16/04/2012 Daily Politics


16/04/2012

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 16/04/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

Afternoon, folks, welcome to the Daily Politics. So MPs return from

:00:44.:00:48.

their Easter break after all of the chocolate, and it when the gloves

:00:48.:00:51.

off as they get down to fighting a whole host of elections. David

:00:52.:00:55.

Cameron was out on the stump with his candidate for London mayor this

:00:55.:00:59.

morning, and he will be launching his party's campaign for the local

:00:59.:01:03.

elections in England later today. We will be talking to party

:01:03.:01:07.

chairman Sayeeda Warsi. We return to Bradford West, the scene of

:01:07.:01:11.

George Galloway's triumph last month. He returns to Parliament as

:01:11.:01:16.

an MP today. We will be talking to the man himself. And should

:01:16.:01:19.

politicians published their tax returns? We sent Adam out with

:01:19.:01:25.

balls in hand. They should, everyone else has to, we all pay

:01:25.:01:30.

taxes. But we do not publish our tax returns. But we do not hide

:01:30.:01:39.

All that in the next hour, and with us for the first half-hour today

:01:39.:01:42.

his former Paralympian Tanni Grey- Thompson, who now sits in the House

:01:42.:01:46.

of Lords as a crossbench peer. Welcome to the programme. Let's

:01:46.:01:50.

start by talking about the Paralympics. We have had the lot of

:01:50.:01:55.

things from viewers wondering whether you support the company

:01:55.:02:02.

which has people's -- which tests people's ability to work sponsoring

:02:02.:02:06.

the Paralympics. It is a decision that is way above anything I am

:02:06.:02:11.

involved in. They take a great deal of care with the companies they

:02:11.:02:17.

allowed to sponsor the brand. However, I have had hundreds of e-

:02:17.:02:20.

mails from disabled people saying they are concerned about the

:02:20.:02:24.

process they go through. Summer that is set in regulations, some of

:02:24.:02:29.

it is the DWP, and there is a case to say that the process must be

:02:29.:02:32.

adequately scrutinised. A number of centres have not been accessible.

:02:32.:02:37.

It is difficult for people to go through that. Isn't it a bit ironic

:02:37.:02:41.

to have that same company, bearing in mind there are lot of disabled

:02:41.:02:45.

people are unhappy about those tests, that the same company is

:02:45.:02:50.

also sponsoring the Paralympics? think it is part of what happens in

:02:50.:02:54.

business. You could pick out any of the sponsors and say, you know,

:02:54.:02:58.

there could be issues with it. Sponsorship of the Paralympics is

:02:58.:03:02.

entirely different to what happens with the assessment process. For me,

:03:02.:03:06.

I want to make sure that process is absolutely right to make sure the

:03:06.:03:11.

right number of disabled people get benefits. We have had a response

:03:11.:03:15.

from the company, which says they conduct assessments on behalf of

:03:15.:03:18.

the DWP and has a professional dedicated team to conduct the work,

:03:18.:03:22.

and they say that in an annual survey the team achieved a

:03:22.:03:28.

satisfaction rating of about 90%. Are you surprised by that? You can

:03:28.:03:34.

get statistics to say whatever you want. Out at two from people saying

:03:34.:03:38.

that they are very happy with the process, but the number of e-mails

:03:38.:03:42.

I have had suggests we need to look at it again to make sure it works.

:03:42.:03:46.

What about disabled campaigners proposing a boycott? Paralympians

:03:46.:03:50.

have spent too long training for it, it is too big a deal. The best

:03:50.:03:54.

thing a Paralympian can do is win a gold medal and then you have a

:03:54.:03:59.

different platform to speak from. It may have escaped your notice,

:03:59.:04:03.

but elections are looming. On the 3rd May, local elections will take

:04:03.:04:07.

place across Scotland and Wales, and in 128 local authorities in

:04:07.:04:12.

England. Londoners will elect a mayor and members of the Greater

:04:12.:04:15.

London Assembly. There are also mayoral elections in the Opel and

:04:15.:04:20.

Salford. 10 cities will hold referendums on whether to have

:04:20.:04:23.

directly-elected mayors. In Doncaster there will be a

:04:23.:04:26.

referendum on whether to abolish the position of directly-elected

:04:26.:04:30.

mayor. Joining the from the launch of their campaign is Conservative

:04:30.:04:33.

Party chairman Sayeeda Warsi. Welcome to the programme. It has

:04:33.:04:38.

been a pretty... Good afternoon. has been a pretty dire few weeks

:04:38.:04:42.

for the government, whichever way you cut it, accusations of a budget

:04:42.:04:47.

for the rich, do people on the doorstep think we are all in this

:04:47.:04:53.

together? Well, look, this is not the best of circumstances or the

:04:53.:04:56.

best backdrop against which we are fighting these local elections.

:04:56.:05:00.

Indeed, for any party in government, local elections are always a

:05:00.:05:06.

difficult time. And of course we also have this particular occasion,

:05:06.:05:09.

seats that we are fighting which are what I would consider Devine

:05:09.:05:14.

Labour heartland, because we fought these four years ago when Labour

:05:14.:05:18.

were twentysomething in the polls and were fairly low in the polls.

:05:18.:05:22.

But what we do have is good Conservative councils up and down

:05:22.:05:25.

the country who have delivered in very difficult circumstances, and

:05:25.:05:29.

the simple message at these elections is, do not allow Labour

:05:29.:05:33.

to do to your local councils what they did to the country. Are you

:05:33.:05:39.

expecting big gains? Well, the independent assessment has said

:05:39.:05:43.

that the Labour Party should gain about 700 seats. So you will have

:05:43.:05:48.

big losses to deal with? Of course, or those predictions, we will not

:05:48.:05:51.

be having the best of nights. It will be a difficult night. But

:05:52.:05:55.

having said that, I have been going up and down this country

:05:55.:05:58.

campaigning alongside my councillors, and what I am hearing

:05:59.:06:02.

is that local people are satisfied in the way in which Conservative

:06:02.:06:05.

councils have been run, where they are preserving frontline services,

:06:05.:06:09.

whereas what they find in Labour areas, where Labour councils are

:06:09.:06:13.

being run, is that not only are they spending money on things which

:06:13.:06:16.

are not considered a priority, but they are not taking advantage of

:06:16.:06:20.

council tax freezes offered by the government. Back to the slogan that

:06:20.:06:24.

has been with the Conservatives for the last few years, we are all in

:06:24.:06:29.

this together, but in the words of David Davies, the tax on charitable

:06:29.:06:34.

donations is an assault on the Big Society idea. You agree with him?

:06:34.:06:37.

No, I think the argument that has been put, and let's remember that

:06:37.:06:40.

his is out for consultation and was always intended to be out for

:06:40.:06:45.

consultation. You have had a barrage of opposition. It is about

:06:45.:06:50.

whether or not those people who earn a lot of money and quite

:06:50.:06:53.

generously give that away to good causes, whether they should also be

:06:53.:06:57.

paying income tax. What George Osborne and the Treasury found was

:06:57.:07:00.

that a lot of these very generous people who give to great causes

:07:00.:07:03.

actually give to them, make the choice of where their money should

:07:03.:07:08.

be going, but actually do not pay much in terms of income tax. It

:07:08.:07:12.

cannot be a fair society where those who are poor one middle

:07:12.:07:14.

incomes do not get a choice of where their money goes because they

:07:15.:07:18.

give to the generic welfare fund, known as paying your tax to the

:07:18.:07:21.

government, but those who are better off can organise their

:07:21.:07:25.

resources in a way where they get to choose where their money goes.

:07:25.:07:28.

We have to strike the right balance between making sure that those who

:07:28.:07:32.

give generously continued to be supported, but also pay their share

:07:33.:07:37.

towards the generic good of the welfare state. So do you include

:07:37.:07:41.

the Tory party treasurer in that? Stanley Fink, the treasurer, is a

:07:41.:07:46.

fantastic guy, and I have known him for many years, hugely generous...

:07:46.:07:51.

But he does not pay enough tax? course, he has quite rightly raised

:07:51.:07:56.

concerns about whether or not the implications of this would be that

:07:56.:08:00.

there may be a reduction in the amount of giving to good causes.

:08:00.:08:04.

says there will be, that he will give less money. Stanley think,

:08:04.:08:08.

along with many other people who give so generously, will be part of

:08:08.:08:11.

the consultation, and I am confident they will be able to

:08:11.:08:13.

strike the right balance between making sure that rich people

:08:13.:08:17.

continue to give generously and support good causes and also make a

:08:17.:08:21.

contribution to the general public purse. You yourself have been a

:08:21.:08:25.

great advocate of listening to activists and listening to what the

:08:25.:08:29.

grassroots are saying, rather than the voices of MPs and ministers.

:08:29.:08:35.

Let's take the 50 pence rate of tax, grassroots Tories did not want that.

:08:35.:08:40.

Sorry, I did not catch that, Jo. Grassroots Tories did not want the

:08:40.:08:45.

50p tax rate remote. The decision that was taken by the Chancellor on

:08:45.:08:49.

the reduction to 45p was a decision based on how much revenue was being

:08:49.:08:54.

raised. Sure, but... Taxation is all about making sure that we get

:08:54.:08:59.

the most Lee Camp of those that can afford to pay. But he didn't listen

:08:59.:09:04.

to activists on that issue. clearly shows that at 50p you are

:09:04.:09:08.

raising less than what you would raise at 45%, so activists of all

:09:08.:09:11.

political parties would say it is better to get more from the rich

:09:11.:09:17.

than less from the rich. Let's have a look at the post-budget U-turns

:09:17.:09:21.

that have been reported in the papers. On the charity Relate tax,

:09:21.:09:24.

you talk about the consultation, you think it will be draft for

:09:24.:09:30.

change? As I had said, this was always intended to go out for

:09:30.:09:35.

consultation, and it would be wrong for me to predict the wrong --

:09:35.:09:38.

outcome of the consultation. That would be a Labour consultation,

:09:38.:09:42.

predicting the outcome before you have spoken to people. It will be a

:09:42.:09:45.

proper government consultation. I would like to see a balance

:09:45.:09:50.

struck... Because it is wrong? believe in people being allowed to

:09:50.:09:53.

give generously to charities, it is something that I do, that many of

:09:54.:09:58.

my friends and family do, but we also pay tax to the Government, and

:09:58.:10:02.

I think it is important that we strike... You said it has got to

:10:02.:10:05.

strike a balance, is the proposal as it stands now wrong at the

:10:05.:10:10.

moment? The proposal is going to go out for consultation. It would be

:10:10.:10:13.

wrong for me to predict the outcome of that, but it would be right for

:10:13.:10:16.

me to ensure that all voices are heard during that consultation,

:10:16.:10:21.

which is why I have been peaking -- speaking to philanthropists to make

:10:21.:10:24.

sure that their voices are heard loudly when the consultation takes

:10:24.:10:31.

place. What about the pasty tax? Should there be a U-turn? Well,

:10:31.:10:34.

let's talk about what it is all about. Labour tried to make out

:10:34.:10:38.

that it was some sort of major class war. Let me tell you from

:10:38.:10:42.

somebody who was working class and Northern, it is not a class war,

:10:42.:10:45.

because actually many people go out and buy a chip butty for their

:10:46.:10:51.

lunch are as a snack, and that has 20% tax on it at the moment. It is

:10:51.:10:55.

absolutely right and then that if you buy hot food, whether from the

:10:55.:10:59.

fish-and-chip shop, the chicken shop or a pasty, it cannot be fair

:10:59.:11:05.

that you buy -- a 20% tax on fish and chips, 20% on a chicken and

:11:05.:11:11.

chips, but not on your plastic. no U-turn there, what about...

:11:11.:11:16.

think it is a sensible measure. What about the conservatory tax, as

:11:16.:11:23.

the Tory MPs are calling it? Well, look, Jo, this is an interview

:11:23.:11:26.

about local elections. I can give you chapter and verse on every

:11:26.:11:29.

single provision in the Budget. What I'm saying is that the

:11:29.:11:32.

measures we are announcing in the Budget, they were measures that

:11:32.:11:36.

were supposed to simplify the tax system, measures which are supposed

:11:36.:11:40.

to be more fair, to make sure that those who can pay tax should pay

:11:40.:11:44.

tax, to make sure there are no loopholes, as with the pasty tax,

:11:44.:11:47.

make sure that we get the best possible that we can for the public

:11:48.:11:51.

purse, so that we can spend it in the best interests of the nation.

:11:51.:11:55.

But those measures have upset an awful lot of people, a lot of them

:11:55.:11:59.

Tory MPs and voters who will be talking to about these things on

:11:59.:12:06.

the doorsteps. The conservatory tax, will it be dropped? It is my job,

:12:06.:12:09.

Jo, to make sure that the voice of actor bursts up and down this

:12:09.:12:13.

country is heard by the Prime Minister and Cabinet colleagues. --

:12:13.:12:16.

activists. It is why I am on the road to make sure those voices are

:12:16.:12:20.

brought back. But it is also my job to make sure that every decision

:12:20.:12:24.

the Government makes is not a decision made in party interests

:12:24.:12:28.

but in the national interests. It is why we formed a coalition, and

:12:28.:12:32.

David Cameron is the leader of the Conservative Party, but I have

:12:32.:12:34.

great respect for him that he does not analyse every single decision

:12:34.:12:38.

that his government makes through the lens of what is right for the

:12:38.:12:41.

Conservatives, but the lens of what is right for the country. That is

:12:41.:12:45.

the kind of Prime Minister that I want to see.

:12:45.:12:48.

Tanni Grey-Thompson, you have been listening to that, what you think

:12:49.:12:52.

about the prospect of local elections? It all becomes extremely

:12:52.:12:55.

partisan as they attacked each other on all fronts. What does that

:12:55.:13:00.

do for voters? I think people are slightly bored of it all, to be

:13:00.:13:03.

honest. I spend a lot of time talking to young people about what

:13:03.:13:08.

they think of politics and sport, and when I have 17 year-olds saying,

:13:08.:13:12.

we are sick to death of soundbites, that is a big wake-up call for

:13:12.:13:16.

politicians. Politics at the moment is quite bland. You see people

:13:16.:13:21.

spinning out the party line. As a crossbencher, I am in a privileged

:13:21.:13:25.

position that I can say what I think, and it is up to me, no-one

:13:25.:13:29.

is telling me what to say. We see too much of the party line. We are

:13:29.:13:34.

going to see a lot more of it before these elections. Last month,

:13:34.:13:37.

George Galloway confounded many people and won the Bradford West

:13:37.:13:41.

by-election in spectacular style. It was considered a safe Labour

:13:41.:13:46.

seat, but standing for Respect, he won with a 10,000 plus majority. He

:13:46.:13:50.

now claims to be the Robin Hood of British politics and will be sworn

:13:50.:13:54.

in as an MP in just over an hour's time, and we will be talking to him

:13:54.:13:58.

in a moment, but there's Len Tingle takes a look at how his victory is

:13:58.:14:00.

shaping the local elections and Bradford.

:14:00.:14:04.

One week ago, this man would never have dreamt of standing as a

:14:04.:14:07.

councillor, but now the political future of Bradford could be in his

:14:07.:14:13.

hands. He is the candidate for Respect in Bradford's Little

:14:13.:14:19.

Houghton Ward. This is a great opportunity, a real opportunity to

:14:19.:14:22.

have a change and bring about change, and this is what is needed.

:14:22.:14:26.

Lots of people who are first-time voters and have just got involved

:14:26.:14:31.

in politicians. Previously, the 43- year-old youth worker had not even

:14:31.:14:37.

been a member of a political party. The political weather which was

:14:37.:14:45.

dark glance over Bradford for so many years has now been swept away.

:14:45.:14:51.

-- clouds. At his victory rally, George Galloway promised that his

:14:51.:14:54.

party would fly at Bradford with council candidates. In fact, just

:14:54.:15:01.

12 are standing. But it could still cause major problems for this man,

:15:01.:15:05.

Ian Greenwood, the Labour councillor defending his seat in

:15:05.:15:09.

the area. He also happens to be the council leader, and Labour is just

:15:09.:15:14.

one short of an outright majority. My own view is that you might local

:15:14.:15:19.

elections on local issues. I was born and brought up there and have

:15:19.:15:23.

represented the ward for 17 years. I understand the concerns that

:15:23.:15:26.

people have, they are about in particular the fact that they are

:15:26.:15:29.

suffering under government cutbacks, the fact that young people cannot

:15:29.:15:34.

get a job, the fact that the regeneration of the district has

:15:34.:15:44.
:15:44.:15:46.

The other parties insist it's not just a two-horse race. Does that

:15:46.:15:51.

make it tougher for you? That's a by-election. Local election people

:15:51.:15:58.

look at the person. People want to know their local issues. I think if

:15:58.:16:02.

we offer a positive vision, and continue our positive campaign, I

:16:02.:16:06.

hope the people will see that we are fighting for them and fighting

:16:06.:16:10.

for Bradford. With three weeks to go before polling day, this ward is

:16:10.:16:13.

likely to be a major focus of attention.

:16:13.:16:18.

Joining me now is the new MP for Bradford West George Galloway who

:16:18.:16:21.

will be sworn into Parliament in just over an hour's time. Welcome

:16:21.:16:25.

to the programme. Thank you. These local elections will be the first

:16:25.:16:30.

test of the Bradford spring, are you worried it might Peter out

:16:30.:16:33.

after the euphoria of the by- election, that it won't translate

:16:33.:16:38.

in the local elections? We had a thank you party yesterday. We

:16:38.:16:44.

catered for 250 people, but 1100 people turned up. That might have

:16:44.:16:48.

been because the curry was good, but it's also an indication that

:16:48.:16:53.

the wind is still in our sales. We'll see. What are your

:16:53.:16:55.

expectations then? We have deliberately targeted 12 seats with

:16:55.:17:00.

a view to holding the balance of power and we're campaigning for a

:17:00.:17:04.

Yes vote in the referendum so we can get a directly elected mayor

:17:05.:17:08.

come November, which we will -- think will be a breakthrough for

:17:08.:17:12.

the people in Bradford. Why is Respect not fielding candidates in

:17:12.:17:17.

Birmingham which was a strong hold for the party? Yes our champion

:17:18.:17:21.

there has been poorly. She would have led the campaign. She lost her

:17:22.:17:29.

seat, didn't she? No, she stood down through ill health. She

:17:29.:17:31.

narrowly avoided winning the Parliamentary seat twice and may

:17:32.:17:36.

well stand again if there's a by- election when she's better.

:17:36.:17:39.

party is not fielding candidates there? We're not fielding

:17:39.:17:43.

candidates in Birmingham. We are in Bradford and other parts of the

:17:43.:17:47.

north. This Bradford spring has started in the north. The sun has

:17:47.:17:51.

risen in the north and we hope to fan out across the country. We're a

:17:51.:17:56.

very small party with very few resources, less than �10,000 was

:17:56.:18:01.

our annual income, Labour's was �9.2 million. We'll talk about

:18:01.:18:05.

party funding later. Coming back to Bradford, it's starting there, in

:18:05.:18:10.

your words, what are you going to do for Bradford? We heard there

:18:10.:18:18.

that it should be about local issues, what issues would you

:18:18.:18:23.

champion? The Odeon is falling down, there's a hole in the city centre

:18:23.:18:27.

where the Westfield Shopping Centre was suppose to be. We're asking

:18:27.:18:32.

what kind of council knocks down the centre without any guarantees.

:18:32.:18:38.

What are you guaranteeing? Heads roll. Whoever signed a contract

:18:38.:18:45.

without penalty clauses so that the they can be recompensated for the

:18:45.:18:49.

failure. We have a campaign to bring public attention to the

:18:49.:18:52.

chronic levels of unemployment. What is the level of youth

:18:53.:18:57.

unemployment? It has tripled in a year and risen by 40% in 12 weeks.

:18:57.:19:01.

What can you do in Parliament to change it? Speak about it. You're

:19:01.:19:05.

going to be in Parliament regularly? Yes, I will be. I'll be

:19:05.:19:10.

appearing on the media and the media seem to want me to appear,

:19:10.:19:14.

including your good selves, so the first thing I've done is draw

:19:14.:19:19.

attention to Bradford's problems. I will be responsible for projecting

:19:19.:19:22.

solutions to those problems over the weeks and months ahead. Will

:19:22.:19:27.

you focus on unemployment more in the coming months than things that

:19:27.:19:31.

also appeal to you on the interNational stage? I don't think

:19:31.:19:35.

it's either/or. One of the reasons I won such a majority was because

:19:36.:19:39.

the other three parties have an iron clad consensus in support of

:19:39.:19:42.

the war in Afghanistan. We said that the war in Afghanistan should

:19:42.:19:45.

end right now and our soldiers brought back before more of them

:19:45.:19:50.

come back in boxes. So, these are not issues that are easily accept

:19:50.:19:56.

rabble, but neither would it be right to concentrate on one more

:19:56.:20:01.

than the other. What do you make of the situation in Syria, should

:20:01.:20:05.

Bashar al-Assad stand down? There should be a free election. That's

:20:05.:20:09.

not really possible at the moment. The fighting isn't going on...

:20:09.:20:14.

truce hasn't held that well. Kofi Annan thinks... Not only do I not

:20:14.:20:17.

support Bashar al-Assad, I never did support Bashar al-Assad. I

:20:17.:20:21.

support the Syrian people's demands for democratic change, just like I

:20:21.:20:27.

do in Saudi Arabia. Now, you would never ask anybody here if they

:20:27.:20:31.

supported democratic change in Saudi Arabia and you need to ask

:20:31.:20:34.

yourselves why your researcher prepared that question rather than

:20:34.:20:39.

say do I support democracy in Saudi Arabia, it's just a point. Only

:20:39.:20:43.

because Syria is so much in the news. Saudi Arabia isn't in the

:20:43.:20:47.

news, but ought to be. Syria is in the news, I know why and you know

:20:47.:20:51.

why. Let's ask about Egypt then, who would you like to see win the

:20:51.:20:55.

forth coming Egyptian presidential election? I'm not sure that the

:20:55.:21:05.
:21:05.:21:07.

name will mean much but the best candidate is Dr Fatou. There have

:21:07.:21:11.

been disqualifications in the last few days. I'm touched that you're

:21:11.:21:15.

interested in on my views on that. You have talked widely about the

:21:15.:21:19.

Middle East. I want to popular ise his name. Thanks for the

:21:19.:21:24.

opportunity to do so. In erms it -- in terms of views expressed, how

:21:24.:21:28.

important was moral or religious views in terms of your win in

:21:28.:21:33.

Bradford? Moral views are important in politics. The morality of

:21:33.:21:36.

killing people for profit. The morality of stealing from people in

:21:36.:21:41.

the way that the economic system we have does. The morality of having

:21:41.:21:47.

children in mass poverty whilst others frolic in riches. These are

:21:47.:21:50.

important moral questions in politics. But the main reason,

:21:50.:21:56.

frankly, that I got the land slide majority I did, is the wholesale

:21:56.:21:59.

rejection of the three cheeks of the same backside that represent

:21:59.:22:03.

the mainstream political parties. On one of the moral issues coming

:22:03.:22:06.

up and has been talked about on gay marriage, have you decided how

:22:06.:22:10.

you'll vote on that issue? Is it coming up, I don't know if it's

:22:10.:22:15.

coming up? I have a long record of supporting equality for gay people.

:22:15.:22:18.

Long before others in the mainstream parties did so. I'm

:22:18.:22:20.

certainly not going to change that stand, because I believe in

:22:20.:22:25.

equality. I believe we're all God's children. I believe that our

:22:25.:22:31.

behaviour will be judged by God on the last day. And not by men on

:22:31.:22:34.

this day. Tanni, listening to George, saying that the main reason

:22:34.:22:38.

he won that election with a land slide, you could say, is because of

:22:38.:22:41.

the rejection of the three main parties, do you agree with that?

:22:41.:22:46.

Yeah I do. I think it's getting harder for people, it's fine when

:22:46.:22:49.

you're deeply involved in politics like we are, most people feel it

:22:49.:22:53.

doesn't touch their lives. It's getting harder for people to see

:22:53.:22:58.

the differences between the parties. On tax returns, would you publish

:22:58.:23:04.

your tax return? Do you think the politicians should? Everyone should,

:23:04.:23:08.

yes. That's what happens in the United States. I think it's a good

:23:08.:23:14.

practice. They're not obliged to by law, they just do. I think the

:23:14.:23:19.

House should voluntarily do that. I register all my income in the

:23:19.:23:23.

Parliamentary registry of interests, much more than I'm forced to do.

:23:23.:23:27.

You wouldn't be concerned by scrutiny? Everyone knows what I

:23:27.:23:30.

earn, which can't be said for all MPs. All right, George Galloway,

:23:30.:23:35.

thank you. Now, reforming benefits for people

:23:35.:23:37.

with disabilities is always difficult and emotive. This

:23:37.:23:41.

Government's under fire because from next year, it intends to phase

:23:41.:23:44.

out the Disability Living Allowance and replace it with the Personal

:23:44.:23:47.

Independence Payment. Ministers say the change will make sure money

:23:47.:23:51.

goes to those who really need it and it will save billions of pounds

:23:51.:23:53.

over the next three years. Campaigners claim that not only

:23:53.:23:58.

will it force thousands of disabled people out of work, but in a worst

:23:58.:24:02.

case scenario, could end up costing more. Who's right? David Thompson

:24:02.:24:07.

went to find out. The RNIB resource centre in London,

:24:07.:24:10.

it's choc full of gadgets designed to help the blind and partially

:24:10.:24:13.

sighted live as independent as possible. But as with most things

:24:13.:24:18.

in this world, they cost. There is some Government assistance for

:24:18.:24:21.

those most in need, the Disability Living Allowance for example. Help

:24:21.:24:28.

with care costs goes from just under �20 to �73.60. There's a

:24:28.:24:32.

mobility allowance worth as much as �51.40 a week. More than three

:24:32.:24:37.

million people get DLA and that costs an estimated �12.6 billion a

:24:37.:24:42.

year. That's a problem. The number of people claiming DLA has trebled

:24:42.:24:46.

since it was introduced 20 years ago. It hasn't really been reformed

:24:46.:24:49.

since then. There's a concern that because there isn't an independent

:24:49.:24:52.

medical assessment at the moment, we're spending too much money on

:24:52.:24:56.

the wrong people so there's less to go round for the people who really

:24:56.:24:59.

need it. A little industry has sprung up of companies who will,

:24:59.:25:02.

for a fee, help you work the tests, say the right things and get the

:25:02.:25:09.

money. So from next year, the Government will introduce the

:25:09.:25:12.

Personal Independence Payment, saving, they hope almost �3 billion

:25:12.:25:17.

in the first three years. The new scheme will feature more rigorous

:25:17.:25:20.

assessments and a stream lined scale of payments. Ministers say

:25:20.:25:24.

that will allow money to be targeted at those would really need

:25:25.:25:30.

it. Campaigners argue this is all about cutting costs. Either way,

:25:30.:25:35.

will it work? The campaign group Disability Rights UK is considering

:25:35.:25:39.

mounting a legal challenge because it believes that in the rush to

:25:39.:25:42.

make savings, ministers haven't shown their workings. In a report

:25:42.:25:45.

due to be sent to the Department of Work and Pensions later this month,

:25:45.:25:49.

it claims that even based on the lowest estimates the Government

:25:49.:25:54.

could end up saving almost �630 million less than expected. That's

:25:54.:25:58.

because it believes ministers have failed to take into account the

:25:58.:26:01.

impact made by things like the loss of tax revenues, increased benefit

:26:01.:26:05.

payments and the cost of assessments. Worst case scenario -

:26:05.:26:08.

the new scheme could actually increase the benefits bill by

:26:08.:26:14.

hundreds of millions of pounds. We think the Government has acted

:26:14.:26:17.

irresponsibly in not assessing properly the full costs to

:26:17.:26:22.

Government and the impact on disabled people. We could see many

:26:22.:26:26.

thousands of disabled people in work lose work. It would undermine

:26:26.:26:30.

our objective if we didn't per sue all options available to us. We

:26:30.:26:32.

believe there's a strong case for a legal challenge to the Government's

:26:33.:26:39.

plans. Baked beans. Heartless and stupid ministers snatch benefits

:26:39.:26:42.

from the needy in a kak handed attempt to save money, well, maybe

:26:42.:26:48.

not. When you look at the fact that it's trebled since it was

:26:48.:26:51.

introduced, they're only trying to get it back down to the levels that

:26:51.:26:57.

it was at in about 2009, so really, actually, this is quite a

:26:57.:27:00.

conservative estimate of how much they might save. Is it possible to

:27:00.:27:06.

reboot a multibillion pound part of the benefit budget without knock-on

:27:06.:27:10.

effects. We do support reform that improves benefits for disabled

:27:10.:27:14.

people. But this is not a case of reform. This is a clear cut and

:27:14.:27:17.

uncosted cut that could have massive implications in public

:27:17.:27:22.

expenditure down the line. Tugging at the heart strings is often the

:27:22.:27:27.

easy way to make a point, but in a time of austerity, it's the purse

:27:27.:27:30.

strings which make or break the argument.

:27:30.:27:33.

We're joined now by the minister for disabled people, Maria Miller.

:27:34.:27:38.

Before we come to you, I'm going to come to you first, Tanni, we aerd

:27:38.:27:42.

there that the numbers receiving DLA has risen by 30%, that's a very

:27:42.:27:45.

large increase in the last eight years. Surely, there is a very

:27:45.:27:49.

strong case for reform? There's a very strong case for reform.

:27:49.:27:53.

Personally I want to see money go to the right people. But I think

:27:53.:27:58.

once people are on DLA, we have to make sure in transition and when

:27:58.:28:01.

they go to Personal Independence Payment, they don't lose out. I

:28:01.:28:05.

want disabled people to be in work. DLA is an important part of helping

:28:05.:28:10.

keep disabled people in work. does that money go towards? People

:28:10.:28:14.

can spend it on whatever they choose to spend it on I think is

:28:14.:28:17.

quite important. For me, I use it to pay for hand controls on my car.

:28:17.:28:22.

I use it for the extra cost of getting around. Where I live in the

:28:22.:28:25.

north-east public transport is not accessible at all. It's very

:28:25.:28:28.

important that people can choose how to spend it. For an individual

:28:28.:28:32.

it's not a huge amount of money, but for me, it's making a huge

:28:32.:28:34.

difference to disable people's lives. It's about giving them an

:28:34.:28:40.

opportunity to live, not just to survive. And you're being accused

:28:40.:28:43.

of taking that opportunity away. Surely that's not what you want to

:28:43.:28:46.

have numbers of disabled people going down in terms of those who

:28:46.:28:50.

are going to work. What disabled people tell me is that they want to

:28:50.:28:53.

be able to live a more independent life. That's driving all the

:28:53.:28:57.

changes that we're making across Government, whether making more

:28:57.:29:01.

money available for adapting people's houses or more money for

:29:01.:29:05.

specialist employment support. can you do that making such large

:29:05.:29:11.

cuts? Rereforming DLA to make sure the money goes to the right people.

:29:11.:29:15.

At the moment we know �600 million is going in overpayments to people

:29:15.:29:20.

who may no longer qualify for the level of support. Do you agree, do

:29:20.:29:24.

you think that amount of money is going to people who don't need it

:29:24.:29:30.

or deserve it? It's really hard. Some of the figures were arriving

:29:30.:29:34.

late in the reform bill. One of the things we need to look at with the

:29:34.:29:37.

impact assessment is making sure the figures are right. We have

:29:37.:29:41.

access to the figures. At the moment, I can't, there are probably

:29:41.:29:45.

a few people claiming DLA who shouldn't be, I don't know the

:29:45.:29:48.

figures. The statistics were produced under the last

:29:48.:29:53.

administration in 2005. How have they done them if they haven't done

:29:53.:29:57.

tests until now on whether people need that living allowance? In 2005

:29:57.:30:03.

it was clear that �600 million was going out in overpayments and �190

:30:03.:30:06.

million going out in underpayments as it were, people not receiving

:30:07.:30:09.

enough money. We have a real problem with the money not getting

:30:09.:30:15.

to the people who need it most. I think the telling statistic is that

:30:15.:30:20.

over 70% of people are receiving this benefit for life with no

:30:20.:30:24.

reassessment, and that's no way to administer a benefit. That can't be

:30:24.:30:27.

right. There will be some disabled people whose disabilities will be

:30:27.:30:31.

there forever and others, do you accept, that the situation could

:30:31.:30:35.

change, in that sense Maria Miller has a point. People have

:30:35.:30:38.

fluctuating conditions. But it's making sure that the right people

:30:38.:30:41.

are retested. There's a cost... are the right people, when you say

:30:41.:30:47.

that, who are you talking about? Are you looking at list of people

:30:47.:30:50.

claiming DLA, isn't everybody the right person to be tested? You can

:30:50.:30:54.

put certain people in boxes and say your condition will never change.

:30:54.:30:58.

I'm paralysed my condition will never get better only worse.

:30:58.:31:02.

There's no point testing somebody like Tanni is there? For the

:31:02.:31:06.

assessment we're work closely with organisations, disabled people to

:31:06.:31:09.

ensure we have the right advice in place for testing people. Clearly

:31:09.:31:13.

we won't retest people at the same intervals. But it is important to

:31:13.:31:17.

make sure that people are getting the right support and if their

:31:17.:31:19.

situation actually gets worse that they're getting support that they

:31:19.:31:24.

need. You haven't brought people along with you, because disability

:31:24.:31:28.

rights UK could launch a legal challenge. So these reforms have

:31:28.:31:38.
:31:38.:31:38.

not convinced the lobby you are Reform is needed. I do not think

:31:38.:31:43.

there is any debate... But they are contesting that your sons are not

:31:43.:31:47.

correct, and that you can actually end up saving less than you expect.

:31:47.:31:51.

Do you admits that? I do not know where they have got their figures

:31:51.:31:56.

from on that. 70% of people at the moment are getting this benefit for

:31:56.:32:01.

life, we have �600 million going out in overpayments, and at a time

:32:01.:32:04.

when we have to make sure that every single pound is working hard

:32:04.:32:08.

and supporting disabled people who needed, it is right that we have

:32:08.:32:13.

assessment. Why is it from this particular lobby, that most people

:32:13.:32:17.

would agree, even if some people are being overpaid, they need this

:32:17.:32:21.

money? As this Clare said, it is not about making cuts to the amount

:32:21.:32:25.

of money that we are spending at the moment. We are continuing to

:32:25.:32:29.

spend the same amount. It is about making sure the money is going to

:32:29.:32:33.

the right people, and at the moment we know that is not the case.

:32:33.:32:37.

you convinced? No OBE, half a million people could lose out in

:32:37.:32:43.

the transition. I would back the government to ensure they track the

:32:43.:32:46.

disabled people who do not make the transition. We might save money by

:32:46.:32:51.

cutting some people from the I P, but it could pass costs to other

:32:51.:32:55.

areas. It could push people into greater need. The government has to

:32:55.:32:59.

respond to the Joint Committee on Human Rights by the 1st May, and a

:32:59.:33:04.

lot of people will be interested in that response to see what happens.

:33:04.:33:07.

We spend �40 billion to support disabled people in a whole variety

:33:07.:33:12.

of ways. DNA is only one part of that. We have seen significant

:33:12.:33:15.

increases in other parts of the budget, and we have to look at the

:33:15.:33:22.

package of measures in the round. Thank you both very much. MPs get

:33:22.:33:25.

back to work this afternoon fresh from the Easter break to discuss

:33:25.:33:29.

what they will be talking about, we enjoyed by Polly Toynbee of the

:33:29.:33:32.

garden and Fraser Nelson of the Spectator. How would you

:33:32.:33:36.

characterise the last few weeks post-Budget for the Conservatives?

:33:36.:33:43.

She shambolic, chaotic, humiliating, the list goes on! But now we have

:33:43.:33:46.

got David Cameron and George Osborne back in the country, they

:33:46.:33:50.

are going to try to get a grip of this. We have seen that with the

:33:50.:33:53.

Treasury fighting back over the charity tax, giving you a list of

:33:53.:33:57.

the offenders who do not pay enough tax in their view. You can see them

:33:57.:34:01.

trying to wrestle back control of the news agenda, and they are

:34:01.:34:04.

hoping the media will turn its focus on to the Labour Party and

:34:04.:34:08.

how badly they are going to do in the upcoming local elections. It is

:34:08.:34:12.

a strange strategy, not what they are doing right, but what Labour is

:34:12.:34:15.

doing wrong, and that is what they're going to try to encourage

:34:15.:34:19.

us journalists to look at. And we may well be doing at as the

:34:19.:34:24.

elections approach, but going back descending is said, the Treasury

:34:24.:34:26.

put out figures showing the percentage of millionaires who pay

:34:26.:34:30.

the basic rate of tax, why has it taken them so long? If they were

:34:30.:34:34.

going to have a fight back, they should have done it a while ago.

:34:34.:34:37.

Because they are not particularly well-organised. This is the hugely

:34:37.:34:41.

embarrassing thing. It is not that bad policy but basic organisation

:34:41.:34:45.

that they have not been capable of. Here we are, three weeks after the

:34:45.:34:49.

Budget, and only now pollinating the arguments that they should have

:34:49.:34:53.

been making before. If I were David Cameron, I would be asking what my

:34:53.:34:58.

Chancellor is playing at, making these arguments now, not weeks ago.

:34:58.:35:01.

Polly Toynbee, the other side of the coin, polls have shown, is that

:35:01.:35:07.

people to support the idea of rich people pay more tax, but they do

:35:07.:35:11.

not like the idea in terms of charitable donations. It is a

:35:11.:35:15.

difficult one to play? I think it is. On this one, the government is

:35:16.:35:19.

on the right track, but they have played it very badly indeed. I

:35:19.:35:23.

think there is real indignation at discovering that very rich people

:35:23.:35:32.

pay incredibly little tax. Some as little as 10%, San none at all.

:35:32.:35:36.

Whether taking on charities was wise, I rather doubt, because there

:35:36.:35:39.

are lots of things that the rich can do to close down first, tax

:35:39.:35:44.

havens, moving money into private equity, building up lots of debt

:35:44.:35:48.

and setting it off against your profits. I think they had gone for

:35:48.:35:51.

that first, rather than charity, they would be in less trouble. But

:35:51.:35:57.

they are right about charity, too. There is no reason... We hope the

:35:57.:36:01.

rich continue to give to charity, but why should the state have to

:36:01.:36:04.

subsidise that? They may be things that are not the state priorities.

:36:04.:36:08.

If you look at what charities include, it includes a charity for

:36:08.:36:13.

helping Japanese dogs. It includes anything that is on the Charity

:36:13.:36:17.

Commission's lists. I cannot quite see why the taxpayer has to fund

:36:17.:36:21.

whatever eccentric tastes billionaires might have. Well,

:36:21.:36:26.

let's get to the issue, whether it is bad organisation, as you have

:36:26.:36:32.

said, Fraser Nelson, or are they of the ball in policy terms? Looking

:36:32.:36:36.

at the publishing of tax returns, for example, is that wise? How far

:36:36.:36:40.

should you go? Should the disclosure go all the way down in

:36:40.:36:45.

terms of politics, or just Cabinet and Shadow Cabinet? It is a bit of

:36:45.:36:48.

a red herring, if you asked me. We know how much ministers get paid,

:36:49.:36:52.

they have to tell Parliament, and it is no great surprise if a tax

:36:52.:36:55.

return is the same. This is happening because the Government

:36:55.:36:59.

wants to help Boris stick it to Ken Livingstone, his tax returns are a

:36:59.:37:03.

source of embarrassment. That is what this is about. It is a big

:37:03.:37:07.

question where you draw the line. You include spouses? They often

:37:07.:37:11.

earn more because of their position and proximity to government. You

:37:11.:37:14.

end up with the Swedish situation where everybody knows what

:37:14.:37:20.

everybody else is earning? I have a feeling, after the mayoral election,

:37:20.:37:24.

it is going to die out as an issue because they will have made the

:37:24.:37:29.

point, which is that Ken Livingstone is a dirty tax Dodger.

:37:29.:37:32.

On that claimed by Fraser Nelson, he would deny that, Polly Toynbee,

:37:32.:37:36.

it could be quite difficult on the local elections for Ed Miliband,

:37:37.:37:42.

particularly in London. Well, I think it is very difficult. I think

:37:42.:37:45.

that Labour is very conflicted about a lot are the candidates that

:37:45.:37:48.

they are putting up here and there, but what is important is that

:37:48.:37:53.

Labour does really well in the local elections. I think that they

:37:53.:37:56.

are very much underestimated in public, what they are actually

:37:56.:37:59.

likely to achieve, and they need to achieve at least 50% more than the

:38:00.:38:04.

numbers they are talking about now. They probably will. This is a

:38:04.:38:07.

classic collection in tough times when the government of the day can

:38:07.:38:10.

accept a thorough kicking, and I think Labour should expect to do

:38:10.:38:14.

very well. A new poll out today looking at the Lib Dem chances

:38:14.:38:18.

reckons that the next election, they are only due to win seven

:38:18.:38:25.

seats. The Lib Dems will be very worried, too. Thank you very much.

:38:25.:38:28.

With me for the rest of the programme are Conservative MP

:38:28.:38:34.

Nicola Blackwood, Labour's Jonathan Reynolds, PPS to Ed Miliband, and

:38:34.:38:39.

Liberal Democrat Julian Huppert. Welcome to all of you. Jonathan

:38:39.:38:43.

Randles, picking up on what Polly Toynbee said, how many seats should

:38:43.:38:49.

Labour be aiming for in these local elections? There are a lot less

:38:49.:38:52.

seats at this year, so it is not something you can make a direct

:38:52.:38:58.

comparison to, so 350 would be very good. It should be nearer 700. Four

:38:58.:39:02.

years ago, when Labour was not doing particularly well, surely

:39:02.:39:07.

they have got to be up to 700, or it will be seen as a failure.

:39:07.:39:11.

other parties will put a figure on it, it is expectations management,

:39:11.:39:15.

everybody is used to it. Four years ago, it was a difficult day for

:39:15.:39:19.

Labour, but that does not automatically mean it will swing

:39:19.:39:23.

back. We see a lot of volatility in the elective. We are putting a

:39:23.:39:27.

sensible projection what we think we can gain, and it is about

:39:27.:39:29.

rebuilding from what was a very disappointing general election

:39:30.:39:34.

result. We heard from George Galloway talking about his outright

:39:34.:39:37.

rejection of the three main parties, including the Conservatives. Is he

:39:37.:39:41.

right? There is a lot of political disillusionment. People feel

:39:41.:39:44.

politicians are not listening, and on the doorstep there is a feeling

:39:44.:39:50.

of that, and I think you generally to get that in the middle of a term.

:39:50.:39:53.

Especially when governments are having to make difficult decisions,

:39:53.:39:56.

the decision we are having to make at the moment. But the solution, I

:39:56.:40:00.

do not think, is specific policies for parties coming out and

:40:00.:40:04.

attacking people. It is politicians getting out and campaigning at

:40:04.:40:07.

talking to people and seeing that we are real people trying to

:40:08.:40:11.

address their concerns. So you do not think it is policies, the post-

:40:12.:40:16.

Budget policies like the charity tax relief, the pasty tax, the fuel

:40:16.:40:20.

crisis, none of these things then much in terms of the way people

:40:20.:40:25.

will vote? I think all of those things matter, but I do not think

:40:25.:40:28.

that is the source of the political disillusionment. I think the source

:40:28.:40:31.

of that is that people do not be engaged with politicians themselves.

:40:31.:40:36.

We have got to get out more locally, face to face with voters, talking

:40:36.:40:41.

to them, engaging with them on issues that matter at a local level.

:40:41.:40:45.

It is also down to local activists, local councillors, local membership.

:40:45.:40:51.

I think that there is a great feeling of disengagement and this

:40:51.:40:55.

enfranchisement, and that is part of the problem. Isn't the point

:40:55.:40:58.

that the activists are the ones who are disillusioned with the policies

:40:58.:41:01.

that we have been talking about, and that is why you're not getting

:41:01.:41:06.

local poll? I have more people out canvassing with me on every session

:41:06.:41:10.

now than I had before the last election, even. So that is not

:41:10.:41:14.

something that I am experiencing a my constituency. So I do not think

:41:14.:41:17.

that is a problem that I am having, and I do not know if that is

:41:17.:41:21.

something that other members are experiencing. None of them will say

:41:21.:41:25.

they are having problems with that, but Polly Toynbee gave that

:41:25.:41:27.

prediction that the Liberal Democrats would only have seven

:41:27.:41:31.

seats out of the number they have currently got. Are you very fearful

:41:31.:41:35.

of these local elections? They were terrible for you last year. Polly

:41:35.:41:39.

has a record of putting a very spun position on that, and we have seen

:41:39.:41:45.

all sorts of odd predictions. It was a spectacularly bad time for

:41:45.:41:48.

Labour last time in these elections, just after Gordon Brown had doubled

:41:48.:41:53.

the tax rate on low income earners, whereas we have lifted two million

:41:53.:41:58.

people out of income tax. The idea is that they will do relatively

:41:58.:42:01.

better, so you are going to suffer. They did spectacularly badly then.

:42:02.:42:05.

On the doorstep I have been finding out that what matters is what

:42:05.:42:08.

happens locally. We live in a bubble where we talk about the same

:42:08.:42:12.

issues that we will discuss, but that is not what comes up on the

:42:12.:42:16.

doorstep. People care about what is happening locally. In Cambridge, my

:42:16.:42:19.

constituency, people like the fact that their councillors have been

:42:19.:42:23.

helping them with issues, running a city that has low unemployment than

:42:23.:42:27.

it had under Labour, the lowest of any city in the country. It is

:42:27.:42:31.

local issues that matter. No Liberal Democrat council has

:42:31.:42:34.

increased council tax. Where they have been well run, they will do

:42:34.:42:40.

well. You cannot get away from the unpopularity of the coalition and

:42:40.:42:44.

the budget, and I have never known a but it been so unpopular for so

:42:44.:42:47.

long. I have quite staunch Conservative areas are my

:42:47.:42:50.

constituent, and the disillusionment is palpable. There

:42:50.:42:54.

is a lot of anger caused by the pasty tax and the granny tax and

:42:54.:42:57.

the row over charitable giving. They do not even seem to think that

:42:57.:43:01.

the government is there for them, and these are Conservative voters.

:43:01.:43:05.

There is always some spillover of national politics, but as in

:43:05.:43:09.

Bradford West, it spills over to every political party, not just the

:43:09.:43:11.

party of government, which is why local issues are much more

:43:12.:43:17.

important than they ever have been before. Should politicians reveal

:43:17.:43:23.

or not? And talking about their tax returns. We send Adam to find out

:43:23.:43:26.

what you think. We are here at HM Revenue and

:43:26.:43:29.

Customs, the home of the taxman, and were going to get the public to

:43:30.:43:34.

vote on whether politicians should publish tax returns, yes or no.

:43:34.:43:40.

Should politicians published their tax returns? Why do say that?

:43:40.:43:47.

idea! I think transparency is the best thing, really, because that

:43:47.:43:50.

way the public will not have anything to say, we will not have

:43:50.:43:56.

any reason to have any doubt in where we are putting our trust.

:43:56.:44:02.

Thank you! Thanks very much. It is a personal thing, you pay your

:44:02.:44:05.

taxes, don't you? Simple as that. Wouldn't it be good to have a bit

:44:05.:44:11.

of evidence? Where is it going to stop, spouses, children? Some of

:44:11.:44:14.

the politicians are pretty well the people, and I believe, may be

:44:14.:44:17.

wrongly, that some of them are probably in the bracket where they

:44:17.:44:21.

are not paying the full whack of tax that the rest of us are. Who'd

:44:21.:44:24.

you think would have the most interesting tax return? George

:44:24.:44:29.

Osborne. Do think it might put people off going into politics?

:44:29.:44:34.

might put the wrong people off. dodgers! I will take one of your

:44:34.:44:40.

papers, if you take one of my balls. Whoops! Do think politicians

:44:40.:44:47.

should... They should, everyone else has to, we all pay taxes.

:44:47.:44:51.

we do not publish them. We do not have to, because we do not hide

:44:51.:44:56.

anything. Maybe they do not hide anything. Maybe they do! Would you

:44:56.:45:00.

be happy to publish your tax return? It ain't a problem to me!

:45:00.:45:08.

How much you pay quite -- how much you pay? Quite a lot! Call me back

:45:08.:45:13.

later with the number! After an hour of intense ball action, you

:45:13.:45:17.

can see the Yes camp is well in the lead, although when you ask people

:45:17.:45:26.

about the details, they tend to get Yes and no, because why should they

:45:26.:45:31.

pay, because it's supposed to be private. In the current way things

:45:31.:45:36.

are going, it's needed for visibility and clarity. Should it

:45:36.:45:41.

be all MPs, just the Cabinet or the top table of the Cabinet?

:45:41.:45:44.

you're asking too many questions in the morning. Always more tricky

:45:45.:45:51.

when you start to think about them. The public is a -- eligible to know

:45:51.:45:55.

what they pay... Do you want to think about it and come back at

:45:55.:46:02.

lunch time? Yes, would that be OK? Come back at lunch time. I wouldn't

:46:02.:46:05.

want mine published, it's not anybody's business. Oh, yes. Grab a

:46:05.:46:15.

ball. There you go, a resounding vote in favour of politicians

:46:15.:46:19.

publishing their tax details. A lot of the people who said yes were

:46:19.:46:23.

civil servants. I'm off to show this to the tax man.

:46:23.:46:30.

How funny that there, he's outside the Treasury offices, they were

:46:30.:46:35.

probably all civil serve abts. I've been joined by Nigel Farage, people

:46:35.:46:42.

would like politicians to have tax rushes -- returns published. In the

:46:42.:46:48.

spirit of transparency should they just do it? Transparency can be a

:46:48.:46:52.

deceptive word. We applied it to the banking sector, look what good

:46:52.:46:57.

it did us. The public are angry about the misuse of public money

:46:57.:47:00.

through expenses, perfectly understandable. The public want to

:47:00.:47:03.

know their politicians are having to live and abide by the same rules

:47:03.:47:05.

they are. That's a perfectly reasonable thing that the public

:47:05.:47:09.

should want. If you start to say that people in politics must

:47:09.:47:13.

declare their tax return, there may be information on that return that

:47:13.:47:18.

actual sli private, charitable donations perhaps would be a good

:47:19.:47:23.

example. But I also think where does this finish? Why not bank

:47:23.:47:27.

statements, why not your leaving School Report? Where do we go with

:47:27.:47:30.

this. That's the point, where do you go with it? Would you like to

:47:30.:47:34.

see politicians have their tax returns published? I wouldn't have

:47:34.:47:39.

a problem with it. Where would you stop it? I'd want protections. You

:47:39.:47:44.

wouldn't want spouses or partners doing that or medical records.

:47:44.:47:48.

where does it stop? People will say actually we've seen your tax return,

:47:48.:47:54.

it's not very interesting, for example, you know, your PAYE, I

:47:54.:47:58.

want more. This is where it's come from, we have a privileged

:47:58.:48:00.

administration, particularly the top rate of tax, people want to

:48:00.:48:03.

know who is benefiting from this. Because they don't feel they are

:48:03.:48:08.

benefiting from it. That's the motivation for this. The Government

:48:08.:48:12.

hasn't become a hostage to fortune. By going down that route, the cash

:48:12.:48:17.

for access then a link in people's minds people having access to top

:48:17.:48:21.

politicians, then the top rate of tax being cut, now they want to see

:48:21.:48:25.

everything. Yes, what we have to make clear that there are

:48:25.:48:29.

privileged people in every party. I think the problem with publishing

:48:29.:48:33.

tax returns is that what you risk is a real trivialisation of the

:48:33.:48:37.

debate. People are going to pick out little bits and pieces of the

:48:37.:48:40.

tax return and the debate will be about that. It won't be about the

:48:40.:48:45.

simple issue - does the candidate pay their taxes, yes or no? Are

:48:45.:48:50.

they a British taxpayer, yes or no? That's all you want to know.

:48:50.:48:56.

but is it? If you get about details, you will go down the expenses route

:48:56.:48:59.

of having trivial stories again and again in the tabloids which is not

:48:59.:49:02.

what the debate should be about. That's not helping the political

:49:02.:49:05.

debate. It's not talking about the important democratic issues which

:49:05.:49:09.

we should be debating before elections. It's damaging the

:49:09.:49:13.

discussion. I think people, most people, assume politicians pay

:49:13.:49:17.

their taxes. What they want... all people are assuming that.

:49:17.:49:21.

of them pay their taxes, what they want to see is the level of tax

:49:21.:49:25.

they pay. What they want to see is whether politicians are not paying

:49:25.:49:29.

as much tax as other people on similar salaries. You're on the

:49:29.:49:32.

street asking this question, I put it to you there are more important

:49:32.:49:36.

questions, what the public wants, more important than seeing MPs' tax

:49:36.:49:39.

rurpbdz, they want to feel that there are people in Parliament in

:49:39.:49:44.

touch and expressing their ideas on issues and not this disconnect and

:49:44.:49:47.

they want to see more competence in Parliament. Isn't this row about

:49:47.:49:51.

the budget one of competence? My argument is the more we have to

:49:52.:49:55.

declare our private incomes, the less chance there is of

:49:55.:49:59.

entrepreneurs come nooing politics and goodness me we could do with

:49:59.:50:04.

some. Zou agree? There are questions if you make every

:50:04.:50:09.

candidate publish their returns. What about yours? Mine is dull. It

:50:09.:50:13.

says I earn money as an MP and pay taxes. There are wealthy people in

:50:13.:50:16.

the Labour Party and other parties. There are people who have more

:50:16.:50:20.

complex arrangements. The vast majority of MPs have fairly simple

:50:20.:50:23.

arrangements of you know, getting a salary and paying tax on it.

:50:23.:50:28.

the is -- is the Government considering this? It looks as if

:50:28.:50:34.

they have danced around the idea, is it more of the I -- a political

:50:34.:50:39.

weapon to attack opponents like Boris Johnson and Ken Livingstone?

:50:39.:50:44.

They're keen not to be seen to trying to hide anything. There is

:50:44.:50:48.

quite a large concern surrounding the issues that have been revealed

:50:48.:50:53.

with the Ken, Boris issue where it was very clear that Ken was

:50:53.:51:00.

avoiding taxes... Totally legally of course, some would say being

:51:00.:51:04.

efficient. You have to say, well, should we address the problems in

:51:04.:51:08.

the tax system to deal with that. We should make it not possible to

:51:08.:51:12.

avoid taxes in that way. Hang on, if you went down that route, you

:51:12.:51:18.

would affect every single limited company in this country, please no.

:51:18.:51:24.

Tax avoidance is legal. I mean has the Government got itself caught up

:51:24.:51:27.

in language problems here, tax avoidance is legal, companies do it

:51:27.:51:32.

to be efficient. People have ISAs to be tax efficient. If you go down

:51:32.:51:35.

that route you will run into all sorts of problems. That's what the

:51:35.:51:41.

Government is doing having a debate about what level of tax avoidance

:51:41.:51:44.

are acceptable. What's acceptable tax avoidance? To go back to the

:51:44.:51:47.

point, the point is that the Government are under pressure

:51:47.:51:50.

because they've made the wrong decision cutting the rate of income

:51:50.:51:53.

tax for the people at the top. They feel they have to compensate for

:51:53.:52:03.

that. Is any tax avoidance acceptable? There's a difference

:52:03.:52:06.

between tax efficiencies and avoiding rules on taxation. This is

:52:06.:52:11.

one of the reasons for a general an tai bues rule which we have pushed

:52:11.:52:15.

for for a while, if you do something simply to avoid paying

:52:15.:52:20.

taxes, you should look carefully at it. ISAs are legitimate and a

:52:20.:52:23.

sensible thing. We can't allow the abuse to happen to continue about

:52:23.:52:29.

Ken or nb else. Stay here all of you, often discuss and so far never

:52:29.:52:33.

solved talks on how political parties are funded started up again

:52:33.:52:38.

laflt week. It came onto the spotlight before the Easter break

:52:38.:52:42.

as cash for access became as a political headache for the Prime

:52:42.:52:47.

Minister. There's no limit on individual donations but a gift

:52:47.:52:51.

over �7500 has to be declared. Sir Christopher Kelly clird a --

:52:51.:52:57.

chaired a report last year calling for a �10,000 cap on individual

:52:57.:53:03.

donations, and a union opt-in. Ed Miliband called for a �5,000 cap on

:53:03.:53:06.

individual donations but no change to the system, where members of

:53:06.:53:10.

unions have to opt-out of a �3 a year to the Labour Partyment

:53:10.:53:14.

Reacting for the Conservatives, Grant Shapps told the Sunday

:53:14.:53:17.

Politics that his proposal was virtually meaningless and would

:53:17.:53:21.

lead to a 1% cut in funding for Labour. The Tories are looking for

:53:21.:53:27.

a more generous limit, talking about a �50,000 cap on individual

:53:27.:53:31.

gifts. Nick Clegg highlighted Lib Dem support for key parts of Sir

:53:31.:53:33.

Christopher Kelly's report including the individual donation

:53:33.:53:38.

cap but warned increased taxpayer funding of parties was unlikely to

:53:38.:53:42.

receive much support from the public. We have had this proposal

:53:42.:53:47.

from Ed Miliband, how should the coalition respond, a �5,000 cap on

:53:47.:53:56.

donations? I'm afraid it does come across as party political postuerg

:53:56.:54:01.

because a chunk of the funding is excluded from the proposal. They

:54:01.:54:04.

would still lose a significant amount of the funding particularly

:54:04.:54:09.

in an election year. Yes, they would. But when we're talking about

:54:09.:54:13.

party funding, which is a huge source of concern for the public

:54:13.:54:18.

and lack of public trust, you need to put everything on the table in

:54:18.:54:21.

these discussions. Everything has been on the table. No, it's not.

:54:21.:54:25.

They have said they would put a �5,000 cap on donations except for

:54:25.:54:31.

those coming from unions. Affiliations. But affiliation fees

:54:31.:54:37.

and membership fees. Which is a big part of Labour funding. And so, it

:54:37.:54:41.

just undermines trust in the negotiations. It gives the

:54:41.:54:44.

impression that Labour are not genuinely wanting to come to the

:54:44.:54:48.

table. It just does not give the public the sense that Labour Party

:54:48.:54:52.

are wanting to come to the table and have a proper discussion and

:54:52.:54:58.

debate about it. Having said that... If Labour did do that, if they went

:54:58.:55:04.

for the opt-in for the affiliation fees to the Labour Party would you

:55:04.:55:07.

consider the �5,000 cap on donations, do you think the

:55:07.:55:10.

Conservatives should consider it? It would certainly give the

:55:10.:55:13.

impression that Labour are genuinely wanting to come to the

:55:13.:55:17.

table and have a proper debate it it -- about it. There's more on the

:55:17.:55:21.

table here than Ed Miliband said than ever before. It deserves a

:55:21.:55:23.

slightly better response than what the coalition parties have given it

:55:23.:55:28.

so far. The money scandals in politics tarnish all of politics.

:55:28.:55:32.

They diminish the job we do. We have to take big money out of

:55:32.:55:40.

politics. You need a substantial cap. A �50,000 cap is not enough.

:55:40.:55:44.

We are putting more on the table before. It deserves a serious

:55:44.:55:50.

response. What about the cap, would you agree? Yes around �5,000,

:55:50.:55:54.

�10,000 feels like the right number. I was quite encouraged that Ed

:55:54.:56:00.

Miliband have said this. We've got significantly more donations than

:56:00.:56:04.

the Labour Party in terms of individual donations. I'm pleased

:56:04.:56:07.

Ed is starting to talk about. It I'd like to see a change to the

:56:07.:56:11.

union system. It is not right that people are, have to take an active

:56:11.:56:15.

step to avoid giving the Labour Party money. There are people in

:56:15.:56:20.

unions who don't want to do it, but don't take that step. People who

:56:20.:56:24.

support other parties who do not want to give the money. This is

:56:24.:56:30.

democratic money. Let people opt in if they want to and if they wish to

:56:30.:56:33.

give each year to the Labour Party that's fine and they can do that.

:56:33.:56:40.

They do unite. If you join Unite, or Unison you have a choice between

:56:40.:56:45.

giving to the Labour-affiliated fund. It's not a case of saying

:56:45.:56:49.

right I've joined this union... It's a confrontational thing to

:56:49.:56:53.

join a union but say I don't want to support the party of choice. You

:56:53.:56:57.

shouldn't put workers in that position. Are you optimistic for

:56:57.:57:01.

consensus on this? Let's be clear here, we're talking about the cap.

:57:01.:57:06.

You say let's take big money out of politics, big private money out of

:57:06.:57:10.

politics and replace it with taxpayer funded money. No-one's

:57:10.:57:15.

talked about state funding yet. Capped union fees gets negotiated,

:57:15.:57:18.

simultaneously with the state funding of politics in this country.

:57:18.:57:21.

It now appears that the three party leaders have accepted that in

:57:21.:57:26.

principle and I am very worried about that. No they haven't.

:57:26.:57:35.

don't think they have. You could fill the gap... One at a time. OK...

:57:35.:57:40.

The limit of �90 million can be reduced. Why do we need big

:57:40.:57:45.

billboards at general election time. You could cut down on some of the

:57:45.:57:48.

parts of political spending. You don't need it and that could fill

:57:48.:57:52.

the gap if donations didn't increase. But that's not really

:57:52.:57:57.

going to happen. You would have to have some state funding in order

:57:57.:58:01.

to... I don't think they've agreed though. Has Nick Clegg signed up to

:58:01.:58:05.

that? No, Nick has said it's not on the table for this Parliament. We

:58:05.:58:10.

can't say was going to happen in 20, 30, 40 years. It's absurd to say so.

:58:10.:58:15.

But how do we stop the influence? It's happened with this Government,

:58:15.:58:19.

the last Government, every Government that money is to buy

:58:19.:58:22.

influence and power. We have to have political parties that

:58:22.:58:28.

function and funding them. But not large money from individuals.

:58:28.:58:32.

cap, your party can't survive, therefore you need state funding.

:58:32.:58:38.

What about your fund sning We'd be better off. What about the cap?

:58:38.:58:41.

taxpayer should not bail out individual political parties.

:58:41.:58:45.

stop you there. I don't hold out a lot of hope for agreement. Thank

:58:45.:58:48.

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS