03/10/2013 Daily Politics

And afternoon and welcome to the Daily Politics. The Conservative

list is considering withdrawing benefits from under 25-year-olds who

are not in work, education or training. We will talk to the

Treasury Minister Sajid Javid. Will the government's new scheme to

underwrite billions of pounds' worth of new mortgages help house-buyers,

or pump up a new house price bubble? Schoolkids will learn how to write

computer code from next autumn. We will hear from two experts.

And Adam has been meeting the party animals at conference and finding

out whether activists go for the serious stuff or the socialising.

Did you go to bed last night or this morning? Is my mother is watching, I

was in bed at 12. 5am. What racy beasts. All that in the

next hour. With me for the whole programme today, two Former Downing

St insiders. Phil Collins worked for Tony Blair and now writes for the

towns -- Times, and Sean Worth were in Britain with David Cameron and is

now at the think-tank Policy Exchange. Let's start with some

breaking news. In the last half-hour, the Labour leader Ed

Miliband has released a letter he has written to the owner of the

Daily Mail, Lord for the mayor, to complain about a Daily Mail reporter

who he says got into a private memorial event held at Guy 's

Hospital in London for his uncle, who died earlier this year. I am

joined now by our political correspondent, who is outside the

Daily Mail headquarters. What is at Miliband asking your brother made to

do? He is asking the owner of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday to

instigate an investigation into what happened yesterday. This was meant

to be a private memorial service for the Miliband family and close

colleagues of Professor Harry Keane, an eminent doctor who died recently.

At that event, a reporter from the Mail on Sunday apparently

At that event, a reporter from the infiltrated it and was asking

members of his family about his late father and about the row over the

Daily Mail story from last weekend, saying that Ralph Miliband, Ed's

Rather hated Britain. Ed Miliband says this crosses a line of common

decency, but he's not going to the press complaints commission about

this. This comes a week before the privy Council discusses a much

tougher form of press regulation, on which the Daily Mail opposes. He is

saying to look for the mayor, time to put your house in order. Has the

Daily Mail responded? They have not responded yet. But as you said, this

only happened in the last half-hour. I am told a Labour Party official

will turn up here with an official copy of the letter, but there has

been no response yet. What will this meeting do in terms of looking ahead

to what is now being seen as a battle between the Daily Mail and

what they see as Ed Miliband and his support for strong press regulation?

Ed Miliband could have decided to lower the temperature today.

Instead, he has decided to increase the temperature considerably and

roared on the attack to the Mail on Sunday. This comes just a week

before this meeting, as I say. There are two different forms of press

relations being discussed, one which the press quite liked, and a tougher

one, the statutory underpinning, which they are discussing next week.

The Daily Mail says that is an attack on press freedom. In its own

pages, it has said that by Ed Miliband talking about the

boundaries that newspapers should keep two, this was a sinister

response, on the row shows that you should not allow politicians

anywhere near the press. But what has actually happened today was

across the political spectrum. Nick Clegg expressed sympathy for Ed

Miliband and denounced the Daily Mail, saying it vilified Britain.

Francis Maude said something similar. There is a possibility that

the Daily Mail have shot themselves in the foot and weakened their case

the Daily Mail have shot themselves for press freedom.

If you hear any response from the Daily Mail while we are now, we will

come back to you. Sean Worth, has the Daily Mail crossed the line in

terms of sending a reporter to this private memorial gathering?

Absolutely. Ed Miliband's reaction has not been about this regulation.

This seems to be personal, exactly the way he responded to the initial

article about his father. The prime minister and other politicians have

been saying that others would react in the same way. So he was right to

go after them, because on this occasion, they overstepped the mark.

What do you think Lord for the mayor and the Daily Mail will do? They

will probably double up. It is impossible to fathom what they are

doing. I think they crossed the line before with the original article,

which was a worthless piece of rubbish. Then they crossed it again

when they reprinted it, alongside Ed Miliband's Right to reply. When you

say rubbish, are you talking about the headline? We already knew much

of the substance about Ralph Miliband in terms of his lyrical

leanings. So do you think all of the article was rubbish, or the

headline? The supposition that he hated Britain is nonsensical. Nobody

who landed on the Normandy beaches or was in the Royal Navy has to beg

for the right to be thought of as a British patriotic op Ralph Miliband

did more in a day's work than any hack will ever do. So the idea that

a few scattered remarks could constitute hating Britain was

absurd. You said Ed Miliband's stance has not been about beefing up

as revelation, but the Daily Mail see it in that way. They feel there

is a battle. They have tried to link his father's views and the fact that

his father influenced Ed Miliband, and what could happen with press

regulation. Are they want? I agree with most of what Phil says about

the original article, but Ed Miliband does write about the

influence of his parents on his political views. So there are

journalists that want to go into that. But you are right, when it

became personal about that individual, that was wrong. It is a

family thing, not about regulation. On that front, many people have

sympathy with him. I suspect it will not alter the Leveson argument in

the end. I think it was likely that the outcome would be to choose the

cross-party consensus deal anyway, which would then lead to a stalemate

with the press. I don't take that has changed.

Now, time for our daily quiz. The question for today is, what new

access arena was Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, spotted wearing

yesterday? Was it a trilby, a cravat, a pair of glasses or a

monocle? At the end of the show, Phil and Sean have the honour and

privilege of giving us the correct cancer.

So, the three main party conferences are over for another year. It was a

busy few weeks, with all three party leaders trying to woo voters with

shining new policies and positive messages. Let's look back at some of

the main announcements. Wicklow messages. Let's look back at some of

tried to attract as with stories of how the Lib Dems have softened the

nasty Tories and promised free school meals for all infants. Ed

Miliband tried to seduce us with his vow to address the cost of living

crisis. He said he would build 200 as new homes each year by 2020 and

freeze energy bills until March 2017. David Cameron's pitch was

about sticking to the course and showing us that only the

Conservatives can build a land of opportunity. He promised to make the

dream of home ownership a reality for more people by bringing forward

his Help To Buy mortgage guarantee scheme, now starting next week. He

also pledged to clamp down on welfare claimants who refuse to

work, and end the automatic entitlement housing benefit and

jobseeker's allowance for under 25s. There are still over a million

young people not in education, employment or training. Today, it is

still possible to leave school, sign on, find a flat, start claiming

housing benefit and opt for a life on benefits. Isn't it time for bold

action here? We should ask, as we write our next manifesto, if that

option should exist at all. Instead, we should give young people a clear

and positive choice. Go to school, go to college, do an apprenticeship,

get a job. But just choose the dole? We have got to offer them something

better. We have been joined by the Treasury minister Sajid Javid and

the Liberal Democrat MP Julian Huppert. Sajid Javid, the majority

of the blunder 25 who are claiming housing benefit have dependents. How

would this policy affect them? Well, David Cameron announced a high-level

announcement yesterday around the direction of Conservative Lizzie,

something we plan to put into our manifesto. -- Conservative policy.

For under 25s, there will be two options, burning on learning. That

is not just because it is the right thing to do for those individuals,

but it is also right for hard-working taxpayers who are

paying for these benefits. So that will affect under 25s claiming

housing benefits who have children? It will affect all under 25s. You

could take that argument to someone who loses their job, they are out of

work temporarily. Maybe they have not signed up for a course, they

lose their benefit, their family could be out on the street? There is

a lot of detail to work out, because this is something we will get ready

in our manifesto. There are not answers yet. People might be worried

if they are in their situation, and with the fluctuating job market,

people will be concerned. That is why we want to set out policy. But

you don't know the detail yet 's it will also depend on a Conservative

majority government, but our intention is clear. Thousands of

young people slide into a life on benefits when they leave compulsory

education. That is not acceptable. Julian Huppert, shouldn't there be a

straightforward choice, you either find a job or get training, or you

lose your benefits? It is helpful to see this message coming from the

Conservatives. This is the sort of thing we have stopped from happening

while we have been in government, this sort of unpleasant approach. We

do need to help young people get into employment or training. But

taking away the support that many of them desperately need will not help.

There are too many of these people, the numbers started shooting at a

decade ago when the economy was doing well. The last government let

them down. We have stopped the growth. It is about providing

opportunities, helping people to learn and earn, not punishing the

most vulnerable. For we get onto whether you are punishing the

vulnerable, do you agree that the Liberal Democrats have stopped your

unpleasant, as Julian says, policy? No. This is a coalition government.

We have different points of view. You could not introduce it under a

coalition. If Julian represents all Lib Dems, then we couldn't. This is

for our manifesto, but it sets a clear direction and builds on the

reform of the welfare system under Iain Duncan Smith and our reforms

under Michael Gove. But isn't the problem is that there are not enough

jobs around for young people? 1 million young people unemployed, and

taking away their benefit will punish them 's well, jobs are being

created. But how many young people are unemployed? Youth unemployed and

is falling, but it is still a problem. Part of dealing with that

is falling, but it is still a issue is having a welfare system

that helps people get into the world of work, but also having an

education system that gives them the skills that companies want. Julian,

it costs £1.2 billion a year. You yourself say there are too many

young people in this situation. You need a it. B we have already stopped

this from happening. This was pushed for by Conservatives in previous

budgets. We discussed this and stopped it from happening. We do

need to do more will stop some of that is about getting rid of some of

the benefit traps. I had an autistic man who worked in my office who was

only allowed to work for six hours a week because if he worked for any

more, he ended up with less money. He was applying for jobs and

eventually found a full-time job, but stopping him on being able to go

eventually found a full-time job, to ten or 16 hours was ridiculous. I

am pleased that we are getting rid to ten or 16 hours was ridiculous. I

of that. It has to be about things like the Deputy Prime Minister's

youth contract to help young people, rather than to hit them hard. I have

taken the YMCA to see Iain Duncan Smith to talk about the people who

are living in the YMCA who need help, who don't have a family to go

back to. The politics of this are interesting, Sean Worth, as we see

the coalition partners divert from each other? Very. You hit the nail

on the head when you talked about detail. Look at something like the

bedroom tax, spare room subsidy, depending on which party you are in.

Human stories started to come out of that where there were anomalies.

Then you see the public support starts to evaporate. So as long as

the Tories do some decent work on that, so that we don't see these

anomalies such as disabled people's medical rooms being brought into

this, it could be some support. Do you agree? No, I think it would be a

disaster. It is not the case that everyone is thinking, I will either

joined McKinsey or I will go on the dole. The vast majority of people

will have to go into some form of training. Where will that come

from? We don't have the provision for that. Where would the money come

from, Sajid Javid? Of course there will be a demand for training. And

where would the money come from? As we work out the detail, I can give

you more information if you invite me back. We certainly will. I just

think it is interesting over this period that both the Liberal

Democrats and the Conservatives, despite boasting about being

fiscally disciplined, have been announcing things that will cost

money. If the end result is that more people end up in work and not a

life of benefits, it is good for them and good for the economy. We

have costed up looking at long-term unemployment, and the coalition will

look at introducing that from April next year, and it will cost £300

million in the short term. We are willing to make that investment

because it will help the long-term unemployed to get the help they want

to get back into work. One of the great policy failures in Britain in

the last 50 years has been the lack of provision for people who don't go

through academic courses and on to university, and David Cameron has

said he is going to fix that. This is a colossal task he has set

himself, and I don't get any sense that you understand the scale. We

have had a dysfunctional welfare system for many years, and the

changes that Iain Duncan Smith is brought about, the introduction of

universal credit and some of the other changes mentioned, they are

not easy, and they might have teething issues. Added is the right

direction of policy, because we can't continue to have a welfare

system that denies people the right to work by giving them the wrong

incentives and a budget that is out of control. Welfare spending under

the previous government went up by 57%, and that is unacceptable.

Thank you very much. The big theme of David Cameron's conference speech

yesterday was making Britain a land of opportunity. Here he is talking

about the Government's plan to underwrite new mortgages up to the

value of £600,000. In a land of opportunity, we must

make sure that more people are able to own a home of their own. Your

make sure that more people are able home is your castle. For most young

people today, their home is their landlord's. It is starting to make

them wonder why they bother. They are stuck in rental accommodation

when they are desperate to buy. I met a couple on Sunday, Emily and

James. They both had decent jobs, but because they didn't have rich

parents, they couldn't get big big enough deposit to buy a house. And

let me tell you where I met them. In their new home, built in their help

to buy mortgage scheme. It was still half built, but they showed me where

the kitchen was going to be. Outside was rubble all over the ground, but

they had already bought a lawn mower. They talked about how excited

they were to be spending their first Christmas in a home of their own. My

friends, that is what we are about, and the party of aspiration will

finish the job on home ownership that we started.

Sajid Javid is still with us. David Cameron says that this is gay to

help young people buy their first home. But if you look at the figures

involved, this scheme will be out of reach for many people. The average

house in the UK costs £242,000, so a 95% mortgage means you would have to

borrow £230,000. You would need a salary of over £57,000 to avoid

that. That is beyond the reach of many, many people. This isn't a

scheme just for young people. It is a scheme for everyone. That would

apply to everyone. Many people in their late 30s or even 40s still

haven't managed to buy a home will stop and the figure that you are

using is not the average price of a first home, that would be a lot

less. Everyone I have ever met aspires to own their own home. We

want to help them with that. It is perfectly natural. There are

millions of people out there, young and not so young, who can afford

payments, and the Prime Minister gave an example in his speech, but

they don't have the savings for the deposit. Ten or 15 years ago, the

average deposit required was around £10,000. Today it is closer to

£30,000. In the early 2000s, it would take you for five years to

save that, but now it will take you 25 years. If people haven't got

access to a big pot of savings or rich parents, they can't afford

those homes. But because they have got the income, they can afford the

mortgage repayments. I understand the thinking behind it, but I'm

trying to work out who it is going to help. The sorts of people you are

talking about who don't have that to help. The sorts of people you are

income or help from parents, what to help. The sorts of people you are

sort of salary, in your mind, does someone have to earn to benefit from

this scheme, if you say my £230,000 for an average home is not the price

of an average first-time home. Let's take the example the Brymon is to.

of an average first-time home. Let's The two individuals -- let's take

the example the Prime Minister referred to. Those two individuals

had an income of £25,000 each, and they can easily afford payments even

on a 95% mortgage, even once you they can easily afford payments even

stress test them and allow for changes in interest rates in the

future. Banks are now obligated to do that. But they don't have rich

parents. And you often find that people who criticise this scheme,

they have their own homes, they have rich parents, and it doesn't really

touch them that much, when it does actually affect a lot of people that

touch them that much, when it does don't have rich parents, but they

can afford the payments. If you are trying to help first-time buyers,

why does the scheme need to go up to houses worth £600,000? I didn't say

it was just for first-time buyers. It is designed to help both

first-time buyers and also people that wish to move up the housing

ladder. That is a big leap up the housing ladder! Why aren't you

focusing just on lower valued houses, or as you say, first-time

buyers, since they are the ones who houses, or as you say, first-time

need the leg up the ladder. As you know, throughout the United Kingdom,

especially in the south-east, you will see a big differentiation in

prices. If you are a family of three or four in the south-east, it might

be the cost of the home that you need. But it is not just the

south-east. If you look at the south-west, people have paid ten

times over their average income in order to meet mortgage payments. It

isn't just a south-east problem. Is it going to work or is it going to

cause a housing bubble? I take some of your points, and I appreciate

that this is a serious problem and of your points, and I appreciate

it is difficult to find policy, but if this were a Labour scheme, you

would be saying, don't these economic illiterate understand that

if you just throw more money at something with constraints applied,

the price will go up. Answer that question. 10% rises in London. We

have a whole list here of mortgage experts, Declan Curran from home

fixed direct says that it is likely to create a house price bubble. You

are creating the next credit crunch. If left unchecked. If there was a

capacity constraint in the market, evidence of a capacity problem, I

would be concerned. What is your benchmark? Annual house construction

fell to its lowest level since the 1920s under the previous government.

It is up 33% since then, but it is still one third below its long-term

average. If you are a housing company, and you know there might be

more mortgage availability because of this scheme, it helps disperse

apply, but to make sure, and to deal with that left unchecked point, we

have given powers quite clearly to the Bank of England... And they are

worried about it! Know they are not. We have asked them to look at it

every September and report back to the government. Is that doing

enough? You have to get supply moving, and there is no reason to

suppose that you are going to be able to. It is more valuable for the

companies to sit on the land. What has changed all that? Why will

housing supply suddenly start moving? Some of the planning changes

we have made... That won't revolutionise supply in the sort of

numbers that you and Ed Miliband are talking about. We have to go on the

facts. In the last year, there was a 49% increase in the number of units

approved by local authorities, and that is a step in the right

direction. Yesterday we heard from the latest PMI reports that

construction is rising at its fastest level since ten years ago.

It is heading in the right direction, but we need to be

vigilant and stay on top of it. Is this good politics and bad

economics? The key difference between this and the previous

housing bubble is not just the sub-prime, and the wider policy

about land release and planning reform. It is the fact that the

government is in control of releasing the extra credit into the

economy, and as you have just said there, and this hasn't been a big

part of the message, to say that you can just turn the taps off. It was a

race to the bottom by sub-prime lending by the banks. But the key

difference and this is where the right needs to support these

measures, the Government can intervene, turn the taps on, monitor

this every year, turn it down a bit if it does heat things up too much.

One of the issues is the supply issue, and we have yet to see how

many homes are built over the next few years. The other issue is the

taxpayer underwriting loans where people could in future default. Is

that a risk that you are comfortable with, bearing in mind that we could

seem ace rate of interest rates rise, not for a few years, but then

seem ace rate of interest rates what happens. It is a risk the

taxpayer doesn't really have, and the reason is that when we announce

this next week, it is clear that it the reason is that when we announce

is commercially priced, so it is priced in a way that the Government

will break even on this. So there is no effective taxpayer subsidy, and

that is what makes it even more powerful. Sajid Javid, thank you.

Finishing the job. Britain can do better than this. A stronger economy

and a better society. Three better still -- messages from three

different party leaders. But can you tell which?

There are some of us, Mr Chairman, who will fight and fight and fight

again to save the party we love. The Britain that is going to be forged

in the white heat of this revolution will be no place for restrictive

practices of outdated methods on either side of industry. I have only

one thing to say. You turn if you want to, but the Lady's not for

turning. And you end in the grotesque chaos of a Labour council,

a Labour council hiring taxis to scuttle around the city handing out

redundancy notices to its own workers. We have to have our

agreements in public and our disagreements in Private. This is a

modern party living in an age of change. It requires a modern

constitution that says what we are in terms the public and understand

-- cannot misunderstand. Tony Blair, looking a little younger there. Your

favourite of the three conferences this year? I thought Ed Miliband's

was the best performance. I am not sure it will last is content. A bit

calmer and's was solid and workmanlike, and although it will be

instantly forgotten, in a sense, that was the point -- David

Cameron's was solid and workmanlike. The decision to be Dell was probably

the right one. -- to be dull. Is that right? You would think that the

pressure would be more on David Cameron to produce more. I think the

key difference this year is that normally in this kind of period in a

Parliament, you would be expecting an election in May. But this is a

fixed term Parliament, so you don't need to air these things. It was

workmanlike because it had to set out a clear stall. Nick Clegg,

exactly the same, but for policy reasons. And there was some of the

theatre about the dog and all the reasons. And there was some of the

rest of it. Yes, the personal stories. But Ed Miliband had a

rest of it. Yes, the personal bigger problem going into the

conferences, he had to do something to give him cut through, and the

freezing of the energy prices policy, to some extent, did that. It

has excited the attention of people who don't normally watch politics.

And it is a web conference speech that does that. Most of them don't.

The clips you saw were all big political moments and descriptions

of major political events. My favourite was Neil Kinnock's

magnificent speech. It was a really big moment. There was nothing

comparable in these conferences that was sufficiently big for anyone to

hang a speech on how we will was sufficiently big for anyone to

remember for anyone. What about Nick Clegg? He had a confident

performance. He probably thinks he Clegg? He had a confident

has got over the worst. There is no serious challenge to his leadership.

Maybe he felt liberated by that. Yeah, the Lib Dems I spoke to at

that conference came back happy. They had had some sort of permission

to go into any government in the next Parliament. Trident, they got

through energy. They are not obsessed with constitutional reform

in the way they were in the past. On the point about catching the

imagination, Ed Miliband got all the headlines. But I was captured by the

other thing he did, which was go on to the Tories' turf about small

businesses. When you are an opposition leader, the way to

capture attention is to be controversial, but also to be

counterintuitive. To me, this was the first time I really saw him

starting to work as an opposition leader. He has a personal

credibility problem, so policy is the thing. The rhythm of conferences

and has been interrupted. Do you think next year, they will be

and has been interrupted. Do you barnstormers? Not necessarily. But

they will be different, because we will then be a year from an

election, and there will be a desire to be prime ministerial on the part

of all three. Nick Clegg, you never used to get Liberal Democrat leaders

doing prime ministerial speeches, but now you do, and they like it.

There was a weird passage where he detailed a lot of things that had

not happened, but would have happened, had it not been for the

Liberal Democrats. It is a novelty in political rhetoric. These things

have not happened, let's cheer! Now, we are going to imagine the scene.

A party conference is. You are looking to have a good time. Listen

to a discussion on infrastructure investment and regional growth, or

check out the drinks reception and parties on the conference fringe?

Adam has been finding out what kind of party animals go to Conservative

Party conference. Let's get to the truth of why these

people are actually here. Is it for the party, or is it really for the

parties? That is an easy one, the parties. What is the best party you

have into? Reception. Why was it so good? It was a great laugh. The

have into? Reception. Why was it so serious stuff, but that is most

important. But I love the social stuff. I will go for the parties,

because they don't stage manage that. When did you go to bed last

night? If my mother is watching, I was in bed at 12. 5am, I got home.

That is hard-core. Go and vote. Loving the vote is. The drink is

good, but the party is important, and it is the best party. The party

stuff, absolutely. Yesterday, we went to one with Liam Fox. Is he a

party animal? I imagine so. Which led to go party has the best

parties? Obviously, the Conservatives know how to party. The

Labour Party like karaoke. But we know how to do it properly! Can I

put one in each? OK. I don't want to spoil the party spirit. The party,

of course. You like a night out, don't you? No matter though I

enjoyed the politics and the people who make up the party and seeing

what's of friends. The party is first and the parties are second.

What is more important, the part of political stuff all the parties?

Which do you prefer? Governing. He says governing is more fun than a

party. Best party was the south-west area deception last night. Prime

minister Cameron turned up. You have to be pretty sad to love the

Conservative Party more than a free pint, so I have to say the parties.

Cheers. I had you down as a partying man? No, I am a Presbyterian. What

is the latest you have been to bed this week 's I am always tucked up

before mid-night. You don't have to choose, you get both at a

conference. The Conservative grassroots are clearly a bunch of

party animals, although more people have gone for the serious side than

the frivolous side. I have got some party invites. See you later.

We have not seen Adam Fleming since then! You are watching the Daily

Politics, and we have been joined by viewers in Scotland, who have been

Politics, and we have been joined by watching First Minister's Questions

from Holyrood. Phil Collins from the Times and Sean were from the

politics to enjoy with me. Did you believe the cabinet minister is when

they said they didn't do the parties? I cannot believe they don't

go to some. I have seen them at some. Maybe you would go to bed

early if you had a media meeting in the morning. The Conservative

conference is a great time to let your hair down and meet everybody,

so I am not surprised the parties won over the politics. Attendants

follows a political cycle. In the first few years, they go to all of

them. By year four, they stop going. By year five, they don't go to

anything. By then, you have got no friends in the press, so you think,

I am not going to the Guardian's party. I think if the food and drink

are good, it is enough. I tend not to go to parties where Liam Fox is

the main attraction. I am sure that will put him off inviting you to the

next one. Now, according to Education

Secretary Michael Gove, one of the big things to come out of David

Cameron's speech yesterday was a commitment to teaching

schoolchildren in England how to write computer programmes. On next

September, all five to 14-year-olds in state schools will be taught how

to code as part of a number of changes to the national curriculum

designed to prepare children for the modern workplace. But our school

kids up for it? BBC Breakfast spoke to some of those taking part in a

national event that brings young coders together. When I write a

piece of code, it is exciting to see what it does and in what ways it

breaks. It is exciting to imagine that you have made this to do that.

I was looking on Google, and I couldn't find an episode list or

website, so I thought I would make one. I am very good at web design.

It was £60,000 per year on job centre! I love the confidence! I am

joined now by Clive Beal, the director of educational development

at raspberry pie, and Emma Mulqueeny, who set up an

organisation which finds and brings together young coders, some of whom

we saw in that film. Clive, we had better explain what you have got in

front of us -- in front of you. Tell us about raspberry pie? It is an

educational charity. We want to support young people to get them

into computing and learn to code and be creative. How difficult is it? I

am a bit of a Luddite, but that is partly my age. Looking at these

youngsters, they are so much better. Is that worldly the case for most

kids? Absolutely. I think we patronise them at an early age, but

if you show them the basics, they will blow you away. Show us the

basics. How much does that contraption cost? You can buy a

Raspberry Pi full £30. That was one of the criteria behind it. You can

buy your own computer for £20 to £30. It is a general purpose

computer. We designed it to be accessible, so we have got pins on

here that I can connect to the outside world. You can put in a

phone charger or nest the card. We have got some programming language

on here. This one is designed for eight to 14-year-olds to get them

into programming. It is a visual programming language. Show us

exactly what that can do, in simple terms? So I have got a little cat on

the stage. If I clicked on this, he moves about, which is not that much

fun, but then I can go and stick it in a loop that goes on for ever. And

I can stop him from bouncing on the edge. Really easy to get into for

younger children, and they love it. Is that the sort of thing that can

get them going? Yes. And most of them will start with a simple

programming thing like that. But actually, there are very few

children that have access to this kind of stuff, because it has not

been taught in schools so far, which is why what has been announced is

important. The footage you should be for was filmed at the Festival of

code that we ran this summer. Our youngest kids are five, and then it

goes up to 18. They start with this, but once they get to grips with the

basics, they quickly want to move on to building their own apps or

websites, and more importantly, solving problems that they find

during the day. They want to find solving problems that they find

their own solutions. That is part of the fun of her grabbing. Do you

think this will set school alight? B my kids are one and three, and they

can both use an iPad. The three-year-old is quite good at it.

You will never see your iPad again. But should it be on the curriculum?

Definitely. The key thing is make it intuitive and easy, and they will

run with it. The future economy will be technology led. We really are in

a global race. I don't want to use that hackneyed term. You have just

used it! I can't think of a better one. We have got to get these kids

doing this stuff, because we need to be world leaders. Do you think it is

as important as doing maths and English GCSE? It has to be on the

curriculum, because there are lots of children who don't have access to

computers. I wonder whether it is like any other language, whether

earlier you learn it, the easier it is. There is an element of that, but

it is also important to remember that your child is consuming that

technology. It is like giving a child a bike, but without giving

them any knowledge about how the roads work and how safe they can

be. How the digital world operates is the same as giving them an iPad

and expecting them to use it, but they have to understand how the

digital world works. But Clive, you can't really buy one of those and

use it immediate leak, you would have to be shown how to do it,

wouldn't you? Or is it simpler than that? It is fairly simple, so you

can plug it in and start programming from scratch. Or if you are a bit

older, use a programming language like python. I think the earlier,

the better, as long as you can understand logic and you like

puzzles and playing, which we all do. You are not too young or too old

puzzles and playing, which we all to start. Thank you for bringing in

the gizmo, Raspberry Pi, and good luck with the coding. There are code

clubs, aren't there? But they are voluntary stop I have tried to find

one. There is not one in my area. That is the problem, but there was

lots of stuff going on. Now onto UKIP. Despite leader Nigel Farage's

assertions that the party opposes racism, the party is again sending

off accusations of racism in its ranks will stop on this programme

yesterday, Lord Heseltine described UKIP is a racist party. Here is what

he said. You always have these right-wing, racist operations,

pandering to the lowest common denominator in politics. That is

what is happening. But when it comes to a general election, the choice

will be very simple. This is where the strength of Cameron lives. Do

you want Ed Miliband as prime minister, or David Cameron? Are you

saying UKIP is racist? Of course. Who doubts that? The language, the

rhetoric, the membership, who doubts it? That was Michael has all time,

our guest yesterday. -- Michael Heseltine. And we've been joined by

Amjad Bashir, who is UKIP's spokesman on small business. You

have given this has been politician the chance to level these

accusations against us. There was a picture in the paper of Nigel

Farage, with the microphone looking like it was a Nazi moustache. We are

a mainstream political party with 30,000 members. We got over 1

million votes in the last elections in May. We are a serious player, and

you can't treat us like this. Would you do that on the front page with

David Cameron? You are now having the right to reply following what

Michael Heseltine said, and he is quite a distinguished politician,

albeit a formal one. Of course we would use a picture of David Cameron

or Ed Miliband just the same. These standards are being applied to Nigel

Farage that have always been applied to other leaders, and the question

is whether he can stand up to it. We to other leaders, and the question

are trying to have a serious discussion about immigration. Are

you seriously suggesting that there are no racists in UKIP? Michael

Heseltine said yesterday that UKIP was racist. Look at me, look at my

ethnicity. Are you saying that there was racist. Look at me, look at my

are no racists in UKIP? There are 30,000 members out there. These

accusations are levelled by the BBC a gain and again. They are not

levelled by the BBC, Michael Heseltine was our guest. Friday or

members keep getting caught up in controversy? These accusations are

not made up, they are based on stories that come out. They haven't

come from nowhere. This is silly. We have just selected somebody to run

for Orpington who is of Indonesian Muslim background. Here I am running

as a potential MEP for Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire. What did you

make of Godfrey Bloom? I am of Pakistani background. I have worked

in this country for 50 years. Would they select me if they were racist?

Is it racist to refer to foreign places as Bongo Bongo Land? The

point that he made was very relevant. He was talking about

foreign aid. The party distance itself from those two lines. Because

foreign aid. The party distance it was racist. It is not right to

dwell on that too much. He has been withdrawn the whip. He is no longer

going to run for the party. That was as a result of his other comment

about women, rather than Bongo Bongo Land. But you distanced yourself

because it wasn't appropriate language. You are not talking about

the real subject. You are saying it is very unfair that people are

accusing the party of being racist. So is it racist to describe a female

journalist as from some form of ethnic extraction? He is married to

an Indian lady who comes from Australia. He was trying to describe

the journalist. Would you describe anybody as being somebody who is of

some form of ethnic extraction? This is political correctness gone mad.

Allow people the latitude to go further. This is stifling the debate

on racism. I am somebody who is of Pakistani background who lives in

this country. I have experienced racism. Lord Heseltine hasn't

this country. I have experienced experienced this. He doesn't know

anything about racism. What do you say to that? Amjad Bashir is of

Pakistani origin, and how can the party be racist if they have him in

the party? If the party was officially racist comment he

wouldn't be sitting here now, I agree with that. But you have party

officials being outed as former BNP members, and Nigel Farage said, we

don't have tonnes of money to do the disciplined checks. The key point

for UKIP is probably learning from that complete implosion at

for UKIP is probably learning from conference, that when you do become

popular, you come under massive scrutiny, and your party needs to

have a disciplined operation of briefing and messaging. I don't know

if you have the resources to do that, but that is the key difference

between UKIP and other parties. We already have 12 MEPs. So why is your

discipline so poor? All these things that you mention, and I take that on

board, these are things we are going to address. Because you have lost

45% of your MEPs since 2009. That is not a sign of a disciplined party.

It is a very disciplined party going forward. I hope to instil that

discipline. I have worked hard over the last 30 years in business. Our

main supporters, one of them is of Pakistani background, and was

responsible for that leaflet that Michael Crick tried to expose to

Godfrey, where are the Asian faces? Is it a racist party? There is a

difference between being a racist party, which it is not, and Michael

Heseltine did not say that, and an accusation that in a party which is

part of a splinter group of smaller parties on the right, there are some

people who hold racist views, and that seems an answer a bleak true. I

beg to differ. We are not a party of the extreme right. We're appealing

to voters across-the-board. 30% from Labour. We are gaining ground all

over the North. Amjad Bashir, I have to stop it there. Thank you very

much. You may think some politicians are

beyond parity. Peter Brookes's cartoons have betrayed various

leaders. Here is some of his work. And Peter Brookes has joined us.

Sign of the Times is out today. Where'd you get the inspiration

from? The politicians. The ideas come from me, and the agony comes

from it. Is there agony? Yes, quite often there is, come for clock in

the afternoon. There is a process to doing them, but every day is

different, and everyday's news is different. What is the process? The

process is listening to the Today programme. Watching the Daily

Politics as Mac indeed! I do have radio and television on a lot. I get

a lot of feedback from that sort of thing. And then I am thinking and

trying to come to terms with what I want to say and what the target is,

and putting it all together. Has a coalition government provided you

with rich pickings. Has it been easier with two parties in

government? Yes, because from day one of the campaign, I came up with

the idea of Clegg being Cameron's fag. You can actually make that work

within this format. I find that inventing things all the time, ways

of humiliating Clegg by Cameron, is one of life's Rita joys for me. --

one of life's great joys. And you will need a new haircut for George

Osborne now. I have heard that the traditional cartoon is under

pressure. Due to the joys of winged journalism. You do get a lot of

cartoons appearing online in various forms, and once newspapers start to

disappear, which may or may not be in the not too distant future, I

hope not, but it could happen, then we will die out. Ed Miliband doesn't

escape you either. I'm sure everyone has heard of Ed Miliband being

compared to Wallace and Gromit. Are you laughing? Philip Larkin was once

asked, weighed you get your ideas from, and he said, sheer genius.

When we discuss which of us will ever be remembered by anyone, if it

is not one of us, it is very definitely going to be Peter

Brookes. How did Ed Miliband respond to this? I have done quite a lot of

these, and apparently the people around him have talked about the

fact that Wallace is a national hero and endlessly resourceful. Trying to

put the spin on it! Is there a line you won't cross? That is difficult

to say. It is terribly difficult to say. I can only answer that from

each day's experience. Let's have a look at the final one, this is a bit

different. Every cartoon isn't necessarily a

laughter cartoon, and I'm dealing with a lot of serious matters. And I

am, by nature, not afraid, not an interventionist. And the whole point

of this cartoon was that Abu Qatada was having a gun held to his head

whilst at the same time Cameron was arming, or not. Thank you very much.

There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz. The

question was: What new accessory was Boris Johnson spotted wearing

yesterday? The answer: A new pair of glasses, which Boris described as

being "a bit Elton John". We gave it away! Peter Brookes, thank you very

much. That's all for today. Thanks to Phil Collins, Sean Worth and all

my guests. I will be back tomorrow. Goodbye.