:00:36. > :00:45.Morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. George Osborne
:00:46. > :00:49.announces a ?50 cut to annual household energy bills. We'll talk
:00:50. > :00:52.to Lib Dem president Tim Farron ahead of the Chancellor's mini
:00:53. > :00:56.budget this week. Net immigration is up for the first
:00:57. > :01:01.time in two years. Labour and the Tories say they want to bring it
:01:02. > :01:10.down, but how? Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper joins us for the
:01:11. > :01:14.Sunday Interview. The harder you shake the pack, the easier it will
:01:15. > :01:18.be for some cornflakes to get to the top. The Mayor of London says
:01:19. > :01:31.inequality and greed are essential to spur economic activity.
:01:32. > :01:43.capital is now a crisis. Another week, another strategy? Can this one
:01:44. > :01:46.deliver? And with me throughout today's
:01:47. > :01:53.programme, well, we've shaken the packet and look who's risen to the
:01:54. > :01:56.top. Or did we open it at the bottom? Helen Lewis, Janan Ganesh
:01:57. > :02:05.and Sam Coates. All three will be tweeting throughout the programme
:02:06. > :02:08.using the hashtag #bbcsp. So, after weeks in which Ed Miliband's promise
:02:09. > :02:11.to freeze energy prices has set the Westminster agenda, the Coalition
:02:12. > :02:13.Government is finally coming up with its answer. This morning the
:02:14. > :02:16.Chancellor George Osborne explained how he plans to cut household energy
:02:17. > :02:20.bills by an average of fifty quid. What we're going to do is roll back
:02:21. > :02:25.the levees that are placed by government on people's electricity
:02:26. > :02:29.bills. This will mean that for the average bill payer, they will have
:02:30. > :02:35.?50 of those electricity and gas bills. That will help families. We
:02:36. > :02:40.are doing it in the way that government can do it. We are
:02:41. > :02:43.controlling the cost that families incurred because of government
:02:44. > :02:46.policies. We are doing it in a way that will not damage the environment
:02:47. > :02:53.or reduce our commitment to dealing with climate change. We will not
:02:54. > :02:58.produce commit men to helping low-income families with the cost of
:02:59. > :03:02.living. Janan, we are finally seeing the coalition begin to play its hand
:03:03. > :03:06.in response to the Ed Miliband freeze? They have been trying to
:03:07. > :03:11.respond for almost ten weeks and older responses have been quite
:03:12. > :03:16.fiddly. We are going to take a bit of tax year, put it onto general
:03:17. > :03:20.taxation, have a conversation with the energy companies, engineered a
:03:21. > :03:26.rebate of some kind, this is not very vivid. The advantage of the
:03:27. > :03:29.idea that they have announced overnight is that it is clear and it
:03:30. > :03:38.has a nice round figure attached to it, ?50. The chief of staff of
:03:39. > :03:42.President Obama, he said, if you are explaining, you're losing. The
:03:43. > :03:48.genius of this idea is that it does not require explanation. He would
:03:49. > :03:52.not drawn this morning on what agreement he had with the energy
:03:53. > :03:56.companies, and whether this would fall through to the bottom of the
:03:57. > :04:00.bill, but the way he spoke, saying, I am not going to pre-empt what the
:04:01. > :04:06.energy companies say, that suggests he has something up his sleeve. Yes,
:04:07. > :04:12.I thought so. The energy companies have made this so badly for so long.
:04:13. > :04:16.It would be awful if he announced this and the energy companies said,
:04:17. > :04:22.we are going to keep this money for ourselves. I do not think he is that
:04:23. > :04:27.stupid. The energy companies have an incentive to go along with this,
:04:28. > :04:31.don't they? My worry is that I am not sure how much it will be within
:04:32. > :04:36.the opinion polls. I think people might expect this now, it is not a
:04:37. > :04:44.new thing, it is not an exciting thing. Say in the markets, they may
:04:45. > :04:48.have priced the ten already. If by Thursday of this week, he is able to
:04:49. > :04:53.say, I have a ?50 cut coming to your bill. The energy companies have
:04:54. > :04:58.guaranteed that this will fall through onto your energy bill, and
:04:59. > :05:03.they have indicated to me that they themselves will not put up energy
:05:04. > :05:09.prices through 2014, has he shot the Ed Miliband Fox? I think he has a
:05:10. > :05:14.couple of challenges. It is still very hard. This is an answer for the
:05:15. > :05:17.next 12 months but did is no chance announced that Labour will stop
:05:18. > :05:21.saying they are going to freeze prices in the next Parliament. He
:05:22. > :05:27.will say, I have not just frozen them, I have done that as well and I
:05:28. > :05:32.have cut them. When people look at their energy bills, they are going
:05:33. > :05:37.up by more than ?50. This is a reduction in the amount that they
:05:38. > :05:42.are going up overall. Year on 08 will be for George Osborne. He will
:05:43. > :05:49.have to come up with something this time next year. The detail in the
:05:50. > :05:53.Sunday papers reveals that George Osborne is trying to get the energy
:05:54. > :05:57.companies to put on bills that ?50 has been knocked off your bill
:05:58. > :06:02.because of a reduction by the government. He is trying to get the
:06:03. > :06:07.energy companies to do his political bidding for him. It will be
:06:08. > :06:13.interesting to see if they go along with that, because then we will know
:06:14. > :06:16.how cross the arm with Ed Miliband. Let's get another perspective.
:06:17. > :06:19.Joining me now from Kendal in the Lake District is the president of
:06:20. > :06:28.the Liberal Democrats, Tim Farron. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. Good
:06:29. > :06:33.morning. Let me ask you this, the coalition is rowing back on green
:06:34. > :06:38.taxes, I do comfortable with that or is it something else you will rebel
:06:39. > :06:43.against? I am very comfortable with the fact we are protecting for the
:06:44. > :06:48.money is going. I am open to where the money comes from. The notion
:06:49. > :06:52.that we should stop insulating the homes of elderly people or stop
:06:53. > :06:56.investing in British manufacturing in terms of green industry, that is
:06:57. > :07:01.something that I resolutely oppose, but I am pleased that the funding
:07:02. > :07:06.will be made available for all that. You cannot ignore the fact that for
:07:07. > :07:11.a whole range of reasons, mostly down to the actions of the energy
:07:12. > :07:15.companies, you have prices that are shooting up and affecting lots of
:07:16. > :07:20.people, making life hard. You cannot ignore that. If we fund the
:07:21. > :07:26.installation of homes for older people and others, if we protect
:07:27. > :07:29.British manufacturing jobs, and raise the money through general
:07:30. > :07:36.taxation, I am comfortable with that. It is not clear that is going
:07:37. > :07:39.to happen. It looks like the eco-scheme, whereby the energy
:07:40. > :07:43.companies pay for the installation of those on below-average incomes,
:07:44. > :07:48.they will spin that out over four years, not two years, and one
:07:49. > :07:53.estimate is that that will cost 10,000 jobs. You're always boasting
:07:54. > :08:01.about your commitment to green jobs, how do square that? I do not believe
:08:02. > :08:05.that. The roll-out will be longer. The number of houses reached will be
:08:06. > :08:12.greater and that is a good thing. My take is that it will not affect the
:08:13. > :08:16.number of jobs. People talk about green levies. There has been
:08:17. > :08:24.disparaging language about that sort of thing. There are 2 million people
:08:25. > :08:32.in this country in the lowest income families and they get ?230 off their
:08:33. > :08:36.energy bills because of what isn't -- because of what is disparaging
:08:37. > :08:43.the refer to as green stuff, shall we call it. There will be more
:08:44. > :08:48.properties covered. We both know that your party is being pushed into
:08:49. > :08:54.this by the Tories. You would not be doing this off your own bad. You are
:08:55. > :09:03.in coalition with people who have jettisoned their green Prudential
:09:04. > :09:10.is? -- credentials. You have made my point quite well. David Cameron's
:09:11. > :09:15.panicked response to this over the last few months was to ditch all the
:09:16. > :09:19.green stuff. It has been a job to make sure that we hold him to his
:09:20. > :09:23.pledges and the green cord of this government. That is why we are not
:09:24. > :09:31.scrapping the investment, we are making sure it is funded from
:09:32. > :09:37.general taxation. I am talking to you from Kendal. Lots of people
:09:38. > :09:39.struggle to pay their energy bills. But all these things pale into
:09:40. > :09:43.insignificance compared to the threat of climate change and we must
:09:44. > :09:48.hold the Prime Minister to account on this issue. Argue reconciled to
:09:49. > :09:54.the idea that as long as you're in coalition with the Tories you will
:09:55. > :09:59.never get a mansion tax? I am not reconciled to it. We are trying to
:10:00. > :10:05.give off other tax cut to the lowest income people. What about the
:10:06. > :10:10.mansion tax? That would be potentially paid for by another view
:10:11. > :10:14.source of finance. That would be that the wealthy... We know that is
:10:15. > :10:20.what you want, but you're not going to get that? We will keep fighting
:10:21. > :10:30.for it. It is extremely important. We can show where we will get the
:10:31. > :10:35.money from. I know that is the adamant. That is not what I asked
:10:36. > :10:41.you. Ed Balls and Labour run in favour of a mansion tax, have you
:10:42. > :10:45.talked to them about it? The honest answer is I have not. It is
:10:46. > :10:53.interesting that they have come round to supporting our policy
:10:54. > :10:57.having rejected it in power. So if Labour was the largest party in
:10:58. > :11:03.parliament but not in power, you would have no problem agreeing with
:11:04. > :11:07.a mansion tax as part of the deal? If the arithmetic falls in that way
:11:08. > :11:12.and that is the will of the British people, fear taxes on those who are
:11:13. > :11:17.wealthiest, stuff that is fear, which includes wealth taxes, in
:11:18. > :11:21.order to fund more reductions for those people on lowest incomes, that
:11:22. > :11:29.is the sort of thing that we might reach agreement on. You voted with
:11:30. > :11:33.Labour on the spare room subsidy. Again, that would be job done in any
:11:34. > :11:42.future coalition talks with Labour, correct? I take the view that the
:11:43. > :11:46.spare room subsidy, whilst entirely fail in principle, in practice it
:11:47. > :11:50.has caused immense hardship. I want to see that changed. There are many
:11:51. > :11:57.people in government to share my view on that. So does Labour. The
:11:58. > :12:01.problem was largely caused Labour because they oversaw an increase in
:12:02. > :12:07.housing costs both 3.5 times while they were in power. The government
:12:08. > :12:14.was forced into a position to tidy up an appalling mess that Labour
:12:15. > :12:24.left. You voted with Labour against it, and also, you want... No, I
:12:25. > :12:33.voted with the party conference. Let's not dance on the head of the
:12:34. > :12:39.ten. Maybe they voted with me. -- on the head of a pin. You are also in
:12:40. > :12:46.favour of a 50% top rate of income tax, so you and Labour are that one
:12:47. > :12:51.there as well? No, I take the view that the top rate of income tax is a
:12:52. > :12:58.fluid thing. All taxation levels are temporary. Nick Clegg said that when
:12:59. > :13:02.the 50p rate came down to 45, that was a rather foolish price tag
:13:03. > :13:07.George Osborne asked for in return for as increasing the threshold and
:13:08. > :13:13.letting several million people out of paying income tax at the bottom.
:13:14. > :13:18.So you agree with Labour? In favour of rising the tax to 50p. I take the
:13:19. > :13:23.view that we should keep our minds open on that. It is not the income
:13:24. > :13:29.tax level that bothers me, it is whether the wealthy pay their fresh
:13:30. > :13:38.air. If that can be done through other taxes, then that is something
:13:39. > :13:45.that I am happy with. -- their fair share. Given your position on the
:13:46. > :13:48.top rate of tax, on the spare room subsidy, how does the prospect of
:13:49. > :13:56.another five years of coalition with the Tories strike you? The answer
:13:57. > :14:01.is, you react with whatever you have about you to what the electorate
:14:02. > :14:07.hand you. Whatever happens after the next election, you have got to
:14:08. > :14:12.respect the will of the people. Yes, but how do you feel about it? We
:14:13. > :14:17.know about this, I am asking for your feeling. Does your heart left
:14:18. > :14:22.or does your heart fall at the prospect of another five years with
:14:23. > :14:26.the Tories? My heart would always follow the prospect of anything
:14:27. > :14:32.other than a majority of Liberal Democrat government. Your heart must
:14:33. > :14:36.be permanently in your shoes then. Something like that, but when all is
:14:37. > :14:41.said and done, we accept the will of the electorate. When you stand for
:14:42. > :14:46.election, you have got to put up with what the electorate say. I have
:14:47. > :14:50.not found coalition as difficult as you might suggest. It is about
:14:51. > :14:56.people who have to disagree and agree to differ. You work with
:14:57. > :15:01.people in your daily life that you disagree with. It is what grown-ups
:15:02. > :15:05.do. A lot of people in your party think that your positioning yourself
:15:06. > :15:09.to be the left-wing candidate in a post-Nick Clegg leadership contest.
:15:10. > :15:27.They think it is blatant manoeuvring. One senior figure says,
:15:28. > :15:30.this is about you. Which bit of the sanctimonious, treacherous little
:15:31. > :15:36.man is there not to like? What can I see in response to that. My job is
:15:37. > :15:43.to promote the Liberal Democrats. I have to do my best to consider what
:15:44. > :15:51.I'd defend to be right. By and large, my position as an MP in the
:15:52. > :15:55.Lake District, but also as the president of the party, is to
:15:56. > :16:00.reflect the will of people outside the Westminster village. That is the
:16:01. > :16:06.important thing to do. Thank you for joining us. David Cameron has said
:16:07. > :16:09.he wants to get it down to the tens of thousands, Ed Miliband has
:16:10. > :16:13.admitted New Labour "got it wrong", and Nick Clegg wants to be
:16:14. > :16:15."zero-tolerant towards abuse". Yes, immigration is back on the political
:16:16. > :16:18.agenda, with figures released earlier this week showing that net
:16:19. > :16:22.migration is on the rise for the first time in two years. And that's
:16:23. > :16:26.not the only reason politicians are talking about it again.
:16:27. > :16:30.The issue of immigration has come into sharp focus because of concerns
:16:31. > :16:36.about the number of remaining ins and Bulgarians that can come to the
:16:37. > :16:42.UK next year. EU citizenship grants the right to free movement within
:16:43. > :16:46.the EU. But when Bulgaria and Romania joined in 2007, the
:16:47. > :16:47.government took up its right to apply temporary restrictions on
:16:48. > :16:57.movement. They must be lifted apply temporary restrictions on
:16:58. > :16:58.end of this year. According to the 2011 census, about one eyed 1
:16:59. > :17:05.million of the population in England and Wales is made up of people from
:17:06. > :17:09.countries who joined the EU in 2004. The government has played down
:17:10. > :17:14.expectations that the skill of migration could be repeated. This
:17:15. > :17:19.week David Cameron announced new restrictions on the ability of EU
:17:20. > :17:24.migrants to claim benefits. That was two, send a message. That prompted
:17:25. > :17:33.criticism is that the UK risks being seen as a nasty country. Yvette
:17:34. > :17:39.Cooper joins me now for the Sunday interview. Welcome to the Sunday
:17:40. > :17:44.Politics, Yvette Cooper. You criticised the coalition for not
:17:45. > :17:47.acting sooner on immigration from Romania and Bulgaria but the
:17:48. > :17:51.timetable for the unrestricted arrival in January was agreed under
:17:52. > :17:55.Labour many years ago, and given the battle that you had with the Polish
:17:56. > :17:59.and the Hungarians, what preparations did you make in power?
:18:00. > :18:05.We think that we should learn from some of the things that happened
:18:06. > :18:08.with migration. It would have been better to have transitional controls
:18:09. > :18:14.in place and look at the impact of what happened. But what preparations
:18:15. > :18:16.did you make in power? We set out a series of measures that the
:18:17. > :18:23.Government still had time to bring in. It is important that this should
:18:24. > :18:27.be a calm and measured debate. There was time to bring in measures around
:18:28. > :18:32.benefit restrictions, for example, and looking at the impact on the
:18:33. > :18:36.labour market, to make sure you do not have exploitation of cheap
:18:37. > :18:40.migrant Labour which is bad for everyone. I know that but I have
:18:41. > :18:45.asked you before and I am asking again, what did you do? We got
:18:46. > :18:50.things wrong in Government. I understand that I am not arguing.
:18:51. > :18:56.You are criticising them not preparing, a legitimate criticism,
:18:57. > :19:03.but what did you do in power? Well, I did think we did enough. Did you
:19:04. > :19:09.do anything? We signed the agency workers directive but too slowly. We
:19:10. > :19:13.needed measures like that. We did support things like the social
:19:14. > :19:16.chapter and the minimum wage, but I have said before that we did not do
:19:17. > :19:22.enough and that is why we recommended the measures in March. I
:19:23. > :19:27.understand that is what you did in opposition and I take that. I put
:19:28. > :19:31.the general point to you that given your failure to introduce controls
:19:32. > :19:36.on the countries that joined in 2004, alone among the major EU
:19:37. > :19:41.economies we did that, should we not keep an embarrassed silence on these
:19:42. > :19:44.matters? You have no credibility. I think you have got to talk about
:19:45. > :19:47.immigration. One of the things we did not do in Government was
:19:48. > :19:55.discussed immigration and the concerns people have and the
:19:56. > :19:57.long-term benefits that we know have come from people who have come to
:19:58. > :20:00.Britain over many generations contributing to Britain and having a
:20:01. > :20:03.big impact. I think we recognise that there are things that we did
:20:04. > :20:07.wrong, but it would be irresponsible for us not to join the debate and
:20:08. > :20:12.suggest sensible, practical measures that you can introduce now to
:20:13. > :20:17.address the concerns that people have, but also make sure that the
:20:18. > :20:19.system is fair and managed. Immigration is important to Britain
:20:20. > :20:24.but it does have to be controlled and managed in the right way. Let's
:20:25. > :20:29.remind ourselves of your record on immigration. The chart you did not
:20:30. > :20:34.consult when in power. This is total net migration per year under Labour.
:20:35. > :20:41.2.2 million of net rise in migration, more than the population
:20:42. > :20:49.of Birmingham, you proud of that? -- twice the population. Are you proud
:20:50. > :20:52.of that or apologising for it? We set the pace of immigration was too
:20:53. > :20:58.fat and the level was too high and it is right to bring migration down.
:20:59. > :21:03.So you think that was wrong? Overruled have been huge benefits
:21:04. > :21:09.from people that have come to Britain and built our biggest
:21:10. > :21:13.businesses. -- overall. They have become Olympic medal winners. But
:21:14. > :21:17.because the pace was too fast, that has had an impact. That was because
:21:18. > :21:21.of the lack of transitional controls from Eastern Europe and it is why we
:21:22. > :21:25.should learn from that and have sensible measures in place now, as
:21:26. > :21:31.part of what has got to be a calm debate. These are net migration
:21:32. > :21:36.figures. They don't often show the full figure. These are the
:21:37. > :21:39.immigration figures coming in. What that chart shows is that in terms of
:21:40. > :21:47.the gross number coming into this country, from the year 2000, it was
:21:48. > :21:52.half a million a year under Labour. Rising to 600,000 by the time you
:21:53. > :21:55.were out of power. A lot of people coming into these crowded islands,
:21:56. > :22:01.particularly since most of them come to London and the South East. Was
:22:02. > :22:06.that intentional? Was that out of control? Is that what you are now
:22:07. > :22:11.apologising for? What we said was that the Government got the figures
:22:12. > :22:15.wrong on the migration from Eastern Europe. If you remember particularly
:22:16. > :22:20.there was the issue of what happened with not having transitional
:22:21. > :22:24.controls in place. The Government didn't expect the number of people
:22:25. > :22:29.coming to the country to be the way it was. And so obviously mistakes
:22:30. > :22:33.were made. We have recognised that. We have also got to recognise that
:22:34. > :22:38.this is something that has happened in countries all over the world. We
:22:39. > :22:41.travel and trade far more than ever. We have an increasingly globalised
:22:42. > :22:45.economy. Other European countries have been affected in the same way,
:22:46. > :22:50.and America, and other developing countries affected in the same way
:22:51. > :22:55.by the scale of migration. I am trying to work out whether the
:22:56. > :22:59.numbers were intentional or if you lost control. The key thing that we
:23:00. > :23:03.have said many times and I have already said it to you many times,
:23:04. > :23:06.Andrew, that we should have a transitional controls in place on
:23:07. > :23:12.Eastern Europe. I think that would have had an impact on them level of
:23:13. > :23:15.migration. We also should have brought in the points -based system
:23:16. > :23:19.earlier. We did bring that in towards the end and it did restrict
:23:20. > :23:22.the level of low skilled migration because there are different kinds of
:23:23. > :23:26.migration. University students coming to Britain brings in billions
:23:27. > :23:30.of pounds of investment. On the other hand, low skilled migration
:23:31. > :23:36.can have a serious impact on the jobs market, pay levels and so on at
:23:37. > :23:40.the low skilled end of the labour market. We have to distinguish
:23:41. > :23:44.between different kinds of migration. You keep trying to excuse
:23:45. > :23:48.the figures by talking about the lack of transitional controls. Can
:23:49. > :23:53.we skip the chart I was going to go to? The next one. Under Labour, this
:23:54. > :23:59.is the source of where migrants came from. The main source was not the
:24:00. > :24:05.accession countries or the remainder of Europe. Overwhelmingly they were
:24:06. > :24:08.from the African Commonwealth, and the Indian subcontinent.
:24:09. > :24:12.Overwhelmingly, these numbers are nothing to do with transitional
:24:13. > :24:16.controls. You can control that immigration entirely because they
:24:17. > :24:21.are not part of the EU. Was that a mistake? First of all, the big
:24:22. > :24:27.increase was in the accession groups. Not according to the chart.
:24:28. > :24:31.In terms of the increase, the changes that happened. Secondly, in
:24:32. > :24:34.answer to the question that you just asked me, we should also have
:24:35. > :24:39.introduced the points -based system at an earlier stage. Thirdly there
:24:40. > :24:42.has been a big increase in the number of university students coming
:24:43. > :24:46.to Britain and they have brought billions of pounds of investment. At
:24:47. > :24:50.the moment the Government is not distinguishing, it is just using the
:24:51. > :24:54.figure of net migration. And that is starting to go up again, as you said
:24:55. > :24:58.in the introduction, but the problem is that it treats all kinds of
:24:59. > :25:03.migration is aimed. It does not address illegal immigration, which
:25:04. > :25:07.is a problem, but it treats university graduates coming to
:25:08. > :25:12.Britain in the same way as low skilled workers. If Labour get back
:25:13. > :25:16.into power, is it your ambition to bring down immigration? We have
:25:17. > :25:21.already said it is too high and we would support measures to bring it
:25:22. > :25:24.down. You would bring it down? There is something called student visas,
:25:25. > :25:30.which is not included in the figures, and it does not include
:25:31. > :25:40.university graduates, and it is a figure that has increased
:25:41. > :25:43.substantially in recent years. They come for short-term study but they
:25:44. > :25:46.do not even have to prove that they come for a college course. They do
:25:47. > :25:48.not even have to have a place to come. Those visas should be
:25:49. > :25:50.restricted to prevent abuse of the system and that is in line with a
:25:51. > :25:53.recommendation from the Inspectorate and that is the kind of practical
:25:54. > :25:58.thing that we could do. Can you give us a ballpark figure of how much
:25:59. > :26:02.immigration would fall? You have seen the mess that Theresa May has
:26:03. > :26:07.got into with her figures. She made a target that it is clear to me that
:26:08. > :26:29.she will not meet. I think that is right. She will not meet it. Can you
:26:30. > :26:33.give as a ballpark figure by which we can judge you? If she had been
:26:34. > :26:35.more sensible and taken more time to listen to experts and decide what
:26:36. > :26:38.measures should be targeted, then she would not be in this mess. You
:26:39. > :26:40.cannot give me a figure? She has chosen net migration. She has set a
:26:41. > :26:43.target, without ifs and buts. I think it is important not to have a
:26:44. > :26:45.massive gap between the rhetoric and reality. Not to make promises on
:26:46. > :26:50.numbers which are not responsible. OK, you won't give me a figure.
:26:51. > :26:55.Fine. Moving on to crime. 10,000 front line police jobs have gone
:26:56. > :26:59.since 2010 but crime continues to fall. 7% down last year alone. When
:27:00. > :27:05.you told the Labour conference that you do not cut crime by cutting the
:27:06. > :27:07.police, you were wrong. I think the Government is being very complacent
:27:08. > :27:12.about what is happening to crime. Crime patterns are changing. There
:27:13. > :27:18.has been an exponential increase, and that is in the words of the
:27:19. > :27:26.police, in online crime. We have also seen, for example, domestic
:27:27. > :27:30.violence going up, but prosecutions dropping dramatically. There is a
:27:31. > :27:34.serious impact as a result of not having 10,000 police in place. You
:27:35. > :27:38.have talked about the exponential increase in online and economic
:27:39. > :27:45.crime. If those are the big growth areas, why have bobbies on the beat?
:27:46. > :27:48.That would make no difference. It is about an approach to policing that
:27:49. > :27:52.has been incredibly successful over many years, which Labour introduced,
:27:53. > :27:56.which is neighbourhood policing in the community is working hard with
:27:57. > :28:00.communities to prevent crime. People like to see bobbies on the beat but
:28:01. > :28:05.have you got any evidence that it leads to a reduction in crime?
:28:06. > :28:09.Interestingly, the Lords Stevens commission that we set up, they have
:28:10. > :28:12.reported this week and it has been the equivalent of a Royal
:28:13. > :28:17.commission, looking at the number of people involved in it. Their strong
:28:18. > :28:21.recommendation was that this is about preventing crime but also
:28:22. > :28:24.respectful law and order, working with communities, and so they
:28:25. > :28:28.strongly took the view with all of their expertise and the 30 different
:28:29. > :28:31.universities that they have involved with it, that on the basis of all
:28:32. > :28:37.that analysis, the right thing was to keep bobbies on the beat and not
:28:38. > :28:42.push them cars. Instinctively you would think it was true. More
:28:43. > :28:47.visible policing, less crime. But in all the criminology work, I cannot
:28:48. > :28:51.find the evidence. There is competing work about why there has
:28:52. > :28:55.been a 20 year drop in overall crime and everybody has different opinions
:28:56. > :28:58.on why that has happened. The point about neighbourhood policing is that
:28:59. > :29:05.it is broader than crime-fighting. It is about prevention and community
:29:06. > :29:10.safety. Improving the well-being of communities as well. Will you keep
:29:11. > :29:15.the elected Police Commissioners? Big sigh! What the report said was
:29:16. > :29:21.that the system is flawed. We raised concern about this at the beginning.
:29:22. > :29:27.You will remember at the elections, Theresa May's flagship policy, at
:29:28. > :29:31.the elections they cost ?100 million and there was 15% turnout. You have
:29:32. > :29:37.to have a system of accountability at the police. Three options were
:29:38. > :29:42.presented, all of which are forms. So you have to have reform. It is
:29:43. > :29:52.not whether to have reformed, it is which of those options is the best
:29:53. > :29:58.way to do it. The commission set out a series of options, and I thought
:29:59. > :30:02.that the preferable approach would be collaboration and voluntary
:30:03. > :30:07.mergers. We know they won't volunteer. There have been some
:30:08. > :30:11.collaboration is taking place. I think the issues with police and
:30:12. > :30:15.crime commissioners have fragmented things and made it harder to get
:30:16. > :30:19.collaboration between police forces. Everybody is asking this
:30:20. > :30:27.question, just before you go. What is it like living with a nightmare?
:30:28. > :30:36.Who does all the cooking, so I can't complain! Says Miliband people are
:30:37. > :30:39.wrong, he is a dream cook? He is! In a speech this week, Boris Johnson
:30:40. > :30:43.praised greed and envy as essential for economic progress, and that has
:30:44. > :30:48.got tongues wagging. What is the Mayor of London up to? What is his
:30:49. > :30:58.game plan? Does he even have a game plan and does he know if he has one?
:30:59. > :31:02.Flash photography coming up. Boris. In many ways I can leave it there.
:31:03. > :31:13.You'd know who I meant. And if you didn't, the unruly mop of blonde
:31:14. > :31:16.hair would tell you, the language. Ping-pong was invented on the dining
:31:17. > :31:34.tables of England. Somehow pulling off the ridiculous to the sublime.
:31:35. > :31:36.It is going to go zoink off the scale! But often having to speed
:31:37. > :31:41.away from the whiff-whaff of scandal. Boris, are you going to
:31:42. > :31:45.save your manage? There's always been a question about
:31:46. > :31:48.him and his as role as mayor and another prized position, as hinted
:31:49. > :31:54.to the Tory faithful this year at conference, discussing former French
:31:55. > :32:02.Prime Minister Alan Juppe. -- Alain Juppe. He told me he was going to be
:32:03. > :32:07.the mayor of Bordeaux. I think he may have been mayor well he was
:32:08. > :32:13.Prime Minister, it is the kind of thing they do in funds -- AvD in
:32:14. > :32:22.France. It is a good idea, if you ask me. But is it a joke? He is much
:32:23. > :32:26.more ambitious. Boris wants to be Prime Minister more than anything
:32:27. > :32:34.else. Perhaps more than he wants to be made of London. The ball came
:32:35. > :32:39.loose from the back of the scrum. Of course it would give great thing to
:32:40. > :32:44.have a crack at, but it is not going to happen. He might be right. First,
:32:45. > :32:47.the Conservatives have a leader, another Old Etonian, Oxford,
:32:48. > :32:54.Bullingdon chap and he has the job Boris might like a crack at. What do
:32:55. > :32:58.you do with a problem like Boris? It is one of the great paradoxes of
:32:59. > :33:04.Tory politics that for Boris Johnson to succeed, David Cameron must feel.
:33:05. > :33:08.Boris needs David Cameron to lose so that he can stand a chance of
:33:09. > :33:11.becoming loser. -- becoming leader. And disloyalty is punished by
:33:12. > :33:13.Conservatives. Boris knows the man who brought down Margaret Thatcher.
:33:14. > :33:20.Michael Heseltine, who Boris replaced as MP for Henley, never got
:33:21. > :33:30.her job. In 1986, she took on the member for Henley, always a risky
:33:31. > :33:34.venture. And why might he make such a jibe, because he's won two more
:33:35. > :33:43.elections than the PM. Conservatives like a winner. Boris, against Robert
:33:44. > :33:53.expectations, has won the Mayor of London job twice. -- public. He
:33:54. > :33:56.might've built a following with the grassroots but he's on shakier
:33:57. > :34:03.ground with many Tory MPs, who see him as a selfish clown, unfit for
:34:04. > :34:06.high office. And besides, he's not the only one with king-sized
:34:07. > :34:13.ambition, and Boris and George are not close, however much they may
:34:14. > :34:19.profess unity. There is probably some Chinese expression for a
:34:20. > :34:23.complete and perfect harmony. Ying and yang. But in plain black and
:34:24. > :34:27.white, if Boris has a plan, it's one he can't instigate, and if David
:34:28. > :34:32.Cameron is PM in 2016, it may not be implementable. He'd need a seat and
:34:33. > :34:38.it wouldn't be plain sailing if he did make a leadership bid. My
:34:39. > :34:43.leadership chances, I think I may have told you before, or about as
:34:44. > :34:48.good as my chances of ying reincarnated as a baked bean. Which
:34:49. > :34:51.is probably quite high. So if the job you want with Brown-esque desire
:34:52. > :35:00.is potentially never to be yours what do you do? He is, of course, an
:35:01. > :35:04.American citizen by birth. He was born in New York public hospital,
:35:05. > :35:09.and so he is qualified to be President of the United States. And
:35:10. > :35:15.you don't need an IQ over 16 to find that the tiniest bit scary.
:35:16. > :35:21.Giles Dilnot reporting. Helen Lewis, Janan Ganesh and Sam Coates are
:35:22. > :35:27.here. Is there a plan for Boris, and if so, what is it? I think the plan
:35:28. > :35:31.is for him to say what he thinks the Tory activist base wants to hear
:35:32. > :35:37.just now. He knows that in 18 months time they can disown it. I think he
:35:38. > :35:43.is wrong, the way the speech has played has a limited number of
:35:44. > :35:46.people. He has cross-party appeal. He has now reconfirmed to people
:35:47. > :35:53.that the Tories are the nasty party and they have been pretending to be
:35:54. > :35:57.modernised. Is it not the truth that he needs David Cameron to lose the
:35:58. > :36:04.2015 election to become leader in this decade? It is very interesting
:36:05. > :36:08.watching his fortunes wax and wane. It always seems to happen in inverse
:36:09. > :36:13.proportion to how well David Cameron is doing in front of his own party.
:36:14. > :36:17.There is no small element of strategy about what we are doing
:36:18. > :36:22.here. The problem with Boris is that he's popular with the country, but
:36:23. > :36:29.not with the party's MPs and its hard-core supporters. This was an
:36:30. > :36:34.appeal to the grassroots this week. He is not the only potential
:36:35. > :36:39.candidate. If we were in some kind of circumstance where Boris was a
:36:40. > :36:48.runner to replace Mr Cameron, who with the other front the? I think it
:36:49. > :36:54.will skip a generation. The recent intake was ideological assertive. I
:36:55. > :36:58.do not buy the idea that it will be Jeremy Hunt against Michael Gove. I
:36:59. > :37:07.then, that generation will be tainted by being in government. It
:37:08. > :37:13.is interesting, what is he trying to pull? He is ideological. He does not
:37:14. > :37:18.believe in many things, but he believes in a few things quite
:37:19. > :37:23.deeply, and one is the idea of competition, both in business and
:37:24. > :37:30.academic selection. He has never been squeamish about expressing
:37:31. > :37:36.that. We do make mistakes sometimes, assuming he is entirely political.
:37:37. > :37:40.Look at all the Northern voters who will not vote for the Tories even
:37:41. > :37:47.though they are socially or economic the Conservatives. I do not think he
:37:48. > :37:53.helps. Who in the Tories would help? That is a tough question. To
:37:54. > :38:03.reason me has also been speaking to the hard right. -- Theresa May. I
:38:04. > :38:05.have been out with him at night. It is like dining with a film star.
:38:06. > :38:10.People are queueing up to speak to People are queueing up to speak to
:38:11. > :38:15.him. Educational selection is one of the few areas that he can offer. He
:38:16. > :38:32.has gone liberal on immigration, as are made of London would have to.
:38:33. > :38:35.Welcome to Sunday Politics South ` my name's Peter Henley. On today's
:38:36. > :38:38.show. Digging up the past. As councils cut
:38:39. > :38:41.or even close their archaeology departments, are we in danger of
:38:42. > :38:54.losing our local heritage because nobody knows where the bodies are
:38:55. > :38:58.buried? Let's meet the politicians who will be with me for the next 20
:38:59. > :39:04.minutes, Diane James fought the by`election for UKIP. And Catherine
:39:05. > :39:11.Beard is a Liberal Democrat MEP for the south`east. Opposite sides of in
:39:12. > :39:15.out on Europe. But both agreed that this James Watson private lenders
:39:16. > :39:23.referendum Bill is something you do not appear approve of? We want a
:39:24. > :39:26.referendum but we do not want the private members bill as it is
:39:27. > :39:31.styled. The electoral commission has made it plain it is unhappy with the
:39:32. > :39:34.wording which is an interesting point because that is an
:39:35. > :39:40.authoritative wadi in terms of how this sort of matter should be
:39:41. > :39:45.addressed. Albeit it does is followed this `` all this does is
:39:46. > :39:48.follow the issue of 2017 referendum whereas we are seeing we need a
:39:49. > :39:55.referendum before that. The bill that have happened and make still
:39:56. > :39:59.have happened, it would have been more preferable to UKIP because it
:40:00. > :40:03.would have brought the key date forward. Both bills do not address
:40:04. > :40:06.the key issue. You are saying they are better things to talk about at
:40:07. > :40:10.the moment? Absolutely, we have little enough Parliamentary time is
:40:11. > :40:15.an European scrutiny and waiting time on a private members bill,
:40:16. > :40:19.which we are all agreed, we need the referendum but the Liberal Democrats
:40:20. > :40:24.say we will have a referendum when there are some that do have a vote
:40:25. > :40:28.about. Is there not already? The legislation that we have supported
:40:29. > :40:31.in this government is when there is a change to our nation shipped to
:40:32. > :40:36.the European Union, that is when we should have a referendum. `` in our
:40:37. > :40:41.relationship. It would most likely be in or out, would you except the
:40:42. > :40:46.treaty change. And you think you could get somewhere with the
:40:47. > :40:51.renegotiation? It is difficult to go in and say, I am holding a big
:40:52. > :40:59.hammer. That is not the way to do business. You don't do that. Do you
:41:00. > :41:04.agree that it will not get very far? He says he wants to renegotiate all
:41:05. > :41:10.the competencies, there are 32. Trying to address the issues within
:41:11. > :41:15.each of them is even going to be a tall order by 2017 for David
:41:16. > :41:19.Cameron. Then you have still got to get agreement with the other member
:41:20. > :41:26.states. It is like saying, I want to play with your football club and not
:41:27. > :41:31.play by the offside rule. When we do have the referendum the Lib Dems
:41:32. > :41:34.will be fighting because we are the party of in.
:41:35. > :41:37.It is of course a month until controls on the numbers of Bulgarian
:41:38. > :41:40.and Romanian workers who can come to the UK are lifted. This week the
:41:41. > :41:44.Prime Minister announced that he wants to see a ban on people from
:41:45. > :41:47.those countries being able to access parts of the welfare state, for
:41:48. > :41:50.example preventing them from claiming housing benefit. What we
:41:51. > :41:55.are doing is sending a signal that of course, there is the right to
:41:56. > :41:58.take up job places around the European Union and people take
:41:59. > :42:02.advantage of that. But actually it is right to say that it is not a
:42:03. > :42:06.right, not a freedom to claim benefits. Also for the longer term,
:42:07. > :42:10.as new countries join the European Union, I am not satisfied with the
:42:11. > :42:14.system we have today which is why I want a renegotiation of the European
:42:15. > :42:18.Union, a change in the rules and then a referendum so people here in
:42:19. > :42:22.the UK can decide whether to stay in that reformed European Union,
:42:23. > :42:24.including reform to free movement and benefit rights, or leave that
:42:25. > :42:27.European Union. When the last group of Eastern
:42:28. > :42:31.European countries joined the EU in 2004, many Poles came over to work
:42:32. > :42:35.in the South, many of them in Southampton. At one point the
:42:36. > :42:38.estimate was that one in ten of the city's population was Polish.
:42:39. > :42:41.Joining me now are Royston Smith, who was the Conservative leader of
:42:42. > :42:45.the city council for much of the time those people were moving here,
:42:46. > :42:53.and Dr Paulina Trevena, who's been working on a study of that
:42:54. > :42:57.community's experiences. Royston, there was a feeling that we did not
:42:58. > :43:02.expect what happened in Southampton. There were specific pressures, want
:43:03. > :43:06.there? There were. The numbers have been hugely exaggerated. UKIP during
:43:07. > :43:09.the Eastleigh by`election exaggerated the numbers. But it was
:43:10. > :43:13.a significant impact. Some would talk about one in ten of the
:43:14. > :43:17.population, it was less than that, I know it was less than that because
:43:18. > :43:20.we were having to say we have this many Eastern European but the
:43:21. > :43:25.government are only funding of sport seven or 8000. When you are
:43:26. > :43:30.underfunded it puts pressure on services. This is not a racist or
:43:31. > :43:34.immigration issue, it was a funding issue for Southampton. You did not
:43:35. > :43:40.know if second hammer people had come here, what they needed, they
:43:41. > :43:43.were just `` just how many people came here. They were turning up
:43:44. > :43:50.saying, we need housing? They had jobs a lot of the time and maybe...
:43:51. > :43:57.Many did have jobs. They were coming through agencies. Yes, we could only
:43:58. > :44:01.count them through national insurance registrations. In
:44:02. > :44:06.Southampton we did not have that, we were not sophisticated enough, we
:44:07. > :44:08.had to pretty much guess. We knew because of the services that people
:44:09. > :44:13.were applying for and because there was a Polish community anyway, this
:44:14. > :44:16.`` the numbers were significant. Down the road in Portsmouth, there
:44:17. > :44:24.were almost none. Southampton had a bit influx of Eastern Europeans
:44:25. > :44:28.advanced and it swamped us. We are still trying to find out exactly why
:44:29. > :44:31.people came to Southampton. It is an interesting issue and I have been
:44:32. > :44:35.trying to find that out in a research. There are a lot of
:44:36. > :44:40.different story around that, one is that before Poland and the other
:44:41. > :44:43.Eastern European countries are in the EU, there was an agreement
:44:44. > :44:48.between the Labour officers in Poland and in Southampton so there
:44:49. > :44:52.were already people working here before Poland joined the EU. There
:44:53. > :44:59.were already networks of people working prior to EU accession here.
:45:00. > :45:03.And when accession took place, these people brought their families,
:45:04. > :45:08.friends and so on. And then work gets back, there is work, it is a
:45:09. > :45:13.decent place to live and you get a second wave of people? It continues
:45:14. > :45:18.to build? Looking forward, then, what would you say we need to know
:45:19. > :45:20.about Bulgarian and remaining immigration? Will there be
:45:21. > :45:27.particular places in the country where they might head for? ``
:45:28. > :45:31.Romanian immigration? It is difficult to answer because there is
:45:32. > :45:35.little data out there on particular locations where people live. It was
:45:36. > :45:38.the same problem only when researching Polish migrants living
:45:39. > :45:44.in rural areas, there was basically no data to go by. Basically I needed
:45:45. > :45:49.to go out and find them. You did that in Dorset? Yes, and in
:45:50. > :45:57.Scotland. Could you talk to the one big employer, would they have had
:45:58. > :45:59.and understanding? The issue is that many employers are not keen to talk
:46:00. > :46:07.to you. There are many employers are not keen to talk
:46:08. > :46:11.to you. There also issues about how migrants are employed, particularly
:46:12. > :46:14.in rural areas in agriculture. But many of the employers are very keen
:46:15. > :46:18.on employing Eastern European workers because they are
:46:19. > :46:23.hard`working, ready to accept the conditions that they are offered.
:46:24. > :46:26.They have often either asked agencies to source people from
:46:27. > :46:30.abroad or they have asked the workers they already have in place
:46:31. > :46:35.to bring over friends and families to work with them. What David
:46:36. > :46:38.Cameron is doing, I turn to our politicians, what he's doing is
:46:39. > :46:43.looking at things like the minimum wage. That is important, isn't it?
:46:44. > :46:47.Rather than just putting up border controls. It would be, Peter, but
:46:48. > :46:52.the point has been made. It is about the package of conditions. There are
:46:53. > :46:55.stories around the UK, it is even happening in Surrey, for instance,
:46:56. > :46:59.where Inprise are bringing these individuals over and they are
:47:00. > :47:03.offering them a package which undermines the minimum wage issue
:47:04. > :47:08.will stop it might include accommodation and transport. That is
:47:09. > :47:11.not a good idea, it is not something which anyone should be endorsing or
:47:12. > :47:15.encouraging but it is happening. That acts as an encouragement to
:47:16. > :47:19.individuals coming across. It makes it that much more difficult for our
:47:20. > :47:23.young people over here, and we have got 1 million of them, why should
:47:24. > :47:27.they not have the opportunity to at least try for those jobs? If they
:47:28. > :47:32.cannot find the minimum wage allocated for them, a very difficult
:47:33. > :47:37.situation. But Bulgaria and Romania might be different to Poland. They
:47:38. > :47:41.have been able to go to other parts of the European Union, whereas
:47:42. > :47:45.Poland did not. That is a fair comment. There have been estimates
:47:46. > :47:49.of somewhere in the region of 2 million nationals from both of those
:47:50. > :47:53.countries who have already left Bulgaria and Rumania and settled in
:47:54. > :47:58.other parts of Europe. They have made that first move. First move?
:47:59. > :48:04.Yes, they have left their countries and on to say, France, Spain or
:48:05. > :48:10.Germany. For them, it is the next step to potentially come here. What
:48:11. > :48:14.you think of that? Bulgaria and Rumania, their second language is
:48:15. > :48:18.not generally English. Where and in Poland it tended to be. We have had
:48:19. > :48:24.a long history of relationships with Poland. Bog area and Romain here are
:48:25. > :48:29.`` bog area and Romania are most likely to have Italian as their
:48:30. > :48:35.second language. It is important that we make sure that the terms and
:48:36. > :48:38.conditions, if you want is to bring them a package to come over, you
:48:39. > :48:43.have to pay the minimum wage. That is something we must enforce. It is
:48:44. > :48:51.not going to be happening in time for January one. That is the nail on
:48:52. > :48:53.the head. If you talk to my Bulgarian and Rumania and
:48:54. > :48:59.colleagues, they say there is no way that people are looking to come
:49:00. > :49:07.here. Across Europe, they are saying the level of racism is getting home
:49:08. > :49:10.`` higher. It is not racism, it is migration watch, that is
:49:11. > :49:16.authoritative, they have an estimate of 50,000. We can talk about all
:49:17. > :49:20.sorts of numbers and pluck them out of fresh air. You have studied what
:49:21. > :49:23.happened with the Polish, when you look at the estimates, do you think
:49:24. > :49:30.we really understand what will happen? It is very difficult to work
:49:31. > :49:35.out what will happen. It is near impossible. What is very important
:49:36. > :49:38.is take context into consideration. The British government was sending
:49:39. > :49:44.out a totally different message those years ago when Poland were
:49:45. > :49:48.joining. It was very much, we have 500,000 vacancies to fill, we need
:49:49. > :49:52.workers. Now the message is very different. And people are not
:49:53. > :49:58.encouraged. Is it posturing for Bulgaria and Romania 's Mac sake or
:49:59. > :50:04.is it 48 British `` is it for a British audience? I think it is
:50:05. > :50:07.both. It is all very well for us to say we do not think very many will
:50:08. > :50:12.come or they will all come, we do not know. We need to deal with that.
:50:13. > :50:15.If we do not put something in which discourages people who are not
:50:16. > :50:19.coming in here to fill vacancies, that perhaps some of our workers
:50:20. > :50:23.will not do or are not qualified to do, if we do not send a message that
:50:24. > :50:27.you cannot come here and spend your life on the UK's generous benefit
:50:28. > :50:33.system, you would have to say that they will come. The rights to move
:50:34. > :50:37.and work is enshrined in the treaties. There are over 2 million
:50:38. > :50:41.Ritz living and working in other parts of the European Union. We have
:50:42. > :50:46.to protect that. We do not have to protect the right to come here and
:50:47. > :50:52.protect benefits `` take benefits. Or leave the European Union
:50:53. > :50:55.altogether. Thank you for coming and talking to us.
:50:56. > :50:58.For the last 30 years or so archaeology has been on the rise. A
:50:59. > :51:01.generation fuelled by Indiana Jones, and shows like Time Team ensured
:51:02. > :51:04.university courses were full to bursting. But things have changed.
:51:05. > :51:09.Harrison Ford has grown old and Tony Robinson has put down his trowel
:51:10. > :51:12.after 20 years. Add to this the recession, with councils deciding
:51:13. > :51:14.they can do without local archaeologists, and changes to
:51:15. > :51:17.planning laws that have downgraded the importance of protecting
:51:18. > :51:20.archaeology, and as our Hampshire political reporter Paul Greer has
:51:21. > :51:21.been finding out, you have the perfect storm for this ancient
:51:22. > :51:40.profession. I am walking along Southampton's
:51:41. > :51:48.amazing medieval walls. It is from this very spot that Henry V inbox
:51:49. > :51:52.his army for France and Agincourt. Henry fifth, we happy band of
:51:53. > :52:01.Brothers? Once more unto the breach? I will come down! What I am trying
:52:02. > :52:06.to say is, if you go a mile that weight you come to an old Saxon
:52:07. > :52:11.town. I'll update River is an `` a mile up the river is an old Roman
:52:12. > :52:17.fort. It is not the archaeology of it is rare. It is the
:52:18. > :52:21.archaeologists. Southampton Council archaeology team has been cut by
:52:22. > :52:25.half. Other cities like Exeter have closed there is entirely. Even
:52:26. > :52:31.world`renowned courses like those at Birmingham University, involved in
:52:32. > :52:35.the Saxon horde find, have been cut. These are not the best of times to
:52:36. > :52:41.be an archaeologist. Doctor Paul Avril teaches archaeology at of the
:52:42. > :52:45.University. I think politicians see heritage as something of a luxury
:52:46. > :52:52.which can be chopped off when they are looking to make cuts. Now seen
:52:53. > :53:01.more like a contaminant like asbestos removal, that archaeology
:53:02. > :53:05.and heritage is a negative impediment to that element that
:53:06. > :53:09.needs to be removed. You are losing people providing specialist advice
:53:10. > :53:16.to planning authorities. Others who keep a close watch on our history
:53:17. > :53:19.and Heritage believe is more and more local archaeologists lose their
:53:20. > :53:21.jobs, the greater the risk becomes that something precious will be
:53:22. > :53:26.destroyed because no one knew it was there. We should leave an ember of
:53:27. > :53:33.fire in the various departments so that when money is available again
:53:34. > :53:37.and we make an economic department, the fires can be giggled again.
:53:38. > :53:42.Archaeology is just one example. If it is cut down to nobody, the
:53:43. > :53:45.experience of a lifetime of dealing with a city which has the best
:53:46. > :53:51.medieval walls in the country apart from York, will be lost. Recent
:53:52. > :53:55.changes to planning laws now is the presumption in favour to sustainable
:53:56. > :53:59.development, with the issue of protecting the archaeology of the
:54:00. > :54:03.site somewhat less important. There are still those in Westminster who
:54:04. > :54:08.would like to see a more balanced approach to saving our historic
:54:09. > :54:12.treasures. Most archaeological excavation which is happening is
:54:13. > :54:16.paid for by developers who want to stick up a big supermarket or
:54:17. > :54:19.housing complex somewhere. A lot of the academic research that used to
:54:20. > :54:23.go on in the past is not happening and some of the county
:54:24. > :54:32.archaeologists, paid for by local councils, are being cut because they
:54:33. > :54:42.are going to put the money into child services or social services.
:54:43. > :54:45.He founded the all`party ocular `` archaeological group. He knows
:54:46. > :54:50.spending money there is not a priority but he said if we do not
:54:51. > :54:52.fight for it, we will regret it. If you do not protect the
:54:53. > :54:55.archaeological environment just as we need to protect our natural
:54:56. > :55:00.environment, once you have lost it, it is configured and that is a false
:55:01. > :55:03.economy. The benefit of `` it is gone for good and that is a fourth
:55:04. > :55:12.economy. The benefit of archaeological things will last
:55:13. > :55:17.years to come. There is a risk that a real gem that can be lost because
:55:18. > :55:22.the man who knows where the bodies are buried is history. Without the
:55:23. > :55:27.specialist advice, there is very little to stop developments
:55:28. > :55:35.occurring that potentially could have ended up with Richard III's
:55:36. > :55:41.bones on the workmen 's figure. Why now, times are hard in a world of
:55:42. > :55:46.archaeology but fortunately, this is one profession where taking the long
:55:47. > :55:52.view comes naturally. He might have two wait for the
:55:53. > :55:59.recognition he richly deserves in his cardboard crown! It is terribly
:56:00. > :56:03.easy to lose this. It is. I come from the antique trade, which was
:56:04. > :56:09.all about preserving things from the past. It is a difficult. I know how
:56:10. > :56:13.councils have to juggle, whether it is meals on wheels or children's
:56:14. > :56:17.services or archaeology. I think what we need to be doing is making
:56:18. > :56:21.sure we do not lose and we protect what we have got at the moment. If
:56:22. > :56:27.we have not got the money to do further research, we need to
:56:28. > :56:30.consolidate in universities. We are just coming into a new phase of
:56:31. > :56:35.funding for the European Union, and culture funding will be coming on
:56:36. > :56:37.stream. I would say keep an eye on that, local councils, it may be that
:56:38. > :56:42.you could bid for European money which will help you preserve the
:56:43. > :56:47.property have got. Do you think the Italians, the Greeks, they have the
:56:48. > :56:49.knowledge, they have kept the knowledge of their previous
:56:50. > :56:53.civilisations as well as the artefacts? Absolutely, and that is
:56:54. > :56:59.where we can share knowledge and get a better value by working together
:57:00. > :57:07.right across the European Union. That sounds like a good European
:57:08. > :57:10.project? I am a little bit cynical about this. When it comes down to
:57:11. > :57:15.it, we have got the planning minister in the coalition government
:57:16. > :57:17.saying he wants housing everywhere. He is probably the biggest threat to
:57:18. > :57:21.some of the archaeological sites that could ever exist. When we have
:57:22. > :57:26.a situation where even burial grounds are being dug up to provide
:57:27. > :57:32.sites for affordable housing, as is happening now, that puts into
:57:33. > :57:37.question... So you bring this back to too much development? If you
:57:38. > :57:42.like, is too much immigration, pressure on resources. There is this
:57:43. > :57:45.claim that local government has embarked on this efficiency drive
:57:46. > :57:52.and cut costs. One has to question, has that efficiency, as a result of
:57:53. > :57:54.just cutting services and making the money is add up rather than doing
:57:55. > :57:58.the job better? Now our regular round`up of the
:57:59. > :58:02.political week in the South in 60 seconds, and this week in a vain
:58:03. > :58:14.attempt to beat the clock ` it's gathering pace throughout.
:58:15. > :58:21.Cycling in Chichester got a gentle boost, a government grant to help
:58:22. > :58:24.bike racks and cycling confidence classes. Stepping up the horsepower,
:58:25. > :58:30.East Hampshire MP Damian Hines was called for tougher action to prevent
:58:31. > :58:39.fly grazing, horses put out on other people's land, by what the RSPCA
:58:40. > :58:42.called irresponsible owners. During the winter, they need supplementary
:58:43. > :58:48.feeding with extra hay. Travelling little faster, the nation's ports
:58:49. > :58:51.with more help with improving rail access according to the transport
:58:52. > :58:54.select committee. The backers of high`speed trains were urged to slow
:58:55. > :58:58.down by protesters at Parliament. The bill is the largest ever
:58:59. > :59:03.published it was full throttle for take`off at Oxford airport. A big
:59:04. > :59:08.jump in demand from private jets, including medical evacuation.
:59:09. > :59:15.Finally, down to earth with a bomb for MPs who now have two shave off
:59:16. > :59:22.their moustaches for Movember. A fine crop this year!
:59:23. > :59:26.No comment about that! It is all for cancer charities. The Autumn
:59:27. > :59:33.statement that we are looking ahead to two, what do you think is likely
:59:34. > :59:39.to be there? Any surprises or it has all been flagged up? I know what I
:59:40. > :59:46.want to see, more taken of the basic rate of income tax, taking up
:59:47. > :59:51.another charge of people. That is not helping the very poorest,
:59:52. > :59:56.raising the threshold. You have more money in your pocket. Not for the
:59:57. > :00:05.very poorest who have already been helped. We have already helped the
:00:06. > :00:08.very poorest. So it is now ?12,000? It is crazy people who are on
:00:09. > :00:12.minimum wage are being taxed, we have to take that out. David Cameron
:00:13. > :00:15.said it could not be done, we have showed him except how it could be
:00:16. > :00:19.done in government and we now need to take the next step. I am sure you
:00:20. > :00:23.would like to see some of the green stuff kept. Can you see that
:00:24. > :00:29.ditched? We would like to see it removed. We are talking ?6.5 billion
:00:30. > :00:38.by 2017, 18, if we just took out two elements, one of those could reduce
:00:39. > :00:45.household energy bills I a lot of money. That would go a long way to
:00:46. > :00:48.help. It is very short`term. You ask anybody about climate change, they
:00:49. > :00:52.say you have to start cutting back now. Any carbon dioxide will stay in
:00:53. > :00:58.the atmosphere for 100 years. It is a long`term view. Let's put it into
:00:59. > :01:05.context. The government has cancelled one of the major arrays.
:01:06. > :01:09.The wind farm. Precisely. A lot of that money goes to water the wind
:01:10. > :01:13.turbines and solar arrays. If we are not doing them, we don't pay for
:01:14. > :01:19.them. We'll see how it works out! Thank you to my guests. Don't
:01:20. > :01:20.forget, you can keep up`to`date with politics in our region by reading my
:01:21. > :01:26.blog. Now, back to Andrew. picked out. People thought he was
:01:27. > :01:41.touching on eugenics and things like that. That is all we have time for.
:01:42. > :01:47.Thank you. What rabbit has George Osborne got up his sleeve? And
:01:48. > :01:54.what's David Cameron up to in China? All questions for The Week Ahead. To
:01:55. > :02:02.help the panel led, we are joined by Kwasi Kwarteng, Tory MP. Welcome to
:02:03. > :02:06.the Sunday Politics. Why has the government been unable to move the
:02:07. > :02:10.agenda and to the broad economic recovery, and allowed the agenda to
:02:11. > :02:15.stay on Labour's ground of energy prices and living standards? Energy
:02:16. > :02:19.has been a big issue over the last few months but the autumn state and
:02:20. > :02:23.will be a wonderful opportunity to readdress where we are fighting the
:02:24. > :02:29.ground, the good economic news that we delivered. If you look at where
:02:30. > :02:33.Labour were earlier this year, people were saying they would they 5
:02:34. > :02:43.million people unemployed. They were saying that there should be a plan
:02:44. > :02:47.B. He is not in the Labour Party? Elements of the left were suggesting
:02:48. > :02:52.it. Peter Hain told me it would be up to 3 million people. Danny
:02:53. > :02:57.Blanchflower said it would be 5 million people. So we have got to
:02:58. > :03:03.get the economy back to the centre of the debate? Yes, the game we were
:03:04. > :03:06.playing was about the economy. That was the central fighting ground of
:03:07. > :03:11.the political debate. We were winning that battle. Labour have
:03:12. > :03:16.cleverly shifted it onto the cost of living. It is essential that the
:03:17. > :03:27.government, that George, talks about the economy. That has been its great
:03:28. > :03:30.success. I do not think this has been a week of admitting that Labour
:03:31. > :03:37.was right, plain cigarettes packaging, other issues. If you look
:03:38. > :03:43.at the big picture, where we are with the economy, we have the
:03:44. > :03:47.fastest growing economy in the G-7. Despite Labour's predictions, none
:03:48. > :03:53.of this has happened, none of the triple dip has happened. The British
:03:54. > :03:59.economy is on a good fitting. That is a good story for the government
:04:00. > :04:02.to bat on. You say that people have stopped talking about the economic
:04:03. > :04:08.recovery, but it is worse than that, people have stopped talking about
:04:09. > :04:11.the deficit? As long as people were talking about the deficit, the
:04:12. > :04:17.Tories were trusted. But people have forgotten about it. This country
:04:18. > :04:23.still spends ?100 billion more than it raises. Yes, I am of the view
:04:24. > :04:29.that the deficit, the national debt, is the biggest question facing
:04:30. > :04:32.this generation of politicians. You are right to suggest that the
:04:33. > :04:39.Conservative Party was strong on this. That head, not deficit, is not
:04:40. > :04:44.going to come down in the foreseeable future? It is rising.
:04:45. > :04:48.This is a test that George Osborne is not going to pass. We know what
:04:49. > :04:53.is coming in the Autumn Statement, it is lots of giveaways, paying for
:04:54. > :04:58.free school meals, paying for fuel duty subsidies. We are still talking
:04:59. > :05:04.about the cost of living, not changing it actively wider economy.
:05:05. > :05:11.There might be extra money for growth but it is not clear what will
:05:12. > :05:15.happen to that. If it is time for giveaways, let's speak about Labour.
:05:16. > :05:23.I have never been a fan of giveaways. Fiscal prudence is what
:05:24. > :05:27.our watchword should be. Look at the headlines. Each time, the deficit
:05:28. > :05:32.figures, the debt figures, were always worse than predicted. This
:05:33. > :05:39.year it will be significantly better. I think that is significant.
:05:40. > :05:44.Any kind of recovery is probably better than no recovery at all. When
:05:45. > :05:49.you look at this recovery, it is basically a consumer spending boom.
:05:50. > :05:57.Consumer spending is up, business investment is way down compared with
:05:58. > :06:02.2008, and exports, despite a 20% devaluation, our flat. Let's get one
:06:03. > :06:09.thing straight, it is a recovery. Any recovery is better than no
:06:10. > :06:14.recovery. Now we can have a debate about, technical debate about the
:06:15. > :06:19.elements of the recovery. It is not technical, it is a fact. There is
:06:20. > :06:26.evidence that there is optimism in terms of what are thinking...
:06:27. > :06:31.Optimism? If I am optimistic about the economy, I am more likely to
:06:32. > :06:37.spend money and invest in business. So far you have not managed that?
:06:38. > :06:42.Exports have not done well either? Exports are not a big section of the
:06:43. > :06:48.British economy. But of course, they are important. But given where we
:06:49. > :06:53.were at the end of last year, no economist was saying that we would
:06:54. > :07:00.be in this robust position today. That is true, in terms of the
:07:01. > :07:04.overall recovery. Now the PM loves to "bang the drum abroad for British
:07:05. > :07:07.business" and he's off to China this evening with a plane-load of British
:07:08. > :07:38.business leaders. And it's not the first time. Take a look at this.
:07:39. > :08:03.Well, you might not think exports unimportant, but clearly the Prime
:08:04. > :08:09.Minister and the Chancellor do. They are important, but they are not what
:08:10. > :08:13.is driving the growth at the moment. We used to talk about the need for
:08:14. > :08:18.export led recovery is, that is why the Prime Minister is going to
:08:19. > :08:23.China. Absolutely, and he's doing the right thing. Do we have any
:08:24. > :08:29.evidence that these tend of trips produce business? The main example
:08:30. > :08:34.so far is the right to trade the Chinese currency offshore. London
:08:35. > :08:40.has a kind of global primacy. London will be the offshore centre. Is that
:08:41. > :08:44.a good thing? I have no problem at all with this sort of policy. I do
:08:45. > :08:48.not think that Britain has been doing this enough compared with
:08:49. > :08:54.France and Germany in recent years. I am optimistic in the long term
:08:55. > :09:00.about this dish -- about British exports to China. China need machine
:09:01. > :09:05.tools and manufacturing products. In 20 years time, China will be buying
:09:06. > :09:11.professional groups, educational services, the things we excel at.
:09:12. > :09:16.All we need to do is consolidate our strengths, stand still and we will
:09:17. > :09:19.move forward. The worst thing we can do is reengineer the economy towards
:09:20. > :09:26.those services and away from something else. We have a lot of
:09:27. > :09:30.ground to make up, Helen? At one stage, it is no longer true, but at
:09:31. > :09:34.one stage you could say that we exported more to Ireland, a country
:09:35. > :09:43.of 4 million people, than we did to Russia, China, India, Brazil, all
:09:44. > :09:49.combined. I believe we form 1% of Chinese imports now. The problem is
:09:50. > :09:55.what you have to give up in exchange for that. It is a big problem for
:09:56. > :10:02.David Cameron's credibility that he has had to row back on his meeting
:10:03. > :10:06.with the Dalai llama. This trip, we have been in the deep freeze with
:10:07. > :10:11.China for a couple of years. This trip has come at a high cost. We
:10:12. > :10:15.have had to open up the City of London to Chinese banks without much
:10:16. > :10:19.scrutiny, we have had to move the date of the Autumn Statement, and
:10:20. > :10:23.there is no mention of human rights. It is awkward to deal with that, all
:10:24. > :10:31.in the name of getting up to where we were a few years ago. A month
:10:32. > :10:35.after strong anchor -- one month after Sri Lanka, where he apologised
:10:36. > :10:42.three human rights abuses, this is difficult to take. Do we have any
:10:43. > :10:46.idea what the Prime Minister hopes to do in China this time? I am not
:10:47. > :10:51.sure there is anything specific, but when you go to these countries,
:10:52. > :10:55.certainly in the Middle East China, they complain, why has the Prime
:10:56. > :11:00.Minister not come to see us? That is very important. High-level
:11:01. > :11:05.delegations from other countries go to these places because the addict
:11:06. > :11:16.-- because they are important export markets. You might look at the Prime
:11:17. > :11:21.Minister playing cricket over there, and wonder, what is that for? I do
:11:22. > :11:26.not mind the Prime Minister Rajoy cricket. This is a high visibility
:11:27. > :11:32.mission, chose that politicians in Britain care. You are part of the
:11:33. > :11:36.free enterprise group. It had all sorts of things on it like tax cuts
:11:37. > :11:44.for those on middle incomes or above the 40% bracket, tax cuts worth 16
:11:45. > :11:50.billion. You will get none of that on Thursday, we are agreed? No. But
:11:51. > :11:57.he does have two budgets between now and the election and if the fiscal
:11:58. > :12:00.position is using a little bit, he may have more leeway than it looked
:12:01. > :12:07.like a couple of months ago. Yes, from a free enter prise point of
:12:08. > :12:12.view, we have looked at the tax cuts that should be looked at. The 40p
:12:13. > :12:18.rate comes in at quite a low level for people who, in the south-east,
:12:19. > :12:24.do not feel particularly wealthy. They are spending a lot of money on
:12:25. > :12:28.commuting, energy bills. The Chancellor has been very open about
:12:29. > :12:33.championing this. He says that the 40p rate will kick in at a slightly
:12:34. > :12:38.higher rate. Labour had a bad summer and the opinion polls seem to be
:12:39. > :12:43.narrowing. Then they had a good hearty conference season. The best.
:12:44. > :12:48.Has the Labour lead solidified or increased the little, maybe up to
:12:49. > :12:52.eight points? If it is a good Autumn Statement, or the Tories start to
:12:53. > :12:59.narrow that lead by the end of the year? If they go into 2014 trailing
:13:00. > :13:03.by single digits, they cannot complain too much. That gives them
:13:04. > :13:09.18 months to chip away at Labour's lead. But do they do that chipping
:13:10. > :13:13.away by eight bidding Labour or do they let time take its course and
:13:14. > :13:18.let the economic recovery continue, maybe business investment joins
:13:19. > :13:21.consumer spending as a source of that recovery, and a year from now,
:13:22. > :13:30.household disposable income begins to rise? That is a better hope than
:13:31. > :13:32.engaging in a bidding war. Be assured, they will be highly
:13:33. > :13:36.political budgets. That's all for today. The Daily Politics is on BBC
:13:37. > :13:39.Two at midday all this week, except on Thursday when we'll start at
:13:40. > :13:41.10:45 to bring you live coverage and analysis of the Chancellor's Autumn
:13:42. > :13:45.Statement in a Daily Politics special for BBC Two and the BBC News
:13:46. > :13:48.Channel. Remember if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.