08/02/2012 Daily Politics

Morning, folks, welcome to the Daily Politics. Today, we are only

mid- banker bashing season, but the Chancellor thinks it has already

gone too far. Is Britain in danger of becoming the enemy of business?

The Health Secretary is under fire over his NHS reforms. Number 10

insists that Andrew Lansley and his bill will survive.

As the temperature outside goes down, the elderly turn it up inside,

but should more affluent pensioners get extra payments from government?

Ann Widdecombe is here to explain why she is giving her as a way.

And why everyone from the Prime Minister down is going nuts for

everything Nordic. All that in the next 90 minutes of

cockle warming TV this freezing February morning. Are your cockles

suitably warmed? Not yet. It takes a lot to warm her cockles.

Providing the heat on your electronic hearth are Labour's Liz

Kendall, the Shadow Health minister. And the International Development

Minister, who just can't give his money away. He has responsibility

for the Caribbean, among other places. Alan Duncan. Surprised you

are not there. First, is and anti-business culture

developing in the UK? The Chancellor George Osborne warned

last night that the row over bonuses and pay threatened to

undermine jobs and prosperity in a free-market economy, and he

defended the principles of rewards for success. His comments come in

the wake of last week's furore over a proposed bonus payment of almost

�1 million to the chief executive of state-owned RBS bank Stephen

Hester. Mr Hester, who eventually turned down the bonus, was on Radio

4's Today programme this morning. The central question that I am

charged with is how to make a commercial success of RBS. And one

of the central questions for society is not how we divide the

pride but whether we have a prior tour. How do we get economic growth

and how do we be successful? The question is not how we divide the

pie, but whether we have a pie at all.

A last night, George Osborne said he wanted to fight an anti-business

culture. There is a distinction between Steve Goodwin -- Fred

Goodwin and Stephen Hester. This man, Stephen Hester, was not in

banking before. He was taken on to clear up the mess and he should be

rewarded if he is successful. We want RBS to be back in private

hands and put in money back into the coffers. When it comes to

higher earners, 1% of income taxpayers pay 28% of the income tax

intake. So should you have taken his bonus? I think the bonuses

should not be in cash, but in shares, invested over a number of

years so that they are not just a short-term reward for short-term

success. Did you agree that he should not take it on this

occasion? What a good guy. He said, I am not going to take it. One can

hear from the tone of the interview this morning that we should not

underestimate the pressure we put people under when there is a sudden

press attack on them over so many days. This is the good guy who is

trying to put things right. Then why did the Government have not

defend him at the time? As you say, there is a distinction between

Stephen Hester and Fred Goodwin. Why did someone not say, let him

have his bonus? Were did defend him. That is not quite true. David

Cameron said not to take the bonus. We do not want anyone to take a

cash bonus. His bonus was shares. It was never to be a cash bonus.

have to be sensitive at a time of austerity when many are finding it

difficult to pay their bills about how something like this, in the

eyes of the public, can look excessive. In my view, we want to

reward these people over the long term for successfully turning

around a bank that became a disaster. That would be good for

the country and the business image of Britain is important, because if

we do not attract businesses, we will not get the growth we need.

Labour claimed that this was their success and that they persuaded

Stephen Hester to waive his bonus. No one in Labour talked about

bonuses or people waving them when they were in government. I actually

think the issue of bonuses is related to a very pro-business

agenda about how we get our economy growing again. If I think about the

small businesses in my constituency, one of the things they regularly

raised is the fact that banks are not lending. It was interesting

that Robert Jenkins, a member of the Bank of England's financial

policy committee, told the Treasury Select Committee recently that for

every �1 billion less in bonuses, that could translate into �20

billion worth of lending to small businesses. We need to promote and

champion our entrepreneurial businesses to get the country

growing again. This is not an anti- business agenda, but a pro-business

agenda. But do you accept that it is only in difficult times that

people are talking about bonuses? You did not care at the time when

things were going well. We did have a bankers' bonus tax. But before

that, it was all about light touch regulation, according to Ed Balls.

The Conservative Party would have wanted even more of a light touch

regulatory approach. In the future, we need to look at how we have a

system where people are rewarded for success, but bonuses are about

exceptional success. She under Labour, even when RBS had bitten

the dust, the bonus pot approved by the then Labour government was �1.3

billion. They have completely changed their tune. In 2009, the

Walker review looked into bankers' bonuses. It talked about there

being far greater transparency in the remuneration of people working

in banks. The Government have not taken action on that. Do you want

to see chief executives of state- owned and part-owned companies

beyond Network Rail and RBS, do you want the Government to look at

their bonuses and say they cannot take them? A big bonuses should

exist, but the genuinely exceptional performance. But should

we be looking at state-owned companies? We need to look at

bonuses across the board, particularly in backs. What are we

trying to achieve here? We are trying to achieve a banking system

where exceptional success is rewarded. But we have to get them

lending again. How do we move our banking system forward so that it

promotes jobs? Do you think it is helpful to talk about predators and

producers? Does that not sound and the business? Be is important to

talk about how we get responsible businesses. I think Ed has helped

set the agenda here. When he first gave his speech at party conference,

raising these issues about what responsible capitalism looked like,

he was pooh-poohed by the press and others. It does look as if the

coalition government has followed his lead. I think the Ed Miliband

approach to this, in many things he is very rational. And that is good.

But because he has been in a slightly desperate position with

his leadership, he has rather whipped up hatred to garner support

for himself. He has regularly been making this point since he became

leader. If Labour goes on about growth, fair enough. But you have

to have a successful business community.

The coalition came to power determined that it would not make

the same mistakes as the last government by becoming embroiled in

was in the Middle East. But that was before the Arab Spring, and

particularly the rebellion in Libya. Now there are questions about

whether elements of the successful operation in Libya could be

replicated in Syria. Libya provided a template for

successful intervention. Make sure any action has UN backing. Allow

local rebels to take the lead, with foreign air support and equipment.

And limit the involvement of Western military forces. Fighting

in Libya went on longer than some expected, but basically everything

went according to plan. You showed the world you could get rid of a

dictator and choose freedom. worsening situation in Syria has

led to demands for more of the same. It seems as though Nicolas Sarkozy

would like to see a repeat of the success in Libya. The EU has

strengthened Scots' actions. France wants to establish a contact group

of supportive countries, and there is talk of arming rebels. But with

Russia and China vetoing un resolutions, it is not clear what

can be achieved. Then there is Iran. Again, sanctions have been imposed,

including an EU or embargo, which Iran is threatening to respond to

by closing the Straits of Hormuz, a crucial area for oil tankers. With

the prospect of unilateral action from Israel, how should Britain and

the rest of the international community respond?

Alan Duncan, as a result of the apparent success in Libya with our

intervention, are you worried that that has made some people in your

government more interventionist mine did? At do not think so. Even

in Libya, we were cautious. It was a no-fly zone supported by a UN

resolution. Most of the rebellion activity came from within.

Crucially, differently from Syria, everything depended on Gaddafi, the

man. The regime in Syria is more complicated. President Assad, who

has become very nasty, was almost accidental President upon the death

of his father. Behind him is a much more nasty group of people. I think

Syria is different from Libya. Libya was a great success and a

real feather in the cap for the Prime Minister. He stuck his neck

out when others mocked him. Did you agree? Yes, I did. There are a

number of neo- Conservatives in the government who do not agree.

Setting aside that distinction about whether you are Rania

Conservative or not, I am not -- I am not a neo- conservative. But I

do not think the Libyan no-fly zone and conflict can be defined as

being either near a Conservative or not. It was the right thing to do.

And I think the revolution in Libya was generated from within. Now we

see what was going on, thank goodness it was. Syria is more

difficult. Iran is very complicated. You touched on oil sanctions. They

are now beginning to bite in Iran. You mean the not buying of Iranian

oil? Yes. It is not a total blockade of all of their exports,

but it is affecting their revenues and their economy. The more

targeted sanctions on people and money are biting effectively. It is

the right thing to do on a round, whose belligerence and reckless

talk about nuclear weapons is a danger to the world. Is there

anything practical we can do in Syria now? It is extremely

difficult. It is difficult even to work out what the dividing lines

are in terms of who are fighting room and what the differences are.

I accept that the regime is fighting its own people. It is

difficult to do anything when you do not have a UN resolution, as we

had in Libya. If it is blocked by the Russians and Chinese, there is

no framework of law within which we might be able to act. It is the

biggest difficulty in the Near Room at least. Horrid and awkward that

we appear to be helpless, but we can only behave within the

framework of international law. There is no real morality in

depending on the UN, though. There is no morality if you are dependent

in the end on two dictatorships called Russia and China. There is

morality when it permits you to do something. Buff -- but if it does

not reach that collective decision, it can block what might otherwise

be regarded as moral action. That is the problem with the UN. It

requires collective consensual and Dortmund. Which means that

sometimes, you need the support of the bad guys, governments which are

good at redressing their own people, Russia and China. They do not care

if another government is repressing its own people. You are right, it

does sometimes require the support of people who are not entirely

savoury in everything they do. But that is the nature of the United

Nations. I understand that, but I was thinking that perhaps the

moralistic talk of the UN should be downgraded, as there is not much

morality in the UN when you have Saudi Arabia on the human rights

commission and you have our policy determined by China and Russia. It

may be realpolitik and it may be legal, but it is not moral by any

definition I would understand. me question the tone you are

adopting about the UN itself. You are somehow blaming the UN for this,

when it is in fact two members of the Security Council who have

rejected a necessary resolution. By all means blame them. Do not blame

the UN, because that is a different phenomenon. There is bipartisan

support on Syria, isn't there? I want to come back to a question

you raised earlier about the practical action that can be taken.

Alan is right about the difficult circumstances that there are.

William Hague said in the House this week that more needs to be

done working with the various opposition groups within Syria. I

also think that building more support and working closely with

the Arab League so that members in the region are prepared not only to

support proper steps towards democracy, but play a role in that,

that is important, as well as continuing to work with our

European and wider international colleagues. We have discussions

between America and Turkey taking place. It is important to see what

more turkey can do. There are practical steps, though it is

You may have to get the Arab League to become democratic since I don't

think there is a democracy... Yesterday papers were full of

speculation about the future of Andrew Lansley and his Health and

Social Care Bill. There is support from Number Ten today as the Bill

goes back to the House of Lords today where it is it is expected to

face opposition from peers. Andrew Lansley's reforms of the NHS

have under gone major problems. He introduced over 100 amendments to

the Bill last yeebg. The Health Secretary had to broaden the role

of the regulator by replacing its duty to promote competition. Nurses

and other healthcare professionals will be able to take up roles on

commissioning bodies. And the Health Secretary, himself, will

remain responsible for the delivery of healthcare, something which many

peers were concerned about. The trouble is the surgeries failed to

cure the original complaints from many Liberal Democrats, cross-

benchers and Labour peer in the Lords. Now the Bill is coming under

attack from bodies and MPs that previously supported it. They are

claiming the surgeries remove the guts from the Bill. The Financial

Times quotes worried Conservative Thank you, Jo.

We are joined by David Owen. Welcome back to the programme. Alan

Duncan, one of your backbenchers is quoted as saying, "we could end up

as the party that messed up the NHS.". We are doing our best to

shape the NHS for the future needs of the country that we can see with

a greater focus on elderly care and on community community need and to

try and empower GPs to be able to commission what they think is best

needed for their patients is what this Bill is all about. It is

taking out a layer of administration, people so often

complain about there being too many managers and not enough doctors.

You put more layers in. The Bill is so complex, it changed so much.

Over 100 amendments last week, 1,000 in total since it was

presented. It has just become a mess? Well, a lot of Bills have

many, many amendments so that's not exactly unprecedented. The whole

process of amendment is designed to improve legislation and we should

welcome anything that genuinely does improve the legislation and

the House of Lords today will start its report stage and I have to say

the Lords is often, it looks at legislation better than we do in

the Commons. So we have got to look at what they say and take a view

about whether it will improve the legislation.

Even the the few leading clinicians who supported your Bill, they say

as a result of the changes you made, it is a dog's breakfast.

reforming piece of legislation, you know, upsets existing ways of

behaving and therefore, is invariably going to provoke more

opposition than support and that is where we are with this Bill at the

moment. Andrew Lansley should be taken out

and shot, he messed up the communication and substance of the

policy. That's from Downing Street. I don't think that would be from

Downing Street. It is from Downing Street.

And it is it is not a comment comment with which I agree.

I wonder when you fought the last election when you had what was in

store. I interviewed Andrew Lansley and I had no idea this was coming.

The House of Commons and House of Lords is paid to examine the

legislation and try and make it as It has been massively changed.

There is deep unhappy about it, but it looks with the Prime Minister

backing the Health Secretary, it is going to happen? Well, I hope it

doesn't. I only think the Prime Minister can stop it. He did stop

forestry. People thought it would be a big blow. It was forgotten

within days. Actually, I had forgotten it until you mentioned

it! If he did it, the NHS would rally because there are many

reforms which they are committed to under the existing legislation you

could do, Stephen Dorrell said they didn't need this. It is a massive

legislation. Far bigger than the original original Health Service

Act. They promise nod top down reorganisation, this is the mother

and father of a top down reorganisation and now they are

saying this argument that because it has gone so far, they can't stop

it. But it will cause chaos, but they have broken all the

conventions which exist in the House of Commons for many, many

decades. You can implement some of the legislation after second

reading, but you cannot pre-empt the democratic process, what they

have done is pre-empt the democratic process and it is a

profound constitutional issue here. And you believe a number of reforms

which you would be consider to be worthwhile reforms to improve the

NHS could go ahead without this Bill? Well, you are a young man,

but you will remember when I was involved with the Health Service

and then with the SDP, I was the architect of the internal market, I

sometimes regret it now, but the internal market was an attempt to

get the cost effective pressures that every Health Service has to

have. This is a rationed Health Service. But it is a popular

service. It is rationed because most people think it is democratic

and fair. One of the other big issues is pulling out the role of

Government and putting in quangos. This quango, the National Health

Service commissioning board is the biggest quango that has been

created. This was a Government, a lot of people agreed, was going to

get rid of quangos. That was the point I made to you.

You created the biggest quango in an attempt to keep the show on the

road? I see in my own constituency GPs

preparing for this. I don't think certainly in the case I have seen

that they are pre-empting the legislation in the way that David

Owen suggests and I think think their preparedness is enthusiastic

to assume... David Owen's point is that a lot of that could be done

without the Bill? The Royal College of General Practitioners are not

involved in pay or pensions against the Government. They have come out

against it. It is unprecedented for the NHS to be so critical.

We know Labour is against it. We know your leader would like the

Bill could be withdrawn, but does Labour have a policy for reforming

the Health Service? Absolutely, we need as our population increases

and we have more people living with long-term and chronic conditions,

we need to put a greater emphasis on services in the community and in

people's homes and making sure the NHS and local council services for

older people work closely together. That's the subject of the Health

Select Committee's report on social care out today and what is very

interesting that report says some of the best example of integration

have been delivered by organisations that pool the money

and the staff together. They are going to be swept away by this

Health Bill. We are going to see major changes

in hospital services. We have got to have an information that

delivers more with less money. The way to do that is not to set all

the parts of the system against one another and it is not to have a

massive distracting wasteful information reorganisation. Let's

be clear, the Government's plans now include at least five layers of

management in the NHS. That's not what Tory backbenchers supported.

It is going to cost billions of pounds. It is a big distraction and

patient care is already suffering with waiting time going up. That is

why this Bill is such a disast are, not because we are against change,

but because this won't help us make the changes we really need to see.

Five layers of management. They will soon catch up with the BBC!

David Owen, it looks like the Lib Dem peers are swinging into line

behind the Government. Is it a lost cause for you? The House of Lords

doesn't have the right to stop a Bill because they find this

politically disvan tainlgous. They are allowed to reform it. It is a

whipped Bill and there is no doubt when the whips of of Liberal

Democrat peers and Conservatives, they can force it through as they

did in the House of Commons. I think we have to reluctantly say

only the people of this country by writing to the Prime Minister and

saying to him, "You said a very different message to us in the last

election and why have you made this change? Admit it is a mistake." His

own adviser said it was a tactic, this pause which they introduced

into the summer. They nearly got away with it and suddenly the

medical profession which is slow, you know, the non political element

to stir has realised this Bill is a disaster.

We have to leave there. You should come back and see us more often.

Oh, it is me! I'm going to do this!

Now, there is con son nation across middle Britain. Teapot sales have

fallen by 40% over the past five years. I will have more difficulty

pouring the tea. Instead of making a proper cup of tea with tea,

leaves, pot and strainer and milk added after, never before the tea.

Brits are taking to brewing their tea in a mug using a teabag, heaven

forbid! Fret, not it is a storm in the

teapot. The tea can be brewed in a Daily

Politics mug! It transforms builder's tea into something

sublime! At least that's what run of the runners on this programme

told me! If you pay attention, you could win

one! After all that, we remind you how to enter in a moment. Let's see

if you can remember when this # Let's get in the mood

# A real groovy mood # Let's have a party party

# Let's get in the mood # A real groovy mood to have a

# I've got a man crazy for me # I believe that for every drop of

rain that falls, a flower grows # My my worry throughout the assent

was the question of the supply of Everybody in Britain hopes the

Ashes aren't in a hurry to leave I think that was from Half a

sixpence. To be in with a chance to win a mug,

You can see the full terms and conditions for Guess The Year on

It is, ing up to -- it is coming up to midday. Let's look at Big Ben.

I'm told it is bitterly cold across the nation. It can only mean one

thing, it is Wednesday and Prime Minister's Questions question and

it is also Nick Robinson. Nick, is health a big issue? Ed Miliband has

been trying to get this story going. Each week reading out a list of the

bodies opposed to the Health Bill. He will be be able to read out

another, there is another health body against it. The story is

embargoed until 12.15! I can't tell you which body at the moment.

Break the embargo? That would be shocking. Parliament is covered by

embargo rules. It comes a day after, I know you were talking about the

article in the in the Times that suggested someone inside Number Ten

wanted Andrew Lansley to be taken out and shot... Yes, I put that to

Mr Mr Duncan. And presumably not patched by the men and women of the

NHS whom we owe so much. With Andrew Lansley's poor presentation

of the Bill and people looking for a sign that the Bill is going to be

scrapped, always a possibility because even supporters of the

reforms argued that some of it could be done without legislation.

. David Owen was saying that. You get people who are both opposed

to the Bill who say scrap the Bill and you get people in favour of

elements who say scrap the Bill. Yesterday, the firmest, clearest

briefing you could have got that not just David Cameron, but Nick

Clegg after a meeting that the two had with Andrew Lansley know they

want to plough on. They want to stick to the Bill and that given

two opportunities to as it were to politically go out and shoot Andrew

Lansley, the resignation of Chris Huhne and the resignation of Liam

Fox before Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner Chris Chris -- Christmas.

The Prime Minister has shunned them all and says, "Plough on.". I get

the impression reading the Times which is clearly a result of

briefing from Downing Street, that the Prime Minister is behind it.

Nick Clegg has been squared. But we will find out. Let's go over to the

I am sure the house would join with me in pay tribute to her Majesty

the Queen in what is an absolutely historic week marking the 60th

anniversary of her accession to the throne. Her Majesty's 60 years of

remarkable leadership and dedicated public service are an inspiration

to us all and something the whole country and Commonwealth can be

proud of. Members will obviously have the opportunity to pay

individual attributes during the humble Address debate on 7th March.

This morning amid ministerial colleagues and others and in

addition to my duties in this House, I shall have further such meetings

later today. Mr Speaker, I am sure the whole house, not least myself,

will join the Prime Minister in his warm tribute to her Majesty. Mr

Speaker, last March, the Prime police officers. Can the Prime

Minister now confirm that frontline officer numbers have been cut in 14

out of 43 police forces? proportion of officers on the

frontline is up. I am sure he will want to join me in congratulating

mayor Boris Johnson on his excellent record on crime in our

capital. Total crime is down, violent crime is down on buses and

tubes. 11,000 knives and guns have been taken off our streets. And

there are 1000 more officers on the streets of London at the end of his

term than at the beginning. That, together with his reminder of the

rule of the dangers of tweeting, is a good start to the day. Does my

right honourable friend share my disappointment at the overthrow

yesterday of the first democratically-elected President of

the Maldives in a coup d'etat? Given our historic links with the

islands, will the Government, by way of a message, do all they can

to ensure that no violence results and that the democratic

institutions remain? My honourable friend is right. This country does

have strong links with the Maldives and does has have a good

relationship with the president. But the president has resigned, and

we have a strong interest in the well-being of several thousand

British tourists and in a stable and democratic government in the

Maldives. Our High Commissioner is in the capital meeting all of the

political leaders. We call on the new government to demonstrate its

respect for the rights of all political parties and their members

and to ensure that the constitution is upheld. We advise British

tourists to advise non-essential travel and those using the airport

should exercise caution. Mr Speaker, can I join the Prime

Minister in pay tribute to her Majesty the Queen, as we celebrate

her diamond jubilee. Her dedication to the country and public service

is and inspiration and example to us all. We look forward to the

official celebrations later this year, which will enable us to

celebrate both her Majesty and our country. Mr Speaker, on the day the

Prime Minister completed his NHS listening exercise, he said this.

"some of the people who work in the NHS were sceptical of our changes.

Today, we are taking people with us". And it is in that spirit of

unity that we want to continue. Why does he think he has failed?

today, 95% of the country is covered by general practitioners

who are not only supporting our reforms, they are implementing our

reforms. For order. The house must calm down. There is a long way to

go. Let's hear the answers. There will be plenty of time. Just today,

50 Foundation trusts have written to the newspapers in support of our

reforms and objecting to what Labour proposing. The signature at

the top of the list, which he may not have noticed, is 1 Anne

Campbell, the former Labour MP for Cambridge. She, running her local

Foundation Trust, supports the reforms. That is what happens.

Labour MPs leave this House and start implementing coalition policy.

A Mr Speaker, even he does not believe that nonsense he just came

out with. Last Friday, the Royal College of General Practitioners

said this about his health bill. "it will cause irreparable damage

to patient care and jeopardise the NHS." the Health Secretary is

shouting from a sedentary position. It is nice to see him here. Some

distance away, I notice. The Prime Minister says he wants the voice of

doctors to be heard in the NHS. Why doesn't he listened to them? It is

always good to get a electron happy families from the right honourable

member. -- to get a lecture on Happy families from the right

honourable member. I care passionately about our NHS, not

least because of what it has done for my family and because of the

amazing service I have received. I want to see that excellent service

implemented for everyone. That means two things - we have to put

more money into the NHS, and we are putting the money in. But it also

means we have to reform the NHS. He used to be in favour of the reform.

Let me read him this. "to safeguard the NHS in tougher fiscal times, we

need sustained reform". That was in the Labour manifesto of the last

election. And on the issue of Money, we are committed to �12.5 billion

in this Parliament. And yet his health spokesman said "it would be

irresponsible to spend more money on the NHS". They are not in favour

of the money or of the reform, they are just a bunch of opportunists.

Isn't this interesting? He says this is all about reform. The Tory

Reform Group has come out against these proposals. It comes to

something when even the Tories don't trust the Tories on the NHS.

Listen to what the chair of the Royal College of GPs... Oh, Mr

Speaker! So when the people they want to put at the heart of the NHS

says things about the bill, they just grown. It says it all about

the benches opposite. This is what she said "this bill is a burden. It

makes no sense. It is incoherent. It will not deal with the big

issues, and it will result in a health service that certainly will

never match the health service we had 12 months ago". Mr Speaker,

which part of that doesn't he understand? Let's look at what has

happened to the NHS over the last 18 months. Let's look at the

figures. 100,000 patients treated more every month. 4000 extra

doctors since the NHS. The number of clinical staff up. The level of

hospital acquired infections down. The number of people in mixed sex

wards down by 94%. That is happening because you have a

combination of money going in and reform. We know what happens if you

do not put in the money and do not do the reform, because there is one

part of the NHS that is run by Labour, and that is in Wales. So

let's look at what is happening to the NHS in Wales. They have cut the

money, and one-third of people are waiting longer than 18 months -- 18

weeks. That is happening in Labour's NHS. If he did not have

the money or the reform, it would happen here, too. I am not

surprised that he is getting so agitated, because he thought the

NHS was his way to modernise the Conservative Party. And I'm afraid

it is coming apart. And I will tell him why, because the promises he

made before the election are coming back to haunt him. We all remember

that promised - no more top down reorganisation. And now he says he

knows better than the doctors, better than the nurses, better than

the midwives, better than the patients' associations, people who

day in, day out rely on DA and devote their lives to the health

service. This is a matter of trust in the Prime Minister. Can he

honestly look people in the health service in the eye and say he has

kept his promise of no more top- down reorganisation? We are cutting

the bureaucracy in the NHS. We are taking out for �0.5 billion of

bureaucracy that will be ploughed into patient care. If you do not

support the reform, you will not see that money going to operations,

doctors, nurses, hospitals, healthcare assistants. That is

happening in the NHS. But there is one group of people I will not

listen to, and that is those who ran the NHS under Labour. This is

what they did - �6 billion wasted on the NHS computer. �250 million

spent on private sector operations that were never carried out. We

still have Private Finance Initiative agreements where we pay

�300 each time someone changes a lightbulb. That is what we got from

Labour. We are putting the money and the reform in. The operations

are up, the waiting times are down, the NHS is improving, and that is

the way it is going to stay. I will tell him about our record on the

NHS. The shortest waiting times in NHS history. More doctors and

nurses than ever before. The highest level of patient

satisfaction ever in the health service. But everyone will have

heard a Prime Minister unable to defend the promise he made, the

promise of no more top-down reorganisation, a Prime Minister

who has broken his word. The reality is this. All his attention

is on this point was top-down reorganisation, and the frontline

is suffering. The number of people waiting more than 18 weeks is up

under him. A&E targets being missed, cancelled operations. Why won't he

just give up and stop wasting billions and drop his bill? If the

record was so good, why were they thrown out at the last election?

Order! I am worried about opposition members. They must calm

themselves at straightaway. Let me rind -- remind the honourable

gentleman of the test he said for the reforms and the Government. He

said the test was whether waiting times would come down. Let me give

him the figures. In-patient waiting times - down. Out-patient waiting

times, down. The number of people waiting more than a year, down to

its lowest ever. The number of people waiting for six months, down

to its lowest ever level. And the number of people on the waiting-

list. What he said was the clear test, that is down. Even when this

Labour leader moves the goalposts, he can't put it in the back of the

net. Mr Speaker, the person moving the goalposts is the Prime Minister.

The reality is that the key test that was set for the health service

was the number of people waiting more than 18 weeks. That number is

up 43% since the general election. However much he twists and turns,

that is the reality. He knows in his heart of hearts that this is a

complete disaster, this bill. That is why his aides are say the Health

Secretary should be taken up and shot, because they know it is a

disaster. The reality is that doctors know it is bad for the NHS.

The nurses know it is bad for the NHS, and patients know it is bad

for the NHS. Every day, he fights for this bill. Every day, trust in

him on the NHS ebbs away and every day, it becomes clearer that the

health service is not safe in his I got to tell him the career

prospects for my right honourable friend are a lot better than his!

This is not a campaign to save the NHS. This is a campaign to try and

save his leadership and I make this prediction, the NHS will go on

getting better and his prospects will go on getting worse.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. When the work programme was introduced in

Burnley in October 2010, the people inactive was 76. Would the Prime

Minister congratulate the people of Burnley for that success?

I certainly join my honourable friend in congratulating not only

the people in Burnley, but the people con conducting the work

programme because I think what we are seeing is more people becoming

able to work and therefore, able to enter the workforce and to raise

not only the country's living standards, but raise their own

living standards too. The people of Preston are furious

that the Indian Government selected a French company as the bidder for

the Indian Air Force jet. The Prime Minister goes on about rebalancing

the British economy. This is a major blow to manufacturing in this

country. Other European leaders can go and help their companies get

major contracts, why is this weak Prime Minister not doing that and

why haven't we got this contract? The honourable gentleman ought to

think about the fact that all European leaders are actually

backing the Eurofighter project. It is a German project. It is an

Italian project, a Spanish project and a British project. I am

disappointed by what has happened in India, but euro fight

certificate not out of the con dur euro fight certificate not out of

the contest and we need to reengage to make sure we get the best deal

for those who make Eurofighter. This is something that ought to

unite parties in this House, getting behind our defence

producers. In order that a constituent of mine could access

the drugs and treatment she was entitled to under the NHS

constitution, her GP, her consultant, her specialist

oncologist and the Secretary of State Secretary of State for health

and I had to write letters. honourable lady raises an important

point, since the introduction of the Cancer Drugs Fund, 10,000 more

people have been able to get cancer drugs drugs that are essential. Let

me tell you one that would damage cancer drug, that's the proposal

from the party opposite to cap drugs at 5%. In the Royal Marston

they would have to cut by a quarter the services they deliver. What a

crazy left-wing plan that only the right honourable gentleman could

come up with. In three months time, just before

the Olympics, Abu Qatada, a truly dangerous man will be roaming the

streets of London with his mobile phone and internet access, thanks

to the Prime Minister, abolishing control orders and house arrest

provisions. How can the Prime Minister justify putting the

public's right to life at risk in order to give over to the Liberal

Democrats on their plans to demolish control orders?

situation with Abu Qatada is unacceptable. As I said, I when I

went to Strasbourg to make a speech in front of the Council of Europe

about this, it is not acceptable that we end up with a situation, we

have someone in your country, that threatens to do you harm, that you

cannot try, you cannot detain and you cannot deport and that is why

the Government will do everything it can, working with our Jordanian

friends and allies to make sure that he can be deported and again,

instead of sniping about this, the whole House ought to unite to help

sort this out. Recently as last September, only a

tiny handful of the 165 acute mental health, adult inpatient beds

in Hampshire were vacant. Yet the trust concerned proposes to cut

those 165 beds to 107, replacing them with something called a

hospital at home or a virtual ward. Given that I believe that the

statistics on which this is based are inconsistent and unreliable,

will the Prime Minister support my call for independent experts from

the Audit Commission to look at those figures before those beds are

closed? Well, I think the honourable

gentleman makes an important point. We are putting the extra resource

into the NHS, but there need to be a clear series of tests as there

are now under our plans before any facilities are changed or closed

and that is about making sure there is GP back for what is proposed and

making sure that any such changes will improve the health of that air

casmt I will -- area. I will look at the issue he raises and ensure

that the Department of Health engage with him on that.

Four police authorities including one I share with the Chancellor,

have just started buying Hyundai cars imported from Korea, add to

that the Thameslink fiasco and Olympic tickets, when are we going

to see leadership from the Prime Minister about public procurement

in his country? Police forces get together and procure together to

cut their costs. We have all lost count of the times of wandering

through police stations and seeing countless different types of

vehicle all costing a large amount of money. What the public want is

police on the streets, not money spent on unnecessary procurement.

The Prime Minister will have seen this morning's Select Committee

report on Libya. Could my right honourable friend tell the House

what steps he is taking to ensure the UK will be able to evacuate all

UK nationals from conflict zones and reduce our reliance on civil

charter aircraft? My honourable friend raises an important point.

The Libya evacuation have brought home to us the importance of having

transport aircraft in the MoD and in the RAF and I can announce today

that because the Ministry of Defence's finances are better run

and better managed and because we have found savings, we will be able

to purchase an additional C17 for the RAF, this aircraft is becoming

an brilliant work horse for the RAF in terms of bringing men and

material into a war war zone like Afghanistan, but evacuating

civilians in times of need. It is an important investment for the

country and I am glad to announce that we can make it today.

May I first of all associate myself with the tributes to Her Majesty

The Queen. Yesterday, the all party

independent group on stalking published its report. The Prime

Minister knows about my interest in this subject and the Government

consultation concluded yesterday. Will he now please meet meet with

myself and a small group of all party members to discuss this

urgent need for a stalking law? We do take this issue seriously. I

am happy to meet with him and discuss it. I know he conversations

with the Home Office. We want to get this issue right and if there

is a need for legislative changes, there maybe opportunities in the

next session for that criminal justice legislation and I will

happily meet and talk with him about it.

During apprenticeship week, I am proud to announce that a college

has increased the number of apprentices from nine to 160 and

the Government increased the number by 170,000 in the last year. Does

my right honourable friend agree that achievements like these

illustrate the importance to give apprenticeships the attention they

deserve? It is one of the most important investments we can make

in the future industrial base this country and helping young people is

investing in apprenticeships. The number over the last year is up by

60, 457,000 people starting apprenticeships and in

apprenticeship week, it is important to stress what we are

doing to get over the objections in the past that people had, making

sure there are more apprenticeships easily had by small businesses, by

the paper of a simple fee, making sure that we have more high level

apprenticeships so we we show that apprenticeships are every bit as

good as having a university degree and involve a university degree and

cutting the bureaucracy by allowing big businesses to run the tisship

schemes rather than doing it via a training provider.

Why hasn't the Government launched an appeal against the Abu Qatada

judgement? Aren't you being dangerously complacent, Prime

Minister? We are doing everything we can to

get this man out of the country. The absolutely key thing to do is

an agreement with Jordan about the way that he will be treated because

the European Court on Human Rights has made a very clear judgement on

that. I happen to think it is the wrong judgement. I regret that

judgement. This guy should have been deported years ago, but

nevertheless, if we can get that agreement with Jordan, he can be on

his way. Complex employment law makes small

businesses nervous about hiring new staff. Would the Prime Minister

agree we need a simpler alternative for our smallest firms for

dismissal rules? I think my honourable friend is

right to raise this issue. If every small business in the country hired

an additional worker that would go a long way to curing both long-term

and youth and total unemployment at one stroke. We have got to make it

easier for businesses to take people on. One of the key

considerations businesses have, is how difficult it is to let someone

go if it doesn't work out and that's why extending to two years

the amount of of time you have to work before you get access to a

tribunal can make a difference in terms of small small business

employment. We have heard from the Prime

Minister how Italian governments and German governments are out

there fighting for British jobs. Can the Prime Minister tell us

exactly how many phone conversations he had directly with

the Indian Prime Minister about the typhoon bid and when the last

conversation actually took place? raise this issue with the Indian

Prime Minister repeatedly on my visit to India and indeed, at the G

keep 20 in in Cannes. When I loaded an aeroplane up with British goods,

who was it that attacked me? Who put out the press releases? Who was

it that doesn't stand up for British industry, and British jobs?

It is Labour. On Monday, I visited the offices of

the Bucksburry Press. I can tell the Prime Minister that Labour's

leg legacy in my constituents constituents is distrust. The right

way to deliver local accountability in our constituency is clinical

commissioning and foundation trust status? The whole point of the

reforms is to put the power in the hands of local doctors so they make

decisions on behalf of patients and what is good for healthcare in

their local area. We may find that the community hospitals that were

repeatedly undermined by the party opposite will get a boost because

owe lol people and local doctors want to see them succeed. That's

what our reforms are all about. There are 40,000 women sick with

anxiety because of faulty medical products and now they are being

failed by private clinics and by an NHS which is dithering about what

to do. We can see the future of a privatised NHS. So will the Prime

Minister pledge, will the Prime Minister pledge to support those

women in the NHS now and claim against the clinics later and will

he drop the Health and Social Care Bill so we we don't have this

happening across the NHS? I will take the question in two halfs. She

is write about the scandal of the PIP implants. The Government has

made clear that we will offer every one of those women a free

consultation and making sure that on the NHS we do everything we can

to help them. It is a scandal and the private clinics that carried

out the operations, they should feel the maximum pressure to undo

the harm they have done. But let me just say to her about the issue of

greater competition and choice within the NHS, I actually think

she should listen to past Labour politicians who have said

themselves that actually greater greater choice, greater competition,

the involvement of the private sector, that can help raise

standards in our NHS system and that's why we should support it.

Thank you, Mr SPeabg. Speaker. The threat to ship building jobs

threatens 32 jobs in the regional supply chain. Will the Prime

Minister commit to do all he can to protect this site? The honourable

lady is right to speak up for Portsmouth and to speak up for ship

building. BAe Systems Has not approached the Government with any

proposal to rationalise ship building. What I would say in terms

of this Government's commitment to the Royal Navy, better building the

new frig ats, there is the plans for replacing Trident and the plans

for aircraft carriers. Treasury tax rates on North Sea Oil

and gas are putting 1500 jobs at ONG North Tyneside at risk. Can I

ask the Prime Minister not to be complacent about north-east jobs,

but to insent advise off --ent sen ta vice in the Budget and to meet

with me and others about the the jobs situation in the north-east?

The honourable lady raises an important point. I saw for myself

when I went to Aberdeen how vital this industry is and indeed how

much investment is taking place in the North Sea. The reason we put up

the tax on North Sea was actually to cut petrol duty for families up

and down the country, but we will make sure that...

THE SPEAKER: I don't know where members are falling about unable to

contain themselves. I want to hear the Prime Minister's answer.

The Prime Minister. We will make sure there is a good

tax regime for the North Sea, whether that is servicing jobs in

England or indeed in Scotland. Mr Speaker, last Wednesday, the

Commons rejected the Lords attempt to wreck the Reform Bill. On seven

occasion the Commons voted, the Prime Minister and a Deputy Prime

Minister voted, but the Children's Minister, the honourable member for

Brent Central, refused to support the Government and has spoken

against the policy. Now Mr Speaker, on occasion, I have spoken against

the Government and then supported them, but I am not a Government

minister. Why is she still a Government minister?.

I thought thought... THE SPEAKER: We want to hear the

Prime Minister's verdict on the honourable member for Brent Central

and we won't if there is too much noise.

I thought he was going to say yet. The honourable lady is a Government

minister. She supports Government policy as all Government ministers

15,000 young disabled people are going to be affected by the changes

to contributory employment support allowance. That's 1500 now

claimants are going to lose �5,900 a year. Is -- �4,900 a year. Is

this the Government of value that the Prime Minister spoke about in

May 2010. We are We are there are two groups. There are the support

group. People who ant able to work. People who deserve to get that

support for as long as they need it without any means-testing. The

second element, are people who need help to get work, but will be able

to work. That's why they are in that group and they are they are

going to get help and support under the work programme to get them into

work. I know the Labour Party has set its face against all of Welfare

Reform. They are making a massive mistake in doing so.

What confidence can we have that universal intervention by Russia

will put an end to the terrible violence in Syria?

I think we can have very well confidence in that. Russia and

China set themselves against Arab opinion and world opinion in

passing what would have been a strong and good UN resolution and I

think the Foreign Secretary was right to push for that resolution.

What we now need to see and Britain will be playing a big part in this

is real engagement with the Opposition groups both inside and

outside Syria, bringing together the strongest possible

international alliance through a contact group so we can co-ordinate

efforts with respect to getting rid of this dreadful regime and making

sure we continue with the sanctions and pressure. The bloodshed in

Syria is appalling. The Russians have to look at their consciences

and realise what they have done, but the rest of the world will will

keep on fighting to give the Syrian people a chance to choose their own

future. Yesterday, I heard an expert, a

health expert, who is visiting the UK say that the NHS remains a

beacon for care and effectiveness in the world. And that it needs to

be improved and perfected, not changed. Will the Prime Minister

accept that advice and abandon the Health Bill?

I will tell you what needs to be abandoned, and that's Labour's

approach to the NHS in Wales. Well, he shakes his head. This is what is

happening in Wales. This is what Labour are doing in Wales. They

have cut health spending in Wales by �400 million. That is a 6.5% cut.

27% of people in Wales wait over six weeks for diagnostic services.

The figure for England is just 1%. As I said earlier, a third of

people waiting over 18 weeks for their operation in Wales. That is

what you get if you get Labour. No money, no reform. No good Health

Service. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Many of my

constituents are among the 337 redundancies announced by Kerry

Foods. The honourable gentleman from Great Grimsby and I have

approached various departments for support. One possibility is the

extension of the enterprise zone. Can the Prime Minister give give

comfort to my constituents by looking at that proposal?

I am grateful for the question. He is right to speak up for his

constituents in this way. The Chancellor is very happy to look at

the idea of expanding ther enterprise zone and -- the

enterprise zone and see what else we can do to help his constituents

That has overrun by six minutes. Clearly, what I sent the Speaker

for Christmas has not worked. Interesting for Prime Minister's

Questions to finish with the Tory backbencher, Peter Bone,

criticising a Lib Dem government minister for not being there for

some of the votes on the welfare benefit cap. But the men exchange

was between the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition on the

all of the questions he is entitled to on that one subject. Before we

discuss that, let's hear your e- mails.

To too much all of the e-mails were in response to the discussion on

health. By Anne says David Cameron may care about the NHS, but he is

allowing Andrew Lansley to destroy it. Liam in witness said, why does

Mr Cameron believe he is right and the health bodies opposing the bill

are wrong? His personal attacks are not befitting of a Prime Minister.

Graeme Knowles says when in a deep hole, David Cameron always gets out

the David Miliband knife. But Geoffrey from Hampshire says

Cameron runs circles behind the Red Ed again. The opposition front

bench is so full of opportunists, they should concentrate on

healthcare and not points-scoring. And Helen says sorry, but Ed still

can't even score with an open goal like the NHS reforms. He still

comes across as stilted and over prepared. His responses are weak

and lack conviction. Anyone who has spent time in NHS hospital knows it

cannot carry on as cities and needs reform. And there were many more

like this, but the majority were critical of David Cameron.

A more confident and assertive Mr Ballam up -- Mr Miliband, I would

suggest. But you would think there was an election around the corner,

in a way, because they were not just arguing about the merits of

health reform, but a kind of you are rubbish, we are great attitude?

In a sense, Ed Miliband made his mirth -- most impact on health a

couple of weeks ago, when he unveiled the list of public bodies

that were turning against it. He revealed another public body today

that is opposed. They are now saying the bill should be scrapped.

It is hard to get the same impact for three weeks running. But he

looked comfortable and the Prime Minister looked pretty

uncomfortable. You can always tell the Prime Minister is uncomfortable,

because he shouts more. Ed Miliband was quieter. David Cameron also

goes for more lines at David Miliband's expense. It is

proportional to how comfortable he feels on the policy. The most

striking thing about the exchanges was the deliberate, planned,

scripted and organised move to support Andrew Lansley as Health

Secretary. He sat forward in his seats. Helpfully, the cameras at

the House of Commons kept taking pictures of him. The Prime Minister

said his career prospects were better than Ed Miliband's. This

followed that flurry of speculation fuelled by the Times yesterday that

he was on his way out. We were told when you were in opposition in the

run-up to the election that the Tory strategy in health was to

sideline it, just to park it. "we are going to ring-fence it, and not

cut funding". Health and your department were to get more. But

defence and police and the Tory litmus tests were not to get

funding. The less we talked about health, the better it was for your

party. There were endless briefings. In some ways, that was the strategy

in the studio. We had lots of debates. Don't rock the boat was

the Tory attitude. But now health is dominated the headlines.

never said we would pocket to one side. We said we would support it.

You wanted to sanitise it. But you cannot fossilise the NHS either. It

takes an enormous amount of money, which we are increasing, in a world

whose demands are changing significantly as the nature of

disease need and age profile changes. If you do not change the

NHS and make it able to respond to the needs of the elderly and the

challenges of obesity and things like that, it will not be an

efficient organisation serving the needs of the people. So within this

increased budget, we want to reform it so that it can. It is not a top-

down, it is actually bottom-up, because we are empowering GPs and

people at that level to be able to offer patients what they need best

by commissioning the resources. it is not a result of a clamour

from GPs to have these reforms. That would be bottom-up. This is

coming from the top, telling GPs that this is how it will be in the

future. But the empowerment is that the lower level. But it comes from

the top. My definition would be different. It will not be an

organisation where people at the top pull all the levers. It will be

an organisation where people who have faced time with patients can

pull the levers. For the moment, health is a Labour issue. You

usually pull back on that than the Conservatives. But there is a

danger for you. Ed Miliband said there are three months to save the

health service. I would suggest that in three months, the health

service will still be around and still treating millions of patients.

If in 18 months' time, these changes have taken place and bedded

down and there is not a material change to the standards of our

health service, it may even be better if the Government is right,

you will be seen to have made a song and dance about not much.

not think people will think we have made a song and dance about not

much. The tough it doesn't get worse? I think there is a chance we

can stop the bill, but even if it goes through, that will not solve

the government's problems. Their problems are going to get worse.

There is a danger for David Cameron. He said his personal priority were

three letters - NHS. At best, he has lost control of the policy. At

worst, these changes are wrong for the future of the NHS. And it will

really start to bite when patients who we are already seeing wait

longer than 18 weeks, the government are say the average wait

is the same, but as people have longer waits, it pulls up the

average. People are waiting longer for their diagnostic tests. That is

frightening. We will see problems with money building up. They have

wasted 20 months. It was going to be tough for the NHS to save �20

billion in efficiency savings. would have had to do that. And it

would have been tough. In Doncaster, we have just heard that they have

spent �3 million on redundancies already. That is a waste and it

should go to patient care. A but this is all about cash. People

forget that even though David Cameron had those posters about

cutting the deficit, but not the NHS, even though the Conservatives

said they would increase spending on the NHS, it would be the

smallest increase in a long period of time since the creation of the

NHS. People often talk about Thatcher's government cutting the

NHS. But the spending on the NHS increased in real terms by 4.3%

every year. Effectively, there is no real terms increase in NHS

spending. It is about flat. There is an argument about numbers, but

it is about flat. The NHS has never done that. Not in one year, let

alone a year after year. It seems to me that tactically, Labour want

to not allow the Tories to say, as you have just done, that would have

happened under you and it is because of the deficit, but to say

that when things get worse in the NHS, which objectively, with less

money, you would think they want -- Wood, to say that it is ideological.

It is because you are fiddling around with it. A much better

argument for the Government would have been, if they had killed the

bill, would have been to say, you are right. We are giving him -- the

best advice possible - drop the bill. But your exact words earlier

in this programme were that in the NHS, we have to make less go

further. I assume you meant was not the budget should be lower but that

given �100, you have to get more out of it. That is always a

challenge with the NHS, because demand is almost infinite.

Resources are finite. David Owen said earlier that things have to be

rationed. So to get efficiency in the NHS is a permanent challenge.

We have to leave it there. They are not going to withdraw the bill, so

we will have plenty of time to talk about it. You said you wanted to

come back on Sarah Teather, the Liberal Democrat minister. She went

to Sheffield for the vote on the welfare cap. She is known to have

raised worries about the number of families with disabled children who

might be effective. Tory backbenchers sick of compromises

such as the one on Abu Qatada want to have a go at her and the

coalition. Now, it is cold outside, in case

you had not noticed. Many pensioners will be glad of their

annual winter fuel allowance from the Government. But everyone over

60 get offered the money, including the comfortably off and even the

wealthy. So is it to good use of our taxes? Former Conservative

minister Ann Widdecombe does not think so, and she gives her

allowance away to charity. Here, she explains why.

Every winter, pensioners die of cold. As temperatures begin to

plummet, there are people who are having to make the choice between

eating properly and keeping warm. And it is estimated that every year,

inadequate heating contributes to the death of thousands of

pensioners. The �200 winter fuel allowance goes into it any

household where there is a pensioner, irrespective of how much

money is coming in. And the over '80s get a �300. So far, the

campaign has persuaded better-off individuals to give up some �2

million. And that has been enough to help about 20,000 poorer

pensioners. But there are still millionaires getting government

handouts while thousands of pensioners struggle just to keep

warm. David Cameron says he will not touch the winter fuel allowance.

And indeed, that pledge was included in the coalition agreement

with the Liberal Democrats. One might argue that he should break

that pledge, and thereby save part of the �2.1 billion that the

allowance cost the Treasury every year. But I think it would be even

better if the money that now goes to well-off pensioners were instead

to be used to raise the allowances for the pensioners who really need

them. But until that happens, we have to persuade as many people as

possible to donate their run needed allowances.

-- and needed allowances. And Ann Widdecombe joins us now.

Presumably it is not politically power -- palatable for David

You have go to ask what is the common sense thing to do. I am well

aware of all the problems that is caused by means-testing. I am not

proposing full means-testing. You are not? No. Where you have got

pensioners in the 40% or 50% tax band they should not get it. If

they can do with child benefit, why not this? If you can do it with

child benefit, why not this? This is the argument about means-tested

versus universal benefit and they made a straight decision on this

for it to be universal. It was a Labour Party decision and no doubt

at the time there was an element of politics in this that they wanted

to Woo as many people as they could. If you were to have means-testing

it would be more complicated either by clawing it back in the tax

system or picking which people qualified or not.

But do you agree with the principle? I think the outcry of

introducing means-testing, the Labour Party has been against

means-testing and now maybe they are in favour of it.

When this was introduced you had to apply. My mother did not apply for

it even though she was in her 90s and could have done, but once you

put it in bank accounts, it is like the �10 Christmas bonus, it arrives

in your bank account, automatic. I think there are many ways in which

we could ensure that this is properly directed. Some people

would love �400, I don't need �200. There is another side to this which

is Cold Weather Payments, if the temperature for a week or so

doesn't go above freezing there was be an automatic payment and it will

only be to those on benefit. It is the principle of universal benefits.

Why can't this Government in these austere times, they seem to be able

to do it with everything else, break this universal benefit?

that were to happen there would be an outcry and not least the Labour

Party who were against means- testing. Once you have got a a

system, it is difficult to unravel Do you think it should be looked

at? All things should be looked at all the time, you know, I am not

one who says that just because it is there, it has to be there

forever. Alan, there is a simpler, I

hesitate to interrupt you, there is a simpler approach to this. Even if

you don't go for fuls means -- full means-testing, why don't you go for,

you have to ask for it or 40% and 50% bands out. That's That's

relatively easy to do. I undertake to pass on your

suggestion to George Osborne. Why doesn't Labour come forward and

say that too? We are trying to look at the real issue which is the high

costs of bills. With due respect... I know that's what you want to talk

about. There is the underlying issue for many of my constituents,

they are worried about the costs of heating. There is more we can do.

We have come forward with the proposal that the energy companies

should put people who are over 75 on the lowest possible rate. We

need to open up that market to get more competition.

Should I get the winter fuel fuel allowance? There is a real issue

here about the costs of means- testing? But should I be getting

it? Well, you don't you should be getting it. What about people in

the House of Lords, should they receive it? There are a number of

issues that need to be looked at and Ed Miliband said that.

Tas difficult issue, isn't -- it is a difficult difficult issue, isn't

it? We want to be kind to you to you to you Ann! We don't want to be

hard on you! How do you identify yourself,

English, Scottish, or Nordic? The Prime Minister is going to put on

his thermals and head off to Stockholm for the Nordic Baltic

summit. Here is Max Cotton on our new friends friends from the north.

Who are our friends? It is a serious serious question. There

come moments in political life when we need to look out there for

allies! There have been very different

answers to that question from our political leaders over the years.

Churchill was the great Atlantis cyst who believed the future of the

UK lay with our American cousins. Then came along Ted Heath. Suddenly

we were in the EEC and had Continental quilts and cappuccino,

but that's a complicated relationship and in the last few

months, we have been told to get lost by the French and by the

Germans! So what is the answer? Nordic. This

man is our future ally. Norwegian, Scandinavian, Danish, it doesn't

matter. He looks great and we have got him some snow!

Millions of years before the Vikings invaded Norwich and grabbed

all our lands after a good bit of pillaging, Britain was part of

Scandinavia, but the tectonic plates or that maybe tutonic plates

priced us apart and created the North Sea leaving Britain too close

to France for comfort. Look at the culture Scandinavia brought to

Britain's shores. If Stig Larsson hadn't of died so young, WH Smith's

would have lobbied to have him knighted and crucially every home

in Britain is furnish with something that arrived in a flat-

pack. Finns and nor weeg -- Norwegians, are they our new best

Did you debt that Andrew? That's why he was in Bill and Ben!

We are joined by a lover of all things Nordic, Frazer Nelson of the

Spectator, would the Nordics like us to join their little club?

don't think so. They are flattered all this attention they are getting.

We are fascinated by Swedish schools and you name it, we are

trying to nick it? Right now, the Nordic countries are standing in

isolation from the terrible things that are happening in Europe.

Sweden doesn't have a deficit. They don't want the likes of us bringing

the economic IQ down. They would rather we admire them from afar.

The centre left was obsessed with Sweden. That was the role model for

social democracy. It is the centre right that looks to Sweden for

ideas? The left love Sweden's huge tax rates. It is the highest tax in

the whole of Europe, but the right love the fact that their market

orientation means they have private companies running the Tube, running

the hospitals, running the schools. In Finland, almost all the school

system is independently run. Organisationally it is to the right

of Britain. What's Mr Cameron hoping to get out

of the trip? I don't know, perhaps a few more pictures of huskies and

an iceberg. He will be there to learn and with any luck he will

learn that cutting tax for the low paid boosts the economy. And that's

what they are doing and it is working.

What is Swedish for goodbye? Hewa! Here is the answer to Guess the

Year. The end of sweet rationing was the

clue. But did you remember when it happened?

What was the year? I don't know. 1953!

The programme ends in chaos. usual.

That's it. Thanks to our guests. We will be back tomorrow at Noon with