:00:46. > :00:49.Afternoon folks, welcome to the Daily Politics. We've bailed the
:00:49. > :00:53.bank out but was it worth it? RBS announced losses of more than three
:00:53. > :00:57.quarters of a million pounds this morning. The unions are angry it's
:00:57. > :01:00.paying �390 million in bonuses to its 17,000 investment bankers. But
:01:01. > :01:03.is the picture really as bleak as it seems?
:01:03. > :01:06.More medical organisations call on the Government to withdraw the
:01:06. > :01:11.Health and Social Care Bill. Ministers say they won't budge and
:01:11. > :01:15.insist the Bill will improve patient care in England.
:01:15. > :01:19.Call me Dave likes riding his bike to work. But is it safe? MPs are
:01:19. > :01:29.debating the issue today. And is the Commons becoming too
:01:29. > :01:35.
:01:35. > :01:41.posh on both sides of the house? We'll be talking class.
:01:41. > :01:44.Anyway, he does not ride his bike to Work anymore, he lives above the
:01:44. > :01:47.shop! All that in the next half hour and
:01:47. > :01:57.with us for the duration, the head of the Royal College of GPs, Clare
:01:57. > :01:58.
:01:58. > :02:00.Gerarda. Now, first this morning let's talk about universities
:02:00. > :02:04.because the lecturers union, the UCU, says the number of
:02:04. > :02:07.undergraduate courses in the UK has fallen by more than a quarter in
:02:07. > :02:11.the last six years. The reduction has been starkest in England, where
:02:11. > :02:21.a third of degree courses have been cut. In Scotland only 3% have
:02:21. > :02:29.
:02:29. > :02:34.disappeared. What do you think of that? Some of the courses may need
:02:34. > :02:39.to go by the bike. But I think part of this is the unintended
:02:39. > :02:43.consequences of the market. Way you have competition and you do not get
:02:43. > :02:47.bums on seats, does not mean the course is not good, it will have to
:02:47. > :02:52.go because it does not make money. We cannot predict what we need in
:02:52. > :02:57.the future, and it is a worrying sign we have seen such a reduction.
:02:57. > :03:02.We might be worrying we might be trying to predict. At the moment
:03:02. > :03:07.politicians are telling us the jobs of the future of green. Everyone
:03:07. > :03:12.says that. 20 years ago and no politician would have told you any
:03:12. > :03:17.job coming from something called the internet? And 20 years ago, who
:03:17. > :03:22.would have known Arabic studies would have been one of the most
:03:22. > :03:26.important studies. We may need a Nordic studies in 20 years. When we
:03:26. > :03:31.talk about health care there are parallels with what has been
:03:31. > :03:35.happening in universities competing against each other, competing
:03:35. > :03:41.against people to go into them. And actually, what we see is a
:03:41. > :03:45.reduction in choice, and not an increase. We will come on to health
:03:45. > :03:47.care in a minute. Now it's time for our daily quiz.
:03:47. > :03:51.On Tuesday, President Obama, gave a barnstorming performance singing at
:03:51. > :04:01.the White House, so our question today is: Which song did President
:04:01. > :04:09.
:04:09. > :04:13.At the end of the show, Clare will give us the correct answer. We will
:04:13. > :04:19.ask for her to sing one of those songs. He don't want to hear me
:04:19. > :04:25.sing. I know the answer to that, and I know why he sang it.
:04:25. > :04:29.Life is full of imponderables. What is the meaning of life? Are we
:04:29. > :04:32.alone in the universe? And just how long will it be before we get a
:04:32. > :04:37.decent return on our stake in the Royal Bank of Scotland? RBS has
:04:37. > :04:42.revealed this morning that it made losses in 2011. Big losses. Around
:04:42. > :04:47.�2 billion in fact. Despite that they're still paying quite a lot in
:04:47. > :04:53.bonuses to their staff. So is it all worth it? Jo, some big
:04:53. > :04:56.questions there. Got some big answers for us?
:04:56. > :05:00.Stephen Hester, the boss of RBS, says he is in the process of
:05:00. > :05:05.defusing "the largest balance sheet risk time bomb in history". So just
:05:06. > :05:09.how big is it? Mr Hester has shrunk RBS's balance sheet from �2.2
:05:09. > :05:14.trillion in 2009 to �1.4 trillion today - that's still about the same
:05:14. > :05:19.size as the UK economy. In the process, Mr Hester has shed about
:05:19. > :05:22.�600 billion of assets and cut around 33,000 jobs worldwide.
:05:22. > :05:28.Despite the losses RBS is paying bonuses to its staff totalling �785
:05:28. > :05:33.million. Of that, 390 million will be used to pay staff in its
:05:33. > :05:35.investment banking arm - half what was paid last year. Last month,
:05:35. > :05:45.Stephen Hester waived his bonus following sustained political
:05:45. > :05:48.
:05:48. > :05:52.pressure. This is what he said to Robert Peston. I don't think high
:05:52. > :05:57.pay is limited to the banking industry. It is a commercial
:05:57. > :06:02.business and we attract people who are attracted by commercial values.
:06:02. > :06:08.If we did not, they wouldn't be good at their job. They compare the
:06:08. > :06:13.money they get with doing the same job elsewhere. When I was asked to
:06:13. > :06:18.come and turn around RBS, I have to look over the world for the best
:06:18. > :06:25.team because we fired the previous management team. We have to get
:06:25. > :06:30.good people from other jobs. joining me now is Richard Hunter,
:06:30. > :06:37.head of equities at the stockbrokers, Hargreaves Lansdown.
:06:37. > :06:42.Turning round RBS is an enormous task. How is Stephen Hester doing?
:06:42. > :06:47.If we take it as a five-year project, it is considerable. You
:06:47. > :06:52.have quoted some of the figures in terms of reducing the balance sheet
:06:52. > :06:56.and reducing its general risk exposure. This is set against not
:06:56. > :07:02.only the fact we have had a financial crisis in the last couple
:07:02. > :07:09.of years. Not only the increasingly global market place is as
:07:09. > :07:14.competitive as it has ever been, but also the kind of political
:07:14. > :07:21."interference" his rivals do not have. The likes of Barclays Bank
:07:21. > :07:25.and HSBC, who have avoided any handouts from the Government, are
:07:25. > :07:30.not held back by any outside interference. So you think he is
:07:30. > :07:35.doing a good job in that sense in making progress. Will the taxpayer
:07:35. > :07:40.ever make a profit out of RBS? There is a long time to go in terms
:07:40. > :07:46.of share price. It needs to hit about 50 pence, as compared to its
:07:46. > :07:53.current 28p. On paper anyway, there is an equalisation of the loss. So
:07:53. > :07:58.it is a longer term view. Apart from the competitive nature of the
:07:58. > :08:03.business we have already mentioned, the investment banking business,
:08:03. > :08:07.whilst profitable did see revenues down 25% over the last year. There
:08:07. > :08:13.are also a number of other businesses that need to be disposed
:08:13. > :08:17.of before RBS can read French at to where it can make some money. It is
:08:17. > :08:21.a longer term objective before there is any prospect of that share
:08:21. > :08:28.price doubling. The chances of it going back into private hands is a
:08:28. > :08:32.long way off, nobody is going to buy it are they? Again, it depends
:08:32. > :08:38.what you compare it with. Compared with up to three years ago, there
:08:38. > :08:41.has been considerable progress. If you look at it today and look at it
:08:41. > :08:47.as a private investor to enter the banking sector, you have to say
:08:47. > :08:54.there is better value elsewhere. You would look at one of the more
:08:54. > :08:59.globally diversified, Government free companies like Barclays Bank
:08:59. > :09:03.and page BSE. But it is possible with further prospects, it will
:09:03. > :09:07.look better than it does today it. It depends on your risk profile as
:09:07. > :09:12.an investor, and how much you are prepared to put that money aside
:09:12. > :09:16.for. With us now is the chair of the
:09:16. > :09:24.Church Arri select committee and the shadow Treasury minister, Chris
:09:24. > :09:29.Lesley. Stephen Hester says RBS is ahead in his strategy to turn the
:09:30. > :09:35.bank around, is he right? deserves some credit, it has been a
:09:35. > :09:39.tough road. It was the largest bank in the world with a lot of toxic
:09:39. > :09:44.waste on its balance sheet and he is claiming that up. It is a big
:09:44. > :09:50.job and it has not been helped by the fact the eurozone has been in
:09:50. > :09:55.crisis. So the decision has been weak. He had 2.7 trillion pounds on
:09:55. > :10:00.his balance sheet, twice the size of Britain's GDP. He has got to get
:10:00. > :10:07.rid of that or cut it down. You wouldn't want a 90 doing that job,
:10:07. > :10:12.you have to pay them well? Indeed he is paid well, he is not short of
:10:12. > :10:17.a few bob. Not big by banking standards? If it wasn't for the
:10:17. > :10:23.taxpayer, this bank wouldn't be there. It is not his fault, he was
:10:23. > :10:28.not there? No, and he has an important job to do. Even when we
:10:28. > :10:35.have a loss-making scenario, the 2 billion loss that has been
:10:35. > :10:41.announced... That is the pre-tax loss. The �7 million does feel
:10:41. > :10:45.inappropriate. It is not showing the restraint. Certainly, the
:10:45. > :10:52.Government as the shareholder, promised it would encourage. I
:10:52. > :10:56.asked Andrew, if at a time when the share value of RBS is so low and is
:10:56. > :11:02.making a loss, if we don't show the culture change now, when will we
:11:02. > :11:06.show it? If not here with RBS, where? Can you think of any other
:11:06. > :11:10.business outside banking way you get a bonus for running a loss of
:11:10. > :11:20.�2 billion? You pay receivers to go into businesses you are going to
:11:20. > :11:21.
:11:21. > :11:28.dismember. It is not the same thing. Of course... Digging the chairman
:11:28. > :11:32.of British Petroleum get a bonus of �2 billion? You pay the Mark -- you
:11:32. > :11:39.pay the person in the market to do the job. Stop interrupting because
:11:39. > :11:44.I want to answer your questions. You are absolutely right, it is
:11:44. > :11:51.more pertinent. You absolutely right, Chris. We have got to get to
:11:51. > :11:57.a point where, when people are paid a bonus, and the public feel those
:11:57. > :12:00.bonuses are coming as a consequence of having been an return to
:12:00. > :12:05.profitability. But the key issue for RBS will be when the public
:12:05. > :12:10.think they will get their money back, 40 billion, I think most
:12:10. > :12:13.people would be prepared to see large payouts. And the decision of
:12:13. > :12:18.the senior management not to take these bonuses after all is a
:12:18. > :12:22.reflection of the fact, the public mood is, when we see the colour of
:12:22. > :12:28.the improvements then the bonuses can be paid. Before I bring Chris
:12:28. > :12:33.Lesley back in, it is a �785 million bonus pool acceptable for a
:12:33. > :12:37.bank that has lost �2 billion? need to divide it up into two
:12:37. > :12:42.sections. The first part is what you need but the most senior
:12:42. > :12:46.management, I have been trying to answer that question. The second is,
:12:46. > :12:50.what do you need to pay to recruit and retain good people who will
:12:50. > :12:54.enable that bind to perform well. It you strip out all of the toxic
:12:55. > :13:01.waste, it has made about 6 billion in profit. It is in a competitive
:13:01. > :13:05.market. We do have to decide, Andrew, if we want this bank to
:13:05. > :13:09.perform as a socially owned enterprise in definitely, or if we
:13:09. > :13:13.wanted to be put back into the commercial sector as soon as
:13:13. > :13:17.possible. If we interfere too much we will arrive at the point where
:13:17. > :13:22.we can never get this bank privatised. We have been talking
:13:22. > :13:28.for months, the Prime Minister was promising a culture change and
:13:28. > :13:32.responsible capitalism. And in the detail of this report, page 50 of
:13:32. > :13:36.the RBS annual report, the compensation ratio, the ratio
:13:36. > :13:43.between the income the bank is generating an the renumeration it
:13:43. > :13:51.is paying out to his executives, has risen in RBS from 32% in 2010,
:13:51. > :13:57.to 29% in 2011. So the steam roller of bonus culture is going up. And
:13:57. > :14:02.it is continually rolling on as if nobody can do anything about it. We
:14:02. > :14:06.own this Bank, 82%. If we won't affect the change in culture now at
:14:06. > :14:12.this moment, are we putting our hands up saying this is the way of
:14:12. > :14:17.the world? Absolutely not, we have a duty to the wider society. They
:14:17. > :14:23.should show the same restaurant as everybody else. I am putting back
:14:23. > :14:29.the point to Chris, when can we get this bank in to the private sector?
:14:29. > :14:33.What is the answer to that? Hold on a minute. If we are going to
:14:33. > :14:38.interfere to the point where the very best people end up drifting
:14:38. > :14:43.away, we will find ourselves in a position where we can never get it
:14:43. > :14:51.into the private sector. Is it necessary for the bonus pool to
:14:51. > :14:56.rise? Really? The American sector are having trouble getting there
:14:56. > :15:02.banks away. We have to ask ourselves, do we really want to run
:15:02. > :15:06.our banks that wait indefinitely? Let me try to get you answer a
:15:06. > :15:10.question. When will this bank end up in the private sector? If you
:15:11. > :15:15.had been listening you would have heard lots of answers, but you are
:15:16. > :15:21.too busy looking at your notes. Just answer the question. Of course,
:15:21. > :15:27.the decision on whether we can get the bank, when I say we, it is you
:15:27. > :15:32.and me, Joe Public into the private sector, will depend on whether the
:15:32. > :15:36.situation improves and how quickly it moves back to profitability. But
:15:36. > :15:44.I do think Stephen Hester and his team have done a good job and we
:15:44. > :15:48.I am asking your judgment, the initial projection was five years.
:15:48. > :15:54.Clear that's out. So what do you think, ten now? It's very difficult
:15:54. > :15:58.to tell. The five years looks out because the eurozone Chris reus --
:15:58. > :16:02.crisis made the conditions look worse. If you look the eurozone
:16:02. > :16:06.crisis out of the situation, you see an American recovery beginning,
:16:06. > :16:13.global recovery perhaps succeeding in taking route. At that point it
:16:13. > :16:18.may be possible that five or six years' time we could get RBS...
:16:18. > :16:22.core bank, the investment bank is being run down, not sure why they
:16:22. > :16:27.need bonuses of �390 million for something they're trying to run
:16:27. > :16:31.down. The core bank, what we the public will want to sell back to
:16:31. > :16:34.the market, that made a profit, quite a good profit in difficult
:16:34. > :16:39.circumstances. And on that side of the bank they're not hugely well
:16:39. > :16:44.paid. So, don't they deserve a bonus for doing well? Bonuses
:16:44. > :16:47.should be paid for exceptional performance and individuals will be
:16:47. > :16:51.either exceptional or won't be and the bonus decision should be made
:16:51. > :16:55.accordingly. It has to be put in the context of the total
:16:55. > :16:59.performance of the organisation and the society in which we live and
:16:59. > :17:03.all I am really saying is that this is an organisation that lives in
:17:03. > :17:09.the same planet as the rest of us. There are businesses up and down
:17:09. > :17:13.the country who are pair p -- paring down rewards, dividends,
:17:13. > :17:20.bonuses they're paying themselves. I want to see RBS exercise the same
:17:20. > :17:23.restraint, especially given... The compensation ratio has gone in the
:17:23. > :17:27.other direction but nobody's picked up on the detail is my point.
:17:27. > :17:31.observation as you listen, I know you don't want to talk about banks,
:17:31. > :17:34.what's going through your mind? these incredible high salaries and
:17:34. > :17:38.bonuses were there over the last few years and we were in the mess
:17:38. > :17:41.that we were in now because of them, so the the answer - to say for
:17:41. > :17:44.example they need this in order to work, that begs the question what
:17:44. > :17:48.were they doing in the past when they were getting one and two
:17:48. > :17:52.million? The other thing is I want to say is how do you know? How do
:17:52. > :17:56.you know you can't attract the best people for salaries that would be
:17:56. > :18:00.significantly less? I work in medicine, we attract some of the
:18:00. > :18:04.brightest of the generation to work in medicine and I find it
:18:04. > :18:11.incredibly arrogant that actually - that you are saying you can't
:18:11. > :18:17.attract the best people unless you offer �750 million bonus pool.
:18:17. > :18:20.Those are the sort of... Hold on. Let Mr Tyrie try and answer that.
:18:20. > :18:24.Where I strongly agree with you is that there is something very
:18:24. > :18:29.curious about the financial sector as a whole that seems to require
:18:29. > :18:34.these uniquely high rewards. Addressing that is a big question
:18:34. > :18:38.that involves the need for much more shareholder activism, not just
:18:38. > :18:41.what the Government is doing but going across the board, looking at
:18:41. > :18:47.ways in which shareholders can take a much more direct interest in what
:18:47. > :18:51.people are paid. I think if you just prick the balloon and say we
:18:51. > :18:55.are not paying this, I think you still will get the bright things
:18:55. > :19:01.into banking, you still will get the loyalty, still the performance
:19:01. > :19:04.and you might get better performance. I think it's self-
:19:05. > :19:10.fulfilling. We are here discussing these staggering salaries. We need
:19:10. > :19:14.to move on, thank you for answering my questions, and Chris, thank you.
:19:14. > :19:17.Now, the budget is looming. George Osborne will have a lot in his
:19:18. > :19:22.inbox. And it appears he is under increasing pressure from his own
:19:22. > :19:28.MPs to rethink plans to withdraw child benefit from high earners. I
:19:28. > :19:31.am joined now by the Tory MPs Christopher Chope and Peter Lilley.
:19:31. > :19:36.What is the the strength of feeling amongst your colleagues over this
:19:36. > :19:40.issue? There is a lot of feeling that the plans as currently put
:19:40. > :19:46.forward are unsustainable and that the Chancellor's got to to think
:19:46. > :19:49.again about this and in fairness to him I think he is he is as is the
:19:49. > :19:54.Prime Minister, the policy originally announced more or less
:19:54. > :19:57.off the back of an envelope at the conference in 2010 doesn't add up,
:19:57. > :20:00.as is made clear from the latest report for the institute of fiscal
:20:00. > :20:04.studies. You say you have evidence and the Chancellor and Prime
:20:04. > :20:08.Minister are rethinking this, where is that from? It's in various
:20:08. > :20:12.statements they've made to the press and obviously in discussions
:20:12. > :20:15.we have on a day to day basis amongst Conservative members of
:20:15. > :20:21.parliament. Are you confident it's going to be dropped? I am not
:20:21. > :20:26.saying that at all. I am saying is that I hope that it will be dropped
:20:26. > :20:31.and that if the Chancellor feels that additional money has to be
:20:31. > :20:36.raised from higher rate taxpayers he won't just pick off higher rate
:20:36. > :20:39.taxpayers who happen to have children. Why pick off higher rate
:20:39. > :20:44.taxpayers with children, rather than higher rate generally? Can you
:20:44. > :20:48.answer that question, Peter Lilley? Why single out those higher rate
:20:48. > :20:52.taxpayers can children rather than those without? Well, he is not just
:20:52. > :20:58.singling them out, of course, it's a higher rate of tax on upper
:20:58. > :21:01.income earners with more than �150,000 and higher rates on those
:21:01. > :21:06.over �100,000 and those just below �150,000. I considered this
:21:06. > :21:09.proposal when I was responsible for social security and rejected it
:21:09. > :21:13.because it does have all sorts of difficulties and problems which
:21:13. > :21:17.Chris has highlighted. I can understand why the Chancellor now
:21:17. > :21:21.is thinking it necessary to go ahead because in a much more
:21:21. > :21:25.difficult financial situation nationally now, than in the 1990s
:21:25. > :21:30.when I was responsible for social security. I don't think he has that
:21:30. > :21:34.much alternative. If he can find an easier way, less unfair way of
:21:34. > :21:38.doing it that's fine, I couldn't then and I am not sure one is
:21:38. > :21:43.available. You do admit it is unfair? Obviously, it's always
:21:43. > :21:49.quoted two lower rate taxpayers with a combined income of 70 or 80
:21:49. > :21:52.won't be hit whereas one will. Picking up something you said, do
:21:52. > :21:55.you think there was an assumption at the time when it was actually
:21:55. > :21:59.announced, this proposal, that it would never really go ahead in 2013
:21:59. > :22:02.and it's only because of the economy that they might well push
:22:02. > :22:06.ahead with it? No, I think when they announce announced it they
:22:06. > :22:10.intended to go ahead and will probably have to if they can find
:22:10. > :22:14.some way of dealing with the unfairness, yes and it is very
:22:14. > :22:19.rough justice or skwruf injustice some -- rough injustice some might
:22:19. > :22:25.say, that's fine. I couldn't see a way of withdrawing child benefit
:22:25. > :22:30.from upper income groups without this sort of rough edge. I was
:22:30. > :22:35.going to say this is - 2010 budget, the first that came in after the
:22:35. > :22:38.coalition was elected. And in that budget the Chancellor made it quite
:22:38. > :22:41.clear that he was going to freeze child benefit for three years and
:22:41. > :22:45.that was what he was going to do with child benefit and wasn't going
:22:45. > :22:50.to alter it in any other way. Then there was a proposal to remove
:22:50. > :22:55.child benefit from 16-19-year-olds which was vetoed and then we came
:22:55. > :22:59.up with this half-baked policy at the conference. There is this
:22:59. > :23:03.universal benefits, isn't the Chancellor arguably making a brave
:23:03. > :23:07.prove that wealthier people shouldn't just by right have that
:23:07. > :23:10.universal benefit? If you go down that road you start saying people
:23:10. > :23:14.who are millionaires shouldn't access the health service without
:23:14. > :23:19.being means tested and I think there is a strong reason for saying
:23:19. > :23:23.we should maintain some universal benefits as set out by Beforage and
:23:23. > :23:28.has been the consensus among the parties for years. You would agree
:23:28. > :23:31.with that with better off pensioners as well? In fact, the
:23:31. > :23:34.Government's specifically ruled out dealing with better off pensioners
:23:34. > :23:40.by taking away their benefits in the same way as they specifically
:23:40. > :23:43.ruled out before the general election taking away child benefit.
:23:43. > :23:48.Thank you very much. Now, when your GP tells you that
:23:48. > :23:53.you don't need that hip replacement or that hernia sorted out, or are
:23:53. > :23:57.they thinking about what's best for you or their budget? Could GPs
:23:57. > :24:01.prapgs be rationing more healthcare procedures for patients they don't
:24:01. > :24:05.think will benefit from treatment under the guise of budget cuts?
:24:05. > :24:10.Adam Fleming has been taking a loom. -- a look.
:24:10. > :24:15.The health sr was -- service was born when we still had rationing.
:24:15. > :24:18.There is the rations... The NHS has always had to do some rationing of
:24:18. > :24:22.its own. Otherwise the nation's every penny could be spent on
:24:22. > :24:27.healthcare. But, with budgets being squeezed there's now more of it.
:24:27. > :24:32.Here's how it works now. The NHS here in north London is
:24:32. > :24:36.very similar to other areas of the country in that they've a list of
:24:36. > :24:38.what the is called procedures of low clinical effectiveness. In
:24:38. > :24:42.other words, operations you will only get if you meet very specific
:24:42. > :24:45.criteria. So here your child will only get
:24:45. > :24:52.their tonsils out if they've suffered a certain number of really
:24:52. > :24:55.serious bouts of tonsilitis. You will only have skin lesinons
:24:55. > :24:58.removed if they're causing real medical problems. Elsewhere in the
:24:58. > :25:03.country if you have a hernia it will only be operated on in its --
:25:03. > :25:07.if its big big enough and other places will only give a hip
:25:07. > :25:09.replacement if it's an emergency. The Primary Care Trusts say they're
:25:09. > :25:13.cutting back on treatments that might not make that much of a
:25:13. > :25:17.difference so there is money left to pay for ones that really do. GPs
:25:17. > :25:21.can appeal in exceptional cases, but this senior surgeon says
:25:21. > :25:25.patients' health is being put at risk for a false economy. If you
:25:25. > :25:30.don't get certain procedures it can lead to extreme problems later on.
:25:30. > :25:33.If you don't have your hip operation, when you should have it,
:25:33. > :25:39.then it's going to be a much more difficult procedure at a later time
:25:40. > :25:43.and it's going to be less satisfactory outcome. And one of
:25:43. > :25:48.the reasons that GPs have had enough of the Government's changes
:25:48. > :25:51.to the NHS is that instead of shadowy anonymous managers making
:25:52. > :25:56.these kind of decisions it will be them. We are going to have to break
:25:56. > :26:02.the news to the patients and obviously we are going to be the
:26:02. > :26:07.ones left holding the baby. So, the politicians will say oh well, we
:26:07. > :26:12.devolved down the decision-making processes to the GPs, go fight it
:26:12. > :26:16.out with them. The NHS of the future will be defined by two
:26:16. > :26:20.things: Less money and more local decisions. The Government say that
:26:20. > :26:29.will make the health service more responsive to patients. Critics say
:26:29. > :26:34.it's a recipe for more rationing. We have as our guest Claire Gerada,
:26:34. > :26:38.the chair of the Royal College of GPs. It's a difficult one for
:26:38. > :26:45.doctors, people will think I need my hip replacement, it would be
:26:45. > :26:49.better for me, but the doctor might say no, it won't. Yes, and GPs have
:26:49. > :26:54.always been careful with the public's purse. We have always in a
:26:54. > :26:57.sense rationed care. We have always, for example, choosing cheaper
:26:57. > :27:02.medicines over more expensive when they have the same effect. I think
:27:02. > :27:06.what we are moving into is an area where GPs may well not just have
:27:06. > :27:10.the patient in front of them that we are concerned about, but
:27:10. > :27:13.actually out there a much wider public purse issue, but also the
:27:13. > :27:18.fact that the patient may think we are doing this for a conflict of
:27:18. > :27:21.interest and to be crude, that our take home pay will be dependent on
:27:21. > :27:24.preventing you getting care and the most important thing and most
:27:24. > :27:28.successful part of the health service is because you trust me as
:27:28. > :27:34.your doctor to do what's best for you based on your needs and not
:27:34. > :27:37.on... I might not. My patients' generation trusted doctors all the
:27:37. > :27:40.time and they were grateful, they were the first beneficiaries of the
:27:40. > :27:45.NHS and they were just grateful to get the kind of care they hadn't
:27:45. > :27:50.got in the 20s and 30s. Subsequent generations aren't quite in awe of
:27:50. > :27:54.doctors any more like that. We may get an opinion from you, but I may
:27:54. > :27:58.want an opinion from another doctor because you may not be right.
:27:58. > :28:03.think you will find that survey after survey still puts the GP as
:28:03. > :28:07.one of the most trusted of all the professions right up there, as 90%,
:28:07. > :28:09.I hope you are not in awe of me... I will tell you at the end of the
:28:09. > :28:14.programme. But you trust the decision I make on your behalf,
:28:14. > :28:19.based on your needs and not some other motive. It may be that you
:28:19. > :28:23.don't need a hip replacement t may be I do defer referring you but you
:28:23. > :28:26.must not think that's made through opl -- some other issue and the
:28:26. > :28:30.worry about these reforms is I am going to be given a quality premium
:28:30. > :28:34.if I save money from not referring you and it will place a conflict of
:28:34. > :28:38.interest. If you look at the States, for example, GPs in the States, the
:28:38. > :28:45.equivalent, have as little trust as the bankers. So, it is something
:28:45. > :28:49.that can be rapidly reversed. puts a huge premium on the doctor
:28:49. > :28:52.being right. It puts a lot of responsibility on you because you
:28:52. > :28:57.may deny a treatment to someone and turn out to be wrong and they
:28:57. > :29:01.suffer as a result. That's very complex. What I would say is that
:29:01. > :29:06.as a GP I make sometimes some life- changing decisions every ten
:29:06. > :29:09.minutes and what I would expect is that our politicians, they take the
:29:09. > :29:13.responsibility for how much health service - how much money should be
:29:13. > :29:16.put into the health service and we work together about deciding what
:29:16. > :29:19.then should be funded but together with some of the organisations, as
:29:19. > :29:27.some of these operations that you heard may not be required,
:29:27. > :29:31.absolutely. In the olden days we used to do hysterectomy for women's
:29:31. > :29:36.anxiety. You may not require an operation but you have to trust
:29:36. > :29:42.that's a decision based on evidence and on your best interests.
:29:42. > :29:47.often would a doctor be faced with a decision like this? Every day,
:29:47. > :29:52.every week? About? Having someone wanting some important treatment
:29:52. > :29:56.and the doctor having to say no, it's not necessary, it's not right
:29:56. > :30:00.for you. Probably every surgery. Every surgery we would say a
:30:00. > :30:04.patient might say what about X and we might say this might be better
:30:04. > :30:07.for you. Yes, of course we can explore that, that might be better,
:30:07. > :30:12.but that's not rationing, that's good patient care. Rationing is
:30:12. > :30:15.where we make a decision based on an you will terior motive and a
:30:15. > :30:19.situation made on finances, either finances that I am going to benefit
:30:19. > :30:22.for or finances that is because the PCT hasn't got any money. In those
:30:22. > :30:25.situations I have to be honest with you and say you can't be referred
:30:25. > :30:35.for that, because there is no money. I don't say to you you don't need
:30:35. > :30:40.
:30:40. > :30:47.It is a rationing decision? It is, but we can't pretend you don't need
:30:47. > :30:53.it because of other reasons. welcome our viewers from Scotland
:30:53. > :30:59.and we are discussing health reforms with the head of the Royal
:30:59. > :31:05.College of GPs. Does that include Scotland? It includes Scotland,
:31:05. > :31:15.Northern Ireland and Wales. I represent 44,000 GPs although we
:31:15. > :31:27.
:31:27. > :31:37.have a devolved Council. The Health Bill was part of a heated debate in
:31:37. > :31:39.
:31:39. > :31:44.the Commons. Andy Burnham said the release of so-called risk registers.
:31:44. > :31:49.Miss the Deputy Speaker, this is what the National Health Service is
:31:49. > :31:54.telling the Prime Minister of the potential effects of his
:31:54. > :31:58.reorganisation. It is appalling and shocking. They are taking
:31:58. > :32:02.unacceptable risks with children's safety and people's lives. If this
:32:02. > :32:08.is what the NHS has been telling ministers for 20 months, how can
:32:09. > :32:15.they possibly justify pressing on with this dangerous reorganisation?
:32:15. > :32:20.Hasn't what remains of any just a vocation for carrying on with his
:32:20. > :32:24.reorganisation just collapsed? If this is what is published in local
:32:24. > :32:28.risk registers, it begs the question, what are they trying to
:32:28. > :32:34.hide in the national assessment? Can I clarify to the house, I met
:32:34. > :32:39.last week with the hospital he referred to earlier. The chief
:32:39. > :32:43.executive or the German raised any of the points he raised. And the
:32:43. > :32:51.local GP commissioning consortia are perfectly happy and are asking
:32:51. > :32:57.me and other local MPs to push ahead with this Bill. Why is he
:32:57. > :33:02.such a scaremongering buffoons. I say, this is by some margin the
:33:02. > :33:09.worst tempered debate I have chaired. Can I ask members on both
:33:09. > :33:13.sides to lower the temperature. We need to have a decent debate.
:33:13. > :33:20.curious, on the one hand, the shadow Secretary of State is saying
:33:20. > :33:25.it is going badly, and he is opposing the reform of the NHS. Yet,
:33:25. > :33:31.the Secretary of State is saying the outcome has never been better,
:33:31. > :33:36.so why is he pressing on with the bill? The argument, the curious
:33:36. > :33:40.thing is, and they know he will appreciate this, even the leader of
:33:40. > :33:50.the opposition says reform is needed in the NHS because of the
:33:50. > :33:54.
:33:55. > :33:57.challengers. I'm joined now by Conservative MP,
:33:57. > :34:07.Anna Soubry, who is Parliamentary private secretary to the Health
:34:07. > :34:10.
:34:10. > :34:17.Minister, Simon Burns, and shadow health minister, Liz Kendall. Now,
:34:17. > :34:22.your boss claims you don't represent the views of GPs in these
:34:22. > :34:27.health reforms? I think I do, I represent a 44,000 general
:34:27. > :34:32.practitioners, and over 90% wanted me to ask for a withdrawal of the
:34:32. > :34:37.bill. It is against the background of 18 months of consultation, three
:34:38. > :34:42.surveys, five executive councils and and national conference,
:34:42. > :34:46.endless consultations. I can categorically tell you my members
:34:46. > :34:52.of the Royal College of GPs do not want this bill. Some of the parts
:34:52. > :34:57.of the bill are good. Putting GPs in charge of money, putting
:34:57. > :35:04.patients first, but in its totality, it is a mess and it is flawed and
:35:04. > :35:14.the Bill won't achieve what Andrew Lansley is setting out to achieve.
:35:14. > :35:16.
:35:16. > :35:22.She represents the GPs? I think she is wrong. Let me tell you what I
:35:22. > :35:27.think. I go into my constituency and talk to real GPs on the ground.
:35:27. > :35:31.In my area, the consortia was formed before we got elected into
:35:31. > :35:41.Government. They were in existence. They are putting into operation
:35:41. > :35:42.
:35:42. > :35:45.already what we are seeking to achieve. That is my experience in
:35:45. > :35:50.my constituency. I was approached by a doctor who lives in my
:35:50. > :35:53.constituency but practices in Nottingham. He said, for God's sake
:35:54. > :35:59.get this Bill through so I can deliver the treatment to my
:35:59. > :36:04.patients have that I want to do. That is anecdotal evidence, her
:36:04. > :36:08.evidence is surveys and taking the opinion, why should your anecdotal
:36:08. > :36:14.evidence be more important? I did not saying it was. You just said
:36:14. > :36:18.she was wrong. I work in a general practice. You are part time.
:36:19. > :36:26.have lots of practices across London and I speak to general
:36:26. > :36:32.practitioners. The doctor you spoke to might be one of the 56 out of
:36:32. > :36:38.2,500... What about the doctors who formed the consortia, the 95% of
:36:38. > :36:48.other areas of the country it is happening? It is not reflected what
:36:48. > :36:51.
:36:51. > :36:57.we're hearing through the Royal College of GPs. GPs write to me.
:36:57. > :37:02.You have been very patient, but you say you are not a politician but in
:37:02. > :37:08.reading your case against the bill and so on, you do have a pretty
:37:08. > :37:14.strong ideological opposition to competition or further choice. You
:37:14. > :37:19.have even said it is an attempt to privatise the NHS and turn it into
:37:19. > :37:26.an American-style system? It is an attempt to privatise the NHS. We're
:37:26. > :37:32.not against competition. Turn it into an American-style system?
:37:32. > :37:36.it into a system with individuals... It is just your opinion. Give me a
:37:36. > :37:41.substantial fact. The American system involves private insurance.
:37:41. > :37:45.Is that what they will do in Britain? I would like to ask what
:37:45. > :37:49.is in the Bill that prevents that from happening. What you will find
:37:49. > :37:53.his there is nothing in the Bill that prevent that happening. We're
:37:53. > :37:57.not against competition, we have never been against competition
:37:57. > :38:01.where it adds value for patients. We are against any qualified
:38:02. > :38:06.provider way you have everybody competing for the same HIP and the
:38:06. > :38:12.same knee. Do you believe the Government is attempting to
:38:12. > :38:16.privatise the NHS? I think when they are telling clinical
:38:16. > :38:20.commissioning groups across the country, you have to put three
:38:20. > :38:24.services out to tender. When they are saying to hospitals you can
:38:24. > :38:29.have up to 49% of your patients treated in the private sector, I am
:38:29. > :38:32.very worried about that. Let me ask my question again in the hope of
:38:32. > :38:38.getting an answer. Do you believe the Government is attempting to
:38:38. > :38:42.privatise the NHS? When they are forcing services out to tender,
:38:42. > :38:48.when that is not what GPs and patients want, then that is what
:38:48. > :38:53.they are doing. Your answer is yes? I need to clarify. Is your answer
:38:53. > :39:01.yes? It is part of where they want to go with the health services,
:39:01. > :39:06.they want to see more services run by the private sector. There is a
:39:06. > :39:10.role for bringing in the private sector where we know it can build
:39:10. > :39:13.capacity and create some challenge in the system and improve services.
:39:13. > :39:19.But you have to manage the consequences choice and competition
:39:19. > :39:24.bring. I think the Government is in denial about how the different
:39:24. > :39:29.parts of the NHS are against this bill. It is not just GPS, the
:39:29. > :39:35.paediatricians came out against the Bill today. They seem to be saying,
:39:35. > :39:39.they are all confused by myths that Labour has put out. These are
:39:39. > :39:43.highly trained professionals. have had enough about who is for
:39:43. > :39:48.and against it. What about the substance of his bill? Let's talk
:39:48. > :39:52.about the substance of it. What you say about the Labour criticism,
:39:52. > :39:56.they are not against some more competition, we're not against
:39:56. > :40:01.further choice, but it has to be managed and not a free for all and
:40:01. > :40:04.the danger is this will lead down to too much private involvement?
:40:04. > :40:08.There are enough structures that have been put into this Bill to
:40:09. > :40:14.make sure that does not happen. Let's look at the so-called
:40:14. > :40:24.competition and the so-called privatisation. I find that deeply
:40:24. > :40:25.
:40:25. > :40:29.offensive. How many times does the Secretary of State, ministers, the
:40:29. > :40:35.Prime Minister, every Tory stand up and say this Bill is not about
:40:35. > :40:38.privatising the NHS. Can somebody put forward were it says in the
:40:38. > :40:43.built where it will allow privatisation. We believe it should
:40:43. > :40:48.be free at the point of delivery. I will concede we have probably not
:40:48. > :40:55.explained it in the simple terms it needs to be explained in. It is our
:40:56. > :40:59.fault. It is Andrew Lansley's fault. He is the Health Secretary. As a
:40:59. > :41:05.team, I would agree we have not explained it in good, simple
:41:05. > :41:11.language. So let's have that debate in simple language. It is about
:41:11. > :41:14.shifting power back to GPs. I have no problem with that. Or Derry
:41:14. > :41:20.people in my constituency get it and ordinary GPs in my constituency
:41:20. > :41:24.like it. If you can just encapsulate in a couple of
:41:24. > :41:29.sentences, why it is not just due against what has been done, you
:41:29. > :41:33.wanted to be dropped, why? It is so complex now with hundreds of
:41:33. > :41:38.amendments that don't make sense. It is so conflicted. They have lost
:41:38. > :41:43.control? We are turning one National Health Service into
:41:43. > :41:47.thousands of different health services, competing for each other.
:41:47. > :41:53.It is a complete and utter mess that needs stopping. We need to
:41:53. > :41:57.work with you now to stabilise the NHS. You need to stop saying things
:41:57. > :42:04.like we are going to privatise it and introducing an American-style
:42:04. > :42:09.system. Liz, I will give you the final word, but it has to be brief.
:42:09. > :42:14.If this Bill won't help us make the changes we need. We need to shift
:42:14. > :42:18.services into the community and more towards integration. This Bill
:42:18. > :42:23.sets different part of the NHS against each other and won't help
:42:23. > :42:26.them work together. I hope we come back to it.
:42:26. > :42:30.Now, should more be done to protect the growing number of cyclists on
:42:30. > :42:32.our streets? MPs have been debating that this morning and in a moment
:42:32. > :42:42.we'll be talking to the Cambridgeshire MP, Julian Huppert.
:42:42. > :42:42.
:42:42. > :42:47.But first we put our very own Chris Hoy - Giles Dilnot, on his bike.
:42:47. > :42:52.I have been cycling to work for four years. It keeps me fit, saved
:42:52. > :42:58.me money and they don't have to run a car or pay for public transport.
:42:58. > :43:03.But I do feel vulnerable sometimes. Three things, vehicles too many
:43:04. > :43:08.people trying to share too little road space. They are not malicious,
:43:08. > :43:12.just ignorance of me being there, even though they shouldn't be. And
:43:12. > :43:16.pedestrians who just stepped in front of you because they did not
:43:16. > :43:21.hear you. And they get aggressive like that. But other cyclists can
:43:21. > :43:26.provide a lot of problems as well. They have got to take
:43:26. > :43:30.responsibility for it, they do some stupid stuff. Jumping red lights
:43:30. > :43:37.and riding on pavements. I am coming up to some traffic now. This
:43:37. > :43:42.is where it gets dodgy. I'm really, really don't like this bit. Too
:43:42. > :43:52.many lanes across. One of the reasons I would say I am a safe
:43:52. > :43:56.cyclist is because I am a driver, too. Not enough drivers understand
:43:56. > :44:06.cyclists and cyclists do not understand drivers. New can see how
:44:06. > :44:06.
:44:06. > :44:10.close some of these vehicles get. There we are, Jenny end.
:44:10. > :44:14.That was a frightening shot at the end with the bus coming towards him.
:44:14. > :44:22.Will he make the next Olympics? And the Liberal Democrat MP, Julien
:44:22. > :44:25.Huppert, is with us now. It is not safe on the roads is it? Cycling is
:44:25. > :44:30.a safe thing to do, but I would like it to be more sake. Most
:44:30. > :44:38.people who do cycle cycle regularly absolutely fine. We need to stop
:44:38. > :44:43.these crashes and there is a lot we can do. Is it fairly safe? You are
:44:43. > :44:49.looking at someone who has had two accidents, my feet been crushed,
:44:49. > :44:55.Blackfriars Bridge. It is terrifying. By what? Lorries.
:44:55. > :45:00.are the danger aren't they? It is terrifying Cycling in London.
:45:00. > :45:04.terrifying and we need to tackle it. As more people cycle, people get
:45:04. > :45:14.used to cyclists, give them more space and it gets savour. There are
:45:14. > :45:17.places like those bridges,. -- safer. We cannot fix the traffic
:45:17. > :45:21.levels on the dangerous junctions and there are cyclists out there
:45:21. > :45:25.who are not very good at it and they are a danger to themselves.
:45:26. > :45:35.You have to be very confident to tackle the roads in London and
:45:35. > :45:39.Have a space for cyclists and a space for other users. A good
:45:39. > :45:44.quality space for cyclists, not some track that weaves around trees.
:45:44. > :45:51.You are right about the education point. The Government's continued
:45:51. > :45:55.funding to train 9-11-year-olds. I would like to see cycles... With
:45:55. > :45:59.helmets? The key thing about helmets is what we found in the
:45:59. > :46:02.world where they've become become compulsory is people have stopped
:46:02. > :46:06.cycling, particularly children. Why? Because of the look of it, the
:46:06. > :46:08.feel, it reduces the number and that's bad for the health. The life
:46:08. > :46:12.expectancy of people who cycle is longer than people who don't cycle
:46:12. > :46:16.because of the health benefits. It keeps you fit, it's much better for
:46:16. > :46:19.you than sitting on the tube or a car. Would you advise for the
:46:19. > :46:23.health of the nation and your own health cycle something a good idea
:46:23. > :46:25.after what you experienced? Absolutely, if we can get more
:46:25. > :46:31.people cycling it will become safer, exactly what you say. The problem
:46:31. > :46:35.we have, in fact, I passed my cycling test many moons ago, the
:46:35. > :46:40.problem is in all honesty, is the speed of cars, especially over
:46:40. > :46:43.bridges, who seem to think a bridge is a motorway. It's cars and vans
:46:43. > :46:49.not understanding that you get squashed against the side and they
:46:49. > :46:53.lose you. It's actually pedestrians who tend to rush out. I think I am
:46:53. > :46:58.biased about this, I love cycling, I am now frightened of cycling, but
:46:58. > :47:00.I love it and we need to get more bikes on the road. Thank you very
:47:00. > :47:04.much. An MP has been arrested on
:47:04. > :47:08.suspicion of assault following an incident in a bar at the House of
:47:08. > :47:11.Commons last night. It's understood the MP is Labour's Eric Joyce, and
:47:11. > :47:15.we can now speak to our political correspondent Vicky Young. What can
:47:15. > :47:21.you tell us? We understand that the police were called to a bar in the
:47:21. > :47:24.House of Commons before Len.00pm -- 11.00 where they handcuffed Eric
:47:24. > :47:27.Joyce, he was taken to a central London police station where he is
:47:27. > :47:32.still being head. There -- held. There are various reports about
:47:32. > :47:35.what went on. Eyewitness reports about glasses being broken, about
:47:35. > :47:38.angry exchanges, even about a window in the House of Commons
:47:38. > :47:42.being broken and the Conservative MP Stuart Andrew is alleging that
:47:42. > :47:46.he was assaulted, he was headbutted and we are waiting to see whether
:47:46. > :47:49.the police take this further. The Labour Party issued a statement
:47:49. > :47:53.swiftly saying it was an extremely serious incident and they have
:47:53. > :47:56.suspended Eric Joyce from the Labour Party, penning results of a
:47:56. > :48:00.police investigation. In the last hour or so the Speaker of the House
:48:00. > :48:03.of Commons has said he takes these allegations very seriously and he's
:48:03. > :48:08.warned MPs not to talk about it on the floor of the House of Commons
:48:08. > :48:14.while this investigation continues. It's not the only high profile
:48:14. > :48:18.arrest, is it? Other news, the West Midlands MEP, Nicki Sinclair has
:48:18. > :48:22.been arrest on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud the European
:48:22. > :48:26.Parliament. She now sits as an independent. This is an
:48:26. > :48:29.investigation going back to 2010 when allegations surfaced about
:48:29. > :48:32.expenses and she's one of four people who have been detained by
:48:32. > :48:36.they've been released on bail today and that investigation also
:48:36. > :48:39.continues. Thank you.
:48:39. > :48:43.That's the kind of behaviour you get with subsidised drinking.
:48:43. > :48:48.That's why the Government wants a minimum price.
:48:48. > :48:58.They have all the subsidised booze in parliament. They're hitting each
:48:58. > :49:00.
:49:00. > :49:04.other. Allegedly. Hitting each - may be who did it!
:49:04. > :49:09.Is parliament too posh? It's a question the Conservative leaning
:49:09. > :49:13.think tank Policy Exchange is asking, only a year after my own
:49:13. > :49:18.documentary on the matter. Do they need working class MPs in
:49:18. > :49:21.parliament? Many professions have opened up to people from other
:49:21. > :49:26.backgrounds, research from the Policy Institute found in 1979
:49:26. > :49:33.almost 40% of Labour MPs had done manual or clerical work. By 2010
:49:33. > :49:38.that was only 9%. 60% of Government Ministers, 54% of Conservative MPs,
:49:38. > :49:40.40% of Liberal Democrats, they all attended fee-paying schools,
:49:40. > :49:46.compared with 7% of the population as a whole.
:49:46. > :49:51.So, is the future more Bullingdon than bog standard comp? Does it
:49:51. > :50:01.matter that the Commons is not quite as common as what it used to
:50:01. > :50:05.
:50:05. > :50:10.Jack Dromey and David Amess welcome to our discussion. Does it matter?
:50:10. > :50:16.Yes, it does. Parliament is increasingly narrow in whom it
:50:16. > :50:19.draws from. Progress is being made in the last 20 years in relation to
:50:19. > :50:23.women and black and Asian ethnic minority people. Much more progress
:50:23. > :50:27.needs to be made, but it's absolutely wrong that parliament
:50:27. > :50:32.has come to be dominated by the professional middle classes and
:50:32. > :50:36.professional political classes. What I want to see is parliament
:50:36. > :50:41.truly representative, including of the world of work, and that means
:50:41. > :50:46.car workers, care workers, but also chief executives. A rich diversity
:50:46. > :50:49.from the world of work in the House of Commons. People who have
:50:49. > :50:53.walkeded walk and talked the talk and know from experience what the
:50:53. > :50:57.real world is like. And what can be wrong with that? I think the way
:50:57. > :51:00.things are at the moment class just doesn't matter at all. The House of
:51:00. > :51:04.Commons is completely irrelevant. You could shut it down tomorrow, it
:51:04. > :51:09.wouldn't make any difference. The Commons was destroyed since 1997
:51:09. > :51:13.and if we get our power back it might matter. My mother still lives
:51:13. > :51:17.in the original terrace house in the East End of London, returning
:51:17. > :51:21.the first Labour member of parliament - you are much posher
:51:21. > :51:27.than I am, Jack and the Labour Party is for goodness sake. I
:51:27. > :51:33.haven't got a hangup about class. I just want the country to be
:51:33. > :51:37.governored well. I was brought up in the East End of London, no
:51:37. > :51:40.bathroom, outside toilet, no - I am proud of it but I don't go around
:51:40. > :51:44.saying I am a working class Conservative, because all MPs are
:51:44. > :51:48.middle class. The idea that we are going to pretend we are working
:51:48. > :51:52.class... David, I am surprised at you from your background, because
:51:52. > :51:56.it's not healthy. I am being frank about all political parties,
:51:56. > :51:59.including our party. It is simply not healthy that your party is
:51:59. > :52:03.increasingly dominated by people from a public school background and
:52:03. > :52:11.bankers. They've all been journalists or lecturers, you are
:52:11. > :52:15.not representing the working - get real on this. Let me ask you this.
:52:15. > :52:18.How did your party get into a position, given it's called the
:52:18. > :52:22.Labour Party, that you made so much effort to get more women in and
:52:22. > :52:25.more ethnic minorities in, with some success as a consequence, but
:52:26. > :52:30.you actually forgot to get people from ordinary background in?
:52:30. > :52:33.agree with that. Historically the Labour Party was an alliance of the
:52:34. > :52:37.organised working class and the middle classes, absolutely, we need
:52:37. > :52:41.to be more than that because we need to appeal to the country as a
:52:41. > :52:44.whole. But there has been a sad decline of people from working
:52:44. > :52:50.class backgrounds, that's wrong. Doesn't that reflect the decline of
:52:50. > :52:54.the works class? -- Clarking class? There's been changes in the working
:52:54. > :53:01.class, but if you look occupationally and in class terms
:53:01. > :53:06.where people are drawn from, that's wrong. In relation to Labour,...
:53:06. > :53:08.will give you the last word. What Ed Miliband has said and he is
:53:08. > :53:12.right, is we need to change that. We need to be truly representative
:53:12. > :53:19.of the country as a whole. I oepl wish that the Conservative Party
:53:19. > :53:23.would do the same thing. Aren't you worried that you increasingly, you
:53:23. > :53:26.are becoming more public school again? There is the grammar school
:53:26. > :53:31.generation drops out, there are few of you getting on in the
:53:31. > :53:35.Conservative side, even the women and ethnic minorities that have
:53:35. > :53:38.broken through, they're all pretty posh. Right, first of all I
:53:38. > :53:43.definitely support grammar schools. I went to a grammar school and it
:53:43. > :53:46.gave me... What about the general point? Generally, I am not hung up
:53:46. > :53:52.where my colleagues have been educated. Even if they come from an
:53:52. > :53:57.increasingly narrow group? Look, I am concerned about their judgment
:53:57. > :54:01.and the advice that they get and whether the country's well governed
:54:01. > :54:06.I am not hung up about class. For goodness sake, the Labour Party to
:54:06. > :54:13.start talking about class when it was run by the most upper class
:54:13. > :54:18.Prime Minister ever. We have run out of time, sorry. We have to go
:54:18. > :54:22.to Somalia, which has more to worry about than class. I knew we
:54:22. > :54:25.wouldn't get anywhere. But I thank you both.
:54:25. > :54:28.From one battle to another. To Somalia, because representatives
:54:28. > :54:32.of more than 50 countries are meeting in London today to try to
:54:32. > :54:36.find a solution to two decades of turmoil and conflict in the country.
:54:36. > :54:38.The United Nations Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon, and the
:54:38. > :54:41.American Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, are among those
:54:41. > :54:47.attending. The Prime Minister, who is leading the conference, said he
:54:47. > :54:52.wants to address the growing threat to global security posed by
:54:52. > :54:57.terrorists and pirates. Andrew Mitchell joins us now, on that
:54:57. > :55:01.basis, it's such a failed state. Everybody gress it has been --
:55:01. > :55:06.agrees it has been and to some extent still is. What can be
:55:06. > :55:10.achieved today? What is impressive about the conference so far is the
:55:10. > :55:13.absolute identity of purpose you have from all the disparate groups
:55:13. > :55:18.from inside Somalia. The countries of the region and the international
:55:18. > :55:22.community and the United Nations, everyone is at least focused and
:55:22. > :55:27.pulling in the same direction. And that is a breakthrough. We are
:55:27. > :55:29.clear what needs to be done now, and I hope that will be the outcome
:55:29. > :55:35.of this conference today which our Prime Minister has convened.
:55:35. > :55:38.Britain's been engaged in Somalia now for sometime, because of the
:55:38. > :55:41.dreadful humanitarian consequences, but the effects of this failed
:55:41. > :55:45.state across the world and the region are seen every day.
:55:45. > :55:50.course not negotiating with the militant group al-Shabaab, you
:55:50. > :55:53.agree with Hillary Clinton on that, do you? Yes, absolutely. They've
:55:53. > :55:56.been killing their own people, have been threatening and trying to kill
:55:56. > :55:59.people elsewhere in the region and the world. They are a barrier to
:55:59. > :56:03.progress in Somalia. Everyone understands that. What we need to
:56:03. > :56:07.ensure is that there is a political process from the bottom, not
:56:07. > :56:10.imposed from the outside, which people in Somalia can see is
:56:10. > :56:15.genuinely to their advantage and what's what this conference is
:56:15. > :56:19.seeking to achieve. If al-Shabaab is such a threat and still controls
:56:19. > :56:23.large sections of the country, what about a stronger military presence?
:56:23. > :56:27.Well, that is right and that is why the United Nations agreed yesterday,
:56:27. > :56:31.following the Foreign Secretary's resolution being passed, that we
:56:31. > :56:34.would boost the United Nations African Union troops there. The
:56:34. > :56:39.European Union will be providing funding to pay for these troops T
:56:39. > :56:47.will increase from something like 10,000 to 17,000, and that that as
:56:47. > :56:54.you suggest, is absolutely essential if progress is to be made.
:56:54. > :56:57.What about military... It fell to the Ethiopian forces pushing
:56:57. > :56:59.through there, that's good news for all the poor people who have been
:56:59. > :57:03.caught up in these dreadful circumstances in Somalia. What
:57:03. > :57:07.about military presence from us, for example, if it's such a big
:57:07. > :57:15.threat to security and the country is still in a very precarious state,
:57:15. > :57:17.what about our military presence? We are focused on boosting this
:57:17. > :57:21.African Union and United Nations force, and that's why the
:57:21. > :57:27.resolution to which I referred is extremely good news. Britain has
:57:27. > :57:29.given technical advice. We had a mission last year which went in and
:57:29. > :57:32.assisted with planning and its strategy, that's extremely
:57:33. > :57:38.important. It's an area where the British military have made a big
:57:38. > :57:43.big contribution. But the key thing is to support them, which is led by
:57:43. > :57:45.Barundi and Uganda who put their troops on the ground and suffered
:57:45. > :57:55.substantial reu and -- substantially and we need to
:57:55. > :57:59.
:57:59. > :58:09.support them. Time before we go to What was the correct answer? I have
:58:09. > :58:12.
:58:12. > :58:19.no idea. I suspect Give me some loving. No, let's hear it.
:58:19. > :58:23.# Same old place # Sweet home Chicago.
:58:23. > :58:27.Sweet Home Chicago because it's his home town. I know he was in
:58:27. > :58:35.Indonesia when he was a kid but Chicago is his home town before you
:58:35. > :58:41.start tweeting and annoying me. 1990 was the answer from the guess
:58:41. > :58:48.the year competition. Dr Claire, you get to pick. Mark from