17/09/2012 Newsnight


17/09/2012

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 17/09/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

They will raise standards, they will be fairer and more efficient.

:00:11.:00:14.

That was what the Conservative Government said when it first

:00:14.:00:19.

brought in GCS Es, and that's pretty much what the new

:00:19.:00:22.

Conservative-led Government is arguing for now they are abolishing

:00:22.:00:26.

them. Or put it another way, if a change is such good news for these

:00:26.:00:29.

people, why is the Government waiting five years before the first

:00:29.:00:35.

of the new English Baccalaureate exams happens. The free schools

:00:35.:00:40.

Evangelist, Toby Young, and an education campaigner are here to be

:00:41.:00:44.

disagreeable. The Government ponders fresh budget cuts, wage

:00:44.:00:48.

freezes have been a fact of life since the crash, Newsnight learns

:00:48.:00:54.

that benefits may soon get the same treatment. More British troops are

:00:54.:00:59.

killed by a rogue Afghan police detatchment, while two Americans

:00:59.:01:03.

die at Camp Bastion, where Prince Harry was based. Did he get more

:01:03.:01:08.

protection than other soldiers. Once we knew on Friday night that

:01:08.:01:11.

the perimeter at bastion had been breached, he would have been moved

:01:11.:01:15.

to a secure position, under effective guard. And this. I will

:01:15.:01:21.

have another cup of tea. One false move and the badger gets it. As the

:01:21.:01:27.

Government authorise a cull, is it time we stopped being sentimental

:01:27.:01:31.

about animals. Springwatch's Simon King will defend badger rights,

:01:31.:01:41.
:01:41.:01:48.

from the Tory MP, Anne McIntosh. It is the best part of 25 years since

:01:49.:01:55.

the Conservatives brought in GCSEs, when they said O-levels were --E

:01:55.:02:01.

levels were clamped out. Now they want to scrap them and bring in

:02:01.:02:04.

something called the English Baccalaureate. Nobody wants

:02:05.:02:07.

standards to fall and children to fail, the only important question

:02:07.:02:17.
:02:17.:02:19.

is will the change work. You can turn over your paper now.

:02:19.:02:24.

A spring pour-style maths lesson in central London. Michael Gove has

:02:24.:02:29.

often praised the academic rigour of the small Asian state and its

:02:29.:02:33.

tough exams. Students at the King Soloman Academy are learning to

:02:33.:02:39.

master maths the Singapore way. two main differences between the

:02:39.:02:42.

Singapore approach and the conventional approach would be, one,

:02:42.:02:47.

in the style of teaching, which has much more of a concrete and

:02:47.:02:51.

tangible element built into every lesson, and the second would be the

:02:51.:02:54.

structure of the curriculum. Rather than structuring the curriculum

:02:54.:03:02.

based on two -week units and moving from fractions to algegra, and

:03:02.:03:07.

decimals, back to algegra and fractions. We spend six or seven

:03:07.:03:11.

weeks just on one topic, then we move on to the next topic. What

:03:11.:03:14.

that structure allows us to do is achieve depth and mastry rather

:03:14.:03:17.

than breath and light coverage. Which is the way the system

:03:17.:03:21.

currently works in most schools? Exactly, that is the way it

:03:21.:03:27.

currently works in most schools. School starts here at 8.00am,

:03:27.:03:31.

finshes most days at 4.30 and there is a lot of homework. Just five

:03:31.:03:36.

days in, these new pupils say they enjoy it. Even if you are not

:03:36.:03:39.

getting something, he explains it to you loads of times, he will

:03:39.:03:44.

explain it again and it will still be fun. I think maths is really fun.

:03:44.:03:50.

I have learned that you can do 60 questions in less than 50 seconds

:03:50.:03:56.

which is really good and now I will improve my multiplication knowledge.

:03:56.:04:00.

Over half the pupils are on free school meals, three quarters don't

:04:00.:04:05.

speak English at home. The headteacher is ambitious for them,

:04:05.:04:09.

he welcomes Michael Gove's reform. For me and our school, we believe

:04:09.:04:12.

all children are capable of achieving academic success, and

:04:12.:04:15.

reaching a high bar. And through the dedication of the staff here

:04:15.:04:19.

and their families, we will help them to do that. For me, having a

:04:19.:04:23.

high bar is a good thing, because it challenges us and them to make

:04:23.:04:28.

sure the children are well educated and able to succeed after 16.

:04:28.:04:33.

Broadly Michael Gove's plan is that GCSE will be replaced by the

:04:33.:04:37.

English Baccalaureate, the first courses will start in September

:04:37.:04:42.

2015. The exams will be more rigorous, there will be one test,

:04:42.:04:47.

no moduals. And no course work in core subjects. And only one Exam

:04:47.:04:53.

Board will set the exam in each subject. Critical to reform is

:04:53.:04:58.

ending an examination system that nas rored the curriculum, forced

:04:58.:05:03.

idea listic professionals to teach to the test, and allowed head

:05:03.:05:07.

teachers to offer the softest possible options. We believe the

:05:07.:05:11.

race to the bottom is to end, it is time to tackle grade inflation and

:05:11.:05:15.

dumbing down, we believe it is time to raise aspirations and restore

:05:15.:05:19.

rigour to the examinations. We on this side of the House, will not

:05:19.:05:24.

support changes that only work for some children. We need system-wide

:05:24.:05:29.

improvement, and we need change that enjoys genuine support from

:05:29.:05:34.

the world of education and from employers. The truth is, that these

:05:34.:05:39.

plans don't meet those challenges. This announcement comes in the

:05:39.:05:43.

middle of the biggest controversy ever to hit the GCSE exam, over the

:05:43.:05:47.

grading of this year's English language papers, that has seriously

:05:47.:05:51.

undermined the credibility of the test, and the rows is not over --

:05:51.:05:55.

row is not over yet. The difference between England and Wales is to the

:05:55.:05:59.

best way of handling this, and late tomorrow some Welsh students are

:05:59.:06:03.

likely to get new grades. Michael Gove is genuine about

:06:03.:06:09.

consulting on the best possible exam system to fit with making sure

:06:09.:06:13.

that we have the best available education for children of all

:06:14.:06:16.

abilities, in every school, then he wouldn't be starting from here. He

:06:16.:06:21.

would be starting from a discussion about what is in the curriculum,

:06:21.:06:27.

what do we need to test, and what do we need to test it.

:06:27.:06:32.

Any questions to ask Mr Clegg, he's the Deputy Prime Minister. This is

:06:32.:06:35.

a coalition initiative, it was the Liberal Democrat who reportedly

:06:35.:06:39.

delayed the start of the new exam, and insisted there be one test for

:06:39.:06:44.

all. Some doubt the changes now planned are really significant.

:06:44.:06:51.

Lots of these changes were already in train. For example, the moduals

:06:51.:06:55.

were going for 2014, the Baccalaureate subjects were already

:06:55.:06:58.

in place, as an accountability measure rather than a curriculum

:06:58.:07:06.

for all. The new GCSEs that were just introduced that were already

:07:06.:07:09.

including more challenging questions. A consultation will last

:07:09.:07:12.

three months, then in the new year Exam Boards will start to bid to

:07:12.:07:17.

run the new qualifications. But the first students will only start

:07:17.:07:20.

studying for them in three years time, after the next general

:07:20.:07:24.

election. Here to discuss this are Toby Young,

:07:24.:07:28.

who is the co-founder of the West London Free School, and Jan Hodges,

:07:28.:07:34.

a former teacher and CE O of the education charity, The Edge

:07:34.:07:37.

Foundation. Let's start to find some agreement first. Is there

:07:38.:07:42.

something wrong with the current system? Absolutely, we believe very

:07:42.:07:46.

strongly that the current curriculum is not catering for the

:07:46.:07:51.

wide range of skills and abilities that it nieds to, we would very

:07:51.:07:58.

much like -- needs to, we would like all students studying academic

:07:58.:08:03.

subjects, but also vocational subjects, some overarching

:08:03.:08:09.

Baccalaureate that necks all those achievements.

:08:09.:08:13.

You would agree that the current system isn't working, is this the

:08:13.:08:19.

correct solution to the problem? Yes, first of all, we have to say

:08:19.:08:23.

it is uncontroversial that GCSEs are not working. We have

:08:23.:08:28.

established that? Not for the same reason as January. We have

:08:28.:08:32.

different reasons? One reason is the introduction of one overarching

:08:32.:08:36.

Exam Board, the problem with more than one co-operation board, in

:08:36.:08:39.

order to compete for business, they lower standards and you have a race

:08:40.:08:44.

to the bottom. Another thing the reforms today will do is limit the

:08:44.:08:52.

number of students getting the top grade in 98 -- 1998, 14% got A or

:08:52.:08:57.

A*s, last year almost a quarter of all pupils got As or A*s, we need

:08:57.:09:02.

to limit the top mark to the very best pupils. Also the introduction

:09:02.:09:06.

of the English Baccalaureate will make a difference. The problem with

:09:06.:09:12.

having more than one Baccalaureate is it eliminates the purpose of it.

:09:12.:09:16.

The reason for having it is to make sure that all children, no matter

:09:16.:09:20.

what their background get to study this core body of facts, and leave

:09:20.:09:25.

school with some grasp of the world, and not at a disadvantage when it

:09:25.:09:29.

comes to competing with children who have been to grammar schools or

:09:29.:09:33.

independent schools. Let's take that key point, the key thing about

:09:33.:09:37.

the English Baccalaureate and what he is promosing, what is wrong with

:09:37.:09:44.

his -- proposing, what is wrong with his idea? We don't think

:09:44.:09:48.

anything is wrong, no-one would argue the core subjects are very

:09:48.:09:53.

important. We also believe it is important for people to experience

:09:53.:09:56.

vocational subjects, engineering, those kinds of practical and

:09:56.:10:00.

applied schools. You can't do an English Baccalaureate in those

:10:00.:10:03.

subjects? No it is confined to the axe defplic core. We would like to

:10:03.:10:10.

-- academic core. We would like it widened to take in the range of the

:10:10.:10:12.

subjects. The illusion Baccalaureate won't be mandatory,

:10:12.:10:16.

people won't have to do those subjects. It is not nearly as

:10:16.:10:19.

draconian a reform as some people imagine. But the problem with what

:10:19.:10:25.

you have been saying, is it can be code, it can be a smoke screen,

:10:25.:10:30.

under which the curriculum is dumbed down. To give you an example,

:10:30.:10:34.

in 2004, the last Government made foreign language no longer

:10:34.:10:41.

mandatory, but they did make ICT mandatory, before coming on TV

:10:41.:10:46.

tonight, I memorised a question set in 2010, what can you not do on a

:10:46.:10:56.
:10:56.:10:59.

computer, (a) send an e-mail (b) book a holiday) and the Examination

:10:59.:11:04.

Board that set the exam was one of the boards that was exposed as

:11:04.:11:08.

spoon feeding the answers to that. The answer was not trying before

:11:08.:11:14.

you buy it, was it? That is it. not sure the relevance it has?

:11:15.:11:20.

is the dumbing down that has taken place as a result of GCSEs.

:11:20.:11:24.

does it possibly make sense not to do anything about this until 2017?

:11:24.:11:28.

I think that was an accommodation the Secretary of State had to reach

:11:28.:11:35.

with Nick Clegg. That man introduced as the Deputy Prime

:11:35.:11:38.

Minister! He was introduced as Deputy Prime Minister. I think if

:11:38.:11:41.

he had his way it would be introduced more quickly. I think we

:11:41.:11:44.

need more debate and discussion, we need to ask harders questions about

:11:44.:11:48.

why we want people to learn certain things, what is the purpose of it.

:11:48.:11:50.

Are we really preparing people for the 21st sent treatment will

:11:50.:11:55.

requiring them to do three-hour written exams at the end, as the

:11:55.:11:59.

only means of assessment, is that really preparing people for the

:11:59.:12:04.

world of work. Employers want people who can problem-solve,

:12:04.:12:10.

creative, innovative, I'm not sure that just sticking to academic

:12:10.:12:14.

subjects alone, and just doing three R compassions will deliver

:12:14.:12:19.

the improfpls we need. The current system isn't producing the people

:12:19.:12:25.

we need? We are not disagree with that. It was interesting to hear

:12:25.:12:29.

about Singapore, they have been rowing back a lot from a lot of

:12:29.:12:33.

rote learning and preparation for exams. They are recognising their

:12:33.:12:37.

young people need a wider range of skilgs and abilities. I'm not sure,

:12:37.:12:42.

would you -- Kills and abilities. I'm not sure, -- Skims and

:12:42.:12:49.

abilities. I'm not sure would you describe Singapore people as people

:12:49.:12:54.

very skilled? I think it is a stereotypical portrait of an

:12:54.:12:59.

eastern male as a nerd and incapable of creativity. I don't

:12:59.:13:09.
:13:09.:13:11.

think that is true. I think it is a myth to say you can't foster

:13:11.:13:18.

innovation and creativity with rote learning. There was included 100

:13:18.:13:23.

Latin phrases by rote for Shakespeare, but you can't say he

:13:23.:13:27.

wasn't creative. The skills set as wanted by employers of the 21st

:13:27.:13:32.

century, were the same as in the 20th century, and 19th century, and

:13:32.:13:37.

stretching back to time immemorial. We need a range of knowledge and

:13:37.:13:42.

skills, not downgrading knowledge to upgrade skills. I agree, that is

:13:42.:13:45.

right. We have ended where we started. We know the Government is

:13:45.:13:49.

committed to cutting the benefits bill as part of its efforts to

:13:49.:13:52.

control public spending. What we haven't known until now is how they

:13:52.:13:55.

are going to do it. Tonight Newsnight can reveal that the

:13:55.:13:59.

Government is looking at freezing benefits and cutting the rate in

:13:59.:14:03.

which they increase in value. It is bound to ignite controversy. Our

:14:03.:14:13.
:14:13.:14:13.

political editor is has the story. # Let me take you back to 2003

:14:14.:14:20.

Let me take you back to 2003 indeed, back then the average salary might

:14:20.:14:25.

have seen Anne crease in wage. Inflation hovered at a manageable

:14:25.:14:31.

level, bright brass fittings, shiny pans, even a new bathroom suite,

:14:31.:14:38.

were all, sort of, affordable. A decade on, that is unlikely, new

:14:38.:14:44.

soft furnishings are only the half of T it is trickling a debate about

:14:44.:14:49.

fairness in Government. People with salaries don't expect an increase

:14:49.:14:53.

in their earnings any time soon. But people on benefits have seen

:14:53.:14:56.

small increases to low incomes. Been fits are linked to inflation,

:14:56.:15:00.

and inflation has been vigorous, the Chancellor tried to end this

:15:00.:15:04.

link last September, then he was beaten back by the Lib Dems and the

:15:04.:15:06.

Welfare Secretary, Iain Duncan Smith. But now the Conservatives

:15:06.:15:10.

are returning to the issue. The Prime Minister floated an end

:15:10.:15:14.

to this when he gave a speech on welfare in June. There are national

:15:15.:15:20.

questions we have to ask. This year we increased benefits by 5.2%. This

:15:20.:15:24.

was in line with the inflation rate last September. But it was almost

:15:24.:15:29.

twice as much as the average wage increase. Given that so many

:15:29.:15:31.

working people are struggling to make ends meet, we have to ask

:15:31.:15:37.

whether this is the right approach. It might be better to link benefits

:15:37.:15:42.

to prices, unless wages have slowed, in which case they should be linked

:15:42.:15:45.

to wages instead. Newsnight understands that the Government is

:15:45.:15:49.

looking at a new figure, they have estimated that had benefits

:15:49.:15:53.

increased in line with earnings over the last four years since 200,

:15:53.:15:58.

they would have paid out �14 -- 2008, they would have paid out �14

:15:58.:16:02.

billion less from the Exchequer. The public research think-tank has

:16:02.:16:04.

come up with its own simply imposing numbers, they estimate

:16:04.:16:10.

over the last year, had working age benefits been uprated in line with

:16:10.:16:14.

earnings, rather than the 5.2% inflation that they did go up by,

:16:14.:16:18.

then �5 billion would have been saved. Looking at one benefit in

:16:18.:16:21.

particular, the think-tank says it would mean that jobseeker's

:16:21.:16:29.

allowance would now be �66.81, rather than �71 a week.

:16:29.:16:32.

That 5.2% figure last September was probably an outliar, and people

:16:32.:16:38.

don't expect it to be repeated any time soon. But wages are bumbling

:16:38.:16:42.

along, and inflation is doing unpredictable things, it could

:16:42.:16:48.

outpace wage increases for some time. To move things back to those

:16:48.:16:52.

in work, those at the top are considering a par dime shift. As

:16:52.:16:55.

earnings feel like they are being minaturised, Newsnight understands

:16:55.:16:59.

that those at the top of Government are trying to bring what they think

:16:59.:17:03.

is some parity to the incredibly shrinking family budgets. A freeze

:17:03.:17:07.

to benefits being contemplated for two years, before a new link will

:17:07.:17:11.

be imposed to earnings, but what to freeze.

:17:11.:17:15.

The most dramatic option includes freezing 90% of benefits, it could

:17:15.:17:19.

bring in �7 billion. But it will require a freezing of benefits for

:17:19.:17:24.

those on disabilities, which my sources suggest they would not do,

:17:24.:17:34.
:17:34.:17:34.

without significant amealation. The IPPR calculate that if all

:17:34.:17:40.

working age benefits were frozen from 2014-2015, �4 billion could be

:17:40.:17:43.

saved in the further two years, freezing benefits of those of

:17:43.:17:47.

working age. To get to the �7 billion figure, the Government will

:17:47.:17:51.

have to go to places they may not want to, freezing child benefits

:17:51.:17:55.

and Child Tax Credits. The think- tank believes this would bust the

:17:55.:17:58.

child poverty target, and if the next election is to be fought on

:17:58.:18:02.

living standards, the Government would have found itself in a very

:18:02.:18:07.

tight spot. The Institute for Fiscal Studies today urged caution,

:18:07.:18:10.

believing any shift in uprating would have limited effects,

:18:10.:18:16.

inflation this year has fallen more rapidly than expected, the effects

:18:16.:18:19.

on forecast benefit spending will be small, their researchers told

:18:19.:18:29.
:18:29.:18:30.

Newsnight. The MP of Spellthorpe, disagrees, and thinks his

:18:30.:18:33.

institutes believe they should continue to, and the Government

:18:33.:18:39.

could have �6 billion out of a benefit of �80 billion f they froze

:18:40.:18:44.

benefit for three years assuming an inflation rate of 2.5%. It is

:18:44.:18:47.

important to look at where we have come from. Wages haven't increased,

:18:47.:18:52.

people in low-paid jobs are not getting wage increases. It is only

:18:52.:18:57.

right, across the board, to put a cash freeze, that means if you earn

:18:58.:19:02.

�100, then you earn the nominal amount in year two and year three.

:19:02.:19:06.

This can save the Exchequer a lot of money. This is not some joud

:19:06.:19:10.

landish idea, the Swedes did -- outlandish idea, the Swedes did it

:19:11.:19:14.

to sort out their problem, Israel did it recently in the last five or

:19:14.:19:18.

six years, and tackled their deficit and public spending problem.

:19:18.:19:21.

For some there is the parity argument, but there is also the

:19:21.:19:25.

bottom line. The Chancellor needs to find an extra �10 billion from

:19:25.:19:28.

the welfare budget, in order to keep cuts to other Government

:19:28.:19:33.

departments, in future, the same as they are right now.

:19:33.:19:36.

If you look back at what has happened to benefits in recent

:19:36.:19:40.

history, benefits for children have gone up by more than prices, but

:19:40.:19:43.

the benefits for the parents haven't. We have done some research

:19:43.:19:47.

to look at forecasts of what will happen to poverty, based on current

:19:47.:19:52.

changes to the benefit system. We are seeing a rise in poverty up to

:19:52.:19:58.

2020. If benefits are cut further, we will see an even bigger rise.

:19:58.:20:04.

Benefits are also paid to those in work, as well as those out. Ending

:20:05.:20:07.

the link wouldn't clearly incentivise work, but the

:20:07.:20:12.

Government thinks the status quo is actually retro. Paying for tea and

:20:12.:20:17.

toast should feel the same for everyone.

:20:17.:20:20.

Allegra Stratton is with us. How serious is the Government about

:20:20.:20:24.

going through with this? If they are going to meet their �10 billion

:20:24.:20:26.

cuts to the welfare budget, which the Chancellor has said they want

:20:26.:20:30.

to, and the Prime Minister has repeatedly said he wants to, they

:20:30.:20:36.

are serious. �10 billion, a wealth tax the Liberal Democrats have

:20:36.:20:42.

proposed, brings in �2 billion, something like this, it is �4-�7

:20:42.:20:48.

billion, �7 billion seems too harsh, but �4 billion is doable. You have

:20:48.:20:51.

other policies, something like to child benefit, you are talking

:20:51.:20:54.

about having to go to something like this if you are ever to get up

:20:54.:20:58.

to the scale of �10 billion, otherwise you are around the �2,

:20:58.:21:03.

this is what they have said they will do. You think they will go

:21:03.:21:05.

with it? This is being considered at the to much Government.

:21:05.:21:10.

With us now is Anne Begg, the MP for Aberdeen South, and also the

:21:10.:21:14.

chair of the Work and Pensions Select Committee, also with us is

:21:14.:21:17.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the MP for north- east Somerset. You're not going to

:21:18.:21:22.

sit there and say we are all in this together? I will sit here and

:21:22.:21:26.

say it is right that benefits should not rise faster than

:21:26.:21:30.

earnings. It is unfair on people who are working that their earnings

:21:30.:21:35.

are rising more slowly than those people on out of work benefits.

:21:35.:21:39.

can you dispute the fairness of what he's just said? Because most

:21:40.:21:43.

years earnings do increase far more than benefits do, even when they

:21:43.:21:47.

are linked to RPI as they were originally, now it is CPI. I think

:21:47.:21:53.

it would be unfair to take one year where earnings were around, prices

:21:53.:21:57.

are around 5.2%, and earnings about 2%, which is what happened last

:21:57.:22:01.

year. And think that some how that will be the case from now on. The

:22:01.:22:04.

people we are talking about are people who don't get a great deal

:22:04.:22:11.

of money in the first place. Explain? Last year and this year

:22:11.:22:21.
:22:21.:22:22.

earnings have risen slowly more slowly than prices, so those on

:22:22.:22:27.

benefits are getting more increase. You wouldn't dispute that?

:22:27.:22:31.

absolutely want work to pay, that is right. We are talking about such

:22:31.:22:34.

small, marginal amounts in terms it of the individual, it is �5 a week,

:22:35.:22:42.

it is a lot if you are only on �68 as opposed to �72, or �73 it would

:22:42.:22:47.

have to be. The difference for those who are on the lower end of

:22:47.:22:50.

the scale is that it is the proportion of their income that is

:22:50.:22:53.

affected, as opposed to somebody who is in work. You also have to

:22:53.:22:57.

remember, of course, that more than 50% of benefits go to people who

:22:57.:23:02.

are in work, they are at the low pay end. Give them a double whammy

:23:02.:23:07.

of lower wages, and lower benefits, and they are going to be hurt quite

:23:07.:23:11.

badly as well. There is another element to this that strikes one as

:23:11.:23:17.

a reasonably dispassionate observer, that people on benefits at that

:23:17.:23:20.

level are being penaliseded in a way that you promised pensioners

:23:20.:23:25.

will never be penalised? That is a very good point. But promises were

:23:25.:23:29.

made for this parliament, to pensioners, there is a triple lock

:23:29.:23:34.

for them. I think that politicians ought to stuck to their promises,

:23:34.:23:37.

even if they turn out to be very difficult to keep. But the

:23:37.:23:40.

treatment you accept is completely different? Pensioners have been

:23:40.:23:44.

given guarantees, not just by the Conservatives, but by all parties,

:23:44.:23:48.

to protect their pensions, and I think we should not change that,

:23:48.:23:52.

without having put it forward in a manifesto, first. I could say to

:23:52.:23:59.

you, pensioners, many of them, vote for you and your party, people on

:23:59.:24:02.

benefits very often don't? Don't vote, let alone Conservative.

:24:02.:24:06.

you can treat them as you like? don't think that's right. I don't

:24:06.:24:08.

think the Government is that callous about the way it treats

:24:08.:24:13.

people. I think it made certain promises, and it is right to keep

:24:13.:24:17.

those. Do I think over the next ten years we have to look at

:24:17.:24:22.

pensioners' benefits, I think we will have to. Do you agree with

:24:22.:24:26.

that? I don't think we should be taking money from those who are the

:24:26.:24:29.

poorest in society. Do you think pensioners are getting an easy deal,

:24:29.:24:33.

when these sort of arrangements are looked at? They are certainly being

:24:33.:24:36.

protected at the moment. Should they be? 50% of the welfare budget

:24:37.:24:41.

is on the old age pension, 70% of welfare spending goes on those who

:24:42.:24:45.

are offer retirement age. So the bulk of these cuts, all of these

:24:45.:24:50.

cuts are falling on a working age population. It is the poorest in

:24:50.:24:57.

society that are losing out. But is it fair? Is it fair that pensioners

:24:57.:25:00.

should be privileged in the way they are? I wouldn't argue we

:25:00.:25:04.

should be attacking pensioners, I don't think we should attack anyone

:25:04.:25:09.

on the lower wage. You are going to wish it away this deficit?

:25:09.:25:13.

Absolutely not. Why was it too difficult to keep a 50p rate of

:25:13.:25:16.

income tax. That was too difficult or complicated, or cost far too

:25:16.:25:21.

much money, let's go and hit the pensioners and hit the poorest.

:25:21.:25:26.

50p tax rate doesn't raise any money, that is its problem. The

:25:26.:25:29.

economy remains in a mess, the Government is spending more money

:25:29.:25:33.

than it raises in taxes, or is likely to do in the foreseeable

:25:33.:25:42.

future, and it is business -- the business is spending on welfare,

:25:42.:25:46.

the biggest part of the budget. If we do nothing about welfare the

:25:46.:25:50.

country is insolvent, we have to make tough decisions. You already

:25:50.:25:53.

said most of the Welfare Bill goes to pensioners? That is why the

:25:53.:25:58.

pension age has to rise higher than it is, and people have to work

:25:58.:26:03.

longer. That is already going on. We have to be clear about this in

:26:03.:26:08.

the election manifesto, whether we can maintain things like free bus

:26:08.:26:12.

passes and the Winter Fuel Allowance. We mustn't break

:26:12.:26:16.

promises given in the past, if we do the whole trust in politics

:26:16.:26:19.

remains decayed. The one thing poorer people do is spend their

:26:19.:26:24.

money. If we are looking at a means of reinflating their the economy,

:26:24.:26:28.

they are the ones who should be -- reinflating the economy, they are

:26:29.:26:33.

the ones who should be getting money, rather than those who save

:26:33.:26:38.

their money. If we start to really starve the poorest of the money,

:26:38.:26:42.

their communities get affect, they don't have the spending power in

:26:42.:26:47.

the shops, and there can be a run- on effect. The deprived community

:26:47.:26:49.

becomes more deprived as local businesses and shops close down

:26:49.:26:53.

because the money isn't there. That, if Government was being sensible,

:26:53.:26:57.

that's where they should be looking to inflate the economy. Thank you

:26:57.:27:00.

very much. It has come to something when the

:27:00.:27:04.

Defence Secretary has to go to parliament to reassure our elected

:27:04.:27:07.

representatives that the safety of British troops in Afghanistan is a

:27:07.:27:10.

top priority. He had to do it because this weekend two more

:27:10.:27:14.

British soldiers were killed by supposed allies in the Afghan army.

:27:14.:27:19.

Separately two Americans lost their lives, in the theoretically safe

:27:19.:27:23.

compound of Camp Bastion, in yet another called green-on-blue attack.

:27:23.:27:26.

I will be asking the Defence Secretary, Philip Hammond, what we

:27:26.:27:30.

are still doing there, shortly. And if Prince Harry deserves special

:27:30.:27:36.

protection. First, though, here is this report.

:27:36.:27:41.

NATO insists after 1 years, the insurgency in Afghanistan is now on

:27:41.:27:45.

the back foot, that didn't feel like that in Kabul today.

:27:45.:27:48.

Protesters around the world have reacted against the anti-Islamic

:27:48.:27:52.

film, produced in the USA, that ridicules the Prophet Mohammed. In

:27:52.:27:56.

the Afghan capital, protestors burned cars and shouted "death to

:27:56.:28:01.

America". Not what NATO needed after the humiliating attack on

:28:01.:28:06.

Friday night at Camp Bastion. One of the most heavily-guarded bases

:28:06.:28:11.

in the country. Taliban commanders, armed with guns and rockets, and

:28:11.:28:16.

wearing suicide vests and US uniforms, killed two US Marine,

:28:16.:28:19.

destroyed six Harrier jets, damaged another two, and destroyed

:28:19.:28:25.

buildings. The cost was estimated at tens of millions of dollars. The

:28:25.:28:28.

base is where Prince Harry is currently deployed, the Taliban

:28:28.:28:32.

said they would have killed him if they found him. The attack was a

:28:33.:28:38.

humiliation for NATO, and follow as whole series of called green-on-

:28:38.:28:41.

blue incidents, involving rogue Afghan soldiers or police, turning

:28:41.:28:45.

their guns on allied troops. The number of such attacks has been

:28:45.:28:48.

rising. In the latest incident at the weekend, two British soldiers

:28:48.:28:52.

were shot by a man wearing an Afghan Police uniform, four

:28:52.:28:59.

Americans were killed in a similar attack. In 2007, there were only

:28:59.:29:03.

two NATO troops killed in such incidents, but by last year the

:29:03.:29:09.

number had risen to 35. So far this year there have been 51 green-on-

:29:09.:29:13.

blue killings. Today the Defence Secretary, Philip Hammond, was

:29:13.:29:18.

called to the House to discuss the price in green-on-blue deaths. He

:29:18.:29:24.

was challenged by Labour MP Paul Flynn. Our soldiers are being

:29:24.:29:30.

killed by their allies, it is not warfare, it is murder. We should

:29:30.:29:34.

now take the decision that has been taken by our colleagues in the

:29:34.:29:37.

Canadian parliament, in the Dutch parliament, to bring their troops

:29:37.:29:44.

home. They have been home for two years. The French are coming home

:29:44.:29:48.

early and so are the New Zealanders. There is no reason why we shouldn't

:29:48.:29:52.

do what the country wants, and bring our brave soldiers home by

:29:52.:29:57.

Christmas. All this, of course, at a time when NATO is preparing to

:29:57.:30:00.

leave, handing over maintenance of law and order to Afghan security

:30:00.:30:05.

and police forces. Last week in Afghanistan, the Defence Secretary

:30:05.:30:09.

suggested there could be more flexibility and more British troops

:30:09.:30:13.

than originally suggested might withdraw next year, ahead of the

:30:13.:30:17.

2014 date set by NATO for the ending of combat operations.

:30:17.:30:22.

Military commander on the ground are telling me, in sharp contra

:30:22.:30:26.

distinction to what I was hearing from them only four or five months

:30:26.:30:30.

ago, that they now believe their force requirements during 2013 will

:30:30.:30:35.

allow scope for drawdown from current numbers, during 2013, on

:30:35.:30:40.

our way to our objective of complete drawdown by the end of

:30:40.:30:45.

2014. But today there was one hopeful sign in Kabul, with the

:30:45.:30:51.

men's team at the world 2012 cricket championship in shrilaankka,

:30:51.:30:56.

the Afghan women's team, who get no official report d Sri Lanka, the

:30:56.:31:03.

Afghan women's team, who get no official support were out

:31:03.:31:07.

practising. The Taliban would not allow women to play sport at all.

:31:07.:31:13.

This is the kind of society NATO wants. It thrives, today, despite

:31:13.:31:17.

bombers. Earlier I spoke to Philip Hammond,

:31:17.:31:23.

the Defence Secretary. For what did British soldiers give their lives?

:31:23.:31:27.

Like many other soldiers who have given their lives, they are there

:31:27.:31:30.

to defend Britain's national security, to make sure that

:31:30.:31:33.

Afghanistan can't be a base for international terrorists to attack

:31:33.:31:40.

us and our allies, as they did with impunitive years and few years ago.

:31:40.:31:43.

We have been told that since the start of the deployment, now we

:31:43.:31:48.

have a situation where members of a supposedly allied army are

:31:48.:31:52.

attacking us? We have set out a strategy to withdraw from our

:31:52.:31:56.

combat role in Afghanistan by the end of 2014. In order to protect

:31:56.:32:01.

our legacy, and to protect our national security into the future,

:32:01.:32:08.

we have to make that transition by training and equipping the Afghans

:32:08.:32:10.

to defend their own national security, and protect their own

:32:10.:32:14.

territory, to make sure it can't be used by international terrorists.

:32:14.:32:17.

That necessarily means our forces exposing themselves to a certain

:32:18.:32:22.

amount of risk as they work closely alongside the Afghans. What you are

:32:22.:32:27.

saying, effectively, if I read you correctly, is this, you are

:32:27.:32:32.

committed to withdraw by the end of 2014, that in order for that to

:32:32.:32:35.

happen the Afghan army has to be built up, and clearly, in the

:32:35.:32:41.

process of building up the Afghan Army, vetting procedures have been

:32:41.:32:46.

completely hopeless? There is a number of measures, both ISAF and

:32:46.:32:52.

the Afghan Government are now taking in response to this spate of

:32:52.:32:56.

green-on-blue attacks. You are right, that during the phase of

:32:56.:33:00.

rapid build-up of the Afghan security forces, not enough

:33:00.:33:05.

attention was paid to close vetting. The Afghans are now, woulding right

:33:05.:33:09.

the way back through their force, re-- working right the way back

:33:09.:33:12.

through their force revetting people. They have assigned twice

:33:12.:33:16.

the number of direct rate of security people to the Afghan --

:33:17.:33:21.

direct yaitd of security people to the Afghan Army, they are revetting

:33:21.:33:24.

people when they have come back from leave, or if they have been A

:33:24.:33:32.

wol. On our side we have put -- awol, on our side we have put in

:33:32.:33:36.

place measures to make sure the troops are specially protected

:33:36.:33:41.

where there is Afghan contact. And other procedures to make sure we

:33:41.:33:45.

minimise the risk. We cannot eliminate the risk that our troops

:33:45.:33:50.

face. This is a high-risk procedure, but it is essential, if we are to

:33:51.:33:54.

deliver future security in Afghanistan, while being able to

:33:54.:34:02.

withdraw ourselves from combat. these young men have died in order

:34:02.:34:08.

that we can see the inadequacies of a poll say that we insisted upon --

:34:08.:34:13.

of a policy that we insisted on? are building up Afghan security

:34:14.:34:18.

forces, so we can first withdraw to a supporting role, a then come home.

:34:18.:34:23.

There is nothing in conditions on the ground which would affect the

:34:23.:34:27.

timetable of our withdrawal, is that correct? I don't think that is

:34:27.:34:31.

true at all. It is possible we could be there after the end of

:34:31.:34:35.

2014, if things get bad? We have made a commitment to be out of the

:34:35.:34:38.

combat role by the end of 2014. Clearly conditions on the ground

:34:38.:34:41.

have nothing whatever to do with it, they might speed up the withdrawal,

:34:41.:34:46.

but that is it? We have got just over a two-year programme to

:34:46.:34:52.

complete the transition to Afghan forces. There is a clear plan of

:34:52.:34:56.

districts see qeingsally transferring to Afghan lead

:34:56.:35:01.

responsibility, and for the allied forces to move into what they call

:35:01.:35:04.

a Security Force Assistance posture. So we have a very clear plan. We

:35:04.:35:13.

are executing it, and we are not going to be derailed from it,

:35:13.:35:16.

however devastating the psychological impact of it is. We

:35:17.:35:19.

will put in place the measure necessary to combat them, and we

:35:19.:35:23.

will continue with our plan. That is what the Taliban doesn't want us

:35:23.:35:30.

to do. It is because the Taliban recognises the impact that it will

:35:30.:35:34.

have on their aspirations, us leaving behind a properly-trained

:35:34.:35:39.

and equipped Afghan national security force, that they are so

:35:39.:35:43.

desperate to disrupt this process. One further point, Prince Harry is

:35:43.:35:48.

serving there at present, is he exposed to the same dangers as

:35:48.:35:54.

every other officer there? He's an Apache pilot, he faces the same

:35:54.:35:59.

risks that Apache pilots face as they go about their daily business.

:35:59.:36:04.

He's no more or less exposed to risk than any other Apache pilot.

:36:04.:36:08.

Any stories about him being bundled to safety the moment an attack

:36:08.:36:12.

happens, and being treated differently to other soldiers there,

:36:12.:36:18.

are not true? No, that's a different question. Clearly there

:36:18.:36:22.

are fullback plans, I can't go into the detail of them. But once we

:36:22.:36:27.

knew on Friday night that the perimeter at bastion had been

:36:27.:36:35.

breached, he would have been moved -- Bastion had been breached, he

:36:35.:36:42.

would have been moved to a place of guard. That was so he was receiving

:36:42.:36:46.

special treatment? You asked me if he was at any greater risk. I told

:36:46.:36:50.

you in combat he's at the same risk as any other Apache pilot. Clearly

:36:50.:36:55.

if we have a VIP in theatre, and frank low, if I was there, or you

:36:55.:37:01.

were in Camp Bastion, and there was a breach of the perimeter security,

:37:01.:37:06.

anybody who might, by nature of who they are, be a target, would be put

:37:06.:37:09.

into a secure location. So he's not serving there as an

:37:10.:37:14.

order wry officer, is he? He is serving there -- An ordinary

:37:14.:37:21.

officer, is he? He is serving as an ordinary officer, but there are

:37:21.:37:24.

measures in place that realise he could be a target himself as a

:37:24.:37:29.

result of who he is. If you are thinking up a storyline

:37:29.:37:36.

for the episode of The Thick Of It, you would be hard-pushed to better

:37:36.:37:40.

than the Government minister who allows the destruction of badgers.

:37:40.:37:45.

The English people are notoriously sentimental about animal, they even

:37:45.:37:49.

have a memorial to commemorate their effort for the war effort.

:37:49.:37:55.

Now it is one move and he gets it. There may be no other way to save

:37:55.:38:00.

cattle from bovine tuberculosis, now a license has been granted to

:38:00.:38:06.

allow an experimental cull. Just supposing this sweetly odd old

:38:06.:38:10.

fellow, sniffling about in the wind and the Willows, was really a

:38:10.:38:16.

disease in disguise. We need all the help we can get. The science is

:38:16.:38:21.

complicated, but farmer who lose their cattle and livelihoods to

:38:22.:38:26.

bovine TB, don't share the sentimentalalty. Last year about

:38:26.:38:30.

26,000 cows had to be slaughtered in the name of TB control in

:38:30.:38:35.

England. In the badger cull, up to 6,000 badgers will be shot, in the

:38:35.:38:42.

first two pilot areas named today. Over the next 12 years, as many as

:38:42.:38:47.

130,000 could be sacrificed to save cattle. The Government predicts a

:38:47.:38:53.

16% drop in bovine TB in the culled areas. You know, the scientists

:38:53.:39:02.

know, and we all know it's simply not going to work.

:39:02.:39:06.

Shooting furry animal doesn't make for popular politic. One opinion

:39:06.:39:10.

poll suggests four out of five of us oppose the idea. In the sign of

:39:10.:39:18.

the nervousness about the plan, Waitrose, Co-Op, and M & S, all

:39:18.:39:22.

rushed tonight to say they won't sell milk from farms where badgers

:39:22.:39:25.

are culled. Sainsbury's, on the other hand, has no problem with the

:39:25.:39:31.

scheme. Joining us tonight is wildlife

:39:31.:39:34.

cameraman, Simon King, and Anne McIntosh, who chairs Environment,

:39:35.:39:38.

Food and Rural Affairs Committee. You're here in a private capacity,

:39:38.:39:43.

I take it. Can you think of a policy more likely to lose you

:39:43.:39:47.

support than this? Actually we are united in wanting a healthy badger

:39:47.:39:52.

population. But you are doing it to help the badgers? You need, badgers

:39:52.:39:59.

are on the increase, the incidents of TB in badgers, and through them

:40:00.:40:04.

the incidents of bovine TB has increased. You are shooting badgers

:40:04.:40:10.

because it is good for badgers? are looking to have a vaccine, both

:40:10.:40:14.

for badgers and for cattle, but we are not there yet. This is a pilot.

:40:14.:40:18.

In the meantime you are going to shoot them? This is a pilot cull.

:40:18.:40:23.

And I think we owe it to the farmers and the rural economy of

:40:23.:40:28.

the areas most badly affected, and to the badgers themselves, to

:40:28.:40:32.

eliminate bovine TB, which we have singularly failed to do, or even

:40:32.:40:39.

control it. There you see, it is good for them? May I start by

:40:40.:40:46.

saying, I, the wildlife Trusts whole heartedly sympathise with the

:40:46.:40:48.

farming community, we work alongside them every day, and we

:40:48.:40:53.

have a strong and good relationship with farmer, and empathise with

:40:53.:41:00.

those who have lost a herd with the outbreak, the outcomes are

:41:00.:41:04.

devastating. Science has proved time and time again that killing

:41:04.:41:11.

badge does not have a lasting -- badgers does not have a large and

:41:11.:41:18.

long lasting effect on keeping out bovine TB. That is the problem here.

:41:18.:41:24.

If you kill the badgers the incidents drop by 16%? That leaves

:41:24.:41:30.

84%. You said it has no impact, it clearly does? Little lasting impact.

:41:30.:41:35.

It has to be 570% efficacy, you have to kill 07% or more of the

:41:36.:41:40.

badgers for efficacy. We don't know how much badgers we have. They are

:41:41.:41:44.

hardly endangered? They are not, they are protected. We should be

:41:44.:41:47.

proud of our natural legacy and heritage. We have what represents

:41:47.:41:52.

25% of the badgers in Europe. you thought there might be some

:41:52.:41:58.

connection between the way they are protected and bovine TB spreading

:41:58.:42:06.

the way it is -- it is? The way to deal with it is not to cull badgers.

:42:06.:42:12.

It is by vaccination with the badgers and the cattle. Also by

:42:12.:42:16.

biohusbanding. In Wales they are vaccinating rather than shooting

:42:16.:42:19.

badger, why are they able to do it and England isn't? We need to

:42:19.:42:25.

proceed with the cull. We need to look at the fact that positive

:42:25.:42:28.

reactors in cattle who are vaccinated will increase. You then

:42:28.:42:33.

have the problem, and this is a personal view, you then have a

:42:33.:42:39.

problem that if that is the case, what happens to the meat and the

:42:39.:42:44.

milk from cattle who show signs of TB, after being vaccinated. Will

:42:44.:42:49.

they be allowed, will the milk and products be allowed into the food

:42:49.:42:53.

chain, will the meat be exported. You need to think this out before

:42:53.:42:58.

you start a policy? We are united around the fact that it has to be

:42:58.:43:04.

science-led. You just cannot continue with 26,000 animals being

:43:04.:43:08.

slaughtered, that is an animal welfare cry us is, in any shape or

:43:08.:43:15.

form, 26,000 cattle slaughtered in one year. That is a welfare scandal.

:43:15.:43:20.

26,000 cattle is 100,000 badgers? think you have to grasp the fact, I

:43:20.:43:24.

don't think Simon would disagree with this, any diseased badger will

:43:24.:43:29.

die a grizley death, because it will be exposed and left to die by

:43:29.:43:33.

its own set. The science doesn't support that. It is fact of life.

:43:33.:43:39.

And I think. No it is not. I agree that you do have to find out

:43:39.:43:43.

exactly, we are one of the few European countries to have

:43:43.:43:47.

protected badgers, we need to know how many badgers there are in the

:43:47.:43:53.

population. I think a limited, pilot scheme, will show whether the

:43:53.:43:56.

results do follow the science, and whether it will produce a reduction

:43:56.:44:01.

in the spread of bovine TB. never go to bed at night thinking,

:44:01.:44:05.

you won't go to bed tonight thinking, oh myed God, we are going

:44:05.:44:13.

to have to make another U-turn? This is a pilot cull. If we can

:44:13.:44:18.

actually encourage more research, and encourage, and an earlier

:44:18.:44:22.

development of vaccine, and what the implications are, for the

:44:22.:44:27.

cattle that are vaccinated, you will find all sides would poll that.

:44:27.:44:32.

The vaccine is there now, it is rolled out by the Wildlife Trust in

:44:32.:44:37.

the counties, it is proving an efficacy of nearly 74% efficacy.

:44:37.:44:43.

Which one is that. It is the BCG vaccine for badgers. We want

:44:43.:44:49.

Government very much to put effort, and resources behind a vaccine that

:44:49.:44:54.

is oral. The political bite in this, if the political U-turn comes in,

:44:54.:44:58.

who knows, it will be because badgers are seen to be fluffy,

:44:58.:45:01.

kaudley creature, it is not to d with the science, it is to do with

:45:01.:45:06.

what they look like. That is why I'm not talking about that. You are

:45:06.:45:10.

not a vegetarian, and you wouldn't have a problem killing rats?

:45:10.:45:17.

million rats in Britain, who might carry TB, because they are mammals.

:45:17.:45:26.

Are you happy to see rats rubbed out? I would like BTB rubbed out

:45:26.:45:32.

and efficiently. You would vaccinate rats? No cattle that are

:45:32.:45:36.

suffering. A vaccinated animal doesn't have the disease. I think

:45:36.:45:43.

you accept if you vaccinate a cow, it will show a reactor to the

:45:43.:45:48.

vaccine. I think there needs to be more testing generally, Jeremy, I

:45:48.:45:52.

think we would all support the fact there should be more testing.

:45:52.:45:56.

are talking about a different test? There are two different types of

:45:56.:45:59.

tests, at the last parliament the committee looked at this, we

:45:59.:46:03.

haven't had a chance to look at this in this parliament. If you can

:46:04.:46:09.

increase both the research, and the testing of TB, in badger, and in

:46:09.:46:17.

cattle. Undoubtedly, the Wildlife Trust, I support a robust testing

:46:17.:46:21.

programme, increased security measures. I would agree.

:46:21.:46:26.

Vaccination with badgers and cattle and anE U policy that work. That's

:46:26.:46:30.

it for now, more in a while, interesting goings on at the

:46:30.:46:34.

laboratories in Chicago, they are researching ways of improving the

:46:34.:46:39.

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS