15/06/2011

:00:21. > :00:25.Good morning and welcome to the Daily Politics. Coming up in

:00:25. > :00:30.today's programme: The Chancellor orders a big shake-up of the banks.

:00:30. > :00:32.But has he done enough to avoid a taxpayers' bailout in future?

:00:33. > :00:37.Teachers vote to strike over pensions, and now civil servants

:00:37. > :00:41.look certain to go out too. How should the government respond?

:00:41. > :00:46.It's a big day for Ed Miliband - after a week of bad headlines, can

:00:46. > :00:56.he prove the doubters wrong in PMQs?

:00:56. > :00:57.

:00:57. > :01:02.And have pensioners never had it so good? Turns 60 in Britain today,

:01:02. > :01:06.and it suddenly feels like life is a beach. Free bus passes, eye tests

:01:06. > :01:09.and massive winter fuel payments are all made available to you,

:01:09. > :01:19.regardless of where the work or if you are very rich indeed. But I

:01:19. > :01:24.

:01:24. > :01:27.don't think we can afford it. All that coming up. 90 minutes of

:01:27. > :01:29.public broadcasting service at its finest. And with us for the

:01:29. > :01:31.duration, former Communities Secretary Hazel Blears and former

:01:31. > :01:34.Conservative Cabinet Minister Cecil Parkinson. Welcome to you both.

:01:34. > :01:36.First today, the Chancellor has decided that there should be a

:01:36. > :01:43.separation of the retail and investment operations of the big

:01:43. > :01:51.banks. Banks won't have to sell off their investment arms, but they

:01:51. > :01:54.will have to ringfence their retail divisions to protect depositors.

:01:54. > :01:56.He'll use his annual mansion house speech in the City of London

:01:56. > :01:58.tonight to make the announcement which follows the recommendations

:01:58. > :02:07.of the independent banking commission headed by Sir John

:02:07. > :02:10.Vickers. There had been some doubt about whether George Osborne would

:02:10. > :02:18.go as far as Vickers, though there was pressure from within the

:02:18. > :02:27.coalition and notably from Vince Cable to do so. Cecil Parkinson,

:02:27. > :02:31.has he made the right decision? think he has. You certainly have to

:02:31. > :02:39.separate those two aspects of banking. In fact, I sometimes think

:02:39. > :02:42.the word banking is one of the most over-used words in Britain. A lot

:02:42. > :02:48.of the stuff that has happened was nothing to do with Pang Qing. It

:02:48. > :02:52.was pure speculation. -- it was nothing to do with banking. We

:02:52. > :03:00.dignify the speculation by allowing people to call it investment

:03:00. > :03:06.banking. So I do not think, for many people who invested money with

:03:06. > :03:10.the big banks, had no idea their money was being used by packages of

:03:10. > :03:15.duff mortgages. So separating those two so that people know their money

:03:15. > :03:21.will not be used in that hugely speculative, dangerous fashion, is

:03:21. > :03:26.vital. But are you satisfied that this degree of separation, because

:03:26. > :03:29.he is not going the whole hog and saying that retail banking cannot

:03:29. > :03:33.be in investment banking, he is saying they have to be separate

:03:33. > :03:38.companies. Are you saying that if an investment bank goes bust again,

:03:38. > :03:44.that the taxpayer will not have to bail it out? De at is the object of

:03:44. > :03:49.the exercise. We will have to see how these Chinese walls are built

:03:49. > :03:57.and how strong they are. We have had experience of Chinese walls in

:03:57. > :04:03.the past, where banks were supposed to own shares and sell them and

:04:03. > :04:09.advise on them. They were pretty poor. The strength of the wall will

:04:09. > :04:14.be vital. Should you have gone the whole hog and said if you are in

:04:14. > :04:20.retail banking, you can't be in investment banking? And vice versa?

:04:20. > :04:26.This is broadly the right package. It has been recommended. There has

:04:26. > :04:31.been a study about it. I am keen that we retain our pre-eminence in

:04:31. > :04:35.financial services in this country. It is important to the economy. So

:04:35. > :04:39.separating it completely to look good, if it would have harmed our

:04:39. > :04:43.standing as a financial services centre, I would not have supported.

:04:43. > :04:48.But I am concerned about enforcement. We have seen that

:04:48. > :04:52.regulation was not tough enough when we got into this global crisis.

:04:52. > :04:56.I want to see not just the Chinese walls, but somebody following it up

:04:56. > :05:00.and making sure it is an forced. Banks are dangerous creatures and

:05:00. > :05:05.will slip back to their old habits unless someone keeps an eye on them.

:05:05. > :05:08.The danger would have been if he had gone further and done a total

:05:08. > :05:13.separation, some of the big investment banks could have gone to

:05:13. > :05:18.New York. Meyer Bloomberg is already asking them to come. That

:05:18. > :05:24.is true, so you have this conflict of interests. We want British

:05:24. > :05:32.banking to be strong and successful. But we do not want depositors'

:05:32. > :05:39.funds used to buy packages of dud American mortgages. So striking a

:05:39. > :05:42.balance was key. Thumbs up for the Chancellor from Cecil.

:05:42. > :05:45.Could we be heading for a summer of disappointing weather? Probably.

:05:45. > :05:47.And there could be a few strikes too. This afternoon, we'll learn

:05:47. > :05:51.whether thousands of civil servants will join teachers on the picket

:05:51. > :05:55.line at the end of the month. So how will the government react to

:05:55. > :05:58.unruliness in the classroom and elsewhere? Here's Anita.

:05:58. > :06:01.Yes, Andrew, co-ordinated strikes do look more likely after the two

:06:01. > :06:07.biggest teaching unions, the NUT and ATL, voted in favour of

:06:07. > :06:10.industrial action on June 30th over changes to their pension plans. And

:06:10. > :06:16.today, the PCS union that represents civil service workers is

:06:16. > :06:19.expected to overwhelmingly back striking on the same day. Their top

:06:19. > :06:25.dog Mark Serwotka says up to 750,000 public sector workers could

:06:25. > :06:28.also strike over pension changes. This all comes after the Business

:06:28. > :06:33.Secretary Vince Cable was booed and heckled at the GMB union's

:06:33. > :06:38.conference last week. He suggested that co-ordinated action may lead

:06:39. > :06:41.to tougher union laws. The Mayor of London Boris Johnson and the CBI

:06:41. > :06:45.are amongst those who have called for firmer legislation - they want

:06:45. > :06:51.the law changed to prevent a strike taking place unless at least half

:06:51. > :06:54.of the union members in a workplace take part in a ballot. This morning,

:06:54. > :06:58.the Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude said the government has no

:06:58. > :07:06.plans to change union laws at the moment, but did not rule out doing

:07:06. > :07:16.so in the future. Well, we're joined now by Iain McNicol of the

:07:16. > :07:19.GMB union. Hazel Blears and Lord Parkinson are still here. I

:07:19. > :07:24.understand that pensions are one of the main reasons that people are

:07:24. > :07:28.voting to strike. But given that 90% of people in the public sector

:07:28. > :07:34.have defined pensions, the nice kind of pension, and only 10% in

:07:34. > :07:40.the private sector, will there be much public sympathy? I think there

:07:40. > :07:46.will. If you look at local government workers now, the average

:07:46. > :07:51.pension that a local government member gets is �3,500. That is no

:07:51. > :07:56.gold-plated pensions scheme. Yes, there are a few at the top. Quite a

:07:56. > :08:06.few, actually. But the vast majority of our members, when they

:08:06. > :08:11.retire, have a pension scheme of up to �4,000 a year. But those at the

:08:11. > :08:19.lower end, those earning under �21,000, that is not wear these

:08:19. > :08:23.changes will really hit? government are looking at putting a

:08:23. > :08:27.3% tax on pensions, and that will affect all members of the scheme.

:08:28. > :08:32.In local government, that 3% that they have been asked to contribute

:08:32. > :08:37.will not go back into the pensions. I am sure there could be a fair

:08:37. > :08:40.discussion if they were going back into pension funds. But it is going

:08:40. > :08:45.straight back into central government coffers. So it is a tax

:08:45. > :08:49.on those who have their pensions now. So some public sector workers

:08:49. > :08:56.are only contributing 1.5% at the moment? Yes, but that is the

:08:56. > :09:01.minority. How big a minority? not sure. Neither am I. But the

:09:01. > :09:07.local government workers that Unison and the GMB represent pay 6%

:09:07. > :09:11.into their funded schemes. These are funded schemes with the money

:09:11. > :09:15.within them to pay for the retirement. We renegotiated the

:09:15. > :09:21.scheme two years ago, where extra contribution was made by those

:09:21. > :09:26.paying into the scheme, with a reduction of some of the benefits.

:09:26. > :09:29.A lot of people used to take the view that those in the public

:09:29. > :09:34.sector, this was at a time when private sector pensions were good,

:09:34. > :09:38.too. But it was thought that it was OK that public sector workers had a

:09:38. > :09:43.decent pension scheme, because they were not as well paid. But that has

:09:43. > :09:49.changed. On average, public sector workers are now paid �2,000 more

:09:49. > :09:53.than the average private sector workers. Do you want a race to the

:09:53. > :09:58.bottom? Should we be damning everything down? Or should we work

:09:58. > :10:02.to try and increase the money and pay and terms of conditions of

:10:02. > :10:06.those in the private sector? That is what the trade unions have tried

:10:06. > :10:12.to do. I understand that and I know you do not represent teachers, but

:10:12. > :10:19.if you look at some of these figures, between 2000 and 2010, a

:10:19. > :10:23.teachers' pay increased by 13% in real terms. They have an average of

:10:23. > :10:28.13 wicks' holiday a year in state schools, 18 weeks in the private

:10:28. > :10:31.schools. And they are going on strike, too. That compares to 28

:10:31. > :10:35.days' average in the private sector. Most people would think in these

:10:35. > :10:40.tough times, we are all suffering. There is an incredible squeeze on

:10:40. > :10:46.living standards going on which is hurting the poorest most. Something

:10:46. > :10:50.has to give? In the public sector, there has been no pay rise for the

:10:50. > :10:56.last two years. With inflation running at 5%, that is a 10% pay

:10:56. > :11:02.cut over the last two years for those working in the public sector.

:11:02. > :11:07.So there has been no pay rise in the public sector for two years? Or

:11:07. > :11:12.are we into the second year now? are through the second year now.

:11:12. > :11:16.There has been no pay rise in the LAUGHTER Sets of pay negotiations.

:11:16. > :11:26.There was meant to be a payment of two and �50 for the people who were

:11:26. > :11:31.earning less than that -- there was meant to be a payment of �250. That

:11:31. > :11:37.has been raised with the Government. This is a difficult one for the

:11:37. > :11:40.Labour Party, Hazel? On the one hand, you are sympathetic to what

:11:40. > :11:45.the GMB is saying here. On the other hand, you do not want a

:11:45. > :11:49.reputation again for supporting public sector strikes. Not at all.

:11:49. > :11:54.Ed Miliband has been very direct about this. He said last year that

:11:54. > :11:59.he would not support irresponsible strikes. Having said that, I can

:11:59. > :12:03.understand why people are worried about their pensions. People feel

:12:03. > :12:07.insecure about the squeeze on living standards. In the public

:12:07. > :12:13.sector, they often did take lower- paid, thinking they would have job

:12:13. > :12:17.security and a decent pension. this an irresponsible strike?

:12:17. > :12:22.not think anybody supports strikes. People themselves will not want to

:12:22. > :12:28.lose the money. But the government has a responsibility to see if they

:12:28. > :12:31.can go into more talks and negotiate. But if it is not

:12:31. > :12:35.irresponsible, why wouldn't they Labour leader and a Labour

:12:35. > :12:40.opposition support the GMB? would be sent to government, is

:12:40. > :12:44.there a way of talking this through? Is there a fair settlement

:12:44. > :12:50.that could be reached? Every avenue has to be explored before people go

:12:50. > :12:53.on strike. Your union colleague, Mark Serwotka, has been on this

:12:53. > :12:58.programme many times. He said he thought negotiations were not going

:12:58. > :13:04.anywhere. Do you agree? We are still party to the negotiations.

:13:04. > :13:09.Has he gone out of them? No. There is always hope as long as people

:13:09. > :13:13.are talking. This morning on the radio, you heard Francis Maude,

:13:13. > :13:20.when he was asked about whether he would look to change the parameters

:13:20. > :13:23.he had set, he never answered that question. The government are -- if

:13:23. > :13:28.the Government refused to negotiate, you are in a difficult situation.

:13:28. > :13:31.If you sit around the table and explore, as we have done with

:13:31. > :13:36.private companies, if you can thrash out a deal both sides are

:13:36. > :13:40.happy with, strikes are not inevitable. But the ones coming up

:13:40. > :13:44.are. Cecil Parkinson, you were in government at a time when Britain

:13:45. > :13:50.was synonymous with strikes. You have been through quite a few. Do

:13:51. > :13:56.you sense a return to these days, or is it not been the same league?

:13:56. > :14:04.First of all, the public sector was hugely reduced when we were in

:14:04. > :14:07.power. When I went to DDT eye on behalf of the taxpayer -- when I

:14:07. > :14:14.went to the Department of Trade and Industry on behalf of British

:14:14. > :14:18.Airways, it could go on and on. And they were all closed shops. They

:14:18. > :14:22.all had heavily unionised workforces. They are now in the

:14:22. > :14:30.private sector, so the scope for the disruption we had at that time

:14:30. > :14:37.is much less. There are still a lot of key industries. The tubes in

:14:37. > :14:41.London, the hospitals, the schools. But there are many areas which

:14:41. > :14:49.previously would have been unionised which now are not. Are we

:14:49. > :14:53.heading for a summer of discontent? I think commonsense will prevail.

:14:53. > :15:00.But one has to accept that the country is in a very difficult

:15:00. > :15:04.situation. I am made director of a number of private companies. We

:15:04. > :15:08.have all had to close the final salary schemes, because they were a

:15:08. > :15:18.threat to the existence of the company. The deficits grew and grew,

:15:18. > :15:23.and you were never in control of them. In the public sector, behind

:15:23. > :15:30.all these funds is the public sector. The country is in a

:15:30. > :15:37.difficult situation, no one denies that. But we are now in a country

:15:37. > :15:43.where the average pay of a FTSE 100 chief-executive is now nearly �3.8

:15:43. > :15:47.million. When you were in business, the ratio was 40-1. Chief

:15:47. > :15:52.executives earned 40 times more than the average worker. Today it

:15:52. > :15:58.is 150 times. In that situation, why would you make people earning

:15:58. > :16:02.less pay? You are not going to get me defending big City salaries. I

:16:02. > :16:09.cannot imagine what Mrs Thatcher would have said about some of the

:16:09. > :16:12.salaries that are being taken. you get my point. I do, and it

:16:12. > :16:18.seems to me that the capitalists seem determined to destroy

:16:18. > :16:27.capitalism. It is a most peculiar attitude. And the politicians have

:16:27. > :16:33.Let me ask Ian before we go, had you see it panning out in the next

:16:33. > :16:36.couple of months? There are still negotiations Turk be had and they

:16:36. > :16:41.will be difficult, tough negotiations -- negotiations to be

:16:41. > :16:46.had. But if local government understands that they are fully

:16:46. > :16:50.funded, and yes, they're always difficulties with the stock market

:16:50. > :16:54.because of the investments in shares, but I do think there is an

:16:54. > :16:59.opportunity to get round the table and sort this out. I do worry that

:17:00. > :17:07.the government are unwilling to get the settlement that everyone will

:17:07. > :17:15.be happy with. Iain McNicol, come back and see us. He is not going

:17:15. > :17:18.anywhere. Why is he stain? There is a very interesting bit coming up.

:17:18. > :17:20.Well, it's a big Wednesday for Ed Miliband. His performance at last

:17:20. > :17:25.week's Prime Minister's questions was widely criticised. And since

:17:25. > :17:27.then it's seemingly gone from bad to worse. We've had the 'we're-not-

:17:27. > :17:34.plotting-against-Tony-Blair really' files, and worse - accusations that

:17:34. > :17:37.he didn't get drunk at university. What a weirdo! He spent most of his

:17:37. > :17:40.time - apparently - deciding which chocolate bar to buy from the

:17:40. > :17:45.college tuck shop. Well, he's got an equally difficult decision to

:17:45. > :17:55.make today. What to go on at PMQs. But we're kind people here at the

:17:55. > :17:59.

:17:59. > :18:04.Daily Politics. We have made this. Hold this. Is this all for me?

:18:04. > :18:07.have glued a number of category to a number of chocolate bars, and

:18:07. > :18:16.since we do not have Ed Miliband, we have is representative on earth,

:18:16. > :18:23.Hazel. Will he go on it welfare? Will he go on family-friendly

:18:23. > :18:33.policies? Will he go on strike? Inflation? Will he go on the

:18:33. > :18:33.

:18:33. > :18:43.plodding? Leadership? The economy. I am glad we rehearsed this.

:18:43. > :18:47.

:18:47. > :18:53.Deficit? So, hazel, which one? Quickly. Pick a bar. I will go for

:18:53. > :19:00.those too. The NHS and the economy. A we will discuss this a bit more

:19:00. > :19:05.seriously. Because he has had a turbulent time with his leadership,

:19:05. > :19:10.Ian McNicol, and the GMB really worked hard for him to be installed,

:19:10. > :19:13.but they have really gone off him. When asked if they approve of his

:19:13. > :19:18.style of leadership, they could not even bring themselves to raise

:19:18. > :19:23.their hand at the conference. think it was bad state of could do

:19:23. > :19:29.better. That was put to the audience, and everyone thought he

:19:29. > :19:33.could do better. Are you going off him? No, the media story is about

:19:33. > :19:37.David Cameron and Nick Clegg and he is in a difficult position to break

:19:37. > :19:41.through. What he needs to do is pick two or three issues and get

:19:41. > :19:45.out and about round the country and talk to people on the doorstep and

:19:45. > :19:51.in their constituencies and in their workplaces. When all the

:19:51. > :19:56.talking is said and done, is he up to the job? I think so. He is

:19:56. > :20:01.really up to the job. We have this book being serialised in one of the

:20:01. > :20:05.national newspapers which talks of the way the party responded and

:20:05. > :20:08.await his brother responded to him to declare his attention to stand.

:20:08. > :20:14.How much damage does it do when you hear that people are smacking their

:20:14. > :20:17.heads on the table, saying, David, go and hit him. I was told that

:20:17. > :20:22.book was sent back by the newspaper because it wasn't sexy enough and

:20:22. > :20:26.they were told to get more gossip in it, so that is the level of this

:20:26. > :20:30.debate. But you will acknowledge there was deep discomfort at the

:20:30. > :20:35.time, and there is a different kind of discomfort because people are

:20:35. > :20:40.saying he's not landing punches. Everybody wants to rake over the

:20:41. > :20:46.entrails of last year's events. I think it is time we moved on.

:20:46. > :20:51.rage over last week's entrails. His performance at PMQs was lacklustre.

:20:51. > :20:54.We to acknowledge that? A I think everyone would acknowledge that he

:20:54. > :20:59.not -- had not given a great performance. A if you go over last

:20:59. > :21:02.week, you had a fine speech on Monday when he set out the centre

:21:02. > :21:06.ground and the fact we needed people to take responsibility at

:21:06. > :21:14.the top and bottom. That was a very good speech and he did break

:21:14. > :21:20.Putting partisan politics to one side, does it matter if he is not

:21:20. > :21:26.good at PMQs, if he can deliver that kind of speech? There is a

:21:26. > :21:31.danger that new leaders always have difficulties establishing

:21:31. > :21:37.themselves. I remember one party chairman when Edward Heath was

:21:37. > :21:42.Prime Minister, every year at the party conference it was make or

:21:42. > :21:48.break for Ted Heath. And Lord Hailsham said, look, if you plant a

:21:48. > :21:54.tree or a shrub and you pull it up every week to see if the roots are

:21:54. > :22:02.striking, they never strike. So having chosen him, you have to get

:22:02. > :22:05.behind him. And he won those three elections out of four. You would

:22:05. > :22:10.maybe not be surprised to know that I was delighted it was him, because

:22:10. > :22:17.I think there is a gap between him and the public. They find him at a

:22:17. > :22:20.mysterious figure. And the second thing is, it is very difficult to

:22:20. > :22:27.lead 8 parliamentary party where the parliamentary party did not

:22:27. > :22:31.want to. So he has his own peculiar problems. You say PMQs is not as

:22:31. > :22:35.important, but it is the window into his leadership. For most

:22:35. > :22:40.people watching at home, they will see that on the news and hear bits

:22:40. > :22:45.of that on the driving to work. And if he is not effective there, how

:22:45. > :22:49.will they bridge the gulf? It is important because it is what most

:22:49. > :22:53.ordinary people see on their televisions on a Wednesday. He has

:22:53. > :22:57.had some really good PMQs. You will have some occasions when it is not

:22:57. > :23:03.perfect, and he really did score against David Cameron on the NHS.

:23:03. > :23:08.He got David Cameron to lose his temper at PMQs. I thought that was

:23:08. > :23:15.a fantastic performance. So he is comfortable then? How long has he

:23:15. > :23:20.got to settle into the job? How long will he be the new boy? It is

:23:20. > :23:24.less than a year since he became the leader. Difficult circumstances,

:23:24. > :23:27.the worst election result since 1983. He has to rebuild the party

:23:27. > :23:33.and show we have changed. It is a big job and I think he deserves

:23:33. > :23:40.support. What you want him to go on today at PMQs? I think he needs to

:23:40. > :23:44.get stuck into the NHS, have a go at Cameron and Clegg. Even the

:23:44. > :23:49.water down blueprint of Andrew Lansley? Yes, I think it is an

:23:49. > :23:52.opportunity. You have people standing back and saying that they

:23:52. > :23:56.have listened, but that does not resonate with people. I am not

:23:56. > :24:02.convinced that the party has really listened anyway. We will leave it

:24:02. > :24:09.there. Are you saying that too loyal Labour journalist sexed up

:24:09. > :24:16.their book to please the Mail on Sunday? Loyal Labour journalist? Do

:24:16. > :24:25.those words computer? There might be the odd one. -- to those words

:24:25. > :24:29.Now - it's time for a health warning. In fact you're health and

:24:29. > :24:32.safety is our first priority. Unlike some in the profession, they

:24:32. > :24:41.followed the Prime Minister and deputy PM onto a hospital ward

:24:41. > :24:44.yesterday and got this ticking off from a consultant. Just a minute. I

:24:44. > :24:54.am a senior consultant in the department. While we told to walk

:24:54. > :24:55.

:24:55. > :25:05.around like this -- Why are we told to walk around like this? I am not

:25:05. > :25:08.

:25:08. > :25:13.That photo-shoot went pretty well! Cecil, this is not going to hurt at

:25:13. > :25:17.all. Well, we take no such risks here so you are quite safe

:25:17. > :25:23.competing for one of our completely sterile Daily Politics mugs.

:25:23. > :25:33.will remind you how to enter, but less see if you can remember when

:25:33. > :26:02.

:26:02. > :26:09.# "Just A Little Bit" - Liberty X but sometimes I feel like I want to

:26:09. > :26:16.crawl away and hide, but I won't. just don't think I'm as good at it

:26:16. > :26:22.as I was at my other job. prosecutor verses Slobodan

:26:22. > :26:32.Milosevic. No one is above the law or above the reach of international

:26:32. > :26:34.

:26:34. > :26:44.My mother always said, are you eating pretzels? Chew them before

:26:44. > :26:50.

:26:50. > :26:56.So, if you want to be within a chance of winning one of these

:26:56. > :27:02.beautiful things, send your answer to the e-mail address. For terms

:27:02. > :27:09.and conditions, they are on our website. Did you notice they took

:27:09. > :27:14.all the chocolate away? That was in a nanosecond. I am worried that you

:27:14. > :27:18.have touched the glove -- the market without your gloves on.

:27:18. > :27:22.is coming up to midday, so let's take a look at Big Ben, as we

:27:22. > :27:26.always do. Not a great deal out there, but it is looking clear. It

:27:26. > :27:34.can only mean one thing, Prime Minister's questions in a few

:27:34. > :27:39.minutes. And we also have some Let's play a part of the build up.

:27:39. > :27:43.It is all on a Ed Miliband. Absolutely. The reason last week

:27:43. > :27:47.was so important is that the government is in a bit of a mess.

:27:48. > :27:50.There are you turns on dustbins, health, sentencing. And there was

:27:50. > :27:56.an expectation ahead of last Wednesday that Ed Miliband would

:27:56. > :28:00.bring these things together and land a punch, but he didn't. It was

:28:00. > :28:06.the fact he underperformed to expectations. There was an audible

:28:06. > :28:10.deflation from his own side and he failed to really pin up the story

:28:10. > :28:13.on the Prime Minister and let himself become a target of media

:28:13. > :28:18.criticism and sniping from backbenchers. So today, what he has

:28:18. > :28:23.to do, his land a punch. Pick a subject, possibly the NHS although

:28:23. > :28:26.dustbins is a great subject. And try to explain to the public, who

:28:26. > :28:33.don't like Prime Minister's Questions that much, why the

:28:33. > :28:37.government is not functioning as it should. The public like PMQs and

:28:37. > :28:42.they do not like it when it is quite. Every time the Speaker says

:28:42. > :28:47.they should be quiet, we get e-mail saying they like the argy-bargy.

:28:47. > :28:51.But from a party leader point of view, it has to be professional.

:28:51. > :28:54.What line would you take on the NHS? There is a general sense in

:28:54. > :29:01.the country that the government has been all over the place on it and

:29:01. > :29:04.the coalition's divided on it. But all of this talk of GP

:29:04. > :29:07.commissioning and abolition of primary care trusts and that there

:29:07. > :29:14.will be health senates and we are getting rid of strategic health

:29:14. > :29:18.authorities, I would suggest that for most people, including me...

:29:18. > :29:22.There is a line I would and wouldn't take. I wouldn't take the

:29:22. > :29:25.line of privatising the NHS, because David Cameron will say that

:29:25. > :29:29.they are implementing the rules that your government starting. The

:29:29. > :29:36.line I would take is waiting lists. You have to have some retail

:29:36. > :29:39.politics'. That is about patients. In his speech the Prime Minister

:29:39. > :29:45.gave an unspecific pledge that waiting lists might rise, so that

:29:45. > :29:50.will resonate with people at home. We may be going over win a second.

:29:50. > :29:53.What would you advise Mr Miliband to do? I would advise him to be

:29:53. > :29:57.passionate and angry on behalf of the British people. They want to

:29:57. > :30:02.hear him standing up and pinning the blame on the Prime Minister and

:30:02. > :30:07.also asked him why it costs �800 million for the NHS reorganisation.

:30:07. > :30:12.The that is the price ticket. complete waste of money. It is

:30:12. > :30:16.unbelievable. You have been part of a big reforming government, Cecil.

:30:16. > :30:21.They want to reform the education system big time, cut the deficit as

:30:21. > :30:31.it has never been cut before, so was it wise to also come with a

:30:31. > :30:34.major reform of the NHS? The NHS is something where each party has

:30:34. > :30:41.identified the same answer. When I was in the Cabinet we talked about

:30:41. > :30:45.the internal market. Labour or abolish it then brought it back.

:30:45. > :30:50.Tony Blair said it was conservative and got rid of it, but then seven

:30:50. > :30:54.years later he goes back to where we were. The question was whether

:30:54. > :30:57.it was wise to go in for radical reform on top of all the other

:30:57. > :31:05.things, especially since we were not prepared for it? I think it is

:31:05. > :31:10.necessary. It is a huge burden, but a necessary burden, but a colossal

:31:10. > :31:14.burden for the taxpayer. And there is huge waste. In the manifesto you

:31:14. > :31:21.said there would be no more top down reorganisation of the NHS and

:31:21. > :31:25.you are doing all of this. It is unusual to be criticised for

:31:25. > :31:29.getting on with the policy that you didn't promise. Most of the

:31:29. > :31:37.criticism comes from not implementing policies that you did.

:31:37. > :31:41.There was a bit of tap dancing know. This looks pretty much like top

:31:41. > :31:44.down reorganisation, if he walks and talks like that. There is a

:31:44. > :31:47.massive centralisation of the power they would give away. On the one

:31:47. > :31:52.hand the public say they do not want reorganisation because they

:31:52. > :31:56.don't trust politicians, but we had some polling this week that

:31:56. > :32:05.suggested that the public for their big problems with the NHS. We are

:32:05. > :32:10.This morning I had a meeting with colleagues and others. Initial to

:32:10. > :32:16.know why duties, I shall have further meetings later.

:32:16. > :32:20.Thousands of people in my constituency work hard at for less

:32:20. > :32:26.than �26,000 a year. Does my right honourable friend agree with me

:32:26. > :32:34.that everybody who believes in the necessity of capping benefits must

:32:34. > :32:38.vote for the Welfare Reform Bill tonight? My honourable friend is

:32:38. > :32:44.right. We are right to reform welfare. Welfare costs have got out

:32:44. > :32:48.of control in our country. We want to make sure that work always pays.

:32:48. > :32:52.We want to make sure that if people do the right thing, we are on their

:32:52. > :32:56.side. It cannot be right for some families to get over �26,000 a year

:32:56. > :33:01.in benefits that is paid for by people who are working hard and pay

:33:01. > :33:05.their taxes. Everyone in the House should support the welfare bill

:33:05. > :33:15.tonight. It is disappointing that Labour talk about welfare, but will

:33:15. > :33:19.

:33:19. > :33:24.not vote for welfare reform. THE SPEAKER: Ed Miliband.

:33:24. > :33:29.Mr Speaker, when the Prime Minister signed off his welfare bill, did he

:33:29. > :33:37.know that it would make 7000 cancer patients worse off by as much as

:33:37. > :33:40.�94 a week? That is not the case. We are using the same definition of

:33:40. > :33:44.people who are suffering and are terminally ill as the last

:33:44. > :33:49.government. We want to make sure those people are helped and

:33:49. > :33:52.protected. If you are in favour of welfare reform, you want to

:33:52. > :33:57.encourage people to do the right thing, it is no good talking about

:33:57. > :34:06.it, you have to vote for it. usual, he does not know what is in

:34:06. > :34:11.his own bill. Listen to Macmillan Cancer Support. On 13th June 2011 -

:34:11. > :34:15.cancer patients to lose up to �94 a week. These are people who have

:34:15. > :34:19.worked hard all their lives, who have done the right thing, who have

:34:19. > :34:25.paid their taxes. And when they are indeed, the Prime Minister is

:34:25. > :34:33.taking money away from him. I ask him again, how can it be right that

:34:33. > :34:40.people with cancer, 7000 of them, are losing �94 a week? We are using

:34:41. > :34:44.the same test as the last government supported. All we see

:34:44. > :34:49.here is a Labour Party desperate not to support welfare reform, and

:34:49. > :34:53.try to find an excuse to get off supporting welfare reform. Anyone

:34:53. > :34:58.who is terminally ill get immediate access to the higher level of

:34:58. > :35:03.support. We will provide that to all people who are unable to work.

:35:03. > :35:07.That is the guarantee we make. He has to stop reading of his

:35:07. > :35:12.responsibilities and back the welfare reform he talks about.

:35:12. > :35:18.Speaker, he doesn't know the detail of his own bill. Let me explain it

:35:18. > :35:24.to him. Because the Government is stopping contributory employment

:35:25. > :35:33.support allowance after one year for those in work-related activity,

:35:33. > :35:42.cancer patients, 7000 of them, are losing �94 a week. I ask him again,

:35:43. > :35:49.how can that be right? Order. The question has been asked. Order.

:35:49. > :35:54.Order. The answer will be heard. is wrong on the specific point.

:35:54. > :36:01.First of all, our definition of terminally ill is the same one used

:36:01. > :36:04.by the last government. Anyone out of work will be given the extra

:36:04. > :36:10.support that comes from employment support allowance, irrespective of

:36:10. > :36:15.a person's income or assets. That will last for 12 months. He is

:36:15. > :36:19.wrong, and he should admit it. On a means-tested basis, this additional

:36:19. > :36:24.support can last indefinitely. That is the truth. He should check his

:36:24. > :36:28.facts before he comes to the house and chickens out of welfare reform.

:36:28. > :36:33.Let's be clear about this. In the first answer, he said his policy

:36:34. > :36:37.was the same as the last government. Now he has admitted that they are

:36:38. > :36:44.ending contributory best employment support allowance after one year.

:36:44. > :36:54.Let me tell him what Macmillan Cancer Support says. I think they

:36:54. > :36:58.should listen. This is what they are saying. I think it is a

:36:58. > :37:07.disgrace that Conservative members are shouting while we are talking

:37:07. > :37:11.about people with cancer. This is what they say. Many people will

:37:11. > :37:15.lose this benefit simply because they have not recovered quickly

:37:15. > :37:22.enough. Mr Speaker, asking the question again, will he now admit

:37:22. > :37:28.that 7000 cancer patients are losing up to �94 a week? Let me

:37:28. > :37:34.explain it again to him. I do not think he has got the point. Order.

:37:34. > :37:37.Order. I think it is a disgrace that members on both sides of the

:37:37. > :37:42.house are shouting their heads off when matters of the most serious

:37:42. > :37:48.concern are being debated. I repeat what I have said before. The public

:37:48. > :37:52.despise this sort of behaviour. Let's have a bit of order. This is

:37:52. > :37:57.important, and I want to explain to the honourable gentleman why he has

:37:57. > :38:01.got it wrong and what we are proposing is right. The definition

:38:01. > :38:07.of who is terminally ill, these are horrible things to discuss, but let

:38:07. > :38:10.me explain. It is the same definition, six months. Anyone out

:38:10. > :38:15.of work who lives longer than that will be given the extra support

:38:15. > :38:21.that comes from employment support allowance. That is irrespective of

:38:21. > :38:24.a person's income or their assets, and will last for 12 months, not

:38:24. > :38:28.the six months that the Leader of the Opposition said. On a means-

:38:28. > :38:33.tested basis, this additional support can last indefinitely. It

:38:33. > :38:38.is the same test as the last government. It is put in place

:38:38. > :38:41.fairly. We have listened to Macmillan Cancer Support, and we

:38:41. > :38:45.have made sure someone is reviewing all the medical tests that take

:38:45. > :38:49.place under the system. I know he wants to create a distraction from

:38:49. > :38:53.the fact that he will not support welfare reform, but I have answered

:38:53. > :38:58.his question. He should now answer mind - why will you not back the

:38:58. > :39:05.bill? In case he had forgotten, I asked the questions, and he fails

:39:05. > :39:09.to answer them. Let me try and explain it to him. Listen to

:39:09. > :39:13.professor Jane Mayer, chief medical officer or of Macmillan Cancer

:39:13. > :39:18.Support. "in my experience, one year is simply not long enough for

:39:18. > :39:21.many people to recover from cancer. The serious physical and

:39:21. > :39:24.psychological side-effects can last for many months, even years after

:39:24. > :39:29.treatment has finished. It is crucial that patients are not

:39:29. > :39:33.forced to return to work before they are ready". Macmillan Cancer

:39:33. > :39:36.Support and Britain's cancer charities have been making this

:39:36. > :39:39.argument for months. I am amazed that the Prime Minister does not

:39:39. > :39:43.know about this argument. Why doesn't he know about these

:39:43. > :39:48.arguments? The House of Commons is voting on this bill tonight. He

:39:48. > :39:54.should know about these arguments. I ask him again, will he now admit

:39:54. > :39:59.that 7000 cancer patients are losing up to �94 a week? I have

:39:59. > :40:04.answered his question three times. With a full explanation. The whole

:40:04. > :40:09.point about our benefit reforms is that there are proper medical tests.

:40:09. > :40:14.So we support those who cannot work as a generous and compassionate

:40:14. > :40:18.country should, but we make sure those who can work have to go out

:40:18. > :40:22.to work so that we do not reward bad behaviour. He is attempting to

:40:22. > :40:25.put up a smokescreen, because he has been found out. He made a

:40:26. > :40:30.speech this week about the importance of welfare reform, but

:40:30. > :40:39.he cannot take his divided party with him. That is what this is

:40:39. > :40:44.about, weak leadership of a divided party. Mr Speaker, what an absolute

:40:44. > :40:49.disgrace to describe cancer patients in this country as a

:40:49. > :40:53.smokescreen. This is about cancer charities who are concerned on

:40:53. > :40:57.their behalf, and he does not know his own policy. It is not about

:40:57. > :41:02.those who are terminally ill, it is about those recovering from cancer

:41:02. > :41:06.who are losing support as a result of this government. We know he does

:41:06. > :41:12.not think his policies through. Isn't this one occasion when if

:41:12. > :41:19.ever there was a case to pause, listen and reflect, this is it. Why

:41:19. > :41:26.doesn't he do so? This week, we have seen the honourable gentleman

:41:26. > :41:33.get on the wrong side of every issue. If it is cutting the deficit,

:41:33. > :41:38.we now have these CBI, the IMF, his brother, Tony Blair, all on our

:41:38. > :41:42.side and only he is on his own. On welfare reform, we have everyone

:41:42. > :41:47.recognises that welfare needs to be reformed, apart from the right

:41:47. > :41:50.honourable gentleman. On the health service, yes, we now have the Royal

:41:50. > :41:53.College of GPs, the Royal College of Nurses, the Royal College of

:41:53. > :41:57.Physicians, the former Labour Health Minister and Tony Blair all

:41:57. > :42:02.on the side of reform. And on his own, the right honourable gentleman,

:42:02. > :42:12.a weak leader of a divided party. That is what we have learned this

:42:12. > :42:21.

:42:21. > :42:25.Prime Minister, Mike constituent's mother, a British national, on a

:42:25. > :42:29.recent visit to India, was kidnapped and then beheaded in a

:42:29. > :42:33.horrendous murder incident. Can I ask the British Government to urge

:42:33. > :42:36.the Indian authorities to carry out a fall and transparent and thorough

:42:36. > :42:40.investigation and bring to account those responsible for this

:42:40. > :42:45.horrendous murder so that my constituents and his family can get

:42:45. > :42:50.justice for their mother? understand why my honourable friend

:42:50. > :42:53.wants to raise this case. On behalf of the house, we send our

:42:53. > :42:56.condolences to the family. I understand their wish for justice

:42:56. > :43:00.to be brought to bear on the perpetrators. The Foreign Office

:43:00. > :43:03.has been providing the family with consular support, and they will

:43:03. > :43:07.arrange to meet my right honourable friend and the family to see what

:43:07. > :43:10.further assistance we can give. However, responsibility for

:43:11. > :43:14.investigating crime committed overseas has to rest with the

:43:14. > :43:20.police and judicial authorities in that country. We cannot interfere

:43:20. > :43:24.in the processes, but I take to heart the points he makes.

:43:24. > :43:34.Speaker, we know that the deficit was the price paid to avoid a

:43:34. > :43:37.

:43:37. > :43:42.depression caused by... Are caught by the bankers. But in March, the

:43:42. > :43:49.forecast for the budget deficit was increased by �46 billion, �1,000

:43:49. > :43:52.per person. Will he now at last accept that cuts are choking growth,

:43:52. > :43:56.that that is stoking inflation, and both are increasing the deficit? He

:43:56. > :44:03.is going too far, too fast, hindering and not helping the

:44:03. > :44:13.recovery. Yes or no? The deficit is the price paid for Labour's

:44:13. > :44:13.

:44:13. > :44:17.profligacy in office. Tony Blair in his memoirs, I know they do not

:44:17. > :44:22.want to hear about Tony Blair any more, funny, that. He was a Labour

:44:22. > :44:28.leader who used to win elections. He said that by 2007, spending was

:44:28. > :44:32.out of control. We have to get on top of debt and spending and the

:44:32. > :44:40.deficit. I understand that the Labour leader is trying to persuade

:44:40. > :44:44.the shadow Chancellor of that. Good The Prime Minister will be aware

:44:44. > :44:54.that yesterday was the anniversary of the liberation of the Falkland

:44:54. > :45:01.

:45:01. > :45:05.Sees the United States will he remind the President that they will

:45:05. > :45:09.never be acceptable to her Majesty's government, and if the

:45:09. > :45:16.special relationship means anything, it means that they defend British

:45:16. > :45:20.sovereign treat -- sovereignty over our own territory. He makes an

:45:20. > :45:23.excellent point and I'm sure everybody will want to remember the

:45:23. > :45:27.anniversary of the successful retaking of the Falkland Islands

:45:27. > :45:32.and the superb bravery and courage of all our armed forces who took

:45:32. > :45:36.part in that action. We should also remember those that fell in terms

:45:36. > :45:41.of taking back the Falklands. The point he makes is a good one. What

:45:41. > :45:46.I would say is this, as long as the Falkland Islands want to be a

:45:46. > :45:50.sovereign British territory, they should remain so. End of story.

:45:50. > :45:55.This week we have seen the government changed its mind on the

:45:55. > :45:58.NHS, and sentencing, student visas and dustbin collection, so will the

:45:58. > :46:04.Prime Minister tell us now whether the Prime Minister will change his

:46:04. > :46:09.mind on a government plans to force women to wait up to two years

:46:09. > :46:13.longer before they qualify for their state pensions? All parties

:46:13. > :46:16.supported the equalisation of the pension age between men and women.

:46:16. > :46:20.That needed to happen. It also needs to happen that we raise

:46:20. > :46:25.pension ages to make sure the pension system is affordable.

:46:25. > :46:29.Appoint a would make is because we have been able to do that, we have

:46:29. > :46:31.really into pensions back to earnings, and pensioners are

:46:31. > :46:34.�15,000 better off in their retirement than they would have

:46:34. > :46:38.been under Labour. I think that is a good deal and the right thing to

:46:38. > :46:48.do. If anyone in the party opposite wants to be serious about pension

:46:48. > :46:49.

:46:49. > :46:53.reform and dealing with the deficit, I agree with the government's

:46:53. > :46:57.timetable for increasing the men's state pension age to 66, because it

:46:57. > :47:04.happens gradually. But I would ask the Prime Minister to think again

:47:04. > :47:08.about women's state pension age. The timetable has women's state

:47:08. > :47:13.pension age going up too quickly and leaves women of my age, born in

:47:13. > :47:17.1954, without enough time to plan for what could be two years extra

:47:17. > :47:22.work. Will the Government please look at this again? I understand

:47:22. > :47:27.the concerns about this. But I said in the House last week that over 80

:47:27. > :47:31.% of those affected will only see their pension age come in one year

:47:31. > :47:36.later. So it is actually a very relatively small number. But the

:47:36. > :47:40.key thing is making sure that the pension system is sustainable so we

:47:40. > :47:43.can pay out higher pensions. There is a similar argument that the

:47:43. > :47:46.house was having in the previous set of questions about the

:47:46. > :47:50.sustainability of public sector pensions. We have to take these

:47:50. > :47:55.difficult decisions. They are right for the long term and they mean a

:47:55. > :47:58.better pension system for those who are retiring. Does the Prime

:47:58. > :48:02.Minister agree with the Institute for Fiscal Studies that with

:48:02. > :48:06.inflation at 4.5 %, more than twice the government target, it is

:48:06. > :48:09.hitting pensioners and lower income families the hardest? The point

:48:09. > :48:15.about pensions is there is the triple guarantee that they will go

:48:15. > :48:18.up by earnings or 2.5 %, or whichever is higher, so it won't

:48:18. > :48:22.affect them in that way. We clearly want to see inflation come down.

:48:22. > :48:25.There is a shared agreement across the House that it is right for the

:48:25. > :48:28.Bank of England to have the responsibility. I notice he does

:48:28. > :48:32.not raise today the welcome news that we have seen the biggest fall

:48:32. > :48:36.in unemployment in one month figures than we have seen at any

:48:36. > :48:42.time in a decade. I think it is time the party opposite started

:48:42. > :48:47.welcoming that good news. There is increasing concern within the house

:48:47. > :48:50.and across the country about the hidden suffering of traffic to

:48:50. > :48:54.children and re- trafficked children. Does the Prime Minister

:48:54. > :48:58.agree that it is essential that a co-ordinated, multi-agency approach

:48:58. > :49:01.across the country from borders to local authorities and local police

:49:01. > :49:06.forces, including the excellent charitable organisations involved

:49:06. > :49:10.in the work, is promoted urgently? My Honourable Friend makes

:49:10. > :49:15.extremely good point and I know how hard the party works on this group.

:49:15. > :49:17.I listen very carefully on what they have to say. One thing that I

:49:17. > :49:21.hope will make a difference is the formation of the National crime

:49:21. > :49:27.agency which should bring a greater co-ordination to vital issues such

:49:27. > :49:31.as this. The SNP won a landslide in the

:49:31. > :49:35.recent elections and the mandate to improve the powers of the Scottish

:49:35. > :49:39.parliament. So will the Prime Minister respect the Scottish

:49:39. > :49:43.electorate and accept the six proposals for improvement in the

:49:43. > :49:47.Scotland Bill by the Scottish government? For we listened very

:49:47. > :49:51.carefully to what people have to say and week of course respect that

:49:51. > :49:55.the SNP won the mandate in Scotland and we are responding positively.

:49:55. > :49:59.But the first point I would make is that the Scotland Bill before the

:49:59. > :50:04.house is a massive extension of devolution. He shakes his head, but

:50:04. > :50:08.is an extra �12 billion of spending power. We will go ahead with that

:50:08. > :50:12.and look at the proposals that Alex Salmond has had. I take the respect

:50:12. > :50:15.agenda seriously, but it is a two- way street. A street in which I

:50:15. > :50:19.respect the views of the Scottish people, but they also have to

:50:19. > :50:26.respect we are still part of, and will always be part of, I believe,

:50:26. > :50:30.a United Kingdom. Last Friday was the 9th anniversary of the British

:50:30. > :50:33.Legion, and on Tuesday, 120 soldiers from the Air assault

:50:33. > :50:37.Brigade will march into Parliament to welcome them back from

:50:37. > :50:42.Afghanistan. Can have a Prime Minister repeat his assurance that

:50:42. > :50:46.the armed forces covenant will be rewritten for the first time in

:50:46. > :50:49.history and written into law? give that assurance and I'm

:50:49. > :50:52.delighted that the Royal British Legion have agreed an approach we

:50:52. > :50:56.will take in the Armed forces Bill and that is being passed through

:50:56. > :50:59.the house. I am glad that the forced -- House of Commons will be

:50:59. > :51:02.welcoming the soldiers from the Brigade as the rest of the armed

:51:02. > :51:05.forces, the bravest of the brave, the best of the best, there isn't

:51:05. > :51:09.too much we can do for the people, which is why the armed forces

:51:09. > :51:15.covenant matters and why we kept our promise Stoop double the

:51:15. > :51:19.operational allowance to soldiers serving in Afghanistan. Millions of

:51:19. > :51:22.our constituents are once more facing big increases in their gas

:51:22. > :51:27.and electricity bills. Many will find it very difficult to make ends

:51:27. > :51:32.meet. What action will the government take to help them?

:51:32. > :51:37.are taking a range of actions. Obviously, the fact we have or oil

:51:37. > :51:42.costing $115 per barrel and gas prices rising by 15 % over a year,

:51:42. > :51:46.that has an impact, but we are putting �250 million into the warm

:51:46. > :51:51.home discount and funding a more targeted warm front scheme that

:51:51. > :51:55.will help 47,000 families this year. We are legislating so social

:51:55. > :51:58.tariffs have to offer the best prices available. We are keeping a

:51:58. > :52:03.promise to say that Post Office card account holders should get a

:52:03. > :52:05.discount. We are keeping the winter fuel payment. And we have

:52:05. > :52:08.permanently increase the cold weather payments. We didn't just

:52:08. > :52:14.allow him to be increased in an election year. We are keeping the

:52:14. > :52:19.higher payments that are very valuable to his constituents.

:52:19. > :52:25.week my Honourable Friend the Member for Stoke visited a school

:52:25. > :52:28.near Stafford. In meetings, parents expressed the excellent teaching --

:52:28. > :52:31.gratitude for the excellent teaching but also of a provision of

:52:31. > :52:37.their children after the age of 19. Knowing his deep concern in the

:52:37. > :52:41.area, what encouragement can my right honourable friend give them?

:52:41. > :52:44.We have to support special schools. The pendulum again special

:52:44. > :52:47.education swung too far against inclusion, and it is important we

:52:47. > :52:51.give parents and carers proper choices to make sure they can

:52:51. > :52:54.choose between mainstream and special education. He raises the

:52:54. > :52:58.important point that many parents of disabled children when they

:52:58. > :53:02.become young adults want them to go on studying in further education

:53:02. > :53:05.colleges and elsewhere, but the current rules seem to suggest that

:53:05. > :53:09.once they have finished the course, that is it. Parents asked what we

:53:09. > :53:12.will do now and we have to find a better answer for parents who are

:53:12. > :53:17.finding their much-loved children living for much longer and want

:53:17. > :53:22.them to have a purposeful and complete life. In the face of what

:53:22. > :53:26.are crippling energy price rises, driving pensioners and one off

:53:26. > :53:32.family into fuel poverty by the thousands every day under the

:53:32. > :53:35.coalition, can I ask him, he's heat struggling with his energy bill or

:53:36. > :53:41.are any others of the 21 millionairess in his Cabinet

:53:41. > :53:46.struggling with the energy bills? And when is he going to take a

:53:46. > :53:50.personal grip of this situation? From reading the papers this week

:53:50. > :53:54.the people who seem to be coining it are the ones who worked for the

:53:55. > :54:00.last government, but there we are. Clearly fuel prices have gone up

:54:00. > :54:03.because of what has happened to World War -- world gas and oil

:54:04. > :54:06.prices, but we are serious about helping families. That is why we

:54:06. > :54:09.have frozen the council tax and a lifting one million people out of

:54:09. > :54:15.tax and a taken a set of measures to help with energy bills which I

:54:15. > :54:20.describe. We have also managed to cut petrol tax this year, paid for

:54:20. > :54:23.by the additional tax on the North Sea oil industry. I notice that

:54:23. > :54:29.while the party opposite wants to support the petrol price tax, they

:54:29. > :54:33.don't support the fuel -- increase in the North Sea oil tax.

:54:33. > :54:37.Absolutely typical of an opportunistic opposition. The Prime

:54:37. > :54:41.Minister will be aware that this week is National diabetes wheat and

:54:41. > :54:45.the theme this year is let's talk diabetes to encourage people with

:54:45. > :54:50.the condition to speak out and not feel stigmatised all worried about

:54:50. > :54:58.being discriminated against, or joked against in school or in the

:54:58. > :55:02.workplace. Would the Prime Minister please support the campaign?

:55:02. > :55:06.certainly will. And my Honourable Friend makes extremely good point,

:55:06. > :55:08.that many people with diabetes find it an embarrassingly honest and

:55:08. > :55:12.something they don't want to talk about, yet it is affecting more and

:55:12. > :55:17.more people. We have to find a way to encourage people to say that

:55:17. > :55:19.there is nothing abnormal or wrong, but we need to help people manage

:55:19. > :55:23.their diabetes, particularly because you want to see them have

:55:23. > :55:27.control over health care and spend less time in hospital if at all

:55:27. > :55:31.possible. I fully support the campaign and we have to look at the

:55:31. > :55:34.long-term cost of people getting diabetes and recognise there is a

:55:34. > :55:39.big public health agenda, particularly about exercise, that

:55:39. > :55:49.we need to get hold of. The Prime Minister will know that this is the

:55:49. > :55:50.

:55:50. > :55:54.first opportunity I have had to ask him a question. I stand here fresh

:55:54. > :55:58.and full of hope, so why would give the Prime Minister one more chance

:55:58. > :56:02.to answer the question. People in my constituency and up and down the

:56:02. > :56:07.country faced enormous increases in their energy bills announced by

:56:07. > :56:11.Scottish Power. They need help now. When is the Prime Minister going to

:56:11. > :56:18.keep his promise, made in opposition, to take tough action on

:56:18. > :56:22.it excessive energy prices? As I said in answer some moments ago, we

:56:22. > :56:27.are taking action. There is only a certain amount you can do when you

:56:27. > :56:32.see fuel prices go up by as much as they have over the last year, a 50

:56:32. > :56:36.% increase in oil and gas, but we do have the warm home in Kuyt --

:56:36. > :56:39.Discount, the warm front scheme, and making sure that where there

:56:39. > :56:43.are special tariffs, companies have to offer them to their users. That

:56:43. > :56:46.makes a difference and there is the point about the Post Office card

:56:46. > :56:50.account holders who currently don't get all the discounts available to

:56:50. > :56:54.people who paid by direct debit. We are making sure they get the

:56:54. > :57:04.discount. She shakes her head, but in one year that's a lot more than

:57:04. > :57:08.

:57:08. > :57:11.Would my Right Honourable friend congratulate the ladies in Ilkeston

:57:12. > :57:17.who made part of the lace on the Duchess of Cambridge's wedding

:57:17. > :57:20.dress. This is the last traditional lace factory here, and that town

:57:20. > :57:25.centre has declined in the recent years over those losses. Would my

:57:25. > :57:28.Right Honourable Friend agree with me that the review into

:57:28. > :57:34.revitalising our town centres has come at a perfect time and time by

:57:34. > :57:39.the Prime Minister to attend our constituents as part of this.

:57:39. > :57:42.would be delighted to come to the constituency. I didn't know that

:57:42. > :57:46.their constituents were responsible for the lace on the Duchess's

:57:46. > :57:50.incredible dress, but I feel I leave today's session enriched by

:57:50. > :57:54.the knowledge. We do want to see the growth in manufacturing and

:57:54. > :57:58.production in Britain, and what we are seeing in the economy,

:57:58. > :58:02.difficult as the months ahead will inevitably be, a growth of things

:58:02. > :58:09.made in Britain, whether that is cars, vans or lace for people

:58:09. > :58:18.stresses. Mr Speaker, the United States secretary of state, Robert

:58:18. > :58:28.Gates, has said - I beg your pardon, Secretary of Defence - has said

:58:28. > :58:30.

:58:30. > :58:37.that the NATO operation in Libya has exposed serious security gaps.

:58:37. > :58:44.A first -- but First Sea Lord, Admiral Mark Stanhope, has said

:58:44. > :58:54.that the operation in Libya cannot be sustained for longer than three

:58:54. > :58:54.

:58:54. > :59:04.months without serious cuts elsewhere. Given those problems...

:59:04. > :59:04.

:59:04. > :59:10.Isn't it time that the Prime Minister reopened at the defence

:59:10. > :59:15.review and did another U-turn on his failed policies? He is called

:59:15. > :59:18.Mark Stanhope, that is his name. I had a meeting of the First Sea Lord

:59:18. > :59:23.yesterday, and he agreed we could sustain the mission as long as we

:59:23. > :59:26.need to, and that is exactly the words that the chief of defence

:59:26. > :59:29.staff used yesterday, because we are doing the right thing. I want

:59:29. > :59:35.one simple message to go out from every part of this government and

:59:35. > :59:39.every part of this House of Commons, that time is on our side. We have

:59:39. > :59:44.got NATO, the United Nations, the Arab League and we have right on

:59:44. > :59:47.our side. The pressure is building, militarily, diplomatically,

:59:47. > :59:51.politically and time is running out for Colonel Gaddafi. On the issue

:59:51. > :59:56.of the defence review, I would say this. For 10 years they haven't had

:59:56. > :59:59.a defence review, now they want to win a row. At the end of this

:59:59. > :00:03.review we have the 4th highest defence budget for any country in

:00:03. > :00:13.the world. We have superb armed forces, superbly equipped and they

:00:13. > :00:14.

:00:14. > :00:19.are doing a great job in the skies By the time PMQs have finished, 450

:00:19. > :00:24.children will have died from preventable disease and famine. Is

:00:24. > :00:29.it not the case that increasing Britain's aid budget is very much

:00:29. > :00:33.the right thing to do and will save millions of lives across the world.

:00:33. > :00:39.I very much welcome the support from the Honourable Gentleman for

:00:39. > :00:42.the policy of increasing our aid budget and reaching the 0.7 %

:00:42. > :00:46.target of gross national income. I think there are good reasons for

:00:46. > :00:49.doing this. First of all, we are keeping a promise to the poorest

:00:49. > :00:52.people in the poorest countries of the world and we are saving lives.

:00:52. > :00:56.Yes, of course, things are difficult at home but I think we

:00:56. > :00:59.should keep the promise even in the midst of difficulties. The second

:00:59. > :01:03.point I would make is that we are making sure our aid budget is spent

:01:03. > :01:08.very specifically on things like that she Nations for children that

:01:08. > :01:12.will save lives. -- vaccinations. That will mean a child vaccinated

:01:12. > :01:15.every two seconds and a life saved every two minutes. The last point I

:01:15. > :01:20.would make to anyone who has doubts about this issue, is I really do

:01:20. > :01:23.think that as well as saving lives, it is also about Britain's standing

:01:23. > :01:27.for something in the world and standing up for something in the

:01:27. > :01:37.world, the importance of having a strong aid budget, mending broken

:01:37. > :01:37.

:01:37. > :01:43.countries, as well as having an issue as well. In that this carer's

:01:43. > :01:46.week when we celebrate the contribution of Birmingham's care

:01:46. > :01:50.assistants and the loving families who look after their loved ones,

:01:51. > :01:57.will the Prime Minister join with me in condemning Birmingham City

:01:57. > :02:01.Council for cutting care to 4,100 of the most vulnerable in our city,

:02:01. > :02:07.branded unlawful by the High Court. Bank and I asked the Prime Minister

:02:07. > :02:12.what he intends to do to make sure that never again does Birmingham

:02:12. > :02:15.City Council fail the elderly and disabled? I think everybody in the

:02:15. > :02:19.House should welcome that it is Careys week, and I will have a

:02:19. > :02:24.reception in Number Ten tonight to celebrate that with many people who

:02:24. > :02:28.take part and are carers. This government is putting in �400

:02:28. > :02:31.million to give carers more breaks and specifically putting in �800

:02:31. > :02:35.million to make sure those looking after disabled children get regular

:02:35. > :02:39.breaks. What we have in Birmingham is an excellent Conservative and

:02:39. > :02:49.Liberal Democrat alliance doing a very good job recovering from a

:02:49. > :02:49.

:02:49. > :02:52.complete mess Labour made of the Last night on Channel 4 television

:02:52. > :02:55.there was documentary called the killing fields, showing the

:02:55. > :03:00.atrocities committed by the Sri Lankan government to the Tamil

:03:00. > :03:03.people which resulted in over 40,000 people being killed. Would

:03:03. > :03:08.the Prime Minister join me in calling for justice for the Tamil

:03:08. > :03:11.people and the people who have lost their lives? I didn't see the

:03:11. > :03:14.documentary, but I understand it was an extremely powerful programme

:03:14. > :03:19.and it refers to some very worrying events that are alleged to have

:03:19. > :03:22.taken place towards the end of that campaign. And what the government

:03:22. > :03:25.has said, along with other governments, is that there should

:03:25. > :03:28.Lankan government does need this to be investigated and the UN needs

:03:28. > :03:33.this to be investigated and we need to make sure we get to the bottom

:03:33. > :03:36.of what happened. The Prime Minister will be aware of the

:03:36. > :03:40.shambles of corporate governance which is the duration at Natural

:03:40. > :03:44.Resources Corporation. I would not expect him to give specific comment

:03:44. > :03:47.on it, but would he agree on behalf of millions of pension holders and

:03:47. > :03:52.small shareholders across the country that high standards of

:03:52. > :03:56.corporate governance at the City of London is critical, as is the role

:03:56. > :03:59.of the Financial Reporting Council? I am aware of this problem and the

:03:59. > :04:03.Honourable Gentleman makes important point. We have caused

:04:03. > :04:07.want companies to come to London to access capital to float on the main

:04:07. > :04:09.market, and that is one of the attractions of Britain, that we are

:04:10. > :04:12.an open economy, but when the companies come they have to

:04:12. > :04:16.understand we have rules of corporate governance that are there

:04:16. > :04:19.for a reason and we need to obey the rules, and I'm sure the

:04:19. > :04:29.Chancellor will be addressing this not only in his speech tonight, but

:04:29. > :04:33.also in the papers we will publish in subsequent days. Mr Speaker,

:04:33. > :04:38.does the Prime Minister agree with me that if the coalition government

:04:38. > :04:41.had not adopted the economic policy that it has rather than listen to

:04:41. > :04:46.the advice of the Shadow Chancellor mortgage interest rates could be 5%

:04:46. > :04:51.higher than what they are now? Honourable Friend makes important

:04:51. > :04:55.point. In this country today, tragically, we have agreed levels

:04:55. > :04:59.of government debt that German interest rates. That is an enormous

:04:59. > :05:03.monetary boost to our economy and we should all welcome the cut in

:05:03. > :05:06.unemployment today. If we had not taken action on the deficit and

:05:06. > :05:16.proved to the markets that we had a way of paying back the debt and

:05:16. > :05:17.

:05:17. > :05:21.deficit, we would be straight in Prime Minister's Questions finishes

:05:21. > :05:26.five minutes later than normal. It started two minutes later than it

:05:26. > :05:31.should have done. I think the Speaker was a lull in extra time,

:05:31. > :05:36.or maybe he needs a new watch. The Leader of the Opposition went on a

:05:36. > :05:42.specific issue of cancer patients who are under treatment and whether

:05:42. > :05:46.they continue to get a particular welfare payment or not. All six

:05:46. > :05:49.questions were taken up by that. It is a technical matter. We will

:05:49. > :05:53.speak to a representative of Macmillan Cancer Care In a moment,

:05:53. > :05:58.who originally raised this issue. And we will have a briefing on what

:05:58. > :06:02.the Government reply is. But before we go into whether Mr Mellor brand

:06:02. > :06:08.was right to go on something so specific because all eyes were on

:06:08. > :06:11.him, let's see what you thought of PMQs. John says Cameron was on the

:06:11. > :06:15.back foot. How can he say Miliband is on the wrong side of the

:06:15. > :06:18.argument when questioning the withdrawal of help from cancer

:06:18. > :06:23.patients? Another e-mail says Cameron avoided

:06:23. > :06:29.the issue today. It was a decent, if not great performance from Ed.

:06:29. > :06:33.Ivan in Cambridge seems to have written -- says we seem to have

:06:33. > :06:37.written Ed Miliband's Obituary too early. Cameron was trounced and

:06:37. > :06:43.looked flustered and foolish at the dispatch box. Some of you are

:06:43. > :06:50.getting annoyed with Ed Miliband on the cancer theme. Ed's use of

:06:50. > :06:55.cancer patients is appalling in his attempt to avoid voting on welfare

:06:55. > :07:00.reform. But hey, what did he do to his own brother? Another says I

:07:01. > :07:04.wonder what people feel about people using them as an excuse to

:07:04. > :07:07.back out of supporting much-needed welfare reform. That might be a

:07:07. > :07:12.good point to talk to Macmillan Cancer Research about, because we

:07:12. > :07:17.have the head of their campaigns here. Were you misquoted by Ed

:07:17. > :07:21.Miliband? No. We think it was a really important issue for Ed

:07:21. > :07:26.Miliband to raise. It is clear that the government had not realised

:07:26. > :07:31.that their welfare reforms will have such a big impact on cancer

:07:31. > :07:35.patients who want to work, but are not quite yet fully ready to do so.

:07:35. > :07:39.We did get in touch with the Department of Work and Pensions

:07:39. > :07:44.while all this was going on, and this was what they had to say.

:07:44. > :07:47."people deemed too ill to work will be placed in a support group for

:07:47. > :07:52.employment support allowance. There are no requirements for these

:07:52. > :07:57.people to seek work, and the rate of the allowance they receive will

:07:57. > :08:01.not go down after a year. The Macmillan claimed would only apply

:08:01. > :08:07.to people in the Work Related Activity Book, those assessed as

:08:07. > :08:11.capable of at least some work". So it does seem as if when you are

:08:11. > :08:15.really ill, you will not be expected to work and you will not

:08:15. > :08:19.lose benefits. The at is a very technical answer from the

:08:19. > :08:23.Government, which means there are 7000 who this will apply to. There

:08:23. > :08:27.are cancer patients who will be hit under the proposals unless the

:08:27. > :08:33.Government is able to rethink them. It will be those who are recovering

:08:33. > :08:37.from cancer treatment. The people who want to work and will be able

:08:37. > :08:42.to work in the future, but not yet, because of the treatment they have

:08:42. > :08:45.had. I can't believe for a moment that the Government really

:08:45. > :08:52.understands that these people, who want to work, will be penalised to

:08:52. > :08:57.the tune of nearly �100 a week. No doubt this argument will

:08:57. > :09:04.continue as the day goes on as people try to get to grips with the

:09:04. > :09:08.issues on both sides. It seems to apply to a small number of people,

:09:08. > :09:12.although in their thousands, who are recovering from a or under

:09:12. > :09:16.treatment for cancer, but deemed still to be able to do some kind of

:09:16. > :09:23.work. The argument is what amount of welfare payment they should

:09:23. > :09:28.continue to get. Was Mr Miliband right to go on that specific issue

:09:28. > :09:32.for all six questions? I think that today will no doubt be claimed as a

:09:32. > :09:37.victory for Ed Miliband. He was passionate. The issue he picked was

:09:37. > :09:44.retail politics'. People care about this issue hugely. It is hard to

:09:44. > :09:48.argue against somebody defending cancer patients. There are very few

:09:48. > :09:52.people, David Cameron included, who would support people who are

:09:52. > :09:56.seriously ill seeing a cut in their benefit. But it was interesting

:09:57. > :10:01.that Ed Miliband did this through the whole of his entire six

:10:01. > :10:05.question stretch. And it ended up with him in a difficult place. By

:10:05. > :10:11.the end of Ed Miliband's exchanges, he was suggesting, astonishingly,

:10:12. > :10:17.that we should have a pause on the entire welfare plans. That is

:10:17. > :10:21.extraordinary. I am sure Hazelwood agree that one of Labour's problems

:10:21. > :10:24.is that people think Labour were too soft on scroungers and people

:10:24. > :10:28.who kept hold of benefits and claimed things they should not have

:10:28. > :10:32.done. And here is Ed Miliband putting himself on the other

:10:32. > :10:38.argument -- the other side of the argument on reform, calling for a

:10:38. > :10:42.pause in the week that his party is divided. So you have Ed Miliband no

:10:42. > :10:48.doubt having a victory within the Commons, but I am curious at the

:10:48. > :10:54.decision to go on that as an issue and end up calling for a rethink,

:10:54. > :10:58.given where his party is. I think he has had a good day. It was a big

:10:58. > :11:02.test, and he was passionate and angry. It was a real issue that

:11:02. > :11:07.affects people's lives, so it was right. In terms of the welfare

:11:07. > :11:11.issue, people do want us to reform welfare. They want it to be a fair

:11:11. > :11:15.system, and Ed told on Monday about taking responsibility at the top

:11:15. > :11:18.and bottom. But there are things in the welfare bill which are pretty

:11:19. > :11:23.punitive, and that is why there is a debate. But I think he did well

:11:23. > :11:28.today. Being broadly in favour of welfare reform, but disliking some

:11:28. > :11:32.of the things in the bill, is a respectable position for any a

:11:32. > :11:36.position to take. But doesn't that mean you support the principle and

:11:36. > :11:40.argue for changes at committee stage, whereas Mr Miliband has been

:11:40. > :11:45.giving the impression that he would like not to proceed with the

:11:45. > :11:49.welfare reform at all. You don't agree with that? As the committee

:11:49. > :11:54.develops, I think you will see the provisions being tested, and

:11:54. > :11:57.rightly. But I think the people of the country want us to reform

:11:57. > :12:04.welfare. But they also wanted to be fair. If you have groups like

:12:04. > :12:09.cancer sufferers who will lose �100 a week, that is not fair. On the

:12:09. > :12:13.general point of welfare reform, the arguments include people that

:12:13. > :12:17.the press called scroungers and people taking benefits they are not

:12:17. > :12:22.in part two. The more fundamental point about welfare reform is

:12:22. > :12:27.surely to remove the existing perverse incentives, where many

:12:27. > :12:31.people are better off taking welfare than going to work. That

:12:31. > :12:36.was exactly our policy, to say that in any circumstances, you will

:12:36. > :12:41.always be better off in work. We were talking about �40 a week if

:12:41. > :12:46.you were prepared to take a job. If you have a system that is so

:12:46. > :12:50.complicated, and it is, that at the margins you will lose 95p out of

:12:50. > :12:58.every pound you earn, that is not an incentives. So I support making

:12:58. > :13:05.work pay. Was welfare reform an issue too hot for Mrs Thatcher to

:13:05. > :13:09.handle at the time? I do not think so. Then why didn't the Thatcher

:13:09. > :13:14.government go with it? Well, we did. There is this myth that we did not

:13:14. > :13:18.do anything on the health service and just focused on the economy. It

:13:18. > :13:26.is untrue. You put millions on incapacity benefit instead of on

:13:26. > :13:34.unemployment benefit. That was one of our big problems. Incapacity

:13:34. > :13:38.benefit shrank alongside your record. Why didn't the Thatcher

:13:38. > :13:42.government tackle welfare reform? Not long afterwards, Bill Clinton

:13:42. > :13:48.did in the US. We had a lot of things to do when we came to power.

:13:48. > :13:52.People forget what a state the country was in. When I went to

:13:52. > :13:57.Russia as the trade minister in 1979, the Russian minister said to

:13:57. > :14:04.me, we are not going to buy any more from you. You are on strike.

:14:04. > :14:08.Your goods are never delivered on time. They are inadequate. In fact,

:14:08. > :14:14.I must tell you that we are going to buy less from you. We regard you

:14:14. > :14:16.as the sick man of Europe. Ten years later, I went to Moscow again

:14:16. > :14:19.as the Energy Secretary, and the members of the Politburo were

:14:19. > :14:25.queuing up in the hope of getting a meeting, because they saw Britain

:14:25. > :14:29.as a country that had turned itself around. But you can't do everything.

:14:29. > :14:32.Final Word From Sam. Where does this leave Mr Miliband now? Where

:14:32. > :14:36.he was before, which is still having to tackle the two big

:14:36. > :14:40.problems with Labour's reputation, firstly to repair it on the deficit

:14:40. > :14:44.and public finances, and secondly to repair their reputation on

:14:44. > :14:48.welfare reform and not being tough enough. I do not think he achieved

:14:48. > :14:55.anything on those today, although he did look competent in front of

:14:55. > :15:00.his troops. As always during Prime Minister's Questions, it is not

:15:00. > :15:03.just David Cameron and Ed Miliband who are in the spotlight. John

:15:03. > :15:06.Bercow was a controversial choice when he was elected as Speaker

:15:06. > :15:13.almost two years ago now. First, a reminder of some of his more ill-

:15:13. > :15:17.tempered interventions. Order. The Government Chief Whip has

:15:17. > :15:24.absolutely no business whatsoever shouting from a sedentary position.

:15:24. > :15:27.Order! The honourable gentleman will remain in the chamber. The

:15:27. > :15:37.right honourable gentleman has absolutely no business scurrying

:15:37. > :15:41.out of the chamber. Order! Order! The Chief Whip has no business...

:15:41. > :15:48.Order! The right honourable gentleman has known business

:15:48. > :15:54.behaving in that way. A bad example is being said by some

:15:54. > :15:58.senior members to newcomers. Order. There are far too many private

:15:58. > :16:08.conversations taking place. The public is not impressed. They want

:16:08. > :16:09.

:16:09. > :16:11.Order! The minister will resume his seat. The answers have been

:16:11. > :16:15.excessively long winded and repetitive and must not happen

:16:15. > :16:19.again. I have made the position clear and I hope the minister will

:16:19. > :16:28.learn from that. So, an ill- tempered exchange with the health

:16:28. > :16:31.minister Simon Burns who was heard calling the Speaker eight stupid

:16:31. > :16:37.sanctimonious dwarf. He later issued an apology, but did he mean

:16:37. > :16:41.it? Who knows? We are joined by Bobby Friedman who has published a

:16:41. > :16:45.biography of John Bercow. Welcome to the Daily Politics. We have seen

:16:45. > :16:49.you can get angry at times and really does polarise people -- he

:16:49. > :16:54.can get angry. But he does survive through to the next election, or

:16:54. > :16:57.does he? Are I think he will survive. But as anything in

:16:57. > :17:04.politics it comes with a proviso. Because of the way John was elected,

:17:04. > :17:08.he does polarise people. When I was speaking to people for the book,

:17:08. > :17:12.they work some people who said there he was the best thing I ever

:17:12. > :17:16.met, but on the other side you have people who hate him with the real

:17:17. > :17:20.venom and a real personal venom, actually. I think John's position

:17:20. > :17:25.is a little more vulnerable than your average speaker, but only if

:17:25. > :17:28.there is a big event, and who knows what it might be. But if some event

:17:28. > :17:31.were to come up we have the kind of a powder keg building up that

:17:31. > :17:36.people would not step in to save him like they would with other

:17:36. > :17:39.speakers. But at the moment, people think, as a speaker, he is doing a

:17:39. > :17:43.good job. There is no immediate sign that people are trying to get

:17:43. > :17:46.rid of him. What is the general view of him on the Conservative

:17:46. > :17:51.backbenches? A lot of the Conservative backbenches do not

:17:51. > :17:55.like him and a lot would get rid of him tomorrow if they could. But

:17:55. > :17:58.there are others, more moderate, who were changing their view. When

:17:58. > :18:03.John was elected, one minister said to me that he had never seen

:18:03. > :18:09.anything quite so tribal within the Conservative Party as the feeling

:18:09. > :18:12.against John. Nothing has united as much as the Conservative benches

:18:12. > :18:15.have against John Bercow. But as people see how he is doing and

:18:15. > :18:19.getting more urgent questions in and getting through the order paper

:18:19. > :18:24.quicker, I think they realise he is doing quite a good job. I think

:18:24. > :18:30.that is helping. You have to remember that John Major and the

:18:30. > :18:35.government at times and I got eight text from a special adviser saying

:18:35. > :18:38.that the subject of the book was palest of expletives, but that

:18:38. > :18:41.special adviser was preparing for an urgent question that had been

:18:41. > :18:48.granted. That is what you want the Speaker to be doing and you want to

:18:48. > :18:53.hold them to account. Do we know what David Cameron thinks of John

:18:53. > :19:00.Bercow? He has never forgiven John Bercow for the attack when he was

:19:00. > :19:03.standing to be leader of the Conservative Party, he attacked his

:19:03. > :19:07.background as liking hunting and been from Eton College. It was very

:19:07. > :19:11.personal, and it was a necessary, because he was a Ken Clarke

:19:11. > :19:15.supporter, and Ken Clarke said he did not know why he did it. Cameron

:19:15. > :19:18.has stepped in to save him. He backed him in Buckingham at the

:19:18. > :19:21.last election, the constituency where he was honourable. And he

:19:21. > :19:25.also made sure that Conservative MPs did not try and get rid of him

:19:25. > :19:28.when they came back to the Commons after the election. But who knows

:19:28. > :19:32.whether Cameron would step in another time? I think there is a

:19:32. > :19:36.lasting scar, and juicy with a lot of senior Conservatives, he has

:19:36. > :19:42.stepped out of line once too often and Cameron will never forget that.

:19:42. > :19:47.But he has made quite a political journey. We have a clip from an

:19:47. > :19:53.issue of Question Time -- an edition of Question Time, from 1981.

:19:53. > :19:57.Let's see what he was like then. One more common from the audience.

:19:57. > :20:02.For Mrs Castle to describe what Mr Whitelaw said about financial

:20:02. > :20:06.assistance as economic nonsense is utterly absurd. Mrs Castle recalls

:20:06. > :20:10.in her recent book that Mr Callaghan once said that if you

:20:10. > :20:14.were a young man, he would emigrate because he did not have any answers

:20:14. > :20:17.to Britain's economic problems or any others. I would suggest took

:20:17. > :20:26.Mrs Castle that the region she sought to join the European

:20:26. > :20:32.Parliament was precisely the same. Mr Whitelaw was talking economic

:20:32. > :20:36.common sense. A very good point. that the same that man who is now

:20:36. > :20:43.the speed of the house? I think his views have changed a lot since then

:20:43. > :20:46.-- speak of the house. And his hairstyle. Be it has certainly

:20:46. > :20:53.changed for the better. But you can see that kind of energy, and when

:20:53. > :20:57.he gets his teeth into something, he will not let it go. Back in the

:20:57. > :21:01.1980s, he was very right wing and in favour of repatriating

:21:01. > :21:06.immigrants and things like that. He has done a genuine conversion over

:21:06. > :21:12.issues such as that. Now he has the same fervour over gay rights and

:21:12. > :21:16.things like that. What our guest is saying, Cecil Parkinson, is that he

:21:16. > :21:21.is the marmite speaker. You seem to love him or hate him. Is that a

:21:21. > :21:25.healthy thing for the Speaker to be? It is a fact, whether it is

:21:25. > :21:31.healthy or unhealthy, that is the situation is. Where do you come

:21:31. > :21:36.down on this? I have known John for a long time. He personally staged a

:21:36. > :21:40.riot at Essex University that I was involved in. He did not plan to

:21:40. > :21:45.stage a riot, but by the time he had finished what he was doing, we

:21:45. > :21:52.had a riot. I have kept an eye on John over many years. Tell us what

:21:52. > :21:56.happened. The week before, Teddy Taylor had been attacked by a

:21:56. > :22:02.student who smashed and it a kick into his face and cut him and the

:22:02. > :22:06.student was arrested. I was going the next week -- smashed and it

:22:06. > :22:13.paid into his face. John announced it would be a ticket only, no

:22:13. > :22:17.Labour members meeting. All the other students decided we would not

:22:17. > :22:23.getting to the room, so there were hundreds of people blocking the

:22:23. > :22:29.entrance. And we subsequently had the meeting, and we had 1,200

:22:29. > :22:38.people there. It was not a right. Do you like Marmite or not, Hazel

:22:38. > :22:43.Blears? I love the Speaker. loved the speaker? You loved the

:22:43. > :22:46.speaker? I think he is a breath of fresh air. He welcomes the new

:22:46. > :22:52.members, he gets through the business, he is about my size and

:22:52. > :22:57.we see eye-to-eye. On that shock news going across the wires of the

:22:57. > :23:05.world, that Hazel Blears is in love with the Speaker, we say goodbye to

:23:05. > :23:08.Bobby Friedman. Before we go on, we need to point out that Mike Hobday

:23:08. > :23:14.from Macmillan who spoke to us from PMQs was a Labour candidate in the

:23:14. > :23:20.last election. Just as we find these things out, we tell you them.

:23:20. > :23:28.With the country's finances still in a pretty dire Strait, should we

:23:28. > :23:34.still be paying for eye tests, bus passes? Peter Stringfellow, and

:23:34. > :23:39.even Mark not for, dire Straits, you see. It thinks that the

:23:39. > :23:41.taxpayer is already paying far too much to subsidise the over-sixties

:23:41. > :23:45.and that any increase in state funding for long-term care for the

:23:45. > :23:55.elderly which might come out in the review next month might be the

:23:55. > :24:00.

:24:00. > :24:05.Turn that 60 in Britain today, and it suddenly feels like life is a

:24:05. > :24:08.beach. Free bus passes, eye tests, and winter fuel payments are all

:24:08. > :24:14.made available to you regardless of whether you are working unemployed

:24:14. > :24:18.will very rich indeed. But I don't think Britain can avoid it --

:24:18. > :24:21.afford it. Last year the old as members of the baby-boom generation

:24:21. > :24:25.began to retire. There are 17 million of them and they have

:24:25. > :24:31.better pensions, more savings and own more homes than any other age

:24:31. > :24:36.group in society, but we continue to subsidise them. A few years ago

:24:36. > :24:39.a parliamentary report found that winter fuel payments cost Britain

:24:39. > :24:43.�3 billion every year. But only 12 % of the people who get them

:24:43. > :24:53.actually need them. To me, that sounds like a terrible waste of

:24:53. > :24:58.

:24:58. > :25:01.Since taking office, the coalition have cut university funding, the

:25:01. > :25:06.education maintenance allowance and even housing benefit for young

:25:06. > :25:10.people. But more than one million of them are unemployed and 25 % are

:25:10. > :25:12.still living with their parents. It sounds to me like they are the ones

:25:13. > :25:16.that need the help, especially when you consider that over the course

:25:16. > :25:24.of their tax Payne lives the younger generation will have to pay

:25:24. > :25:29.for all of those juicy benefits for the older, richer generation. Next

:25:29. > :25:32.month the deal not commission will present the Government with plans

:25:32. > :25:35.for the provision of elderly care in Britain. We do not know what

:25:35. > :25:39.they will say, but the man in charge is already indicating that

:25:39. > :25:44.he thinks that care for the elderly is the poor relation of Britain's

:25:44. > :25:47.welfare state. With so many people worried about how they will pay for

:25:47. > :25:50.care and the quality of care they receive in their old age, I

:25:50. > :25:55.understand something must be done, but my point is simple. Britain

:25:55. > :25:58.can't continue to hand out benefits to the elderly without a thought of

:25:58. > :26:01.the younger, poorer people who will have to pay for it. It is like

:26:01. > :26:11.giving one generation a big long holiday and not inviting the rest

:26:11. > :26:12.

:26:12. > :26:20.So Ed Howker, what have you got against the old? I have got nothing

:26:20. > :26:26.against the old. OK. Fine, good. Isn't the reason politicians pay

:26:26. > :26:30.attention to this is that they are very involved in society?

:26:30. > :26:34.Absolutely right. So, what is wrong with that. If they are willing to

:26:35. > :26:39.pay an active part in society and those in the voting age are not, so

:26:39. > :26:42.be it? We have this thing called representative democracy, and the

:26:42. > :26:46.whole idea is that you try and govern on behalf of all people

:26:46. > :26:52.whether they voted for you or not or whether you have curried favour

:26:52. > :26:56.with them or not. My problem with this agenda which seeks to give

:26:56. > :27:01.huge swathes of benefits, often completely unnecessary ones, to an

:27:01. > :27:05.older generation, is that we have a huge quantity of young people in

:27:05. > :27:11.Britain hurting very badly and not enough is being done to address

:27:11. > :27:14.their needs. But also we talk about this all the time. There are many

:27:14. > :27:18.people in the older bracket who are hurting as well who have paid their

:27:18. > :27:24.dues, possibly 14 wars, and they have done their bit for this

:27:24. > :27:27.country. -- possibly fault in a war. Let's be polemic. You have a young

:27:27. > :27:31.generation who may be could do without this attitude that

:27:31. > :27:36.everything will come on a plate, but you have to scrimp and save

:27:36. > :27:39.like their grandparents did. course, there are complex things

:27:39. > :27:44.about how the Government approach is the idea of debt with younger

:27:44. > :27:48.people. There is a lot of talk about making them save by also

:27:48. > :27:52.making them get into debt if they want to be educated, so that is a

:27:52. > :27:57.mixed message. But there is a practical issue that young people

:27:57. > :28:01.face in the last 20 or 30 years of their working lives, a huge fiscal

:28:01. > :28:06.pressure that comes from underfunded pensions, a doubling of

:28:06. > :28:09.health care costs in the next 10 or 20 years, and there is no way

:28:09. > :28:13.whatsoever that we have thought seriously about the mechanisms that

:28:14. > :28:16.will be needed for them to pay for that whilst maintaining a good

:28:16. > :28:21.quality of a welfare system throughout the generations, and

:28:21. > :28:26.that is my problem. So perhaps they make rise up in anger and change

:28:26. > :28:29.the political system? Isn't that what democracy is about? I don't

:28:29. > :28:32.think we necessarily need a revolution. It is a very 1960s way

:28:32. > :28:39.of looking at how the young people engage in politics. It is just

:28:39. > :28:42.making sure that the basic polities address their needs. A such an

:28:42. > :28:49.interesting subject, but very squeezed because of the time. Do

:28:49. > :28:54.come back again and talk to worse. While we have been on air, the

:28:54. > :28:57.Greek banks and possibly three French banks are exposed to that

:28:57. > :29:01.debt from Greece and they could be another sovereign bank crisis.

:29:02. > :29:06.Thank you to Hazel and Cecil. No time to pick the winner for guess