:00:36. > :00:42.Welfare reform is one of the government's most popular policies.
:00:43. > :00:46.So Labour says it would be even tougher than the Tories.
:00:47. > :00:50.We'll be asking the Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary if she's got
:00:51. > :00:56.Even Labour supporters worry that Ed Miliband hasn't got what it takes
:00:57. > :01:01.Labour grandees are increasingly vocal about their concerns.
:01:02. > :01:12.Over 50% of Labour voters think they'd do better with a new leader.
:01:13. > :01:16.And what of this leader? He's apparently "toxic" on the doorstep.
:01:17. > :01:20.In the South West: unpopular than Gordon Brown,
:01:21. > :01:22.Could Cornwall lose millions if it's stopped from running
:01:23. > :01:27.And the lawyers claiming legal `id cuts
:01:28. > :01:40.promised an electric car revolution, why so little progress?
:01:41. > :01:47.Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh, the toxic tweeters
:01:48. > :01:55.First, the deepening crisis in Iraq, where Sunni Islamists are now
:01:56. > :01:57.largely in control of the Syrian-Iraq border, which means
:01:58. > :02:03.they can now re-supply their forces in Iraq from their Syrian bases
:02:04. > :02:06.Rather than moving on Baghdad, they are for the moment consolidating
:02:07. > :02:09.their grip on the towns and cities they've already taken.
:02:10. > :02:11.They also seem to be in effective control of Iraq's
:02:12. > :02:15.biggest oil refinery, which supplies the capital.
:02:16. > :02:17.And there are reports they might now have taken the power
:02:18. > :02:24.Iraqi politicians are now admitting that ISIS,
:02:25. > :02:27.the name of the Sunni insurgents, is better trained, better equipped and
:02:28. > :02:32.far more battle-hardened than the US-trained Iraqi army fighting it.
:02:33. > :02:35.Which leaves the fate of Baghdad increasingly in the hands
:02:36. > :02:53.No good news coming out of there, Janan. No good news and no good
:02:54. > :02:57.options either. The West's best strategy is to decide how much
:02:58. > :03:02.support to give to the Iraqi government. The US is sending over
:03:03. > :03:05.about 275 military personnel. Do they go further and contemplate
:03:06. > :03:11.their support? General Petraeus argued against it as it might be
:03:12. > :03:17.seen as the US serving as the force of Shia Iraqis -- continue their
:03:18. > :03:26.support. Do we contemplate breaking up Iraq? It won't be easy. The Sunni
:03:27. > :03:29.and Shia Muslim populations don t live in clearly bordered areas, but
:03:30. > :03:33.in the longer term, do we deal with it in the same way we dealt with the
:03:34. > :03:38.break-up of the Ottoman empire over 100 years ago? In the short-term and
:03:39. > :03:45.long-term, completely confounding. Quite humiliating. If ISIS take
:03:46. > :03:51.Baghdad I can't think of a bigger ignominy for foreign policy since
:03:52. > :03:55.Suez. If Iraq is partitioned, it won't be up to us. It will be what
:03:56. > :04:01.is happening because of what is happening on the ground. Everything
:04:02. > :04:07.does point to partition, and that border, which ISIS control, between
:04:08. > :04:12.Syria and Iraq, that has been there since it was drawn during the First
:04:13. > :04:15.World War. That is gone as well An astonishingly humbling situation the
:04:16. > :04:24.West, and you can see the Kurds in the North think this is a charge --
:04:25. > :04:27.chance for authority. They think this is the chance to get the
:04:28. > :04:33.autonomy they felt they deserved a long time. Janan is right. We can't
:04:34. > :04:37.do much in the long term, but we have to decide on the engagement.
:04:38. > :04:40.And the other people wish you'd be talking turkey, because if there is
:04:41. > :04:45.some blowback and the fighters come back, they are likely to come back
:04:46. > :04:49.from Turkey. Where is Iran in all of this? There were reports last week
:04:50. > :04:53.that the Revolutionary guard, the head of it, he was already in
:04:54. > :04:57.Baghdad with 67 advisers and there might have been some brigades that
:04:58. > :05:03.have gone there as well. Where are they? What has happened? I'm pretty
:05:04. > :05:14.sure the Prime Minister of Iraq is putting more faith in Iran than the
:05:15. > :05:18.White House and the British. I think they are running the show, in
:05:19. > :05:22.technical terms. John Kerry is flying into Cairo this morning, and
:05:23. > :05:26.what is his message? It is twofold. One is to Arab countries, do more to
:05:27. > :05:31.encourage an inclusive government in Iraq, mainly Sunni Muslims in the
:05:32. > :05:36.government, and the Arab Gulf states should stop funding insurgents in
:05:37. > :05:41.Iraq. You think, Iraq, it's potentially going to break up, so
:05:42. > :05:45.this sounds a bit late in the day and a bit weak. It gets
:05:46. > :05:49.fundamentally to the problem, what can we do? Niall Ferguson has a big
:05:50. > :05:53.piece in the Sunday Times asking if this is place where we cannot doing
:05:54. > :05:58.anything. He doesn't want to do anything. By the way, that is what
:05:59. > :06:03.most Americans think. That is what opinion polls are showing. You have
:06:04. > :06:07.George Osborne Michael Gold who would love to get involved but they
:06:08. > :06:10.cannot because of the vote in parliament on Syria lasted -- George
:06:11. > :06:15.Osborne and Michael Gove. This government does not have the stomach
:06:16. > :06:18.for military intervention. We will see how events unfold on the ground.
:06:19. > :06:21.All parties are agreed that Britain's 60-year old multi-billion
:06:22. > :06:26.The Tory side of the Coalition think their reforms are necessary
:06:27. > :06:29.and popular, though they haven't always gone to time or to plan.
:06:30. > :06:33.In the eight months she's had since she became Shadow Secretary of State
:06:34. > :06:40.for Work and Pensions, Rachel Reeves has talked the talk about getting
:06:41. > :06:42.people off benefits, into work and lowering the overall welfare bill.
:06:43. > :06:45.her first interview in the job she threatened "We would
:06:46. > :06:49.But Labour has opposed just about every change the Coalition
:06:50. > :06:53.has proposed to cut the cost and change the culture of welfare.
:06:54. > :06:56.Child benefit, housing benefit, the ?26,000 benefit cap -
:06:57. > :07:02.They've been lukewarm about the government's flagship Universal
:07:03. > :07:05.Credit scheme - which rolls six benefit payments into one - and
:07:06. > :07:12.And Labour has set out only two modest welfare cuts.
:07:13. > :07:16.This week, Labour said young people must have skills or be in training
:07:17. > :07:21.That will save ?65 million, says Labour, though the cost
:07:22. > :07:27.And cutting winter fuel payments for richer pensioners which will
:07:28. > :07:34.Not a lot in a total welfare bill of around ?200 billion.
:07:35. > :07:37.And with welfare cuts popular among even Labour voters, they will soon
:07:38. > :07:44.have to start spelling out exactly what Labour welfare reform means.
:07:45. > :07:57.Welcome. Good morning. Why do you want to be tougher than the Tories?
:07:58. > :08:00.We want to be tough in getting the welfare bill down. Under this
:08:01. > :08:04.government, the bill will be ?1 million more than the government set
:08:05. > :08:09.out in 2010 and I don't think that is acceptable. We should try to
:08:10. > :08:13.control the cost of Social Security. But the welfare bill under the next
:08:14. > :08:17.Labour government will fall? It will be smaller when you end the first
:08:18. > :08:21.parliament than when you started? We signed up to the capping welfare but
:08:22. > :08:27.that doesn't see social security costs ball, it sees them go up in
:08:28. > :08:32.line with with inflation or average earnings -- costs fall. So where
:08:33. > :08:37.flair will rise? We have signed up to the cap -- welfare will rise We
:08:38. > :08:41.have signed up to the cap. We will get the costs under control and they
:08:42. > :08:44.haven't managed to achieve it. The government is spending ?13 billion
:08:45. > :08:49.more on Social Security and the reason they are doing it is because
:08:50. > :08:53.the minimum wage has not kept pace with the cost of living so people
:08:54. > :08:57.are reliant on tax credits. They are not building houses and people are
:08:58. > :09:03.relying on housing benefit. We have a record number of people on zero
:09:04. > :09:07.hours contracts. I'm still not clear if you will cut welfare if you get
:09:08. > :09:13.in power. Nobody is saying that the cost of welfare is going to fall.
:09:14. > :09:18.The welfare cap sees that happening gradually. That is a Tory cap. And
:09:19. > :09:25.you've accepted it. You're being the same as the Tories, not to. If they
:09:26. > :09:29.had a welfare cap, they would have breached it in every year of the
:09:30. > :09:34.parliament. Social Security will be higher than the government set out
:09:35. > :09:37.because they failed to control it. You read the polls, and the party
:09:38. > :09:40.does lots of its own polling, and you're scared of being seen as the
:09:41. > :09:47.welfare party. You don't really believe all of this anti-welfare
:09:48. > :09:50.stuff? We are the party of work not welfare. The Labour Party was set up
:09:51. > :09:52.in the first place because we believe in the dignity of work and
:09:53. > :09:56.we believe that work should pay wages can afford to live on. I make
:09:57. > :10:01.no apologies for being the party of work. We are not the welfare party,
:10:02. > :10:06.we are the party of work. Even your confidential strategy document
:10:07. > :10:09.admits that voters don't trust you on immigration, the economy, this is
:10:10. > :10:14.your own people, and welfare. You are not trusted on it. The most
:10:15. > :10:17.recent poll showed Labour slightly ahead of the Conservative Party on
:10:18. > :10:22.Social Security, probably because they have seen the incompetence and
:10:23. > :10:26.chaos at the Department for Work and Pensions under Iain Duncan Smith.
:10:27. > :10:32.Your own internal document means that the voters don't trust you on
:10:33. > :10:35.welfare reform. That is why we have shown some of this tough things we
:10:36. > :10:40.will do like the announcement that Ed Miliband made earlier this week,
:10:41. > :10:44.that young people without basic qualifications won't be entitled to
:10:45. > :10:47.just sign on for benefits, they have to sign up for training in order to
:10:48. > :10:50.receive support. That is the right thing to do by that group of young
:10:51. > :11:00.people, because they need skills to progress. We will, once that. - we
:11:01. > :11:05.will, onto that. You say you criticise the government that it had
:11:06. > :11:09.a cap and wouldn't have met it, but every money-saving welfare reform,
:11:10. > :11:16.you voted against it. How is that being tougher? The most recent bout
:11:17. > :11:20.was the cap on overall welfare expenditure, and we went through the
:11:21. > :11:25.lobbies and voted for the Tories. You voted against the benefit cap,
:11:26. > :11:30.welfare rating, you voted against, child benefit schemes, you voted
:11:31. > :11:32.against. You can't say we voted against everything when we voted
:11:33. > :11:36.with the Conservatives in the most recent bill with a cap on Social
:11:37. > :11:43.Security. It's just not correct to say. The last time we voted, we
:11:44. > :11:50.walked through the lobby with them. You voted on the principle of the
:11:51. > :11:55.cap. You voted on every step that would allow the cap to be met. Every
:11:56. > :11:58.single one. The most recent vote was not on the principle of the cap it
:11:59. > :12:01.was on a cap of Social Security in the next Parliament and we signed up
:12:02. > :12:06.for that. It was Ed Miliband who called her that earlier on. Which
:12:07. > :12:13.welfare reform did you vote for We voted for the cap. Other than that?
:12:14. > :12:18.We have supported universal credit. You voted against it in the third
:12:19. > :12:23.reading. We voted against some of the specifics. If you look at
:12:24. > :12:28.universal credit, they have had to write off nearly ?900 million of
:12:29. > :12:32.spending. I'm not on the rights and wrongs, I'm trying to work out what
:12:33. > :12:35.you voted for. Some of the things we are going to go further than the
:12:36. > :12:41.government with. For example, cutting benefits for young people
:12:42. > :12:43.who don't sign of the training. The government had introduced that. For
:12:44. > :12:46.example, saying that the richest pensioners should not get the winter
:12:47. > :12:50.fuel allowance, that is something the government haven't signed up.
:12:51. > :12:54.You would get that under Labour and this government haven't signed up
:12:55. > :13:00.for it. ?100 million on the winter fuel allowance and ?65 million on
:13:01. > :13:05.youth training. ?165 million. How big is the welfare budget? The cap
:13:06. > :13:13.would apply to ?120 billion. And you've saved 125 -- 165 million
:13:14. > :13:18.Those are cuts that we said we would do in government. If you look at the
:13:19. > :13:21.real prize from the changes Ed Miliband announced in the youth
:13:22. > :13:25.allowance, it's not the short-term savings, it's the fact that each of
:13:26. > :13:27.these young people, who are currently on unemployment benefits
:13:28. > :13:34.without the skills we know they need to succeed in life, they will cost
:13:35. > :13:38.the taxpayer ?2000 per year. I will come onto that. You mentioned
:13:39. > :13:42.universal credit, which the government regards as the flagship
:13:43. > :13:48.reform. It's had lots of troubles with it and it merges six benefits
:13:49. > :13:51.into one. You voted against it in the third reading and given lukewarm
:13:52. > :13:57.support in the past. We have not said he would abandon it, but now
:13:58. > :14:01.you say you are for it. You are all over the place. We set up the rescue
:14:02. > :14:04.committee in autumn of last year because we have seen from the
:14:05. > :14:09.National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee, report after
:14:10. > :14:14.report showing that the project is massively overbudget and is not
:14:15. > :14:18.going to be delivered according to the government timetable. We set up
:14:19. > :14:20.the committee because we believe in the principle of universal credit
:14:21. > :14:25.and think it is the right thing to do. Can you tell us now if you will
:14:26. > :14:31.keep it or not? Because there is no transparency and we have no idea. We
:14:32. > :14:37.are awash with information. We are not. The government, in the most
:14:38. > :14:42.recent National audit Forest -- National Audit Office statement said
:14:43. > :14:47.it was a reset project. This is really important. This is a flagship
:14:48. > :14:52.government programme, and it's going to cost ?12.8 billion to deliver,
:14:53. > :14:56.and we don't know what sort of state it is in, so we have said that if we
:14:57. > :15:03.win at the next election, we will pause that for three months and
:15:04. > :15:08.calling... Will you stop the pilots? We don't know what status they will
:15:09. > :15:12.have. We would stop the build of the system for three months, calling the
:15:13. > :15:18.National Audit Office to do awards and all report. The government don't
:15:19. > :15:21.need to do this until the next general election, they could do it
:15:22. > :15:25.today. Stop throwing good money after bad and get a grip of this
:15:26. > :15:30.incredibly important programme. You said you don't know enough to a view
:15:31. > :15:34.now. So when you were invited to a job centre where universal credit is
:15:35. > :15:40.being rolled out to see how it was working, you refused to go. Why We
:15:41. > :15:43.asked were a meeting with Iain Duncan Smith and he cancelled the
:15:44. > :15:46.meeting is three times. I'm talking about the visit when you were
:15:47. > :15:51.offered to go to a job centre and you refused. We had an appointment
:15:52. > :15:53.to meet Iain Duncan Smith at the Department for Work and Pensions and
:15:54. > :15:58.said he cancelled and was not available, but he wanted us to go to
:15:59. > :16:03.the job centre. We wanted to talk to him and his officials, which she
:16:04. > :16:06.did. Would it be more useful to go to the job centre and find out how
:16:07. > :16:20.it was working. He's going to tell you it's working fine.
:16:21. > :16:26.Advice Bureau in Hammersmith, they are working to help the people
:16:27. > :16:33.trying to claim universal credit. Iain Duncan Smith cancelled three
:16:34. > :16:38.meetings. That is another issue I was asking about the job centre It
:16:39. > :16:44.is not another issue because Iain Duncan Smith fogged us off. This
:16:45. > :16:48.week you said that jobless youngsters who won't take training
:16:49. > :16:57.will lose their welfare payments. How many young people are not in
:16:58. > :17:02.work training or education? There are 140,000 young people claiming
:17:03. > :17:08.benefits at the moment, but 850 000 young people who are not in work at
:17:09. > :17:16.the moment. This applies to around 100,000 young people. There are
:17:17. > :17:23.actually 975,000, 16-24 -year-olds, not in work, training or education.
:17:24. > :17:30.Your proposal only applies to 100,000 of them, why? This is
:17:31. > :17:35.applying to young people who are signing on for benefits rather than
:17:36. > :17:43.signing up for training. We want to make sure that all young people ..
:17:44. > :17:47.Why only 100,000? They are the ones currently getting job-seeker's
:17:48. > :18:00.allowance. We are saying you can not just sign up to... Can I get you to
:18:01. > :18:06.respond to this, the number of people not in work, training or
:18:07. > :18:42.education fell last year by more than you are planning to help. Long
:18:43. > :18:45.education fell last year by more address that problem to make sure
:18:46. > :18:50.all young people have the skills they need to get a job. Your policy
:18:51. > :18:55.is to take away part of the dole unless young unemployed people agree
:18:56. > :19:01.to study for level three qualifications, the equivalent of an
:19:02. > :19:04.AS-level or an NVQ but 40% of these people have the literary skills of a
:19:05. > :20:38.nine-year-old. After all that failed nine-year-old. After all that failed
:20:39. > :20:42.went back to college because he wanted to get the skills. He said
:20:43. > :20:47.that it wasn't until he went back to college that he could pick up a
:20:48. > :20:53.newspaper and read it, it made a huge difference but too many people
:20:54. > :20:57.are let down by the system. I am wondering how the training will make
:20:58. > :21:02.up for an education system that failed them but let's move on to
:21:03. > :21:08.your leader. Look at this graph of Ed Miliband's popularity. This is
:21:09. > :21:12.the net satisfaction with him, it is dreadful. The trend continues to
:21:13. > :21:18.climb since he became leader of the Labour Party, why? What you have
:21:19. > :21:22.seen is another 2300 Labour councillors since Ed Miliband became
:21:23. > :21:30.the leader of the Labour Party. You saw in the elections a month ago
:21:31. > :21:35.that... Why is the satisfaction rate falling? We can look at polls or
:21:36. > :21:40.actual election results and the fact that we have got another 2000 Labour
:21:41. > :21:45.councillors, more people voting Labour, the opinion polls today show
:21:46. > :21:49.that if there was a general election today we would have a majority of
:21:50. > :21:57.more than 40, he must be doing something right. Why do almost 0%
:21:58. > :22:04.of voters want to replace him as leader? Why do 50% and more think
:22:05. > :22:10.that he is not up to the job? The more people see Ed Miliband, the
:22:11. > :22:15.less impressed they are. The British people seem to like him less. The
:22:16. > :22:20.election strategy I suggest that follows from that is that you should
:22:21. > :22:25.keep Ed Miliband under wraps until the election. Let's look at actually
:22:26. > :22:30.what happens when people get a chance to vote, when they get that
:22:31. > :22:36.opportunity we have seen more Labour councillors, more Labour members of
:22:37. > :22:43.the European Parliament... Oppositions always get more. The
:22:44. > :22:47.opinion polls today, one of them shows Labour four points ahead. You
:22:48. > :22:52.have not done that well in local government elections or European
:22:53. > :22:58.elections. Why don't people like him? I think we have done incredibly
:22:59. > :23:03.well in elections. People must like a lot of the things Labour and Ed
:23:04. > :23:07.Miliband are doing because we are winning back support across the
:23:08. > :23:12.country. We won local councils in places like Hammersmith and Fulham,
:23:13. > :23:18.Crawley, Hastings, key places that Labour need to win back at the
:23:19. > :23:23.general election next year. Even you have said traditional Labour
:23:24. > :23:28.supporters are abandoning the party. That is what Ed Miliband has said as
:23:29. > :23:34.well. We have got this real concern about what has happened. If you look
:23:35. > :23:39.at the elections in May, 60% of people didn't even bother going to
:23:40. > :23:43.vote. That is a profound issue not just for Labour. You said
:23:44. > :23:48.traditional voters who perhaps at times we took for granted are now
:23:49. > :23:54.being offered an alternative. Why did you take them for granted? This
:23:55. > :24:00.is what Ed Miliband said. I am not saying anything Ed Miliband himself
:24:01. > :24:05.has not said. When he ran for the leadership he said that we took too
:24:06. > :24:09.many people for granted and we needed to give people positive
:24:10. > :24:13.reasons to vote Labour, he has been doing that. He has been there for
:24:14. > :24:17.four years and you are saying you still take them for granted. Why? I
:24:18. > :24:22.am saying that for too long we have taken them for granted. We are on
:24:23. > :24:31.track to win the general election next year and that will defy all the
:24:32. > :24:34.odds. You are going to win... Ed Miliband will win next year and make
:24:35. > :24:42.a great Prime Minister. Now to the Liberal Democrats, at the
:24:43. > :24:46.risk of intruding into private grief. The party is still smarting
:24:47. > :24:49.from dire results in the European and Local Elections. The only poll
:24:50. > :24:53.Nick Clegg has won in recent times is to be voted the most unpopular
:24:54. > :24:58.leader of a party in modern British history. No surprise there have been
:24:59. > :24:59.calls for him to go, though that still looks unlikely. Here's
:25:00. > :25:02.Eleanor. Liberal Democrats celebrating,
:25:03. > :25:08.something we haven't seen for a while. This victory back in 199 led
:25:09. > :25:13.to a decade of power for the Lib Dems in Liverpool. What a contrast
:25:14. > :25:19.to the city's political landscape today. At its height the party had
:25:20. > :25:23.69 local councillors, now down to just three. The scale of the
:25:24. > :25:29.challenge facing Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems is growing. The party is
:25:30. > :25:33.rock bottom in the polls, consistently in single figures. It
:25:34. > :25:38.was wiped out in the European elections losing all but one of its
:25:39. > :25:45.12 MEPs and in the local elections it lost 42% of the seats that it was
:25:46. > :25:51.defending. But on Merseyside, Nick Clegg was putting on a brave face.
:25:52. > :25:56.We did badly in Liverpool, Manchester and London in particular,
:25:57. > :26:02.we did well in other places. But you are right, we did badly in some of
:26:03. > :26:06.those big cities and I have initiated a review, quite
:26:07. > :26:12.naturally, to understand what went wrong, what went right. As Lib Dems
:26:13. > :26:16.across the country get on with some serious soul-searching, there is an
:26:17. > :26:21.admission that his is the leader of the party who is failing to hit the
:26:22. > :26:26.right notes. Knocking on doors in Liverpool, I have to tell you that
:26:27. > :26:32.Nick Clegg is not a popular person. Some might use the word toxic and I
:26:33. > :26:35.find this very difficult because I know Nick very well and I see a
:26:36. > :26:41.principal person who passionately believes in what he is doing and he
:26:42. > :26:52.is a nice guy. As a result of his popularity, what has happened to the
:26:53. > :26:55.core vote? In parts of the country, we are down to just three
:26:56. > :27:00.councillors like Liverpool for example. You also lose the
:27:01. > :27:04.deliverers and fundraisers and the organisers and the members of course
:27:05. > :27:09.so all of that will have to be rebuilt. As they start fermenting
:27:10. > :27:14.process, local parties across the country and here in Liverpool have
:27:15. > :27:20.been voting on whether there should be a leadership contest. We had two
:27:21. > :27:25.choices to flush out and have a go at Nick Clegg or to positively
:27:26. > :27:30.decide we would sharpen up the campaign and get back on the
:27:31. > :27:35.streets, and by four to one ratio we decided to get back on the streets.
:27:36. > :27:41.We are bruised and battered but we are still here, the orange flag is
:27:42. > :27:46.still flying and one day it will fly over this building again, Liverpool
:27:47. > :27:51.town hall. But do people want the Lib Dems back in charge in this
:27:52. > :27:55.city? I certainly wouldn't vote for them. Their performance in
:27:56. > :28:00.Government and the way they have left their promises down, I could
:28:01. > :28:06.not vote for them again. I voted Lib Dem in the last election because of
:28:07. > :28:12.the university tuition fees and I would never vote for them again
:28:13. > :28:15.because they broke their promise. The Lib Dems are awful, broken
:28:16. > :28:19.promises and what have you. I wouldn't vote for them. This is the
:28:20. > :28:24.declaration of the results for the Northwest... Last month, as other
:28:25. > :28:29.party celebrated in the north-west, the Lib Dems here lost their only
:28:30. > :28:34.MEP, Chris Davies. Now there is concern the party doesn't know how
:28:35. > :28:40.to turn its fortunes around. We don't have an answer to that, if we
:28:41. > :28:48.did we would be grasping it with both hands. We will do our best to
:28:49. > :28:53.hold onto the places where we still have seats but as for the rest of
:28:54. > :28:57.the country where we have been hollowed out, we don't know how to
:28:58. > :29:01.start again until the next general election is out of the way. After
:29:02. > :29:04.their disastrous performance in the European elections, pressure is
:29:05. > :29:15.growing for the party to shift its stance. I think there has to be a
:29:16. > :29:22.lancing of the wound, there should in a referendum and the Liberal
:29:23. > :29:26.Democrats should be calling it. The rest of Europe once this because
:29:27. > :29:32.they are fed up with Britain being unable to make up its mind. The Lib
:29:33. > :29:37.Dems are now suffering the effects of being in Government. The party's
:29:38. > :29:44.problem, choosing the right course to regain political credibility
:29:45. > :29:49.We can now speak to form a Lib Dems leader Ming Campbell. Welcome back
:29:50. > :29:55.to the Sunday Politics. Even your own activists say that Nick Clegg is
:29:56. > :29:59.toxic. How will that change between now and the election? When you have
:30:00. > :30:04.had disappointing results, but you have to do is to rebuild. You pick
:30:05. > :30:09.yourself up and start all over again, and the reason why the
:30:10. > :30:14.Liberal Democrats got 57, 56 seats in the House of Commons now is
:30:15. > :30:16.because we picked ourselves up, we took every opportunity and we have
:30:17. > :30:28.rebuilt from the bottom up. least popular leader in modern
:30:29. > :30:33.history and more unpopular than your mate Gordon Brown. You are running
:30:34. > :30:37.out of time. No one believes that being the leader of a modern
:30:38. > :30:41.political party in the UK is an easy job. Both Ed Miliband and David
:30:42. > :30:45.Cameron must have had cause to think, over breakfast this morning,
:30:46. > :30:48.when they saw the headlines in some of the Sunday papers. Of course it
:30:49. > :30:53.is a difficult job but it was pointed out a moment or two ago that
:30:54. > :30:56.Nick Clegg is a man of principle and enormous resilience if you consider
:30:57. > :31:00.what he had to put up with, and in my view, he is quite clearly the
:31:01. > :31:03.person best qualified to lead the party between now and the general
:31:04. > :31:09.election and through the election campaign, and beyond. So why don't
:31:10. > :31:13.people like him? We have had to take some pretty difficult decisions
:31:14. > :31:20.and, of course, people didn't expect that. If you look back to the rather
:31:21. > :31:23.heady days of the rose garden behind ten Downing St, people thought it
:31:24. > :31:27.was all going to be sweetness and light, but the fact is, we didn t
:31:28. > :31:31.know then what we know now, about the extent of the economic crisis we
:31:32. > :31:35.win, and a lot of difficult decisions have had to be taken in
:31:36. > :31:40.order to restore economic stability. Look around you. You will see we are
:31:41. > :31:44.not there yet but we are a long way better off than in 2010. You are not
:31:45. > :31:52.getting the credit for it, the Tories are. We will be a little more
:31:53. > :31:56.assertive about taking the credit. For example, the fact that 23
:31:57. > :32:00.million people have had a tax cut of ?800 per year and we have taken 2
:32:01. > :32:03.million people out of paying tax altogether. Ming Campbell, your
:32:04. > :32:10.people say that on every programme like this. Because it is true. That
:32:11. > :32:14.might be the case, but you are at seven or 8% in the polls, and nobody
:32:15. > :32:22.is listening, or they don't believe it. Once
:32:23. > :32:23.is listening, or they don't believe doubt that what we have achieved
:32:24. > :32:27.will be much more easily recognised, and there is no doubt,
:32:28. > :32:31.for example, in some of the recent polls, like the Ashcroft Pole,
:32:32. > :32:39.something like 30% of those polled said that as a result at the next
:32:40. > :32:41.something like 30% of those polled general election, they would prepare
:32:42. > :32:46.their to be a coalition involving the Liberal Democrats. So there is
:32:47. > :32:50.no question that the whole notion of coalition is still very much a live
:32:51. > :32:54.one, and one which we have made work in the public interest. The problem
:32:55. > :32:58.is people don't think that. People see you trying to have your cake and
:32:59. > :33:01.eat it. On the one hand you want to get your share of the credit for the
:33:02. > :33:05.turnaround in the economy, on the other hand you can't stop yourself
:33:06. > :33:09.from distancing yourself from the Tories and things that you did not
:33:10. > :33:15.like happening. You are trying to face both ways at once. If you
:33:16. > :33:28.remember our fellow Scotsman famously said you cannot ride both
:33:29. > :33:28.remember our fellow Scotsman to the terms -- terms of the
:33:29. > :33:30.remember our fellow Scotsman coalition agreement, which is what
:33:31. > :33:34.we signed up to in 2010. In addition, in furtherance of that
:33:35. > :33:37.agreement, we have created things like the pupil premium and the
:33:38. > :33:41.others I mentioned and you were rather dismissive. I'm not
:33:42. > :33:45.dismissive, I'm just saying they don't make a difference to what
:33:46. > :33:50.people think of you. We will do everything in our power to change
:33:51. > :33:56.that between now and May 2015. The interesting thing is, going back to
:33:57. > :34:01.the Ashcroft result, it demonstrated clearly that in constituencies where
:34:02. > :34:05.we have MPs and we are well dug in, we are doing everything that the
:34:06. > :34:10.public expects of us, and we are doing very well indeed. You aren't
:34:11. > :34:15.sure fellow Lib Dems have been saying this for you -- you and your
:34:16. > :34:19.fellow Liberal Dems have been saying this for a year or 18 months, and
:34:20. > :34:22.since then you have lost all of your MEPs apart from one, you lost your
:34:23. > :34:29.deposit in a by-election, you lost 310 councillor, including everyone
:34:30. > :34:34.in Manchester or Islington. Mr Clegg leading you into the next general
:34:35. > :34:40.election will be the equivalent of the charge of the light Brigade I
:34:41. > :34:44.doubt that very much. The implication behind that lit you
:34:45. > :34:49.rehearsed is that we should pack our tents in the night and steal away.
:34:50. > :34:52.-- that litany. And if you heard in that piece that preceded the
:34:53. > :34:56.discussion, people were saying, look we have to start from the bottom and
:34:57. > :35:10.have to rebuild. That is exactly what we will do. Nine months is a
:35:11. > :35:16.period of gestation. As you well know. I wouldn't dismiss it quite so
:35:17. > :35:19.easily as that. I'm not here to say we had a wonderful result or
:35:20. > :35:24.anything like it, but what I do say is that the party is determined to
:35:25. > :35:30.turn it round, and that Nick Clegg is the person best qualified to do
:35:31. > :35:35.it. Should your party adopt a referendum about in or out on
:35:36. > :35:37.Europe? No, we should stick to the coalition agreement. If there is any
:35:38. > :35:43.transfer of power from Westminster to Brussels, that will be subject to
:35:44. > :35:48.a referendum. No change. And finally, as a Lib Dem, you must be
:35:49. > :35:54.glad you are not fighting the next election yourself? I've fought every
:35:55. > :36:00.election since 1974, so I've had a few experiences, some good, some
:36:01. > :36:03.bad, but the one thing I have done and the one thing a lot of other
:36:04. > :36:07.people have done is that they have stuck to the task, and that is what
:36:08. > :36:11.will happen in May 2015. Ming Campbell, thank you for joining us.
:36:12. > :36:13.It's just gone 11.35am, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:36:14. > :36:16.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now
:36:17. > :37:06.stranger to that kind of rulour while Mr Gilbert declared there was
:37:07. > :37:09.more chance of him joining NASA and becoming the first man on M`rs than
:37:10. > :37:12.joining the Tories. Anything is possible with the help of the Sunday
:37:13. > :37:15.Politics graphics department. Defections or no defections, Robin,
:37:16. > :37:19.underlying this of course is the fact that, undeniably, it is not a
:37:20. > :37:22.great time, electorally, to be a Lib Dem, is it?
:37:23. > :37:26.Well, it hasn't been in the last month, certainly not with the
:37:27. > :37:31.elections, local elections `nd by`election, but we have thd next
:37:32. > :37:34.year towards the general eldction, we can start again, we are ` party
:37:35. > :37:39.government, and we have to persuade people of the great things we have
:37:40. > :37:42.done in government, the libdral agenda that we have deliverdd. And
:37:43. > :37:46.have got a great programme `head of us, and I think we can do that,
:37:47. > :37:49.although we have the Lord Ashcroft poll that also tells us that...
:37:50. > :37:51.We going to talk about that, yes. ..Things are difficult.
:37:52. > :37:52.Particularly in Cornwall, yds. What
:37:53. > :37:56.Liberal Democrats are resilhent and Lord Ashcroft always makes that
:37:57. > :37:58.point, and he always says there s absolutely no complacency
:37:59. > :38:01.Conservative Party and my mdssage to the Conservative Party is absolutely
:38:02. > :38:07.right. OK. They will be grateful for that, no doubt. But having Steph
:38:08. > :38:10.here from UKIP as well, it strikes me, looking at recent electhons and
:38:11. > :38:15.looking at that particular poll it does look as if, while you `re going
:38:16. > :38:20.down on one side of the seesaw, UKIP almost in mirror image seem to be
:38:21. > :38:25.going up. Well, of course, we have become the... We're in government,
:38:26. > :38:28.we're the party of responsibility, we're delivering, actually
:38:29. > :38:32.things in power. UKIP is thd party very much of none of the rest,
:38:33. > :38:37.perhaps we were to some degree. Though, yes, UKIP has done very well
:38:38. > :38:40.recently. I suspect they won't do nearly as well in the gener`l
:38:41. > :38:43.election coming up, but thex will have their effect, there no doubt
:38:44. > :38:46.about that. It's a problem potentially, isn't it, Steph, that
:38:47. > :38:52.absolutely right that there was a protest party which attractdd people
:38:53. > :38:55.previously which happened to be called the Lib Dems, now thdy are in
:38:56. > :39:00.government, if you like, in some people's eyes they are tainted with
:39:01. > :39:03.government in some ways in the same way as Labour and the
:39:04. > :39:05.Conservatives. Now you are the protest party. They might not be
:39:06. > :39:11.particularly interested in xour views. I think there are two points
:39:12. > :39:17.here. Firstly, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and I'm
:39:18. > :39:21.sure you were delighted to hear a party chairman say that wd are
:39:22. > :39:23.learning from the Lib Dems, because they have been very effective
:39:24. > :39:29.I think the other factor th`t is coming into play is that more people
:39:30. > :39:32.are realising, a lot of people in Cornwall vote Liberal Delocrat
:39:33. > :39:35.thinking they are from the original Liberal party, and they are not
:39:36. > :40:01.as socially democratic in their thinking, so I think it is dasier
:40:02. > :40:04.for them to come to us rathdr than perhaps go elsewhere, when they are
:40:05. > :40:09.I don't think the Liberal Ddmocrats are going to be wiped out, but I do
:40:10. > :40:12.think there is going to be ` significant change, and I think next
:40:13. > :40:15.year's general election is going to be really interesting, becatse I am
:40:16. > :40:18.sure we will get some MPs and of course it depends how thd other
:40:19. > :41:32.parties pan out, the balancd of power, may not lead to many seats.
:41:33. > :41:41.Liberal Democrats who signed up for that did break that pledge,
:41:42. > :41:43.no doubt about that, and Nick Clegg has apologised for that.
:41:44. > :41:47.The irony is that actually the way the regime has turned ott is
:41:48. > :41:50.actually much better for sttdents as it has turned out in terms of paying
:41:51. > :41:53.back, and we have a lot of support from the student community now.
:41:54. > :41:55.They all move on, but, yeah, it was...
:41:56. > :41:58.There were a lot of lessons to be learnt from the coalition.
:41:59. > :42:04.I'm glad I've got two representatives from Cornwall here
:42:05. > :42:06.today, because Cornwall is dmbarking on its third tranche
:42:07. > :42:12.That is a mixed blessing, bdcause it means, after nearly 15 years of
:42:13. > :42:15.support, Cornwall is still one of the poorest places in the whole EU.
:42:16. > :42:18.It is also a year late getthng started and a battle is unddr
:42:19. > :43:59.Here's Scott Bingham. is managed locally in Cornw`ll.
:44:00. > :44:04.On a visit to the Aerohub in the last week,
:44:05. > :44:08.the Minister for local growth played down the concerns, saying that
:44:09. > :44:13.local enterprise partnerships, or LEPs, would continue to decide
:44:14. > :44:39.I don't know anybody on the LEP from central
:44:40. > :44:42.Everybody on the LEP is frol local councils, local representathves
:44:43. > :44:46.It is actually led by busindsses, so that is about as devolved
:44:47. > :44:49.as you could possibly get, as far as I am concerned.
:44:50. > :44:51.And the chairman of Cornwall's LEP seemed relatively happy with that
:44:52. > :44:56.If it is agreed then give us the authority to spend it.
:44:57. > :44:59.Most of our leaders are either from the local authority or they are
:45:00. > :45:04.That is what the minister s`id he was going to do, so if we hold
:45:05. > :45:08.Whether the rest of Cornwall's business community are convhnced
:45:09. > :45:11.There is concern too that the move towards a national
:45:12. > :45:14.operation programme flies in the face of government preaching
:45:15. > :45:15.on localism and Cornwall's `mbition for devolution.
:45:16. > :45:18.But when EU cash has alreadx created around 25,000 jobs in the county,
:45:19. > :45:21.much more than national pride at stake.
:45:22. > :45:25.I think it is fair to say that the Lib Dems and UKIP, like the
:45:26. > :45:27.Conservatives, are theoretically very keen on the notion of localism.
:45:28. > :45:43.Steph, I mean, you sit on Cornwall Council.
:45:44. > :45:44.Would you like to see this programme
:45:45. > :45:47.administerd locally? Absolttely and I do that ask to see thd
:45:48. > :46:06.agreed to sign the letter of two sure that actually it is more
:46:07. > :46:08.effective when the money is delivered locally.
:46:09. > :46:11.But one of the big problems has been with the huge amount
:46:12. > :46:15.People see money spent as an outcome, as a successful outcome.
:46:16. > :46:18.A few ask a business, to see how well they are dohng,
:46:19. > :46:21.they don't look that expendhture, they looked at profit, they look
:46:22. > :46:24.at income, and what we have absolutely got to do this thme is
:46:25. > :46:27.make sure this round of EU funding delivers the outcome we need.
:46:28. > :46:30.Clearly it hasn't, as you s`id in your introduction, the Cornish
:46:31. > :46:32.economy has gone backwards, despite half a billion here.
:46:33. > :46:33.Somebody got something very wrong with that.
:46:34. > :46:36.There have been some successful programmes.
:46:37. > :46:38.OK, it was Robin who was involved right at
:46:39. > :46:45.But just quickly, I take it you are not impressed
:46:46. > :46:53.answer to this issue of loc`l management, that essentiallx even
:46:54. > :47:03.if it is administered in London essentially all
:47:04. > :47:10.the decisions would be made by the LEP in Cornwall?
:47:11. > :47:20.I want to see much more loc`l control, because it is much more
:47:21. > :47:23.likely that we will actuallx get the outcomes we need, which is
:47:24. > :47:26.growth in the Cornish econoly, not how much is spent, but what does
:47:27. > :47:33.OK, Robin, I take it, you are nodding, you also think that the
:47:34. > :47:36.whole thing should be running Cornwall? Yes. Absolutely. Ht came
:47:37. > :47:39.as a question in the House of Lords yesterday actually. One of the
:47:40. > :47:42.things that came out was th`t the government minister Baroness Stahl
:47:43. > :47:44.said very strongly that it would be administered in Cornwall, apart from
:47:45. > :47:48.checking eligibility. Now, `s the UK Government take all the rap on if
:47:49. > :47:51.it is spent wrong, then I don't disagree with that, but I think we
:47:52. > :47:54.have got to be very careful about language here. I congratulate Steph
:47:55. > :47:58.on signing the letter with the other group leaders to impress on the
:47:59. > :48:03.government that this is really, really important, that the let and
:48:04. > :48:05.government that this is really, really important, that the LEP and
:48:06. > :48:11.local authority have decision`making powers on this. The governmdnt, I
:48:12. > :48:14.think, from a ministerial point of view, is convinced they havd
:48:15. > :48:17.delivered on that. What I think they have got to be very careful about is
:48:18. > :48:25.what the civil servants acttally do behind that. And because thdre is so
:48:26. > :48:27.much of this jargon and process stuff around European funding. Once
:48:28. > :48:42.it hits the shores of the UK that we had to be very careful that a real
:48:43. > :48:46.decision is backed down. Have you got the sense of who is right at the
:48:47. > :48:52.moment, because the governmdnt is saying, well, don't worry,
:48:53. > :48:55.officially administered in London, but all the decision`making is in
:48:56. > :49:10.Cornwall. And you have got people in Cornwall saying we are going to
:49:11. > :49:12.absolutely certain is that Europe says this, and the
:49:13. > :49:15.government has confirmed it, the money is has been ring fencdd, it
:49:16. > :49:18.has to be spent in Cornwall. It has to be spent in Cornwall and the
:49:19. > :49:21.Isles of Scilly. I think, to be honest, the ministers actually
:49:22. > :49:24.believe they have delivered what Cornwall once. The danger is that
:49:25. > :49:31.the process in terms of civhl servants and doesn't actually quite
:49:32. > :49:34.get to that, that Tina Stahl, the Minister, said very specifically
:49:35. > :49:36.that there will be complete decision`making on the programme at
:49:37. > :49:40.Cornish level. I don't take that for granted. I am not as naive `s that.
:49:41. > :49:43.I'm sure Steph doesn't, either. But ministers have stated that, and it
:49:44. > :49:47.is on the record, it is on Hansard, and I think that is at least a step
:49:48. > :49:50.towards it, we have just got to keep out absolutely vigilant on this
:49:51. > :49:53.Steph, as you are a UKIP councillor, I must make the point
:49:54. > :49:56.that obviously none of this money would be here at all if we work
:49:57. > :50:00.outside the EU, which you would like to see. If we were outside of the
:50:01. > :50:03.EU, all the money would say here. We are net contributors. Well, it
:50:04. > :50:06.wouldn't necessarily be in Cornwall, would it? Now. It depends on
:50:07. > :50:08.electing the right people to Westminster, doesn't it? We have got
:50:09. > :50:11.all six of our Cornish MPs `re net members of the government. Governing
:50:12. > :50:14.parties, and we are not necdssarily getting as much of a positive
:50:15. > :50:17.response from central government as we would like, so if we can't.. A
:50:18. > :50:21.few look at the lobbying power of the small number of MPs we have got,
:50:22. > :50:24.and I don't think Robin would disagree, with this, whichever party
:50:25. > :50:26.is actually in government, ht doesn't actually bring us more
:50:27. > :50:29.funding for local authoritids, more funding for the police, so far
:50:30. > :50:32.better rail and road links, does it? So it is difficult to imagine that
:50:33. > :50:35.any domestic government would be giving that type of money to
:50:36. > :50:37.Cornwall. But half a billion of EU funding, our money returned, hasn't
:50:38. > :50:40.delivered those that growth in the Cornish economy that we are looking
:50:41. > :50:44.for, either, has it? It hasn't made a huge difference. . It has made a
:50:45. > :50:46.huge difference. If it hadn't been there, we wotld be
:50:47. > :50:49.far, far further back. The whole history of the Cornish economy since
:50:50. > :50:53.the end of the Industrial Rdvolution and the has been an defence cuts and
:50:54. > :50:55.that sort of side, has been Cornwall dividing further and further and
:50:56. > :50:59.further away from the rest of the UK. That was reasonably stopped and
:51:00. > :51:02.actually we crept well out of the, for a few years, the category of
:51:03. > :51:06.being in it, so we. I didn't want us to have aid for another further
:51:07. > :51:09.term, because we should havd been in the right place. In the last two
:51:10. > :51:12.years, yes, we have moved b`ckwards, but I think that might be something
:51:13. > :51:16.to do with the grand recesshon that we have had, and the fact that. . We
:51:17. > :51:19.have all had the grand recession... You can't use that one... No, no, no
:51:20. > :51:22.I mean let's not be naive hdre. Peripheral areas outside of the
:51:23. > :51:25.south`east suffer far more from the recession, look at the north`east of
:51:26. > :51:28.England, look at parts of W`les And if we could just move forward with
:51:29. > :51:31.the programme. If you look `t the amount of money that is just added
:51:32. > :51:34.to GDP from the campus, the university campus, a lot of
:51:35. > :51:37.well`paid jobs, the construction of the building, the maintenance, the
:51:38. > :51:39.students, the accommodation, the bars, the clubs, and so on. All of
:51:40. > :51:43.that is added to GDP and we have still gone backwards. Yes. Dxactly.
:51:44. > :51:45.That proves my point, doesn't it? Because that was only there for
:51:46. > :51:49.because of EU funding. So if that wasn't there, it would be absolutely
:51:50. > :51:52.worse. OK. Stephanie. You h`ve proved my point. OK. We do need to
:51:53. > :51:55.move on with. Criminal lawydrs in Devon are refusing to take on new
:51:56. > :51:57.legal aid cases in protest at funding cuts. Thd
:51:58. > :52:00.industrial action means somd people are appearing in the county's courts
:52:01. > :52:02.without legal representation. The lawyers say they are making the
:52:03. > :52:05.important point that the government the government's plans to slice 18%
:52:06. > :52:08.of the legal aid budget aid budget could soon mean the poor ard denied
:52:09. > :52:10.access to justice permanently. Jenny Cooper reports. Since April, a
:52:11. > :52:13.number of cases across Devon have been delayed or disrupted bdcause
:52:14. > :52:16.defendants have been left whthout a lawyer to represent them. Criminal
:52:17. > :52:19.lawyers in the county have been refusing to take legal aid cases,
:52:20. > :52:21.because of a row with the government. They are protesting
:52:22. > :52:24.against government plans for a 7.5% cut in fees for solicitors. Fewer
:52:25. > :52:27.legal aid contracts for four work at least a sense police stations, and
:52:28. > :52:30.an average 6% fee cut for barristers. Only last week, a man
:52:31. > :52:32.appeared here at Exeter Crown Court accused of harassing Fiona LcEwan,
:52:33. > :52:36.the mother of Scarlett Keeldy, who was killed in Goa six years ago But
:52:37. > :52:38.there was no one to represent him because criminal lawyers across
:52:39. > :52:42.Devon are taking part in industrial action in protest at legal `id cuts.
:52:43. > :52:44.So, the hearing has been delayed, and the defendant was released on
:52:45. > :52:48.bail. This lawyer was asked to take on the case, but he explaindd to the
:52:49. > :52:51.judge why he couldn't. Given that I have had a lifetime, a workhng
:52:52. > :52:55.lifetime, of doing this, to turn round to those who need my help and
:52:56. > :52:58.say that I am not prepared to help them, it really goes very mtch
:52:59. > :53:01.against the grain, and I find it very difficult. But you havd decided
:53:02. > :53:04.to take part in the action. What drives you, why are you doing it,
:53:05. > :53:07.despite the fact that it gods against your values? Becausd if I
:53:08. > :53:14.and others in my position do not do so now the situation is simply going
:53:15. > :53:18.to get worse. Devon is only one of a handful of areas in the country
:53:19. > :53:23.where this is happening. In Hull, it has had a big impact. It has caused
:53:24. > :53:26.a catalogue of delays and forced all's senior judge, Jeremy
:53:27. > :53:32.Richardson, to issue unprecddented guidance on how courts should
:53:33. > :53:36.proceed. This is the first indication that it is causing
:53:37. > :53:44.significant problems. What this is designed to demonstrate is what life
:53:45. > :53:48.will be like in the criminal justice system if the government gets its
:53:49. > :53:53.way with these particular proposals. Campaigners in Ddvon
:53:54. > :53:57.admit that things aren't quhte as serious as they are in whold. But
:53:58. > :54:06.they want the court could grind to a halt if the protest continuds. This
:54:07. > :54:08.firm focuses entirely on dohng criminal legal aid work but the
:54:09. > :54:16.partners here say they will have to close if the cuts continue. I'm
:54:17. > :54:24.depressed and frustrated and sad. I went to a comprehensive school. I do
:54:25. > :54:28.legal aid work because I thhnk it is important and because it provides
:54:29. > :54:32.me with a living, but I can't do it on thin air. I can't run a business
:54:33. > :54:35.being paid legal aid rates which don't allow me to pay my st`ff.
:54:36. > :54:47.There is also concern about the impact of the cuts on wider society.
:54:48. > :54:54.The purpose of the welfare state is for society to look after the
:54:55. > :54:57.accused of crime or who havd difficulties with their employment
:54:58. > :55:02.or their housing or they have been injured to be able to seek redress
:55:03. > :55:05.and to take legal advice on that, and to be represented. But `cross
:55:06. > :55:19.the board, all of those are`s have been decimated in the last two
:55:20. > :55:22.years. In a statement, the Linistry of Justice says. But the delays
:55:23. > :55:25.caused by any boycott may actually end up costing the government money.
:55:26. > :55:29.Robin. This is very concernhng, isn't it? yes. It is, actually. I
:55:30. > :56:00.would agree with that. A fundamental part of democracy is access to
:56:01. > :56:03.justice. But we also have a problem in that the country has got pretty
:56:04. > :56:14.bankrupt back in 2010, and legal aid costs the country, us as
:56:15. > :56:17.individuals, ?2 billion and this programme is to try to shavd, not
:56:18. > :56:20.a decimation of it, but abott 2 0 million of it, which is abott 1 % of
:56:21. > :56:24.that money. So you have to get a balance there. I actually think that
:56:25. > :56:27.is the wrong thing to cut in terms of the Justice budget. To md, it is
:56:28. > :56:30.ridiculous that we keep 85,000 people in work in this country in
:56:31. > :56:33.jail. Which is 50% more than any equivalent countries like France and
:56:34. > :56:36.Italy. But in terms of this issue, we still have the most expensive,
:56:37. > :56:40.one of the most expensive ldgal aid systems in the world. That hs not
:56:41. > :56:43.just rhetoric. I have looked at the figures. It is true. And so we have
:56:44. > :57:01.a real dilemma here. Whether this is exactly the right solution, I don't
:57:02. > :57:04.know. But we had to pay it back in some way. OK. Steph,
:57:05. > :57:08.mean, you get is very proud of the British justice system. Are you
:57:09. > :57:11.concerned about these cuts? Yes in the sense that there is a rhsk to
:57:12. > :57:14.people and the law, as Robin says, should apply to everybody, dverybody
:57:15. > :57:17.should have access, it shouldn't depend on whether you can afford to
:57:18. > :57:20.employ somebody in the legal profession. But it is getting out of
:57:21. > :57:23.hand, the level of debt in this country, I mean, you know, this
:57:24. > :57:26.government is making some ilpact on reducing the deficit and thd economy
:57:27. > :57:29.seems to be growing. Would xou make the cut in this place? We would
:57:30. > :57:33.actually look at it differently and go for cutting the CPS. We didn t
:57:34. > :57:36.used to have a CPS. We spending a fortune on that? OK. We havd got to
:57:37. > :57:40.move on to our round`up of people to go weak. In just 60 seconds. A very
:57:41. > :57:43.philosophical question therd. Devon County Council decides to close 20
:57:44. > :57:46.care homes and 17 day centrds to save ?12 million. Unions sax 10 0
:57:47. > :57:49.jobs are at risk. The counchl has made quite a brash decision. It is
:57:50. > :58:01.going to impact greatly on the community. And staff who
:58:02. > :58:05.provide those front line services. Outspoken top`line MP and GP Sarah
:58:06. > :58:08.Weatherstone is elected to chair the Commons Health Committee. The NHS
:58:09. > :58:11.touches peoples lives a million times every 36 hours. It is the most
:58:12. > :58:20.extraordinary achievement and also the most extraordinary challenge.
:58:21. > :58:25.Meanwhile, in the wake of the winter's floods, the
:58:26. > :58:28.Commons Environment Committde tells the government to spend a lot more
:58:29. > :58:31.money on preventive work. Wd are spending more in this parli`ment
:58:32. > :58:47.than any previous government has done. ?3.2 billion on flood
:58:48. > :58:50.defences. And Plymouth MP and former life guard Alison Seabeck shgns up
:58:51. > :59:00.the Royal life saving Society's campaign to reduced drowning.
:59:01. > :59:02.Steph. Is the government grhpping the flood problems efficiently?
:59:03. > :59:05.Probably not sufficiently. @t least it does appear to be taking it
:59:06. > :59:08.seriously, but too little too late, I think. Sums it up. They h`ve been
:59:09. > :59:11.calling for maintenance of the flood defences, the dredging and so on,
:59:12. > :59:15.for so long, and why did it take the severe weather of last wintdr for
:59:16. > :59:18.the government really to st`nd up and take notice? Robin are xou going
:59:19. > :59:19.to defend the government? Well, no, I want to say
:59:20. > :59:24.information, you can apply to them and they will be obliged to tell
:59:25. > :59:42.you. Thanks for joining us. Andrew, back to you.
:59:43. > :59:47.think you'd want to. Labour grandees are not queueing up to sing his
:59:48. > :59:52.praises. Look at this. In my view, he is the leader we have and he is
:59:53. > :59:56.the leader I support and he is somebody capable of leading the
:59:57. > :00:02.party to victory. Ed Miliband will leave this to victory, and I believe
:00:03. > :00:07.he can. If he doesn't, what would happen to the Labour Party? We could
:00:08. > :00:11.be in the wilderness for 15 years. At the moment he has to convince
:00:12. > :00:17.people he has the capacity to lead the country. That's not my view but
:00:18. > :00:19.people don't believe that. We had a leader of the Labour Party was
:00:20. > :00:26.publicly embarrassed, because whoever was in charge of press
:00:27. > :00:36.letting go through a process where we have councillors in Merseyside
:00:37. > :00:39.resigning. It was a schoolboy error. Having policies without them being
:00:40. > :00:50.drawn together into a convincing and vivid narrative and with what you do
:00:51. > :00:55.the people in the country. You have to draw together, connect the
:00:56. > :01:02.policies, link them back to the leader and give people a real sense
:01:03. > :01:08.of where you are going. Somehow he has never quite managed to be
:01:09. > :01:14.himself and create that identity with the public. And we are joined
:01:15. > :01:24.by the president of you girls, Peter Kellner. Welcome to the Sunday
:01:25. > :01:29.politics. -- YouGov. The Labour Party is six points ahead in your
:01:30. > :01:33.poll this morning. So what is the problem? On this basis he will win
:01:34. > :01:36.the next election. If the election were today and the figures held up,
:01:37. > :01:41.you would have a Labour government with a narrow overall majority. One
:01:42. > :01:48.should not forget that. Let me make three points. The first is, in past
:01:49. > :01:53.parliaments, opposition normally lose ground and governments gain
:01:54. > :01:56.ground in the final few months. The opposition should be further ahead
:01:57. > :02:02.than this. I don't think six is enough. Secondly, Ed Miliband is
:02:03. > :02:05.behind David Cameron when people are asked who they want as Prime
:02:06. > :02:09.Minister and Labour is behind the Conservatives went people are asked
:02:10. > :02:12.who they trust on the economy. There have been elections when the party
:02:13. > :02:16.has won by being behind on leadership and other elections where
:02:17. > :02:21.they have won by being behind on the economy. No party has ever won an
:02:22. > :02:26.election when it has been clearly behind on both leadership and the
:02:27. > :02:29.economy. Let me have another go The Labour Party brand is a strong
:02:30. > :02:36.brand. The Tory Bramleys week. The Labour brand is stronger. That is a
:02:37. > :02:46.blast -- the Labour -- the Tory Bramleys week. A lot of the Tories
:02:47. > :02:54.-- the Tory brand is weak. Cant you win on policies and a strong party
:02:55. > :02:57.brand? If you have those too, you need the third factor which isn t
:02:58. > :03:02.there. People believing that you have what it takes, competent
:03:03. > :03:09.skills, determination, determination, whatever makes to
:03:10. > :03:15.carry through. -- whatever mix. A lot of Ed Miliband policies, on the
:03:16. > :03:19.banks, energy prices, Brent controls, people like them. But in
:03:20. > :03:24.government, would they carry them through? They think they are not up
:03:25. > :03:29.to it. -- rent controls. If people think you won't deliver what you
:03:30. > :03:33.say, even if they like it, they were necessarily vote for you. That is
:03:34. > :03:38.the missing third element. There is a strong Labour brand, but it's not
:03:39. > :03:44.strong enough to overcome the feeling that the Labour leadership
:03:45. > :03:48.is not up to it. Nick, you had some senior Labour figure telling you
:03:49. > :03:52.that if Mr Miliband losing the next election he will have to resign
:03:53. > :03:57.immediately and cannot fight another election the way Neil Kinnock did
:03:58. > :03:59.after 1987. What was remarkable to me was that people were even
:04:00. > :04:03.thinking along these lines, and even more remarkable that they would tell
:04:04. > :04:10.you they were thinking along these lines? What is the problem? The
:04:11. > :04:16.problem is, is that Ed Miliband says it would be unprecedented to win the
:04:17. > :04:20.general election after the second worst result since 1918. They are
:04:21. > :04:23.concerned about is the start of a script that he would say on the day
:04:24. > :04:26.after losing the general election. Essentially what the people are
:04:27. > :04:31.trying to do is get their argument in first and to say, you cannot do
:04:32. > :04:35.what Neil Kinnock did in 1987. Don't forget that Neil Kinnock in 198 was
:04:36. > :04:40.in the middle of a very brave process of modernisation and had one
:04:41. > :04:44.and fought a very campaign that was professional but he lost again in
:04:45. > :04:50.1992, and they wanted to get their line in first. What some people are
:04:51. > :04:53.saying is that this is an election that the Labour Party should be
:04:54. > :04:56.winning because the coalition is so unpopular. If you don't win, I'm
:04:57. > :05:00.afraid to say, there is something wrong with you. Don't you find it
:05:01. > :05:03.remarkable that people are prepared to think along these lines at this
:05:04. > :05:07.stage, when Labour are ahead in the polls, still the bookies favourite
:05:08. > :05:12.to win, and you start to speak publicly, or in private to the
:05:13. > :05:17.public print, but we might have to get rid of him if he doesn't win.
:05:18. > :05:19.Everything you say about labour in this situation has been said about
:05:20. > :05:23.the Tories. We wondered whether Boris Johnson would tie himself to
:05:24. > :05:28.the mask and he is the next leader in waiting if Cameron goes. It's a
:05:29. > :07:19.mirror image of that. We talk about things being unprecedented. It's
:07:20. > :07:22.mirror image of that. We talk about and they could make the changes I
:07:23. > :07:28.find it odd that they are being so defeatist. Don't go away. Peter is a
:07:29. > :07:33.boffin when it comes to polls. That is why we have a mod for the
:07:34. > :07:36.election prediction swings and roundabouts. He is looking for what
:07:37. > :07:43.he calls the incumbency effect. Don't know what is a back-up -- what
:07:44. > :07:52.that's about question don't worry, here is an. Being in office is bad
:07:53. > :07:57.for your health. Political folk wisdom has it that incumbency
:07:58. > :08:01.favours one party in particular the Liberal Democrats. That is because
:08:02. > :08:04.their MPs have a reputation as ferociously good local campaigners
:08:05. > :08:09.who do really well at holding on to their seats. However, this time
:08:10. > :08:14.round, several big-name long serving Liberal Democrats like Ming
:08:15. > :08:18.Campbell, David Heath and Don Foster are standing down. Does that mean
:08:19. > :08:24.the incumbency effect disappears like a puff of smoke? Then there is
:08:25. > :08:28.another theory, called the sophomore surge. It might sound like a movie
:08:29. > :08:32.about US college kids, but it goes like this. New MPs tend to do better
:08:33. > :08:36.in their second election than they did in their first. That could
:08:37. > :08:42.favour the Tories because they have lots of first-time MPs. The big
:08:43. > :08:45.question is, what does this mean for the 7th of May 2015, the date of the
:08:46. > :08:56.next general election? The answer is, who knows? I know a man who
:08:57. > :09:01.knows. Peter. What does it all mean? You can go onto your PC now and draw
:09:02. > :09:04.down programmes which say that these are the voting figures from a
:09:05. > :09:08.national poll, so what will the seats look like? This is based on
:09:09. > :09:12.uniform swing. Every seat moving up and down across the country in the
:09:13. > :09:18.same way. Historically, that's been a pretty good guide. I think that's
:09:19. > :09:22.going to completely break down next year, because the Lib Dems will
:09:23. > :09:27.probably hold on to more seats than we predict from the national figures
:09:28. > :09:31.and I think fewer Tory seats will go to the Labour Party than you would
:09:32. > :09:36.predict from the national figures. The precise numbers, I'm not going
:09:37. > :09:42.to be too precise, but I would be surprised, sorry, I would not be
:09:43. > :09:47.surprised if Labour fell 20 or 5 seats short on what we would expect
:09:48. > :09:52.on the uniform swing prediction Next year's election will be tight.
:09:53. > :09:57.Falling 20 seats short could well mean the difference between victory
:09:58. > :10:01.and defeat. What you make of that, Helen? I think you're right,
:10:02. > :10:05.especially taking into account the UKIP effect. We have no idea about
:10:06. > :10:09.that. The conventional wisdom is that will drain away back to the
:10:10. > :10:14.Conservatives, but nobody knows and it makes the next election almost
:10:15. > :10:17.impossible to call. It means it is a great target the people like Lord
:10:18. > :10:23.Ashcroft with marginal polling, because people have never been so
:10:24. > :10:26.interested. It is for party politics and we all assume that UKIP should
:10:27. > :10:34.be well next year, but their vote went up from 17 up to 27%. Then that
:10:35. > :10:38.17% went down to 3%, so they might only be five or 6% in the general
:10:39. > :10:42.election, so they might not have the threat of depriving Conservatives of
:10:43. > :10:46.their seats. Where the incumbency thing has an effect is the Liberal
:10:47. > :10:51.Democrats. They have fortress seats where between 1992 and 1997 Liberal
:10:52. > :10:56.Democrats seats fell, but their percentage went up. They are losing
:10:57. > :10:59.the local government base though. True, but having people like Ming
:11:00. > :11:03.Campbell standing down means they will struggle. We are used to
:11:04. > :11:07.incumbency being an important factor in American politics. It's hard to
:11:08. > :11:12.get rid of an incumbent unless it is a primary election, like we saw in
:11:13. > :11:16.Virginia, but is it now becoming an important factor in British
:11:17. > :11:21.politics, that if you own the seat you're more likely to hold on to it
:11:22. > :11:25.than not? If it is, that's a remarkable thing. It's hard to be a
:11:26. > :11:27.carpetbagger in America, but it is normal in British Parliamentary
:11:28. > :11:31.constituencies to be represented by someone who did not grow up locally.
:11:32. > :11:35.It is a special kind of achievement to have an incumbency effect where
:11:36. > :11:39.you don't have deep roots in the constituency. I was going to ask
:11:40. > :11:42.about the Lib Dems. If we are wrong, and they collapse in Parliamentary
:11:43. > :11:47.representation as much as the share in vote collapses, is that not good
:11:48. > :11:51.news is that the Conservatives? They would be in second place in the
:11:52. > :11:55.majority of existing Lib Dems seats. For every seat where Labour are
:11:56. > :11:58.second to the Lib Dems, there are two where the Conservatives are
:11:59. > :12:06.second. If the Lib Dem representation collapses, that helps
:12:07. > :12:11.the Conservatives. I'm assuming the Tories will gain about ten seats. If
:12:12. > :12:14.they gain 20, if they'd had 20 more seats last time, they would have had
:12:15. > :12:20.a majority government, just about. So 20 seats off the Lib Dem, do the
:12:21. > :12:24.maths, as they say in America, and they could lose a handful to labour
:12:25. > :12:27.and still be able to run a one party, minority government. The fate
:12:28. > :12:35.of the Lib Dems could be crucial to the outcome to the politics of
:12:36. > :12:39.light. On the 8th of May, it will be VE Day and victory in election day
:12:40. > :12:42.as well as Europe. The Lib Dems will be apoplectic if they lose all of
:12:43. > :12:48.the seats to their coalition partners. The great quote by Angela
:12:49. > :12:52.Merkel, the little party always gets crushed. It's a well-established
:12:53. > :12:55.idea that coalition politics. They can't take credit for the things
:12:56. > :12:59.people like you may get lumbered with the ones they don't. They have
:13:00. > :13:03.contributed most of this terrible idea that seized politics where you
:13:04. > :13:08.say it, but you don't deliver it. Tuition fees is the classic example
:13:09. > :13:13.of this Parliament. Why should you believe any promise you make? And Ed
:13:14. > :13:17.Miliband is feeling that as well. But in 1974 the liberal Democrats
:13:18. > :13:20.barely had any MPs but there were reporters outside Jeremy Thorpe s
:13:21. > :13:25.home because they potentially held not the balance of power, but were
:13:26. > :13:28.significantly in fourth. Bringing back memories Jeremy Thorpe, and we
:13:29. > :13:33.will leave it there. Thanks to the panel. We are tomorrow on BBC Two.
:13:34. > :13:37.At the earlier time of 11am because of Wimbledon. Yes, it's that time of
:13:38. > :13:42.year again already. I will be back here at 11 o'clock next week.
:13:43. > :13:46.Remember, if it is Sunday, it is the Sunday Politics.