20/10/2013 Sunday Politics Yorkshire and Lincolnshire

Good morning and welcome to The Sunday Politics. Alex Salmond says a

vote for Scottish independence would be an act of national self belief.

His deputy joins us live from the SNP conference in Perth. Is

Whitehall meddling too much in modern affairs? The Communities

Secretary, Eric Pickles, joins me for The Sunday Interview. Senior

coppers will be answering questions this week over

On the Sunday Politics in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire, why Michael

Heseltine as swung to the defence of Northern cities, amid claims they

should be left to decay. Northern cities, amid claims they

have one arm tied behind its back? All of that to come. And the Home

Office minister sacked by Nick Clegg, who says his party is like a

wonky shopping trolley, which keeps veering off to the left. He will

join us live at noon. With me to unpack all of this, Nick Watt, Helen

Lewis and Iain Martin. They will be tweeting throughout the programme,

using hashtag #bbcsp. It is the last day of the Scottish national party

conference in Perth. We have discovered that Alex Salmond has

been on the same diet as Beyonce. The SNP leader compared his attempts

to lose weight with the campaign for independence - lots achieved so far,

20 more to do. In a moment, I will be joined by the deputy leader of

the SNP, Nicola Sturgeon. First they report on the independence

campaign. September 18 2014, the date of destiny for Scotland, the

day when these campaigners hope its people will decide to vote yes for

independence. In a recent poll, only 14% said they knew enough to vote

either way. That is unlikely to change any time soon. I think the

Scottish people will be going to the polls next year still not knowing an

awful lot of stuff which is important, because the outcome, in

terms of taxation, debt, exactly what will happen to the allocation

of assets between the two countries, will come about as a result of

negotiation between a Scottish government and the UK Government.

That is not stuff which will be known year. At the moment, polls

suggest Scotland will decide to remain within the UK. A recent

survey found that 44% of those questioned planned to vote no, 5%

yes. But interestingly, the undecideds were at 31%, suggesting

that Alex Salmond's task might be tough but not impossible. There are

a number of reasons which make a vanilla campaign a good idea. It

does not put off cautious voters, it allows for people to imagine their

own version of what independence will be like, and crucially, it

allows for the yes campaign to take advantage of any mistakes by the no

campaign. In other words, the yes campaign are not out there with big

ideas, they are just waiting for the no campaign to trip up. What we do

know is that whatever happens next September, Scotland will be getting

more power. From 2016, a separate income tax regime will come into

force, giving the Scottish Parliament control over billions of

pounds of revenue. What we do not know yet is how the alternative

would pan out. There are issues which would be raised by

independence, issues about how the national debt is allocated, what the

currency will look like, how an independent Scotland would balance

the books, because it would have a bigger job to do, even down the

Whitehall government has to do. Those are really big issues, which a

Scottish government would have to face, on top of whatever negotiation

it had to have with the UK Government. The Scottish

government's White Paper on independence, two to be published

within weeks, should fill in some of the banks. But how Scotland votes in

September may yet be determined by what it feels rather than what it

knows. And joining me from Perth is Scotland's Deputy First Minister,

Nicola Sturgeon. Nicola Sturgeon, we meet again! Hello, Andrew. Former

leader of the SNP Gordon Wilson said, if this referendum fails, it

will fail on the basis that people put their British identity ahead of

their Scottish identity, so we have got to attack on the British

identity - what does he mean? Gordon Wilson is a very respected, much

loved former leader of the SNP. My view is that I do not think the

independence referendum is really about identity. I am secure and

proud of my Scottish identity, but this is a decision about where power

best lies. Do decision-making powers best lie here in Scotland, with a

government which is directly accountable to the people of

Scotland, or does it best lie in Westminster, with governments which,

very often, people in Scotland do not vote for? That is the issue at

the heart of the campaign. Let me just clarify, you do not agree with

him, that you need to go on the attack with regard to the British

identity of Scottish people? No I do not think we are required to

attack British identity. It is absolutely compatible for somebody

to feel a sense of British identity but still support Scottish

independence, because Scottish independence is about a transfer of

power. It is about good government, accountable government, ensuring

that decisions are taking here in Scotland, by people who have got the

biggest stake in getting those decisions right. I represent a

constituency in the south side of Glasgow, and if you speak to many

people in my constituency, if you ask them their national identity,

many of them would say Irish, Pakistani, Indian, Polish, and many

of them will vote yes next year because they understand the issue at

stake, which is the issue of where decisions are best taken. It looks

like you are changing tack ex-, you have realised the softly softly

approach, of saying that actually, nothing much will change, we will

still have the Queen, the currency, and all the rest of it, is moving

over towards voting for a left-wing future for Scotland... Well, I know

that what we are doing is pointing out is pointing out the choice

between two futures. If we vote yes, we take our own future into our own

hands. We make sure that for ever after, we have governments which

will be in demented policies which we have voted for. If we do not

become independent, then we continue to run the risk of having

governments not only that we do not vote for, but often, that Scotland

rejects. We are seeing the dismantling of our system of social

security. There are politicians in all of the UK parties who are

itching to cut Scotland's share of spending. So Scotland faces a choice

of two futures, and it is right to point out the positive consequences

of voting yes, but also the consequences of voting no. But you

are promising to reverse benefit cuts and increase the minimum wage.

You would renationalise the Royal Mail, though how you would do that

nobody knows. You are promising to cut energy bills. These are the kind

of promises that parties make in a general election campaign, not in a

once in 300 years extra stench or choice. Is the future of Scotland

really going to be decided on the size of the minimum wage? --

existential choice. A yes vote would be about bringing decision-making

powers home, but we are also setting out some of the things an SNP

government would do, if elected A decision on what the first

government of an independent Scotland would be would not be taken

in the referendum, that decision would be taken in the 2016 election.

And all of the parties will put forward their offers to the

electorate. We are setting out some of the things which we think it is

important to be prioritised. These are things which have a lot of

support in Scotland. We see the pain being felt by people because of the

rising cost of energy bills, there is widespread opposition to some of

the welfare cuts. So, we are setting out the options which are open to

Scotland, but only open to Scotland if we have the powers of

independence. Given that you seem to be promising aid permanent socialist

near Varna, if Scotland is independent, if you are right of

centre in Scotland, and I understand that is a minority pursuit where you

are, but it would be a big mistake to vote for independence, in that

case, wouldn't it? No, because the whole point of independence is that

people get the country they want, and the government a vote for. So,

right of centre people should not vote for independence? No, because

people who are of that political persuasion in Scotland get the

opportunity to vote for parties which represent that persuasion and

if they can persuade a majority to vote likewise, then they will get a

government which reflects that. That is the essence of independence.

Right now, we have a Westminster government which most people in

Scotland rejected at the last general election. That is hardly

democratic. It is right and proper that the SNP, as the current

government, points out the opportunities that would be opening

up. Can I just clarify one thing, when we spoke on The Daily Politics

earlier last week, you made it clear to me that Alex Salmond, we know he

wants to debate with David Cameron, but you made it clear to me that he

would debate with Alistair Darling as well, and Mr Carmichael... He

made it clear yesterday. Well, he said to the BBC this morning that he

would only debate with these people after he had had a debate with Mr

Cameron, so who is right? I was making the point last week, and Alex

Salmond was making it yesterday and this morning - let's have that

agreement by David Cameron to come and debate with Alex Salmond, and

then Alex Salmond, just like me will debate with allcomers. So if he

does not get the David Cameron debate, then he will not do the

others, is that right? Let's focus on is wading David Cameron to do the

right thing. So, in other words he will not debate, yes or no? Members

of the SNP government... We know that, but what about Alex Salmond?

He said yesterday, we will debate with all sorts of people, including

the people you have spoken about, but David Cameron should not be let

off the hook just putting aside the independence issue, energy prices

are now even playing into the SNP, so every political party has to do

something about energy prices. Yes, it is clearly it is interesting is

the difference between the SNP and the Labour approach. Ed Miliband

electrified the party conference season when he said he would freeze

energy prices for 20 months, seemingly having an amazing control

over the energy market, where we know that essentially what pushes

prices up the wholesale prices on world market. What Nicola Sturgeon

is talking about is actually saying, this amount is added to your bills

for green levies, and we are going to take them off your bills and they

will be paid out of general taxation in an independent Scotland. That is

a credible government, making a credible case, very different to

what Labour is saying, although playing to the same agenda. So,

Labour has got a populist policy, the SNP has also got a populist

policy, the one group of people that do not have a decent response to

this is the coalition? Exactly. What the SNP also have is a magic money

pot, so that speech yesterday, you are right, it was very left wing,

social democratic, but there was none of the icing like Labour has

been talking about, with fiscal responsibility. I think that is the

difference between the two. We know what the Tories would really like to

do, all of these green levies which were put on our bills in the good

times, when they were going to be the greenest party ever, the Tories

would like to say, let's just wipe out some of them, put the rest on to

some general government spending, but they have a problem, which is in

the Department of Energy and Climate Change. Not only that, they really

are stuck now. But there is something in the free schools debate

this morning, the parties are now determined to send a message to

their potential voters at the next election, that they are trying to

fight their coalition partners. Do not expected any change in coalition

policy or free schools policy before the election, but we can expect to

hear the parties try to pretend that they are taking on their coalition

partners. Mr Clegg has said, we would put this free schools policy

into our manifesto, so is it not possible that the Tories will say,

if you give us an overall majority, we will cut your electricity bill

because we will get rid of these green levies? I think that is

entirely possible. The Tories know that they are stuck on this, they do

not have a response to Ed Miliband. How much should ministers in

Whitehall medal in local decisions across England? In opposition, David

Cameron said he wanted a fundamental shift of power from Whitehall to

local people. He said, when one size fits all solution is...

Eric Pickles described it as "an historic shift of power". But the

Communitites and Local Government Secretary can't stop meddling. In

the past few months Mr Pickles has tried to ban councils from using

CCTV cameras and "spy cars" to fine motorists... Told councils how to

act quicker to shut down illegal travellers' sites... Criticised

councils who want to raise council tax... Insisted councils release

land to residents hoping to build their own property... And stated new

homes should have a special built in bin storage section. It seems not a

week goes by without a policy announcement from the hyper active

Mr Pickles. So is the government still committed to localism, or is

it all about centralism now? And Communities Secretary Eric

Pickles joins me now for the Sunday Interview.

Welcome. Nice to be here. You said in July you were going to give town

halls the power to wreak their local magic. So why issue diktats from

Westminster? It is not about giving power to local councils, it is going

beyond that to local people. If local councils refuse to open up

their books, we have to go straight to local people. You have attacked

councillors using so-called spy cameras to enforce parking rules.

Why is that your business? Because there is an injustice taking place.

You cannot use fines to raise money and that is plainly happening. If

you get yourself a ticket from a CCTV, it could be days or weeks

before that lands on your doorstep and you have virtually no

possibility to be able to defend yourself. But just leave it to

people to vote out the council then. We are trying to enforce the law and

it clearly states that you cannot use parking fines in order to fund

general rate. So why are you not taking them to court if they are

breaking the law? There have been a number of court cases taken by local

residents. I am there to stand by local residents. Your even trying to

micromanage, allowing motorist s to park for 15 minutes in local high

street. Why is that your business? I'm trying to ensure that local

authorities understand the importance of the town centre. If

you look at all opinion polls, right now there is a five-minute leeway

but there are many cases of people being jumped on by parking officials

for quite trivial things. It is about saying, surely I can go and

get a pint of milk. But a party that dines out on localism, that is a

matter for local people, not the men in Whitehall. I have to be on the

side of local people. That person who wants to go and get a pint of

milk. Ultimately it is a matter for them. It is a matter for the

council. But a little bit of criticism is not a bad thing. You

have now declared war on the wheelie bin and suggested that new homes

should have built in storage sections. You just cannot help

meddling! I suppose that is possible. You are a meddler! I am in

charge of building regulations and planning. So I may have some

responsibility there. Another one, interfering in local planning

decisions. A couple of places, you ruled in favour of developers. They

want to build over 200 houses against the wishes of the parish and

district councils. The local MP said the Secretary of State's decision

runs roughshod over any concept of localism. Now I have to be a

blushing violet because of course this is still potentially subject to

judicial review. I have to act properly. And Apple went is entitled

to justice. -- an applicant. A local authority has a duty to ensure that

is adequate housing for people in their area. This was not a decision

that I took as a personal decision, it was on the advice of an

inspector. But you contradict what David Cameron himself said in 2 12,

he spoke about a vision where we give communities much more say and

local control. People in villages fear big housing estates being

plonked from above. You have just done exactly that. After a proper

quasi judicial enquiry. What we have is planning framework which local

people can decide where it goes But they cannot say, nothing here. They

have to have a five-year housing supply. Previous to this government

decided exactly where houses would go, now local people can take the

lead. Anna Silbury said because of the way your department rules, local

authorities now have no alternative but to agree development on green

belt land. I do not accept that I think around Nottingham there are

particular problems with regards to the green belt. The matter has been

referred back. the green belt. The matter has been

want to see development on the green belt but on Brownfield site. We want

to see underused land. But you have to remember why we have the green

belt. Not to remember why we have the green

nice, it is their to prevent conurbations bumping into one

another. Your conurbations bumping into one

is vocal about the need to deal what he calls the historic under

provision of housing. Shelter says we need 250,000 new homes per year.

provision of housing. Shelter says Houston statistics are getting

there, but nowhere near that. - housing. You cannot

there, but nowhere near that. - localism agenda as well as meeting

housing demand. I do not accept that. We inherited a position where

the lowest level of building since the 1920s was in place. But it has

steadily improved. It does take a while. You cannot have a localism

agenda where people call the shots on housing as well as meeting the

housing demand. People have a duty to ensure that future generations

have somewhere to live. You cannot pull up the drawbridge. There is

nothing incompatible between that and localism. Because someone has to

be the voice of those people who are going to live there and to make sure

there is the proper amount. Plans now exist for more than 150,000

homes to be built on protected land, including the green belt. That will

mean riding over local concerns Each application will be taken on

its own merits. To suggest that there is an assault on the green

belt is as far from the truth as you can imagine. Should Andrew Mitchell

get his job back if the years exonerated? I would be honoured to

sit with Andrew Mitchell in the Cabinet. I have always believed his

version. But it is a matter for the Prime Minister who he has in

government. He would have no problem in seeing him back in Cabinet?

Absolutely not. Your mother answered Vulcan junior minister Nick balls

said about the Royal Charter for the press, there's nothing we have done

that troubles me as much as this. Is that your view? It is not. I accept

the compromise agreement put together. If the press want to have

an additional protection that the Royal Charter offers, then they can

move into the system. But if they want to continue independently that

is acceptable to me. But you previously echoed Thomas Jefferson,

you said for a free society to operate the river of a free press

has to flow without restriction That is what I said at the time We

had to find a compromise. And that seems to me to be a better

compromise. Let me just show you this little montage of pictures that

we have. I could not be happier Then you are in the Desert and there

you are in San Francisco. Then you are in the casino. That is my

personal favourite. These students took a cardboard cutout of you and

took it round the world with them. Did you ever think you would become

a student icon? I always felt secretly that that might happen one

day. But it came earlier in my career than I thought! Why would

they do that? I think they thought I could do with a bit of an airing! I

went to Norfolk earlier, but that looks better. Thank you.

On Wednesday senior police folk including chief constables, will be

questioned by MPs about what's become known as Plebgate. That's the

incident in Downing Street last year which led to the resignation of the

government chief whip Andrew Mitchell. Last week the Independent

Police Complaints Commission questioned the "honesty and

integrity" of police officers who met Mr Mitchell following the row.

So do scandals like this affect public trust in the police? Here's

Adam Fleming. It's a story of politics, the

police, and CCTV. No, not Andrew Mitchell, but an MP's researcher

called Alex Bryce and his partner Iain Feis.

It started on a summer night in 2011. They'd been in Parliament

After a few words with a police officer, Ian was wrestled to the

ground. Alex came to have a look and the same thing happened to him. Both

were arrested and charged. These pictures emerged on day one of their

trial. A trial that was halted because the police version of events

just didn't match the footage. A lot of people with incidence like this

which we experienced, people think there is no smoke without fire. So

when we said we did nothing wrong, people would think police just would

not do that. There is always that underlying view that some people

have. I think that has been challenged and people who know us

believe that. This year the Met apologised and paid compensation.

And it's led to an unlikely sort of friendship. When the truth came out

about the Andrew Mitchell story I actually sent him an e-mail to

congratulate him about the truth coming out. He did send a reply

acknowledging that. So where are we with THAT saga? Remember last

September? Andrew Mitchell had a row with police at the gates of Downing

Street about his bike. He lost his job as chief whip after accusations

he called the officers plebs. That, he's always denied. This week the

police watchdog the IPCC suggested that three officers may have lied

about a meeting with him at the height of the scandal. Add that to

the charge sheet of cases that haven't exactly flattered the

police. Like the revelation of a cover up over Hillsborough. The

prosecution of an officer from the Met over the death of Ian Tomlinson

during protests in 2009. Along with news that undercover officers were

told to smear the family of Stephen Lawrence. During Thursday's protest

by teachers in Westminster the police operation was really, really

relaxed. And recent scandals have done nothing to affect society's

view of the boys and girls in blue - or should I say hi-vis. About 6 % of

the public say they trust the police. And that's not budged since

pollsters started measuring it 0 years ago.

Of course, in Britain, crime is down, so the perception might be

that the police is doing a good job. And the rank-and-file recently

seamed pretty chipper at this awards ceremony. Is it a good time to be a

police officer? It is a good time. Despite all of the headlines? Still

a good time. But speak to officers privately, and they say Plebgate is

affecting how the public see them. Some of them also think

politicians, the Tories especially, are enjoying that a little too much.

Adam Fleming reporting there. Going head-to-head on this issue of trust

in the police, a Sunday Mirror columnist and Peter Kirkham, former

chief inspector. Peter Kirkham, let me come to you first. Plebgate, the

cover-ups over John Charles De menace, the death of Ian Tomlinson,

the industrial deception over Hillsborough, why is the culture of

deceit so prevalent in the police? I do not agree there is a cultural

deceit. These are all individual incidents which raise individual

issues. I would suggest that your short headline summarising each of

them has taken the most negative view of it. How can you be positive

about the police's behaviour over Hillsborough? It remains to be seen

with the inquiry but we are probably talking about a handful of senior

officers, dealing with the paperwork. Well over 100 testimonies

being doctored by the police. Well, those testimonies were true to start

with, so the officers have told the truth, and they have been changed

for some reason. By the police. By the police all lawyers we have got

this thing that the police conflates everything. There are 43 forces

there is ACPO, there is the College Of Policing... People say it was a

handful of police officers, it wasn't, it was six senior police

officers who were alleged to have doctored 106 D4 statements. Even

today we are hearing that more than 1000 officers are yet to be spoken

to about Hillsborough. -- 164. Do we pretend that Hillsborough, and some

of these examples, are the exception rather than the rule? What is the

evidence that this is now prevalent in our police? I think there is a

lot of evidence, and Plebgate is probably the thing which has

clinched it. The public want to know, how deep does this girl? The

audacity of a group of policemen who think they can set up a Cabinet

minister. Five of those who were arrested and bailed still have not

been charged. One of those officers actually wrote an e-mail pretending

to be a member of the public. I do not see what the problem is in

prosecuting them for that. Taking Plebgate, there are loads of

different bits of that incident There is the officers on duty in

Downing Street, the issue of who leaked the story to the Sun, there

are the officers who claim to have been there who would appear not to

have been there, and then we have got the West Midlands meeting

issue, which has sort of been resolved this week. There has been

misconduct. But at a lower level. But it is the audacity of an

organisation which thinks it can take on an elected minister and

destroy him for their own political purposes, at a time when the

Government are cutting please pay, when they are freezing their

pensions and reducing their numbers. It looks very much to all of us the

public, that the police are at war with the government, and they are

going to do anything they can to discredit the Government. The police

would have every reason to be at war with the Government, because there

if there is a crisis of trust.. But it looks like they fitted up a

Cabinet minister. That remains to be seen, it is being investigated. We

know that those Birmingham officers, they totally misrepresented to, if

not lied outright, about what was said. Again, that is a

misrepresentation of what happened. If you actually go and look at what

is said, it is plain from the context, they were saying, he has

told us nothing new. But he had in the transcript, it said he hadn't.

He would not admit he had used the word pleb. He apologised profusely,

he said it would never happen again, he said many things that he had not

said before. I agree, which is presumably... Thereon many police

forces in this country, they have one of the toughest jobs in the

land, they end up getting involved in almost anything which happens in

society, and there are obviously a number of difficult examples, but

what is the evidence that it is out of hand, other than just several bad

apples? This bad apples argument, we have some amazing police people,

thank God, but it is because of those that we have to root out the

bad ones, the ones that are possibly corrupt. From where most of us are

standing, the ones who are being accused of being corrupt, there does

not seem to be any process to deal with these people. The trouble with

a rotten apple is that it spreads. It is not fair on the good cops to

be tainted by this, and I think the police force, as an institution...

For all of us, we have to respect the police. There is a problem, is

there not? People do worry that if you can fit up a Cabinet minister,

you can fit up anybody... . I would disagree that anybody has proved

that anybody has been fitted up. We are yet to hear what happened at the

gates of Downing Street. But what we do know about the gates of Downing

Street is that we were told by the police officers that passers-by had

heard this incredible row, where Mitchell's file went was bullied.

That is not true... . They did not use those words, actually. All

right, but it is clear that the Police Federation jumped on this as

a politically motivated campaign... I have always said that politics

should be kept out of policing. The federation, they cannot go on

strike, but this was to covertly political, so I criticise them for

that. Do we need a better way of monitoring the police? We need a

more competent and properly resourced Independent police

commission. But if you look at those Bravery Awards, every police

officer, every year, who acts with bravery... That is the police force

we want to believe in. That is the police force you have got. We will

leave it there. Coming up in just over 20 minutes, I will be speaking

to former Lib Minister Jeremy Browne. And in The Week Ahead,

Hello, you're watching the Sunday Politics for Yorkshire, Lincolnshire

and the North Midlands. Coming up today: Can we continue to protect

our green belt, amid pressure to build thousands of new homes?

And why the man they used to call Tarzan has swung to the defence of

Northern towns and cities, after claims they should be left to decay.

We'll be discussing the regeneration game in a moment, with our guests `

it's nice to see them, to see them, nice. Toby Perkins is the Labour MP

for Chesterfield and Shadow Small Business Minister, and Stuart Andrew

is the Conservative MP for Pudsey. Welcome to you both. Well, we've had

falling unemployment this week, thousands of new jobs created we are

told, Toby Perkins ` has this been a good week for our economy? Well, I

think it's obviously great news when we see unemployment going down. But

what there's a real sense at the moment is that it's a recovery for

some ` we're seeing huge growth in London and the South East, but

beneath those job figures what we're also seeing is a huge amount of

underemployment, lots of people in part`time work that want to be in

full`time work, and a lot of people who are in work but also in poverty,

so there is a real sense that the general public are being left behind

by some of the good news that the country's seeing. Stuart Andrew,

what are you saying to your constituents who come to you and

say, "We can't afford our gas and electric bills now, they've gone up

so much? What's the Government doing about it?" Well, the first thing we

have to do is get the economy repaired, and that has taken a

considerable amount of time and a lot of effort of course, because it

was in a terrible State when we inherited it. And the fact is that

there are as you say over a million new private sector jobs have been

created, unemployment is falling, that is good ` but we've got a long

way to go, get the economy right and then we can help with the cost of

living. Well, we'll chat more in a moment

because I want you both to ponder this question. Should the Government

spending taps be turned off in areas which are deemed to be beyond hope?

That was the controversial suggestion in a magazine this week

which listed a number of Northern towns and cities described as

"decaying". There's been an outcry in Hull, one of the places mentioned

in the Economist article. Now the former Deputy Prime Minister has

entered the debate ` he says cities like Hull can learn from Liverpool,

where he led a programme of economic regeneration in the 1980s.

With its waterfront, dogs and industrial heritage, Liverpool has

much in common with Harle, its fellow maritime city at the other

end of the M 62. Many people here will look at

Liverpool with some envy. In recent years it has had some's one of the

fastest`growing economies in the UK, so it's hard to imagine that just

over 30 years there was talk in Government of abandoning the city.

Archive documents reveal that following riots in Liverpool in

1981, the then Chancellor, Geoffrey Howe, suggested a pro`dash back

programme of managed decline. There was an echo of that era in the

latest edition of the Economist, an article suggested that the

Government should not pour any more money into so`called failing cities

such as Tab Micro `` Hull. For a lot time Government has put effort into

trying to move jobs were the people are, and it has not really work. We

have still seen these predicted `` persistent divides, in Hull 27% of

households have nobody in work. Former Liverpool MP and Labour

Minister Peter Kilfoyle says he has heard that argument before, and

claims it has been proved wrong. We had a think tank a few years ago,

saying places in the North should be abandoned and everybody moved down

to London and Oxford. This is nonsense. Any forward`looking

Government, any forward`looking society, would want to invest in

Hull as they invest in Liverpool. Does that come a point where the

Government has to stop spending money on a city if there are no

results. Any Government that says that has to ask themselves, why have

they not put the results they set out to obtain? Part of the reason is

that so much in this country is concentrated in the South East. We

cannot continue with everything being emphasised in the South East

at the cost of the rest of the country. All that means is you have

an affordable transport costs in the South East, unaffordable housing

costs. Now the man who was credited with turning Liverpool's fortunes

around back in the 1980s has entered the debate. Lord Heseltine has been

commissioned by the present Government to look at ways of

boosting economic growth in cities like Hull. The former Deputy Prime

Minister says the solution is devolving more power away from

London. What I am arguing and have been trying to show over decades is

that you would be much better off saying what would you do if you

originated the idea is, because you actually know what Leeds needs, what

Bradford needs, what Hull needs. Let us that the other way up. The first

thing is to find out who is in charge, that is why I believe in

directly elected chief executives. Everybody knows about London and

Boris Johnson. Ministers have dismissed talk of struggling

Northern cities being abandoned by Government, a move which would be

sure to make waves from the Humber to the Mersey. Mueller is there ever

an economic argument for the Government's pulling up like a city

scene is failing? I would not advocate that. I am in

complete agreement with Lord Heseltine, that we need to give the

power to those towns and cities because the people who live there

understand it and know what will work to help regenerate the

economy. It has worked in places like Liverpool. Here in Leeds we

have a fantastic city. There is a danger that you will portray the

North is being a wasteland of cities and towns, but there are lots of

great economic activities going on. We need the leadership in place that

Lord Heseltine mentions. But why have so many of our northern cities

been left behind? Anna what we are seeing at the moment is an increase

in the North`South divide. Recently we had a programme to rebuild the

infrastructure and get economic growth going. The two areas that got

the most were London and the south`east. Humber got less than

Dorset, Oxfordshire, Thames Valley and Berkshire. The local authority

cuts are following most strongly in areas in the north. So what we are

seeing is the rhetoric of the Government not being backed up by

the reality of where the money is going.

This North`South divide has. Just happened. They were in Government

over the last 13 years, and the divide got very wide. There is

massive investment happening in our infrastructure projects. The

northern hop on the railways will make a huge difference in connecting

our towns and cities. We are investing in road infrastructure as

well, and the regional growth fund is bringing in billions of pounds of

extra private investment. This is what we need to create the jobs here

to get rid of that divide. What we actually saw over 13 years of Labour

Government was a renaissance in Arab British cities. We saw areas that

have been so badly let go of by British `` Mrs Thatcher's Government

started regenerate. Over the last three years we have seen a reversal

of that where the cuts that came into Leeds, and an increase in

London and the south`east. At nation Prime Minister. `` two nation Prime

Minister. Michael Heseltine says he wants at mini`Boris in towns in the

north. In Doncaster they rejected that. I thought that was a good

idea, to have somebody who is a figurehead for our major cities. It

has worked well in London as he said. But there was a referendum,

the people made their decision and we have to abide by that. Would you

like more elected mayors? We were originally supportive of the idea,

but the most important thing is you go to local democracy and see what

people want. It is clear that in most of the areas they did not want

an elected mayor, so that is up to the to decide. Peter Kilfoyle do you

think too much of our power is centred on London? I I am keen to

see more power devolved down to local authorities.

When you go to Whitehall and see thousands of people churning out of

those offices at lunchtime, surely some of those people could be

working on both? Yes, there should be more of those Government

departments moving up here. I am all for devolving power, but it does not

tally with a Government that has had the biggest cuts of all the

departments. They are saying to council leaders up and down the

north, you make the tough decisions, and you have to decide whether to

shut the library or cut back on social services. So the rhetoric

about devolving the power to local Government doesn't match up with

cutting the findings. Most of these people who come up with the clearest

look about 12. Theories. This is why politics needs people from all

different backgrounds. Now, we're told frequently by

politicians we live on a crowded island. They will also tell us there

is a serious housing shortage. Those same politicians might also in the

same breath agree we have to protect the green belt. So how do we square

that circle? Is it time to change how we decide where hundreds of

thousands of houses should be built in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire over

the next 25 years? Here's Louise Martin.

Here are the numbers of houses proposed for possible building over

the next two decades across Yorkshire and Lincolnshire, some of

which will be built on green belt. England's green and pleasant lands

have been immortalised in song and portrait, but campaigners say those

lands are now under threat by new homes. Hilary Benn spoke to

concerned residents in Aireborough. They are not happy about a

consultation that may seem `` would see homes built on green belt.

Planning is so important because it allows communities to say, not

here, but here. One of the first neighbourhood plans in the country

that has gone to a referendum in Oxfordshire is proposing building

775 new homes in the area. I think three quarters of the people who

came out to vote voted in favour of the plan. Why did they do that?

Because they had had the chance to shape whether new development is

going to go. This field is one of many that Leeds City Council looked

at during their consultation for development proposals. And it is

green belt. But with up to 70,000 homes that could be built in the

city region, and the planning minister saying the green belt is

safe for now, locals are worried. Francesco's home backs onto this

land. She is concerned if they build here, it will have a big impact on

infrastructure. I think more local people need to say, the a 65 is not

moving already. Is it really a good idea to put more houses here? So I

think as a community we need to work together. So with an increasing push

to build as more homes are needed across the region, residents are not

happy about the level of involvement they are being given on decisions.

They want to be allowed to suggest areas were building can take place.

That idea is being backed by a local `` leading think tank. People want

to know that if they say yes to some homes now, they will have control

over what they look like. It will not be decided by someone from the

council or from London. Policy exchange say that planning powers

need to be spread far and wide. So if we are going to increase ``

address the housing shortage, do we need to rip it all up and start

again? New life `` we are going to have to make some difficult

decisions, which will mean birdie on the green belt.

It will certainly mean serious decisions. We are needing `` the

last time we had a housing crisis of this size was because of Adolf

Hitler and the Luftwaffe. The Labour Party have said if private

developers do not sit `` last night we will allow councils to go to them

and say either use this land or you use `` lose it. That would get us to

was the level of house building we need. Stuart, you represent a leafy

rather suburban constituency which has a lot of new houses planned over

the next couple of years. How do you square the circle between the need

for new houses in protecting the green belt? I was a councillor for

that area in the film for a number of years. They have had their fair

share of building in fairness. Every bit of Brownfield site has been used

for housing. The problem is that the housing figures projected for the

next 14 years certainly here by Leeds City Council are totally

unrealistic. Never before has the city ever built that number of

houses. So I am saying the City Council themselves are saying it is

highly ambitious... So people should not be living in these? No, let us

build more houses but let us be realistic so we are saying to the

developers to use a brown field sites first, and then we will

release step`by`step and slowly, the green belt sites. At the moment the

way we are going, we will be in real danger of releasing far too much

green belt sites. Do people want to live on Brownfield sites? People

want to live next to green fields with trees. Demand is always a key

issue. But what we are seeing at the moment is big housing companies

buying up pieces of land, land banking, waiting for the value of

that land to go up... Ed Miliband is going to nationalise it. No, we will

give councils the opportunity to put escalating fees and people sitting

there with planning permission, and eventually we will clean up the

comprehensive `` compulsory purchase orders to allow councils to take

hold of that land and get something done. But you either have to support

what we are saying and that, by getting them to build on green belt.

We have 2 million too few houses at the moment. I will not be lectured

by the Labour Party that created the planning problems that most of my

constituents have had for the last ten years. I am saying that I do not

agree with you, I do not agree that people do not want to live in those

areas. What we have to do is create the places where people want to

live. In Aireborough, there is a neighbourhood Forum group that have

done excellent work and work with the community to decide what it is

`` where people want to live? . People want to live. Too often we do

not think about where people are going to work or go to school. The

planning system needs reforming. The planning system `` the planning

minister says it was up to your Government to uphold the Thatcherite

ideal of suburban home ownership. I am not saying you will get them to

live on a Brownfield site, I am saying you regenerate them so it is

an attractive place to live. Nick and I have had many arguments in

Parliament because this is an issue that I know is impacting on my

constituency, and I am determined to stand up for those people who are

doing some enormous workfare to try and defend what are actually very

important open green spaces. The reality of this is that we have a

plan that will make a difference, and the Tory Government have either

got do what Nick said, leave it to the market, restrict the ability of

local authorities to put planning restrictions are away, you support

our plans. At the moment what I am hearing is not giving a solution in

either direction. No, 74,000 houses... You never did it in the

height of the property boom. In the macro the housing crisis has never

been as bad. It has not just started. It is disingenuous of you

to suggest that an wholly unrealistic. We have got to build

more houses, but let us be realistic and not rape the countryside at the

same time. Let's move on now and get more of

the week's political news ` Len Tingle has our round`up in 60

Seconds. Few can silence a normally rowdy

Prime Minister's Question Time, but Dennis Skinner's passion did just

that this week. He told MPs how medical assessors had said a

cancer`stricken Bolsover man was fit for work, and cut his benefit. He

died 11 months later, still waiting for his appeal to be heard. Abolish

this cruel, heartless monster called Atos. Get rid of it.

Hull man John Hurst says he'll continue his long campaign to get

Government to give prisoners the right to vote ` that's despite the

UK's Supreme Court throwing out an appeal by two other prisoners this

week. Former Shadow Home Secretary David Davis has no doubt how MPs

would vote. No votes for any prisoners. Other than for those

already on remand. And outspoken MEP Godfrey Bloom

launched his autobiography ` and revealed he's had a few interesting

offers. I've been asked to do Strictly Come Dancing, I'm a

Celebrity ` all sorts of things. Sadly, he's turning them all down.

What a great shame. What would you rather see, Godfrey Bloom doing the

tango or him eating bugs in the jungle? Good question. I think

eating bugs in the jungle. I'm not going to comment. I hear he's very

light on his feet. Dennis Skinner, your neighbouring MP, made that

passionate comment in the Commons earlier in the week. But those cases

involving ATOS, the assessment company, they're in a minority

aren't they? Well, of course the majority don't drop dead a few

seconds after Atos have found them fit to work, but exactly the same

thing has happened on two occasions in my constituency, I've been

speaking on your programme previously about that. The reality

is far too often I see people in my surgeries who clearly are not fit to

work, the system clearly isn't working, and it's really putting

people, particularly some of those with serious mental health problems,

through even more difficulties on top of the medical difficulties

they're facing already. The system's broken, it needs reforming. And you

must have had cases in your postbag about this, Stuart Andrew. I have

indeed, and each time I've made sure that I've gone as high as I can to

get that resolved. If it isn't a perfect system, it's much improved

from what it was when it first started, but we have got to get it

right. At the end of the day what we do need to do though is have a

system in place that helps people back into work if they can work `

but rightly, if they can't work then it is ludicrous to expect them to

come back again. . OK. Are we going to see prisoners getting the vote?

Not if it was up to me, I'm not a supporter of that. I think there's

certain rights that you lose at the point that you go to prison and I

think that should be one of them. I think there's numerous practical

difficulties but I think there's also a moral difficulty, so for me

I'm a no. And it's going to cost the Government millions if it doesn't

comply with a European Court ruling, isn't it? Well, potentially. But I

think what has been excellent this week is the Attorney`General has

done a superb job at the Supreme Court. He got all the judges to back

the case that he put forward. And Toby's exactly right ` if you've

committed a crime that means you have to go to prison, then why

should you then have a say in who runs that society that you did so

much damage to? It's just not on, it's not fair. Right. Eagle`eyed

viewers at the beginning of the programme might have seen your

introduction caption, Stuart, let's look at this again if we can. Is

that really where you were born? Can you give us a pronunciation? I can

indeed, it's Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndro`

bwllllantysiliogogogoch. Fancy having a go at that, Toby? Well, I

didn't even know he was Polish. I'm sure there'll be a welcome in

the hillside for both of you. Thank you both for joining us on the

Sunday Politics in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire. So many thanks, Toby

Perkins and Stuart Andrew, and with that we'll go back to Andrew Neil in

London. that we'll go back to Andrew Neil in

which links in with this. Thank you to both of you for being my guests

today. Are the Lib Dems like a wonky

shopping trolley? Why is Nick Clegg kicking off over free schools? And

what about Boris and George's love bombing of China? All questions for

The Week Ahead. We are joined now by the former Home Office minister and

Liberal Democrat MP Jeremy Browne. Jeremy Browne, let me ask you this

key question - ??GAPNEXT who is in the ascendancy in your party, those

who would fear to the left, or those who would fear to the centre? The

point I was making in the interview that I gave to the times was that I

want us to be unambiguously and on up genetically -- and

unapologetically a Liberal party. I do not want us to be craving the

approval of columnists like Polly Toynbee. I do not want us to be a

pale imitation of the Labour Party. I think we should be proud and

unambiguously a authentic Liberal party. That is my ambition for the

party. If it is, as you put it, fearing to the left, then I think

that is a mistake, I think we should be on the liberal centre ground But

is it actually veering to the left, your party? I think there is a

danger when a party, or any organisation, feels that it is in a

difficult position, to look inwards, to look for reassuring

familiar policy positions. I do not want us to be the party which looks

inwards and speaks to the 9% of people who are minded to support us

already. I want us to look outwards and speak to the 91% of the

population, for whom I think we have got a good story to tell about the

contribution we have made to getting the deficit down, cutting crime

keeping interest rates low, and also, distinctive Liberal Democrat

policies for example on income tax and pupil premiums. If we look like

we are a party which is uneasy and ambivalent about our role in

government, people will not give us credit for the successes of the

government, and we will not be able to claim the authorship which we

should be able to claim for our policies excesses in government I

want us to be confident, outward looking, and authentically liberal.

If we are that, people real sense that and they will respond

positively. Does that not therefore make it rather strange that Nick

Craig should choose to distance himself from the coalition's schools

policy? Well, I support free schools, I think they are a liberal

policy. Education is a fascinating area, so let's explore it a bit We

have had two very significant and troubling reports in the last

fortnight, one from Alan Milburn, saying that social mobility has

stalled in this country, in other words, what your parents do is a

reliable guide to how you will get on in life and the other saying that

Britain lags behind our competitors, the other

industrialised countries, in terms of the educational attainment of

15-year-olds. Both of those are worrying. We have a scandalous

situation in this country where two thirds of children from

disadvantaged backgrounds are failing to get five Grade A to Grade

C. Some get none at all. If we were the world leaders in education, we

could have an interesting conversation about how we are able

to maintain that position, but we are not. Whether there are good

things one less good things which have happened in our schools over

the last 30-40 years, we really need to raise our game and stop letting

young people down who need a good quality education in order to

realise their full potential in life. It sounds like you do not

share Mr Clegg's designations? I think there are two big dangers for

us as a party. I do not think we should be instinctively statist and

I do not think either we should be instinctively in favour of the

status quo. I want us to have a restless, radical, energetic,

liberal reforming instinct, which is about putting more power and

responsible at the end opportunity in the hands of individual people.

As I say, we look at the education system, of course there are good

teachers and good outcomes in some schools and for some pupils,

overall, our performance in this country is not good enough, so the

status quo has not been a successful stop I am interested in how we can

innovate. -- has not been a success. Are the Tories wooing you? Well I

do not know if that is the right word, I have been reported, and I

have set myself, that the Conservatives have, if you like

made some advances or generous suggestions to me, but I am a

liberal, and I am a Liberal Democrat. I have been a member of

the Lib Dems since the party was founded, I joined when I was 18

years old. I have campaigned tirelessly for the Liberal Democrats

for my entire adult life, so I am not about to go and join another

political party. I would turn this on its head, let me put it like

this, I think there are quite a few liberals in the other political

parties, people like Alan Milburn, who wrote a report on social

mobility, people like Nick Bowles in the Conservative Party. Our

ambition, as Liberal Democrats, should be to attract liberals from

other political parties, and no political party, to the Lib Dems.

Just briefly, have you suggested that the Tories do not run a

candidate against you in the next election? I have not suggested

anything of the sort. The Conservatives have to make their own

decisions about which candidates they select, and I will take on

whoever is select it from each of the political parties. Thank you for

joining us. There is a danger not from Jeremy Browne, but from Mr

Clegg, in that, having been part of a coalition which has gone through

an enormous squeeze in living standards for three years, it did

not look like both was coming, it was being regarded overall as a

failure, but now, it may be turning the corner, so why would you then

start to disassociate yourself from the coalition's policies? Yes, the

danger for Nick Clegg is that he makes the Liberal Democrats looked

like visitors in a guesthouse, a guesthouse which is owned by the

Conservatives. As you say, they were there for the three difficult years,

and just at the moment when the economy seems to be coming right,

and we are getting some nice growth, they seek to distance themselves. It

is interesting that Jeremy Browne came out with the outrageously

disloyal statement that he supported free schools statement. That is a

disloyal Liberal Democrat view, but on Thursday, of course, the Liberal

Democrat party was in favour of free schools, because in that statement

about the Al-Madinah school, David Laws made a passionate defence about

what Nick Clegg is now criticising, which is having on qualified

teachers. If things are now coming right, the big risk for the Liberal

Democrats always was that they would not get the credit anyway. Well if

they diss associate themselves like this, they definitely will not get

the credit. It depends which voters their opinion poll ratings are dire,

he spoke about 9%, and sometimes it is less than that. So, where are

they going to get those voters from? They have not got those

anti-Iraq war voters. Is it not Mission impossible, getting Labour

voters test surely the left of the Lib Dem vote is peeling off towards

labour, not away from Labour? I wonder to what extent, and this

might be speculation, this might be organised and arranged, that Cameron

and Clegg both understand that they have groups of voters that they need

to get, so they need to send messages out to different groups, it

looks like a bit of a setup to me. Boris in China, along with boy

George - let's have a look... Who, according to JK Rowling, was Harry

Potter's first girlfriend? That s right, and she is Chinese overseas

student, is that not right at Hogwarts? Actually, we are not sure

it is right, she is actually from Scotland. It is not only London

which has a diverse society. Putting that to one side, we are inviting

the Chinese into finance our power stations, to run big banks in the

cities, we are giving out more visas to them, are we right to embrace the

Dragon? What worries me about the power stations then, it is 30% of

investment, and it reminds me a lot of PFI, the idea that you do not

want a huge investment on your balance sheet, but if somebody bails

out halfway through, we cannot stop with a half finished power station.

It is EDF, the French company, which will actually build it, and we will

be guaranteeing the debt for them. It is extraordinary that there has

been so little adverse comment after George Osborne and Boris's trip to

China, and is it now really the UK Government policy, to sell Britain

to the Chinese? There was a debate in government about this, as they

were getting ready for the trip and there will be at some point in the

next six months be a David Cameron trip to China. He has had to wait

three years because they were annoyed about him meeting the Dalai

llama. There were some people in the Foreign Office who were saying,

fine, but tread carefully. George Osborne's view is absolutely not,

get in there, I do not care about any of these problems, get stuck

in. I think he is storing up five years since the financial crisis,

Chinese banks are being given a special, light touch regulatory

regime. What could possibly go wrong?! There is lots to see. Energy

prices have continued to dominate this week. We have got the EDF deal,

whereby we are going to be giving them twice the market rate for their

energy. But for the coalition, all eyes are on the GDP figures. The

expectation and hope is that the recovery will be stronger than the

figures have suggested so far, on which basis it can influence the

result of the next general election. The chief economist at the

Bank of England was saying on Twitter last week that the Bank of

England may now bring forward the assessment when it says, maybe we

are going to have to change monetary policy, if unemployment goes below

7%. And we know what that means interest rates. The Bank of England

on Twitter! That is it for today. The Daily Politics is back tomorrow

on BBC Two. I will be back with prime Minster 's questions on

Wednesday, and of course, we will be back at 11 o'clock on BBC One next

Sunday.