:00:36. > :00:42.Welfare reform is one of the government's most popular policies.
:00:43. > :00:45.So Labour says it would be even tougher than the Tories.
:00:46. > :00:49.We'll be asking the Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary if she's got
:00:50. > :00:55.Even Labour supporters worry that Ed Miliband hasn't got what it takes
:00:56. > :01:00.Labour grandees are increasingly vocal about their concerns.
:01:01. > :01:11.Over 50% of Labour voters think they'd do better with a new leader.
:01:12. > :01:16.And what of this leader? He's apparently "toxic" on the doorstep.
:01:17. > :01:16.The polls say Nick Clegg's more unpopular than Gordon Brown,
:01:17. > :01:28.In the West ` media blackout in your council chamber. We will
:01:29. > :01:39.promised an electric car revolution, why so little progress?
:01:40. > :01:46.Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh, the toxic tweeters
:01:47. > :01:54.First, the deepening crisis in Iraq, where Sunni Islamists are now
:01:55. > :01:57.largely in control of the Syrian-Iraq border, which means
:01:58. > :02:03.they can now re-supply their forces in Iraq from their Syrian bases
:02:04. > :02:06.Rather than moving on Baghdad, they are for the moment consolidating
:02:07. > :02:08.their grip on the towns and cities they've already taken.
:02:09. > :02:11.They also seem to be in effective control of Iraq's
:02:12. > :02:14.biggest oil refinery, which supplies the capital.
:02:15. > :02:17.And there are reports they might now have taken the power
:02:18. > :02:23.Iraqi politicians are now admitting that ISIS,
:02:24. > :02:26.the name of the Sunni insurgents, is better trained, better equipped and
:02:27. > :02:32.far more battle-hardened than the US-trained Iraqi army fighting it.
:02:33. > :02:34.Which leaves the fate of Baghdad increasingly in the hands
:02:35. > :02:52.No good news coming out of there, Janan. No good news and no good
:02:53. > :02:56.options either. The West's best strategy is to decide how much
:02:57. > :03:01.support to give to the Iraqi government. The US is sending over
:03:02. > :03:05.about 275 military personnel. Do they go further and contemplate
:03:06. > :03:11.their support? General Petraeus argued against it as it might be
:03:12. > :03:16.seen as the US serving as the force of Shia Iraqis -- continue their
:03:17. > :03:26.support. Do we contemplate breaking up Iraq? It won't be easy. The Sunni
:03:27. > :03:29.and Shia Muslim populations don t live in clearly bordered areas, but
:03:30. > :03:33.in the longer term, do we deal with it in the same way we dealt with the
:03:34. > :03:37.break-up of the Ottoman empire over 100 years ago? In the short-term and
:03:38. > :03:45.long-term, completely confounding. Quite humiliating. If ISIS take
:03:46. > :03:51.Baghdad I can't think of a bigger ignominy for foreign policy since
:03:52. > :03:54.Suez. If Iraq is partitioned, it won't be up to us. It will be what
:03:55. > :04:00.is happening because of what is happening on the ground. Everything
:04:01. > :04:06.does point to partition, and that border, which ISIS control, between
:04:07. > :04:12.Syria and Iraq, that has been there since it was drawn during the First
:04:13. > :04:15.World War. That is gone as well An astonishingly humbling situation the
:04:16. > :04:23.West, and you can see the Kurds in the North think this is a charge --
:04:24. > :04:26.chance for authority. They think this is the chance to get the
:04:27. > :04:32.autonomy they felt they deserved a long time. Janan is right. We can't
:04:33. > :04:36.do much in the long term, but we have to decide on the engagement.
:04:37. > :04:39.And the other people wish you'd be talking turkey, because if there is
:04:40. > :04:44.some blowback and the fighters come back, they are likely to come back
:04:45. > :04:49.from Turkey. Where is Iran in all of this? There were reports last week
:04:50. > :04:52.that the Revolutionary guard, the head of it, he was already in
:04:53. > :04:57.Baghdad with 67 advisers and there might have been some brigades that
:04:58. > :05:02.have gone there as well. Where are they? What has happened? I'm pretty
:05:03. > :05:13.sure the Prime Minister of Iraq is putting more faith in Iran than the
:05:14. > :05:18.White House and the British. I think they are running the show, in
:05:19. > :05:22.technical terms. John Kerry is flying into Cairo this morning, and
:05:23. > :05:25.what is his message? It is twofold. One is to Arab countries, do more to
:05:26. > :05:31.encourage an inclusive government in Iraq, mainly Sunni Muslims in the
:05:32. > :05:36.government, and the Arab Gulf states should stop funding insurgents in
:05:37. > :05:41.Iraq. You think, Iraq, it's potentially going to break up, so
:05:42. > :05:44.this sounds a bit late in the day and a bit weak. It gets
:05:45. > :05:48.fundamentally to the problem, what can we do? Niall Ferguson has a big
:05:49. > :05:52.piece in the Sunday Times asking if this is place where we cannot doing
:05:53. > :05:58.anything. He doesn't want to do anything. By the way, that is what
:05:59. > :06:02.most Americans think. That is what opinion polls are showing. You have
:06:03. > :06:07.George Osborne Michael Gold who would love to get involved but they
:06:08. > :06:09.cannot because of the vote in parliament on Syria lasted -- George
:06:10. > :06:14.Osborne and Michael Gove. This government does not have the stomach
:06:15. > :06:18.for military intervention. We will see how events unfold on the ground.
:06:19. > :06:20.All parties are agreed that Britain's 60-year old multi-billion
:06:21. > :06:25.The Tory side of the Coalition think their reforms are necessary
:06:26. > :06:28.and popular, though they haven't always gone to time or to plan.
:06:29. > :06:32.In the eight months she's had since she became Shadow Secretary of State
:06:33. > :06:39.for Work and Pensions, Rachel Reeves has talked the talk about getting
:06:40. > :06:42.people off benefits, into work and lowering the overall welfare bill.
:06:43. > :06:44.her first interview in the job she threatened "We would
:06:45. > :06:48.But Labour has opposed just about every change the Coalition
:06:49. > :06:53.has proposed to cut the cost and change the culture of welfare.
:06:54. > :06:55.Child benefit, housing benefit, the ?26,000 benefit cap -
:06:56. > :07:02.They've been lukewarm about the government's flagship Universal
:07:03. > :07:05.Credit scheme - which rolls six benefit payments into one - and
:07:06. > :07:12.And Labour has set out only two modest welfare cuts.
:07:13. > :07:15.This week, Labour said young people must have skills or be in training
:07:16. > :07:21.That will save ?65 million, says Labour, though the cost
:07:22. > :07:26.And cutting winter fuel payments for richer pensioners which will
:07:27. > :07:34.Not a lot in a total welfare bill of around ?200 billion.
:07:35. > :07:37.And with welfare cuts popular among even Labour voters, they will soon
:07:38. > :07:43.have to start spelling out exactly what Labour welfare reform means.
:07:44. > :07:56.Welcome. Good morning. Why do you want to be tougher than the Tories?
:07:57. > :08:00.We want to be tough in getting the welfare bill down. Under this
:08:01. > :08:03.government, the bill will be ?1 million more than the government set
:08:04. > :08:08.out in 2010 and I don't think that is acceptable. We should try to
:08:09. > :08:12.control the cost of Social Security. But the welfare bill under the next
:08:13. > :08:16.Labour government will fall? It will be smaller when you end the first
:08:17. > :08:21.parliament than when you started? We signed up to the capping welfare but
:08:22. > :08:26.that doesn't see social security costs ball, it sees them go up in
:08:27. > :08:32.line with with inflation or average earnings -- costs fall. So where
:08:33. > :08:36.flair will rise? We have signed up to the cap -- welfare will rise We
:08:37. > :08:41.have signed up to the cap. We will get the costs under control and they
:08:42. > :08:43.haven't managed to achieve it. The government is spending ?13 billion
:08:44. > :08:49.more on Social Security and the reason they are doing it is because
:08:50. > :08:52.the minimum wage has not kept pace with the cost of living so people
:08:53. > :08:56.are reliant on tax credits. They are not building houses and people are
:08:57. > :09:02.relying on housing benefit. We have a record number of people on zero
:09:03. > :09:06.hours contracts. I'm still not clear if you will cut welfare if you get
:09:07. > :09:12.in power. Nobody is saying that the cost of welfare is going to fall.
:09:13. > :09:18.The welfare cap sees that happening gradually. That is a Tory cap. And
:09:19. > :09:25.you've accepted it. You're being the same as the Tories, not to. If they
:09:26. > :09:29.had a welfare cap, they would have breached it in every year of the
:09:30. > :09:33.parliament. Social Security will be higher than the government set out
:09:34. > :09:37.because they failed to control it. You read the polls, and the party
:09:38. > :09:40.does lots of its own polling, and you're scared of being seen as the
:09:41. > :09:46.welfare party. You don't really believe all of this anti-welfare
:09:47. > :09:49.stuff? We are the party of work not welfare. The Labour Party was set up
:09:50. > :09:52.in the first place because we believe in the dignity of work and
:09:53. > :09:55.we believe that work should pay wages can afford to live on. I make
:09:56. > :10:00.no apologies for being the party of work. We are not the welfare party,
:10:01. > :10:05.we are the party of work. Even your confidential strategy document
:10:06. > :10:08.admits that voters don't trust you on immigration, the economy, this is
:10:09. > :10:13.your own people, and welfare. You are not trusted on it. The most
:10:14. > :10:16.recent poll showed Labour slightly ahead of the Conservative Party on
:10:17. > :10:21.Social Security, probably because they have seen the incompetence and
:10:22. > :10:25.chaos at the Department for Work and Pensions under Iain Duncan Smith.
:10:26. > :10:31.Your own internal document means that the voters don't trust you on
:10:32. > :10:34.welfare reform. That is why we have shown some of this tough things we
:10:35. > :10:39.will do like the announcement that Ed Miliband made earlier this week,
:10:40. > :10:43.that young people without basic qualifications won't be entitled to
:10:44. > :10:46.just sign on for benefits, they have to sign up for training in order to
:10:47. > :10:49.receive support. That is the right thing to do by that group of young
:10:50. > :10:59.people, because they need skills to progress. We will, once that. - we
:11:00. > :11:05.will, onto that. You say you criticise the government that it had
:11:06. > :11:08.a cap and wouldn't have met it, but every money-saving welfare reform,
:11:09. > :11:15.you voted against it. How is that being tougher? The most recent bout
:11:16. > :11:19.was the cap on overall welfare expenditure, and we went through the
:11:20. > :11:24.lobbies and voted for the Tories. You voted against the benefit cap,
:11:25. > :11:29.welfare rating, you voted against, child benefit schemes, you voted
:11:30. > :11:31.against. You can't say we voted against everything when we voted
:11:32. > :11:36.with the Conservatives in the most recent bill with a cap on Social
:11:37. > :11:43.Security. It's just not correct to say. The last time we voted, we
:11:44. > :11:49.walked through the lobby with them. You voted on the principle of the
:11:50. > :11:54.cap. You voted on every step that would allow the cap to be met. Every
:11:55. > :11:58.single one. The most recent vote was not on the principle of the cap it
:11:59. > :12:01.was on a cap of Social Security in the next Parliament and we signed up
:12:02. > :12:05.for that. It was Ed Miliband who called her that earlier on. Which
:12:06. > :12:12.welfare reform did you vote for We voted for the cap. Other than that?
:12:13. > :12:18.We have supported universal credit. You voted against it in the third
:12:19. > :12:23.reading. We voted against some of the specifics. If you look at
:12:24. > :12:27.universal credit, they have had to write off nearly ?900 million of
:12:28. > :12:31.spending. I'm not on the rights and wrongs, I'm trying to work out what
:12:32. > :12:34.you voted for. Some of the things we are going to go further than the
:12:35. > :12:40.government with. For example, cutting benefits for young people
:12:41. > :12:43.who don't sign of the training. The government had introduced that. For
:12:44. > :12:46.example, saying that the richest pensioners should not get the winter
:12:47. > :12:50.fuel allowance, that is something the government haven't signed up.
:12:51. > :12:54.You would get that under Labour and this government haven't signed up
:12:55. > :13:00.for it. ?100 million on the winter fuel allowance and ?65 million on
:13:01. > :13:05.youth training. ?165 million. How big is the welfare budget? The cap
:13:06. > :13:12.would apply to ?120 billion. And you've saved 125 -- 165 million
:13:13. > :13:17.Those are cuts that we said we would do in government. If you look at the
:13:18. > :13:20.real prize from the changes Ed Miliband announced in the youth
:13:21. > :13:24.allowance, it's not the short-term savings, it's the fact that each of
:13:25. > :13:27.these young people, who are currently on unemployment benefits
:13:28. > :13:33.without the skills we know they need to succeed in life, they will cost
:13:34. > :13:38.the taxpayer ?2000 per year. I will come onto that. You mentioned
:13:39. > :13:41.universal credit, which the government regards as the flagship
:13:42. > :13:47.reform. It's had lots of troubles with it and it merges six benefits
:13:48. > :13:50.into one. You voted against it in the third reading and given lukewarm
:13:51. > :13:57.support in the past. We have not said he would abandon it, but now
:13:58. > :14:01.you say you are for it. You are all over the place. We set up the rescue
:14:02. > :14:03.committee in autumn of last year because we have seen from the
:14:04. > :14:08.National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee, report after
:14:09. > :14:13.report showing that the project is massively overbudget and is not
:14:14. > :14:17.going to be delivered according to the government timetable. We set up
:14:18. > :14:19.the committee because we believe in the principle of universal credit
:14:20. > :14:24.and think it is the right thing to do. Can you tell us now if you will
:14:25. > :14:31.keep it or not? Because there is no transparency and we have no idea. We
:14:32. > :14:36.are awash with information. We are not. The government, in the most
:14:37. > :14:41.recent National audit Forest -- National Audit Office statement said
:14:42. > :14:46.it was a reset project. This is really important. This is a flagship
:14:47. > :14:51.government programme, and it's going to cost ?12.8 billion to deliver,
:14:52. > :14:55.and we don't know what sort of state it is in, so we have said that if we
:14:56. > :15:03.win at the next election, we will pause that for three months and
:15:04. > :15:08.calling... Will you stop the pilots? We don't know what status they will
:15:09. > :15:11.have. We would stop the build of the system for three months, calling the
:15:12. > :15:17.National Audit Office to do awards and all report. The government don't
:15:18. > :15:20.need to do this until the next general election, they could do it
:15:21. > :15:25.today. Stop throwing good money after bad and get a grip of this
:15:26. > :15:30.incredibly important programme. You said you don't know enough to a view
:15:31. > :15:34.now. So when you were invited to a job centre where universal credit is
:15:35. > :15:39.being rolled out to see how it was working, you refused to go. Why We
:15:40. > :15:43.asked were a meeting with Iain Duncan Smith and he cancelled the
:15:44. > :15:45.meeting is three times. I'm talking about the visit when you were
:15:46. > :15:50.offered to go to a job centre and you refused. We had an appointment
:15:51. > :15:53.to meet Iain Duncan Smith at the Department for Work and Pensions and
:15:54. > :15:57.said he cancelled and was not available, but he wanted us to go to
:15:58. > :16:03.the job centre. We wanted to talk to him and his officials, which she
:16:04. > :16:06.did. Would it be more useful to go to the job centre and find out how
:16:07. > :16:20.it was working. He's going to tell you it's working fine.
:16:21. > :16:26.Advice Bureau in Hammersmith, they are working to help the people
:16:27. > :16:32.trying to claim universal credit. Iain Duncan Smith cancelled three
:16:33. > :16:37.meetings. That is another issue I was asking about the job centre It
:16:38. > :16:43.is not another issue because Iain Duncan Smith fogged us off. This
:16:44. > :16:47.week you said that jobless youngsters who won't take training
:16:48. > :16:56.will lose their welfare payments. How many young people are not in
:16:57. > :17:01.work training or education? There are 140,000 young people claiming
:17:02. > :17:08.benefits at the moment, but 850 000 young people who are not in work at
:17:09. > :17:15.the moment. This applies to around 100,000 young people. There are
:17:16. > :17:22.actually 975,000, 16-24 -year-olds, not in work, training or education.
:17:23. > :17:29.Your proposal only applies to 100,000 of them, why? This is
:17:30. > :17:35.applying to young people who are signing on for benefits rather than
:17:36. > :17:42.signing up for training. We want to make sure that all young people ..
:17:43. > :17:46.Why only 100,000? They are the ones currently getting job-seeker's
:17:47. > :17:59.allowance. We are saying you can not just sign up to... Can I get you to
:18:00. > :18:05.respond to this, the number of people not in work, training or
:18:06. > :18:15.education fell last year by more than you are planning to help. Long
:18:16. > :18:23.turn -- long-term unemployment is an entrenched problem... This issue
:18:24. > :18:29.about an entrenched group of young people. Young people who haven't got
:18:30. > :18:34.skills and are not in training we know are much less likely to get a
:18:35. > :18:41.job so there are 140,018-24 -year-olds signing onto benefits at
:18:42. > :18:44.the moment. This is about trying to address that problem to make sure
:18:45. > :18:50.all young people have the skills they need to get a job. Your policy
:18:51. > :18:54.is to take away part of the dole unless young unemployed people agree
:18:55. > :19:01.to study for level three qualifications, the equivalent of an
:19:02. > :19:08.AS-level or an NVQ but 40% of these people have the literary skills of a
:19:09. > :19:14.nine-year-old. After all that failed education, how are you going to
:19:15. > :19:18.train them to a level standard? We are saying that anyone who doesn't
:19:19. > :19:23.have that a level or equivalent qualification will be required to go
:19:24. > :19:29.back to college. We are not saying that within a year they have to get
:19:30. > :19:33.up to that level but these are exactly the sorts of people... These
:19:34. > :19:37.people have been failed by your education system. These people are,
:19:38. > :19:43.for the last four years, have been educated under a Conservative
:19:44. > :19:47.government. 18 - 21-year-olds, most of them have their education under a
:19:48. > :19:53.Labour government during which 300,000 people left with no GCSEs
:19:54. > :19:59.whatsoever. I don't understand how training for one year can do what 11
:20:00. > :20:03.years in school did not. We are not saying that within one year
:20:04. > :20:06.everybody will get up to a level three qualifications, but if you are
:20:07. > :20:11.one of those people who enters the Labour market age 18 with the
:20:12. > :20:18.reading skills of a nine-year-old, they are the sorts of people that
:20:19. > :20:25.should not the left languishing I went to college in Hackney if you
:20:26. > :20:30.you are -- a few weeks ago and there was a dyslexic boy studying painting
:20:31. > :20:34.and decorating. In school they decided he was a troublemaker and
:20:35. > :20:39.that he didn't want to learn. He went back to college because he
:20:40. > :20:44.wanted to get the skills. He said that it wasn't until he went back to
:20:45. > :20:49.college that he could pick up a newspaper and read it, it made a
:20:50. > :20:54.huge difference but too many people are let down by the system. I am
:20:55. > :20:59.wondering how the training will make up for an education system that
:21:00. > :21:04.failed them but let's move on to your leader. Look at this graph of
:21:05. > :21:09.Ed Miliband's popularity. This is the net satisfaction with him, it is
:21:10. > :21:16.dreadful. The trend continues to climb since he became leader of the
:21:17. > :21:19.Labour Party, why? What you have seen is another 2300 Labour
:21:20. > :21:24.councillors since Ed Miliband became the leader of the Labour Party. You
:21:25. > :21:33.saw in the elections a month ago that... Why is the satisfaction rate
:21:34. > :21:37.falling? We can look at polls or actual election results and the fact
:21:38. > :21:42.that we have got another 2000 Labour councillors, more people voting
:21:43. > :21:46.Labour, the opinion polls today show that if there was a general election
:21:47. > :21:54.today we would have a majority of more than 40, he must be doing
:21:55. > :22:00.something right. Why do almost 0% of voters want to replace him as
:22:01. > :22:06.leader? Why do 50% and more think that he is not up to the job? The
:22:07. > :22:12.more people see Ed Miliband, the less impressed they are. The British
:22:13. > :22:17.people seem to like him less. The election strategy I suggest that
:22:18. > :22:22.follows from that is that you should keep Ed Miliband under wraps until
:22:23. > :22:27.the election. Let's look at actually what happens when people get a
:22:28. > :22:31.chance to vote, when they get that opportunity we have seen more Labour
:22:32. > :22:38.councillors, more Labour members of the European Parliament...
:22:39. > :22:44.Oppositions always get more. The opinion polls today, one of them
:22:45. > :22:49.shows Labour four points ahead. You have not done that well in local
:22:50. > :22:55.government elections or European elections. Why don't people like
:22:56. > :23:00.him? I think we have done incredibly well in elections. People must like
:23:01. > :23:04.a lot of the things Labour and Ed Miliband are doing because we are
:23:05. > :23:08.winning back support across the country. We won local councils in
:23:09. > :23:14.places like Hammersmith and Fulham, Crawley, Hastings, key places that
:23:15. > :23:19.Labour need to win back at the general election next year. Even you
:23:20. > :23:25.have said traditional Labour supporters are abandoning the party.
:23:26. > :23:30.That is what Ed Miliband has said as well. We have got this real concern
:23:31. > :23:35.about what has happened. If you look at the elections in May, 60% of
:23:36. > :23:40.people didn't even bother going to vote. That is a profound issue not
:23:41. > :23:45.just for Labour. You said traditional voters who perhaps at
:23:46. > :23:50.times we took for granted are now being offered an alternative. Why
:23:51. > :23:56.did you take them for granted? This is what Ed Miliband said. I am not
:23:57. > :24:02.saying anything Ed Miliband himself has not said. When he ran for the
:24:03. > :24:06.leadership he said that we took too many people for granted and we
:24:07. > :24:10.needed to give people positive reasons to vote Labour, he has been
:24:11. > :24:14.doing that. He has been there for four years and you are saying you
:24:15. > :24:19.still take them for granted. Why? I am saying that for too long we have
:24:20. > :24:23.taken them for granted. We are on track to win the general election
:24:24. > :24:34.next year and that will defy all the odds. You are going to win... Ed
:24:35. > :24:38.Miliband will win next year and make a great Prime Minister.
:24:39. > :24:43.Now to the Liberal Democrats, at the risk of intruding into private
:24:44. > :24:47.grief. The party is still smarting from dire results in the European
:24:48. > :24:50.and Local Elections. The only poll Nick Clegg has won in recent times
:24:51. > :24:54.is to be voted the most unpopular leader of a party in modern British
:24:55. > :24:58.history. No surprise there have been calls for him to go, though that
:24:59. > :24:59.still looks unlikely. Here's Eleanor.
:25:00. > :25:04.Liberal Democrats celebrating, something we haven't seen for a
:25:05. > :25:10.while. This victory back in 199 led to a decade of power for the Lib
:25:11. > :25:15.Dems in Liverpool. What a contrast to the city's political landscape
:25:16. > :25:21.today. At its height the party had 69 local councillors, now down to
:25:22. > :25:25.just three. The scale of the challenge facing Nick Clegg and the
:25:26. > :25:30.Lib Dems is growing. The party is rock bottom in the polls,
:25:31. > :25:35.consistently in single figures. It was wiped out in the European
:25:36. > :25:41.elections losing all but one of its 12 MEPs and in the local elections
:25:42. > :25:48.it lost 42% of the seats that it was defending. But on Merseyside, Nick
:25:49. > :25:52.Clegg was putting on a brave face. We did badly in Liverpool,
:25:53. > :25:58.Manchester and London in particular, we did well in other places. But you
:25:59. > :26:03.are right, we did badly in some of those big cities and I have
:26:04. > :26:09.initiated a review, quite naturally, to understand what went
:26:10. > :26:13.wrong, what went right. As Lib Dems across the country get on with some
:26:14. > :26:18.serious soul-searching, there is an admission that his is the leader of
:26:19. > :26:23.the party who is failing to hit the right notes. Knocking on doors in
:26:24. > :26:29.Liverpool, I have to tell you that Nick Clegg is not a popular person.
:26:30. > :26:33.Some might use the word toxic and I find this very difficult because I
:26:34. > :26:38.know Nick very well and I see a principal person who passionately
:26:39. > :26:44.believes in what he is doing and he is a nice guy. As a result of his
:26:45. > :26:54.popularity, what has happened to the core vote? In parts of the country,
:26:55. > :26:58.we are down to just three councillors like Liverpool for
:26:59. > :27:01.example. You also lose the deliverers and fundraisers and the
:27:02. > :27:07.organisers and the members of course so all of that will have to be
:27:08. > :27:11.rebuilt. As they start fermenting process, local parties across the
:27:12. > :27:17.country and here in Liverpool have been voting on whether there should
:27:18. > :27:22.be a leadership contest. We had two choices to flush out and have a go
:27:23. > :27:26.at Nick Clegg or to positively decide we would sharpen up the
:27:27. > :27:31.campaign and get back on the streets, and by four to one ratio we
:27:32. > :27:37.decided to get back on the streets. We are bruised and battered but we
:27:38. > :27:42.are still here, the orange flag is still flying and one day it will fly
:27:43. > :27:48.over this building again, Liverpool town hall. But do people want the
:27:49. > :27:52.Lib Dems back in charge in this city? I certainly wouldn't vote for
:27:53. > :27:56.them. Their performance in Government and the way they have
:27:57. > :28:03.left their promises down, I could not vote for them again. I voted Lib
:28:04. > :28:09.Dem in the last election because of the university tuition fees and I
:28:10. > :28:13.would never vote for them again because they broke their promise.
:28:14. > :28:17.The Lib Dems are awful, broken promises and what have you. I
:28:18. > :28:21.wouldn't vote for them. This is the declaration of the results for the
:28:22. > :28:26.Northwest... Last month, as other party celebrated in the north-west,
:28:27. > :28:31.the Lib Dems here lost their only MEP, Chris Davies. Now there is
:28:32. > :28:38.concern the party doesn't know how to turn its fortunes around. We
:28:39. > :28:45.don't have an answer to that, if we did we would be grasping it with
:28:46. > :28:50.both hands. We will do our best to hold onto the places where we still
:28:51. > :28:55.have seats but as for the rest of the country where we have been
:28:56. > :28:59.hollowed out, we don't know how to start again until the next general
:29:00. > :29:02.election is out of the way. After their disastrous performance in the
:29:03. > :29:12.European elections, pressure is growing for the party to shift its
:29:13. > :29:17.stance. I think there has to be a lancing of the wound, there should
:29:18. > :29:23.in a referendum and the Liberal Democrats should be calling it. The
:29:24. > :29:29.rest of Europe once this because they are fed up with Britain being
:29:30. > :29:34.unable to make up its mind. The Lib Dems are now suffering the effects
:29:35. > :29:39.of being in Government. The party's problem, choosing the right course
:29:40. > :29:45.to regain political credibility We can now speak to form a Lib Dems
:29:46. > :29:50.leader Ming Campbell. Welcome back to the Sunday Politics. Even your
:29:51. > :29:57.own activists say that Nick Clegg is toxic. How will that change between
:29:58. > :30:02.now and the election? When you have had disappointing results, but you
:30:03. > :30:06.have to do is to rebuild. You pick yourself up and start all over
:30:07. > :30:11.again, and the reason why the Liberal Democrats got 57, 56 seats
:30:12. > :30:15.in the House of Commons now is because we picked ourselves up, we
:30:16. > :30:26.took every opportunity and we have rebuilt from the bottom up.
:30:27. > :30:29.least popular leader in modern history and more unpopular than your
:30:30. > :30:34.mate Gordon Brown. You are running out of time. No one believes that
:30:35. > :30:38.being the leader of a modern political party in the UK is an easy
:30:39. > :30:42.job. Both Ed Miliband and David Cameron must have had cause to
:30:43. > :30:46.think, over breakfast this morning, when they saw the headlines in some
:30:47. > :30:50.of the Sunday papers. Of course it is a difficult job but it was
:30:51. > :30:54.pointed out a moment or two ago that Nick Clegg is a man of principle and
:30:55. > :30:58.enormous resilience if you consider what he had to put up with, and in
:30:59. > :31:01.my view, he is quite clearly the person best qualified to lead the
:31:02. > :31:05.party between now and the general election and through the election
:31:06. > :31:10.campaign, and beyond. So why don't people like him? We have had to take
:31:11. > :31:14.some pretty difficult decisions and, of course, people didn't expect
:31:15. > :31:21.that. If you look back to the rather heady days of the rose garden behind
:31:22. > :31:24.ten Downing St, people thought it was all going to be sweetness and
:31:25. > :31:29.light, but the fact is, we didn t know then what we know now, about
:31:30. > :31:33.the extent of the economic crisis we win, and a lot of difficult
:31:34. > :31:37.decisions have had to be taken in order to restore economic stability.
:31:38. > :31:42.Look around you. You will see we are not there yet but we are a long way
:31:43. > :31:49.better off than in 2010. You are not getting the credit for it, the
:31:50. > :31:54.Tories are. We will be a little more assertive about taking the credit.
:31:55. > :31:58.For example, the fact that 23 million people have had a tax cut of
:31:59. > :32:02.?800 per year and we have taken 2 million people out of paying tax
:32:03. > :32:07.altogether. Ming Campbell, your people say that on every programme
:32:08. > :32:11.like this. Because it is true. That might be the case, but you are at
:32:12. > :32:13.seven or 8% in the polls, and nobody is listening, or they don't believe
:32:14. > :32:22.it. Once is listening, or they don't believe
:32:23. > :32:25.doubt that what we have achieved will be much more easily
:32:26. > :32:28.recognised, and there is no doubt, for example, in some of the recent
:32:29. > :32:30.polls, like the Ashcroft Pole, something like 30% of those polled
:32:31. > :32:39.said that as a result at the next something like 30% of those polled
:32:40. > :32:41.general election, they would prepare their to be a coalition involving
:32:42. > :32:47.the Liberal Democrats. So there is no question that the whole notion of
:32:48. > :32:52.coalition is still very much a live one, and one which we have made work
:32:53. > :32:56.in the public interest. The problem is people don't think that. People
:32:57. > :32:59.see you trying to have your cake and eat it. On the one hand you want to
:33:00. > :33:03.get your share of the credit for the turnaround in the economy, on the
:33:04. > :33:06.other hand you can't stop yourself from distancing yourself from the
:33:07. > :33:14.Tories and things that you did not like happening. You are trying to
:33:15. > :33:14.face both ways at once. If you remember our fellow Scotsman
:33:15. > :33:27.famously said you cannot ride both remember our fellow Scotsman
:33:28. > :33:28.to the terms -- terms of the remember our fellow Scotsman
:33:29. > :33:31.coalition agreement, which is what we signed up to in 2010. In
:33:32. > :33:35.addition, in furtherance of that agreement, we have created things
:33:36. > :33:39.like the pupil premium and the others I mentioned and you were
:33:40. > :33:42.rather dismissive. I'm not dismissive, I'm just saying they
:33:43. > :33:46.don't make a difference to what people think of you. We will do
:33:47. > :33:51.everything in our power to change that between now and May 2015. The
:33:52. > :33:57.interesting thing is, going back to the Ashcroft result, it demonstrated
:33:58. > :34:02.clearly that in constituencies where we have MPs and we are well dug in,
:34:03. > :34:08.we are doing everything that the public expects of us, and we are
:34:09. > :34:13.doing very well indeed. You aren't sure fellow Lib Dems have been
:34:14. > :34:17.saying this for you -- you and your fellow Liberal Dems have been saying
:34:18. > :34:20.this for a year or 18 months, and since then you have lost all of your
:34:21. > :34:24.MEPs apart from one, you lost your deposit in a by-election, you lost
:34:25. > :34:29.310 councillor, including everyone in Manchester or Islington. Mr Clegg
:34:30. > :34:36.leading you into the next general election will be the equivalent of
:34:37. > :34:41.the charge of the light Brigade I doubt that very much. The
:34:42. > :34:45.implication behind that lit you rehearsed is that we should pack our
:34:46. > :34:50.tents in the night and steal away. -- that litany. And if you heard in
:34:51. > :34:53.that piece that preceded the discussion, people were saying, look
:34:54. > :35:08.we have to start from the bottom and have to rebuild. That is exactly
:35:09. > :35:12.what we will do. Nine months is a period of gestation. As you well
:35:13. > :35:17.know. I wouldn't dismiss it quite so easily as that. I'm not here to say
:35:18. > :35:21.we had a wonderful result or anything like it, but what I do say
:35:22. > :35:25.is that the party is determined to turn it round, and that Nick Clegg
:35:26. > :35:30.is the person best qualified to do it. Should your party adopt a
:35:31. > :35:35.referendum about in or out on Europe? No, we should stick to the
:35:36. > :35:39.coalition agreement. If there is any transfer of power from Westminster
:35:40. > :35:46.to Brussels, that will be subject to a referendum. No change. And
:35:47. > :35:51.finally, as a Lib Dem, you must be glad you are not fighting the next
:35:52. > :35:56.election yourself? I've fought every election since 1974, so I've had a
:35:57. > :36:01.few experiences, some good, some bad, but the one thing I have done
:36:02. > :36:04.and the one thing a lot of other people have done is that they have
:36:05. > :36:06.stuck to the task, and that is what will happen in May 2015. Ming
:36:07. > :36:10.Campbell, thank you for joining us. It's just gone 11.35am, you're
:36:11. > :36:12.watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers
:36:13. > :36:15.in Scotland who leave us now Coming up here in 20 minutes,
:36:16. > :36:26.the Week Ahead..First Hello and welcome to the
:36:27. > :36:29.Sunday Politics here in the West. On the show this week, the councils
:36:30. > :36:33.that are so shy they won't let We will ask why some local
:36:34. > :36:42.authorities would rather their public discussions were kept
:36:43. > :36:46.more private. We are joined by two Coalithon
:36:47. > :36:50.pundits who are here to givd us their analysis of the West Country
:36:51. > :36:52.action. They are the Phil Nevilles, if
:36:53. > :36:56.you like, of the Sunday Polhtics. I speak of Don Foster,
:36:57. > :37:00.MP for Bath and Justin Tomlhnson, We have got to be serious jtst
:37:01. > :37:09.for a moment. I want to talk
:37:10. > :37:12.about knife crime first of `ll. House of Commons MPs voted hn favour
:37:13. > :37:15.of mandatory jail sentences This was saying that anybodx
:37:16. > :37:26.above the age of 16 found c`rrying a knife, not using it, for thd second
:37:27. > :37:29.time, would automatically bd sent to prison for six months, with no
:37:30. > :37:33.opportunity for the judge to take the circumstances of the case
:37:34. > :37:36.into account. We think that's very particularly at a time
:37:37. > :37:45.when carrying knives has fallen by 30%. We are also trying to talk
:37:46. > :37:48.about putting 16`year`olds hn prison when our prisons are overcrowded. It
:37:49. > :37:52.costs a lot of money to do ht. We are worried that it might lead to
:37:53. > :37:55.16`year`olds handing knives down to If you don't carry
:37:56. > :37:59.a knife you can't use it. You can come up with all
:38:00. > :38:02.the headline grabbing comments that The truth is, all of the experts,
:38:03. > :38:06.including the Magistrates Association,
:38:07. > :38:10.said this is a crazy way to do it. Putting young people in prison leads
:38:11. > :38:15.them to be much more likely to be on one of the Conservative MPs for
:38:16. > :38:27.Enfield, led on this in Parliament The leading judges were calling
:38:28. > :38:30.for this. It sends
:38:31. > :38:32.a crystal clear message to those that want to choose to carrx a knife
:38:33. > :38:35.that it is absolutely unaccdptable. It is making sure that we prevent
:38:36. > :38:43.things in the first place. The truth is that there are stop
:38:44. > :38:46.and search methods in operation and most people who are stopped
:38:47. > :38:49.and searched are from black They are going to be
:38:50. > :38:52.disproportionately found thdn to It is actually those communhties
:38:53. > :38:56.themselves that are asking Often knives are carried as a status
:38:57. > :39:04.symbol and then something sparks it. Sometimes the kids carry thdm
:39:05. > :39:07.for older members of a gang. Invariably they are the mugs
:39:08. > :39:12.that go to prison. This is why it is part of a range
:39:13. > :39:15.of packages to deal with thhs. This is as serious as it gets
:39:16. > :39:19.and we have to have a range of packages that send a crystal
:39:20. > :39:21.clear message that carrying This is an example of why it is
:39:22. > :39:26.important to let judges look at the details of the case rather
:39:27. > :39:28.than automatically lock people up. You can film inside the
:39:29. > :39:31.United Nations, the European Parliament and the Houses
:39:32. > :39:34.of Parliament, but you try taking a television camera into Bath Council
:39:35. > :39:37.and you will get kicked out. It is one of
:39:38. > :39:39.a few local authorities in the West Country who ban TV crews
:39:40. > :39:42.from recording their deliberations, flouting guidelines
:39:43. > :39:46.from the Government We were allowed to film the very
:39:47. > :40:04.start of this Bath and North East Then an official came to
:40:05. > :40:07.tell us to switch off. It's a quarter of a century
:40:08. > :40:10.since cameras were first allowed Still Bath and North East Somerset
:40:11. > :40:13.and a couple of other counchls won't hastened by the advent
:40:14. > :40:17.of new technology. Elsewhere there have been
:40:18. > :40:19.confrontations involving people This one in Middlesbrough rdsulted
:40:20. > :40:33.in everyone being ordered ott. In the Bath chamber some filming is
:40:34. > :40:37.allowed. It started But the quality is not what
:40:38. > :40:57.we would normally broadcast. It is not necessarily for
:40:58. > :41:05.duplication. Despite this the council still said no to new
:41:06. > :41:09.scanners. There is a fear of manipulation. That fear is growing
:41:10. > :41:15.rapidly since we started webcasting meetings. Peoples contributhons have
:41:16. > :41:21.improved remarkably. The is changing. It is now a bigger
:41:22. > :41:26.acceptance of the role of wdbcasting and cameras in meetings. He is a
:41:27. > :41:32.convert. Soon his fellow cotncillors will have no choice. The Government
:41:33. > :41:37.last year issued guidance s`ying that the councils should allowed
:41:38. > :41:43.filming. When they heard of the reluctance to change, ministers
:41:44. > :41:47.decided to make it mandatorx. The law is expected to change ndxt
:41:48. > :41:51.month. In Bristol it will m`ke no difference. For a decade our cameras
:41:52. > :42:09.have been able to capture mdmorable moments. We are trying to protect
:42:10. > :42:13.our services. And they led the way with
:42:14. > :42:21.webcasting, starting seven xears ago. While a typical council meeting
:42:22. > :42:31.has a few in the gallery, thousands can view online. It is only
:42:32. > :42:34.councillors and members of the media who sit through an entire mdeting. I
:42:35. > :42:42.would not want to inflict that on people. But it is important to look
:42:43. > :42:45.at issues of major concern or something that concerns the local
:42:46. > :42:50.community so that they can see what is happening. That is the most
:42:51. > :42:55.exciting thing. People realhse that it is a and they can take p`rt in
:42:56. > :43:01.it. But getting the official blessing to film is one thing.
:43:02. > :43:09.Predicting how the public rdact as another entirely. You might have to
:43:10. > :43:17.speak more quietly for a molent We may leave it there. In a molent we
:43:18. > :43:26.will hear from an independent councillor who opposes allowing
:43:27. > :43:29.cameras in. But first, do you sense the outrage that local authorities
:43:30. > :43:41.should throw out television cameras when they are supposed to bd
:43:42. > :43:44.accountable? I do. It is yotr friends in Bath. The Liberal
:43:45. > :43:50.Democrats are not the majorhty. It is important that they open them up.
:43:51. > :43:58.We started with radio in Parliament. Then we had teldvision.
:43:59. > :44:01.Have you told them? I have. They have now introduced a web c`st. Up
:44:02. > :44:09.to 1000 people watch council meetings life. 1500 people watch the
:44:10. > :44:15.archived version. It is good for democracy. What do you think the
:44:16. > :44:21.problem is? Is it that the councillors are not up to scratch?
:44:22. > :44:30.They cannot handle the heat that comes out of that particular
:44:31. > :44:41.kitchen. I spent ten years hn Swindon Borough Council. I would be
:44:42. > :44:50.delighted for people to fill. It was... My council looked at doing
:44:51. > :44:52.it. I am talking about times when something is newsworthy and a news
:44:53. > :45:00.crew wants to come in and they are turned away. My counsel opens The
:45:01. > :45:22.Doors and said any organisation good film. `` my counsel opened the way
:45:23. > :45:31.to allow any organisation to film. It is an opportunity for people to
:45:32. > :45:38.engage with the council. Yot think it is right that television cameras
:45:39. > :45:45.should not be allowed in. Unless you show the entire debate things can be
:45:46. > :45:48.taken out of context. When xou watch the television news and you see a
:45:49. > :45:59.debate in the House of Commons would you want the entire four hotrs
:46:00. > :46:03.shown? I would want the opportunity. But you would never hear thd details
:46:04. > :46:11.of a court case because thex go on for days. That is the main reason
:46:12. > :46:19.why we should not have TV then the council chamber. If the public want
:46:20. > :46:22.to know, they have a public speaking session, and they can infludnce the
:46:23. > :46:29.councillors in debate by attending the meetings. They can do vdry
:46:30. > :46:33.little sat at home in a chahr watching television. Television has
:46:34. > :46:39.been around for 60 years. That is how people find out information
:46:40. > :46:47.People find out information through the press. The big danger whth being
:46:48. > :46:58.televised is that councillors will play to the camera. Would you show
:46:59. > :47:11.off to the campus? I would show off anywhere. Has he got a point? The
:47:12. > :47:14.same arguments were used in 197 about recording what was gohng on in
:47:15. > :47:20.the House of Commons. The truth is from time to time people misbehave.
:47:21. > :47:25.They are now hot on camera. The public can make a judgement. On the
:47:26. > :47:34.whole people do behave bettdr. `` they are now hot on camera ht is
:47:35. > :47:47.important that the public h`ve the opportunity to see what is going on.
:47:48. > :47:59.You helped to ban tweeting from the council chamber? We have to leave it
:48:00. > :48:05.there. Thank you for coming in. The summer holidays are just around
:48:06. > :48:14.the corner. It is looking lhke a bumper year for tourism in the West.
:48:15. > :48:22.Even The Sun is shining. Thd Government has made it easidr for
:48:23. > :48:31.two lists from China. `` visitors from China.
:48:32. > :48:45.We report from the Cotswolds. Peace and quiet in the Cotswolds. It is
:48:46. > :48:51.like stepping back in time. Until, by lunch, the coach park is full.
:48:52. > :48:59.They come from all over. We are from North Yorkshire. It is lovely around
:49:00. > :49:10.here. We are from Leamington spa. They are from Oxford. We always say
:49:11. > :49:20.Newcastle. I am from San Fr`ncisco in the United States. This hs
:49:21. > :49:24.quaint. One nation stands ott. You will find their language at the
:49:25. > :49:34.train station. They are backing our boys in Brazil. And he enjoxed the
:49:35. > :49:42.national cuisine. Do you like it here? Yes. We are eating fish and
:49:43. > :49:48.chips. Do you like fish and chips? Yes.
:49:49. > :49:58.The Japanese do not need a Visa to come here. But the Chinese do need a
:49:59. > :50:03.Visa. The Chinese need one Visa to cover
:50:04. > :50:11.26 Nations, but the UK is not one of them. That means that over 0 million
:50:12. > :50:16.Chinese visitors, only a sm`ll fraction cross the Channel. The
:50:17. > :50:29.Chinese spend three times more than the average overseas tourists. Now
:50:30. > :50:40.the Government is making it easier. It is fantastic news. We have been
:50:41. > :50:49.waiting for this day for too long. It is significant. It is a positive
:50:50. > :50:55.step in the right direction. It is not just in tourism the Chinese
:50:56. > :51:03.money is making a differencd. There is also business. ?18 billion worth
:51:04. > :51:16.of deals were signed off thhs week. But this is not welcomed by
:51:17. > :51:24.everyone. Security for our electricity, water, ports. The fact
:51:25. > :51:39.that they are controlled ovdrseas means we do not have control. The
:51:40. > :51:45.economy could be stopped. Chinese investors will be funding of 40 of
:51:46. > :51:51.this nuclear power station. Some people think that the infludnce of
:51:52. > :51:57.the Far East has gone too f`r. Are you happy that we are allowing
:51:58. > :52:10.so much Chinese influence? Absolutely. The importance for us is
:52:11. > :52:30.to secure foreign investment and to provide long`term economic growth.
:52:31. > :52:34.Getting the two lists in ` they are spending three times as much as
:52:35. > :52:44.other visitors `` getting the visitors then. Nick Clegg spoke out
:52:45. > :52:54.against the regime in China. Was the correct to do so? He was right to do
:52:55. > :52:59.so. It was also right for the Prime Minister to do the same when he was
:53:00. > :53:03.in China. It is perfectly possible to have dialogue with peopld with
:53:04. > :53:08.whom we have disagreements. The Coalition is a very good ex`mple. We
:53:09. > :53:18.can actually do business and raise our concerns about and rights. If we
:53:19. > :53:22.are involved in economic developments, which could ldad to
:53:23. > :53:28.social and political development, that is a good thing. Why do we need
:53:29. > :53:36.help to build nuclear power stations? They are investing more in
:53:37. > :53:46.the recent years than they have done. It is vitally important for
:53:47. > :53:58.the economic growth in this country. We live in a global economy. We are
:53:59. > :54:08.attracting more Chinese invdstment than France and Germany. We are also
:54:09. > :54:11.sending our expertise. That is an opportunity for UK companies to
:54:12. > :54:27.export into a rapidly expanding economy. Bass is already cr`mmed
:54:28. > :54:36.with visitors. Do we need more? Yes. 8500 jobs have been created. We have
:54:37. > :54:43.got 1000 Chinese students pdr year. That is very important. We need more
:54:44. > :54:55.of them. This country is currently not getting its fair share. We are
:54:56. > :55:08.opening up new Visa centres across China. They are welcome. It is nice
:55:09. > :55:19.to see them. But the jobs whll be low paid. And they will be filled by
:55:20. > :55:29.Europeans. There is an appetite to take up jobs. When you are
:55:30. > :55:39.attracting high`end tourism, you must provide a high end service
:55:40. > :55:49.Three years ago we introducdd Mandarin language gates. We want to
:55:50. > :56:00.make Bath the most Chinese friendly city in the UK. We need mord people
:56:01. > :56:04.speaking the language. If you have taken your eye off the political
:56:05. > :56:07.ball with all the football on the television, you might be gr`teful
:56:08. > :56:15.for this rundown of the week in 60 seconds.
:56:16. > :56:18.A group of MPs criticised the Government for not spending enough
:56:19. > :56:33.on maintaining rivers beford the floods this winter.
:56:34. > :56:37.People have suffered an accdptably. The issue of a plague of flhes was
:56:38. > :56:56.raised in the House of Commons on Wednesday.
:56:57. > :57:01.An MP faces an inquiry. People inside Gloucestershire may
:57:02. > :57:05.soon be waxing down their surfboards. And man`made surfing
:57:06. > :57:17.lake was approved by councillors. But the Government has the final
:57:18. > :57:28.say. Let us pick up on the polling for
:57:29. > :57:36.the Lib Dems. It is looking dire. It is looking dire in national opinion
:57:37. > :57:40.polls. Hopefully more peopld will realise the great contributhon that
:57:41. > :57:49.we have made as Liberal Democrats to getting us out of the econolic
:57:50. > :57:58.mess. Our task is to get ovdr the messages of the good things we have
:57:59. > :58:03.achieved. Very often at this stage in the election cycle we ard in a
:58:04. > :58:09.dire position. Time after thme when it gets closer to the electhon our
:58:10. > :58:15.figures bounceback and we do much better than the pundits predict Why
:58:16. > :58:21.are the Lib Dems taking the blame for the problems of the Coalition?
:58:22. > :58:28.There is still a long way to go before the general election. We
:58:29. > :58:37.cannot be complacent. We ard in the grown`up politics. Do you or them a
:58:38. > :58:53.favour? In a mass porter of the Coalition. `` I am a supporter of
:58:54. > :58:57.the Coalition. What we have seen with the Liberal Democrats hs that
:58:58. > :59:02.where they have good active MPs they are doing much better than the
:59:03. > :59:13.national picture. That is all we have time for. Thank you. Please
:59:14. > :59:18.keep in touch with us on social media. Now we go back to London
:59:19. > :59:23.information, you can apply to them and they will be obliged to tell
:59:24. > :59:41.you. Thanks for joining us. Andrew, back to you.
:59:42. > :59:47.think you'd want to. Labour grandees are not queueing up to sing his
:59:48. > :59:51.praises. Look at this. In my view, he is the leader we have and he is
:59:52. > :59:55.the leader I support and he is somebody capable of leading the
:59:56. > :00:01.party to victory. Ed Miliband will leave this to victory, and I believe
:00:02. > :00:07.he can. If he doesn't, what would happen to the Labour Party? We could
:00:08. > :00:11.be in the wilderness for 15 years. At the moment he has to convince
:00:12. > :00:16.people he has the capacity to lead the country. That's not my view but
:00:17. > :00:19.people don't believe that. We had a leader of the Labour Party was
:00:20. > :00:26.publicly embarrassed, because whoever was in charge of press
:00:27. > :00:35.letting go through a process where we have councillors in Merseyside
:00:36. > :00:39.resigning. It was a schoolboy error. Having policies without them being
:00:40. > :00:49.drawn together into a convincing and vivid narrative and with what you do
:00:50. > :00:55.the people in the country. You have to draw together, connect the
:00:56. > :01:01.policies, link them back to the leader and give people a real sense
:01:02. > :01:07.of where you are going. Somehow he has never quite managed to be
:01:08. > :01:13.himself and create that identity with the public. And we are joined
:01:14. > :01:24.by the president of you girls, Peter Kellner. Welcome to the Sunday
:01:25. > :01:28.politics. -- YouGov. The Labour Party is six points ahead in your
:01:29. > :01:32.poll this morning. So what is the problem? On this basis he will win
:01:33. > :01:36.the next election. If the election were today and the figures held up,
:01:37. > :01:41.you would have a Labour government with a narrow overall majority. One
:01:42. > :01:47.should not forget that. Let me make three points. The first is, in past
:01:48. > :01:53.parliaments, opposition normally lose ground and governments gain
:01:54. > :01:55.ground in the final few months. The opposition should be further ahead
:01:56. > :02:02.than this. I don't think six is enough. Secondly, Ed Miliband is
:02:03. > :02:05.behind David Cameron when people are asked who they want as Prime
:02:06. > :02:08.Minister and Labour is behind the Conservatives went people are asked
:02:09. > :02:12.who they trust on the economy. There have been elections when the party
:02:13. > :02:16.has won by being behind on leadership and other elections where
:02:17. > :02:20.they have won by being behind on the economy. No party has ever won an
:02:21. > :02:25.election when it has been clearly behind on both leadership and the
:02:26. > :02:29.economy. Let me have another go The Labour Party brand is a strong
:02:30. > :02:35.brand. The Tory Bramleys week. The Labour brand is stronger. That is a
:02:36. > :02:46.blast -- the Labour -- the Tory Bramleys week. A lot of the Tories
:02:47. > :02:54.-- the Tory brand is weak. Cant you win on policies and a strong party
:02:55. > :02:56.brand? If you have those too, you need the third factor which isn t
:02:57. > :03:02.there. People believing that you have what it takes, competent
:03:03. > :03:08.skills, determination, determination, whatever makes to
:03:09. > :03:15.carry through. -- whatever mix. A lot of Ed Miliband policies, on the
:03:16. > :03:19.banks, energy prices, Brent controls, people like them. But in
:03:20. > :03:23.government, would they carry them through? They think they are not up
:03:24. > :03:28.to it. -- rent controls. If people think you won't deliver what you
:03:29. > :03:32.say, even if they like it, they were necessarily vote for you. That is
:03:33. > :03:38.the missing third element. There is a strong Labour brand, but it's not
:03:39. > :03:44.strong enough to overcome the feeling that the Labour leadership
:03:45. > :03:48.is not up to it. Nick, you had some senior Labour figure telling you
:03:49. > :03:51.that if Mr Miliband losing the next election he will have to resign
:03:52. > :03:56.immediately and cannot fight another election the way Neil Kinnock did
:03:57. > :03:59.after 1987. What was remarkable to me was that people were even
:04:00. > :04:02.thinking along these lines, and even more remarkable that they would tell
:04:03. > :04:10.you they were thinking along these lines? What is the problem? The
:04:11. > :04:15.problem is, is that Ed Miliband says it would be unprecedented to win the
:04:16. > :04:19.general election after the second worst result since 1918. They are
:04:20. > :04:22.concerned about is the start of a script that he would say on the day
:04:23. > :04:25.after losing the general election. Essentially what the people are
:04:26. > :04:30.trying to do is get their argument in first and to say, you cannot do
:04:31. > :04:34.what Neil Kinnock did in 1987. Don't forget that Neil Kinnock in 198 was
:04:35. > :04:39.in the middle of a very brave process of modernisation and had one
:04:40. > :04:43.and fought a very campaign that was professional but he lost again in
:04:44. > :04:50.1992, and they wanted to get their line in first. What some people are
:04:51. > :04:53.saying is that this is an election that the Labour Party should be
:04:54. > :04:56.winning because the coalition is so unpopular. If you don't win, I'm
:04:57. > :04:59.afraid to say, there is something wrong with you. Don't you find it
:05:00. > :05:03.remarkable that people are prepared to think along these lines at this
:05:04. > :05:06.stage, when Labour are ahead in the polls, still the bookies favourite
:05:07. > :05:11.to win, and you start to speak publicly, or in private to the
:05:12. > :05:16.public print, but we might have to get rid of him if he doesn't win.
:05:17. > :05:18.Everything you say about labour in this situation has been said about
:05:19. > :05:23.the Tories. We wondered whether Boris Johnson would tie himself to
:05:24. > :05:28.the mask and he is the next leader in waiting if Cameron goes. It's a
:05:29. > :05:30.mirror image of that. We talk about things being unprecedented. It's
:05:31. > :05:34.unprecedented for a government to gain seats. All the things you say
:05:35. > :05:39.about labour, you could say it the Conservatives. That's what makes the
:05:40. > :05:42.next election so interesting. But in the aftermath of the European
:05:43. > :05:44.elections and the local government elections, in which the
:05:45. > :05:49.Conservatives did not do that well, the issue was not Mr Cameron or the
:05:50. > :05:52.Tories doing well, the issue was the Labour Party and how they had not
:05:53. > :05:55.done as well as they should have done, and that conversation was
:05:56. > :06:01.fuelled by the kind of people who have been speaking to nick from the
:06:02. > :06:05.Labour Party. Rachel Reeves cited their real-life performance in
:06:06. > :06:09.elections as a reason for optimism. When in fact their performance in
:06:10. > :06:11.the Europeans and locals was disappointing for an opposition one
:06:12. > :06:16.year away from a general election. What alarms me about labour is the
:06:17. > :06:21.way they react to criticisms about Ed Miliband. Two years ago when he
:06:22. > :06:24.was attacked, they said they were 15 points ahead, and then a year ago
:06:25. > :06:29.there were saying they were nine or ten ahead, and now they are saying
:06:30. > :06:34.we are still five or six ahead. The trend is alarming. It points to a
:06:35. > :06:39.smaller Labour lead. Am I right in detecting a bit of a class war going
:06:40. > :06:43.on in the Labour Party? There are a lot of northern Labour MPs who think
:06:44. > :06:48.that Ed Miliband is to north London, and there are too many metropolitan
:06:49. > :06:55.cronies around him must I think that is right, Andrew. What I think is,
:06:56. > :07:00.being a pessimist in terms of their prospects, I do think the Labour
:07:01. > :07:03.Party could win the next election. I just don't think they can as they
:07:04. > :07:07.are going at the moment. But the positioning for a possible defeat,
:07:08. > :07:13.what they should be talking about is what do we need to change in the
:07:14. > :07:17.party and the way Ed Miliband performs in order to secure victory.
:07:18. > :07:22.That is a debate they could have, and they could make the changes I
:07:23. > :07:28.find it odd that they are being so defeatist. Don't go away. Peter is a
:07:29. > :07:32.boffin when it comes to polls. That is why we have a mod for the
:07:33. > :07:36.election prediction swings and roundabouts. He is looking for what
:07:37. > :07:42.he calls the incumbency effect. Don't know what is a back-up -- what
:07:43. > :07:52.that's about question don't worry, here is an. Being in office is bad
:07:53. > :07:56.for your health. Political folk wisdom has it that incumbency
:07:57. > :08:01.favours one party in particular the Liberal Democrats. That is because
:08:02. > :08:04.their MPs have a reputation as ferociously good local campaigners
:08:05. > :08:09.who do really well at holding on to their seats. However, this time
:08:10. > :08:13.round, several big-name long serving Liberal Democrats like Ming
:08:14. > :08:18.Campbell, David Heath and Don Foster are standing down. Does that mean
:08:19. > :08:23.the incumbency effect disappears like a puff of smoke? Then there is
:08:24. > :08:28.another theory, called the sophomore surge. It might sound like a movie
:08:29. > :08:32.about US college kids, but it goes like this. New MPs tend to do better
:08:33. > :08:36.in their second election than they did in their first. That could
:08:37. > :08:41.favour the Tories because they have lots of first-time MPs. The big
:08:42. > :08:45.question is, what does this mean for the 7th of May 2015, the date of the
:08:46. > :08:56.next general election? The answer is, who knows? I know a man who
:08:57. > :09:00.knows. Peter. What does it all mean? You can go onto your PC now and draw
:09:01. > :09:03.down programmes which say that these are the voting figures from a
:09:04. > :09:07.national poll, so what will the seats look like? This is based on
:09:08. > :09:12.uniform swing. Every seat moving up and down across the country in the
:09:13. > :09:17.same way. Historically, that's been a pretty good guide. I think that's
:09:18. > :09:21.going to completely break down next year, because the Lib Dems will
:09:22. > :09:26.probably hold on to more seats than we predict from the national figures
:09:27. > :09:30.and I think fewer Tory seats will go to the Labour Party than you would
:09:31. > :09:35.predict from the national figures. The precise numbers, I'm not going
:09:36. > :09:41.to be too precise, but I would be surprised, sorry, I would not be
:09:42. > :09:47.surprised if Labour fell 20 or 5 seats short on what we would expect
:09:48. > :09:52.on the uniform swing prediction Next year's election will be tight.
:09:53. > :09:56.Falling 20 seats short could well mean the difference between victory
:09:57. > :10:01.and defeat. What you make of that, Helen? I think you're right,
:10:02. > :10:05.especially taking into account the UKIP effect. We have no idea about
:10:06. > :10:09.that. The conventional wisdom is that will drain away back to the
:10:10. > :10:13.Conservatives, but nobody knows and it makes the next election almost
:10:14. > :10:16.impossible to call. It means it is a great target the people like Lord
:10:17. > :10:22.Ashcroft with marginal polling, because people have never been so
:10:23. > :10:25.interested. It is for party politics and we all assume that UKIP should
:10:26. > :10:33.be well next year, but their vote went up from 17 up to 27%. Then that
:10:34. > :10:37.17% went down to 3%, so they might only be five or 6% in the general
:10:38. > :10:41.election, so they might not have the threat of depriving Conservatives of
:10:42. > :10:45.their seats. Where the incumbency thing has an effect is the Liberal
:10:46. > :10:50.Democrats. They have fortress seats where between 1992 and 1997 Liberal
:10:51. > :10:55.Democrats seats fell, but their percentage went up. They are losing
:10:56. > :10:58.the local government base though. True, but having people like Ming
:10:59. > :11:03.Campbell standing down means they will struggle. We are used to
:11:04. > :11:06.incumbency being an important factor in American politics. It's hard to
:11:07. > :11:12.get rid of an incumbent unless it is a primary election, like we saw in
:11:13. > :11:15.Virginia, but is it now becoming an important factor in British
:11:16. > :11:20.politics, that if you own the seat you're more likely to hold on to it
:11:21. > :11:24.than not? If it is, that's a remarkable thing. It's hard to be a
:11:25. > :11:27.carpetbagger in America, but it is normal in British Parliamentary
:11:28. > :11:31.constituencies to be represented by someone who did not grow up locally.
:11:32. > :11:35.It is a special kind of achievement to have an incumbency effect where
:11:36. > :11:38.you don't have deep roots in the constituency. I was going to ask
:11:39. > :11:42.about the Lib Dems. If we are wrong, and they collapse in Parliamentary
:11:43. > :11:46.representation as much as the share in vote collapses, is that not good
:11:47. > :11:51.news is that the Conservatives? They would be in second place in the
:11:52. > :11:54.majority of existing Lib Dems seats. For every seat where Labour are
:11:55. > :11:58.second to the Lib Dems, there are two where the Conservatives are
:11:59. > :12:06.second. If the Lib Dem representation collapses, that helps
:12:07. > :12:10.the Conservatives. I'm assuming the Tories will gain about ten seats. If
:12:11. > :12:14.they gain 20, if they'd had 20 more seats last time, they would have had
:12:15. > :12:19.a majority government, just about. So 20 seats off the Lib Dem, do the
:12:20. > :12:23.maths, as they say in America, and they could lose a handful to labour
:12:24. > :12:27.and still be able to run a one party, minority government. The fate
:12:28. > :12:34.of the Lib Dems could be crucial to the outcome to the politics of
:12:35. > :12:39.light. On the 8th of May, it will be VE Day and victory in election day
:12:40. > :12:41.as well as Europe. The Lib Dems will be apoplectic if they lose all of
:12:42. > :12:47.the seats to their coalition partners. The great quote by Angela
:12:48. > :12:51.Merkel, the little party always gets crushed. It's a well-established
:12:52. > :12:54.idea that coalition politics. They can't take credit for the things
:12:55. > :12:58.people like you may get lumbered with the ones they don't. They have
:12:59. > :13:02.contributed most of this terrible idea that seized politics where you
:13:03. > :13:07.say it, but you don't deliver it. Tuition fees is the classic example
:13:08. > :13:12.of this Parliament. Why should you believe any promise you make? And Ed
:13:13. > :13:16.Miliband is feeling that as well. But in 1974 the liberal Democrats
:13:17. > :13:19.barely had any MPs but there were reporters outside Jeremy Thorpe s
:13:20. > :13:24.home because they potentially held not the balance of power, but were
:13:25. > :13:27.significantly in fourth. Bringing back memories Jeremy Thorpe, and we
:13:28. > :13:32.will leave it there. Thanks to the panel. We are tomorrow on BBC Two.
:13:33. > :13:36.At the earlier time of 11am because of Wimbledon. Yes, it's that time of
:13:37. > :13:41.year again already. I will be back here at 11 o'clock next week.
:13:42. > :14:38.Remember, if it is Sunday, it is the Sunday Politics.
:14:39. > :14:42.to the beating heart of today's vibrant shops.