15/07/2012 Sunday Politics North East and Cumbria

In the North East and Cumbria - full coverage of yesterday's Durham

Gala. Plus how many children are really benefitting from the

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 1798 seconds

Government's "pupil premium"? Hello, and welcome to the Sunday

Politics in the North East and Cumbria. Coming up. What difference

has the pupil premium made to children at schools in our region?

We've got an end-of-term report from Teesside. My guests for this -

our final programme of the series - are Durham North West MP, Pat Glass,

and Newcastle Liberal Democrat councillor Nick Cott. And we start

with the Durham Gala - a celebration of the North East's

mining heritage. But there was a time when it was also a key event

in the political calendar, attended by Prime Ministers such as Clement

Attlee and Harold Wilson. In more recent years, Labour leaders have

stayed away - perhaps embarrassed by the Gala's connections with more

left-wing unions. That's was until yesterday - when Ed Miliband

addressed the crowds in Durham. Our reporter Fergus Hewison was there.

A babe in arms, a smile and a wave. After a 23-year absence, the miners

gala welcomed back a relaxed looking Labour leader. Ed

Miliband's appearance is seen by some as an attempt to reconnect

with core Labour supporters, but, of course, it risks handing out

ammunition to opponents who accuse him of being too close to the

unions. When he took to the stage to speak, Mr Miliband paid tribute

to those very people who put him where he is today, the trade union

members who voted for him and helped him gain the leadership

ahead of his brother, David. trade unions founded the Labour

Party. Our party is stronger because of the 3 million nurses,

engineers, shop workers and all of the trade union levy payers who are

part of that movement. Previous Labour leaders stayed away from the

gala, afraid perhaps of aligning themselves too closely with the

trade union movement. So has Mr Miliband damaged the brand by

agreeing to speak? The unions have their job to do, we will disagree

from time to time, as we have done over the last 18 months or so. But

the link we have to trade unions and to ordinary people in this

country is a really important link. Today is not just about politics,

it is about celebration of community. Anyone who watched the

marching of the banners, the idea that some of this is a bunch of

militants. Frankly that is nonsense. Almost all of the great and good of

the Labour Party and trade union movement in the region were at the

gala. Most were relieved to see a Labour leader at the Big Meeting

surrounded by minders. He is certainly not in the pocket of the

trade unions, as any Labour leader has not been in recent years, but

he does listen to the trade unions, of course he does. But it is a

healthy relationship. I find the reasons that Labour leaders have

not been here for that period frankly inexplicable. Frankly, why

would you not come? The speech were short and did not offer much in the

way of policies but discern the left Labour supporters with smiles

on their faces simply by turning up. Fergus Hewison reporting on

yesterday's Durham Gala. Now to our local councils, which again are

making cut-backs. This week Durham reduced opening hours at 38 of its

libraries as part of its efforts to save nearly �190 million. But can

such cuts be made in a way that's both fair to local residents and to

the most vulnerable? It's a big challenge and one council - Labour-

run Newcastle - has set up its own independent "Fairness Commission"

to try and help. Its report is due out tomorrow. But the opposition

Liberal Democrats have already dismissed it as a political gimmick.

It is a little bit about public relations, a little bit of

politicking. Nobody is good be against extending bareness, but it

would be more convincing if this council and the other hand full of

Labour councils had set up there fairness commission when there was

a Labour government. It seems to me to be a device that they have

created two not the coalition government for the tough decisions

that it is home to take in the light of the difficult inheritance

that it had. So is that fair? Well the deputy leader of Newcastle

Council, Joyce McCarthy, joins me now. Is this about political

posturing and coalition bashing? clip the not. I refute everything

that David said in that statement. We believe that it is wrong that

about one in three children in Newcastle would in poverty. We

believe that it is wrong that people will lose 10 or 12 years of

birdlife. Hour Fairness Commission, which, as you said, is independent,

is in partnership with Newcastle University and the city council and

the partners on not just from politics but from the Church, from

education, from higher education and from the community and

voluntary sector. We invited them to have a look at these issues and

help us to find a way through wit. All those things you said about

life expectancy but true under a Labour government. Were you

shouting just as loud about it then? Absolutely, but under a

Labour government the Government understood the difficult to which

we were having. But they were still the same problems. It did reduce

National League Child poverty, perhaps not far enough. What we are

trying to do in Newcastle is insure that with our partners we have a

clear direction. The Fairness Commission does not tell us what to

do, it gives us some principles to work to an suggest that every

decision should be considered with affair in this perspective.

decides what those principles are? What is fair to some is not fair to

others. Kenny, with the set of rules that says this is fair?

have looked at ways in which we might look at burners. The sectors

have set up about 10 principles in a report and we would use those to

guide us through the difficult decisions in the future. Amateurs

this commission costing? Not very much. The only actual cost is a few

1000 pounds that has been spent on research evidence that helps us

identify the evidence that backs up the decisions or we will make. If

we are looking at fairness, it is unfair that bankers can walk away

with millions of Pounds and we are making cuts in services.

Nick Cott, these are the biggest cuts councils have ever had to make

so was it not right to take a step back to look at how you can do it

as fairly as possible? It is a laudable aim for any public body to

be looking at issues of fairness. I have no objection in principle to

the eye deer of 810 Fred. What I am concerned about is the necessity of

having a commission to actually investigate these issues. I think

there is plenty of research that has been done in relation to

fairness, and it can mean different things to different people. We have

to be very careful about how we present fairness and what

expectations are could be raised. It is unreal issue that the Labour-

run authority has a particular view about fairness that relates to

geographical locations over and the Bath tackling disadvantage where

disadvantaged manifests itself, which I think is hidden behind this

smokescreen of the Fairness Commission. Pat Glass, is it ever

possible to make the cut but are having to be made fairly? One of

the things we never hear in Parliament noun is that we are all

in this together. The ship has sailed on but one. If the

government wanted to be fair it would not be giving tax cuts to

millionaires error it would be making Bankers and companies pay

their taxes. I do not want to commit a Newcastle City Council,

because I am at Durham MP. What I do not think is fair is that every

man, woman and child in Durham county has had cuts of more than

simply paints and yet people in Surrey and Devon have got increases

of � two each. What ever councils do, there is a perception that

there is an unfairness in the source of these cuts from the

Treasury. The amount of money through government grant that comes

to Newcastle is five times more than it is per person, per head of

population, than it is in a number of Surrey councils, which often

used as comparison. Win or austerity comes, when cuts need to

be made, that will unfortunately have an impact on people. What

local authorities and national government and other public bodies

need to do is to work out how they will protect those who are most

vulnerable and those most in need. It is unfair to castigate the

government has eight government which is basically bashing people

in need rather than bankers. Councils also biding despite these

cuts and the perception is that there was that stick at. But think

it is amazing that Nick is depending people in Surrey. I'm

sure there are 100 times more millionaires in Surrey and there

are in Newcastle, said those kind of comparisons... I find it amazing

that you are defending Surrey in comparison to Newcastle. I was

talking recently, we meet regularly the MPs in Durham and the leaders

of Durham County Council, and they are telling us that we have more

cuts to come. There are business rate cuts which will mean in Durham

County an extra �80 million taken out of the local economy. The

government is talking at regional benefits and breach will pay which

will take massive amounts out of the local economy. The council in

Durham are telling me that in years to come they will struggle to even

deliver their statutory functions. Whatever might have happened in the

past, we are facing a real crisis in the region.

Now, ask any Liberal Democrat what difference they've made in

government and it's a fair bet the words "pupil premium" will soon be

on their lips. It's their flagship policy for schools - designed to

raise the educational achievements of the poorest children by

directing extra money to every pupil who receives free school

meals. North East schools received some �38 million this year - with

another �4r million going to Cumbria. But is it the best way to

deliver improvements in our schools?

A two-storey time at South Bank Primary in Middlesbrough. The

school is in a deprived area but these children are making great

strides because as well as meeting in groups they often you want to

want help. This very personal approach is only possible because

of the �60,000 the school got the sheer from the pupil premium.

pupil premium has afforded me that flexibility to respond to the needs

of my children where they need the additional support. Without it, I

am not sure my results would be at the level they are at, and without

it by children would not feel motivated, feel confident, and be

able to challenge themselves to raise the aspirations to reach

their potential. With more than half of its children getting free

school meals, it is hardly surprising that some Debbie Clinton

does well out of the pupil premium. A few miles away, Nunthorpe School

is one of those that has had to cut its budget. Only around one in 10

of its people's war on free school meals. It is also one of the most

successful academically in the country. The issue is that the

child is a child and all children have a equal legal entitlement to

equality of opportunity within the education system. While we,

inevitably with a small number of both families defined as deprived,

have every so sympathy with those families with large numbers of

children from families defined as deprived, we feel that the ball

park is not a fair one and has not been for quite some time. How much

difference will money make any way? And recent research by Durham

University raised doubt on whether the way in which the money is being

spent will raise standards. Over the past 10 or 15 years, the spend

in education has increased cutely already. And we have not seen

dramatic increases, it may be no increases at all entertainment

across the board. The research on spending and its relationship with

genuine improvement in learning is very mixed. Sometimes it can have

the benefit, but it is not necessarily so, and it depends of

the money is spent on. Like any story, the pupil premium is bound

to have its ups and downs, winners and losers, but it is far from

clear that this is heading for a happy ending.

If this was a Labour policy, you would be ignored him, and yet

you're criticising it. There are couple of things that need be said

about the pupil premium. In principle, it is a great policy. On

the face of it, money following children who while the poorest

children. The first thing is, it is not new money, it is a

redistribution of what was called additional educational needs

funding. As you can see in Middlesbrough, there has been some

redistribution between secondary and primary, so it is not new money.

The other important issue is that the latest research has shown very

clearly that money is going from those areas where there were large

concentrations of children on free school meals, it took areas where

there are fewer concentrations. So the same amount of money is being

spread out more widely. One of it for teas that is losing ate his

Middlesbrough, also South Tyneside and Liverpool. The authorities that

are gaining, not surprisingly, are Rutland and Surrey! Surrey again!

It is the intricacies of the funding system that means that this

is not working. This is just recycled money. I think it is

highly debatable whether it is new money or not. When a new government

comes into power by a range priorities differently. There were

changes made to the education budget, to council budgets, all

public services had changes to their budget. This is additional

cash which is being used for targeting disadvantage, for ball

rubble people in particular. It follows the child, so there will be

children in Surrey that will benefit from the people premium,

but there will also be peoples in Newcastle that will benefit. Is the

North East disadvantaged in this, do you think? I would not say that.

By 2014, they will be �2.5 billion spent on this initiative across the

country. It means that it goes straight to those schools where

there are children and young people who of disadvantage, he or in need,

who need additional assistance. Labour port record amounts of money

into education and the owners is not there that it achieved anything.

I would disagree with that. Over the years that we were in power,

all children improved. I'm not surprised by the evidence that was

found. I know, after career in education, that the things that

make a difference a good teaching and learning and good leadership

and management. No matter how much money put in, if the teaching and

learning and the leadership and management is not right, you were

not get the changes. If you get that right and put additional money

in then you will get results. bother than about whether many

peers, it is about the quality of the teaching? Honesty, I do not

want money taken out of this region, and it does make a difference, if

you have the right teaching and learning and management going on.

We can get good quality teachers and get the best people in our

schools and we have that money to pay them with.

Now, it's nearly the end of this series of the Sunday Politics. And

we can't go without bidding a fond farewell to the part of the

programme that's become legendary. No Mark Denten this week - the

strain for speed has been so great he just couldn't last the distance.

But peaking perfectly for the finale, here's Fergus with the

week's political stories - in 60 The north-east has seen a big fall

in university applications, down 11.7 %. Sunderland and Teesside saw

the biggest drop though Durham but the trend. Royal Bank of Scotland

Group should be broken up, according to an MP who wants the

network of new community banks. North Tyneside MP criticised the

decision to cut Remploy factories this week. What impact of cutbacks

having on Teesside? MPs were not convinced. In some areas, big or

him to make three separate complaints of anti-social behaviour

before getting a response. Isn't this a symptom of police levels

being cut back to 1974 levels? unlikely rebels were among 91

Tories who defied the boss to vote against Lords reform.

That is about it from us for this week. We will be back in September.