Browse content similar to 25/10/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Line | From | To | |
---|---|---|---|
Afternoon, folks, welcome to the Daily Politics. | :00:37. | :00:40. | |
Happy days! The double-dip recession is declared dead after | :00:40. | :00:45. | |
the economy grew by 1% in the last quarter. So where does that leave | :00:46. | :00:49. | |
Ed Balls? We'll ask him. And the International Development | :00:49. | :00:54. | |
Select Committee say Afghanistan may never be a viable state. Is it | :00:54. | :01:04. | |
:01:04. | :01:04. | ||
time to declare that 11-year And who is top dog in Westminster? | :01:04. | :01:08. | |
Dave? George? Ed? Nope. One of these fine mutts is Parliamentary | :01:08. | :01:18. | |
:01:18. | :01:19. | ||
Pooch of the Year and will join us And with me throughout the | :01:19. | :01:25. | |
programme, the Director General of Saga, Ros Altmann. But first, that | :01:25. | :01:29. | |
rare thing, some good news. They're calling it the Olympic effect. | :01:29. | :01:32. | |
Between July and September, the economy grew by 1% - that's the | :01:32. | :01:38. | |
highest it's been since the third quarter of 2007. Compare that to | :01:38. | :01:41. | |
the previous quarter, between April and June, when the economy shrank | :01:41. | :01:46. | |
by 0.4%. These latest figures do, however, include ticket sales for | :01:46. | :01:51. | |
the Olympics and Paralympics, which may have boosted the numbers. | :01:51. | :01:53. | |
Nevertheless, it does officially bring to an end the double-dip | :01:53. | :01:59. | |
recession that lasted for the previous nine months. I'm joined | :01:59. | :02:08. | |
now by the Shadow Chancellor, Ed Balls. Welcome back. Unemployment | :02:08. | :02:12. | |
is down, inflation is down, retail sales are up, the deficit is better | :02:12. | :02:16. | |
than we thought, growth is bouncing back. This must be a distressing | :02:16. | :02:22. | |
time for you! It is good news. And about time. The economy has flat | :02:22. | :02:27. | |
line for a year, we are finally getting some growth, we should have | :02:27. | :02:32. | |
had a growth in the last two years. Let's hope we are stopping -- | :02:32. | :02:40. | |
starting to move into a better phase. Is this just a blip or is it | :02:40. | :02:44. | |
the start of growth? Not spectacular growth, probably, but | :02:44. | :02:50. | |
growth. That is the question. is the answer? Is it going to be a | :02:50. | :02:56. | |
sustained recovery? Take out the Olympics, take up the bank holiday | :02:56. | :03:01. | |
effect... The Jubilee effect. The underlying position of this quarter | :03:01. | :03:05. | |
is weak, but it is positive. There is growth, but it is not good | :03:06. | :03:11. | |
enough. We will not get investment moving and living standards rising | :03:11. | :03:18. | |
1.3% gross. How do the next 12 months look? My worry is that | :03:18. | :03:20. | |
George Osborne and David Cameron will cross their fingers and hope | :03:20. | :03:26. | |
for the best. I think that is complacent. Look at the eurozone, | :03:26. | :03:29. | |
look at family budgets, the worry in the business world about | :03:30. | :03:33. | |
investing. I think it would be better to do a bit more to get this | :03:33. | :03:40. | |
recovery move big. That is why I am still concerned. The IMF is | :03:40. | :03:46. | |
predicting growth of just over 1% next year. It is not good enough. | :03:46. | :03:51. | |
If you strip out the special factors you mentioned in Q3, at the | :03:51. | :03:57. | |
Jubilee impact which was negative in Q2, the Olympics in Q3, the | :03:57. | :04:03. | |
underlying rate for Q3 would be 0.3%. It is consistent. It is | :04:03. | :04:07. | |
nowhere near good enough. In the last two years, George Osborne said | :04:07. | :04:13. | |
he would get 4.6% growth and he has got 0.6%. A 5th of the level of | :04:13. | :04:18. | |
Germany or America. Are we going to catch up? The reason the deficit is | :04:18. | :04:22. | |
going up is because of that weak growth. He needs to catch up that | :04:22. | :04:29. | |
lost ground. 0.3%, or 1% a year, will take us a generation to catch | :04:29. | :04:33. | |
up that lots ground. By you still claiming the Government is cutting | :04:33. | :04:39. | |
too fast and too quickly? -- are you. Going to the next year and ask | :04:39. | :04:44. | |
yourself, with the eurozone in real trouble, with China slowing down, | :04:44. | :04:48. | |
with all of these worries in the world, is this the time for Britain | :04:48. | :04:52. | |
to have the fastest attempt to get the deficit down we've seen in the | :04:52. | :04:56. | |
last 100 years? I've always said I thought that was foolish and risky | :04:56. | :04:59. | |
and a more balanced approach was more likely to work. Their approach | :04:59. | :05:02. | |
has not worked in the last two years and they are crossing their | :05:02. | :05:08. | |
fingers again. The IMF said exactly the same thing two weeks ago. | :05:08. | :05:13. | |
IMF said only change plans if you don't get any growth, but it looks | :05:13. | :05:19. | |
like phi are on track. Come on! The IMF said that 12 months ago. How | :05:19. | :05:24. | |
much growth have we had in the last 12 months? 0. If we had taken their | :05:24. | :05:28. | |
advice 12 months ago, we would not be having this anaemic recovery. | :05:28. | :05:32. | |
The IMF said the Government should only change policy of growth | :05:32. | :05:36. | |
doesn't return to the economy. Growth has returned so the IMF is | :05:36. | :05:39. | |
still banking on what the Government is doing. For the IMF | :05:39. | :05:43. | |
said that 12 months ago. If growth should fall significantly below | :05:43. | :05:48. | |
current projections, and it is only projecting 1%, countries with room | :05:48. | :05:53. | |
for manoeuvre like Britain should snoozed their planned adjustment | :05:53. | :05:56. | |
for 2013 and beyond. High growth hasn't fallen significantly below | :05:56. | :06:01. | |
the projections. When the IMF first said that, they were projecting | :06:01. | :06:06. | |
twice that level of growth. They've been downgrading their growth and | :06:06. | :06:10. | |
we've still been undershooting. Are you confident we will meet the | :06:10. | :06:13. | |
great figure next year? The Chancellor is not confident, the | :06:13. | :06:17. | |
Bank of England governor is not confident, the prime minister seems | :06:17. | :06:21. | |
deeply complacent. I think for cautious thing to do is to get on | :06:21. | :06:27. | |
and build some houses. Get young people back to work. Where is | :06:27. | :06:31. | |
George Osborne's plan? How much has overall government spending fallen | :06:31. | :06:37. | |
since Labour left power? It has gone up. Welfare spending is 20% up. | :06:37. | :06:43. | |
Overall state spending has fallen by �16 billion. 2.3% of total | :06:43. | :06:49. | |
expenditure. 16 billion cut in spending doesn't make that much | :06:49. | :06:54. | |
difference. Under the Alistair Darling clan, departmental budgets | :06:54. | :06:58. | |
were to fall to 0.2% a year, under George Osborne they are falling by | :06:58. | :07:03. | |
2.8%. I know you and Mr Osborne like to play at this huge | :07:03. | :07:06. | |
differences, when you drill into the figures, you are not that far | :07:06. | :07:10. | |
apart. For last time I came on can't cure viewing figures | :07:10. | :07:14. | |
plummeted so why were not getting to that debate about expectations. | :07:14. | :07:20. | |
We said two years ago, because of our Chancellor's decision, we would | :07:20. | :07:24. | |
have earlier and bigger tax rises and spending cuts, confidence | :07:24. | :07:27. | |
collapsed, the economy went into recession and we've not seen the | :07:27. | :07:32. | |
kind of investment we need. Quite a lot if those spending cuts and tax | :07:32. | :07:36. | |
rises are still to come. If you're a millionaire you will get a tax | :07:36. | :07:42. | |
cut, everybody else will pay more tax. If you earn a million you will | :07:42. | :07:52. | |
get a tax cut. Let me ask you... want to apologise. I didn't speak | :07:52. | :07:57. | |
correctly. If you are a person who earns �1 million next year, you | :07:57. | :08:02. | |
will get �40,000 back, you will pay �40,000 less. We've done that. I'm | :08:02. | :08:09. | |
glad you've taken the correction. Where's the fairness in that? They | :08:09. | :08:14. | |
will get quite a lot of money. It won't be you or me! It will not be | :08:14. | :08:23. | |
me and it will not be you. There's still this great Freya -- affair | :08:23. | :08:28. | |
that you just borrowed too much in the good years and spent too much. | :08:28. | :08:33. | |
You told Andrew Marr, your quote was, I don't think we have a | :08:33. | :08:37. | |
structural deficit as the boom years came to an end. Do you stand | :08:37. | :08:41. | |
by that? We discussed this many times and I've been very clear | :08:41. | :08:48. | |
about the position. Going into the downturn in 2006 and 2007, at the | :08:48. | :08:51. | |
Treasury figures and other figures from other economists were not at | :08:51. | :08:55. | |
that time, there was a structural deficit on the current account | :08:55. | :08:58. | |
excluding investment, and our national debt was low, what | :08:59. | :09:02. | |
happened subsequently with the financial crisis, in retrospect, | :09:02. | :09:06. | |
clearly there was a structural deficit at that time. Her few told | :09:06. | :09:11. | |
Andrew Marr there was no structural deficit in 2007. As perceived by | :09:11. | :09:20. | |
policy makers. At you were wrong. You told them that in 2011. You | :09:20. | :09:24. | |
said there was no structural deficit. I stand by that. There | :09:24. | :09:33. | |
was! No. Did Mervyn King, as coroner -- Governor, think Int 2007 | :09:33. | :09:38. | |
there was a structural deficit? They didn't. Few told Der Andrew | :09:38. | :09:43. | |
Marr in 2011 that you didn't leave behind if the structural deficit. | :09:43. | :09:48. | |
didn't say that. Those were your exact words. "I don't think we had | :09:49. | :09:54. | |
a structural deficit then". We now know the structural deficit was | :09:54. | :10:02. | |
5.2% of GDP. You were �73 billion out. You and I have discussed this | :10:02. | :10:07. | |
many times and I have been completely consistent. At the time | :10:07. | :10:16. | |
in 2007,... Let's be clear. The charges in 2006/7, Labour was being | :10:16. | :10:20. | |
irresponsible given the figures available. The answer is that at | :10:20. | :10:24. | |
that time, there was not a structural deficit on the current | :10:24. | :10:29. | |
account. In retrospect, of course there was. I've never denied that. | :10:29. | :10:34. | |
You told Andrew Marr to -- for years after 2007 that there was | :10:34. | :10:39. | |
still no structural deficit. didn't say that. There was a �73 | :10:39. | :10:42. | |
billion structural deficit. Wouldn't it be wise to say I was | :10:42. | :10:49. | |
wrong. You've got to not simply stick to the Tory briefing live. | :10:49. | :10:53. | |
Kaka I have not read the Tory briefing, I have not spoken to the | :10:53. | :10:59. | |
Tories. I have read the IMF document, deface say there was a 73 | :10:59. | :11:04. | |
bn structural deficit, you told for Vadamar there was none. A year ago, | :11:04. | :11:11. | |
and I can give you the exact quote, I said... Of course in retrospect | :11:11. | :11:15. | |
there was a structural deficit, but did policy makers think there was | :11:16. | :11:21. | |
one at the time? Absolutely not. The whole world, including Britain, | :11:21. | :11:27. | |
got that wrong. Of course we did. Did I say something in 2011 to | :11:27. | :11:31. | |
Andrew Marr which I now need to correct? Absolutely not. I'm at a | :11:31. | :11:35. | |
loss as to why you do not need to correct it. I'm told you have to go | :11:35. | :11:39. | |
elsewhere and I have to go elsewhere. I would happily stay for | :11:39. | :11:44. | |
up we can talk about bank bonuses. The facts matter. If you don't have | :11:44. | :11:50. | |
to go, let me keep you. This is the exact quote. I don't think we had a | :11:50. | :11:54. | |
structural deficit at all in that period before the recession. | :11:54. | :11:59. | |
Exactly. That's right. We now know you had a structural deficit of 73 | :11:59. | :12:06. | |
billion. Exactly. Both can't be right! Let me explain the economics. | :12:06. | :12:12. | |
I will give you the final word. 2007, was there at that time, as | :12:12. | :12:17. | |
policy makers straw -- for the world, has struggled of said? No. | :12:17. | :12:24. | |
His question to me was, should you have acted differently in 2007? At | :12:24. | :12:29. | |
the time, the answer is no. In retrospect, because we now know the | :12:29. | :12:34. | |
world was different, of course. had one and you didn't know? Yes. | :12:34. | :12:39. | |
What you told Andrew Marr was wrong but you didn't know? No. Was there | :12:39. | :12:44. | |
are structural deficit at the time as perceived by Pozzi makers? No. | :12:44. | :12:49. | |
Two heavy men are waiting to drag you away. K this goes to the heart | :12:50. | :12:54. | |
of the focus groups. They think you borrow too much. You told us there | :12:54. | :12:58. | |
was no deficit and there was issued structural deficit. It is quite | :12:58. | :13:03. | |
germane to Labour's positioning of the economy. That is why I've had - | :13:04. | :13:10. | |
- extended a conversation. In 2011, I said Andrew Marr exactly this. | :13:10. | :13:15. | |
Had we known in 2007 what was going on in the financial services | :13:15. | :13:19. | |
industry, had we acted with tougher regulation, we could have avoided | :13:19. | :13:23. | |
for structural deficit which turned out to be fair. That is something | :13:23. | :13:28. | |
you only know and in retrospect. Can you shed any light on this? | :13:28. | :13:31. | |
What you may have meant to say to Andrew Large -- Andrew Marr was I | :13:32. | :13:35. | |
didn't think there was a structural deficit, but you've been quoted as | :13:35. | :13:42. | |
saying you don't think. I've said this so many times, including on | :13:42. | :13:47. | |
your programme many times. You can always take a set of words and say | :13:47. | :13:51. | |
did he really mean to say this or that? I've been very consistent on | :13:51. | :13:55. | |
this and I'm very happy to defend my record. If George Osborne would | :13:55. | :13:59. | |
come on your programme, he could defend his record. Why doesn't he | :13:59. | :14:03. | |
come on? For that is the most interesting question of the day. | :14:03. | :14:07. | |
I'm looking forward to the Sunday politics for my third time. Why | :14:08. | :14:14. | |
doesn't the Chancellor, on? I have no idea. I would love it. Thank you | :14:14. | :14:20. | |
for coming in. Always fun, see you later. The Chancellor has been | :14:20. | :14:24. | |
talking about the growth figures, this is what he had to say. | :14:24. | :14:28. | |
There'll always one-off factors, but if you take the last two | :14:28. | :14:36. | |
quarters together, you can see underlying growth in the British | :14:37. | :14:41. | |
economy, but there are plenty of risks. Look at the data from the | :14:41. | :14:46. | |
eurozone this week. That shows us there still a difficult economic | :14:46. | :14:50. | |
situation in the world. If we stick with what we are doing, getting the | :14:50. | :14:54. | |
deficit down, creating jobs, fixing the deep-seated problems in the | :14:54. | :15:00. | |
British economy, I think you can see now that it is going to deliver | :15:00. | :15:10. | |
:15:10. | :15:14. | ||
the kind of underlying prosperity The business minister joins us, the | :15:14. | :15:19. | |
economy is back where it used to be one year ago, do you want a medal? | :15:19. | :15:24. | |
No, this is good news but there is a long way to go. It comes on top | :15:24. | :15:27. | |
of the good news of falling unemployment and falling inflation | :15:27. | :15:31. | |
and that the deficit is down by a quarter, but it is a long, hard | :15:31. | :15:35. | |
road that we need to travel, and I think it shows we are on track but | :15:35. | :15:40. | |
that we should not underestimate what more needs to be done. As I | :15:40. | :15:45. | |
say, first of all, the economy is only the size it was around 2007, | :15:45. | :15:49. | |
not even back to where it was in 2008, and indeed it is only back to | :15:49. | :15:54. | |
where it was one year after you have been in power, so all we are | :15:54. | :15:58. | |
doing... We are not really growing, we are simply flatlining. He is | :15:58. | :16:02. | |
that right? I caught one of the interesting thing is that the ONS | :16:02. | :16:07. | |
stated this morning is that in the crash the economy shrank by about | :16:07. | :16:14. | |
just under 7%, and we are now halfway back from the low point of | :16:14. | :16:21. | |
2009. Some of that happened under Labour. Below point was in 2009, an | :16:21. | :16:24. | |
action in 2010... Some of the growth happened under Labour, not | :16:24. | :16:28. | |
you. We have taken over and are trying to get growth going on a | :16:29. | :16:33. | |
sustainable basis, of course we are. You have not grown at all in the | :16:33. | :16:38. | |
last 12 months. This is good news on a quarterly basis. Not to have | :16:38. | :16:42. | |
grown at all? It is good news on the quarter, but the thing is, | :16:42. | :16:46. | |
Andrew, are you telling me that life is difficult for many people | :16:46. | :16:50. | |
and that there is much more we need to do? If you are telling me that, | :16:50. | :16:55. | |
I completely agree, because it is not only about clearing up the mess | :16:55. | :16:58. | |
that Ed Balls left, but it is also up making sure that Britain can | :16:58. | :17:02. | |
compete in the future, you know, over my whole generation we are not | :17:02. | :17:08. | |
just going to be competing with Europe, as we were, but with China, | :17:08. | :17:12. | |
Indonesia, a global race, as the Prime Minister said. We know you | :17:12. | :17:15. | |
have been given a shortened version of the Prime Minister's speech to | :17:15. | :17:19. | |
bring on programmes like this, haven't you? It is critically | :17:19. | :17:22. | |
important... You have been given a short version of the speech to | :17:22. | :17:28. | |
repeat? I was given the full version! For the less bright | :17:28. | :17:31. | |
members of your party, it has been shortened and made into a bullet | :17:31. | :17:36. | |
points. I thought it was one of the best speeches... That is not what I | :17:36. | :17:41. | |
am asking you. Hasn't it? There are constant communications with MPs, | :17:41. | :17:47. | |
but the crucial point is not who said what when, but over the next | :17:47. | :17:52. | |
generation we are going to have a competition at the rising giants of | :17:52. | :17:56. | |
the world, it is true! The most interesting thing other than the | :17:56. | :18:00. | |
overall figure is that 1% is higher than expected, although it is clear | :18:00. | :18:06. | |
it is a one-off, nobody is claiming the economy is going to grow at 4% | :18:06. | :18:13. | |
per annum in the near future, which is what 1% might imply. Both at the | :18:13. | :18:17. | |
Conservative and Lib Dem conferences in 2011, and the | :18:17. | :18:20. | |
Conservative and Lib Dem conferences again in 2012, we heard | :18:20. | :18:23. | |
endless speeches about getting more infrastructure investment, | :18:24. | :18:27. | |
investing in this and that, and we discovered that in the third | :18:27. | :18:31. | |
quarter of this year, the construction sector decreased, fell | :18:31. | :18:37. | |
by 2.5%. What happened to that infrastructure investment? Well, we | :18:37. | :18:41. | |
have got to do it faster, I think. Take housebuilding. The planning | :18:41. | :18:45. | |
system is really slow in this country. I was in Suffolk talking | :18:45. | :18:49. | |
about the need to build a relief road, and the planning for that, | :18:49. | :18:54. | |
they told me, it was going to take seven years. We need to make that | :18:54. | :18:58. | |
much, much faster. That is why we are reforming planning. We have | :18:58. | :19:04. | |
made some reforms, and we need to make more. He promised a lot more | :19:04. | :19:09. | |
infrastructure, Mr Clegg as part of the coalition, we covered the | :19:09. | :19:14. | |
speech live in 2011, not 2012, planning more infrastructure, but | :19:14. | :19:18. | |
construction decrees 3% between the first and second quarters of this | :19:18. | :19:25. | |
year, and now by another 2.5%. -- decreased. The talk about | :19:25. | :19:28. | |
infrastructure is all hot air! fact that they finished building | :19:28. | :19:33. | |
the Olympics is a one-off, but I'm not using that as an excuse. If | :19:33. | :19:36. | |
construction needs to be made easier, we need to build more and | :19:36. | :19:42. | |
make it quicker, it takes much too long to get an idea and even the | :19:42. | :19:47. | |
funding behind it into turning it into bricks and mortar. I am just | :19:47. | :19:50. | |
suggesting... I accept the challenge that we should do more. | :19:50. | :19:56. | |
You should stop talking about it and actually do something about it. | :19:56. | :19:58. | |
We have a four-day growth and infrastructure bill which will make | :19:58. | :20:03. | |
the planning process easier, so I completely agree. -- we have put | :20:03. | :20:06. | |
forward a growth and infrastructure built. You are absolutely right | :20:06. | :20:10. | |
that we have to get infrastructure moving, and institutions are | :20:10. | :20:15. | |
billions waiting in the wings to invest. Where are the projects? You | :20:15. | :20:21. | |
could be cynical, from a political perspective, just potentially | :20:21. | :20:24. | |
saying, well, maybe the coalition does not need to worry now, the | :20:24. | :20:30. | |
election is not until 2015. They must make sure that growth happens | :20:30. | :20:33. | |
in 2014, so maybe next year we will see the big projects announced | :20:33. | :20:39. | |
which will get growth going. Does that sound right? It is a | :20:39. | :20:44. | |
possibility. If you look at growth this quarter, you have a 0.4% of | :20:45. | :20:49. | |
the growth from public spending, public consumption. That is not | :20:49. | :20:55. | |
austerity. 0.2% and was from ticket sales. You have got a long way to | :20:55. | :21:00. | |
go before we get the rebalancing of the economy that we are in the dock. | :21:00. | :21:06. | |
If you're anxious to cut the deficit, why is central government | :21:07. | :21:10. | |
spending 0.4% up this year? Are you talking about departmental | :21:10. | :21:17. | |
spending? Central government current spending, the whole lot. | :21:17. | :21:22. | |
Yes, so that includes... It includes the spending of | :21:22. | :21:25. | |
departments and also, more broadly than that, for instance, spending | :21:26. | :21:32. | |
on pensions, which went up sharply over the last year, because... | :21:32. | :21:37. | |
else does it include? It includes the interest bill. It does not, | :21:37. | :21:41. | |
actually. You are giving me the figures. You are the minister. It | :21:41. | :21:48. | |
does not include welfare spending. If you take at current spending, it | :21:48. | :21:52. | |
is 1.4% up this year compared to last. I thought you were cutting | :21:52. | :21:58. | |
spending. Is that in nominal terms. That is nominal terms. So in real | :21:58. | :22:02. | |
terms it is falling. He used a different figure with Ed Balls | :22:02. | :22:07. | |
because you were trying to... Obviously, I used the figures that | :22:07. | :22:10. | |
I think our strongest for whomever I am interviewing. The figures were | :22:11. | :22:14. | |
different because they were departmental figures that I used | :22:14. | :22:19. | |
with him. It is falling in real terms, and to argue that there is | :22:19. | :22:24. | |
not austerity going on is not reflected in the figures and in | :22:24. | :22:30. | |
real terms. I mean, that is clear. Government spending contributed | :22:30. | :22:35. | |
0.4% to that 1% of growth, so 40% of growth in that quarter was | :22:35. | :22:39. | |
government spending. Public borrowing has actually gone up. The | :22:39. | :22:42. | |
only reason that the numbers are lower is because you are the �20 | :22:43. | :22:47. | |
billion from the Royal Mail pension scheme in there. If you cross that | :22:47. | :22:51. | |
out, public borrowing is higher than it was before. We tend to take | :22:51. | :22:54. | |
these figures out, because the Royal Mail thing does skewered. | :22:55. | :23:00. | |
When I used the figures, I do not use the Royal Mail. What is your | :23:00. | :23:03. | |
feeling, though? Obviously, these figures are good news, it would be | :23:03. | :23:06. | |
churlish to deny that, they are better than City forecasters | :23:06. | :23:11. | |
thought. But I think you and I can agree that the next quarter is not | :23:11. | :23:16. | |
going to grow by 1%, the economy is not going to grow by 4% next day, | :23:16. | :23:21. | |
but has broke returned? Is the worst over, in your view? Well, | :23:21. | :23:25. | |
growth has clearly returned in this quarter. You know that is not what | :23:25. | :23:33. | |
I am asking. I am not a forecast of. It is good that we have got the OBR. | :23:33. | :23:36. | |
Their forecasts... Their forecasts are always wrong. They are | :23:36. | :23:41. | |
independent. Independent but wrong! I used to be an independent | :23:42. | :23:46. | |
forecaster. You were making astrologers look respectable! | :23:46. | :23:49. | |
Something like that! We have to look through the individual | :23:50. | :23:54. | |
quarterly figures. That is what I was asking you. These are good news, | :23:54. | :23:58. | |
but when I go around the country off, I meet businesses are | :23:58. | :24:01. | |
expanding fast, who cannot get enough skilled staff, but I also | :24:01. | :24:05. | |
meet people who are struggling, and we have got to make it possible for | :24:05. | :24:08. | |
everybody to employ more people, the more prosperous and more | :24:08. | :24:12. | |
profitable, to compete in his global race. We are looking through | :24:12. | :24:15. | |
the quarterly figures for sustainable and long-term | :24:15. | :24:19. | |
prosperity. I do not normally shake hands with anybody on this | :24:19. | :24:24. | |
programme, but Ed Balls shook hands at me, so in the interests of | :24:24. | :24:27. | |
impartiality, fairness and even dealing, Matthew Hancock, thank you | :24:27. | :24:32. | |
of being on the programme. An interesting line from the Work | :24:32. | :24:35. | |
and Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan Smith this morning. He told the BBC | :24:35. | :24:38. | |
that the Government's proposed curbs on benefits for children | :24:38. | :24:42. | |
could be introduced for families with more than two children, that | :24:42. | :24:46. | |
is the first time we have had a number, and it is lower than many | :24:46. | :24:51. | |
people expected. Let's get more from Gary O'Donoghue. Tell us more | :24:51. | :24:55. | |
about this and what has happened. Well, they have floated this idea | :24:55. | :25:02. | |
before about limiting the number of children the state can support. At | :25:02. | :25:05. | |
the Conservative Party conference, the idea came up along with the | :25:05. | :25:10. | |
idea of cutting housing benefit for the under 25s. But it is the first | :25:10. | :25:13. | |
time we have had a specific number, and the argument is this. The | :25:13. | :25:17. | |
average family in Britain has 1.8 children. Therefore, it is in line | :25:17. | :25:21. | |
with what everyone else is doing. Their argument is also that people | :25:21. | :25:25. | |
in work have to make decisions about how many children they can | :25:25. | :25:32. | |
support and that the polling evidence suggests that public | :25:32. | :25:36. | |
opinion is on their side. It is more about changing behaviours and | :25:36. | :25:40. | |
money, because when you look at it, for example, if you take child | :25:40. | :25:44. | |
benefit, one of the benefits that is dependent on how many children | :25:44. | :25:49. | |
you have, it costs the state just over �1 billion per year for | :25:49. | :25:54. | |
children in excess of two. In other words, three and upwards, just over | :25:54. | :25:59. | |
1 billion for that portion of families. So it is not big, big | :25:59. | :26:03. | |
money, you might say, but it may change behaviour. The problem is | :26:03. | :26:07. | |
twofold. They have not run it as the Lib Dems, which may be a | :26:07. | :26:11. | |
problem! The second issue is how you address that moral argument | :26:11. | :26:17. | |
that says, what on earth can the unborn child who get brought into | :26:17. | :26:21. | |
the world, why are you penalising them? They had no choice in this | :26:21. | :26:24. | |
whatsoever. That is a really difficult moral argument to address | :26:24. | :26:29. | |
in this context. I am sure we will hear a lot more about that, thank | :26:29. | :26:34. | |
you for marking our car on that. What to make of it? It is a very | :26:34. | :26:38. | |
interesting one. I know Iain Duncan Smith is passionately committed to | :26:38. | :26:42. | |
reforming the welfare bill, to making families take responsibility | :26:42. | :26:47. | |
for themselves, for their lives, and for the way they live. But I | :26:47. | :26:53. | |
think Gary was right in his last command, you know, would we then be | :26:53. | :26:57. | |
punishing the unborn children of families who decide to have more? - | :26:57. | :27:01. | |
- comment. It is not as if you can live comfortably on the amount that | :27:01. | :27:07. | |
you get from child benefit, but I can quite understand that working | :27:07. | :27:10. | |
families, small families who decide they cannot afford more children, | :27:10. | :27:14. | |
will resent paying more to those who go on and have seven or eight | :27:14. | :27:18. | |
children. Maybe two is not the right number of. It is like the | :27:18. | :27:24. | |
Chinese one-child policy! That... That is what it struck me as, which | :27:24. | :27:28. | |
is democratically dangers. We need to encourage people to have three | :27:28. | :27:33. | |
children so you replace the population. As long as we are at | :27:33. | :27:36. | |
two or below, we still have an ageing population. We should make | :27:36. | :27:41. | |
it clear that the policy would not apply to those with children, more | :27:41. | :27:45. | |
than two children who are currently getting child benefit, and it would | :27:45. | :27:52. | |
only apply in future. But it still does smack a bit of the Chinese | :27:52. | :27:56. | |
one-child policy. It is a fascinating topic, I'm sure we will | :27:56. | :27:59. | |
hear a lot more about that, and the government will be under pressure | :27:59. | :28:02. | |
to flesh it out and tell us if they are really going to do this. | :28:02. | :28:06. | |
That is quite enough about trivial matters like children, benefits and | :28:06. | :28:11. | |
the economy! Time to focus on the important stuff, because today is | :28:11. | :28:15. | |
the annual Westminster dog of the year awards, and I understand we | :28:15. | :28:25. | |
:28:25. | :28:29. | ||
A little later in the show, we would get the correct answer, I | :28:29. | :28:33. | |
suspect she does not have a clue what we are talking about! We are | :28:33. | :28:38. | |
going to meet the winner and his or her owner. All we can tell you is | :28:38. | :28:44. | |
that he or she is an MP... Should companies be compelled to address | :28:45. | :28:49. | |
the lack of women on their boards by new rules enforcing a quota for | :28:49. | :28:53. | |
women on company boards? 1 EU commissioner, Viviane Reding from | :28:53. | :28:59. | |
Luxembourg, has been pushing for an EU directive which would do exactly | :28:59. | :29:04. | |
that, setting a 40% Minimum for women on company boards, in other | :29:04. | :29:08. | |
words four out of 10 people on a board would have to be female. That | :29:08. | :29:11. | |
idea was rejected by the commission early in the week in Brussels, but | :29:11. | :29:19. | |
it is not dead, far from it, as our very own one woman on the board, Jo, | :29:19. | :29:24. | |
tells us, joining his live from glamorous Strasbourg. | :29:24. | :29:28. | |
Glamorous it is, missing a back in London, and you are right, this has | :29:28. | :29:32. | |
been a hugely divisive issue, not just for the European Commissioners | :29:32. | :29:36. | |
but also the member states of the European Union, but it has not | :29:36. | :29:40. | |
completely disappeared. It will be presented again next month, and | :29:40. | :29:46. | |
with me at two glamorous women to discuss the issue, a Labour British | :29:46. | :29:53. | |
MEP who was for the idea, and a Tory MEP who is against. Maria, can | :29:53. | :29:56. | |
I start with you? Do you accept there is a problem with under- | :29:56. | :30:02. | |
representation of women on company boards? Yes, of course I do, I | :30:02. | :30:05. | |
believe there is an under representation on company boards as | :30:05. | :30:09. | |
they are in many areas of women, so we should be looking to increase | :30:09. | :30:19. | |
:30:19. | :30:22. | ||
women's imports, small businesses, $:/STARTFEED. I don't want European | :30:22. | :30:27. | |
quotas. I don't think Europe should be telling member states what to do, | :30:27. | :30:31. | |
they have to do what is right for their country, for their culture, | :30:31. | :30:37. | |
for the economy. He each member state can decide what is best for | :30:37. | :30:42. | |
them. Whether it is some form of voluntary quotas, no quotas. I | :30:42. | :30:47. | |
think the best way is to increase women's on the pathway towards | :30:47. | :30:53. | |
boardrooms. That is the point. Why should Europe dictate to member- | :30:53. | :30:57. | |
states when member states are perfectly capable of introducing | :30:58. | :31:02. | |
quotas themselves? Five EU countries already have quotas. | :31:02. | :31:07. | |
the rest don't. The point about this is that we do want to see more | :31:07. | :31:12. | |
women represented on company boards and another senior positions. I | :31:12. | :31:16. | |
honestly believe the only way you're going to do this is by some | :31:16. | :31:21. | |
measure of enforcement. We can talk about more women, we can have | :31:21. | :31:27. | |
voluntary measures forever, and we still won't get there. It is only | :31:27. | :31:31. | |
when thereon mandatory quotas that this will actually happen and we | :31:31. | :31:36. | |
will have true equality and parity. Talking doesn't place women on | :31:36. | :31:41. | |
those boards. We are moving forward. Voluntary measures are taking | :31:41. | :31:46. | |
effect. It in the UK we have increased by 5%. In Europe it is | :31:46. | :31:52. | |
1.9%. We find things such as the 30% club. They said at the end of | :31:52. | :31:58. | |
2010, the percentage of women on FTSE 100 boards stood at 12.5%. | :31:58. | :32:03. | |
is moving forward. If you enforce things, if you make companies | :32:03. | :32:07. | |
change their policies, it will not be successful, you have to carry | :32:07. | :32:11. | |
the company with you. I believe most people are looking towards | :32:11. | :32:17. | |
having more women born boards. I take up for 1.9 percentage you? | :32:17. | :32:22. | |
This was an initiative of the Commissioner, who is introducing | :32:22. | :32:27. | |
this. A couple of years ago, she wrote to many companies throughout | :32:27. | :32:31. | |
the EU and ask them to take voluntary measures, to sign a | :32:31. | :32:36. | |
pledge. That 1.9 increase was the increase she got in one year as a | :32:36. | :32:41. | |
result of these voluntary measures. If we do that up to 2020, we would | :32:41. | :32:50. | |
only see a 25% increase. We want a 40% increase by 2020. Come the go | :32:50. | :32:55. | |
back to how serious she was. It was put on a website and companies were | :32:55. | :33:00. | |
asked to sign up. Companies need to be approached and have it explained | :33:00. | :33:07. | |
to them. Her method was totally wrong. There is a case of leading | :33:07. | :33:13. | |
by example. The European Council President has said female under- | :33:13. | :33:16. | |
representation is blatant and then he backs a male candidate to go on | :33:16. | :33:22. | |
the board of the European Central Bank. Was that right? I think... | :33:22. | :33:28. | |
Yes or no? Or we need to look at the ability of. Pie would like to | :33:28. | :33:31. | |
come back to this question because it comes up all the time. Women are | :33:31. | :33:36. | |
just as capable as men. We know there are women who can fill these | :33:36. | :33:44. | |
route -- roles. A number of women have been identified. Women are | :33:44. | :33:47. | |
just as good as men and we need to make sure women get into the | :33:47. | :33:51. | |
positions. We will come back to this issue, it is being presented | :33:51. | :33:59. | |
again next month. Thank you. Andrew. Come back quickly from Trust Book - | :33:59. | :34:04. | |
- Strasbourg and bring us a present! It is quite near the Blue | :34:04. | :34:13. | |
nun vineyards. And some chocolates! When you look... Let's broaden it | :34:13. | :34:19. | |
out of the FTSE 250 big companies. It is quite remarkable how few | :34:19. | :34:23. | |
women of all these boards. There's a problem, isn't there? There's | :34:23. | :34:28. | |
definitely an issue and it would be much better if we do aim to have | :34:28. | :34:33. | |
more women, or I diverse range of backgrounds of people on company | :34:33. | :34:38. | |
boards. I'm not convinced that impose'a, especially one as high as | :34:38. | :34:44. | |
40%, is the way to go. You have to find the right women, bring them on | :34:44. | :34:48. | |
board, you have to look for diversity in other areas as well, | :34:48. | :34:54. | |
not just gender. I agree that we shouldn't have Europe dictating to | :34:54. | :34:58. | |
ask how many women we should have on particular boards. Yes, | :34:59. | :35:02. | |
encouraging, in sent advising, facilitating more women to | :35:03. | :35:05. | |
participate at the top of business would be great. Her they've been | :35:05. | :35:10. | |
doing that and it has not make much difference. I understand what | :35:10. | :35:14. | |
you're saying about being against the quota, but without something | :35:14. | :35:19. | |
that breaks the log jam, you will not get the step-change that many | :35:19. | :35:24. | |
people feel is required. If you want it next year, a quota is the | :35:24. | :35:28. | |
only way. If you've got time to wait, and I'm not sure what the | :35:28. | :35:32. | |
desperate rush is, I believe it will happen, I'm quite sure it will | :35:32. | :35:37. | |
happen. But you can't say exactly when, exactly how long it will take | :35:37. | :35:42. | |
and exactly what level we will reach. We will come To bat back to | :35:42. | :35:45. | |
this, I'm sure. Now, the Government's reform of | :35:45. | :35:47. | |
public sector pensions takes another step forward next week with | :35:47. | :35:50. | |
the Public Service Pension Bill's second reading in Parliament. The | :35:50. | :35:53. | |
controversial plan, which led to major strike action last year, will | :35:53. | :35:55. | |
see public sector workers paying more into their pensions and | :35:55. | :35:59. | |
working for longer. They'll also switch from the so called "gold- | :35:59. | :36:04. | |
plated" final salary schemes to ones based on career average. But | :36:04. | :36:09. | |
just how "gold-plated" have public sector pensions been? We sent | :36:09. | :36:19. | |
:36:19. | :36:25. | ||
Susana Mendonsa to London's Gold-plated pensions, it is a | :36:25. | :36:29. | |
phrase that pops up time and again when the Government explains why is | :36:29. | :36:32. | |
changing public sector pensions, but is the private sectors offering | :36:32. | :36:36. | |
just plain silver by comparison? A trades union that represents | :36:36. | :36:41. | |
workers in both sectors says not. Her gold plenty pension is when a | :36:41. | :36:47. | |
chief executive gets six figures paid into their part. If you want | :36:47. | :36:50. | |
it in the private sector, maybe MPs' pensions qualify, but you have | :36:50. | :36:56. | |
to look at how much public service pensioners live on. If anyone | :36:56. | :37:01. | |
thinks if �6,000 per annum is gold- plated, well, I don't think anyone | :37:01. | :37:06. | |
would believe that. You can get a good look at what real life gold | :37:06. | :37:12. | |
plating is like here at this workshop. A bit of silver in the | :37:12. | :37:15. | |
liquid and you end up with the pricier looking bit of metal | :37:15. | :37:21. | |
without much gold on it. But just how much gold is there in a public | :37:21. | :37:24. | |
sector pension? Lord Hutton's report last year described the | :37:24. | :37:29. | |
average as being a modest �7,800 a year, but the National Association | :37:29. | :37:33. | |
of Pension funds says an equivalent pension in the private sector would | :37:33. | :37:38. | |
be about �330 less. But most of the private sector workers who pay into | :37:38. | :37:45. | |
a pension tend to be on a less glossy option. So-called defined | :37:45. | :37:48. | |
contribution schemes which invest the money you and your employer | :37:48. | :37:53. | |
paid in. They are usually worth less than the final salary schemes | :37:53. | :37:55. | |
many public sector workers have enjoyed, which are based on | :37:55. | :37:59. | |
earnings at the end of your career. The average pension pot within a | :37:59. | :38:05. | |
defined contribution scheme is something like �25,000. That would | :38:05. | :38:09. | |
give you an annual income of around �1,250. There's a big difference | :38:09. | :38:13. | |
there. Prospect says that is because private sector companies | :38:13. | :38:17. | |
have been chipping away at salary linked pension schemes. If there's | :38:17. | :38:21. | |
a difference, and there's a difference between pension | :38:21. | :38:24. | |
provision in the private sector and public sector in this country, it | :38:25. | :38:28. | |
because pension provision in the private sector has fallen behind | :38:28. | :38:34. | |
far too much and we don't want to race to the bottom. But the body | :38:34. | :38:37. | |
that speaks for workplace pensions says that that was done for good | :38:38. | :38:43. | |
reason. 10 years ago, 88% of pension schemes, defined benefit | :38:43. | :38:48. | |
pension schemes, would be open to new members. If people started with | :38:48. | :38:52. | |
a new employer, they would be in a defined pension scheme. Today that | :38:52. | :38:57. | |
figure is around 19%. You've seen a massive shift away from defined | :38:57. | :39:01. | |
pension provision. It is just unaffordable for the employer to | :39:02. | :39:07. | |
provide those pensions. Now public sector pensions are being dipped in | :39:07. | :39:11. | |
the same pool. The Treasury says the public service pensions bill | :39:11. | :39:17. | |
will save �65 billion over the next 50 years. But that is gold plated - | :39:17. | :39:21. | |
- that gold-plated tag remains disputed. | :39:21. | :39:23. | |
And Gail Cartmail, assistant general secretary of Unite, joins | :39:23. | :39:33. | |
me. Let me come to you first. Is it fair to describe public sector | :39:33. | :39:39. | |
pensions as gold-plated? I must admit, I do think they are very | :39:39. | :39:42. | |
generous, they are much more generous than those available to | :39:42. | :39:47. | |
the private sector. I wouldn't call them solid gold, but I think they | :39:47. | :39:51. | |
are hugely valuable. They are fully inflation-linked, they are | :39:51. | :39:59. | |
guaranteed by the taxpayer. And they are worth a significant sum. | :39:59. | :40:02. | |
Public sector workers, of course they deserve good pensions, but | :40:02. | :40:06. | |
they are getting good pensions. I hope they will appreciate them. | :40:06. | :40:10. | |
What do you say to that? John Hutton was asked to look at public | :40:10. | :40:17. | |
sector pensions in detail. He rebutted the allegation and that | :40:17. | :40:20. | |
they are gold-plated. He was very quick off the mark to say they are | :40:20. | :40:28. | |
not. Clive said you in the past, many women in the NHS retire on a | :40:28. | :40:31. | |
pension of �2,000 a year and less. An average pension for local | :40:32. | :40:36. | |
government workers of �4,000 a year. Her have they been working full- | :40:36. | :40:40. | |
time for a long time? Many people have many years of service, but | :40:40. | :40:45. | |
penchant is a portion of salary, often. And salaries are low. | :40:45. | :40:51. | |
still people contribute. Pensions is deferred pay. The pension scheme | :40:51. | :40:57. | |
member is contributing from their salary towards their pension pot. | :40:57. | :41:02. | |
We sometimes get plied signed it, there are so massive pensions in | :41:02. | :41:09. | |
the public sector. -- blind-side it. But there are plenty of public | :41:09. | :41:13. | |
sector workers who don't have big pensions, they are quite small. | :41:13. | :41:18. | |
They will need the state pension on top of their own occupational | :41:18. | :41:23. | |
pension to survive when they retire. There are two very big issues. | :41:24. | :41:28. | |
Whenever one talks about public sector pensions, you either get | :41:28. | :41:32. | |
enormous criticism from public sector workers saying don't attack | :41:32. | :41:36. | |
our pensions or enormous criticism from taxpayers saying we are paying | :41:36. | :41:41. | |
the port -- fortune for these pensions. If you talk about the | :41:41. | :41:44. | |
value of these pensions, if you went into the marketplace and by | :41:44. | :41:49. | |
one, you can't because it is government guaranteed, a �7,000 a | :41:49. | :41:56. | |
year pension is worth about �300,000. �300,000 is beyond the | :41:56. | :42:02. | |
wildest dreams of most private sector workers. They are getting | :42:02. | :42:05. | |
good pensions, they are worth a lot of money. The problem is because it | :42:05. | :42:12. | |
doesn't sound like much each year, it is not valued properly. What is | :42:12. | :42:16. | |
happening in the private sector is that individuals are having to take | :42:16. | :42:21. | |
responsibility for their own retirement whereas we are still | :42:21. | :42:24. | |
guaranteeing pensions for the public sector workers and quite | :42:24. | :42:27. | |
right, if they've served their country loyally, they deserve a | :42:27. | :42:31. | |
good pension, but there's a disconnect between what a penchant | :42:31. | :42:34. | |
actually will cost taxpayers and the value that the workers | :42:34. | :42:38. | |
themselves are placing on it. you made any progress with the | :42:38. | :42:43. | |
Government on trying to get it to a million -- median rate? One of the | :42:43. | :42:47. | |
concerns we have about the belt that is going to be put before | :42:47. | :42:53. | |
Parliament very soon is the lack of detail. A huge amount is reliable | :42:53. | :42:59. | |
regulation. I am worried about the role of Treasury being absolutely | :42:59. | :43:04. | |
in control, irrespective of what the schemes look like in any point | :43:04. | :43:10. | |
in time. We are worried about the automatic link between the state | :43:10. | :43:14. | |
pension retirement age, or the state retirement age, and the | :43:14. | :43:20. | |
scheme retirement age. We are going to have a lot of public sector | :43:20. | :43:25. | |
workers who do jobs such as ambulance paramedics on the | :43:25. | :43:28. | |
Government's own formula working until 70, potentially. We are | :43:28. | :43:33. | |
worried about those links, automatic links. What kind of | :43:33. | :43:36. | |
pension are you one? For I've got bits of pension from lots of | :43:36. | :43:41. | |
different places. If you've always been on the move. A That's right. | :43:41. | :43:46. | |
Unions give good pensions to their employees. Yes. Subject to | :43:47. | :43:51. | |
financial scrutiny by our elected executives. We are undergoing | :43:51. | :43:55. | |
reform in my own union. You have a good pension? Yes, thank you. | :43:55. | :44:02. | |
friends you very much! By -- thank you very much. | :44:02. | :44:05. | |
You're watching the Daily Politics, and we've been joined by viewers in | :44:05. | :44:07. | |
Scotland who have been watching First Minister's Questions from | :44:07. | :44:11. | |
Holyrood. But why should they be the only ones who get to see Alex | :44:11. | :44:19. | |
Salmond being put on the spot by MSPs? He has since sought any | :44:19. | :44:22. | |
advice on whether an independent Scotland would have to apply for | :44:22. | :44:26. | |
membership of the EU, he had said to the Sunday politics in March | :44:26. | :44:30. | |
that he had sought that legal advice. Here's a flavour of this | :44:30. | :44:38. | |
I would like to ask the First Minister a familiar question about | :44:38. | :44:43. | |
whether a separate Scotland would be a member of the EU. It is a | :44:43. | :44:46. | |
question Andrew Neil are stimp on March fourth. Have you sought | :44:46. | :44:50. | |
advice from your own Scottish law officers in this matter? Starting | :44:50. | :44:56. | |
his answer with the words, we have, yes, could do First Minister get to | :44:56. | :45:06. | |
:45:06. | :45:11. | ||
know we haven't been 27 words? The 27 words that she refers to are | :45:11. | :45:19. | |
the words which were taken out of the Labour Party press release. So | :45:19. | :45:23. | |
I do not think it is a great argument to attack the probity of | :45:23. | :45:27. | |
government when you then remove 27 words from the press release, not | :45:27. | :45:35. | |
the most ingenious tactic, or even from the Labour Party. And yes, an | :45:35. | :45:38. | |
independent Scotland will be a member of the European Union. | :45:38. | :45:48. | |
Pretty lively stuff at there in Holyrood, and we are joined by | :45:48. | :45:51. | |
Scotland political editor Brian Taylor, who was watching all of | :45:51. | :46:01. | |
:46:01. | :46:01. | ||
First Minister's Questions, he will mark our car. -- Card. It was a | :46:02. | :46:06. | |
real muddle, that is all your fault, Andrew. The wicked media generally | :46:07. | :46:12. | |
get a kicking,, it is all your fault for asking that question and | :46:12. | :46:17. | |
not picking up what Mr Salmond was saying. The argument he is making, | :46:17. | :46:23. | |
to be serious for a moment, is that all the statements by governments | :46:23. | :46:26. | |
contain a generic underpinning our legal advice. In other words, if | :46:26. | :46:30. | |
there is something dodgy, law officers will point it out, the | :46:30. | :46:34. | |
negative approach. You cannot say that, that goes against the law. | :46:34. | :46:38. | |
What is now being sought, definitely being sought by the | :46:38. | :46:43. | |
Scottish government, is specific advice on the issue of EU accession | :46:43. | :46:46. | |
post-independence. Mr Salmon says that when he was being interviewed | :46:46. | :46:50. | |
by you about the issue of legal advice, he was talking about that | :46:50. | :46:54. | |
generic stuff, referring to previous documents and debate and | :46:54. | :46:58. | |
statements by ministers. Now it is very specific legal advice that is | :46:58. | :47:02. | |
being sought. His opponents were not impressed by that argument and | :47:02. | :47:08. | |
said he could not be trusted. Ruth Davidson, the Conservative leader, | :47:08. | :47:11. | |
compared him to Del Boy from Only Fools and horses, to Bill Clinton, | :47:11. | :47:17. | |
and finally to Richard Nixon! Things going well, then, I see! I | :47:17. | :47:22. | |
think what puzzles many people who have been following this, and it | :47:22. | :47:26. | |
still puzzles me, there is that whatever the First Minister was | :47:26. | :47:35. | |
referring to when he answered my question, if there was no legal | :47:35. | :47:40. | |
advice, why did they then fight the information can listeners -- | :47:40. | :47:43. | |
commissioners to stop that advice been published if it was a blank | :47:43. | :47:50. | |
sheet of paper? He points out that the code of practice for ministers, | :47:50. | :47:54. | |
and he has invited an independent panel on the code of advice to | :47:54. | :47:58. | |
check whether he has breached it or check generally at this episode has | :47:58. | :48:02. | |
been handled, but he points out that the code of practice for | :48:02. | :48:04. | |
ministers' covers not only that they should not publish legal | :48:04. | :48:07. | |
advice, but they should not disclose whether that advice exists | :48:07. | :48:11. | |
or not. He gave the example of Dominic Grieve saying pretty well | :48:11. | :48:16. | |
exactly the same thing in response to a question about his point. Alex | :48:17. | :48:21. | |
Salmond's argument was that he was defending the principle of non | :48:21. | :48:26. | |
publication. The way around that is to seek the permission of the law | :48:26. | :48:29. | |
officers to publish the fact that it exists or does not exist. Nicola | :48:29. | :48:33. | |
Sturgeon has now done that, and therefore the legal advice does not | :48:34. | :48:39. | |
exist at present, but is now seeking specific legal advice. Was | :48:39. | :48:42. | |
he publish that outcome? She will not, they say they are still bound | :48:42. | :48:46. | |
by the code. She referred to the fact that there was a court appeal | :48:46. | :48:50. | |
going that if they have lost that court case, it would have set a | :48:50. | :48:54. | |
precedent for other occasions of the Information Commissioner in | :48:54. | :48:57. | |
Scotland ordering the government to publish information about | :48:57. | :49:00. | |
government advice. I think they thought they would lose and | :49:00. | :49:05. | |
therefore backed down. You can ask the questions from now on! Thank | :49:05. | :49:10. | |
you for being with us. Cheers. has been 11 years since the start | :49:10. | :49:12. | |
of the war in Afghanistan, and in two years' time British troops will | :49:12. | :49:19. | |
be gone. The number of lives last has been significant, as we are | :49:19. | :49:22. | |
reminded today with the loss of two more British soldiers in Helmand | :49:22. | :49:27. | |
province. The life for civilians, particularly female ones, remains | :49:27. | :49:30. | |
dangerous. Today the International Development Select Committee has | :49:30. | :49:33. | |
published a report which doubts whether the country will ever | :49:33. | :49:37. | |
become a viable state and questions how effective our aid to the | :49:37. | :49:42. | |
country has been. The chairman of that committee joins me now. | :49:42. | :49:45. | |
Welcome to the Daily Politics. Many people might think that what your | :49:45. | :49:51. | |
committee has concluded his kind of what they felt in their gut, that | :49:51. | :49:55. | |
it was 11 years and we have not got that far. Well, I hope it is not | :49:55. | :49:58. | |
quite that. I think what we are saying is that we have spent an | :49:58. | :50:05. | |
awful lot of money and a huge number of lives, 435 British lives, | :50:05. | :50:08. | |
many more Afghan and our allies, and we have not created a viable | :50:08. | :50:13. | |
state, and the suggestion that we will leave on behind in 2014 is not | :50:13. | :50:18. | |
recognised by anybody. But we have, on the other hand, at a lower level, | :50:18. | :50:21. | |
delivered really significant progress for people in Afghanistan, | :50:21. | :50:24. | |
particularly women, and were anxious to say that we cannot walk | :50:24. | :50:29. | |
away at the end of 2014 and abandoned those women and indeed | :50:29. | :50:34. | |
the people of Afghanistan in the future. We have got to target what | :50:34. | :50:37. | |
we do so that it is more practical in what it can secure afterwards. | :50:37. | :50:43. | |
We have to be realistic about what we can achieve. Isn't there a great | :50:43. | :50:46. | |
danger that when the Americans are getting out in 2014, a weakened | :50:46. | :50:50. | |
state without the Americans, we are all getting out, some people who | :50:50. | :50:55. | |
know a lot more about Afghanistan than I do say, I don't know how | :50:55. | :50:58. | |
long to give the Hamid Karzai government in Carole once we have | :50:58. | :51:05. | |
gone, a week, a month? -- Kabul. It will be swept away, it will be like | :51:05. | :51:09. | |
Saigon in 1975. We are not the defence committee, but Hamid Karzai | :51:09. | :51:14. | |
is not standing again, he has said he will not, so it will be a new | :51:14. | :51:19. | |
government. You know what I mean. It is unpredictable. The government | :51:20. | :51:26. | |
will not be swept away and the Taliban coming back, arm raised the | :51:26. | :51:31. | |
-- almost nobody believes that. really? Security will be patchy, | :51:31. | :51:36. | |
good in some areas, in other areas gains will be harder. We have got | :51:36. | :51:39. | |
to accept that. We have already said as a government and a country | :51:39. | :51:44. | |
that we are committed to supporting post conflict, fragile states, | :51:44. | :51:47. | |
where it is hardest to deliver, where poverty is worst, and the | :51:47. | :51:51. | |
danger of slipping back into the worst poverty is most acute. We | :51:51. | :51:54. | |
have got not bad at it in places like Yemen and Somalia, because | :51:54. | :51:58. | |
although it is terrible, we have achieved some progress, and it | :51:58. | :52:01. | |
would be wrong to assume we have delivered nothing, not just as much | :52:01. | :52:06. | |
as we might have hoped. There is now talk about the number of women | :52:06. | :52:10. | |
going to schools, the number of young girls and so on. Isn't there | :52:10. | :52:15. | |
a danger that will be swept away once we have gone? There is a | :52:15. | :52:19. | |
danger, absolutely, and if we leave nothing behind... We know what | :52:19. | :52:24. | |
happens there brave little girl in Pakistan. Not only that, we have | :52:24. | :52:28. | |
our situations where schools have been closed in Afghanistan, where | :52:28. | :52:32. | |
teachers have been executed in front of the children, girls | :52:32. | :52:36. | |
machine-gunned on their way to school. But in other parts of | :52:36. | :52:39. | |
Afghanistan, 2.2 million are going to school, and in one province | :52:39. | :52:43. | |
girls are going to university in for increasing numbers. It is not | :52:43. | :52:47. | |
unified, it is a very disparate country. Real progress has been | :52:47. | :52:50. | |
made, and I think we have to walk beside those people we have helped | :52:50. | :52:54. | |
and tried to make sure we secured those games and take them forward. | :52:54. | :52:58. | |
That is what we are trying to focus people's attention on. You might | :52:58. | :53:02. | |
not build a viable state, but that is no excuse for letting it fall | :53:02. | :53:06. | |
apart. Was it worth the price of all the blood and treasure we have | :53:06. | :53:11. | |
lost? Had we known how difficult it would have been, I'm sure we would | :53:11. | :53:15. | |
not have done it in this way, although that some of us might say | :53:15. | :53:18. | |
if we had not been diverted to another war, we might have had more | :53:18. | :53:22. | |
success. The invasion of Iraq. is a personal view, not the | :53:22. | :53:26. | |
committee. We lost a lot of momentum at the beginning, and we | :53:26. | :53:30. | |
might have built a viable state earlier. But we're have made | :53:30. | :53:34. | |
serious gains. The majority of people in Afghanistan do not want | :53:34. | :53:36. | |
the Taliban back, and we have an obligation to work with them as | :53:36. | :53:39. | |
long as they need help. Thank you for coming in to discuss your | :53:39. | :53:44. | |
report. Now, the time for waiting is almost over, the smoke has risen | :53:44. | :53:49. | |
from the parliamentary chimney, and we have a winner of this year's | :53:49. | :53:52. | |
Westminster dog of the year! We bring you all the big prizes. We | :53:52. | :54:02. | |
:54:02. | :54:03. | ||
asked earlier which of these had I have to ask you what the correct | :54:03. | :54:09. | |
answer is, I have no idea how you would know. I have not got a clue! | :54:09. | :54:14. | |
You said I was gutted telly, I assumed somebody would let me know! | :54:14. | :54:19. | |
-- I was going to tell you. How am I going to tell you? I know you | :54:19. | :54:23. | |
want to hear more of this story, because this prize is an honour for | :54:23. | :54:28. | |
the dog at least, not so much for the owner. It is worth remembering | :54:28. | :54:33. | |
that Andrew Mitchell won the first prize back in 2009! Three years on, | :54:33. | :54:38. | |
he is the one in the doghouse! Any moment, we will meet this year's | :54:38. | :54:48. | |
:54:48. | :54:48. | ||
Apology for the loss of subtitles for 51 seconds | :54:48. | :55:39. | |
winner, but first a flavour of In a world exclusive, Charley Hull | :55:40. | :55:44. | |
Thake and his dog Star joins us now, the winners. -- Charlie Elphicke. | :55:44. | :55:49. | |
What are their special qualities? She is an extremely friendly, | :55:49. | :55:54. | |
outgoing kind of dog who one at the judges' hearts. Was the competition | :55:54. | :55:59. | |
tough? More entrance than I can recall, about 20 people and dead. | :55:59. | :56:03. | |
Did she get on well with the others? Was there any bitchiness | :56:03. | :56:10. | |
among the contestants? The Deputy Speaker of the house has a huge dog | :56:10. | :56:18. | |
that is one year old, and she tried to eat Star, but they ended up as | :56:18. | :56:28. | |
friends. She is looking hungry there. What price is there? | :56:28. | :56:34. | |
gets a plaque, a nice little plaque and some treats. You are allowed to | :56:34. | :56:39. | |
take a dog into the Houses of Parliament? Normally, not really, | :56:39. | :56:43. | |
it is discouraged and not preferred, because I think they worry that | :56:43. | :56:48. | |
they will start moving things around the place. Little note to | :56:48. | :56:53. | |
the Speaker, please call me! So they cannot keep you company in a | :56:53. | :56:57. | |
long sitting, sitting under the desk there, man's best friend. | :56:57. | :57:02. | |
Sadly not, she keeps the kids company at home. The earth does | :57:02. | :57:12. | |
:57:12. | :57:14. | ||
graft Becker Next? -- Dowes crafts beckon next? One thing at a time! | :57:14. | :57:19. | |
would love to have a dog again, I had a golden labrador, she was | :57:19. | :57:24. | |
gorgeous. I have got four dogs. I have got a labrador and three | :57:24. | :57:30. | |
golden retrievers. Fabulous. I should have put them in. Star is | :57:30. | :57:38. | |
wonderful, look at these guys. What now happens to Star with this new | :57:38. | :57:42. | |
found fame? She has been on the Daily Politics, the sky is the | :57:42. | :57:46. | |
limit now. I think today is particularly good, though, because | :57:46. | :57:51. | |
it is a reminder, a non serious reminder that we are a nation of | :57:51. | :57:54. | |
dog-lovers and animal welfare really matters. You must hope you | :57:54. | :57:57. | |
do not end up in the duck house like Andrew Mitchell three years | :57:57. | :58:02. | |
later. Who knows what the future will hold?! I enjoyed our interview, | :58:02. | :58:07. | |
I wish you all the best, Star. One of the most intelligent interviews | :58:07. | :58:12. | |
I have had on this programme! Time to give you the answer to our ESTA | :58:12. | :58:17. | |
competition from yesterday. I overran, you did not get it, the | :58:17. | :58:20. | |
answer was 1995, you take your life in your hands and press the red | :58:20. | :58:28. | |
button. Do it now! We can find out who the winner is, Linda Ratcliffe | :58:28. | :58:33. | |
from County Durham, the Daily Politics mug is yours. Right, | :58:33. | :58:38. | |
thanks to everyone, special thanks, the One O'Clock News is starting | :58:39. | :58:43. | |
over on BBC One now. I am back tonight for this week, John | :58:43. | :58:48. | |
Sergeant will be looking at the BBC's troubles, Alan Johnson, | :58:48. | :58:52. |