01/04/2012 Sunday Politics South East

In the South East, out with the old and in with the new, how a

Docklands redevelopment could spell the end of two historic Medway

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 2164 seconds

I'm Julia George and this is Sunday Politics in the South East. Coming

up in the next 20 minutes: As the Government gets tough on

income support, it could be back to work sooner rather than later for

single parents. With me in the studio today is

Conservative MP for East Surrey, Sam Gyimah, and the former Labour

MP for Gillingham and Rainham, Paul Clark. Let's start with grammar

schools - the big story of the week. Sevenoaks could get two new mini

grammars linked to existing schools in Tonbridge or Tunbridge Wells.

2,000 parents signed a petition, Kent County Council approved the

idea, and a loophole in the new schools admission code means it's

entirely legal. Given that the parents want it, and that a Kent

County Council have said they back the idea, any reason why it should

not go ahead? In 1998 we had a clear policy, that was that there

would be no new grammar schools created. That was very clear. As

you had said in your introduction, about a loophole. The worry is

whether this is now back door to actually recreating grammar schools

in a wider area across the country. I understand exactly why the

parents in Sevenoaks have campaigned for this for their

children, but it makes you wonder where is the money going to come

from out of what is a Devonport, and which schools will be adversely

affected -- what is a given pot. Some said there was a shortage of

grammar school places. Some would say that because pupils from Surrey

and London and East Sussex are coming across the border and taking

places, is that fair and reasonable? I think it is unfair.

There are lot of very good schools in East Surrey, the constituency I

represent. Two points about this, the first is parental choice. 70%

of parents were in support of this many grammar school, to use the

phrase that you used. -- mini grammar school. The broader issues

about academies and that the heads of academies are given broader

scope over budgets, the setting up of the curriculum, and breaking

down the barriers between state and independent schools. So you have

got Wellington College that has set up an academy, and I don't see the

thrust of government policy as bringing back the old school divide

between grammar and comprehensive. The thrust of government policy is

responding to parents' Choice and having enough good school places

for parents to send their kids to. What's more important, creating new

homes and jobs or protecting the future of a local football club? In

the Medway towns, councillors have to decide whether a �650 million

development at Chatham Docks is, on balance, a good thing. The Peel

Group wants to build a new hotel, a large supermarket and flats and

they claim it will benefit a deprived area. But Gillingham

Football Club say the development would scupper their plans to move

to a new stadium. Helen Drew has Medway has plenty of history. From

dockyards that have been here for hundreds of years, to Kent's only

Football League Club, at the same site since 1893. But there is a big,

modern development planned for Chatham docks. Intended to

regenerate the area, which could threaten its heritage. Gillingham

FC is a Medway football club based, unsurprisingly, in a Medway town.

The club says it could be forced out if the docks development gets

the go-ahead. The problem is this. Gillingham's ground is hemmed in by

houses on all sides, transport is not ideal and there are very few

additional facilities, so it needs to relocate. To make a new stadium

financially viable, it requires a new supermarket alongside it. But

with one being proposed at Chatham Docks, and the only other side

within made way for the club's relocation just two miles from it,

it is too close to attract similar investment. The reality is if

Chatham Docks goes ahead, and if it takes the supermarket, with the

investment it would bring and the conferencing and other retail and

facilities that would generate the football club needs, the football

club would be able to relocate within Medway and will have no

option but to look elsewhere, and that will have to be outside

Medway's area. A football club is very important for investment

generally. The club's chairman Hazlitt -- written to Medway

council, asking it to reject the Chatham docks proposal. He told us

that building a new stadium would create over 2000 jobs and he will

start looking outside of Medway immediately, if the development on

this site goes ahead. The �650 million plans for Chatham Docks

include building a hotel, Holmes, a conference centre and a big

supermarket here. The developers are repealed group, who are beside

the BBC's new home at Salford Quays -- the developers are the Peel

Group. It is not just the football club that objects. The groups says

it would create 3,500, took 4,000 jobs, but opponents are worried it

could lead to the downfall of the docks, which have been operating

for hundreds of years, initially as a naval port and more recently

commercially. Sections of nearby docks are also closing. The future

is very bleak for the dock facilities. Rochester ridge beside

has a housing development which has been planned for the last 10 years

-- Rochester riverside. The Sheerness docks area, there is

going to be a wind farm fabrication unit, which will take over

something like two-thirds of the port facility. The development of

Chatham dock will require a large proportion to be taken over. It

will be disastrous. Not just on lost jobs, but that is obviously in

the forefront, but it is also the facility. The facility will

disappear for ever, it will never come back. Aside from potentially

taking away businesses like the football club and docks, there are

concerns about the implications on housing demands. The developers are

planning to build flats and houses on the side, but some say it might

not be enough. If you have a development organised around a

supermarket, by its nature, supermarkets offer relatively low-

paid, part-time and often insecure jobs. The outcome can be for

housing, if you organise a development around a supermarket,

you have even greater pressure on social housing, even greater

pressure on low-cost homes, and that can reinforce the culture of

poverty, the culture of low incomes which you already have in the

Medway towns today. Should the development at Chatham docks get

the go-ahead, or are the benefits of having a football club in Medway,

as well as rare working dogs, too great to be washed away?

Helen Drew, reporting. Joining me from our studio in Westminster is

Conservative MP for Rochester and Strood, Mark Reckless.

Why do you welcome the Chatham Docks development? I believe Medway

is open for business. I think it is important that we extend a welcome

to investors who would like to put money into Medway, would like to

develop land to bring in more employment, more mixed use. Be that

retail, hotels, housing. I think it is quite an attractive development

that Peel Group have put four. They have done Salford media keys, as

the BBC is well aware of. I think this is an interesting proposal,

high quality office development, it will create jobs and the decision

is one for the development control team at Medway councillors. I think

it looks like a good idea. There is an interesting point, that it is

not ambitious enough. Talk about a supermarket, flats and a hotel, he

says you should be trying to encourage higher end jobs.

understood that the development involved higher-value office

development, and what Peel Group described as an events centre. They

were talking about bringing things like the X Factor and other types

of events to make way. If that were to succeed, that would be a real

positive. Broadly, I think if there are good ideas for investment, we

generally want to welcome that and support that, rather than look for

something that is perfect. Or allowing Gillingham football club

to have a veto over whether other landowners develop their businesses

and sites in Medway. Are you saying Gillingham Football Club's argument

is not a real one, that this would damage them? As I understand it,

Gillingham Football Club are saying that Medway council should and

other developments and not allow other people to allow a supermarket

to set up, and create jobs, and better shopping for people in

Medway. The only people who should be allowed to do that are

Gillingham Football Club and until they have done that, no one else

should be allowed to develop their land, least of all with a retail

supermarket. I don't think that can be right. We have to welcome all

investors to Medway. In an even- handed way, to show Medway is open

for business, wants to create jobs and is going to support that

investment and redevelopment that is so important for the future of

the towns. Let's bring in a Gillingham Football Club fan, Paul

Clark. Mark Reckless has got a good point, why should Gillingham

Football Club be allowed to hold the council and this development

hostage? Gillingham Football Club, I am not here to speak on their

behalf but they are not holding it to veto. Five years ago we had this

polarisation, some in authority saying it didn't matter whether

Gillingham football club went, and others said it was important they

remained. I have to say to you, I believe for the good of the Medway

towns, it is important to retain... Actually older than 120 years,

something like 130 years of Gillingham football club itself

within the Medway towns. I think it is important for Gillingham

football club that it remains in the Medway towns as well. It is

about finding a suitable site. Five years ago I worked very closely

with Paul Scally and the leader of the council to look at identifying

40 odd sights as to what would work, and it wouldn't work. If I am not

mistaken, they have gone down to League 2, they have a ground that

is often only half full, do they really need this new stadium?

have to think big. You need to think bigger. This isn't just about

building a football stadium, this is about building a multi-purpose

stadium that actually can present, as much as I love the X Factor,

let's think bigger and better in terms of events and so on, and

opportunities across the board for entertainment. You can see the

arguments playing up, would you welcome the developments like this?

And I am an Arsenal fan. Really muddying the waters back ex

something that Mark said that is interesting, the watchword should

be sending the signal that Medway is open for business, to attract

the biggest possible investment, to regenerate the town, to create jobs,

at a time when growth is really the biggest challenge facing the UK.

For me, not representing the Syria, and mindful that it is another

football club, what I would say -- not representing this area. If I

was advising, go for the deal that brings the most intense of economic

potential to the area. -- in terms of. When we were in government,

being open for business, no question that Medway was open for

business. The regeneration, the investment in the universities,

Rochester riverside, to make way for the development that is

happening there now. What I am saying, and I do believe that Peel

have now said... Let me close this down, and Peel have said to us,

they are still happy for Gillingham to talk to them about this

development, so the door is still open.

Should you go back to work when your kids start school? This week

in the South East, nearly 7,000 single parents - mostly mums -

received letters from the government suggesting they should

start looking for a job. They'll all be moved from income support to

Jobseeker's Allowance after their child's fifth birthday. So is this

a timely message to work-shy parents? And are there many jobs

you can do between school drop-off and pick up, term-time only. Let's

ask our guests of the day what they make of this.

Sam Gyimah, why now? You have to remember the age at which parents

have to look for work has been coming down for the last three

years. Under the Labour government it was 12, then 10, now five years

old. The policy simply says, when your children reach the age of five,

you should be moved from income support to Jobseeker's Allowance,

which means you should begin to look for work. The reason I say why

now, we have historically very high unemployment and it is

disproportionately affecting women, so it seems like a bad time to do

it. We also have �300 million of extra support for childcare coming

in next year, why now? I understand the pressures that lone parents can

be on. I was brought up by my mother on her own, there were three

of us, she had to juggle. I was in Ghana, where there was no support.

I understand the challenges of juggling children and work. I and

35, a lot of my friends are having children, because that seems to be

the age, for a lot of them, they say, I am going to have my children,

when they get to the stage when they start school, I will begin to

look for work and maybe when they are 13, I will aim to get back into

the workforce full-time. This is what happens anyway, as far as the

economy is concerned, so I don't see anything wrong with saying that

if people are on benefits as well, that should be aligned with how

things happen with most people. We're talking about single parents

specifically. Your party started this, Sam is right to point out

that it came down to seven, why didn't you take the opportunity

during the good economic times to make -- did the one thing that

would make a real difference, tackle the issue of unaffordable

child care. That is exactly what we did do, we increase the number of

child care places by some 30,000. Under the working tax credit, up to

80% of childcare costs were covered. The Universal Credit that is coming

in, locking huge cuts in child care support. There is an issue about

the timing of this. We reduced it from 16, 12, to 10. The coalition

brought it down to seven in October. I am not disagreeing with that. Nor

is the Labour Party disagreeing with that. But the timing is

worrying. These people, and mainly women, are going to be going...

Low-paid jobs, short-term hours and so on. They are going to be going

for those jobs. The king in the Gillingham and Rainham, there has

been a 190% increase in long-term young unemployed in a year --

looking in Gillingham and Rainham. For every vacancy notified to the

Jobcentre, there are almost 35 claimants for every job. I am

worried about the people who we want to be helping themselves, and

most of them wanted... If they can't find a job that they can't do

in term time, they are not going to lose anything, they will still get

the same amount of money. They have got to be seeking jobs. There are

certain relaxations for lone parents, in the sense that they can

work short term, they can turn down jobs if they are not suitable for

child care responsibilities. But that is going to be a difficulty. I

do wonder whether we need to be looking at whether employers are

geared up to say, don't start at 9:30am, or 10 o'clock am, to say

that -- to make sure you can do the summer run. What about the school

holidays? -- to make sure you can do the school runs. You have put

your finger on it, people should be looking for work, during term hours.

If that is not possible, they should not be put under pressure.

We are going to do a whole programme on the cost of childcare,

not that I have got a vested interest!

And now a round-up of the week's events in the region with our

political editor, Louise Stewart. The MP for Thanet North defended

controversial comments he made about gay marriage. His support

civil partnerships but believes that... Marriage is a term that

describes a union between a man and a woman, in church or out of church.

No stranger to controversy herself, Speaker's wife Sally burkas spot

anger among the family of two young Canterbury men who died after

taking a drug which is to be banned. Sally Birkenau said a stroke -- a

ban would only increase its use. Kent County Council backs the first

major expansion of a grammar school in 40 years. A former Cranbrook

Rugby School welcomed the first full assisted -- rugby player

welcomed the first full assisted suicide debate to be held in the

Commons in a number of years. And epilepsy sufferers aim to reduce

the stigma of the condition by A powerful subject on legalising

assisted dying. If there was an opportunity to vote on us, would

you vote in favour of changing the law? No, the debate was whether the

DPP guidelines should be put in statute, and I think, no. The

simple reason is I do not really think the law could sufficiently

address all the circumstances in which someone could be in that

situation, and they wouldn't be coerced into dying. Whilst I

appreciate the pain and suffering that some people find themselves in,

I don't think the law can sufficiently addressed the

challenges around the collision. I agree with Sam. There was a

debate in my time and for the same reason, you cannot legislate for

each individual circumstance. My worry is that we should protect the

most abominable. -- vulnerable.