:00:43. > :00:48.Politics. It is the big euro referendum vote next week for MPs.
:00:48. > :00:56.How will Euro-sceptics in the Cabinet vote? We will ask Defence
:00:56. > :01:06.Secretary, Philip Hammond. Will Mr Hammon's plans to cuts work and if
:01:06. > :01:07.
:01:07. > :01:13.it doesn't, what that? The Defence Secretary is our Sunday Interview.
:01:13. > :01:19.Is help to buy a recipe for sky high prices? Labour and the Tories go
:01:19. > :01:24.In London, five years after he scrapped plans for the thAm gateway
:01:24. > :01:34.bridge is the Mayor of London on the verge of' big U-turn in the river
:01:34. > :01:38.
:01:39. > :01:45.With me a political panel as relaxed as David Cameron in the run-up to a
:01:45. > :01:48.euro vote in the House of Commons, here is Nick Watt, Janan Ganesh and
:01:48. > :01:53.Helen Lewis. Now, when in January David Cameron promised a referendum
:01:53. > :01:57.on Europe after the next election, he hoped it would spike UKIP's guns
:01:57. > :02:01.and satisfy his backbenchers. Well, it has done neither. UKIP goes from
:02:01. > :02:10.strength to strength and Tory backbenchers are more bull she than
:02:10. > :02:16.ever. Next week, they will -- bull she than ever. The process
:02:16. > :02:20.propelling Downing Street into a tail-spin. Its latest wheeze is that
:02:20. > :02:27.ministers don't have toe vote against it, just -- have to vote
:02:28. > :02:32.against it, just abstain. Here is Michael Gove speaking to James
:02:32. > :02:35.Landale earlier. How are you going to vote? We need to have a
:02:35. > :02:40.referendum at some point in the future. It is not appropriate at
:02:40. > :02:43.this stage. Also in a way, it is an exercise as I said earlier in
:02:43. > :02:50.letting off steam. We can't have a Referendum Bill because we are in
:02:50. > :02:55.coalition. So Helen, ministers abstain on their
:02:55. > :02:59.own Queen's Speech. How bad does it look? We are not worried at all!
:02:59. > :03:01.They are really worried. It is terrible. It shows that Cameron
:03:01. > :03:06.can't keep control of his backbenchers and it is a proxy for
:03:06. > :03:11.the fact that a lot of them would rather have someone else's leader.
:03:11. > :03:15.They make sure that Mr Cameron can't keep control of his own Government
:03:15. > :03:21.ministers be. Maybe some will go with the rebels and not just
:03:21. > :03:24.abstain? I think it does look bad that the Conservative Party is now
:03:24. > :03:27.banking on about Europe, something that David Cameron said they
:03:27. > :03:31.wouldn't do and when they bang on about Europe, don't forget where it
:03:31. > :03:37.is on the list of people's priorities. It is Number Ten. They
:03:37. > :03:42.should be talking about cost of livering. So it is not very good --
:03:42. > :03:45.living. So it is not good. This is a coalition. In a coalition, both
:03:45. > :03:48.parties can't get what they want. If David Cameron was leading a majority
:03:48. > :03:52.Government, there would be a referendum and legislation. That's
:03:52. > :03:56.not happening because he is in a coalition. The Parliamentary
:03:56. > :04:02.shenanigans, people will look at that and think that's a coalition,
:04:03. > :04:06.but where they won't be amused is a party banging on about something
:04:06. > :04:09.which is Number Ten on people's list.
:04:09. > :04:14.The backbenchers think that Cameron wants a referendum in order to stay
:04:14. > :04:20.in. They want one to come out. their behaviour through this has
:04:20. > :04:25.been the worst in its entirety. They said in January that the referendum
:04:25. > :04:28.speech would shoot UKIP's fox. It would pacify the Tory Party and they
:04:28. > :04:32.said it would ensure that David Cameron would not need to talk about
:04:32. > :04:37.Europe between now and the next election. It failed on all three
:04:37. > :04:42.counts. So where do they go from here? Well, the biggest worry is not
:04:42. > :04:46.the amendment next week, but what do the Tory rights ask for next? Is it
:04:46. > :04:51.a mandate referendum or legislating for the referendum now? Or bringing
:04:51. > :04:53.the entire referendum itself ahead before... I mean there are those
:04:53. > :04:57.calling for a mandate referendum which is the referendum to allow you
:04:57. > :05:07.to go and negotiate, but those who want a mandate referendum, there are
:05:07. > :05:09.
:05:09. > :05:14.divisions within that. It is like the divisions of the Judair front.
:05:14. > :05:19.I think Labour should shut their trap and let them get on with it.
:05:19. > :05:25.I like that. New advice to the Labour Party, shut your trap!
:05:25. > :05:35.Michael Gove had something more incendiary to say when it came to
:05:35. > :05:41.remarks about Nick Clegg and math hOOt hau Oakeshott and -- Matthew
:05:41. > :05:46.Oakeshott and Vince the Cable. It has overshadowed the Queen's
:05:46. > :05:49.Speech. I thought you had forgotten about that. Here is a reminder.
:05:49. > :05:56.Wednesday's Queen's Speech was supposed to put the coalition
:05:56. > :06:00.roadshow on track. A row between Nick Clegg and Liz Truss brought Lib
:06:00. > :06:04.Dem Tory tensions back to the boil. The Cabinet agree on plans to
:06:04. > :06:08.strengthen Army reserve, but the idea is controversial on the Tory
:06:08. > :06:15.backbenches. Defence deck, Philip Hammond, wants the deployable
:06:15. > :06:20.reserves to be 30,000 strong by 2020. Alleviating reductions in
:06:20. > :06:25.regular troop numbers. The Spending Review will reveal how deep future
:06:25. > :06:28.defence cuts will be. Given the health, schools and aid budgets are
:06:28. > :06:33.protected, other departments, including the Ministry of Defence
:06:33. > :06:35.would be at the brunt -- will bear the brunt of the cuts and the
:06:35. > :06:39.Defence Secretary expressed his concern.
:06:39. > :06:42.We won't be able to make significant further cuts without eroding
:06:42. > :06:47.military capability. One thing missing from the Queen's
:06:47. > :06:57.Speech was any mention of a EU referendum. Conservative
:06:57. > :06:59.
:06:59. > :07:02.backbenchers will attempt to stop a vote on the vum next week. Firl fill
:07:02. > :07:07.-- referendum next week. Philip Hammond joins me now. Secretary of
:07:07. > :07:10.State, welcome to the programme. Your Cabinet colleague, Michael Gove
:07:10. > :07:17.had something remarkable to say about the coalition this morning.
:07:17. > :07:22.About Nick Clegg and Vince Cable and the Lib Dem peer, Matthew Oakeshott.
:07:22. > :07:25.Let's look at what he had to say. don't think we can understand Nick
:07:25. > :07:29.Clegg's position without also appreciating the position that he is
:07:29. > :07:34.in because of internal Lib Dem politics. So he is not going to get
:07:34. > :07:37.his way? I think he has got to show because, you know, there is a
:07:37. > :07:42.campaign at the moment being led by Matthew Oakeshott this Liberal
:07:42. > :07:47.Democrat in the Lords to destabilise Nick Clegg because Matthew Oakeshott
:07:47. > :07:50.wants Vince Cable to succeed him and Nick needs to show Lib Dems that he
:07:50. > :07:53.is fighting hard. I understand. That's one of the things that happen
:07:53. > :07:56.in coalition. We have had discussions with Nick in the past
:07:56. > :08:02.where we haven't always had the same starting position, but in the end,
:08:02. > :08:07.because he is a reasonable guy, we have managed to find an appropriate
:08:07. > :08:11.sin is a sis. His job is in jeopardy, do you
:08:11. > :08:16.agree? Well, all party leaders have to manage their parties. It is part
:08:16. > :08:20.of what they do. In a coalition, it the leaders of both parties in the
:08:20. > :08:22.coalition are simultaneously managing their parties and managing
:08:22. > :08:27.the Government's agenda. It is a balancing act.
:08:27. > :08:31.Is there a pattern of behaviour you recognise in will Mr Clegg that he
:08:31. > :08:35.takes positions to give his own side red meat rather than on the
:08:35. > :08:42.substance of the issue? Well, all party leaders have to manage their
:08:42. > :08:44.parties, but as Michael Gove said, we manage to come to a sensible
:08:44. > :08:48.solution that allows the Government's business to proceed in
:08:48. > :08:51.a sensible way. So what positions does David Cameron
:08:51. > :08:54.take that he doesn't believe in, but he has to give red meat to his
:08:54. > :08:58.backbenchers? I am not saying that Nick Clegg is taking a up a position
:08:58. > :09:02.he doesn't really believe in. He is expressing concerns that he is
:09:02. > :09:06.hearing from his, from inside his own party and there will be a
:09:06. > :09:10.discussion, but on the substantive issue of childcare ratios, it is
:09:10. > :09:14.clear that Britain is out of step with our European neighbours and out
:09:14. > :09:16.of step with many of the countries which are reckoned to have the best
:09:16. > :09:21.childcare systems in Europe like Sweden.
:09:21. > :09:26.Do you think Vince Cable is man ufrg for Nick Clegg's job -- manoeuvring
:09:26. > :09:31.for Nick Clegg's job? Well, I am not privy to say the inner workings of
:09:31. > :09:35.the Lib Dem party, but Vince Cable has always been an ambitious man.
:09:35. > :09:40.P if it determines positions that the Lib Dems take inside the
:09:40. > :09:47.coalition, you will need to be privy to that? We are not privy to the
:09:47. > :09:52.workings. Workings of the Lib Dem leadership. Vince Cable has always
:09:52. > :09:55.been ambitious. There will be a Tory backbench
:09:55. > :09:59.amendment which says to the Queen's Speech it regrets that an EU
:09:59. > :10:04.Referendum Bill was not included in the Queen's Speech, will you vote
:10:04. > :10:07.for it, against or it or abstain? Well, I haven't seen any amendment
:10:07. > :10:11.yet... Well, I have just read it out. You don't know what amendment
:10:11. > :10:15.will be tabled. That is the amendment. I have spoken
:10:15. > :10:20.to the MPs bringing it forward and that's the amendment... We don't
:10:20. > :10:23.know whether it will be accepted or selected for a vote. It is a
:10:23. > :10:27.hypothetical question how one would vote, but I would say this, members
:10:27. > :10:35.of the Government, members of the Cabinet are responsible for the
:10:35. > :10:39.Queen's Speech. It would be bizarre if kwerp voting in -- if we were
:10:40. > :10:44.voting in favour an amendment that we share responsibility for. The
:10:44. > :10:50.substance has been inflated. We are agreeing here. We are all believe
:10:50. > :10:54.that there needs to be a referendum on Europe. We all believe that the
:10:54. > :10:57.British people need to have a say. So and we also all agree that we
:10:57. > :11:00.need to make very clear to the public our commitment to that
:11:00. > :11:05.referendum. Now some of our backbench colleagues think that the
:11:05. > :11:08.best way to do that is to bring forward a Bill in this Parliament
:11:08. > :11:12.that would be almost certain to be defeated because it won't be
:11:12. > :11:16.supported by the Liberal Democrats and it will be opposed by the Labour
:11:16. > :11:20.Party. The Prime Minister has made clear that he will give a commitment
:11:20. > :11:25.that if he is Prime Minister, after the next election, there will be a
:11:25. > :11:27.referendum. So we're going to have the referendum one way or another if
:11:27. > :11:31.we have a Conservative Government after the election.
:11:31. > :11:34.But Michael Gove told the BBC that he will abstain on this amendment
:11:34. > :11:39.and you can't tell me whal you will do. Well, you are all over the
:11:39. > :11:42.place, aren't you? If an amendment was tabled, it seems abstention
:11:42. > :11:48.would be an appropriate thing for a Cabinet member to do. Voting
:11:48. > :11:51.against, voting in favour of it is out of the question because we have
:11:51. > :11:57.collective responsibility for the Queen's Speech, but I wouldn't want
:11:57. > :12:01.to vote against it and allow that to be misinterpreted as in anyway
:12:01. > :12:06.questioning our commitment to our belief in the idea of a referendum.
:12:06. > :12:11.I mean as one Tory MP says this morning, it is bizarre and bonkers
:12:11. > :12:14.that Cabinet Ministers won't rally to support their own legislative
:12:14. > :12:18.programme. You will abstain on a motion that attacks your Queen's
:12:18. > :12:22.Speech? The legislative programme is clear. This is about what we are
:12:22. > :12:26.going to do and legislate for, but we know there is a sub-text agenda
:12:26. > :12:30.here. It is not about the legislation itself, it is about the
:12:30. > :12:34.clarity of commitment to the proposed agenda and I think what the
:12:34. > :12:39.Prime Minister has done making a clear statement that if he is Prime
:12:39. > :12:42.Minister after the next election, there will be an in/out referendum
:12:42. > :12:46.and it is the right way to go and we can probably do other things over
:12:46. > :12:50.the course of this Parliament to reinforce that. Perhaps we can
:12:50. > :12:53.publish a draft Bill so people can see what the referendum might be.
:12:54. > :12:58.You wouldn't put it before Parliament. Can I tell you what
:12:58. > :13:01.Chris Grayling said about this. He says Britain cannot and should not
:13:01. > :13:04.continue without a change to its current relationship with the
:13:05. > :13:08.European Union. Do you agree with that? Yes, I do.
:13:08. > :13:11.If we can't get a change, we leave? The European Union is... Correct?
:13:11. > :13:14.The European Union is going to change. There is no question about
:13:14. > :13:19.that. Not just... Well, you don't know
:13:19. > :13:24.that, Secretary of State? Well, yes, I do. Not because Britain wants it
:13:24. > :13:29.to change, but the logic of the eurozone means it has to change so
:13:29. > :13:33.there will be question. If you are wrong and you don't follow these
:13:33. > :13:39.things anymore that I do and if you are wrong, do you agree with Chris
:13:39. > :13:42.Grayling that we should vote to leave? The question with respect,
:13:42. > :13:49.Andrew is whether that change satisfies the needs of Britain and
:13:49. > :13:53.the British people. That's the question. And with the commitment to
:13:53. > :13:57.a referendum, David Cameron will be in a very strong position to
:13:57. > :14:03.negotiate for Britain it the changes that we need as part of the overall
:14:03. > :14:08.package of changes that the European Union is going to have to implement.
:14:08. > :14:13.If you won't answer my question. Let's move on. Let's go to defence.
:14:14. > :14:17.You are cutting the Army over 100,000 to over 80,000 and you will
:14:17. > :14:22.fill the gap led increasing the deployable reserves from 15,000 to
:14:22. > :14:28.30,000. However you look at it, a cut of 20,000 regular troops
:14:28. > :14:32.balanced by an increase of over 15,000 reservists, it is a clear
:14:32. > :14:38.diminition of British military strength, isn't it? We are changing
:14:38. > :14:43.the nature of the reserves. Making the reserves a more integrated part
:14:43. > :14:48.of the army, so they will train together and work together and verve
:14:48. > :14:52.battalions will be paired with -- reserve battalions will be paired
:14:52. > :14:56.with regular battalions. But you are right, we have had to make some
:14:56. > :15:00.tough decisions in defence. Our budget has been reduced and we had
:15:00. > :15:05.to decide how we were going to absorb that budget reduction and
:15:05. > :15:11.what we decided to do, with military advice, was to reduce the numbers in
:15:11. > :15:19.the regular army to increase the verves and to ensure re-- reserves
:15:19. > :15:23.and ensure we provided the equipment our troops needed. The alternative
:15:23. > :15:29.was to maintain numbers that wasn't affordable and under equip them
:15:29. > :15:33.which has been done in the past. Let me look at something. Kurm Bob
:15:33. > :15:37.Stewart use -- colonel Bob Stewart used to be a colonel in the British
:15:37. > :15:41.Army, he says someone at the MoD is smoke a lot of dope if they think
:15:41. > :15:45.they will manage to get the reserves up to 30,000. What are you smoking?
:15:45. > :15:55.We will get the reserves up to 30,000. The reserves have been
:15:55. > :15:57.
:15:57. > :16:01.higher than 30,000. They have been allowed to decrease and it the last
:16:01. > :16:04.Government sent messages about what it thinks about the reserves when
:16:04. > :16:14.Gordon Brown had to do cuts. That was then, what are you going to
:16:14. > :16:23.
:16:23. > :16:27.do? For employers it meebs making sure the training and qualifications
:16:27. > :16:31.that reservist get during their training is recognised in their
:16:31. > :16:36.civilian careers. It means giving employers more certainty about the
:16:36. > :16:39.timing of liability for callout of their reservist employees. For the
:16:39. > :16:44.reservists themselves, it means an assurance that they will get the kit
:16:44. > :16:49.and we will get the training, including training with regular army
:16:49. > :16:54.battalions and training on overseas missions. Are you going to offer fox
:16:54. > :16:59.incentives? -- financial sintives? We are looking at that. I would like
:16:59. > :17:04.to look at financial incentivisation for those employers that matters.
:17:04. > :17:09.Does that mean tax breaks? financial incentivisation. What does
:17:09. > :17:15.it mean in English? It means cash, cash when their employees get called
:17:15. > :17:20.out on reserve service. Now that does matter, to small employees. If
:17:20. > :17:23.I talk to the large employers, maul employers. If I talk to the large
:17:23. > :17:28.employers, they are not interested in financial incentives. They do
:17:28. > :17:31.this because it is good for their business and because it is part of
:17:31. > :17:35.that corporate, social responsibility agenda. What money
:17:35. > :17:38.are we talking about? I cannot give you figures. It is something we are
:17:38. > :17:42.looking at. By the time we publish the white paper, later in the
:17:42. > :17:46.spring, we will have a concrete offer on the table. Let's look at
:17:46. > :17:49.spending cuts in the defence department. You told the Telegraph -
:17:50. > :17:54."Any further reduction on the defence budget would fall on the
:17:54. > :17:58.level of activity we will be able to carry out?" Is there going to be a
:17:58. > :18:01.further reduction? We are engaged in a Spending Review. We know that.I'm
:18:01. > :18:05.not going to conduct it in public. I cannot answer your question until we
:18:05. > :18:11.get to the end of that process but what I can and have said is that
:18:11. > :18:14.there are further efficiency gains we can make in defence, it would be
:18:14. > :18:18.absurd to pretend that there are not. But they are not going to
:18:18. > :18:22.amount to very large amounts of money. If we go beyond the amounts
:18:22. > :18:31.that we can take through efficiency gain we will have to reduce military
:18:32. > :18:37.cape bible. You said you will not have to -- military kipabilities.
:18:37. > :18:40.You said you will not be able to make sufficient cuts. Are you being
:18:40. > :18:44.asked to? There is a cross-government discussion going on
:18:44. > :18:50.at the moment. The Chancellor will make an announcement on You 26th.
:18:50. > :18:55.Let's look at what has been said. You said take 0. 0.5% out of the
:18:55. > :19:01.welfare budget, you solve the problem in defence. 0. 5%. There is
:19:01. > :19:05.a body in the Cabinet who who says we need to look at the welfare
:19:05. > :19:08.budget. As you know, and as has many made public by the Liberal
:19:09. > :19:12.Democrats, they are blocking any further reductions in the welfare
:19:12. > :19:14.budget at the present time that. Means the whole of the further
:19:14. > :19:18.fiscal consolidation that the Chancellor needs to make, has to
:19:18. > :19:22.fall on departmental budgets. That will mean some very, very tough
:19:22. > :19:26.choices. Are you comfortable, as a Conservative Defence Minister, that
:19:26. > :19:29.you are presiding over a 10% cut in the defence budget, in the life of
:19:29. > :19:34.this Government, while your Government is increasing overseas
:19:34. > :19:38.aid by 25%? Are you comfortable with that equation? Well, look, the
:19:38. > :19:43.overseas aid commitment is one we made before the last election. I
:19:43. > :19:47.take you back to the discussion we just had... I understand that. I'm
:19:47. > :19:52.asking if you were comfortable with it. It was a commitment we made and
:19:52. > :19:56.I'm comfortable that if we make a promise, we stick to it. Your policy
:19:56. > :19:58.is supported by Labour and the Liberal Democrats. It is a
:19:58. > :20:02.Westminster consensus but for the rest of the country the polls show
:20:02. > :20:06.this is a Africa view, that you should increase aid and cut defence.
:20:06. > :20:10.It is only Westminster that this is a popular view. It shows you how out
:20:10. > :20:15.of touch the political elite in this country is We are what we are doing
:20:15. > :20:20.is working with our colleagues in DFID to look at how we can better
:20:20. > :20:25.use defence and development budgets together. For example, in fragile
:20:25. > :20:28.states, where we are seeking to prevent conflict and built capacity
:20:29. > :20:33.upstream rather than intervening when things breakdown later on. The
:20:33. > :20:36.more we can do together, across the defence development boundary, the
:20:36. > :20:41.more effective we will be. Aid will pick up part of that budget. Would
:20:41. > :20:48.health and education pick up part of your budget as well? We already have
:20:49. > :20:53.considerable interaction with the considerable interaction with the
:20:53. > :20:57.Pick up some of the military hospitals. You are referring to
:20:57. > :21:01.something in a newspaper. I'm trying to get an answer. The point is this:
:21:01. > :21:05.As we bring our troops back from Germany. We have 19,000 odd troops
:21:05. > :21:09.there. We provide health and education services in Germany for
:21:09. > :21:13.them at the moment. As they come back to the UK, the burden will
:21:13. > :21:17.transfer from defence on to the health and education budgets as they
:21:17. > :21:22.are relocated. Some of the military hospitals and military medical that
:21:22. > :21:26.is done now, would you like the health budget to pick some up?
:21:26. > :21:29.make this transfer back from Germany, that's inevitably what will
:21:29. > :21:32.happen. Some of the burden of providing that health care and
:21:32. > :21:36.education will transport to the Department of Health and Department
:21:36. > :21:41.for Education. Would you like the education to pick up some of the
:21:41. > :21:46.education costs of defence? Yes, we are spending money at the moment. We
:21:46. > :21:50.run secondary and primary schools in Germany we will no longer run once
:21:50. > :21:54.we've repatriated our forces to the UK. You are raiding other
:21:54. > :21:59.department's budgets to get this 10% cuts? I'm not raiding other
:22:00. > :22:04.departments' budgets. As we transform our Armed Forces and bring
:22:04. > :22:09.them home, naturally the role defence plays in providing health
:22:09. > :22:14.care and education abroad will be diminished abroad. Yes or no. That
:22:14. > :22:19.would be nice That would make it no fun. Are health and education
:22:19. > :22:23.ministers agreed to this? They are absolutely aware that as we drawdown
:22:23. > :22:27.from Germany we'll expect their departments to meet the cost of that
:22:27. > :22:30.redeployment. Yes or noI have not heard anything to the contrary.
:22:30. > :22:34.That's neither a yes or a no but never mind.
:22:34. > :22:40.Thank you for being with us. It is not easy to get on the property
:22:40. > :22:44.ladder. Imagine if someone helped to subsidise your mortgage or put it
:22:44. > :22:51.another way, Help to Buy. That's what the Chancellor did say nounsing
:22:51. > :22:54.would he underwrite mortgages for people who could find a 5% deposit
:22:54. > :23:00.-- did, announcing. We'll debate the rights and wrongs
:23:00. > :23:04.in a moment but first Adam Fleming has more. I'm come to a wrapped
:23:04. > :23:10.brand new estate in -- I've come to a brand new estate in Northampton to
:23:10. > :23:17.find out about the Chancellor's policy of buying houses. You could
:23:17. > :23:23.just tell that George Osborne wanted us to think Margaret Thatcher's
:23:23. > :23:30.traud mark pollty the right to buy, because he called his scheme Help to
:23:30. > :23:36.Buy. The buyer will stump up at least 5%. Repayments start after
:23:36. > :23:40.five years and it is only available for people buying new builds.
:23:40. > :23:45.This is our two bedroom apartment. People like Ethan, who will be
:23:45. > :23:48.moving into a brand new flat like this one next month. Although I
:23:48. > :23:53.think he will lose the pink duvet. If this Government scheme didn't
:23:53. > :23:59.exist, what would you have done? Still lived with my parents until
:23:59. > :24:03.I'd saved up enough money to get my own and put a deposit by myself and
:24:03. > :24:08.try to get a mortgage, if the Government scheme wasn't around.
:24:08. > :24:12.long do you think that will have taken? Until I was in the 30s.What
:24:12. > :24:17.age are you now? 22. The agency administering the scheme in this
:24:17. > :24:23.area say there are lots more people like him in the queue. At the
:24:23. > :24:27.moment, around 250 applicants have actually put in an application and
:24:27. > :24:31.are in the process of being approved and given that this is really just a
:24:31. > :24:38.month or so after the announcement, and people haven't really heard a
:24:38. > :24:42.great deal about the detail of the equity-based help tow buy a loan, it
:24:42. > :24:49.is not great. The Government hopes it'll help to get house builders
:24:49. > :24:56.demorg of this, building and shoring up the economy. Jim money son works
:24:56. > :25:01.for the developers of this place. -- Jim Munson I think the benefits of
:25:01. > :25:05.that that to the economy, you wouldn't see that return on many
:25:05. > :25:09.other investments. It works all the way down from the supply train
:25:09. > :25:13.through to the contractors and employment, more take-up of
:25:13. > :25:16.apprenticeship roles. Take-up of the second part of the schem starts in
:25:17. > :25:21.January 2014. It is a bit more controversial. The Government will
:25:21. > :25:26.guarantee up to 15% of a buyers' mortgage. And it can be for any kind
:25:26. > :25:30.of home, up to the value of �600,000. But some say it is not
:25:30. > :25:33.such a grand design. The taxpayer becomes liable for losses, although
:25:33. > :25:39.the Government's still not reached a deal with the mortgage lenders, as
:25:39. > :25:43.they've not found a way to prevent it going used to buy second homes.
:25:43. > :25:49.-- it being used. Then the wider question: Is it really a good idea
:25:49. > :25:53.for the state to get involved in the mortgage market in such a big way?
:25:53. > :26:03.Conservative MP, Nadhim Zahawi and shadow economic secretary to the
:26:03. > :26:08.Treasury, Cathy Jamieson join me now to go head-to-head on Help to Buy.
:26:08. > :26:12.Nadhim Zahawi let me come to you first. Why won't these schemes
:26:12. > :26:16.create a housing bubble? You are increasing demand artificially but
:26:16. > :26:20.aren't building enough affordable homes? If you look at the scheme and
:26:20. > :26:23.then the planning reforms we are making, those go hand-in-hand.
:26:23. > :26:27.Looking at core stroonls in different authorities, most local
:26:27. > :26:33.authorities now have the message and are doing the right thing. Rugby
:26:33. > :26:39.district council has embraced the localism bill act that is now in
:26:40. > :26:44.place, and is doing the right thing in terms of Will of allocating the
:26:45. > :26:52.in terms of Will of allocating the right land for development. The
:26:52. > :26:55.average age of a first-time buyer now is 37. I think that is criminal.
:26:55. > :26:58.Fshling We understand the problem -- we understand the problem. We are
:26:58. > :27:02.trying to find out if your solution is going to be right. You are
:27:02. > :27:07.pumping up the demand. How many homes were started in England last
:27:07. > :27:11.year? Just under 100,000.A deplorable level, correct? Well, you
:27:11. > :27:18.are right but also the net increase in the number of dwellings in this
:27:18. > :27:28.year is at 135,000, which is at an all-time high since 2008/9. 2009 was
:27:28. > :27:29.
:27:29. > :27:37.the worst year since the war. Hardly a great yardstick. After Labour's
:27:37. > :27:40.#3r06ly gassy with the money, it is a hard challenge -- profligacy.
:27:40. > :27:45.You increase supply as well as demand by reforming planning. That
:27:46. > :27:50.is pient. We saw on the film -- that's the point. We saw on the film
:27:50. > :27:55.someone being able to buy a property at 22, instead of waiting to their
:27:55. > :27:58.30s. Shouldn't you welcome welcome this? We should try and courage and
:27:58. > :28:02.support people who want to get into their new homes but the point is
:28:02. > :28:05.about supply. Labour did have a good record in Government. 500,000
:28:05. > :28:10.affordable homes and a lot of them build in the last five years of
:28:10. > :28:15.Government. The question here is: Do these measures really bring more
:28:15. > :28:18.houses into the mix to make them available, and there have been
:28:18. > :28:24.serious questions asked about that? The Treasury Select Committee has
:28:24. > :28:27.raised a number of issues and in fact was quite critical saying the
:28:27. > :28:31.Chancellor was unconvincing on this particular aspect of the mortgage
:28:31. > :28:34.guarantee scheme and also that if you wanted to ensure that there were
:28:34. > :28:37.more homes available you wouldn't necessarily start from this point of
:28:37. > :28:42.view. I think there is a lot of unanswered questions, particularly
:28:42. > :28:45.around this issue of people being able to buy second homes.
:28:45. > :28:50.Essentially a second home subsidy. The Government have said that wasn't
:28:50. > :28:54.the intention but they haven't yet been able to show us how they would
:28:54. > :28:58.stop that happening? How would you stop it happening? One of the things
:28:58. > :29:05.we have to look at is the detail. How do you decide with Ethan's case,
:29:05. > :29:11.if his parents want to help him to get to that 5% snoochl or if someone
:29:11. > :29:15.is selling -- that 5%? Or if someone is selling a smaller property in
:29:15. > :29:19.order to get a bigger property. Labour shouldn't be playing politics
:29:19. > :29:24.with this. There isn't any. For Cathy to say we didn't think about
:29:24. > :29:29.the supply, we did. We introduced the localism bill which became an
:29:29. > :29:32.act. All about reforming the planning system making it easier for
:29:32. > :29:36.sites to be found in different areas to make it easier. I think that
:29:36. > :29:38.shows how on the defensive the Tories seem to be on this. The
:29:38. > :29:42.Treasury Select Committee and indood some independent economists, people
:29:42. > :29:46.in the banking system and the building societies have welcomed,
:29:46. > :29:50.broadly welcomed the scheme but have said that the detail is not right
:29:50. > :29:53.and that the Government needs to go back and sort this out. They have
:29:53. > :29:56.raised questions about whether it will increase the number of homes
:29:56. > :30:00.that are available, or whether it'll simply cause a bubble in the housing
:30:00. > :30:03.market, which wouldn't be in anyone's interests. And, of course,
:30:03. > :30:07.if Labour - if the Tories had followed Labour's suggestion of
:30:07. > :30:12.using the money from the 4G option to build more affordable homes that
:30:12. > :30:16.would have given an additional boost. I'm really not going to take
:30:16. > :30:20.any lectures on the issue about support for people who want on to
:30:20. > :30:27.the housing ladder. Why didn't you use that 4G money to build more
:30:27. > :30:30.use that 4G money to build more homes? They are all over the place
:30:30. > :30:34.where they are going to spend the money and fin the cuts for it. Ed
:30:34. > :30:44.Miliband couldn't answer the question. Kathy is waffling on this.
:30:44. > :30:44.
:30:44. > :30:48.The reality is we are putting 19. 5 billion bds more into affordable
:30:48. > :30:52.home. These are all, you know, solid, real policies. Labour need to
:30:52. > :30:55.come up with some policies or support us in making sure that young
:30:55. > :31:00.people can get on to the housing ladder.
:31:00. > :31:03.Part of the problem for the housing starge is you didn't build enough --
:31:03. > :31:08.shortage is that you didn't build enough homes when you were in power.
:31:08. > :31:12.In the Labour years you built only half of the affordable homes, social
:31:12. > :31:15.housing, local authority housing, than the Conservatives did during
:31:15. > :31:19.the Conservative years. That's hardly a record to be proud of?
:31:19. > :31:21.Well, both Ed Miliband and Ed Balls have looked at that record and said
:31:21. > :31:25.yes, of course, there is more than we can do.
:31:26. > :31:30.You were boasting about it earlier. It is only 50% of what the Tories
:31:30. > :31:34.built. You didn't build enough houses when you were in power?
:31:34. > :31:37.what the Tories have managed to achieve is the lowest record in the
:31:37. > :31:42.peace time years since the 1920s. They have nothing to boast about
:31:42. > :31:46.either. Of course, people who are out there, who went on to the
:31:46. > :31:50.housing ladder and who are keen to get into housing association or a
:31:50. > :31:54.housing co-operative or to get a council house want to see housing
:31:54. > :31:56.built and it is interesting the trEEsh Select Committee report
:31:56. > :32:00.clearly -- Treasury Select Committee report clearly said that should be
:32:00. > :32:06.the focus at looking at the supply as well as the demand and there are
:32:06. > :32:10.real concerns that have to be addressed. Are you going to vote for
:32:10. > :32:13.this EU referendum amendment to the Queen's Speech? Yes, I am. I think
:32:13. > :32:18.if I were Prime Minister I would be relaxed about that.
:32:18. > :32:23.No, we have run out of time. Thank you very much. It is hard to get a
:32:23. > :32:33.yes or no these days. It is 11. 30am and you are watching
:32:33. > :32:43.the Sunday Politics. I will be look ago the week ahead. Until then, the
:32:43. > :32:44.
:32:44. > :32:49.We are looking at the laritiest thinking at what river -- latest
:32:49. > :32:59.thinking of what river crossings are needed in some. Could the mayor's
:32:59. > :33:00.
:33:00. > :33:03.plans prove a bridge too far for his Conservative colleagues. Let's start
:33:03. > :33:09.with big bigger picture of what investment London needs and how it
:33:09. > :33:12.should raise the money to pay for it. Next week a report will
:33:12. > :33:17.recommend devolution of more tax raising and retaining powers to
:33:17. > :33:21.London Government in the form of both the boroughs and the mayor.
:33:21. > :33:26.Would you welcome that? We have been talk being business rates, probably
:33:26. > :33:31.a revaluation of the council tax, more borrowing powers for councils.
:33:31. > :33:37.Would you welcome that? I would, but it is not a new idea. When I was
:33:38. > :33:44.deputy leader of the barnet Council we were lobbying the council to do
:33:44. > :33:48.this. When we had new projects, we were keen tothe stamp duty to
:33:48. > :33:53.provide that the infrastructure. There is no surprise the report has
:33:53. > :33:59.come to this conclusion. It is a surprise that the Conservative-led
:33:59. > :34:02.Government isn't saying yes? Well, I am not sure it is the Government.
:34:02. > :34:07.is usually the Treasury. The last time I looked it was part
:34:07. > :34:12.of the Government. Why not? Would you call for it? I certainly would
:34:12. > :34:16.support calls for it. I believe in greater localism ra than the the
:34:16. > :34:23.Treasury deciding. The mayor will have to spending decisions in the
:34:23. > :34:27.future. For example,' projection of the population will increase. He
:34:27. > :34:35.will have to put more infrastructure in such as the Tube and this could
:34:35. > :34:42.be one way of funning it. David Lamby, Labour -- Lammy Labour
:34:42. > :34:45.created the financial devolution. Nothing, Labour wasn't thinking
:34:45. > :34:55.about doing anything in terms of tax revenue and tax raising powers. Is
:34:55. > :35:01.it time to look at that? Yes, it is. I think Boris is right to ask Tony
:35:01. > :35:08.Traveres to look at this. He is the man to do the job. If you like G20,
:35:08. > :35:14.LA is now 123 years old. -- GLA is now 13 years old. It is a teenager.
:35:14. > :35:17.We cannot have a situation where we need to do Crossrail one and it
:35:17. > :35:21.takes 30 years to get part of the money out of the treasury to make
:35:21. > :35:24.this happen. The Treasury will always think that London's roads are
:35:24. > :35:28.paved with gold. There are other considerations across Whitehall and
:35:28. > :35:31.across the country. This isn't about more money for London, it is about
:35:31. > :35:36.having greater flexibility for the mayor and local authorities to both
:35:36. > :35:39.borrow to build housing, and to retain stamp duty, business rates
:35:39. > :35:42.and the others. Rather than waiting every three
:35:42. > :35:47.years. Absolutely. With a population of ten million, you have got to have
:35:47. > :35:51.the certainty on bridges, on roads, on rail, and on housing and we need
:35:51. > :35:55.that. Someone from Local Government, won't
:35:55. > :35:59.there be and how do you resolve the tension there maybe in terms of what
:35:59. > :36:03.was devolved between the mayor and the boroughs? The boroughs are the
:36:03. > :36:06.heavy lifters. They are the spenders. They know where their
:36:06. > :36:09.economic needs are and where the housing is needed? That's correct.
:36:09. > :36:13.The relationship between the mayor is very good. He works very closely
:36:13. > :36:18.with the London boroughs. I know they have identified priorities
:36:18. > :36:22.between themselves. I think he will address their concerns in his
:36:22. > :36:26.decisions about infrastructure, but David makes a good point and that's
:36:26. > :36:34.that the fiscal autonomy of London Government is nothing like it is in
:36:34. > :36:38.other parts of the world such as New York or some of the provinces in
:36:38. > :36:42.France and it is time we gave the mayor and the London Assembly the
:36:42. > :36:46.power to decide their own funding decisions.
:36:46. > :36:49.Let's turn to the question of river crossings. No shortage in central
:36:49. > :36:53.and West London, but out east, it is another story. Plans for a big
:36:53. > :36:58.crossing, the Thames Gateway Bridge was shelved by Boris Johnson when he
:36:58. > :37:08.was elected. But could we now be seeing the signs of one big mayoral
:37:08. > :37:09.
:37:09. > :37:14.Jean et using the Blackwall Tunnel twice a day to commute from her home
:37:14. > :37:19.in Kent into Canary Wharf. Getting across the river has become an
:37:19. > :37:23.obsession. I can do an hour from my office door to here quite easily
:37:23. > :37:26.three times a week you could take an hour from my office door to here.
:37:26. > :37:30.And it is not far. More than just a waste of time, she
:37:30. > :37:36.says the traffic lost her money and has had a huge impact on the way she
:37:36. > :37:42.can work. You cannot guarantee a breakfast meeting. No way. And many
:37:42. > :37:47.a time I have had to make excuses for not turning up. People know now
:37:47. > :37:51.not to book me first thing at 9am on a morning because the chances of me
:37:51. > :37:56.getting there are slim. The idea that East London needs more
:37:56. > :37:59.river krotion is uncontroversial, but -- river crossings is
:37:59. > :38:04.uncontroversial, but if Ken Livingstone had his way, later this
:38:04. > :38:09.year, this would have opened to the public, the Thames Gateway Bridge.
:38:09. > :38:13.Attacked by green groups and local Conservative councils, plans for the
:38:13. > :38:23.six lane road bridge was scrapped by Boris Johnson. But could a U-turn be
:38:23. > :38:24.
:38:24. > :38:27.on the cards? This week, Transport for London, announced the results of
:38:27. > :38:34.their consultation into new river crossings in East London. Proposals
:38:34. > :38:38.for a new road crossing on the same spot received the support of 71% of
:38:38. > :38:42.respondents. The mayor's other option of a ferry was less popular.
:38:42. > :38:49.The message from some local businesses is clear. Do a U-turn on
:38:49. > :38:53.it. We need it. It is not going to help East London if we don't have
:38:53. > :38:58.more river crossings. Not just one, I would love two. I don't want a
:38:58. > :39:01.ferry particularly, it is not sustainable long-term. Whereas a
:39:01. > :39:05.bridge and a tunnel, that would solve all the problems.
:39:05. > :39:09.Businesses maybe urging him on, but if the mayor does want to go ahead
:39:09. > :39:19.with the bridge, he may face opposition from some, not least
:39:19. > :39:24.
:39:24. > :39:29.There was a division in opinion depending on which side of the river
:39:29. > :39:34.you were, Newham and Tower Hamlets and other councils were supportive
:39:34. > :39:38.of a Thames Gateway, people in Bexley Council and yourself weren't.
:39:38. > :39:43.Do you think that could change if a bridge proposal came back? No is the
:39:43. > :39:47.short answer to that, Tim. The boroughs on the north side of the
:39:47. > :39:52.Thames would be maintain their support for it. Bexley would not
:39:52. > :39:55.because the road infrastructure in Bexley would not support the volume
:39:55. > :40:00.of traffic that the bridge would transfer on to the roads.
:40:00. > :40:04.Would a different model or a bridge that was more local rather than a
:40:04. > :40:07.great big one which was proposed that would meet with approval?
:40:07. > :40:12.I don't think it could be possible to design such a bridge without
:40:12. > :40:15.destroying the business case for it because the roads are too small. One
:40:15. > :40:23.of the principle roads the traffic would have to travel along is little
:40:23. > :40:27.more than a country track where two cars have difficulty passing side by
:40:27. > :40:30.side and that goes through ancient woodland.
:40:30. > :40:35.Wouldn't your constituents prefer or when they weigh these things up want
:40:35. > :40:39.the access of getting across to the economic heartland of the capital,
:40:39. > :40:42.north of the river, such as the person we saw in that film and
:40:42. > :40:47.wouldn't they be prepared to take that disruption? I suspect some
:40:47. > :40:51.might, but most wouldn't because the area we are talking about is
:40:51. > :40:56.residential and the housing is very, very close to the road that would be
:40:56. > :41:02.concerned. What you would be doing is turning semi busy domestic roads
:41:02. > :41:07.into something like the south circular almost overnight and whilst
:41:08. > :41:12.there could be potentially, although the planning inspector didn't think
:41:12. > :41:17.there would be any benefit, there would be environmental implications.
:41:17. > :41:22.So should the mayor rule this out? Yes. We are not opposed to the idea
:41:22. > :41:25.of more crossings in East London. I think everybody would agree those
:41:25. > :41:29.are desirable. It would need to be the right crossing in the right
:41:29. > :41:33.location and this is neither. It should be ruled out by the mayor.
:41:33. > :41:36.He has the power to do that and he should be doing that? Yes. What I
:41:36. > :41:41.would like to see from the mayor and what I called on the mayor to rule
:41:41. > :41:44.out a fixed link crossing in that location. Not o to rule out
:41:44. > :41:49.crossings in East London. There are other locations that could and
:41:49. > :41:57.should be looked at in more Department of Health. A crossing at
:41:57. > :42:01.that -- in more depth. If there was ap consultation on that, what do you
:42:01. > :42:05.say? It is a mistake. I think Transport for London have been
:42:05. > :42:10.clever in getting us back on to the table because it was dead and buried
:42:10. > :42:14.five years ago. Having it back on the table now, they have manoeuvred
:42:14. > :42:18.themselves into the position. Well, the Mayor of London allowed
:42:18. > :42:22.that No, Transport for London. The mayor is allowing consultation.
:42:22. > :42:26.He could stop the consultation now. He could put a stop to it and it
:42:26. > :42:30.won't just happen? Yes, he could do that, but he is committed to
:42:30. > :42:34.exploring the possibility of further crossings in East London. And that's
:42:34. > :42:39.fine, the danger is and this is why we have been pushing hard against
:42:39. > :42:43.this, this particular crossing is the wrong cross in the wrong
:42:43. > :42:48.location. David Lammy were you a Labour mayor,
:42:49. > :42:53.would you go for a Thames Gateway bridge? There have got to be
:42:53. > :42:57.crossks, that's clear. Nine million people in London. We have to have
:42:57. > :43:02.easier routes for people in the south-east particularly. I think it
:43:02. > :43:08.should have remained in the consultation. 71% of people were
:43:08. > :43:13.saying they wanted it. Clearly, the concerns of Bexley have to be met
:43:13. > :43:19.and so, you know, I don't know the detail, but you have got to get a
:43:19. > :43:27.way... Was it three lanes or two? These proposals aren't the thAments
:43:27. > :43:32.gateway. There is a dis -- Thames Gateway. Would you are have -- would
:43:32. > :43:35.you have a Thames Gateway bridge? Xwor ris should never -- Boris
:43:35. > :43:38.should never have taken the proposals out. We should be
:43:38. > :43:45.consulting on that and moving forward, but not just on that
:43:45. > :43:48.because it would lead too increased press. You need ferry boat crossings
:43:48. > :43:51.as well. George Osborne, we have heard in
:43:51. > :43:55.autumn statements and Budgets, no one is disputing, everyone thinks
:43:55. > :43:59.there is a need for infrastructure and he gave money for the mayor to
:43:59. > :44:05.look at river crossings. You are not affected by it locally, but surely
:44:05. > :44:10.as a Conservative, you would support proposals for something that
:44:10. > :44:13.facilitates traffic getting around the capital easily? Is would. I go
:44:13. > :44:19.back to the point that I was making. It is down to the local authorities
:44:19. > :44:24.to make that decision where they should be sited. Bexley have a
:44:24. > :44:28.concern and feel that's not the right location. 71% of people want
:44:28. > :44:31.an additional river crossing. Shouldn't the mayor decide?
:44:31. > :44:34.mayor should consult with the London boroughs who are closer to the
:44:34. > :44:38.people. The majority of the boroughs want
:44:38. > :44:41.it? Well, the final decision is for the mayor to make, but I believe he
:44:41. > :44:42.should work closely with colleagues, both in Local Government on the
:44:42. > :44:49.north and the Southside of the river.
:44:49. > :44:54.The mayor has got to think about the I shall interests of London, not --
:44:54. > :44:57.think about the interests of London. If you are worried about the
:44:57. > :45:01.signals, I have heard you in the London Assembly indicating your
:45:01. > :45:11.worries. Do you think it looks like a U-turn is on the cards here?
:45:11. > :45:14.
:45:14. > :45:18.have asked? I cannot read the mind of the mayor. I would want to say,
:45:18. > :45:23.we have heard in your story and the other panellists today talking about
:45:23. > :45:27.China 1% of people want this to happen. -- talking about 71%.
:45:27. > :45:32.Transport for London ran this consultation for 14 weeks, and they
:45:33. > :45:37.had 6,000 people respond, less than 2%. It is not overwhelming.A very
:45:37. > :45:41.good point. When they come back to doing a statutory consultation, they
:45:41. > :45:44.will have to be much more rigorous. That's all the time we have on this
:45:44. > :45:48.at the moment. Thank you for coming It is estimated that 4% of council
:45:48. > :45:52.homes in London are being illegally sublet, more than any other part of
:45:52. > :45:59.the country. Late they are summer this will become a criminal offence.
:45:59. > :46:04.The number of local authorities in the capital appear set to get tough.
:46:04. > :46:11.According to the Government, 4% of social housing in London is being
:46:11. > :46:15.illies Italy sublet by the tennants without permission -- Illictitly. In
:46:16. > :46:20.Harrow, the council take it very seriously. We have a small housing
:46:20. > :46:27.stock and high housing demand. All this is costing the council a lot of
:46:27. > :46:29.money to deal with. We followed council officers as they went
:46:29. > :46:35.door-to-door looking to inspect properties they thought were
:46:35. > :46:40.breaking the rules. But at the fist one, there is a problem. Morning,
:46:40. > :46:45.Harrow council. No answer. And at the second... Hello, Harrow council.
:46:45. > :46:49.the second... Hello, Harrow council. And, the third. Now this is the
:46:49. > :46:51.fourth property we have tried this morning and nobody has answered.
:46:51. > :46:57.Unfortunately the council at this stage have no right to force entry
:46:57. > :47:00.at all. If they want to do that, they have to send a letter, apply to
:47:00. > :47:04.the court to get a court order and come back. By the fifth we are
:47:04. > :47:07.getting used to the sound of knocking. But then... An answer
:47:07. > :47:12.are having a problem getting into this property. Without permission
:47:12. > :47:17.they are not allowed to enter and gather evidence. A message is left
:47:17. > :47:24.to get in touch with the council. Before it gets to this stage, an
:47:24. > :47:29.awful lot of work will have gone into these cases. They will have had
:47:29. > :47:34.to build evidence, based on tip-offs and very often they will have
:47:34. > :47:38.knocked on the doors before. They might have to knock on property
:47:38. > :47:42.number six again, but from later this summer subletting of social
:47:42. > :47:47.property will be a criminal offence, punishable with two years in prison.
:47:47. > :47:51.With it now becoming a criminal offence, it may well be easier for
:47:51. > :47:57.authorities now to engage maybe with the local police force to maybe get
:47:57. > :48:02.warrants and to execute warrants to force access to the properties and,
:48:03. > :48:08.you know, will be able to expedite cases far quicker and far cheaper
:48:08. > :48:13.than just continuing to knock doors and not get any results at all.
:48:13. > :48:20.For new laws -- the new laws might have been a help at doors number
:48:20. > :48:25.seven, eight and nine People with becoming smaert and operating more
:48:25. > :48:28.sophisticated because they can see there is a lot of publicity around
:48:28. > :48:33.it. -- becoming smarter. They are having people in the property that
:48:33. > :48:39.can pose as the tenant by leaving their passports and identification
:48:39. > :48:43.with the subleather. -- sub-letter and briefing the sub-letter if the
:48:43. > :48:47.council turns up. We have had that. Councils across London are looking
:48:47. > :48:52.forward thiefg more power on this issue. -- looking forward to having
:48:52. > :48:58.more power. What do you think about that, memo to Harrow, go around in
:48:58. > :49:02.the evening when people are in and not at work.
:49:02. > :49:05.Eileen Short is here from the Defend Council Housing campaign. What do
:49:05. > :49:09.you think is going to happen? think it is a ridiculous and
:49:09. > :49:15.shameful waste of time and energy. It does nothing to create the homes
:49:15. > :49:19.we need. Councils have the powers to deal with illegal sub-letting, but
:49:19. > :49:24.at the moment that really isn't the issue. It is part of a really
:49:24. > :49:28.sustained attack on council housing, coming from the Government, at the
:49:29. > :49:34.same time as Lord Freud, the benefits minister is going
:49:34. > :49:37.aroundbury telling people to take in a longerer. -- going around Britain.
:49:37. > :49:41.They have powers but not tough powers. This is the threat of a
:49:41. > :49:45.criminal action. It is ridiculous. What you will find and I predict it
:49:45. > :49:48.now, that what council also find is that people have their sister's chin
:49:48. > :49:52.and their boy friends living with them because they haven't got
:49:52. > :49:57.anywhere else to go. -- their sister's children.
:49:57. > :50:02.In many instances it won't be that, it will be an illegal sub-let and
:50:02. > :50:07.anything that prevents, when we know it is a scarce resource, anything
:50:07. > :50:10.that stops that has to be a good thing. If people jump queues by
:50:10. > :50:15.sub-letting, it is wrong, isn't it? Councils have the powers. I tell you
:50:15. > :50:21.what has created the nervousness for councils, is that they no longer
:50:21. > :50:25.manage their house housing property with an estate office. Everybody is
:50:25. > :50:30.behind a switchboard. Nobody knows what is going on. Instead of
:50:30. > :50:35.managing ect ifively they will want to take the truch yob of the law. --
:50:35. > :50:39.managing effectively. This will give them more powers. There is nothing
:50:39. > :50:43.to create homes. Where will those people go to? A private renting
:50:43. > :50:47.sector that nobody can afford. this worth pursuing It certainly
:50:47. > :50:51.was. The pressure on social and council housing in my constituency
:50:51. > :50:56.and I'm sure in David's is immense. We have many people who desperately
:50:56. > :51:00.need to be homed. If there is one person who is illegally sub-letting
:51:00. > :51:04.and making money, we have to take ction a. I ask Eileen -- take
:51:04. > :51:08.action. I ask Eileen, if the councils have power, why are they
:51:08. > :51:11.not taking action? The Government have stepped in to brick in
:51:11. > :51:14.fairness. You have to ask the councils but I think most people
:51:14. > :51:18.know that if you are going to do something about the shortage of
:51:18. > :51:23.housing, then you need to build the council housing we need and not cut
:51:23. > :51:27.the budget for new homes by 60%. David Lammy you have to support this
:51:27. > :51:31.and get tough. You can't have a situation where people are making
:51:31. > :51:36.money by sub-letting council properties. I think it has to be
:51:36. > :51:40.clamped down on. But it is a small problem. The big problem is supply.
:51:40. > :51:44.You can't have bedroom tax, take in a lodger and go down on people for
:51:44. > :51:48.doing it. They have to match it up. It is a sense of being preoccupied
:51:48. > :51:54.by the small problem when the big problem, building houses and
:51:54. > :51:58.creating supply is not being done. It might strike people as odd. Times
:51:58. > :52:03.are hard for councils, they haven't got much money but they are expected
:52:03. > :52:08.to put money into teams going around knocking during the day, without
:52:08. > :52:11.much luck. Let me come back to the so-called bedroom tax, which is not
:52:11. > :52:14.a tax. The previous Government decided to do this in the private
:52:14. > :52:18.sector which was supported but because it is in the social sector
:52:18. > :52:22.the Labour Party is not supporting it. No-one understands why that is.
:52:22. > :52:25.You said take in a lodger and now you are going after people doing the
:52:25. > :52:35.same thing. That's the point. you very much.
:52:35. > :52:38.
:52:38. > :52:45.Time for a look at the rest of the A �1 billion deal to build a
:52:45. > :52:52.university campus near the lik -- Olympic Park in Stratford has fallen
:52:52. > :52:54.through. Newham college had been in talks since October to develop the
:52:54. > :52:58.Carpenter Estate but haven't agreed terms.
:52:58. > :53:07.The Marie opened a new business centre in Tottenham part destroyed
:53:07. > :53:11.by the riots. -- the mayor. Council tennants in Westminster are
:53:11. > :53:17.set to receive free broadband connections. The network will
:53:17. > :53:20.initially be offered to 1 thousand homes in the o Grosvenor estate in
:53:20. > :53:24.June before being rolled out to all 22,000 council tennants by early
:53:24. > :53:28.next year. Under current reform plans the Fire Service will take
:53:28. > :53:32.longer to reach many Londoners in the case of an incident. The figures
:53:32. > :53:39.from the London Fire Brigade believes the impact of plans which
:53:39. > :53:44.will see 12 fire stations closed and 18 fire engines lost.
:53:44. > :53:48.Matthew Offord under these fire proposals more fire engines will not
:53:48. > :53:52.be getting to this incident within this crucial six minutes. It is not
:53:52. > :53:55.going to affect your area. You seem to have benefited by putting fire
:53:55. > :53:59.engines back. Aren't you worried about it? It is something I
:53:59. > :54:03.considered within my own area and the amount of fire engines and tend
:54:03. > :54:06.acts that we have got. My concern was we had to ensure that those
:54:06. > :54:11.tenders can actually reach road traffic accidents in that amount of
:54:11. > :54:16.time if there had been a reduction. I'm very pleased that the Government
:54:16. > :54:19.have - rather they have listened to me on that issue and we don't have
:54:19. > :54:23.any cuts. But, what we have seen is a major change within the Fire
:54:23. > :54:26.Service across London, that there are less fires being attended. There
:54:26. > :54:30.is more preventative work and we are reaping the benefits of that.
:54:30. > :54:33.you, because there is a lot of emotion about this, David Lammy, you
:54:33. > :54:37.can't complab about this, really, can you? -- you can't complain. You
:54:37. > :54:42.are not losing, are you losing any fire stations on your patch? Your
:54:42. > :54:46.fire response times are not changing under the changes, in a big urban
:54:46. > :54:49.area. We campaigned and won. There are 40 wards in London, some with
:54:49. > :54:53.poor and deprived communities. There is a fire in your house, you pick up
:54:53. > :54:58.the phone and ring the Fire Brigade and now they are not going to get to
:54:58. > :55:02.you at the same speed as in my constituency. When your house is
:55:02. > :55:05.burning down you don't care about the modelling. You want to know what
:55:05. > :55:10.the fire engine is coming to you. is managing risk. Because of the
:55:10. > :55:13.cuts, the same lines we got on police station closures, we will now
:55:13. > :55:17.see people less safe in London as a consequence. Don't you wish and
:55:17. > :55:21.think Labour should have taken on and looked at this earlier, really?
:55:21. > :55:25.It is outdated, how fire provision is, in London. I don't accept that.
:55:25. > :55:29.We are now going to see more overcrowding, in areas than we have
:55:29. > :55:32.seen before as a result of these changes. I'm sorry, no more time for
:55:32. > :55:42.both you. Thank you very much, both you. Thank you very much,
:55:42. > :55:42.
:55:42. > :55:47.In a moment we'll look ahead to the big stories that will dominate
:55:47. > :55:50.politics next week, with our political panel. First the news.
:55:50. > :55:54.Good afternoon. The Education Secretary, Michael Gove, has told
:55:54. > :55:58.the BBC he would vote for Britain to leave the EU if there was a
:55:58. > :56:03.referendum today. He's the most senior Conservative to
:56:03. > :56:08.date to publicly contemplate backing Britain's exit from the EU. He told
:56:08. > :56:12.the BBC's Andrew Marr Show -- life outside would be perfectly tolerable
:56:12. > :56:15.but he said the best course was to follow David Cameron's plan to
:56:15. > :56:17.renegotiated powers and lead the change Europe needed. I think the
:56:17. > :56:21.most important thing to do is to support the Prime Minister in
:56:21. > :56:25.renegotiating our position and then put it to a referendum. Some of my
:56:25. > :56:28.colleagues are very exuberant and want to let off steam, fair enough.
:56:28. > :56:32.My own view is, let the Prime Minister lay out our negotiation
:56:32. > :56:37.platform, make sure that he has a scombloort, which I'm convinced we
:56:37. > :56:41.will secure. -- a majority. Then let's have the referendum then.
:56:41. > :56:45.former Prime Minister of Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif, says he's confident
:56:45. > :56:49.he'll be returned to power, more than 13 years after he was ousted in
:56:49. > :56:53.a military coup. Partial, unofficial results from yesterday's general
:56:53. > :56:58.election, put his Pakistan Muslim League well in the lead. But, the
:56:58. > :57:03.party's expected to fall short of an overall majority, forcing it to go
:57:03. > :57:08.into coalition. He had been widely tipped to return
:57:08. > :57:13.to power. But it's still a remarkable personal comeback from
:57:13. > :57:18.Nawaz Sharif, after being ousted as Prime Minister by the Army in 1999.
:57:18. > :57:25.And on the day after, Pakistan's newspapers reflect it.
:57:25. > :57:29.It was cricketing legend, Imran Khan who most threatened Nawaz Sharif's
:57:29. > :57:34.ambitions, galvanising young voters with his call for a new Pakistan.
:57:34. > :57:40.With victory in sight, Nawaz Sharif seemed to recognise the force of
:57:40. > :57:45.that challenge. "With zbod's help, we will fulfil every single promise
:57:45. > :57:49.we've made to the youth." -- with God's he. Voters yesterday defied
:57:49. > :57:53.the violence that played the campaign and continued on election
:57:54. > :57:57.day itself with a turnout of more than 60%. If Nawaz Sharif and his
:57:57. > :58:01.party fall short of the majority they need to govern on their own, he
:58:01. > :58:06.will have to cut deals with other parties or independence. He promised
:58:06. > :58:10.the electorate strong and stable government, arguing that a new and
:58:10. > :58:16.ineeffective coalition would be bad news for Pakistan.
:58:16. > :58:21.He will have a honeymoon period of sorts but from the economy, to
:58:21. > :58:25.tackling extremism, time will not be on his side.
:58:25. > :58:29.The Syrian Government has rejected accusations that it was behind two
:58:29. > :58:32.car bombs that killed at least 43 people in Turkey yesterday and
:58:32. > :58:38.wounded dozens more. Hundreds of mourners have attended
:58:38. > :58:43.the funerals of the victims in the town of Reyhanli, where many Syrian
:58:43. > :58:48.Foulkes have fled. Nine people, owl area Syrian refugees have fled.
:58:48. > :58:56.Nine people have been arrested. Here a group of senior nurses is
:58:56. > :58:59.warning of inadequate staffing levels on many hospitals wards. The
:58:59. > :59:02.Safe Staffing Alliance says people's health is being put at risk but the
:59:02. > :59:07.Government says hospitals are best-placed to decide on the number
:59:07. > :59:15.of registered nurses. That's all the news for the moment.
:59:15. > :59:20.More news on BBC One at 5.35pm. So, how will that euro vote play out
:59:20. > :59:25.and what will it mean for Dave and Ed is and what will be the fallout
:59:25. > :59:32.from the hand grenade that the edge secretary, Michael Gove has thrown
:59:32. > :59:35.into the heart of politician -- that Education Secretary, Michael grove
:59:35. > :59:39.that is thrown into the heart of coalition politics.
:59:39. > :59:44.Let's start with Michael Gove's remarks abouts whether he would vote
:59:44. > :59:49.to stay in or out of Europe, if offered the status quo or out, he
:59:49. > :59:52.says he would choose out. That's what Mr Grayling is saying as well.
:59:52. > :59:56.Mr Hammond wouldn't really answer that question, dancing on the head
:59:56. > :00:00.of a pin taking in comfort in - oh, Europe will change. But they are
:00:00. > :00:03.having to line up and answer this, aren't they? It shows the division
:00:03. > :00:06.in the Cabinet now is not over whether it is right for the Prime
:00:06. > :00:11.Minister to have a referendum now, or in 2017, they are all agreed on
:00:11. > :00:15.that. The division is what happens in 2017 and clearly, you have one
:00:15. > :00:19.group of Cabinet ministers, the Prime Minister, George Osborne,
:00:19. > :00:22.possibly Philip Hammond, or scared of life outside the European Union.
:00:22. > :00:25.And the whole Prime Minister strategy is to reform our
:00:25. > :00:29.relationship, so we can stay in. Then there is another group of
:00:29. > :00:33.ministers, Michael Gove, outside the Cabinet, Boris Johnson, and for
:00:33. > :00:36.them, they have no fear of life outside the European Union. And they
:00:37. > :00:41.say - if the Prime Minister can re-establish a better relationship,
:00:41. > :00:44.fine, we'll stay in. But if we can't, no problem going out. The
:00:44. > :00:48.problem for David Cameron, is that he is telling the Conservative Party
:00:48. > :00:51.what he is going to do is renegotiate the terms of British
:00:51. > :00:55.membership, and what he is telling to European leaders and Angela
:00:55. > :00:59.Merkel, is, no, I want to reform the European Union as a whole. And if
:00:59. > :01:03.that is what he does, if what he does is what he is telling Merkel he
:01:03. > :01:08.will try and do, you will see that Michael Gove and Boris Johnson will
:01:08. > :01:10.be campaigning for a no vote forbury to leave the European Union. -- for
:01:10. > :01:14.to leave the European Union. -- for Britain to leave. That is he at Tory
:01:14. > :01:19.nightmare. They think people like Mr Gove and Mr Grayling, they think
:01:19. > :01:24.that even if Mr Calm drount get much back from Europe -- Mr Cameron, if
:01:24. > :01:33.he gets a Wilsonian fig leaf back, he will campaign it stay in, whereas
:01:33. > :01:40.he will campaign it stay in, whereas they'll campaign to stay out.
:01:40. > :01:44.If there is no renegotiation he would have to support exit as well.
:01:44. > :01:47.When 2017 comes around and renegotiation hasn't been
:01:47. > :01:52.substantial, there is something about David Cameron, his tendency to
:01:52. > :01:56.side with majority opinion or establishment opinion, his
:01:56. > :02:00.reluctance to rock the boat on an issue as big as this that will lead
:02:00. > :02:04.him to campaign for a yes vote. If a Tory leader takes a minority
:02:04. > :02:08.position within his party and wins, and keeps Britain within the EU, you
:02:08. > :02:14.can just imagine how vicious the tear-up within the party will be.
:02:14. > :02:20.That's still to come. We did know that Michael Gove was likely to come
:02:20. > :02:25.out rather than accept the status quo. What we didn't know, is what he
:02:25. > :02:29.thought of Nick Clegg. This is the hand grenade on the Marr Show.
:02:29. > :02:32.You are suggesting that internal Lib Dem politics an an attempt to
:02:32. > :02:37.destabilise Nick Clegg is determining policy about how
:02:37. > :02:45.children are cared for in this country? Well, we have to
:02:45. > :02:49.acknowledge that you need to look at newspapers today to see that Lord
:02:49. > :02:54.Oakeshott is trying to promote Vince. It is understandable within
:02:54. > :03:00.the Lib Dems this goes on. Nick has to show a lit of leg as it were on
:03:00. > :03:05.these -- a bit of leg as it were on these issues. It is remarkable. He
:03:05. > :03:09.is saying that the Deputy Prime Minister has chosen this position on
:03:09. > :03:16.childcare, it is different what he did have, because he needs to shore
:03:16. > :03:23.up his position with his activists? It is a fantastic story and one I
:03:23. > :03:27.don't believe. He moved the conversation on from splits in the
:03:27. > :03:32.Tory Party to splits in Lib Dems. You don't believe that Nick Clegg
:03:32. > :03:36.has taken that position or Vince Cable is on manoeuvres? I don't
:03:36. > :03:40.believe NEC has taken a position that is purely political and the
:03:40. > :03:45.idea that somebody would take a position for... But he wrote to Liz
:03:45. > :03:51.Truss saying this is fine, go ahead. Well, he says that's a consultation.
:03:51. > :03:57.I read the letter, thrilling though it was and it is very detailed.
:03:57. > :03:59.I think, you heard him on the LB C Show and he does believe that the
:03:59. > :04:07.ratios would be bad if they were relaxed.
:04:07. > :04:12.The story I would suggest, Nick, is that Michael Gove is furious with
:04:12. > :04:15.the way Nick Clegg has stitched up Liz Truss who is one of his junior
:04:15. > :04:21.ministers and someone he admirers a lot and this was the revenge on
:04:21. > :04:29.Clegg this morning? And for such a polite man, Michael Gove has a shiny
:04:29. > :04:34.pair of metal toe capped doctor Martin's. Of course, he is annoyed
:04:34. > :04:38.that Nick Clegg is changing his position and Helen would say this is
:04:38. > :04:42.a consultation and I am responding to the doubts. But on the point is
:04:42. > :04:46.Nick Clegg in trouble? Weirdly this time last year, Nick Clegg of the
:04:46. > :04:50.three party leaders, the one whose position was most insecure, wind the
:04:50. > :04:54.tape forward and Nick Clegg of the three party leaders is the one who
:04:54. > :04:59.is the most secure. Matthew Oakeshott called for him to go at
:04:59. > :05:04.the end of August. As much as we love Matthew Oakeshott, he is like a
:05:04. > :05:07.bee that stung and lost his life so nobody really licence to him now.
:05:07. > :05:14.Reading Mr Cable's interview in the Sunday Telegraph this morning, I am
:05:14. > :05:20.not tee old at 70. -- I am not too old at 70. Nick Clegg is wrong when
:05:20. > :05:30.he says that 3. 5 million jobs will go if we leave the European Union.
:05:30. > :05:31.
:05:31. > :05:36.He clearly is on manoeuvres. I gis I disagree -- I disagree. His age is
:05:36. > :05:43.probably too old. Hoon has gone. You are left with the Tim Farron's of
:05:43. > :05:46.this world. Nick Clegg is safe until 2015. It is a cheeky cheeky comment
:05:46. > :05:51.from Michael Gove. If there is a party leader who makes concessions
:05:51. > :05:58.to his own tribe in order to hang on to his job, it is David Cameron. We
:05:58. > :06:01.saw that before. It is becoming the response of the
:06:01. > :06:05.school yard. Michael Gove knows all about leadership ambitions. I am not
:06:05. > :06:10.sure he does have ambitions to lead the Conservative Party? , he enjoys
:06:10. > :06:14.causing a stir. You saw it with his comments about, was it Mr Men Nazis
:06:14. > :06:19.this week. He has an eye for a good headline and he likes, he likes
:06:19. > :06:22.getting one. Now, you told the Labour Party just
:06:22. > :06:27.to shut-up about Europe... entirely.
:06:27. > :06:32.I para phrase. Do you think it will follow your advice, because Miliband
:06:32. > :06:35.said we won't have a referendum? Yes, he gave a speech and Ed Balls
:06:35. > :06:38.has a softer position and I think they would do well to say as little
:06:38. > :06:43.about this as possible. But they are not able to because
:06:43. > :06:46.people like me ask them questions like that! Can they get away with
:06:46. > :06:50.just shutting up about this. There are people in the Labour Party
:06:50. > :06:57.worried that this is given their leader is fragile and not that big
:06:58. > :07:02.anyway, this is a ding are yous position? And the Tories are
:07:02. > :07:05.convinced it is dangerous for them not to offer a referendum. If Ed
:07:05. > :07:08.Miliband becomes Prime Minister and offers a referendum, the first-half
:07:08. > :07:12.of his premiership is taken up with the issue of Europe and if he loses,
:07:12. > :07:16.if Britain votes to leave, his premiership ends after
:07:16. > :07:20.two-and-a-half years. Some people are critical of Ed Miliband for not
:07:20. > :07:23.being strong enough. He has been clear on this from the word go and
:07:24. > :07:27.said it clearly in the speech yesterday. This is not the time to
:07:27. > :07:31.have an in or out referendum and we the Labour Party have agreed with
:07:31. > :07:34.the change in law that this coalition introduced which is if
:07:34. > :07:38.there is a further transfer of sovereignty from here to Brussels
:07:38. > :07:41.there will have to be a referendum. He doesn't to take Britain out of
:07:41. > :07:43.the European Union so he doesn't want to be a Prime Minister that
:07:43. > :07:50.would have to preside over that if the referendum went the wrong way.
:07:50. > :07:57.So in a sense, he stuck to a principle here? You saw Michael Gove
:07:57. > :08:01.say I have every confidence we will win a majority and they don't have
:08:01. > :08:05.confidence. The chairman doesn't have confidence in that? It is all
:08:05. > :08:08.contingent on that 2017 is having a majority which they won't have. So
:08:08. > :08:11.we are still dancing on the head of a pin.
:08:11. > :08:15.It would be interesting to see what happens. Right, that's it. You can
:08:15. > :08:19.keep up-to-date with the big political stories on the Daily