10/11/2013 Sunday Politics South

Morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. Ed Miliband's on

the war path over pay day loans, your energy bill and what he calls

the bedroom tax. His spinners say he's resurgent though the polls

don't show it. We'll be talking to his right hand woman, Labour's

Deputy Leader, Harriet Harman. From resurgent to insurgent. Nigel Farage

won an award this week for being a political insurgent. We'll be

talking to the UKIP leader. And Harriet hates, hates, hates page

three. She wants rid of it. But what do you think? We sent Adam out with

some balls. Stay. It is good fun for In the South, normal shipbuilding in

Portsmouth. Workers come to terms with

It is free choice. In London, the row over the super sewer rumbles on.

And with me, fresh from their success at yesterday's Star Wars

auditions, Darth Vader. Obi Wan Kenobi and R2D2. Congratulations on

your new jobs. We'll miss you. Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh.

First, the talks with Iran in Geneva. They ended last night

without agreement despite hopes of a breakthrough. America and its allies

didn't think Iran was prepared to go far enough to freeze its nuclear

programme. But some progress has been made and there's to be another

meeting in ten days' time, though at a lower level. The Foreign

Secretary, William Hague, had this to say a little earlier. On the

question of, or will it happen in the next few weeks? There is a good

chance of that. We will be trying again on 20th, 21st of November and

negotiators will be trying again. We will keep an enormous amount of

energy and persistence behind solving this. Will that be a deal

which will please everyone? No, it will not. Compromises will need to

be made. I had discussions with Israeli ministers yesterday and put

the case for the kind of deal we are looking

the case for the kind of deal we are interests of the whole world,

including interests of the whole world,

the world, to reach a diplomatic agreement we can be confident in in

this issue. This otherwise will threaten the world with nuclear

proliferation and conflict in the future. The interesting thing about

this is that it seems future. The interesting thing about

prepared to go far enough over the Iraq heavy water plutonium reactor

it is building. The people who took the toughest line - the French.

France has always had a pretty tough line on Iran. They see it as a

disruptive influence in Lebanon I am reasonably optimistic a deal will

be done later this month when the talks reconvene. Western economic

sanctions have had such an impact on Iran domestic league. They have

pushed inflation up to 40%. Dashes-macro domestically. The new

president had a campaign pledge saying, I will deal with sanctions.

I actually think, by the end of this year, we will see progress in these

talks. Should we be optimistic? The next round of talks will be at

official level. The place to watch will be Israel. The language which

has been coming out of there is still incredibly angry, incredibly

defensive. They do not want a deal at all. Presumably John Kerry has to

go away and tried to get Israel to be quiet about it, even if they

cannot be happy about it. They cannot agree to a deal which allows

the Iraq reactor with plutonium heavy water. You do not need that

with a peaceful nuclear power programme will stop that is why the

Israelis are so nervous. If there is an international deal, Israel could

still bomb that but it would be impossible. The French tactics are

interesting. It says the French blocked it in part because they are

trying to carry favour with Israel but also the Gulf Arab states, who

are really nervous about and Iranians nuclear capability. Who is

that? Saudi Arabia. Newsnight had a story saying that Pakistan is

prepared to provide them with nuclear weapons. You are right about

Saudi Arabia. They are much more against this deal than Israel. Who

is Herman van Rompuy's favourite MEP? It is probably not Nigel

Farage. He plummeted to the bottom of the EU president's Christmas card

list after comparing him to a bank clerk with the charisma of a damp

rag. And he's been at it again this week. Have a look. Today is November

the 5th, a big celebration festival day in England. That was an attempt

to blow up the Houses of Parliament with dynamite and destroy the

Constitution. You have taken the Dahl, technocratic approach to all

of these things. What you and your colleagues save time and again you

talk about initiatives and what you are going to do about unemployment.

The reality is nothing in this union is getting better. The accounts have

not been signed off for 18 years. I am now told it is 19 and you are

doing your best to tone down any criticism. Whatever growth figures

you may have, they are anaemic. Youth unemployment in the

Mediterranean is over 50% in several states. You will notice there is a

rise in opposition dashed real opposition. Much of it ugly

opposition, not stuff that I would want to link hands with. And Nigel

Farage joins me now. Let me put to you what the editor of the Sun had

to say. He says, UKIP will peak at the European election and then it

will begin to get marginalised as we get closer to 2015 because there is

now that clear blue water between Labour and the Tories. What do you

say to that? There may be layered blue water on energy pricing but on

Eastern Europe, there is no difference at all. When Ed Miliband

offers the referendum to match Cameron, even that argument on

Europe will be gone. The one thing that will keep UKIP strong, heading

towards 2015, is if people think in some constituencies we can win. I

cannot sit here right now and say that will be the case. If we get

over the hurdle of the European elections clearly, I think there

will be grounds to say that UKIP can win seats in Westminster. You are

going to run? Without a shadow of a doubt. I do not know which

constituency. The welcome I got in Edinburgh was not that friendly

Edinburgh is not everything in Scotland. I think we have a

realistic chance of winning those elections. If we do that, we will

have the momentum behind us. You might be the biggest party after the

May elections. The National front is likely to do very well in France as

well. They have won the crucial by-election in the South of France.

Have you talked about joining full season in Parliament? The leader has

tried to take the movement into a different direction than her father.

The man she beat, to become leader, actually attended the BNP

conference. The problem she has with her party and we have with her party

is that anti-Semitism is too deep and we will not be doing a deal with

the French national government. You can guarantee you will not be

joining such groups. I can guarantee that. Let's move on to Europe. Let's

accept that the pro-Europeans exaggerate the loss of jobs that

would follow the departure of Britain from the UK. Is there no

risk of jobs whatsoever? No risk whatsoever. There is no risk at all.

There have been some weak and lazy arguments put around about this We

will go on doing business - go on doing trade with Europe. We will

have increased opportunities to do trade deals with the rest of the

world and they will create jobs The head of Nissan, the head of Hitachi

and CBI many other voices in British business, when they all expressed

concern about the potential loss of jobs and incoming investment, we

should just ignore them. With Nissan, the BBC News is making this

a huge story. The boss did not say what was reported. He said there was

a potential danger to his future investment. They have already made

the investments. They have built the plant in Sunderland, which they say

is operating well. We should be careful of what bosses of big

businesses say. This man said they may have two leaves Sunderland if we

did not join the euro. I do not take that seriously. As for the CBI, they

wanted us to join the euro and now they do not. Even within the CBI,

there is a significant minority saying, we do not agree with what

the CBI director-general is saying. The former boss of the organisation

is saying we need a referendum and we need a referendum soon. It

depends on the renegotiation. There is not the uniformity. What we are

beginning to see in the world, is, manufacturing and small businesses

are a lot more voices saying, the costs of membership outweigh any

potential benefit. If you look at the polls, if Mr Cameron does

repatriate some powers and he joins with Labour, the Lib Dems, the

Nationalists in Scotland and Wales, most of business, all of the unions

to say we should stay in, you are going to lose, aren't you? In 1 75,

the circumstances were exactly the same. Mr Wilson promised a

renegotiation and he got very little. The establishment gathered

around him and they voted for us to stay in. I do not think that will

happen now. The scales have fallen. We do not want to be governed by

Herman Van Rompuy and these people. These people are Eurosceptic but

they do not seem to feel strongly enough about it that they are going

to defy all the major parties they vote for, companies that employ

them, unions they are members of. I am absolutely confident there will

be a lot voices in business saying, we need to take this opportunity to

break free, give ourselves a chance of a low regulation lowball trader.

-- global trade. In 1970 53 small publications said to vote yes. I am

not contemplating losing. The most important thing is to get the

referendum. If UKIP is not strong, there will not be a referendum.

Earlier in the year, your party issued a leaflet about the remaining

sample parents being able to come to this country. The EU will allow 29

million Bulgarians and remaining is to come to the UK. That is

technically correct but we both know that is not the case. It is an open

door to these people. Why take the risk? By make out there are 29

million people? I stand by that verdict. It is an open door. 29

million are not going to come. They can if they want. Also 29 million

people from France can come. After these countries have joined, we will

do another leaflet saying that Mr Cameron wants to open the door to 70

million people from Turkey. That is scaremongering. I would not say

that. We have a million young British workers between 16 and 4

without work. A lot of them want work and we do not need another

massive oversupply in the unskilled labour market. Why did you have such

a bad time on question Time this week? The folk that did not buy your

anti-immigration stick. Do you think that group of people in the room was

representative of the voters of Boston? What would make you think it

was unrepresentative? When the county council elections took place

this year in Boston, of the seven seats, UKIP won five and almost won

the other two. I don't think that audience reflected that, but that

doesn't matter. How an audience is put together, how a panel is put

together, on one programme, it doesn't mean much at all. It shows

that your anti-immigrant measure doesn't fly as easily as you hoped

it would? The opinion polls which will be launched on Monday that we

are conducting and nearing completion, they show two things.

Firstly, an astonishing number of people who think it's irresponsible

and wrong to open the doer to Romania and Bulgaria, secondly and

crucially, a number of people whose vote in the European elections and

subsequent general elections may be determined by the immigration

issues. This does matter. It would be the perfect run group the

European elections in May for you if a lot of Bulgarians and remainians

flooded in. You would like that to happen? I think it will happen.

Whether I like it or not, it will happen. You think it will be good

for you, it will stir things up If you say to people in poor countries,

you can come here, get a job, have a safety net of a benefits system

claim child allowance for your kids in Bucharest, people will come You

are ready with the arguments already? You will be disappointed if

only ten turn up? Whether lots come or not we should. Taking the risk

and yes, we are going to make it a major issue in the European

election. Let's leave it there. Thank you very much, Nigel Farage.

The summer of 2013 was not good for Ed Miliband, with questions over his

leadership, low ratings and complaints about no policies. He

bounced back with a vengeance at the Labour Conference in September,

delivering a speech which this week won the spectator political speech

of the year aword. In that speech he focussed on the cost-of-living and

promised a temporary freeze on energy prices. Even said this. The

next election isn't just going to be about policy. It's going to be about

how we lead and the character we show. I've got a message for the

Tories today. If they want to have a debate, about leadership and

character, be my guest And if you want to know the difference between

me and David Cameron, here is an easy way to remember it. When it was

Murdoch v the McCanns, he took the side of Murdoch. When it was the

tobacco lobby versus the cancer charities, he took the side of the

tobacco lobby. When the millionaires wanted a tax cut as people pay the

bedroom tax, he took the side of the millionaires. A come to think of it,

here is an easier way to remember it. David Cameron was a Prime

Minister who introduced the bedroom tax. I'll be the Prime Minister who

repeals the bedroom tax There we go, that will go down with the party

faithful on Tuesday. There will be a debate on the bedroom tax. Labour's

Deputy Leader, Harriet Harman, joints me now. Let's begin with the

bedroom tax or bedroom subsidy. Nearly 11% of people who've come off

Housing Benefits all together after their spare room subsidy was

stopped, isn't that proof that reform was necessary? No. I think

that the whole way that the bet room tax has been attempted to be

justified is completely wrong. What it's said is that it will actually

help take people off the waiting lists by putting them into homes

that have been vacated by people who've downsized by being

incentivised by the bedroom tax so basically if you are a council

tenant or Housing Association tenant in a property with spare bedrooms,

then because the penalty is imposed, you will move to a smaller property.

That is the justification for it. But actually, something like 96 of

the people who're going to be hit by the bedroom tax, there isn't a

smaller property for them to move into. I understand that. Therefore

they are, like the people in my constituency, if they have got one

spare bedroom, they are hit by 700 a year extra to pay and that is

completely unfair As a consequence of people losing the subsidy for

their spare room, they have decided to go out and get work and not

depend on Housing Benefit at all? 11% of them. What's wrong with that?

Well, they are going to review the way 2 the bedroom tax is working.

What is wrong with that? But that's not working. That's the result of

Freedom of Information, 141 councils provided the figures, 25,000 who've

come off benefits, of the 233,0 0 affected, it's about 11%. These

people were clearly able to get a job was having the Housing Benefit

in the first place? But of course the people who're on the benefits

who're not in work are always looking for work and many of them

will find work which is a good thing, but for those who don't find

work, or who find work where it s low-paid and need help with their

rent, it's wrong to penalise them on the basis of the fact that their

family might have grown up and moved away and so you have either got to

move out of your home, away from your family and your neighbourhood,

or you've got to stay where you are and, despite the fact that you are

low-paid or unemployed, you have got to find an extra ?700 a year because

of your rent. So it's very unfair The Government that was

commissioning independent research on the impact of this work change

and welfare policy, particularly on the impact on the most vulnerable,

some of which you have been talking about there, shouldn't they have

waited until you have got the independent research, that

independent investigation before determining your policy? No. In

fact, the Government should have waited until they'd have done their

independent research before they bought into effect something and

imposed it on people in a way which is really unfair. They could have

known. Why didn't you wait? What they could have done is, they could

have asked councils, are people going to be able to Manifest into

smaller homes if we impose the bedroom tax and the answer from

councils and Housing Associations would have been no, they can't move

into smaller homes because which haven't got them there. They should

have done the evaluation before they introduced the policy. We are

absolutely clear and you can see the evidence, people are falling into

rent arrears. Many people, it's a terrifying thing to find that you

can't pay your rent, and some of the people go to payday loan companies

to get loans to pay their rent. It is very, very unfair. The

justification for it, which is people will move, is completely

bogus. There aren't places for them to go. On the wider issue of welfare

reform, a call for the TUC showed that voters support the Government's

welfare reforms, including a majority of Labour voters. Why are

you so out of touch on welfare issues, even with your own

supporters? Nobody wants to see people who could be in a job

actually living at the taxpayers' expense. That's why we have said

that we'll introduce a compulsory jobs guarantee, so that if you are a

young person who's been unemployed for a year, you will have to take a

job absolutely have to take a job, and if you have been unemployed as

somebody over 25, there'll be a compulsory thing after two years of

unemployment. So if you have been on welfare two years? So the main issue

about the welfare bill actually is people who're in retirement who need

support. We have said for the richest pensioners, they shouldn't

have to pay their winter fuel allowance. My point wasn't abouts

the sub stance, it's about how you don't reflect public opinion --

substance. The Parliamentary aid said the political backlog of

benefits and social security is "not yet one that we have won. Labour

must accept that they are not convincing on these matters,". Well,

redo have to convince people and explain the policies we have got and

the view we take. So, for example, for pensioners, who're well off we

are saying they don't need the Winter Fuel Payment that. 's me

saying to you and us saying to people in this country, we do think

that there should be that tightening. For young people, who've

been unemployed, they should be offered jobs but they've got to take

them. So yes, we have to make our case. OK. The energy freeze which we

showed there, on the speech, as popular. The living wage proseles

have been going down well as well. Why is Labour's lead oaf the

Conservatives being cut to 6% in the latest polls? Ed Miliband's own

personal approval rating's gotten worse. Why is that? I'm not going to

disdues ins and outs of weekly opinion polls with you or anybody

else because I'm not a political commentator, but let me say to you

the facts of what's happened since Ed Miliband's been leader of the

Labour Party. We have got 1,950 New Labour councillors, all of those...

But you're... All those who've won their seats against the

Conservatives or the Liberal Democrats and no, Andrew you don't

always get that in opposition. In 1997 after Tony Blair was elected,

the Tories carried on losing council seats. Exceptional circumstances and

these days Mr Blair was 25% ahead in the polls. You were six. The economy

grew at an annual rate of 3% in the third quarter just gone. Everybody,

private and public forecasters now saying that Britain in this coming

year will grow faster than France, Italy, Spain, even Germany will grow

faster. Your poll ratings are average when the economy was

flatlining, what happens to them when the economy starts to grow

Well, I've just said to you, I'm not a political commentator or a pundit

on opinion polls. We are putting policies forward and we are holding

the Government to account for what they are doing and we think that

what they did opt economy pulled the plugs from the economy, delayed the

recovery, made it stagnate and we have had three years lost growth. I

understand that, but it's now starting to grow. Indeed. If you are

no political commentator, let me ask you this, you anticipated the

growth, so you switched your line to no growth to this is growth and

living standards are rising. If the economy does grow up towards 3% next

year, I would suggest that living standards probably will start to

rise with that amount of growth What do you do then? We have not

switched our line because the economy started to grow. All the way

along, we said the economy will recover, but it's been delayed and

we have had stagnation for far too long because of the economic

policies. We have been absolutely right to understand the concerns

people have and recognise that they are struggling with the

cost-of-living. Sure. And we are right to do that. What kind of

living standards stuck to rise next year? -- start to rise next year. I

hope they will. For 40 months of David Cameron's Prime Ministership,

for 39 of those, wages have risen slower than prices, so people are

worse off. I understand that. You will know that the broader

measurement, real household disposable income doesn't show that

decline because it takes everything into account. Going around the

country, people feel it. They say where's the recovery for me. Living

standards now start to rise? If that happens, what is your next line

There is a set of arguments about living standards, the National

Health Service, about the problems that there is in A, which caused

-- are caused by the organisation. I can put forward other lines. All

right. Let me ask you one other question If no newspapers have

signed up to the Government-backed Labour-backed Royal Charter on press

regular lace by 2015 and it looks like the way things are going none

will have, if you are in power, will a Labour Government legislate to

make them? They don't have to sign up to the Royal Charter, that's not

the system. What the Royal Charter does is create a recogniser and

basically says it's for the newspapers to set up their own

regulator. They are doing that. My question is... Let me finish. If

they decide to have nothing to do with the Royal Charter that was

decided in Miliband's office in the wee small hours, will you pass

legislation to make them? The newspapers are currently setting up

what they call... I know that, Harriet Harman. Just let me finish.

OK. Because the newspapers are setting up the independent Press

Standards Organisation. Right. If it is independent, as they say it is,

then the recogniser will simply say, we recognise that this is

independent and the whole point is that, in the past when there's been

skaen deals a tend press have really turned people's lives upside down

and the press have said OK we'll sort things out, leave it to us

then they have sorted things out but a few years later they have slipped

back, all this recogniser will do is check it once every three years and

say yes, you have got an independent system and it's remained independent

and therefore that is the guarantee things won't slip back. Very

interesting. Thank you for that That's really interesting that if

they get their act right, you won't force the alternative on them. We

want the system as set forward by Leveson which is not statute and

direct regulation. I want to stick with the press because I want to

ask, is this a British institution or an out-of-date image for a by

gone age. The Sun's Page 3 has been dividing the nation since it first

appeared way back in 1970. That s 43 years ago. Harriet Harman's called

for it to be removed, so we sent Adam out to ask whether the topless

photographs should stay or go. We have asked people if page three

should stay or go. Page three. What do you think? Nothing wrong with it

at all. I think it is cheap and exploits women. It is a family

newspaper. Should it stay or go Go. I will look like the bad guy. It

should go. You have changed your mind. It is free choice. Girls do

not have to be photographed. Old men get the paper just for that. Know

when your age does that? Not really. Dashes-macro know what your age

Page three girls, should they stay or go? I am not bothered. There are

other ways of getting noticed. Page three of the Sun newspaper every

day, there is a woman with no top on. We got rid of that about 40

years ago in Australia. I am not in favour of censorship. It has been

long enough. It can stay there. What is wrong with it? We want to

encourage children to read the newspapers. I do not want my

children to look at that. It is degrading. Do you think we will see

the day when they get rid of it? Yes, I do. I am wondering if I can

turn this into some kind of a shelter. It is tipping it down. I

think the council should do something about their car parks!

Mother nature, the human body. It should stay. Is some people like it,

that is fine. I have nothing against it. You know what has surprised me,

lots of women saying it should stay. Maybe they are seeing it as

empowering. As I have a baby daughter in there, I am happy to see

it go. Imagine my grandad opening up his paper and they're being my bats!

It should go. There is nothing wrong with it. He wants it to go. What

about people who think that page three should be banned? Idiots. Do

you know a girl called Lacey, aged 22, from Bedford? Good luck to her.

I do not know her as a person that I have heard she is nice. What about

her decision to be on page three? Nothing to lose. Do you think she

has made Bedford proud? That is not hard. What have we learned? More

people want page three to stay down for it to go. Most people do not

really seem to care, do they? You have heard a range of views. I am

not arguing it should be banned. I have not argued for it to be banned

but I have disapproved of it since the 1970s. You do not think it

should be banned? I do not think there should be dictating content

but I do think, if you arrive from outer space in this country in

21st-century Britain, and asked yourself what was the role of women

in society... To stand in their knickers and nothing else, I think

women have more to aspire to than to be able to take their clothes off in

public. The sun no longer has the circulation, or the political

importance, that it had in the 1980s when page three was at its height.

Aren't people just voting with their feet anyway? The market is sorting

this out. Half the number of people buy it now than they did 20 years

ago. Until the time the sun does not have page three any more, I am

entitled to my view that it is outdated and wrong. I am happy to

establish that you do not want to ban it. What should happen? Should

people boycott the paper? I have never implied or said it should be

banned. I have always been forthright. Should people boycott

the paper? I have not called for a boycott. The women's movement, of

which I am part, and this is not about politicians censoring the

press. I am part of the movement which says women can do better than

taking off their clothes and being in their knickers in the newspapers.

Why don't you do something about it? I am doing something about it by

saying it is outdated. I am not doing anything more about it. Should

people buy the paper as long as there is a page three? Would you

like to say to viewers, as long as page three is in the sand, you

should not buy it? Dashes-macro be Son. I am saying, wake up to what

the role of women in society should be, which is more than page three.

If they changed it in Australia, which is where Rupert Murdoch came

from, why can they not change it in this country? You're watching the

Sunday Politics. Coming up in just over 20 minutes... I'll be talking

to man leading the campaign Welcome To Sunday Politics South, My

Name's Peter Henley. On Today's Show: The End Of Shipbuilding In

Portsmouth. What Future Now For The Workers

Affected, Industry In The City, And The Wider Economy Of South

Hampshire? More Than That Soon. Let's Meet The

Politicians Who Will Be With Me. Alan Whitehead is the Labour MP for

Southampton. A lot of job losses this week. Is this a reminder that

the recovery has not reached everyone? It is a patchy recovery.

It is a recovery that seems to be concentrated in London more than

anywhere else. The news and the effects across the rest of the

country are very uneven. A number of con `` a number of companies will

suffer badly from a very long time. These are some of the results. A lot

of people still under wages. It is the tail end. There are real green

shoots coming out. These are two industries you have talk about that

have issues there. A lot of skilled people. And a lot of people with

that huge amount of corporate knowledge and skills. We need to

think about how we capture that. That has happened again. We have had

Pfizer in Kent. We need to capture knowledge because they do not want

to lose it out of the country. The cost of living aspect is very

important, isn't it? People do not have money in their pockets. Maybe

month `` maybe confidence could go away. Recovery from recession has to

start being felt in people's pockets as well. That is not the case at the

moment. It also has to be felt in terms of building those sorts of

industries in the longer term that are going to be durable for the

South. And the idea that the South is just the engine of the economy

and is not subject to the sort of problems is completely false. It

shows just how much work we need to do to make sure those industries

work. If we came out all guns blazing from a recession, you would

be really worried about that. It is a very, very slow coming out, which

will probably mean we have sound foundations. There are new

businesses coming and people are developing. I was speaking to a

company last night, order books are full. Rolls`Royce in Chichester is

expanding. We have some growth. But actually, out of any recession, it

is a slow and steady growth that you want. You do not want a Big Bang,

because you will go bust again. It has been a week of bad employment

news in the South and the worst was undoubtedly on Wednesday with the

announcement that shipbuilding in Portsmouth would cease from next

year, with the loss of around 1,100 jobs at BAE Systems. There will

still be refurbishment and repair work done on Royal Navy ships but

any building work now transfers to Govan on the Clyde. Was it all dirty

politics, muddied by the Scottish referendum, as some have claimed, or

an acknowledgement that there just isn't enough work to keep two yards

going? Gerald Vernon`Jackson is leader of Portsmouth City Council

and joins us now. Only ten months until the Scottish

referendum. Is there a point to just trying to keep BAE Systems all those

facilities available in case they are needed and what needs to be

brought back by the MOD into England? Yes. The decision was wrong

for Portsmouth and the whole of the South and wrong for the Navy and

Britain. Partly because the referendum is ten months away. Are

you aiming to keep those facilities in case they are needed for MOD

warship building? BAE say the last work will finish in September of

2014. The referendum is in October 2014. I hope they will not dismantle

things of that period. If Scotland does choose to go independent and

the work could come back down here to the South coast, the facilities

would remain. The City Council with a union campaign, will fight this

decision? We mustn't let it happen? There isn't a chancel decision to be

changed at the moment. But the referendum would change it? BAE as a

company has decided to move the work to Scotland. Government ministers

have clearly decided to support that. The Labour opposition front

bench have also decided to support that. I do not see any allies. Why

bother keeping those facilities open for warship building? Why not start

trying to building, as these people have suggested, move on and get a

better deal from the Government? We need to make sure we have the work

and people employed maintaining Royal Nagy `` Royal Navy ships. We

need to make sure that workers secure and we can grow that work. If

that is an ability to bring shipbuilding back to Portsmouth,

great. The record of UK shipbuilding competing with other countries

around the world is not good. When the Royal Navy went out to buy for

new tankers, no British yards bid. Nobody did. Nobody has the skills

any more left to be able to bid for that work. Once these skills go, it

is very, very difficult to rebuild them. I think we have to do a twin

track approach. We have to see if we can win more work for maintaining

ships in Portsmouth, so keeping on some of the guys that have lost jobs

this week. Still working with the Royal Navy, maintaining ships. It is

very similar skills and BAE wants to move people between the two areas.

But also, if it is possible to keep the facilities available so that

Scotland does Ford to become independent, the Royal Navy will not

have to go and buy ships from a foreign country, an independent

country, which they have never done. The Royal Navy has to have the

ability to build ships here in the United Kingdom. There was a lot of

politics in this. You talk about the Scottish decision. But you could see

the day was always going to come and you made the warnings about

Portsmouth. How much do feel stitched up by your own Government?

There is a long`term problem, which is we're not having enough warships

built. How much you feel stitched up? Can I answer the question? When

Mrs Thatcher became prime minister, we had 79 frigates and Destroyers.

Now we have 19. There just isn't the work. All parties have failed to

order enough ships so that our media just 30,000 people. We have shrunk

and shrunk and shone. `` and shrunk. Ministers have a sensible point that

there is not enough work. Maybe the question is, should we be building

more warships? Fine, but all over the years you have had discussions

in public or private with people, well below suggestions to you,

look, you will have to prepare for the closure of this yard? BAE

Systems have been quite clear that is not enough work, not enough

contracts given by the Government to sustain three yards. That has been

obvious. The agreement signed by the last Labour Government and BAE said

that the things would happen. BAE would be paid over ?200 million a

year for shipbuilding even if they build nothing by the Government.

Secondly, all shipbuilding should be consolidated in one company. And the

third thing was that ship loading should reduce. Rationalisation, they

call it. That was the agreement signed by the last Government and

BAE. This has been around for a long time. I do not think it is the right

decision, particularly not in the strategic sense, for the future of

the Royal Navy. We should retain somewhere in England the ability to

build advanced service warships. There will be many people, unions

included, who feel this is a decision that could be thought.

There's a Labour Party believe that? The position of the Labour Party is

rather nuanced terms of the idea that yes, the need to be a review.

And yes, there needed to be some coherence in future shipbuilding

policy. But it is quite clear that the decision that was reached on

this particular occasion, not just to consolidate shipbuilding but as

far as Portsmouth is concerned, to take the rest of the aircraft

carrier away in the end, even though that had been agreed so to be built

in Portsmouth. It seems to smack of a hurried endgame decision which

needn't have been done in that particular way. It could have been

planned for a rather different way. The Government needs to offer more

help, doesn't it? The review started about 18 months ago. I remember

talking about what if, about a year ago. It has been there. We know the

situation. We know the Government inherited a ?38 billion hole in

defence spending. Is this the Government are BAE decision? It is a

BAE decision. It is clearly be a decision. Making sure maintenance is

being run there and using those skills, it has got to be the way

forward. But not now hundred and 40 jobs. It is a really big thing. ``

940 jobs. Let's hope support does come.

And tomorrow night you can see an Inside Out special on Portsmouth.

They'll be looking at the background to the decision and its impact on

the families of those most affected. That's on BBC One at 7.30.

We all know that our ageing population is causing real

challenges for care providers, with all the tensions between people

wanting to stay in their own homes but maybe needing more intensive

care as they get older. As our Berkshire political reporter Patrick

O'Hagan has been finding out, the future could be in what are called

extra care homes. Meet Hannah. Two years ago, she

watched out of the window as one of the new generation of so`called

extra care homes was built for her. As well as 60 others. Now she is in,

she cannot imagine living anywhere else. It was just unbelievable. It

did not take me very long. Within one week, I had actually settled

here. The smell of boiled cabbage here. Everyone living here has their

own flat with ensuite facilities. You can mingle with others if you

want to, but that is not Hannah's style. I live in two worlds. I live

in the world downstairs and the world here. When I put Mike and my

daughter, this is my world. We are facing a crisis, a growing elderly

population and rising care costs calls for bold solutions. Extra care

homes do just that. They provide extra care. So when someone like

Hannah can no longer cope on their own, they moved to another part of

the building for more specialist help. Crucially, they are not moved

on to another home. There is more security knowing there is help there

if they need it. But also the Flex ability and freedom to be as

independent as they like. `` the flexibility. With ageing population,

that is what we need. We need more of these homes. Reading Borough

Council will be building to extra care homes in the next four years.

That is because the population of reading's over 85 is assessed to

double in the next two years. That means it is going up to around 6000

people. Reading gave the land to this development free of charge.

Everything else was paid for by a housing association. It did not cost

Reading Borough Council taxpayers' money. It meant that the council had

to work very closely with the Housing Association and they were

able to finance it out of the rent they would get in the future. Sounds

pretty much like a private care home, really, the difference being

that Oaktree and the nuclear homes that the council wants to open the

building to people on benefits. `` will be open to people on benefits.

Some of the horns the council homes `` owns a 50 years old. It will

invest millions of pounds on the extra care model. Unlike reading, it

will be more involved in building the new facilities. The number of

people wanting to get into a residential home per se will be

going down, and I do think that extra care provision whether it is

an apartment where couples can live instead of splitting up couples as

often has to happen, I think for once it is looking better. But

before you can even think about opening new extra care homes, you

need to shut down older ones. That has caused problems in Hampshire. I

am broke extra care housing but it is not for people living and a care

home with dementia. They cannot live independently. They can never have

their own front door or key. We cannot do that. Our expectations for

how people like Hannah and ultimately ourselves should be

looked after arising. The dilemma for care providers is how to match

these expectations in a time where money is becoming increasingly

skills. `` skills. It is not for business, isn't it?

But it is staying ahead and providing what people want. You need

to build a range of options for people. We have all got elderly

people. It is great and it is fantastic. But various people need

these things from assisted technology to homes which are great

success. We have 12 in West Sussex across the county. How long have

they been operating? Over the last few years. People really enjoy it.

We're looking at another style of that at the moment and which we

might invest in. It is not just one option that fits everything. So, for

dementia, maybe? That will need very different care. We have got to

provide that range to give people the choice. And solutions in a city

like Southampton, it might be different to country areas. Is

assisted living the future? It is part of the future. It is a very

attractive idea that as you require more care, you will certainly live

longer, then you are in the same circumstances. You're not being

uprooted and being thrown into some apparently alien environment. I

think that is very important. It certainly is not something that can

replace everything else that is there. Certainly, you cannot do it

any more than a city than in a real environment. There needs to be a

palette of independent and assisted and fairly heavily assisted care

available. It is actually add`ons, I think, rather than substitutions.

The big cost of the future. Next week sees the first anniversary

of the Police and Crime Commissioner elections. They didn't produce the

best turnout ever ` just 15% of us went to the polling station. They

were supposed to be setting local policing priorities, holding their

forces to account and coming up with improvements in crime`fighting. So,

12 months on, how have they been doing? Anthony Stansfeld is the

Commissioner for Thames Valley and joins us now from our Oxford studio.

Mr Stansfeld, crime is down. Is it your fault? I would like to think I

had a small part to play. It is largely but not entirely the police.

We have set the priorities and made a real area `` effort in areas.

Burglaries have come down in enormous amounts. They have come

down about 20% this year. In areas such as Reading, 40%. That is a huge

reduction in crime and the overall reduction is over 10%. You are a

conservative. Several in our area, sorry, Dorset, independence,

Hampshire as well. People talk about the politicisation of the police.

Does it make a difference that you are a conservative? I do not think

it matters at all. Politics does not seem to come into it. Simon Hayes in

Hampshire is a good friend of mine it is not an issue at all. One of

the issues as the cost of it all. You have a chief executive costing

?93,000 a year. You are quoted in one of the newspapers as saying

that, I am extreme good value for money. If I could hire myself, I

would charge a lot more. Is that true? I never said that. It is

absolute rubbish. It is true that my chief executive earns 93,000, which

is considerably more than I do. I inherited my staff from the police

authority. The police authority had a budget of about 1.6 million and we

saved about ?600,000, which were not spending from. It is much cheaper

now. If you were paid more, you would not have to charge for travel

expenses, which has caused a lot of trouble. I've taken a lot of flak

over that and the arrangement you have a car and driver. Yes, the

Sunday mail had to make an apology because they got all the facts

wrong. Quite an embarrassment for you, though. I think the pay is very

fair indeed. It is considerably less than any executive in a hospital or

an executive at the BBC. I have about 20 people if not more in my

own police force that more money than I do. That is a very minor

issue, I think. That sends a very `` that sends a bit like a pay claim. I

am adequately recompense. You have this community partnership money.

The suggestion is because you have a priority for rural areas, that was

one of your objectives, that maybe you would take stuff away from the

city. Some of the councils are concerned about that. Will you make

that money go where there is the highest risk of crime or do you want

to adjust the formula? No. The formula which I inherited in some

areas was very distorted. Milton Keynes, for instance, which is half

as big as Reading, was getting from the Home Office have as much as

Reading. I have to even things out a bit. It does not affect rural areas.

The amount of money in the budget has been the just by 20%. That is

through savings in the areas. Nowhere is getting a cut of anywhere

like that. In the first year, I maintained a funding at its previous

level largely from cuts in my own budget. It will not carry on like

that, you're seeing, for areas with high risk crime? Now, if you have a

20% cut, you will have to pass some of it on. I think everyone is

extremely satisfied that we have come to a very good arrangement.

Now our regular round`up of the political week in the South in 60

seconds. In the week coastal defences were

deliberately breached in West Sussex, the South saw a tide of

protest. Probation officers went on strike across the region in protest

at privatisation. On the same day, Oxfordshire County

Council saw demonstrations as they consulted on cuts.

And job centres saw from people whose benefits have been sanctioned

and money withheld. The Government says rules are clear but citizens

advice as early system is too harsh. Talk to the person who is about to

be sanctioned. Listen to the story first. Government ministers were

concentrating on new jobs and skills. Vince Cable was at this

technical College for 14 to 18`year`olds. You can see the

difference that is made by having a course that is linked to practical

work. Despite demonstrations of the Army incinerator, it came online

coming waste to electricity. Lots of protests. They ever make a

difference and what is the best way of influencing people, really? It is

a combination of things. The protesting is an essential part of

the Democratic political process. A placard, megaphone... I have to say

that by the time you get to a position where people feel so driven

to protest in the way they do, lots of other things have passed under

the bridge. It is necessary, it seems to me, to make sure the

political process is accountable as it can be along the line. Protests

sometimes a last throw of the dice for people who fielded as nothing

else they can do whilst everything else has failed. You have got to see

the problems coming. Indeed. That is part of the communications. If

people feel very strongly about it, there will be protests. They can do

that and it is a democratic right. The whole thing I've tried to get

communications right, working with people, explaining what we have to

do. We have all got big challenges coming up. Particularly on the

budgets. That is where we have to leave it for this week. Thank you to

my guests for joining us. Don't forget, you can keep up`to`date by

reading my blog with things here in the South.

more equipment so they can see cyclists. Back to you, Andrew.

We learned this week that no more warships will be built at

Portsmouth, the home of the Royal Navy since the days of the Mary Rose

and Francis Drake. But has the city been sacrificed to save jobs on the

Clyde in Scotland? Is England the loser in an effort to keep the

United Kingdom intact? Let's speak to Eddie Bone, he leads the campaign

for an English Parliament. Is England the loser in this attempt to

doubt, Andrew. We would look at it from the campaign for the English

Parliament that the British governance is bribing the Scots to

stay with the union at the cost of English jobs. What is the best

outcome for England when Scotland votes in the referendum next year?

We have got to have an English parliament. What I mean by that is

an endless governor and with a first minister speaking on behalf of the

people of England. -- and English government. If Scotland votes for

independence, that is the union coming to an end. It will be

dissolved legally. England would be going to negotiating table without

true representation. The union continues but it continues without

Scotland. I want to come back to my... That is the constitutional

position. You may not agree with me but that is the constitutional

position. Do you want Scotland to vote for independence next year We

want a fair deal with equality for England. If that can be maintained

or England can have a fair deal within the union, that is brilliant.

Let's have a federal system are all the nations are treated equally If

that cannot happen and Scotland decides to stay, if Scotland goes,

it is an independent England, isn't it? If Scotland votes to leave the

union, what is left of the United Kingdom would be so dominated by

England at Westminster would, in effect, Beale English Parliament,

wouldn't it? I do not agree with you. I think that is a British, deny

list approach. The act of union was a fusion with the King of England to

the King of Scotland. That would come to an end. The Welsh are very

concerned. They are a very small nation. If you have a botched

British come English Parliament the Welsh would be in a very vulnerable

situation. They would not be listened to. Also a situation with

Northern Ireland. There are voices in Northern Ireland talking about

trying to reunite Northern Ireland. It would be a very volatile

situation. Would you prefer England to become an independent nation

separate from what was left of the UK, which would be Wales and

Northern Ireland? Would you like to see England have a seat in the UN? I

want their representation for the people of England. English jobs were

sacrificed because the British government wanted Scotland to

remain... You have answered that very quickly. I am -- very clearly.

Would you want England, without Northern Ireland and Wales to become

a separate nation state? If that is what it takes for people of England

to have their representation - representation that looks at

policies of the NHS, education very different from Wales and Northern

Ireland - then so be it. Independence will need to be the way

forward. We have a small window of opportunity that the federal system

might still work. D1 indenting have a system like Scotland? -- do you

want England to have a system like Scotland? What we need to do now is

implement the process is to get their representation for England. I

would urge your viewers to join our campaign because it is the only way

to protect jobs in England, protect the NHS, protect education.

Otherwise we will see the people in England continually penalised by the

British government is trying desperately to save the union by

giving more to Scotland and Wales. Nice to talk to you. Helen, on this

business of the Clyde versus Portsmouth, it would have been

pretty inconceivable of the British government that believes in the

union to have allowed the Clyde to close. That would have been a

disaster. It would have been. It's dumped Nicola Sturgeon. Hang on a

minute, if there was Scottish independence, England were not allow

its warships to be built in a foreign country. She was unable to

admit there were any downsides to Scottish independence. It would be

dangerous for Scotland to talk about this. You have a Lib Dem and a

Conservative MP with reasonable majorities. They will find that a

killer on their doorstep in the next election. There are no results in

this for Mr Cameron. He has one MP and he will be lucky to have two.

And the South of England, I know Portsmouth is quite an industrial

area, but the South of England is overall Tory territory. He has

backed the Clyde where there are no Tory votes. The Tory problem in

Scotland is crucial. The trend to look out for is the rise of English

nationalism within the Conservative Party. They have the word Unionist

in their official title. If, in election after election, they failed

to win a significant presence in Scotland, and they are failing to

win a majority in Westminster because of that, it is not hard to

imagine that in ten years time that would be a party which has more

autonomy. One person we know who does not sign up to that. David

Cameron is a romantic Unionist at heart he may say that are not any

vote in Scotland but he want to keep the union together. With the Clyde,

you saw a rival together of economic and political interests. It is

economic or the case the greatest shipbuilding capability in the

United Kingdom is in the Clyde. It is politically very helpful for this

government to say to people in Scotland, look at the benefits of

being in the United Kingdom and under their breath, or in the case

of Alistair Carmichael to a camera, look what might go if you leave

That came together very conveniently to the government. Now, how do you

like your politicians? Squeaky clean with an impeccable past? Or are you

happy for them to have a few skeletons in the closet? Well, last

week the Toronto Mayor Rob Ford admitted smoking crack cocaine. He

said he took the drug about a year ago whilst in a drunken stupor. So,

what impact do confessions have on a political career? In a moment, we'll

hear what our panel has to say, but first, take a look at this. Yes I

have smoked crack cocaine. Am I an addict? No. Have I tried it?

Probably one of my drunken stupor is, about a year ago. I have used

drugs in the past. I have used class a drugs in the past. About 30 years

ago at university, I did smoke cannabis. I took cannabis is a few

times at university and it was wrong. Have you snorted cocaine I

tried to but unsuccessfully years ago. I sneezed. The people around

you who took cocaine, they went .. Is it better to confess or the that

get you into even more hot water? It is absolutely better. The confession

by Jacqui Smith was without glamour. Finding a Labour politician who once

smoked cannabis 25 years ago... I do not think it makes you think that

she cannot be a serious politician. Politicians should brace thing about

them which everyone knows. In the case of Ed Miliband, he should not

deny being geeky. That would reek of in authenticity. The Tory MP meant

to be regarded as a rising star turns out he was claiming to heat

his horses stables at the expense of the tax payer. He had made a

generous claim for energy bills in his constituency home. He went

through the papers and found he had been using it to heat the stables

and he laid it all out and did the right thing. He was completely

honest. Is that the end of it? It will still haunt in because energy

is such a big issue. He was right to be honest about it. Helen was

saying, absolutely, you need to be honest about your past. Harriet

Harman said she smoked pot at university. If you have smoked pot,

you can have a front line career. If you have taken class a drugs, you

cannot have a front line career There is the politician confessing

and the remarkable willingness of the public to forgive. It is

enlightened and progressive to forgive a politician for an affair

or taking soft drugs at university. To smoke crack cocaine and demand be

mad of following the Mayor of Toronto does astonishes me. There

was an example in America a few years ago. It was crack cocaine He

was elected having confessed to smoking crack cocaine. I draw the

line around class a drugs. We will put the team on to investigate him.

Help to Bible come back into the headlines again. Mr Cameron will

surroundings by the people who are benefiting from buying their homes

on this scheme in the same way that this is that you used to visit those

who had bought their council houses. It will become hugely politicised.

The Bank of England thinks that unemployment will drop late 201 ,

early 2015. They will put interest rates up. Those with 95% mortgages

will have two find an extra ?40 a month to pay them off. I would not

be surprised if David Cameron is setting up himself with this

trouble. They will not want to raise interest rates. Mark Carney was very

careful to give himself three get out clauses. If unemployment hits a

certain level, Key has three measures which have to be fulfilled

before he goes ahead and raises interest rates. As a Tory

strategist, would you rather go into the election with low and implement

or low interest rates? I think they would stick to low interest rates.

-- low unemployment. It is not just panellists who are raising questions

about it, it is senior figures people in senior economic positions.

They are saying the scheme is fine at the moment. David Cameron will be

surrounded by people who have taken mortgages out at low levels and it

is all fine right now but if interest rates go up, it will not be

cosy. That's all folks. The Daily Politics is back tomorrow on BBC Two

at midday. I'll be back next Sunday at the normal time of 11am.

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