29/06/2014

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:38. > :00:48.No surprise that Mr Cameron didn't get his way at the European summit.

:00:49. > :00:51.But does it mean Britain has just moved closer to the EU exit?

:00:52. > :00:54.Doctors want to ban smoking outright.

:00:55. > :00:57.A sensible health measure or the health lobby's secret plan all

:00:58. > :01:11.Could Teesside get its own Boris Johnson?

:01:12. > :01:14.And old trains, run`down stations and poor journey

:01:15. > :01:28.times ` can the Government get rail services back on track?

:01:29. > :01:31.And with me, as always, the best and the brightest political

:01:32. > :01:42.panel in the business Nick Watt Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh.

:01:43. > :01:45.They've had their usual cognac, or Juncker as it's known in

:01:46. > :01:47.Luxembourg, for breakfast and will be tweeting under the influence

:01:48. > :01:49.He's a boozing, chain-smoking, millionaire bon viveur who's made

:01:50. > :01:51.it big in the world of European politic.

:01:52. > :01:55.I speak of Jean-Claude Juncker, the former Prime Minister of Luxembourg

:01:56. > :01:59.He'll soon be President of the European Commission,

:02:00. > :02:05.He wasn't David Cameron's choice of course.

:02:06. > :02:09.But those the PM thought were his allies deserted him and he ended up

:02:10. > :02:24.on the wrong end of a 26-2 vote in favour of Arch-Fedrealist Juncker.

:02:25. > :02:27.-- on the wrong end of a 26-2 vote in favour of Arch-Federalist

:02:28. > :02:29.So where does this leave Mr Cameron's hopes

:02:30. > :02:32.of major reform and repatriation of EU powers back to the UK?

:02:33. > :02:37.Let's speak to his Europe Minister David Lidington

:02:38. > :02:44.Welcome to the programme. The Prime Minister says that now with Mr

:02:45. > :02:47.Juncker at the helm, the battle to keep Britain in the EU has got

:02:48. > :02:52.harder. In what way has it got harder? For two reasons. The

:02:53. > :02:57.majority of the leaders have accepted the process that shifts

:02:58. > :03:02.power, it will not careful, from the elected heads of government right

:03:03. > :03:09.cross Europe to the party bosses, the faction leaders in the European

:03:10. > :03:18.Parliament and and the disaffection was made clear in many European

:03:19. > :03:21.countries. Mr Juncker had a distinguished period as head of

:03:22. > :03:24.Luxembourg, and was not a known reformer, but we have to judge on

:03:25. > :03:27.how he leads the commission and there were some elements in the

:03:28. > :03:32.mandate that the heads of government gave this week to the new incoming

:03:33. > :03:37.European Commission that I think are cautiously encouraging for us. The

:03:38. > :03:44.Prime Minister talked about those that not everybody wants to

:03:45. > :03:49.integrate and to the same extent and speed. Let me just interrupt you.

:03:50. > :03:53.What is new about saying that Europe can go closer to closer union at

:03:54. > :04:02.different speeds? That has always been the case. It's nothing new

:04:03. > :04:12.Indeed there are precedents, and they are good examples of the

:04:13. > :04:17.approach as part of the course and one of the elements that the Prime

:04:18. > :04:20.Minister is taking forward in the strategy is to get general

:04:21. > :04:25.acceptance that while we agree that most of the partners have agreed to

:04:26. > :04:29.the single currency will want to press forward with closer

:04:30. > :04:34.integration of their economic and tax policies, but not every country

:04:35. > :04:38.in the EU is going to want to do that. We have to see the pattern

:04:39. > :04:42.that has grown up enough to recognise there is a diverse EU with

:04:43. > :04:48.28 member states and more in the future. We won't all integrate the

:04:49. > :04:53.extent. It is a matter of a pattern that is differentiation and

:04:54. > :04:56.integration. I understand that. John Major used to call it variable

:04:57. > :05:01.geometry, and other phrases nobody used to understand, but the point is

:05:02. > :05:04.that you're back benches don't want any union at any speed, even in the

:05:05. > :05:10.slow lane. They want to go in the other direction. It depends which

:05:11. > :05:23.backbencher you talk to. There's a diverse range of views. I think that

:05:24. > :05:27.there is acceptance that the core of the Prime Minister's approaches to

:05:28. > :05:29.seek reform of the European Union, for renegotiation after the

:05:30. > :05:34.election, then put it to the British people to decide. It won't be the

:05:35. > :05:37.British government or ministers that take the final decision, it's the

:05:38. > :05:40.British people, provided they are a Conservative government, who will

:05:41. > :05:43.take the decision on the basis of the reforms that David Cameron

:05:44. > :05:48.secures whether they want to stay in or not. Is there more of a chance,

:05:49. > :05:53.not a certainty or probability, but at least more of a chance that with

:05:54. > :05:59.Mr Juncker in that position of Britain leaving the EU? I don't

:06:00. > :06:03.think we can say that at the moment. I think we can say that the task of

:06:04. > :06:11.reform looks harder than it did a couple of weeks ago. But we have do

:06:12. > :06:23.put Mr Juncker to the test. I do think he would want his commission

:06:24. > :06:28.to be marked and I think that there is, and I find this in numbers

:06:29. > :06:32.around Europe, and there is a growing recognition that things

:06:33. > :06:36.cannot go on as they have been. Europe, economically, is in danger

:06:37. > :06:40.of losing a lot of ground will stop millions of youngsters are out of

:06:41. > :06:43.work already that reform. There is real anxiety and a number of

:06:44. > :06:46.countries now about the extent to which opinion polls and election

:06:47. > :06:51.results are showing a shift of support to both left and right wing

:06:52. > :06:53.parties, sometimes outright neofascist movements, expressing

:06:54. > :07:01.real content and resentment at Howard in touch -- how out of touch

:07:02. > :07:05.decisions have become. You say you are sensing anxiety about the

:07:06. > :07:11.condition of Europe, so why did they choose Mr Juncker then? You would

:07:12. > :07:17.have to put that question to some of the heads of European government.

:07:18. > :07:20.Clearly there were a number for whom domestic politics played a big role

:07:21. > :07:28.in the eventual decision that they took. There were some who had signed

:07:29. > :07:32.up to the lead candidate process and felt they could not back away from

:07:33. > :07:37.that, whatever their private feelings might have been, but I

:07:38. > :07:40.think the PM was right to say that this was a matter of principle and

:07:41. > :07:45.it shouldn't just be left as a stitch up by the European Parliament

:07:46. > :07:50.to tell us what they do. He said, I can't agree to pretend to acquiesce.

:07:51. > :07:55.They have to make the opposition clear that go on with reform. Are

:07:56. > :08:02.the current terms of membership for us unacceptable? The current terms

:08:03. > :08:08.of the membership are very far from perfect. Are they unacceptable? The

:08:09. > :08:15.current terms are certainly not ones that I feel comfortable with. The

:08:16. > :08:20.Prime Minister described them as unacceptable. Do you think they are?

:08:21. > :08:25.We look at the views of the British people at the moment. If you look at

:08:26. > :08:28.the polling at the moment, the evidence is that people are split on

:08:29. > :08:38.whether they think membership is a good thing. I'm asking what you

:08:39. > :08:41.think. David Cameron wants to in -- endorse changes in our interest but

:08:42. > :08:46.also because the biggest market is going to suffer if they don't

:08:47. > :08:51.challenge -- grasp the challenge of political and economic reform.

:08:52. > :08:55.Newsnight, Friday night, Malcolm Rifkind the former Secretary of

:08:56. > :08:58.State said to me that even if the choice was to stay in on the

:08:59. > :09:02.existing terms, he would vote to stay in on the existing terms. He

:09:03. > :09:06.doesn't necessarily like them, but he would vote to stay in. That is

:09:07. > :09:09.the authentic voice of the Foreign Office, isn't it? That is the

:09:10. > :09:16.position of your department. Is it your position? Malcolm Rifkind is a

:09:17. > :09:22.distinguished and independent minded backbencher. He's not in government

:09:23. > :09:24.now. But that is your position. No, the position of the government and

:09:25. > :09:29.the Conservative Party in the government is that we believe that

:09:30. > :09:33.important changes, both economic and political reforms, are necessary and

:09:34. > :09:37.that they are attainable in our interest and those of Europe as a

:09:38. > :09:44.whole. Would you vote to stay in on the existing terms? That's not going

:09:45. > :09:49.to be a question that the referendum. Really? I know that in

:09:50. > :09:53.2017 Europe is going to look rather different to how it looks today For

:09:54. > :09:56.one thing our colleagues in the Eurozone will want and need to press

:09:57. > :10:00.ahead with closer integration. That, in our view, needs to be done

:10:01. > :10:06.in a way that fully respects the rights of those of us who remain

:10:07. > :10:10.outside. Variable geometry, tackling things like the abuse of freedom of

:10:11. > :10:13.migration. Those are all in the conclusions from the leader this

:10:14. > :10:17.week and we should welcome that Very briefly, finally, when will

:10:18. > :10:21.you, as a government, give us the negotiating position of the

:10:22. > :10:24.government? Will you give us what you hope to achieve before the

:10:25. > :10:31.election or not? David Cameron set out very clearly in his Bloomberg

:10:32. > :10:36.speech that he wanted a Europe that was more democratically accountable,

:10:37. > :10:40.more flexible, more at it -- economically competitive. That is

:10:41. > :10:43.all very general. When will you lay out the negotiating position? It's

:10:44. > :10:48.not general. It is very far from general. We have seen evidence in

:10:49. > :10:54.the successful cut of the European budget, the reform of fisheries

:10:55. > :10:58.those reforms have started to take effect. We have won some victories

:10:59. > :11:02.and I'm sure the Prime Minister as we get towards the general election,

:11:03. > :11:05.will want to make clear what the Conservative Party position is, and

:11:06. > :11:13.perhaps other political leaders will do the same for their party. Thank

:11:14. > :11:17.you for joining us this morning The harsh reality of this is that there

:11:18. > :11:21.is a yawning gap between what the Prime Minister can hope to bring

:11:22. > :11:25.back and what will satisfy his Conservative backbenchers. Yes, I

:11:26. > :11:30.think the Parliamentary Conservative Party is divided into three parts,

:11:31. > :11:33.those who would vote to leave the EU regardless, those who would stay

:11:34. > :11:36.regardless, and a huge middle ground of people who want to stay in on

:11:37. > :11:41.renegotiated terms. These are not three equal parts. Those who would

:11:42. > :11:45.vote to stay in regardless are smaller and smaller. Compared to 20

:11:46. > :11:49.years ago, tiny. But the people in the middle, generally, would only

:11:50. > :11:53.stay in if you secure a renegotiation that will not be

:11:54. > :12:00.re-secured. In other words, they are de facto, out by 2017 and the

:12:01. > :12:03.referendum. This whole saga of the recent weeks has been the single

:12:04. > :12:08.biggest economy in foreign policy under this government. That's not

:12:09. > :12:13.what the voters think. -- single biggest ignominy. I mean the failure

:12:14. > :12:17.to secure the target. The opinion polls show that standing up against

:12:18. > :12:21.Mr Juncker has proved rather popular. I suggest that is not Mr

:12:22. > :12:25.Cameron's problem. His problem is that, if in the end he gets only

:12:26. > :12:30.because Medic changes, and if he says he still thinks that with these

:12:31. > :12:33.changes -- cosmetic changes. And he says that they should stay in, that

:12:34. > :12:39.would split the Tory party wide open. Eurosceptics say would be the

:12:40. > :12:44.biggest split since the corn laws. He wants to protect the position of

:12:45. > :12:52.coming out, and you might get that. He wants to crack down on abuse of

:12:53. > :12:54.benefits, and he might get that He wants to restrict freedom of

:12:55. > :12:58.movement for future member states, and that's difficult, because it is

:12:59. > :13:02.a treaty change. And he wants to deal with closer union, but that is

:13:03. > :13:05.also treaty change. In the Council conclusions, David Cameron was

:13:06. > :13:10.encouraged because it said, let s look at closer union, but it did not

:13:11. > :13:14.say it would reform. All it said was ever closer union can be interpreted

:13:15. > :13:17.in different ways. In other words, we're not going to change it. The

:13:18. > :13:28.fundamental problem the David Cameron was that two years ago, when

:13:29. > :13:31.he vetoed the fiscal compact, that showed Angela Merkel was unwilling

:13:32. > :13:34.to help them and what happened in the last two weeks was that Angela

:13:35. > :13:36.Merkel was unable to help him. There is not a single leader of the

:13:37. > :13:40.European Union that once Juncker as president, and he doesn't want it,

:13:41. > :13:44.he wants the note take a job at the European Council. But there was this

:13:45. > :13:47.basic stitch up by the European Parliament that meant he was

:13:48. > :13:51.presented, and when Angela Merkel put the question over his head there

:13:52. > :13:56.was a huge backlash in Germany and she was unable to deliver. I

:13:57. > :13:59.understand that, but I'm looking forward to Mr Cameron's predicament.

:14:00. > :14:05.I don't know how he squares the circle. It seems inconceivable that

:14:06. > :14:10.he can bring back enough from Brussels to satisfy his

:14:11. > :14:14.backbenchers. No, you can't. Most of them fundamentally want out. They

:14:15. > :14:17.don't want to be persuaded by renegotiations. Where it's hard to

:14:18. > :14:21.draw conclusions from the polling is that if you ask people question that

:14:22. > :14:24.sounds like, do you like the fact that our Prime Minister has gone to

:14:25. > :14:28.Brussels and stuck it to the man, they say yes, but how many people

:14:29. > :14:33.will go to the voting booths and put their cross in the box based on

:14:34. > :14:40.Europe? We know mostly voters care about Europe as a proxy for

:14:41. > :14:42.immigration fears. In ten people in this country could not tell you who

:14:43. > :14:44.John Claude Juncker is Angela Weir is replacing. -- and who he is

:14:45. > :14:48.replacing. And I'm joined in the studio now by

:14:49. > :14:51.arch-Eurosceptic Conservative MEP, Daniel Hannan and from Strasbourg by

:14:52. > :15:12.staunch European and former Liberal war? His declared objectives would

:15:13. > :15:16.leave Britain still in the common agricultural policy, the common

:15:17. > :15:24.foreign policy, the European arrest warrant, so the negotiating aims

:15:25. > :15:26.which we just heard Nick setting out wouldn't fundamentally change

:15:27. > :15:35.anything. It would be easy for the Government to declare war on any of

:15:36. > :15:40.these things. The danger from your point of view as someone who wants

:15:41. > :15:44.to stay in is that if David Cameron only gets cosmetic changes, the

:15:45. > :15:49.chance of getting the vote to leave the European Union increases,

:15:50. > :15:57.doesn't it? Hypothetically it probably does but we have two big

:15:58. > :16:03.things to get through first in domestic politics before we even

:16:04. > :16:07.reach a negotiation. One is are we going to have the United Kingdom

:16:08. > :16:13.this time next year following the referendum in Scotland? Secondly,

:16:14. > :16:18.are the Conservatives after the general election next year going to

:16:19. > :16:23.be in a position to pursue a negotiation? In other words are they

:16:24. > :16:28.going to be a majority government or even a minority government? For the

:16:29. > :16:33.sake of this morning let's assume the answer to both is yes, the UK

:16:34. > :16:38.stays intact and against the polls they were saying this morning, David

:16:39. > :16:42.Cameron forms an overall majority after the election. There is a

:16:43. > :16:50.danger, if he doesn't bring much back, that people will vote yes

:16:51. > :16:54.correct? There is that danger and I see a lot of the British press

:16:55. > :16:59.comment this morning saying this could be a rerun of the Harold

:17:00. > :17:04.Wilson like negotiation of the 1970s, a bit cosmetic but enough to

:17:05. > :17:08.say we have got new terms and you should go with it. I think what is

:17:09. > :17:14.different however, and this is really an appeal if you like, it

:17:15. > :17:18.cannot just be left to the Liberal Democrats and coalition government

:17:19. > :17:24.to make this case on our Rome. A lot of interest groups across the land

:17:25. > :17:28.will have to start being prepared to put their head above the parapet on

:17:29. > :17:34.the fundamental - do you want Britain to remain in the European

:17:35. > :17:38.Union? Yes or no? Are you willing to put your public reputations on the

:17:39. > :17:42.line? We are not getting enough of that at the moment and it is getting

:17:43. > :17:54.dangerously close to closing time. Daniel Hannan, David Cameron will

:17:55. > :18:00.not get away with this, will he It will be an acceptable to his party.

:18:01. > :18:05.If it is an acceptable to Tory backbenchers it is because it is

:18:06. > :18:10.working and they are reflecting what their constituents say. A majority

:18:11. > :18:14.of people in the country are unhappy with the present terms. They can see

:18:15. > :18:20.there is a huge wide world beyond the oceans and we have confined

:18:21. > :18:24.ourselves to this small trade bloc. There is a huge debate to be had

:18:25. > :18:31.about whether we could be doing better outside. It is not danger, it

:18:32. > :18:34.is democracy, trusting people. If the only person offering a

:18:35. > :18:40.referendum at the moment is the Prime Minister, it has serious

:18:41. > :18:46.consequences for his party, your party, that's what I'm talking

:18:47. > :18:51.about. I am very proud of being part of the party that is trusting people

:18:52. > :18:57.to offer this. If he only gets cosmetic changes he cannot carry his

:18:58. > :19:02.party. But ultimately it will not be his party, it is the electorate as a

:19:03. > :19:06.whole that has to decide whether the changes are substantive. Everything

:19:07. > :19:11.we have been hearing just now is about staying out of future

:19:12. > :19:15.integration, protecting the role of the non-euro countries. People are

:19:16. > :19:20.upset about what is going on today with the EU. They can see laws being

:19:21. > :19:25.passed by people they cannot vote for, friendships overseas are

:19:26. > :19:29.prejudiced, and they conceive that the European Union has just put in

:19:30. > :19:34.charge in the top slot somebody who wants a United States of Europe into

:19:35. > :19:40.which we will eventually be dragged into as some kind of Providence

:19:41. > :19:50.Jean-Claude Juncker is a Federalist, you are Federalist, why did the Lib

:19:51. > :19:54.Dems oppose him? We shared the view that whilst you take account of what

:19:55. > :19:58.the members of the European Parliament say, ultimately the

:19:59. > :20:02.choice of the presidency in the commission should be the political

:20:03. > :20:07.leaders, the governmental leaders at a national level, and that's why we

:20:08. > :20:12.went down the route we did. It was more to do with the system than the

:20:13. > :20:17.individual. Although I would say that you need to bear in mind, I

:20:18. > :20:22.mean Daniel, I respect him personally and the integrity of his

:20:23. > :20:29.views, as I think he does mine, but to dismiss the European Union as a

:20:30. > :20:34.small trading block globally, when you have got the United States of

:20:35. > :20:44.America, China and other countries acknowledging its importance, it is

:20:45. > :20:56.really Walter Mitty land. Are we closer than... Daniel Hannan, are we

:20:57. > :21:02.closer to an exit after what happened last week? Yes, because the

:21:03. > :21:11.idea that we could get substantive reforms, gets a mythic and powers

:21:12. > :21:19.back and be within a looser, more flexible European Union has plainly

:21:20. > :21:24.been closed off. We have to face up to the actual European Union that

:21:25. > :21:29.has taken shape on our doorstep Are we going to be part of that or are

:21:30. > :21:33.we going to have a much more semidetached, looser relationship

:21:34. > :21:46.with it which we can either achieve via a unilateral system of power or

:21:47. > :21:50.another way. This debate is never-ending, it is going on and on

:21:51. > :21:54.and has bedevilled British prime ministers for as long as I can

:21:55. > :21:59.remember. Shouldn't the Lib Dems change their stance on the

:22:00. > :22:05.referendum yet again let's just have this in-out referendum and have it

:22:06. > :22:10.sided one way or another? Our position remains clear. If there is

:22:11. > :22:17.a constitutional issue put before us in terms of treaty changes then we

:22:18. > :22:27.will have a referendum. Why not now? I am probably the wrong person to

:22:28. > :22:32.ask because I argued and voted for a referendum on Maastricht because I

:22:33. > :22:36.thought that was a constitutional treaty. Anything that makes the

:22:37. > :22:43.Queen a citizen of the European Union surely has constitutional

:22:44. > :22:47.implications. Anyway, 20 years on we are where we are and we need to

:22:48. > :22:55.established common vocabulary. You talk about federalism. What do we

:22:56. > :22:58.mean? Most of the people operating in the European Parliament and the

:22:59. > :23:04.institution across the road, the Council of Europe, they mean by

:23:05. > :23:11.federalism decentralisation of powers, not a Brussels superstate

:23:12. > :23:14.but actually the kind of decentralisation that maintains

:23:15. > :23:23.national characteristics and pools resources and sovereignty where it

:23:24. > :23:27.makes sense. Mr Juncker, who is now going to be in charge of the

:23:28. > :23:38.Brussels commission, he believes in a single EU reform policy, an EU

:23:39. > :23:42.wide minimum wage and EU wide taxes. You said this week that you

:23:43. > :23:49.liked the sound of Juncker federalism. Does that sound good to

:23:50. > :23:52.you? No, and I think the new president of the commission will be

:23:53. > :23:58.disappointed if he puts forward these views because although we only

:23:59. > :24:03.had Hungary voting with us, I think if you go to other countries,

:24:04. > :24:10.France, Poland, Scandinavia, they are not going to buy that kind of

:24:11. > :24:15.menu. What they mean by federalism is the continental concept, also the

:24:16. > :24:23.North American concept, that we can sit very happily... They have an

:24:24. > :24:33.army, a federal police force, federal taxation. Yes, but in terms

:24:34. > :24:37.of the political institutions which is what we are discussing here, you

:24:38. > :24:41.can have the supranational, the European level, whilst still having

:24:42. > :24:46.the very vibrant national, and indeed as we are practising in the

:24:47. > :24:52.United Kingdom the subnational. A very brief final word from you,

:24:53. > :24:58.Daniel. That is ultimately going to be the choice. The European Union is

:24:59. > :25:03.an evolving dynamic, we can see the direction it is going in. Do we want

:25:04. > :25:07.to be part of that? I suspect Charles Kennedy would have loved a

:25:08. > :25:23.referendum. I cannot help but notice his party is going downhill since he

:25:24. > :25:28.was running it. It is illegal to light up in the workplace, pubs and

:25:29. > :25:31.restaurants. Now the British Medical Association has voted to outlaw

:25:32. > :25:37.everywhere but not everybody at once. It would apply to anyone born

:25:38. > :25:41.after the year 2000. In a moment we will debate the merits of those

:25:42. > :25:48.plans but first he is Adam. There was a time when to be British

:25:49. > :25:53.was to be a smoker. 1948 was the year off peak fag with 82% of men

:25:54. > :25:58.smoking mainly cigarettes but it was a pipe that Harold Wilson used as a

:25:59. > :26:02.political prop to help with the hard-hitting interviews they did in

:26:03. > :26:12.those days. The advertisements make out pipe smokers to be more virile,

:26:13. > :26:17.more fascinating men than anybody else. Do you thought -- have that

:26:18. > :26:28.thought anywhere in your mind? No. It changed in 2006 when smoking in

:26:29. > :26:32.enclosed places was banned. I would rather be inside but unfortunately

:26:33. > :26:38.we have got to do what this Government tells us to do. I think

:26:39. > :26:44.it is good, it is calm and you can breathe. Research suggests it has

:26:45. > :26:48.improved the health of bar workers no end and reduced childhood asthma.

:26:49. > :26:54.Now just one in five adults is a smoker. Coming next, crackdowns on

:26:55. > :26:59.those newfangled e-cigarettes, smoking in cars and possibly the

:27:00. > :27:06.introduction of plain packaging There is still those who take pride

:27:07. > :27:19.in smoking and see it as a war on freedom.

:27:20. > :27:22.We're joined now by Dr Vivienne Nathanson

:27:23. > :27:25.from the British Medical Association who voted for a graduated ban

:27:26. > :27:29.on smoking at their conference last week, and Simon Clark

:27:30. > :27:38.They're here to go head-to-head There are plenty of things which are

:27:39. > :27:48.bad for our health, why single out cigarettes? We need some sugar in

:27:49. > :27:52.our diets but the fact is that we need to stop people smoking as

:27:53. > :27:57.children because if we can do that, the likelihood that they will start

:27:58. > :28:02.smoking is very small. In no circumstances is smoking good for

:28:03. > :28:06.you. There are lots of smokers who live long, healthy lives but we

:28:07. > :28:11.totally accept smoking is a risk to your health and adults have to make

:28:12. > :28:16.that decision, just as you make the decision about drinking alcohol

:28:17. > :28:20.eating fatty foods and drinking sugary drinks. This proposal is

:28:21. > :28:25.totally impractical. It will create a huge black market in cigarettes

:28:26. > :28:28.which will get bigger every year. They say this is about stopping

:28:29. > :28:34.children smoking but there is already a law in place that stops

:28:35. > :28:39.shopkeepers from selling cigarettes to children. This target adults so

:28:40. > :28:45.you could have the bizarre situation in the year 3035 for example where a

:28:46. > :28:50.36-year-old can go into shops to buy cigarettes but if you are 35 you

:28:51. > :28:54.will be denied that, which is ludicrous. The point is that the

:28:55. > :28:58.younger you start smoking the more likely you will become heavily

:28:59. > :29:04.addicted. I take the point, but the point he is saying is that if this

:29:05. > :29:09.becomes law, down the road, if you go into shops to buy cigarettes you

:29:10. > :29:13.would have to take your birth certificate, wouldn't you? We have

:29:14. > :29:17.no idea how the legislation would be written but the key point is that if

:29:18. > :29:23.we can stop young people from starting to smoke, we will in 2

:29:24. > :29:28.years have a whole group of people who have never smoked so you won't

:29:29. > :29:32.have that problem of people who are smokers and they are now in their

:29:33. > :29:36.20s and 30s. Or you will have a lot of younger people who get cigarettes

:29:37. > :29:39.the way they currently get illegal drugs now. They are already getting

:29:40. > :29:46.cigarettes illegally and we have to deal with that. We have got to get

:29:47. > :29:56.better. The Government has not been able to stop it. We know this is

:29:57. > :30:01.going to kill 50%... When you are 15 you think you will live for ever.

:30:02. > :30:05.Indeed but they also do it as rebellion and because they see

:30:06. > :30:09.adults and it is remarkably easy to buy cigarettes. Whatever the case is

:30:10. > :30:14.for individual choice, won't most people agree that if you could stop

:30:15. > :30:17.young people smoking, so that through the rest of their lives they

:30:18. > :30:28.never smoked, that would be worth doing? You get 16 or 17-year-olds

:30:29. > :30:33.who already do that. Is it worth trying? When the government

:30:34. > :30:37.increased the age at which shopkeepers could sell from 16 to

:30:38. > :30:43.18, we supported it. We don't support a ban on proxy purchasing,

:30:44. > :30:46.we support reasonable measures, but this is unreasonable. This proposal

:30:47. > :30:52.says a lot about the BMA, because this week the BMA also passed a

:30:53. > :30:55.motion to ban the use of E cigarettes in public places. There

:30:56. > :30:59.is no evidence that they are dangerous to health, so why are they

:31:00. > :31:03.doing that? They are becoming a temperance society. This is not

:31:04. > :31:06.about public health, it's an old-fashioned temperance society and

:31:07. > :31:10.they have to get their act together because they are bringing the

:31:11. > :31:15.medical profession into disrepute. We were having argument is about

:31:16. > :31:20.things that people buy large accept, smoking in bars or public places,

:31:21. > :31:22.but the real aim of the BMA was the total banning of cigarettes

:31:23. > :31:28.altogether. This would suggest that that was true to claim that. It s

:31:29. > :31:33.not about a ban, it's about a move to a country where nobody wants to

:31:34. > :31:37.smoke and no one is a smoker. But it would be illegal to smoke. It would

:31:38. > :31:44.be illegal to buy, not smoke, and there's a difference between two. So

:31:45. > :31:47.even if I am born in the year 2 00, it would still be illegal to smoke,

:31:48. > :31:54.just illegal to buy the cigarettes? Indeed. The point being that the

:31:55. > :31:58.habit of smoking is very strongly linked to your ability to buy, so

:31:59. > :32:02.that is why things like Price and availability and marketing are so

:32:03. > :32:06.important. People will flood across the Channel with the cigarettes One

:32:07. > :32:09.thing you will find is that throughout the world people is

:32:10. > :32:13.looking at -- people are looking at the same kind of measures, and

:32:14. > :32:17.different countries like Australia, they were the first with a

:32:18. > :32:20.standardised packaging. Other countries will follow, because all

:32:21. > :32:26.of us are facing the fact that we can't afford to pay for the

:32:27. > :32:30.tragedy. There will be people waiting to flood the market with

:32:31. > :32:33.cigarettes. This is nonsense. Thanks for both coming and going

:32:34. > :32:37.head-to-head. "Unless we have more equal

:32:38. > :32:41.representation, our politics won't be half as good as it should be "

:32:42. > :32:43.So said David Cameron back in 2 09. So how's it going?

:32:44. > :32:45.Well, you can judge the quality of the politics for yourself,

:32:46. > :32:48.but we've been crunching the numbers to find out what

:32:49. > :32:49.parliament might look like after the next year's general election.

:32:50. > :32:56.Here's Giles. Politicians are elected to

:32:57. > :32:59.Parliament to represent their constituents, but the make-up of

:33:00. > :33:05.Parliament does not reflect society well at all the parties it. In 010

:33:06. > :33:09.more women and ethnic minority candidates entered Westminster but

:33:10. > :33:17.not significantly more inner chamber still dominated by white males.

:33:18. > :33:23.Looking at the current make-up of the Commons, Labour has 83 female

:33:24. > :33:30.MPs, the Conservative have 47 women MPs, which is just over 47% -- and

:33:31. > :33:34.the Lib Dems have 12% of the parties. All of the parties have

:33:35. > :33:37.selected parliaments in those seats where existing MPs are retiring and

:33:38. > :33:40.to fight seats at the next election, and they've all been

:33:41. > :33:45.trying to up the number of women and ethnic minorities because discounts

:33:46. > :33:50.and can be capitalised on. A picture tells a thousand words. Look at the

:33:51. > :33:55.all-male front bench before us. And he says he wants to represent the

:33:56. > :33:58.whole country. Despite the jibe the Labour Party know they have a long

:33:59. > :34:10.way to go on the issue of being representative. So we

:34:11. > :34:11.way to go on the issue of being look at this particular area of lack

:34:12. > :34:11.of women and ethnic minorities. Women first.

:34:12. > :34:43.In the most marginal, 40 have women candidates, that would mean if they

:34:44. > :34:49.got just enough to win power, they would have 133 women, which is 1%

:34:50. > :34:51.The Conservatives currently have 305 MPs and their strategy

:34:52. > :34:54.at the next election is to concentrate on their 40 most

:34:55. > :34:56.marginal seats, and the 40 seats most mathematically likely to turn

:34:57. > :35:00.In those 40, 29 candidates have been selected

:35:01. > :35:05.If they kept hold of their existing seats and won those 29 new ones

:35:06. > :35:09.they would have 56 women MPs, around 17%, and up 2% from last time.

:35:10. > :35:12.The Liberal Democrats are fighting to hold on to the 57 seats they won

:35:13. > :35:15.at the last election, if they manage that, they would have

:35:16. > :35:20.However all the indications are it could be

:35:21. > :35:24.a bad night for the Lib Dems, if they lost 20 seats, on a uniform

:35:25. > :35:29.swing it would leave them with just four women, 11% of the party.

:35:30. > :35:33.One Conservative peer who thinks the party needs to look at all

:35:34. > :35:36.options if it's female numbers go down in 2015, says Parliament is

:35:37. > :35:51.The bottom line is, if 50% of our population is not being looked at

:35:52. > :35:58.evenly, are we really using the best of our talent? And yes, women's life

:35:59. > :36:01.experiences are different. They are not superior, they are not inferior.

:36:02. > :36:03.They are different. But surely those life experiences need to be

:36:04. > :36:07.represented here at Westminster So that's the Parliamentary

:36:08. > :36:09.projection for gender, According to the last census

:36:10. > :36:15.in 2011, 13% of people in the UK Labour currently has 16 MPs from

:36:16. > :36:20.black, Asian or minority ethnic backgrounds or just over 6%, if they

:36:21. > :36:24.get their extra 68 seats that figure would go up to 26, 8% of their party

:36:25. > :36:28.were from BAME backgrounds. The Tories currently have 11 BAME

:36:29. > :36:35.candidates, or 4% of the party. If they get an extra 29 seats,

:36:36. > :36:38.that would mean 14 BAME MPs, The Liberal Democrats

:36:39. > :36:47.don't have any BAME MPs. If they manage to cling

:36:48. > :36:52.on to their current number of seats they would have two,

:36:53. > :36:55.giving them a proportion of 4%. If they lost

:36:56. > :36:57.their 20 most vulnerable seats, But even if you changed the mix

:36:58. > :37:07.of gender and ethnicity in Parliament would that solve

:37:08. > :37:09.the problem? Probably not. Only 10% of us have gone to

:37:10. > :37:13.a private fee paid school. A Quarter of all Mps went to Oxford

:37:14. > :37:22.or Cambridge. Only a fifth

:37:23. > :37:29.of us went to any university. There is a huge disillusionment with

:37:30. > :37:33.the political elite due to the fact that these people don't look like

:37:34. > :37:36.us. They don't speak like us, they don't have our experiences and they

:37:37. > :37:41.cannot communicate in a way we relate to. If you look at the

:37:42. > :37:44.turnout, at the moment, if you are an unskilled worker, you are 20

:37:45. > :37:47.points less likely to turn and vote than a middle-class professional and

:37:48. > :37:49.that is getting worse with single election.

:37:50. > :37:52.And that's the key, evidence does suggest that if a

:37:53. > :37:55.Party reflects the society it exists within, it is more likely to get

:37:56. > :38:04.It's just gone 11.35pm, you're watching the Sunday Politics.

:38:05. > :38:07.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now

:38:08. > :38:11.Coming up here in 20 minutes, we'll have more from the panel.

:38:12. > :38:20.First though, the Sunday Politics where you are.

:38:21. > :38:22.Hello and a warm welcome to your local part of the show.

:38:23. > :38:26.We're talking trains this wdek ` and taking a journey in West Culbria.

:38:27. > :38:30.Passenger groups say lines like this are being neglected with old

:38:31. > :38:35.Does the Government have a plan to do something about it

:38:36. > :38:39.Who better to ask than the Transport Minister ` Scarborough and Whitby

:38:40. > :38:42.Conservative MP Robert Goodwill ` he's with me in the studio.

:38:43. > :38:45.With him, a member of Labour's Treasury team, Newcastle North's

:38:46. > :38:52.But let's start with a new transport project ` High Speed Rail.

:38:53. > :38:55.The Chancellor George Osborne this week floated the idea of HS3,

:38:56. > :39:01.But just like HS2 from London to Birmingham, it wouldn't go

:39:02. > :39:06.That's not good enough according to Cumbrian MP Tim Farron who wants

:39:07. > :39:09.a more ambitious plan ` including a high speed line

:39:10. > :39:27.Robert Goodwill, another high`speed rail link which is not coming

:39:28. > :39:34.anywhere near us. That is not true. Because HS2 will go up to Bhrmingham

:39:35. > :39:45.then form a Y `` a Y and cole to us. The trains will keep going tp

:39:46. > :39:51.through leaves of the East Coast. Another high`speed link to cross

:39:52. > :39:55.over into the Northeast? Thd Leeds and Manchester conurbations are two

:39:56. > :39:59.powerhouses. We have committed to electrifying the line which will

:40:00. > :40:04.have some benefits. But it hs a good idea to look at how we can love on

:40:05. > :40:10.from HS2. People in Scotland have ideas and people in Wales as well.

:40:11. > :40:15.That is decades away. We nedd to plan this. It is a major investment.

:40:16. > :40:19.We need to look at where we can move on from HS2 for better investment.

:40:20. > :40:22.The Chancellor has kicked the ball into play and we should kick it

:40:23. > :40:29.around and see what the bendfits could be. Catherine McKinnell, plans

:40:30. > :40:31.for HS3 have been welcomed by the Northeast Chamber of Commerce ``

:40:32. > :40:41.change of commerce, which you welcome them? With a caveat. They

:40:42. > :40:45.need to have benefits for the country north of Leeds. It `lmost

:40:46. > :40:49.seemed like George Osborne had completely forgotten that this

:40:50. > :40:53.reason exists. I think he h`s been trying to backpedal since the

:40:54. > :40:57.announcement on Monday. We know that HS2 has taken a long time to

:40:58. > :41:02.actually get on track. It is still not really on track. There has been

:41:03. > :41:07.delayed. There have been huge increases in the cost of th`t

:41:08. > :41:14.project. And so this talk of HS ultimately is jam tomorrow. But what

:41:15. > :41:19.Labour going to do? They had no plans and they have no plans to go

:41:20. > :41:24.beyond Leeds and Manchester? HS was a plan that was conceived under the

:41:25. > :41:30.Labour government and we have seen huge delay in getting it gohng under

:41:31. > :41:34.this government. We are going to set out our plans in the manifesto but

:41:35. > :41:39.the ball is very much in thd government's court to get a grip on

:41:40. > :41:44.HS2 rather than floating around pie in the sky idea about the ftture. We

:41:45. > :41:47.would like to see HS2 on tr`ck and see the benefits actually rdach this

:41:48. > :41:52.region which we did not hear the Chancellor even mention on Londay.

:41:53. > :41:57.He mentioned Teeside, but not in connection with the railways.

:41:58. > :42:00.Well, let's turn now to the state of our local railways

:42:01. > :42:02.which is causing serious concern among passenger groups and LPs.

:42:03. > :42:05.They point to trains that are nearly 30 years old,

:42:06. > :42:07.inaccessible stations and ldngthy journey times on the Northern Rail

:42:08. > :42:11.The Government says it'll invest ?1 billion over the next five xears

:42:12. > :42:13.in making things better ` and has started a consultathon

:42:14. > :42:21.This is the 9:38 from Carlisle to Lancaster via Barrow.

:42:22. > :42:30.There is a fast train but this is the stopping tr`in.

:42:31. > :42:32.It takes more than three and a half hours,

:42:33. > :42:35.hugging the Cumbrian coastlhne as it chugs its way West, calling at

:42:36. > :42:42.Many of the stations are by request only.

:42:43. > :42:48.There is no ticket office hdre, or even a ticket machine.

:42:49. > :42:51.You will not find any station staff and there are no public loos,

:42:52. > :42:56.Many of the trains have been in service for decades, although some

:42:57. > :43:00.Outside peak hours, they are rarely busy but regular

:43:01. > :43:06.I think there could be an extra couple of trains late in thd day,

:43:07. > :43:10.There is too big a gap between trains sometimes.

:43:11. > :43:14.Yes, basically, somewhere to have a drink and amiable.

:43:15. > :43:17.You can ask for whatever yot want, it wouldn't happen.

:43:18. > :43:20.The latest National Rail Passenger Survey suggested continuing

:43:21. > :43:24.dissatisfaction with Northern Rail, which runs the services.

:43:25. > :43:27.Just 61% of those asked were satisfidd with

:43:28. > :43:34.And only 64% said they were content with the cleanliness.

:43:35. > :43:38.Both scores are lower than the national average.

:43:39. > :43:40.Northern Rail said the figures are better than last year

:43:41. > :43:44.and it is listening to customers and continuing to improve.

:43:45. > :43:47.But among rail users, are were high hopes that whdn new

:43:48. > :43:52.franchises start in 2016, they will deliver a much`needed make over

:43:53. > :43:58.There is a crying need for new rolling stock.

:43:59. > :44:08.You go down to the south and see the difference in condition.

:44:09. > :44:10.It is vital for the economy of the area.

:44:11. > :44:16.Lots of people use trains to get to hospitals in Hexham and Newcastle

:44:17. > :44:22.For all sorts of reasons, we need a better service th`n now.

:44:23. > :44:26.The ageing rolling stock and slow services are key targets for change.

:44:27. > :44:30.Both on lines within Cumbri` and to the North East.

:44:31. > :44:35.There are three specific areas where I think there c`n

:44:36. > :44:42.One of them is the Carlisle to Newcastle route

:44:43. > :44:46.We want the trains to stop `t very small stations along the rotte, but

:44:47. > :44:49.we also want to see an exprdss line as well so there is a fast train.

:44:50. > :44:53.There needs to be substanti`l investment because

:44:54. > :44:56.the rolling stock is quite poor quality ` and of course connectivity

:44:57. > :44:59.between Cumbria, between thd east and west and the north and south.

:45:00. > :45:02.The government's consultation on rail services in the North runs

:45:03. > :45:08.But with unions and campaigners already picking holes in thd

:45:09. > :45:12.proposals, there is growing doubt that improvements that passdngers

:45:13. > :45:37.Let's get the view of the unions. Is there room for hope there whll be a

:45:38. > :45:43.big improvement? I don't sed any room for hope at all. One of the

:45:44. > :45:48.things you need to ask Robert Goodwill today is whether the

:45:49. > :45:54.trans`Pennine express services will continue to run from Scarborough in

:45:55. > :45:57.his franchise proposals. Perhaps his colleagues Tim Farron would also

:45:58. > :46:03.like to ask the DFT what is happening over the Windermere oxen

:46:04. > :46:12.home service. That is under consultation as well, that could go

:46:13. > :46:16.as well. Driver operated tr`ins `` driver only operated trains will be

:46:17. > :46:23.the future and we think that is less customer focused. And also there's a

:46:24. > :46:27.report over the horizon takhng away staff and ticket offices. And

:46:28. > :46:29.another proposal is that he was to hand over stations to local

:46:30. > :46:35.authorities which already cash`strapped. It is not workable.

:46:36. > :46:40.So ?1 billion makes no diffdrence but your solution is to put this

:46:41. > :46:46.into public hands. Out of that raise a single extra penny to improve

:46:47. > :46:50.services? I think the railw`ys cost three or four times what thdy cost

:46:51. > :46:55.under British rail when it was nationalised. The reality is that

:46:56. > :46:58.the conservatives who privatise the railways and keep restructuring

:46:59. > :47:03.them, because it is busy not working, one of the things H would

:47:04. > :47:08.say is that we can stop thel taking money out in terms of these foreign

:47:09. > :47:16.companies that run our railways The `` natural that the Dutch n`tional

:47:17. > :47:20.railways and the German railways... But how can we raise the kind of

:47:21. > :47:24.money to transform the servhces You have to have more public money. It

:47:25. > :47:28.is not a matter of who owns it, it means more investment. You can't

:47:29. > :47:33.make that argument unless you see how the railways funded at the

:47:34. > :47:39.moment. And we are thinking about three or four times normallx than

:47:40. > :47:42.British rail used. The forehgn`owned companies of Germany, Holland, the

:47:43. > :47:47.examples we have in this arda, they take money out of the area that

:47:48. > :47:51.could be used for rail investment. We already paying for the privatise

:47:52. > :47:55.railways through the taxpaydr. We are saying it could be structured

:47:56. > :47:59.better, publicly owned and publicly accountable. What we have got for

:48:00. > :48:06.the Northern and Trans Pennhne franchises bad news all round.

:48:07. > :48:12.Robert Goodwill, it is not just the RMT that are sceptical. The services

:48:13. > :48:18.need improvement. Can you pdrsuade us that you have a plan for that?

:48:19. > :48:21.Lets not forget that before the last election, there were people who were

:48:22. > :48:27.saying we were embarking on a teaching style round of cuts and all

:48:28. > :48:31.the stations would be shut down We have not done that. We have shown a

:48:32. > :48:35.commitment to keeping local services. More than that, wd have

:48:36. > :48:38.committed to a massive programme of electrification around the country

:48:39. > :48:44.which means new electric tr`ins We are committed to electrifying 6 0

:48:45. > :48:49.miles of our rail network compared to eight miles from the previous

:48:50. > :48:52.Labour government. We have ` ?3 billion package of improvemdnts to

:48:53. > :48:58.our rail network. For specific services, what can you tell people

:48:59. > :49:02.that will improve? Brisley, we have some very old rolling stock. Some of

:49:03. > :49:07.it has been improved alreadx. We have a new station in Middldsbrough.

:49:08. > :49:10.My constituents can get off at the hospital rather than travel

:49:11. > :49:13.information is rough. And I would love to have a trains starthng in

:49:14. > :49:20.Whidbey in the mornings so that people could come to work in

:49:21. > :49:35.Middlesbrough. `` in which we. `` in Whitby. There are services that will

:49:36. > :49:39.disappear, according to critics There is a service from Manchester

:49:40. > :49:43.through to York. It is whether we have a train that runs on dhesel or

:49:44. > :49:46.electric or whether we could increase the frequency of the

:49:47. > :49:50.service from Scarborough into York. Not everybody who travels there goes

:49:51. > :49:54.to Manchester. A lot of people get off and some of the complaints I get

:49:55. > :49:59.from commuters going into York is that there is only one train and

:50:00. > :50:04.hour at certain times of dax. Let's move it on. Catherine McKinnell

:50:05. > :50:09.this has built up over decades. At least the coalition have a plan

:50:10. > :50:13.What we need to see in this franchise plan is a commitmdnt, a

:50:14. > :50:19.steady timetable and a promhse that this rolling stock will not

:50:20. > :50:24.potentially be improved, but will actually be improved. These trains

:50:25. > :50:27.are 30 years old. There is no heating in the winter. They are

:50:28. > :50:32.totally inaccessible for people with mobility problems. We need to see a

:50:33. > :50:37.proper guarantee that this rolling stock is going to be improvdd as

:50:38. > :50:42.part of the franchising deal. It is all they get the moment in the

:50:43. > :50:47.government's plans. What about the planned about `` what about the idea

:50:48. > :50:52.of taking it into public ownership. Should Labour look at this? Craig

:50:53. > :50:58.raise a very important point that a number of our railways incltding the

:50:59. > :51:02.ones in Newcastle are run bx German state`owned railways. We have Dutch

:51:03. > :51:06.owned railways, French owned railways. If we were in govdrnment,

:51:07. > :51:10.we would not be rushing to put out to tender the East Coast Mahn Line

:51:11. > :51:18.which by 2015 will have rettrned ?1 billion to the taxpayer. Wh`t about

:51:19. > :51:22.other services. Would not bd rushing about `` we would be rushing for

:51:23. > :51:28.ideological reasons to put the matter to tender. Would you put them

:51:29. > :51:32.in public ownership? A statd`owned railway company could bid along with

:51:33. > :51:36.other railway companies and bade against the foreign`owned state

:51:37. > :51:40.companies to win the contract. At the moment, they are not actually

:51:41. > :51:44.allowed to do that. We would change that. A final question. Would you

:51:45. > :51:48.expect `` would you accept that there has been a huge imbal`nce in

:51:49. > :51:52.spending between the north `nd south. The figures suggest ?200 per

:51:53. > :51:57.head in London, ?5 per head in the North. Less is not forget that some

:51:58. > :52:03.of the Crossrail `` let us not forget that some of the projects Lye

:52:04. > :52:10.Cross well `` like Crossrail were planned by Labour. We bring it. We

:52:11. > :52:17.are bringing investment back to the North. We are manufacturing train

:52:18. > :52:21.plans in Sedgefield. Now London has too much powdr

:52:22. > :52:23.and cities in the north need to work together

:52:24. > :52:26.to compete with the capital. But this week it was coming

:52:27. > :52:29.from George Osborne. He wants to create a

:52:30. > :52:31."northern powerhouse" with cities joining forces under elected mayors

:52:32. > :52:34.in the style of Boris Johnson. And he's also promised more

:52:35. > :52:35.investment in the north's science`based btsinesses

:52:36. > :52:38.` if they come up with good ideas. So how have

:52:39. > :52:51.the Chancellor's ideas gone down? Once known as I'm up a list,

:52:52. > :52:58.Middlesbrough was a powerhotse. But it has some of the highest rates of

:52:59. > :53:03.unemployment in the UK. The slow pace of regeneration here in

:53:04. > :53:07.Middlesbrough is the way thd fact that it is not in northern

:53:08. > :53:11.powerhouse. The Chancellor's solution is the choice of a Boris

:53:12. > :53:16.Johnson style elected mayor not just for that as well, but for the whole

:53:17. > :53:21.of the Teeside Valley. This man like the idea. He hopes to be

:53:22. > :53:25.Middlesbrough's mayor next xear He says a beefed up Teeside version

:53:26. > :53:32.could do much more. To have elected leaders trying to make decisions is

:53:33. > :53:36.not the best way to do it. Things will work much better if thdre is a

:53:37. > :53:42.Teeside wide body with one person at the top who is accountable `nd

:53:43. > :53:45.responsible for taking big decisions, driving investment at a

:53:46. > :53:50.level that affects everybodx, not just a tiny slice of the

:53:51. > :53:57.conurbation. Would the region's voters be enthusiastic? Although

:53:58. > :54:02.voters decided to keep their elected mayor, the three this year, voters

:54:03. > :54:05.in Hartlepool got rid of thdirs In Darlington and in Newcastle, the

:54:06. > :54:11.public have decided they did not want mayor is in charge of their

:54:12. > :54:14.communities. Some think that the Chancellor's speech is more about

:54:15. > :54:19.saving his team`mates and moving the north Bay division. He is in dire

:54:20. > :54:24.need of political traction hn the north. He knows that the Tory brand

:54:25. > :54:28.in the north and the North Dast in particular is toxic. He is doing

:54:29. > :54:32.something for those regions where he has marginal MPs. I am afrahd that

:54:33. > :54:37.the Chancellor is far too l`te and his MPs and those constituencies are

:54:38. > :54:40.on a hiding to nothing. But the Chancellor also talked about

:54:41. > :54:44.investment in cutting`edge science in places like this. Teesidd Centre

:54:45. > :54:49.for process innovation is hdlping develop the technology to ttrn

:54:50. > :54:56.rubbish into valuable fuel. It could create hundreds of jobs and he says

:54:57. > :55:03.that this man says support for innovation capacity that produce a

:55:04. > :55:06.positive reaction. We could get first`class academic capability and

:55:07. > :55:09.full`scale industrial capabhlity and infrastructure in the sites that we

:55:10. > :55:14.have. We are waiting for thdse opportunities and these jobs. With a

:55:15. > :55:18.little help, Teeside's business leaders think they could be part of

:55:19. > :55:21.a powerhouse. But they think that should include infrastructure

:55:22. > :55:26.investment here and not just between Manchester and Leeds. We want to see

:55:27. > :55:28.the opportunity for Middlesbrough to link with London, we won't

:55:29. > :55:34.Darlington to have more frepuent stops on these Coast mainline. We

:55:35. > :55:38.want is the electrification of the line through to Middlesbrough and to

:55:39. > :55:43.Teesport. So there are several things on rail that we would want

:55:44. > :55:48.but we would also lobby for whatever high`speed links are going to make

:55:49. > :55:52.sure the North East is incltded 150 years ago, Middlesbrough was at the

:55:53. > :55:56.centre of Britain's economic success. The Chancellor wants that

:55:57. > :56:13.to be true today. Has he re`lly offered anything to fuel a

:56:14. > :56:21.renaissance. Is this all data vu, Catherine McKinnell. What wd have

:56:22. > :56:26.seen from this government is four years of sustained funding, things

:56:27. > :56:31.shifted from areas in this region to areas in the south. We have seen

:56:32. > :56:36.jobs in this region decreashng as a proportion of the number of jobs in

:56:37. > :56:41.the whole economy. We have seen the North East lose out time and time

:56:42. > :56:44.again. I share Tom Blenkinsop's cynicism about the timing of this

:56:45. > :56:54.announcement. Ultimately, what we need to see is the local authority

:56:55. > :56:57.groupings which were suggested as the replacements, it has taken a

:56:58. > :57:03.long time to get them on thdir feet. And to bring investment to bring in

:57:04. > :57:11.jobs to the area. They are only now just Artem to make progress. Labour

:57:12. > :57:19.seems to be keen on these mdas. As an MP for Newcastle, could xou see

:57:20. > :57:36.the advantage of a mayor covering that area? . Would you say, don t

:57:37. > :57:39.think about mayor 's? It is unthinkable to the people. Hf a new

:57:40. > :57:46.offer is put forward, it is up to people to think if that is what they

:57:47. > :57:51.want. We need a strong regional voice to shout for investment. The

:57:52. > :58:15.Chancellor's speech was short on detail. What powers would this may

:58:16. > :58:19.have? I would like it to be somebody will like Boris Johnson with his

:58:20. > :58:24.power. People always say whoever we vote for, the council gets Laginn.

:58:25. > :58:32.But people feel they have pdople foisted on them. We would not foist

:58:33. > :58:36.people on people. It comes down to the mayor is. You can have ` good

:58:37. > :58:41.champion for a particular conurbation. We should look more

:58:42. > :58:47.closely at this proposal. Pdople rejected John Prescott's big idea

:58:48. > :58:56.and we need to keep it local. Somebody you can identify whth and

:58:57. > :59:01.the buck. . I'm talking abott Boris! Labour going to make an announcement

:59:02. > :59:06.which is raised similar, I suspect. If Labour makes out an annotncement

:59:07. > :59:13.it will not leave out the entire Northeast. This is a very cxnically

:59:14. > :59:19.timed announcement from the Chancellor and ultimately it is all

:59:20. > :59:23.jam tomorrow. There is nothhng concrete in his proposals. There is

:59:24. > :59:25.nothing that we can say, th`t will be grateful this region. We will

:59:26. > :59:31.have to leave it there. The number of hospital admissions

:59:32. > :59:34.as a result of eating disorders is 30% higher in the North East than

:59:35. > :59:37.the national average. So plans to close

:59:38. > :59:39.a specialist unit at the Roxal Victoria Infirmary in Newcastle were

:59:40. > :59:41.likely to be controversial. It was taken up by a Tyneside MP

:59:42. > :59:44.in the Commons this week. Here's Mark Denten with mord on that

:59:45. > :59:50.and the rest of the week's news The problems caused

:59:51. > :59:53.by shop closures in South Shields have been highlighted in thd Commons

:59:54. > :59:55.by Emma Law Buck after Marks Spencer closed on King

:59:56. > :00:00.Street after 80 years of tr`ding. An independent commission chaired

:00:01. > :00:02.by the Bishop of Carlisle h`s called for benefit changes to reduce

:00:03. > :00:06.the impact on vulnerable people The decision to close

:00:07. > :00:09.down a specialist unit in Ndwcastle for eating disorders has bedn

:00:10. > :00:13.criticised by Newcastle MP. She blamed it for sending pdople

:00:14. > :00:19.to local units far from homd. That is how we have come to the

:00:20. > :00:23.ridiculous and tragic situation of our National Health Service sending

:00:24. > :00:28.vulnerable Tyneside patients to Glasgow, to Norwich, to London, when

:00:29. > :00:33.there are empty beds in the centre And finally,

:00:34. > :00:40.a new plan to transform the The ?74 million project aims to

:00:41. > :00:45.create jobs And one extra bit of news from

:00:46. > :00:54.West Cumbria. Where the

:00:55. > :00:56.Workington MP Sir Tony Cunnhngham has announced he's to stand down

:00:57. > :00:59.at the next General Election. He's been the MP

:01:00. > :01:03.in the Labour seat since 2001. And that's about it from me

:01:04. > :01:06.for this week. You can read more

:01:07. > :01:08.about the northern powerhouse plans on my blog, and don't forget to

:01:09. > :01:11.follow me on Twitter. Now though it's back to Andrew

:01:12. > :01:16.for the rest of this week's show. been problems elsewhere in Europe,

:01:17. > :01:17.but I take your point. Thanks to both of you today. Back to you,

:01:18. > :01:23.Andrew. Now, there have been some

:01:24. > :01:25.less-than-helpful remarks about the way the Labour party makes

:01:26. > :01:27.policy, and they've come from the man who is heading Labour's

:01:28. > :01:32.Policy Review, Jon Cruddas. In a speech to party activists he

:01:33. > :01:36.was recorded saying that, "instrumentalised, cynical nuggets

:01:37. > :01:39.of policy to chime with our focus groups and our press strategies and

:01:40. > :01:42.our desire for a topline in terms of the 24 hour media cycle,

:01:43. > :01:45.dominate and crowd out any He added that Labour's election

:01:46. > :01:55.strategy was being hampered by a The shadow chancellor, Ed Balls

:01:56. > :02:16.was asked about what Mr Cruddas had I talked to him a couple of days

:02:17. > :02:22.ago, and he's not frustrated, he is excited about his policy agenda He

:02:23. > :02:27.is frustrated that one report of 250 pages gets reduced down. So it's our

:02:28. > :02:32.fault? That is the way we live in the world in which we live, but we

:02:33. > :02:36.have big ideas about devolution long term infrastructure spending

:02:37. > :02:40.and new manufacturing policy, new investment in skills, big changes

:02:41. > :02:48.which, let's be honest, I'm really on George Osborne's agenda. How

:02:49. > :02:52.serious is this? It is Wimbledon, so let's call it an unforced error You

:02:53. > :02:56.go to the party speeches, and you don't know who is in the audience.

:02:57. > :03:00.There is no need for something as serious as this to happen. It's

:03:01. > :03:03.hugely serious because it speaks about something people have felt for

:03:04. > :03:07.a long time, that they have doled out little nuggets of policy but no

:03:08. > :03:11.overarching story. There was a quite saying the Ed Miliband has given as

:03:12. > :03:15.a shopping list, not a narrative. When people in the party say things

:03:16. > :03:20.that are true, it's very difficult for people to explain it away. Not

:03:21. > :03:23.sure Mr Miliband can win here. He was recently criticised for not

:03:24. > :03:28.having policies. Now he's being criticised for having too many. I

:03:29. > :03:30.think this line of attack is particularly wounding because he

:03:31. > :03:36.prides himself on being a politician of ideas. That is his unique selling

:03:37. > :03:41.point, and the weight that David Cameron's prime ministerial nature

:03:42. > :03:44.is his selling point. So it is wounding. If I was the Labour Party,

:03:45. > :03:50.before announcing any policy, I would ask can help fix us on the

:03:51. > :03:56.economy? It might be radicalised immolating on its own terms, but

:03:57. > :03:59.it's politically useless. -- radical and innovative on its own terms I

:04:00. > :04:03.don't think any member of the public does not think they are not radical

:04:04. > :04:06.enough or creative enough. If anything, it's the opposite. They

:04:07. > :04:10.are a bit nervous about what a Labour government could do and

:04:11. > :04:14.nervous about the economic reputation. Reassurance, caution,

:04:15. > :04:18.maybe a bit of timidity might be the notions that inform their policies

:04:19. > :04:24.or should inform their policies in night -- my view, not the opposite.

:04:25. > :04:27.I am worried for Jon Cruddas, because anyone who questions the

:04:28. > :04:32.Labour Party are part of the nexus of the banking industry who are

:04:33. > :04:34.terrified of a Labour victory. It's interesting that this goes to the

:04:35. > :04:38.heart of the debate in the Labour Party, at the highest levels, do

:04:39. > :04:42.they put a big offer to the British people, or a little off, John

:04:43. > :04:49.Cruddas offer, or Douglas Alexander offer? Ed Miliband says that his

:04:50. > :04:52.ideas about freezing energy prices and rent controls are a big offer,

:04:53. > :04:57.but his policy chief clearly has real concerns that they don't go far

:04:58. > :05:01.enough. How important a figure is John Cruddas in the project? He is

:05:02. > :05:06.hell of the -- head of the policy review and has a huge amount of

:05:07. > :05:12.power, and so him slagging off the policy review is a bad moment. He is

:05:13. > :05:15.trusted in that inner circle and the problem for Ed Miliband from the odd

:05:16. > :05:19.is that he has people with strong opinions, Maurice clasping is

:05:20. > :05:24.another, big thinkers, but they maybe don't have a precaution that a

:05:25. > :05:29.professional politician might have in terms of giving bland answers.

:05:30. > :05:32.So, David Cameron had to apologise after his former director

:05:33. > :05:33.of communications was convicted of phone hacking.

:05:34. > :05:37.David Cameron's other former friend, Rebekah Brooks, had a better day.

:05:38. > :05:43.At the same trial, she was cleared of all the charges against her.

:05:44. > :05:49.I take full responsibility for employing Andy Coulson. I did some

:05:50. > :05:52.on the basis of undertakings I was given by him about phone hacking and

:05:53. > :05:56.those turned out not to be the case. I always said that if they turned

:05:57. > :06:01.out to be wrong, I would make a full and frank apology, and I do that

:06:02. > :06:06.today. I am extremely sorry that I employed him. It was the wrong

:06:07. > :06:11.decision. I'm clear about that. When I was arrested it was in the middle

:06:12. > :06:14.of a maelstrom of controversy, politics and of comment. Some of

:06:15. > :06:24.that was there, but much of it was not, so I'm grateful to the jury for

:06:25. > :06:29.coming to that decision. Not been a great week for David Cameron. Andy

:06:30. > :06:31.Coulson found guilty, and another person who had worked in Downing

:06:32. > :06:37.Street is also charged on an unrelated issue. And he was 26- on

:06:38. > :06:40.the wrong end in Brussels, and there is a poll this morning which no one

:06:41. > :06:45.seems to be talking about which puts Labour nine points ahead. Before all

:06:46. > :06:49.that there was Dominic Cummings criticising the Downing Street

:06:50. > :06:53.operation is being shambolic. Is Mr Cameron's judgement becoming an

:06:54. > :06:56.issue? Yes, what often happens when one leader is under pressure for

:06:57. > :07:01.long enough, as Ed Miliband has been the six months, we get bored. We

:07:02. > :07:04.then switch the Gatling gun to the other guy. So David Cameron going

:07:05. > :07:07.into the Conference season might be the man under pressure. The whole

:07:08. > :07:11.Andy Coulson saga has raised questions about his judgement and

:07:12. > :07:14.those around him, but any political damage she was going to sustain over

:07:15. > :07:17.Andy Coulson and phone hacking was sustained years ago -- he was

:07:18. > :07:21.going. It was Brother beyond the date the News of the World was

:07:22. > :07:26.closed down three summers ago - it was probably on the date. As the

:07:27. > :07:32.hacking trial cut through to the general public? Or is it just as

:07:33. > :07:36.media and political obsessives? I am sure it has cut through in some way

:07:37. > :07:40.but it didn't necessarily happen in recent days, more likely in recent

:07:41. > :07:44.years. It was some time ago that Andy Coulson resigned in high

:07:45. > :07:48.profile circumstances. It has had a slow burning effect over a few

:07:49. > :07:54.years, and the Prime Minister fears the Big Bang. But there is one theme

:07:55. > :07:58.and words that unites this week with Juncker and Andy Coulson, and that

:07:59. > :08:01.is that the Prime Minister can be lackadaisical. He was lackadaisical

:08:02. > :08:04.in not asking big question is when there was a lot in the public domain

:08:05. > :08:08.about what had happened that the News of the World. And he was

:08:09. > :08:11.lackadaisical with Juncker. He made a calculation that Angela Merkel

:08:12. > :08:15.would support him and it turned out she couldn't. Maybe he needs to

:08:16. > :08:19.change. He was late in understanding what was happening in Germany when

:08:20. > :08:26.both the Christian Democrats, her party, wanted Juncker, and when the

:08:27. > :08:31.actual Murdoch press of Germany said that they wanted him as well. He

:08:32. > :08:35.never saw that. He only looks at one person in Germany, Angela Merkel,

:08:36. > :08:40.and it is a grand coalition, and the SDP felt strongly about it. He is,

:08:41. > :08:42.in a sense, an essay crisis Prime Minister. He is, in a sense, an

:08:43. > :08:48.essay crisis Prime Minister. He s very good in an essay, and the SA

:08:49. > :08:53.gets a double first the essay. Is Ed Miliband right to be angry? He has

:08:54. > :08:58.John Cruddas attacking him, and that is the news leading in the Sunday

:08:59. > :09:01.Times, and has not been a good week the Prime Minister and in which Mr

:09:02. > :09:04.Miliband has a bigger lead in the polls than he has had some time so

:09:05. > :09:08.he must be wondering why they are having a go at him. He made a

:09:09. > :09:11.tactical error in Prime Minister's Questions by asking all the

:09:12. > :09:15.questions about Andy Coulson. The one at the end about what Gus

:09:16. > :09:20.O'Donnell said was rather hopeful in the extreme. Politicians can be out

:09:21. > :09:24.of touch on all sides of the house. The problem is, and there is a great

:09:25. > :09:28.quote by William Hague, is that the Tory party has two modes, panic and

:09:29. > :09:31.complacency. At the moment they are complacent. They think Ed Miliband

:09:32. > :09:34.will lose Labour election but I don't know if they have a positive

:09:35. > :09:37.plan about how to win it. -- lose Labour the election.

:09:38. > :09:40.Now, we knew Prince Charles had trouble keeping his views

:09:41. > :09:42.about the environment and the countryside to himself,

:09:43. > :09:44.but that's not the only thing he's passionate about according to

:09:45. > :09:47.a radio four documentary to be broadcast this lunchtime.

:09:48. > :09:51.Here's former Education Secretary, David Blunkett on how the Prince

:09:52. > :09:55.had once attempted to influence his policy on schools.

:09:56. > :10:01.I would explain that our policy was not to expand grammar schools, and

:10:02. > :10:07.he didn't like that. He was very keen that we should go back to a

:10:08. > :10:11.different era where youngsters had what he would've seen as the

:10:12. > :10:12.opportunity to escape from their background, where as I wanted to

:10:13. > :10:14.change their background. And you can hear that documentary -

:10:15. > :10:24.it's called The Royal Activist Does it matter that Prince Charles

:10:25. > :10:27.is getting involved in this kind of policy, released behind closed doors

:10:28. > :10:33.question mark on the issue of grammar schools is not clear anybody

:10:34. > :10:36.listened to him. I think it is a principal problem. I've spoken to

:10:37. > :10:39.form a government members, and judging by what they say, if

:10:40. > :10:43.anything we underestimate how much contacting makes with ministers And

:10:44. > :10:49.how many representations he makes on the issue that interest him. There

:10:50. > :10:52.has been an attempt to keep it hidden. It's almost a theological

:10:53. > :10:57.question about whether the future monarch should be involved in the

:10:58. > :11:00.public realm. If he wants to influence policy, shouldn't we know

:11:01. > :11:05.what policy he's trying to influence and what position he is taking?

:11:06. > :11:11.Sewer speech is better than private one-on-one lobbying. Possibly - so

:11:12. > :11:15.a speech. Prince Charles's views are interesting. He's not a straight

:11:16. > :11:19.down the light reactionary. He makes a left-wing case for rammer schools.

:11:20. > :11:24.There is an interview with him in the Financial Times in which his

:11:25. > :11:27.argument in favour for architectural development takes into account

:11:28. > :11:30.affordable housing in the wake which no one would have suspected. He has

:11:31. > :11:34.interesting views, but I'm not convinced on the point of principle

:11:35. > :11:39.whether someone is dashing his position should be speaking. Your

:11:40. > :11:46.former employer 's famously described him as the SDP king. You

:11:47. > :11:53.slightly feel sorry for him. He s 66 and still an apprentice. He's in a

:11:54. > :11:57.difficult position. We know what the powers of the monarch are. They are

:11:58. > :12:00.to advise in courage and warned the Prime Minister of the day. These in

:12:01. > :12:03.the difficult position where the problem for him is that there is a

:12:04. > :12:07.line that isn't really defined, but you slightly feel he just gets a bit

:12:08. > :12:12.too close to it and possibly crosses that line with the lobbying that

:12:13. > :12:17.goes on. I think the worrying thing is that at some point he will become

:12:18. > :12:22.King and will he know that he has got to work within that framework?

:12:23. > :12:25.He is somebody that cannot win either. If he doesn't take an

:12:26. > :12:29.interest in public policy, he will be thought to be a bit of a waster,

:12:30. > :12:33.going round opening town halls, and when he does have an interest we

:12:34. > :12:38.think, hey, you are in the monarchy, stay out. There's an interesting

:12:39. > :12:43.parallel with first ladies who are encouraged to find a controversial

:12:44. > :12:47.charitable project. Michelle Obama has bought childhood obesity, and

:12:48. > :12:51.that is the standard thing. Everybody knows that that is a bad

:12:52. > :12:55.thing, but you are not offering solutions that are party political.

:12:56. > :12:58.I feel there must be a middle way with what he should be able to do

:12:59. > :13:02.about finding big causes he can complain about without getting stuck

:13:03. > :13:06.into lobbying ministers. Which can become a party political issue. He

:13:07. > :13:09.has had some influence on architecture, because the buildings

:13:10. > :13:11.we are putting up to date are better than the ones we used to put up

:13:12. > :13:16.The Daily Politics is on BBC 2 at 11:00am

:13:17. > :13:20.We'll be back here at the same time next week.

:13:21. > :13:25.Remember if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.