02/03/2014 Sunday Politics North West

Morning folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.

Fears that Ukraine could face invasion escalate this morning as

Russian forces take control of Crimea. President Obama and his

European allies tell President Putin to back off. It doesn't sound like

he's listening. Shadow Education Secretary Tristram

Hunt has started spelling out Labour's plans for schools. So

what's the verdict - full marks or must try harder? He joins us for the

Sunday Interview. And all the big political parties

are desperate to broaden their appeal. We'll look at some unusual

ideas for And in the North West: Suits you,

sir, but does the way we tax business premises also measure up?

I'll be speaking to the Business Secretary Vince Cable.

changes. And tightening household finances.

And with me, as always, three journalists who'd make a clean sweep

if they were handing out Oscars for political punditry in LA tonight.

But just like poor old Leonardo DiCaprio they've never won so much

as a Blue Peter badge! Yes, it's Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan

Ganesh. Instead of acceptance speeches they'll be tweeting faster

than the tears roll down Gwyneth Paltrow's face. Yes, that's as

luvvie as we get on this show. Events have been moving quickly in

Ukraine this weekend. The interim government in Kiev has put the

Ukrainian military on full combat alert after Russia's parliament

rubber-stamped the deployment of Russian troops anywhere in Ukraine.

Russian troops seem already to be in control of the mainly

Russian-speaking Crimea region, where Russia has a massive naval

base. President Obama told President Putin that Russia has flouted

international law by sending in Russian troops but the Kremlin is

taking no notice. This is now turning into the worst stand-off

between Russia and the West since the conflict between Georgia and

Russia in 2008, though nobody expects any kind of military

response from the West. Foreign Secretary William Hague is on his

way to Kiev this morning to show his support for the new government,

though how long it will survive is another matter. We can speak to our

correspondent David Stern, he's in Kiev.

As things look from Kiev, can we take it they've lost Crimea, it is

now in all essence under Russian control? Yes, well for the moment,

Crimea is under Russian control Russian troops in unmarked uniforms

have moved throughout the peninsula taking up various positions, also at

the Ismis which links Ukraine into Crimea. They've surrounded Ukrainon

troops there. Three units have been captured according to a top

officials. We can say at the moment Russia controls the peninsula. It

should also be said, also they have the support of the ethnic Russian

population. The ethnic Russians make up the majority of the population.

They are also not entirely in control because there are other

groups, namely the Tatar as and the ethnic Ukrainian speakers who are at

least at the moment tacitly resisting. We'll see what they'll

start to do in the coming days. David, I'm putting up some pictures

showing Russian troops digging in on the border between Crimea and

Ukraine. I get the sense that is just for show. There is, I would

assume, no possibility that the Ukrainians could attempt to retake

Crimea by military force? It seems that the Ukrainians are weighing

their options right now. Their options are very limited. Any

head-to-head conflict with Russia would probably work against the

Ukrainians. They seem to be taking more of a long-term gain. They are

waiting for the figs's first move. They are trying not to create any

excuse that the Russians can stage an even larger incursion into Crimea

or elsewhere, for that matter. They also seem to be trying to get

international support. It should be said, this is a new Government. It

has only been installed this week. They are trying to gain their

footing. This is a major crisis They have to count on the loyalty of

the army they might have some resistance from solders from the

eastern part of the country who are Russian speaking. They probably

could count on Ukrainian speakers and people from the centre and west

of the country as well as regular Ukrainians. A lot of people are

ready to fight to defend Ukrainian Terre Tory. Where does the Kremlin

go next? They have Crimea to all intents and purposes. There's a weak

Government in Kiev. Do they move to the eastern side of Ukraine which is

largely Russian speaking and there's already been some unrest there?

That's the big question, that's what everybody's really asking now. Where

does this go from here? We've had some unrest in the eastern part of

the country. There have been demonstrations and clashes. More

ominously, there have been noises from the Kremlin they might actually

move into eastern Ukraine. Putin in his conversation with Barack Obama

said they might protect their interests there. It should be said,

if they do expand, in fact, they've also said they are dead against the

new Government seeing it as illegitimate and fascist. It does

contain risks. They will have to deal with international reactions.

America said there will be a deep reaction to this and it will affect

Russia's relations with Ukraine and the international community. They

have to deal with the reaction in Ukraine. This may unite Ukrainians

behind this new interim Government. Once Russia moves in, they will be

seen as an invading force. It plays on historical feelings of Russia

being an imperial force. Joining me is MP Mark Field who sits

on the security Security and Intelligence Committee in the House

of Commons. What should the western response be to these events? I can

understand why William Hague is going to Kiev tomorrow to stand side

by side whizz whoever's in charge. They need to CEOP sit numbers and

also President Putin. The truth is we are all co significant fatries to

the Budapest Memorandum of almost 20 years ago which was designed to

maintain the integrity of the Ukraine and Crimea. There needs to

be a discussion along those lines. The difficulty is President Putin

has watched events in recent months, in relation to Syria, it is palpable

President Obama's focus of attention ask the other side of the Pacific

rather than the Atlantic. The vote in the House of Commons, I was very

much against the idea of military action or providing weapons to the

free Syrian army. My worry is, events proved this, the majority of

the other options toed as sad are rather worse. It is clear now we are

in a constitutional mess in this country. We cannot even contemplate

military action without a parliamentary vote that moves

against quick reaction that is required from the executive or, I

suspect, there will be very little appetite for any military action

from the West over in Ukraine. We are corn tours under the agreement

of less than 20 years ago. We may be but we've guaranteed an agreement

which it is clear we haven't the power to enforce. You wrote this

morning, Britain is a diminished voice. Clams Iley navigating the

Syrian conflict we relick wished decisions to the whims of

parliamentary approval. That may or may not be but the Kremlin's not

watching how we voted on the Syrian issue? In relation to Syria, it was

where is the western resolve here. The truth ask Putin's position is

considerably less strong. In diplomatic terms. He had a victory

in Syria in relation to chemical weapons and in relation to the

West's relationship with Iran. Putin is a vital inter locking figure In

demographic and economic terms, Russia's in very deep trouble. The

oil price started to fall to any degree, oil and gas price, given the

importance of mineral wealth and exports for the Russian economy

Putin would be in a lot of trouble. It requires an engagement from the

EU and the EU are intending to look at their internal economic problems

and will be smarting from the failure within a matter of hours of

the deal they tried to broker only nine days' ago.

You say if Mr Putin decides to increase the stakes and moves into

the east, takes over the whole place, our Government, you say, will

find itself with another colossal international headache. Some people

watching this will be thinking, what's it got to do with us? It s a

long way away from Britain. We haven't a dog in this fight? We have

in this regard for the longer term here. I think if there were to be

some military action in Ukraine the sense of Russia taking over, it

could have a major impact on the global economy in very quick order.

You should not deny that. There will be move to have sanctions against

Russia. The escalation of that will be difficult. The other fact is

looking at our internal affairs and reform, partners, the Baltic states,

Finland, Poland, the Czech Republic, they will be looking at a resurgent

Russia now and think they'll need to hold as tightly as possible to the

EU institutions and the power of Germany at the centre of that. This

whole appetite for the reforms politically and economically will be

closed very much within a matter of a short period of time. It has

longer term implications. Mark Field, thank you.

We're joined now by BBC News night's Diplomatic Editor Mark Urban. Is

there any prospect of a western military response? Clearly at the

moment, it is nil. The boat has sailed with the Crimean. It has been

per performed by Russian forces It is now a matter of coordinating a

plate cal line. European foreign ministers tomorrow. To say what will

our future limits be? Where could we possibly draw red lines? To try to

think a couple of steps down this, what happens if Russia interrupts

energy supplies to EU member states ornate owe countries? These are the

important steps they have to think about. It is quite clear we are in a

different world here now. Also, Ukraine is facing a urgent foreign

exchange crisis. Within literally a few weeks they could run out of

money. All of these are rushing towards decision makers very fast.

There is an interim and I suggestion unstable Government in Kiev. Crimea

semi-to be under Russian control. There are clashes between the

reformers and Russian nationals in the east of the country. What does

Mr Putin do next? He has lots of options, of course. He has this

carte blanch carte blanch from his Parliament to go in to the rest of

Ukraine if he wants to. His military deployment suggests the one bite at

a time, just Crimea to start with. See what response comes from the

Ukrainian Government. Of course so far, there hasn't been a coherent

response. The really worrying thing about recent months, not just recent

days, are the indications that the future of Ukraine as a unitary state

is now in doubt. Look at it from the other side of the equation. The

President when faced with demonstrations, many extremists he

was unable to deal with that. Now we have the other side, if you like,

the Russian speakers, the other side of the fight, Russian nationalists

showing they can get away with unilateral action more or less with

impunity. The Ukrainian chiefs have been sacked. I think there are

considerable questions now as to whether Ukraine is falling apart

and, if that happens, we're into a Yugoslav-type situation which will

continue posing very serious questions for the EU and NATO for

months or years to come. So, Janan, Ukraine is over? Where the west to

concede to the Russian in Crimea, it would perversely be a net loss for

Russia. You'd assume the rest of Ukraine would become an un

unambiguously a member of the the EU, maybe NATO. On top of that a

Russian dream of Eurasion dream they will look at Putin's behaviour

and is a, no, thanks, we'll head towards the EU. It is a short-term

victory for Putin which backfires on his broader goals in Well, many

people said if he grabs Crimea, he loses Ukraine, which is your point.

We have seen violent demonstrations in the big eastern cities in Ukraine

yesterday. People taking control of certain buildings. The risk is there

of spreading beyond Crimea. I think the lack of any unified or visible

response from Ukrainian armed forces... They allowed Russian

troops to walk into the bases in Crimea. They have supposedly gone on

red alert but they have done absolutely nothing. We don't see

them deploying from barracks. There are serious questions about whether

they would just fall apart. Putin is not going to let them split away. I

would have thought he would like the entire Ukraine to come into the

Russian ambit. Barack Obama is saying this will not stand. He has a

90 minute conversation with Vladimir Putin and what is his response? I am

suspending my cooperation in the run-up to the Sochi Summit. What is

the EU doing? Nothing. There is nothing they can do and Putin knows

there are a series of lines that he is able to cross and get away with

it. Why should Berlin, London, Washington be surprised by the

strength of Vladimir Putin's reaction? It was never going to let

Ukraine just fall into the arms of the EU. That is the interesting

point. And who does he listen to? Paddy Ashdown was saying sent Angela

Merkel because she is the only person who can talk to him and I

find that response worrying. We need to speak with a united voice but

nobody knows what we should be saying. Military intervention is out

for the West so we go to economic sanctions. Doesn't Vladimir Putin

just say, oh, you want sanctions? I have turned off the gas tap. Yes, it

is move and countermove, and it is difficult to predict where it will

end up. In all these meetings that are being held, they do think a step

or two ahead and try and set out clear lines. Thank you for coming in

this morning. Labour has been struggling since

2010 to decide exactly how to take education secretary Michael Gove,

one of the boldest reformers of the coalition and most divisive figures.

Ed Miliband appointed TV historian Tristram Hunt and many thought

Labour had found the man to teach Michael Gove a lesson. But how much

do we really know about the party's plans for England's schools? Wales,

Scotland and Northern Ireland are a devolved matter. Child has been back

to school to find out. A politician once told me, do you know why

education secretaries changed schools? Because they can. Michael

Gove might dispute the motive but he is changing schools, like this one.

The changes he is ringing in our encouraging them to be academies,

free from local authorities to control their own budgets, ushering

in free schools, focusing on toughening exams and making them the

core of the curriculum with less coursework, and offering heads more

discretion on tougher discipline. And he is in a hurry to put all this

in place. But has that shut out any chance for a Labour Government to

change it all themselves and do they really want to? Any questions?

Visiting a different school, first in line to get a crack at that

would-be Labour's third shadow education secretary since 2010,

Tristram Hunt. In post, he has not been taken about fine tuning

previous direct opposition to free schools and he has also suggested

teachers in England would have to be licensed under a Labour Government,

allowing the worst to be sacked and offering training and development to

others and of course ending coalition plans to allow unqualified

teachers into classrooms. Full policy detail is still unmarked

work. Your opinion about evolution? What is very clear is that Labour's

education policy is still evolving. We are learning that they have some

clear water, but we also seem, from the sting at the back, to get the

feeling that there is not a great deal of difference from them and the

current Government on types of schools and the way education should

proceed. -- from listening at the back. So what exactly is different

about their policy? What Tristram Hunt's job is to do is to be open

and honest about the shared agenda between us and the Tories. There are

a lot of areas where there is clear water between us and Tristram Hunt

as to turn his back, shared agenda, stop fighting it, and forge our

agenda, which I think people will be really interested in. The art of

Government, of course, is to balance competing pictures of policy, even

inside your own party. It is fair to say that if Labour reflects and

draws its own visions of a shared agenda, it might have to square that

idea with teaching unions, who are already unhappy with the pace and

tone of change that the Government had sketched out. What we sincerely

hope is that if Labour were to form the next Government, that they would

look at a serious review of accountability measures. That is

really what ways on teachers every single day. Actually they would look

at restoring the possibility, for example, of local councillors to be

able to open schools. That seems eminently sensible. If they are not

going to move back from the free schools and academies programme at

the very least they need to say that academy chains will be inspected

because at the moment they are not. Labour have balls in the air on

education and are still throwing around precise policy detail. There

are areas that they could grab hold of and seize possession. A focus on

the rounding of the people, developing character, the impact of

digitalisation on the classroom Also the role and handling of

teachers in the system and the interdependence of schools. That is

all still to play for. Currently I think the difference between the

parties is that the coalition policies, while we do not agree with

all of them, are clear and explicit, and Labour's policies are yet to be

formulated in a way that everybody can understand clearly. I don't

think that Tristram Hunt or Miliband will want to pick unnecessary fights

before the election. I think we will have quite a red, pinkish fuzziness

around the whole area of policy but after the election there will be

grey steel from Tristram Hunt. But if fuzzy policy before the election

is the lesson plan, it does rather risk interested voters being left in

the dark. Tristram Hunt joins me now for the

Sunday interview. Welcome. Thank you. Which of Michael

Gove's school reforms would you repeal? We are not interested in

throwing a change for the sake of it. When I go round schools,

teachers have been through very aggressive changes in the last three

years, so when it comes to some of the curriculum reforms we have seen,

we are not interested in changing those for the sake of it. Where we

are interested in making change is having a focus on technical and

vocational education, making sure that the forgotten 15% is properly

addressed in our education system. What we saw in your package was an

interesting description of how we have seen structural reforms in the

names of schools. Academies, free schools, all the rest of it.

International evidence is clear that it is the quality of leadership of

the headteachers and the quality of teaching in the classroom that

transforms the prospects of young people. Instead of tinkering around

the names of schools, we focus on teacher quality. Viewers will be

shocked to note that this Government approves of unqualified teachers in

the classroom. We want to have fully qualified, passionate, motivated

teachers in the classroom. It sounds like you might not repeal anything.

You might build on it and you might go in a different direction, with

more emphasis on technological education but no major repeal of the

reforms of Michael Gove? I don't think you want to waste energy on

undoing reforms. In certain situations they build on Labour

Party policy. We introduced the sponsored academy programmes and we

began the Teach First programmes, and we began the London challenge

which transformed the educational prospects of children in London We

want to roll that out across the country. You have said there will be

no more free schools, which Michael Gove introduced, but you will allow

parents let academies, which just means free schools by a different

name. No, because they will be in certain areas. We want to create new

schools with parents. What we have at the moment is a destructive and

market-driven approach to education. I was in Stroud on

Thursday and plans for a big new school, in an area with surplus

places, threatened to destroy the viability of local, rural schools.

We want schools to work together in a network of partnership and

challenge, rather than this destructive market-driven approach.

You say that, but your version of free schools, I think, would only be

allowed where there is a shortage of places. That means that where there

is an excess of bad schools, parents will have no choice. They still have

to send their kids to bad schools. And we have to transform bad schools

and that was always the Labour way in Government. At the moment we just

have an insertion of new schools. Schools currently underperforming

are now underperforming even more. Children only have one chance at

education. What about their time in school? Our focus is on the

leadership of the headteacher and having quality teachers in the

classroom. So they cannot set up new better schools and they have to go

to the bad schools. Tony Blair said it should be easier for parents to

set up new schools where they are dissatisfied with existing schools.

You are not saying that. Even where they are dissatisfied with existing

schools, they cannot set up free schools and you are reneging on

that. We live in difficult economic circumstances where we have got to

focus public finances on the areas of absolute need. We need 250,0 0

new school places. 150,000 in London alone. We have to focus on building

new schools and where we have to put them. And secondly... Absolutely

not. Focusing on those schools. Making sure we turned them around,

just as we did in Government. We have had a remarkable degree of

waste under the free school programme. If you think of the free

school in Derby, the Academy in Bradford, and as we saw in the

Telegraph on Friday, the free schools in Suffolk, a great deal of

waste of public money on underperforming free schools. That

is not the Labour way. We focus on making sure that kids in schools at

the moment get the best possible education. Except that in your own

backyard, in Stoke, only 34% of secondary school pupils attend a

good or outstanding school. 148 out of 150 of the worst performing local

authorities and it is Labour-controlled. Still terrible

schools and yet you say parents should not have the freedom to start

a better school. We have great schools in Stoke-on-Trent as well.

We face challenges, just as Wolverhampton does and the Isle of

Wight and Lincolnshire. Just like large parts of the country. What is

the solution to that? Making sure we share excellence among the existing

schools and making sure we have quality leadership in schools. Those

schools in Stoke-on-Trent are all academies. It is not a question only

of structure but of leadership. It is also a question of going back to

the responsibility of parents to make sure their kids are school

ready when they get to school. To make sure they are reading to their

children in the evening. We can t put it all on teachers. Parents have

responsibilities. I understand that but you have told me Labour's policy

would not be to set up new schools which parents hope will be better.

Parents continue to send their kids to bad schools in areas like Stoke.

Labour has had plenty of time to sort out these schools in Stoke and

they are still among the worst performing in the country. You are

condemning these parents to having to send their kids to bad schools.

Where we have seen the sett ing up of Derby, Suffolk, we have seen that

is not the simple solution. Is simply setting up a new is not a

successful model. What works is good leadership. I was in Birmingham on

Friday at a failing comprehensive is not a successful model. What works

is good leadership. I was in Birmingham on Friday at a failing

comprehensive school and now people are queueing round the block to get

into it. You can turn around schools with the right leadership,

passionate and motivated teachers, and parents engaged with the

learning outcome of their kids. In the last few years of the Labour

Government, only four kids from your this Government would set up the new

school. In Birmingham, they got in a great headmaster and turned the

school around and now people are queueing round the block to get into

it. You can turnaround schools with the right leadership, passionate and

motivated teachers, and parents engaged with the learning outcome of

their kids. In the last few years of a Labour Government, only four kids

from your area of and you had plenty of chances to put this right but

only four got to the two and you had plenty of chances to put this right

but only four got to the two leading universities. Traditionally young

people could leave school at 16 and walking two jobs in the potteries,

the steel industry, the traditionally young people could

leave school at 16 and walking two jobs in the potteries, the steel

industry, the but also to get an apprenticeship at Jaguar Land

Rover, JCB, Rolls-Royce. That is why Ed Miliband's focus on the forgotten

15%, which we have just not seen from this Government, focusing on

technical and vocational pathways, is fundamental to Your headmaster

was guiles Slaughter. Was he a good teacher? He He never taught me.

Over 90% of teeners in the private sector are qualified. They look for

not simply teachers with qualified teacher status. Teachers with MAs.

Teachers who are improving them cephalitis. Becoming better

educators. cephalitis. Becoming better

teaching. You were taught by unqualified teachers. Your parents

paid over ?15,000 a year for you being taught by unqualified

teachers. Why did you make such a big deal of it? Because we've seen

right around the world those education systems which focus on

having the most qualified teachers perform the best. It cannot be right

that anyone can simply turn up, as at the moment, have schools at

veritising for unqualified teachers teaching in the classroom. We want

the best qualified teachers with the deepest subject knowledge, for the

passion in learning for their kids. It is absurd we are having arguments

about this. Simply having a paper qualification doesn't make you a

great teacher. Let me take you to Brighton college. It is gone from

the 147th to the 18 18th best private school in the land. Fllt the

headmaster says: This is the top Sundaytimes school

of the year. The school in derby where this Government allowed

unqualified teaching assist taints. We had teachers who could barely

speak English. That is because if you have unqualified teachers you

end up with a dangerous situation. The problem with that school was not

unqualified teachers. People were running that school who were unfit

to run a school. We have an issue about discipline and behaviour

management in some of our schools. Some of the skills teachers gain

through qualifications and learning is how to manage classes and get the

best out of kids at every stage It doesn't end with a qualified teacher

status. That's just the beginning. We want our teachers to have

continue it will development. It is not good enough to have your initial

teacher trainingaged work through your career for 30 years. You need

continual learning. Learning how to deal with digital technology.

Refresh your subject knowledge. As an historian I help teachers. You've

taught as an unqualified teacher. Not in charge of a subject group. I

give the odd lecture. I'm-y to go to as many schools as possible. I don't

blame you. It is uplifting. Would you sack all unqualified teachers?

We'd want them all to gain teacher status. What if they say no? If they

are not interested in improving skills and deepening their knowledge

they should not be in the classroom. If a free school or academy hired a

teach thinking they are a great teacher but unqualified, if they are

then forced by you to fire them they will be in breach of the law.

They are being urged by us to make sure they have qualified teacher

status. We've lots of unqualified teachers as long as they are on the

pathway to making sure they are qualified. But if they say they

don't want to do this, will you fire them? It is not an unreasonable

suggestion is that the teachers in charge of our young people have

qualifications to teach and inspire our young people particularly when

we face global competition from Shanghai, Korea and so on. The head

teacher of Brighton college finds incredibly inspeechational teachers

who don't' necessarily have a teaching qualifications. It is a

different skill to teach ten young nice boys and girls in Brighton to

teaches 20 or 30 quids with challenging circumstances, special

educational needs, different ability. Being a teacher at Brighton

college is an easy gig in comparison to other schools. Where we want

teachers to have a capacity to teach properly. Do you think Tristram

could ever lead the Labour Party? I think Ed is a great leader, the

reforms yesterday were a real sign for his leadership. And the fact

David Owen, the man with a pre-history with our party is back

with us. It is great. Even Gideon had to change his name to George.

Have you thought of switching to Tommy or Tony? Maybe not Tony!

Michael Foot was called Dingle Foot. I love the Labour because it accepts

everybody from me to Len McCluskey. We are a big, broad happy family on

our way to Government. Thank you very much.

You're watching The Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers in

Scotland who leave us for Sunday politics Scotland. In over 20

minutes I'll look at I'm Arif Ansari. Coming up in the

North West: Suits you, sir, but does the way we tax business premises

also measure up? It certainly increases the divide between North

and South which does not make it easy for businesses to cope in this

environment. I'll be speaking to Business Secretary, Vince Cable But

looking very sharp in the studio this week, the Conservative MP for

Pendle, Andrew Stephenson. And joining me for the first time since

she announced she's stepping down at the next election is Hazel Blears,

the Labour MP for Salford and Eccles. Welcome both. Hazel, a big

announcement, you had some great times as at MP and some difficult

ones. How hard will it be to move on? It is always a cut decision

Being an MP has been a fantastic experience. I have done things I

would never have drained of and have hopefully made this city a better

place, so it is difficult. Is this part of your legacy, media city

Yes, here we are. By the next election I will have been an MP for

nearly 20 years, it has been my whole life and I want to try and

bring on somebody new who will be a champion and a fighter for Salford.

Were you disappointed that Ed Miliband did not put you in his

team? Know, when I went back to parliament we had a long talk and he

asked if I wanted to do that, and I said I had done so many jobs in

government I did not want to replay that light, so I have been working

on issues like dementia, social mobility, bringing young people to

work in Parliament and getting companies to be more socially

responsible, and I have enjoyed my time. I have another year yet, so I

am not quite gone. How confident are you Ed Miliband will win the next

election? I think the Conservatives are deeply unpopular. I think our

policy agenda is beginning to be fleshed out, I think the idea of

campaigning around the cost of living, people are struggling and it

is a good thing, and I think it will be close because X is quite volatile

at the moment, but I am confident we will have a Labour government and I

will be fighting every day for that. If Labour does win, Andrew, that

could be at your expense. It could be my predecessor MP who won the

seat, that when I speak to local businesses they seem to be doing

well, local people seem optimistic, so I think it is all to play for.

Thank you. The burning issue in Trafford this week has been the

go`ahead for a new biomass incinerator, despite opposition from

local people. But after a legal challenge, the High Court ruled the

government acted lawfully in approving Peel Energy's plans for

the wood`burning electricity plant. So where does that leave localism,

the idea that decisions are taken closer to home? A question for Euan

Doak. It mobilised the community. Air

pollution 70% above EU limits. Residents opposing the building of

an incinerator were backed by their council. But in the end, the High

Court said the government was right to grant permission for the Barton

Renewable Energy Plant. None of the councillors in Trafford supported

the building of the plant by Peel Energy. It will be built just

further along the Manchester Ship Canal, on Peel`owned land. Salford

Council also opposed it. But the decision to build it was taken 00

miles away, in London. Local people's views have been ignored.

Most local people I have spoken to are post to the plant, and they

believe their government's promises about a local agenda, that local

people would have a say on planning decisions that affect them, they

have been let down by that agenda. The biomass incinerator will burn

mainly waste wood and the Environment Agency will monitor

emissions. But opponents have dubbed it the smiling assassin, and claim

it will further damage air quality. Last week the European Commission

began legal proceedings over excessive pollution in Greater

Manchester. It is so devastating for the people that live here and the

impact this will have on our lives, our health and our future. They

argue decisions like this are stacked in favour of the developer.

The government will always go with the developers were possible, that

is what they want to do under the new arrangement, especially if it is

commercial or industrial development or housing. If these decisions go to

the top we can expect to see the Secretary of State rule in favour of

the development. Peel weren't available for interview but said:

"We now intend to focus our attention on completing the work

necessary for the plant to be built." It is planned to open in

2016. Was the government right to oppose

local people and the Tory run council? There is a difficult

balancing act here and I know Trafford Council bought this tooth

and nail with local residents saying this was the wrong place. You have a

situation where the Environment Agency says this would not damage

health and air quality and so it would always be settled in the

courts. I think it is a regrettable decision. I am not a local MP but I

can understand why residents opposed it and local politicians. Why do you

say it is regrettable? You look at a developer of this size, it is a big

development and has united people from different parties against that,

so there is clearly grounds for consultation. Why did the government

want local people? There is a balance with these things. The

government got the balance wrong. You have to represent local views

but when you're looking at objects of national importance there is a

balance to be struck. I have not necessarily saying the government

got this one right, as an outsider looking at the details, I think the

council had a good case against it but it seems the courts decided

otherwise. Hazel, you support renewable energy. I had the same

situation in tackles, a plan to build a massive biomass incinerator

within 50 metres of people's houses. We fought a 12 day planning inquiry

with hardly any resources, the developer had ?1 million legal team

and after 12 days the inspector found in our favour. It was an

amazing decision. Andrew is being brave to date because his government

have made so much about localism, neighbourhood plans, local people

making decisions, and here in Trafford you have a community up in

arms and they have been ignored In the case of this one for the

Environment Agency says there are satisfied there wouldn't be a risk

to people's health, what do you do? That evidence is controversial. We

put forward evidence including experts from Salford University that

the emissions could endanger health, but our biggest case was that local

people didn't want it, and for once the planning inspector went with

local people and in this case the government have not listened to

local people and when you have something like this where people

live next door to it with their children, you have to go with the

people. Thank you. Business rates are about as popular

as council tax. Businesses pay out for council services based upon the

value of their premises. But a revaluation has been delayed. And

because property prices in parts of the North West have fallen, some say

they're paying more than they should be. I've been asking the Business

Secretary Vince Cable about it, but first, here's Stuart Pollitt.

Historically, Underbank was once the way into Stockport. But these days,

not enough shoppers are making their way down this street. You've got an

easy figure to fit. Freedman's has been in Stockport since 1893. In the

last five years, trade and rent has fallen, but rates haven't. We've

been paying rates forward under 20 years, but is now more a drained

than ever? Yes, it is. I don't know how much he paid but it is a big

drain. We have asked them to reduce it but it is not much. David is not

happy about having to find money for his business rates, especially as

some businesses nearby pay nothing at all. Even with that incentive,

you will find many empty shops on two, three, four places to rent

within a few yards. Paul's tattoo parlour has survived, and is now

receiving some relief from the rates. We are paying about half the

rates we normally paid and it will hopefully be free the next couple of

years to bring more trade here. A few things is on the street

obviously have a grand because they have been there a few months, . One

of these beautiful historical areas. The government has intervened to

help shopping in Stockport. It sent Mary Portas with ?100,000 to spend

but it is another government decision, one about business rates

which new research claims has cost businesses here millions. Business

rates are based on the rental value of the building. The Government

postponed a rate revaluation due in 2013 until 2015. Research for the

Grimsey Review shows that's good news for places like London's Bond

Street. Rents there have soared 72%, so sticking with 2008 values has

saved luxury stores ?66 million In Greater Manchester, rents have

fallen. In Stockport, they're down 47%, so the delay in revaluation has

cost an estimated ?61million. Had a revaluation taken place in 2015

retailers here would be paying 60 million less so throwing them

?100,000 is an insult. You have a perverse situation where Greater

Manchester retailers are subsidising the likes of Burberry and adoption

of Havana, and that cannot be right in a system of their taxation. ``

Dulcie and valour. The Government says delaying the revaluation has

benefited 800,000 out of 1.1 million premises. But politically it's

pitted the Coalition Government against Lib Dem and Tory council in

the North West. You are in conflict with the Coalition Government on

this one. I stand up for the people of Stockport and I believe it was

the wrong decision for this part of the world. It increases the divide

between north and South and does not make it easy for businesses to

survive in this environment. As the first signs of spring appear, the

businesses of Little Underbank are still waiting for recover it to

arrive on their streets. And while the Business Secretary Vince Cable

was opening a new business park in Burnley this week, I asked him if

the current system was working fairly. No, and I think there is a

general view in the business community the business rate system

does not work well and the government has capped the increase

in business rates and we're now looking more widely at how to put it

on a better footing, having annual revaluations, and I share the view

of a lot of business associations that we should look for a different

system of taxing business. A lot of people here feel the current system

is unfair because they are paying too much business rates. I think

that is fair and there are a lot of losers from the postponement of

revaluation, but when the government did the sums it found there were

more winners than losers. But the winners are all down south and the

losers are up north. It is not as simple as that, but I understand in

areas where commercial rents have not risen, there is a genuine

grievance that the companies are not getting the benefit in terms of

their business rate. We need to look at the system and reformat.

Stockport and Trafford Council have lobbied government to say please do

not put off the revaluation. Can you commit that will not happen? I was

in Merseyside at you weeks ago when this was raised and I said the

government is now looking at annual revaluations and different ways of

charging business rates that change the unfairness is in the system Did

you consider Ed Miliband and the Labour Party to be pro`business

Many things they have been saying lately have cast doubt on that.

Freezing energy prices causes problems with investment in energy

and I hope to take Britain forward we get all the parties taking a

pro`business approach which helps business to have a long`term

planning horizon so they can get investment capital. How concerned is

the Lib Dem leadership about the apparent collapse of support for the

party in the North West? We realise 20 went into government we made some

unpopular decisions but we are used to ups and downs and the next big

battle is around the European battle `` the European elections. We are

the only party which is making a positive case for British

involvement in Europe and I think we will be vindicated.

And we're also joined now by Christian Spence, head of business

intelligence at the Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce.

Vince Cable making it clear he thinks the current system is not

working and once an alternative so what would it be? As things have

suggested, the biggest issue is around revaluations. Currently the

amount they pay in business rates is adjusted every five years according

to market value, businesses are still paying now in relation to what

they paid in 2008 at the height of the market. Since then we have seen

in many areas, not just a level of rent staying the same but a

significant fall. So you do want to see a revaluation? I think it has to

happen, it is the single most important thing in the system. Some

businesses in the North West will lose out but that is tough. Those

who have seen trading go up will, but that is better. Out`of`town

centres have seen significant increases in their turnover and I

think they can share the burden Our concern is for small businesses

many have is seen a large fall in the value of their property, so to

be paying business rates as a proportion of their rent from 2 08

is unfair. But Vince Cable is saying he is not keen on business rates at

all, he was the system reformed Would you favour a different kind of

taxation? Since the recession we have seen the economy on a firmer

footing, we expect that to continue, but the current rate system is

fundamentally broken. Tied to the square footage of year promises and

its rental value may work well for a high street `based economy of 2

years ago, but our retail is under pressure from internet and

international firms who were not subject to the same conditions, so

it is broken. Hazel, you blame the government for this? I think the

fact Vince Cable is talking about an annual review is by commission he

should have got on with it before now. That is a good idea? I think

the system does need fundamental reform. We have committed to

freezing business rate and trying to cut them because small businesses

employ most people in this country and our town centres are struggling.

We have done in a little things like having cafes and art events, but...

You haven't had Mary Portas. We haven't, but a man who used to run

Tesco said the economy has changed dramatically. People ordering online

don't pay business rates because there are no promises. Maybe we

should move towards corporation tax but we need a new system. People

feel aggrieved when they need to run a small business like the Taylor

there, we need to do something to help them. Does the government need

to get its act together on this We are heading in the right direction

in terms of what events was saying about a new system. I would favour

annual revaluations but I think we need to decide what the new system

will be. You would favour a new system? Yes, the government is doing

its best to mitigate what it can enable ad system. In an area like

Pendle, where we have low values in many high street shops, that has

helped some businesses but it is a sticking plaster. Why did the

government delay their revaluation? Until we can come up with a better

system. They have capped increases of business rates at 2% and there

are debates about that, and I hope as we go towards the budget we will

see the Chancellor taking representation on board. That was a

mistake? No, delaying it is logical because the system is broken so we

knew a new system in place. But in the meantime companies are losing

out. In the meantime the revaluation officer said if we do a head under

the current system, the majority of businesses would lose out on the

businesses that pay the most in terms of increases, we are talking

about pubs, hotels, some of the small businesses that would be

harmed and put out of business by revaluation in 2015. Christian, one

change is the idea that councils can keep some of the increase in

business rates. Has that changed anything? It is hard to tell, we are

not through the first fiscal year. The biggest thing now for local

authorities who have seen huge cuts to their revenue they have lost a

third of their incomes since 20 0 and those cuts are not finished yet.

The question for local authorities is whether they have the will to

look at this rate in terms are renewed maximisation. Businesses

across the country note you cannot continue to increase price and

expect to increase revenue, so how do they maximise rates? They now

have flexibility to cut rates for certain businesses and need to look

at that. Hazel, Vince Cable is saying he does not think Labour is

pro`business. What did you make of that? I reject that. We have been

supporting small businesses and we set a freeze for business rates in

2015 because we understand the pressure is on the people who employ

most people in this country. It is the pricing coming from him because

he is meant to be the most pro`Labour member of Cabinet. I

think that shows the pressure he is under we could not resist a smile

because the Lib Dems have lost their way, they do not know what they

stand for, a complete flip`flop on commission fees, they have lost

their left of centre about, I feel sorry for events. Thank you.

Let's see what else has been making the news this week. Here's 60

Seconds. A Cheshire councillor has called for

clarity on the destruction of Syrian chemical weapons in Ellesmere Port.

The Foreign Office says Veolia will be dealing with 150 tonnes of

material that poses no risk. Lancashire's Police Commissioner

says he has "no case to answer" despite the police watchdog looking

again at his expenses. Clive Grunshaw had been told in January he

would not face charges. Liverpool City Council is ending its

partnership with BT. The mayor shot down within three months and is

looking at further savings. European Commissioner Johannes Hahn

was at Manchester University's Graphene Institute. The EU's giving

?24 million for research into the world's thinnest, strongest and most

conductive material. In a global world you have to work together

And our newest MP has taken his seat in the Commons. Labour's Mike Kane

won the recent by`election in Wythenshawe and Sale East.

That's it from us this week. Just time to thank my guests Hazel Blears

and Andrew Stephenson. Hopefully not the last time we have you here.

Government to change it. Thank you both for being here. Andrew, back to

you. This week grant Shap said he wanted

to rebrand the Tories as the workers' party to show it can reach