01/07/2012 Sunday Politics North East and Cumbria


01/07/2012

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 01/07/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

In the North East and Cumbria. Is the Government planning to pay

:01:33.:01:36.

lower levels of benefits to people living in this region? A Lib Dem

:01:36.:01:46.
:01:46.:01:46.

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 1684 seconds

:01:46.:29:50.

Minister tells us he won't support Hello, and the warmest of welcomes.

:29:50.:29:57.

My guests, Roberta Blackman-Woods and James Wharton. I suspect they

:29:57.:30:01.

will not see eye-to-eye on our big talking point, the Government plans

:30:01.:30:07.

to cut �10 billion from the welfare bill. Also, the onward march of the

:30:07.:30:11.

wind turbines, have councils in our emir are learned lessons from

:30:11.:30:15.

Scotland and ligature in their efforts to stop developments like

:30:15.:30:19.

this. First, the government has revealed radical thinking about

:30:19.:30:24.

benefits and who should receive them. Scrapping housing benefit for

:30:24.:30:29.

under 20 fives is one idea, but are ministers are also considering

:30:29.:30:35.

paying lower benefits to people in parts of the North? The idea was

:30:35.:30:40.

floated at, but during a visit to Teesside, one Cabinet minister told

:30:40.:30:48.

us he was not prepared to support Dis week, Danny Alexander has been

:30:48.:30:53.

taking the long view. From 250 feet up at the top of this chemical

:30:53.:30:58.

plant. The Chief Secretary to the Treasury was here to discuss plans

:30:58.:31:02.

for dozens of new jobs. He is not the only one who has been gazing

:31:02.:31:07.

into the distance. David Cameron has also been looking ahead at what

:31:07.:31:12.

he sees as the next big challenge. How to generate not just work but

:31:12.:31:16.

also the work ethic by cracking down on the benefits culture. Among

:31:17.:31:22.

the ideas he has floated, the axing of housing benefit for under 25 and

:31:22.:31:26.

a cap on benefits to families with three or more children. They are

:31:26.:31:30.

also looking at possible local rates of benefit that could mean

:31:30.:31:35.

lower payments in the north and in the south. To the Liberal Democrats

:31:35.:31:38.

decree in the need to get tougher? They might be other changes that

:31:38.:31:44.

are need -- that are needed, but we will have to debate it in the

:31:44.:31:47.

normal way, and if we think changes are needed, we will bring them

:31:47.:31:53.

forward. What about local rates of benefit? There is no prospect of

:31:53.:31:56.

the Government introducing regional benefits. We have looked at local

:31:56.:32:01.

market facing pay in the public sector, an issue which we have

:32:01.:32:04.

asked the independent bodies to consider, but they need to come

:32:04.:32:07.

forward with overwhelming evidence to make us move in that direction.

:32:07.:32:13.

In terms of Richard Rowe lies in benefits, there is a non-starter.

:32:13.:32:18.

In this part of Middlesbrough, 40% are on benefit. Less than half are

:32:18.:32:22.

in work. You might expect people living here to be against the idea

:32:22.:32:29.

of cuts to welfare. But opinion it is divided. The people who are

:32:29.:32:34.

straight, they do not get treated right. It is the people who play

:32:34.:32:38.

the system that get the cream. if he was on the door, how would he

:32:38.:32:43.

like it? It is not on. Some people do not want to work. Definitely,

:32:43.:32:49.

they are scared of work. They are frightened of craft. They do not

:32:49.:32:53.

know what work is. They do not appreciate money, they have never

:32:53.:32:59.

bandit. Differences in the government mean they have to tread

:32:59.:33:02.

carefully on welfare reform. But evidence of public frustration in

:33:02.:33:06.

areas like this suggests a more radical approach could win votes as

:33:06.:33:13.

well a save money. With me now, Robert McDonald, an

:33:13.:33:18.

expert in poverty and the benefits system. What is the Government

:33:18.:33:23.

trying to achieve with these ideas? Is it about cutting spending or a

:33:23.:33:29.

radical reform to get people back to work? One of the things I would

:33:29.:33:34.

say, for me, too many of these ideas about reform, whether from

:33:34.:33:38.

politicians or the sort that you hear in the tabloid press, they are

:33:38.:33:45.

too often based on anecdote and myth and exceptional stories. Danny

:33:45.:33:49.

Alexander used the word evidence. What I would stress, any talk about

:33:49.:33:54.

welfare reform needs to be based on the evidence that we need it. In

:33:54.:33:59.

this case, in terms of discussions about regionalisation and

:33:59.:34:04.

incentivise Asian of benefit, we need to look at the evidence --

:34:04.:34:08.

incentivising benefit. Our evidence is that people are desperate for

:34:08.:34:12.

work, rather than lead in pushing or having their benefits cut

:34:12.:34:17.

further in order to look for work. What about the idea of regional

:34:17.:34:20.

benefits? Could that work? The government will look for ways to

:34:20.:34:25.

cut the bill, which is massive. There are various things that we

:34:25.:34:32.

can do. It seems that this is governed against the thrust of what

:34:32.:34:37.

I understood what one of the key planks of the welfare reform, which

:34:37.:34:42.

was to simplify benefits and the system. This would be introducing a

:34:42.:34:45.

complex set of new rules about where we might draw the line

:34:45.:34:50.

geographically between one neighbourhood and another one. I am

:34:50.:34:57.

not sure that it is really a serious suggestion, given the

:34:57.:35:03.

complexity of the latter. -- the matter. Any government will talk

:35:03.:35:08.

about reducing the Bill, that is quite right, but the key way to do

:35:08.:35:15.

it is to help people move away from benefits. The point that I would

:35:15.:35:22.

differ on, we do that by cutting benefits, but we need to create

:35:22.:35:28.

more jobs opportunities. There is a high rate of unemployment here.

:35:28.:35:33.

Over 20 jobseeker's for every job. We need to create opportunities for

:35:33.:35:43.
:35:43.:35:45.

the people who want and need them. There was a bit of anger from a

:35:45.:35:51.

working-class community, Middlesbrough. People think enough

:35:51.:35:56.

is enough. We do need to look at the system and in particular we

:35:56.:36:00.

want to get a contributory principle back into the system, so

:36:00.:36:07.

you pay in and get money out. All political parties have to think of

:36:07.:36:13.

this. But what the professor said, this is unworkable, but it is also

:36:13.:36:17.

undesirable, because it will further exacerbate the divide

:36:17.:36:21.

between north and south, it will take money out of a local economy,

:36:21.:36:25.

and that is not a policy we want the government to pursue. They need

:36:25.:36:30.

to concentrate on getting more jobs into this region and others.

:36:30.:36:35.

Everybody agrees, but actually, is there a disincentive for people to

:36:35.:36:41.

work? When there is a system where the pay is lower here than ours

:36:41.:36:49.

where cover it is marginally beneficial for you to leave the

:36:49.:36:53.

benefits and... We need more confidence back into the economy,

:36:53.:36:58.

so jobs are being created, and then you can look to give people the

:36:58.:37:01.

skills and support them into employment. That is the way we

:37:01.:37:09.

should go forward. We know that that worked until 2008, so we don't

:37:09.:37:12.

-- so we want the Government to concentrate on getting people into

:37:12.:37:21.

work. That is the criticism, these are mad schemes, but not a serious

:37:21.:37:28.

platform policy. We have heard from Danny Alexander, there is little

:37:28.:37:36.

prospect of this going ahead. But benefits are already partially

:37:36.:37:39.

regionalised, through housing benefit, but that is a non starter.

:37:39.:37:44.

Do you think it should have been a non-stop to? Chris Grayling said it

:37:44.:37:48.

was right to have a debate. It is right to have a debate about all of

:37:48.:37:54.

the options, but the problems about which you draw the boundaries, how

:37:54.:37:57.

you identify areas in which the cost of living is higher or lower,

:37:57.:38:04.

the potential knock-on impact to a regional economy, there are so many

:38:04.:38:08.

problems and complexities, I would be very surprised if the end result

:38:08.:38:11.

of any review all debate was an agreement that this was a good way

:38:11.:38:15.

to go forward. We should look at everything, of course, we should

:38:15.:38:21.

keep options open. But your advice would be to leave it alone? We have

:38:21.:38:24.

heard from Danny Alexander, the government is unlikely to go down

:38:24.:38:28.

this route. There are so many things we need to sort out, changes

:38:28.:38:37.

to reform the system, but this is not one. The problem is, the Labour

:38:37.:38:40.

Party are perceived as being on the side of people receiving benefits,

:38:40.:38:46.

and there is anger that people exploit the system. When we were in

:38:46.:38:51.

government, we did a lot to get people off benefits and into work.

:38:51.:38:59.

Made up of people on incapacity benefit. For those who are able, we

:38:59.:39:02.

want a supportive system that is compassionate. We do not hear about

:39:02.:39:08.

compassion from the Conservatives. We need a system that encourages

:39:08.:39:14.

people into work. What about housing benefit for the under 25?

:39:14.:39:19.

would give an example, if you have got two young people with two

:39:19.:39:23.

children, are they supposed to be back into the parental home? It is

:39:23.:39:28.

an in-work benefit as well, it is paid to people on low incomes,

:39:28.:39:32.

including people who work. It is an unworkable suggestion. You are

:39:32.:39:36.

attacking benefits for younger people and leaving the benefits for

:39:36.:39:41.

older people. This is one of the problems, people simplify and

:39:41.:39:45.

exaggerate. If we are going to the cut housing benefit for people

:39:45.:39:49.

under 25, there is a reasonable reason for looking at that. It has

:39:49.:39:53.

not been we would say to every bond, you cannot have housing benefit --

:39:53.:40:00.

it does not mean. There would have to be a system in place. You are

:40:00.:40:04.

supposed to be simplified the system. You could not take housing

:40:04.:40:10.

benefit away from people coming out of care. Should you look at

:40:10.:40:16.

licences for pensioners, cold weather payments, but go to

:40:16.:40:24.

millionaires? The issue of the means testing of benefits, the

:40:24.:40:27.

problem is means testing that would cost nearly as much as it would

:40:27.:40:30.

save, and the government is committed to retaining those

:40:30.:40:34.

benefits, because that was a pledge it made.

:40:34.:40:37.

It was rain that made the headlines this week, but that does not always

:40:37.:40:44.

the case. The number of wind turbines built recently have lodged

:40:44.:40:51.

-- changed last parts of the area. But authorities are telling

:40:51.:40:58.

developers enough is enough. Phil Wilson taking the chance to

:40:58.:41:03.

get around his bit of County Durham. It is a pleasant environment, I

:41:03.:41:09.

grew up here. I know the area, I am proud of it. He is worried about

:41:09.:41:13.

the landscape. What we have got behind us, 17 wind turbines, two

:41:13.:41:20.

wind farms together. If it was just the 17 turbines in the area, it

:41:20.:41:25.

would not be a problem, because I am not against them totally, but we

:41:25.:41:29.

get several applications, and the impact on the landscape is getting

:41:29.:41:34.

desperate. The some of his constituents feel desperate as well.

:41:34.:41:41.

The Duke is lovely, and it will be ruined. -- view. An energy company

:41:41.:41:47.

wants but 24 wind turbines here. -- wants to put 24 wind turbines here.

:41:47.:41:52.

The decision will be made by the Secretary of State, sitting in

:41:52.:41:56.

Westminster, with no idea about this area. The people who make the

:41:56.:42:01.

decision should be elected by the people affected by it. We are

:42:01.:42:05.

losing our democratic right to control what happens in our county.

:42:05.:42:09.

But the industry says if local councils have power to decide the

:42:09.:42:13.

fate of every wind farm, the result will be chaos. Why should they be

:42:13.:42:17.

treated any differently from any other development? The system that

:42:17.:42:24.

we have applies across all types of development, energy, roads, housing,

:42:24.:42:30.

etc. You are looking for a decision based on policy, not on single

:42:31.:42:34.

issues, 50 vocal opponents campaigning to their local

:42:34.:42:39.

councillor. That is not democracy, that is too ready. Despite what the

:42:39.:42:43.

industry says, councils are putting their foot down about these things.

:42:43.:42:46.

Policies are being drawn up all over the place to try to curtail

:42:47.:42:52.

them. In Northern Ireland, a wind farm cannot be within 500 metres of

:42:52.:42:56.

a house. The Scottish Borders Council has introduced bevvies of

:42:56.:43:00.

constraint, banning them near some historic buildings. Lincolnshire

:43:00.:43:05.

Council says no wind farm should be within two kilometres of a house.

:43:05.:43:09.

The council has been busy publicising that policy, including

:43:09.:43:12.

through this lorry, but the juggernaut is heading this way.

:43:12.:43:16.

Next week, the leader of Lincolnshire Council this

:43:16.:43:20.

travelling to Northumberland for a summit with the opposition

:43:20.:43:25.

Conservative group. Northumberland already has three large wind farms,

:43:25.:43:27.

another 13 are either at the planning stage or under

:43:27.:43:33.

construction. Some local politicians say it is time for wind

:43:33.:43:39.

farms exclusion zones. A national park must be one, and potentially,

:43:39.:43:43.

a but least parts of green belt land. It is time for us to look out

:43:43.:43:47.

of the box more and not plonk a wind farm in the middle of a

:43:47.:43:51.

beautiful piece of countryside, just the same as we would not plonk

:43:51.:43:55.

a bungalow in the middle of a field over there, we could not do that.

:43:55.:43:59.

We must have the same John Pollard see that prevents that.

:43:59.:44:03.

Government says we need a mix of energy to keep an eye lights on.

:44:03.:44:09.

Take are increasingly part of it. Changing local landscapes, the

:44:09.:44:17.

council has the final say. The problem is, your government was

:44:17.:44:21.

a big player about handing power to the local people, but it is a con

:44:21.:44:26.

job, and that is why people are getting frustrated. It is a very

:44:26.:44:29.

complex of Gibbard, and it is right to say that you cannot have

:44:29.:44:34.

complete local control over every type of government, but the big

:44:34.:44:38.

issue up with wind farms, we should not build them anyway, because they

:44:38.:44:43.

are inefficient, they drive up the cost of an atrocity, this bold

:44:43.:44:48.

landscapes, they do not save huge amounts of carbon. -- they spoilt

:44:48.:44:53.

landscapes. You were one of the MPs that complained it was impossible

:44:53.:44:57.

to defeat applications to the planning system. That has been the

:44:57.:45:04.

case for far too long. Your government is overseeing the system.

:45:05.:45:09.

You have to have a system that can allow developments to go ahead that

:45:09.:45:13.

the local community do not support, otherwise you would never build a

:45:13.:45:17.

power station. Should it be changed? It needs to be adapted to

:45:18.:45:22.

take account of local need and factors, and that is happening,

:45:22.:45:29.

because communities can put up local plans. But the big issue with

:45:29.:45:34.

wind farms is that the subsidy that the government is providing is

:45:34.:45:43.

causing them to happen. Every us have had enough of wind turbines?

:45:43.:45:45.

Durham county council have said they think there are probably

:45:46.:45:50.

enough wind farms in County Durham. I agree with them, but I do think

:45:51.:45:57.

it needs to remain part of our energy mix. People always say, we

:45:57.:46:03.

can have offshore points. I would include onshore, but local

:46:03.:46:08.

communities can have -- should have a greater say, and the policy

:46:08.:46:11.

framework does not make it easier for local communities to have a say.

:46:12.:46:17.

The threshold for referring it to the national policy decision-making

:46:17.:46:22.

was set in 1989, and that does need to be reviewed. We did not think of

:46:22.:46:28.

wind farms in that context, and we need to. Local committees should

:46:28.:46:36.

have more say, but this is too important, one committee should not

:46:36.:46:41.

decide. Communities need to consider alternatives. The

:46:41.:46:50.

government have cut subsidy to solar energy. We should be

:46:50.:46:53.

investing in this. This region is brilliant for that, but the

:46:53.:46:58.

government has not invested. We could invest in wave energy. We

:46:58.:47:05.

need to have a spectrum of renewables. Is this massively over

:47:05.:47:10.

exaggerated? There are huge spaces of countryside, is it really

:47:10.:47:15.

overwhelmed with wind turbines? come to my part of Teesside,

:47:15.:47:19.

travelling into County Durham, you can see them all over the place. It

:47:19.:47:23.

is the number of applications that is forcing this issue. Is it

:47:23.:47:27.

because of the spectre of subsidies being cut that might be fighting it

:47:27.:47:32.

-- forcing them to get in before it happens? These have been going in

:47:32.:47:37.

for a long time, they have to run tests, go through in a longer

:47:37.:47:41.

process. A lot of them have been around for a long time. It is

:47:41.:47:46.

subsidy that we all pay to allow electric bills. The drive towards

:47:46.:47:50.

subsidising wind power has pushed people into fuel poverty and pushed

:47:50.:47:57.

our builds up. At this point last week, we made a

:47:57.:48:03.

joke about how England might miss a penalty in the game last week. It

:48:03.:48:10.

came true, but it was not my fault! Marker's only just recovered, with

:48:10.:48:20.
:48:20.:48:24.

no comments about our prospects at A geologist says this plane could

:48:24.:48:26.

be amongst the most suitable places for an underground nuclear waste

:48:26.:48:33.

store. The emirs meet international guidelines. A campaign to allow big

:48:33.:48:37.

Great North air ambulance to recover the VAT it pays on fuel is

:48:37.:48:42.

to be taken to the Commons. There will be a debate next week to get

:48:42.:48:45.

the charity exempted. There have been 65 expressions of interest

:48:46.:48:51.

from companies bidding to take over the remainder of these factories.

:48:51.:48:54.

The MP said the Government had handled the consultation badly.

:48:54.:49:01.

has been a shambles, chaos and confusion from day one. Forget the

:49:01.:49:05.

woes of the English national team, Tim Farron has his eyes set on the

:49:05.:49:09.

lovely, he has tabled a motion calling for three teams to be

:49:09.:49:12.

promoted and three relegated each season between the Football League

:49:12.:49:17.

and the lower divisions, giving up the non-League teams a greater

:49:17.:49:22.

chance of breaking into the big- time.

:49:22.:49:27.

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS