06/04/2014 Sunday Politics North East and Cumbria

Morning folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.

Pressure on Culture Secretary Maria Miller mounts as the Tory press

Tory voters and even a Tory Minister turn against her. That's our top

story. The economic outlook is getting

rosier. But Ed Miliband is having none of it. The cost of living

crisis is here to stay, says Labour. Shadow Minister Caroline Flint joins

us for the Sunday Interview. And we bring you the Sunday Politics

Gallery. But which former world leader is behind these paintings of

And coming up in the North Dast and world

And coming up in the North Dast and Cumbria...

new London borough. A blue flint for regeneration or economic Armageddon?

And with me as always, the best and the brightest political panel in the

business - Janan Ganesh, Helen Lewis and Nick Watt. Their tweets will be

as brief as a Cabinet Minister's apology.

A frenzy of betting on the Grand National yesterday. But there was

one book on which betting was suspended, and that was on the fate

of Culture Secretary Maria Miller, now the 2/1 favourite to be forced

out the Cabinet. She galloped through her apology to the Commons

on Thursday in just 32 seconds. But speed did her no favours. There s

been mounting pressure on her to resign ever since, especially from

Tories. And this weekend the Chairman of the Independent

Parliamentary Standards Authority, Ian Kennedy, said it's time MPs gave

away the power to decide how colleagues who break the rules are

punished. An inquiry into Maria Miller's expenses claims was launch

in 2012, following allegations he claimed ?90,000 to fund a house she

lived in part time with her parents. She had designated this her second

home. She was referred to the Parliamentary Standards

Commissioner, who recommended that she repay ?45,000. But this week the

Commons Standards Committee, comprising of MPs from all parties,

dismissed the complaint against Maria Miller and ordered her to

repay just ?5,800 for inadvertently overclaiming her merge claimants.

She was forced to apologise to the Commons for the legalistic way she

dealt with the complaints against her. But Tony Gallagher told the

Daily Politics on Friday: We got a third call from Craig Oliver who

pointed out, she is looking at Leveson and the call is badly timed.

I think if you are making a series of telephone calls to a newspaper

organisation investigating the conduct of a Cabinet Minister, that

comes close After that interview Craig Oliver

contacted us, saying there was no threat in anyway over Leveson. I

mead it clear at the time. Tony Gallagher is talking rubbish about

me, and you can use that. The Daily Telegraph have released a tape of a

phone call between Maria Miller s aid, Joanna Hindley, and a reporter

investigating her expenses claim. Joanna Hindley said:

Maria's obviously been having quite a lot of editor's meetings around

Leveson at the moment. So I'm just going to kind of flag up that

connection for you to think about. The Prime Minister is sticking by

his Culture Secretary, but this weekend's crescendo of criticism of

her presents him with a problem and he could be wishing Maria Miller

would just fall on her sword. Even over 80% of Tory voters in a Mail on

Sunday poll think she should go On the Andrew Marr Show, the Work and

Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, defended his colleague. I've

known her always to be a reasonable and honest person. But is she doing

the Government or her any good by staying in office at the moment do

you think? This is a matter the Prime Minister has to take

consideration of and she herself. My view generally is I'm supportive of

Maria, because if we are not careful we end one a witch-hunt of somebody.

And I'm joined now by the Conservative MP, Bob Stewart, and

the man in the white suit, former MP and anti-sleaze campaigner Martin

Bell. Welcome to you both. Stuart Stuart sturkts let me put this to

you, a Conservative MP told this programme, this is a quote, she has

handled this appallingly. Downing Street has acted like judge and

jury, for Craig Oliver to get involved is disastrous. She's been

protected by the whips from the start. What do you say to that? It's

not great, is it? The fact of the matter is the question one should

ask is, did she deliberately try to make money? Did she deliberately try

to obscure ate? The answer is she certainly didn't deliberately try to

make money, in the system, which was the old system, and with regard to

obscure ago, I wasn't there, but let's put it this way. She was going

through a quasi-judicial process and might have ended up in court, so she

has a right to defend herself. Hold on o you said she doesn't do it to

make money, she remortgaged the house a couple of times to earn more

interest to us, the taxpayer, and when interest rates went down she

didn't reduce the amount she was charging in expenses. Well, the

point is the adjudicator said there was ?45,000 she was owed. And then a

committee, Standards Committee, said actually it should be reduced. That

was mainly MPs but there are three lay members. Yes, but they don't

have the vote. OK, fine, that is where it is wrong and we've got to

get it sorted. Let me put another quote from our Conservative MP. He

didn't want to be named. None of you do at the moment. I'm being named.

But you are backing her. George young in cahoots. He's been leading

on the Standards Committee to find her innocent. The Standards

Committee is unfit for purpose. I think the Standards Committee should

be revisited. I think the system is still evolving. And I think actually

we ought to have totally independent judgment on MPs' pay and allowances.

We haven't have not got there yet and that is where it is wrong.

Martin Bell, have MPs interfered in the Maria Miller process and with

the current Standards Commissioner in the same way that they saw off a

previous Commissioner they thought was too independent? Andrew it is

exactly the same. Yesterday I looked at a diary entry I made for May

2000, I said, dreadful meeting standards and privileges, they are

playing party politics. One of them told Elizabeth fill kin to her face

the gossip in the tea room was she had gone crazy. Nothing's changed.

What this shows is most of all, what's the committee for? If it is

just going to rubber stamp what the party wants and its mates, I don't

see any point. But it hasn't rubber stamped. It's changed it. Well, it

has watered down. That's why we should make it totally independent

and it shouldn't be involved in the House of Commons. It is plus plus ca

change isn't it? MPs', scandal, and MPs closing ranks for one of their

own. Has the Commons learned nothing? And this is after the

expenses scandal, where everything was out for everybody to see, you

would think MPs would be careful. This is before the expenses scandal.

We are looking at an historical event, during your time, Martin not

mine. I'm clean on this. You campaigned for him as an

independent. I did, he was a good friend of mine. And now you've

joined the club. And now you are defending Maria Miller? I'm

defending someone who hasn't been proved guilty of anything beyond the

fact she was rather slow to come forward with evidence. My point on

that, is I understand that. MPs are being lambasted the whole time these

days. There were a heck of a lot of them, Martin, who are utterly

decent. She didn't try to make money. We've just been through that.

I don't think that's right. The jury is out on that. What should have

happened in the Miller case, Martin Bell? I don't think there should be

a committee on standards. I think the Commissioner should make a

report. There has been to be justice for the MP complained against. Then

the committee of the whole House can consider it. But we are, the House

of Commons, then as now is incapable of regulating itself. That's been

proving yet again. She made a perfunctory apology. She threatened

and instructed the Standards Commissioner investigating her, and

her special adviser linked expenses to Leveson, when trying to stop the

Daily Telegraph from publishing I mean, is that the behaviour of a

Cabinet Minister? Well, it's probably not the behaviour of

someone that's got time on their hands. She's a very busy Cabinet

Minister. Well, she had enough time to write lots of letters to the

Standards Commission ser. She felt under such threat. She had the time.

She had to make the time. Die know the lady is not trying desperately

to make money. I disagree but on that. The fact of the matter is

this was an old, old system, that we've tried to put right, or the

Commons has tried to put right. I agree that MPs shouldn't get

involved in this. Should we get rid of this committee? It serves no

purpose except to cause trouble The adjudicator has said that and it

should be the end of it. It shouldn't come back to the Commons.

Although her special adviser threatened them over Leveson she was

and is the Minister responsible for trying to introduce something like

Leveson and that is something a big chunk that the press doesn't want.

She is a target. It has a good record on this issue. It played wit

a straight bat. The facts aren't in dispute are they? Will she make it

to the next cabinet reshuffle and then go? Iain Duncan Smith said it

is a matter for the Prime Minister. In my view, as things stand, I

question did she deliberately want to make money? I don't think she

did. Should she go? No. Should she be reshuffled? I don't know.

Goodness me, you are asking someone who will never be reshuffled,

because he will never make it. I was only asking for your opinion, not

your ability to do it. This is a problem for Cameron isn't it? It is

a problem for Cameron. There is nothing wrong with returning to be

badge benches, as you know. Hear, hear. To that. Stick with me. Helen,

can she survive? Is I'm going out of the prediction game when I said

Clegg is going to win the date, so I owe Janan a tenner on that one.

Grant Shapps has supported her. She was ringed by Sir George young and

Jeremy Hunt... This is pretty devastating. On past form David

Cameron hates having to bounce people out of the cabinet. He will

want to keep Maria Miller until the summer reshuffle. This is a question

mark on whether she survive this is. This isn't damaging to the

Conservative or the Labour Party, it is damaging to everyone. This is

catastrophic damage to the entire political establishment. Every

single speech that David Cameron and Ed Miliband have given since 20 9,

talking about restoring trust, they can wipe them from their computers,

because voters are going to look that there and say, this lot haven't

learnt anything. They are giving perfunctory apologies and then you

have MPs sitting in judgment on MPs and rather than paying back ?45 000,

she pays back ?5,800 after MPs have been into it. Damage is huge. Just

getting rid of one Cabinet Minister, you will need to do more than that.

You will notice that Labour haven't made huge weather of this. No,

goodness me, they have their own skeletons. Exactly. The person who

has made hay out of this is Nigel Farage, who has not been backwards

in coming forward. He doesn't seem to care about skeletons. The Prime

Minister has be-Gunby backing her, but that's not popular even with

Tory voters. How does he get out of this? This is the problem for him.

Five years ago his reaction to the expenses scandal was seen by many

Tory backbenchers as excessive. They felt hung out to dry by a man who is

independently wealthy. To go from that to making a special exemption

to Maria Miller because it is politically suitable is more

incendiary and provocative. It is not just upsetting the voters and

the Daily Telegraph but a good number of people behind him. I think

they will get rid of her. I think the Government, to paraphrase

Churchill, will zoo the decent thing after exhausting all options, of the

European elections a reshuffle. The culture department has gone from a

baulk water in haul to one of the most politically sensational jobs

because of its proximity to the Leveson issue. She has to be

replaced by someone Lily skillful and substantial. Mr Cameron is not

short of smart women? Nikki Morgan, the education department, these are

absolutely outstanding women and the problem that the generation elected

in 2005, Maria Miller generation, there are some really good people

elected in 2010. You are not responsible for hacking into the

culture Department's Twitter account last night? I was out at the time!

They all say that! One so, Maria Miller is like a modern-day Robin

Hood... She robs the poor to help the rich. Which one of us has not

embezzled the taxpayer? I reckon it is the lady. You have the perfect

cover. We would not know how to would we? You cannot tweet from a

mobile device, can you? Play it safe. No, do something dramatic

Have lots of pledges. Have just a few pledges. Ah, there must be a

Labour policy review reaching its conclusion because everyone has some

free advice for the party about its message and the man delivering it.

Here's Adam. He is well liked by the public don't quite buy him as a

leader. The papers say he is in hock to the unions and the party has a

lead in the polls but it is not solid. Bartenders Neil Kinnock. That

is what they said Winnie who lost the 1982 election. The whole country

deserves better and we will work to ensure that the day will come when

with the Labour government, the country will get better. Someone who

was there can see some spooky parallels. The important lesson from

1992 is it cannot rest on your laurels and hope for the best, you

cannot sit on a lead of seven points because the election narrows that

and you cannot rely on the government not getting its act

together because the Conservative Party was well funded and organised,

the double whammy posters, the tax bombshell, but incredibly effective

and the message was unified and they beat us on the campaign. The lesson

for Labour today is this lead will evaporate quite possibly over the

next few months and we might go into the election behind in the polls.

But Ed Miliband is getting conflicting advice about how to

avoid 1992 happening. Be bold, be cautious and then, the idea that

Labour can squeak into office with just 35% of the vote, which worries

some people. Each month, the Labour Party meets around the country and

last week, everybody spoke about the dangers of this 35% strategy. They

were increasingly unhappy and it is very important that those people

around the leader naturally have a duty to protect him and they make

sure he gets this message that while there is total support for him, they

do want this key year in the run-up to the General Election to be

putting out an alternative which we can defend on the doorstep. The

doorstep where Neil Kinnock made his concession speech is crammed with

Spanish back hackers. The old Labour offices are no a budget hostel.

Labour headquarters is down the road and they are putting the finishing

touches to a speech Ed Miliband will give this week about the cost of

living and I am told he will drop hints about new policies in juicy

areas like housing, low pay, growth and devolving power. As for the

charge that they are not radical enough, his people say they want to

be bold but they have to be credible as well. They say that Labour is

more united than it has ever been but there has been some grumbling

that the cost of living campaign is not the same as a vision for the

country. And that Ed Miliband was not statesman-like enough at Prime

Minister's Questions and one figure who sat at the same table in the

Neil Kinnock years summed it up like this. Things are OK but it feels

like we're playing for the draw Shadow Energy Secretary Caroline

Flint joins me now for the Sunday Interview. This 35% victory

strategy, it does not sound very ambitious? I am campaigning to win

this election with a majority government and everybody else around

the table is also. But we want to go to every corner of the country and

win votes for Labour and win seats, that is what we are working towards.

To avoid last time, the coalition bartering. But that 35% is a victory

strategy so are you saying there is no 35% strategy and that no one at

the heart of Labour is not arguing for this? We are working to win

around the country and to win all of those battle ground seats and we

must have a strategy that appeals to a cross-section of the public but

within that, that broad group Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park and. You

could do that with 35% of the vote? There is lots of polling and

everyone looks at this about what we need to do to get seats and we want

to have a comprehensive majority at the next election to win to govern

this country. Last week, we have been reading reports of splits in

the party over policy and on tactics, even strategy. A struggle

for control of the General Election manifesto, we are told. What are you

arguing over? I said on the committee and just listening to the

film before, it is about being radical but also credible and we are

talking about evolution and that is an important subject but we are also

united and to be honest, in 201 people were writing us off saying we

would turn on ourselves and that has not been the case. We are not

arguing about the fundamentals, we are discussing the policies that are

coming up with different colleagues and talking about how we can make

sure they are presented to the public and that is part of a

process. That is a discussion, not disagreement. The Financial Times,

which is usually pretty fair, reports a battle between Ed

Miliband's radical instincts and the more business fiscal conservatism of

Ed Balls. What side are you on? I am for radical change, I am for energy

and I believe strongly we must be formed the market and people might

portray that as anti-business but this is about more competition and

transparency and others coming into this market so our policy on this is

radical, not excepting the status quo. It is also for business.

Opinion polls show that few people regard Ed Miliband as by Minister

material -- Prime Minister material. That has been true since he became

leader. And in some cases, they have been getting worse. Why is that

Opinion polls say certain things about the personalities of leaders,

David Cameron is not great either. And they were not great when he was

in opposition. At this stage, he was getting 49% as Prime Minister real

material and Ed Miliband, 19. - Prime Minister material. When you

look at certain questions that the public is asked about who you think

you would trust about being fair in terms of policy towards Britain who

understands the cost of living crisis, they very much identify with

Ed Miliband. We are ahead in the polls. Ed Miliband has made that

happen. We have one more councillors, we have been running in

by-elections and we have held this government over the barrel over six

months on energy prices. That is to do with his leadership. The more

that voters save him, the less they seem convinced. In 2011, he had been

leader for one year, and only 1 % regarded him as weird, by 2014, that

was 41%. Look at that! Look at that weirdness! What people need is to

know where the Labour Party stands on fundamental issues. And in those

areas, particularly the cost of living and fairness and people being

concerned that we are entering into a period where people will be worse

for the first time ever at the end of the Parliament, these things are

important and Ed Miliband is part of our success. Definitely. I think

this is ridiculous, to be fair, he is not a politician that says, I am

dying with the Arctic monkeys, I know who is the number one. He did

not play that game. -- down. He is not either there to portray himself

as someone who was with the children, I know everything about

popular culture. His authenticity is the most important thing. People do

not think he is authentic, unless they think we were at is authentic.

Is it true that his staff applaud him when he comes back after giving

even a mediocre speech? I have never heard that. I have never heard about

him being applauded. And I am pleased to applaud him with he makes

speeches, I have given him a standing ovation. You have to do

that because the cameras are rolling! No, he made a good speech.

Five minutes without notes. It took a long time to memorise I don't

blame him! The cost of living. Focusing on that, it has paid

dividends. But inflation is falling and perhaps collapsing, unemployment

is falling faster than anybody thought, as we can see. Wages are

rising, soon faster than prices Retail sales are booming, people

have got money in their pockets Isn't the cost of living crisis

narrative running out of steam? I do not think so and I should say that I

welcome any sign of positive changes in the economy, if anybody gets a

job in Doncaster, I am pleased by the end of this Parliament families

will be over ?900 worse off because of tax and benefit changes and the

working person is ?1600 worse off and it is the first government since

the 1870s where people will be at the end of the Parliament. We

believe the government made wrong choices that lead the rich off at

the expense of those on middle and lower incomes. -- let the rich. The

average family ?794 worse off from tax and benefit changes. That has

been backed up. They are those figures. But he has skewed these

figures by including the richest, where the fall in tax and the

penalty they pay is highest. If you take away the richest, it is nowhere

near that figure. Everybody agrees and even the government and

knowledges that at the end of their tenure in Parliament, people will be

worse off. 350,000 extra people who would desperately like full-time

work who are working part-time and 1 million young people unemployed and

the reason the cost of living has a residence is people feel that. I was

in a supermarket and at Doncaster and someone summed this up, he said

I work hard and at the end of the week, beyond paying bills, I have

got nothing else. If you take away the top 10% who are losing over

?600,000, the average loss comes down to around ?400, less than half

of what you claim. That figure is totally misleading. These are the

figures from the IFS. It still shows... Whatever way you shape

this, people will still be worse off, families worse off because of

these changes to tax and benefits and working people because wages

have not kept up with prices. Your energy portfolio, you back the

enquiry into the big six companies and you intend to go ahead with the

price freeze and reconfigure the market even before it reports. If

you win, this is a waste of time? Whilst we have had this process

before the announcement, we always feel if it goes that way, there

might be areas we have not thought of that the enquiry will also draw

attention to that we might want to add on. You are right, our basic

reforms for the new regulator, to separate generation supply, we will

pursue that. What happens if this report concludes that your plans are

not correct? You will still go ahead? I don't think so. Actually,

if you look at the report that Ofgem produced, some of the issues Labour

has been drawing attention to like vertical integration, they cover

that. I was asking about the Competition Commission? The report

last week is a result of working together and I think it is clearly

accepted in this sector, look at SSE last week, they will separate the

business. We are pushing at the open door. It has already pulled out of

gas. So it follows if you freeze energy prices across the market it

might be the right thing to do but there will be a cost in terms of

jobs and investment, correct? Well, I met with SSE last weekand the

chief executive and talked about these issues. The jobs changes are

partly about them looking at how they could be more efficient as a

company. On offshore wind that wasn't really to do with the price

freeze. That was more to do with issues around confidence in that

area and therefore willing to put the money into it, as well as

technical issues as well But there'll be job losses. Is that a

price worth paying? We believe the reason we are having a price freeze

is these companies have been overcharging customers and haven't

been investing in their organisations and making them more

efficient. I do not believe a price freeze is linked to job losses.

These companies do need to be more efficient. Goal for all of us is

realising the fantastic opportunity for more jobs and growth from an

energy sector that has certainty going forward. That's what Labour

will deliver. Caroline Flint, thank you.

It's 1130 and you're watching The Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to

viewers in Scotland, who leave us now for Sunday Politics Scotland.

Half Good afternoon. This afternoon, Coming up here

Half Good afternoon. This afternoon, we are talking about plans to shake

up English Heritage. There `re worries that many centres could

close to the public. In the main strike was 30 years ago and there is

a call for an enquiry into police tactics during the main str`ight.

The three enterprise partnerships in the region have the submittdd bids

for millions of pounds of extra money and new powers. They will have

to compete with 36 other bids from across the United Kingdom for a

slice of the ?2 billion pot. The Conservatives say it will ddliver

hundreds of jobs and businesses but labour is sceptical. You ard heavily

involved in the fund at its inception. The number of jobs

promised have not come throtgh. If you look at the companies who have

money in the North East, thd likes of Nissan, the engineering `nd

manufacturing sector has done tremendously well. Manufacttring,

exports, whose businesses. But surely that is not really for the

fund was set up for. It is to help the growth and exports and H think

it is working extremely well. That is just in the North East. Ht has

happened in other parts of the country and is helping to rdbalance

the economy to the manufacttring sector, which we want to sed. The

North East has done well out of the fun compared to regions, such as the

building of the new bridge. The pain reason for the fund is to ensure

growth in employment and jobs in the region. I am not satisfied that this

has been productive, partictlarly on my part of the North East. There has

only been about ?1.4 million spent from the fund in my area. It has

helped some business to get established, it has maybe treated

remaining 260 jobs. It is wdlcome, but it is not what we need. We need

more money. By creating extra money in the region, is it not better for

the North East as a whole. @s I say, 260 jobs and everyone of thdm is

welcome in North East. But hn the North East, 160 thousand potnds

worth said to be treated in the region. The regional growth front

has not delivered what it should be in the past. So we should not really

be too grateful. There is a belief that the partnerships are wdak,

there are two of them in thd North East. Surely it needs to get a shade

of the money which represents the needs. The greatest problem has been

ourselves, the lack of unitx we have seen in recent months betwedn the

local authorities in the region it means we are Colin for one region,

so that we get the money to deliver it to the various parts of ht. but

instead all we have been getting squabbles. The combined authority

has been delayed. There havd been too many rows and divisions. We were

way behind the rest of the country because of disagreements in the

region when they were being established. If you see what is

happening in the North West and the likes of Leeds, other parts of the

country, they were up and rtnning straightaway. It is easy for someone

from the Liberal Democrats to see it as Labour who are squabbling, but we

have seven authorities combhne. We have to understand each of them

They are elected to ensure that they do the best for their community It

is not squabbling. It is individual authorities insisting that, before

the deal was done, everybodx should be looked on as equal in thd

combined authority. And that is very important if it is to succedd. A

group of Labour MPs are calling for a Hillsborough style enquirx into

police tactics during the mhners' strike in 1984. Most miners arrested

were charged with main order offences. But it left them `nd

sometimes there are waves whth a criminal record. Peter Beard has

joined those who see a enquhry is necessary. 30 years ago, thdse were

battle grounds. The County Durham 's wife was standing in speaking

alongside Arthur Scargill. We have a government pursuing violent policies

against the people. A few wdeks later, she was arrested by police on

a picket line in a local village. She was accused of threatenhng

behaviour. One of them punched me and pushed me into the van. When we

got to the police station, ht was the same attitude. I sat thdre in

the cold and I could not believe the lies that were coming from, the

police officers. She receivdd a conditional discharge for a claim

she said she did not commit, but says there should be an enqtiry into

why the innocent were found guilty. Every arm of the state was tsed

against the main orders, thd families and their communithes. The

abuse of state power was terrible. Web is not just me. People got

landed with convictions, and it was like living in a police state.

Within a year of Florence 's arrest, that it was closed. It is p`rkland

and many of the main asked them what here have gone to the graves. But

for the communities, there hs unfinished business about the

straight and questions needhng answers. The local MP was convicted

of two public order offences during the period. He thinks many liners

received rough justice. While the police had to do was invent a story

for the majesty and the maghstrate would believe them. If the

magistrates are honest, thex will come out and admit that thex were

instructed to come down hard on the main honours. Today, the police and

claim Commissioner, via Beard, was then looking into police conduct.

She can understand why people are seeking justice. I can understand

why there are calls for an dnquiry into it. There are obviouslx people

who feel a deep sense of injustice from the period. They want to get a

proper answer as to why thex were treated that way. But one

conservative who was an MP then says there should not be an enquhry. If

you look back to the year, the most significant event was the arrival of

Nissan in Sunderland. It wotld be wrong to launch an enquiry hnto

this, as opposed to other shtuations such as Hillsborough and bloody

Sunday, whether we are obviously good reasons for an enquiry. I think

it is best to leave this ye`r. Could this be therapeutic for the North

East? 30 years on, there ard still wins that will not heal unldss

properly investigated. This was not Hillsborough. There was not what of

life loss of life. Why spend millions of us. Let us move on. This

was not like Hillsborough. Have the actions of the police and it really

operated during the strike from the picket line, the really maghstrates

operated during the main straight, the way the politicians operate it

was an absolute disgrace. Qtestions need to be asked about thesd

operations by the police on the picket lines. If that had h`ppened

at the time, we seek striking similarities between that and

Hillsborough. They were tot`lly out of control, the told lies in court,

falsified documents. If these questions had been asked back then,

Hillsborough, could it have been avoided? That is conjecture. But

here we may not have broke the law. Surely you must see that. When you

say that Mrs Thatcher and sdnior ministers showing that the lain

honours were right. But there was a likes of concrete blocks getting

blocked from the motorway. The government denied that they cannot

with a plan to make the main is redundant. The misled of liberty.

The told lies deliberately. There was a conspiracy against thd main

honours. Why did they contelplate bringing the armed forces against

ordinary, hard`working men `nd women. That is why there should be

an enquiry. It was a conspiracy You are the MP in Stockton at the time.

Is an enquiry worth having? I can see no point in dredging up what

happened 30 years ago. This was a tragic event for many peopld. I

sympathise with some of those in the North East, but Arthur Scargill B is

a heavy responsibility for what he did. He split the main stond the

middle, caused great decepthon in mining community. You could say that

he led a conspiracy against the government. What is the point of

pursuing that now. Like the one argument to you. If it is rhght that

the court, the police were tsed as political tools by the government,

that could happen again. Should we not get to the truth of whether that

was the case? I do not belidve magistrate should be told what

decisions to take in court by the government. I do not believd that

happens. I do not believe it did happen. I do not think therd is any

point going back over it all again. There is no value to the region in

doing that. We need to be looking ahead and start looking

nostalgically to the past. Of course we want to look forward. I want to

look forward to the people who were fighting for their communithes at

the team, the economic prosperity of the communities, they were pushed

back by the state and we should be looking for an enquiry and getting

an amnesty for people who h`d the criminal records given to them

wrongly. Though, if you likd sightseeing, it will not be long

before you come across a pl`ce run by English Heritage. In the region,

there are some 400 houses and gardens, but current plans by

English Heritage to letting them? Northumberland, even on a grey day,

the enthusiasm of visitors hs not dimmed. The gardens are beattiful

and the itself, it is amazing how much is still standing. He could see

that someone was looking after this place really well. It is am`zing to

think of all the things that have been built in the past. It has a

lovely garden which changes throughout the year. His sttdy never

stands still and there are big changes in plan for English

Heritage. The currently an `rm of government will be split into. One

half will take on responsibhlity for the National Heritage collection,

the buildings in historic shtes This will mean government ftnding

being phased out by 2023. Btt the charity will receive ?80 million as

a one`off cash injection to ease the transition to charitable st`tus We

can address the conservation defects that desperately need addressing as

well as investing in the properties in the way we cannot do at the

moment. We will be able to fund raise from away. Source. `` away.

Source. This was run by English Herhtage,

but there is no cafe, no visitor centre in no way to charge people

coming to visit. So how would the new charity generate income from a

place like this? A beautiful ruin any remote spot. We will look after

all the properties in our c`re. The larger properties, which get the

likes of 60,000 visitors a xear they will generate income from the

likes of entry fees and catdring. Even with this cross subsidx,

critics question whether English Heritage will become be abld to

raise enough money when it becomes a charity. The likes of a fird or

flood or C an outbreak of foot and mouth disease and you find that the

visitors drop, all targets `re missed and there is a huge

shortfall. The government argues the plans are built on strong

foundations. There is no qudstion that the two new bodies being

created, historic England, the regulator of their heritage, and

English Heritage, which will run and manage the properties on behalf of

the nation, will still have exactly the same powers as they havd now. As

the peer into the future, stpporters of the plan say it is a way of

ensuring iconic monuments and buildings are preserved for the

future. Critics worry about what lies ahead. There is a dangdr that

our heritage could be damagdd. Is this a gamble? I think it is a

gamble, but change is always time to give rise to anxiety. But if you

look at the track record in the region and the rest of the country

of the likes of the National trust. We do not get government money.

English Heritage has been gdtting 20 million, been given an 80 mhllion to

launch this in a new way. If you look at what is happening in Bishop

Auckland, with philanthropy money coming in. It is standard to a

massive visitor attraction. It can be done. Of course it will give rise

to anxiety and ratio that. H hope it works, and there is no reason it

should not. Is this a sensible way of taking the government out of the

equation? English Heritage hs a very important organisation to the

region. Tourism is so important to the North East. If you look at the

likes of Northumberland, English Heritage plays a huge role there. We

have that because English Hdritage runs its all well and anythhng which

police are in jeopardy, I would worry about. Carlisle is a regular

visit for top politicians. The Prime Minister was he recently. Hdre is

the rest of the week 's news. Readers of Northumberland councils

make their counterparts frol across the border in Scotland, to look at

improving transport links. Harriet Harman was in the region to visit

the new centre. There has also been questions about the West Culberland

Hospital. Six years after the rebuilding programme, the hospital

has been plunged into crisis. We nearest hospital is not down the

road, it is 42 may also be `n Carlisle, and it too is strtggling.

Can he please do everything to assist me and make local colmunity

to retain services in the Wdst Cumberland Hospital. Finallx,

that is about it from us. Wd are back much later next week, `t half

past two in the afternoon. Dobson. Tim Donovan is back in the

chair next week. And with that, back to Andrew. Welcome back and time now

to get more from our panel. So they can justify their meagre patents.

This cost of living mantra will last all the way until the election.

Cannot? Ed Miliband leaves he is onto something and for most of this

Parliament, inflation has outstripped wages. That is going to

go the other way and wages will rise, to which you say Ed Miliband

has nothing to say. He says if you think people are going to feel

better in the blink of an eye, you are a Conservative and do not

understand the depth of this and he is taking the message from a

presidential election in America in 2012 and make Romney was ahead on

some of the economic indicators but Barack Obama was ahead on the key

one, do you believe this candidate will make your family's life

better? The message that Ed Miliband will try to say is the next election

is about whose side are you on? And he believes Labour will be on the

side of more voters than conservatives. It would be crazy for

Labour not to talk about the cost of living because even if wages exceed

inflation next year, it is not as if voters will walk around feeling like

Imelda Marcos, they will still feel as if they were struggling and not

just compared... Retail sales are slowing? That is not the sign of

palpable disparity. Circumstances are better than three years ago but

not better than five years ago. The Reagan question will still be

employed, are you better off than at the last election? But things in

America were actually getting worse when he asked that. I covered that

election, that is why it resonated and they did get worse. The

Ayatollah had quadrupled the price of oil. This is based on things

getting relatively better, after a very long wait, so the cost of

living critique will have to adapt? It will but it gets out of a very

sticky spot and the IFS says wages will not outstrip inflation and by

that time they can start talking about other things, plans for the

railways and tuition fees and at the moment, everything is up for grabs.

Labour know that every time they talk about something they want to

do, the question is, how do you pay for it? They can talk about the

economy and they don't have substantial things to say. Is it

true that Mr Iain Duncan Smith was going to make a major announcement

on benefit cheats? Or something to do with that this morning? But he

decided against it because of the tobacco over Maria Miller? It would

be very odd to go on to The Andrew Marr Show to have a chat and see

what he is having for lunch. Patrick went from the Guardian said he was

going to set out higher financial penalty phase for providing

inaccurate information in claims. This is a bad day to do that, given

that MP expenses are treated far more lenient the than any one from

Joe public. That would be fascinating, if true. And he is

making a very big speech on well for tomorrow and this tweet from Patrick

went at the Guardian, he has proper sized on welfare matters and he

tends to know what is going on. But it would be deeply unfortunate if

that was the message today. How can he make a speech that has anything

about cracking down on benefit claimants? Not today but I am not

sure tomorrow. Do you get the impression that nobody in both main

parties is very confident of winning in 2015? I column last week said the

result, the most likely result from one year on is another hung

parliament and which government results from that depends on the

mathematical specifics of whether the Tories can do a deal as well as

Labour, leaving everything in the hands of Nick Clegg or whether one

party can do a straightforward deal but I do not detect any sense of

exuberance or confidence in either camp. And the Tories are still

shooting themselves over losing the boundary commission reforms because

that was going to net them 20 seats and they lost that because they

messed up the House of Lords reform and there are still furious with

themselves. The former US President, George W Bush, has been a busy boy

and here at the Sunday Politics we thought you'd like to see the

results of his artistic endeavours. Time for the gallery.

I was a prize to find myself saying, some of these are not bad! --

surprised. Vladimir Putin? I like the one of Tony Blair but his early

ones of dogs, to be in the presence of the master is to see his portrait

of a Joanne Love. He is not of the Turner prize but I was surprised. He

gets the mask of Vladimir Putin also Tony Blair. I was impressed

that he did not allow personal or political grudges to influence his

artwork. Jacques Chirac, he comes out of this incredibly well! And

Angela Merkel comes out astonishingly well. Quite generous

as well. Tony Blair is the best one and the reason is he had the closest

relationship with them and he has talked about this portrait, saying

he was quite fond of him and you can see that. These are awful, they

would not get you an A-level but you must admire him to have the guts to

do this, and display them publicly! An A-level? Just doing joined up

numbers gets you that these days! What do you do when you retire? This

is less embarrassing than some of the other things people have done.

As good as Churchill? I don't know... No! Churchill was brilliant!

And on that! That's all for today. Tune into BBC Two every day at

lunchtime this week for the Daily Politics. And we'll be back at the

later time of 2:30pm next Sunday after the London Marathon. Remember,

if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.