20/10/2013 Sunday Politics North East and Cumbria

Good morning and welcome to The Sunday Politics. Alex Salmond says a

vote for Scottish independence would be an act of national self belief.

His deputy joins us live from the SNP conference in Perth. Is

Whitehall meddling too much in modern affairs? The Communities

Whitehall meddling too much in Secretary, Eric Pickles, joins me

for The Sunday Interview. Senior coppers will be answering questions

this Thousands more jobs will be lost in

the region's town halls. How long can the cuts go on?

And claims high`interest credit is leaving families drowning in debt.

All of that to come. And the Home Office minister sacked by Nick

Clegg, who says his party is like a wonky shopping trolley, which keeps

veering off to the left. He will join us live at noon. With me to

unpack all of this, Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Iain Martin. They will be

tweeting throughout the programme, using hashtag #bbcsp. It is the last

day of the Scottish national party conference in Perth. We have

discovered that Alex Salmond has been on the same diet as Beyonce.

The SNP leader compared his attempts to lose weight with the campaign for

independence - lots achieved so far, 20 more to do. In a moment, I will

be joined by the deputy leader of the SNP, Nicola Sturgeon. First

they report on the independence campaign. September 18 2014, the

date of destiny for Scotland, the day when these campaigners hope its

people will decide to vote yes for independence. In a recent poll, only

14% said they knew enough to vote either way. That is unlikely to

change any time soon. I think the Scottish people will be going to the

polls next year still not knowing an awful lot of stuff which is

important, because the outcome, in terms of taxation, debt, exactly

what will happen to the allocation of assets between the two countries,

will come about as a result of negotiation between a Scottish

government and the UK Government. That is not stuff which will be

known year. At the moment, polls suggest Scotland will decide to

remain within the UK. A recent survey found that 44% of those

questioned planned to vote no, 5% yes. But interestingly, the

undecideds were at 31%, suggesting that Alex Salmond's task might be

tough but not impossible. There are a number of reasons which make a

vanilla campaign a good idea. It does not put off cautious voters, it

allows for people to imagine their own version of what independence

will be like, and crucially, it allows for the yes campaign to take

advantage of any mistakes by the no campaign. In other words, the yes

campaign are not out there with big ideas, they are just waiting for the

no campaign to trip up. What we do know is that whatever happens next

September, Scotland will be getting more power. From 2016, a separate

income tax regime will come into force, giving the Scottish

Parliament control over billions of pounds of revenue. What we do not

know yet is how the alternative would pan out. There are issues

which would be raised by independence, issues about how the

national debt is allocated, what the currency will look like, how an

independent Scotland would balance the books, because it would have a

bigger job to do, even down the Whitehall government has to do.

Those are really big issues, which a Scottish government would have to

face, on top of whatever negotiation it had to have with the UK

Government. The Scottish government's White Paper on

independence, two to be published within weeks, should fill in some of

the banks. But how Scotland votes in September may yet be determined by

what it feels rather than what it knows. And joining me from Perth is

Scotland's Deputy First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon. Nicola Sturgeon, we

meet again! Hello, Andrew. Former leader of the SNP Gordon Wilson

said, if this referendum fails, it will fail on the basis that people

put their British identity ahead of their Scottish identity, so we have

got to attack on the British identity - what does he mean? Gordon

Wilson is a very respected, much loved former leader of the SNP. My

view is that I do not think the independence referendum is really

about identity. I am secure and proud of my Scottish identity, but

this is a decision about where power best lies. Do decision-making powers

best lie here in Scotland, with a government which is directly

accountable to the people of Scotland, or does it best lie in

Westminster, with governments which, very often, people in Scotland do

not vote for? That is the issue at the heart of the campaign. Let me

just clarify, you do not agree with him, that you need to go on the

attack with regard to the British identity of Scottish people? No I

do not think we are required to attack British identity. It is

absolutely compatible for somebody to feel a sense of British identity

but still support Scottish independence, because Scottish

independence is about a transfer of power. It is about good government,

accountable government, ensuring that decisions are taking here in

Scotland, by people who have got the biggest stake in getting those

decisions right. I represent a constituency in the south side of

Glasgow, and if you speak to many people in my constituency, if you

ask them their national identity, many of them would say Irish,

Pakistani, Indian, Polish, and many of them will vote yes next year

because they understand the issue at stake, which is the issue of where

decisions are best taken. It looks like you are changing tack ex-, you

have realised the softly softly approach, of saying that actually,

nothing much will change, we will still have the Queen, the currency,

and all the rest of it, is moving over towards voting for a left-wing

future for Scotland... Well, I know that what we are doing is pointing

out is pointing out the choice between two futures. If we vote yes,

we take our own future into our own hands. We make sure that for ever

after, we have governments which will be in demented policies which

we have voted for. If we do not become independent, then we continue

to run the risk of having governments not only that we do not

vote for, but often, that Scotland rejects. We are seeing the

dismantling of our system of social security. There are politicians in

all of the UK parties who are itching to cut Scotland's share of

spending. So Scotland faces a choice of two futures, and it is right to

point out the positive consequences of voting yes, but also the

consequences of voting no. But you are promising to reverse benefit

cuts and increase the minimum wage. You would renationalise the Royal

Mail, though how you would do that nobody knows. You are promising to

cut energy bills. These are the kind of promises that parties make in a

general election campaign, not in a once in 300 years extra stench or

choice. Is the future of Scotland really going to be decided on the

size of the minimum wage? -- existential choice. A yes vote would

be about bringing decision-making powers home, but we are also setting

out some of the things an SNP government would do, if elected A

decision on what the first government of an independent

Scotland would be would not be taken in the referendum, that decision

would be taken in the 2016 election. And all of the parties will put

forward their offers to the electorate. We are setting out some

of the things which we think it is important to be prioritised. These

are things which have a lot of support in Scotland. We see the pain

being felt by people because of the rising cost of energy bills, there

is widespread opposition to some of the welfare cuts. So, we are setting

out the options which are open to Scotland, but only open to Scotland

if we have the powers of independence. Given that you seem to

be promising aid permanent socialist near Varna, if Scotland is

independent, if you are right of centre in Scotland, and I understand

that is a minority pursuit where you are, but it would be a big mistake

to vote for independence, in that case, wouldn't it? No, because the

whole point of independence is that people get the country they want,

and the government a vote for. So, right of centre people should not

vote for independence? No, because people who are of that political

persuasion in Scotland get the opportunity to vote for parties

which represent that persuasion and if they can persuade a majority to

vote likewise, then they will get a government which reflects that. That

is the essence of independence. Right now, we have a Westminster

government which most people in Scotland rejected at the last

general election. That is hardly democratic. It is right and proper

that the SNP, as the current government, points out the

opportunities that would be opening up. Can I just clarify one thing,

when we spoke on The Daily Politics earlier last week, you made it clear

to me that Alex Salmond, we know he wants to debate with David Cameron,

but you made it clear to me that he would debate with Alistair Darling

as well, and Mr Carmichael... He made it clear yesterday. Well, he

said to the BBC this morning that he would only debate with these people

after he had had a debate with Mr Cameron, so who is right? I was

making the point last week, and Alex Salmond was making it yesterday and

this morning - let's have that agreement by David Cameron to come

and debate with Alex Salmond, and then Alex Salmond, just like me

will debate with allcomers. So if he does not get the David Cameron

debate, then he will not do the others, is that right? Let's focus

on is wading David Cameron to do the right thing. So, in other words he

will not debate, yes or no? Members of the SNP government... We know

that, but what about Alex Salmond? He said yesterday, we will debate

with all sorts of people, including the people you have spoken about,

but David Cameron should not be let off the hook just putting aside the

independence issue, energy prices are now even playing into the SNP,

so every political party has to do something about energy prices. Yes,

it is clearly it is interesting is the difference between the SNP and

the Labour approach. Ed Miliband electrified the party conference

season when he said he would freeze energy prices for 20 months,

seemingly having an amazing control over the energy market, where we

know that essentially what pushes prices up the wholesale prices on

world market. What Nicola Sturgeon is talking about is actually saying,

this amount is added to your bills for green levies, and we are going

to take them off your bills and they will be paid out of general taxation

in an independent Scotland. That is a credible government, making a

credible case, very different to what Labour is saying, although

playing to the same agenda. So, Labour has got a populist policy,

the SNP has also got a populist policy, the one group of people that

do not have a decent response to this is the coalition? Exactly. What

the SNP also have is a magic money pot, so that speech yesterday, you

are right, it was very left wing, social democratic, but there was

none of the icing like Labour has been talking about, with fiscal

responsibility. I think that is the difference between the two. We know

what the Tories would really like to do, all of these green levies which

were put on our bills in the good times, when they were going to be

the greenest party ever, the Tories would like to say, let's just wipe

out some of them, put the rest on to some general government spending,

but they have a problem, which is in the Department of Energy and Climate

Change. Not only that, they really are stuck now. But there is

something in the free schools debate this morning, the parties are now

determined to send a message to their potential voters at the next

election, that they are trying to fight their coalition partners. Do

not expected any change in coalition policy or free schools policy before

the election, but we can expect to hear the parties try to pretend that

they are taking on their coalition partners. Mr Clegg has said, we

would put this free schools policy into our manifesto, so is it not

possible that the Tories will say, if you give us an overall majority,

we will cut your electricity bill because we will get rid of these

green levies? I think that is entirely possible. The Tories know

that they are stuck on this, they do not have a response to Ed Miliband.

How much should ministers in Whitehall medal in local decisions

across England? In opposition, David Cameron said he wanted a fundamental

shift of power from Whitehall to local people. He said, when one size

fits all solution is... Eric Pickles described it as "an

historic shift of power". But the Communitites and Local Government

Secretary can't stop meddling. In the past few months Mr Pickles has

tried to ban councils from using CCTV cameras and "spy cars" to fine

motorists... Told councils how to act quicker to shut down illegal

travellers' sites... Criticised councils who want to raise council

tax... Insisted councils release land to residents hoping to build

their own property... And stated new homes should have a special built in

bin storage section. It seems not a week goes by without a policy

announcement from the hyper active Mr Pickles. So is the government

still committed to localism, or is it all about centralism now?

And Communities Secretary Eric Pickles joins me now for the Sunday

Interview. Welcome. Nice to be here. You said

in July you were going to give town halls the power to wreak their local

magic. So why issue diktats from Westminster? It is not about giving

power to local councils, it is going beyond that to local people. If

local councils refuse to open up their books, we have to go straight

to local people. You have attacked councillors using so-called spy

cameras to enforce parking rules. Why is that your business? Because

there is an injustice taking place. You cannot use fines to raise money

and that is plainly happening. If you get yourself a ticket from a

CCTV, it could be days or weeks before that lands on your doorstep

and you have virtually no possibility to be able to defend

yourself. But just leave it to people to vote out the council then.

We are trying to enforce the law and it clearly states that you cannot

use parking fines in order to fund general rate. So why are you not

taking them to court if they are breaking the law? There have been a

number of court cases taken by local residents. I am there to stand by

local residents. Your even trying to micromanage, allowing motorist s to

park for 15 minutes in local high street. Why is that your business?

I'm trying to ensure that local authorities understand the

importance of the town centre. If you look at all opinion polls, right

now there is a five-minute leeway but there are many cases of people

being jumped on by parking officials for quite trivial things. It is

about saying, surely I can go and get a pint of milk. But a party that

dines out on localism, that is a matter for local people, not the men

in Whitehall. I have to be on the side of local people. That person

who wants to go and get a pint of milk. Ultimately it is a matter for

them. It is a matter for the council. But a little bit of

criticism is not a bad thing. You have now declared war on the wheelie

bin and suggested that new homes should have built in storage

sections. You just cannot help meddling! I suppose that is

possible. You are a meddler! I am in charge of building regulations and

planning. So I may have some responsibility there. Another one,

interfering in local planning decisions. A couple of places, you

ruled in favour of developers. They want to build over 200 houses

against the wishes of the parish and district councils. The local MP said

the Secretary of State's decision runs roughshod over any concept of

localism. Now I have to be a blushing violet because of course

this is still potentially subject to judicial review. I have to act

properly. And Apple went is entitled to justice. -- an applicant. A local

authority has a duty to ensure that is adequate housing for people in

their area. This was not a decision that I took as a personal decision,

it was on the advice of an inspector. But you contradict what

David Cameron himself said in 2 12, he spoke about a vision where we

give communities much more say and local control. People in villages

fear big housing estates being plonked from above. You have just

done exactly that. After a proper quasi judicial enquiry. What we have

is planning framework which local people can decide where it goes But

they cannot say, nothing here. They have to have a five-year housing

supply. Previous to this government decided exactly where houses would

go, now local people can take the lead. Anna Silbury said because of

the way your department rules, local authorities now have no alternative

but to agree development on green belt land. I do not accept that I

think around Nottingham there are particular problems with regards to

the green belt. The matter has been referred back.

the green belt. The matter has been want to see development on the green

belt but on Brownfield site. We want to see underused land. But you have

to remember why we have the green belt. Not

to remember why we have the green nice, it is their to prevent

conurbations bumping into one another. Your

conurbations bumping into one is vocal about the need to deal

what he calls the historic under provision of housing. Shelter says

we need 250,000 new homes per year. provision of housing. Shelter says

Houston statistics are getting there, but nowhere near that. -

housing. You cannot there, but nowhere near that. -

localism agenda as well as meeting housing demand. I do not accept

that. We inherited a position where the lowest level of building since

the 1920s was in place. But it has steadily improved. It does take a

while. You cannot have a localism agenda where people call the shots

on housing as well as meeting the housing demand. People have a duty

to ensure that future generations have somewhere to live. You cannot

pull up the drawbridge. There is nothing incompatible between that

and localism. Because someone has to be the voice of those people who are

going to live there and to make sure there is the proper amount. Plans

now exist for more than 150,000 homes to be built on protected land,

including the green belt. That will mean riding over local concerns

Each application will be taken on its own merits. To suggest that

there is an assault on the green belt is as far from the truth as you

can imagine. Should Andrew Mitchell get his job back if the years

exonerated? I would be honoured to sit with Andrew Mitchell in the

Cabinet. I have always believed his version. But it is a matter for the

Prime Minister who he has in government. He would have no problem

in seeing him back in Cabinet? Absolutely not. Your mother answered

Vulcan junior minister Nick balls said about the Royal Charter for the

press, there's nothing we have done that troubles me as much as this. Is

that your view? It is not. I accept the compromise agreement put

together. If the press want to have an additional protection that the

Royal Charter offers, then they can move into the system. But if they

want to continue independently that is acceptable to me. But you

previously echoed Thomas Jefferson, you said for a free society to

operate the river of a free press has to flow without restriction

That is what I said at the time We had to find a compromise. And that

seems to me to be a better compromise. Let me just show you

this little montage of pictures that we have. I could not be happier

Then you are in the Desert and there you are in San Francisco. Then you

are in the casino. That is my personal favourite. These students

took a cardboard cutout of you and took it round the world with them.

Did you ever think you would become a student icon? I always felt

secretly that that might happen one day. But it came earlier in my

career than I thought! Why would they do that? I think they thought I

could do with a bit of an airing! I went to Norfolk earlier, but that

looks better. Thank you. On Wednesday senior police folk

including chief constables, will be questioned by MPs about what's

become known as Plebgate. That's the incident in Downing Street last year

which led to the resignation of the government chief whip Andrew

Mitchell. Last week the Independent Police Complaints Commission

questioned the "honesty and integrity" of police officers who

met Mr Mitchell following the row. So do scandals like this affect

public trust in the police? Here's Adam Fleming.

It's a story of politics, the police, and CCTV. No, not Andrew

Mitchell, but an MP's researcher called Alex Bryce and his partner

Iain Feis. It started on a summer night in

2011. They'd been in Parliament After a few words with a police

officer, Ian was wrestled to the ground. Alex came to have a look and

the same thing happened to him. Both were arrested and charged. These

pictures emerged on day one of their trial. A trial that was halted

because the police version of events just didn't match the footage. A lot

of people with incidence like this which we experienced, people think

there is no smoke without fire. So when we said we did nothing wrong,

people would think police just would not do that. There is always that

underlying view that some people have. I think that has been

challenged and people who know us believe that. This year the Met

apologised and paid compensation. And it's led to an unlikely sort of

friendship. When the truth came out about the Andrew Mitchell story I

actually sent him an e-mail to congratulate him about the truth

coming out. He did send a reply acknowledging that. So where are we

with THAT saga? Remember last September? Andrew Mitchell had a row

with police at the gates of Downing Street about his bike. He lost his

job as chief whip after accusations he called the officers plebs. That,

he's always denied. This week the police watchdog the IPCC suggested

that three officers may have lied about a meeting with him at the

height of the scandal. Add that to the charge sheet of cases that

haven't exactly flattered the police. Like the revelation of a

cover up over Hillsborough. The prosecution of an officer from the

Met over the death of Ian Tomlinson during protests in 2009. Along with

news that undercover officers were told to smear the family of Stephen

Lawrence. During Thursday's protest by teachers in Westminster the

police operation was really, really relaxed. And recent scandals have

done nothing to affect society's view of the boys and girls in blue -

or should I say hi-vis. About 6 % of the public say they trust the

police. And that's not budged since pollsters started measuring it 0

years ago. Of course, in Britain, crime is

down, so the perception might be that the police is doing a good

job. And the rank-and-file recently seamed pretty chipper at this awards

ceremony. Is it a good time to be a police officer? It is a good time.

Despite all of the headlines? Still a good time. But speak to officers

privately, and they say Plebgate is affecting how the public see them.

Some of them also think politicians, the Tories especially,

are enjoying that a little too much. Adam Fleming reporting there. Going

head-to-head on this issue of trust in the police, a Sunday Mirror

columnist and Peter Kirkham, former chief inspector. Peter Kirkham, let

me come to you first. Plebgate, the cover-ups over John Charles De

menace, the death of Ian Tomlinson, the industrial deception over

Hillsborough, why is the culture of deceit so prevalent in the police? I

do not agree there is a cultural deceit. These are all individual

incidents which raise individual issues. I would suggest that your

short headline summarising each of them has taken the most negative

view of it. How can you be positive about the police's behaviour over

Hillsborough? It remains to be seen with the inquiry but we are probably

talking about a handful of senior officers, dealing with the

paperwork. Well over 100 testimonies being doctored by the police. Well,

those testimonies were true to start with, so the officers have told the

truth, and they have been changed for some reason. By the police. By

the police all lawyers we have got this thing that the police conflates

everything. There are 43 forces there is ACPO, there is the College

Of Policing... People say it was a handful of police officers, it

wasn't, it was six senior police officers who were alleged to have

doctored 106 D4 statements. Even today we are hearing that more than

1000 officers are yet to be spoken to about Hillsborough. -- 164. Do we

pretend that Hillsborough, and some of these examples, are the exception

rather than the rule? What is the evidence that this is now prevalent

in our police? I think there is a lot of evidence, and Plebgate is

probably the thing which has clinched it. The public want to

know, how deep does this girl? The audacity of a group of policemen who

think they can set up a Cabinet minister. Five of those who were

arrested and bailed still have not been charged. One of those officers

actually wrote an e-mail pretending to be a member of the public. I do

not see what the problem is in prosecuting them for that. Taking

Plebgate, there are loads of different bits of that incident

There is the officers on duty in Downing Street, the issue of who

leaked the story to the Sun, there are the officers who claim to have

been there who would appear not to have been there, and then we have

got the West Midlands meeting issue, which has sort of been

resolved this week. There has been misconduct. But at a lower level.

But it is the audacity of an organisation which thinks it can

take on an elected minister and destroy him for their own political

purposes, at a time when the Government are cutting please pay,

when they are freezing their pensions and reducing their numbers.

It looks very much to all of us the public, that the police are at war

with the government, and they are going to do anything they can to

discredit the Government. The police would have every reason to be at war

with the Government, because there if there is a crisis of trust.. But

it looks like they fitted up a Cabinet minister. That remains to be

seen, it is being investigated. We know that those Birmingham officers,

they totally misrepresented to, if not lied outright, about what was

said. Again, that is a misrepresentation of what happened.

If you actually go and look at what is said, it is plain from the

context, they were saying, he has told us nothing new. But he had in

the transcript, it said he hadn t. He would not admit he had used the

word pleb. He apologised profusely, he said it would never happen again,

he said many things that he had not said before. I agree, which is

presumably... Thereon many police forces in this country, they have

one of the toughest jobs in the land, they end up getting involved

in almost anything which happens in society, and there are obviously a

number of difficult examples, but what is the evidence that it is out

of hand, other than just several bad apples? This bad apples argument, we

have some amazing police people thank God, but it is because of

those that we have to root out the bad ones, the ones that are possibly

standing, the ones who are being standing, the ones who are being

not seem to be any process to deal not seem to be any process to deal

with these people. The trouble with not seem to be any process to deal

a rotten apple is that it spreads. not seem to be any process to deal

It is not fair on the good cops to be tainted by this, and I think the

police force, as an institution .. For all of us, we have to respect

the police. There is a problem, is there not? People do worry that if

you can fit up a Cabinet minister, you can fit up anybody... . I would

disagree that anybody has proved that anybody has been fitted up We

are yet to hear what happened at the gates of Downing Street. But what we

do know about the gates of Downing Street is that we were told by the

do know about the gates of Downing police officers that passers-by had

heard this incredible row, where Mitchell's file went was bullied.

That is not true... . They did not use those words, actually. All

right, but it is clear that the Police Federation jumped on this as

a politically motivated campaign... I have always said that politics

should be kept out of policing. The federation, they cannot go on

strike, but this was to covertly political, so I criticise them for

that. Do we need a better way of monitoring the police? We need a

more competent and properly resourced Independent police

commission. But if you look at those Bravery Awards, every police

officer, every year, who acts with bravery... That is the police force

we want to believe in. That is the police force you have got. We will

leave it there. Coming up in just over 20 minutes, I will be speaking

to former Lib Minister Jeremy Browne. And in The

local part of the show, for the North East and Cumbria.

Coming up: The easy credit that it's claimed is pushing tens of thousands

of people into ever`deeper debt. The Government is urged to take action `

but are loan companies providing a valuable service in difficult times?

My guests this week: the Labour MP for Bishop Auckland, Helen Goodman,

and the North East Conservative Euro`MP, Martin Callanan.

Now, it's been a week of bad news from our biggest councils, with more

cuts to services and potentially thousands of job losses on the way.

Durham revealed last week that the cuts it has to make by 2017 have

risen to ?108 million. On Tuesday, Gateshead warned just

over 400 jobs could go over the next two years as it tries to find ?45

million. The next day, Middlesbrough Council revealed up to 1500 jobs

were at risk, almost half of the remaining workforce. It needs to

find ?67 million over three years. The week ended with the news that

Cumbria County Council is also up against it, looking for savings of

?80 million over the next three years, with 600 jobs at risk.

The next few months will see those councils consulting with local

people over which services to cut. In Gateshead, everything from

leisure centres to support for the Baltic art gallery and Sage arts

centre is under review. Council leader Mick Henry says the Local

Government Secretary needs to realise the pressures councils are

facing. My message to Eric Pickles is I

would rather he spent less time making what I call one`liners,

having a go at local Government. He is the Secretary of State for Local

Government. He says he is in favour of localism but he seems to have a

pop at me and other people whenever he gets a chance. I would ask him,

next time he goes in the Cabinet and offers up more savings for his

department, that he should think about asking for maybe less savings

so that the people of Gateshead and elsewhere don't actually have their

quality of life reduced. Martin Callan, I note you have said

these cuts are caused by having to repay the debt of the last

Government but local Government macro has taken a digger shared than

other areas. How can you keep doing this queue Mac we are only going

back to spending levels that they had five or six years ago. But we

have two reduced the deficit inherited by Labour. Local

government has to take its share of the cuts. What is interested is that

the survey that the BBC did that show people 's belief in the quality

of service is actually increasing. They think the services are getting

better, which you would not think listening to make Henry. The problem

is they have still got half of these cuts to go. Durham told me they were

given one figure in the spring and Eric Pickles gave another one in the

summer, which meant 120 million extra pounds in savings. You cannot

plan for that. The Government tries to take into account views...

Councils are just an easy target queue Mac all governments spending

apart from the health service are subject to savings and reductions in

spending. They have to do things more efficiently. The Labour Party

left is with all these debts. Despite the cuts so far all councils

have carried on delivering services, body art library and

leisure centre most things remain open. Is it that bad? The cuts

account to ?4 in every ?10 from central Government and as we have

seen that is hundreds of millions. Also, the cuts are very unfair. So

for example, in Durham, the cuts amount to ?275 per household but in

Windsor, only ?87, and... Jerome was spending much more in the first

place. Durham is more deprived and has higher needs. There is a real

question about whether those services which they are obliged by

law, such as children's services, such as looking after people, they

will still be able to do. What would you have cut instead, though, in

order to save these councils? The point I'm making is that if the cuts

been distributed more fairly, then the north`east could have had...

Southern councils will have struggled more. But we would have

had ?94 million more to spend and we have greater need up here. Labour

Party policy is just to borrow more money. Labour Party policy is that

we stick with the overall totals. That does not mean that we would not

redistribute within existing budgets. That is our policy. Martin

Callanan, some people say that was going to be able to afford to do in

the next few years is looked after older people and social services. Of

course not. Helen has just contradicted the council leader we

saw earlier. We should ask the question, which councils are going

to gain and which are going to lose queue Mac it is easy to sit here in

the North and say North councils will gain. The reality is, they have

accepted the overall level of spending. ?NEWLINE Now, pay`day

loans from the likes of Wonga have made plenty of headlines recently.

But they're just the tip of the credit iceberg. Many more people use

"doorstep lenders" like Provident Financial. Then there's Brighthouse

and similar businesses which offer everything from TVs to sofas on hire

purchase. They all offer a service to those short of cash ` but it

comes at a high price. Well, this week, charities and consumer groups

launched a campaign to highlight what they describe as bad products

and bad practices, which can leave families drowning in debt. I met

Eleanor Eamens from Northumberland. She took up a high`interest loan but

soon found she couldn't repay it. I started off with a ?100 loan from

them and it was basically ?50 interest but at the time it was

manageable. It was near Christmas I had decided to take it out. Then,

basically, I was nearly paying that off and then I was offered another

loan from them. At the end I think it was roughly six loans from them

at the same time and at the end it was ?4000. Obviously, I feel they

were irresponsible because I do not think the checks were in place to

protect people. I say to a lot of people I take responsibility for

what I did. I chose to borrow and somebody did not make me borrow the

money. But when you are on a low income and you need that money, it

is so tempting and they did not ever look on if you had other debts to

pay. They did not look into what your whole income is and what you

have got to pay out. So they did not have a clue whether you could afford

it. Eleanor Eamens from Northumberland.

Well, the companies who provide loans say they're offering a service

to people who need money quickly. Julio Martino is from The Mint ` a

Newcastle`based credit firm. It is important that businesses do

not charge ridiculous interest rates, but we do have to charge an

interest rate through which we make money. We are not a bank or a

building society or a huge financial organisation, so we cannot charge

APR similar to a credit card. We are essentially lending to people who

cannot get credit cards, cannot get credit from a bank. They need to get

credit elsewhere and there are companies like myself who are

willing to take a slightly greater risk in some circumstances to lend

to these people who do need credit. Well Durham University has been

working with families on Teesside who have got into debt, in an effort

to find out about the scale of the problem. Professor Sarah Banks

directed the study and she's with me now. How typical was the experience

of Eleanor that we saw there, in the families in Teeside queue `` in

Teeside? Very typical. People were struggling to get by, taking out new

loans to repay the interest on the existing loans. A third of our

families had some kind of mental health problems. Many had other

severe crises and problems, so it was exacerbating an already

stressful life. Does this tell us anything we couldn't have guessed or

knew already, that these loans are aimed at people on low incomes and

if they do not manage them properly they get into Robbins? I think we

knew that but this shows graphically what it does to people's lives. The

longer people have the loans the more difficult it is to get free as

they would wish. We are studying how people get into debt but also asking

people if they wanted a mental to help them sort out their finances,

to break away from the high cost credit and to consider using

low`cost alternatives like credit unions. What should policymakers do

about this? It is a big thing to suddenly expect the credit unions to

take up the millions of pounds of loans that go through these

companies. It will be quite a long process. There is a credit union

modernisation process but it will take quite a long time for credit

unions to compete with the likes of Wonga. It has been shown in other

countries, particularly in some states in the USA that a can be put

on the total cost of credit. It can be 10% of the total amount borrowed.

There can be restrictions on the rollovers on the financing and still

you find that payday loan companies can still operate. They have less

defaults on their loans and are still able to make some kind of

profit. So I think he put like the guy from The Mint could still

operate but people like Eleanor would not be preyed upon and would

not have to take out too many loans that they are not able to repay.

Labour have set out what they would do this week. Tellers. It has two

parts. It has controlling the existing payday lenders by putting a

cap on the overall cost of credit and then it has got a positive part

which is putting a levy on them and recycling ?30 million to support

credit unions `` ?13 million. So it is control and support for all times

tips and I think that is reasonable. We will come back to that. Martin

Callanan, this is more than the Government is offering. A few

reforms, basically? Not at all. We are spending three times as much on

credit unions. The overall approach I agree with. We are setting up the

National Conduct Authority which will have the power to the overall

cost of credit, reduce rollovers and promote responsible advertising and

lending. That this is not a new problem in the north`east. We have

had problems with loans for many years. These people deny they are

loan sharks. They are operating legally. Are these companies we are

talking about issuing a valid business model, or exploiting poor

and vulnerable people? I do not think they are exploiting people.

People need to have the information given, with responsible advertising.

The products need to be promoted fashionably and responsibly to them.

I am not in favour of banning them, because they do provide a valuable

service. Would you prefer to force these companies out of business

queue `` out of business? What Martin has just said is wrong. It

was Archbishop Welby who forced the change in law on the Government and

the Government have not yet said they will leak use the law to make

that. We would do that. Labour had 13 years in power when they did

nothing about this. As a matter of fact, there are twice as many people

going to payday lenders now than they were five years ago. The

industry has doubled. The scale of it is completely new. Cut to the

chase on your policy. To develop credit unions. Given how much

business there is, you were never going to be able to replace these

companies with Reddit unions. It is unrealistic. I agree that credit

unions cannot be the whole answer and we do need the banks to be more

responsible. I was very disappointed when HSBC closed a branch in my

constituency and would not support the local credit union. I also think

we need to look at the behaviour of the big banks. Martin, we accept

that a lot of the people taking these loans are doing it because the

banks do not want to know and something about that has to change

as well? If you do not have a regular income the banks are not

interested in lending to you and that is why we have a problem in the

north`east. It is very hard. You cannot force banks... Banks got

themselves into a lot of trouble with irresponsible lending. It is

not right for politicians to intervene and force them into more

responsible lending. It is different parts of the market. The banks are

interested in eager loans, the businesses to householders, etc.

Well, they are not even doing that! The banks cannot win because they

are being forced to build up their balances... That is probably a

discussion for another day. Bad for pupils and bad for parents `

that was the view of Education Minister David Laws on this week's

teachers' strike which disrupted hundreds of schools across Cumbria

and the North East. He said plans to introduce performance`related pay

and adjust pensions would not change. Teachers, though, are

determined to fight on. Luke Walton met two on the education front line

with very different views about this week's strike and the issues behind

it. My name is Elizabeth Thompson and

I'm taking strike action today due to the constant erosion of teachers

past might pay conditions. It is not a decision I have taken lightly and

I hope we can get parental support acres with `` because what we want

to do is achieve the best education for young people. My name is Graeme

Murray and I disagree with the strike because we should not

interfere with our students pass Mac education. Two teachers, two

opposing views on the strike. At this union rally in Durham the talk

was of a two`year pay freeze and intolerable work load. So it's life

in the classroom really getting worse? There is constant paperwork

to prove you are doing your job properly, rather than leaving you

alone to do your job opening. Long hours. Michael Gove said recently he

wants to get rid of teachers who leave school at 3:05pm. I do not

know any teachers who are not there until 5pm or 6pm and we bring work

home as well. Because we do have things like the holidays, we do use

a lot of those holidays to get work done. I speak for myself and the

start of the school here in general. But you do have the flexibility of

perhaps when you would do that work at times and when you wouldn't, when

you can have some downtime. So the perks far outweigh negatives. At the

core of the dispute, Government plans for more formers related pay

and to overhaul pensions. Ministers say talented teachers would be

better rewarded and the system made more affordable but again, the

profession's opinion is divided. The schools are being driven towards

making profit, especially in academies, so they will try to save

many white Lovering teachers past might pay. Regarding the pensions,

the pensions we are paying more every month towards our pension. New

teachers now have two work until they are 68 years old and will get

less at the end of it. Who wants to be teaching at 68 years old?

Performance related pay is in principle a good thing because it is

good to reward achievement, success, and I do not think it is good to

reward underachievement. If there is underachievement you look into it

and see if there is something we can do to help the individuals who have

underachieved. But in terms of the pension scheme also, teachers pass

Mac pension schemes are renowned for being very good. They are still very

good. Things have changed slightly but if you look at it, the package

itself is a very attractive one. Martin Callanan, is the strike right

or wrong? It is wrong. They should be in the classroom educating

pupils. It is inconvenient for students and parents. Helen? It is

very regrettable and we see here people disagreeing so it is

obviously a very hard decision for these teachers to make. Do you have

sympathy with that decision? I do because we should think of education

as an investment in the future and I think well rewarded teachers benefit

our pupils. Is some blame laid at the Government 's door because of

the changes to terms and conditions? This is giving head

teachers the power to pay good teachers more, in performance

related pay. There are reforms to the pension system but teachers will

still have a much better pension than probably everybody in the

private sector. Three quarters of parents in a poll I have seen think

it is a good idea to pay the best teachers the most money. Are they

right? There is a good case for performance related pay but there is

a problem with regional pay, which the Government have also good on the

agenda, which means teachers in our area would be paid less. And I can

understand why the teachers are concerned about the pensions,

because, obviously, if you have committed your life to doing

something and suddenly you find your pension arrangements being changed,

you have sunk your life into this and you do not have much left...

Welcome to the real world, isn't it? Lots of people in the private and

public sector have had to accept that there tension cannot be as

valuable as it was because we have an ageing population and cannot

afford it. Everybody also knows that the level of pay and pensions have

to be looked at together. If you compare the pay of teachers and the

pay of doctors, you can see that the teachers have got a reasonable point

here. Martin Gove wants to attract the best people into teaching.

Making them work until 68, cutting their pensions, that is not the best

way, is it? I think it is still an attractive proposition for new

graduates. Teachers are relatively well`paid compared to the private

sector. The best ones, who put in the extra others, can be paid more.

What if you are paying teachers less in North Tyneside band Norfolk, for

example? Is that acceptable? It probably is. It is a cheaper cost of

living. I am in favour of giving schools and head teachers the

flexibility. Thank you very much. Now, what else has been going on in

the wonderful world of politics? Here's a few of the stories making

the news ` all in 60 Seconds. The Government has been asked to

take control of children's services in Cumbria after it was named as one

of the worst 20 authorities for child protection in England.

Westmorland and Lonsdale MP Tim Farron said children's lives were at

stake. Where to bury nuclear waste? It's

the question that never seems to get an answer. In January, Cumbria

County Council voted to withdraw from the search for a site, but

Copeland Borough Council still wants to be considered. This week,

councils met to discuss their response to the Government's latest

consultation. Labour peer Lord Adonis has

officially opened a contraversial new academy school. It was opposed

by his own party's councillors in North Tyneside. The former education

minister opened the King's Priory in Tyneland. It is excellent that

King's Priory has become an academy, bringing the best of private

education into the state system with no fees.

Meanwhile, teams of Ofsted inspectors spent the week at 17

schools in Northumberland. They want to find out why attainment for

children eligible for free school meals is falling below other parts

of the country. And that's about it from us. Next

week, we'll have a special report looking at what businesses ` and MPs

` in the region think of High Speed two. In the meantime, there's more

about the problems of debt on my blog ` just go to

bbc.co.uk/richardmoss. Or you can always join the conversation on

Twitter. For now it's back to Andrew for the rest of the

which links in with this. Thank you to both of you for being my guests

today. Are the Lib Dems like a wonky

shopping trolley? Why is Nick Clegg kicking off over free schools? And

what about Boris and George's love bombing of China? All questions for

The Week Ahead. We are joined now by the former Home Office minister and

Liberal Democrat MP Jeremy Browne. Jeremy Browne, let me ask you this

key question - ??GAPNEXT who is in the ascendancy in your party, those

who would fear to the left, or those who would fear to the centre? The

point I was making in the interview that I gave to the times was that I

want us to be unambiguously and on up genetically -- and

unapologetically a Liberal party. I do not want us to be craving the

approval of columnists like Polly Toynbee. I do not want us to be a

pale imitation of the Labour Party. I think we should be proud and

unambiguously a authentic Liberal party. That is my ambition for the

party. If it is, as you put it, fearing to the left, then I think

that is a mistake, I think we should be on the liberal centre ground But

is it actually veering to the left, your party? I think there is a

danger when a party, or any organisation, feels that it is in a

difficult position, to look inwards, to look for reassuring

familiar policy positions. I do not want us to be the party which looks

inwards and speaks to the 9% of people who are minded to support us

already. I want us to look outwards and speak to the 91% of the

population, for whom I think we have got a good story to tell about the

contribution we have made to getting the deficit down, cutting crime

keeping interest rates low, and also, distinctive Liberal Democrat

policies for example on income tax and pupil premiums. If we look like

we are a party which is uneasy and ambivalent about our role in

government, people will not give us credit for the successes of the

government, and we will not be able to claim the authorship which we

should be able to claim for our policies excesses in government I

want us to be confident, outward looking, and authentically liberal.

If we are that, people real sense that and they will respond

positively. Does that not therefore make it rather strange that Nick

Craig should choose to distance himself from the coalition's schools

policy? Well, I support free schools, I think they are a liberal

policy. Education is a fascinating area, so let's explore it a bit We

have had two very significant and troubling reports in the last

fortnight, one from Alan Milburn, saying that social mobility has

stalled in this country, in other words, what your parents do is a

reliable guide to how you will get on in life and the other saying that

Britain lags behind our competitors, the other

industrialised countries, in terms of the educational attainment of

15-year-olds. Both of those are worrying. We have a scandalous

situation in this country where two thirds of children from

disadvantaged backgrounds are failing to get five Grade A to Grade

C. Some get none at all. If we were the world leaders in education, we

could have an interesting conversation about how we are able

to maintain that position, but we are not. Whether there are good

things one less good things which have happened in our schools over

the last 30-40 years, we really need to raise our game and stop letting

young people down who need a good quality education in order to

realise their full potential in life. It sounds like you do not

share Mr Clegg's designations? I think there are two big dangers for

us as a party. I do not think we should be instinctively statist and

I do not think either we should be instinctively in favour of the

status quo. I want us to have a restless, radical, energetic,

liberal reforming instinct, which is about putting more power and

responsible at the end opportunity in the hands of individual people.

As I say, we look at the education system, of course there are good

teachers and good outcomes in some schools and for some pupils,

overall, our performance in this country is not good enough, so the

status quo has not been a successful stop I am interested in how we can

innovate. -- has not been a success. Are the Tories wooing you? Well I

do not know if that is the right word, I have been reported, and I

have set myself, that the Conservatives have, if you like

made some advances or generous suggestions to me, but I am a

liberal, and I am a Liberal Democrat. I have been a member of

the Lib Dems since the party was founded, I joined when I was 18

years old. I have campaigned tirelessly for the Liberal Democrats

for my entire adult life, so I am not about to go and join another

political party. I would turn this on its head, let me put it like

this, I think there are quite a few liberals in the other political

parties, people like Alan Milburn, who wrote a report on social

mobility, people like Nick Bowles in the Conservative Party. Our

ambition, as Liberal Democrats, should be to attract liberals from

other political parties, and no political party, to the Lib Dems.

Just briefly, have you suggested that the Tories do not run a

candidate against you in the next election? I have not suggested

anything of the sort. The Conservatives have to make their own

decisions about which candidates they select, and I will take on

whoever is select it from each of the political parties. Thank you for

joining us. There is a danger not from Jeremy Browne, but from Mr

Clegg, in that, having been part of a coalition which has gone through

an enormous squeeze in living standards for three years, it did

not look like both was coming, it was being regarded overall as a

failure, but now, it may be turning the corner, so why would you then

start to disassociate yourself from the coalition's policies? Yes, the

danger for Nick Clegg is that he makes the Liberal Democrats looked

like visitors in a guesthouse, a guesthouse which is owned by the

Conservatives. As you say, they were there for the three difficult years,

and just at the moment when the economy seems to be coming right,

and we are getting some nice growth, they seek to distance themselves. It

is interesting that Jeremy Browne came out with the outrageously

disloyal statement that he supported free schools statement. That is a

disloyal Liberal Democrat view, but on Thursday, of course, the Liberal

Democrat party was in favour of free schools, because in that statement

about the Al-Madinah school, David Laws made a passionate defence about

what Nick Clegg is now criticising, which is having on qualified

teachers. If things are now coming right, the big risk for the Liberal

Democrats always was that they would not get the credit anyway. Well if

they diss associate themselves like this, they definitely will not get

the credit. It depends which voters their opinion poll ratings are dire,

he spoke about 9%, and sometimes it is less than that. So, where are

they going to get those voters from? They have not got those

anti-Iraq war voters. Is it not Mission impossible, getting Labour

voters test surely the left of the Lib Dem vote is peeling off towards

labour, not away from Labour? I wonder to what extent, and this

might be speculation, this might be organised and arranged, that Cameron

and Clegg both understand that they have groups of voters that they need

to get, so they need to send messages out to different groups, it

looks like a bit of a setup to me. Boris in China, along with boy

George - let's have a look... Who, according to JK Rowling, was Harry

Potter's first girlfriend? That s right, and she is Chinese overseas

student, is that not right at Hogwarts? Actually, we are not sure

it is right, she is actually from Scotland. It is not only London

which has a diverse society. Putting that to one side, we are inviting

the Chinese into finance our power stations, to run big banks in the

cities, we are giving out more visas to them, are we right to embrace the

Dragon? What worries me about the power stations then, it is 30% of

investment, and it reminds me a lot of PFI, the idea that you do not

want a huge investment on your balance sheet, but if somebody bails

out halfway through, we cannot stop with a half finished power station.

It is EDF, the French company, which will actually build it, and we will

be guaranteeing the debt for them. It is extraordinary that there has

been so little adverse comment after George Osborne and Boris's trip to

China, and is it now really the UK Government policy, to sell Britain

to the Chinese? There was a debate in government about this, as they

were getting ready for the trip and there will be at some point in the

next six months be a David Cameron trip to China. He has had to wait

three years because they were annoyed about him meeting the Dalai

llama. There were some people in the Foreign Office who were saying,

fine, but tread carefully. George Osborne's view is absolutely not,

get in there, I do not care about any of these problems, get stuck

in. I think he is storing up five years since the financial crisis,

Chinese banks are being given a special, light touch regulatory

regime. What could possibly go wrong?! There is lots to see. Energy

prices have continued to dominate this week. We have got the EDF deal,

whereby we are going to be giving them twice the market rate for their

energy. But for the coalition, all eyes are on the GDP figures. The

expectation and hope is that the recovery will be stronger than the

figures have suggested so far, on which basis it can influence the

result of the next general election. The chief economist at the

Bank of England was saying on Twitter last week that the Bank of

England may now bring forward the assessment when it says, maybe we

are going to have to change monetary policy, if unemployment goes below

7%. And we know what that means interest rates. The Bank of England

on Twitter! That is it for today. The Daily Politics is back tomorrow

on BBC Two. I will be back with prime Minster 's questions on

Wednesday, and of course, we will be back at 11 o'clock on BBC One next

Sunday.