:00:10. > :02:07.He will try to force a vote in the October. Home Secretary Theresa
:02:07. > :02:10.He will try to force a vote in the was asked about his plans on the BBC
:02:10. > :02:18.earlier this morning. I think he has got it wrong, I think what we need
:02:18. > :02:22.to do is to negotiate the settlement with the European Union and then put
:02:22. > :02:28.that to the people me to decide whether to be in or out. Is this a
:02:28. > :02:37.flea bite or a real threat? I think the next election, a Conservative
:02:37. > :02:40.Party that will be offering people that renegotiation, a new settlement
:02:40. > :02:45.with Europe, looking to the future and putting that to the British
:02:45. > :02:47.people in and in or out referendum. And what the amendment possibly
:02:47. > :02:51.could do, as James Wharton, who And what the amendment possibly
:02:51. > :02:56.putting the Referendum Bill through Parliament has said, is it could
:02:56. > :03:02.jeopardise that bill. Adam Afriyie joins us now from Millbank studio.
:03:02. > :03:05.Good morning. If the referendum would be held next October, it would
:03:05. > :03:12.have to be an in-out question based the status quo? There wouldn't be
:03:12. > :03:17.time for a full renegotiation. I disagree. By having a referendum in
:03:17. > :03:21.2014, it gives us 12 months to renegotiate, but it kick-started
:03:21. > :03:23.negotiations, because the European Union, if they wish us to remain
:03:23. > :03:27.and make changes so that they would members, would need to accommodate
:03:27. > :03:32.and make changes so that they would persuade the British public to stay,
:03:32. > :03:36.strengthens the Prime Minister's hand, and 12 months is ample time
:03:36. > :03:39.for that kind of negotiation. You might think that, but Germany has
:03:39. > :03:44.not even got a government at the moment, why should they meet our
:03:44. > :03:45.timetable? This is going to be incredibly, located renegotiation. I
:03:45. > :03:52.think, basically, 80% of people incredibly, located renegotiation. I
:03:52. > :03:56.a referendum. More than 50% what a election. British businesses need
:03:56. > :03:58.certainty, and we could carry on taking a scan down the road for
:03:58. > :04:02.ever, but I have struggled with taking a scan down the road for
:04:02. > :04:06.conscience over this one. I do not want to cause trouble, but it is
:04:06. > :04:09.essential that Parliament and MPs have the opportunity to search their
:04:09. > :04:12.souls and give people a referendum this side of the election. That
:04:12. > :04:17.would also bring certainty and clarity for the future, and like I
:04:17. > :04:20.said, it strengthens the Prime Minister's hand if it is successful.
:04:20. > :04:23.You right in the Mail on Sunday Minister's hand if it is successful.
:04:23. > :04:28.the people are not convinced there even will be a referendum, so they
:04:28. > :04:32.don't trust David Cameron? I think the headline was not the headline I
:04:32. > :04:39.wrote for that piece. What I am You are saying that the British
:04:39. > :04:42.people are not convinced. Look, there are too many uncertainties
:04:42. > :04:46.here - they may not be convinced the Conservatives will win the election,
:04:46. > :04:47.I hope we will, they may not be convinced the renegotiation will be
:04:47. > :04:52.good enough, that there will be convinced the renegotiation will be
:04:52. > :04:58.referendum. Do you trust David That is why we need to bring the
:04:58. > :05:02.referendum forward, there is time to negotiate, and we tidy up the issue
:05:02. > :05:06.that has been hanging around for too long. Do you trust David Cameron to
:05:06. > :05:16.deliver a referendum in 2017? I Minister, and of course I trust
:05:16. > :05:16.deliver a referendum in 2017? I referendum? There as only variables
:05:16. > :05:21.in between. What I am doing with referendum? There as only variables
:05:21. > :05:23.this amendment, is to try to be referendum? There as only variables
:05:23. > :05:25.is that Parliament and every MP referendum? There as only variables
:05:25. > :05:28.the opportunity decide whether they want to be sure of a referendum
:05:28. > :05:33.within this parliament, or maybe leave it to the vagaries of what may
:05:33. > :05:37.within this parliament, or maybe happen in 2015. Supposing you got
:05:37. > :05:39.your way, how would you vote? Like Michael Gove, I would vote for us to
:05:39. > :05:42.leave as of today, but there will be Michael Gove, I would vote for us to
:05:42. > :05:43.an enormous amount of pressure on European Union leaders to come
:05:43. > :05:48.forward with proposals. If they European Union leaders to come
:05:48. > :05:49.to say, the mandate is not ever closer political union, it is ever
:05:49. > :05:55.closer trading harmony, giving us closer trading harmony, giving us
:05:55. > :05:57.more border control and control closer trading harmony, giving us
:05:57. > :06:00.our legal system, I might change my mind. But this is what needs to
:06:00. > :06:05.happen - if we have a referendum in happen - if we have a referendum in
:06:05. > :06:07.negotiations to be kick-started happen - if we have a referendum in
:06:07. > :06:11.people to argue in or out, and the end result is a stronger Prime
:06:11. > :06:14.Minister. Is it true that you have end result is a stronger Prime
:06:14. > :06:19.Minister. Is it true that you have got about 80 MPs supporting this? It
:06:19. > :06:24.certain, and I think we will see it on hold over the next three or five
:06:24. > :06:29.weeks. He will have to ask each individual MP. I am asking you,
:06:29. > :06:35.is your motion! There will be other motions coming forward, and I know
:06:35. > :06:39.cross-party, for people who want the British public to have a say in
:06:39. > :06:45.2014. You know it is not going to get through, the whips will stop
:06:45. > :06:48.this from happening. One of the successes, apparently, of your
:06:48. > :06:51.party's Manchester conference was that you were not divided over
:06:51. > :06:55.Europe anymore, the Europe issue was settled. Here you are bringing it
:06:55. > :06:59.Europe anymore, the Europe issue was back to life and pouring petrol
:06:59. > :07:03.Europe anymore, the Europe issue was unlicensed troublemaker of the
:07:03. > :07:06.Tories? The only struggle I have had is not a fight with my party but
:07:06. > :07:06.Tories? The only struggle I have had with my conscience as to whether or
:07:06. > :07:09.not I would give Parliament and with my conscience as to whether or
:07:09. > :07:15.British people an opportunity to have a say in 2014. I wrestled with
:07:15. > :07:18.it, and I decided I wanted people to have that opportunity. It is for
:07:18. > :07:21.each individual MP to search their soul, speak to constituents and
:07:21. > :07:27.decide whether they want that. You decided it would get you in the
:07:27. > :07:29.headlines again. Oh, you are so cynical, Andrew! I have no ambition
:07:29. > :07:37.publicity seeker. All I seek is cynical, Andrew! I have no ambition
:07:37. > :07:39.would not be able to sleep at night if I did not bring forward this
:07:39. > :07:43.opportunity for Britain to have if I did not bring forward this
:07:43. > :07:48.say. We have left it far too long. Nobody under the age of 56 has had a
:07:48. > :07:52.say. Thanks for joining us, good luck with this continuing struggle
:07:52. > :07:55.with your conscience! I will move the seat around and addressed the
:07:55. > :07:57.panel, what do you make of it? The party managers must be furious with
:07:57. > :08:01.him. I think what this confirms party managers must be furious with
:08:01. > :08:09.that David Cameron is incredibly lucky in his enemies. His most
:08:09. > :08:13.prolific critics, Nadine Dorries, Peter Bone, Adam Afriyie, even if
:08:13. > :08:17.you are very anti-Cameron, you will not think, man, if only they were in
:08:17. > :08:23.charge of the party! I think the party managers are not too alarmed.
:08:23. > :08:28.They do not take him seriously? No, is not as if the James Wharton bill
:08:28. > :08:32.is a work of genius, it is riddled with flaws, anomalies and loopholes.
:08:32. > :08:36.It purports to guarantee that a referendum will take place in the
:08:36. > :08:39.next Parliament. My understanding of theoretically impossible and that
:08:39. > :08:42.all the future government would theoretically impossible and that
:08:42. > :08:45.is cancel out that bill with another bill. He does have a point that
:08:45. > :08:50.Cameron's plan for a referendum bill. He does have a point that
:08:50. > :08:59.nothing like as likely to happen... dangerous. The problem for David
:08:59. > :09:03.Cameron is twofold. One, if Ed Miliband says he's going to support
:09:03. > :09:07.Adam Afriyie, it will go through. Unlikely that Ed Miliband would
:09:07. > :09:10.Adam Afriyie, it will go through. that, but what he might do is say to
:09:10. > :09:15.his MPs, ignore this. It may well be significant number of Labour MPs do
:09:15. > :09:22.not turn up, and then what you have Conservative backbenchers, and in
:09:22. > :09:28.that war you might well find that through, and then the Prime Minister
:09:28. > :09:35.has real trouble, because Adam Afriyie says, the Prime Minister
:09:35. > :09:38.membership, up what basis and with which mandate? He would not be able
:09:38. > :09:40.to get agreement with Nick Clegg or Ed Miliband, so you would be looking
:09:40. > :09:48.think he is a Labour mole, that Ed Miliband, so you would be looking
:09:48. > :09:50.what I have come to, a Daily Mail style conspiracy theory, it could
:09:50. > :09:54.not be more perfect. The prospect of style conspiracy theory, it could
:09:54. > :10:01.a referendum on the EU at the same time as Scottish independence is
:10:01. > :10:08.has told us he could not sleep at conscience. We could send him some
:10:08. > :10:11.pills, I suppose. We know he's going to sack all those lieutenants were
:10:11. > :10:16.going around and saying he is the great future and the next leader of
:10:16. > :10:21.the Conservative Party. He denied doing that! He would be amazed to
:10:21. > :10:26.hear you say that, this is a crisis conversations in corridors, quite an
:10:26. > :10:31.operation to get letters into Graham Brady, he said to have letters,
:10:31. > :10:34.operation to get letters into Graham 46, but at the moment this campaign
:10:34. > :10:43.is being run by Lieutenant of Adam They are disaffected and not happy
:10:43. > :10:48.under David Cameron's leadership. There is a whole army of them! I am
:10:48. > :10:51.pleased he has outmanoeuvred the awkward squad, and now James Wharton
:10:51. > :10:57.is saying, you're going to kill awkward squad, and now James Wharton
:10:58. > :11:03.bill. I do not think they are very competence lieutenants. The main
:11:03. > :11:08.episode is it will unify a large Conservative Party behind David
:11:08. > :11:13.Cameron. On what they hope is a settled position. We still hope
:11:13. > :11:16.Cameron. On what they hope is a be talking to John Prescott, who is
:11:16. > :11:21.in hole, if you see him, pointing in the direction of the BBC studios! Do
:11:21. > :11:26.you want to buy a house? Can you afford the mortgage repayments but
:11:26. > :11:27.not the 20% or 30% deposit the mortgage provider is demanding from
:11:27. > :11:31.you? The Government says it has mortgage provider is demanding from
:11:31. > :11:38.scheme designed for you which is in launching next week, help to buy,
:11:38. > :11:42.re-emergence of 95% mortgages, remember them?! But is the policy
:11:42. > :11:44.really good for home-buyers or the British economy? Here is Giles.
:11:45. > :11:49.Never mind who lives in a house British economy? Here is Giles.
:11:49. > :11:53.this, who can afford to buy a house these days? The Government would
:11:53. > :11:53.this, who can afford to buy a house like many more people to be able to
:11:53. > :11:56.without putting down a crippling like many more people to be able to
:11:56. > :11:58.without putting down a crippling amount of money as a deposit, and in
:11:58. > :12:03.the spirit of rights to buy, the government has launched help to
:12:03. > :12:03.the spirit of rights to buy, the confusingly it is the name for two
:12:03. > :12:25.been running since April. Help to government are bringing it in early.
:12:25. > :12:29.Let's get in on the inside and take a good look around at what this
:12:29. > :12:34.scheme actually has to offer. And why the Government thinks it really
:12:34. > :12:40.works. Help to Buy 1 was an equity loan scheme. The idea, nice, is
:12:40. > :12:40.works. Help to Buy 1 was an equity it was for new build only, up to a
:12:40. > :12:46.value of £600,000. But it is Help to value of £600,000. But it is Help to
:12:46. > :12:50.Buy 2 that everyone is looking into right now. It is for any property up
:12:50. > :12:57.to a value, again, of £600,000. right now. It is for any property up
:12:57. > :12:59.time the Government is guaranteeing that it will take on the first
:13:00. > :13:03.losses should the home owner in that it will take on the first
:13:03. > :13:08.future failed to make their mortgage payments. Don't worry about that, if
:13:08. > :13:12.you are a buyer, you are going to be concerned about coming up with the
:13:12. > :13:17.5% deposit and 95% mortgages will be available again in participating
:13:17. > :13:26.banks and building societies. And a housing prime mover. You cannot
:13:26. > :13:30.get training to 5% mortgage anymore, 90% even, so there are couples in
:13:30. > :13:33.our country who have good jobs, decent incomes, they could afford
:13:33. > :13:41.the mortgage payments but they failure in our banking market. So
:13:41. > :13:44.Jonathan, but I guess for you this is not Homes Under The Hammer, but a
:13:44. > :13:50.main impact of this scheme will is not Homes Under The Hammer, but a
:13:50. > :13:54.to push up prices, who does that benefit? Mostly rich and all the
:13:54. > :13:59.people who own their houses. Plus the banks, of course, because it is
:13:59. > :14:03.a subsidy for them. Who loses? People who want to buy a house in
:14:03. > :14:08.the future. Moreover, it is a bit odd that the Government says it
:14:08. > :14:10.the future. Moreover, it is a bit not OK to borrow to finance schools
:14:11. > :14:22.or roads, but it is fine for the effectively, in order to guarantee
:14:22. > :14:27.housing market. 2.3 million? I do not think Help to Buy covers that.
:14:27. > :14:33.But enter a would-be buyer, will they now be seeing a plethora of
:14:33. > :14:40.help to buy mortgages? In a word, no. David Cameron has brought the
:14:40. > :14:44.months, and banks were not ready at that stage. Two banks have committed
:14:44. > :14:49.to fund the scheme, the Lloyds group and the RBS group, so lenders like
:14:49. > :14:52.Halifax, RBS and NatWest. They will be doing the scheme, but even once
:14:52. > :15:00.the scheme is up and running you are probably find 95% mortgages on the
:15:00. > :15:09.high street because of the guarantee the government is offering. People
:15:09. > :15:13.might say this is how we got into a mess in the first place. Why would
:15:13. > :15:20.the government want to make those products available then now? It
:15:20. > :15:22.the government want to make those more what investment banks were
:15:22. > :15:27.doing in the background that caused performed extremely well through the
:15:27. > :15:35.depths of the downturn. Is this performed extremely well through the
:15:35. > :15:36.game changer? Yes, I have done my best to save over the last few years
:15:36. > :15:41.but this has enabled me to make best to save over the last few years
:15:41. > :15:47.first purchase. How frustrating best to save over the last few years
:15:47. > :15:52.it just renting? Very frustrating, you are throwing away money hand
:15:52. > :16:00.over fist, and now I can take that enthusiasm raises a question back at
:16:00. > :16:06.the flat. If you are looking for a 95% mortgage, you don't really care
:16:06. > :16:14.economy, you are thinking, great, I can buy a house. Yes, if I was a
:16:14. > :16:21.house buyer or a bank, I would be pleased, but it will do longer term
:16:21. > :16:24.economic damage. The tricky steps the government are trying to pull
:16:24. > :16:31.off is that home-buyers might be so grateful for the opportunity to
:16:31. > :16:32.off is that home-buyers might be so their own homes that they reward the
:16:32. > :16:34.Government with the vote, while their own homes that they reward the
:16:35. > :16:51.the same time the Government tries to sidestep consequences that such a
:16:51. > :16:57.Now Conservative MP Margot James, and Allister Heath, editor of City
:16:57. > :17:03.It is said by the critics that this scheme will cause a housing bubble.
:17:03. > :17:17.Where is the evidence? House prices are more varied. Housing not just in
:17:17. > :17:22.London remains overvalued and the problem with this scheme is that it
:17:22. > :17:30.will pump up house prices, it will therefore houses will become even
:17:30. > :17:34.more overvalued. That is a dangerous territory, last time it ended in
:17:34. > :17:41.tears, and now the Government is taking on the risk of that policy.
:17:41. > :17:44.What do you say to that? We have a real problem, it takes people on
:17:44. > :17:54.average until they are 38 years real problem, it takes people on
:17:54. > :17:59.property. The problem is not that they cannot afford it, but they
:17:59. > :18:03.cannot afford the deposit. We have got to do something to allow people
:18:03. > :18:07.to get their feet on the property ladder and I don't agree it will
:18:07. > :18:22.cause a boom in house prices. It would if we were not building any
:18:22. > :18:33.have had a record this year, 12 months to right now, the record
:18:33. > :18:33.have had a record this year, 12 the last ten years. These are not
:18:33. > :18:40.the statistics I have seen, but the last ten years. These are not
:18:40. > :18:46.new supply is coming up. It is starting to creep up. We don't see
:18:46. > :18:50.enough house building, need to build more houses and that is a solution
:18:50. > :18:54.to this problem. You are right, people cannot afford to buy homes
:18:54. > :18:59.and the reason is there are not enough good quality homes in the
:18:59. > :19:03.deposits are so high is because secondly the Government has passed
:19:03. > :19:07.laws to make the banking system secondly the Government has passed
:19:07. > :19:15.prudent, telling them to put more wrong. Now suddenly the Government
:19:15. > :19:19.is not happy with the outcome of its own rules and is trying to create
:19:19. > :19:26.these subsidies to circumvent the rules it has put in place. It is not
:19:26. > :19:31.a subsidy. Don't forget banks have to pay a charge in order to take
:19:32. > :19:38.part in this loan scheme and that the... You are guaranteeing the
:19:38. > :19:41.money. Yes, but the fear is worked out on a commercial basis. The
:19:41. > :19:48.taxpayer is protected. Why? You out on a commercial basis. The
:19:48. > :19:54.guaranteeing £12 billion worth of mortgages per year. Yes but the
:19:54. > :19:59.change in the whole mortgage basis has been made a few years ago in
:19:59. > :20:02.response of the crash. They made the distressed test on people applying
:20:03. > :20:12.for mortgages much higher and you twice... So it will not be like
:20:13. > :20:19.these self certification mortgages handed out in America that caused
:20:19. > :20:23.the sub-prime crisis? Pigment bit like that but the banks are rightly
:20:24. > :20:28.asking for bigger deposits, they know there is a big chance house
:20:28. > :20:33.prices could fall if interest rates eventually, so they are demanding
:20:33. > :20:38.bigger deposits. The Government eventually, so they are demanding
:20:38. > :20:41.circumventing this is being passed eventually, so they are demanding
:20:41. > :20:45.on to the taxpayers which is why it is a dangerous policy. Instead they
:20:45. > :20:54.should be massively accelerating Planning permission is much easier
:20:54. > :20:58.to get now, we have seen a 49% increase in planning permission
:20:58. > :20:58.to get now, we have seen a 49% a new building over the last year, a
:20:58. > :21:04.huge increase. In the figures I a new building over the last year, a
:21:04. > :21:08.recently, they showed new start a new building over the last year, a
:21:08. > :21:11.the 12 months to the autumn were only about 110,000 which is the
:21:11. > :21:17.figure you inherited, which was only about 110,000 which is the
:21:17. > :21:23.an all-time low in 2010. New house built in the last quarter are third
:21:23. > :21:28.up on the time last year. You have relaxation of planning laws and
:21:28. > :21:30.up on the time last year. You have other policies the Government put
:21:30. > :21:36.into effect last year to take effect and it is coming through now. I
:21:36. > :21:42.agree, if we weren't building more houses, if the construction sector
:21:42. > :21:48.advantage of the increased demand, there would be a risk. David Cameron
:21:48. > :21:57.says you are snob and it is only snobs who dislike Help To Buy. They
:21:57. > :22:03.don't have the bank of mum and dad, people like that will finally get on
:22:03. > :22:06.the housing ladder. That is complete nonsense. We need a sustainable
:22:06. > :22:11.housing market where there is a large amount of construction, like
:22:11. > :22:18.in the 1930s for example, where large numbers of proper family homes
:22:18. > :22:24.were being built for people. House prices were pushed down and people
:22:25. > :22:29.could afford houses. You are now encouraging people to take out a 95%
:22:29. > :22:38.mortgage, I thought that was a bad idea, so supposing interest rates go
:22:38. > :22:43.struggle, and supposing house prices fall by more than 5%, I am now faced
:22:43. > :22:48.with negative equity and soaring interest rates that I cannot afford.
:22:48. > :22:54.95% mortgage, if you can afford interest rates that I cannot afford.
:22:54. > :23:00.repayments, you will be fine. What happens when interest rates rise?
:23:00. > :23:02.They have got to rise a lot before you get into trouble. People are
:23:02. > :23:08.already affording rent which is you get into trouble. People are
:23:08. > :23:15.lot higher than mortgage payments. You will not be able to get into
:23:15. > :23:20.this scheme unless you can afford repayments double what they are
:23:20. > :23:24.this scheme unless you can afford the moment. The Conservatives should
:23:24. > :23:30.limelight last week but there was an unwelcome intruder in the shape
:23:30. > :23:32.limelight last week but there was an row between Ed Miliband and the
:23:32. > :23:40.Daily Mail. Just over a week ago the claiming that Ed Miliband's Father
:23:40. > :23:47.Ralph hated Britain. They showed a picture of his father's gravestone
:23:47. > :23:52.with the caption, grave socialist. They then removed the photo and
:23:52. > :23:56.with the caption, grave socialist. Ed Miliband the right to reply on
:23:56. > :24:00.printed an editorial alongside it saying they stood by every word
:24:00. > :24:05.printed an editorial alongside it published an fair headline. It also
:24:06. > :24:10.reporter had gate-crashed a private memorial service for Ed Miliband's
:24:10. > :24:14.uncle in a London hospital, for which the paper has now apologised,
:24:15. > :24:23.but Ed Miliband has called on the hard look at the way his papers
:24:23. > :24:30.but Ed Miliband has called on the run. This comes a week before a
:24:30. > :24:30.but Ed Miliband has called on the Joining us now from Hull, John
:24:31. > :24:42.Prescott. Does this row between Joining us now from Hull, John
:24:42. > :24:49.reinforce the case for tough, new certainly influences the opinion
:24:49. > :24:53.about that but that is more of Paul Dacre's doing. Ed Miliband rang
:24:53. > :24:54.about that but that is more of Paul while I was in Strasbourg making
:24:54. > :24:58.sure my complaints were nothing while I was in Strasbourg making
:24:58. > :25:04.do with press regulation and he while I was in Strasbourg making
:25:04. > :25:07.right. This argument is not about politicians and media people, it is
:25:07. > :25:15.about ordinary people that love politicians and media people, it is
:25:15. > :25:20.and dealt with. All of these cases affected individual people and they
:25:21. > :25:26.are the ones that need to have justice in this matter. Next week we
:25:26. > :25:32.will be hearing whether the Privy Council will be reporting on the
:25:33. > :25:37.proposal to replace it. Are you agreeing then that what the mail did
:25:37. > :41:41.have identified a supply of land in their emerging new plans, and we
:41:41. > :41:45.discovered that no new sites have been created in Kent and Sussex in
:41:45. > :41:50.the last five years, although some have been extended. Charities
:41:50. > :41:56.working with travellers and gypsies say there is a real shortage of
:41:56. > :42:00.accommodation, that councils just are not addressing. There are
:42:00. > :42:04.certain strategic pieces of planning that have to really be addressed at
:42:04. > :42:09.national level and not at local level, and one of those is the
:42:09. > :42:13.provision of Gypsy and Traveller sites. If you just leave it to local
:42:13. > :42:21.people, there would not be a site built anywhere, I don't think. Even
:42:21. > :42:25.those local authorities who take things seriously and say they're
:42:25. > :42:29.going to develop a site, very often what happens is the local opposition
:42:29. > :42:34.becomes mobilised, the placards come out, there is angry residents
:42:34. > :42:40.meetings, marchers on the town hall, and the local authority gets
:42:40. > :42:44.cold feet and drops its proposals. A public consultation on the proposals
:42:44. > :42:48.is likely to start in the next few weeks. Meanwhile, three generations
:42:48. > :42:55.of this family hope that their dream of living together at a permanent
:42:55. > :42:59.site will become a reality soon. They were young women like us when
:42:59. > :43:02.they came to this town. Is it going to be that case for our kids? I
:43:02. > :43:05.don't know. It would be a shame. We're joined now by Clarance
:43:05. > :43:07.Mitchell — he is the Conservative parliamentary candidate for Brighton
:43:07. > :43:14.Pavillion, he's in our Westminster studio.
:43:14. > :43:18.The work we heard from, they want a good, settled, stable life, a home
:43:18. > :43:22.for their families just like the rest of us. Is that too much to ask?
:43:22. > :43:27.If they choose to settle and put roots down, if you like, they are
:43:27. > :43:36.entitled to do that wherever they wish. There are also entitled to do
:43:36. > :43:41.it as travellers. Our objection to do this site is not anti—traveller,
:43:41. > :43:45.and it is ridiculous to say that we are racist, and somehow. It is about
:43:45. > :43:49.the practicalities of this particular site. It is the wrong
:43:49. > :43:53.proposal in the wrong place. People fought long and hard to get this
:43:53. > :44:01.designated as a national park, and it should be protected. You say the
:44:01. > :44:06.Conservatives in Brighton and how say it sets a dangerous precedent,
:44:06. > :44:10.but this park is huge and diverse, it covers hundreds of miles. I use
:44:10. > :44:15.saying there should be no homes anywhere, or just no new traveller
:44:15. > :44:23.homes? They should not be large and camps like this being set. 12 sites?
:44:23. > :44:29.Is that large? It is the principle of it. This could bring in over 100
:44:29. > :44:33.vehicles if those sites are fully occupied. That itself will cause
:44:33. > :44:37.massive access problems. There is only one Small Rd to it. There could
:44:37. > :44:46.be all sorts of tensions, even between the travellers. The main
:44:46. > :44:51.thing is the danger for water contamination. This site is above a
:44:51. > :44:58.tunnel that draws the water off to a small pumping station and then write
:44:58. > :45:03.down to the town. It is not just a local problem for the people in
:45:03. > :45:06.areas nearby. This is a potential problem, there are a lot of
:45:06. > :45:14.questions about water contamination that have not been answered. You say
:45:14. > :45:19.the site is on top of this major tunnel. What are you saying? Is it a
:45:19. > :45:23.suggestion that travellers will go to the toilet straight onto the
:45:23. > :45:26.ground? Are we talking about application and urination? I'm being
:45:26. > :45:31.blunt and this is not anti—traveller, but in the cases of
:45:31. > :45:36.whether have been unauthorised encroachments into other park
:45:36. > :45:41.areas, gas, public areas are used for just the purposes you described,
:45:41. > :45:45.with no attempt to clear it up. But this site would be connected to the
:45:45. > :45:49.mains sewerage. That is another concern, I know. But there
:45:49. > :45:55.government money set aside for creating permanent travellers sites
:45:55. > :45:59.which is not being spent. You also worried about them going to the loo
:45:59. > :46:03.in the field. If they get there sooner connection, there is
:46:03. > :46:09.government money to do it. Problem solved. In this case, a proper sewer
:46:09. > :46:15.will be built, that will be hugely expensive, it has to be built to
:46:15. > :46:19.join the main sewer. On top of that, our concern is that General
:46:19. > :46:25.contamination from the site can sink down 55 metres straight into this
:46:25. > :46:28.tunnel, there is a cesspit which is not big enough for the people who
:46:28. > :46:33.been using the existing site, let alone another influx of families.
:46:33. > :46:38.This is not anti—traveller, it's about it being a protected area. You
:46:38. > :46:44.keep making that point, but it is interesting, on your own website,
:46:44. > :46:47.you celebrate the cultural diversity of Brighton. Diversity is about more
:46:47. > :46:54.than enjoying gay pride. These are your constituents. Does diversity
:46:54. > :46:58.stop at their doors? Many of these people are not constituents. They
:46:58. > :47:02.are mobile, they are not registered voters. The family in our report
:47:02. > :47:07.have been living in the area of the decades. I'm not going to talk about
:47:07. > :47:12.individuals. We believe as a group that this site is a wrong site for a
:47:12. > :47:15.camp of this size and nature. If people do want to settle and stop
:47:15. > :47:20.travelling, that is their right, but they need to be encouraged to buy a
:47:20. > :47:26.plot of land, to apply for proper planning commission and to pay the
:47:26. > :47:30.council tax. There was an obligation here, the suggestion from Clarence
:47:30. > :47:36.Mitchell as they need to go do this by themselves. Henry Smith, there is
:47:36. > :47:40.an obligation by local authorities. Writing and to doing what they are
:47:40. > :47:46.required to do, they are binding and setting aside land. —— Brighton and
:47:46. > :47:54.Hove are doing what they are required to do. And then you get
:47:54. > :47:57.local opposition to bits. Settled people are so opposed, does this not
:47:57. > :48:04.need to be taken up at national level? I think it is absurd that a
:48:04. > :48:10.local planning matters should be decided at national level. That is
:48:10. > :48:14.top down, demand controlled... Well, one of your Conservative MPs
:48:14. > :48:20.says he is going to take this step Eric Pickles, say he wants to refer
:48:20. > :48:24.it up to national level. I think Mike Weatherly is right that local
:48:24. > :48:28.people 's concern should be addressed. If we have a democratic
:48:28. > :48:33.process, that needs to be respected. They looked at 50 sites, and it
:48:33. > :48:35.wasn't just the City Council, it was the South Downs Park authority and
:48:35. > :48:40.their criteria as well. the South Downs Park authority and
:48:40. > :48:45.would be expected to pay council tax, anti—social behaviour would not
:48:45. > :48:49.be tolerated. What is the problem? I think why many people get upset at
:48:49. > :48:53.the prospect of a traveller site near to their homes is because of
:48:53. > :48:59.the experience they have had in the past when travelling communities
:48:59. > :49:01.have come through. That is why people are very concerned and they
:49:01. > :49:07.feel there is not a level playing field, there isn't a fair system.
:49:07. > :49:09.That is why it is right that local authorities who are democratically
:49:09. > :49:15.elected should be deciding these issues. Tristan, you are a Medway
:49:15. > :49:19.Council. Your authority has not created any new traveller sites in
:49:19. > :49:28.the last ideas. Would you to change that? —— in the last ideas. Well,
:49:28. > :49:33.the previous administration looked at a site in the centre of Brighton
:49:33. > :49:36.which is on a former rubbish tip which had significant issues around
:49:36. > :49:41.pollution, and yet they were very happy to place people there. Put
:49:41. > :49:47.your money where your mouth is, let's talk about your council,
:49:47. > :49:52.Medway. Should you be looking at new sites? First of all, it is a
:49:52. > :49:57.Conservative administration. But would you, I'm asking you. You would
:49:57. > :50:01.like to be in control one day, presumably. We need to take the
:50:01. > :50:06.toxicity out of this debate. We absolutely have a responsibility to
:50:06. > :50:11.house people. This has been going on for three or four years in Brighton.
:50:11. > :50:15.It's going to go on for longer because there will be public
:50:15. > :50:20.consultation on this one. Thank you both, and our prankster Clarence
:50:20. > :50:24.Mitchell. Now, Dave doesn't want one, Nick
:50:24. > :50:27.does and, well, Ed agrees with Nick. The 'mansion tax' has showed up some
:50:27. > :50:30.clear blue water between the two parties in the Coalition Government,
:50:30. > :50:33.and has placed Labour squarely in support of the Liberal Democrats on
:50:33. > :50:36.this key policy. Outside London, the South East has nearly 60% of the
:50:36. > :50:41.country's most expensive properties, so it's the kind of issue that may
:50:41. > :50:44.play big on the doorstep. In our Westminster studio now is
:50:44. > :50:52.James Flanagan who is the Liberal Democrat candidate for Canterbury
:50:52. > :50:57.and Whitstable. This mansion tax, by my reckoning,
:50:57. > :51:01.page 14 of the Lib Dems last manifesto. How committed is the
:51:01. > :51:07.party to it now? We are very committed, we think it is a very
:51:07. > :51:11.fair tax. It will affect less than 1% of properties across the country.
:51:11. > :51:16.We believe it will bring in the best part of £2 billion which can be
:51:16. > :51:23.spent in other schemes, for example, put it towards lower income tax in
:51:23. > :51:26.the future. Less than 1% across the country, but it could affect quite
:51:26. > :51:34.icky people in your prospective constituency. It's not going to play
:51:34. > :51:40.out well back, is it? The average house price here is about £230,000.
:51:40. > :51:44.That does not mean there are not properties that are considerably
:51:44. > :51:49.more valuable. Indeed, but I'd spoken to many people and explained
:51:49. > :51:55.the concept of the tax, and they are very supportive. Why don't you
:51:55. > :52:00.explain it to us. How would it work? There would be an annual levy of 1%
:52:00. > :52:06.on properties of £2 million or more. That is not for the £2 million, any
:52:06. > :52:11.part of the valuation above 2 million would be taxed at 1%. So if
:52:11. > :52:17.your property was worth £3 million, you would pay £10,000 every year for
:52:17. > :52:23.the privilege of owning that house? That's right, and what we're saying
:52:23. > :52:26.is, in these difficult times, we believe the wealthiest in society
:52:26. > :52:31.should contribute a little bit more. A big house is only one measure of
:52:31. > :52:35.the wealthiest. You could have two houses, one in Canterbury worth 1.7
:52:35. > :52:38.five million and another house in the West Country were the same
:52:38. > :52:45.amount in you would not pay anything. That's right, if you own
:52:45. > :52:50.two houses, both valued at 2 million or 1.9 million each, you would not
:52:50. > :52:54.pay the mansion tax. You would still pay council tax and you would still
:52:54. > :52:58.pay capital gains tax on the house that is not your main residence, so
:52:58. > :53:02.overall you would still be paying a large amount of tax. You are
:53:02. > :53:09.branding yourself as the high tax party, are you not handing boats on
:53:09. > :53:13.a platter to the Conservatives? We are branding ourselves as a party
:53:13. > :53:23.that wants to see a stronger economy and a fairer society. On the point
:53:23. > :53:27.of tax, our policy of raising the income tax threshold has been a key
:53:27. > :53:33.policy and we've helped to bring out in. By doing that, we've lifted 3
:53:33. > :53:42.million people out of low income tax and we've given a tax cut to many
:53:42. > :53:46.more. We are privileged to have a representative of the three major
:53:46. > :53:50.political parties here. Tristan, the Labour, would you like to see and
:53:50. > :54:01.syntax in the Labour Party manifesto? —— to see a mansion tax.
:54:01. > :54:10.We would like to see a similar 1,, £2 million. We would reintroduce a
:54:10. > :54:17.10p tax which would raise significant sons. We put it to
:54:17. > :54:21.parliament in March and the Lib Dems actually did not vote to support us.
:54:21. > :54:30.They talk a good game, but when it comes to voting in Parliament, they
:54:30. > :54:34.actually voted against. Henry, it is a little uncomfortable, isn't it?
:54:34. > :54:37.The Lib Dems, your coalition partners, and you are never going to
:54:37. > :54:43.agree, because your party looks after rich people. That's not true,
:54:43. > :54:49.we are looking to reduce taxation across for, because we think when
:54:49. > :54:51.people are allowed to keep more of what they earn, they will spend it
:54:51. > :54:57.more efficiently rather than an inefficient government, however
:54:57. > :55:01.well—meaning that will be. The trouble with the mansion tax idea is
:55:01. > :55:08.it sounds catchy, but in actual fact, to raise £2 billion, it would
:55:08. > :55:12.have to be levied against 150,000 homes. In many of those, you may
:55:12. > :55:20.have people who are asset rich but income poor. He is not going to come
:55:20. > :55:27.onto your side. So it is you and Labour on this one, isn't it? A new
:55:27. > :55:37.coalition. We do agree. That's all we got time at —— four. Just a quick
:55:37. > :55:48.round—up of the political events of this week.
:55:48. > :55:52.After 65 days of protests, 125 arrests and £4 million of policing
:55:52. > :55:57.costs, drilling has ceased and the anti—fracking protesters have gone
:55:57. > :56:00.home. Medway has some of the highest debt rates in the country, so will
:56:00. > :56:04.be welcome rules that the government is planning tougher regulations of
:56:04. > :56:09.payday lenders? I think it is important we don't
:56:09. > :56:12.force people into the illegal lending sphere.
:56:12. > :56:17.Boris Johnson spoke positively of the potential hub airport in the
:56:17. > :56:22.Thames Estoril. Locals aren't so positive about it. The Rochester
:56:22. > :56:26.MP's own survey of the Medway towns said 92% of people were against the
:56:26. > :56:31.idea. And it is the People's peer, so let
:56:31. > :56:36.them have a stake in it. Renovation on Hastings Pier begin next month,
:56:36. > :56:41.and residents are being given the opportunity to become shareholders
:56:41. > :56:49.in the project. I should certainly think about it. Maybe it isn't so
:56:49. > :56:53.exciting that some after all. Landlocked constituencies, both of
:56:53. > :56:55.you, but would you buy shares in a peer? It seems like an innovative
:56:55. > :57:07.idea. That's it from us this week. more affordable homes needed, but we
:57:07. > :57:19.have no time. Andrew, back to you. Our next guest is no stranger to
:57:19. > :57:41.controversy, a former UKIP MEP he recently lost his party's whip after
:57:41. > :57:45.a series of outbursts including receiving aid as 'Bongo Bongo Land'
:57:45. > :57:48.and joking that a group of UKIP women who didn't clean behind their
:57:48. > :57:53.fridges were 'sluts'. Now he sits in independent but remains a UKIP party
:57:53. > :58:02.member. Here's a flavour of recent events in the political life of
:58:03. > :58:12.Godfrey Bloom. How you can possibly be giving £1 million a month...
:58:12. > :58:15.Bongo Bongo Land. I got 6000 e-mails within 12 hours, only 47 were not
:58:15. > :58:20.agreeing with me so you are the within 12 hours, only 47 were not
:58:20. > :58:22.that is out of touch. Everybody knows me, a bit like the Marmite
:58:22. > :58:27.joke, they love me or they hate knows me, a bit like the Marmite
:58:27. > :58:37.but I have always told me like it is. I made a joke and said that
:58:38. > :58:42.women who did not clean behind the French were sluts and everybody
:58:42. > :58:45.laughed along, including the women. I have had hundreds of e-mails,
:58:45. > :58:50.saying, God Almighty, can't you I have had hundreds of e-mails,
:58:50. > :58:56.a joke any more? I am long in the correctness and I understand UKIP
:58:56. > :59:10.have moved on and they are doing well, and I wish them well. This,
:59:10. > :59:16.with no black faces on it. You are picking people out for the colour of
:59:16. > :59:19.with no black faces on it. You are their skin? You disgust me! Perhaps
:59:19. > :59:27.the way they are doing things now is disgrace me. We are joined now with
:59:27. > :59:34.a suitable distance between us by the independent MEP for Yorkshire
:59:34. > :59:39.and the Humber, Godfrey Bloom. You said this weekend that you have
:59:39. > :59:47.and the Humber, Godfrey Bloom. You be a complete sociopath to be in
:59:47. > :59:51.politics, are you a sociopath? No, I am just an ordinary bloke from the
:59:51. > :59:55.rugby club likes to tell it as it is. I did not come into politics to
:59:55. > :00:00.rugby club likes to tell it as it save my country from the clutches of
:00:00. > :00:06.the awful, evil... That is why I am in politics, and that is why I
:00:06. > :00:14.member, and I will still be voting ability... Do you accept that your
:00:14. > :00:21.conference? We were both born in ability... Do you accept that your
:00:21. > :00:27.same year, we are too old to worry about regrets. Let's look forward
:00:27. > :00:35.and see... Never mind the year I was born, what is the answer to my
:00:35. > :00:42.country and intent to do the best I independent for my country, and
:00:42. > :00:44.country and intent to do the best I re-elected. They are the only game
:00:44. > :00:54.in town, the only party that will get as out. Shouldn't you have been
:00:54. > :00:58.liability? You hijacked the party conference. That is a matter of
:00:58. > :01:02.perception. We have heard nothing in the last two years but it is a
:01:02. > :01:05.one-man band, a Nigel Farage party, and I can make a joke at a fringe
:01:05. > :01:13.meeting and collapse the whole thing. This doesn't say anything
:01:13. > :01:22.Andrew. It tells you about your journalism - it is not about UKIP or
:01:22. > :01:29.me, it was the journalists' reaction to a small joke at a meeting. And
:01:29. > :01:43.myself, unless I had a commended. Personality, the most unbelievable
:01:43. > :01:55.force of personality to collapse a party conference. Nigel Farage has
:01:55. > :02:00.been a friend of mine for 20 years, and may I remind you that in June
:02:00. > :02:05.and July UK was slipping in the polls, and when I made my statement
:02:05. > :02:13.about overseas aid, we went back to liability, I never was, I am a vote
:02:13. > :02:17.getter. As you know, there is a correlation, but let me show you
:02:18. > :02:23.what Nigel Farage had to say about you on the BBC. Let's blunder clip
:02:23. > :02:29.of that. We are not here to win friends amongst the liberal elite,
:02:29. > :02:38.and Godfrey's problem was that he manifesto. Don't you need to reflect
:02:38. > :02:41.that you are too outrageous, too politically incorrect even for UKIP?
:02:41. > :02:46.Well, you see, to a certain extent I politically incorrect even for UKIP?
:02:46. > :02:50.have been gagged on other subjects. I am a libertarian, I wanted to
:02:50. > :02:53.have been gagged on other subjects. about flat tax. I thought David
:02:53. > :02:57.Aronowitz wrote a very good piece in the times on drugs, and I have been
:02:57. > :03:01.gagged to speak about any of these things because they are not part of
:03:01. > :03:10.it, so I tend to speak about other things. Maybe they have outgrown
:03:10. > :03:13.machine, and they have to get rid of the Victor Meldrew wing. You might
:03:13. > :03:17.have a point, but I am speaking the Victor Meldrew wing. You might
:03:17. > :03:23.you from Hull, and if you look at Barnsley, and very recently in
:03:23. > :03:28.Scarborough and Whitby in the buy legends, 25%, so how you see things
:03:28. > :03:31.in the bubble, it is not like how we see it appear in Yorkshire. You
:03:31. > :03:34.in the bubble, it is not like how we like the one who was sitting in
:03:34. > :03:35.in the bubble, it is not like how we bubble! Is UKIP unravelling? Of
:03:35. > :03:40.course it isn't, we are getting bubble! Is UKIP unravelling? Of
:03:40. > :03:45.of the vote in by-elections, of course it is not. Boy, wouldn't
:03:45. > :03:48.of the vote in by-elections, of main parties and the establishment
:03:48. > :03:52.love to see that! But I am sorry, it is not happening. Will you stand as
:03:52. > :03:54.an independence against UKIP in is not happening. Will you stand as
:03:54. > :04:07.European elections? Almost certainly elections were next week, I could
:04:07. > :04:09.do not think I will go that route. Will you stand as a UKIP candidate
:04:09. > :04:13.again? We do not know, probably Will you stand as a UKIP candidate
:04:13. > :04:18.but I shall certainly be trying Will you stand as a UKIP candidate
:04:18. > :04:20.help UKIP as best I can. You both share a flat, I understand, in
:04:20. > :04:26.Brussels, neither of you clean behind the fridge. Other than the
:04:26. > :04:29.fact that the place is probably quite murky, you have got a chance
:04:29. > :04:34.to talk to each other and get back into his good graces, haven't you? I
:04:34. > :04:43.am sure we will be having a beer before the month is out. So Godfrey
:04:43. > :04:49.take it? For those of you who were shrugged! Thank you very much for
:04:49. > :04:55.joining. A great pleasure. I will have to move my own share, you do
:04:55. > :05:00.not have the sea Jeremy Paxman doing that! Nobody votes for UKIP because
:05:00. > :05:06.they think they are a smooth, slick, absence of PR polish is the reason
:05:06. > :05:10.for their popularity, so these are skirmishes are not a problem, and
:05:10. > :05:14.more than that, Godfrey Bloom does make Nigel Farage look better. Even
:05:14. > :05:20.in that clip from Andrew Marr, he juxtaposition with someone like
:05:20. > :05:24.Godfrey Bloom than he has done before. I mean, he did hijacked
:05:24. > :05:25.Godfrey Bloom than he has done conference, it was a disaster, they
:05:25. > :05:28.got tonnes of publicity but not conference, it was a disaster, they
:05:28. > :05:36.kind they wanted. But you have to journalists. I thought he was sexist
:05:36. > :05:41.long before anyone else, he used to have an incredible page on his
:05:41. > :05:47.website entitled Godfrey Bloom: Misogynist, and the proof that he
:05:47. > :05:53.photographed with a girls' rugby characters in politics. He does
:05:53. > :05:55.photographed with a girls' rugby Nigel Farage look better, but is sin
:05:55. > :06:01.was to say things you said before but to ruin the party conference. It
:06:01. > :06:05.sounds like he is coming back. A beer in Brussels and he will be
:06:05. > :06:06.sounds like he is coming back. A on the UKIP ticket. Sitting having a
:06:06. > :06:11.beer in that built the Chechen, on the UKIP ticket. Sitting having a
:06:11. > :06:15.sounds like it may be what the deal is that he comes back into UKIP
:06:15. > :06:18.sounds like it may be what the deal does not stand as an MEP at the
:06:18. > :06:22.European Parliamentary elections. -- in that built the kitchen. It is
:06:22. > :06:24.right to say the electorate are sophisticated and they know what
:06:24. > :06:32.this party is for, what characters Godfrey Bloom said for people to
:06:32. > :06:37.electorate know what they go using UKIP four. They are using it as
:06:37. > :06:37.electorate know what they go using vehicle to beat over the head the
:06:37. > :06:40.three established parties. They vehicle to beat over the head the
:06:40. > :06:44.probably do it in the European elections and give them first place.
:06:44. > :06:55.The big question is what happens in problem that Nigel Farage was making
:06:55. > :06:56.The big question is what happens in an Andrew Marr this morning is that
:06:56. > :06:58.he wants to copy the tactics of an Andrew Marr this morning is that
:06:58. > :06:59.he wants to copy the tactics of Paddy Ashdown, get elected and
:06:59. > :07:00.councils, build up a Parliamentary base, and to do that you do need
:07:01. > :07:04.Commons next week, and there is base, and to do that you do need
:07:04. > :07:06.ministerial reshuffle on the cards, that is the rumour in Westminster.
:07:06. > :07:10.David Cameron has spoken of the that is the rumour in Westminster.
:07:10. > :07:12.David Cameron has spoken of the extraordinary talent pool of women
:07:12. > :07:14.among his ministers, so could he bring more of them into the cabinet?
:07:14. > :07:19.He was talking about it earlier bring more of them into the cabinet?
:07:19. > :07:24.week. I think we are getting there in Britain, but we have a long way
:07:24. > :07:29.businesses in Britain, there are not boardroom. If you look at politics
:07:29. > :07:33.in Britain, there aren't nearly enough women around the Cabinet
:07:33. > :07:38.table. So I think, in every walk of life, whether it is the judiciary,
:07:38. > :07:40.whether it is politics, business, there is a lot further to go. Before
:07:40. > :07:44.the last election, we only had there is a lot further to go. Before
:07:44. > :07:47.women Members of Parliament. We there is a lot further to go. Before
:07:47. > :07:49.have around 50, so we have made there is a lot further to go. Before
:07:50. > :07:55.big change, but it is still 50 out of 300, not nearly enough. So we
:07:55. > :07:59.need to do more. My wife likes to say, if you don't have women in
:07:59. > :08:03.need to do more. My wife likes to places, you're not just missing
:08:03. > :08:05.need to do more. My wife likes to missing out on a lot more than
:08:05. > :08:09.need to do more. My wife likes to of the talent, and I think she
:08:09. > :08:13.need to do more. My wife likes to probably has a point. The prime
:08:13. > :08:14.need to do more. My wife likes to there going to be a reshuffle? I
:08:14. > :08:18.think you are right to say there there going to be a reshuffle? I
:08:18. > :08:24.will be a lot more women, they need to change the ratio of women to
:08:24. > :08:32.will be a lot more women, they need called Dave who went to maudlin
:08:32. > :08:42.college. So obviously they are not fishing in the biggest talent pool,
:08:42. > :08:45.but there are numbers. Esther McVey has been selling a very difficult
:08:46. > :08:47.brief in work and pensions, you could see people being given bigger
:08:48. > :08:54.roles. Helen is pretty sure. We could see people being given bigger
:08:54. > :08:57.told it is not a Cabinet level reshuffle me it is under Secretary
:08:57. > :09:04.level, so maybe you could put Esther McVey into the Cabinet. Margot
:09:04. > :09:07.James, who you had here not that long ago, she is very impressive.
:09:07. > :09:11.What is impressive is that some long ago, she is very impressive.
:09:11. > :09:15.like Andrea Leadsom, who is really impressive, worked in the City,
:09:15. > :09:19.like Andrea Leadsom, who is really smart, really big on important
:09:19. > :09:23.intervention, she should still be in there, but she fell out with George
:09:23. > :09:32.Osborne when she dared to criticise him a few years ago over Ed Balls
:09:32. > :09:40.you are doing it on talent, Andrea expectation, if he does not do this
:09:41. > :09:48.now, a tonne of bricks will fall on him. He has got no excuse not to
:09:48. > :09:55.promote women, because the 2010 intake was disproportionately female
:09:55. > :09:59.in terms of talent. The question of the Tories and the struggle with
:09:59. > :10:03.women voters is a very deep and historic one. You have to remember
:10:03. > :10:07.that for most of the post-war period they had an advantage electorally
:10:07. > :10:11.amongst women voters. Many times Conservative government without
:10:11. > :10:14.amongst women voters. Many times women of this country. This began to
:10:14. > :10:20.change in the mid-1990s, and the question is, why has that happened?
:10:20. > :10:25.personalities at the top are now much more hostile to women, or less,
:10:25. > :10:27.personalities at the top are now Brent doubled to female voters?
:10:27. > :10:28.personalities at the top are now is such a deep historical trend
:10:28. > :10:35.personalities at the top are now I do not think one reshuffle will
:10:35. > :10:40.change it. -- or less competent civil. The English party conference
:10:40. > :10:46.season is over, do you share the consensus view that Ed Miliband
:10:46. > :10:51.season is over, do you share the out best of the three party leaders?
:10:51. > :10:56.I think I probably do, but his overall approval ratings are still
:10:56. > :10:59.minus 20, whereas Cameron's minus ten. And the more the recovery seems
:11:00. > :11:02.minus 20, whereas Cameron's minus to take place, and some of the
:11:02. > :11:07.latest figures are quite amazing, they certainly surprised me, you
:11:07. > :11:14.wonder whether Labour's tactic is right to put all their eggs into the
:11:14. > :11:18.living standards basket. I was looking at car sales, which are
:11:18. > :11:21.booming. If people start to feel better, and they don't yet, but
:11:21. > :11:29.booming. If people start to feel they were, it is tougher to go on
:11:29. > :11:32.about living standards. George Osborne's... You have Ed Miliband
:11:32. > :11:36.making a great thing about living standards, but then they say under
:11:36. > :11:43.their breath, this is global forces, outstripping wage increases. And
:11:43. > :11:46.you're absolutely right, as the economy improves, presumably that
:11:46. > :11:50.will be dealt with, but Miliband's argument will be that there are
:11:50. > :11:55.people suffering, and even if the economy recovers, they will still
:11:55. > :12:00.forces, it is difficult to blame the government for that. Body being
:12:00. > :12:06.noticed now, there is nothing worse for the leader of the opposition
:12:06. > :12:10.than to be not noticed. -- but he is being noticed now. It seems that he
:12:10. > :12:12.in many ways has set the political weather. Look at the number of
:12:12. > :12:18.references to the Labour leader weather. Look at the number of
:12:18. > :12:25.Mr Cameron's speech. And in Mr Obama's speech on a similar topic,
:12:25. > :12:31.living standards. Was the mentioning Ed Miliband?! Oh, he was using the
:12:31. > :12:37.same language, he has not gone that far. If I were Ed Miliband, I would
:12:37. > :12:40.be more worried now, because Labour through the kitchen sink at their
:12:40. > :12:44.conference. They came out with the biggest policy announcements they
:12:44. > :12:48.could, compulsory apprenticeships, the energy freeze on prices, and it
:12:49. > :12:53.generated a poll boost which has fizzled away within ten days. I
:12:54. > :12:56.generated a poll boost which has not know where they go from here.
:12:56. > :13:03.What is significant with Ed Miliband conference beaches, he has set the
:13:03. > :13:07.one nation Britain, and the problem with those speeches is people say,
:13:07. > :13:14.they are fine, they are academic, but what does it mean? What you
:13:14. > :13:16.they are fine, they are academic, now is an intellectual framework
:13:16. > :13:19.that translates into policies. The polls to watch are not the ones
:13:19. > :13:23.after the conferences, but at the end of the month when it has also
:13:23. > :13:27.pulled down. They will tell us where we are going. We will have to go
:13:27. > :13:31.ourselves now. Thank you to our guests. The Daily Politics will
:13:31. > :13:33.ourselves now. Thank you to our back tomorrow at noon on BBC Two,
:13:33. > :13:36.and I will be back on BBC One this time, same time, next week. If it is
:13:37. > :13:39.Sunday, it is the Sunday Politics.