:00:47. > :00:52.With the UK economy possibly moving towards a recession, I will report
:00:52. > :00:55.how the Chancellor can repair growth. In the South East:
:00:55. > :00:57.Important for democracy or a total waste of time? The parliamentary
:00:58. > :01:00.rituals which many MPs love, but which leave voters baffled.
:01:01. > :01:10.And will higher drink prices be enough to solve the problem of
:01:11. > :01:11.
:01:11. > :34:51.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 2020 seconds
:34:51. > :34:57.Aachen to -- welcome to The Politics Show. The parliamentary
:34:57. > :35:00.procedures which may benefit MPs more than voters. There's actually
:35:00. > :35:06.it's an Early Day Motion St the Early Day Motion should be
:35:06. > :35:09.abolished which seems silly. higher prices and fewer pubs sold
:35:09. > :35:19.alcohol-related problems in the region? Were there is discord, may
:35:19. > :35:21.
:35:21. > :35:26.we bring harmony. And how Maggie Ever wondered what MPs do with
:35:26. > :35:29.their time? If you do, you're not alone. Caroline Lucas, the Green
:35:29. > :35:33.member for Brighton Pavilion, thinks a lot of time is wasted at
:35:33. > :35:37.Parliament and that reform is overdue. We will talk to her
:35:37. > :35:47.shortly but first, Helen Drew reports on doubts on whether our
:35:47. > :35:51.
:35:51. > :35:54.The German debates, Private Member's Bills, the list goes on.
:35:54. > :35:59.All of parliamentary debates that he might have heard about --
:35:59. > :36:06.adjournment debate. But what do MPs get up to on a daily basis? And how
:36:06. > :36:11.much of his it in the best in tune -- best interests of constituents?
:36:11. > :36:20.A PP Jews are all part to parliamentary groups, set up by MPs
:36:20. > :36:24.and splat up by the House of Lords -- set up. They cover a wide range
:36:24. > :36:28.of subject and while some of them are worthy like fuel poverty and
:36:28. > :36:35.homeland security, others include things like bingo and jazz
:36:35. > :36:41.appreciation. If it is something that the House is likely to beat
:36:41. > :36:46.legislate or debate, but if it is not the purpose is less obvious.
:36:46. > :36:51.There are groups that exist to celebrate particular beverages or
:36:51. > :36:54.sports. They can have some great parties. I remember in my youth
:36:54. > :36:58.when I worked at the House of Commons attending a reception held
:36:58. > :37:07.by the group which supported the Scotch whisky industry. That group
:37:07. > :37:15.would suggest it does some useful work lobbying MPs on excise duties
:37:15. > :37:20.but it also means that various members of Parliament consume vast
:37:20. > :37:23.quantities of whisky. I am not sure that is serving the best interests
:37:23. > :37:27.of the constituents although it is not against the law. While it is
:37:27. > :37:37.not compulsory to attend meetings, when an MP is on a lot of groups it
:37:37. > :37:39.
:37:39. > :37:44.all adds up. One of our MPs Caroline Lucas, while campaigning
:37:44. > :37:54.for the responsible use of time, is on the largest number of groups.
:37:54. > :37:55.
:37:55. > :37:59.They range from the environment Then there are early day motions,
:37:59. > :38:02.and the subject as submitted to the MPs for debate in the Commons
:38:02. > :38:06.although very few of them ever see the light of day. Some politicians
:38:06. > :38:12.refuse to sign them because they say they are a waste of time and
:38:12. > :38:17.money. One of them is Henry Smith, MP for Crawley. He lets people know
:38:17. > :38:22.his position. I think early-day motions are a parliamentary device
:38:22. > :38:24.that have had their a day. Several are submitted every day by members
:38:24. > :38:29.of Parliament and I did some research and so far in this
:38:29. > :38:33.Parliament, not one early-day motion has resulted in a debate in
:38:33. > :38:37.the House of Commons floor or a vote in the Commons so I think they
:38:37. > :38:42.are a parliamentary device that needs to be abolished or heavily
:38:42. > :38:46.updated. And the worst thing is they cost the taxpayer �1 million
:38:46. > :38:51.per year so I think there is a good reason to reform them. Like the
:38:52. > :38:55.all-party groups, early-day motions cover subjects that arguably do not
:38:55. > :39:02.need to be discussed in Parliament. The recent example is a
:39:02. > :39:10.commendation of the Staffordshire born terrier group from promoting
:39:10. > :39:15.the breed. So some of them are for very minor things. I think it is
:39:15. > :39:18.important that lot of MPs are clear with voters what early-day motions
:39:18. > :39:22.do and how much power led to have to change something which is not
:39:22. > :39:27.very much. As well as not having a lot of power, some people say there
:39:27. > :39:32.is a risk they give false hope. think in my own experience of MPs,
:39:32. > :39:35.there are some will say to constituents who are passionately
:39:35. > :39:39.interested in a subject, that they will raise it with the
:39:39. > :39:43.parliamentary group and put down an early-day motion. It to somebody
:39:43. > :39:48.who does not understand exactly how Parliament works, that can sound
:39:48. > :39:52.like dramatic action. It can sound as if their concern is being raised
:39:52. > :39:55.in the cockpit of national affairs. The reality is they are being
:39:55. > :40:01.fobbed off with a committee which has no power and a motion which
:40:01. > :40:04.will not be debated for. Is being a member of lot of groups and signing
:40:04. > :40:09.lots of Early Day Motions an indication that an MP cares about
:40:09. > :40:13.issues and is working incredibly hard? Or are these things a waste
:40:13. > :40:19.of MPs' time and taxpayers' time and money?
:40:19. > :40:23.Caroline Lucas joins me now from Brighton. We will talk about the
:40:23. > :40:29.reforms to what in a moment but fast, let's talk about the early
:40:29. > :40:34.day motions. You have signed 660, almost as many as all the other new
:40:34. > :40:42.MPs in Parliament. Why? Because I think they are used for. I think we
:40:42. > :40:47.can reform them and make them clearer -- they are used for. They
:40:47. > :40:51.can be useful tools in terms of raising issues among fellow MPs and
:40:51. > :40:56.once you put down an early-day motion, it gives you an opportunity
:40:56. > :41:00.to speak to lot of MPs to ask them to sign it and it gives you a
:41:00. > :41:04.chance to debate it with them. But crucially enables people outside
:41:04. > :41:11.Parliament to be able to contact their MPs with something concrete
:41:11. > :41:15.to do. Not just agreeing with something... Out of those 660 that
:41:15. > :41:19.you have signed over 18 months, what proportion roughly have
:41:19. > :41:24.resulted in some change? I think it takes time for things to get onto
:41:24. > :41:31.the agenda. I could not claim that any one single Early Day Motion has
:41:31. > :41:38.resulted in a change of legislation but it is about building a momentum.
:41:38. > :41:42.I have seen that. For example around energy efficiency. If you
:41:42. > :41:49.start agitating fire early day motions and want to get one that
:41:49. > :41:53.has perhaps been signed by 100-200 MPs, that has wait. What I would
:41:53. > :41:58.say is that I agree we can change them but I am always honest about
:41:58. > :42:03.the likelihood of them on their and changing things, I think they are a
:42:03. > :42:12.very useful way of demonstrating support on an issue. You say they
:42:12. > :42:17.take time. You want to reform Parliament on the time spent voting.
:42:17. > :42:22.Others have said they will not spend any time signing them. I get
:42:22. > :42:26.many people writing to me saying how disappointed those are who have
:42:26. > :42:30.MPs who will not signed early-day motions. They feel that if they
:42:30. > :42:35.cannot be bothered just to write your name down and demonstrate your
:42:35. > :42:40.level of support, that is actually doing a disservice. But it is also
:42:40. > :42:44.misleading your constituents. It looks impressive to say you have
:42:44. > :42:48.raised the issue in Parliament but if it is not achieving something,
:42:48. > :42:53.that is also misleading as well. I say, you have to be honest about
:42:53. > :42:55.it and recognise it will not change things overnight. But I disagree,
:42:56. > :43:00.there and many issues that take a while to get onto the political
:43:01. > :43:05.agenda. Look how long it has taken for people to take climate change
:43:05. > :43:09.seriously. One way of doing that is by this particular process. If I
:43:10. > :43:15.can make a comparison, yesterday we were debating in Parliament one of
:43:15. > :43:23.the issues that came via the e- petitions. It is the same idea,
:43:23. > :43:28.putting your name to something. 140,000 people signed one
:43:28. > :43:31.particular one. That is now debated in Parliament. And you could say
:43:31. > :43:35.that a debate in Parliament may not change anything that it will mean
:43:35. > :43:42.we will have a vote next year and that could change things. I know
:43:42. > :43:48.you want to reform parliamentary processes, we spoke about all-party
:43:48. > :43:53.parliamentary groups. Do you think some of them are a bit indulgent to
:43:53. > :43:58.net work and socialise? I think a lot of them are. But I challenge
:43:58. > :44:02.you to say that any of the 36 that I am in our indulgent. I could not
:44:02. > :44:10.possibly go to all of the meetings but for the group on tribal peoples,
:44:10. > :44:15.there is a real issue that the interests of British companies and
:44:15. > :44:23.those activities across the world have on tribal peoples. I think
:44:23. > :44:25.that their activity is legitimate. I am the President of the all-party
:44:25. > :44:30.group on fuel poverty and energy efficiency and we have ministers
:44:30. > :44:35.come to our Group, we can hold them to account, we get a range of views.
:44:35. > :44:41.It is a way of educating MPs and making sure we build political will
:44:41. > :44:45.to make changes. We will be talking to you again in a few minutes.
:44:45. > :44:49.Brighton may be the party couple of the region but now it has got
:44:49. > :44:54.another less glamourous title to contend with. According to a report
:44:54. > :44:57.published by the North West Public Observatory, Brighton also leads
:44:57. > :45:01.the South East in terms of alcohol- related problems with Hastings and
:45:01. > :45:04.Eastbourne following closely behind. The coalition government has
:45:04. > :45:08.announced a nationwide ban on selling alcohol at prices lower
:45:08. > :45:13.than the tax to be paid to the Exchequer and some local
:45:13. > :45:16.authorities are starting to take action as well. Brighton and Hove's
:45:16. > :45:20.Green Council is setting limits on the bars are opening in the City
:45:20. > :45:27.but will these be enough to tackle alcohol abuse or is it just
:45:27. > :45:31.cosmetic? Caroline Lucas remains our studio and Richard Dodd joins
:45:31. > :45:36.us from the British Retail Consortium. Letters addressed the
:45:36. > :45:39.two issues of pricing and access. The higher prices, will they help
:45:39. > :45:42.solve the problem in your constituency, Caroline Lucas?
:45:42. > :45:47.the Government has suggested will not help at all. They have said it
:45:47. > :45:50.should not be sold below its cost price and the Guardian did an
:45:51. > :45:55.investigation into what difference that has made, and 4,000 different
:45:55. > :45:59.promotional offers, it would have affected just one of those. We
:45:59. > :46:03.clearly do need to look at alcohol pricing but we need to make a
:46:03. > :46:07.distinction between what we do on the retail side and by that I mean
:46:07. > :46:10.the prices that supermarkets offer cheap alcohol as a special offer,
:46:10. > :46:16.and what we do in restaurants and bars. We need to make a big
:46:16. > :46:19.distinction between a lowering what is available in terms of the
:46:19. > :46:25.hospitality trade and making higher the rate that are in the retail
:46:25. > :46:29.trade because that is where the problems are. A Richard Dodd,
:46:29. > :46:32.people have been asking about this for a lot of time because they are
:46:32. > :46:36.worried about the number of people admitted to hospital with alcohol-
:46:36. > :46:39.related problems? I would like to make a distinction between those
:46:39. > :46:43.two part of the trade and supermarkets are the most
:46:43. > :46:47.responsible sellers of alcohol but there are in terms of things like
:46:47. > :46:51.preventing under-age sales were they have the best record out there.
:46:51. > :46:56.The key point here is that irresponsible drinking is not about
:46:56. > :47:02.price, it is a cultural issue. And even though it seems like a really
:47:02. > :47:05.easy solution that can easily be legislated on, putting up prices
:47:05. > :47:10.will not change that culture. What it will do is penalise the vast
:47:10. > :47:14.majority of people who drink perfectly responsibly to no could
:47:14. > :47:23.end. Caroline Lucas, a lot of people come to your constituency
:47:23. > :47:30.and spend a lot of money drinking freely and cheaply. There are areas
:47:30. > :47:35.that we are very concerned about, because the NHS in our constituency
:47:35. > :47:39.has written to the parliamentary bodies about this. Extra-strong
:47:39. > :47:44.cheap white cider, that can often be sold at cheaper than a price of
:47:44. > :47:49.a bottle of water. You can walk around cities in the country and
:47:50. > :47:53.find people who are drinking it because it is simply the cheapest
:47:53. > :47:58.way to get intoxicated. Richard Dodd, those sort of prices, would
:47:58. > :48:02.you not agree that is ridiculous? That is only a tiny part. We
:48:02. > :48:07.already have the highest alcohol tax rate in Europe in this country.
:48:07. > :48:11.And yet you may say that there are some people who drink to excess and
:48:11. > :48:20.behave irresponsibly as a result but legislating on price will not
:48:20. > :48:28.change that. What retailers are doing is working to change that
:48:28. > :48:32.culture and doing it through education and information. Unit
:48:33. > :48:38.labelling on bottles, things like that and the Drink Aware campaign
:48:38. > :48:44.which is promoting a healthy attitude to drinking. Not just
:48:44. > :48:47.pricing, education, but surely will help as well? There are issues
:48:47. > :48:54.around culture, absolutely but there are certainly issues around
:48:54. > :48:57.the accessibility made so because of price. Many health care
:48:57. > :49:00.professionals will say there is a direct link between the level of
:49:00. > :49:04.the price and the level of damage done and nothing we must address
:49:04. > :49:10.that as well. Patterson the Hell's happening in your city, the green
:49:10. > :49:14.run council wants more powers to control licences. Do you think they
:49:14. > :49:18.are going far enough? I think it is correct they should have more
:49:18. > :49:21.leverage to be able to set were cumulative impact should be, in
:49:21. > :49:26.other words looking at where the areas are where we should be able
:49:26. > :49:29.to reduce the number of licences. I think we need to look at that on a
:49:29. > :49:33.case-by-case basis but having said that, we have a number of people
:49:33. > :49:39.who come to my constituency surgeries who are really fed up of
:49:39. > :49:44.people vomiting in gardens, the noise that can happen in the early
:49:44. > :49:48.hours of the morning... There will also be a lot of bar owners making
:49:48. > :49:54.a lot of money he will be extremely worried. Bringing Richard in.
:49:54. > :49:58.is why I am talking about a case- by-case basis. The council should
:49:58. > :50:02.have more powers which the council should then exercise on a case-by-
:50:02. > :50:06.case basis. Where there is the man, businesses should be allowed to
:50:06. > :50:10.meet that and that should be the general principle -- where there is
:50:10. > :50:13.demand. But people drink responsibly and behave
:50:13. > :50:17.irresponsibly but what we should not do is demonise alcohol in our
:50:17. > :50:21.society. Whether that is what happens in Scotland, where alcohol
:50:21. > :50:26.should be in a particular place in a store and should not be displayed
:50:27. > :50:36.widely, or it is cutting down on the places you can actually sell it,
:50:36. > :50:41.that is the wrong way to go. We need to live with it in a sense of
:50:41. > :50:43.sensibility and responsibility. That is what the British Retail
:50:43. > :50:48.Consortium wants to achieve. will leave it there. Thank you,
:50:48. > :50:50.both of you for joining us. As you may have heard, a new film
:50:51. > :50:59.about the life of Margaret Thatcher starring Meryl Streep is going to
:50:59. > :51:04.be released in the new year. I want conviction. Dennis! When Thatcher
:51:04. > :51:07.came to power in 1979, she turned the political map of the south is
:51:07. > :51:12.blued by talking to the aspirations of the lower middle classes. More
:51:12. > :51:17.than three decades later, the region remains a Tory stronghold.
:51:17. > :51:20.Let's examine The Iron Lady's political legacy. Joining me is
:51:20. > :51:24.Professor Tim Bale, author of The Conservatives: From Thatcher To
:51:24. > :51:30.Cameron. How did Maggie turn the region such a deep shade of blue?
:51:30. > :51:35.She concentrated very much as you put it on the lower middle classes.
:51:35. > :51:44.She made sure their wages were rising. She spoke to their worries
:51:44. > :51:54.and aspirations and give the country a sense of direction. With
:51:54. > :51:55.
:51:55. > :52:00.a leader at knew what she was doing. His Cameron copying her? He is
:52:00. > :52:04.putting taxes up to some extent and he is toughing it out. There is
:52:04. > :52:10.another argument that say he is not emulating her enough, for many
:52:10. > :52:14.backbenchers. No, many people believe he should approach things
:52:14. > :52:17.on the right wing, particularly law and order and immigration. They
:52:17. > :52:21.feel it would attract more voters to the Conservative Party. I don't
:52:21. > :52:25.think there is much evidence for that. They have got those votes
:52:25. > :52:29.sewn up so they have to concentrate on the floating voters in the
:52:29. > :52:36.middle and they are more interested in honesty in the economy. Tony
:52:36. > :52:43.Blair won those voters over in 1997 and kept them with new Labour for a
:52:43. > :52:50.long time. Is the economy a way forward? Yes, Cameron needs the
:52:50. > :52:58.economy to improve over the years for that to happen. But Tony Blair
:52:58. > :53:02.lost the voters in 2005 and it was a disaster in the South East of the
:53:02. > :53:11.Labour Party in 2010. We are in a recession so you would have thought
:53:11. > :53:19.that there were parallels with other years. Margaret Thatcher had
:53:19. > :53:22.advantages that David Cameron does not have. An at right majority,
:53:22. > :53:29.four 1. She had the revenues of North Sea oil and selling off
:53:29. > :53:33.council houses as well and other privatisations and he does not have
:53:33. > :53:43.that. She sold it all off before he next back you can say that and that
:53:43. > :53:44.
:53:44. > :53:50.How much is the legacy of Margaret Thatcher fought David Cameron? How
:53:50. > :53:53.much is it a problem? The recipe for success is following Maggie's
:53:53. > :53:58.example, for many Conservatives. That might not be enough this time
:53:58. > :54:02.round. We also must remember that most governments around the world
:54:02. > :54:06.lose votes between elections, he probably will not pick up that many
:54:06. > :54:11.next time round. There are other Conservative leaders he could
:54:11. > :54:17.mention but it does seem that 1979 is where Conservative momentum
:54:17. > :54:23.begins. I think Margaret Thatcher is the icon for the Conservatives
:54:23. > :54:28.and they tend just to look at her. They could look at other leaders,
:54:28. > :54:32.there is Macmillan, Disraeli, a whole pantheon but they always look