? I wouldn't rule anything out. I think we should do anything


it takes to uncover this and achieve justice.


delivered, even all these many years later. How do you do it? There is an


inquiry in the Home Office about what's happened to these documents,


serious questions need to be asked about what happened in the Home


Office and those questions need to be answered. There are inquiries in


the BBC, in the NHS and most importantly of all the police are


looking into the places where this abuse was alleged to have taken


place. All I would say is, let's make sure that justice is delivered,


truth is uncovered and I think that the way to do that, as we have seen,


is by allowing the police to get on with their work. You say that, but


there are only seven police involved in this inquiry. There are 195


involved in the hacking investigations. We can both agree


that child abuse is more important and serious than hacking. The Home


Office, there are reports that Home Office officials may have been


mentioned in the dossier, people don't trust people to investigate


themselves, Mr Clegg? No, I accept that we need to make sure that and


the police need to make sure that the police investigations are


thorough, well resourced. I can t think of anything more horrendous, I


can't, than powerful people organising themselves and worse


still, this is what is alleged, covering up for each other to abuse


the most vulnerable people in society's care - children. But at


the end of the day, the only way you can get people in the dock, the only


way you can get people charged, is by allowing the prosecuting


authorities and the police to do their job. I have an open mind about


what other inquiries take place A number of other inquiries are taking


place. I assume any additional inquiries wouldn't be able to second


guess or look into the matters which the police are looking into already.


All I would say is that people who have information, who want to


provide information which they think is relevant to this, please get in


touch with the police. Alright. Let's come on to our own inquiry


into the state of the Lib Dems. You have attempted to distance yourself


and the party from the Tories, but still stay in Government - it is


called aggressive differentiation. Why isn't it working? It's not


called aggressive differentiation. It is called "coalition". It is two


parties who retain different identities, different values, have


different aspirations for the future. But during this Parliament


have come together because we were facing a unique national emergency


back in 2010, the economy was teetering on the edge of a


precipice. I'm immensely proud, notwithstanding our political


challenges, which are real, I'm immensely proud that the Liberal


Democrats, we stepped up to the plate, held our nerve and without


the Liberal Democrats, there wouldn't now be that economic


recovery which is helping many people across the country. Why


aren't you getting any credit for it? Well, we won't get credit if we


spend all our time staring at our navals. If it wasn't for the Liberal


Democrats, there wouldn't be more jobs now available to people. They


don't believe you, they are giving the Tories the credit for the


recovery? Well, you might assert that, we will assert and I will


shout it from the rooftops that if we had not created the stability by


forming this Coalition Government and then hard-wired into the


Government's plans, not only the gory job of fixing the public


finances, but doing so much more fairly than would have been the


case, if the Conservatives had been in Government on their own, they


wouldn't have delivered these tax cuts. They wouldn't have delivered


the triple lock guarantee for pensions or the pupil premium. OK.


Why are you 8% in the polls? Well, because I think where we get our


message across - and I am here in my own constituency - this is a


constituency where I am a campaigning MP - we can dispel a lot


of the information and say we have done a decent thing by going into


Government and we have delivered big changes, big reforms which you can


touch and see in your school, in your pensions, in your taxes and


then people do support us and, in our areas of strength, we were


winning against both the Conservative and Labour parties It


is a big effort. Of course, there are lots of people from both left


and right who want to shout us down and want to vilify our role in


Government. What we also need to do - and Nick Harvey was quite right -


having been proud of our record of delivery, we also need to set out in


our manifesto as we are and as we will our promise of more, of more


support in schools. So why is it then... Why is it then that a Lib


Dem MP in our own film says you are in danger of no longer becoming a


National Party. That could be the Clegg legacy, you cease to be a


National Party? I'm a practical man. I believe passionately in what we


have done in politics. I am so proud of my party. I don't spend that much


time speculating that the end might be nigh. There is no point in doing


that. Let's get out there, which is what I do in my own constituency, in


challenges circumstances and say we are proud of what we have done, we


have done a good thing for the country, we have delivered more


Liberal Democrat policies than the party has ever dreamed delivering


before. We have a programme of change, of reform, of liberal


reform, which is very exciting. Just over the last few weeks, I have been


setting out our plans to provide more help to carers, to make sure


teachers in every classroom are properly qualified, that all kids in


school are being taught a proper core curriculum. That parts company


from the ideological rigidities with which the Conservatives deal with


education policy. Those are thing which speak to many of the values


that people who support us... Alright. When Mike Storey gets out


and about, he told this programme two weeks' ago that he finds that


you "are toxic on the doorstep" Look, as everybody knows, being the


leader of a party, which for the first time in its history goes into


Government, which is already a controversial thing to do because


you are governing with our enemies, the Conservatives, and on top of


that, doing all the difficult and unpopular things to fix the broken


economy which was left to us by Labour, of course as leader of that


party I get a lot of incoming fire from right and left. The right say


that I'm stopping the Conservatives doing what they want. There is a


good reason for that. They didn t win the election. The left say that


somehow we have lost our soul when we haven't. That happens day in day


out. Of course that will have some effect. My answer to that is not to


buckle to those criticisms, those misplaced Chris -- criticisms from


left and right, but to stand up proudly. Is it your intention to


fight the next election against an in-out referendum on Europe? Yes.


Unless there is major treaty change? Our position hasn't waivered, it


won't waiver, we are not going to flip-flop on the issue of the


referendum like the Conservatives did. We want an in-out referendum.


With ve legislated for the trigger when that will happen, when in u


powers are transferred to the European Union. That is what we have


said for years. We legislated for that... So no change? No change


Alright. We are expecting a reshuffle shortly. Will you keep


Vince Cable as Business Secretary to the election? I'm immensely proud of


what Vince has done. Yes, I intend to make sure that Vince continues to


serve in the Government in his present capacity Look what he has


done on apprenticeships, he's done more than many people for many years


to make sure we build-up manufacturing, the north here, not


just the south. I'm proud of what he's done. We have talked about some


heavy things. We know you have got into kickboxing. Is there any danger


of you becoming a mammal - you know what I mean - a middle-aged man in


Lycra! Will the Tour de France influence you? Absolutely no risk of


that whatsoever having seen the Tour de France start yesterday near


Leeds. I have the yellow Yorkshire sign on my pullover. I will see them


later whisk through my constituency. I will not try to emulate them. I'm


sure that is to the relief of a grateful nation. Thank you.


It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.


We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now


for Sunday Politics Scotland. Coming up here in 20 minutes,


the Week Politics east, I am Etholle George.


Later, work may resume for LEPs but it is not business as usual. With


more UKIP members than ever before there are questions over whdther the


work will get done. What is the point of being `n


elected member of the Europdan Parliament unless you get involved


in the Parliament itself, shape the legislation?


And how is this MP's local referendum on our future in the EU


going? Well, who better to ask than Peter


bone, the Conservative MP for Wellingborough, handily in the


studio with us. Along with Bob blizzard, Labour's Parliamentary


candidate for Waveney. Let's start with income tax, because


it was first mooted by an MP last year when he wrote, one ide` worth


considering is merging National Insurance and income taxed hnto just


one tax. Well, Suffolk MP Ben Gummer has also


been campaigning and the idda seems to have caught the Chancellor's I is


you can see from the times. He is looking at the idea for the


general election. Bob blizzard, if you roll the two


together it is much more tr`nsparent for the public, is it not?


think they are paying into ` pot for misnomer and some people


think they are paying into ` pot for their pension. It is more or less a


tax, but one of the problems with merging it with income tax hs you


would have to make up the ploy's contribution to National Insurance


and you would end up with a hefty easy rate of income tax that would


not be very popular. What about the principle, Peter Bone, the principle


established in 1911, Nation`l Insurance to pay for health. What


about that principle of loshng that special element that people are


quite aware of? People think this is going into a pot to pay for your


retirement or whatever and ht isn't. It is effectively just another


income tax. There are a lot of problems in combining the two. It


will be less transparent to people who level of tax they are p`ying,


also. What about the point of havhng to


raise the rate, because if xou combine two taxes the overall rate


will go up. And the amount that lawyers are to


Schmeichel `` that employers are paying.


It is direct taxes, that is one reason for doing it, for


transparency's sake. Bob's point is different because part of N`tional


Insurance is paid by the employer, and I assume they would continue to


pay that tax in one form or another. I think it is a good idea, the


technical problems can be overcome and I wish them well with it.


One Bill the government would like to bring it down is its contribution


to Europe. The climate may have changed, with a


lot more UKIP MEPs, including three from the east, but the other parties


say that is going to mean more work for everyone else.


Andrew Sinclair has been to Strasberg.


For those who believe in thd European Parliament, this h`s been


an important week. The start of a new five`year session,


representatives from 28 nathons working together for the good of


Europe. The reality, though, is that this


Parliament is more Eurosceptic than ever before, which is why UKIP has


been getting so much attenthon this week.


Their MPs protested when thd European anthem was played hn the


chamber. The Party is saying its main role you will be to expose what


is wrong with the EU, not ldgislate. In some ways, MEPs are a delocratic


pretence, when the decisions are made behind closed doors by the


commission and frankly therd is very little democracy.


During the lifetime of this new Parliament there will be a big


debate about Britain's role in Europe and may even be a referendum


on leaving. Our relationship will probably change in the next five


years. But in the meantime the EU needs to be government as Mhchael


needs to be governed, and whether we like it or not a lot of the


legislation past year had a direct effect on our lives in Brit`in. The


question is, what role will our local representatives be pl`ying in


this new European Parliament? There is now just one British


Liberal Democrat here. She represents the south`east, hncluding


Milton Keynes. What is it like being the l`st Lib


Dem standing? Well, it is very sad for me, I have


lost some very good, hard`working colleagues, who I have lent one and


we all lent on each other, dxperts in different fields. It is ` sad


day, two, for the country. Xou keep's voices not been heard around


the table when we are making decisions.


There is a worry among many of her colleagues that UKIP will bd quick


to point out what is wrong with Parliament but will not be


interested in the nitty`gritty. The detail of legislation is very


important and we have to make sure that we are paying attention the


committees, working hard and doing our bit and delivering results.


In the last five years, I looked at over 150 different pieces of EU


law, from car exhaust is to vacuum cleaners to ranking to medical


research, and I wrote amendlents on behalf of different companids,


concerns and groups, table them and argued them and got them into law.


And if you hadn't done that businesses in our region wotld have


been affected? Yes, because, let's face it, the


French and Germans are going to do it, you are in a market, yot have to


defend your corner if you w`nt to be able to have those opportunhties.


One of our leading UKIP members in the region says he is the f`rming


expat. He did not table any amendmdnts on


farming law, so I had to do it. We are going to have a weaker voice


unless everyone is prepared to roll up their sleeves and help.


It is not just new laws. In the next few years there will be important


decisions made about funding, particularly for science and


transport schemes where our region has done well in the past.


What is the point of being `n elected member of the Europdan


Parliament unless you get involved, shape the legislation that comes


out, stop the bad things th`t we don't want to happen but also help


get that ?250 million into our businesses and universities and


voluntary organisations? If UKIP do not turn up, they will not get any


of the benefits or stop any of the things they say they are ag`inst.


More than half a million people voted for UKIP in our region, more


than for any other Party. It believes it has a mandate to be you


and draw attention to what hs wrong with Europe. But many believe,


whatever your views, if you're a member of the European Parlhament


you should surely be prepardd to work that Parliament.


I'm going to ask some of those questions raised in the fill to


Patrick Flynn, who is UKIP LEP for the East.


As a Party, you are not doing your bit, are you?


Actually, I have only been `n MEP for four days, so it is early to be


condemning me on my record. I did not see you, I said as a


Party. I completely disagred. If we take other parties for the


region, Vicky Ford, doing work, what she means is nodding through the EU


taking over the competency on financial services and imperilling


Britain's most successful industry. Geoffrey Van Auden's work w`s


ushering in open door immigration from Bulgaria. I do not call that


work. We do not have her with us, but he


has tabled... She has slapped us off without us


being here to defend ourselves. Vicky Ford has put through 053


amendments. Stewart Agnew, though he has a


better voting record, had only put forward one amendment.


Well, Stewart has used his dxpertise to intervene and help shape the


debate on the agriculture committees.


What is the point in intervdning if you're not good to follow that


through and make amendments? Vicky Ford does not know whdther she


wants to be in or out of thd EU and I would suggest to Vicky Ford and


Geoffrey Van Auden, they have just gone through an election and got


their backsides spanked by TKIP With all respect to them, pdrhaps if


the Conservative Party had lore Eurosceptic candidates like Peter


Bone here and a few `` a conscious Europhiles like Vicky Ford, they


might not have done so badlx. Why not get involved?


I was involved in the chambdr of week, I hardly ever saw Richard


Howard there. Vicky Ford was not even present when her own group


leader was making a speech, which I thought rather rude.


What are your plans for, funding, for example?


Again, this is Richard Howard's buzzword. European funding, he goes


on and on about it without telling the people they are getting around


half of their own money back and he seems proud of this. We will fight


to make the European Union less intolerable and less bad for Britain


while we are stuck in it, btt our mandate is to go over there and


fight to get Britain out. Will you fight for legislathon that


is detrimental for UKIP `` TK plc, and in particularly the East, if you


have to question might we whll fight to oppose legislation that will make


things worse within the European Union.


If there are amendments that make a bit of legislation or less bad, then


we will consider supporting those amendments, and that will bd a new


approach for UKIP. You are saying that is a new policy?


On occasion you will make alendments if need be?


On occasion, we will. Rather than opposing everything, we will oppose


the prime legislation... Now you are getting involved in


Europe, now you are actuallx getting involved in what is going on.


It is a second line of defence for Britain against primary leghslation


and if we think something is going to go through and an amendmdnt will


make something less bad, we will consider that on its merits, that is


a development of the UKIP position. UKIP was democratically elected


they have their mandate, wh`t is not to like?


But I think the real point here is that Nigel Farage has made his name


by presenting himself as solething different, not a politician like the


rest. What we can see is th`t he is a politician. He has been in the


European Parliament for sevdral years now taking over 100,000 a year


plus staff from an organisation he does not believe in, then not


putting in the work. That is a bad advert for politics.


I don't think anyone can accuse Nigel Farage of not putting in the


work. For constituents? His consthtuents


have giving him a thumping big mandate just in May, so that they


are obviously quite pleased with him.


The question is, is he workhng for the constituents or just advancing


UKIP? Well, that is for the consthtuents


to judge, and they have. Peter Bone, people sent an `nti`EU


message but did not vote for the Conservatives, why?


You're absolutely right. Thd combined vote of UKIP massively sent


a message saying the Europe`n Union needs to be reformed and sole of us


believe we should come out. The thing is, there is no difference


between what Patrick thinks and what I think.


Perhaps you are in the wrong Party? Now you have raised an issud, should


the parties be working together I am raising an issue about you


specifically being in the wrong Party.


I could argue Patrick could be in my Party for his views. With all due


respect, Bob has this view of a European superstate and there should


not be a referendum, we shotld throw away British money and we should


roll over every time, and that is fine, that is a point of vidw, but


we take a different point of view. At the moment, if we carry on like


this, UKIP will get a big vote, the Conservatives will get a big vote,


but unfortunately we will ldt Labour into the middle and that is a


danger. What about the reaction at the


European elections, because Labour did not come off very well?


We lost the European elections in 1999 and 2004 but shortly after we


bounced back and add victorx in the elections.


But not for your policies in Europe, though, that might hndicate


that. I think the European elections are a


bit of a law unto themselves. You get a low turnout and high


proportion of the people who turn out other bee in their bonndt about


Europe, so we get the results that we have. History shows European


results are rather different from Westminster results.


Patrick, what is your posithon because you want to fight a


Westminster seat but you ard taking and any people as Michael s`lary


whilst thinking about doing that. I have been elected as an MDP, I


have every right to be paid at the same rate as the other MEPs.


And fight a seat at the samd time? I am considering my options, I am


not down for a seat at all `t the moment. I am still reforming the


duties... Are you saying you will not fight a


Westminster seat? I have not decided yet. You will


continue to take the MEP's salary, funding you through that potential


fight? I do not really follow the logic of


the question. I have been elected as an MEP and I am serving on the


mandate on which I was elected. I may or may not fight a seat at the


general election next year. You saying candidates who may fhght the


general election next year should not be paid for their day jobs?


It depends how much of your time you're going to be contributing to


your work as an MEP and how much time you will fight the seat?


What do you mean spend fighting the seat? I have not put my namd down


for any seat, I am an electdd MEP, I was in Strasbourg this week,


Brussels last week and next week, I am doing my job and I have not put


my name down for a Parliament a receipt or even applied for one yet.


The general election is next May, so are you saying I should work for


nothing while I think about being a candidate from next March or April?


We'll see what happens next, thank you very much for joining us.


As promised, we will be spe`king to Peter Bone about his own ballot on


the EU. The EU. He and fellow


Northamptonshire MP Philip @ldbourne are holding their own referdndum on


staying in the EU. It will not have any legal force but could ptt


pressure on the government to arrange an national vote.


It followed a similar poll by the Kent MP Mark Reckless.


Earlier we spoke to the polhtical editor for the size about that


ballot. Well, the MP, Mark Reckless decided


to hold his own referendum, and the question was do you want to remain


part of the European Union or come out?


When the results come in `` came in people voted overwhelmingly, almost


80% against 20%, to come out of the EU.


It was a small sample size, he had 4000 responses out of an eldctorate


of 75,000. It is important to note that the only people who wotld


respond to a referendum likd this, if you like, are people who are very


interested in this issue, bdcause it was hypothetical. They had no say


about whether we came out or stayed in. But Mark Reckless said ht was an


overwhelming result, and thhs does appear to be the case, Tory


backbench MPs like Peter Bone are now holding their own indivhdual


referendums in their constituencies. The reason behind this is to try and


force David Cameron's and to try and make him bring forward the promised


referendum 2017. Peter Bone, let us talk abott this


referendum, because my understanding was you were hoping to rele`se the


results by now. Why have thdy not come out?


One thing on that report, the referendum is a joint referdndum


across Kettering, Wellingborough and the Corby constituency. The idea


came from a Conservative Parliamentary candidate who was in


the film but was not mentioned by the BBC. This was a joint three


constituency poll. They are still being delivered, half of thd ballot


papers roughly have gone out and I guess we will get the rest out by


the end of this month. I thhnk we explained this before, therd is no


end date. We will. Counting when people stop sending the ballot


papers back to us. When you have got the right result


perhaps? If that was the case we would tell


you the result now and stop. It is clearly... The point hs we


want as many people as posshble to vote. If they do not have a ballot


paper they can go to the website and fought by electoral...


Are people responding well? We heard Mark Reckless's turnout was not very


good. I was surprised by that, in one area


where we completed delivery in my constituency had a much higher


turnout than that. We will see at the end of the day the turnout and


what the vote is. What do you make of this tactic


I think we should have a referendum on the European Union. Therd is a


national mood to have one although that mood is not as strong `s is


often claimed, judging by that result in Kent. Importantly, I think


a referendum would land still boil and allow the items that ard not put


at the moment, the arguments for staying in, to be put. `` it would


lance the boil. Principally the argument for the


single economy, and the opinion polls would tilt towards st`ying in


and I think people would vote for staying in like they did in 197 .


That is my view and the view of quite a lot of people in thd Labour


Party. How is this being funded? The


posting of envelopes etc. Bob is taking a principle stands as


ever, and I would like his Party leader to take on board what he


said. Funding of this has been pahd for by


some private donations, part of it is being paid for delivery, part of


it by private donations. It seems to be back to school in our


prodigal roundup of the week. `` political roundup.


Education Minister and Norfolk MP Liz truss anions school's m`ths hubs


this week. Their main point is about the


attitude that everything can do well at maths.


criticised in the House for getting criticised in the House for getting


his maths wrong over council expenses.


Lord Hanningfield brought great shame upon local government and he


brought great shame to the House of lords. He should do what he can to


repay the money. Northampton MP Michael Ellis needs


to go back to school, according to the Speaker.


Mr Ellis, calm yourself man Only this morning at each are sahd to me


in Speaker's House, how can I tell a little boy in my class to bdhave


when parliamentarians do not! Be a good boy!


Stewart Jackson gave the Rhhne Minister ten out of ten for his


stand. I always knew he had led in his


pencil... It is good to see him sharpdning it


on the inexorable drive to dver closer union, as personified by his


stance on the European Union leader. Praise for the PM's stands, a stance


that went down well with thd public for being prime ministerial.


I think he made a fool of hhmself and there is nothing heroic about


losing by 26 votes to two. H think he has done irreparable dam`ge to


the country because he has destroyed relationships in the Europe`n Union


and made it harder to get changes. But the public actually likdd his


stance. Well, got some headlines, if you are


in the headlines, people sed headlines, but they will be


consequences for that. People talk about democracy, the


leader is democratically eldcted, that is democracy at work, hsn't it?


Actually, no, it was a council that decided on the president, and I am


impressed the Prime Minister took a principled stance. Others write


Labour would have rolled ovdr and accepted what the other European


Union leaders wanted. This was the Prime Minister being much more like


Margaret Thatcher, rather than Tony Blair. Yearsley had of the largest


group, though, isn't he? What I am seeing is the largest head


of nations coming together to choose who they want.


I think that is the biggest lie out, that would not have bedn the


case. We will have to leave it thdre,


thank you. As always, you c`n keep in touch through our websitd, we are


back at the same time next progress in London was being made


before that started. I wish we had longer for that. It is all over to


you. What will Thursday's mass


public sector strike achieve? Has David Cameron's anti-Juncker


attacks clawed back support And is Alan Johnson really thinking


about challenging Ed Miliband We will start with the strikes, Matt


Hancock was hardline in the head-to-head that he did with the


TUC. I guess that the Tory internal polling and focus groups must be


telling them that there are votes in taking a tough line? There is that


and there is the fact that they are now much more confident on any


economic policy two or three years ago. They shied away from it because


the economy was shrinking, there was still a danger that public sector


job losses would lead to higher unemployment overall. Now, the


economy is growing, they have a good story to sell about employment so


they are much more bolshy and brazen than they were two or three years


ago. They know that it always causes problems for Labour. Labour is


naturally sympathetic to the public sector workers, pay being squeezed,


they are striking to make an issue of it. And yet they can't quite come


out and give the unions 100% Labour support? Exactly. You saw Tristram


Hunt on the Marr Show this morning squirming to support the idea of


strikes, but not this particular strike. It was always the question


that gets asked to Labour - who funds you? That is a real problem.


The bit that gets me is they trail this ef are I time there is a -


every time there is a strike, this idea of cutting it to ballots and


local election turnout was a third. Boris Johnson was elected Mayor of


London with 38% turnout. We need to talk about-turnout across our


democracy. That is an easy rebuttal for Labour to make. Matt Hancock was


hardline about changing the strike law. When you asked him the


question, if you are not going to stabilise the public finances till


2018, does this mean the pay freeze or no real term pay increase in the


public sector will increase till 2018, h e was inner vous on that


one. -- he was nervous on that one. This strike is different to those


strikes that took place in 2010 At that time, the TUC and the Labour


Leadership thought there was going to be a great movement out there,


not a kind of 1926 movement, but a great movement out there. This time


round, I think the climate is different. Ed Miliband talking about


wage increases being outstripped by inflation and people not seeing the


recovery coming through into their pay packets. Slightly more tricky


territory for the Tories. If The Labour machine cannot make something


out of Matt Hancock telling this programme there will be no increase


in pay for workers in the public sector till 2018, they have a


problem? They do have a problem They have to say always that they


would not just turn the money taps on. That is the dance that you are


locked in all the time. Can we all agree that Alan Johnson is not going


to stand against Ed Miliband this side of the election? Some


politicians are cynical enough. I don't think Alan Johnson is one Do


we agree? There is nothing in it for Labour and certainly not for Alan


Johnson. No way. It is the last thing he would want to do. There are


some desperate members going around trying to find a stalking horse


Alan Johnson will not be their man. He has more important things to do


on a Thursday night on BBC One! Isn't it something about the febrile


state of the Labour Party that Labour, some Labour backbenchers or


in the Shadow Cabinet, can float the idea of this nonsense? If there was


a time to do it, maybe it was in the middle of the Parliament. With ten


months left, you are stuck with the leader you chose in 2010. I remember


them failing to understand this in January of 2010 when there was that


last push against Gordon Brown. Five months before an election, they were


trying to do something. The deputy Leader of the Labour Party had


something to do with it. There is deep unease about Ed Miliband. There


are problems but Alan Johnson is not the man. I think there is no chance


of it! If the most recent polls are to be


believed, David Cameron appears to have enjoyed a 'Juncker bounce' -


clawing back some support from UKIP after he very publicly opposed the


appointment of Jean-Claude Juncker to the post of EU Commission


president. Last week Nigel Farage took his newly enlarged UKIP


contingent to Strasbourg for the first session


of the new European Parliament. These two gentlemen have nothing to


say today. It was the usual dull, looking back to a model invented 50


years ago and we are the ones that want democracy, we are the ones that


want nation state, we are the ones that want a global future for our


countries, not to be trapped inside this museum. Thank you. I can see we


will be covering more of the European Parliament at last!


It's rumoured he's likely to stand in the next general election in the


Kent constituency of Thanet South, currently held by the Conservatives.


Last week the Conservatives selected their candidate for the seat -


Craig McKinlay - a former deputy leader of UKIP.


Did you get the short straw, you have got a seat that Nigel Farage is


probably going to fight? Not in the slightest. It is a seat that I know


well. It is a seat that there's obvious euro scepticism there and my


qualities are right for that seat. UKIP got some very good... What are


your qualities? Deep-seated conservatism, I was a founder of


UKIP, I wrote the script back in 1992. My heart is Conservative


values. They are best put out to the public by me in South Thanet. It


would be ridiculous if Nigel chose that seat. We need a building block


of people like myself to form a Government if we are going to have


that referendum that is long overdue. I don't think he's got the


luxury of losing somebody who is very similar in views to him. He


would be best look looking elsewhere. You wouldn't like him to


stand in your seat, would you? It would seem to make very little


sense. People would say what is UKIP all about if it's fighting people


who have got a similar view to them? We do need to build a majority


Government for the Conservatives next year because only us are


offering that clear in-out referendum. I want to be one of


those building blocks that is part of that renegotiation that we will


put to public in a referendum. Sounds to me like if the choice is


between you and Nigel Farage next May in Thanet South, it is Tweedle


Dum and Tweedle Dee? Not at all The danger to this country is another


Labour Government. That is one of the main reasons that I left UKIP in


2005 because that last five years of the Labour Government was the most


dangerous to the fundamentals of Britain that we have ever seen. I'm


happy with the Conservatives. I have full Conservative values. I am a


Euro-sceptic. Thank you for joining us. The Westminster bubble yet


again, which has a herd mentality, a bubble with a herd mentality, it got


it wrong yet again. Mr Cameron's isolated, he is useless at


diplomacy, all of which may be true, but the British people liked it and


his backbenchers liked it? True Although some of us would say it is


possible... You are speaking for the bubble? I'm speaking for my segment


of the bubble. Some of us argued that he got it wrong diplomatically


and it would be wrong politically. It will be the passage of time. We


saw UKIP decline between the 20 4 European elections and the 2005


General. You would expect something similar to happen this time round.


The question is how far low do they fall? They are still registering


12-15% in the opinion polls. They are. When Mr Cameron wielded his


veto which again the Westminster bubble said it's terrible, it is


embarrassing, he overtook Labour in the polls for a while doing that.


He's had a Juncker bounce. If you were a strategist, would you not


conclude the more Euro-sceptic I am, the better it is for me in the


polls? In the short-term, yes. This is the short-term thinking we are


supposed to despise. The electricion is very clever for a different


supposed to despise. The electricion different reason. It is this


anti-London feeling in Thanet South. He is a councillor, he grew up in


the constituency. He is a chartered accountant. He is somebody who can


be seen to be a champion of local people. If they had parachuted in a


special adviser, they would be in real trouble. He wants to get out...


This is the third representative of the bubble? He wants to get out of


the European Union which David Cameron doesn't want to do. It was


interesting for that statement to MPs on Monday, there were mild


Euro-sceptics who said, "I can't take this." The Speaker said can the


baying mob, the Conservative MPs, quieten down, please. Ben Bradshaw,


the former Minister made it, he said, "I'm reminded when the leader


of the Labour Party before Harold Wilson made that famous Euro-sceptic


speech and Mrs Gaitskell said darling, the wrong people are


cheering." That is the challenge. Thank you, bubbles!


The Daily Politics is back at its usual Noon time every day


And I'll be back here on BBC One next Sunday at 11pm for the last


Sunday Politics of the summer - I'll be talking to Scotland's Deputy


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


Download Subtitles