0:00:32 > 0:00:35Good afternoon. Welcome to the Daily Politics. Put down that Oscar,
0:00:35 > 0:00:38Meryl, and pay attention please, to the real cut and thrust of
0:00:38 > 0:00:42Westminster politics. There is more trouble for the Government in the
0:00:42 > 0:00:47House of Lords over plans to reform the NHS. And now the Royal College
0:00:47 > 0:00:49of Surgeons is reconsidering its support for too. How many local
0:00:49 > 0:00:54authorities will defy the Government and raise council tax?
0:00:55 > 0:00:58And what - if any - punishment might await those which do? George
0:00:58 > 0:01:00Osborne comes out fighting against those who want him to spend money
0:01:00 > 0:01:05promoting growth in next month's budget. Britain's run out of money,
0:01:05 > 0:01:14he says! And, if your political career goes off the rails, how
0:01:14 > 0:01:17should you best go about organising All that in the next hour. And
0:01:17 > 0:01:27braving the slings and arrows of political fortune, with us this
0:01:27 > 0:01:34
0:01:34 > 0:01:37Monday is the former minister for deregulation, Neil Hamilton. Best
0:01:37 > 0:01:40known for the whole Cash for Honours saga, he is now back in
0:01:40 > 0:01:43politics with the UK Independence Party. So, if you have any thoughts
0:01:43 > 0:01:46or comments on anything we are discussing, then you can tweet your
0:01:46 > 0:01:49comments. But first, the German parliament will vote today on
0:01:49 > 0:01:51whether to approve the second bail- out for Greece, which was agreed
0:01:51 > 0:01:54last week by eurozone finance ministers. There are some critics
0:01:54 > 0:01:57of the deal in Chancellor Merkel's own ruling coalition. However, she
0:01:57 > 0:02:00is expected to get the votes she needs with opposition support. The
0:02:00 > 0:02:02German parliament will decide whether to approve the 130 billion
0:02:02 > 0:02:04euro rescue package agreed last week. But one of Chancellor
0:02:04 > 0:02:06Merkel's own ministers has suggested today that Greece's
0:02:06 > 0:02:12chances of regenerating and becoming competitive are definitely
0:02:12 > 0:02:15greater outside the eurozone than in. And here, George Osborne has
0:02:15 > 0:02:19warned that we have run out of money and that any tax cuts would
0:02:19 > 0:02:21have to be paid for. There has been speculation on whether the
0:02:21 > 0:02:25Chancellor will help low earners by raising the personal allowance for
0:02:25 > 0:02:28income tax. And it looks unlikely that motorists will get any extra
0:02:28 > 0:02:33help, the Chancellor says he has already taken action to cancel
0:02:33 > 0:02:42planned fuel duty increases. Let's get more on this with Stephen Evans,
0:02:42 > 0:02:49who is in Berlin. The Germans may not like it. It looks as though
0:02:49 > 0:02:53they will vote through the second bail out for Greece. Chancellor
0:02:53 > 0:02:59Merkel will gets the vote so she needs from the opposition parties.
0:02:59 > 0:03:03They met on Friday and said they would do the deed. The doubters but
0:03:04 > 0:03:10in her own party will be outnumbered, no matter how many of
0:03:10 > 0:03:16them there are. You cannot deny that there is rising scepticism
0:03:16 > 0:03:19about the whole thing. The Finance Minister wrote to Members of
0:03:19 > 0:03:27Parliament over the weekend, basically saying there is no
0:03:27 > 0:03:34guarantee that this will work. That is a change of stance. If you look
0:03:34 > 0:03:39at this newspaper, it is saying pay-day for Greece, billions full
0:03:39 > 0:03:44Greece. Halt! It has thrown its weight behind the sceptics. If you
0:03:44 > 0:03:49are a politician, you will take note. If they're going to go ahead
0:03:49 > 0:03:55with this, it sounds as though the Germans will need to swallow it.
0:03:55 > 0:04:00Them is a hint there could be more money down the line for Greece. --
0:04:00 > 0:04:04there is a hint. The Finance Minister is saying, do not think
0:04:04 > 0:04:11this is the end was that the tone in the past has always been, we do
0:04:11 > 0:04:17this deal and that we seek light at the end of the time off. The 10
0:04:17 > 0:04:22this time is, of the alternatives are worse. We want you to go for it.
0:04:22 > 0:04:26It is not the end of the matter and we do not guarantee success. The
0:04:26 > 0:04:34bigger question beyond this vote is whether the Germans agreed to
0:04:34 > 0:04:37increase the size of the bail out fund. There was the G20 over the
0:04:37 > 0:04:44weekend basically saying the Europeans have to put more into
0:04:44 > 0:04:48their own bail out fund. The implications are that the IMF, for
0:04:48 > 0:04:52example, where Britain could have the say, with then think about
0:04:52 > 0:04:57putting in more money themselves but the Europeans with need to do
0:04:57 > 0:05:06their bit first. That is the next battle and we wait to hear what is
0:05:06 > 0:05:14happening with that. With us now is Neil Hamilton and Chris Lesley. I
0:05:14 > 0:05:24must correct what I said before, cash or on a Skype it was Cash for
0:05:24 > 0:05:26
0:05:26 > 0:05:30Questions. This boat may well go through. -- for on us. I think it
0:05:30 > 0:05:34could have serious consequences with default. The current option is
0:05:34 > 0:05:38not that much better in terms of austerity being piled upon Greece
0:05:38 > 0:05:42and the tensions it is stoking up. Ultimately we need to make sure
0:05:42 > 0:05:47that markets have confidence in the eurozone and eurozone countries
0:05:47 > 0:05:53need to dip into their own pockets and put up a firewall of sufficient
0:05:53 > 0:05:57size - a bail out fund that will do the job. The Labour Party has been
0:05:57 > 0:06:00saying this for nine months. The Chancellor is beginning to change
0:06:00 > 0:06:04his mind to say the eurozone countries had to dip into their
0:06:04 > 0:06:09pockets first before coming to the rest of the world. Before we come
0:06:09 > 0:06:19to that, at the Hampton, do you think now would be better for
0:06:19 > 0:06:19
0:06:19 > 0:06:24Greece to default and and nine months' time - as Macro -- Neil
0:06:24 > 0:06:30Hamilton, do you think now would be better able greased to default than
0:06:30 > 0:06:36in nine months' time? Definitely. It is an enormous bankruptcy
0:06:36 > 0:06:42machine. The Greek people are being sacrificed on the vanity of
0:06:42 > 0:06:48politicians. Unemployment is 20%. The Greek economy contracted by 6%
0:06:48 > 0:06:52last year. This is worse than anything that has happened in this
0:06:52 > 0:06:59country during the Great Depression. People are not really worried about
0:06:59 > 0:07:04what happens to the Greeks. It is about protecting eurozone itself.
0:07:04 > 0:07:09Thinking this is better for them and having as a disorderly default.
0:07:09 > 0:07:13They should care about social consequences. The difficulty is you
0:07:13 > 0:07:18could be out of the frying pan and into the fire. There is a debate
0:07:18 > 0:07:27about whether they should have joined the euro in the first place.
0:07:27 > 0:07:33We are where we are. They cannot grow in their economy inside the
0:07:33 > 0:07:37eurozone. I totally agree with Neil Hamilton on mess. How outrageous we
0:07:37 > 0:07:43have not had the leadership from those heads of government across
0:07:43 > 0:07:47the eurozone, and also from the British government as well! Pretty
0:07:47 > 0:07:53much everyone has accepted inside and outside of Greece that with
0:07:53 > 0:07:56that level of austerity and that level of pain there can never be
0:07:56 > 0:08:03growth. There is knackery danger that if you have a strategy for
0:08:03 > 0:08:09solving the problem that you will end up with the problem Goering on
0:08:09 > 0:08:13and on. There are steps that can be taken to stimulate growth. We have
0:08:13 > 0:08:17a series of right-wing governments across the eurozone who take the
0:08:17 > 0:08:22view of George Osborne that there is nothing governments can do to
0:08:22 > 0:08:28stimulate growth. You cannot stimulate growth by recycling the
0:08:29 > 0:08:34tax payers money. That is completely nonsensical. Greece
0:08:34 > 0:08:44cannot get out of its current problems by -- without having a
0:08:44 > 0:08:45
0:08:45 > 0:08:48lower value currency. The biggest export earners are tourism and
0:08:48 > 0:08:52shipbuilders. There is one potential problem, if it did
0:08:52 > 0:09:00default, there would be the worry of contagion. The firewall has not
0:09:00 > 0:09:05been set up perversely enough and we have not agreed a figure. --
0:09:06 > 0:09:10robustly. Without that, Portuguese and Italian debt could be driven.
0:09:10 > 0:09:16We are not bailing out the Greeks, we are bailing out the French and
0:09:16 > 0:09:23German banks. The Greek people are having to pay the interest on those
0:09:23 > 0:09:30bombs for the foreseeable future, this time to the European tax payer.
0:09:30 > 0:09:36-- bonds. My view is that a lot of pressure should have been put on,
0:09:36 > 0:09:43particularly Germany, but it was not. We needed diplomatic pressure
0:09:43 > 0:09:50to have been stronger. Is that enough for the European mechanism?
0:09:50 > 0:09:56This is what they are discussing. I think there are some queries about
0:09:56 > 0:10:03this. I do not think the Chancellor is out of the words. They could be
0:10:03 > 0:10:10going back and back again. They need the bail out for and -- a bail
0:10:10 > 0:10:14out fund that is more robust. If they think the IMF will come in and
0:10:14 > 0:10:18do the bailing out process, the Americans are right in saying, let
0:10:18 > 0:10:23those wealthy nations dip into their pockets first before coming
0:10:23 > 0:10:28to other countries, like the UK, to do the bailing out job. That is the
0:10:28 > 0:10:33message we have to send. European Central Bank is not the
0:10:33 > 0:10:36lender of last resort. The German tax payer was not prepared to be
0:10:36 > 0:10:42put on the hook for the consequences of that decision. They
0:10:42 > 0:10:46are printing money from nowhere. It is a fast quantitative easing
0:10:46 > 0:10:51programme. The money you are talking about is not money that is
0:10:51 > 0:10:56being lent to the European Central Bank, they are pressing a computer
0:10:56 > 0:11:02key and creating it. There will be huge hyperinflation and that is
0:11:02 > 0:11:06what wants to be avoided. There is huge pressure from Britain. Should
0:11:06 > 0:11:10we contribute more? I think it is time for the eurozone countries to
0:11:11 > 0:11:15dig into their pockets first. The Prime Minister called Bass
0:11:15 > 0:11:22breathtakingly irresponsible for taking that view. The Chancellor
0:11:22 > 0:11:29has come round to active. Not a penny more from the British tax
0:11:29 > 0:11:33payer to pour into this bottomless pit! What you pour in today, it
0:11:33 > 0:11:41will not do what it said it would and they will be back for more in a
0:11:41 > 0:11:44few months' time. You may not have noticed that it is freezing in most
0:11:44 > 0:11:47parts of England. No, not the weather. We are talking about the
0:11:47 > 0:11:50council tax. This is the second year that the Government has given
0:11:50 > 0:11:54local authorities money so that they won't put up bills. But is the
0:11:54 > 0:11:57freeze all that it seems? We sent Adam out during the recent bout of
0:11:57 > 0:12:01wintry weather to investigate. At times, this winter has been pretty
0:12:01 > 0:12:06chilly in West Sussex. It is not just the landscape that has been
0:12:06 > 0:12:12frozen, so has the council tax. is funded by central government who
0:12:13 > 0:12:17are offering the Government to grant -- local government a grant.
0:12:17 > 0:12:24It will vary across the country. For families in West Sussex in an
0:12:24 > 0:12:30average property, they will save about �34 a year, 65p a week. John
0:12:30 > 0:12:37makes a living from freezing things. He is an ice sculptor. Like a lot
0:12:37 > 0:12:43of locals, he is glad that, at last, there is one Bill that is not
0:12:43 > 0:12:49increasing. The cost of heating, electric, stuff like that, is going
0:12:49 > 0:12:55up. It will give us a break, albeit for a short period. No one can
0:12:55 > 0:13:00complain about that. Not all local authorities are as welcoming of the
0:13:00 > 0:13:05idea as West Sussex. I am now in Surrey, where they are not taking
0:13:05 > 0:13:11the Government's money and council tax bills are going up. The council
0:13:11 > 0:13:14here is fighting the freeze with a planned tax rise of 2.9%. The
0:13:14 > 0:13:20county's Conservative leader is doing it because the Government
0:13:20 > 0:13:27handout only lasts for one year. you take the council tax grant this
0:13:27 > 0:13:31year off the Government, you still will be down 2.5% next it in your
0:13:31 > 0:13:35budget. That is the question everyone needs to address. If you
0:13:35 > 0:13:45had gone for a council tax freeze the ship, how much would you have
0:13:45 > 0:13:46
0:13:46 > 0:13:50had to have put it up next year? -- this year. Probably about 5%.
0:13:51 > 0:13:55local of authorities had decided what they are doing. At least 20 up
0:13:55 > 0:14:02going the way of Surrey. A few, mainly Labour-controlled and
0:14:02 > 0:14:08Brighton, are opting for increases of 3.5%. So far, none have gone
0:14:08 > 0:14:13beyond that. Otherwise there would have to hold a local referendum. A
0:14:13 > 0:14:18new law designed by the Government which will have an effect on town
0:14:18 > 0:14:27halls as they decide to freeze or not. With me now is the Communities
0:14:27 > 0:14:32Secretary, Eric Pickles. He is the proud owner of a Daily Politics mug.
0:14:33 > 0:14:39How many councils in England are planning to increase council tax?
0:14:39 > 0:14:46tiny number. Do you know how many? We will not know until 12th March.
0:14:46 > 0:14:52So far we have over 300 who are going to freeze it. There are eight
0:14:52 > 0:14:59he will reduce it. That is pretty high for this time of year. I would
0:14:59 > 0:15:04anticipate, in terms of local authorities, it could be near 90%.
0:15:04 > 0:15:11All the councils have not officially declared. That is a
0:15:11 > 0:15:17significant number. Your report said brighten, Taunton Deane has
0:15:17 > 0:15:23not and Scarborough has not. They are in the figures. It is a mix
0:15:23 > 0:15:28politically. These are councils of all shades who could resist. About
0:15:28 > 0:15:35three or four are Conservative but the majority are Labour. It is
0:15:35 > 0:15:41strange. If I was a resident of Surrey, I would say a, why have you
0:15:41 > 0:15:48turn down just short of �40 million in government grants? Instead of
0:15:48 > 0:15:52that you're going to take �16.5 million away from me. That seems a
0:15:52 > 0:15:58logical. The point that was made in the thumb, the council's who want
0:15:58 > 0:16:04to increase, they do not know if they are going to provide the same
0:16:04 > 0:16:08level of funding, they will have to increase by 6%. That is the
0:16:08 > 0:16:13economics of the madhouse. If you are going to give councils the
0:16:13 > 0:16:19equivalent of a 2.5% rise and you were to Dublin next year, it would
0:16:19 > 0:16:24be around 5%. We're changing the way that local government is
0:16:24 > 0:16:29financed. We're changing the process of the business rate next
0:16:29 > 0:16:34year. It is theoretically possible that Surrey maybe in a worse
0:16:34 > 0:16:39position because they have raised the council tax this year. That is
0:16:39 > 0:16:42why most councils have taken the sensible course been taking money
0:16:42 > 0:16:49from the Government in recognition that things are a little bit
0:16:49 > 0:16:54difficult for families, let's show some slop -- solidarity. What about
0:16:54 > 0:17:02localism? Local areas should decide what to do. You are dictating to
0:17:02 > 0:17:10local governments telling them what I am not forcing them to freeze
0:17:10 > 0:17:14their council tax! You have been pretty heavy about it! I am robust!
0:17:14 > 0:17:19Surrey will be putting up their council tax and a number of Labour
0:17:19 > 0:17:23authorities. I am taking no sanctions against them. It is
0:17:23 > 0:17:28interesting. They have stood up for localism but they haven't taken the
0:17:28 > 0:17:36ultimate test, to increase it a bit more and take it to the electorate.
0:17:36 > 0:17:40If they have a good case, take it to the electorate. A politician
0:17:40 > 0:17:44should never be frightened of the public and. Eric has been admirably
0:17:44 > 0:17:50robust about this and has been protecting the interests of local
0:17:50 > 0:17:55taxpayers. But he cannot because a proportion of councils will rebel.
0:17:55 > 0:18:01And they are idiots for doing so. The idea that businesses of these
0:18:01 > 0:18:07sizes cannot make 3% economies in 12 months is ridiculous. Non-jobs
0:18:07 > 0:18:10are still being advertised for by its various councils, a senior
0:18:10 > 0:18:15travel awareness officer for Enfield Council to tell people to
0:18:15 > 0:18:19walk more often and use their bicycle, and Camden is looking for
0:18:19 > 0:18:25someone �30,000 a year with a load of management gobbledegook that
0:18:25 > 0:18:29means nothing. You can always find examples of that but are you saying
0:18:29 > 0:18:35that Chelmsford, Devon and Surrey are basically practising the
0:18:35 > 0:18:39economics of the madhouse? Yes! Follow Brentwood's example.
0:18:39 > 0:18:46Hammersmith and Fulham. Cut the council tax. And which services
0:18:47 > 0:18:50will be harm? No services! This ridiculous idea that merely because
0:18:50 > 0:18:56you buy your services better, because you control your staff
0:18:56 > 0:19:01better, because you concentrate on protecting frontline services, that
0:19:01 > 0:19:06somehow we will get better services... Look at Hammersmith and
0:19:06 > 0:19:12Fulham. It has cut its council tax successfully for five years and
0:19:12 > 0:19:21services have got better. In my own counsel in Wiltshire, they are
0:19:21 > 0:19:26cutting the wheelie bin collections rather than... -- in my council!
0:19:26 > 0:19:32Eric Pickles failed to get councils to do what he wanted about that!
0:19:32 > 0:19:34Totally wrong! I am not forcing them. They do not have to have the
0:19:34 > 0:19:39weekly collection but I am providing serious sums of money
0:19:39 > 0:19:45off... Why should they get more of an incentive to do what you would
0:19:45 > 0:19:50like? Because I give them an advantage so smaller councils can
0:19:50 > 0:19:55go out together and improved procurement. There a lot of things
0:19:55 > 0:19:58two separate rubbish. We will give them a grant for that. Rather than
0:19:58 > 0:20:03putting a yoghurt pot into the wrong being, they will be
0:20:03 > 0:20:08encouraged and not given a fine -- into the wrong rubbish bin. We have
0:20:08 > 0:20:12had that discussion many time before. Let's go back to the idea
0:20:12 > 0:20:15of reassurance under the new scheme that will come in for local
0:20:15 > 0:20:21government. Can you offer reassurance that councils will get
0:20:21 > 0:20:26money next year so they can change their mind? Councils will be able
0:20:26 > 0:20:31to retain the growth in their business rate so if they bring in
0:20:31 > 0:20:35new business... But that is difficult in the current times.
0:20:36 > 0:20:42have started this process whereby they get sums of money for every
0:20:42 > 0:20:47house that they built in their area. We are moving away from where you
0:20:47 > 0:20:51demonstrate how bad your council is to get more money to one in which
0:20:51 > 0:20:56the power is in your hands. The idea that if we don't take the
0:20:56 > 0:21:01money, we have to put it up, that is the view of an officer, not a
0:21:01 > 0:21:07politician. So there will be money next year to compensate? To be
0:21:07 > 0:21:12clear, next year we are moving on to a new system of local government
0:21:12 > 0:21:17and the power is in their hands, not my hands. You said there will
0:21:17 > 0:21:24be no sanction for councils. So no penalty in future for councils who
0:21:24 > 0:21:29do not toe the line? Other than if you bump into me in Westminster!
0:21:29 > 0:21:34was going to say that only people with the legal powers to send you
0:21:34 > 0:21:37to prison if you do not pay for the services that they decide on and
0:21:37 > 0:21:41the level they are provided at could possibly behave in this way.
0:21:41 > 0:21:47If they are in the competitive world of business, they would have
0:21:47 > 0:21:50to cut the Cote according to their cloth. There is not this bottomless
0:21:50 > 0:21:57pit of money that the government can shovel towards local
0:21:57 > 0:22:07authorities. They have to get into the real world. What about high
0:22:07 > 0:22:07
0:22:07 > 0:22:12council tax bands for expensive homes, every -- Eric? It would need
0:22:12 > 0:22:16a full revaluation. It would probably cost somewhere in the
0:22:16 > 0:22:24region of �200 million to do that. We have seen this in action in
0:22:25 > 0:22:30Wales. A lot of houses with John two or three bands and I am very
0:22:30 > 0:22:35doubtful that a whether we would recoup this money -- a lot of
0:22:35 > 0:22:42houses would jump. So you are not in favour of it? I am not sure that
0:22:42 > 0:22:47I am. I am being understated. It would be a very expensive process.
0:22:47 > 0:22:52My council tax is �3,000 already and I don't want it to go up any
0:22:52 > 0:22:58more! Why does the owner of a �2 million house in Kensington pay the
0:22:58 > 0:23:03same as someone in a one-bedroom flat were �350,000? If you want to
0:23:03 > 0:23:08raise serious money, you can raise it with a revaluation and we have a
0:23:08 > 0:23:12rule that out. There are legitimate concerns about foreign nationals
0:23:12 > 0:23:17purchasing their property through a company rather than themselves and
0:23:17 > 0:23:22I hope the Chancellor may well be looking at that. You keep saying
0:23:22 > 0:23:27that. We know it is a matter for the Chancellor. Just in case they
0:23:27 > 0:23:31put it back to the Treasury! Thank you.
0:23:31 > 0:23:34Our guest of the day of course is Neil Hamilton. Once a minister in
0:23:34 > 0:23:38John Major's government, who lost his seat in 1997 after weeks of
0:23:38 > 0:23:41headlines about cash for questions. But he is refusing to believe that
0:23:41 > 0:23:44his political life is over and he is back in public life as an
0:23:44 > 0:23:46elected member of UKIP's National Executive Committee. So how do you
0:23:46 > 0:23:48make a successful political comeback? David Thompson
0:23:49 > 0:23:54investigates. All political careers end in
0:23:54 > 0:23:58failure or so the saying goes. Some sail more spectacularly than others.
0:23:58 > 0:24:03I shall be registering the biscuits... Neil Hamilton was
0:24:03 > 0:24:08forced to resign from John Major's government over claims he had taken
0:24:08 > 0:24:12cash for asking questions in Parliament. That led to him losing
0:24:12 > 0:24:17his seat at an election and later been declared bankrupt. Since then,
0:24:17 > 0:24:21he has had a lively alternative career outside politics, but now he
0:24:21 > 0:24:26is back on the political comeback trail as the senior member of the
0:24:26 > 0:24:30UK Independence Party. It is fair to say that Neil Hamilton is not
0:24:30 > 0:24:39dreaming of Number Ten but he is making a political comeback.
0:24:39 > 0:24:44Question is, how do you pull it How you have got to have a brass
0:24:44 > 0:24:48neck and treat people as though the circumstances of your resignation
0:24:48 > 0:24:51were unimportant and you cannot imagine why anybody should suppose
0:24:51 > 0:24:56that you cannot come back because if you start going around penitent,
0:24:57 > 0:25:02you will not get anywhere. Matthew's and voice brought to
0:25:02 > 0:25:11mind the Prince of comebacks. Peter Mandelson was once, twice, three
0:25:11 > 0:25:16times Cabinet minister. comeback kid! Quite enough! And a
0:25:16 > 0:25:20more recent departee would like a Cabinet comeback as well. You come
0:25:20 > 0:25:27into politics to make a difference. There are different ways of doing
0:25:27 > 0:25:35that. Is that a Yes? But given the grief ministers get,
0:25:35 > 0:25:42why would you come back? I was one of the biggest profile ministers,
0:25:42 > 0:25:47to a backbencher. Was I devastated? No. I was profoundly relieved. For
0:25:47 > 0:25:52a while. For a while. And then you start to want to come back.
0:25:52 > 0:25:56Fortunately, Anne Widdecombe saw the error of her ways and
0:25:56 > 0:26:00reinvented herself as the Queen of everything television and that
0:26:00 > 0:26:04seems to be the way many politicians come back in to the
0:26:04 > 0:26:10public eye. The media that most politicians go to of the serious
0:26:10 > 0:26:16stuff. The? No. I went to Strictly Come Dancing. The joy every time
0:26:17 > 0:26:22and is you can say yes or No As You fancy, not because you think it is
0:26:22 > 0:26:25a good stepping stone for your career. She is right. This Week
0:26:25 > 0:26:30attracts politicians but are there shows that should not be touched
0:26:30 > 0:26:35with the proverbial? There on media opportunities which are so cheap
0:26:35 > 0:26:40that you have to be paid a great deal to endure them. For instance,
0:26:40 > 0:26:45if you go on to "I'm A Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here!", look at
0:26:45 > 0:26:49George Galloway for instance. That is probably curtains to your being
0:26:49 > 0:26:53taken entirely seriously so make sure they pay you a lot. Let's face
0:26:53 > 0:27:01it, you would have to appear in something pretty bad because if you
0:27:01 > 0:27:07can come back from this, then anything is possible.
0:27:07 > 0:27:09David Thomson reporting. And we are joined now by the former Labour MP
0:27:09 > 0:27:12for Reading, Martin Salter, who decided to quit frontline politics
0:27:12 > 0:27:22before the last election. And has so far dedicated his life after
0:27:22 > 0:27:32parliament to fish. Being happy! And? Monster fish! Is that your
0:27:32 > 0:27:40It is a kingfish. I spent 15 happy months in Australia and New Zealand
0:27:40 > 0:27:44I wanted to be somewhere where people were not coming up to me in
0:27:44 > 0:27:49the street and giving me problems. I wanted to catch big fish that I
0:27:49 > 0:27:53had dreamt about when I was a little kid, and I did. So you
0:27:53 > 0:27:58achieve your ambition. Would anything tempt you back into
0:27:58 > 0:28:02politics? I have waited to come on this programme, I have listened to
0:28:02 > 0:28:07the interviews, watched the Strictly Come Dancing nonsense. I
0:28:07 > 0:28:11want to come back even less now than I ever did. We had this
0:28:11 > 0:28:17discussion several years ago. I have no intention of going around
0:28:17 > 0:28:22the House of Commons in my 60s. I stood down when I was 57. I am not
0:28:22 > 0:28:27criticising people but it is not for me. What is it that has tempted
0:28:27 > 0:28:32you back about the game? It is not a game. There of things that really
0:28:32 > 0:28:37matter in life. I have left the House of Commons to devote more
0:28:37 > 0:28:41time to politics! Why would you want to go there again? There are
0:28:41 > 0:28:46things I believe in very strongly. We started the programme talking
0:28:46 > 0:28:52about things in Greece. The human tragedy that is tied up in that is
0:28:52 > 0:28:58visited in so many other areas. I want to do something about it. I
0:28:58 > 0:29:04have spent the last 14 years doing a lot of other things! We didn't
0:29:04 > 0:29:10have a big enough programme for all of them! It is not mainstream!
0:29:10 > 0:29:20is not edifying! Why can't we have fun in our 60s? We can do a variety
0:29:20 > 0:29:25
0:29:25 > 0:29:29of different things. I am enjoying being on the wing in UKIP. I am
0:29:29 > 0:29:33simply advancing the cause is that I believe in. I have no personal
0:29:33 > 0:29:39ambitions in politics what's the weather. I don't see myself walking
0:29:39 > 0:29:42through the door of Number Ten -- whatsoever. Do you think the fact
0:29:42 > 0:29:49you have trodden the media stage is because that was the only option
0:29:49 > 0:29:53left to you? It was. I was too hot to handle, even for the many people
0:29:53 > 0:29:56who didn't believe the allegations that were made about me. Being
0:29:56 > 0:30:03controversial means you are effectively unemployable and I have
0:30:03 > 0:30:08been self-employed happily for 14 years. I have lost a huge amount of
0:30:09 > 0:30:15money and I was bankrupt for three years because of the legal expenses
0:30:15 > 0:30:20of trying to clear my name. I have spent those years recovering the
0:30:20 > 0:30:24family fortune as it were! I am fortunate enough to have a more
0:30:24 > 0:30:29financially successful partner than most! Do you think part of the
0:30:29 > 0:30:34problem was that if you, if you fall from grace becomes so
0:30:34 > 0:30:44notorious, if you hold on too long, it takes that much longer to come
0:30:44 > 0:30:48
0:30:48 > 0:30:52back? And love people like David Of course. Things were said about
0:30:52 > 0:30:57me which caused my political career to be destroyed, which I denied
0:30:57 > 0:31:04because they were untrue. That is different from people like Jonathan
0:31:04 > 0:31:12Aitken and Jeffrey Archer. Perhaps it was not the most enjoyable
0:31:12 > 0:31:17pursuit between 1997 or 2008, being a Tory MP. When and lost my seat, I
0:31:17 > 0:31:23did not stop believing in all the things I've previously believed in,
0:31:23 > 0:31:28I just took up the reins from where I left off. It is difficult to come
0:31:28 > 0:31:34back if there has been a very long and dominating campaign that has
0:31:34 > 0:31:40filled headlines or filled an election. With some MPs, it would
0:31:40 > 0:31:45be the same post expensive -- expenses. It is a little bit tragic
0:31:45 > 0:31:49for a lot of people. There are people who have only to find
0:31:49 > 0:31:55themselves by having those two initials after their names. There
0:31:55 > 0:31:59is an interesting world. I wanted to see if I could make it in civvy
0:31:59 > 0:32:05street. Walking through Reading as not a councillor or not a member of
0:32:05 > 0:32:12parliament was very interesting. I now work for a fantastic
0:32:12 > 0:32:15organisation called the Angling Trust. We look after Britain's
0:32:15 > 0:32:22number one participant sport. I have transferred skills and
0:32:22 > 0:32:27experiences I have learned from politics to another field. The age
0:32:27 > 0:32:35at which she retired from politics meant you could pursue something
0:32:35 > 0:32:41which you enjoyed. -- you retire. Some MPs lost their seats in 1997,
0:32:41 > 0:32:46and 2010. They have to get real jobs and have real careers. I went
0:32:46 > 0:32:51to a gathering of former MPs which was interesting. Those who had
0:32:51 > 0:32:56planned their soft landing, by and large, they have done all right.
0:32:56 > 0:33:04They could use their skills, experiences and contacts, and
0:33:04 > 0:33:08enjoyed their lives. We all miss an incredibly exciting part of our
0:33:09 > 0:33:13lives. Those people who are suddenly turfed out of office, it
0:33:13 > 0:33:18is a shock to the system. It is difficult for people to apply for
0:33:18 > 0:33:25jobs when you look like a beaten individual. That is the experience
0:33:25 > 0:33:34of some MPs. There is an expectation that it used to be a
0:33:34 > 0:33:40Korea by life. If you were an MP, you could rest on your laurels.
0:33:40 > 0:33:48should it be a career for life? In 1980s, the average number of
0:33:48 > 0:33:52letters that an MP got is about 20 a week. Now it is in the hundreds.
0:33:52 > 0:34:00The pressures are huge. I do not think it is a job that people can
0:34:00 > 0:34:04do, particularly in marginal situations, for 20 years. Martin is
0:34:04 > 0:34:12wholly unsuited for a life in politics because he is a genuine
0:34:12 > 0:34:19human being. That is debatable. What the House of Commons lacks is
0:34:19 > 0:34:23people with a hinterland. That is crucial. The professional
0:34:23 > 0:34:32politician who goes from university to researcher or trade union
0:34:32 > 0:34:37boffin... Of like David Cameron. I agree with you. It is a major flaw
0:34:37 > 0:34:43in the system. Politics should be seen, not as a part-time career,
0:34:43 > 0:34:48but you should be able to see you live in compartments. I have had a
0:34:48 > 0:34:53full life in many respects. Not only his third the media stuff and
0:34:53 > 0:34:57nonsense, I do serious things as well. I am a barrister by
0:34:58 > 0:35:03profession and to use my legal expertise. You are a better dancer
0:35:03 > 0:35:08than me. I do not know whether we will seek either of you on Strictly
0:35:08 > 0:35:13Come Dancing. We could dance together! Before we go down that
0:35:13 > 0:35:17road, I was say goodbye to both of you. No doubt you'll have seen some
0:35:17 > 0:35:20red carpet glamour on the news this morning as everyone who was anyone
0:35:20 > 0:35:23was in Hollywood for the Oscars, well in a moment we too will be
0:35:23 > 0:35:26able to add a touch of showbiz sparkle to Westminster with one of
0:35:26 > 0:35:29Fleet Street's most glamorous parings. First, let's take a look
0:35:29 > 0:35:32at what's coming up this week. Today is a busy day with the Health
0:35:32 > 0:35:35Bill being debated in the Lords. Liberal Democrat peers will be
0:35:35 > 0:35:38trying to push through several amendments, most notably on the
0:35:38 > 0:35:41role of competition within the NHS. Speaking of the Lords, Nick Clegg
0:35:41 > 0:35:44is appearing in front of a joint committee to discuss Lords reform.
0:35:44 > 0:35:46The Deputy Prime Minister is keen to push ahead with plans to
0:35:46 > 0:35:50introduce a mainly elected Upper House, despite opposition amongst a
0:35:50 > 0:35:52number of peers. And, on Wednesday, the Employment Minister, Chris
0:35:52 > 0:35:56Grayling, is due to meet companies involved in the Government's
0:35:57 > 0:36:00controversial workfare scheme. Mr Grayling will be hoping to reassure
0:36:00 > 0:36:04businesses that, despite a raft of bad headlines last week, the work
0:36:04 > 0:36:08experience project is still worthwhile. And finally, after a
0:36:08 > 0:36:14two week break, the Leveson Inquiry is back. The hearings will look at
0:36:14 > 0:36:17the relationship between the press and the police. So joining me from
0:36:17 > 0:36:27the red carpet now is Tom Newton Dunn from The Sun and Suzanne Moore,
0:36:27 > 0:36:30who writes for the Guardian and the Mail on Sunday. Tom, how much of a
0:36:30 > 0:36:38strain on coalition relations at the top is the ongoing saga of the
0:36:38 > 0:36:42NHS Bill and now House of Lords reform? This morning we have
0:36:42 > 0:36:47already had significant movement from the Government on NHS reform.
0:36:47 > 0:36:52We will hear from Nick Clegg later on. In lobby this morning, which we
0:36:52 > 0:36:56have every morning, it was asked directly what the position of the
0:36:56 > 0:37:01Government may be on the amendments to the House Bill in the House of
0:37:01 > 0:37:07Lords. They said we'd do not think there should be any significant
0:37:07 > 0:37:12changes. If all they do is clarify legislation, we will not feel any
0:37:12 > 0:37:18need to overturn that. That is totally different from where the
0:37:18 > 0:37:23Government was last week. They said they would fight all the way.
0:37:23 > 0:37:28sounds as if they are suffering the line. There has been some
0:37:28 > 0:37:33discussion about whether this Bill could lead to privatisation. The
0:37:33 > 0:37:38Government has said the service will remain free at the point of
0:37:38 > 0:37:42use. Is that your fear? It has been circulated quite widely a list of
0:37:42 > 0:37:47both MPs and Lords who have interests in private health
0:37:47 > 0:37:52companies. It is a real career. When you have professional bodies
0:37:52 > 0:37:56very against much of this legislation, yes, people are very
0:37:56 > 0:37:59upset about it. The NHS is something the Tories said they were
0:37:59 > 0:38:05not going to privatise and they were not going to change all the
0:38:05 > 0:38:10top-down management. This is what they are doing. In terms of
0:38:10 > 0:38:14privatisation, what you understand by that? Supporters of the Bill
0:38:14 > 0:38:19would argue that competition exists to some extent already within the
0:38:20 > 0:38:24NHS. It is still going to be free. What is the privatisation that
0:38:24 > 0:38:28people are talking about? It is a simple issuing of contracts which
0:38:28 > 0:38:33have already been drawn up with private health care companies. The
0:38:33 > 0:38:38links are already well known, and MPs. If you are going to make any
0:38:38 > 0:38:42of this work, you need to have all the professionals on side. At the
0:38:42 > 0:38:46moment they do not. If GPs are saying they do not want to manage
0:38:46 > 0:38:50the funds and consultants are saying, we do not want to do this,
0:38:50 > 0:38:54it is hard to bring in another level of management to make them do
0:38:54 > 0:38:58it. That is part of what they're doing and that is part of what they
0:38:58 > 0:39:04said they would not do. Chris Grayling is meeting companies who
0:39:04 > 0:39:08are taking part in the scheme. A couple of companies have decided to
0:39:08 > 0:39:15pull out or are reconsidering their position. How much trouble is this
0:39:15 > 0:39:21in? For me, it is quite extraordinary. It should not be a
0:39:21 > 0:39:28story at all. Two things happened last week, the Socialist Worker
0:39:28 > 0:39:36Party led protest. Let's be clear who is behind all this. The
0:39:36 > 0:39:42problems of a man has done as well. As Westminster and the media bubble
0:39:42 > 0:39:47has a tendency to do, it turns it into an avalanche. Stewart rose
0:39:47 > 0:39:52yesterday said, these sort of companies who are buckling in the
0:39:52 > 0:39:57face of an absolute minority protest, need to show some backbone.
0:39:57 > 0:40:02Anyone who might support what is effectively and has proved to be a
0:40:02 > 0:40:09very effective brake getting young people back into work needs to back
0:40:09 > 0:40:17this. -- effective way of getting young people. David Cameron needs
0:40:17 > 0:40:23to stand up and defend his own policy. The group's Against this
0:40:23 > 0:40:29have been accused of being supporters of Trotsky and reds
0:40:29 > 0:40:34under the beds. That is ridiculous. A lot of people do not want to see
0:40:34 > 0:40:39a compulsory element of kids working for nothing. The companies
0:40:40 > 0:40:46have backed down. They have seen the incredibly bad PR. Most people
0:40:46 > 0:40:50would support the idea of the unemployed doing something that was
0:40:50 > 0:40:57based on community led projects. They do not support the idea that
0:40:57 > 0:41:02some huge firms, like Tesco, or pound land or whatever, can make a
0:41:03 > 0:41:07profit of the back of free Labour. The idea that stacking shelves is
0:41:07 > 0:41:12valid work experience, I would like to see some politician stack
0:41:12 > 0:41:19shelves and say that is going to lead to a fantastic career. It is
0:41:20 > 0:41:23typical of a government who has never really worked. They need work
0:41:23 > 0:41:26experience. That is interesting! Now, forgive me if you think I've
0:41:26 > 0:41:29said this before, but the big political news story of the day is
0:41:29 > 0:41:32likely to be the fate of the Government's proposed reforms to
0:41:32 > 0:41:35the NHS in the House of Lords. The English Constitution is a wonderful
0:41:35 > 0:41:39thing which, from time to time, involves legislation bouncing back
0:41:39 > 0:41:44and forth between the two Houses of Parliament. The technical term is
0:41:44 > 0:41:54ping-pong. In our series of the A to Z of Parliament, Quentin Letts
0:41:54 > 0:42:10
0:42:10 > 0:42:13B is full parliamentary bills. Where better to talk about
0:42:13 > 0:42:19parliamentary legislation than in a fencing school. Parliamentary
0:42:19 > 0:42:23legislation is about fancy footwork, as you can see from the
0:42:23 > 0:42:29professionals. A Bill is a proposal for legislation. It will become law
0:42:29 > 0:42:34if it passes through Parliament. It has to be introduced to I their
0:42:34 > 0:42:39House by a government minister. Before it becomes law it has to
0:42:39 > 0:42:48pass through various stages. At each stage, the Government must
0:42:48 > 0:42:58beat En garde. There are five stages a bill must pass. First
0:42:58 > 0:43:01
0:43:01 > 0:43:06reading, second reading, Committee, report and third reading.
0:43:06 > 0:43:11Throughout this process, the Bill may be changed by new clauses or
0:43:11 > 0:43:16anemones put down by the opposition. All the time the Braille - as that
0:43:16 > 0:43:22of the Bill is being jacked and stamped by opposition MPs. The
0:43:23 > 0:43:30Government may accept some changes and not others. A bill must gain
0:43:30 > 0:43:37the approval of both Houses of Parliament, the Commons and the
0:43:37 > 0:43:44Lords. That can lead to to-ing and fro-ing, called parliamentary ping-
0:43:44 > 0:43:51pong. If the two Houses cannot agree, the Commons can use the
0:43:51 > 0:43:58Parliament Act. It does not happen very often. It finally becomes law
0:43:58 > 0:44:03when it receives Royal Assent. It means Her Majesty thinks it is all
0:44:03 > 0:44:13right. Back to the sharp end of things. Where were we? Is this
0:44:13 > 0:44:15
0:44:15 > 0:44:17I didn't fancy Quentin Letts's chances!
0:44:17 > 0:44:20Quentin Letts at the Landsdowne Club in Mayfair with Olympic
0:44:20 > 0:44:22hopeful Corinna Lawrence and her coach, Vladimir Meshkoff. In a
0:44:22 > 0:44:25moment I'll be talking to three members of their Lordships House.
0:44:25 > 0:44:29But first Norman Smith is in Central Lobby now. Norman, we heard
0:44:29 > 0:44:34about this meeting about the Royal College of Surgeons? We seem to be
0:44:34 > 0:44:40seen growing number of health professionals getting wobbly about
0:44:40 > 0:44:43the proposal because the Royal College of Surgeons, the Royal
0:44:43 > 0:44:48College of obstetricians and Royal College of Physicians are to hold a
0:44:48 > 0:44:52meeting. They do not hold these extraordinary general meetings to
0:44:53 > 0:44:56swap the time of day, presumably they have concerns about what the
0:44:56 > 0:45:00government is doing to the health service. The absolute linchpin to
0:45:00 > 0:45:03winning the arguments over health reform is getting health
0:45:03 > 0:45:08professionals on board and what is significant about these three
0:45:08 > 0:45:12latest colleges is that they were all invited to the Downing Street
0:45:12 > 0:45:16summit last week, which was meant to be for those who will
0:45:16 > 0:45:20constructively engaged and willing to co-operate. Now it seems even
0:45:20 > 0:45:23they are getting cold feet about these reforms. Thank you.
0:45:23 > 0:45:25And joining me now, Labour's Lord Winston, Liberal Democrat, Baroness
0:45:25 > 0:45:34Jolly and the Conservative, Lord Forsyth. Or Robert, Judith and
0:45:34 > 0:45:39Michael for the next 20 minutes or so. Michael, less support or
0:45:39 > 0:45:46certainly what was already fragile support from health professionals
0:45:46 > 0:45:51is even more under threat. Can the bill continue? Yes. One of the
0:45:51 > 0:45:56things about the bill is that it went through the House of Commons
0:45:56 > 0:46:01pretty well and scrutinised and what has been going on in the Lords
0:46:01 > 0:46:06isn't detailed discussion -- non- scrutinised. Many amendments. Of
0:46:06 > 0:46:11course issues arise. But the fundamental issues of the bill, to
0:46:11 > 0:46:15give patients more choice and to give more power to the
0:46:15 > 0:46:20professionals as opposed to the bureaucrats, are things which
0:46:20 > 0:46:25everyone supports. But surely the backing of health professionals is
0:46:25 > 0:46:31critical to the success? No, the backing of patients is critical and
0:46:31 > 0:46:37that is what the bill aims to achieve. So as far as Michael
0:46:37 > 0:46:45Forsyth is concerned, the patients count more, you on making
0:46:45 > 0:46:51unnecessary and amendments -- you are making unnecessary amendments.
0:46:51 > 0:46:57We have amendments probably down to no more than a dozen clauses, there
0:46:57 > 0:47:03are over 360 clauses. You have already caused it. We played some
0:47:04 > 0:47:08part in it but it took our Conservative partners to work with
0:47:08 > 0:47:12us and work together and also at that stage work with a lot of the
0:47:12 > 0:47:16Royal Colleges on improving this bill. Some of the amendments are
0:47:16 > 0:47:23amendments that the government would be very happy to accept.
0:47:24 > 0:47:28Which ones? Detailed points... but on competition? You probably
0:47:28 > 0:47:32have not followed this in the House of Lords. Judith and Freddie have
0:47:32 > 0:47:37done sterling work and I have listened to this. It is a very
0:47:38 > 0:47:43complicated bill but what we are trying to achieve is very simple.
0:47:43 > 0:47:47More power to the patience. Lord Winston, it is still able to
0:47:47 > 0:47:53achieve what it set out to achieve, which is more patient choice, which
0:47:53 > 0:47:56already existed to some extent anyway, and the support of health
0:47:56 > 0:48:02professionals is a red herring. agree with one thing, I think it
0:48:02 > 0:48:06will go well. I think the record will be astonishing because this is
0:48:06 > 0:48:09a thoroughly bad bill in almost every respect and it is something
0:48:09 > 0:48:13which the Prime Minister at the hustings and Nick Clegg both argued
0:48:13 > 0:48:17that it was something they would not do to the health service, and
0:48:17 > 0:48:20they have done it. They have effectively gone against an
0:48:20 > 0:48:25election pledge. I think it is shocking the Liberal Democrats on
0:48:25 > 0:48:29their own admission have only put down 10 amendments on the bill they
0:48:29 > 0:48:33are deeply worried about. Let's come down to basics. The real
0:48:33 > 0:48:39problem is that what the patient wants is a doctor who has time to
0:48:39 > 0:48:42listen to them and to examine them and to address their concerns. That
0:48:42 > 0:48:48is very healing. What is increasingly happening is the
0:48:48 > 0:48:52separation of the patient from that healing process. This bill, by
0:48:52 > 0:48:56fragmenting the health service, will make it much worse.
0:48:56 > 0:49:01government has said it is about giving power to doctors to make the
0:49:01 > 0:49:05best choices for the patient? will make them more able to choose
0:49:05 > 0:49:09bureaucratically, yes, but if you do for the health service to more
0:49:09 > 0:49:16and more GPs and commissioning groups, you end up with less time
0:49:16 > 0:49:20to do what is important -- if you default. That is, practise medicine.
0:49:20 > 0:49:24This is why the colleges are worried. They are worried because
0:49:24 > 0:49:27they are increasingly concerned, all my colleagues will tell you,
0:49:27 > 0:49:31there will be more and more separation from the patient who
0:49:31 > 0:49:36needs the care. If you cannot persuade doctors and health
0:49:36 > 0:49:41professionals, you will not be able to persuade the Patients. His many
0:49:41 > 0:49:46GPs are worried about this and talking about fears of
0:49:46 > 0:49:50privatisation, you will not persuade the public -- if many GPs.
0:49:50 > 0:49:55The best way to persuade them is by demonstrating success and it is
0:49:55 > 0:50:00entirely natural that people are fearful of change but this bill
0:50:00 > 0:50:08reduces bureaucracy by 4.5 million, it gives more power two GPs and
0:50:08 > 0:50:11nurses and it enables the patients to have more say. The key thing is
0:50:11 > 0:50:16the relationship with the doctor but if we have doctors spending
0:50:16 > 0:50:20more time with patients, we need to have more resources available and
0:50:20 > 0:50:25less spent on bureaucracy. Lib Dem Lords are not trying to scupper
0:50:25 > 0:50:29this? Or absolutely not. purpose of the Lords is to
0:50:29 > 0:50:36scrutinise legislation. There was several areas that we felt were
0:50:36 > 0:50:41lacking. I think 10 is probably too few. We do not have the resources
0:50:41 > 0:50:45of the Labour Party. We have looked at specific areas where we have
0:50:45 > 0:50:50concern and we worked really hard with the government, engaging them
0:50:50 > 0:50:55at every stage. Competition is where there seems to be a lot of
0:50:55 > 0:51:01uncertainty. Lib Dems are worried about the competition element?
0:51:01 > 0:51:06There are areas of this, yes. There is evidence that competition can
0:51:06 > 0:51:10improve performance. It does exist anywhere in the NHS so what are you
0:51:10 > 0:51:17worried about? What we don't want to see is the NHS being overtaken
0:51:17 > 0:51:27by the private sector. And you think this bill will do that?
0:51:27 > 0:51:27
0:51:27 > 0:51:31inevitable. Can I just come back quickly on that? Is bill builds on
0:51:31 > 0:51:35the 2006 bill, which laid the groundwork for competition and
0:51:35 > 0:51:41private sector involvement, so what the Liberal Democrats are trying to
0:51:41 > 0:51:46do is use his bill to plug the gap that was left in the 2006
0:51:46 > 0:51:51legislation -- this bill. Labour lay the groundwork so what are you
0:51:51 > 0:51:54worried about? Labour left the National Health Service in a good
0:51:54 > 0:51:58state because if you look at the independent American think-tanks,
0:51:58 > 0:52:03it shows that the British health service is over twice as cheaper
0:52:03 > 0:52:06than the American system, a third cheaper than the German system, and
0:52:07 > 0:52:11a quarter of cheaper than the French. The outcomes are better
0:52:11 > 0:52:15than many countries including France, Italy, Germany and Spain
0:52:15 > 0:52:20and our care of old people has been good and therefore one has to ask,
0:52:20 > 0:52:24why do you meet at this stage, when the country is in such turmoil, and
0:52:24 > 0:52:28through expensive reshuffle of the health service which is as Major
0:52:29 > 0:52:33and as demoralising as this -- why do you need? Do you think it will
0:52:33 > 0:52:40lead to privatisation was mad yes. Unfortunately I think that is
0:52:40 > 0:52:45already happening. This will make it easier and much worse. Once you
0:52:45 > 0:52:53have that, you do not have joined up care. I had a friend the other
0:52:53 > 0:52:59day he spent six hours in casualty to a broken nose. She said, my real
0:52:59 > 0:53:05problem is my sinuses. He said, that is a different department.
0:53:05 > 0:53:09With privatisation, that will get worse and worse. Thank you. I am
0:53:09 > 0:53:11afraid I have to leave it there. A little later today, the Deputy
0:53:11 > 0:53:14Prime Minister Nick Clegg will appear before a joint committee of
0:53:14 > 0:53:18both Houses of Parliament talking about Lords reform. There is much
0:53:18 > 0:53:21talk that there could be a bill to change the composition of the Upper
0:53:21 > 0:53:24House in the next Queen's Speech. If it happens, it will undoubtedly
0:53:24 > 0:53:28soak up days of parliamentary time and be a long and bloody battle.
0:53:28 > 0:53:31And we saw a little glimpse of just how long and bloody on yesterday's
0:53:31 > 0:53:33Sunday Politics. This was the Lib Dem peer Lord Oakeshott taking on
0:53:33 > 0:53:36the Conservative MP, Philip Davis. Our coalition agreements as we were
0:53:36 > 0:53:40established a committee to bring proposals for a major elected
0:53:40 > 0:53:44second chamber on the basis of proportional representation and as
0:53:44 > 0:53:48you are not very good on the coalition agreement, let me give
0:53:48 > 0:53:52you this and you can read it and remember it, and if you go back on
0:53:52 > 0:53:58the deal for that I can assure you, you will not find Lib Dems in
0:53:58 > 0:54:06parliament at all keen to vote for redistribution. Redistribution of
0:54:06 > 0:54:11the boundaries. Frankly... You have made you point. I voted against
0:54:11 > 0:54:15that bill as well so it wouldn't bother me! I was not elected on a
0:54:15 > 0:54:21coalition agreement, I was elected by the people before any coalition
0:54:21 > 0:54:25agreement. I did not sign up to that. Do you back up Lord
0:54:25 > 0:54:30Oakeshott's threat? Islamic is not backing of that sort of reform, you
0:54:30 > 0:54:38can forget it over the boundary review -- if there is not that
0:54:38 > 0:54:48backing? I back his call to reform the House of Lords, yes. Why?
0:54:48 > 0:54:49
0:54:49 > 0:54:54than a coalition agreement. In each of the three Party's manifesto is,
0:54:54 > 0:55:03there was this pledge. But who cares whether there is a wholly
0:55:03 > 0:55:09elected House of Lords? A lot of politicians care. The one might
0:55:09 > 0:55:16argue... But this health bill has shown up the importance of the
0:55:16 > 0:55:20House of Lords. As an expert chamber. A political chamber could
0:55:20 > 0:55:25not do to the Health Bill what is actually happening to the Health
0:55:25 > 0:55:30Bill. I have only been in the chamber 14 months and there are
0:55:30 > 0:55:35some experts but also, there are a lot of people who when you enter
0:55:35 > 0:55:39the House of Lords, you come in as an expert but only if you keep on
0:55:39 > 0:55:44practising, your expertise goes, so you have wisdom but not necessarily
0:55:44 > 0:55:49expertise. There on some experts in the House of Lords, and on
0:55:49 > 0:55:53difficult subjects, I go and listen to a debate occasionally. The key
0:55:53 > 0:55:57point is that most people in the House of Lords do not want anything.
0:55:57 > 0:56:02They are not controlled by the whips. They are free to say what
0:56:02 > 0:56:07they want. At the end of the day, the government will decide what
0:56:07 > 0:56:10happens. The House of Commons is pre-eminent. The problem with an
0:56:10 > 0:56:16elected House of Lords is not that it will change the House of Lords,
0:56:16 > 0:56:20which it will to its detriment, but it will destroy the House of
0:56:20 > 0:56:25Commons as the pre-eminent house and if I am elected, I am not going
0:56:25 > 0:56:28to give way on issues and if I am elected for 15 years on
0:56:28 > 0:56:33proportional representation, I will argue I have a stronger mandate
0:56:33 > 0:56:37than people in the House of Commons. If you are elected, you have a
0:56:37 > 0:56:44political career! You are a politician so people know where you
0:56:44 > 0:56:49come from but because it is really long term, it is only... 15 years?
0:56:49 > 0:56:53It is really long. It is only one term. You cannot keep coming back.
0:56:54 > 0:57:00But you do not need to worry, as they do in the House of Commons, of
0:57:00 > 0:57:05keeping on the site of the whips. But I will spend my time trying to
0:57:05 > 0:57:10get people on the side of their... I tell you something. I have been
0:57:10 > 0:57:14in the House of Lords quite a long time like Michael. I don't suppose
0:57:14 > 0:57:19that Nick Clegg has ever once sat through a debate in the House of
0:57:19 > 0:57:24Lords to see how it works. One of the reasons Nick Clegg will sink
0:57:24 > 0:57:27without trace is because of that lack of experience and his
0:57:27 > 0:57:31willingness to opine about various things that he does not have
0:57:31 > 0:57:36experience on and I think his attack on the House of Lords is
0:57:36 > 0:57:40actually a savage attack on our constitution at a time when reform
0:57:40 > 0:57:46is needed in the House of Commons. We should get away from PMQs, we
0:57:46 > 0:57:52should get away from pools in the bar... Let's not bring that up.
0:57:52 > 0:57:57arguments in the bath. It is highly relevant. Why is it so important to
0:57:57 > 0:58:03Nick Clegg? Will it cause a rift in the coalition? I don't think it
0:58:03 > 0:58:09will cause a rift. There are bumpy times in the coalition and both of
0:58:09 > 0:58:14us find issues uncomfortable but we went into this arrangement in 2010
0:58:14 > 0:58:18and deals were made, conversations were had as part of the agreement.
0:58:18 > 0:58:23So the Conservatives should keep to it? I would love them to keep to it.
0:58:23 > 0:58:28The idea that we would reform our constitution so fundamentally in
0:58:28 > 0:58:33return for votes on an issue about the redistribution of seats, that
0:58:33 > 0:58:37is appalling. That is a bill that went to Parliament, has been agreed,
0:58:37 > 0:58:40and the notion that there is a squalid backroom deal to destroy
0:58:40 > 0:58:44the Upper House and change the nature of the House of Commons, I
0:58:44 > 0:58:49don't think any respectable member of any political party would sign
0:58:49 > 0:58:55up to that and I was amazed to hear Matthew suggesting it. Squalid
0:58:55 > 0:58:59deal? I am not aware of any deal within the Liberal Democrats to try
0:58:59 > 0:59:04to scotch anything, as Matthews suggests. We could go on but I have