:00:36. > :00:42.Welfare reform is one of the government's most popular policies.
:00:43. > :00:46.So Labour says it would be even tougher than the Tories.
:00:47. > :00:49.We'll be asking the Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary if she's got
:00:50. > :00:56.Even Labour supporters worry that Ed Miliband hasn't got what it takes
:00:57. > :01:00.Labour grandees are increasingly vocal about their concerns.
:01:01. > :01:12.Over 50% of Labour voters think they'd do better with a new leader.
:01:13. > :01:20.A health warning. apparently "toxic" on the doorstep.
:01:21. > :01:23.Even during the World Cup, lixing sport with politics can prove toxic.
:01:24. > :01:25.When the beautiful game turns ugly, taxpayers can be
:01:26. > :01:40.promised an electric car revolution, why so little progress?
:01:41. > :01:46.Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh, the toxic tweeters
:01:47. > :01:55.First, the deepening crisis in Iraq, where Sunni Islamists are now
:01:56. > :01:57.largely in control of the Syrian-Iraq border, which means
:01:58. > :02:03.they can now re-supply their forces in Iraq from their Syrian bases
:02:04. > :02:06.Rather than moving on Baghdad, they are for the moment consolidating
:02:07. > :02:09.their grip on the towns and cities they've already taken.
:02:10. > :02:11.They also seem to be in effective control of Iraq's
:02:12. > :02:14.biggest oil refinery, which supplies the capital.
:02:15. > :02:17.And there are reports they might now have taken the power
:02:18. > :02:23.Iraqi politicians are now admitting that ISIS,
:02:24. > :02:27.the name of the Sunni insurgents, is better trained, better equipped and
:02:28. > :02:32.far more battle-hardened than the US-trained Iraqi army fighting it.
:02:33. > :02:35.Which leaves the fate of Baghdad increasingly in the hands
:02:36. > :02:52.No good news coming out of there, Janan. No good news and no good
:02:53. > :02:57.options either. The West's best strategy is to decide how much
:02:58. > :03:02.support to give to the Iraqi government. The US is sending over
:03:03. > :03:05.about 275 military personnel. Do they go further and contemplate
:03:06. > :03:11.their support? General Petraeus argued against it as it might be
:03:12. > :03:17.seen as the US serving as the force of Shia Iraqis -- continue their
:03:18. > :03:26.support. Do we contemplate breaking up Iraq? It won't be easy. The Sunni
:03:27. > :03:29.and Shia Muslim populations don t live in clearly bordered areas, but
:03:30. > :03:33.in the longer term, do we deal with it in the same way we dealt with the
:03:34. > :03:37.break-up of the Ottoman empire over 100 years ago? In the short-term and
:03:38. > :03:45.long-term, completely confounding. Quite humiliating. If ISIS take
:03:46. > :03:51.Baghdad I can't think of a bigger ignominy for foreign policy since
:03:52. > :03:55.Suez. If Iraq is partitioned, it won't be up to us. It will be what
:03:56. > :04:00.is happening because of what is happening on the ground. Everything
:04:01. > :04:07.does point to partition, and that border, which ISIS control, between
:04:08. > :04:12.Syria and Iraq, that has been there since it was drawn during the First
:04:13. > :04:15.World War. That is gone as well An astonishingly humbling situation the
:04:16. > :04:23.West, and you can see the Kurds in the North think this is a charge --
:04:24. > :04:26.chance for authority. They think this is the chance to get the
:04:27. > :04:32.autonomy they felt they deserved a long time. Janan is right. We can't
:04:33. > :04:37.do much in the long term, but we have to decide on the engagement.
:04:38. > :04:40.And the other people wish you'd be talking turkey, because if there is
:04:41. > :04:45.some blowback and the fighters come back, they are likely to come back
:04:46. > :04:49.from Turkey. Where is Iran in all of this? There were reports last week
:04:50. > :04:53.that the Revolutionary guard, the head of it, he was already in
:04:54. > :04:57.Baghdad with 67 advisers and there might have been some brigades that
:04:58. > :05:03.have gone there as well. Where are they? What has happened? I'm pretty
:05:04. > :05:14.sure the Prime Minister of Iraq is putting more faith in Iran than the
:05:15. > :05:18.White House and the British. I think they are running the show, in
:05:19. > :05:22.technical terms. John Kerry is flying into Cairo this morning, and
:05:23. > :05:26.what is his message? It is twofold. One is to Arab countries, do more to
:05:27. > :05:31.encourage an inclusive government in Iraq, mainly Sunni Muslims in the
:05:32. > :05:36.government, and the Arab Gulf states should stop funding insurgents in
:05:37. > :05:41.Iraq. You think, Iraq, it's potentially going to break up, so
:05:42. > :05:45.this sounds a bit late in the day and a bit weak. It gets
:05:46. > :05:49.fundamentally to the problem, what can we do? Niall Ferguson has a big
:05:50. > :05:52.piece in the Sunday Times asking if this is place where we cannot doing
:05:53. > :05:58.anything. He doesn't want to do anything. By the way, that is what
:05:59. > :06:02.most Americans think. That is what opinion polls are showing. You have
:06:03. > :06:07.George Osborne Michael Gold who would love to get involved but they
:06:08. > :06:10.cannot because of the vote in parliament on Syria lasted -- George
:06:11. > :06:14.Osborne and Michael Gove. This government does not have the stomach
:06:15. > :06:18.for military intervention. We will see how events unfold on the ground.
:06:19. > :06:20.All parties are agreed that Britain's 60-year old multi-billion
:06:21. > :06:26.The Tory side of the Coalition think their reforms are necessary
:06:27. > :06:29.and popular, though they haven't always gone to time or to plan.
:06:30. > :06:33.In the eight months she's had since she became Shadow Secretary of State
:06:34. > :06:39.for Work and Pensions, Rachel Reeves has talked the talk about getting
:06:40. > :06:42.people off benefits, into work and lowering the overall welfare bill.
:06:43. > :06:45.her first interview in the job she threatened "We would
:06:46. > :06:49.But Labour has opposed just about every change the Coalition
:06:50. > :06:53.has proposed to cut the cost and change the culture of welfare.
:06:54. > :06:55.Child benefit, housing benefit, the ?26,000 benefit cap -
:06:56. > :07:02.They've been lukewarm about the government's flagship Universal
:07:03. > :07:05.Credit scheme - which rolls six benefit payments into one - and
:07:06. > :07:12.And Labour has set out only two modest welfare cuts.
:07:13. > :07:16.This week, Labour said young people must have skills or be in training
:07:17. > :07:21.That will save ?65 million, says Labour, though the cost
:07:22. > :07:27.And cutting winter fuel payments for richer pensioners which will
:07:28. > :07:34.Not a lot in a total welfare bill of around ?200 billion.
:07:35. > :07:37.And with welfare cuts popular among even Labour voters, they will soon
:07:38. > :07:43.have to start spelling out exactly what Labour welfare reform means.
:07:44. > :07:56.Welcome. Good morning. Why do you want to be tougher than the Tories?
:07:57. > :08:00.We want to be tough in getting the welfare bill down. Under this
:08:01. > :08:04.government, the bill will be ?1 million more than the government set
:08:05. > :08:09.out in 2010 and I don't think that is acceptable. We should try to
:08:10. > :08:13.control the cost of Social Security. But the welfare bill under the next
:08:14. > :08:17.Labour government will fall? It will be smaller when you end the first
:08:18. > :08:21.parliament than when you started? We signed up to the capping welfare but
:08:22. > :08:26.that doesn't see social security costs ball, it sees them go up in
:08:27. > :08:32.line with with inflation or average earnings -- costs fall. So where
:08:33. > :08:37.flair will rise? We have signed up to the cap -- welfare will rise We
:08:38. > :08:41.have signed up to the cap. We will get the costs under control and they
:08:42. > :08:44.haven't managed to achieve it. The government is spending ?13 billion
:08:45. > :08:49.more on Social Security and the reason they are doing it is because
:08:50. > :08:52.the minimum wage has not kept pace with the cost of living so people
:08:53. > :08:56.are reliant on tax credits. They are not building houses and people are
:08:57. > :09:03.relying on housing benefit. We have a record number of people on zero
:09:04. > :09:06.hours contracts. I'm still not clear if you will cut welfare if you get
:09:07. > :09:13.in power. Nobody is saying that the cost of welfare is going to fall.
:09:14. > :09:18.The welfare cap sees that happening gradually. That is a Tory cap. And
:09:19. > :09:25.you've accepted it. You're being the same as the Tories, not to. If they
:09:26. > :09:29.had a welfare cap, they would have breached it in every year of the
:09:30. > :09:33.parliament. Social Security will be higher than the government set out
:09:34. > :09:37.because they failed to control it. You read the polls, and the party
:09:38. > :09:40.does lots of its own polling, and you're scared of being seen as the
:09:41. > :09:47.welfare party. You don't really believe all of this anti-welfare
:09:48. > :09:49.stuff? We are the party of work not welfare. The Labour Party was set up
:09:50. > :09:52.in the first place because we believe in the dignity of work and
:09:53. > :09:56.we believe that work should pay wages can afford to live on. I make
:09:57. > :10:01.no apologies for being the party of work. We are not the welfare party,
:10:02. > :10:06.we are the party of work. Even your confidential strategy document
:10:07. > :10:09.admits that voters don't trust you on immigration, the economy, this is
:10:10. > :10:14.your own people, and welfare. You are not trusted on it. The most
:10:15. > :10:17.recent poll showed Labour slightly ahead of the Conservative Party on
:10:18. > :10:22.Social Security, probably because they have seen the incompetence and
:10:23. > :10:26.chaos at the Department for Work and Pensions under Iain Duncan Smith.
:10:27. > :10:31.Your own internal document means that the voters don't trust you on
:10:32. > :10:35.welfare reform. That is why we have shown some of this tough things we
:10:36. > :10:40.will do like the announcement that Ed Miliband made earlier this week,
:10:41. > :10:43.that young people without basic qualifications won't be entitled to
:10:44. > :10:46.just sign on for benefits, they have to sign up for training in order to
:10:47. > :10:50.receive support. That is the right thing to do by that group of young
:10:51. > :11:00.people, because they need skills to progress. We will, once that. - we
:11:01. > :11:05.will, onto that. You say you criticise the government that it had
:11:06. > :11:08.a cap and wouldn't have met it, but every money-saving welfare reform,
:11:09. > :11:16.you voted against it. How is that being tougher? The most recent bout
:11:17. > :11:19.was the cap on overall welfare expenditure, and we went through the
:11:20. > :11:25.lobbies and voted for the Tories. You voted against the benefit cap,
:11:26. > :11:30.welfare rating, you voted against, child benefit schemes, you voted
:11:31. > :11:32.against. You can't say we voted against everything when we voted
:11:33. > :11:36.with the Conservatives in the most recent bill with a cap on Social
:11:37. > :11:43.Security. It's just not correct to say. The last time we voted, we
:11:44. > :11:50.walked through the lobby with them. You voted on the principle of the
:11:51. > :11:55.cap. You voted on every step that would allow the cap to be met. Every
:11:56. > :11:58.single one. The most recent vote was not on the principle of the cap it
:11:59. > :12:01.was on a cap of Social Security in the next Parliament and we signed up
:12:02. > :12:06.for that. It was Ed Miliband who called her that earlier on. Which
:12:07. > :12:13.welfare reform did you vote for We voted for the cap. Other than that?
:12:14. > :12:18.We have supported universal credit. You voted against it in the third
:12:19. > :12:23.reading. We voted against some of the specifics. If you look at
:12:24. > :12:28.universal credit, they have had to write off nearly ?900 million of
:12:29. > :12:32.spending. I'm not on the rights and wrongs, I'm trying to work out what
:12:33. > :12:35.you voted for. Some of the things we are going to go further than the
:12:36. > :12:41.government with. For example, cutting benefits for young people
:12:42. > :12:43.who don't sign of the training. The government had introduced that. For
:12:44. > :12:46.example, saying that the richest pensioners should not get the winter
:12:47. > :12:50.fuel allowance, that is something the government haven't signed up.
:12:51. > :12:54.You would get that under Labour and this government haven't signed up
:12:55. > :13:00.for it. ?100 million on the winter fuel allowance and ?65 million on
:13:01. > :13:05.youth training. ?165 million. How big is the welfare budget? The cap
:13:06. > :13:13.would apply to ?120 billion. And you've saved 125 -- 165 million
:13:14. > :13:18.Those are cuts that we said we would do in government. If you look at the
:13:19. > :13:20.real prize from the changes Ed Miliband announced in the youth
:13:21. > :13:24.allowance, it's not the short-term savings, it's the fact that each of
:13:25. > :13:27.these young people, who are currently on unemployment benefits
:13:28. > :13:34.without the skills we know they need to succeed in life, they will cost
:13:35. > :13:38.the taxpayer ?2000 per year. I will come onto that. You mentioned
:13:39. > :13:42.universal credit, which the government regards as the flagship
:13:43. > :13:48.reform. It's had lots of troubles with it and it merges six benefits
:13:49. > :13:51.into one. You voted against it in the third reading and given lukewarm
:13:52. > :13:57.support in the past. We have not said he would abandon it, but now
:13:58. > :14:01.you say you are for it. You are all over the place. We set up the rescue
:14:02. > :14:04.committee in autumn of last year because we have seen from the
:14:05. > :14:08.National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee, report after
:14:09. > :14:13.report showing that the project is massively overbudget and is not
:14:14. > :14:17.going to be delivered according to the government timetable. We set up
:14:18. > :14:20.the committee because we believe in the principle of universal credit
:14:21. > :14:25.and think it is the right thing to do. Can you tell us now if you will
:14:26. > :14:31.keep it or not? Because there is no transparency and we have no idea. We
:14:32. > :14:36.are awash with information. We are not. The government, in the most
:14:37. > :14:42.recent National audit Forest -- National Audit Office statement said
:14:43. > :14:47.it was a reset project. This is really important. This is a flagship
:14:48. > :14:51.government programme, and it's going to cost ?12.8 billion to deliver,
:14:52. > :14:56.and we don't know what sort of state it is in, so we have said that if we
:14:57. > :15:03.win at the next election, we will pause that for three months and
:15:04. > :15:08.calling... Will you stop the pilots? We don't know what status they will
:15:09. > :15:11.have. We would stop the build of the system for three months, calling the
:15:12. > :15:18.National Audit Office to do awards and all report. The government don't
:15:19. > :15:20.need to do this until the next general election, they could do it
:15:21. > :15:25.today. Stop throwing good money after bad and get a grip of this
:15:26. > :15:30.incredibly important programme. You said you don't know enough to a view
:15:31. > :15:34.now. So when you were invited to a job centre where universal credit is
:15:35. > :15:40.being rolled out to see how it was working, you refused to go. Why We
:15:41. > :15:43.asked were a meeting with Iain Duncan Smith and he cancelled the
:15:44. > :15:46.meeting is three times. I'm talking about the visit when you were
:15:47. > :15:51.offered to go to a job centre and you refused. We had an appointment
:15:52. > :15:53.to meet Iain Duncan Smith at the Department for Work and Pensions and
:15:54. > :15:58.said he cancelled and was not available, but he wanted us to go to
:15:59. > :16:03.the job centre. We wanted to talk to him and his officials, which she
:16:04. > :16:06.did. Would it be more useful to go to the job centre and find out how
:16:07. > :16:20.it was working. He's going to tell you it's working fine.
:16:21. > :16:26.Advice Bureau in Hammersmith, they are working to help the people
:16:27. > :16:32.trying to claim universal credit. Iain Duncan Smith cancelled three
:16:33. > :16:37.meetings. That is another issue I was asking about the job centre It
:16:38. > :16:44.is not another issue because Iain Duncan Smith fogged us off. This
:16:45. > :16:47.week you said that jobless youngsters who won't take training
:16:48. > :16:57.will lose their welfare payments. How many young people are not in
:16:58. > :17:02.work training or education? There are 140,000 young people claiming
:17:03. > :17:08.benefits at the moment, but 850 000 young people who are not in work at
:17:09. > :17:15.the moment. This applies to around 100,000 young people. There are
:17:16. > :17:23.actually 975,000, 16-24 -year-olds, not in work, training or education.
:17:24. > :17:30.Your proposal only applies to 100,000 of them, why? This is
:17:31. > :17:35.applying to young people who are signing on for benefits rather than
:17:36. > :17:43.signing up for training. We want to make sure that all young people ..
:17:44. > :17:46.Why only 100,000? They are the ones currently getting job-seeker's
:17:47. > :18:00.allowance. We are saying you can not just sign up to... Can I get you to
:18:01. > :18:06.respond to this, the number of people not in work, training or
:18:07. > :18:15.education fell last year by more than you are planning to help. Long
:18:16. > :18:24.turn -- long-term unemployment is an entrenched problem... This issue
:18:25. > :18:29.about an entrenched group of young people. Young people who haven't got
:18:30. > :18:34.skills and are not in training we know are much less likely to get a
:18:35. > :18:41.job so there are 140,018-24 -year-olds signing onto benefits at
:18:42. > :18:45.the moment. This is about trying to address that problem to make sure
:18:46. > :18:50.all young people have the skills they need to get a job. Your policy
:18:51. > :18:54.is to take away part of the dole unless young unemployed people agree
:18:55. > :19:01.to study for level three qualifications, the equivalent of an
:19:02. > :19:08.AS-level or an NVQ but 40% of these people have the literary skills of a
:19:09. > :19:14.nine-year-old. After all that failed education, how are you going to
:19:15. > :19:19.train them to a level standard? We are saying that anyone who doesn't
:19:20. > :19:24.have that a level or equivalent qualification will be required to go
:19:25. > :19:29.back to college. We are not saying that within a year they have to get
:19:30. > :19:33.up to that level but these are exactly the sorts of people... These
:19:34. > :19:38.people have been failed by your education system. These people are,
:19:39. > :19:43.for the last four years, have been educated under a Conservative
:19:44. > :19:48.government. 18 - 21-year-olds, most of them have their education under a
:19:49. > :19:53.Labour government during which 300,000 people left with no GCSEs
:19:54. > :19:59.whatsoever. I don't understand how training for one year can do what 11
:20:00. > :20:03.years in school did not. We are not saying that within one year
:20:04. > :20:07.everybody will get up to a level three qualifications, but if you are
:20:08. > :20:11.one of those people who enters the Labour market age 18 with the
:20:12. > :20:19.reading skills of a nine-year-old, they are the sorts of people that
:20:20. > :20:25.should not the left languishing I went to college in Hackney if you
:20:26. > :20:30.you are -- a few weeks ago and there was a dyslexic boy studying painting
:20:31. > :20:35.and decorating. In school they decided he was a troublemaker and
:20:36. > :20:40.that he didn't want to learn. He went back to college because he
:20:41. > :20:44.wanted to get the skills. He said that it wasn't until he went back to
:20:45. > :20:49.college that he could pick up a newspaper and read it, it made a
:20:50. > :20:55.huge difference but too many people are let down by the system. I am
:20:56. > :20:59.wondering how the training will make up for an education system that
:21:00. > :21:04.failed them but let's move on to your leader. Look at this graph of
:21:05. > :21:09.Ed Miliband's popularity. This is the net satisfaction with him, it is
:21:10. > :21:16.dreadful. The trend continues to climb since he became leader of the
:21:17. > :21:19.Labour Party, why? What you have seen is another 2300 Labour
:21:20. > :21:25.councillors since Ed Miliband became the leader of the Labour Party. You
:21:26. > :21:33.saw in the elections a month ago that... Why is the satisfaction rate
:21:34. > :21:38.falling? We can look at polls or actual election results and the fact
:21:39. > :21:42.that we have got another 2000 Labour councillors, more people voting
:21:43. > :21:47.Labour, the opinion polls today show that if there was a general election
:21:48. > :21:54.today we would have a majority of more than 40, he must be doing
:21:55. > :22:00.something right. Why do almost 0% of voters want to replace him as
:22:01. > :22:06.leader? Why do 50% and more think that he is not up to the job? The
:22:07. > :22:13.more people see Ed Miliband, the less impressed they are. The British
:22:14. > :22:17.people seem to like him less. The election strategy I suggest that
:22:18. > :22:22.follows from that is that you should keep Ed Miliband under wraps until
:22:23. > :22:27.the election. Let's look at actually what happens when people get a
:22:28. > :22:31.chance to vote, when they get that opportunity we have seen more Labour
:22:32. > :22:38.councillors, more Labour members of the European Parliament...
:22:39. > :22:45.Oppositions always get more. The opinion polls today, one of them
:22:46. > :22:49.shows Labour four points ahead. You have not done that well in local
:22:50. > :22:55.government elections or European elections. Why don't people like
:22:56. > :23:00.him? I think we have done incredibly well in elections. People must like
:23:01. > :23:04.a lot of the things Labour and Ed Miliband are doing because we are
:23:05. > :23:09.winning back support across the country. We won local councils in
:23:10. > :23:15.places like Hammersmith and Fulham, Crawley, Hastings, key places that
:23:16. > :23:19.Labour need to win back at the general election next year. Even you
:23:20. > :23:25.have said traditional Labour supporters are abandoning the party.
:23:26. > :23:31.That is what Ed Miliband has said as well. We have got this real concern
:23:32. > :23:36.about what has happened. If you look at the elections in May, 60% of
:23:37. > :23:41.people didn't even bother going to vote. That is a profound issue not
:23:42. > :23:46.just for Labour. You said traditional voters who perhaps at
:23:47. > :23:50.times we took for granted are now being offered an alternative. Why
:23:51. > :23:56.did you take them for granted? This is what Ed Miliband said. I am not
:23:57. > :24:03.saying anything Ed Miliband himself has not said. When he ran for the
:24:04. > :24:07.leadership he said that we took too many people for granted and we
:24:08. > :24:11.needed to give people positive reasons to vote Labour, he has been
:24:12. > :24:14.doing that. He has been there for four years and you are saying you
:24:15. > :24:20.still take them for granted. Why? I am saying that for too long we have
:24:21. > :24:24.taken them for granted. We are on track to win the general election
:24:25. > :24:34.next year and that will defy all the odds. You are going to win... Ed
:24:35. > :24:38.Miliband will win next year and make a great Prime Minister.
:24:39. > :24:43.Now to the Liberal Democrats, at the risk of intruding into private
:24:44. > :24:47.grief. The party is still smarting from dire results in the European
:24:48. > :24:51.and Local Elections. The only poll Nick Clegg has won in recent times
:24:52. > :24:55.is to be voted the most unpopular leader of a party in modern British
:24:56. > :24:59.history. No surprise there have been calls for him to go, though that
:25:00. > :24:59.still looks unlikely. Here's Eleanor.
:25:00. > :25:05.Liberal Democrats celebrating, something we haven't seen for a
:25:06. > :25:10.while. This victory back in 199 led to a decade of power for the Lib
:25:11. > :25:16.Dems in Liverpool. What a contrast to the city's political landscape
:25:17. > :25:21.today. At its height the party had 69 local councillors, now down to
:25:22. > :25:26.just three. The scale of the challenge facing Nick Clegg and the
:25:27. > :25:31.Lib Dems is growing. The party is rock bottom in the polls,
:25:32. > :25:36.consistently in single figures. It was wiped out in the European
:25:37. > :25:41.elections losing all but one of its 12 MEPs and in the local elections
:25:42. > :25:48.it lost 42% of the seats that it was defending. But on Merseyside, Nick
:25:49. > :25:52.Clegg was putting on a brave face. We did badly in Liverpool,
:25:53. > :25:59.Manchester and London in particular, we did well in other places. But you
:26:00. > :26:03.are right, we did badly in some of those big cities and I have
:26:04. > :26:09.initiated a review, quite naturally, to understand what went
:26:10. > :26:13.wrong, what went right. As Lib Dems across the country get on with some
:26:14. > :26:18.serious soul-searching, there is an admission that his is the leader of
:26:19. > :26:23.the party who is failing to hit the right notes. Knocking on doors in
:26:24. > :26:29.Liverpool, I have to tell you that Nick Clegg is not a popular person.
:26:30. > :26:34.Some might use the word toxic and I find this very difficult because I
:26:35. > :26:38.know Nick very well and I see a principal person who passionately
:26:39. > :26:45.believes in what he is doing and he is a nice guy. As a result of his
:26:46. > :26:54.popularity, what has happened to the core vote? In parts of the country,
:26:55. > :26:58.we are down to just three councillors like Liverpool for
:26:59. > :27:01.example. You also lose the deliverers and fundraisers and the
:27:02. > :27:07.organisers and the members of course so all of that will have to be
:27:08. > :27:11.rebuilt. As they start fermenting process, local parties across the
:27:12. > :27:17.country and here in Liverpool have been voting on whether there should
:27:18. > :27:23.be a leadership contest. We had two choices to flush out and have a go
:27:24. > :27:26.at Nick Clegg or to positively decide we would sharpen up the
:27:27. > :27:31.campaign and get back on the streets, and by four to one ratio we
:27:32. > :27:37.decided to get back on the streets. We are bruised and battered but we
:27:38. > :27:42.are still here, the orange flag is still flying and one day it will fly
:27:43. > :27:48.over this building again, Liverpool town hall. But do people want the
:27:49. > :27:52.Lib Dems back in charge in this city? I certainly wouldn't vote for
:27:53. > :27:56.them. Their performance in Government and the way they have
:27:57. > :28:03.left their promises down, I could not vote for them again. I voted Lib
:28:04. > :28:09.Dem in the last election because of the university tuition fees and I
:28:10. > :28:13.would never vote for them again because they broke their promise.
:28:14. > :28:17.The Lib Dems are awful, broken promises and what have you. I
:28:18. > :28:21.wouldn't vote for them. This is the declaration of the results for the
:28:22. > :28:26.Northwest... Last month, as other party celebrated in the north-west,
:28:27. > :28:32.the Lib Dems here lost their only MEP, Chris Davies. Now there is
:28:33. > :28:38.concern the party doesn't know how to turn its fortunes around. We
:28:39. > :28:45.don't have an answer to that, if we did we would be grasping it with
:28:46. > :28:50.both hands. We will do our best to hold onto the places where we still
:28:51. > :28:55.have seats but as for the rest of the country where we have been
:28:56. > :28:59.hollowed out, we don't know how to start again until the next general
:29:00. > :29:02.election is out of the way. After their disastrous performance in the
:29:03. > :29:12.European elections, pressure is growing for the party to shift its
:29:13. > :29:17.stance. I think there has to be a lancing of the wound, there should
:29:18. > :29:24.in a referendum and the Liberal Democrats should be calling it. The
:29:25. > :29:30.rest of Europe once this because they are fed up with Britain being
:29:31. > :29:34.unable to make up its mind. The Lib Dems are now suffering the effects
:29:35. > :29:40.of being in Government. The party's problem, choosing the right course
:29:41. > :29:46.to regain political credibility We can now speak to form a Lib Dems
:29:47. > :29:50.leader Ming Campbell. Welcome back to the Sunday Politics. Even your
:29:51. > :29:58.own activists say that Nick Clegg is toxic. How will that change between
:29:59. > :30:02.now and the election? When you have had disappointing results, but you
:30:03. > :30:07.have to do is to rebuild. You pick yourself up and start all over
:30:08. > :30:11.again, and the reason why the Liberal Democrats got 57, 56 seats
:30:12. > :30:16.in the House of Commons now is because we picked ourselves up, we
:30:17. > :30:26.took every opportunity and we have rebuilt from the bottom up.
:30:27. > :30:29.least popular leader in modern history and more unpopular than your
:30:30. > :30:35.mate Gordon Brown. You are running out of time. No one believes that
:30:36. > :30:38.being the leader of a modern political party in the UK is an easy
:30:39. > :30:42.job. Both Ed Miliband and David Cameron must have had cause to
:30:43. > :30:47.think, over breakfast this morning, when they saw the headlines in some
:30:48. > :30:51.of the Sunday papers. Of course it is a difficult job but it was
:30:52. > :30:54.pointed out a moment or two ago that Nick Clegg is a man of principle and
:30:55. > :30:58.enormous resilience if you consider what he had to put up with, and in
:30:59. > :31:02.my view, he is quite clearly the person best qualified to lead the
:31:03. > :31:05.party between now and the general election and through the election
:31:06. > :31:10.campaign, and beyond. So why don't people like him? We have had to take
:31:11. > :31:14.some pretty difficult decisions and, of course, people didn't expect
:31:15. > :31:21.that. If you look back to the rather heady days of the rose garden behind
:31:22. > :31:24.ten Downing St, people thought it was all going to be sweetness and
:31:25. > :31:29.light, but the fact is, we didn t know then what we know now, about
:31:30. > :31:33.the extent of the economic crisis we win, and a lot of difficult
:31:34. > :31:37.decisions have had to be taken in order to restore economic stability.
:31:38. > :31:43.Look around you. You will see we are not there yet but we are a long way
:31:44. > :31:49.better off than in 2010. You are not getting the credit for it, the
:31:50. > :31:54.Tories are. We will be a little more assertive about taking the credit.
:31:55. > :31:58.For example, the fact that 23 million people have had a tax cut of
:31:59. > :32:02.?800 per year and we have taken 2 million people out of paying tax
:32:03. > :32:07.altogether. Ming Campbell, your people say that on every programme
:32:08. > :32:12.like this. Because it is true. That might be the case, but you are at
:32:13. > :32:14.seven or 8% in the polls, and nobody is listening, or they don't believe
:32:15. > :32:22.it. Once is listening, or they don't believe
:32:23. > :32:25.doubt that what we have achieved will be much more easily
:32:26. > :32:29.recognised, and there is no doubt, for example, in some of the recent
:32:30. > :32:31.polls, like the Ashcroft Pole, something like 30% of those polled
:32:32. > :32:39.said that as a result at the next something like 30% of those polled
:32:40. > :32:42.general election, they would prepare their to be a coalition involving
:32:43. > :32:47.the Liberal Democrats. So there is no question that the whole notion of
:32:48. > :32:52.coalition is still very much a live one, and one which we have made work
:32:53. > :32:56.in the public interest. The problem is people don't think that. People
:32:57. > :33:00.see you trying to have your cake and eat it. On the one hand you want to
:33:01. > :33:03.get your share of the credit for the turnaround in the economy, on the
:33:04. > :33:07.other hand you can't stop yourself from distancing yourself from the
:33:08. > :33:14.Tories and things that you did not like happening. You are trying to
:33:15. > :33:14.face both ways at once. If you remember our fellow Scotsman
:33:15. > :33:27.famously said you cannot ride both remember our fellow Scotsman
:33:28. > :33:28.to the terms -- terms of the remember our fellow Scotsman
:33:29. > :33:32.coalition agreement, which is what we signed up to in 2010. In
:33:33. > :33:36.addition, in furtherance of that agreement, we have created things
:33:37. > :33:40.like the pupil premium and the others I mentioned and you were
:33:41. > :33:42.rather dismissive. I'm not dismissive, I'm just saying they
:33:43. > :33:46.don't make a difference to what people think of you. We will do
:33:47. > :33:52.everything in our power to change that between now and May 2015. The
:33:53. > :33:58.interesting thing is, going back to the Ashcroft result, it demonstrated
:33:59. > :34:03.clearly that in constituencies where we have MPs and we are well dug in,
:34:04. > :34:08.we are doing everything that the public expects of us, and we are
:34:09. > :34:13.doing very well indeed. You aren't sure fellow Lib Dems have been
:34:14. > :34:17.saying this for you -- you and your fellow Liberal Dems have been saying
:34:18. > :34:21.this for a year or 18 months, and since then you have lost all of your
:34:22. > :34:24.MEPs apart from one, you lost your deposit in a by-election, you lost
:34:25. > :34:30.310 councillor, including everyone in Manchester or Islington. Mr Clegg
:34:31. > :34:36.leading you into the next general election will be the equivalent of
:34:37. > :34:41.the charge of the light Brigade I doubt that very much. The
:34:42. > :34:45.implication behind that lit you rehearsed is that we should pack our
:34:46. > :34:51.tents in the night and steal away. -- that litany. And if you heard in
:34:52. > :34:54.that piece that preceded the discussion, people were saying, look
:34:55. > :35:08.we have to start from the bottom and have to rebuild. That is exactly
:35:09. > :35:13.what we will do. Nine months is a period of gestation. As you well
:35:14. > :35:17.know. I wouldn't dismiss it quite so easily as that. I'm not here to say
:35:18. > :35:22.we had a wonderful result or anything like it, but what I do say
:35:23. > :35:25.is that the party is determined to turn it round, and that Nick Clegg
:35:26. > :35:31.is the person best qualified to do it. Should your party adopt a
:35:32. > :35:36.referendum about in or out on Europe? No, we should stick to the
:35:37. > :35:40.coalition agreement. If there is any transfer of power from Westminster
:35:41. > :35:46.to Brussels, that will be subject to a referendum. No change. And
:35:47. > :35:51.finally, as a Lib Dem, you must be glad you are not fighting the next
:35:52. > :35:57.election yourself? I've fought every election since 1974, so I've had a
:35:58. > :36:01.few experiences, some good, some bad, but the one thing I have done
:36:02. > :36:04.and the one thing a lot of other people have done is that they have
:36:05. > :36:07.stuck to the task, and that is what will happen in May 2015. Ming
:36:08. > :36:10.Campbell, thank you for joining us. It's just gone 11.35am, you're
:36:11. > :36:13.watching the Sunday Politics. Hello again from the Midlands.
:36:14. > :36:27.in Scotland who leave us now I'm Patrick Burns and we're turning
:36:28. > :36:31.the tables on two of the Colmons This, though, is where they face
:36:32. > :36:39.the questions for a change. Karen Lumley, Conservative LP
:36:40. > :36:43.for Redditch in Worcestershhre ` she's on the Transport
:36:44. > :36:46.Select Committee. David Winnick,
:36:47. > :36:50.Labour MP for Walsall North, is on the Home Affairs Select Comlittee,
:36:51. > :36:53.which he first joined, would you And it's with
:36:54. > :37:02.the home affairs committee that we begin because David was
:37:03. > :37:05.in attendance for a session The chair of
:37:06. > :37:08.Birmingham City Council's children's services was one of three whtnesses
:37:09. > :37:11.who was sure the MPs there was no convincing evidence of an extremist
:37:12. > :37:14.plot to indoctrinate childrdn I think there's been some confusion
:37:15. > :37:26.between extremism and religious conservatism
:37:27. > :37:28.and those are different things. There's also been confusion between
:37:29. > :37:32.extremism and bad governancd, in my opinion, and I think there were some
:37:33. > :37:35.actions taken because of people s religion but also some actions taken
:37:36. > :37:38.by people who happened to share one religion
:37:39. > :37:40.and within the long ongoing dialogue about this, much has been confused
:37:41. > :37:45.between those different things. The message
:37:46. > :37:48.from her is that there has been some confusion but there are surd and
:37:49. > :37:52.so is there has not been evhdence There is continuing controvdrsy
:37:53. > :38:03.but there isn't always agredment even between members of Parliament
:38:04. > :38:09.of same party about what prdcisely But perhaps one could say that there
:38:10. > :38:19.may have been various actions taken by governors which I would certainly
:38:20. > :38:22.disapprove of The evidence that we heard
:38:23. > :38:26.on Tuesday is that this school in particular,
:38:27. > :38:34.the person who was giving... A teacher, not a Muslim,
:38:35. > :38:37.as far as I understand, was saying that he was satisfied that dxtremism
:38:38. > :38:41.certainly hadn't taken placd. On the governorship issue, the
:38:42. > :38:46.concern we heard from Bridgdt Jones, we're hearing of leading Muslim
:38:47. > :38:54.figures in the community saxing that Michael Gove's insistence
:38:55. > :39:02.on Britishness is making it more or difficult for Muslims to serve
:39:03. > :39:04.as trustees and governors and we're hearing that some have
:39:05. > :39:06.resigned in protest. We need to make sure that governors
:39:07. > :39:22.are held accountable I think whichever religion xou
:39:23. > :39:24.come from, that's irrelevant. This is about making sure that
:39:25. > :39:27.our children only get one chance If these leaders aren't holding
:39:28. > :39:31.the heads to account, they shouldn't be governors
:39:32. > :39:38.and should be stripped of that. The senior teacher to whom David
:39:39. > :39:40.referred told the committee that it was ilpossible
:39:41. > :39:43.for the Ofsted inspector to do an impartial job because
:39:44. > :39:45.of the extreme atmosphere around I've been through several Ofsted
:39:46. > :39:49.inspections and I think thex do When I first started,
:39:50. > :39:54.Ofsted inspectors gave you six`months' noticed that thdy were
:39:55. > :39:56.going to come. I think they should be able
:39:57. > :40:02.to knock on the door. Do you think the teacher
:40:03. > :40:04.in question, Mr Donaghy from Parkview, h`d a
:40:05. > :40:06.point about Ofsted's imparthality? Well, I'm not altogether
:40:07. > :40:08.certain about that. What I'm concerned about is creating
:40:09. > :40:13.an atmosphere where Muslim schools are being seen in
:40:14. > :40:30.a different light than other schools And as I've said before, I'l
:40:31. > :40:33.against extremism of any kind in any They're perhaps has been
:40:34. > :40:37.an element of exaggeration `nd I would very much be concerned
:40:38. > :40:40.if it was an atmosphere which could A health warning `
:40:41. > :40:45.mixing sport with politics can be Protests on the street
:40:46. > :40:49.as the beautiful game turns ugly. It's the political football that
:40:50. > :40:51.could leave our local taxpaxers More
:40:52. > :40:55.on this coming up a little later. Well, one of the great sellhng
:40:56. > :40:58.points of high`speed rail for the pro HS2 lobby has bden job
:40:59. > :41:02.creation so it was surprising to say the least when a leading advocate
:41:03. > :41:25.of the project had one of its major Washwood Heath looks more
:41:26. > :41:28.like a wasteland these days than It was home to LDV which, in its
:41:29. > :41:40.heyday, employed 800 peopld here. Now HS2's earmarked the sitd
:41:41. > :41:42.for a depot cleaning The local MP's not happy and has
:41:43. > :41:49.called for the plans to be scrapped. It's the size
:41:50. > :41:51.of 105 football pitches, Sites like that don't come onto the
:41:52. > :41:58.market very often and that's why what the planners at the cotncil
:41:59. > :42:01.have said to me and the private sector have said to me is, "look,
:42:02. > :42:06.you can get thousands of jobs on this site in the short`term," so
:42:07. > :42:09.what I'm demanding is the bdst for Birmingham and the best
:42:10. > :42:11.for HodgeHill. Responding to Liam Byrne's concerns,
:42:12. > :42:17.the transport minister said Whilst the local MP has his doubts,
:42:18. > :43:05.this business leader told md that It's too valuable and opportunity.
:43:06. > :43:19.much`needed jobs is the wrong call. High`speed engineering is
:43:20. > :45:02.Birmingham's Olympic opporttnity. I certainly hope there will be
:45:03. > :45:04.further talks and negotiations. I've debated with myself if that's
:45:05. > :45:08.the magic special about HS2 and I conclude this is the overall
:45:09. > :45:11.interest of the West Midlands. I wouldn't be supporting it
:45:12. > :45:14.otherwise, considering all the costs I remain of the view that it's in
:45:15. > :45:21.the overall interests of thd West Midlands but as far as this place is
:45:22. > :45:49.concerned, if it can providd jobs of the kind Liam Byrne is suggdsting `
:45:50. > :45:53.and he is a supporter of HS2 ` I perhaps we should avoid too much
:45:54. > :45:56.dogmatism. It may well be at the end of it all that HS2, the
:45:57. > :46:00.organisation, turn out to bd right. But simply to clamp down on it now
:46:01. > :46:03.and say, " under no circumstances can the yard be used for jobs,"
:46:04. > :46:06.I have hesitation is about that What you think
:46:07. > :46:08.about this suggestion of Chhnese investment after we've had
:46:09. > :46:10.the visit of the Chinese prdmier? We're open to Chinese investment all
:46:11. > :46:12.over, I've got nothing
:46:13. > :46:15.against HS2 being invested hn by The most important thing is, we need
:46:16. > :46:21.HS2 and we need it as soon `s. We need HS2 and we need plenty
:46:22. > :46:23.of jobs. So Liam Byrne isn't just dohng
:46:24. > :46:26.a coded message to suggest Labour There has been speculation that
:46:27. > :46:30.Ed Balls as Chancellor would put We're not committed on the basis
:46:31. > :46:37.of everlasting escalated costs, Thank you. I don't know
:46:38. > :46:56.about World Cup fever but for some of our local authorities, football
:46:57. > :46:59.can be a bit like catching ` cold. Sport and politics can be
:47:00. > :47:02.a toxic mix which seriously damages Coventry,
:47:03. > :47:04.Herefordshire and Stoke`on`Trent at one time or another have all
:47:05. > :47:11.missed becoming the real losers in a game of political football ``
:47:12. > :47:17.risked. BBC Midlands today's sports
:47:18. > :47:18.presenter explains why. In the world of football, the
:47:19. > :47:21.maxim that sport and politics don't Witness the protests on the
:47:22. > :47:26.streets of Brazil over the billions Closer to home there have bden
:47:27. > :47:33.questions about the role Hereford Council has to play in the future of
:47:34. > :47:37.Herefordshire united football club. The whole thing as been a dhsaster
:47:38. > :47:41.for the fans, the city, the county The local council owns the land on
:47:42. > :47:50.which the Edgar Street stand stands. The local authority is owed ?65 000
:47:51. > :47:54.in rent, rate and legal sees ` money they'll probably never see
:47:55. > :48:02.again after the club were expelled from the Football Conferencd with
:48:03. > :48:04.spiralling debts. If there were a more equitable
:48:05. > :48:06.distribution of money betwedn the Premier League and the lower
:48:07. > :48:09.leagues, this wouldn't happdn. The sums you are talking
:48:10. > :48:13.about are few weeks wages Stoke`on`Trent City Council wrote
:48:14. > :48:29.off ?1.5 million owed by portfolio football club two years ago. `` Port
:48:30. > :48:32.Vale Football Club. At the same time,
:48:33. > :48:34.the authority was axing hundreds of Over at Coventry City, the football
:48:35. > :48:38.club fell behind with rental payments for the Ricoh Aren`,
:48:39. > :48:41.repeatedly by more than ?1 lillion. The stadium is partly owned
:48:42. > :48:43.by the council. The Sky Blues have now left
:48:44. > :48:45.the city altogether The club's former owners accused the
:48:46. > :48:49.council of illegally loaning ?1 The council say it was legal,
:48:50. > :48:53.the dispute ended up in court and a judge is due to announce
:48:54. > :48:56.a final ruling next Monday. Is it any wonder that taxpaxers from
:48:57. > :49:00.Brazil to Birmingham are asking is So is it really for councils and,
:49:01. > :49:11.ultimately, taxpayers to carry the can financially when football
:49:12. > :49:16.clubs fall on hard times? We're
:49:17. > :49:18.also joined today by a leadhng authority on the politics and
:49:19. > :49:20.culture of sport, Professor Ellis Jesse Norman is calling for
:49:21. > :49:37.something akin to a redistrhbution of wealth in football and wd know at
:49:38. > :49:41.the top that is awash with loney. Hard`pressed council taxpaydrs may
:49:42. > :49:44.think it is up to football to mature `` ensure there is a fair
:49:45. > :49:49.distribution. I can see their point of vidw
:49:50. > :49:52.but there is another case. When you think about it, football
:49:53. > :49:55.clubs do create jobs and th`t generates revenue that is ttrned
:49:56. > :49:57.into tax and there are intangible factors like civic pride and there
:49:58. > :50:00.some parts of the country where the identity of the town or citx is
:50:01. > :50:04.integrated with that of the club. You can't imagine Wolverhampton
:50:05. > :50:06.without the Wolves, for exalple So in many parts of the world,
:50:07. > :50:08.Europe, the United States, they think nothing
:50:09. > :50:11.of helping out not just thehr football clubs but sports clubs
:50:12. > :50:16.in general because they do feel On the other side
:50:17. > :50:24.of the balance sheet, as you pointed out, a lot of people
:50:25. > :50:28.will look askance at this and say, "these are not just million`ire
:50:29. > :50:32.clubs but billionaire clubs, so why So what's the answer? We've heard
:50:33. > :50:44.suggestions in commentary that some of the fans could club together to
:50:45. > :50:46.cover the cost. Are there other ways
:50:47. > :50:49.of trying to help which doesn't put much more burden on hard`prdssed
:50:50. > :50:51.finances of local authoritids? There are other ways
:50:52. > :50:53.but I'm not going to be I'm a Democrat to the last `nd I
:50:54. > :50:58.say, let the people decide. But I'd want to know
:50:59. > :51:13.from the citizens of Coventry whether they would be prepared to
:51:14. > :51:16.cough up an extra fiver on their If they want the club
:51:17. > :51:20.and they're prepared to havd some part of their taxes paid ring fenced
:51:21. > :51:23.for that, that's their decision We heard your party colleagte
:51:24. > :51:26.Jesse Norman say it was I've had serious experience ``
:51:27. > :51:30.similar experience with Redditch Well,
:51:31. > :51:39.Hereford and Redditch could both be Redditch United have been in debt
:51:40. > :51:45.many times over the years and Now there are new owners in who
:51:46. > :51:50.at the moment, are doing a fantastic job but I don't think it's
:51:51. > :51:53.up to local taxpayers to bahl them out although I do what Reddhtch
:51:54. > :51:56.United frequently and they're doing But I think it's up to
:51:57. > :52:00.the townspeople to support that How important is the football to
:52:01. > :52:03.deem `` football team in Walsall, bearing in mind what Ellis was
:52:04. > :52:05.saying about the reputation`l and economic balance you get
:52:06. > :52:10.from having a football club? It's very much part of it,
:52:11. > :52:13.like Wolves in Wolverhampton. There's no question whether we
:52:14. > :52:16.could ever be without the S`dlers. Fortunately, the sort of financial
:52:17. > :52:28.problems which have been mentioned in Coventry and elsewhere h`ve
:52:29. > :52:31.not arisen, at least recently. Are you comfortable with Labour
:52:32. > :52:35.authorities, in effect, helping to bail out the likds
:52:36. > :52:45.of Port Vale in Stoke`on`Trdnt and the problems with the Ricoh Arena
:52:46. > :52:50.in Coventry. As far as Coventry is concerned
:52:51. > :53:02.it seems to me that I have sympathy with the action the council has
:53:03. > :53:06.taken the council has taken. I think you've got to
:53:07. > :53:12.appreciate that... Some people don't see footb`ll clubs
:53:13. > :53:15.as anything but businesses but many other people ` and I
:53:16. > :53:21.include myself and I think xou would ` see football clubs
:53:22. > :53:24.as part of the cultural landscape. The reluctance
:53:25. > :53:26.of local authorities just to... I understand the reluctance, yes,
:53:27. > :53:29.but I'm not necessarily sayhng that they shouldn't at least consider
:53:30. > :53:31.helping out clubs. Because we do seem to have
:53:32. > :53:33.a problem. A few years ago, Manchester City
:53:34. > :53:47.Council built what was then the City of Manchester Stadium specifically
:53:48. > :53:50.for the Commonwealth Games. After it was finished with,
:53:51. > :53:53.they go to Manchester City `nd say, Call it the Etihad,
:53:54. > :54:12.whatever, and we'll let you have rate". I don't hear Manchester
:54:13. > :54:15.taxpayers complaining. There are very few thanks,
:54:16. > :54:22.it seems to me, from local We've seen
:54:23. > :54:31.in Coventry where one of thd fans' groups ran a candidate against
:54:32. > :54:34.the Labour council leader there In a way, it's a rocky road for
:54:35. > :54:37.any councillors getting involved. I think it is but I think also that
:54:38. > :54:40.football, especially small clubs, It's not just going to watch
:54:41. > :54:44.on Saturday that they provide youth I think people see their cltb
:54:45. > :54:49.as part of a community, not just I do think that football cltbs
:54:50. > :54:55.are more than businesses. They are businesses
:54:56. > :54:57.but they're something else `s well. Now for our regular update on the
:54:58. > :55:06.political developments making the news here over the past week, our
:55:07. > :55:10.round`up in 60 seconds, brotght to us this time by BBC WM mid`lorning
:55:11. > :55:12.presenter Adrian Goldberg. Lichfield Conservative MP Mhchael
:55:13. > :55:14.Fabricant got into trouble on Twitter again, suggesting he
:55:15. > :55:16.might punch newspaper columnist The PM said his comments were
:55:17. > :55:30.completely unacceptable. The Highways Agency says it's doing
:55:31. > :55:34.its best to speed up roadworks which are causing horrendous traffic jams
:55:35. > :55:36.around Coventry's Toll Bar Hsland. A direct rail service
:55:37. > :55:38.from Shropshire to London is back It is due to be reintroduced
:55:39. > :55:42.by the end of the year. It will allow Shrewsbury businessmen
:55:43. > :55:45.to be in central London, do a full Conservative Mike Bird remahns
:55:46. > :55:48.leader of Walsall Council after They have more councillors than
:55:49. > :55:53.the Tories And six of the region's NHS Trusts
:55:54. > :55:58.are in deficit by a total The University Hospital of
:55:59. > :56:02.North Staffordshire is in the red Worcestershire Acute Hospit`ls
:56:03. > :56:31.by ?12 million. And just for good measure, the Save
:56:32. > :56:35.The Alex campaign on behalf of a hospital in Karen's constittency
:56:36. > :56:37.tell me they're infuriated by what they call the breaking news that
:56:38. > :56:40.Worcestershire acute hospit`ls have levels. Karen,
:56:41. > :56:43.you've been doing your best to stop this issue blowing up all over your
:56:44. > :56:46.constituency as the general election Worcestershire Acute
:56:47. > :56:57.Hospitals They went out to consultation three
:56:58. > :57:01.years ago and we still haven't seen This should have been done,
:57:02. > :57:05.dusted and we should have bden able to get on with getting bettdr
:57:06. > :57:08.services and I'm really dis`ppointed People may be concerned
:57:09. > :57:11.about the quality of the service if The debt that I know
:57:12. > :57:15.about is a bit less than the figures you are talking
:57:16. > :57:17.about but it isn't acceptable. We've got to come up with a plan
:57:18. > :57:21.for the whole of the Worcestershire trust and that has got to bd to go
:57:22. > :57:24.out to consultation and the people of Redditch have got
:57:25. > :57:28.to be able to have their sax. You'll have heard David Camdron
:57:29. > :57:31.in the Commons say that we have these warnings all the time
:57:32. > :57:34.and yet year after year, thd trusts still find a way of absorbing
:57:35. > :57:37.measures that are required `nd the Yes, but it certainly
:57:38. > :57:41.needs more funding. Would a future Labour government
:57:42. > :57:44.give it more funding? It certainly did so last tile
:57:45. > :57:52.and whatever may happen in the future, nobody disputes ` as
:57:53. > :57:57.far as I understand the Conservative Party doesn't dispute ` that very
:57:58. > :57:59.substantial funding went into the NHS under the last Labour government
:58:00. > :58:02.and I'm very pleased about that A very quick word about the latest
:58:03. > :58:05.Twitter indiscretion, if I can put It seems to be another gaffd,
:58:06. > :58:09.another week. Will you be having
:58:10. > :58:17.a word with him when you sed him I think he's realised the error
:58:18. > :58:21.of his ways but I think that's I'm
:58:22. > :58:27.on my best behaviour this morning. I'll make no comment about Lr
:58:28. > :58:31.Fabricant. We'll see what excitement hd
:58:32. > :58:39.has lined up for us next wedk. My thanks to Karen Lumley
:58:40. > :58:41.and to David Winnick. Finally, what is it
:58:42. > :58:45.about library closures, I wonder? They absolutely infuriates
:58:46. > :58:48.so many people and get councils Do you remember a couple of years
:58:49. > :58:54.ago, Gloucestershire had thdir plans Well, despite assurances to the
:58:55. > :59:06.contrary, another of our biggest local authorities wants budget cuts
:59:07. > :59:08.to come in which critics sax would It's a big talking point
:59:09. > :59:14.and that is going to be one of our issues for this programme
:59:15. > :59:17.next Sunday. I hope you'll join us. This is where we will rejoin
:59:18. > :59:21.Andrew Neil. information, you can apply to them
:59:22. > :59:24.and they will be obliged to tell you. Thanks for joining us. Andrew,
:59:25. > :59:43.back to you. think you'd want to. Labour grandees
:59:44. > :59:49.are not queueing up to sing his praises. Look at this. In my view,
:59:50. > :59:52.he is the leader we have and he is the leader I support and he is
:59:53. > :59:58.somebody capable of leading the party to victory. Ed Miliband will
:59:59. > :00:05.leave this to victory, and I believe he can. If he doesn't, what would
:00:06. > :00:09.happen to the Labour Party? We could be in the wilderness for 15 years.
:00:10. > :00:13.At the moment he has to convince people he has the capacity to lead
:00:14. > :00:18.the country. That's not my view but people don't believe that. We had a
:00:19. > :00:24.leader of the Labour Party was publicly embarrassed, because
:00:25. > :00:28.whoever was in charge of press letting go through a process where
:00:29. > :00:37.we have councillors in Merseyside resigning. It was a schoolboy error.
:00:38. > :00:46.Having policies without them being drawn together into a convincing and
:00:47. > :00:51.vivid narrative and with what you do the people in the country. You have
:00:52. > :00:57.to draw together, connect the policies, link them back to the
:00:58. > :01:06.leader and give people a real sense of where you are going. Somehow he
:01:07. > :01:12.has never quite managed to be himself and create that identity
:01:13. > :01:15.with the public. And we are joined by the president of you girls, Peter
:01:16. > :01:26.Kellner. Welcome to the Sunday politics. -- YouGov. The Labour
:01:27. > :01:30.Party is six points ahead in your poll this morning. So what is the
:01:31. > :01:35.problem? On this basis he will win the next election. If the election
:01:36. > :01:39.were today and the figures held up, you would have a Labour government
:01:40. > :01:44.with a narrow overall majority. One should not forget that. Let me make
:01:45. > :01:49.three points. The first is, in past parliaments, opposition normally
:01:50. > :01:55.lose ground and governments gain ground in the final few months. The
:01:56. > :02:01.opposition should be further ahead than this. I don't think six is
:02:02. > :02:04.enough. Secondly, Ed Miliband is behind David Cameron when people are
:02:05. > :02:07.asked who they want as Prime Minister and Labour is behind the
:02:08. > :02:11.Conservatives went people are asked who they trust on the economy. There
:02:12. > :02:14.have been elections when the party has won by being behind on
:02:15. > :02:18.leadership and other elections where they have won by being behind on the
:02:19. > :02:21.economy. No party has ever won an election when it has been clearly
:02:22. > :02:27.behind on both leadership and the economy. Let me have another go The
:02:28. > :02:32.Labour Party brand is a strong brand. The Tory Bramleys week. The
:02:33. > :02:41.Labour brand is stronger. That is a blast -- the Labour -- the Tory
:02:42. > :02:49.Bramleys week. A lot of the Tories -- the Tory brand is weak. Cant you
:02:50. > :02:56.win on policies and a strong party brand? If you have those too, you
:02:57. > :03:01.need the third factor which isn t there. People believing that you
:03:02. > :03:03.have what it takes, competent skills, determination,
:03:04. > :03:14.determination, whatever makes to carry through. -- whatever mix. A
:03:15. > :03:17.lot of Ed Miliband policies, on the banks, energy prices, Brent
:03:18. > :03:21.controls, people like them. But in government, would they carry them
:03:22. > :03:26.through? They think they are not up to it. -- rent controls. If people
:03:27. > :03:30.think you won't deliver what you say, even if they like it, they were
:03:31. > :03:35.necessarily vote for you. That is the missing third element. There is
:03:36. > :03:40.a strong Labour brand, but it's not strong enough to overcome the
:03:41. > :03:46.feeling that the Labour leadership is not up to it. Nick, you had some
:03:47. > :03:50.senior Labour figure telling you that if Mr Miliband losing the next
:03:51. > :03:53.election he will have to resign immediately and cannot fight another
:03:54. > :03:58.election the way Neil Kinnock did after 1987. What was remarkable to
:03:59. > :04:01.me was that people were even thinking along these lines, and even
:04:02. > :04:07.more remarkable that they would tell you they were thinking along these
:04:08. > :04:14.lines? What is the problem? The problem is, is that Ed Miliband says
:04:15. > :04:18.it would be unprecedented to win the general election after the second
:04:19. > :04:21.worst result since 1918. They are concerned about is the start of a
:04:22. > :04:24.script that he would say on the day after losing the general election.
:04:25. > :04:28.Essentially what the people are trying to do is get their argument
:04:29. > :04:33.in first and to say, you cannot do what Neil Kinnock did in 1987. Don't
:04:34. > :04:36.forget that Neil Kinnock in 198 was in the middle of a very brave
:04:37. > :04:41.process of modernisation and had one and fought a very campaign that was
:04:42. > :04:46.professional but he lost again in 1992, and they wanted to get their
:04:47. > :04:52.line in first. What some people are saying is that this is an election
:04:53. > :04:55.that the Labour Party should be winning because the coalition is so
:04:56. > :04:58.unpopular. If you don't win, I'm afraid to say, there is something
:04:59. > :05:02.wrong with you. Don't you find it remarkable that people are prepared
:05:03. > :05:04.to think along these lines at this stage, when Labour are ahead in the
:05:05. > :05:10.polls, still the bookies favourite to win, and you start to speak
:05:11. > :05:15.publicly, or in private to the public print, but we might have to
:05:16. > :05:18.get rid of him if he doesn't win. Everything you say about labour in
:05:19. > :05:21.this situation has been said about the Tories. We wondered whether
:05:22. > :05:25.Boris Johnson would tie himself to the mask and he is the next leader
:05:26. > :05:30.in waiting if Cameron goes. It's a mirror image of that. We talk about
:05:31. > :05:33.things being unprecedented. It's unprecedented for a government to
:05:34. > :05:36.gain seats. All the things you say about labour, you could say it the
:05:37. > :05:41.Conservatives. That's what makes the next election so interesting. But in
:05:42. > :05:43.the aftermath of the European elections and the local government
:05:44. > :05:47.elections, in which the Conservatives did not do that well,
:05:48. > :05:51.the issue was not Mr Cameron or the Tories doing well, the issue was the
:05:52. > :05:54.Labour Party and how they had not done as well as they should have
:05:55. > :05:57.done, and that conversation was fuelled by the kind of people who
:05:58. > :06:03.have been speaking to nick from the Labour Party. Rachel Reeves cited
:06:04. > :06:06.their real-life performance in elections as a reason for optimism.
:06:07. > :06:11.When in fact their performance in the Europeans and locals was
:06:12. > :06:15.disappointing for an opposition one year away from a general election.
:06:16. > :06:19.What alarms me about labour is the way they react to criticisms about
:06:20. > :06:23.Ed Miliband. Two years ago when he was attacked, they said they were 15
:06:24. > :06:26.points ahead, and then a year ago there were saying they were nine or
:06:27. > :06:31.ten ahead, and now they are saying we are still five or six ahead. The
:06:32. > :06:37.trend is alarming. It points to a smaller Labour lead. Am I right in
:06:38. > :06:42.detecting a bit of a class war going on in the Labour Party? There are a
:06:43. > :06:45.lot of northern Labour MPs who think that Ed Miliband is to north London,
:06:46. > :06:53.and there are too many metropolitan cronies around him must I think that
:06:54. > :06:57.is right, Andrew. What I think is, being a pessimist in terms of their
:06:58. > :07:02.prospects, I do think the Labour Party could win the next election. I
:07:03. > :07:05.just don't think they can as they are going at the moment. But the
:07:06. > :07:12.positioning for a possible defeat, what they should be talking about is
:07:13. > :07:15.what do we need to change in the party and the way Ed Miliband
:07:16. > :07:20.performs in order to secure victory. That is a debate they could have,
:07:21. > :07:26.and they could make the changes I find it odd that they are being so
:07:27. > :07:30.defeatist. Don't go away. Peter is a boffin when it comes to polls. That
:07:31. > :07:35.is why we have a mod for the election prediction swings and
:07:36. > :07:41.roundabouts. He is looking for what he calls the incumbency effect.
:07:42. > :07:44.Don't know what is a back-up -- what that's about question don't worry,
:07:45. > :07:54.here is an. Being in office is bad for your health. Political folk
:07:55. > :07:59.wisdom has it that incumbency favours one party in particular the
:08:00. > :08:02.Liberal Democrats. That is because their MPs have a reputation as
:08:03. > :08:07.ferociously good local campaigners who do really well at holding on to
:08:08. > :08:10.their seats. However, this time round, several big-name long serving
:08:11. > :08:17.Liberal Democrats like Ming Campbell, David Heath and Don Foster
:08:18. > :08:20.are standing down. Does that mean the incumbency effect disappears
:08:21. > :08:26.like a puff of smoke? Then there is another theory, called the sophomore
:08:27. > :08:31.surge. It might sound like a movie about US college kids, but it goes
:08:32. > :08:35.like this. New MPs tend to do better in their second election than they
:08:36. > :08:39.did in their first. That could favour the Tories because they have
:08:40. > :08:44.lots of first-time MPs. The big question is, what does this mean for
:08:45. > :08:51.the 7th of May 2015, the date of the next general election? The answer
:08:52. > :08:59.is, who knows? I know a man who knows. Peter. What does it all mean?
:09:00. > :09:02.You can go onto your PC now and draw down programmes which say that these
:09:03. > :09:07.are the voting figures from a national poll, so what will the
:09:08. > :09:10.seats look like? This is based on uniform swing. Every seat moving up
:09:11. > :09:15.and down across the country in the same way. Historically, that's been
:09:16. > :09:20.a pretty good guide. I think that's going to completely break down next
:09:21. > :09:23.year, because the Lib Dems will probably hold on to more seats than
:09:24. > :09:28.we predict from the national figures and I think fewer Tory seats will go
:09:29. > :09:33.to the Labour Party than you would predict from the national figures.
:09:34. > :09:38.The precise numbers, I'm not going to be too precise, but I would be
:09:39. > :09:43.surprised, sorry, I would not be surprised if Labour fell 20 or 5
:09:44. > :09:51.seats short on what we would expect on the uniform swing prediction
:09:52. > :09:53.Next year's election will be tight. Falling 20 seats short could well
:09:54. > :09:59.mean the difference between victory and defeat. What you make of that,
:10:00. > :10:03.Helen? I think you're right, especially taking into account the
:10:04. > :10:07.UKIP effect. We have no idea about that. The conventional wisdom is
:10:08. > :10:11.that will drain away back to the Conservatives, but nobody knows and
:10:12. > :10:16.it makes the next election almost impossible to call. It means it is a
:10:17. > :10:18.great target the people like Lord Ashcroft with marginal polling,
:10:19. > :10:24.because people have never been so interested. It is for party politics
:10:25. > :10:30.and we all assume that UKIP should be well next year, but their vote
:10:31. > :10:36.went up from 17 up to 27%. Then that 17% went down to 3%, so they might
:10:37. > :10:39.only be five or 6% in the general election, so they might not have the
:10:40. > :10:43.threat of depriving Conservatives of their seats. Where the incumbency
:10:44. > :10:49.thing has an effect is the Liberal Democrats. They have fortress seats
:10:50. > :10:53.where between 1992 and 1997 Liberal Democrats seats fell, but their
:10:54. > :10:57.percentage went up. They are losing the local government base though.
:10:58. > :11:02.True, but having people like Ming Campbell standing down means they
:11:03. > :11:05.will struggle. We are used to incumbency being an important factor
:11:06. > :11:10.in American politics. It's hard to get rid of an incumbent unless it is
:11:11. > :11:13.a primary election, like we saw in Virginia, but is it now becoming an
:11:14. > :11:17.important factor in British politics, that if you own the seat
:11:18. > :11:23.you're more likely to hold on to it than not? If it is, that's a
:11:24. > :11:26.remarkable thing. It's hard to be a carpetbagger in America, but it is
:11:27. > :11:29.normal in British Parliamentary constituencies to be represented by
:11:30. > :11:33.someone who did not grow up locally. It is a special kind of achievement
:11:34. > :11:37.to have an incumbency effect where you don't have deep roots in the
:11:38. > :11:41.constituency. I was going to ask about the Lib Dems. If we are wrong,
:11:42. > :11:44.and they collapse in Parliamentary representation as much as the share
:11:45. > :11:48.in vote collapses, is that not good news is that the Conservatives? They
:11:49. > :11:53.would be in second place in the majority of existing Lib Dems seats.
:11:54. > :11:56.For every seat where Labour are second to the Lib Dems, there are
:11:57. > :12:00.two where the Conservatives are second. If the Lib Dem
:12:01. > :12:08.representation collapses, that helps the Conservatives. I'm assuming the
:12:09. > :12:13.Tories will gain about ten seats. If they gain 20, if they'd had 20 more
:12:14. > :12:17.seats last time, they would have had a majority government, just about.
:12:18. > :12:21.So 20 seats off the Lib Dem, do the maths, as they say in America, and
:12:22. > :12:25.they could lose a handful to labour and still be able to run a one
:12:26. > :12:29.party, minority government. The fate of the Lib Dems could be crucial to
:12:30. > :12:36.the outcome to the politics of light. On the 8th of May, it will be
:12:37. > :12:40.VE Day and victory in election day as well as Europe. The Lib Dems will
:12:41. > :12:46.be apoplectic if they lose all of the seats to their coalition
:12:47. > :12:50.partners. The great quote by Angela Merkel, the little party always gets
:12:51. > :12:54.crushed. It's a well-established idea that coalition politics. They
:12:55. > :12:57.can't take credit for the things people like you may get lumbered
:12:58. > :13:00.with the ones they don't. They have contributed most of this terrible
:13:01. > :13:04.idea that seized politics where you say it, but you don't deliver it.
:13:05. > :13:09.Tuition fees is the classic example of this Parliament. Why should you
:13:10. > :13:14.believe any promise you make? And Ed Miliband is feeling that as well.
:13:15. > :13:18.But in 1974 the liberal Democrats barely had any MPs but there were
:13:19. > :13:21.reporters outside Jeremy Thorpe s home because they potentially held
:13:22. > :13:26.not the balance of power, but were significantly in fourth. Bringing
:13:27. > :13:30.back memories Jeremy Thorpe, and we will leave it there. Thanks to the
:13:31. > :13:34.panel. We are tomorrow on BBC Two. At the earlier time of 11am because
:13:35. > :13:38.of Wimbledon. Yes, it's that time of year again already. I will be back
:13:39. > :13:41.here at 11 o'clock next week. Remember, if it is Sunday, it is the
:13:42. > :14:38.Sunday Politics. to the beating heart
:14:39. > :14:43.of today's vibrant shops.