27/10/2013

:00:37. > :00:41.Morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. Hope you enjoyed

:00:42. > :00:46.the extra hour in bed, and that you've realised it's not 12:45. It's

:00:47. > :00:49.11:45! It's getting stormy outside. But they're already battening down

:00:50. > :00:51.the hatches at Number Ten because coalition splits are back, with

:00:52. > :00:57.bust-ups over free schools and power bills. We'll speak to the Lib Dems,

:00:58. > :01:01.and ask Labour who's conning whom over energy.

:01:02. > :01:04.EU leaders have been meeting in Brussels. But how's David Cameron

:01:05. > :01:14.getting on with that plan to change our relationship with Europe? We

:01:15. > :01:18.were there to ask him. Have we got any powers back yet? DS!

:01:19. > :01:19.Foreign companies own everything from our energy companies to our

:01:20. > :01:44.railways. Does it matter who investment in buses not keeping

:01:45. > :01:46.pace? And with me, three journalists

:01:47. > :01:49.who've bravely agreed to hunker down in the studio while Britain braces

:01:50. > :01:52.itself for massive storm winds, tweeting their political forecasts

:01:53. > :02:00.with all the accuracy of Michael Fish on hurricane watch. Helen

:02:01. > :02:02.Lewis, Janan Ganesh and Nick Watt. Now, sometimes coalition splits are

:02:03. > :02:07.over-egged, or dare we say even occasionally stage-managed. But this

:02:08. > :02:10.week, we've seen what looks like the genuine article. It turns out Nick

:02:11. > :02:14.Clegg has his doubts about the coalition's flagship free schools

:02:15. > :02:17.policy. David Cameron doesn't much like the green levies on our energy

:02:18. > :02:20.bills championed by the Lib Dems. Neither of them seems to have

:02:21. > :02:25.bothered to tell the other that they had their doubts. Who better to

:02:26. > :02:35.discuss these flare-ups than Lib Dem Deputy Leader Simon Hughes? He joins

:02:36. > :02:39.me now. Welcome. Good morning. The Lib Dems spent three years of

:02:40. > :02:43.sticking up for the coalition when times were grim. Explain to me the

:02:44. > :02:49.logic of splitting from them when times look better. We will stick

:02:50. > :02:53.with it for five years. It is working arrangement, but not

:02:54. > :02:57.surprisingly, where there right areas on which we disagree over

:02:58. > :03:01.where to go next, we will stand up. It is going to be hard enough for

:03:02. > :03:07.the Lib Dems to get any credit for the recovery, what ever it is. It

:03:08. > :03:10.will be even harder if you seem to be semidetached and picky. The

:03:11. > :03:15.coalition has led on economic policy, some of which were entirely

:03:16. > :03:20.from our stable. The one you have heard about most often, a Lib Dem

:03:21. > :03:25.initiative, was to take people on blowing comes out of tax. The

:03:26. > :03:29.recovery would not have happened, there would not have been confidence

:03:30. > :03:34.in Britain, had there not been a coalition government with us in it,

:03:35. > :03:38.making sure the same policies produced fair outcomes. We are not

:03:39. > :03:43.going to leave the credit for any growth - and there has been very

:03:44. > :03:48.good news this week. We have played a part in that, and without us, it

:03:49. > :03:52.would not have happened. Does it not underline the trust problem you

:03:53. > :03:57.have? You promised to abolish tuition fees. You oppose nuclear

:03:58. > :04:03.power, now you are cheerleading the first multi-billion pounds

:04:04. > :04:08.investment in nuclear generation. You are dying out on your enthusiasm

:04:09. > :04:12.on green levies, and now they are up for renegotiation. Why should we

:04:13. > :04:20.trust a word you say? In relation to green levies, as you well know, just

:04:21. > :04:28.under 10% is to do with helping energy and helping people. Unless

:04:29. > :04:31.there is continuing investment in renewables, we will not have the

:04:32. > :04:37.British produced energy at cheaper cost to keep those bills down in the

:04:38. > :04:46.future. At cheaper cost? Explain that to me. Off-shore energy is

:04:47. > :04:50.twice the market rate. The costs of renewables will increasingly come

:04:51. > :04:55.down. We have fantastic capacity to produce the energy and deliver lots

:04:56. > :05:00.of jobs in the process. The parts of the energy bill that may be up for

:05:01. > :05:04.renegotiation seems to be the part where we subsidise to help either

:05:05. > :05:11.poor people pay less, or where we do other things. Too insulated the

:05:12. > :05:16.homes? Are you up to putting that to general taxation? Wouldn't that be

:05:17. > :05:20.progressive? I would. It would be progressive. I would like to do for

:05:21. > :05:24.energy bills what the Chancellor has done for road traffic users,

:05:25. > :05:31.drivers, which is too fuelled motor fuel -- to freeze new to fall. That

:05:32. > :05:35.would mean there would be an immediate relief this year, not

:05:36. > :05:40.waiting for the election. So there is a deal to be done there? Yes We

:05:41. > :05:44.understand we have to take the burden off the consumer, and also

:05:45. > :05:48.deal with the energy companies, who look as if they are not paying all

:05:49. > :05:51.the tax they should be, and the regulator, which doesn't regulate

:05:52. > :05:56.quickly enough to deal with the issues coming down the track. We can

:05:57. > :06:00.toughen the regulator, and I hope that the Chancellor, in the Autumn

:06:01. > :06:04.statement, was signalled that energy companies will not be allowed to get

:06:05. > :06:11.away with not paying the taxes they should. And this deal will allow

:06:12. > :06:16.energy prices to come down? Yes How could David Laws, one of your

:06:17. > :06:21.ministers, proudly defend the record of unqualified teachers working in

:06:22. > :06:26.free schools, and then stand side-by-side with Mr Clegg, as he

:06:27. > :06:30.says he is against them? David Laws was not proudly defending the fact

:06:31. > :06:35.that it is unqualified teachers He said that some of the new,

:06:36. > :06:42.unqualified teachers in free schools are doing a superb job. But you want

:06:43. > :06:45.to get rid of them? We want to make sure that everybody coming into a

:06:46. > :06:52.free school ends up being qualified. Ends up? Goes through a process that

:06:53. > :06:55.means they have qualifications. Just as we said very clearly at the last

:06:56. > :07:01.election that the manifesto curriculum in free schools should be

:07:02. > :07:07.the same as other schools. It looks like Mr Clegg is picking a fight

:07:08. > :07:11.just for the sake of it. Mr Clegg was taught by people who didn't have

:07:12. > :07:15.teaching qualifications in one of the greatest schools in the land, if

:07:16. > :07:21.not the world. It didn't seem to do him any harm. What is the problem?

:07:22. > :07:28.If you pay to go to a school, you know what you're getting. But that

:07:29. > :07:32.is what a free school is. No, you don't pay fees. A free school is

:07:33. > :07:36.parents taking the decisions, not you, the politicians. We believe

:07:37. > :07:40.they would expect to guarantee is, firstly that the minimum curriculum

:07:41. > :07:45.taught across the country is taught in the free schools, and secondly,

:07:46. > :07:48.that the teachers there are qualified. Someone who send their

:07:49. > :07:55.kids to private schools took a decision to take -- to send their

:07:56. > :08:00.children there, even if the teachers were unqualified, because they are

:08:01. > :08:06.experts in their field. Someone who send their kids to free schools is

:08:07. > :08:11.because -- is their decision, not yours. Because some of the free

:08:12. > :08:15.schools are new, and have never been there before, parents need a

:08:16. > :08:22.guarantee that there are some basics in place, whatever sort of school.

:08:23. > :08:26.So they need you to hold their hand? It is not about holding hands, it is

:08:27. > :08:30.about having a minimum guarantee. Our party made clear at our

:08:31. > :08:35.conference that this is a priority for us. Nick Clegg reflects the view

:08:36. > :08:38.of the party, and I believe it is an entirely rational thing to do. Nick

:08:39. > :08:45.Clegg complained that the Prime Minister gave him only 30 minutes

:08:46. > :08:51.notice on the Prime Minister Buzz 's U-turn on green levies. That is

:08:52. > :08:55.almost as little time as Nick Clegg gave the Prime Minister on his

:08:56. > :09:04.U-turn on free schools. Aren't you supposed to be partners? Green

:09:05. > :09:06.levies were under discussion in the ministerial group before Wednesday,

:09:07. > :09:11.because we identified this as an issue. We do that in a practical

:09:12. > :09:18.way. Sometimes there is only half an hour's notice. We had even less than

:09:19. > :09:24.half an hour this morning! Simon Hughes, thank you.

:09:25. > :09:29.So the price of energy is the big battle ground in politics at the

:09:30. > :09:34.moment. 72% of people say that high bills will influence the way they

:09:35. > :09:37.vote at the next election. Ed Miliband has promised a price freeze

:09:38. > :09:44.after the next election, but will the coalition turned the tables on

:09:45. > :09:53.Labour, with its proposal to roll back green levies. Caroline Flint

:09:54. > :09:59.joins us from Sheffield. It looks like the coalition will be able to

:10:00. > :10:04.take ?50 of energy bills, by removing green levies. It is quite

:10:05. > :10:07.clear that different parts of the government are running round waking

:10:08. > :10:11.up to the fact that the public feel that this government has not done

:10:12. > :10:16.enough to listen to their concerns. Last week, there was a classic case

:10:17. > :10:20.of the Prime Minister making up policy literally at the dispatch

:10:21. > :10:24.box. Let's see what they say in the autumn statement. The truth is,

:10:25. > :10:29.whatever the debate around green levies, and I have always said we

:10:30. > :10:47.should look at value for money at those green levies. Our argument is

:10:48. > :10:49.about acknowledging there is something wrong with the way the

:10:50. > :10:52.market works, and the way those companies are regulated. Behind our

:10:53. > :10:54.freeze for 20 months is a package of proposals to reform this market I

:10:55. > :10:57.understand that, but you cannot tell as the details about that. I can.

:10:58. > :11:00.You cannot give us the details about reforming the market. We are going

:11:01. > :11:04.to do three things, and I think I said this last time I was on the

:11:05. > :11:07.programme. First, we are going to separate out the generation side

:11:08. > :11:15.from the supply side within the big six. Secondly, we will have a energy

:11:16. > :11:20.pool, or power exchange, where all energy will have to be traded in

:11:21. > :11:23.that pool. Thirdly, we will establish a tougher regulator,

:11:24. > :11:29.because Ofgem is increasingly being seen as not doing the job right I

:11:30. > :11:34.notice that you didn't mention any reform of the current green and

:11:35. > :11:40.social taxes on the energy bill Is it Labour's policy to maintain the

:11:41. > :11:44.existing green levies? In 2011, the government chose to get rid of warm

:11:45. > :11:49.front, which was the publicly funded through tracks a scheme to support

:11:50. > :11:54.new installation. When they got rid of that, it was the first time we

:11:55. > :12:00.had a government since the 70s that didn't have such a policy. What is

:12:01. > :12:05.your policy? We voted against that because we believe it is wrong. We

:12:06. > :12:15.believe that the eco-scheme, a government intervention which is ?47

:12:16. > :12:18.of the ?112 on our bills each year, is expensive, bureaucratic and isn't

:12:19. > :12:22.going to the fuel poor. I am up for a debate on these issues. I am up

:12:23. > :12:26.for a discussion on what the government should do and what these

:12:27. > :12:29.energy companies should do. We cannot let Cameron all the energy

:12:30. > :12:33.companies off the hook from the way in which they organise their

:12:34. > :12:39.businesses, and expect us to pay ever increasing rises in our bills.

:12:40. > :12:44.There is ?112 of green levies on our bills at the moment. Did you vote

:12:45. > :12:51.against any of them? We didn't, but what I would say ease these were

:12:52. > :12:56.government imposed levies. When they got rid of the government funded

:12:57. > :13:05.programme, Warm Front, they introduced the eco-scheme. The

:13:06. > :13:10.eco-project is one of the ones where the energy companies are saying

:13:11. > :13:13.it's too bureaucratic, and it is proving more expensive than

:13:14. > :13:17.government estimates, apparently doubled the amount the government

:13:18. > :13:23.thought. These things are all worth looking at, but don't go to the

:13:24. > :13:32.heart of the issue. According to official figures, on current plans,

:13:33. > :13:37.which you support, which you voted for, households will be paying 1%

:13:38. > :13:48.more per unit of electricity by 2030. It puts your temporary freeze

:13:49. > :13:53.as just a blip. You support a 4 % rise in our bills. I support making

:13:54. > :13:58.sure we secure for the future access to energy that we can grow here in

:13:59. > :14:04.the UK, whether it is through nuclear, wind or solar, or other

:14:05. > :14:10.technologies yet to be developed. We should protect ourselves against

:14:11. > :14:15.energy costs we cannot control. The truth is, it is every fair for you

:14:16. > :14:19.to put that point across, and I accept that, but we need to hear the

:14:20. > :14:24.other side about the cost for bill payers if we didn't invest in new,

:14:25. > :14:28.indigenous sources of energy supply for the future, which, in the long

:14:29. > :14:32.run, will be cheaper and more secure, and create the jobs we

:14:33. > :14:37.need. I think it is important to have a debate about these issues,

:14:38. > :14:42.but they have to be seen in the right context. If we stay stuck in

:14:43. > :14:47.the past, we will pay more and we will not create jobs. How can you

:14:48. > :14:53.criticise the coalition's plans for a new nuclear station, when jeering

:14:54. > :14:58.13 years of a Labour government you did not invest in a single nuclear

:14:59. > :15:08.plant? You sold off all our nuclear technology to foreign companies

:15:09. > :15:14.Energy provision was put out to private hands and there has been no

:15:15. > :15:26.obstacle in British law against ownership outside the UK. Part of

:15:27. > :15:30.this is looking ahead. Because your previous track record is so bad

:15:31. > :15:35.What we did decide under the previous government, we came to the

:15:36. > :15:41.view, and there were discussions in our party about this, that we did

:15:42. > :15:46.need to support a nuclear future. At the time of that, David Cameron

:15:47. > :15:50.was one of those saying that nuclear power should be a last

:15:51. > :15:55.resort. And as you said, the Liberals did not support it. We

:15:56. > :16:00.stood up for that. We set in train the green light of 10 sites,

:16:01. > :16:04.including Hinkley Point, for nuclear development. I am glad to

:16:05. > :16:09.see that is making progress and we should make more progress over the

:16:10. > :16:15.years ahead. We took a tough decision when other governments had

:16:16. > :16:24.not done. You did not build a new nuclear station. When you get back

:16:25. > :16:29.into power, will you build HS2? That has not had a blank cheque

:16:30. > :16:34.from the Labour Party. I am in favour of good infrastructure. Are

:16:35. > :16:41.you in favour of?, answer the question? I have answered the

:16:42. > :16:45.question. It does not have a blank cheque. If the prices are too high,

:16:46. > :16:50.we will review the decision when we come back to vote on it. We will be

:16:51. > :16:55.looking at it closely. We have to look for value for money and how it

:16:56. > :17:02.benefits the country. Have you stocked up on jumpers this winter?

:17:03. > :17:07.I am perfectly all right with my clothing. What is important, it is

:17:08. > :17:11.ridiculous for the Government to suggest that the answer to the loss

:17:12. > :17:22.of trust in the energy companies is to put on another jumper.

:17:23. > :17:28.The coalition has taken a long time to come up with anything that can

:17:29. > :17:34.trump Ed Miliband's simple freezing energy prices, vote for us. Are

:17:35. > :17:37.they on the brink of doing so? I do not think so. They have had a

:17:38. > :17:42.problem that has dominated the debate, talking about GDP, the

:17:43. > :17:48.figures came out on Friday and said, well, and went back to talking

:17:49. > :17:53.about energy. My problem with what David Cameron proposes is he agrees

:17:54. > :17:58.with the analysis that the Big Six make too many profits. He wants to

:17:59. > :18:02.move the green levies into general taxation, so that he looks like he

:18:03. > :18:08.is protecting the profits of the energy companies. If the coalition

:18:09. > :18:15.can say they will take money off the bills, does that change the

:18:16. > :18:19.game? I do not think the Liberal Democrats are an obstacle to

:18:20. > :18:26.unwinding the green levies. I think Nick Clegg is open to doing a deal,

:18:27. > :18:30.but the real obstacle is the carbon reduction targets that we signed up

:18:31. > :18:35.to during the boom years. They were ambitious I thought at the time

:18:36. > :18:40.From that we have the taxes and clocking up of the supply-side of

:18:41. > :18:44.the economy. Unless he will revise that, and build from first

:18:45. > :18:50.principles a new strategy, he cannot do more than put a dent into

:18:51. > :18:55.green levies. He might say as I have got to ?50 now and if you

:18:56. > :18:59.voters in in an overall majority, I will look up what we have done in

:19:00. > :19:05.the better times and give you more. I am sure he will do that. It might

:19:06. > :19:09.be ?50 of the Bill, but it will be ?50 on your general taxation bill,

:19:10. > :19:17.which would be more progressive They will find it. We will never

:19:18. > :19:23.see it in general taxation. The problem for the Coalition on what

:19:24. > :19:26.Ed Miliband has done is that it is five weeks since he made that

:19:27. > :19:30.speech and it is all we are talking about. David Cameron spent those

:19:31. > :19:34.five weeks trying to work out whether Ed Miliband is a Marxist or

:19:35. > :19:38.whether he is connected to Middle Britain. That is why Ed Miliband

:19:39. > :19:44.set the agenda. The coalition are squabbling among themselves,

:19:45. > :19:51.looking petulant, on energy, and on schools. Nobody is taking notice of

:19:52. > :19:56.the fact the economy is under way, the recovery is under way. Ed

:19:57. > :20:03.Miliband has made the weather on this.

:20:04. > :20:12.It UK has a relaxed attitude about selling off assets based -- to

:20:13. > :20:15.companies based abroad. But this week we have seen the Swiss owner

:20:16. > :20:18.of one of Scotland's largest industrial sites, Grangemouth, come

:20:19. > :20:21.within a whisker of closing part of it down. So should we care whether

:20:22. > :20:24.British assets have foreign owners? Britain might be a nation of

:20:25. > :20:29.homeowners, but we appear to have lost our taste for owning some of

:20:30. > :20:32.our biggest businesses. These are among the crown jewels sold off in

:20:33. > :20:39.the past three decades to companies based abroad. Roughly half of

:20:40. > :20:41.Britain's essential services have overseas owners. The airport owner,

:20:42. > :20:43.British Airports Authority, is owned by a Spanish company.

:20:44. > :20:47.Britain's largest water company Thames, is owned by a consortium

:20:48. > :20:50.led by an Australian bank. Four out of six of Britain's biggest energy

:20:51. > :20:53.companies are owned by overseas giants, and one of these, EDF

:20:54. > :20:56.Energy, which is owned by the French state, is building Britain's

:20:57. > :21:03.first nuclear power plant in a generation, backed by Chinese

:21:04. > :21:08.investors. It's a similar story for train operator Arriva, bought by a

:21:09. > :21:11.company owned by the German state. So part of the railways privatised

:21:12. > :21:19.by the British government was effectively re-nationalised by the

:21:20. > :21:23.German government. But does it matter who owns these companies as

:21:24. > :21:28.long as the lights stay on, the trains run on time, and we can

:21:29. > :21:33.still eat Cadbury's Dairy Milk? We are joined by the general

:21:34. > :21:40.secretary of the RMT, Bob Crow, and by venture capitalist Julie Meyer.

:21:41. > :21:46.They go head to head. Have we seen the consequences of

:21:47. > :21:53.relying for essential services to be foreign-owned? Four of the Big

:21:54. > :22:00.Six energy companies, Grangemouth, owned by a tax exile in Switzerland.

:22:01. > :22:05.It is not good. I do not think there is a cause and effect

:22:06. > :22:09.relationship between foreign ownership and consumer prices. That

:22:10. > :22:13.is not the right comparison. We need to be concerned about

:22:14. > :22:17.businesses represented the future, businesses we are good at

:22:18. > :22:23.innovating for example in financial services and the UK has a history

:22:24. > :22:34.of building businesses, such as Monotypes. If we were not creating

:22:35. > :22:40.businesses here -- Monotise. Like so many businesses creating

:22:41. > :22:48.products and services and creating the shareholders. Should we allow

:22:49. > :22:53.hour essential services to be in foreign ownership? It was

:22:54. > :22:59.demonstrated this week at Grangemouth. If you do not own the

:23:00. > :23:03.industry, you do not own it. The MPs of this country and the

:23:04. > :23:06.politicians in Scotland have no say, they were consultants.

:23:07. > :23:13.Multinationals decide whether to shut a company down. If that had

:23:14. > :23:19.been Unite union, they are the ones who saved the jobs. They

:23:20. > :23:23.capitulated. They will come back, like they have for the past 150

:23:24. > :23:30.years, and capture again what they lost. If it had closed, they would

:23:31. > :23:34.have lost their jobs for ever. If the union had called the members up

:23:35. > :23:39.without a ballot for strike action, there would have been uproar. This

:23:40. > :23:44.person in Switzerland can decide to shut the entire industry down. The

:23:45. > :23:50.coalition, the Labour Party, as well, when Labour was in government,

:23:51. > :23:53.they played a role of allowing industries to go abroad, and it

:23:54. > :24:06.should be returned to public ownership. Nestor. It has

:24:07. > :24:14.demonstrated that the Net comes from new businesses. We must not

:24:15. > :24:20.be... When Daly motion was stopped by the French government to be sold,

:24:21. > :24:25.it was an arrow to the heart of French entrepreneurs. We must not

:24:26. > :24:29.create that culture in the UK. Every train running in France is

:24:30. > :24:37.built in France. 90% of the trains running in Germany are built in

:24:38. > :24:44.Germany. In Japan, it has to be built in that country, and now an

:24:45. > :24:48.energy company in France is reducing its nuclear capability in

:24:49. > :24:52.its own country and wants to make profits out of the British industry

:24:53. > :24:57.to put back into it state industry. That happened with the railway

:24:58. > :25:03.industry. They want to make money at the expense of their own state

:25:04. > :25:10.companies. We sold off energy production. How did we end up in a

:25:11. > :25:16.position where our nuclear capacity will be built by a company owned by

:25:17. > :25:25.a socialist date, France, and funded by a communist one, China,

:25:26. > :25:28.for vital infrastructure? I am not suggesting that is in the national

:25:29. > :25:33.interest. I am saying we can pick any one example and say it is a

:25:34. > :25:37.shame. The simple matter of the fact is the owners are having to

:25:38. > :25:41.make decisions. Not just Grangemouth, businesses are making

:25:42. > :25:48.decisions about what is the common good. Not just in the shareholders'

:25:49. > :25:52.interest. For employees, customers. What is in the common good when

:25:53. > :25:57.prices go up by 10% and the reason is that 20 years ago they shut

:25:58. > :26:02.every coal pit down in this country, the Germans kept theirs open and

:26:03. > :26:08.subsidised it and now we have the Germans doing away with nuclear

:26:09. > :26:14.power and they have coal. Under the Labour government, in 2008, the

:26:15. > :26:19.climate change Act was passed. Well before that, and you know yourself,

:26:20. > :26:23.they shut down the coal mines to smash the National Union of

:26:24. > :26:29.Mineworkers because they dared to stand up for people in their

:26:30. > :26:33.community. Even if we wanted to reopen the coalmines, it would be

:26:34. > :26:40.pointless. Under the 2008 Act, we are not meant to burn more coal

:26:41. > :26:47.The can, as if you spent some of the profits, you could have carbon

:26:48. > :26:52.catch up. That does not exist on a massive scale. You are arguing the

:26:53. > :26:57.case, Julie Meyer, for entrepreneurs to come to this

:26:58. > :27:02.country. Even Bob Crow is not against that. We are trying to

:27:03. > :27:10.argue, should essential services be in foreign hands? Not those in

:27:11. > :27:16.Silicon round about doing start ups. I am trying to draw a broader

:27:17. > :27:20.principle than just energy. Something like broadband services,

:27:21. > :27:27.also important to the functioning of the economy. I believe in the

:27:28. > :27:32.UK's ability to innovate. When we have businesses that play off

:27:33. > :27:36.broadband companies to get the best prices for consumers. These new

:27:37. > :27:44.businesses and business models are the best way. Not to control, but

:27:45. > :27:49.to influence. It will be a disaster. Prices will go up and up as a

:27:50. > :27:54.result. Nissan in Sunderland, a Japanese factory, some of the best

:27:55. > :27:57.cars and productivity. You want that to be nationalised and bring

:27:58. > :28:03.it down to the standard of British Leyland? It is not bring it down to

:28:04. > :28:08.the standard. The car manufacturing base in this country has been

:28:09. > :28:13.wrecked. We make more cars now for 20 years -- than in 20 years.

:28:14. > :28:21.Ford's Dagenham produced some of the best cars in the world. Did you

:28:22. > :28:28.buy one? I cannot drive. They moved their plants to other countries

:28:29. > :28:32.where it was cheaper labour. Would you nationalise Nissan? There

:28:33. > :28:39.should be one car industry that produces cars for people. This week

:28:40. > :28:46.the EU summit was about Angela Merkel's mobile phone being tapped,

:28:47. > :28:50.they call it a handy. We sent Adam to Brussels and told him to ignore

:28:51. > :28:52.the business about phone-tapping and investigate the Prime

:28:53. > :29:08.Minister's policy on Europe instead. I have come to my first EU summit to

:29:09. > :29:12.see how David Cameron is getting on with his strategy to claim power was

:29:13. > :29:22.back from Brussels. Got any powers back yet? Yes! Which ones? Sadly,

:29:23. > :29:26.his fellow leaders were not as forthcoming. Chancellor, are you

:29:27. > :29:33.going to give any powers back to Britain? Has David Cameron asked you

:29:34. > :29:39.for any powers back? The president of the commission just laughed, and

:29:40. > :29:51.listen to the Lithuanian President. How is David Cameron's renegotiation

:29:52. > :29:55.strategy going? What's that? He wants powers back for Britain. No

:29:56. > :30:00.one knows what powers David Cameron actually wants. Even our usual

:30:01. > :30:07.allies, like Sweden, are bit baffled. We actually don't know yet

:30:08. > :30:15.what is going through the UK membership. We will await the

:30:16. > :30:21.finalisation of that first. You should ask him, and then tell us!

:30:22. > :30:26.Here is someone who must know, the Dutch Prime Minister, he is doing

:30:27. > :30:30.what we are doing, carrying out a review of the EU powers, known as

:30:31. > :30:35.competencies in the jargon, before negotiating to get some back. Have

:30:36. > :30:40.you had any negotiations with David Cameron over what powers you can

:30:41. > :30:47.bring back from Brussels? That is not on the agenda of this summit.

:30:48. > :30:50.Have you talked to him about it This is not on the schedule for this

:30:51. > :31:00.summit. David Cameron's advises tummy it is

:31:01. > :31:08.because he is playing the long game. -- David Cameron's advisers tell me.

:31:09. > :31:15.At this summit, there was a task force discussing how to cut EU red

:31:16. > :31:20.tape. Just how long this game is was explained to me outside the summit,

:31:21. > :31:26.by the leader of the Conservatives in the European Parliament. I think

:31:27. > :31:29.the behind-the-scenes negotiations will start happening when the new

:31:30. > :31:35.commissioner is appointed later next year. I think the detailed

:31:36. > :31:39.negotiations will start to happen bubbly after the UK general

:31:40. > :31:43.election. That is when we will start getting all of the detail of the

:31:44. > :31:51.horse trading, and real, Lake night negotiations. Angela Merkel seems

:31:52. > :31:56.keen to rewrite the EU's main treaties to deal with changes in the

:31:57. > :32:00.Eurozone, and that is the mechanism David Cameron would use to

:32:01. > :32:04.renegotiate our membership. Everyone here says his relationship with the

:32:05. > :32:09.German Chancellor is strong. So after days in this building, here is

:32:10. > :32:14.how it looks. David Cameron has a mountain to climb. It is climbable,

:32:15. > :32:20.but he isn't even in the foothills yet. Has he even started packing his

:32:21. > :32:24.bags for the trip? Joining us now, a man who knows a

:32:25. > :32:30.thing or two about the difficulties Prime Minister 's face in Europe.

:32:31. > :32:33.Former Deputy Prime Minister, Michael Heseltine. We are nine

:32:34. > :32:41.months from David Cameron's defining speech on EU renegotiation. Can you

:32:42. > :32:47.think of one area of progress? I don't know. And you don't know. And

:32:48. > :32:53.that's a good thing. Why is it a good thing? Because the real

:32:54. > :33:04.progress goes on behind closed doors. And only the most naive,

:33:05. > :33:12.because the real progress goes on behind closed doors. Because, in

:33:13. > :33:17.this weary world, you and I, Andrew, know full well that the moment you

:33:18. > :33:22.say, I making progress, people say, where? And the machine goes to work

:33:23. > :33:28.to show that the progress isn't enough. So you are much better off

:33:29. > :33:38.making progress as best you can in the privacy of private diplomacy. It

:33:39. > :33:42.is a long journey ahead. In this long journey, do you have a clear

:33:43. > :33:48.sense of the destination? Do you have a clear sense of what powers Mr

:33:49. > :33:52.Cameron wants to negotiate? I have a clear sense of the destination,

:33:53. > :33:58.which is a victory for the campaign that he will win to stay inside the

:33:59. > :34:07.European community. That is the agenda, and I have total support for

:34:08. > :34:13.that. I understand that, but if he is incapable of getting any tangible

:34:14. > :34:19.sign of renegotiation, if he is able only to do what Wilson did in 1975,

:34:20. > :34:24.which was to get a couple of token changes to our membership status, he

:34:25. > :34:29.goes into that referendum without much to argue for. He has everything

:34:30. > :34:37.to argue for. He's got Britain's vital role as a major contributor to

:34:38. > :34:44.the community. He's got Britain's self interest as a major

:34:45. > :34:50.beneficiary, and Britain's vital role in the City of London. He's got

:34:51. > :34:55.argue for that now. He could have a argue for that now. He could have a

:34:56. > :35:02.referendum now. He doesn't want one now. I haven't any doubt that he

:35:03. > :35:12.will come back with something to talk about. But it may be slightly

:35:13. > :35:18.different to what his critics, the UK isolationist party people, want.

:35:19. > :35:23.He may, for example, have found that allies within the community want

:35:24. > :35:29.change as well, and he may secure changes in the way the community

:35:30. > :35:33.works, which would be a significant argument within the referendum

:35:34. > :35:38.campaign. Let me give you an example. I think it is a scandal

:35:39. > :35:44.that the European Commission don't secure the auditing of some of the

:35:45. > :35:50.accounts. Perhaps that could be on the agenda. He might find a lot of

:35:51. > :35:58.contributing countries, like Germany, like Colin and, would be

:35:59. > :36:03.very keen. -- like Holland. David vetoed the increase in the European

:36:04. > :36:09.budgets the other day, and he had a lot of allies. So working within

:36:10. > :36:14.Europe on the things that people paying the European bills want is

:36:15. > :36:21.fertile ground. Is John Major right to call for a windfall tax on the

:36:22. > :36:25.energy companies? John is a very cautious fellow. He doesn't say

:36:26. > :36:32.things without thinking them out. So I was surprised that he went for a

:36:33. > :36:36.windfall tax. First of all, it is retrospective, and secondly, it is

:36:37. > :36:42.difficult to predict what the consequences will be. I am, myself,

:36:43. > :36:45.more interested in the other part of his speech, which was talking about

:36:46. > :36:51.the need for the Conservative Party to seek a wider horizon, to

:36:52. > :36:55.recognise what is happening to the Conservative Party in the way in

:36:56. > :37:05.which its membership is shrinking into a southeastern enclave. Are you

:37:06. > :37:16.in favour of a windfall tax? I am not in favour of increasing any

:37:17. > :37:22.taxes. Do you share Iain Duncan Smith's point of view on welfare

:37:23. > :37:32.reform? I think Iain Duncan Smith is right. It is extremely difficult to

:37:33. > :37:40.do, but he is right to try. I think public opinion is behind him, but it

:37:41. > :37:46.isn't easy, because on the fringe of these issues there are genuine hard

:37:47. > :37:50.luck stories, and they are the ones that become the focus of attention

:37:51. > :37:57.the moment you introduce change. It requires a lot of political skill to

:37:58. > :38:01.negotiate your way through that. But isn't Iain Duncan Smith right to

:38:02. > :38:05.invoke the beverage principle, that you should be expected to make a

:38:06. > :38:12.contribution for the welfare you depend on? Yes, he is. I will let

:38:13. > :38:17.you get your Sunday lunch. Thanks for joining us.

:38:18. > :38:31.Coming up in just over 20 minutes, I will be looking

:38:32. > :38:37.You're watching the Sunday Politics for Yorkshire and Lincolnshire.

:38:38. > :38:41.Coming up today. Is it time to stop milking the motorist? We speak to

:38:42. > :38:44.businesses, market traders and even advocate who say that they are

:38:45. > :38:51.concerned about the growing cost of Sunday and late`night parking. And

:38:52. > :38:55.we will be delving into a row about privatised sexual health services

:38:56. > :39:01.run by none other than Richard Branson's Virgin group. Let's say

:39:02. > :39:04.hello to our guests. Fabian Hamilton is Labour MPs are Leeds north`east

:39:05. > :39:11.and Craig Whittaker is the Conservative MP for the Calder

:39:12. > :39:14.Valley. George Osborne came to Leeds on Friday to tell us that the

:39:15. > :39:18.economy has grown faster than at any time during the past few years. Our

:39:19. > :39:23.labour going to start running out of bullets to fire at the Government?

:39:24. > :39:28.We'll was wanted the economy to grow, it is just a shame that it has

:39:29. > :39:32.taken so long. It is good for everybody. The economy growing is

:39:33. > :39:38.good. GDP figures mean nothing if you cannot afford to pay your gas

:39:39. > :39:41.bill. That is true. But let us not forget we have been in such a mess

:39:42. > :39:45.for so long in this country that it is great to see some results coming

:39:46. > :39:56.through. We will chat more at the moment. `` in a moment. You may have

:39:57. > :39:59.travelled on one of their planes or trains, watched their TV or used

:40:00. > :40:02.their broadband. But did you now that part of Richard Branson's

:40:03. > :40:05.Virgin empire is responsible for running sexual health services in

:40:06. > :40:07.parts of our area? The awarding of the contract in Northern

:40:08. > :40:11.Lincolnshire has been controversial, with unions claiming that public

:40:12. > :40:14.health has been put at risk by a series of problems ` a claim denied

:40:15. > :40:24.by Virgin Care. Vicky Johnson has the story. Unsafe sex served up as

:40:25. > :40:29.entertainment on BBC Three. But most people agree that first time the

:40:30. > :40:35.enter our sexual health clinic it is more embarrassing than entertaining.

:40:36. > :40:41.In April, Virgin Care took over the service from the NHS across North

:40:42. > :40:45.Lincolnshire. They set up clinics in Scunthorpe and Grimsby at the

:40:46. > :40:50.transfer has not gone entirely smoothly according to this man, we

:40:51. > :40:55.have changed his voice to preserve his anonymity. The staff work on

:40:56. > :41:00.their opinion rather than your files. It is impossible. They do not

:41:01. > :41:03.get your readings back in a few went to the GP and he did not have the

:41:04. > :41:11.file, you would think there was something wrong with him, wouldn't

:41:12. > :41:15.you? Staff are not just embarrassed, they are worried that safety and

:41:16. > :41:24.quality are being compromised. According to vault sorbic from

:41:25. > :41:26.Unison. In both sides they have issue about Chlamydia screening.

:41:27. > :41:32.Chlamydia screening kits have not turned up. They have not turned up

:41:33. > :41:35.until late September. Programmes have not been up and running like

:41:36. > :41:40.they were previously, so there is a big issue for public seven `` safety

:41:41. > :41:45.in North and North East Lincolnshire. North Lincolnshire

:41:46. > :41:48.Council, now responsible for public health, admits that targets on

:41:49. > :41:53.Chlamydia screening have not yet been met, but a spokesperson said

:41:54. > :41:57.that the situation is being managed. Part of the problem, say the unions,

:41:58. > :42:04.is that the transfer of the service to private company coincided with

:42:05. > :42:09.the NHS reforms. The chaos that came out of the health and social care

:42:10. > :42:14.act has compromised patient care and the health of the communities in

:42:15. > :42:17.North and North East Lincolnshire. Nick Dakin, MP for Scunthorpe, says

:42:18. > :42:23.he is keeping a close eye on the situation. I have met with public

:42:24. > :42:26.health at North Lincolnshire Council and I have spoken to them again

:42:27. > :42:30.since and they have assured me that they are monitoring this contract

:42:31. > :42:35.closely and I am on their case. Separately, I am asking for a

:42:36. > :42:39.meeting with Virgin Care, so that they can update me with exactly what

:42:40. > :42:43.they are doing. I am sure that they can `` want to provide a good

:42:44. > :42:48.service. Part of my job is to ensure that they do. Staff and patients say

:42:49. > :42:53.that they are struggling to cope with daily frustrations. It is hard

:42:54. > :42:56.not to lose your temper and keep calm when you go in there and this

:42:57. > :43:05.and that has not happened and you can get the test three times before

:43:06. > :43:09.getting results back. Union leaders claim any problems with sexual

:43:10. > :43:12.health services could put local people at unnecessary risk. They are

:43:13. > :43:27.hoping to meet soon with managers from Virgin Care to discuss their

:43:28. > :43:30.concerns. Well, Virgin Care sent us a statement in which they claimed

:43:31. > :43:31.town centre premises were an improvement on previous provision,

:43:32. > :43:43.and that statement said: Craig Whittaker, these concerns were

:43:44. > :43:47.being raised about sexual health services in your constituency, would

:43:48. > :43:54.you want answers from Virgin Care? I would do exactly what Nick Bacon is

:43:55. > :43:57.doing, asking the relevant parties, commissioners and providers, for the

:43:58. > :44:00.relevant answers to the questions and making sure that they were being

:44:01. > :44:06.monitored properly. Let us not forget. This seems like an

:44:07. > :44:11.ideological battle between unions and a private provider. You got to

:44:12. > :44:16.take that into account as well. The unions say that this is example why

:44:17. > :44:21.privatised health care is not working in some areas. I can give

:44:22. > :44:27.you some examples of where it is working extremely well. GPs are

:44:28. > :44:31.self`employed people. Let us not just label a private or NHS. There

:44:32. > :44:37.was a balance and it is about quality provision for the people

:44:38. > :44:43.that are giving the service. Are the unions right to highlight this or is

:44:44. > :44:49.it just part of either logical conflict, because the unions do not

:44:50. > :44:53.want any privatisation? I don't understand why Virgin Care say that

:44:54. > :44:56.it is a better service. It is clearly not working in Scunthorpe

:44:57. > :45:01.and Nick Dakin is right to take it up the way that he has. This is not

:45:02. > :45:05.about ideology, but about why a private company that makes profits

:45:06. > :45:08.can do a better job than the public sector, where it is being done by

:45:09. > :45:12.the public good, and I do not believe that Virgin are doing this

:45:13. > :45:19.for the public good, but for their shareholding. People are suspicious

:45:20. > :45:22.about privatised health care. Just because they are a privatised

:45:23. > :45:29.company does not mean they will be inferior to the NHS. But they have

:45:30. > :45:35.to make profits. Let us talk about mid Staffordshire, about Morecambe,

:45:36. > :45:41.about the issues that we have had with the NHS, and these are not

:45:42. > :45:50.private providers. It was a failure of management. It was NHS management

:45:51. > :45:55.and it has been a failure. Why does a private provider make a better

:45:56. > :46:00.service at a lower cost when it has to make a profit? We see them

:46:01. > :46:05.providing a much better service in some instances than our own NHS and

:46:06. > :46:09.we have seen that, and the prime example is mid Staffordshire and

:46:10. > :46:12.what is happening in Morecambe. The people know that they are getting a

:46:13. > :46:16.privatised health company delivering their care? Some of the Virgin

:46:17. > :46:23.clinics, there was no branding. It just says, NHS. Should people be

:46:24. > :46:29.upfront, and should the just be upfront and above board if they are

:46:30. > :46:33.using private companies? All we want is that people who use NHS services,

:46:34. > :46:39.that we get a free medical service that is of great quality, when we

:46:40. > :46:42.want it and where we need it. And providing that is done every time,

:46:43. > :46:47.doesn't really matter it is a private provider or estate

:46:48. > :46:51.provider? Many of your constituents will have used either clinics and

:46:52. > :46:56.hospitals and been happy with it. If the service is good and it is at a

:46:57. > :47:01.lower cost, and they don't understand how it can be, then that

:47:02. > :47:03.is good, but when you realise that you are complaining to a private

:47:04. > :47:09.company and go through that to the NHS management responsible for

:47:10. > :47:12.commissioning it. Should there be more checks and balances? If it is

:47:13. > :47:16.found that private companies are not delivering a certain level of care,

:47:17. > :47:21.should they be stripped of that contract? Not just the private

:47:22. > :47:25.companies but for NHS providers as well. Any contract that is tendered

:47:26. > :47:30.out needs to have checks and balances for whoever is the service

:47:31. > :47:39.does either full top `` who ever is the service provider. Now when

:47:40. > :47:43.you've finished watching the Sunday Politics, you might be heading out

:47:44. > :47:47.to do some shopping. In many towns and cities parking is free on a

:47:48. > :47:50.Sunday, but an increasing number of councils are charging drivers to

:47:51. > :47:53.park on weekends and in the evening. It's causing a big row in Leeds,

:47:54. > :47:56.from where Joe Inwood reports. What do a music venue, a market stall, a

:47:57. > :48:01.restaurant and the church all have in common? They all say that

:48:02. > :48:10.charging for Sunday and late`night parking would devastate them. I

:48:11. > :48:13.think it is terrible. It has not been thought through. The effect on

:48:14. > :48:20.local businesses is going to be very bad. They have created a fantastic

:48:21. > :48:24.shopping destination in this city and now they are taking it away

:48:25. > :48:29.because it is easy to think, I will go elsewhere, where it is easy to

:48:30. > :48:35.park. Psychologically it is a big negative that people have to spend

:48:36. > :48:40.money on parking that they could spend from their pockets in the

:48:41. > :48:45.venues. People will come and make a day of it, come to church, spend

:48:46. > :48:49.some time in the shopping centre. That is the modern Sunday. And we

:48:50. > :48:55.think that less people will come on back sort of basis. What are the

:48:56. > :48:59.changes they are concerned about? It is just after six o'clock, you can

:49:00. > :49:04.see cars looking for somewhere to stop. If they find a space,

:49:05. > :49:09.currently, it is free. Under the new plans this page ?2 for the rest of

:49:10. > :49:13.the evenings. On Sunday it is ?1, ?4 for the whole day. In total it

:49:14. > :49:18.should make the City Council ?400,000 per year. This comes in the

:49:19. > :49:22.same week it was announced that they make up to ?7 million a year profit

:49:23. > :49:27.from parking. That is more than any other council in the North of

:49:28. > :49:31.England. Despite repeated requests, nobody from the council has been

:49:32. > :49:34.available for interview. In a statement, they said that parking

:49:35. > :49:39.charges in Leeds are comparable with other major cities, but considerably

:49:40. > :49:42.cheaper than the private alternatives and that they have not

:49:43. > :49:45.risen in four years. They did not address the concerns of local

:49:46. > :49:49.businesses. They did not explain why a city that already makes ?7 million

:49:50. > :49:54.in profit should increase that, and they did not explain why they have

:49:55. > :50:00.ignored the results of their own consultation. I would say to the

:50:01. > :50:04.council, listen to your community, to your residence, and think about

:50:05. > :50:07.what is right for the residents. It seems clear to me that the people of

:50:08. > :50:11.Leeds are saying that they do not want this. It damages businesses. It

:50:12. > :50:15.damages people wanting to go to church, not just businesses, and

:50:16. > :50:20.that is a horrendous position. They should be wanting to see that town

:50:21. > :50:27.flourishing and vibrant and the best way to do that is to make parking

:50:28. > :50:30.cheap. In Swindon they took a deliberately relaxed approach,

:50:31. > :50:35.cutting charges and giving ten minutes leeway, and they are seeing

:50:36. > :50:38.the benefits. We have seen an increase in footfall in that time,

:50:39. > :50:43.one of the few town centres in the south of England that has shown

:50:44. > :50:51.growth in visits to the town centre. Leeds is undoubtedly a private ``

:50:52. > :50:56.thriving place. It has many signs of a city on the up. With the council

:50:57. > :50:59.taking some credit for that success, but the concern from the town centre

:51:00. > :51:07.is that these changes could put much of that in jeopardy. Let us pick up

:51:08. > :51:13.on that point. Do you want to defend Labour`1 lead City Council in

:51:14. > :51:19.introducing these parking charges, is it going to stop the economic

:51:20. > :51:23.recovery? I don't think it will, but I do not blame the council but doing

:51:24. > :51:30.what they are doing. Their budgets have been slashed hugely by central

:51:31. > :51:34.government. If local government had more financial autonomy it could

:51:35. > :51:38.draw a better balance between parking charges and business rates

:51:39. > :51:40.and other sources of income, maybe local income taxes if they were

:51:41. > :51:44.completely devolved to cities like Leeds, but the issue is that they

:51:45. > :51:48.have got to find a way of producing more revenue now that the essential

:51:49. > :51:56.revenue that they have has been slashed by central government. This

:51:57. > :52:01.is an absolute copout. It lacks vision. It lacks leadership. It

:52:02. > :52:07.lacks a range of things. You have got five local authorities in West

:52:08. > :52:11.Yorkshire, five HR departments, five accountancy departments, all

:52:12. > :52:18.replicated across certain things. If you want to save money let us look

:52:19. > :52:22.at those areas. They have talked about it and talked about it but

:52:23. > :52:25.they have not done it. Instead what they do is they put more and more

:52:26. > :52:29.money on the motorist and suddenly, places like Leeds will lose out with

:52:30. > :52:36.high parking charges because people will go elsewhere. Do you think that

:52:37. > :52:41.parking should be free? I think that parking charges for retailers is a

:52:42. > :52:44.good thing because it increases turnover and football increases. The

:52:45. > :52:52.evidence shows that when you have car parking charges, it increases

:52:53. > :53:01.footfall. ?2 a day is not a lot of money. I have just paid outside for

:53:02. > :53:12.Mike minutes parking, 40p. Just outside here in the BBC. `` for 90

:53:13. > :53:15.minutes parking. For 90 minutes parking at costs ?4 just outside the

:53:16. > :53:22.building so if you put another ?1 on top of that it is an incredibly

:53:23. > :53:27.expensive 90 minutes. We are talking about Sundays and evenings, ?2 for

:53:28. > :53:33.the entire day. That is pretty good value. But will they go to other

:53:34. > :53:41.centres, out`of`town retail parks, which are free? I doubt that, if you

:53:42. > :53:46.put it up by ?2 on a Sunday. We remember that Tony Blair wanted a

:53:47. > :53:48.cafe culture. How is charging motorists going to encourage people

:53:49. > :53:54.to come into town centres after dark? It is not going to encourage

:53:55. > :53:59.more people but it will not put them off, either. If you charge ?7 a day,

:54:00. > :54:02.it will, but up to ?2 a day on a Saturday evening Sunday, I doubt

:54:03. > :54:07.that that will put the ball. It is cheaper than the boss. In the

:54:08. > :54:08.meantime you can shop on the Internet and not be any parking

:54:09. > :54:21.charges. `` it will put people off. Motorists increasingly see

:54:22. > :54:26.themselves as a cash cow, from councils and from the national

:54:27. > :54:32.government as well. Who is going to help the hard`pressed motorists? If

:54:33. > :54:35.you go into Central London there was a ?10 congestion charge per day.

:54:36. > :54:42.That has not reduced congestion in Central London. I do not find it to

:54:43. > :54:47.be any less. We have the same issue in Calderdale. We have a Labour run

:54:48. > :54:56.council that is deciding to put double yellow lines to try and help

:54:57. > :54:59.when the M6 G2 motorway closes. They have halved the parking for

:55:00. > :55:02.residents and what they have then gone and done is put car parking

:55:03. > :55:12.charges on the only free car park in the village, not a town or city. It

:55:13. > :55:17.just shows what a nonsense this is. You say that it is the Labour run

:55:18. > :55:21.council. It would never have happened if I was on the council.

:55:22. > :55:27.Let us look at some of the Conservative run councils. Councils

:55:28. > :55:31.are being squeezed by the `` central government, whatever party runs them

:55:32. > :55:39.and they are desperate for revenue. It is a copout where they can save

:55:40. > :55:43.more money in other areas. The procurement issues we have within

:55:44. > :55:45.the NHS and local councils are horrendous and until we address

:55:46. > :55:55.those key, fundamental issues and save money... I know from talking to

:55:56. > :55:59.the leader of Leeds City Council that he has been talking to other

:56:00. > :56:02.torture councils to make savings by having central purchasing and

:56:03. > :56:09.functions. They are talking and negotiating and doing. This was six

:56:10. > :56:12.months, nine months ago. They had a clear plan and I know that they are

:56:13. > :56:21.putting that into operation to save the taxpayer money. They have to do

:56:22. > :56:24.it. Let's get some more of the week's political news now. Len

:56:25. > :56:29.Tingle has our round`up in 60 seconds. Has this week seen the end

:56:30. > :56:34.of George Galloway's Bradford Spring? Less than 18 months after

:56:35. > :56:38.respect 15 seats on Bradford Council it has all ended in tears, with all

:56:39. > :56:41.five angrily quitting the party claiming lack of consultation on

:56:42. > :56:45.policy. They will now sit as independent councillors. It is four

:56:46. > :56:48.years since the last private operator of trains on the East Coast

:56:49. > :56:52.line could London said it could not make a profit but it has gone under

:56:53. > :56:56.state ownership. The new Labour shadow transport secretary and wait

:56:57. > :56:59.for Mary Creagh is asking why the Government wants to sell it off

:57:00. > :57:05.again. Franchising is not delivered on the East Coast mainline. This

:57:06. > :57:09.week David come Cameron said he has found the green shoots of recovery

:57:10. > :57:17.in the world were largest online fashion retailer based at

:57:18. > :57:21.Grimethorpe. We see this employing 2300 people and a few years ago it

:57:22. > :57:25.employed no one at all. But a Labour MP said that there was a long way to

:57:26. > :57:29.go. We have a long way to go in Barnsley.

:57:30. > :57:35.Why privatise these Coast Main line if it is making money for the

:57:36. > :57:41.Government? Have you been on these Coast lately? This service is

:57:42. > :57:46.appalling, the trains are filthy. I had to stand for nearly 60% of the

:57:47. > :57:51.journey, having paid ?134 for my one`way ticket. That is just

:57:52. > :57:55.appalling. That is why they are making money because they are

:57:56. > :58:00.offering a poor level of service. Some of the privatise train

:58:01. > :58:06.operating companies are not much better. I paid ?35 for a first`class

:58:07. > :58:10.ticket in advance, and it was comfortable and clean and well

:58:11. > :58:20.organised. Well, it would be in first class. The service quality,

:58:21. > :58:23.they are chalk and cheese. I'm sorry, I have never had a bad

:58:24. > :58:29.service from the East Coast mainline. I do not recognise the

:58:30. > :58:34.trend that they are talking about. Come up with me in standard class. I

:58:35. > :58:38.have sat in standard as well. It is sometimes quite crowded. It is more

:58:39. > :58:43.than crowded. I could not get a seat. I paid in advance and I saved

:58:44. > :58:48.a huge amount of taxpayers money. Mary Creagh says that she is open to

:58:49. > :58:55.the idea of the full renationalisation of the railways.

:58:56. > :59:00.It is ?200 million a year from East Coast, I directly operated railway

:59:01. > :59:05.going back to the Treasury. Some of that could be used for investment.

:59:06. > :59:10.Why are we giving that money to the private sector? It is going straight

:59:11. > :59:12.into the Treasury coffers. It is on `` unbelievable that we are saying

:59:13. > :59:19.that shareholders need to get that cash. Bring back British rail. You

:59:20. > :59:26.would not be complaining then, would you? I would at least have someone

:59:27. > :59:35.to complain to! George Galloway. We heard about the Respect councillors

:59:36. > :59:45.and Brad. Has the Bradford Spring turned into a winter of discontent?

:59:46. > :59:49.It was never going to last. He is a populist politician. He just picks

:59:50. > :59:54.up an issue and runs with it. The tragedy is for the people of

:59:55. > :59:57.Radford. The people there need a good MP was interested in them and

:59:58. > :00:01.the sad thing for me is that George Galloway has not done the job he

:00:02. > :00:06.promised to do for the people of Bradford when he won that

:00:07. > :00:16.by`election so convincingly. He's not here to defend himself, as he

:00:17. > :00:19.has done, bustly, on many things. He's one of those rare breeds of

:00:20. > :00:23.politicians to reach passes of the electorate that others do not. You

:00:24. > :00:30.cannot make promises and not all of them. I am sad for people in one of

:00:31. > :00:34.the poorest parts that are not getting the service that they

:00:35. > :00:37.deserve and badly need. Would you like him back in the Labour Party?

:00:38. > :00:46.That is not a decision for me to make. Would he make a good mayor of

:00:47. > :00:54.London? He has got that Boris Johnson style independence about

:00:55. > :00:59.them. He is not a patch on Boris. It sounds like we are seeing the start

:01:00. > :01:04.of electioneering. Yes, we are. You're not going to deny that?

:01:05. > :01:07.Absolutely not. If you're a politician you should be campaigning

:01:08. > :01:12.and electioneering all the time because you never take your election

:01:13. > :01:16.for granted. Well, don't peak too soon, gentlemen. Thank you both. You

:01:17. > :01:19.have been watching the Sunday Politics for Yorkshire and

:01:20. > :01:20.Lincolnshire. Now, back to Andrew Neil in London.

:01:21. > :01:32.free school area for into that category. Thank you.

:01:33. > :01:32.Is Labour about to drop its support category. Thank you.

:01:33. > :01:36.Is Labour about to drop its support for High Speed 2, a rail line the

:01:37. > :01:47.party approved while in government? for High Speed 2, a rail line the

:01:48. > :02:00.these green shoots? These are all questions for The Week Ahead.

:02:01. > :02:04.So, HS2. Miss Flint wouldn't answer the question. She's in northern MP

:02:05. > :02:09.too. Ed Balls is comparing it to the Millennium Dome.

:02:10. > :02:14.too. Ed Balls is comparing it to the minute's silence for HS2? It will

:02:15. > :02:19.not be quite as crude as that. They will not stand up and say, we

:02:20. > :02:20.not be quite as crude as that. They senior Labour person said to me it

:02:21. > :02:22.would be a bit senior Labour person said to me it

:02:23. > :02:28.that Gordon Brown and Ed Balls set for the euro back in 97. They will

:02:29. > :02:32.be chucking lots of questions into the air, and the questions will

:02:33. > :02:39.create doubt, and will create the grounds for Labour to say, at some

:02:40. > :02:43.point, we think there is a much much better way of spending the money. It

:02:44. > :02:50.isn't ?42 billion, because that includes a contingency. Let's see

:02:51. > :02:58.what Peter Mandelson had to say about HS2. He was in the government

:02:59. > :03:02.when Labour supported it. Frankly, there was too much of the argument

:03:03. > :03:08.that if everyone else has got a high-speed train, we should have won

:03:09. > :03:14.too. Regardless of need, regardless of cost, and regardless of

:03:15. > :03:19.alternatives. As a party, to be frank, we didn't feel like being

:03:20. > :03:26.trumped by the zeal of the then opposition's support for the

:03:27. > :03:31.high-speed train. We wanted, if anything, to upstage them. So they

:03:32. > :03:38.didn't really need it, and we're only talking about ?50 billion. Why

:03:39. > :03:43.would you take a decision involving ?50 billion in a serious way? For

:03:44. > :03:48.David Cameron, if it becomes clear Labour is against it, he cannot

:03:49. > :03:53.proceed. He indicated last week that he wouldn't proceed if the certainty

:03:54. > :03:57.wasn't there. For Labour, HS2 is really a debate about the deficit by

:03:58. > :04:01.proxy. They think that if you don't go ahead with HS2, that releases

:04:02. > :04:06.tens of billions of pounds to spend on other things, such as public

:04:07. > :04:28.services, without going into boring. I don't think that works because

:04:29. > :04:30.there was a difference between cancelling something that already

:04:31. > :04:33.exists to pay for something else, and cancelling something that does

:04:34. > :04:36.not yet exist and will be paid for over decades to pay for something

:04:37. > :04:39.here and now. Can Labour do this? I know that the line will be, we are

:04:40. > :04:41.not going to build this railway because we are going to build

:04:42. > :04:44.200,000 houses a year. Can they do this without political cost? I think

:04:45. > :04:48.there will be political costs, but they will play this card of we have

:04:49. > :04:53.changed our mind. I think Cameron's line has been very clever, saying we

:04:54. > :04:59.cannot do it without labour. You can put it in two ways. Sorry, we cannot

:05:00. > :05:03.go ahead with it, but Labour has ruined your chance of prosperity, or

:05:04. > :05:09.they can tie themselves to it, and then Labour cannot attack it on

:05:10. > :05:15.great grounds when costs do spire. You can write Labour's script right

:05:16. > :05:23.now. They can say, if we were in charge, the financial management

:05:24. > :05:27.would be much better. This raises some really important questions for

:05:28. > :05:33.the government. They have utterly failed to make the case for HS2

:05:34. > :05:38.There is a real case to make. Between London and Birmingham it is

:05:39. > :05:42.about capacity not speed. North of Birmingham, it is about

:05:43. > :05:46.connectivity. It is a simple case to make, but it is only in the last

:05:47. > :05:50.month that they have been making that case. It shows really terrible

:05:51. > :05:58.complacency in the coalition that they haven't done that. We'll HS2

:05:59. > :06:02.happen or not? I think it will. For the reasons that Nick outlined,

:06:03. > :06:11.there is not of a constituency for it amongst Northern areas. -- there

:06:12. > :06:18.is enough of a constituency for it. There is private investment as well.

:06:19. > :06:24.It isn't like Heathrow. I say no, because I think Labour will drop

:06:25. > :06:27.their support for it. Caroline Flint said she was in favour of the

:06:28. > :06:33.concept of trains generally, but will it go further than that? It is

:06:34. > :06:39.difficult to see how it will go ahead if Labour will not support it

:06:40. > :06:46.after setting five tests that it clearly will not meet. Some will

:06:47. > :06:51.breathe a sigh of relief. Some will say, even in the 20th century, we

:06:52. > :06:57.cannot build a proper rail network. The economy was another big story of

:06:58. > :07:02.the week. We had those GDP figures. There is a video the Tories are

:07:03. > :07:06.releasing. The world premiere is going to be here. Where's the red

:07:07. > :07:10.carpet? It gives an indication of how the Tories will hand Mr Miliband

:07:11. > :07:44.and labour in the run-up to the election. Let's have a look at it.

:07:45. > :07:50.These graphics are even worse than the ones we use on our show! How on

:07:51. > :07:59.earth would you expect that to go viral? It did have a strange feel

:08:00. > :08:03.about it. It doesn't understand the Internet at all. Who is going to

:08:04. > :08:15.read those little screens between it? Put a dog in it! However,

:08:16. > :08:20.putting that aside, I have no idea that that is going to go viral. The

:08:21. > :08:27.Tories are now operating - and I say Tories rather than the coalition -

:08:28. > :08:31.on the assumption that the economy is improving and will continue to

:08:32. > :08:36.improve, and that that will become more obvious as 2014 goes on. We

:08:37. > :08:43.just saw their how they will fight the campaign. Yes, and at the

:08:44. > :08:48.crucial moment, you will reach the point where wages. To rise at a

:08:49. > :08:52.faster pace than inflation, and then people will start to, in the words

:08:53. > :08:57.of Harold Macmillan, feel that they have never had it so good. That is

:08:58. > :09:06.the key moment. If the economy is growing, there is a rule of thumb

:09:07. > :09:09.that the government should get a benefit. But it doesn't always work

:09:10. > :09:12.like that. The fundamental point here is that Ed Miliband has had a

:09:13. > :09:17.great month. He has totally set the agenda. He has set the agenda with

:09:18. > :09:22.something - freezing energy prices - that may not work. That video shows

:09:23. > :09:26.that the Conservatives want to get the debate back to the

:09:27. > :09:33.fundamentals. That this is a party that told us for three years that

:09:34. > :09:38.this coalition was telling us to -- was taking us to hell on a handcart.

:09:39. > :09:45.That doesn't seem to have happened. The energy price was a very clever

:09:46. > :09:49.thing, at the party conference season, which now seems years ago.

:09:50. > :09:56.They saw that the recovery was going to happen, so they changed the

:09:57. > :10:00.debate to living standards. Some economists are now privately

:10:01. > :10:05.expecting growth to be 3% next year, which was inconceivable for five

:10:06. > :10:07.months ago. If growth is 3% next year, living standards will start to

:10:08. > :10:14.rise again. Where does Labour go then? I would go further, and say

:10:15. > :10:19.that even though Ed Miliband has made a small political victory on

:10:20. > :10:25.living standards, it hasn't registered in the polls. Those polls

:10:26. > :10:29.have been contracted since April -- have been contracting since April.

:10:30. > :10:35.That macro economic story matters more than the issue of living

:10:36. > :10:38.standards. The interesting thing about the recovery is it confounds

:10:39. > :10:44.everybody. No one was predicting, not the Treasury, not the media not

:10:45. > :10:51.the IMF, not the academics, and the only people I can think of... I fit

:10:52. > :10:57.-- I thought they knew everything! The only people I know who did are

:10:58. > :11:00.one adviser who is very close to George Osborne, and the clever hedge

:11:01. > :11:05.fund is who were buying British equities back in January. Because

:11:06. > :11:10.the Treasury's record is so appalling, no one believe them, but

:11:11. > :11:15.they were saying around February, March this year, that by the end of

:11:16. > :11:23.the summer, the recovery would be gathering momentum. For once, they

:11:24. > :11:27.turned out to be right! They said that the economy would be going gang

:11:28. > :11:34.bust is! Where did the new Tory voters come from? I agree, if the

:11:35. > :11:43.economic recovery continues, the coalition will be stronger. But

:11:44. > :11:47.where will they get new voters from? For people who sign up to help to

:11:48. > :11:52.buy, they will be locked into nice mortgages at a low interest rate,

:11:53. > :11:57.and just as you go into a general election, if you are getting 3%

:11:58. > :12:00.growth and unemployment is down the Bank of England will have to review

:12:01. > :12:05.their interest rates. People who are getting nice interest rates now may

:12:06. > :12:12.find that it is not like that in a few months time. The point John

:12:13. > :12:16.Major was making implicitly was that Mrs Thatcher could speak to people

:12:17. > :12:21.on low incomes. John Major could not speak to them -- John Major could

:12:22. > :12:25.speak to them. But this coalition cannot speak to them. This idea

:12:26. > :12:33.about the reshuffle was that David Cameron wanted more Northern voices,

:12:34. > :12:38.more women, to make it look like it was not a party of seven men. When

:12:39. > :12:43.David Cameron became leader, John Major said, I do not speak very

:12:44. > :12:47.often, but when I do, I will help you, because I think you are good

:12:48. > :12:52.thing and I do not want to be like Margaret Thatcher. But that speech

:12:53. > :12:57.was clearly a lament for the party he believed that David Cameron was

:12:58. > :13:03.going to lead and create, but that isn't happening. And energy prices

:13:04. > :13:07.continue into this coming week. We have the companies going before a

:13:08. > :13:11.select committee. My information is they are sending along the secondary

:13:12. > :13:17.division, not the boss. How can they get along -- get away with that I

:13:18. > :13:21.got the letter through from British Gas this week explaining why my

:13:22. > :13:25.bills are going up, and at no point since this became a story have any

:13:26. > :13:30.of the big companies handled it well. I will have to leave it there.

:13:31. > :13:37.Make sure you pay your bill! That's it for today. The Daily Politics is

:13:38. > :13:44.back on BBC Two tomorrow. I will be back here on BBC One next Sunday.

:13:45. > :13:51.Remember, if it's Sunday, it is The Sunday Politics.