17/11/2013 Sunday Politics South West

Morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.

Downing Street announces an inquiry into allegations of hardball tactics

and intimidation by unions in industrial disputes. That's our top

story. Thousands dead. Hundreds of

thousands without homes. Millions affected. What is Britain doing to

help the Philippines in the wake of Typhoon Haiyan? We'll ask

International Development Secretary Justine Greening.

Winter is coming and so, it seems, is another crisis in England's

hospitals. I'll be asking the Shadow Health Secretary how he'd put a stop

to the NHS's annual woes. In the South West: The Lib Dem MP

who says his leader's got his priorities wrong on free school

meals. And the fight to save the region's

airports. and renewed calls to get lorries off

the roads in peak hours. With me, the best and brightest

political panel that money can buy. Janan Ganesh, Nick Watt and this

week, Zoe Williams, who'll be tweeting their thoughts throughout

the programme. The Government has announced a

review to investigate what the Prime Minister has called "industrial

intimidation" by trade union activists. Bruce Carr QC will chair

a panel to examine allegations of the kind of tactics that came to

light during the Grangemouth dispute, when the Unite union took

their protests - replete with a giant rat - outside the family homes

of the firms' bosses. Earlier this morning the Cabinet office minister,

Francis Maude spoke to the BBC and this is what he had to say. To look

at whether the law currently works and see if it is ineffective in

preventing the kind of intimidatory activity that was alleged to have

taken place around range mouth during the previous disputes --

Grangemouth. We make no presumptions at the beginning of this. I do think

it is a responsible thing for the government to establish what

happened and really do a proper review into whether the law is

adequate to meet the needs. That was Francis Maude. This is a purely

political move, isn't it? Unite did this a couple of times, it is hardly

happening all over the country but the government want to say, we are

prepared to investigate Unite properly, Labour isn't. This seemed

a lot worse when I thought it was a real rat. I thought it was a giant

dead rat. I am not sure if you know much about rats but real rats are

not this big, even the ones in London. The thing is, obviously it

is naked politics but I think it is more intelligent than it looks. They

are trying to taint Miliband as a week union puppet and that doesn't

really wash. They hammer away with it and it might wash for some

people. But it really castrates Miliband in the important issues he

has to tackle. Zero hours, living wage, all of those things in which

he needs to be in concert with the unions, and to use their expertise.

He is making them absolutely toxic to go anywhere near. It keeps the

Unite story alive, have to kill -- particularly since Mr Miller band is

under pressure to reopen the investigation into what Unite are up

to -- Mr Miliband. They are frustrated, not only at the BBC but

the media generally at what they think is a lack of coverage. I see

the political rationale from that respect. There is a risk. There are

union members who either vote Tory or are open to the idea of voting

Tory. All Lib Dem. If the party comes across as too zealous in as --

its antipathy, there is an electoral consequence. Ed Miliband has been

careful to keep a distance. Yes they depend on vast amounts of

money. When Len McCluskey had a real go at the Blairites, Ed Miliband was

straight out there with a very strong statement. Essentially Len

McCluskey wanted Blairites in the shadow cabinet sacked and Ed

Miliband was keen to distance himself or for that is why it is not

quite sticking. Another story in the Sunday papers this morning, the Mail

on Sunday got hold of some e-mails. When I saw the headline I thought it

was a huge cache of e-mails, it turns out to be a couple. They peel

away the cover on the relationship between Ed Miliband and Ed Balls,

with some of Ed Miliband's cohorts describing what Mr balls is trying

to do as a nightmare. How bad are the relations? They are pretty bad

and these e-mails confirm the biggest open signal in Westminster,

which is that relations are pretty tense, -- open secret. That Ed

Miliband doesn't feel that Ed Balls is acknowledging the economy has

grown that Labour needs to admit to past mistakes. The sort of great

open signal is confirmed. On a scale of 1-10, assuming that Blair-Brown

was ten. I think it is between six and seven. They occupy this joint

suite of offices that George Cameron and -- David Cameron and George

Osborne had. It is not just on the economy that there were tensions,

there were clearly tensions over HS2, Ed Balls put a huge question

over it at his conference. There will be more tensions when it comes

to the third runway because my information is that Mr balls wants

to do it and Ed Miliband almost resigned over it when he was in

government. I don't think Ed Miliband is thinking very

politically because he has tried live without Ed Balls and that is

not tenable either. -- life without. He has defined a way of making it

work. That is where Tony Blair had the edge on any modern politician.

He didn't want to make Ed Balls his Shadow Chancellor, he had to.

Somebody said to him, if you make Ed Balls Shadow Chancellor, that will

be the last decision you take as leader of the Labour Party. Is it as

bad? I was surprised at how tame the e-mails were. At the FT it is

compulsory, one French word per sentence! To call him a nightmare,

compared to what they are willing to say in briefings, conversations

bits of frustrations they express verbally come what is documented in

the e-mails is actually pretty light. It has been a grim week for

the people of the Philippines as they count the cost of the

devastation wrought by Typhoon Haiyan. HMS Daring has just arrived

near the worst hit areas - part of Britain's contribution to bring aid

to the country. It has been one of the worst natural

disasters in the history of the Philippines. Typhoon Haiyan hit the

country nine days ago, leaving devastation in its wake. The numbers

involved are shocking. The official death toll is over 3600 people, with

many thousands more unaccounted for. More than half a million people have

lost their homes and the UN estimates 11 million have been

affected. David Cameron announced on Friday that the UK government is to

give an extra ?30 million in aid, taking the total British figure ?250

million. An RAF Sea 17 aircraft landed yesterday with equipment to

help aid workers get too hard to reach areas. HMS Illustrious is on

its way and due to arrive next weekend. The British public have

once again dipped into their pockets and given generously. They have

given more than ?30 million to the Disasters Emergency Committee.

The International Development Secretary, Justine Greening, joins

me now for the Sunday Interview Good morning, Secretary of State.

How much of the ?50 million that the government has allocated has got

through so far? All of it has landed on the ground now. HMS Daring has

turned up, that will be able to start getting help out to some of

those more outlying islands that have been hard to reach. We have

seen Save the Children and Oxfam really being able to get aid out on

the ground. We have a plane taking off today that will not read just

carrying out more equipment to help clear the roads but will also have

their staff on board, too. We have ?50 million of aid actually on the

ground? We instantly chartered flights directly from Dubai where we

have preprepared human Terry and supplies, and started humanity work

-- humanitarian supplies. A lot of it has now arrived. I think

we have done a huge amount so far. We have gone beyond just providing

humanitarian supplies, to getting the Royal Air Force involved. They

have helped us to get equipment out there quickly. We have HMS

Illustrious sailing over there now. Why has that taken so long? It was

based in the Gulf and is not going to get there until two weeks after

the storm first hit and that is the one ship we have with lots of

helicopters. The first decision we took was to make sure we could get

the fastest vessel out there that was able to help HMS Daring. HMS

Illustrious was just finishing an exercise and planning to start to

head back towards the UK. We have said to not do that, and diverted

it. Shouldn't it have happened more quickly? We took the decisions as

fast as we were able to, you can't just turn a big warship around like

the HMS Illustrious. We made sure we took those decisions and that is

while it will be taking over from HMS Daring come and that is why HMS

Daring is ready there. It will be able to provide key support and

expertise that has not been there so far. The US Navy is doing the heavy

lifting here. The US Navy had the USS Washington, there is an aircraft

carrier, 80 planes, 5000 personnel and they have the fleet, they are

doing the real work. We obviously helping but the Americans are taking

the lead. It is a big international effort. Countries like the US and

the UK, that have a broader ability to support that goes beyond simply

call humanitarian supplies -- have made sure we have brought our

logistics knowledge, we have sent out our naval vessels. It shows we

are working across government to respond to this crisis. Why does

only just over 4% of your aid budget go on emergency disaster and

response? A lot depends on what crises hit in any given year. We

have done a huge amount, responding to the crisis in Syria, the conflict

there and the fact we have 2 million refugees who have fled the country.

We are part of an international effort in supporting them. Shouldn't

we beginning more money to that rather than some of the other

programmes where it is harder to see the results question of if we were

to give more money to the refugees, it would be a visible result. We

could see an improvement in the lives of children, men and women.

What we need to do is alongside that is stop those situations from

happening in the first place. A lot of our development spend is helping

countries to stay stable. Look at some of the work we are doing in

Somalia, much more sensible. Not just from an immigration but there

is a threat perspective. There is a lot of terrorism coming from

Somalia. You only have to look at Kenya recently to see that. Which is

why you talk about what we do with the rest of the spend. It is why it

is responsible to work with the government of Somalia. Should we

give more, bigger part of the budget to disaster relief or not? I think

we get it about right, we have to be flexible and we are. This Philippine

relief is on top of the work in Syria. Where can you show me a

correlation between us giving aid to some failed nation, or nearly failed

nation, and that cutting down on terrorism? If you look at the work

we have done in Pakistan, a huge amount of work. Some of it

short-term. It is written by terrorism. That is -- ridden by

terrorism. That is not going to fix it self in a sense. Look at the work

that we do in investing in education. The things that little

girls like Malala talk about as being absolutely key. We are ramping

up our aid to Pakistan, it will be close to half ?1 billion by the time

of the election. Why should British taxpayers be giving half ?1 billion

to a country where only 0.5% of people in Pakistan pay income tax,

and 70% of their own MPs don't pay income tax. It is a good point and

that is why we have been working with their tax revenue authority to

help them increase that and push forward the tax reform. You are

right, and I have setup a team that will go out and work with many of

these countries so they can raise their own revenues. You really think

you will raise the amount of tax by sending out the British HRM see How

many troops I we sending out to protect them? They don't need

troops. We make sure that we have a duty of care alongside our staff,

but we have to respond to any crisis like the Philippines, and alongside

other countries we have two work alongside them so that they can

reinvest in their own public services. If they can create their

own taxes, will we stop paying aid? We need to look at that but the new

Pakistan Government has been very clear it is a priority and we will

be helping them in pursuing that. Let me show you a picture. Who are

these young women? I don't know I'm sure you are about to tell me. They

are the Ethiopian Spice Girls and I'm surprised you don't know because

they have only managed to become so famous because your department has

financed them to the tune of ?4 million. All of the work we do with

women on the ground, making sure they have a voice in their local

communities, making sure they have some control over what happens to

their own bodies in terms of tackling FGM, female genital

mutilation... Did you know your department has spent ?4 million on

the Ethiopian Spice Girls? Yes, I do, and we have to work with girls

and show them there is a life ahead of them with opportunity and

potential that goes beyond what many of them will experience, which

includes early and forced marriage. It is part of the work we do with

local communities to change attitudes everything you have just

said is immeasurable, and they broadcast on a radio station that

doesn't reach most of the country so it cannot have the impact. It only

reaches 20 million people and the project has been condemned saying

there were serious inefficiencies. That aid report was done a while ago

now, and it was talking about the project when it first got going and

a lot of improvements have happened since. I would go back to the point

that we are working in very difficult environments where we are

trying to get longer term change on the ground and that means working

directly with communities but also investing for the long-term,

investing in some of these girls start changing attitudes in them and

their communities. Why does the British taxpayers spend ?5 million

on a Bangladesh version of Question Time? We work with the BBC to make

sure we can get accountabilities... That is bigger then the BBC Question

Time Normal -- budget. That includes the cost of David Dimbleby's

tattoo! We are working to improve people's prospects but also we are

working to improve their ability to hold their governments to account so

that when they are not getting services on the ground, they have

ways they can raise those concerns with the people who are there to

deliver services for them. In your own personal view, should the next

Conservative Government, if there is one, should you continue to ring

fence spending on foreign aid? But it is critical that if we are going

to spend 7.7% of our national income, we should make sure it is in

our national interest and that means having a clear approach to

humanitarian responses, in keeping the country safe, and a clearer

approach on helping drive economic development and jobs so there is a

long-term end of the dependency Do you believe in an shrine in the

percentage of our GDP that goes on foreign aid in law? Yes, and that is

a coalition agreement. There have been a lot of agreements that you

are sceptical about ring fencing. We are focused on shaking up the

economy and improving our public finances. Why haven't you done that?

At the end of the day we will be accountable but we are committed to

doing that. You are running out of time, will you do it? I hope we can

find the Parliamentary time, but even if we don't, we have acted as

if that law is in place and we have already met 0.7% commitment. If you

are British voter that doesn't believe that we should enshrine that

in by law, which means that with a growing economy foreign aid will

rise by definition, and if you think we should be spending less money on

the Ethiopian Spice Girls, for whom should you wrote in the next

election? I think we have a very sensible approach. I don't know what

the various party manifestoes.. The only party who thinks we shouldn't

be doing this is UKIP. I think you have to look at the response to both

the Philippines crisis and Children In Need. Of all the steps we are

taking to get the country back on track, it shows the British people

will respond to need when they need it and it is one of the things that

makes Britain's special. Thank you. "It's always winter but

never Christmas" - that's how doctors describe life inside

accident and emergency. The College of Emergency Medicine have warned

that this year could bring the "worst crisis on record". If that

dire prediction comes, expect a spring of political recriminations,

but how prepared are the NHS in England? And what do they make of

this autumnal speculation? Giles has been to Leeds to find out.

This winter has already come to our hospitals. It had an official start

date, November the 3rd. That is when weekly updates are delivered to the

NHS's most senior planners, alerting them to any sudden changes in

patient numbers coming in. Where do they numbers register most then

A They are the barometer for what is going on everywhere else, and

they are the pressure point, so if the system is beginning to struggle

then it is in the A department that we see the problems. It is not

that the problems are the A departments, but they are the place

where it all comes together. Plans to tackle those problems start being

drawn up in May and they look at trends, even taking notice of any

flu epidemics in New Zealand. They also look at the amount of bets But

the weather, economic realities structural reforms, and changes to

the general health of the population, are all factors they

have to consider. We get huge amounts of information through the

winter in order to help the NHS be the best it can be, but we had to

redouble our efforts this year because we expected to be a

difficult winter. We know the NHS is stretched so we are working hard to

be as good as we can be. That means they are looking at winter staffing

levels, plans to ask for help from neighbouring hospitals, and

dovetailing help with GP surgeries, and still having the ability to move

up an extra gear, a rehearsed emergency plan if the NHS had to

face a major disease pandemic. You spend any time in any of our

hospitals and you realise the NHS knows that winter is coming and they

are making plans, but you also get a palpable feeling amongst health

workers across the entire system that they do get fed up of being

used as a political football. Doctors and all health care

professionals are frustrated about the politics that surrounds the NHS

in health care. They go to work to treat patients as best as they can,

and the political knock-about does not help anyone. I find it

frustrating when there is a commentary that suggests the NHS

does not planned, when it is surprised by winter, and wherever

that comes from it is hard to take, knowing how much we do nationally

and how much our hard working front line staff are doing. When the

Coalition have recently tried to open up the NHS to be a more

independent body, it is clear the NHS feel they have had an unhealthy

dose of political wrangling between parties on policy. The NHS is not

infallible or making any guarantees, but they seem confident that they

and their patients can survive the winter.

Joining me now from Salford in the Shadow Health Secretary, Andy

Burnham. Tell me this, if you were health secretary now, you just took

over in an emergency election, what would you do to avoid another winter

crisis? I would immediately halt the closure of NHS walk-in centres. We

heard this week that around one in four walk-in centres are closed so

it makes no sense whatsoever for the Government to allow the continued

closure of them. I would put nurses back on the end of phones and

restore an NHS direct style service. The new 111 service is not in a

position to provide help to people this winter. I think the time has

come to rethink how the NHS care is particularly for older people so I

propose the full integration of health and social care. It cannot

make any sense any more to have this approach where we cut social care

and let elderly people drift to hospitals in greater numbers. We

have two rethink it as a whole service. So you would repeal some of

the Tory reforms and move commissioning to local authorities

so the NHS should brace itself for another major top-down health

reorganisation? No, unlike Andrew Lansley I will work with the

organisations ie inherit. He could work with primary care trusts but he

turned it upside down when it needed stability. I will not do that but I

will repeal the health and social care act because last week we heard

that hospitals and health services cannot get on and make sensible

merger collaborations because of this nonsense now that the NHS is

bound by competition law. Let me get your views on a number of ideas that

have been floated either by the press or the Coalition. We haven't

got much time. Do you welcome the plan to bring back named GPs for

over 75s? Yes, but it has got harder to get the GP appointment under this

Government because David Cameron scrapped the 48-hour guarantee that

Tony Blair brought in. He was challenged in the 2005 election

about the difficulty of getting a GP appointment, and Tony Blair brought

in the commitment that people should be able to get that within 48

hours. That has now been scrapped. Do you welcome the idea of allowing

everyone to choose their own GP surgery even if it is not in our

traditional catchment area? I proposed that just before the last

election, so yes. Do you welcome the idea of how a practice is being

rated being a matter of public record, and of us knowing how much,

at least from the NHS, our GP earns? Of course, every political party

supports transparency in the NHS. More information for the public of

that kind is a good thing. Do you welcome this plan to make it will

form the collect in an NHS hospital -- make wilful neglect a criminal

offence. It is important to say you can't pick and mix these

recommendations, you can't say we will have that one and not the

others. It was a balanced package that Sir Robert Francis put forward.

My message is that it must be permitted in full. If we are to

learn the lessons, the whole package must be addressed, and that includes

safe staffing levels across the NHS. Staff have a responsible to two

patients at the government also has responsible at T2 NHS staff and it

should not let them work in understaffed, unsafe conditions -- a

responsibility to NHS staff. Is there a part of the 2004 agreements

that you regret and should be undone? A lot of myths have been

built up about the contract. When it came in, there was a huge shortage

of GPs across the country. Some communities struggle to recruit.

This myth that the government have built, that the 2004 GP contract is

responsible for the AM decries is, it is spin of the worst possible

kind -- the A crisis. You would redo that contract? It was redone

under our time in government and change to make it better value for

money. GPs should be focused on improving the health of their

patients and that is a very good principle. Not so great if you can't

get 24-hour access. I agree with that. We brought in evening and

weekend opening for GPs. That is another thing that has gone in

reverse under Mr Cameron. It is much harder to get a GP appointment under

him and that is one of the reasons why A is an oppressor. -- under

pressure. What do you make of the review into intimidatory tactics by

unions? If there has been intimidation, it is unacceptable,

and that should apply to unions as well as employers. Was Unite wrong

to turn up and demonstrate? I don't know the details, this review will

look into that presumably. I need reassurance that this is not a

pretty cool call by Mr Cameron on the designed to appear near the

election -- that this is not a political call. Are you sponsored by

unite? No. Do you get any money from Unite? No. What have you done wrong?

It seems others are getting money from Unite. Can I tell you what I

think is the scandal of British party political funding, two health

care companies have given ?1.5 million in donations to the Tory

party, they have ?1.5 billion in NHS contracts. I wonder why you don't

spend much time talking about that and obsess over trade union funding.

We are happy to talk about that. We see from e-mails that Mr Miliband's

closest advisers regard Mr Ed Balls as a bit of a nightmare, do you see

a bit of a nightmare about him as well? I don't at all, he is a very

good friend. I can't believe that you are talking about those e-mails

on a national political programme. My goodness, you obviously scraping

the barrel today. I have been in front-line labour politics for 20

years. I can't remember the front bench and the wider party being as

united as it is today and it is a great credit to Ed Miliband and Ed

Balls. We are going into a general election and we are going to get rid

of a pretty disastrous coalition government. It was worth spending a

few seconds to establish your not having nightmares. Thank you for

joining me. It's just gone 11:30am. You're

watching the Sunday Politics. Coming up in just over 20 minutes, I'll be

talking to the MP accused of Hello, I'm Martyn Oates, coming up

on the Sunday Politics in the South West: The fight to save the region's

dwindling air links. And for the next 20 minutes, I'm

joined by Labour's Councillor Kate Wheller, from Dorset County Council,

and Oliver Colvile, Conservative MP for Plymouth Sutton and Devonport.

On Monday, David Cameron met some of the first people to benefit from the

recently extended Help To Buy scheme ` the Government backed mortgages to

get people onto the housing ladder. On the same day, though, St Ives MP

Andrew George claimed the main beneficiaries are likely to be the

rich. In principle, the government has got it right and we need to have

the government is standing behind people trying to get onto the

housing ladder. But as designed, it may actually only benefit the

wealthy who will get onto the housing ladder anyway, and possibly

be used the second home ownership. What we need it to do is help people

who otherwise wouldn't get into that market. Clearly, the intention is

not the Vista benefit the wealthy. Where that happened, it would rub

salt into the wounds in places like Cornwall and Devon and Dorset. My

understanding is that 75% of the people applying to have this help

from the government are actually going to be under 30, and that is

good news, because we need to encourage the young to start owning

homes as well. In terms of the financial circumstances, you don't

share the concerns of Andrew? No, I don't. They have to find 5% of the

deposit and the government will find another 15. That will hopefully take

some of the pressure off the bank of mum and dad. This is interesting.

You will know, I'm sure, there are critics on the right for quite

different reasons he says this is `` who say this is all built on debt,

which might prove dangerous, and it might drive another housing bubble.

We could have a whole host of reasons for stopping people from

doing things. I think we should be positive about it. We have to make

sure we increase the housing stock which will be sold. The big problem

is we are encouraging people to take on mortgages while interest levels

are low, and interest levels we know cannot stay at this artificially low

level for too long. They will go up. You may not be old enough to

remember 50% mortgages, but I am. To find people at risk of being in that

situation gash the horror of repossession, prices going up,

interest levels going up almost daily. That is what this initiative

risks doing. So you would prefer this is not happen? No, I would

refer that the government used any spare money to build houses that are

affordable, to control rent so that landlords are not buying whole

portfolios of homes and benefiting from people in my area, on the

lowest wages. There was a real coalition love`in

in the Commons this week ` the kind of thing that doubtless warms

Oliver's heart. The Tory Education Secretary said how much he liked

Nick Clegg's plan to give all infants free school meals next year.

Disagreement, though, came from another Lib Dem Nick. North Devon's

Nick Harvey says the policy will subsidise parents who can afford to

pay, while ignoring more than a million children in real need.

Janine Jansen reports. Many children from low income

families are entitled to free school meals. However, Deputy Prime

Minister Nick Clegg says, from next temper, all infants and eight will

get a free lunch, regardless of whether they are rich or poor. We're

going to give everybody a hot, helping meal at lunchtime. If you

are a parent paying for your child's school lunch, you could have

a saving of over ?400 per child per year. The trouble is, one MP does

not agree. 1.2 million children living within the government's

definition of child poverty do not get a meal at school. Why does the

government consider it a higher priority to give it to all children

between the ages of five and seven, 1.3 million of which can afford to

pay. All children should be able to enjoy high`quality lunches. I'm

right `` unlike the Right Honourable gentleman, who I normally agree

with, I will have to part ways with him. This school was set up in the

1700s. Today, it has the highest number of children on free school

meals in the whole of Devon. Almost half the pupils are on free school

meals, and that is actually highly unusual the Devon. Even though in

the county there are a high number of families on low incomes, the

actual take`up of free school meals is low ` just under 12%. Parents

told me the low take`up could be due to the stigma, but there is a bigger

problem about eligibility. One society says thousands of children

who meet the government's definition of living in poverty are not getting

a free meal. If a couple was working more than 24 hours, they tend not to

be eligible. If they single parent was working more than 16 hours, they

tend not to be eligible, despite the fact they may also be on low income.

The Children's Society says families on less than 60% of the average

income are missing out. It says the number of children in poverty not

getting a free school meal in Cornwall is 9200 ` and average of

51%. In Devon, it is more than 15,000. The highest centage of the

so`called working poor is in central Devon, that is 30 `` 53%. One mother

has her own solution. I think it should be eligible to all children,

no matter what their circumstances. That may be beyond the government's

means, but Nick Harvey says his suggestion would not cost 1p more. I

want to use this sum of money that has been found and take all children

living in poverty and give them a school meal. It seems agreeing with

Nick isn't as straightforward as it once was.

Kate, the last Labour government had some pilots looking at extending

free school meals. I think the idea is something which is still popular

in Labour circles. The question is, how would you do it? I like the idea

of free school meals much more universally. It is good social

cohesion, for children to all sit down and eat together. The whole

thing about take`up is difficult. There is a huge stigma attached. It

doesn't surprise me the Lib Dems are in this situation. They are

developing thick skin is not agreeing with each other. I think

it's a shame they've chosen this to fall apart on, because it is a good

initiative. Which of the next EU agree with? `` of the Nicks do you

agree with? On this occasion, I agree with Nick Clegg. If families

were paid a living wage, we would all be able to feed our children

properly, wouldn't we? But should we not target families who really need

it? We all know that an awful lot of people who do require that help do

not ask for it, for all sorts of misplaced pride. This way, all

children will now receive a good, hot meal. Oliver, I have a feeling

you will say a good `` the same thing. I will. There is a big

problem in my area with low skills and low wages, so anything we can do

to try to take the pressure off families making ends meet we should

most certainly be doing. Anything which also takes away the stigma of

children being given school meals, they don't have to be concerned

about it, I think is also a good thing. In other areas such as child

benefits, the government seems to be moving away from universal benefit

and saying, let's target this towards people who really need it.

This is about making sure children have a good start to the day. A need

to make sure they have a good breakfast. Nick Harvey is saying at

the moment this will lead a lot of older children who desperately need

this money out of the frame, when the same part of money could be

targeting them. In my constituency, there are places where 50 or 60% of

children are getting free school meals. I am sure there are many more

people whose children are involved in. I think it is important that we

do everything we can to make sure children have a healthy start. A

related issue, something else Nick Harvey talks about a lot is the fact

that the government's pupil premium is tagged directly to free school

meal take`up, despite the fact that if the government assesses child

poverty in a much broader way, that is leaving a lot of people in the

south`west out of the net. I asked what the definition of child poverty

was and I was told it was very difficult. I represent a naval

garrison city and I know it goes towards service families and I think

that is a good then. The pupil premium is complex. It should not be

linked to free school meals, but it has been. It makes life terribly

difficult for schools themselves ` they don't really know where they

are. The government is now talking about looking at the whole thing. I

read only recently that when universal credit comes in, this will

make a big difference and it will change, but the start of universal

credit is a movable feast. Heaven knows when that will actually start.

And the ramifications of that impact on all these other benefits are also

unknown. Until we get to grips with the entire package, we will always

have these questions, should we be doing this or that? The whole thing

needs a proper, comprehensive look at. And despite promises, that

simply isn't happening. It hasn't been a great week for

aviation in the South West. On Monday the Exeter`based operator

Flybe announced heavy job losses. And there's huge concern about the

future of flights to London from the region's only other surviving

airport at Newquay. Flybe currently provides these as well, but plans to

pull out in the spring. Tamsin Melville reports.

The early flight from London Gatwick to Newquay. It is the airport's

flagship route, but as things stand, aged `` it could stop in March.

Without that flight it will be very difficult to do business on a

national basis. It makes things so much easier. The people to invest,

it is essential. To travel down to Cornwall any other way takes so many

hours. But this plane was less than half full. The operator has blamed

costs at Gatwick for reasons of pulling out. The number of

passengers checking in at the Gates has fallen every year for the past

five years. With Cornwall Council subsidising this airport to the tune

of ?3 million a year, critics argue it is not worth keeping it open. The

council's had to keep the Gatwick flight going by classing it is a

public service obligation route has support, but there is a lengthy

tender process governed by EU rules. At the same time, some ministers say

they need to re`evaluate air passenger duty. There is a special

exemption for flights in an out of Northern Ireland. The principle is,

where air passenger duty does cause home to the viability, they can look

at an exception. `` does cause harm. We need to look at whether these

places are in disproportionately affected by air passenger duty. But

this passenger says keeping the airport going with taxpayers money

is wrong. Cornwall Council is having to find over ?3 million every year

to prop the airport up. We just cannot afford that every more. ``

anymore. In a bid to claw back some cash, the authority is talking about

doubling the airport development the paid by each passenger to ?10, but

this is not enough for Tim. Even putting it up by ?5 is not going to

go up anywhere near to covering the subsidy. In the past, the cost of

subsidising the airport has been explored. For now, closing the

airport completely is off the agenda. Passengers will rise again.

Cornwall has got another round of European funding and there will be

more interest and investment. If we lose the airport now, that is a

crucial part of our productivity to make sure we are competitive with

the rest of the country and the world. Across the region, Plymouth

airport closed in 2011. Efforts to reopen it looked uncertain. This

week, Flybe announced it would cut a further 500 jobs. The site of

flights leaving Newquay is clearly something that cannot be guaranteed.

Tamsin Melville reporting. And the Green Party's Rupert Read joins us

to discuss. Listening to that report, it seems clear that the main

spokespeople and business people are united that it is essential to

retain services like this. Your party disagrees. Well, they are

looking to get free money, which is never really free. It comes from the

taxpayer. This is wrong. But the argument is this stimulates the

private sector. It is not persuasive when you take into account a Friends

of the Earth report which shows regional airports are in most cases

a drain on the local economy. Why? It is because people leave the area

on those planes and fly off to go on holiday. Goods get shipped in

Shipley `` cheaply and undercut local businesses. I think Newquay

airport is in terminal decline. We ought to be shipping the quality ``

the money into ways it can be used better to help the local people. For

example, how about serious investment in rail travel? The

numbers using trains in the area are going up. Let's put our money into

that. We think that should be done as part of a renationalised train

system. Oliver, what do you make of the argument that Plymouth airport

is dying? The issue is very sad. 37,000 people signed a petition to

make sure it could be brought back to life again. I understand Newquay

is likely to get some money from the Chief Secretary of the Treasury.

I've written to the secretary of state asking whether or not Plymouth

could have similar things as well. But I do think we need to try and

maintain if we possibly can the regional airports. It is a problem.

My fear is that Exeter Airport may be the only one that survives. We

need to make sure we have significantly better train routes,

as Rupert said. If the airports do have to go, we need to get trains

which go into the heart of Exeter Airport as well, the same as what

happens in Southend. Kate, you are obviously quite far away. Do you

think regional airports are worth the fuss? Well, we do have one very

popular airport. We use Extech airport in our area as well. ``

Exeter Airport. I think regional airports are good for the economy

and they are good for the country as a whole. However, I do think we need

to be looking much more holistic li at the whole infrastructure. ``

holistically. Particularly along the south coast. We need general

investment in the infrastructure ` road, rail and broadband. That is

what will really make the difference to our economic road. `` growth.

Unfortunately, if a regional airport is not washing its own face, as they

say, it may have to go. We cannot keep subsidising things. Rupert, I

can see you do not think there is much of an argument for regional

airports. As what the competitive disadvantage some areas would face

if Newquay closes? Oliver has called for money to be invested in pretty

much everything, but there is in the money. The money should be targeted

where it can do good. Wi`Fi is absolutely crucial. And, as I've

said clearly, rail investment. The numbers using the trains in your

part of the country are going up. Let's have good quality rail

services we can rely on and be proud of. Rupert, thank you. Time now for

our round`up of the political week in just 60 seconds.

This is the only region which has seen a rise in unemployment. The

so`called bedroom tax is labelled Dickensian, as Andrew Leis intellect

`` yet another coalition policy. This target is the most marginalised

in society. It is completely the wrong way to address the serious

shortage in affordable housing. The region's Police Commissioner has

asked to put up council tax by more than 2%.

Cornwall Council plans a rise of just under that. And Baroness Wilcox

says we should call time on train toilets flushing straight onto the

tracks. I'm delighted to say how happy I am

to travel by rail most of the time, all the way to the West country. But

I'm sorry to say that we still have raw sewage going out onto the lines.

Oliver. Conservative elite commissioners and council leaders

all saying they need more money. Well, they want to say that there

will be no council tax increases for the next three years. The cost of

living is such an issue this autumn, I think it is important councils do

everything they can to keep those taxes down. I will be calling on the

local authority here to do that. You keep the council tax down this year

because you artificially put it off. What that means is that,

ultimately, we have to put a big hike in because we simply cannot

fulfil our commitment is to our residents on the level of funding

central government is giving us. I spent the whole of yesterday in

meetings... if we hear more. Thank you. Andrew,

it is back to you. Who'd be an MP? It's a good

question. Certainly something Mark Pritchard must have asked himself

when his picture graced the front page of the Daily Telegraph, with

allegations that he had offered to set up business deals overseas in

return for hundreds of thousands of pounds. Mr Pritchard dismissed the

claims as hurtful and wrong. He referred himself to the

Parliamentary Standards Commissioner who has now said there is

insufficient evidence to investigate. In a moment we'll talk

to Mr Pritchard, but first let's take a look back at how the story

unfurled. A Conservative MP has denied allegations that he used his

Parliamentary contacts for financial gain... The daily Telegraph says

Mark Pritchard offered to broker investments overseas. In a statement

he said the allegations made by the Telegraph are false. Mr Pritchard

was secretly filmed... What do you make of these allegations? He has

referred himself to the Parliamentary Commissioner for

standards to clear his name and I suspect this story will reopen the

debate about what MPs should be allowed, having business interests

elsewhere. Is it not clear that you did ask for money in consultancy

services? First of all I would like to apologise for the sunglasses I

have had a lot of comments about that. On a serious point, these

claims by the Telegraph of false. You didn't ask for ?3000? They are

false, hurtful and malicious. It is known widely that I have sued the

Telegraph previously. I have also been critical of their coverage of

the plebgate affair, their reporting of that. I have been supportive of

the cross-party Royal Charter and I know that some people in the media

don't like my position on that. That is why it is malicious. I believe in

a free press. That free press also has a responsibility to be fair

accurate and lawful. In discussions with this business who turned out to

be a Telegraph reporter, it is true that you ask for ?3000 a month

consultancy fee. The point is.. That is the point. No. That video

has been cut and pasted to serve the Telegraph's story. The story was

that we want to get Mark Bridger, for whatever reason, at any cost. --

Mark Bridger hard. I would not go down the line they were hoping I

would go down. Everything I own outside of Parliament is openly

declared. We are allowed to have outside witness interests. The

Telegraph need to say clearly whether they accept that or they

don't. I think you need to say clearly whether you asked for the

money or not. You then went on to ask for ?300,000 if it was a 10

million deal, you asked for 3% commission. Let me be clear, if I

was asking for income in return for lobbying, or raising issues in

Parliament, or setting up Parliamentary groups, or going to

ministers, writing to ministers that would be completely

inappropriate. I was approached by somebody to advise them on business.

It is entirely proper and entirely within the rules for members of

Parliament to have outside consultancies and interests. Did you

or didn't you? I am answering the question in the way that I want to

answer it, not in the way that fits a particular narrative. The

narrative, unfortunately, of some parts of the Telegraph and to be

fair, there are some very good journalists, I know there is a

dispute about the direction of that paper at senior parts. Do they want

to return to being a Catholic, objective newspaper or do they want

to slip into the slippery slope of being an agnostic rag, looking for

sensationalist headlines? Part of this has come from your membership

of these all-party Parliamentary groups. You were in Malta when you

are first approached, I think you were on a trip there, Hungary is

another one, there is an uncomfortable overlap between your

political and business interests. I have no business interests in any of

those countries. Some of the country is the Telegraph mentioned, let me

be clear, I have not even visited. You were boasting that you knew the

Albanian Prime Minister and the Mayor of Teheran and the previous

prime minister. I make no apology for making foreign trips. I think it

is unfortunate we have a narrative developing in some parts of the

press that if a politician goes abroad at the taxpayers expense it

is wrong. If they go abroad at a host government's expense it is

wrong. If they go abroad with a charity, NGO and private company,

even if it is declared, it is wrong. We want people with an international

perspective in Parliament. Look at this map. You are a member of 5

country groups. I don't know what Canada has done not to deserve you,

or Australia. 54 groups, you are a part of. You're like... This is the

Mark Pritchard British Empire. That is very kind. If I had global

interests that white I would not be in Parliament. No, no, no. That is

the point... It is the suspicion, that you used these groups to drum

up business for your consultants. Prove it, that is the trouble. These

sorts of headlines, create suspicion. I am suing the

Telegraph... Have you issued a writ? I expect an apology. Have you issued

a writ? I have just answered your question. It is yes or no, have you

issued a writ? I am in final legal discussions tomorrow about issuing a

writ. You have raised something for top the fact is that is inaccurate.

I am a member of 40-something Parliamentary groups, of which I

make no apology. We have got 54 Let me answer the question if I may It

would be very useful. There are 196 countries around the world, it is

less than a quarter of the country groups on my figures. I make no

apology. One of my regrets is not having visited Syria, I don't know

if I am a member of the Syria group, part I should become a member, I

make no apology. -- perhaps I should become. When it came to the Syria

vote, I was blind sided foot of yes, we have excellent briefings. I had

to make a judgement based on part knowledge with nothing beats being

on the ground, as even BBC journalists recognised this week.

Nothing beats being on the ground. You posted about your connections in

Albania to getting a business contract. You meet these people

through these all Parliamentary groups. That is where there is an

unhealthy overlap. That is what the Telegraph said, let's wait and see.

Look... You are a newspaperman, you know lots of people in the newspaper

industry, as well as being a respected broadcaster. I am not

going to prejudice my legal proceedings against the Telegraph. I

make no apology. A good politician has to be local am a national and

international. Hang on hang on - has to be local, national and

international. We need politicians who get out of the Westminster

bubble, who have a business hinterland, who keep their foot in

the real world and have an international perspective. And ask

for 3% commission? I have answered the question. It was a cut and

pasted video, photo shopped to suit the agenda of the Telegraph. They

need to get back to serious news reporting and I wish those well at

the senior part of the Telegraph who want to get to those days. We look

forward to the writ. Thank you. Now - there's been more good news on

the economy for George Osborne this week - inflation's down, growth

forecasts have been revised up and unemployment has fallen again. On

Friday the former Bullingdon boy donned a head torch and went down't

pit for just one of many photo opportunities ahead of the Autumn

Statement, which he'll deliver in the Commons on fifth December. And,

who knows, he might even take his hard hat off for that.

# Going underground. # Let the boys all saying and let

the boys all shout for tomorrow # Lah, lah, love, love.

# I talk and talk until my head explodes.

# Make this boy shout, make this boy scream.

# Going underground. # Going underground.

# I'm going underground. # I'm going underground.

George Osborne in his heart out he probably sleeps with it on. This

Autumn Statement is becoming a more important part of the political

calendar for the coalition. It looks like this is where they are finally

going to come up with some kind of response to Ed Miliband's game

changing electricity price freeze. The idea which is mooted is they

will move people's green tax on two general bills which is not an answer

but cosmetically it could have apolitical impact. George Osborne is

receiving a lot of representations from lobby groups, business, MPs on

his own side, for tax cuts and extra bits spending and he has to spend

the next two weeks reminding people of something that has been skewered

by the economic recovery. This country has a fiscal deficit which

is twice that of France, supposedly the crisis economy in western Europe

or if you accept it will take another parliament again to

eliminate this deficit, we are not even halfway through the age of

austerity. He is in no position to give anything away. He has to hold

the line. Danny Alexander has been useful but this is his real

challenge. He is going to give stuff away. When the Autumn Statement

comes away, 15 months from an election, Nick Clegg has been

talking about raising the tax allowance threshold even further,

talk of moving green levies of the electricity bills, he is going to

give stuff away. We will get funding for free school meals that Nick

Clegg mentioned in his party conference. The significance of the

Autumn Statement is twice a year, a Chancellor stands up and we all look

at the state of the economy. If you talk to members of the Chancellor's

circle, it is interesting how nervous they are. They say, don t

assume we are going to have this wonderful growth for ever, don't

assume everything is fine in the eurozone. I think what would help

the Chancellor is if somebody was able to see some of that humility in

public. It is recognised that he was far too triumphalist

speech he made on the 9th of September, when he said to Ed Balls,

we have one and you cannot make an economic policy on the cost of

living -- we have... Won. economic policy on the cost of

people don't seem to learn from Norman Lamont's green shoots. Labour

has moved from complaining there is no growth, now there is, to say

has moved from complaining there is is gross but living standards are

not rising. If the economy grows by nearly 3% next year, even the bank

is saying it will grow by 2.8%, living standards could start to

rise. It does but everybody in a difficult position politically if

the economy starts growing, ironically. We need to remind

ourselves that economy, the natural direction of an economy is to grow.

Unless the politicians screw up Unless you have some idiot in

charge! It is not a cause for the Morris dance that they seem to be

doing, certainly on the Tory side. Osborne is put in a difficult

position goes he will have to stop giving stuff away, he cannot push

the austerity line at the same time as jangling his magical growth - he

will have to start giving stuff away. It puts Labour in a difficult

position, it is very unlikely that living standards will match GDP Not

since 2003, GDP has been a great indicator. Wages have stagnated for

ten years, food has gone up 17% energy has gone up 24%. That is a

decade in which everybody has got poorer. The real sweet spot comes

when wages start to outstrip inflation. It is a sweet spot and

will be a huge challenge for Ed Miliband. As ever on the economy

with a sweet spot, you have a danger moment because that is when the

governor of the Bank of England will have to look at interest rates.

Everything he was saying last week was when we move toward 7%

unemployment come that is not the trigger for raising interest rates,

it is the moment when we look at it. Everything was saying he did not

want to do that. When do you anticipate wages outstripping

inflation? It hasn't happened for so long. The second half of next year.

Wages and prices are not the sole measure of living standards, there

are broader measures which no one seems willing to use.

That's all for today. The Daily Politics will be back at tomorrow at

midday on BBC Two and I will back here on BBC One at 11:00am next

week. Remember if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.