:01:45. > :01:50.In the South East, will Shepway District Council's proposal turn
:01:51. > :02:00.Romney Marsh into a nuclear waste dumped generate jobs or radiate
:02:01. > :02:01.
:02:01. > :28:56.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 1615 seconds
:28:56. > :29:00.Hello, I'm Natalie Graham and this is the Sunday Politics in the South
:29:00. > :29:03.East. Coming up, looking for trouble? How Kent and East Sussex
:29:03. > :29:07.County Council's stand to get millions of pounds from the
:29:07. > :29:12.government if they can turn around the families that caused social
:29:12. > :29:14.problems. -- Kent and East Sussex councils. Joining me is the Tory MP
:29:14. > :29:21.for Dover and Deal Charlie Elphicke and a prospective Labour candidate
:29:21. > :29:23.for Hastings and Rye Sarah Owen. It has been a -- an awful couple of
:29:23. > :29:28.weeks for weather but the silver lining is that the hosepipe ban has
:29:28. > :29:35.been lifted for some people in the South East, but not all. It seems
:29:35. > :29:40.unfair that some customers have a band and some do not. -- a hosepipe
:29:40. > :29:47.ban. We need to make sure that we have enough reservoir capacity and
:29:47. > :29:53.we need to stop the leaks. Near where I am in Deal, there are four
:29:53. > :29:58.times that a road has collapsed because the sewers have not been
:29:58. > :30:03.maintained. Is that the answer, Sarah? Or perhaps less reliance on
:30:03. > :30:07.groundwater? I think that is the answer and there is something we
:30:07. > :30:12.can do about this. The government could bring forward their water
:30:12. > :30:18.reform bill, not sit on it for 18 months, and we could get tougher
:30:18. > :30:23.with the law -- the water companies. They are already fined if they do
:30:23. > :30:28.not meet their targets. They say that when you look at the ground
:30:28. > :30:31.they cover and how deep the leaks are, it is an expensive job. People
:30:31. > :30:36.are paying for water they are not going to receive. The government
:30:36. > :30:40.does nothing for people in the South East. I would like to see
:30:40. > :30:44.something done here in the South East. I have met with the water
:30:44. > :30:50.regulator's and made the case that they need to be much tougher on the
:30:50. > :30:53.water companies. -- water regulators. When the nuclear power
:30:53. > :30:59.stations at Dungeness have been recommissioned a bank -- about
:30:59. > :31:02.1,000 jobs will go from a deprived area. Sharp will -- Shepway
:31:02. > :31:08.District Council is considering putting forward Romney Marsh as a
:31:08. > :31:12.side for the country's first nuclear disposal unit. It would
:31:12. > :31:22.create hundreds of high quality jobs for generations to come, so is
:31:22. > :31:24.
:31:24. > :31:28.the environmental risk worth it for The government is decommissioning
:31:28. > :31:33.existing nuclear power stations, including bees in Dungeness, and
:31:33. > :31:37.plans to build new ones around the country. Both create nuclear waste.
:31:37. > :31:42.It is asking for a region to volunteer to store the waist and
:31:42. > :31:46.one option could be set -- could be Shepway. It would become the full -
:31:46. > :31:51.- the country's first nuclear disposal unit, taking waste from
:31:51. > :31:55.across the UK. It would be stored under Romney Marsh but the exact
:31:55. > :32:03.location is yet to be decided. It would be insecure containers in
:32:03. > :32:10.miles of tunnels and would slowly decay. -- in secure mack. Shepway
:32:10. > :32:13.District Council is asking for local views. This is what the new
:32:13. > :32:19.site could look like, with all the waste in one location, whereas at
:32:19. > :32:23.the moment most of the -- the most radioactive waste is largely kept
:32:23. > :32:28.at nuclear power stations. There is a lot of local opposition, saying
:32:28. > :32:33.the move could be dangerous and affect tourism, but Romney Marsh is
:32:33. > :32:36.one of the most deprived areas of Kent and could benefit.
:32:36. > :32:41.engineers nuclear power station has employed over 500 people for the
:32:41. > :32:45.last 50 odd years. Those jobs will be disappearing over time as the
:32:45. > :32:53.stations are decommission by 2000 a team. At the same number of jobs
:32:53. > :33:03.will be created by this facility. - - 2018. It would also maintain the
:33:03. > :33:05.
:33:05. > :33:09.service industries in the area. Shops and restaurants and pubs.
:33:09. > :33:14.are always being asked to look at what we can do for Romney Marsh.
:33:14. > :33:18.think we should look at every possible opportunity. However, it
:33:18. > :33:25.might put some people off. Most of the locals we spoke to were not put
:33:25. > :33:30.off at all. Far from it, in fact. It needs to be somewhere. If it is
:33:30. > :33:34.Romney Marsh, so be it. I know people round here don't like it but
:33:34. > :33:42.I don't see anything wrong with it. I am all in favour, doesn't bother
:33:42. > :33:46.me at all. Why? It has to go somewhere. If it is not here it
:33:46. > :33:54.would be somewhere else. I have no problem with it if it creates
:33:54. > :33:58.problems in the future. Jobs are needed? Definitely. The government
:33:58. > :34:08.minister responsible for nuclear waste is South East MP Charles
:34:08. > :34:16.
:34:16. > :34:21.Whilst many politicians in the county are opposed to the plan,
:34:21. > :34:25.some economists say the council's approach makes sense. Councils have
:34:25. > :34:28.to exercise leadership. They have an opportunity to replace a nuclear
:34:28. > :34:32.power station that has brought really good jobs to the area and
:34:32. > :34:37.they could either do what so many politicians do, jump on a bandwagon,
:34:37. > :34:41.or they can say, let's think about this seriously and talk to local
:34:41. > :34:46.people. They are not trying to impose it, by asking local people
:34:46. > :34:49.what they think. They should be commended for doing that. Looking
:34:49. > :34:55.after nuclear waste is not something that gets moved around
:34:55. > :35:00.from pillar for -- pillar to post. It brings jobs really forever.
:35:00. > :35:05.consultation runs until the end of July and if Kip -- if successful
:35:05. > :35:10.construction would not start until 2025. But would this be a good way
:35:10. > :35:16.of securing long-term jobs, or too dangerous to be worth it?
:35:16. > :35:19.Joining us now is one of the strongest critics of the plan, the
:35:19. > :35:24.leader of Kent County Council, Paul Carter. You have described this in
:35:24. > :35:30.the past as utter madness but if you listen to the report that
:35:30. > :35:36.people on the marshes and want this. They need to look at the facts. I
:35:36. > :35:41.believe that thought and discussion about this will blight this area.
:35:41. > :35:46.We are trying to produce good quality jobs. We have millions of
:35:46. > :35:53.pounds to stimulate good quality jobs in the investment businesses -
:35:53. > :35:56.- and invest in businesses. Here we are in an earthquake zone that has
:35:56. > :36:01.had five earthquakes in the last 400 years. It is a totally
:36:01. > :36:07.unsuitable location, they should be miles away from civilisation.
:36:07. > :36:11.surely if that is the case it would have been called out long before it
:36:11. > :36:14.happens. On the principle that there is a desperate need, as you
:36:14. > :36:19.know, for high-quality jobs in this part of the country, but people who
:36:19. > :36:26.live there want it, why should they not be allowed to say so? They are
:36:26. > :36:34.not high-quality jobs. If they go through all the processes and hoops,
:36:34. > :36:39.the jobs would not be created until 2025. That is when the plants are
:36:39. > :36:49.decommission. What we should be doing is getting the Government's
:36:49. > :36:53.
:36:53. > :37:01.to support the building of business in Dungeness. -- the government. We
:37:01. > :37:05.will be campaigning alongside the local MP. As you alluded to, that
:37:05. > :37:12.has already been ruled out as a site for a new nuclear power
:37:12. > :37:22.station. If that fails, what do you do to help the economy? A whole
:37:22. > :37:34.
:37:34. > :37:38.range of series at of issues. -- a whole range and series. The rail
:37:38. > :37:43.connections to Sam witch are very good indeed. There are very good
:37:43. > :37:48.quality jobs there. The East Kent economy has a really good
:37:48. > :37:56.optimistic future but talk of nuclear dumping grounds in one of
:37:56. > :38:01.the most beautiful areas of Kent is madness in my view. You are doing
:38:01. > :38:06.exactly what Dr Tim Leunig said, jumping on the bandwagon. I am not.
:38:06. > :38:11.I don't want to blight the area and stop investment coming into East
:38:11. > :38:18.Kent to provide quality jobs. I believe this will stigmatise and be
:38:18. > :38:23.to the detriment of good-quality investment. For now, thank you very
:38:23. > :38:30.much. Your constituency is very close to Dungeness and many of your
:38:30. > :38:35.perspective -- prospective constituents worked there. On the
:38:35. > :38:39.jobs issue, we are all agreed that it would be good for jobs but I
:38:39. > :38:43.disagree on the quality of jobs offered by a nuclear dumping
:38:43. > :38:49.facilities. What was picked up rightly there is that Shepway
:38:49. > :38:53.residents are being consulted but Labour constituencies like in
:38:53. > :39:00.Tollbar are not being consulted. If this government decides to dump
:39:00. > :39:04.nuclear waste on our doorstep, people will be angry. You already
:39:04. > :39:09.have two nuclear reactors there. You have experience of dealing with
:39:09. > :39:12.nuclear materials. I believe this is on a much larger scale.
:39:12. > :39:18.Dungeness is being decommissioned. You saw the very beautiful Romney
:39:18. > :39:27.Marsh LANs and I don't want those farmers to be blighted with that. -
:39:27. > :39:32.- lands. We have very delicate flora and fauna as well. Charlie
:39:32. > :39:37.Elphicke, you are nearby as well, do you agree? Very much so. We need
:39:37. > :39:42.to build the Dungeness power station. We have a great history in
:39:42. > :39:46.Romney Marsh of zero carbon energy production. What happens to the
:39:46. > :39:51.waste generated by the power station? They should stick it under
:39:51. > :40:00.a mountain in Cumbria. Your government is committed to nuclear
:40:00. > :40:08.power. We will have more waste. You would transported to Cumbria? --
:40:08. > :40:13.transport it. It already goes to Sellafield to be processed. The
:40:13. > :40:17.answer is that this quagmire called Natural England same but there is a
:40:17. > :40:24.bit of seaweed but needs to be protected, we should put our energy
:40:24. > :40:26.needs ahead of that. Thank you all for now. Paul cuttable stay with us
:40:27. > :40:31.because this week East Sussex County Council confirmed it has
:40:31. > :40:34.signed up to the government's troubled families initiative, so it
:40:34. > :40:42.would get up to �4000 for each problem house told it can
:40:42. > :40:50.successfully we debilitate. -- household. They run more than 2500
:40:50. > :40:53.of such families in Kent. -- there are. Is this a creative money-
:40:53. > :40:58.saving solution for a poorly thought-out initiative which will
:40:58. > :41:03.stigmatise those who need help? Paul Carter is the leader of Kent
:41:03. > :41:07.County Council. You sign up in March, so are you a fan? I think
:41:07. > :41:11.there is the need to focus on a significant number of families that
:41:11. > :41:17.are troubled families that need help and support. The government's
:41:17. > :41:21.initiative is geared to the younger generation and trying to stop anti-
:41:21. > :41:28.social behaviour and get better school attendance and more young
:41:28. > :41:34.people in better job opportunities. How easy is that to achieve? You
:41:34. > :41:41.calculate you will get �8.5 million coming into the county to do it.
:41:41. > :41:45.Over two or three years. It will be paid on results for the second or
:41:45. > :41:50.the third year. We have to start in September doing things very
:41:50. > :41:55.differently in supporting and identifying young people who need
:41:55. > :42:01.difference support to get them back on track, back into education and
:42:01. > :42:05.employment and engaged in their communities, being constructive,
:42:05. > :42:13.not destructive force. You are committed to spending something
:42:13. > :42:16.like �15 million yourselves. Where will that come from? We have
:42:16. > :42:21.massive amounts of multi-agency work going on already in supporting
:42:21. > :42:25.a significant number of families in Kent in different ways. A lot of
:42:25. > :42:30.that activity is not integrated in the way I believe it should be. I
:42:30. > :42:34.think the secret of our success will be joining together that
:42:34. > :42:39.resource, working out where the problems are, looking at the
:42:39. > :42:49.symptoms and put him in the Cure, help and support in very different
:42:49. > :42:53.ways that have been done before. -- putting in the cure. We need to use
:42:53. > :42:58.the information that we have from health authorities, district
:42:58. > :43:04.council housing authorities, social services authorities, use that
:43:04. > :43:07.information to work out where the families are and go after it
:43:07. > :43:13.deprivation before it happens. We need to deal with the existing
:43:13. > :43:17.problems as well. It doesn't sound like it is going far enough.
:43:17. > :43:22.wanted to go further. There was a sense that you throw money at these
:43:22. > :43:27.families and hope they go away. We are using money to solve the
:43:27. > :43:34.problems, get the kids out of a failed future of crime and getting
:43:35. > :43:38.be parents back into the workplace. What do you make of it? We can
:43:38. > :43:42.agree in principle that helping troubled families is a good thing
:43:42. > :43:47.but nobody here has identified what a troubled family is. Eric Pickles
:43:48. > :43:52.himself seems to be confused. Is he talking about a families that spill
:43:52. > :43:56.out into the wider community or just people who are struggling?
:43:56. > :44:02.think that includes all of those things. An adult out of work,
:44:02. > :44:06.children not going to score, and also crime caused by a family.
:44:06. > :44:11.of these are people accessing services which have been cut. It
:44:11. > :44:16.seems like you are taking with one hand and giving a lot less and with
:44:16. > :44:20.the other. It will only last three years, this project. We are talking
:44:20. > :44:27.about generations of problems. I think that shows how little you
:44:27. > :44:32.understand the problem. Nobody says it is going to stop. If it delivers
:44:32. > :44:39.what we are expecting, I am sure it will go on for ever. It is about
:44:39. > :44:44.delivering improved support. can guarantee that there will be
:44:44. > :44:53.funding for this after three years? If it is successful and reduces the
:44:53. > :44:57.amount of multi- agency support cost. Sarah made another point,
:44:57. > :45:04.which is that funding has been taken away by your government to a
:45:04. > :45:08.lot of grassroots initiatives. need to use the information we have
:45:08. > :45:11.more effectively to identify families which are going to become
:45:12. > :45:18.troubled families. We don't do that at the moment to the extent we
:45:18. > :45:24.should do because of data protection legislation. It is hard
:45:24. > :45:27.to say, you might become troubled, we are going to act now. In a way
:45:27. > :45:32.that is worse than acting afterwards. Prevention is better
:45:32. > :45:36.than cure. It is about providing membership and having a special
:45:36. > :45:41.focus to secure families in need before they go off the rails to
:45:41. > :45:45.give our kids the best possible future. When you are targeting the
:45:45. > :45:51.issue you have to get your figures and facts correct. The data is
:45:51. > :45:56.based on data from 2005. Since then we have had a recession so there
:45:56. > :46:00.will be more problem families and as a result of cuts to services...
:46:00. > :46:05.You are talking about people going back into apprenticeships, those
:46:05. > :46:09.are all things that have been taken away, so I think this is
:46:09. > :46:16.showmanship, about grabbing headlines. The coalition government
:46:16. > :46:22.has put a lot of additional money into apprenticeships. We are going
:46:22. > :46:31.to have to leave it there. Thank you very much for joining us. It is
:46:31. > :46:35.time for our round-up of the week's event with Louise Stuarts -- Louise
:46:35. > :46:40.Stewart. The Hastings and Rye MP Amber Rudd
:46:40. > :46:44.welcomed a European agreement to end the practice of fish discards.
:46:45. > :46:51.We have had a problem where the size of the catch has been decided
:46:51. > :46:54.in Brussels will stop the Health Secretary Andrew Lansley launched
:46:54. > :46:59.an overhaul of health care in East Kent which could act as a blueprint
:46:59. > :47:07.for the rest of the country. The hunt goes on. Labour called for
:47:07. > :47:13.a fresh inquiry into whether the -- weather Jeremy Hunt broke the
:47:13. > :47:18.ministerial code. What will be launched -- helped by
:47:18. > :47:22.launching a third inquiry? The Speaker had heard enough and
:47:22. > :47:25.but Damian Green firmly in his place.
:47:25. > :47:33.I it needed no assistance from the Immigration Minister. He should sit
:47:33. > :47:38.and listen to intently. -- I needed no assistance.
:47:38. > :47:42.With comments like that, who leads the opposition?
:47:42. > :47:49.Thank you. This agreement to end a fish discards his only an agreement,
:47:49. > :47:53.it will not necessarily change anything. Not necessarily. Ending
:47:53. > :47:59.discards is a good thing but that is not the real issue in Hastings
:47:59. > :48:05.and Rye, it is the issue of quotas. It is how much they are allowed to
:48:05. > :48:09.catch. We are only seemed half her fish per fishermen every day.
:48:09. > :48:14.Charlie Elphicke, you were at that visit by the Health Secretary. A
:48:14. > :48:21.lot of MPs in your constituency unhappy about these changes. And a
:48:21. > :48:27.lot are enthusiastic! We have GPs and the district council and myself
:48:27. > :48:34.working together to improve health care and they are delivering a
:48:34. > :48:38.proper hospital for Dover. Thank you both very much indeed, Charlie