12/01/2014

:00:38. > :00:46.Good morning, welcome. 2014 is barely under way, and the

:00:47. > :00:51.coalition is fighting over cuts. Nick Legg says Tory plans to balance

:00:52. > :00:54.the books would hit the poorest hardest. He will not say what he

:00:55. > :00:59.will cut. That is the top story. Chris Grayling called for a

:01:00. > :01:03.completely new deal with Europe as he battles will rings from the

:01:04. > :01:08.European Court of Human Rights. He joins me.

:01:09. > :01:12.Labour promises to shift house-building up a gear, but how

:01:13. > :01:18.will they get a million new homes built by 2020? We will hear from

:01:19. > :01:21.Emma Reynolds. In London, why you may not get an

:01:22. > :01:24.ambulance even when the incident may be serious. Have cuts left to the

:01:25. > :01:39.service being overstretched? With me for the duration, a top trio

:01:40. > :01:43.of political pundits, Helen Lewis, Jan and Ganesh and Nick Watt. They

:01:44. > :01:51.will be tweeting faster than France or long scoots through Paris. Nick

:01:52. > :01:55.Clegg sticks to his New Year resolution to sock it to the Tories,

:01:56. > :02:00.the is how he described Tory plans for another 12 billion of cuts on

:02:01. > :02:04.welfare after the next election. You cannot say, as the Conservatives

:02:05. > :02:07.are, that we are all in it together and then say that the welfare will

:02:08. > :02:11.not make any additional contributions from their taxes if

:02:12. > :02:14.there is a Conservative government after 2015 in the ongoing effort to

:02:15. > :02:22.balance the books. We are not even going to ask that very wealthy

:02:23. > :02:27.people who have retired who have benefits, paid for by the

:02:28. > :02:31.hard-pressed taxpayers, will make a sacrifice. The Conservatives appear

:02:32. > :02:37.to be saying only the working age pork will be asked to make

:02:38. > :02:39.additional sacrifices to fill the remaining buckle in the public

:02:40. > :02:45.finances. Nick Legg eating up on the Tories

:02:46. > :02:52.a, happens almost every day. I understand it is called aggressive

:02:53. > :02:58.differentiation. Will it work for them? It has not for the past two

:02:59. > :03:03.years. This began around the time of the AV referendum campaign, that is

:03:04. > :03:07.what poisoned the relations between the parties. They have been trying

:03:08. > :03:13.to differentiation since then, they are still at barely 10% in the

:03:14. > :03:19.polls, Nick Clegg's personal ratings are horrendous, so I doubt they will

:03:20. > :03:22.do much before the next election. It is interesting it has been combined

:03:23. > :03:28.with aggressive flirtation with Ed Balls and the Labour Party. There

:03:29. > :03:33.was always going to be some sort of rapprochement between them and the

:03:34. > :03:37.Labour Party, it is in the Labour Party's interests, and it is intent

:03:38. > :03:41.macro's interests, not to be defined as somebody who can only do deals

:03:42. > :03:46.with the centre-right. A colleague of yours, Helen, told me there was

:03:47. > :03:51.more talk behind closed doors in the Labour Party high command, they have

:03:52. > :03:55.to think about winning the election in terms of being the largest party,

:03:56. > :04:00.but not necessarily an overall majority. There is a feeling it was

:04:01. > :04:03.foolish before the last election not to have any thought about what a

:04:04. > :04:09.coalition might be, but the language has changed. Ed Miliband had said, I

:04:10. > :04:16.cannot deal with this man, but now, I have to be prismatic, it is about

:04:17. > :04:19.principles. Even Ed Balls. Nick Clegg had specifically said that Ed

:04:20. > :04:25.Balls was the man in politics that he hated. He said that was just a

:04:26. > :04:31.joke. Of course, it is about principles, not people! When Ed

:04:32. > :04:36.Balls said those nice things about Nick Clegg, he said, I understood

:04:37. > :04:40.the need to get a credible deficit reduction programme, although he

:04:41. > :04:44.said Nick Clegg went too far. The thing about Nick Clegg, he feels

:04:45. > :04:49.liberated, he bears the wounds from the early days of the coalition, and

:04:50. > :04:55.maybe those winds will haunt him all the way to the general election. But

:04:56. > :04:58.he feels liberated, he says, we will be the restraining influence on both

:04:59. > :05:03.the Conservatives, who cannot insure that the recovery is fair, and the

:05:04. > :05:06.Labour Party, that do not have economic red ability. He feels

:05:07. > :05:12.relaxed, and that is why he is attacking the Tories and appearing

:05:13. > :05:18.pretty relaxed. He could also be falling into a trap. The Tories

:05:19. > :05:23.think what they suggesting on welfare cuts is possible. The more

:05:24. > :05:29.he attacks it, the more Tories will say, if you gave us an overall

:05:30. > :05:33.majority, he is the one it. He keeps taking these ostensibly on popular

:05:34. > :05:37.positions and it only makes sense when you talk to them behind the

:05:38. > :05:41.scenes, they are going after a tiny slice of the electorate, 20%, who

:05:42. > :05:48.are open to the idea of voting Lib Dem, and their views are a bit more

:05:49. > :05:53.left liberal than the bulk of the public. There is a perverse logic in

:05:54. > :06:00.them aggressively targeting that section of voters. In the end, ten

:06:01. > :06:06.macro's problem, if you do not like what this coalition has been doing,

:06:07. > :06:10.you will not vote for somebody who was part of it, you will vote for

:06:11. > :06:17.the Labour Party. The Tories are too nasty, Labour are to spendthrift,

:06:18. > :06:20.Lib Dem, a quarter of their vote has gone to Labour, and that is what

:06:21. > :06:27.could hand the largest party to Labour. That small number of voters,

:06:28. > :06:31.soft Tory voters, the problem for the Liberal Democrats is, if you

:06:32. > :06:36.fight, as they did, three general elections to the left of the Labour

:06:37. > :06:38.Party, and at the end of the third, you find yourself in Colour Vision

:06:39. > :06:46.with the Conservatives, you have a problem.

:06:47. > :06:53.Chris Grayling is a busy man, he has had to deal with aid riot at HM

:06:54. > :06:54.Prison Oakwood, barristers on strike and unhappy probation officers

:06:55. > :07:11.taking industrial action. Prison works. It ensures that we are

:07:12. > :07:21.protected from murderers, muggers and rapists. It makes many who are

:07:22. > :07:27.tempted to commit crime think twice. Traditional Tory policy on criminal

:07:28. > :07:30.justice and prisons has been tough talking and tough dealing. Not only

:07:31. > :07:35.have they tended to think what they are offering is right, but have had

:07:36. > :07:39.the feeling, you thinking what they thinking. But nearly two decades

:07:40. > :07:45.after Michael Howard's message, his party, in Colour Vision government,

:07:46. > :07:50.is finding prison has to work like everything else within today's

:07:51. > :07:53.financial realities. The Justice Secretary for two years after the

:07:54. > :08:00.election had previous in this field. Ken Clarke. Early on, he signalled a

:08:01. > :08:06.change of direction. Just binding up more and more people for longer

:08:07. > :08:16.without actively seeking to change them is, in my opinion, what you

:08:17. > :08:19.would expect of Victorian England. The key to keeping people out of

:08:20. > :08:26.prison now, it seems, is giving them in a job, on release. Ironically,

:08:27. > :08:31.Ken Clarke was released from his job 15 months ago and replaced by Chris

:08:32. > :08:37.Grayling. But here, within HM Prison Liverpool, Timpson has been working

:08:38. > :08:41.since 2009 with chosen offenders to offer training and the chance of a

:08:42. > :08:46.job. Before you ask, they do not teach them keep cutting in a

:08:47. > :08:48.category B prison. The Academy is deliberately meant to look like a

:08:49. > :08:55.company store, not a prison. It helps. You forget where you are at

:08:56. > :09:00.times, it feels weird, going back to a wing at the end of the day. It is

:09:01. > :09:06.different. A different atmosphere. That is why people like it. Timpson

:09:07. > :09:11.have six academies in prisons, training prisoners inside, and

:09:12. > :09:15.outside they offer jobs to ex-offenders, who make up 8% of

:09:16. > :09:20.their staff. It has been hard work persuading some governors that such

:09:21. > :09:25.cooperation can work. I have seen a dramatic change positively, working

:09:26. > :09:33.with prisoners, particularly in the last five years. They understand now

:09:34. > :09:36.what business's expectation is. Timpson do not just employ

:09:37. > :09:42.offenders, but as one ex-prisoner released in February and now

:09:43. > :09:48.managing his own store says, the point is many others will not employ

:09:49. > :09:52.offenders at all. From what I have experienced, on one hand, you have

:09:53. > :09:56.somebody with a criminal conviction, on the other, somebody who does not

:09:57. > :10:00.have one, so it is a case of favouring those who have a clean

:10:01. > :10:06.record. Anybody with a criminal conviction is passed to one side and

:10:07. > :10:09.overlooked. That, amongst myriad other changes to prison and how we

:10:10. > :10:15.deal with prisoners, is on the desk of the man at the top. Ever since

:10:16. > :10:18.Chris Grayling became Secretary of State for Justice, he has wanted to

:10:19. > :10:22.signal a change of direction of policy, and he is in a hurry to make

:10:23. > :10:26.radical reforms across the board, from size and types of prisons to

:10:27. > :10:30.probation services, reoffending rates, legal aid services, and there

:10:31. > :10:34.has been opposition to that from groups who do not agree with him.

:10:35. > :10:38.But what might actually shackle him is none of that. It is the fact that

:10:39. > :10:42.he is in government with a party that does not always agree with him,

:10:43. > :10:45.he has to abide by the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights,

:10:46. > :10:52.and in those famous words, there is no money left. We would like to go

:10:53. > :10:57.further and faster. I would like him too, but we are where we are. If the

:10:58. > :11:00.Liberal Democrats want to be wiped out at the next election based on

:11:01. > :11:04.what they believe, that is fair enough. We accept there has to be

:11:05. > :11:14.savings, but there are areas where we feel that there is ideological

:11:15. > :11:17.driven policy-making going on, and privatising may not save any money

:11:18. > :11:23.at all, and so does not make any sense. The question is, we'll all of

:11:24. > :11:36.that means some of Chris Grayling's reforms need closer inspection?

:11:37. > :11:44.Chris Grayling joins me now. Welcome. We have a lot to cover. If

:11:45. > :11:48.you get your way, your own personal way, will be next Tory manifesto

:11:49. > :11:52.promise to withdraw from the European Convention of human

:11:53. > :11:59.rights? It will contain a promise for radical changes. We have to

:12:00. > :12:05.curtail the role of the European court here, replace our human rights

:12:06. > :12:09.act from the late 1990s, make our Supreme Court our Supreme Court,

:12:10. > :12:13.they can be no question of decisions over riding it elsewhere, and we

:12:14. > :12:18.have to have a situation where our laws contain a balance of rights and

:12:19. > :12:22.responsibilities. People talk about knowing their rights, but they do

:12:23. > :12:28.not accept they have responsible it is. This is what you said last

:12:29. > :12:37.September, I want to see our Supreme Court being supreme again... That is

:12:38. > :12:41.clear, but let's be honest, the Supreme Court cannot be supreme as

:12:42. > :12:45.long as its decisions can be referred to the European Court in

:12:46. > :12:52.Strasbourg. There is clearly an issue, that was raised recency --

:12:53. > :12:55.recently. We have been working on a detailed reform plan, we will

:12:56. > :13:00.publish that in the not too distant future. What we will set out is a

:13:01. > :13:05.direction of travel for a new Conservative government that will

:13:06. > :13:08.mean wholesale change in this area. You already tried to reform the

:13:09. > :13:15.European Court, who had this declaration in 2012, do you accept

:13:16. > :13:19.that the reform is off the table? There is still a process of reform,

:13:20. > :13:23.but it is not going fast enough and not delivering the kind of change we

:13:24. > :13:25.need. That is why we will bring forward a package that for the

:13:26. > :13:31.different from that and will set a different direction of travel. We

:13:32. > :13:36.are clear across the coalition, we have a different view from our

:13:37. > :13:42.colleagues. You cannot be half pregnant on this, either our

:13:43. > :13:47.decisions from our Supreme Court are subject to the European Cup or not,

:13:48. > :13:51.in which case, we are not part of the European court. I hope you will

:13:52. > :13:54.see from our proposals we have come up with a sensible strategy that

:13:55. > :13:59.deals with this issue once and for all. Can we be part of the

:14:00. > :14:04.Strasbourg court and yet our Supreme Court be supreme? That is by point,

:14:05. > :14:09.we have to curtail the role of the court in the UK. I am clear that is

:14:10. > :14:16.what we will seek to do. It is what we will do for this country. But

:14:17. > :14:19.how? I am not going to announce the package of policies today, but we

:14:20. > :14:23.will go into the next election with a clear strategy that will curtail

:14:24. > :14:30.the role of the European Court of Human Rights in the UK. The

:14:31. > :14:34.decisions have to be taken in Parliament in this country. Are you

:14:35. > :14:36.sure that you have got your own side on this? Look at what the Attorney

:14:37. > :15:02.General says. I would be asking Strasberg a

:15:03. > :15:08.different question to that. If the best in class, he is saying is

:15:09. > :15:12.enough is enough, actually somebody in Strasberg should be asking if

:15:13. > :15:16.this has gone the way it should have done. I would love to see wholesale

:15:17. > :15:20.reform in the court tomorrow, I'm not sure it is going to happen which

:15:21. > :15:27.is why we are going to the election with a clear plan for this country.

:15:28. > :15:32.Would you want that to be a red line in any coalition agreement? My

:15:33. > :15:38.mission is to win the next election with a majority. But you have to say

:15:39. > :15:42.where your red lines would be. We have been very clear it is an area

:15:43. > :15:47.where we don't agree as parties, but in my view the public in this

:15:48. > :15:52.country are overwhelmingly behind the Conservative party. 95

:15:53. > :15:56.Conservative MPs have written to the Prime Minister, demanding he gives

:15:57. > :16:00.the House of Commons the authority to veto any aspect of European Union

:16:01. > :16:07.law. Are you one of the people who wanted to sign that letter but you

:16:08. > :16:12.couldn't because you are minister? I haven't been asked to sign the

:16:13. > :16:24.letter. We need a red card system for European law. I'm not convinced

:16:25. > :16:29.my colleagues... I don't think it is realistic to have a situation where

:16:30. > :16:33.one parliament can veto laws across the European Union. I understand the

:16:34. > :16:39.concerns of my colleagues, but when we set out to renegotiate our

:16:40. > :16:42.membership, we have got to deliver renegotiation and deliver a system

:16:43. > :16:46.which is viable, and I'm not convinced we can have a situation

:16:47. > :16:52.where one Parliament can prevent laws across the whole European

:16:53. > :17:01.Union. So you wouldn't have signed this letter? I'm not sure it is the

:17:02. > :17:05.right approach. I support the system I just talked about. Iain Duncan

:17:06. > :17:09.Smith has suggested EU migrants coming to work in this country

:17:10. > :17:15.should have to wait for two years before they qualify for welfare

:17:16. > :17:21.benefits, do you agree? Yes, I think there should be an assumption that

:17:22. > :17:25.before you can move from one country to another, before you can start to

:17:26. > :17:30.take back from that country's social welfare system, you should have made

:17:31. > :17:34.a contribution to it. I spent two and a half years working in Brussels

:17:35. > :17:38.trying to get the European Commission to accept the need for

:17:39. > :17:43.change. There is a groundswell of opinion out there which is behind

:17:44. > :17:47.Iain Duncan Smith in what he is saying. I think we should push for a

:17:48. > :17:52.clear system that says people should be able to move from one country to

:17:53. > :17:59.get a job, but to move to another country to live off the state is not

:18:00. > :18:05.acceptable. You are planning a new 2000 capacity mega prison and other

:18:06. > :18:11.smaller presence which will be run by private firms. After what has

:18:12. > :18:16.happened with G4S, why would you do that? No decision has been made

:18:17. > :18:24.about whether it will be public or private. What do you think it will

:18:25. > :18:28.be? I'm not sure yet. There is no clear correlation over public and

:18:29. > :18:35.private prisons and whether there are problems or otherwise. Oakwood

:18:36. > :18:38.is in its early stages, it has had teething problems at the start, but

:18:39. > :18:46.the rate of disturbance there is only typical for an average prison

:18:47. > :18:51.of its category. If you take an example of Parc prison in Wales, a

:18:52. > :18:56.big private run prison, run by G4S, when it was first launched under the

:18:57. > :19:02.last government it had teething problems of the same kind as Oakwood

:19:03. > :19:07.and is now regarded as one of the best performing prisons. Why would

:19:08. > :19:13.you give it to a private company then? We have only just got planning

:19:14. > :19:19.permission for the so we will not be thinking about this for another few

:19:20. > :19:25.years. Some of the companies who run prisons are under investigation with

:19:26. > :19:30.dreadful track records. In the case of G4S, what we have experienced is

:19:31. > :19:34.acceptable and they have not been able to go ahead with a number of

:19:35. > :19:40.contracts they might have otherwise got. They are having to prove to the

:19:41. > :19:44.Government they are fit to win contracts from the Government again.

:19:45. > :19:50.They are having to pay compensation to the Government and the taxpayer.

:19:51. > :19:57.What has happened is unacceptable. So why would you give them a 2000

:19:58. > :20:07.capacity mega prison? Or anyone like them? It cannot be said that every

:20:08. > :20:11.private company is bad. In addition to problems at Oakwood, you are

:20:12. > :20:15.quite unique now in your position that you have managed to get the

:20:16. > :20:22.barristers out on strike the first time since history began. What

:20:23. > :20:28.happens if the bar refuses to do work at your new rates of legal aid

:20:29. > :20:33.and the courts grind to a halt? I don't believe that will happen. When

:20:34. > :20:38.the barristers came out on strike, three quarters of Crown Courts were

:20:39. > :20:43.operating normally, 95% of magistrates courts were operating

:20:44. > :20:46.normally. We are having to take difficult decisions across

:20:47. > :20:51.government, I have no desire to cut back lately but we are spending over

:20:52. > :20:55.?2 billion on legal aid at the moment at a time when budgets are

:20:56. > :21:03.becoming tougher. You issued misleading figures about criminal

:21:04. > :21:09.barristers, you said that 25% of them earn over ?100,000 per year but

:21:10. > :21:15.that is their turnover, including VAT. 33% of that money goes on their

:21:16. > :21:20.expenses, they have to pay for their own pensions and insurance. People

:21:21. > :21:26.are not getting wealthy out of doing this work. I don't publish figures,

:21:27. > :21:31.our statisticians do, with caveats in place explaining the situation.

:21:32. > :21:35.Where you have high-cost cases, where we have taken the most

:21:36. > :21:39.difficult decisions, we have tried hard in taking difficult decisions

:21:40. > :21:50.to focus the impact higher up the income scale. But do you accept

:21:51. > :21:55.their take-home pay is not 100,000? I accept they have to take out other

:21:56. > :21:59.costs, although some things like travelling to the court, you and I

:22:00. > :22:11.and everyone else has to pay for travelling to work. That is net of

:22:12. > :22:17.VAT. We have had a variety of figures published, some are and some

:22:18. > :22:24.are not. Let's be clear, the gross figures for fees from legal payments

:22:25. > :22:30.include 20% VAT. On a week when even a cabinet minister can be fitted up

:22:31. > :22:36.by the police, don't we all need well-financed legal aid? There is no

:22:37. > :22:40.chance that as a result well-financed legal aid? There is no

:22:41. > :22:52.changes people will end up in court unable to defend themselves. We have

:22:53. > :22:57.said in exceptional circumstances, if you haven't got any money to pay,

:22:58. > :23:01.we will support you, but there is no question of anyone ended up in

:23:02. > :23:06.court, facing a criminal charge, where they haven't got a lawyer to

:23:07. > :23:11.defend them. Let's look at how so many dangerous criminals have

:23:12. > :23:17.managed to avoid jail. Here are the figures for 2012. Half the people

:23:18. > :23:29.for sexual assault found guilty, not jailed. I thought you were meant to

:23:30. > :23:34.be tough on crime? Those figures predate my time, but since 2010 the

:23:35. > :23:39.number of those people going to jail has been increasing steadily. If you

:23:40. > :23:43.put the figures for 2010 on there, you would see a significant change.

:23:44. > :23:50.We will never be in a position where everybody who commits violence will

:23:51. > :23:53.end up in jail. The courts will often decided to his more

:23:54. > :23:58.appropriate to give a community sentence, but the trend is towards

:23:59. > :24:03.longer sentences and more people going to jail. That maybe but it is

:24:04. > :24:10.even quite hard to get sent to jail if you do these things a lot, again

:24:11. > :24:15.and again. In 2012 one criminal avoided being sent to jail despite

:24:16. > :24:24.having more than 300 offences to his name. 36,000 avoided going to jail

:24:25. > :24:28.despite 15 previous offences. That is why we are taking steps to

:24:29. > :24:35.toughen up the system. Last autumn we scrapped repeat cautions. You

:24:36. > :24:40.could find people getting dozens. As of last autumn, we have scrapped

:24:41. > :24:45.repeat cautions. If you commit the same offence twice within a two-year

:24:46. > :24:51.period you will go to court. You still might end up not going to

:24:52. > :24:57.jail. More and more people are going to jail. I cannot just magic another

:24:58. > :25:04.34,000 prison places. You haven't got room to put bad people in jail?

:25:05. > :25:09.The courts will take the decisions, and it is for them to take the

:25:10. > :25:15.decisions and not me, that two men in a bar fight do not merit a jail

:25:16. > :25:21.sentence. These figures contain a huge amount of offences from the

:25:22. > :25:25.most minor of offences to the most despicable. Something is wrong if

:25:26. > :25:30.you can commit 300 offences and still not end up in jail. That's

:25:31. > :25:37.right, and we are taking steps so this cannot happen any more. Nick

:25:38. > :25:45.Clegg said this morning you are going to make 12 billion of welfare

:25:46. > :25:50.cuts on the back of this, he is right, isn't he? People on the

:25:51. > :25:58.lowest incomes are often not paying tax at all, the rich... But these

:25:59. > :26:03.cuts will fall disproportionately on average earners, correct? Let's look

:26:04. > :26:12.at the proposal to limit housing benefit for under 25s. Until today,

:26:13. > :26:17.after people have left school or college, the live for a time with

:26:18. > :26:21.their parents. For some, that is not possible and we will have to take

:26:22. > :26:25.that into account, but we have said there is a strong case for saying

:26:26. > :26:30.you will not get housing benefit until you are some years down the

:26:31. > :26:33.road and have properly established yourselves in work. And by

:26:34. > :26:41.definition these people are on lower than average salaries. Give me a

:26:42. > :26:47.case in which those on the higher tax band will contribute to the

:26:48. > :26:51.cuts. We have already put in place tax changes so that the highest tax

:26:52. > :26:59.rate is already higher than it was in every year of the last

:27:00. > :27:05.government. The amount of tax... There is no more expected of the

:27:06. > :27:09.rich. We will clearly look at future policy and work out how best to

:27:10. > :27:14.distribute the tax burden in this country and it is not for me to

:27:15. > :27:20.second-guess George Osborne's future plans, but we need to look at for

:27:21. > :27:26.example housing benefit for the under 25s. Is it right for those who

:27:27. > :27:32.are not working for the state to provide accommodation for them?

:27:33. > :27:34.Thank you for being with us. All three major parties at

:27:35. > :27:37.Westminster agree there's an urgent need to build more homes for

:27:38. > :27:40.Britain's growing population. But how they get built, and where, looks

:27:41. > :27:42.set to become a major battle ground in the run-up to the next general

:27:43. > :27:45.election. Although 16% more house-builds were

:27:46. > :27:48.started in 2012/13 than the previous year, the number actually completed

:27:49. > :27:55.fell by 8% - the lowest level in peacetime since 1920. The Office for

:27:56. > :27:58.National Statistics estimates that between now and 2021 we should

:27:59. > :28:05.expect 220,000 new households to be created every year. At his party's

:28:06. > :28:12.conference last autumn, Ed Miliband promised a Labour government would

:28:13. > :28:17.massively increase house-building. I will have a clear aim but by the end

:28:18. > :28:22.of the parliament, Britain will be building 200,000 homes per year,

:28:23. > :28:27.more than at any time for a generation. That is how we make

:28:28. > :28:30.Britain better than this. The Labour leader also says he'd give urban

:28:31. > :28:33.councils a "right to grow" so rural neighbours can't block expansion and

:28:34. > :28:38.force developers with unused land to use it or lose it. The Government

:28:39. > :28:40.has been pursuing its own ideas, including loan guarantees for

:28:41. > :28:44.developers and a new homes bonus to boost new house-building. But David

:28:45. > :28:47.Cameron could have trouble keeping his supporters on side - this week

:28:48. > :28:49.the senior backbencher Nadhim Zahawi criticised planning reforms for

:28:50. > :28:57.causing "physical harm" to the countryside. Nick Clegg meanwhile

:28:58. > :29:12.prefers a radical solution - brand new garden cities in the south east

:29:13. > :29:14.of England. In a speech tomorrow, Labour's shadow housing minister

:29:15. > :29:17.Emma Reynolds will give more details of how Labour would boost

:29:18. > :29:21.house-building, and she joins me now. It is not the politicians to

:29:22. > :29:26.blame, it is the lack of house-builders? We want a vibrant

:29:27. > :29:32.building industry, and at the moment that industry is dominated by big

:29:33. > :29:35.house-builders. I want to see a more diverse and competitive industry,

:29:36. > :29:43.where self build plays a greater role. In France over 60% of new

:29:44. > :29:48.homes are built by self builders, but small builders build more homes

:29:49. > :29:53.as well. 25 years ago they were building two thirds of new homes,

:29:54. > :29:56.now they are not building even a third of new homes. That's because

:29:57. > :29:59.land policies have been so restrictive that it is only the big

:30:00. > :30:04.companies who can afford to buy the land, so little land is being

:30:05. > :30:09.released for house building. I agree, there are some fundamental

:30:10. > :30:13.structural problems with the land market and that is why we have said

:30:14. > :30:17.there doesn't just need to be tinkering around the edges, there

:30:18. > :30:21.needs to be real reforms to make sure that small builders and self

:30:22. > :30:26.build and custom-built have access to land. They are saying they have

:30:27. > :30:32.problems with access to land and finance. At the end of the day it

:30:33. > :30:38.will not be self, small builders who reach your target, it will be big

:30:39. > :30:42.builders. I think it is pretty shameful that in Western Europe the

:30:43. > :30:51.new houses built in the UK are smaller than our neighbours. But

:30:52. > :30:55.isn't not the land problem? France is 2.8 times bigger in land mass and

:30:56. > :31:03.we are and that is not a problem for them. There is a perception we are

:31:04. > :31:09.going to build on the countryside, but not even 10% is on the

:31:10. > :31:17.countryside. There is enough for us to have our golf courses. There is

:31:18. > :31:21.enough other land for us to build on that is not golf courses. The

:31:22. > :31:26.planning minister has said he wants to build our National Parks, I am

:31:27. > :31:32.not suggesting that. The single biggest land border is the public

:31:33. > :31:36.sector. It is not. There are great opportunities for releasing public

:31:37. > :31:41.land, that is why I have been asking the government, they say they are

:31:42. > :31:44.going to release and of public land for tens of thousands of new homes

:31:45. > :31:49.to be built, but they say they are not monitoring how many houses are

:31:50. > :31:56.being built on the site. When your leader says to landowners, housing

:31:57. > :32:02.development owners, either use the land or lose it, in what way will

:32:03. > :32:07.they lose it? Will you confiscated? This is about strengthening the hand

:32:08. > :32:12.of local authorities, and they say to us that in some cases,

:32:13. > :32:16.house-builders are sitting on land. In those cases, we would give the

:32:17. > :32:22.power to local authorities to escalate fees. This would be the

:32:23. > :32:27.compulsory purchase orders, a matter of last resort, and you would hope

:32:28. > :32:34.that by strengthening the hand of local authorities, you could get the

:32:35. > :32:41.house-builders to start building the homes that people want. Would you

:32:42. > :32:46.compulsory purchase it? We would give the local authority as a last

:32:47. > :32:49.resort, after escalating the fees, the possibility and flexible it is

:32:50. > :32:52.to use the compulsory purchase orders to sell the land on to a

:32:53. > :32:58.house builder who wants to build houses that we need. Can you name

:32:59. > :33:00.one report that has come back in recent years that shows that

:33:01. > :33:06.hoarding of land by house-builders is a major problem? The IMF, the

:33:07. > :33:09.Conservative mayor of London and the Local Government Association are

:33:10. > :33:13.telling us that there is a problem with land hoarding. Therefore, we

:33:14. > :33:18.have said, where there is land with planning permission, and if plots

:33:19. > :33:23.are being sat on... Boris Johnson says there are 180,000 plots in

:33:24. > :33:31.London being sat on. We need to make sure the house-builders are building

:33:32. > :33:34.the homes that young families need. They get planning permission and

:33:35. > :33:37.sell it on to the developer. There is a whole degree of complicity, but

:33:38. > :33:43.there is another problem before that. That is around transparency

:33:44. > :33:47.about land options. There is agricultural land that

:33:48. > :33:53.house-builders have land options on, and we do not know where that is.

:33:54. > :33:59.Where there is a need for housing, and the biggest demand is in the

:34:00. > :34:04.south-east of England, that is where many local authorities are most

:34:05. > :34:08.reluctant to do it, will you in central government take powers to

:34:09. > :34:15.force these authorities to give it? We have talked about the right to

:34:16. > :34:23.grow, we were in Stevenage recently. What we have said is we

:34:24. > :34:26.want to strengthen the hand of local authorities like Stevenage so they

:34:27. > :34:32.are not blocked every step of the way. They need 16,000 new homes, but

:34:33. > :34:36.they do not have the land supply. What about the authorities that do

:34:37. > :34:40.not want to do it? They should be forced to sit down and agree with

:34:41. > :34:44.the neighbouring authority. In Stevenage, it is estimated at

:34:45. > :34:47.?500,000 has been spent on legal fees because North Hertfordshire is

:34:48. > :34:53.blocking Stevenage every step of the way. Michael Lyons says the national

:34:54. > :35:00.interest will have to take President over local interest. Voice cannot

:35:01. > :35:06.mean a veto. The local community in Stevenage is crying out for new

:35:07. > :35:09.homes. Do you agree? There has to be land available for new homes to be

:35:10. > :35:15.built, and in areas like Oxford, Luton and Stevenage... Do you agree

:35:16. > :35:37.with Michael Lyons? The national interest does have to be served,

:35:38. > :35:42.with Michael Lyons? The national will put the five new towns? We have

:35:43. > :35:45.asked him to look at how we can incentivise local authorities to

:35:46. > :35:50.come forward with sites for new towns. You cannot tell us where they

:35:51. > :35:54.are going to be? I cannot. We will have to wait for him. When you look

:35:55. > :36:00.at the historic figures overall, not at the moment, Private Housing

:36:01. > :36:04.building is only just beginning to recover, but it has been pretty

:36:05. > :36:07.steady for a while. The big difference between house-building

:36:08. > :36:11.now and in the past, since Mrs Thatcher came to power a and

:36:12. > :36:17.including the Tony Blair government, we did not build council houses.

:36:18. > :36:21.Almost none. Will the next Labour government embark on a major council

:36:22. > :36:29.has programme? We inherited housing stock back in 1997... This is

:36:30. > :36:33.important. Will the next Labour government embark on a major council

:36:34. > :36:36.has programme? We have called on this government to bring forward

:36:37. > :36:42.investment in social housing. We want to see an investment programme

:36:43. > :36:47.in social housing, I cannot give you the figures now. We are 18 months

:36:48. > :36:50.away from the election. Will the next Labour government embark on a

:36:51. > :36:55.major council house Northern programme? I want to see a council

:36:56. > :37:00.house building programme, because there is a big shortage of council

:37:01. > :37:08.homes. That is a guess? Yes. We got there in the end. -- that is a yes?

:37:09. > :37:14.We will be talking to Patrick homes in the West Midlands in a moment.

:37:15. > :37:18.You are watching the Sunday Politics. Coming up in just over 20

:37:19. > :37:23.minutes, I will look at the week ahead with our political panel and

:37:24. > :37:31.Jacob Rees Mogg. Until then, the Sunday Politics across the UK.

:37:32. > :37:41.Hello, welcome. With me this week, Bob Stewart, Conservative MP for

:37:42. > :37:45.Beckenham, and make earlier, welcome to you both. Later on, why

:37:46. > :37:50.ambulances are more and more not being sent to some incidents. Have

:37:51. > :37:57.financial cuts played a part? Let's have a quick word on the Mark Duggan

:37:58. > :38:01.case and the reaction to it, after an inquest jury concluded he had

:38:02. > :38:07.been lawfully killed by police. It was back in August 2011 that it

:38:08. > :38:10.happened, and it was what started a sequence of events which sparked

:38:11. > :38:13.some of the worst rioting seen in London. There have been calls for

:38:14. > :38:19.calm since while the family considers its next legal steps. What

:38:20. > :38:24.did you make of this this week's ten jury is made their decision, but

:38:25. > :38:27.what is clear, despite the main decision, nine out of ten raised

:38:28. > :38:33.concerns about the handling of the case. We have got to see the IPCC

:38:34. > :38:38.enquiry come to an end. One of the things that strikes me, it has taken

:38:39. > :38:43.a long time, and there is still another enquiry, it is painful

:38:44. > :38:49.all-round. The other big issue is around how the police force reflects

:38:50. > :38:54.London. Of our 32,000 officers, less than 1000 are black, and many of

:38:55. > :38:57.them do not live in London. There is a wider issue in terms of community

:38:58. > :39:03.relations. It is something we need to be looking at a game with the Met

:39:04. > :39:06.Police. Some people ask, how could this be a lawful killing if a man

:39:07. > :39:12.was not on the? Did you feel there was an element of perversity? It was

:39:13. > :39:21.an interesting case. The family are taking further legal action. My

:39:22. > :39:25.colleague David Lammy sat in the inquest and heard and saw a lot of

:39:26. > :39:32.what was going on, I did not, I am not going to second-guess a jury,

:39:33. > :39:36.who were reflective of London. I do think they have to make their

:39:37. > :39:40.decision. It is important that the family do what they feel they need

:39:41. > :39:45.to do that is justice, but it is a conclusion, not a verdict, and there

:39:46. > :39:52.are further investigations going on and questions that have been asked.

:39:53. > :39:55.With your past and history, somebody who has borne arms, what was your

:39:56. > :40:01.view when you saw this come through? I thought it was the right

:40:02. > :40:06.verdict, but we both do not like politicians making comment. I will

:40:07. > :40:11.make a couple of points. He had a gun in his car. He should not have

:40:12. > :40:16.had. It seems he may have, holding get. But yourself in the position of

:40:17. > :40:22.the officers facing that. A man comes out of the car, he may not --

:40:23. > :40:26.he may be throwing it away, that it could easily look like he is about

:40:27. > :40:32.to use it. The decision for a police officer to open fire is enormous,

:40:33. > :40:38.not made in three months, as we have had this inquest, but in seconds. It

:40:39. > :40:43.is extremely difficult. If you do not want this sort of incident, do

:40:44. > :40:48.not be associated with a firearm, it is illegal, what was he doing with a

:40:49. > :40:53.gun in his car? Did you understand the angry reactions and the

:40:54. > :40:56.protests? One of the senior police officers could not even read his

:40:57. > :41:02.statement outside the court. It was unfair. Make has already said, it

:41:03. > :41:11.was a decision of the jury that made that decision, people all like us,

:41:12. > :41:15.the jury made the frankly, that is the best way in our society of

:41:16. > :41:18.making such a decision. When the police officer came out and people

:41:19. > :41:24.were angry, for goodness sake, please remember this, do not be

:41:25. > :41:29.associated with firearms. I have carried firearms, I have used them,

:41:30. > :41:35.I hate them. I would not allow a pistol in my house, almost to save

:41:36. > :41:41.my life. In Ireland, I refused to have one in my house, because I was

:41:42. > :41:47.frightened. It was possible for this to be a lawful killing verdict and

:41:48. > :41:52.for him to have been unarmed, because what the intention of the

:41:53. > :41:59.police officer... The police officer did not... The police officer shot

:42:00. > :42:03.the man because he thought there was a threat to life. He did not shoot

:42:04. > :42:08.for any other reason. He did not think, I can just shoot away. He

:42:09. > :42:13.made the decision, and that is what the jury backed up. What is

:42:14. > :42:19.interesting here, we have had cases before in London, there has been an

:42:20. > :42:23.unlawful killing verdict, but still they lead to criminal actions

:42:24. > :42:28.later, different burdens of proof, and police officers are acquitted.

:42:29. > :42:33.Here, it is difficult to see what the legal avenue is for the family,

:42:34. > :42:40.because the jury has decided in an inquest. There are issues around the

:42:41. > :42:44.intelligence gathering, the IPCC has questions to and set about how it

:42:45. > :42:50.handled it, it has got to continue the investigation, and in terms of

:42:51. > :42:53.wider community relations, in my constituency, a lot of people have

:42:54. > :42:56.been stopped and searched, given that have reduced in recent months,

:42:57. > :43:01.because of an action by the Commissioner in London, but

:43:02. > :43:07.middle-aged men who are still angry about being stopped as youngsters,

:43:08. > :43:14.and still stop now, not stopped spectrally. I have raised this with

:43:15. > :43:17.my own but recommend, policing by consent, it needs to be respectful,

:43:18. > :43:22.that is important. I agree with that.

:43:23. > :43:26.With the region lashed by bad weather, questions have been raised

:43:27. > :43:31.about London's ability to cope with extreme weather. Many stretches out

:43:32. > :43:35.West have experienced flooding or at least flood warnings. Even the

:43:36. > :43:41.government's own special adviser has called for increased spending on

:43:42. > :43:43.flood defences. Nearly three quarters of a million

:43:44. > :43:47.properties in London are at risk from surface water flooding caused

:43:48. > :43:50.by rainfall. If a period of heavy rain coincided with a tidal surge of

:43:51. > :43:55.the Thames, the effect could be devastating. The Green party are

:43:56. > :43:58.concerned that not enough is being done to protect the capital. There

:43:59. > :44:04.are three things that could be done now. We have got to restore some of

:44:05. > :44:10.our rivers, because they are in concrete bunkers. We should be

:44:11. > :44:14.planting more trees, not the 10,000 the Met is planting, but hundreds of

:44:15. > :44:17.thousands, like New York. And we need to take a serious look at the

:44:18. > :44:22.Thames barrier, which may now not be fit for purpose. Some engineering

:44:23. > :44:26.expert claimed that the Thames barrier was not built to withstand

:44:27. > :44:31.frequent extreme weather and that a second barrier should urgently be

:44:32. > :44:44.considered. The Environment Agency has responded, stating...

:44:45. > :44:48.Is the capital braces itself for more what weather, the debate over

:44:49. > :44:58.whether London is adequately protected will not go away.

:44:59. > :45:03.Let's continue the debate. If the Environment Agency says it is 60

:45:04. > :45:10.years, it has a 60 year shelf life, should we think about another

:45:11. > :45:18.barrier? Remember, the reason for the barrier was the 93 floods,

:45:19. > :45:24.enormous flooding on the East Coast -- the 1953 floods. We should look

:45:25. > :45:27.at what we are going to do when this barrier becomes inadequate, there is

:45:28. > :45:31.nothing wrong with that, it will not cost a great deal of money, but

:45:32. > :45:47.let's plan for it, so we can put measures in. We might have had tidal

:45:48. > :45:52.surges with this heavy rainfall and broadly it has protected London,

:45:53. > :45:56.hasn't it? I know from my time in the London assembly, we were talking

:45:57. > :46:01.then about what happens next with the Thames barrier but I think there

:46:02. > :46:05.are wider issues. There are issues around pollution when there is heavy

:46:06. > :46:10.rain, so it is a wider issue about how we deal with flooding across

:46:11. > :46:16.London, and I think the mayor should be doing more to make sure the

:46:17. > :46:21.waterways in London are properly supported. Before the Olympics,

:46:22. > :46:28.there was such a lot of rubbish in those waterways that it caused a

:46:29. > :46:33.problem. If you get rid of the concrete, you can help prepare. Have

:46:34. > :46:40.you had many problems in your constituency? I have visited two

:46:41. > :46:45.houses which have been flooded, the answer is no thankfully, but the

:46:46. > :46:55.main problems come when the trains are blocked. Are you detecting there

:46:56. > :46:59.is more fear about flooding? It is not a big issue locally, but there

:47:00. > :47:10.is an issue with concreting over London. We have had mayors who have

:47:11. > :47:17.dealt with green issues, but we have not had one that has looked at blue

:47:18. > :47:23.issues, like the waterways. Do you feel your government has equipped

:47:24. > :47:29.itself well, or will it be vulnerable? It will be vulnerable

:47:30. > :47:33.for tax cutting, that is inevitable, but it is doing its best

:47:34. > :47:39.with what we have got. Every government will be attacked for not

:47:40. > :47:45.providing enough when things happen, but we have a problem with

:47:46. > :47:51.liquidity. Particularly liquidity problems over the last few weeks,

:47:52. > :47:54.good choice of words! Three years ago the London ambulance service

:47:55. > :47:59.started cutting millions of pounds from its budget and shredding

:48:00. > :48:03.hundreds of staff, but when it put that plan into reverse a year later

:48:04. > :48:10.recognising it was not sustainable. As it left the service vulnerable?

:48:11. > :48:16.Some studies suggest ambulances are increasingly not being dispatched to

:48:17. > :48:21.certain incidents. London ambulance's control room in

:48:22. > :48:25.Waterloo. If you dial 999 there is a good chance the call will be dealt

:48:26. > :48:29.with in this room. Sunday Politics has learned the demand for

:48:30. > :48:33.ambulances is getting so high that people on the end of these phones

:48:34. > :48:41.have to be in increasingly acute need to get a vehicle sent out of

:48:42. > :48:47.them. On New Year's Eve last year the call room was so overwhelmed

:48:48. > :48:56.that people were not guaranteed a response. It is fundamentally an

:48:57. > :49:01.acceptable. If at somebody is suffering serious burns, they should

:49:02. > :49:05.be guaranteed an ambulance. To have arbitrary criteria put in place as

:49:06. > :49:09.to who will get one, that is taking the NHS into new and dangerous

:49:10. > :49:15.territory. I think the public will be very worried to hear that. It

:49:16. > :49:20.breaks the norms we have lived by. We have been warning the Government

:49:21. > :49:26.of the growing crisis in A We don't believe they have acted on

:49:27. > :49:30.those warnings and it is patients paying the price. New Year's Eve is

:49:31. > :49:34.the busiest day of the year the London ambulance but we have also

:49:35. > :49:38.discovered ambulance responses are increasingly restricted throughout

:49:39. > :49:45.the year. Since April 2012 London ambulance has had to move its

:49:46. > :49:48.service to what it calls level D more and more, meaning some people

:49:49. > :49:54.do not necessarily get an ambulance. This includes

:49:55. > :49:59.psychiatric, abnormal behaviour, or a suicide attempt. These calls are

:50:00. > :50:09.put to a clinical area for review, which is a source of concern for

:50:10. > :50:15.mental health charity Sane. It can be very difficult to judge the

:50:16. > :50:20.urgency. There is also a chance the problem can get dealt with by the

:50:21. > :50:24.wrong people. People in crisis do not get that urgent response, and

:50:25. > :50:29.more and more it is falling to the police. By the last figures, 9000

:50:30. > :50:33.people with mental illness had to be taken into police custody and suffer

:50:34. > :50:38.the double punishment of going into a police cell just because there was

:50:39. > :50:42.nowhere for them to go, no psychiatric services available. Of

:50:43. > :50:53.those people, they were not creating a nuisance, 80% of them had been

:50:54. > :50:58.self harming or suicidal. Could it be that the squeeze of resources was

:50:59. > :51:01.one of the reasons behind the reduced service? I have someone here

:51:02. > :51:08.who may be able to answer that, Doctor Fiona Moore, welcome to you.

:51:09. > :51:14.New Year's Eve first, obviously the busiest night of the year, isn't it?

:51:15. > :51:20.How do you shift things? Were there serious incidents you could not get

:51:21. > :51:25.too? New Year's Eve is quite unique, and this year was the

:51:26. > :51:33.busiest we have ever had, so we are seeing an incoming call rate of over

:51:34. > :51:40.600 calls per hour. We normally have up to 200, so it is a busy time.

:51:41. > :51:48.Sometimes there are incidents that you might not be able to go to, is

:51:49. > :51:54.that right? We prioritise our calls and we always respond to those

:51:55. > :52:00.sickest and most seriously injured patients. Was there anyone, for

:52:01. > :52:05.instance, trapped in a vehicle, or who suffered burns who you would not

:52:06. > :52:11.have got an ambulance to one New Year's Eve? We responded to 6000

:52:12. > :52:17.patients over New Year but we need to be innovative when we have surges

:52:18. > :52:21.in demand. We have a telephone assessment by senior paramedics,

:52:22. > :52:26.just as you showed in that clip, in the control room doing a telephone

:52:27. > :52:31.assessment. We continue to provide ambulance responses and cars to

:52:32. > :52:38.those most seriously ill and injured patients. Do you accept what Andy

:52:39. > :52:44.Burnham says, he is shocked and saying that this will not be safe.

:52:45. > :52:48.Our priority is to respond to the most seriously ill patients and we

:52:49. > :52:53.have undoubtedly seen a serious increase in demand. Demand has been

:52:54. > :52:58.going up for the past 11 years and we have seen a surge over the last

:52:59. > :53:04.couple of years, especially to those calls that we prioritise as category

:53:05. > :53:08.a or immediately life-threatening. Does an increase in demand and a cut

:53:09. > :53:13.in the service in the past, although I accept in the past year or so they

:53:14. > :53:20.have tried to put resources back in, does not contribute to you

:53:21. > :53:23.making patients less safe? We continue to prioritise those

:53:24. > :53:29.patients that require an ambulance but increasingly we are looking at

:53:30. > :53:35.lower priority calls to manage them safely. When you talk of innovation

:53:36. > :53:44.at a time of emergencies, that worries people. It sounds like it

:53:45. > :53:50.could be dangerous. We have developed telephone assessment by

:53:51. > :53:56.paramedics so that we can refer patients to their GP, involving the

:53:57. > :54:01.NHS more rather than just having a response of taking patients to an

:54:02. > :54:05.emergency department. Certainly for the seriously ill and injured, the

:54:06. > :54:18.patients with major trauma, heart attacks and strokes, they go to the

:54:19. > :54:21.specialist units. So it is right to say that people with mental health

:54:22. > :54:28.episodes are not likely to get the same attention in the future? We do

:54:29. > :54:34.not restrict resources to them so they do get responses, even when we

:54:35. > :54:45.are using the prioritisation so we would perhaps refer more patients to

:54:46. > :54:50.NHS 111. Does this give you cause for concern? Yes, but I think it is

:54:51. > :54:56.right back to the Government. There has been a real issue with 111. We

:54:57. > :54:59.have looked at this in detail and we see how other services which are

:55:00. > :55:06.privatised are taking the safe option and calling for an ambulance

:55:07. > :55:12.rather than doing the proper triage over the phone, and that is putting

:55:13. > :55:17.real pressure on Fiona and her colleagues. In your constituency,

:55:18. > :55:23.are you happy to see this kind of rationalisation because of money? We

:55:24. > :55:27.have two, to be honest. Everybody would like more money for the London

:55:28. > :55:32.ambulance service but we haven't got it so we have got to prioritise. One

:55:33. > :55:37.of the questions you could have is, is this life-threatening? If it is,

:55:38. > :55:42.an ambulance is required, and that is why the owner is saying we have

:55:43. > :55:47.to prioritise. At the lower end of the market, if you like, sometimes

:55:48. > :55:52.people call ambulances and they don't need them. Isn't the problem

:55:53. > :55:59.that with telephone assessment, you need to see someone, you need to be

:56:00. > :56:05.there. You need a response on the ground? It can be a combination of

:56:06. > :56:09.both, so for some patients it is safe to do a clinical assessment

:56:10. > :56:15.over the telephone. GPs and nurses do it all the time, and now we

:56:16. > :56:20.manage 70,000 patients per year over the telephone without needing to

:56:21. > :56:24.send an emergency response. Will this be developing over the coming

:56:25. > :56:30.year, and have you got the money you need? We have seen an investment

:56:31. > :56:33.from GP commissioners over the last year so we have been recruiting

:56:34. > :56:42.additional members of staff, and so far this year we have recruited an

:56:43. > :56:47.additional 170. So this will be bedding down and you will be seeing

:56:48. > :56:53.how this works? We have been doing this for over a year, and it is

:56:54. > :57:01.something we will continue to do. We will work closely with 111 and we

:57:02. > :57:03.have seen it work successfully. Now it is time for the rest of the

:57:04. > :57:16.political news in 60 seconds. Almost 14,000 fines have been issued

:57:17. > :57:21.to drivers and cyclists during an operation in London sparked by the

:57:22. > :57:27.death of six cyclists in two weeks. Metropolitan police officers were

:57:28. > :57:30.sent to 166 key junctions during rush-hour periods. Boris Johnson has

:57:31. > :57:36.called for stronger controls on welfare claimants from the EU. The

:57:37. > :57:41.mayor urged a two-year ban on full benefit claims by migrants from

:57:42. > :57:46.states like Romania and Bulgaria. The price of London's congestion

:57:47. > :57:50.charge could rise by 15% under new proposals by Transport for London.

:57:51. > :57:56.It said the cost had remained static since 2009 and it hoped to rise to

:57:57. > :58:00.?11 50 for a daily rate would deter unnecessary journeys. The mayor has

:58:01. > :58:11.written to the Home Secretary outlining plans to equip the Met

:58:12. > :58:13.Police with water cannon. He said he will continue to consult the public

:58:14. > :58:20.on their views of use of the devices in extreme circumstances. A brief

:58:21. > :58:26.one on the congestion charge. You were around when Ken Livingstone

:58:27. > :58:32.introduced it. About time it was put up? I think this looks like the Mary

:58:33. > :58:40.scrubbing money out of London's pockets. It doesn't seem to be very

:58:41. > :58:45.strategic. Why now? Why you ?1 50? I haven't seen any data to suggest

:58:46. > :58:50.this will reduce traffic further so I am sceptical. Transport officials

:58:51. > :58:55.seem to be suggesting they are pre-empting that so it doesn't

:58:56. > :59:00.happen. They would say that when they have a big hole in the budget.

:59:01. > :59:06.We are seeing lower frequency on public transport and yet the

:59:07. > :59:10.congestion charge is going up. It is literally just filling the black

:59:11. > :59:13.hole the mayor has got because he and George Osborne are having an

:59:14. > :59:22.argument about funding in London. Bob Stewart, are you happy to see it

:59:23. > :59:30.go up? I hate it, I have never liked it. Look at the way it is dealing

:59:31. > :59:36.with traffic. That is good. I don't come into town any other way than

:59:37. > :59:43.public transport. My constituents actually normally come by train, the

:59:44. > :59:49.same way. If you don't want to pay ?1 50 extra, don't come by car. Is

:59:50. > :59:55.it fair to raise it, since it has not been raised since 2009? He

:59:56. > :00:06.hasn't been raising it in the interim. Wishy-washy. Personally I

:00:07. > :00:11.have told you where I stand. I don't like the congestion charge, I never

:00:12. > :00:16.have. I know it is effective but I don't like it personally. If the

:00:17. > :00:23.money went into supporting safer cycling, I would be all for it. It

:00:24. > :00:32.will not be revoked. And I wouldn't want it to go. Thank you, back to

:00:33. > :00:38.Andrew. Can David Cameron get his way on EU

:00:39. > :00:42.migration? Will he ever be able to satisfy his backbenchers on Europe?

:00:43. > :00:52.Is Ed Miliband trying to change the tone of PMQ 's? More questions for

:00:53. > :00:56.the week ahead. We are joined by Jacob Rees Mogg

:00:57. > :01:01.from his constituency in Somerset. Welcome to the programme. You one of

:01:02. > :01:08.the 95 Tory backbenchers who signed this letter? Suddenly. Laws should

:01:09. > :01:16.be made by our democratically elected representatives, not from

:01:17. > :01:24.Brussels. How could Europe work with a pick and mix in which each

:01:25. > :01:31.national parliament can decide what Brussels can be in charge of? The

:01:32. > :01:33.European Union is a supernatural body that is there for the

:01:34. > :01:41.cooperation amongst member states to do things that they jointly want to

:01:42. > :01:43.do. It ought not be there to force -- to enforce uniform rules on

:01:44. > :01:46.countries that do not want to participate. It is the vision of

:01:47. > :01:52.Europe that people joined when we signed up to it and came in in 1973.

:01:53. > :01:57.It has accreted powers to itself without having the support of the

:01:58. > :02:02.public of the member states. This is just a way of preparing the ground

:02:03. > :02:06.for you to get out of Europe altogether, isn't it? I do not big

:02:07. > :02:11.so. There is a role for an organisation that does some

:02:12. > :02:16.coordination and that has trade agreements within it, I do not think

:02:17. > :02:20.there is a role for a federal state. Europe seems to be dominating the. I

:02:21. > :02:26.remember your leader telling you not to bang on about Europe, your

:02:27. > :02:30.backbench colleagues seem to have ignored that. Would you like to

:02:31. > :02:38.restrict the flow of EU migrants to come to work in this country? Yes. I

:02:39. > :02:42.think we should have control of our own borders, so we can decide who we

:02:43. > :02:46.want to admit for the whole world. What we have at the moment is a

:02:47. > :02:51.restrictive control of people coming from anywhere other than the EU.

:02:52. > :02:56.There is a big decrease in the number of New Zealanders who came in

:02:57. > :03:00.the last quarter for which figures are available, but a huge increase

:03:01. > :03:04.in people coming from the continent. Does it really make sense to stop

:03:05. > :03:08.our second cousins coming so that we can allow people freely to come from

:03:09. > :03:13.the continent? I do not think so, we need to have domestic control of our

:03:14. > :03:17.borders in the interests of the United Kingdom. There are still lots

:03:18. > :03:22.more people coming from the rest of the world than from the European

:03:23. > :03:29.Union. That has been changing. But there are still more. A lot more.

:03:30. > :03:35.The permanent residence coming from the European Union are extremely

:03:36. > :03:39.high. In the period when the Labour Party was in charge, we had to put 5

:03:40. > :03:44.million people coming here, of whom about 1 billion were from Poland. --

:03:45. > :03:52.we had 2.5 million people coming here. We have no control over them.

:03:53. > :03:57.Like the clock behind you, you are behind the times on these figures. I

:03:58. > :04:00.have stopped the clock for your benefit, because it was going to

:04:01. > :04:09.chime otherwise! I thought that might be distracting! Only a Tory

:04:10. > :04:19.backbencher could stop a clock! Helen, when you at this up, it is

:04:20. > :04:22.preparing to get out, is it not? We have had this one bill about a

:04:23. > :04:27.referendum that seems to have tied us up in knots for months on end. If

:04:28. > :04:33.Parliament could scrutinise every piece of EU legislation, we would

:04:34. > :04:38.never get anything else done. It would be incredible. Even Chris

:04:39. > :04:45.Grayling said earlier that you can not have a national veto on anything

:04:46. > :04:49.that the EU proposes. I am surprised that Jacob Rees Mogg is talking

:04:50. > :04:54.about dismantling one of Margaret Thatcher's most important legacies,

:04:55. > :04:58.the creation of the single market, and the person sent there to dream

:04:59. > :05:02.it up under Margaret Thatcher said the only way you can run this

:05:03. > :05:07.sensibly is by not having national vetoes, because if you have that,

:05:08. > :05:11.guess what will happen? The French will impose lots of protectionist

:05:12. > :05:13.measures. It was Margaret Thatcher's idea that national

:05:14. > :05:21.parliaments should never veto. How could you fly in the face of the

:05:22. > :05:29.lady? Even the great lady makes mistakes. Excuse me, Jacob Rees Mogg

:05:30. > :05:35.says even Margaret Thatcher makes mistakes! No wonder the clock has

:05:36. > :05:42.stopped! Even be near divine Margaret made a mistake! But on the

:05:43. > :05:47.single market, it has been used as an excuse for massive origination of

:05:48. > :05:50.domestic affairs. We should be interested in free trade in Europe

:05:51. > :05:55.and allowing people to export and import freely, not to have uniform

:05:56. > :06:02.regulations, as per the single market, because what that allows is

:06:03. > :06:04.thought unelected bureaucrats to determine the regular vision. We

:06:05. > :06:08.want the British people to decide the rules for themselves. If this

:06:09. > :06:12.makes the single market not work, that is not the problem, because we

:06:13. > :06:19.can still have free trade, which is more important. If David Cameron is

:06:20. > :06:26.watching this, I am sure he is, it will be nice for you to come on and

:06:27. > :06:31.give us an interview, he must be worried. He is beginning to think, I

:06:32. > :06:37.am losing control. It is a clever letter, the tone is ingratiating and

:06:38. > :06:40.pleasant, every time, you have stood up to Brussels, you have achieved

:06:41. > :06:46.something, but the content is dramatic. If you want Parliament to

:06:47. > :06:49.have a veto, you want to leave the EU, because the definition is

:06:50. > :06:54.accepting the primacy of European law. The MPs should be clear about

:06:55. > :06:59.that. It is almost a year since the Europe speech in which David Cameron

:07:00. > :07:03.committed to the referendum. The political objective was to put that

:07:04. > :07:09.issue to bed until the next election. It has failed. David

:07:10. > :07:12.Cameron is going to have to pull off a major miracle in any

:07:13. > :07:21.renegotiations to satisfy all of this. Yes, it makes me think how

:07:22. > :07:24.much luckier he has been in coalition with the Liberal

:07:25. > :07:26.Democrats, because there is a bit of the Tory party that is

:07:27. > :07:32.irreconcilable to what he wants to do. The Conservative MPs are making

:07:33. > :07:36.these demands just as David Cameron is seeing the debate goes his way in

:07:37. > :07:41.Europe. Angela Merkel has looked over the cliff and said, do I want

:07:42. > :07:47.the UK out? No, they are a counterbalance to France. France one

:07:48. > :07:51.the UK to leave, but they do not, because they do not want to lose the

:07:52. > :07:56.only realistic military power Tom other than themselves. Just when the

:07:57. > :08:03.debate is going David Cameron's way, Jacob Rees Mogg would take us out.

:08:04. > :08:08.Let me move on to another subject. That is nonsense. The debate is not

:08:09. > :08:13.beginning to go David Cameron's way. We are having before us on Monday a

:08:14. > :08:19.bill about European citizenship and spending British taxpayers money so

:08:20. > :08:22.that Europe can go and say we are all EU citizens, but we signed up to

:08:23. > :08:29.being a part of a multinational organisation. The spin that it is

:08:30. > :08:32.going the way of the leader of a political party is one that has been

:08:33. > :08:38.used before, it was said of John Major, it was untrue then and it is

:08:39. > :08:43.now. It is, for the continuing deeper integration of the European

:08:44. > :08:50.Union. I want to ask a quick question. Chris Grayling said to us

:08:51. > :08:55.that the Tories would devise a way in which the British Supreme Court

:08:56. > :08:58.would be supreme in the proper meaning of that, but we could still

:08:59. > :09:06.be within the European Court of Human Rights. Can that circle be

:09:07. > :09:11.squared? I have no idea, the Lord Chancellor is an able man, and I am

:09:12. > :09:17.sure he is good at squaring circles. I am not worried about whether we

:09:18. > :09:25.remain in the convention or not. PMQ 's, we saw a bit about this week,

:09:26. > :09:31.Paul Gorgons had died, so the house was more subdued, but he wants a

:09:32. > :09:33.more subdued and serious prime ministers questions. Let's remind

:09:34. > :09:39.ourselves what it was like until now.

:09:40. > :09:42.What is clear is that he is floundering around and he has no

:09:43. > :09:49.answer to the Labour Party's energy price freeze. The difference is,

:09:50. > :09:53.John Major is a good man, the Right Honourable gentleman is acting like

:09:54. > :09:58.a conman. Across the medical profession, they say there is a

:09:59. > :10:03.crisis in accident and emergency, and we have a Prime Minister saying,

:10:04. > :10:08.crisis, what crisis? How out of touch can hate the? You do not need

:10:09. > :10:17.it to be Christmas to know when you are sitting next to a turkey.

:10:18. > :10:20.It is not a bad line. Is Ed Miliband trying to change the tone of prime

:10:21. > :10:25.ministers questions? Is he right to do so? The important point is this

:10:26. > :10:31.was a special prime ministers questions, because everybody was

:10:32. > :10:35.really sad and by the death of Paul Goggins and in the country, the

:10:36. > :10:39.legacy of the floods. That was the first question that Ed Miliband

:10:40. > :10:44.asked about, so that cast a pall over proceedings. When it suits him,

:10:45. > :10:48.Ed Miliband would like to take a more statesman-like stance, but will

:10:49. > :10:53.it last? That is how David Cameron started. His first prime ministers

:10:54. > :10:58.questions, he said to Tony Blair, I would like to support you on

:10:59. > :11:03.education, and he did in a vote which meant Tony Blair could see off

:11:04. > :11:09.a naughty operation from Gordon Brown. But it did not last, they are

:11:10. > :11:14.parties with different visions. Jacob Rees Mogg, would you like to

:11:15. > :11:19.see it more subdued? I like a bit of Punch and Judy. You need to have

:11:20. > :11:24.fierce debate and people putting their views passionately, it is

:11:25. > :11:29.excellent. I am not good at it, I sit there quite quietly, but it is

:11:30. > :11:35.great fun, very exciting, and it is the most watched bit of the House of

:11:36. > :11:39.Commons each week. If it got as dull as ditchwater, nobody would pay

:11:40. > :11:45.attention. Three cheers for Punch and Judy. Ed Miliband is going to

:11:46. > :11:50.make a major speech on the economy this week. You can now define the

:11:51. > :11:55.general approach. We had it from Emma Reynolds, we have seen it over

:11:56. > :12:01.energy prices, this market is bust, the market is not working properly,

:12:02. > :12:06.and that will therefore justify substantial government intervention.

:12:07. > :12:11.Intervention which does not necessarily cost money. It is the

:12:12. > :12:14.deletion and reorganising industries. It constitutes an answer

:12:15. > :12:17.to the question which has been hounding him, what is the point of

:12:18. > :12:20.the Labour Party when there is no money left? He says, you do not

:12:21. > :12:25.spend a huge amount fiscally, but you arrange markets to achieve

:12:26. > :12:31.socially just outcomes without expenditure. It is quite serious

:12:32. > :12:36.stance. I am not sure it will survive the rigours of an election

:12:37. > :12:40.campaign, but it is an answer. Is that an approach, to use broken

:12:41. > :12:46.markets, to justify substantial state intervention? Yes, and the

:12:47. > :12:49.other big plank is infrastructure spending. The Lib Dems would not be

:12:50. > :12:55.against capital investment for info structure will stop Emma Reynolds

:12:56. > :12:58.talking about house-building, the idea of pumping money into the

:12:59. > :13:03.economy through infrastructure is something that the Labour Party will

:13:04. > :13:09.look at. Jacob Rees Mogg, you once thought Somerset should have its own

:13:10. > :13:15.time zone, and today, you have delivered on that promise! Live on

:13:16. > :13:21.the Sunday Politics! I try to deliver on my promises!

:13:22. > :13:26.That is all for today, the Daily Politics is on BBC Two every day

:13:27. > :13:33.this week, just before lunch. I aren't back next Sunday here on BBC

:13:34. > :13:38.One at 11am. -- I am back. If it is Sunday, it is the Sunday Politics.