:00:46. > :00:51.Afternoon folks. Welcome to the Daily Politics. Goodbye GCSEs,
:00:51. > :00:55.hello "Gove Levels". Education Secretary Michael Gove announces
:00:55. > :01:00.plans to shake up secondary schools exams in England to make them more
:01:00. > :01:04.rigorous. We'll discuss the plan with former Tory Education
:01:04. > :01:06.Secretary, Ken Baker. Iain Duncan Smith faces questions about his
:01:06. > :01:10.plan for universal credits with reports that the country's most
:01:10. > :01:15.senior civil servant is out to block the reform. We'll discuss the
:01:15. > :01:19.Welfare Secretary's big project. Scores are written every year, but
:01:19. > :01:26.can political books really change anything? Can writing one really
:01:26. > :01:36.help your political career? And could Britain see a full state
:01:36. > :01:39.funeral for King Richard III? We'll hear from one MP who wants a
:01:39. > :01:49.military procession, lying in state - the whole works - if this
:01:49. > :01:51.
:01:51. > :01:54.skeleton turns out to be the 15th century king. All that in the next
:01:54. > :01:57.hour and with us for the duration Patrick Diamond from the left of
:01:57. > :02:00.centre think-tank Policy Network, he was once adviser to Tony Blair
:02:00. > :02:02.and Gordon Brown. Don't blame us! And by Ruth Porter from the Free
:02:02. > :02:10.Market Institute of Economic Affairs. Welcome to the Daily
:02:10. > :02:14.Politics. Let's kick off though with an interesting line from the
:02:14. > :02:17.latest British Social Attitudes report which is published today.
:02:17. > :02:21.The survey reveals the proportion of people wanting increased public
:02:21. > :02:27.spending - even if it means higher taxes - has gone up for the first
:02:27. > :02:33.time in a decade. But only by a little. It has gone up to 36% while
:02:33. > :02:40.55% want spending levels to stay where they are.
:02:40. > :02:45.Isn't that the dip lem ma for a left of centre party at the moment?
:02:45. > :02:49.To act collectively in various ways and even at this will time when
:02:49. > :02:55.public spending has been cut, there is only 36% want more public
:02:55. > :02:58.spending? That's right. The numbers favouring more public spending have
:02:58. > :03:03.increased in recent years. That's a sign that people are worried that
:03:03. > :03:07.the cuts which the current Government are carrying out are
:03:07. > :03:11.biting hard. It is a dilemma for every left of centre Government.
:03:11. > :03:18.What's the right balance to strike between taxation and public
:03:18. > :03:25.spending and do people feel they are getting value for money out of
:03:25. > :03:28.things like the NHS and schools? have been talking about a small
:03:28. > :03:32.increase, there is a big increase in the number of people who think
:03:33. > :03:37.the NHS is in decline. That's surely more worrying? Well, it is
:03:37. > :03:42.interesting in that when you look at outcomes in health, so far
:03:42. > :03:45.people have felt that the NHS is delivering and it is not. The
:03:45. > :03:50.Government is trying to reform the Health Service whilst also trying
:03:50. > :03:55.to say that the Health Service is delivering. I think at some point
:03:55. > :03:58.it needs to change that narrative if it is going to get public
:03:58. > :04:01.opinion on its side. Why do you think people are saying
:04:01. > :04:04.it is not as good as it was last year? Is that because they have
:04:04. > :04:08.tried to reform it? Because the media and the Labour Party have
:04:08. > :04:11.been saying these reforms are terrible? Or do you think people
:04:11. > :04:14.are experiencing a worse service on the ground? I think people are
:04:14. > :04:19.bound to be experiencing a worse service on the ground and the
:04:19. > :04:22.Government needs to play catch-up and start pointing to the fact that
:04:22. > :04:26.the NHS has not been delivering and make the case.
:04:26. > :04:29.There is a disjuncture between how people feel about their local
:04:29. > :04:37.hospital or GP and how they feel about the National Health Service
:04:37. > :04:43.as a national entity. And there is no doubt that the impact of the
:04:43. > :04:48.Lancy Reforms has sapped many people's confidence in the NHS.
:04:48. > :04:53.John Major said yesterday that the economy has, "Passed the the
:04:53. > :04:57.darkest moment." I think he might have talked about green shoots
:04:57. > :05:01.which no minister will do. We are used to reporting bad things about
:05:01. > :05:06.the economy that sometimes we miss a turning point and bad is always a
:05:06. > :05:08.better story thang good. -- than good. Are there signs that the
:05:08. > :05:11.worst might be over? It is difficult to tell. There is a
:05:11. > :05:14.problem with the kind of language that John Major was using in the
:05:14. > :05:18.sense that there is a lot of evidence that many people out there
:05:18. > :05:20.in the real world of experiencing problems with the economy, not
:05:20. > :05:24.least the huge numbers of young people who are unemployed and
:05:24. > :05:28.haven't been able to find jobs or college places when leaving school.
:05:28. > :05:30.There are real issues about performance of our economy at the
:05:30. > :05:34.same time, we have to recognise that the return of economic
:05:34. > :05:39.confidence is very, very important to us getting out of this economic
:05:39. > :05:45.mess that we're in. So we're -- restoring confidence is important.
:05:45. > :05:47.Ruth, it is still bad, but have we passed the worse? It is hard to say.
:05:47. > :05:51.Things with the eurozone could get worse.
:05:52. > :05:56.But that got better? It keeps getting pushed into the long grass.
:05:56. > :05:59.We don't know. Some of it depends on that. But yeah.
:05:59. > :06:03.Ruth is right, international circumstances matter a huge amount
:06:03. > :06:06.to the UK. We are an economy that relies on exports, the health of
:06:06. > :06:09.the eurozone will have a crucial impact on our our ability to
:06:09. > :06:15.recover. That might be another reason for
:06:15. > :06:18.being positive. We were covering stories about Kate's pictures, some
:06:18. > :06:23.events took place in Europe. It is time for our quiz. The question
:06:23. > :06:32.today is which of these is the odd one out? George Osborne, Alex
:06:32. > :06:37.Salmond, Theresa May, or Bojo, also known as Boris Johnson!
:06:37. > :06:40.I have worked it out myself! Have you worked it out? Just about.
:06:40. > :06:46.Have you? No idea. LAUGHTER
:06:46. > :06:53.We'll see. We are probably wrong. They are calling them Gove Levels a
:06:53. > :06:57.new system of exams intending to sweep away GCSEs. The reforms don't
:06:57. > :07:00.affect Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland. The Education Secretary
:07:00. > :07:03.alooning with the -- along with the Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg
:07:03. > :07:08.who was hostile to the plan will announce the details later today.
:07:08. > :07:13.So what's it all about? Well, the current system of modules and
:07:13. > :07:18.assessment, will be replaced by one exam per subject at the end of a
:07:18. > :07:23.two year course like the old O- levels. Each exam would be three
:07:23. > :07:28.hours long. They can be as short as 90 minutes. There will be no
:07:28. > :07:31.opportunity to bump upgrades by resitting parts of the test. If
:07:31. > :07:36.students are unhappy with the grade, they would have to resit the exam.
:07:37. > :07:45.The new exams would include more maths and more full length essays
:07:45. > :07:51.and a return to English to foreign language translation tests. 22% get
:07:51. > :07:55.an A or an A* grade at present, with a new course as few as a%
:07:55. > :08:01.would be expected to get a grade one. The Government plans to launch
:08:01. > :08:04.the new system in the autumn of 2015 which would mean we would see
:08:04. > :08:10.the the first examinations in the summer of 2017. So that's where we
:08:10. > :08:16.are. Let's go to our Adam to get a bit on the politics of this. April
:08:16. > :08:20.dam, are you there for -- Adam, are you there for us? Afternoon, Andrew.
:08:20. > :08:25.Tell me this Adam, it is good to see new the glorious sunshine there.
:08:25. > :08:31.Mr Clegg seemed to be against this when it was originally announced,
:08:31. > :08:39.now he is standing by Mr Clegg to announce it. What happened? Well,
:08:39. > :08:44.the Government decided to junk this idea of a return to a two-tier exam
:08:44. > :08:48.system like the old O-levels. Now you might remember right back at
:08:48. > :08:51.the start of the summer, leaked documents from the Department for
:08:52. > :08:56.Education suggested that's what Michael Gove wanted to do. Nick
:08:56. > :09:01.Clegg read about that in the Daily Mail and was furious and took a red
:09:01. > :09:07.pen to that idea and Number Ten were surprised by it too. That
:09:07. > :09:11.queued through or four months of wrangling and that's led us to this
:09:12. > :09:15.point today. Having said that, there is not going to be a two-tier
:09:15. > :09:18.system, there has been hints there will be some differentation by
:09:18. > :09:21.ability in the new exams. We don't know what form that will take. We
:09:21. > :09:26.will have to wait until Michael Gove, the Education Secretary
:09:26. > :09:32.stands up in there at 3.30pm to outline his plans.
:09:32. > :09:35.Does This have the hallmarks of a prom pro mice that doesn't --
:09:36. > :09:41.compromise that doesn't please either side. The Lib Dems wouldn't
:09:41. > :09:46.have gone back to an O-level system and if Mr Gove got his way he would
:09:46. > :09:49.be introducing two new exams? the Lib Dems are happy this lunch
:09:49. > :09:56.time and they are pointing to two things as they see as victories,
:09:56. > :09:59.one, the stuff we were talking about. They are going to use this
:09:59. > :10:03.catchphrase, they will have an exam system where no child is left
:10:03. > :10:06.behind. The other thing they are happy about is the timetable for
:10:06. > :10:12.this because bear in mind pupils will not start studying for the
:10:12. > :10:17.exams until 2015 which means they won't be sitting them until 2017.
:10:17. > :10:20.In political terms that's years away in case there are problems
:10:20. > :10:27.with the introduction of this new system. Coalition Coalition sources
:10:27. > :10:37.think this is an example. Example of the way the the parties are
:10:37. > :10:41.
:10:41. > :10:47.working together. Two new words Prolition and colicios!
:10:48. > :10:51.We are joined by Kennet Baker who still keeps a deep interest in
:10:51. > :10:56.matters education particularly in schools. Were you the architect of
:10:56. > :11:01.the GCSEs? Keith Joseph was. He started them. I implemented them. I
:11:01. > :11:06.think they have they have watered down over the year. They became
:11:06. > :11:10.less rigorous, I took a thing called the school certificate. It
:11:10. > :11:17.was really tough. But it was a certificate that ended education at
:11:17. > :11:23.16 16 because then you went to work. The first question - why have an
:11:23. > :11:29.exam at 16 when you are extending the school leaving age to 18?
:11:29. > :11:35.you keep people in school until 18 who were only doing O-levels? If
:11:35. > :11:40.you do well at 16, you go on to do A-levels? The real age of transfer
:11:40. > :11:46.is 14. Test them at 14 and provide the sort of schools that are nooded
:11:46. > :11:52.for young -- needed for youngsters. This is an academic driven reform
:11:52. > :11:54.and I welcome it. I guess is... is a radical idea if you are going
:11:54. > :11:58.to learn a foreign language you should have to translate something
:11:58. > :12:02.from English into that foreign language? Well, many youngsters in
:12:02. > :12:06.our schools will not do that. You can forget that.
:12:06. > :12:10.This is very much a grammar school approach to life. You have got to
:12:10. > :12:15.remember there are millions of youngsters in our schools who at 14
:12:15. > :12:20.want a practical vocational, hands on learning. Learning by doing as
:12:20. > :12:23.well as studying. That's why I'm setting up the university technical
:12:23. > :12:29.colleges and we are finding by mixing the engineering and maths
:12:29. > :12:35.together, their maths shoots up. I know you are doing that work in
:12:35. > :12:41.setting up schools which are more vocational than academic. Are you
:12:41. > :12:45.sad to see the end of GCSEs are have they become so devalued that
:12:45. > :12:49.it is time for something new? have to revise the exam system.
:12:49. > :12:53.They had become devalued, but they are welcome by lots of youngsters.
:12:54. > :12:58.They are They are proud of achievement, but if you have, you
:12:58. > :13:02.can't just test at 16 by a three hour exam in every subject. If you
:13:02. > :13:06.are you are doing a practical subject, you have done project work
:13:06. > :13:11.and created working together. You have modules. You have got to have
:13:11. > :13:17.that build in. I don't want vocational qualifications put in
:13:17. > :13:22.the back yard. They should be there in the front, on the front stage.
:13:22. > :13:26.I am unclear. Are you in favour of Mr Gove's reforms or not? I am in
:13:26. > :13:29.favour of the greater rigour in the basic subjects in English, maths
:13:29. > :13:34.and science. Could that not have been done with
:13:34. > :13:42.the existing GCSEs? You have to change the syllabus. It takes three
:13:42. > :13:47.or four years to do that. In trigonometry, how far do you go?
:13:47. > :13:50.How far do you go? That requires a lot of study and examination and
:13:50. > :13:55.the syllabuses have to be approved and the teachers have to learn to
:13:55. > :13:59.teach them. When you want to improve an exam system it is not
:13:59. > :14:04.like turning up the gas on a cooker to get it hotter. It takes longer
:14:04. > :14:10.than that to do. And in this change do you fear that
:14:10. > :14:14.the need for vocational education with rigour? Is not high up enough
:14:14. > :14:19.in the agenda? Yes, I don't think it is high enough. I am fighting
:14:19. > :14:23.for it to be high indeed. That's why I am starting these colleges
:14:23. > :14:28.with Michael Gove's support. I want to make them - look all of Europe
:14:28. > :14:32.is change to go 14 and America is changing to 14. You have four types
:14:32. > :14:36.of colleges, liberal arts college, a technical engineering college, a
:14:36. > :14:45.vocational college and a performing arts college. That's what Austria
:14:45. > :14:50.does and on Ontario. Is it your under standings that
:14:50. > :14:55.when the new O-levels came in you would be able to do vocational O-
:14:55. > :15:00.levels of rigour or will the O- levels be of an academic nature?
:15:00. > :15:05.There will Be vocational O-levels. I introduced the National
:15:05. > :15:10.Curriculum in 1998. The National Curriculum should stop at 14 and
:15:10. > :15:14.you should have a variety of different schools.
:15:14. > :15:18.This idea that there will be one exam system for each subject,
:15:19. > :15:23.rather than competing exam systems, providing a range of subjects?
:15:23. > :15:27.That's good. The big change that Michael is going to do is take out
:15:27. > :15:30.the exam boards competing with each other. That's been the do you think
:15:30. > :15:34.grading. That's encouraging the race to the
:15:34. > :15:40.bottom? That's what happened. It didn't happen in our time,
:15:40. > :15:50.Andrew. When children took O-levels they were easy.
:15:50. > :15:51.
:15:51. > :15:55.I I didn't only take O-levels! Isn't the real criticism of Labour
:15:55. > :15:59.is they spent a lot of money on education and made it a priority of
:15:59. > :16:04.Government, Mr Blair's famous, education, education, education,
:16:04. > :16:08.but they seem content to dine out on improving results, even as the
:16:08. > :16:12.evidence showed that the exams were being devalued. They were becoming
:16:12. > :16:15.easier to sit? I'm not sure about that. You don't think they were.
:16:15. > :16:18.a day when we are talking about reforming the qualification for
:16:18. > :16:22.GCSEs, I think we should remember there are thousands of young people
:16:22. > :16:27.who have got very good GCSEs grades this year nain previous years, they
:16:27. > :16:31.deserve them and have worked hard for them. -- this year and previous
:16:31. > :16:35.years. There is thast' not the issue. There is an issue about the
:16:35. > :16:39.integrity of the system. I think the point about the competition
:16:39. > :16:42.between exams boards needs to be addressed and the regulation of the
:16:42. > :16:45.exam system which again I think the Government will be addressing,
:16:45. > :16:49.which is welcome. The essential question, which Lord Baker
:16:49. > :16:54.addressside the question about what is the purpose of GCSE and what is
:16:54. > :16:57.the purpose of testing people at 16. The crucial question we have to
:16:57. > :17:00.address as this university technical colleges address, is what
:17:00. > :17:04.is the route for people who don't want to go on to university but who
:17:04. > :17:08.nevertheless deserve a hi-quality prestigious alternative pathway. We
:17:08. > :17:12.don't have that at the moment. Labour may have to implement this
:17:12. > :17:15.reform and if it gets into power at the next Government, should it or
:17:15. > :17:20.should it not? I think there are aspects of the package being
:17:20. > :17:23.proposed that Labour needs to look at. We don't know what Michael gef
:17:23. > :17:27.is precisely going to introduce but there are aspects that ought to be
:17:27. > :17:30.looked at by Labour. -- Michael Gove. The original Michael Gove
:17:30. > :17:35.criticism is you can't have one exam for everybody, one exam for
:17:35. > :17:40.people who like me read the auto cue and other people who are going
:17:40. > :17:44.to be nuclear physicists and brain surgeons but we end up with one.
:17:44. > :17:48.Lord baker is right. We need a system which is more diverse than
:17:48. > :17:51.what we have. Extra what is extraordinary is the Government has
:17:51. > :17:57.decided and expended so much political capital in this idea of
:17:57. > :18:01.just tackling the credibility of our GCSE system. When you look at
:18:01. > :18:06.the British education system there are far more fundamental issues
:18:06. > :18:10.which need tackling long before people get through to 16. Looking
:18:10. > :18:16.at basic skills in things like maths and reading and if you look
:18:16. > :18:26.at the latest OECD studies we are failing miserably on all of those.
:18:26. > :18:28.
:18:28. > :18:33.One nice thing is the head boy got a place at Russell university. He
:18:33. > :18:36.turned it down to do an apprenticeship with Rolls Royce,
:18:36. > :18:40.because he will get work and probably do a degree afterwards. I
:18:40. > :18:43.want different pathways for youngsters responding to their
:18:43. > :18:47.needs. Always good to talk to you on these matters. You may not have
:18:47. > :18:50.heard for them, su certainly didn't vote for them but the men and women
:18:50. > :18:55.who work for what we call think- tanks will almost certainly have
:18:55. > :18:59.had an effect on your life. Why? Because these so-called policy
:18:59. > :19:02.wonks, who dream up the bright ideas which sometimes form the
:19:02. > :19:06.policies of our political parties, so they have an influence. Does
:19:07. > :19:12.that make them a vital part of our democracy or a bnch of theorists
:19:12. > :19:16.who really should get out into the real world -- bunch of theorists.
:19:16. > :19:26.As Ken Baker has been saying. Most twopbt Oxbridge. David went to find
:19:26. > :19:31.
:19:31. > :19:35.This is the natural habitat of the think-tank. It might not look very
:19:35. > :19:37.exciting but people like these on both the left and right of politics
:19:37. > :19:43.come up with the ideas which ministers turn into policies which
:19:43. > :19:47.they use to govern Britain. It's a bigger deal than it looks.
:19:47. > :19:55.Nick paerdz is one of the kings of the think-tank jungle and a living
:19:55. > :19:58.example of how xected to Government they can be - nick Pearce. And an
:19:58. > :20:03.example of how connected to Government they should be. You want
:20:03. > :20:07.to give ammunition to look into the future. Things that are innovative.
:20:07. > :20:11.Helping you to think where will we be in two, three, four years' time
:20:11. > :20:14.and they should be doing things that politicians with their busy
:20:14. > :20:19.schedules, can't themselves easily do. So it is important for think
:20:19. > :20:22.tanks to be staying ahead of the curve, and thinking about things in
:20:22. > :20:26.creative innovative ways, politics is a hard place to do that in.
:20:26. > :20:31.there are those who believe that governments of whatever colour
:20:31. > :20:36.could do with a bit less blue-sky thinking and be a bit more real
:20:36. > :20:40.world. Do I not rely on them to give me ideas and I don't think my
:20:40. > :20:45.colleagues do. If they need to know something, they go out and find it.
:20:45. > :20:49.We need to restore our trust with the public. The way of doing that
:20:49. > :20:52.is to listen to what they have to say and put forward policies they
:20:52. > :20:56.want. Then there is the question of independence. Think-tanks need
:20:56. > :21:02.money and it has been suggested one of the best ways to lobby
:21:02. > :21:05.Government is to sponsor a think- tank event and get them to invite a
:21:05. > :21:09.sympathetic minister along. There isn't as much money going into
:21:09. > :21:12.think-tanks so they are having to fund-raise. It is important, if you
:21:12. > :21:15.do fund-raise to be absolutely clear where you are getting your
:21:15. > :21:19.money, from what research projects are being funded and you are
:21:19. > :21:23.transparent and above-board about it. Here is an idea. How about the
:21:23. > :21:27.people we pay to run the country doing a bit of their own thinking
:21:27. > :21:32.for a change. If I went out on to the streets of Redditch tomorrow
:21:32. > :21:37.and asked people what they, were I think I'd get a view blank stares.
:21:37. > :21:41.I think the people of Redditch expect me and the Government to put
:21:41. > :21:43.forward policies. That's who they letted to do that sort of thing.
:21:44. > :21:48.This might look detached from the real world but these people do at
:21:48. > :21:53.least give politicians something to work, with and you could be
:21:53. > :21:58.forgiven for thinking they could do with all the help they can get. My
:21:58. > :22:03.two guests here, Patrick Diamond and Ruth Porter, they are hi-tank
:22:03. > :22:10.policy wonks themselves, a very weird Westminster breed. Is it
:22:10. > :22:15.right you should have so much influence on the policy process?
:22:15. > :22:19.Being -- it's been the way for a long time. I think it is wonderful.
:22:19. > :22:24.The fundamental principle behind a think-tank is ideas matter. If you
:22:24. > :22:27.go back that lovely story of Margaret Thatcher throwing down on
:22:27. > :22:31.the table a copy of skaf constitution of Liberty and saying
:22:31. > :22:33.this is what we believe in. You have an interesting example at the
:22:34. > :22:37.moment with Ed Miliband talking about the idea of pre-distribution
:22:37. > :22:41.and that's clearly going to be something which, whatever name it
:22:41. > :22:45.ends up with, which is going to influence Labour's thinking over
:22:45. > :22:52.the months and possibly years to come and the origins and the seeds
:22:52. > :22:57.for that were in a lecture that was delivered at Demos two years ago by
:22:57. > :23:00.one of the world's leading political thinkers. I think it is
:23:00. > :23:04.important. Ideas do have consequences for all of us in the
:23:04. > :23:10.nitty gritty of our lives. We need it take them seriously. But the
:23:10. > :23:16.problem is who is coming up with the ideas, the think-tanks, and
:23:16. > :23:20.there are lots within a stone's through of here. They straight out
:23:20. > :23:24.of university, wet behind the ears, never had a proper job, never had
:23:24. > :23:29.to meet a pay bill or done a union negotiation and yet they are coming
:23:29. > :23:35.up with the way to run the country. Well that's a approximatelyite
:23:35. > :23:38.description. An extraordinary bit of charm. There are lots of people
:23:38. > :23:41.working this n think-tanks that come from different backgrounds.
:23:41. > :23:44.There are people increasingly in think-tanks that come from a jk
:23:44. > :23:49.ground of having worked in organisations whether they have
:23:49. > :23:53.delivered things on the ground, whether it is charities or
:23:53. > :23:57.political enterprise. There is an issue, I think about the proximity
:23:57. > :23:59.of think-tanks to the political parties. I think where you see
:23:59. > :24:03.think-tanks making a difference to the debate about the ideas in
:24:04. > :24:06.politics, it is where they are able to have some critical distance to
:24:06. > :24:09.what political parties and politicians are saying. When we
:24:09. > :24:14.have lived through an era in which they have been fundamental
:24:14. > :24:17.questions asked about our banks system and financial secondor and
:24:18. > :24:21.fundamental questions asked about how we can fund our public services,
:24:21. > :24:24.we need think-tanks that have independence from politics and have
:24:24. > :24:27.the courage to ask more difficult questions than those that are
:24:27. > :24:31.perhaps asked every day in political debate. In one way you
:24:31. > :24:35.are not independent, because to get your money, you go to big companies
:24:35. > :24:39.or vested interests, lobby groups and they finance your seminars in
:24:39. > :24:46.return for you, because you can attract ministers and shadow
:24:46. > :24:52.ministers. You give these vested interest of Government ministers.
:24:52. > :24:56.think there is a difference between think-tanks that do money for
:24:56. > :25:00.specific research reports. And just having seminars paid for by the
:25:00. > :25:04.energy industry or the green lobby. Point of independence which Nick
:25:04. > :25:07.Pearce made in that film, which is very interesting, I think is when
:25:08. > :25:11.MPs get into Parliament, they are so busy with the day-to-day of
:25:11. > :25:15.things that they can't take a step back from that and actually ask
:25:15. > :25:18.questions, genuinely bwhat policies are going to be, not in the
:25:18. > :25:22.interests of a particular industry, like a trade association, but what
:25:22. > :25:26.policies are going to be in the interests of the country as a whole.
:25:27. > :25:31.I think that's the unique space that think-tanks occupy.
:25:31. > :25:34.I'm still puzzled you can afford to work for a think-tank and live in
:25:34. > :25:39.London. Because they don't pay very much.
:25:39. > :25:45.Before you leave, Ruth and Patrick, we need to find out the answer to
:25:45. > :25:48.our quiz. The question was: which was the odd-one-out, George Osborne,
:25:48. > :25:53.Alex Salmond, Theresa May or Boris Johnson. Patrick, I think you were
:25:53. > :25:58.a little bit more sure. I'm going to take a punt at Boris Johnson.
:25:58. > :26:02.Because... Because he was the only one not to be booed at the medal
:26:02. > :26:07.ceremony at the Olympic or Paralympic Games. You are almost
:26:08. > :26:12.right. He was the only one not to be booed but Mr Salmond was booed,
:26:12. > :26:16.but not at the Olympics. Let's hear a bit of what happened
:26:16. > :26:20.at the weekend. It was before the weekend, I think. It was in George
:26:21. > :26:25.Square in the heart of Glasgow. word with the First Minister at the
:26:25. > :26:30.end here. A proud summer as well. BOOS.
:26:30. > :26:33.Come on, folks. I think we should say firstly from Glasgow and
:26:33. > :26:38.Scotland that Colin and his committee in London set the bar
:26:38. > :26:44.very high indeed. Did a wonderful job. That was at the Olympic
:26:44. > :26:50.ceremony for the Scottish Olympians and medal winners there. There were
:26:50. > :26:55.cheers there. It wasn't as quite as clear-cut as Mr Os Gordon Brown.
:26:55. > :26:58.But we can speak to Torcuil Crichton from Scotland's daily
:26:58. > :27:04.newspaper. Were you surprised he got booed
:27:04. > :27:10.even by only part of the audience? Well, you take George Square in
:27:10. > :27:14.Glasgow where they fly red flags and you take them celebrating the
:27:14. > :27:19.Olympics and you take a national leader who was disparaging about
:27:19. > :27:22.the Olympics for seven years, and you just add water. Or maybe oil.
:27:22. > :27:26.Perhaps. It must have been vicious bus you could tell from the delight
:27:26. > :27:32.of the reaction from Labour politicians that it had been effect.
:27:32. > :27:37.Do you think he was surprised by it, he is not used to being booed?
:27:37. > :27:42.He has been booed in the past. He was booed in Hampden stadium and I
:27:43. > :27:48.heard at the Military Tattoo. He is a popular politician, he is a
:27:48. > :27:51.Marmite politician, some like him, some don't, but he has personal
:27:51. > :27:58.popularity opinions that George Osborne would sell the Crown Estate
:27:58. > :28:02.for. Don't give him that idea. is satled to this unpopular policy,
:28:02. > :28:07.independence -- sadled. He is Alex Salmond first leader, associated
:28:07. > :28:11.with independence. His strategy now has to somehow decouple the
:28:11. > :28:15.unpopular policy and have a referendum or not and decouple that
:28:15. > :28:18.from the idea of a popular SNP Government and a popular
:28:18. > :28:22.nationalist leader because win, lose or draw the referendum, the
:28:22. > :28:26.SNP will want to carry on governing in Scotland so he has to try to
:28:26. > :28:29.keep these two, somehow, although it will not be easy, keep these
:28:29. > :28:33.ideas apart. Is there something significant by the fact that this
:28:33. > :28:37.happened in Glasgow, which is Scotland's biggest city and the
:28:37. > :28:42.surrounding area contains about half of Scotland's population and
:28:42. > :28:48.it is still, as I understand it, quite a tough nut for the
:28:48. > :28:51.nationalists to crack. It is not national -- natural nationalists
:28:51. > :29:00.territory and maybe because of Rangers and other things, parts of
:29:00. > :29:03.it are quite strongly Unionist. because of the working class
:29:03. > :29:07.protestant inheritance of unionism. Politically Labour, although this
:29:07. > :29:11.high tide of nationalism, we saw the Scottish Government elections
:29:11. > :29:15.meant that the SNP now have constituency seats in the Scottish
:29:15. > :29:19.Parliament in Glasgow. Nonetheless, when they tried to storm Glasgow in
:29:19. > :29:22.the local government elections, which would have been that next
:29:22. > :29:27.step towards a successful referendum campaign, Labour stopped
:29:27. > :29:31.them at the gate. It was a Stalingrad scenario where Labour
:29:31. > :29:38.had to pile everything into Glasgow to save the day, which they zand
:29:38. > :29:43.that may well have been the high tide of Alex Salmond's SNP may have
:29:43. > :29:47.been May 2010 when they won that amazing majority in the Scottish
:29:47. > :29:51.Parliament. Glasgow has been hard for the SNP.
:29:51. > :29:54.George Square is where they raise red skies. Thank you for joining us.
:29:54. > :29:59.A beautiful view of Westminster behind you there.
:29:59. > :30:04.Thank you for joining us. Patrick and Ruth thauve thank you also for
:30:04. > :30:09.being with us today. -- Patrick and Ruth. Thank you also.
:30:09. > :30:17.We have a busy week, today sees the Second Reading of the
:30:17. > :30:21.infrastructure Bill which gar which allows the Government to guarantee
:30:21. > :30:25.infrastructure works. And tomorrow Michael gef will
:30:25. > :30:28.announce the exam restructure. And on Wednesday, Parliament goes into
:30:29. > :30:32.recess, again, well it has been there for two weeks, there will be
:30:32. > :30:35.no Prime Minister's Questions. On Thursday, former Liberal Democrat
:30:35. > :30:42.secretary, Chris Huhne appears in court. That could be worth the
:30:42. > :30:47.price of admission, accused of perverting the course of justice,
:30:47. > :30:52.on a speeding offence, a charge he denies.
:30:52. > :30:54.And the UKIP conference starts in brum on Friday and on Saturday, the
:30:54. > :30:59.Liberal Democrats begin their autumn skin dig in the delights of
:30:59. > :31:01.Brighton. To give us more detail we have Westminster insiders, -
:31:01. > :31:07.actually they are outside Westminster at the moment - and
:31:07. > :31:13.they may not be allowed back in again. Helen lies of the New
:31:13. > :31:18.Statesman and Andrew Pierce of the Lots of talk about leadership
:31:18. > :31:24.threats or unhappiness for Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg. Do we take
:31:24. > :31:28.any of it seriously? Yes, I think we do. The Tory MPs are very, very
:31:28. > :31:31.unhappy and unless John Major is right and the green shoots of
:31:32. > :31:36.recovery are underway I think Mr Cameron Cameron could be in trouble,
:31:36. > :31:40.but not yet. They will give him a year. The leader who is in most
:31:40. > :31:46.trouble is Nick Clegg. I think it is inconceivable he will lead the
:31:46. > :31:56.Liberal Democrats into the next general election. So keep - most
:31:56. > :31:59.
:31:59. > :32:02.most people are putting their money on Vince Cable. Don't forget Tim
:32:02. > :32:05.Farran, and he is not a Cabinet Minister so he can speak up for the
:32:05. > :32:09.Liberal Democrat activist who are fed-up. What have they got out of
:32:10. > :32:13.the coalition? They didn't get AV or House of Lords reform. They
:32:13. > :32:18.might get may marriage, but that wasn't in their manifesto.
:32:18. > :32:23.Helen, do you think David Cameron is not under any immediate threat,
:32:23. > :32:29.it is the medium-term nonsense? Do you think Nick Clegg is under more
:32:29. > :32:34.threat? Well, I think Nick Clegg is a useful sponge for the Lib Dems.
:32:34. > :32:39.There is a testimony temptation that you can pin the unpopular
:32:39. > :32:41.things on him. But I think David Cameron will be watching Boris
:32:41. > :32:44.Johnson's conference speech with apprehension.
:32:44. > :32:48.We all will! LAUGHTER
:32:48. > :32:52.But more so than anyone else. We know he is a fantastic or ra tor.
:32:52. > :32:57.He has the freedom of not being in the Cabinet to say the things he
:32:57. > :33:04.wants to say and he can throw red meat to the Tory faithful.
:33:04. > :33:07.There is 14 Tory MPs ready to plunge the sword into Mr Cameron. I
:33:07. > :33:12.suggest to you Andrew there is always in the history of the Tory
:33:12. > :33:15.Party 14 MPs ready to plunge the sword into their leader? That's
:33:15. > :33:24.right. You need 46 and that's a long way off, but it is interesting
:33:24. > :33:29.that one has been publicly outed, Patrick Mercer. He was sacked by Mr
:33:29. > :33:34.Cameron. Some of the 14 will be people who have been overlooked for
:33:34. > :33:38.a job and there will be an awkward squad. But there is no doubt behind
:33:38. > :33:41.the scenes in the House of Commons people are very, very uneasy. They
:33:41. > :33:45.see how far Labour are ahead in the opinion polls and remember this -
:33:45. > :33:50.they have not really forgiven David Cameron for not winning the general
:33:50. > :33:56.election against Gordon Brown who really should have been a walk over.
:33:56. > :34:03.Helen, what do you make of the love affair now between Mr Clegg and Mr
:34:03. > :34:13.Gove? They are not out together, indeed we had one description that
:34:13. > :34:18.now the reform of the GCSEs, that it is a new word colicious? Well,
:34:18. > :34:23.it it is in the Nick Clegg's interest and the dumping of the
:34:23. > :34:27.two-tier system. I can't imagine the two of them will be having
:34:27. > :34:34.country suppers any time soon! They are unlikely bedfellows. I
:34:34. > :34:38.think David Cameron is - sorry escape Michael Gove is comfortable
:34:38. > :34:42.working alongside David Laws, it is one of the orange book Lib Dems. A
:34:43. > :34:46.Lib Dem that most Tories think is in the wrong party.
:34:47. > :34:50.OK, Helen, Andrew, we will leave it there. Good luck trying to get back
:34:50. > :35:00.into Westminster. I have spoken to security!
:35:00. > :35:03.
:35:03. > :35:07.We have been joined by three MPs, the Conservative Chris Skidmore,
:35:07. > :35:13.labour's representative. Michael Gove and NEC are announcing their
:35:13. > :35:17.plans to scrap GCSEs. Let's talk about. Is there a concern among
:35:17. > :35:23.parents and teachers that the exam system in some ways seem to change
:35:23. > :35:28.every year? Well, for somebody who has taken GCSEs, the real change
:35:28. > :35:30.that happens is each year that the standards go up and yet, at the
:35:30. > :35:34.same time, we see from businesses, from universities, they are not
:35:34. > :35:38.happy with the the results and you have got to take GCSEs in an
:35:38. > :35:42.international context. You are seeing grade inflation taking place
:35:42. > :35:45.year-on-year on year and to be fair politicians of all political
:35:46. > :35:51.parties previously hold your hands up, we have not been honest and we
:35:51. > :35:58.have not said, "Hang on a second, we have seen past grades going up
:35:58. > :36:02.from 40% to 70%." And that's what we need to look at. If we are to be
:36:03. > :36:06.fair on the pupils, if they need to get into university, we need to be
:36:06. > :36:09.rigorous in our approach to educational stoondz.
:36:09. > :36:14.-- standards. Did Labour allow the exams to get
:36:14. > :36:18.easy? No. You have to look at what has been taught at school and the
:36:18. > :36:23.quality of teaching and I think it doesn't really matter at the end of
:36:23. > :36:26.the day about the exams. GCSEs are fine and if the Conservatives want
:36:26. > :36:31.to go back to the old-fashioned system which had a two-tier
:36:31. > :36:39.system... But they are not going back to that? It might not be the
:36:39. > :36:43.same. But they are messing up the exam system. If exams didn't get
:36:43. > :36:48.easier so more and more people get higher and higher marks, how come
:36:48. > :36:52.more and more people get better and better at exams and yet in every
:36:52. > :36:56.major international league table we fell down the league tables?
:36:56. > :36:58.reason people did better because there has been real investment by a
:36:58. > :37:03.Labour Party Government for 13 years.
:37:03. > :37:07.Why did they fall down the league tables? Well, they are measured in
:37:07. > :37:11.different ways. Every one we fell down. Something
:37:11. > :37:15.is clearly wrong when our exam results showed us getting better
:37:15. > :37:21.and better and by international international comparisons we were
:37:21. > :37:24.getting worse and worse, we were below Albania on some things?
:37:24. > :37:28.mean that's not the real question here. The real question is about
:37:28. > :37:31.investment in education and about making sure that what has been
:37:31. > :37:35.taught is being taught well. The children are learning it well and
:37:35. > :37:39.not messing around with an exam system... Why doesn't that show up
:37:39. > :37:45.- you are not answering the question. Why doesn't that show up
:37:45. > :37:48.if we had done this investment and our pupils are getting brighter and
:37:48. > :37:52.brighter because teachers are getting better and better, why did
:37:52. > :37:56.we tumble down the international comparisons? Well, there are many
:37:56. > :38:00.different factors why you can have the comparisons, but to pin it down
:38:00. > :38:05.to the fact that it is the exam system that has got easier is the
:38:05. > :38:10.wrong comparison. Why? I am asking you? I am saying
:38:10. > :38:16.that's the wrong comparison to make. The fact is for some reason we want
:38:16. > :38:21.to denigrate our young people because they are doing better -
:38:21. > :38:26.they do. I thought you were against this?
:38:26. > :38:29.no,, what we are against is having a two-tier education system and
:38:29. > :38:33.leaving children behind, deciding at age 14 that some children were
:38:33. > :38:37.less able than others. We have managed to make sure that isn't
:38:37. > :38:40.what is going to happen in the education system going forwards. We
:38:40. > :38:45.have problems in the education system. I think the problems we
:38:45. > :38:51.have is far earlier in the age three to five which is why we have
:38:51. > :38:57.been pushing the pupil premium, �2.5 billion per year will be going
:38:57. > :39:00.into educating early years. If Mr Gove hadn't proposed them in
:39:00. > :39:03.the first place, this is not a route you would have gone down?
:39:04. > :39:07.is not. But it is a coalition Government.
:39:07. > :39:10.You don't really believe in it? looked at the proposals. We made
:39:10. > :39:14.them better. We made sure that no children are left behind.
:39:14. > :39:19.Children are left behind every day? Well, yes they were.
:39:19. > :39:24.They have been left behind in the past and they will be left behind
:39:25. > :39:28.in the future. Look at the number of kids who go to our top
:39:28. > :39:31.universities who are on free school lunches? The reason that that is
:39:31. > :39:36.because our children are not getting the basics right at age
:39:36. > :39:40.three to five. By age five, too many of our children are already
:39:40. > :39:45.left behind and they never camp up and that's why -- catch up and
:39:45. > :39:48.that's where we need to be investing most money to turn that
:39:48. > :39:53.around. I would love to talk more about
:39:53. > :39:56.this because I am interested. This afternoon the welfare secretary,
:39:56. > :40:02.Iain Duncan Smith, will be questioned by MPs about his
:40:02. > :40:08.flagship benefits policy. It is called the Universal Credit. Mr
:40:08. > :40:18.Duncan Smith wants this to replace other benefits. Reports emerged in
:40:18. > :40:22.the papers over the weekend of senior politicians against it. The
:40:22. > :40:26.Social Market Foundation published a report saying that Universal
:40:26. > :40:30.Credit will lead to increased hardship for benefit claimants.
:40:30. > :40:37.The Government are trying to prepare families for work and to
:40:37. > :40:42.simplify the system, but this this single monthly payment is a big
:40:42. > :40:48.gambling. It is handing overall responsibilities to family and our
:40:48. > :40:53.research with low income families show many are concern dha concerned
:40:53. > :40:58.that many will run out of money by the end of the month and it could
:40:58. > :41:03.cause havoc. Chris Skidmore, the Universal
:41:03. > :41:07.Credit, what is it? Well, it is a single wrap around payment that
:41:07. > :41:12.will merge the benefits together. At the moment we have 55 different
:41:12. > :41:15.types of benefits within the DWP. With that will come a measure where
:41:15. > :41:18.we will have a tapering system because there is great unfairness
:41:19. > :41:21.that you can want be in work, but at the same time you haven't got
:41:21. > :41:25.that cushion because you lose your benefits.
:41:25. > :41:29.But will it be universal? We don't know what will happen to council
:41:29. > :41:33.tax benefit? You have got to take that in the context that we have
:41:33. > :41:36.the highest benefits bill in the whole of Europe and it is
:41:36. > :41:40.unsustainable. Really? We pay more benefits than
:41:40. > :41:44.Sweden or France? Yes. Do we? Yes.
:41:44. > :41:47.Where did you get that from? Western Europe.
:41:47. > :41:50.Well, Sweden and France are in Western Europe.
:41:50. > :41:57.More people maybe on it, but that doesn't mean we have the highest
:41:57. > :42:00.bill? Well, the proportion. We'll look at that. It is not, it
:42:00. > :42:05.is probably not quite Universal Credit would be a more accurate
:42:05. > :42:10.name for it, but explain Mr Cameron tried to move Iain Duncan Smith,
:42:10. > :42:15.but this is very much his baby. The Cabinet Secretary seems to be
:42:15. > :42:20.against it and the Lib Dems are lukewarm about it. Is the
:42:20. > :42:23.coalition's heart really in the change? Well, speaking to
:42:23. > :42:27.constituents particularly at Jobcentre, they think this is a
:42:27. > :42:31.radical change change that's needed. I don't know, but speaking to other
:42:31. > :42:34.MPs here, but the number of people I get who have a problem with the
:42:34. > :42:38.system and the complexity of the system, the number of loopholes and
:42:38. > :42:42.issues with that needs to be simplified and sorted out. We can't
:42:42. > :42:47.carried on with the status quo. We can't carry on with the rising
:42:47. > :42:53.benefits bill. Is Labour, I know you can argue
:42:53. > :42:56.about details and say you do things in different ways, but a general
:42:57. > :43:00.proposition, is Labour in favour or against the Universal Credit?
:43:00. > :43:04.principle Labour said they are in favour of the Universal Credit, but
:43:04. > :43:08.it depends on how it is put into place. And the fact that you also
:43:08. > :43:12.have to recognise the fact that there is no one single formula for
:43:12. > :43:18.each family and what the current proposal doesn't do is take those
:43:18. > :43:22.into consideration in a Freedom of Information Request about the
:43:22. > :43:29.Universal Credit to the department which was refused. It seems that
:43:29. > :43:38.the whole scheme has gone over by �100 million. �100 million wouldn't
:43:38. > :43:45.be much in a welfare bill of �130 million... �156 billion.
:43:45. > :43:48.Leaving that aside. More people would go back to work, but that
:43:48. > :43:53.proposals shows because of the changes to working tax credit,
:43:53. > :43:57.increasing the hours from 16 to 24, what you are going to have is more
:43:57. > :44:02.working families lose out on working credits and as a result end
:44:02. > :44:09.up going into the benefit system system which they are out of.
:44:09. > :44:14.If Labour wins the next election will you keep the Universal Credit,
:44:14. > :44:20.or change it in ways you are talking about or scrap it? I think
:44:20. > :44:26.it will be changed in certain ways. So you will keep it? There are good
:44:26. > :44:34.things about it. Some things about it are good, but the way it has
:44:34. > :44:41.been impla thed -- implemented is wrong. Disability benefit benefit
:44:41. > :44:44.for young children is going to go down. People with young families.
:44:44. > :44:49.Those are the things we would make sure wouldn't happen.
:44:49. > :44:55.Would you cut the welfare bill? Some aspects would be cut. What
:44:55. > :45:04.aspects would you cut? What bits would you cut? Cut down on some of
:45:04. > :45:08.the benefits. In terms of, for example, we have said that we will
:45:08. > :45:11.see what the state of the economy is when we get in and then
:45:11. > :45:15.according to that make an adjustment, but we will not hit the
:45:15. > :45:25.vulnerable. No, no, you said that. I wonder
:45:25. > :45:28.
:45:28. > :45:32.Has this policy still got legs? People seem to be undermining Iain
:45:32. > :45:36.Duncan Smith within the coalition? I don't mean the Liberal Democrats,
:45:36. > :45:40.I mean the cabinet secretary. It was quite remarkable that Mr
:45:40. > :45:43.Cameron should try to move Iain Duncan Smith. He has told me both
:45:43. > :45:47.privately and publicly that this is the one thing that he is in
:45:47. > :45:55.politics to do, he said to me once - I don't want to do anything else
:45:55. > :45:59.after this is done. Absolutely and probably the they are probably the
:45:59. > :46:03.team, in coalition terms that are working best together. Steve Webb
:46:03. > :46:06.is in there doing the pension side of things and he wouldn't want to
:46:06. > :46:10.be moved. But they are working well together. All parties would agree
:46:10. > :46:17.the principle behind this is about making work pay. It's actually how
:46:17. > :46:21.we do that best. And I think that there are far too many
:46:21. > :46:25.disincentives in the system as it is at present, as Chris has said,
:46:25. > :46:29.when you gain work you immediately lose some means-tested benefits and
:46:29. > :46:33.have to apply for other benefits. By removing a lot of that, it makes
:46:33. > :46:38.it easier for people to move into work, the taper is far better, so
:46:38. > :46:42.we can have people working five hours, ten hours, and it still be
:46:42. > :46:46.worth their while, whereas at the moment it isn't. Is your party
:46:46. > :46:49.united in this? Only earlier this year, Paddy Ashdown spoke out
:46:49. > :46:53.against welfare reform and he was against the benefit cap, even
:46:53. > :46:58.though that will only be reduced to �26,000, which is the average wage
:46:58. > :47:02.people get when they go out and work, and yet you will still get
:47:02. > :47:05.benefits equal to the average age of people working, why speak
:47:05. > :47:08.against it? It is an enormous reform, one of the biggest the
:47:08. > :47:12.Government has ever tried to undertake which presumably is why
:47:12. > :47:16.Labour just avoided it for the last 13 years. There will be elements of
:47:16. > :47:22.Tha'ir lots of people will have issues with. I had issues with some
:47:22. > :47:25.of the welfare reform as well. You know, I voted against some of the
:47:25. > :47:30.proposals on under-occupancy, I don't think they are workable in
:47:30. > :47:35.the present form. But the general thrust of the welfare reform
:47:35. > :47:38.package, and bringing in Universial Credit, is, without doubt, the
:47:38. > :47:43.right direction to be going and all parties I think, agree on that.
:47:43. > :47:48.Have you got a plan B for when the IT system doesn't work? It probably
:47:48. > :47:53.won't, will it? We have had problems. It won't work. But if you
:47:53. > :47:56.look at the system currently it is boosted off BBC micro-s. We have to
:47:56. > :48:00.march forward with this and regardless with technology we will
:48:00. > :48:06.get there in the end. It is an interesting, huge, reform. Now what
:48:06. > :48:10.did you read over the summer? That twepbtyi shades of whatnot nonsense
:48:10. > :48:14.or whatever it was called -- 20 shades. How about Britannia
:48:14. > :48:18.Unchained. It sounds like it could be written by the same author but
:48:18. > :48:21.it is a series of essays by proud young Tory MPs who have come up
:48:21. > :48:24.with solutions for nearly all of the country's problems. They are so
:48:24. > :48:28.bright, that's what they have done. One of the authors is even sitting
:48:28. > :48:31.with me here in the studio. But do these books ever change politics?
:48:31. > :48:41.Adam has been reading between the lines.
:48:41. > :48:44.
:48:44. > :48:47.Have you got a book called Britannia Unchained? It's by truss
:48:47. > :48:54.truss truss. -- Liz Truss, Kwasi Kwarteng, Dominic Raab, Chris
:48:54. > :49:00.Skidmore, Priti Patel. No. They are very up-and-coming.
:49:00. > :49:04.I'm very sorry. There it is. Now this is a series
:49:04. > :49:10.of essays about things like the competitiveness of UK industry. How
:49:10. > :49:14.to cut the deficit, good Tory stuff like that. But it hit the headlines
:49:14. > :49:20.after the authors accused British workers of being work shy. It's the
:49:20. > :49:25.latest in a very, very long shelf of political cook books filled with
:49:25. > :49:31.recipes for policies. Now this is one of the granddadies. The Future
:49:31. > :49:35.of socialism by Anthony Crosland. Gordon Brown says in the foreword
:49:35. > :49:39."It was a wick-up call to a post- war Labour Party. He was a
:49:39. > :49:43.moderniser before the word became current." Then there is compassion
:49:43. > :49:47.able Conservatism by Jesse Norman, now an MP. In the mid-2,000s this
:49:47. > :49:55.is one of the books you reached for if you wanted to know what this new
:49:55. > :49:58.guy, David Cameron, was all about. And about the Orning Book written
:49:58. > :50:03.by Nick Clegg, Christopher Huhne and David Laws. Even now, the
:50:03. > :50:07.Liberal Democrats is split between these guys, who are much more
:50:07. > :50:12.market-friend lip and those who are much more left-wing. But political
:50:12. > :50:16.publisher Iain Dale says no MP writes them for the money because
:50:16. > :50:19.they don't make any. You really write books it make your own rep
:50:19. > :50:23.pew traigs. Over the past few years you have had a few Conservative MPs
:50:23. > :50:27.who got in in the 2010 election who are looking it make their names and
:50:27. > :50:33.stand out from the crowd because there are what, 150 new Tory MPs.
:50:33. > :50:37.The book-buying public has propelled Britannia Unchained in
:50:37. > :50:42.7,000-and-something position in the best seller list of a well-known
:50:42. > :50:45.online retailer but do tomes like this prove more persuasive at
:50:45. > :50:48.Westminster? What has influence is the ideas of being advanced.
:50:48. > :50:53.Remember the books are only one aspect. They do it by newspaper
:50:53. > :51:01.articles, by blogs and interviews on radio and TV. The books by
:51:01. > :51:04.themselves, no, not many will read them. The view among Parliament's
:51:04. > :51:10.bibliophiles is that they mark out people who want to get on. It is
:51:10. > :51:14.not the plot that matters, it is the author. Do you have Full
:51:14. > :51:16.disclosure by Andrew Neil? You do, and it is only 50p. I'll be
:51:16. > :51:23.straight around to do it. Thank you very much.
:51:23. > :51:28.50p. He was robbed. You can get it for 20 on another online list. 20p
:51:28. > :51:33.that is. So, Chris, what is it like to be 7,430 on the best-sellers
:51:33. > :51:37.list? It is an honour for a political book. I'm surprised it
:51:38. > :51:43.got that high so, far. It has only come out. I appreciate the plug.
:51:43. > :51:49.It'll zm now. You call for - it is a libertarian, Europe sceptic pro-
:51:49. > :51:52.reform of welfare, further than Mr Duncan Smith could go. There is no
:51:52. > :51:57.chance that any of this can be done before the next election, in a
:51:57. > :52:01.sense this is your manifesto for the next election. It is very much
:52:01. > :52:03.trying to get ideas on the table. There is nowhere on in book that
:52:03. > :52:07.says this is what the Conservative Party should do to win a general
:52:07. > :52:13.election. This is about getting ideas out to be debated and
:52:13. > :52:17.discussed. Very much in the model, - we are now in the 21 century,
:52:17. > :52:21.looking forward 20 to 30 years. It is an optimistic book. Well there
:52:22. > :52:26.are two parts, we can keep the stpait us quo or how can we compete
:52:26. > :52:31.with India and China and the other nations becoming industrialised, in
:52:31. > :52:38.order to ensure that we continue our place... Are you read this
:52:38. > :52:48.book? Written one, this one? Written one. No. What political
:52:48. > :52:48.
:52:48. > :52:54.book influenced you? Well I actually found that the Capital by
:52:54. > :52:57.Marx and others interesting. There is a bit I particularly liked, but
:52:57. > :53:02.competition is the last - business people or capitalism needs
:53:02. > :53:07.competition like it needs a hole in its head. I thought that was a very
:53:07. > :53:11.good expression. Adam Smith put it much better. When a group of
:53:11. > :53:17.businessmen get it better, their purpose is to conspire against the
:53:17. > :53:23.public. He wrote better than Marx. Have you written a bok? I have read
:53:23. > :53:27.a few. Would you like to do one? Are you going to readbury tan why
:53:27. > :53:32.unchained? I have to admit I looked it up on a well-known online
:53:32. > :53:39.retailer. I can get it for �6.28. It'll soon be cheaper than that.
:53:39. > :53:43.might hold on. But the Purple Book about �6.50. What is that?
:53:43. > :53:49.Labour Party's equivalent of the Orning Book. You can get it for
:53:49. > :53:52.�6.50 but you have to pay �10 for the Orange Book. Orange Book must
:53:52. > :53:56.have been the most talked about Liberal Democrat book of modern
:53:56. > :53:59.times. People define themselves to it. It is portrayed as being a
:53:59. > :54:05.left-right split, where your reporter mentioned a number of
:54:05. > :54:07.people who contributed to it but one of the main contributors was
:54:08. > :54:12.Vince cable. Nobody would say that the Conservatives look upon him -
:54:12. > :54:17.well they would say he should be in another party - but not the
:54:17. > :54:20.Conservative Party. Didn't David Laws call in it for an insurance-
:54:20. > :54:25.based system of health care. What happened to that? It's ideas. All
:54:25. > :54:29.out there for ideas. Have you read it It is radical and far-reaching
:54:29. > :54:33.stuff. Some of the stuff on top-up fees, if we ever get there, will be
:54:33. > :54:38.welcome. We need to move on. We have an important contemporary
:54:38. > :54:42.story to do. Very up-to-date. Britain could see a full-scale
:54:42. > :54:47.state funeral. Oh, yes, for king Richard III. Chris Skidmore here
:54:47. > :54:52.thinks so, but only if a set of bones that were nound a car park in
:54:52. > :54:57.Leicester turns out to be the remains of the 159 century king. -
:54:57. > :55:00.were found. Lin Foxhall is head of the
:55:00. > :55:06.University of Leicester's School of Archaeology. Does it look like
:55:06. > :55:11.these are the bones of King Richard III? Well we have a pretty likely
:55:11. > :55:17.candidate for the body of King Richard III, but at the moment it
:55:17. > :55:23.is only circumstantial evidence. We have a skeleton, male, clearly
:55:23. > :55:30.killed in battle and with severe scoliosis, that is curvature of the
:55:30. > :55:40.spine, buried in a place in the grey friers' Church, where some
:55:40. > :55:40.
:55:40. > :55:45.historical sources suggested he ought to be buried Grey Friarss
:55:45. > :55:48.Church. But we need to do more testing to make sure this is really
:55:48. > :55:52.the right individual, including genetic testing. When skilled
:55:52. > :55:57.professionals like yourselves and others get to grips with this, will
:55:57. > :56:01.you be able to tills, reasonably defintively, at some stage, whether
:56:01. > :56:05.or not this is the king? Well, we hope so. Again, it depends on the
:56:05. > :56:10.results of the DNA testing. And there are many things that could go
:56:10. > :56:14.wrong with that. I mean we hope, we're pretty hopeful that we'll get
:56:14. > :56:18.some good results out of that, but at this stage we can't be certain
:56:18. > :56:24.and that's going to take about another 12 weeks. I mean it is very
:56:24. > :56:27.unusual for archaeologists to be able to identify individuals in the
:56:28. > :56:33.archaeological record. This is extraordinary. And that we have got
:56:33. > :56:37.this close to even suggesting we have a famous individual is pretty
:56:37. > :56:41.remarkable. All right let me bring Chris Skidmore in. Why - let's
:56:41. > :56:45.assume this is the king - why should he get a state funeral?
:56:45. > :56:49.I think it's followed the traditions of every single anointed
:56:49. > :56:54.English king or Queen that they are afforded a state funeral at the end
:56:54. > :56:58.of their lives. We have not dug many up. No but everyone buried has
:56:58. > :57:01.been given a state funeral. Who is going to pay for the cost? Well it
:57:01. > :57:05.is something to be debated. I put down the motion to discuss it.
:57:05. > :57:10.There are interesting things, whether Richard should be buried in
:57:10. > :57:13.a Catholic orangely cancer mony. would have to be Catholic, he
:57:13. > :57:18.wasn't Anglican. Well there is a debate. How can you do that in the
:57:18. > :57:21.modern world, how can you have a Catholic state funeral? Well there
:57:21. > :57:26.may be Catholic rites so you could have a state funeral wrapped up
:57:26. > :57:30.within that. But it is worthwhile having a discussion. It is a
:57:30. > :57:37.remarkable find. Isn't this the chap that killed the Princes in the
:57:37. > :57:41.tower. Well that's certainly debatable. Tudor propaganda. I am
:57:41. > :57:51.have written a become about the Battle of Bosworth. I'm having to
:57:51. > :57:55.rewrite it because of the findings. People went missing. He Boss the
:57:55. > :57:59.Battle of Bosworth. Professor you must be excited about this, whether
:57:59. > :58:03.or not the bones should get a state funeral, it is a great find. It is.
:58:03. > :58:09.This is a debate we need to have further down the line. We're
:58:09. > :58:16.following, as all archaeologists should, the English Heritage and
:58:16. > :58:20.the Code of Ethical Practice for dealing on burials. And English
:58:20. > :58:25.Heritage's view on Christian burials is when you reinter the
:58:25. > :58:28.bones, where they get reinterred is a matter for discussion between all
:58:28. > :58:31.the relevant interested parties. Now in the case with a remarkable
:58:31. > :58:35.situation and a remarkable individual like this, there are
:58:35. > :58:39.some very important interested parties, including the Church of
:58:39. > :58:43.England and possibly the Palace, certainly possibly Parliament. So I
:58:43. > :58:47.think we're going to have this debate later. All right, professor.
:58:47. > :58:51.I'm sorry I have to interrupt. You will need the professor of
:58:51. > :58:54.diplomacy when it comes to all that. Thank you for joining us. People