16/02/2014 Sunday Politics Yorkshire and Lincolnshire

Good morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. It would be

extremely difficult, if not impossible, for an independent

Scotland to join the European Union, so says the President of the

European Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, in a significant

development in the independence debate. It's our top story. He has

the power to bring travel chaos to the nation's capital. Bob Crow

joined us for the Sunday interview. Another by-election and

An Sunday Politics in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire, great art sell`off. My

some of our town halls are considering blogging the family

silver in With me, the best and brightest

political panel in the business The twits will be as incessant and

probably as welcome as the recent rain. A significant new development

in the debate over Scottish independence this morning, the

President of the European Commission, President Jose Manuel

Barroso, has confirmed what the Nationalists have long denied, that

an independent Scotland would have to reply to join the European Union

as a new member, that it would require the agreement of all 28

member states and that would be in his words, extremely difficult, if

not impossible. In case there is a new country, a new state coming out

of a current member state, it will have to apply and, this is very

important, the application to the union would have to be approved by

all of the other member states. Countries like Spain, with the

secessionist issues they have? I don't want to interfere in your

democratic discussion here, but of course, it will be extremely

difficult to get the approval of all of the other member states, to have

a new member coming in from one member state. We have seen that that

Spain has been opposing even the recognition, for instance, so it is

a similar state. It is a new country. I believe it is great to be

externally difficult, if not impossible. Well, he says he doesn't

want to interfere, but he has just dropped a medium-sized explosive

into the debate on Scottish independence? A huge story. Alex

Salmond must be wondering what is going to go wrong next. His pitch to

the Scottish people is based on two things, the currency union with

England and the rest of the United Kingdom, which was blown apart last

week, and this morning, his claims that Scotland would automatically

get into the European Union has been dynamited. He's not only saying that

they would have to apply, it is also saying it might be impossible to get

the agreement of all 28 members to allow Scotland in. That's even more

significant than the application? The reference to Spain is

interesting, we talk about Catalan independence, an economic and active

area that Spain does not want to be independent. About five other

countries are blocking Kosovo's accession to the EU. There is no

reason they would want to encourage the secessionist in their country by

letting Scotland do the same. If Scotland does have to apply, and it

does get in, it solves the currency problem because all new members have

to accept the Euro? At the moment, the SNP are rejecting that quite

strongly. What an interesting intervention today. However, I know

that those arguing that Scotland should stay in the union are worried

that the polls are tightening. A lot of these interventions, parents care

arguments, they don't look like they are convincing the Scottish people.

We haven't had any polls yet? We haven't, but we have since the

currency debate was reignited in the last few weeks and it shows the

polls tightening slightly. I think Alistair Darling's campaign would

prefer to be much further ahead at the stage. They are worried that

these technical commandments are not having much sway. Are the polls

tightening slightly? They could be within the statistical margin for

error. They are, but not much. Alex Salmond's main page is one of

reassurance. He wants to say you can vote for independence, a pound in

the pocket will be the same as before and you will still be a

member of the European Union. In the last three or four matter days, both

of those claims have been blown apart. Angus MacNeil has already

told BBC Radio 5 Live that the remarks are nonsense and he is

playing more politics. We hope to speak to the SNP's finance minister,

John Swinney, a little bit later in the programme. It is not just the

constant rain that London commuters have had to deal with. There was

also a strike on the tube that disrupted the travel of millions. A

second stoppage was on the cards, but it was called off at the last

minute. The leader of the biggest

underground workers union, the RMT, is Bob Crow, who has led his members

into 24 strikes on the tube since 2005, as well as disputes on the

national rail network. Under his leadership, the union's membership

has grown from 57,000 in 2002 to more than 80,000, at a time when

union membership overall has been shrinking. The current dispute has

seen Bob Crow squaring up to Boris Johnson over the mayor's plans to

close tube station ticket offices. The 48-hour stoppage at the

beginning of this month is estimated to have cost the London economy ?100

million. The two sides have agreed a truce, for now, but Mr Crow has

threatened further action if the mayor imposes his changes.

Bob Crow joins me now for the Sunday interview.

Welcome to the Sunday Politics. You have suspended the strike for the

moment. What will it take to call it off entirely? Want to know first of

all wider booking office has to close. The Mayor of London made it

quite clear in his election programme that the booking offices

would remain open. It was strange, really, because Ken Livingstone

wanted to close them down and the mayor thought it was popular to keep

them open and put in his campaign to keep them open. However, we have not

the news figures. We are being told only 3% of people use the booking

offices. That's not true. In research done, if somebody does to a

booking office with somebody sitting there and asks for a ticket of less

than ?5, they are not allowed to sell them a ticket, it is madness.

Do you use the ticket office? When it is open, yes. You said to ITV

that he didn't. I don't know what I said to ITV, I don't know what time

people use them, sometimes they are open and sometimes they are closed.

People make out that these ticket office staff are people that sit

behind barriers like a newsagent. I'm not knocking a newsagent,

however, these people were the same people treated like Lions when they

were helping people named in the terrorist incidents, taking them out

of the panels. Suddenly they are lazy people that sit in ticket

offices. My understanding is that the people would come from behind

and be out and about now. It is the management wants to run the

underground without ticket offices, isn't that their prerogative? They

are paid to manage, not you, not your members, they are the managers?

Managers are there to manage, and we want good managers. But we've got

some really bad managers that are not looking at the railway as a

whole. This is a successful industry, not an industry in

decline, one of the most successful in Britain. It is moving 3.4 million

people a day. All of the forecast is or it will move to 3.6 million per

day. The mayor wants to run services on a Friday and Saturday night. We

are not opposed to that. However, it does not make sense that if more

people are going to be using the tube on Friday and Saturday, coming

home at two o'clock three o'clock in the morning, a lot of people

drinking, a lot of people not dragging, why take 1000 people of

the network that come to the aid of people that are looking to people? I

want to show you this picture. This is you. Taking a break in Brazil, I

think it is. I was trying to copy you. You deserve this break because

you have done a fantastic job for your members. Yes, I don't see what

that has got to do with it. Let s get every editor of the daily

newspapers and see where they go on their holidays, I would like to

know. What I choose to do... I'm not attacking you for doing that...

You've got a picture up there, I've got to say, why don't they go and

follow Boris Johnson when he was away on holiday, when the riots were

taking place in London, and he refused to come back? Why don't they

go and view the editors of newspapers, where they go on

holiday? Why do they look at you when you go on holiday? They

sometimes do, actually. The basic pay of a tube driver will soon be

?52,000. Ticket office workers are already earning over ?35,000. Never

mind a holiday on Copacabana beach, or membership by your house for what

you have done for them? When you look at the papers this morning I

see that Wayne Rooney is going to get a ?70 million deal over the next

four deals. I see NHS doctors are getting ?3000 a shift. I see a lot

of people that do a lot of people that, in my opinion, don't do

anything for society. The top paid people in this country should be

doctors and nurses. Unfortunately, we live in a jungle. If you are not

strong, the bosses will walk all over you. The reason why we got good

terms and conditions is because we fought for them. The reality is all

of these three political parties, liberals, Tories and Labour, they

have all put no programme that to defend working people. So we have to

do it on our own. And that is why you have done such a great job for

your members and why union membership has been rising, people

want to be part of a successful operation. But it has come at a cost

for less well-paid workers, who travel on the cheap? If everyone

believes if London Underground tube workers take a pay freeze they are

going to redistribute the money to the rest of the workers that work on

the cheap... But the people that travel on the tube, let's look at

some of them, they are the ones that suffer from your strike action. The

starting salary of a cheap driver now, ?48,000. The starting salary

for a nurses only ?26,000, ?22, 00 for a young policeman, ?27,000 for a

teacher starting out. As your members have spread, they have had

to live through 24 strikes in 1 years to push up your members

wages. It's I'm all right Jack? The have put a pay freeze on by

conservatives and liberals. The police constables, so have the

teachers. We have had the ability to go and fight. The reality is, at the

end of the day, as I have said before, no one is going to put up

the cause for workers. Not one single party in parliament are

fighting the cause for workers. They all support privatisation, they all

support keeping the anti-trade union laws, they all support illegal wars

around the world. Unless they have a fighting trade union, our members

pay would be as low as some others. You said we could not care less if

we have 1 million strikes. But these people, the lower paid people who

travel on the tube, who need it as an essential service, they care Of

course they care, I've said before that I apologise to the troubling

public for the dispute that took place. 24 strikes in 13 years? It

two to tango. If the boy never imposed terms and conditions on us

against our will... But you've got great terms and conditions! But it's

a constant battle, they are trying to change them. Drivers are having

their pay going up to ?50,000. You said they are making it worse, it is

going up. They are trying to make things worse for workers. You said

at the start of the interview that the tube strike cost ?100 million in

two days. It means that when members go to work for two days it is worth

?100 million. That demonstrates what they are worth. Only a fighting

trade union can defend workers out there. Your members should enjoy

what you have got for them, because it's not going to last, is it?

Technology will change the whole way your business operates. As Karl Marx

says, you said I was a mixture of Karl Marx, Only Fools And Horses and

the Sopranos. I thought that was quite funny... The Karl Marx part of

it, the only thing that is constant is change. We have been crying out

for new technology. But for who To put people on the dole, so they

can't do anything and do anything for society, or technology so

everybody benefits, lower fares better service and better terms and

conditions for the workers. But you have made Labour so expensive on the

underground that management now has a huge incentive to substitute

technology for Labour. And that s what it's going to do, it is closing

the ticket offices and very soon, starting in 2016, the driverless

trains coming. What I am saying is that your members should enjoy this

because it's not going to last. Driverless trains are not coming

in, it is not safe. We have them in Nuremberg, Shanghai, Sao Paulo, it

is not safe? These are new lines that have been built so that when it

breaks down, people can get out of the tunnel. Would you want to be

stuck on a summers day on the Northern line? A pregnant woman who

cannot get off the train? Absolute panic that takes place, the reality

is simple, it is a nonsense. It s not going to happen because it is a

Victorian network. On Docklands railway for example it is driverless

but when the train breaks down, it is above ground on a very small

section. All of these other cities managed to have it. You remind me

about Henry Ford in the 1930s when he said, you see that robot over

their, he cannot buy a car. All sorts of new jobs are being created

all the time in other areas. Come back to the ticket offices, not many

people use the ticket offices any more, what is wrong with getting the

stuff out of the ticket office on to the concourses, meeting and

greeting, helping disabled people and tourists and making it a better

service? They can do more on the concourse than they can in the

ticket office. Andrew, he took the decision to close down every single

ticket office. You cannot compare for example Chesham with the likes

of Heathrow. Are you telling me people are going to be on a long

transatlantic flight, arrived at Heathrow and cannot get a ticket.

The stuff will be redeployed on the concourse. The simple problem is

that it is not just about the booking office, it is about people

having a visual. If you are partially sighted, you cannot use

the machines. If British is not your first language, you cannot use the

offices. How many languages do your members speak? I don't know, I

struggle with English. The machines can speak many different languages.

They are dehumanising things. You phone the bank, all you hear is

press one for this, two for that. People want to hear it human being

and what makes the London Underground so precious is that

people want to see people. Having well-dressed, motivated people out

on the concourse, what part of that don't you like? They will be on the

concourse and they will have machines. The fact is that London

Underground did a risk assessment of closing down their booking offices

and it is clear that if you are disabled, if you are partially

sighted, London Underground becomes more dangerous. You are posing the

closing of ticket offices, opposing driverless trains, when you opposed

to the Oyster card when it came in? No, Oyster cards, it is how you deal

with it. It is not the only way They should supplement the staff and

the job. If more people used the London Underground system, you want

more staff to deal with them. Let's look at your mandate to strike. Of

your members who work on the Tube, only 40% bothered to vote. Only 30%

voted for the strike, so 70% actually didn't vote to strike of

your members, but the strike went ahead. Isn't it right to have a

higher threshold before you can cause this disruption? It would be

lovely if everyone voted but the Tories took that away. We used to

have ballots at the workplace. What I'm trying to say to you is that we

used to have a ballot box at the workplace and the turnouts were

higher. The Tories believe that if they can have a secret ballot where

ballot papers went to people's home addresses, where they could be

persuaded by the bosses, votes would be different. Let's go back to the

workplace ballot because you get a bigger turnout. Will the RMT

re-affiliate to the Labour Party? I have no intention to. We got

expelled from the Labour Party. But you will give some money to the

Labour councils? Those that support our basic policies get money, we

don't give money directly to MPs, we give it to constituencies. Are you

going to stand for re-election in 2016? I might do, I might not. You

haven't decided yet? No, but more than likely I will do. And will you

stand again as an anti-EU candidate? Yes, I am standing in London, and

right across, completely different to UKIP's policies. They are

anti-European, they believe all of the faults of Europe are down to the

immigrants. We are anti-European Union. If London Underground is as

badly run as you think, why don t you run for mayor? That is down the

road, it has not come up yet. I m not ruling anything out. I'm not

ruling out getting your job on the Sunday Politics. You have got to

retire as well, you have got to put your feet up. I will get you to

renegotiate my package. Shall we go on strike first? If I could have

your wages, I would have two trips to Rio every year. Good luck. And if

you're in the London region they'll have more on the Tube strike later

in the programme. Let's get back to those comments from Jose Manuel

Barroso, and reaction to these comments from John Swinney. Scottish

Nationalists denied all along you would have to reapply, we have now

heard it without any caveats, you will and you might not get in. I

think Jose Manuel Barroso's comments were preposterous this morning. He

compared the situation to the one in Kosovo. Britain is the member,

Scotland is not the member. If you go independent, you will have to

reapply, he says. All of the arrangements we have in place are

compatible with the workings of the European Union because we have been

part of it for 40 years. The propositions we put forward work

about essentially negotiating the continuity of Scotland's membership

of the European Union and that position has now been explained and

debated and discussed and reinforced by comments made by experts. We are

talking about the president of the European commission and we have

spoken to him since he gave that interview on the BBC this morning,

it was an intervention that he made that he wanted to lay out that

Scotland should be in no doubt that if they vote for independence they

will have to apply for European membership and they may not get it

if it is vetoed by other members. What he didn't say is that no state

of the European Union have indicated they would veto Scottish

membership. The Spanish foreign minister has. They have said that if

there is an agreed process within the UK that Scotland becomes an

independent country, then Spain has got nothing to say about the issue.

That indicates to me clearly that the Spanish government will have no

stance to take on the Scottish membership of the European Union

because it is important that Scotland is already part of the

European Union, our laws are compatible with the European Union

and we play our part. The only threat to Scotland's participation

in the European Union is the potential in/out referendum that

David Cameron wants to have in 2017. It has not been a great week for

you, has it? Everything you seem to want, the monetary union, that has

been blown out of the water by the Westminster parties, now Jose Manuel

Barroso has said you will have to reapply to the European Union, it

has not been a good week. You will follow the debate closely, and the

Sunday newspapers are full about the backlash taking place within

Scotland at the bullying remarks of the Chancellor and his cohorts. Is

Jose Manuel Barroso a bully is well now? He is making an indirect

comparison between Scotland and Kosovo. If you vote for independence

and you do have two apply again to join, if you do get in it solves

your currency problem because you will have to accept the euro. We

have set out an option on the currency arrangements which would be

to establish the currency union. You would have to adopt the euro. That's

not rate because you have to be part of the exchange-rate mechanism for

two years before you can apply for membership and an independent

Scotland has no intention of signing up to the exchange rate mechanism or

the single currency. We are concentrating on setting out our

arguments for maintaining the pound sterling, which is in the interests

of Scotland and the UK. Thank you for joining us this morning.

This week's least surprising news was that Labour won the safe seat of

Wythenshawe and Sale East in a by-election, following the death of

the MP Paul Goggins. With the result so predictable, all eyes were on

whether this would be the sixth time this parliament that UKIP would come

second. And whether they'd chip away at Labour's vote, not just the

Tories and the Lib Dems. Adam stayed up all night to find out what it all

meant. Forget the hype. Forget the theorising. And yes - everyone has a

theory. UKIP are learning from us. What have they picked up from you?

To be silly. Thanks to this week's by-election we've got some hard

evidence in paper form that helps answer the question: How are UKIP

doing? Turns out the answer is well, but not well enough to beat Labour.

I'm therefore claim -- declare that Mike Cane is elected. So UKIP have

come second and increased their share of the vote quite

significantly. But their performance isn't as good as their performances

in some of the other by-elections isn't as good as their performances

this parliament. Just don't suggest to them that their bandwagon has

ground to a halt. A week ago you'd told me you were going to win, what

happened? No, I didn't, I said I wanted to win. My mistake. How are

you feeling? It is a Labour stronghold, we always knew it was

going to be a fight. Labour were running scared of letting us present

our arguments. UKIP's campaign in Wythenshawe didn't point to the

right but to the left, with leaflets that branded Labour as a party of

millionaires who didn't care about the working class. It wasn't a

winning strategy but it did help them beat the Tories who focused on

dog mess and potholes instead. Professional UKIP-watcher Rob Ford

from Manchester Uni thinks they could be on the right track. He's

analysed the views of 5,000 UKIP voters for a new book, which could

confound the received wisdom about the party. The common media image of

the typical UKIP voter is a ruddy faced golf club and -- member from

the south-east of the UK and many UKIP activists do resemble that

stereotype to some extent, they do pick up a lot of activists from the

Conservative party, but UKIP voters are older, more working class, more

likely to live in Northern, urban areas, and they are much more

anti-system than anti-EU. And they're precisely the voters that

the Tory MP David Mowat needs if he's to hold on to his narrow

majority in the constituency just down the road. Do you have a UKIP

strategy in your seat? Our UKIP strategy is to point out that if

they want a referendum on if they want to be in the EU or not, there

is one way to get it, for the Conservatives to form their next

government and for me to be their MP. UKIP could accidentally destroy

what they want? I'm not sure it will be accidental. People need to

realise that if Ed Miliband is the Prime Minister, there will be no

referendum on the EU and UKIP may have made their point but they would

not have got their referendum. Over at UKIP local HQ, it is tidying up

time. Not helping, Nigel? I had major surgery on the 19th of

November and I am still weak as a kitten. I can barely lift a pint

with my right hand, it is as serious as that. The answer is, Carreon,

chaps, you're all doing a very good job. There will be carrying on to

the European elections in May, which will provide more evidence of if the

UKIP and wagon is powering on or if it is just parked. -- bandwagon.

With me now is the Conservative MEP Vicky fraud and UKIP director of

medication is Patrick O'Flynn. He will also be a candidate in the

upcoming European elections. You came second in Manchester, but it

was not a close second. -- Vicky Ford. There is nothing that is a

game changer? I think it is very unusual for any insurgent party,

like the liberals used to be, to actually win a safe seat of the

opposition. Those shocks, going back to Walkington etc, it tended to be

winning seats against an unpopular government. We did extraordinarily

well in Wythenshawe. Labour compressed the campaign down to the

shortest possible time and maxed out the postal vote. Whatever we think

about Labour, they do have an efficient machine, lots of union

activists signed a lot of people with a lot of know-how. It pushed

you into third place and showed the increasing irrelevance of the Tories

in the North? Tory minded voters in the North Sea more inclined to vote

for UKIP than you? I think by-elections are by-elections. The

same day, we took a seat from Labour in Birmingham. Well, that was a

by-election as well, so we should discount that as well. You should

learn from them, and we need to look forward to the elections in 2014.

That is in May this year, when we have a chance to really grab this

change in Europe, grab this change that we were talking about just now.

You don't worry, particularly in the north, if people want to vote

against Labour your supporters are drifting to UKIP? I think people

vote UKIP in a European election and they have done that for many years.

They vote that because they want change. The problem is, Patrick's

party have had MEPs since 1999 and they cannot deliver that change.

They can't because they don't have seats in Westminster. It was on that

video, the only way we are going to get the change we want in Europe is

to have that referendum and have the renegotiation, and that means vote

Tory. What do you say to that? Let's get real, the Conservative Party has

not won a Parliamentary majority in 22 years. But the only way you will

get a referendum, if that is what motivates you, and with UKIP it is,

the only way it will be a referendum on Europe in this country as if

there is a majority Conservative government at the next election. And

you could well stop that from happening? I don't accept that. I

believe, just as we forced David Cameron and into a referendum pledge

he explicitly ruled out making before through our success, and I

was there in PMQs, when his MPs asked him and he said it would not

be in the national interest because he didn't want to leave, our

electoral success forced that pledge. I believe by winning the

European action this May we can force Ed Miliband, again, against

his will, to match that pledge. Then, whatever formulation varies in

the next Parliament, we will get a referendum. Labour MPs have just had

the chance to say we want a referendum. They refused to do it.

The only way you are going to get a renegotiation, a change in our

relationship with Europe and an in or out referendum is to have a

Conservative Government. Please, UKIP, stop pretending that you can

deliver, because you don't deliver and you don't... We have delivered,

we forced David Cameron to give a pledge for a referendum he didn't

want to make. We will know if you are right about Ed Miliband or not,

you will have to tell us going into the campaign. If you are wrong, what

do you do then? There are still loads of reasons for people to vote

UKIP. A referendum is one thing. David Cameron, and I asked him

directly, thermally wants to stay in. He wants to be the Edward Heath

of the 21st century. The Tories are going to say, vote UKIP, get Ed

Miliband. What would you say to that? I would say we have probably

maxed out the Tory vote we are going to get because David Cameron has

been incredibly helpful in sending them in our direction. Our potential

for growth now, would we are concentrating on, his those

disenchanted former Labour voters and more and more of them are coming

towards us on things like immigration and law and order. We

want to renegotiate our relationship with Europe. We need to have people

who are going to turn up to negotiate with people like Barroso.

That meant a Prime Minister that is not Ed Miliband but David Cameron.

UKIP MEPs do not turn up to defenders. If President Hollande is

as good as his word and says there will be no substantial

renegotiation, certainly no treaty change this side of 2017 when he is

up for the election, what do you do then? He is a French Socialist Prime

Minister, I don't expect him to agree. But you can't bring anything

of substance back with these negotiations. Then people will vote

to leave. The Prime Minister has been very clear that British public

opinion is on a knife edge and unless we get what we want from a

renegotiation, we will leave. You unless we get what we want from a

would vote to leave? Let's see what we get with the deal on the table in

2017. If the status quo was what we have today, I would vote to leave.

But I want to renegotiate. We will have to move on. For those viewers

lucky enough to live in the East of England, they will be seeing more of

Patrick in a moment. You are watching Sunday Politics. Coming up

in just over 20 minutes, I will be talking about, what else, the

weather, with Hello, you're watching the Sunday

Politics for Yorkshire and Lincolnshire. Coming up today: The

great art sell`off. Why some of our town halls are considering flogging

the family silver in order to balance the books.

Plus we'll find out why a senior Labour figure says the party needs

to do more to deal with the threat from UKIP in South Yorkshire.

And we'll look at claims of a North`South divide when it comes to

help being offered to flood victims. Our guests today are MP for Barnsley

Central Dan Jarvis, MP First, we're asking whether it's

time town halls should sell off their family silver. Many of our

local councils hold millions of pounds' worth of fine art work from

some of the world's most famous artists. But with authorities facing

a financial squeeze, there's pressure from some to cash`in on

council art collections. Here's Louise Martin.

Of, is a creative inspiration on a billion`dollar economy. In these

times of posterity should the Council considers selling the family

silver worth more than ?250 million? Art is a big`money business but how

much is the artwork worth? Leeds City Council collection has been

valued at ?150 million but they don't break the ice down directly to

fine art. The suggestion last year from

Bradford opposition councillors that the polity should sell off some of

the David Hockney pieces came with serious criticisms, including from

the artist himself. But would it make financial sense?

They might not get the price today that they will get in five years

time but they might get more. Art is therefore asked to enjoy and our

kids to enjoy and grandkids to enjoy. Once you put money into art

at all changes. Among the works in West Yorkshire

collections are Francis bacon pieces. The leader of Kirklees

Council says art could follow buildings and land in being sold

off. Each year we send off several

million pounds worth of buildings and land to funds things. We will

take advice this summer and that will help us make decisions on what

we could hold onto and the decisions of what to sell will be taken in a

transparent manner with contributions from everyone.

David Green, leader of Bradford Council, hit back at colleagues that

suggest pieces are sold off. The artwork has been left in trust

to the people of Bradford and as the guardians of that artwork for future

generations, we have a duty to protect it and make sure it is

widely available. Do we sell`off the family silver to

cover costs? For Kirklees, it is looking increasingly likely.

Dan Jarvis, is this a simple way for councils to solve the black holes in

the financial budgets? It is not a simple solution. We live

in the cult financial Times and it is tough to be an local government.

In my part of the world, we have invested money in a museum and I

think that cultural offer is very important. I think we need to be

cautious about getting rid of a cultural legacy and an inheritance

for the next generation. It contributes to towns and cities

being places we want to 11 and places we want people to visit.

Your colleagues say they want to sell off the art collections.

Not every single one. The leader of the group has talked about other

arrangements. As the Council the best to look after these? The story

and Bradford is that the insurance was ?20 million. Desperate times

call for desperate measures and you cannot have any area of the

Council's budgets or assets which are areas we cannot go. We are

cutting youth services so you must look at every single part of the

Council's acid this. `` asset base.

Selling one or two good bring an important contribution.

Should they sell off fine art? I think it would be sad to sell off

our national heritage. What I do think is that you could look to make

cuts in different ways cause you have still got the chief Executive

is an lots of money and you could look there first. Instead of getting

rid of our heritage, let's get rid of cuts were we really needed.

Somebody on ?250,000 a year doesn't need that money and we could look at

cutting their salaries. But make sure that the cuts are in the right

place, get rid of the fat cat salaries, not lollipop lady 's the

problem is that the funding settlements from national government

are unfair. David Cameron's on local authority

has a better funding solution than many in Yorkshire. These are

difficult times. I agree they are drastic times but I would say that's

we need to look carefully at what the spending solutions are for the

long`term I think this is a short`term measure.

It is a short`term measure to what is a short`term crisis. The

recession has gone on for longer than people imagine is but it will

end and if there are things that we can do then we should look at it.

A senior Labour figure says his party needs to do much more to deal

with the threat from UKIP in many working class Yorkshire heartlands.

In a week when UKIP recorded another second place finish in a northern

by`election, former minister John Healey claims Labour should

"wake`up" to the threat from Nigel Farage's party. Liz Roberts has the

story. With a majority of almost 14,000,

you think this Labour MP would be sitting comfortably but these

streets are now a battle ground with the enemy closing in.

There has been some comfort for people nationally in Labour that

UKIP are taking four or five Conservative votes for everyone

Labour vote. I don't think that's true in working`class areas like

this. The Labour minister has apologised.

One thing we didn't get right was immigration.

But has it come too late? It needs to wake up and recognise

the problems and expose the truth about you cat.

The UKIP army has been gaining ground and devotes, including from

Labour voters. It all is was a Labour voter but in

2007 I changed to UKIP. I believe that the Labour Party, no new

Labour, has abandoned working people.

It is no surprise that Labour should be worried. UKIP has come a serious

second in two by`elections in the area and has ambitions to conquer

new territory. We are beginning to become the party

of opposition in the North of England.

We are getting the message across on the doorstep. They have had enough

of Labour and see us as an alternative party for the working

man and they will be voting for us in May. We have support from

lifelong Labour voters. That is the claim but UKIP are

starting from lobe are. `` low bar. It has always been in my family so I

will stick with Labour. I'm done with voting. Not at all.

They are all the same. The battle lines have now been drawn

and with European and local elections coming up, Labour will

soon know if you are a serious threat come the general election.

As he writes that Labour should wake up to the threat?

We shouldn't be complacent about it. People are hugely cynical about

politicians and UKIP have been successful in branding themselves as

a receptacle for protest votes. Next year in the general election, there

will be an increasing focus on the policies and the people they choose

to represent them. But we need to get out and about and talk to people

about the issues that affect them. We talk about the rise of the Cape,

it became second end the by`election this week, but you were 9000 votes

behind Labour. When will you start winning seats?

The demographics they were a little bit difference compared to a lot of

Labour heartlands. We found public sector workers living under a Labour

council and they were quite happy and comfortable. They have held the

vote well but we are still very pleased with our result because we

have gone from theft to second place `` fifth. Voters are saying to us

they want to be involved and they will vote for us.

You don't need me to remind you that the Lib Dems lost their deposits in

the by`election. I've worried about recovering in time for the general

election? I don't think UKIP will be a threat

to us because they are generally a right`wing party. There has always

been a strong right wing vote within the working class and that will be

all 22 UKIP. `` vulnerable to UKIP. I can hardly begrudge another party

seeking the protest vote. I think Labour have a particular problem

with the traditional right`wing vote that has been all the way back to

Mosley. It has always been there and will always be vulnerable to the

UKIP vote. Is there at the suggestion that your

party has neglected the needs of working`class voters?

Particularly on immigration. I'm clear that we made mistakes on

immigration and we want to that again. It is not the single most

important issue for people on the street. People are experiencing a

cost of living crisis. We need to demonstrate to them that we have the

policies that will steer them through these difficult times.

Europe is one policy but it doesn't keep people awake at night. People

are kept awake wondering how they will pay the bills and our challenge

is to demonstrate how we would help them pay those bells.

Europe is a massive drop in because it does affect our everyday lives.

You touched on immigration. If we don't have control of our own

borders... That's not true, they don't

originate there. The policy doesn't originate in Europe.

I have not sat in Westminster so I don't want to say it does and you

say it doesn't. As far as I'm concerned, many laws originate from

Europe. Give me three. Give me one.

We are looking at immigration because that is one area where EU

dictates on. We cannot control our own borders so therefore we have a

situation where we have open mass immigration and we have free

movement of migrants from the EU over to this country.

And the other way. Some immigration is good and some

migration is good. But unlimited at uncontrolled is not good for the

country. We have many major problems occurring and I could list them.

Is that worrying for you as a pro`EU party?

There is one party that is unashamedly pro`European. A reformed

Europe is what people want and we clearly stand for that.

Plenty more on this to come. Let's get some more of the week's

political news now. Len Tingle has our round`up in 60 seconds.

The government sprang into action this week to announce an immediate

?5,000 grant to help every bloodied home in the country but the timing

anger those who lived near the Humber. This MP told the Commons

that properties had been hit well before Christmas.

Can the minister explained why it has taken two months for that

announcement to be made and only after the playing fields of Eton

bloodied? Anger bubbled to the surface in

BBC's Question Time. It is not within a few miles of

London, they don't care. The threat of the floods and the

incessant nature of the bad weather has just made this a more important

and bigger emergency as the weeks have passed.

He says 16 is too young to vote? These young people certainly don't

and they lobbied Parliament this week.

We want them to realise they can influence the country and that

politics influences everything in their lives.

Was it right for Diana Johnson to start playing politics with flooding

by making that claim about the government acting because the

playing fields of Eton were flooded? I think she was making a genuine

point that we `` will be felt across the region. If we only had flooding

in Yorkshire, the Prime Minister wouldn't have said money was no

object. Has there been a North`South divide

in response to flooding? It's interesting that people say

this is political but there aren't many Labour MPs in the south`west of

the country and there are acres under water. You would have thought

there would have been flooding protection but clearly that is not

the case. Nigel Farage popped up in Somerset.

Has it been helpful all these party leaders grandstanding in these

floods hit towns? That is bound to happen, they are

bound to go and see it from them selves. I am interested in how we're

going to pay to put things right. They were Cameron said there is

unlimited funds `` David Cameron. If there is unlimited funds, why are we

asked in the EU? Why shouldn't we asked the EU?

Would you take the money from the EU?

What I am saying is, what was so wrong with Nigel's comment about

having 1% of the foreign aid budget? What is wrong with starting at home

with aids, just 1%, to help these people in our country.

But you would take the EU money. I am not saying that we would or

would not. I am saying we would take 1% of the foreign budget.

So you are not prepared to take EU money?

I am not prepared to say that is the case.

Why wouldn't you take it? I didn't say I wouldn't take it.

You have got to make a decision. Would you take it?

I am not prepared to say whether I would take that money. It is

probably our own money. So would you take it, yes or no?

I am not saying that we would take that money.

You have to take judgements in politics.

There is a debate is raging that we shouldn't be spending millions

abroad at a time of national crisis. Your thoughts.

That is another argument. I think it is the right thing to do to stop

kids dying from hunger around the world. It is right that we continue

to be a responsible nation and make a contribution. It is simplistic to

say we want to send that any abroad. This has been a wake`up call for

people. We need to make good on financial judgements on how to spend

money to prevent these floods from happening again in the future. There

have been cuts to the lad budget `` flood budget.

Should the voting age be reduced to 16?

Absolutely. It has been our party policy for years and we need to

other parties to join us. Hopefully we will be working with David

McIntire and others in the area to campaign for this. Of course they

should be able to vote. Would you like to see that?

Personally, I would say yes because we have a high population of

intelligent 15 and 16`year`olds who are more politically aware.

Are they mature enough? Most of them are added at a time

when we need is to connect with young people we need to connect with

them so I would say yes. That's it from us thank

direction? No, in real terms now the rent is falling in London. Andrew,

back to you. Welcome back. Let's start by talking

about the weather. What could be more British? It has been

practically the only topic of conversation for the past few

weeks. This morning, Ed Miliband has made the direct link, declaims,

between this exceptionally wet and windy weather and climate change.

That's an interesting development, taking place. Ed Miliband is the

author of the 2008 Climate Change Act, so he has to stick to that line

or his life 's work goes up in smoke. When he passed it, there was

Westminster consensus. Now the Tories are beginning to appeal off.

UKIP has definitely peeled off. Labour and Lib Dems are sticking to

their guns, there is now a debate? It has moved from consensus to very

fragile consensus. It's an interesting tactic for Ed Miliband

to take. He could either approach the floods talking about government

failures and handling, instead he has gone for the intellectual

argument, try and turn this into a debate about ideology and climate

change. I think he will find that quite difficult. Partly, I don't

think the public I get listening to an argument like that. Partly

because only one in three of the public totally agree with him. The

polls for The Times think that about one in three think that man-made I'm

a change is responsible for these floods, the rest do not. I'm not

sure that the interventions will be particularly well picked up. It puts

David Cameron in a difficult position. He was hugging those

huskies, it was going to be the greenest Government ever, and now he

has an Environment secretary that doesn't really believe in climate

change. Well, we don't know where he stands. That is not where he was in

2010. It has always been sold to us that he is statesman-like and

pragmatic, but that drifts into he doesn't really believe anything

This is a worldwide phenomenon now. You've got the Canadian government,

they are pretty sceptical these days. The new Australian government

is pretty sceptical. The Obama administration has been attacked by

the green movement across the United States, he is probably about to

approve the keystone pipeline that will take over the Texas refineries.

What was a huge consensus across the globe is a guinea to break down

Probably started to break down about the time of the financial crisis,

the age of austerity, when suddenly people had more to worry about than

green issues. Even at home it is a slightly risky tactic for Ed

Miliband. The idea there is a scientific consensus on this, there

isn't. You look at Professor Collins this morning, climate systems

expert, saying, actually, the jet stream is not operating further

south because of climate change Or if it is, it is beyond our

knowledge. He flies in the face of what Ed Miliband as saying. He's

saying the wet weather is caused by global warming, the head of science

at Exeter University says the IPCC originally looked at whether climate

change could affect what happens to the jet stream and, because it had

no evidence it had any effect, it decided not to include it at all in

the IPCC report. The problem we have got is that any individual

phenomenon is difficult to attribute to climate change. But the Labour

Leader just have? And The Met Office have done the same thing. It's a

fragile in, but overall we can say we are getting more extreme weather

than ever. The most extreme weather, hurricanes and tropical storm is,

they have been in decline. Equally, we have had ten of the hottest

summers in the last ten years since 1998. Overall, there is a case that

can be made that we are getting more. Each individual thing is

difficult to say. Until recently, almost everyone agreed with that

case. Now the parties are reflecting differences. I wanted to move on,

what did you make of two interesting things that happened with the

interview with UKIP and the Tories, one Cory saying I am voting to come

out, and the UKIP chap saying we are maxed out on Tory defectors, we

can't get any more? I think that was a dangerous admission from Patrick

O'Flynn from UKIP, essentially saying that their vote has peaked.

Looking at the by-elections, I'm not sure that was a particularly wise

reflection on that. They got 18 , 23% last year. The case he is making

is that there are more votes to be gained by attracting former Labour

voters than former Tories. I'm not sure that red UKIP, the bit of UKIP

that tries to make benefit protection and some other kind of

social issues at the heart really sits comfortably with their

insurgent, anti-state message. I don't think it will do particularly

well. This is why they are pushing the message, it is their response to

the idea and suggestion of a Tory rallying cry that they vote for

Nigel Farage, and it is really a vote for Ed Miliband. Patrick is a

very good journalist, a very good commentator. He answered almost as a

commentator rather than head of communications for a political

party. The Government are still trying to rid itself of troublesome

priests, an attack on welfare reforms from the Catholic Archbishop

of Westminster. Let's have a look and see what he said. The basic

safety net that was there to guarantee that people would not be

left in hunger or in destitution has actually been torn apart. It no

longer exists. And it is a real real, dramatic crisis. The second is

that, in this context, the administration of social assistance,

I am told, has become more and more punitive. If applicants do not get

it right, they have to wait and they have to wait for ten days, two

weeks, with nothing. Has the basic safety net disappeared? I don't see

how it is possible to argue that. It is certainly the case that there

have been reductions in various benefits, some benefits have been

scrapped and there is a welfare reform programme. But this country

is still spending ?94 billion a year on working age benefits. Excluding

pensions? The idea that this equates to some sort of wiping out of the

safety net is... He has gone on a full frontal assault on the Tory

reforms, not the kind of attack that Labour would be prepared to make?

No, they know that it doesn't play very well in the country. He's not

up for election. Whether or not you agree about the safety net, I think

the welfare reforms have been poorly managed and I don't think that is a

full dispute. Universal credit, it is in some very long grass. It had

some stupid ideas, like the idea that it would be paid monthly,

instead of weekly, meaning that people are more likely to run out of

money by the end of the month. It's interesting, in the past, when

members of the cloth have attacked the government for welfare reforms,

the Government have responded by trying to paint them as lefties

ideological driven. I think that is hard in this case, an assault made

deliberately in the Telegraph from somebody who feels they come from a

centre-right position. I think there will be a bit of awkwardness about

this intervention. It is not the kind of thing they wanted to see. Is

it politically damaging for the Government? It is if it makes them

look mean-spirited. But that is the problem with welfare reforms. You

can say all sorts of things about Iain Duncan Smith's competence. But

the whole thing springs from a moral mission, as he sees it, to liberate

the poor and extend opportunity One of the worst moments for the Tories

was blaming the low level of voting in Wythenshawe and sale in the fact

that the constituency had, in the words of one senior Tory, the

largest council estate in Europe inside its constituency boundary.

The point being what? Because you live in a council estate you don't

vote? That they don't see people living in council estate as one of

them, not an impulse that Margaret Thatcher would have had. I think

it's dangerous if they are painting is people as opponents rather than

trying to win them over. When they do vote, they determine elections!

The idea that there is no such thing as a working-class Tory is toxic. I

want to show you a picture. There we go. It is behind me, on the 5th of

February, it is all men. And then, on the next, look at that, the 2th,

there are a few women. Not exactly many, but some. It is an

improvement. But it is so transparent, isn't it? We phoned up

one of the women that sat behind David Cameron to ask, why the sudden

change? They said, I don't know why you are bothering to ask, it is

completely natural, we didn't do anything to stage manage it. Did his

nose gets longer? It is something that is very transparent and

depressing about the way politicians choose to react to these moments.

Every week they put two women behind David Cameron, so that a tight shot

shows them. It is called the doughnut. They don't have many women

to shuffle around, there are only four among 14 in the Shadow Cabinet.

Also, the fact that women, younger women in particular, are much less

likely to vote Tory than five or ten years ago. David Cameron, it drives

and furious, he is obviously aware this is one of the biggest potential

demographic problem is that they have. It also reminds us of how the

public can actually see the wiring behind a lot of the stuff. Do they

really think your blog so stupid that they will not notice that the

following week the front bench is packed with women? I think it just

increases contempt for the entire rocket. It is an issue where Labour

seem to have pulled ahead of the other parties. We are being told

that 50% of candidates in their 100 target seats will be female. It

looks like the composition of Labour continues to go towards a kind of

rough 50-50 split, eventually. Although that is true, I think the

faces we see on the telly, Ed Miliband, Ed Balls, Chris Leslie,

they are almost always men. There is a Rachel Reeves, a prominent female

face that goes up a lot. But really, the number of e-mails they put up is

proportionally a lot smaller. Is the Miliband team still a men's club?

Behind the scenes, it is very blokey. It's been described as a

kind of seminar room at a university. I think that is true.

The Observer did the cutout and keep of the people behind Mr Miliband. As

opposed to the Shadow Cabinet, with lots of women in it, it was very

male. The one reason Labour have all of these women to put up in

constituencies is all women short lists is. If Tories want to change

things, I know they can be prone to minute -- and in relation, but they

work. In ten years time, I think it will give Labour an immense

advantage. By then, I think they will have a woman leader. Who will

that be? Potentially somebody not even yet in the Commons. You can see

how quickly people can rise to the top, but the Labour Party is going

to be increasingly donated by women. Do you think there will be a Labour

Leader before Theresa May becomes leader of the Conservatives? I think

it is ultimately about Osborne trying to stop Boris. I think I

would be astonished if she managed it. The first female Labour Leader?

I would pick Rachel Reeves the way it is currently going, she knows her

stuff and does well on TV. That is all for this week. We have a week

off now. I'll be back in the week after next. Remember, if it is

Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics, unless it's a Parliamentary recess.

For many of us, making a new start on the other side of the world