21/09/2014 Sunday Politics North West

Good morning from Manchester, where the Labour Party are gathering

for their annual conference as British politics adjusts to what

the rest of the UK. in Scotland might mean for

Scotland's decision to vote 'no means more powers heading north

But what about Home Rule for England?

Independence for Scotland has been his life's work. Alex Salmond tells

us why he is stepping down after losing Thursday's vote. And we've

got an exclusive survey of what the people who want to be Labour

And we're at the Labour Party Conference in Manchester asking how

Ed Miliband can win back lost voters in the North West and what

powers and more freedom to spend. But what is the next devolution step

for the capital? With me, the best and brightest political panel in the

business, at least that is what they pay me to say every week. Nick Watt,

Helen Lewis and, this week, we have done some devolution ourselves to

other areas, and we have Sam Coates from the times. The union survived,

but only at the cost of more powers for the Scottish parliament and

enshrining the formula that gives Scotland a privileged position when

it comes to public spending, which has MPs on both sides of the Commons

of in arms. The Scottish has MPs on both sides of the Commons

has been answered for now. Suddenly, the English question takes centre

stage, doesn't it? Absolutely. It has a grubby feel, when that vow was

put to the Scottish people, that they hoped would swing the vote

there was nothing about English only votes. It was unconditional? The

Tory proposal did talk very core justly about looking at the

proposals by a former clerk of the House of Commons that looked at this

issue. That was very cautious. - cautiously. These proposals will not

get through Westminster unless David Cameron addresses the English-only

issue. You look at people like Chris Grayling in the Sunday Telegraph.

Alistair Darling on the Andrew Marr Show said you could not have a link

between what you are giving Holyrood and English-only MPs. Back on says,

is welshing on the deal. -- comic he They were furious that he gave away

these tax powers and inscribed the Barnett formula. They said they

weren't going to vote for it. It is a shameless piece of opportunism.

Now they can say that Labour are the ones that don't trust you and don't

want to give you more powers. He knows it is going to be a tight

timetable. The idea of getting a draft of this out by Burns Night,

most people would say, given they had six years to set up Scottish

parliament, the idea we will solve these huge constitutional questions

in four months is absurd. But they don't care about the constitutional

questions, the one they care about is English votes? There is a simple

reason they won that. If you look at the MPs in England alone, the Tories

have a majority of 59, an overwhelming bias, and if you strip

out Wales Scotland and Northern Ireland, so this has become a

partisan issue. The question is whether David Cameron can follow

through on the promise. He said he would link the two Scottish powers,

but it's not clear you will get either before the general election.

It's not but the purpose is to cause Labour Party discomfort, and it is.

You can see with date -- Ed Miliband this morning, they find it very hard

to answer the question, why shouldn't there be English votes for

English laws? Ed Miliband this morning was saying how London MPs

get to vote on London transport and English MPs don't outside of London

and it is confusing, but Labour is in a difficult position. They were

before the Prime Minister made his announcement. The yes side triumphed

in Glasgow, the largest city in Scotland, a Labour heartland, and

the Prime Minister is saying that if Labour don't agree to this by the

time of the general election, he is handing a gift to the SNP, that that

would be the party that the natural Labour voters would vote for to see

off the plan. It's not just Tory backbenchers. There are Labour

backbenchers saying there should be in which bodes for English laws

Even people in the Shadow Cabinet think it is right. The cases

unarguable. If you say her chewing a partisan way, you can't sell it to

the country. Ed Miliband is on course to have a majority of about

20, and you take the 40 English MPs, and he hasn't got it. This is a

coalition government where the Conservatives haven't got really to

be in charge, they have put in sweeping laws. Labour should

probably take the bullet on this one. Let's leave it for the moment.

But don't go away. As they struggle to keep the United Kingdom in one

piece, David Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg promised to keep

something called the Barnett Formula.

It wasn't invented in Barnet, but by man called Joel Barnett.

And it's how the UK government decides how much

public money to spend in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

It's controversial, because it's led to public spending

being typically 20% higher in Scotland than in England.

Well, some English MPs aren't happy about that.

I'm joined now by the Tory MP Dominic Raab.

Welcome to the Sunday Politics. How can the Prime Minister scrap the

Barnett Formula when he has just about to keep it on the front page

of a major Scottish newspaper? If we are going to see financial

devolution to Scotland, more powers of tax and spend, it's impossible

not to look at the impact on the wider union, and there have been

promises made to the Scottish and we should do our best to deliver them,

but there have been promises made to the English, Welsh and Northern

Irish. If you look at the Barnett Formula which allocates revenue

across the UK, it is massively prejudicial to those other parts. We

have double the number of ambulance staff and nurses compared to

England. The regional breakdown is more stark with double the amount

spent on social housing in Scotland than in Yorkshire and the North West

and the Midlands. The Welsh do very poorly on social services for the

elderly. What are we saying? That they need our children, patients and

the elderly are worth less than the Scots? That's not the way to have a

sustainable solution. I understand the distribution impact of the

Barnett Formula, but Westminster politicians are already held in

contempt by a lot of people and to rat on such a public pledge would

confirm their worst fears. Your leader would have secured the union

on a false prospectus. First of all, it's clear from the Ashcroft

poll that the offer made in the Scottish newspaper had zero effect

and if anything was counter-productive to the overall

result because two thirds of swing voters in the last few days voted

for independence. But we can't keep proceeding without looking at the

promises made to the English. We said in the referendum that we would

have English laws -- English votes on English issues. The Liberal

Democrats, in their manifesto, pledged to scrap the Barnett

Formula. We have to reconcile all of the promises to all parts of the UK,

and Alex Salmond talks about a Westminster stitch up, but what he's

trying to do is, with gross double standards, is in French stitch up in

rapid time, which would be grossly unfair to the rest of the rest of UK

-- is contrive stitch up. What is unfair about the current spending

formula? The extra money Scotland gets from Barnet, is covered by the

oil revenues it sends to London Scotland is only getting back on

spending what it pays in tax. There is no analysis out there that

suggests it is the same amount. Having voted to stay in the UK. Let

me give you the figures. Last year revenues were 4.5 billion, and the

Barnett Formula was worth 4.5 billion to Scotland. It is awash. A

huge amount of British taxpayer investment has gone into extracting

North Sea oil, and if we move to a more federal system, we would need

to look at things like the allocation of resources, but the

Barnett Formula has been lambasted as a national embarrassment and

grossly unfair by its Labour Party architect, Lord Barnett. So what we

need is to change this mechanism so it is based on need. The irony is,

when the Scots allocate Avenue to the -- revenue to their local

authorities, it's done on a needs basis, and what is good for Scotland

must be good for the rest of Britain. One final question. The

Prime Minister is now making his promise of more home rule for

Scotland conditional on English votes for English laws. Why didn't

he spell out the condition when he made his bow to the Scottish people?

Why has this condition been tacked on by the Prime Minister? In the

heat of the referendum debate lots of things were said, but the truth

is that Parliament must also look at this and make its views known, and

English MPs as well. You will find that conservative as well as a lot

of Labour MPs would say, we cannot just rush through a deal that is

unsustainable. It has to be good for all parts of Britain. Yes, we should

deliver on our promises for more devolution to Scotland, but let s

deliver on promises to be English, and Northern Irish. Why are they

locked out of the debate? Let's leave it there. Thank you for

joining us. The man responsible

for taking Scottish nationalism from the political fringes to within

touching distance of victory, Alex Salmond, has a flair for dramatic

announcements, and he gave us another on Friday

when he revealed he's to stand Friends and foes have paid tribute

to his extraordinary career. In a moment I'll be speaking to

Alex Salmond, but first here's Adam Fleming with

the story of the vote that broke The BBC's HQ on the Clyde, the whole

place converted into a studio for Scotland's big night. You know what

you need for big events, big screens, and there are loads of them

here. That one is three stories high, and this is the one Jeremy

Vine uses for his graphics. The other thing that is massive is the

turnout in the referendum, it is enormous. It was around 85% of the

electorate, that is 4 million ballot papers. First to declare

Clackmannanshire. No, 19,000. 1 ,000 and 36. The first Noel of the night,

and there were plenty more. -- the first no vote. The better together

campaigners were over the moon, like Jim Murphy, who had campaigned in

100 different towns. I don't want to sound schmaltzy, but it makes you

think more of Scotland. It makes you small tree. Yes, 194,779. Around

five a.m., the Yes campaign applauded as they won Scotland's

biggest city, Glasgow. Dundee went their way as well, but just for

areas out of 32 opted for independence. How many copies have

you had? This is my second cup of tea on the morning -- how many

copies. He was enjoying the refreshments on offer, but the yes

campaigners were not in a happy place. We are in the bowels of one

of the parts of the British establishment that, I've got to say,

has probably done its job in this referendum, because I think the BBC

has been critical in shoring up the establishment and have supported the

no campaign as best as they could. But there was no arguing with the

numbers, and by sunrise, the BBC called it. Scotland has voted no in

this referendum on independence The result, in Fife, has taken the no

campaign over the line and the official result of this referendum

is a no. There we go, on a screen three stories high, Scotland has

said no to independence. As soon as the newsprint was driving north of

the border, the focus shifted south as the Prime Minister pledged more

devolution for Scotland but only if it happened everywhere else as well.

Just as Scotland will vote separately in the Scottish

Parliament on their issues of tax, spending on welfare, so to England,

as well as Wales and Northern Ireland, should be able to vote on

these issues, and all this must take place in tandem with and at the same

pace as the settlement for Scotland. It began to dawn on us all that we

might end up doing this again. See you for an English referendum soon?

Northern Ireland. There could be another one in Scotland. But not

next weekend? Give me a break. There was no break for Nick, because Alex

Salmond came up with one last twist, his resignation was as leader, my

time is nearly over. But the Scotland, the campaign continues,

and the dream shall never die. So, the referendum settled, the

Constitution in flux, and a leader gone. All in a night work.

Alex Salmond is to stand down as First Minister of Scotland. He shows

no signs of going quietly. Last night, I spoke to the SNP leader in

Aberdeen and began by asking him if it was always his intention to

resign if he lost the referendum. I certainly have thought about it

Andrew. But for most of the referendum campaign I thought we

were going to win. So, I was... Yeah, maybe a few months back I

considered it. But I only finally made up my mind on Friday lunch

time. Did you agonise over the decision to stand down? I'm not

really an agonising person. When you get beaten in a referendum, you have

to consider standing down as a real possibility. Taking responsibility

and politics has gone out of fashion but there is an aspect, if you need

a campaign, and I was the leader of the Yes Campaign, and you don't win,

you have to contemplate if you are the best person to lead future

political campaigns. In my judgement, it was time for the SNP

and the broader yes movement, the National movement of Scotland, they

would benefit from new leadership. In your heart of hearts, through the

campaign, as referendum on day approached, you did think you were

going to win? Yes, I did. I thought for most of the last month of the

campaign, we were in with a real chance. In the last week I thought

we had pulled ahead. I thought the decisive aspect wasn't so much the

fear mongering, the scaremongering, the kitchen sink being thrown at

Scotland by orchestration from Downing Street, I thought the real

thing was the pledge, the vow, the offer of something else. A lot of

people that had been moving across to independence saw within that a

reason to say, well, we can get something anyway without the

perceived risks that were being festooned upon them. You were only

five points away from your dream. You won Scotland's largest city

There is now the prospect of more power. Why not stay and be an

enhanced First Minister? Well, it is a good phrase. I'm not going away,

though. I'm still going to be part of the political process. In

Scotland, if people in Aberdeenshire wish to keep electing me, that is

what I will do. But I don't have to be First Minister of Scotland,

leader of the Yes Campaign, to see that achieved. The SNP is a strong

and powerful leadership team. There are a number of people that would do

a fantastic job as leader of the party and First Minister. I've been

leader of the party for the last 24 years, I think it is time to give

somebody else a shot. There are many able-bodied people that will do that

well. -- many able people that will do that well. I'm still part of the

national movement, arguing to take this forward. I think you are right,

the question, one of the irony is developing so quickly after the

referendum, it might be those that lost on Thursday end up as the

political winners and those that won end up as the losers. When we met

just for the vote, a couple of days before the vote, you said to me that

there was very little you would change about the campaign strategy.

Is that still your view? Yes. There are one or two things, like any

campaign, there is no such thing as a pitcher campaign. I would refer

not to dwell on such things. I will leave of my book, which will be

called 100 Days, coming out before Christmas. Once you read that, I

will probably reveal the things I would have changed. Basically,

broadly, this was an extraordinary campaign. Not just a political

campaign, but a campaign involving the grassroots of Scotland in an

energising, empowering way, the like of which in on of us have witnessed.

It was an extraordinary phenomenon of grassroots campaigning, which

carried the Yes Campaign so far almost to victory. If Rupert Murdoch

put his Scottish Sun behind you would have that made the difference?

If ifs and ands were pots and pans... Why did he not? I would not

say that, you have form with him that I do not have. I'm not sure

about that. I was very encouraged. The coverage, not in the other

papers, The Times, which was extremely hostile to Scottish

independence, but the coverage in the Scottish Sun was fair, balanced

and we certainly got a very fair kick of the ball. In newspapers I

would settle for no editorial line and just balanced coverage. We

certainly got that from the Scottish Sun and that was an encouragement. I

think you saw from his tweets, certainly in his heart he would have

liked to have seen a move forward in Scotland and I like that. He said if

you lost, that was it, referendum wise, for a generation, which he

defined as about 20 years. Is that still your view? Yes, it is. It has

always been my view. It's a personal view. There are always things that

can change in politics. If the UK moved out of the European Union for

example, that would be the sort of circumstance. Some people would

argue with Westminster parties, and I'm actually not surprised that they

are reneging on commitments, I am just surprised by the speed they are

doing it. They seem to be totally shameless in these matters. You

don't think they will meet the vow? You don't think there will keep to

their vow? They are not, for that essential reason you saw developing

on Friday. The Prime Minister wants to link change in Scotland to change

in England. He wants to do that because he has difficulty in

carrying his backbenchers on this and they are under pressure from

UKIP. The Labour leadership are frightened of any changes in England

which leave them without a majority in the House of Commons on English

matters. I would not call it an irresistible force and immovable

object, one is resistible and one is movable. They are at loggerheads.

The vow, I think, was something cooked up in desperation for the

last few days of the campaign. I think everybody in Scotland now

engines that. -- recognises that. It was the people that were persuaded

to vote no that word tricked, effectively. They are the ones that

are really angry. Ed Miliband and David Cameron, if they are watching

this, I would be more worried about the anger of the no voters than the

opinion of the Yes Vote on that matter. If independence is on the

back burner for now, what would you advise your successor's strategy for

the SNP to be? I would advise him or her not to listen to advice from

their predecessor. A new leader brings forward a new strategy. I

think this is, for the SNP, a very favourable political time. There

have been 5000 new members joined since Thursday. That is about a 25%

increase in the party membership in the space of a few days. More than

that, I think this is an opportunity for the SNP. But my goal is the

opportunity for Scotland. I would repeat I am not retiring from

politics. I'm standing down as First Minister of Scotland. On Friday

coming back to the north-east of Scotland, I passed through Dundee,

which voted yes by a stud -- substantial margin. There was a line

of a song I couldn't get out of my head, and old Jacobite song,

rewritten by Robert Burns, the last line is, so, tremble falls wakes, in

the midst of your glee, you've not seen the last of my bonnets and me.

So you are staying a member of the Scottish Parliament, shall we see

you again in the House of Commons? What does the future hold for you?

Membership of Scottish Parliament is dependent on the good folk of

Aberdeenshire east. If they choose to elect me, I will be delighted to

serve. I've always loved being a constituency member of Parliament, I

have known some front line politicians that regarded that as a

chore. I'm not saying they didn t do it properly, I am sure they did But

I love it. You get distilled wisdom from being a constituency member of

Parliament that helps you keep your feet on the ground and have a good

observation as to what matters to people. I have no difficulty with

being a constituent member of Parliament. Can you promise me it

will never be Lord Salmond? Yes Thanks for joining us. Great

pleasure, thank you. Now, the independence referendum is over the

next big electoral test is a general election. It is just over seven

months away. In a moment I will be talking to Chuka Umunna, but what

are the political views of the men and women fighting to win seats for

the Labour Party? The Sunday Politics has commissioned an

exclusive survey of the Parliamentary candidates.

Six out of seven Labour candidates say that the level of public

spending during their last period of office was about right. 40% of them

want a Labour government to raise taxes to reduce the budget deficit.

18% favour cutting spending. On immigration, just 15% think that the

number coming to Britain is too high. Only 7% say we generous to

immigrants. Three in ten candidates believe the party relationship with

trade unions is not close enough. Not that we spoke to think it is too

close. Or than half of the candidates say want to scrap the

nuclear deterrent, Trident. Four in five want to nationalise the

railways. If they are after a change of leader, Yvette Cooper was their

preferred choice. Chuka Umunna came in fourth. And he joins me now for

the Sunday interview. Why is Labour choosing so many

left-wing candidates? I don't think I accept the characterisation of

candidates being left wing. I don't think your viewers see politics in

terms of what is left and right I think they see it in terms of what

is right and wrong. Obviously, many of the things we have been talking

about, how we ensure that the next generation can do better than the

last, how we raise the wages of your viewers, who are currently working

very hard but not making a wage they can live off, that is what they are

talking about and that is what the public will judge them on. But they

want to raise taxes, they don't want to cut public spending, they want to

re-nationalise the railways, they don't think there is too much

immigration, they want to scrap Trident. These are all positions

clearly to the left of current party policy. But that is your

characterisation. If you look at our policy to increase the top rate of

tax to 50% for people earning over ?150,000, that is a central

position. It is something that enjoys the support of the majority

of the public. Trident? If you talk to the British public about

immigration, yes, there are concerns about the numbers coming in and out,

yes people want to see integration, yes, people want to see people

putting a contribution before they take out, the people recognise, if

you look at our multicultural nation, we have derived a lot of

benefits from immigration. I don't think your characterisation of those

positions, that is your view... It's not, it is their view. They are

saying... You describe it... You described those positions as left

wing positions. I am saying to you that I actually think a lot of those

positions are centrist positions that would enjoy the support of the

majority of your viewers. I don t think your viewers think the idea of

the broadest shoulders bearing the heaviest burden in forms of tax are

going to see it as a way out, radical principle. They want to

scrap Trident, not party policy It isn't.

I think that 73... Well, we will have 400 Parliamentary candidates at

the time of the next general election, not including current MPs.

This is 73 out of over 400 of them. I think we also need to treat the

survey with a bit of caution. They are not representative? You are

basically quoting the results of a small percentage of our

Parliamentary candidates. It's pretty safe to say when you look at

their views, they might be right or wrong, that's not my point, it's

fairly safe to say that new Labour is dead? Again, I don't think people

see things in terms of gold -- old or new Labour. We are standing at a

Labour Party. We are a great country, but we have big challenges.

We want to make sure that people can achieve their dreams and aspirations

in this country. Too many people are not in that position. Too many

people worry about the prospects of their children. Too many people do

not earn a wage they can live off. Too many people are worried about

the change. We have to make sure we are giving people a stake in the

future. That is a Labour thing, you want to call it old or new come I

don't care. It's a choice between Labour and the Conservatives in

terms of who runs the next government. That one of your

candidate we spoke to things that the party's relationship with the

unions is to close. 30% of them think it should be closer. You have

spoken to 73 out of 400 candidates. Why should the others be any

different? It's a fairly representative Sample. Many people

working on this set are the member of the union, the National union of

journalists. People that came here to this Conference would have been

brought here by trade union members. Do you think the relationship should

be closer? I think it is where it should be. It should not be closer?

I think that trade unions help create wealth in our country. If you

look at some other success stories we are in the north-west, GM

Vauxhall is there because you have trade unions working in partnership

with government and local employees to make sure we kept producing cars.

I'm not asking if unions are good or bad, I'm asking if Labour should be

closer. You are presupposing, by the tone of your question, that our

relationship is a problem. Let's turn to the English question. Why do

you need a constitutional conversation where you have to

discuss whether English people voting on English matters is

unfair? We want to give the regions and cities in England more voice,

but let's get it into perspective, we have had a situation where the

Scottish people, as desired buying rich people, have to remain part of

the UK -- by English people. What is the answer to the question? I don't

want to get to a situation where people have voted for solidarity

where you have a prime ministers talking about dividing up the UK

Parliament. Let me put this point you. Most Scottish voters think it

is unfair that Scottish MPs get to vote on English matters. That comes

out in Scottish polls. Why don't you see it as unfair? If the Scots see

it as unfair, why don't you? This is an age-old conundrum that has been

around for 100 years and it's not so simple. You're talking about making

a fundamental change to the British constitution on a whim. It's not

just an issue, in respect of Scottish MPs. As a London MP, I can

vote on matters relating to the transport of England and transport

is a devolved matter in London. In Wales, there are a number of

competencies that Welsh MPs can vote on and they've been devolved to

them. So with all of these different votes, you will exclude different

MPs? I think the solution is not necessarily to obsess about what is

happening between MPs in Westminster. That turns people

politics. We need to devolve more. I think we should be giving the cities

and regions of England more autonomy in the way that we are doing in

Scotland, but I've got to say, Andrew, it's dishonourable and in

bad faith for the Prime Minister to now seek to link what he agreed

before the referendum to this issue of English votes for English MPs.

That is totally dishonourable and in bad faith. You have promised to

devolve more tax powers to Scotland. What would they be? This is being

decided at the moment. I cannot give you the exact detail of what the tax

powers would be. Could you give us a rough idea? There is a White Paper

being produced before November and there will be draft legislation put

forward in January. Your leader has vowed that this will happen. And you

haven't got a policy? You can't tell us what the tax powers will be? I

can't tell you on this programme right now. But we have accepted the

principle on further devolution on tax, spending on welfare and we will

have further details in due course. Your leader promised to maintain the

Barnett Formula for the foreseeable future. Why is that fair when it

enshrines more per capita spending for Scotland than it does for Wales,

which is poorer, and more than many of the poorer regions in England

get? Why is that fair? We have said that in terms of looking at go -

local government spending playing out in this Parliament, we have

looked at what the government has done which is having already

deprived communities having money taken away from them and wealthier

communities are getting more. We accept that the Barnett Formula has

worked well. How has it works well? There is a cross parliamentary

consensus as they don't know what to do about it. Why has it works well,

when Wales, clearly loses out? I'm not sure by I accept that when you

look at overall underspend -- government spending. It is per

capita spending in Scotland, which is way ahead of per capita spending

in Wales, but per capita incomes in Scotland are way ahead of Wales Why

is that fair Labour politician? We have said we want to have more

equitable distribution. You haven't, you have said you will keep the

Barnett Formula. I'm not sure necessarily punishing Scotland is

the way to go. The way that this debate is going, what message does

it send to the Scottish people? I want to be clear, I am delighted

with the result we have got. The unity and solidarity where

maintaining across the nations of the United Kingdom. All of this

separatist talk, setting up different nations of the UK against

each other goes completely against what we've all been campaigning for

over the last two years, and we shouldn't have any truck with it.

Coming onto the announcement on the minimum wage, you would increase it

by ?1 50 to take it to ?8, which would be over five years. That is

all you are going to do over five years. Have you worked out how much

of this increase will be clawed back in taxation and fewer benefits? Work

has been done on it. How much? I can't give you an exact figure. The

policy pays for itself. The way we have looked at this, we looked at

the government figures, and if people are earning more, they would

therefore be paying more in income tax and they will be receiving less

in benefit and will pay out less in tax credits, so we are confident

that this will pay for itself. I'm not asking about the pavement, I'm

asking what it means for low paid workers will stop they will get an

extra 30p per hour -- about the payment. How much of the 30p to they

get to keep? In terms of what they get in the first instance, somebody

on the minimum wage now, with our proposal, would get in the region of

?3000 a year more than they are at the moment. That is before tax and

benefits. How much do they keep I cannot give you an exact figure Why

don't you give me an exact figure if you've done the modelling? We are

talking about some of the lowest paid people in the country, and I

would suggest to you that going down this route, they would face a

marginal rate of tax of 50 or 6 % and they will not keep most of this

increase you are talking about. I don't accept your figures. But you

haven't got any of your own. I just don't have any in my head I can give

you right now. Don't you think out policies before you announce them?

Of course we think our policies before we announce them but we are

confident people have more in their pocket and will be better off with

the changes proposed, and we are also seeking to incentivise

employers to pay a living wage as well. At the end of the day, as I

said, the economy is recovering great, but we know, at the moment,

it's still not delivering for a huge number of your viewers and we're

determined to do something about it. The status quo is not an option And

even joining me. Twice in three days. You can't have too much of a

good thing. I am mad. He said that, not me.

It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics. We

say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now for

Coming up here in twenty minutes, we'll be joined by John Prescott to

talk about the challenge facing Labour as their conference starts

First though, the Sunday Politics where you are.

Will Scotland's no mean a yds for city leaders here?

There is now a political imperative for devolution in England as well

We're live from the centre of Manchester.

Just behind me, the conference hall where Ed Miliband will tell us

on Tuesday why he should be the next Prime Minister.

To discuss his chances and the local implications of

the Scotland vote is the Labour MP for Garston and Halewood and Shadow

And to explain why his partx should get another go at government, Paul

Maynard, the MP for Blackpool North and Cleveleys, who's helping to

We will be talking about labour 's plan for Britain's future. To make

sure that how you `` to makd sure the economy works for everybody and

not just the privileged few. We find up and then the north`west when the

knock on doors the same dissatisfaction found in Scotland.

There are some issues, parthcularly errant having greater power, that

are going to resonate at thd conference this week. What do you

think will be the following from Scotland to Mac we cannot stop

governing the whole of the country just because of one referendum.

It is alive political questhon for all parties to deal with. The issue

is not going to call we any time soon. Most people want a coffee

didn't answer from all of the main parties on how we deal with that. ``

most people want a clear answer from all of the main parties.

"Set our cities free and we'll deliver".

That was the message this wdek from the leaders of Liverpool

and Manchester as they pressed the case for more local powdrs

Business boomed at this Middleton flag factory

A yes vote could have meant another bonanza.

From a business point of vidw, if the Union flag had have changed,

that would have been a phenomenal opportunity for us, but I'm still

Now there's a real possibility Scotland's

decision will start a revolttion in England's regional governments.

Smiles and handshakes between the leaders of Liverpool

and Manchester at the recent Global Cities Conference.

In Manchester, there's backhng for combined authorities, created

to improve transport, econolic development and regeneration.

It doesn't add an extra tier of government but it does ghve

a basis for extra powers to come down to the locality.

The critics of the combined authorities system

Actually, the combined authority conshsts

They're not directly elected, though.

Not directly elected, but bdcause they come from the 10 consthtuent

councils of Greater Manchester, there is an accountability right

back, through local councillors to everyone within the city region.

The Liverpool City Region h`s one too, but there it's not seen

You're absolutely right about the argument about colbined

Yes, the combined authoritids have a role, but I would like to see

more of metro main model in terms of the old sort of county council ways,

but without taking on all of the bureaucracy of the county council.

Others think it's too early to for the debate.

It may be a regional assembly, it may be more powers

Something structure has to happen, but let's talk about function first.

The winds of change are now about to blow through how England's

And with that a renewed focts on how Scotland's public services

Because there is a feeling here in Warrington that places

If we were in Scotland, the same demography as we h`ve,

we would have all the ?1000 every year more in public spending.

That is an anomaly that's bden around and we mustn't enshrhne

that anomaly in a constituthonal settlement like Scotland.

In Manchester, the Union Flag flies to welcome

With just a hint of relief, the union itself remains intact for now.

In what would Labour offered to the north of England? We need a

constitution to establish and to work out what is the best form of

anguished air pollution `` the best form of English devolution. We

should have that convention and in light of that we should be `ble to

come up with a settlement that works for England as well as it works for

Scotland, Northern Ireland `nd Wales. We need to make sure that we

keep the promise that all the leaders meet to Scotland, to the

timetable set. Do you have hdeas yourself of what you would like to

see change in the North West Germanic and think we need

devolution of more power and responsibility, more money to our

English `` our English regions. For you, this is city, regional lead

to? Yes. There may be different ways of going forward in different

regions. There has been a long`standing process in Scotland

got to the settlement that they have. We need some of that `nd the

English regions. There is an urgency to get the Westminster issuds right

now. But when we move on to further devolution from Westminster then to

the regions, the options ard that much greater. Partly, which you did

would depend on what your w`nted to achieve with your devolution. What

are you planning to achieve? To my mind, it needs to be a economic

development. We have a masshve productivity gap that needs to be

overcome. I don't want to sde Lancashire left out of the picture,

or Cheshire left out of the picture. But you don't want Lancashire to be

left out, do you have ideas for how they should not be let out `` left

out? It is about what you w`nt to achieve what your devolution, and if

it is about economic development, that has to focus on transport and

infrastructure. Greater Manchester has immediately it straight. I want

to see the same idea in Lancashire, where they can have the samd `` more

control over their own resotrces. And we're also joined now bx

Jon Tonge, Professor of Polhtics What is the difference with what the

parties are offering here two goodbye to extend the powers of

local taxation. We should bd careful about competing Scotland and Wales

with what is happening in the north`west. The fact is that

evolution to a region is very different to devolution to ` region.

Must have of the Scots 40 to leave leave the UK the other day. It is

not the same as in the north`west. Devolution as an idea that has been

kicking around for a long thme. Ten years ago, the idea was that we

would have their portion `` emotion from `` for the whole of thd

north`west. That was rejectdd by the north`east. What happens to the

shires, Lancashire or Cheshhre? We have to exceed the unit of

devolution. Lets quality centralisation. Is there a danger

that if you do that, you end up with anomalies. Yes. Let's face ht,

regional e`mail `` inequality is not going to be solved by devolttion to

the north`west. Frankly, regional equality `` inequality could be

increased by devolution. Is it drew something that gets people talking

and street? At the editor of devolving power to the north`west?

Maria says it does. If you do decentralise more powers, do you

then have to respond to that by giving more accountability, more

democratic accountability? We have a directly elected mayor. Not a

regional one. Not at present. Weezer Convention to get this right. That's

because we need consensus along all the different interests that Paul

and John have talked about. `` we need a convention to get th`t

straight. Scottish people w`nt more power and authority commenddd them

were locally. Constitutional Convention will make sure that we

get that great. What will not work as a stitch up from the Prile

Minister just because he thhnks that he will lose the next electhon.

Quick response to that? You cannot get these things into the long

grass. Constitutional Convention will not keep my constituents happy.

We cannot avoid answering these questions, we have to do with it

now. That is the Scotland forward. `` the Scotland forward.

Well, it's unlikely to prodtce an 85% turnout, but

On Tuesday, the Labour leader Ed Miliband will

make his case to be our next Prime Minister just behind le.

To do that, he'll have to whn back voters in some of the 12 North West

Our reporter Claire Hamilton's been to one of them.

Pendle's rolling hills have witnessed a sinister

Its politics less so, though next May, Labour and the Conserv`tives

Places like Pendle have been hit massively.

Labour's candidate believes this health centre, built under the last

Labour MP, is symptomatic of what is wrong with the current government.

They are struggling to see their GP, their children or grandchildren are

struggling to get a job and the jobs they get are low paid.

They are struggling to get `ccess to see a consultant at hospital

and they cannot get the child into the primary school that they

The charge for both Labour and the Conservatives here hs to

think new ways to regeneratd Pendle, making its industrial history its

Brierfield Mill, built in the 1 30s, could be the biggest regeneration

Current MP Andrew Stevenson is convinced its salvation

He is more cautiously optimhstic about his own chances

Two thirds of its history it has been a Labour seat,

the local Labour Party are very well`financed, they have received

over ?200,000 in donations `lready this year, so it's going to be a

I have really been a pro`business MP,

There is a lot we can be proud of here in Pendle.

But has he done enough to convince the voters in Pendle

I need to see some results hn where they've actually helped the public.

The coalition government at the moment probably have not

spoken as well as they could have done to the people of Pendld.

There's more people in work at the moment so I can't re`lly

In Nelson, the blight of a Labour housing project scrapped under

Local councillor Mohammed Ipbal says too much is made of Ed Miliband s

Nobody has ever raised the hssue of Ed Miliband's leadership,

more recently, and previously leaders of the Labour Party.

What people are really concdrned about is how they get food

on the table, how they get good education for their children

Labour lost Pendle after 18 years by just 3,500 votes in 2010.

Overturning the Tories 8% m`jority here would set Mr Miliband closer

Our reporter Mark Edwardson's been over to

The mood is pretty boring hdre at the moment. You can see that

delegates and politicians are moving through the main hall on thd way to

the conference hall which is just behind that black cartoon. Lots of

different organisations, sole of them on the left wing, many unions

are here, of course, quite ` lot of animal rights organisations, and the

tech firms are here also. F`cebook is here. They are here to advise

people about fitting elections on social media. Perhaps a sign of the

future. Welcome to the problem. Earlier this year you called for

what you make call new blood at the top of the party. Have a lesson to

you? It is still the same. Individually, they are good.

Collectively they are not the could have been. I hope they will begin.

Maybe we will have a reshuffle very quickly. I think we should. We are

starting a general election campaign and we have to focus on what is

important to people. We havd to focus on building houses, ddaling

with low pay. You were highly critical of how Labour fought to the

local and European elections earlier this year. Have they listendd? I

think the electorate is listening. I hope the leadership is listdning.

That was a dry run which we did not do very well. We have to le`rn the

lessons. Making mistakes once is OK. Repeating it would be an absolute

tragedy. That is why we to get Ed Miliband to focus on things that are

vitally important. Tell us what are the changes needed before md to make

it successful for Labour? Bhtter organisations that members of the

Shadow Cabinet are well org`nised. Stop making silly mistakes. People

turning up and not knowing the names of local people. The biggest mistake

of the European election was Ed Miliband not knowing the pr`ise of

his own shopping list. That was a core issue in the sham `` c`mpaign.

Thank you for joining us. What are the challenges that Labour

faces this week? When we did this programme last year from thd

Conservative Party conference, labourer's Paul Reed was in double

figures. At the moment it is only at 6%. Ed Miliband has to make a speech

this week which will be at night not only the faithful but give sense

that they can capture the sdat that they lost last time, partictlarly in

Lancashire. `` capture the seats. What is the economic narrathve year

two the first thing Labour has to do is that they have a tough

by`election. Talking to a sdnior Labour councillor, they are worried

about the UK challenge to L`bour. `` Ukip. Ed Miliband is right hn one

sense, that it is not a recovery for all. You're going in reversd. I did

not see it like that. The ndxt election as an important ond, but it

was always going to be a close one. Labour is trying to be a ond term

opposition, not something that we are always able to do. I am

confident that we will be able to do it. The issue here this week is

proving to people across thd north`west that we can have an

economic recovery and a recovery that works for everyone, not just a

privileged few. What people are finding at the moment is th`t they

are being told things are bdtter, but their own wages are stagnant or

going down, they are on zero hours contracts which means they cannot

pay the rent or their mortg`ge. You have told us that the government cut

spending, we would spiral into recession

dishes making sure that everybody has a C. `` the issue is th`t

everybody has a C. It is for everyday working people, not just

for Accu privileged people `t the top. One issue will be the leader

and the leader's speech. We just heard your colleague saying that the

team is not good enough. He is calling for a reshuffle of the

Shadow Cabinet. I am sure that he, as always, is ready with his views.

I think it is quite to make commitments and speech this week. I

think he has a team around him that is ready to help Labour when the

next election. Is he right that the Labour team has to up its g`me? We

all want to of the time. We need to needed as well as we possibly can.

We have an obligation to thd people of the country to provide them with

an alternative to this appalling government. 1 million peopld having

to visit food banks in order to eat in one of the richest countries in

the world. That is not an acceptable way of going forward. Your colleague

in Pendle said that it will be a huge challenge to hold on to as a

marginal constituency. Will it be the same for you? You don't take an

election result from planted. He is working as hard as I am to lake sure

that we are doing the best job in a constituency. Why are you both so up

against it? Because we have majority and that is the nature of ddmocracy.

What I hear in my constituency is genuine positivity. People can see

that we have a long`term economic plan to make sure that the dconomy

will keep on going. What thdy do not want to do is replicate France and

Germany. Labourer's economic model will end in cases. People w`nt to

that the people in charge of the country are going in the right

direction. You are helping drop Paul `` policies for the Conserv`tive

Party. What will you, but that will combat Labour on those issuds of the

cost of living? The keyword from years and security. It is economic,

financial security. Knowing that the government is in charge of things

and heading in the right direction, not making things up as thex go

repeating the same mistakes of the past, that lenders into crisis. ..

People are on zero hours contracts, they cannot afford to pay the rent,

thinking about visiting a feedback... A French model will lead

to a French model will lead to higher unemployment. Thank xou for

being with others this week. Time for a look at the rest

of the week's news now. Muslim groups have called

for the release of the Islalic State The Foreign Secretary,

said British forces could not rescue the aid worker from Eccles, because

they do not know where he is. We are dealing with

a very barbaric organisation. Labour's parliamentary candhdate for

St Helens South was arrested over an alleged assault at a Scottish

referendum polling station. Marie Rimmer's the former ldader

of St Helens council. Fylde councillors have objected to

Cuadrilla's planning applic`tions to drill for shale gas at Rose`cre Wood

and Little Plumpton. Lancashire County Council whll

make the final decision. There'll be five candidates for the

Heywood and Middleton by`eldction. The vote

on 9th October was triggered by And building a new future

for the Blues. Everton Football Club and

Liverpool City Council have agreed on plans for a new stadium `t

Walton Hall Park. It ends a decade`long search

for a site. How much to party conferencds still

matter? I think they are ch`nging in nature. We have so many lobbyists

and hangers on, that some of the meaning has been lost. Many cannot

afford to come anyway. It is changing. Ideally a viable part of

our democracy two I am less certain of that. `` are at the viable part

of our democracy? I am not certain of that. I think our confiddnce is

coming more relevant. It was a bit stage`managed in the past, whistled

these days. I have been comhng along to him. There are some people I only

see once a year at the confdrence. It is a great gathering of the party

faithful and it is important for that. Thank you very much.

And next week we'll be lookhng ahead to the Conservative Party Conference

the Conservative mayor's policy No more time I'm afraid. Andrew, back

to you. Welcome back the to Labour

conference, where we're joined by the latest hot new stand-up

comedian on the Manchester circuit. I speak of course of former Deputy

Prime Minister John Prescott. In between giving tub-thumping

speeches to rally the party faithful this week,

he's appearing at the Comedy Store. He was also of course the man

behind the last attempt to solve Our political panel is with me as

well. John, we have got Scottish votes for Scottish laws, and more

Scottish votes for Scottish laws, why not English votes for English

laws? That's an English parliament in a major constitutional change and

that is what has started. I certainly don't agree with that I

campaign for powers to be given to the regions. When I first tested it

in the Northeast, I lost. Why? Because they said they were not the

same powers you are giving to Scotland. So, basically, we must do

that, decentralised, not just with a Westminster Parliament. As you know,

in 32 years I produce the alternative. You've kept that for 32

years? I took it off my shelf and everybody was talking about it now,

but they weren't in 1982. This was my five plan. 200 meetings all

around the country -- five-year plan. You wrote this morning, not 35

years ago, that this was a plot to turn Westminster into a Tory

dominated English parliament. But if that is how England had voted, it's

not a plot, it's democracy. You can get reform in a more federal

structure, and even English parliament does fit into the federal

structure and that is what the Liberals say, but you need a fairer

representation. It might be quite radical, and we could get rid of the

Lord's, and have representation in the region there. It can't be done

in two weeks. Alex Salmond, he's assuming he has been sold out, and

it was less than a week ago they remain the announcement. We have to

get it carried out will stop but don't connect it to the English

parliament that fixes it in their favour. It may be pretty low

politics from David Cameron to come up with something that was not in

the vowel -- a bow on the front page of the daily record, but if they do

not agree with what he said at the time of the general election, he

will say two in which voters, if you want real protection in England

vote Conservative, and if you want Scottish MPs deciding on your level

of taxation, vote Labour. He is scared to death of UKIP may have

been saying it for a while. In the constitutional changes have to see

what is fair and equitable, the same with the Barnett fallen -- formula.

But what you have to do is get a fair system. It takes time to

discuss it. I was doing a 32 years ago and nobody wanted to know. We

had better start a debate, and don't mixed up the constitutional type of

English parliament with what we are promising in Scotland. It is about

trust and politics. So the turnout of the north-east regional assembly

and they voted against it. The turnout that the police and crime

commissioners was low. How'd you get people interested in the process and

it doesn't feel like a conversation in smoky rooms and you go back to

British people and tell them what you decided? If you look at the

turnout in Scotland whether they were interested in, now it is

phenomenally interesting. It is about real power, having real

influence. What they said to me in the north-east, they said we know

you have an idea for devolution and you will give us assemblies but it

doesn't have the power of Scotland, but now we are talking about

equity, similar distribution of power and similar resources. The

English people are entitled to that. They have been robbed of it for too

long. Labour has long struggled with what it should do over devolving

power to the regions and you came up with regional assemblies. Ed

Miliband has a different idea of city regions. Aren't they the same

idea of yours but without a democratic accountability? Can we

really trust the greater region of Manchester or Birmingham to deliver

if there is not the same kind of democratic link with the people I

live in whole, and it stops on the boundary of the Pennines -- the city

of Hull. We have city regions from Labour because I failed in the

north-east to get the assemblies in, and now we have to look at those

options. Do you work through city regions? Mainly in the north, I

might say. Even the federal structure they talk about my be in

the North or Midlands with Birmingham, but there are a number

of options and that is where I believe that what the White Paper

should do is to put those options in. Instead of having to put them

together, state what you want to do in the English regions. Leave it to

the legislation, which is what will happen with the Scottish, and once

you've agreed it, you do it after. You have to start the radical debate

about giving the English regions, not centralised in London, but

decentralised. Do you need to have a separate English parliament?

Wouldn't it just satisfy the English if you simply said to MPs, when it's

in English matter in the House of Commons, stop interfering? I would

disagree with that. I would say put the option in the White Paper. The

White Paper seems to be talking about Scotland. If you don't put the

commitments to what you want to do with the English regions, people

might say I'm not supporting that. Put the framework in the White

Paper, but a different timetable. Devolution in this country has been

to a different timetable, whether it's Wales, Northern Ireland. Start

looking fundamentally at it and the Labour Party should be leading the

debate. Let's come the no campaign lost Glasgow. The cradle of British

socialism. -- let's come to something that happened with the

referendum as the no campaign lost Glasgow. Is it a sign that the

Labour Party are finding it hard to what -- hold on to their traditional

working class vote question mark its different in Manchester. They would

say it is a message about decentralisation. If we change the

message a bit maybe. We have been thinking that now it is that either

the Labour Party to recognise it is not the old message and old areas

that will win it. I remember covering the 1997 referendum in

Scotland and you gave a tub thumping speech in a big hall in Hamilton and

you really connected. Obviously it was a different referendum because

that was about a parliament, not independence and Alex Salmond was on

your side, but you, and Ingush MP, an English minister, connected to

the core Labour voters in a way that Ed Miliband is failing to do -- an

English MP. You make a fair point. In the big rally, I had to point out

I was Welsh. Enough of this. Get on with it. What I was saying there was

that I supported you, as I did for 30 odd years when Labour MPs were

against any thinker Scotland. I support you, but I expect you to

come in with your Scottish MPs and make sure the English get their

share of the powers and resources and that is what that speech was

about, and by God, it's as relevant today as it was then. I haven't got

any Scottish MPs, I live in Knightsbridge. Did you get the vote?

No. What would you have done? I can't tell you. You would have voted

yes, come on. I'm interested. What do you want to hear from the speech

by Ed Miliband? People are wondering about where Labour stands. There are

many issues we have flown around, and we've done the discussion just

now. What he has got to do where he started off on the minimum wage You

are trying to deal with those left behind. Those are the bottom. That

is the Labour message. The National Health Service is our creation and

we have to say it will be saved If you can save all of these bankers

with all the money and say you haven't got the money for the NHS,

say where we stand. That will be the priority. The third one, housing. I

have had a revolutionary idea that you can buy a house without a

deposit and without the interest or paying the stamp duty, and you buy

it by rent. The government gives ?150 billion guaranteed housing for

up to 600,000. Get down to ordinary people who can use their rent to buy

the house. It's happening in the north-east. Why are they not

listening to you? You have said more to connect with ordinary people in

three minutes than we will probably hear in an hour. I've been telling

them, made, and we have a commission coming out. People don't want

commissions, they want action. I say, I know what we do, housing

health, the people. say, I know what we do, housing

That a lot of people run away. I think in Glasgow, they wondered

about that. If you turn up on the same three platforms, and I know

it's a critical thing to say, they think in Scotland it is a coalition.

I don't like coalitions. It looks like a coalition, didn't it? Maybe

it was saved because Rupert Murdoch started the The Times about the

polls and he couldn't even get the sun to say that they wanted. We

haven't got time. I wondered how long it would take is to get to

repot Murdoch. You beat the record. -- to Rupert Murdoch. Labour is

quite behind on the economy, and people are looking at Labour, trying

to work out if they can trust you to the stewards of the economy given

2010. Under Labour 's plans there is 20 billion of cuts to make in the

next Parliament. Will we hear anything about that? It is about the

proportion of debt to GDP. I know it sounds historic, but our debt when

we came in in 1997 was a proportion of GDP, and you must know this, and

that was less than Thatcher's. Why did we get done on debt? You guys

run around saying a lot about it, but the fact is it was worse under

Thatcher. Thatcher is now seen as a hero. If you look at the debt, it is

still a problem. Gordon Brown did an awful lot to solve those problems,

but they were still left with us. What we have to have is a sensible

discussion like we had on devolution and now we are talking about

finances. Let's look at the public sector debt and the price we pay. We

need to be putting the record straight. The problem is they tell

me, John, we have to look to the future not the past. We are getting

screwed on the past and we have to change it and perhaps Gordon Brown

coming in could do something. Finishing on the future, when we did

a poll of the Labour candidates you were watching on the big screen

when it came up that their favourite to succeed Ed Miliband was Yvette

Cooper, why did you shout no! That is alive. -- alive. -- that is not

true. I know resistance is not strong. What did that mean?

You can't get away with anything at a Conference, John. I was dropping

comments them to pick up everywhere, I do not wear -- nowhere they got

that one from. Good to have you back. Round of applause for former

Deputy Prime Minister. That's it for today. Don't applaud them, they are

useless. my guests. I'll be back here at

Labour conference for the Daily 11:30am tomorrow when we'll bring

you live coverage of the speech by We're here all week, and next Sunday

you can find us in Birmingham for Remember if it's Sunday,

it's the Sunday Politics.