13/04/2014 Sunday Politics West Midlands

Aternoon folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics. As MPs head off for

their Easter break, campaigning for the European elections in six weeks'

time gets underway. In a Sunday Politics special, we'll debate the

issues at stake on May 22nd with senior party figures from the

Conservatives, Labour, Liberal Democrats, and UKIP. And as ever

we'll be discussing the week ahead with our panel of top political

In the Midlands, what happens to commentators.

In the Midlands, what happens to your health services when doctors

demand a shake`up? It is newspapers which some claim are

politically slanted and not impartial about informing people of

local services. So all that to come between now and

quarter to four and for the next thirty minutes or so we'll be

debating the European elections Here in the studio we have Syed

Kamall, leader of the Conservatives in the European Parliament, Richard

Howitt, chair of the Labour group of MEPs, Sarah Ludford, deputy leader

of the Lib Dems in Europe, and Patrick O'Flynn, UKIP's director of

communications. Welcome to you all. In a moment, all four will give us

their opening pitch for the elections. A little earlier they

drew lots to decide who'll go first. And that privilege goes to Syed

Before that, though, here's a quick reminder of what all the fuss is

about. The vote to choose members of the

European Parliament takes place on Thursday the 22nd of May. The same

day as local elections are held in England and Northern Ireland. The UK

sends 73 England and Northern Ireland. The UK

sends NTP is to Brussels. And the vote is a form of proportional

representation. In total, there are 751 MEPs from the 28 member states.

What do they do all day? The European Parliament's power has

grown. A vet of the EU commissioners and they can amend, approve or

reject nearly all EU legislation and the EU budget. Some laws MEPs have

been responsible for include price caps on mobile phone chargers,

banking regulation and cover food regulation two -- labelling.

Syed Kamall, you have 30 seconds. Europe cannot go on as it is. Europe

needs to change. And our relationship with Europe needs to

change. Only the Conservatives have a plan to deliver that change and of

the British people and in-out referendum. Labour and the Lib Dems

will not and UKIP simply cannot Only the Conservatives will offer

the three yards, with Conservative MEPs working alongside a

conservative Prime Minister. For, really is and above all a

referendum. Sarah Ludford is next. Your choice is simple. If you think

Britain is better off in Europe vote for the Liberal Democrats. The

Lib Dems are the only party of Ian, fighting to keep Britain in Europe

and in work. There is nothing patriotic about UKIP's desire to

pull-out. That is playing Russian roulette with Britain's economy and

jobs. The Conservatives are flirting with exit and Labour lacks the

courage to speak up. Thought Liberal Democrat on May the 22nd to say in

Europe for jobs and security. Sarah Ludford. Next, Richard Howitt from

Labour. The European elections are about who represents you. They are

not a referendum on a referendum. Labour MEPs believe in putting jobs

and growth first. A guarantee to help young people into work,

reforming energy markets so that bills are brought down for good

Labour believes in reform in Europe, but within. It is David Cameron who

is risking your job and Britain s prosperity because of divisions in

his own party. Labour MEPs put British interests first. Our fourth

opening statement from Patrick O'Flynn. The EU is old hat. It is a

declining regional trade bloc in an era of global trade. It is a

20th-century political project designed to prevent conflict in

Europe that is now reawakening old hostilities. It is an attempt to

force on the European people European this as their primary

collective identity. It has hollowed out British democracy and now we do

not even control our own borders. That is why you should vote UKIP.

That is the opening statements. Let's get on with the debate. Why

should people vote in the selections? If you vote UKIP, we can

deliver an earthquake that will rock the foundations of British politics

and the European political class. We can send a signal to Europe that

Britain has had enough, that Britain wants to retain its nation state

status and regain political power and the ability to forge trading

deals across the world. Britain leading Europe to freedom twice in

the last century through bloodshed. We feel that a UKIP win in those

elections could help Britain set an example to lead European nation

states back to free assembly again. Syed Kamall, isn't it the case that

many Tory voters will vote you clip to keep you honest, to keep your

feet to the fire? Whatever you think of the European Parliament or the

EU, the fact is that the European Parliament as equal power with the

28 governments of the EU. When David Cameron delivered the first cut to

the EU budget, the first ever cut, he needed a strong team of

Conservative MEPs working alongside him. But many of your supporters

will vote for UKIP for the reasons I gave. Many will vote Liberal

Democrat. Not very many. Many of our supporters will vote for us because

we are the only party trying to change the EU and offer reform. We

have offered renegotiation and a referendum. And how would you vote

in such a referendum? We have no idea whether he would vote yes or

no. Let him answer. I will answer that question. If the EU continues

on this road, towards a United States of Europe, and if there was

no change at the time of the referendum, then I would probably

vote to leave. You have no confidence in David Cameron? We

Javier Culson opportunity to read negotiate our relationship with

Europe and the Conservatives are at the forefront of that agenda. David

Cameron have not given a list of demands. He said that if things do

not change, he will probably vote to leave, is that right? If at the time

of the referendum, things had not changed, I would vote to leave and

we have a golden opportunity to perform the agenda. Richard, the

last time the British people had a say on this was over 40 years ago.

Under a Labour government. Which was deeply divided on the issue. And

that was a say on the common market. Today's EU is a very different

animal from the common market. Why can we not, under another Labour

government, have another vote? First of all, we want it to be more than a

free trading area. We make no apologies about that. But in the

elections because this is half of Britain's exports and investment. If

you care about your job and business, you cannot hear from the

party of government that they probably want you to leave because

the CBI, the engineering employees in Federation and the chimp of

commerce, 80% of them say it is necessary to stay in. So why not

give us a vote? When David Cameron says he wants to repatriate social

powers, he means takeaway maternity rights and holidays. If the case is

so strong, why not give us an in-out vote? David Miliband has said that

there will be a referendum if there was a proposal to change powers Why

wait? This is based on a series of reforms. Labour has a set of

reforms. David Cameron is silent about what they would be. That is

because he knows that if he put them forward, they would either be

unsatisfactory to his Eurosceptic backbenchers and he would be out of

a job, or they would be unacceptable to European leaders. Why is your

leader missing in action? Ed Miliband is unable to say even the

positive things that you are saying. He has run away from the argument.

He actually said there would not be a referendum in his time.

For a conservative to say they will have a referendum but not give the

reforms, it is a mistake. Nick Clegg gave Nigel Farage a huge opportunity

in that debate. He said that the Eurosceptic view was to leave

Britain like Billy no mates. I can say that he is the best qualified

person to say that. Sarah Ludford, you have said that lots of people

are going to vote Lib Dem but that is not what the polls are saying.

You are 7% in two polls this morning. Eclectic's decision to

champion Europe has been a disaster for you. You face wet out. We swayed

a lot of people our way with Nick Clegg's debate. Where is the

evidence? We are the only party that is completely united, saying that we

are wanting to stay in. It is essential because formally and jobs

are supported by our trade with the EU. Linked to the EU. We are finding

a lot of moderate conservative voters are actually fed up with the

Tories being split and divided all over the place. Syed Kamall saying

that we might vote in rout. -- in or out. We are consistent. A poll in

London showed that 18% would vote for us. I am delighted about that.

London is not the whole country it may surprise you. We need to move on

to immigration, an important issue. We are a member of the EU and the

rules say that with a few caveats, our fellow EU citizens are free to

come here if they want. Why can we not just accept that? Britain has a

proud record when it comes to immigration. We have been open to

people across the world for centuries. But we welcome people who

come to our country to contribute to pay taxes and two wards are a

society positively. But there are three real concerns that we have to

address. The first one is numbers, and secondly people who may come

here not to work but for benefits, and thirdly, getting a hang of the

numbers. I think it is shameful that only this week the office for

National said that they did not collect sufficient figures under a

Labour government. 350,000 extra people came in and they did not

count the numbers. That is the size of a city like Cardiff. That is

shameful. 350,000 came from all over the place. Do you accept the free

movement of peoples within the EU? I accept and am open to people who

want to come here and contribute. In the same way... Do you accept the

free movement of peoples within the EU? In our manifesto, we have said

it is an issue for reform. We have to make sure that people are coming

here to work and contribute positively, not simply to come here

and take advantage of the system. I will tell you what else is

shameful. What is shameful is David Cameron making a pledge to the

British people on an issue that they really care about, to bring net

immigration down to the tens of thousands a year, having no means of

fulfilling that pledge. And we see now it is back up to 212,000 a year

because we have no volume control and no quality control from

immigration from our neighbours And that is a disgrace. How could UKIP

address that issue? Because we would leave the EU. How? Tell me how. You

do not have a single member of Parliament. He will not get a single

member of Parliament. How are you... ? TUC are hoping to get an

MEP. What do you say? -- he is here today hoping to get an MEP. All of

-- almost 2 million Brits live and work in the rest of the EU. Is that

worth having? The majority are wealthy, retired people. Why do not

object to bilateral agreements with countries with similar living

standards to us. France, the Netherlands, that works fine. But

these three people want Turkey to join the EU, 75 Na Li and people

running our country, only 10% of which... Syed Kamall is Michael year

to say whether they are in favour of free movement for work, not for

benefits... That is what I'm saying. You said you were unable to

be clear. That leaves 2 million British people absolutely unsure as

to whether they would have a right to continue to live in other

countries. It is a two-way street. You are putting those people in a

state of uncertainty. EU migrants have been good for the British

economy and contribute far more than they take out in services and

benefits. One in seven businesses were founded in -- by migrants. And

they cannot just turn up and claim benefits. The coalition government

has legislated to make sure that they cannot claim for three months.

They will not be able to claim for more than six months. Richard

Howitt, Jack Straw said it was A spectacular mistake for Labour to

allow EU migrants from Poland and Hungary to work in the UK from

2004." Why should we trust a party that makes spectacular mistakes and

hasn't apologised for it? We accept it is a mistake and I apologise We

make a firm commitment for new EU states we will put down transitional

controls. When I listen to the Conservatives and UKIP trying to

re-write history, saying immigration was out of control, uncontrolled,

open door, we hear it over and over again. It is not true. Anyone who

was around at the time... Come on, Richard. Hold on, you undercounted

by 350,000. You were letting 2 million in over the years, an

under-counted by 350,000 people you didn't know came in. You should have

tightened the benefit rules. The Conservative MEP today has, in four

years in government in Britain, is trying it blame the previous Labour

Government over the fact they won't count people in or people out.

Yvette Cooper - it is not easy for people to come to the country and

benefits are changing, changing the habitual residence test and we are

going to say that migrants can't come and claim child benefit if

their children are outside the country. Labour a has shown they

have listened to concerns but we say it is a stronger, better, country

because it is diverse and multicultural snoo.d this is fantasy

politics from all the Peters. They are committed to a system with no

volume control and no quality control. You talk about benefits as

if it is only out of work benefits. In work benefits cost a lot of money

for the British taxpayer. Big businesses bring in minimum wage

workers. It is ?5,000 per perschool place What are you going to do? Have

all the pensioners come back to Britain? How will will you fund the

health care? Do you really think Spain and pour tu ghal their current

situation, are going to turn their backs on British property owners

with wealth? -- Portugal. They might not wanting pensioners to use their

health service. Pensioners often come back to Britain to use the

health service. You have shown it represents wealthy people's

interests. A second Conservative Party. Hang on a minute... Blue

collar wages were down. They want it character for the National Health

Service, have cuts that go farther and comprehensive education. This is

a debate on the wider politics between Conservatives and UKIP and

Labour will... You can't both talk time. UKIP - they haven't thought it

through, thousand they will have trade access in the EU, hasn't

thought how they will have trade deals that the Liberal Democrats

support, like with the United States: Would you have a cap on

non-EU immigrants? We are not in favour of a cap. No cap on either.

No. Well it is a target. It is a moving feast, as it were. Would you

have a limit on non-EU limits? We have limits on quality. We have

people who are skilled migrants coming in. Lip its? . By quality,

not by quantity. -- Limits. How do you do that? We need to move

on to foreign affairs. Should we pool more sovereignty to

give the European Union more clout in foreign and defence matters? I'm

Labour's defence and foreign affairs spokesperson. No we don't need to

pull more powers into Europe. As we undertake this live debate there are

guns being fired in Ukraine as we speak. Europe is facing, for the

first time, since the end of the Second World War, Armies crossing

national borders and floatening peace. Doesn't it -- threatening

peace. Doesn't it need to come together of the We don't need more

powers. We need political will. With Vladimir Putin, in my view, he has

-- we have fallen short in the sanctions. But it is Europe, not

Britain. Remember Putin calling Britain little England a small

island with no influence. Labour doesn't agree with that. But if

that's the mindset that allows someone like Vladimir Putin to send

troops across borders threatening peace, it is worrying. And when we

have, in UKIP a party that say they admire Putin and support his

policies, that is no recipe for how Europe should be wrong. I was

waiting for that. Let me ask him. We don't admire Putin as a leader. .

Oh. No we don't. What Nigel Farage said, was he admired him as a

political operator. Testifies Franklin D Roosevelt who said a good

foreign policy was speaking softly but carrying a big stick. The EU

shouts its mouthed off while carrying a matchstick. It is fantasy

that you wiebl it stand up to Putin over the Ukraine. -- that you would

be able to stand up. Do you admire what Putin is doing in the Ukraine?

No. What matters in foreign policy is the outcould. We have a terrible

outcome in the Ukraine, like Syria, and Georgia... What would UKIP do?

What u skip would do, would be to keep our people safe -- UKIP.

How? And not commit our Foreign Office and troops Foreign wars.

Patrick O'Flynn. You brought up this issue of foreign wars. Now Nigel

Farage said in previous debates that Britain should leave the EU because,

"We have had enough of endless foreign wars." Which wars has the EU

taken us into? The EU has ban very important factor in the push towards

trying to get military intervention in Syria, for example. What wars has

the etch U taken us into it -- EU. Fortunately the EU doesn't have its

own army yet. It has wanted to sign up to an expansionist agenda. Did it

want Iraq? No, that was Labour. UKIP opposed Iraq, so did most of the

mainline Europeans. Germany was against Syria and Libya. No EU

policy. We had an Anglo French deal on Syria. A by lateral deal. A

European dimension. No, buy lateral. We have a European Union that wants

to expand ever-more into other people's spheres of influence. If we

are going to stand up to what Putin is do, which obviously Nigel Farage

has no intentions of doing, you have to get your act together on economic

sanctions and diplomatic force and in trade matters, in supporting

eastern European countries. Sayeria, who and whose army? And NATO and

working transatlanticically, is important through NATO. I will come

to you in a moment. Nick Clegg said that the idea of an EU Army was "A

dangerous fantasy that is simply not true ""Why then, are we already

working on etch U-owned and controlled drones -- EU-owned and

the President of the European Parliament has said that the

majority of MEPs want the EU to have "deployable troops." He is not

speaking for me or Liberal Democrats. The EU does not and will

not have an army. Our defence is mainly shaped through NATO. He is

President of the Parliament What we must do is to get equipment which

can operate together. We waste an awful lot of our spending in Europe

because we duplicate equipment. We don't get the bang for our bucks

that we should. It is a useful role for the EU, to get equipment working

together. That doesn't make sense. You say military equipment, a NATO

job. No, the EU, there is a kind of dimension of the EU members of NATO,

in working together on a common quument o o so they can talk to each

other -- on common equipment, so they can talk to each other. The EU

has a role but not an army. So a European defence agency, that helps

our defence industries and those jobs are extremely important and

would be threatened if the Conservatives and UKIP took us out

of Europe but it is 100 years since the start of the fist world war

Remember that Europe was set up to try to get a secure peace within

Europe T succeeded. Now look on Ukraine but also on the southern

borders to the Arab Spring countries in North Africa. It is more

important than ever that we work to keep keep peace and stability on our

borders. Can I say to Syed and the Conservative MEPs. You talk about

the three Rs, I have a fourth, retreat. If you take us out of the

European Union, it will be the worse retreat by Britain since Gallipoli.

Let him answer If he wants answers -- the British Parliament is the

right place with a British Foreign Secretary to decide our foreign

policy. You say that, but can I quote David Cameron, this is germain

to what you are saying, David Cameron said "There is no doubt that

we are more powerful than Washington, Beijing and Delhi,

because we are a powerful player in the European Union." Do you agree?

He is saying that there are times when it comes to international

foreign affairs when you have to cooperate with partners. Often they

are EU partners but often they are not. The problem we have...

Washington have made it very clear that it wants Britain to talk

through Brussels. No, not at all. Talk through the French and

Italians, come on, wake up? Through the EU collective. I'm vice chair of

the EU delegation. I hear it from the American counterparts. They want

the EU to get itself together and not least on Ukraine. Why should our

sovereignty be at the behest of .. ? I want to hear from Syed calm

amplgts the British Parliament is the right place to decide our

foreign poll sinchts sometimes we work with our European partners

sometimes we work with our non-European partners. It is our

choice to pull sovereign trito work together. G, we move on to our foirt

area. We hear a lot in this country about MPs expenses. Snted the real

scan dalt MEPs gravy train. -- isn't the real scandal, the MEPs gravy

train? You all have your snouts The trough? I don't think so. There is

transpancy. The way we use our expenses is online and anyone can

ask to examine those. We have actually voted to reform MEPs'

allowances. We regularly vote but unfortunately the majority in

Parliament don't. Have you voted to cut them? Yes. By how much? About

5%. A 5% We hoped to have economies I never fly except across the

Atlantic. Difficult to do it any other way. I didn't swim.

But we voted for economy flutes We voted for European Parliament policy

of transparency which other groups haven't. UKIP don't turn up to vote.

They don't earn their salaries. Dhoent do anything. They should hand

their salaries and allowances back. You can't ause UKIP of being on the

gravy train and the other that we don't claim our attendance allowance

because our MEPs are not there. Your attendance allowance is if you are

there, you are saying we don't turn up You are in the building and claim

the allowances. You are not an MEP, UKIP are so ashamed of what their

MEPs have done in Brussels, they didn't field a sitting MEP for

today's debate. I think each party decides who it wishes to field. I

have the honour of being the UKIP representative. I would say by going

in the past few weeks, xeeming to me saying - we are sick of the others.

-- people saying to me. : We are quite excited. Can I ask Patrick

O'Flynn. He says he touched a chord and his party is strong in the polls

today, between 18% and 20%. Haven't you also struck a chord with hip

crasscy. Two of your MEPs were jailed for expenses and benefits'

fraud. Two more asked to pay back ?37,000 for using European funds.

Nigel Farage has boosted about getting ?2 million in expenses and

he went on to employ his wife as a secretarial allowance after telling

other members not to People who do wrong and break the law, go to ja. I

have no time. -- go to jail. People who spend money they are not

entitled to should pay it back and that's right. But what UKIP does and

the good UKIP MEPs do, is use the allowances they are given to pursue

the political agenda they put up when elected which is to get Britain

out of this superstate. Instead of using it for parliamentary work

Very interesting. Richard Howitt. We were the first British political

party to have independent audits of our MEPs' expenses, from 1990, way

before the expenses crisis blew up. The Maria Miller scandal has of

course hit David Cameron and the Conservative Party hard as it should

do. But you are right, even in my own region you have UKIP candidates

and councillors who have been charged with fraudulently filling

out election papers and other shot lifting. Another independent inquiry

found he made racist comments. We had a European candidate last week

in Hertfordshire who got a parking ticket from the police and called

the police fascists. These people aren't here.

I'll let you have a quick reply We can bring up parochial cases. Let

him answer. Not so long ago a Liberal Democrat councillor was sent

down for firebombing, I don't say they are a bunch of arsonists, but

now I think, Nick Clegg might have burnt some cactuses, once. I'm glad

you pronounced that word carefully. Syed Kemal, the EU's auditors, they

are strongly critical of the EU s financials saying "Errors permist in

all main spending areas", the financials are poorly managed. It is

a shambles And that's something that all parties agree on. As we agree on

expenses, the British parties are at the forefront of transpancy. Every

year when we vote for the discharge of the budget, the Conservatives

also vote for it but we don't get enough MEPs from other countries to

investigate in favour. The Liberal Democrats have put forward to make

each Finance Minister, George Osborne and his counterpart to sign

a declaration to say all EU money is properly spent in my country.

Funnily enough they don't want to do that but I look forward to you

confirming that George Osborne will sign it. All the time we hear it is

about the money we pay in, about ?150 per family per year. What about

the money that comes back? ?1. billion that comes to Britain's

regions because of being in Europe. I myself helped to negotiate a fund

to help Britain's food banks to ensure so. Poorest and most

destitute people... Isn't it our money that went there first. Can I

tell you the Conservative-led Government have blocked us from

claiming that money. If you want to have the clearest choice at these

European elections, it is between... Tell us why. It affects our rebate.

Tony Blair gave away our rebate He is quite right. Lib Dems fought to

make sure that we apply for money to help with flooding. That is what the

Tories were blocking. If you want the clearest example at the European

elections, the Conservative Party and MEPs blocked the cap on bankers

bonuses, and then blocked a Labour victory to get money for free

banks. We need to move on to the future. It is important and people

are watching. The EU's Justice Minister says that we need to build

a United States of Europe with the commission as its government. Is she

right? Not at all. But the future, if we take the next ten years,

thinks about climate change and the fact that we are not going to hit of

the two degrees target. Europe has led and needs to lead towards

getting a new sustainable world It is the political will to use these

powers, so she is wrong. It is about the threats from abroad. Labour

reforms like getting a commissioner for growth and rebalancing the

budget, reforming the common agricultural policy, all of those

things will need to happen to make Europe more democratic and open But

against the rise of Brazil and China... We do not need more

treaties and powers. We need more action with more Labour MEPs. Sarah

Ludford, you would sign up to that? No. Unless they do not think that

should concentrate on institutional matters. What we need to do is

concentrate on making Europe progrowth and competitive and create

more jobs in a competitive world. We need more trade deals to open up our

exports, we need to streamline the EU. We need less red tape and

Liberal Democrats have done a lot on that. We need better scrutiny of EU

legislation at West Munster because the national parties... More powers

or less for the EU government? In some areas, I would like to see it

slimmed down. Including, I am not sure whether the EU should be

funding food banks. I think that is a national responsibility. Dearie

me. The EU have to concentrate on the economy and climate change. This

is the coalition talking. If we want to fritter away political capital on

things which are interfering in national matters, then we do not

have the support to tackle those big challenges. Would you still want to

join the Euro one-day? Now is not a good idea. We wanted the Eurozone to

still be sound, which is why... Did not ask you that. Do you want to

join the Euro one-day? If it is a success and it did the economy. Now

is not the time but in principle, the idea of a single currency has

advantages. That was a yes. We are not ruling it out for ever but not

in the foreseeable future. It is not on the horizon. What would our

relationship be with Europe in the future if UKIP got its way and we

left? We would be trading partners with Europe and we would seek

partnership in specific serious I'd tell you what, can I just say..

Would we be Norway? We would be stronger than Norway because we are

the biggest export market in the Eurozone. We can negotiate a bespoke

trading agreement reflecting our enormous importance. Not on

services, which make up 80% of the economy. We are the biggest export

market in the Eurozone. Our biggest exports are services and they would

have to agree to free trade and services. They still have not. Can I

read you something? Let me read you something. There would be a free

trade agreement in place the day after our exit. Germany would demand

no less. Who said that? Not somebody from UKIP, but Digby Jones. Mr

business. He is talking about goods, not services. Norway has that

and they have no say. You would have to accept the EU rules without any

say. No MEPs are commissioners. Let me give you another. Enough. One is

enough. Syed Kamall, is it not looking forward pretty much Mission:

Impossible for Mr Cameron to get anything like the repatriations of

powers that would satisfy your irreconcilables? My father was a bus

driver in the 50s and one of the reasons I am here today is because

he told me that you can achieve anything if you work hard. He said

to me, do not listen to the doubters. When people tell you that

something cannot be done, it is a sign of their limitations, not

yours. They said that we could not pull Britain out of the bailout

mechanism but we did it. He said we could not be to a -- veto European

treaty and we did that. They said we would never cut the budget and we

did that. The first ever. But overall, we are paying more into the

European budget. And they are not sticking to it. More, not less. They

say that we cannot achieve reform but we have achieved reform and we

are at the forefront of that. Science's father came to Britain

because Britain was open and looking outward. What the Conservatives now

have, with leaderless Cameron, is an inward looking attitude. They are

allowing the rise of UKIP. They are putting so much at risk. People

should vote Labour. We are going to have to stop now. No point talking

because we are about to finish. I think you all for a spirited debate.

I'm sure Nigel Fries and Mr Clegg will have learned a lot about how to

debate. -- Nigel Farage. It's just gone 3pm, and you're

watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who

leave us now for Sunday Politics Scotland. Coming up here in twenty

One specialises getting the money minutes, the

One specialises getting the money in, and the other spending ht.

Philip Dunn, Conservative MP for Ludlow in Shropshire, is thd

Minister for defence procurdment, which even after defence cuts,

accounts for around ?14.5 bhllion a year. Shabana Mahmood, Labotr MP for

Birmingham Ladywood. She is the shadow exchequer secretary `t the

Treasury, which is all about raking in the taxes and avoiding avoidance.

As for evading evasions, maxbe that is where I come in, but let's hope

not. And we begin today with Ed Miliband's vision about a ndw

generation of city and county regions with devolved powers to

spend up to ?20 billion to reverse a century of centralisation under

successive governments. The party's policy commission wants are`s like

ours to punch their weight economically by upskilling `nd

reskilling the work force to harness new technologies, all this with a

minister for each region to hold it all together. It's a radical plan to

put real power and resources to local areas, so they can crdate the

middle income, private sector jobs that we need. We cannot be hn an

economy that simply creates low`paying, insecure jobs. Of course

a job is better than no job. But we want real jobs that will make a real

difference to people, and that is what this plan is about. Ed

Miliband, Philip, boldly gohng where your government has failed to go. He

is proposing ?20 billion to back this up, whereas you have only put

?2 billion behind the Heseltine proposals. I am afraid this is yet

another Labour solution to ` problem that it doesn't really exist. Ed

Miliband's plan to deal with the jobs crisis is to introduce another

tier of government. This is precisely the problem we had the

problem before, which is whx we got rid of the regional governmdnt

structures. He is persevering with the LEPs which were brought in by

yourselves. LEPs are better regionally... They are bettdr than

regional, they are much mord local than regional. In the case of

Shropshire and Herefordshird, they are working with Telford and

Wreckin, in an area that is not dominated, dare I say it, bx

Birmingham, which the previous regional government structure was.

He is solving a problem that doesn't exist, Shabana? This is abott the

recovery, OK? We have finally got a recovery underway after thrde years

of flat`lining. But it is an imbalanced recovery, it is not

investment led, or export ldd and it too London`centric and the South. So

this is a very radical plan to say we need a balanced recovery and we

need our big cities and reghons to have a real stake in this rdcovery.

If he is persevering with the Local Enterprise Partnerships, th`t then

presupposes that you are expecting the West Bromwichs, the

Wolverhamptons and the Shropshires to buy into the idea of Birlingham

is a regional capital, which they are reluctant to do. The fastest

growth in the UK is in the West Midlands in jobs. This isn't about

capitals or setting areas against each other, it is about trust. It is

saying we recognise that thd Industrial Revolution, it w`s our

big cities that power that revolution. We want to devolve trust

and money so that local people can take control of economic development

and jobs. If you were in government, would you want the job yourself

Shabana? Well I cannot predhct that, but I think that having reghonal

ministers was a big plus whdn we were in government and we should

reintroduce that. Would you want a job as a regional Minister? Not as a

regional Minister. No, it doesn t. It creates another tier of

bureaucracy all around. It leans somebody bats for your region in

Whitehall and beyond. We will keep our watch on this.

Thank you both very much indeed Well, Ed Miliband also told me he

had written to every local enterprise partnership, every

university and every local government leader about his

proposals. So that definitely includes the council bosses we were

a bit to meet next. The unprecedented pressure on local

authority budgets is exposing deep philosophical differences bdtween

even the best of friends. Hi, Roger. Good to see you `gain.

Philip Atkins and Roger Lawrence met as schoolboys at college in north

Staffordshire. Now they're working together on i54, where Wolvdrhampton

meets Staffordshire. Cutting edge manufacturers are creating over 2000

jobs. South Staffordshire is the district planning authority

ploughing in the local business rates but it's Wolverhampton and

Staffordshire who are co`funding the new motorway junction here,

partners, friends, but polar opposites. Conservative Councillor

Atkins is on a journey towards working smarter, forging

partnerships. Labour Councillor Lawrence sees nothing posithve in

cutting 2,000 jobs to save ?123 million. Inevitably, we're now

having to make decisions th`t none of us were elected to make, reducing

library hours, closing day centres. Money is not the real issue. It is

how you spend what little you have. Yes, we took control in 2008,

anybody who can see what was happening after the financi`l crash

of 2008, must have been livhng in a totally different world. So we

focused on outcomes, rather than on the service itself. So for dxample

all of the partners came together and decided that people in work

commitments crying, are healthier, are happier, and they put ldss drag

on our services. So we all `greed that the economy was the nulber one

priority. We are having to find extra school places, that wd are

having to find extra help for older people. We are having to find ?

million ?1.5 million for older people. But the thing that hs

particularly hitting us is the increasing numbers of looked after

children. Our numbers have virtually gone up by 50% in the last three

years. It costs us ?40,000. That's a ?10 million increase over three

years in costs for looked after children. Everyone knows th`t

children's safeguarding is something that you cannot afford to gdt wrong.

While Staffordshire drive on, some of Wolverhampton's austeritx

measures could be reversibld, reducing libraries hours in the hope

of restoring them.But Staffordshire's highways mahntenance

will form part of a rolling partnership with an asset company

saving ?21 million in the fhrst five years in helping maintain the

council tax freeze. You are putting council tax up by just under two

percent that would trigger ` referendum, which Eric Pickles says

makes you a democracy dodgers, Roger the dodger. How do you react to

that? It is the first incre`se in four years. We have to say that

again councils operate in dhfferent ways. From our point of view, we

used to get 75% of our monex from our central government grant. That

is because council tax base is comparatively low, because 80% of

properties are in the bottol two bands. That means we are more

dependent on government grant than most authorities. Our revente grant

is...is low. So we are actu`lly one of the lower funded councils on

education and a whole range of things. I am very sceptical about

the future of local governmdnt. I think that we are under a lot of

pressure, our room for manoduvre has been diminished. Having said that,

we are absolutely committed to managing the position we ard in and

we will do that and we will make the necessary reductions, and wd will do

all the partnership working and promote the local economy, do all

the things necessary for us to do. Local government has got a lot to

teach the National Health Sdrvice and other parts of government where

we have actually, we have t`ken the greater efficiency savings, the cuts

in the savings, that the government have had to bring in since 2008

Wolverhampton is working sm`rter too, bringing services together in

new hubs delivers economies of scale. Local government is being

transformed. Wherever your council, whatever its colour. Whether or not

it has a reverse gear. And thanks to Philip and Roger Lawrence for

accepting my invitation. By the way, you can see our conversation in

full, on Midlands Today's F`cebook page. Shabana,, this is the end of

local government as we know it. `` he says. To judge by all thdse

efficiencies and working sm`rter, that Philip Atkins is finding, maybe

that is no bad thing at all? We have to compare like for like. So a the

is of high deprivation, likd Wolverhampton in Birmingham, what we

are seeing is the pressure from the cut will put us in a business where

we will find it hard to fulfil the duties we have by law. So looking

after children and social c`re, adults and social care, that is

going to put a massive amount of pressure and Arab ability to deliver

those services. That is what Roger Lawrence said with a passion. The

weight of having to care for looked after children and so on, fdwer

revenue raising essentials than more affluent areas. What that mdans that

local councils are having to look afresh at the way they deliver

services. What has been happening in last councils like Staffordshire,

like Shropshire, the leadership are getting to grips with these issues

and completely changing the way in which services are delivered. Rather

than accepting it has to be like for like, look at how we can deliver

services differently. In yotr county, Shropshire will havd to save

?80 million over three years. No amount of working smarter whll save

that amount of money. Many `reas, we are looking at councils becoming a

commissioner of services and getting service delivered... There will be

job losses in your council. The job losses in the public sector are

being picked up in the priv`te sector. That raised suspicions

raised in that enter view. Taking jobs away from the public sdctor. It

is about rating efficiency for the taxpayer. `` greater. If efficiency

only gets you so far. A citx like Birmingham is losing ?150 pdr

dwelling, that is a big deal. We have the responsibility for council

tax benefit and housing bendfit we have only been given 90% of the

money by governments to be those benefits. Where is the rest of the

money to come from? There is a virtuous circle in all of this, if

the economy improves, peopld will be able to pay more for servicds. That

is as cystic view. If you look at adults and social care, we `re

living longer. We are looking at plans that do not have a big black

hole at the moment `` like they have at the moment. Thank you both very

much indeed. This has an increasingly faliliar

ring about it. A fundamental shake`up in A services. This time

and Shropshire. The medics want the county to have a new acute super

hospital, plus a number of trgent care centres. What will this mean

for the existing Telford and Shrewsbury hospitals. Here hs our

political reporter. It is a tale of two hospitals, the

Royal Shrewsbury and the Prhncess Royal and Telford. Between them they

serve some 500,000 people across Shropshire and mid`Wales. Btt in the

changing, one former hospit`l chief executive wonders what sort of

future they may have. If we do not make changes now, we will sde in the

future, I deterioration of service. We will find more difficultx in

attracting top`quality staff, for example. The current financhal

situation and Shropshire is pure. The future fit programme dods what

it says on the town. It aims to look at whether or not the current

hospital set up and Shropshhre will be, well fit for purpose in the

future. Doctors and nurses have been asked

for their opinions on how things should change. They have cole up

with a radical situation, btild and use of ANC were, where `` a super

A summit along the motorw`y. It will improve patient outcomds. This

begs the question of what h`ppens to the existing hospitals and

Shrewsbury and Telford. Any suggestion of downgrading or cutting

health services is a guaranteed controversy waiting to happdn. Just

as the people. Good scenes like these be repeated in frocks? We have

either got to have them in @ focused and Telford or we whll have

to have a new service locathon in the centre of the county, sdrving

both main population centres of Telford and Shrewsbury. Any other

option in my view would not be acceptable to residents. Rpl 54 in

Shrewsbury there is an appe`l to work together. `` the M 54. I do not

want this to be its ugly he`d again. We have two important

communities in Shropshire, but we need to work together with the

clinicians, the best solution for both of our towns and the whole of

Shropshire. The clinical colmunity group is also keen to stress that

plan will not involve clothhng `` closing either Shrewsbury or Telford

hospitals. But the services they deliver me change. This is not about

taking anything away from the two areas. This is about bringing

something new for the area. The plans are still very much at an

embryonic stage and more details including likely costs are not

expected until next year. This tale of two hospitals has a long way to

run yet. It certainly has. The public

consultation over those futtre fit proposals is due to begin ndxt

January, just in time for the run`up to the general election. Surely that

is about the last thing that you need, and major hospital issue

exploding right into the general election? I think we will h`ve to

see what they are consulting on My expectation is that the dechsion

time will be well into 2015 and therefore I am hoping this will not

become a contentious issue `t the election, because this sits over and

above party politics. This hs about getting the right care for our

residents for the next decade. We saw that we do not want this to be

another pillow fight. We saw David right there, batting for Telford.

Everyone will be running to their corners. 90 clinicians in the county

have been putting proposals together. They are going to consider

28 different work streams which will touch between 450`500 clinicians.

You will back what they say? I want to make my decision based on what

the proposals are. The areas that I represent, the rural areas, these

urgent care centres. Bolstering our community hospitals to take on other

services to address gaps in service. What you think, Shabana? Thdy have

to be clinically led. They have to be based on evidence. This hs a

political M `` decision in the end. You have to take the public with

you. People go in times of crisis, there is an emotional attachment to

their local services. If yot make changes, your local community has

been part of the conversation in unit `` a valid way. We havd to have

a system that takes people with them. We have got to make a case

that people understand, arotnd the fact that we are living longer, we

use the services differentlx to what we did before. People need to be

involved in the process. Wh`t you think is the future then for the

existing Telford and Shrewsbury hospitals? We heard the concerns are

that the financial possession `` position is poor. I would lhke to

see with Shabana's analysis. As you heard in the clip, neither Telford

no Shrewsbury hospitals are under threat of closure here. This is

about deciding how best to provide the emergency care for the

population as a whole. Therd will be some give and take in terms of

services? What they are indhcating is that it is unlikely to h`ve

parallel A care in those two locations. They are trying to create

more centres of urgent care and then the more critical emergency care,

one step before the drama Cdntre, will need to be concentrated in one

place. You need a critical lass of specialists in order to makd sure

you have the best possible outcomes for the patients. That means

sometimes services have to be in one place, but it has to be accdssible

to everyone around. Let's c`tch up with the other political

developments making the news here over the past week. Our 60 seconds

round`up this afternoon comds from our political reporter.

West Midlands Police say thdy will not be a new enquiry into the

Birmingham pub bombings which claimed 21 lives. The Justice for

the 21 campaign groups say they are disappointed by the decision. The

weed around a referendum now wants answers. Topping the list is Nicky

Sinclair. UKIP has been doing its bid to revive the high Stredt. Paul

Nuttall was on and to open the new campaign shop. We are hoping to get

MEPs here in the West Midlands. We are standing in local electhons and

we will be putting up a candidate in every single seat. The Lichfield

Conservative MP has been sacked as vice`chairman of the party `fter he

criticised HS2 and made Twitter comments about Maria Miller's

expenses. Mr Javad has come a winner out of this. He replaces Maria

Miller as the culture secretary But his appointment has not gone

down well with Michael Rosen, presenter of word of mouth on BBC

Radio 4. In an open letter he accuses the former banker of being

unfit for the job because ctlture and the arts are about much, much

more than money. We know th`t he is a Star Trek fan. But apart from that

he does not have many credentials for being cultural secretarx. He is

a cultured man. He and his wife have been supporting the arts in a

private capacity for many ydars He is an extremely capable,

intelligent, political leaddr of the future. I think... A future prime

minister? I would not go as far as that. That is for the party at the

time. He is a very capable guy. In terms of social mobility, the son of

a bus strive for. Mr Javad, was a Treasury minister. I opposed narrate

a business. Our politics ard very much in different directions, but he

is a man of Asian origin. Hd is sitting in a British Cabinet. I

think men of ethnic minoritx backgrounds can take in the region

from the fact that if they want to achieve that in their lives, they,

too. `` I have opposed him on many times. We have a real issue about

women at the top of governmdnt. Women are being marginalised by

this. We have got to women hn the Treasury team. How many havd you

got? Three, actually. You think it is an inspired appointment? There is

a controversy around it as we have heard. He is a man on gender issues,

for a start. Covering the qtality beef, as you have said, he hs the

first male, Asian Cabinet mdmber. `` equality brief.

BBC WMO start their coveragd between 11 and 12 o'clock when Adri`n

Goldberg presents a special 's seat from Cannock. At the same thme on

Wednesday, from Tamworth. Wd are back in three weeks after

risk. We have run out of time. - particular candidates. Back to you,

Andrew. The sun's out, Ed Balls has run the

London Marathon, and MPs leave Westminster for their Easter break.

Let's discuss what's coming up in the Week Ahead.

We will get more of what we have just seen. Let's look back on the

debate. What did we learn from the argument is? That it is going to

bore and irritate whole lot of people, this election campaign. Four

parties shouting at each other about things that most people do not know

much about. They know very little about how the European Parliament

works, what an MEP is supposed to do. A lot of heat and not a lot of

light. I've updated well, all of them, but the net effect is not

going to encourage people to go out and vote and not many do. One thing

that struck me was that on Europe, the Labour and Lib Dem positions are

not that far apart. They are pretty much the same. And yet the knocks

lots of each other. I suppose they feel that they had to do that

because that is the format. I'd agree with Polly. Their word UKIP

and the Tories to attack two we try to make it exciting, and we know the

issues are important. But people out there have not heard of these

individuals. It is not very exciting. That is worrying because

these are huge national questions for us. We need to find a way of

making it more fun. People may not know these MEPs, they may not know

the detail of the debate, but it is an issue on which people have strong

opinions. It is a visceral thing for many people. Especially on the

immigration issue. The debate took off and became more vociferous at

that point. To a large extent, you wonder whether not only this

European election but the eventual referendum will be a referendum on

the issue of immigration and free movement. If we did not learn much

from the argument, the thing we did learn is that the structure of these

televised debate influences the outcome. One of the reasons that

Nigel Farage did well in the debate is that in a two-man debate, each

man has as good a chance as the other. If it is four people, one man

can be ganged up on. Patrick O'Flynn did well for a man who is not an

elected politician yet. At times, 40 came under attack and did not hold

the line as well as you would expect. Does that create a perverse

incentive for the main parties to agree to a four way debate before

the general election? I do not think the David Cameron has nearly as much

to worry about from a televised debate in the run-up to the

elections than his spin doctors believe. When you put him up against

Ed Miliband, and we have not actually seen Ed Miliband in that

format, I think he will come off all right. This is an election which the

polls would have us believe that the battle for first place is between

UKIP and labour. It certainly is. Obviously, it is neck and neck and

we will not know until we are closer. And it matters a lot to both

of them. If Mr Miliband does not come first, that is not good news

for the main opposition at this stage. Except to some extent all of

the people will put it to one side and say that this is a bizarre

election. A plague on both your houses, let's vote UKIP. It is not

clear how much that translates into the next election. It is not too

disastrous for Labour. It would be better if they came first. If Mr

Miliband comes first, not a problem, but it becomes second and UKIP soars

away, what are the consequences I think there is a widespread

expectation already at Westminster that UKIP is very likely to come

first. If Ed Miliband fails to come first, there will not be a great

deal of shock in the West Mr village. Else think what is

remarkable about Ed Miliband is that despite consistently poor personal

leadership approval ratings, the overall Labour poll is consistently

very high. We have seen that budget blip, it seems to have taken us back

to where we were before. Leadership is not everything. Mrs Thatcher was

miles behind James Callaghan but in the end, it was the party politics

that mattered more. If Mr Cameron comes third and the Tories come

third, maybe a poor third, is it headless chicken time on the Tory

backbenchers? It has often been said that the Tory Party has two modes,

complacency and panic. You will see them shift into panic mode. By June,

I think. Many of the stories in the sun will be about David Cameron s

personal leadership and his grip on the party. There will be pressure on

conference by the time that comes around. It is a natural consequence

of being the incumbent party. The Lib Dems are 7% in two of the polls

today. It was widely thought that in the first and second debates, Nigel

Farage won both. In retrospect, was the challenge strategy a disaster

for Mr Clegg? I do not think it was because he had nothing to lose. But

he is lower in the polls than when he started. He has not lost a great

deal. The polls were quite often that low. I think it was a good

thing to do. It raised his profile. It made him the leading party in.

That may be a difficult place to be. That is how you end up with 7%

in the polls. The reason he is fighting with Labour is that he

knows very well that all he has to do is to get his votes back that

have gone to Labour and labour have to fight hard to make sure that they

do not go back. Every party looks to where it is going to get it

support. If it is a wipe-out for the Lib Dems, and they lose all their

MEPs, not saying that is going to happen but you could not rule it out

for, are we back in Nick Clegg leadership crisis territory? One of

the astonishing things about this Parliament is the relative absence

of leadership speculation about Nick Clegg will stop at the first couple

of years, his position seems tricky, but maybe that is because

Chris Hughton is gone and he was the only plausible candidate. This cable

is not getting any younger, to put it delicately. That was not delegate

at all! And we have reached a desperate stage where Danny

Alexander is talked about as a candidate. That was not delegate

either! Maybe he is holding onto power the lack of alternatives. If

they ended up with no MEPs at all, and a less than double digits

score... With Danny Alexander, it is clear that Scotland, one way or

another, will be moving further away. You could not have the leader

of a national party be a Scot. But he does not have the following in

the party. I'm glad you're liberal attitudes to immigration extends to

me. I would not have been here for 43 years. There will be leadership

talk after that holes. It has been bubbling in the background, but you

have to talk to the grass roots activists. -- after the polls. The

grass roots activists are despairing. If things are bad, they

lose their network of activists who they need to fight the next

election. I think you mean, not that you could have a Scot, but that it

would be more difficult to have a Scot from a Scottish constituency.

Absolutely. I think a Scottish constituency, so many things will be

different. Or to hold the great offices of state. Let's come onto

the Crown Prosecution Service is. It is an English institution. Where

does the CPS and after losing yet another high-profile case come this

time Nigel Evans? They had nine counts against him and they did not

win on one. It is obviously very embarrassing. They will have a bit

of explain to do but I guess the threshold for bringing these cases

is high. There has to be considered at least a 50-50 chance of actually

winning the case. We do not know what went on behind the scenes when

they weighed up whether to bring the case. Nigel Evans makes an

interesting point about whether it is legitimate to bundle together a

number of stand-alone relatively weak accusations, and when you put

them together to militantly, the CPS uses that to make a case. Is that a

legitimate thing to do? He was a high-profile figure, not just

because he was a Tory MP. He was the deputy speaker of the House. And yet

the CPS are certainly the police, to begin with they did not have that

many people to testify against him. And then they trawled for more. You

wonder if they would have done that if it was not for the fact that he

was a public figure. The trouble is, they are dammed if they do and

dammed if they do not. Particularly with politicians and the reputation

they have these days, if there is any suggestion that they let

somebody off because they are a high-profile politician, and they

are saying that about Cyril Smith, that is the accusation. A strange

story. Most unlikely and very bizarre. But that is the accusation.

If there is any with of that, I can see why the CPS says, we better let

the courts try this one. Also, they are in trouble overrated cases

because their success rate on bringing people to court for rape is

so thin. When it looked as if his accusers were not really accusing

him, it looks quite weak. You cannot help but feeling that they are

falling over backwards now in high-profile cases because of their

abject and total failure over Jimmy Savile. I think this is exactly the

kind of case that happens when you are trying to make a point or redeem

a reputation or change a culture. All of these big things. As opposed

to what criminal justice is supposed to be about, which is specific

crimes and specific evidence matching those crimes. The CPS has

no copper a fleet joined in this list of public and situations that

has taken a fall over the past five or six years. We have had

Parliament, the newspapers, the police will stop I think this is as

bad a humiliation as any of those because it is Innocent people

suffering. You are the most recent, being a lobby correspondent in

Westminster, and we now see on Channel 4 News that basically,

Westminster is twinned with Sodom and Gomorrah. Yes. I know. Is this

true? It is all rather the red. I do not move in those circles. And you

were in the lobby at one stage? Not that long ago. Is it right. Is it

right to be twinned with Sodom and Gomorrah? I'll ask him for his

opinion. Being technically a member of the lobby, I can observe some of

this stuff. And what surprises me is that journalists, when the complain

about Sodom and Gomorrah, write themselves out of it. It is as if it

is just MPs. We are unalloyed and unvarnished. Actually, the fact is

it has always been a bit like Sodom and tomorrow. Of course it has.

Think about how we have had wave after wave of stories and scandals.

But less of it recently. It was I think that attitudes have slightly

changed. I'll also think that if you get 650 people in any organisation

and you put that much scrutiny on them, you will find an awful lot

going on in most people's officers of a scurrilous nature. Even in the

BBC In 2013, the public voted for

a portrait of At times he's interesting,

at times he's very funny, My life is a very happy life

and I'm a very happy person. Will you feel nervous

when this is unveiled? I suppose being the centre

of attention but for ever. You're wanted, you're needed,

so everything is not over.