06/10/2013 Sunday Politics Yorkshire and Lincolnshire

Morning, folks, welcome to the Sunday Politics. And

Morning, folks, welcome to the election? We talk to the Tory rebel

Morning, folks, welcome to the demanding one next year, that is our

top story. As government ministers prepare to decide how the press

should be regulated, what will be the impact of this week's row

should be regulated, what will be between the Daily Mail and Ed

Miliband? You are talking about the colour of

In Yorkshire and Lincolnshire, a row peoples faces?!

In Yorkshire and Lincolnshire, a row breaks out over claims that in a fit

cut for under 25s would lead to an increase in

He will try to force a vote in the October. Home Secretary Theresa

He will try to force a vote in the was asked about his plans on the BBC

earlier this morning. I think he has got it wrong, I think what we need

to do is to negotiate the settlement with the European Union and then put

that to the people me to decide whether to be in or out. Is this a

flea bite or a real threat? I think whether to be in or out. Is this a

Party that will be offering people that renegotiation, a new settlement

with Europe, looking to the future and putting that to the British

people in and in or out referendum. And what the amendment possibly

could do, as James Wharton, who And what the amendment possibly

putting the Referendum Bill through Parliament has said, is it could

jeopardise that bill. Adam Afriyie joins us now from Millbank studio.

Good morning. If the referendum would be held next October, it would

have to be an in-out question based the status quo? There wouldn't be

time for a full renegotiation. I disagree. By having a referendum in

2014, it gives us 12 months to renegotiate, but it kick-started

negotiations, because the European Union, if they wish us to remain

and make changes so that they would members, would need to accommodate

and make changes so that they would persuade the British public to stay,

strengthens the Prime Minister's hand, and 12 months is ample time

for that kind of negotiation. You might think that, but Germany has

not even got a government at the moment, why should they meet our

timetable? This is going to be incredibly, located renegotiation. I

think, basically, 80% of people incredibly, located renegotiation. I

a referendum. More than 50% what a election. British businesses need

certainty, and we could carry on taking a scan down the road for

ever, but I have struggled with taking a scan down the road for

conscience over this one. I do not want to cause trouble, but it is

essential that Parliament and MPs have the opportunity to search their

souls and give people a referendum this side of the election. That

would also bring certainty and clarity for the future, and like I

You right in the Mail on Sunday clarity for the future, and like I

the people are not convinced there even will be a referendum, so they

don't trust David Cameron? I think the headline was not the headline I

wrote for that piece. What I am You are saying that the British

people are not convinced. Look, there are too many uncertainties

here - they may not be convinced the Conservatives will win the election,

I hope we will, they may not be convinced the renegotiation will be

good enough, that there will be convinced the renegotiation will be

referendum. Do you trust David That is why we need to bring the

referendum forward, there is time to negotiate, and we tidy up the issue

that has been hanging around for too long. Do you trust David Cameron to

deliver a referendum in 2017? I Minister, and of course I trust

deliver a referendum in 2017? I referendum? There as only variables

in between. What I am doing with referendum? There as only variables

this amendment, is to try to be referendum? There as only variables

is that Parliament and every MP referendum? There as only variables

the opportunity decide whether they want to be sure of a referendum

within this parliament, or maybe leave it to the vagaries of what may

within this parliament, or maybe happen in 2015. Supposing you got

your way, how would you vote? Like Michael Gove, I would vote for us to

leave as of today, but there will be Michael Gove, I would vote for us to

an enormous amount of pressure on European Union leaders to come

forward with proposals. If they European Union leaders to come

to say, the mandate is not ever closer political union, it is ever

closer trading harmony, giving us closer trading harmony, giving us

more border control and control closer trading harmony, giving us

our legal system, I might change my mind. But this is what needs to

people to argue in or out, and the end result is a stronger Prime

Minister. Is it true that you have end result is a stronger Prime

Minister. Is it true that you have got about 80 MPs supporting this? It

certain, and I think we will see it on hold over the next three or five

weeks. He will have to ask each individual MP. I am asking you,

is your motion! There will be other motions coming forward, and I know

cross-party, for people who want the British public to have a say in

2014. You know it is not going to get through, the whips will stop

this from happening. One of the successes, apparently, of your

party's Manchester conference was that you were not divided over

Europe anymore, the Europe issue was settled. Here you are bringing it

Europe anymore, the Europe issue was back to life and pouring petrol

Europe anymore, the Europe issue was unlicensed troublemaker of the

Tories? The only struggle I have had is not a fight with my party but

Tories? The only struggle I have had with my conscience as to whether or

not I would give Parliament and with my conscience as to whether or

British people an opportunity to have a say in 2014. I wrestled with

it, and I decided I wanted people to have that opportunity. It is for

each individual MP to search their soul, speak to constituents and

decide whether they want that. You decided it would get you in the

headlines again. Oh, you are so cynical, Andrew! I have no ambition

publicity seeker. All I seek is cynical, Andrew! I have no ambition

would not be able to sleep at night if I did not bring forward this

opportunity for Britain to have if I did not bring forward this

say. We have left it far too long. Nobody under the age of 56 has had a

luck with this continuing struggle Nobody under the age of 56 has had a

luck with this continuing struggle panel, what do you make of it? The

party managers must be furious with him. I think what this confirms

party managers must be furious with that David Cameron is incredibly

lucky in his enemies. His most prolific critics, Nadine Dorries,

Peter Bone, Adam Afriyie, even if you are very anti-Cameron, you will

not think, man, if only they were in charge of the party! I think the

party managers are not too alarmed. They do not take him seriously? No,

is not as if the James Wharton bill is a work of genius, it is riddled

with flaws, anomalies and loopholes. It purports to guarantee that a

referendum will take place in the next Parliament. My understanding of

theoretically impossible and that all the future government would

theoretically impossible and that is cancel out that bill with another

bill. He does have a point that Cameron's plan for a referendum

bill. He does have a point that nothing like as likely to happen...

dangerous. The problem for David Cameron is twofold. One, if Ed

Miliband says he's going to support Adam Afriyie, it will go through.

Unlikely that Ed Miliband would Adam Afriyie, it will go through.

that, but what he might do is say to his MPs, ignore this. It may well be

significant number of Labour MPs do not turn up, and then what you have

Conservative backbenchers, and in that war you might well find that

through, and then the Prime Minister has real trouble, because Adam

Afriyie says, the Prime Minister to get agreement with Nick Clegg or

Ed Miliband, so you would be looking to get agreement with Nick Clegg or

Ed Miliband, so you would be looking think he is a Labour mole, that

Ed Miliband, so you would be looking what I have come to, a Daily Mail

style conspiracy theory, it could not be more perfect. The prospect of

style conspiracy theory, it could a referendum on the EU at the same

time as Scottish independence is has told us he could not sleep at

conscience. We could send him some pills, I suppose. We know he's going

to sack all those lieutenants were going around and saying he is the

great future and the next leader of the Conservative Party. He denied

doing that! He would be amazed to hear you say that, this is a crisis

conversations in corridors, quite an operation to get letters into Graham

Brady, he said to have letters, operation to get letters into Graham

46, but at the moment this campaign is being run by Lieutenant of Adam

They are disaffected and not happy under David Cameron's leadership.

There is a whole army of them! I am pleased he has outmanoeuvred the

awkward squad, and now James Wharton is saying, you're going to kill

awkward squad, and now James Wharton bill. I do not think they are very

competence lieutenants. The main episode is it will unify a large

Conservative Party behind David Cameron. On what they hope is a

settled position. We still hope Cameron. On what they hope is a

be talking to John Prescott, who is in hole, if you see him, pointing in

the direction of the BBC studios! Do you want to buy a house? Can you

the direction of the BBC studios! Do not the 20% or 30% deposit the

mortgage provider is demanding from you? The Government says it has

mortgage provider is demanding from scheme designed for you which is in

launching next week, help to buy, re-emergence of 95% mortgages,

remember them?! But is the policy really good for home-buyers or the

British economy? Here is Giles. Never mind who lives in a house

British economy? Here is Giles. this, who can afford to buy a house

these days? The Government would this, who can afford to buy a house

without putting down a crippling like many more people to be able to

without putting down a crippling amount of money as a deposit, and in

the spirit of rights to buy, the government has launched help to

the spirit of rights to buy, the confusingly it is the name for two

been running since April. Help to government are bringing it in early.

Let's get in on the inside and take a good look around at what this

scheme actually has to offer. And why the Government thinks it really

works. Help to Buy 1 was an equity loan scheme. The idea, nice, is

works. Help to Buy 1 was an equity it was for new build only, up to a

value of £600,000. But it is Help to value of £600,000. But it is Help to

Buy 2 that everyone is looking into right now. It is for any property up

to a value, again, of £600,000. right now. It is for any property up

time the Government is guaranteeing that it will take on the first

losses should the home owner in that it will take on the first

future failed to make their mortgage payments. Don't worry about that, if

available again in participating banks and building societies. And

a housing prime mover. You cannot get training to 5% mortgage anymore,

90% even, so there are couples in our country who have good jobs,

decent incomes, they could afford the mortgage payments but they

failure in our banking market. So Jonathan, but I guess for you this

is not Homes Under The Hammer, but a main impact of this scheme will

is not Homes Under The Hammer, but a to push up prices, who does that

benefit? Mostly rich and all the people who own their houses. Plus

the banks, of course, because it is a subsidy for them. Who loses?

People who want to buy a house in the future. Moreover, it is a bit

odd that the Government says it the future. Moreover, it is a bit

not OK to borrow to finance schools or roads, but it is fine for the

effectively, in order to guarantee housing market. 2.3 million? I do

not think Help to Buy covers that. But enter a would-be buyer, will

they now be seeing a plethora of help to buy mortgages? In a word,

no. David Cameron has brought the months, and banks were not ready at

that stage. Two banks have committed to fund the scheme, the Lloyds group

and the RBS group, so lenders like Halifax, RBS and NatWest. They will

be doing the scheme, but even once the scheme is up and running you are

high street because of the guarantee the government is offering. People

might say this is how we got into a mess in the first place. Why would

the government want to make those products available then now? It

the government want to make those more what investment banks were

doing in the background that caused performed extremely well through the

depths of the downturn. Is this performed extremely well through the

game changer? Yes, I have done my best to save over the last few years

but this has enabled me to make best to save over the last few years

first purchase. How frustrating best to save over the last few years

it just renting? Very frustrating, you are throwing away money hand

over fist, and now I can take that enthusiasm raises a question back at

the flat. If you are looking for a 95% mortgage, you don't really care

economy, you are thinking, great, I can buy a house. Yes, if I was a

house buyer or a bank, I would be pleased, but it will do longer term

economic damage. The tricky steps the government are trying to pull

off is that home-buyers might be so grateful for the opportunity to

off is that home-buyers might be so their own homes that they reward the

Government with the vote, while their own homes that they reward the

the same time the Government tries to sidestep consequences that such a

Now Conservative MP Margot James, and Allister Heath, editor of City

It is said by the critics that this scheme will cause a housing bubble.

Where is the evidence? House prices are more varied. Housing not just in

London remains overvalued and the problem with this scheme is that it

will pump up house prices, it will therefore houses will become even

more overvalued. That is a dangerous territory, last time it ended in

tears, and now the Government is taking on the risk of that policy.

What do you say to that? We have a real problem, it takes people on

average until they are 38 years real problem, it takes people on

property. The problem is not that they cannot afford it, but they

cannot afford the deposit. We have got to do something to allow people

to get their feet on the property ladder and I don't agree it will

cause a boom in house prices. It would if we were not building any

have had a record this year, 12 the last ten years. These are not

the statistics I have seen, but the last ten years. These are not

new supply is coming up. It is starting to creep up. We don't see

enough house building, need to build more houses and that is a solution

to this problem. You are right, people cannot afford to buy homes

and the reason is there are not enough good quality homes in the

deposits are so high is because secondly the Government has passed

laws to make the banking system secondly the Government has passed

prudent, telling them to put more wrong. Now suddenly the Government

is not happy with the outcome of its own rules and is trying to create

these subsidies to circumvent the rules it has put in place. It is not

a subsidy. Don't forget banks have to pay a charge in order to take

part in this loan scheme and that the... You are guaranteeing the

money. Yes, but the fear is worked out on a commercial basis. The

taxpayer is protected. Why? You out on a commercial basis. The

guaranteeing £12 billion worth of mortgages per year. Yes but the

change in the whole mortgage basis has been made a few years ago in

response of the crash. They made the distressed test on people applying

for mortgages much higher and you twice... So it will not be like

these self certification mortgages the sub-prime crisis? Pigment bit

like that but the banks are rightly asking for bigger deposits, they

know there is a big chance house prices could fall if interest rates

eventually, so they are demanding bigger deposits. The Government

eventually, so they are demanding circumventing this is being passed

eventually, so they are demanding on to the taxpayers which is why it

is a dangerous policy. Instead they should be massively accelerating

Planning permission is much easier to get now, we have seen a 49%

increase in planning permission to get now, we have seen a 49%

a new building over the last year, a huge increase. In the figures I

a new building over the last year, a recently, they showed new start

a new building over the last year, a the 12 months to the autumn were

only about 110,000 which is the figure you inherited, which was

only about 110,000 which is the an all-time low in 2010. New house

built in the last quarter are third up on the time last year. You have

relaxation of planning laws and up on the time last year. You have

other policies the Government put into effect last year to take effect

and it is coming through now. I agree, if we weren't building more

houses, if the construction sector advantage of the increased demand,

there would be a risk. David Cameron says you are snob and it is only

snobs who dislike Help To Buy. They don't have the bank of mum and dad,

people like that will finally get on the housing ladder. That is complete

housing market where there is a large amount of construction, like

in the 1930s for example, where large numbers of proper family homes

were being built for people. House prices were pushed down and people

could afford houses. You are now encouraging people to take out a 95%

mortgage, I thought that was a bad idea, so supposing interest rates go

struggle, and supposing house prices fall by more than 5%, I am now faced

with negative equity and soaring interest rates that I cannot afford.

95% mortgage, if you can afford interest rates that I cannot afford.

repayments, you will be fine. What happens when interest rates rise?

They have got to rise a lot before you get into trouble. People are

already affording rent which is you get into trouble. People are

lot higher than mortgage payments. You will not be able to get into

this scheme unless you can afford repayments double what they are

this scheme unless you can afford the moment. The Conservatives should

limelight last week but there was an unwelcome intruder in the shape

limelight last week but there was an row between Ed Miliband and the

Daily Mail. Just over a week ago the claiming that Ed Miliband's Father

Ralph hated Britain. They showed a picture of his father's gravestone

with the caption, grave socialist. picture of his father's gravestone

Ed Miliband the right to reply on printed an editorial alongside it

saying they stood by every word printed an editorial alongside it

published an fair headline. It also reporter had gate-crashed a private

memorial service for Ed Miliband's uncle in a London hospital, for

which the paper has now apologised, but Ed Miliband has called on the

hard look at the way his papers but Ed Miliband has called on the

run. This comes a week before a but Ed Miliband has called on the

Joining us now from Hull, John Prescott. Does this row between

Joining us now from Hull, John reinforce the case for tough, new

certainly influences the opinion about that but that is more of Paul

Dacre's doing. Ed Miliband rang about that but that is more of Paul

while I was in Strasbourg making sure my complaints were nothing

while I was in Strasbourg making do with press regulation and he

while I was in Strasbourg making right. This argument is not about

politicians and media people, it is about ordinary people that love

politicians and media people, it is and dealt with. All of these cases

affected individual people and they are the ones that need to have

justice in this matter. Next week we will be hearing whether the Privy

Council will be reporting on the proposal to replace it. Are you

with its Miliband article was a matter of judgement? Yes, and the

with its Miliband article was a conclusion that the relationship

between the press, the police and politicians should be governed,

between the press, the police and proposal given by half the press

industry that that does not meet the Leveson requirement and I suspect

the Privy Council this week will have to reject that, and I hope

the Privy Council this week will will because it is not consistent

with the Leveson report which the Prime Minister said he supported.

You attacked the mail in your column today but your paper went through

the Cameron family bins to see what nappies they used for their disabled

son. Isn't that far more offensive than what the Daily Mail wrote about

Ralph Miliband? It probably is, than what the Daily Mail wrote about

couldn't defend that. I have had Haven't we all? Yes, but we are

editors who acts unilaterally. Paul Dacre is running this thing in the

which the press have accepted the old PCC is no good. They are playing

for time because if they reject old PCC is no good. They are playing

this week there is 12 months until you can consider a parliamentary

alternative and then you are near the election and you begin to bully

the leaders. That is how they have been successful in putting off

recommendations. Maybe my memory is fading but did you or anybody else

in the Labour Party object to the Sunday Mirror's behaviour? I didn't

know about it. I would just say Sunday Mirror's behaviour? I didn't

is wrong if that is what they did. As you said, you have the same

position when they go through your rubbish bins, I think that is wrong.

We have Leveson set up by the Prime Minister to look at the cultures and

practices and the unilateral action of editors and he came forward with

Parliament under a compromise of the Royal Charter. I don't like a Royal

frankly, but we have agreed to go frankly, but we have agreed to go

Government set up in charge at the same time rushed through the press

box? It looks like a fix, like they are using the Royal Charter as a

means of delaying everything. They have now said they are going to

introduce their own independent charter. This industry does not

introduce their own independent of the Mail. What is the endgame for

this? Is it the head of Paul Dacre? He is not an acceptable character to

account. When Ed Miliband rang me it regulation, he wanted the argument

of decency. Are you and Ed Miliband regulation, he wanted the argument

of decency. Are you and Ed Miliband after Paul Dacre's head? No, he

of decency. Are you and Ed Miliband stay there. It is like with Murdoch,

of decency. Are you and Ed Miliband we were not attacking him but what

extent, what they are doing about politicians who can look after

themselves. We know, with the bad cases he had to deal with, they

might get libel action, which the press say, but they pretty well

destroyed their lives. That is about judgment. If you say, as Paul Dacre

got good judgment? I would say no, Thank you for joining us, he did not

even have to go to the BBC studios, we sent a truck there for him. What

is the endgame in this? Whether the Labour Party is trying to make this

an issue press regulation are not, this is where it is going. We have

the criminal trial involving Andy Coulson coming up, the Privy Council

discussing press radiation before the end of the year, and the

question is, what is political impact?

question is, what is political of the Leveson story over the past

several years, hacking and everything, is close to zero,

because most voters do not care, and those who do care believe that all

parties are roughly complicit in being too close to editors and

proprietors. You said that Adam Afriyie was a Labour mould, with a

smile. Is the Daily Mail also a Labour mole? This has been a dream

for Ed Miliband, I took on Murdoch, I am taking on the energy companies

and now the evil Daily Mail! I think... I should say I used to work

for the Daily Mail, but when they printed the right of reply, they

surrounded it with a big two fingers up at Ed. If they had not done

surrounded it with a big two fingers that, they would not be in this

position. The poll in the Sunday Times this morning shows 72% think

the Daily Mail was wrong and backed Mr Miliband's demand for an apology.

If you come to define and your dad, people are naturally going to do

this, but it took all the coverage away from the Tory conference, the

media loves covering itself, here we are doing it again, this has been a

dream for Mr Miliband. The political significance of this is that David

Cameron said in the House of Commons that he wanted to try to find some

common ground between the three party Royal Charter and the

so-called press industry version. What the Daily Mail has done is

ensured that the Prime Minister is not going to be able to do that.

What is going to happen this week is that the press Royal Charter has to

be considered first, and that will probably be rejected. The Privy

Council will reject it. probably be rejected. The Privy

three party Royal Charter will come probably be rejected. The Privy

up, but meanwhile the press will set up their own regulatory body because

the Royal Charter is not a proper statutory underpinning, they will be

able to go ahead with that. There statutory underpinning, they will be

will be the legal basis for the oversight of the oversight body, and

it will basically just be an ambassador that will not be

resolved. As you say, no-one much cares about this outside of the

profession and a few media watchers. But this has been great politics for

Ed Miliband. It is only great politics if he scores a great

victory. I take your view that people are cynical about it. But the

narrative is, I am the chap who stands up to vested interests. But

all those vested interests are people that you would expect a

left-wing politician to want to take on. It is also more significant

about who he has stood up for, and the person he has studied for is his

father. Maybe people thought of him as a Marxist, now they think of him

as war hero. He gets to the crux of matters, you know! You are watching

the Sunday Politics. Coming up in just over 20 minutes, I will be

speaking to Godfrey You are watching the Sunday politics

for Yorkshire and Lincolnshire. Coming up today. A row breaks out

over claims that benefit cuts for under 25 is would lead to a big

increase in homelessness. And we will find out why Yorkshire

is at the bottom of the league when it comes to attracting overseas

investment. Let's say hello to our guests today. Michael Dugher is the

Labour MP for Barnsley East, Alec Shelbrooke is the Conservative MP

for helmet and Rothwell. Many commentators are now saying that

your two parties are farther apart politically speaking them they have

in for some time, what is your take? Watching the Conservative party

conference, I think they are further apart from the electorate and the

centre ground of British politics than they have been for some time.

At Labour's conference, the theme of the cost of living crisis. In

Yorkshire, families are on average £1700 per year worse off every year

since David Cameron became Prime Minister. There is a huge cost of

living crisis going on, that is what we focused on so we had ideas about

freezing energy bills, they have gone up for most people. Talking

about the cost of living, the big issues. David Cameron mentioned the

Labour Party 25 times and the cost of living three times, that was

telling. You're partly —— your party has been on the back foot. The

Labour Party has gone to the 1970s socialism, talking about state

freezing land —— seizing land and energy prices freezing. The

Conservatives have cleared up the mess left by the Labour Party and we

have now got to build the economy going forward. Labour spent three

years saying the economy would not recover, it has, they have moved on

to the cost of living, to grow. One area where there is a

big divide is on welfare. A war of word had erupted over claims that it

cuts could see an increase in the number of young people becoming

homeless. —— claims that benefit cuts. The Conservatives say 16—25

—year—olds should be repaired to earn or learn all face losing their

dole. But one leaving —— one leading housing charity says scrapping

benefits for under 25s would have devastating effects in parts of the

law. This is the East Marsh area of

Grimsby weather number of people claiming benefits outnumbers those

in work. This area was recently described in a survey by one think

tank as a benefit ghetto. According to the Centre for social justice,

51% of the working age occupation here rely on benefits. Rees is 23

and claims job—seeker 's allowance and housing benefit. He says he is

worried about reports that young people could be the target of the

next big welfare crackdown. That is all I have got to support myself

while I am looking for a job. I am trying to get a job. I have got an

interview at the factory tomorrow. Even still, coming in and out of the

factory, the work dies down. If I lost my benefits, I would not be

able to survive. Today it is still possible to leave school, signed on,

find a flat, start taming housing benefit and opt for a life

benefits. David Cameron has suggested that

16—25 —year—olds who shun education, employment or training would lose

their benefits under a future Conservative government. They would

not be entitled to housing benefit and it could mean they are excluded

from claiming job—seeker's allowance. One charity which

represents homeless groups across the UK says that would have a big

impact on places like Grimsby. I think the impact on areas like the

North of England is potentially devastating. Our members in the area

report that they already are at record numbers of young people

approaching them for help with homelessness. With poverty, we are

seeing an increase in the use of food banks, an increase in the

number of people approaching councils for help and advice for

homelessness. If these proposals go through we expect to see significant

increases in the numbers of young people seeking help with

homelessness problems in these areas. However, many conservatives

say they are simply responding to widespread concern about the abuse

of benefits. This was the view of some voters in Cleethorpes. I think

a lot of the younger ones could do more work than what they do. And an

living. There always seems to be a job out there, you have got to keep

looking and apply for courses. It is the people who have been unemployed

for months he seemed to abuse the system. What we have got to make

sure is that welfare benefits go to people who are genuinely in need. It

was created by the Labour government as a safety net and that is how it

should be. What do you a new generation of homeless young

people? There will be hard cases because of broken homes and so on,

the system has got to accommodate and deal with sympathetically. The

reality is, if we are going to meet housing demands over the next

generation, we cannot be providing social housing for people who are

only 17 or 18 and expecting the state somehow to pick up the tab for

providing them with accommodation. Where are the families? So expect an

increasingly heated war of words between the politicians when it

comes to the war on welfare. Alec Shelbrooke, what do you make to

those claims that cutting benefits for under 25s could lead to a big

increase in homelessness? Let's be very clear about what the Prime

Minister said and what has been reported. This is the potential

losing of benefits for 18—25 —year—oldss who refused to take part

in education, learning or work. People who are trying to opt out of

the system and live a life on benefits. Overall the majority of

people in that age bracket will not be losing their benefits. Should a

young person who refuses to take a job, refuses to take a training

place or refuses to go back into education, should they be allowed to

keep their benefits? Look at what Labour proposed many months ago. Our

compulsory jobs guarantee, we said that all young people who had been

unemployed for more than a year, and everyone else who has been

unemployed for more than two years, the long—term unemployed, should be

offered a job. That should —— that job should include training and job

search and we would find that job for employers. Here

toughness, they would not be able to turn it down. If they did, they

would lose their benefits. The government has got to do better in

terms of providing opportunities and jobs for young people. We know

unemployment is rising in Yorkshire and we don't that the number —— we

know the number of young people aged between 18 and 24 who have been

unemployed by more than two years has gone up fourfold in the last

year. That is not because benefits have got more generous, that is

because there is a jobs crisis. Therein lies the problem. It is all

very well forcing young people to go on training schemes, but if there is

no job, what is the point? You are faced with dark choices. —— stark

choices. There has been a huge rise in apprenticeships and what we are

saying is the money we are spending on people who refused to take part,

should be spent on training programme that go in. We have a

difficult economic limit. During the boom years, we saw young term

unemployment in people grow. We can all play the statistics but the fact

is, what do we do about it? To be trap people into a benefit system

where they have got no education or training or hope of getting out, or

do we give them tough love and say, if you are in training or a job or

going through further education, you will continue to be funded. But if

you opt out of all of those things, your benefits will stop. Tough love?

We have said, if you turn down the Labour compulsory job guarantee, we

will give you a job, we will fund the job. That is a £1 billion

commitment fully costed. We would rip an —— we would repeat the bank

bonuses tax. top rate tax cuts for millionaires.

Wouldn't it be better to use that money to do something about the fact

that there are 1 million young people unemployed? Are you not

convinced? The bank bonus tax has been used for every Labour spending

commitment in the last three years. The fact is under these governments,

the people on the higher tax rates are paying more tax than they ever

did under Labour. It is no surprise that the latest opinion polling

showed that the 18 to 25—year—olds support Conservatives over Labour. I

saw a young lad recently who said that he dragged himself out of one

of the largest council estates of Europe in Leeds, working hard,

trying to hurt —— earn a living. He said he was bothered by people who

have never bothered to do that. You want to stop them buying beer and

fags with the dole. I think the most important thing is to prevent people

falling into poverty. For all of the criticism, not one person has given

me an argument of how beer and fags stop people falling

me an argument of how beer and fags stop people poverty.

Yorkshire will host the Tour de France next year, but Yorkshire does

not appear to be enjoying the same kind of success in the global

business race. The region lags behind many other parts of the UK

when it comes to attracting overseas investment.

Foreign investment, selling yourself abroad is the best way out of

economic trouble, so—called businesses —— as businesses tell us.

But has Yorkshire lost a unified voice?

attracts nearly half of the UK's foreign funded budgets. It is the

equivalent of the fourth biggest country in Europe, because of its

investment. The rest of the country has seen its share of foreign

investments dropped by nearly a quarter. These part of the country

used to have regional development agencies like Yorkshire Forward but

the government got rid of them. Has that made a difference? If Yorkshire

can gather together its business communities, universities as well as

local authorities and government, and put to overseas boardrooms

unified picture for Yorkshire, we will be more accessible. The focus

must be on original story, investors like that, rather than a fragmented

approach that in this region are sometimes offering. If you look at

so many jobs that have been created by foreign investment, other regions

have done well. Yorkshire is at the bottom of the list. How has the

North West and Wales done it? You join me at media city in

Salford, home to BBC Northwest and home to a few thousand new jobs.

Behind all of this is a Northwest company backed with an awful lot of

foreign cash, a lot of it from China. 35 miles away along the 62,

that is another success story. Jaguar Land Rover, another few

thousand jobs there, this time back by cash from India. What have we got

that you have not got? We have lost the regional development agency,

we are really struggling to find a replacement for it, one with the

cash and the clouds to promote our region overseas. I can tell you what

we do have, that is just over here. It is Manchester United's football

ground. The authors of this report believe that if you have got a

successful football team, one which is globally recognised, that helps

pull in overseas investment. We have got plenty of them. How about you? I

am here at Cardiff Bay, once the biggest coal port in the world. The

device of —— the demise of industry, you are more likely to

seek restaurants here now. Wales developed through the Welsh to

relevant agency in the 80s and 90s. In 2005, the Welsh government at the

time scrapped the WDA. It was hugely controversial. The accusation was

that Wales had lost its brand overseas. Inward investment levels

plummeted. Since then, things have picked up. There has been a big push

on trade shows overseas, and a new office has opened in central London.

Much of selling Wales overseas now is done at a high political level.

Much of it by the first Minister of wealth itself. We have got

individual local price partnerships now, voices to shout for South, west

and north Yorkshire. Are we missing a strong opportunity to sell

Yorkshire as a whole? When our neighbours across the Pennines are

doing much better with us —— than us with the same tools, what are we

doing wrong? I will ask that question to Michael

Dugher. Why do you believe Yorkshire is lagging behind other parts of the

UK? Part of it is the state of the economy over the last three years,

growth strangled out of the economy, it is only now belatedly coming back

and is still less than 1%. We have got to do better as a whole country

in terms of growth. I think the government had strategic error when

it abolished the regional developer agency. It was doing pretty well in

Yorkshire, they got rid of it in haste and I think they are now

trying to turn them into something that looks more like a regional

element agency. They need the clout and resources. In Wales, they have

lost their RDA, but they have got a strong focus because of the

government in Wales. We do not have that. When I listen to David Cameron

and George Osborne, they have got no idea about places in Yorkshire. Ask

them about regional policy, they say we have got HS2, that is the railway

line. That is all they have got. Don't get started on HS2! Do we need

a single body batting for Yorkshire and Humber as a whole? The regional

development agencies spent a huge amount of money, a lot from the

European Union, we hear an argument about the European Union, it was

spent on revenue projects. If you go to some of the new projects in

eastern Europe, it is on capital projects. That makes it better to do

infrastructure and move forward. The government has done for —— far more

than just talk about HS2. We have invested millions of pounds in Leeds

alone. We are talking about Kirkstall Ford, creating

and homes, a trolley bus system in the city, it is unreasonable to say

that government ignores the North of England. We have to make sure that

we have an economy which is able to cope and have the infrastructure

there to support growth, and see what happens. In terms of Manchester

United, we obviously want Leeds United to do very well. They are in

a good place in the table, in a few years Manchester United will not be!

We have got whole city as well, don't forget! Response, Alec

Shelbrooke? I don't have the answer is to turn Leeds United into a

Champions League club, I'm not sure that would be very popular in

Barnsley. The government has to do better. The cuts, for instance, are

this unfortunate the higher in Yorkshire that they are in the south

of England. —— they are disproportionately higher. Yorkshire

is not getting anything like the same kind of opportunities. The

government is happy to forget about huge part of Yorkshire that is not

good enough. We need more from David Cameron and George Osborne. But they

just do not get the North. Your response, the North—South divide?

That is cobblers. This government unlike the Labour government before

has invested millions of pounds in Leeds alone, millions across the

North of England with projects coming, we only have two look at the

tram system in the city. Money taken away for Labour, it was put into

crossrail in London. That is old news now. Let's have a look at the

round—up in 50 seconds. says she has been told to dumb down

her CV if she wants to find a job in hole. She has a degree from the

city's University but claims she was told it would make a overqualified

for most vacancies in the town. Her local MP has criticised the advance.

That would create, I say, a brain drain. Hundreds of schools across

Lincolnshire and Yorkshire were closed last week as members of the

two biggest teaching union went on strike. They are angry about changes

to pensions, increased workloads and plans to bring him perform rated

pay. The government has accused those on strike of jeopardising the

learning of their pupils. The fallout continues over Doncaster

Impey and Labour leader Ed Miliband's clash with the Daily

Mail. The newspaper has again refused to apologise for his demands

the —— it's that addition of his father Ralph, a former politics

lecturer, as a man who hated Britain.

Had Ed Miliband not referred to his father Ralph in many of his

conference speeches, would that have made him their game for the

newspapers? I think people are interested in your back story, where

you come from, the values that you have got but that was not what this

Daily Mail article was about. I think most people now see that this

was an absolutely appalling, disgraceful smear on Ed Miliband's

late father. Masquerading as journalism. They thought they could,

they were playing the man knocked the ball, they were playing the

man's fathers. Having a picture of his grade and putting it in the

paper, the vast majority of people, and this is not possibly political

point —— this is not a party to little point, the vast majority of

people thought that was disgraceful. They should have the guts to

apologise. There is not a lot I can disagree with there. Too many people

are playing the man in politics. It is perfectly legitimate to look at

Ralph Miliband's political background, and the things he is

saying, especially when Ed Miliband says his father influenced him on

his issues, sometimes it looks back to the 1970s socialism. In terms of

the personal attacks, I agree with Michael. You cannot do that in

politics, it is unacceptable. In my own constituency, I have got members

of the Labour Party trying to paint this picture that I am some toff

from the south. I could not be further away from Eton if I tried.

You have got to get down to policies. The Daily Mail have to

reflect on their story. They had Mr —— a good story with the socialism

of the background, but they had two Fat —— but they went too far with

the attack. On the teachers strikes, were they right to seek that? We

want to see a negotiated sage —— we want to see a negotiated

settlement. Were they wrong to go on strike? I think it is a breakdown

with the relationship. There needs to be a negotiated settlement. I do

not think Michael Gove has helped. It is time we had a national debate

about what is happening in our schools. We have got 6000 fewer

teachers now, people leaving the teaching profession, that is one of

the reasons why we have got, in Yorkshire, the number of infants

school kids in classes beyond 30 kids class has doubled since the

general election. That is a big worry.

Many teachers do not like Michael Gove, do they? Whether they like him

or not, we are putting into practice not just what is in our manifesto

but extending what was put in under the last Labour government. It is

interesting to note that on the one hand you are having an opposition

who are opposed to free schools and academies. We are not opposed to the

academies that you are continuing. Free schools are another way forward

and I think Labour are opposed to them. We have got to get down to

fundamental issues about what the striking is about. As a trade

unionist, there is a role for trade unions to protect people in the

workplace. They keep getting hijacked by political agendas and

that has got to stop. I cannot tell you how difficult I have had this

week from parents complaining about this strike. We will come back to

this another time. Back to Westminster for you both tomorrow,

clean had dishes, clean underwear packed no doubt. Your constituencies

will no that you are both well groomed, well done!

will no that you are both well have no time. Andrew, back to

Our next guest is no stranger to controversy, a former UKIP MEP he

recently lost his party's whip after a series of outbursts including

receiving aid as 'Bongo Bongo Land' and joking that a group of UKIP

women who didn't clean behind their fridges were 'sluts'. Now he sits in

independent but remains a UKIP party member. Here's a flavour of recent

events in the political life of Godfrey Bloom. How you can possibly

be giving £1 million a month... Bongo Bongo Land. I got 6000 e-mails

within 12 hours, only 47 were not agreeing with me so you are the

within 12 hours, only 47 were not that is out of touch. Everybody

knows me, a bit like the Marmite joke, they love me or they hate

knows me, a bit like the Marmite but I have always told me like it

is. I made a joke and said that women who did not clean behind the

French were sluts and everybody laughed along, including the women.

I have had hundreds of e-mails, saying, God Almighty, can't you

I have had hundreds of e-mails, a joke any more? I am long in the

correctness and I understand UKIP have moved on and they are doing

well, and I wish them well. This, with no black faces on it. You are

picking people out for the colour of with no black faces on it. You are

the way they are doing things now with no black faces on it. You are

disgrace me. We are joined now with a suitable distance between us by

the independent MEP for Yorkshire and the Humber, Godfrey Bloom. You

said this weekend that you have and the Humber, Godfrey Bloom. You

be a complete sociopath to be in politics, are you a sociopath? No, I

am just an ordinary bloke from the rugby club likes to tell it as it

is. I did not come into politics to rugby club likes to tell it as it

save my country from the clutches of the awful, evil... That is why I am

in politics, and that is why I member, and I will still be voting

ability... Do you accept that your conference? We were both born in

ability... Do you accept that your same year, we are too old to worry

about regrets. Let's look forward and see... Never mind the year I was

born, what is the answer to my country and intent to do the best I

independent for my country, and country and intent to do the best I

re-elected. They are the only game in town, the only party that will

get as out. Shouldn't you have been liability? You hijacked the party

conference. That is a matter of perception. We have heard nothing in

the last two years but it is a one-man band, a Nigel Farage party,

the last two years but it is a meeting and collapse the whole

Andrew. It tells you about your journalism - it is not about UKIP or

me, it was the journalists' reaction to a small joke at a meeting. And

myself, unless I had a commended. Personality, the most unbelievable

force of personality to collapse a party conference. Nigel Farage has

been a friend of mine for 20 years, and may I remind you that in June

and July UK was slipping in the polls, and when I made my statement

about overseas aid, we went back to liability, I never was, I am a vote

getter. As you know, there is a correlation, but let me show you

what Nigel Farage had to say about you on the BBC. Let's blunder clip

of that. We are not here to win friends amongst the liberal elite,

and Godfrey's problem was that he manifesto. Don't you need to reflect

that you are too outrageous, too politically incorrect even for UKIP?

Well, you see, to a certain extent I politically incorrect even for UKIP?

have been gagged on other subjects. about flat tax. I thought David

Aronowitz wrote a very good piece in the times on drugs, and I have been

gagged to speak about any of these things because they are not part of

it, so I tend to speak about other things. Maybe they have outgrown

machine, and they have to get rid of the Victor Meldrew wing. You might

have a point, but I am speaking the Victor Meldrew wing. You might

you from Hull, and if you look at Barnsley, and very recently in

Scarborough and Whitby in the buy legends, 25%, so how you see things

in the bubble, it is not like how we see it appear in Yorkshire. You

in the bubble, it is not like how we like the one who was sitting in

in the bubble, it is not like how we bubble! Is UKIP unravelling? Of

course it isn't, we are getting bubble! Is UKIP unravelling? Of

of the vote in by-elections, of course it is not. Boy, wouldn't

of the vote in by-elections, of main parties and the establishment

love to see that! But I am sorry, it is not happening. Will you stand as

an independence against UKIP in is not happening. Will you stand as

European elections? Almost certainly elections were next week, I could

do not think I will go that route. Will you stand as a UKIP candidate

again? We do not know, probably Will you stand as a UKIP candidate

but I shall certainly be trying Will you stand as a UKIP candidate

help UKIP as best I can. You both share a flat, I understand, in

Brussels, neither of you clean behind the fridge. Other than the

fact that the place is probably quite murky, you have got a chance

to talk to each other and get back into his good graces, haven't you? I

am sure we will be having a beer take it? For those of you who were

shrugged! Thank you very much for joining. A great pleasure. I will

have to move my own share, you do not have the sea Jeremy Paxman doing

that! Nobody votes for UKIP because they think they are a smooth, slick,

absence of PR polish is the reason for their popularity, so these are

skirmishes are not a problem, and more than that, Godfrey Bloom does

make Nigel Farage look better. Even in that clip from Andrew Marr, he

juxtaposition with someone like Godfrey Bloom than he has done

before. I mean, he did hijacked Godfrey Bloom than he has done

conference, it was a disaster, they got tonnes of publicity but not

conference, it was a disaster, they kind they wanted. But you have to

journalists. I thought he was sexist long before anyone else, he used to

have an incredible page on his website entitled Godfrey Bloom:

Misogynist, and the proof that he photographed with a girls' rugby

characters in politics. He does photographed with a girls' rugby

Nigel Farage look better, but is sin was to say things you said before

but to ruin the party conference. It sounds like he is coming back. A

beer in Brussels and he will be sounds like he is coming back. A

on the UKIP ticket. Sitting having a beer in that built the Chechen,

on the UKIP ticket. Sitting having a sounds like it may be what the deal

is that he comes back into UKIP sounds like it may be what the deal

does not stand as an MEP at the European Parliamentary elections. --

in that built the kitchen. It is Godfrey Bloom said for people to

electorate know what they go using UKIP four. They are using it as

electorate know what they go using vehicle to beat over the head the

three established parties. They vehicle to beat over the head the

probably do it in the European elections and give them first place.

The big question is what happens in problem that Nigel Farage was making

The big question is what happens in an Andrew Marr this morning is that

he wants to copy the tactics of an Andrew Marr this morning is that

he wants to copy the tactics of Paddy Ashdown, get elected and

councils, build up a Parliamentary base, and to do that you do need

Commons next week, and there is base, and to do that you do need

ministerial reshuffle on the cards, that is the rumour in Westminster.

David Cameron has spoken of the that is the rumour in Westminster.

David Cameron has spoken of the extraordinary talent pool of women

among his ministers, so could he bring more of them into the cabinet?

He was talking about it earlier bring more of them into the cabinet?

week. I think we are getting there in Britain, but we have a long way

businesses in Britain, there are not boardroom. If you look at politics

in Britain, there aren't nearly enough women around the Cabinet

table. So I think, in every walk of life, whether it is the judiciary,

whether it is politics, business, there is a lot further to go. Before

the last election, we only had there is a lot further to go. Before

women Members of Parliament. We there is a lot further to go. Before

have around 50, so we have made there is a lot further to go. Before

big change, but it is still 50 out of 300, not nearly enough. So we

need to do more. My wife likes to say, if you don't have women in

need to do more. My wife likes to places, you're not just missing

need to do more. My wife likes to missing out on a lot more than

need to do more. My wife likes to of the talent, and I think she

need to do more. My wife likes to there going to be a reshuffle? I

think you are right to say there there going to be a reshuffle? I

will be a lot more women, they need to change the ratio of women to

will be a lot more women, they need called Dave who went to maudlin

college. So obviously they are not fishing in the biggest talent pool,

but there are numbers. Esther McVey has been selling a very difficult

brief in work and pensions, you could see people being given bigger

roles. Helen is pretty sure. We could see people being given bigger

told it is not a Cabinet level reshuffle me it is under Secretary

level, so maybe you could put Esther McVey into the Cabinet. Margot

James, who you had here not that long ago, she is very impressive.

What is impressive is that some long ago, she is very impressive.

like Andrea Leadsom, who is really impressive, worked in the City,

like Andrea Leadsom, who is really smart, really big on important

intervention, she should still be in there, but she fell out with George

Osborne when she dared to criticise him a few years ago over Ed Balls

you are doing it on talent, Andrea expectation, if he does not do this

now, a tonne of bricks will fall on him. He has got no excuse not to

promote women, because the 2010 intake was disproportionately female

women voters is a very deep and historic one. You have to remember

that for most of the post-war period they had an advantage electorally

amongst women voters. Many times Conservative government without

amongst women voters. Many times women of this country. This began to

change in the mid-1990s, and the question is, why has that happened?

personalities at the top are now much more hostile to women, or less,

personalities at the top are now Brent doubled to female voters?

personalities at the top are now is such a deep historical trend

personalities at the top are now I do not think one reshuffle will

change it. -- or less competent civil. The English party conference

season is over, do you share the consensus view that Ed Miliband

season is over, do you share the out best of the three party leaders?

I think I probably do, but his overall approval ratings are still

minus 20, whereas Cameron's minus ten. And the more the recovery seems

minus 20, whereas Cameron's minus to take place, and some of the

latest figures are quite amazing, they certainly surprised me, you

wonder whether Labour's tactic is right to put all their eggs into the

living standards basket. I was looking at car sales, which are

booming. If people start to feel better, and they don't yet, but

booming. If people start to feel they were, it is tougher to go on

about living standards. George Osborne's... You have Ed Miliband

making a great thing about living standards, but then they say under

their breath, this is global forces, will be dealt with, but Miliband's

argument will be that there are people suffering, and even if the

economy recovers, they will still forces, it is difficult to blame the

government for that. Body being noticed now, there is nothing worse

for the leader of the opposition than to be not noticed. -- but he is

being noticed now. It seems that he in many ways has set the political

weather. Look at the number of references to the Labour leader

weather. Look at the number of Mr Cameron's speech. And in Mr

Obama's speech on a similar topic, living standards. Was the mentioning

Ed Miliband?! Oh, he was using the same language, he has not gone that

far. If I were Ed Miliband, I would be more worried now, because Labour

through the kitchen sink at their conference. They came out with the

biggest policy announcements they could, compulsory apprenticeships,

the energy freeze on prices, and it generated a poll boost which has

fizzled away within ten days. I generated a poll boost which has

not know where they go from here. What is significant with Ed Miliband

conference beaches, he has set the one nation Britain, and the problem

with those speeches is people say, they are fine, they are academic,

but what does it mean? What you they are fine, they are academic,

now is an intellectual framework that translates into policies. The

polls to watch are not the ones after the conferences, but at the

end of the month when it has also pulled down. They will tell us where

back tomorrow at noon on BBC Two, we are going. We will have to go

back tomorrow at noon on BBC Two, time, same time, next week. If it is

Sunday, it is the Sunday Politics.