:00:33. > :00:37.Aternoon folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics. As MPs head off for
:00:38. > :00:43.their Easter break, campaigning for the European elections in six weeks'
:00:44. > :00:46.time gets underway. In a Sunday Politics special, we'll debate the
:00:47. > :00:48.issues at stake on May 22nd with senior party figures from the
:00:49. > :00:58.Conservatives, Labour, Liberal Democrats, and UKIP. And as ever
:00:59. > :01:09.we'll be discussing the week ahead with our panel of top political
:01:10. > :01:13.commentators. They'll be tweeting throughout the programme using the
:01:14. > :01:17.hashtag bbcsp. In London this week, the council
:01:18. > :01:20.newspapers which some claim are politically slanted and not
:01:21. > :01:25.impartial about informing people of local services.
:01:26. > :01:29.So all that to come between now and quarter to four and for the next
:01:30. > :01:31.thirty minutes or so we'll be debating the European elections
:01:32. > :01:34.Here in the studio we have Syed Kamall, leader of the Conservatives
:01:35. > :01:37.in the European Parliament, Richard Howitt, chair of the Labour group of
:01:38. > :01:40.MEPs, Sarah Ludford, deputy leader of the Lib Dems in Europe, and
:01:41. > :01:51.Patrick O'Flynn, UKIP's director of communications. Welcome to you all.
:01:52. > :01:53.In a moment, all four will give us their opening pitch for the
:01:54. > :02:03.elections. A little earlier they drew lots to decide who'll go first.
:02:04. > :02:06.And that privilege goes to Syed Before that, though, here's a quick
:02:07. > :02:12.reminder of what all the fuss is about.
:02:13. > :02:16.The vote to choose members of the European Parliament takes place on
:02:17. > :02:21.Thursday the 22nd of May. The same day as local elections are held in
:02:22. > :02:21.England and Northern Ireland. The UK sends 73
:02:22. > :02:26.England and Northern Ireland. The UK sends NTP is to Brussels. And the
:02:27. > :02:33.vote is a form of proportional representation. In total, there are
:02:34. > :02:37.751 MEPs from the 28 member states. What do they do all day? The
:02:38. > :02:42.European Parliament's power has grown. A vet of the EU commissioners
:02:43. > :02:48.and they can amend, approve or reject nearly all EU legislation and
:02:49. > :02:51.the EU budget. Some laws MEPs have been responsible for include price
:02:52. > :03:01.caps on mobile phone chargers, banking regulation and cover food
:03:02. > :03:05.regulation two -- labelling. Syed Kamall, you have 30 seconds.
:03:06. > :03:09.Europe cannot go on as it is. Europe needs to change. And our
:03:10. > :03:15.relationship with Europe needs to change. Only the Conservatives have
:03:16. > :03:18.a plan to deliver that change and of the British people and in-out
:03:19. > :03:22.referendum. Labour and the Lib Dems will not and UKIP simply cannot
:03:23. > :03:27.Only the Conservatives will offer the three yards, with Conservative
:03:28. > :03:32.MEPs working alongside a conservative Prime Minister. For,
:03:33. > :03:39.really is and above all a referendum. Sarah Ludford is next.
:03:40. > :03:43.Your choice is simple. If you think Britain is better off in Europe
:03:44. > :03:46.vote for the Liberal Democrats. The Lib Dems are the only party of Ian,
:03:47. > :03:50.fighting to keep Britain in Europe and in work. There is nothing
:03:51. > :03:54.patriotic about UKIP's desire to pull-out. That is playing Russian
:03:55. > :03:59.roulette with Britain's economy and jobs. The Conservatives are flirting
:04:00. > :04:05.with exit and Labour lacks the courage to speak up. Thought Liberal
:04:06. > :04:10.Democrat on May the 22nd to say in Europe for jobs and security. Sarah
:04:11. > :04:15.Ludford. Next, Richard Howitt from Labour. The European elections are
:04:16. > :04:20.about who represents you. They are not a referendum on a referendum.
:04:21. > :04:25.Labour MEPs believe in putting jobs and growth first. A guarantee to
:04:26. > :04:29.help young people into work, reforming energy markets so that
:04:30. > :04:33.bills are brought down for good Labour believes in reform in Europe,
:04:34. > :04:37.but within. It is David Cameron who is risking your job and Britain s
:04:38. > :04:43.prosperity because of divisions in his own party. Labour MEPs put
:04:44. > :04:51.British interests first. Our fourth opening statement from Patrick
:04:52. > :04:55.O'Flynn. The EU is old hat. It is a declining regional trade bloc in an
:04:56. > :04:57.era of global trade. It is a 20th-century political project
:04:58. > :05:02.designed to prevent conflict in Europe that is now reawakening old
:05:03. > :05:10.hostilities. It is an attempt to force on the European people
:05:11. > :05:15.European this as their primary collective identity. It has hollowed
:05:16. > :05:21.out British democracy and now we do not even control our own borders.
:05:22. > :05:24.That is why you should vote UKIP. That is the opening statements.
:05:25. > :05:30.Let's get on with the debate. Why should people vote in the
:05:31. > :05:33.selections? If you vote UKIP, we can deliver an earthquake that will rock
:05:34. > :05:38.the foundations of British politics and the European political class. We
:05:39. > :05:45.can send a signal to Europe that Britain has had enough, that Britain
:05:46. > :05:47.wants to retain its nation state status and regain political power
:05:48. > :05:55.and the ability to forge trading deals across the world. Britain
:05:56. > :05:58.leading Europe to freedom twice in the last century through bloodshed.
:05:59. > :06:01.We feel that a UKIP win in those elections could help Britain set an
:06:02. > :06:09.example to lead European nation states back to free assembly again.
:06:10. > :06:12.Syed Kamall, isn't it the case that many Tory voters will vote you clip
:06:13. > :06:17.to keep you honest, to keep your feet to the fire? Whatever you think
:06:18. > :06:22.of the European Parliament or the EU, the fact is that the European
:06:23. > :06:25.Parliament as equal power with the 28 governments of the EU. When David
:06:26. > :06:32.Cameron delivered the first cut to the EU budget, the first ever cut,
:06:33. > :06:38.he needed a strong team of Conservative MEPs working alongside
:06:39. > :06:42.him. But many of your supporters will vote for UKIP for the reasons I
:06:43. > :06:50.gave. Many will vote Liberal Democrat. Not very many. Many of our
:06:51. > :06:53.supporters will vote for us because we are the only party trying to
:06:54. > :06:59.change the EU and offer reform. We have offered renegotiation and a
:07:00. > :07:02.referendum. And how would you vote in such a referendum? We have no
:07:03. > :07:07.idea whether he would vote yes or no. Let him answer. I will answer
:07:08. > :07:13.that question. If the EU continues on this road, towards a United
:07:14. > :07:17.States of Europe, and if there was no change at the time of the
:07:18. > :07:22.referendum, then I would probably vote to leave. You have no
:07:23. > :07:25.confidence in David Cameron? We Javier Culson opportunity to read
:07:26. > :07:28.negotiate our relationship with Europe and the Conservatives are at
:07:29. > :07:36.the forefront of that agenda. David Cameron have not given a list of
:07:37. > :07:41.demands. He said that if things do not change, he will probably vote to
:07:42. > :07:45.leave, is that right? If at the time of the referendum, things had not
:07:46. > :07:52.changed, I would vote to leave and we have a golden opportunity to
:07:53. > :07:59.perform the agenda. Richard, the last time the British people had a
:08:00. > :08:04.say on this was over 40 years ago. Under a Labour government. Which was
:08:05. > :08:09.deeply divided on the issue. And that was a say on the common market.
:08:10. > :08:14.Today's EU is a very different animal from the common market. Why
:08:15. > :08:20.can we not, under another Labour government, have another vote? First
:08:21. > :08:26.of all, we want it to be more than a free trading area. We make no
:08:27. > :08:30.apologies about that. But in the elections because this is half of
:08:31. > :08:34.Britain's exports and investment. If you care about your job and
:08:35. > :08:37.business, you cannot hear from the party of government that they
:08:38. > :08:40.probably want you to leave because the CBI, the engineering employees
:08:41. > :08:44.in Federation and the chimp of commerce, 80% of them say it is
:08:45. > :08:50.necessary to stay in. So why not give us a vote? When David Cameron
:08:51. > :08:57.says he wants to repatriate social powers, he means takeaway maternity
:08:58. > :09:01.rights and holidays. If the case is so strong, why not give us an in-out
:09:02. > :09:06.vote? David Miliband has said that there will be a referendum if there
:09:07. > :09:11.was a proposal to change powers Why wait? This is based on a series of
:09:12. > :09:15.reforms. Labour has a set of reforms. David Cameron is silent
:09:16. > :09:20.about what they would be. That is because he knows that if he put them
:09:21. > :09:22.forward, they would either be unsatisfactory to his Eurosceptic
:09:23. > :09:31.backbenchers and he would be out of a job, or they would be unacceptable
:09:32. > :09:34.to European leaders. Why is your leader missing in action? Ed
:09:35. > :09:41.Miliband is unable to say even the positive things that you are saying.
:09:42. > :09:44.He has run away from the argument. He actually said there would not be
:09:45. > :09:53.a referendum in his time. For a conservative to say they will
:09:54. > :09:58.have a referendum but not give the reforms, it is a mistake. Nick Clegg
:09:59. > :10:02.gave Nigel Farage a huge opportunity in that debate. He said that the
:10:03. > :10:06.Eurosceptic view was to leave Britain like Billy no mates. I can
:10:07. > :10:13.say that he is the best qualified person to say that. Sarah Ludford,
:10:14. > :10:17.you have said that lots of people are going to vote Lib Dem but that
:10:18. > :10:21.is not what the polls are saying. You are 7% in two polls this
:10:22. > :10:25.morning. Eclectic's decision to champion Europe has been a disaster
:10:26. > :10:29.for you. You face wet out. We swayed a lot of people our way with Nick
:10:30. > :10:37.Clegg's debate. Where is the evidence? We are the only party that
:10:38. > :10:40.is completely united, saying that we are wanting to stay in. It is
:10:41. > :10:45.essential because formally and jobs are supported by our trade with the
:10:46. > :10:48.EU. Linked to the EU. We are finding a lot of moderate conservative
:10:49. > :10:54.voters are actually fed up with the Tories being split and divided all
:10:55. > :11:02.over the place. Syed Kamall saying that we might vote in rout. -- in or
:11:03. > :11:07.out. We are consistent. A poll in London showed that 18% would vote
:11:08. > :11:12.for us. I am delighted about that. London is not the whole country it
:11:13. > :11:16.may surprise you. We need to move on to immigration, an important issue.
:11:17. > :11:21.We are a member of the EU and the rules say that with a few caveats,
:11:22. > :11:27.our fellow EU citizens are free to come here if they want. Why can we
:11:28. > :11:31.not just accept that? Britain has a proud record when it comes to
:11:32. > :11:34.immigration. We have been open to people across the world for
:11:35. > :11:39.centuries. But we welcome people who come to our country to contribute to
:11:40. > :11:43.pay taxes and two wards are a society positively. But there are
:11:44. > :11:47.three real concerns that we have to address. The first one is numbers,
:11:48. > :11:51.and secondly people who may come here not to work but for benefits,
:11:52. > :11:56.and thirdly, getting a hang of the numbers. I think it is shameful that
:11:57. > :11:58.only this week the office for National said that they did not
:11:59. > :12:03.collect sufficient figures under a Labour government. 350,000 extra
:12:04. > :12:07.people came in and they did not count the numbers. That is the size
:12:08. > :12:13.of a city like Cardiff. That is shameful. 350,000 came from all over
:12:14. > :12:19.the place. Do you accept the free movement of peoples within the EU? I
:12:20. > :12:25.accept and am open to people who want to come here and contribute. In
:12:26. > :12:31.the same way... Do you accept the free movement of peoples within the
:12:32. > :12:34.EU? In our manifesto, we have said it is an issue for reform. We have
:12:35. > :12:39.to make sure that people are coming here to work and contribute
:12:40. > :12:45.positively, not simply to come here and take advantage of the system. I
:12:46. > :12:49.will tell you what else is shameful. What is shameful is David
:12:50. > :12:51.Cameron making a pledge to the British people on an issue that they
:12:52. > :12:56.really care about, to bring net immigration down to the tens of
:12:57. > :13:02.thousands a year, having no means of fulfilling that pledge. And we see
:13:03. > :13:05.now it is back up to 212,000 a year because we have no volume control
:13:06. > :13:10.and no quality control from immigration from our neighbours And
:13:11. > :13:15.that is a disgrace. How could UKIP address that issue? Because we would
:13:16. > :13:19.leave the EU. How? Tell me how. You do not have a single member of
:13:20. > :13:26.Parliament. He will not get a single member of Parliament. How are
:13:27. > :13:39.you... ? TUC are hoping to get an MEP. What do you say? -- he is here
:13:40. > :13:43.today hoping to get an MEP. All of -- almost 2 million Brits live and
:13:44. > :13:53.work in the rest of the EU. Is that worth having? The majority are
:13:54. > :13:55.wealthy, retired people. Why do not object to bilateral agreements with
:13:56. > :14:00.countries with similar living standards to us. France, the
:14:01. > :14:03.Netherlands, that works fine. But these three people want Turkey to
:14:04. > :14:16.join the EU, 75 Na Li and people running our country, only 10% of
:14:17. > :14:20.which... Syed Kamall is Michael year to say whether they are in favour of
:14:21. > :14:23.free movement for work, not for benefits... That is what I'm
:14:24. > :14:31.saying. You said you were unable to be clear. That leaves 2 million
:14:32. > :14:34.British people absolutely unsure as to whether they would have a right
:14:35. > :14:38.to continue to live in other countries. It is a two-way street.
:14:39. > :14:42.You are putting those people in a state of uncertainty. EU migrants
:14:43. > :14:45.have been good for the British economy and contribute far more than
:14:46. > :14:52.they take out in services and benefits. One in seven businesses
:14:53. > :14:57.were founded in -- by migrants. And they cannot just turn up and claim
:14:58. > :15:03.benefits. The coalition government has legislated to make sure that
:15:04. > :15:11.they cannot claim for three months. They will not be able to claim for
:15:12. > :15:15.more than six months. Richard Howitt, Jack Straw said it was A
:15:16. > :15:22.spectacular mistake for Labour to allow EU migrants from Poland and
:15:23. > :15:27.Hungary to work in the UK from 2004." Why should we trust a party
:15:28. > :15:31.that makes spectacular mistakes and hasn't apologised for it? We accept
:15:32. > :15:36.it is a mistake and I apologise We make a firm commitment for new EU
:15:37. > :15:40.states we will put down transitional controls. When I listen to the
:15:41. > :15:44.Conservatives and UKIP trying to re-write history, saying immigration
:15:45. > :15:49.was out of control, uncontrolled, open door, we hear it over and over
:15:50. > :15:55.again. It is not true. Anyone who was around at the time... Come on,
:15:56. > :16:00.Richard. Hold on, you undercounted by 350,000. You were letting 2
:16:01. > :16:06.million in over the years, an under-counted by 350,000 people you
:16:07. > :16:12.didn't know came in. You should have tightened the benefit rules. The
:16:13. > :16:17.Conservative MEP today has, in four years in government in Britain, is
:16:18. > :16:22.trying it blame the previous Labour Government over the fact they won't
:16:23. > :16:27.count people in or people out. Yvette Cooper - it is not easy for
:16:28. > :16:32.people to come to the country and benefits are changing, changing the
:16:33. > :16:38.habitual residence test and we are going to say that migrants can't
:16:39. > :16:41.come and claim child benefit if their children are outside the
:16:42. > :16:46.country. Labour a has shown they have listened to concerns but we say
:16:47. > :16:49.it is a stronger, better, country because it is diverse and
:16:50. > :16:53.multicultural snoo.d this is fantasy politics from all the Peters. They
:16:54. > :16:57.are committed to a system with no volume control and no quality
:16:58. > :17:01.control. You talk about benefits as if it is only out of work benefits.
:17:02. > :17:07.In work benefits cost a lot of money for the British taxpayer. Big
:17:08. > :17:16.businesses bring in minimum wage workers. It is ?5,000 per perschool
:17:17. > :17:23.place What are you going to do? Have all the pensioners come back to
:17:24. > :17:26.Britain? How will will you fund the health care? Do you really think
:17:27. > :17:31.Spain and pour tu ghal their current situation, are going to turn their
:17:32. > :17:38.backs on British property owners with wealth? -- Portugal. They might
:17:39. > :17:42.not wanting pensioners to use their health service. Pensioners often
:17:43. > :17:46.come back to Britain to use the health service. You have shown it
:17:47. > :17:52.represents wealthy people's interests. A second Conservative
:17:53. > :17:55.Party. Hang on a minute... Blue collar wages were down. They want it
:17:56. > :17:59.character for the National Health Service, have cuts that go farther
:18:00. > :18:03.and comprehensive education. This is a debate on the wider politics
:18:04. > :18:09.between Conservatives and UKIP and Labour will... You can't both talk
:18:10. > :18:12.time. UKIP - they haven't thought it through, thousand they will have
:18:13. > :18:15.trade access in the EU, hasn't thought how they will have trade
:18:16. > :18:20.deals that the Liberal Democrats support, like with the United
:18:21. > :18:24.States: Would you have a cap on non-EU immigrants? We are not in
:18:25. > :18:28.favour of a cap. No cap on either. No. Well it is a target. It is a
:18:29. > :18:33.moving feast, as it were. Would you have a limit on non-EU limits? We
:18:34. > :18:37.have limits on quality. We have people who are skilled migrants
:18:38. > :18:42.coming in. Lip its? . By quality, not by quantity. -- Limits.
:18:43. > :18:50.How do you do that? We need to move on to foreign affairs.
:18:51. > :18:54.Should we pool more sovereignty to give the European Union more clout
:18:55. > :18:58.in foreign and defence matters? I'm Labour's defence and foreign affairs
:18:59. > :19:03.spokesperson. No we don't need to pull more powers into Europe. As we
:19:04. > :19:07.undertake this live debate there are guns being fired in Ukraine as we
:19:08. > :19:12.speak. Europe is facing, for the first time, since the end of the
:19:13. > :19:17.Second World War, Armies crossing national borders and floatening
:19:18. > :19:20.peace. Doesn't it -- threatening peace. Doesn't it need to come
:19:21. > :19:28.together of the We don't need more powers. We need political will. With
:19:29. > :19:31.Vladimir Putin, in my view, he has -- we have fallen short in the
:19:32. > :19:36.sanctions. But it is Europe, not Britain. Remember Putin calling
:19:37. > :19:40.Britain little England a small island with no influence. Labour
:19:41. > :19:44.doesn't agree with that. But if that's the mindset that allows
:19:45. > :19:48.someone like Vladimir Putin to send troops across borders threatening
:19:49. > :19:51.peace, it is worrying. And when we have, in UKIP a party that say they
:19:52. > :19:57.admire Putin and support his policies, that is no recipe for how
:19:58. > :20:01.Europe should be wrong. I was waiting for that. Let me ask him. We
:20:02. > :20:09.don't admire Putin as a leader. . Oh. No we don't. What Nigel Farage
:20:10. > :20:12.said, was he admired him as a political operator. Testifies
:20:13. > :20:18.Franklin D Roosevelt who said a good foreign policy was speaking softly
:20:19. > :20:23.but carrying a big stick. The EU shouts its mouthed off while
:20:24. > :20:27.carrying a matchstick. It is fantasy that you wiebl it stand up to Putin
:20:28. > :20:31.over the Ukraine. -- that you would be able to stand up. Do you admire
:20:32. > :20:36.what Putin is doing in the Ukraine? No. What matters in foreign policy
:20:37. > :20:41.is the outcould. We have a terrible outcome in the Ukraine, like Syria,
:20:42. > :20:47.and Georgia... What would UKIP do? What u skip would do, would be to
:20:48. > :20:53.keep our people safe -- UKIP. How? And not commit our Foreign
:20:54. > :20:58.Office and troops Foreign wars. Patrick O'Flynn. You brought up this
:20:59. > :21:02.issue of foreign wars. Now Nigel Farage said in previous debates that
:21:03. > :21:07.Britain should leave the EU because, "We have had enough of endless
:21:08. > :21:12.foreign wars." Which wars has the EU taken us into? The EU has ban very
:21:13. > :21:20.important factor in the push towards trying to get military intervention
:21:21. > :21:25.in Syria, for example. What wars has the etch U taken us into it -- EU.
:21:26. > :21:32.Fortunately the EU doesn't have its own army yet. It has wanted to sign
:21:33. > :21:38.up to an expansionist agenda. Did it want Iraq? No, that was Labour. UKIP
:21:39. > :21:43.opposed Iraq, so did most of the mainline Europeans. Germany was
:21:44. > :21:50.against Syria and Libya. No EU policy. We had an Anglo French deal
:21:51. > :21:55.on Syria. A by lateral deal. A European dimension. No, buy lateral.
:21:56. > :22:00.We have a European Union that wants to expand ever-more into other
:22:01. > :22:05.people's spheres of influence. If we are going to stand up to what Putin
:22:06. > :22:10.is do, which obviously Nigel Farage has no intentions of doing, you have
:22:11. > :22:14.to get your act together on economic sanctions and diplomatic force and
:22:15. > :22:21.in trade matters, in supporting eastern European countries. Sayeria,
:22:22. > :22:24.who and whose army? And NATO and working transatlanticically, is
:22:25. > :22:30.important through NATO. I will come to you in a moment. Nick Clegg said
:22:31. > :22:35.that the idea of an EU Army was "A dangerous fantasy that is simply not
:22:36. > :22:40.true ""Why then, are we already working on etch U-owned and
:22:41. > :22:42.controlled drones -- EU-owned and the President of the European
:22:43. > :22:49.Parliament has said that the majority of MEPs want the EU to have
:22:50. > :22:52."deployable troops." He is not speaking for me or Liberal
:22:53. > :22:57.Democrats. The EU does not and will not have an army. Our defence is
:22:58. > :23:01.mainly shaped through NATO. He is President of the Parliament What we
:23:02. > :23:05.must do is to get equipment which can operate together. We waste an
:23:06. > :23:09.awful lot of our spending in Europe because we duplicate equipment. We
:23:10. > :23:14.don't get the bang for our bucks that we should. It is a useful role
:23:15. > :23:18.for the EU, to get equipment working together. That doesn't make sense.
:23:19. > :23:24.You say military equipment, a NATO job. No, the EU, there is a kind of
:23:25. > :23:30.dimension of the EU members of NATO, in working together on a common
:23:31. > :23:34.quument o o so they can talk to each other -- on common equipment, so
:23:35. > :23:39.they can talk to each other. The EU has a role but not an army. So a
:23:40. > :23:42.European defence agency, that helps our defence industries and those
:23:43. > :23:45.jobs are extremely important and would be threatened if the
:23:46. > :23:51.Conservatives and UKIP took us out of Europe but it is 100 years since
:23:52. > :23:55.the start of the fist world war Remember that Europe was set up to
:23:56. > :23:59.try to get a secure peace within Europe T succeeded. Now look on
:24:00. > :24:02.Ukraine but also on the southern borders to the Arab Spring countries
:24:03. > :24:07.in North Africa. It is more important than ever that we work to
:24:08. > :24:12.keep keep peace and stability on our borders. Can I say to Syed and the
:24:13. > :24:16.Conservative MEPs. You talk about the three Rs, I have a fourth,
:24:17. > :24:23.retreat. If you take us out of the European Union, it will be the worse
:24:24. > :24:27.retreat by Britain since Gallipoli. Let him answer If he wants answers
:24:28. > :24:29.-- the British Parliament is the right place with a British Foreign
:24:30. > :24:36.Secretary to decide our foreign policy. You say that, but can I
:24:37. > :24:40.quote David Cameron, this is germain to what you are saying, David
:24:41. > :24:44.Cameron said "There is no doubt that we are more powerful than
:24:45. > :24:48.Washington, Beijing and Delhi, because we are a powerful player in
:24:49. > :24:51.the European Union." Do you agree? He is saying that there are times
:24:52. > :24:55.when it comes to international foreign affairs when you have to
:24:56. > :25:00.cooperate with partners. Often they are EU partners but often they are
:25:01. > :25:05.not. The problem we have... Washington have made it very clear
:25:06. > :25:10.that it wants Britain to talk through Brussels. No, not at all.
:25:11. > :25:16.Talk through the French and Italians, come on, wake up? Through
:25:17. > :25:19.the EU collective. I'm vice chair of the EU delegation. I hear it from
:25:20. > :25:24.the American counterparts. They want the EU to get itself together and
:25:25. > :25:29.not least on Ukraine. Why should our sovereignty be at the behest of .. ?
:25:30. > :25:32.I want to hear from Syed calm amplgts the British Parliament is
:25:33. > :25:35.the right place to decide our foreign poll sinchts sometimes we
:25:36. > :25:39.work with our European partners sometimes we work with our
:25:40. > :25:45.non-European partners. It is our choice to pull sovereign trito work
:25:46. > :25:51.together. G, we move on to our foirt area. We hear a lot in this country
:25:52. > :25:57.about MPs expenses. Snted the real scan dalt MEPs gravy train. -- isn't
:25:58. > :26:04.the real scandal, the MEPs gravy train? You all have your snouts The
:26:05. > :26:09.trough? I don't think so. There is transpancy. The way we use our
:26:10. > :26:13.expenses is online and anyone can ask to examine those. We have
:26:14. > :26:18.actually voted to reform MEPs' allowances. We regularly vote but
:26:19. > :26:23.unfortunately the majority in Parliament don't. Have you voted to
:26:24. > :26:29.cut them? Yes. By how much? About 5%. A 5% We hoped to have economies
:26:30. > :26:35.I never fly except across the Atlantic. Difficult to do it any
:26:36. > :26:41.other way. I didn't swim. But we voted for economy flutes We
:26:42. > :26:46.voted for European Parliament policy of transparency which other groups
:26:47. > :26:50.haven't. UKIP don't turn up to vote. They don't earn their salaries.
:26:51. > :26:55.Dhoent do anything. They should hand their salaries and allowances back.
:26:56. > :26:59.You can't ause UKIP of being on the gravy train and the other that we
:27:00. > :27:05.don't claim our attendance allowance because our MEPs are not there. Your
:27:06. > :27:08.attendance allowance is if you are there, you are saying we don't turn
:27:09. > :27:12.up You are in the building and claim the allowances. You are not an MEP,
:27:13. > :27:17.UKIP are so ashamed of what their MEPs have done in Brussels, they
:27:18. > :27:22.didn't field a sitting MEP for today's debate. I think each party
:27:23. > :27:26.decides who it wishes to field. I have the honour of being the UKIP
:27:27. > :27:32.representative. I would say by going in the past few weeks, xeeming to me
:27:33. > :27:39.saying - we are sick of the others. -- people saying to me. : We are
:27:40. > :27:43.quite excited. Can I ask Patrick O'Flynn. He says he touched a chord
:27:44. > :27:49.and his party is strong in the polls today, between 18% and 20%. Haven't
:27:50. > :27:54.you also struck a chord with hip crasscy. Two of your MEPs were
:27:55. > :27:59.jailed for expenses and benefits' fraud. Two more asked to pay back
:28:00. > :28:03.?37,000 for using European funds. Nigel Farage has boosted about
:28:04. > :28:07.getting ?2 million in expenses and he went on to employ his wife as a
:28:08. > :28:12.secretarial allowance after telling other members not to People who do
:28:13. > :28:17.wrong and break the law, go to ja. I have no time. -- go to jail. People
:28:18. > :28:21.who spend money they are not entitled to should pay it back and
:28:22. > :28:26.that's right. But what UKIP does and the good UKIP MEPs do, is use the
:28:27. > :28:29.allowances they are given to pursue the political agenda they put up
:28:30. > :28:33.when elected which is to get Britain out of this superstate. Instead of
:28:34. > :28:39.using it for parliamentary work Very interesting. Richard Howitt. We
:28:40. > :28:45.were the first British political party to have independent audits of
:28:46. > :28:50.our MEPs' expenses, from 1990, way before the expenses crisis blew up.
:28:51. > :28:53.The Maria Miller scandal has of course hit David Cameron and the
:28:54. > :28:58.Conservative Party hard as it should do. But you are right, even in my
:28:59. > :29:01.own region you have UKIP candidates and councillors who have been
:29:02. > :29:05.charged with fraudulently filling out election papers and other shot
:29:06. > :29:11.lifting. Another independent inquiry found he made racist comments. We
:29:12. > :29:15.had a European candidate last week in Hertfordshire who got a parking
:29:16. > :29:21.ticket from the police and called the police fascists. These people
:29:22. > :29:26.aren't here. I'll let you have a quick reply We
:29:27. > :29:29.can bring up parochial cases. Let him answer. Not so long ago a
:29:30. > :29:34.Liberal Democrat councillor was sent down for firebombing, I don't say
:29:35. > :29:40.they are a bunch of arsonists, but now I think, Nick Clegg might have
:29:41. > :29:46.burnt some cactuses, once. I'm glad you pronounced that word carefully.
:29:47. > :29:52.Syed Kemal, the EU's auditors, they are strongly critical of the EU s
:29:53. > :29:58.financials saying "Errors permist in all main spending areas", the
:29:59. > :30:04.financials are poorly managed. It is a shambles And that's something that
:30:05. > :30:08.all parties agree on. As we agree on expenses, the British parties are at
:30:09. > :30:11.the forefront of transpancy. Every year when we vote for the discharge
:30:12. > :30:16.of the budget, the Conservatives also vote for it but we don't get
:30:17. > :30:19.enough MEPs from other countries to investigate in favour. The Liberal
:30:20. > :30:24.Democrats have put forward to make each Finance Minister, George
:30:25. > :30:28.Osborne and his counterpart to sign a declaration to say all EU money is
:30:29. > :30:33.properly spent in my country. Funnily enough they don't want to do
:30:34. > :30:37.that but I look forward to you confirming that George Osborne will
:30:38. > :30:42.sign it. All the time we hear it is about the money we pay in, about
:30:43. > :30:47.?150 per family per year. What about the money that comes back? ?1.
:30:48. > :30:52.billion that comes to Britain's regions because of being in Europe.
:30:53. > :30:56.I myself helped to negotiate a fund to help Britain's food banks to
:30:57. > :31:00.ensure so. Poorest and most destitute people... Isn't it our
:31:01. > :31:03.money that went there first. Can I tell you the Conservative-led
:31:04. > :31:07.Government have blocked us from claiming that money. If you want to
:31:08. > :31:16.have the clearest choice at these European elections, it is between...
:31:17. > :31:24.Tell us why. It affects our rebate. Tony Blair gave away our rebate He
:31:25. > :31:28.is quite right. Lib Dems fought to make sure that we apply for money to
:31:29. > :31:31.help with flooding. That is what the Tories were blocking. If you want
:31:32. > :31:35.the clearest example at the European elections, the Conservative Party
:31:36. > :31:41.and MEPs blocked the cap on bankers bonuses, and then blocked a Labour
:31:42. > :31:48.victory to get money for free banks. We need to move on to the
:31:49. > :31:53.future. It is important and people are watching. The EU's Justice
:31:54. > :31:57.Minister says that we need to build a United States of Europe with the
:31:58. > :32:05.commission as its government. Is she right? Not at all. But the future,
:32:06. > :32:09.if we take the next ten years, thinks about climate change and the
:32:10. > :32:14.fact that we are not going to hit of the two degrees target. Europe has
:32:15. > :32:17.led and needs to lead towards getting a new sustainable world It
:32:18. > :32:20.is the political will to use these powers, so she is wrong. It is about
:32:21. > :32:25.the threats from abroad. Labour reforms like getting a commissioner
:32:26. > :32:29.for growth and rebalancing the budget, reforming the common
:32:30. > :32:34.agricultural policy, all of those things will need to happen to make
:32:35. > :32:41.Europe more democratic and open But against the rise of Brazil and
:32:42. > :32:46.China... We do not need more treaties and powers. We need more
:32:47. > :32:51.action with more Labour MEPs. Sarah Ludford, you would sign up to that?
:32:52. > :32:56.No. Unless they do not think that should concentrate on institutional
:32:57. > :33:01.matters. What we need to do is concentrate on making Europe
:33:02. > :33:08.progrowth and competitive and create more jobs in a competitive world. We
:33:09. > :33:13.need more trade deals to open up our exports, we need to streamline the
:33:14. > :33:17.EU. We need less red tape and Liberal Democrats have done a lot on
:33:18. > :33:21.that. We need better scrutiny of EU legislation at West Munster because
:33:22. > :33:29.the national parties... More powers or less for the EU government? In
:33:30. > :33:37.some areas, I would like to see it slimmed down. Including, I am not
:33:38. > :33:40.sure whether the EU should be funding food banks. I think that is
:33:41. > :33:47.a national responsibility. Dearie me. The EU have to concentrate on
:33:48. > :33:52.the economy and climate change. This is the coalition talking. If we want
:33:53. > :33:57.to fritter away political capital on things which are interfering in
:33:58. > :34:00.national matters, then we do not have the support to tackle those big
:34:01. > :34:08.challenges. Would you still want to join the Euro one-day? Now is not a
:34:09. > :34:14.good idea. We wanted the Eurozone to still be sound, which is why... Did
:34:15. > :34:17.not ask you that. Do you want to join the Euro one-day? If it is a
:34:18. > :34:23.success and it did the economy. Now is not the time but in principle,
:34:24. > :34:30.the idea of a single currency has advantages. That was a yes. We are
:34:31. > :34:34.not ruling it out for ever but not in the foreseeable future. It is not
:34:35. > :34:38.on the horizon. What would our relationship be with Europe in the
:34:39. > :34:43.future if UKIP got its way and we left? We would be trading partners
:34:44. > :34:47.with Europe and we would seek partnership in specific serious I'd
:34:48. > :34:52.tell you what, can I just say.. Would we be Norway? We would be
:34:53. > :34:58.stronger than Norway because we are the biggest export market in the
:34:59. > :35:02.Eurozone. We can negotiate a bespoke trading agreement reflecting our
:35:03. > :35:06.enormous importance. Not on services, which make up 80% of the
:35:07. > :35:10.economy. We are the biggest export market in the Eurozone. Our biggest
:35:11. > :35:15.exports are services and they would have to agree to free trade and
:35:16. > :35:21.services. They still have not. Can I read you something? Let me read you
:35:22. > :35:25.something. There would be a free trade agreement in place the day
:35:26. > :35:31.after our exit. Germany would demand no less. Who said that? Not somebody
:35:32. > :35:35.from UKIP, but Digby Jones. Mr business. He is talking about
:35:36. > :35:39.goods, not services. Norway has that and they have no say. You would have
:35:40. > :35:46.to accept the EU rules without any say. No MEPs are commissioners. Let
:35:47. > :35:54.me give you another. Enough. One is enough. Syed Kamall, is it not
:35:55. > :35:57.looking forward pretty much Mission: Impossible for Mr Cameron to get
:35:58. > :36:07.anything like the repatriations of powers that would satisfy your
:36:08. > :36:10.irreconcilables? My father was a bus driver in the 50s and one of the
:36:11. > :36:13.reasons I am here today is because he told me that you can achieve
:36:14. > :36:17.anything if you work hard. He said to me, do not listen to the
:36:18. > :36:20.doubters. When people tell you that something cannot be done, it is a
:36:21. > :36:24.sign of their limitations, not yours. They said that we could not
:36:25. > :36:29.pull Britain out of the bailout mechanism but we did it. He said we
:36:30. > :36:33.could not be to a -- veto European treaty and we did that. They said we
:36:34. > :36:38.would never cut the budget and we did that. The first ever. But
:36:39. > :36:44.overall, we are paying more into the European budget. And they are not
:36:45. > :36:48.sticking to it. More, not less. They say that we cannot achieve reform
:36:49. > :36:53.but we have achieved reform and we are at the forefront of that.
:36:54. > :37:00.Science's father came to Britain because Britain was open and looking
:37:01. > :37:08.outward. What the Conservatives now have, with leaderless Cameron, is an
:37:09. > :37:13.inward looking attitude. They are allowing the rise of UKIP. They are
:37:14. > :37:19.putting so much at risk. People should vote Labour. We are going to
:37:20. > :37:22.have to stop now. No point talking because we are about to finish. I
:37:23. > :37:27.think you all for a spirited debate. I'm sure Nigel Fries and Mr Clegg
:37:28. > :37:30.will have learned a lot about how to debate. -- Nigel Farage.
:37:31. > :37:33.It's just gone 3pm, and you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say
:37:34. > :37:36.goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now for Sunday Politics
:37:37. > :37:39.Scotland. Coming up here in twenty minutes, the Week Ahead. First
:37:40. > :37:50.though, the Sunday Politics where you are.
:37:51. > :37:58.Welcome to the London part of the programme. I'm joined by Tom Brake,
:37:59. > :38:05.the Liberal Democrat MP for Carl Scholten and... Welcome to you both.
:38:06. > :38:08.Later, we will be looking at the councils which some claim are making
:38:09. > :38:12.partial claims in their taxpayer funded newspapers. Three years after
:38:13. > :38:17.new guidelines were introduced. First, secret intelligence reports
:38:18. > :38:20.obtained by BBC London have revealed that some police officers in the
:38:21. > :38:26.flying squad were suspected of plotting to kidnap the partner of a
:38:27. > :38:30.cash van driver to obtain a ?50 000 ransom. According to the documents,
:38:31. > :38:34.a group of London-based officers hatched the alleged plot in the
:38:35. > :38:38.mid-1990s. Sources have told the BBC that the reports were part of a
:38:39. > :38:43.lorry-load of documents thought to have been shredded by the Met. Kate,
:38:44. > :38:50.what do you make of this? With a quick thought, what can the Met to
:38:51. > :38:54.do to restore faith or confidence? Many of these things, of course our
:38:55. > :38:59.historic. Yes, they are. But it does not mean that we cannot try to get
:39:00. > :39:03.to the bottom of it. I think the most worrying thing was the fact
:39:04. > :39:06.that somebody gave permission for all those documents to be shredded
:39:07. > :39:14.and we do not know where the others are. I'd hope they can find them.
:39:15. > :39:18.Most people see the police in the way they see them around their
:39:19. > :39:22.communities. The thing that worries me most about what is happening in
:39:23. > :39:25.the police these days is not just that it is a numbers game, because
:39:26. > :39:29.the numbers, we can argue about whether they have gone up or down,
:39:30. > :39:31.but it is about how they are being used. In my own borough, the
:39:32. > :39:38.commanders do not have much say in how they want to police. We have
:39:39. > :39:42.lost a lot of our community policing, which did a lot of good
:39:43. > :39:45.work in making people feel that the police officer they saw a lot of
:39:46. > :39:47.good work in making people feel that the police officer they saw around
:39:48. > :39:49.the area, they knew him. More recently, that has changed and it is
:39:50. > :39:56.more centralised. The Commissioner coming in, with all the problems
:39:57. > :40:01.that the meat -- the Met had faced, it seems to want to have a hands-on
:40:02. > :40:05.attitude towards London. Do not think you can do that with
:40:06. > :40:08.communities that are different. Good of the Commissioner and senior
:40:09. > :40:12.police officers be excused for saying that this is something that
:40:13. > :40:16.happened a long time ago and, yes, we will deal with it but it is not
:40:17. > :40:19.the picture now? Clearly, these are things that happened a long time ago
:40:20. > :40:24.and there have been measures taken which should ensure that they do not
:40:25. > :40:27.happen again. For instance, the College of policing is set up and is
:40:28. > :40:33.a code of ethics that officers will have to follow. There are is a
:40:34. > :40:37.public enquiry underway into the issue of undercover officers. There
:40:38. > :40:40.is action being taken. They do not think the scope for complacency One
:40:41. > :40:44.of the areas that Kate has referred to, where I think you could reduce
:40:45. > :40:49.the risk of these sorts of things happening, is if more borough is in
:40:50. > :40:54.London were to adopt the model that Sutton has adopted, of a partnership
:40:55. > :40:58.between the local police and the local authority where they have
:40:59. > :41:02.pooled resources to tackle crime. That means that they are working
:41:03. > :41:05.more cooperatively together and think the risk of the police going
:41:06. > :41:09.off and doing something by themselves is reduced as a result.
:41:10. > :41:14.And that happens a lot in my borough, in the north, where we have
:41:15. > :41:20.big companies. Many of the big employers are set up their own
:41:21. > :41:23.employers groups and are actually putting extra money into trying to
:41:24. > :41:30.get the environment improved and better policed. It is not all doom
:41:31. > :41:34.and gloom but obviously these things make people feel worried and we need
:41:35. > :41:37.to get to the bottom of it. Moving on, the mayor announced another
:41:38. > :41:41.scheme this week to build more housing. If regressed, London
:41:42. > :41:46.Housing bank would provide loans to developers to speed up development
:41:47. > :41:51.is that have had planning permission but are taking too long to complete.
:41:52. > :41:56.Demand for housing in London is huge but across the city there of sites
:41:57. > :42:00.which are standing empty despite planning permission having already
:42:01. > :42:03.been granted. City Hall estimates it could be as many as 200,000
:42:04. > :42:09.potential homes which have yet to be built. This week, Boris Johnson
:42:10. > :42:16.announced a ?200 million plan to change that. We are launching a new
:42:17. > :42:23.housing bank which aims to give money, on a short-term basis, up to
:42:24. > :42:29.ten years, to developers, to build homes now on the later phases of big
:42:30. > :42:33.schemes. The new housing would be let to Londoners at below the market
:42:34. > :42:36.rate. After ten years, the homes would be sold and the initial loan
:42:37. > :42:42.that would be repaid to City Hall. With a population in London due to
:42:43. > :42:45.increased by 20%, housing will become even more of a priority. And
:42:46. > :42:50.it will take more than this one scheme to fix the problem.
:42:51. > :42:58.Let's talk to the Chief Executive of shelter. What do you think of that
:42:59. > :43:03.idea? It is a start. It is only one of the things that needs to happen.
:43:04. > :43:06.It is not going to change the nature of the crisis that is facing many
:43:07. > :43:12.Londoners. Prices are going up, as R.N. Is. With the best will in the
:43:13. > :43:17.world, we are only building about 6000 of the 13,000 affordable homes
:43:18. > :43:20.we need this year. Implicit is this -- in this is that developers do not
:43:21. > :43:26.have the money. Are the banks lending to them? It is an
:43:27. > :43:29.interesting question and I think developers should be answering that
:43:30. > :43:32.question and looking at how they can use the land they have better to get
:43:33. > :43:39.that out. There's also the question of affordability. One of the most
:43:40. > :43:41.used words in the endless language, some of these properties are not
:43:42. > :43:46.going to be affordable to many Londoners. When you hear that the
:43:47. > :43:52.offer is to try to get developers to build them and then, for ten years,
:43:53. > :43:56.they will be rented at below market rent. What do you make of that? In
:43:57. > :44:01.some areas, that is still a lot of money. I think the problem is that
:44:02. > :44:03.for ten years, what is going to happen to the House and the people
:44:04. > :44:14.in that house? There are still questions. This is a good start but
:44:15. > :44:18.it is likely piecemeal. We need bigger on a grander schemes. The
:44:19. > :44:26.idea of the mere using a limited amount of money, when there are
:44:27. > :44:34.banks there to be doing it, shouldn't the mayor be able to? --
:44:35. > :44:38.the idea of the mayor. That is the height of a political debate. But at
:44:39. > :44:42.the moment, between the both parties. There are a lot of powers
:44:43. > :44:48.that he could use to force these issues and that is what we need to
:44:49. > :44:53.see. What kind of thing? We could begin to ask questions about putting
:44:54. > :44:57.powers in place, about why land is left empty for so long. There are
:44:58. > :45:00.options around taxation. Those are issues which the political parties
:45:01. > :45:04.are discussing at the moment and we would like to see them pushed. We
:45:05. > :45:09.would like to see the mayor use all of his powers. Would that be more
:45:10. > :45:14.effective? We need to see investment, absolutely, which makes
:45:15. > :45:17.it affordable and ensures that it is affordable. And we need the
:45:18. > :45:20.political will to drive this element forward. There is land available and
:45:21. > :45:26.we should be using it. Tom Brake, why should the mere or City Hall the
:45:27. > :45:36.needing to provide this kind of money on a loan basis? -- mayor
:45:37. > :45:41.Given the pressure on housing in London we need as wide a range of
:45:42. > :45:45.initiatives as possible. When will we see them? I would like to see the
:45:46. > :45:48.idea of community trusts where the land would be held separately in a
:45:49. > :45:51.trust. You would then be able to build properties at a much lower
:45:52. > :45:55.rate because people would not be taking in the value of the land
:45:56. > :46:00.when they make the purchase. We also need to see schemes, perhaps that
:46:01. > :46:05.covenant properties - I mean my worry here as was outlined is that
:46:06. > :46:08.in ten years' time, if those properties simply go for sale, there
:46:09. > :46:13.is no chance the tennants in the properties will be able to buy them.
:46:14. > :46:16.You need to put a covenant on those flats so, when they get passed on,
:46:17. > :46:21.if someone moves out, they get passed on to someone who equally
:46:22. > :46:25.needs affordable housing, rather than losing that to the bulk of
:46:26. > :46:29.affordable housing available in London. Do you go along with that?
:46:30. > :46:32.Very many of my constituents will not benefit in the slightest from an
:46:33. > :46:36.awful lot of the building going on noement, particularly along the
:46:37. > :46:39.riverside, where although there is a small percentage going to be
:46:40. > :46:44.affordable, it is not, as you have said "affordable" to many, many of
:46:45. > :46:49.them. I would like to see us go back to really basics, which was local
:46:50. > :46:55.authorities being able to build more what are genuine council housing.
:46:56. > :46:58.Being able to borrow. Some are doing that. A few councils are doing a
:46:59. > :47:02.small amount of that. That's what we need. We also need to get to a
:47:03. > :47:07.situation where, when places are built, as you say, they are not then
:47:08. > :47:11.able to be sold on. I don't think we are ever going stop the right-to-buy
:47:12. > :47:16.but for example n my area I have a lot of Co-Opes, they cannot be sold
:47:17. > :47:20.on. That makes a difference. And you agree with, that I don't think you
:47:21. > :47:27.are agreeing with the borrowing power. The Government allows local
:47:28. > :47:32.authorities to borrow a little bit, we would argue it could let them
:47:33. > :47:36.bore yes more. We know that there is austerity, we know that the need to
:47:37. > :47:41.to control spending, but surely when so many people are out there saying
:47:42. > :47:46.- you have to take this step, why is this not happening? Well, I think
:47:47. > :47:51.there are initiatives underway, for instance with the right-to-buy local
:47:52. > :47:54.authorities are the in position to build new homes from the money they
:47:55. > :47:57.have raised from selling properties. That's something I would want to
:47:58. > :48:00.encourage local authorities to do. In London, for instance, I think the
:48:01. > :48:05.mayor could do more in terms of releasing land that he has or the
:48:06. > :48:08.GLA and Transport for London, releasing land for building
:48:09. > :48:12.affordable homes and the mayor in relation to some of the larger
:48:13. > :48:15.projects, around Battersea power station, for instance, could be
:48:16. > :48:21.demanding a higher percentage of affordable homes. We'll make a
:48:22. > :48:25.reference to that later. I'm sorry to can you cut you short.
:48:26. > :48:27.Three years ago the coalition government introduced guidelines for
:48:28. > :48:30.council-run newspapers and magazines, then it accused some
:48:31. > :48:35.authorities of using publications to put out political propaganda. Now,
:48:36. > :48:42.it's still accusing some councils of doing that as well.
:48:43. > :48:48.Local authorities are publishing magazines full of propaganda. Not
:48:49. > :48:53.far off Soviet Russia's notorious paper. At least according to the
:48:54. > :48:56.government. In 2011 they tried introducing a voluntary code of
:48:57. > :49:00.practice but ministers say it is being ignored by some authorities.
:49:01. > :49:04.Two weeks ago they wrote to six of them, threatening them ultimately
:49:05. > :49:08.with legal action. Five of the six are in London. Either there is
:49:09. > :49:11.unfair competition, using tax payers' money, for example, a weekly
:49:12. > :49:14.newspaper that takes on and makes it very difficult for the freedom of
:49:15. > :49:17.independent press or if there is political prop began darks tax
:49:18. > :49:22.payers' money should not be used for that. Dobb propaganda. We asked the
:49:23. > :49:26.five councils involved for an interview but they declined. They
:49:27. > :49:30.pointed out the magazines were popular with local residents and in
:49:31. > :49:36.some cases made the local authority money from advertising. Some
:49:37. > :49:40.disputed whether they breached government outlines.
:49:41. > :49:43.In Hammersmith and Fulham the council's fortnightly H F news had
:49:44. > :49:48.been criticised by a local commercial newspaper and others and
:49:49. > :49:54.the council replaced it with this magazine but according to the local
:49:55. > :49:59.Labour Party, the council's publication takes a stance on social
:50:00. > :50:03.issues, here it says the local Charing Cross Hospital's future is
:50:04. > :50:07.secured but Labour were out on the streets this week defending the
:50:08. > :50:11.hospital against what it calls the effective closure. We are asking
:50:12. > :50:16.people to stand with us to save the hospital. In actual fact it would be
:50:17. > :50:20.13% would be less. The day after it was announced they were going to do
:50:21. > :50:24.that a glossy magazine, at ?20, 00 of public money, went to every
:50:25. > :50:28.household in the borough splashed with the headline -- Charing Cross
:50:29. > :50:31.Hospital saved. It is not true. Labour claim the council magazine
:50:32. > :50:34.has been used as an express to telephone residents in hair homes
:50:35. > :50:38.and push the one-sided view of another council policy. Council tax
:50:39. > :50:42.w no mention of what Labour says is the other half of the story, the
:50:43. > :50:44.introduction of over 600 new stealth taxes.
:50:45. > :50:52.Residents were called at home and asked: "Did you receive a companiy
:50:53. > :50:56.of Your magazine on Friday?" Did you find the Your mg zeen informative,
:50:57. > :51:00.do you agree with the council's proposal to cut council tax again by
:51:01. > :51:03.3% next year? Someone sitting at home, cooking
:51:04. > :51:08.their tea. They are busy, the phone rings, you have a council official
:51:09. > :51:12.on the line asking you about a one-sided Conservative poll sane the
:51:13. > :51:16.other side is ?64 million of stealth taxes, never mentioned at all. They
:51:17. > :51:21.were specifically asking questions designed to give a false impression
:51:22. > :51:25.of the Conservative administration's record and to get it into people's
:51:26. > :51:29.consciousness. What exactly was going on here? Sunday Politics asked
:51:30. > :51:33.a leading polling company. There has been circumstances, in America
:51:34. > :51:37.largely, of where people have done things called push polls where
:51:38. > :51:42.really they are pretending to do a poll but their ultimate aim has fwon
:51:43. > :51:47.push out negative propaganda about their opponents. -- aim has been to
:51:48. > :51:51.push out. This isn't the same but is the main aim of this to put out a
:51:52. > :51:55.message or to get results? It is almost impossible to say. But what
:51:56. > :52:00.is clear is that despite Government guidelines coming in three years
:52:01. > :52:04.ago, the controversy surrounding local government publicity remains.
:52:05. > :52:08.I'm joined by the Conservative deputy leader of Hammersmith and
:52:09. > :52:12.Fulham Council, Greg Smith to respond to am soft things we heard
:52:13. > :52:17.there. Welcome. Fist of, let's take that example about a hospital. You
:52:18. > :52:21.say saved or this says saved when we know it is losing most of its floor
:52:22. > :52:26.space and services are going. Were you, are you using taxpayer funded
:52:27. > :52:30.publications for misleading information? We have halved
:52:31. > :52:33.communication spending since 20002346 Hammersmith and full. What
:52:34. > :52:37.that particular example, we think it is very important to pet let our
:52:38. > :52:41.residents know what we are doing on their behalf. -- to let our
:52:42. > :52:44.residents know. Councils don't run the NHS. We have no control over
:52:45. > :52:49.hospitals but there was a proposal put down by NHS London essentially
:52:50. > :52:52.close Charing Cross Hospital instead of waving placards we got in front
:52:53. > :52:56.of the Secretary of State, we got in front of the officials at the NHS
:52:57. > :52:59.and we got them to a position where there will still be a hospital on
:53:00. > :53:03.that site. In fact ?100 million rebuild of the site. There will
:53:04. > :53:06.still be emergency functions there, there will still be specialist
:53:07. > :53:09.cancer services and other services. There will still be a hospital
:53:10. > :53:13.serving our residents on that site. What about the second main claim
:53:14. > :53:17.there in the film, you are getting council people to ring people up
:53:18. > :53:22.afterwards and asking them that third question - do you or don't you
:53:23. > :53:26.approve of or like our 3% cut in council tax. I looked into that It
:53:27. > :53:30.wasn't something the council Z the people who distributed the quarterly
:53:31. > :53:33.magazine do a poll to check their guys haven't been chucking them in
:53:34. > :53:38.the bin and people have received their magazine. It was them, was it?
:53:39. > :53:42.They phoned up 100 people. 100 people out of a population of
:53:43. > :53:46.183,500 and asked them if they had their magazine. They put that
:53:47. > :53:51.additional question N I don't even know what the result of that poll
:53:52. > :53:56.was. -- that additional question in. What on earth is it o to do with
:53:57. > :53:59.them? They said - do you want to put an extra question in, we thought,
:54:00. > :54:03.why not, we have not seen the results. But you were using that
:54:04. > :54:07.opportunity - we described it as push polling, but you were using it
:54:08. > :54:13.as an opportunity to remind those people you had cut council tax 00
:54:14. > :54:17.people were phoned it was not a taxpayer-funded exercise it was
:54:18. > :54:21.something they did as a standard practice. Do you think it is right,
:54:22. > :54:29.or do you do it as well, do you accept that you use council
:54:30. > :54:33.publications, your new quarterly magazine, to put the Conservative
:54:34. > :54:37.gloss on there. Every organisation wants to at the time people it
:54:38. > :54:40.serves, whether it is a council serving residents or a business
:54:41. > :54:45.serving customers, what they are doing. We fully comply with the new
:54:46. > :54:49.code the government has brought in. But this is nothing new. The Labour
:54:50. > :54:56.Party when they ran Hammersmith and Fulham produced a ?500,000 glossy
:54:57. > :55:03.magazine a year called HFM. Our magazine don't cost the tax payers a
:55:04. > :55:08.penny because the advertisers going... This was February 2006 a
:55:09. > :55:12.couple of months before the local elections. Kate Hoey, does everyone
:55:13. > :55:16.do it? Every council wants to get information out. If it is run by a
:55:17. > :55:20.particular political party, good things, then, they feel will go to
:55:21. > :55:27.their party. Lambeth, I think, did used to do some pretty dreadful prop
:55:28. > :55:31.began da. Now I'm quite -- propaganda. Now I'm happy and
:55:32. > :55:34.relaxed. We have a monthly magazine which is really about information.
:55:35. > :55:38.It is not party political. And actually there are a lot of people
:55:39. > :55:42.in my constituency who aren't on emain don't get communications in a
:55:43. > :55:46.way that perhaps some of us would. -- aren't on e-mail.
:55:47. > :55:49.A magazine about telling them what is happening can be useful. I think
:55:50. > :55:52.all political parties need to be careful but ultimately the public
:55:53. > :55:58.aren't stupid. They know when they are being told something. If that's
:55:59. > :56:01.the case, why on earth does the government feel it wants to
:56:02. > :56:06.interfere or go to six councils and say - we don't like the way you said
:56:07. > :56:10.that or this document you are proproducing? I don't understand t
:56:11. > :56:17.one of the councils Greenwich, produces a weekly newspaper. --
:56:18. > :56:23.understand it... People people informed, admirable. I would be
:56:24. > :56:27.surprised if there was enough information to proindividual a
:56:28. > :56:31.weekly newspaper. The trouble is, there is a risk that the content of
:56:32. > :56:36.that, because there isn't enough on a weekly basis to provide conthaent
:56:37. > :56:40.is factual, the content -- conthaent is factual. It is likely to be more
:56:41. > :56:44.political spin than it is useful information for the residents My
:56:45. > :56:47.borough used to put out different leaflets about different things if
:56:48. > :56:52.you add up the cost of those, if you do one properly produced monthly one
:56:53. > :56:57.t can save money. I'm very relaxed about it, but it does have to be
:56:58. > :57:01.carefully looked at. I can understanden, at certain times,
:57:02. > :57:07.coming up to elections-- I can understand. I suspect over the next
:57:08. > :57:12.few years most council also move towards social media and delivering
:57:13. > :57:16.information by e-mail. A lot of people don't get e-mail. Will you
:57:17. > :57:20.keep this going? We have stripped out the cost. Our publications are
:57:21. > :57:24.funded by advertising and at the same time we have managed to cut
:57:25. > :57:28.council tax by 20% over eight years. And put up a few extra. That's a
:57:29. > :57:35.discussion for another time. The rest of the political news in 6
:57:36. > :57:40.Seconds. A A man convicted of links with the
:57:41. > :57:44.Mafia in Italy has been released on bail after being re-arrested. He was
:57:45. > :57:47.detained in west London after a fresh European arrest warrant was
:57:48. > :57:52.received from Italy. He was allowed to stay in the UK after winning a
:57:53. > :57:59.fist extradition battle last month. -- a first.
:58:00. > :58:06.Newham council refunded up 347, 00 to almost 500 drivers after parking
:58:07. > :58:12.tickets were illegally issued. Controversy over the plans for the
:58:13. > :58:15.redevelopment, phase 3 of the batter Battersea Power Station were
:58:16. > :58:20.revealed. 1300 homes will be created but 03
:58:21. > :58:29.will be affordable. Following the rows I nafgs Culture
:58:30. > :58:36.Secretary, Maria Miller d following the resignation -- -- following the
:58:37. > :58:40.resignation of Culture Secretary, Maria Miller, Zac Goldsmith wants to
:58:41. > :58:45.give constituents the power of recalling their MP.
:58:46. > :58:48.And Tom Brake, will you be pushing for what Zac Goldsmith wants?. It is
:58:49. > :58:52.a Liberal Democrat commitment in our manifesto that we'll deliver recall.
:58:53. > :58:56.It is a coalition agreement that we will - it is in the coalition
:58:57. > :59:01.agreement that we'll deliver recall. There is a Government desire to do
:59:02. > :59:05.that. When? We have already published a draft bi. It is being
:59:06. > :59:08.consulted on. There are two triggers in the bill. The first trigger would
:59:09. > :59:13.be if a Member of Parliament received a prison sentence or a
:59:14. > :59:16.custodial sentence of 12 months or less, automatically that would
:59:17. > :59:20.trigger a petition that their constituents could sign and the
:59:21. > :59:25.second trigger, a bit more complex, would be a trigger of - if the
:59:26. > :59:29.Member of Parliament had committed serious wrong-doing, then also if
:59:30. > :59:35.the standards committee agreed to that and if the House agreed to it,
:59:36. > :59:40.then that could also be... I don't think actually it is as good, the
:59:41. > :59:43.bill they are putting and discussing which Zac Goldsmith's bill, which
:59:44. > :59:48.I'm a supporter of. I think there needs to be a mechanism. He is
:59:49. > :59:52.saying you need 20% of people within eight weeks would have to sign a
:59:53. > :59:56.petition. That's right. Because that avoids it just being - no MP is
:59:57. > :00:01.going to be recalled over because they voted in a particular way over
:00:02. > :00:04.a particular issue. I mean I made myself unpopular with a few people
:00:05. > :00:09.over particular issues but it is ultimately, 20%, a large amount a
:00:10. > :00:12.number of people but ultimately I think the public want to feel there
:00:13. > :00:15.is a way, if something terrible goes wrong, after about a year, there is
:00:16. > :00:20.nothing that can be done about that MP for five years now that we have
:00:21. > :00:24.fixed parliaments. I'm quite relaxed. Can I say that there are
:00:25. > :00:29.examples in other countries where recall is used in a vexatious way.
:00:30. > :00:34.We are not other countries. We are the UK. We do things differently.
:00:35. > :00:38.From a political manner to unseat particular canned datsds. That's the
:00:39. > :00:48.risk. We have run out of time. - particular candidates. Back to you,
:00:49. > :00:51.Andrew. The sun's out, Ed Balls has run the
:00:52. > :00:54.London Marathon, and MPs leave Westminster for their Easter break.
:00:55. > :01:04.Let's discuss what's coming up in the Week Ahead.
:01:05. > :01:09.We will get more of what we have just seen. Let's look back on the
:01:10. > :01:14.debate. What did we learn from the argument is? That it is going to
:01:15. > :01:18.bore and irritate whole lot of people, this election campaign. Four
:01:19. > :01:22.parties shouting at each other about things that most people do not know
:01:23. > :01:26.much about. They know very little about how the European Parliament
:01:27. > :01:35.works, what an MEP is supposed to do. A lot of heat and not a lot of
:01:36. > :01:38.light. I've updated well, all of them, but the net effect is not
:01:39. > :01:45.going to encourage people to go out and vote and not many do. One thing
:01:46. > :01:50.that struck me was that on Europe, the Labour and Lib Dem positions are
:01:51. > :01:56.not that far apart. They are pretty much the same. And yet the knocks
:01:57. > :01:58.lots of each other. I suppose they feel that they had to do that
:01:59. > :02:05.because that is the format. I'd agree with Polly. Their word UKIP
:02:06. > :02:11.and the Tories to attack two we try to make it exciting, and we know the
:02:12. > :02:15.issues are important. But people out there have not heard of these
:02:16. > :02:18.individuals. It is not very exciting. That is worrying because
:02:19. > :02:22.these are huge national questions for us. We need to find a way of
:02:23. > :02:30.making it more fun. People may not know these MEPs, they may not know
:02:31. > :02:33.the detail of the debate, but it is an issue on which people have strong
:02:34. > :02:37.opinions. It is a visceral thing for many people. Especially on the
:02:38. > :02:43.immigration issue. The debate took off and became more vociferous at
:02:44. > :02:47.that point. To a large extent, you wonder whether not only this
:02:48. > :02:50.European election but the eventual referendum will be a referendum on
:02:51. > :02:55.the issue of immigration and free movement. If we did not learn much
:02:56. > :02:57.from the argument, the thing we did learn is that the structure of these
:02:58. > :03:05.televised debate influences the outcome. One of the reasons that
:03:06. > :03:11.Nigel Farage did well in the debate is that in a two-man debate, each
:03:12. > :03:15.man has as good a chance as the other. If it is four people, one man
:03:16. > :03:21.can be ganged up on. Patrick O'Flynn did well for a man who is not an
:03:22. > :03:24.elected politician yet. At times, 40 came under attack and did not hold
:03:25. > :03:28.the line as well as you would expect. Does that create a perverse
:03:29. > :03:33.incentive for the main parties to agree to a four way debate before
:03:34. > :03:36.the general election? I do not think the David Cameron has nearly as much
:03:37. > :03:41.to worry about from a televised debate in the run-up to the
:03:42. > :03:45.elections than his spin doctors believe. When you put him up against
:03:46. > :03:48.Ed Miliband, and we have not actually seen Ed Miliband in that
:03:49. > :03:56.format, I think he will come off all right. This is an election which the
:03:57. > :04:01.polls would have us believe that the battle for first place is between
:04:02. > :04:04.UKIP and labour. It certainly is. Obviously, it is neck and neck and
:04:05. > :04:10.we will not know until we are closer. And it matters a lot to both
:04:11. > :04:13.of them. If Mr Miliband does not come first, that is not good news
:04:14. > :04:20.for the main opposition at this stage. Except to some extent all of
:04:21. > :04:26.the people will put it to one side and say that this is a bizarre
:04:27. > :04:29.election. A plague on both your houses, let's vote UKIP. It is not
:04:30. > :04:35.clear how much that translates into the next election. It is not too
:04:36. > :04:41.disastrous for Labour. It would be better if they came first. If Mr
:04:42. > :04:48.Miliband comes first, not a problem, but it becomes second and UKIP soars
:04:49. > :04:50.away, what are the consequences I think there is a widespread
:04:51. > :04:56.expectation already at Westminster that UKIP is very likely to come
:04:57. > :04:59.first. If Ed Miliband fails to come first, there will not be a great
:05:00. > :05:03.deal of shock in the West Mr village. Else think what is
:05:04. > :05:08.remarkable about Ed Miliband is that despite consistently poor personal
:05:09. > :05:15.leadership approval ratings, the overall Labour poll is consistently
:05:16. > :05:18.very high. We have seen that budget blip, it seems to have taken us back
:05:19. > :05:23.to where we were before. Leadership is not everything. Mrs Thatcher was
:05:24. > :05:30.miles behind James Callaghan but in the end, it was the party politics
:05:31. > :05:35.that mattered more. If Mr Cameron comes third and the Tories come
:05:36. > :05:39.third, maybe a poor third, is it headless chicken time on the Tory
:05:40. > :05:42.backbenchers? It has often been said that the Tory Party has two modes,
:05:43. > :05:51.complacency and panic. You will see them shift into panic mode. By June,
:05:52. > :05:54.I think. Many of the stories in the sun will be about David Cameron s
:05:55. > :05:58.personal leadership and his grip on the party. There will be pressure on
:05:59. > :06:03.conference by the time that comes around. It is a natural consequence
:06:04. > :06:11.of being the incumbent party. The Lib Dems are 7% in two of the polls
:06:12. > :06:16.today. It was widely thought that in the first and second debates, Nigel
:06:17. > :06:22.Farage won both. In retrospect, was the challenge strategy a disaster
:06:23. > :06:27.for Mr Clegg? I do not think it was because he had nothing to lose. But
:06:28. > :06:33.he is lower in the polls than when he started. He has not lost a great
:06:34. > :06:39.deal. The polls were quite often that low. I think it was a good
:06:40. > :06:44.thing to do. It raised his profile. It made him the leading party in.
:06:45. > :06:50.That may be a difficult place to be. That is how you end up with 7%
:06:51. > :06:53.in the polls. The reason he is fighting with Labour is that he
:06:54. > :06:57.knows very well that all he has to do is to get his votes back that
:06:58. > :07:03.have gone to Labour and labour have to fight hard to make sure that they
:07:04. > :07:08.do not go back. Every party looks to where it is going to get it
:07:09. > :07:11.support. If it is a wipe-out for the Lib Dems, and they lose all their
:07:12. > :07:19.MEPs, not saying that is going to happen but you could not rule it out
:07:20. > :07:21.for, are we back in Nick Clegg leadership crisis territory? One of
:07:22. > :07:26.the astonishing things about this Parliament is the relative absence
:07:27. > :07:29.of leadership speculation about Nick Clegg will stop at the first couple
:07:30. > :07:33.of years, his position seems tricky, but maybe that is because
:07:34. > :07:37.Chris Hughton is gone and he was the only plausible candidate. This cable
:07:38. > :07:42.is not getting any younger, to put it delicately. That was not delegate
:07:43. > :07:44.at all! And we have reached a desperate stage where Danny
:07:45. > :07:48.Alexander is talked about as a candidate. That was not delegate
:07:49. > :07:53.either! Maybe he is holding onto power the lack of alternatives. If
:07:54. > :08:00.they ended up with no MEPs at all, and a less than double digits
:08:01. > :08:04.score... With Danny Alexander, it is clear that Scotland, one way or
:08:05. > :08:10.another, will be moving further away. You could not have the leader
:08:11. > :08:14.of a national party be a Scot. But he does not have the following in
:08:15. > :08:18.the party. I'm glad you're liberal attitudes to immigration extends to
:08:19. > :08:24.me. I would not have been here for 43 years. There will be leadership
:08:25. > :08:28.talk after that holes. It has been bubbling in the background, but you
:08:29. > :08:35.have to talk to the grass roots activists. -- after the polls. The
:08:36. > :08:38.grass roots activists are despairing. If things are bad, they
:08:39. > :08:42.lose their network of activists who they need to fight the next
:08:43. > :08:45.election. I think you mean, not that you could have a Scot, but that it
:08:46. > :08:52.would be more difficult to have a Scot from a Scottish constituency.
:08:53. > :08:57.Absolutely. I think a Scottish constituency, so many things will be
:08:58. > :09:01.different. Or to hold the great offices of state. Let's come onto
:09:02. > :09:06.the Crown Prosecution Service is. It is an English institution. Where
:09:07. > :09:11.does the CPS and after losing yet another high-profile case come this
:09:12. > :09:14.time Nigel Evans? They had nine counts against him and they did not
:09:15. > :09:21.win on one. It is obviously very embarrassing. They will have a bit
:09:22. > :09:24.of explain to do but I guess the threshold for bringing these cases
:09:25. > :09:30.is high. There has to be considered at least a 50-50 chance of actually
:09:31. > :09:33.winning the case. We do not know what went on behind the scenes when
:09:34. > :09:36.they weighed up whether to bring the case. Nigel Evans makes an
:09:37. > :09:41.interesting point about whether it is legitimate to bundle together a
:09:42. > :09:46.number of stand-alone relatively weak accusations, and when you put
:09:47. > :09:52.them together to militantly, the CPS uses that to make a case. Is that a
:09:53. > :09:56.legitimate thing to do? He was a high-profile figure, not just
:09:57. > :10:03.because he was a Tory MP. He was the deputy speaker of the House. And yet
:10:04. > :10:08.the CPS are certainly the police, to begin with they did not have that
:10:09. > :10:12.many people to testify against him. And then they trawled for more. You
:10:13. > :10:15.wonder if they would have done that if it was not for the fact that he
:10:16. > :10:19.was a public figure. The trouble is, they are dammed if they do and
:10:20. > :10:22.dammed if they do not. Particularly with politicians and the reputation
:10:23. > :10:26.they have these days, if there is any suggestion that they let
:10:27. > :10:29.somebody off because they are a high-profile politician, and they
:10:30. > :10:35.are saying that about Cyril Smith, that is the accusation. A strange
:10:36. > :10:39.story. Most unlikely and very bizarre. But that is the accusation.
:10:40. > :10:45.If there is any with of that, I can see why the CPS says, we better let
:10:46. > :10:49.the courts try this one. Also, they are in trouble overrated cases
:10:50. > :10:56.because their success rate on bringing people to court for rape is
:10:57. > :10:59.so thin. When it looked as if his accusers were not really accusing
:11:00. > :11:04.him, it looks quite weak. You cannot help but feeling that they are
:11:05. > :11:07.falling over backwards now in high-profile cases because of their
:11:08. > :11:12.abject and total failure over Jimmy Savile. I think this is exactly the
:11:13. > :11:16.kind of case that happens when you are trying to make a point or redeem
:11:17. > :11:20.a reputation or change a culture. All of these big things. As opposed
:11:21. > :11:23.to what criminal justice is supposed to be about, which is specific
:11:24. > :11:28.crimes and specific evidence matching those crimes. The CPS has
:11:29. > :11:31.no copper a fleet joined in this list of public and situations that
:11:32. > :11:34.has taken a fall over the past five or six years. We have had
:11:35. > :11:38.Parliament, the newspapers, the police will stop I think this is as
:11:39. > :11:41.bad a humiliation as any of those because it is Innocent people
:11:42. > :11:44.suffering. You are the most recent, being a lobby correspondent in
:11:45. > :11:49.Westminster, and we now see on Channel 4 News that basically,
:11:50. > :11:56.Westminster is twinned with Sodom and Gomorrah. Yes. I know. Is this
:11:57. > :12:00.true? It is all rather the red. I do not move in those circles. And you
:12:01. > :12:05.were in the lobby at one stage? Not that long ago. Is it right. Is it
:12:06. > :12:09.right to be twinned with Sodom and Gomorrah? I'll ask him for his
:12:10. > :12:17.opinion. Being technically a member of the lobby, I can observe some of
:12:18. > :12:21.this stuff. And what surprises me is that journalists, when the complain
:12:22. > :12:25.about Sodom and Gomorrah, write themselves out of it. It is as if it
:12:26. > :12:30.is just MPs. We are unalloyed and unvarnished. Actually, the fact is
:12:31. > :12:34.it has always been a bit like Sodom and tomorrow. Of course it has.
:12:35. > :12:38.Think about how we have had wave after wave of stories and scandals.
:12:39. > :12:44.But less of it recently. It was I think that attitudes have slightly
:12:45. > :12:50.changed. I'll also think that if you get 650 people in any organisation
:12:51. > :12:54.and you put that much scrutiny on them, you will find an awful lot
:12:55. > :12:58.going on in most people's officers of a scurrilous nature. Even in the
:12:59. > :14:01.BBC In 2013, the public voted for
:14:02. > :14:04.a portrait of At times he's interesting,
:14:05. > :14:12.at times he's very funny, My life is a very happy life
:14:13. > :14:20.and I'm a very happy person. Will you feel nervous
:14:21. > :14:22.when this is unveiled? I suppose being the centre
:14:23. > :14:26.of attention but for ever.