:00:42. > :00:46.Good afternoon, welcome to the Daily Politics. On our lunchtime
:00:46. > :00:50.menu today: The Labour leader calls on British business to rally to the
:00:50. > :00:53.flag. Yes, he says successive governments have failed to
:00:53. > :00:57.appreciate just how much "pride and patriotism" can ensure the success
:00:57. > :01:01.of our manufacturing base. The nightmare continues in the town
:01:01. > :01:04.of Syrian town of Homs. International air power stopped
:01:04. > :01:09.Gaddafi in his tracks. Now, one senior American senator says the
:01:09. > :01:14.time has come to prepare to bomb Assad. So should we intervene?
:01:15. > :01:18.And. The Church has a key role in British life. It's an integral part
:01:18. > :01:23.of the state. But should we go further and become a more Christian
:01:23. > :01:26.country? All that in the next hour. With us
:01:26. > :01:32.for the whole programme today is the philosopher and television
:01:32. > :01:35.presenter, Alain De Botton. If you have any thoughts or
:01:35. > :01:37.comments on anything we're discussing, then you can tweet your
:01:37. > :01:40.comments, using the hashtag #bbcdp. First, the Immigration Minister,
:01:40. > :01:43.Damien Green, has given an interview to today's Financial
:01:43. > :01:49.Times, where he urges British companies to wean themselves off
:01:49. > :01:54.what he calls "an addiction" to hiring foreign workers. In the long
:01:54. > :01:59.run, he says we should have more of an instinct to say, "let's find a
:01:59. > :02:03.British worker, let's train a British worker." Alain de Botton.
:02:04. > :02:09.Is it appropriate, when we are part of the European Union, with free
:02:09. > :02:15.movement of the workers and Labour, to say Britain is addicted to
:02:15. > :02:19.hiring foreign workers. Ultimately, if you are buying a washing machine
:02:19. > :02:25.or train, what matters is that it functions, not the nationality of
:02:26. > :02:31.the person who built it. That is the logic of capitalism. To say,
:02:31. > :02:35.keep it Jobs For the Boys, doesn't make sense, it is counter to
:02:35. > :02:41.everything that the modern economy believes in it. Except, there will
:02:41. > :02:45.be people who say, look at the French, who are much more patriotic
:02:45. > :02:51.in terms of backing their own businesses. You only have to look
:02:51. > :02:56.at the militancy of French farmers, truck drivers. And say we need more
:02:57. > :03:00.of that spirit here particularly in these economic times. A certain
:03:00. > :03:05.amount of careful protectionism can be good. A lot of the industry's
:03:05. > :03:09.the French have protected, by a French car is still not a great
:03:09. > :03:14.move. So on the whole, industries that are heavily protected get lazy
:03:14. > :03:21.and do not produce goods that are up to standard. Again, a global
:03:21. > :03:25.lesson. It's like the argument, do you employ your own family? To shed
:03:25. > :03:29.jobs amongst those who are the best? You can understand the
:03:29. > :03:34.sentiment, keep it in the family. But that is a sentimental choice
:03:34. > :03:40.which will have a knock-on effect. For there is also a practical
:03:40. > :03:45.reality, whatever rhetoric, and we will talk about Ed Miliband and his
:03:46. > :03:50.speech on patriotism and industrial policy, but Gordon Brown ran into
:03:50. > :03:57.problems with his mantra, British jobs for British workers, because
:03:57. > :04:01.of the decline of -- because of the difficulty of hiring purely on the
:04:01. > :04:06.basis of nationality. That is impossible when everything in the
:04:06. > :04:11.modern economy is about free market of jobs. It real patriotism means
:04:11. > :04:15.been proud of being British when things are really excellent,
:04:15. > :04:21.otherwise it is pasteurisation. Saying this train which cost double
:04:21. > :04:27.and doesn't work, it is fast it because it is British. But saying,
:04:27. > :04:31.my child made this pot which doesn't hold any water. We are all
:04:31. > :04:34.guilty of that. The manufacturers' organisation the EEF has this
:04:34. > :04:37.morning accused the government of failing to develop a "joined-up"
:04:37. > :04:41.strategy for industry. It's been almost a year since George Osborne
:04:41. > :04:44.said he wanted Britain to be carried aloft by a "march of the
:04:44. > :04:47.makers". So how's he doing? Well, British manufacturing is always
:04:47. > :04:51.said to be in long-term decline, although it still accounts for 12%
:04:51. > :04:54.of GDP. That's roughly the same as in the US and France. There are
:04:54. > :04:57.some bright spots. Factories have been enjoying a rebound in orders.
:04:57. > :05:00.And today, Japanese car manufacturer Nissan has announced a
:05:00. > :05:10.�125m investment, that could create 2,000 jobs in Sunderland. Vince
:05:10. > :05:12.
:05:12. > :05:19.Cable described the announcement as a "vote of confidence" in UK plc.
:05:19. > :05:24.The despite what happened 30 years ago, there is a lot of new
:05:24. > :05:27.investment going in and Britain is seen as a country of choice by the
:05:27. > :05:30.big international investors. But there are still concerns over
:05:30. > :05:35.the future of Vauxhall's Ellesmere Port factory, with speculation that
:05:35. > :05:38.owner General Motors may pull the plug. Speaking within the last hour,
:05:38. > :05:42.Labour leader Ed Miliband is calling for a new "made in Britain",
:05:42. > :05:47.mark to inject some patriotism into the British economy.
:05:47. > :05:51.There are few words of we don't hear enough in our country. Made in
:05:51. > :05:56.Britain. Not because we don't make things, but because we don't
:05:56. > :06:01.celebrated enough, it is not part of our culture. They made in
:06:01. > :06:07.Britain market is about pride and patriotism, about the things we do,
:06:07. > :06:11.celebrating manufacturing. A made in Britain mark is about inspiring
:06:11. > :06:15.people to be engineers, manufacturers and designers, and
:06:15. > :06:18.about sending a message right across the world, about what we can
:06:18. > :06:25.achieve. With us now is the Business Minister Mark Prisk.
:06:25. > :06:29.his Labour Shadow, Ian Wright. For this is great news, you are MP
:06:29. > :06:33.for Hartlepool, we will seek jobs created in the north east.
:06:33. > :06:37.This is exactly what should be happening, an active government
:06:37. > :06:43.strategy, government working with productive business. Moving on from
:06:43. > :06:49.what happened with Peter Mandelson when he provided Investment to
:06:49. > :06:54.Nissan, this is exactly right. I just want Britain to succeed.
:06:54. > :07:00.they are doing the right thing, the coalition, investing in parts of
:07:00. > :07:04.manufacturing that a successful? So there has been this expansion.
:07:04. > :07:08.Without handing state subsidies to every single part of the industry.
:07:08. > :07:13.In many parts of what the government is doing, it is
:07:13. > :07:18.successful. But often, the rhetoric is not matched by actions and it is
:07:18. > :07:22.frustrating we lead the world in many things like offshore wind
:07:22. > :07:25.technology, where the government is not backing British business.
:07:25. > :07:29.are say they are not putting money in the? What do you mean exactly?
:07:29. > :07:39.We will come on to the idea of patriotism later. It doesn't have
:07:39. > :07:41.
:07:41. > :07:47.to be about money. It can provide, in -- is a very clear road map,
:07:47. > :07:52.where is it the British economy is going? Can we have certainty? That
:07:52. > :07:57.is the way we need to go. A long- term direction for the British
:07:57. > :08:03.economy with manufacturing and engineering at its heart. Pratchett
:08:03. > :08:06.isn't, what does that mean? Apart from it being rhetorical and waving
:08:06. > :08:11.the flag for Britain. We have talked about it being impossible to
:08:11. > :08:17.give British workers jobs purely on the basis of nationality. What else
:08:17. > :08:22.is it about? I would mention procurement, government is a
:08:22. > :08:28.massive customer. The Ministry of Defence, the Royal Navy, will spend
:08:28. > :08:34.half a billion pounds on providing four new tankers. Not one single
:08:34. > :08:38.British firm applied for the contracts. We had UK firms which
:08:38. > :08:42.are world class, we can that Britain by do this, but nothing
:08:42. > :08:48.happened. Unfortunately none of the companies came forward to make a
:08:48. > :08:53.bid. Government cannot push businesses into contracts. We can
:08:53. > :08:59.make sure we get it right on skills, investing in infrastructure, making
:08:59. > :09:04.sure we get that new generation of engineers to come into industry.
:09:04. > :09:10.Why is it the manufacturers' organisation has criticised the
:09:10. > :09:16.lack of growth strategy. They are not seeing these messages. They
:09:16. > :09:26.don't believe in what you are going. Today, Nissan have made a big
:09:26. > :09:27.
:09:27. > :09:32.investment, Ford and BMW have done the same. Tory voter -- Toyota. We
:09:32. > :09:37.have a clear strategy. What is important is you get those
:09:37. > :09:42.practical measures making sure we can support Our Competitive
:09:42. > :09:49.advantage. Not to focus simply on the measure of Investment, it is
:09:49. > :09:55.about making sure the UK competes. A isn't that part of it? You cited
:09:55. > :09:59.examples of success, have you been converted of -- to state
:09:59. > :10:05.intervention? A I always believed we should be a good partner to
:10:05. > :10:12.industry. Today's investment is a good example. Do you sympathise
:10:12. > :10:18.with what Ed Miliband has been talking about, backing British,
:10:18. > :10:22.saying it and doing it? I won the UK to be the most competitive place
:10:22. > :10:29.possible for manufacturing. Could command does play a role. We have
:10:29. > :10:33.to change the rules we have inherited. We need to make sure the
:10:33. > :10:38.overall industry is competitive, otherwise we get into the problem
:10:38. > :10:43.trying to defend an industry in some cases which may have proved
:10:43. > :10:50.not competitive. The danger for the French is actually they have gone
:10:50. > :10:57.down that avenue. Let us look at Vauxhall and Ellesmere Port, what
:10:57. > :11:06.can the government do to save that plant? The whole of General
:11:06. > :11:13.Motors's Europe programme, we are actively engaged on a joint
:11:13. > :11:17.approach. That involvement is from the top, making sure we build on
:11:17. > :11:21.the two good plants, Ellesmere Port and Luton. We are in discussions
:11:21. > :11:28.specifically with them now. will you come out over the German
:11:28. > :11:31.plants, General Motors are looking at both. What can you do? Ours are
:11:31. > :11:37.already the most productive in Europe, we have a strong exchange
:11:37. > :11:43.rate, a good skills record. And we deliver on what we promise.
:11:43. > :11:48.think that strategy in terms of car manufacturing, will work in the
:11:48. > :11:52.long term, it will help the recovery? Yes, but there is no
:11:52. > :11:57.magic bullet, it takes decades to arrive at a point where a large
:11:57. > :12:02.company will take a decision for hard-headed business reasons. There
:12:02. > :12:06.is often a clash between head and heart. He cannot expect General
:12:06. > :12:13.Motors to keep open an area because there are lots of British people.
:12:13. > :12:19.They care about money. As the government, it has to get away
:12:19. > :12:25.position where it is a financial logic, not patriotic budget.
:12:25. > :12:28.Patriotism will not impress General Motors. Saying, please keep making
:12:28. > :12:35.your car's here because we are British. They will say, they are
:12:35. > :12:42.American. There is a logic to that argument. This is a global world we
:12:42. > :12:46.operate in, and who is the most competitive. It is a global race,
:12:46. > :12:50.the most competitive economy we have seen. What Britain needs to be
:12:51. > :12:54.doing is working with productive businesses to make sure the skills,
:12:54. > :13:00.research and development, innovation, come forward.
:13:00. > :13:02.Government is not joined up in this regard. We have seen the Secretary
:13:02. > :13:08.of State for Education downgrading the status of the engineering
:13:08. > :13:13.Diploma. What message does that send out? You have been talking
:13:13. > :13:17.about the high points of manufacturing, so why do that?
:13:17. > :13:22.Michael is trying to simplify the complex and brought range of the
:13:22. > :13:29.curriculum. He is meeting industrialists to see how he can do
:13:29. > :13:35.this. Is a very worried this becomes protectionism? You could be
:13:35. > :13:38.accused here. I do not believe in protectionism. What we need to do
:13:38. > :13:43.is make sure government works together closely with industry to
:13:43. > :13:45.make sure we have productive and a competitive environment in which
:13:45. > :13:48.British businesses can thrive. Yesterday, in Washington, we saw
:13:48. > :13:51.the President of the United States sitting down with the Prime
:13:51. > :13:54.Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu. The two have had some
:13:54. > :13:57.pretty tense meetings in the past, and the Israeli message was
:13:57. > :14:02.uncompromising. The world, they believe, cannot wait much longer
:14:02. > :14:06.before intervening to stop Iran from getting a nuclear bomb.
:14:06. > :14:09.Meanwhile, on the other side of the city, the man who stood against
:14:09. > :14:12.Barak Obama in the race for the American presidency was calling for
:14:12. > :14:15.military action. This time, against Syria. For John McCain, the time
:14:15. > :14:25.has come for an international coalition to stop the massacre in
:14:25. > :14:27.
:14:27. > :14:31.the town of Homs. The Assad's forces around the march.
:14:31. > :14:36.Providing assistance took opposition groups is necessary. But,
:14:36. > :14:42.at this late hour, that alone will not be sufficient to stop the
:14:42. > :14:49.slaughter and save innocent lives. The only realistic way to do so, it
:14:49. > :14:52.is with foreign air power. Therefore, at the request of the
:14:52. > :14:58.Syrian National Council, the Free Syrian Army, and local co-
:14:58. > :15:03.ordinating committees inside the country, the United States should
:15:03. > :15:13.lead and his national effort to detect population centres in Syria,
:15:13. > :15:14.
:15:14. > :15:16.especially in the north, through Over in Central Lobby for us now is
:15:16. > :15:19.the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, Richard Ottaway,
:15:19. > :15:24.and the former Lib Dem leader, Sir Ming Campbell. What is your
:15:24. > :15:31.response to the call to arms by John McCain? If the Americans would
:15:31. > :15:35.not intervene in Libya with the UN resolution, I have to say, I take
:15:35. > :15:40.with a pinch of salt that they would intervene in Syria without
:15:41. > :15:48.one. It is a huge leap. I think we need to get to the bottom of what
:15:48. > :15:52.is behind it. Do you think he will be an isolated voice even within
:15:52. > :15:59.his own party or will others follow on the basis that the Americans did
:15:59. > :16:02.not intervene in Libya because others were doing that?
:16:02. > :16:08.question is whether or not the Americans have the resources to do
:16:08. > :16:13.this. They have a fleet deployed in the Gulf at the moment, looking at
:16:13. > :16:21.Iran. Having a major operation in the Mediterranean is a huge,
:16:21. > :16:29.logistical exercise. So Menzies Campbell, do you think the Obama
:16:29. > :16:34.regime will ignore this call by John McCain? It is presidential
:16:34. > :16:39.election year. Everything has to be seen through that prism. In my
:16:39. > :16:43.recent experience, there is no enthusiasm - no appetite - for
:16:43. > :16:53.further intervention in the Middle East by the United States. Libya
:16:53. > :16:56.
:16:56. > :17:01.was an interesting illustration. The difficulty about the argument
:17:01. > :17:05.from John McCain is, the forces on the ground are pretty scattered and
:17:05. > :17:11.not very effective. As a consequence, and aerial campaign
:17:11. > :17:16.would not have the kind of impact, for example, it had been Libya and
:17:16. > :17:22.to go further back, which it had in relation to Milosevic in Serbia,
:17:22. > :17:26.when all the trouble was being caused in Serbia -- Kosovo. One
:17:26. > :17:32.thing which made Milosevic realised the game was up was when the
:17:32. > :17:37.Russians said, they would no longer back him. If we could persuade the
:17:37. > :17:41.Russians not to back President Assad, I think we would get some
:17:41. > :17:47.movement. People are hoping there are hints that may be happening.
:17:47. > :17:52.What people may be asking, I know people have cited There is not the
:17:52. > :17:59.international will to intervene in Syria as there was in Libya, a
:17:59. > :18:06.morally, what is the difference between what Gaddafi is doing and
:18:06. > :18:12.what Assad is doing in Homs? Nothing. If anything, it is worse.
:18:12. > :18:18.We cannot conduct foreign, defence and security policy on the strength
:18:18. > :18:24.of moral, a knee-jerk reactions. It is very challenging. Before leaping
:18:24. > :18:27.into this sort of thing, you have to take a considered approach. Both
:18:27. > :18:31.the British government and the American government and their
:18:31. > :18:36.allies have concluded it is not possible. The only possible step
:18:36. > :18:43.that might be taken us some sort of humanitarian corridor which may be
:18:43. > :18:53.protected in some way. Beam that is hugely complex and very difficult.
:18:53. > :18:53.
:18:53. > :18:57.-- even that. Alain De Botton, reacting in saying we cannot have
:18:57. > :19:03.foreign-policy on the basis of knee-jerk reactions, do you agree?
:19:03. > :19:09.We can have a foreign policy. What is the outcome of life versus the
:19:09. > :19:15.cost of death in an intervention in Syria? The can make the calculation
:19:15. > :19:18.here. Intervention does not stack up. It would cost more lives to
:19:18. > :19:24.intervene. That is still maintaining a moral stance. On a
:19:24. > :19:27.moral basis, one could argue it does not make sense. Difficult when
:19:27. > :19:31.you see the distressing pictures from Homs and the daily massacres.
:19:31. > :19:40.You have to look at the broad picture. He cannot look at an
:19:40. > :19:46.isolated victim. Bets come on to the subject of Israel and Iran. --
:19:46. > :19:50.let's come on. I will shout louder than normal! A fairly
:19:50. > :19:56.uncompromising message from Binyamin Netanyahu. It is getting
:19:56. > :20:02.to the stage when you have two leaders diverging. They are not
:20:02. > :20:06.singing from the same hymn sheet. When you look at what President
:20:06. > :20:11.Obama said to have three days ago, he said there is too much loose
:20:12. > :20:15.talk about military action. There is no doubt that, although
:20:15. > :20:20.yesterday, the joint photo opportunity, when all the cameras
:20:21. > :20:26.were there, there was the kind of apparent measure of agreement. It
:20:26. > :20:32.is no doubt there is a substantial disagreement between the Americans
:20:32. > :20:38.and the Israelis. That is a feature of the fact that President Obama
:20:38. > :20:43.and Binyamin Netanyahu had never had a constructive relationship.
:20:43. > :20:51.do not think Israel is capable of being restrained. I am informed
:20:51. > :20:56.they can only to a limited exercise without the support of the US.
:20:56. > :21:00.you have any sympathy with the position of Israel? They feel it is
:21:00. > :21:06.just them and it is only up to them to do with the threat of Iran
:21:06. > :21:11.because they would be the first target. Just to pick up on Richard
:21:11. > :21:15.-- what Richard Ottaway said, they do have some refuelling capability.
:21:16. > :21:18.The distances involved are so substantial that the Israelis could
:21:18. > :21:23.not carry out the kind of attack which would be effected without
:21:23. > :21:29.American assistance. Back to presidential year in America, I do
:21:29. > :21:34.not see that being available. Do I have sympathy for the few the
:21:34. > :21:41.Israelis find themselves in a parlous condition? Yes, indeed. We
:21:41. > :21:44.have a moral obligation to insure we look at every diplomatic
:21:44. > :21:47.alternative before we consider military action. Do you agree with
:21:47. > :21:53.that body you think they have waited long enough and been patient
:21:53. > :21:57.enough and we must look seriously at other action against Iran?
:21:57. > :22:01.need to let sanctions take their course. Some of the tougher
:22:01. > :22:06.sanctions you can imagine a being imposed at the moment. They will
:22:06. > :22:11.escalate over the coming months. We have not yet reached the point
:22:11. > :22:16.where we have to make a decision on mess. The difficult assessment is,
:22:16. > :22:21.how do you judge whether sanctions have succeeded or failed? If they
:22:21. > :22:30.do not succeed, you will have the difficult choice of, which is the
:22:30. > :22:35.least bad option? Iran or the nuclear strike? Britain does not
:22:35. > :22:40.have much say in this issue, do they? Quite clearly we are not able
:22:40. > :22:43.to provide military support in this. We could, if we so chose, offer
:22:43. > :22:49.logistical support, just when we did when the Americans bombed Libya
:22:49. > :22:54.in the 80s. In relation to that, we have British minesweepers in the
:22:54. > :22:58.Gulf helping to ensure the Strait of Hormuz is kept open to
:22:58. > :23:04.international shipping. We have the Republican Guard which, frankly,
:23:04. > :23:10.goes its own way. The real risk, it seems to me, is that some
:23:10. > :23:17.accidental provocation takes place with -- which forced his
:23:17. > :23:21.retaliation and we could have substantial escalation. -- forces
:23:21. > :23:23.retaliation. That is the biggest risk at the moment. Yesterday
:23:23. > :23:25.afternoon, the Conservative MP, Mark Pritchard, resigned as the
:23:25. > :23:28.deputy chairman of his party's International Committee. In his
:23:28. > :23:31.resignation letter to the Prime Minister, Mr Pritchard said he
:23:31. > :23:34.wanted the freedom to speak out on immigration, Europe and what he
:23:34. > :23:42.sees as a lack of clarity for national and individual aspiration.
:23:42. > :23:49.So what did he mean? Mark Pritchard is here. You said to want to speak
:23:49. > :23:53.more freely. Speak more freely. What you want to say? I fully
:23:53. > :23:56.support the Government in a wide range of policies, such as
:23:56. > :24:01.education reforms which are absolutely vital in making the
:24:01. > :24:07.United Kingdom more competitive and to -- in an increasingly
:24:07. > :24:10.competitive global economy with the rise of Asia and Latin America.
:24:10. > :24:15.There are first class universities in those areas. I support the
:24:15. > :24:19.welfare reforms and other policies as well. There are areas of
:24:19. > :24:24.difference. I felt it would be inconsistent remain in a role
:24:24. > :24:29.appointed by the Prime Minister if I felt uncomfortable on some issues.
:24:29. > :24:33.Which issues are they? Just a line them for us. People might say, on
:24:33. > :24:39.the main issues, you seem to agree with the Government. The Government
:24:39. > :24:42.needs to have a more robust policy on immigration. We saw from the
:24:42. > :24:48.Office of National Statistics last week that there is very little
:24:48. > :24:52.process -- progress been made on immigration. The impact on
:24:52. > :24:59.education, public services, social cohesion communities up and down
:24:59. > :25:03.the land, is significant. The Government has been quite timid
:25:03. > :25:10.thus far. They have been timid on tackling a fault in the student
:25:10. > :25:15.visa system. There are work visas, tourist visas, family visas. All of
:25:15. > :25:22.these need to be addressed. The Government says it is looking at
:25:22. > :25:25.this. The Government needs to do more. I particularly care about it
:25:25. > :25:31.passionately. It is impacting on communities up and down the land,
:25:31. > :25:34.having an impact in schools, having an impact on hospitals and social
:25:34. > :25:37.cohesion. The Government is right to say it is a priority when they
:25:37. > :25:41.entered into government. I want to bring the Government to account and
:25:41. > :25:46.hold it to account on behalf of my constituents, who really care about
:25:46. > :25:51.this issue. They need to do more and do it more quickly, be less
:25:51. > :25:55.timid and more radical. One might suggest you were pretty outspoken
:25:55. > :26:04.when you work in your role. I am trying to get to what more you want
:26:04. > :26:05.to say that we have not heard from you already. You have outlined
:26:05. > :26:09.immigration, what about Europe? Europe, the Government says, we are
:26:09. > :26:14.in coalition, there is not much we can do until we have a Conservative
:26:14. > :26:20.majority, potentially, after the next election. Let's workout some
:26:20. > :26:23.policies ahead of the next manifesto. We heard last week that
:26:23. > :26:27.Number 10 themselves believes it is highly a mite too that we will have
:26:27. > :26:31.a Conservative majority of the next election, we may have to continue
:26:31. > :26:37.with the Liberal Democrats - if they choose to continue with us of
:26:37. > :26:40.course - at the next election. It is about working up to the next
:26:40. > :26:45.general election where they become more robust on Europe. We have
:26:45. > :26:50.become more robust on Europe. It may never happen because there may
:26:50. > :26:57.not be the largest party. We may not win the general election. That
:26:57. > :27:04.is up for -- to the British electorate. In the meantime, we're
:27:04. > :27:12.Euro-sceptic like as a party. Europe is costing jobs and holding
:27:12. > :27:14.back growth. The European political project, and the high cost of
:27:14. > :27:19.employment and social regulations on small, medium and large
:27:19. > :27:24.businesses in this country, are costing jobs. As soon as people
:27:24. > :27:27.begin to make the link between Europe and bred on the table, that
:27:27. > :27:32.will be a game change in British politics. You feel let down on
:27:32. > :27:36.those issues particularly. current government is Euro-sceptic
:27:36. > :27:40.light. There is a lot of reverse talk on Europe. When it comes to
:27:40. > :27:46.the Conservative Party and its leaders, through successive years,
:27:46. > :27:51.it is action are not work that really counts. How will you conduct
:27:51. > :27:56.a campaign from now on? It is not a campaign. I am a member of
:27:56. > :28:00.parliament, elected to represent my constituents. On some areas there
:28:00. > :28:03.was a difference but in an increasing number of areas, people
:28:04. > :28:09.are saying, what is the difference between the last government and
:28:09. > :28:15.this government? You struggle to answer those questions. We live in
:28:15. > :28:21.extraordinary times. We need some radical thinking to set this
:28:21. > :28:26.country on the right course on a range of issues. Were you under
:28:26. > :28:32.pressure from party whips and party managers? Was that why you wanted
:28:32. > :28:35.to resign from your official post? It was inconsistent. If I held a
:28:35. > :28:41.position within the party, appointed by the Prime Minister, I
:28:41. > :28:44.felt constrained in that position. What did the position entail?
:28:44. > :28:49.appointed by the Prime Minister to engage with sister parties around
:28:49. > :28:54.the world, on behalf of the Conservative Party, to try to help
:28:54. > :28:57.parties grow their capacities campaign and organisation. It was
:28:57. > :29:03.something I enjoyed. Foreign affairs and international agencies
:29:03. > :29:13.was something I enjoyed Foster I have to put my constituents first.
:29:13. > :29:15.
:29:15. > :29:21.-- I enjoyed. MPs are talking about going that step further. It is
:29:21. > :29:25.Aperol because it is the resignation in terms of belief. --
:29:25. > :29:31.admirable. There are genuine problems in terms of sitting in the
:29:31. > :29:36.EU and arguing that we, as one of the Macro member of a large
:29:36. > :29:41.organisation, should have special breaks on things like Labour laws.
:29:41. > :29:46.-- one member. That is where the heart of the Conservative Party say
:29:46. > :29:52.we should just get out of this thing. You are in this thing. There
:29:52. > :29:56.is not much you can do. It is a very dangerous thing when the
:29:56. > :30:01.political elite in Europe continually denied their peoples
:30:01. > :30:07.say on the European question. The majority of people in this nation
:30:07. > :30:12.have not had a say on Europe since 1975. Either they were not born but
:30:12. > :30:17.they were not old enough to vote in 1975. Those who work, a lot of them
:30:17. > :30:23.felt we were signing up to an economic union and not a political
:30:23. > :30:27.union. As a philosopher, I hope you might agree that there is a
:30:27. > :30:34.fundamental and democratic deficit. Millions of people have never had a
:30:34. > :30:38.say on Europe. You could respond to this? For too long, the right wing
:30:38. > :30:44.of the Conservative Party has made dramatic gestures without engaging
:30:44. > :30:50.in patter beware this country could go. I hope you'll wing of the party
:30:50. > :30:55.does not do that again. -- your wing. There were some of negative
:30:55. > :31:01.voices. They did not look at the reality of Britain within the EU.
:31:01. > :31:08.Blurts tried to change towards sensible policies in certain areas.
:31:08. > :31:12.-- let's try. About sovereignty and independence of the nation is not
:31:12. > :31:17.negative. Britain will continue to be a partner whatever arrangement
:31:17. > :31:20.or agreement any subsequent Conservative government might bring
:31:20. > :31:24.about. We need to connect a European project with the British
:31:24. > :31:31.people, otherwise they will become more disenfranchised. Europe will
:31:31. > :31:35.continue to become a key training partner. We need an economic
:31:35. > :31:39.agreement and not a political union. We are becoming more and more
:31:39. > :31:45.towards a political a range of which disenfranchise us British
:31:45. > :31:50.people and disadvantages this country being competitive. In a
:31:50. > :31:58.global world, we have a deficit with -- a Mini to engage more with
:31:58. > :32:01.our partners round the world. -- Alastair Campbell famously said:
:32:01. > :32:04."We don't do God." And yet, in British politics, God, the Anglican
:32:04. > :32:08.version of him, is everywhere. Prayers are said before each
:32:08. > :32:11.session of the Commons. Our laws have to be passed by the Head of
:32:11. > :32:14.the Church of England, that's the Queen, before they can be enacted.
:32:14. > :32:17.The House of Lords is decorated with unelected bishops. Thousands
:32:17. > :32:20.of England's primary schools are supported by the Church. Should we
:32:20. > :32:30.do something about the fact that having an established church throws
:32:30. > :32:33.
:32:33. > :32:38.up all sort of anomalies in modern Of May Allhallows in the City of
:32:38. > :32:46.London on Ash Wednesday. The first day of Lent. City workers to take
:32:46. > :32:52.40 minutes out of life in the third millennium. Remember that you are
:32:52. > :32:58.dust... The does anyone go to church any more? Despite decades of
:32:58. > :33:02.decline in church attendance, people do. A survey as recently as
:33:02. > :33:08.2002 showed that 40% of the population, more than 20 million
:33:08. > :33:15.people, went to church on Christmas Day. The recent economic crisis has
:33:15. > :33:23.increased attendance here. As a city church, we organise a lot of
:33:23. > :33:29.carol services in the lead-up to Christmas. In 2011, we have seen
:33:30. > :33:35.here a very significant growth in attendance. People have been coming,
:33:35. > :33:42.at times of uncertainty, they want to return to something that they
:33:42. > :33:48.know, they want to connect to this greater narrative. And start a
:33:48. > :33:54.conversation and hopefully they will want to continue. But we can't
:33:54. > :33:58.force that, when they're ready they come. The role of the Church of
:33:58. > :34:03.England in our society has not changed that much in several
:34:03. > :34:08.centuries. The monarch must still be a communicant in the Church of
:34:08. > :34:14.England, he or she must not be married to everyone Catholic. 26
:34:14. > :34:18.bishops still have a seat in the House of Lords. A third of
:34:18. > :34:22.England's primary schools are controlled by the Anglican Church.
:34:22. > :34:27.Bob Morris is a constitutional expert, who tells me the vast
:34:27. > :34:31.majority of us are happy to accept the anomalies that come with an
:34:31. > :34:36.ancient established Church. Do think we as the British people have
:34:36. > :34:41.an appetite to go there and start reforming these things? A don't see
:34:41. > :34:47.that anyone wishes to take that head-on. This is likely to generate
:34:47. > :34:51.more heat than light. There will be some specific areas which
:34:51. > :34:55.Parliament will think it desirable to attend to. Some of these issues
:34:55. > :35:01.will arise perhaps when there is the next coronation for the Queen
:35:01. > :35:07.passes away, and the new king will have ideas of his own, how he
:35:07. > :35:11.wishes to relate to religion in a multicultural society. I guess at
:35:12. > :35:16.some stage in the future we will have to decide if we live in a
:35:16. > :35:21.secular or a Christian society. During that debate, I personally am
:35:21. > :35:31.looking forward to using the word, and tea disestablishment terrorism,
:35:31. > :35:32.
:35:32. > :35:34.on the Daily Politics, for the first time -
:35:34. > :35:44.antidisestablishmentarianism. Joining us now is the Conservative
:35:44. > :35:44.
:35:44. > :35:49.MP, Steve Baker. The Church of England is becoming an atheistic
:35:49. > :35:53.institution. It is remarkably tolerant. Its survival strategy has
:35:53. > :36:00.been to become a largely secular organisation where people get
:36:00. > :36:06.married, from people who have long ago stopped believing in anything
:36:06. > :36:10.supernatural. So, for the Church of England, either they become a truly
:36:10. > :36:15.religious organisation, and leave the centre of British politics and
:36:15. > :36:20.life, or they carry on down the track of becoming a secular
:36:20. > :36:23.organisation with a Christian heritage. Is it true, saying
:36:23. > :36:29.largely they don't believe, or is it they don't preach it in the same
:36:29. > :36:36.weight as they used to, to embrace larger and different congregations?
:36:36. > :36:42.Most of them are so embarrassed in belief, especially in private. And
:36:42. > :36:48.so, really what they want to beat his nice spiritual guides, there
:36:48. > :36:58.would love to welcome other faiths, once again, it reduces the heat on
:36:58. > :37:00.
:37:00. > :37:07.them. Spiritual guides, isn't that the role for religion. Spirituality
:37:07. > :37:10.NGOs -- endures. Although that the critique of the Church of England
:37:10. > :37:18.is one we hear, Lee. I wouldn't say it is wrong but I certainly know
:37:18. > :37:23.the Church of England ministers I meet are believers. So, it is a
:37:23. > :37:30.broad church. But, that doesn't mean there is a role for government
:37:30. > :37:35.to get involved in terms of that moral spiritual guidance? Everyone
:37:35. > :37:43.points to back to basics under John Major, getting involved in morality
:37:43. > :37:47.of -- is always dangerous for government. There is a wonderful
:37:47. > :37:51.book by cs Lewis, he developed the idea throughout the ages, all
:37:51. > :37:55.religions have had this common set of values. It is time for
:37:55. > :38:02.politicians to be more humble and realistic about what they can
:38:02. > :38:07.legislate for, to accept a more central approach to morality. When
:38:07. > :38:12.I go to Moscow and All About My values, we have common ground.
:38:12. > :38:18.there any role for politicians in advocating morality, whether it
:38:18. > :38:26.comes to taxation, family-friendly policies, or consultation on gay
:38:26. > :38:31.marriage for example? After 100 years of growing state involvement,
:38:31. > :38:34.the scandals we have had, it is time for politicians to think about
:38:34. > :38:37.what they can realistically achieved by taking this leading
:38:37. > :38:43.role. Which isn't to say they should abdicate, we should all set
:38:43. > :38:47.an example. It is not realistic to legislate to put morality into
:38:47. > :38:54.people's hearts. It can't just be down to religion in terms of giving
:38:54. > :38:59.a lead. The Big Society, which the government has promoted, trying to
:38:59. > :39:04.give moral and spiritual guidance in communities, is difficult
:39:04. > :39:09.outside religion. I do not think government can get involved.
:39:10. > :39:15.Big Society was a terrible idea? its added to educate people
:39:15. > :39:21.morality. Ethics and morality have to be part of a grassroots movement,
:39:21. > :39:26.it is already. Can you do this without religion? The you have to
:39:26. > :39:31.copy of religions. Religions provide a blueprint for how you
:39:31. > :39:37.teach morality. You gather people in communities. You have regular
:39:37. > :39:43.get-togethers, you rehearse ideas, you create a moral idea. The clue
:39:43. > :39:47.is been studying religion, not going to religion. Politicians have
:39:47. > :39:52.not studied religion properly, they have not understood religion. They
:39:52. > :39:58.have taken the worst bits to moralise. If we do it outside of
:39:58. > :40:02.religion we have to study religion. In the area of faith schools, many
:40:02. > :40:09.people would argue they have been successful. They have combined a
:40:09. > :40:15.backdrop of religion with successful academic results. I do
:40:15. > :40:19.support state, faith schools. When we talk about a further expansion,
:40:19. > :40:23.should it be about meeting the needs of parents, or should be
:40:23. > :40:28.directed by the state? Some people object because they find themselves
:40:28. > :40:33.paying through taxation for the faith based education of another
:40:33. > :40:37.person's child. That is a valid objection. We have a state funded
:40:37. > :40:45.education system which most of us agree is bright, but we need to
:40:45. > :40:48.accept British and his pit -- it is part of people's morality. But it
:40:48. > :40:55.is sad be parents are having to fake an interest in religion in
:40:55. > :40:59.order to get a good education. We need good schools with an ethical
:40:59. > :41:05.background and moral programme which is not strictly based on
:41:06. > :41:12.religion. But they have achieved that. For most of us who do believe,
:41:12. > :41:21.we do believe it is about God. I am interested in the relationship of
:41:21. > :41:26.God, not ritual. What I love is the things you're talking about, there
:41:26. > :41:30.needed to have a morality. I am fascinated by your ideas. What I
:41:30. > :41:34.wouldn't want to do is to back those ideas with state power. This
:41:34. > :41:41.is where we have lost track of tolerance, we have forgotten
:41:41. > :41:46.tolerance is a profound disagreement, plus refraining from
:41:46. > :41:52.the use of force. We have moved into a small elite in London
:41:52. > :42:00.imposing its own consensus on everyone. I am saying, let us have
:42:00. > :42:04.a more Polly centric few. We all know times are tough for young
:42:04. > :42:08.people trying to find jobs. And new figures out today show it's not
:42:08. > :42:10.necessarily any easier if you have a degree. New data from the Office
:42:10. > :42:13.for National Statistics shows graduate unemployment is still at
:42:13. > :42:17.its highest level since 1995. The figures also show that more
:42:17. > :42:20.graduates are having to take jobs that don't require a degree. The
:42:20. > :42:24.number of graduates going in to lower skilled jobs stood at just
:42:24. > :42:28.over one in four in 2001. That figure now stands at over one in
:42:28. > :42:31.three today. The figures also show that one new graduate in every five
:42:31. > :42:39.available to work is unemployed. Jamie Jenkins is from the Office
:42:39. > :42:44.for National Statistics. Is it the case that more graduates
:42:44. > :42:49.are having to take jobs which don't require a degree? What we have seen
:42:49. > :42:54.over the last decade, recent graduates who left university and
:42:54. > :43:00.looking for work within six years, that has increased by 40% over the
:43:00. > :43:05.last decade. 1.5 million recent graduates going into the Labour
:43:05. > :43:13.market. Over that same period, we have seen an increase in the
:43:13. > :43:18.percentage of those going into the was killed jobs, up to 36%. What we
:43:18. > :43:28.have seen also is looking at the final quarter of 2011, 86% of
:43:28. > :43:30.
:43:30. > :43:34.graduates were in work, scented 2% of non graduates in work. -- 72%.
:43:34. > :43:39.But you don't necessarily need a degree for if many of those jobs in
:43:39. > :43:44.the first place. Normally does that when required getting to a degree
:43:45. > :43:49.level, that has increased up to 36%. Looking out graduates and non-
:43:49. > :43:56.graduates, we have seen the types of pay depending on the subjects
:43:56. > :44:03.they have chosen. We have seen �15 per hour is the average wage if you
:44:04. > :44:13.are a graduate. �9 per Iraq if you are in non-graduate. There are
:44:14. > :44:18.
:44:18. > :44:22.large variations. It is obviously much better to go
:44:22. > :44:26.into medicine or law, because you will earn a much higher wage or
:44:26. > :44:31.salary if that is what you're looking for. This continues the
:44:31. > :44:36.argument people have been making for a long time, arts teaching in
:44:36. > :44:41.universities is not playing any productive role in the economy.
:44:41. > :44:46.mean the teaching or that the subject does not play well?
:44:46. > :44:51.subject. And one can doubt whether it is being taught properly in the
:44:51. > :44:57.first place, many graduates complain about the quality. Arts
:44:57. > :45:02.should be playing a role as moral guidance, ethical teaching. But not
:45:02. > :45:07.really as something you are doing to get a job. We have confused the
:45:07. > :45:14.teaching of the arts, a wonderful thing, anyone should took on the
:45:14. > :45:20.weekend, and to make that a degree subject and to expect someone will
:45:20. > :45:25.get a productive jobs, that is the problem. We have confused something
:45:25. > :45:31.that is really good with something else, getting a good job. They are
:45:31. > :45:37.not compatible. So low you wouldn't recommend people to do philosophy?
:45:37. > :45:47.Absolutely not. So there will be a decline in those arts subjects.
:45:47. > :45:51.
:45:51. > :45:57.These are of -- these subjects are Yesterday, the Prime Minister
:45:58. > :46:02.reported to the Commons on the heads of European government.
:46:02. > :46:12.Attention turned to whether David Cameron was right to keep Britain
:46:12. > :46:14.
:46:15. > :46:17.Can he confirm that for all his claims the European Court of
:46:17. > :46:24.Justice and the European Commission will be fully involved in
:46:24. > :46:29.implementing a treaty? Can he tell us how he find -- found out about
:46:29. > :46:34.the result of the meetings on the issue of economic questions
:46:34. > :46:39.affecting the whole of the UK? The Prime Minister was asked about this
:46:39. > :46:49.and the best he could manage was to save the Prime Minister may not be
:46:49. > :46:55.in the room but he could well beat in the building? It is Elvis! I do
:46:55. > :47:02.not think that is very reassuring. Was there a discussion of the
:47:02. > :47:08.European West -- arrest warrant? A lot of backbenchers want asked to
:47:08. > :47:14.withdraw from it and others want no change battle. Can I suggest he
:47:14. > :47:17.might want to campaign for reform rather than withdraw? This was a
:47:17. > :47:21.European Council devoted to the discussion of the economy and
:47:21. > :47:25.foreign affairs. There was no discussion of the European arrest
:47:25. > :47:30.warrant whatsoever Foster I still have not heard from the party
:47:30. > :47:40.opposite about whether they would sign this treaty or not. Which you
:47:40. > :47:49.
:47:49. > :47:55.sign it? Not for yes, Sheikh for no. other way. Even Wallace & Gromit
:47:55. > :48:05.could do this. This is farcical. This thing exists. Would you sign
:48:05. > :48:08.it or not? Utterly, utterly feeble. Despite jockeying for position, why
:48:09. > :48:14.does the Prime Minster think his European colleagues might wish to
:48:14. > :48:19.ignore his advice on how to grope their economies? I think that would
:48:19. > :48:27.have been better if it stayed in the stalls. It would never have
:48:27. > :48:30.made it out onto the course. That was the Commons yesterday on Europe.
:48:30. > :48:33.And, today, a group of Conservative MPs has set out new proposals for
:48:33. > :48:36.changes to European employment law. The Fresh Start group says halving
:48:36. > :48:41.the burden of regulations imposed by Brussels on British business
:48:41. > :48:44.would deliver a massive boost to our economy. And joining us now is
:48:44. > :48:53.one of the authors of that report, Andrea Leadsom, and, alongside her,
:48:53. > :48:58.Labour's Jack Dromey. I have had a brief look at the pamphlet. Are you
:48:58. > :49:01.calling for dismantling of the aspects of social employment
:49:01. > :49:05.regulation that accompany the be you? We're trying to set up what
:49:05. > :49:10.the options are and what the consequences are of current
:49:10. > :49:15.legislation affecting the UK. It has all been implemented them Berry
:49:15. > :49:21.is a big cost to the economy. The Chancellor does not have much money
:49:21. > :49:26.in the coffers. He needs to be looking at regulation. The bulk of
:49:26. > :49:30.that comes out of the EU. At the same time, abandoning rights for
:49:30. > :49:34.workers in terms of their conditions, the hours they work,
:49:34. > :49:39.the brakes they are allowed to have, which had been in existence for
:49:39. > :49:43.quite a while. Not necessarily. say that is what you would be able
:49:43. > :49:46.to do. You would like Britain to come out of those arrangements
:49:46. > :49:50.where employers to have some restrictions on what they can
:49:50. > :49:55.expect workers to do. These sorts of restrictions we have major
:49:55. > :49:59.problems with our, with the agency workers directive, where, after 12
:49:59. > :50:05.weeks you are entitled to maternity pay and to the same rights as if
:50:05. > :50:08.you were a fully employed person, that is restricting jobs. It is
:50:08. > :50:13.winning back companies are getting rid of people after 11.5 weeks to
:50:13. > :50:16.avoid having to meet those restrictions. We want to get rid of
:50:16. > :50:20.the problems and barriers to creating new implement. What is
:50:20. > :50:28.wrong with that? It is fundamentally wrong to have a
:50:28. > :50:32.workforce divided. It is wrong to exploit agency workers on the one
:50:32. > :50:38.hand or to undercut the directly employed on the other hand. What
:50:38. > :50:42.Andrea has done, I think, perhaps starting to take us in the
:50:42. > :50:48.direction of coming clean about what the agenda is all about. It is
:50:48. > :50:53.the bizarre notion that, if you have low reach -- wages and
:50:53. > :50:57.produced workers' rights, that is the key to economic success. Also,
:50:57. > :51:01.of the consequences. If you read the pamphlet carefully, I have read
:51:01. > :51:06.what the authors of the pamphlet have said, it is about less
:51:06. > :51:10.protection in terms of long working hours, less protection in terms of
:51:10. > :51:15.safety at work, less protection in terms of equal treatment at work.
:51:15. > :51:21.Anyone who has worked in will be involved with the real world of
:51:21. > :51:25.work will know that how you treat employers is crucial. It is not a
:51:25. > :51:30.recipe for economic success in Britain. What evidence to have that
:51:30. > :51:35.it will lead to economic success? I completely disagree with what he
:51:35. > :51:42.has said. It is not about cutting workers' rights. It is about
:51:42. > :51:45.repatriating powers to Britain. The problem I have... In order to
:51:45. > :51:51.change the legislation so that it better suits the British economy
:51:51. > :51:57.and the needs of Britain right now. There is a key principle of
:51:57. > :52:03.subsidiarity that says, Werritty is a vocal only issue, the national
:52:03. > :52:11.government should make the decisions. -- where it is a local
:52:11. > :52:17.only issue. There are real barriers to young people finding work in
:52:17. > :52:21.companies. It is not calling for repatriation. It is talking about
:52:21. > :52:25.the implications of the potential for Britain to create new jobs if
:52:25. > :52:29.we were to repatriate those powers and use them more flexibly
:52:29. > :52:34.ourselves. What is the point of doing this if you are not calling
:52:34. > :52:37.for it? One of the things I noticed is that you admitted would be
:52:37. > :52:40.extremely difficult to achieve - you would not be able to have the
:52:40. > :52:46.sort of power to persuade people to do this. Is said that a case that
:52:46. > :52:51.you do not think it is achievable. What we're doing is the research
:52:51. > :52:54.into will areas of EU policy - looking at what the options are for
:52:54. > :52:57.change and the likelihood of being able to achieve those changes.
:52:57. > :53:02.Further work needs to be done to prioritise what would be the best
:53:02. > :53:06.bits to renegotiate for Britain, bearing in mind that EU reform is
:53:06. > :53:12.inevitable. I think Andrea is an outrider for George Osborne. There
:53:12. > :53:16.is a deeply held view that what they want to do is roll back the
:53:16. > :53:23.protection of workers on transfer. I was at fault in a test case to
:53:23. > :53:29.cover 6 million workers X-SCID by Mrs Thatcher. -- I was involved.
:53:29. > :53:37.George Osborne has said, we want to go back down a pass. Andrea is the
:53:37. > :53:42.outrider for that. -- that path. Do we really want to be going down the
:53:42. > :53:47.path of Dog eat Dog competition on the downward spiral of wages? That
:53:47. > :53:50.is not the kind of Britain or Europe I think that British people
:53:50. > :53:53.want. Our guest of the day is, of course, the philosopher, Alain de
:53:53. > :53:56.Botton, who has written extensively on many things including happiness.
:53:56. > :53:58.Back when he was in Opposition, you may remember, David Cameron was
:53:58. > :54:03.very keen on measuring happiness, or economic well-being, and
:54:03. > :54:07.treating those figures as if they were as important as GDP. This may
:54:07. > :54:09.come as good news to the people of Northern Ireland, who we discovered
:54:09. > :54:17.in last week's Prime Minister's Questions are the most joyous in
:54:17. > :54:27.the nation. The Prime Minister may have seen the headlines that the
:54:27. > :54:28.
:54:28. > :54:31.happiness of people living in Northern Ireland... And, er... As
:54:31. > :54:36.the major party of government for the last five years in Northern
:54:36. > :54:40.Ireland, but we are not surprised by that. I am delighted to hear
:54:40. > :54:45.that the people of Northern Ireland on happiest in the United Kingdom.
:54:45. > :54:51.I have to say their representatives in this house to not always give
:54:51. > :54:54.that impression. -- House. Maybe I have been missing something. So, is
:54:54. > :54:57.measuring happiness a good idea? Joining me now from Oxford is a ray
:54:57. > :55:03.of sunshine, otherwise known as the FT's undercover economist and the
:55:03. > :55:09.presenter of Radio 4's More or Less, Tim Harford. Is it a good idea to
:55:09. > :55:14.measure happiness? It is not a bad idea. Measuring happiness is an
:55:14. > :55:18.endlessly fascinating subject. What has been discussed is not a big
:55:18. > :55:23.deal. The Office for National Statistics have huge surveys they
:55:23. > :55:28.already conduct. They have added four simple questions to some of
:55:28. > :55:31.these surveys and covered in the answers are. I do not think the
:55:31. > :55:35.results will be transformative. I do not think there will lead to a
:55:35. > :55:40.radical shift in policy. They tell us that people really hate being
:55:40. > :55:46.unemployed and people really hate being ill and sick. I do not think
:55:46. > :55:51.it will transform policy. At the same time, it is not very hard to
:55:51. > :55:56.add questions to a question you are already answering -- asking. It is
:55:56. > :56:01.not worth spending money on, is it? The answers to those questions are
:56:01. > :56:05.no surprise. People do not like the unemployed and people do not like
:56:05. > :56:10.being killed. It is not worth spending any money on. They hardly
:56:10. > :56:14.are spending any money on this. It is adding a few extra questions to
:56:14. > :56:20.existing questionnaire. The actual questions are often described as
:56:20. > :56:27.much unhappiness. What is going on is more subtle. How satisfied you
:56:27. > :56:34.with your life as a whole? The second question is do you think
:56:34. > :56:44.what you're doing in your life is worthwhile? How happy did you feel
:56:44. > :57:00.
:57:00. > :57:06.These are a snapshot of the day, what indication does it truly give
:57:06. > :57:10.us? The direction of this research is really good. It is sane humans
:57:11. > :57:16.care about a lot of things other than just money. We care about time,
:57:16. > :57:23.for example. There are fascinating statistics, some people will trade
:57:23. > :57:30.at a certain amount of money for time. Also, things like by the
:57:30. > :57:34.people live in an attractive or body Environment, that plays a huge
:57:34. > :57:40.role in how people make decisions. For too long we have had a vision
:57:40. > :57:50.of Economics which has assumed human beings are totally dictated
:57:50. > :58:02.
:58:02. > :58:08.by always Max amazing the income. - Money can't buy us happiness but it
:58:08. > :58:12.does help. It does buy happiness. There are other surprises. You
:58:12. > :58:15.won't be surprised to hear people seem to be happy when they are
:58:15. > :58:25.praying. People are not particularly happy when they are
:58:25. > :58:29.
:58:29. > :58:33.Thank you for joining us. That is all for today. Thanks to our guests
:58:33. > :58:43.and thank you to you. The One o'clock News is starting it up on
:58:43. > :58:48.BBC One and I will be back with Andrew Tyrie at 11:30pm -- 11:30am.