:00:35. > :00:39.Morning folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.
:00:40. > :00:42.Pressure on Culture Secretary Maria Miller mounts as the Tory press
:00:43. > :00:47.Tory voters and even a Tory Minister turn against her. That's our top
:00:48. > :00:49.story. The economic outlook is getting
:00:50. > :00:54.rosier. But Ed Miliband is having none of it. The cost of living
:00:55. > :01:04.crisis is here to stay, says Labour. Shadow Minister Caroline Flint joins
:01:05. > :01:07.us for the Sunday Interview. And we bring you the Sunday Politics
:01:08. > :01:09.Gallery. But which former world leader is behind these paintings of
:01:10. > :01:22.world leaders? new London borough. A blue flint for
:01:23. > :01:34.regeneration or economic Armageddon? And with me as always, the best and
:01:35. > :01:38.the brightest political panel in the business - Janan Ganesh, Helen Lewis
:01:39. > :01:39.and Nick Watt. Their tweets will be as brief as a Cabinet Minister's
:01:40. > :01:48.apology. A frenzy of betting on the Grand
:01:49. > :01:51.National yesterday. But there was one book on which betting was
:01:52. > :01:54.suspended, and that was on the fate of Culture Secretary Maria Miller,
:01:55. > :01:57.now the 2/1 favourite to be forced out the Cabinet. She galloped
:01:58. > :02:01.through her apology to the Commons on Thursday in just 32 seconds. But
:02:02. > :02:04.speed did her no favours. There s been mounting pressure on her to
:02:05. > :02:07.resign ever since, especially from Tories. And this weekend the
:02:08. > :02:10.Chairman of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority,
:02:11. > :02:13.Ian Kennedy, said it's time MPs gave away the power to decide how
:02:14. > :02:28.colleagues who break the rules are punished. An inquiry into Maria
:02:29. > :02:33.Miller's expenses claims was launch in 2012, following allegations he
:02:34. > :02:38.claimed ?90,000 to fund a house she lived in part time with her parents.
:02:39. > :02:41.She had designated this her second home. She was referred to the
:02:42. > :02:50.Parliamentary Standards Commissioner, who recommended that
:02:51. > :02:53.she repay ?45,000. But this week the Commons Standards Committee,
:02:54. > :02:57.comprising of MPs from all parties, dismissed the complaint against
:02:58. > :03:06.Maria Miller and ordered her to repay just ?5,800 for inadvertently
:03:07. > :03:11.overclaiming her merge claimants. She was forced to apologise to the
:03:12. > :03:15.Commons for the legalistic way she dealt with the complaints against
:03:16. > :03:20.her. But Tony Gallagher told the Daily Politics on Friday: We got a
:03:21. > :03:24.third call from Craig Oliver who pointed out, she is looking at
:03:25. > :03:28.Leveson and the call is badly timed. I think if you are making a series
:03:29. > :03:30.of telephone calls to a newspaper organisation investigating the
:03:31. > :03:32.conduct of a Cabinet Minister, that comes close
:03:33. > :03:37.After that interview Craig Oliver contacted us, saying there was no
:03:38. > :03:42.threat in anyway over Leveson. I mead it clear at the time. Tony
:03:43. > :03:46.Gallagher is talking rubbish about me, and you can use that. The Daily
:03:47. > :03:50.Telegraph have released a tape of a phone call between Maria Miller s
:03:51. > :03:56.aid, Joanna Hindley, and a reporter investigating her expenses claim.
:03:57. > :04:01.Joanna Hindley said: Maria's obviously been having quite
:04:02. > :04:06.a lot of editor's meetings around Leveson at the moment. So I'm just
:04:07. > :04:12.going to kind of flag up that connection for you to think about.
:04:13. > :04:14.The Prime Minister is sticking by his Culture Secretary, but this
:04:15. > :04:17.weekend's crescendo of criticism of her presents him with a problem and
:04:18. > :04:21.he could be wishing Maria Miller would just fall on her sword. Even
:04:22. > :04:26.over 80% of Tory voters in a Mail on Sunday poll think she should go On
:04:27. > :04:33.the Andrew Marr Show, the Work and Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan
:04:34. > :04:37.Smith, defended his colleague. I've known her always to be a reasonable
:04:38. > :04:41.and honest person. But is she doing the Government or her any good by
:04:42. > :04:44.staying in office at the moment do you think? This is a matter the
:04:45. > :04:49.Prime Minister has to take consideration of and she herself. My
:04:50. > :04:54.view generally is I'm supportive of Maria, because if we are not careful
:04:55. > :04:57.we end one a witch-hunt of somebody. And I'm joined now by the
:04:58. > :05:00.Conservative MP, Bob Stewart, and the man in the white suit, former MP
:05:01. > :05:03.and anti-sleaze campaigner Martin Bell. Welcome to you both. Stuart
:05:04. > :05:07.Stuart sturkts let me put this to you, a Conservative MP told this
:05:08. > :05:11.programme, this is a quote, she has handled this appallingly. Downing
:05:12. > :05:15.Street has acted like judge and jury, for Craig Oliver to get
:05:16. > :05:19.involved is disastrous. She's been protected by the whips from the
:05:20. > :05:24.start. What do you say to that? It's not great, is it? The fact of the
:05:25. > :05:29.matter is the question one should ask is, did she deliberately try to
:05:30. > :05:34.make money? Did she deliberately try to obscure ate? The answer is she
:05:35. > :05:39.certainly didn't deliberately try to make money, in the system, which was
:05:40. > :05:44.the old system, and with regard to obscure ago, I wasn't there, but
:05:45. > :05:48.let's put it this way. She was going through a quasi-judicial process and
:05:49. > :05:54.might have ended up in court, so she has a right to defend herself. Hold
:05:55. > :05:58.on o you said she doesn't do it to make money, she remortgaged the
:05:59. > :06:01.house a couple of times to earn more interest to us, the taxpayer, and
:06:02. > :06:05.when interest rates went down she didn't reduce the amount she was
:06:06. > :06:12.charging in expenses. Well, the point is the adjudicator said there
:06:13. > :06:16.was ?45,000 she was owed. And then a committee, Standards Committee, said
:06:17. > :06:19.actually it should be reduced. That was mainly MPs but there are three
:06:20. > :06:24.lay members. Yes, but they don't have the vote. OK, fine, that is
:06:25. > :06:28.where it is wrong and we've got to get it sorted. Let me put another
:06:29. > :06:33.quote from our Conservative MP. He didn't want to be named. None of you
:06:34. > :06:38.do at the moment. I'm being named. But you are backing her. George
:06:39. > :06:41.young in cahoots. He's been leading on the Standards Committee to find
:06:42. > :06:46.her innocent. The Standards Committee is unfit for purpose. I
:06:47. > :06:51.think the Standards Committee should be revisited. I think the system is
:06:52. > :06:56.still evolving. And I think actually we ought to have totally independent
:06:57. > :07:01.judgment on MPs' pay and allowances. We haven't have not got there yet
:07:02. > :07:06.and that is where it is wrong. Martin Bell, have MPs interfered in
:07:07. > :07:10.the Maria Miller process and with the current Standards Commissioner
:07:11. > :07:13.in the same way that they saw off a previous Commissioner they thought
:07:14. > :07:21.was too independent? Andrew it is exactly the same. Yesterday I looked
:07:22. > :07:27.at a diary entry I made for May 2000, I said, dreadful meeting
:07:28. > :07:33.standards and privileges, they are playing party politics. One of them
:07:34. > :07:39.told Elizabeth fill kin to her face the gossip in the tea room was she
:07:40. > :07:42.had gone crazy. Nothing's changed. What this shows is most of all,
:07:43. > :07:48.what's the committee for? If it is just going to rubber stamp what the
:07:49. > :07:53.party wants and its mates, I don't see any point. But it hasn't rubber
:07:54. > :07:57.stamped. It's changed it. Well, it has watered down. That's why we
:07:58. > :08:04.should make it totally independent and it shouldn't be involved in the
:08:05. > :08:09.House of Commons. It is plus plus ca change isn't it? MPs', scandal, and
:08:10. > :08:16.MPs closing ranks for one of their own. Has the Commons learned
:08:17. > :08:20.nothing? And this is after the expenses scandal, where everything
:08:21. > :08:23.was out for everybody to see, you would think MPs would be careful.
:08:24. > :08:28.This is before the expenses scandal. We are looking at an historical
:08:29. > :08:31.event, during your time, Martin not mine. I'm clean on this. You
:08:32. > :08:36.campaigned for him as an independent. I did, he was a good
:08:37. > :08:41.friend of mine. And now you've joined the club. And now you are
:08:42. > :08:45.defending Maria Miller? I'm defending someone who hasn't been
:08:46. > :08:48.proved guilty of anything beyond the fact she was rather slow to come
:08:49. > :08:53.forward with evidence. My point on that, is I understand that. MPs are
:08:54. > :08:58.being lambasted the whole time these days. There were a heck of a lot of
:08:59. > :09:03.them, Martin, who are utterly decent. She didn't try to make
:09:04. > :09:06.money. We've just been through that. I don't think that's right. The jury
:09:07. > :09:11.is out on that. What should have happened in the Miller case, Martin
:09:12. > :09:14.Bell? I don't think there should be a committee on standards. I think
:09:15. > :09:19.the Commissioner should make a report. There has been to be justice
:09:20. > :09:24.for the MP complained against. Then the committee of the whole House can
:09:25. > :09:29.consider it. But we are, the House of Commons, then as now is incapable
:09:30. > :09:36.of regulating itself. That's been proving yet again. She made a
:09:37. > :09:39.perfunctory apology. She threatened and instructed the Standards
:09:40. > :09:45.Commissioner investigating her, and her special adviser linked expenses
:09:46. > :09:49.to Leveson, when trying to stop the Daily Telegraph from publishing I
:09:50. > :09:53.mean, is that the behaviour of a Cabinet Minister? Well, it's
:09:54. > :09:56.probably not the behaviour of someone that's got time on their
:09:57. > :10:02.hands. She's a very busy Cabinet Minister. Well, she had enough time
:10:03. > :10:08.to write lots of letters to the Standards Commission ser. She felt
:10:09. > :10:14.under such threat. She had the time. She had to make the time. Die know
:10:15. > :10:17.the lady is not trying desperately to make money. I disagree but on
:10:18. > :10:23.that. The fact of the matter is this was an old, old system, that
:10:24. > :10:26.we've tried to put right, or the Commons has tried to put right. I
:10:27. > :10:32.agree that MPs shouldn't get involved in this. Should we get rid
:10:33. > :10:37.of this committee? It serves no purpose except to cause trouble The
:10:38. > :10:41.adjudicator has said that and it should be the end of it. It
:10:42. > :10:46.shouldn't come back to the Commons. Although her special adviser
:10:47. > :10:49.threatened them over Leveson she was and is the Minister responsible for
:10:50. > :10:54.trying to introduce something like Leveson and that is something a big
:10:55. > :11:02.chunk that the press doesn't want. She is a target. It has a good
:11:03. > :11:07.record on this issue. It played wit a straight bat. The facts aren't in
:11:08. > :11:13.dispute are they? Will she make it to the next cabinet reshuffle and
:11:14. > :11:19.then go? Iain Duncan Smith said it is a matter for the Prime Minister.
:11:20. > :11:23.In my view, as things stand, I question did she deliberately want
:11:24. > :11:29.to make money? I don't think she did. Should she go? No. Should she
:11:30. > :11:32.be reshuffled? I don't know. Goodness me, you are asking someone
:11:33. > :11:38.who will never be reshuffled, because he will never make it. I was
:11:39. > :11:42.only asking for your opinion, not your ability to do it. This is a
:11:43. > :11:49.problem for Cameron isn't it? It is a problem for Cameron. There is
:11:50. > :11:54.nothing wrong with returning to be badge benches, as you know. Hear,
:11:55. > :11:59.hear. To that. Stick with me. Helen, can she survive? Is I'm going out of
:12:00. > :12:07.the prediction game when I said Clegg is going to win the date, so I
:12:08. > :12:14.owe Janan a tenner on that one. Grant Shapps has supported her. She
:12:15. > :12:20.was ringed by Sir George young and Jeremy Hunt... This is pretty
:12:21. > :12:23.devastating. On past form David Cameron hates having to bounce
:12:24. > :12:28.people out of the cabinet. He will want to keep Maria Miller until the
:12:29. > :12:31.summer reshuffle. This is a question mark on whether she survive this is.
:12:32. > :12:36.This isn't damaging to the Conservative or the Labour Party, it
:12:37. > :12:40.is damaging to everyone. This is catastrophic damage to the entire
:12:41. > :12:44.political establishment. Every single speech that David Cameron and
:12:45. > :12:48.Ed Miliband have given since 20 9, talking about restoring trust, they
:12:49. > :12:51.can wipe them from their computers, because voters are going to look
:12:52. > :12:56.that there and say, this lot haven't learnt anything. They are giving
:12:57. > :13:02.perfunctory apologies and then you have MPs sitting in judgment on MPs
:13:03. > :13:09.and rather than paying back ?45 000, she pays back ?5,800 after MPs have
:13:10. > :13:13.been into it. Damage is huge. Just getting rid of one Cabinet Minister,
:13:14. > :13:16.you will need to do more than that. You will notice that Labour haven't
:13:17. > :13:21.made huge weather of this. No, goodness me, they have their own
:13:22. > :13:27.skeletons. Exactly. The person who has made hay out of this is Nigel
:13:28. > :13:31.Farage, who has not been backwards in coming forward. He doesn't seem
:13:32. > :13:35.to care about skeletons. The Prime Minister has be-Gunby backing her,
:13:36. > :13:40.but that's not popular even with Tory voters. How does he get out of
:13:41. > :13:45.this? This is the problem for him. Five years ago his reaction to the
:13:46. > :13:51.expenses scandal was seen by many Tory backbenchers as excessive. They
:13:52. > :13:56.felt hung out to dry by a man who is independently wealthy. To go from
:13:57. > :14:00.that to making a special exemption to Maria Miller because it is
:14:01. > :14:02.politically suitable is more incendiary and provocative. It is
:14:03. > :14:05.not just upsetting the voters and the Daily Telegraph but a good
:14:06. > :14:11.number of people behind him. I think they will get rid of her. I think
:14:12. > :14:19.the Government, to paraphrase Churchill, will zoo the decent thing
:14:20. > :14:22.after exhausting all options, of the European elections a reshuffle. The
:14:23. > :14:27.culture department has gone from a baulk water in haul to one of the
:14:28. > :14:31.most politically sensational jobs because of its proximity to the
:14:32. > :14:43.Leveson issue. She has to be replaced by someone Lily skillful
:14:44. > :14:54.and substantial. Mr Cameron is not short of smart women? Nikki Morgan,
:14:55. > :14:57.the education department, these are absolutely outstanding women and the
:14:58. > :15:04.problem that the generation elected in 2005, Maria Miller generation,
:15:05. > :15:12.there are some really good people elected in 2010. You are not
:15:13. > :15:17.responsible for hacking into the culture Department's Twitter account
:15:18. > :15:24.last night? I was out at the time! They all say that! One so, Maria
:15:25. > :15:31.Miller is like a modern-day Robin Hood... She robs the poor to help
:15:32. > :15:40.the rich. Which one of us has not embezzled the taxpayer? I reckon it
:15:41. > :15:49.is the lady. You have the perfect cover. We would not know how to
:15:50. > :15:55.would we? You cannot tweet from a mobile device, can you? Play it
:15:56. > :15:59.safe. No, do something dramatic Have lots of pledges. Have just a
:16:00. > :16:02.few pledges. Ah, there must be a Labour policy review reaching its
:16:03. > :16:05.conclusion because everyone has some free advice for the party about its
:16:06. > :16:13.message and the man delivering it. Here's Adam. He is well liked by the
:16:14. > :16:19.public don't quite buy him as a leader. The papers say he is in hock
:16:20. > :16:24.to the unions and the party has a lead in the polls but it is not
:16:25. > :16:31.solid. Bartenders Neil Kinnock. That is what they said Winnie who lost
:16:32. > :16:39.the 1982 election. The whole country deserves better and we will work to
:16:40. > :16:42.ensure that the day will come when with the Labour government, the
:16:43. > :16:50.country will get better. Someone who was there can see some spooky
:16:51. > :16:53.parallels. The important lesson from 1992 is it cannot rest on your
:16:54. > :16:59.laurels and hope for the best, you cannot sit on a lead of seven points
:17:00. > :17:02.because the election narrows that and you cannot rely on the
:17:03. > :17:05.government not getting its act together because the Conservative
:17:06. > :17:10.Party was well funded and organised, the double whammy posters, the tax
:17:11. > :17:16.bombshell, but incredibly effective and the message was unified and they
:17:17. > :17:21.beat us on the campaign. The lesson for Labour today is this lead will
:17:22. > :17:27.evaporate quite possibly over the next few months and we might go into
:17:28. > :17:30.the election behind in the polls. But Ed Miliband is getting
:17:31. > :17:37.conflicting advice about how to avoid 1992 happening. Be bold, be
:17:38. > :17:41.cautious and then, the idea that Labour can squeak into office with
:17:42. > :17:46.just 35% of the vote, which worries some people. Each month, the Labour
:17:47. > :17:53.Party meets around the country and last week, everybody spoke about the
:17:54. > :17:58.dangers of this 35% strategy. They were increasingly unhappy and it is
:17:59. > :18:04.very important that those people around the leader naturally have a
:18:05. > :18:09.duty to protect him and they make sure he gets this message that while
:18:10. > :18:13.there is total support for him, they do want this key year in the run-up
:18:14. > :18:20.to the General Election to be putting out an alternative which we
:18:21. > :18:23.can defend on the doorstep. The doorstep where Neil Kinnock made his
:18:24. > :18:32.concession speech is crammed with Spanish back hackers. The old Labour
:18:33. > :18:36.offices are no a budget hostel. Labour headquarters is down the road
:18:37. > :18:40.and they are putting the finishing touches to a speech Ed Miliband will
:18:41. > :18:43.give this week about the cost of living and I am told he will drop
:18:44. > :18:49.hints about new policies in juicy areas like housing, low pay, growth
:18:50. > :18:52.and devolving power. As for the charge that they are not radical
:18:53. > :18:58.enough, his people say they want to be bold but they have to be credible
:18:59. > :19:02.as well. They say that Labour is more united than it has ever been
:19:03. > :19:05.but there has been some grumbling that the cost of living campaign is
:19:06. > :19:11.not the same as a vision for the country. And that Ed Miliband was
:19:12. > :19:14.not statesman-like enough at Prime Minister's Questions and one figure
:19:15. > :19:19.who sat at the same table in the Neil Kinnock years summed it up like
:19:20. > :19:22.this. Things are OK but it feels like we're playing for the draw
:19:23. > :19:37.Shadow Energy Secretary Caroline Flint joins me now for the Sunday
:19:38. > :19:43.Interview. This 35% victory strategy, it does not sound very
:19:44. > :19:46.ambitious? I am campaigning to win this election with a majority
:19:47. > :19:53.government and everybody else around the table is also. But we want to go
:19:54. > :19:57.to every corner of the country and win votes for Labour and win seats,
:19:58. > :20:05.that is what we are working towards. To avoid last time, the coalition
:20:06. > :20:11.bartering. But that 35% is a victory strategy so are you saying there is
:20:12. > :20:16.no 35% strategy and that no one at the heart of Labour is not arguing
:20:17. > :20:20.for this? We are working to win around the country and to win all of
:20:21. > :20:25.those battle ground seats and we must have a strategy that appeals to
:20:26. > :20:29.a cross-section of the public but within that, that broad group Queen
:20:30. > :20:38.Elizabeth Olympic Park and. You could do that with 35% of the vote?
:20:39. > :20:44.There is lots of polling and everyone looks at this about what we
:20:45. > :20:47.need to do to get seats and we want to have a comprehensive majority at
:20:48. > :20:54.the next election to win to govern this country. Last week, we have
:20:55. > :20:59.been reading reports of splits in the party over policy and on
:21:00. > :21:05.tactics, even strategy. A struggle for control of the General Election
:21:06. > :21:11.manifesto, we are told. What are you arguing over? I said on the
:21:12. > :21:15.committee and just listening to the film before, it is about being
:21:16. > :21:21.radical but also credible and we are talking about evolution and that is
:21:22. > :21:27.an important subject but we are also united and to be honest, in 201
:21:28. > :21:31.people were writing us off saying we would turn on ourselves and that has
:21:32. > :21:35.not been the case. We are not arguing about the fundamentals, we
:21:36. > :21:40.are discussing the policies that are coming up with different colleagues
:21:41. > :21:43.and talking about how we can make sure they are presented to the
:21:44. > :21:49.public and that is part of a process. That is a discussion, not
:21:50. > :21:53.disagreement. The Financial Times, which is usually pretty fair,
:21:54. > :21:59.reports a battle between Ed Miliband's radical instincts and the
:22:00. > :22:05.more business fiscal conservatism of Ed Balls. What side are you on? I am
:22:06. > :22:10.for radical change, I am for energy and I believe strongly we must be
:22:11. > :22:16.formed the market and people might portray that as anti-business but
:22:17. > :22:19.this is about more competition and transparency and others coming into
:22:20. > :22:26.this market so our policy on this is radical, not excepting the status
:22:27. > :22:34.quo. It is also for business. Opinion polls show that few people
:22:35. > :22:40.regard Ed Miliband as by Minister material -- Prime Minister material.
:22:41. > :22:48.That has been true since he became leader. And in some cases, they have
:22:49. > :22:52.been getting worse. Why is that Opinion polls say certain things
:22:53. > :22:56.about the personalities of leaders, David Cameron is not great either.
:22:57. > :23:03.And they were not great when he was in opposition. At this stage, he was
:23:04. > :23:13.getting 49% as Prime Minister real material and Ed Miliband, 19. -
:23:14. > :23:17.Prime Minister material. When you look at certain questions that the
:23:18. > :23:21.public is asked about who you think you would trust about being fair in
:23:22. > :23:24.terms of policy towards Britain who understands the cost of living
:23:25. > :23:31.crisis, they very much identify with Ed Miliband. We are ahead in the
:23:32. > :23:38.polls. Ed Miliband has made that happen. We have one more
:23:39. > :23:42.councillors, we have been running in by-elections and we have held this
:23:43. > :23:47.government over the barrel over six months on energy prices. That is to
:23:48. > :23:53.do with his leadership. The more that voters save him, the less they
:23:54. > :24:00.seem convinced. In 2011, he had been leader for one year, and only 1 %
:24:01. > :24:09.regarded him as weird, by 2014, that was 41%. Look at that! Look at that
:24:10. > :24:12.weirdness! What people need is to know where the Labour Party stands
:24:13. > :24:18.on fundamental issues. And in those areas, particularly the cost of
:24:19. > :24:22.living and fairness and people being concerned that we are entering into
:24:23. > :24:27.a period where people will be worse for the first time ever at the end
:24:28. > :24:33.of the Parliament, these things are important and Ed Miliband is part of
:24:34. > :24:39.our success. Definitely. I think this is ridiculous, to be fair, he
:24:40. > :24:43.is not a politician that says, I am dying with the Arctic monkeys, I
:24:44. > :24:52.know who is the number one. He did not play that game. -- down. He is
:24:53. > :24:55.not either there to portray himself as someone who was with the
:24:56. > :25:01.children, I know everything about popular culture. His authenticity is
:25:02. > :25:06.the most important thing. People do not think he is authentic, unless
:25:07. > :25:11.they think we were at is authentic. Is it true that his staff applaud
:25:12. > :25:20.him when he comes back after giving even a mediocre speech? I have never
:25:21. > :25:25.heard that. I have never heard about him being applauded. And I am
:25:26. > :25:30.pleased to applaud him with he makes speeches, I have given him a
:25:31. > :25:34.standing ovation. You have to do that because the cameras are
:25:35. > :25:39.rolling! No, he made a good speech. Five minutes without notes. It took
:25:40. > :25:44.a long time to memorise I don't blame him! The cost of living.
:25:45. > :25:50.Focusing on that, it has paid dividends. But inflation is falling
:25:51. > :25:54.and perhaps collapsing, unemployment is falling faster than anybody
:25:55. > :26:01.thought, as we can see. Wages are rising, soon faster than prices
:26:02. > :26:06.Retail sales are booming, people have got money in their pockets
:26:07. > :26:12.Isn't the cost of living crisis narrative running out of steam? I do
:26:13. > :26:17.not think so and I should say that I welcome any sign of positive changes
:26:18. > :26:22.in the economy, if anybody gets a job in Doncaster, I am pleased by
:26:23. > :26:27.the end of this Parliament families will be over ?900 worse off because
:26:28. > :26:33.of tax and benefit changes and the working person is ?1600 worse off
:26:34. > :26:38.and it is the first government since the 1870s where people will be at
:26:39. > :26:42.the end of the Parliament. We believe the government made wrong
:26:43. > :26:48.choices that lead the rich off at the expense of those on middle and
:26:49. > :26:54.lower incomes. -- let the rich. The average family ?794 worse off from
:26:55. > :27:00.tax and benefit changes. That has been backed up. They are those
:27:01. > :27:04.figures. But he has skewed these figures by including the richest,
:27:05. > :27:09.where the fall in tax and the penalty they pay is highest. If you
:27:10. > :27:14.take away the richest, it is nowhere near that figure. Everybody agrees
:27:15. > :27:17.and even the government and knowledges that at the end of their
:27:18. > :27:24.tenure in Parliament, people will be worse off. 350,000 extra people who
:27:25. > :27:28.would desperately like full-time work who are working part-time and 1
:27:29. > :27:33.million young people unemployed and the reason the cost of living has a
:27:34. > :27:37.residence is people feel that. I was in a supermarket and at Doncaster
:27:38. > :27:41.and someone summed this up, he said I work hard and at the end of the
:27:42. > :27:49.week, beyond paying bills, I have got nothing else. If you take away
:27:50. > :27:55.the top 10% who are losing over ?600,000, the average loss comes
:27:56. > :28:02.down to around ?400, less than half of what you claim. That figure is
:28:03. > :28:09.totally misleading. These are the figures from the IFS. It still
:28:10. > :28:14.shows... Whatever way you shape this, people will still be worse
:28:15. > :28:18.off, families worse off because of these changes to tax and benefits
:28:19. > :28:24.and working people because wages have not kept up with prices. Your
:28:25. > :28:29.energy portfolio, you back the enquiry into the big six companies
:28:30. > :28:33.and you intend to go ahead with the price freeze and reconfigure the
:28:34. > :28:37.market even before it reports. If you win, this is a waste of time?
:28:38. > :28:41.Whilst we have had this process before the announcement, we always
:28:42. > :28:46.feel if it goes that way, there might be areas we have not thought
:28:47. > :28:51.of that the enquiry will also draw attention to that we might want to
:28:52. > :28:54.add on. You are right, our basic reforms for the new regulator, to
:28:55. > :29:00.separate generation supply, we will pursue that. What happens if this
:29:01. > :29:06.report concludes that your plans are not correct? You will still go
:29:07. > :29:10.ahead? I don't think so. Actually, if you look at the report that Ofgem
:29:11. > :29:13.produced, some of the issues Labour has been drawing attention to like
:29:14. > :29:20.vertical integration, they cover that. I was asking about the
:29:21. > :29:25.Competition Commission? The report last week is a result of working
:29:26. > :29:31.together and I think it is clearly accepted in this sector, look at SSE
:29:32. > :29:51.last week, they will separate the business. We are pushing at the open
:29:52. > :29:55.door. It has already pulled out of gas. So it follows if you freeze
:29:56. > :29:59.energy prices across the market it might be the right thing to do but
:30:00. > :30:04.there will be a cost in terms of jobs and investment, correct? Well,
:30:05. > :30:07.I met with SSE last weekand the chief executive and talked about
:30:08. > :30:11.these issues. The jobs changes are partly about them looking at how
:30:12. > :30:15.they could be more efficient as a company. On offshore wind that
:30:16. > :30:17.wasn't really to do with the price freeze. That was more to do with
:30:18. > :30:22.issues around confidence in that area and therefore willing to put
:30:23. > :30:28.the money into it, as well as technical issues as well But
:30:29. > :30:32.there'll be job losses. Is that a price worth paying? We believe the
:30:33. > :30:36.reason we are having a price freeze is these companies have been
:30:37. > :30:39.overcharging customers and haven't been investing in their
:30:40. > :30:44.organisations and making them more efficient. I do not believe a price
:30:45. > :30:48.freeze is linked to job losses. These companies do need to be more
:30:49. > :30:52.efficient. Goal for all of us is realising the fantastic opportunity
:30:53. > :30:55.for more jobs and growth from an energy sector that has certainty
:30:56. > :30:58.going forward. That's what Labour will deliver. Caroline Flint, thank
:30:59. > :31:01.you. It's 1130 and you're watching The
:31:02. > :31:04.Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us
:31:05. > :31:17.now for Sunday Politics Scotland. Coming up here in
:31:18. > :31:24.Hello. I'm Arif Ansari. Comhng up in the north`west, cracking up. And
:31:25. > :31:28.nobody is laughing on Mersexside after the combined authoritx's first
:31:29. > :31:32.meeting. Whitehall is just touring their hands up and laughing at us,
:31:33. > :31:35.and I'm sure the Manchester authorities are sniggering `ll the
:31:36. > :31:40.way to the bank over this. They could not have had a worse start. In
:31:41. > :31:44.proper working order in our studio, we have Ivan Lewis, the Labour MP
:31:45. > :31:49.for Bury South, and the Shadow Northern Ireland Secretary, and
:31:50. > :31:53.Graham Evans, Conservative LP for Weaver Vale. Graham, we will talk
:31:54. > :31:57.about the Merseyside combindd authority, about political
:31:58. > :32:02.cooperation. How difficult hs that in politics? I think it is fairly
:32:03. > :32:08.easy. My experience as a new MP I have always worked really treasure
:32:09. > :32:12.MP, and all the cash MPs, including Merseyside MPs. I find it e`sy to
:32:13. > :32:19.act in the regional interest. Even with a different party? Yes. Ivan,
:32:20. > :32:22.Northern Ireland is all abott relationships and cooperation now.
:32:23. > :32:27.Yes, and putting aside historical differences, feuds, egos, and the
:32:28. > :32:32.kissing on the big picture, jobs, growth, transport and
:32:33. > :32:38.infrastructure. As a Mancunhan, I am reluctant to comment on Merseyside,
:32:39. > :32:41.but I think local authoritids do a remarkable job protecting the
:32:42. > :32:44.communities from Tory lead cuts But it is incredibly important they come
:32:45. > :32:47.together to look at the intdrest of the sub region as a whole, `nd I
:32:48. > :32:50.hope they can put aside these divisions of recent days and focus
:32:51. > :32:55.on the things that matter to the people of Merseyside. Maybe they
:32:56. > :33:00.need to get you in there to give me talking to! On last week's
:33:01. > :33:03.programme, we tell you how Merseyside's combined authority
:33:04. > :33:06.would be for the first time on April Fools' Day. But which of thd six
:33:07. > :33:13.council leaders will be chahring itlast week, I asked the le`der of
:33:14. > :33:17.Knowsley Council about it. That will be decided by democratic process on
:33:18. > :33:23.Tuesday morning. That will be our first item on the agenda. So how
:33:24. > :33:28.well did that go? Not very. Our reporter has more.
:33:29. > :33:32.Take B6 Merseyside council `nd create a single body to provide
:33:33. > :33:36.clear leadership. The plan was simple enough. But that was before
:33:37. > :33:42.the six heads were asked to choose one to represent them. Liverpool
:33:43. > :33:46.mayor and his political allx, second bug macro petered out, weren't even
:33:47. > :33:51.in the room when Phil Davies of the Wirral was appointed the ch`ir of
:33:52. > :33:55.the new regional authority. It was not the start many had hoped for the
:33:56. > :34:02.new combined authority, which met here. And it did not end thdre,
:34:03. > :34:05.because what followed was a public fallout and concern over ex`ctly who
:34:06. > :34:11.would be less involved in this new authority. Joe Anderson, thd leader
:34:12. > :34:15.of the biggest council, clahmed he was banned from becoming ch`ir
:34:16. > :34:19.because the majority felt hd was too big a personality, and Liverpool was
:34:20. > :34:23.too strong, and described it as a missed opportunity, accusing the
:34:24. > :34:29.others up indulging in Toytown politics. Ultimately, a votd is to
:34:30. > :34:34.place, a democratic process occurred, and we have a chahr of the
:34:35. > :34:38.combined authority. If you live in the other authorities in thhs
:34:39. > :34:43.country, whether Sheffield, Leeds all the Northeast, none of the core
:34:44. > :34:49.cities chair them. I think dach leader chose Phil on his merits Be
:34:50. > :34:53.split is being seen as amatdur in. This is bad for investment, both
:34:54. > :34:57.public and private sector. Whitehall is throwing their hands up `nd
:34:58. > :35:02.laughing at us. Be combined authority should be focusing on
:35:03. > :35:06.regional strategies on the dconomy, regeneration and transport,
:35:07. > :35:12.something one group that represents around 170 organisations is quick to
:35:13. > :35:14.point out. We have members who are big national and international
:35:15. > :35:19.organisations, and they feel they are part of a city and a region
:35:20. > :35:23.which is beginning to work very effectively, so they are
:35:24. > :35:28.disappointed. Joe Anderson hs taking legal advice, which he says is about
:35:29. > :35:32.how we extricate ourselves from the process legally and not abott the
:35:33. > :35:36.behaviour of others will stop there was clearly a majority in the room.
:35:37. > :35:40.There were four people who voted for somebody else to be chair, so the
:35:41. > :35:44.decision is made, under the legislation, it is thereford
:35:45. > :35:47.invalid. That has not stoppdd some people asking if we are heading for
:35:48. > :35:52.the end of the combined authority before it has even begun.
:35:53. > :35:57.We are joined from Liverpool by Peter Dowd, the Labour leaddr of
:35:58. > :36:01.Sefton Council. Thank you vdry much for joining us. Perhaps you could
:36:02. > :36:05.begin by explaining what happened, and why you and Joe Anderson were
:36:06. > :36:11.not in the votes to decide who should be chairman. There w`s a
:36:12. > :36:15.meeting at ten o'clock that all the leaders were out, a pre`meeting to
:36:16. > :36:18.go through some business, and we effectively could not get a
:36:19. > :36:23.consensus as to who should be the leader. I left about our past ten.
:36:24. > :36:27.Joe Anderson and I went into a meeting to discuss matters with our
:36:28. > :36:32.chief executives, and by thd time we came out, after 11 o'clock, the
:36:33. > :36:37.decision to appoint the new chair and vice`chair had been madd. One
:36:38. > :36:42.thing we are told by the others in the rumour that the chief Executive
:36:43. > :36:46.of the authority came out and spoke to you and Joe Anderson, and you
:36:47. > :36:50.both said that you were not going to be in that meeting, and that's why
:36:51. > :36:55.she went back, told them th`t, and they decided to press on. Is that
:36:56. > :37:01.true or not? No, that is not what happened. That is not correct. The
:37:02. > :37:05.bottom line is, I turned about the meeting at ten o'clock, with every
:37:06. > :37:10.intention, as is my responshbility, of going to the 11 o'clock leeting,
:37:11. > :37:14.which I did fall is top I arrived slightly later, because of the
:37:15. > :37:22.conversations we were having. What do you make of the leader of Saint
:37:23. > :37:30.Helens Council telling us that the problem is that his ego is `t the
:37:31. > :37:35.centre of all this and otherwise Joe Anderson and's? Identix at that We
:37:36. > :37:39.as leaders have met in one form or another for the past 30 years. There
:37:40. > :37:43.has been a huge amount of cooperation. That is why we are here
:37:44. > :37:48.at the moment. You push this through. I don't think it w`s about
:37:49. > :37:51.that. I believe the status puo was the most appropriate way forward, at
:37:52. > :37:56.least during the transition period. There is no compelling reason why
:37:57. > :38:01.Joe, who chaired the non`st`tutory body, why that shouldn't carry on in
:38:02. > :38:07.the statutory format. You fdlt it was important that he should? Yes.
:38:08. > :38:11.There was a period of continuity for the next 12 months, maybe, while we
:38:12. > :38:17.got everything in place. Thhs is a new statutory body, and it seemed to
:38:18. > :38:20.change course halfway through was inappropriate. In the case of
:38:21. > :38:26.Greater Manchester, they have Lord Peter Smith and Wigan, not from
:38:27. > :38:33.Manchester. This is not Manchester. We are all different in that regard.
:38:34. > :38:39.We came into this body on the 1st of April, and it seemed to me that at
:38:40. > :38:42.this particular point, Mersdyside's situation, that continuity would
:38:43. > :38:45.have been the most appropri`te way forward. It was determined that
:38:46. > :38:50.would not be the case, and we now just move on and get on with the
:38:51. > :38:54.business. Joe Anderson has lade it clear there would be legal `ction,
:38:55. > :38:59.that he is going to get on with the job now. But I would think xou
:39:00. > :39:05.access that this is the worst start to it imaginable? It is a dhfficult
:39:06. > :39:10.start, but at the end of thd day. Politics can be robust, and it can
:39:11. > :39:13.be that way in Merseyside. H think it shows that we are passionate
:39:14. > :39:17.about we want to do and how we want to take things forward, and I would
:39:18. > :39:22.rather be passionate about things than sleepwalking on the job. But
:39:23. > :39:29.you can be passionate withott falling out. In politics, you
:39:30. > :39:32.sometimes fallout. You fallout in every area of occasions, and this
:39:33. > :39:37.has to be put into context `nd perspective. We have worked
:39:38. > :39:40.collaboratively, progressivdly and proactively for many years, and will
:39:41. > :39:46.continue to do so. I don't think this particular incident is a show
:39:47. > :39:52.stopper. Graham, we have halted in Council, that is part of it, partly
:39:53. > :39:58.in your constituency. How sdrious a problem is this? Well, I am very
:39:59. > :40:01.disappointed. He talked abott the politics of it, but what about the
:40:02. > :40:06.economic 's? There is huge potential in Merseyside. The message hs that
:40:07. > :40:10.we can't agree and we are split on the first day. It is about hnward
:40:11. > :40:14.investment. What message dods it send to Chinese investors, bringing
:40:15. > :40:18.investment, jobs and growth to Merseyside? Not the right mdssage.
:40:19. > :40:22.As Ivan said, you only have to look at what has happened and Manchester
:40:23. > :40:28.will stop inward investment and long`term, sustainable growth. That
:40:29. > :40:32.is what we need in Merseyside, in all the boroughs of Merseyshde. Are
:40:33. > :40:38.you certain this is damaging, or will it be brushed off and love on?
:40:39. > :40:42.I am an optimist. I like to think things can be sorted out, and they
:40:43. > :40:45.can get background the tabld to sort out this issue, and I would
:40:46. > :40:50.encourage them to do that as soon as possible. It sends out the wrong
:40:51. > :40:55.message, not just nationallx, but internationally. Ivan, you probably
:40:56. > :41:00.agree. Of course. But we should remember the major challengd facing
:41:01. > :41:05.these leaders, who are doing an excellent job, at least Torx lead
:41:06. > :41:09.cuts from Westminster. We should remember on an occasion likd this
:41:10. > :41:11.that the people we are taught me about a high`calibre people
:41:12. > :41:17.providing really exceptional leadership individual circulstances.
:41:18. > :41:20.They understand better than anyone, and only lectures from outshde, that
:41:21. > :41:25.this was unfortunate. It wotld have been better if it had not h`ppened.
:41:26. > :41:28.We know in terms of the Manchester model, the potential for getting
:41:29. > :41:31.this right, in tins of jobs and growth will stop the cost of living
:41:32. > :41:36.crisis facing people across Merseyside. I would ask my
:41:37. > :41:40.colleagues, and I don't think they need me to tell them, to put the big
:41:41. > :41:44.picture first, and that is the interests of the people of
:41:45. > :41:48.Merseyside, the bread and bttter issues concerning them, and also
:41:49. > :41:52.celebrating the fact that Mdrseyside has recently made significant
:41:53. > :41:57.progress. There is always a Manchester ` Merseyside deb`te. But
:41:58. > :42:01.in Manchester, we are proud of the last 30 years' development. But
:42:02. > :42:04.Merseyside has also recentlx been doing well as well, and that has
:42:05. > :42:11.come from civic leadership. This is not a good example of that, though.
:42:12. > :42:14.Let me go back quickly to Pdter in Liverpool. Peter, what do you make
:42:15. > :42:20.of what Graham was saying, that economic leave this is damaging in
:42:21. > :42:24.terms of investment? I don't think it is damaging at all. I thhnk it
:42:25. > :42:28.amounts to a head`up, and shows you how passionate we are about it. It
:42:29. > :42:31.is partly about economic 's, but in the context of the kicking we are
:42:32. > :42:38.getting from his government in terms of expenditure, this is on the
:42:39. > :42:44.low`end of the Richter scald. Thank you very much for talking to us
:42:45. > :42:47.Now, while the combined authority is proving to be more of a gamble than
:42:48. > :42:51.expected, many of you will have gambled on more traditional sporting
:42:52. > :42:55.event this weekend. But the betting slip is on the way out, and one
:42:56. > :43:01.local MP claims that adverts for online betting or gambling `` are
:43:02. > :43:12.gambling with our children's future. Our reporter has more.
:43:13. > :43:21.It's the biggest betting wedkend of the year, but gambling isn't just a
:43:22. > :43:26.race course feature any mord. It is all about the next goal, thd number
:43:27. > :43:33.of calls, the match goals, the final score. It is now online and on your
:43:34. > :43:39.TV. Last year, there were 1.4 million gambling ads. One in 24 of
:43:40. > :43:44.all adds shown on television. Tory MPs Jake Berry wants to restrict
:43:45. > :43:49.those adverts to after 9pm. Jake, why are you trying to bring in this
:43:50. > :43:53.bill? I am really concerned as in the last decade, the number of
:43:54. > :43:56.opportunities for people to gamble at massively increased. I al
:43:57. > :44:03.concerned about those adverts being shown to people under the age of
:44:04. > :44:06.16. We must act now. This wdek, he launched a bill in the Commons, but
:44:07. > :44:13.faced opposition from some on his own side. My honourable fridnd is a
:44:14. > :44:20.good man, but on this, he is badly misguided. I think this measure is
:44:21. > :44:26.an extension of the nanny state it is a liberal, it is not backed up by
:44:27. > :44:32.the available evidence. How did you get on yesterday? Really good. We
:44:33. > :44:36.had 300 people in altogether. As a youth worker, Nathan feels lany
:44:37. > :44:41.teenagers can be misguided `bout gambling. Same macro the three main
:44:42. > :44:44.areas we struggle with our pal, pornography and gambling. Those are
:44:45. > :44:48.things people have unrestricted access to, even though it is really
:44:49. > :44:52.for over 18 's. If you are constantly being told ending courage
:44:53. > :44:53.to find that behaviour, it hs something that can be quite
:44:54. > :45:04.addictive. Paul is constantly on the lookout
:45:05. > :45:10.for addicts and underage galblers. Protecting his punters and being
:45:11. > :45:16.responsible, he says, is part of the job. We have a strict think 21
:45:17. > :45:20.policy, the same as in any pub or licensed premises. No under 18 is
:45:21. > :45:26.allowed to enter the premisds, and we regulate in`house and do external
:45:27. > :45:29.checks as well. Gambling restrictions were relaxed bx the
:45:30. > :45:34.Blair government. Gordon Brown dropped the idea of super c`sinos,
:45:35. > :45:38.but kept most of the legisl`tion. This campaign group supports
:45:39. > :45:42.gambling, but not at any prhce. The last Labour government the regular
:45:43. > :45:49.and liberalised gambling to the extent where we are now the Las
:45:50. > :45:53.Vegas of Europe. We have 24`hour advertisements. It is badly wrong.
:45:54. > :45:59.Will rolling some of that b`ck be a safe bet for our children?
:46:00. > :46:02.Ivan, you are formerly the shadow Secretary of State for Culttre,
:46:03. > :46:06.Media and Sport. These support that kind of move? Hundreds of thousands
:46:07. > :46:14.of people will have a fight at on the Grand National safely. But we
:46:15. > :46:17.know gambling ravages peopld lives and has a detrimental effect if out
:46:18. > :46:22.of control. It is getting the balance right between a harlless
:46:23. > :46:25.flutter for some and a terrhble addiction for some. We support
:46:26. > :46:30.giving local authorities, for example, the power to limit the
:46:31. > :46:37.number of gambling shops in any one area. The current government do not
:46:38. > :46:41.support that. We called on the government for a fundamental review
:46:42. > :46:47.of advertising before the w`tershed, because we have major concerns. So
:46:48. > :46:52.you would ban it? No, our position is to have a fundamental review
:46:53. > :46:55.look at the positives and ndgatives. But we are concerned. The government
:46:56. > :47:03.listened to our call for a review, and it is under way at the loment.
:47:04. > :47:07.Why do you think? It is a L`bour Party issue, because it was them who
:47:08. > :47:14.introduced the legislation. There were no gambling machines then, but
:47:15. > :47:17.there were 30000 x 2010. Thdre is already the power to restrict the
:47:18. > :47:23.number of gambling shops on the High Street in place. With regard to Jake
:47:24. > :47:28.Berry's Bill, I agree, thinking that advertising before the watershed is
:47:29. > :47:34.not a good idea, so I support that. You would ban it? Same macro I would
:47:35. > :47:40.restrict it, yes. You don't believe it is the nanny state? No, H think
:47:41. > :47:47.it is like smoking, and also alcohol advertising. On balance, I think
:47:48. > :47:50.Jake Berry is correct. Realistically, he will not get
:47:51. > :47:53.anywhere, because this is a ten minute rule Bill, and they'll lose
:47:54. > :47:59.bail. Should the government take this up? I would think so, xes. If
:48:00. > :48:04.there is evidence it could hnfluence young people and become an
:48:05. > :48:08.addiction, of course we shotld take necessary action. This is the party
:48:09. > :48:13.that relaxed the legislation, so it is very much at their doorstep.
:48:14. > :48:17.First, we suggested that local authorities be able to control the
:48:18. > :48:22.number of betting shops. Thd government would not supporters
:48:23. > :48:25.Second, they were calling for more and more deregulation, not lore
:48:26. > :48:31.legislation, so it is hypocritical for them to try and blame L`bour
:48:32. > :48:38.when they wanted more deregtlation. Local authorities or the have the
:48:39. > :48:42.power to restrict the number of business premises on one High St.
:48:43. > :48:50.Let's leave it there. Now thme for the rest of the week's news. This
:48:51. > :48:54.conservative setback MP Mark Menzies after Loroupe tabloid alleg`tions.
:48:55. > :48:58.The Prime Minister has offered his qualified support. He wants to set
:48:59. > :49:02.out in his own time, and cancer to the allegations, anything wd should
:49:03. > :49:06.give him the chance to do that. Calls for Foreign Office al Parejo
:49:07. > :49:10.housewife imprisoned in Iran for posting critical message on
:49:11. > :49:14.Facebook. She was visiting family, and denies spying. The sun of Arthur
:49:15. > :49:18.Horrocks was among those who paid tribute to lost loved ones `t the
:49:19. > :49:20.inquest into the deaths of 86 football fans at Hillsborough got
:49:21. > :49:26.underway in Warrington. It could take one year. Is the
:49:27. > :49:31.volumes to the regard in whhch at the was held. The TUC wants action,
:49:32. > :49:35.after figures showed as manx as 40% of workers in the north`west are
:49:36. > :49:38.paid less the living wage. Lake District hoteliers gavd the
:49:39. > :49:42.thumbs down to plans for a new 5 million development. Premier Inn
:49:43. > :49:52.must now submit a full planning application.
:49:53. > :50:00.Ivan, the Mark Menzies situ`tion has been quite important. What do you
:50:01. > :50:03.think? Are these really personal matters? I think it's a personal
:50:04. > :50:08.tragedy, and entirely betwedn him and his constituents. Where do you
:50:09. > :50:14.draw the line between a personal issue and an MP's behaviour pushing
:50:15. > :50:19.it into the public realm? I think that is a judgement to be m`de by
:50:20. > :50:22.the people who vote for that person. That is the nature of
:50:23. > :50:28.democracy, a direct relationship between us and our voters, but also
:50:29. > :50:32.the party we stand for, as we stand on a ticket. That is where those
:50:33. > :50:36.issues should be resolved. People have a right to defend themselves.
:50:37. > :50:40.Mark has said many of these allegations are untrue and he wants
:50:41. > :50:43.to contest them. He is entitled to space for that. What do you think
:50:44. > :50:50.should be done, Graham? I essentially agree. It is a latter of
:50:51. > :50:55.the relationship between Mark and his association, but they are
:50:56. > :50:59.allegations, and he wants to clear his name because he disputes a lot
:51:00. > :51:03.of them. Does he need to be able to say some of this is untrue? In the
:51:04. > :51:05.fullness of time, I'm sure that is what will come out. Thank you to
:51:06. > :51:08.both of Dobson. Tim Donovan is back in the
:51:09. > :51:21.chair next week. And with that, back to Andrew. Welcome back and time now
:51:22. > :51:28.to get more from our panel. So they can justify their meagre patents.
:51:29. > :51:33.This cost of living mantra will last all the way until the election.
:51:34. > :51:37.Cannot? Ed Miliband leaves he is onto something and for most of this
:51:38. > :51:42.Parliament, inflation has outstripped wages. That is going to
:51:43. > :51:48.go the other way and wages will rise, to which you say Ed Miliband
:51:49. > :51:52.has nothing to say. He says if you think people are going to feel
:51:53. > :51:55.better in the blink of an eye, you are a Conservative and do not
:51:56. > :51:59.understand the depth of this and he is taking the message from a
:52:00. > :52:05.presidential election in America in 2012 and make Romney was ahead on
:52:06. > :52:10.some of the economic indicators but Barack Obama was ahead on the key
:52:11. > :52:13.one, do you believe this candidate will make your family's life
:52:14. > :52:20.better? The message that Ed Miliband will try to say is the next election
:52:21. > :52:23.is about whose side are you on? And he believes Labour will be on the
:52:24. > :52:27.side of more voters than conservatives. It would be crazy for
:52:28. > :52:33.Labour not to talk about the cost of living because even if wages exceed
:52:34. > :52:36.inflation next year, it is not as if voters will walk around feeling like
:52:37. > :52:42.Imelda Marcos, they will still feel as if they were struggling and not
:52:43. > :52:49.just compared... Retail sales are slowing? That is not the sign of
:52:50. > :52:56.palpable disparity. Circumstances are better than three years ago but
:52:57. > :52:59.not better than five years ago. The Reagan question will still be
:53:00. > :53:05.employed, are you better off than at the last election? But things in
:53:06. > :53:10.America were actually getting worse when he asked that. I covered that
:53:11. > :53:15.election, that is why it resonated and they did get worse. The
:53:16. > :53:21.Ayatollah had quadrupled the price of oil. This is based on things
:53:22. > :53:26.getting relatively better, after a very long wait, so the cost of
:53:27. > :53:32.living critique will have to adapt? It will but it gets out of a very
:53:33. > :53:36.sticky spot and the IFS says wages will not outstrip inflation and by
:53:37. > :53:40.that time they can start talking about other things, plans for the
:53:41. > :53:45.railways and tuition fees and at the moment, everything is up for grabs.
:53:46. > :53:48.Labour know that every time they talk about something they want to
:53:49. > :53:53.do, the question is, how do you pay for it? They can talk about the
:53:54. > :53:56.economy and they don't have substantial things to say. Is it
:53:57. > :54:02.true that Mr Iain Duncan Smith was going to make a major announcement
:54:03. > :54:07.on benefit cheats? Or something to do with that this morning? But he
:54:08. > :54:11.decided against it because of the tobacco over Maria Miller? It would
:54:12. > :54:17.be very odd to go on to The Andrew Marr Show to have a chat and see
:54:18. > :54:20.what he is having for lunch. Patrick went from the Guardian said he was
:54:21. > :54:24.going to set out higher financial penalty phase for providing
:54:25. > :54:30.inaccurate information in claims. This is a bad day to do that, given
:54:31. > :54:36.that MP expenses are treated far more lenient the than any one from
:54:37. > :54:41.Joe public. That would be fascinating, if true. And he is
:54:42. > :54:46.making a very big speech on well for tomorrow and this tweet from Patrick
:54:47. > :54:50.went at the Guardian, he has proper sized on welfare matters and he
:54:51. > :54:56.tends to know what is going on. But it would be deeply unfortunate if
:54:57. > :54:59.that was the message today. How can he make a speech that has anything
:55:00. > :55:04.about cracking down on benefit claimants? Not today but I am not
:55:05. > :55:11.sure tomorrow. Do you get the impression that nobody in both main
:55:12. > :55:16.parties is very confident of winning in 2015? I column last week said the
:55:17. > :55:20.result, the most likely result from one year on is another hung
:55:21. > :55:25.parliament and which government results from that depends on the
:55:26. > :55:29.mathematical specifics of whether the Tories can do a deal as well as
:55:30. > :55:33.Labour, leaving everything in the hands of Nick Clegg or whether one
:55:34. > :55:37.party can do a straightforward deal but I do not detect any sense of
:55:38. > :55:43.exuberance or confidence in either camp. And the Tories are still
:55:44. > :55:47.shooting themselves over losing the boundary commission reforms because
:55:48. > :55:51.that was going to net them 20 seats and they lost that because they
:55:52. > :55:54.messed up the House of Lords reform and there are still furious with
:55:55. > :55:58.themselves. The former US President, George W Bush, has been a busy boy
:55:59. > :56:02.and here at the Sunday Politics we thought you'd like to see the
:56:03. > :56:06.results of his artistic endeavours. Time for the gallery.
:56:07. > :56:54.I was a prize to find myself saying, some of these are not bad! --
:56:55. > :57:01.surprised. Vladimir Putin? I like the one of Tony Blair but his early
:57:02. > :57:06.ones of dogs, to be in the presence of the master is to see his portrait
:57:07. > :57:11.of a Joanne Love. He is not of the Turner prize but I was surprised. He
:57:12. > :57:17.gets the mask of Vladimir Putin also Tony Blair. I was impressed
:57:18. > :57:22.that he did not allow personal or political grudges to influence his
:57:23. > :57:26.artwork. Jacques Chirac, he comes out of this incredibly well! And
:57:27. > :57:33.Angela Merkel comes out astonishingly well. Quite generous
:57:34. > :57:37.as well. Tony Blair is the best one and the reason is he had the closest
:57:38. > :57:41.relationship with them and he has talked about this portrait, saying
:57:42. > :57:47.he was quite fond of him and you can see that. These are awful, they
:57:48. > :57:53.would not get you an A-level but you must admire him to have the guts to
:57:54. > :57:59.do this, and display them publicly! An A-level? Just doing joined up
:58:00. > :58:04.numbers gets you that these days! What do you do when you retire? This
:58:05. > :58:08.is less embarrassing than some of the other things people have done.
:58:09. > :58:17.As good as Churchill? I don't know... No! Churchill was brilliant!
:58:18. > :58:20.And on that! That's all for today. Tune into BBC Two every day at
:58:21. > :58:23.lunchtime this week for the Daily Politics. And we'll be back at the
:58:24. > :58:26.later time of 2:30pm next Sunday after the London Marathon. Remember,
:58:27. > :58:33.if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.