02/03/2014 Sunday Politics Yorkshire and Lincolnshire

Morning folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.

Fears that Ukraine could face invasion escalate this morning as

Russian forces take control of Crimea. President Obama and his

European allies tell President Putin to back off. It doesn't sound like

he's listening. Shadow Education Secretary Tristram

Hunt has started spelling out Labour's plans for schools. So

what's the verdict - full marks, or must try harder? He joins us for the

Sunday Interview. And all the big political parties

appeal. We'll look at some unusual appeal. We'll look at some unusual

We are on the hunt for the missing European millions to fund our food

banks. finances.

And with me, as always, three journalists who'd make a clean sweep

if they were handing out Oscars for political punditry in LA tonight.

But just like poor old Leonardo DiCaprio they've never won so much

as a Blue Peter badge! Yes, it's Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan

Ganesh. Instead of acceptance speeches they'll be tweeting faster

than the tears roll down Gwyneth Paltrow's face. Yes, that's as

luvvie as we get on this show. Events have been moving quickly in

Ukraine this weekend. The interim government in Kiev has put the

Ukrainian military on full combat alert after Russia's parliament

rubber-stamped the deployment of Russian troops anywhere in Ukraine.

Russian troops seem already to be in control of the mainly

Russian-speaking Crimea region, where Russia has a massive naval

base. President Obama told President Putin that Russia has flouted

international law by sending in Russian troops but the Kremlin is

taking no notice. This is now turning into the worst stand-off

between Russia and the West since the conflict between Georgia and

Russia in 2008, though nobody expects any kind of military

response from the West. Foreign Secretary William Hague is on his

way to Kiev this morning to show his support for the new government,

though how long it will survive is another matter. We can speak to our

correspondent David Stern, he's in Kiev.

As things look from Kiev, can we take it they've lost Crimea, it is

now in all essence under Russian control? Yes, well for the moment,

Crimea is under Russian control Russian troops in unmarked uniforms

have moved throughout the peninsula taking up various positions, also at

the Ismis which links Ukraine into Crimea. They've surrounded Ukrainon

troops there. Three units have been captured according to a top

officials. We can say at the moment Russia controls the peninsula. It

should also be said, also they have the support of the ethnic Russian

population. The ethnic Russians make up the majority of the population.

They are also not entirely in control because there are other

groups, namely the Tatar as and the ethnic Ukrainian speakers who are at

least at the moment tacitly resisting. We'll see what they'll

start to do in the coming days. David, I'm putting up some pictures

showing Russian troops digging in on the border between Crimea and

Ukraine. I get the sense that is just for show. There is, I would

assume, no possibility that the Ukrainians could attempt to retake

Crimea by military force? It seems that the Ukrainians are weighing

their options right now. Their options are very limited. Any

head-to-head conflict with Russia would probably work against the

Ukrainians. They seem to be taking more of a long-term gain. They are

waiting for the figs's first move. They are trying not to create any

excuse that the Russians can stage an even larger incursion into Crimea

or elsewhere, for that matter. They also seem to be trying to get

international support. It should be said, this is a new Government. It

has only been installed this week. They are trying to gain their

footing. This is a major crisis They have to count on the loyalty of

the army they might have some resistance from solders from the

eastern part of the country who are Russian speaking. They probably

could count on Ukrainian speakers and people from the centre and west

of the country as well as regular Ukrainians. A lot of people are

ready to fight to defend Ukrainian Terre Tory. Where does the Kremlin

go next? They have Crimea to all intents and purposes. There's a weak

Government in Kiev. Do they move to the eastern side of Ukraine which is

largely Russian speaking and there's already been some unrest there?

That's the big question, that's what everybody's really asking now. Where

does this go from here? We've had some unrest in the eastern part of

the country. There have been demonstrations and clashes. More

ominously, there have been noises from the Kremlin they might actually

move into eastern Ukraine. Putin in his conversation with Barack Obama

said they might protect their interests there. It should be said,

if they do expand, in fact, they've also said they are dead against the

new Government seeing it as illegitimate and fascist. It does

contain risks. They will have to deal with international reactions.

America said there will be a deep reaction to this and it will affect

Russia's relations with Ukraine and the international community. They

have to deal with the reaction in Ukraine. This may unite Ukrainians

behind this new interim Government. Once Russia moves in, they will be

seen as an invading force. It plays on historical feelings of Russia

being an imperial force. Joining me is MP Mark Field who sits

on the security Security and Intelligence Committee in the House

of Commons. What should the western response be to these events? I can

understand why William Hague is going to Kiev tomorrow to stand side

by side whizz whoever's in charge. They need to CEOP sit numbers and

also President Putin. The truth is we are all co significant fatries to

the Budapest Memorandum of almost 20 years ago which was designed to

maintain the integrity of the Ukraine and Crimea. There needs to

be a discussion along those lines. The difficulty is President Putin

has watched events in recent months, in relation to Syria, it is palpable

President Obama's focus of attention ask the other side of the Pacific

rather than the Atlantic. The vote in the House of Commons, I was very

much against the idea of military action or providing weapons to the

free Syrian army. My worry is, events proved this, the majority of

the other options toed as sad are rather worse. It is clear now we are

in a constitutional mess in this country. We cannot even contemplate

military action without a parliamentary vote that moves

against quick reaction that is required from the executive or, I

suspect, there will be very little appetite for any military action

from the West over in Ukraine. We are corn tours under the agreement

of less than 20 years ago. We may be but we've guaranteed an agreement

which it is clear we haven't the power to enforce. You wrote this

morning, Britain is a diminished voice. Clams Iley navigating the

Syrian conflict we relick wished decisions to the whims of

parliamentary approval. That may or may not be but the Kremlin's not

watching how we voted on the Syrian issue? In relation to Syria, it was

where is the western resolve here. The truth ask Putin's position is

considerably less strong. In diplomatic terms. He had a victory

in Syria in relation to chemical weapons and in relation to the

West's relationship with Iran. Putin is a vital inter locking figure In

demographic and economic terms, Russia's in very deep trouble. The

oil price started to fall to any degree, oil and gas price, given the

importance of mineral wealth and exports for the Russian economy

Putin would be in a lot of trouble. It requires an engagement from the

EU and the EU are intending to look at their internal economic problems

and will be smarting from the failure within a matter of hours of

the deal they tried to broker only nine days' ago.

You say if Mr Putin decides to increase the stakes and moves into

the east, takes over the whole place, our Government, you say, will

find itself with another colossal international headache. Some people

watching this will be thinking, what's it got to do with us? It s a

long way away from Britain. We haven't a dog in this fight? We have

in this regard for the longer term here. I think if there were to be

some military action in Ukraine the sense of Russia taking over, it

could have a major impact on the global economy in very quick order.

You should not deny that. There will be move to have sanctions against

Russia. The escalation of that will be difficult. The other fact is

looking at our internal affairs and reform, partners, the Baltic states,

Finland, Poland, the Czech Republic, they will be looking at a resurgent

Russia now and think they'll need to hold as tightly as possible to the

EU institutions and the power of Germany at the centre of that. This

whole appetite for the reforms politically and economically will be

closed very much within a matter of a short period of time. It has

longer term implications. Mark Field, thank you.

We're joined now by BBC News night's Diplomatic Editor Mark Urban. Is

there any prospect of a western military response? Clearly at the

moment, it is nil. The boat has sailed with the Crimean. It has been

per performed by Russian forces It is now a matter of coordinating a

plate cal line. European foreign ministers tomorrow. To say what will

our future limits be? Where could we possibly draw red lines? To try to

think a couple of steps down this, what happens if Russia interrupts

energy supplies to EU member states ornate owe countries? These are the

important steps they have to think about. It is quite clear we are in a

different world here now. Also, Ukraine is facing a urgent foreign

exchange crisis. Within literally a few weeks they could run out of

money. All of these are rushing towards decision makers very fast.

There is an interim and I suggestion unstable Government in Kiev. Crimea

semi-to be under Russian control. There are clashes between the

reformers and Russian nationals in the east of the country. What does

Mr Putin do next? He has lots of options, of course. He has this

carte blanch carte blanch from his Parliament to go in to the rest of

Ukraine if he wants to. His military deployment suggests the one bite at

a time, just Crimea to start with. See what response comes from the

Ukrainian Government. Of course so far, there hasn't been a coherent

response. The really worrying thing about recent months, not just recent

days, are the indications that the future of Ukraine as a unitary state

is now in doubt. Look at it from the other side of the equation. The

President when faced with demonstrations, many extremists he

was unable to deal with that. Now we have the other side, if you like,

the Russian speakers, the other side of the fight, Russian nationalists

showing they can get away with unilateral action more or less with

impunity. The Ukrainian chiefs have been sacked. I think there are

considerable questions now as to whether Ukraine is falling apart

and, if that happens, we're into a Yugoslav-type situation which will

continue posing very serious questions for the EU and NATO for

months or years to come. So, Janan, Ukraine is over? Where the west to

concede to the Russian in Crimea, it would perversely be a net loss for

Russia. You'd assume the rest of Ukraine would become an un

unambiguously a member of the the EU, maybe NATO. On top of that a

Russian dream of Eurasion dream they will look at Putin's behaviour

and is a, no, thanks, we'll head towards the EU. It is a short-term

victory for Putin which backfires on his broader goals in Well, many

people said if he grabs Crimea, he loses Ukraine, which is your point.

We have seen violent demonstrations in the big eastern cities in Ukraine

yesterday. People taking control of certain buildings. The risk is there

of spreading beyond Crimea. I think the lack of any unified or visible

response from Ukrainian armed forces... They allowed Russian

troops to walk into the bases in Crimea. They have supposedly gone on

red alert but they have done absolutely nothing. We don't see

them deploying from barracks. There are serious questions about whether

they would just fall apart. Putin is not going to let them split away. I

would have thought he would like the entire Ukraine to come into the

Russian ambit. Barack Obama is saying this will not stand. He has a

90 minute conversation with Vladimir Putin and what is his response? I am

suspending my cooperation in the run-up to the Sochi Summit. What is

the EU doing? Nothing. There is nothing they can do and Putin knows

there are a series of lines that he is able to cross and get away with

it. Why should Berlin, London, Washington be surprised by the

strength of Vladimir Putin's reaction? It was never going to let

Ukraine just fall into the arms of the EU. That is the interesting

point. And who does he listen to? Paddy Ashdown was saying sent Angela

Merkel because she is the only person who can talk to him and I

find that response worrying. We need to speak with a united voice but

nobody knows what we should be saying. Military intervention is out

for the West so we go to economic sanctions. Doesn't Vladimir Putin

just say, oh, you want sanctions? I have turned off the gas tap. Yes, it

is move and countermove, and it is difficult to predict where it will

end up. In all these meetings that are being held, they do think a step

or two ahead and try and set out clear lines. Thank you for coming in

this morning. Labour has been struggling since

2010 to decide exactly how to take education secretary Michael Gove,

one of the boldest reformers of the coalition and most divisive figures.

Ed Miliband appointed TV historian Tristram Hunt and many thought

Labour had found the man to teach Michael Gove a lesson. But how much

do we really know about the party's plans for England's schools? Wales,

Scotland and Northern Ireland are a devolved matter. Child has been back

to school to find out. A politician once told me, do you know why

education secretaries changed schools? Because they can. Michael

Gove might dispute the motive but he is changing schools, like this one.

The changes he is ringing in our encouraging them to be academies,

free from local authorities to control their own budgets, ushering

in free schools, focusing on toughening exams and making them the

core of the curriculum with less coursework, and offering heads more

discretion on tougher discipline. And he is in a hurry to put all this

in place. But has that shut out any chance for a Labour Government to

change it all themselves and do they really want to? Any questions?

Visiting a different school, first in line to get a crack at that

would-be Labour's third shadow education secretary since 2010,

Tristram Hunt. In post, he has not been taken about fine tuning

previous direct opposition to free schools and he has also suggested

teachers in England would have to be licensed under a Labour Government,

allowing the worst to be sacked and offering training and development to

others and of course ending coalition plans to allow unqualified

teachers into classrooms. Full policy detail is still unmarked

work. Your opinion about evolution? What is very clear is that Labour's

education policy is still evolving. We are learning that they have some

clear water, but we also seem, from the sting at the back, to get the

feeling that there is not a great deal of difference from them and the

current Government on types of schools and the way education should

proceed. -- from listening at the back. So what exactly is different

about their policy? What Tristram Hunt's job is to do is to be open

and honest about the shared agenda between us and the Tories. There are

a lot of areas where there is clear water between us and Tristram Hunt

as to turn his back, shared agenda, stop fighting it, and forge our

agenda, which I think people will be really interested in. The art of

Government, of course, is to balance competing pictures of policy, even

inside your own party. It is fair to say that if Labour reflects and

draws its own visions of a shared agenda, it might have to square that

idea with teaching unions, who are already unhappy with the pace and

tone of change that the Government had sketched out. What we sincerely

hope is that if Labour were to form the next Government, that they would

look at a serious review of accountability measures. That is

really what ways on teachers every single day. Actually they would look

at restoring the possibility, for example, of local councillors to be

able to open schools. That seems eminently sensible. If they are not

going to move back from the free schools and academies programme at

the very least they need to say that academy chains will be inspected

because at the moment they are not. Labour have balls in the air on

education and are still throwing around precise policy detail. There

are areas that they could grab hold of and seize possession. A focus on

the rounding of the people, developing character, the impact of

digitalisation on the classroom Also the role and handling of

teachers in the system and the interdependence of schools. That is

all still to play for. Currently I think the difference between the

parties is that the coalition policies, while we do not agree with

all of them, are clear and explicit, and Labour's policies are yet to be

formulated in a way that everybody can understand clearly. I don't

think that Tristram Hunt or Miliband will want to pick unnecessary fights

before the election. I think we will have quite a red, pinkish fuzziness

around the whole area of policy but after the election there will be

grey steel from Tristram Hunt. But if fuzzy policy before the election

is the lesson plan, it does rather risk interested voters being left in

the dark. Tristram Hunt joins me now for the

Sunday interview. Welcome. Thank you. Which of Michael

Gove's school reforms would you repeal? We are not interested in

throwing a change for the sake of it. When I go round schools,

teachers have been through very aggressive changes in the last three

years, so when it comes to some of the curriculum reforms we have seen,

we are not interested in changing those for the sake of it. Where we

are interested in making change is having a focus on technical and

vocational education, making sure that the forgotten 15% is properly

addressed in our education system. What we saw in your package was an

interesting description of how we have seen structural reforms in the

names of schools. Academies, free schools, all the rest of it.

International evidence is clear that it is the quality of leadership of

the headteachers and the quality of teaching in the classroom that

transforms the prospects of young people. Instead of tinkering around

the names of schools, we focus on teacher quality. Viewers will be

shocked to note that this Government approves of unqualified teachers in

the classroom. We want to have fully qualified, passionate, motivated

teachers in the classroom. It sounds like you might not repeal anything.

You might build on it and you might go in a different direction, with

more emphasis on technological education but no major repeal of the

reforms of Michael Gove? I don't think you want to waste energy on

undoing reforms. In certain situations they build on Labour

Party policy. We introduced the sponsored academy programmes and we

began the Teach First programmes, and we began the London challenge

which transformed the educational prospects of children in London We

want to roll that out across the country. You have said there will be

no more free schools, which Michael Gove introduced, but you will allow

parents let academies, which just means free schools by a different

name. No, because they will be in certain areas. We want to create new

schools with parents. What we have at the moment is a destructive and

market-driven approach to education. I was in Stroud on

Thursday and plans for a big new school, in an area with surplus

places, threatened to destroy the viability of local, rural schools.

We want schools to work together in a network of partnership and

challenge, rather than this destructive market-driven approach.

You say that, but your version of free schools, I think, would only be

allowed where there is a shortage of places. That means that where there

is an excess of bad schools, parents will have no choice. They still have

to send their kids to bad schools. And we have to transform bad schools

and that was always the Labour way in Government. At the moment we just

have an insertion of new schools. Schools currently underperforming

are now underperforming even more. Children only have one chance at

education. What about their time in school? Our focus is on the

leadership of the headteacher and having quality teachers in the

classroom. So they cannot set up new better schools and they have to go

to the bad schools. Tony Blair said it should be easier for parents to

set up new schools where they are dissatisfied with existing schools.

You are not saying that. Even where they are dissatisfied with existing

schools, they cannot set up free schools and you are reneging on

that. We live in difficult economic circumstances where we have got to

focus public finances on the areas of absolute need. We need 250,0 0

new school places. 150,000 in London alone. We have to focus on building

new schools and where we have to put them. And secondly... Absolutely

not. Focusing on those schools. Making sure we turned them around,

just as we did in Government. We have had a remarkable degree of

waste under the free school programme. If you think of the free

school in Derby, the Academy in Bradford, and as we saw in the

Telegraph on Friday, the free schools in Suffolk, a great deal of

waste of public money on underperforming free schools. That

is not the Labour way. We focus on making sure that kids in schools at

the moment get the best possible education. Except that in your own

backyard, in Stoke, only 34% of secondary school pupils attend a

good or outstanding school. 148 out of 150 of the worst performing local

authorities and it is Labour-controlled. Still terrible

schools and yet you say parents should not have the freedom to start

a better school. We have great schools in Stoke-on-Trent as well.

We face challenges, just as Wolverhampton does and the Isle of

Wight and Lincolnshire. Just like large parts of the country. What is

the solution to that? Making sure we share excellence among the existing

schools and making sure we have quality leadership in schools. Those

schools in Stoke-on-Trent are all academies. It is not a question only

of structure but of leadership. It is also a question of going back to

the responsibility of parents to make sure their kids are school

ready when they get to school. To make sure they are reading to their

children in the evening. We can t put it all on teachers. Parents have

responsibilities. I understand that but you have told me Labour's policy

would not be to set up new schools which parents hope will be better.

Parents continue to send their kids to bad schools in areas like Stoke.

Labour has had plenty of time to sort out these schools in Stoke and

they are still among the worst performing in the country. You are

condemning these parents to having to send their kids to bad schools.

Where we have seen the sett ing up of Derby, Suffolk, we have seen that

is not the simple solution. Is simply setting up a new is not a

successful model. What works is good leadership. I was in Birmingham on

Friday at a failing comprehensive is not a successful model. What works

is good leadership. I was in Birmingham on Friday at a failing

comprehensive school and now people are queueing round the block to get

into it. You can turn around schools with the right leadership,

passionate and motivated teachers, and parents engaged with the

learning outcome of their kids. In the last few years of the Labour

Government, only four kids from your this Government would set up the new

school. In Birmingham, they got in a great headmaster and turned the

school around and now people are queueing round the block to get into

it. You can turnaround schools with the right leadership, passionate and

motivated teachers, and parents engaged with the learning outcome of

their kids. In the last few years of a Labour Government, only four kids

from your area of and you had plenty of chances to put this right but

only four got to the two and you had plenty of chances to put this right

but only four got to the two leading universities. Traditionally young

people could leave school at 16 and walking two jobs in the potteries,

the steel industry, the traditionally young people could

leave school at 16 and walking two jobs in the potteries, the steel

industry, the but also to get an apprenticeship at Jaguar Land

Rover, JCB, Rolls-Royce. That is why Ed Miliband's focus on the forgotten

15%, which we have just not seen from this Government, focusing on

technical and vocational pathways, is fundamental to Your headmaster

was guiles Slaughter. Was he a good teacher? He He never taught me.

Over 90% of teeners in the private sector are qualified. They look for

not simply teachers with qualified teacher status. Teachers with MAs.

Teachers who are improving them cephalitis. Becoming better

educators. cephalitis. Becoming better

teaching. You were taught by unqualified teachers. Your parents

paid over ?15,000 a year for you being taught by unqualified

teachers. Why did you make such a big deal of it? Because we've seen

right around the world those education systems which focus on

having the most qualified teachers perform the best. It cannot be right

that anyone can simply turn up, as at the moment, have schools at

veritising for unqualified teachers teaching in the classroom. We want

the best qualified teachers with the deepest subject knowledge, for the

passion in learning for their kids. It is absurd we are having arguments

about this. Simply having a paper qualification doesn't make you a

great teacher. Let me take you to Brighton college. It is gone from

the 147th to the 18 18th best private school in the land. Fllt the

headmaster says: This is the top Sundaytimes school

of the year. The school in derby where this Government allowed

unqualified teaching assist taints. We had teachers who could barely

speak English. That is because if you have unqualified teachers you

end up with a dangerous situation. The problem with that school was not

unqualified teachers. People were running that school who were unfit

to run a school. We have an issue about discipline and behaviour

management in some of our schools. Some of the skills teachers gain

through qualifications and learning is how to manage classes and get the

best out of kids at every stage. It doesn't end with a qualified teacher

status. That's just the beginning. We want our teachers to have

continue it will development. It is not good enough to have your initial

teacher trainingaged work through your career for 30 years. You need

continual learning. Learning how to deal with digital technology.

Refresh your subject knowledge. As an historian I help teachers. You've

taught as an unqualified teacher. Not in charge of a subject group. I

give the odd lecture. I'm-y to go to as many schools as possible. I don't

blame you. It is uplifting. Would you sack all unqualified teachers?

We'd want them all to gain teacher status. What if they say no? If they

are not interested in improving skills and deepening their knowledge

they should not be in the classroom. If a free school or academy hired a

teach thinking they are a great teacher but unqualified, if they are

then forced by you to fire them, they will be in breach of the law.

They are being urged by us to make sure they have qualified teacher

status. We've lots of unqualified teachers as long as they are on the

pathway to making sure they are qualified. But if they say they

don't want to do this, will you fire them? It is not an unreasonable

suggestion is that the teachers in charge of our young people have

qualifications to teach and inspire our young people particularly when

we face global competition from Shanghai, Korea and so on. The head

teacher of Brighton college finds incredibly inspeechational teachers

who don't' necessarily have a teaching qualifications. It is a

different skill to teach ten young nice boys and girls in Brighton to

teaches 20 or 30 quids with challenging circumstances, special

educational needs, different ability. Being a teacher at Brighton

college is an easy gig in comparison to other schools. Where we want

teachers to have a capacity to teach properly. Do you think Tristram

could ever lead the Labour Party? I think Ed is a great leader, the

reforms yesterday were a real sign for his leadership. And the fact

David Owen, the man with a pre-history with our party is back

with us. It is great. Even Gideon had to change his name to George.

Have you thought of switching to Tommy or Tony? Maybe not Tony!

Michael Foot was called Dingle Foot. I love the Labour because it accepts

everybody from me to Len McCluskey. We are a big, broad happy family on

our way to Government. Thank you very much.

You're watching The Sunday Politics. Coming up today. We are on the hunt

for the missing European millions to fund our food banks, and that is

amid claims we are only getting crumbs from the table in Brussels.

And we will be asking why so few women want to get involved in local

politics in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire. I will be discussing

this with our guests, Craig Whittaker, the Conservative MP and

Fabian Hamilton, the Labour MP. David Cameron says he does not want

another coalition after the next election. He is narrowing his

options, isn't he? Finally we are on the same page, I would like that as

well. I think the coalition has done the job it has set out to do but it

has run its course and it is time we went back to proper politics. Every

week, Nick Clegg seems to be getting closer to Labour and going for that

coalition with Labour with the next election, how do you feel about

that? Sick! To be honest! I think it would be a big mistake. I always

think the Conservatives made a mistake. If they governed as a

minority party after 2010, they might not have lasted that long, but

the Lib Dems would have looked principled and the government could

have done what it could do with a minority administration. If we are a

minority, we should do the same. The live them spring `` the Lib Dems

Spring conference is in York next week, tickets still available!

Yorkshire food banks are being deprived of millions of pounds of

European money. Some MPs have good`sized government for not

cutting into an EU fund which could help feed the poorest people in our

part of the world. The European Union is meant to be an

organisation that can help its members in times of extreme

trouble. With billions of euros available in special funds for

emergency economic relief. This week, here at the European

Parliament here in muscle, the UK government has been under fire for

deciding not to apply for funding. Other European union states are not

so resident. We are 100 metres away from the European Parliament here,

and look at this building. It has been specially built for a

delegation from just one European state, of area. Every day, dozens if

not `` Bavaria. Dozens if not hundreds of the officials are

lobbying everyday for aid and funds. This is where some of that European

money could be spent. This is a breakfast club for families in one

of the poorest parts of south Leeds, run entirely by volunteers, funded

by donations. It opened its doors here at a local Methodist church six

months ago. And the hungry families keep on coming. We give food that

will last you about three days. Free world down the road, another

initiative aimed at giving emergency relief to the hungry. This is a food

bank. It will mean a lot, it will stop before big starving, and will

be able to eat and get me on until I can get somebody started. Upstairs

in the warehouse, three days of supplies are kicked and bag `` are

bagged for Byron, who is waiting for a benefit claim to kick in and

literally has nothing will stop this operation is growing fast. In South

Leeds alone, it is feeding a thousand people per week, half of

them children, and the food is staggering. I need three tonnes of

food every month so I plan to engage the local supermarkets, churches and

businesses into giving us a regular supply of food. Back in Brussels,

Liberal Democrat MEP Edward McMillan Scott said more could be done if the

UK government asks for more for what the EU calls its Solidarity fund.

There is 3.5 billion available. The British government has applied for 3

million. France, same size, has applied for 443 million. These are

the sort of figures we should get right both as the government and the

MEPs are presenting the region. The Conservatives argue it is not as

simple as that. It is not that we are not going to commit money, it is

how we get it. We have got to be careful, taking it from the

Solidarity fund, we have to beat all the trite area and that might cost

us more money `` we have to meet all the criteria and that might cost us

more money than we can save. They claim that the flood relief and

poverty funding comes to MIDI strings attached, Labour say that

misses the point. It is a bit sad that food aid comes to the poorest

parts of the EU, we do need it now. If we have a, we should apply for

it. Those disputes about high finance and European budgets are not

on the menu back in Leeds. Here, concern is keeping the children fed

and being able to produce a couple of shopping bags full of food.

Craig Whittaker, how can the government justify not making the

most of the EU food aid budget? The French are getting 100 times more

than we are. My understanding with the Solidarity fund is, which is

what we are talking about, is that there are quite a lot of criteria

attached to it , one of which is a threshold which says you have two

have spent a certain amount of money before you get it. And the cost of

paying it back is quite huge as well. Would you rather millions of

pounds went to Richard French farmers hungry people in Yorkshire?

Hungry people in Yorkshire, but we're not talking the same funding.

We are talking about... The farmers cap which is a totally different

separate budget, could lead to the Solidarity fund which is what we are

talking about today. `` compared to the Solidarity fund. If anything

sums up the failures of the European Union, it has to be this. The French

get more than ?400 million out of this food aid pot and we get a tiny

fraction. Why is that a failure of the European Union? Surely

surely that is a failure of the British government, and not shouting

so much as the French government. That is perpetuating the idea that

we get a bum deal from Brussels. Let's try harder, but isn't it a

disgrace that we have do apply for food banks and this day and age? The

fact we have them speaks volumes for the state we have now. There were

criticism from this letter, written to newspapers, by the bishops, why

do people have food banks? This has been the case for a long time, they

doubled under the Labour government and more people need to know. Our

economy is in a mess. I thought it was getting better? It is, but it

has been in the mess for a very long time. This is one of the issues we

face. The government are signposting people to food banks which

traditionally has not happened. Things will get better. But this is

the current situation that we are in. Staying on the EU theme, there

is also an issue in a lack money in our area, the money given to the

areas after the flooding. My flood hit constituents are mystified as to

why the government does not seem to be applying for EU funds which could

be assisting them. There are issues about the overall scale of the

circumstances or the damage that gives rise to a claim on EU funds,

but there is also an issue that I remember from the past that related

to the impact that such claims would have on the British rebate, so it is

not necessarily a cost free option. Fabian Hamilton, you are unashamedly

pro`European. Do we get more out of Europe than we put in? Because it

does not seem like it. I am not sure the figures are. Certainly for the

last few years. It seems very here from the food banks issue that if

there is this contingency fund that is available, we should be applying

for it. If there is money available for flood defences, we need to look

at the strings attached but we need to apply for as much as we can get.

It is up to us to apply, not up to the EU to give the money out. It

goes back to Maggie's rebate 30 years ago, that is why we are not

getting as much as we should be. I do not think it is. Under the

flooding, Fabian is right, with the flooding, the government has to show

that you have spent 3.5 billion on clean`up costs before you can apply

to the fund. As our flooding issues are still ongoing, we do not know

how much we have spent. I either Andrew Lansley did not say that, ``

I know he did not say that, that is what he meant! You summed it up

beautifully! Many people would say, what is the point of the EU, would

you be simpler that every tax pound that the government to collect

should be spent in this country, not in Brussels. The EU is not just

about paying money and credit, it is part of it. But it is much more of

that. It is a trade and social organisation to make sure that the

barriers between nations that caused wars in the last century could never

happen again. It rages the threshold of freedom of speech, of rule of

law, democratic ability to stop that is why most of the Ukraine wants to

join the EU because they see that is the one of the benefits of the club.

Plenty more in the run`up to the European elections in May.

Take a look at the people who represent you on the local council.

Chances are, they are male, white and older than average. Council

chiefs say they are trying hard to attract a more diverse range of

candidates but some claim it is not financially worthwhile for many

people to get involved in local politics.

We live in diverse communities. But step inside the world of local

government, and it is a different story. Jackie Brockway sits on

Lincolnshire county council, where men outnumber women three to one.

The female introductory to be here, women have a lot to offer. There

needs to be a balance to give a proper for perspective of what

society is. Last week, this authority voted to raise the amount

it pays its councillors by 23%. Taking it to just over ?10,000 per

year. Over a 50 week year, I do 45 hours a week, they give the eighth

take`home of two 87 `` ?2 87, which is fine, I am not in this for money

I won a pension. But how can we expect a young person or someone

with a mortgage to step aside from their careers to take on this

response ability? I think that is something we really need to be

thinking about. There is only one party admitted to improving social

mobility at this country. At 21 years of age, Robin Hunter Clark is

one of the country's youngest chancellors, but he voted against

the rise of the county council. Providing we are not out of pocket,

I do not think we are, there are quite adequate allowances, there are

people in this country suffering, choosing whether to heat or eat. I

think this is an immoral thing to do and councillors should not be

increasing their allowances. It is still the case that the average

councillor in Lincolnshire is a white, middle`class, middle`aged

man. But councils are starting to realise more than ever that those

are sitting on the bench here and not altogether `` do not altogether

reflect those in the outside world. Take Lincoln, the city has slightly

more women than men and its largest age group is the under 30s. The same

cannot be said for its city council. More than half of the councillors

are men, with an average age of 55. Just one is a member of an ethnic

minority. We currently pay ?4480 as a basic amounts, and we have agreed

a 1% increase and will take it up to 4500. Ultimately is this not an

issue of money? We present it might be one of the factors that people

are not standing. The average salary in Lincoln is ?23,000, so it is the

sixth of what the average person will earn. Whether they are a

bargain for taxpayers or an overpriced privileged set,

councillors are a cornerstone of local democracy. Which is why

authorities want them to come from all walks of life.

We have also been joined by one of the youngest mayors in the country,

she is 28, she is the mayor of Broughton in North Lincoln, she's

also. The question many are asking is, how do we get more people like

you involved in local politics? We need to be very careful, thinking

about what people saw that on the renumeration, I do not want people

to go into the local government for the money. I think we need to be

careful that we do not end up with a situation where only people who are

independently wealthy or retired or people whose partners are able to

support them are able financially, practically, to go into local

government. But you think customers should it paid more? Adequately to

have a `` I think we need to have a serious conversation about this, as

think maybe they do. Is there an argument for more generous

allowances and local government? It would be controversial. I do not

know, but I think she is right. We do not want to go back to the old

days where it was only will `` wealthy businessmen or business

people who are giving civic duty. We have got to set it at a level where

single mums or dads can do it, people of low beams, because they

have got a lot to give to local and national government. Why do you

think the majority of people in local government and be male, white

and middle`aged? The allowances may have something to do with it but we

need to look at the way our political parties work as well, are

they friendly to both genders and people from ethnic Menorah tees? Is

it a male dominated `` ethnic minorities? Is it male dominated?

The parties need to reflect the local population. If the poor that

we are electing people from is reflecting the local publishing, we

are likely to get better candidates. What do you think about all women

short lists? I think it would be very humiliating, to think I would

be put in a position. We need to move forward from that. I you saying

that these selection committees cannot be trusted to choose the

female candidate if she is the most able candidate? If that is the case,

you really need to look at your selection committees and re`educate

how they are choosing these people, not give them no option but to

choose a woman. My party takes a different view but I think if you

have equal number of men and women on a short list, leave it to your

members to select the best person. They need to do that. See beyond the

child the `` the gender. That cannot be happening, because of that did

happen, you could not have 80% of MPs being male. If a woman is

nominated on and open short list in the Labour Party, many women do get

put on the final short list. It seems to me if you have got the

choice, it is up to the members to decide. If your members reflect

society more widely, you will choose the right person. It is about

attracting women at the grassroots, into parish and town councils, and

bringing them up. If you are rooted in your local area, you understand

it and you are passionate about it as I am, you will make a better

empty. You have got a situation where the Conservative party could

be left with a single female MP in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire after the

deselection. We have got a different problem, it is about the working

environment. There is a very large number of female MPs on both side of

the house standing down after the election because the working

environment is not conducive to family life or the agendas they want

to follow. We need to look at that at national and local level. I do

not believe positive discolouration of the right way forward. The female

MPs that I speak to lose it. `` I do not believe positive discrimination

is the right way forward. Do you think it will be damaging for your

party to have only two or three female MPs in the whole country

after the election? Absolutely, and we need to have a look at how we

select candidates as a party, as do all the major parties, because we

need to get a better balance and diversity and cross`section of what

our communities are present. The hours have changed in the House of

Commons. But I was elected in 1997, it was not uncommon to sit until

3am. That is incompatible with family life. We have changed

radically, there have been many more changes that need to take place, but

it has changed a lot. When I was elected there were 100 women MPs,

not enough, but that was more than the total of all women who had ever

been elected to Parliament since 1990.

Let's get more of the political views of the week.

`` political news. The government has criticised Hull

City Council's plans to increase council tax by just under 2% and

lose up to 450 jobs. The Labour run authority is one of the number to

set their annual budgets claiming they are being forced to reduce

services and cut thousands of jobs in all.

The workforce at a military base in north Yorkshire is to be reduced

over the next two years. Around 2200 staff work at the base near

Harrogate. 500 American posts will be phased out by 2016, some British

jobs are to go as well. One of the biggest chain of

academies in England has walked away from age contract walking `` running

a number of schools. The carrot `` recruit Charity E`Act walked away

after Ofsted inspectors raised concerns about some schools. Lead

City Council that could lead Judy Blake was unimpressed. We are facing

up the pieces of a catastrophic series of events where the sponsor

has walked away. The government is critical, Craig

Whittaker, of Northern Labour councils who have decided to

increase council tax but they say they are getting a raw deal from

central government. Some of the poorest councils in our area have

had their funding cut. Our Labour council in Calderdale have put in

their budget to freeze this year, the conservative and liberal

Democrat one is the further three years. I think it is having a

serious look at how they can freeze. People are hurting, it is very

difficult for families and you get ?200 increases in your council tax,

that is a big ask. Should Labour councils be taking Eric Pickles

lottery money and freezing council tax? `` Eric Pickles' money?

Councils are in a real pickle here, if I can use the pun. They need to

deliver services efficiently but they do not want to raise council

tax so it is a real dilemma. On to academies, E`Act Luuk De Jong of

another of academies across the country, `` losing control of a

number of academies, some people saying that cracks are starting to

appear in the academy programme. Not at all. The unions also said

academies are not policed or checked up on enough and here is a prime

example of that going in and highlighting the issues of this

Academy chain. Ten schools is a minority to converge to how many

state schools we haven't similar situations. `` compared to family

state schools. This shows that Ofsted are doing the job, the checks

and balances for academies and they are doing the right thing. It is not

good news for those schools. In those goodbye, `` in days gone by,

they could turn to the local authority but now they can't, their

calls are not returned. It is a polity. `` appalling. They took my

calls if they are trying to get through the Department of education

so they should get in touch with me. I know from the member of West lead

in East lead, they are not getting a response and that a shocking. Thank

you for your time. You have been watching the Sunday politics.

Government to change it. Thank you both for being here. Andrew, back to

you. This week grant Shap said he wanted

to rebrand the Tories as the workers' party to show it can reach

out to blue-collar workers. One Conservative Party MP said they

should scrap what he said was their boring old logo. We asked him and

two other independent MPs how they'd freshen up their logos.

Aspiration's always been our core value. About helping people get on

with life. Giving people ladders of opportunity. That's why our symbol

must reflect our values of aspiration and why I'm calling for

our symbol to be changed from a tree to a ladder which symbolises social

mobility and stands up for everything conservatism represents.

I like an he will fanned, an animal that never forgets. We're the only

party which seems to remember what life was like before the NHS and

minimum wage and the global financial crash was caused by too

little regulation not too much. We have a leader who can spot the

elephant in the room, the lack of women on the Tory frontbench. The

republicans in America have had the same idea. Theirs is a suspicious

blue. Our would be deepest red. We love our Liberal Democrat bird. Mrs

Thatcher called it the dead parrot when we launched it. We won the

Eastbourne by-election off the Tories very soon aftered with.

Perhaps it feels like we're in a coalition cage but we're escaping

that soon. Why does it fly to the right? Most Liberal Democrats would

want it to fly to the left. I hope it will soon.

Interesting there. Let's stick with the Robert Hall pin one. He was

being serious. The others were fun. It is interesting that talking about

appealing to the blue collared vote, the upper working class, lower

middle class, curiously now neither Mr Cameron nor Mr Miliband has great

cut through with these people. But in wanting to be the Workers Party,

how do you square that with choosing five old Etonians to draw up four

next manifesto. Labour said one of the things was cutting inheritance

tax, after all their priorities they went to privilege rather than earned

income. Rebranding is not enough. The one question the modernisers

never asked themselves when they took party ten years ago is the

thing we know as the Conservative Party, salvageable as a brand? I'm

beginning to think it isn't. If you look at all public opinion research,

there are lots of people in this contrary with Conservative views.

They won't vote Tory or contemplate the possibility of voting Tory. Can

we get over the electoral problems by relaunching as a different

pro-business, pro-worker party. That means new name, new logo. It will

mean new people as well. If you say you're on the sides of what Thatcher

called the strivers, the people themselves want to see you have

strivers in the people who run your party so you know what we've been

through, the struggles we've had. How many of the six drawing up the

manifesto have had ever a mortgage. The one who's not an old Etonian

went to St Paul's. He's a day schoolboy! It is interesting and it

was funny you mentioned an elephant. Don't think of an elephant as the

title of that book. Calling it the Workers Party draws attention to the

Tories biggest electoral weakness. The idea they are a class apart Out

of touch. I think it is interesting, they have identified their elections

are won or lost by this particular demo graphic of the C 1, and C .

Mrs Thatcher got them by the shed load, Tony Blair got them. His

failure in 2010 is the reason David Cameron didn't win an overall

majority. I'm disappointed with the ladder. You should have a hammer or

sickle! The Conservatives have a terrible brand problem. You heard

them explaining why they did badly in the Wythenshawe by-election,

saying there's quite a large council estate there In 1961, I think the

Conservatives won a by-election back then, they were getting through to

those sort of voters. There is not a single Conservative councillor in

Manchester. They have this terrible problem. You're right for them to

pick up on the five Etonians writing their manifesto. David Cameron sir

rounding himself with his own. He doesn't have to do that. I seas

things like isn't Robert Halpen great. He decides and has his own.

He has some more slightly common people from St Paul's! One of the

ways the Conservatives hoped to broaden their appeal is the tougher

line on immigration. We learned net immigration is rising substantially.

Back up over 200,000. Nigel Farage of UKIP wrapped up the rhetoric In

scores of our cities and market towns, this country, in a short

space of time, has become N'Zonzi rkable whether it is --

unrecognisable. Whether it is the impact on local schools and

hospitals. In many parts of England you don't hear English spoken, this

is not the kind of the community we want to leave to our children and

grandchildren. Helen, maybe people, I assume, will love the sentiments.

Others will say, this is getting... It is going down a dangerous road.

Nigel Farage's wife is German and he shares a flat with Godfully Bloom,

nobody knows what he's saying half of the time. You can handle the

letters from Yorkshire. Alex Salmond does not make his case on Scotland

for the Scottish. Let's put aside whether the policy's right or wrong.

How bad, by the Tories own lights, is the fact the net figure for

immigration went up 60,000? It looks really bad. If I was a Tory

strategist, I'd be philosophical about it. Immigration, even if they

were meeting the target, I don't think the public would believe it.

It is like crime a few years ago, the crime rates had been declining

for the best part of 20 years but the fear of crime remains high.

There's such a degree of cynicism that regardless of your

administrative record in Government, the public will remain hostile to

you. This is where Nigel Farage can be potent. He said it is not about

numbers. It is about community. It is about people seeing their

communities change. And in the Sunday Telegraph, it was said this

isn't a dog whistle, a it is a meaty bone for a bull terrier. The problem

for the Government on these figures is we know why the net migration

figures are not looking good. They got down the non-EU figures but the

EU figures are going up. From Italy and Spain as their economies tanked,

people came here. If he hadn't made such a big deal of the numbers, the

Tories, I mean, you could present this as a huge success story. If you

believe immigration was good for the country. You would say it doesn t

matter what Labour says, the best and the brightest young people from

all over Europe are voting with their feet to come to Britain. But

you never hear that case being made and certainly not by Labour. They

acknowledge although immigration is best in the abstract for the

economy, people don't feel it in their daily lives. There's a huge

vacuum for the case where immigration should be in our public

life. I remember a time when the economy was in such decline there

was a rush to the door in the sixties and seventies. Now we are

claiming our economy's doing better than any of the other major

economies bar Germany, people want to join in our success. London was a

declining city until the mid-eighties. Theresa May cannot be

honest. She was proposing a cap on immigration. Not going to happen.

Today she is saying maybe people from poorer member states cannot

come in until their economies grow. That's future accession states.

That's Turkey in ten years' time It is causing divisions with the

coalition. She's bashing Vince Cable. You often see Liberal

Democrats bashing the Tories. You don't often see a Tory minister bash

Vince Cable. She does on the immigration figures. He thought they

were good news. Last week, Vince responded to the news by saying it

was a policy he was happy for the gift to flunk. The problem was going

for a cap. There are six moving parts. UK citizens leaving, coming

back. EU citizens leaving and coming back and then third party nationals.

And students coming to study. Of course. You only have control over

the EU citizens. Have you to clamp down on ace strayian, Chinese or

American graduates. They should have gone for the Australian points

system. I don't have a pure cap on numbers just background etc. Tim

Farran said in the European election either vogue Liberal Democrat or

UKIP. He turned that to his advantage. It is hopeful but he s

come up with a way to spin this Labour has his special conference.

Was it or was it not an event? Not sure it was the biggest moment in

the party since 1918. But things fell apart in the special conference

in 1981. 2004 got another special conference. Who's on board? David

Owen who founded the gang of four. He's not joined but he's given them

money. He's not going to sit with them in the Lord's. He's given

money. They lost the gang of four. Back comes David Owen. Not historic?

Why would he want it to be more significant than it was. There's a

tendency to see him taking the fight to his party. Why would he want

that? The fact it has not pleased Grant Shapps is not a test to see

whether this has worked. It has been described as an historic moment and

incremental of what John did. The trade union block voters disappeared

a long time ago. They still have 50% of the vote. But 2,000 of union

members voting for this guy has gone. It is a reform from 20 years

ago. Welcome but not historic. Ed Miliband's stored up trouble. Len

McCluskey wants a million new homes and answered to the benefit caps is

not reconcilable with the deficit reduction strategy. In five years'

time if there is a Labour Government it becomes very difficult. We should

keep an eye on it? Always. Labour Party process is never ending.

Unlike this programme. That's all from us today. Continuing reports of

events in the Ukraine on the BBC News Channel. There's no Daily

Politics tomorrow because of cover Arg of the Nelson Mandela memorial

service at Westminster Abbey on BBC Two live. We'll be back on the Daily

Politics on Tuesday at midday. We'll be back here next week with the Work

and Pensions Secretary, Ian Smith. If it is Sunday, it is the Sunday

Politics.