:00:28. > :00:33.Good morning, folks. Welcome to the Daily Politics. As strikes loom,
:00:33. > :00:35.the Government starts to talk tough with the unions. Are we headed for
:00:35. > :00:39.a destructive showdown? The Government announces the biggest
:00:39. > :00:46.defence shake-up for a generation. But cannot help close the black
:00:46. > :00:51.hole at the MoD? And remember this? A former Cabinet colleague well. We
:00:51. > :01:01.will discuss the legacy of Margaret Thatcher's handbag, which goes on
:01:01. > :01:07.With us for the duration, format army colonel, now Conservative MP,
:01:07. > :01:13.Bob Stewart. Welcome back. Let's kick off this morning with news
:01:13. > :01:17.that the Chinese Prime Minister... Premiere, rather, Wen Jiabao, is on
:01:17. > :01:21.his second day of a visit to the UK. He was greeted at Number Ten
:01:21. > :01:24.earlier this morning. He has just arrived at a Foreign Office, where
:01:24. > :01:27.he is signing an agreement which gives British government --
:01:27. > :01:32.companies access to markets in regional Chinese cities. The deal
:01:32. > :01:36.could potentially be worth more than �10 billion to the UK economy.
:01:36. > :01:40.In a moment he will be talking to the Prime Minister in a press
:01:40. > :01:44.conference, as well as trade, the sticky issue of China's a human
:01:44. > :01:50.rights record is likely to be raised. Bob Stewart, how sensible
:01:50. > :01:54.is it for us now to but East when it comes to trade? Absolutely. That
:01:54. > :02:02.is the Bigg Market. Asia is the Bigg Market, and perhaps South
:02:02. > :02:07.America. It's great if we go beyond Shanghai, that kind of area, going
:02:07. > :02:13.to the hinterland. China has stacks of money and we wouldn't mind
:02:13. > :02:18.having our fair share of that in trade. They import too much to us,
:02:18. > :02:21.we want to balance that up. Fine, the figures make sense. But I
:02:21. > :02:26.wonder how you, as someone who came to prominence sitting on that tank
:02:26. > :02:29.and shouting at people about human rights in the Balkans, how does it
:02:29. > :02:34.sit with you that it would mean doing deals with a country that
:02:35. > :02:39.does not value human rights as we do in this country? It's sad. But,
:02:39. > :02:44.as you said, it will be on the agenda the whole time. I hope that
:02:44. > :02:47.eventually China will come round. We have dealt with regimes, I have
:02:47. > :02:51.personally dealt with regimes that don't have much respect of human
:02:51. > :02:55.rights. I'm afraid that is the real world. I would love it to be
:02:55. > :03:01.Utopian, I would love it not to be a factor. But it is and we have to
:03:01. > :03:05.deal with it. Nobody is asking for Utopia, but is it not hypocritical
:03:05. > :03:08.to pursue action against Colonel Gaddafi because he is anti-
:03:08. > :03:12.democratic, a dictator, because he suppresses opposition. But many of
:03:12. > :03:15.those things could be talked about when it comes to the Chinese, but
:03:15. > :03:19.we are falling over ourselves to plug a financial hole with them.
:03:19. > :03:24.Actually, we're taking action against Colonel Gaddafi because he
:03:24. > :03:27.threatened to kill hundreds of people in Benghazi. Under the
:03:27. > :03:32.Security Council resolution, that is what... But there is some debate
:03:32. > :03:36.about whether we overstep that line. There is debate. It would be good
:03:36. > :03:40.for him to go. But that is not part of the Security Council resolution.
:03:40. > :03:45.But you take my Point Barrow, there are some values that we hold
:03:46. > :03:50.sacrosanct. There are regimes that don't. Some we choose to be friends
:03:50. > :03:55.with, others which used take action against. You are right, I'm afraid
:03:55. > :03:59.that is right. We will not get that perfect. Sometimes you have to dine
:03:59. > :04:06.with a long spoon. Maybe we are dining with a long spoon in China's
:04:06. > :04:11.case. Or chopsticks! Thousands of schools and colleges in England and
:04:11. > :04:13.Wales are predicted to close on Thursday. Civil servants will also
:04:13. > :04:17.walkout over reductions in pension benefits. There is little prospect
:04:17. > :04:20.of a settlement before Thursday. Over the last few days, the
:04:20. > :04:23.rhetoric has ratcheted up, as it usually does at this stage in a
:04:23. > :04:27.dispute. As you say, this week we are going
:04:27. > :04:31.to see the biggest public sector strikes for years. It could become
:04:31. > :04:34.a pretty drawn-out battle between the unions and the Government.
:04:34. > :04:38.Teachers, lecturers and civil servants are striking on Thursday
:04:38. > :04:41.in protests against reforms to their pensions. But other unions
:04:42. > :04:46.have warned that they are prepared to take action as well. Dick
:04:46. > :04:50.Prentice, the general secretary of Unison, says it will not just be
:04:50. > :04:53.short stoppages but long-term industrial action through all of
:04:53. > :04:57.our public services. Talks between the unions and government are
:04:57. > :05:02.ongoing. To be honest, there's not much sign of compromise on either
:05:02. > :05:05.side. Three weeks ago, the Lib Dem Business Secretary Vince Cable
:05:05. > :05:09.warned that increased industrial action could cause pressure for
:05:09. > :05:12.tougher union laws. Education Secretary Michael Gove said that
:05:12. > :05:17.strike laws should be kept under review. One option would be to
:05:17. > :05:21.impose a turnout threshold on union ballots. He also wants schools to
:05:21. > :05:26.stay open on Thursday, despite the strikes, possibly with the help of
:05:26. > :05:29.parents. Let's look to Francis Maude, because he said that the
:05:29. > :05:37.Government should stop paying for full-time union officials in
:05:37. > :05:40.Whitehall. All of these things are contentious to union ears. Both
:05:40. > :05:44.sides say they want to avoid disruption to the public, but it
:05:44. > :05:48.now looks inevitable. We are joined by Sally Hunt,
:05:48. > :05:52.general secretary of the university and college union. It is one of the
:05:52. > :05:58.unions that are going to strike on Thursday. You want the Government
:05:58. > :06:03.to back down on increasing the retirement age, not to change the
:06:03. > :06:07.pension Index to a tougher index. Not to go to a career average
:06:07. > :06:12.scheme for pensions. You and I know that the Government is not going to
:06:12. > :06:16.give way on any of these things. Well, you make us sound
:06:16. > :06:20.unbelievably unreasonable. No, I don't... What we want the
:06:20. > :06:23.Government to do is talk. It is talking. What they are doing his
:06:23. > :06:27.soundbites and they been doing it for a couple of weeks. If you want
:06:27. > :06:31.to have credible negotiation, you want to make sure that the clear
:06:31. > :06:36.red lines on either side are ones that people have to explore and
:06:36. > :06:40.talk about. Are you wrong in saying that you want the Government to
:06:40. > :06:48.move on these areas? We want them to move, but we want to have a
:06:48. > :06:55.proper negotiation, as we have before. On what, sorry?
:06:55. > :06:59.teachers' pension scheme. The difficulty we have got is that we
:06:59. > :07:03.want to resolve the situation and, as on many occasions, we've had to
:07:03. > :07:05.review pension schemes because we accept we are getting old and in
:07:05. > :07:10.many cases we are having a healthier old age. That means we
:07:10. > :07:15.have to have the flexibility to explore how. What the Government
:07:15. > :07:18.has done over the last few weeks is, rather than say, we recognise there
:07:18. > :07:22.are issues around accrual rates, around 80 of retirement and
:07:22. > :07:26.contribution levels, rather than saying, can we explore that, set
:07:26. > :07:30.against what Hutton said, what the National Audit Office has said,
:07:30. > :07:34.they are saying, this is what it is going to be and that is it.
:07:34. > :07:37.negotiations are still going on? hope so, we are going into
:07:37. > :07:41.negotiations will stop so why are you going on strike when things are
:07:41. > :07:45.still going on? The strength of feeling has been to such an extent
:07:45. > :07:49.that we have some members now, every poorly paid, who do not
:07:49. > :07:52.believe that the Government is negotiating in good faith. So why
:07:52. > :07:57.it do you not break off the negotiations? That is not what our
:07:57. > :07:59.members would want. What is the point of a one-day strike? I hope
:07:59. > :08:02.it will make sure that the Government understands the strength
:08:02. > :08:06.of feeling and that we will get into a discussion that allows us to
:08:06. > :08:14.say, OK, now we are doing something sensible. I hope we don't have to
:08:14. > :08:17.strike on Thursday. Assuming none of these hopes come true, the
:08:17. > :08:22.Government say, well, they went on strike for one day, nobody noticed,
:08:22. > :08:24.what do you do next? We sit with our sister unions, we explore what
:08:24. > :08:29.is going to happen with the other unions moving towards industrial
:08:29. > :08:33.action. It seems to me that we could be moving to an autumn of a
:08:33. > :08:37.lot of tension. We don't want that. This Thursday's strike is just a
:08:37. > :08:41.token strike, whatever happens. It is a shot across the bows of the
:08:41. > :08:46.Government. You are running into the summer, when there is no point
:08:46. > :08:50.go on strike because none of your members will be working. If there's
:08:50. > :08:54.going to be a clash, it will be in the autumn? I think the clash is
:08:54. > :08:57.happening now. But you are only going on strike for one day. Having
:08:57. > :09:02.the Civil Service affected, schools closed down, having universities
:09:02. > :09:06.not able to teach... Not many people will notice. I disagree. If
:09:06. > :09:09.you live where I do, if you have children, as I do, you are having
:09:09. > :09:13.discussions right the way to the last week with parents that know
:09:13. > :09:16.that it is a real issue for them. Those parents, friendly, are not
:09:16. > :09:19.saying that the teachers and lecturers are wrong, they are
:09:19. > :09:24.saying, what Tanit is going on that we have a government that is not
:09:25. > :09:28.discussing this credibly but doing this? The Poles don't suggest there
:09:28. > :09:36.is much sympathy for you. But we will see when the strikes take
:09:36. > :09:41.place. -- polls. Why should harder and tax money be used to keep union
:09:41. > :09:47.officials and a job? -- hard-earned tax money. If we go beyond that
:09:47. > :09:51.emotive discussion... What's the answer to the question? �80 million
:09:51. > :09:58.of taxpayers' money is used to pay workers, not to do work, but to be
:09:58. > :10:01.full-time union officials. Why? make sure, in many cases, that we
:10:01. > :10:04.have a good industrial relations, to make sure that people at work
:10:04. > :10:09.are represented, to make sure that you have a good and well working
:10:09. > :10:12.workplace. What is happening most of the time, if I might say so, is
:10:12. > :10:15.that people that represent people and trade unions are doing it in
:10:15. > :10:19.their own time. They are not generally doing his... Some are
:10:19. > :10:24.getting bigger salaries, �80 million a year is a lot of money.
:10:24. > :10:27.Some across the public sector are given support by employers. A lot.
:10:27. > :10:31.They recognise that it makes sense to have people who are experienced
:10:31. > :10:34.and know what they're doing. The majority of people that give their
:10:34. > :10:38.time give it of their own free will and do it because they care about
:10:38. > :10:41.making sure that people in their work are looked after and are safe.
:10:41. > :10:44.That's something I'm not going to be defensive about. We can bring
:10:44. > :10:48.the colonel in. You get the impression that the Government has
:10:48. > :10:54.made up its mind what it wants to do. To call what it is doing at the
:10:54. > :10:57.moment negotiation is really not the proper meaning of that word. At
:10:57. > :11:03.the very most, it's prepared to tinker at the margins. That's not
:11:03. > :11:08.negotiation. I think it's trying to negotiate. I very much hope that we
:11:08. > :11:13.will not have a strike. But you are, treat our viewers seriously, there
:11:13. > :11:18.will be a strike on Thursday. not convinced of that. Do you want
:11:18. > :11:24.to put a tenner on it? Actually, no pulled that yes, because you know
:11:24. > :11:27.there is going to be one. What the unions want to know is how much
:11:27. > :11:31.flexibility is their on these issues on the table? Or is the
:11:31. > :11:37.Government going through the notions of negotiation for form's
:11:37. > :11:41.sake? I don't think it is going through the motions. It does
:11:41. > :11:45.actually want to get a decent compromise. It also wants to make
:11:45. > :11:49.sure that teachers at all levels get treated properly. Where should
:11:49. > :11:53.it compromise? I don't know the details of where it is going to
:11:53. > :11:59.compromise. I know damn well that negotiations should continue, even
:11:59. > :12:07.though there is a striker. And I agree, negotiations should continue.
:12:07. > :12:12.I hope it doesn't come. I would almost put my tenner. You are on an
:12:12. > :12:16.army pension, I'd keep your money if I were you. We are beating the
:12:16. > :12:20.Government this afternoon. It seems that you haven't got much hope that
:12:21. > :12:24.there will be any movement. Were they to talk, if they will look at
:12:24. > :12:27.the age of retirement, if they will look at the 3% tax they have put on
:12:28. > :12:33.our members, if it will look at the accrual rates, if they will say,
:12:33. > :12:37.actually, Danny Alexander in his press statement was not doing the
:12:37. > :12:47.negotiation, but we are and that is not where we are. Unfortunately,
:12:47. > :12:47.
:12:47. > :12:52.Listening to all of these ifs, I think we'll see you on the picket
:12:52. > :12:56.line. I'm glad you're going to join us! We will just be there as
:12:56. > :12:59.journalists. Cup of tea? Even a copy, if you are nightspots of more
:12:59. > :13:03.than I get here! They are going to need to find more
:13:03. > :13:06.than a tenner, it's been called the bigger shake-up of the armed forces
:13:06. > :13:13.for a generation, Liam Fox is going to tell the House of Commons about
:13:13. > :13:17.plans to slim down the command structure. Mr Fox has said that he
:13:17. > :13:20.wants to put an end to the infighting between the army, navy
:13:20. > :13:24.and air force and bring costs under control. With continued commitments
:13:24. > :13:28.in Libya and Afghanistan, semi in the military are complaining that
:13:28. > :13:34.ministers are already stretching resources beyond their limits. --
:13:34. > :13:37.some in the military. Return from Afghanistan and a
:13:37. > :13:42.jumble of the motions for everyone. Joy, pride and perhaps sheer relief
:13:42. > :13:46.that they are home, for now. We have heard a lot of talk in recent
:13:46. > :13:49.weeks from politicians and retired top brass about overstretched, the
:13:49. > :13:54.idea that we are asking our armed forces to do too much with too
:13:54. > :13:58.little. If it does exist, what is the effect on the people at the
:13:58. > :14:02.sharp end, our service personnel and their families? People like
:14:02. > :14:06.Nina and Ryan Gillette. Right and left the Army in January after two
:14:06. > :14:12.tours of Afghanistan. He accepts that politicians are trying to help,
:14:12. > :14:18.but there are still problems. Sometimes they might over-expect
:14:18. > :14:22.what the army is able to do. What I saw in terms of overstretch was the
:14:22. > :14:27.fact that the regiments were not big enough to cope with the
:14:27. > :14:32.operational requirements. A big thing for the guys is that when
:14:32. > :14:34.they do a six-month tour they do want to come back and spent time
:14:35. > :14:39.with their families. commitments are causing concern and
:14:39. > :14:42.tension at the highest level. Plans to streamline the very top of the
:14:42. > :14:47.armed forces, in an attempt to improve their efficiency, will be
:14:47. > :14:50.announced today. But will they actually relieve the pressure?
:14:51. > :14:55.terms of families that talk to us, there is evidence of overstretch.
:14:55. > :14:59.With the redundancies facing all three services, they are doing the
:14:59. > :15:02.same amount of work with less people. The Army families
:15:02. > :15:06.Federation has also discovered evidence of a problem with leave.
:15:06. > :15:09.More than 60% of those who took part in an informal survey said
:15:09. > :15:15.that they or their partners had struggled to take all of their time
:15:15. > :15:19.off, something that Ryan and Nina experienced. None of our friends
:15:19. > :15:22.could come to our wedding because they can get the time off. These
:15:22. > :15:27.are the things, there's not much time to get your annual leave. The
:15:27. > :15:32.minute you go back, you've got your post opera leave, then you are
:15:32. > :15:35.straight into training again. So, it becomes a problem. While no one
:15:35. > :15:45.doubts that ministers meanwhile, they may need to take bold
:15:45. > :15:50.Ministers need to look at the decisions that were made and re-
:15:50. > :15:56.examine some of them, perhaps even reverse them. People can still see
:15:56. > :16:01.us doing the same amount of work, but with less people. No one joins
:16:01. > :16:07.the armed forces for an easy life, and that includes the families. But
:16:07. > :16:17.they do expect a fair deal. Colonel Bob Stewart is still with
:16:17. > :16:22.us. We also joined by Dan Jarvis, a former Army officer. How will get
:16:22. > :16:26.of Reading nearly all of the military representation on the
:16:26. > :16:30.Defence board improve decision- taking? The Chief of Defence Staff
:16:30. > :16:35.is meant to represent all three, and all three are meant to work to
:16:35. > :16:38.him. I can see a slimming down being quite a good thing, and have
:16:38. > :16:43.always thought that, ever since I worked as a major in the Ministry
:16:43. > :16:47.of Defence. There were too many generals. And there are too many
:16:47. > :16:53.admirals and too many Air Commodores. Why not get rid of this
:16:53. > :16:58.top-heavy top brass? That is what the plan is, isn't it? No, it is
:16:58. > :17:04.simply not to let them sit on the Defence board. It is a slimming
:17:04. > :17:09.down as well. We have more admirals than we have ship's! And probably
:17:09. > :17:17.more generals than there are regiments, you're absolutely right.
:17:17. > :17:20.And more civil servants and the MoD than soldiers in uniform! Some of
:17:20. > :17:26.those 60,000 are people who do guarding of bases and release
:17:26. > :17:30.soldiers. It is not quite as easy as that. I agree that slimming down
:17:30. > :17:36.the top ranks in the armed forces, but the Chiefs of Staff will decide
:17:36. > :17:45.exactly who goes as I understand. Why is our defence procurement so
:17:45. > :17:49.useless? I have no idea. I remember in the early 1980s, when I was a
:17:49. > :17:55.major, watching Michael Heseltine come in and saying, I'm going to
:17:55. > :18:00.sort out procurement with lean look and sharp sword, but with the
:18:00. > :18:04.Ministry of Defence, the problem is, it is like you put a huge great
:18:04. > :18:09.ball of party at the end of a corridor and run at it really hard,
:18:09. > :18:16.and you get off and say, look, I have made a big impression. But you
:18:16. > :18:20.turn around, and it has gone back. But we have got to drive. That is
:18:20. > :18:24.certainly true. But the assets that this government has at the moment
:18:24. > :18:33.that it inherited from the previous government, obviously, they haven't
:18:33. > :18:37.had time to make many changes. I wonder, as a tax payer, but we are
:18:37. > :18:40.paying �36 billion in defence, the Defence Secretary reminded us this
:18:40. > :18:45.morning that even after these cuts, we will be the fourth-biggest
:18:45. > :18:50.defence budget in the world, and we seem to be struggling to keep a
:18:50. > :18:53.couple of tornadoes of Eurofighter has over the skies of Libya. It is
:18:53. > :18:56.essential to do what we can to achieve the best value for the
:18:56. > :19:02.taxpayer. What is more important is that our service people who serve
:19:02. > :19:07.on a frontline get the right kit been the right places. From my
:19:07. > :19:13.experience of Iraq and Afghanistan, I had the right kit. It wasn't true
:19:13. > :19:18.from the start, though. That is right. This is precisely why the
:19:18. > :19:22.Government should do the right thing and had a new chapter. There
:19:22. > :19:27.are currently making significant decisions about resources based on
:19:27. > :19:34.how the world was in October 2010, and not have it is today. But isn't
:19:34. > :19:41.there a better hypocrisy in that? Your government didn't have a
:19:41. > :19:48.defence spending review in 10 years. Remember what happened to John
:19:48. > :19:55.Nott's defence review? They then invaded the Falklands. You didn't
:19:55. > :20:04.do one for 10 years. I think the parallel is 9/11. There was then a
:20:04. > :20:07.new chapter, which sat on top of the SIDS are from 1998. The Prime
:20:07. > :20:11.Minister fundamentally misunderstood my question the other
:20:11. > :20:17.day. Nobody is saying that we need a second review, we need a new
:20:17. > :20:22.chapter to sit on the board. But it doesn't mean that you don't
:20:22. > :20:26.Revisited. So will there be a new chapter? There will be a continual
:20:26. > :20:31.vision of what has happened, and that is sensible. It is normal
:20:31. > :20:34.merge to practise. Given the experience of what has happened, as
:20:34. > :20:40.Mr Jarvis has points out since the review came out, what differences
:20:40. > :20:45.would you like to see made now? can tell you what I would like!
:20:45. > :20:52.That is what I asked. I would like to have an aircraft carrier back.
:20:52. > :21:00.But we haven't got that. And if you do that, what are you going to cut?
:21:00. > :21:04.As Dan said, the world has moved on. But I do slightly disagree. The
:21:04. > :21:12.Libyan operation, the one we are talking about, we wouldn't do it
:21:12. > :21:16.differently. We probably wouldn't use Harriers. We want to see the
:21:16. > :21:21.restoration of three infantry battalions cut by Labour as soon as
:21:21. > :21:30.possible. We will never be able to really improve the welfare of our
:21:30. > :21:36.forces unless we look at expanding army. The first was Dr Liam Cox,
:21:36. > :21:41.the third was the now Prime Minister. -- Dr Liam Fox. What
:21:41. > :21:46.happened to that? We haven't got the money. If you actually want to
:21:46. > :21:53.run a defence budget, you still have to do it within limits. The
:21:53. > :22:00.world has changed. We haven't got the money to do everything we want.
:22:01. > :22:06.Labour's job is to do a critique of government defence policy. But
:22:06. > :22:13.Labour leaving behind this �38 billion black hole kind of
:22:13. > :22:18.undermines things, doesn't it? don't accept the detail about �38
:22:18. > :22:21.billion. Everybody else does. don't think they do. The point
:22:21. > :22:26.about resources is that we need to be spending money based on how the
:22:26. > :22:34.world this today, and that is why we need, in light of the Arab
:22:34. > :22:37.Spring, to really look at the S D S R, a new chapter. To make sure that
:22:37. > :22:41.the billions of pounds that we are spending is spent in accordance
:22:41. > :22:45.with the world today and not the world prior to the Arab Spring.
:22:45. > :22:49.We have to leave it there, although I make prediction that in 10 years
:22:50. > :22:55.somebody will be sitting in this chair asking some other MP why it
:22:55. > :23:01.the procurement is so useless! It really is just as well that
:23:01. > :23:06.Andrew has been a good boy this morning. Because I have got my bag.
:23:06. > :23:12.I have brought it into the studio. Are you leaving home?
:23:12. > :23:17.Know, that is a handbag. I carry it around every day. The handbag was
:23:17. > :23:27.Lady Thatcher's weapon of choice. Mine is a satchel, very old, heavy
:23:27. > :23:28.
:23:28. > :23:33.and dangerous. Margaret Thatcher and her use of the hand -- fashion
:23:33. > :23:37.accessory even gave rise to the term handbagging. Her handbag is to
:23:37. > :23:47.go on sale at Christie's today. Here is a reminder of some of its
:23:47. > :24:12.
:24:12. > :24:22.moments. # We are living in a material world,
:24:22. > :24:40.
:24:40. > :24:45.# Living in a material world, We all have our own recollections
:24:45. > :24:52.of that terrifying handbag. With us now we have the fashion expert
:24:52. > :24:56.Caryn Franklin. It was almost like a suit of armour. It was, but it
:24:56. > :25:03.was also ultimately the symbolic of a woman in a job where she was
:25:03. > :25:09.among us, the rest of the team were men. It became something that said,
:25:09. > :25:14.this is a woman. And it was fashion's act of logistics, her
:25:14. > :25:21.life went in there. She was organised, she was and jangling
:25:21. > :25:25.change in her pockets, not knowing where her keys are. It came to
:25:25. > :25:31.represent somebody who was authoritative, very organised. And
:25:31. > :25:37.it would go on the table. It is interesting that you think it
:25:37. > :25:45.feminised her, because for many it was felt that she might take a
:25:45. > :25:52.swing at them! Were they very expensive? It is gaining mythology,
:25:52. > :25:55.this handbagged! It was just a handbag. I think that is the point,
:25:55. > :26:00.because something can be just a jacket are just a pair of shoes,
:26:00. > :26:06.but this was more than that. served a purpose. There is nothing
:26:06. > :26:10.sire -- stylish about any item unless it serves a function. But it
:26:11. > :26:20.was a prop. You can look at various politicians, Winston Churchill and
:26:21. > :26:22.
:26:22. > :26:26.his cigar, for instance. Harold Wilson's unsmoked pipe. And then
:26:27. > :26:35.behind closed doors it turned into a cigar and the beer tent to brandy.
:26:35. > :26:43.He was saying, I am a man of the people. But other women might want
:26:43. > :26:47.to relate to this, but if a man had a bag... I will defend any female
:26:47. > :26:51.politician's right to have a bag! We had time on our hands, so here
:26:51. > :27:01.is what we think David Cameron would look like with a man back.
:27:01. > :27:09.
:27:09. > :27:15.This is what Andrew Neil would look Hold it properly! If you think,
:27:15. > :27:22.�100,000, the value of that, would anything that you had to be worth
:27:22. > :27:32.that? Is that how much it might raise? Her last Salvatore Ferragamo
:27:32. > :27:33.
:27:33. > :27:43.We are looking at a woman's handbag, and she was a rare woman in a man's
:27:43. > :27:43.
:27:44. > :27:47.world. If you look at Nelson Mandela, he weaves together to
:27:47. > :27:53.heritages, an African style of design on his shirt but a very
:27:53. > :28:03.Western shirt. Another man who wears a sharp suit and a novelty
:28:03. > :28:04.
:28:04. > :28:13.tie today. Tell me about the handbag. In 1982, my company, the
:28:13. > :28:19.company in Cheshire, -- a company abroad, was blown up, and Margaret
:28:19. > :28:25.Thatcher came out to Ireland, and I went around the hospital with
:28:25. > :28:32.Margaret Thatcher. I have to say, she was astonishingly kind. She
:28:32. > :28:36.went round the bends, and one-bed, she was visibly moved to tears. The
:28:36. > :28:40.end result, she sat down and cuddled a man. People say she's
:28:40. > :28:49.terribly good personally. And then she went out and gave the press