:00:43. > :00:50.Afternoon, folks, welcome to the Daily Politics. In the words of
:00:50. > :00:54.Monty Python, he's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy! Or is he?
:00:54. > :01:00.Boris Johnson has hit Birmingham. The City has not seen anything like
:01:00. > :01:05.it since Ken Dodd played the Hippodrome in 1965! We will be
:01:05. > :01:08.speaking to the man himself, Boris, not Ken Dodd!
:01:08. > :01:14.The attention has apparently not been good for his ego but we
:01:14. > :01:18.thought we would add to the further anyway. He has got everything, he
:01:18. > :01:22.keeps the crowds, he makes us all happy.
:01:22. > :01:28.We will be talking to this man about how he will keep the health
:01:28. > :01:31.service healthy. He is not from the FA, he is the Health Secretary,
:01:31. > :01:35.Jeremy Hunt. And burglars beware - householders
:01:35. > :01:41.in England and Wales will soon be able to defend their home and
:01:41. > :01:46.family without fear of prosecution. As Nick Robinson said, we have gone
:01:46. > :01:50.from hug a hoodie to bash a burglar in under two years.
:01:50. > :01:54.All that is coming up in the next hour, with us for the duration the
:01:54. > :01:58.former Secretary of State for Scotland, Michael Forsyth.
:01:58. > :02:02.Let's talk about the economy, Michael Forsyth takes a big
:02:02. > :02:05.interest. It dominated conference yesterday, until Boris Johnson
:02:05. > :02:09.arrived! A report from the International
:02:09. > :02:14.Monetary Fund, the IMF, did not make happy reading for the
:02:14. > :02:23.Chancellor this morning. Its latest World economic Outlook, the IMF
:02:23. > :02:29.says it expects UK economic output to shrink by 0.4% this year, and
:02:29. > :02:34.that will be followed, it says, by a rise of just over 1% in 2013.
:02:34. > :02:38.That is also a downgrade. This is what the Prime Minister said.
:02:38. > :02:41.Obviously these are difficult times for the economy, and what the IMF
:02:41. > :02:46.report is doing is coming into line with other forecasters who have
:02:46. > :02:51.already said growth will disappoint right across Europe this year. We
:02:51. > :02:55.know that. But the IMF also say we should not abandon our plans of
:02:55. > :02:59.making reductions in government spending and also, regrettably in
:02:59. > :03:03.some cases, putting up some taxes to get on top of our debt and
:03:03. > :03:09.deficit. We do not new palm be, what we are doing is making sure
:03:09. > :03:12.that every part of plan A is firing on all Senate -- cylinders.
:03:12. > :03:17.The Prime Minister. Contrary to some reports, the IMF
:03:17. > :03:21.does not say to the government you have to change the plan now, but it
:03:21. > :03:26.says if growth continues to be as bad as it is now, you will have to
:03:26. > :03:29.change? That is embarrassing? have not read the report, but
:03:29. > :03:34.usually they are pretty hedged about, I am not surprised there are
:03:34. > :03:39.nuances. I think we have got fixated with reducing the deficit,
:03:39. > :03:43.of course we have to, but the way to reduce the deficit is to get
:03:43. > :03:49.growth going again. I think what was lacking in a speech from the
:03:49. > :03:53.Chancellor was any indication other than the scheme for equity and
:03:53. > :03:56.small businesses, any indication of how he will get smaller and medium-
:03:57. > :04:02.sized businesses running ahead. That is the only way forward.
:04:02. > :04:06.does not, in a sense, have strategy for growth? It feels a bit like Mr
:04:06. > :04:10.Micawber, he hope something will turn up when the numbers come out.
:04:10. > :04:14.I think we have to be more radical, looking at tax reductions and
:04:14. > :04:19.finding ways to finance them. Instead of putting off the spending
:04:19. > :04:24.cuts, we should perhaps look at other ways of making reductions in
:04:24. > :04:29.public expenditure, it seems to me. On overseas aid where there is a
:04:29. > :04:34.37% increase planned, even if they still wanted to go ahead, why not
:04:34. > :04:40.defer that rather than cutting people's benefits? Similarly, if
:04:40. > :04:45.the Government believes that we should reward people in work and
:04:45. > :04:48.not those on benefit, what were they doing increasing benefits by
:04:48. > :04:53.5.5% when what we should be saying is that benefits will be increased
:04:53. > :04:59.in line with the growth and wealth of the country, and that means that
:04:59. > :05:05.we will not be able to do RPI. It does not seem as if there is any
:05:05. > :05:11.appetite in the Treasury, or in 10 Downing Street, for a radical
:05:11. > :05:16.supply of reforms? The traditional Tory recipe would be to say, look,
:05:16. > :05:21.let's make the taxes flatter, let's cut them and get rid of all the
:05:21. > :05:25.complications, all the loopholes - which, by the way, is what the tax
:05:26. > :05:30.avoiders use. It is so easy to be a tax avoided because the tax code is
:05:30. > :05:35.now so complicated. But I see none... I agree with you, and when
:05:35. > :05:40.we were in opposition and I did the Tax Reform Commission, he said to
:05:40. > :05:44.me, I want a simpler, flatter, fairer system. But he has
:05:44. > :05:50.complicated the system and has not done, as you have described, he has
:05:50. > :05:54.not taken the action necessary to broaden and lower the tax base.
:05:54. > :05:59.There was a very good passage in his speech when he defended the 45%
:05:59. > :06:02.reduction, arguing it would mean more money and less pressure on
:06:02. > :06:06.poorer people. The same argument could have been done for lowering
:06:06. > :06:11.it to 40%, and the same argument applies to those being pushed into
:06:11. > :06:14.paying 40% tax, the middle earners. The result will be you will get
:06:15. > :06:18.less revenue and that will make the deficit worse.
:06:18. > :06:22.He made the tax code more complicated yesterday by announcing
:06:22. > :06:29.that if you are prepared to give up employment rights, or most of them,
:06:29. > :06:32.and you are a new work in a company, you can get shares in the new
:06:32. > :06:38.company and will not pay capital gains on them. What did you make of
:06:38. > :06:41.that? I couldn't work out what problem he was trying to us all. If
:06:41. > :06:45.the problem is that people want to take on workers but they are not
:06:45. > :06:48.sure, particularly young workers, whether they will perform and
:06:48. > :06:52.whether it will be very expensive to fire them because they will
:06:52. > :06:56.threaten to go to a tribunal, with enormous legal costs, I don't see
:06:56. > :06:59.how do having a scheme of giving them shares in the business to give
:07:00. > :07:04.up their employment rights will be in the interest of employer or
:07:04. > :07:08.employee. They end up in shares with a company that they can't deal
:07:08. > :07:13.with... They can't sell... incentive apparently is you will
:07:13. > :07:16.not have to pay capital gains tax, but everyone has a �10,000 capital
:07:16. > :07:21.gains tax allowance before they have to pay any, so that does not
:07:21. > :07:27.see much of an incentive. I just wonder what problem he is trying to
:07:27. > :07:32.solve. Other than I have to say something to the Tory party
:07:32. > :07:36.conference? I forgot that. People can get up to �50,000 in shares,
:07:36. > :07:41.but for many companies it would be a lot lower. You might get �10,000
:07:41. > :07:45.worth of shares, any capital gain you get is tax free, but even if
:07:45. > :07:49.the value of the shares doubled you would not have paid tax anyway?
:07:49. > :07:54.if you are starting a business the last thing you want to do is give
:07:54. > :07:58.away equity, because if the business grows, that is their way
:07:58. > :08:02.in which she will race money. If you have given it to a load of
:08:02. > :08:07.people you have subsequently hat -- sacked and who hate you, you have a
:08:07. > :08:11.big problem. I don't think this is addressing the issue, the cost of
:08:11. > :08:16.taking people on and if it does not work reaching an agreement with
:08:16. > :08:19.them to leave. Similarly, it seems the big problem we have and the
:08:19. > :08:23.economy at the moment his confidence, and taking away
:08:23. > :08:30.employment security from people is not a way of increasing confidence.
:08:30. > :08:34.Wasn't it at one of the things in the report? A suggestion? I read in
:08:34. > :08:37.the newspaper to date that he said it was one of his ideas, but I have
:08:38. > :08:42.not seen it. Ruth Davidson is currently Leader
:08:42. > :08:48.of your party in Scotland. She said yesterday it is staggering a public
:08:48. > :08:53.sector spending makes up 50% of Scottish GDP. But only 12% are net
:08:53. > :08:57.contributors, so the average Scottish household consumes over
:08:57. > :09:02.�14,000 more in public services than it pays in taxes. These
:09:02. > :09:10.figures may be true, but was that her Mitt Romney moment? Deadliest
:09:10. > :09:15.governor Ron the only insulted 47% of Americans -- at least governor
:09:15. > :09:19.Mitt Romney only in some third. think it could have been phrased
:09:19. > :09:25.better. She is right that there is a high dependency on public money
:09:25. > :09:31.in Scotland, but the way forward is to encourage more small businesses
:09:31. > :09:35.and enterprise. I think to accuse people on the public sector pay
:09:35. > :09:41.roll of being dependent on the stage, we are talking about doctors,
:09:41. > :09:46.nurses and so one, they spend money and pay VAT, I think it is an
:09:46. > :09:56.unfortunate way of presenting it. Mitt Romney said he had expressed
:09:56. > :09:57.
:09:57. > :10:00.himself inelegantly, we will file that under eye for inelegant.
:10:00. > :10:05.she is saying that public expenditure is unsustainable in
:10:05. > :10:12.Scotland, that is a good thing. This was very public, I don't think
:10:12. > :10:17.she could get away with it! Let's cross to the Conference and speak
:10:17. > :10:20.to the political editor of brats the magazine and the editor of the
:10:20. > :10:25.Spectator. The speech from George Osborne was sombre and serious,
:10:25. > :10:28.there was a muted response, was it the right speech for the moment?
:10:28. > :10:36.think he had to make a feel bad speech for two reasons, obviously
:10:36. > :10:40.you knew the IMF reports was coming and it would have looked odd to fly
:10:40. > :10:43.over Birmingham scattering �10 notes from a helicopter. But he is
:10:43. > :10:47.preparing for a year ahead which will be focused on a spending
:10:47. > :10:51.review, cutting billions from public spending, I think he is
:10:51. > :10:54.seeking positive agreement and warning people what is coming.
:10:54. > :10:59.Surprisingly, he resisted the temptation to say that things are
:10:59. > :11:03.tough but we will make them better. He was seeming to say that there is
:11:03. > :11:07.not much we can do, we will make things worse for some other be able.
:11:07. > :11:12.Fraser Nelson, how did that sentiment go down with the
:11:12. > :11:16.grassroots Tories? Lots of them would have liked to have heard a
:11:16. > :11:20.progress message, and George Osborne's main announcement of the
:11:20. > :11:24.rather peculiar employee share capital gains thing has lots of
:11:24. > :11:29.flaws which Michael just detailed, it did not have them skipping down
:11:29. > :11:34.the aisles in delight. George Osborne has no good news. If he had
:11:34. > :11:41.a serious announcement he would say that until December. He has a Pre-
:11:41. > :11:46.Budget Report. Normally everyone likes to light up the Conference
:11:46. > :11:50.with a big gismo but it is currently bear. Often people will
:11:50. > :11:52.feel they are heading for defeat because there has not been a
:11:52. > :11:57.recovery and there has not been a recovery because George Osborne
:11:57. > :12:03.could have done better with the growth strategy. There are no
:12:03. > :12:08.prospects. I suppose you could credit him with honesty? But it has
:12:08. > :12:13.been lit up by the arrival of the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson.
:12:13. > :12:18.There is a media mania around him, is that all it is or is he an does
:12:19. > :12:20.he pose a threat? I don't think it is just whipped up by the media. I
:12:21. > :12:27.think Boris is the perfect contemporary politician in some
:12:27. > :12:30.ways, a politician for a time when we hate politicians. He taps into
:12:31. > :12:34.the electoral bone that Nick Clegg did last time, we do not regard him
:12:34. > :12:39.as one of them, he gets away with things other politicians do not.
:12:39. > :12:44.Who else could get away with making jokes about the Soho sex industry
:12:44. > :12:50.and calling Michael Gove AJA cloth?! He has a sense of humour
:12:50. > :12:53.which is incredibly disarming and diffuses hostility. He is a massive
:12:54. > :12:59.consumer of oxygen at the conference, but I think we all know
:12:59. > :13:05.what happened to Cleggmania. What does it do to David -- to David
:13:05. > :13:09.Cameron and his standing? We have a strange dynamic, Cameron and Boris
:13:09. > :13:12.both admit the tension between them, Boris said the other day it is
:13:12. > :13:17.somehow good for the Conservatives because it stops people talking
:13:17. > :13:21.about Ed Miliband. It is a morale- booster, at least. You should see
:13:21. > :13:26.their faces in the hall, the audience reaction is more telling
:13:26. > :13:30.than Boris's speech, they are smiling as they queue, smiling as
:13:30. > :13:34.they listen, smiling as they are on their way out. Somebody has to give
:13:34. > :13:37.them a morale-booster. It is like a Shakespearean tragedy when you
:13:37. > :13:44.bring in a comic figure halfway through to cheer the audience, that
:13:44. > :13:47.is Boris's role. Cameron needs that to make the Conference a success. I
:13:47. > :13:52.don't think anyone could look at this beach and say he was sticking
:13:52. > :13:56.a knife into Cameron. It was good, it did what it had two and David
:13:56. > :14:00.Cameron after smiling like everyone else. It must have lifted all the
:14:00. > :14:06.spirits. What about the response to Ed Miliband? Have they answered the
:14:06. > :14:11.One nation slogan, an attempt by Ed Miliband to move onto the centre
:14:11. > :14:14.ground or to move the centre to the left? Both parties now say they are
:14:14. > :14:18.formally on the centre line and you cannot move for mentions of one
:14:18. > :14:22.nation here. They don't agree about where the centre ground is, Labour
:14:22. > :14:26.thinks it has shifted left and the Tories think it is to the right.
:14:26. > :14:31.What we saw from Boris was a response in terms of... Are not
:14:31. > :14:41.going on endlessly but talking about the bread and butter issues
:14:41. > :14:48.which most of the people are interested in. Thank you both.
:14:48. > :14:54.It is David Cameron's birthday! # Happy birthday to you!
:14:54. > :15:04.So we have prepared a birthday quiz. The question for the day is what
:15:04. > :15:05.
:15:05. > :15:10.has Samantha Cameron promised the Is it a game for his iPad, a curry
:15:10. > :15:20.dinner, a night out with Herman van Rompuy, that is what I have always
:15:20. > :15:23.
:15:24. > :15:27.wanted, or a Boris Johnson voodoo I think I know the answer!
:15:27. > :15:33.Now, it is not about him. He doesn't want to be Prime Minister
:15:33. > :15:39.and all the attention is bad for his ego. Who am I talking about? No,
:15:39. > :15:44.not not Simon Cowell, you numpties, Boris Johnson, of course. Do the
:15:44. > :15:48.Tory faithful really want BoJo as their next leader. Only one man,
:15:48. > :15:52.our Adam, has the balls to find out. There is no indication David
:15:52. > :15:57.Cameron is going anywhere, if the Tories did need a new leader who
:15:57. > :16:01.would they turn to Boris or anyone but Boris? Probably Boris.
:16:01. > :16:07.Why? Because he has a great personality and people like him.
:16:07. > :16:12.Great. Our first Boris fan. It has got to be Boris. He is very
:16:12. > :16:16.popular. Fair enough. He did do that thing
:16:16. > :16:22.about Hillsborough, the article about Hillsborough. It would have
:16:22. > :16:26.to be anyone, but. Boris Boris's past is coming back
:16:26. > :16:31.to haunt him. He is not a statesman, he is a
:16:32. > :16:38.fabulous person for the party, but I can't see him being a statesman.
:16:38. > :16:48.He has got everything. He has got honesty. He makes us all happy. Yes,
:16:48. > :16:48.
:16:48. > :16:56.Boris. Thank you very much.
:16:56. > :17:03.The vodka party is on Tuesday evening.
:17:03. > :17:10.That old ambassador's trick. I must practise... I must practise
:17:10. > :17:12.my Boris more. He is not actually Russian, is he Turkish? Yes, he is
:17:12. > :17:22.Turkish actually. You have got similar hair to him.
:17:22. > :17:23.
:17:23. > :17:33.Are you part of the family? I could I am a fan, but it is not anyone,
:17:33. > :17:34.
:17:34. > :17:39.but Boris. Future leader? Someone else.
:17:39. > :17:45.I would vote for Grant. If it were between Boris and anyone else,
:17:45. > :17:55.Boris or anyone but Boris, I would back Boris. Boris or anyone but.
:17:55. > :18:02.
:18:02. > :18:05.She doesn't like Boris. I love Well, I just popped into the
:18:05. > :18:11.exhibition hall because I hear somebody has stolen our idea. Look
:18:11. > :18:21.at this! Oh well, back to the less exciting
:18:21. > :18:21.
:18:21. > :18:25.balls. Who do you have as a future leader, but Boris or anyone but?
:18:26. > :18:31.All I can say is that Boris is a wonderful man to work for and I
:18:31. > :18:35.enjoy what I do for him enormously. Well, Boris, you have got a fair
:18:35. > :18:38.few detractors, but the majority of people are happy to have you as the
:18:38. > :18:42.future leader of the party if anything should happen to David
:18:42. > :18:46.Cameron! I think you are cheeky and
:18:46. > :18:51.troublesome and just appealing to people's nature by doing this. It
:18:51. > :18:53.is very entertaining, but I bet you haven't had one MP put anything in
:18:53. > :18:58.there. You would be surprised. That's the
:18:58. > :19:04.best review I have ever had. should be very flattered.
:19:04. > :19:07."Cheek Y and troublesome" some of us live for reviews like that.
:19:07. > :19:10.Boris has been speaking to the conference this morning. Let's get
:19:10. > :19:17.a flavour. You showed that we can overcome a
:19:17. > :19:22.Labour lead and win even in places which Ed and the two Eds are so
:19:22. > :19:27.cocky as to think they own. If we can win in the middle of a
:19:27. > :19:37.recession and wipe out a 17 point Labour lead then I know that David
:19:37. > :19:38.
:19:38. > :19:42.Cameron will win in 2015 when the economy...
:19:42. > :19:46.APPLAUSE Where is Dave? There. There you are,
:19:46. > :19:50.Dave. I know that Dave will win in 2015 when the economy has turned
:19:50. > :19:55.around and we are already seeing signs of progress. When people are
:19:55. > :20:05.benefiting from jobs and growth and the firm leadership you have shown,
:20:05. > :20:07.
:20:07. > :20:17.the tough decisions you have taken. Happy birthday by the way. Happy
:20:17. > :20:21.
:20:21. > :20:24.birthday by the way. APPLAUSE
:20:24. > :20:28.I was pleased to see that you have called me a blond haired mop in the
:20:28. > :20:32.pages - well a mop is what I am. Well, if I am a mop, Dave, you are
:20:32. > :20:37.a broom, a broom that's that's cleaning up the mess left by the
:20:37. > :20:41.Labour Government. I con I congratulate you and your
:20:41. > :20:49.colleagues and your colleagues George Osborne, the dustpan and
:20:49. > :20:55.Michael Gove the jay cloth and William Hague the sponge. But it is
:20:55. > :20:58.the function of Conservative Governments to be the household
:20:58. > :21:06.instruments to clear things up after the Labour binge has got out
:21:06. > :21:15.of control. Well, it is only fitting that the
:21:15. > :21:19.Brillo pad should interview the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson.
:21:19. > :21:25.I thought we would be helpful and allow you to to clear up a few
:21:25. > :21:30.things. Let me begin. Go on. Do you rule outstanding for
:21:31. > :21:35.Parliament before the end of your term as London mayor in 2016?
:21:35. > :21:42.As I've said many times since the election and many times before the
:21:42. > :21:48.election, the job of mayor is an engrossing one. It is the most
:21:48. > :21:53.wonderful job in British politics and London has elected me for four
:21:53. > :21:59.years to deliver jobs and growth, to do everything I can to get the
:21:59. > :22:03.city growing again and growing strongly and keep fighting crime
:22:03. > :22:07.and deliver my manifesto. I had a nine point plan I'm going to
:22:07. > :22:09.deliver. It is going to take four years, plus we have got to get the
:22:09. > :22:14.benefits from the Olympic investment.
:22:14. > :22:20.So do you rule outstanding for Parliament?
:22:20. > :22:23.Yes. It goes without saying that it is not possible to do, you know, I
:22:23. > :22:27.have got to sell the people of London.
:22:27. > :22:35.If any Tory constituency approached you to be their candidate before
:22:35. > :22:39.2016, the answer from you would be a categorical no? I think your
:22:39. > :22:43.chances Andrew, which have always been excellent in my view of being
:22:43. > :22:47.approached by a Tory constituency as their potential saviour are
:22:47. > :22:52.better than mine. OK. It is not going to happen.
:22:52. > :22:55.But... The you were chairman of the Scottish young Conservatives.
:22:55. > :23:03.No, you were wrong, but you have been wrong several times on that.
:23:03. > :23:08.Coming back to my question... always makes me cross... Can I just
:23:08. > :23:14.be clear if a Tory constituency approaches you between now and 2016,
:23:14. > :23:19.to stand to be their candidate, your answer is a categorical no?
:23:19. > :23:23.is and I've said that before and I have got a wonderful job to do and
:23:23. > :23:27.I want to do it. When you seize to be London mayor
:23:27. > :23:35.in 2016, will you run again for Parliament? Well, by that stage it
:23:35. > :23:39.is really very difficult to say what I will be doing and what I
:23:39. > :23:49.want. So three or four years time, that's a long time in politics.
:23:49. > :23:52.What I I want to do and Ken Clarke for all his sort of slightly
:23:52. > :23:57.intestimony pratt language made a good point about things that are
:23:57. > :24:00.needed in in London. People want to see crime being brought down. They
:24:01. > :24:07.want to see jobs and growth and that's what I want to do.
:24:07. > :24:13.OK. You say you are, these are your words, "Healthy competition with Mr
:24:13. > :24:21.Cameron." What are you competing with him about?
:24:21. > :24:25.I thought those were his words, but anyway, I think the point is the
:24:25. > :24:30.difference is not important. What matters is the public don't feel
:24:30. > :24:33.that I am just going to sit on my hands if there is something
:24:34. > :24:38.important that London needs to get done or some important interest of
:24:38. > :24:42.the city that I need to get across even if it means that the plaster
:24:42. > :24:46.comes off the ceiling in Downing Street or elsewhere across
:24:46. > :24:51.Whitehall. There are controversial proposals that we have seen for
:24:51. > :24:56.mansion taxes from the Lib Dems, extra wealth taxes which would
:24:56. > :25:01.affect London and Londoners. We have got a real problem now with
:25:01. > :25:06.aviation capacity. I want to push ahead with solving that problem in
:25:06. > :25:09.particular. There will be arguments inevitably for any Mayor of Any
:25:09. > :25:13.great city is going to have with the Government in charge and I
:25:13. > :25:17.wouldn't wouldn't be doing my job if I didn't put those points across
:25:17. > :25:22.as forcefully as I can. The best thing for - the point I always make
:25:22. > :25:27.here, is the best thing for the UK economy as a whole is to invest in
:25:27. > :25:31.London. Build more homes in London. Invest in London Transport and you
:25:31. > :25:38.will drive the rest of the UK economy.
:25:38. > :25:44.Do you support an in/out referendum on Europe now?
:25:44. > :25:51.I see no particular reason to have an in/out referendum now. What I
:25:51. > :25:57.certainly think you cannot do is go forward to amendments to the EU
:25:57. > :26:01.fundamental constitution to the, to create a fiscal union as it is
:26:01. > :26:04.loosely called using the Brussels institution, the commission, the
:26:04. > :26:08.Luxembourg court, the Parliament, using those institutions which are
:26:08. > :26:14.held in common without putting that reform to the people of this
:26:14. > :26:18.country. We cannot go ahead in my view to a political fiscal union in
:26:18. > :26:21.Europe without that being remitted for proper public debate and a
:26:21. > :26:24.proper vote in this country. That's what I support.
:26:25. > :26:28.So what should the choice be? Should it be, "Here is a new
:26:28. > :26:34.settlement we have negotiated with Europe? You can have that are you
:26:34. > :26:41.can leave Europe?" What would the choice be? Well, what I would like
:26:41. > :26:46.to see - it depends what, where we are at. What I would certainly
:26:46. > :26:50.advocate is a no vote to further moves to fiscal integration, Andrew
:26:50. > :26:54.because I don't think... understand that. I don't think
:26:54. > :26:58.those are sensible and you will appreciate that point. I think if
:26:58. > :27:03.if following that, following that it may very well be that people say,
:27:03. > :27:07."Well, what is the British relationship with the EU?" Where do
:27:07. > :27:11.we really stand? At that stage I certainly think that it would be a
:27:11. > :27:16.good thing to have a systematic repatriation of some powers and
:27:16. > :27:22.there is no earthly reason why that cannot be done. There are all sorts
:27:22. > :27:25.of variable ge om tee that abouts been set-up over the years within
:27:25. > :27:29.the wider European area. There is no reason why Britain shouldn't
:27:29. > :27:35.benefit from a new relationship. Do you support a cut in the top
:27:35. > :27:40.rate of tax to 40% now? Well, I think it is politically
:27:40. > :27:44.very difficult to deliver now and I understand the objection that are
:27:44. > :27:50.raised by everybody and I can see that it would not be easy at a time
:27:50. > :27:54.when people are suffering, when you are trying to cut welfare bills and
:27:54. > :27:58.cut welfare schemes and all the rest of it. That is absolutely
:27:58. > :28:04.plain. But would you still like to do it?
:28:04. > :28:10.Let me, what you can't do endlessly is allow Britain to be competing
:28:10. > :28:15.with one hand tied behind our back compared to other tax jurisdictions
:28:15. > :28:19.which are extremely challenging for us at the moment. They are going
:28:19. > :28:26.ahead with all sorts of things that we are not able to go ahead with
:28:26. > :28:32.and I don't want to see us charging more in tax than all our main
:28:32. > :28:38.rivals. Why should we pay more tax in Britain than in France, than in
:28:38. > :28:42.Germany, Switzerland, I think even in Italy? We are starting to get to
:28:42. > :28:46.a situation where we tax uncompetitive and that really needs
:28:46. > :28:49.to be addressed and it is a difficult argument. I accept that
:28:49. > :28:53.people won't like to hear, but it has got to be made. Again, that's
:28:53. > :28:55.the kind of point that you have got to make as Mayor of London that
:28:55. > :28:59.isn't necessarily welcome in Number Ten.
:28:59. > :29:08.Do you agree with the ring-fencing of the big London banks to separate
:29:08. > :29:16.retail from investment banking? Well, there are, what I'm generally
:29:16. > :29:22.opposed to are measures that are taken, unilaterally and you would
:29:22. > :29:28.have to look at the detail of whatever Vickers is suggesting. I
:29:28. > :29:33.am opposed to measures that disadvantage UK financial services.
:29:33. > :29:38.Is that what ring-fencing does? have we have being going through a
:29:38. > :29:41.long period of bashing financial services. Two million people work
:29:41. > :29:48.in business and financial services around this country. It is a huge,
:29:48. > :29:52.huge proportion of the economy and we can't endlessly keep bashing it
:29:52. > :29:56.for political reasons. I would be wary of measures that shoot
:29:56. > :30:01.ourselves in the foot and aren't replicated across-the-board.
:30:01. > :30:08.Do you agree as a good Tory that even as defence spending is being
:30:08. > :30:11.axed, spending on foreign aid should be rising by billions?
:30:11. > :30:15.You know, I don't, I am not responsible for either of these
:30:15. > :30:20.budgets, but what I would say... Well, you are not responsible for
:30:20. > :30:23.the 40% tax? London is a city of huge range of people's
:30:23. > :30:28.nationalities, 300 languages spoken in our city, many of them, of
:30:28. > :30:32.course, have contact... What's the answer to the question?
:30:32. > :30:38.With people around the world and I do think that it is important that
:30:38. > :30:44.we do what we can to give people in the developing world access to
:30:44. > :30:50.hygiene, sanitation. I understand that. Should we be
:30:50. > :30:54.adding billions to foreign aid when defence is being cut. I will ask
:30:54. > :31:04.again, should we be adding billions to foreign aid when defence is
:31:04. > :31:05.
:31:05. > :31:10.On defence spending, you could argue the toss on each individual
:31:10. > :31:14.line. I'm asking for the principle. I'm in the convinced it should be
:31:14. > :31:20.sacrosanct and you need to spend money on this or that but on
:31:20. > :31:23.overseas aid, I think you are making a poll emical comparison. On
:31:23. > :31:28.overseas aid, I think there is an argument. You should look at how
:31:28. > :31:31.the money is spent. I don't want to see money being taken from poor
:31:31. > :31:36.people in rich countries and Given to rich people in poor countries.
:31:36. > :31:40.wanted a yes or no. It was a complicated question, if I may say
:31:40. > :31:44.so. I thought it was simple. Maybe foreign aid wasn't top of the
:31:44. > :31:49.ageneral d at Eton. Should David Cameron have sacked Andrew
:31:49. > :31:54.Mitchell? I say! Say it again. Should David Cameron have sacked
:31:54. > :32:01.Andrew Mitchell? I think that was a matter for the Prime Minister.
:32:01. > :32:05.know that, but what is your view? Between him and Mr Mitchell. He has
:32:05. > :32:09.plainly apologised and cleared the matter up. Frankly, that story went
:32:09. > :32:14.on for quite long enough. Should very been fired? If one of your top
:32:14. > :32:18.people have done it, would you have fired them? Well, you know, I don't
:32:18. > :32:21.propose, with the best will in the world to get dragged back into a
:32:21. > :32:24.story that I have already commented on extensively. I have said before,
:32:24. > :32:30.I don't think it is right to insult police officers. I think people
:32:30. > :32:34.should be arrested for it. understand that. That wasn't what I
:32:34. > :32:37.was asking. It is a free country. didn't have the opportunity to
:32:37. > :32:40.interrogate Mr Mitchell myself. That was something the Prime
:32:40. > :32:45.Minister did. It is a free country, if you don't want to answer the
:32:45. > :32:50.question, you don't have to. Let me move on. What has been the toughest
:32:50. > :32:56.decision you have taken as London Mayor? There have been several
:32:56. > :33:00.difficult decisions, but I suppose I would single out the decision to
:33:01. > :33:05.ask the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police service to
:33:05. > :33:08.think about what else he could do and to give others the chance for a
:33:08. > :33:16.new leadership at the Met. There are all sorts of difficult
:33:16. > :33:21.decisions you have to take. doesn't sound that tough, does it?
:33:21. > :33:24.I think, as my owe pon sent never tired of pointing out during the
:33:24. > :33:30.election campaign -- opponent, I have been owe bliedged to take
:33:30. > :33:35.tough decisions on the cost of transport -- have been obliged.
:33:35. > :33:40.asked for the toughest. There you go. Thank you for that. When you
:33:40. > :33:50.are at the centre of the media circus as you are and have been in
:33:50. > :33:54.
:33:54. > :34:00.Birmingham, who is it that whispers in your ear, momento mori? Memento.
:34:00. > :34:04.We never knew how the Latins pronounced it. Who puts in your ear
:34:04. > :34:10.that you are plainly mortal? Look, there are plenty of people to make
:34:10. > :34:17.that point. Who? I go back to what I have been saying. Abundant people
:34:18. > :34:23.in this very conference. Who? you know, all these people standing
:34:23. > :34:27.around me. I think most don't know Latin. Let me move on. For the
:34:27. > :34:30.aindividualance of doubt - -- aindividualance of doubt - after
:34:30. > :34:34.you have been Prime Minister of Britain, do you rule out being the
:34:34. > :34:41.President of the United States? -- avoidance of doubtment Andrew this
:34:41. > :34:46.is getting beyond satire. You don't rule it out? No, but you are asking
:34:46. > :34:51.me... You could be, you were born an American. My chances of becoming
:34:51. > :34:56.Prime Minister are as I always say - about as good as me being
:34:56. > :34:59.reincarnated as ang olive. My chances of being the President of
:34:59. > :35:04.the United States after being Prime Minister, I think, you know, no
:35:04. > :35:08.better than yours, let me put it that way and probably considerably
:35:08. > :35:13.worse. Constitutionly I couldn't run as President since unlike you I
:35:13. > :35:17.wasn't born in the United States. You could get a green card. Stop
:35:17. > :35:21.filly bustering again. The most important question of the day -
:35:21. > :35:25.what have you bought David Cameron for his birthday? Well, I think the
:35:25. > :35:29.most important thing that any of us here can do is just to point out
:35:29. > :35:33.that this is the right Government for this country... No, what have
:35:33. > :35:38.you bought him? They are going in the right direction. What have you
:35:38. > :35:42.bought him, Boris? What have I... I think I hope you will - I don't
:35:42. > :35:46.know whether you had a chance to watch what I had to say, I was able
:35:46. > :35:52.it wish him a happy birthday and a hope for many years in office to
:35:52. > :35:56.come. I haven't yet lashed out on a present that's bus like you...
:35:56. > :36:01.you telling the people of Britain, Mr Mayor, that you have not bought
:36:01. > :36:07.the Prime Minister a birthday present? Is austerity so bad?
:36:07. > :36:11.Andrew, I will if you will. I'm not allowed. Wait. I tell you what, I
:36:11. > :36:16.did give him a present, it popped fortuitously into my head. I was
:36:16. > :36:21.able to give him a preb. I will send you won as well, Johnson's
:36:21. > :36:29.Life of London available in all good bookshops, a fantastic read
:36:29. > :36:35.which I'm sure you will enjoy. Now out in paperback. Excellent. I have
:36:35. > :36:41.always regarded you as a modern Bosswell with a funny accent. Thank
:36:41. > :36:45.you very much. We will now work out how many questions you answered.
:36:45. > :36:48.They were very difficult. That's what I got paid for. The last time
:36:48. > :36:53.I looked you got paid to answer them. Whether you did is another
:36:53. > :36:57.question I did my best. It is always interesting to interview the
:36:57. > :37:01.mayor, isn't it? How many did he answer? I thought he did pretty
:37:01. > :37:06.well, actually. You obviously spent the entire morning thinking of all
:37:06. > :37:10.the beastly questions you could ask him. The point is... The point is
:37:10. > :37:13.that he comes across as completely authentic, which is why he is so
:37:13. > :37:18.popular in the conference. He doesn't hedge about. He answered
:37:18. > :37:21.your questions as well as he could. Well if he has got ambitions beyond
:37:21. > :37:26.being Mayor of London, will he not have to - he will have to learn to
:37:26. > :37:31.do more interviews like that, which I know we had a bit of fun at the
:37:31. > :37:35.end, but the stem of the interview was on serious issues, and he will
:37:35. > :37:40.have to learn to answer them seriously as well. And I think he -
:37:40. > :37:44.I thought he did that brilliantly. He was amusing and then when we
:37:44. > :37:49.came to the serious questions like Europe and so on, he gave you a
:37:49. > :37:54.very clear idea of what was required. Really, what did he say?
:37:54. > :37:57.He said that... He didn't want in and out. He didn't want in and out
:37:57. > :38:00.referendum. But if there was going to be a federal Europe that the
:38:00. > :38:04.British people had the right to have a say on whether they wanted
:38:04. > :38:07.to be part of that and that the Government had to look to bring
:38:07. > :38:09.some powers back from Brussels. British people won't be asked if
:38:09. > :38:14.they are going to be part of a federal Europe. The Government will
:38:14. > :38:19.try to do a new deal which will be different from a federal Europe. So
:38:19. > :38:22.what will the question then be: we have a new deal, we have a new
:38:22. > :38:27.arrangement, a more arm's length arrangement with a federal Europe,
:38:27. > :38:32.so we could have that or we could leave, isn't that the question? Or
:38:32. > :38:36.could we have that and be a full federal union, what is the answer?
:38:36. > :38:39.Well I agree with that. I agree with that. I think you have to have
:38:39. > :38:44.a renegotiation. It is that or it is out. I think if you are
:38:44. > :38:46.negotiating, the people on the other side need to know that's the
:38:46. > :38:50.alternative. That's not where the Government is. I got a strong
:38:50. > :38:54.impression he is not in favour of the Government policy of ring-
:38:54. > :38:58.fencing the retail operation of the banks from the investment or what
:38:58. > :39:03.the politicians sneer at, the casino element. I think that's one
:39:04. > :39:11.of his strengths. Did you get that impression Yes. I think he said he
:39:11. > :39:16.doesn't want to let the City of London be disadvantaged compared to
:39:16. > :39:20.other competitors. I think it is brave of him to say that and I
:39:20. > :39:25.think it is because he says things like that, that they like him. I
:39:25. > :39:31.call it the Blair system, it went through the system, when politics
:39:31. > :39:36.are what people want it hear and people say that. He doesn't do that.
:39:36. > :39:40.He does it in an amusing and an easy manner. During the elections
:39:40. > :39:45.for the GLC a youngster said to me - are you going to vote for Boris
:39:45. > :39:51.Johnson. I said "Of course I am he is a Conservative." He said, "Oh my
:39:51. > :39:56.God is he a Conservative as well, that's marvellous." Could you see
:39:56. > :39:59.him as Prime Minister? Yes, I could. So you could see him as the next
:39:59. > :40:03.leader of your party Well if we lost the election, it is a
:40:03. > :40:07.possibility. Do you believe him when he says he won't run for
:40:07. > :40:14.Parliament before his term as mayor ends? I think he was right to say
:40:15. > :40:18.that three years is a very long time away. It doesn't the most
:40:18. > :40:23.categorical reply I had. It was the only reply he could give you, if he
:40:23. > :40:26.had any sense at all. All right. Thank you to that. Are you Are you
:40:26. > :40:29.looking forward to your book? will see if it is that or another
:40:29. > :40:32.broken promise from the mayor. Later this afternoon the Justice
:40:32. > :40:36.Secretary, Chris Grayling, will announce that home owners in
:40:36. > :40:39.England and Wales, who attack burglars will not face arrest or
:40:40. > :40:45.prosecution unless they use grossly disproportionate violence. I
:40:45. > :40:48.managed to speak to Mr Grayling earlier and began by asking the law
:40:49. > :40:52.needed to be changed? We keep getting this debate each time an
:40:52. > :40:55.incident happens.Er if tune ately they are not that common but they
:40:55. > :40:59.do happen from time to time. Each time they happen we have this
:40:59. > :41:02.debate about the law all over again. The current test is, is your
:41:02. > :41:05.behaviour reasonable? I want to raise the bar, in recognition of
:41:05. > :41:09.the fact that people do hit out in high pressure situation and that
:41:09. > :41:14.the law needs to, I think, treat people who are in that position, as
:41:14. > :41:17.the victims of crime, not the perpetrators of crime. What happens
:41:17. > :41:20.all too often is they are arrested and put in the police cell and
:41:20. > :41:26.there is a lengthy debate about whether they should be charged or
:41:26. > :41:32.not. I think from moment one people should act that unless they act in
:41:32. > :41:35.way that's grossly disproportionate, the law should be on their side.
:41:35. > :41:40.You say they are prosecuted and put in jails. What are the numbers? How
:41:40. > :41:44.many people have been prosecuted and put in jail for using
:41:44. > :41:50.disproportionate force? Over the years, thankfully, these cases are
:41:50. > :41:53.rare. You do get people going to trial, and getting sent to jail and
:41:53. > :41:59.then released because the courts decided they should not have been
:41:59. > :42:03.put in jail. But I think the spopbt that people who face an intruder in
:42:03. > :42:06.their homes are victims not perpetrators of crime. There is a
:42:06. > :42:11.debate about prosecuting them, they may be brought before the courts
:42:11. > :42:14.and acquitted but the point is to raise the bar so that the natural
:42:14. > :42:18.assumption in the Criminal Justice System is that the law is on their
:42:18. > :42:22.side, unless they act in a way that's grossly disproportionate.
:42:22. > :42:26.For example if the burglar is out cold in the kitchen floor and you
:42:26. > :42:31.get a knife and carry on stabbing them, that would be grossly
:42:31. > :42:35.disproportionate. Short of that I want people to feel confident they
:42:35. > :42:39.have trite protect themselves in their homes. But the law according
:42:39. > :42:42.to Lord Chief Justice and Ken Clarke would, cover for that. The
:42:42. > :42:46.Lord Chief Justice said "You can phrase it in different way bus the
:42:46. > :42:49.reality is that the householder is entitled to use reasonable force to
:42:49. > :42:55.get rid of the burglar." Even if you set the bar higher, that will
:42:55. > :42:59.still be the same? I have talk to the Lord Chief Justice about this.
:42:59. > :43:03.I'm grate to him for the comments made. A strong signal coming from
:43:03. > :43:07.the judges is a big help. He says you don't need to change the law.
:43:07. > :43:12.What he said actually is that the householders' rights should be
:43:12. > :43:16.clear and strong. He said it is. I'm raising the bar, so there is no
:43:16. > :43:19.question about this any more. said yourself the numbers are very
:43:19. > :43:22.small about householders being prosecuted and sent to jail, it is
:43:22. > :43:25.not a big problem you have said that yourself. The Lord Chief
:43:25. > :43:29.Justice has made it clear that he is happy with the law as it stands.
:43:29. > :43:33.This is just about good headlines. The Lord Chief Justice didn't say
:43:33. > :43:38.he was happy about the law as it stands. What he said, is what they
:43:38. > :43:42.need as judges, is to send a strong message. That's right and proper.
:43:42. > :43:46.I'm saying, as a politician, is that I think we need to set the bar
:43:46. > :43:49.higher than it is at the moment, so there isn't a debate about whether
:43:49. > :43:53.someone's action were reasonable in the situation, and so they are not
:43:53. > :43:58.in a danger of being put in a police cell rather than being
:43:58. > :44:02.treated adds witnesses and victims to the crime I'm saying only in an
:44:02. > :44:08.event where the actions are grossly disproportionate, should there
:44:08. > :44:10.really be a debate about whether it was disproportionate or not.
:44:11. > :44:14.September 2008 there were two brothers who were convicted for
:44:14. > :44:18.chasing after an intruder and beating him with a cricket bat.
:44:18. > :44:24.Would you count than as "disproportionate force, but
:44:24. > :44:28.wouldn't be prosecuted under your suggestions?" Look, I'm not going
:44:28. > :44:32.to get into applying this principle to individual past cases. This is a
:44:32. > :44:36.past case. Why not? I don't think it would be sense I will. I'm
:44:36. > :44:39.looking to the future and saying we have had over the years numerous
:44:39. > :44:43.cases where there has been a significant debate about what is
:44:43. > :44:47.permissible and what is not under the law. Would that have been
:44:47. > :44:50.permisable, Chris Grayling? I'm not going to apply - because I didn't
:44:50. > :44:55.sit through that particular case, I don't know the exact circumstances.
:44:55. > :45:01.It wouldn't be right for me to say db this is exactly how the law
:45:01. > :45:04.would have applied in that case. -- thiss exactly how the law would
:45:04. > :45:07.have applied. I'm setting a bar which says to the police and
:45:07. > :45:11.prosecuting authorities, that the default should be that you are on
:45:11. > :45:14.the side of the householder, that the householder isn't charged,
:45:14. > :45:24.doesn't come before the courts, unless they use grossly
:45:24. > :45:27.
:45:27. > :45:31.disproportional force in response He couldn't tell me how the law
:45:31. > :45:35.would be applied. I think each case has to be looked on its merits by
:45:35. > :45:38.the court and they have got to look at the circumstances and I'm
:45:38. > :45:44.looking forward to seeing the drafting for the legislation he
:45:44. > :45:48.proposes because I think it is very difficult to write down in
:45:48. > :45:52.legislation something which will cover the range of cases of which
:45:52. > :45:55.you gave examples. But he is following the sentiments of the
:45:55. > :45:58.country that people feel they should be able to act reasonably in
:45:58. > :46:03.their own homes, but the examples you gave of chasing somebody down
:46:03. > :46:05.the street with a baseball bat that is clearly not a reasonable way to
:46:05. > :46:10.behave. Under the law as he is suggesting
:46:10. > :46:17.that would be allowed. You would be allowed if you felt that was
:46:17. > :46:21.disproportionate, but not grossly disproportionate? The would have to
:46:21. > :46:24.say it would be disproportionate. What he is trying to do is send a
:46:25. > :46:28.signal so the judges will give guidance to the courts and that's
:46:28. > :46:31.sensible, but whether you can actually write it down in
:46:32. > :46:33.legislation, I think the principles are clear and have been clear for
:46:33. > :46:36.sometime now. Do you think it is headline
:46:36. > :46:40.grabbing? It certainly gets headlines.
:46:40. > :46:43.But not a lot more than that. The argument here is really the Lord
:46:43. > :46:46.Chief Justice is saying it won't change from what the law is now.
:46:46. > :46:49.Each case will be looked at individually, whatever Chris
:46:49. > :46:53.Grayling says and wherever he wants to set bar, it will not change
:46:53. > :46:56.anything? But I think if people are arrested because they acted
:46:56. > :47:01.reasonably in their own homes and put in the cells, that is
:47:01. > :47:03.unreasonable behaviour, but that's a matter for guidance rather than
:47:03. > :47:09.legislation. Thank you. The Government has planned to
:47:09. > :47:15.reform the NHS in England proved controversial and politically
:47:15. > :47:19.difficult and claimed the scalp of Andrew Lansley. Junt has been a--
:47:19. > :47:25.Jeremy Hunt has been addressing conference and we will speak to him
:47:25. > :47:30.shortly. This is what he had to say. So let me start by saying about
:47:30. > :47:40.Andrew Lansley's reforms. They are brave. They are right and they will
:47:40. > :47:50.
:47:50. > :47:51.make our NHS stronger. Andrew is here.
:47:51. > :47:54.APPLAUSE The centralised structures make it
:47:54. > :47:58.the fifth largest organisation in the world. Smaller than the Red
:47:58. > :48:02.Army, but bigger than the Indian railways. Conference, we will never
:48:02. > :48:06.meet the challenges we will face with over one million people trying
:48:06. > :48:09.to meet 1,000 targets to satisfy one Secretary of State sitting
:48:09. > :48:15.behind his desk in Whitehall. We know what happens when you do that,
:48:15. > :48:19.don't we? We had the perfect case study under Labour. 48-hour GP
:48:19. > :48:27.appointments targets, that made it harder, not easier, to see your GP.
:48:27. > :48:36.Billions wasted on NHS IT contracts. To believe in the NHS is to believe
:48:36. > :48:41.in its reform. Not my words, but those of Lord Darzi Labour Health
:48:41. > :48:47.Minister under Andy Burnham. Now he is in opposition, Mr Burnham sings
:48:47. > :48:51.a different tune. Let me try out a little quiz on you. Last week at
:48:51. > :48:54.the Labour Conference, Andy Burnham complained about foundation trusts
:48:54. > :49:02.setting their own employment conditions in the south-west. But
:49:02. > :49:07.guess who was Health Minister when the Act enthis Rhining those power
:49:07. > :49:09.got Royal Assent. Guess who was it? Andy Burnham. He went on to
:49:09. > :49:13.criticise private sector involvement in the NHS, but who was
:49:13. > :49:18.the Health Secretary who ensured that a private company would run a
:49:18. > :49:24.district general hospital for the very first time? Who was it? Andy
:49:24. > :49:29.Burnham. He railed against so- called cuts, but whilst we are
:49:29. > :49:32.increasing the NHS Budget by over �12 million, who was the Health
:49:32. > :49:38.Secretary who went into the last election saying it would be
:49:38. > :49:45.irresponsible to increase the NHS budget. Who was? Andy Burnham. The
:49:46. > :49:49.first rule of opposition, Andy Burnham, criticise what the new lot
:49:49. > :49:56.do, not what you do yourself. Jeremy Hunt joins us from
:49:56. > :50:00.Birmingham. Mr Hunt, a newly appointed minister said the
:50:00. > :50:05.Government had screwed up the presentation of the NHS reforms.
:50:05. > :50:08.What will you do differently? Well, I think I made it very clear.
:50:08. > :50:13.Good afternoon, Andrew, by the way. I made it clear in that speech that
:50:13. > :50:17.I am a very big supporter of Andrew Lansley's reforms. He will be seen
:50:17. > :50:20.as the architect of the modern NHS and I am a big supporter of them,
:50:20. > :50:25.but what we need to do, having had a debate about structures, is to
:50:25. > :50:28.talk about how those structures can deliver, improved outcomes for
:50:28. > :50:32.patients and what I was doing this morning was talking about some of
:50:32. > :50:35.the things the improvements in the way we look after people with
:50:35. > :50:39.dementia for example. The improvement in survival rates for
:50:39. > :50:42.cancer and other diseases where we are below the European average and
:50:42. > :50:45.those new structures will help help deliver improvements that people
:50:45. > :50:50.can see on the ground. So we are moving into a different phase now
:50:50. > :50:54.where we talk about what people can see changing in the service they
:50:54. > :50:58.get from the NHS. But the Chief Executive of the
:50:58. > :51:01.King's Fund told us in a year or two's time, the Health Service will
:51:01. > :51:06.do very well indeed just to maintain its current standards of
:51:06. > :51:09.patient care. So if we don't get your improvement, there will be no
:51:09. > :51:13.improvement on the presentation? Well, we have got to do both. The
:51:13. > :51:17.public want the NHS to deliver more and better, but they want it to
:51:17. > :51:21.maintain its current standards, but the King's Fund are right, we have
:51:21. > :51:24.the massive challenging of an ageing population as I mentioned in
:51:24. > :51:29.my speech, there are more more pensioners than children. We have
:51:29. > :51:34.two-thirds of the people who are getting consultant care in hospital
:51:34. > :51:38.are over the age of 65. That's a big challenge for the system. The
:51:38. > :51:41.reforms will help us, but we need do other things as well because we
:51:41. > :51:45.are living longer. It is good news, but that brings with it, a host of
:51:45. > :51:50.other really, really big challenges. But there are reports that one in
:51:50. > :51:53.ten accident and emergency areas are closing and labour wards are
:51:54. > :51:59.closing at that rate too. If that is happening, that is hardly going
:51:59. > :52:04.to help your presentation, is it? That's a presentational disaster.
:52:04. > :52:07.Well, there are parts of the country where local doctor groups
:52:08. > :52:12.are saying that they want to run services differently because they
:52:12. > :52:16.think they can get better outcomes for patients and we have a system
:52:16. > :52:20.that we test whether those changes will improve patient choice,
:52:20. > :52:24.whether there is good evidence to show they will improve mortality
:52:24. > :52:28.rates, whether there has been proper consultation, whether it is
:52:28. > :52:33.what local doctors want and then in certain cases if it is high-profile,
:52:33. > :52:37.it will end up on my desk and I will take independent advice about
:52:38. > :52:41.them. Those changes are parts of the system saying we want to do
:52:41. > :52:44.things better. It is not about cuts. We are putting �12 billion more
:52:44. > :52:50.into the NHS over this Parliament than the last Government did...
:52:50. > :52:52.that in real terms or nominal terms? Well, in real terms NHS
:52:52. > :52:57.spending is going up, but by a small amount.
:52:57. > :53:01.Yes. This is the point the King's Fund
:53:01. > :53:05.are making, the demand on the system is going up by 4% a year.
:53:05. > :53:08.Yes. That's because of the factors that we were talking about. So in
:53:08. > :53:12.order to stand still if you like we have to have productivity
:53:12. > :53:18.improvements of 4% a year and I think these new structures and
:53:18. > :53:24.reforms will help that, but I want to raise our standards, I think we
:53:24. > :53:28.should be the best in Europe for dementia care. So the fact is that
:53:28. > :53:31.your �12 billion of extra spending is a propaganda figure because it
:53:31. > :53:41.doesn't take into account inflation. This year health spending will be
:53:41. > :53:43.
:53:43. > :53:47.lucky to rise by 1% in real terms from �103.1 billion to �102.8
:53:47. > :53:53.billion. Next year, how much will health spending rise as planned
:53:53. > :53:57.next year in real terms? Well, what we have done... No, how much?
:53:57. > :54:02.no, no, let me answer your question if I may. You suggested it was
:54:02. > :54:06.propaganda. We have protected the NHS bug, Labour, Andy Burnham said
:54:06. > :54:09.that that it would be irresponsible to increase the spending in the NHS.
:54:09. > :54:14.We are increasing it, but effectively not by a huge amount,
:54:14. > :54:17.we are protecting the NHS budget and that is when the rest of
:54:17. > :54:23.Government spending overall, we are cutting spending by 19% across all
:54:23. > :54:26.Government departments. That is a huge commitment that this
:54:26. > :54:29.Government is making to the NHS because we know how much health
:54:29. > :54:33.matters to every family in the country. Mr Hunt under your
:54:33. > :54:39.Government's pro projections, health spending next year in real
:54:40. > :54:45.terms will rise by �60 million. �60 million on a budget of �103 billion.
:54:45. > :54:50.How much is that percentage wise? You are increasing the budget by
:54:50. > :54:55.0.05%. It is peanuts. In the context where there are
:54:55. > :54:58.public spending cuts in every other Government department, it is
:54:58. > :55:02.incredibly significant that in real terms this Government made a big,
:55:02. > :55:07.big choice to protect the NHS budget because we know how much it
:55:07. > :55:14.matters and you know... You said you would increase it every year?
:55:14. > :55:19.Well and we are increasing it by... By 0.5%. Well, I think
:55:19. > :55:22.You never told us that. The point that we are we are making
:55:23. > :55:26.is when we are having to make cuts when cuts across the world are
:55:26. > :55:29.having to make cuts in public spending, the one area we have
:55:29. > :55:32.taken a choice to protect is the NHS. That is because it matters to
:55:32. > :55:35.the British people. It means that other Government departments had to
:55:35. > :55:39.have deeper cuts and it is a choice that Labour wouldn't make. Indeed,
:55:39. > :55:42.in Wales, whether Labour run the show, they didn't make that choice
:55:42. > :55:46.and the NHS budget has been cut. If we're going to get the outcomes
:55:46. > :55:52.that I was going to talk about this morning, we are going to improve
:55:52. > :55:55.our survival rates from cancer, for example, from liver disease, from
:55:55. > :56:00.respiratory diseases then we need to show that commitment in the NHS,
:56:00. > :56:04.but we've done it because we think it is what people want.
:56:04. > :56:07.Wheng -- when you were the Sports Minister, you trained as a linesman
:56:07. > :56:10.and we have seen you doing that recently. Now that you are the
:56:10. > :56:15.Health Minister, what are you going to train as? You are are you going
:56:15. > :56:19.to try to be a brain surgeon? think that might ablittle bit
:56:19. > :56:24.optimistic. I don't know what you think. I agree with you.
:56:24. > :56:28.I will probably leave that one, but I am incredibly thrilled to to do
:56:28. > :56:32.the job I am doing and I want to throw myself into the NHS which is
:56:32. > :56:36.a fantastic system. I hope you come back. We had more
:56:36. > :56:42.questions, but we are sadly coming up to one o'clock. I hope you will
:56:42. > :56:46.come back and see us during the week or on a Sunday when when we
:56:46. > :56:50.can go through the health figures carefully.
:56:50. > :56:53.Did David Cameron do the right thing in promoting Jeremy Hunt to
:56:53. > :56:57.Health Secretary? He is a good communicator and he will deal with
:56:57. > :57:01.a difficult brief. The problem is that the demands in the Health
:57:01. > :57:04.Service are going to outstrip the resources and yes, you can make it
:57:04. > :57:09.more efficient, but we are going to have to look at other ways of
:57:09. > :57:13.bringing income into the NHS and I am afraid, I mean I have free
:57:13. > :57:18.prescriptions in Scotland. Why have I got free prescriptions? It is
:57:18. > :57:22.unaffordable and I think he has got a tough, tough job ahead of him.
:57:22. > :57:26.He was brought in to take the heat out of this issue after Andrew
:57:26. > :57:32.Lansley, putting through the ri forms -- reforms. Will he be able
:57:32. > :57:36.to do it? I thought he got off to a ropey start by starting an abortion
:57:36. > :57:43.about the abortion limits because that irritate his colleagues in the
:57:43. > :57:46.House of Commons. It over shadowed the preconference
:57:46. > :57:53.coverage. The Government is not intending to do anything about this.
:57:53. > :57:55.It was an unfortunate row. I think what he has to do, he has has to
:57:55. > :57:58.spell out what the priorities are in the Health Service and take
:57:58. > :58:01.people how it is as we have to on the economy. We have to level with
:58:02. > :58:04.people. You can't have all these things and at the same time not
:58:04. > :58:10.have any money. No. All right. Well, it is just
:58:10. > :58:20.time to find out the answer to our quiz. What has Sam Cam promised
:58:20. > :58:27.Dave for his birthday, a new iPad game, a curry, a night out with
:58:27. > :58:32.with Herman Van Rompuy or voodoo doll? I think a curry.
:58:32. > :58:36.Certainly not the night out with Herman Van Rompuy!
:58:36. > :58:40.Thank you. Thank you for being with us today.
:58:40. > :58:44.Thank you to our guests, the One O'Clock News is starting now on BBC
:58:44. > :58:49.One, but remember today at conference tonight with James
:58:49. > :58:55.Landale. That's after Newsnight. Tomorrow, we are on at 11am. It is