23/04/2013 Daily Politics

Politics. It has not quite been the Battle of Bannockburn, the the SNP

and Treasury spent this morning at war over the pound. George Osborne

warned the Scottish Nationalists they would have to give up control

of key elements of the economy to keep using the pound, should they

gain independence. The SNP accused him of scaremongering.

It is St George's Day, we will be looking at the English Democrats'

local election campaign. She did not want to read it or know

what people said about her. The authorised biography of Margaret

Thatcher is published today. We will be speaking to its author, Charles

Moore. Who says there is no important

Parliamentary business going on? One MP wants a debate on the timing of

the FA Cup Final! All that in the next hour. With this

for the duration is Foreign Office Minister Baroness Warsi. Welcome to

the programme. Let's talk about terror. Following

the bombing in Boston last week, the Canadian authorities say they have

foiled an Al-Qaeda supported terrorist attacks. In Madrid, the

Spanish authorities say they have arrested two suspected members of

Al-Qaeda who they claim have a similar profile to these suspects in

the recent attacks in Boston. Our extra precautions being taken here?

We are on a constant state of alert. We have a substantial threat. It is

something we are constantly aware of. When situations around the

world, such as Boston and Canada, happened, we become more aware of

the threat and the necessary precautions are taken. On the basis

of what you have said, that we are on constant alert, should be

security services funding be cut further? I will not debate what may

be the outcome of budgetary negotiations in the years to come...

Would it be safe in the current state we are in? The security of our

citizens will never be put at risk, whatever the economic climate. The

security services direct tremendous job. We hear about the occasions,

sadly, when things go wrong, but they are keeping us safe. I know

from David Cameron all the way through the government, they will

always make sure they are properly supported. That sounds like there

will not be cuts. I will not in gauge in a discussion that might

take part between colleagues and the Chancellor, but we will never put

the security of citizens here or abroad at risk because of austerity.

Do you think it is irresponsible of MI5 and MI6 to warn, as has been

reported in the papers, that Great Britain would be vulnerable to a

terrorist attack if security funding is cut? This is an ongoing thing

which has happened for a number of weeks. Quite sadly, I think, it has

been played out in the media. Different departments have to have

these discussions with the Treasury at the relevant time is when these

decisions are taken about budgets. I am sorry if that sounds like I am

repeating myself, the reality is that both abroad and at home, the

security services play an incredibly crucial and vital role which is

hugely supported. Many public statements have been made by the

Prime Minister, the Home Secretary, the Foreign Secretary, as to the

value we place on their work. They will always be properly supported.

You have Jewish diction, if you like, for affairs in Afghanistan --

you have jurisdiction. Is around ready to take over responsibility?

think so. I was in Helmand a few months ago and saw for myself how

local policing was done by the local forces. More and more of the country

is protected by Afghan National Security forces. We are still there

in a training and support capacity. There lots of training -- there are

lots of issues around the world. But up and down the country, you can see

they are taking over the security of their country.

Now it is time for our daily quiz. What entertainment is provided for

members of the House of Lords when they have to stay for late-night

votes? Is it burlesque dance classes, film screenings, open my

comedy nights or stitch and bitch clubs? At the end of the show,

hopefully side will give us the right answer.

In 1707, Scotland and England merged their currencies. Will 2014 be the

year it comes to an end? The UK Chancellor of the Exchequer warned

this morning that it was unlikely that Scotland's 5 million citizens

could keep the pound if they voted for independence. Speaking to

Glasgow business leaders this morning, George Osborne said that

Glasgow would face an uncertain financial future, with England,

Wales and Northern Ireland are likely to want a currency zone with

their newly divorced neighbours. He said it could -- one MP said a

currency zone could work in the interests of all involved, but this

is what George Osborne said. would 58 million citizens give away

some of their sovereignty over monetary and potentially other

economic policies to 5 million people in another state? Before the

rest of the UK could ever agree to enter a formal currency union, any

further you -- any further UK Chancellor of the Exchequer would

have to provide a British people with a clear and compelling and said

to the question of sovereignty. The SNP asserts that it would be in

everyone's interest for an independent Scotland to keep the

pound is part of a eurozone style sterling's own. But a report we are

publishing today shows that is not the case. Let's stop speculating and

look at the evidence. Would the rest of the UK family agreed to take that

risk? Could a situation where an independent Scotland and the rest of

the UK share the pound and the Bank of England be made to work?

Frankly, it is unlikely. There is real -- real doubt about the and to

these questions. In other words, the only way to be sure to keep the

pound as the Scottish currency is to stay in the United Kingdom.

We are now joined by the SNP Treasury spokesman at Westminster,

Stewart Hosie, and the former Labour Chancellor Alistair Darling, who is

in Edinburgh and is leading the BETTER together -- Better Together

campaign. Was Scotland forced out of sterling,

the additional business costs for businesses in Northern Ireland,

Wales and England would be substantial. There is no need.

Scotland brings a great deal to the currency table, there is a �40

billion contribution in balancing trade terms with gas and oil. It

would not make sense for George Osborne or Alistair Darling to run

around England explaining why they wanted to shred the currency to make

a political point? If you like the pound so much, why are you going for

independence? The union is about more than currency, it is tax and

spending decisions which every UK Chancellor takes on the behalf of

Scotland. We think the big tax and spending decisions should be taken

in Scotland on behalf of Scottish people to meet the needs of the

Scottish people, while sharing a currency which make sense for

everybody. Alistair Darling, can a currency union be made to work?

things have to happen, you have to get the agreement of the other

country to join it, that is not guaranteed, as we see. Secondly, you

have to submit to something of a straitjacket, as we see in the

Eurozone, where both parties agree on budget, tax, spending and so on.

Thinking about it, the pound is the bedrock of our economy, it is a

thing about jobs and pensions depend upon. What is becoming clear today

is that despite the fact that the nationals have asserted there will

be a currency union, they have not spoken to anyone else, they cannot

guarantee it and they cannot guarantee the pound. That is the

case if there is no currency union or you can't agreed the terms and

conditions, you are driven back to one of two options, you either use

the currency in the same way that Panama uses the US dollar, which

would be ruinous for the Scottish financial services industry because

you would have no central bank, or you are driven to issuing your own

separate new Scottish currency in the most turbulent times we have

ever seen, something I noticed that the Scottish finance minister, John

Swinney, conspicuously failed to rule out twice this morning when

asked about it. Nationalist policy is being made up on the hoof, rather

like the European Union money said it was automatic, it is not true,

they said we could rejoin NATO automatically, that is not true,

they can't guarantee currency union. As we have heard from George

Osborne, the rest of the UK does not sound like it wants it. I am sure

that George Osborne and Alistair Darling will say these things to

make it sound dreadfully difficult until we get to the referendum. At

that point, if there is a yes vote calm minds will come together.

Alistair Darling has described this as logical and desirable. He also

said that currency is the bedrock, it is the bedrock of trade, which is

why we want to keep it. We do not understand why Alistair would not

want to be in that. You wanted to join the euro at some stage, now you

don't, understandably, because it is in crisis, why do you want a new

monetary union between Scotland and England and, if you like, replicate

what has happened with the Eurozone and expect the UK to take on the

risk without close political union? I have explained why it is in

everyone's best interest. The idea that you have to have political

union to have a currency union is not true. With Belgium and

Luxembourg, it did not lead to political union, nor did it lead to

tax harmonisation. Are you prepared to accept the constraints that would

be put on new if you were part of the currency? Are you prepared to

have your budget look that at Westminster before Holyrood?

recognise that for a currency pact. But the stability pact would apply

to both parts of the union, not just Scotland. There would have to be

constraints to make sure that nothing got out of hand. Alistair

Darling, it is clear the government tactic is to make this as difficult

as possible because they don't want it, that is understandable. Can they

stop it? Can the government say no? Two of course you can, for a

currency union to work, both sides have to be willing partners. Stewart

Hosie hit on the problem, both sides would have to agree that they moved

to a situation where their budgets were approved by a foreign country,

which is what they would be at the time. It is no wonder that the rest

of the UK might say, we never voted for this, nobody asked us about it.

Stewart Hosie says this is something that has been raised in the course

of the campaign, he is asking us to take a massive gamble in believing

that, firstly, there will be a currency union and, secondly, the

terms and conditions would be acceptable to Scotland or the rest

of the UK. You can't guarantee that. I believe that the pound is

important for trade, I believe that the UK as a whole has done well and

will continue to do well. That is so long as we stay part of the mighty

kingdom, we are better and stronger together. If you choose to leave the

UK there are consequences, the Nationalists are trying to hide that

from people in Scotland and the rest of the UK because they cannot

guarantee. Alistair Darling, if the SNP, as Stewart Hosie has said, get

a clear mandate for independence, is it democratically viable for

Westminster to say we are not even going to discuss the idea of a

currency union? If Scotland votes for independence and it has a

democratic right to do so if that is what the majority choose, we are

voting to leave the rest of the UK. After that, we decide what we are

going to do. We can ask for a currency union but maybe the other

side to not want to play, or the terms and conditions might be such

that you have such budgetary restrictions that you do not have

independence at all. A currency union takes you to an economic and

then a political union. Or if the currency unit does not work -- the

currency union does not work or you do not like it, you are either left

with using sterling, and heaven help the financial services industry in

Scotland if they had no central bank, or you set out on an uncharted

course with your own currency. This is Scotland's decision, I am

Scottish, sitting in the capital of Scotland, I do not want to see my

country gambled with. I want to ensure the best possible option for

my country, which is why I think we are better and stronger together.

What is your Plan B in the event of no currency union, added sounds

increasingly like that will not happen? I disagree.What is your

Plan B? There will be a lot of hysterical stuff said by the no

campaign in the run up to September. You keep a currency union which

works, you keep it to reduce columns -- transaction cost is, you do not

shred the currency by taking �40 billion just to make a political

point in the run-up to the referendum. Alastair is wrong. Of

course they will be strident and assertive, of course they will say

it is dreadfully difficult. What about economic question the

financial markets are not just going to take on trust the

creditworthiness of an independent Scotland? They will not just say,

you are right, we trust you, it will be fine. When you go into a currency

union, Alistair Darling is talking about that risk to the British

economy as it stands. I think it would be far better to have a

sensible discussion about the markets, about guilt assurance in

Scotland. It is right that the credit aid gin seas may say that

Scotland has no history of those issues, but given the Scottish

economy is in a better position than the UK, with a lower deficit, lower

net debt, better in employment and higher growth, the underlying

economic's means that there is no certainty at all that Scotland would

have higher borrowing costs, which is the scare story the no campaign

I'm in favour of what we have at the moment where we have the United

Kingdom, where we have the two economies working well together.

The question before us and before people in Scotland is whether or

not you want to break that up. What the Nationalists are asking us to

do is to vote to separate, leave the UK, but by the way, we want to

get back into an arrangement with the currency. It's similar -- it

won't wash. You're right to ask Stewart Hosie and the Nationalists

what is plan B, because if you can't get the currency union or the

terms are unacceptable because they're putting controls over your

budgets and so on, as we see in the eurozone, what is your plan B? Are

we going have a new currency? That is going into uncharted water. Most

people in Scotland would want nothing to do with. It the pound

matters to us, for our jobs and our savings, pension tooz. Which is why

we want to keep it. Why do you want to leave the UK in the first place?

The union is about more than just currency. It's about George Osborne

with an austerity budget, with a trillion pound deficit, with the

deficit approaching 100% of GDP and with decisions like the bedroom tax

being taken not in the interests of Scottish people. It's about all the

other tax and spend decisions not just the currency. As both of us

know, we are not voting for the next Government for the next five

years. You are voting for something that could last for 300 years.

You're asking us to take a gamble. You know, the SNP is the party that

told us they had a legal opinion that said we'd automatically get

into the European Union. It turned out to be complete nonsense. Now

they're trying to bluster their way through an argument that is central

to the credibility and it's been blown apart. Thank you very much.

You have the final word on this. What do you say to Stewart Hosie?

What I say is that it was important to raise the issue of the debate on

independence, but now is when the real debate starts, the reasonable,

practical, pragmatic approach to what that means in reality. What

Alistair Darling has said is correct. Can you raise the

overarching issue of we want independence, but it will boil down

to the real practical measures and how it will impact upon Scotland.

Unfortunately, the answers are not clear from the SNP as to what that

will mean for the Scottish people. Thank you very much.

The local elections are over a week away and what with it being St

George's Day and all that we thought, who better to nail their

patriotic colours to the mast than the English Democrats. The party

was unveiled in 2002, after Robin Tilbrook's English National Party

merged with other paertsz. Their policy for a creation of a devolves

English Parliament. It's not clear how many members the party has.

Robin Tilbrook claims it's around 3,000. In the May elections they

are fielding 39 candidates with 23 of them standing in Kent. They're

putting up three district councillors. Their biggest achieve

to date is when Peter Davies won Doncaster in 2009. He resigned from

the party in February concerned with the number of people joining

from the British National Party. The leader of the English Democrats,

Robin Tilbrook is with us. Welcome to the programme. Davies zaif

Davies the mayor of Doncaster resigned from the party concerned

about the number of former BNP members joining the party. Was he

right? No, the number of the people joining from the BNP is fairly

small. It happened a year or so ago. It was old news any way. Peter, on

the other hand, is somebody who is now an ex-sul porter of six parties

and he is one of those people that is quite difficult to work with. He

glorifies in the title of being the maverick mayor. You're pleased he's

gone? We think we have a better candidate standing. We are getting

a very good response from people in Doncaster. I'm hopeful we will win

again. Do you stand by your comments thaw made at the 10th

annual conference in Leicester in September 2011, the BNP supporters

are joining us. They will help us become a credible party. We need

not be too defensive. I think that's right. You just said there

weren't that many BNP joining the party, are there? What numbers are

we talking about? Out of about 3,000 members that we've got,

probably about 200 or 300 who are ex-BNP. That doesn't worry you at

all? No, as long as they are genuine converts to what we are

talking about, I'm not bothered about it. Does it worry you? If 10%

of my membership was an ex-extreme right-wing party it would worry me.

The concerns that Peter Davies has raised have been raised by a number

of organisations. There are a lot of NGOs and third-sector

organisation who's work in the area of monitoring extreme right-wing

movements. This has been happening for a number of years, as the BNP

has lost support, much of the hard core supporters have drifted into

other parties. Converted to the policies of the English Democrats?

Look, you know, however much people convert, if 10 mers of the -- 10%

of the party membership are ex- members of an extreme party that

should worry you. You were somebody who was talking about joining

Labour, weren't you? That's a complete nonsense. The fact is that

people are able to change their mind and they should be allowed to,

within reason. What we're looking at is a situation where people are

becoming more and more concerned about English national identity.

The census from 2011 show that something like 70% of people in

England consider themself English. 60% of those said they were English

only. English national identity is the issue that's rising up the

political spectrum. It is important that there should be a moderate,

sensible English Nationalist Party to represent that view. We are that

party. Many people are incredibly proud of being English. The patron

saint, St George's Day, who we're celebrating today, St George was of

Palestinian origin. He wasn't a white man from the shires. He was

Greek. He was half Greek and half Palestinian. Therefore, I think you

know the kind of people you are attracting from the British

National Party are exactly the kind of people who would see anybody who

was not white as not acceptable. Salute nonsense. We have stood non-

white candidates. We're happy to do so. We are happy to have people

join us who are genuine converts to our party. Any sensible party would

do so. The Conservative Party, undoubtedly has people in it who

are ex-BNP as well. Labour has at least two Councillor who's are ex-

BNP activists, in one case a person who was a BNP Councillor. It's a

ridiculous point to say you shouldn't allow people to change

their minds. This is politics, this is grown-up politics. People change

their minds. It's perfectly fair and reasonable to do so. Is it a

failure of mainstream parties as well that actually, the English

Democrats are taking an issue that is important in many people's minds

and hasn't been dealt with in terms of patriotism, in terms of English

identity. The Conservative Party has failed to address it.

wouldn't agree with that at all. If you look at everything that we've

been doing and what the Department for Communities and Local

Government have been doing, we're flying the flag today. I draped

myself in a Union flag when we celebrated the Royal Wedding and it

went to the Olympics. You don't need to be nasty and extreme right-

wing to be patriotic. I'm deeply patriotic. I'm proud of being

English. I'm proud of being a Yorkshire woman. I don't feel the

need to sign up to some of the views of the British National Party

to do that. To drape your self-in the Union Jack shows the confusion.

The Union Jack is not an emblem of England. I never said it was.It's

an emblem of being English. I was proud of being English. St George's

Day, according to the BBC website, St George was from Turkey. We won't

get into a discussion. It's now Turkey. 500 years later he was

martyred in 303. How are you celebrating? Well, standard, good

old fashioned roast beef and I'm geeing to be thoroughly enjoying

the day. I have my rose... Should it be a bank holiday? Yes, we're

only the party campaigning for it to be a bank holiday. Obviously

what we want is a proper celebration of England's national

day. Are you celebrating? Of course I am. I celebrate being English

every single day. I don't need to put a badge on to say I'm English.

Thank you very much. Now, our guest of the day is also minister for

faith and communities and looks to highlights problems relating to

attacks and discrimination against ethnic communities. Does

Islamophobia pass the dinner-table test? Baroness Warsi went out to

see for herself. I'm here at theality ring ham

Islamic Cultural Centre. This building was an unused chapel. It

was bought by the Muslim community and now provides essential services

for local communities. This is a progressive, open, confident,

successful community. It has great relations with the local churches,

with synagogues and other faithes. But despite that, it still doesn't

stop them being subjected to anti- Muslim hatred and anti-Muslim

attacks. Welcome. I see you brought the sunshine with you. I did, I

brought it over the Pennines. I was shown around the centre and

explained what had happened here. How many attacks have you had on

the centre? We had about ten to 12 attacks. Those windows were smashed,

windows on both sides of the hall smashed. In the past graffiti was

put on both halls and been set on fire. Having said all that, we have

very good relationship with our neighbours. They keep an eye on the

centre. Just for the sake of one or two bad apples, we don't want to

tarnish the whole community over these attacks. Sadly, however,

these sorts of attacks are not just limited to religious buildings.

They are taking place across the country and are blighting victims'

daily lives. Women have had veils torn from their heads. Children

have been physically assaulted at school. And families have been

continually targeted, some even driven from their homes. Matthew

Goodwin is an academic from the University of Nottingham. He's

conducted research into the area of extremism. His work has shown that

this problem is under reported. Compared to other forms of

prejudice, Andy Semitism, racism, those kind of --ant Semitism,

racism, those kind of prejudices, it's 2013 and we only just have a

system in place to monitor attacks against Muslim communities.

Alongside that, there's a bigger challenge going on here. That's a

large reservoir of public hostility towards British Muslim communities,

49%, almost one out of every two citizens rejected the idea that

Muslims were compatible with the British way of life. Two years ago,

I said that Islamophobia had passed the dinner-table test. What I meant

by that was that unfortunately, anti-Muslim sentiment was found in

the most civilised of settings. Two years on, evidence supports that

statement. But the good news is that Government is finally dealing

with the issue and it's now a priority.

The experience here in this quiet, leafy suburb shows anti-Muslim

attacks can happen any time, any place. As I've said before, an

attack on one community is an attack on all of us. We must rise

against this intolerance and bigotry and together, we must stamp

We're joined now by Professor Ted Cantle who works with iCoCo who

works with community cohesion and author of the Cantle Report.

Welcome to the programme. Would you agree there is a problem with

Muslim hate crimes? Very definitely. There's been a very big increase.

As was explained in your piece there. And Muslims are far more

likely than any other group to say they've experienced prejudice. So

there's no doubt about that. What about the way the Muslim community

community as if it was one community. The vast majority of

Muslims in Britain are not associated with terrorism or any of

this agenda. We have to be very clear, this is a small section.

Sayeeda Warsi, how is the government dealing with this? We set up the

cross government group on anti-Muslim hatred which brings

together civil servants from all government departments who would

have an interest and have to deal with this issue. We have also funded

-- funded a project which is monitoring anti-muscle attacks. This

effectively monitors online hatred, it is for people to report

anti-Muslim attacks. It is working with mosques, myself, and the

secretary of state Eric Pickles, we went to every mosque in the UK, we

talked about what opportunities they were, how they could report, how

victim support would step in. Professor Ted Cantle, does the

government have the right approach? Unfortunately, I think it doesn't.

It is important to identify hate crime against Muslims, to set up a

special initiative is very dangerous, it just perpetuates the

situation we have had. Yesterday I was on BBC Radio Sheffield talking

about hate crime against the Roma community. This morning I was on LBC

talking about racist attacks on the London Underground. The more we

single out the Muslim community for special treatment the more, I think,

ironically, we are making matters worse. We have to see hate crime

more generally, including those with special needs, subject to the most

vicious hate crime recently, and make sure we are tackling this as

one community, not as a series of specialist groups? So the government

approach is counter-productive? have a lot of time for Ted, I

remember him when we were dealing with the fallout from the Bradford

riots. But I think his understanding is fundamentally flawed. There are

very specific challenges that we as a country face. Wider Muslim

community specifically, why not hate -- hate crime against different

communities? We had a cross government working group on

anti-Semitism, it still exists and it has been hugely successful.

looking at Muslim hatred we did not feel the need to reinvent wheel, but

to look at something which worked. If you look at these statistics for

disaggregated religious hate crime, hate crime as a whole, but which

communities most being impacted, almost 60 % of religious hate crime

is directed towards the dish muslin community. I think it is worse than

that, this government is developing initiatives singling out separate

communities. We are giving money to church groups, Christian

communities, Muslim communities, and presiding over the explosion of

faith schools for Muslims, Sikhs, Hindus, Jewish people, even

evangelical Christians. Is it any wonder that children are growing up

with prejudiced views when they are separated almost at birth? We have

to end the way in which we have Balkanised our education system. I

don't see that this government is trying to create an integrated

society. Faith schools have led to segregation, in the view of

Professor Ted Cantle? Is it right to faith school -- to have faith

schools which in some cases... Educationally, of course, people

believe they are successful, but do they reinforce separation between

communities? I don't think so, I think in some areas they provide the

only form of a decent, strong education. The push that Michael

Gove has had on academies and free schools, in many areas... Does it

reinforce separate the spit in communities? I have seen faith

schools in action. Talking about the British Muslim community, the amount

of faith state schools which are Muslim faith schools is probably in

single digits. Compared that to the number of... Why did your government

take the duty to promote community cohesion in schools out of the

Ofsted regime? The one thing that was going on in schools which was

helping schools from different backgrounds get together has been

removed from the Ofsted regime. Schools are no longer taking this

seriously, and all the cohesion resources at local level in

voluntary sector bodies have been cut back so that, really, there is

nothing going on with regards to integration, and we are about to

face a new wave, probably, of Romanian and Bulgarian migration,

which will not be as big as people say but we are not preparing for

integration in the way the government said it would. Answer the

question on a huge and being taken out of Ofsted? There was a juicy,

that did not necessarily mean it was happening in schools. -- there was a

GT. I would say that any school with a diverse range of pupils would be

considering dealing with issues of inter-faith relations, community

cohesion, as part of what the headteacher would set as it vision.

We are not a prescriptive government, just because you have a

tick box which says we have a duty of community cohesion and we have

take that, that does not mean it is happening. We have moved away from

the site load approach, single group funding. Let's have a meeting and

tell you about what we are really doing. You to have a meeting, then

come back to the programme. Thank you very much. Last night the House

of Lords voted to outlaw caste discrimination amongst Asians,

something which has been proclaimed as a big step.

The government said it had set up an education programme to tackle caste

discrimination, but Piers said that this was not enough and the law had

to be changed. Here is a flavour of the debate.

We believe that the time is already overdue for it to be stated that

discrimination on caste in the public sphere, like any other -- any

other discrimination, is not acceptable. It is contrary to the

culture and values of our society and should be seen to be illegal.

The government has come a long way in thinking about this. We part

company because we believe that we need to pass this amendment is now,

we need to get the legislation on the statute book and we need to then

resolve the issues that flow from that. That is why we are supporting

Lord Harry's game. -- supporting Lord Harris again. There needs to be

action to address this problem. The government is prepared to act, we

need to make sure we do this in the right way and that we consider all

the issues before we act and not afterwards. For that reason, I hope

very much that the noble and reverend Lord is able to withdraw

his amendment in the house and that he accepts the motion put forward.

We believe it is very important to make it quite clear that legislation

is necessary to protect people. I feel we have had such a serious

debate tonight and the issues have been so thoroughly debated that it

is right that the opinion of this house should be tested.

Joining us as Barry Gardiner MP, chair of Labour friends of India.

Why can't the government support legislation to outlaw caste

discrimination? This debate started whilst I was in opposition. I took

the equalities act through on behalf of the opposition. Labour were in a

very different position, they did not think there was evidence to

bring it in place, I said, let's keep a power... Did you vote for the

legislation? I said that we should retain this power so that in the

future when we had the evidence, we should bring it back into

legislation. Since then, there has been researched and as to the extent

of caste discrimination. How how far would it take place in the private

sphere? I feel that further work needs to be done to ensure we start

looking at the evidence, look at how we can protect these communities.

There are real issues in relation to people who feel they are

discriminated against, because they are perceived in a community as

being lesser human beings. That has to be dealt with. Why didn't you

vote? Legislation has two vote. -- legislation has two work. Baroness

Warsi didn't quite represent her position three years ago in that

way. Three years ago she quoted from a report saying that the Labour

government was not going far enough, the Labour Government said that we

should wait, we should conduct research and give a period of

reflection to make sure that when we did exercise the power in secondary

legislation to put caste in as a protected characteristic, that it

would be done in the right way. For three years she has been in

government and no consultation has taken place. Baroness Thornton, who

has been wonderful, she paid huge tribute to Lord Howe is, Baroness

Thornton has listened more in three weeks than your government has in

three years. As a result, you have had to back from your position and

the government has announced that within two months it be lamenting

precisely what the Labour Government said should happen in a few years

time. There will be people watching who will say that surely this is a

no-brainer. Why shouldn't people be protected from caste discrimination

in the UK? I completely agree. former lawyer, let me say, I want a

situation where you provide real protection for people in real lives.

Why can't it because -- be part of the equality act and work as

effectively as it does for others? have spent lots of time listening to

communities from within the Hindu and Sikh community, some who are for

and some who are against, some say that putting it on the statute books

will not deal with what happens in private spheres, quiet

discrimination and intra- community issues. If we can go with what the

government has said it will do, it has said it will bring in through

secondary legislation this Parliament within two months. I pay

tribute to the Association of Hindu organisations which met with shadow

ministers over the past few weeks, with somebody who has brilliantly

represented the views of the community. The point being made by

Sayeeda Warsi is that if it is happening privately... It is not

about a private sphere, Baroness Warsi knows this very well. She has

deliberately clouded the issue. It is very specific legislation and it

is about the provision of services and employment law. As a former

barrister you should have got your facts right, you clouded the issue

by pretending otherwise. To answer your question, the one about what

other ways in which this can be properly implemented, the first

thing is not to do what the government said and have a big

programme of education about caste. Caste is a diminishing issue in the

community in this country, everybody except that. Everybody except that

there is tiny, tiny discrimination, but that everybody is entitled to

redress under the law if they are discriminated against. We don't want

people to be monitored for caste, to register and record their caste. The

community was deeply concerned about that. The government has not

listened. Could there be a U-turn? The government are looking at it

today. I would say that we are actually on the same page. We both

protect people from caste discrimination. , you might like to

say that, but we are not. Are the unions blocking public

service reform? Giles is on the green with one man who thinks they

are, and one man who thinks they are not. I have got Paul Nowak, the

assistant general secretary of the TUC, and Dr Sean Worth, from Policy

Exchange. You seem to suggest there are more people using public

services, less money coming in. You want a revolution in delivery, what

is that? You are right about the challenges, demand is going up and

money is not, we need to bring in innovation and the best possible

providers. You need to give people what they want, a lot more choice,

information and more different providers delivering services.

more private companies... It does not matter. People want protection.

If providers are coming in they want to make sure they are not profiteers

looking for a fast buck, that the services will be there. I have been

saying that there is a hardening sense of militancy in the trade

union movement running the public sector, we need to make sure that

emergency services are protected at all costs. Not being allowed to

strike, which is where you are kicking the hornets nest? I can't

imagine the TUC buying that. But around half of the people surveyed

said they don't mind who provides the service, as long as it is

maintained? It is about opening up public services to the market, more

private sector involvement. It is a bizarre report when tens of billions

of pounds are being taken out of public spending and communities are

under pressure, public services have been decimated right across the

country. And on the day that the public accounts committee has

criticised the government for wasting millions on the academies

programme. For all of public services, Policy Exchange... Does It

Actually Matter? We Just Want Our Services Provided. People Want Good

Quality Public Services That They Can Trust. The Public Says They

Trust The Public Sector To Deliver That. Trade union surveys on this

subject are the only ones which have ever been published. The audit

commission, the public sector and private companies, very clear,

people don't care who is doing the admin, they want very good services.

Policy exchange care. You are not involved in the debate. You work for

a lobby group which represents companies delivering private

healthcare services. At the end of the day, this is about getting the

best bang for the buck for the taxpayer, delivering quality public

services. The idea that the public sector is inherently better is not

You worked in Number Ten, you don't any more. I've heard it from

backbenchers, Steve Hilton is gone, Tim Chatwin has gone. People are

leaving Number Ten. Is it because like you they want to do things and

they think the Government is not going to do them? I worked in

politics for many years before going into Government. I left for

personal reasons. They're all leaving for personal reasons?

They're looking for challenges. The Government needs to hire more

political people right across because there is such a big agenda

to push through. Are you sure it's not because they think this isn't

going to last? Coalition is not as dynamic and idealistic as a

majority Government, obviously. It's certainly not why I left

working in politics. I can't speak for anyone else. Gentlemen, thank

you very much. That's the debate. Can I see it will carry on until

2015. Thank you very much. Now it comes

in two volumes, the first of which is out today. It costs �30 although

I'm told if you shop around you can buy it for less. The book shop

Waterstone's says it's the second most pre-ordered biography of the

year so far. What am I talking about, well the authorised

biography of Baroness Thatcher. It's written by Charles Moore who

we'll talk to in a moment. First, here's a bit about it. It was

conceived in 1997, but it had a number of crucial conditions

attached to it. The book was to be published only after Baroness

Thatcher's death. She never wanted to read it. She didn't want to know

what the people who contributed to it thought of her. Charles Moore

had access to thousands of pages of private and Government papers. And

to the lady herself, with whom he conducted numerous interviews. Is

it any good? Let's ask the man who wrote it, that might be a biased

view. It's very heavy. Was it liberating for you when you were

conducting all the interviews and doing the research, knowing that

she was never going to read it? Very liberating. It was a condition

she laid down from the first, which I was relieved about. I had talked

to people who had written buy yoing Fiz of living politicianed and they

are breathing down their neck and wanting to say wasn't it clever

here and why not say this. Mrs Thatcher said it can't appear in my

lifetime and I'm not allowed to read it, but you have complete

access to everything you could want. Huge responsibility. Huge

responsibility, but a great relief and the extraordinary thing was it

really did surprise me was she never did try to ask me what I was

saying. She didn't change her mind and started to probe you? Not even

one little tiny bit. I was really surprised and delighted because it

meant I could get on with proper work. I feared I would have an

argument where she was wanting the book to be something, never.

Literally never. How would you describe the book then, when you

say she might have influenced it to be something, what do you mean?

Often people want everything to be nice about them, but also they want

to preach a particular message. Neither of those things was I ever,

erm, I'm trying to write and I've written, I think, proper history

for the first time. This is beyond all the Poe legalic, which raged

around her for years and years. Of course, I take account of the Poe

legalic, but I want it to be -- polemic, but I want a stand in

history Andreasen a mixture of a private woman, who I see much more

of through this material than anyone else and the public deeds.

Does it contradict much of what's been written about her beforehand?

It doesn't exactly contradict, but it hugely amplifies and qualifies.

For example, she's a conviction politician. We all know that. But

she's also very, very cautious and a very cunning politician. This

comes up much more strongly by the study of her work. Then of course,

there's the whole aspect of her private life and her youth, which

is very little known. Yes, I mean it's interesting because I've been

reading up some of the notes about it and there were things clearly

that I didn't know about the relationship with her sister, for

example, what was that like? sister was four years older, that's

her only sibling. She was less academic than Margaret. Mural, who

I met was a very strong character, stronger than Margaret. Really?!

Very formidable. Right!Because Margaret said please, everything

can be seen, Muriel showed me letters that Margaret had written

her in her youth. Were they close? Yes, at that time. They maintained

good res. -- Relations. They reveal the whole of her youth from her

school days, through Oxford, early work and her boyfriends. And her

marriage and her children. So they're absolutely, and her love of

clothes and films and things like that. So, for example, three

boyfriends that nobody's ever heard of. To be honest which Mrs Thatcher

most of the time denied. Really? But did admit to me. Who were they?

One who called Tony Bray. A farmer called Willie Cullen, who she

passed over to her sister and who married Muriel. Then there's a Dr

Called Robert Henderson. Very little if anything has been said

about them. Tony Bray nothing before, nothing whatever. A tiny

bit has been said about Willie Cullen and Dr Henderson. What about

her mother. This is slightly obscure. I think it wasn't very

good. Margaret wanted to grow away from her mother. This is known,

what I think is less known is that she very much wanted to grow away

from her farther. We know how much she admired her father, and this is

true. She had a provincial life and she wanted to get into the big

world and quite a lot of letters in the book where the father is

clearly upset that he's not seeing enough of Margaret because Margaret

is getting on with life. I'm sure one reason that Margaret expressed

such loyalty to him when she became famous was that she felt guilty.

Any revelations? In the early life there's this whole the young woman,

the emotional side and the love. In the political life, I think there's

the how did she do it. There's a marvellously interesting memoir she

wrote of the Falklands. She hardly kept a record of anything. She kept

a private record of the Falklands War which she wrote a year after it

happened. Where you see the extraordinary intensity of emotion

and the cin yesterdayible risks involved in it all. -- Are you

looking forward to it? I am disappointed I didn't bring a copy

for Charles to sign while he's here. I will do it for you. It's

fantastic in the way you describe. It I haven't read any of it yet,

but I think the human being behind the politician is what really

interests me because ultimately, I think as politicians we are so

caricatured and demonised and presented in a certain way, to be

able to step away from that and say who was the person and what rooted

her. And who also was the woman. It's interesting and important her

sex. It makes it more interesting than the average politician.

had a very strong relationship with Denis Thatcher. What will her

children think of the book? They've helped me throughout and been very

kind. I hope they'll enjoy it. It's always a bit difficult reading

about your own mother, but I hope they enjoy it. Just quickly to you,

Margaret Thatcher has been criticised for not doing enough to

help other women break the glass ceiling, as a Muslim woman, you sit

in Cabinet, do you think that is part of your role too, to help

other women break through? Long before I came into politics, I used

to, I probably shouldn't say this on national TV, I was constantly

concerned I would be before a tribunal because I went out of my

way to make sure I created opportunities for women. I think

people like to promote and support people who are actually in their

own frame. That's why you see so many men immediately turning to men

when they look for promotion or people to bring into an

organisation. Soy think every woman has an obligation and

responsibility to say, you know, give somebody a go. Charles Moore,

thank you very much. Time before we go to cross to College Green and

talk to John Leech, who has tabled a Parliamentary motion about

something very important. What are you calling for? A change in the

time when the FA Cup final is on, because the FA Cup final this year

is going to be at 5.15pm, which will mean a lot of Wigan fans and

Manchester City fans are not going to be able to return home on the

last train. For the future we want to make sure that the FA Cup gets

its prominence back and is as a stand-alone if fixture on a

Saturday afternoon ot 3pm so everyone can watch it and the fan

kz get home in time after. It can't be changed for this time, it's too

late. It's certainly too late for this year. But for the future we

can make sure some lessons are learned and that fans in the North

West, let's hope that lots of North West clubs are getting to the FA

Cup final year after year, we need to make sure they'll be able to get

back after the game late at night. At the moment, because the FA Cup

final is being held on days when there are other league fixtures,

it's being avoided from 3pm, so that as many fans can watch as

possible. Of course, there are then implications for the fans trying to

return home. Do people care enough these days about the FA Cup for it

to be on a special day or to have it to itself? You tell that to the

25,000-odd Wigan fans that have never been to an FA Cup final

before and you tell that to the 25,000 City fans that will be going

to Wembley for the second time for the FA Cup final in the last three

years. And who do you support?I'm a season ticket holder at

Manchester City. Are you worried people will be distracted bit

Premier League, which you haven't won? Well, unfortunately, the best

team won it this season. The best team won it last season as well.

Hopefully next season it will be a City versus United curtain raiser

for the Charity Shield and then City will go on to win the

championship next year. Would you like to congratulate Manchester

United? Slightly through gritted teeth, but I suppose they have been

the best team this season. Well done. You did it. Thank you very

much for joining us from College Green. Now there's just time to

find out the answer to our quiz. What entertainment if needed is

provide for the members of the House of Lords when they have to

stay for late-night votes. Film screenings, open mic, comedy nights

or Stitch 'n Bitch clubs? From the note I got round it was a movie, I

think we had Skyfall on last time. I think we had Julian Fellowes

talking about Downton Abbey. Why do you need entertainment? I don't

have the time to be entertained. These are late nights, people are

there for a long time in the evening. It passes the time for

people who are waiting for votes. I have the privilege of a huge red

box, soy don't have the opportunity to take part. So you didn't watch

the film, you're not watching the film? I couldn't bear watching

Skyfall with my colleagues. That's all for today. Thanks to my against,