27/11/2011 The Politics Show South East

With the UK economy possibly moving towards a recession, I will report

how the Chancellor can repair growth. In the South East:

Important for democracy or a total waste of time? The parliamentary

rituals which many MPs love, but which leave voters baffled.

And will higher drink prices be enough to solve the problem of

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 2020 seconds

Aachen to -- welcome to The Politics Show. The parliamentary

procedures which may benefit MPs more than voters. There's actually

it's an Early Day Motion St the Early Day Motion should be

abolished which seems silly. higher prices and fewer pubs sold

alcohol-related problems in the region? Were there is discord, may

we bring harmony. And how Maggie Ever wondered what MPs do with

their time? If you do, you're not alone. Caroline Lucas, the Green

member for Brighton Pavilion, thinks a lot of time is wasted at

Parliament and that reform is overdue. We will talk to her

shortly but first, Helen Drew reports on doubts on whether our

The German debates, Private Member's Bills, the list goes on.

All of parliamentary debates that he might have heard about --

adjournment debate. But what do MPs get up to on a daily basis? And how

much of his it in the best in tune -- best interests of constituents?

A PP Jews are all part to parliamentary groups, set up by MPs

and splat up by the House of Lords -- set up. They cover a wide range

of subject and while some of them are worthy like fuel poverty and

homeland security, others include things like bingo and jazz

appreciation. If it is something that the House is likely to beat

legislate or debate, but if it is not the purpose is less obvious.

There are groups that exist to celebrate particular beverages or

sports. They can have some great parties. I remember in my youth

when I worked at the House of Commons attending a reception held

by the group which supported the Scotch whisky industry. That group

would suggest it does some useful work lobbying MPs on excise duties

but it also means that various members of Parliament consume vast

quantities of whisky. I am not sure that is serving the best interests

of the constituents although it is not against the law. While it is

not compulsory to attend meetings, when an MP is on a lot of groups it

all adds up. One of our MPs Caroline Lucas, while campaigning

for the responsible use of time, is on the largest number of groups.

They range from the environment Then there are early day motions,

and the subject as submitted to the MPs for debate in the Commons

although very few of them ever see the light of day. Some politicians

refuse to sign them because they say they are a waste of time and

money. One of them is Henry Smith, MP for Crawley. He lets people know

his position. I think early-day motions are a parliamentary device

that have had their a day. Several are submitted every day by members

of Parliament and I did some research and so far in this

Parliament, not one early-day motion has resulted in a debate in

the House of Commons floor or a vote in the Commons so I think they

are a parliamentary device that needs to be abolished or heavily

updated. And the worst thing is they cost the taxpayer �1 million

per year so I think there is a good reason to reform them. Like the

all-party groups, early-day motions cover subjects that arguably do not

need to be discussed in Parliament. The recent example is a

commendation of the Staffordshire born terrier group from promoting

the breed. So some of them are for very minor things. I think it is

important that lot of MPs are clear with voters what early-day motions

do and how much power led to have to change something which is not

very much. As well as not having a lot of power, some people say there

is a risk they give false hope. think in my own experience of MPs,

there are some will say to constituents who are passionately

interested in a subject, that they will raise it with the

parliamentary group and put down an early-day motion. It to somebody

who does not understand exactly how Parliament works, that can sound

like dramatic action. It can sound as if their concern is being raised

in the cockpit of national affairs. The reality is they are being

fobbed off with a committee which has no power and a motion which

will not be debated for. Is being a member of lot of groups and signing

lots of Early Day Motions an indication that an MP cares about

issues and is working incredibly hard? Or are these things a waste

of MPs' time and taxpayers' time and money?

Caroline Lucas joins me now from Brighton. We will talk about the

reforms to what in a moment but fast, let's talk about the early

day motions. You have signed 660, almost as many as all the other new

MPs in Parliament. Why? Because I think they are used for. I think we

can reform them and make them clearer -- they are used for. They

can be useful tools in terms of raising issues among fellow MPs and

once you put down an early-day motion, it gives you an opportunity

to speak to lot of MPs to ask them to sign it and it gives you a

chance to debate it with them. But crucially enables people outside

Parliament to be able to contact their MPs with something concrete

to do. Not just agreeing with something... Out of those 660 that

you have signed over 18 months, what proportion roughly have

resulted in some change? I think it takes time for things to get onto

the agenda. I could not claim that any one single Early Day Motion has

resulted in a change of legislation but it is about building a momentum.

I have seen that. For example around energy efficiency. If you

start agitating fire early day motions and want to get one that

has perhaps been signed by 100-200 MPs, that has wait. What I would

say is that I agree we can change them but I am always honest about

the likelihood of them on their and changing things, I think they are a

very useful way of demonstrating support on an issue. You say they

take time. You want to reform Parliament on the time spent voting.

Others have said they will not spend any time signing them. I get

many people writing to me saying how disappointed those are who have

MPs who will not signed early-day motions. They feel that if they

cannot be bothered just to write your name down and demonstrate your

level of support, that is actually doing a disservice. But it is also

misleading your constituents. It looks impressive to say you have

raised the issue in Parliament but if it is not achieving something,

that is also misleading as well. I say, you have to be honest about

it and recognise it will not change things overnight. But I disagree,

there and many issues that take a while to get onto the political

agenda. Look how long it has taken for people to take climate change

seriously. One way of doing that is by this particular process. If I

can make a comparison, yesterday we were debating in Parliament one of

the issues that came via the e- petitions. It is the same idea,

putting your name to something. 140,000 people signed one

particular one. That is now debated in Parliament. And you could say

that a debate in Parliament may not change anything that it will mean

we will have a vote next year and that could change things. I know

you want to reform parliamentary processes, we spoke about all-party

parliamentary groups. Do you think some of them are a bit indulgent to

net work and socialise? I think a lot of them are. But I challenge

you to say that any of the 36 that I am in our indulgent. I could not

possibly go to all of the meetings but for the group on tribal peoples,

there is a real issue that the interests of British companies and

those activities across the world have on tribal peoples. I think

that their activity is legitimate. I am the President of the all-party

group on fuel poverty and energy efficiency and we have ministers

come to our Group, we can hold them to account, we get a range of views.

It is a way of educating MPs and making sure we build political will

to make changes. We will be talking to you again in a few minutes.

Brighton may be the party couple of the region but now it has got

another less glamourous title to contend with. According to a report

published by the North West Public Observatory, Brighton also leads

the South East in terms of alcohol- related problems with Hastings and

Eastbourne following closely behind. The coalition government has

announced a nationwide ban on selling alcohol at prices lower

than the tax to be paid to the Exchequer and some local

authorities are starting to take action as well. Brighton and Hove's

Green Council is setting limits on the bars are opening in the City

but will these be enough to tackle alcohol abuse or is it just

cosmetic? Caroline Lucas remains our studio and Richard Dodd joins

us from the British Retail Consortium. Letters addressed the

two issues of pricing and access. The higher prices, will they help

solve the problem in your constituency, Caroline Lucas?

the Government has suggested will not help at all. They have said it

should not be sold below its cost price and the Guardian did an

investigation into what difference that has made, and 4,000 different

promotional offers, it would have affected just one of those. We

clearly do need to look at alcohol pricing but we need to make a

distinction between what we do on the retail side and by that I mean

the prices that supermarkets offer cheap alcohol as a special offer,

and what we do in restaurants and bars. We need to make a big

distinction between a lowering what is available in terms of the

hospitality trade and making higher the rate that are in the retail

trade because that is where the problems are. A Richard Dodd,

people have been asking about this for a lot of time because they are

worried about the number of people admitted to hospital with alcohol-

related problems? I would like to make a distinction between those

two part of the trade and supermarkets are the most

responsible sellers of alcohol but there are in terms of things like

preventing under-age sales were they have the best record out there.

The key point here is that irresponsible drinking is not about

price, it is a cultural issue. And even though it seems like a really

easy solution that can easily be legislated on, putting up prices

will not change that culture. What it will do is penalise the vast

majority of people who drink perfectly responsibly to no could

end. Caroline Lucas, a lot of people come to your constituency

and spend a lot of money drinking freely and cheaply. There are areas

that we are very concerned about, because the NHS in our constituency

has written to the parliamentary bodies about this. Extra-strong

cheap white cider, that can often be sold at cheaper than a price of

a bottle of water. You can walk around cities in the country and

find people who are drinking it because it is simply the cheapest

way to get intoxicated. Richard Dodd, those sort of prices, would

you not agree that is ridiculous? That is only a tiny part. We

already have the highest alcohol tax rate in Europe in this country.

And yet you may say that there are some people who drink to excess and

behave irresponsibly as a result but legislating on price will not

change that. What retailers are doing is working to change that

culture and doing it through education and information. Unit

labelling on bottles, things like that and the Drink Aware campaign

which is promoting a healthy attitude to drinking. Not just

pricing, education, but surely will help as well? There are issues

around culture, absolutely but there are certainly issues around

the accessibility made so because of price. Many health care

professionals will say there is a direct link between the level of

the price and the level of damage done and nothing we must address

that as well. Patterson the Hell's happening in your city, the green

run council wants more powers to control licences. Do you think they

are going far enough? I think it is correct they should have more

leverage to be able to set were cumulative impact should be, in

other words looking at where the areas are where we should be able

to reduce the number of licences. I think we need to look at that on a

case-by-case basis but having said that, we have a number of people

who come to my constituency surgeries who are really fed up of

people vomiting in gardens, the noise that can happen in the early

hours of the morning... There will also be a lot of bar owners making

a lot of money he will be extremely worried. Bringing Richard in.

is why I am talking about a case- by-case basis. The council should

have more powers which the council should then exercise on a case-by-

case basis. Where there is the man, businesses should be allowed to

meet that and that should be the general principle -- where there is

demand. But people drink responsibly and behave

irresponsibly but what we should not do is demonise alcohol in our

society. Whether that is what happens in Scotland, where alcohol

should be in a particular place in a store and should not be displayed

widely, or it is cutting down on the places you can actually sell it,

that is the wrong way to go. We need to live with it in a sense of

sensibility and responsibility. That is what the British Retail

Consortium wants to achieve. will leave it there. Thank you,

both of you for joining us. As you may have heard, a new film

about the life of Margaret Thatcher starring Meryl Streep is going to

be released in the new year. I want conviction. Dennis! When Thatcher

came to power in 1979, she turned the political map of the south is

blued by talking to the aspirations of the lower middle classes. More

than three decades later, the region remains a Tory stronghold.

Let's examine The Iron Lady's political legacy. Joining me is

Professor Tim Bale, author of The Conservatives: From Thatcher To

Cameron. How did Maggie turn the region such a deep shade of blue?

She concentrated very much as you put it on the lower middle classes.

She made sure their wages were rising. She spoke to their worries

and aspirations and give the country a sense of direction. With

a leader at knew what she was doing. His Cameron copying her? He is

putting taxes up to some extent and he is toughing it out. There is

another argument that say he is not emulating her enough, for many

backbenchers. No, many people believe he should approach things

on the right wing, particularly law and order and immigration. They

feel it would attract more voters to the Conservative Party. I don't

think there is much evidence for that. They have got those votes

sewn up so they have to concentrate on the floating voters in the

middle and they are more interested in honesty in the economy. Tony

Blair won those voters over in 1997 and kept them with new Labour for a

long time. Is the economy a way forward? Yes, Cameron needs the

economy to improve over the years for that to happen. But Tony Blair

lost the voters in 2005 and it was a disaster in the South East of the

Labour Party in 2010. We are in a recession so you would have thought

that there were parallels with other years. Margaret Thatcher had

advantages that David Cameron does not have. An at right majority,

four 1. She had the revenues of North Sea oil and selling off

council houses as well and other privatisations and he does not have

that. She sold it all off before he next back you can say that and that

How much is the legacy of Margaret Thatcher fought David Cameron? How

much is it a problem? The recipe for success is following Maggie's

example, for many Conservatives. That might not be enough this time

round. We also must remember that most governments around the world

lose votes between elections, he probably will not pick up that many

next time round. There are other Conservative leaders he could

mention but it does seem that 1979 is where Conservative momentum

begins. I think Margaret Thatcher is the icon for the Conservatives

and they tend just to look at her. They could look at other leaders,

there is Macmillan, Disraeli, a whole pantheon but they always look