28/09/2012 Daily Politics

Good afternoon and welcome to the Daily Politics.

Ed Balls says a Labour Government would review every single penny of

Government spending. Could a Chancellor Balls really find cuts

where Chancellor Osborne hasn't? Weak, that's the Public Accounts

Committee verdict on the Department for Work and Pensions procedures

after MPs examined allegations of fraud in government back to work

schemes. Committee chairwoman Margaret Hodge joins us.

And it's bail out fever in Europe with Spain on the brink and Greece

looking for more help from Brussels. We'll ask Greek born economist

Vicky Pryce what happens next. Remember this? At least I don't

have to worry about her running off with the bloke next door!

Unfortunately not all political jokes hit the spot like that one as

Danny Alexander found out this week. We'll talk to the man who wrote

Tony's joke about the golden rules of political gags. All that in the

next hour. I'm Carol ex-Walker and Owen Jones and columnist and

novelist Cristina Odone are here to keep me company throughout today's

show. Let's start with Ed Balls. The Shadow Chancellor has announced

that a Labour Government would review every penny of Government

expenditure should it win back power after the next Election

promising to be ruthless and disciplined as it conducted a zero-

based spending review. Well let's talk about that. Eoin, I will start

with you. What do you make of that? An incoming chancellor, he is not

going to start cutting, he will start from the bottom and go

through everything and every department? There is a problem.

Different departments actually use different accounting rules so what

is zero in one department doesn't mean the same in another department.

It would be interesting to see how he would get around this. Labour

haven't come up with an alternative alternative to what the

Conservatives are doing and austerity sucked growth out of the

economy and borrowing is surging as a result because tax receipts

declined as the economy contracts. Instead of challenges the austerity,

Labour aren't coming up with a coherent. They are coming up with

their own version of austerity. I don't think people could

distinguish that from what George Osborne is doing.

They haven't said if they are going to stick to the A Rule total.

Christine, what do you think? can't come up with an alternative

to something that's so unpopularment people are saying,

"Austerity measures from the coalition, unlivable with. We

cannot bear it. Let's look to Labour and nothing." Ed Balls is

trying to scramble up up something that makes sense. What are we going

to do for one year, we are going to be stalled whilst they review

positions of each department. We're supposed to be fixing this economy

now and I think a that one of the things that's really worries us is

is Ed Balls saying, "Give us sometime when we get in.". He is

saying he is going to go through it and unlike the present Government...

Or like his own previous Government when he was an architect of our

debts. He is going to have a look at what

is in the best long-term interests of the country and do things item

by item? He is going to get a grey beard before Balls fixes the

economic situation. If he thinks this is how we are going to do it.

The lack of coherence was emphasised when we heard in the

same day that we have Balls saying we are going back to zero. We have

Harriet Harman saying, "Oh, we are going to slow down talks." --

cuts." Joined up Government, my foot. That's when you think Labour

could be bold and come up with an alternative P. Spend loads more?

That's what Harriet Harman was suggesting? Billions is being

wasted on housing benefit. But that's lining the pockets of

private landlords and not going into the pockets of the tenants.

Labour could argue, let's bring down social housing which would

stimulate the economy and create jobs. Take tax credits, billions

spent on tax credits, but they are a subsidy for low pay. If we had a

living wage, that would bring down the welfare spending.

Briefly, Ed Balls is trying to send out a tough message at the start of

the Labour Party Conference. Is that going to set the right tone?

No. One of the funnyest things was the message that he sent out which

was picked up by the Telegraph today. He is posing in front of a

Winston Churchill photograph and a book by Martin Gilbert that's the

biography of the big Prime Minister and he is so obviously chomping at

the bit and trying to use this as a platform for his own political

destiny. You think Ed Balls is on the move.

That's a matter we will come back The Government says that private

companies and charities about �900 million a year to help get

unemployed people back into long- term jobs. But there have been

widespread allegations of fraud in these welfare-to-work schemes and

this morning a committee of MPs said ministers weren't doing enough

to tackle the problem. The MPs said the Department for Work and

Pensions had missed vital evidence about potential frauds, notably at

the private provider A4E. In February, A4E founder Emma Harrison,

who was also the Government's family champion, stood down amid

allegations of wrongdoing and the firm, which is the Government's

largest provider, is still the subject of a police investigation.

But it said a recent audit had found no evidence of fraud and

issued a statement saying that A4E is a very different company from

the one it was two years ago. The committee chairman and Labour MP,

Margaret Hodge, says that risks remain, adding that it is still

possible for providers to be paid for work they haven't done. But the

Work and Pensions Department said the cases of fraud referred to by

the committee took place under schemes set up by Labour. The

department said it had put in place the toughest anti-fraud measures

ever included in a back to work scheme. I'm joined by the Chair of

the Committee that produced the committee, the Labour MP, Margaret

Hodge. Thank you very much for joining us.

What do you think are the real problems here? The fraud has now

been identified and is being addressed? We accept that the fraud

we identified was on past schemes because we look at the past and not

the present and the future. As we looked at the current structure, it

is a better structure, but there are still problems. Let me give you

an example. Somebody wrote to me that they had been referred, again

to A4E and they found their own job before being referred to A4E. A4E

rang them up and they said, "I don't need your help." The company

said come in and sign and we will give you a �50 voucher and the

company company collects up to �2,000 for that person. I had

another case of another provider where a gentleman started his own

business, was referred to a company. The company said, "Come in, show us

your invoices and we will get you a grant for �2,000." He went in. Got

his invoices. They got paid for finding him work which they hadn't

done anything about, but he never got his grant. It didn't exist.

As you said, these are problems that happened in the past... No, no,

those are problems with the current scheme.

The Government says it checks 100% of cases where individuals are in

work. That's surely a big improvement on what was happening

under the Labour Government? We are talking about fraud and malprabg

and malpractice. It is a waste of public money. You don't pay a

company if they haven't done the work. The second thing is the

department asserts that it has got things right. Now this current

programme has been going since June June 2011, we are now 15 months on

and there is still not a statistic produced by the Government to

demonstrate whether or not they are meeting the objectives.

You would acknowledge they have tightened up their procedures and

their checks considerably since the days when the Labour Government was

using similar contracts? I think they have tightened up their

procedures and checks. I think there are still risks and I really

do believe that the fact that they are not producing statistics leaves

you with a worry and a concern that the programme is either not meeting

its objectives which is a �5 billion programme, to get over

three million people into work. Not meeting its objectives or there is

something wrong with it. I think there is a complacency in the

Department for Work and Pensions which you don't see in other

departments, you know... You know, in May of this year, Iain Duncan

Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary, he wrote to 11 former

ministers including yourself saying thea wanted to -- that he wanted to

see the papers relating totalgations of fraud and those

haven't been released. That doesn't smack of complacency? There were

problems - my committee looks objectively at past expenditure and

we have been clear. I, I am the Labour chair of that chair...

have been asked to release those papers? Well, I have no problem and

I said so to my colleagues. That is an issue for my colleagues.

Then we should have the papers released, shouldn't we? The papers

are out there. I have given the papers. I a lot of papers passed to

me, a lot of evidence in brown envelopes, a lot of e-mails, all of

which I have passed to the department and work and pensions.

Their attitude was "it was all past schemes. "they said these were past

schemes. Everything is hunky-dory. I said it doesn't matter if they

are past schemes and there was fraud, they need to investigate

that properly. They are doing so and A4E has got a cloud over it.

And I must say in the context in the G4 S statement today I have a

real concern about how the department or Government decides

whether or not it is a fit and proper company which with it should

do business. I know you want to move on, but if you had a builder

in your home who did a shoddy job and we know A4E had one contract

taken away from them and they have police looking at another, Emma

Harrison paid herself an �8.6 million dividend in country year in

a company that gets its money out of public money. You wouldn't ask

that builder to... This is A4 E saying they have addressed the

problems and they are fit and proper contractors to carry out the

contracts. Are you saying they are not fit and proper? If that's

theication, why does the Government not let us see the statistics so

that we can judge on A4 E's performance whether or not they are

a fit and proper company. Cristina Odone, the Government is

reliant on the private contractors, do you think there is a whiter

problem here? Well, I think definitely whether it is a public

service that is being given out to a private contractor or to a

Government contractor, what we need is scrutiny, better scrutiny and

what Margaret Hodge's committee has shown is that the scrutiny over A4

E has been abysmal or at least not perfect and I think that what we

need to have is the great transparency that we have been

promised by the coalition from A to Z to focus on these private

contractors. One of the problems was that Emma Harrison and her

social enterprise was how we were sold it, looked so good. It was

part of wishful thinking. Big Society come through.

Is it a problem with this particular company or is there a

wider difficulty do you think in keeping tabs on the private

contractors? It is wider than that and New Labour and the

Conservatives have to come to terms with that record. It is not just

the case with A4 E, we have had two G4 S directors resigning today.

During the Olympics they were expected to provide security and

failed to do so, who had to step in? The State. And Philip Hammond,

a Conservative Cabinet Minister he said that questioned his belief

that the private sector automatically provided better value

for money and was more efficient than the public sector.

My fear is what we will end up with is taxpayers money, hard earned

taxpayers money, lining the pockets of private contractors who are

ripping us all off. Margaret, in your committee, you

have looked at a whole series of these different projects where the

Government has brought in private contractors. Is it a problem of the

contracts of a lack of oversight or the way the whole systems work?

There is a generic problem across Government particularly as they use

more private contractors to deliver public services and it is about

transparency. Too often both the contractor and the department hide

behind commercial confidentiality and won't tell you how they are

spending the money and either you build transparency into the

contract or allow Freedom of Information provisions to relate to

contracts that where it is the taxpayers money, delivering a

public service, I think that's hugely important and I also think,

and we are coming across it the Health Service and across PFI, that

the ability of Government to really strike a descent deal, a good deal

for the taxpayer, to have those commercial business skills which

will ensure that we get proper value and aren't ripped off, don't

In just under 30 days, there will be a new president of the United

States, or if you believe the polls, confirmation that the same one the

staying on for another four years. Next week, Mitt Romney has what

might be his last chance to turn the race around with the

presidential debate in Denver on Wednesday. Can he do it? We asked

the Huffington post's Ryan Grim for his take on the race. We are on the

rooftop of the Huffington post. Last Monday and, Mitt Romney

announced a major Reset of his stumbling campaign. Hours later we

are published footage of him in a secret fund raiser saying that 47 %

of the people are deadbeats. It reinforced the stereotype that

people already have of Romney. many Americans are struggling to

find work in the economy. To many of them are living pay cheque to

pay cheques. More Americans are living in poverty than when

President Obama took office. My plan will create 12 million new

jobs over the next four years. We shouldn't measure compassion by how

many people on welfare. We should measure compassion by how many

people are able to get off welfare and get a good paying job. I am

Mitt Romney and I approve this message. In order to re energise

his campaign, Mitt Romney came here to Capitol Hill, where he scooped

up Paul Ryan to be his number two. The picky made last August was

heralded by his Tea Party and grassroots Conservatives. They

found a way to bring their ideology into the campaign but it has not

happened. Take a look at what happened this week in Ohio. Mitt

Romney had this bizarre interaction with his own audience. Back is

quite a guy, isn't it, Paul Ryan, that is something. Wait a second,

Romney Ryan, Ann Romney Ryan, Ron the Ryan. A despite having run what

many people considered the worst presidential campaign they have

ever seen, Mitt Romney is still very much in this race and that is

for one reason. He has history on his side. Not since this man, FDR,

has a President been re-elected with an economy this hour and an

unemployment rate this high. Ronnie has a chance to change his

direction and he has signalled he is ready to go on the offensive. --

Ann Romney. The President has a tendency to say things which are

not tree and in attacking his opponents, I have looked at prior

debate and it is difficult to say I am are going to spend my time

correcting things which are not accurate or I might go and spend my

time talking that things I want to talk about? It will be hard to make

those charges stick because Ronnie has been accused of the same thing.

A welfare advert he has been running has been called false. Paul

Ryan during his convention speech made at least four major misleading

claims which were called out by the media. But we have a major money

advantage for Mitt Romney and a tumultuous Middle East. It is

possible that in January, he could be downsizing and moving into this

Lumb here. It makes our campaigns look rather

tame, doesn't it? Irwin, I am guessing you are not a huge fan of

Mitt Romney. If you were his chief spin doctor, you would be burying

your head in your hands. I would beam rocking in a foetal position

in a corner somewhere. Not since FDR has any President won re-

election with an unemployment rate above 8%. Unemployment is

stubbornly high in that country. Yesterday, GDP figures were slashed.

The economy is in a terrible state but in all the polls, Obama is

pulling ahead, particularly in the key battleground states like Ohio.

He has a very firm lead there. Unless there is a huge deal broker,

for example Israel attacks Iran, I cannot see how Mitt Romney has any

chance of winning an election he should have walked. Despite all

those problems, it is interesting that Mitt Romney is still there in

the race. People feel there is a huge amount to play for. It is

unbelievable. Especially when you watch him put his foot repeatedly

in his mouth. I think it is that old it is the economy, stupid. What

Obama has to fight is not a man but money. He has to fight the fact

that a lot of Americans feel poorer today than they did when he came in.

That is where the problem lies. there were such high expectations

on Obama. Do you think he is suffering the backlash from that?

have to say, as somebody who has lived in Washington DC, I never

thought it could happen, that somebody who was black could get in

as President. Obama for me, can stop right there. For me, he has

changed what America looks like. He has changed what America can say to

the world. The problem is, after that momentous, historic,

heartbreaking and thrilling moment, what has he done? It has not been

exactly the best confirmation of an intelligent, brilliant strategic

mind. If I was Mitt Romney's chief- of-staff, which thankfully I am not,

I would get him to do what Reagan did back in 1980 by repeatedly

hammer Jimmy Carter by saying to you feel better off than you did

four years ago? The case for most Americans is absolutely not. But we

have already had a classic Mitt Romney attacking 47 % of Americans

as scroungers, including many natural Republican voters, people

like military veterans and pensioners. It was the worst own

goal. You can see the 60 something year-old granny sitting in her

porch and Chicago and saying, I would have voted for year... Took

there was even a suggestion that some of these 47 % were people who

had been taken out of tax by a previous Republican tax changes.

is really ruining it. What he should stick to his economics. And

then he could stand a chance. are coming up to this first

presidential debate and as we know, very often these debates can be

turned one way or another by one chance comment, one chance remark.

A classic one-liner, absolutely. There was one in 1988. By eight do

not remember it because I was very young at the time. One Republican

vice-presidential candidate said he compared himself to JFK. Someone

else said he knew JFK and he was no JFK. That turned the debate around.

Mitt Romney does not have the affection of the conservative base.

That he Party's mantra is one half of America is subsidising the other

but they do not think he is one of theirs. The establishment think he

is incompetent. He does not have a strong base in the party. Thank you

both very much. It has been another turbulent week

in the eurozone with a nationwide strike in Greece descending into

riots, protesters throwing petrol bombs and rocks and dozens of

arrests being made. Yesterday, the Greek government made progress on

the basic outlines of a new 13 billion euros package of cuts and

tax increases. That has been overshadowed by a request from some

in the governing coalition fraud more help from Brussels to soften

the effect of cuts. Meanwhile, demonstrators have been out on the

streets of Spain this week with tens of thousands of protesting at

austerity measures. Nevertheless, the Spanish government yesterday

announced a new round of tax and cups - at tax cuts. Vicky Pryce,

who was born in Greece, is the author of a new book on the crisis.

She joins us now. We keep hearing that Greece is on the brink, that

it is seeking another bail out, that it has another round of cuts,

obviously people are feeling a great deal of pain, way do you

think Greece stands at the moment? The problem we have is Greece has

seen a reduction in its GDP for the last five years. The likelihood is

we will see a drop in output of -- in 2012 and 2013. If other

countries had a drop in GDP would have riots in the streets. There

has been a huge amount of pain. And major increase in unemployment,

there is now 27 % unemployment. Confusingly, we have now got a new

package of cuts, very unpopular, we thought there was a deal, arranged,

but it seems Greece is asking for more time? The government which has

now come to power which is a coalition government, which is made

up of Socialists and the centre right and also some centre-left as

well, it is a three-party coalition, came with a mandate to renegotiate

the deal because the latest package had caused so much concern. None of

this has come into Greece yet. We are talking about 110 to 130

billion euros, as part of a second package, which has meant mainly

recapitalising the banking sector, mainly there to increase liquidity

in the system and also to compensate all the banks which took

a haircut, if you like. They took a reduction. Very little is due to

come into the Greek economy itself, which means that people are

suffering, contractors are not being paid, it is not as if the

West, western Europe has been putting a lot of money into Greece,

very little of that has come. But the conditions attached to that

money are so tight and have required the Greeks to have come

with a further package of cuts which is the 11.6 billion there

have just agreed. So little more time for Greece to stagger on and

in the meantime, mounting concerns about Spain which has also had to

announce another round of cuts. How serious is the situation in Spain

now? Is it getting to the point that Greece is that? Greece needs

extra time to do it and what it really needs is to have a lot of

the debt renegotiated and frankly, written off. There is no way it can

carry on the way it is. It is very similar in Spain. It has the same

unemployment rate. It is a much larger economy sea can imagine how

many people are out of work, it is stupendous. The youth unemployment

rate is at 54 %. Spain has already extended its own timetable which

the markets have accepted. It is about to hear terrible things about

its banking sector. It will need to go for a proper bail out. The debt

in Spain is unsustainable in my view. Like Greece, it will have a

reduction in GDP this year, a reduction next year and the

austerity package just announced is adding more pain. It cut public

spending, raise taxes and cuts benefits which will affect the

population at large. So far, we have seen the leadership of Germany,

France and others in Europe have been that they have been so

concerned about a wider collapse of the European currency that they

have decided it is better to carry on doing whatever they need to to

try and keep these countries in the eurozone. Is that going to continue

or are we going to finally reach some crisis point. We seem to keep

approaching crisis point and then the crisis get staved off for a

little longer, more time is given. The problem is, they have not been

doing enough, and they have not been doing it fast enough. The way

they are operating, they are doing the opposite. Every time there is a

summit, a decision is made. It used to last few weeks. The markets have

stopped believing what comes out of those summits and what you hear

every now and then, a decision is made and then it gets reversed. It

is going on right this minute about how you refund capitalisation in

the backs. Do you think it is looking inevitable that Greece and

Spain might have to leave the euro? No. I think everyone will work hard

to ensure that certainly Spain and Greece and the other countries,

because if Greece believes the whole thing will fall apart. Italy

is in trouble. Mario Monti is talking about extending his stay as

Prime Minister so he can continue the reform process. I think the

Germans will have to fund it. Christina Odone, with this eurozone

crisis having an impact here, but we seem to be carrying on lurching

from one crisis point to the next, do you think the leaders in Europe

are right to try and keep this project on the rails at all costs?

I think the problem is, it is not just a global village, it is a

European village. Whatever happens to Greece, does have a huge impact

on the rest of us, so we are linked together and some of us may think a

country like Greece or Spain or Italy, is a bit of an albatross

around another country's neck but we are stuck together. The problem

is, the politics of any kind of stronger centralised discipline is

so unappealing, especially unappealing to northern Europe and

especially to Britain, because what we cannot bear is the thought of

more sovereignty going to some central anonymous, autonomous

institution that we have no power over, we have no say in, we are

just going to be quashed as citizens of a nation. And that, I

think, is what people are really There has been a lot of

surrendering of sovereignty which has has taken too much? Too much

some might say. Possibly, but some of the countries,

we want to talk about Spain and Italy and Greece, probably wanted

more of their sovereignty to go because they wanted to be run by

the technocrats in Brussels rather than their own politicians.

That's one of the of the problems. We are talking about Greece and

Italy and Spain, countries that have a low civic understanding of

what responsibility lies. Countries that are featured nationally as the

tax dodge U Owen? The Nobel prize winning

economist has it right. It compares it to a medieval witchdoctor as the

patient gets weaker, bleeds it more. What we are seeing in Greece is a

catastrophe. So they should be spending more?

What is happening is debt is surging in Greece. We have over

half of young people unemployed. We have a society basically being

dismantled because of austerity imposed by the German Government.

Not because of austerity. This is the key point. If you look at

Ireland, Ireland had a budget surplus before the crisis. All

countries regardless whether they had a surplus or deficit had been

hit by a financial crisis. Money borrowed in a bad way is not

good money. You are saying that part of the problems in places like

Greece and Spain is that the EU, the terms of the bail outs are so

so strict that it is making the problems worse. Do you think they

would be better off outside the euro? In the case of Greece, about

70% of the population want to stay within the euro, but that's giving

them little flexibility in dealing with the crisis. What needs to

happen is firstly, a lot of the debt needs to be written off. There

is no way it can be paid off and what we are seeing is the

dismantling of a society as a result of that, young people, no

future in that country, but the banks to be taken over and publicly

controlled and used to invest in the economy which at the moment I

mean are sustained by the taxpayer. Surely there is a point there in

these tight rules that are being imposed on countries like Greece

and Spain, are making it really very, very difficult indeed for

those economies to find anyway to recover? What you need is to change

the rules. Not necessarily to see the countries go. There is no doubt

that all of them reform, whether you look at Italy or Spain. You

actually have countries that don't do the right things if you like and

because the euro was a good thing for them in the short-term is, low

interest rates to finance the housing boom in Spain and the

French banks in Greece and they borrowed like there was no tomorrow.

But they weren't - but what happened since with with the crisis

that hit, there was nothing to fall back on because they hadn't

restructured and they had no way they could change their exchange

rate. We need to re-think this. OK, I am sure a lot more to come.

There is a big summit coming up before the end of the year.

Did you hear the one about the politician who died on stage? Well,

we don't mean literally. When Danny Alexander stood up in front of the

Lib Dem conference and told jokes you could have heard a pin drop. It

was a reminder that while political humour can have them rolling in the

aisles, it can have heading for the exits. We have come up with the

# I'm joker # Cherie, I mean...

APPLAUSE Well, at least I don't have to

worry about her running off with The Guardian Disclosed that the

speech had not been written by Gordon Brown at all.

LAUGHTER But by a 27-year-old choral singing

researcher name Ed Balls. There you have it, the final proof, Labour's

brand-new shining, modernist economist dream, but it wasn't

Brown's, it was Balls! APPLAUSE

I will not make agen issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit

for political purposes my opponents youth and inexperience.

LAUGHTER You did wrack up more medals than

France, didn't you? Yes! And more med medals than

Germany and Australia and more medals my friends per head, more

medals per head than virtually every country on earth and yes, you

brought sport home to a city and a country where by and large it was

invented and codified. You brought athletics home, you brought home

rowing, you brought home cycling, you brought home judo, I am not

sure if judo was invented in London. Of course, not everything about the

Budget this year was perfect. LAUGHTER

Julia Church my brilliant special adviser was getting married a few

weeks after the Budget in Cornwall. I checked to make sure that her

future husband was not a caravan gelling churchgoer with a taste for

pasttries, but I will always think of that period of four U-turns and

a wedding. Thank you.

APPLAUSE Oh dear. Poor old Danny having to

laugh himself to break up the silence there. But we are joined by

the man who wrote Tony Blair's Gordon and Cherie joke, the former

speech writer and now Times columnist. Cherie had put her foot

in it and Tony Blair turned the corner there. Yes, the Gordon Brown

speech was over shadowed by something about Cherie Blair having

said something rude about him to a journalist and it ran, it was

running the next day and that's the key to why the joke worked. It is

because we conceded in that joke that she probably had said it. And

the joke had a real purpose. It wasn't just a joke, completely

separate from the speech, had a political impact because we were

saying, "Yeah, OK, three probably said it. But let's not worry about

it too much." The original joke is a Les Dawson gag. The original one

is where Les Dawson used to say, "My wife has just run off with the

guy next door, and do you know what? I'm really going to miss

him.". LAUGHTER

In that circumstance, was it Tony Blair himself who decided we have

got to make a a joke out of this? And you were tasked with coming up

with it? There were more people involved and everybody knows the

best way of dealing with it is to have some lightness of touch. It

has - as you said, it has got to be funny. If a joke is really funny

you hide in the laughter the political point. If it is not funny,

you risk basically insulteding everybody, you risk Gordon Brown

being annoyed and risk drawing attention to the facts without

disolving it. It took a while to fin the right right form at.

And did Cherie see the joke? Yes. LAUGHTER

Eventually. A couple of seconds after the

laughter in the hall, everybody saw the joke! It is risque. If you do a

joke like that, there is a risk attached. As the Prime Minister

stood up to speak, it wasn't in the script, it was in his head and we

didn't know know until he said it, whether he was going to. He judged

the mood about whether to do the joke. Danny Alexander... You were

at the scene biting your nails wondering if it is going to happen?

Firstly, is he going to say it and is it going to come off? I never

thought it would come off as well as it did. What Danny Alexander

should have done with get out of it. I'm dying here. I have got to stop,

but he goes on and on and supplies his own laughter track at the end.

Is part of the problem the politician involved or the

solution? We saw Boris Johnson there who seems capable of opening

his mouth and saying just about anything and getting everyone on

his side and everyone laughing and Danny Alexander didn't have that

effect even at Lib Dem conference? Comedy has to be organic. It has

could come out of the thing that you are writing. You hate it when

they say before they go on, "Have you got any jokes?" They shouldn't

be separate. Boris does it naturally and his problem is the

opposite. He needs to be not so funny and for serious, but some

people can't do it. Occasionally you get somebody who is not funny,

to be funny. The classic case was Margaret Thatcher. The Lib Dems had

a new motive that looked like a dead parrot. They got her to do the

dead parrot sketch. She didn't know who Monty Python was and she

watched the video and before she went on the stage and she said,

"This Monty Python, is he one of us?". Oh, how wonderful.

It worked because the script was good.

They always say politics is show business for ugly people and

often... Like acting? When it comes to actsing, politicians not least

your own boss could be superb, but when it comes to humour, the

classic one was Sarah Tether last year, I urge your viewers to watch

it and she talked about going back to Strictly Come Dancing and says

George Osborne is going to be doing the line dancing and everything was

wrong, its timing, the way she delivered it. It was trending on

Twitter Within an hour and it was a car crash.

And yet politicians feel the need to turn to humour, to make

themselves appear human and normal and... It is playing to the gallery.

It is trying to appeal to the audience. It is trying to feel the

audience. It is trying to feed the audience, but it really, rarely

works and Boris, you are right, Philip. One of the weird things is

that when the politician is so effortlessly funny and so you know,

wonderful, all he has to do is touch the hair and everybody roars

with laughter. It does leave some of his audience wondering, "Is he

serious?" When push comes to shove, can he deliver? Well, he has been

re-elected to City Hall so it is obviously working.

It is not Number Ten. It is interesting to see what he

does at the the Tory party conference.

Do you think Ed Miliband should try more jokes next week?

LAUGHTER I don't.

Look at the look of horror on his speech when you said that!

No, I don't think he should. If - he is not an unfunny person

privately. It just depends. If it occurs naturally in the writing and

it is funny then yes, but it should be something he is comfortable with

that he has devised. He shouldn't bow to the pressure that I have got

to have two jokes and let's put put them in at the last minute. You

lose confidence when you tell a joke and it dies.

You may remember how a couple of weeks ago, we asked the

Conservative author Richard D North on to the Daily Politics to give us

his guide on how to be a right- winger. Well, we thought we would

ask Owen Jones for a guide for the left-winger. Have a look at this.

At five, pay your taxes. Don't do a Jimmy Carr.

At four, none of us have any control of our upbringing. We want

working people to have a a voice, but it doesn't mean hating people

for being born posh. At three, join a trade union and

never cross a picket line. It is the only means workers have to

fight for a fair share of the cake. It is a non mover at tworks don't

go all people's front. The real enemy is capitalism, not each

other! And at one, your goal is a society

run by working people for working people. Not Not in the interests of

That was almost a bit of Clause four at the end there. It is not

exactly the cool thing to be left wing at the moment. Do you think it

is time for the left wing to we exert itself and put pressure on Ed

Miliband and Ed Balls? I think most people outside off political life

do-nothing cod issues in terms of left and right, they think of

things in terms of issues which have to be addressed, whether they

solutions are convincing, coherent and resonate with their experiences.

We are four years now into an intractable economic crisis, where

people face the biggest squeeze in living standards since my ground

was born in the 1920s. It remains boom-time for those at the top. The

Sunday Times Rich List, the wealth went up by the 5th. I think there

is a growing appetite now when we have seen the failures of free-

market capitalism to say, there is a different way of running society

and I think people are more open now to talking about higher taxes

on the rich. Christina, does Owen Jones have a point? A lot of people

are struggling, do you think this could be an opportunity for the

left? And unfair society is a terrible thing. But I think what

Phil wrote this morning in his column was a bit of a challenge to,

which it is what does Labour stand for when there is no money? That is

the problem. When you said it Labour no longer is the coherent

opposition, what do they stand for? What are they going to do? Why

should I go and vote for them? Let's bring in Phil here. Do you

consider yourself a man of the left these days. It is not something

people often ask that yes, rather than right. I think what I to

disagree is the alternatives to captors and, what you will get is

responsible capitalism. You may or may not get it but that is the

frame of the argument. What you will get is a different form of

capitalism. What I do not get the sense of his public ownership of

the commanding heights of the economy and other things for stud

you do consider yourself a man of the left? Yes, I am a democratic

socialist and I want a society run by the working people. Are you in

1980 person Orin 1930 person? 2012 left winger. I do not want to

return to the old form of statism pioneered by Peter Mandelson's

grandfather, Herbert Morrison. I do not want the old-style British Rail.

I would have workers and passengers have been democratically

represented elect lives on the board. What role do we have as tax

payers bailing out the banks to running the Bank's? You have

written these five Rules. Phil Collins helped Tony Blair very much

to shift the Labour Party, do you have him as part of that cabal who

betrayed the left or do you think they help? I think it would be fair

to say we come from a slightly different tradition. Clause 4,

would you bring it back? necessarily in that form. I like

the idea of a society run by working people. I avoid the cries

of betrayal because the way I see that rightward shift is the rise of

the New Right in the 1980s. The form of globalisation with Hendon

Government's. But also, after the end of the Cold War, even if your

airport Stalinist totalitarianism, as I hope all people on the left

did, that was Banaz capitalism's final victory. We are still

suffering from the legacy. other thing about Old Labour, it

was phenomenally on successful -- New Labour. Well Tony Blair won

something. Exactly. The absurdity of the view that the Labour Party

can return to view it has -- doesn't extend to the market for

haircuts and core jets? What product markets are you extending

this into? I must just ask you, Christina, you used to work for the

New Statesman, weighed you consider yourself on this? I have become

more right-wing than Phil and right centre. What I cannot bear about

Owen's vision, I like you but I do not like your vision, what I do not

like his huge state quashing all individual initiative. The one

thing I still like about David Cameron is the Big Society, the one

that nobody liked. But what I loved was the thought of lots of people

really taking up and doing things and seeing their neighbourhood,

their locality as a great launch pad for all kinds of initiatives.

Your statism... Is it is not statism. You obviously feel very

passionate about this. Do you think it is possible that as you continue

in the years to come, you could perhaps move on a political journey

yourself? That you might be tempted by David Cameron's Big Society,

that you might, as you get older, as a lot of people have shifted

from the left to the right? It is thickly shade right-wing shift. But

no. I come from a very proud left- wing background. Four generations

of both sides my family have been committed to the trade union

movement. My great grandad was on the 1926 General Strike. My parents

were trade union activists and none of them shifted to the right. What

I am arguing for is a higher taxes on the rich, democratic control of

our banks, social ownership, not the old form of statism. We have

got lots of socialism in this country for the rich. Banks propped

up by the tax payer, landlords who are paid housing benefits for

example. I do not want to run the railways. Well I am not asking you

to. We are going to leave this discussion now. It has been a week

dominated by the Liberal Democrats hanging up by the beach in Brighton.

David Cameron was given a lesson in history on American TV. Here is

David Thomson with the 60 second round up.

Chief Whip Andrew Mitchell decided to get off his bike and perhaps his

high horse as he headed in to work on Monday. But after apologising he

was not keen to hang around for more questions from the plebs,

Surrey, hacks. Luckily, he could count on the support of his

coalition colleagues. A jokes about social class are not good for the

unity of the coalition. As Eimear pleb, I could not resist. Talking

of the Lib Dems, it was conference time in Brighton. Nick Clegg might

be expecting a bloodbath in the next election. I have seen

generations of liberals marching towards the sound of gunfire.

Hamza finally got his marching orders to the US but the BBC

blocked -- blotted its copybook with people in high places. David

Cameron went to American -- America and he should have paid more

attention to history lessons at Eton. Magna Carter? You are testing

may. Be it would be good if you knew this. The yes, it would be.

There was David Cameron in a spot of trouble but the trials of Andrew

Mitchell have dominated the headlines for a long time. We have

heard he has told his local newspaper that he believes the

whole row has been blown out of all proportion by the national media.

He says he has apologised and hopes he can draw a line under it. Do you

think he has a point? No, I thought he was disgusting and it was really

embarrassing! It made me cringe. Unbelievably, I think he will get

away with it. He is in the headlines now. In the headlines

after seven days, you should be dead. He should have just kept

Ashton. He will put himself back in the headlines if he speaks like

that. That attitude reinforced the Tory party as the party for the

rich. The focus in the coming week will be on the Labour Party. It is

a curious situation for Ed Miliband because he is ahead in the polls

but he is facing huge amount of criticism for a failure to show

sufficient leadership. What do you think he will do? It is a peculiar

conference. It is unique because of the length of the political cycle.

For the first time, we know we will have a five-year cycle. Normally,

this would be the firing gun for an election campaign. But it will not

now. Have a longer period. The first two conferences are kind of

get to know Ed Miliband, the next two will be moving to a general

election but this one is struggling for a purpose. He does not want to

reveal too much, too early because that is a mistake. But at the same

time, everybody on my side of the fence is there, but who are you,

what are you going to do? It is a difficult conference for him.

have heard a lot about a blank sheet of paper. There will be huge

amount of pressure on him to come out with some policies? There will

be, but I'm not sure he will be wise to yield to it. It is unfair

that say it is a blank sheet of paper because of what he has

written a some emerging themes which you may or may not like.

People were not aware of them to stop the actors always true because

people were not paying attention but they will. He will talk about

responsible capitalism. My own view is it will not be enough. You

cannot say the paper will be plant. Given the long election cycle, how

do you think he is doing. Do you think he is really poised to step

up a gear over the next couple of years and storm and the next

election? I think they have got trouble on policy because there is

not a sense of what the Labour Party really is because there is no

money to hand out. Having said that, Ed Miliband was underestimated when

he became leader. I never thought he was as bad as he was painted. I

think the surprise that some people have had that he has had some good

moments has been a surprise, just them changing their minds and

realising what was true all along, he is better than that. The

question is, will it be enough? were quite critical of his speech

last year which talked about predatory capitalism but some would

argue he is vindicated because Vince Cable has said this is

something we could work on. Do you think in hindsight you were too

harsh? No aye, in hindsight I was too generous. I'm sure some would

say that but it is a silly distinction. This distinction

between predator and producer for so vet immediately. Instantly,

Andrew Neil dismantled it as a distinction. It collapses.

Christina, how great is the pressure now? It is lack Mitt

Romney. I can see so many parallels. -- it is like Mitt Romney. This is

a guy with so much to gain. He is facing an opposition which is so

unpopular, which has not been able to make cuts, a kind of cohesive

national mission and what does he do? He stands there and loses all

kinds of credibility. I am afraid I am not owe an Ed Miliband fund or a

least not this Ed Miliband. thanks to my guests. We will have

to leave there now. 1 o'clock News is starting over on BBC One. Andrew

will be back on BBC One on Sunday with the Sunday Politics where he