:00:36. > :00:40.Morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. Hope you enjoyed
:00:41. > :00:45.the extra hour in bed, and that you've realised it's not 12:45. It's
:00:46. > :00:48.11:45! It's getting stormy outside. But they're already battening down
:00:49. > :00:51.the hatches at Number Ten because coalition splits are back, with
:00:52. > :00:56.bust-ups over free schools and power bills. We'll speak to the Lib Dems,
:00:57. > :01:00.and ask Labour who's conning whom over energy.
:01:01. > :01:03.EU leaders have been meeting in Brussels. But how's David Cameron
:01:04. > :01:13.getting on with that plan to change our relationship with Europe? We
:01:14. > :01:17.were there to ask him. Have we got any powers back yet? DS!
:01:18. > :01:19.Foreign companies own everything from our energy companies to our
:01:20. > :01:20.railways. Does it matter who Maximum Temperature 17 Celsius.
:01:21. > :01:35.Goodbye. as many daily journeys made by bus
:01:36. > :01:43.than by tube, so why is the planned investment in buses not keeping
:01:44. > :01:46.pace? And with me, three journalists
:01:47. > :01:48.who've bravely agreed to hunker down in the studio while Britain braces
:01:49. > :01:51.itself for massive storm winds, tweeting their political forecasts
:01:52. > :01:59.with all the accuracy of Michael Fish on hurricane watch. Helen
:02:00. > :02:01.Lewis, Janan Ganesh and Nick Watt. Now, sometimes coalition splits are
:02:02. > :02:06.over-egged, or dare we say even occasionally stage-managed. But this
:02:07. > :02:10.week, we've seen what looks like the genuine article. It turns out Nick
:02:11. > :02:13.Clegg has his doubts about the coalition's flagship free schools
:02:14. > :02:16.policy. David Cameron doesn't much like the green levies on our energy
:02:17. > :02:20.bills championed by the Lib Dems. Neither of them seems to have
:02:21. > :02:24.bothered to tell the other that they had their doubts. Who better to
:02:25. > :02:34.discuss these flare-ups than Lib Dem Deputy Leader Simon Hughes? He joins
:02:35. > :02:38.me now. Welcome. Good morning. The Lib Dems spent three years of
:02:39. > :02:42.sticking up for the coalition when times were grim. Explain to me the
:02:43. > :02:48.logic of splitting from them when times look better. We will stick
:02:49. > :02:52.with it for five years. It is working arrangement, but not
:02:53. > :02:56.surprisingly, where there right areas on which we disagree over
:02:57. > :03:00.where to go next, we will stand up. It is going to be hard enough for
:03:01. > :03:06.the Lib Dems to get any credit for the recovery, what ever it is. It
:03:07. > :03:09.will be even harder if you seem to be semidetached and picky. The
:03:10. > :03:15.coalition has led on economic policy, some of which were entirely
:03:16. > :03:19.from our stable. The one you have heard about most often, a Lib Dem
:03:20. > :03:24.initiative, was to take people on blowing comes out of tax. The
:03:25. > :03:28.recovery would not have happened, there would not have been confidence
:03:29. > :03:34.in Britain, had there not been a coalition government with us in it,
:03:35. > :03:38.making sure the same policies produced fair outcomes. We are not
:03:39. > :03:42.going to leave the credit for any growth - and there has been very
:03:43. > :03:47.good news this week. We have played a part in that, and without us, it
:03:48. > :03:51.would not have happened. Does it not underline the trust problem you
:03:52. > :03:56.have? You promised to abolish tuition fees. You oppose nuclear
:03:57. > :04:02.power, now you are cheerleading the first multi-billion pounds
:04:03. > :04:07.investment in nuclear generation. You are dying out on your enthusiasm
:04:08. > :04:11.on green levies, and now they are up for renegotiation. Why should we
:04:12. > :04:20.trust a word you say? In relation to green levies, as you well know, just
:04:21. > :04:27.under 10% is to do with helping energy and helping people. Unless
:04:28. > :04:31.there is continuing investment in renewables, we will not have the
:04:32. > :04:36.British produced energy at cheaper cost to keep those bills down in the
:04:37. > :04:46.future. At cheaper cost? Explain that to me. Off-shore energy is
:04:47. > :04:49.twice the market rate. The costs of renewables will increasingly come
:04:50. > :04:54.down. We have fantastic capacity to produce the energy and deliver lots
:04:55. > :04:59.of jobs in the process. The parts of the energy bill that may be up for
:05:00. > :05:03.renegotiation seems to be the part where we subsidise to help either
:05:04. > :05:11.poor people pay less, or where we do other things. Too insulated the
:05:12. > :05:15.homes? Are you up to putting that to general taxation? Wouldn't that be
:05:16. > :05:19.progressive? I would. It would be progressive. I would like to do for
:05:20. > :05:24.energy bills what the Chancellor has done for road traffic users,
:05:25. > :05:30.drivers, which is too fuelled motor fuel -- to freeze new to fall. That
:05:31. > :05:34.would mean there would be an immediate relief this year, not
:05:35. > :05:39.waiting for the election. So there is a deal to be done there? Yes We
:05:40. > :05:43.understand we have to take the burden off the consumer, and also
:05:44. > :05:47.deal with the energy companies, who look as if they are not paying all
:05:48. > :05:50.the tax they should be, and the regulator, which doesn't regulate
:05:51. > :05:55.quickly enough to deal with the issues coming down the track. We can
:05:56. > :05:59.toughen the regulator, and I hope that the Chancellor, in the Autumn
:06:00. > :06:03.statement, was signalled that energy companies will not be allowed to get
:06:04. > :06:10.away with not paying the taxes they should. And this deal will allow
:06:11. > :06:15.energy prices to come down? Yes How could David Laws, one of your
:06:16. > :06:20.ministers, proudly defend the record of unqualified teachers working in
:06:21. > :06:25.free schools, and then stand side-by-side with Mr Clegg, as he
:06:26. > :06:30.says he is against them? David Laws was not proudly defending the fact
:06:31. > :06:34.that it is unqualified teachers He said that some of the new,
:06:35. > :06:41.unqualified teachers in free schools are doing a superb job. But you want
:06:42. > :06:45.to get rid of them? We want to make sure that everybody coming into a
:06:46. > :06:51.free school ends up being qualified. Ends up? Goes through a process that
:06:52. > :06:55.means they have qualifications. Just as we said very clearly at the last
:06:56. > :07:01.election that the manifesto curriculum in free schools should be
:07:02. > :07:06.the same as other schools. It looks like Mr Clegg is picking a fight
:07:07. > :07:10.just for the sake of it. Mr Clegg was taught by people who didn't have
:07:11. > :07:15.teaching qualifications in one of the greatest schools in the land, if
:07:16. > :07:21.not the world. It didn't seem to do him any harm. What is the problem?
:07:22. > :07:27.If you pay to go to a school, you know what you're getting. But that
:07:28. > :07:31.is what a free school is. No, you don't pay fees. A free school is
:07:32. > :07:36.parents taking the decisions, not you, the politicians. We believe
:07:37. > :07:40.they would expect to guarantee is, firstly that the minimum curriculum
:07:41. > :07:44.taught across the country is taught in the free schools, and secondly,
:07:45. > :07:47.that the teachers there are qualified. Someone who send their
:07:48. > :07:54.kids to private schools took a decision to take -- to send their
:07:55. > :07:59.children there, even if the teachers were unqualified, because they are
:08:00. > :08:05.experts in their field. Someone who send their kids to free schools is
:08:06. > :08:11.because -- is their decision, not yours. Because some of the free
:08:12. > :08:14.schools are new, and have never been there before, parents need a
:08:15. > :08:21.guarantee that there are some basics in place, whatever sort of school.
:08:22. > :08:25.So they need you to hold their hand? It is not about holding hands, it is
:08:26. > :08:29.about having a minimum guarantee. Our party made clear at our
:08:30. > :08:34.conference that this is a priority for us. Nick Clegg reflects the view
:08:35. > :08:37.of the party, and I believe it is an entirely rational thing to do. Nick
:08:38. > :08:45.Clegg complained that the Prime Minister gave him only 30 minutes
:08:46. > :08:50.notice on the Prime Minister Buzz 's U-turn on green levies. That is
:08:51. > :08:55.almost as little time as Nick Clegg gave the Prime Minister on his
:08:56. > :09:03.U-turn on free schools. Aren't you supposed to be partners? Green
:09:04. > :09:06.levies were under discussion in the ministerial group before Wednesday,
:09:07. > :09:10.because we identified this as an issue. We do that in a practical
:09:11. > :09:17.way. Sometimes there is only half an hour's notice. We had even less than
:09:18. > :09:23.half an hour this morning! Simon Hughes, thank you.
:09:24. > :09:28.So the price of energy is the big battle ground in politics at the
:09:29. > :09:33.moment. 72% of people say that high bills will influence the way they
:09:34. > :09:36.vote at the next election. Ed Miliband has promised a price freeze
:09:37. > :09:43.after the next election, but will the coalition turned the tables on
:09:44. > :09:52.Labour, with its proposal to roll back green levies. Caroline Flint
:09:53. > :09:59.joins us from Sheffield. It looks like the coalition will be able to
:10:00. > :10:04.take ?50 of energy bills, by removing green levies. It is quite
:10:05. > :10:07.clear that different parts of the government are running round waking
:10:08. > :10:10.up to the fact that the public feel that this government has not done
:10:11. > :10:15.enough to listen to their concerns. Last week, there was a classic case
:10:16. > :10:20.of the Prime Minister making up policy literally at the dispatch
:10:21. > :10:23.box. Let's see what they say in the autumn statement. The truth is,
:10:24. > :10:28.whatever the debate around green levies, and I have always said we
:10:29. > :10:46.should look at value for money at those green levies. Our argument is
:10:47. > :10:49.about acknowledging there is something wrong with the way the
:10:50. > :10:51.market works, and the way those companies are regulated. Behind our
:10:52. > :10:53.freeze for 20 months is a package of proposals to reform this market I
:10:54. > :10:56.understand that, but you cannot tell as the details about that. I can.
:10:57. > :10:59.You cannot give us the details about reforming the market. We are going
:11:00. > :11:03.to do three things, and I think I said this last time I was on the
:11:04. > :11:06.programme. First, we are going to separate out the generation side
:11:07. > :11:14.from the supply side within the big six. Secondly, we will have a energy
:11:15. > :11:19.pool, or power exchange, where all energy will have to be traded in
:11:20. > :11:22.that pool. Thirdly, we will establish a tougher regulator,
:11:23. > :11:28.because Ofgem is increasingly being seen as not doing the job right I
:11:29. > :11:33.notice that you didn't mention any reform of the current green and
:11:34. > :11:39.social taxes on the energy bill Is it Labour's policy to maintain the
:11:40. > :11:43.existing green levies? In 2011, the government chose to get rid of warm
:11:44. > :11:48.front, which was the publicly funded through tracks a scheme to support
:11:49. > :11:53.new installation. When they got rid of that, it was the first time we
:11:54. > :11:59.had a government since the 70s that didn't have such a policy. What is
:12:00. > :12:04.your policy? We voted against that because we believe it is wrong. We
:12:05. > :12:14.believe that the eco-scheme, a government intervention which is ?47
:12:15. > :12:17.of the ?112 on our bills each year, is expensive, bureaucratic and isn't
:12:18. > :12:21.going to the fuel poor. I am up for a debate on these issues. I am up
:12:22. > :12:25.for a discussion on what the government should do and what these
:12:26. > :12:28.energy companies should do. We cannot let Cameron all the energy
:12:29. > :12:33.companies off the hook from the way in which they organise their
:12:34. > :12:39.businesses, and expect us to pay ever increasing rises in our bills.
:12:40. > :12:44.There is ?112 of green levies on our bills at the moment. Did you vote
:12:45. > :12:50.against any of them? We didn't, but what I would say ease these were
:12:51. > :12:55.government imposed levies. When they got rid of the government funded
:12:56. > :13:04.programme, Warm Front, they introduced the eco-scheme. The
:13:05. > :13:09.eco-project is one of the ones where the energy companies are saying
:13:10. > :13:12.it's too bureaucratic, and it is proving more expensive than
:13:13. > :13:16.government estimates, apparently doubled the amount the government
:13:17. > :13:23.thought. These things are all worth looking at, but don't go to the
:13:24. > :13:31.heart of the issue. According to official figures, on current plans,
:13:32. > :13:36.which you support, which you voted for, households will be paying 1%
:13:37. > :13:48.more per unit of electricity by 2030. It puts your temporary freeze
:13:49. > :13:52.as just a blip. You support a 4 % rise in our bills. I support making
:13:53. > :13:57.sure we secure for the future access to energy that we can grow here in
:13:58. > :14:03.the UK, whether it is through nuclear, wind or solar, or other
:14:04. > :14:09.technologies yet to be developed. We should protect ourselves against
:14:10. > :14:14.energy costs we cannot control. The truth is, it is every fair for you
:14:15. > :14:18.to put that point across, and I accept that, but we need to hear the
:14:19. > :14:23.other side about the cost for bill payers if we didn't invest in new,
:14:24. > :14:27.indigenous sources of energy supply for the future, which, in the long
:14:28. > :14:32.run, will be cheaper and more secure, and create the jobs we
:14:33. > :14:36.need. I think it is important to have a debate about these issues,
:14:37. > :14:41.but they have to be seen in the right context. If we stay stuck in
:14:42. > :14:46.the past, we will pay more and we will not create jobs. How can you
:14:47. > :14:52.criticise the coalition's plans for a new nuclear station, when jeering
:14:53. > :14:57.13 years of a Labour government you did not invest in a single nuclear
:14:58. > :15:07.plant? You sold off all our nuclear technology to foreign companies
:15:08. > :15:13.Energy provision was put out to private hands and there has been no
:15:14. > :15:25.obstacle in British law against ownership outside the UK. Part of
:15:26. > :15:30.this is looking ahead. Because your previous track record is so bad
:15:31. > :15:34.What we did decide under the previous government, we came to the
:15:35. > :15:40.view, and there were discussions in our party about this, that we did
:15:41. > :15:45.need to support a nuclear future. At the time of that, David Cameron
:15:46. > :15:50.was one of those saying that nuclear power should be a last
:15:51. > :15:54.resort. And as you said, the Liberals did not support it. We
:15:55. > :15:59.stood up for that. We set in train the green light of 10 sites,
:16:00. > :16:03.including Hinkley Point, for nuclear development. I am glad to
:16:04. > :16:08.see that is making progress and we should make more progress over the
:16:09. > :16:14.years ahead. We took a tough decision when other governments had
:16:15. > :16:23.not done. You did not build a new nuclear station. When you get back
:16:24. > :16:29.into power, will you build HS2? That has not had a blank cheque
:16:30. > :16:34.from the Labour Party. I am in favour of good infrastructure. Are
:16:35. > :16:40.you in favour of?, answer the question? I have answered the
:16:41. > :16:45.question. It does not have a blank cheque. If the prices are too high,
:16:46. > :16:49.we will review the decision when we come back to vote on it. We will be
:16:50. > :16:54.looking at it closely. We have to look for value for money and how it
:16:55. > :17:01.benefits the country. Have you stocked up on jumpers this winter?
:17:02. > :17:07.I am perfectly all right with my clothing. What is important, it is
:17:08. > :17:11.ridiculous for the Government to suggest that the answer to the loss
:17:12. > :17:21.of trust in the energy companies is to put on another jumper.
:17:22. > :17:27.The coalition has taken a long time to come up with anything that can
:17:28. > :17:33.trump Ed Miliband's simple freezing energy prices, vote for us. Are
:17:34. > :17:36.they on the brink of doing so? I do not think so. They have had a
:17:37. > :17:41.problem that has dominated the debate, talking about GDP, the
:17:42. > :17:48.figures came out on Friday and said, well, and went back to talking
:17:49. > :17:53.about energy. My problem with what David Cameron proposes is he agrees
:17:54. > :17:58.with the analysis that the Big Six make too many profits. He wants to
:17:59. > :18:01.move the green levies into general taxation, so that he looks like he
:18:02. > :18:08.is protecting the profits of the energy companies. If the coalition
:18:09. > :18:14.can say they will take money off the bills, does that change the
:18:15. > :18:19.game? I do not think the Liberal Democrats are an obstacle to
:18:20. > :18:25.unwinding the green levies. I think Nick Clegg is open to doing a deal,
:18:26. > :18:30.but the real obstacle is the carbon reduction targets that we signed up
:18:31. > :18:34.to during the boom years. They were ambitious I thought at the time
:18:35. > :18:39.From that we have the taxes and clocking up of the supply-side of
:18:40. > :18:43.the economy. Unless he will revise that, and build from first
:18:44. > :18:49.principles a new strategy, he cannot do more than put a dent into
:18:50. > :18:54.green levies. He might say as I have got to ?50 now and if you
:18:55. > :18:58.voters in in an overall majority, I will look up what we have done in
:18:59. > :19:05.the better times and give you more. I am sure he will do that. It might
:19:06. > :19:09.be ?50 of the Bill, but it will be ?50 on your general taxation bill,
:19:10. > :19:16.which would be more progressive They will find it. We will never
:19:17. > :19:22.see it in general taxation. The problem for the Coalition on what
:19:23. > :19:25.Ed Miliband has done is that it is five weeks since he made that
:19:26. > :19:29.speech and it is all we are talking about. David Cameron spent those
:19:30. > :19:33.five weeks trying to work out whether Ed Miliband is a Marxist or
:19:34. > :19:38.whether he is connected to Middle Britain. That is why Ed Miliband
:19:39. > :19:44.set the agenda. The coalition are squabbling among themselves,
:19:45. > :19:50.looking petulant, on energy, and on schools. Nobody is taking notice of
:19:51. > :19:55.the fact the economy is under way, the recovery is under way. Ed
:19:56. > :20:02.Miliband has made the weather on this.
:20:03. > :20:12.It UK has a relaxed attitude about selling off assets based -- to
:20:13. > :20:14.companies based abroad. But this week we have seen the Swiss owner
:20:15. > :20:17.of one of Scotland's largest industrial sites, Grangemouth, come
:20:18. > :20:20.within a whisker of closing part of it down. So should we care whether
:20:21. > :20:23.British assets have foreign owners? Britain might be a nation of
:20:24. > :20:28.homeowners, but we appear to have lost our taste for owning some of
:20:29. > :20:31.our biggest businesses. These are among the crown jewels sold off in
:20:32. > :20:38.the past three decades to companies based abroad. Roughly half of
:20:39. > :20:40.Britain's essential services have overseas owners. The airport owner,
:20:41. > :20:43.British Airports Authority, is owned by a Spanish company.
:20:44. > :20:46.Britain's largest water company Thames, is owned by a consortium
:20:47. > :20:49.led by an Australian bank. Four out of six of Britain's biggest energy
:20:50. > :20:52.companies are owned by overseas giants, and one of these, EDF
:20:53. > :20:55.Energy, which is owned by the French state, is building Britain's
:20:56. > :21:02.first nuclear power plant in a generation, backed by Chinese
:21:03. > :21:07.investors. It's a similar story for train operator Arriva, bought by a
:21:08. > :21:10.company owned by the German state. So part of the railways privatised
:21:11. > :21:19.by the British government was effectively re-nationalised by the
:21:20. > :21:22.German government. But does it matter who owns these companies as
:21:23. > :21:27.long as the lights stay on, the trains run on time, and we can
:21:28. > :21:32.still eat Cadbury's Dairy Milk? We are joined by the general
:21:33. > :21:39.secretary of the RMT, Bob Crow, and by venture capitalist Julie Meyer.
:21:40. > :21:46.They go head to head. Have we seen the consequences of
:21:47. > :21:53.relying for essential services to be foreign-owned? Four of the Big
:21:54. > :21:59.Six energy companies, Grangemouth, owned by a tax exile in Switzerland.
:22:00. > :22:04.It is not good. I do not think there is a cause and effect
:22:05. > :22:08.relationship between foreign ownership and consumer prices. That
:22:09. > :22:13.is not the right comparison. We need to be concerned about
:22:14. > :22:16.businesses represented the future, businesses we are good at
:22:17. > :22:22.innovating for example in financial services and the UK has a history
:22:23. > :22:33.of building businesses, such as Monotypes. If we were not creating
:22:34. > :22:40.businesses here -- Monotise. Like so many businesses creating
:22:41. > :22:48.products and services and creating the shareholders. Should we allow
:22:49. > :22:52.hour essential services to be in foreign ownership? It was
:22:53. > :22:58.demonstrated this week at Grangemouth. If you do not own the
:22:59. > :23:02.industry, you do not own it. The MPs of this country and the
:23:03. > :23:06.politicians in Scotland have no say, they were consultants.
:23:07. > :23:13.Multinationals decide whether to shut a company down. If that had
:23:14. > :23:18.been Unite union, they are the ones who saved the jobs. They
:23:19. > :23:23.capitulated. They will come back, like they have for the past 150
:23:24. > :23:29.years, and capture again what they lost. If it had closed, they would
:23:30. > :23:33.have lost their jobs for ever. If the union had called the members up
:23:34. > :23:38.without a ballot for strike action, there would have been uproar. This
:23:39. > :23:43.person in Switzerland can decide to shut the entire industry down. The
:23:44. > :23:49.coalition, the Labour Party, as well, when Labour was in government,
:23:50. > :23:52.they played a role of allowing industries to go abroad, and it
:23:53. > :24:05.should be returned to public ownership. Nestor. It has
:24:06. > :24:13.demonstrated that the Net comes from new businesses. We must not
:24:14. > :24:20.be... When Daly motion was stopped by the French government to be sold,
:24:21. > :24:24.it was an arrow to the heart of French entrepreneurs. We must not
:24:25. > :24:29.create that culture in the UK. Every train running in France is
:24:30. > :24:36.built in France. 90% of the trains running in Germany are built in
:24:37. > :24:44.Germany. In Japan, it has to be built in that country, and now an
:24:45. > :24:48.energy company in France is reducing its nuclear capability in
:24:49. > :24:52.its own country and wants to make profits out of the British industry
:24:53. > :24:56.to put back into it state industry. That happened with the railway
:24:57. > :25:02.industry. They want to make money at the expense of their own state
:25:03. > :25:09.companies. We sold off energy production. How did we end up in a
:25:10. > :25:15.position where our nuclear capacity will be built by a company owned by
:25:16. > :25:24.a socialist date, France, and funded by a communist one, China,
:25:25. > :25:27.for vital infrastructure? I am not suggesting that is in the national
:25:28. > :25:33.interest. I am saying we can pick any one example and say it is a
:25:34. > :25:36.shame. The simple matter of the fact is the owners are having to
:25:37. > :25:40.make decisions. Not just Grangemouth, businesses are making
:25:41. > :25:47.decisions about what is the common good. Not just in the shareholders'
:25:48. > :25:52.interest. For employees, customers. What is in the common good when
:25:53. > :25:56.prices go up by 10% and the reason is that 20 years ago they shut
:25:57. > :26:01.every coal pit down in this country, the Germans kept theirs open and
:26:02. > :26:07.subsidised it and now we have the Germans doing away with nuclear
:26:08. > :26:14.power and they have coal. Under the Labour government, in 2008, the
:26:15. > :26:18.climate change Act was passed. Well before that, and you know yourself,
:26:19. > :26:22.they shut down the coal mines to smash the National Union of
:26:23. > :26:28.Mineworkers because they dared to stand up for people in their
:26:29. > :26:32.community. Even if we wanted to reopen the coalmines, it would be
:26:33. > :26:40.pointless. Under the 2008 Act, we are not meant to burn more coal
:26:41. > :26:47.The can, as if you spent some of the profits, you could have carbon
:26:48. > :26:51.catch up. That does not exist on a massive scale. You are arguing the
:26:52. > :26:56.case, Julie Meyer, for entrepreneurs to come to this
:26:57. > :27:02.country. Even Bob Crow is not against that. We are trying to
:27:03. > :27:10.argue, should essential services be in foreign hands? Not those in
:27:11. > :27:15.Silicon round about doing start ups. I am trying to draw a broader
:27:16. > :27:19.principle than just energy. Something like broadband services,
:27:20. > :27:26.also important to the functioning of the economy. I believe in the
:27:27. > :27:31.UK's ability to innovate. When we have businesses that play off
:27:32. > :27:36.broadband companies to get the best prices for consumers. These new
:27:37. > :27:43.businesses and business models are the best way. Not to control, but
:27:44. > :27:48.to influence. It will be a disaster. Prices will go up and up as a
:27:49. > :27:54.result. Nissan in Sunderland, a Japanese factory, some of the best
:27:55. > :27:57.cars and productivity. You want that to be nationalised and bring
:27:58. > :28:02.it down to the standard of British Leyland? It is not bring it down to
:28:03. > :28:07.the standard. The car manufacturing base in this country has been
:28:08. > :28:13.wrecked. We make more cars now for 20 years -- than in 20 years.
:28:14. > :28:20.Ford's Dagenham produced some of the best cars in the world. Did you
:28:21. > :28:27.buy one? I cannot drive. They moved their plants to other countries
:28:28. > :28:31.where it was cheaper labour. Would you nationalise Nissan? There
:28:32. > :28:38.should be one car industry that produces cars for people. This week
:28:39. > :28:45.the EU summit was about Angela Merkel's mobile phone being tapped,
:28:46. > :28:49.they call it a handy. We sent Adam to Brussels and told him to ignore
:28:50. > :28:51.the business about phone-tapping and investigate the Prime
:28:52. > :29:08.Minister's policy on Europe instead. I have come to my first EU summit to
:29:09. > :29:12.see how David Cameron is getting on with his strategy to claim power was
:29:13. > :29:21.back from Brussels. Got any powers back yet? Yes! Which ones? Sadly,
:29:22. > :29:25.his fellow leaders were not as forthcoming. Chancellor, are you
:29:26. > :29:32.going to give any powers back to Britain? Has David Cameron asked you
:29:33. > :29:39.for any powers back? The president of the commission just laughed, and
:29:40. > :29:50.listen to the Lithuanian President. How is David Cameron's renegotiation
:29:51. > :29:55.strategy going? What's that? He wants powers back for Britain. No
:29:56. > :29:59.one knows what powers David Cameron actually wants. Even our usual
:30:00. > :30:07.allies, like Sweden, are bit baffled. We actually don't know yet
:30:08. > :30:14.what is going through the UK membership. We will await the
:30:15. > :30:20.finalisation of that first. You should ask him, and then tell us!
:30:21. > :30:25.Here is someone who must know, the Dutch Prime Minister, he is doing
:30:26. > :30:30.what we are doing, carrying out a review of the EU powers, known as
:30:31. > :30:34.competencies in the jargon, before negotiating to get some back. Have
:30:35. > :30:39.you had any negotiations with David Cameron over what powers you can
:30:40. > :30:46.bring back from Brussels? That is not on the agenda of this summit.
:30:47. > :30:50.Have you talked to him about it This is not on the schedule for this
:30:51. > :30:59.summit. David Cameron's advises tummy it is
:31:00. > :31:07.because he is playing the long game. -- David Cameron's advisers tell me.
:31:08. > :31:15.At this summit, there was a task force discussing how to cut EU red
:31:16. > :31:19.tape. Just how long this game is was explained to me outside the summit,
:31:20. > :31:25.by the leader of the Conservatives in the European Parliament. I think
:31:26. > :31:28.the behind-the-scenes negotiations will start happening when the new
:31:29. > :31:34.commissioner is appointed later next year. I think the detailed
:31:35. > :31:38.negotiations will start to happen bubbly after the UK general
:31:39. > :31:43.election. That is when we will start getting all of the detail of the
:31:44. > :31:50.horse trading, and real, Lake night negotiations. Angela Merkel seems
:31:51. > :31:55.keen to rewrite the EU's main treaties to deal with changes in the
:31:56. > :31:59.Eurozone, and that is the mechanism David Cameron would use to
:32:00. > :32:03.renegotiate our membership. Everyone here says his relationship with the
:32:04. > :32:08.German Chancellor is strong. So after days in this building, here is
:32:09. > :32:13.how it looks. David Cameron has a mountain to climb. It is climbable,
:32:14. > :32:19.but he isn't even in the foothills yet. Has he even started packing his
:32:20. > :32:23.bags for the trip? Joining us now, a man who knows a
:32:24. > :32:29.thing or two about the difficulties Prime Minister 's face in Europe.
:32:30. > :32:32.Former Deputy Prime Minister, Michael Heseltine. We are nine
:32:33. > :32:41.months from David Cameron's defining speech on EU renegotiation. Can you
:32:42. > :32:46.think of one area of progress? I don't know. And you don't know. And
:32:47. > :32:52.that's a good thing. Why is it a good thing? Because the real
:32:53. > :33:03.progress goes on behind closed doors. And only the most naive,
:33:04. > :33:11.because the real progress goes on behind closed doors. Because, in
:33:12. > :33:16.this weary world, you and I, Andrew, know full well that the moment you
:33:17. > :33:21.say, I making progress, people say, where? And the machine goes to work
:33:22. > :33:27.to show that the progress isn't enough. So you are much better off
:33:28. > :33:37.making progress as best you can in the privacy of private diplomacy. It
:33:38. > :33:41.is a long journey ahead. In this long journey, do you have a clear
:33:42. > :33:47.sense of the destination? Do you have a clear sense of what powers Mr
:33:48. > :33:52.Cameron wants to negotiate? I have a clear sense of the destination,
:33:53. > :33:58.which is a victory for the campaign that he will win to stay inside the
:33:59. > :34:06.European community. That is the agenda, and I have total support for
:34:07. > :34:12.that. I understand that, but if he is incapable of getting any tangible
:34:13. > :34:18.sign of renegotiation, if he is able only to do what Wilson did in 1975,
:34:19. > :34:23.which was to get a couple of token changes to our membership status, he
:34:24. > :34:29.goes into that referendum without much to argue for. He has everything
:34:30. > :34:37.to argue for. He's got Britain's vital role as a major contributor to
:34:38. > :34:43.the community. He's got Britain's self interest as a major
:34:44. > :34:49.beneficiary, and Britain's vital role in the City of London. He's got
:34:50. > :34:54.everything to argue for. He could argue for that now. He could have a
:34:55. > :35:02.referendum now. He doesn't want one now. I haven't any doubt that he
:35:03. > :35:11.will come back with something to talk about. But it may be slightly
:35:12. > :35:17.different to what his critics, the UK isolationist party people, want.
:35:18. > :35:23.He may, for example, have found that allies within the community want
:35:24. > :35:28.change as well, and he may secure changes in the way the community
:35:29. > :35:32.works, which would be a significant argument within the referendum
:35:33. > :35:37.campaign. Let me give you an example. I think it is a scandal
:35:38. > :35:44.that the European Commission don't secure the auditing of some of the
:35:45. > :35:49.accounts. Perhaps that could be on the agenda. He might find a lot of
:35:50. > :35:57.contributing countries, like Germany, like Colin and, would be
:35:58. > :36:02.very keen. -- like Holland. David vetoed the increase in the European
:36:03. > :36:08.budgets the other day, and he had a lot of allies. So working within
:36:09. > :36:13.Europe on the things that people paying the European bills want is
:36:14. > :36:20.fertile ground. Is John Major right to call for a windfall tax on the
:36:21. > :36:24.energy companies? John is a very cautious fellow. He doesn't say
:36:25. > :36:31.things without thinking them out. So I was surprised that he went for a
:36:32. > :36:35.windfall tax. First of all, it is retrospective, and secondly, it is
:36:36. > :36:41.difficult to predict what the consequences will be. I am, myself,
:36:42. > :36:44.more interested in the other part of his speech, which was talking about
:36:45. > :36:50.the need for the Conservative Party to seek a wider horizon, to
:36:51. > :36:54.recognise what is happening to the Conservative Party in the way in
:36:55. > :37:04.which its membership is shrinking into a southeastern enclave. Are you
:37:05. > :37:15.in favour of a windfall tax? I am not in favour of increasing any
:37:16. > :37:22.taxes. Do you share Iain Duncan Smith's point of view on welfare
:37:23. > :37:31.reform? I think Iain Duncan Smith is right. It is extremely difficult to
:37:32. > :37:40.do, but he is right to try. I think public opinion is behind him, but it
:37:41. > :37:45.isn't easy, because on the fringe of these issues there are genuine hard
:37:46. > :37:50.luck stories, and they are the ones that become the focus of attention
:37:51. > :37:56.the moment you introduce change. It requires a lot of political skill to
:37:57. > :38:01.negotiate your way through that. But isn't Iain Duncan Smith right to
:38:02. > :38:05.invoke the beverage principle, that you should be expected to make a
:38:06. > :38:11.contribution for the welfare you depend on? Yes, he is. I will let
:38:12. > :38:16.you get your Sunday lunch. Thanks for joining us.
:38:17. > :38:26.Coming up in just over 20 minutes, I will be looking
:38:27. > :38:33.Hello once again from the Midlands. I'm Patrick Burns. And our guests
:38:34. > :38:36.today both entered Parliament at the last election, share an interest in
:38:37. > :38:39.Pakistan and Kashmir, and beyond that have absolutely nothing in
:38:40. > :38:43.common. Andrew Griffiths, Conservative MP for Burton, is a
:38:44. > :38:51.tireless campaigner for cuts in beer duty. Perhaps he should have a word
:38:52. > :38:57.with the Shadow Treasury Minister, Shabana Mahmood, Labour MP for
:38:58. > :39:01.Birmingham Ladywood. Let's begin though by finding out
:39:02. > :39:04.what they make of that extension to the pilot badger cull in
:39:05. > :39:07.Gloucestershire. Natural England have been given a licence to
:39:08. > :39:10.continue shooting for a further eight weeks, after only 30% of the
:39:11. > :39:14.area's badgers were killed during the original six`week period. To be
:39:15. > :39:18.effective against bovine TB, it's believed 70% of badgers need to be
:39:19. > :39:27.killed, much to the horror of some campaigners.
:39:28. > :39:34.Keep telling us this is led by science. It has gone beyond any
:39:35. > :39:40.scientific justification there could have been for killing badgers and
:39:41. > :39:47.that was bad enough to begin with. Andrew, this is beginning to look
:39:48. > :39:51.like a bit of embarrassing scenario for the government. There is ill
:39:52. > :39:56.feeling from the countryside. We recognise this is a difficult
:39:57. > :40:01.decision and thing to do. But I have seen in my own constituency the
:40:02. > :40:06.devastation that TB can cost of farmers and it can devastate
:40:07. > :40:12.generations of work. The taxpayer over the past ten years has had to
:40:13. > :40:16.spend ?5 million on fighting TB in cattle and badgers. The situation
:40:17. > :40:21.gets worse every year. We cannot continue and the way that we have
:40:22. > :40:29.been doing so. We must do something. Shabana, I recall the early days of
:40:30. > :40:33.the Tony Blair government. The agricultural Minister then talked
:40:34. > :40:37.about this issue. Andrew has talked about the cost and damage to
:40:38. > :40:42.farmers. At least we can get this problem. The last time the
:40:43. > :40:46.government commissioned a ten year trial project to see what difference
:40:47. > :40:53.Collingwood make the problem of bovine TB, the scientific evidence
:40:54. > :40:56.was against any cull. It can only at best aspect 16% of the problem so
:40:57. > :41:00.you still have a day for percent of the problem to deal with and the
:41:01. > :41:03.government's only evidence of its current badger cull shows that it
:41:04. > :41:12.will cost farmers more money than it will save. So that man in the clip
:41:13. > :41:18.suggested that it is bad science and politically wet. If you look at
:41:19. > :41:22.countries like Australia and New Zealand, they have seen it TB fall
:41:23. > :41:28.through tackling it. And Ireland, they have had it since 2000, they
:41:29. > :41:32.have seen a drop of 45%. No one talks about the 300,000 cattle that
:41:33. > :41:39.have been needlessly slaughtered because of TB. Do you understand the
:41:40. > :41:44.sensitivities of people who view strongly about killing badgers on
:41:45. > :41:50.such a scale? Of course I do but it is a dangerous issue. Having badgers
:41:51. > :41:57.with bovine TB in the population is not something we must put up with. I
:41:58. > :42:02.do not think Andrew has done the cause of scientific experts,
:42:03. > :42:06.world`renowned experts, any good at all. They are basing their positions
:42:07. > :42:11.on scientific fact, that is a problem with this badger cull, it is
:42:12. > :42:14.a shot in the dark and bad for farmers. We will watch how it
:42:15. > :42:18.progresses with interest. Coming up a little later: How do you
:42:19. > :42:21.keep ex`offenders on the straight and narrow and stop the revolving
:42:22. > :42:24.door of crime? The government's "revolution" in the Probation
:42:25. > :42:33.Service could bring round yet more work for G4S and Serco. We'll have
:42:34. > :42:39.more on this in a few minutes time. Who said what to whom, and when?
:42:40. > :42:42."Plebgate" is as much about what wasn't said. The word "pleb", for a
:42:43. > :42:44.start, according to Andrew Mitchell. When three Police Federation
:42:45. > :42:48.representatives were hauled before the Home Affairs Select Committee,
:42:49. > :42:51.they had to account for what they'd said to the press, after a meeting
:42:52. > :42:57.with the Sutton Coldfield MP just over a year ago. Then their chief
:42:58. > :43:00.constables had to explain why they'd rejected calls to discipline them.
:43:01. > :43:07.Ben Godfrey asks if 45 seconds in Downing Street could do lasting
:43:08. > :43:10.damage to the Police. Who would have thought that a few
:43:11. > :43:15.words uttered by Andrew Mitchell at the end of a long and tiring day,
:43:16. > :43:17.more than a year ago, would have the power to summon three Midlands chief
:43:18. > :43:22.constables before a parliamentary committee, and in a humbled mode?
:43:23. > :43:25.My officers got involved in a political campaign which was
:43:26. > :43:32.ill`thought through and has led to a lot of public confidence issues for
:43:33. > :43:35.us. All three came to offer Mr Mitchell
:43:36. > :43:37.an apology, but remained divided about whether disciplinary action
:43:38. > :43:40.should be taken following an investigation into three Police
:43:41. > :43:47.Federation officers who briefed against the Sutton Coldfield MP last
:43:48. > :43:49.October. I've taken the decision that the
:43:50. > :43:53.decision`making process should be revisited and I've sought for that
:43:54. > :43:57.to be done independently. My deputy chief constable, who in
:43:58. > :44:01.this case took the decision that there was no action, he had all the
:44:02. > :44:04.evidence available to him when he made that decision.
:44:05. > :44:14.So you disagree with what Mr Shaw is doing?
:44:15. > :44:17.Yes. If you look closely at the evidence, I think you'd almost
:44:18. > :44:19.certainly expect there to be a different decision for the three
:44:20. > :44:22.officers because their involvement and their specifics of the
:44:23. > :44:26.allegations made is very, very different.
:44:27. > :44:29.MPs were obviously frustrated. In one force, the chap will face
:44:30. > :44:33.misconduct proceedings and the two other people who took part in the
:44:34. > :44:40.same event will escape. Are you going to be comfortable with that
:44:41. > :44:43.state of affairs? I'm afraid, Mr Parker, Mr Sims, that
:44:44. > :44:48.we think you've made the wrong decision and we feel you all should
:44:49. > :44:50.have done the same thing by having a redetermination.
:44:51. > :44:57.So after five hours of witnesses, Plebgate will now spawn another
:44:58. > :45:02.report. Yes, on and on it goes. John God,
:45:03. > :45:06.the public relations consultant who briefed the media about that suppose
:45:07. > :45:13.it private meeting in Andrew Mitchell's constituency office.
:45:14. > :45:17.Shabana, do you think there has been an element of conspiracy about this?
:45:18. > :45:23.I think this whole affair has been barred from start to finish. We are
:45:24. > :45:27.not beyond the other finish! Yes, and it only seems to be getting
:45:28. > :45:33.worse at the moment. It has knocked public confidence in the police. It
:45:34. > :45:36.has denied Andrew Mitchell some truth and resolution. It has cost
:45:37. > :45:41.him his cabinet can be at least up until now and I think all of the
:45:42. > :45:45.individuals who have a stake in this must get a grip and sort it out and
:45:46. > :45:49.recognise how much damage this is doing. The police do a fantastic job
:45:50. > :45:52.and put their lives on the link to protect us. When things go wrong we
:45:53. > :46:00.must have confidence in the process that means we will get screwed and
:46:01. > :46:04.resolution at the end of it and we are not getting that at the moment
:46:05. > :46:07.from wide gate. We are now hearing there is a serious proposition that
:46:08. > :46:09.the police may be equipped now with cameras and recording equipment that
:46:10. > :46:13.they would wear to protect the public. It was only because one of
:46:14. > :46:19.Andrew Mitchell's assistants chose to record that situation that this
:46:20. > :46:23.hearing is taking place at all. It is correct to say that the vast
:46:24. > :46:27.majority of police officers up and down the country to a brilliant job.
:46:28. > :46:32.But the evidence in this case as there for all to see. The recording
:46:33. > :46:36.shows Mr Mitchell giving a full explanation of what happened, but he
:46:37. > :46:40.said, all of those things were laid out in front of those officers, and
:46:41. > :46:44.yet, they went out in front of the press and hold a completely
:46:45. > :46:49.different view. Cannot have a situation where that happens to a
:46:50. > :46:51.Cabinet Minister, because if it happens to a Cabinet Minister, it
:46:52. > :46:56.could happen to an ordinary member of the public. There is clearly an
:46:57. > :47:01.issue of trust here and it comes to a trade`off as to whether the public
:47:02. > :47:06.trust the police or politicians, both who are now mistrusted slightly
:47:07. > :47:11.by the public. But we must try to rebuild this fabric of upholding the
:47:12. > :47:16.law as we know what. That is true and as a starting .1 thing we have
:47:17. > :47:19.recently been talking about is getting rid of the IPCC, the
:47:20. > :47:23.Independent Police Complaints Commission, because this affair has
:47:24. > :47:28.showed that they are not able to bring complaints that are made to a
:47:29. > :47:32.full and proper resolution and eBay that the public would expect. We
:47:33. > :47:35.could replace that with a new authority that would have the power
:47:36. > :47:42.to repel disciplinary action if it is necessary because this affair has
:47:43. > :47:48.shown that the IPCC does not have the keys to do any of those things.
:47:49. > :47:53.We have heard already about budgets and changes to terms and conditions
:47:54. > :47:56.of the police. It is a poor show that negotiations between the
:47:57. > :47:58.government and the police has got to the stage where frankly the
:47:59. > :48:10.relationship is breaking down. That is correct. It is a huge mistake on
:48:11. > :48:13.behalf of the Police Federation. You talk about cuts and we have seen
:48:14. > :48:20.record falls in crime. We have seen crime at a record low. For which the
:48:21. > :48:24.police should be congratulated. Of course they should. We have seen the
:48:25. > :48:27.police union is trying to use the Andrew Mitchell affair as a
:48:28. > :48:34.bargaining chip in order to break down the government's resolve. That
:48:35. > :48:37.is no way for the police to act. The starting point should be looking at
:48:38. > :48:41.how we resolve complaints when they are made about the police so that we
:48:42. > :48:44.can restore trust and confidence that when complaints are made they
:48:45. > :48:51.will be properly dealt with. Thank you both.
:48:52. > :48:54.It is nothing less than a revolution in the Probation Service and the
:48:55. > :48:58.government wants to think about privatising it. Companies and
:48:59. > :49:01.charities must have bids and by next April by a series of
:49:02. > :49:06.payment`by`results contract with the new system due to be rolled out in
:49:07. > :49:15.one year's time. With reoffending rates sharply down in our part of
:49:16. > :49:22.the country, what now? Cath Mackie no reports.
:49:23. > :49:26.Pip Singleton has written an open letter to the burglar who ransacked
:49:27. > :49:29.her sister's home in Worcester. He stole a bracelet designed by
:49:30. > :49:35.their oldest sister who died of cancer. The police felt that they
:49:36. > :49:40.were not first timers and they were possible regular offenders because
:49:41. > :49:42.of the way that they got in through the back door.
:49:43. > :49:48.Not that long ago, the burglar may well have been Ben. I was 18 when I
:49:49. > :49:52.first committed a crime. Now 22, he's come to West Bromwich
:49:53. > :49:55.Police Station ` this time as a reformed offender meeting those who
:49:56. > :50:06.helped him rehabilitate back into society. Whilst I was in jail I did
:50:07. > :50:11.a fresh start course. When I got out I got in touch with the West
:50:12. > :50:13.Midlands Police. I did the programme with the Princes trust and that has
:50:14. > :50:16.helped me. Upstairs police and probation
:50:17. > :50:23.officers sit together trying to stop persistent reoffenders across
:50:24. > :50:26.Sandwell. I think it is a huge challenge for the individual. It is
:50:27. > :50:33.like changing your whole lifestyle. It is not something you can do at a
:50:34. > :50:38.flick of a switch. We should discuss how they have got on in prison, what
:50:39. > :50:43.things they have achieved and what rehabilitation measures have been
:50:44. > :50:49.put in place. We will look at things like accommodation needs, making
:50:50. > :50:52.sure their finances and benefits issues are going to be sorted and
:50:53. > :50:55.resolved upon release. The result is one of the lowest
:50:56. > :51:03.reoffending rates in the country. You might be thinking at this point,
:51:04. > :51:06."Well, what's the problem?" Well, there is a big problem nationally,
:51:07. > :51:08.according to the Justice Secretary Chris Grayling. He says 600,000
:51:09. > :51:11.crimes are committed annually by reoffenders, costing the country ?13
:51:12. > :51:14.billion, and his verdict is "This can't go on".
:51:15. > :51:16.Arguably his most controversial proposal is to privatise the
:51:17. > :51:19.Probation Service for low`risk offenders on a payment`by`results
:51:20. > :51:31.basis, prompting a call for strike action from staff. Many poor things
:51:32. > :51:35.it repugnant morally that this should take place. The justice
:51:36. > :51:38.system must be independent and not answerable to shareholders.
:51:39. > :51:44.Serious concern too from some police and crime commissioners. If our key
:51:45. > :51:48.partners are disrupted and place by people without a track record or the
:51:49. > :51:52.experience and this area, clearly that could be a major blow to the
:51:53. > :51:54.achievements we have got in the West Midlands.
:51:55. > :52:00.But away from the politics, the victims live with the consequences
:52:01. > :52:07.of reoffending. Please do the right thing and give it back to us, Pip
:52:08. > :52:10.Singleton. Since Cath Mackie completed at the
:52:11. > :52:16.port media that Probation Service staff will strike on Tuesday and
:52:17. > :52:21.Wednesday next week and processed `` in protest against the government's
:52:22. > :52:23.future plans. We are joined by the head of
:52:24. > :52:30.Britain's oldest penal reform charity. They believe that prison
:52:31. > :52:35.does not work. We have heard from the Justice Secretary Chris Grayling
:52:36. > :52:39.who says there are 600,000 claims committed each year by the
:52:40. > :52:43.offenders, costing the country ?13 billion each year. To borrow from my
:52:44. > :52:50.rather inelegant sentence earlier on, it is broke, the system does
:52:51. > :52:55.need a shake`up. Yes, the system is in a terrible place. It is very
:52:56. > :53:02.difficult to see positive outcomes across the justice system.
:53:03. > :53:06.Particularly with regard to prisons. Our charity believes that the prison
:53:07. > :53:09.does have a purpose, and that is to lock people who are dangerous away
:53:10. > :53:15.from the rest of us and that could be for long periods of time in some
:53:16. > :53:18.cases. What it is not there to do is to fill it with people that we find
:53:19. > :53:24.simply annoying and not dangerous and to have committed crimes of
:53:25. > :53:28.property, time and again, it is not there to put these people are way
:53:29. > :53:33.for short periods of time. That is why short`term prison sentences are
:53:34. > :53:37.so unsuccessful because it is impossible for them to have area
:53:38. > :53:39.ability to purpose and it is impossible to do anything positive
:53:40. > :53:45.in the community for these people when better alternatives exist. Do
:53:46. > :53:48.you not welcome the government's and arrived in these reforms which is
:53:49. > :53:53.about concentrating what is in the public service, the Probation
:53:54. > :54:01.Service, and that minority of high`risk offenders, who most need
:54:02. > :54:04.the services of the probation staff? There is great concern around the
:54:05. > :54:08.changes made by the government as regards taking control away from
:54:09. > :54:14.local, specialist probation trusts, who will be stripped down so that
:54:15. > :54:25.perhaps only one third, as little of 20%, could be covered by National
:54:26. > :54:28.Probation Service. They are suggesting that only 10% of the
:54:29. > :54:33.money given to private companies will be paid by results, it could be
:54:34. > :54:37.as little as 5%, but we are very concerned that it will create poor
:54:38. > :54:45.incentives and that companies will be able to benefit from that.
:54:46. > :54:48.One of the other authorities that have played into the smaller the
:54:49. > :54:53.date in terms of policy making, the Policy Exchange, they say this
:54:54. > :55:00.offers tremendous opportunities and greater discretion for staff and the
:55:01. > :55:05.potential for innovation. If you look at the justice as a whole, the
:55:06. > :55:08.police do an excellent job and their performance is good. The Probation
:55:09. > :55:14.Service to an excellent job. Do not just listen to me, ask the Minister
:55:15. > :55:22.of Justice for the performance is the sticks. Many in this region,
:55:23. > :55:27.including West Mercia and Warwickshire are judged been
:55:28. > :55:33.exceptional. Why destroy these institutions that have been built up
:55:34. > :55:37.over 100 years? Because they simply are not working. Let us look at the
:55:38. > :55:42.facts. If you come out of prison, almost half of those who do commit a
:55:43. > :55:46.crime after 12 months. If you have had a small sentence, 55% of those
:55:47. > :55:52.offenders will be commit a crime within 12 months. They have a 43%
:55:53. > :55:57.success rate. That is not good enough. 600,000 claims as 600,000
:55:58. > :56:02.victims and that is who should be at the front of this debate. Is the
:56:03. > :56:05.merit of the government's proposals is precisely that the new
:56:06. > :56:09.arrangement will concentrate the efforts and the public's Probation
:56:10. > :56:17.Service and that minority, those most likely to reoffend? Even though
:56:18. > :56:20.the Probation Service under these plans would focus on the high
:56:21. > :56:23.offenders, you must do something about the risk of reoffending for
:56:24. > :56:27.those who are not in that category and the problem with this proposal
:56:28. > :56:30.is Chris Grayling is the minister who set up the Work Programme,
:56:31. > :56:34.another payment`by`results system designed to get people back into
:56:35. > :56:39.work, which on the government's owns this this text has shown it to be
:56:40. > :56:43.worse than doing nothing. We cannot face that risk and the Probation
:56:44. > :56:50.Service, especially when crime is rising and other areas. Let us pause
:56:51. > :56:57.for the moment. As we have heard from Mark, West Mercia's Probation
:56:58. > :57:01.Service as only five of those rated outstanding.
:57:02. > :57:04.Staff and other local partners are planning to bid for one of the new
:57:05. > :57:07.contracts themselves. But first they're having to go through an
:57:08. > :57:10.elaborate process to form themselves into a kind of mutual society. We
:57:11. > :57:13.asked the Conservative MP for Kenilworth and Southam if this
:57:14. > :57:15.wasn't weighting the process too heavily in favour of private
:57:16. > :57:19.companies. An existing probation trust is a
:57:20. > :57:21.public sector body and if you have a payment`by`results system which says
:57:22. > :57:24.to someone, "Look, we will pay you the full contract value only if you
:57:25. > :57:28.succeed in getting reoffending down," you're asking them to put
:57:29. > :57:32.some of their payment at risk. If it's a solely public sector body,
:57:33. > :57:38.then the money they're using to put at risk is still public money, so
:57:39. > :57:42.the system doesn't work like that. There you are, Shabana, a precise
:57:43. > :57:47.response, he is seen payment`by`results as the way to go.
:57:48. > :57:50.He is completely wrong. It has failed and the Work Programme and
:57:51. > :57:53.there is every indication that it will not work for the Probation
:57:54. > :57:59.Service. We are seeing some radical reform. For the first time, people
:58:00. > :58:02.going on a short sentence will get rehabilitation support and mentoring
:58:03. > :58:05.when they come out. For the first time we are guaranteeing that
:58:06. > :58:09.everyone will have 12 months of support. It is important to try and
:58:10. > :58:15.break the cycle and work with people. Mark, we know there will be
:58:16. > :58:21.a strike next week, is this a helpful response by the staff? I can
:58:22. > :58:24.understand why it is happening. No other country in the world has done
:58:25. > :58:28.this. The companies who may bid and when these contracts are under
:58:29. > :58:33.investigation from the Serious Fraud Office. We must leave that
:58:34. > :58:37.discussion therefore the moment. Now our regular round`up of the
:58:38. > :58:40.political week in the Midlands in 60 Seconds, brought to us this week by
:58:41. > :58:44.our Hereford and Worcester political reporter, Matthew Bone.
:58:45. > :58:46.Macmillan Cancer Support is backing a radical plan to provide
:58:47. > :58:51.co`ordinated cancer care for more than a million people in
:58:52. > :58:56.Staffordshire. You have to look at a local health
:58:57. > :58:59.system in a different way ` in its entirety and look at a patient
:59:00. > :59:04.pathway from someone suspecting of their cancer right through to end of
:59:05. > :59:07.life. But no plan's been published yet
:59:08. > :59:09.about the future of Stafford Hospital. The health regulator
:59:10. > :59:14.Monitor's asked for a 40`day extension while it looks at
:59:15. > :59:17.finances. The Fire Brigades Union in Hereford
:59:18. > :59:21.and Worcester has turned up the heat by saying that ?4.7 million of cuts
:59:22. > :59:23.over the next three years could cost lives.
:59:24. > :59:26.Meanwhile, Dudley and Herefordshire Council also had gloomy news about
:59:27. > :59:29.the impact of cuts. Dudley needs to save ?32 million more than
:59:30. > :59:36.originally thought by 2017. Herefordshire says it needs to
:59:37. > :59:38.increase council tax bills by 5%. Finally, the Staffordshire Moorlands
:59:39. > :59:42.came out top as the Midland's most happy place in a survey this week.
:59:43. > :59:53.But Wolverhampton had the lowest happiness rating.
:59:54. > :59:59.And they also say, Shabana, that Birmingham is below the national
:00:00. > :00:04.average. I thought the city was supposed to be one happy family! I
:00:05. > :00:11.thought we were! I am surprised to find us in that place. Hopefully we
:00:12. > :00:16.will be on top next time. East Staffordshire, you need a feel`good
:00:17. > :00:20.factor. They are only slightly more happy than Wolverhampton. People are
:00:21. > :00:24.happy if we are confident about their families and jobs and feeling
:00:25. > :00:28.safe. In Burton we have had the lowest unemployment levels for five
:00:29. > :00:33.years. We have record falls in crime, that will make people happy.
:00:34. > :00:35.There is a disconnect with places like Wolverhampton and stalked
:00:36. > :00:41.because the economic process is not working. I could argue that they are
:00:42. > :00:45.all run by Labour councils. And the government that is failing to tackle
:00:46. > :00:53.the cost of living traces that is having a huge impact up and down the
:00:54. > :00:56.country. We will call that 15`15. My thanks to Shabana and Andrew.
:00:57. > :01:00.Next week, Felicity Norman will be here for the Green Party and Lorely
:01:01. > :01:03.Burt for the Liberal Democrats. I wonder if they see something of
:01:04. > :01:06.their own early campaigning zeal in the remarkable Malala Yousafzai, the
:01:07. > :01:09.Pakistani teenager shot by the Taliban for speaking out about
:01:10. > :01:13.educating girls? It's a year since she came to Birmingham for treatment
:01:14. > :01:17.and to start a new life. Inside Out tomorrow at 7:30pm here on BBC One
:01:18. > :01:18.in the West Midlands will reveal how she's adjusting.This though, is
:01:19. > :01:31.where free school area for into that
:01:32. > :01:31.Is Labour about to drop its support category. Thank you.
:01:32. > :01:36.Is Labour about to drop its support for High Speed 2, a rail line the
:01:37. > :01:47.party approved while in government? for High Speed 2, a rail line the
:01:48. > :01:59.these green shoots? These are all questions for The Week Ahead.
:02:00. > :02:04.So, HS2. Miss Flint wouldn't answer the question. She's in northern MP
:02:05. > :02:09.too. Ed Balls is comparing it to the Millennium Dome.
:02:10. > :02:13.too. Ed Balls is comparing it to the minute's silence for HS2? It will
:02:14. > :02:19.not be quite as crude as that. They will not stand up and say, we
:02:20. > :02:19.not be quite as crude as that. They senior Labour person said to me it
:02:20. > :02:21.would be a bit senior Labour person said to me it
:02:22. > :02:27.that Gordon Brown and Ed Balls set for the euro back in 97. They will
:02:28. > :02:31.be chucking lots of questions into the air, and the questions will
:02:32. > :02:38.create doubt, and will create the grounds for Labour to say, at some
:02:39. > :02:43.point, we think there is a much much better way of spending the money. It
:02:44. > :02:49.isn't ?42 billion, because that includes a contingency. Let's see
:02:50. > :02:57.what Peter Mandelson had to say about HS2. He was in the government
:02:58. > :03:01.when Labour supported it. Frankly, there was too much of the argument
:03:02. > :03:08.that if everyone else has got a high-speed train, we should have won
:03:09. > :03:13.too. Regardless of need, regardless of cost, and regardless of
:03:14. > :03:19.alternatives. As a party, to be frank, we didn't feel like being
:03:20. > :03:25.trumped by the zeal of the then opposition's support for the
:03:26. > :03:30.high-speed train. We wanted, if anything, to upstage them. So they
:03:31. > :03:37.didn't really need it, and we're only talking about ?50 billion. Why
:03:38. > :03:42.would you take a decision involving ?50 billion in a serious way? For
:03:43. > :03:47.David Cameron, if it becomes clear Labour is against it, he cannot
:03:48. > :03:52.proceed. He indicated last week that he wouldn't proceed if the certainty
:03:53. > :03:56.wasn't there. For Labour, HS2 is really a debate about the deficit by
:03:57. > :04:01.proxy. They think that if you don't go ahead with HS2, that releases
:04:02. > :04:05.tens of billions of pounds to spend on other things, such as public
:04:06. > :04:28.services, without going into boring. I don't think that works because
:04:29. > :04:30.there was a difference between cancelling something that already
:04:31. > :04:32.exists to pay for something else, and cancelling something that does
:04:33. > :04:35.not yet exist and will be paid for over decades to pay for something
:04:36. > :04:38.here and now. Can Labour do this? I know that the line will be, we are
:04:39. > :04:40.not going to build this railway because we are going to build
:04:41. > :04:43.200,000 houses a year. Can they do this without political cost? I think
:04:44. > :04:47.there will be political costs, but they will play this card of we have
:04:48. > :04:53.changed our mind. I think Cameron's line has been very clever, saying we
:04:54. > :04:58.cannot do it without labour. You can put it in two ways. Sorry, we cannot
:04:59. > :05:02.go ahead with it, but Labour has ruined your chance of prosperity, or
:05:03. > :05:08.they can tie themselves to it, and then Labour cannot attack it on
:05:09. > :05:14.great grounds when costs do spire. You can write Labour's script right
:05:15. > :05:22.now. They can say, if we were in charge, the financial management
:05:23. > :05:27.would be much better. This raises some really important questions for
:05:28. > :05:33.the government. They have utterly failed to make the case for HS2
:05:34. > :05:37.There is a real case to make. Between London and Birmingham it is
:05:38. > :05:42.about capacity not speed. North of Birmingham, it is about
:05:43. > :05:45.connectivity. It is a simple case to make, but it is only in the last
:05:46. > :05:49.month that they have been making that case. It shows really terrible
:05:50. > :05:57.complacency in the coalition that they haven't done that. We'll HS2
:05:58. > :06:01.happen or not? I think it will. For the reasons that Nick outlined,
:06:02. > :06:10.there is not of a constituency for it amongst Northern areas. -- there
:06:11. > :06:17.is enough of a constituency for it. There is private investment as well.
:06:18. > :06:23.It isn't like Heathrow. I say no, because I think Labour will drop
:06:24. > :06:27.their support for it. Caroline Flint said she was in favour of the
:06:28. > :06:32.concept of trains generally, but will it go further than that? It is
:06:33. > :06:38.difficult to see how it will go ahead if Labour will not support it
:06:39. > :06:45.after setting five tests that it clearly will not meet. Some will
:06:46. > :06:50.breathe a sigh of relief. Some will say, even in the 20th century, we
:06:51. > :06:56.cannot build a proper rail network. The economy was another big story of
:06:57. > :07:01.the week. We had those GDP figures. There is a video the Tories are
:07:02. > :07:05.releasing. The world premiere is going to be here. Where's the red
:07:06. > :07:09.carpet? It gives an indication of how the Tories will hand Mr Miliband
:07:10. > :07:43.and labour in the run-up to the election. Let's have a look at it.
:07:44. > :07:49.These graphics are even worse than the ones we use on our show! How on
:07:50. > :07:58.earth would you expect that to go viral? It did have a strange feel
:07:59. > :08:02.about it. It doesn't understand the Internet at all. Who is going to
:08:03. > :08:14.read those little screens between it? Put a dog in it! However,
:08:15. > :08:20.putting that aside, I have no idea that that is going to go viral. The
:08:21. > :08:26.Tories are now operating - and I say Tories rather than the coalition -
:08:27. > :08:30.on the assumption that the economy is improving and will continue to
:08:31. > :08:36.improve, and that that will become more obvious as 2014 goes on. We
:08:37. > :08:42.just saw their how they will fight the campaign. Yes, and at the
:08:43. > :08:47.crucial moment, you will reach the point where wages. To rise at a
:08:48. > :08:51.faster pace than inflation, and then people will start to, in the words
:08:52. > :08:56.of Harold Macmillan, feel that they have never had it so good. That is
:08:57. > :09:05.the key moment. If the economy is growing, there is a rule of thumb
:09:06. > :09:08.that the government should get a benefit. But it doesn't always work
:09:09. > :09:11.like that. The fundamental point here is that Ed Miliband has had a
:09:12. > :09:17.great month. He has totally set the agenda. He has set the agenda with
:09:18. > :09:21.something - freezing energy prices - that may not work. That video shows
:09:22. > :09:25.that the Conservatives want to get the debate back to the
:09:26. > :09:32.fundamentals. That this is a party that told us for three years that
:09:33. > :09:37.this coalition was telling us to -- was taking us to hell on a handcart.
:09:38. > :09:44.That doesn't seem to have happened. The energy price was a very clever
:09:45. > :09:49.thing, at the party conference season, which now seems years ago.
:09:50. > :09:55.They saw that the recovery was going to happen, so they changed the
:09:56. > :09:59.debate to living standards. Some economists are now privately
:10:00. > :10:04.expecting growth to be 3% next year, which was inconceivable for five
:10:05. > :10:07.months ago. If growth is 3% next year, living standards will start to
:10:08. > :10:13.rise again. Where does Labour go then? I would go further, and say
:10:14. > :10:18.that even though Ed Miliband has made a small political victory on
:10:19. > :10:25.living standards, it hasn't registered in the polls. Those polls
:10:26. > :10:29.have been contracted since April -- have been contracting since April.
:10:30. > :10:34.That macro economic story matters more than the issue of living
:10:35. > :10:37.standards. The interesting thing about the recovery is it confounds
:10:38. > :10:44.everybody. No one was predicting, not the Treasury, not the media not
:10:45. > :10:51.the IMF, not the academics, and the only people I can think of... I fit
:10:52. > :10:56.-- I thought they knew everything! The only people I know who did are
:10:57. > :11:00.one adviser who is very close to George Osborne, and the clever hedge
:11:01. > :11:05.fund is who were buying British equities back in January. Because
:11:06. > :11:09.the Treasury's record is so appalling, no one believe them, but
:11:10. > :11:14.they were saying around February, March this year, that by the end of
:11:15. > :11:22.the summer, the recovery would be gathering momentum. For once, they
:11:23. > :11:26.turned out to be right! They said that the economy would be going gang
:11:27. > :11:33.bust is! Where did the new Tory voters come from? I agree, if the
:11:34. > :11:42.economic recovery continues, the coalition will be stronger. But
:11:43. > :11:46.where will they get new voters from? For people who sign up to help to
:11:47. > :11:51.buy, they will be locked into nice mortgages at a low interest rate,
:11:52. > :11:57.and just as you go into a general election, if you are getting 3%
:11:58. > :12:00.growth and unemployment is down the Bank of England will have to review
:12:01. > :12:04.their interest rates. People who are getting nice interest rates now may
:12:05. > :12:11.find that it is not like that in a few months time. The point John
:12:12. > :12:15.Major was making implicitly was that Mrs Thatcher could speak to people
:12:16. > :12:20.on low incomes. John Major could not speak to them -- John Major could
:12:21. > :12:25.speak to them. But this coalition cannot speak to them. This idea
:12:26. > :12:32.about the reshuffle was that David Cameron wanted more Northern voices,
:12:33. > :12:38.more women, to make it look like it was not a party of seven men. When
:12:39. > :12:42.David Cameron became leader, John Major said, I do not speak very
:12:43. > :12:47.often, but when I do, I will help you, because I think you are good
:12:48. > :12:51.thing and I do not want to be like Margaret Thatcher. But that speech
:12:52. > :12:56.was clearly a lament for the party he believed that David Cameron was
:12:57. > :13:02.going to lead and create, but that isn't happening. And energy prices
:13:03. > :13:06.continue into this coming week. We have the companies going before a
:13:07. > :13:11.select committee. My information is they are sending along the secondary
:13:12. > :13:16.division, not the boss. How can they get along -- get away with that I
:13:17. > :13:21.got the letter through from British Gas this week explaining why my
:13:22. > :13:24.bills are going up, and at no point since this became a story have any
:13:25. > :13:30.of the big companies handled it well. I will have to leave it there.
:13:31. > :13:36.Make sure you pay your bill! That's it for today. The Daily Politics is
:13:37. > :13:43.back on BBC Two tomorrow. I will be back here on BBC One next Sunday.
:13:44. > :13:51.Remember, if it's Sunday, it is The Sunday Politics.