:00:44. > :00:47.Good afternoon, folks bs welcome to the Daily Politics. In a few
:00:47. > :00:50.minutes, we expect to hear that interest rates are on hold yet
:00:50. > :00:55.again for the 36th month in a row and that the Bank of England is
:00:56. > :00:59.going to print yet more money to buy up Government debt, all in the
:00:59. > :01:03.hope of stimulating growth. If or when it happens, you will be the
:01:03. > :01:05.first to know. Fabio Capello resigns as England
:01:05. > :01:09.football manager, the Football Association is holding a press
:01:09. > :01:13.conference right now. Should his replacement be an
:01:13. > :01:17.Englishman? Ken Livingstone is no stranger to
:01:17. > :01:21.controversy but now he's gone and said the Tory party is or was
:01:21. > :01:24.riddled with gays. There's outrage. Yes, there is
:01:24. > :01:28.outrage! Is any of it genuine?
:01:28. > :01:32.And politicians love their bikes and now there's news from France
:01:32. > :01:38.that cyclers there will be allowed to jump red lights. What's new? Is
:01:38. > :01:42.that the sort of thing you would like to see her?
:01:42. > :01:46.-- see here? Drivers jump red lights in Paris,
:01:46. > :01:50.why shouldn't cyclists. cyclists do here anyway. All that
:01:50. > :01:55.in the next hour of public service broadcasting at its finest.
:01:55. > :01:58.With us for the duration, the leader of the UK Independence Party,
:01:58. > :02:03.Nigel Farage. Welcome to back to the programme. Thank you.
:02:03. > :02:07.comments or thoughts or just got nothing else to do and you want to
:02:07. > :02:17.say something about what we are going to discuss, you can tweet
:02:17. > :02:18.
:02:18. > :02:22.your comments. # DP. Most of you watching yesterday will
:02:22. > :02:25.remember that the Prime Minister is currently wrapped up at a Nordic
:02:25. > :02:29.summit in Sweden. Now what he said there this morning is that he was
:02:29. > :02:33.looking for measures to accelerate the number of women working for top
:02:33. > :02:37.British firms, saying he wants a target of around 30%. He's also
:02:37. > :02:43.said he won't rule out quotas as a way of getting there. But not just
:02:43. > :02:48.yet. A good idea, Nigel Farage? It's not his idea, of course. The
:02:48. > :02:52.yarpblt voted for this in principle and legislation, we are told, will
:02:52. > :02:55.be brought forward shortly. The 30% quota won't be a Government
:02:56. > :03:01.decision but something imposed on us from Brussels. Is it a good idea
:03:01. > :03:04.though? No, I don't believe in quotas. While it may seem unfair
:03:04. > :03:09.that fewer women reach FTSE company, the fact is that there are not as
:03:09. > :03:13.many women who want to do the very demanding sfen day a week jobs. A
:03:13. > :03:17.lot of women have children and it's difficult in the corporate jungle
:03:17. > :03:23.to get to the top if you have to take time off two or three times in
:03:23. > :03:27.your career. If you look at parental leave and flexible working
:03:27. > :03:30.hours and flexible pay in other countries, that would make it
:03:30. > :03:34.easier? Yes, they have a different approach and the state is very
:03:34. > :03:39.happy to kfr all of the Cos for maternity believe and things like
:03:39. > :03:44.this -- cover. The point is, I talk about the corporate jungle. The
:03:44. > :03:48.people that get to the top utterly dedicate themselves to these jobs
:03:48. > :03:52.year after year after year and if you take six months off, you are
:03:52. > :03:55.disadvantaged. It's just as simple as that. So the status quo would
:03:55. > :03:59.change if there weren't these quotas and you say that would be
:03:59. > :04:05.fine because it's too difficult? Not because it's difficult but lots
:04:05. > :04:10.of women make other life choices. How many female UKIP MEPs are there
:04:10. > :04:14.in your party? We have two. The party director is female. Indeed on
:04:14. > :04:17.our assembly list for London for the elections in May we have got
:04:17. > :04:23.female barristers and brokers, but I don't believe in quotas and
:04:23. > :04:25.certainly in UKIP, if people get on, they do so on ability. The Prime
:04:25. > :04:30.Minister says it would help the economy, there is an economic
:04:30. > :04:34.reason to have the quotas? I don't know where he gets that from.
:04:34. > :04:37.say the Government figures that say... He's spouting the EU line.
:04:37. > :04:42.This is what the recommendation in the European Parliament that we
:04:42. > :04:46.voted for. I didn't vote for it, but that is what it said.
:04:46. > :04:50.Now, while Jo was doing that, we have discovered the Bank of England
:04:50. > :04:55.has frozen interest rates. They are still at 0.5%, that's not
:04:55. > :05:01.surprising. It's also extending its programme of what is called
:05:01. > :05:05.technically quantitive easing, basically the creating of the new
:05:05. > :05:09.money. It will be �50 billion. A little less than the City thought.
:05:09. > :05:15.They were thinking maybe up to �75 billion. It began with �75 billion,
:05:15. > :05:21.it got up to �200 billion, then did another �75 billion, it's now added
:05:22. > :05:24.another �50 billion, that takes total printing of money up to �3 25
:05:24. > :05:27.billion. We've never had that before, Jo.
:05:27. > :05:30.No. Thank you for setting out the No. Thank you for setting out the
:05:30. > :05:36.firs. The Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee cut
:05:36. > :05:39.interest rates to 0.5% in March 2009, a record low. Since then they
:05:39. > :05:43.haven't shift ford almost three years. The bank began its programme
:05:43. > :05:53.of quantitive easing at the same time, creating new money to buy
:05:53. > :05:54.
:05:54. > :05:59.financials a setss with the - QE has been increased at several
:05:59. > :06:02.stages to �275 billion in October last year and now with a further
:06:02. > :06:06.�50blt announced today, creating new money and keeping interest
:06:06. > :06:10.rates down would be expected to cause inflation.
:06:10. > :06:14.At a time when the Consumer Prices Index is well above target at 4.2%,
:06:14. > :06:18.you might wonder why the bank is sticking with the programme.
:06:18. > :06:22.The reason is the continuing problem facing the economy. It
:06:22. > :06:25.shrank by 0.2% in the fourth quarter of last year. But whilst
:06:25. > :06:30.low interest rates might help the economy and people with big
:06:30. > :06:35.mortgages, they're bad for savers. In one recent poll, just 23% of
:06:36. > :06:39.people said low rates are good for their personal finances compared to
:06:39. > :06:42.36% who said they are bad. Thanks Jo. We are joined by the
:06:42. > :06:47.Conservative MP, Matthew Hancock, he's a former economist at the Bank
:06:48. > :06:51.of England so maybe he can tell us why out of the last 68 forecasts of
:06:51. > :06:55.inflation they got 59 wrong. He was the adviser to Chancellor George
:06:55. > :06:59.Osborne and then became an MP. We are joined also by the Shadow
:06:59. > :07:03.economic secretary to the Treasury, Chris Lesley who I don't think has
:07:03. > :07:10.made any forecasts on inflation. Matthew Hancock, do you accept that
:07:10. > :07:12.one of the main consequences of QE is to transfer wealth from savers
:07:12. > :07:17.is to transfer wealth from savers to borrowers?
:07:17. > :07:22.No, I don't think that's one of the main points. It keeps interest
:07:22. > :07:25.rates low? Yes, but we manage our macro economy by altering interest
:07:25. > :07:31.rates and of course it has different impacts on different
:07:31. > :07:37.people. The most important impact of QE is to try to make sure this
:07:37. > :07:42.de-leveraging in the banking system goes at a pace that doesn't damage
:07:42. > :07:46.the wider economy more than the difficulties that we are trying to
:07:46. > :07:50.get through. We've always had this position. We've got these debts,
:07:50. > :07:54.we've talked about them around this programme a lot, and our argument's
:07:54. > :07:58.always been, you want fiscal responsibility and monetary
:07:58. > :08:02.activism where the monetary side keeps the economy going once you do
:08:02. > :08:09.the difficult stuff. But it's difficult to finance the debt?
:08:09. > :08:14.the Bank of England is, well it's not technically printing money but
:08:14. > :08:18.it's carrying out quantitive easing. Hold on. The Government issued �17
:08:18. > :08:23.billion worth of gilts in October last year, the bank bought �17
:08:23. > :08:28.billion worth of gilts in November the government issued �12 billion
:08:28. > :08:35.worth of gilts and the bank bought �24 billion worth of gilts. In 2012
:08:35. > :08:41.so far, the Government's issued �16 worth of debt, the bank's bought
:08:41. > :08:44.�24 billion. You are monetising the debt? What was wrong with what I
:08:44. > :08:50.said there? The key point in that is that the Bank of England is
:08:50. > :08:55.independent and what's crucial is that in these very difficult
:08:55. > :09:00.economic times when we have got the debt deficit we need to deal with -
:09:00. > :09:08.some people don't agree with that - we do, we have also got to keep the
:09:08. > :09:12.economy going and when rates get close to 0p%, the way you help the
:09:12. > :09:18.economy is more quantitive easing. It's difficult, I understand that,
:09:18. > :09:23.but the consequence of this is to help keep the economy going. As we
:09:23. > :09:26.saw, inflation is still above target but it's coming down.
:09:27. > :09:32.Manufacturing figures this morning 1% growth in December, that's good.
:09:32. > :09:35.Our trade deficit is at its smallest since 2003. So there is
:09:35. > :09:42.some good news. You say the Bank of England is independent. George
:09:42. > :09:51.Osborne cheerleads the bank in doing this, he's invented this
:09:51. > :09:54.phrase dtion monetary activism". -- "monetary activism". I come back to
:09:54. > :09:59.the point that you are monetising the debt. You are borrowing money
:09:59. > :10:03.paid for by money printed by the bank? Absolutely not. The bank is
:10:03. > :10:06.independent. Monetary activism. Doesn't matter whether they are
:10:06. > :10:10.independent or not, they are buying the debt. Of course it matters, you
:10:10. > :10:14.don't want politicians setting interest rates. What monetary
:10:14. > :10:18.activism means is you give the Bank of England the space to manage the
:10:18. > :10:22.economy by having a credible fiscal plan so everybody knows that we
:10:22. > :10:26.have the political will to deal with our debts as a country. Chris,
:10:26. > :10:31.I suspect if Labour was in power, you would be doing the same?
:10:31. > :10:37.not sure that we'd be in this particular hole. We are following
:10:37. > :10:41.the system set out by Alistair Darling. You have had a fair run
:10:41. > :10:45.now, Matthew. Do you support this? Anything that can support the
:10:45. > :10:50.economy. So you do? My point is, I don't think there's an ability to
:10:50. > :10:53.continue printing your way out of this particular hole. It's pretty
:10:53. > :10:56.desperate stuff when you end up having to have the Bank of England
:10:56. > :11:00.bailing out the Chancellor for his failure on growth and the key thing
:11:01. > :11:05.I think is this, Matthew says well printing money has a small effect
:11:05. > :11:08.on interest rates. As you said, it's absolutely the determinate of
:11:08. > :11:11.the low interest rates you've got printing your way to low interest
:11:11. > :11:15.rates is not a sustainable way forward. The difficulty with this
:11:15. > :11:17.point about saying the Bank of England are independent, well yes,
:11:17. > :11:22.they choose the amount of quantitive easing, but the
:11:22. > :11:26.Chancellor has to sign off the policy as well. Expecting the Bank
:11:26. > :11:32.of England to do all the heavy lifting on saving our economy and
:11:32. > :11:35.getting growth done, it's t not going to work. You are pushing on a
:11:35. > :11:39.string. Mr Hancock? I have o to respond to the partisan point. The
:11:39. > :11:43.system for ensuring that the Bank of England has the independence to
:11:43. > :11:48.take these decisions was set up by independence by Gordon Brown and
:11:48. > :11:52.then the independence over QE by Alistair Darling and that hasn't
:11:52. > :11:57.been changed. But that's been signed off by the Chancellor?
:11:57. > :12:01.Chancellor's always, whether Alistair Darling or George Osborne,
:12:01. > :12:04.has always signed off... A very important point. I'm not saying
:12:04. > :12:08.there isn't a place from time to time for quantitive easing, but the
:12:08. > :12:14.key they think is this. When we first had to do this back in 2009,
:12:14. > :12:18.George Osborne said that printing money was "the last resort of a
:12:18. > :12:22.desperate government". You were his Chief of Staff at the time. Did you
:12:22. > :12:25.advise him to stay that? We were in a desperate situation. Nobody
:12:25. > :12:29.really cares what he said then. was quite important. I don't care
:12:29. > :12:35.and I ask the questions. OK, well I care. As a Conservative,
:12:35. > :12:38.meant to encourage people to save, to build up their own property, a
:12:38. > :12:43.party that aspouzs a property- owning democracy, are you
:12:44. > :12:47.comfortable as a Conservative with a policy which is effectively
:12:47. > :12:55.state-imposed negative real interest rates? -- aspouses.
:12:55. > :12:58.state always has a role in the level of interest rates... Are you
:12:58. > :13:08.comfortable? The rates are not imposed by the state but the bond
:13:08. > :13:12.
:13:12. > :13:15.market, whether we like it or not. This is all level economics we are
:13:16. > :13:19.trying to teach you. Hardly. Do I think it's good that we have long-
:13:19. > :13:23.term interest rates at record lows? Yes I do because it's the biggest
:13:23. > :13:27.stimulus our economy could get and it would be under threat if we gave
:13:27. > :13:31.our... It's not stimulating the economy, we had �75 billion in
:13:31. > :13:36.October and our economy went into reverse in that quarter. You left
:13:36. > :13:43.us in a great big hole. Let me bring in Nigel Farage. Where are
:13:43. > :13:46.you on this? I understood why back in 08-08 09, QE was used because
:13:46. > :13:49.there was a real serious scare about the banks which has now gone.
:13:49. > :13:53.The savers are getting a rotten deal and the real problem is we are
:13:53. > :13:56.not dealing with the size of the debt. I know it's difficult, but we
:13:56. > :14:01.are not having any serious groth in the UK economy. They are the real
:14:01. > :14:05.problems that need to be addressed -- growth. You have some people
:14:05. > :14:10.saying we are cutting too fast, some people saying we are stum
:14:10. > :14:13.lating the economy. We are not cutting. -- stimulating. Some say
:14:13. > :14:17.you are not cutting enough, some say you are cutting too much. If
:14:17. > :14:21.you are criticised from both sides, you are normally in the right place.
:14:21. > :14:24.We are borrowing more than we are earning every year. Which must mean
:14:24. > :14:28.you are all wrong. We have an extreme over here, one over there
:14:28. > :14:31.and we are broadly down the middle and I feel comfortable in that
:14:31. > :14:36.place. Are you comfortable? Are you comfortable with Government
:14:36. > :14:41.spending, yes or no? No, no Government spending. Can I just
:14:41. > :14:44.point out that the several months ago, the Bank of England snuck out
:14:44. > :14:50.in small print of six point type that the effect of its quantitive
:14:50. > :14:58.easing so far had been to raise inflation by anything between 1 and
:14:58. > :15:02.2.6%. I think we can take it that it's closer to the 2.6 because the
:15:02. > :15:07.bank wanted to downplay the real effect. Are you comfortable with
:15:07. > :15:13.that? Inflation hits the poorest so you are squeezing savers in Middle
:15:13. > :15:16.England and hitting the poorest by putting that up? That's not what
:15:16. > :15:22.the Bank of England report said. I don't know whether you have read
:15:22. > :15:26.the report. Of course I have. showed that it boosted the economy.
:15:26. > :15:30.It also said it put up inflation by up to 2.5%, the same as the
:15:30. > :15:32.increase in VAT? So do you want the Bank of England not to manage the
:15:32. > :15:38.economy or do you want the Bank of England to manage the economy?
:15:38. > :15:42.want you to answer my question. These are difficult trade-offs. You
:15:43. > :15:46.can't ignore the debt. The same report was instructive because all
:15:46. > :15:49.the claims about low interest rates being caused by George Osborne was
:15:49. > :15:53.blown out of the water when the Bank of England said that around 1%
:15:53. > :15:57.of that low interest rate was caused by the printing of money.
:15:57. > :16:02.Printing of money, does it sound sustainable to you? We'll leave it
:16:02. > :16:11.there. The distinguished economic Editor of the Scotsman says this
:16:11. > :16:16.morning that the bank may end up I am going to leave with you now
:16:16. > :16:20.because Jo is about to do a story of which I have no interest! I am
:16:21. > :16:27.glad you stated your position there, Andrew. Was the England football
:16:27. > :16:32.managerks Fabio Capello right to rescission? I am an -- resign. I am
:16:32. > :16:39.an expert on this. This morning David Cameron said he was sorry to
:16:39. > :16:43.see Mr Capello Go, but the Sports Minister sounded less optimistic.
:16:43. > :16:46.The FA had no option, but to strip John Terry of the captaincy, not to
:16:46. > :16:50.prejudge the court case, but because it would have been
:16:50. > :16:53.impossible for him to discharge his responsibilities as captain of the
:16:53. > :16:57.England team with that hanging over him. It is a great shame that Fabio
:16:57. > :17:00.Capello has acted in the way that he has. If a player in his team had
:17:00. > :17:06.behaved in the way that he has behaved to the FA, he would have
:17:06. > :17:10.taken the toughest possible action and I'm delighted that the FA
:17:11. > :17:14.agreed with him that he should no longer be manager.
:17:14. > :17:19.David Thompson is in the House of Commons. David.
:17:19. > :17:26.Well, look forget about deficit reduction, what MPs want to talk
:17:26. > :17:30.about, who should be the next England manager and I am joined by
:17:30. > :17:34.Damien Collins, and Sir Bob Russell, Lib Dem and keen football fan.
:17:34. > :17:37.Damien, in a sense you have been part of this process and you were
:17:37. > :17:42.one of the first people to say that you thought that John Terry should
:17:42. > :17:46.be stripped of the captaincy while the court case was pending, are you
:17:46. > :17:50.happy with where we are now? Well, it was Fabio Capello's decision to
:17:50. > :17:54.resign. If he couldn't accept that John Terry's position had become
:17:54. > :17:59.untenable, it was right for him to go. Footballers and football, they
:18:00. > :18:04.are part of society. It is not just a sport. The England manager, just
:18:04. > :18:09.like the England captain is a public figure and we expect things
:18:09. > :18:13.of them and where we are maybe regrettable to many fans, but it
:18:13. > :18:18.has become inevitable and it was Capello's decision.
:18:18. > :18:24.Whatever the rights and wrongs of that case, we are four months away
:18:24. > :18:31.from a major European tournament without a manager. Have the FA
:18:31. > :18:35.handled this well? The FA don't handle anything well. The Football
:18:35. > :18:39.Association in this country is pretty useless and the way they
:18:39. > :18:47.have handled the last two England managers and this affair in
:18:47. > :18:51.particular, establish and confirms that the FA are a useless bunch.
:18:52. > :18:55.What should they do? They should never have had a foreign manager in
:18:55. > :19:00.the first place. The FA are not up to the job.
:19:00. > :19:05.OK. Do you think now that given we have had Svens and Fabios, do you
:19:05. > :19:15.think it is time for the manager to be if not English, from the British
:19:15. > :19:18.Isles? Their job is to a coach who has developed his career through
:19:18. > :19:22.the English coaching system. That would be a good thing. Someone who
:19:22. > :19:27.should understand the culture of football in our country maybe
:19:27. > :19:33.better than a coach brought inside particularly one that has never had
:19:33. > :19:37.any managerial experience in the UK. We need an English manager, we have
:19:37. > :19:41.got coalition consensus on something at least. Over to you.
:19:41. > :19:46.Consensus, I don't know, I'm moving on. Is that good or bad? I don't
:19:46. > :19:53.know. Consensus, what about you, do you think it should be an
:19:53. > :19:58.Englishman? I was astonished when this chap Capello was appointed. He
:19:58. > :20:06.earnt �24 million quid and he couldn't speak the English. Why
:20:06. > :20:11.don't we have somebody English running the English football team?
:20:11. > :20:15.Nobody could have done a worse job. I think Redknapp will be the next
:20:15. > :20:19.man, and good. OK, we have consensus. Everyone
:20:19. > :20:22.wants Harry, I think! Our guest of the day, Nigel Farage
:20:22. > :20:27.is the leader of the UK Independence Party still. He gave
:20:27. > :20:33.up the job for a bit when he stood against the Speaker John better cue
:20:34. > :20:43.at the -- Bercow at the last election. His successor wasn't seen
:20:44. > :20:44.
:20:44. > :20:54.as a runaway suck success. Who could we send to investigate, Giles,
:20:54. > :20:56.
:20:56. > :21:02.of course, our own Nigel looky Even before Nigel Farage first
:21:02. > :21:07.became leader of UKIP in 2006, a party he was involved in founding
:21:07. > :21:11.in the early 90s, people whispered the party was something of a one
:21:11. > :21:15.man show. As they built themselves to a regular feature of the
:21:15. > :21:22.political landscape, they, he would argue however flattering it is not
:21:22. > :21:26.true. A one time party candidate, now a Conservative MP disagrees.
:21:26. > :21:31.There is a cult around Nigel Farage and always has been for the last
:21:31. > :21:33.ten years. They follow him. They think he is a charismatic leader
:21:33. > :21:41.and his approach and manner is something that appeals to them.
:21:41. > :21:48.It is a reality, UKIP have become an electoral thorn in other parties
:21:48. > :21:55.sides. Nigel Farage led them and UKIP got the highest share of the
:21:55. > :21:59.vote. His attacks are praised and damned. You have the charisma of a
:21:59. > :22:05.damp rag and the appearance of a low grade bank clerk. The question
:22:05. > :22:10.I want to ask - who are you? I never heard of you. Nobody in
:22:10. > :22:15.Europe heard of you. He stood down as leader to fight
:22:15. > :22:19.the general election in John Bercow's seat. The leadership
:22:19. > :22:26.election show cased five candidates no one heard of and who Nigel
:22:26. > :22:32.wanted, Nigel gets. Only one of of them is a serious credible
:22:32. > :22:34.candidate and that's Lord Pearson. A year later he failed to win the
:22:34. > :22:38.Parliamentary seat and by enough to make some question his judgement.
:22:38. > :22:42.He was involved in an accident that shook him and fired him up for
:22:42. > :22:47.taking the leadership back. I have survived an aeroplane crash and if
:22:47. > :22:53.before that you thought I was bold, well I'm fearless now. I'm up for
:22:53. > :23:03.it, I want the job again. He won. His job will be to keep
:23:03. > :23:06.UKIP a political force in the face of growing Conservative scepticism.
:23:06. > :23:12.In the 90s they had serious thinking people on board who were
:23:12. > :23:17.trying to get an issue on the agenda in a sensible way and didn't
:23:17. > :23:20.see UKIP as a long-term project, saw it as a short-term thing.
:23:20. > :23:24.Their opponents may snigger, but there are people in UKIP who are
:23:24. > :23:28.smart and people who are charismatic and people who know how
:23:28. > :23:32.to stay on the right side of being a professional politician. The fact
:23:32. > :23:35.that Nigel Farage can do all three at a time when the party might be
:23:35. > :23:44.under pressure means they probably need him more than ever.
:23:44. > :23:49.No, thank you. I'm always told I Come to think of it, you don't.
:23:49. > :23:59.So you are a one-man band? Absolute nonsense.
:23:59. > :24:00.
:24:00. > :24:06.No one heard of anyone else in the party? Last week one of your guests
:24:06. > :24:13.is in UKIP. I was looking this morning...
:24:13. > :24:18.not a politician. He bankrolls you. He used to bankroll the Tories.
:24:18. > :24:24.He bankrolled William Hague. When people like that take on senior
:24:24. > :24:28.roles, it says we are far more than a one-man band. We have women and
:24:28. > :24:32.women, barristers, shipbrokers, professional and competent people.
:24:32. > :24:37.There has been a change in UKIP. How many are standing in the
:24:37. > :24:44.elections? 25 in all. I'm confident that on our message,
:24:44. > :24:49.jobs and growth interestingly, we are so ham strung by EU law that we
:24:49. > :24:54.are not able to go out there and create jobs that we will do well.
:24:54. > :24:58.Giles said, "A party under pressure." Look in 2011 we made a
:24:58. > :25:04.lot of progress in the opinion polls. We started off at 2.5% to 3%,
:25:04. > :25:09.we finished at 7% to 7.5%. Public sees and you rate quite well
:25:09. > :25:14.in the polls as a leader, but the public sees you as a one-man band
:25:14. > :25:20.leading a one issue party? Well, that's unfair. I think... That's
:25:20. > :25:24.how they see you? There are people like my deputy who is only 34, a a
:25:24. > :25:29.Scouser who is is beginning to appear on more and more BBC
:25:29. > :25:34.programmes. There is three our four names.
:25:34. > :25:37.But not the younger ones in the party? Well, you know, get him on
:25:37. > :25:42.and we will get people elected to that London Assembly who are bright
:25:42. > :25:45.and young. You said in 2011 that had been
:25:45. > :25:49.amazing year and you went through your successes. What's the target
:25:49. > :25:54.for 2012? What will be another amazing year for you if you achieve
:25:54. > :25:58.what? Well, the thing we have to do this year, we have to win seats in
:25:58. > :26:02.the London Assembly. If we fail to do that, then 2012 will have been a
:26:02. > :26:06.failure. That's the big objective is to get people elected there. We
:26:06. > :26:11.will be continuing to fight by- elections, local elections, and you
:26:11. > :26:14.know, in Barnsley last year, we came second in the by-election in
:26:14. > :26:18.in Barnsley and I would look for that trend in the opinion polls to
:26:18. > :26:22.continue. We were up until the summit, where Cameron was thought
:26:22. > :26:26.to have vetoed something, we were running neck in neck with the Lib
:26:26. > :26:30.Dems and I I expect that trend to continue and I think we will get
:26:30. > :26:36.past them. Even The Greens have their MP in
:26:36. > :26:42.Brighton, you haven't managed that? Our support is is spread across the
:26:42. > :26:47.country. We don't have... Aren't the Greens spread across the
:26:47. > :26:52.country thinly? Absolutely not. The Greens do well in three or four
:26:52. > :26:57.big cities and poorly everywhere else. We tend to do respectively
:26:57. > :27:00.everywhere. We have got to built up -- build up a local base. There are
:27:00. > :27:04.areas where we have district and county councillors and those are
:27:04. > :27:07.the areas we have to work on. Like the Greens and the Lib Dems,
:27:07. > :27:12.you have to build that up from the ground up, that's more difficult?
:27:12. > :27:15.It is a heck of a job and I'm not pretending it is easy, but we are
:27:15. > :27:22.making progress. Let's look at the policy and beyond
:27:22. > :27:25.the one that you are famous for. What of an English Parliament? The
:27:25. > :27:30.Scots have a Parliament. The Welsh have a Parliament, what about an
:27:30. > :27:33.English assembly? Absolutely. We said we as a party believe in an
:27:33. > :27:35.English Parliament and I believe in a federal structure for the United
:27:35. > :27:39.Kingdom. Where would you put the English
:27:39. > :27:44.Parliament? It should be in the House of Commons. That's the
:27:44. > :27:48.British Parliament? I don't see any need for Scottish or Welsh or
:27:48. > :27:52.Northern Irish MPs to debate things that are English only issues and
:27:52. > :27:57.most of the business that is conducted there, tends to be on
:27:57. > :28:00.Irish only issues. We need to have a separate Parliament and the
:28:00. > :28:05.country if it stays a United Kingdom after the Scottish
:28:05. > :28:08.referendum, comes together in Westminster which will be the
:28:08. > :28:11.imperial Parliament for the UK? proposal that we are debating, it
:28:11. > :28:15.is not party policy is the House of Commons would be the English
:28:15. > :28:19.Parliament and the House of Lords which is in need of reform would
:28:19. > :28:26.become a union Parliament. That's the way we're going.
:28:26. > :28:31.Wouldn't it be good for regional policy if you put it in York?
:28:31. > :28:35.don't think there is there is appetite for yet more buildings and
:28:35. > :28:39.more MPs. What about High Speed Two, are you
:28:39. > :28:43.in favour of that? I am opposed to T it is a ridiculous price and it
:28:43. > :28:49.is the wrong route and it is astonishing that all three parties
:28:49. > :28:53.support it. I know this was agreed to in Brussels many, many years ago.
:28:53. > :28:56.I would have thought we could spend a fraction of the money upgrading
:28:56. > :29:00.the existing lines. Come the Scottish referendum if the
:29:00. > :29:02.question is along the the lines of do you think Scotland should be
:29:02. > :29:06.independent, how will you advice advice your supporters to vote?
:29:06. > :29:08.There has to be a debate in Scotland. Alex Salmond got away
:29:08. > :29:11.with murder. This idea that Scotland could be independent and
:29:11. > :29:15.part of a European Union, let's have that debate.
:29:15. > :29:20.How are you going to vote? I don't want the United Kingdom to break up,
:29:20. > :29:22.but I want it to change. Right, but you are the United
:29:23. > :29:28.Kingdom independence party, so you must be in favour of the United
:29:28. > :29:34.Kingdom? I am in favour of devolved powers. I don't see any
:29:34. > :29:38.inconsistency with that. The geny is is out of the bottle.
:29:38. > :29:42.We have more to discuss including Ken Livingstone and gays.
:29:42. > :29:44.We welcome viewers to BBC Scotland, they have been watching First
:29:45. > :29:51.Minister's Questions and they join the Daily Politics and we can bring
:29:51. > :30:00.you the news that in London, Ken Livingstone caused outrage. In an
:30:00. > :30:10.interview New Statesman magazine. He has been talk being the
:30:10. > :30:36.
:30:36. > :30:43.Conservative Party's attitude to Great English! The best English, Mr
:30:43. > :30:47.Livingstone. We get your drift. Well, it's caused a row, as many
:30:47. > :30:52.things Mr Livingstone says. We are joined by Labour's Chris Bryant and
:30:52. > :30:56.the Conservative Mike Freer. Mike Freer, you first, he says it was a
:30:56. > :31:01.joke, he's known for shooting from the hip, you maybe make a mistake
:31:01. > :31:06.if you take him too seriously? Let's hope London doesn't make that
:31:06. > :31:12.mistake twice. On BBC this morning, he was asked did he use the wrong
:31:12. > :31:19.word. The local London talk station? Yes. Other than "riddled"?
:31:19. > :31:23.Yes. People always said "riddled with what". But on LBC he said no,
:31:23. > :31:25.he wouldn't change the word, he stood by the word so he didn't
:31:25. > :31:31.misspeak, he wasn't shooting from the hip, I think he knew exactly
:31:31. > :31:35.what he was saying. Chris Bryant, what's your take on it? The word
:31:35. > :31:41."riddled" is pretty daft. I've read the full interview and it reads
:31:41. > :31:47.oddly. I'm not sure whether he's talking about hypocrisy riddling
:31:47. > :31:51.the Conservative Party in relation to... Or If you read it, he does
:31:51. > :31:59.mean gay. He actually says when people came out, they became
:31:59. > :32:04.ministers and that was great. He says that. I'm not a fan of this
:32:04. > :32:07.word "riddled" at all. It's unpleasant. However, I would say
:32:07. > :32:11.there is a bit of Fawkes outrage here because Mike was banging on
:32:11. > :32:15.yesterday about how terrible this was. I remember when Boris Johnson
:32:15. > :32:19.said that if two men should be allowed the marry, why not three
:32:19. > :32:24.men or for that matter three men and a dog. Mike Tweeted to said
:32:24. > :32:32.that was Ken that said that, it wasn't, it was Boris. I didn't say
:32:32. > :32:39.that's what condition said, I said it didn't sound like Boris --
:32:39. > :32:43.that's what when said. We are talking about Boris. What Boris
:32:43. > :32:47.said is that he said he doesn't care that the state determines what
:32:47. > :32:53.marriage is, basically he said two men, three men, one man and a dog,
:32:54. > :32:58.he doesn't care. How offensive is that. Homosexuality is the same as
:32:58. > :33:05.beastiality. He's saying he doesn't care. If Boris made these remarks
:33:05. > :33:08.of Ken, there would be a lot more outrage? Mike, you are a hypocrite
:33:08. > :33:12.because you are not prepared to own up to the fact you got this wrong
:33:13. > :33:17.yesterday. But what about this point? Boris said the Tory party
:33:17. > :33:22.used to be riddled with gays in the closet, if he said that, what would
:33:22. > :33:25.you feel? I dislike the word "riddled", however it's true that
:33:25. > :33:28.there were, I think it was horrible for many years in the Conservative
:33:28. > :33:32.Party as a gay man, we know that there are several men who've now
:33:32. > :33:36.come out who weren't able to do so, had to pretend to be something
:33:36. > :33:40.different and some of those have subsequently said they had to vote
:33:40. > :33:44.the wrong way against what they wanted to. Is that true? That was
:33:44. > :33:48.hypocrisy. The difficulty is, if you are a gai MP, previously as a
:33:48. > :33:51.Conservative, it was difficult. The Conservative Party couldn't run
:33:51. > :34:01.apart from gay men, it practically ran for Central Office, so there's
:34:01. > :34:06.a bit of let's balance the books. That's a bit suggestive. Chris is
:34:06. > :34:11.very good at standing up and accusing other people of homophobia.
:34:11. > :34:16.I want him to stand up to the home Phoebes in his own party, starting
:34:16. > :34:20.with Ken Livingstone. Livingstone is not a home Phoebe. I
:34:21. > :34:30.disagree with Ken using the word requests riddled" but he's not a
:34:31. > :34:34.
:34:34. > :34:38.home Phoebe. He's battled for LGTB rights for years, even when it was
:34:38. > :34:43.- he's been there all the way through. Can I put a wider point to
:34:43. > :34:49.you that, almost every time a politician on the left or the right
:34:50. > :34:55.now goes kind of off piste in their language, they get slapped down.
:34:55. > :35:00.They get dragged on to this programme by you. We haven't got
:35:00. > :35:04.any of them on. Riddled or dragged, not too sure, just be careful. The
:35:04. > :35:08.point I'm making is if we carry on like this on the left and the right,
:35:08. > :35:14.we'll end up with politicss who sound like I speak your weight
:35:14. > :35:19.machines. You have heard that from either of us this morning have you?
:35:19. > :35:23.I'm tired of, if one of my party says something stupid, I'll stand
:35:23. > :35:29.up and shout them down, but the Labour Party expect them to be
:35:29. > :35:33.sacked, you know. That's a lie, that's a direct lie. Yesterday, you
:35:33. > :35:38.were saying that can't have been Boris that said about the equating
:35:38. > :35:44.homosexuality with beastiality. But you didn't then reply, did you?
:35:44. > :35:48.me bring in... I wonder whether voters in London are having this
:35:48. > :35:56.furious debate. They'll say, it's Ken Livingstone, he's been saying
:35:56. > :36:01.silly inoffensive things since the '70s. I think Ken likes to shock,
:36:01. > :36:05.offend, there's no need phone an argument. Isn't the truth that Ken
:36:05. > :36:12.Livingstone is wrong on both accounts, that just because you
:36:12. > :36:18.came out as lesbian or gay, you did not automatically get a job. That's
:36:18. > :36:22.definitely wrong as you will know. And although undoubtedly there were
:36:22. > :36:29.gay MPs in the Conservative Party who felt that they couldn't be
:36:29. > :36:34.openly gay, the party, to use his unfortunate word, wasn't "riddled"
:36:34. > :36:40.which implies 80-90% were gay, there were a minority and times
:36:40. > :36:46.were difficult for them so he's factually wrong on both. It's the
:36:46. > :36:49.contagion of riddled. We all don't like riddled. Shall we end on that
:36:49. > :36:54.agreement then? I don't think he was intending to shock anybody.
:36:54. > :36:58.Listen, he's looking at... going to give Mike Freer the final
:36:58. > :37:07.word because he's been the quitest. When the world is looking at London
:37:07. > :37:13.for the Olympics, the Paralympics, world pride, do we need
:37:13. > :37:21.Sanctimonious. I'm not, I've let you speak. Do we give a stuff what
:37:21. > :37:24.Ken Livingstone says outside London? I don't. Boris is the real
:37:24. > :37:29.homophobic one. Thanks for joining us and I think we should move on.
:37:29. > :37:32.Do you think that row would drag on, to use that unfortunate phrase?
:37:32. > :37:35.I don't think that got us anywhere, but it was good. Pretty much every
:37:35. > :37:39.local authority in the country is having to tighten the purse strings
:37:39. > :37:42.and find savings. But the BBC's found that many of them are also
:37:42. > :37:52.forking out millions in fines because they've missed their
:37:52. > :37:53.
:37:53. > :37:57.European targets on recycling. It's bin day on this estate in
:37:57. > :38:03.Worcester. Last week, it was recycling. This week, there's only
:38:03. > :38:09.one place the city's rubbish is heading. The landfill site on the
:38:09. > :38:13.edge of town is home to 180,000 tonnes a year.
:38:13. > :38:17.But growing mountains of rubbish like these are costing the councils
:38:17. > :38:23.dear. All local authorities have to pay landfill taxes, essentially a
:38:23. > :38:28.Government fine to encourage them to hit European recycling rates.
:38:28. > :38:32.The problem is, despite the fact our councils are throwing less to
:38:32. > :38:36.landfill, the fines are rising. Even though more and more of us are
:38:36. > :38:39.recycling our rubbish, it's not enough to keep Brussels happy.
:38:39. > :38:42.you just look at the headline figure, you will see we are paying
:38:42. > :38:48.more tax there so we must be failing, but we are not, we are
:38:48. > :38:51.actually on track, we are managing to wean ourselves off it. The waste,
:38:51. > :38:54.it's a long-term plan, you can't change the system overnight but
:38:54. > :38:59.need to have a clear and positive strategy which we are working to
:38:59. > :39:06.year on year. And with budgets under more and more pressure, the
:39:06. > :39:10.landfill tax is proving a real headache. In the financial year
:39:10. > :39:16.2005-0106, Worcestershire County Council sent 262,000 tonnes to
:39:16. > :39:22.landfill and paid �3.4 million in tax.
:39:22. > :39:29.In 2010-2011, that waste fell to 127,000 tonnes, but the fine shot
:39:29. > :39:32.up to �5.8 million. At the same time, Shropshire paid �4.2 million
:39:32. > :39:36.and Gloucestershire, �7 million. The figures have caught the eye of
:39:36. > :39:41.MEPs on the continue net. It should be a matter for the Westminster
:39:41. > :39:45.Government and not for Brussels. We should be able to spend our money
:39:45. > :39:50.in a meaningful way and not be fined by the EU.
:39:50. > :39:53.But the reality is, if we are going to reduce our carbon emission and
:39:53. > :40:00.catch up with your European neighbours, the answer doesn't lie
:40:00. > :40:04.with holes in the ground. If people had understood earlier
:40:04. > :40:10.the drivers behind sustainability and taken on the Green Party
:40:10. > :40:14.message a bit more, then we could have avoided a lot of the pain of
:40:14. > :40:18.landfill tax. Whilst most agree landfill isn't
:40:18. > :40:26.the way forward, unless our councils stop burying rub Nish the
:40:26. > :40:29.ground, then they'll continue to throw away good money after bad.
:40:29. > :40:33.Natalie Bennett is a Green Party member and a journalist and she
:40:33. > :40:37.joins us now. It's the fines isn't it, in a time like this when there
:40:37. > :40:40.are massive cuts, should councils be paying fines if they miss their
:40:40. > :40:44.targets? The massive cuts are absolutely dreadful, that's hitting
:40:44. > :40:48.social services and those issues. So they shouldn't be fined? But the
:40:48. > :40:52.issue of waste is a separate issue that simply has to be dealt with.
:40:52. > :40:55.The situation is, it's the UK Government that decided what level
:40:55. > :40:58.these fines should be at and it's the UK Government that has to deal
:40:58. > :41:02.with this problem on a national level. We are going to run out of
:41:02. > :41:06.landfill spaces in eight years' time, there's nowhere to put it, we
:41:06. > :41:11.are using an area the size of Warwick to dump waste on which is
:41:11. > :41:15.great for seagulls but not humans. What we have also got to do is, the
:41:15. > :41:20.councils have to do better. they've made big improvements,
:41:20. > :41:26.they've been successful at reducing landfill which begs the question
:41:26. > :41:29.should they face fines of �64 a tonne, rising to �80 a tonne in
:41:29. > :41:33.2014. Worcestershire County Council faced a fine of almost �6 million
:41:33. > :41:37.last year, people will say at a time when libraries are closing,
:41:37. > :41:41.that is not a good use of money? But that council and the others
:41:41. > :41:46.with it have a chance to do much better. The councils being fined
:41:46. > :41:51.are the ones doing very poorly generally. There is a huge Sarah
:41:51. > :41:58.yoution between the council doing best with 66% and the worst at 14%,
:41:58. > :42:01.so the councils have a lot of this in their hand -- huge variation.
:42:01. > :42:05.What is the point of it all? This legislation was brought in to deal
:42:05. > :42:09.with the landfill question in areas like Belgium and the Netherlands
:42:09. > :42:13.which were in many cases below the water table. That's why the
:42:13. > :42:18.legislation? Brussels was put into place. It was never relevant or
:42:18. > :42:20.popt for the UK. -- appropriate. When we are going to run out in
:42:20. > :42:23.eight years? There are plenty of landfill sites out there, no
:42:23. > :42:27.mistake about that. What's happened is, because of the threat of fines,
:42:27. > :42:31.we have put people on to fortnightly bin collections across
:42:31. > :42:34.most of the UK and if we don't use landfill, we move towards
:42:34. > :42:37.incinerators which people will object to even more strongly.
:42:37. > :42:41.to your point that there isn't a need for it in the UK. Does this
:42:41. > :42:44.mean that there is? We can argue about how much landfill sites there
:42:44. > :42:48.are. Even if they came from Europe or the UK, surely they have to do
:42:48. > :42:52.something to reduce the amount of waste? The point is, this
:42:52. > :42:57.legislation was designed to deal with water table problems in the
:42:57. > :43:01.low countries, we are applying it to the enth degree, it isn't
:43:01. > :43:07.relevant to the UK, we should say to hell with it. We have a picture
:43:07. > :43:11.behind us at the moment, not sure viewers can see what a landfill
:43:11. > :43:15.looks like. It's an unpleasant nasty place good for seagulls, not
:43:15. > :43:20.humans. We want to reduce waste, that is a good target to have, it
:43:20. > :43:26.will improve our lives, no reason why we shouldn't be saying improve
:43:26. > :43:31.things. Fines are the way? We have to look also at a plastic bag tax.
:43:31. > :43:34.More taxs? And forcing the supermarkets to reduce the
:43:34. > :43:38.wonderful packages, where you get a piece of meet with plastic and
:43:38. > :43:42.container and more wrapping. You have to change the way we do those
:43:42. > :43:47.sorts of things and reduce to a lower waste. Thank you very much.
:43:47. > :43:51.I'm presuming you wouldn't support that either? No, I wouldn't. Funny.
:43:51. > :43:56.The Government Bill to reform the NHS in England is still causing
:43:56. > :43:59.ministers sleepless nights. For the lazier ones, it's causing them
:43:59. > :44:01.sleepless afternoons. Yesterday there was another defeat in the
:44:01. > :44:11.Lord's and if you were watching Prime Minister's Questions, you
:44:11. > :44:14.
:44:14. > :44:21.THE SPEAKER: Ed pland Miliband. Speaker, isn't this interesting
:44:21. > :44:29.because he says this is all about reform. The Tory reform group has
:44:29. > :44:33.come out against these proposals. I have to say, Mr Speaker, it comes
:44:33. > :44:40.to something when even the Tories don't trust the Tories on the NHS.
:44:40. > :44:45.Let's look at the figures. 100,000 patients treated more every month,
:44:45. > :44:49.4,000 extra doctors since the NHS, the number of clinical staff up,
:44:49. > :44:54.the level of hospital acquired infections down, the number of
:44:54. > :44:58.people who are in mixed sex wards down by 94%. That is what is
:44:58. > :45:01.happening because you have got a combination of money going in and
:45:01. > :45:06.reform. He knows in his heart of hearts
:45:06. > :45:09.this is a complete disaster this Bill. That's why his aides are
:45:09. > :45:13.saying the Health Secretary should be taken out and shot because they
:45:13. > :45:23.know it's a disaster. I've got to tell him, the career prospects for
:45:23. > :45:24.
:45:24. > :45:28.my right honourable friend are a Nik Darlington speaks for the Tory
:45:28. > :45:34.reform group and he joins us now. Mr Lansley seems like a man
:45:34. > :45:38.clinging to a timebomb that he can only not hear ticking? I didn't
:45:38. > :45:40.publish the article. The article was written by an independent
:45:40. > :45:46.contributor to the blog which I edit.
:45:46. > :45:50.You published it this then? Miliband miss represent that had
:45:50. > :45:58.article, -- misrepresent that had article. The article which was
:45:58. > :46:05.written by Craig Barratt is is pro reform.
:46:06. > :46:09.It said it was a timebomb where Mr Lansley couldn't hear ticking?
:46:09. > :46:14.believe in debate. Any party will have different opinions and it was
:46:14. > :46:17.right to put it on the blog. We have a disclaimer over the blog
:46:17. > :46:23.saying that the opinions of the individual contributors are not
:46:23. > :46:28.those of the Tory reform group. We released a statement saying we are
:46:28. > :46:34.pro reform. We want to introduce more competition to the NHS and
:46:34. > :46:38.Labour had 18 years to reform the NHS and did nothing. Ed Miliband
:46:38. > :46:43.misrepresented the article and misrepresented the Tory reform
:46:43. > :46:48.group's position. So you can say anything you want on
:46:48. > :46:53.the blog and it is not anything to do with the tOrm or the re-- Tory
:46:53. > :47:01.Party or the reform group? They are not the opinions of the Tory reform
:47:01. > :47:05.group. We want it there for a forum for debate. That happens in any
:47:05. > :47:08.party. I want people to have their opinion. I think that opinion
:47:08. > :47:15.deserved to be heard. Did you really flag it up as this,
:47:15. > :47:24."Was not the view of the Tory reform group.". Yes.
:47:24. > :47:28.Where can I find out where the views of the Tory reform group?
:47:28. > :47:33.TRG is in favour of reforms. We support David Cameron and the
:47:33. > :47:38.coalition coalition and we were the first group to express support.
:47:38. > :47:43.I was looking on your website and I couldn't find it. I could find the
:47:43. > :47:47.attack, but not the support? attack was made by an individual
:47:47. > :47:50.contributor. . Where is the support bit? We we
:47:50. > :47:55.haven't had any reason to run anything on it in the month leading
:47:55. > :47:59.up to it. How many members has the Tory
:47:59. > :48:03.reform group got? I don't have that information with me.
:48:03. > :48:06.I thought that's who you represented? I am the editor of the
:48:06. > :48:14.Tory reform group blog. You don't know if it is thousands
:48:14. > :48:18.of people or a man and a dog in a back room in Battersea.? I can
:48:18. > :48:22.assure you it is not a man and a dog.
:48:22. > :48:27.Two dogs. It is a sizable organisation.
:48:27. > :48:33.I would suggest you send Mr Miliband a crate of champagne
:48:33. > :48:38.because you have had publicity? has been an interesting day. It
:48:38. > :48:42.shows the power of plit political blogs. I can't say it was
:48:42. > :48:47.comfortable to see it used in that forum, but I defend the right to
:48:47. > :48:50.publish it and I think that people have a right to be heard in a free
:48:50. > :48:57.debate. If other people in the Conservative Party don't want
:48:57. > :49:00.debate then they shouldn't criticise people like like Ken
:49:00. > :49:08.Clarke. Maybe you will get more members.
:49:08. > :49:14.There has been speculation about whether Andrew Lansley will end up
:49:14. > :49:17.paying for this with his job. Mehdi Hasan joins us now. Is it wise to
:49:17. > :49:21.misrepresent in that way on a subject that Labour Labour seems to
:49:21. > :49:27.be doing well in? Not at all. It led to a great line about the
:49:27. > :49:35.Tories not believing the Tories on health. Let's talk about NHS
:49:35. > :49:40.misrepresentation in debates. David Cameron misrepresented Labour's
:49:40. > :49:44.position on private income for hospitals. He said waiting lists
:49:44. > :49:47.were down when they are up. It is fair game? It is understandable
:49:47. > :49:50.game. What about looking at Andrew
:49:50. > :49:54.Lansley, the Government gets its Hillary Clinton Bill through,
:49:54. > :49:59.patched -- Health Bill through, patched up and with its amendments
:49:59. > :50:03.and there is a reshovel. Is there - - reshuffle. Is there any point of
:50:03. > :50:09.getting rid of Andrew Lansley? there is a point.
:50:09. > :50:11.If your argument is that Lansley has done badly because he hasn't
:50:11. > :50:14.communicated this is the line in the briefings take him out and
:50:14. > :50:18.shoot him, you could argue it doesn't make sense because the Bill
:50:18. > :50:21.is through. But if you think the problem is the Bill and the chaos
:50:21. > :50:26.that it is going to bring to the NHS, the only way you can try and
:50:26. > :50:30.have some fresh start when the problems start kicking in from
:50:30. > :50:38.increased bureaucracy, from closing hospitals and people complaining
:50:38. > :50:40.about postcode Lottery, the thing is to get rid of the man who
:50:40. > :50:43.authorised the Bill. If it is about a lack of
:50:43. > :50:46.communication, that doesn't mean that the Prime Minister doesn't
:50:46. > :50:50.support the essence of the Bill and the essence of reform. I put to you
:50:50. > :50:53.again, I know what you think, but it is not worth David Cameron
:50:53. > :50:58.sacrificing his Health Secretary when he agrees with the essence of
:50:59. > :51:05.reform? If this Bill creates chaos as some suspect it will, in the NHS,
:51:05. > :51:15.then the Prime Minister, he is at his most ruthless and decisive when
:51:15. > :51:18.he is saving his own skin. I think he will get rid of Lansley. Health
:51:18. > :51:23.secretaries don't have long life expectancy.
:51:23. > :51:28.Nigel Farage, let's go back to the Bill. Is there there going to be a
:51:28. > :51:31.U-turn. Everyone says we have gone too far, do you agree? I think they
:51:31. > :51:35.will continue with this reform, whether it is good or bad, I'm not
:51:35. > :51:39.sure. I think we need a bigger debate about the NHS, about the
:51:39. > :51:43.fact that since Labour came to power and made the increases in the
:51:43. > :51:46.increase in money, we put more money, we haven't got an increased
:51:46. > :51:50.service and I wonder whether the real debate we need is whether it
:51:50. > :51:54.is time for us to move towards an insurance based system.
:51:54. > :51:58.The real terms increase is eroded and whether it will be a real terms
:51:58. > :52:01.increase is yet to be seen over the years... We don't know that yet. It
:52:01. > :52:05.is about money in the sense that we are trying to squeeze �20 billion
:52:05. > :52:08.in efficiency between now and 2015 and at that time, you are carrying
:52:08. > :52:12.out a costly �3 billion reorganisation which you said you
:52:12. > :52:19.wouldn't. On the point about U- turns, the Health Service Journal
:52:19. > :52:22.editor who came out against this, says he hears from senior civil
:52:22. > :52:27.servants they are considering a Plan B, something that has not been
:52:27. > :52:32.written down. If there is a Plan B, the man who identified Plan A,
:52:33. > :52:39.condition be the -- can't be the one who pushed it out. I can't see
:52:39. > :52:42.Andrew Lansley being the man carrying out Plan B.
:52:42. > :52:47.The European Central Bank kept interest rates at 1% too. So no
:52:47. > :52:53.change there either. The same with the Bank of England keeping ours at
:52:53. > :52:59.0.5%. What is it about politicians and their bikes? It is a beautiful
:52:59. > :53:02.day for a bike ride. So was yesterday, I thought.
:53:03. > :53:07.# I'm going to ride my bike until I get home
:53:07. > :53:11.# I'm going to ride my bike until I get home #
:53:11. > :53:15.Yes, there is not much that stops the Prime Minister as he whizzes
:53:15. > :53:20.down Whitehall, pedestrians diving for cover. Every politician wants
:53:20. > :53:24.to enhance their fitness and green credentials by being at least
:53:24. > :53:28.photographed with one! There is news from Paris that cyclists are
:53:28. > :53:34.going to have freedom that none of this lot dreamed of. They will be
:53:34. > :53:36.allowed to skip red lights completely. Well, with me now Tony
:53:36. > :53:41.Armstrong from Living Street a charity that stands up for
:53:41. > :53:47.pedestrian rights. And the London editor of the Telegraph, a keen
:53:47. > :53:52.cyclist, Andrew Gilligan. Given most schoolists I see, what's
:53:52. > :53:55.the change? It is recognising reality, isn't it? Cyclists go
:53:56. > :54:01.through red lights. I go through them. I went through a couple on
:54:01. > :54:05.the way here. I I hope you crawled through.
:54:05. > :54:09.zoom through a couple, but only when there is no pedestrians.
:54:09. > :54:14.How did you know there wasn't a car coming? Well, because you can see.
:54:14. > :54:19.You look before you cross. Many said that and ended up in the
:54:19. > :54:22.hospital. It is safer in lots of cases to go through red lights if
:54:22. > :54:25.you are a cyclist because you don't get caught up in the crossing
:54:25. > :54:29.traffic. Isn't there a danger of hitting a
:54:29. > :54:34.pedestrian stood on the road and across me comes a cyclist through
:54:34. > :54:36.the red light. And that's wrong. I wouldn't do that if it was a
:54:36. > :54:40.pedestrian. You don't always know when they are
:54:40. > :54:43.stepping out. What do you think Just because it
:54:44. > :54:47.exists at the moment, doesn't make it right to officialise it and
:54:47. > :54:50.institutionalise it. The fear for pedestrians is something that is a
:54:50. > :54:53.major concern. Lots of our supporters get in touch and say
:54:53. > :54:58.they feel fearful about crossing the streets because cyclists just
:54:58. > :55:02.zoom. On the way into work this morning, I was cycling and a
:55:02. > :55:05.cyclist went past three through a pedestrian green man phase. It is
:55:05. > :55:08.not in the name of safety, but purely because they can't be
:55:08. > :55:11.bothered to stop. I dispute that. If you are caught
:55:11. > :55:15.up in traffic from a red light and you are a cyclist and you are small
:55:15. > :55:20.and vulnerable. If you go ahead of the light then you are not caught
:55:20. > :55:29.up in that traffic. So you would like to see a trial... I would love
:55:30. > :55:35.to see a trial of what happens in Paris and what the reason the par
:55:35. > :55:38.Parisan authorities, they recognise the safety arguments of cyclist
:55:38. > :55:42.outweigh the dangers to pedestrians. You describe people being afraid.
:55:43. > :55:47.There is little data on cyclist being hit by pedestrians who go
:55:47. > :55:51.through red lights. Cyclists are more menaced by other vehicles than
:55:51. > :55:56.we menace pedestrians. You are shaking your head.
:55:56. > :56:01.I have to say, I'm irritated with cyclists. I live in a small country
:56:01. > :56:04.lane on the North Downs it used to be lovely on Sundays, now we have
:56:04. > :56:08.people wearing a colourful kit cycling around the place which is
:56:08. > :56:12.fine, but they go two abreast in the road and think they own the
:56:12. > :56:15.place and when you try and overtake them, they abuse you. I get a
:56:15. > :56:19.feeling that cyclist in the country and in the town think they have a
:56:19. > :56:24.different set of laws that apply to them and this would be the wrong
:56:24. > :56:27.signal to send out. I think they should be tougher on cyclists and
:56:27. > :56:31.the way they behave. You would be against a trial?
:56:31. > :56:35.would be against a trial. Lots of things can be put in place to
:56:35. > :56:39.improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists and this won't do this. We
:56:39. > :56:44.need to bring manners and civil yilt on to our streets and people
:56:44. > :56:48.just feel as if everyone is in it for themselves. What about
:56:48. > :56:51.pedestrians going through the red man? If you are on a vehicle, if
:56:51. > :56:54.you are on a car, you have more responsibility if you are moving at
:56:54. > :57:01.speed. What about going through a red man?
:57:01. > :57:06.It is about respect. Everyone should look where they are going.
:57:06. > :57:12.Should people be prevented from doing that? People on foot aren't
:57:12. > :57:19.travelling at speed, whereas people on vehicles are. We need to re-
:57:19. > :57:23.educate people on cycles and motor vehicles as well.
:57:23. > :57:31.Where would you dot best? I would have a rule if a pedestrian
:57:31. > :57:41.crossing was red and there were no no pedestrians crossing and you
:57:41. > :57:42.
:57:42. > :57:51.could do it. The prench did in -- the French did it in Strasbourg and
:57:51. > :57:58.Nante. What is it about these capital cities, "not many, dead, we
:57:58. > :58:06.shall try it.". On a road near me, some of the of the traffic lights
:58:06. > :58:11.shouldn't be there. There are pedestrian crossings when there are
:58:11. > :58:15.no pedestrians crossing. Time to put you out of your misery and pick
:58:15. > :58:19.a winner for yesterday's Guess the Year competition. 1953 was the
:58:19. > :58:26.answer. Nigel, make somebody's day, they will win a mug.
:58:26. > :58:30.Lucky them. Lucky, lucky, lucky. It is Richard Batstone from
:58:30. > :58:36.Warrington. . You win a Daily Politics mug!
:58:36. > :58:40.That can't be bad, can it? We thank all our guests. Thank you to Nigel