:00:41. > :00:47.Morning, welcome to the veritable Sunday Politics. We have Alastair
:00:47. > :00:52.Charmichael. We'll ask him what Sunday Politics. We have Alastair
:00:52. > :00:57.Moore hadn't. Ken Clarke just keeps has that his predecessor Michael
:00:57. > :01:04.Moore hadn't. Ken Clarke just keeps going on and on and on. He'll bang
:01:04. > :01:06.Free of the shackles of Government, former Energy Secretary Chris Huhne
:01:06. > :01:13.will be with us. We'll ask him for Diane Abbott will join us. That
:01:13. > :01:18.nasty Ed Miliband sent her packing last week. We'll nined out why.
:01:18. > :01:23.In the capital, a report by the Conservatives on the London Assembly
:01:23. > :01:36.says we've misunderstood the problem of human trafficking and that men
:01:36. > :01:41.pundits who we try to shuffle out of a job but failed miserably, Mick
:01:41. > :01:50.watt, Miranda Green Andijan an Ganesh. They'll Tweet like mad as if
:01:50. > :01:59.Is Ed Miliband's Labour Party moving chid owe Cabinet reshuffle was seen
:01:59. > :02:08.a a shift to the lot of. Two have announced policy changes which could
:02:08. > :02:13.Pensions Secretary Rachel Reeves says Labour will be tougher on the
:02:13. > :02:16.Tories. While Tristram Hunt says Labour loves Tory-style free schools
:02:16. > :02:25.after all. Here he is on the BBC viewers. If you are a group of
:02:25. > :02:29.parents, social entrepreneurs, teachers, interested in setting
:02:29. > :02:32.parents, social entrepreneurs, school in areas where you need new
:02:32. > :02:34.school place, the Labour Government will be on your side. That's free
:02:34. > :02:40.enterprise and innovation. It will will be on your side. That's free
:02:41. > :02:46.be in areas of need. We have a school places crisis going on. It
:02:46. > :03:00.teachers in these schools. And accountability. What is going on
:03:00. > :03:07.with the Al Madina school is because of terrible mistakes with Michael
:03:07. > :03:11.changed, the change of tone is I'm not sure if the policies have
:03:11. > :03:13.changed, the change of tone is remarkable, both on welfare and
:03:13. > :03:16.changed, the change of tone is schools. A significant change of
:03:17. > :03:24.reshuffle on the Labour frontbench last week was init wered as a purge
:03:24. > :03:31.of Blair rights. It seemed to be a purge of anti-reform thinking.
:03:31. > :03:35.Rachel Reeves was not saying anythi different on substance but saying
:03:35. > :03:42.Labour will be tough than the Tories on welfare. You've seen that clip
:03:42. > :03:48.from Tristram, free schools will be allowed to be set up in areas of
:03:48. > :03:52.need. Greater oversight. But a completely different change of tone,
:03:52. > :03:58.we are on the side of parents and social entrepreneurs who want to set
:03:58. > :04:06.these up. A different change. Why are they doing this? On education,
:04:06. > :04:12.polarised. You've had the Michael department. This weekend, we've
:04:12. > :04:14.polarised. You've had the Michael leaked memos from one of Michael
:04:14. > :04:19.Gove's advisers which are extreme views about the state of education.
:04:19. > :04:25.And on the other side teaching unions. It hasn't led to a healthy
:04:25. > :04:30.debate which represents what parents want out of schools or employers.
:04:30. > :04:33.This is a huge move from the Labour Party to sound more reasonable.
:04:33. > :04:38.This is a huge move from the Labour have been silent on education which
:04:38. > :04:46.is a huge policy area on the left. Is this a focus group-driven change?
:04:46. > :04:52.They've seen the polls. Welfare reforms are hugery popular and free
:04:52. > :04:58.only apiece the focus groups by changing the policy substantially. I
:04:58. > :05:02.always thought a test for this Labour reshuffle was not whether Ed
:05:02. > :05:06.Miliband would promote Blair rights, it is clear he did, it is whether
:05:06. > :05:12.they would be allowed to be Blair rights. When Stephen Twigg carried
:05:12. > :05:16.the education portfolio it was clear his own views were closer to the
:05:16. > :05:21.Government than he was allowed to let on. He was constrained. There is
:05:21. > :05:25.no point of giving Tristram Hunt this job if he is not allowed to say
:05:25. > :05:29.what he thinks. I wouldn't mind betting privately he thinks free
:05:29. > :05:35.schools should be available beyond just areas of need. He hasn't yet
:05:35. > :05:44.defined need. It could be, we've run schools are so bad we need schools.
:05:44. > :05:56.If that is it, it is the same Asics itsing Government policy. In they
:05:56. > :06:00.unsatisfactory that's no different. He wanted to say he was in favour of
:06:00. > :06:06.higher educational standards and rigour, he had to tell the audience
:06:06. > :06:09.he has a Cambridge PhD to attack Michael Gove. That was difficult for
:06:09. > :06:18.Tristram Hunt he had to mention that. Is that worth something, a PhD
:06:18. > :06:24.from Cambridge? Obviously to him it is. He said they would demand proper
:06:24. > :06:34.teaching qualifications. That could teaching? Independent schools do not
:06:34. > :06:39.have to have teachers with formal teaching qualifications. I've never
:06:39. > :06:48.been to one? What about you? That decision by Michael Gove to allow
:06:48. > :06:54.free schools to employ nonunionised and non-trained people, so he has to
:06:54. > :06:58.Watch this space. The dust settled after the party resufficients. Do
:06:58. > :07:11.the Tories look a bit more like Britain. Do the Tories look more
:07:11. > :07:16.#4 With reshuffles, you're never really certain. There's whispers,
:07:16. > :07:22.rumours, guesses. But the only way to know it is underway is keeping
:07:22. > :07:28.beady eyes on a front door. Up until now, the only way we knew who was in
:07:28. > :07:31.and who was out was who came walking down this bit of Downing Street
:07:31. > :07:34.and who was out was who came walking a smile on their face after going to
:07:34. > :07:39.see the boss. The once who are to be sacked, they usually go round the
:07:39. > :07:47.back. Not this time. No, something new alerted us all. The-PM started
:07:47. > :07:51.can't remember a triple decker reshuffle where you've three parties
:07:51. > :07:57.changing ministerial teams at the resufficient happened on Twitter.
:07:57. > :08:05.Not that the press stopped watching the door as well. News was a bit
:08:05. > :08:10.Charmichael replaced Michael Moore, the first to be pounced on. I'm
:08:10. > :08:15.disappointed to be leaving office now but pleased at what I've been
:08:15. > :08:19.able to achieve in the last couple of years. Not as pleased as one
:08:19. > :08:35.imagines as the man receiving the welcome that went on, and on and
:08:35. > :08:42.simultaneously having Jeremy Browne, in a sense seen off the premises of
:08:42. > :08:58.the Home Office in conspiracy to let # Blowing hi Jude through a traffic
:08:58. > :09:02.Democrats. We tend to think they are herbivorous. Sacking a Cabinet
:09:02. > :09:05.Minister, another minister, Jeremy Browne. By lunch time, the Tory
:09:05. > :09:09.ranks were shifting too. The PM Browne. By lunch time, the Tory
:09:10. > :09:12.to boost the numbers of telegenic women walking into Government and
:09:12. > :09:21.turning perceptions around. He tipped a so-called flatcap to men
:09:21. > :09:24.backgrounds with room for some which fitted neither label but are friends
:09:24. > :09:30.of George Osborne. And, all the while, those new Tory ministers
:09:30. > :09:33.of George Osborne. And, all the learning of Labour's changes. Labour
:09:33. > :09:37.too knows the value of new young blood striding into the limelight.
:09:37. > :09:43.Again some with TV experience of that. Tristram Hunt and Gloria de
:09:43. > :09:47.peer row would be hard to describe as hard left. But Blairbrushing
:09:47. > :09:52.peer row would be hard to describe past out of the picture seemed to be
:09:52. > :09:58.the name of the day. Liam Byrne With Diane Abbott also gone, was
:09:58. > :10:00.this really a Blair right cull? It depends what you mean. Blair right
:10:00. > :10:04.used to mean someone who wanted depends what you mean. Blair right
:10:04. > :10:07.Blair to be leader of the Labour Party. Somebody who worked closely
:10:07. > :10:11.with him. Now it means sometimes people who believe in a certain
:10:11. > :10:14.with him. Now it means sometimes of ideologyies or ideas. There are
:10:14. > :10:18.still very much those kind of Blair rights within the party. But we
:10:18. > :10:21.still very much those kind of Blair seeing the group around Tony Blair
:10:21. > :10:27.are not long assassin flew enjoys as they once were. By evening, it was
:10:27. > :10:32.over. New bees were sharing the ministers quietly thanked commits
:10:32. > :10:46.raters. Or -- commiserators. Or ministers quietly thanked commits
:10:46. > :10:51.disified. How much much someone standing here might want it to be
:10:51. > :10:59.the case, you are unlikely to get someone coming out of that do going
:10:59. > :11:04."how could." And running off crying! And the brand, spanking new Scottish
:11:04. > :11:12.Secretary Alastair Charmichael joins us from Orkney on a line that hasn't
:11:12. > :11:17.been used since the fleet was used in the outbreak of World War I! I
:11:17. > :11:21.wasn't around at the time. I'm hearing you loud and clear. Why
:11:21. > :11:26.wasn't around at the time. I'm you agreed to run a department?
:11:26. > :11:30.wasn't around at the time. I'm you wanted to abolish six years
:11:30. > :11:31.wasn't around at the time. I'm Hello? Maybe our connections are not
:11:31. > :11:37.Charmichael. Can you hear me? I Hello? Maybe our connections are not
:11:37. > :11:42.hear you now. There was a nasty second there where you disappeared.
:11:42. > :11:44.Let me try the question again. Why have you agreed to run a department
:11:44. > :11:50.you wanted to abolish six years have you agreed to run a department
:11:50. > :11:54.Because this is the, probably one of the most important jobs in British
:11:54. > :12:00.politics at the moment. To ensure that Scotland remains part of the
:12:00. > :12:06.UK. Even when I was talking about the reconfiguration of rep sen Taigs
:12:06. > :12:10.of Scotland -- representation of Scotland within Whitehall, there was
:12:10. > :12:14.always a job to be done. That is true in spades now. I will focus on
:12:14. > :12:18.making sure the UK Government has a real voice in that debate. What
:12:18. > :12:19.making sure the UK Government has a you that Michael Moore didn't have?
:12:19. > :12:24.Look, I think Michael Moore did you that Michael Moore didn't have?
:12:24. > :12:32.excellent job. The work he did delivering the Edinburgh agreement
:12:32. > :12:40.clear legal and decisive referendum, the work delivering extra powers to
:12:40. > :12:47.substantial piece of work. I'm not friend of mine. I will say that
:12:47. > :12:48.substantial piece of work. I'm not we go forward into this, this is now
:12:48. > :12:52.about the actual debate itself. we go forward into this, this is now
:12:52. > :13:02.will be putting the case, with some passion, I hope, for Scotland to
:13:02. > :13:08.just some abstract debate about nationhood, sovereignty, this is a
:13:09. > :13:16.their livelihoods, the cost of their mortgage. That and an awful lot
:13:16. > :13:25.challenge. I understand that. But if you're being put in there to save
:13:25. > :13:30.the union, every pole has the no -- poll has the no campaign margin
:13:30. > :13:35.alley ahead. Mr Moore was doing pretty well to save the union. I
:13:35. > :13:42.suspect you've been given the job to Scotland? And lieu, you misread
:13:42. > :13:45.suspect you've been given the job to situation if you -- Andrew, you
:13:45. > :13:48.misread the situation new think anybody is going to be the person
:13:48. > :13:50.who will save the union. The people who will save the union are the
:13:50. > :13:54.people of Scotland if they turn who will save the union are the
:13:54. > :13:59.next year and vote to save the union. We have to put the case for
:13:59. > :14:05.that. That is what I will be doing. Look at the position of your own
:14:05. > :14:12.party. You came fourth in the last Scottish parentry elections. You
:14:12. > :14:18.were even behind the Conservatives. The latest poll has you still in
:14:18. > :14:22.fourth. Are you there because you're a bruiser and you will pep up the
:14:22. > :14:25.Liberal Democrats opportunity in Scotland. If I had a pound for
:14:25. > :14:30.everybody to referred to me as being Scotland. If I had a pound for
:14:30. > :14:34.a bruiser, I wouldn't need to be sitting here this morning. I could
:14:34. > :14:39.have retired by now. The truth of this, if I can address it once and
:14:39. > :14:45.for all, I have done probably one of the most complex and subtle jobs in
:14:45. > :14:51.three-and-a-half years, Liberal Democrat Chief Whip in a Coalition
:14:51. > :14:54.survived in that job a week, let alone three-and-a-half years, if I
:14:54. > :14:59.was the sort of person who went around picking unnecessary fights.
:14:59. > :15:04.So, can we just please forget about this business about being a bruiser.
:15:04. > :15:08.As far as the position of the party in the polls, this is true also
:15:08. > :15:11.As far as the position of the party the referendum vote, opinion polls
:15:11. > :15:14.are a snapshot. They are not a prediction of what will happen in
:15:14. > :15:20.the future. I will be out there putting the case. Neither the next
:15:20. > :15:25.election nor the referendum is one or lost yet. One of the things I
:15:25. > :15:32.really want to be guarding against because we are a good margin ahead
:15:32. > :15:40.today, 12 months out from the actual polling day, that it is in the bag.
:15:40. > :15:43.Believe me, Andrew, it is not. As you know, wasn't for the Liberal
:15:43. > :15:52.Democrats. Not just talking about the polls. You came fourth in the
:15:52. > :16:03.You said you were happy to facial ex-Salmond in a TV debade. Should
:16:03. > :16:15.David Cameron face him? I am happy debate. Should David Cameron face
:16:15. > :16:19.him? No, because that allows Alex Nationalists to portray this as
:16:19. > :16:23.him? No, because that allows Alex sort of contest or choice between a
:16:23. > :16:25.vision of Scottish social democracy and English conservativism, which it
:16:25. > :16:30.is not. This is a debate that has to is not. This is a debate that has to
:16:30. > :16:38.be held in Scotland about the future of Scotland amongst Scots. David
:16:38. > :16:43.Cameron has a very important part in Scotland's public life, but he is
:16:43. > :16:47.not Scottish and I think he will accept Commies edit himself in fact,
:16:47. > :16:57.the person who should be debating Darling. He has got a Scottish name
:16:57. > :17:04.wealthiest of Scotland at some stage in the past. Anyway, you described
:17:04. > :17:10.the campaign to keep the union together as lacking passion, were
:17:10. > :17:17.you referring to the campaign or referring to Alistair Darling. I
:17:17. > :17:23.think what I was saying is that referring to Alistair Darling. I
:17:24. > :17:30.we move into this new stage, and Alistair Darling said it himself, we
:17:30. > :17:35.are now campaigning for people Alistair Darling said it himself, we
:17:35. > :17:41.hearts because if you look at the range of papers the Government has
:17:41. > :17:50.published, it is pretty clear the arguments lie in relation to the
:17:50. > :17:55.head. I am not giving up the battle for the hearts and Scotland because
:17:56. > :17:57.there is a good strong case, as somebody who is proud to be Scottish
:17:58. > :18:03.and to be British, for Scotland somebody who is proud to be Scottish
:18:03. > :18:09.remain part of the UK. You come somebody who is proud to be Scottish
:18:09. > :18:14.distilleries and I understand you celebratory drink for your new post.
:18:14. > :18:21.Not a drop has touched my lips. celebratory drink for your new post.
:18:22. > :18:27.supporting local business! I will be making up for lost time on the
:18:27. > :18:28.supporting local business! I will be of November, I will be doing it
:18:28. > :18:34.supporting local business! I will be aid of Macmillan Cancer care and if
:18:34. > :18:39.website, they can donate. It is worthwhile. I cannot think of a
:18:39. > :18:50.better cause. One Cabinet minister who many thought might get Reef
:18:50. > :18:54.better cause. One Cabinet minister Clarke. Welcome to Sunday Politics.
:18:54. > :19:03.minorities, where did you fit in? I minorities, where did you fit in? I
:19:03. > :19:09.would describe myself as the elder statesman, to be polite, but it
:19:09. > :19:11.would describe myself as the elder difficult to replace them. I enjoy
:19:11. > :19:13.it. It is a great privilege to have a role in Cabinet and I will carry
:19:13. > :19:19.on as long as David wants me to a role in Cabinet and I will carry
:19:19. > :19:24.I have seen many reshuffles, they are dreadful and I seem to have
:19:24. > :19:30.survived them so far. Did David Cameron talk to you before this
:19:30. > :19:37.reshuffle? No, he didn't. I would have had expected a phone call,
:19:37. > :19:47.asking, how do you think about stepping down, but he didn't and my
:19:47. > :19:51.role is one of giving my wit and wisdom to the Cabinet and meetings
:19:51. > :19:56.of the Security Council so he has got to put up with me a bit longer.
:19:56. > :20:03.You said you are going to stand again at the next election, why
:20:03. > :20:05.You said you are going to stand you keep going? What do you hope to
:20:05. > :20:11.achieve in politics? I am mostly a political anorak, I have been since
:20:11. > :20:17.I was very small, by the process of politics but the older I get I get
:20:17. > :20:20.governance of the country and at the moment the combination of problems
:20:20. > :20:25.is quite appalling. The difficulty of tackling the modern world is
:20:25. > :20:28.is quite appalling. The difficulty difficult and I find it fascinating.
:20:29. > :20:30.The old argument that attracts every decent person into politics, you
:20:30. > :20:35.might be able sometimes to make decent person into politics, you
:20:35. > :20:38.bit of difference, and I try to decent person into politics, you
:20:38. > :20:40.that. I try not to hark back on decent person into politics, you
:20:40. > :20:43.experience but we will have a lot of tough problems which I think the
:20:43. > :20:50.Conservative Government will have to tackle. You opposed referenda on
:20:50. > :20:57.Maastricht, the Lisbon Treaty, you were even against one on Britain
:20:57. > :21:04.adopting the euro. It must follow that you are against the referenda
:21:04. > :21:13.on Britain's membership to the EU? I accountable to the long-term and
:21:13. > :21:19.representatives, but this is a minority now and my colleagues have
:21:19. > :21:23.firmly decided a referendum needs to be held to settle the question of
:21:23. > :21:28.Britain's relationship with the European Union which I think is
:21:28. > :21:32.Britain's relationship with the of the most important things in
:21:32. > :21:38.Britain's place in the modern world politicians are able to look after
:21:38. > :21:45.the living standards, the economy, the safety against terrorism. Last
:21:45. > :21:49.the living standards, the economy, summer you said that only extreme
:21:49. > :21:54.nationalists wanted a silly EU referendum. It follows your party
:21:54. > :22:00.must be full of extremely silly nationalists. The people who are
:22:00. > :22:07.desperate to have a referendum are all the people who actually want to
:22:07. > :22:12.referendum will involve the public and people like me have got to get
:22:12. > :22:15.across to the public, don't just feel angry about the last thing
:22:15. > :22:17.across to the public, don't just read in the newspaper about what the
:22:17. > :22:22.commission is or is not doing, do commission is or is not doing, do
:22:22. > :22:29.bear in mind this is our base in the modern world. We happen to be a
:22:29. > :22:36.leading member, almost as valuable and rich as the Americans, from
:22:36. > :22:40.influence in events. That is not just how the politicians get on
:22:40. > :22:48.influence in events. That is not politicians look after us when we
:22:48. > :22:52.spilling over from the Middle East, or we face public services being
:22:52. > :23:00.threatened. You didn't even turn up to vote for the bill which will
:23:00. > :23:04.threatened. You didn't even turn up engagements on the Friday concerned.
:23:04. > :23:07.It seemed to get through without my participation. You didn't want to be
:23:07. > :23:16.seen voting for something your heart Look, many of your colleagues I
:23:16. > :23:24.seen voting for something your heart interviewed say that if the choice
:23:24. > :23:29.was between the state -- the status quo with the European Union and
:23:29. > :23:33.leaving, they would leave. The truth is that you would vote to stay in
:23:33. > :23:41.even on the status quo, wouldn't supporting the EU to leave now if I
:23:41. > :23:45.got chance. I think our economy supporting the EU to leave now if I
:23:45. > :23:54.investment, as in Washington last been if we were outside the EU.
:23:54. > :24:01.investment, as in Washington last week. We are trying to roll forward
:24:01. > :24:05.the prospect of free trade and I have to reassure Americans that
:24:05. > :24:10.the prospect of free trade and I are not likely to leave the EU to
:24:10. > :24:15.That is true but it also needs reform. The cry for reform, which is
:24:15. > :24:22.particularly Germany, is a good reform. The cry for reform, which is
:24:22. > :24:25.Even if David Cameron came back reform. The cry for reform, which is
:24:25. > :24:34.nothing from Brussels, you would still vote to stay in, correct?
:24:34. > :24:39.one which is dwindling in comparison with others, in the modern world it
:24:39. > :24:43.would be dangerous. I also think the dangers of the Middle East and the
:24:43. > :24:54.dangers of some of the countries disengage. I will take that as a
:24:54. > :25:00.strengthen the case, and of some members of the public don't agree
:25:00. > :25:06.persuaded when David delivers his reforms. The latest poll gives
:25:06. > :25:10.Labour a ten point lead over the Tories and the reason why it has a
:25:10. > :25:15.ten point lead is because UKIP are up there with 18% of the vote and
:25:15. > :25:20.ten point lead is because UKIP are the Tory vote has slumped in the
:25:20. > :25:26.Paul to 27%. How would you see off UKIP? By saying you need a strong
:25:26. > :25:30.Paul to 27%. How would you see off and effective Government. We faced
:25:31. > :25:36.terrible problems. Every Government I have been in has been behind in
:25:36. > :25:40.the polls. This Government is not as popular as the previous Government I
:25:40. > :25:42.have served in under the three previous prime ministers. When you
:25:42. > :25:46.get an election, people have to previous prime ministers. When you
:25:46. > :25:53.themselves who do we want to decide the issues of war and peace in this
:25:53. > :25:59.country? Who do we want to get us out of our economic problems. I
:25:59. > :26:03.don't think Ed Miliband is up to it. That generalised stuff will not
:26:03. > :26:08.don't think Ed Miliband is up to it. off UKIP. People will not listen to
:26:08. > :26:11.that. When people answer an opinion poll, they tell you how annoyed
:26:11. > :26:16.that. When people answer an opinion are by something that has recently
:26:16. > :26:20.upset them, but people are more sensible than this. Every Government
:26:20. > :26:27.I have served in has been behind in the polls. At a general election you
:26:28. > :26:36.have to mobilise the public to start thinking, who do we want to govern
:26:36. > :26:45.us? They did take over a calamitous important problems to be decided
:26:45. > :26:49.going forward. UKIP represents anti-immigration, anti-foreigners,
:26:49. > :26:52.anti-Europe, anti-politics but I don't think it will get 18% of the
:26:52. > :27:25.Thank you. Once upon a time, a politician whose career ended in
:27:25. > :27:29.disgrace might choose to lie low for a while, perhaps to spend a bit
:27:29. > :27:31.disgrace might choose to lie low for time tending the tulips and doing
:27:31. > :27:32.the odd bit of charity work. Not Chris Huhne. He walked free from
:27:32. > :27:35.prison only five months ago but Chris Huhne. He walked free from
:27:35. > :27:39.former Energy Secretary is already back in the public eye - a column in
:27:39. > :27:43.the Guardian, a job with a renewable interview. So is he working on a
:27:43. > :27:47.political rehabilitation? Chris Politics. The answer to that is
:27:47. > :27:50.clearly know, and thank you for inviting me back. You have set your
:27:50. > :27:55.career in politics is over so what does the future hold for you? I
:27:55. > :27:57.career in politics is over so what happy doing what I am doing, I am
:27:57. > :28:03.passionate about green energy and climate change, so I am doing things
:28:03. > :28:09.on that front in terms of business non-governmental organisations,
:28:09. > :28:09.on that front in terms of business I am doing a column for the Guardian
:28:09. > :28:14.on Mondays. You obviously get a I am doing a column for the Guardian
:28:14. > :28:20.of material from the Sunday Politics to write about. Have you embarked on
:28:20. > :28:24.political rehabilitation? It was clear from the point of view of
:28:24. > :28:29.political rehabilitation? It was George when I was sentenced, he
:28:29. > :28:33.rehabilitating you, because I had not offended for ten years, it was
:28:33. > :28:39.actually about stopping people like you, Andrew, Ron doing the same
:28:39. > :28:44.thing. It was a deterrent effect for the public. That is I think why
:28:44. > :28:47.thing. It was a deterrent effect for prosecution was brought. I had not
:28:47. > :29:17.offended for ten years on this, rehabilitate yourself in the public?
:29:17. > :29:23.coalition to the bitter end? Or should they re-establish their own
:29:23. > :29:30.Coalition agreement is for the whole Parliament, and the Lib Dems are
:29:30. > :29:33.going to stay, and should stay. What would be a good result for the Lib
:29:33. > :29:41.Dems in 2015? The loss of ten, would be a good result for the Lib
:29:41. > :29:46.interesting election because I think you will have essentially three
:29:46. > :29:54.party leaders, all of whom are negative ratings so it will be a
:29:54. > :30:01.battle between the walking wounded. In those circumstances, in my view,
:30:01. > :30:12.the Lib Dems can come out very well. But you will lose seats, won't
:30:12. > :30:17.the Liberal Democrats do badly in next year's European elections,
:30:17. > :30:17.the Liberal Democrats do badly in could come fourth on fifth behind
:30:17. > :30:25.leadership be in jeopardy? I've could come fourth on fifth behind
:30:25. > :30:31.in countless cycles where we've could come fourth on fifth behind
:30:31. > :30:35.very low poll ratings. The normal pickup to the subsequent general
:30:35. > :30:40.election on average has been 10 percentage points. So he's not in
:30:40. > :30:41.jeopardy? I think Nick will be there at the next general election. I
:30:41. > :30:45.think he'll lead the party into at the next general election. I
:30:45. > :30:48.next general election. I expect we'll do much better than most
:30:48. > :30:52.people think. If we are heading we'll do much better than most
:30:52. > :30:57.another hung Parliament, which is Let's be honest, you'd rather be in
:30:57. > :31:01.coalition with the Labour Party Let's be honest, you'd rather be in
:31:01. > :31:06.have a repeat of the Conservatives? One of the key things I sawed to
:31:06. > :31:10.colleagues, whatever your personal preference, I used to be a Labour
:31:10. > :31:15.Party member, you can derive from that I'm on the left of centre of
:31:15. > :31:21.the party. I always said to my colleagues in the party, it is
:31:21. > :31:24.the we are in politics because we are Liberal Democrats, not because
:31:24. > :31:29.we are either Conservatives or second best Labour. If you don't
:31:29. > :31:33.take that view, you don't have any bargaining position when it comes to
:31:33. > :31:38.coalition. You have to be able, genuinely, to do a coalition with
:31:38. > :31:42.either of the other parties. I understand that, but you'd prefer
:31:42. > :31:46.Labour? Your personal preference really should not come into this. It
:31:46. > :31:53.is about making sure you get the best possible deal for the things
:31:53. > :31:56.you get that with one party rather than another, that's fine. You stand
:31:56. > :32:00.up for Liberal Democrat values, than another, that's fine. You stand
:32:00. > :32:04.for Conservative or Labour second best values. You said you're keeping
:32:04. > :32:10.up your interest in energy matters. Is Ed Miliband right to promise
:32:11. > :32:13.up your interest in energy matters. temporary price freeze? There's
:32:13. > :32:18.up your interest in energy matters. pop ewe louse posturing. It is not a
:32:18. > :32:23.sensible policy. It was tried in California in 2,000 and 2001 which
:32:23. > :32:28.led to blackouts. We had the Prime Minister promising we should sift
:32:28. > :32:35.everybody automatically to the unfortunately we're at the stage in
:32:35. > :32:41.the political cycle where we are getting clap trap. You're against
:32:41. > :32:45.the freeze? It is a bad idea when we are trying to encourage investment.
:32:45. > :32:50.When the market can give us some of the lowest gas and electricity
:32:51. > :32:54.son-in-law of the lowest? Not our base price? The other European Ian
:32:54. > :32:58.prices are only higher because they put a lot more taxes on to it? Our
:32:58. > :33:04.base energy prices are among the highest in Europe? No, if you look
:33:04. > :33:06.at EU comparisons in what goes out to people's households. That's after
:33:06. > :33:10.all the taxes have been put on them? to people's households. That's after
:33:10. > :33:51.green taxes is George Osborne with should no better. One the-hip ok
:33:51. > :34:00.not want it. We do not need it to agreement because the Conservatives
:34:00. > :34:02.not want it. We do not need it to electricity system. It was a revenue
:34:02. > :34:07.raising measure by the Tories. It set off a whole load of hairs about
:34:07. > :34:12.green taxes which are now coming home to roost. Final point to you,
:34:12. > :34:18.wish we'd more time to talk, you're a big supporter of Leveson-style
:34:18. > :34:20.press regulation. Will you stop writing for The Guardian if it
:34:20. > :34:21.refuses to sign up to the Leveson writing for The Guardian if it
:34:22. > :34:24.charter? I think that's neither writing for The Guardian if it
:34:25. > :34:30.nor there. The Guardian gives me a writing for The Guardian if it
:34:30. > :34:32.great platform. If it doesn't sign up to what you believe in will
:34:33. > :34:38.great platform. If it doesn't sign support it? No because I'm sure
:34:39. > :34:41.they'll allow me to make that that point. I think newspapers will sign
:34:42. > :34:44.they'll allow me to make that that up for it. They've had a collapse in
:34:44. > :34:45.they'll allow me to make that that public trust and confidence in
:34:45. > :34:47.recent years. Unparalleled. public trust and confidence in
:34:48. > :34:50.need a third party public trust and confidence in
:34:50. > :34:53.say these guys have cleaned public trust and confidence in
:34:54. > :34:56.act. If they are going to get trust back and they will.
:34:56. > :34:58.act. If they are going to get trust haven't signed up, which
:34:58. > :34:59.act. If they are going to get trust you can come back and we'll talk
:35:00. > :35:06.about it. You're watching the Sunday politics.
:35:07. > :35:24.Coming up later: A burden on talk
:35:24. > :35:26.Coming up later: A burden on public services or an addition which could
:35:26. > :35:30.benefit us all? We'll be looking at the findings of
:35:30. > :35:32.a Kent County Council report which assesses the possible impact of
:35:32. > :35:39.Romanian and Bulgarian immigration on the county.
:35:39. > :35:42.Joining me in the studio today are Tracey Crouch, the Conservative MP
:35:42. > :35:44.for Chatham and Aylesford, and Roger Latchford, the leader of the UK
:35:44. > :35:49.Independence Party, and therefore leader of the opposition, on Kent
:35:49. > :35:52.County Council. Welcome to you both. Now, it's just too good an
:35:52. > :35:55.opportunity not to ask you both about the announcement last week by
:35:55. > :35:59.the leader of Roger's party, Nigel Farage, that he's planning to stand
:35:59. > :36:02.as an MP at the next general election. And — Tories beware — he's
:36:02. > :36:05.eyeing up a seat in Kent. Thanet South has been mentioned, and he
:36:05. > :36:12.also says he's been considering Folkestone and Hythe.
:36:12. > :36:16.This must be quite worrying for Conservatives in the Southeast? We
:36:16. > :36:22.will have to wait and see what he decides. I think many of us across
:36:22. > :36:26.the south—east are very proud of the record of government and where we
:36:26. > :36:32.stand on European issues so we will have to wait and see what he
:36:32. > :36:41.decides. This could highlight a problem of relying on Nigel. We do
:36:41. > :36:49.not rely on them. We are not a 1—person party. Where does that
:36:49. > :36:54.leave us? At the conference, Nigel made it quite clear that he will not
:36:54. > :37:01.declare his intentions until after the European election. See as having
:37:01. > :37:09.some fun at the Conservatives' expense. Look at what happened. We
:37:09. > :37:14.saw Paul Carter's face at the time. He was worried he would lose
:37:14. > :37:18.control. It is interesting in terms of political environment across the
:37:18. > :37:20.county and we'll have to wait and see what happens across the coming
:37:20. > :37:29.months. This is democracy and people have every right to vote how they
:37:29. > :37:31.wish. They spoke at the local elections and we will have to wait
:37:31. > :37:38.and see what happens at the general election. We are proud of our record
:37:38. > :37:44.in government and I think people judge us on the fact that we're
:37:44. > :37:48.making a difference. Now, they were once the hub of the
:37:48. > :37:51.community — a bustling place for people to shop and meet. But now,
:37:51. > :37:54.many of our town centres are home to empty shops and a dwindling
:37:54. > :37:59.footfall. In the South East, more town centre shops have closed in the
:37:59. > :38:02.last year than in any other part of the UK. So, can our local
:38:02. > :38:03.politicians reverse this worrying trend? Bhavani Vadde went to Dover
:38:03. > :38:22.to look at one radical idea. Once upon a time in a land not so
:38:22. > :38:32.far away, the butcher, the baker, were part and parcel of a thriving
:38:32. > :38:36.High Street. But now town centres are struggling and Dover is no
:38:36. > :38:40.exception. This week, Dover District Council debated whether to ask the
:38:40. > :38:46.government for a new power to impose a local levy on the large storage to
:38:46. > :38:56.help smaller high—street shops. But the idea was rejected. This man
:38:56. > :39:00.thinks it was the wrong decision. It is sucking the life out of town. If
:39:00. > :39:03.they raised money from out—of—town supermarkets, it could be spent on
:39:03. > :39:08.regenerating parts of the town which really need it. The whole of the
:39:09. > :39:12.pedestrian precinct could do with some money being spent to make it a
:39:12. > :39:19.more attractive place to walk around. A levy is already being
:39:19. > :39:23.charged in Northern Ireland and Scotland on large supermarkets. The
:39:23. > :39:30.revenue is used to help small businesses and public services.
:39:30. > :39:37.Dover councillor Peter Wallace put forward a motion for a levy of his
:39:37. > :39:44.miss rates paid by large retailers. He thinks it could raise up to £1
:39:45. > :39:47.million. We could use the money to give lower business rates to shops
:39:47. > :39:54.to help keep them going and free parking. We are desperate for a high
:39:54. > :40:01.turnover. We need as many people as Canterbury and other places. Free
:40:01. > :40:06.parking would really attract people. In Scotland and Northern Ireland, it
:40:06. > :40:09.has not put food prices up in supermarkets. No jobs have been lost
:40:09. > :40:15.and it has worked. We don't have to be the guinea pig for this. Six
:40:15. > :40:20.other councils in England are discussing similar action. The
:40:20. > :40:26.campaign group Local Works once local authorities to submit
:40:27. > :40:33.proposals to government under the 2007 sustainable communities act.
:40:33. > :40:43.The cost of this is absolutely tiny. It is less than 1000 of big
:40:43. > :40:52.companies revenues. The revenues it will generate for local communities
:40:52. > :41:03.will be very significant. Margate's town centre was the focus of a make
:41:03. > :41:07.over. She recommended encouraging independent start—ups. It seems that
:41:07. > :41:11.is not enough to ensure the health of high streets. It is not just
:41:11. > :41:17.independent shops disappearing from the High Street. The number of
:41:17. > :41:23.branded stores shutting down has risen as well. In the south—east
:41:23. > :41:27.last year, we had the most net closures of retail chain shops. We
:41:27. > :41:33.lost around 400 stores across the region. Back at this cafe, these
:41:33. > :41:40.customers think something needs to be done to boost the fortunes of
:41:40. > :41:50.Dover's town centre. If they want to make it like it used to be, the
:41:50. > :41:56.changes we have had are not good. It has gone down and down. It is not
:41:56. > :42:03.lovely like it used to be. We must ensure we do not have empty shops.
:42:03. > :42:08.The empty shops need to be tidied up to make it look a little more
:42:08. > :42:13.attractive. We should generally try to bring business into the
:42:13. > :42:18.south—east. High streets need help if they are ever to return to their
:42:18. > :42:26.heyday. Why aren't councils chomping at the idea of a local tax to help
:42:26. > :42:29.them do just that? I'm joined now by Councillor Paul
:42:29. > :42:32.Watkins, leader of Dover District Council. His party rejected that
:42:32. > :42:37.idea of the council imposing a levy on larger shops to support a town
:42:37. > :42:43.centre revival. The first question is why? We have taken a pragmatic
:42:43. > :42:51.local approach. This is supposed to be a local initiative. This is a
:42:51. > :42:56.local response. We have a town centre scheme of our own which we
:42:56. > :43:00.are trying to bring forward is to encourage larger shop is to the town
:43:00. > :43:03.centre. There is a potential waterfront development as well which
:43:03. > :43:12.will bring vitality back to the town centre. One man said you were
:43:12. > :43:16.sucking the life out of the town. They want their lovely little town
:43:16. > :43:24.back. What you have done so far doesn't appear to have worked. We
:43:24. > :43:33.have announced a multiplex cinema scheme coming soon in the town
:43:33. > :43:36.centre. And restaurants and so on. What is wrong with the principle of
:43:36. > :43:42.charging huge supermarket companies who can afford it in order to do
:43:42. > :43:50.something radical like give people free parking. They will come to the
:43:51. > :43:56.shops name. This is part of a bigger problem. This is a gesture really
:43:56. > :44:02.and the real issue is business rates on town centre shops. We will
:44:02. > :44:12.support any campaign that takes the relief or supports town centre shops
:44:12. > :44:16.in the uniform business rate. I don't understand why you reject the
:44:16. > :44:24.idea. It sounds like it could be to do with party politics. It has
:44:24. > :44:31.worked elsewhere. It has worked in Northern Ireland and Scotland. Why
:44:31. > :44:37.not give it a go? There is only one supermarket in the area that this
:44:37. > :44:39.would apply to. The money gained from it would not be enough to do
:44:39. > :44:48.the types of things the public indicate. The estimates are £1
:44:48. > :44:51.million. Those figures are wrong. There is only one supermarket and
:44:51. > :44:58.the figures represented their don't add up to that. There is no way Eric
:44:58. > :45:08.Pickles will pass a new taxation law and even if you did, they would want
:45:08. > :45:13.their take out of this as well. This highlights that the government
:45:13. > :45:17.effort to regenerate town centres has failed so far. I don't agree
:45:17. > :45:26.with that. This is early is important we support our high
:45:26. > :45:29.streets. There is a lot of work going on in one of the high streets
:45:29. > :45:32.in the border of my constituency to make sure there is a good mix of
:45:33. > :45:41.shops and attract people to come there. It is a radical idea, isn't
:45:41. > :45:47.it? I think it is right that we don't burden big businesses. It
:45:47. > :45:57.would be something like 1000th of their revenue. They already pay
:45:57. > :46:03.corporation tax, business tax. We are talking about supermarkets here.
:46:03. > :46:09.This is an issue where you don't want to deter big businesses which
:46:09. > :46:16.employ a lot of people who spend money in the local economy. There is
:46:16. > :46:26.evidence that supermarkets take jobs from the local community. A
:46:26. > :46:30.supermarket will employ probably a hundred people who will make money
:46:30. > :46:34.and take it into the local economy. There is a mix of small shops which
:46:34. > :46:44.might lose employees as a consequence of big business. And you
:46:44. > :46:47.are not concerned about those? This proposal has been rejected in
:46:47. > :46:53.Bristol and Gloucester and I think it is the right decision to reject
:46:53. > :47:05.extra taxes on businesses who already face a huge tax burden. I
:47:05. > :47:14.have made this quite clear. I am surprised by Tracey's response. I
:47:14. > :47:23.strongly support this idea. Anything we can do to encourage high streets
:47:23. > :47:34.to survive, basically, this scheme, to me, was a gimmick. The top end of
:47:34. > :47:41.Margate High Street is derelict. I believe that the larger supermarkets
:47:41. > :47:45.can afford an additional levy, provided it is ring fenced by
:47:45. > :47:52.district councils to take away parking charges in the high streets.
:47:52. > :48:00.So, you as the UKIP opposition leader on Kent County Council will
:48:01. > :48:05.support Labour in Dover? Yes. This is not politics, it is what is best
:48:05. > :48:13.for people. If I want to see the High Street survive, and the old and
:48:13. > :48:17.frail who don't have cars and can't go out of town and rely on local
:48:17. > :48:23.shops, they can only do it if those shops survive. Let's look at it
:48:23. > :48:28.again. I know there should be government approval but the fact
:48:28. > :48:36.that it has failed in the past doesn't mean to say it can't be
:48:36. > :48:41.reconsidered for the future. So, something needs to be done.
:48:41. > :48:47.Something has to be done for the future of high streets. It is
:48:47. > :48:50.important that there is a reason for people to come into high streets and
:48:50. > :48:59.stop I'm just not convinced that levying an extra tax on big business
:48:59. > :49:02.will do any good. Now, the migration of Romanians and
:49:02. > :49:05.Bulgarians would have both positive and negative economic impacts,
:49:05. > :49:08.according to a new report by Kent County Council. It looks at what
:49:08. > :49:11.might happen next year when restrictions on work are lifted for
:49:11. > :49:15.people from both those European countries. But the numbers may
:49:15. > :49:18.provide fuel for both sides in what is already a heated debate. The
:49:18. > :49:21.report estimates the influx of workers could add £3 million to the
:49:21. > :49:25.cost of public services in Kent, but it also calculates it could bring
:49:25. > :49:31.£70 million worth of benefits to the national economy. Let's cross back
:49:31. > :49:33.to Dover, where we're now joined by Councillor Martin Whybrow, the Green
:49:33. > :49:39.Party councillor on Kent County Council. First of all, why should
:49:39. > :49:41.Kent have to take that hit of £3 million in order to bring £70
:49:41. > :49:53.million to the rest of the Well, I think the first thing to
:49:53. > :49:59.point out is that this is an estimate. I am not even sure that it
:49:59. > :50:06.is an estimate. It is quite a strange report. On one hand, it is
:50:06. > :50:10.evenhanded. It points out that immigrants are light users of public
:50:10. > :50:16.services and there are economic benefits from immigration. But,
:50:16. > :50:23.there is a big hole in the report. There is a huge question over
:50:23. > :50:33.numbers. Yes, the report says this is a series of what Fs.
:50:33. > :50:43.Particularly, the two parties represented here... The principle
:50:43. > :50:49.that Kent County Council should take a hit to benefit the national
:50:49. > :50:57.economy. Is that fair? The report says there is the potential for
:50:57. > :51:03.additional costs because of public services used by an influx of
:51:03. > :51:11.immigrants. Overall, the report is evenhanded. It points out the
:51:11. > :51:20.benefits as well. It points out costs as well. The added pressure
:51:20. > :51:23.for places at schools. Housing. Your party believes immigration is good
:51:23. > :51:30.for society but we have limited resources. We can't afford these
:51:30. > :51:38.people, can we? Let's put it into context. The immigration question is
:51:38. > :51:43.put into the political spotlight by certain parties. There are many
:51:43. > :51:49.pressures on public services and schools and social housing and a lot
:51:49. > :51:55.of the time immigration is the easiest thing to grasp at. Put into
:51:55. > :52:04.the context of cuts, 40% cuts in five years from 2010, weighed up
:52:04. > :52:17.against the cost of any additional burden of immigration then you see
:52:17. > :52:26.the other side of the argument. Your Southeast chair disagreed with the
:52:26. > :52:32.report saying that £70 million of benefits could be brought. I had a
:52:32. > :52:39.long discussion with the leader of Kent County Council. I realise that
:52:39. > :52:45.a paper must be written but I do not believe the figures in it. I don't
:52:45. > :52:55.like the figures. You like today £3 million. I would even question that.
:52:55. > :53:03.I think it could be much higher. In this report, it identifies that
:53:03. > :53:09.these immigrants provided that they come... This is our point. UKIP
:53:09. > :53:15.would support immigration provided that those immigrants come in, work,
:53:15. > :53:21.pay their taxes, national insurance and contribute to the economy. But
:53:21. > :53:28.they have identified at the jobs as being domestic service, holding and
:53:28. > :53:39.labouring. We have a high unemployment rate of indigenous
:53:39. > :53:44.people. Actually, it says that migrant workers would be light users
:53:44. > :53:50.of public service and are unlikely to use our hospitals. The economic
:53:50. > :53:52.benefits would outweigh the cost. The trouble is, your party likes to
:53:52. > :54:08.pick certain figures and prey on people's fears. We are clearly in
:54:08. > :54:17.support of immigration, per se. But we want to make sure that immigrants
:54:17. > :54:20.are not a burden on the country. We know the immigration subject has
:54:20. > :54:26.drawn many people over to UKIP. Immigration has always been a
:54:26. > :54:34.difficult subject for government, no matter which political party is in
:54:34. > :54:35.power. I agree that immigration is good for the country but
:54:35. > :54:45.uncontrolled immigration is not. We have seen a failure to control
:54:45. > :54:48.immigration in recent years. We, in government, have tried to get to
:54:48. > :54:54.grips with that. We have seen positive changes and reforms. An
:54:54. > :54:59.Eastern European immigration, which is what we're talking about, I was
:54:59. > :55:03.an adviser in opposition when the first set of countries joined Europe
:55:03. > :55:10.and we made it clear that there had to the controls. The trouble is your
:55:10. > :55:19.party is changing its language to bring voters back. You concerned
:55:19. > :55:23.about the tone of the recently? We have not reacted or responded to
:55:23. > :55:31.UKIP. They have raised and issue about immigration but it is a
:55:31. > :55:35.national issue. And now a round up of the other
:55:35. > :55:41.political events that you might have missed this week with Ed Baranski.
:55:41. > :55:47.With some of the country's highest train fares in the south—east,
:55:47. > :55:51.commuters were offered some relief this week. The government will cap
:55:51. > :55:56.any rise at 6%. Norman this week. The government will cap
:55:56. > :56:03.been appointed Home Office minister. In 2006, he claimed that David Kelly
:56:03. > :56:09.was murdered and covered up. Now, he says that is history and looks
:56:09. > :56:25.forward to working with Theresa May. Tim Lawton was issued with a
:56:25. > :56:28.harassment warning. He has clearly lost the plot when it comes to
:56:28. > :56:36.distinction between the victim and perpetrator. A village roundabout
:56:36. > :56:47.received a special prize. The Kent roundabout was proclaimed roundabout
:56:47. > :56:52.of the year. What did you make of the row about
:56:52. > :56:59.Norman Baker's promotion? He says he will work constructively. I have to
:56:59. > :57:04.say, I have a great deal of respect for him. We get on well. Were you
:57:04. > :57:08.surprised by his appointment, for him. We get on well. Were you
:57:08. > :57:18.his history with the David Kelly Brook? I'm sure he will go and do
:57:18. > :57:30.his best. He will keep her on her toes, if nothing else. More she on
:57:30. > :57:33.his. You said that you reckon you could support labour in Dover
:57:33. > :57:46.against the Conservatives. Any alliances you would be happy to
:57:46. > :57:53.form? In a word, no. Would you advocate a UKIP person standing
:57:53. > :57:59.against Tracy? I regret to say that it is our intention to put a
:57:59. > :58:06.candidate in every seat. Will you stand for Parliament? No, I am too
:58:06. > :58:08.old. That's all we've got time for from
:58:08. > :58:29.the South East this week. My commentators calling it the purge of
:58:29. > :58:33.the Blairites, but one poor lamb who fell victim to this perch was Diane
:58:34. > :58:39.Abbott, not somebody who worshipped at the altar of Tony Blair. Life on
:58:39. > :58:43.the backbenches means she can pursue other interests such as attending
:58:43. > :58:52.the Cheltenham literary Festival, and where she joins us now. Welcome.
:58:52. > :58:59.Why did Ed Miliband fire you? He think the thing that did it for
:58:59. > :59:05.Why did Ed Miliband fire you? He was me coming out on Syria. This was
:59:05. > :59:05.Why did Ed Miliband fire you? He a purge of the Blairites, how did
:59:05. > :59:10.you become collateral damage? I a purge of the Blairites, how did
:59:10. > :59:12.no idea but the fact that I was a purge of the Blairites, how did
:59:12. > :59:19.one member of the front bench to go public about my concerns on Syria
:59:19. > :59:24.probably tipped my enemies in the party machinery over the edge. But
:59:24. > :59:27.he went your way on Syria, in the end he agreed with your line on
:59:27. > :59:33.Syria so why would that be for dismissal? I agree with you - you're
:59:33. > :59:39.fired. Because I actually spoke dismissal? I agree with you - you're
:59:39. > :59:48.and it was the fact that I spoke up, which was like a pebble falling
:59:48. > :59:52.and it was the fact that I spoke up, forest or something. I am glad I
:59:52. > :00:07.spoke up on Syria. He doesn't like people around them than who are
:00:07. > :00:14.outspoken, who speak their minds? I think he's convinced he needs people
:00:15. > :00:21.who read from the scripts. People increasingly upset that even though
:00:21. > :00:24.who read from the scripts. People I was speaking party policy, I was
:00:24. > :00:30.reading from the script. Since Mr Miliband bid you farewell, you've
:00:30. > :00:38.said he's doing his best. Is his best good enough? I am sure it will
:00:38. > :00:43.be. I've always said the Labour Party chose the right Miliband.
:00:43. > :00:45.be. I've always said the Labour will remain loyal to him on the
:00:45. > :00:51.backbenches. You're going to be loyal? However, I want to join in
:00:51. > :00:57.the debate. You're going to be loyal? Absolutely. I was loyal both
:00:57. > :00:59.in public and private when others were bitching about him behind the
:00:59. > :01:05.from the backbenches, I hope to were bitching about him behind the
:01:05. > :01:09.involved in the debate particularly around nick policy. Et's see how
:01:09. > :01:12.loyal you are. You must be happy with all this new tough talk on
:01:12. > :01:22.welfare and free schools? Well, with all this new tough talk on
:01:22. > :01:28.think both Rachel and Tristram are very talented. We're going to have
:01:28. > :01:32.to see how this all plays out. The issue of free schools, they are
:01:32. > :01:34.to see how this all plays out. The thing. But diminishing the role
:01:34. > :01:34.to see how this all plays out. The local authorities is another. There
:01:34. > :01:43.need strong local authorities. I'm local authorities is another. There
:01:43. > :01:47.sure Tristram will be aware of that. As for welfare, I'm sure Rachel
:01:47. > :01:53.knows some of the cuts the Tories have made have been counter prod
:01:53. > :01:57.ublingtive in -- productive in terms of spending. You wouldn't call that
:01:58. > :02:04.your full-hearted endorsement, would you? What are you on, and lieu?
:02:04. > :02:08.your full-hearted endorsement, would haven't seen the detail of Rachel's
:02:08. > :02:13.new position. You have to wait and see the detail. It is in the papers.
:02:13. > :02:17.You haven't stopped reading the papers. It was the Observer. When
:02:17. > :02:21.will you announce you're running for Mayor of London? I have no plans to
:02:21. > :02:26.announce that I'm running for Mayor Mayor of London? I have no plans to
:02:26. > :02:30.of London. No plans. That's what Michael his I will Tyne used to
:02:30. > :02:31.of London. No plans. That's what me. He had no plans to run against
:02:31. > :02:38.Margaret Thatcher. Are these the same kind of plans you have? I know.
:02:38. > :02:45.No, no. I have no plans. You know going for it. Everybody knows you're
:02:45. > :02:56.going for it. Just fess up to your old mate! ! I have no plans to run.
:02:56. > :03:03.If you did run, who would be, what would be your biggest threat other
:03:03. > :03:13.than yourself? I think there's a lot of very talented candidates, David
:03:13. > :03:18.They are all talented. I would have to weigh up the field. What do you
:03:18. > :03:20.think your chances would be of getting the taxi drivers' vote?
:03:20. > :03:28.Well, you know, Andrew, some of getting the taxi drivers' vote?
:03:28. > :03:33.most loyal viewers of This Week getting the taxi drivers' vote?
:03:33. > :03:38.were taxi drivers and their wives. I'm not frightened of reaching out
:03:38. > :03:43.to middle England. You will find if you walk around London sub usual ya,
:03:43. > :03:47.they all know me and they all love This Week. Love This Week. I thought
:03:47. > :03:53.you were going to say they all love you. One person who loves you, is
:03:53. > :03:57.Michael Portillo. He wasn't a happy chappie on Thursday night. You can't
:03:57. > :04:03.see it but you can hear. This is what he said. I was disappointed for
:04:03. > :04:07.her. She had decided to leave this something else in politics. She
:04:07. > :04:11.wanted to do something serious. something else in politics. She
:04:11. > :04:14.had taken what appeared to be a something else in politics. She
:04:14. > :04:19.position but taken it extremely serious and was committed to the
:04:20. > :04:29.issues. I'm quite disappointed for her. Why would Ed Miliband do such a
:04:29. > :04:37.thing. You just mentioned about London mayor, did Diane not ask
:04:37. > :04:39.thing. You just mentioned about Someone who's an eminent person
:04:39. > :04:42.thing. You just mentioned about this programme, I don't know how he
:04:42. > :04:47.could do that. I think Michael's missing you. Are you free this
:04:47. > :04:52.Thursday night? Make him a happy man, come back to the fold. I think
:04:52. > :04:57.I may be free this Thursday night. So, if he'll have me, I'll be there.
:04:57. > :05:02.My people will speak to your people. We'll get it sorted out. Diane,
:05:02. > :05:07.watch that big vase behind you, you're not insured for. That thanks
:05:07. > :05:13.Does she have a chance of being Mayor of London? She's very well
:05:13. > :05:19.known as Michael pointed out. That is important. People who are outside
:05:19. > :05:21.known as Michael pointed out. That the party fold have traditionally
:05:21. > :05:26.done well in the mayoral election. The job of being a London mayor
:05:26. > :05:29.done well in the mayoral election. running an economy the size of a
:05:29. > :05:31.nation. It is a very serious job. There may be problems with her
:05:31. > :05:39.running? That was a transparent There may be problems with her
:05:39. > :05:50.for it. She's potentially a very compelling Coll ticks. People have
:05:50. > :05:57.left-winger but she's quite tough and conservative. Michael Gove said
:05:57. > :06:03.he had fallen in love with Diane which That's one vote he has. What
:06:03. > :06:09.do you think? I thing about Diane Abbott is she has a fantastic way of
:06:09. > :06:13.connecting. She has a really good way of connecting wi people. She
:06:13. > :06:21.would be a very strong candidate in candidate. It will probably be a
:06:21. > :06:25.Labour win next time. Depends, if Labour wins the 2015 election it may
:06:25. > :06:31.be more difficult. There's a danger for Labour that Diane is the big
:06:31. > :06:36.personality liked by the party primary but isn't necessarily a
:06:36. > :06:40.personality liked by the party in come the London general election?
:06:40. > :06:46.That's true. London is traditionally a Labour city. But Boris managed to
:06:46. > :06:51.win as an outsider. There are big dangers for Labour with that. I
:06:51. > :06:55.think, as I said before, somebody who seems a bit independent from
:06:55. > :07:04.their own party machinery tend to do We've only had mayors so far that
:07:04. > :07:06.were independent? Indeed. And how well Ken Livingstone did last time.
:07:06. > :07:09.Not that far behind bar Is Johnson. well Ken Livingstone did last time.
:07:10. > :07:11.Not that far behind bar Is Johnson. He was and is much more left-wing
:07:11. > :07:21.than Diane Abbott. Diane didn't He was and is much more left-wing
:07:21. > :07:29.stray on Syria, it was immigration. Why was Jeremy brown replaced by
:07:29. > :07:34.This is very much to do with Clegg deciding he has to go back to those
:07:34. > :07:37.people who abandoned the Liberal Democrats the day they went into
:07:37. > :07:43.coalition with the Conservatives really, and convince them there
:07:43. > :07:46.coalition with the Conservatives some holy areas of policy, sacred
:07:46. > :07:49.areas which they will defend. That includes civil liberties. In the
:07:49. > :07:52.Home Office, that incident with includes civil liberties. In the
:07:52. > :07:58.immigration vans went down very badly across the whole nation. Went
:07:58. > :08:02.down particularly badly with Liberal Democrats and voters. In the Home
:08:03. > :08:13.somebody there to put a shield on purpose behind it. And Nick Clegg
:08:13. > :08:18.has won the argument against the left, Vince Cable on the economy,
:08:18. > :08:22.away day in July, briefings say DrCable's been put in his box. He's
:08:22. > :08:26.won the argument on economic policy against the left. When it comes
:08:26. > :08:28.won the argument on economic policy the touchstone issue in the Home
:08:28. > :08:32.Office, he wants to shore up that vote on the left. And please The
:08:32. > :08:39.Guardian. This is important for something else going on which is
:08:39. > :08:43.that Nick Clegg has to keep his parliamentary party happy. That
:08:43. > :08:48.involves giving them ministerial jobs. A lot of Liberal Democrats
:08:48. > :08:59.losing their jobs, Michael Moore, because vacancies have to be created
:08:59. > :09:07.for number people to come in. By Liberal Democrat MPs will have been
:09:07. > :09:13.on the payroll. It is effective party management. I want to move on
:09:13. > :09:15.to press regulation. Brian Leveson's famous report, appeared before the
:09:15. > :09:20.parliamentary select committee. famous report, appeared before the
:09:20. > :09:31.will run you a clip from Connor politicians got involved in this. We
:09:31. > :09:37.moved away from the press 300 years ago. The centr commitment is Lord
:09:37. > :09:45.Leveson wanted a system the press self-regulation. This is state
:09:45. > :09:51.involvement which I worry about profoundly. He sits on the media
:09:51. > :09:56.interviews and investigations into the media. Chris Huhne said earlier
:09:56. > :10:00.he thought all the newspapers would sign up to the Government-backed
:10:00. > :10:07.Royal Charter. I think he's totally should. But he did say they would. I
:10:07. > :10:12.think he's wrong. They won't sign up. All the mood music when that
:10:12. > :10:19.Royal Charter was agreed on Friday was they would not sign up. It is
:10:19. > :10:21.Maria Miller, is essentially saying to the press industry, if you don't
:10:21. > :10:25.sign up, the Royal charter will to the press industry, if you don't
:10:25. > :10:30.ahead. I cannot control the Labour to the press industry, if you don't
:10:30. > :10:32.industry is wind the clock back to the press industry, if you don't
:10:32. > :10:40.what they are calling the Puttnam stage. That was earlier this year,
:10:40. > :10:45.Lord Puttnam was tack amendments which would introduce statutory
:10:45. > :10:54.regulation. Maria Miller says you statutory legislation but if you
:10:54. > :11:02.don't sign up to this, it will be a lot worse. Will that work? Playing
:11:02. > :11:06.the good cop, bad cop routine? Will that pressurise everyone to sign up.
:11:06. > :11:11.Lots of people are saying this will be a club with no members. It won't
:11:11. > :11:16.work. As Nick and I broke the story last week that the Government was
:11:16. > :11:21.going to reject the newspaper-backed one, I'm certain that the newspapers
:11:21. > :11:28.now, most of them maybe, not all, but most, will go the legal route
:11:28. > :11:33.and to judicial review on what the Government's proposing and will
:11:33. > :11:33.and to judicial review on what the it to strains Bowring where freedom
:11:33. > :11:42.of the press is enshrined. They it to strains Bowring where freedom
:11:42. > :11:45.fight this? There is enough fury amongst Fleet Street to result in
:11:45. > :11:49.that. The big political question going forward is which of the party
:11:49. > :11:53.leaders does the press blame the most for the emergence of press
:11:53. > :11:59.regulation? The Tories are very confident they'll blame Ed Miliband
:11:59. > :12:03.the most. They'll target him before 2015. David Cameron gave us Brian
:12:03. > :12:11.Leveson. You appoint a judge who shouldn't be surprised with what you
:12:11. > :12:15.got in the Leveson report? I big chunk of press will look at David
:12:15. > :12:29.Cameron saying, you were the guy who intended what will happen. If he had
:12:29. > :12:32.have appointed Brian Leveson. If they face more punitive fines over
:12:32. > :12:37.Labour ale cases they take that they face more punitive fines over
:12:37. > :12:45.Europe. The Daily Mail and the tallest presumably will have to
:12:45. > :12:51.suspend their campaign of Britain to leave the European Convention of
:12:51. > :12:59.suspend that. We must never come out Churchill was behind it. He was
:13:00. > :13:01.indeed. But it is actually a major constitutional issue whether you
:13:01. > :13:06.regulate the press or not. There was constitutional issue whether you
:13:06. > :13:11.a lot of ill feeling that this Marie ya miller statement was snubbing out
:13:11. > :13:16.on Friday afternoon. Somebody said freedom of the press too important
:13:16. > :13:21.to sneak out on afully afternoon. The whole subject should be treated
:13:21. > :13:27.with respect. We've run out of time. I'll be back next Sunday with the
:13:27. > :13:37.Communities Secretary Eric Pickles at our usual time of 11.00am. If