:00:37. > :00:43.Welfare reform is one of the government's most popular policies.
:00:44. > :00:46.So Labour says it would be even tougher than the Tories.
:00:47. > :00:50.We'll be asking the Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary if she's got
:00:51. > :00:56.Even Labour supporters worry that Ed Miliband hasn't got what it takes
:00:57. > :01:01.Labour grandees are increasingly vocal about their concerns.
:01:02. > :01:12.Over 50% of Labour voters think they'd do better with a new leader.
:01:13. > :01:21.Later in the programme: apparently "toxic" on the doorstep.
:01:22. > :01:24.NATO?s chief on the Newport summit and future of the military alliance.
:01:25. > :01:40.promised an electric car revolution, why so little progress?
:01:41. > :01:47.Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh, the toxic tweeters
:01:48. > :01:55.First, the deepening crisis in Iraq, where Sunni Islamists are now
:01:56. > :01:57.largely in control of the Syrian-Iraq border, which means
:01:58. > :02:04.they can now re-supply their forces in Iraq from their Syrian bases.
:02:05. > :02:06.Rather than moving on Baghdad, they are for the moment consolidating
:02:07. > :02:09.their grip on the towns and cities they've already taken.
:02:10. > :02:11.They also seem to be in effective control of Iraq's
:02:12. > :02:15.biggest oil refinery, which supplies the capital.
:02:16. > :02:17.And there are reports they might now have taken the power
:02:18. > :02:24.Iraqi politicians are now admitting that ISIS,
:02:25. > :02:27.the name of the Sunni insurgents, is better trained, better equipped and
:02:28. > :02:32.far more battle-hardened than the US-trained Iraqi army fighting it.
:02:33. > :02:35.Which leaves the fate of Baghdad increasingly in the hands
:02:36. > :02:53.No good news coming out of there, Janan. No good news and no good
:02:54. > :02:57.options either. The West's best strategy is to decide how much
:02:58. > :03:02.support to give to the Iraqi government. The US is sending over
:03:03. > :03:05.about 275 military personnel. Do they go further and contemplate
:03:06. > :03:11.their support? General Petraeus argued against it as it might be
:03:12. > :03:17.seen as the US serving as the force of Shia Iraqis -- continue their
:03:18. > :03:26.support. Do we contemplate breaking up Iraq? It won't be easy. The Sunni
:03:27. > :03:29.and Shia Muslim populations don't live in clearly bordered areas, but
:03:30. > :03:33.in the longer term, do we deal with it in the same way we dealt with the
:03:34. > :03:38.break-up of the Ottoman empire over 100 years ago? In the short-term and
:03:39. > :03:45.long-term, completely confounding. Quite humiliating. If ISIS take
:03:46. > :03:51.Baghdad I can't think of a bigger ignominy for foreign policy since
:03:52. > :03:55.Suez. If Iraq is partitioned, it won't be up to us. It will be what
:03:56. > :04:01.is happening because of what is happening on the ground. Everything
:04:02. > :04:07.does point to partition, and that border, which ISIS control, between
:04:08. > :04:12.Syria and Iraq, that has been there since it was drawn during the First
:04:13. > :04:15.World War. That is gone as well. An astonishingly humbling situation the
:04:16. > :04:24.West, and you can see the Kurds in the North think this is a charge --
:04:25. > :04:27.chance for authority. They think this is the chance to get the
:04:28. > :04:33.autonomy they felt they deserved a long time. Janan is right. We can't
:04:34. > :04:37.do much in the long term, but we have to decide on the engagement.
:04:38. > :04:40.And the other people wish you'd be talking turkey, because if there is
:04:41. > :04:45.some blowback and the fighters come back, they are likely to come back
:04:46. > :04:50.from Turkey. Where is Iran in all of this? There were reports last week
:04:51. > :04:53.that the Revolutionary guard, the head of it, he was already in
:04:54. > :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. > :05:18.White House and the British. I think they are running the show, in
:05:19. > :05:22.technical terms. John Kerry is flying into Cairo this morning, and
:05:23. > :05:26.what is his message? It is twofold. One is to Arab countries, do more to
:05:27. > :05:31.encourage an inclusive government in Iraq, mainly Sunni Muslims in the
:05:32. > :05:36.government, and the Arab Gulf states should stop funding insurgents in
:05:37. > :05:42.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. > :05:58.anything. He doesn't want to do anything. By the way, that is what
:05:59. > :06:03.most Americans think. That is what opinion polls are showing. You have
:06:04. > :06:07.George Osborne Michael Gold who would love to get involved but they
:06:08. > :06:10.cannot because of the vote in parliament on Syria lasted -- George
:06:11. > :06:15.Osborne and Michael Gove. This government does not have the stomach
:06:16. > :06:18.for military intervention. We will see how events unfold on the ground.
:06:19. > :06:21.All parties are agreed that Britain's 60-year old multi-billion
:06:22. > :06:26.The Tory side of the Coalition think their reforms are necessary
:06:27. > :06:29.and popular, though they haven't always gone to time or to plan.
:06:30. > :06:33.In the eight months she's had since she became Shadow Secretary of State
:06:34. > :06:40.for Work and Pensions, Rachel Reeves has talked the talk about getting
:06:41. > :06:43.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. > :06:53.has proposed to cut the cost and change the culture of welfare.
:06:54. > :06:56.Child benefit, housing benefit, the ?26,000 benefit cap -
:06:57. > :07:02.They've been lukewarm about the government's flagship Universal
:07:03. > :07:05.Credit scheme - which rolls six benefit payments into one - and
:07:06. > :07:13.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. > :07:21.That will save ?65 million, says Labour, though the cost
:07:22. > :07:27.And cutting winter fuel payments for richer pensioners which will
:07:28. > :07:35.Not a lot in a total welfare bill of around ?200 billion.
:07:36. > :07:37.And with welfare cuts popular among even Labour voters, they will soon
:07:38. > :07:44.have to start spelling out exactly what Labour welfare reform means.
:07:45. > :07:57.Welcome. Good morning. Why do you want to be tougher than the Tories?
:07:58. > :08:01.We want to be tough in getting the welfare bill down. Under this
:08:02. > :08:04.government, the bill will be ?13 million more than the government set
:08:05. > :08:09.out in 2010 and I don't think that is acceptable. We should try to
:08:10. > :08:13.control the cost of Social Security. But the welfare bill under the next
:08:14. > :08:17.Labour government will fall? It will be smaller when you end the first
:08:18. > :08:21.parliament than when you started? We signed up to the capping welfare but
:08:22. > :08:27.that doesn't see social security costs ball, it sees them go up in
:08:28. > :08:32.line with with inflation or average earnings -- costs fall. So where
:08:33. > :08:37.flair will rise? We have signed up to the cap -- welfare will rise? We
:08:38. > :08:41.have signed up to the cap. We will get the costs under control and they
:08:42. > :08:44.haven't managed to achieve it. The government is spending ?13 billion
:08:45. > :08:50.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. > :09:03.relying on housing benefit. We have a record number of people on zero
:09:04. > :09:07.hours contracts. I'm still not clear if you will cut welfare if you get
:09:08. > :09:13.in power. Nobody is saying that the cost of welfare is going to fall.
:09:14. > :09:18.The welfare cap sees that happening gradually. That is a Tory cap. And
:09:19. > :09:25.you've accepted it. You're being the same as the Tories, not to. If they
:09:26. > :09:29.had a welfare cap, they would have breached it in every year of the
:09:30. > :09:34.parliament. Social Security will be higher than the government set out
:09:35. > :09:37.because they failed to control it. You read the polls, and the party
:09:38. > :09:41.does lots of its own polling, and you're scared of being seen as the
:09:42. > :09:47.welfare party. You don't really believe all of this anti-welfare
:09:48. > :09:50.stuff? We are the party of work, not welfare. The Labour Party was set up
:09:51. > :09:52.in the first place because we believe in the dignity of work and
:09:53. > :09:56.we believe that work should pay wages can afford to live on. I make
:09:57. > :10:01.no apologies for being the party of work. We are not the welfare party,
:10:02. > :10:06.we are the party of work. Even your confidential strategy document
:10:07. > :10:09.admits that voters don't trust you on immigration, the economy, this is
:10:10. > :10:14.your own people, and welfare. You are not trusted on it. The most
:10:15. > :10:17.recent poll showed Labour slightly ahead of the Conservative Party on
:10:18. > :10:22.Social Security, probably because they have seen the incompetence and
:10:23. > :10:26.chaos at the Department for Work and Pensions under Iain Duncan Smith.
:10:27. > :10:32.Your own internal document means that the voters don't trust you on
:10:33. > :10:35.welfare reform. That is why we have shown some of this tough things we
:10:36. > :10:40.will do like the announcement that Ed Miliband made earlier this week,
:10:41. > :10:44.that young people without basic qualifications won't be entitled to
:10:45. > :10:47.just sign on for benefits, they have to sign up for training in order to
:10:48. > :10:50.receive support. That is the right thing to do by that group of young
:10:51. > :11:00.people, because they need skills to progress. We will, once that. -- we
:11:01. > :11:05.will, onto that. You say you criticise the government that it had
:11:06. > :11:09.a cap and wouldn't have met it, but every money-saving welfare reform,
:11:10. > :11:16.you voted against it. How is that being tougher? The most recent bout
:11:17. > :11:20.was the cap on overall welfare expenditure, and we went through the
:11:21. > :11:25.lobbies and voted for the Tories. You voted against the benefit cap,
:11:26. > :11:30.welfare rating, you voted against, child benefit schemes, you voted
:11:31. > :11:32.against. You can't say we voted against everything when we voted
:11:33. > :11:36.with the Conservatives in the most recent bill with a cap on Social
:11:37. > :11:44.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. > :12:18.We have supported universal credit. You voted against it in the third
:12:19. > :12:23.reading. We voted against some of the specifics. If you look at
:12:24. > :12:28.universal credit, they have had to write off nearly ?900 million of
:12:29. > :12:32.spending. I'm not on the rights and wrongs, I'm trying to work out what
:12:33. > :12:35.you voted for. Some of the things we are going to go further than the
:12:36. > :12:41.government with. For example, cutting benefits for young people
:12:42. > :12:44.who don't sign of the training. The government had introduced that. For
:12:45. > :12:46.example, saying that the richest pensioners should not get the winter
:12:47. > :12:50.fuel allowance, that is something the government haven't signed up.
:12:51. > :12:54.You would get that under Labour and this government haven't signed up
:12:55. > :13:00.for it. ?100 million on the winter fuel allowance and ?65 million on
:13:01. > :13:06.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. > :13:38.the taxpayer ?2000 per year. I will come onto that. You mentioned
:13:39. > :13:42.universal credit, which the government regards as the flagship
:13:43. > :13:48.reform. It's had lots of troubles with it and it merges six benefits
:13:49. > :13:51.into one. You voted against it in the third reading and given lukewarm
:13:52. > :13:57.support in the past. We have not said he would abandon it, but now
:13:58. > :14:02.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. > :14:31.keep it or not? Because there is no transparency and we have no idea. We
:14:32. > :14:37.are awash with information. We are not. The government, in the most
:14:38. > :14:42.recent National audit Forest -- National Audit Office statement said
:14:43. > :14:47.it was a reset project. This is really important. This is a flagship
:14:48. > :14:52.government programme, and it's going to cost ?12.8 billion to deliver,
:14:53. > :14:56.and we don't know what sort of state it is in, so we have said that if we
:14:57. > :15:03.win at the next election, we will pause that for three months and
:15:04. > :15:08.calling... Will you stop the pilots? We don't know what status they will
:15:09. > :15:12.have. We would stop the build of the system for three months, calling the
:15:13. > :15:18.National Audit Office to do awards and all report. The government don't
:15:19. > :15:21.need to do this until the next general election, they could do it
:15:22. > :15:26.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. > :15:34.now. So when you were invited to a job centre where universal credit is
:15:35. > :15:40.being rolled out to see how it was working, you refused to go. Why? We
:15:41. > :15:43.asked were a meeting with Iain Duncan Smith and he cancelled the
:15:44. > :15:46.meeting is three times. I'm talking about the visit when you were
:15:47. > :15:51.offered to go to a job centre and you refused. We had an appointment
:15:52. > :15:53.to meet Iain Duncan Smith at the Department for Work and Pensions and
:15:54. > :15:58.said he cancelled and was not available, but he wanted us to go to
:15:59. > :16:03.the job centre. We wanted to talk to him and his officials, which she
:16:04. > :16:06.did. Would it be more useful to go to the job centre and find out how
:16:07. > :16:20.it was working. He's going to tell you it's working fine.
:16:21. > :16:27.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. > :17:08.benefits at the moment, but 850,000 young people who are not in work at
:17:09. > :17:16.the moment. This applies to around 100,000 young people. There are
:17:17. > :17:23.actually 975,000, 16-24 -year-olds, not in work, training or education.
:17:24. > :17:30.Your proposal only applies to 100,000 of them, why? This is
:17:31. > :17:36.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. > :18:34.skills and are not in training we know are much less likely to get a
:18:35. > :18:41.job so there are 140,018-24 -year-olds signing onto benefits at
:18:42. > :18:45.the moment. This is about trying to address that problem to make sure
:18:46. > :18:50.all young people have the skills they need to get a job. Your policy
:18:51. > :18:55.is to take away part of the dole unless young unemployed people agree
:18:56. > :19:01.to study for level three qualifications, the equivalent of an
:19:02. > :19:09.AS-level or an NVQ but 40% of these people have the literary skills of a
:19:10. > :19:14.nine-year-old. After all that failed education, how are you going to
:19:15. > :19:19.train them to a level standard? We are saying that anyone who doesn't
:19:20. > :19:24.have that a level or equivalent qualification will be required to go
:19:25. > :19:29.back to college. We are not saying that within a year they have to get
:19:30. > :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. > :19:43.for the last four years, have been educated under a Conservative
:19:44. > :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. > :20:03.years in school did not. We are not saying that within one year
:20:04. > :20:07.everybody will get up to a level three qualifications, but if you are
:20:08. > :20:11.one of those people who enters the Labour market age 18 with the
:20:12. > :20:19.reading skills of a nine-year-old, they are the sorts of people that
:20:20. > :20:25.should not the left languishing. I went to college in Hackney if you
:20:26. > :20:30.you are -- a few weeks ago and there was a dyslexic boy studying painting
:20:31. > :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. > :20:49.college that he could pick up a newspaper and read it, it made a
:20:50. > :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. > :21:04.failed them but let's move on to your leader. Look at this graph of
:21:05. > :21:10.Ed Miliband's popularity. This is the net satisfaction with him, it is
:21:11. > :21:16.dreadful. The trend continues to climb since he became leader of the
:21:17. > :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. > :21:33.saw in the elections a month ago that... Why is the satisfaction rate
:21:34. > :21:38.falling? We can look at polls or actual election results and the fact
:21:39. > :21:42.that we have got another 2000 Labour councillors, more people voting
:21:43. > :21:47.Labour, the opinion polls today show that if there was a general election
:21:48. > :21:54.today we would have a majority of more than 40, he must be doing
:21:55. > :22:00.something right. Why do almost 50% of voters want to replace him as
:22:01. > :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. > :22:22.follows from that is that you should keep Ed Miliband under wraps until
:22:23. > :22:27.the election. Let's look at actually what happens when people get a
:22:28. > :22:31.chance to vote, when they get that opportunity we have seen more Labour
:22:32. > :22:38.councillors, more Labour members of the European Parliament...
:22:39. > :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. > :22:55.government elections or European elections. Why don't people like
:22:56. > :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. > :23:19.Labour need to win back at the general election next year. Even you
:23:20. > :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. > :23:41.people didn't even bother going to vote. That is a profound issue not
:23:42. > :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. > :23:56.did you take them for granted? This is what Ed Miliband said. I am not
:23:57. > :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. > :24:34.next year and that will defy all the odds. You are going to win... Ed
:24:35. > :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. > :24:47.grief. The party is still smarting from dire results in the European
:24:48. > :24:51.and Local Elections. The only poll Nick Clegg has won in recent times
:24:52. > :24:55.is to be voted the most unpopular leader of a party in modern British
:24:56. > :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 1998 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. > :25:26.just three. The scale of the challenge facing Nick Clegg and the
:25:27. > :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. > :26:03.are right, we did badly in some of those big cities and I have
:26:04. > :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. > :26:18.serious soul-searching, there is an admission that his is the leader of
:26:19. > :26:24.the party who is failing to hit the right notes. Knocking on doors in
:26:25. > :26:29.Liverpool, I have to tell you that Nick Clegg is not a popular person.
:26:30. > :26:34.Some might use the word toxic and I find this very difficult because I
:26:35. > :26:38.know Nick very well and I see a principal person who passionately
:26:39. > :26:45.believes in what he is doing and he is a nice guy. As a result of his
:26:46. > :26:54.popularity, what has happened to the core vote? In parts of the country,
:26:55. > :26:58.we are down to just three councillors like Liverpool for
:26:59. > :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. > :27:23.be a leadership contest. We had two choices to flush out and have a go
:27:24. > :27:26.at Nick Clegg or to positively decide we would sharpen up the
:27:27. > :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. > :27:42.are still here, the orange flag is still flying and one day it will fly
:27:43. > :27:48.over this building again, Liverpool town hall. But do people want the
:27:49. > :27:52.Lib Dems back in charge in this city? I certainly wouldn't vote for
:27:53. > :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. > :28:21.wouldn't vote for them. This is the declaration of the results for the
:28:22. > :28:26.Northwest... Last month, as other party celebrated in the north-west,
:28:27. > :28:32.the Lib Dems here lost their only MEP, Chris Davies. Now there is
:28:33. > :28:38.concern the party doesn't know how to turn its fortunes around. We
:28:39. > :28:45.don't have an answer to that, if we did we would be grasping it with
:28:46. > :28:50.both hands. We will do our best to hold onto the places where we still
:28:51. > :28:55.have seats but as for the rest of the country where we have been
:28:56. > :28:59.hollowed out, we don't know how to start again until the next general
:29:00. > :29:02.election is out of the way. After their disastrous performance in the
:29:03. > :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. > :30:02.now and the election? When you have had disappointing results, but you
:30:03. > :30:07.have to do is to rebuild. You pick yourself up and start all over
:30:08. > :30:12.again, and the reason why the Liberal Democrats got 57, 56 seats
:30:13. > :30:16.in the House of Commons now is because we picked ourselves up, we
:30:17. > :30:27.took every opportunity and we have rebuilt from the bottom 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. > :30:42.job. Both Ed Miliband and David Cameron must have had cause to
:30:43. > :30:47.think, over breakfast this morning, when they saw the headlines in some
:30:48. > :30:51.of the Sunday papers. Of course it is a difficult job but it was
:30:52. > :30:55.pointed out a moment or two ago that Nick Clegg is a man of principle and
:30:56. > :30:59.enormous resilience if you consider what he had to put up with, and in
:31:00. > :31:02.my view, he is quite clearly the person best qualified to lead the
:31:03. > :31:06.party between now and the general election and through the election
:31:07. > :31:11.campaign, and beyond. So why don't people like him? We have had to take
:31:12. > :31:15.some pretty difficult decisions, and, of course, people didn't expect
:31:16. > :31:21.that. If you look back to the rather heady days of the rose garden behind
:31:22. > :31:25.ten Downing St, people thought it was all going to be sweetness and
:31:26. > :31:29.light, but the fact is, we didn't know then what we know now, about
:31:30. > :31:33.the extent of the economic crisis we win, and a lot of difficult
:31:34. > :31:37.decisions have had to be taken in order to restore economic stability.
:31:38. > :31:43.Look around you. You will see we are not there yet but we are a long way
:31:44. > :31:49.better off than in 2010. You are not getting the credit for it, the
:31:50. > :31:55.Tories are. We will be a little more assertive about taking the credit.
:31:56. > :31:58.For example, the fact that 23 million people have had a tax cut of
:31:59. > :32:02.?800 per year and we have taken 2 million people out of paying tax
:32:03. > :32:07.altogether. Ming Campbell, your people say that on every programme
:32:08. > :32:12.like this. Because it is true. That might be the case, but you are at
:32:13. > :32:14.seven or 8% in the polls, and nobody is listening, or they don't believe
:32:15. > :32:22.it. Once is listening, or they don't believe
:32:23. > :32:25.doubt that what we have achieved will be much more easily
:32:26. > :32:29.recognised, and there is no doubt, for example, in some of the recent
:32:30. > :32:31.polls, like the Ashcroft Pole, something like 30% of those polled
:32:32. > :32:39.said that as a result at the next something like 30% of those polled
:32:40. > :32:42.general election, they would prepare their to be a coalition involving
:32:43. > :32:47.the Liberal Democrats. So there is no question that the whole notion of
:32:48. > :32:53.coalition is still very much a live one, and one which we have made work
:32:54. > :32:56.in the public interest. The problem is people don't think that. People
:32:57. > :33:00.see you trying to have your cake and eat it. On the one hand you want to
:33:01. > :33:03.get your share of the credit for the turnaround in the economy, on the
:33:04. > :33:07.other hand you can't stop yourself from distancing yourself from the
:33:08. > :33:15.Tories and things that you did not like happening. You are trying to
:33:16. > :33:15.face both ways at once. If you remember our fellow Scotsman
:33:16. > :33:28.famously said you cannot ride both remember our fellow Scotsman
:33:29. > :33:28.to the terms -- terms of the remember our fellow Scotsman
:33:29. > :33:32.coalition agreement, which is what we signed up to in 2010. In
:33:33. > :33:36.addition, in furtherance of that agreement, we have created things
:33:37. > :33:40.like the pupil premium and the others I mentioned and you were
:33:41. > :33:43.rather dismissive. I'm not dismissive, I'm just saying they
:33:44. > :33:47.don't make a difference to what people think of you. We will do
:33:48. > :33:52.everything in our power to change that between now and May 2015. The
:33:53. > :33:58.interesting thing is, going back to the Ashcroft result, it demonstrated
:33:59. > :34:03.clearly that in constituencies where we have MPs and we are well dug in,
:34:04. > :34:09.we are doing everything that the public expects of us, and we are
:34:10. > :34:14.doing very well indeed. You aren't sure fellow Lib Dems have been
:34:15. > :34:17.saying this for you -- you and your fellow Liberal Dems have been saying
:34:18. > :34:21.this for a year or 18 months, and since then you have lost all of your
:34:22. > :34:25.MEPs apart from one, you lost your deposit in a by-election, you lost
:34:26. > :34:30.310 councillor, including everyone in Manchester or Islington. Mr Clegg
:34:31. > :34:37.leading you into the next general election will be the equivalent of
:34:38. > :34:42.the charge of the light Brigade. I doubt that very much. The
:34:43. > :34:46.implication behind that lit you rehearsed is that we should pack our
:34:47. > :34:51.tents in the night and steal away. -- that litany. And if you heard in
:34:52. > :34:54.that piece that preceded the discussion, people were saying, look
:34:55. > :35:09.we have to start from the bottom and have to rebuild. That is exactly
:35:10. > :35:13.what we will do. Nine months is a period of gestation. As you well
:35:14. > :35:17.know. I wouldn't dismiss it quite so easily as that. I'm not here to say
:35:18. > :35:22.we had a wonderful result or anything like it, but what I do say
:35:23. > :35:26.is that the party is determined to turn it round, and that Nick Clegg
:35:27. > :35:31.is the person best qualified to do it. Should your party adopt a
:35:32. > :35:36.referendum about in or out on Europe? No, we should stick to the
:35:37. > :35:40.coalition agreement. If there is any transfer of power from Westminster
:35:41. > :35:46.to Brussels, that will be subject to a referendum. No change. And
:35:47. > :35:52.finally, as a Lib Dem, you must be glad you are not fighting the next
:35:53. > :35:57.election yourself? I've fought every election since 1974, so I've had a
:35:58. > :36:01.few experiences, some good, some bad, but the one thing I have done
:36:02. > :36:05.and the one thing a lot of other people have done is that they have
:36:06. > :36:07.stuck to the task, and that is what will happen in May 2015. Ming
:36:08. > :36:11.Campbell, thank you for joining us. It's just gone 11.35am, you're
:36:12. > :36:13.watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers
:36:14. > :36:16.in Scotland who leave us now Hello and on the
:36:17. > :36:25.Sunday Politics Wales: We hear
:36:26. > :36:31.from the military alliance?s chief. Meanwhile, Welsh military veterans
:36:32. > :36:33.are being offered more support, And a new map
:36:34. > :36:38.for local government is coming. But are the councils and the
:36:39. > :36:41.Welsh Government heading Measures to support veterans will be
:36:42. > :36:48.announced by the Welsh Government It?s already announced there?ll
:36:49. > :36:51.be more money for treating post But there is a concern about big
:36:52. > :37:08.variations in waiting times. It was during the First World War
:37:09. > :37:14.that cases of post-traumatic stress disorder were first documented.
:37:15. > :37:20.Soldiers develop shell shock as a result of their experiences in the
:37:21. > :37:24.trenches. The firing line museum at Cardiff Castle tells the story of
:37:25. > :37:29.the Welsh soldier over the decades and for many ex-service men and
:37:30. > :37:35.women, dealing with the after-effects of combat is part of
:37:36. > :37:40.that story. This man's spell at 18 years in the Army and served in
:37:41. > :37:43.Northern Ireland and the Falklands. He did not seek treatment
:37:44. > :37:48.straightaway but he started recognising he had problems while he
:37:49. > :37:53.was still in the Army. Self diagnosed and I dealt with it. There
:37:54. > :38:00.were occasions, sleepless nights, nightmares, bouts of heavy drinking.
:38:01. > :38:05.But I just put that down to service life anyway because we work hard and
:38:06. > :38:08.we play hard. I had tended not to talk about my experiences and the
:38:09. > :38:13.first time I'd spoke about my experiences were 16 years after the
:38:14. > :38:17.event. It was a long-time bottled up. It was like a pressure cooker
:38:18. > :38:22.for release. You have to admit you are suffering. You are in denial for
:38:23. > :38:33.a long time because people say it is a sign of weakness. The way I looked
:38:34. > :38:41.at it, the job that I chose, that became part of it, in a way. I kind
:38:42. > :38:44.of accepted this. Since 2010, there has been a specialist mental health
:38:45. > :38:51.service for ex-service personnel within the Welsh NHS. Later this
:38:52. > :38:55.year, it launches under a new name. The head of the service says that
:38:56. > :39:03.treating sufferers of conditions like this promptly improve the
:39:04. > :39:06.effectiveness of treatments. Like any disease, the quicker you catch
:39:07. > :39:16.an illness the better. If someone does not present within service,
:39:17. > :39:19.several years down the road, they present with symptoms and problems
:39:20. > :39:32.that could have been dealt with sooner. That makes it more
:39:33. > :39:35.difficult. And there have been concerns about variations in the
:39:36. > :39:40.time veterans have to wait for treat went across Wales. We asked all the
:39:41. > :39:45.local health boards for their current waiting times from first
:39:46. > :39:55.assessment to the start of treatment. Of those who responded,
:39:56. > :39:58.the weight varied from two or three weeks to six months currently in the
:39:59. > :40:06.Cardiff and Vale health board area. The variations are mainly due to a
:40:07. > :40:11.limited number of therapists dealing with fluctuating demand, according
:40:12. > :40:14.to those working in the service. This week the Welsh Government
:40:15. > :40:19.announced there will be more money available to treat post-traumatic
:40:20. > :40:25.stress disorder among that terms. It is promising more details later in
:40:26. > :40:28.the week. The chair of the cross-party group on the Armed
:40:29. > :40:37.Forces welcomes any extra resources but is urging the Welsh Government
:40:38. > :40:40.to do more. There is variation in the ability of health boards to meet
:40:41. > :40:44.the needs of veterans in their areas. We need to make sure that
:40:45. > :40:50.there is adequate investment and to make sure that when clinicians come
:40:51. > :40:59.across a veteran with problems, they are able to strike while the iron is
:41:00. > :41:05.hot. If we do not have that, we will see more family breakdown and
:41:06. > :41:17.unfortunately, more veterans taking their own lives. Over 30 years,
:41:18. > :41:23.since he started showing signs, he has learned to live with his
:41:24. > :41:28.symptoms. It does not affect me in day-to-day life. I have coping
:41:29. > :41:35.strategies. I have good days and bad days. I just cope with it now
:41:36. > :41:38.through hard-working, I work seven days a week and I do not have time
:41:39. > :41:46.to stop and think about things. It does affect me when I see it on the
:41:47. > :42:03.news, I find it very upsetting to this day. You feel for the families.
:42:04. > :42:06.We are all part of the same military community.
:42:07. > :42:11.Army veteran Maldwyn Jones ending that report by Bethan Lewis.
:42:12. > :42:13.Staying with the military, preparations for the NATO summit
:42:14. > :42:21.at the Celtic Manor in Newport are underway.
:42:22. > :42:31.In September, Wales will host the biggest summit in NATO 's history.
:42:32. > :42:36.In London this week, it was revealed that Russian forces were continuing
:42:37. > :42:43.to amass near you crave. That threat will top the agenda in Newport. We
:42:44. > :42:48.will discuss the future and that will be influenced by the current
:42:49. > :42:54.events in Ukraine. Russia's illegal military action in Ukraine has
:42:55. > :42:58.dramatically changed the security situation in Europe and we will have
:42:59. > :43:02.to adapt to that and that will be one of the important topics to be
:43:03. > :43:07.discussed in Wales. You have said that troops are massing on the
:43:08. > :43:10.border. You have also said that NATO will not hesitate in the situation.
:43:11. > :43:16.What exactly are you committing us to by saying that? To defend and
:43:17. > :43:22.protect our allies. That is the core task of NATO. We have two adapt to
:43:23. > :43:27.the new security situation and we have taken immediate steps to
:43:28. > :43:35.enhance policing over the Baltic states. We have deployed naval
:43:36. > :43:43.vessels. We have conducted exercises on the ground. We will not hesitate
:43:44. > :43:49.to take further steps if necessary. Should people in the UK consider
:43:50. > :43:54.Russia and enemy? I would put it this way, we have tried to develop a
:43:55. > :44:01.partnership with Russia but apparently, Russia considers us not
:44:02. > :44:06.a partner but an adversarial. And of course we have two adapt to that.
:44:07. > :44:13.You are also of course discussing the situation in Afghanistan and
:44:14. > :44:17.NATO 's withdrawal as a fighting force there. Can you understand why
:44:18. > :44:26.people in Wales, people who have lost loved ones, may wonder why we
:44:27. > :44:31.got involved in Afghanistan? Let me remind you why we went to
:44:32. > :44:41.Afghanistan in the first place. It was in the wake of the September
:44:42. > :44:44.2001 attacks on the United States. And we wanted to prevent Afghanistan
:44:45. > :44:49.from once again becoming a safe haven for terrorists who could use
:44:50. > :44:55.Afghanistan as a launching pad for terrorist attacks against Europe or
:44:56. > :44:59.North America. And in that respect, we have achieved what we came for
:45:00. > :45:04.because since we launched the military operation we have not seen
:45:05. > :45:09.Afghanistan as a haven for terrorists. Isn't that because NATO
:45:10. > :45:12.has a big military presence there and once we have pulled away, we
:45:13. > :45:22.will leave it in a fragile state again? It is a very important point
:45:23. > :45:27.that we do not believe that. We have spent a lot of time and efforts to
:45:28. > :45:32.build a very strong Afghan security force of 350,000 soldiers and
:45:33. > :45:37.police, that is a lot. And we have seen them handle security incidents
:45:38. > :45:43.quite professionally. Recently they have also secured the presidential
:45:44. > :45:49.elections and done so very professionally. I am confident that
:45:50. > :45:54.they will be able to take full responsibility for the security by
:45:55. > :45:58.the end of this year, as planned. But for people in Wales whose
:45:59. > :46:01.relatives were in the Armed Forces and they have paid the ultimate
:46:02. > :46:10.sacrifice, what would you say to them? First of all, I pay tribute to
:46:11. > :46:14.the service and sacrifice of many British servicemen and women,
:46:15. > :46:19.including a lot from Wales. And they have really made a difference in
:46:20. > :46:25.Afghanistan and their sacrifice has not in in vain. On the contrary, as
:46:26. > :46:33.I said, we have a better security situation but also if we look at the
:46:34. > :46:38.broader development, you see a better Afghan society today than ten
:46:39. > :46:43.or 15 years ago, economic growth, better educational system, 8 million
:46:44. > :46:48.children go to school, alt of which more than one third are girls. Life
:46:49. > :46:56.expectancy has gone up, in particularly for women. And you see
:46:57. > :47:01.a vibrant media environment in Afghanistan. It is a much better
:47:02. > :47:06.society than it was. The summit will be taking place shortly before a
:47:07. > :47:11.referendum in Scotland on independence. Do you have a view on
:47:12. > :47:18.Scottish independence? No, I am definitely not going to interfere
:47:19. > :47:24.with domestic British politics. It could have serious indications for
:47:25. > :47:35.NATO, couldn't it? We have not discussed it. If the Scottish people
:47:36. > :47:42.were to decide on independence, and if an independent Scotland were to
:47:43. > :47:50.apply for membership of NATO, that would be addressed exactly like
:47:51. > :47:53.applications from other nations. Do you think it would be difficult for
:47:54. > :47:58.an independent Scotland to join NATO, given that the SNP is opposed
:47:59. > :48:05.to any nuclear arms being held on Scottish soil or in Scottish waters?
:48:06. > :48:09.Well, it is difficult to make any assessment of that because it is a
:48:10. > :48:15.hypothetical question and we have not discussed it in NATO. Will it be
:48:16. > :48:25.discussed at the summit? No, it will not be discussed. It is a
:48:26. > :48:30.hypothetical question. It is for the Scottish people to decide. Let's
:48:31. > :48:34.await the outcome of the referendum. What will this summit mean for
:48:35. > :48:40.Wales? Will Wales benefit in any way from hosting the summit? There is no
:48:41. > :48:48.doubt that Wales as a whole will benefit from this big event. It is
:48:49. > :48:54.the biggest NATO summit ever. On the first day, we will have delegations
:48:55. > :49:03.from 15 nations plus international organisations. -- 15 nations. It is
:49:04. > :49:12.an excellent opportunity to showcase Wales. We know Wales as rich of
:49:13. > :49:19.culture and history, so it is a very attractive event for Wales. It gives
:49:20. > :49:24.a lot of exposure. Some people may feel the event takes place in a
:49:25. > :49:29.bubble behind a ring of steel and that really the rest of Wales will
:49:30. > :49:35.not benefit. It is almost incidental where the event takes place. There
:49:36. > :49:42.is a lot of economic positive spin off from such an event. All of the
:49:43. > :49:46.nations bring bigger or smaller delegations. You will see thousands
:49:47. > :49:50.and thousands of people going to Wales and of course there is a very
:49:51. > :49:57.positive economic spin off but you should not underestimate the public
:49:58. > :50:04.relations effect of this event, the biggest event ever in NATO 's
:50:05. > :50:08.history will be broadcasted all over the world and let me also mention
:50:09. > :50:13.that this will be an historic summit, we will take very important
:50:14. > :50:20.decisions regarding NATO 's future. For many years to come, this will be
:50:21. > :50:23.remembered as the Wales summit that gives a lot of positive public
:50:24. > :50:26.It?s been talked about for years, studied in detail by a
:50:27. > :50:29.Welsh Government commission and the First Minister has been negotiating
:50:30. > :50:33.But the Labour Party says it?s going to spend another three months
:50:34. > :50:35.consulting about a cut in the number of councils.
:50:36. > :50:37.The Local Government Minister says she?ll postpone elections
:50:38. > :50:47.for councillors who agree to merge with their neighbours.
:50:48. > :50:52.It is not reorganisation. It is about merging local authorities. You
:50:53. > :50:57.will have heard the announcement I made that the elections now have
:50:58. > :51:00.been moved to 2017. I will legislate for that as soon as possible and it
:51:01. > :51:05.will be done on existing authorities and one of the incentives we are
:51:06. > :51:09.offering for voluntary mergers is those elections would move to 2018.
:51:10. > :51:12.Let?s see if we can work out what all this means,
:51:13. > :51:14.with Russell Goodway, a Cardiff councillor and former Labour leader
:51:15. > :51:17.of the authority, and in Swansea with the Liberal Democrat local
:51:18. > :51:26.Peter Black, I will ask you first, to respond to that. She says she
:51:27. > :51:33.wants to legislate as soon as possible. Does she have the
:51:34. > :51:37.authority to legislate as soon as possible? She has the authority to
:51:38. > :51:41.bring a bill before the assembly but what that contains will have to be
:51:42. > :51:44.open to discussion. As I understand it, they want to bring in some
:51:45. > :51:49.legislation before the assembly elections to enable local councils
:51:50. > :51:53.to merge involuntarily and I think also to stop all the local councils
:51:54. > :51:57.spending all the money before any mergers go ahead. That may well have
:51:58. > :52:00.some support. Once those semi-elections are out of the way
:52:01. > :52:06.and they start looking seriously at bringing this merger of local
:52:07. > :52:09.authorities, it is not a reorganisation, it does look like a
:52:10. > :52:12.reorganisation to me, but once those elections are out of the way, I
:52:13. > :52:17.think that is when we start really getting down to business as to what
:52:18. > :52:21.is acceptable and what is not. If she wants to clear the way for
:52:22. > :52:26.councils to merge before then, you will help her? I do not know yet. I
:52:27. > :52:29.would have to see the details. I would not like to see that happening
:52:30. > :52:36.with just ministers making the decision. It would have to be a
:52:37. > :52:40.decision for the whole assembly. It is taking everyone a very long time
:52:41. > :52:45.to make up their own mind how this will proceed. Another delay, how
:52:46. > :52:50.much of an incentive is that to local government? Probably not a
:52:51. > :52:55.huge amount. We have known for 20 years that we made a mistake in 1995
:52:56. > :53:01.in creating 22 authorities. We knew that it would have an adverse impact
:53:02. > :53:05.upon people in Wales. We have to put it right. I have not heard a
:53:06. > :53:10.compelling argument yet against reducing the number of authorities.
:53:11. > :53:18.I think we need to get on with it. I think this needs to be driven by
:53:19. > :53:21.local government. We need local -- we should know what pattern of local
:53:22. > :53:25.governor and we want, we should know what shape of local authorities that
:53:26. > :53:31.we need in order to discharge our important functions. If we have
:53:32. > :53:34.known for 20 years the current setup is a mistake wide as the Welsh
:53:35. > :53:43.Government need to offer further incentives? I have not heard a
:53:44. > :53:46.compelling argument. I have heard an argument about the cost but local
:53:47. > :53:51.government is running out of money to deliver the range of services
:53:52. > :53:56.that we currently deliver. We know that if things do not change, whole
:53:57. > :53:59.areas of service delivery like leisure, culture, are going to
:54:00. > :54:04.disappear from the local government agenda altogether. That is not
:54:05. > :54:10.acceptable. We know we are making redundancies by the many hundreds at
:54:11. > :54:15.the moment. Because we are having to sustain 22 infrastructures,
:54:16. > :54:21.overheads, office staff, senior personnel, it is the front line
:54:22. > :54:28.service people that are being made redundant. I cannot be sustained.
:54:29. > :54:33.Will that work? Are there councils looking at merge involuntarily? I am
:54:34. > :54:38.not aware of any councils looking at merge involuntarily. I am not sure
:54:39. > :54:48.that an extra year is an incentive. It most probably complicates things
:54:49. > :54:52.even more. I think in terms of where we are going, there is an agreement
:54:53. > :54:55.that 22 authorities is too many. The question has to be, what is the
:54:56. > :55:00.right number of authorities and how you go about doing it? I am not
:55:01. > :55:07.convinced by the map that the Williams commission has produced. I
:55:08. > :55:09.think it does not reflect local communities and I think the cost is
:55:10. > :55:20.actually a very important consideration. This is money on top
:55:21. > :55:24.of the cuts facing them already. But what about the money being wasted
:55:25. > :55:28.now by inefficient services question mark I am not sure that it is. There
:55:29. > :55:32.are problems in the sustainability of some services but in terms of
:55:33. > :55:37.wasting money on inefficient services, that is another question
:55:38. > :55:41.that has to be examined. This money has to be found up front and we do
:55:42. > :55:47.not know the payback period yet. I am not convinced this is the right
:55:48. > :55:52.time to do it. There is a lot of work that needs to be done before we
:55:53. > :56:01.get any form -- anyone moving forward. Electoral reform is very
:56:02. > :56:04.important. The assembly does not have the power at the moment to do
:56:05. > :56:08.that. But electoral reform is very important. If you have bigger
:56:09. > :56:18.councils, the elections have to reflect the outcome that how people
:56:19. > :56:26.voted. All we would create -- I'm not in favour of that. Another three
:56:27. > :56:30.months' consultation. Carwyn Jones wanted to present a map by the
:56:31. > :56:36.summer. Three months takes us beyond that. Has he got what he wanted? I
:56:37. > :56:43.think so. He is in control of the agenda. What we do Black has just
:56:44. > :56:45.said is precisely the wrong reason for bringing forward these
:56:46. > :56:50.proposals. It is not about voting systems. It is about people in
:56:51. > :56:55.receipt of services. If we congregate it by making it about
:56:56. > :57:00.voting systems and councillors, then all of a sudden you realise that
:57:01. > :57:03.this is not about improving services for people -- complicate it. This is
:57:04. > :57:14.about petitions talking about themselves again. -- politicians. If
:57:15. > :57:18.you have a proportional voting system in which the result reflects
:57:19. > :57:20.the way that people voted, you have more comfortable councils, more
:57:21. > :57:35.transparent councils and better services. That is key. Voting
:57:36. > :57:41.systems are very important. They had a referendum and they lost. I am
:57:42. > :57:45.sure that the conversation will go on. If I can just ask you about
:57:46. > :57:51.another story while you are here. We have seen reports of young men from
:57:52. > :57:56.Cardiff going out to Syria to join Islamist extremist movements. Is
:57:57. > :58:01.there an issue for schools, education authorities in Wales, that
:58:02. > :58:07.they need to counter extremism among younger people? It is an issue for
:58:08. > :58:10.all of us. I am sure that most people would be surprised and
:58:11. > :58:13.shocked to have cured the news over the past two days, although it is
:58:14. > :58:17.not the first occasion when people who have had a link with Cardiff
:58:18. > :58:23.have been associated with terrorism activities. I think that what is
:58:24. > :58:27.needed is the faith communities, the police, local authorities, they need
:58:28. > :58:29.to get together. I am not sure whether these things are being
:58:30. > :58:41.identified, if they are on the radar. How they respond to it and
:58:42. > :58:45.what arrangements are being put in place, I do not know. Cardiff, I
:58:46. > :58:48.have to say, in terms of the religion ships with the Muslim
:58:49. > :58:51.community leaders has always been very good. They have always been
:58:52. > :58:58.reasonable and supportive. We need to draw on those Russian ships again
:58:59. > :59:06.to see we can put in place something to identify this early on. --
:59:07. > :59:14.You can see what Carwyn Jones has to say for himself in
:59:15. > :59:20.First Minister?s Questions on AMPM on Tuesday afternoon.
:59:21. > :59:24.and they will be obliged to tell you. Thanks for joining us. Andrew,
:59:25. > :59:43.back to you. think you'd want to. Labour grandees
:59:44. > :59:50.are not queueing up to sing his praises. Look at this. In my view,
:59:51. > :59:53.he is the leader we have and he is the leader I support and he is
:59:54. > :59:58.somebody capable of leading the party to victory. Ed Miliband will
:59:59. > :00:06.leave this to victory, and I believe he can. If he doesn't, what would
:00:07. > :00:09.happen to the Labour Party? We could be in the wilderness for 15 years.
:00:10. > :00:13.At the moment he has to convince people he has the capacity to lead
:00:14. > :00:19.the country. That's not my view, but people don't believe that. We had a
:00:20. > :00:25.leader of the Labour Party was publicly embarrassed, because
:00:26. > :00:28.whoever was in charge of press letting go through a process where
:00:29. > :00:37.we have councillors in Merseyside resigning. It was a schoolboy error.
:00:38. > :00:46.Having policies without them being drawn together into a convincing and
:00:47. > :00:51.vivid narrative and with what you do the people in the country. You have
:00:52. > :00:57.to draw together, connect the policies, link them back to the
:00:58. > :01:07.leader and give people a real sense of where you are going. Somehow he
:01:08. > :01:12.has never quite managed to be himself and create that identity
:01:13. > :01:15.with the public. And we are joined by the president of you girls, Peter
:01:16. > :01:26.Kellner. Welcome to the Sunday politics. -- YouGov. The Labour
:01:27. > :01:30.Party is six points ahead in your poll this morning. So what is the
:01:31. > :01:35.problem? On this basis he will win the next election. If the election
:01:36. > :01:39.were today and the figures held up, you would have a Labour government
:01:40. > :01:44.with a narrow overall majority. One should not forget that. Let me make
:01:45. > :01:49.three points. The first is, in past parliaments, opposition normally
:01:50. > :01:55.lose ground and governments gain ground in the final few months. The
:01:56. > :02:01.opposition should be further ahead than this. I don't think six is
:02:02. > :02:04.enough. Secondly, Ed Miliband is behind David Cameron when people are
:02:05. > :02:08.asked who they want as Prime Minister and Labour is behind the
:02:09. > :02:11.Conservatives went people are asked who they trust on the economy. There
:02:12. > :02:14.have been elections when the party has won by being behind on
:02:15. > :02:18.leadership and other elections where they have won by being behind on the
:02:19. > :02:22.economy. No party has ever won an election when it has been clearly
:02:23. > :02:27.behind on both leadership and the economy. Let me have another go. The
:02:28. > :02:32.Labour Party brand is a strong brand. The Tory Bramleys week. The
:02:33. > :02:42.Labour brand is stronger. That is a blast -- the Labour -- the Tory
:02:43. > :02:49.Bramleys week. A lot of the Tories -- the Tory brand is weak. Cant you
:02:50. > :02:56.win on policies and a strong party brand? If you have those too, you
:02:57. > :03:02.need the third factor which isn't there. People believing that you
:03:03. > :03:04.have what it takes, competent skills, determination,
:03:05. > :03:14.determination, whatever makes to carry through. -- whatever mix. A
:03:15. > :03:18.lot of Ed Miliband policies, on the banks, energy prices, Brent
:03:19. > :03:22.controls, people like them. But in government, would they carry them
:03:23. > :03:26.through? They think they are not up to it. -- rent controls. If people
:03:27. > :03:30.think you won't deliver what you say, even if they like it, they were
:03:31. > :03:36.necessarily vote for you. That is the missing third element. There is
:03:37. > :03:40.a strong Labour brand, but it's not strong enough to overcome the
:03:41. > :03:47.feeling that the Labour leadership is not up to it. Nick, you had some
:03:48. > :03:50.senior Labour figure telling you that if Mr Miliband losing the next
:03:51. > :03:53.election he will have to resign immediately and cannot fight another
:03:54. > :03:58.election the way Neil Kinnock did after 1987. What was remarkable to
:03:59. > :04:02.me was that people were even thinking along these lines, and even
:04:03. > :04:08.more remarkable that they would tell you they were thinking along these
:04:09. > :04:14.lines? What is the problem? The problem is, is that Ed Miliband says
:04:15. > :04:18.it would be unprecedented to win the general election after the second
:04:19. > :04:21.worst result since 1918. They are concerned about is the start of a
:04:22. > :04:24.script that he would say on the day after losing the general election.
:04:25. > :04:28.Essentially what the people are trying to do is get their argument
:04:29. > :04:33.in first and to say, you cannot do what Neil Kinnock did in 1987. Don't
:04:34. > :04:36.forget that Neil Kinnock in 1987 was in the middle of a very brave
:04:37. > :04:41.process of modernisation and had one and fought a very campaign that was
:04:42. > :04:47.professional but he lost again in 1992, and they wanted to get their
:04:48. > :04:52.line in first. What some people are saying is that this is an election
:04:53. > :04:55.that the Labour Party should be winning because the coalition is so
:04:56. > :04:59.unpopular. If you don't win, I'm afraid to say, there is something
:05:00. > :05:02.wrong with you. Don't you find it remarkable that people are prepared
:05:03. > :05:05.to think along these lines at this stage, when Labour are ahead in the
:05:06. > :05:10.polls, still the bookies favourite to win, and you start to speak
:05:11. > :05:15.publicly, or in private to the public print, but we might have to
:05:16. > :05:18.get rid of him if he doesn't win. Everything you say about labour in
:05:19. > :05:22.this situation has been said about the Tories. We wondered whether
:05:23. > :05:26.Boris Johnson would tie himself to the mask and he is the next leader
:05:27. > :05:30.in waiting if Cameron goes. It's a mirror image of that. We talk about
:05:31. > :05:33.things being unprecedented. It's unprecedented for a government to
:05:34. > :05:37.gain seats. All the things you say about labour, you could say it the
:05:38. > :05:41.Conservatives. That's what makes the next election so interesting. But in
:05:42. > :05:44.the aftermath of the European elections and the local government
:05:45. > :05:48.elections, in which the Conservatives did not do that well,
:05:49. > :05:51.the issue was not Mr Cameron or the Tories doing well, the issue was the
:05:52. > :05:54.Labour Party and how they had not done as well as they should have
:05:55. > :05:57.done, and that conversation was fuelled by the kind of people who
:05:58. > :06:03.have been speaking to nick from the Labour Party. Rachel Reeves cited
:06:04. > :06:07.their real-life performance in elections as a reason for optimism.
:06:08. > :06:11.When in fact their performance in the Europeans and locals was
:06:12. > :06:15.disappointing for an opposition one year away from a general election.
:06:16. > :06:20.What alarms me about labour is the way they react to criticisms about
:06:21. > :06:23.Ed Miliband. Two years ago when he was attacked, they said they were 15
:06:24. > :06:26.points ahead, and then a year ago there were saying they were nine or
:06:27. > :06:31.ten ahead, and now they are saying we are still five or six ahead. The
:06:32. > :06:37.trend is alarming. It points to a smaller Labour lead. Am I right in
:06:38. > :06:42.detecting a bit of a class war going on in the Labour Party? There are a
:06:43. > :06:46.lot of northern Labour MPs who think that Ed Miliband is to north London,
:06:47. > :06:54.and there are too many metropolitan cronies around him must I think that
:06:55. > :06:57.is right, Andrew. What I think is, being a pessimist in terms of their
:06:58. > :07:02.prospects, I do think the Labour Party could win the next election. I
:07:03. > :07:06.just don't think they can as they are going at the moment. But the
:07:07. > :07:12.positioning for a possible defeat, what they should be talking about is
:07:13. > :07:15.what do we need to change in the party and the way Ed Miliband
:07:16. > :07:20.performs in order to secure victory. That is a debate they could have,
:07:21. > :07:26.and they could make the changes. I find it odd that they are being so
:07:27. > :07:30.defeatist. Don't go away. Peter is a boffin when it comes to polls. That
:07:31. > :07:35.is why we have a mod for the election prediction swings and
:07:36. > :07:41.roundabouts. He is looking for what he calls the incumbency effect.
:07:42. > :07:45.Don't know what is a back-up -- what that's about question don't worry,
:07:46. > :07:54.here is an. Being in office is bad for your health. Political folk
:07:55. > :07:59.wisdom has it that incumbency favours one party in particular, the
:08:00. > :08:03.Liberal Democrats. That is because their MPs have a reputation as
:08:04. > :08:07.ferociously good local campaigners who do really well at holding on to
:08:08. > :08:10.their seats. However, this time round, several big-name long serving
:08:11. > :08:17.Liberal Democrats like Ming Campbell, David Heath and Don Foster
:08:18. > :08:21.are standing down. Does that mean the incumbency effect disappears
:08:22. > :08:27.like a puff of smoke? Then there is another theory, called the sophomore
:08:28. > :08:31.surge. It might sound like a movie about US college kids, but it goes
:08:32. > :08:35.like this. New MPs tend to do better in their second election than they
:08:36. > :08:39.did in their first. That could favour the Tories because they have
:08:40. > :08:44.lots of first-time MPs. The big question is, what does this mean for
:08:45. > :08:51.the 7th of May 2015, the date of the next general election? The answer
:08:52. > :08:59.is, who knows? I know a man who knows. Peter. What does it all mean?
:09:00. > :09:02.You can go onto your PC now and draw down programmes which say that these
:09:03. > :09:07.are the voting figures from a national poll, so what will the
:09:08. > :09:10.seats look like? This is based on uniform swing. Every seat moving up
:09:11. > :09:16.and down across the country in the same way. Historically, that's been
:09:17. > :09:20.a pretty good guide. I think that's going to completely break down next
:09:21. > :09:23.year, because the Lib Dems will probably hold on to more seats than
:09:24. > :09:29.we predict from the national figures and I think fewer Tory seats will go
:09:30. > :09:33.to the Labour Party than you would predict from the national figures.
:09:34. > :09:38.The precise numbers, I'm not going to be too precise, but I would be
:09:39. > :09:44.surprised, sorry, I would not be surprised if Labour fell 20 or 25
:09:45. > :09:51.seats short on what we would expect on the uniform swing prediction.
:09:52. > :09:53.Next year's election will be tight. Falling 20 seats short could well
:09:54. > :09:59.mean the difference between victory and defeat. What you make of that,
:10:00. > :10:03.Helen? I think you're right, especially taking into account the
:10:04. > :10:07.UKIP effect. We have no idea about that. The conventional wisdom is
:10:08. > :10:12.that will drain away back to the Conservatives, but nobody knows, and
:10:13. > :10:16.it makes the next election almost impossible to call. It means it is a
:10:17. > :10:19.great target the people like Lord Ashcroft with marginal polling,
:10:20. > :10:24.because people have never been so interested. It is for party politics
:10:25. > :10:31.and we all assume that UKIP should be well next year, but their vote
:10:32. > :10:36.went up from 17 up to 27%. Then that 17% went down to 3%, so they might
:10:37. > :10:39.only be five or 6% in the general election, so they might not have the
:10:40. > :10:44.threat of depriving Conservatives of their seats. Where the incumbency
:10:45. > :10:50.thing has an effect is the Liberal Democrats. They have fortress seats
:10:51. > :10:53.where between 1992 and 1997 Liberal Democrats seats fell, but their
:10:54. > :10:58.percentage went up. They are losing the local government base though.
:10:59. > :11:02.True, but having people like Ming Campbell standing down means they
:11:03. > :11:05.will struggle. We are used to incumbency being an important factor
:11:06. > :11:10.in American politics. It's hard to get rid of an incumbent unless it is
:11:11. > :11:14.a primary election, like we saw in Virginia, but is it now becoming an
:11:15. > :11:17.important factor in British politics, that if you own the seat
:11:18. > :11:23.you're more likely to hold on to it than not? If it is, that's a
:11:24. > :11:26.remarkable thing. It's hard to be a carpetbagger in America, but it is
:11:27. > :11:30.normal in British Parliamentary constituencies to be represented by
:11:31. > :11:33.someone who did not grow up locally. It is a special kind of achievement
:11:34. > :11:37.to have an incumbency effect where you don't have deep roots in the
:11:38. > :11:41.constituency. I was going to ask about the Lib Dems. If we are wrong,
:11:42. > :11:44.and they collapse in Parliamentary representation as much as the share
:11:45. > :11:48.in vote collapses, is that not good news is that the Conservatives? They
:11:49. > :11:53.would be in second place in the majority of existing Lib Dems seats.
:11:54. > :11:56.For every seat where Labour are second to the Lib Dems, there are
:11:57. > :12:00.two where the Conservatives are second. If the Lib Dem
:12:01. > :12:08.representation collapses, that helps the Conservatives. I'm assuming the
:12:09. > :12:13.Tories will gain about ten seats. If they gain 20, if they'd had 20 more
:12:14. > :12:17.seats last time, they would have had a majority government, just about.
:12:18. > :12:22.So 20 seats off the Lib Dem, do the maths, as they say in America, and
:12:23. > :12:26.they could lose a handful to labour and still be able to run a one
:12:27. > :12:29.party, minority government. The fate of the Lib Dems could be crucial to
:12:30. > :12:36.the outcome to the politics of light. On the 8th of May, it will be
:12:37. > :12:41.VE Day and victory in election day as well as Europe. The Lib Dems will
:12:42. > :12:46.be apoplectic if they lose all of the seats to their coalition
:12:47. > :12:51.partners. The great quote by Angela Merkel, the little party always gets
:12:52. > :12:54.crushed. It's a well-established idea that coalition politics. They
:12:55. > :12:57.can't take credit for the things people like you may get lumbered
:12:58. > :13:01.with the ones they don't. They have contributed most of this terrible
:13:02. > :13:04.idea that seized politics where you say it, but you don't deliver it.
:13:05. > :13:10.Tuition fees is the classic example of this Parliament. Why should you
:13:11. > :13:14.believe any promise you make? And Ed Miliband is feeling that as well.
:13:15. > :13:19.But in 1974 the liberal Democrats barely had any MPs but there were
:13:20. > :13:22.reporters outside Jeremy Thorpe's home because they potentially held
:13:23. > :13:26.not the balance of power, but were significantly in fourth. Bringing
:13:27. > :13:30.back memories Jeremy Thorpe, and we will leave it there. Thanks to the
:13:31. > :13:34.panel. We are tomorrow on BBC Two. At the earlier time of 11am because
:13:35. > :13:39.of Wimbledon. Yes, it's that time of year again already. I will be back
:13:40. > :13:42.here at 11 o'clock next week. Remember, if it is Sunday, it is the
:13:43. > :13:46.Sunday Politics.