02/03/2014 Sunday Politics West

Morning folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.

Fears that Ukraine could face invasion escalate this morning as

Russian forces take control of Crimea. President Obama and his

European allies tell President Putin to back off. It doesn't sound like

he's listening. Shadow Education Secretary Tristram

Hunt has started spelling out Labour's plans for schools. So

what's the verdict - full marks or must try harder? He joins us for the

Sunday Interview. And all the big political parties

are desperate to broaden their appeal. We'll look at some unusual

In the West: New free schools but had what cost? Stroud

changes. And tightening household finances.

And with me, as always, three journalists who'd make a clean sweep

if they were handing out Oscars for political punditry in LA tonight.

But just like poor old Leonardo DiCaprio they've never won so much

as a Blue Peter badge! Yes, it's Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan

Ganesh. Instead of acceptance speeches they'll be tweeting faster

than the tears roll down Gwyneth Paltrow's face. Yes, that's as

luvvie as we get on this show. Events have been moving quickly in

Ukraine this weekend. The interim government in Kiev has put the

Ukrainian military on full combat alert after Russia's parliament

rubber-stamped the deployment of Russian troops anywhere in Ukraine.

Russian troops seem already to be in control of the mainly

Russian-speaking Crimea region, where Russia has a massive naval

base. President Obama told President Putin that Russia has flouted

international law by sending in Russian troops but the Kremlin is

taking no notice. This is now turning into the worst stand-off

between Russia and the West since the conflict between Georgia and

Russia in 2008, though nobody expects any kind of military

response from the West. Foreign Secretary William Hague is on his

way to Kiev this morning to show his support for the new government,

though how long it will survive is another matter. We can speak to our

correspondent David Stern, he's in Kiev.

As things look from Kiev, can we take it they've lost Crimea, it is

now in all essence under Russian control? Yes, well for the moment,

Crimea is under Russian control Russian troops in unmarked uniforms

have moved throughout the peninsula taking up various positions, also at

the Ismis which links Ukraine into Crimea. They've surrounded Ukrainon

troops there. Three units have been captured according to a top

officials. We can say at the moment Russia controls the peninsula. It

should also be said, also they have the support of the ethnic Russian

population. The ethnic Russians make up the majority of the population.

They are also not entirely in control because there are other

groups, namely the Tatar as and the ethnic Ukrainian speakers who are at

least at the moment tacitly resisting. We'll see what they'll

start to do in the coming days. David, I'm putting up some pictures

showing Russian troops digging in on the border between Crimea and

Ukraine. I get the sense that is just for show. There is, I would

assume, no possibility that the Ukrainians could attempt to retake

Crimea by military force? It seems that the Ukrainians are weighing

their options right now. Their options are very limited. Any

head-to-head conflict with Russia would probably work against the

Ukrainians. They seem to be taking more of a long-term gain. They are

waiting for the figs's first move. They are trying not to create any

excuse that the Russians can stage an even larger incursion into Crimea

or elsewhere, for that matter. They also seem to be trying to get

international support. It should be said, this is a new Government. It

has only been installed this week. They are trying to gain their

footing. This is a major crisis They have to count on the loyalty of

the army they might have some resistance from solders from the

eastern part of the country who are Russian speaking. They probably

could count on Ukrainian speakers and people from the centre and west

of the country as well as regular Ukrainians. A lot of people are

ready to fight to defend Ukrainian Terre Tory. Where does the Kremlin

go next? They have Crimea to all intents and purposes. There's a weak

Government in Kiev. Do they move to the eastern side of Ukraine which is

largely Russian speaking and there's already been some unrest there?

That's the big question, that's what everybody's really asking now. Where

does this go from here? We've had some unrest in the eastern part of

the country. There have been demonstrations and clashes. More

ominously, there have been noises from the Kremlin they might actually

move into eastern Ukraine. Putin in his conversation with Barack Obama

said they might protect their interests there. It should be said,

if they do expand, in fact, they've also said they are dead against the

new Government seeing it as illegitimate and fascist. It does

contain risks. They will have to deal with international reactions.

America said there will be a deep reaction to this and it will affect

Russia's relations with Ukraine and the international community. They

have to deal with the reaction in Ukraine. This may unite Ukrainians

behind this new interim Government. Once Russia moves in, they will be

seen as an invading force. It plays on historical feelings of Russia

being an imperial force. Joining me is MP Mark Field who sits

on the security Security and Intelligence Committee in the House

of Commons. What should the western response be to these events? I can

understand why William Hague is going to Kiev tomorrow to stand side

by side whizz whoever's in charge. They need to CEOP sit numbers and

also President Putin. The truth is we are all co significant fatries to

the Budapest Memorandum of almost 20 years ago which was designed to

maintain the integrity of the Ukraine and Crimea. There needs to

be a discussion along those lines. The difficulty is President Putin

has watched events in recent months, in relation to Syria, it is palpable

President Obama's focus of attention ask the other side of the Pacific

rather than the Atlantic. The vote in the House of Commons, I was very

much against the idea of military action or providing weapons to the

free Syrian army. My worry is, events proved this, the majority of

the other options toed as sad are rather worse. It is clear now we are

in a constitutional mess in this country. We cannot even contemplate

military action without a parliamentary vote that moves

against quick reaction that is required from the executive or, I

suspect, there will be very little appetite for any military action

from the West over in Ukraine. We are corn tours under the agreement

of less than 20 years ago. We may be but we've guaranteed an agreement

which it is clear we haven't the power to enforce. You wrote this

morning, Britain is a diminished voice. Clams Iley navigating the

Syrian conflict we relick wished decisions to the whims of

parliamentary approval. That may or may not be but the Kremlin's not

watching how we voted on the Syrian issue? In relation to Syria, it was

where is the western resolve here. The truth ask Putin's position is

considerably less strong. In diplomatic terms. He had a victory

in Syria in relation to chemical weapons and in relation to the

West's relationship with Iran. Putin is a vital inter locking figure In

demographic and economic terms, Russia's in very deep trouble. The

oil price started to fall to any degree, oil and gas price, given the

importance of mineral wealth and exports for the Russian economy

Putin would be in a lot of trouble. It requires an engagement from the

EU and the EU are intending to look at their internal economic problems

and will be smarting from the failure within a matter of hours of

the deal they tried to broker only nine days' ago.

You say if Mr Putin decides to increase the stakes and moves into

the east, takes over the whole place, our Government, you say, will

find itself with another colossal international headache. Some people

watching this will be thinking, what's it got to do with us? It s a

long way away from Britain. We haven't a dog in this fight? We have

in this regard for the longer term here. I think if there were to be

some military action in Ukraine the sense of Russia taking over, it

could have a major impact on the global economy in very quick order.

You should not deny that. There will be move to have sanctions against

Russia. The escalation of that will be difficult. The other fact is

looking at our internal affairs and reform, partners, the Baltic states,

Finland, Poland, the Czech Republic, they will be looking at a resurgent

Russia now and think they'll need to hold as tightly as possible to the

EU institutions and the power of Germany at the centre of that. This

whole appetite for the reforms politically and economically will be

closed very much within a matter of a short period of time. It has

longer term implications. Mark Field, thank you.

We're joined now by BBC News night's Diplomatic Editor Mark Urban. Is

there any prospect of a western military response? Clearly at the

moment, it is nil. The boat has sailed with the Crimean. It has been

per performed by Russian forces It is now a matter of coordinating a

plate cal line. European foreign ministers tomorrow. To say what will

our future limits be? Where could we possibly draw red lines? To try to

think a couple of steps down this, what happens if Russia interrupts

energy supplies to EU member states ornate owe countries? These are the

important steps they have to think about. It is quite clear we are in a

different world here now. Also, Ukraine is facing a urgent foreign

exchange crisis. Within literally a few weeks they could run out of

money. All of these are rushing towards decision makers very fast.

There is an interim and I suggestion unstable Government in Kiev. Crimea

semi-to be under Russian control. There are clashes between the

reformers and Russian nationals in the east of the country. What does

Mr Putin do next? He has lots of options, of course. He has this

carte blanch carte blanch from his Parliament to go in to the rest of

Ukraine if he wants to. His military deployment suggests the one bite at

a time, just Crimea to start with. See what response comes from the

Ukrainian Government. Of course so far, there hasn't been a coherent

response. The really worrying thing about recent months, not just recent

days, are the indications that the future of Ukraine as a unitary state

is now in doubt. Look at it from the other side of the equation. The

President when faced with demonstrations, many extremists he

was unable to deal with that. Now we have the other side, if you like,

the Russian speakers, the other side of the fight, Russian nationalists

showing they can get away with unilateral action more or less with

impunity. The Ukrainian chiefs have been sacked. I think there are

considerable questions now as to whether Ukraine is falling apart

and, if that happens, we're into a Yugoslav-type situation which will

continue posing very serious questions for the EU and NATO for

months or years to come. So, Janan, Ukraine is over? Where the west to

concede to the Russian in Crimea, it would perversely be a net loss for

Russia. You'd assume the rest of Ukraine would become an un

unambiguously a member of the the EU, maybe NATO. On top of that a

Russian dream of Eurasion dream they will look at Putin's behaviour

and is a, no, thanks, we'll head towards the EU. It is a short-term

victory for Putin which backfires on his broader goals in Well, many

people said if he grabs Crimea, he loses Ukraine, which is your point.

We have seen violent demonstrations in the big eastern cities in Ukraine

yesterday. People taking control of certain buildings. The risk is there

of spreading beyond Crimea. I think the lack of any unified or visible

response from Ukrainian armed forces... They allowed Russian

troops to walk into the bases in Crimea. They have supposedly gone on

red alert but they have done absolutely nothing. We don't see

them deploying from barracks. There are serious questions about whether

they would just fall apart. Putin is not going to let them split away. I

would have thought he would like the entire Ukraine to come into the

Russian ambit. Barack Obama is saying this will not stand. He has a

90 minute conversation with Vladimir Putin and what is his response? I am

suspending my cooperation in the run-up to the Sochi Summit. What is

the EU doing? Nothing. There is nothing they can do and Putin knows

there are a series of lines that he is able to cross and get away with

it. Why should Berlin, London, Washington be surprised by the

strength of Vladimir Putin's reaction? It was never going to let

Ukraine just fall into the arms of the EU. That is the interesting

point. And who does he listen to? Paddy Ashdown was saying sent Angela

Merkel because she is the only person who can talk to him and I

find that response worrying. We need to speak with a united voice but

nobody knows what we should be saying. Military intervention is out

for the West so we go to economic sanctions. Doesn't Vladimir Putin

just say, oh, you want sanctions? I have turned off the gas tap. Yes, it

is move and countermove, and it is difficult to predict where it will

end up. In all these meetings that are being held, they do think a step

or two ahead and try and set out clear lines. Thank you for coming in

this morning. Labour has been struggling since

2010 to decide exactly how to take education secretary Michael Gove,

one of the boldest reformers of the coalition and most divisive figures.

Ed Miliband appointed TV historian Tristram Hunt and many thought

Labour had found the man to teach Michael Gove a lesson. But how much

do we really know about the party's plans for England's schools? Wales,

Scotland and Northern Ireland are a devolved matter. Child has been back

to school to find out. A politician once told me, do you know why

education secretaries changed schools? Because they can. Michael

Gove might dispute the motive but he is changing schools, like this one.

The changes he is ringing in our encouraging them to be academies,

free from local authorities to control their own budgets, ushering

in free schools, focusing on toughening exams and making them the

core of the curriculum with less coursework, and offering heads more

discretion on tougher discipline. And he is in a hurry to put all this

in place. But has that shut out any chance for a Labour Government to

change it all themselves and do they really want to? Any questions?

Visiting a different school, first in line to get a crack at that

would-be Labour's third shadow education secretary since 2010,

Tristram Hunt. In post, he has not been taken about fine tuning

previous direct opposition to free schools and he has also suggested

teachers in England would have to be licensed under a Labour Government,

allowing the worst to be sacked and offering training and development to

others and of course ending coalition plans to allow unqualified

teachers into classrooms. Full policy detail is still unmarked

work. Your opinion about evolution? What is very clear is that Labour's

education policy is still evolving. We are learning that they have some

clear water, but we also seem, from the sting at the back, to get the

feeling that there is not a great deal of difference from them and the

current Government on types of schools and the way education should

proceed. -- from listening at the back. So what exactly is different

about their policy? What Tristram Hunt's job is to do is to be open

and honest about the shared agenda between us and the Tories. There are

a lot of areas where there is clear water between us and Tristram Hunt

as to turn his back, shared agenda, stop fighting it, and forge our

agenda, which I think people will be really interested in. The art of

Government, of course, is to balance competing pictures of policy, even

inside your own party. It is fair to say that if Labour reflects and

draws its own visions of a shared agenda, it might have to square that

idea with teaching unions, who are already unhappy with the pace and

tone of change that the Government had sketched out. What we sincerely

hope is that if Labour were to form the next Government, that they would

look at a serious review of accountability measures. That is

really what ways on teachers every single day. Actually they would look

at restoring the possibility, for example, of local councillors to be

able to open schools. That seems eminently sensible. If they are not

going to move back from the free schools and academies programme at

the very least they need to say that academy chains will be inspected

because at the moment they are not. Labour have balls in the air on

education and are still throwing around precise policy detail. There

are areas that they could grab hold of and seize possession. A focus on

the rounding of the people, developing character, the impact of

digitalisation on the classroom Also the role and handling of

teachers in the system and the interdependence of schools. That is

all still to play for. Currently I think the difference between the

parties is that the coalition policies, while we do not agree with

all of them, are clear and explicit, and Labour's policies are yet to be

formulated in a way that everybody can understand clearly. I don't

think that Tristram Hunt or Miliband will want to pick unnecessary fights

before the election. I think we will have quite a red, pinkish fuzziness

around the whole area of policy but after the election there will be

grey steel from Tristram Hunt. But if fuzzy policy before the election

is the lesson plan, it does rather risk interested voters being left in

the dark. Tristram Hunt joins me now for the

Sunday interview. Welcome. Thank you. Which of Michael

Gove's school reforms would you repeal? We are not interested in

throwing a change for the sake of it. When I go round schools,

teachers have been through very aggressive changes in the last three

years, so when it comes to some of the curriculum reforms we have seen,

we are not interested in changing those for the sake of it. Where we

are interested in making change is having a focus on technical and

vocational education, making sure that the forgotten 15% is properly

addressed in our education system. What we saw in your package was an

interesting description of how we have seen structural reforms in the

names of schools. Academies, free schools, all the rest of it.

International evidence is clear that it is the quality of leadership of

the headteachers and the quality of teaching in the classroom that

transforms the prospects of young people. Instead of tinkering around

the names of schools, we focus on teacher quality. Viewers will be

shocked to note that this Government approves of unqualified teachers in

the classroom. We want to have fully qualified, passionate, motivated

teachers in the classroom. It sounds like you might not repeal anything.

You might build on it and you might go in a different direction, with

more emphasis on technological education but no major repeal of the

reforms of Michael Gove? I don't think you want to waste energy on

undoing reforms. In certain situations they build on Labour

Party policy. We introduced the sponsored academy programmes and we

began the Teach First programmes, and we began the London challenge

which transformed the educational prospects of children in London We

want to roll that out across the country. You have said there will be

no more free schools, which Michael Gove introduced, but you will allow

parents let academies, which just means free schools by a different

name. No, because they will be in certain areas. We want to create new

schools with parents. What we have at the moment is a destructive and

market-driven approach to education. I was in Stroud on

Thursday and plans for a big new school, in an area with surplus

places, threatened to destroy the viability of local, rural schools.

We want schools to work together in a network of partnership and

challenge, rather than this destructive market-driven approach.

You say that, but your version of free schools, I think, would only be

allowed where there is a shortage of places. That means that where there

is an excess of bad schools, parents will have no choice. They still have

to send their kids to bad schools. And we have to transform bad schools

and that was always the Labour way in Government. At the moment we just

have an insertion of new schools. Schools currently underperforming

are now underperforming even more. Children only have one chance at

education. What about their time in school? Our focus is on the

leadership of the headteacher and having quality teachers in the

classroom. So they cannot set up new better schools and they have to go

to the bad schools. Tony Blair said it should be easier for parents to

set up new schools where they are dissatisfied with existing schools.

You are not saying that. Even where they are dissatisfied with existing

schools, they cannot set up free schools and you are reneging on

that. We live in difficult economic circumstances where we have got to

focus public finances on the areas of absolute need. We need 250,0 0

new school places. 150,000 in London alone. We have to focus on building

new schools and where we have to put them. And secondly... Absolutely

not. Focusing on those schools. Making sure we turned them around,

just as we did in Government. We have had a remarkable degree of

waste under the free school programme. If you think of the free

school in Derby, the Academy in Bradford, and as we saw in the

Telegraph on Friday, the free schools in Suffolk, a great deal of

waste of public money on underperforming free schools. That

is not the Labour way. We focus on making sure that kids in schools at

the moment get the best possible education. Except that in your own

backyard, in Stoke, only 34% of secondary school pupils attend a

good or outstanding school. 148 out of 150 of the worst performing local

authorities and it is Labour-controlled. Still terrible

schools and yet you say parents should not have the freedom to start

a better school. We have great schools in Stoke-on-Trent as well.

We face challenges, just as Wolverhampton does and the Isle of

Wight and Lincolnshire. Just like large parts of the country. What is

the solution to that? Making sure we share excellence among the existing

schools and making sure we have quality leadership in schools. Those

schools in Stoke-on-Trent are all academies. It is not a question only

of structure but of leadership. It is also a question of going back to

the responsibility of parents to make sure their kids are school

ready when they get to school. To make sure they are reading to their

children in the evening. We can t put it all on teachers. Parents have

responsibilities. I understand that but you have told me Labour's policy

would not be to set up new schools which parents hope will be better.

Parents continue to send their kids to bad schools in areas like Stoke.

Labour has had plenty of time to sort out these schools in Stoke and

they are still among the worst performing in the country. You are

condemning these parents to having to send their kids to bad schools.

Where we have seen the sett ing up of Derby, Suffolk, we have seen that

is not the simple solution. Is simply setting up a new is not a

successful model. What works is good leadership. I was in Birmingham on

Friday at a failing comprehensive is not a successful model. What works

is good leadership. I was in Birmingham on Friday at a failing

comprehensive school and now people are queueing round the block to get

into it. You can turn around schools with the right leadership,

passionate and motivated teachers, and parents engaged with the

learning outcome of their kids. In the last few years of the Labour

Government, only four kids from your this Government would set up the new

school. In Birmingham, they got in a great headmaster and turned the

school around and now people are queueing round the block to get into

it. You can turnaround schools with the right leadership, passionate and

motivated teachers, and parents engaged with the learning outcome of

their kids. In the last few years of a Labour Government, only four kids

from your area of and you had plenty of chances to put this right but

only four got to the two and you had plenty of chances to put this right

but only four got to the two leading universities. Traditionally young

people could leave school at 16 and walking two jobs in the potteries,

the steel industry, the traditionally young people could

leave school at 16 and walking two jobs in the potteries, the steel

industry, the but also to get an apprenticeship at Jaguar Land

Rover, JCB, Rolls-Royce. That is why Ed Miliband's focus on the forgotten

15%, which we have just not seen from this Government, focusing on

technical and vocational pathways, is fundamental to Your headmaster

was guiles Slaughter. Was he a good teacher? He He never taught me.

Over 90% of teeners in the private sector are qualified. They look for

not simply teachers with qualified teacher status. Teachers with MAs.

Teachers who are improving them cephalitis. Becoming better

educators. cephalitis. Becoming better

teaching. You were taught by unqualified teachers. Your parents

paid over ?15,000 a year for you being taught by unqualified

teachers. Why did you make such a big deal of it? Because we've seen

right around the world those education systems which focus on

having the most qualified teachers perform the best. It cannot be right

that anyone can simply turn up, as at the moment, have schools at

veritising for unqualified teachers teaching in the classroom. We want

the best qualified teachers with the deepest subject knowledge, for the

passion in learning for their kids. It is absurd we are having arguments

about this. Simply having a paper qualification doesn't make you a

great teacher. Let me take you to Brighton college. It is gone from

the 147th to the 18 18th best private school in the land. Fllt the

headmaster says: This is the top Sundaytimes school

of the year. The school in derby where this Government allowed

unqualified teaching assist taints. We had teachers who could barely

speak English. That is because if you have unqualified teachers you

end up with a dangerous situation. The problem with that school was not

unqualified teachers. People were running that school who were unfit

to run a school. We have an issue about discipline and behaviour

management in some of our schools. Some of the skills teachers gain

through qualifications and learning is how to manage classes and get the

best out of kids at every stage It doesn't end with a qualified teacher

status. That's just the beginning. We want our teachers to have

continue it will development. It is not good enough to have your initial

teacher trainingaged work through your career for 30 years. You need

continual learning. Learning how to deal with digital technology.

Refresh your subject knowledge. As an historian I help teachers. You've

taught as an unqualified teacher. Not in charge of a subject group. I

give the odd lecture. I'm-y to go to as many schools as possible. I don't

blame you. It is uplifting. Would you sack all unqualified teachers?

We'd want them all to gain teacher status. What if they say no? If they

are not interested in improving skills and deepening their knowledge

they should not be in the classroom. If a free school or academy hired a

teach thinking they are a great teacher but unqualified, if they are

then forced by you to fire them they will be in breach of the law.

They are being urged by us to make sure they have qualified teacher

status. We've lots of unqualified teachers as long as they are on the

pathway to making sure they are qualified. But if they say they

don't want to do this, will you fire them? It is not an unreasonable

suggestion is that the teachers in charge of our young people have

qualifications to teach and inspire our young people particularly when

we face global competition from Shanghai, Korea and so on. The head

teacher of Brighton college finds incredibly inspeechational teachers

who don't' necessarily have a teaching qualifications. It is a

different skill to teach ten young nice boys and girls in Brighton to

teaches 20 or 30 quids with challenging circumstances, special

educational needs, different ability. Being a teacher at Brighton

college is an easy gig in comparison to other schools. Where we want

teachers to have a capacity to teach properly. Do you think Tristram

could ever lead the Labour Party? I think Ed is a great leader, the

reforms yesterday were a real sign for his leadership. And the fact

David Owen, the man with a pre-history with our party is back

with us. It is great. Even Gideon had to change his name to George.

Have you thought of switching to Tommy or Tony? Maybe not Tony!

Michael Foot was called Dingle Foot. I love the Labour because it accepts

everybody from me to Len McCluskey. We are a big, broad happy family on

our way to Government. Thank you very much.

You're watching The Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers in

Scotland who leave us for Sunday politics Scotland. In over 20

minutes I'll Has welcome to Sunday Politics in

the West. Would you open a new school in an area where they already

have hundreds of surplus places That is what these parents hope to

do in Stroud. We will hear from Michael Gove. Let's meet our guests

who are here this week. David Drew who hopes to have a return to

Westminster in the next election. And George Ferguson, Mayor of

Bristol. Let's start with the badger cull which was mired in yet more

controversy this week. Your thoughts on the findings of this independent

panel which claimed the cull was neither effective nor humane. It was

so predictable. Why did we go on with this, why did we waste so much

money? Hopefully now we can now move forward, look for a vaccination

strategy and get away from the daft idea you can cull your way to

dealing with this dreadful disease. It was a lack of alternatives, was

it not? I don't know, David is probably right, there was an

alternative. It makes you angry when you think 10 million could be better

spent. It is sad and an example of central government not really being

in touch with reality. The government's enthusiastic for free

schools is controversial. We are there are excess school places it is

even more controversial. We will hear what the secretary of state

thinks about one approach after this report. This sort of school used to

be a bit alternative but the opening of the first Steiner free school in

2012 which can now be funded by taxpayers. The government

enthusiastic for more free schools and this group in Stroud have been

working on their plans. They are still working on played it might go

but their application has gone in. The feed as it will result in lots

of empty places. There will be new children who need to be

accommodated. We will join the family of schools here and it will

be a lovely edition. This week, Labour's Shadow Education Secretary.

Plans are in place to cater for the growing population which a new free

school could disrupt. I understand there are 300 surplus places in the

area. We have good schools operating in the area. Introducing another

free school into that mix does not seem necessarily the right approach.

He heard the campaign against the preschool which would cost millions.

We have to be very careful about every penny we spend and at the same

time be prepared to consider an application for a free school which

will spend millions of pounds of taxpayers money. It will be

unconventional imported teachers. We do not have to follow the national

curriculum but we have to meet certain benchmarks to deceive the

funding from government. It is nothing new. In 2011 when the

blissful free school opened here and there were threats of legal action

from the head of a nearby secondary who had empty desks. The education

was not to be deterred then and he is here today for what he considers

to be a great success. Michael Gove toured and met the pupils. It is

oversubscribed which he says there is evidence that free schools are

popular with parents. Bristol free school was one of the first. There

are now 174 up and running with more like Stroud hoping to join them I

caught up with the Education Secretary and asked whether it was

right for the state to fund start`up schools? We do not prescribe from

the centre of what good should look like. We let different teachers and

different heads set up free schools to achieve a different kind of

educational attainment to different pupils. There are state schools

under the last government which have been successful. It is important to

recognise that we should, at certain points, let the professionals get on

with the job and decide on the style of education. If standards fall then

we should intervene. You are trying to these standards, don't you want

uniformity of curriculum? There is no tension between making sure

teachers and heads have a greater freedom of curriculum, they are the

experts, but intervening if things go wrong. We have done in the past

20 has been under performance and we have had to take action. Exam

results have often alerted us to things going wrong. In free schools

we are seeing real improvement and academies as well are outperforming

other schools. We struggle with poor teaching yet we're you are bringing

in an sanctioning free schools with unqualified teachers. They may not

have a specific piece of paper that confers on them a title but that

piece of paper does not make the difference between a good teacher

and the bad teacher. In Weston`super`Mare there is the head

teacher who has hired someone who is the manager and Tesco who teaches

business studies, hands`on experience. Some of the people in

other schools do not have the piece of paper but are still brilliant

teachers. That bit of paper, it surely it is important, the

qualification to say you can teach children. I do not like that

dismissed as just a piece of paper, it is the a lot of training and

understanding. Teaching is not just about knowledge, it is also a real

skill. There are some people who can teach brilliantly and naturally but

I absolutely am against undermining the importance of properly trained

teachers. What do you make of it? More and more schools opening up

with teachers perhaps bringing experience but not a teaching

qualification. Goal now, I cannot build the house so why do we believe

someone can just come into teaching? I trained to be a teacher, I was a

good teacher but I happened to go into politics. Whatever government

is in power they have to stop this. These diesels have more control over

their own curriculum where parents can make decisions, is there a place

for that? I am all for freedom of choice part in Stroud we do not need

a free school. We have all these places. Any time bust their budgets

to talk about ?6 million as an initial start`up is completely

unacceptable. I also think the way it has been done is entirely

difficult so I am worried about what will come out of this. The fact is,

you are setting school against school. The reality is it will be

about trying to grab Hoople 's two Phil places. `` grab pupils to fill

places. It to the market environment, what is wrong with

that? We need more schools in Bristol, it would be entirely

sensible to invest in schools of whatever kind in Bristol. I would

love to have the money that is going into the Steiner school. Even if it

is body Steiner free school? ICOM dogma free as far as schools are

concerned, my only concern is that we raise the standards of education

right across the country. I do not think they are elitist schools, they

have specialities, there is one that specialises in music but not to the

exclusion of anything else. Some parents like to be able to choose Es

bestiality, I'd buy into that as long as the catchment area reflects

the city and does not try to grab people from miles away because we

need to educate Bristol children within Bristol. Places are growing.

I am not against Steiner schools, I support one of them in the private

sector and I have asked them before now to come into the state sector.

That would be an entirely different matter. The problem is with the way

things have been played out. We have both in the city of Gloucester and

Cheltenham the need for additional schooling yet we are getting a new

school potentially in Stroud. It is daft, education planning at its

worst. Let's build schools where we have got the need for them and

rebuild some of the good relationships that there have been

in Stroud and sadly, I think, have been damaged by this. I do not think

children notice, the mind about the teacher they have got, the mind

about the place, the education I think it is right there is some

choice in types of education, that is usually a pavement choice rather

than a child's choice. Different schools learn off of each other ``

eight parents choice. We are on a fast improving curve and I am

delighted about that. Thank you Now, with interest rates bumping

along at rock bottom it has been an interesting time for people with

money to save, more of us have been turning to ethical schemes which

allow you to invest money in local schemes but do they take up jobs one

stunned by the local authority? 1926, a royal visit to Bristol to

open a landmark building, built on the proceeds of the tobacco

industry. The city has benefited from many benefactors over the

years. The family left their mark on this city. Another rich man who has

left his mark on the city is Edward Colston. This city was built by a

colliery owner. Bristol has a long history of philanthropy and more of

us are now for giving. 22 million adults give money to local

projects, over half would give more if it was easier to give and they

could see the benefits. This part of Bristol has seen a huge amount of

regeneration over the years, the bulk has been paid for by

entrepreneurial businessmen. Now ordinarily resident to be able to

shape the city's future. The Bristol born and would see ordinarily

resident given the chance to invest their money and projects across the

city. As yet there are no detailed plans of which schemes would benefit

or how much money needs to be raised but those who do invest could get a

4% return. This harbour`side regeneration was led by one man who

grew up around here and wanted to give something back. He is one of

those pushing the idea of the Bristol born. Mr and Mrs Joe Public

putting in ?10 a month and expecting to get it back after an amount of

time but the real value is knowing they are contributing to a piece of

the jigsaw in Bristol. Another new housing scheme goes up but this has

been funded by the state, money that is in short supply. For more homes

to be built in a city we are ER badly needed, it could be born be

the answer? It could bring forward housing for people who do not

qualify for social housing. The waiting list is so huge now that

there is a large section of the population who will never get a

council house. The Bristol Mayor at his budget slashed last week and is

backing the scheme. It could benefit the social fabric of the city,

whether housing or provision for young people or the old, whatever it

may be, and bring some return in the process. Not everyone is supportive.

The real crisis in the city is at two services. 800 full`time jobs

will go at the council. The devastation this will mean is for

users of the council. I do not think issues of bonds in any shape or form

will make up for the devastation that is going to happen. These were

paid for by rich benefactors, centuries later Bristol still has a

chronic need for affordable homes. Could the Bristol born be the answer

to building more homes? Good view and I'd be able to leave our mark on

the city? To discuss this new age of generosity is the Chief Executive of

the Quartet community foundation which gives money to good causes. Is

this the golden age of getting? I am not sure about that but there is

evidence to suggest that during times of a steady more people do

give. Research we have looked into suggests significant proportions of

the population are already giving. People are very keen to give locally

and see the impact of their giving. Do they get a warm blog or do they

just want to see return for their money? There is a whole variety

Some people like to invest to get a return on their money, others are

happy to give to get that warm glow of getting. Some want to give

anonymously and some become very actively involved in the

organisations they give to. It is about catering for a whole range of

opportunities. Essentially we have a very generous population who

actually see that some people have and some people do not. Actually, we

can all do something. Bristol is a very rich city, lots of money

sloshing about, we could do with benefactors, do people seem to be

coming forward in their droves? I think that was a different age. They

did give enormously and sometimes it was conscience getting, what the

Bristol born and is aiming to do is invest. `` Bond. You are putting

your money into something that is worthwhile for Bristol. It is a

social impact bond but has a small return, you are not throwing money

away, you are investing in a very good cause. I think you can invest

in certain areas, certainly in terms of Homs, in dealing with rough

sleeping, whatever it might be, it has to be appealing to the people of

Bristol. `` homes. There are some very poor people in Bristol. We

should use that gap in a way that appeals. Asking people to dig deep,

even with a little bit of a return, is it right to do that to take over

perhaps what the authority should be doing in the first place? I think

people are quite resentful, whether appearing teacher Association is

trying to bail out their school or helping the NHS, people are worried

about that. The community foundation in Gloucestershire I was once the

member of, that is a different scale. The only problem is, if you

think you are investing any bond and you are going to get your money

back, you might be sadly disillusioned. Who are these people

coming forward and giving? We have a whole range of people, individuals,

families, organisations, all sorts of people who see that if you have a

strong community in the place you live and work, that benefits

everybody. To a certain extent they are doing it because they want the

Bristol or Greater Bristol area to be a better place to be. They see

that opportunity. How do we judge the success of something like the

bond? Tell Michael by the success of the project that come out of it It

might be social housing, then you have got a bond that is due to buy

the problem. Then you might have charitable giving that helps with

the running of that property. You can both mix the investment with

charitable giving and then you probably get the best of both

worlds. With the tariff be far too high for the skyline? I am not be in

against high buildings. Isn't it wonderful that if you go up Park

Street it is fantastic. It was the first view that attracted me to

Bristol. Let's look back at the political week just gone by in our

62nd round up. The petition calling for tougher sentences for dangerous

drivers was returned to Downing Street. It was handed in by the

family of the rest will family `` a Bristol couple who were run down

while cycling by a driver who had taken cocaine. And action on female

genital mutilation. I just felt so relieved and thankful that he was

willing to meet others face to face. The Bishop of Bath and Wells will no

longer live in his own palace, a rule that they should have more

privacy by living in a house close by. The Mayor of Bristol made a

generous offer to Standard Life the Scottish bank says it would move

south if Scotland votes for independence, he has offered to find

them a home in Bristol. Let's pick up on that campaign about female

genital mutilations, it was quite a major feat by someone so young. It

is absolutely appalling, I take my hat off to them, I am so proud of

them, Bristol is taking a huge part in this movement. It is a topic some

are afraid to touch. The media have found it quite difficult. This group

broke through because they have been soaked up front, honest and open

about it. Even in the community is concerned people were not talking

about it. Some of the girls did not even know themselves what the threat

was. I'd macro it is an indication that ordinarily young people can

take their campaign to government and get something done. I really

think she is a wonderful example of how a young person properly engaged

in the political process can make a difference. Female genital

mutilation is an outrage. We have to tackle it at a global level which is

rare attitudes have to change. It is all very well Michael Gove saying we

have to speak out in schools but something has to be done. It is now

happening at the world level, thank you Moon is backing the campaign. It

is out there and I think the difference will be made. That is it

for today. Thank you to my guests for being on the show. We will be

back with you next Sunday. From Government to change it. Thank you

both for being here. Andrew, back to you.

This week grant Shap said he wanted to rebrand the Tories as the

workers' party to show it can reach out to blue-collar workers. One

Conservative Party MP said they should scrap what he said was their

boring old logo. We asked him and two other independent MPs how they'd

freshen up their logos. Aspiration's always been our core

value. About helping people get on with life. Giving people ladders of

opportunity. That's why our symbol must reflect our values of

aspiration and why I'm calling for our symbol to be changed from a tree

to a ladder which symbolises social mobility and stands up for

everything conservatism represents. I like an he will fanned, an animal

that never forgets. We're the only party which seems to remember what

life was like before the NHS and minimum wage and the global

financial crash was caused by too little regulation not too much. We

have a leader who can spot the elephant in the room, the lack of

women on the Tory frontbench. The republicans in America have had the

same idea. Theirs is a suspicious blue. Our would be deepest red. We

love our Liberal Democrat bird. Mrs Thatcher called it the dead parrot

when we launched it. We won the Eastbourne by-election off the

Tories very soon aftered with. Perhaps it feels like we're in a

coalition cage but we're escaping that soon. Why does it fly to the

right? Most Liberal Democrats would want it to fly to the left. I hope

it will soon. Interesting there. Let's stick with

the Robert Hall pin one. He was being serious. The others were fun.

It is interesting that talking about appealing to the blue collared vote,

the upper working class, lower middle class, curiously now neither

Mr Cameron nor Mr Miliband has great cut through with these people. But

in wanting to be the Workers Party, how do you square that with choosing

five old Etonians to draw up four next manifesto. Labour said one of

the things was cutting inheritance tax, after all their priorities they

went to privilege rather than earned income. Rebranding is not enough.

The one question the modernisers never asked themselves when they

took party ten years ago is the thing we know as the Conservative

Party, salvageable as a brand? I'm beginning to think it isn't. If you

look at all public opinion research, there are lots of people in this

contrary with Conservative views. They won't vote Tory or contemplate

the possibility of voting Tory. Can we get over the electoral problems

by relaunching as a different pro-business, pro-worker party. That

means new name, new logo. It will mean new people as well. If you say

you're on the sides of what Thatcher called the strivers, the people

themselves want to see you have strivers in the people who run your

party so you know what we've been through, the struggles we've had.

How many of the six drawing up the manifesto have had ever a mortgage.

The one who's not an old Etonian went to St Paul's. He's a day

schoolboy! It is interesting and it was funny you mentioned an elephant.

Don't think of an elephant as the title of that book. Calling it the

Workers Party draws attention to the Tories biggest electoral weakness.

The idea they are a class apart Out of touch. I think it is interesting,

they have identified their elections are won or lost by this particular

demo graphic of the C 1, and C . Mrs Thatcher got them by the shed

load, Tony Blair got them. His failure in 2010 is the reason David

Cameron didn't win an overall majority. I'm disappointed with the

ladder. You should have a hammer or sickle! The Conservatives have a

terrible brand problem. You heard them explaining why they did badly

in the Wythenshawe by-election, saying there's quite a large council

estate there In 1961, I think the Conservatives won a by-election back

then, they were getting through to those sort of voters. There is not a

single Conservative councillor in Manchester. They have this terrible

problem. You're right for them to pick up on the five Etonians writing

their manifesto. David Cameron sir rounding himself with his own. He

doesn't have to do that. I seas things like isn't Robert Halpen

great. He decides and has his own. He has some more slightly common

people from St Paul's! One of the ways the Conservatives hoped to

broaden their appeal is the tougher line on immigration. We learned net

immigration is rising substantially. Back up over 200,000. Nigel Farage

of UKIP wrapped up the rhetoric In scores of our cities and market

towns, this country, in a short space of time, has become N'Zonzi

rkable whether it is -- unrecognisable. Whether it is the

impact on local schools and hospitals. In many parts of England

you don't hear English spoken, this is not the kind of the community we

want to leave to our children and grandchildren. Helen, maybe people,

I assume, will love the sentiments. Others will say, this is getting...

It is going down a dangerous road. Nigel Farage's wife is German and he

shares a flat with Godfully Bloom, nobody knows what he's saying half

of the time. You can handle the letters from Yorkshire. Alex Salmond

does not make his case on Scotland for the Scottish. Let's put aside

whether the policy's right or wrong. How bad, by the Tories own lights,

is the fact the net figure for immigration went up 60,000? It looks

really bad. If I was a Tory strategist, I'd be philosophical

about it. Immigration, even if they were meeting the target, I don't

think the public would believe it. It is like crime a few years ago,

the crime rates had been declining for the best part of 20 years but

the fear of crime remains high. There's such a degree of cynicism

that regardless of your administrative record in Government,

the public will remain hostile to you. This is where Nigel Farage can

be potent. He said it is not about numbers. It is about community. It

is about people seeing their communities change. And in the

Sunday Telegraph, it was said this isn't a dog whistle, a it is a meaty

bone for a bull terrier. The problem for the Government on these figures

is we know why the net migration figures are not looking good. They

got down the non-EU figures but the EU figures are going up. From Italy

and Spain as their economies tanked, people came here. If he hadn't made

such a big deal of the numbers, the Tories, I mean, you could present

this as a huge success story. If you believe immigration was good for the

country. You would say it doesn t matter what Labour says, the best

and the brightest young people from all over Europe are voting with

their feet to come to Britain. But you never hear that case being made

and certainly not by Labour. They acknowledge although immigration is

best in the abstract for the economy, people don't feel it in

their daily lives. There's a huge vacuum for the case where

immigration should be in our public life. I remember a time when the

economy was in such decline there was a rush to the door in the

sixties and seventies. Now we are claiming our economy's doing better

than any of the other major economies bar Germany, people want

to join in our success. London was a declining city until the

mid-eighties. Theresa May cannot be honest. She was proposing a cap on

immigration. Not going to happen. Today she is saying maybe people

from poorer member states cannot come in until their economies grow.

That's future accession states. That's Turkey in ten years' time It

is causing divisions with the coalition. She's bashing Vince

Cable. You often see Liberal Democrats bashing the Tories. You

don't often see a Tory minister bash Vince Cable. She does on the

immigration figures. He thought they were good news. Last week, Vince

responded to the news by saying it was a policy he was happy for the

gift to flunk. The problem was going for a cap. There are six moving

parts. UK citizens leaving, coming back. EU citizens leaving and coming

back and then third party nationals. And students coming to study. Of

course. You only have control over the EU citizens. Have you to clamp

down on ace strayian, Chinese or American graduates. They should have

gone for the Australian points system. I don't have a pure cap on

numbers just background etc. Tim Farran said in the European election

either vogue Liberal Democrat or UKIP. He turned that to his

advantage. It is hopeful but he s come up with a way to spin this

Labour has his special conference. Was it or was it not an event? Not

sure it was the biggest moment in the party since 1918. But things

fell apart in the special conference in 1981. 2004 got another special

conference. Who's on board? David Owen who founded the gang of four.

He's not joined but he's given them money. He's not going to sit with

them in the Lord's. He's given money. They lost the gang of four.

Back comes David Owen. Not historic? Why would he want it to be more

significant than it was. There's a tendency to see him taking the fight

to his party. Why would he want that? The fact it has not pleased

Grant Shapps is not a test to see whether this has worked. It has been

described as an historic moment and incremental of what John did. The

trade union block voters disappeared a long time ago. They still have 50%

of the vote. But 2,000 of union members voting for this guy has

gone. It is a reform from 20 years ago. Welcome but not historic. Ed

Miliband's stored up trouble. Len McCluskey wants a million new homes

and answered to the benefit caps is not reconcilable with the deficit

reduction strategy. In five years' time if there is a Labour Government

it becomes very difficult. We should keep an eye on it? Always. Labour

Party process is never ending. Unlike this programme. That's all

from us today. Continuing reports of events in the Ukraine on the BBC

News Channel. There's no Daily Politics tomorrow because of cover

Arg of the Nelson Mandela memorial service at Westminster Abbey on BBC

Two live. We'll be back on the Daily Politics on Tuesday at midday. We'll

be back here next week with the Work and Pensions Secretary, Ian Smith.

If it is Sunday, it is the Sunday Politics.