13/05/2012 Sunday Politics South West

In the South West. The Government's promised to make supermarkets pay

farmers a fair price, but the retail giants say that'll mean

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 2006 seconds

Hello, and welcome to the Sunday Politics in the South West. Coming

up. The undelivered promise to give voters the power to sack naughty

MPs. I'm joined by somebody who's becoming on old hand on this

programme, Labour MP Alison Seabeck, who is gamely struggling with a

cold today. And by a Sunday Politics debutant - though

certainly no political virgin - the Lib Dem peer, cornwall councillor

and former MEP, Robin Teverson. This week the government had the

bit of news to warm the cockles of shadow defence ministers, like to,

it announced it is going to buy a batch of jump-jet for the new

aircraft carriers. This was joyride do in government, the government

did the defence review and said it was a stupid idea, and now they are

packed your plan. Absolutely, and a considerable cost to the taxpayer.

Philip Hammond struggled to explain why they had taken the original

decision and not seek advice on it. The argument seems to me that

something has changed, the facts have changed. Perhaps he would like

to risk derision advice on why they went for the fixed-wing aircraft.

This is acutely embarrassing U-turn, is it not just the fact he did not

look closely into this other government and have been forced to

go back to this plan? I don't think it's very good at all. Having said

that, what worries me is that we have an Anglo-French defence treaty

that is very difficult in terms of interoperability between the two

and Davies, the two aircraft carriers. How could it ever cost �1

billion to change catapults on an aircraft carrier? What sort of

original contract did the previous cont'd -- government signed which

means that he's changes cost so much money? I think there are

questions about the Ministry of Defence over many years.

The Queen's Speech revealed that the Government is finally

introducing a regulator to police the relationship between

supermarkets and farmers. It's supposed to stop big retailers

using their commercial muscle to take advantage of food producers.

Farmers have been demanding this for years. But the supermarkets say

it will push up prices at the checkout. In a further twist, some

supporters of the idea fear what the Government's produced is a

toothless beast which will struggle to expose exploitation or punish

the offenders. John Ayres reports. How much is a pint, or should I say

0.568 litres, of milk? There's a feeling that some people in the

corridors of power don't know. only are Cameron and was born two

posh boys who don't know the price of bill, but there two arrogant

posh boys who showed no remorse, and no passion to want to

understand the lives of others. not only does David Cameron say he

knows the price of milk but his Government's also trying to do

something about it. Ruth Kimber is a dairy farmer from Somerset. If

the price she receives for a litre of milk drops by just a penny, it

can cost her thousands. The problem is that the buyers are so strong.

We have to find a way of matching up the strengths. The only way we

can do that with so few of them and so many of us is to have an

adjudicator with a decent amount of powers to make his position or her

position tenable. An adjudicator is exactly what was announced in the

Queen's Speech last week. A policeman in effect, to ensure

deals are fair. And this isn't just about milk. Releationships involved

in producing all sorts of food will come under strutiny. Most of us,

when we had food, so long as it tastes nice and cost a fair price,

we don't think much about how it has got here. The farmers say that

the supermarkets have too much power and if it continues that way

then it could be damaging to the farming industry and other long-

term effect on security of food. Richard Haddock is a Devon farmer

who has set up his own farm shop because he would rather cut out the

middle man. He not only wants an adjudicator, but he wants the

powers to be extended further. whole thing has to be looked at. It

needs at least Monday, a genuine policemen with teeth. If things go

down in price, we have to move down, and if things go up in price, they

must have to move up. It could be another quango, depends if the

government did it teeth. Quangos. I thought the Government

said it was getting rid of those. And how much is this going to cost?

The cost will be pushed on to consumers so we will be paying for

a quango which will not be able to do anything and will not identify

the problem specifically identified in the competition report. So how

effective will it be? As it stands, the only sanction available will be

to name and shame businesses that don't play fair. The worry is that

people will not be prepared to come Ford and whistle blowers will not

have the protection that they need. Supermarkets will feel but one that

bit of censure from D adjudicator, unless it hits them in the pocket,

will not make them change their practices. The supermarkets believe

they are fair, saying they do invest in farming. It would take

away cos that we would be able to invest in stores and shops and

keeping prices down for consumers. Farmers say they want an

adjudicator, the supermarkets say it's not necessary. There is going

to be one, the test will be if it can actually make any difference.

This has been a big issue for the Lib Dems. I knew concern that now

it is actually happening, you might not at the Palace to do the job?

First, I am pleased that something has happened. Not everything has

got into the Queen's Speech and we do have this bill, and it had its

first reading on Friday. So it means that it is there and has to

be taught through. I think there are some issues about it and the

one that I would say is that if you have legislation and to bother to

do that, you change a code of practice into something that is

statutory. You need to do it properly. That organisation is to

have reasonable teeth, like the Financial Services Authority does

for the finance area. There is provision for finding within this

piece of legislation. It is a last resort but last with the minister.

That is right, it just be referred to the minister, and a dead thing

that is good enough. But continues to be the adjudicated themselves.

And it needs to be pretty big fines, presumably, dealing with retailers

on this scale. Yes, to be noticeable, they have to be

significant. I think just naming and shaming or having

investigations is important but it does not quite get there yet and

maybe more but the government to change its mind. Alison, did you

recruit labour's official position? There is clearly a debate that has

to be had. There are -- I spoke to farmers, about a year ago, about

whether the code was strong enough, and they felt it was not. I

actually do think having an ombudsman of some sort is the way

to go. But I heartily agree with Robin that it has to have teeth.

You will play with some very big players here. What about the

argument that farming incomes are doing quite well at the moment, but,

whatever happens, it this actually works it will put up prices for

consumers and those other people that are really hurting at the

moment? The balance must be found through the middle of this. Clearly,

the consumer will pay a price, I suspect. It is almost inevitable.

But we have seen farmers' fortunes ebb and flow and when they are at

the bottom, they really struggle. Robin do you agree that the

consumer is bound be hit in the pocket by this? In fact, price 16

is excluded out of this completely, and I think the most important

thing is that farmers need to have sensible returns so that they are

there for a long term. Some people were as intrigued by the bills

which didn't make it into the Queen's Speech as the ones that did.

Social care reform and gay marriage both missed the boat. And there was

no update on the Government's promise to give voters the power to

sack misbehaving MPs between general elections. So it's still

not clear when this particular coalition pledge will be honoured.

And the plans the Government's already sketched out have drawn

fierce criticism from people who say they're not worth the paper

they're written on anyway. Tamsin Melville reports.

I have done nothing criminal, that is the most awful thing. They were

the symbols of the MPs' expenses scandal in the South west. Anthony

Steen's flagpole - for which he tried to claim �28.50. And Julia

Goldsworthy's rocking chair - which had cost taxpayers �1,000. We have

too many MPs who once they are elected have a job for life.

image of the designer rocking chair dogged Julia Goldsworthy, until she

lost her re-drawn seat at the 2010 general election. And it was cases

like hers which contributed to a new enthusiasm for the option of

getting rid of MPs between elections. In the last

parliamentary session a draft Bill on the Recall of MPs appeared. But

there was no mention of it becoming law in this week's Queen's Speech.

Under the coalition's plans, a Commons Committee decides if a

recall should be triggered. Then, if 10% of constituents sign a

petition, a by-election goes ahead. Critics think there's a danger of

vested interests. What we want is for voters to be able to decide, at

not a group of MPs, but there they attempt to remove their MP, and not

just for serious wrongdoing, but for loss of confidence for any

reason. It needs to be opened up democratically and if the threshold

is enough, then we should be and trouble to the people and not just

the parliament, but we have to get that right. Neil Parish is joined

by more than 50 cross-party members who are supporting alternative

proposals which give more power to voters to sack their MP - rather

than a Parliamentary committee. But this approach has its critics too.

If you could below anybody to trigger an recall mechanism they

will be big money, for example the Murdoch press might have it in for

an MP he was having a bit of a nuisance for them. We have to be

careful that the trigger mechanism is with the public but is on the

best possible grounds. Across the pond, the power of recall is a

feature of politics in some American states, and was most

famously used in California in 2003 when Governor Gray Davis lost a

ballot to Arnold Schwarzenegger. The Terminator attracted global

attention to a little-known power that's only ever been used twice at

this level. It is supposed to be this instrument of direct democracy

and people power but in the end, what really triggers these recalls

his money, and large amounts of money, from private citizens or

from the unions. It does not tend to be a grassroots movement. It may

not be widely used in top level politics in the US, but as a symbol

of direct democracy the National Union of Students here is running

its own Right to Recall campaign - against Lib Dem MPs who did a U-

turn on tuition fees. I think everyone should be accountable for

their actions. So I think it is something the NUS have got right.

If people decide they should lose their seats, then they should lose

their seats. If they have gone so far against policy than the need to

be put under the spotlight. But, for now, the Government's Bill

remains a draft, and the supporters of the alternative proposals are

still waiting for a promised Commons debate.

Robin, Lib Dems like constitutional reform. Some people so they are

fixated with them! You could not get people to change the voting

system last year. Your big thing now is 0 reform. This thing, which

strikes me the one bit of constitutional reform that might

enthuse people, did not get a mention. Of course, as the peer,

cannot be fired under any circumstances. That is why does

need reform. In terms of right to recall, then it is part of the

coalition agreement so it needs to go in there. I think the draft bill

was pretty anaemic. You have to get a balance between the public being

able to recall someone who has really gone against what they

should be doing but at the same time not stopping them from really

saying what they think of being able to stand up to some of the

pressure groups and do what the majority of their constituents want

them to do. It needs to be left in the hands of the people and not

just Parliament. I agree. It is interesting that in a very thin

Queen's Speech that this Bill was not included. I'm not quite sure

what the logic was because it think it is something we should debate

and I think the public want us to have the discussion and they want

to be involved. But there are risks. We do have to make sure that it

cannot be used vexatiously, but the money cannot be used to house

somebody for whatever reason. You could see, either within individual

parties, factions getting together to try to unseat an MP who perhaps

is taking an individual few want something. They need to be checks

and balances in there but it is important that we discuss it.

do you achieve that? We heard that in America, on the few occasions

when this has happened, big money tends to be involved. Yes, and in

the draft Bill there are all sorts of provisions are but a new finance

how this works. I remember when I was a prospective candidate back in

the 1990s, around the poll tax, people said to me how did we get

redress snow on our MP if they voted the wrong way, and you cannot.

You need to leave it in the hands of people with a threshold that

means they after it signed a petition properly in a particular

place, they are proper constituent, that it has to be a bar of a

certain threshold. This debate about whether quite trivial issues

could sparks this. The government plans would apply to criminal

offences. It somebody is convicted of criminal offence while they are

in Parliament Commission may just be kicked out anyway? That is a

very good point and is clearly something we should discuss.

would expect lawmakers to keep the law themselves. At the moment, it

is over 12 months, they should be out anyway. Absolutely, lawmakers

should be law keepers. Now our regular round-up of the

political week in 60 seconds. The police hit the streets - not to

supervise a protest but to do the protesting. We are seeing a real

effect in Dorset, and losing officers and support staff which

will have a detrimental effect on the service we give. And tomorrow's

pensioners had the same idea. A multi-million pound uplift of

public money is needed to re-open Plymouth Airport, according to the

group campaigning to save it. costs a number of millions to free

the airport for the long term of the city then that is a superb deal

for the city. Pollock handliners say quota cuts could shipwreck

their businesses. I was at sea on the second and by the evening off

the third I had a phone call to tell me I had caught my quota for

the month. And the company in charge of emptying Cornwall's bins

is fined of tens of thousands of pounds for being a bit rubbish

itself. Should they be put your the kestrel

Plymouth airport? There are certainly came back and looking at

the airport and its relation to the city. But it is far too early. But

then it is an issue that is being taken very seriously. Robin, you're

not from Plymouth, but I know you have been a great business lobbyist

and business people say transport links are the top priority. They

are. I used to represent Plymouth in Europe. One might use his

letters get a decent train service in Plymouth. What about the

airport? I think the airport is something I would like to support

and want to be there, but the council tax payer cannot subsidise

him by millions. If we can make it work, that is good, but it us to

work financially in the long term. Could you not be repaid in the long

term by the Investment? It depends what kind of detail they come up

with. Was there there are commercial interests around there.

Plymouth City Council is still the freeholder so I would have thought

it could find some way of fixing this. What is your message to the

company canteen on not tempting pins in Cornwall? I got a lot of

aggro from my accountant institutes and the need to get their act

together. I think they have now run out of the bags to give people so I