19/01/2014 Sunday Politics West Midlands

Morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. Nick Clegg says

Chris Rennard must apologise. "What for?", say his friends. We'll ask

senior Lib Dem minister Danny Alexander whose side he's on.

What about the voters? What do they make of the Lib Dems? We hear the

views of a Sunday Politics focus group.

and this afternoon will be drier and brighter. Highs of seven Celsius.

MP. And we'll get the verdict on Portsmouth MP Penny Mordaunt's

plunge from the highboard from who else but the Minister for

Portsmouth. And with me, as always, the best and

the brightest political panel in the business: and in London, Boris

Johnson has pledged to recruit more volunteers. Nick Watt, Helen Lewis

and Janan Ganesh, who'll be tweeting throughout the programme.

First this morning, Nick Clegg is considering a fresh investigation

into the behaviour of the party s former chief executive, Lord

Rennard. Last week, a lawyer appointed by the party decided that

no action could be taken against him, but that women who had accused

the Lib Dem peer of inappropriate behaviour "were broadly credible".

More than 100 party activists are demanding an apology. Chris Rennard

say he's nothing to apologise for and the party whip must be returned

to him. Helen, this is not going away. It is turning into a crisis

for the Lib Dems? They have only got seven female MPs. There is no female

Cabinet Minister. There is a reasonable chance that after the

next election there might in no female Liberal Democrat MPs at all.

A scandal like this will not encourage women into the party. Have

they made a complete mess of it You feel for Nick Clegg, because he

launched an utterly rigorous process. He called in a QC. The QC

looked at it and decided that the evidence did not meet the burden of

proof in a criminal trial. But clearly he felt that the evidence

from these women was very credible and serious. He said it was broadly

credible. Clearly it was serious. Rennard is being advised by Lord

Carlisle, fellow Liberal Democrat peer, who is giving purely legal

advice. He is saying it has not reached that edge-mac, so do not

apologise. This is a political issue, so the agony continues. Nick

Clegg was hoping to keep the party whip withdrawn. But they did not

launch an enquiry, the Webster enquired it was not an enquiry, it

was a legal opinion. You're right, it was an internal opinion. The Lib

Dems distinguished themselves from the other two parties not with

policy, but with ethics. They presented themselves as being

cleaner, and in possession of more Robert Jay than Labour and the

Conservatives. That will be harder to do now. -- more probity. There

are a Lib Dem peers that are more relaxed about taking him back and

letting him pick up the party whip. That is the problem. There is a

generational issue. The older Lib Dems in the House of Lords, the kind

of thing, he did not do anything that wrong. The younger activists

and those outside the House of Lords, they think it is a pollen.

Yes, there is definitely a sort of what you are complaining about sort

of thing. That is symptomatic of a cultural difference. The report last

year found that they tried to manage the allegations. They did not do

what any company would do if there was an allegation of sexual

harassment. If there had not in the by-election in Eastleigh, this story

may not have got the attention it did. Channel four news are the one

that really drove this. Without their reporting, this might not have

come out. It is not going to go away, because the issue of whether

he gets the party whip back will come week. -- will come up this

week. So it's not been a great week for

the Liberal Democrats and none of this will help public perceptions of

a party already struggling in the polls. In a moment, I'll be talking

to the second most senior Liberal Democrat in the land, Danny

Alexander. First, Adam Fleming went to Glasgow to find out what voters

there made of the party. Let's put the Lib Dems under the

microscope in Glasgow. We have recruited some Glaswegians who have

voted for them, and some who have not. Hello, John. Let's get started.

I will be watching them through the one-way mirror, along with the

former Liberal Democrat MP John Barrett. Let's get to the heart of

the matter straightaway. If the Lib Dems were a biscuit, what would they

be? Tunnock's Teacake. Hard on the outside but soft in the middle. They

give in. There is no strength of character there. They just give in

to whoever. Ouch. Rich Tea. A bit bland and boring. Melts and crumbles

under any sort of heat and pressure. Morrison's own brand of biscuit not

top of the range like Marks Spencer or Sainsbury's or Waitrose.

A custard cream, sandwiched between David Cameron and the Tories. I

think they were concerned that they had one exterior, but something else

was really inside. They did not find it too definitive, too clear, too

concise, too tasty, too appealing. Which means? It is a worry. If that

is their gut reaction, literally, let's find out what is behind it.

The context of them being stuck between a rock and a hard place for

them as a party, I feel slightly sorry for them. I think people who

voted for them will think they are victims as well, being sold down the

river by going to the coalition I think the ones, particularly student

fees, that was an important one to a lot of people. People felt cheated.

I agree. Just going back on that, so publicly and openly, it makes you

think, well, what do they stand for? It is trust. Harsh. But our group is

feeling quite upbeat about the state of the economy. What have the Lib

Dems contributed to that? I am not quite sure. It is George Osborne, a

Conservative, who is the Chancellor, so it is mostly down to him. The

Liberal Democrats are mostly on their coat tails, if you know what I

mean. Have the Lib Dems done anything, anyone? I think the

Liberal Democrats were responsible for increasing the tax allowance,

?10,000 for next year. I think they have played a major role in that.

Yes. I am glad somebody noticed that. We will have helped everyone

who is receiving a salary, and it is interesting that nobody has

mentioned that. Now, let's talk about personalities. Everyone knows

him, but what about say, this guy? Alexander. Danny, they got it

straightaway. I actually quite like him. I think he talks very clearly

and it is easy to understand what he says. Fellow redhead Charles Kennedy

is popular as well. He is very charismatic and it is through him

that I voted Liberal the last few times. But who is this? I recognise

him but I cannot tell you his name. That is the party's leader in

Scotland, Willie Rennie, and the party's role in the upcoming

referendum on independence draws a blank as well. It does not feel like

they have featured, it is SNP and Labour and Conservative. They are

last in a four horse race. We have been talking about the biggest issue

in Scottish politics, independence and the referendum and the Lib Dems

are nowhere. They are not mentioned and they seem to think it is all

about Labour and the SNP. The Lib Dems are part of the Better Together

campaign and we are being drowned out among that. Looking to the

future, what messages do voters have for the Lib Dems? Get a backbone. Do

not go back on your policies or your word. Be strong and decisive. If you

will pardon the expression, man up. DIY, do it yourself. Do not award

bankers and other people for failure. Stand up. Be your own

person, party. If that focus group represented the whole country, what

would the result for the Lib Dems be at 2015 in the election? If they get

the message across between now and then, the result could be OK. If

they do not get the message across, the result could be disaster. Maybe

they would do a lot better on their own. I do not think you are seeing

the true Lib Dems because they are in the coalition. They maybe deserve

another chance. Crucially for the Lib Dems, that means there is some

hope, but there is also plenty of anger, some disappoint, and a bit of

bafflement as well. And watching that with me, senior

Liberal Democrat and Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander

Welcome to the programme. One of the things that comes through from the

focus group is that if there is any credit around for the economic

recovery, it is the Tories that are getting it, and you are not? What

can you do about that? The first thing to say is that the economy

would not be recovering if it was not for the Liberal Democrats. If it

was not for our decision right beginning in 2010 to form a strong,

stable coalition government that to deal with the problems, we would

still be in the mess that Labour left us with. Why are you not

getting the credit? That was one focus group. It was interesting to

hear opinions. We have to work very hard to get across the message that

the economy would not be recovering without the Liberal Democrats.

People would not be seeing the largest income tax cuts for a

generation without the Liberal Democrats. The ?10,000 threshold

that one of the people referred to is coming into peoples pay packets

this year. Lots of people recognise that. There was the one person in

the focus groups. This is your measure of success, raising the

people at which people pay income tax. But most of the voters do not

even give you credit for that. The role that we haven't British

politics as a party, is that we are the only party that can be trusted

to deliver a fair society and a strong economy. People know they

cannot trust the Labour Party. We saw it again from Ed Miliband this

morning. You cannot trust the Labour Party with the nation's finances. It

may well be your policy, the income tax threshold, but it is the Tories

that are getting the credit? I do not think that is true. I have spent

lots of time meeting photos and lots of people recognise that if it was

not for the Liberal Democrats, people would not be seeing those tax

cuts. We are helping disadvantaged children in schools. It is right

that we have to work very hard between now and polling day to do

several things, to make sure that we secure the recovery, there can be no

complacency. The economic recovery is in its early stages and we need

to make sure it is sustainable. We need to make sure the benefits of

the recovery are shared out people who have made sacrifices, people on

low pay, people who have seen their savings are eroded. The Tories have

now hijacked another Lib Dem policy, another big hike in the

minimum wage. You spoke about the need to make sure that people on low

pay benefit from the recovery, a big hike in the minimum wage. Did the

Chancellor consulting on this? We have been talking about it for some

time. Vince Cable asked the low pay commission for advice on this. Why

did Vince Cable not make this announcement, why was it the

Chancellor? Let me say a few other things about this. If we are going

to secure the recovery, this year we have to make sure that businesses

start investing. We have got to get Roddick typically rising. An

increase in the minimum wage is something that needs to follow that.

We will not do it unless the low pay commission adviser as it is

important for the economy at this stage. Did you know the Chancellor

was coming out with that statement? I did not know he was going to say

something on that particular day. We have worked together on it in the

tragedy to see what the economic impact would be, and to emphasise

that it is the commission, which has credibility with business, trade

unions and government. It must not be a politically motivated increase.

So you did not know, and Vince Cable, and it is properly a matter

for him as the Business Secretary, he did not make the announcement? I

don't think that's right. I don t clear every word I say with him I

don't expect him to do the same to me. The Lib Dems have told us before

it was the Treasury that was blocking this from happening. We

were going to ask the low pay commission to advise us on bringing

the minimum wage back up. During the financial crisis, wages have been

lower-than-expected but it's also right, we shouldn't act in a hasty

way, we should listen to what the commission has to say, and if they

don't recommend an increase we have to make sure economic conditions are

there to get it right. Not only are the Tories getting credit for that,

our Scottish voters group showed that people have still not forgiven

you for ratting on tuition fees and that was a broken promise that

didn't even apply to the people in Scotland, where there are no tuition

fees! Nick Clegg has been very clear about the issues that that brought

up. If you look at our manifesto, the University of London said we

delivered about 70% of our policies in the manifesto. They haven't

forgiven you for the big one. The big promise we made was to cut

income tax the millions of people. That is a policy which is putting

money back into the pockets of working people. It is only possible

because we are delivering our economic plan in government with the

Conservatives. Now we have to make sure, through tax cuts, through

looking at issues like the minimum wage and other groups who have made

sacrifices, make sure that benefit is shared. I am not going to agree

to anything which undermines the confidence of businesses to invest

in this country over the next 1 months. Speaking of Scotland, the

Lib Dems, why do they now look largely irrelevant in the battle for

the union? Not one of our focus group even knew who your Scottish

leader is. I don't accept that. I have spent a lot of time with

Alistair Carmichael and others, we are all making the case every day.

If Scotland votes to be independent, it will be in a much worse financial

position within the European Union. Scotland will be contributing to the

rebate for the UK, rather than benefiting from it. It has been a

disaster for your Scottish based to have joined a coalition with the

Tories. It may have been the right thing to do, you say it is in the

national interest, but Scottish Lib Dems did not expect to be in a

coalition with the Tories. By the way I think it is also in the

national interests and the interests of the people for Scotland, cutting

the income tax of Scottish people, stabilising the economy. We are now

seeing good growth. But you are in meltdown. I don't accept that. We

will see what happens in the 20 5 election. I think we have a record

to be proud of, we have played a very important role in clearing up

the mess Labour made in the economy, of making sure the

Coalition government tackles the problems in this country, but does

so in a fair way. I think the biggest risks to the economic

recovery over the next few years is either a majority Labour government

or a majority Conservative government. Labour you cannot trust

with the finances, the Tories want us to play chicken with the European

Union which would truly be a disaster to investment in this

country. You announced this week that if Scotland votes to leave the

UK, it would be the British Treasury that would guarantee all British

government debt. There wouldn't be a negotiation, but the backstop would

be that even if they didn't take anything, we would still guarantee

the debt. What was happening in the markets that you needed to calm them

down? We were getting quite a few questions from the people we rely on

to lend us money. We are still borrowing billions of pounds every

month as a country. Those people were asking us to clarify this

point. It was becoming a serious concern? It wasn't reflected in the

guilty yields. I follow the bond market quite carefully and there was

no sign this was having an impact. That's why the right thing to do was

to clarify this point now, rather than the concerns being reflected in

what you imply, and I think it is a bad idea for Scotland to vote for

separation but it would be wrong to allow for the fact that question is

on the table to cost taxpayers in the UK more money and higher

interest payments simply because Alex Salmond has put that question

on the table. That's why I think it was the right thing to do. There

were a lot of calls from the focus group that you need to be different.

Nick Clegg has embarked on this aggressive differentiation. Where

you can be different is the bankers' bonuses. What conceivable

reason could there be for anybody at RBS getting a bonus twice in their

salary? We have not been approached by RBS in terms of those votes. I

would be sceptical about an approach from RBS if it can. It shows what we

have presided over as a party in government, massive reductions. .

I'm not asking you about that, I'm asking what conceivable case there

can be for a bank that has failed to sell its branches even though

ordered by the Government, still has 38 billion of toxic debt on its

balance sheet, I ask again what possible reason should they get

twice salary as a bonus? Your right to say RBS is in a very different

position to other banks, it is mostly owned by the state. RBS

hasn't put a case to us but they might do so I would like to look at

what they would say, but I would be sceptical as to whether a case could

be made given some of the things you said, but also the fact that it is a

bank that has benefited from the taxpayer standing behind it. Now RBS

has to focus more on domestic retail. Let me turn to Chris

Rennard, ten women have accused him of sexual harassment. He denies

every case. Who do you believe? We have been through a process on this

as a party. A report has been issued on this. I agree with Alistair

Webster on this, he has made clear that while he cannot prove what

happened to a criminal standard that there is clear there has been

considerable distress and harm caused. I agree with him about that

and that's why it is necessary for Chris Rennard to apologise as he has

been asked to do. If he refuses to apologise, should he be denied the

Lib Dem whip in the Lords? I don't think he should be readmitted to the

Liberal Democrat group in the House of Lords until such time as the

disciplinary process, including the apology, has been done properly We

are very democratic party, it is a matter for our group in the House of

Lords in due course to make that judgement. Party HQ has had a lot of

complaints from party members about the fact no apology has been made.

The appropriate committee would need to look at that and decide what

action needs to be taken because these are very serious matters. We

as a party have learned a lot, taken a long, hard look at ourselves, to

change the way we work. The apology does need to be made. We are told

that Lord Newby, the Chief Whip of the Liberal Democrats in the House

of Lords, we are told he has shaken hands with Chris Rennard and

welcomed him back. That decision has not been taken yet. I think Lord

Newby would share my view on this. Have you shaken his hand and

welcomed him back? No, I haven't. Does Nick Clegg have the power to

deny Chris Rennard as the whip? I am making it clear that a lack of

apology is totally unacceptable and therefore we have to take steps if

that is not forthcoming. His view and my view is that Lord Rennard

should not be readmitted to the House of Lords if that is not

forthcoming. In our party, our group in the House of Lords has two in the

end take a view for itself. And they can override Nick Clegg's view? I

hope that when they look at this... Do they have the power to override

Nick Clegg? They have the power to decide who should be the whip. The

failure to follow up the simple human demand for an apology for the

stress that has been caused is totally unacceptable. Your party is

totally down lighted on this -- divided on this. Here is what Lord

Carlile had to say. A total nonsense, hyperbole. It is a

ridiculous statement to make and we have seen Alistair Webster, the QC

who did this investigation, comment on that himself this morning. He has

followed the process the party laid down in its rules, which sets the

standard for the investigation which asked him to report on the evidence

he has found, but he also has a duty of confidentiality and

responsibility under the data protection legislation as well. Here

is what your activists have said in a letter to the Guardian. This shows

there are strong opinions, but why should Chris Rennard apologise for

something he denies, unproven allegations, on an unpublished

report that Chris Rennard has not been allowed to read? He should

apologise because he wants to continue to be a member of the

Liberal Democrats and this is the recommendation that has been made by

the internal disciplinary process. Webster himself said this was not an

inquiry, it is an opinion. If Chris Rennard apologises on this basis, he

opens himself to civil lawsuits He says he is not going to do it. As a

Liberal Democrat you join the party because you believe in its values,

you abide by its rules. One of those rules is that we have a process if

there are disciplinary allegations. The committee of the party supported

Webster's recommendations, one of which was that an apology should be

made because he clearly found distress had been caused. Will there

now be a proper inquiry? I don't think any of these legalistic

things, I don't think he can have it both ways. Will there be a proper

inquiry? Alistair Webster did do a proper inquiry. There was a proper

report into what happened at the time and we have learned a lot from

this is a party, and the most important thing now is that Chris

Rennard apologises. You have made that clear. What kind of biscuits

are you? Are you a Tunnocks? Soft on the inside? It is good of you to be

advertising a Scottish product. We just wondered if you weren't tough

enough to take on Ed Balls. Thank you. More than tough enough is the

answer to that. Generally governments are a bit

rubbish at IT projects. They tend to run way over budget and never quite

achieve what they promised. So the revelations of a former spy that the

US and British security agencies were in fact astonishingly efficient

at eavesdropping on the digital communications of their citizens

came as a bit shock. But just how worried should we be about their

clandestine activity? In his latest revelation, former US

by Edward Snowden has claimed that America's National Security Agency

operates a secret database called Dishfire. It collect 200 million

mobile phone messages every day from around the world, accessed, he says,

why British and American spies. This week, the president has outlined a

series of surveillance reforms, including Ning to the storage of the

phone call information of millions of Americans, and no Morse -- and no

more spying on allies like Angela Merkel. Critics say that the British

intelligence agencies have refused to acknowledge even the need for a

debate on the issue. The Foreign Secretary William six says that we

have a very strong system of checks and balances. -- William Hague. ??

new line Nick Pickles is director of the pressure group Big Brother

Watch. The Labour MP Hazel Blears in on Parliament's Intelligence And

Security Committee. They're here to go head to head.

Welcome to both of you. Hazel Blears, let me come to you first.

President Obama has made some major changes as a result of what we have

learned that the NSA in America was up to. But British politicians seem

to, they are not up for this kind of thing, they are hoping it will go

away? It is not going away and that is why my committee, the

Intelligence And Security Committee, has decided to launch an enquiry

into whether the legal framework is up-to-date. We have had massive

technological change. We have had a call for evidence. Some of the

sessions will be open so that people can see what the evidence is.

Obviously some of the information will have to be classified, but on

the committee, there is a real commitment to say, there is a big

debate going on, let's see if the system is as Rob asked as we can

make it. The big question is oversight and the call for evidence

that the committee has issued is not mention oversight. It is ten years

since the Foreign Affairs Committee said that the committee should be a

fully elected committee chosen by Parliament and not the Prime

Minister. It has changed, actually. The Prime Minister nominates people

and the house gets to him -- gets to approve. In America, they have a

separation of power, the president does not nominate Kennedy.

Basically, Hazel Blears, you're an establishment lackey? I do not think

so. Most of the people on the committee have some experience of

intelligence and these issues. In this country, we have robust

scrutiny, compared to some of her European neighbours. We have

Parliamentary scrutiny, the interception commissioners, and

ministers have to sign the warrants. But there may be room for

improvement, which is why we are having the enquiry. Do not forget,

President Obama said that the agency should not have the ability to

collect data, he wanted to put more safeguards in. That is essential for

the work of the agencies. If you cannot see the data, you cannot take

the connections and see the patterns. Some people never talk

about the threat from terrorism it is all about travesty. There are

several thousand people in this country, as we are talking, who are

actively planning to do a country harm. When this debate started in

the US, the NSA head stood up and said there are 54 plots that have

been detected by this capability that has detected and that in bulk.

Now the head of the NSA has admitted that the number is actually zero. It

is not the intelligence committee in the US that did the work to reduce

that number, it was a Judiciary Committee. The fact that we have two

different bodies doing this in this country, it means that you do not

get the correct view. How can people have confidence in a body when if

you go around Europe, for example, or the world, we are not at the end

not requiring judges to not sign warrants? I do not accept that the

committee failed on that range of issues. You look at the reports on

7/7. Two reports by the committee get to the heart of it. If you look

at that terrorist attack on our country, people will say, why did

you not have them on the radar? The agencies are between a rock and a

hard race. They have got to be subject to oversight, but beanie

capability. Did you know about Dishfire? We go to GCHQ on a regular

basis and I know about the capabilities that we have got. Some

of the names of these programmes, we would not necessarily know. But did

you know that GCHQ had the capability to use Dishfire, or to

get Dishfire material from the NSA? I knew and my committee knew that we

had the capability to collect data, and these days, people do not write

letters, they do not use landline telephones, they use the Internet

and text in, so it is important that the agencies are able to keep up

with that take the logical change. What should happen? The proper legal

framework should include, if a company is cooperating, as Google

and Facebook do, it should be illegal for GCHQ to hack into them.

In the US, Lundberg estimate that this has driven a 35mm and hole in

the US economy because people do not trust but there are systems are

secure. We need to know that GCHQ are not trying to use a different

door into the system, whether by hacking or foreign intelligence. We

need judicial oversight with judges and not politicians signing off. The

final 30 seconds to you. As a result of the changes in the Justice and

Security act, the committee is accountable to Parliament and not

the Prime Minister. Those changes are taking place, and I am up for

the debate if we need more change or not. But I want British agencies to

have more power to protect the people in this country. Thank you to

both of you. It's coming up to 11:40. You're watching the Sunday

Politics. Coming up in just over 20 minutes, we'll get the verdict of

the Minister for Portsmouth on that dive from the Portsmouth MP. Ouch!

Hello, I'm David Gregory`Kumar. Welcome to the Sunday Politics in

the Midlands. Today I am joined from the men `` by the men from the

marginals. Ian Austin is high on the Tory target list for 2015. Marcus

Jones is the MP for Nuneaton. His Warwickshire seat is the sort of

place at Miliband must win. Welcome both. We begin in Warwickshire with

full calls for a merger between the police force and neighbouring West

Mercia. They are already engaged in what they call a strategic alliance,

but the police Federation have upped the ante, saying that a merger could

be the best way to protect front`line policing. We already work

closely with Warwickshire Police, but we have not yet taken the final

step to merge into a single force. Both Police and Crime Commissioner

several that out during their terms in office, but after the next PCC

elections that will have to become a serious consideration because it is

an obvious way of saving money. He has a point. 400 posts have

already gone across the two forces. If a merger means protecting the

front line, surely you are in favour? Warwickshire Police force

have done extremely well in recent years. They are working well with

the West Mercia force. Savings are being made through that partnership.

But the Police and Crime Commissioner in Warwickshire has

clearly stated, as has the Commissioner of West Mercia, that

they will not embark on a formal merger. I am supportive of that, and

also supportive of finding further savings whilst protecting front`line

policing. I do not want others to go down the same route as we did a few

years ago under the Labour government when there was an

enforced merger and a lot of money was wasted on a failed plan. Labour

was all in favour of this. There was talk of a regional police force that

the whole West Midlands. If you can make savings in the back office and

get resources shifted to the front line. We would not have wasted money

on Police Commissioners, which I think is an expensive experiment. I

am not sure it is working. Rob Jones is doing a good job in the West

Midlands. I am not convinced this has been a good idea, especially

when experienced officers are being forced out of the drawer,

recruitment is frozen and police stations are being closed in Dudley.

I want to see polices `` police embedded in communities and close to

the front line. Marcus Jones, there will be one comments team, one chief

customer one Deputy police constable... The savings could be

substantial. A lot of savings are being made through slimming down

management structures and having joint management structures in

relation to both forces. At the end of the day, those forces are still

keeping their autonomy, still able to react to local needs. At the

moment, they are doing exactly the right thing. They are doing the

right thing and pushing ahead. Is this the right way to go? Sacking

thousands of front line police officers whilst embarking on an

expensive experiment is regarded as `` would be regarded as doing the

right thing by most people in the West Midlands.

Coming up, we are taking a trip down Benefits Street. What does the

controversial Channel four programme say about Coalition driven welfare

reform or the legacy of Labour? The extremism task force was set up

in the wake of the killing of Drummer Lee Rigby in Woolwich last

year. Its brief is to look at whether the government is doing

enough to confront extremism and radicalisation. Last year, the West

Midlands saw a number of high`profile plots involving

so`called home`grown terrorists. Irving has been identified as a

hotspot. `` Birmingham has been identified as a vulnerable hotspot.

Violent extremists led works are using the internet, Twitter feeds

and social networks to inspire and radicalised disaffected teenagers.

The messages are seductive for young minds are seeking answers.

I have been invited into this mosque in Birmingham. 8000 people come

through these doors every week. They are worried about the unseen hands

of extremists. I am worried and I don't want my children to become

extremist. I do not want them to be hurt in an attack year by a far

right, white extremist and neither do I want them to grow up and become

Muslim fundamentalists. I want them to have access to reasoned and

rational and reasonable people who can make them active and engaged

citizens. These young scholars are the imam this `` the imams the

religious leaders of the future. In the past they have from Pakistan or

the Middle East. Now these home`grown young men I given the

tools to challenge extremism. The majority of Muslims have coexisted

with people of other faiths, in particular Jews and Christians,

across the world, without any kind of antagonism. It seems that the

modern climate today, we have a few black sheep here and there who are

causing problems. A charity is sending tens of winter clothing to

refugees in Syria. More than 100 young people have been volunteering

in this warehouse, giving up their time and energy. But what do they

think of which society? Do they feel valued and respected? I am proud to

be British. If any big ask me, I am British Pakistani. Sometimes

delicate US Muslims and think that you are the ones who did 9/11 Mac.

That is the only bad thing. They want to help cut out the

extremists. Our region does not want this. Can the government legislate

against extremism? Foreign policy and unemployment can all be

triggers, even people confidence that there `` their religion is not

incompatible with being British. 99.99% of Muslims are against all

and every form of extremism and radicalisation. The bad guys are the

0.01% who tend to hide away from institutions. These are the good

guys, proud to be British and Muslim, working for the greater

good. But how to reach and, those who operate in the shadows? Remains

the challenge for everyone. Ian Austin, you are on the Home

Affairs Select Committee. We have to acknowledge that in the West

Midlands, the most successful extremist attack last year was

carried out a Ukrainian against the Muslim community. How can you

legislate against that? Attacks like that are clearly very difficult to

legislate against, but what I thought was interesting about that

film, for me, that young woman summed it up and she said she was

proud to be British, and that is what we need. We need a stronger

sense of what it means to be British and a stronger sense of British

patriotism, based not on not what you look like all they do or know

where your parents are from, but in what you believe and what you

contribute and the values of democracy and equality, freedom,

fairness and tolerance, which define and unite Britain. Talking to the

gym extremists, it is clear that the political debate did influence what

they think. Do you think about these things when you voted for military

action in Syria? We need to look at the wider picture here. We cannot

tolerate extremism wherever it comes from in our communities will stop

the political debate does make a difference. We have to give

communities the ability to actually speak and allow their communities to

speak against radicalism and extremism, and you could see on that

clip that is happening and that is extremely important as we go

forward, to make sure we don't see more of the terrible situations

happening on our streets. We get a task force after every atrocity. Do

they just give you something to do as politicians and make you look

busy? Do they ever generate anything you really think has an impact?

There are lessons to be learned from a situation. There are lessons to be

learned, especially in terms of making sure that we tackle the

radicalism in our universities, and that is being done as a direct

result of things done over recent years, particularly the awful attack

on the. If you look at some things that have been tried out, like

Project Champion, but in CCTV into a predominantly Muslim area in

Birmingham, that backfired. You can pick on individual schemes and say

which ones work and which ones didn't, but the truth of this is

that the vast majority of people in Britain have `` of all backgrounds,

and as he said, 99.99% of Muslims are peace loving and committed to

this country and want to see a better trip `` better Britain for

them and their children. We have to unite people across all communities

to work together and build a stronger and more united society in

which we all tackle extremism wherever it is found. We believe

that therefore now. Wang C. `` thank you very much.

Benefits Street has caused plenty of outrage again this week. Liberal

people on Twitter say that the programme demonises people who are

living in a deprived part of Birmingham who are facing deep

welfare cuts. But others say that the show reveals the truth about the

legacy of a Labour welfare policy, people living largely on taxpayers?

Cash. We look at the political fallout.

Benefits Street has been accused of painting an unflattering picture of

life in James Turner Street, a deprived part of Winton Green.

Questions have been asked in Parliament. One MP asked the work

and pensions secretary if he had seen it. If so, had he been struck

by the number of people on that you managed to combine complaining about

welfare reforms whilst being able to afford to buy copious notes of

cigarettes, have a lot of tatties done and watch sky TV on the

obligatory widescreen TV? In response, the site `` secretary of

state set lifestyle lifestyles and show irritated working people and

where one of the factors behind government reforms. Many people are

shocked by what they see, but the reality is that the government backs

our welfare package, to stop these abuses which date back to the last

government, trapping people in benefit dependency. Outside the

headquarters of the London production company which made the

programme, a demonstration was organised by the trade union Unite.

There is only 3% of the welfare spend which goes on unemployment

benefit. They described the programme is a heavily edited

hatchet job. Channel four denied that it mocks the poor, saying it

paints a fair picture of life in James Turner Street.

Have either of you watched it? I have watched a brief part of the

programme. Bits of it. I saw some of it on catch`up. I put up with about

15 minutes of it. It could be a street in Dudley, couldn't it? I

don't know of any street in Disley that are remotely like that. In the

street, there are 99 houses, hundreds of people living there. So

far on the programme they have featured half a dozen. I'm not sure

it will present a fair picture of people on the street, let alone

anywhere else. The vast majority... Where there are people committing

fraud... They film people preparing to go shoplifting. I think that is

outrageous. That is not responsible broadcasting. I think the vast

majority of people who are on benefits have worked and want to

work and are trying to get back into work. Where people don't want to

work, I think we should have limits on how much can be claimed, how long

people can claim for. We are proposing a compulsory jobs

guarantee. After a certain amount of time, if they have not got a job,

they will have to take it or lose their benefits. Deep people coming

into your constituency surgery? Do you recognise these people? There

are people in every constituency like the people we have seen on the

programme. There is no doubt on `` about that. I feel sorry for people

who are trying to do the right thing and trying to get into work and who

feel they are being demonised for being an benefits. I feel for the

other people living on James `` James Turner Street, the high ``

hard working people. The most positive way to get people out of

poverty is getting people into work. This government has created 1.6

million private sector jobs. People are getting into work. Employment is

going down, `` unemployment is going down. We are doing everything we can

to make work pay. We are doing that by reducing the amount of tax that

people have to pay on their wages and recommending quite a substantial

increase in the minimum wage. That is the best way to make work pay,

get people back into work. Let's here from Channel four. They spoke

to those earlier in the week. We were clear from the outset that

we were not trying to do a broad picture of the benefits welfare

system, but examined a part of Britain where dependency on benefits

is highly concentrated. James Turner Street in Birmingham has a lot of

people who depend on benefits to live. There is a long`term problem

with high employment. The hopes of them to get out off benefits are

relatively high. Lets try and unpack this a bit.

There has been a huge reaction. Iain Duncan Smith says the public backs

the kind of welfare reform they are putting forward because they want to

CNN to the abuses that we have seen something of the programme. He says

that these people are trapped in the welfare dependency created by

Labour. There is a long`term generational problem of unemployment

in some families and some communities. We have all got to work

harder to tackle that. Fraud and error is going up. Unemployment has

risen during this government. I want to see limits on how long people can

be on benefits, limits to how much people can claim. I don't think that

anybody should be better off on benefits than in work, but I don't

think this programme presents a fair picture of the vast majority of

people who are on benefits and desperately trying to get back into

work and get a job. What we have to do, the economy has started to grow

nationally, which is good. I don't think anybody would pretend that the

benefits of economic growth and we have just begun to see has filtered

through here in Birmingham, and not in areas like Winson Green. There

has to be more done to encourage economic growth. 3% of the welfare

budget goes on unemployment benefits. Real savings would come if

you tackle pensioners, winter fuel allowance, free TV licences, all

these kinds of things, but you don't tackle it because they vote for you.

I did accept what you are saying at all. Most of the people who are on

pension benefits, and when we say benefits, a lot of these things are

people that `` things that people have contributed to, they have

worked hard and they deserve a good and decent time and. What we need to

do is get more people into work, despite what Ian says. There are

less people are unemployed now than when this government came into

power. There was a situation under the previous Labour government where

they make the situation of welfare dependency worse. We are now

tackling the problem. It is a tough job that we have got on our hands of

doing that, but we are doing that and making work pay, bringing in

universal credit and trying to raise the minimum wage, giving people more

of the money they earned by reducing income tax, and that is the way to

incentivise people, getting them into work and hopefully we will see

far less of this type of culture. OK, we will see what Benefits Street

brings this week. It is time for our regular round`up

of the political week. West Mercia's Police and Crime

Commissioner Bill Longmore has lung cancer. He is not stepping down, but

his deputy Barry Sheldon will take over in the interim. Staffordshire

county council is have voted to close care homes for people with

learning disabilities despite protests from users. More rail

delays. Virgin has shelved plans to reinstate a direct link from

Shropshire to London. It was to happen in May but December now looks

more likely. Birmingham City Council is considering selling landmarks

like the NEC to pay legal claims over equal pay, totalling more than

?1 billion. The Chancellor was here again celebrating good economic news

as the government agreed to pay ?30 million into 3`D printing and

aerospace technology in Coventry. Is all about a British economy that

builds its manufacturing base, Britain that makes things again and

is not just rely on the City of London.

Marcus Jones, you mentioned that things are looking up. The pants ``

the Chancellor was positive there. Can we just cut back on austerity?

Is this the end of austerity? I don't think it is. We are borrowing

more than we are bringing in in taxation, so we have to keep

tackling that. I tackling the deficit we have been able to keep

mortgage rates and interest rates low for businesses. It has had a

positive effect because unemployment is down and manufacturing is on the

rise again. We have seen a resurgence here in the nest `` West

Midlands, which is good news will stop we need a sustainable

recovery. The government has got a long`term plan to achieve that. It

is all good news. It is getting harder to utilise any political

hits, because it is all coming good. I don't think that is true. In

employment and? Inflation at 2%? It is great that the economy has

finally started to grow after George Osborne choked off the recovery by

cutting too far in 2010. This covenant has borrowed more in former

years and the last governor and borrowed in 13 years. Lord Osborne

has been saying they want to see a rise in the minimum wage, but many

people in the West Midlands will not be able to take that seriously from

Chancellor who is on the West Midlands will not be able to take

that seriously from Chancellor who is never want tax cuts has been for

the wealthiest people in Britain. But there is good news locally. Of

course, great news when the economy starts news `` move. I want to see a

proper long`term sustained to covering `` recovery. As I say,

no`one will take this seriously from the governor and his number one

objective has been to cut taxes for the very wealthy. They are the

people that this government is primarily trying to help. The

problem is, do your constituents Theo Leggett is speeding through to

them on the ground? They are starting to feel that. There has

been a tough time for people living across the West Midlands, but things

are starting to get better slowly. It is important that the job is not

yet done the by any means. There are a lot of spending commitments.

Labour do not want to put the country right in a sustainable when

`` way. They want to borrow more and put his back where we were. I think

getting better? Sign that we don't think there is evidence of that in

Dudley yet. Thank you very much. Tomorrow's Inside Out West Midlands

is a special episode about people who steal electricity and gas. We

houses being built by the mayor. Andrew, back to you. Welcome back.

Now she made quite a splash last night. I am talking, of course, of

the Portsmouth North MP, Penny Mordaunt. If you missed her first

appearance in ITV's celebrity diving competition show, here she is in

action. APPLAUSE

Here is a lady who is more used to campaigning for votes than diving

for them. She created far too much rotation. Hard work has gone into

the start of this dive to try and control it. That looked painful Now

the Portsmouth North MP got voted off the show last night but what

about the verdict that really matters? The newly appointed

Minister for Portsmouth, Michael Fallon, is here. Welcome to the

programme. I would give her ten out of ten for bravery. I was cheering

her on. She was doing this for a local charity, raising money for the

local swimming pool. She was a good sport. As Minister for Portsmouth,

can we expect to see you in your swimming trunks for the next

series? I do not think I have the spare time at the moment. But there

is a big challenge in Portsmouth. Penny Mordaunt and the other local

MPs there have been remorseless in asking ministers to help the city.

They are losing jobs. There is a goblin Trinity -- there is a big

opportunity to create jobs. Should she have been on a celebrity

television show of their role these problems in Portsmouth? This was in

her spare time and it is raising money for a good cause. I do not

think we should eat two sniffy about it. Did I not see you dressed up on

Thursday night, doing your programme? This is my job. This is

not her job. It was in her spare time, she was raising money for a

local charity. Your Minister for Portsmouth. Are we going to have a

minister for every town? Are we going to have a minister for

Chipping Sodbury? Chipping Sodbury does not have the issues that

Portsmouth have -- that Portsmouth has. There are jobs at risk in

shipbuilding. The government puts in a lot of money through the regional

growth fund, some ?20 million. There are range of government funding

streams going into Portsmouth. My job is to make sure that is properly

coordinated. I need to make sure that Portsmouth seizes this

opportunity to develop a more broadly -based marine and maritime

economy. To make sure a marginal seat stays Tory at the next

election? There are marginal seats everywhere. There is a Liberal

Democrat marginal the -- seat. Vince Cable and I have been working

together for the issues that Portsmouth is facing. We work on

these things together. But I have the very specific job of making sure

that the effort on the ground is coordinated. So Vince Cable is not

the Minister for Portsmouth? I have been there recently, so has Vince

Cable. So there are two ministers for Portsmouth? Just a minute. I am

making sure that the effort is properly coordinated on the ground.

I am determined to turn this challenging time into a proper

opportunity. Should we be to Paul faced about this? No, good honour.

How much money would be have to pay you to get into a swimming costume?

Bid is not enough money in the BBC covers. Good on her. It took seven

years to get a leg there's an MP. She should be a minister. It is a

pity she has the spare time to do this. She is very talented. It is

interesting about the Minister for Portsmouth, up in the north-east

they must be sad that they do not have any marginal seats. Nick Brown

as David Cameron last July, can we have a minister for the north-east,

and the Prime Minister is said no? Does this mean that Portsmouth is

more deprived economic late than the north-east? No, it means it is a

marginal seat. The Labour Leader Ed Miliband was on

the Andrew Marr programme this morning and he outlined plans under

a Labour government for an annual competition audit. Here is what he

had to say. The next Labour government will have an annual

competition at it, not just done by the regulatory body. Alongside them

will be the citizens advice bureau, setting the agenda for the future,

setting the agenda for how we can ensure that competition will benefit

consumers and businesses. I want to see Labour going into the next

election as the party of competition, the party of the

consumer, the party of hard-pressed working families who are struggling.

They need somebody to deal with those issues and that is what the

next Labour government will do. I thought you were meant to be the

party of competition? We are the party of competition. This is the

party that has given us some of these problems. We have an annual

competition review in the energy sector. We have already tackling

banking. What is interesting about his proposal is it is the smaller

ones who are less sure about this, the smaller banks who think that

this could inhibit the growth. It is the smaller energy companies who

think that through interfering with the market, through his price

freeze, that he will hinder competition. We spoke about this

before. It is a clever pitch that Ed Miliband is making. Under the guise

of token markets and claiming to be the party of competition, he is

creating the reason for state intervention? -- broken markets

Exactly, and it is state intervention that does not work

There is a proud tradition in government of smashing open cartels.

Teddy Roosevelt did it nearly a century ago. The problem is, in

those situations it was clear and obvious that the consumers were

suffering. I am not sure it is entirely obvious in this country. In

the banking sector we have free current accounts in the high street.

That is not true in all Western countries. In the energy sector our

bills are not outlandish they high. It is when we take taxes into

account the become unaffordable He has to make the case that consumers

are suffering as a result of these monopolies. Ed Miliband would say it

is not about state intervention but about making markets work. The piece

that was written by his intellectual Duryea about the significance and

the importance of Teddy Roosevelt. He was the Republican president in

the yearly -- in the early years of the last century. He wanted markets

to work. There is an interesting debate on Twitter this morning. Tim

Montgomerie is saying, why are we, the Conservative Party, not seen as

the party of Teddy Roosevelt? We are seen as the party of business.

There are smaller energy companies competing against the big six. In

banking, we have seen smaller companies coming. It was the Labour

government that created the big six energy companies. I think Teddy

Roosevelt also invaded Cuba and the Philippines. That could give us a

clue as to Ed Miliband's foreign policy. Nigel Farage has promised to

purge the party of its more extreme candidates ahead of the European

Council elections in May. But that may not be going so well. Listen to

this. The latest in this process is these homosexual laws. And Thomas I

shall manage. I believe that the Prime Minister, who was warned that

disasters would follow a three went in this direction, he has persisted,

and I believe that this is largely a repercussion from this godlessness

that he has persisted in. The instructions I have got from now on,

or is just not to answer in, and not to give interviews such as this one.

So you are ignoring them? I am not ignoring them. But you are talking

to me? You are the last one I shall be speaking to. I think it is too

late. Who would have thought it It is not global warming that is

causing the floods, it is gay marriage? That explains it. Last

year David Cameron offered a coded retraction of his statement that

UKIP is full of fruit cakes. I think he will be tempted to retract the

retraction. It is a warning to lots of Tories who think that their best

interests are served by flirting with lace -- with UKIP. Nigel Farage

is a very plausible guy, but several layers down, there are people who

are very different. Nigel Farage is saying that he's going to clear the

party out of what Mr Cameron called the fruitcakes. If he is true to his

word, Mr Sylvester's days in the party should they numbered. If Nigel

Farage falls under the bus, what is left of place -- what is left of

UKIP? People say that they like UKIP because unlike other politicians,

they speak their mind. But as it turns into more of a proper

organisation, people speaking their mind will be less acceptable. The

European elections are always a protest vote. People are not happy

with the elite. You will get people saying utterly ridiculous things

like that man in Henley-on-Thames. But this is a chance to vote against

the entire political establishment. I am not sure that comments like

that will make much of a difference. There are lots of arguments about

climate change. That was certainly a new one! They are the only big

protest party at the moment. Protest party is obviously hoovered up lots

of votes. We have got to be clear in European message that we are the

only party that can reform Europe and give people a proper choice the

first referendum in over 40 years. Mr Sylvester used to be a

conservative. You're probably glad to see the back of him? David

Cameron is right, there are probably a few fruitcakes around there. I

think that mainstream conservatives will understand that this is the

only party that can secure European reform and give people the choice

they have been arguing for. Whatever happens in the European elections,

it is a protest vote. We have almost run out of time. We will see this

week of Chris Rennard gets the party whip act. There is a battle brewing

between Danny Alexander and the common side of the Liberal Democrats

and the House of Lords. If he turns up on Monday and asks to be let in,

I they going to make a big scene at the gate of Parliament? And the

issue will stay in the papers? Yes, they are clearly nervous that Lord

Rennard might be tempted to mount a legal bid. That is all for today.

Thanks to all my guests. The Daily Politics is back on Monday at midday

on BBC Two. And I will be here again next week. Remember if it is Sunday,

it is the Sunday Politics.