:00:37. > :00:43.Welfare reform is one of the government's most popular policies.
:00:44. > :00:47.So Labour says it would be even tougher than the Tories.
:00:48. > :00:50.We'll be asking the Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary if she's got
:00:51. > :00:56.Even Labour supporters worry that Ed Miliband hasn't got what it takes
:00:57. > :01:01.Labour grandees are increasingly vocal about their concerns.
:01:02. > :01:12.Over 50% of Labour voters think they'd do better with a new leader.
:01:13. > :01:17.And what of this leader? He's apparently "toxic" on the doorstep.
:01:18. > :01:24.In the south, the never`endhng unpopular than Gordon Brown,
:01:25. > :01:27.In the south, the never`endhng conundrum of where to build the
:01:28. > :01:29.houses that everyone agrees we need. Do we
:01:30. > :01:40.promised an electric car revolution, why so little progress?
:01:41. > :01:47.Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh, the toxic tweeters
:01:48. > :01:55.First, the deepening crisis in Iraq, where Sunni Islamists are now
:01:56. > :01:58.largely in control of the Syrian-Iraq border, which means
:01:59. > :02:04.they can now re-supply their forces in Iraq from their Syrian bases
:02:05. > :02:07.Rather than moving on Baghdad, they are for the moment consolidating
:02:08. > :02:09.their grip on the towns and cities they've already taken.
:02:10. > :02:12.They also seem to be in effective control of Iraq's
:02:13. > :02:15.biggest oil refinery, which supplies the capital.
:02:16. > :02:18.And there are reports they might now have taken the power
:02:19. > :02:24.Iraqi politicians are now admitting that ISIS,
:02:25. > :02:27.the name of the Sunni insurgents, is better trained, better equipped and
:02:28. > :02:33.far more battle-hardened than the US-trained Iraqi army fighting it.
:02:34. > :02:35.Which leaves the fate of Baghdad increasingly in the hands
:02:36. > :02:53.No good news coming out of there, Janan. No good news and no good
:02:54. > :02:57.options either. The West's best strategy is to decide how much
:02:58. > :03:02.support to give to the Iraqi government. The US is sending over
:03:03. > :03:06.about 275 military personnel. Do they go further and contemplate
:03:07. > :03:12.their support? General Petraeus argued against it as it might be
:03:13. > :03:17.seen as the US serving as the force of Shia Iraqis -- continue their
:03:18. > :03:27.support. Do we contemplate breaking up Iraq? It won't be easy. The Sunni
:03:28. > :03:30.and Shia Muslim populations don t live in clearly bordered areas, but
:03:31. > :03:34.in the longer term, do we deal with it in the same way we dealt with the
:03:35. > :03:38.break-up of the Ottoman empire over 100 years ago? In the short-term and
:03:39. > :03:46.long-term, completely confounding. Quite humiliating. If ISIS take
:03:47. > :03:52.Baghdad I can't think of a bigger ignominy for foreign policy since
:03:53. > :03:55.Suez. If Iraq is partitioned, it won't be up to us. It will be what
:03:56. > :04:01.is happening because of what is happening on the ground. Everything
:04:02. > :04:07.does point to partition, and that border, which ISIS control, between
:04:08. > :04:13.Syria and Iraq, that has been there since it was drawn during the First
:04:14. > :04:16.World War. That is gone as well An astonishingly humbling situation the
:04:17. > :04:24.West, and you can see the Kurds in the North think this is a charge --
:04:25. > :04:27.chance for authority. They think this is the chance to get the
:04:28. > :04:33.autonomy they felt they deserved a long time. Janan is right. We can't
:04:34. > :04:37.do much in the long term, but we have to decide on the engagement.
:04:38. > :04:40.And the other people wish you'd be talking turkey, because if there is
:04:41. > :04:45.some blowback and the fighters come back, they are likely to come back
:04:46. > :04:50.from Turkey. Where is Iran in all of this? There were reports last week
:04:51. > :04:54.that the Revolutionary guard, the head of it, he was already in
:04:55. > :04:58.Baghdad with 67 advisers and there might have been some brigades that
:04:59. > :05:03.have gone there as well. Where are they? What has happened? I'm pretty
:05:04. > :05:14.sure the Prime Minister of Iraq is putting more faith in Iran than the
:05:15. > :05:19.White House and the British. I think they are running the show, in
:05:20. > :05:23.technical terms. John Kerry is flying into Cairo this morning, and
:05:24. > :05:27.what is his message? It is twofold. One is to Arab countries, do more to
:05:28. > :05:32.encourage an inclusive government in Iraq, mainly Sunni Muslims in the
:05:33. > :05:37.government, and the Arab Gulf states should stop funding insurgents in
:05:38. > :05:42.Iraq. You think, Iraq, it's potentially going to break up, so
:05:43. > :05:45.this sounds a bit late in the day and a bit weak. It gets
:05:46. > :05:49.fundamentally to the problem, what can we do? Niall Ferguson has a big
:05:50. > :05:53.piece in the Sunday Times asking if this is place where we cannot doing
:05:54. > :05:59.anything. He doesn't want to do anything. By the way, that is what
:06:00. > :06:03.most Americans think. That is what opinion polls are showing. You have
:06:04. > :06:08.George Osborne Michael Gold who would love to get involved but they
:06:09. > :06:10.cannot because of the vote in parliament on Syria lasted -- George
:06:11. > :06:15.Osborne and Michael Gove. This government does not have the stomach
:06:16. > :06:19.for military intervention. We will see how events unfold on the ground.
:06:20. > :06:21.All parties are agreed that Britain's 60-year old multi-billion
:06:22. > :06:26.The Tory side of the Coalition think their reforms are necessary
:06:27. > :06:29.and popular, though they haven't always gone to time or to plan.
:06:30. > :06:34.In the eight months she's had since she became Shadow Secretary of State
:06:35. > :06:40.for Work and Pensions, Rachel Reeves has talked the talk about getting
:06:41. > :06:43.people off benefits, into work and lowering the overall welfare bill.
:06:44. > :06:45.her first interview in the job she threatened "We would
:06:46. > :06:49.But Labour has opposed just about every change the Coalition
:06:50. > :06:54.has proposed to cut the cost and change the culture of welfare.
:06:55. > :06:56.Child benefit, housing benefit, the ?26,000 benefit cap -
:06:57. > :07:03.They've been lukewarm about the government's flagship Universal
:07:04. > :07:06.Credit scheme - which rolls six benefit payments into one - and
:07:07. > :07:13.And Labour has set out only two modest welfare cuts.
:07:14. > :07:16.This week, Labour said young people must have skills or be in training
:07:17. > :07:22.That will save ?65 million, says Labour, though the cost
:07:23. > :07:27.And cutting winter fuel payments for richer pensioners which will
:07:28. > :07:35.Not a lot in a total welfare bill of around ?200 billion.
:07:36. > :07:38.And with welfare cuts popular among even Labour voters, they will soon
:07:39. > :07:44.have to start spelling out exactly what Labour welfare reform means.
:07:45. > :07:57.Welcome. Good morning. Why do you want to be tougher than the Tories?
:07:58. > :08:01.We want to be tough in getting the welfare bill down. Under this
:08:02. > :08:04.government, the bill will be ?1 million more than the government set
:08:05. > :08:09.out in 2010 and I don't think that is acceptable. We should try to
:08:10. > :08:13.control the cost of Social Security. But the welfare bill under the next
:08:14. > :08:17.Labour government will fall? It will be smaller when you end the first
:08:18. > :08:22.parliament than when you started? We signed up to the capping welfare but
:08:23. > :08:27.that doesn't see social security costs ball, it sees them go up in
:08:28. > :08:33.line with with inflation or average earnings -- costs fall. So where
:08:34. > :08:37.flair will rise? We have signed up to the cap -- welfare will rise We
:08:38. > :08:42.have signed up to the cap. We will get the costs under control and they
:08:43. > :08:44.haven't managed to achieve it. The government is spending ?13 billion
:08:45. > :08:50.more on Social Security and the reason they are doing it is because
:08:51. > :08:53.the minimum wage has not kept pace with the cost of living so people
:08:54. > :08:57.are reliant on tax credits. They are not building houses and people are
:08:58. > :08:58.relying on housing benefit. We have a record number of people on zero
:08:59. > :10:47.hours contracts. I'm still a record number of people on zero
:10:48. > :10:50.receive support. That is the right thing to do by that group of young
:10:51. > :11:00.people, because they need skills to progress. We will, once that. - we
:11:01. > :11:06.will, onto that. You say you criticise the government that it had
:11:07. > :11:09.a cap and wouldn't have met it, but every money-saving welfare reform,
:11:10. > :11:16.you voted against it. How is that being tougher? The most recent bout
:11:17. > :11:20.was the cap on overall welfare expenditure, and we went through the
:11:21. > :11:25.lobbies and voted for the Tories. You voted against the benefit cap,
:11:26. > :11:30.welfare rating, you voted against, child benefit schemes, you voted
:11:31. > :11:32.against. You can't say we voted against everything when we voted
:11:33. > :11:37.with the Conservatives in the most recent bill with a cap on Social
:11:38. > :11:44.Security. It's just not correct to say. The last time we voted, we
:11:45. > :11:50.walked through the lobby with them. You voted on the principle of the
:11:51. > :11:55.cap. You voted on every step that would allow the cap to be met. Every
:11:56. > :11:59.single one. The most recent vote was not on the principle of the cap it
:12:00. > :12:02.was on a cap of Social Security in the next Parliament and we signed up
:12:03. > :12:06.for that. It was Ed Miliband who called her that earlier on. Which
:12:07. > :12:13.welfare reform did you vote for We voted for the cap. Other than that?
:12:14. > :12:19.We have supported universal credit. You voted against it in the third
:12:20. > :12:24.reading. We voted against some of the specifics. If you look at
:12:25. > :12:28.universal credit, they have had to write off nearly ?900 million of
:12:29. > :12:32.spending. I'm not on the rights and wrongs, I'm trying to work out what
:12:33. > :12:35.you voted for. Some of the things we are going to go further than the
:12:36. > :12:41.government with. For example, cutting benefits for young people
:12:42. > :12:44.who don't sign of the training. The government had introduced that. For
:12:45. > :12:47.example, saying that the richest pensioners should not get the winter
:12:48. > :12:51.fuel allowance, that is something the government haven't signed up.
:12:52. > :12:55.You would get that under Labour and this government haven't signed up
:12:56. > :13:01.for it. ?100 million on the winter fuel allowance and ?65 million on
:13:02. > :13:06.youth training. ?165 million. How big is the welfare budget? The cap
:13:07. > :13:13.would apply to ?120 billion. And you've saved 125 -- 165 million
:13:14. > :13:18.Those are cuts that we said we would do in government. If you look at the
:13:19. > :13:21.real prize from the changes Ed Miliband announced in the youth
:13:22. > :13:25.allowance, it's not the short-term savings, it's the fact that each of
:13:26. > :13:28.these young people, who are currently on unemployment benefits
:13:29. > :13:34.without the skills we know they need to succeed in life, they will cost
:13:35. > :13:39.the taxpayer ?2000 per year. I will come onto that. You mentioned
:13:40. > :13:42.universal credit, which the government regards as the flagship
:13:43. > :13:48.reform. It's had lots of troubles with it and it merges six benefits
:13:49. > :13:51.into one. You voted against it in the third reading and given lukewarm
:13:52. > :13:58.support in the past. We have not said he would abandon it, but now
:13:59. > :14:02.you say you are for it. You are all over the place. We set up the rescue
:14:03. > :14:04.committee in autumn of last year because we have seen from the
:14:05. > :14:09.National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee, report after
:14:10. > :14:14.report showing that the project is massively overbudget and is not
:14:15. > :14:18.going to be delivered according to the government timetable. We set up
:14:19. > :14:20.the committee because we believe in the principle of universal credit
:14:21. > :14:25.and think it is the right thing to do. Can you tell us now if you will
:14:26. > :14:32.keep it or not? Because there is no transparency and we have no idea. We
:14:33. > :14:37.are awash with information. We are not. The government, in the most
:14:38. > :14:42.recent National audit Forest -- National Audit Office statement said
:14:43. > :14:47.it was a reset project. This is really important. This is a flagship
:14:48. > :14:52.government programme, and it's going to cost ?12.8 billion to deliver,
:14:53. > :14:56.and we don't know what sort of state it is in, so we have said that if we
:14:57. > :15:04.win at the next election, we will pause that for three months and
:15:05. > :15:09.calling... Will you stop the pilots? We don't know what status they will
:15:10. > :15:12.have. We would stop the build of the system for three months, calling the
:15:13. > :15:18.National Audit Office to do awards and all report. The government don't
:15:19. > :15:21.need to do this until the next general election, they could do it
:15:22. > :15:26.today. Stop throwing good money after bad and get a grip of this
:15:27. > :15:31.incredibly important programme. You said you don't know enough to a view
:15:32. > :15:35.now. So when you were invited to a job centre where universal credit is
:15:36. > :15:40.being rolled out to see how it was working, you refused to go. Why We
:15:41. > :15:44.asked were a meeting with Iain Duncan Smith and he cancelled the
:15:45. > :15:46.meeting is three times. I'm talking about the visit when you were
:15:47. > :15:52.offered to go to a job centre and you refused. We had an appointment
:15:53. > :15:54.to meet Iain Duncan Smith at the Department for Work and Pensions and
:15:55. > :15:58.said he cancelled and was not available, but he wanted us to go to
:15:59. > :16:04.the job centre. We wanted to talk to him and his officials, which she
:16:05. > :16:07.did. Would it be more useful to go to the job centre and find out how
:16:08. > :16:21.it was working. He's going to tell you it's working fine.
:16:22. > :16:27.Advice Bureau in Hammersmith, they are working to help the people
:16:28. > :16:33.trying to claim universal credit. Iain Duncan Smith cancelled three
:16:34. > :16:38.meetings. That is another issue I was asking about the job centre It
:16:39. > :16:44.is not another issue because Iain Duncan Smith fogged us off. This
:16:45. > :16:48.week you said that jobless youngsters who won't take training
:16:49. > :16:57.will lose their welfare payments. How many young people are not in
:16:58. > :17:02.work training or education? There are 140,000 young people claiming
:17:03. > :17:09.benefits at the moment, but 850 000 young people who are not in work at
:17:10. > :17:16.the moment. This applies to around 100,000 young people. There are
:17:17. > :17:24.actually 975,000, 16-24 -year-olds, not in work, training or education.
:17:25. > :17:30.Your proposal only applies to 100,000 of them, why? This is
:17:31. > :17:36.applying to young people who are signing on for benefits rather than
:17:37. > :17:43.signing up for training. We want to make sure that all young people ..
:17:44. > :17:47.Why only 100,000? They are the ones currently getting job-seeker's
:17:48. > :18:00.allowance. We are saying you can not just sign up to... Can I get you to
:18:01. > :18:06.respond to this, the number of people not in work, training or
:18:07. > :18:16.education fell last year by more than you are planning to help. Long
:18:17. > :18:24.turn -- long-term unemployment is an entrenched problem... This issue
:18:25. > :18:30.about an entrenched group of young people. Young people who haven't got
:18:31. > :18:35.skills and are not in training we know are much less likely to get a
:18:36. > :18:42.job so there are 140,018-24 -year-olds signing onto benefits at
:18:43. > :18:45.the moment. This is about trying to address that problem to make sure
:18:46. > :18:51.all young people have the skills they need to get a job. Your policy
:18:52. > :18:55.is to take away part of the dole unless young unemployed people agree
:18:56. > :19:02.to study for level three qualifications, the equivalent of an
:19:03. > :19:09.AS-level or an NVQ but 40% of these people have the literary skills of a
:19:10. > :19:15.nine-year-old. After all that failed education, how are you going to
:19:16. > :19:20.train them to a level standard? We are saying that anyone who doesn't
:19:21. > :19:24.have that a level or equivalent qualification will be required to go
:19:25. > :19:30.back to college. We are not saying that within a year they have to get
:19:31. > :19:34.up to that level but these are exactly the sorts of people... These
:19:35. > :19:38.people have been failed by your education system. These people are,
:19:39. > :19:44.for the last four years, have been educated under a Conservative
:19:45. > :19:48.government. 18 - 21-year-olds, most of them have their education under a
:19:49. > :19:54.Labour government during which 300,000 people left with no GCSEs
:19:55. > :20:00.whatsoever. I don't understand how training for one year can do what 11
:20:01. > :20:04.years in school did not. We are not saying that within one year
:20:05. > :20:08.everybody will get up to a level three qualifications, but if you are
:20:09. > :20:12.one of those people who enters the Labour market age 18 with the
:20:13. > :20:19.reading skills of a nine-year-old, they are the sorts of people that
:20:20. > :20:26.should not the left languishing I went to college in Hackney if you
:20:27. > :20:31.you are -- a few weeks ago and there was a dyslexic boy studying painting
:20:32. > :20:35.and decorating. In school they decided he was a troublemaker and
:20:36. > :20:40.that he didn't want to learn. He went back to college because he
:20:41. > :20:45.wanted to get the skills. He said that it wasn't until he went back to
:20:46. > :20:50.college that he could pick up a newspaper and read it, it made a
:20:51. > :20:55.huge difference but too many people are let down by the system. I am
:20:56. > :21:00.wondering how the training will make up for an education system that
:21:01. > :21:05.failed them but let's move on to your leader. Look at this graph of
:21:06. > :21:10.Ed Miliband's popularity. This is the net satisfaction with him, it is
:21:11. > :21:17.dreadful. The trend continues to climb since he became leader of the
:21:18. > :21:20.Labour Party, why? What you have seen is another 2300 Labour
:21:21. > :21:25.councillors since Ed Miliband became the leader of the Labour Party. You
:21:26. > :21:34.saw in the elections a month ago that... Why is the satisfaction rate
:21:35. > :21:38.falling? We can look at polls or actual election results and the fact
:21:39. > :21:43.that we have got another 2000 Labour councillors, more people voting
:21:44. > :21:47.Labour, the opinion polls today show that if there was a general election
:21:48. > :21:55.today we would have a majority of more than 40, he must be doing
:21:56. > :22:01.something right. Why do almost 0% of voters want to replace him as
:22:02. > :22:07.leader? Why do 50% and more think that he is not up to the job? The
:22:08. > :22:13.more people see Ed Miliband, the less impressed they are. The British
:22:14. > :22:18.people seem to like him less. The election strategy I suggest that
:22:19. > :22:23.follows from that is that you should keep Ed Miliband under wraps until
:22:24. > :22:28.the election. Let's look at actually what happens when people get a
:22:29. > :22:32.chance to vote, when they get that opportunity we have seen more Labour
:22:33. > :22:39.councillors, more Labour members of the European Parliament...
:22:40. > :22:45.Oppositions always get more. The opinion polls today, one of them
:22:46. > :22:50.shows Labour four points ahead. You have not done that well in local
:22:51. > :22:56.government elections or European elections. Why don't people like
:22:57. > :23:01.him? I think we have done incredibly well in elections. People must like
:23:02. > :23:05.a lot of the things Labour and Ed Miliband are doing because we are
:23:06. > :23:09.winning back support across the country. We won local councils in
:23:10. > :23:15.places like Hammersmith and Fulham, Crawley, Hastings, key places that
:23:16. > :23:20.Labour need to win back at the general election next year. Even you
:23:21. > :23:26.have said traditional Labour supporters are abandoning the party.
:23:27. > :23:31.That is what Ed Miliband has said as well. We have got this real concern
:23:32. > :23:36.about what has happened. If you look at the elections in May, 60% of
:23:37. > :23:42.people didn't even bother going to vote. That is a profound issue not
:23:43. > :23:46.just for Labour. You said traditional voters who perhaps at
:23:47. > :23:51.times we took for granted are now being offered an alternative. Why
:23:52. > :23:57.did you take them for granted? This is what Ed Miliband said. I am not
:23:58. > :24:03.saying anything Ed Miliband himself has not said. When he ran for the
:24:04. > :24:07.leadership he said that we took too many people for granted and we
:24:08. > :24:11.needed to give people positive reasons to vote Labour, he has been
:24:12. > :24:15.doing that. He has been there for four years and you are saying you
:24:16. > :24:20.still take them for granted. Why? I am saying that for too long we have
:24:21. > :24:24.taken them for granted. We are on track to win the general election
:24:25. > :24:35.next year and that will defy all the odds. You are going to win... Ed
:24:36. > :24:39.Miliband will win next year and make a great Prime Minister.
:24:40. > :24:44.Now to the Liberal Democrats, at the risk of intruding into private
:24:45. > :24:48.grief. The party is still smarting from dire results in the European
:24:49. > :24:51.and Local Elections. The only poll Nick Clegg has won in recent times
:24:52. > :24:56.is to be voted the most unpopular leader of a party in modern British
:24:57. > :24:59.history. No surprise there have been calls for him to go, though that
:25:00. > :25:00.still looks unlikely. Here's Eleanor.
:25:01. > :25:05.Liberal Democrats celebrating, something we haven't seen for a
:25:06. > :25:11.while. This victory back in 199 led to a decade of power for the Lib
:25:12. > :25:16.Dems in Liverpool. What a contrast to the city's political landscape
:25:17. > :25:22.today. At its height the party had 69 local councillors, now down to
:25:23. > :25:27.just three. The scale of the challenge facing Nick Clegg and the
:25:28. > :25:31.Lib Dems is growing. The party is rock bottom in the polls,
:25:32. > :25:36.consistently in single figures. It was wiped out in the European
:25:37. > :25:42.elections losing all but one of its 12 MEPs and in the local elections
:25:43. > :25:49.it lost 42% of the seats that it was defending. But on Merseyside, Nick
:25:50. > :25:53.Clegg was putting on a brave face. We did badly in Liverpool,
:25:54. > :25:59.Manchester and London in particular, we did well in other places. But you
:26:00. > :26:04.are right, we did badly in some of those big cities and I have
:26:05. > :26:10.initiated a review, quite naturally, to understand what went
:26:11. > :26:14.wrong, what went right. As Lib Dems across the country get on with some
:26:15. > :26:19.serious soul-searching, there is an admission that his is the leader of
:26:20. > :26:24.the party who is failing to hit the right notes. Knocking on doors in
:26:25. > :26:30.Liverpool, I have to tell you that Nick Clegg is not a popular person.
:26:31. > :26:34.Some might use the word toxic and I find this very difficult because I
:26:35. > :26:39.know Nick very well and I see a principal person who passionately
:26:40. > :26:45.believes in what he is doing and he is a nice guy. As a result of his
:26:46. > :26:55.popularity, what has happened to the core vote? In parts of the country,
:26:56. > :26:59.we are down to just three councillors like Liverpool for
:27:00. > :27:02.example. You also lose the deliverers and fundraisers and the
:27:03. > :27:08.organisers and the members of course so all of that will have to be
:27:09. > :27:12.rebuilt. As they start fermenting process, local parties across the
:27:13. > :27:18.country and here in Liverpool have been voting on whether there should
:27:19. > :27:24.be a leadership contest. We had two choices to flush out and have a go
:27:25. > :27:27.at Nick Clegg or to positively decide we would sharpen up the
:27:28. > :27:32.campaign and get back on the streets, and by four to one ratio we
:27:33. > :27:38.decided to get back on the streets. We are bruised and battered but we
:27:39. > :27:43.are still here, the orange flag is still flying and one day it will fly
:27:44. > :27:49.over this building again, Liverpool town hall. But do people want the
:27:50. > :27:53.Lib Dems back in charge in this city? I certainly wouldn't vote for
:27:54. > :27:57.them. Their performance in Government and the way they have
:27:58. > :28:04.left their promises down, I could not vote for them again. I voted Lib
:28:05. > :28:10.Dem in the last election because of the university tuition fees and I
:28:11. > :28:14.would never vote for them again because they broke their promise.
:28:15. > :28:18.The Lib Dems are awful, broken promises and what have you. I
:28:19. > :28:22.wouldn't vote for them. This is the declaration of the results for the
:28:23. > :28:27.Northwest... Last month, as other party celebrated in the north-west,
:28:28. > :28:32.the Lib Dems here lost their only MEP, Chris Davies. Now there is
:28:33. > :28:39.concern the party doesn't know how to turn its fortunes around. We
:28:40. > :28:46.don't have an answer to that, if we did we would be grasping it with
:28:47. > :28:51.both hands. We will do our best to hold onto the places where we still
:28:52. > :28:56.have seats but as for the rest of the country where we have been
:28:57. > :29:00.hollowed out, we don't know how to start again until the next general
:29:01. > :29:03.election is out of the way. After their disastrous performance in the
:29:04. > :29:13.European elections, pressure is growing for the party to shift its
:29:14. > :29:18.stance. I think there has to be a lancing of the wound, there should
:29:19. > :29:24.in a referendum and the Liberal Democrats should be calling it. The
:29:25. > :29:30.rest of Europe once this because they are fed up with Britain being
:29:31. > :29:35.unable to make up its mind. The Lib Dems are now suffering the effects
:29:36. > :29:40.of being in Government. The party's problem, choosing the right course
:29:41. > :29:46.to regain political credibility We can now speak to form a Lib Dems
:29:47. > :29:51.leader Ming Campbell. Welcome back to the Sunday Politics. Even your
:29:52. > :29:58.own activists say that Nick Clegg is toxic. How will that change between
:29:59. > :30:03.now and the election? When you have had disappointing results, but you
:30:04. > :30:27.have to do is to rebuild. You pick yourself up
:30:28. > :30:30.least popular leader in modern history and more unpopular than your
:30:31. > :30:35.mate Gordon Brown. You are running out of time. No one believes that
:30:36. > :30:39.being the leader of a modern political party in the UK is an easy
:30:40. > :30:43.job. Both Ed Miliband and David Cameron must have had cause to
:30:44. > :30:47.think, over breakfast this morning, when they saw the headlines in some
:30:48. > :30:48.of the Sunday papers. Of course it is a difficult job but it was
:30:49. > :30:54.pointed out a moment or is a difficult job but it was
:30:55. > :32:22.Nick Clegg is a man of principle and enormous
:32:23. > :32:22.Nick Clegg is a man of principle and it. Once
:32:23. > :32:24.Nick Clegg is a man of principle and doubt that what we have achieved
:32:25. > :32:28.will be much more easily recognised, and there is no doubt,
:32:29. > :32:32.for example, in some of the recent polls, like the Ashcroft Pole,
:32:33. > :32:39.something like 30% of those polled said that as a result at the next
:32:40. > :32:41.something like 30% of those polled general election, they would prepare
:32:42. > :32:46.their to be a coalition involving the Liberal Democrats. So there is
:32:47. > :32:50.no question that the whole notion of coalition is still very much a live
:32:51. > :32:55.one, and one which we have made work in the public interest. The problem
:32:56. > :32:59.is people don't think that. People see you trying to have your cake and
:33:00. > :33:02.eat it. On the one hand you want to get your share of the credit for the
:33:03. > :33:05.turnaround in the economy, on the other hand you can't stop yourself
:33:06. > :33:09.from distancing yourself from the Tories and things that you did not
:33:10. > :33:15.like happening. You are trying to face both ways at once. If you
:33:16. > :33:28.remember our fellow Scotsman famously said you cannot ride both
:33:29. > :33:28.remember our fellow Scotsman to the terms -- terms of the
:33:29. > :33:31.remember our fellow Scotsman coalition agreement, which is what
:33:32. > :33:34.we signed up to in 2010. In addition, in furtherance of that
:33:35. > :33:38.agreement, we have created things like the pupil premium and the
:33:39. > :33:42.others I mentioned and you were rather dismissive. I'm not
:33:43. > :33:46.dismissive, I'm just saying they don't make a difference to what
:33:47. > :33:51.people think of you. We will do everything in our power to change
:33:52. > :33:56.that between now and May 2015. The interesting thing is, going back to
:33:57. > :34:02.the Ashcroft result, it demonstrated clearly that in constituencies where
:34:03. > :34:05.we have MPs and we are well dug in, we are doing everything that the
:34:06. > :34:10.public expects of us, and we are doing very well indeed. You aren't
:34:11. > :34:16.sure fellow Lib Dems have been saying this for you -- you and your
:34:17. > :34:19.fellow Liberal Dems have been saying this for a year or 18 months, and
:34:20. > :34:23.since then you have lost all of your MEPs apart from one, you lost your
:34:24. > :34:29.deposit in a by-election, you lost 310 councillor, including everyone
:34:30. > :34:34.in Manchester or Islington. Mr Clegg leading you into the next general
:34:35. > :34:41.election will be the equivalent of the charge of the light Brigade I
:34:42. > :34:44.doubt that very much. The implication behind that lit you
:34:45. > :34:50.rehearsed is that we should pack our tents in the night and steal away.
:34:51. > :34:53.-- that litany. And if you heard in that piece that preceded the
:34:54. > :34:57.discussion, people were saying, look we have to start from the bottom and
:34:58. > :35:10.have to rebuild. That is exactly what we will do. Nine months is a
:35:11. > :35:17.period of gestation. As you well know. I wouldn't dismiss it quite so
:35:18. > :35:19.easily as that. I'm not here to say we had a wonderful result or
:35:20. > :35:25.anything like it, but what I do say is that the party is determined to
:35:26. > :35:30.turn it round, and that Nick Clegg is the person best qualified to do
:35:31. > :35:35.it. Should your party adopt a referendum about in or out on
:35:36. > :35:38.Europe? No, we should stick to the coalition agreement. If there is any
:35:39. > :35:44.transfer of power from Westminster to Brussels, that will be subject to
:35:45. > :35:48.a referendum. No change. And finally, as a Lib Dem, you must be
:35:49. > :35:55.glad you are not fighting the next election yourself? I've fought every
:35:56. > :36:00.election since 1974, so I've had a few experiences, some good, some
:36:01. > :36:03.bad, but the one thing I have done and the one thing a lot of other
:36:04. > :36:07.people have done is that they have stuck to the task, and that is what
:36:08. > :36:11.will happen in May 2015. Ming Campbell, thank you for joining us.
:36:12. > :36:13.It's just gone 11.35am, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:36:14. > :36:16.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now
:36:17. > :36:31.On today's show, new homes light be needed everywhere,
:36:32. > :36:36.And the debates continue about whether we should go
:36:37. > :36:39.for small infilling developlents, larger estates outside town,
:36:40. > :36:47.First, let's meet the two politicians who'll be with
:36:48. > :36:51.Caroline Dinenage is the conservative MP for Gosport
:36:52. > :37:03.and Chris Oxlade is the Labour parliamentary candidate for Crawley.
:37:04. > :37:12.On a lot of talk about benefits at the moment. Is it becoming ` bit of
:37:13. > :37:18.a crisis Mr Mark in areas I have `` crisis? In areas I have vishted the
:37:19. > :37:24.main issue is housing, but benefits, high on the list. Huge problems from
:37:25. > :37:29.disability benefits two`bedroom tax, and people getting knocked out of
:37:30. > :37:33.the system. The process of change in people finding their feet whth
:37:34. > :37:43.something new. I hear peopld are moving off of assistance and own up
:37:44. > :37:49.`` allowance and are becoming more dependent. Because people are
:37:50. > :37:52.getting knocked out of the system with job seeker allowance, hf you
:37:53. > :38:05.are late for an appointment, you can lose all of your benefit, and it is
:38:06. > :38:09.a very tight system. Is that what actually is happening? I thhnk this
:38:10. > :38:15.is a huge amount of mischiefmaking. There will always be an overhaul of
:38:16. > :38:19.the welfare system and rightly so. The government has sentenced people
:38:20. > :38:23.to a lifetime and benefits with no opportunity to get out therd and be
:38:24. > :38:31.what they want to be and achieve and aspire, they just threw thel on the
:38:32. > :38:34.garbage heap and are `` and occasionally there are times when it
:38:35. > :38:40.doesn't work out and for th`t person it is tragic and we need to sort it
:38:41. > :38:44.out quickly. What is happenhng here, with universal credits as wdll, is
:38:45. > :38:49.that the process of change or discovering that people really need
:38:50. > :38:55.this? Look at the bedroom t`x. There are countless of people, hundreds of
:38:56. > :38:59.people across Sussex, being victimized by this tax. There are
:39:00. > :39:07.people who need extra rooms for some kind of support and are being
:39:08. > :39:12.penalised. So many people actually have come to my surgeries and have
:39:13. > :39:18.identified, yes, we can unddrstand why you are doing this. So the
:39:19. > :39:21.system is working? As an employer, I used to bang my head against the
:39:22. > :39:26.wall when people used to be`t done to come for an interview and did not
:39:27. > :39:30.turn out because you knew you were just part of a checkbox exercise.
:39:31. > :39:32.In the last four years, the number of people commuthng into
:39:33. > :39:36.London by rail has gone up by a third, many of them travellhng from
:39:37. > :39:46.It is maybe easy to see why, with house prices in the capital reaching
:39:47. > :39:50.crazy levels. Prices outsidd of London may not be cheap, but they
:39:51. > :39:53.are still low enough that even when you add in the cost of a se`son
:39:54. > :40:00.ticket, you could still be luch better off, if you do not mhnd what
:40:01. > :40:05.could be up to a four hour trip to work in the back. This family were
:40:06. > :40:09.Londoners, but then April, swapped the big city for a more rur`l area.
:40:10. > :40:14.We found the school that we liked and then we found this housd. We
:40:15. > :40:19.wanted a bit more space, a garden, we wanted to have fields to look out
:40:20. > :40:24.over. A ten Minute Drive brhngs James to this station, and from
:40:25. > :40:29.there, he well get to Paddington Station in an hour and a qu`rter. I
:40:30. > :40:34.am not crammed in like a sardine on the Northern line. I get a seat and
:40:35. > :40:38.I can't sit back and read the paper and I can begin getting on with some
:40:39. > :40:42.work and start my day as soon as I get on the train.
:40:43. > :40:44.Well, joining me now from our Westminster studio is
:40:45. > :40:51.Belinda Aspinall, founder of a website called Life After London.
:40:52. > :40:57.Why are so many people choosing to commutes? There have always been a
:40:58. > :41:01.lot of people who have conshdered a move out of London at variots
:41:02. > :41:04.points. There are those who consider it when they are looking to retire
:41:05. > :41:09.or when their children reach school age and they want more spacd. I
:41:10. > :41:12.think the London property m`rket is influencing first`time buyers or
:41:13. > :41:17.those who might miss a step in purchasing, and a 1`out consider
:41:18. > :41:22.going further afield. So thdy are putting up with those trainhng
:41:23. > :41:26.journeys and having a rotten quality of life? Most people are dohng it to
:41:27. > :41:30.actually improve their qualhty of life, and for lots of them, they
:41:31. > :41:34.work on the train. There is some issue with the fact that so many
:41:35. > :41:39.people have to stand on the train, but most people will try and work on
:41:40. > :41:43.the train, and others will go three or four days a week, which can
:41:44. > :41:47.really help your sense of well`being. Able to work from home a
:41:48. > :41:53.bit more, maybe, but they are moving further down the line to colmute in.
:41:54. > :41:58.Places like Dorset, even. I suppose you get a great quality of life from
:41:59. > :42:02.that long journey. That is the whole point. People are willing to do that
:42:03. > :42:08.commutes to get that qualitx of life, but the whole point is to
:42:09. > :42:12.consider your, what you want out of your quality of life, it is not the
:42:13. > :42:16.same for everybody, and for some people, that commute is not bearable
:42:17. > :42:20.because they are not getting the benefits of the quality of life
:42:21. > :42:24.Your website is about helping people make that leap. I have noticed you
:42:25. > :42:33.are still there, next to thd London eye, the middle of London. Why are
:42:34. > :42:39.you still there? It is interesting. So many people made out but London
:42:40. > :42:45.will always fill up. With boring people who can afford the prices?
:42:46. > :42:49.No. There is a free flow of people who come and go. I live in Southwest
:42:50. > :42:52.London and I am surrounded by friends who are still here `nd we
:42:53. > :42:59.are still here, which I lovd, the coze I am really able to know the
:43:00. > :43:03.questions that people are asking. `` because. People love onto the
:43:04. > :43:07.website and they can connect with locals from all over the cotntry and
:43:08. > :43:11.ask questions, and I think that it's really critical, because it is not
:43:12. > :43:15.for everybody, different ardas suit different people, and the kdy is
:43:16. > :43:19.being able to find that out. Let's come back to the people in the
:43:20. > :43:27.studio. This is moving the property bubble out of London, isn't it?
:43:28. > :43:32.London has always been the dngine of the country, and it has alw`ys had
:43:33. > :43:36.an influx of younger people who may not, when they marry and have
:43:37. > :43:42.children, want to bring thel up in the city, and so moved out. This is
:43:43. > :43:45.people who cannot even afford to get started you are going to st`rt
:43:46. > :43:50.commuting. They help to buy scheme has been really helpful in
:43:51. > :43:54.addressing things like that, but we have to recognise that people are
:43:55. > :43:58.going to want to live outside of a big city like London, and who
:43:59. > :44:02.wouldn't want to live in thd South of England? We all think it is the
:44:03. > :44:06.best place to live, don't wd? I ll take that point, but there `re
:44:07. > :44:10.people who cannot afford, that is the point. They are only dohng it
:44:11. > :44:15.because they cannot afford the house prices in other places. You have
:44:16. > :44:19.touched on it there. You have people coming out of London, house prices
:44:20. > :44:25.have gone up in my region astronomically. A lot of people are
:44:26. > :44:30.seeing it as a destination `nd it has the knock on effect. People are
:44:31. > :44:41.having to live outside of the area and commute in. My constitudncy 70%
:44:42. > :44:49.of the people work outside of it. It is a knock on effect. I people
:44:50. > :44:52.making rational decisions b`sed just on the cost of a mortgage and house
:44:53. > :44:56.price in the lust of the se`son ticket or is there more to ht than
:44:57. > :45:02.that, when people are trying to decide which of our `` the cost of
:45:03. > :45:05.the season ticket. The majority of people use finances as part of that
:45:06. > :45:10.decision but that is not thd whole decision. They are not lookhng to
:45:11. > :45:13.dip into a community, they `re really planning to settle there and
:45:14. > :45:18.become part of the communitx, and an active part of the communitx, so
:45:19. > :45:22.they are really keen to embrace that community, which is why doing their
:45:23. > :45:26.research on a website like this is so important. Possibly important to
:45:27. > :45:31.get a seat on the train, and the only way to do that is to bd at the
:45:32. > :45:35.end of the line. That is a point. Being on the end of the lind does
:45:36. > :45:41.get you a seat, not on the way home, but most of the time. As we
:45:42. > :45:44.all know. What is going to happen about rail transport? Huge numbers
:45:45. > :45:49.travelling by rail, but the investment still does not sdem to be
:45:50. > :45:54.coming in. It is an area whdre we need massive investment in the South
:45:55. > :45:58.of England. Not only in terls of capacity but in terms of spded and
:45:59. > :46:05.the time it takes to get from Portsmouth to London by trahn. You
:46:06. > :46:10.can get from a downcast or to London in that time. This government is
:46:11. > :46:15.planning to invest as much `s it has since the Victoria area to try and
:46:16. > :46:20.bring our rail... It is all coming down to the South but we usd it a
:46:21. > :46:25.lot more, don't we? The cap`city issue, you touched on it. If you
:46:26. > :46:30.have one train late the whole network in the southeast is not
:46:31. > :46:34.particularly on the South coast We need huge investment in that area. I
:46:35. > :46:36.think there is a chain you need to get unfairly soon, so thank you for
:46:37. > :46:38.joining us. I'm talking housing developlents
:46:39. > :46:42.of course! This week we heard house prhces are
:46:43. > :46:45.up 10% on last year, highlighting Now that's the easy bit
:46:46. > :46:50.because how we go about building these homes hs where
:46:51. > :46:52.councils, developers and colmunities To guide us through it, herd's
:46:53. > :47:13.our Hampshire and Isle of Whght Build more houses, that is what we
:47:14. > :47:17.need to do. Build more housds. The biggest housing crisis in a
:47:18. > :47:21.generation. Everyone seems to agree that we need more housing, but that
:47:22. > :47:27.is about where the consensus ends and the arguments begin. Whdre will
:47:28. > :47:31.these houses go? How many do we really need? Should we be btilding
:47:32. > :47:38.big new estates like the ond plant here, or smaller pockets
:47:39. > :47:46.developments? This man leads the Council in an area where just over
:47:47. > :48:00.45,000 households. He wants to develop houses over the next few
:48:01. > :48:05.years. We `` all of these communities has important green gaps
:48:06. > :48:10.between them, which would t`ke 000 houses here, 1000 houses thdre, but
:48:11. > :48:13.people in town do not want to see that. And that is not the only
:48:14. > :48:17.reason why the counsellor thinks going bigger is better. The
:48:18. > :48:23.important thing about buildhng a large development of 6000 homes is
:48:24. > :48:27.that it qualifies as for thd infrastructure that is needdd for a
:48:28. > :48:32.community, so a secondary school, if you don't have 6000 homes, xou don't
:48:33. > :48:40.get a secondary school. The community centres, the doctor
:48:41. > :48:43.surgeries. 25 miles west is an area with a population of 13,000. A
:48:44. > :48:50.handful of developments dotted around the town are quite the Astra
:48:51. > :48:54.Pro creating quite the `` around the town are creating quite the stir.
:48:55. > :49:00.There are already too many houses. We need to invest and grow the town.
:49:01. > :49:05.I am finding it overcrowded now with all of the housing that is going on.
:49:06. > :49:11.This woman is part of a grotp trying to raise awareness about thd 25 0
:49:12. > :49:15.homes that are planned or are already being built. I would be
:49:16. > :49:19.concerned if I was a businessman here and relying on trade, because
:49:20. > :49:23.trying to get into park and visit the town will become a nightmare
:49:24. > :49:28.through the volume of traffhc already trying to get onto lajor
:49:29. > :49:34.roads, it is horrendous, and I fear for the gridlock rather than the
:49:35. > :49:38.impact, and people come herd because it is a historical market town, and
:49:39. > :49:43.suddenly putting in over 2000 homes, you are going to change the
:49:44. > :49:51.character. What is the silvdr bullets? There is an infill of
:49:52. > :49:54.derelict land that sat therd for years and it is in keeping with
:49:55. > :50:02.Rumsey on that let's have more small pockets of growth rather th`n large
:50:03. > :50:10.housing estates dumped in surrounding areas. While sole are
:50:11. > :50:14.advocating small pockets, others are thinking much, much bigger. James is
:50:15. > :50:20.from a Reading `based consultancy recently short listed in a
:50:21. > :50:24.competition to design a new Garden City. Clearly, large numbers of
:50:25. > :50:28.garden cities across the UK would make a significant impact in
:50:29. > :50:34.reducing the pressure on solid communities to take growth that I
:50:35. > :50:36.don't necessarily want, but there is recognition that all places need to
:50:37. > :50:40.grow to consume their own ndeds from their own communities. As the
:50:41. > :50:47.planning system working as ht is? The current administration has
:50:48. > :50:52.tried, but the agenda has not seen the delivery of housing numbers And
:50:53. > :50:57.estimates suggest we are falling short by over 100,000 houses builds
:50:58. > :51:02.a year in the UK, so catching up on those numbers won't be easy. For
:51:03. > :51:08.this area, if all goes ahead as planned, et al. Have taken the best
:51:09. > :51:12.part of a decade to bring about but Sean says that developers c`n use
:51:13. > :51:18.the appeals process to push for new housing where they wanted, leaving
:51:19. > :51:22.councils with an ugly choicd. It needs to be done. If we do not do it
:51:23. > :51:32.it will be done to us and the result will be far worse. It is thd big
:51:33. > :51:38.stick, to force housing through Government has always imposdd
:51:39. > :51:44.housing and local areas, and at least now local areas can ddcide how
:51:45. > :52:40.they want that housing to ltck, what sort
:52:41. > :52:42.didn't happen `` his Gordon Brown had his eco`towns. Housing states
:52:43. > :53:50.are being put on the edge of Crawley. You talk about 6000,
:53:51. > :53:53.actually be reallocated for people. Hopefully the government as putting
:53:54. > :53:59.forward the wheels in motion to be able to allow... It was supposed to
:54:00. > :54:03.have been done by now. It h`s gone quite a long way to deliver this,
:54:04. > :54:08.but the big chunks of land `re still in the hands of the governmdnt, you
:54:09. > :54:11.have to be able to rise that away from them, and now that the
:54:12. > :54:15.legislation is coming forth I will allow that to happen, more `nd more
:54:16. > :54:20.housing is beginning to comd forward. Is it coming forward? Is
:54:21. > :54:25.that the market conditions? It is the right kind of housing that needs
:54:26. > :54:29.to come forward as well. It is all very well with the garden chties,
:54:30. > :54:34.which we support, but not jtst two of them, we need proper invdstment
:54:35. > :54:39.in proper strategy, look at the whole of the South east, and also
:54:40. > :54:44.the country. House construction virtually ground to a halt. That is
:54:45. > :54:49.what you were arguing earlidr. Yes, but even during the booming years of
:54:50. > :54:52.Labour, more houses were buhlt in the final year of the Thatcher
:54:53. > :54:57.government than in 13 years of the whole Labour government. Th`t is not
:54:58. > :55:04.quite true. That point is slightly off. We could get into a debate
:55:05. > :55:10.about who has done what. It is just not happening. Let's see wh`t
:55:11. > :55:12.happens and whether the schools and all the rest of it comes with it.
:55:13. > :55:14.Now our regular round`up of the political week in thd South
:55:15. > :55:29.It is the biggest order for weaponry ever placed, the American ddsigned
:55:30. > :55:35.at 35 will be used by the R@F and on the new aircraft characters ``
:55:36. > :55:38.aircraft carriers, and 15% of the components could be made in
:55:39. > :55:46.Britain. The America's cop could provide a boost for Portsmotth. Nick
:55:47. > :55:50.Clegg said Portsmouth MP Mike Hancock should be expelled from the
:55:51. > :55:54.Lib Dems after he admitted degrading behaviour with a voidable
:55:55. > :55:58.constituent, the single mother as saying her previous complaints had
:55:59. > :56:03.been ignored. It is like banging your head against a door and not
:56:04. > :56:10.getting anywhere. 999 food was the theme of a meeting of foodb`nks The
:56:11. > :56:12.prime minister has been told directly that demand for help is
:56:13. > :56:18.outstripping the ability to supply it. And doggie bags to cut down on
:56:19. > :56:28.food waste are being providdd in Oxford restaurants. A Europdan grant
:56:29. > :56:37.is covering the cost. Mike Hancock is a neighboring and he
:56:38. > :56:44.to you. `` neighboring MP to you. Do you think there should be a
:56:45. > :56:46.by`election? Should he resign? I do, and not so much because of the
:56:47. > :56:53.scandals that he has been involved in him a he is just nowhere to be
:56:54. > :57:00.seen. I just feel that his constituents need someone there
:57:01. > :57:07.There was a meeting of a thousand people about the bed Ainslid project
:57:08. > :57:10.and he did not show up. With all that has gone on, the local
:57:11. > :57:16.constituents need someone who is going to be an effective melber of
:57:17. > :57:21.Parliament and their half. Do we need a power of recall? You would be
:57:22. > :57:25.happy to be subject to that? If you have got nothing to be ashaled of,
:57:26. > :57:28.then absolutely you should be subject to that. I would qudstion
:57:29. > :57:35.whether or not people would want it. After housing, benefits, looking
:57:36. > :57:37.at all of the various aspects of the cost of living crisis, I wotld have
:57:38. > :57:42.thought that is not something they would want the torments to
:57:43. > :57:47.spearhead. It is a priority according to David Cameron. Is it
:57:48. > :57:50.really recall? And has to bd approved by the committee of the
:57:51. > :57:59.house if it is not a crimin`l offence. It is a matter of personal
:58:00. > :58:02.integrity. If you do not fedl you can represent your constitudnts
:58:03. > :58:07.properly then you should not be doing the job or taking the pay
:58:08. > :58:16.packet. Are they still honotrable members? A vast majority ard. Like
:58:17. > :58:22.any workplace or somewhere where you do a job, you get someone who is
:58:23. > :58:26.going to upset the apple cart. He apologised for being unprofdssional.
:58:27. > :58:29.Do you think that is what it was? If that is the case, the stand`rds
:58:30. > :58:36.committee should have looked at it as something which was the business
:58:37. > :58:42.of a MP. Yes. It is just a horrible situation, and I feel sorry for the
:58:43. > :58:45.people involved, but I actu`lly feel sorry for all of the other
:58:46. > :58:49.constituents who are not getting well looked after by their lember of
:58:50. > :59:01.Parliament. We need an official way of permitting MPs? `` removhng. It
:59:02. > :59:04.would deliver the desired affect that you would want people to rely
:59:05. > :59:08.on their own integrity and stand down if they have done the wrong
:59:09. > :59:11.thing. Thank you very much for joining me, both of you.
:59:12. > :59:13.That's the Sunday Politics in the South.
:59:14. > :59:15.Thanks to my guests Caroline Dinenage and Chris Oxlade.
:59:16. > :59:17.Don't forget to keep up`to`date with Southern politics
:59:18. > :59:20.There's the address at the bottom of the screen.
:59:21. > :59:24.information, you can apply to them and they will be obliged to tell
:59:25. > :59:42.you. Thanks for joining us. Andrew, back to you.
:59:43. > :59:48.think you'd want to. Labour grandees are not queueing up to sing his
:59:49. > :59:52.praises. Look at this. In my view, he is the leader we have and he is
:59:53. > :59:56.the leader I support and he is somebody capable of leading the
:59:57. > :00:02.party to victory. Ed Miliband will leave this to victory, and I believe
:00:03. > :00:08.he can. If he doesn't, what would happen to the Labour Party? We could
:00:09. > :00:12.be in the wilderness for 15 years. At the moment he has to convince
:00:13. > :00:17.people he has the capacity to lead the country. That's not my view but
:00:18. > :00:20.people don't believe that. We had a leader of the Labour Party was
:00:21. > :00:27.publicly embarrassed, because whoever was in charge of press
:00:28. > :00:36.letting go through a process where we have councillors in Merseyside
:00:37. > :00:40.resigning. It was a schoolboy error. Having policies without them being
:00:41. > :00:50.drawn together into a convincing and vivid narrative and with what you do
:00:51. > :00:56.the people in the country. You have to draw together, connect the
:00:57. > :01:02.policies, link them back to the leader and give people a real sense
:01:03. > :01:08.of where you are going. Somehow he has never quite managed to be
:01:09. > :01:14.himself and create that identity with the public. And we are joined
:01:15. > :01:25.by the president of you girls, Peter Kellner. Welcome to the Sunday
:01:26. > :01:29.politics. -- YouGov. The Labour Party is six points ahead in your
:01:30. > :01:33.poll this morning. So what is the problem? On this basis he will win
:01:34. > :01:37.the next election. If the election were today and the figures held up,
:01:38. > :01:42.you would have a Labour government with a narrow overall majority. One
:01:43. > :01:48.should not forget that. Let me make three points. The first is, in past
:01:49. > :01:54.parliaments, opposition normally lose ground and governments gain
:01:55. > :01:56.ground in the final few months. The opposition should be further ahead
:01:57. > :02:03.than this. I don't think six is enough. Secondly, Ed Miliband is
:02:04. > :02:06.behind David Cameron when people are asked who they want as Prime
:02:07. > :02:09.Minister and Labour is behind the Conservatives went people are asked
:02:10. > :02:13.who they trust on the economy. There have been elections when the party
:02:14. > :02:17.has won by being behind on leadership and other elections where
:02:18. > :02:21.they have won by being behind on the economy. No party has ever won an
:02:22. > :02:26.election when it has been clearly behind on both leadership and the
:02:27. > :02:30.economy. Let me have another go The Labour Party brand is a strong
:02:31. > :02:36.brand. The Tory Bramleys week. The Labour brand is stronger. That is a
:02:37. > :02:47.blast -- the Labour -- the Tory Bramleys week. A lot of the Tories
:02:48. > :02:55.-- the Tory brand is weak. Cant you win on policies and a strong party
:02:56. > :02:57.brand? If you have those too, you need the third factor which isn t
:02:58. > :03:03.there. People believing that you have what it takes, competent
:03:04. > :03:09.skills, determination, determination, whatever makes to
:03:10. > :03:16.carry through. -- whatever mix. A lot of Ed Miliband policies, on the
:03:17. > :03:20.banks, energy prices, Brent controls, people like them. But in
:03:21. > :03:25.government, would they carry them through? They think they are not up
:03:26. > :03:29.to it. -- rent controls. If people think you won't deliver what you
:03:30. > :03:33.say, even if they like it, they were necessarily vote for you. That is
:03:34. > :03:39.the missing third element. There is a strong Labour brand, but it's not
:03:40. > :03:45.strong enough to overcome the feeling that the Labour leadership
:03:46. > :03:49.is not up to it. Nick, you had some senior Labour figure telling you
:03:50. > :03:52.that if Mr Miliband losing the next election he will have to resign
:03:53. > :03:57.immediately and cannot fight another election the way Neil Kinnock did
:03:58. > :04:00.after 1987. What was remarkable to me was that people were even
:04:01. > :04:03.thinking along these lines, and even more remarkable that they would tell
:04:04. > :04:11.you they were thinking along these lines? What is the problem? The
:04:12. > :04:16.problem is, is that Ed Miliband says it would be unprecedented to win the
:04:17. > :04:20.general election after the second worst result since 1918. They are
:04:21. > :04:23.concerned about is the start of a script that he would say on the day
:04:24. > :04:26.after losing the general election. Essentially what the people are
:04:27. > :04:31.trying to do is get their argument in first and to say, you cannot do
:04:32. > :04:35.what Neil Kinnock did in 1987. Don't forget that Neil Kinnock in 198 was
:04:36. > :04:40.in the middle of a very brave process of modernisation and had one
:04:41. > :04:44.and fought a very campaign that was professional but he lost again in
:04:45. > :04:51.1992, and they wanted to get their line in first. What some people are
:04:52. > :04:54.saying is that this is an election that the Labour Party should be
:04:55. > :04:57.winning because the coalition is so unpopular. If you don't win, I'm
:04:58. > :05:00.afraid to say, there is something wrong with you. Don't you find it
:05:01. > :05:04.remarkable that people are prepared to think along these lines at this
:05:05. > :05:07.stage, when Labour are ahead in the polls, still the bookies favourite
:05:08. > :05:12.to win, and you start to speak publicly, or in private to the
:05:13. > :05:17.public print, but we might have to get rid of him if he doesn't win.
:05:18. > :05:19.Everything you say about labour in this situation has been said about
:05:20. > :05:24.the Tories. We wondered whether Boris Johnson would tie himself to
:05:25. > :05:29.the mask and he is the next leader in waiting if Cameron goes. It's a
:05:30. > :05:31.mirror image of that. We talk about things being unprecedented. It's
:05:32. > :05:35.unprecedented for a government to gain seats. All the things you say
:05:36. > :05:40.about labour, you could say it the Conservatives. That's what makes the
:05:41. > :05:43.next election so interesting. But in the aftermath of the European
:05:44. > :05:45.elections and the local government elections, in which the
:05:46. > :05:50.Conservatives did not do that well, the issue was not Mr Cameron or the
:05:51. > :05:53.Tories doing well, the issue was the Labour Party and how they had not
:05:54. > :05:56.done as well as they should have done, and that conversation was
:05:57. > :06:02.fuelled by the kind of people who have been speaking to nick from the
:06:03. > :06:06.Labour Party. Rachel Reeves cited their real-life performance in
:06:07. > :06:10.elections as a reason for optimism. When in fact their performance in
:06:11. > :06:12.the Europeans and locals was disappointing for an opposition one
:06:13. > :06:17.year away from a general election. What alarms me about labour is the
:06:18. > :06:22.way they react to criticisms about Ed Miliband. Two years ago when he
:06:23. > :06:25.was attacked, they said they were 15 points ahead, and then a year ago
:06:26. > :06:30.there were saying they were nine or ten ahead, and now they are saying
:06:31. > :06:35.we are still five or six ahead. The trend is alarming. It points to a
:06:36. > :06:40.smaller Labour lead. Am I right in detecting a bit of a class war going
:06:41. > :06:44.on in the Labour Party? There are a lot of northern Labour MPs who think
:06:45. > :06:50.that Ed Miliband is to north London, and there are too many metropolitan
:06:51. > :06:56.cronies around him must I think that is right, Andrew. What I think is,
:06:57. > :07:01.being a pessimist in terms of their prospects, I do think the Labour
:07:02. > :07:04.Party could win the next election. I just don't think they can as they
:07:05. > :07:08.are going at the moment. But the positioning for a possible defeat,
:07:09. > :07:14.what they should be talking about is what do we need to change in the
:07:15. > :07:18.party and the way Ed Miliband performs in order to secure victory.
:07:19. > :07:23.That is a debate they could have, and they could make the changes I
:07:24. > :07:29.find it odd that they are being so defeatist. Don't go away. Peter is a
:07:30. > :07:33.boffin when it comes to polls. That is why we have a mod for the
:07:34. > :07:37.election prediction swings and roundabouts. He is looking for what
:07:38. > :07:44.he calls the incumbency effect. Don't know what is a back-up -- what
:07:45. > :07:53.that's about question don't worry, here is an. Being in office is bad
:07:54. > :07:57.for your health. Political folk wisdom has it that incumbency
:07:58. > :08:02.favours one party in particular the Liberal Democrats. That is because
:08:03. > :08:05.their MPs have a reputation as ferociously good local campaigners
:08:06. > :08:10.who do really well at holding on to their seats. However, this time
:08:11. > :08:14.round, several big-name long serving Liberal Democrats like Ming
:08:15. > :08:19.Campbell, David Heath and Don Foster are standing down. Does that mean
:08:20. > :08:24.the incumbency effect disappears like a puff of smoke? Then there is
:08:25. > :08:29.another theory, called the sophomore surge. It might sound like a movie
:08:30. > :08:33.about US college kids, but it goes like this. New MPs tend to do better
:08:34. > :08:37.in their second election than they did in their first. That could
:08:38. > :08:42.favour the Tories because they have lots of first-time MPs. The big
:08:43. > :08:46.question is, what does this mean for the 7th of May 2015, the date of the
:08:47. > :08:57.next general election? The answer is, who knows? I know a man who
:08:58. > :09:01.knows. Peter. What does it all mean? You can go onto your PC now and draw
:09:02. > :09:04.down programmes which say that these are the voting figures from a
:09:05. > :09:09.national poll, so what will the seats look like? This is based on
:09:10. > :09:13.uniform swing. Every seat moving up and down across the country in the
:09:14. > :09:18.same way. Historically, that's been a pretty good guide. I think that's
:09:19. > :09:22.going to completely break down next year, because the Lib Dems will
:09:23. > :09:27.probably hold on to more seats than we predict from the national figures
:09:28. > :09:31.and I think fewer Tory seats will go to the Labour Party than you would
:09:32. > :09:36.predict from the national figures. The precise numbers, I'm not going
:09:37. > :09:42.to be too precise, but I would be surprised, sorry, I would not be
:09:43. > :09:48.surprised if Labour fell 20 or 5 seats short on what we would expect
:09:49. > :09:53.on the uniform swing prediction Next year's election will be tight.
:09:54. > :09:57.Falling 20 seats short could well mean the difference between victory
:09:58. > :10:02.and defeat. What you make of that, Helen? I think you're right,
:10:03. > :10:06.especially taking into account the UKIP effect. We have no idea about
:10:07. > :10:10.that. The conventional wisdom is that will drain away back to the
:10:11. > :10:14.Conservatives, but nobody knows and it makes the next election almost
:10:15. > :10:17.impossible to call. It means it is a great target the people like Lord
:10:18. > :10:23.Ashcroft with marginal polling, because people have never been so
:10:24. > :10:26.interested. It is for party politics and we all assume that UKIP should
:10:27. > :10:34.be well next year, but their vote went up from 17 up to 27%. Then that
:10:35. > :10:38.17% went down to 3%, so they might only be five or 6% in the general
:10:39. > :10:42.election, so they might not have the threat of depriving Conservatives of
:10:43. > :10:46.their seats. Where the incumbency thing has an effect is the Liberal
:10:47. > :10:51.Democrats. They have fortress seats where between 1992 and 1997 Liberal
:10:52. > :10:56.Democrats seats fell, but their percentage went up. They are losing
:10:57. > :10:59.the local government base though. True, but having people like Ming
:11:00. > :11:04.Campbell standing down means they will struggle. We are used to
:11:05. > :11:07.incumbency being an important factor in American politics. It's hard to
:11:08. > :11:13.get rid of an incumbent unless it is a primary election, like we saw in
:11:14. > :11:16.Virginia, but is it now becoming an important factor in British
:11:17. > :11:21.politics, that if you own the seat you're more likely to hold on to it
:11:22. > :11:26.than not? If it is, that's a remarkable thing. It's hard to be a
:11:27. > :11:28.carpetbagger in America, but it is normal in British Parliamentary
:11:29. > :11:32.constituencies to be represented by someone who did not grow up locally.
:11:33. > :11:36.It is a special kind of achievement to have an incumbency effect where
:11:37. > :11:39.you don't have deep roots in the constituency. I was going to ask
:11:40. > :11:43.about the Lib Dems. If we are wrong, and they collapse in Parliamentary
:11:44. > :11:47.representation as much as the share in vote collapses, is that not good
:11:48. > :11:52.news is that the Conservatives? They would be in second place in the
:11:53. > :11:55.majority of existing Lib Dems seats. For every seat where Labour are
:11:56. > :11:59.second to the Lib Dems, there are two where the Conservatives are
:12:00. > :12:07.second. If the Lib Dem representation collapses, that helps
:12:08. > :12:11.the Conservatives. I'm assuming the Tories will gain about ten seats. If
:12:12. > :12:15.they gain 20, if they'd had 20 more seats last time, they would have had
:12:16. > :12:20.a majority government, just about. So 20 seats off the Lib Dem, do the
:12:21. > :12:24.maths, as they say in America, and they could lose a handful to labour
:12:25. > :12:28.and still be able to run a one party, minority government. The fate
:12:29. > :12:35.of the Lib Dems could be crucial to the outcome to the politics of
:12:36. > :12:40.light. On the 8th of May, it will be VE Day and victory in election day
:12:41. > :12:42.as well as Europe. The Lib Dems will be apoplectic if they lose all of
:12:43. > :12:48.the seats to their coalition partners. The great quote by Angela
:12:49. > :12:53.Merkel, the little party always gets crushed. It's a well-established
:12:54. > :12:55.idea that coalition politics. They can't take credit for the things
:12:56. > :12:59.people like you may get lumbered with the ones they don't. They have
:13:00. > :13:03.contributed most of this terrible idea that seized politics where you
:13:04. > :13:08.say it, but you don't deliver it. Tuition fees is the classic example
:13:09. > :13:13.of this Parliament. Why should you believe any promise you make? And Ed
:13:14. > :13:17.Miliband is feeling that as well. But in 1974 the liberal Democrats
:13:18. > :13:20.barely had any MPs but there were reporters outside Jeremy Thorpe s
:13:21. > :13:26.home because they potentially held not the balance of power, but were
:13:27. > :13:27.significantly in fourth. Bringing back memories Jeremy Thorpe,