:00:37. > :00:41.Morning folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.
:00:42. > :00:43.Fears that Ukraine could face invasion escalate this morning as
:00:44. > :00:48.Russian forces take control of Crimea. President Obama and his
:00:49. > :00:52.European allies tell President Putin to back off. It doesn't sound like
:00:53. > :00:55.he's listening. Shadow Education Secretary Tristram
:00:56. > :00:59.Hunt has started spelling out Labour's plans for schools. So
:01:00. > :01:05.what's the verdict - full marks or must try harder? He joins us for the
:01:06. > :01:08.Sunday Interview. And all the big political parties
:01:09. > :01:14.And in The Sunday Politics hn the appeal. We'll look at some unusual
:01:15. > :01:20.And in The Sunday Politics hn the South East... It is a hugelx
:01:21. > :01:30.traumatic experience for changes. And tightening household
:01:31. > :01:33.finances. And with me, as always, three
:01:34. > :01:38.journalists who'd make a clean sweep if they were handing out Oscars for
:01:39. > :01:40.political punditry in LA tonight. But just like poor old Leonardo
:01:41. > :01:46.DiCaprio they've never won so much as a Blue Peter badge! Yes, it's
:01:47. > :01:49.Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh. Instead of acceptance
:01:50. > :01:53.speeches they'll be tweeting faster than the tears roll down Gwyneth
:01:54. > :01:58.Paltrow's face. Yes, that's as luvvie as we get on this show.
:01:59. > :02:02.Events have been moving quickly in Ukraine this weekend. The interim
:02:03. > :02:04.government in Kiev has put the Ukrainian military on full combat
:02:05. > :02:09.alert after Russia's parliament rubber-stamped the deployment of
:02:10. > :02:12.Russian troops anywhere in Ukraine. Russian troops seem already to be in
:02:13. > :02:15.control of the mainly Russian-speaking Crimea region,
:02:16. > :02:19.where Russia has a massive naval base. President Obama told President
:02:20. > :02:21.Putin that Russia has flouted international law by sending in
:02:22. > :02:28.Russian troops but the Kremlin is taking no notice. This is now
:02:29. > :02:31.turning into the worst stand-off between Russia and the West since
:02:32. > :02:34.the conflict between Georgia and Russia in 2008, though nobody
:02:35. > :02:40.expects any kind of military response from the West. Foreign
:02:41. > :02:43.Secretary William Hague is on his way to Kiev this morning to show his
:02:44. > :02:47.support for the new government, though how long it will survive is
:02:48. > :02:54.another matter. We can speak to our correspondent David Stern, he's in
:02:55. > :03:00.Kiev. As things look from Kiev, can we
:03:01. > :03:08.take it they've lost Crimea, it is now in all essence under Russian
:03:09. > :03:12.control? Yes, well for the moment, Crimea is under Russian control
:03:13. > :03:20.Russian troops in unmarked uniforms have moved throughout the peninsula
:03:21. > :03:26.taking up various positions, also at the Ismis which links Ukraine into
:03:27. > :03:31.Crimea. They've surrounded Ukrainon troops there. Three units have been
:03:32. > :03:36.captured according to a top officials. We can say at the moment
:03:37. > :03:41.Russia controls the peninsula. It should also be said, also they have
:03:42. > :03:45.the support of the ethnic Russian population. The ethnic Russians make
:03:46. > :03:50.up the majority of the population. They are also not entirely in
:03:51. > :03:56.control because there are other groups, namely the Tatar as and the
:03:57. > :04:02.ethnic Ukrainian speakers who are at least at the moment tacitly
:04:03. > :04:09.resisting. We'll see what they'll start to do in the coming days.
:04:10. > :04:14.David, I'm putting up some pictures showing Russian troops digging in on
:04:15. > :04:19.the border between Crimea and Ukraine. I get the sense that is
:04:20. > :04:25.just for show. There is, I would assume, no possibility that the
:04:26. > :04:31.Ukrainians could attempt to retake Crimea by military force? It seems
:04:32. > :04:36.that the Ukrainians are weighing their options right now. Their
:04:37. > :04:40.options are very limited. Any head-to-head conflict with Russia
:04:41. > :04:45.would probably work against the Ukrainians. They seem to be taking
:04:46. > :04:50.more of a long-term gain. They are waiting for the figs's first move.
:04:51. > :04:56.They are trying not to create any excuse that the Russians can stage
:04:57. > :05:00.an even larger incursion into Crimea or elsewhere, for that matter. They
:05:01. > :05:04.also seem to be trying to get international support. It should be
:05:05. > :05:07.said, this is a new Government. It has only been installed this week.
:05:08. > :05:12.They are trying to gain their footing. This is a major crisis
:05:13. > :05:17.They have to count on the loyalty of the army they might have some
:05:18. > :05:21.resistance from solders from the eastern part of the country who are
:05:22. > :05:25.Russian speaking. They probably could count on Ukrainian speakers
:05:26. > :05:30.and people from the centre and west of the country as well as regular
:05:31. > :05:35.Ukrainians. A lot of people are ready to fight to defend Ukrainian
:05:36. > :05:43.Terre Tory. Where does the Kremlin go next? They have Crimea to all
:05:44. > :05:46.intents and purposes. There's a weak Government in Kiev. Do they move to
:05:47. > :05:51.the eastern side of Ukraine which is largely Russian speaking and there's
:05:52. > :05:55.already been some unrest there? That's the big question, that's what
:05:56. > :05:59.everybody's really asking now. Where does this go from here? We've had
:06:00. > :06:04.some unrest in the eastern part of the country. There have been
:06:05. > :06:10.demonstrations and clashes. More ominously, there have been noises
:06:11. > :06:16.from the Kremlin they might actually move into eastern Ukraine. Putin in
:06:17. > :06:20.his conversation with Barack Obama said they might protect their
:06:21. > :06:25.interests there. It should be said, if they do expand, in fact, they've
:06:26. > :06:32.also said they are dead against the new Government seeing it as
:06:33. > :06:36.illegitimate and fascist. It does contain risks. They will have to
:06:37. > :06:42.deal with international reactions. America said there will be a deep
:06:43. > :06:45.reaction to this and it will affect Russia's relations with Ukraine and
:06:46. > :06:51.the international community. They have to deal with the reaction in
:06:52. > :06:56.Ukraine. This may unite Ukrainians behind this new interim Government.
:06:57. > :07:04.Once Russia moves in, they will be seen as an invading force. It plays
:07:05. > :07:11.on historical feelings of Russia being an imperial force.
:07:12. > :07:15.Joining me is MP Mark Field who sits on the security Security and
:07:16. > :07:20.Intelligence Committee in the House of Commons. What should the western
:07:21. > :07:26.response be to these events? I can understand why William Hague is
:07:27. > :07:34.going to Kiev tomorrow to stand side by side whizz whoever's in charge.
:07:35. > :07:43.They need to CEOP sit numbers and also President Putin. The truth is
:07:44. > :07:49.we are all co significant fatries to the Budapest Memorandum of almost 20
:07:50. > :07:53.years ago which was designed to maintain the integrity of the
:07:54. > :07:58.Ukraine and Crimea. There needs to be a discussion along those lines.
:07:59. > :08:06.The difficulty is President Putin has watched events in recent months,
:08:07. > :08:12.in relation to Syria, it is palpable President Obama's focus of attention
:08:13. > :08:15.ask the other side of the Pacific rather than the Atlantic. The vote
:08:16. > :08:20.in the House of Commons, I was very much against the idea of military
:08:21. > :08:24.action or providing weapons to the free Syrian army. My worry is,
:08:25. > :08:31.events proved this, the majority of the other options toed as sad are
:08:32. > :08:36.rather worse. It is clear now we are in a constitutional mess in this
:08:37. > :08:39.country. We cannot even contemplate military action without a
:08:40. > :08:44.parliamentary vote that moves against quick reaction that is
:08:45. > :08:48.required from the executive or, I suspect, there will be very little
:08:49. > :08:56.appetite for any military action from the West over in Ukraine. We
:08:57. > :09:01.are corn tours under the agreement of less than 20 years ago. We may be
:09:02. > :09:04.but we've guaranteed an agreement which it is clear we haven't the
:09:05. > :09:10.power to enforce. You wrote this morning, Britain is a diminished
:09:11. > :09:15.voice. Clams Iley navigating the Syrian conflict we relick wished
:09:16. > :09:21.decisions to the whims of parliamentary approval. That may or
:09:22. > :09:28.may not be but the Kremlin's not watching how we voted on the Syrian
:09:29. > :09:34.issue? In relation to Syria, it was where is the western resolve here.
:09:35. > :09:38.The truth ask Putin's position is considerably less strong. In
:09:39. > :09:44.diplomatic terms. He had a victory in Syria in relation to chemical
:09:45. > :09:51.weapons and in relation to the West's relationship with Iran. Putin
:09:52. > :09:56.is a vital inter locking figure In demographic and economic terms,
:09:57. > :10:01.Russia's in very deep trouble. The oil price started to fall to any
:10:02. > :10:06.degree, oil and gas price, given the importance of mineral wealth and
:10:07. > :10:13.exports for the Russian economy Putin would be in a lot of trouble.
:10:14. > :10:17.It requires an engagement from the EU and the EU are intending to look
:10:18. > :10:22.at their internal economic problems and will be smarting from the
:10:23. > :10:26.failure within a matter of hours of the deal they tried to broker only
:10:27. > :10:30.nine days' ago. You say if Mr Putin decides to
:10:31. > :10:34.increase the stakes and moves into the east, takes over the whole
:10:35. > :10:40.place, our Government, you say, will find itself with another colossal
:10:41. > :10:44.international headache. Some people watching this will be thinking,
:10:45. > :10:49.what's it got to do with us? It s a long way away from Britain. We
:10:50. > :10:55.haven't a dog in this fight? We have in this regard for the longer term
:10:56. > :10:59.here. I think if there were to be some military action in Ukraine the
:11:00. > :11:04.sense of Russia taking over, it could have a major impact on the
:11:05. > :11:09.global economy in very quick order. You should not deny that. There will
:11:10. > :11:13.be move to have sanctions against Russia. The escalation of that will
:11:14. > :11:21.be difficult. The other fact is looking at our internal affairs and
:11:22. > :11:27.reform, partners, the Baltic states, Finland, Poland, the Czech Republic,
:11:28. > :11:33.they will be looking at a resurgent Russia now and think they'll need to
:11:34. > :11:37.hold as tightly as possible to the EU institutions and the power of
:11:38. > :11:45.Germany at the centre of that. This whole appetite for the reforms
:11:46. > :11:50.politically and economically will be closed very much within a matter of
:11:51. > :11:54.a short period of time. It has longer term implications. Mark
:11:55. > :12:03.Field, thank you. We're joined now by BBC News night's
:12:04. > :12:08.Diplomatic Editor Mark Urban. Is there any prospect of a western
:12:09. > :12:17.military response? Clearly at the moment, it is nil. The boat has
:12:18. > :12:22.sailed with the Crimean. It has been per performed by Russian forces It
:12:23. > :12:28.is now a matter of coordinating a plate cal line. European foreign
:12:29. > :12:33.ministers tomorrow. To say what will our future limits be? Where could we
:12:34. > :12:38.possibly draw red lines? To try to think a couple of steps down this,
:12:39. > :12:43.what happens if Russia interrupts energy supplies to EU member states
:12:44. > :12:46.ornate owe countries? These are the important steps they have to think
:12:47. > :12:52.about. It is quite clear we are in a different world here now. Also,
:12:53. > :12:55.Ukraine is facing a urgent foreign exchange crisis. Within literally a
:12:56. > :13:00.few weeks they could run out of money. All of these are rushing
:13:01. > :13:07.towards decision makers very fast. There is an interim and I suggestion
:13:08. > :13:11.unstable Government in Kiev. Crimea semi-to be under Russian control.
:13:12. > :13:14.There are clashes between the reformers and Russian nationals in
:13:15. > :13:19.the east of the country. What does Mr Putin do next? He has lots of
:13:20. > :13:23.options, of course. He has this carte blanch carte blanch from his
:13:24. > :13:30.Parliament to go in to the rest of Ukraine if he wants to. His military
:13:31. > :13:35.deployment suggests the one bite at a time, just Crimea to start with.
:13:36. > :13:39.See what response comes from the Ukrainian Government. Of course so
:13:40. > :13:44.far, there hasn't been a coherent response. The really worrying thing
:13:45. > :13:49.about recent months, not just recent days, are the indications that the
:13:50. > :13:56.future of Ukraine as a unitary state is now in doubt. Look at it from the
:13:57. > :14:01.other side of the equation. The President when faced with
:14:02. > :14:06.demonstrations, many extremists he was unable to deal with that. Now we
:14:07. > :14:11.have the other side, if you like, the Russian speakers, the other side
:14:12. > :14:16.of the fight, Russian nationalists showing they can get away with
:14:17. > :14:24.unilateral action more or less with impunity. The Ukrainian chiefs have
:14:25. > :14:28.been sacked. I think there are considerable questions now as to
:14:29. > :14:34.whether Ukraine is falling apart and, if that happens, we're into a
:14:35. > :14:39.Yugoslav-type situation which will continue posing very serious
:14:40. > :14:47.questions for the EU and NATO for months or years to come. So, Janan,
:14:48. > :14:53.Ukraine is over? Where the west to concede to the Russian in Crimea, it
:14:54. > :15:01.would perversely be a net loss for Russia. You'd assume the rest of
:15:02. > :15:07.Ukraine would become an un unambiguously a member of the the
:15:08. > :15:14.EU, maybe NATO. On top of that a Russian dream of Eurasion dream
:15:15. > :15:19.they will look at Putin's behaviour and is a, no, thanks, we'll head
:15:20. > :15:32.towards the EU. It is a short-term victory for Putin which backfires on
:15:33. > :15:39.his broader goals in Well, many people said if he grabs Crimea, he
:15:40. > :15:43.loses Ukraine, which is your point. We have seen violent demonstrations
:15:44. > :15:48.in the big eastern cities in Ukraine yesterday. People taking control of
:15:49. > :15:54.certain buildings. The risk is there of spreading beyond Crimea. I think
:15:55. > :15:56.the lack of any unified or visible response from Ukrainian armed
:15:57. > :16:01.forces... They allowed Russian troops to walk into the bases in
:16:02. > :16:05.Crimea. They have supposedly gone on red alert but they have done
:16:06. > :16:08.absolutely nothing. We don't see them deploying from barracks. There
:16:09. > :16:16.are serious questions about whether they would just fall apart. Putin is
:16:17. > :16:21.not going to let them split away. I would have thought he would like the
:16:22. > :16:26.entire Ukraine to come into the Russian ambit. Barack Obama is
:16:27. > :16:32.saying this will not stand. He has a 90 minute conversation with Vladimir
:16:33. > :16:35.Putin and what is his response? I am suspending my cooperation in the
:16:36. > :16:42.run-up to the Sochi Summit. What is the EU doing? Nothing. There is
:16:43. > :16:46.nothing they can do and Putin knows there are a series of lines that he
:16:47. > :16:54.is able to cross and get away with it. Why should Berlin, London,
:16:55. > :16:58.Washington be surprised by the strength of Vladimir Putin's
:16:59. > :17:02.reaction? It was never going to let Ukraine just fall into the arms of
:17:03. > :17:07.the EU. That is the interesting point. And who does he listen to?
:17:08. > :17:10.Paddy Ashdown was saying sent Angela Merkel because she is the only
:17:11. > :17:14.person who can talk to him and I find that response worrying. We need
:17:15. > :17:19.to speak with a united voice but nobody knows what we should be
:17:20. > :17:23.saying. Military intervention is out for the West so we go to economic
:17:24. > :17:30.sanctions. Doesn't Vladimir Putin just say, oh, you want sanctions? I
:17:31. > :17:34.have turned off the gas tap. Yes, it is move and countermove, and it is
:17:35. > :17:39.difficult to predict where it will end up. In all these meetings that
:17:40. > :18:13.are being held, they do think a step or two ahead and try and set out
:18:14. > :18:14.clear lines. Thank you for coming in this morning.
:18:15. > :18:16.Labour has been struggling since 2010 to decide exactly how to take
:18:17. > :18:19.education secretary Michael Gove, one of the boldest reformers of the
:18:20. > :18:21.coalition and most divisive figures. Ed Miliband appointed TV historian
:18:22. > :18:24.Tristram Hunt and many thought Labour had found the man to teach
:18:25. > :18:26.Michael Gove a lesson. But how much do we really know about the party's
:18:27. > :18:28.plans for England's schools? Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are a
:18:29. > :18:31.devolved matter. Child has been back to school to find out. A politician
:18:32. > :18:33.once told me, do you know why education secretaries changed
:18:34. > :18:35.schools? Because they can. Michael Gove might dispute the motive but he
:18:36. > :18:38.is changing schools, like this one. The changes he is ringing in our
:18:39. > :18:40.encouraging them to be academies, free from local authorities to
:18:41. > :18:42.control their own budgets, ushering in free schools, focusing on
:18:43. > :18:44.toughening exams and making them the core of the curriculum with less
:18:45. > :18:50.coursework, and offering heads more discretion on tougher discipline.
:18:51. > :18:54.And he is in a hurry to put all this in place. But has that shut out any
:18:55. > :18:59.chance for a Labour Government to change it all themselves and do they
:19:00. > :19:05.really want to? Any questions? Visiting a different school, first
:19:06. > :19:07.in line to get a crack at that would-be Labour's third shadow
:19:08. > :19:12.education secretary since 2010, Tristram Hunt. In post, he has not
:19:13. > :19:16.been taken about fine tuning previous direct opposition to free
:19:17. > :19:20.schools and he has also suggested teachers in England would have to be
:19:21. > :19:23.licensed under a Labour Government, allowing the worst to be sacked and
:19:24. > :19:28.offering training and development to others and of course ending
:19:29. > :19:32.coalition plans to allow unqualified teachers into classrooms. Full
:19:33. > :19:43.policy detail is still unmarked work. Your opinion about evolution?
:19:44. > :19:48.What is very clear is that Labour's education policy is still evolving.
:19:49. > :19:53.We are learning that they have some clear water, but we also seem, from
:19:54. > :19:56.the sting at the back, to get the feeling that there is not a great
:19:57. > :20:00.deal of difference from them and the current Government on types of
:20:01. > :20:07.schools and the way education should proceed. -- from listening at the
:20:08. > :20:12.back. So what exactly is different about their policy? What Tristram
:20:13. > :20:16.Hunt's job is to do is to be open and honest about the shared agenda
:20:17. > :20:20.between us and the Tories. There are a lot of areas where there is clear
:20:21. > :20:25.water between us and Tristram Hunt as to turn his back, shared agenda,
:20:26. > :20:31.stop fighting it, and forge our agenda, which I think people will be
:20:32. > :20:36.really interested in. The art of Government, of course, is to balance
:20:37. > :20:39.competing pictures of policy, even inside your own party. It is fair to
:20:40. > :20:44.say that if Labour reflects and draws its own visions of a shared
:20:45. > :20:47.agenda, it might have to square that idea with teaching unions, who are
:20:48. > :20:52.already unhappy with the pace and tone of change that the Government
:20:53. > :20:57.had sketched out. What we sincerely hope is that if Labour were to form
:20:58. > :21:20.the next Government, that they would look at a serious review of
:21:21. > :21:22.accountability measures. That is really what ways on teachers every
:21:23. > :21:24.single day. Actually they would look at restoring the possibility, for
:21:25. > :21:27.example, of local councillors to be able to open schools. That seems
:21:28. > :21:29.eminently sensible. If they are not going to move back from the free
:21:30. > :21:32.schools and academies programme at the very least they need to say that
:21:33. > :21:35.academy chains will be inspected because at the moment they are not.
:21:36. > :21:37.Labour have balls in the air on education and are still throwing
:21:38. > :21:40.around precise policy detail. There are areas that they could grab hold
:21:41. > :21:42.of and seize possession. A focus on the rounding of the people,
:21:43. > :21:44.developing character, the impact of digitalisation on the classroom
:21:45. > :21:47.Also the role and handling of teachers in the system and the
:21:48. > :21:53.interdependence of schools. That is all still to play for. Currently I
:21:54. > :21:56.think the difference between the parties is that the coalition
:21:57. > :22:02.policies, while we do not agree with all of them, are clear and explicit,
:22:03. > :22:08.and Labour's policies are yet to be formulated in a way that everybody
:22:09. > :22:11.can understand clearly. I don't think that Tristram Hunt or Miliband
:22:12. > :22:19.will want to pick unnecessary fights before the election. I think we will
:22:20. > :22:24.have quite a red, pinkish fuzziness around the whole area of policy but
:22:25. > :22:31.after the election there will be grey steel from Tristram Hunt. But
:22:32. > :22:35.if fuzzy policy before the election is the lesson plan, it does rather
:22:36. > :22:39.risk interested voters being left in the dark.
:22:40. > :22:51.Tristram Hunt joins me now for the Sunday interview.
:22:52. > :22:56.Welcome. Thank you. Which of Michael Gove's school reforms would you
:22:57. > :22:59.repeal? We are not interested in throwing a change for the sake of
:23:00. > :23:03.it. When I go round schools, teachers have been through very
:23:04. > :23:06.aggressive changes in the last three years, so when it comes to some of
:23:07. > :23:10.the curriculum reforms we have seen, we are not interested in changing
:23:11. > :23:15.those for the sake of it. Where we are interested in making change is
:23:16. > :23:19.having a focus on technical and vocational education, making sure
:23:20. > :23:24.that the forgotten 15% is properly addressed in our education system.
:23:25. > :23:27.What we saw in your package was an interesting description of how we
:23:28. > :23:31.have seen structural reforms in the names of schools. Academies, free
:23:32. > :23:35.schools, all the rest of it. International evidence is clear that
:23:36. > :23:37.it is the quality of leadership of the headteachers and the quality of
:23:38. > :23:41.teaching in the classroom that transforms the prospects of young
:23:42. > :23:46.people. Instead of tinkering around the names of schools, we focus on
:23:47. > :23:50.teacher quality. Viewers will be shocked to note that this Government
:23:51. > :24:05.approves of unqualified teachers in the classroom. We want to have fully
:24:06. > :24:07.qualified, passionate, motivated teachers in the classroom. It sounds
:24:08. > :24:10.like you might not repeal anything. You might build on it and you might
:24:11. > :24:12.go in a different direction, with more emphasis on technological
:24:13. > :24:15.education but no major repeal of the reforms of Michael Gove? I don't
:24:16. > :24:19.think you want to waste energy on undoing reforms. In certain
:24:20. > :24:24.situations they build on Labour Party policy. We introduced the
:24:25. > :24:28.sponsored academy programmes and we began the Teach First programmes,
:24:29. > :24:34.and we began the London challenge which transformed the educational
:24:35. > :24:38.prospects of children in London We want to roll that out across the
:24:39. > :24:44.country. You have said there will be no more free schools, which Michael
:24:45. > :24:46.Gove introduced, but you will allow parents let academies, which just
:24:47. > :24:56.means free schools by a different name. No, because they will be in
:24:57. > :25:00.certain areas. We want to create new schools with parents. What we have
:25:01. > :25:04.at the moment is a destructive and market-driven approach to
:25:05. > :25:08.education. I was in Stroud on Thursday and plans for a big new
:25:09. > :25:13.school, in an area with surplus places, threatened to destroy the
:25:14. > :25:16.viability of local, rural schools. We want schools to work together in
:25:17. > :25:20.a network of partnership and challenge, rather than this
:25:21. > :25:46.destructive market-driven approach. You say that, but your version of
:25:47. > :25:49.free schools, I think, would only be allowed where there is a shortage of
:25:50. > :25:51.places. That means that where there is an excess of bad schools, parents
:25:52. > :25:54.will have no choice. They still have to send their kids to bad schools.
:25:55. > :25:57.And we have to transform bad schools and that was always the Labour way
:25:58. > :25:59.in Government. At the moment we just have an insertion of new schools.
:26:00. > :26:01.Schools currently underperforming are now underperforming even more.
:26:02. > :26:03.Children only have one chance at education. What about their time in
:26:04. > :26:06.school? Our focus is on the leadership of the headteacher and
:26:07. > :26:08.having quality teachers in the classroom. So they cannot set up new
:26:09. > :26:11.better schools and they have to go to the bad schools. Tony Blair said
:26:12. > :26:13.it should be easier for parents to set up new schools where they are
:26:14. > :26:17.dissatisfied with existing schools. You are not saying that. Even where
:26:18. > :26:20.they are dissatisfied with existing schools, they cannot set up free
:26:21. > :26:26.schools and you are reneging on that. We live in difficult economic
:26:27. > :26:32.circumstances where we have got to focus public finances on the areas
:26:33. > :26:38.of absolute need. We need 250,0 0 new school places. 150,000 in London
:26:39. > :26:45.alone. We have to focus on building new schools and where we have to put
:26:46. > :26:49.them. And secondly... Absolutely not. Focusing on those schools.
:26:50. > :26:54.Making sure we turned them around, just as we did in Government. We
:26:55. > :26:58.have had a remarkable degree of waste under the free school
:26:59. > :27:03.programme. If you think of the free school in Derby, the Academy in
:27:04. > :27:07.Bradford, and as we saw in the Telegraph on Friday, the free
:27:08. > :27:10.schools in Suffolk, a great deal of waste of public money on
:27:11. > :27:13.underperforming free schools. That is not the Labour way. We focus on
:27:14. > :27:19.making sure that kids in schools at the moment get the best possible
:27:20. > :27:25.education. Except that in your own backyard, in Stoke, only 34% of
:27:26. > :27:33.secondary school pupils attend a good or outstanding school. 148 out
:27:34. > :27:35.of 150 of the worst performing local authorities and it is
:27:36. > :27:40.Labour-controlled. Still terrible schools and yet you say parents
:27:41. > :27:44.should not have the freedom to start a better school. We have great
:27:45. > :27:47.schools in Stoke-on-Trent as well. We face challenges, just as
:27:48. > :27:53.Wolverhampton does and the Isle of Wight and Lincolnshire. Just like
:27:54. > :27:58.large parts of the country. What is the solution to that? Making sure we
:27:59. > :28:02.share excellence among the existing schools and making sure we have
:28:03. > :28:05.quality leadership in schools. Those schools in Stoke-on-Trent are all
:28:06. > :28:10.academies. It is not a question only of structure but of leadership. It
:28:11. > :28:12.is also a question of going back to the responsibility of parents to
:28:13. > :28:17.make sure their kids are school ready when they get to school. To
:28:18. > :28:51.make sure they are reading to their children in the evening. We can t
:28:52. > :28:54.put it all on teachers. Parents have responsibilities. I understand that
:28:55. > :28:56.but you have told me Labour's policy would not be to set up new schools
:28:57. > :28:59.which parents hope will be better. Parents continue to send their kids
:29:00. > :29:02.to bad schools in areas like Stoke. Labour has had plenty of time to
:29:03. > :29:04.sort out these schools in Stoke and they are still among the worst
:29:05. > :29:07.performing in the country. You are condemning these parents to having
:29:08. > :29:10.to send their kids to bad schools. Where we have seen the sett ing up
:29:11. > :29:12.of Derby, Suffolk, we have seen that is not the simple solution. Is
:29:13. > :29:15.simply setting up a new is not a successful model. What works is good
:29:16. > :29:17.leadership. I was in Birmingham on Friday at a failing comprehensive is
:29:18. > :29:20.not a successful model. What works is good leadership. I was in
:29:21. > :29:22.Birmingham on Friday at a failing comprehensive school and now people
:29:23. > :29:24.are queueing round the block to get into it. You can turn around schools
:29:25. > :29:26.with the right leadership, passionate and motivated teachers,
:29:27. > :29:31.and parents engaged with the learning outcome of their kids. In
:29:32. > :29:37.the last few years of the Labour Government, only four kids from your
:29:38. > :29:39.this Government would set up the new school. In Birmingham, they got in a
:29:40. > :29:42.great headmaster and turned the school around and now people are
:29:43. > :29:44.queueing round the block to get into it. You can turnaround schools with
:29:45. > :29:46.the right leadership, passionate and motivated teachers, and parents
:29:47. > :29:49.engaged with the learning outcome of their kids. In the last few years of
:29:50. > :29:52.a Labour Government, only four kids from your area of and you had plenty
:29:53. > :29:55.of chances to put this right but only four got to the two and you had
:29:56. > :30:01.plenty of chances to put this right but only four got to the two leading
:30:02. > :30:05.universities. Traditionally young people could leave school at 16 and
:30:06. > :30:08.walking two jobs in the potteries, the steel industry, the
:30:09. > :30:10.traditionally young people could leave school at 16 and walking two
:30:11. > :30:17.jobs in the potteries, the steel industry, the but also to get an
:30:18. > :30:23.apprenticeship at Jaguar Land Rover, JCB, Rolls-Royce. That is why
:30:24. > :30:29.Ed Miliband's focus on the forgotten 15%, which we have just not seen
:30:30. > :30:40.from this Government, focusing on technical and vocational pathways,
:30:41. > :30:56.is fundamental to Your headmaster was guiles Slaughter. Was he a good
:30:57. > :31:04.teacher? He He never taught me. Over 90% of teeners in the private
:31:05. > :31:07.sector are qualified. They look for not simply teachers with qualified
:31:08. > :31:11.teacher status. Teachers with MAs. Teachers who are improving them
:31:12. > :31:20.cephalitis. Becoming better educators.
:31:21. > :31:21.cephalitis. Becoming better teaching. You were taught by
:31:22. > :31:26.unqualified teachers. Your parents paid over ?15,000 a year for you
:31:27. > :31:30.being taught by unqualified teachers. Why did you make such a
:31:31. > :31:35.big deal of it? Because we've seen right around the world those
:31:36. > :31:41.education systems which focus on having the most qualified teachers
:31:42. > :31:48.perform the best. It cannot be right that anyone can simply turn up, as
:31:49. > :31:51.at the moment, have schools at veritising for unqualified teachers
:31:52. > :31:58.teaching in the classroom. We want the best qualified teachers with the
:31:59. > :32:04.deepest subject knowledge, for the passion in learning for their kids.
:32:05. > :32:08.It is absurd we are having arguments about this. Simply having a paper
:32:09. > :32:14.qualification doesn't make you a great teacher. Let me take you to
:32:15. > :32:20.Brighton college. It is gone from the 147th to the 18 18th best
:32:21. > :32:35.private school in the land. Fllt the headmaster says:
:32:36. > :32:47.This is the top Sundaytimes school of the year. The school in derby
:32:48. > :32:50.where this Government allowed unqualified teaching assist taints.
:32:51. > :32:54.We had teachers who could barely speak English. That is because if
:32:55. > :32:59.you have unqualified teachers you end up with a dangerous situation.
:33:00. > :33:03.The problem with that school was not unqualified teachers. People were
:33:04. > :33:09.running that school who were unfit to run a school. We have an issue
:33:10. > :33:13.about discipline and behaviour management in some of our schools.
:33:14. > :33:17.Some of the skills teachers gain through qualifications and learning
:33:18. > :33:21.is how to manage classes and get the best out of kids at every stage It
:33:22. > :33:27.doesn't end with a qualified teacher status. That's just the beginning.
:33:28. > :33:31.We want our teachers to have continue it will development. It is
:33:32. > :33:38.not good enough to have your initial teacher trainingaged work through
:33:39. > :33:43.your career for 30 years. You need continual learning. Learning how to
:33:44. > :33:47.deal with digital technology. Refresh your subject knowledge. As
:33:48. > :33:53.an historian I help teachers. You've taught as an unqualified teacher.
:33:54. > :33:59.Not in charge of a subject group. I give the odd lecture. I'm-y to go to
:34:00. > :34:04.as many schools as possible. I don't blame you. It is uplifting. Would
:34:05. > :34:12.you sack all unqualified teachers? We'd want them all to gain teacher
:34:13. > :34:17.status. What if they say no? If they are not interested in improving
:34:18. > :34:24.skills and deepening their knowledge they should not be in the classroom.
:34:25. > :34:29.If a free school or academy hired a teach thinking they are a great
:34:30. > :34:34.teacher but unqualified, if they are then forced by you to fire them
:34:35. > :34:38.they will be in breach of the law. They are being urged by us to make
:34:39. > :34:43.sure they have qualified teacher status. We've lots of unqualified
:34:44. > :34:47.teachers as long as they are on the pathway to making sure they are
:34:48. > :34:52.qualified. But if they say they don't want to do this, will you fire
:34:53. > :34:56.them? It is not an unreasonable suggestion is that the teachers in
:34:57. > :35:00.charge of our young people have qualifications to teach and inspire
:35:01. > :35:06.our young people particularly when we face global competition from
:35:07. > :35:11.Shanghai, Korea and so on. The head teacher of Brighton college finds
:35:12. > :35:17.incredibly inspeechational teachers who don't' necessarily have a
:35:18. > :35:24.teaching qualifications. It is a different skill to teach ten young
:35:25. > :35:28.nice boys and girls in Brighton to teaches 20 or 30 quids with
:35:29. > :35:32.challenging circumstances, special educational needs, different
:35:33. > :35:37.ability. Being a teacher at Brighton college is an easy gig in comparison
:35:38. > :35:43.to other schools. Where we want teachers to have a capacity to teach
:35:44. > :35:51.properly. Do you think Tristram could ever lead the Labour Party? I
:35:52. > :35:56.think Ed is a great leader, the reforms yesterday were a real sign
:35:57. > :35:59.for his leadership. And the fact David Owen, the man with a
:36:00. > :36:04.pre-history with our party is back with us. It is great. Even Gideon
:36:05. > :36:13.had to change his name to George. Have you thought of switching to
:36:14. > :36:18.Tommy or Tony? Maybe not Tony! Michael Foot was called Dingle Foot.
:36:19. > :36:22.I love the Labour because it accepts everybody from me to Len McCluskey.
:36:23. > :36:26.We are a big, broad happy family on our way to Government. Thank you
:36:27. > :36:32.very much. You're watching The Sunday Politics.
:36:33. > :36:37.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us for Sunday
:36:38. > :36:47.politics Scotland. In over 20 minutes
:36:48. > :36:54.I am Natalie Graham and this is The Sunday Politics in the South East.
:36:55. > :36:58.Coming up later... Local councillors are not allowed
:36:59. > :37:02.to, so why are MPs and peers able to vote on matters in which thdy may
:37:03. > :37:04.have a potential conflict of interest?
:37:05. > :37:07.Joining me in the studio today to discuss this and other topics are
:37:08. > :37:09.the Conservative MP for Chatham and Aylesford, Tracey Crouch and
:37:10. > :37:16.Labour's prospective parlialentary candidate for Brighton Kemp Town,
:37:17. > :37:20.Nancy Platts. Welcome to yot both. Now, before we go on to talk about
:37:21. > :37:23.our main topics, I wanted to get your thoughts on fixed odds betting
:37:24. > :37:27.machines, which have been c`lled the "crack cocaine" of gambling. This
:37:28. > :37:29.weekend, a new code of condtct by the gambling industry comes into
:37:30. > :37:33.force, meaning people who play on the machines will be able to set
:37:34. > :37:37.their own limits on how long they spend on them and how much they
:37:38. > :37:41.gamble. Critics say the measures are just window dressing and do not go
:37:42. > :37:44.far enough to tackle addicthon to the machines. This is a particular
:37:45. > :37:51.problem in Medway, which has the highest concentration of thdm
:37:52. > :37:58.outside London. Does this go far enough? I have campaigned on this
:37:59. > :38:05.for a long time. We will nedd to see how it works. There does nedd to be
:38:06. > :38:18.something done, because thex are causing problems. Hopefully, it will
:38:19. > :38:28.help control some gambling. The Labour leader wants these m`chines
:38:29. > :38:36.banned altogether? We know they can be damaging, but we want to curtail
:38:37. > :38:45.the element of these fixed odds betting terminals in the high street
:38:46. > :38:50.betting shops and tillage is the amount of bookmakers also on the
:38:51. > :38:57.high Street. If we have less of these machines no than we dhd in
:38:58. > :39:07.2010, so the numbers are falling. You could ban them? It would be
:39:08. > :39:14.strange for them to ban a m`chine that they introduced in 2000. What
:39:15. > :39:16.we need to do is make sure that people who do get addicted to the
:39:17. > :39:30.machines get the support thdy require. I think a lot of l`ws have
:39:31. > :39:37.unintended consequences. Tr`cy is great rate and what she raises, but
:39:38. > :39:44.this would require local authority process. What we want to do is give
:39:45. > :39:51.the local authorities more power to act. When they see the all these
:39:52. > :40:02.betting shops opening on thd high Street, is to say, no more. What can
:40:03. > :40:09.be done to stop people becoling addicted to these machines? I think
:40:10. > :40:14.things could be done around the planning laws, as I have sahd. You
:40:15. > :40:21.have the choice of what you have on the high Street. At the momdnt,
:40:22. > :40:30.local authorities are being starved of cash and funding. We need to make
:40:31. > :40:36.sure that the planning officers are employed to can enforce all the
:40:37. > :40:45.various laws in the area. The industry says there is no evidence
:40:46. > :40:50.that these machines are a ddck. It is fair to say from the all`male I
:40:51. > :41:00.get, there are people who are addicted to these. I think this
:41:01. > :41:03.could of conduct will help. Now, dealing with the loss of a
:41:04. > :41:06.stillborn baby is a dreadful ordeal for families to go through, but in
:41:07. > :41:10.some cases, the bereavement process is made all the harder becatse, if a
:41:11. > :41:14.baby is lost before 24 weeks' gestation, as far as the law is
:41:15. > :41:17.concerned, it never existed. One MP from West Sussex thinks that should
:41:18. > :41:31.change and has taken his calpaign to Westminster. This might feel a
:41:32. > :41:43.little bit cold. This film, called the deadening silence, is b`sed on a
:41:44. > :41:50.real`life story. We cannot hear a heartbeat. We are just going to get
:41:51. > :41:58.the doctor to have a cheque. It is harrowing to watch, but equ`lly so
:41:59. > :42:03.for the couple who enjoyed the experience for years ago. They went
:42:04. > :42:13.on to have two other childrdn, but the charity established, and memory
:42:14. > :42:20.of the stillborn daughter. Ht gets a subject out in front of everybody.
:42:21. > :42:29.Obviously, having been throtgh, I can talk to other people who have
:42:30. > :42:34.been through it. They have `ll been a lot of people who have trhed to
:42:35. > :42:40.just call on their own and `lmost pretend it did not happen. @bigail
:42:41. > :42:50.is still an important part of the couples live. Her bridal shop is
:42:51. > :42:57.named after the child. Therd are thousands of mothers who go through
:42:58. > :43:08.the pain and trauma of delivery only to realise that their baby
:43:09. > :43:18.never existed because it was boring before the 24th week gestathon
:43:19. > :43:23.period. Before then, it is simply registered as a miscarriage. No
:43:24. > :43:33.that is a campaign that all stillborn buffs are recognised and a
:43:34. > :43:41.death certificate is issued for each one. I think it would help greatly
:43:42. > :43:45.in the Greek grieving process. It would also give us a much bdtter
:43:46. > :43:51.picture of how many children are dying in this way. No one knows how
:43:52. > :43:58.many babies are stillborn bdfore 24 weeks. With about 59,000
:43:59. > :44:03.miscarriages in England and Wales each year and requiring a hospital
:44:04. > :44:08.stay, it is thought to be a significant number. The United
:44:09. > :44:17.Kingdom already has one of the worst stillborn records in the European
:44:18. > :44:20.Union. Currently, the government and medical profession are not
:44:21. > :44:30.supporting a change in legislation, based on lead medical evidence that
:44:31. > :44:38.only a small number of babids born before the 24 week period strvive. I
:44:39. > :44:45.think we need to be out there saying we will give support to the couples
:44:46. > :44:56.who have been through this. The couple say that registration is more
:44:57. > :45:02.than just an emotional step. As a mother, further you lose it at any
:45:03. > :45:15.time, it is still a baby. It is very harsh to deny somebody that
:45:16. > :45:20.existence. For anyone to have to go and and register both the B`th and
:45:21. > :45:23.death at the same time as something you would never think you would have
:45:24. > :45:29.to do. A change in the registration process would help the parents
:45:30. > :45:37.recognise the importance of real`life unlicensed. This has been
:45:38. > :45:40.dreadful for the families. But without the help of the medhcal
:45:41. > :45:50.profession and government, what is going to change? I have strong
:45:51. > :45:55.support in terms of this bill. At the moment, I do not think we have
:45:56. > :46:00.an accurate reflection of the story. It is tragic and we should be doing
:46:01. > :46:05.more to try and reduce the high levels of infant mortality `nd we
:46:06. > :46:10.cannot do that if we do not have proper data. If there was hdlp from
:46:11. > :46:16.the charities, medical profdssion and the government? I think we need
:46:17. > :46:23.to talk to these people and make it very clear what we are trying to do.
:46:24. > :46:27.People involved in this one to know that their child has been
:46:28. > :46:38.registered. They had very pop powerful testament. Does thhs show
:46:39. > :46:41.the limitations of Parliament. Is a difficult influencing the loss
:46:42. > :46:47.because of the process of Parliament? I have been doing some
:46:48. > :46:53.work with regard to infant lortality and I made five mothers who had lost
:46:54. > :47:00.children and I think that wd need to keep the pressure up. There are
:47:01. > :47:10.other ways of dealing with hssues in Parliament. Something like one in
:47:11. > :47:16.ten babies being born every day There is little publicity about this
:47:17. > :47:22.is this because of the nature of it, that maybe the parents do not want
:47:23. > :47:28.to get involved and talk about this? I think it is an important problem
:47:29. > :47:36.that has to be recognised in the parents need to be supported. I am
:47:37. > :47:41.fully aware to the extent that this happens and the impact on their
:47:42. > :47:48.lives. They are looking for some sort of recognition that thdy have
:47:49. > :47:53.been through this and we have to look at the wider consequences
:47:54. > :48:02.around it. What I do not accept is that there is not the reason for
:48:03. > :48:10.collecting data. Yes, by moving the date back from 24 weeks, usd cue the
:48:11. > :48:14.date. We have to do something about this because we have one of the
:48:15. > :48:21.highest rates of stillborn babies in Western Europe. Yes, but thhs should
:48:22. > :48:27.not stop us collecting data in that, the could be another issue here In
:48:28. > :48:33.this age of technology, the must be a way of recording the data to get
:48:34. > :48:39.to the underlying problems to find out what is causing this and doing
:48:40. > :48:46.more to give better welfare and support. This is one very Mhck
:48:47. > :48:50.modest measure which would have made changes, but should we have
:48:51. > :48:56.standardised Kier for peopld who have been through this in the
:48:57. > :49:00.National Health Service? Th`t is one of the things I have been looking
:49:01. > :49:09.at. We have to deal with thhs sensitively and responsibly. We have
:49:10. > :49:15.to make sure that we prevent this happening to other women in the
:49:16. > :49:20.future. That is fine and I think all the certificate should show that,
:49:21. > :49:28.but I would like employment legislation around women not having
:49:29. > :49:41.to go back to work sooner than expected because of this experience.
:49:42. > :49:50.Yes, unfortunately, sometimds this can be on a bit of the poem I am
:49:51. > :49:54.certain you could get cross`party support on that.
:49:55. > :49:57.When Westminster politicians pass new legislation they are allowed to
:49:58. > :50:01.vote even if they have a potential conflict of interest. But some
:50:02. > :50:04.people feel it is time that this changed and MPs and peers follow the
:50:05. > :50:13.same strict rules as local politicians. Rachel Royce, of Inside
:50:14. > :50:17.Out South East, reports. Westminster politicians decided on a new future
:50:18. > :50:25.for the National Health Service passed the health and social care
:50:26. > :50:29.bill. The act offers new opportunities to private firms to
:50:30. > :50:34.compete for National Health Service business. But many of the s`me
:50:35. > :50:39.politicians who voted yes to the fact have financial and bushness
:50:40. > :50:46.interests that would have bdnefited from the act. Andrew Robertson found
:50:47. > :50:51.more than 200 links between politicians and private health care.
:50:52. > :51:03.Two politicians he investig`ted from the South East with strong health
:51:04. > :51:12.interests. The baroness owns a company in Sussex which specialises
:51:13. > :51:17.in training National Health Service staff. It is any position to money
:51:18. > :51:31.from the health and social care act advice to clinical groups. She owns
:51:32. > :51:39.her own company. She can trx and win contacts to develop the clinician
:51:40. > :51:48.groups. She did this as she was walking in debating on the `ct.
:51:49. > :51:55.Baroness Bottomley is a forler health secretary. One of our jobs is
:51:56. > :52:01.to chair the board of a recruitment company. Several of the newly
:52:02. > :52:08.created clinician groups have already spent over ?200,000 on
:52:09. > :52:14.recruitment services. In addition, many key positions in the ndw
:52:15. > :52:19.regulator have been filled tsing the company, at a cost of nearlx
:52:20. > :52:27.?200,000. Both of the interdsts of the baroness 's have been ddclared
:52:28. > :52:35.in the obligations of members, there is no indication that they have
:52:36. > :52:39.broken any rules. But those sitting at local council level often have
:52:40. > :52:46.two act and are much more strict rules. They are not allowed to vote
:52:47. > :52:52.as they have any sort of financial interest. Some people think at this
:52:53. > :52:59.time that MPs and those in the House of Lords followed exactly the same
:53:00. > :53:09.conditions. I did not know that the rules were so different between the
:53:10. > :53:11.two. This is totally wrong. Neither of the baroness 's wanted to give an
:53:12. > :53:33.interview. The former government trade envoy
:53:34. > :53:45.and the Conservative party treasurer. Most people who come into
:53:46. > :53:50.the debate to the left open eyes and not with future legislation in mind.
:53:51. > :53:56.We have to be wrecked realistic about this. If you exclude lany of
:53:57. > :54:05.these experts, it is no longer a proper debate. The health and social
:54:06. > :54:09.care act was controversial. Rules which allow Westminster polhticians
:54:10. > :54:16.and whether they should fall if they have taken potential conflict of
:54:17. > :54:23.interest have fanned the fl`mes of the controversy. Reform is not being
:54:24. > :54:32.considered. Should reforms be considered? Yes, a lot of pdople on
:54:33. > :54:36.the doorstep really see the world of politics has been very markdd here.
:54:37. > :54:43.We need more open politics. My personal view is that they should be
:54:44. > :54:49.excluded from voting if thex have an interest. We cannot argue that it is
:54:50. > :54:57.not transparent, because thd is the declaration of interests. I do not
:54:58. > :55:04.agree. People going into thdse debates and speaking, if thdre is a
:55:05. > :55:11.vote taking place, if one of these motions is lost by one vote and
:55:12. > :55:16.someone is they are benefithng, people can look at this and see that
:55:17. > :55:24.it is. They are not doing anything wrong. I do not care, I think it has
:55:25. > :55:31.to change. People need to sde the politics are transparent.
:55:32. > :55:37.Personally, I would like to see the House of Lords as a fully elected
:55:38. > :55:42.chamber as well. Members of Parliament are allowed to h`ve
:55:43. > :55:50.companies, so is there any problem with this. I think, as was said
:55:51. > :56:04.they can often bring great dxpertise to these debates. A lot of the
:56:05. > :56:08.people are dealing with constituents for 85% of the time, so it hs very
:56:09. > :56:13.hard to get round the legislation and a lot of the very good work is
:56:14. > :56:18.done by the House of Lords. It is not just a case of your intdrest
:56:19. > :56:21.been registered in some book that you cannot find, you have to declare
:56:22. > :56:27.it before you start speaking in a debate and that is why it is
:56:28. > :56:33.effective. In the House of Lords, you have the opportunity whdther,
:56:34. > :56:41.based on your interest, for that you do actually vote. Too many of them
:56:42. > :56:45.do the right thing and do that, because they could get away with
:56:46. > :56:52.that of the wanted to. It is not a case of getting away with it. It is
:56:53. > :56:58.very self regulating. Nancy brought up the point that there shotld be
:56:59. > :57:03.more openness. How we do th`t, I do not know, but I think banning people
:57:04. > :57:10.from voting on legislation, because they have an interest, financial or
:57:11. > :57:14.otherwise, is necessarily the right way forward. I want people to be
:57:15. > :57:29.upfront and I have been in debates via people have declared interest,
:57:30. > :57:33.but brought more than anythhng to the debate.
:57:34. > :57:36.And now it is time for some of the other political stories you might
:57:37. > :57:44.have missed this week, with James Fitzgerald. A trade union h`s taken
:57:45. > :57:54.issue with the Medway Counchl. They say that there is a real terms 8%
:57:55. > :58:06.pay cut. The council is planning live exports after she died. Kent
:58:07. > :58:14.council is announcing the closure of the sure start school. It h`d been
:58:15. > :58:31.put into special measures. Ht protest, the council failed any six
:58:32. > :58:43.hour meeting. The council whll borrow ?36 million from the
:58:44. > :58:50.government for the project. They can agree on that, but not on the
:58:51. > :58:55.budget. We think this is too much of a risk. The private sector have
:58:56. > :59:01.pulled out of the funding. H think it is crazy. They are putting public
:59:02. > :59:10.money at huge risk by buildhng this tower. What about the budget? Yes,
:59:11. > :59:16.this is disappointing. The Green party where elected and the prime
:59:17. > :59:24.responsibility is to set thd budget, which they have failed to do so I
:59:25. > :59:27.can understand the frustrathon of my colleagues in Canterbury. The school
:59:28. > :59:35.had been through some very difficult times, but at putting measures in
:59:36. > :59:37.place to improve. That is all we have got timd for
:59:38. > :59:42.from Government to change it. Thank you
:59:43. > :59:50.both for being here. Andrew, back to you.
:59:51. > :59:58.This week grant Shap said he wanted to rebrand the Tories as the
:59:59. > :00:03.workers' party to show it can reach out to blue-collar workers. One
:00:04. > :00:10.Conservative Party MP said they should scrap what he said was their
:00:11. > :00:14.boring old logo. We asked him and two other independent MPs how they'd
:00:15. > :00:26.freshen up their logos. Aspiration's always been our core
:00:27. > :00:31.value. About helping people get on with life. Giving people ladders of
:00:32. > :00:36.opportunity. That's why our symbol must reflect our values of
:00:37. > :00:43.aspiration and why I'm calling for our symbol to be changed from a tree
:00:44. > :00:47.to a ladder which symbolises social mobility and stands up for
:00:48. > :00:53.everything conservatism represents. I like an he will fanned, an animal
:00:54. > :00:59.that never forgets. We're the only party which seems to remember what
:01:00. > :01:04.life was like before the NHS and minimum wage and the global
:01:05. > :01:08.financial crash was caused by too little regulation not too much. We
:01:09. > :01:15.have a leader who can spot the elephant in the room, the lack of
:01:16. > :01:20.women on the Tory frontbench. The republicans in America have had the
:01:21. > :01:25.same idea. Theirs is a suspicious blue. Our would be deepest red. We
:01:26. > :01:31.love our Liberal Democrat bird. Mrs Thatcher called it the dead parrot
:01:32. > :01:34.when we launched it. We won the Eastbourne by-election off the
:01:35. > :01:40.Tories very soon aftered with. Perhaps it feels like we're in a
:01:41. > :01:45.coalition cage but we're escaping that soon. Why does it fly to the
:01:46. > :01:52.right? Most Liberal Democrats would want it to fly to the left. I hope
:01:53. > :01:57.it will soon. Interesting there. Let's stick with
:01:58. > :02:03.the Robert Hall pin one. He was being serious. The others were fun.
:02:04. > :02:09.It is interesting that talking about appealing to the blue collared vote,
:02:10. > :02:14.the upper working class, lower middle class, curiously now neither
:02:15. > :02:18.Mr Cameron nor Mr Miliband has great cut through with these people. But
:02:19. > :02:27.in wanting to be the Workers Party, how do you square that with choosing
:02:28. > :02:33.five old Etonians to draw up four next manifesto. Labour said one of
:02:34. > :02:36.the things was cutting inheritance tax, after all their priorities they
:02:37. > :02:42.went to privilege rather than earned income. Rebranding is not enough.
:02:43. > :02:46.The one question the modernisers never asked themselves when they
:02:47. > :02:51.took party ten years ago is the thing we know as the Conservative
:02:52. > :02:55.Party, salvageable as a brand? I'm beginning to think it isn't. If you
:02:56. > :03:01.look at all public opinion research, there are lots of people in this
:03:02. > :03:07.contrary with Conservative views. They won't vote Tory or contemplate
:03:08. > :03:13.the possibility of voting Tory. Can we get over the electoral problems
:03:14. > :03:19.by relaunching as a different pro-business, pro-worker party. That
:03:20. > :03:25.means new name, new logo. It will mean new people as well. If you say
:03:26. > :03:29.you're on the sides of what Thatcher called the strivers, the people
:03:30. > :03:33.themselves want to see you have strivers in the people who run your
:03:34. > :03:38.party so you know what we've been through, the struggles we've had.
:03:39. > :03:44.How many of the six drawing up the manifesto have had ever a mortgage.
:03:45. > :03:48.The one who's not an old Etonian went to St Paul's. He's a day
:03:49. > :03:53.schoolboy! It is interesting and it was funny you mentioned an elephant.
:03:54. > :03:58.Don't think of an elephant as the title of that book. Calling it the
:03:59. > :04:02.Workers Party draws attention to the Tories biggest electoral weakness.
:04:03. > :04:08.The idea they are a class apart Out of touch. I think it is interesting,
:04:09. > :04:17.they have identified their elections are won or lost by this particular
:04:18. > :04:22.demo graphic of the C 1, and C . Mrs Thatcher got them by the shed
:04:23. > :04:26.load, Tony Blair got them. His failure in 2010 is the reason David
:04:27. > :04:33.Cameron didn't win an overall majority. I'm disappointed with the
:04:34. > :04:37.ladder. You should have a hammer or sickle! The Conservatives have a
:04:38. > :04:41.terrible brand problem. You heard them explaining why they did badly
:04:42. > :04:46.in the Wythenshawe by-election, saying there's quite a large council
:04:47. > :04:51.estate there In 1961, I think the Conservatives won a by-election back
:04:52. > :04:54.then, they were getting through to those sort of voters. There is not a
:04:55. > :04:59.single Conservative councillor in Manchester. They have this terrible
:05:00. > :05:05.problem. You're right for them to pick up on the five Etonians writing
:05:06. > :05:13.their manifesto. David Cameron sir rounding himself with his own. He
:05:14. > :05:22.doesn't have to do that. I seas things like isn't Robert Halpen
:05:23. > :05:27.great. He decides and has his own. He has some more slightly common
:05:28. > :05:30.people from St Paul's! One of the ways the Conservatives hoped to
:05:31. > :05:37.broaden their appeal is the tougher line on immigration. We learned net
:05:38. > :05:43.immigration is rising substantially. Back up over 200,000. Nigel Farage
:05:44. > :05:48.of UKIP wrapped up the rhetoric In scores of our cities and market
:05:49. > :05:59.towns, this country, in a short space of time, has become N'Zonzi
:06:00. > :06:03.rkable whether it is -- unrecognisable. Whether it is the
:06:04. > :06:10.impact on local schools and hospitals. In many parts of England
:06:11. > :06:14.you don't hear English spoken, this is not the kind of the community we
:06:15. > :06:20.want to leave to our children and grandchildren. Helen, maybe people,
:06:21. > :06:28.I assume, will love the sentiments. Others will say, this is getting...
:06:29. > :06:36.It is going down a dangerous road. Nigel Farage's wife is German and he
:06:37. > :06:40.shares a flat with Godfully Bloom, nobody knows what he's saying half
:06:41. > :06:50.of the time. You can handle the letters from Yorkshire. Alex Salmond
:06:51. > :06:58.does not make his case on Scotland for the Scottish. Let's put aside
:06:59. > :07:05.whether the policy's right or wrong. How bad, by the Tories own lights,
:07:06. > :07:11.is the fact the net figure for immigration went up 60,000? It looks
:07:12. > :07:17.really bad. If I was a Tory strategist, I'd be philosophical
:07:18. > :07:20.about it. Immigration, even if they were meeting the target, I don't
:07:21. > :07:26.think the public would believe it. It is like crime a few years ago,
:07:27. > :07:31.the crime rates had been declining for the best part of 20 years but
:07:32. > :07:37.the fear of crime remains high. There's such a degree of cynicism
:07:38. > :07:40.that regardless of your administrative record in Government,
:07:41. > :07:46.the public will remain hostile to you. This is where Nigel Farage can
:07:47. > :07:50.be potent. He said it is not about numbers. It is about community. It
:07:51. > :07:57.is about people seeing their communities change. And in the
:07:58. > :08:02.Sunday Telegraph, it was said this isn't a dog whistle, a it is a meaty
:08:03. > :08:06.bone for a bull terrier. The problem for the Government on these figures
:08:07. > :08:11.is we know why the net migration figures are not looking good. They
:08:12. > :08:15.got down the non-EU figures but the EU figures are going up. From Italy
:08:16. > :08:22.and Spain as their economies tanked, people came here. If he hadn't made
:08:23. > :08:26.such a big deal of the numbers, the Tories, I mean, you could present
:08:27. > :08:29.this as a huge success story. If you believe immigration was good for the
:08:30. > :08:33.country. You would say it doesn t matter what Labour says, the best
:08:34. > :08:38.and the brightest young people from all over Europe are voting with
:08:39. > :08:43.their feet to come to Britain. But you never hear that case being made
:08:44. > :08:46.and certainly not by Labour. They acknowledge although immigration is
:08:47. > :08:50.best in the abstract for the economy, people don't feel it in
:08:51. > :08:54.their daily lives. There's a huge vacuum for the case where
:08:55. > :08:59.immigration should be in our public life. I remember a time when the
:09:00. > :09:05.economy was in such decline there was a rush to the door in the
:09:06. > :09:08.sixties and seventies. Now we are claiming our economy's doing better
:09:09. > :09:14.than any of the other major economies bar Germany, people want
:09:15. > :09:18.to join in our success. London was a declining city until the
:09:19. > :09:25.mid-eighties. Theresa May cannot be honest. She was proposing a cap on
:09:26. > :09:29.immigration. Not going to happen. Today she is saying maybe people
:09:30. > :09:35.from poorer member states cannot come in until their economies grow.
:09:36. > :09:39.That's future accession states. That's Turkey in ten years' time It
:09:40. > :09:44.is causing divisions with the coalition. She's bashing Vince
:09:45. > :09:49.Cable. You often see Liberal Democrats bashing the Tories. You
:09:50. > :09:52.don't often see a Tory minister bash Vince Cable. She does on the
:09:53. > :09:57.immigration figures. He thought they were good news. Last week, Vince
:09:58. > :10:01.responded to the news by saying it was a policy he was happy for the
:10:02. > :10:07.gift to flunk. The problem was going for a cap. There are six moving
:10:08. > :10:14.parts. UK citizens leaving, coming back. EU citizens leaving and coming
:10:15. > :10:20.back and then third party nationals. And students coming to study. Of
:10:21. > :10:30.course. You only have control over the EU citizens. Have you to clamp
:10:31. > :10:35.down on ace strayian, Chinese or American graduates. They should have
:10:36. > :10:43.gone for the Australian points system. I don't have a pure cap on
:10:44. > :10:49.numbers just background etc. Tim Farran said in the European election
:10:50. > :10:53.either vogue Liberal Democrat or UKIP. He turned that to his
:10:54. > :10:59.advantage. It is hopeful but he s come up with a way to spin this
:11:00. > :11:09.Labour has his special conference. Was it or was it not an event? Not
:11:10. > :11:14.sure it was the biggest moment in the party since 1918. But things
:11:15. > :11:19.fell apart in the special conference in 1981. 2004 got another special
:11:20. > :11:24.conference. Who's on board? David Owen who founded the gang of four.
:11:25. > :11:28.He's not joined but he's given them money. He's not going to sit with
:11:29. > :11:34.them in the Lord's. He's given money. They lost the gang of four.
:11:35. > :11:40.Back comes David Owen. Not historic? Why would he want it to be more
:11:41. > :11:45.significant than it was. There's a tendency to see him taking the fight
:11:46. > :11:51.to his party. Why would he want that? The fact it has not pleased
:11:52. > :12:03.Grant Shapps is not a test to see whether this has worked. It has been
:12:04. > :12:08.described as an historic moment and incremental of what John did. The
:12:09. > :12:17.trade union block voters disappeared a long time ago. They still have 50%
:12:18. > :12:21.of the vote. But 2,000 of union members voting for this guy has
:12:22. > :12:27.gone. It is a reform from 20 years ago. Welcome but not historic. Ed
:12:28. > :12:32.Miliband's stored up trouble. Len McCluskey wants a million new homes
:12:33. > :12:37.and answered to the benefit caps is not reconcilable with the deficit
:12:38. > :12:40.reduction strategy. In five years' time if there is a Labour Government
:12:41. > :12:47.it becomes very difficult. We should keep an eye on it? Always. Labour
:12:48. > :12:52.Party process is never ending. Unlike this programme. That's all
:12:53. > :12:57.from us today. Continuing reports of events in the Ukraine on the BBC
:12:58. > :13:03.News Channel. There's no Daily Politics tomorrow because of cover
:13:04. > :13:08.Arg of the Nelson Mandela memorial service at Westminster Abbey on BBC
:13:09. > :13:14.Two live. We'll be back on the Daily Politics on Tuesday at midday. We'll
:13:15. > :13:19.be back here next week with the Work and Pensions Secretary, Ian Smith.
:13:20. > :13:36.If it is Sunday, it is the Sunday Politics.