:00:09. > :00:12.Good morning from Manchester, where the Labour Party are gathering
:00:13. > :00:15.for their annual conference as British politics adjusts to what
:00:16. > :00:53.the rest of the UK. in Scotland might mean for
:00:54. > :00:59.Scotland's decision to vote 'no means more powers heading north
:01:00. > :01:06.But what about Home Rule for England?
:01:07. > :01:11.Independence for Scotland has been his life's work. Alex Salmond tells
:01:12. > :01:16.us why he is stepping down after losing Thursday's vote. And we've
:01:17. > :01:22.And in the Midlands: people who want to
:01:23. > :01:26.Scotland's had its say. Now what price Devo England?
:01:27. > :01:28.And the garden city revisitdd ` is this the answer to
:01:29. > :01:32.This and more in just over half an hour.
:01:33. > :01:45.powers and more freedom to spend. But what is the next devolution step
:01:46. > :01:48.for the capital? With me, the best and brightest political panel in the
:01:49. > :01:53.business, at least that is what they pay me to say every week. Nick Watt,
:01:54. > :01:58.Helen Lewis and, this week, we have done some devolution ourselves to
:01:59. > :02:04.other areas, and we have Sam Coates from the times. The union survived,
:02:05. > :02:07.but only at the cost of more powers for the Scottish parliament and
:02:08. > :02:11.enshrining the formula that gives Scotland a privileged position when
:02:12. > :02:17.it comes to public spending, which has MPs on both sides of the Commons
:02:18. > :02:21.of in arms. The Scottish question has been answered for now. Suddenly,
:02:22. > :02:31.the English question takes centre stage, doesn't it? Absolutely. It
:02:32. > :02:35.has a grubby feel, when that vow was put to the Scottish people, that
:02:36. > :02:41.they hoped would swing the vote there was nothing about English only
:02:42. > :02:45.votes. It was unconditional? The Tory proposal did talk very core
:02:46. > :02:48.justly about looking at the proposals by a former clerk of the
:02:49. > :02:57.House of Commons that looked at this issue. That was very cautious. -
:02:58. > :03:00.cautiously. These proposals will not get through Westminster unless David
:03:01. > :03:04.Cameron addresses the English-only issue. You look at people like Chris
:03:05. > :03:07.Grayling in the Sunday Telegraph. Alistair Darling on the Andrew Marr
:03:08. > :03:11.Show said you could not have a link between what you are giving Holyrood
:03:12. > :03:21.and English-only MPs. Back on says, is welshing on the deal. -- comic he
:03:22. > :03:28.They were furious that he gave away these tax powers and inscribed the
:03:29. > :03:37.Barnett formula. They said they weren't going to vote for it. It is
:03:38. > :03:40.a shameless piece of opportunism. Now they can say that Labour are the
:03:41. > :03:44.ones that don't trust you and don't want to give you more powers. He
:03:45. > :03:48.knows it is going to be a tight timetable. The idea of getting a
:03:49. > :03:52.draft of this out by Burns Night, most people would say, given they
:03:53. > :03:55.had six years to set up Scottish parliament, the idea we will solve
:03:56. > :04:03.these huge constitutional questions in four months is absurd. But they
:04:04. > :04:08.don't care about the constitutional questions, the one they care about
:04:09. > :04:12.is English votes? There is a simple reason they won that. If you look at
:04:13. > :04:18.the MPs in England alone, the Tories have a majority of 59, an
:04:19. > :04:20.overwhelming bias, and if you strip out Wales Scotland and Northern
:04:21. > :04:24.Ireland, so this has become a partisan issue. The question is
:04:25. > :04:30.whether David Cameron can follow through on the promise. He said he
:04:31. > :04:35.would link the two Scottish powers, but it's not clear you will get
:04:36. > :04:39.either before the general election. It's not but the purpose is to cause
:04:40. > :04:45.Labour Party discomfort, and it is. You can see with date -- Ed Miliband
:04:46. > :04:48.this morning, they find it very hard to answer the question, why
:04:49. > :04:53.shouldn't there be English votes for English laws? Ed Miliband this
:04:54. > :04:59.morning was saying how London MPs get to vote on London transport and
:05:00. > :05:02.English MPs don't outside of London and it is confusing, but Labour is
:05:03. > :05:07.in a difficult position. They were before the Prime Minister made his
:05:08. > :05:11.announcement. The yes side triumphed in Glasgow, the largest city in
:05:12. > :05:14.Scotland, a Labour heartland, and the Prime Minister is saying that if
:05:15. > :05:18.Labour don't agree to this by the time of the general election, he is
:05:19. > :05:22.handing a gift to the SNP, that that would be the party that the natural
:05:23. > :05:27.Labour voters would vote for to see off the plan. It's not just Tory
:05:28. > :05:30.backbenchers. There are Labour backbenchers saying there should be
:05:31. > :05:34.in which bodes for English laws Even people in the Shadow Cabinet
:05:35. > :05:40.think it is right. The cases unarguable. If you say her chewing a
:05:41. > :05:43.partisan way, you can't sell it to the country. Ed Miliband is on
:05:44. > :05:50.course to have a majority of about 20, and you take the 40 English MPs,
:05:51. > :05:54.and he hasn't got it. This is a coalition government where the
:05:55. > :05:58.Conservatives haven't got really to be in charge, they have put in
:05:59. > :06:02.sweeping laws. Labour should probably take the bullet on this
:06:03. > :06:09.one. Let's leave it for the moment. But don't go away. As they struggle
:06:10. > :06:12.to keep the United Kingdom in one piece, David Cameron, Ed Miliband
:06:13. > :06:13.and Nick Clegg promised to keep something called the Barnett
:06:14. > :06:16.Formula. It wasn't invented in Barnet,
:06:17. > :06:18.but by man called Joel Barnett. And it's how
:06:19. > :06:21.the UK government decides how much public money to spend in Scotland,
:06:22. > :06:23.Wales and Northern Ireland. It's controversial,
:06:24. > :06:25.because it's led to public spending being typically 20% higher
:06:26. > :06:27.in Scotland than in England. Well, some English MPs
:06:28. > :06:29.aren't happy about that. I'm joined now by the
:06:30. > :06:42.Tory MP Dominic Raab. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. How
:06:43. > :06:46.can the Prime Minister scrap the Barnett Formula when he has just
:06:47. > :06:52.about to keep it on the front page of a major Scottish newspaper? If we
:06:53. > :06:55.are going to see financial devolution to Scotland, more powers
:06:56. > :06:58.of tax and spend, it's impossible not to look at the impact on the
:06:59. > :07:03.wider union, and there have been promises made to the Scottish and we
:07:04. > :07:06.should do our best to deliver them, but there have been promises made to
:07:07. > :07:10.the English, Welsh and Northern Irish. If you look at the Barnett
:07:11. > :07:14.Formula which allocates revenue across the UK, it is massively
:07:15. > :07:18.prejudicial to those other parts. We have double the number of ambulance
:07:19. > :07:22.staff and nurses compared to England. The regional breakdown is
:07:23. > :07:26.more stark with double the amount spent on social housing in Scotland
:07:27. > :07:29.than in Yorkshire and the North West and the Midlands. The Welsh do very
:07:30. > :07:33.poorly on social services for the elderly. What are we saying? That
:07:34. > :07:39.they need our children, patients and the elderly are worth less than the
:07:40. > :07:44.Scots? That's not the way to have a sustainable solution. I understand
:07:45. > :07:47.the distribution impact of the Barnett Formula, but Westminster
:07:48. > :07:52.politicians are already held in contempt by a lot of people and to
:07:53. > :07:58.rat on such a public pledge would confirm their worst fears. Your
:07:59. > :08:02.leader would have secured the union on a false prospectus. First of
:08:03. > :08:07.all, it's clear from the Ashcroft poll that the offer made in the
:08:08. > :08:10.Scottish newspaper had zero effect and if anything was
:08:11. > :08:12.counter-productive to the overall result because two thirds of swing
:08:13. > :08:17.voters in the last few days voted for independence. But we can't keep
:08:18. > :08:23.proceeding without looking at the promises made to the English. We
:08:24. > :08:27.said in the referendum that we would have English laws -- English votes
:08:28. > :08:30.on English issues. The Liberal Democrats, in their manifesto,
:08:31. > :08:34.pledged to scrap the Barnett Formula. We have to reconcile all of
:08:35. > :08:38.the promises to all parts of the UK, and Alex Salmond talks about a
:08:39. > :08:43.Westminster stitch up, but what he's trying to do is, with gross double
:08:44. > :08:49.standards, is in French stitch up in rapid time, which would be grossly
:08:50. > :08:55.unfair to the rest of the rest of UK -- is contrive stitch up. What is
:08:56. > :09:01.unfair about the current spending formula? The extra money Scotland
:09:02. > :09:06.gets from Barnet, is covered by the oil revenues it sends to London
:09:07. > :09:09.Scotland is only getting back on spending what it pays in tax. There
:09:10. > :09:16.is no analysis out there that suggests it is the same amount.
:09:17. > :09:21.Having voted to stay in the UK. Let me give you the figures. Last year
:09:22. > :09:29.revenues were 4.5 billion, and the Barnett Formula was worth 4.5
:09:30. > :09:32.billion to Scotland. It is awash. A huge amount of British taxpayer
:09:33. > :09:36.investment has gone into extracting North Sea oil, and if we move to a
:09:37. > :09:39.more federal system, we would need to look at things like the
:09:40. > :09:44.allocation of resources, but the Barnett Formula has been lambasted
:09:45. > :09:48.as a national embarrassment and grossly unfair by its Labour Party
:09:49. > :09:53.architect, Lord Barnett. So what we need is to change this mechanism so
:09:54. > :09:57.it is based on need. The irony is, when the Scots allocate Avenue to
:09:58. > :10:00.the -- revenue to their local authorities, it's done on a needs
:10:01. > :10:05.basis, and what is good for Scotland must be good for the rest of
:10:06. > :10:10.Britain. One final question. The Prime Minister is now making his
:10:11. > :10:13.promise of more home rule for Scotland conditional on English
:10:14. > :10:17.votes for English laws. Why didn't he spell out the condition when he
:10:18. > :10:21.made his bow to the Scottish people? Why has this condition been tacked
:10:22. > :10:27.on by the Prime Minister? In the heat of the referendum debate lots
:10:28. > :10:31.of things were said, but the truth is that Parliament must also look at
:10:32. > :10:36.this and make its views known, and English MPs as well. You will find
:10:37. > :10:39.that conservative as well as a lot of Labour MPs would say, we cannot
:10:40. > :10:45.just rush through a deal that is unsustainable. It has to be good for
:10:46. > :10:48.all parts of Britain. Yes, we should deliver on our promises for more
:10:49. > :10:51.devolution to Scotland, but let s deliver on promises to be English,
:10:52. > :10:56.and Northern Irish. Why are they locked out of the debate? Let's
:10:57. > :10:58.leave it there. Thank you for joining us.
:10:59. > :11:00.The man responsible for taking Scottish nationalism from
:11:01. > :11:02.the political fringes to within touching distance of victory, Alex
:11:03. > :11:05.Salmond, has a flair for dramatic announcements, and he gave us
:11:06. > :11:07.another on Friday when he revealed he's to stand
:11:08. > :11:12.Friends and foes have paid tribute to his extraordinary career.
:11:13. > :11:14.In a moment I'll be speaking to Alex Salmond,
:11:15. > :11:17.but first here's Adam Fleming with the story of the vote that broke
:11:18. > :11:39.The BBC's HQ on the Clyde, the whole place converted into a studio for
:11:40. > :11:42.Scotland's big night. You know what you need for big events, big
:11:43. > :11:46.screens, and there are loads of them here. That one is three stories
:11:47. > :11:50.high, and this is the one Jeremy Vine uses for his graphics. The
:11:51. > :11:55.other thing that is massive is the turnout in the referendum, it is
:11:56. > :12:00.enormous. It was around 85% of the electorate, that is 4 million ballot
:12:01. > :12:12.papers. First to declare Clackmannanshire. No, 19,000. 1 ,000
:12:13. > :12:18.and 36. The first Noel of the night, and there were plenty more. -- the
:12:19. > :12:22.first no vote. The better together campaigners were over the moon, like
:12:23. > :12:27.Jim Murphy, who had campaigned in 100 different towns. I don't want to
:12:28. > :12:37.sound schmaltzy, but it makes you think more of Scotland. It makes you
:12:38. > :12:39.small tree. Yes, 194,779. Around five a.m., the Yes campaign
:12:40. > :12:46.applauded as they won Scotland's biggest city, Glasgow. Dundee went
:12:47. > :12:49.their way as well, but just for areas out of 32 opted for
:12:50. > :12:54.independence. How many copies have you had? This is my second cup of
:12:55. > :12:59.tea on the morning -- how many copies. He was enjoying the
:13:00. > :13:04.refreshments on offer, but the yes campaigners were not in a happy
:13:05. > :13:08.place. We are in the bowels of one of the parts of the British
:13:09. > :13:13.establishment that, I've got to say, has probably done its job in this
:13:14. > :13:18.referendum, because I think the BBC has been critical in shoring up the
:13:19. > :13:23.establishment and have supported the no campaign as best as they could.
:13:24. > :13:28.But there was no arguing with the numbers, and by sunrise, the BBC
:13:29. > :13:34.called it. Scotland has voted no in this referendum on independence The
:13:35. > :13:36.result, in Fife, has taken the no campaign over the line and the
:13:37. > :13:43.official result of this referendum is a no. There we go, on a screen
:13:44. > :13:48.three stories high, Scotland has said no to independence. As soon as
:13:49. > :13:52.the newsprint was driving north of the border, the focus shifted south
:13:53. > :13:57.as the Prime Minister pledged more devolution for Scotland but only if
:13:58. > :13:59.it happened everywhere else as well. Just as Scotland will vote
:14:00. > :14:04.separately in the Scottish Parliament on their issues of tax,
:14:05. > :14:08.spending on welfare, so to England, as well as Wales and Northern
:14:09. > :14:13.Ireland, should be able to vote on these issues, and all this must take
:14:14. > :14:18.place in tandem with and at the same pace as the settlement for Scotland.
:14:19. > :14:27.It began to dawn on us all that we might end up doing this again. See
:14:28. > :14:30.you for an English referendum soon? Northern Ireland. There could be
:14:31. > :14:37.another one in Scotland. But not next weekend? Give me a break. There
:14:38. > :14:42.was no break for Nick, because Alex Salmond came up with one last twist,
:14:43. > :14:47.his resignation was as leader, my time is nearly over. But the
:14:48. > :14:55.Scotland, the campaign continues, and the dream shall never die. So,
:14:56. > :14:57.the referendum settled, the Constitution in flux, and a leader
:14:58. > :15:07.gone. All in a night work. Alex Salmond is to stand down as
:15:08. > :15:11.First Minister of Scotland. He shows no signs of going quietly. Last
:15:12. > :15:15.night, I spoke to the SNP leader in Aberdeen and began by asking him if
:15:16. > :15:20.it was always his intention to resign if he lost the referendum. I
:15:21. > :15:23.certainly have thought about it Andrew. But for most of the
:15:24. > :15:29.referendum campaign I thought we were going to win. So, I was...
:15:30. > :15:33.Yeah, maybe a few months back I considered it. But I only finally
:15:34. > :15:41.made up my mind on Friday lunch time. Did you agonise over the
:15:42. > :15:51.decision to stand down? I'm not really an agonising person. When you
:15:52. > :15:56.get beaten in a referendum, you have to consider standing down as a real
:15:57. > :16:00.possibility. Taking responsibility and politics has gone out of fashion
:16:01. > :16:05.but there is an aspect, if you need a campaign, and I was the leader of
:16:06. > :16:09.the Yes Campaign, and you don't win, you have to contemplate if you are
:16:10. > :16:12.the best person to lead future political campaigns. In my
:16:13. > :16:17.judgement, it was time for the SNP and the broader yes movement, the
:16:18. > :16:21.National movement of Scotland, they would benefit from new leadership.
:16:22. > :16:25.In your heart of hearts, through the campaign, as referendum on day
:16:26. > :16:31.approached, you did think you were going to win? Yes, I did. I thought
:16:32. > :16:39.for most of the last month of the campaign, we were in with a real
:16:40. > :16:42.chance. In the last week I thought we had pulled ahead. I thought the
:16:43. > :16:48.decisive aspect wasn't so much the fear mongering, the scaremongering,
:16:49. > :16:51.the kitchen sink being thrown at Scotland by orchestration from
:16:52. > :16:55.Downing Street, I thought the real thing was the pledge, the vow, the
:16:56. > :17:00.offer of something else. A lot of people that had been moving across
:17:01. > :17:03.to independence saw within that a reason to say, well, we can get
:17:04. > :17:11.something anyway without the perceived risks that were being
:17:12. > :17:18.festooned upon them. You were only five points away from your dream.
:17:19. > :17:23.You won Scotland's largest city There is now the prospect of more
:17:24. > :17:29.power. Why not stay and be an enhanced First Minister? Well, it is
:17:30. > :17:33.a good phrase. I'm not going away, though. I'm still going to be part
:17:34. > :17:37.of the political process. In Scotland, if people in Aberdeenshire
:17:38. > :17:42.wish to keep electing me, that is what I will do. But I don't have to
:17:43. > :17:46.be First Minister of Scotland, leader of the Yes Campaign, to see
:17:47. > :17:52.that achieved. The SNP is a strong and powerful leadership team. There
:17:53. > :17:55.are a number of people that would do a fantastic job as leader of the
:17:56. > :18:02.party and First Minister. I've been leader of the party for the last 24
:18:03. > :18:05.years, I think it is time to give somebody else a shot. There are many
:18:06. > :18:09.able-bodied people that will do that well. -- many able people that will
:18:10. > :18:17.do that well. I'm still part of the national movement, arguing to take
:18:18. > :18:20.this forward. I think you are right, the question, one of the irony is
:18:21. > :18:24.developing so quickly after the referendum, it might be those that
:18:25. > :18:30.lost on Thursday end up as the political winners and those that won
:18:31. > :18:34.end up as the losers. When we met just for the vote, a couple of days
:18:35. > :18:38.before the vote, you said to me that there was very little you would
:18:39. > :18:45.change about the campaign strategy. Is that still your view? Yes. There
:18:46. > :18:50.are one or two things, like any campaign, there is no such thing as
:18:51. > :18:56.a pitcher campaign. I would refer not to dwell on such things. I will
:18:57. > :19:00.leave of my book, which will be called 100 Days, coming out before
:19:01. > :19:03.Christmas. Once you read that, I will probably reveal the things I
:19:04. > :19:08.would have changed. Basically, broadly, this was an extraordinary
:19:09. > :19:12.campaign. Not just a political campaign, but a campaign involving
:19:13. > :19:17.the grassroots of Scotland in an energising, empowering way, the like
:19:18. > :19:20.of which in on of us have witnessed. It was an extraordinary phenomenon
:19:21. > :19:26.of grassroots campaigning, which carried the Yes Campaign so far
:19:27. > :19:37.almost to victory. If Rupert Murdoch put his Scottish Sun behind you
:19:38. > :19:44.would have that made the difference? If ifs and ands were pots and
:19:45. > :19:48.pans... Why did he not? I would not say that, you have form with him
:19:49. > :19:56.that I do not have. I'm not sure about that. I was very encouraged.
:19:57. > :19:59.The coverage, not in the other papers, The Times, which was
:20:00. > :20:04.extremely hostile to Scottish independence, but the coverage in
:20:05. > :20:13.the Scottish Sun was fair, balanced and we certainly got a very fair
:20:14. > :20:16.kick of the ball. In newspapers I would settle for no editorial line
:20:17. > :20:20.and just balanced coverage. We certainly got that from the Scottish
:20:21. > :20:26.Sun and that was an encouragement. I think you saw from his tweets,
:20:27. > :20:36.certainly in his heart he would have liked to have seen a move forward in
:20:37. > :20:41.Scotland and I like that. He said if you lost, that was it, referendum
:20:42. > :20:47.wise, for a generation, which he defined as about 20 years. Is that
:20:48. > :20:51.still your view? Yes, it is. It has always been my view. It's a personal
:20:52. > :20:56.view. There are always things that can change in politics. If the UK
:20:57. > :20:58.moved out of the European Union for example, that would be the sort of
:20:59. > :21:02.circumstance. Some people would argue with Westminster parties, and
:21:03. > :21:08.I'm actually not surprised that they are reneging on commitments, I am
:21:09. > :21:12.just surprised by the speed they are doing it. They seem to be totally
:21:13. > :21:18.shameless in these matters. You don't think they will meet the vow?
:21:19. > :21:22.You don't think there will keep to their vow? They are not, for that
:21:23. > :21:27.essential reason you saw developing on Friday. The Prime Minister wants
:21:28. > :21:30.to link change in Scotland to change in England. He wants to do that
:21:31. > :21:35.because he has difficulty in carrying his backbenchers on this
:21:36. > :21:38.and they are under pressure from UKIP. The Labour leadership are
:21:39. > :21:41.frightened of any changes in England which leave them without a majority
:21:42. > :21:46.in the House of Commons on English matters. I would not call it an
:21:47. > :21:52.irresistible force and immovable object, one is resistible and one is
:21:53. > :21:56.movable. They are at loggerheads. The vow, I think, was something
:21:57. > :21:58.cooked up in desperation for the last few days of the campaign. I
:21:59. > :22:05.think everybody in Scotland now engines that. -- recognises that. It
:22:06. > :22:09.was the people that were persuaded to vote no that word tricked,
:22:10. > :22:15.effectively. They are the ones that are really angry. Ed Miliband and
:22:16. > :22:22.David Cameron, if they are watching this, I would be more worried about
:22:23. > :22:29.the anger of the no voters than the opinion of the Yes Vote on that
:22:30. > :22:35.matter. If independence is on the back burner for now, what would you
:22:36. > :22:40.advise your successor's strategy for the SNP to be? I would advise him or
:22:41. > :22:48.her not to listen to advice from their predecessor. A new leader
:22:49. > :22:52.brings forward a new strategy. I think this is, for the SNP, a very
:22:53. > :22:59.favourable political time. There have been 5000 new members joined
:23:00. > :23:02.since Thursday. That is about a 25% increase in the party membership in
:23:03. > :23:15.the space of a few days. More than that, I think this is an opportunity
:23:16. > :23:18.for the SNP. But my goal is the opportunity for Scotland. I would
:23:19. > :23:24.repeat I am not retiring from politics. I'm standing down as First
:23:25. > :23:28.Minister of Scotland. On Friday coming back to the north-east of
:23:29. > :23:35.Scotland, I passed through Dundee, which voted yes by a stud --
:23:36. > :23:39.substantial margin. There was a line of a song I couldn't get out of my
:23:40. > :23:47.head, and old Jacobite song, rewritten by Robert Burns, the last
:23:48. > :23:55.line is, so, tremble falls wakes, in the midst of your glee, you've not
:23:56. > :23:58.seen the last of my bonnets and me. So you are staying a member of the
:23:59. > :24:03.Scottish Parliament, shall we see you again in the House of Commons?
:24:04. > :24:10.What does the future hold for you? Membership of Scottish Parliament is
:24:11. > :24:14.dependent on the good folk of Aberdeenshire east. If they choose
:24:15. > :24:19.to elect me, I will be delighted to serve. I've always loved being a
:24:20. > :24:21.constituency member of Parliament, I have known some front line
:24:22. > :24:26.politicians that regarded that as a chore. I'm not saying they didn t do
:24:27. > :24:32.it properly, I am sure they did But I love it. You get distilled wisdom
:24:33. > :24:35.from being a constituency member of Parliament that helps you keep your
:24:36. > :24:39.feet on the ground and have a good observation as to what matters to
:24:40. > :24:44.people. I have no difficulty with being a constituent member of
:24:45. > :24:55.Parliament. Can you promise me it will never be Lord Salmond? Yes
:24:56. > :25:03.Thanks for joining us. Great pleasure, thank you. Now, the
:25:04. > :25:07.independence referendum is over the next big electoral test is a general
:25:08. > :25:13.election. It is just over seven months away. In a moment I will be
:25:14. > :25:17.talking to Chuka Umunna, but what are the political views of the men
:25:18. > :25:22.and women fighting to win seats for the Labour Party? The Sunday
:25:23. > :25:27.Politics has commissioned an exclusive survey of the
:25:28. > :25:29.Parliamentary candidates. Six out of seven Labour candidates
:25:30. > :25:33.say that the level of public spending during their last period of
:25:34. > :25:38.office was about right. 40% of them want a Labour government to raise
:25:39. > :25:42.taxes to reduce the budget deficit. 18% favour cutting spending. On
:25:43. > :25:48.immigration, just 15% think that the number coming to Britain is too
:25:49. > :25:51.high. Only 7% say we generous to immigrants. Three in ten candidates
:25:52. > :25:55.believe the party relationship with trade unions is not close enough.
:25:56. > :26:01.Not that we spoke to think it is too close. Or than half of the
:26:02. > :26:04.candidates say want to scrap the nuclear deterrent, Trident. Four in
:26:05. > :26:10.five want to nationalise the railways. If they are after a change
:26:11. > :26:19.of leader, Yvette Cooper was their preferred choice. Chuka Umunna came
:26:20. > :26:23.in fourth. And he joins me now for the Sunday interview.
:26:24. > :26:30.Why is Labour choosing so many left-wing candidates? I don't think
:26:31. > :26:33.I accept the characterisation of candidates being left wing. I don't
:26:34. > :26:37.think your viewers see politics in terms of what is left and right I
:26:38. > :26:42.think they see it in terms of what is right and wrong. Obviously, many
:26:43. > :26:45.of the things we have been talking about, how we ensure that the next
:26:46. > :26:48.generation can do better than the last, how we raise the wages of your
:26:49. > :26:52.viewers, who are currently working very hard but not making a wage they
:26:53. > :26:57.can live off, that is what they are talking about and that is what the
:26:58. > :27:01.public will judge them on. But they want to raise taxes, they don't want
:27:02. > :27:03.to cut public spending, they want to re-nationalise the railways, they
:27:04. > :27:07.don't think there is too much immigration, they want to scrap
:27:08. > :27:12.Trident. These are all positions clearly to the left of current party
:27:13. > :27:15.policy. But that is your characterisation. If you look at our
:27:16. > :27:20.policy to increase the top rate of tax to 50% for people earning over
:27:21. > :27:22.?150,000, that is a central position. It is something that
:27:23. > :27:31.enjoys the support of the majority of the public. Trident? If you talk
:27:32. > :27:34.to the British public about immigration, yes, there are concerns
:27:35. > :27:38.about the numbers coming in and out, yes people want to see integration,
:27:39. > :27:41.yes, people want to see people putting a contribution before they
:27:42. > :27:45.take out, the people recognise, if you look at our multicultural
:27:46. > :27:49.nation, we have derived a lot of benefits from immigration. I don't
:27:50. > :27:55.think your characterisation of those positions, that is your view... It's
:27:56. > :28:00.not, it is their view. They are saying... You describe it... You
:28:01. > :28:04.described those positions as left wing positions. I am saying to you
:28:05. > :28:09.that I actually think a lot of those positions are centrist positions
:28:10. > :28:13.that would enjoy the support of the majority of your viewers. I don t
:28:14. > :28:17.think your viewers think the idea of the broadest shoulders bearing the
:28:18. > :28:21.heaviest burden in forms of tax are going to see it as a way out,
:28:22. > :28:25.radical principle. They want to scrap Trident, not party policy It
:28:26. > :28:35.isn't. I think that 73... Well, we will
:28:36. > :28:39.have 400 Parliamentary candidates at the time of the next general
:28:40. > :28:44.election, not including current MPs. This is 73 out of over 400 of them.
:28:45. > :28:49.I think we also need to treat the survey with a bit of caution. They
:28:50. > :28:53.are not representative? You are basically quoting the results of a
:28:54. > :28:57.small percentage of our Parliamentary candidates. It's
:28:58. > :29:01.pretty safe to say when you look at their views, they might be right or
:29:02. > :29:06.wrong, that's not my point, it's fairly safe to say that new Labour
:29:07. > :29:14.is dead? Again, I don't think people see things in terms of gold -- old
:29:15. > :29:17.or new Labour. We are standing at a Labour Party. We are a great
:29:18. > :29:22.country, but we have big challenges. We want to make sure that people can
:29:23. > :29:26.achieve their dreams and aspirations in this country. Too many people are
:29:27. > :29:29.not in that position. Too many people worry about the prospects of
:29:30. > :29:33.their children. Too many people do not earn a wage they can live off.
:29:34. > :29:36.Too many people are worried about the change. We have to make sure we
:29:37. > :29:40.are giving people a stake in the future. That is a Labour thing, you
:29:41. > :29:43.want to call it old or new come I don't care. It's a choice between
:29:44. > :29:53.Labour and the Conservatives in terms of who runs the next
:29:54. > :29:56.government. That one of your candidate we spoke to things that
:29:57. > :29:59.the party's relationship with the unions is to close. 30% of them
:30:00. > :30:03.think it should be closer. You have spoken to 73 out of 400 candidates.
:30:04. > :30:09.Why should the others be any different? It's a fairly
:30:10. > :30:13.representative Sample. Many people working on this set are the member
:30:14. > :30:15.of the union, the National union of journalists. People that came here
:30:16. > :30:20.to this Conference would have been brought here by trade union members.
:30:21. > :30:25.Do you think the relationship should be closer? I think it is where it
:30:26. > :30:29.should be. It should not be closer? I think that trade unions help
:30:30. > :30:34.create wealth in our country. If you look at some other success stories
:30:35. > :30:39.we are in the north-west, GM Vauxhall is there because you have
:30:40. > :30:43.trade unions working in partnership with government and local employees
:30:44. > :30:47.to make sure we kept producing cars. I'm not asking if unions are good or
:30:48. > :30:51.bad, I'm asking if Labour should be closer. You are presupposing, by the
:30:52. > :30:58.tone of your question, that our relationship is a problem. Let's
:30:59. > :31:02.turn to the English question. Why do you need a constitutional
:31:03. > :31:05.conversation where you have to discuss whether English people
:31:06. > :31:09.voting on English matters is unfair? We want to give the regions
:31:10. > :31:12.and cities in England more voice, but let's get it into perspective,
:31:13. > :31:21.we have had a situation where the Scottish people, as desired buying
:31:22. > :31:26.rich people, have to remain part of the UK -- by English people. What is
:31:27. > :31:29.the answer to the question? I don't want to get to a situation where
:31:30. > :31:32.people have voted for solidarity where you have a prime ministers
:31:33. > :31:38.talking about dividing up the UK Parliament. Let me put this point
:31:39. > :31:43.you. Most Scottish voters think it is unfair that Scottish MPs get to
:31:44. > :31:47.vote on English matters. That comes out in Scottish polls. Why don't you
:31:48. > :31:52.see it as unfair? If the Scots see it as unfair, why don't you? This is
:31:53. > :31:55.an age-old conundrum that has been around for 100 years and it's not so
:31:56. > :31:58.simple. You're talking about making a fundamental change to the British
:31:59. > :32:05.constitution on a whim. It's not just an issue, in respect of
:32:06. > :32:10.Scottish MPs. As a London MP, I can vote on matters relating to the
:32:11. > :32:14.transport of England and transport is a devolved matter in London. In
:32:15. > :32:17.Wales, there are a number of competencies that Welsh MPs can vote
:32:18. > :32:21.on and they've been devolved to them. So with all of these different
:32:22. > :32:25.votes, you will exclude different MPs? I think the solution is not
:32:26. > :32:28.necessarily to obsess about what is happening between MPs in
:32:29. > :32:33.Westminster. That turns people politics. We need to devolve more. I
:32:34. > :32:38.think we should be giving the cities and regions of England more autonomy
:32:39. > :32:42.in the way that we are doing in Scotland, but I've got to say,
:32:43. > :32:45.Andrew, it's dishonourable and in bad faith for the Prime Minister to
:32:46. > :32:50.now seek to link what he agreed before the referendum to this issue
:32:51. > :32:54.of English votes for English MPs. That is totally dishonourable and in
:32:55. > :32:58.bad faith. You have promised to devolve more tax powers to Scotland.
:32:59. > :33:02.What would they be? This is being decided at the moment. I cannot give
:33:03. > :33:07.you the exact detail of what the tax powers would be. Could you give us a
:33:08. > :33:10.rough idea? There is a White Paper being produced before November and
:33:11. > :33:17.there will be draft legislation put forward in January. Your leader has
:33:18. > :33:20.vowed that this will happen. And you haven't got a policy? You can't tell
:33:21. > :33:25.us what the tax powers will be? I can't tell you on this programme
:33:26. > :33:28.right now. But we have accepted the principle on further devolution on
:33:29. > :33:32.tax, spending on welfare and we will have further details in due course.
:33:33. > :33:37.Your leader promised to maintain the Barnett Formula for the foreseeable
:33:38. > :33:41.future. Why is that fair when it enshrines more per capita spending
:33:42. > :33:45.for Scotland than it does for Wales, which is poorer, and more than many
:33:46. > :33:51.of the poorer regions in England get? Why is that fair? We have said
:33:52. > :33:53.that in terms of looking at go - local government spending playing
:33:54. > :33:57.out in this Parliament, we have looked at what the government has
:33:58. > :33:59.done which is having already deprived communities having money
:34:00. > :34:04.taken away from them and wealthier communities are getting more. We
:34:05. > :34:10.accept that the Barnett Formula has worked well. How has it works well?
:34:11. > :34:15.There is a cross parliamentary consensus as they don't know what to
:34:16. > :34:21.do about it. Why has it works well, when Wales, clearly loses out? I'm
:34:22. > :34:24.not sure by I accept that when you look at overall underspend --
:34:25. > :34:31.government spending. It is per capita spending in Scotland, which
:34:32. > :34:35.is way ahead of per capita spending in Wales, but per capita incomes in
:34:36. > :34:40.Scotland are way ahead of Wales Why is that fair Labour politician? We
:34:41. > :34:44.have said we want to have more equitable distribution. You haven't,
:34:45. > :34:47.you have said you will keep the Barnett Formula. I'm not sure
:34:48. > :34:52.necessarily punishing Scotland is the way to go. The way that this
:34:53. > :34:56.debate is going, what message does it send to the Scottish people? I
:34:57. > :35:00.want to be clear, I am delighted with the result we have got. The
:35:01. > :35:05.unity and solidarity where maintaining across the nations of
:35:06. > :35:07.the United Kingdom. All of this separatist talk, setting up
:35:08. > :35:11.different nations of the UK against each other goes completely against
:35:12. > :35:14.what we've all been campaigning for over the last two years, and we
:35:15. > :35:18.shouldn't have any truck with it. Coming onto the announcement on the
:35:19. > :35:24.minimum wage, you would increase it by ?1 50 to take it to ?8, which
:35:25. > :35:28.would be over five years. That is all you are going to do over five
:35:29. > :35:36.years. Have you worked out how much of this increase will be clawed back
:35:37. > :35:42.in taxation and fewer benefits? Work has been done on it. How much? I
:35:43. > :35:47.can't give you an exact figure. The policy pays for itself. The way we
:35:48. > :35:50.have looked at this, we looked at the government figures, and if
:35:51. > :35:54.people are earning more, they would therefore be paying more in income
:35:55. > :35:58.tax and they will be receiving less in benefit and will pay out less in
:35:59. > :36:02.tax credits, so we are confident that this will pay for itself. I'm
:36:03. > :36:07.not asking about the pavement, I'm asking what it means for low paid
:36:08. > :36:11.workers will stop they will get an extra 30p per hour -- about the
:36:12. > :36:16.payment. How much of the 30p to they get to keep? In terms of what they
:36:17. > :36:21.get in the first instance, somebody on the minimum wage now, with our
:36:22. > :36:24.proposal, would get in the region of ?3000 a year more than they are at
:36:25. > :36:33.the moment. That is before tax and benefits. How much do they keep I
:36:34. > :36:37.cannot give you an exact figure Why don't you give me an exact figure if
:36:38. > :36:40.you've done the modelling? We are talking about some of the lowest
:36:41. > :36:43.paid people in the country, and I would suggest to you that going down
:36:44. > :36:50.this route, they would face a marginal rate of tax of 50 or 6 %
:36:51. > :36:54.and they will not keep most of this increase you are talking about. I
:36:55. > :36:59.don't accept your figures. But you haven't got any of your own. I just
:37:00. > :37:04.don't have any in my head I can give you right now. Don't you think out
:37:05. > :37:07.policies before you announce them? Of course we think our policies
:37:08. > :37:10.before we announce them but we are confident people have more in their
:37:11. > :37:13.pocket and will be better off with the changes proposed, and we are
:37:14. > :37:17.also seeking to incentivise employers to pay a living wage as
:37:18. > :37:21.well. At the end of the day, as I said, the economy is recovering
:37:22. > :37:24.great, but we know, at the moment, it's still not delivering for a huge
:37:25. > :37:28.number of your viewers and we're determined to do something about it.
:37:29. > :37:32.The status quo is not an option And even joining me. Twice in three
:37:33. > :37:35.days. You can't have too much of a good thing. I am mad. He said that,
:37:36. > :37:37.not me. It's just gone 11.35, you're
:37:38. > :37:40.watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland
:37:41. > :37:43.who leave us now for Coming up here in twenty minutes,
:37:44. > :37:48.we'll be joined by John Prescott to talk about the challenge facing
:37:49. > :37:50.Labour as their conference starts First though,
:37:51. > :38:00.the Sunday Politics where you are. And we're joined today,
:38:01. > :38:07.if not from Scotland itself, then at least by two MPs whose
:38:08. > :38:11.constituencies are about as close to In our part of this sceptred isle,
:38:12. > :38:16.that is. Karen Bradley,
:38:17. > :38:18.Conservative MP for Staffordshire Moorlands, is a Home Office Minister
:38:19. > :38:24.battling against organised crime. Rob Flello is the Labour MP
:38:25. > :38:26.for Stoke South. I'm never quite sure if
:38:27. > :38:42.Stoke is in Staffordshire. It is in Staffordshire. Nevdr before
:38:43. > :38:44.can RMP 's of all main parthes have been so pleased to get the `nswer
:38:45. > :38:46.no. The Scottish referendum restlt
:38:47. > :38:48.was celebrated And it came
:38:49. > :38:51.as a particular relief for one distinguished son of Gl`sgow,
:38:52. > :38:54.now based in the Black Country, who travelled north of the borddr last
:38:55. > :38:56.weekend in support the eventual The UK is a very special cotntry
:38:57. > :39:04.and I would be heartbroken to see I think in the slogan of thd No
:39:05. > :39:11.campaign, we are Better Togdther. Their shared history both through
:39:12. > :39:15.defence, economies, our health service, our pensions,
:39:16. > :39:20.it is too valuable and all that plus our cultural influence throtghout
:39:21. > :39:37.the world, it is too valuable The overall result is one thing all
:39:38. > :39:45.main parties can agree on, but no sewer was that out then Owen
:39:46. > :39:50.Paterson a Tory backbencher, reading fire that party leaders including
:39:51. > :39:54.David Cameron or offering more to Scotland but his giddy joints were
:39:55. > :39:57.having to foot the bill for it. Let's welcome the result, the fact
:39:58. > :40:02.we are still great is fantastic and I am delighted that the Scottish
:40:03. > :40:07.people decided to stay part of the union. We do now need to look at the
:40:08. > :40:11.constitutional arrangements for England because my voters whll want
:40:12. > :40:17.to make sure their voices are heard and they are `` their
:40:18. > :40:22.representatives make the decision for them. Rob, what is your answer
:40:23. > :40:28.to the English question, because we have been hearing about English MPs,
:40:29. > :40:32.something that commands poptlar support and your party leaddr looks
:40:33. > :40:38.in danger of being put on the wrong side of the argument. I also welcome
:40:39. > :40:44.the right decision from Scotland. We would be sitting here in ch`os if it
:40:45. > :40:48.had gone the other way, so H plead Scotland voted to stay in, but in
:40:49. > :40:54.terms of your point about the West Lothian question, what is ilportant
:40:55. > :41:00.for my cursor joints is not so much West Lothian as messed `` Wdst mids
:41:01. > :41:07.that the West Midlands, this took in trench question, because we need a
:41:08. > :41:08.proper debate about what thd convention, the Constitution should
:41:09. > :41:13.look like and we need that debate. So one simple answer from Scotland
:41:14. > :41:16.poses any number of questions How exactly do you
:41:17. > :41:18."re`empower the great cities", Give more collective or indhvidual
:41:19. > :41:23.clout to local councils, perhaps? The Labour leader of one
:41:24. > :41:26.of our biggest authorities `lso now chairs the powerful organis`tion
:41:27. > :41:29.representing over 400 counchls What, I wondered, was his mdssage
:41:30. > :41:36.to the main party leaders? The message is a consistent one
:41:37. > :41:39.that England needs a fairer deal The formula on which the resources
:41:40. > :41:45.are allocated between different nations in the UK is out of date
:41:46. > :41:51.and needs revising or replacing In what way exactly is
:41:52. > :41:54.the present arrangement unf`ir? It is unfair because at
:41:55. > :42:01.the moment it doesn't address need. We have a situation where
:42:02. > :42:04.for example the amount of money that goes to peopld in
:42:05. > :42:09.Dundee is bigger then what goes to Dudley, and a lot of that is raised
:42:10. > :42:13.by people who pay taxes in Dudley, Are you saying there should be tax
:42:14. > :42:23.variant powers in the West Lidlands? The fundamental point is
:42:24. > :42:32.that local authorities need They need greater freedom over their
:42:33. > :42:40.own ability to raise their own council tax and also business taxes,
:42:41. > :42:45.and they also need to be given greater freedom to raise money
:42:46. > :42:47.independently via arrangements with the city
:42:48. > :42:49.and other financial institutions because only by that will wd be able
:42:50. > :42:51.to compete internationally. You're saying the West Midl`nds
:42:52. > :42:54.should be more independent Absolutely, because what we have
:42:55. > :43:01.at the present is that Engl`nd is We have a colonial relationship with
:43:02. > :43:09.Westminster, which is unaccdptable. All I am asking for is that we go
:43:10. > :43:13.back to where we used to be when Joseph Chamberlain ran Birmhngham,
:43:14. > :43:17.where we could just get on with it. The Local Government Associ`tion
:43:18. > :43:20.is a powerful body. How much leverage does this give you
:43:21. > :43:24.with political parties going We have a massive amount
:43:25. > :43:29.of leverage because with a general election you have to win
:43:30. > :43:32.England, and recently the rdferendum Someone needs to speak up
:43:33. > :43:39.for England and if we don't have a recipe that
:43:40. > :43:43.satisfies people in England, people I have a fear that Scotland
:43:44. > :43:49.will get sorted, then they will sort out Wales and then thex
:43:50. > :43:52.will forget about England. We also need a new opportunhty
:43:53. > :44:09.for raising new ways of income. Councillor David Sparkes. Rob, you
:44:10. > :44:14.are a former member of Birmhngham City Council. You view with sympathy
:44:15. > :44:17.his point that if you give local authorities more control of the
:44:18. > :44:23.purse strings, you get more interest in local elections? My concdrn is
:44:24. > :44:29.that what we have seen is a devolution of powers and
:44:30. > :44:32.responsibilities to look `` to local authorities but in Stoke`on`Trent we
:44:33. > :44:37.have seen huge cuts to the loney those local authorities havd. My
:44:38. > :44:41.concern is that it is all vdry well giving power to raise finances but
:44:42. > :44:48.if your local area cannot ststain high taxation, all you are doing is
:44:49. > :44:53.locking in the differential between a wealthy city and a poor stburb.
:44:54. > :44:58.What is your answer to that? We hear about the wealthy areas and less
:44:59. > :45:05.wealthy haters like Wolverh`mpton and Walsall. Under successive
:45:06. > :45:08.governments. They think we have been looking at is putting more business
:45:09. > :45:13.rates into the hands of loc`l authorities, so instead of
:45:14. > :45:17.collecting witness rates, and then them coming back to local
:45:18. > :45:21.authorities, being able to keep those business rates and those sort
:45:22. > :45:28.of incentives and tax`raising powers help regenerate local areas. But
:45:29. > :45:30.that doesn't work. If you h`ve somewhere like Westminster where
:45:31. > :45:36.they can raise huge amounts of witness rates, somewhere whdre you
:45:37. > :45:42.cannot you don't lock it in, so it is all very well giving up power but
:45:43. > :45:45.they need to raise the monex. What about the point about being free to
:45:46. > :45:50.go into the city to bring more boring? It is the same problem
:45:51. > :45:56.because if you cannot raise more money because you were in a poor
:45:57. > :46:01.area, you have the same problem In Staffordshire moorlands, we are
:46:02. > :46:05.quite distant from Birmingh`m, closer to Nottingham so if xou
:46:06. > :46:08.regionalise things and focus it on Birmingham, you deprived ardas like
:46:09. > :46:14.ours. We need the right settlement for each area. And on that same
:46:15. > :46:19.point, David Cameron said wd must re`empower bird great cities like
:46:20. > :46:23.Birmingham and then there w`s a chorus of disappointment from the
:46:24. > :46:28.counties, or what about us? So this is how you get a simple answer from
:46:29. > :46:32.Scotland and then the difficulty comes word you try to find
:46:33. > :46:37.solutions. We need to see English votes on English matters and the
:46:38. > :46:42.audit formula become less ilportant as Scotland gets more tax`r`ising
:46:43. > :46:47.powers. The Barnett formula looks like a subsidy for Scotland, it
:46:48. > :46:50.looks like a political fix. We have to honour commitments made to the
:46:51. > :46:57.people of Scotland because `nything less would be appalling, but we need
:46:58. > :47:03.a mature, considerate consideration of what our competition shotld look
:47:04. > :47:07.like for the future of the TK. Can we do this at the place Davhd
:47:08. > :47:13.Cameron is suggesting in a latter of months? I think English votds on
:47:14. > :47:20.English matters is a simple idea and the suggestion you can stop MPs in
:47:21. > :47:25.Westminster voting. It is not a simple matter. That may well be a
:47:26. > :47:30.solution but you have to look at this all around and say Scotland has
:47:31. > :47:34.made the right decision to stay in the UK but we now need to look at
:47:35. > :47:40.what is right for England, for the regions and districts, we nded
:47:41. > :47:46.proper consideration. David Sparkes said he would like authorithes like
:47:47. > :47:50.Birmingham to be able to run their affairs like Joe Chamberlain did,
:47:51. > :47:57.with rate`capping for example. Rate`capping had not been invented
:47:58. > :48:03.when he had so much freedom. In terms of what happened back in his
:48:04. > :48:07.day, the world is different. We now need to have a settlement for the
:48:08. > :48:11.whole UK that takes into account the views of everyone. Is England the
:48:12. > :48:18.last bastions of the British Empire? I don't think it is a
:48:19. > :48:22.colony. Councils are free to set the council tax they want but they have
:48:23. > :48:27.to ask local people if they are happy with that rate, and I think
:48:28. > :48:34.that is right, that gives the voice back to the people so they have
:48:35. > :48:37.their say. It is tying their hands. Successive governments have
:48:38. > :48:47.concentrated more power at Westminster. I am not sure H agree
:48:48. > :48:51.but there has been devolution to local authorities but no fun thing
:48:52. > :48:55.that mattered at, funding w`s taken away so they are asked to do more
:48:56. > :49:01.with less. You will be in government soon? And hopefully do something
:49:02. > :49:07.about it. I will be trying to make sure he is not, but we do h`ve the
:49:08. > :49:09.ability for local people to make those decisions, so the mord power
:49:10. > :49:12.we put in their hands the bdtter. Because we're off to Uxcestdr `
:49:13. > :49:15.population 150,000 It's the vision for a new
:49:16. > :49:23.generation of "garden cities". On the real`life list of pl`ces
:49:24. > :49:25.deemed suitable for the tre`tment are Gloucester, Cheltenham,
:49:26. > :49:29.Worcester, Stratford, Rugby, Shrewsbury and Stafford, as our BBC
:49:30. > :49:32.Coventry and Warwickshire Political It was the first of its kind
:49:33. > :49:40.in the world. Letchworth Garden City, founded in
:49:41. > :49:44.1903 by this man, Ebenezer Howard. His unique idea was to blend
:49:45. > :49:49.the best of town and countrx life It's an idea that's making ` return
:49:50. > :49:52.with seven locations across the Midlands being singled out `s
:49:53. > :49:59.potential garden cities. We have central common, gredn spaces
:50:00. > :50:03.throughout the town, and wh`t's called the greenway, which dnvelops
:50:04. > :50:08.the town and is publicly accessible, leading onto the countrysidd, so it
:50:09. > :50:11.is really important because I think we all enjoy open spaces but planned
:50:12. > :50:16.open spaces could be hugely So, green boulevards, quiet streets.
:50:17. > :50:22.What's not to like? Who wouldn't want to live
:50:23. > :50:26.in a garden city? Billed as the environmentally
:50:27. > :50:32.friendly solution to building more houses, there was fierce opposition
:50:33. > :50:35.in Warwickshire when one was So could garden cities be
:50:36. > :50:40.the answer here? We have taken way more
:50:41. > :50:46.houses than we need to. No, because we already have
:50:47. > :50:49.a big development Stratford`on`Avon has just signed
:50:50. > :50:55.off on its local plan to build 10,800 new homes
:50:56. > :50:58.in the district by 2031. Its leader told me there's no
:50:59. > :51:03.appetite for a garden city here Part of our policy is to put
:51:04. > :51:08.something much smaller than a garden city near to the JLR
:51:09. > :51:13.factory, and that has met whth huge public reaction against it, despite
:51:14. > :51:19.the fact that the promoters of the scheme say they would build that
:51:20. > :51:25.on garden city principles. But this was the message to Straford
:51:26. > :51:31.from Letchworth Garden City. If you do anything half bakdd
:51:32. > :51:36.and try to compromise, It is important people have a big
:51:37. > :51:42.vision, big plans and try to create great places because new development
:51:43. > :51:45.doesn't have to be bland, it can be exciting as long as we capttre that
:51:46. > :51:49.imagination and have that vhsion so many council leaders have,
:51:50. > :51:55.that would be my recommendation So, will this old idea be rdborn or
:51:56. > :51:59.will it be dismissed as a ghmmick? As another threat to
:52:00. > :52:03.the green belt from developdrs? Either way, the question relains `
:52:04. > :52:05.what's the best way to solvd And we are also joined here today
:52:06. > :52:14.by the 21st century's answer to He's the winner of the ?250,000
:52:15. > :52:22.Wolfson Economics Prize, which I'm told is ranked second only
:52:23. > :52:27.to the Nobel Prize, and the man who's suggested a new gener`tion
:52:28. > :52:43.of garden cities could be p`rt of Congratulations. Thank you. Is this
:52:44. > :52:49.intended as a serious contrhbution to the debate about the housing
:52:50. > :52:55.crisis or just an eye`catchhng sound bite? There is agreement we need
:52:56. > :53:00.more houses in this country, we are under providing and it may not look
:53:01. > :53:06.that way in Stratford on Avon but nationally we need to do th`t. A lot
:53:07. > :53:12.of that could go into cities like Birmingham and Wolverhampton but not
:53:13. > :53:16.all. You talk about the gredn belt and as far as I can see for
:53:17. > :53:23.politicians, it is a rail lhne and you mention it in this contdxt at
:53:24. > :53:30.your peril. I am not a politician, if you are you need to have caution.
:53:31. > :53:35.That is why the debate needs to happen on a national level. One
:53:36. > :53:38.reason for the competition hs to generate that debated and gdt people
:53:39. > :53:43.thinking about where it is best to put houses. At the moment they go in
:53:44. > :53:48.the least attractive field `round every village, we are saying do not
:53:49. > :53:53.do that, put them in a propdr development like an Edgbaston rather
:53:54. > :53:59.than pushing them around and annoying every village, we `re
:54:00. > :54:04.saying put them in a single place. Our politicians sympathetic? If seen
:54:05. > :54:10.reports that you and George Osborne talk to each other. What is the real
:54:11. > :54:15.politics of this? I don't t`lk to George Osborne directly, but
:54:16. > :54:21.politicians are looking for an answer. They see potential hn the
:54:22. > :54:25.garden city because polling shows garden cities are popular as ideas,
:54:26. > :54:32.somewhere else is what people are saying. And they are not a pillar in
:54:33. > :54:38.South Warwickshire, we saw the idea of a possible development and people
:54:39. > :54:43.are up in arms. 75% of people polled said they were a good thing, if
:54:44. > :54:46.given a choice where to put the housing, faceless suburbs or
:54:47. > :54:52.anywhere else, it is how to engage that enable political process which
:54:53. > :54:59.is difficult. Karen, what is your view of this? How about a g`rden
:55:00. > :55:04.city in the Mormons? We need a garden city where people ard happy
:55:05. > :55:07.with it. I have seen in the peatlands that local parishds have
:55:08. > :55:12.been able to contribute us do what housing needs they have two keep
:55:13. > :55:16.villages alive. Would you wdlcome it? People talk about that hn
:55:17. > :55:21.principle but not when it comes to their backyard. The Mormons is an
:55:22. > :55:29.unusual case because we are partly the current national park, but I
:55:30. > :55:35.think the right housing in the right areas could be welcome, and planning
:55:36. > :55:40.amenities makes a differencd. I know does all the places on David's list
:55:41. > :55:44.happened to be conservative areas. Shouldn't you pitch for Stoke to be
:55:45. > :55:50.added to this? Sort of, is ly answer. The reality with
:55:51. > :55:56.Stoke`on`Trent is that therd is role into green fields around thd city
:55:57. > :56:00.which is completely wrong. There are huge amounts of Brownfield land in
:56:01. > :56:06.Stoke`on`Trent that need to be built on. When that is exhausted, we then
:56:07. > :56:11.need a proper plan approach, but not yet, we have to exhaust what we
:56:12. > :56:16.have. Absolutely right for Stoke`on`Trent, and not all the
:56:17. > :56:20.places, Oxford is Labour`controlled, but there are certain places like
:56:21. > :56:27.Oxford and Wester where there isn't scope to expand. They are popular
:56:28. > :56:30.places, why build it unpopular places when it is less dangdrous
:56:31. > :56:35.than we should be building hn popular places, and if you plan
:56:36. > :56:40.properly and design beautiftl housing you could maybe get over
:56:41. > :56:44.some objection. Let me raisd some criticisms, that it would m`ke an
:56:45. > :56:52.appreciable difference to affordable housing, just give city slickers
:56:53. > :56:57.another option, and also th`t you tack on small developments rather
:56:58. > :57:01.than this one size fits all idea? In Germany, look at how they do
:57:02. > :57:08.extensions, there are crimes, open space, proper provision, but with
:57:09. > :57:13.little X `` estates you cannot do that, so you work with scald, the
:57:14. > :57:20.value of the land which Ebenezer Howard intended to be spent on the
:57:21. > :57:25.quality, but now it goes to the farmer. If you can spend th`t on the
:57:26. > :57:29.place you get up audible hotsing and get the money to do that, provide
:57:30. > :57:35.facilities and create attractive places. Fascinating. We will see
:57:36. > :57:38.what happens. Thank you all very much.
:57:39. > :57:40.Now our regular round`up of the political week
:57:41. > :57:43.It's brought to us today by Charmaine Burton,
:57:44. > :57:46.presenter of the Different @ngles show on Birmingham's New Stxle
:57:47. > :57:52.The West Midlands MEP Nikki Sinclaire appeared before Bhrmingham
:57:53. > :57:55.magistrates on charges of money laundering
:57:56. > :58:02.Herefordshire Council is adding its name to a court petition calling
:58:03. > :58:09.The council is owed ?65,000 by the non`league club.
:58:10. > :58:13.Another 6000 jobs are to go at Birmingham City Council on top
:58:14. > :58:18.The council says it's the equivalent to the closure
:58:19. > :58:25.It's a stark figure and I've not taken any pleasure
:58:26. > :58:30.Protestors marched to demonstrate against proposals to
:58:31. > :58:36.Some services are due to move to the University Hospital of
:58:37. > :58:42.Thousands of jobs are at risk after Newcastle`under`Lyme`based
:58:43. > :58:48.The company was founded by Staffordshire entreprenetr
:58:49. > :58:57.But generally there's an improving picture on jobs.
:58:58. > :58:59.The latest figures show unelployment in the West Midlands has dipped
:59:00. > :59:08.below 200,000 for the first time since the economic crash.
:59:09. > :59:17.So that is welcome but isn't part of that picture that more of them are
:59:18. > :59:22.low paid, temporary contracts, so large jobs are being done down? I
:59:23. > :59:31.dispute that, we have good figures in the Mormons. But the moorlands
:59:32. > :59:36.isn't the complete picture. The jobs being created by the right jobs for
:59:37. > :59:39.those people and that he put IME taking new jobs are excited and
:59:40. > :59:46.interested in them, and my lessage to people worried about this
:59:47. > :59:50.company, I am pleased there is some talk of rescue from Vodafond but I
:59:51. > :59:58.want to see support for the people affected. I disagree, I think there
:59:59. > :00:03.are too many people on minilum wage zero hours contract jobs whdre they
:00:04. > :00:07.have to pay to get to works if their contract requires them to go from
:00:08. > :00:11.location to location, they have to fund it themselves, provide their
:00:12. > :00:16.own uniform and there is a fundamental problem with jobs that
:00:17. > :00:20.are being treated. I welcomd every job that this is too late, they
:00:21. > :00:22.should have happened three xears ago and they are not quality jobs, which
:00:23. > :00:26.we need to see. My thanks to Karen Bradley `nd
:00:27. > :00:28.Rob Flello. I'll be heading up to Manchdster
:00:29. > :00:31.for the Labour Party conferdnce where I'll be interviewing
:00:32. > :00:33.the party leader Ed Miliband. That will be on Midlands Today
:00:34. > :00:36.on Wednesday evening at 6:30pm And on next Sunday's progralme I'll
:00:37. > :00:39.be talking to the Prime Minister David Cameron
:00:40. > :00:41.at the start of the Conserv`tive And UKIP gather in Doncaster,
:00:42. > :00:48.so we'll also be hearing But this is where we, in our part
:00:49. > :00:58.of our still`United Kingdom, the Conservative mayor's policy No
:00:59. > :01:06.more time I'm afraid. Andrew, back to you.
:01:07. > :01:08.Welcome back the to Labour conference, where we're joined
:01:09. > :01:12.by the latest hot new stand-up comedian on the Manchester circuit.
:01:13. > :01:17.I speak of course of former Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott.
:01:18. > :01:19.In between giving tub-thumping speeches to rally
:01:20. > :01:22.the party faithful this week, he's appearing at the Comedy Store.
:01:23. > :01:25.He was also of course the man behind the last attempt to solve
:01:26. > :01:37.Our political panel is with me as well. John, we have got Scottish
:01:38. > :01:40.votes for Scottish laws, and more Scottish votes for Scottish laws,
:01:41. > :01:45.why not English votes for English laws? That's an English parliament
:01:46. > :01:49.in a major constitutional change and that is what has started. I
:01:50. > :01:53.certainly don't agree with that I campaign for powers to be given to
:01:54. > :01:56.the regions. When I first tested it in the Northeast, I lost. Why?
:01:57. > :02:01.Because they said they were not the same powers you are giving to
:02:02. > :02:09.Scotland. So, basically, we must do that, decentralised, not just with a
:02:10. > :02:12.Westminster Parliament. As you know, in 32 years I produce the
:02:13. > :02:17.alternative. You've kept that for 32 years? I took it off my shelf and
:02:18. > :02:23.everybody was talking about it now, but they weren't in 1982. This was
:02:24. > :02:29.my five plan. 200 meetings all around the country -- five-year
:02:30. > :02:33.plan. You wrote this morning, not 35 years ago, that this was a plot to
:02:34. > :02:37.turn Westminster into a Tory dominated English parliament. But if
:02:38. > :02:42.that is how England had voted, it's not a plot, it's democracy. You can
:02:43. > :02:46.get reform in a more federal structure, and even English
:02:47. > :02:49.parliament does fit into the federal structure and that is what the
:02:50. > :02:54.Liberals say, but you need a fairer representation. It might be quite
:02:55. > :02:58.radical, and we could get rid of the Lord's, and have representation in
:02:59. > :03:05.the region there. It can't be done in two weeks. Alex Salmond, he's
:03:06. > :03:08.assuming he has been sold out, and it was less than a week ago they
:03:09. > :03:13.remain the announcement. We have to get it carried out will stop but
:03:14. > :03:18.don't connect it to the English parliament that fixes it in their
:03:19. > :03:21.favour. It may be pretty low politics from David Cameron to come
:03:22. > :03:28.up with something that was not in the vowel -- a bow on the front page
:03:29. > :03:30.of the daily record, but if they do not agree with what he said at the
:03:31. > :03:34.time of the general election, he will say two in which voters, if you
:03:35. > :03:38.want real protection in England vote Conservative, and if you want
:03:39. > :03:42.Scottish MPs deciding on your level of taxation, vote Labour. He is
:03:43. > :03:46.scared to death of UKIP may have been saying it for a while. In the
:03:47. > :03:50.constitutional changes have to see what is fair and equitable, the same
:03:51. > :03:54.with the Barnett fallen -- formula. But what you have to do is get a
:03:55. > :03:58.fair system. It takes time to discuss it. I was doing a 32 years
:03:59. > :04:02.ago and nobody wanted to know. We had better start a debate, and don't
:04:03. > :04:08.mixed up the constitutional type of English parliament with what we are
:04:09. > :04:13.promising in Scotland. It is about trust and politics. So the turnout
:04:14. > :04:18.of the north-east regional assembly and they voted against it. The
:04:19. > :04:21.turnout that the police and crime commissioners was low. How'd you get
:04:22. > :04:25.people interested in the process and it doesn't feel like a conversation
:04:26. > :04:28.in smoky rooms and you go back to British people and tell them what
:04:29. > :04:33.you decided? If you look at the turnout in Scotland whether they
:04:34. > :04:36.were interested in, now it is phenomenally interesting. It is
:04:37. > :04:39.about real power, having real influence. What they said to me in
:04:40. > :04:43.the north-east, they said we know you have an idea for devolution and
:04:44. > :04:47.you will give us assemblies but it doesn't have the power of Scotland,
:04:48. > :04:50.but now we are talking about equity, similar distribution of
:04:51. > :04:54.power and similar resources. The English people are entitled to that.
:04:55. > :04:59.They have been robbed of it for too long. Labour has long struggled with
:05:00. > :05:03.what it should do over devolving power to the regions and you came up
:05:04. > :05:07.with regional assemblies. Ed Miliband has a different idea of
:05:08. > :05:11.city regions. Aren't they the same idea of yours but without a
:05:12. > :05:14.democratic accountability? Can we really trust the greater region of
:05:15. > :05:19.Manchester or Birmingham to deliver if there is not the same kind of
:05:20. > :05:24.democratic link with the people I live in whole, and it stops on the
:05:25. > :05:29.boundary of the Pennines -- the city of Hull. We have city regions from
:05:30. > :05:33.Labour because I failed in the north-east to get the assemblies in,
:05:34. > :05:37.and now we have to look at those options. Do you work through city
:05:38. > :05:40.regions? Mainly in the north, I might say. Even the federal
:05:41. > :05:43.structure they talk about my be in the North or Midlands with
:05:44. > :05:48.Birmingham, but there are a number of options and that is where I
:05:49. > :05:52.believe that what the White Paper should do is to put those options
:05:53. > :05:56.in. Instead of having to put them together, state what you want to do
:05:57. > :05:59.in the English regions. Leave it to the legislation, which is what will
:06:00. > :06:03.happen with the Scottish, and once you've agreed it, you do it after.
:06:04. > :06:07.You have to start the radical debate about giving the English regions,
:06:08. > :06:12.not centralised in London, but decentralised. Do you need to have a
:06:13. > :06:17.separate English parliament? Wouldn't it just satisfy the English
:06:18. > :06:21.if you simply said to MPs, when it's in English matter in the House of
:06:22. > :06:25.Commons, stop interfering? I would disagree with that. I would say put
:06:26. > :06:30.the option in the White Paper. The White Paper seems to be talking
:06:31. > :06:33.about Scotland. If you don't put the commitments to what you want to do
:06:34. > :06:38.with the English regions, people might say I'm not supporting that.
:06:39. > :06:41.Put the framework in the White Paper, but a different timetable.
:06:42. > :06:46.Devolution in this country has been to a different timetable, whether
:06:47. > :06:49.it's Wales, Northern Ireland. Start looking fundamentally at it and the
:06:50. > :06:56.Labour Party should be leading the debate. Let's come the no campaign
:06:57. > :07:00.lost Glasgow. The cradle of British socialism. -- let's come to
:07:01. > :07:04.something that happened with the referendum as the no campaign lost
:07:05. > :07:09.Glasgow. Is it a sign that the Labour Party are finding it hard to
:07:10. > :07:12.what -- hold on to their traditional working class vote question mark its
:07:13. > :07:17.different in Manchester. They would say it is a message about
:07:18. > :07:26.decentralisation. If we change the message a bit maybe. We have been
:07:27. > :07:29.thinking that now it is that either the Labour Party to recognise it is
:07:30. > :07:33.not the old message and old areas that will win it. I remember
:07:34. > :07:38.covering the 1997 referendum in Scotland and you gave a tub thumping
:07:39. > :07:41.speech in a big hall in Hamilton and you really connected. Obviously it
:07:42. > :07:45.was a different referendum because that was about a parliament, not
:07:46. > :07:49.independence and Alex Salmond was on your side, but you, and Ingush MP,
:07:50. > :07:53.an English minister, connected to the core Labour voters in a way that
:07:54. > :08:02.Ed Miliband is failing to do -- an English MP. You make a fair point.
:08:03. > :08:09.In the big rally, I had to point out I was Welsh. Enough of this. Get on
:08:10. > :08:14.with it. What I was saying there was that I supported you, as I did for
:08:15. > :08:17.30 odd years when Labour MPs were against any thinker Scotland. I
:08:18. > :08:21.support you, but I expect you to come in with your Scottish MPs and
:08:22. > :08:25.make sure the English get their share of the powers and resources
:08:26. > :08:31.and that is what that speech was about, and by God, it's as relevant
:08:32. > :08:35.today as it was then. I haven't got any Scottish MPs, I live in
:08:36. > :08:43.Knightsbridge. Did you get the vote? No. What would you have done? I
:08:44. > :08:50.can't tell you. You would have voted yes, come on. I'm interested. What
:08:51. > :08:57.do you want to hear from the speech by Ed Miliband? People are wondering
:08:58. > :09:00.about where Labour stands. There are many issues we have flown around,
:09:01. > :09:07.and we've done the discussion just now. What he has got to do where he
:09:08. > :09:12.started off on the minimum wage You are trying to deal with those left
:09:13. > :09:15.behind. Those are the bottom. That is the Labour message. The National
:09:16. > :09:18.Health Service is our creation and we have to say it will be saved If
:09:19. > :09:22.you can save all of these bankers with all the money and say you
:09:23. > :09:28.haven't got the money for the NHS, say where we stand. That will be the
:09:29. > :09:31.priority. The third one, housing. I have had a revolutionary idea that
:09:32. > :09:34.you can buy a house without a deposit and without the interest or
:09:35. > :09:40.paying the stamp duty, and you buy it by rent. The government gives
:09:41. > :09:45.?150 billion guaranteed housing for up to 600,000. Get down to ordinary
:09:46. > :09:48.people who can use their rent to buy the house. It's happening in the
:09:49. > :09:51.north-east. Why are they not listening to you? You have said more
:09:52. > :09:56.to connect with ordinary people in three minutes than we will probably
:09:57. > :10:00.hear in an hour. I've been telling them, made, and we have a commission
:10:01. > :10:06.coming out. People don't want commissions, they want action. I
:10:07. > :10:10.say, I know what we do, housing health, the people. That is our
:10:11. > :10:14.language. That is why we are Labour. That a lot of people run away. I
:10:15. > :10:18.think in Glasgow, they wondered about that. If you turn up on the
:10:19. > :10:22.same three platforms, and I know it's a critical thing to say, they
:10:23. > :10:27.think in Scotland it is a coalition. I don't like coalitions. It looks
:10:28. > :10:32.like a coalition, didn't it? Maybe it was saved because Rupert Murdoch
:10:33. > :10:38.started the The Times about the polls and he couldn't even get the
:10:39. > :10:41.sun to say that they wanted. We haven't got time. I wondered how
:10:42. > :10:48.long it would take is to get to repot Murdoch. You beat the record.
:10:49. > :10:51.-- to Rupert Murdoch. Labour is quite behind on the economy, and
:10:52. > :10:54.people are looking at Labour, trying to work out if they can trust you to
:10:55. > :11:01.the stewards of the economy given 2010. Under Labour 's plans there is
:11:02. > :11:06.20 billion of cuts to make in the next Parliament. Will we hear
:11:07. > :11:11.anything about that? It is about the proportion of debt to GDP. I know it
:11:12. > :11:16.sounds historic, but our debt when we came in in 1997 was a proportion
:11:17. > :11:23.of GDP, and you must know this, and that was less than Thatcher's. Why
:11:24. > :11:26.did we get done on debt? You guys run around saying a lot about it,
:11:27. > :11:33.but the fact is it was worse under Thatcher. Thatcher is now seen as a
:11:34. > :11:37.hero. If you look at the debt, it is still a problem. Gordon Brown did an
:11:38. > :11:41.awful lot to solve those problems, but they were still left with us.
:11:42. > :11:44.What we have to have is a sensible discussion like we had on devolution
:11:45. > :11:49.and now we are talking about finances. Let's look at the public
:11:50. > :11:52.sector debt and the price we pay. We need to be putting the record
:11:53. > :11:56.straight. The problem is they tell me, John, we have to look to the
:11:57. > :11:59.future not the past. We are getting screwed on the past and we have to
:12:00. > :12:06.change it and perhaps Gordon Brown coming in could do something.
:12:07. > :12:10.Finishing on the future, when we did a poll of the Labour candidates you
:12:11. > :12:14.were watching on the big screen when it came up that their favourite
:12:15. > :12:25.to succeed Ed Miliband was Yvette Cooper, why did you shout no! That
:12:26. > :12:27.is alive. -- alive. -- that is not true. I know resistance is not
:12:28. > :12:44.strong. What did that mean? You can't get away with anything at
:12:45. > :12:49.a Conference, John. I was dropping comments them to pick up everywhere,
:12:50. > :12:54.I do not wear -- nowhere they got that one from. Good to have you
:12:55. > :12:59.back. Round of applause for former Deputy Prime Minister. That's it for
:13:00. > :13:01.today. Don't applaud them, they are useless.
:13:02. > :13:06.my guests. I'll be back here at Labour conference for the Daily
:13:07. > :13:10.11:30am tomorrow when we'll bring you live coverage of the speech by
:13:11. > :13:15.We're here all week, and next Sunday you can find us in Birmingham for
:13:16. > :13:23.Remember if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.