26/01/2014 Sunday Politics West Midlands

Morning folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.

Ed Balls has gone socialist and fiscal Conservative in one speech.

He promises to balance the biggest bit of the budget. And to bring back

the 50p top tax rate. Political masterstroke, or a return to old

Labour? If you go to work by public

transport, chances are the price of your ticket has just gone up -

again. We'll speak to Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin. He's

our Sunday Interview. And it's been another wet week

across much of the UK, but what's the outlook according to this man?

This morning.This morning. Held in recent years by party

In the Midlands, is fracking coming to a town near you?

And with me - as always - the political panel so fresh-faced,

entertaining and downright popular they make Justin Bieber look like a

boring old has-been just desperate to get your attention. Nick Watt,

Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh, and they'll be tweeting quicker than a

yellow Lamborghini racing down Miami Beach. Being political nerds, they

have no idea what I'm talking about. Ed Balls sprung a surprise on us all

yesterday. We kinda thought Labour would head for the election with a

return to the 50p top rate of tax. But we didn't think he'd do it now.

He did! The polls say it's popular, Labour activists now have a spring

in their step. The Tories say it's a return to the bad old days of the

'70s, and bosses now think Labour is anti-business. Here's the Shadow

Chancellor speaking earlier this morning. I was part of a Government

which did very many things to open up markets, to make the Bank of

England independent, to work closely with business, but the reality is we

are in very difficult circumstances and because if I'm honest you,

George Osborne's failure in the last few years, those difficult

circumstances will last into the next Parliament. Business people

have said to me they want to get the deficit down, of course they do But

to cut the top rate... It is foolish and feeds resentment I want to do

the opposite and say look, pro-business, pro investment, pro

market, but pro fairness. Let's get this deficit down in a fairway and

make the reforms to make our economy work for the long term. What are the

political implications of Labour now in favour of a 50%, in practise 352%

top rate of tax? One of the political implications I don't think

exist is that they'll win new voters. I'm not sure many people out

there would think, I would love to vote for Ed Miliband but I'm not

sure if he wants to tax rich people enough. It will con Dale their

existing vote but I don't think it is the kind of, in the 1990s we

talked about triangulation, moving beyond your core vote, I don't think

it is a policy like that. If there has been a policy like that this

year, this month, it has been the Tories' move on minimum wage. I

thought Labour would come back with their own version, a centre-right

policy, and instead they have done this. I think we talk about the 35%

strategy that Labour supposed will have, I think it is a policy in that

direction rather than the thing Tony Blair or Gordon Brown would have

done. Where he was not clear is on how much it would raise. We know the

sum in the grand scheme of things isn't much, the bedroom tax was

about sending a message. What we are going to see is George Osborne and

Ed Balls lock as they try to push the other one into saying things

that are unpopular. The Tories, ?150,000 a year, that's exactly

where Ed Balls want them to be. All three main parties have roughly the

same plan, to run a current budget surplus by the end of the next

Parliament. George Osborne said ?12 billion of welfare cuts, hasn't said

how he is going to do it. Ed Balls is giving an idea that he is going

to restore this 50 persons rate The contribution of that will be

deminimus. It is not much, but what does it say about your values.

Because it is that package, it is cleverer than people think. Where

the challenge is is the question that Peter Mandelson posed at the

last election, which is can the Labour Party win a general election

if it doesn't have business on its side? That's the big challenge and

that's the question looking difficult for them this morning

Does it matter if Labour has business on its side. I thought the

most fascinating thing about this announcement is it came from the guy

mindful of business support, Ed Balls. When in opposition and when a

Minister and as a shadow as a result, he's been far more conscious

than Ed Miliband about the need not to alienate the CB Bill. In the

run-up of an election. This is a measure of Ed Miliband's strength in

the Labour Party, that his view of things can prevail so easily over a

guy who for the last 15 years has taken a different view. Eight out of

ten businesses according to the CBI don't want us to leave business

Business is in a bit of a cleft stick. Ed Miliband would like to see

businesses squealing, and Ed Balls is clearly not so comfortable on

that one. There's a difference on that. Mind you, they were squealing

this morning from Davos. They probably had hangovers as well. The

other thing they would say is this is not like Ed Balls thinks that 50p

is the optimal rate forever, it what go eventually. Isn't that what

politicians said when income tax was introduced? Yeah, in '97 Labour

regarded 40 persons as the rate where it would stay.

It's been a bad week for the Lib Dems. Again. Actually, it's been one

of the worst weeks yet for Nick Clegg and his party in recent

memory, as they've gone from talking confidently about their role in

Government to facing a storm of criticism over claims of

inappropriate sexual behaviour by a Lib Dem peer, Chris Rennard, and a

Lib Dem MP, Mike Hancock. Here's Giles with the story of the week. A

challenge to Nick Clegg's authority as he face as growing row over the

Liberal Democrat... I want everyone to be treated with respect by the

Liberal Democrats. We are expecting him to show moral leadership on our

behalf. A good man has been publicly destroyed by the media with the

apparent support of Nick Clegg. I would like Nick Clegg to show

leadership and say, this has got to stop. When Nick Clegg woke up on

Monday morning he knew he was in trouble, staring down the barrel of

a stand justify with Lord Rennard over allegations that the peer had

inappropriately touched a number of women. Chris Rennard thought he was

cleared. Nick Clegg wanted more I said if he doesn't apologise, he

should withdraw from the House of Lords. If he does that today, what

do you do then? I hope he doesn t. I think no apology, no whip. 2014 was

starting badly for the Liberal Democrats. Chris Rennard refused to

apologise, saying you can't say sorry for something you haven't

done. The and he was leaning towards legal action. Butch us friends

better defending Pym and publicly. This is a good, decent man, who has

been punished by the party, with the leadership of the party that seems

to be showing scant regard for due process. But his accusers felt very

differently. It is untenable for the Lib Dems to have a credible voice on

qualities and women's issues in the future if Lord Rennard was allowed

to be back on the Lib Dem benches in the House of Lords. Therein lay the

problem that exposed the weaknesses of the Lib Dem leaders. The party's

internal structures have all the simplicity of a circuit diagram for

a supercomputer, exposing the complexity of who runs the Liberal

Democrats? The simple question that arose of that was can the leader of

the Lib Dems remove a Lib Dem peer? The simple answer is no. The Lib Dem

whips in the Lords could do it but if enough Lib Dem peers disagreed,

they could overrule it. Some long-stand ng friends of roar

Rennard think he is either the innocent victim of a media

witch-hunt or at the least due process has been ridden over rough

shot by the leadership. Nobody ever did spot Lord Rennard as he didn't

turn up to the Lords, will citing ill health. But issued a statement

that ruled out an apology. He refused to do so and refused to

comply with the outcome of that report, so there was no alternative

but for the party to suspend his membership today. On Wednesday Nick

Clegg met Lib Dem peers, not for a crunch decision, but to discuss the

extraordinary prospect of legal action against the party by the man

long credited with building its success. The situation was making

the party look like a joke. One Tory MP said to one of my colleagues this

morning, the funny thing about the Liberal Democrats, you managed to

create a whole sex scandal without any sex. And we can laugh at

ourselves but actually it is rather serious. And it got more serious,

when an MP who had resigned the Lib Dem whip last year was expanded from

the party over a report into allegations of serious and unwelcome

sexual behaviour towards a constituent. All of this leaves the

Lib Dems desperately wishing these sagas had been dealt with long ago

and would now go away. Nick Clegg ended the week still party leader.

Lord Rennard, once one of their most powerful players, ended the week,

for now, no longer even in it. Giles on the Lib Dems' disastrous

week. Now, as you doubtless already know, on Tuesday Lib Dem MPs will

vote to choose a new deputy leader. You didn't know that? You do now.

The job of Nick Clegg's number two is to speak with a genuine Lib Dem

voice, untainted by the demands of coalition Government. At this point

in the show we had expected to speak to all three candidates for the

post, held in recent years by party veterans like Vince Cable and Simon

Hughes. We thought it being quite a significant week for the party, they

might have something to say. And here they are. Well that's their

pictures. For various reasons, all three are now unavailable. Malcolm

Bruce, he's reckoned to be the outsider. His office said he had a

"family commitment". Gordon Birtwistle, the Burnley MP, was

booked to appear but then told us, "I was at an event last night with

Lorely Burt" - she's one of the candidates - "and she told me it was

off". And Lorely Burt herself, seen by many as the red hot favourite,

told us: "Because of the Rennard thing we don't want to put ourselves

in a position where we have to answer difficult questions." How

refreshingly honest. Helen, how bad politically is all this for the Lib

Dems? What I think is the tragic irony of the Lib Dems is they've

been revealed as being too democratic. In the same way that

their party conference embarrassed Nick Clegg by voting sings that he

signed up to, and now everything has to be run past various

sub-committees first. Is it democratic or chaotic? It is

Byzantine. Mike Hancock was voluntarily suspended, and this week

he was properly suspended. It was new information into the public

domain that forced that. I'm already hearing Labour and Conservative

Party musing that if it is a long Parliament, we will form a minority

Government. It is a disaster for them. Voters like parties that

reflect and are interested this their concerns. Parties that are

self obsessed turn them off. The third party, if they carry on like

this, they'll be the fifth party in the European elections, so they have

got to draw a line under this. They do that, if they do, through

mediation. As I understand it, Chris Rennard,s who has go devoted his

entire life to the Liberal Democrats, and previously the

Liberal Party, is keen to draw a line under this. He is up for

mediation but he needs to know that the women that he has clearly

invaded their personal space, that there wouldn't be a possible legal a

action from them. The it is very difficult to see how you could

resolve that. Except he is threatening through his friends

these famous friends, to spill all the beans about all the party's sex

secrets. Isn't the danger for the Lib Dems, this haunts them through

to the European elections, where they'll get thumped in the European

elections? They'll get destroyed in the European elections, which keeps

it salient as a story over the summer. And it has implications for

Nick Clegg's leadership. He's done a good job until now, perhaps better

than David Cameron, of exercising authority over his party. He had a

good conference in September. Absolutely, and now the Lib Dems

have looked like a party without a leader or a leadership structure.

Part of that is down to the chaotic or Byzantine organisational

structure of the party. Part of it is Nick Clegg's failure to assert

himself and impose himself over events. Is it Byzantine or

Byzantine. It is labyrinthine. You don't get these words on the Today

programme. The cost of living has been back on the agenda this week as

Labour and the Tories argue over whether the value of money in your

pocket is going up or down. Well there's one cost which has been

racing ahead of inflation and that's the amount you have to pay to travel

by train, by bus and by air. Rail commuters have been hard hit over

the last four years, with the cost of the average season ticket going

up by 18% since January 2010, while wages have gone up by just 3.6% over

the same period. It means some rail users are paying high prices with

commuters from Kent shelling out more than ?5,000 per year from the

beginning of this month just to get to work in London. It doesn't

compare well with our European counterparts. In the UK the average

rail user spends 14% of their average income on trains. It is just

1.5% in Italy. Regulated fares like season tickets went up 3.1% at the

beginning of this month, and with ministers keen to make passengers

fought more of the bills, there are more fare rises coming down the

track. And Patrick McLoughlin joins me now for the Sunday Interview

Welcome. You claim to be in the party of hard-working people, so why

is it that since you came to power rail commuters have seen the cost of

their average season ticket going up in money terms by over 18% while

their pay has gone up in money terms by less than four? I would point out

that this is the first year in ten years that we have not had an above

inflation increase on fares. The Government accepts we have got to do

as much as we can to help the passengers. A big inflation increase

since 2010. This is the first year in ten years that it has not been

above RPI, but we are also investing huge amounts of money into the

railways, building new trains for the East Coast Main Line and the

great Western. We are spending 500 million at Birmingham station, this

is all increasing capacity, so we are seeing investments. Over the

next five years Network Rail will invest over ?38 billion in the

network structure. We also have an expensive railway and it is ordinary

people paying for it. A season ticket from Woking in Surrey,

commuter belt land in London, let's look at the figures. This is a

distance of over 25 miles, it cost over ?3000 per year. We have picked

similar distances to international cities.

The British commuter is being ripped off. The British commuter is seeing

record levels of investment in our railways. The investment has to be

paid for. We are investing huge amounts of money and I don't know

whether the figures you have got here... I'm sure they are likewise,

as you have managed to do... White -- ten times more than the Italian

equivalent. We have seen transformational changes in our

railway services and we need to carry on investing. We were paying

these prices even before you started investing. We have always paid a lot

more to commute in this country than our European equivalents. I'm not

quite sure I want to take on Italy is a great example. You would if you

were a commuter. You is a great example. You would if you

the other rates of taxation has to be paid as well. Isn't it the case

they are making profits out of these figures and using them to subsidise

cheaper fares back in their homeland? The overall profit margin

train companies make is 3%, a reasonable amount, and we have seen

a revolution as far as the railway industry is concerned.

a revolution as far as the railway 20 years we have seen passenger

journeys going from 750 million to 1.5 billion. That is a massive

revolution in rail. Let me look 1.5 billion. That is a massive

spokesperson for the German government, the Ministry of

transport. They are charging huge fares in

Britain to take that money back to subsidise fares in Germany. What do

you say to that? We are seeing British companies winning contracts

in Germany. The National Express are winning contracts to the railways.

What about the ordinary commuter? They are paying through the nose so

German commuters can travel more cheaply. We are still subsidising

the railways in this country, but overall we want to reduce the

subsidy we are giving. We are still seeing growth in our railways and I

want to see more people using them. Why do you increase rail fares at

the higher RPI measure than the lower CPI measurement? That is what

has always been done, and we have stopped. This is the first time in

ten years that we have not raised the rail figures above RPI. You

still link fares to RPI. You use the lower CPI figure when it suits you,

to keep pension payments down for example, but the higher one when it

comes to increasing rail fares. We are still putting a huge subsidy

into the rail industry, there is still a huge amount of money going

from the taxpayer to support the rail industry. I am not asking you

about that, I am asking you why you link the figures to the higher RPI

vesture Mark if we are going to pay for the levels of investment, so all

the new trains being built at Newton Aycliffe for the East Coast Main

Line and the great Western, ?3. billion of investment, new rolling

stock coming online, then yes, we have to pay for it, and it is a

question of the taxpayer paying for it all the -- or the passenger.

You have capped parking fines until the next election, rail commuters we

have seen the cost of their ticket has gone up by nearly 20%, you are

the party of the drivers, not the passengers, aren't you?

We are trying to help everybody who has been struggling. I think we are

setting out long-term plans for our railways, investing heavily in them

and it is getting that balance right. But you have done more for

the driver than you have for the user of public transport. I don t

accept that. They are paying the same petrol prices as 2011. This is

the first time in ten years that there has not been an RPI plus

rise. We are investing record amounts. Bus fares are also rising,

4.2% in real terms in 2010, at a time when real take-home pay has

been falling. This hits commuters particularly workers who use buses

on low incomes, another cost of living squeeze. I was with

Stagecoach in Manchester on Friday, and I saw a bus company investing in

new buses. Last week First ordered new buses. Part of your hard-working

families you are always on about, they are the ones going to work

early in the morning, and yet you are making them pay more for their

buses in real terms than they did before. They would be happier if

they could travel more cheaply. It is about getting investment in

services, it has to be paid for Why not run the old buses for five more

years? Because then there is more pollution in the atmosphere, modern

buses have lower emissions, and we are still giving huge support

overall to the bus industry and that is very important because I fully

accept that the number of people, yes, use the train but a lot of

people use buses as well. High-speed two, it has been delayed because 877

pages of key evidence from your department were left on a computer

memory stick, part of the submission to environmental consultation. Your

department's economic case is now widely regarded as a joke, now you

do this. Is your department fit for purpose? Yes, and as far as what

happened with the memory stick, it is an acceptable and shouldn't have

happened, and therefore we have extended the time. There has been an

extension in the time for people to make representation, the bill for

this goes through Parliament in a different way to a normal bill. It

is vital HS2 provides what we want. What I am very pleased about is when

the paving bill was passed by Parliament just a few months ago,

there was overwhelming support, and I kept reading there was going to be

70 people voting against it, in the end 30 people voted against it and

there was a good majority in the House of Commons. So can you give a

guarantee that this legislation will get onto the statute books? I will

do all I can. I cannot tell you the exact Parliamentary time scale. The

bill will have started its progress through the House of Commons by

2015, and it may well have concluded. The new chairman of HS2

said he can bring the cost of the line substantially under the budget,

do you agree with that? The figure is ?42 billion with a large

contingency, and David Higgins, as chairman of HS2, is looking at the

whole cast and seeing if there are ways in which it can be built

faster. At the moment across London we are building Crossrail, ?14.

billion investment. There was a report last week saying what an

excellent job has been done. Crossrail started under Labour.

Actually it was Cecil Parkinson in the 1990 party conference. You may

get HS2 cheaper if you didn't pay people so much, why is the

nonexecutive chairman of HS2 on ?600,000? And the new chief

executive on ?750,000. These are very big projects and we need to

attract the best people become so we are going for the best engineers in

the world to engineer this project. It is a large salary, there is no

question about it, but I'm rather pleased that engineers rather than

bankers can be seen to get big rewards for delivering what will be

very important pieces of national infrastructure. I didn't have time

to ask you about your passenger duty so perhaps another time. We are

about to speak to Nigel Mills and all of these MPs on your side who

are rebelling against the Government, how would you handle

them? We have got to listen to what our colleagues are talking about and

try to respond it. Would you take them for a long walk off a short

pier? I'm sure I would have many conversations with them. An

immigration bill to tack the immigration into the UK. When limits

on migration from Bulgaria and Romania were lifted this year there

were warnings of a large influx of migrant workerses from the two new

European countries. So far it's been more of a dribble than a flood. Who

can forget Labour MP Keith Vaz greeting a handful of arrivals at

Luton Airport. But it is early days and it is one of the reasons the

Government's introduced a new Immigration Bill. The Prime Minister

is facing rebellion from backbenchers who want tougher action

on immigration from abroad. Nigel Mills would reimpose restrictions on

how many Romanians and Bulgarians can come here. Joining me is Nigel

Mills, Conservative MP behind the amendment and Labour MP Diane

Abbott. Welcome. Nigel Mills, there hasn't been an influx of Romanians

and Bulgarians. Why do you want to restore these, kick these

transitional controls way forward to 2019? I don't think any of us were

expecting a rush on January 1st Andrew. I think we were talking

about a range of 250,000 to 350 000 people over five years. That's

obviously a large amount of people, especially when you think net

migration to the UK was well in excess of the Government's target of

tens of thousands last year. The real concern is that it would be

ever increasing our population, attracting lots of low-skilled,

low-wage people, which keeps our people out of work and wages down.

Did you accept that if you were to accept this, it would be in breach

of the Treaty of Rome, the founding principle of the European Union We

were trying to keep the restrictions that Bulgaria and Romania accepted

for their first seven years of EU membership, on the basis that when

we signed the treaty we weren't aware that we would have a huge and

catastrophic recession we are still recovering from. But you would be in

breach of the law, correct? The UK Parliament has a right to say we

signed this deal before the terrible recession, and we need a bit longer

in our national interest. It is worth noting that Bulgaria and

Romania haven't met all their accession requirements. The

Bulgarian requirement passed a law... So if they break the law it

is alright for us to break the law? Is we should be focusing on trying

to get 2. 4 million of our own in work, and 1 million people not in

work... Let me bring in Diane Abbott. Will you vote for this

amendment and why? It is in breach of the treaty. While I deplore MPs

that try to cause trouble, these MPs have been particularly mindless

because what they want to do wouldn't be legal. However, it is a

Tory internal brief, if I might say so. Maybe you can cause trouble by

voting for it. No, that would be going too far. Underlying it is a

real antagonism for David Cameron. They have had to hold off on this

bill until January. It was supposed to be debating before Christmas As

we speak they've not cut a deal so it could be pretty grus om. Nigel

Mills, what do you say to that I think there is a recognition that

there is a problem with the amount of migration from EU countries that

we need to tackle. We could try to achieve an annual cap perhaps,

longer limits on when countries get free movement. I think the debate is

moving in the right direction, but I think those people who are trapped

out of work and desperately looking for work want something to be done

now and not wait a few more years while we have more assessments

Andrews. People are worried about the level of immigration. They I it

is too high. That's the consensus in the country. We spoke to to

migration centre in Hackney and they said they are struggling to cope

with the number of people using their services. These are people

with problems with the law. In the past years EU migrants put in more

to the economy in taxation than they take out in benefits. When it comes

to free movement, which is agitating Nige em, that horse has bolted. We

signed a treaty. There is nothing people like Nigel Mills can do,

unless they want to rip their party apart, God forbid. Will you go as

far as to rip your party apart, Nigel Mills? Are you going to take

this all the way? Would you rather see this bill go down than your

amendment not be accepted? This is a very important bill. I think we all

want to see measures on the statute book, so the last thing we want to

see is this bill go down. We do need to set out clearly that we have real

concerns about the level of EU migration and something needs to be

done. Would you rather have the bill without your amendment or no bill at

all? I am hoping we can have the bill with the amendment. I know

that, but if you can't? Is that will depend on what the Labour Party

decide to do. They are talking tougher on immigration but will they

take action on it? Your party has been talking tough on immigration

but I will be surprised if an Ed Miliband Labour Party would vote for

egg in direct cameravention of the Treaty of Rome. It would make no

sense. Nigel Mills is wishing for the impossible. If I was a Tory I

would be wringing high hands. He hasn't ruled out crashing the bill.

That's incredible. Where will this end, Nigel Mills? We'll end with a

vote on Thursday. There's a lot of amendments people can use to show

their concern about migration. We want limited and proportionate

action, and that's what I am proposing. I want to see the bill on

the statute book, I want the restrictions on people who shouldn't

be here getting bank accounts and driving licences. I don't want to

crash this bill but there's more measures we need in it. Nigel Mills

thank you. You are going to be -- popping up I think on the Sunday

Politics East Midlands. Diane Abbott, thank you as well.

We're in for more heavy rain and high winds across the UK today. You

may remember that one UKIP councillor - he's since been

suspended - caused controversy last weekend by blaming the recent

flooding on the legalisation of gay marriage. Why didn't I think of

that? So who better than this man to bring you the unofficial forecast.

I'll be bringing you the late least UKIP weather from your area.

You're watching Sunday Politics. Also coming up in just over 20

minutes, I'll be looking at the week ahead with our political panel.

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

the Midlands. Today I'm joined by guests from the country and from the

city. Laurence Robertson is the

Conservative MP for rural Tewkesbury on the banks of the Severn and the

Avon ` and at this time of year often a bit too close for comfort!

Ann Lucas is the Labour leader of Coventry City Council, which after

Birmingham is this region's biggest local authority. Welcome both.

And it's in Coventry where we kick off this week, as the sorry and

lengthy saga of what will happen to the city's football club appears to

be heading for extra time. Sky Blues are playing their "home" Games in

Northampton at the moment, after an acrimonious dispute over unpaid rent

meant they left the Ricoh Arena. The Arena is part owned by Coventry City

Council. Plans for a brand`new stadium have been drawn up by the

football club but, as yet, they haven't revealed the exact location

` much to the annoyance of the fans. Ann, do you need to bang some heads

together or is yours one of heads that needs to be banged? We have a

stadium which is as people will know not just a football ground, it is an

Arena that has a foot `` a hotel, a casino, restaurants, anything you

could want. Except a football team. Well, we loved having them there.

You are a fan. Joining up a stadium with a football team would not seem

that hired. What is the difficulty? Coventry City under its current

ownership feel that they cannot lay there, unless they own Compleat

unfettered freehold ownership of the Arena and all its surrounds. That is

not for sale. Laurence, you are a Conservative MP. Birmingham owned

the NEC. Do you think councils should own stuff like this or should

they be selling it of? It is not for me to say what happens in Coventry,

but I think, brig governance up and down the land, local Government and

the Government itself probably own too many things. But I think if

council assets are sold off, it should be for capital and then they

get revenue from that. One cannot live off capital. So I think there

needs to be a sensible approach to these things. In Gloucestershire

they owed 80 farms, why should the council owned farms? Farms give

people the opportunity to get on the farming ladder or get into the

industry perhaps at an early age. But yes, there are those who say

that the councils should sell those farms. There has to be a difference

between capital and revenue. You cannot live off the capital, as I

have said. The offing, our property portfolio is there so that we can

make profit from capital. `` very often. But do you think you are

going to solve this problem any time soon? It doesn't look like it is

going to be sold very quickly, I am sad to say.

Coming up: Unemployment is down in the Midlands, the biggest drop in

the country, and the number of people in work is up. So, are we

building a sustainable recovery or will there be a sting in the tail

with added interest? We'll have more on that later in the programme.

Is fracking on the way? The official map from the Department of Energy

and Climate Change shows most of the Midlands is "under consideration"

for shale gas extraction. It also shows that in parts of Shropshire

and Staffordshire licences are already in place. But suggestions

that there could be a boom here are wide of the mark. Two of the

country's leading energy companies have told this programme they've no

interest in this part of the world, and our local authorities have given

a lukewarm response to the incentives being offered by the

Government. Ben Godfrey's been drilling down into the issue.

At Keele University in Staffordshire, they've been

searching for coal`bed methane. It's a natural gas, sitting in a coal

seam some 2,000 feet beneath us. What we would like to do is provide

our gas and potentially our electricity from our own resources.

The West Midlands is seeing more gas exploration of this kind ` this

expert says it's preferred to the controversial technique of fracking,

where gas is forced from shale rock. You don't actually have to produce

artifactual fractures. Coal is relatively fractured anywhere. ``

artificial. Fracking involves drilling into

shale and widening tiny cracks, some less than a millimetre wide, which

hold molecules of gas. Water, sand and chemicals are pumped in at high

pressure ` to flush the gas to the surface.

This Government map has caused some confusion. The blue areas show

potential sites for shale gas drilling, and it covers most of our

region. The yellow areas, which cover parts of Staffordshire and

Shropshire, are currently licensed for gas exploration. So will

fracking come here? Staffordshire and Shropshire seem

primed for fracking. It's in fireball? Probably not, because the

shale here has not been the temperature required to make gas. ``

is it viable. It is unlikely to have prospective commercial quantities of

gas. Dart Energy wants to start fracking

in the UK. The multinational operates a third of the 33 licensed

sites looking for oil and gas in the West Midlands. But their boss says

they won't be fracking here. This is a less attractive area from a

technical ex``` perspective. From our work so far we think it is

unlikely to be a significant player in unconventional gas.

Another energy firm, Cuadrilla ` which drew protests at its Lichfield

HQ last year ` is also ruling it out here.

Environmental campaigners aren't convinced by those denials ` and

claim fracking poses a huge health risk. Once they have dogged the

holes, they have already put harmful chemicals into the earth. `` God. ``

out. `` dug. Councils in the West Midlands tell

us they've had no applications for fracking. But Staffordshire County

Council is open to the idea if the benefits are right. We have to look

closely at what the Government is offering. That is balanced against

the need for cheaper energy. There needs to be real advantages to the

community. There's certainly no political

consensus ` fracking hasn't been ruled out in Staffordshire, but take

a step over the border and it's a different story. Conservative`led

Cheshire East Council, which incidentally includes George

Osborne's constituency, says fracking is not for them.

The Prime Minister believes onshore gas has a big future. As for

fracking? Well, you don't need to dig too deep to see that the West

Midlands isn't really on the map. Well, joining us now is Professor

Alister Scott of Birmingham City University, who's Professor of

Spatial Planning and Governance, Birmingham City University. Which

I'm guessing means environmental planning expert. You haven't got a

problem with fracking, more the way the Government is going about it.

What is the difficulty you see? The Government are very positive towards

fracking to the extent that they are saying that anybody who opposes it

is somehow a rational. And even we have heard Trotskyist. We have heard

that fracking is the best thing since sliced bread, mooted by the

Government on one hand, and then on the other hand we have environmental

campaigners claiming environmental catastrophe. So for people like me

it is about thinking about what evidence is in the public domain

that allows people to make an informed decision about the impacts

of fracking for them. But there is nothing wrong with Government being

a cheerleader for technology. Well, we don't actually have at the moment

a coherent energy policy. So fracking is being evolved within

this gap in policy, and somehow it might appear as a sort of

opportunist cash and grab. It doesn't fit neatly with any sort of

long`term commitment or strategy. We have had those blue map, which could

be explored. The thing that will alarm people? `` do you think. The

process you get from an initial application to explore to a final

approved let's go fracking, is a context procedure that involves both

planning applications `` complex. And also licenses and environmental

permits. That goes through different stages, so from initial exploration

to assessment and then the final, yes, there are resources. It sounds

like there is protection there. What are you worried about? The

protection through `` is through a planning process which looks at a

particular application. The problem is that the planning system is very

good at looking at the impact in a particular area for that

application, but bad at looking at the strategic case. If we have the

Government saying the case for fracking is unassailable, and David

Cameron is saying it is going to happen, that creates a political

climate where those strategic issues are already being decided. I am

saying that people expressing concern against fracking have no

forum or place to enter those discussions in a proper debate,

because the planning application process does not include those as

valid considerations. Laurence, Ann, would you welcome

fracking in Tewkesbury and Coventry? My instinct is no. Because as a

council leader I have a duty of care for the people of Coventry, and an

expert who wants to do it will tell me it is great, and somebody who is

not sure will tell me it isn't. I am no expert, and I am not prepared to

take that risk on the half of my people. And Tewkesbury? They should

not be any risks taken, everything done should be safe. `` there should

not be. We have a company looking to build a nuclear power plant not far

outside my constituency. We have to address the fact that the production

of electricity from nuclear is gradually reducing, and we know net

importers of gas. There may be a squeeze on energy production in the

future. We are not going back to living in caves with candles, so we

have to produce electricity. You were an energy spokesman. Do you

think we handled the debate well? I think the last Government should

have brought nuclear replacement on earlier than they did. I think this

issue should have been looked at, but we have to move from here. If

the Government over selling it? It is not necessarily going to be the

solution to all the problems. I am not pretending that it is. The one

concern I have got is that David Cameron lobbied effectively against

the EU, which was trying to create extra regulation or a directive to

take on board the particular issues that are raised by fracking, and in

the research that was done as part of the commission's work here, they

identified that the kind of regulatory framework had gaps that

currently are not provided for, so strategic planning, issues to do

with methane and the risk assessment aspects, and therefore it begs the

question why is the Government trying to rush this through and

actually wipe away regulations, with the idea that Britain's open for

business? I don't think it is being rushed through, there has to be

serious considerations for the environment. I don't think we need

the you to tell us that, we have been carrying out `` we have had a

nuclear industry for a long time, one of the first plants in the world

was built here. So I don't think we need EU to tell `` Europe to tell us

here. You have called this debate a pantomime. Was that about better? It

makes for better discussion about the issues. `` was that a bit

better. The West Midlands may not be suitable for fracking, but the West

Midlands is affected upstream from reverse.

Thank you for coming in. Unemployment in the West Midlands is

down again, big time. In the last quarter the drop here was bigger

than anywhere else. At the same time more people are in jobs ` so what's

not to like? As always, the devil's in the detail. The West Midlands has

pockets of unemployment that are higher than any other part of the

country, and a new survey from the TUC claims it's actually harder to

find a job now in this region than it was four years ago. Here's our

Business correspondent Peter Plisner.

Look beyond Birmingham's ultra`modern buildings, and it's a

place where there's a serious unemployment problem. At 16%, the

second city jobless total is more than double the UK average. There is

not much around here for our age, because you need the experience for

it and it is good to get the experience in college.

Overall the latest figures show welcome news for the region.

Unemployment stands at 222,000 ` that's a drop of 32,000 on the last

quarter. But at 8.1% the West Midlands jobless total is still

above the national average. A report from the TUC released on Monday

suggests it's actually getting harder, not easier, to find a job in

the region. When the Chancellor talks about a UK recovery, regions

such as the West Midlands are massively disadvantaged. Employment

chances have been reduced, and the rebalancing of the economy the

Chancellor promised has not taking `` taken place.

The picture isn't a simple one, but generally the economic numbers look

good. The problem for the Government, is will positive numbers

on the page translate into a feel`good factor at the polls?

It's what I ask all MPs these days ` forget the numbers, are your

constituents feeling this recovery? They do feel that things are slowly

getting better. We came from a very difficult situation that did hit a

lot of people. I think the Prime Minister has made it clear we are

not clear yet, but I think dude `` things are improving. We have on

deployment figures falling and employment figures increasing and

very much so in the private sector. `` employment figures. So what about

the Midlands being left behind? There has always been a special

challenge for the inner cities, and that is true today as it was 30

years ago. But that doesn't mean we should not try to improve the

economic situation for people throughout the country. Yes, there

are pockets of the country where it is more difficult to find jobs,

where it is more difficult to make your way through. I fully denies

that. But over all I think the country `` full Iraqi lives that. I

think the country is `` I fully recognise that. We came from a very

difficult situation. In Coventry do you recognise that up the

assessment? If I were to knock doors in my ward until people they are a

lot but of land they were last year, I would have to run pretty

quickly. `` better off than they were. Entry has unemployment of 9%,

so we are above average, `` Coventry, and we are working really

hard locally with our job shop to try and place people. But we are

working from a base, don't forget, way back in the 80s I watched

Coventry lose something like 60,000 jobs in the space of six months. We

get hit every time there is a downturn. It is always the inner

cities, the people who cannot afford it. The Government's been making a

big play of these figures. Perhaps in a few months though, people might

start to feel it. If tomorrow, I honestly believe these were the

right policies `` I believe these were the right policies, I would be

saying, hands up, we got it wrong. Yes, there are new job

opportunities, zero hours jobs, temporary jobs. There are people

working full`time who cannot make ends meet. I am a fourth generation

of women who have been able to buy their own property. My daughter has

bought those. Sadly I wonder if my ground `` granddaughter will be able

to buy those. And speaking of jobs, it's time to

meet the woman taking over this one next week. BBC Midlands Today's

Elizabeth Glinka has our regular round`up of the political week in

the Midlands in 60 seconds. With the economy going up a gear,

the Treasury's Chief Secretary Danny Alexander was in Solihull to have a

look around the home of the booming car makers Jaguar Land Rover.

The Labour MP for Perry Barr Khalid Mahmood is recovering after a kidney

transplant operation at Birmingham's Queen Elizabeth Hospital.

MPs have voted to release secret papers in the case of the Shrewsbury

24. The group ` including actor Ricky Tomlinson ` were convicted for

picket line disturbances in a builder's strike in the early '70s.

The Stasi published their file after the Berlin Wall came down. I think

we can. `` their files. West Brom's Nicolas Anelka faces a

ban, and shirt sponsor Zoopla is ending its deal with the club over

the player's goal celebration ` which is regarded by some

anti`Semitic. And a Conservative Party report into

a Nazi`themed stag do organised by Cannock MP Aidan Burley has

described his conduct as "offensive and unacceptable."

And Elizabeth Glinka will be here in this very seat for next Sunday's

programme. Some said Aidan Power `` Aidan Burley's stag party was just a

bit of fun. I used to say to my children, can you see anybody

laughing? I don't think it was fun. Ian Austin said Aidan's version was

misleading. I will leave it between Aidan and the Chief Whip to discuss

it. Nobody should do anything in public life that is likely to offend

anybody else. The details are to have to leave to those two. Nicolas

Anelka, was that just stupidity as well? I don't know anything about

him except, and it is very true, if you are in the public eye and it

doesn't matter what job you do, you have to think very carefully about

your actions and reactions. Because it has caused's if you are Joe

average on the street, perhaps nobody will take any notice. This

has cost West Bromwich ?3 million. That is a huge amount. You were

involved in Northern Ireland. Symbols matter, don't they? Yes, and

it won't think is to have respect `` the important thing is to have

respect for the other side's viewpoints and history, whilst

retaining the right to celebrate your own tradition. In Northern

Ireland there is the duty to care for each other's views, but also

respect your own tradition and celebrated.

Many thanks to Laurence and to Ann for joining us today. Next Friday

BBC Radio Stoke will be looking at what HS2 will mean for Staffordshire

as the public consultation over the controversial rail project comes to

an end. And on BBC WM tomorrow morning, Pete Morgan at Breakfast

will be looking into a new report that says Birmingham's got more

people claiming Jobseeker's Allowance than any other big UK city

` something we touched on earlier. But for us for this week it's the

end of the line, I'm afraid, and that can mean only one thing ` it's

time to rejoin Andrew Neil. constituency, very pleased. Andrew,

back to you. UKIP leader Nigel Farage is never

far away from controversy, but this week he's been outdoing himself He

was hit over the head with a placard by a protester in Kent, provoked

outrage by saying women with children are worth less to city

firms, and said the ban on owning handguns was 'crackers'. He also

seemed less than sure of his party's own policies when I interviewed him

on the Daily Politics. And the story that got everyone talking was the

suggestion by a UKIP councillor that flooding is linked to gay marriage.

We'll talk about all of that in a moment, but first, over to Nigel

with the weather. Weather for all areas of the British Isles but

definitely not "Bongo Bongo Land." You may have heard about a storm in

a tea cup developed when you kip councillor in Oxfordshire blamed the

floods on the gay marriage Bill The old party is focusing on the view of

UKIP members like him, even though he had said a sell yuj of things

before when a Tory councillor. How quickly things change depending on

when the blouse. There are occasional barmy views by people of

all persuasions. In Whitby a Labour councillor claimed of fathered a

child with an extra terrorist ral, and said his real mother was a

foot green alien. And in Wales a councillor

thinking about heading off for the slopes, there were flurries of

embarrassment for the Tories after Aidan Burly organised a Nazi skiing

party in a resort. Anyone heading to Brussels, perhaps

on the gravy train, watch out for hot air.

In Britain temperatures are rising ahead of the European elections in

May. It could get stormy, so advise light aircraft. Watch out for

outbreaks of common sense, and no chance of cyclonic fruit cakes. Back

to you, Andrew, with the rest of the Sunday Politics.

Nick, if it was any other party that had bon through the past week it

would be in meltdown. And maybe it is harming UKIP and maybe it isn't.

What do you think? That just shows, that great weather forecast, Prince

Charles now has a rival to be an excellent weather forecaster, as

does the Duchess of Cornwall. It shows why Nigel Farage is the fefr

candidate to the European elections. Our invitation to the British people

to kick the establishment. The establishment have spent five years

that the European Parliament is a waste of time, so who are you going

to vote for? A Nigel Farage type of person. What was important about

your eadviceration of Nigel Farage on Daily Politics is that when it

came to the substance, they flounder. But the point about that

party is they may have the thinnest set of policies, but people know

what they stand for more than any other parties - get out of Europe, a

grammar school in every town. If any other leading politician called for

an end to the ban on handguns, at a time when we've seen these appalling

gun deaths in the United States now almost one every week in some

terrible siege in a school. It would be a crisis. It seems to wash off

him. He's got congenital foot-and-mouthitis. Straight into

another wild nothing to do with why people might vote UKIP. I don't

think people are desperate to have handgun licences back in this

country. It is such an unusual phenomenon, UKIP, that if this was a

Tory or a Labour or a Lib Dem saying it, we've seen the damage done to

the Lib Dems on a much more serious manner, we would say this is

terminal. But maybe it adds to this image that we are not like the other

parties. I think that is it. We keep waiting for these scandals and

embarrassments to do damage to UKIP's poll ratings, but it's not

working. It is ultimately because if you are an antiestablishment party,

if you are an anti-system party the rules of the game which apply to the

establishment parties don't apply to you. And the more ramshackle and

embarrassing you are, the more authentic you seem. It what be take

something for them not to finish second in May. Do they spend the

following 12 months sinking in the poll snoos And George Osborne's

strategy is fame everything as Labour versus the Conservatives The

electorate will have their fun in May. Maybe the Tories will be beat

into third place but in thejection is that -- but in the general

election it is Labour versus the Tories. The Conservative Party will

run around, 46 letters to Graham Brady, a leadership contest. That

sort of scenario. UKIP, if it rules well in the European elections,

could cause big trouble for Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg couldn't it?

The big point about this, David Cameron said this is not a political

party but a pressure group. This is the way to look at UKIP, and the way

it is used by people in the right of the party, who say we have to do

this. I like the policy of painting the trains in their old liveries. It

would be like my old train set. I like the bigger passports.

Pre-GNER... And London and Midland. I used to be a train spotter.

Gordon Birtwhistle has been on the phone. Good to know you are watching

but pity you are not here. He wanted to clarify he had constituency

commitments to prevent him coming on the show to talk about becoming

leader of the party, but he didn't dispute anything we said on the

show. Yesterday, Ed Balls said that

housing investment will be a central priority for the next Labour

Government. It's a big issue, as the lack of new homes pushes up the the

price of owning or renting. Well, tomorrow the Tories will announce

what they say is the most ambitious programme of affordable

housebuilding for 20 years. The Government sees housing as a really

important part of the economy. That's why we are announcing a 23

billion package for 165,000 new affordable homes. So individual

builders, councils, housing associations can bid for that money.

Phase one, which we are halfway through at the moment, we've built

170,000 houses. 99,000 already coming out of the ground, so we ve

made real progress on that. So, 165,000 new, affordable homes. It is

a lot. Let me add three more words. Over three years. It is not such a

lot. It is not, and Labour's commitment is 200,000 homes a year

and even that isn't enough. The problem here is that the vest

interest is with people who already have homes. They have a vote in the

system through the planning regulations. In London there is a

gap in the hedge through Richmond Park through which you should be

able to see St Paul's Cathedral That's why you cannot build homes

where you want them. I don't think we want to build homes over Richmond

Park. He wasn't saying that. That's dies an Tyne -- that's Byzantine.

You've got to deal with supply, which is why Labour is talking about

200,000 a year, and what George Osborne has done with supply is

helping with demand. We know the Help to Buy Scheme is pretty

dangerous, and Mark Carney is keen to put the break on that. If you are

to deal with supply, you have to do radical things. Chris Huhne talked

about on brownfield sites you can tax people who are holding the land

as if the development has taken place. Then if you are really going

to deal with it you have to talk about the greenfield sites, and you

have to deal with the garden cities argument, which is too much for the

Tories. All the parties seem to agree building new houses is a

political winner. I hope that they are right. I'm not sure they are.

The housing market is the example of what economists call the insider

in-outsider problem. People who are already homeowners have no rational

incentive to vote for more housing stock. Even if you leave aside the

Conservative arable objections, if you are a homeowner there is an

interest to stick with the planning promise that we have. So then we are

stuck between a rock and a hard place. Not only are we growing at

the moment but our population is growing. I've seen projects that in

quite quickly we will overtake Germany and become the largest

populated country in Europe. If that's the case we've got to build

homes. We have. If you look at Tower Hamlets in London, the population is

r ging higher than the number of dwelling. Classically the theory's

been young people are most affected by this and they don't vote much.

But when their parents have young Johnny stuck at home at 37, that's

an electoral issue. That's why the garden cities project is

interesting, because they finance themselves. You zone it for

development, it is worth ?2 million an acre and then you can build on

it. But who is going to want the greenfield sites gone. And how

quickly can we build garden cities today? Some were started before the

Town and Country Planning Act. I've read stats about the way Chinese and

Japanese are building houses and they were slower than that. Here's a

thought, sticking on the housing theme. Ed Miliband came up with the

energy freeze, a populist interventionist move. Then the use

it or lose it to land developers. Then breaking up the banks. Now the

50p tax rate. How much would you put on Labour coming up for rent

controls? That's already a big split. They are split already on it.

They have. In London it is a popular policy. It might not play well in

the rest of the country. I would say 50-50 on that. I think Labour

supporting rent controls like the Tories having a go at welfare. The

policy may be individually popular but it sends an impression about the

party which might be less attract active. It confirms underlying

suspicions that vote these guys into power and suddenly they are

tampering with the private economy. The memories of the '70s when

Governments tried and failed to do that. It is riskier than a

superficial reading of the polls would suggest. One to watch? I think

they are looking at it. That was the key message of the Ed Balls speech

on housing, is looking at supply and how you get to that 200,000 figure a

year, which is substantially more than what Kris Hopkins is talking

about. What we didn't get to talk about, remember we had Michael

Wilshaw on, the Chief Inspector of Schools. We all consumed was Mr

Gove's man, the Education Secretary's man. Now according to

the Sunday Times he is spitting blood about the way Mr Gove and his

office are speaking about him behind the scenes. We've checked the quotes

and he stands by them, so I think we'll have to have the head of

Ofsted back on the programme. If you are watching, we're here. All that

to the Lib Dems who didn't come on today.

That's all for today. Thanks to all my guests. The Daily Politics is

back on Monday at midday on BBC Two, and I'll be here again next week.

Remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.

Britain, with 120,000 soldiers is now at war with Germany

This would be the first truly modern war.

and resolve of entire populations against each other.