06/07/2014

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:34. > :00:40.Up to a million public sector workers will strike this week.

:00:41. > :00:43.It's one of the biggest walk-outs since 201 .

:00:44. > :00:46.The country's top trade unionist Frances O'Grady and

:00:47. > :00:51.Tory Business Minister Matt Hancock go head-to-head.

:00:52. > :00:54.The Tour de France seems to have cheered him up - just as well

:00:55. > :00:58.for the Deputy Prime Minister hasn't got much else to smile about.

:00:59. > :01:00.Nick Clegg joins me live from Sheffield to discuss the

:01:01. > :01:07.Just over ten weeks until Scotland determines its future.

:01:08. > :01:10.The man leading the campaign AGAINST independence, Alistair Darling,

:01:11. > :01:16.Do we still need a nuclear deterrent?

:01:17. > :01:19.And disabled students on the benefit changes they say will

:01:20. > :01:34.And with me throughout the show, three top-flight political

:01:35. > :01:37.journalists always ahead of the peleton - Nick Watt,

:01:38. > :01:51.They'll be tweeting faster than Tour de France cyclists can pedal.

:01:52. > :01:54.The news is dominated this morning by stories swirling

:01:55. > :01:57.around allegations of an historic Westminster paedophile ring.

:01:58. > :01:59.Concern has grown because of the disappearance of a dossier

:02:00. > :02:01.handed over to the Home Office in 1983, along with over 100 official

:02:02. > :02:04.files related to it and possibly containing details of historic child

:02:05. > :02:09.Labour is calling for a public inquiry led by a child protection

:02:10. > :02:14.But speaking earlier on The Andrew Marr Show this morning

:02:15. > :02:19.the Education Secretary Michael Gove ruled that out.

:02:20. > :02:26.The most important thing that we need to do is ensure that the due

:02:27. > :02:29.process of law pursues those who may be guilty of individual crimes and

:02:30. > :02:33.we also learn lessons about what may or may not have gone wrong in the

:02:34. > :02:36.past, but it is also important to emphasise that many of the

:02:37. > :02:41.allegations that are being made are historic. And what we do now in

:02:42. > :02:46.order to keep children safer is better and stronger than was the

:02:47. > :02:49.case when 20 or 30 years ago. Without getting into a boring

:02:50. > :02:55.tit-for-tat, public inquiry, "yes" or "no"? No. Helen, can the

:02:56. > :02:59.Government go on resisting calls for a full-scale inquiry? It is very

:03:00. > :03:02.hard. There are cynical and non-cynical reasons for calling for

:03:03. > :03:06.an inquiry. The cynical one allows you to say I can't comment on this.

:03:07. > :03:11.The non-cynical is it manages to get people to air allegations in a way

:03:12. > :03:15.that is safe. What we saw at the Leveson Inquiry was helpful, people

:03:16. > :03:19.who felt they had been shut out from justice getting a chance to tell

:03:20. > :03:23.their side of the story. A public inquiry in this case is a good idea.

:03:24. > :03:27.Labour have called for a lot of public inquiries. A list was made in

:03:28. > :03:34.2012 of how many they called for. Not only Savile, but the West Coast

:03:35. > :03:37.Main Line and breast implants. On this particular issue, the people

:03:38. > :03:40.don't trust the politicians, they don't trust the police either

:03:41. > :03:45.because they may have been complicit in a cover-up. They may not trust

:03:46. > :03:49.the Home Office who we are told some of their officials were mentioned in

:03:50. > :03:53.the dossier? That is what David Cameron is hanging on to. This is a

:03:54. > :03:57.matter now because they are alleged criminal activity, it is for the

:03:58. > :04:02.police to investigate. In that big piece in the Sunday Times, Tim

:04:03. > :04:03.Shipman reports one of the people making the allegations lives in the

:04:04. > :04:06.United States making the allegations lives in the

:04:07. > :04:09.been out to the United States to interview him. The Prime Minister

:04:10. > :04:10.would say that is how serious the police are taking it. The problem

:04:11. > :04:16.for the Prime Minister - he police are taking it. The problem

:04:17. > :04:20.allergic to big public inquiry. His finest moment was his response to

:04:21. > :04:21.the Bloody Sunday inquiry shortly after he became Prime

:04:22. > :04:35.inrequest -- that inquiry took 2 years to report. The problem is the

:04:36. > :04:40.dossier has gone missing, the files have gone missing, more allegations

:04:41. > :04:42.keep coming out either directly or indirectly. It doesn't look like it

:04:43. > :04:50.is going to go away? The fact the dossiers are missing means it is

:04:51. > :04:54.inappropriate for the Home Office to be investigating this. There is

:04:55. > :04:54.inappropriate for the Home Office to a police investigation. If after

:04:55. > :05:02.that, there are questions unanswered which can only be answered by

:05:03. > :05:02.that, there are questions unanswered public inquiry, or which require

:05:03. > :05:05.resources that can only be commanded by a public inquiry, I could see the

:05:06. > :05:11.case for going down that road. I fear that sometimes in this country

:05:12. > :05:14.we invest almost supernatural powers in what a public inquiry can do. I

:05:15. > :05:18.in what a public inquiry can do I wonder whether there is another

:05:19. > :05:22.example of a country that goes through this stale ritual every few

:05:23. > :05:25.years of a scandal emerging, the opposition calling for an inquiry,

:05:26. > :05:29.the Government saying no and then holding the line or giving in. I

:05:30. > :05:33.don't know what we think this inquiries can do. It comes back to

:05:34. > :05:36.your point, Helen, you should be careful what you call an inquiry on

:05:37. > :05:42.so it doesn't devalue the concept. On Thursday up to a million public

:05:43. > :05:44.sector workers - including teachers, firemen and council workers -

:05:45. > :05:46.will go on strike. Their unions have differing gripes

:05:47. > :05:48.but the fact they're all striking on the same day is designed to send

:05:49. > :05:50.a strong message to the government. As the economy picks up again

:05:51. > :05:53.they're demanding an end Growth has returned strongly to

:05:54. > :05:59.the UK economy and unemployment is at its lowest

:06:00. > :06:02.level for more than five years. So why is there still talk

:06:03. > :06:05.of austerity The deficit is coming down but much

:06:06. > :06:10.more slowly than the government And accumulated deficits -

:06:11. > :06:17.the national debt - The UK is now in hock to the tune

:06:18. > :06:26.of ?1.3 trillion - and rising. In fact, we're only 40% of the way

:06:27. > :06:29.through George Osborne's planned austerity, with the chancellor now

:06:30. > :06:32.saying he won't manage to balance Unions are now rebelling

:06:33. > :06:38.against tight pay controls. Since 2010, average public sector

:06:39. > :06:42.pay, which goes to about 1 in 5 Over the same period,

:06:43. > :06:49.prices increased by 16% - meaning the average public sector

:06:50. > :06:53.worker saw their pay squeezed Going head-to-head on the public

:06:54. > :07:00.sector strikes and austerity - the general secretary of the TUC

:07:01. > :07:20.Frances O'Grady, and Conservative We have seen it, public sector pay

:07:21. > :07:25.squeezed by 9% under the Coalition Government. Isn't it time to take

:07:26. > :07:31.your foot off the brake a bit? I don't think it is the right time to

:07:32. > :07:35.let go of the public finances at all. We were always clear that this

:07:36. > :07:40.is what's called a structural deficit, it doesn't go away just

:07:41. > :07:45.because the growth is returning and the economy is coming back. We have

:07:46. > :07:51.protected and are protecting the lowest paid public sector workers

:07:52. > :07:56.who weren't part of the pay freeze and now pay going up by 1%. These

:07:57. > :08:01.are difficult decisions. We have had that discussion many times. They are

:08:02. > :08:06.necessary in order to keep that plan on track and as we can see in the

:08:07. > :08:09.wider economy, it is working. People's living standards will have

:08:10. > :08:13.to continue to fall if you are in the public sector? We need to keep

:08:14. > :08:17.public spending under control and pay restraint is one of the main

:08:18. > :08:21.ways of being able... The answer is yes? The answer is this is

:08:22. > :08:24.necessary. The answer is yes, this is necessary. It isn't because we

:08:25. > :08:28.want to. We have to. This strike isn't going to change the

:08:29. > :08:31.Government's mind, is it? It does seem like the Government isn't

:08:32. > :08:35.listening. We have had years... They are listening, they just don't

:08:36. > :08:38.agree. Ordinary people, including those in the public sector, are

:08:39. > :08:43.finding it really tough. What really sticks in the throat is the idea

:08:44. > :08:46.that money can be found to give tax cuts to billionaires, to

:08:47. > :08:54.millionaires and to big corporations. But it can't be found

:08:55. > :08:58.to help 500,000 workers in local government, dinner ladies, school

:08:59. > :09:02.meal workers, lollipop men and women who are earning less than the living

:09:03. > :09:05.wage. What do you say to that? We have protected those who are the

:09:06. > :09:10.least well-paid in the public sector. But this is about a

:09:11. > :09:14.long-term... How can you? Hold on. You have said you have protected

:09:15. > :09:20.them. This involves ordinary people, many watching this programme, they

:09:21. > :09:26.have had a 1% pay rise in some cases since 2010. The average gas bill is

:09:27. > :09:29.up 57%, electric bill up 22%, food costs up 16%, running a car 11%, in

:09:30. > :09:35.costs up 16%, running a car 11% in what way have you protected people

:09:36. > :09:40.from spending they have to make Firstly, you read out the average

:09:41. > :09:43.increases in public sector pay. That has had the biggest impact at the

:09:44. > :09:49.top end and those at the bottom end have been best protected, as best we

:09:50. > :09:52.could. Of course, we have also taken two million people out of income tax

:09:53. > :09:56.and increased the income tax threshold which has a big positive

:09:57. > :10:00.impact. We have frozen and then cut fuel duty, which would have been 20

:10:01. > :10:04.pence higher. I wanted to take on this point about priorities. We have

:10:05. > :10:09.got to make sure that we get the economy going at the same time and

:10:10. > :10:12.we raised more money from those at the top than we did before 2010,

:10:13. > :10:17.the top than we did before 2010 partly because we have encouraged

:10:18. > :10:22.them to invest. And this is a really important balance of making sure we

:10:23. > :10:27.get the books back in order, we have stability for family finances and we

:10:28. > :10:31.get the economy going. Why not spread the living wage? We know you

:10:32. > :10:35.could pay for that pay increase itself if you spread the living wage

:10:36. > :10:40.through the private sector and guarantee... The living wage being

:10:41. > :10:46.above the minimum wage? Absolutely. ?7.65 in the rest of the country,

:10:47. > :10:56.?8.80 in London. What is the answer? I'm a fan of the minimum wage. But

:10:57. > :11:00.not for public sector workers. Being able to pay low-paid workers as much

:11:01. > :11:03.as possible within the constraints of the public finances is something

:11:04. > :11:07.I have pushed very hard. The evidence we can increase the minimum

:11:08. > :11:14.wage has to be balanced which the Low Pay Commission do with the

:11:15. > :11:20.impact on the number of jobs... Even after a pay freeze for quite a while

:11:21. > :11:28.among public sector workers, they are still paid 15% on average more

:11:29. > :11:34.than those in the private sector? That is not true. It is, according

:11:35. > :11:37.to the ONS figures. I read that report this morning. If you look at

:11:38. > :11:43.the whole package, what they are saying is public service workers are

:11:44. > :11:52.worse off. Average earnings in the public sector are ?16.28 an hour

:11:53. > :11:56.compared to ?14.16 private. You are comparing apples and pears. It's the

:11:57. > :11:59.kind of jobs and the size of the workplace that people work in. They

:12:00. > :12:06.are still overall on average better off? Lower paid workers tend to be

:12:07. > :12:14.better off because unions negotiate better deals for lower paid workers.

:12:15. > :12:18.They are more unionised in the pry private sector. The public sector is

:12:19. > :12:22.worse off. This is a political strike, isn't it? There is a whole

:12:23. > :12:25.disparate range of reasons. The strike is saying that you are

:12:26. > :12:30.against this Government, that is what this is about? I this I what

:12:31. > :12:34.firefighters, local government workers and health workers who are

:12:35. > :12:38.protesting, too, alongside teachers are saying is that this Government

:12:39. > :12:42.is not listening, it is out of touch, people can't carry on having

:12:43. > :12:48.cuts in their living standards depending on benefits. When will the

:12:49. > :12:51.public sector worker ever get a real increase in their pay under a

:12:52. > :12:58.Conservative Government? Well, we certainly hope to have the books

:12:59. > :13:00.balanced by 2018. Not before then? 2018 is when we hope to be able to

:13:01. > :13:06.be in surplus. It is testament... be in surplus. It is testament. .

:13:07. > :13:14.So, no real pay increase for public sector workers before 2018?

:13:15. > :13:18.Interestingly, this isn't just about the Conservatives and the Lib Dems,

:13:19. > :13:22.the Labour Party leadership have said it is a test of their

:13:23. > :13:26.credibility that they support the squeeze on public sector pay. I look

:13:27. > :13:29.forward to them, they ought to come out and say very clearly that these

:13:30. > :13:32.strikes are wrong and they are against the strikes and stop taking

:13:33. > :13:38.union money. It is a democratic right. Hold on. They are - they

:13:39. > :13:46.think the policy of pay restraint is necessary. Alright. On this point

:13:47. > :13:51.about democracy... Ask yourself why so many ordinary decent public

:13:52. > :13:58.service workers are so fed up. They have seen so many billions of pounds

:13:59. > :14:09.wasted through outsourcing to organisations like G4 S. In Unite

:14:10. > :14:16.and UNISON the turnout in this vote was under 20%. Alright. OK. One

:14:17. > :14:19.final question... Hold on. You said millions and millions voted on

:14:20. > :14:21.this... I want to ask you this question. Is the story in the Mail

:14:22. > :14:27.on Sunday today that Mr Cameron s on Sunday today that Mr Cameron's

:14:28. > :14:33.planning a big crackdown on the unions over balloting, is that true?

:14:34. > :14:36.Well, strikes like this... I know the cases, is it true you are going

:14:37. > :14:38.to dhang the law? Strikes like this make that argument stronger. The

:14:39. > :14:40.Conservative Party is make that argument stronger. The

:14:41. > :15:22.on the basis is one that puts the matter of

:15:23. > :16:28.independence to bed is one that puts the matter of

:16:29. > :16:34.is. For the first time I can remember, all three parties are more

:16:35. > :16:40.or less on the same page in terms of additional powers, we already have

:16:41. > :16:44.powers in terms of policing and transport, now more powers are

:16:45. > :16:52.planned in relation to tax and welfare. But you are all saying

:16:53. > :16:55.different things. Between 2009 and 2012, the three parties have

:16:56. > :17:00.slightly different proposals but they came together and there was an

:17:01. > :17:08.agreed series of reforms in relation to tax which are now on the statute

:17:09. > :17:13.book. If you go back to the devolutionary settlement in 1998,

:17:14. > :17:17.people unified around a single proposition so there is history here

:17:18. > :17:20.and these three parties have delivered and they will deliver in

:17:21. > :17:27.the event of people saying we will stay part of the UK. If Scotland

:17:28. > :17:29.vote no to independence, when will Scotland get these extra powers?

:17:30. > :17:31.vote no to independence, when will Scotland get these extra powers I

:17:32. > :17:36.would imagine that in the general election all three parties will have

:17:37. > :17:40.something in their manifesto and you would expect to see legislation in

:17:41. > :17:44.the session of Parliament that follows that. Imagining is not

:17:45. > :17:50.certainty. Because the three parties have said this is what they will do,

:17:51. > :17:56.and it is important having said that they stick to it. If you look in the

:17:57. > :18:02.past when the Nationalists said the same thing, when they cast doubt

:18:03. > :18:07.over what would happen in 2012, we delivered. The only party that

:18:08. > :18:10.walked out of both of these discussions were the Nationalists

:18:11. > :18:15.because they are not interested in more powers, they want a complete

:18:16. > :18:20.break. You cannot say that if Edinburgh gets more devolution that

:18:21. > :18:27.wouldn't mean fewer Scottish MPs in Westminster, can you? Nobody has any

:18:28. > :18:33.plans to reduce the number of MPs. If you step back from this moment,

:18:34. > :18:36.what people have been asked to do in September is to vote on the future

:18:37. > :18:42.of their country, Scotland, and whether we should be part of the UK.

:18:43. > :18:45.When I say part of the UK, full members of the UK with

:18:46. > :18:50.representation in the House of Commons and the institutions that

:18:51. > :18:57.affect our lives. This is a critically important vote. We want

:18:58. > :19:00.to see more decentralisation of power to Scotland, and to local

:19:01. > :19:05.authorities within Scotland, but we don't want a complete break with the

:19:06. > :19:10.uncertainties, the risks and the downright disadvantages that would

:19:11. > :19:20.throw Scotland's away if we were to make that break. The economic

:19:21. > :19:38.arguments are dominating people's thinking, the polls show, that is

:19:39. > :19:42.what is dominating at the moment. You cannot guarantee continued

:19:43. > :19:48.membership of the European Union given all the talk now about an

:19:49. > :19:53.in-out UK referendum. Firstly I don't think anyone has ever argued

:19:54. > :19:57.Scotland wouldn't get back in. The big question is the terms and

:19:58. > :20:01.conditions we would have to meet and we are applying to get into

:20:02. > :20:08.something that is established, it wouldn't be a negotiation. What we

:20:09. > :20:13.have said is there is no way Europe would let Scotland keep the rebate

:20:14. > :20:20.which Scotland has, there would be big questions over whether we have

:20:21. > :20:24.to join the euro, and other terms and conditions. The European Union

:20:25. > :20:29.does not act with any great speed, on average it takes eight and a half

:20:30. > :20:33.years to get into Europe. I don't want that uncertainty or the

:20:34. > :20:40.disadvantages that would come Scotland's away that come with

:20:41. > :20:46.losing clout in the European Union. The second point you asked me about

:20:47. > :20:50.is in relation to the UK's membership of the European Union,

:20:51. > :21:00.and if you look at polls, the majority of people still want to

:21:01. > :21:05.stay in the UK. Frankly, a lot of people on my side didn't make the

:21:06. > :21:12.argument against independence for a long time, we have been doing that

:21:13. > :21:17.over the last two and a half years and we are making progress and that

:21:18. > :21:20.is why I can say I think we will win provided we continue to get our

:21:21. > :21:25.arguments across. Similarly with the European Union, the case needs to be

:21:26. > :21:32.made because it is a powerful case. Isn't it true that the Nationalists

:21:33. > :21:41.win either way? They win if it is a yes vote, and they win if it is a no

:21:42. > :21:47.vote. They wanted devolution max so they win either way. There is a

:21:48. > :21:51.world of difference between devolution and further devolution

:21:52. > :21:57.where you remain part of the UK There is a world of difference

:21:58. > :22:02.between that and making a break where Scotland becomes a foreign

:22:03. > :22:06.country to the rest of the UK. You lose that security and those

:22:07. > :22:16.opportunities. You lose the same currency, the opportunity with

:22:17. > :22:20.pensions and so on. They are entitled to argue this case with

:22:21. > :22:26.passion, they want a break, but the two things are worlds apart. Gordon

:22:27. > :22:31.Brown said that the no campaign was too negative, have you adjusted to

:22:32. > :22:35.take that criticism into account? Ever since I launched this campaign

:22:36. > :22:41.over two years ago I said we would make a strong powerful case for

:22:42. > :22:48.remaining part of the UK. Look at our research, where we have had

:22:49. > :22:52.warnings from people to say that if we do well with research in Scotland

:22:53. > :22:58.we get more than our population share of the grand and we gain from

:22:59. > :23:02.that. There is a positive case but equally nobody will stop me from

:23:03. > :23:06.saying to the Nationalists, look at the assertions you make which are

:23:07. > :23:10.collapsing like skittles at the moment. Their assertions don't stand

:23:11. > :23:16.up. They assert that somehow milk and honey will be flowing. It is

:23:17. > :23:22.perfectly healthy within a referendum campaign to say that what

:23:23. > :23:38.you are saying simply isn't true. You have been negative, we all know

:23:39. > :23:48.about the so-called Cyber Nats book you compared Alex Salmond to the

:23:49. > :23:53.leader of North Korea. On! The context was that Alex Salmond was

:23:54. > :23:58.being asked why it was that UKIP had additional seat and he appeared to

:23:59. > :24:04.blame television being been doing from another country, from BBC South

:24:05. > :24:13.of the border. If you cannot have humour in a debate, heaven help us.

:24:14. > :24:17.I think it is important in this debate that people from outside

:24:18. > :24:23.politics should be allowed to have their say whatever side they are on

:24:24. > :24:28.because that will make for a far better, healthier debate. Nobody

:24:29. > :24:32.should be put in a state of fear and alarm by worrying about what will

:24:33. > :24:37.happen if they stand up. Despite the nastiness, more and more people are

:24:38. > :24:46.making a stand. We have run out of time. Thank you.

:24:47. > :24:48.I will be talking to the SNP's hippity leader, Nicola Sturgeon,

:24:49. > :24:54.hippity leader, Nicola Sturgeon next week on Sunday Politics.

:24:55. > :24:59.Scotland: For Richer or Poorer will be on BBC Two at 9pm tomorrow.

:25:00. > :25:05.Disastrous results in the European elections, it is fair to say the Lib

:25:06. > :25:10.Dems are down in the doldrums. In a moment I will be speaking to Nick

:25:11. > :25:25.Clegg, but first Emily has been asking what Lib Dems would say to

:25:26. > :25:34.the Prime -- Deputy Prime Minister on Call Clegg. Our phone in this

:25:35. > :25:37.week is the challenges facing the Liberal Democrats. They are rock

:25:38. > :25:43.bottom in the polls and have dire results in the local and European

:25:44. > :25:48.elections so what can the party do to turn things around? Get in

:25:49. > :25:54.touch, we are going straight to line one and Gareth. How much is a

:25:55. > :25:58.problem of that loss of local support? It is a massive problem

:25:59. > :26:02.because those are the building blocks of our success. The

:26:03. > :26:08.councillors who gets the case work done are also the people who go out

:26:09. > :26:14.and deliver the leaflets and knock on doors. Interesting, and it is not

:26:15. > :26:19.just local support the party has lost, is it? In the next general

:26:20. > :26:24.election there are some big-name Liberal Democrat MPs standing down

:26:25. > :26:34.like Malcolm Bruce and Ming Campbell, how much of a problem will

:26:35. > :26:39.that be? That is a real challenge and we have some of our brightest

:26:40. > :26:44.and best reaching an age of maturity at the same moment so that is quite

:26:45. > :26:48.an additional test in what will be a difficult election anyway. So how

:26:49. > :26:51.does the party need to position itself to win back support? Let's

:26:52. > :26:56.does the party need to position itself to win back support? Let s go

:26:57. > :27:01.to Chris online free, has the party got its strategy right? There is

:27:02. > :27:08.always a danger of appearing to be a party that merely dilutes Labour or

:27:09. > :27:12.dilutes the Conservatives. We have a of is serious, positive messages and

:27:13. > :27:14.we need to get those across in the next election because if we don t

:27:15. > :27:19.next election because if we don't people will vote for the Tories

:27:20. > :27:25.Nick, what do you think of the party's message at the moment? I

:27:26. > :27:31.have had a look at early draft of our manifesto and there is some good

:27:32. > :27:36.stuff in there but the authors are probably too interested in what may

:27:37. > :27:41.think we have achieved in the last five years and not really focusing

:27:42. > :28:09.on what the voters will want to be hearing about the next five years.

:28:10. > :28:13.Perhaps they should get out more and test some of these messages on the

:28:14. > :28:17.doorstep. So you want to see the top ranks of the party on the doorstep.

:28:18. > :28:21.Gareth online one also wants to make a point about the manifesto. There

:28:22. > :28:26.is clearly a problem somewhere near the top and there are some people

:28:27. > :28:29.who seem to be obsessed with power for power's sake, and happy with a

:28:30. > :28:35.timid offer but the Liberal Democrats want to change things. We

:28:36. > :28:39.are running out of time so let's try to squeeze one more call in. What

:28:40. > :28:44.are your thoughts on the long-term future of the party? I think serious

:28:45. > :28:49.long-term danger is that the party could be relegated to the fringes of

:28:50. > :28:53.the UK and no longer being a national party. We have gone back

:28:54. > :28:57.decades if that happens because for many years we have been represented

:28:58. > :29:00.in every part of the country at some level and we have got to rescue

:29:01. > :29:04.ourselves from that. Some interesting views but we are going

:29:05. > :29:08.to have to wait until the general election next year to find out how

:29:09. > :29:13.well the Lib Dems face up to these challenges. Thanks for listening, we

:29:14. > :29:15.are going to finish with an old classic now.

:29:16. > :29:18.# I'm sorry, I'm sorry... #. Nick Clegg, welcome to the

:29:19. > :29:22.programme. I want to come onto your situation in a minute but as you

:29:23. > :29:25.will have seen in the papers, there is mounting concern over and

:29:26. > :29:27.historic Westminster paedophile ring, and files relating to it

:29:28. > :29:31.mysteriously disappearing. Why are you against a full public enquiry

:29:32. > :29:41.into this? I wouldn't rule anything out. I think we should do anything

:29:42. > :29:56.it takes to uncover this and achieve justice.

:29:57. > :30:01.delivered, even all these many years later. How do you do it? There is an

:30:02. > :30:05.inquiry in the Home Office about what's happened to these documents,

:30:06. > :30:08.serious questions need to be asked about what happened in the Home

:30:09. > :30:13.Office and those questions need to be answered. There are inquiries in

:30:14. > :30:17.the BBC, in the NHS and most importantly of all the police are

:30:18. > :30:22.looking into the places where this abuse was alleged to have taken

:30:23. > :30:28.place. All I would say is, let's make sure that justice is delivered,

:30:29. > :30:33.truth is uncovered and I think that the way to do that, as we have seen,

:30:34. > :30:36.is by allowing the police to get on with their work. You say that, but

:30:37. > :30:41.there are only seven police involved in this inquiry. There are 195

:30:42. > :30:45.involved in the hacking investigations. We can both agree

:30:46. > :30:50.that child abuse is more important and serious than hacking. The Home

:30:51. > :30:53.Office, there are reports that Home Office officials may have been

:30:54. > :30:59.mentioned in the dossier, people don't trust people to investigate

:31:00. > :31:01.themselves, Mr Clegg? No, I accept that we need to make sure that - and

:31:02. > :31:04.that we need to make sure that and the police need to make sure that

:31:05. > :31:06.the police investigations are thorough, well resourced. I can't

:31:07. > :31:12.thorough, well resourced. I can t think of anything more horrendous, I

:31:13. > :31:15.can't, than powerful people organising themselves and worse

:31:16. > :31:19.still, this is what is alleged, covering up for each other to abuse

:31:20. > :31:23.the most vulnerable people in society's care - children. But at

:31:24. > :31:29.the end of the day, the only way you can get people in the dock, the only

:31:30. > :31:31.way you can get people charged, is by allowing the prosecuting

:31:32. > :31:37.authorities and the police to do their job. I have an open mind about

:31:38. > :31:41.what other inquiries take place A number of other inquiries are taking

:31:42. > :31:44.place. I assume any additional inquiries wouldn't be able to second

:31:45. > :31:48.guess or look into the matters which the police are looking into already.

:31:49. > :31:51.All I would say is that people who have information, who want to

:31:52. > :31:54.provide information which they think is relevant to this, please get in

:31:55. > :31:59.touch with the police. Alright. Let's come on to our own inquiry

:32:00. > :32:04.into the state of the Lib Dems. You have attempted to distance yourself

:32:05. > :32:07.and the party from the Tories, but still stay in Government - it is

:32:08. > :32:13.called aggressive differentiation. Why isn't it working? It's not

:32:14. > :32:19.called aggressive differentiation. It is called "coalition". It is two

:32:20. > :32:21.parties who retain different identities, different values, have

:32:22. > :32:25.different aspirations for the future. But during this Parliament

:32:26. > :32:29.have come together because we were facing a unique national emergency

:32:30. > :32:34.back in 2010, the economy was teetering on the edge of a

:32:35. > :32:37.precipice. I'm immensely proud, notwithstanding our political

:32:38. > :32:39.challenges, which are real, I'm immensely proud that the Liberal

:32:40. > :32:42.Democrats, we stepped up to the plate, held our nerve and without

:32:43. > :32:46.the Liberal Democrats, there wouldn't now be that economic

:32:47. > :32:48.recovery which is helping many people across the country. Why

:32:49. > :32:56.aren't you getting any credit for it? Well, we won't get credit if we

:32:57. > :33:00.spend all our time staring at our navals. If it wasn't for the Liberal

:33:01. > :33:05.Democrats, there wouldn't be more jobs now available to people. They

:33:06. > :33:13.don't believe you, they are giving the Tories the credit for the

:33:14. > :33:17.recovery? Well, you might assert that, we will assert and I will

:33:18. > :33:22.shout it from the rooftops that if we had not created the stability by

:33:23. > :33:25.forming this Coalition Government and then hard-wired into the

:33:26. > :33:29.Government's plans, not only the gory job of fixing the public

:33:30. > :33:32.finances, but doing so much more fairly than would have been the

:33:33. > :33:35.case, if the Conservatives had been in Government on their own, they

:33:36. > :33:40.wouldn't have delivered these tax cuts. They wouldn't have delivered

:33:41. > :33:47.the triple lock guarantee for pensions or the pupil premium. OK.

:33:48. > :33:52.Why are you 8% in the polls? Well, because I think where we get our

:33:53. > :34:03.message across - and I am here in my own constituency - this is a

:34:04. > :34:08.constituency where I am a campaigning MP - we can dispel a lot

:34:09. > :34:11.of the information and say we have done a decent thing by going into

:34:12. > :34:15.Government and we have delivered big changes, big reforms which you can

:34:16. > :34:22.touch and see in your school, in your pensions, in your taxes and

:34:23. > :34:26.then people do support us and, in our areas of strength, we were

:34:27. > :34:27.winning against both the Conservative and Labour parties.

:34:28. > :34:27.winning against both the Conservative and Labour parties It

:34:28. > :34:31.Conservative and Labour parties. It is a big effort. Of course, there

:34:32. > :34:34.are lots of people from both left and right who want to shout us down

:34:35. > :34:39.and want to vilify our role in Government. What we also need to do

:34:40. > :34:43.- and Nick Harvey was quite right - having been proud of our record of

:34:44. > :34:49.delivery, we also need to set out in our manifesto as we are and as we

:34:50. > :34:57.will our promise of more, of more support in schools. So why is it

:34:58. > :35:02.then... Why is it then that a Lib Dem MP in our own film says you are

:35:03. > :35:06.in danger of no longer becoming a National Party. That could be the

:35:07. > :35:12.Clegg legacy, you cease to be a National Party? I'm a practical man.

:35:13. > :35:16.I believe passionately in what we have done in politics. I am so proud

:35:17. > :35:19.of my party. I don't spend that much time speculating that the end might

:35:20. > :35:26.be nigh. There is no point in doing that. Let's get out there, which is

:35:27. > :35:29.what I do in my own constituency, in challenges circumstances and say we

:35:30. > :35:32.are proud of what we have done, we have done a good thing for the

:35:33. > :35:36.country, we have delivered more Liberal Democrat policies than the

:35:37. > :35:40.party has ever dreamed delivering before. We have a programme of

:35:41. > :35:43.change, of reform, of liberal reform, which is very exciting. Just

:35:44. > :35:48.over the last few weeks, I have been setting out our plans to provide

:35:49. > :35:52.more help to carers, to make sure teachers in every classroom are

:35:53. > :35:58.properly qualified, that all kids in school are being taught a proper

:35:59. > :36:02.core curriculum. That parts company from the ideological rigidities with

:36:03. > :36:05.which the Conservatives deal with education policy. Those are thing

:36:06. > :36:12.which speak to many of the values that people who support us...

:36:13. > :36:19.Alright. When Mike Storey gets out and about, he told this programme

:36:20. > :36:22.two weeks' ago that he finds that you "are toxic on the doorstep".

:36:23. > :36:26.you "are toxic on the doorstep" Look, as everybody knows, being the

:36:27. > :36:30.leader of a party, which for the first time in its history goes into

:36:31. > :36:34.Government, which is already a controversial thing to do because

:36:35. > :36:38.you are governing with our enemies, the Conservatives, and on top of

:36:39. > :36:42.that, doing all the difficult and unpopular things to fix the broken

:36:43. > :36:46.economy which was left to us by Labour, of course as leader of that

:36:47. > :36:47.party I get a lot of incoming fire from right and left. The right say

:36:48. > :36:53.that I'm stopping from right and left. The right say

:36:54. > :37:17.win the election. The left say from right and left. The right say

:37:18. > :37:23.proudly. Is it your intention to fight the next election against an

:37:24. > :37:29.in-out referendum on Europe? Yes. Unless there is major treaty change?

:37:30. > :37:33.Our position hasn't waivered, it won't waiver, we are not going to

:37:34. > :37:34.flip-flop on the issue of the referendum like the Conservatives

:37:35. > :37:40.did. We want an in-out referendum. referendum like the Conservatives

:37:41. > :37:41.when that will happen, when in u powers are transferred to the

:37:42. > :39:01.European Union. That is what we It's just gone 11.35, you're

:39:02. > :39:07.watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers

:39:08. > :39:09.in Scotland who leave us now for Sunday Politics Scotland.

:39:10. > :39:17.Coming up here in 20 minutes, the Week

:39:18. > :39:24.Disabled students on the benefit changes they say will

:39:25. > :39:30.I dread to think of the lives that will be rtined

:39:31. > :39:34.by students not having enough money to purchase the equipment to come

:39:35. > :39:40.Let?s welcome my guests this week, the Conservative MP for Lancaster

:39:41. > :39:43.and Fleetwood, Eric Ollerenshaw and Andrew Miller, the Labour MP

:39:44. > :39:49.Over the last few weeks the political parties have been

:39:50. > :39:52.falling over themselves to support the North of England.

:39:53. > :39:55.The Chancellor announced extra funding for transport and science

:39:56. > :40:03.And Labour offered more political power to the regions.

:40:04. > :40:06.The way we solve these questions I am talking about is with local

:40:07. > :40:10.people making local decisions with local businesses about how

:40:11. > :40:18.their area can grow, prosper and create the jobs of the future.

:40:19. > :40:21.Andrew, it feels a bit like a competition, here, to see who can

:40:22. > :40:29.It is blindingly obvious thd power has to come out of the centre.

:40:30. > :40:33.It is in the interests of the national economy to have

:40:34. > :40:38.more resource and decision making in the regions.

:40:39. > :40:44.And, here in the north`west, we have got enormous assets at our disposal.

:40:45. > :40:49.I have just helped the North`West Business Leaders Team work on the

:40:50. > :40:57.It has taken the political parties a long time to wake up to that.

:40:58. > :41:00.Some of us have been arguing that for a very long time

:41:01. > :41:03.and I am pleased to see that the region is being recognised

:41:04. > :41:09.as a potential powerhouse that can transform the economy, not just

:41:10. > :41:12.Is there a distinction, Eric, between what

:41:13. > :41:18.We coined a phrase called 'localism' back in 2010.

:41:19. > :41:21.I think Miliband is now playing catch`up with what we have been

:41:22. > :41:23.trying to do in terms of investment and infrastructure

:41:24. > :41:28.We are getting a link road that was promised 35 years ago,

:41:29. > :41:31.but the coalition government has now spent the money and the diggers are

:41:32. > :41:35.It is just called catch`up and rebalancing the north`south divide

:41:36. > :41:38.which actually got wider under the 35 years of the Labour Party, so

:41:39. > :41:44.That is a bit like claiming credit for the second Mersey crosshng.

:41:45. > :41:46.It was actually a Labour decision that is being reinforced

:41:47. > :41:52.I think there is a long gestation here and we need to

:41:53. > :41:57.And we ought to be working cooperatively in the interests

:41:58. > :42:02.A group of former ministers, diplomats and generals said

:42:03. > :42:06.replacing the Trident nuclear deterrent is crucial to prevent the

:42:07. > :42:12.But exactly what will replace it and when is still open to qtestion.

:42:13. > :42:15.And that could have an impact on jobs in Barrow,

:42:16. > :42:24.For the last 40 years there has been at least one nuclear armed submarine

:42:25. > :42:28.And after three years of research, the cross`party Trident Commission

:42:29. > :42:34.found that Britain should keep its independent nuclear detdrrent.

:42:35. > :42:37.But the committee of former ministers, diplomats and generals

:42:38. > :42:40.were split over how many submarines should be built here in Barrow,

:42:41. > :42:44.and argue there could be advantages to delaying the renewal programme.

:42:45. > :42:47.The Conservative members believe in a like`for`like replacement

:42:48. > :42:53.It does if you want to be certain that you

:42:54. > :42:56.actually have a submarine available whenever you might need it,

:42:57. > :43:01.365 days a year, every week of the year for the next 40 years, which is

:43:02. > :43:06.The report asks for greater collaboration with the US and France

:43:07. > :43:09.and the Liberal Democrats believe that would mean the deterrent would

:43:10. > :43:16.I would like to see the boats reduced from four to three.

:43:17. > :43:18.I would like the weapons system modifying,

:43:19. > :43:22.not to be a Trident missile but to be a cheaper Cruise missile

:43:23. > :43:29.I think that would be just as effective as the four bo`ts with

:43:30. > :43:33.the Trident missiles and it would save the country billions of pounds

:43:34. > :43:36.that we could spend on other things that the country desperatelx needs.

:43:37. > :43:40.The cost of replacing the four boats is put at ?20 billion.

:43:41. > :43:43.Reducing that number, or delaying the decision beyond

:43:44. > :43:47.2016, would have a dramatic impact on Barrow but not the overall cost

:43:48. > :43:55.Every time, as a country, we decide to build a new nuclear

:43:56. > :44:06.When you have a programme lhke this, by the time you get to building

:44:07. > :44:09.the fourth boat, the costs are coming down anyway.

:44:10. > :44:12.In March, the government announced ?300 million to upgrade the Barrow

:44:13. > :44:21.A decision won't be taken until 2016 at the earliest.

:44:22. > :44:24.And we're also joined now by Tom Crone, one of the Green Party's

:44:25. > :44:25.two newly`elected councillors in Liverpool.

:44:26. > :44:32.Why do you want to disarm in terms of nuclear weapons

:44:33. > :44:40.The Green Party has always been opposed to nuclear weapons in

:44:41. > :44:44.Britain but, in the 21st Century, with the change in threats the

:44:45. > :44:48.country is facing, it is quite clear that for most of the realistic

:44:49. > :44:52.threats we face nuclear weapons are not a realistic deterrent

:44:53. > :44:55.and can?t be used to solve lany of those problems.

:44:56. > :44:59.We are constantly being told that it is essential to replace Trident

:45:00. > :45:03.but countries such as Spain, Germany, Italy ? most other

:45:04. > :45:07.European countries ? are dohng fine without any nuclear weapons.

:45:08. > :45:11.They are able to spend that money, instead, on public services.

:45:12. > :45:14.That?s what, as a councillor, I would like to see.

:45:15. > :45:16.I?m constantly being approached by people worried that their

:45:17. > :45:20.libraries, their sports centres are under threat of closure and I think

:45:21. > :45:23.politicians should be standhng up for those issues rather than

:45:24. > :45:25.investing lots of taxpayers' money on

:45:26. > :45:28.a new weapons system. But they would be worried if nuclear bombs started

:45:29. > :45:35.And I do not think that is one of the immediate threats we ard facing.

:45:36. > :45:38.The threats we are looking `t are more to do with terrorism, with

:45:39. > :45:44.We have seen recent news reports about people having bombs

:45:45. > :45:48.These are not going to be stopped by nuclear weapons

:45:49. > :45:51.and I think we should be spdnding the money more wisely

:45:52. > :45:53.Andrew, the argument, it is outdated.

:45:54. > :45:59.It is not needed in today's environment.

:46:00. > :46:02.Well, if it were possible to define all the threats that face

:46:03. > :46:05.the country this would be a much easier debate to have, but

:46:06. > :46:10.the simple reality is that nobody has that ability and foresight.

:46:11. > :46:13.Frankly, the Greens will never be in a

:46:14. > :46:18.position to have to make a decision about the difficult things, about

:46:19. > :46:26.The great matters of state like that, that are right

:46:27. > :46:30.at the heart of government of any colour, to ignore that as

:46:31. > :46:36.a possibility and not to go for the minimum credible and independent

:46:37. > :46:41.deterrent, I think, at this stage, would be a wrong decision.

:46:42. > :46:45.Would you reduce the number of boats from four to three as has

:46:46. > :46:56.Later on, as the programme for developing weapons

:46:57. > :47:00.for the boats evolves, we mhght be in a different position because we

:47:01. > :47:03.might have a better underst`nding of some of the threats.

:47:04. > :47:08.But they are so complex and changing all the time in this

:47:09. > :47:14.world of a new asymmetric threat, but also with rogue countrids with

:47:15. > :47:18.nuclear weapons at their disposal, we cannot take chances.

:47:19. > :47:22.Eric, given the strain on the military, given the cuts that

:47:23. > :47:26.the military has endured, wouldn?t it be better to spend some of that

:47:27. > :47:32.?20 billion on the army, air force or navy, and conventional forces?

:47:33. > :47:37.The ultimate job of governmdnt is to protect its people.

:47:38. > :47:39.In an unsafe world, looking at what we are seeing in Iraq,

:47:40. > :47:44.looking at North Korea now, with long`range rocketry, Iran possibly

:47:45. > :47:47.with long`range rocketry, we have go to have the ultimate weapon.

:47:48. > :47:51.And this is the ultimate weapon and it has kept us safe for what,

:47:52. > :47:57.But who would we be defending against in today's world?

:47:58. > :48:02.We have a threat from other countries and evdn

:48:03. > :48:05.Russia, shall we say, given what?s happened in the Ukraine and Crimea.

:48:06. > :48:08.This is an unsafe world and the government is responsible

:48:09. > :48:11.This weapons system has just done that.

:48:12. > :48:14.Tom, Andrew is saying you are not ever going to have

:48:15. > :48:20.It is easy for you to say it, but you are not facing up to re`lity.

:48:21. > :48:23.We may not be making those decisions at the moment, but we still have

:48:24. > :48:26.our principle position and to bring in things like Ukraine and Syria

:48:27. > :48:31.as examples of why we need nuclear weapons ? these situations have

:48:32. > :48:34.arisen in a world with lots of nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons

:48:35. > :48:37.are unable to prevent these things and are unable to stop them once

:48:38. > :48:41.There are only a handful of countries left in the world ? I

:48:42. > :48:45.think nine countries ? which still have a nuclear arsenal.

:48:46. > :48:47.The rest of the world are talking and working towards disarmalent

:48:48. > :48:49.We should be supporting those efforts to invest...

:48:50. > :48:52.Just to be clear, is it not just that you would save

:48:53. > :48:55.money by reducing the number of submarines, you would just say,

:48:56. > :49:03.Yes, we would disarm our nuclear arsenal.

:49:04. > :49:10.It is a principle position `nd it is different to the three main parties.

:49:11. > :49:11.Right, we will leave it there, but thank you very much indeed.

:49:12. > :49:14.Now, students with disabilities here in the North West have warned that

:49:15. > :49:17.benefit changes may mean fewer of them going to university.

:49:18. > :49:20.The Disabled Students' Allowance ` DSA ` helps pay for what they need,

:49:21. > :49:22.such as special software or accommodation.

:49:23. > :49:24.As Stuart Pollitt explains, the government's now asking

:49:25. > :49:33.universities themselves to take more responsibility for welfare.

:49:34. > :49:36.Students have been on the streets over tuition fees,

:49:37. > :49:41.then over educational maintenance allowances or EMA, so could DSA be

:49:42. > :49:51.Krishnan is busy preparing the ground for a new garden

:49:52. > :49:54.at the University of Central Lancashire in Preston.

:49:55. > :49:57.He's studying for an Environmental Management degree, a degree which

:49:58. > :50:03.It has enabled me to actually come to university.

:50:04. > :50:06.I have received a lot of equipment from them and human support such

:50:07. > :50:09.as the library assistant, note`takers for my lectures

:50:10. > :50:16.and a practical assistant to help me with laboratory and field work.

:50:17. > :50:19.I dread to think of the lives that would be ruined

:50:20. > :50:22.by students not having enough money to purchase the equipment

:50:23. > :50:30.Without the DSA I just would not have been able to start the course.

:50:31. > :50:31.Krishnan isn't alone in his concerns.

:50:32. > :50:35.Craig has spina bifida and is midway through a law degree.

:50:36. > :50:38.The greatest concern people have is that you will simply not be

:50:39. > :50:43.People will be languishing on benefits.

:50:44. > :50:51.Currently students are entitled to up to ?5,161 a year

:50:52. > :50:53.for specialist equipment, around ?20,000 for non`medical helpers

:50:54. > :50:59.like note`takers and up to ?1,7 0 for things like travel expenses.

:51:00. > :51:01.Students with anything from dyslexia through to blhnd

:51:02. > :51:05.and deaf undergraduates are tested to check if they are eligible.

:51:06. > :51:11.Last year 53,000 students rdceived DSA, costing nearly ?120 million.

:51:12. > :51:14.The new President of UCLAN's student union was one

:51:15. > :51:19.The students at UCLAN will be massively affected.

:51:20. > :51:22.There are around 2,500 students who rdceived

:51:23. > :51:26.I agree with the government looking at DSA

:51:27. > :51:33.They should be looking at reforming the whole DSA `nd

:51:34. > :51:36.thinking, how can we make it better, how can we make it more bendficial?

:51:37. > :51:38.So, students are worried but there are implications, too

:51:39. > :51:41.for universities, who have been asked to supply more funding

:51:42. > :51:44.and to take more responsibility for disabled students.

:51:45. > :51:47.The problem is, the univershties do not actually yet know exactly what

:51:48. > :51:54.The detail from the governmdnt about which students will continue

:51:55. > :51:57.to receive DSA is not reallx clear to us at this moment in time.

:51:58. > :51:59.Are you going to have to provide more people

:52:00. > :52:06.One thing that is really cldar from the announcement is that there

:52:07. > :52:08.is going to be a significant financial impact on Lancastdr

:52:09. > :52:11.University and, in fact, on universities across the country when

:52:12. > :52:15.We are getting, I think, a better balance between

:52:16. > :52:18.the individual payment for the student and the obligation of the

:52:19. > :52:22.institution and overall there will be more provision, more support.

:52:23. > :52:25.This is a better system for the disabled because soletimes,

:52:26. > :52:27.with it all being done throtgh an individual budget

:52:28. > :52:31.And where there are extra individual needs for the student,

:52:32. > :52:35.of course disabled students allowance will carry on.

:52:36. > :52:37.Krishnan just hopes that's true and that by the time

:52:38. > :52:41.his garden flourishes other students will continue to get the help he has

:52:42. > :52:47.And we're joined now from London by Dr Nicola Martin

:52:48. > :52:51.from the National Association of Disability Practitioners, which

:52:52. > :52:54.represents people who work with students who need extra support.

:52:55. > :52:57.Nicola, thanks for being on the programme.

:52:58. > :53:04.The consultation period feels like it is not really

:53:05. > :53:09.The National Association of Disability Practitioners represents

:53:10. > :53:13.practically every universitx in the UK and includes people with

:53:14. > :53:18.expertise in promoting disability equality in post`school education `

:53:19. > :53:23.the National Union of Students, obviously a whole wealth

:53:24. > :53:25.of expertise ` and the announcement came in thd spring

:53:26. > :53:29.as an absolute bolt out of the blue, with no prior consultation.

:53:30. > :53:33.We understand that consultation in the autumn will be

:53:34. > :53:38.about the clarity of procedures rather than whether the ide` is any

:53:39. > :53:43.Do you agree with the principle of it, though?

:53:44. > :53:45.I think that disability practitioners are incredibly

:53:46. > :53:48.flexible people who have moved with the times

:53:49. > :53:52.as assistance technology has changed along with everything else.

:53:53. > :53:57.We are used to change, we are used to development and DSA needs to be

:53:58. > :54:03.reviewed in some ways, but this period, having everything in place

:54:04. > :54:10.I used to be a principal lecturer for inclusive practices at Sheffield

:54:11. > :54:16.Hallam University, which was very forward thinking, and in eight years

:54:17. > :54:20.we made some strides towards developing embedded inclusive

:54:21. > :54:25.practice, but not in any way enough that we would compensate

:54:26. > :54:30.for providing non`medical help support for disabled students who

:54:31. > :54:36.absolutely need something which is tailored to their individual needs.

:54:37. > :54:39.Okay, let me bring in Eric Ollerenshaw.

:54:40. > :54:45.What do you make of this and particularly the criticisms there?

:54:46. > :54:48.I can understand the criticisms and the worry about it,

:54:49. > :54:51.but you can argue consultation/prior consultation

:54:52. > :54:54.Consultation is actually gohng on, so the government is actually

:54:55. > :54:59.This allowance was agreed 24 years ago and hasn?t been reviewed since.

:55:00. > :55:02.Obviously, 25 years ago a computer might have been seen

:55:03. > :55:07.as a complex need, whereas now it is a different kind of world.

:55:08. > :55:13.We are trying to find out the best way of helping the ones with the

:55:14. > :55:18.It has been successful in tdrms of delivering that but, given we

:55:19. > :55:22.agreed that universities could have an increase in fees, one of

:55:23. > :55:26.the principles behind that was that universities would also demonstrate

:55:27. > :55:32.So we want to see what univdrsities are also doing in encouraging more

:55:33. > :55:37.and supporting disabled into the actual colleges and the courses.

:55:38. > :55:39.While at the same time, obviously, every single item of governlent

:55:40. > :55:42.expenditure has to be reviewed because we still haven?t yet closed

:55:43. > :55:51.If that was a correct analysis, what Eric is saying is that the lassive

:55:52. > :55:56.increase and hike in fees that the coalition have brought in is passing

:55:57. > :56:01.the cost of disabled students back to the student population.

:56:02. > :56:07.This is the public duty and it is hugely important that we

:56:08. > :56:13.should not allow this clever smoke and mirrors exercise to continue.

:56:14. > :56:16.What has happened, just as hs happening in local government, local

:56:17. > :56:20.government has been told to do more and more with less and less money.

:56:21. > :56:23.Universities are now being told to do more and more with less

:56:24. > :56:26.And the victims in all this, in this case, are disabled students.

:56:27. > :56:32.I encourage every single disabled student to write to their MP

:56:33. > :56:38.and demand that the system hs, yes, there can be a review, I fully agree

:56:39. > :56:42.with that, but let us make sure that it is based upon a fair set of rules

:56:43. > :56:51.Because there is case after case coming through

:56:52. > :56:57.Those institutes that have a significant number

:56:58. > :57:01.of people with disabilities will be asked to put their hands deeper

:57:02. > :57:04.in the pockets so the ones that have been most progressive will be

:57:05. > :57:09.Dr Martin, you wanted to come back in.

:57:10. > :57:13.It will mean that the disability services within

:57:14. > :57:16.universities will be the equivalent of a postcode lottery.

:57:17. > :57:19.Some universities will be much better place to support dis`bled

:57:20. > :57:23.students and disabled students, themselves, will be seen

:57:24. > :57:28.as a direct cost to univershties, which may well limit recruitment.

:57:29. > :57:31.There will also be a perceived feeling that support is

:57:32. > :57:35.going to be less readily av`ilable to disabled students, which is going

:57:36. > :57:39.to limit them in terms of deciding to go to university.

:57:40. > :57:43.Also, it is incredibly short term because we know 70% of disabled

:57:44. > :57:50.graduates access employment and 40% of disabled people who are

:57:51. > :58:00.We are assuming it is going to happen.

:58:01. > :58:03.There is a consultation going on and, as I said, this disability

:58:04. > :58:05.allowances was agreed 25 years ago, in totally different circumstances.

:58:06. > :58:08.The universities have got more money coming in so there must be

:58:09. > :58:11.a trade off in terms of this across the board, between

:58:12. > :58:17.If it means we can concentr`te more money on the more severely disabled

:58:18. > :58:19.then, presumably, we can increase accessibility.

:58:20. > :58:26.In terms of the notion of complex needs and directing support towards

:58:27. > :58:30.students with most complex needs, that in itself is going to be

:58:31. > :58:34.a cost in terms of working out how you define complex and how

:58:35. > :58:41.That cannot be changed within 12 months.

:58:42. > :58:44.I would argue for example, my research is with students with

:58:45. > :58:48.autism at the University of Cambridge, very brilliant young

:58:49. > :58:52.people in a very complex environment which renders their needs complex

:58:53. > :58:59.Although we are being consulted it is really about the clarity

:59:00. > :59:03.of the process rather than actually how the system is going to operate

:59:04. > :59:09.It is certainly an issue of equity across all universities.

:59:10. > :59:16.Dr Martin, thank you very much for your time.

:59:17. > :59:24.The Former Home Secretary Leon Brittan said Home Office officials

:59:25. > :59:26.didn't report back after he passed them

:59:27. > :59:29.a dossier alleging a Westminster paedophile ring in the 80s.

:59:30. > :59:31.The Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk had told the Home Affairs Committee

:59:32. > :59:37.Why did he not ask those officials to come back to him within

:59:38. > :59:40.a week providing details of what the allegations are and ask him

:59:41. > :59:47.Parents of children with special edtcational

:59:48. > :59:51.needs in Wigan say they've been let down by the local authority.

:59:52. > :59:54.The government's chosen the local Council to pilot changes

:59:55. > :01:33.Cumbria County Council revealed that it paid former Chief Executive

:01:34. > :01:37.The question is, why did that not happen?

:01:38. > :01:39.Do you think there was a paedophile ring operating

:01:40. > :01:43.at Westminster, which is what is, basically, being alleged?

:01:44. > :01:46.I am not certain that that was in the dossier and certainlx there

:01:47. > :01:54.Certainly there appears to have been a cover up at a pretty high level

:01:55. > :01:57.and that needs to be investhgated and clarity brought

:01:58. > :02:07.Andrew Miller, Eric Ollerenshaw, thank you very much indeed.

:02:08. > :02:10.We?ll now hand you back to Andrew Neil in London.

:02:11. > :02:14.research indicates that most of the progress in London was being made

:02:15. > :02:16.before that started. I wish we had longer for that. It is all over to

:02:17. > :02:20.you. What will Thursday's mass

:02:21. > :02:22.public sector strike achieve? Has David Cameron's anti-Juncker

:02:23. > :02:24.attacks clawed back support And is Alan Johnson really thinking

:02:25. > :02:47.about challenging Ed Miliband We will start with the strikes, Matt

:02:48. > :02:52.Hancock was hardline in the head-to-head that he did with the

:02:53. > :02:57.TUC. I guess that the Tory internal polling and focus groups must be

:02:58. > :03:00.telling them that there are votes in taking a tough line? There is that

:03:01. > :03:07.and there is the fact that they are now much more confident on any

:03:08. > :03:14.economic policy two or three years ago. They shied away from it because

:03:15. > :03:18.the economy was shrinking, there was still a danger that public sector

:03:19. > :03:23.job losses would lead to higher unemployment overall. Now, the

:03:24. > :03:28.economy is growing, they have a good story to sell about employment so

:03:29. > :03:32.they are much more bolshy and brazen than they were two or three years

:03:33. > :03:37.ago. They know that it always causes problems for Labour. Labour is

:03:38. > :03:42.naturally sympathetic to the public sector workers, pay being squeezed,

:03:43. > :03:47.they are striking to make an issue of it. And yet they can't quite come

:03:48. > :03:52.out and give the unions 100% Labour support? Exactly. You saw Tristram

:03:53. > :03:55.Hunt on the Marr Show this morning squirming to support the idea of

:03:56. > :03:58.strikes, but not this particular strike. It was always the question

:03:59. > :04:02.that gets asked to Labour - who funds you? That is a real problem.

:04:03. > :04:04.The bit that gets me is they trail this ef are I time there is a --

:04:05. > :04:09.this ef are I time there is a - every time there is a strike, this

:04:10. > :04:14.idea of cutting it to ballots and local election turnout was a third.

:04:15. > :04:17.Boris Johnson was elected Mayor of London with 38% turnout. We need to

:04:18. > :04:26.talk about-turnout across our democracy. That is an easy rebuttal

:04:27. > :04:30.for Labour to make. Matt Hancock was hardline about changing the strike

:04:31. > :04:33.law. When you asked him the question, if you are not going to

:04:34. > :04:38.stabilise the public finances till 2018, does this mean the pay freeze

:04:39. > :04:43.or no real term pay increase in the public sector will increase till

:04:44. > :04:49.2018, h e was inner vous on that one. -- he was nervous on that one.

:04:50. > :04:51.This strike is different to those strikes that took place in 2010 At

:04:52. > :04:54.strikes that took place in 2010. At that time, the TUC and the Labour

:04:55. > :05:00.Leadership thought there was going to be a great movement out there,

:05:01. > :05:05.not a kind of 1926 movement, but a great movement out there. This time

:05:06. > :05:11.round, I think the climate is different. Ed Miliband talking about

:05:12. > :05:15.wage increases being outstripped by inflation and people not seeing the

:05:16. > :05:23.recovery coming through into their pay packets. Slightly more tricky

:05:24. > :05:27.territory for the Tories. If The Labour machine cannot make something

:05:28. > :05:34.out of Matt Hancock telling this programme there will be no increase

:05:35. > :05:37.in pay for workers in the public sector till 2018, they have a

:05:38. > :05:40.problem? They do have a problem. They have to say always that they

:05:41. > :05:45.would not just turn the money taps on. That is the dance that you are

:05:46. > :05:48.locked in all the time. Can we all agree that Alan Johnson is not going

:05:49. > :05:57.to stand against Ed Miliband this side of the election? Some

:05:58. > :06:02.politicians are cynical enough. I don't think Alan Johnson is one. Do

:06:03. > :06:06.we agree? There is nothing in it for Labour and certainly not for Alan

:06:07. > :06:11.Johnson. No way. It is the last thing he would want to do. There are

:06:12. > :06:15.some desperate members going around trying to find a stalking horse

:06:16. > :06:19.Alan Johnson will not be their man. He has more important things to do

:06:20. > :06:24.on a Thursday night on BBC One! Isn't it something about the febrile

:06:25. > :06:29.state of the Labour Party that Labour, some Labour backbenchers or

:06:30. > :06:34.in the Shadow Cabinet, can float the idea of this nonsense? If there was

:06:35. > :06:37.a time to do it, maybe it was in the middle of the Parliament. With ten

:06:38. > :06:41.months left, you are stuck with the leader you chose in 2010. I remember

:06:42. > :06:49.them failing to understand this in January of 2010 when there was that

:06:50. > :07:01.last push against Gordon Brown. Five months before an election, they were

:07:02. > :07:05.trying to do something. The deputy Leader of the Labour Party had

:07:06. > :07:13.something to do with it. There is deep unease about Ed Miliband. There

:07:14. > :07:16.are problems but Alan Johnson is not the man. I think there is no chance

:07:17. > :07:20.of it! If the most recent polls are to be

:07:21. > :07:22.believed, David Cameron appears to have enjoyed a 'Juncker bounce' -

:07:23. > :07:25.clawing back some support from UKIP after he very publicly opposed the

:07:26. > :07:29.appointment of Jean-Claude Juncker to the post of EU Commission

:07:30. > :07:31.president. Last week Nigel Farage took his newly enlarged UKIP

:07:32. > :07:34.contingent to Strasbourg for the first session

:07:35. > :07:54.of the new European Parliament. These two gentlemen have nothing to

:07:55. > :07:59.say today. It was the usual dull, looking back to a model invented 50

:08:00. > :08:02.years ago and we are the ones that want democracy, we are the ones that

:08:03. > :08:07.want nation state, we are the ones that want a global future for our

:08:08. > :08:14.countries, not to be trapped inside this museum. Thank you. I can see we

:08:15. > :08:21.will be covering more of the European Parliament at last!

:08:22. > :08:23.It's rumoured he's likely to stand in the next general election in the

:08:24. > :08:26.Kent constituency of Thanet South, currently held by the Conservatives.

:08:27. > :08:28.Last week the Conservatives selected their candidate for the seat -

:08:29. > :08:30.Craig McKinlay - a former deputy leader of UKIP.

:08:31. > :08:41.Did you get the short straw, you have got a seat that Nigel Farage is

:08:42. > :08:47.probably going to fight? Not in the slightest. It is a seat that I know

:08:48. > :08:50.well. It is a seat that there's obvious euro scepticism there and my

:08:51. > :08:56.qualities are right for that seat. UKIP got some very good... What are

:08:57. > :09:00.your qualities? Deep-seated conservatism, I was a founder of

:09:01. > :09:06.UKIP, I wrote the script back in 1992. My heart is Conservative

:09:07. > :09:13.values. They are best put out to the public by me in South Thanet. It

:09:14. > :09:17.would be ridiculous if Nigel chose that seat. We need a building block

:09:18. > :09:20.of people like myself to form a Government if we are going to have

:09:21. > :09:24.that referendum that is long overdue. I don't think he's got the

:09:25. > :09:28.luxury of losing somebody who is very similar in views to him. He

:09:29. > :09:33.would be best look looking elsewhere. You wouldn't like him to

:09:34. > :09:37.stand in your seat, would you? It would seem to make very little

:09:38. > :09:41.sense. People would say what is UKIP all about if it's fighting people

:09:42. > :09:45.who have got a similar view to them? We do need to build a majority

:09:46. > :09:48.Government for the Conservatives next year because only us are

:09:49. > :09:53.offering that clear in-out referendum. I want to be one of

:09:54. > :09:58.those building blocks that is part of that renegotiation that we will

:09:59. > :10:03.put to public in a referendum. Sounds to me like if the choice is

:10:04. > :10:10.between you and Nigel Farage next May in Thanet South, it is Tweedle

:10:11. > :10:14.Dum and Tweedle Dee? Not at all. The Dum and Tweedle Dee? Not at all The

:10:15. > :10:18.danger to this country is another Labour Government. That is one of

:10:19. > :10:22.the main reasons that I left UKIP in 2005 because that last five years of

:10:23. > :10:27.the Labour Government was the most dangerous to the fundamentals of

:10:28. > :10:36.Britain that we have ever seen. I'm happy with the Conservatives. I have

:10:37. > :10:44.full Conservative values. I am a Euro-sceptic. Thank you for joining

:10:45. > :10:52.us. The Westminster bubble yet again, which has a herd mentality, a

:10:53. > :10:58.bubble with a herd mentality, it got it wrong yet again. Mr Cameron's

:10:59. > :11:03.isolated, he is useless at diplomacy, all of which may be true,

:11:04. > :11:05.but the British people liked it and his backbenchers liked it? True.

:11:06. > :11:08.his backbenchers liked it? True Although some of us would say it is

:11:09. > :11:12.possible... You are speaking for the bubble? I'm speaking for my segment

:11:13. > :11:24.of the bubble. Some of us argued that he got it wrong diplomatically

:11:25. > :11:29.and it would be wrong politically. It will be the passage of time. We

:11:30. > :11:36.saw UKIP decline between the 2004 European elections and the 2005

:11:37. > :11:39.General. You would expect something similar to happen this time round.

:11:40. > :11:44.The question is how far low do they fall? They are still registering

:11:45. > :11:48.12-15% in the opinion polls. They are. When Mr Cameron wielded his

:11:49. > :11:52.veto which again the Westminster bubble said it's terrible, it is

:11:53. > :11:57.embarrassing, he overtook Labour in the polls for a while doing that.

:11:58. > :12:02.He's had a Juncker bounce. If you were a strategist, would you not

:12:03. > :12:12.conclude the more Euro-sceptic I am, the better it is for me in the

:12:13. > :12:17.polls? In the short-term, yes. This is the short-term thinking we are

:12:18. > :12:19.supposed to despise. The electricion is very clever for a different -

:12:20. > :12:23.is very clever for a different -- the selection is very clever for a

:12:24. > :12:28.different reason. It is this anti-London feeling in Thanet South.

:12:29. > :12:31.He is a councillor, he grew up in the constituency. He is a chartered

:12:32. > :12:35.accountant. He is somebody who can be seen to be a champion of local

:12:36. > :12:39.people. If they had parachuted in a special adviser, they would be in

:12:40. > :12:43.real trouble. He wants to get out... This is the third representative of

:12:44. > :12:46.the bubble? He wants to get out of the European Union which David

:12:47. > :12:51.Cameron doesn't want to do. It was interesting for that statement to

:12:52. > :12:55.MPs on Monday, there were mild Euro-sceptics who said, "I can't

:12:56. > :13:00.take this." The Speaker said can the baying mob, the Conservative MPs,

:13:01. > :13:05.quieten down, please. Ben Bradshaw, the former Minister made it, he

:13:06. > :13:12.said, "I'm reminded when the leader of the Labour Party before Harold

:13:13. > :13:17.Wilson made that famous Euro-sceptic speech and Mrs Gaitskell said

:13:18. > :13:19.darling, the wrong people are cheering." That is the challenge.

:13:20. > :13:22.Thank you, bubbles! The Daily Politics is back

:13:23. > :13:26.at its usual Noon time every day And I'll be back here on BBC One

:13:27. > :13:32.next Sunday at 11pm for the last Sunday Politics of the summer - I'll

:13:33. > :13:37.be talking to Scotland's Deputy Remember, if it's Sunday,

:13:38. > :13:44.it's the Sunday Politics.